vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Development Document for Final
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Point Source Category
April 2002
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water (4303T)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
EPA-821 -R-02-004
-------
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Development Document for Final
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and
Standards for the Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Point Source Category
EPA 821-R-02-004
Christine Todd Whitman
Administrator
G. Tracy Mehan, III
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water
Geoffrey H. Grubbs
Director, Office of Science and Technology
Sheila E. Frace
Director, Engineering and Analysis Division
Donald F. Anderson
Acting Chief, Chemical Engineering Branch
William Anderson and George Jett
Project Managers
Yu-Ting Guilaran
Project Engineer
Jade Lee-Freeman
Statistician
April 2002
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water
Washington, DC 20460
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed and approved for publication by the Engineering
and Analysis Division, Office of Science and Technology. The Agency would like to
acknowledge the contributions of the Engineering and Analysis Division staff toward the
development of this technical document.
This report was prepared with the technical support of Eastern Research Group,
Inc. and statistical support of Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), under the
direction and review of the Office of Science and Technology. Neither the United States
Government nor any of its employees, contractors, subcontractors, or their employees make any
warrant, expressed or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's
use of or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in
this report, or represents that its use by such party would not infringe on privately owned rights.
The primary contact regarding questions or comments on this document is:
George Jett
U.S. EPA Engineering and Analysis Division (4303T)
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 566-1070 (telephone)
(202) 566-1053 (fax)
jett.george@epa.gov
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1 APPLICABILITY AND SUMMARY OF FINAL REGULATION 1-1
1.1 Applicability 1-1
1.2 Applicability Interface With Other Regulations . 1-2
1.2.1 Electroplating 1-3
1.2.2 Metal Finishing 1-3
1.2.3 Coil Coating 1-3
1.2.4 Ferroalloy Manufacturing 1-3
1.2.5 Metal Molding and Casting 1-4
1.3 Summary of Proposed Regulation 1-4
1.4 Summary of Final Regulation 1-6
1.5 Protection of Confidential Business Information 1-9
1.6 References 1-9
2 BACKGROUND 2-1
2.1 Legal Authority 2-1
2.1.1 Legislative Background 2-1
2.1.2 Section 304(m) Requirements and Litigation 2-3
2.2 History of Iron and Steel Category Rulemaking Activities 2-4
2.2.1 Prior Regulations 2-4
2.2.2 Current Regulation 2-5
2.2.3 Preliminary Study of the Iron and Steel Category 2-7
2.2.4 Proposed Regulation 2-8
2.2.5 Notice of Data Availability 2-10
2.2.6 Extension to Public Comment Period 2-10
2.2.7 Public Outreach 2-10
2.3 References 2-11
3 DATA COLLECTION 3-1
3.1 Base Year 3-1
3.2 Surveys 3-2
3.3 Site Visits 3-7
3.4 Sampling 3-9
3.5 Other Data Sources 3-11
3.6 Public Participation 3-12
3.7 Summary of Post-Proposal Data Collected 3-14
3.8 References 3-15
4 ANALYTICAL METHODS AND BASELINE VALUES 4-1
4.1 Explanation and Importance of Baseline Values 4-1
4.2 Reporting Conventions Associated with Analytical Results 4-2
4.3 Nominal Quantitation Limits 4-3
i
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
4.4 Comparisons to Baseline Values 4-3
4.4.1 Individual Data Values 4-4
4.4.2 Assessment of Treatability of Influent 4-4
4.5 Analytical Methods 4-5
4.5.1 Methods 1613B, 1625, 1664 (2,3,7,8-TCDF, Benzo(a)pyrene,
Naphthalene, Phenol, HEM) 4-5
4.5.2 Method 1620 and 200.7 (Metals) 4-6
4.5.3 Method 160.2,209C, and 2540D (Total Suspended Solids) ... 4-6
4.5.4 Method 218.4 (Hexavalent Chromium) 4-7
4.5.5 Method 239.2 (Lead) 4-7
4.5.6 Method 245.1 (Mercury) 4-8
4.5.7 Method 3120B (Chromium and Hexavalent Chromium) 4-8
4.5.8 Method 3130B (Lead, Zinc) 4-8
4.5.9 Method 335.2 (Total Cyanide) 4-9
4.5.10 Method 340.2 (Fluoride) 4-9
4.5.11 Methods 350.2,417/350.2, and 4500-NH3 (Ammonia as
Nitrogen) 4-10
4.5.12 Methods 353.1, 353.2, and 353.3 (Nitrate/Nitrite) 4-10
4.5.13 Methods 4500-CN M and D4374-98 (Thiocyanate) 4-10
4.5.14 Methods 625 and 610 (Naphthalene) 4-11
4.5.15 Method 8270 (Benzo(a)pyrene) 4-11
4.5.16 Methods 420.1 and 420.2 (Phenols (4AAP)) 4-12
4.6 Requirements for Laboratory Analysis for Compliance Monitoring .. 4-13
4.7 References 4-13
5 DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY 5-1
5.1 Types of Sites 5-1
5.2 Manufacturing Operations 5-4
5.2.1 Cokemaking 5-4
5.2.2 Sintering 5-7
5.2.3 Briquetting 5-7
5.2.4 Blast Furnace Ironmaking 5-8
5.2.5 Direct-Reduced Ironmaking 5-9
5.2.6 Steelmaking 5-10
5.2.7 Vacuum Degassing 5-12
5.2.8 Ladle Metallurgy and Secondary Steelmaking 5-12
5.2.9 Casting 5-13
5.2.10 Hot Forming 5-14
5.2.11 Finishing 5-17
5.3 References 5-20
ii
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
6 SUBCATEGORIZATION 6-1
6.1 Subcategorization Factors 6-1
6.2 Proposed Subcategorization 6-3
6.3 Final Subcategorization 6-4
6.3.1 Proposed Subpart A: Cokemaking 6-5
6.3.2 Proposed Subpart B: Ironmaking 6-7
6.3.3 Proposed Subpart C: Integrated Steelmaking 6-8
6.3.4 Proposed Subpart D: Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming 6-10
6.3.5 Proposed Subpart E: Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming 6-10
6.3.6 Proposed Subpart F: Steel Finishing 6-11
6.3.7 Proposed Subpart G: Other Operations 6-12
7 WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION 7-1
7.1 Water Use and Wastewater Generation and Discharge 7-1
7.1.1 Cokemaking Operations 7-2
7.1.2 Sintering and Ironmaking Operations 7-6
7.1.3 Integrated Steelmaking Operations 7-7
7.1.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Operations 7-10
7.1.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Operations ... 7-11
7.1.6 Steel Finishing Operations 7-13
7.1.7 Other Operations 7-18
7.2 Identification of Pollutants of Concern (POCs) 7-18
7.2.1 Cokemaking Subcategory 7-20
7.2.2 Ironmaking Subcategory 7-21
7.2.3 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 7-22
7.2.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory 7-23
7.2.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory . 7-23
7.2.6 Steel Finishing Subcategory 7-26
7.2.7 Other Operations Subcategory 7-28
7.3 Untreated Process Wastewater Characterization Data for Pollutants of
Concern 7-28
7.4 References 7-29
8 POLLUTION PREVENTION AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT
TECHNOLOGIES 8-1
8.1 Wastewater Minimization and Pollution Prevention Technologies ... 8-2
8.1.1 High-Rate Recycle 8-2
8.1.2 Countercurrent Cascade Rinsing 8-3
8.1.3 Acid Reuse, Recycle, and Recovery Systems 8-4
iii
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
8.1.4 Extension of Process Solution Life 8-6
8.1.5 Evaporation with Condensate Recovery 8-7
8.2 Process Modifications 8-7
8.2.1 Effluent-Free Pickling Process with Fluid Bed Hydrochloric
Acid Regeneration 8-7
8.2.2 Nitric-Acid-Free Pickling 8-8
8.2.3 Effluent-Free Exhaust Cleaning 8-8
8.3 Treatment Technologies 8-8
8.3.1 Physical/Chemical Treatment 8-9
8.3.2 Biological Treatment 8-28
8.3.3 Sludge Handling 8-32
8.4 Best Management Practices (BMPs) 8-35
8.5 References 8-37
9 TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS CONSIDERED AS THE BASIS OF THE
REGULATION 9-1
9.1 Cokemaking 9-2
9.1.1 By-Product Recovery Cokemaking 9-2
9.1.2 Non-Recovery Cokemaking 9-6
9.2 Ironmaking and Sintering 9-7
9.3 Integrated Steelmaking 9-11
9.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming 9-14
9.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming 9-16
9.6 Steel Finishing 9-20
9.7 Other Operations 9-23
9.7.1 Briquetting 9-24
9.7.2 Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI) 9-24
9.7.3 Forging 9-25
10 INCREMENTAL INVESTMENT AND OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS FOR THE REGULATION 10-1
10.1 Methodology 10-1
10.1.1 Investment Costs 10-3
10.1.2 Operating and Maintenance Costs 10-7
10.1.3 One-Time Costs 10-10
10.2 Results : 10-13
10.2.1 Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery and
Non-Recovery Segments 10-13
10.2.2 Ironmaking and Sintering Subcategories 10-16
10.2.3 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 10-19
10.2.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory .... 10-21
iv
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
10.2.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Subcategory 10-22
10.2.6 Steel Finishing Subcategory 10-24
10.2.7 Other Operations Subcategory 10-27
10.3 References 10-29
11 POLLUTANT LOADINGS 11-1
11.1 Sources and Use of Available Data 11-2
11.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings 11-3
11.2.1 Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations 11-4
11.2.2 Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline
Pollutant Concentrations 11-4
11.2.3 Cotreatment of Wastewater 11-6
11.2.4 POCs Included in the Pollutant Loadings Analysis 11-7
11.2.5 Sites and Data Used in the Pollutant Loadings Analysis 11-7
11.2.6 Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation 11-8
11.3 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings 11-10
11.3.1 Treated Pollutant Loadings Calculation 11-10
11.4 Pollutant Removals Calculation 11-11
11.5 How the Costing Analysis Coordinates with the Method Used to
Calculate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals 11-12
11.6 Example Calculation 11-13
11.6.1 Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation 11-13
11.6.2 Treated Pollutant Loadings Calculation 11-15
11.6.3 Pollutant Removals Calculation 11-16
11.7 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Cokemaking
Subcategory 11-18
11.7.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-19
11.7.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings
and Pollutant Removals 11-21
11.8 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Ironmaking Subcategory . 11-22
11.8.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-22
11.8.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings
and Pollutant Removals 11-25
11.9 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Sintering Subcategory ... 11-25
11.9.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-26
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
11.9.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings
and Pollutant Removals 11-27
11.10 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Integrated Steelmaking
Subcategory 11-28
11.10.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-29
11.10.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant
Loadings and Pollutant Removals 11-30
11.11 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Integrated and Stand-Alone
Hot Forming Subcategory 11-31
11.11.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-31
11.11.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant
Loadings and Pollutant Removals 11-33
11.12 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming Subcategory 11-34
11.12.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-34
11.12.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant
Loadings and Pollutant Removals 11-36
11.13 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Steel Finishing
Subcategory 11-37
11.13.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-38
11.13.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant
Loadings and Pollutant Removals 11-40
11.13.3 Alternative Methodology to Estimate
Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Steel
Finishing Subcategory 11-41
11.14 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Other Operations
Subcategory 11-41
11.14.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant
Loadings 11-42
11.14.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant
Loadings and Pollutant Removals 11-43
11.15 References 11-43
12 REGULATED POLLUTANTS 12-1
12.1 Regulated Pollutant Selection Methodology for Direct Dischargers . 12-1
12.1.1 Cokemaking Subcategory 12-3
12.1.2 Sintering Subcategory 12-6
vi
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
12.1.3 Other Operations Subcategory 12-6
12.2 Regulated Pollutant Selection Methodology for Indirect
Dischargers 12-7
12.2.1 Methodology for Determining BAT Percent Removals 12-8
12.2.2 Methodology for Determining POTW Percent Removals .... 12-9
12.2.3 Results of POTW Pass-Through Analysis 12-10
13 PRODUCTION-NORMALIZED FLOWS 13-1
13.1 Overview of Data Selection 13-1
13.2 Overview of PNF Selection 13-2
13.3 Subpart A: Cokemaking Subcategory 13-3
13.3.1 By-Product Recovery Cokemaking 13-3
13.3.2 Non-Recovery Cokemaking 13-8
13.4 Subpart B: Ironmaking Subcategory 13-8
13.4.1 Sintering With Wet Air Pollution Controls 13-8
13.4.2 Sintering With Dry Air Pollution Controls 13-10
13.4.3 Blast Furnace Ironmaking 13-10
13.5 Subpart C: Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 13-13
13.5.1 Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) Steelmaking 13-14
13.5.2 Ladle Metallurgy 13-18
13.5.3 Vacuum Degassing 13-18
13.5.4 Continuous Casting 13-20
13.6 Subpart D: Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory . 13-22
13.7 Subpart E: Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Subcategory 13-23
13.7.1 Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) Steelmaking 13-24
13.7.2 Ladle Metallurgy 13-24
13.7.3 Vacuum Degassing 13-24
13.7.4 Continuous Casting 13-26
13.7.5 Hot Forming 13-28
13.7.6 Combined Thin Slab Casting and Hot Forming 13-31
13.8 Subpart F: Steel Finishing Subcategory 13-33
13.8.1 Acid Pickling 13-33
13.8.2 Cold Forming 13-36
13.8.3 Alkaline Cleaning 13-37
13.8.4 Continuous Annealing 13-38
13.8.5 Hot Coating 13-39
13.8.6 Electroplating 13-40
13.9 Subpart G: Other Operations 13-41
13.9.1 Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI) Segment 13-41
13.9.2 Forging Segment 13-41
vii
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
13.9.3 Briquetting Segment 13-41
13.10 References 13-42
14 LIMITATIONS AND STANDARDS: DATA SELECTION AND
CALCULATION 14-1
14.1 Overview of Data Selection 14-1
14.2 Episode Selection for Each Subcategory and Option 14-3
14.2.1 Cokemaking Subcategory 14-4
14.2.2 Sintering Subcategory 14-7
14.2.3 Other Operations 14-8
14.3 Data Exclusions and Substitutions 14-9
14.4 Data Aggregation 14-9
14.4.1 Aggregation of Field Duplicates 14-10
14.4.2 Aggregation of Grab Samples 14-11
14.4.3 Aggregation of Data Across Outfalls ("Flow-Weighting") .. 14-11
14.5 Data Editing Criteria 14-12
14.6 Overview of Limitations 14-13
14.6.1 Objective 14-13
14.6.2 Selection of Percentiles 14-13
14.6.3 Compliance with Limitations 14-14
14.7 Summary of the Limitations 14-16
14.8 Estimation of Concentration-Based Limitations 14-17
14.8.1 Calculation of Option Long-Term Averages 14-18
14.8.2 Calculation of Option Variability Factors 14-19
14.8.3 Transfers of Option Variability Factors 14-19
14.8.4 Summary of Steps Used to Derive Concentration-Based
Limitations 14-20
14.9 Conversion to Production-Normalized Limitations 14-21
14.9.1 Conversion from Concentration-Based Limitations 14-22
14.9.2 Significant Digits for Production-Normalized Limitations .. 14-22
14.10 Naphthalene PSES 14-23
14.10.1 Daily Maximum Standard 14-23
14.10.2 Monthly Average Standard 14-24
15 NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 15-1
15.1 Energy Requirement Impacts 15-1
15.1.1 Cokemaking Subcategory 15-1
15.1.2 Ironmaking Subcategory 15-2
15.1.3 Sintering Subcategory 15-3
15.1.4 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 15-3
15.1.5 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory 15-4
viii
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
15.1.6 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Subcategory 15-4
15.1.7 Steel Finishing Subcategory 15-4
15.1.8 Other Operations Subcategory 15-5
15.1.9 Energy Requirements Summary 15-5
15.2 Air Emission Impacts 15-5
15.3 Solid Waste Impacts 15-7
15.3.1 Cokemaking Subcategory 15-8
15.3.2 Ironmaking Subcategory 15-8
15.3.3 Sintering Subcategory 15-9
15.3.4 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 15-9
15.3.5 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory 15-9
15.3.6 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Subcategory 15-10
15.3.7 Steel Finishing Subcategory 15-10
15.3.8 Other Operations Subcategory 15-11
15.3.9 Solid Waste Impacts Summary 15-11
15.4 References 15-11
16 IMPLEMENTATION OF PART 420 THROUGH THE NPDES
AND PRETREATMENT PROGRAMS 16-1
16.1 Applicability of the Revised Part 420 16-2
16.2 Changes in Subcategorization Structure and Applicability 16-4
16.3 Subcategory-Specific Process Wastewater Sources 16-5
16.4 Calculating NPDES Permit and Pretreatment Effluent Limitations .. 16-6
16.4.1 Production Basis 16-6
16.4.2 Calculating NPDES Permit and Pretreatment Limitations ... 16-8
16.5 Application of Best Professional Judgement 16-12
16.6 Water Bubble 16-14
16.7 Ammonia Waiver 16-16
16.8 Compliance Monitoring 16-16
16.8.1 Sample Types 16-17
16.8.2 Monitoring Frequency 16-17
16.8.3 Compliance Monitoring Locations 16-18
16.9 NPDES Permit and Pretreatment Variances and Exclusions 16-19
16.9.1 Economic Variances 16-19
16.9.2 Variances Based on Localized Environmental Factors 16-20
16.9.3 Central Treatment Provision 16-20
16.10 References 16-21
17 GLOSSARY 17-1
ix
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES
Page
3-1 Iron And Steel Industry Survey Strata 3-19
3-2 Number of Sites Visited in Each State and in Canada 3-20
3-3 Number of Sites Visited for Each Type of Site 3-21
3-4 Number of Sites Visited With Each Type of Manufacturing Process 3-22
3-5 Manufacturing Processes Sampled 3-23
3-6 Treatment Systems Sampled 3-24
3-7 Analytical Methods Used During Sampling Program 3-28
3-8 Analytes Included Within Analyte Groups 3-30
4-1 Analytical Methods and Baseline Values 4-15
5-1 1997 National Estimate of Types of Iron and Steel
Sites in the United States 5-21
5-2 1997 National Estimate of Sites Producing or Processing Carbon, Alloy, or
Stainless Steel 5-22
5-3 1997 National Estimate of Direct, Indirect, and Zero or Alternative
Discharging Sites 5-23
5-4 1997 National Estimate of Actual Production and Rated Capacity by
Manufacturing Operation 5-24
6-1 Subcategory Comparison of the 1982 and Proposed Regulations 6-14
6-2 Final Subcategorization 6-15
7-1 1997 National Estimate of Annual Discharge from Manufacturing Operations
by Discharge Type 7-30
7-2 Pollutants Not Detected in Untreated Wastewater Samples 7-31
7-3 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Cokemaking Subcategory -
By-Product Recovery Segment 7-34
x
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
7-4 Pollutants of Concern, Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery
Segment 7-39
7-5 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Ironmaking
Subcategory 7-42
7-6 Pollutants of Concern, Ironmaking Subcategory - Sintering Segment 7-46
7-7 Pollutants of Concern, Ironmaking Subcategory - Blast Furnace Segment .. 7-49
7-8 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Integrated Steelmaking
Subcategory 7-50
7-9 Pollutants of Concern, Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 7-58
7-10 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Integrated and Stand-Alone
Hot Forming Subcategory 7-59
7-11 Pollutants of Concern, Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment 7-64
7-12 Pollutants of Concern, Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment 7-65
7-13 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Non-integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming Subcategory 7-66
7-14 Pollutants of Concern, Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment 7-73
7-15 Pollutants of Concern, Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment 7-74
7-16 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Steel Finishing
Subcategory 7-75
7-17 Pollutants of Concern, Steel Finishing Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy
Steel Segment 7-79
7-18 Pollutants of Concern, Steel Finishing Subcategory - Stainless Steel
Segment 7-81
xi
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
7-19 Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern, Other Operations
Subcategory - Direct-Reduced Ironmaking Segment 7-83
7-20 Pollutants of Concern, Other Operations Subcategory - Direct-Reduced
Ironmaking Segment 7-90
7-21 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment 7-91
7-22 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Ironmaking Subcategory 7-94
7-23 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 7-98
7-24 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory 7-100
7-25 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory 7-102
7-26 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Steel Finishing Subcategory 7-104
7-27 Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern,
Other Operations Subcategory - Direct-Reduced Ironmaking Segment .... 7-108
8-1 Wastewater Minimization, Pollution Prevention, and Process Modification
Technologies 8-39
8-2 Wastewater Treatment and Sludge Handling Technologies 8-41
9-1 Wastewater Treatment Technologies Reported by Industry Survey
Respondents for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Sites 9-27
9-2 High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies Reported by Industry
Survey Respondents for Blast Furnace Ironmaking and Sintering Sites 9-28
9-3 High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies Reported by
Industry Survey Respondents for Integrated Steelmaking Sites 9-29
xii
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
9-4 High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies Reported
by Industry Survey Respondents for Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming Sites 9-30
9-5 High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies Reported by
Industry Survey Respondents for Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming Sites 9-31
9-6 In-Process and End-of-Pipe Wastewater Treatment Technologies Reported
by Industry Survey Respondents for Steel Finishing Sites 9-32
9-7 High-Rate Recycle Equipment and Blowdown Wastewater Treatment
Technologies Reported by Industry Survey Respondents for
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI) and Forging Sites 9-33
10-1 Assumptions Used to Develop Cost Estimates in Tables 10-2 through
10-13 10-30
10-2 Design Specifications for Cokemaking Granular Activated Carbon Model
Treatment Systems 10-31
10-3 Estimated Investment Costs for Cokemaking Granular Activated Carbon
Model Treatment Systems (100,000 - 2,700,000 gpd) 10-32
10-4 Design Specifications for Cokemaking Breakpoint Chlorination Model
Treatment Systems 10-37
10-5 Estimated Investment Costs for Cokemaking Breakpoint Chlorination Model
Treatment Systems (100,000 - 2,700,000 gpd) 10-38
10-6 Design Specifications for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment Systems for
Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater 10-46
10-7 Estimated Investment Costs for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment
Systems for Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater (150,000 -
2,000,000 gpd) 10-47
10-8 Design Specifications for Breakpoint Chlorination Model Treatment Systems
for Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater 10-53
xiii
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
10-9 Estimated Investment Costs for Breakpoint Chlorination Model Treatment
Systems for Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater (150,000 -
2,000,000 gpd) 10-54
10-10 Design Specifications for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment Systems
for Basic Oxygen Furnace, Vacuum Degassing, and Continuous Casting
Wastewater 10-61
10-11 Estimated Investment Costs for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment Systems
for Basic Oxygen Furnace, Vacuum Degassing, and Continuous Casting
Wastewater (150,000 - 2,000,000 gpd) 10-62
10-12 Design Specifications for Multimedia Filtration Model Treatment
Systems 10-69
10-13 Estimated Investment Costs for Multimedia Filtration Model Treatment
Systems (150,000 - 20,000,000 gallons per day) 10-70
10-14 Cost Factors to Determine Investment Costs 10-78
10-15 Iron and Steel Investment Cost Equations 10-79
10-16 Iron and Steel Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Cost Equations 10-83
10-17 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Cokemaking Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-96
10-18 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Ironmaking and Sintering
Subcategories (in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-96
10-19 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Integrated Steelmaking
Subcategory (in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-96
10-20 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming Subcategory (in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-97
10-21 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming Subcategory (in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-97
10-22 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-98
xiv
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
10-23 Summary of Incremental Costs for the Other Operations Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars) 10-98
11-1 Pollutants of Concern Not Detected in Effluent at Any Site 11-45
11-2 Pollutants of Concern That Failed the Influent Editing Criteria 11 -49
11-3 POTW Percent Removals 11-51
11-4 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
for the Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Cokemaking
Segment 11-54
11-5 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Segment, Direct Dischargers... 11-56
11-6 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Segment, Indirect Dischargers . 11-58
11-7 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Ironmaking Subcategory, Blast Furnace Wastewater Only 11-60
11-8 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for
the Ironmaking Subcategory, Commingled Blast Furnace and Sintering
Wastewater 11-62
11-9 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Ironmaking
Subcategory, Blast Furnace Wastewater Only 11-64
11-10 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Ironmaking
Subcategory, Commingled Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater 11-66
11-11 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Ironmaking Subcategory, Direct Dischargers 11-69
11-12 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Ironmaking Subcategory, Indirect Dischargers 11-71
11-13 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the Sintering
Subcategory, Commingled Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater 11-73
xv
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
11-14 Minimum Levels Used as Treated Effluent Concentrations for the
Sintering Subcategory 11-75
11-15 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals for the Sintering Subcategory, Direct Dischargers 11-76
11-16 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory 11-78
11-17 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Integrated
Steelmaking Subcategory 11-79
11-18 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory, Direct Dischargers 11-80
11-19 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy
Steel Segment 11-81
11-20 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless
Steel Segment 11-82
11-21 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Integrated and Stand-
Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment 11-83
11-22 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Integrated and Stand-
Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment 11-84
11-23 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon and
Alloy Steel Segment, Direct Dischargers 11-85
11-24 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy
Steel Segment, Indirect Dischargers 11-86
11-25 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless Steel
Segment, Indirect Dischargers 11-87
xvi
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
11-26 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon and
Alloy Steel Segment 11-88
11-27 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless Steel
Segment 11-89
11-28 LTAs for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory -
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment 11-91
11-29 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Non-Integrated
Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment .... 11-92
11-30 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon
and Alloy Steel Segment, Direct Dischargers 11-93
11-31 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless
Steel Segment, Direct Dischargers 11-94
11-32 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings for the Non-Integrated
Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel
Segment, Indirect Dischargers 11-96
11-33 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals for
the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory - Stainless Steel
Segment, Indirect Dischargers 11-97
11-34 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Steel Finishing Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment 11-98
11-35 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Steel Finishing Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment 11-100
11-36 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Steel Finishing
Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment 11-102
11-37 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Steel Finishing
Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment 11-104
xvii
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
11-38 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Steel Finishing Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment,
Direct Dischargers 11-106
11-39 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals for the Steel Finishing Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment,
Direct Dischargers 11-108
11 -40 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Steel Finishing Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment,
Indirect Dischargers 11-110
11-41 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals for the Steel Finishing Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment,
Indirect Dischargers 11-112
11 -42 Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Other Operations Subcategory - Forging Segment 11-114
11 -43 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Other Operations
Subcategory - DRI Segment 11-115
11 -44 Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Other Operations
Subcategory - Forging Segment 11-116
11 -45 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals for the Other Operations Subcategory - DRI Segment, Direct
Dischargers 11-117
11 -46 Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings Pollutant
Removals for the Other Operations Subcategory - Forging Segment,
Direct Dischargers 11-118
12-1 Pollutants Considered for Regulation for Direct Dischargers Cokemaking
Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment 12-15
12-2 Henry's Law Constants for Organic Pollutants of Concern Cokemaking
Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment 12-19
13-1 Model PNF by Subcategory 13-43
xviii
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Page
14-1 Aggregation of Field Duplicates 14-25
14-2 Aggregation of Grab Samples 14-26
14-3 Aggregation of Data Across Streams 14-27
14-4 Cases where Option Variability Factors Could Not be Calculated 14-28
15-1 Summary of Current and Incremental Energy Requirements and Sludge
Generation by Subcategory 15-12
15-2 Incremental Energy Requirements by Subcategory and Option 15-13
15-3 Incremental Sludge Generation by Subcategory and Option 15-14
16-1 40 CFR Part 420 - Subcategorization 16-22
16-2 40 CFR Part 420 - Process and Non-Process Wastewaters 16-25
16-3 Example 1: Application of 40 CFR Part 420 - Direct Discharge Blast
Furnaces and Sinter Plant 16-27
16-4 Example 2: Application of 40 CFR Part 420 - Indirect Discharge
Coke Plant 16-28
16-5 List of Approved Test Methods for Pollutants Regulated Under the Final Rule
for the Iron and Steel Point Source Category 16-29
xix
-------
List of Figures
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
5-1 Iron and Steelmaking Operations 5-25
5-2 Forming and Finishing Operations 5-26
5-3 Integrated Steel Manufacturing Sites 5-27
5-4 Cokemaking Sites 5-28
5-5 By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Process Diagram 5-29
8-1 Illustration of a Fluidized Bed Acid Regeneration Process 8-47
8-2 Typical Free and Fixed Ammonia Distillation Column 8-48
8-3 Typical Cooling Tower 8-49
8-4 Typical Oil/Water Separator 8-50
8-5 Typical Dissolved Air Flotation System 8-51
8-6 Typical Hexavalent Chromium Reduction System 8-52
8-7 Process Flow Diagram of a Typical Chemical Precipitation System for
Metals Removal 8-53
8-8 Minimum Solubilities of Various Metals Hydroxides 8-54
8-9 Typical Ion Exchange System 8-55
8-10 Typical Clarification System 8-56
8-11 Typical Multimedia Filtration System 8-57
8-12 Process Flow Diagram of a Typical Biological Treatment System 8-58
8-13 Typical Sequencing Batch Reactor Operation for One Cycle 8-59
8-14 Process Flow Diagram of Typical Biological Denitrification Systems 8-60
8-15 Typical Gravity Thickener 8-61
xx
-------
List of Figures
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Page
8-16 Typical Vacuum Filtration System 8-62
8-17 Typical Plate-and Frame Filter Press 8-63
9-1 BAT-1 for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking 9-34
9-2 BAT-3 for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking 9-35
9-3 PSES-1 for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking 9-36
9-4 PSES-3 for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking 9-37
9-5 BAT-1 for Ironmaking (Blast Furnace and Sintering Operations) 9-38
9-6 PSES-1 for Ironmaking (Blast Furnace and Sintering Operations) 9-39
9-7 BAT-1 and PSES-1 for Integrated Steelmaking (All Segments) 9-40
9-8 BAT-1 and PSES-1 for Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
(All Segments) 9-41
9-9 BAT-1 and PSES-1 for Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming (All
Segments) 9-42
9-10 BAT-1 and PSES-1 for Carbon and Alloy Steel Finishing 9-43
9-11 BAT-1 and PSES-1 for Stainless Steel Finishing 9-44
9-12 BPT-1 for Direct Reduced Ironmaking 9-45
9-13 BPT-1 for Forging 9-46
10-1 Activated Carbon System for By-Products Recovery Cokemaking
Wastewater 10-99
10-2 Breakpoint Chlorination for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking
Wastewater 10-100
10-3 Blowdown Metals Precipitation for Ironmaking Wastewater 10-101
10-4 Breakpoint Chlorination for Ironmaking Wastewater 10-102
xxi
-------
List of Figures
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Page
10-5 Blowdown Metals Precipitation for Steelmaking Wastewater 10-103
10-6 Filtration of Wastewater from All Subcategories 10-104
xxii
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
SECTION 1
APPLICABILITY AND SUMMARY OF FINAL REGULATION
This section presents a brief overview of the Iron and Steel Category, discusses
the applicability of the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the category, and presents
the applicability interface between the final rule and other regulations for the metals industry.
This section also briefly summarizes the final rule and describes the Agency's efforts to protect
confidential business information.
1.1 Applicability
The Iron and Steel Category comprises sites that produce raw materials used in
ironmaking and steelmaking or produce finished or semifinished steel products. Operations
include cokemaking, sintering, ironmaking, steelmaking, ladle metallurgy, vacuum degassing,
continuous and ingot casting, hot forming, salt bath and electrolytic descaling, acid pickling, cold
forming, alkaline cleaning, hot coating, direct-reduced ironmaking, briquetting, and forging.
Manufacturing operations that may be subject to the promulgated Iron and Steel
rule are generally reported under one or more of the following North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) codes (Reference 1-1):
• 324199, Other Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing;
• 331111, Iron and Steel Mills;
• 331210, Iron and Steel Pipe and Tube Manufacturing from Purchased
Steel;
• 331221, Rolled Steel Shape Manufacturing; and
• 332812, Metal coating, engraving (except jewelry and silverware), and
allied services to manufacturers.
Specifically, the promulgated Iron and Steel effluent limitations guidelines and
standards apply to wastewater discharges resulting from the following manufacturing operations:
• By-product recovery and other cokemaking operations manufacturing
metallurgical coke (both furnace and foundry coke);
• Sintering, briquetting, and other beneficiation or Agglomeration operations
conducted by heating iron-bearing materials (e.g., iron ore, mill scale, blast
furnace flue dust, blast furnace wastewater treatment sludge), limestone,
coke fines, and other materials in a traveling grate combustion system to
produce a beneficiate or agglomerate for charging to a blast furnace;
1-1
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
• Ironmaking operations in which iron ore and other iron-bearing materials
are reduced to molten iron in a blast furnace;
• Direct-reduced ironmaking in which iron pellets are produced through a
reaction of iron ore with hot reducing gases;
• Basic oxygen furnace (BOF) steelmaking, ladle metallurgy, vacuum
degassing, and continuous casting operations at integrated steel mills. The
rule also applies to BOF steelmaking conducted at any location;
• Electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking, ladle metallurgy, vacuum
degassing and continuous casting operations conducted at non-integrated
steel mills. The final rule also applies to EAF steelmaking conducted at
any location;
• Hot forming operations conducted at integrated steel mills, non-integrated
steel mills, and stand-alone hot forming mills;
• Steel forging operations performed at iron and steel mills; and
• Carbon, alloy, and stainless steel finishing operations, including salt bath
and electrolytic sodium sulfate descaling, acid pickling, cold forming,
alkaline cleaning, hot coating and continuous annealing at integrated, non-
integrated, and stand-alone facilities.
1.2 Applicability Interface With Other Regulations
Several existing regulations currently establish effluent limitations guidelines and
standards for the metals industry. Regulations covering nonferrous materials, including
aluminum forming (40 CFR Part 467), copper forming (40 CFR Part 468), nonferrous metals
manufacturing (40 CFR Part 421), and nonferrous metals forming (40 CFR Part 471) do not
interface with the effluent limitations guidelines and standards promulgated for the Iron and Steel
Category. Regulations that cover ferrous materials, however, do interface with the final rule for
the Iron and Steel Category.
For facilities with process operations in more than one category, National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit writers must use a building-block
approach to develop technology-based effluent limitations. Similarly, pretreatment control
authorities must use the combined wastestream formula (Reference 1-2) to develop pretreatment
requirements for facilities with process operations in more than one category. Permit writers and
control authorities should refer to the applicability statements of the regulations for further
clarification.
1-2
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
1.2.1 Electroplating
Facilities that are covered by the Electroplating Category and discharge to a
publicly owned treatment works (POTW) are regulated under 40 CFR Part 413. This category
comprises indirect discharging job shop electroplating and independent printed circuit board
manufacturers that were in operation prior to July 15,1983. The electroplating rule specifically
excludes continuous strip electroplating operations conducted at indirect discharging iron and
steel facilities; therefore, the electroplating rule does not overlap with the final Iron and Steel
rule.
1.2.2 Metal Finishing
Wastewater discharges from facilities within the Metal Finishing Category are
regulated under 40 CFR Part 433. This category comprises facilities that perform any of the
following six metal finishing operations on any basis material: electroplating, electroless plating,
anodizing, coating (chromating, phosphating, and coloring), chemical etching and milling, and
printed circuit board manufacturing. The Metal Finishing rule establishes effluent limitations
guidelines and standards for 40 surface treatment operations at facilities within this category.
1.2.3 Coil Coating
Wastewater discharges from facilities within the Coil Coating Category are
regulated under 40 CFR Part 465. Coil coating facilities typically clean, conversion coat, and
apply organic polymeric materials (such as paint) to continuous strips of metal coil (typically
steel, galvanized metal, or aluminum). The Coil Coating Category comprises facilities that
perform at least two of these three operations. The Iron and Steel rule is not intended to regulate
mild acid or mild alkaline cleaning operations conducted at coil coating facilities, nor is it
intended to regulate conversion coating or the application of organic polymeric material to steel;
therefore, the promulgated Iron and Steel rule does not overlap with the Coil Coating rule.
1.2.4 Ferroalloy Manufacturing
Wastewater discharges from facilities Within the Ferroalloy Manufacturing
Category are regulated under 40 CFR Part 424. This category comprises facilities that smelt
ferroalloys in electric furnaces or other devices with wet air pollution control, recover and
process furnace slag, produce calcium carbide in covered electric furnaces with and without wet
air pollution control and manufacture electrolytic manganese products and electrolytic chromium
products. A ferroalloy is an iron-bearing product, not within the range of those products called
steel, which contains a considerable amount of one or more alloying elements, such as
manganese, silicon, phosphorus, vanadium, and chromium. The Iron and Steel Category does not
cover any ferroalloy manufacturing operations.
1-3
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
1.2.5 Metal Molding and Casting
Wastewater discharges from facilities within the Metal Molding and Casting
Category are regulated under 40 CFR Part 464. This category comprises facilities that remelt,
mold, and cast aluminum, copper, zinc, and ferrous metals and alloys into intermediate or
finished products. The Iron and Steel rule does not overlap with the Metal Molding and Casting
rule.
1.3 Summary of Proposed Regulation
On October 31,2000, the EPA Administrator signed proposed revisions to
technology-based effluent limitations guidelines and standards for wastewater discharges from
new and existing iron and steel facilities. The proposed rule was published in the Federal
Register on December 27, 2000 (65 FR 81964). EPA proposed to alter the applicability and
scope of the existing rule by adding electroplating operations and by including direct iron
reduction, briquetting, and forging operations. In addition, EPA proposed excluding from the
iron and steel guideline in Part 420 some wire, cold forming, and hot dip coating operations. In a
proposed rule for the Metal Products and Machinery (MP&M) industrial category published on
January 3, 2001 (66 FR 424), EPA proposed to address these operations under Part 438.
The Agency proposed to revise the subcategorization scheme to create seven
subcategories of iron and steel facilities based on co-treatment of compatible waste streams. This
would have replaced the present structure of 12 subcategories. The proposed subcategorization
approach would have reflected the way treatment systems are run in the iron and steel industry.
EPA proposed the following seven subcategories:
Subpart
Subcategory
Segment
Subpart A
Cokemaking Subcategory
By-product
Non-recovery
Subpart B
Ironmaking Subcategory
Blast Furnace
Sintering
Subpart C
Steelmaking Subcategory
Subpart D
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Mills Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart E
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming Operations Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart F
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart G
Other Operations Subcategory
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking
Forging
Briquetting
1-4
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
For most of the subcategories, except for cokemaking, finishing, and the newly
added subcategory for other operations, the Agency proposed limits based on improved
performance and operation of the same technologies that were the basis for the limits and
standards promulgated in 1982 and amended in 1984. Consequently, the proposed limitations
were more stringent than the limitations promulgated in 1982. For the cokemaking subcategory,
EPA proposed BAT limits based on a technology option that was essentially the same as the
1982 technology basis but included an additional treatment step — alkaline chlorination. For
finishing, EPA proposed limits based on the 1982 technology basis with the addition of
counter-current rinsing and acid purification.
For many of the proposed subcategories, wastewater flow reduction steps, in
concert with better performance of the blowdown treatment systems, provided the primary basis
for the proposal limits and standards. The proposed rule included the following features:
• EPA proposed two different BAT approaches for the carbon and alloy
segment of the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory. The
options differed in the amount of time that facilities in the segment would
have to achieve BAT limitations. Under one option, a facility would be
subject to BAT limitations as soon as these limitations are placed in the
NPDES permit. Under the other option, a facility could obtain additional
time to achieve BAT limitations.
• The Agency proposed zero discharge as NSPS for the non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming subcategory.
• EPA considered defining a reasonable measure of actual production for
calculating NPDES and pretreatment permit production rates.
• EPA proposed regulating, among others, mercury and selenium based on
toxicity and presence in cokemaking wastewater.
• EPA proposed regulating 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (2,3,7,8-TCDF)
in sinter plant wastewater and requiring compliance monitoring either after
the primary treatment of sinter plant wastewater or after sinter plant and
blast furnace wastewater discharges are cotreated, but before sinter plant
wastewater is combined with any other process or non-process discharges.
• EPA considered developing a limit, based on acid purification technology
or product substitution, for nitrate/nitrite (in the form of nitrate-nitrite-N)
for stainless steel finishing operations with nitric acid and combination
acid pickling.
• EPA considered waiving the pretreatment standards for ammonia as
nitrogen for blast furnace wastewater indirectly discharged to POTWs that
have the capability to conduct nitrification.
1-5
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
• EPA proposed revising the units of pollutant limitations from kilograms of
allowable pollutant discharge per thousand kilograms of production
(kg/kkg), also expressed as pounds of allowable pollutant discharge per
thousand pounds of production (lbs/1,000 lbs), to pounds of allowable
pollutant discharge per ton of production (lbs/ton).
• EPA proposed making the following revisions to the 1982 "Water Bubble"
provision, but leaving the remainder unchanged:
— Allow trades for cold rolling operations,
— Allow trades for cokemaking operations, but only when more
stringent limits result,
— Prohibit trades for sintering operations when less stringent limits
result, and
— Prohibit trades for oil and grease.
• While the 1982 regulation often prompts permit writers and control
authorities to apply pH limitations at internal discharge monitoring
locations, prior to additional treatment or mixing with other wastewater
discharges, the proposed rule allows permit writers and control authorities
to establish pH effluent limitations at final outfalls such that redundant and
unnecessary pH neutralization can be avoided.
The presentation in the remainder of this Technical Development Document will
be organized around the proposed subcategorization scheme. The proposed subcategorization
scheme was the basis on which EPA evaluated the technology options described and on which
EPA made its final determinations regarding the content of the promulgated rule.
1.4 Summary of Final Regulation
EPA has decided to revise effluent limitations guidelines and standards only for
current Subpart A (cokemaking), Subpart B (sintering), Subpart C (ironmaking), and Subpart D
(steelmaking), and to promulgate new effluent limitations guidelines and standards for new
Subpart M (other operations).
As a result of EPA's technical and economic review, EPA is promulgating revised
BAT limitations, NSPS and pretreatment standards for the cokemaking by-product recovery
segment based on technologies that are different than those proposed. Specifically, EPA is
promulgating effluent limits based primarily on ammonia still and biological treatment with
nitrification for direct dischargers and pretreatment standards based primarily on ammonia still
treatment for indirect dischargers.
1-6
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
For the cokemaking subcategory, today's rule combines the "iron and steel" and
"merchant" segments into a newly-created "by-product recovery" cokemaking segment for most
regulatory purposes, although EPA is retaining the "iron and steel" and "merchant" segments for
purposes of reflecting the existing BPT limitations. EPA concluded that this was appropriate
because the production processes, wastewater characteristics, and wastewater flow rates from all
by-product recovery cokemaking operations, including merchant facilities, are similar.
EPA is also eliminating the segment in BAT for by-product coke plants with
physical chemical treatment systems. EPA has determined that technology basis for BAT
limitations promulgated in today's rule are technically and economically achievable for all direct
discharging by-product coke plants.
EPA is not establishing limitations and standards for selenium, mercury, or
thiocyanate, nor is it establishing pretreatment standards for phenol in cokemaking subcategory.
EPA is establishing limitations for phenols (4AAP) in the cokemaking subcategory.
For the sintering subcategory, EPA is revising the current regulation to add
limitations and standards for one additional pollutant, 2,3,7,8-TCDF, while keeping the rest of
the limits unchanged. The technology basis for new TCDF limitations and standards for the
sintering subcategory remains unchanged from the proposal and is the same as the technology
basis for the 1982 regulations with the addition of mixed-media filtration. EPA is also
establishing limitations of no discharge of process wastewater pollutants for new and existing
direct dischargers and new and existing indirect dischargers for sintering operations with dry air
pollution control systems.
EPA is codifying language providing that the ammonia as nitrogen pretreatment
standards do not apply to cokemaking, ironmaking, and sintering facilities discharging to
POTWs with nitrification capability.
For the steelmaking subcategory, EPA is revising BPT, BCT, BAT, and PSES
limitations for the semi-wet basic oxygen furnace (BOF) operations to allow discharge of process
wastewater, when merited by safety considerations. EPA is allowing discharge of process
wastewater because certain safety concerns currently prevent some sites from balancing the water
applied for BOF gas conditioning with evaporative losses to achieve zero discharge. Also in the
steelmaking subcategory, for the semi-wet EAF operations, EPA is establishing limitations of no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants for new direct dischargers and existing and new
indirect dischargers, making these limitations equivalent to the previously promulgated BPT,
BCT, and BAT limitations applicable to semi-wet electric arc furnace (EAF) operations. EPA
identified none of the safety or production concerns discussed for semi-wet BOF operations.
EPA is establishing, as proposed, the limitations and standards for the Other
Operations subcategory.
1-7
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
Due to the small number of subcategories affected by today's rule, the Agency has
decided to retain the 1982 subcategory structure with the addition of an "other operations"
subcategory. As a result, the final rule covers the following 13 subcategories:
Subcategory
Description
Subcategory A
Cokemaking (includes by-product and non-recovery operations)
Subcategory B
Sintering (includes wet and dry air pollution control operations)
Subcategory C
Ironmaking
Subcategory D
Steelmaking (includes basic oxygen furnace and electric arc
furnace operations)
Subcategory E
Vacuum degassing
Subcategory F
Continuous casting
Subcategory G
Hot forming
Subcategory H
Salt bath descaling
Subcategory I
Acid pickling
Subcategory J
Cold forming
Subcategory K
Alkaline cleaning
Subcategory L
Hot coating
Subcategory M
Other operations (includes forging, direct-reduced ironmaking,
and briquetting operations)
EPA is eliminating segments for the following obsolete operations: beehive
cokemaking, ferromanganese blast furnaces, and open hearth furnaces.
EPA is promulgating the following revisions to the "Water Bubble" provision:
• Allow trades for cold rolling operations;
• Allow trades for cokemaking operations, but only when more stringent
limits result;
• Allow trades for Subpart M operations;
• Prohibit trades for 2,3,7,8-TCDF;
• Eliminate the net reduction provision;
1-8
-------
Section 1 - Applicability and Summary of Final Regulation
• Prohibit trades for oil and grease; and
• Allow trades for new as well as existing sources.
1.5 Protection of Confidential Business Information
EPA recognizes that certain data in the rulemaking record have been claimed as
confidential business information (CBI). The Agency has withheld CBI from the public record in
the Water Docket. In addition, the Agency has withhold from disclosure some data not claimed
as CBI because the release of these data could indirectly reveal CBI. Furthermore, EPA has
aggregated certain data in the public record, masked facility identities, or used other strategies to
prevent the disclosure of CBI. The Agency's approach to CBI protection ensures that the data in
the public record both explain the basis for the final rule and provide the opportunity for public
comment, without compromising data confidentiality.
1.6 References
1-1 North American Industry Classification System, U.S. Office of Management and
Budget. Washington, DC, 1997.
1-2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance Manual for the Use of
Production-Based Pretreatment Standards and the Combined Wastestream
Formula. Washington, DC, September 1985.
1-9
-------
Section 2 - Background
SECTION 2
BACKGROUND
This section provides background information on the development of revised
effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the Iron and Steel Category. Sections 2.1 and
2.2 discuss the legal authority and legislative background for the rule. Section 2.3 presents
references for the Iron and Steel Category rulemaking activities.
2.1 Legal Authority
EPA is revising effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the Iron and Steel
Category under the authority of Sections 301, 304, 306,307,308,402, and 501 of the Clean
Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311, 1314, 1316,1317, 1318,1342, and 1361.
2.1.1 Legislative Background
Congress adopted the Clean Water Act (CWA) to "restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters" (Section 101(a), 33 U.S.C.
1251(a)). To achieve this goal, the CWA prohibits the discharge of pollutants into navigable
waters except in compliance with the statute. The CWA confronts the problem of water
pollution on a number of different fronts. Its primaiy reliance, however, is on establishing
restrictions on the types and amounts of pollutants discharged from various industrial,
commercial, and public sources of wastewater.
Congress recognized that regulating only those sources that discharge effluent
directly into the nation's waters would not be sufficient to achieve the goals of the CWA.
Consequently, the CWA requires EPA to promulgate nationally applicable pretreatment
standards that restrict pollutant discharges for those facilities that discharge wastewater indirectly
through sewers flowing to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) (Section 307(b) and (c), 33
U.S.C. 1317(b) and (c)). National pretreatment standards are established for wastewater
pollutants that may pass through or interfere with POTW operations. Generally, pretreatment
standards are designed to ensure that wastewater from direct and indirect industrial dischargers
are subject to similar levels of treatment. In addition, POTWs are required to implement local
treatment limits applicable to their industrial indirect dischargers to satisfy any local
requirements (40 CFR 403.5).
Direct dischargers must comply with effluent limitations in National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits; indirect dischargers must comply with
pretreatment standards. These limitations and standards are established by regulation for
categories of industrial dischargers and are based on the degree of control that can be achieved
using various levels of pollution control technology.
2-1
-------
Section 2 - Background
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT) —
Section 304(b)(1) of the CWA
In establishing the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the Iron and
Steel Category, EPA generally defines BPT effluent limitations for conventional, non-
conventional, and priority pollutants. In specifying BPT, EPA looks at a number of factors. EPA
first considers the cost of achieving effluent reductions in relation to the effluent reduction
benefits. The Agency also considers the age of equipment and facilities, the processes employed
and any required process changes, engineering aspects of the control technologies, non-water
quality environmental impacts (including energy requirements), and other factors the Agency
deems appropriate (CWA 304(b)(1)(B)). Traditionally, EPA establishes BPT effluent limitations
based on the average of the best performances of facilities within the industry of various ages,
sizes, processes, or other common characteristics. Where, however, existing performance is
uniformly inadequate, EPA may require higher levels of control than currently in place in an
industrial category if the Agency determines that the technology can be practically applied.
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT) — Section 304(b)(4)
of the CWA
The 1977 amendments to the CWA required EPA to identify effluent reduction
levels for conventional pollutants associated with BCT technology for discharges from existing
industrial point sources. In addition to other factors specified in Section 304(b)(4)(B), the CWA
required that EPA establish BCT limitations after consideration of a two-part "cost
reasonableness" test. EPA explained its methodology for the development of BCT limitations in
July 1986 (51 FR 24974).
Section 304(a)(4) designates the following as conventional pollutants:
biochemical oxygen demand, total suspended solids, fecal coliform, pH, and any additional
pollutants defined by the Administrator as conventional. The Administrator designated oil and
grease as an additional conventional pollutant on July 30, 1979 (44 FR 44501).
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) —
Section 304(b)(2) of the CWA
In general, BAT effluent limitations guidelines represent the best economically
achievable performance of facilities in the industrial subcategory or category. The factors
considered in assessing BAT include the cost of achieving BAT effluent reductions, the age of
equipment and facilities involved, the process employed, potential process changes, and non-
water quality environmental impacts, including energy requirements. The Agency retains
considerable discretion in assigning the weights of these factors. BAT limitations may be based
on effluent reductions attainable through changes in a facility's processes and operations. As
with BPT, where existing performance is uniformly inadequate, BAT may require a higher level
of performance than is currently being achieved based on technology transferred from a different
subcategory or category. BAT may be based upon process changes or internal controls, even
when these technologies are not common industry practice.
2-2
-------
Section 2 - Background
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) — Section 306 of the CWA
NSPS reflect effluent reductions that are achievable based on the best available
demonstrated control technology. New facilities have the opportunity to install the best and most
efficient production processes and wastewater treatment technologies. As a result, NSPS should
represent the most stringent controls attainable through the application of the best available
control technology for all pollutants (that is, conventional, non-conventional, and priority
pollutants). In establishing NSPS, EPA is directed to take into consideration the cost of
achieving the effluent reduction and any non-water quality environmental impacts and energy
requirements.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES) — Section 307(b) of the
CWA
PSES are designed to prevent the discharge of pollutants that pass through,
interfere with, or are otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. The CWA
authorizes EPA to establish pretreatment standards for pollutants that pass through POTWs or
interfere with treatment processes or sludge disposal methods at POTWs. Pretreatment standards
are technology-based and analogous to BAT effluent limitations guidelines.
The General Pretreatment Regulations, which set forth the framework for the
implementation of categorical pretreatment standards, are found at 40 CFR Part 403. Those
regulations contain a definition of pass-through that address local rather than national instances
of pass-through and establish pretreatment standards that apply to all non-domestic dischargers
(see 52 FR 1586, January 14, 1987).
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS) — Section 307(c) of the
CWA
Like PSES, PSNS are designed to prevent the discharges of pollutants that pass
through, interfere with, or are otherwise incompatible with the operation of POTWs. PSNS are
to be issued at the same time as NSPS. New indirect dischargers have the opportunity to
incorporate into their facilities the best available demonstrated technologies. The Agency
considers the same factors in promulgating PSNS as it considers in promulgating NSPS.
2.1.2 Section 304(m) Requirements and Litigation
Section 304(m) of the CWA, added by the Water Quality Act of 1987, requires
EPA to establish schedules for (1) reviewing and revising existing effluent limitations guidelines
and standards; and (2) promulgating new effluent limitations guidelines and standards. On
January 2, 1990, EPA published an Effluent Guidelines Plan (55 FR 80) that established
schedules for developing new and revised effluent limitations guidelines and standards for
several industry categories, one of which was the Iron and Steel Category.
2-3
-------
Section 2 - Background
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Public Citizen, Inc. filed
suit against the Agency, alleging violation of Section 304(m) and other statutory authorities
requiring promulgation of effluent limitations guidelines and standards (Reference 2-1). Under
the terms of a consent decree dated January 31, 1992, which settled the litigation, EPA agreed to,
among other things, conduct a study of the Iron and Steel industry. This study, which is
discussed in Section 2.2.3 of this document, was completed in 1995. After the study, the Agency
named the Iron and Steel rule as one of the rules to be developed under the consent decree. On
November 18, 1998, the court approved modifications to the consent decree to revise the
deadline for the Iron and Steel rule to October 2000 for proposal and April 2002 for final action.
2.2 History of Iron and Steel Category Rulemaking Activities
This section presents a brief history of Iron and Steel Category rulemaking
activities. Section 2.2.1 discusses prior Iron and Steel Category wastewater discharge
regulations. Section 2.2.2 discusses the current Iron and Steel rule. Section 2.2.3 discusses the
Preliminary Study of the Iron and Steel Category. Section 2.2.4 discusses the Proposed
Regulation, Section 2.2.5 the Notice of Data Availability, and Section 2.2.6 the Extension to the
Public Comment Period.
2.2.1 Prior Regulations
On June 28, 1974, EPA promulgated effluent limitations for BPT and BAT,
NSPS, and PSNS for basic steelmaking operations (Phase I) of the integrated steel industry (39
FR 24114-24133,40 CFR Part 420, Subparts A-L). The regulation covered the following 12
subcategories of the industry:
• By-product cokemaking;
• Beehive cokemaking;
• Sintering;
• Blast furnace (iron);
• Blast furnace (ferromanganese);
• Basic oxygen furnace (semi-wet air pollution control methods);
• Basic oxygen furnace (wet air pollution control methods);
• Open hearth furnace;
• Electric arc furnace (semi-wet air pollution control methods);
• Electric arc furnace (wet air pollution control methods);
• Vacuum degassing; and
• Continuous casting and pressure slab molding.
In response to several petitions for review, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Third Circuit remanded that regulation on November 7,1975 (Reference 2-2). While the
court rejected all technical challenges to the BPT limitations, it held that the BAT effluent
limitations and NSPS for certain subcategories were "not demonstrated." In addition, the court
questioned the entire regulation on the grounds that EPA had failed to adequately consider the
impact that plant age had on the cost or feasibility of retrofitting pollution controls, had failed to
2-4
-------
Section 2 - Background
assess the impact of the regulation on water scarcity in arid and semi-arid regions of the country,
and had failed to make adequate "net/gross" provisions for pollutants found in intake water
supplies. The court also held that the "form" of the regulation was improper because the
regulation did not provide "ranges" of limitations to be selected by permit issuers. This
judgement, however, was amended (Reference 2-3).
On March 29, 1976, EPA promulgated BPT effluent limitations and proposed
BAT effluent limitations, NSPS, and PSNS for steel forming and finishing operations (Phase II)
within the steel industry (39 FR 12990-13030,40 CFR Part 420, Subparts M-Z). The regulation
covered the following 14 subcategories of the industry:
• Hot forming - primary;
• Hot forming - section;
• Hot forming - flat;
• Pipe and tube;
• Pickling - sulfuric acid - batch and continuous;
• Pickling - hydrochloric acid - batch and continuous;
• Cold rolling;
• Hot coating - galvanizing;
• Hot coating - terne;
• Miscellaneous runoff - storage piles, casting, and slagging;
• Combination acid picking - batch and continuous;
• Scale removal - Kolene and Hydride;
• Wire pickling and coating; and
• Continuous alkaline cleaning.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit remanded that regulation on
September 14, 1977 (Reference 2-4). While the court again rejected all technical challenges to
the BPT limitations, it again questioned the regulation in regard to the age/retrofit and water
scarcity issues. In addition, the court invalidated the regulation for lack of proper notice to the
specialty steel industry and directed EPA to reevaluate its cost estimates in light of "site-specific
costs" and reexamine its economic impact analysis. The court also held that the Agency had no
statutory authority to exempt plants in the Mahoning Valley region of Eastern Ohio from
compliance with the BPT limitations.
On January 28, 1981, the Agency promulgated General Pretreatment Regulations
applicable to existing and new indirect dischargers within the Iron and Steel industry and other
major industries (40 CFR Part 403,47 FR 4518).
2.2.2 Current Regulation
On May 27, 1982, EPA promulgated effluent limitations for BPT, BAT, BCT, and
NSPS, PSES, and PSNS for the Iron and Steel Category (47 FR 23258,40 CFR Part 420). The
regulation covered the following 12 subcategories of the industry:
2-5
-------
Section 2 - Background
• Cokemaking;
• Sintering
• Ironmaking;
• Steelmaking;
• Vacuum degassing;
• Continuous casting;
• Hot forming;
• Salt bath descaling;
• Acid pickling;
• Cold forming;
• Alkaline cleaning; and
• Hot coating.
The 1982 regulation was the first promulgated by EPA under the 1977
amendments to the CWA, and thus was the first to distinguish between conventional, non-
conventional, and priority pollutants in the regulatory scheme established by the 1977
amendments.
The American Iron and Steel Institute, certain members of the Iron and Steel
industry, and the NRDC filed petitions to review the 1982 regulation. Their challenges were
consolidated into one lawsuit by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (Reference 2-5). On
February 4, 1983, the parties in the consolidated lawsuit entered into a comprehensive settlement
agreement that resolved all issues raised by the petitioners. In accordance with the settlement
agreement, EPA modified and clarified certain parts of the Iron and Steel rule and published
additional preamble language regarding the rule.1 The Iron and Steel rule was amended on May
17, 1984 (49 FR 21024). Some of the modifications made to the rule include the following:
• EPA included a method for calculating production-based pretreatment
standards. This method largely mirrored the method given at 40 CFR
122.45(b)(2) for calculating production-based effluent limitations for
direct dischargers.
• While the "Water Bubble" provision in the 1982 rule provided that the
alternative effluent limitations established under the provision must result
in no increase in the discharge of pollutants beyond that allowed by the
generally applicable limitations, the provision was amended to provide
that alternative effluent limitations must result in a specified decrease in
the discharge of traded pollutants from the amount allowed by the
generally applicable limitations.
'EPA also agreed to take final action on an amendment to the General Pretreatment Regulations (40 CFR Part 403)
to permit the reclassification of noncontact cooling water flows contaminated with significant quantities of pollutants
from "dilute" to "unregulated" for purposes of the combined wastestream formula at 40 CFR 403.6 (e).
2-6
-------
Section 2 - Background
• EPA included a provision that removal credits may be granted for phenols
(4AAP) when used as an indicator or surrogate pollutant.
• BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS effluent limitations and standards for lead
and zinc were raised slightly in the ironmaking and sintering
subcategories.
• EPA modified BAT effluent limitations and PSES for total cyanide and
established a new segment for existing indirect blast furnace dischargers.
The new segment contained standards identical to the generally applicable
PSES except that the promulgated ammonia-N and phenols (4AAP)
standards were less stringent.
• BPT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS effluent limitations and standards for
zinc were raised slightly in the sulfuric and hydrochloric acid pickling
segments of the acid pickling subcategory.
• While the 1982 regulation limited all cold worked pipe and .tube
operations to zero discharge for BPT, BAT, BCT, NSPS, PSES, and
PSNS, EPA modified the rule to permit nominal discharges (rather than
contract hauling) of spent oil or water solution and to specify that
limitations and standards for types of process wastewater not covered
under the 1982 regulation were to be developed on a case-by-case basis.
• EPA modified effluent limitations and standards for zinc under the hot
coating subcategory, provided that facilities achieving zinc discharge
levels more stringent than the amended limitations and standards
continued to do so. The amended rule also provided that the limitations
could be used as a basis for determining alternative limitations under the
"Water Bubble" provision, even for those facilities achieving discharge
levels more stringent than the amended limitations and standards.
EPA temporarily excluded 21 facilities from the provisions of the 1982 rule due
to economic considerations, provided the owner(s) or operator(s) of the facilities requested that
the Agency consider establishing alternative effluent limitations and supplied EPA with
information consistent with 40 CFR 420.01(b) on or before July 26,1982.
2.2.3 Preliminary Study of the Iron and Steel Category
EPA was required by the terms of the 1992 consent decree with the NRDC to
initiate preliminary reviews of a number of categorical effluent limitations guidelines and
standards on a set schedule. In compliance with the requirement, EPA published the
"Preliminary Study of the Iron and Steel Category" (EPA 821-R-95-037) in September 1995.
The study included:
2-7
-------
Section 2 - Background
• A preliminary assessment of the status of the industry with respect to the
Iron and Steel rule promulgated in 1982 and amended in 1984;
• Identification of better-performing mills using conventional and
innovative in-process pollution prevention and end-of-pipe treatment
technologies;
• Estimation of possible effluent reduction benefits if the industry was
upgraded to the level of better-performing mills; and
• Identification of regulatory and implementation issues with the Iron and
Steel rule and identification of possible solutions to those regulatory and
implementation issues.
The study found that the Iron and Steel industry had evolved during the decade
following the 1984 amendments to the Iron and Steel rule. The study found that the industry had
made improvements in manufacturing techniques, water conservation, pollution prevention, and
wastewater treatment practices. The study also found that the industry had consolidated and
modernized in response to domestic and world competition. While integrated mills continued to
decrease in size in response to changes in demand, the market for non-integrated mills using steel
scrap as their primary material continued to expand due to improvements in the quality of steel
manufactured from scrap. Cokemaking operations were declining due to changes in ironmaking
processes, while direct-reduced ironmaking was increasing. Also, continuous casting became the
new industry standard due to the increased energy efficiency of the process compared with
piecemeal casting.
Overall, the study found that the industry was operating with greater efficiency.
Pollutant loadings had decreased due to increased wastewater recycle rates on manufacturing
processes and improved wastewater treatment processes. At the time of the study, many better-
performing mills were discharging wastewater loadings far below the 1982 standards; however,
not all of the industry had improved wastewater treatment or implemented proactive pollution
prevention practices. At the time of the study, some mills continued to discharge in excess of the
1982 rule.
2.2.4 Proposed Regulation
On October 31,2000, the EPA Administrator signed proposed revisions to
technology-based effluent limitations guidelines and standards for wastewater discharges from
new and existing iron and steel facilities. The proposed rule was published in the Federal
Register on December 27,2000 (65 FR 81964). EPA proposed to alter the applicability and
scope of the existing rule by adding electroplating operations and by including direct iron
reduction, briquetting, and forging operations. In addition, EPA proposed excluding from the
iron and steel guideline in Part 420 some wiring, cold forming, and hot dip coating operations.
In a proposed rule for the Metal Products and Machinery (MP&M) industrial category published
on January 3, 2001 (66 FR 424) EPA proposed to address these operations under Part 438.
2-8
-------
Section 2 - Background
The Agency proposed to revise the subcategorization scheme to create seven
subcategories of iron and steel facilities based on co-treatment of compatible waste streams. This
would have replaced the present structure of 12 subcategories. The proposed subcategorization
approach reflected the way treatment systems are generally run in the iron and steel industry.
EPA proposed the following seven subcategories:
Subpart
Subcategory
Segment
Subpart A
Cokemaking Subcategory
By-product
Non-recovery
Subpart B
Ironmaking Subcategory
Blast Furnace
Sintering
Subpart C
Steelmaking Subcategory
Subpart D
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Mills Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart E
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming Operations Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart F
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart G
Other Operations Subcategory
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking
Forging
Briquetting
For most of the subcategories, except for cokemaking, finishing, and the newly
added subcategory for other operations, the Agency proposed limits based on improved
performance and operation of the same technology basis used to establish limits and standards in
the 1982 rule. Consequently, the proposed limitations were more stringent than the limitations
promulgated in 1982. For the cokemaking subcategory, EPA proposed BAT limits based on a
technology option that was essentially the same as the 1982 technology option but included an
additional treatment step — alkaline chlorination. For finishing, EPA proposed limits based on
the 1982 technology basis with the addition of counter-current rinsing and acid purification.
For many of the proposed subcategories, wastewater flow reduction steps, in
concert with better performance of the blowdown treatment systems, provided the primary basis
for the proposal limits and standards. The proposed options were presented in the Federal
Register at 65 FR 81968-69, December 27,2000 and in the Proposed Technical Development
Document (EPA-821-B-00-011) in Section 14 (Reference 2-6).
Additionally, the proposed regulation provided notice of EPA's intent to delist a
number of obsolete manufacturing operations from Part 420. These operations are shut down,
the equipment has generally been dismantled, and production is not likely to ever resume in the
United States. These operations are Beehive Coke Ovens (Part 420.12 (c), Part 420.13 (c), Part
420.14 (c), Part 420.15 (c), 420.16 (c), and 420.17 (c)); Ferromanganese blast furnace (Part
2-9
-------
Section 2 - Background
420.32(b), Part 420.33(b), 420.34(b), 420.35(b), and 420.36(b)); and Open Hearth Furnace
(420.42 (c), and 420.43(c), 420.44 (d), 420.45 (c), 420.46(d), and 420.47(d)).
The proposed regulation is available on line at:
www.epa.gov/ost/ironsteel/notices.html.
2.2.5 Notice of Data Availability
On February 14,2001, EPA published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) at
66 FR 10253. This notice provided additional discussion and clarification on some of the issues
raised in the proposal. For example, the notice discussed EPA's new finding that phenol does
not pass through POTWs, and indicated that EPA was rethinking its proposal to establish a
nation-wide limit on ammonia from steel finishing operations.
The NODA also provided notice of changes to certain portions of the proposed
regulation and accompanying preamble to eliminate inconsistencies. Finally, it corrected
potentially confusing typographical errors and extended the proposal's comment period from
February 26, 2001 to March 26, 2001. The February NODA is located on line at:
www.epa.gov/ost/ironsteel/reg.html,
2.2.6 Extension to Public Comment Period
On April 4, 2001, EPA published a notice (66 FR 17842) extending the comment
period to April 25,2001.
2.2.7 Public Outreach
Public outreach began early in the process for the re-visitation of Part 420. The
Agency visited 37 mills in order to get a better understanding of the current state of the iron and
steel industry. The two purposes of the preliminary visits were to get assistance on preparation
of the 308 survey and to search for candidate sampling mills. We needed a better understanding
on what kinds of questions we needed to ask, how to ask them, what kind of data was available,
where, who to ask, and other useful information such as current performance levels of treatment
systems. All this information was use to prepare an Information Collection Request (ICR),
which contained the 308 survey questionnaires, for OMB review. The OMB approved the ICR
on March 3,1998 (OMB Control No. 2040-0193).
Once we began to receive the 1997 database from the survey responses, the
Agency prepared some preliminary summary information, and held a series of public meeting
with stakeholders to discuss data submitted. Significant meetings were held in both Washington,
D.C. and Chicago during 1998,1999, and 2000 to reach a larger audience. Many additional
meetings were held with stakeholders to reach the regulated community and to seek technical
advise from the industry. At these meetings we sought the advice of all stakeholders on what
they believed needed to be revised with Part 420, how this should be done, and sought their
assistance in achieving this goal. We often presented information on pollutants of concern,
2-10
-------
Section 2 - Background
candidate treatment systems performance levels from better performing mills, and some
preliminary estimates of attainability. On every occasion possible, some requested by the
industry, some requested by the Agency staff, staff either went to the trade associations offices or
participated via conference call to keep the dialogue open. These working session were essential
to get a better understanding of their issues. At all meetings, the staff provided updates on the
development of the study, exchanged ideas and, where appropriate, presented aggregate
information to continue the dialogue.
The Agency also set up a website (www.epa.gov/ost/ironsteel) specifically to
keep the public informed the about the development of the iron and steel regulation. The website
contained background information on the purpose of the study, the current 1982 regulation, the
preliminary study, all Federal Register notices related to this action, a complete copy of the ICR,
news and stakeholder information such as minutes of meetings and action related to this activity,
Agency contacts, links to trade associations, as well as other information. All documents
presented at the public meetings were placed on the website and the website was kept up to date.
The Agency also invited many other stakeholders including members of the
environmental community into our discussions. On some occasions, the Agency paid the travel
of several stakeholders to attend these meeting in order to get input from all concerned
stakeholders.
After the revised regulation was proposed, EPA continued to our outreach efforts.
Staff presented aggregate information at several national conventions, held a public meeting on
February 20, 2001, answered hundreds of phone calls. The staff completely complied with all
written requests submitted by industry representative, within the bounds of 40 CFR Part 2,
Subpart B, including providing plant-specific detailed costing when disclosure would not
compromise confidential business information claims. The Agency made a special effort to keep
the industry technical community involved since we felt it was essential to have their technical
expertise available. We had a series of meetings in April 2001 and another in November 2001 to
get a better understanding of their concerns with the proposed regulation. Every effort, within
reason, was made to bring all stakeholders into the process to get a picture of the current iron and
steel industry.
2.3
References
2-1
NRDC et al. v. Whitman. Civ. No. 89-2980 fD.D.C.V
2-2
American Iron and Steel Institute, et al. v. EPA. 526 F.2d 1027 C3d Cir. 19751.
2-3
American Iron and Steel Institute, et al. v. EPA. 560 F.2d 589 ("3d Cir. 19771.
2-4
American Iron and Steel Institute, et al. v. EPA. 568 F.2d 284 ("3d Cir. 1977).
2-5
National Steel Corp. v. EPA. No. 82-3225 and Consolidated Cases.
2-11
-------
Section 2 - Background
2-6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for the
Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Point Source Category. EPA 821-B-00-011, Washington, DC,
December 2000.
2-12
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
SECTION 3
DATA COLLECTION
EPA collected and evaluated information and data from various sources in the
course of developing today's final effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the iron and
steel industry. EPA used these data to develop the industry profile, to determine the applicability
of the rule, to subcategorize the industry, and to determine wastewater characteristics, technology
options, compliance costs, pollutant loading reductions, and non-water quality environmental
impacts. This section discusses the following data collection activities:
• Base year, for developing industry characteristics (Section 3.1);
• Surveys, including descriptions of the survey instruments and
determination of survey recipients (Section 3.2);
• Site visits, including descriptions of the types of sites visited, the
geographical locations, and the manufacturing processes at the sites visited
(Section 3.3);
• Sampling episodes, including the types of sites sampled, the
manufacturing processes and treatment systems sampled, and the sampling
process (Section 3.4);
• Other data sources (Section 3.5);
• Public participation, including meetings with stakeholders from industry
trade associations, individual steel companies, environmental groups, and
nongovernmental organizations (Section 3.6);
• Summary of post-proposal data collected, including data submitted with
comments on the proposed rule and data requested by the Agency (Section
3.7); and
• References (Section 3.8).
3.1 Base Year
EPA's effluent limitations guidelines studies typically use a base year for
developing the industry characteristics that provide the basis for consistent technical, economic,
and environmental assessments. When the iron and steel study data gathering efforts were
initiated, 1997 was the most current year for gathering relatively complete, accurate information
on manufacturing processes, waste management practices, in-place wastewater treatment
technology, wastewater characteristics, costs of wastewater management and treatment practices,
production levels, and pollutant loadings as well as economic and financial conditions. EPA
3-1
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
took a "snap-shot" of the industry to develop the costs for various wastewater treatment
technology options, pollutant reduction benefits, and economic impacts for each option.
Therefore, the impacts would correspond to the concurrent industry characteristics. As is the
case for most effluent guidelines, for the final rule, EPA continued to use the base year
information (from 1997) in its engineering analyses unless indicated otherwise. This is
appropriate because it allows EPA to maintain a consistent database upon which to base its
analyses.
3.2 Surveys
The principal source of information and data used in developing effluent
limitations guidelines and standards is the industry response to surveys distributed by EPA under
the authority of Section 308 of the Clean Water Act. EPA designed these surveys to obtain
information concerning manufacturing operations, wastewater generation and treatment,
discharge practices, and analytical data. The Agency also developed related surveys to obtain
financial data for use in assessing economic impacts and the economic achievability of
technology options.
EPA developed an Information Collection Request (ICR) entitled U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data that explains
the regulatory basis and intended use of the industry surveys. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approved the ICR in August 1998 (OMB Control No. 2040-0193, approval
expired 08/31/2001) (Reference 3-1). The Agency published three Federal Register notices
announcing:
(1) the intent to distribute the surveys (62 FR 54453; October 20,1997);
(2) the submission of the ICR to the OMB (63 FR 16500; April 3, 1998); and
(3) OMB's approval of the ICR (63 FR 47023; September 3,1998)
(References 3-2 through 3-4).
The Agency consulted with industry trade associations and visited a number of sites to develop
the survey instruments and to ensure an accurate mailing list.
EPA distributed four industry surveys:
• U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (detailed
survey);
• U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data fShort Form)
(short survey);
• U.S. EPA Collection of Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Treatment
Capital Cost Data (cost survey); and
3-2
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
• U.S. EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of
1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (analytical and production survey).
In October 1998, EPA mailed the detailed survey to 176 iron and steel sites and the short survey
to 223 iron and steel sites. EPA designed the detailed survey for those iron and steel sites that
perform any iron and steel manufacturing process. Those sites include integrated and
non-integrated steel mills, as well as sites that were initially identified as stand-alone cokemaking
plants, stand-alone sinter plants, stand-alone direct-reduced ironmaking plants, stand-alone hot
forming mills, and stand-alone finishing mills. The short survey is an abbreviated version of the
detailed survey. It was designed for stand-alone iron and steel sites with the exceptions of those
that received the detailed survey. EPA mailed the cost survey and the analytical and production
survey to subsets of the facilities that received the detailed or short survey to obtain more detailed
information on wastewater treatment system costs, analytical data, and facility production. EPA
mailed the cost survey to 90 iron and steel sites and the analytical and production survey to 38
iron and steel sites.
The detailed and short surveys were divided into two parts: Part A: Technical
Information and Part B: Financial and Economic Information. The "Part A" technical questions
in the detailed survey comprised four sections, with Sections 3 and 4 being combined in the short
survey, as follows:
• Section 1: General Site Information;
• Section 2: Manufacturing Process Information;
• Section 3: In-Process and End-of-Pipe Wastewater Treatment and
Pollution Prevention Information; and
• Section 4: Wastewater Outfall Information.
The financial and economic information in Part B of the detailed survey also
comprised four sections, as shown below:
• Section 1: Site Identification;
• Section 2: Site Financial Information;
• Section 3: Business Entity Financial Information; and
• Section 4: Corporate Parent Financial Information.
Part B of the short survey contained a single section for site identification and
financial information. More detailed descriptions of financial data collection and analysis are
included in the Economic Analysis of Final Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for
the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category (Reference 3-5).
The detailed survey requested detailed descriptions of all manufacturing processes
and treatment systems on site. The short survey contained manufacturing process questions for
3-3
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
only forming and finishing operations. EPA eliminated the cokemaking, ironmaking, and
steelmaking questions from the short survey because those processes were not applicable to the
facilities that received the short survey. The Agency also reduced the amount of detail requested
in the short survey. EPA used the detailed descriptions of hot forming mills from the integrated,
non-integrated, and stand-alone hot forming mills to make assumptions about industry trends.
Part A Section 1 requested site contacts and addresses and general information
regarding manufacturing operations, age, and location. The Agency used this information to
develop the proposed subcategorization and applicability statements.
Part A Section 2 requested information on products, types of steel produced,
production levels, unit operations, chemicals and coatings used, quantity of wastewater
discharged from unit operations, miscellaneous wastewater sources, flow rates, pollution
prevention activities, and air pollution control. The Agency used these data to evaluate
manufacturing processes and wastewater generation, to develop the model production-
normalized flow rates, and to develop regulatory options. EPA also used these data to develop
the proposed subcategorization and applicability and to estimate compliance costs and pollutant
removals associated with the regulatory options EPA considered for the final rule.
Part A Section 3 requested detailed information (including diagrams) on the
wastewater treatment systems and discharge flow rates, monitoring analytical data, and operating
and maintenance cost data (including treatment chemical usage). The Agency used these data to
identify treatment technologies-in-place, to determine regulatory options, and to estimate
compliance costs and pollutant removals associated with the regulatory options considered for
the final rule.
Part A Section 4 requested permit information, discharge locations, wastewater
sources to each outfall, flow rates, regulated pollutants and limits, and permit monitoring data.
EPA used this information to calculate baseline or current loadings for each facility. The Agency
also used this information to calculate the pollutant loadings associated with the regulatory
options considered for the final rule.
The cost survey requested detailed capital cost data on selected wastewater
treatment systems installed since 1993, including equipment, engineering design, and installation
costs. (EPA chose 1993 because 1997 was the base year for the detailed and short surveys, and
this provided the Agency with a five year range for collecting cost data on recently installed
treatment systems.) EPA incorporated these data into a costing methodology and used them to
determine incremental investment costs and incremental operating and maintenance costs
associated with the regulatory options considered for the final rule.
The analytical and production survey requested detailed daily analytical and flow
rate data for selected sampling points, and monthly production data and operating hours for
selected manufacturing operations. The Agency used the analytical data collected to estimate
baseline pollutant loadings and pollutant removals from facilities with treatment-in-place similar
to the technology options considered for the final rule, to evaluate the variability associated with
3-4
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
iron and steel industry discharges, and to establish effluent limitations guidelines and standards.
The Agency used the production data collected to evaluate the production basis for applying the
proposal in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits and pretreatment
control mechanisms.
EPA mailed the iron and steel industry surveys by mail to facilities that were
identified from the following sources:
• Association of Iron and Steel Engineers' 1997 and 1998 Directories: Iron
and Steel Plants Volume 1. Plants and Facilities (Reference 3-6);
• Iron and Steel Works of the World (11 th and 12th editions) directories
(Reference 3-7);
• Iron and Steel Society's The Steel Industry of Canada. Mexico, and the
United States: Plant Locations (Reference 3-8);
• Member lists from the following trade associations:
— American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute (Reference 3-9),
— American Galvanizers Association (Reference 3-10),
— American Iron and Steel Institute (Reference 3-11),
— American Wire Producers Association (Reference 3-12),
— Cold Finished Steel Bar Institute (Reference 3-13),
— Specialty Steel Industry of North America (Reference 3-14),
— Steel Manufacturers Association (Reference 3-15),
— Steel Tube Institute of North America (Reference 3-16), and
— Wire Association International (Reference 3-17);
• Dun & Bradstreet Facility Index Database (Reference 3-18);
• EPA's Permit Compliance System CPCS1 Database (Reference 3-19);
• EPA's Toxic Release Inventory CTRI1 Database (Reference 3-20);
• Iron and Steel Society's Iron and Steelmaker "Roundup" editions
(Reference 3-21);
• 33 Metalproducing "Roundup" editions (Reference 3-22); -
• 33 Metalproducing "Census of the North American Steel Industry"
(Reference 3-23); and
• Thomas Register (Reference 3-24).
3-5
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
The Agency cross-referenced these sources with one another to develop a list of
individual sites. Based on these sources, EPA identified 822 candidate facilities to receive
surveys. These candidates include some steel finishing facilities that EPA may include in the
Metal Products and Machinery (MP&M) Category under 40 CFR Part 438. To minimize the
burden on the respondents, EPA grouped facilities into 12 strata. In general, EPA determined the
strata based on its understanding of the manufacturing processes at each facility. Table 3-1
presents the stratification of the iron and steel industry for the surveys.
Depending on the amount or type of information EPA required for the
rulemaking, EPA either solicited information from all facilities within a stratum (i.e., a census or
"certainty" stratum) or selected a random sample of facilities within a stratum (i.e., statistically
sampled stratum). EPA sent a survey to all facilities in the certainty strata (strata 5 and 8)
because the Agency determined it was necessary to capture the size, complexity, or uniqueness of
the steel operations at these sites. EPA also sent surveys to all facilities in strata 1 through 4 (all
cokemaking sites, integrated steelmaking sites, and sintering and direct-reduced ironmaking
sites) because of the relatively low number of sites in each stratum and because of the size,
complexity, and uniqueness of raw material preparation and steel manufacturing operations at
these sites. The Agency statistically sampled the remaining sites in strata 6, 7, and 9 through 12.
EPA calculated survey weights for each selected facility based on the facility's probability of
selection. If the Agency sent a survey to every facility in a stratum, each selected facility
represents only itself and has a survey weight of one (1). For statistically sampled strata, each
selected facility represents itself and other facilities within that stratum that were not selected to
receive an industry survey. These facilities have survey weights greater than one (1). See
Appendix A for more details.
Of the 822 candidate facilities, EPA mailed either a detailed survey or a short
survey to 399 facilities.1 Detailed survey recipients included integrated mills, non-integrated
mills, stand-alone cokemaking sites, stand-alone sintering sites, stand-alone direct-reduced
ironmaking sites, stand-alone hot forming sites, and stand-alone finishing sites. Short survey
recipients included stand-alone cold forming sites, stand-alone pipe and tube sites, stand-alone
hot dip coating sites, and stand-alone wire sites. Section 5 describes these types of sites. EPA
received 378 completed surveys, including those from 33 sites that certified that they were not
engaged in iron and steel activities. Eleven survey recipients did not respond and, thus, are
considered nonrespondents. The non-respondents consisted of non-integrated sites, stand-alone
pipe and tube sites, and stand-alone wire sites. Finally, EPA did not receive responses from
another ten survey recipients: seven of these sites were closed (i.e., the surveys were
undeliverable), two sites were considered part of a third site owned by the same company (i.e.,
responses regarding the operations from those two sites were included with the response for the
third site), and one site received two surveys under two mailing addresses and completed only
one survey.
'Before the surveys were actually mailed, the Agency notified potential survey recipients. One site, randomly
selected from stratum 12 and notified that it would be receiving a survey, notified the Agency that it was not engaged
in iron and steel activities. The Agency decided not to mail a survey to that site. Therefore, this site was not
included in the 399 facilities receiving surveys.
3-6
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
One hundred fifty-four of the returned surveys were from sites with operations
that were later determined to be within the proposed scope of the MP&M Category. Similarly,
two recipients of MP&M surveys were determined to be within the scope of the Iron and Steel
Category. Therefore, the Agency used the data from 191 returned surveys and the two MP&M
industry surveys in the development of the final rule.
Once the Agency completed a review of the detailed and short surveys and
defined the technology options, EPA identified survey respondents who had installed wastewater
treatment systems in the last 10 years (since 1990) that were similar to the technology options
and mailed them the cost survey. Of the 90 cost survey recipients, 88 returned completed
surveys. EPA selected 38 facilities to receive the analytical and production survey who had
indicated in the detailed or short survey that: (1) they had treatment trains similar to the
treatment technology options, (2) they had collected analytical data for that treatment train, (3)
they had a treatment train with a dedicated outfall from which EPA could evaluate performance,
and (4) they did not add excessive dilution water to the outfall before sampling. All 38 analytical
and production survey recipients returned completed surveys. EPA included in the public record
all information and data collected in the surveys for which sites have not asserted claims of
confidential business information under 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B.
3.3 Site Visits
EPA conducted 67 site visits at iron and steel facilities in 19 states and Canada
between January 1997 and June 1999. In response to comments received on the proposed rule,
the Agency conducted an additional seven site visits at iron and steel facilities in five states
between January and November 2001. Some of the additional site visits were to sites that had
previously been visited by the Agency. Table 3-2 presents the number of sites visited in each
state. However, sites that were visited more than once were not counted more than once.
The purpose of the site visits was to collect information about each site's
manufacturing processes, water management practices, and treatment technologies, and to
evaluate each facility for potential inclusion in the sampling program. EPA also used
information collected during site visits to help develop the industry surveys. EPA selected sites
to visit based on the type of site (as described in Section 5.1), the manufacturing operations at
each facility, the type of steel produced (carbon, alloy, stainless), and the wastewater treatment
operations. The Agency wanted to visit all types of iron and steel manufacturing operations as
well as all types of wastewater treatment operations, including recently installed treatment
systems. Before EPA received any completed surveys, the Agency used information collected
from the sources used to develop the survey database to select sites to visit. After EPA evaluated
the completed surveys, the Agency used information provided by the sites to select additional
sites to visit. Table 3-3 summarizes the number of sites visited both before and after proposal for
each type of site. However, sites that were visited more than once were not counted more than
once.
EPA collected detailed information during each site visit on the manufacturing
processes, wastewater generation, in-process treatment and recycling systems, wastewater
3-7
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
management practices and pollution prevention, end-of-pipe treatment technologies, and, if the
facility was a candidate for sampling, the logistics of collecting samples. The Agency observed
the following manufacturing processes: coke plants, sinter plants, briquetting plants, blast
furnaces, direct-reduced ironmaking plants, an iron carbide plant, basic oxygen furnaces, electric
arc furnaces, vacuum degassers, ladle metallurgy stations, continuous and ingot casting facilities,
hot forming mills (including forging mills), and cold forming mills. The Agency also observed
acid pickling, descaling, and surface cleaning and coating operations (i.e., manufacturing lines or
areas with acid cleaning, alkaline cleaning, annealing, electroplating, and/or hot dip coating
operations). Table 3-4 summarizes the number of sites visited both before and after proposal that
performed any of these manufacturing processes. However, sites that were visited more than
once were not counted more than once.
EPA observed in-process wastewater treatment and recycling systems,
pretreatment systems, and end-of-pipe wastewater treatment systems that were either dedicated to
a manufacturing process or shared by multiple processes. The Agency observed the following
wastewater treatment operations: biological treatment, metals precipitation, solids settling,
alkaline chlorination, and filtration systems.
In response to comments received on the proposed rule, the Agency visited seven
additional sites for the following reasons:
• Additional coke plants - To better understand coke plant wastewater
sources and how flows might be reduced, and to review physical/chemical
treatment and biofiltration at coke plants to understand the differences
between these technologies and conventional activated sludge systems;
• Additional hot strip mill wastewater treatment systems - To determine
modifications required to achieve the proposed BAT limitations; and
• Additional finishing operations - To assess rinsewater flow rates for
finishing operations; to understand how finishing operation flow rates
relate to product quality considerations; to determine typical flow control
equipment and monitoring practices necessary to operate rinses effectively
at finishing lines; and to collect investment cost and operating and
maintenance cost data for flow controls and the installation of
countercurrent rinse tanks on finishing lines.
EPA included in the public record all information and data collected during site visits for which
sites have not asserted claims of confidential business information under 40 CFR Part 2,
Subpart B.
3-8
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
3.4 Sampling
After evaluating information obtained during the site visits, EPA conducted
wastewater sampling at 16 sites between June 1997 and June 1999. EPA selected these sites
using the following criteria:
• The site performed operations either currently regulated under 40 CFR
Part 420 or identified in the Preliminary Study or otherwise identified as
iron and steel operations;
• The site performed high-rate recycling, in-process treatment, or end-of-
pipe treatment operations that EPA believed may represent potential
model pollutant control technology; and
• The site's compliance monitoring data indicated that it was among the
better performing pollutant control systems in the industry, based on
comparisons of monitoring data from other facilities with limits from the
1982 regulation in their permits.
In response to comments received on the proposed rule, EPA conducted
wastewater sampling at four additional sites between November 2000 and April 2001. EPA
selected these additional sites for the following reasons:
• As a collaborative effort between the American Iron and Steel Institute and
EPA, to supplement the 1997/1998 sampling results by further
characterizing raw sinter plant wastewater, specifically the amount of
dioxins and furans generated by this industry, and to evaluate wastewater
treatment system performance; and
• To further characterize untreated wastewater generated by continuous
casting and hot forming operations at non-integrated steel mills.
Table 3-5 shows the type and number of manufacturing processes sampled during
the EPA sampling program, both before and after proposal.
During the 16 initial sampling episodes, EPA collected samples of untreated
process wastewater (treatment system influents), treatment system effluents, source water to
characterize background concentrations, and other samples to characterize the performance of
individual treatment units. During the additional four sampling episodes, EPA collected samples
of untreated process wastewater (treatment system influents), treatment system effluents, and
source water to characterize background concentrations. Table 3-6 summarizes all of the
treatment systems sampled during the sampling program.
In general, the Agency collected 24-hour composite samples from wastewater
sampling points each day of each sampling episode. Exceptions to this rule included samples
3-9
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
collected for volatile organics analysis and oil and grease (O&G), which EPA collected as
multiple grab samples over each 24-hour period (laboratory personnel composited the volatile
organics samples before analysis, while EPA mathematically composited the O&G analytical
results after the analyses were performed). EPA collected a one-time grab sample from each
water source contributing to the manufacturing processes sampled. The Agency collected all
waste oil and treatment system sludge samples as one-time grab samples.
EPA analyzed wastewater samples for up to approximately 300 analytes spanning
the following pollutant classes: conventional, priority, and nonconventional pollutants, including
metals, volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, and dioxins and furans.
Analyte selection was based on knowledge of the manufacturing processes and raw materials
used. EPA generally collected samples using the following protocol:
• Five consecutive days of samples for conventionals, nonconventional and
priority metals, and certain other nonconventional pollutants, including
total suspended solids (TSS), total dissolved solid (TDS), chlorides,
fluorides, sulfates, total organic carbon (TOC), chemical oxygen demand
(COD), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), nitrate/nitrite, ammonia as
nitrogen, and total phenols;
• Five consecutive days of samples from biological treatment systems for
five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BODs) and five-day carbonaceous
biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5);
• Five consecutive days of samples of cokemaking, blast furnace
ironmaking, and sintering wastewater for total sulfide, thiocyanate,
amenable cyanide, total cyanide, and weak acid dissociable (WAD)
cyanide;
• Five consecutive days of samples of cokemaking wastewater for organics
and dioxins/furans;
• Three days of samples, usually consecutive, of all noncokemaking
wastewater for organics;
• Two days of samples, usually consecutive, of blast furnace ironmaking,
sintering, and basic oxygen furnace steelmaking wastewater for
dioxins/furans;
• Five consecutive days of samples from carbon and alloy steel finishing
treatment systems containing chromium-bearing wastewater from
electroplating or hot coating operations, and from stainless steel finishing
treatment systems for hexavalent chromium; and
3-10
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
• On six occasions (one cokemaking plant, two sintering operations, one
direct-reduced ironmaking plant, and two non-integrated steel mills), the
Agency performed a one-day raw wastewater characterization sampling for
pollutants of concern.
Table 3-7 shows the EPA analytical methods used and parameters analyzed for
during the sampling program, the manufacturing processes for which the analyte or analyte group
was analyzed, and the general frequency with which samples were collected during the sampling
program. EPA analyzed one-time grab waste oil and sludge samples for metals, volatile and
semivolatile organic compounds, total phenols, and dioxins/furans, depending on the treatment
system from which they were collected. Table 3-8 lists the specific analytes included within the
following analyte groups: dioxins/furans, metals, volatile organics, and semivolatile organics.
EPA used the analytical results from untreated samples to characterize the
industry, develop the list of pollutants of concern, and develop raw wastewater characteristics.
EPA used data from both untreated wastewater samples, intermediate treatment samples, and
treated effluent samples to evaluate treatment system performance, develop pollutant loadings
and removals, and develop the technology options for the iron and steel industry. EPA used data
collected from treated effluent sampling points to calculate the long-term averages (LTAs) and
limitations for each of the regulatory options considered for the final rule. During each sampling
episode, EPA also collected flow rate data corresponding to each sample collected and
production information from each associated manufacturing operation for use in calculating
pollutant loadings and production-normalized flow rates. EPA included in the public record all
information and data collected during sampling episodes for which sites have not asserted claims
of confidential business information under 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B, or that would not otherwise
disclose confidential business information because of small strata sizes or previously released
information.
3.5 Other Data Sources
EPA evaluated existing data sources to collect technical and financial information
about the iron and steel industry, as discussed below.
The Agency collected technical information from iron and steel industry trade
journals published from 1985 through 1997 as well as information from Iron and Steel Society
conference proceedings. Trade journals included Iron and Steel Engineer, published by the
Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE) (Reference 3-25), Iron and Steelmaker, published
by the Iron and Steel Society (ISS) (Reference 3-26), and New Steel (formerly Iron Age),
published by Chilton Publications (Reference 3-27). EPA obtained the following types of
information from these sources: storm-water and wastewater issues, new and existing
wastewater treatment technologies, wastewater treatment and manufacturing equipment upgrades
and installations, and company mergers, acquisitions, and joint ventures. EPA also used these
sources to identify facilities for potential site visits.
3-11
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
EPA consulted the following publications: Census Manufacturers - Industry
Series and Current Industrial Reports (U.S. Bureau of the Census) (References 3-28 and 3-29);
World Steel Dynamics (Paine Webber) (References 3-30 through 3-36); and The Annual
Statistical Report (American Iron and Steel Institute) (Reference 3-37). These sources provided a
variety of financial information, ranging from aggregate data on employment and payroll to steel
shipments by product, grade, and market.
The Agency performed searches on the following on-line databases: Pollution
Abstracts. Water Resources Abstracts. Engineering Index. Material Business File. National
Technical Information Service fNTIS\ Enviroline. Compendex. and Metadex (References 3-38
through 3-45) to collect information on wastewater treatment technology and pollution
prevention practices used in the iron and steel industry. The Agency also searched EPA's TRI
(Reference 3-20) and PCS databases (Reference 3-19) to determine what pollutants were reported
by the industry. In addition, the Agency reviewed secondary sources, including data, reports, and
analyses published by government agencies; reports and analyses published by the iron and steel
industry and its associated organizations; and publicly available financial information compiled
by both government and private organizations to collect additional financial information.
The Agency used the Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment
Works (Reference 3-46), commonly referred to as the "50-POTW Study," as the primary source
of POTW percent removal data, described in more detail in the POTW pass-through
methodology in Section 12.2.2. However, the 50-POTW Study did not contain data for all
pollutants subject to the pass-through analysis. Therefore, EPA obtained additional data from
EPA's National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL)'s Treatability Database
(formerly called the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) Treatability Database)
(Reference 3-47). Finally, EPA used data submitted in comments on the proposal from POTWs
that accept iron and steel wastewater to supplement the POTW pass-through analysis.
3.6 Public Participation
EPA encouraged participation of all interested parties throughout the development
of the iron and steel category effluent limitations guidelines and standards. EPA conducted
outreach with the following trade associations, which represent the vast majority of iron and steel
facilities: American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA),
Specialty Steel Industry of North America (SSINA), Cold Finished Steel Bar Institute (CFSBI),
Wire Association International, Incorporated (WAI), American Wire Producers Association
(AWPA), Steel Tube Institute of North America (STINA), American Galvanizers Association,
Incorporated (AGA), and American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute (ACCCI). EPA met on
several occasions with various industry representatives to discuss aspects of the regulation
development. EPA also participated in industry meetings and presented updates on the status of
the regulation development.
Because some facilities affected by the revised rulemaking are indirect
dischargers, the Agency made a concerted effort to consult with pretreatment coordinators and
state and local entities who will be responsible for implementing the iron and steel regulation.
3-12
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
EPA sponsored five stakeholder meetings between December 1998 and January
2000. Four were held in Washington, D.C. and one was held in Chicago, Illinois. The primary
objectives of the meetings were to present the Agency's thinking regarding the technology bases
for the proposed revisions to 40 CFR Part 420 and to seek dialogue, discuss issues, and obtain
new ideas from interested stakeholders, including industry representatives and members of
environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the
Environmental Defense Fund (now Environmental Defense), Atlantic States Legal Foundation,
Friends of the Earth, and Save the Dunes.
During the stakeholder meetings, EPA presented process flow diagrams showing
preliminary technology options and potential best management practices (BMPs) that may be
incorporated into a revised Part 420 and/or included in NPDES permit and pretreatment
guidance. The presentations were organized by type of manufacturing process. In addition to
soliciting comments on the preliminary options, EPA requested ideas from the stakeholders to
identify useful incentives for greater pollution control.
At the meetings, EPA encouraged participants to supplement their oral statements
with written comments and supporting data. In that regard, EPA provided a set of data quality
protocols for use when submitting data for the iron and steel rulemaking effort. This handout,
along with all other handouts and meeting summaries, is posted on EPA's iron and steel industry
web site at http://www.epa.gov/OST/ironsteel/. All of the materials presented at the stakeholder
meetings, as well as meeting summaries and any written comments from participants not
containing confidential business information, are also in the public record.
Following the publication of the proposal, the Agency held a pretreatment hearing
and public meeting on February 20,2001 in Washington, D.C. to summarize the proposed
rulemaking, to provide answers to questions posed by the audience, and to listen to comments
pertaining to the proposed pretreatment standards. During the public meeting portion, the
Agency presented a summary of the proposal, including background information on the effluent
guidelines, the purpose of the rule, the general applicability and interface with the MP&M rule,
data collection activities, subcategorization, proposed technology options, proposed regulated
pollutants, total costs and removals, general implementation, and economic impacts. Following
the public meeting, the Agency held the pretreatment hearing. Two representatives from three of
the major trade associations (AISI, SSINA, and SMA) provided orals comments. These
comments are included in Section 12.2 of the Iron and Steel Administrative Record.
EPA met with members of ACCCI on February 6, 2001. During this meeting,
members of the trade association presented general information on the merchant coke industry
and information on the economic effects of increased imports, decreased demand for coke, new
and continuing regulatory burdens in addition to this rule, and coke battery upgrades, repairs, and
rehabilitation on the merchant coke industry. All of the materials presented at this meeting are
included in Section 12.3.1 of the Iron and Steel Administrative Record.
Between April 20 and 26,2001, the Agency met with members of SMA, SSINA,
and AISI in a series of meetings over four days. During the meetings, EPA presented plots
3-13
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
showing facility production-normalized flows for each subcategory and segment to complement
discussions of the Agency's rationale for developing production-normalized flows. Industry
representatives provided several handouts to complement discussions of issues related to alkaline
chlorination design and performance, variability in cokemaking wastewater sources and volumes,
variability in hot forming wastewater flow and intake water quality, and general stainless steel
production processes. All of the materials presented at these meetings, as well as summaries of
the meetings, are included in Section 12.3.2 of the Iron and Steel Administrative Record.
EPA met with members of ACCCI, AISI, SMA, and SSINA on November 15,
2001 as a follow-up to the April meetings. The intent of this meeting was to provide an
overview of EPA activities subsequent to proposal in response to public comments. A summary
of this meeting is included in Section 12.3.3 of the Iron and Steel Administrative Record.
All of the materials presented at all of the meetings following the publication of
the proposal, as well as meeting summaries, data submitted, and any written comments from
participants not containing confidential business information, are in the public record.
3.7 Summary of Post-Proposal Data Collected
EPA received 42 comments on the iron and steel proposal. From these comments,
EPA obtained additional data and information from the industry and POTWs, including
monitoring data and information related to cost of treatment and pass-through of pollutants at
POTWs. Monitoring data submitted included the following:
• Five years of effluent data from a POTW that receives cokemaking
wastewater;
• Three and a half years of average monthly influent data, effluent data, and
the percent removal for ammonia and phenol from a POTW that receives
cokemaking wastewater;
• A summary of aeration tank influent and effluent data and biofilter effluent
data for thiocyanate from a POTW that receives cokemaking wastewater;
• A summary of existing effluent quality data for the nine merchant coke
plants;
• One year of biweekly self-monitoring effluent data from a finishing
treatment system without alkaline precipitation and ferric coprecipitation;
• One week of self-monitoring grab samples of the influent to and the
effluent from a chromium (VI) reduction system; and
3-14
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
• A summary of influent and effluent pollutant concentrations and pollutant
removal percent removal rates for all of the proposed regulated pollutants
from a POTW that receives wastewaters from all of the subcategories.
EPA used these data to supplement its analyses and findings for the final rule.
The Agency also received comparisons of the industry estimates for costs to
achieve the proposed BAT limitations and the estimates calculated by EPA for the nine merchant
coke plants, two integrated mills, and a stand-alone cokemaking plant. Where appropriate, the
Agency used these data to revise the cost estimates to achieve compliance with BAT.
The Agency requested and received self-monitoring data from six non-integrated
steelmaking sites, ironmaking data from one integrated mill, and ammonia still influent data from
two coke plants and effluent data from one coke plant. From the industry meetings following
publication of the proposal, EPA received three years of monthly hot forming mill treatment
plant effluent data (1998 to 2000) for zinc, five years of daily cokemaking treatment plant
effluent data for thiocyanate, five years of discharge monitoring reports (DMR) data from a
cokemaking treatment plant, and three years of DMR data from a cokemaking treatment plant as
well as influent data for cyanide and selenium. EPA used these data to augment its datasets used
to develop the model LTAs, to update the site-specific and average subcategory baseline
pollutant concentrations, to further assess ammonia still operation, and to supplement other
analyses and findings for the final rule.
All of the data submitted that do not contain confidential business information are
in the public record.
3.8 References
3-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Information Collection Request. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry
Data. EPA ICR 1830.01. Washington, DC, March 1998.
3-2 Agency Announcement of Information Collection Activities: 1997 Iron and Steel
Industry Survey (EPA ICR No. 1830.01). Federal Register: October 20, 1997
(Volume 62, Number 202, Pages 54453-54454).
3-3 Agency Announcement of Information Collection Activities: Submission for
OMB Review; Comment Request; Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry
Data (EPA ICR 1830.01). Federal Register: April 3, 1998 (Volume 63, Number
64, Pages 16500-16501).
3-4 Agency Information Collection Activities; OMB Responses. Federal Register:
September 3, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 171, Page 47023-47024).
3-15
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
3-5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Economic Analysis of Final Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point
Source Category. EPA 821-R-02-006, Washington, DC, December 2000.
3-6 Association of Iron and Steel Engineers. Directory: Iron and Steel Plants
Volume 1. Plants and Facilities. Pittsburgh, PA, 1997 and 1998.
3-7 Iron and Steel Works of the World (11th and 12th edition). Metal Bulletin Books
Ltd., Surrey, England, 1994 and 1997.
3-8 Iron and Steel Society. The Steel Industry of Canada. Mexico, and the United
States: Plant Locations. Warrendale, PA, 1995.
3-9 American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute. Member List. 1997.
3-10 American Galvanizers Association. Member List. 1997.
3-11 American Iron and Steel Institute. Member List. 1998.
3-12 American Wire Producers Association. Member List. 1997.
3-13 Cold Finished Steel Bar Institute. Member List. 1997.
3-14 Specialty Steel Industry of North America. Member List. 1997.
3-15 Steel Manufacturers Association. Member List. 1997.
3-16 Steel Tube Institute of North America. Member List. 1997.
3-17 Wire Association International. Member List. 1997.
3-18 Dun & Bradstreet. Facility Index Database. 1997.
3-19 U.S. EPA. Permit Compliance System CPCS) Database.
3-20 U.S. EPA. Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Database. 1995.
3-21 Iron and Steel Society. Iron and Steelmaker. "Roundup: Electric Arc Furnace,"
May 1996 and May 1997; "Roundup: Blast furnace," August 1996 and August
1997; "Roundup: Continuous Caster," November 1996 and November 1997.
3-22 33 Metalproducing. "Roundup." Penton Publications, Cleveland, OH, May 1989
and May 1991.
3-16
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
3-23 33 Metalproducing. "Census of the North American Steel Industry." Penton
Publications, Cleveland, OH, March 1996, July 1996, September 1996, October
1996, November 1996, and March 1997.
3-24 Thomas Register. Thomas Publishing Company, New York, NY, 1996.
3-25 Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE). Iron and Steel Engineer.
Pittsburgh, PA, 1985 through 1997.
3-26 Iron and Steel Society (ISS). Iron and Steelmaker. Warrendale, PA, 1985 through
1997.
3-27 New Steel (formerly Iron Age\ Chilton Publications. 1985 through 1997.
3-28 U.S. Bureau of the Census. Census Manufacturers - Industry Series. 1992.
3-29 U.S. Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. 1992.
3-30 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. "Steel's Thin-Slab/ Flat-Rolling
Revolution: Provoking Changed." January 1996.
3-31 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. "Steel Dynamics Inc. Progress Report."
May 1996.
3-32 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. "PriceTrack # 55." April 1997.
3-33 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. "Trico Steel: Raising the Ante in Steel's
Flat-Rolling Revolution." June 1997.
3-34 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. " PriceTrack #56." August 1997.
3-35 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. "Flat-Rolled Process-by-Process Costs."
December 1997.
3-36 Paine Webber. World Steel Dynamics. "Long Product Process-by-Process
Costs." December 1997.
3-37 American Iron and Steel Institute. The Annual Statistical Report. 1997.
3-38 Pollution Abstracts (on-line).
3-39 U.S. Geological Survey. Water Resources Abstracts (on-line).
3-40 Engineering Index (on-line).
3-17
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
3-41 Material Business File (on-line!
3-42 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Technical Information Service
fNTIS^) (on-line).
3-43 Congressional Information Service, Inc. Enviroline (on-line).
3-44 Engineering Information, Inc. Compendex (on-line).
3-45 Cambridge Scientific Abstracts. Metadex (on-line).
3-46 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works. EPA 440/1-82/303. Washington, DC, September
1982.
3-47 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Risk Management Research
Laboratory fNRMRL) Treatability Database Version 5.0. Cincinnati, OH, 1994.
3-48 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Preliminary Study of the Iron and Steel
Category. 40 CFR Part Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards. EPA 821-
R-95-037, Washington, DC, September 1995.
3-49 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for the
Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Point Source Category. EPA 821-B-00-011, Washington, DC,
December 2000.
3-18
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-1
Iron And Steel Industry Survey Strata
Stratum
Number
Stratum Name
Number of Sites
in Stratum
Number of Sites
Receiving
Surveys
1
Integrated steel sites with cokemaking
9
9
2
Integrated steel sites without cokemaking
12
12
3
Stand-alone cokemaking sites
16
16
4
Stand-alone direct-reduced ironmaking
and sintering sites
5
5
5
Detailed survey certainty stratum (a)(b)
60
60
6
Non-integrated steel sites
69
40
7
Stand-alone finishing sites and stand-
alone hot forming sites
54
35
8
Short survey certainty stratum (b)(c)(d)
13
13
9
Stand-alone cold forming sites (d)
62
37
10
Stand-alone pipe and tubes sites (d)
164
59
11
Stand-alone hot coating sites (d)
106
49
12
Stand-alone wire sites (d)
252
67
Total
822
L 402
(a) This stratum includes facilities from strata 6 and 7.
(b) These strata each include data transferred from one site that received an MP&M survey.
(c) This stratum includes facilities from strata 9 through 12.
(d) These strata include returned surveys from the 154 sites with operations that were later determined to be within
the scope of the proposed MP&M Category.
3-19
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-2
Number of Sites Visited in Each State and in Canada
State
Number of Sites
Visited
Alabama
7
Arizona
1
Arkansas
1
California
2
Canada
2
Illinois
6
Indiana
9
Kentucky
1
Louisiana
1
Maryland
2
Michigan
3
New York
2
Ohio
10
Oregon
1
Pennsylvania
12
South Carolina
1
Texas
2
Utah
2
Virginia
2
West Virginia
3
3-20
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-3
Number of Sites Visited for Each Type of Site
Type of Site
Number of Sites Visited
Integrated mill with cokemaking
10
Integrated mill without cokemaking
10
Stand-alone cokemaking plant
15
Stand-alone sintering plant (a)
1
Stand-alone direct-reduced ironmaking plant (b)
1
Non-integrated mill
16
Stand-alone hot forming mill
1
Stand-alone finishing mill
11
Stand-alone pipe and tube mill
4
Stand-alone iron carbide mill
1
(a) EPA visited seven additional sintering plants at integrated mills.
(b) EPA visited one additional direct-reduced ironmaking mill at a non-integrated mill.
3-21
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-4
Number of Sites Visited With Each Type of Manufacturing Process
Manufacturing Process
Number of Sites Visited
with Each Type of
Manufacturing Process
Cokemaking
25
Sintering
8
Briquetting
4
Blast furnace ironmaking
20
Direct-reduced ironmaking
2
Iron carbide
1
Basic oxygen furnace steelmaking
19
Electric arc furnace steelmaking
19
Vacuum degassing
18
Ladle metallurgy
34
Casting (a)
33
Hot forming (b)
36
Cold forming
34
Acid pickling or descaling
28
Surface cleaning and coating (c)
28
(a) Casting operations include ingot casting and continuous casting.
(b) Hot forming operations include hot rolling, forging, seamless pipe and tube, and
butt-welded pipe and tube operations.
(c) Surface cleaning and coating operations include acid cleaning, alkaline cleaning,
annealing, electroplating, and hot coating operations.
3-22
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-5
Manufacturing Processes Sampled
Manufacturing Process
Number of Processes Sampled
Cokemaking
4
Sintering
4
Blast furnace ironmaking
3
Direct-reduced ironmaking
1
Basic oxygen furnace steelmaking
5
Vacuum degassing
2
Continuous casting
8
Hot forming (a)
9
Descaling
2
Acid pickling
7
Cold forming
5
Surface cleaning or coating (b)
4
(a) Hot forming operations sampled include hot rolling, seamless pipe and tube, and butt-welded
pipe and tube operations.
(b) Surface cleaning and coating operations include acid cleaning, alkaline cleaning, annealing,
electroplating, and hot coating operations.
3-23
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-6
Treatment Systems Sampled
Treatment
System
Treatment System Description
Samples Collected
1
Coke plant treatment system
with ammonia stripping and
biological treatment
Ammonia still influent, ammonia still effluent, biological
treatment system effluent
2
Coke plant treatment system
with ammonia stripping and
biological treatment
Ammonia still influent, ammonia still effluent, biological
treatment system effluent
3
Coke plant treatment system
with ammonia stripping,
biological treatment, and sand
and granular activated carbon
filtration
Flushing liquor, by-products recovery wastewater,
equalization tank effluent, biological treatment system
effluent, sand filter effluent, carbon filter effluent
4
Coke plant treatment system
with ammonia stripping and
biological treatment
Ammonia still influent, ammonia still effluent, biological
treatment system effluent
5
Sinter plant treatment system
Sinter plant untreated wastewater, treatment system effluent
6
Sinter plant treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Sinter plant untreated wastewater, treatment system effluent
7
Blast furnace and sinter plant
treatment system
Sinter plant untreated wastewater, combined recycle water
8
Blast furnace and sinter plant
blowdown treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Blast fumace scrubber untreated wastewater, sinter plant
scrubber untreated wastewater, blast furnace treatment
blowdown, sinter plant treatment blowdown, combined
final effluent, treatment system filter cake
9
Blast furnace treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Blast fumace untreated wastewater, recycle wastewater,
filter press sludge
10
Blast fumace treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Blast fumace untreated wastewater, treatment system
blowdown, treatment system filter cake
11
Direct-reduced iron treatment
and high-rate recycle system
Clarifier influent, sand filter influent, treatment system
effluent
12
Basic oxygen fumace treatment
and high-rate recycle system
Basic oxygen fumace untreated wastewater, recycle water
13
Basic oxygen fumace blowdown
treatment system
Classifier effluent, thickener effluent, treatment system
effluent, vacuum filter cake
3-24
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-6 (Continued)
Treatment
System
Treatment System Description
Samples Collected
14
Steelmaking (vacuum degasser,
continuous caster) treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Vacuum degasser untreated wastewater, clarifier overflow,
filter effluent, continuous caster untreated wastewater,
treatment system effluent
15
Basic oxygen furnace treatment
and high-rate recycle system
Basic oxygen furnace untreated wastewater, untreated gas
cooling water, thickener overflow, drum filter sludge, filter
press sludge
16
Steelmaking (basic oxygen
furnaces, vacuum degasser,
continuous casters) treatment
and high-rate recycle system
Continuous caster untreated wastewater, vacuum degasser
untreated wastewater, clarifier underflow, thickener
underflow, treatment system blowdown
17
Continuous caster treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Scale pit influent
18
Continuous caster treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Scale pit influent
19
Continuous caster treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Scale pit influent, treatment system effluent
20
Continuous caster treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Continuous caster untreated wastewater, sand filter effluent
21
Continuous caster treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Continuous caster scale pit influent, sand filter effluent
22
Continuous caster treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Continuous caster untreated wastewater, treatment system
effluent, scale pit waste oil
23
Hot strip mill treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Hot strip mill untreated wastewater, treatment system
effluent
24
Hot strip mill treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Continuous caster untreated wastewater, vacuum degasser
untreated wastewater, hot strip mill untreated wastewater,
treatment system blowdown
25
Hot strip mill treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Roughing mill untreated wastewater, finishing mill
untreated wastewater, roughing mill sand filter effluent,
finishing mill sand filter effluent, waste oil
26
Hot strip mill blowdown
treatment and high-rate recycle
system
Hot strip mill untreated wastewater, treatment system
blowdown
3-25
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-6 (Continued)
Treatment
System
Treatment System Description
Samples Collected
27
Hot strip mill treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Hot mill scale pit influent, treatment system effluent, scale
pit waste oil
28
Hot mill treatment and high-rate
recycle system
Hot mill untreated wastewater, treatment system effluent,
blowdown treatment system effluent, scale pit waste oil
29
Hot strip mill treatment and
high-rate recycle system
Sand filter influent, treatment system effluent
30
Oily wastewater treatment
system
Oily wastewater influent, treatment system effluent
31
Plate mill treatment system
Scale pit influent, scale pit effluent, scale pit waste oil
32
Rolling mill treatment and high-
rate recycle system
Scale pit influent
33
Rolling mill treatment and high-
rate recycle system
Scale pit influent
34
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, galvanizing untreated
wastewater, sand filter influent, sand filter effluent
35
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system with
chromium reduction
pretreatment
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, chromium reduction
pretreatment influent, chromium reduction pretreatment
effluent, sand filter influent, sand filter effluent
36
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system with
chromium reduction
pretreatment
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, cold forming untreated
wastewater, electrogalvanizing untreated wastewater, hot
dip coating untreated wastewater, oily wastewater,
chromium reduction pretreatment effluent, intermediate
treatment, final effluent
37
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, cold forming untreated
wastewater, treatment system influent, treatment system
effluent
38
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system with
chromium reduction
pretreatment
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, descaling untreated
wastewater, chromium reduction pretreatment effluent,
treatment system effluent
39
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system
Electroplating solution, treatment system influent, clarifier
effluent, sand filter effluent
3-26
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-6 (Continued)
Treatment
System
Treatment System Description
Samples Collected
40
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, oily wastewater,
treatment system effluent
41
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system with oily
wastewater pretreatment and
chromium pretreatment
Continuous annealing untreated wastewater, alkaline
cleaning untreated wastewater, electroplating untreated
wastewater, hot dip coating untreated wastewater, acid
pickling untreated wastewater, oily wastewater pretreatment
influent, oily wastewater pretreatment effluent, chromium
reduction pretreatment influent, chromium reduction
pretreatment effluent, treatment system influent, treatment
system effluent
42
Steel finishing chemical
precipitation system
Acid pickling untreated wastewater, electrogalvanizing
untreated wastewater, treatment system effluent
3-27
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-7
Analytical Methods Used During Sampling Program
EPA Method
Parameter
Manufacturing
Processes
Typical
Sampling
Frequency
(Days/Episode)
160.2
Total suspended solids (TSS)
All
5
160.1
Total dissolved solids (TDS)
All
5
325.1, 325.2, or 325.3
Chlorides
All
5
340.1, 340.2, or 340.3
Fluorides
All
5
375.1, 375.3, or 375.4
Sulfates
All
5
150.1
pH
All
5
415.1
Total organic carbon (TOC)
All
5
410.1,410.2, or 410.4
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
All
5
351.1,351.2, 351.3, or
351.4
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
All
5
353.1, 353.2, or 353.3
Nitrate/nitrite
All
5
350.1,350.2, or 350.3
Ammonia as nitrogen
All
5
405.1 or 5210B
Five-day biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD5)
Cokemaking
5
405.1 or SM5210
Five-day carbonaceous biochemical
oxygen demand (CBODs)
Cokemaking
5
1664
Hexane extractable material (oil
and grease)
All
5
1664
Silica-gel treated hexane
extractable material (total
petroleum hydrocarbons)
All
5
420.1 or 420.2
Total phenols
All
5
376.1,376.2, or D4658
Total sulfide
Cokemaking, blast
furnace ironmaking,
sintering
5
4500CN Part M
Thiocyanate
Cokemaking, blast
furnace ironmaking,
sintering
5
3-28
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-7 (Continued)
EPA Method
Parameter
Manufacturing
Processes
Typical
Sampling
Frequency
(Days/Episode)
335.1, 335.2, and 1677
Cyanide (amenable), cyanide
(total), and weak acid dissociable
cyanide (WAD), respectively
Cokemaking, blast
furnace ironmaking,
sintering
5
1613B
Dioxins/furans
Cokemaking, blast
furnace ironmaking,
sintering, basic oxygen
furnace steelmaking
2 (blast furnace
ironmaking,
sintering, basic
oxygen furnace
steelmaking)
5 (cokemaking)
218.4
Hexavalent chromium
Chromium-bearing
electroplating and hot
coating wastewater
from carbon and alloy
finishing operations,
stainless steel finishing
operations
5
1620
Metals
All
5
1624C
Volatile organics
All
3
5 (cokemaking)
1625C
Semivolatile organics
All
3
5 (cokemaking)
3-29
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-8
Analytes Included Within Analyte Groups
DIOXINS/FURAN ANALYTES
2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
1,2,3,7,8-PENTACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
1,2,3,7,8-PENTACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
2,3,4,7,8-PENTACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
1,2,3,4,7,8-HEXACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
1,2,3,4,7,8-HEXACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
1,2,3,6,7,8-HEXACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
1,2,3,6,7,8-HEXACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
1,2,3,7,8,9-HEXACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
1,2,3,7,8,9-HEXACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HEPTACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
2,3,4,6,7,8-HEXACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
OCT ACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HEPTACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZOFURAN
METAL ANALYTES
ALUMINUM
MANGANESE
ANTIMONY
MERCURY
ARSENIC
MOLYBDENUM
BARIUM
NICKEL
BERYLLIUM
SELENIUM
BORON
SILVER
CADMIUM
SODIUM
CALCIUM
THALLIUM
CHROMIUM
TIN
COBALT
TITANIUM
COPPER
VANADIUM
IRON
YTTRIUM
LEAD
ZINC
MAGNESIUM
3-30
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-8 (Continued)
VOLATILE ORGANIC ANALYTES
ACRYLONITRILE
TRANS-1,4-DICHLORO-2-BUTENE
BENZENE
TRIBROMOMETHANE
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
TRICHLOROETHENE
BROMOMETHANE
TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE
CARBON DISULFIDE
VINYL ACETATE
CHLOROACETONITRILE
VINYL CHLORIDE
CHLOROBENZENE
1,1 -DICHLOROETHANE
CHLOROETHANE
1,1 -DICHLOROETHENE
CHLOROFORM
1,1,1 -TRICHLOROETH ANE
CHLOROMETHANE
1,1,1,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
CIS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE
1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
CROTONALDEHYDE
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE
1,2-DIBROMOETHANE
DIBROMOMETHANE
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
DIETHYL ETHER
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE
ETHYL CYANIDE
1,2,3-TRICHLOROPROPANE
ETHYL METHACRYLATE
1,3-BUTADIENE, 2-CHLORO
ETHYLBENZENE
1,3-DICHLOROPROPANE
IODOMETHANE
1,4-DIOXANE
ISOBUTYL ALCOHOL
2-BUTANONE
M-XYLENE
2-CHLOROETHYLVINYL ETHER
METHYL METHACRYLATE
2-HEXANONE
METHYLENE CHLORIDE
2-PROPANONE
o+p XYLENE
2-PROPEN-l-OL
TETRACHLOROETHENE
2-PROPENAL
TETRACHLOROMETHANE
2-PROPENENITRILE, 2-METHYL-
TOLUENE
3-CHLOROPROPENE
TRANS-1,2-DICHLOROETHENE
4-METHYL-2-PENT ANONE
TRANS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE
3-31
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-8 (Continued)
SEMI V OLATILE ORGANIC ANALYTES
ACENAPHTHENE
DY-N-OCTYL PHTHALATE
ACENAPHTHYLENE
DY-N-PROPYLNITROSAMINE
ACETOPHENONE
DIBENZO(A,H)ANTHRACENE
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
DIBENZOFURAN
ANILINE
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
ANILINE, 2,4,5 -TRIMETHYL-
DIETHYL PHTHALATE
ANTHRACENE
DIMETHYL PHTHALATE
ARAMITE
DIMETHYL SULFONE
BENZANTHRONE
DIPHENYL ETHER
BENZENETHIOL
DIPHENYLAMINE
BENZIDINE
DIPHENYLDI SULFIDE
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
ETHANE, PENTACHLORO-
BENZO(A)PYRENE
ETHYL METHANESULFONATE
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
ETHYLENETHIOUREA
BENZO(GHI)PERYLENE
FLUORANTHENE
BENZO(K)FLUORANTHENE
FLUORENE
BENZOIC ACID
HEXACHLOROBENZENE
BENZONITRILE, 3,5-DIBROMO-4-HYDROXY-
HEXACHLOROBUT ADIENE
BENZYL ALCOHOL
HEXACHLOROC YCLOPENT ADIENE
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
HEXACHLOROETHANE
BIPHENYL
HEXACHLOROPROPENE
BIPHENYL, 4-NITRO
HEXANOIC ACID
BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE
INDENO( 1,2,3-CD)P YRENE
BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL) ETHER
ISOPHORONE
BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL) ETHER
ISOSAFROLE
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
LONGIFOLENE
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE
MALACHITE GREEN
CARBAZOLE
MESTRANOL
CHRYSENE
METHAPYRILENE
CROTOXYPHOS
METHYL METHANESULFONATE
DY-N-BUTYL PHTHALATE
N-DECANE
3-32
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-8 (Continued)
SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC ANALYTES (CONTINUED)
N-DOCOSANE
PENTACHLOROPHENOL
N-DODECANE
PENTAMETHYLBENZENE
N-EICOSANE
PERYLENE
N-HEXACOSANE
PHENACETIN
N-HEXADECANE
PHENANTHRENE
N-NITROSODI-N-BUTYLAMINE
PHENOL
N-NITROSODIETHYLAMINE
PHENOL, 2-METHYL-4.6-DINITRO-
N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE
PHENOTHIAZINE
N -NITROSODIPHENYL AMINE
PRONAMIDE
N-NITROSOMETHYLETHYLAMINE
PYRENE
N-NITROSOMETHYLPHENYLAMINE
PYRIDINE
N-NITROSOMORPHOLINE
RESORCINOL
N-NITROSOPIPERIDINE
SAFROLE
N-OCTACOSANE
SQUALENE
N-OCTADECANE
STYRENE
N-TETRACOSANE
THIANAPHTHENE
N-TETRADECANE
THIOACET AMIDE
N-TRIACONTANE
THIOXANTHE-9-ONE
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
TOLUENE, 2,4-DIAMINO-
NAPHTHALENE
TRIPHENYLENE
NITROBENZENE
TRIPROPYLENEGLYCOL METHYL ETHER
o-ANISIDINE
1 -BROMO-2-CHLOROBENZENE
o-CRESOL
1 -BROMO-3-CHLOROBENZENE
o-TOLUIDINE
1 -CHLORO-3-NITROBENZENE
o-TOLUIDINE, 5-CHLORO-
1 -METHYLFLUORENE
p -CHLORO ANILINE
1 -METHYLPHENANTHRENE
p-CRESOL
1 -NAPHTHYLAMINE
p-CYMENE
1 -PHENYLN APHTHALENE
p-DIMETHYLAMINOAZOBENZENE
1,2-DIBROMO-3-CHLOROPROPANE
p-NITROANILINE
1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE
PENTACHLOROBENZENE
1,2-DIPHENYLHYDRAZINE
3-33
-------
Section 3 - Data Collection
Table 3-8 (Continued)
SEMIVOLATILE ORGANIC ANALYTES (CONTINUED)
1,2,3-TRICHLOROBENZENE
2,3,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL
1,2,3-TRIMETHOXYBENZENE
2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL
1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
1,2,4,5-TETRACHLOROBENZENE
2,4-DINITROPHENOL
1,2,3,4-DIEPOXYBUTANE
2,4-DINITROTOLUENE
1,3-DICHLORO-2-PROPANOL
2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL
1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE
2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL
1,3,5-TRITHIANE
2,6-DI-TER-BUTYL-P-BENZOQUINONE
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE
2,6-DICHLORO-4-NITRO ANILINE
1,4-DINITROBENZENE
2,6-DICHLOROPHENOL
1,4-NAPHTHOQUINONE
2,6-DINITROTOLUENE
1,5-NAPHTHALENEDIAMINE
3 -METH YLCHOLANTHRENE
2-(METHYLTHIO)BENZOTHIAZOLE
3-NITROANILINE
2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE
3,3'-DICHLOROBENZIDINE
2-CHLOROPHENOL
3,3 '-DIMETHOX YBENZIDINE
2-ISOPROPYLNAPHTALENE
3,6-DIMETHYLPHENANTHRENE
2-METHYLBENZOTHIOAZOLE
4-AMINOBIPHENYL
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
4-BROMOPHENYL PHENYL ETHER
2-NITROANILINE
4-CHLORO-2-NITROANILINE
2-NITROPHENOL
4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHEN OL
2-PHENYLNAPHTALENE
4-CHLOROPHENYLPHENYL ETHER
2-PICOLINE
4-NITROPHENOL
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
4,4'-METHYLENEBIS(2-CHLOROANILINE)
2,3-DICHLOROANILINE
4,5-METHYLENE PHENANTHRENE
2,3-DICHLORONITROBENZENE
5-NITRO-O-TOLUIDINE
2,3,4,6-TETRACHLOROPHENOL
7,12-DIMETH YLBENZ(A)ANTHRACENE
3-34
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
SECTION 4
ANALYTICAL METHODS AND BASELINE VALUES
This section describes the analytical methods associated with the concentration
data used to develop the limitations and standards for the iron and steel industry. In today's rule,
EPA is regulating only a subset of the pollutants discussed in this section. Depending on the
subcategory and whether a facility is a direct or indirect discharger, the regulated pollutants are:
ammonia as nitrogen, benzo(a)pyrene, oil and grease as hexane extractable material (HEM),
naphthalene, phenols (4AAP), 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF), total cyanide, and total
suspended solids (TSS). EPA has included discussion of other pollutants in this section because
EPA used the data in its pollutants of concern analyses presented elsewhere in this document.
This section discusses the methods used to analyze the samples that EPA and the
industry collected from iron and steel wastewater. Section 3 discusses these sampling efforts.
This section also discusses how EPA used the results of its wastewater analyses for purposes of
calculating the limitations and standards in today's rule (Section 14 describes the methodology
used for those calculations).
Section 4.1 briefly describes baseline values for the pollutants and their
importance. Section 4.2 describes the reporting conventions laboratories used in expressing the
results of the analysis. Sections 4.3 and 4.4 further explain nominal quantitation limits and
baseline values, respectively. Section 4.5 describes the specific analytical methods and the
corresponding baseline value for pollutants used in EPA's pollutants of concern analyses and in
developing the limitations and standards. Table 4-1 summaries the analytical methods and
baseline values discussed in Section 4.5. This table also identifies each pollutant by Chemical
Abstract Registry number, indicates whether the samples were collected by EPA or by industry,
and lists the nominal quantitation value for the method used. Section 4.6 describes the
requirements for laboratory analysis in compliance monitoring for today's regulations.
4.1 Explanation and Importance of Baseline Values
The database that EPA used to calculate the limitations and standards consists of
two types of analytical data: 1) data collected and analyzed by EPA ("sampling episodes"), and
2) industry-supplied data ("self-monitoring episodes"). EPA consistently used the same method
to analyze all samples for a particular pollutant, as shown in Table 4-1. The methods used for the
industry-supplied data varied. Generally, industry used either EPA methods from Methods for
Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes (MCAWW) (Reference 4-1) or the American Public
Health Association's Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater
(References 4-2 and 4-3).
As described further in Section 4.4, in using this database, EPA compared the
reported concentrations for each pollutant to a baseline value. EPA used a single baseline value
for each pollutant in these comparisons for both EPA sampling episodes and industry self-
monitoring episodes. EPA used the nominal quantitation limits associated with the analytical
4-1
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
methods employed in its sampling episodes as the basis for determining each "baseline value."
EPA determined that this was appropriate because EPA consistently used a single method for
each pollutant while industry used a range of different methods. Consequently, the baseline
value for each pollutant generally is the nominal quantitation limit associated with the analytical
method EPA used to analyze that pollutant in its sampling episodes.
In general, the term "nominal quantitation limit" describes the smallest quantity of
an analyte that can be measured reliably with a particular analytical method. In some cases,
however, EPA used a value lower than the nominal quantitation limit as the baseline value
because submitted data demonstrated that reliable measurements could be obtained at a lower
level. In a few instances, EPA concluded that the nominal quantitation limit for a specified
method was less than the level that laboratories could reliably achieve. For those pollutants, EPA
modified the nominal quantitation limit upward and used a higher value as the baseline value.
Section 4.3 discusses these instances and the nominal quantitation limit for each pollutant
further.
4.2 Reporting Conventions Associated with Analytical Results
Most of the analytical data were reported as liquid concentrations in
weight/volume units (e.g., micrograms per liter (lugfLj). In a few instances, the results were
provided in weight/weight solids units (e.g., milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)). In those
instances, EPA converted the solids results into weight/volume units by using a conversion factor
based upon the percent of solids in the sample. In addition, EPA converted data supplied in
weight/time units to weight/volume units.1
The laboratories expressed the result of the analysis either numerically or as "not
quantitated"2 for a pollutant in a sample. When the result is expressed numerically, then the
pollutant was quantitated3 in the sample. For example, for a hypothetical pollutant X, the result
would be reported as "15 fxg/L" when the laboratory quantitated the amount of pollutant X in the
sample as being 15 yug/L. For the nonquantitated results for each sample, the laboratories
reported a "sample-specific quantitation limit."4 For example, for the hypothetical pollutant X,
the result would be reported as "<10 yug/L" when the laboratory could not quantitate the amount
of pollutant X in the sample. That is, the analytical result indicated a value less than the sample-
specific quantitation limit of 10 yug/L, meaning the actual amount of pollutant X in that sample is
'Some facilities reported the results in lbs/day and included the flow rates for each day. EPA used this information
to convert the results to mg/L.
2Elsewhere in this document and in the preamble to the rule, EPA refers to pollutants as "not detected" or
"nondetected." This section uses the term "not quantitated" or "nonquantitated" rather than nondetected.
3Elsewhere in this document and in the preamble to the rule, EPA refers to pollutants as "detected." This section
uses the term "quantitated" rather than detected.
¦"Elsewhere in this document and in the preamble to the rule, EPA refers to a "sample-specific quantitation limit" as a
"sample-specific detection limit" or, more simply, as a "detection limit."
4-2
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
between zero (i.e., the pollutant is not present) and 10 jUg/L. The sample-specific quantitation
limit for a particular pollutant is generally the smallest quantity in the calibration range that can
be measured reliably in any given sample. If a pollutant is reported as not quantitated in a
particular wastewater sample, it does not mean that the pollutant is not present in the wastewater,
merely that analytical techniques (whether because of instrument limitations, pollutant
interactions or other reasons) do not permit its measurement at levels below the sample-specific
quantitation limit.
In its calculations, EPA generally substituted the value of the reported sample-
specific quantitation limit for each nonquantitated result. In a few cases when the sample-
specific quantitation limit was less than the baseline value, EPA substituted the baseline value for
the nonquantitated result. In a few instances when the quantitated value was below the baseline
value, EPA considered these values to be nonquantitated in the statistical analyses and
substituted the baseline value for the measured value. Section 4.3 further discusses these cases.
4.3 Nominal Quantitation Limits
Protocols used for determining nominal quantitation limits in a particular method
depend on the definitions and conventions that EPA used at the time the method was developed.
As stated previously, the nominal quantitation limit is the smallest quantity of an analyte that can
be reliably measured with a particular method. The nominal quantitation limits associated with
the EPA methods addressed in the following sections fall into three general categories. The first
category includes Methods 1613B, 1625, and 1664, which use the minimum level (ML)
definition as the lowest level at which the entire analytical system must give a recognizable
signal and an acceptable calibration point for the analyte. The second category pertains
specifically to Method 1620, and is explained in detail in Section 4.5.2. The third category
pertains to the remainder of the methods, in which a variety of terms are used to describe the
lowest level at which measurement results are quantitated. These include the classical wet
chemistry methods and several EPA methods for the determination of metals and organics. In
some cases (especially with the classical wet chemistry analytes), the methods are older (1970s
and 1980s) and different concepts of quantitation apply. These methods typically list a
measurement range or lower limit of measurement. The terms differ by method and, as discussed
in subsequent sections, the levels presented do not always represent the lowest levels laboratories
can currently achieve. For those methods associated with a calibration procedure, the
laboratories demonstrated through a low point calibration standard that they were capable of
reliable quantitation at method-specified (or lower) levels. In such cases, these nominal
quantitation limits are operationally equivalent to the ML (though not specifically identified as
such in the methods). In the case of titrimetric or gravimetric methods, the laboratory adhered to
the established lower limit of the measurement range published in the methods. Section 4.5
presents details of the specific methods.
4.4 Comparisons to Baseline Values
EPA performed two types of comparisons of the concentration data to the baseline
values. For the proposal, EPA performed a third type of comparison in which the metals (i.e.,
4-3
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
those measured by EPA Method 1620) and TSS baseline values were compared to the option
long-term averages used to calculate the limitations and standards. However, for today's rule,
EPA has not provided any limitations and standards for any metal and the TSS levels were high
enough that it was not necessary to perform the comparison. Thus, only the two types of
comparisons involving baseline values for today's rule are described below.
4.4.1 Individual Data Values
When the baseline value was based upon method-defined minimum levels of
Methods 1613B, 1625, or 1664 (see Section 4.5.1), EPA compared the individual concentration
values to the baseline values. For these methods, the baseline values are based upon MLs that
were developed through interlaboratory studies to determine the lowest measurable level (Section
4.5.1 provides a more precise definition).
Before using the data measured by these methods, EPA compared each analytical
result (i.e., quantitated value or sample-specific quantitation limit for a non-quantitated value) to
the baseline value for the pollutant. The objective of this comparison was to identify any results
reported below the method-defined ML of quantitation. Results reported below the method-
defined ML were changed to the ML to ensure that all results used by EPA were quantitatively
reliable. In addition, any quantitated value changed to the ML was also considered to be
nonquantitated5 in calculating the limitations and standards and in EPA's pollutants of concern
analyses. In most cases, the quantitated values and sample-specific quantitation limits were equal
to or greater than the baseline values. If EPA had data from multiple methods for a particular
analyte (e.g., naphthalene) and one of those methods (e.g., 1625) had an ML, then EPA
performed this comparison for all of the data for that analyte.
An example of this comparison: Suppose a facility's dataset had five values for
HEM, of which two were nonquantitated with sample-specific quantitation limits of 2 mg/L and
6 mg/L and the remaining three values were quantitated at 4 mg/L, 25 mg/L, and 50 mg/L. In the
comparison, EPA compared the baseline value of 5 mg/L for HEM to all five values of HEM in
the facility's dataset. Because the sample-specific quantitation limit of 2 mg/L is less than 5
mg/L, EPA changed this sample-specific quantitation limit to 5 mg/L and considered the value to
be a sample-specific quantitation limit (i.e., nonquantitated) rather than a quantitated value.
Likewise, EPA changed the quantitated value of 4 mg/L to 5 mg/L. The remaining sample-
specific quantitation limit of 6 mg/L and the two quantitated values of 25 mg/L and 50 mg/L
remained the same because they were greater than the baseline value of 5 mg/L.
4.4.2 Assessment of Treatability of Influent
As explained in Section 14, in the "LTA test," EPA compared a multiple of the
baseline value to influent concentrations to determine if the influent concentrations were at
treatable levels for all pollutants. If the influent concentrations were determined to be below
treatable levels, then the corresponding effluent data were excluded from the analyses.
5As explained in Appendix E, EPA applied different statistical assumptions to quantitated and nonquantitated results.
4-4
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
4.5 Analytical Methods
In developing the limitations and standards and in its pollutants of concern
analyses, EPA generally used only data from analytical methods approved for compliance
monitoring or those that EPA has used for decades in support of effluent limitations guidelines
and standards development. (The remainder of this section refers to such methods as 'NPDES-
approved'6 or 'nonapproved.') Unless otherwise stated, Standard Methods references are based
on the 18th edition, which is the edition currently approved for NPDES monitoring. Table 4-1
summarizes the analytical methods, the associated pollutants measured by the method, the
nominal quantitation levels, and the baseline levels. The following subsections provide
additional information supporting Table 4-1 which is located at the end of Section. 4. (The
subsections are listed in order by method number, except for Method 420 which is in Section
4.5.16.)
4.5.1 Methods 1613B, 1625,1664 (2,3,7,8-TCDF, Benzo(a)pyrene, Naphthalene,
Phenol, HEM)
As stated earlier, Method 1613B for dioxins, Method 1625 for semivolatile
organic compounds, and Method 1664 for HEM7 and silica gel treated n-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)8 use the ML concept for quantitation of the pollutants measured by the
methods. The ML is defined as the lowest level at which the entire analytical system must give a
recognizable signal and an acceptable calibration point for the analyte. When an ML is published
in a method, the Agency has demonstrated that at least one well-operated laboratory can achieve
the ML, and when that laboratory or another laboratory uses that method, the laboratory is
required to demonstrate, through calibration of the instrument or analytical system, that it can
make measurements at the ML.
For these three NPDES-approved analytical methods, if a quantitated value or
sample-specific quantitation limit was reported with a value less than the ML specified in a
method, EPA substituted the value of the ML and assumed that the measurement was
nonquantitated. For example, if the ML was 10 £ig/L and the laboratory reported a quantitated
value of 5 £ig/L, EPA assumed that the concentration was nonquantitated with a sample-specific
quantitation limit of 10 £ig/L.
Of the analytes measured by these methods, today's rule includes limitations and
standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF (Method 1613B); benzo(a)pyrene and naphthalene (Method 1625);
and HEM (Method 1664). None of the reported values from these methods were less than the
ML; therefore, no substitutions were made to data from EPA's sampling episodes. However, in
6NPDES is the acronym for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
7 As explained in Section 14.1, EPA excluded oil and grease data determined by analytical methods that required
freon, an ozone depleting agent. Thus, this section does not describe those analytical methods.
8SGT-HEM measures nonpolar material (i.e., n-hexane extractable material that is not absorbed by silica gel).
Method 1664 measures both oil and grease and nonpolar material.
4-5
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
calculating the limitations and standards for naphthalene, EPA also included data generated from
Method 625 (see Section 4.5.14).
4.5.2 Method 1620 and 200.7 (Metals)
Method 1620 for metals determination uses the concept of an instrument detection
limit (IDL), which is defined as "the smallest signal above background noise that an instrument
can detect reliably."9 EPA used Method 1620 to determine metals in the samples collected
during its sampling episodes. While Method 1620 is not an NPDES-approved method, it
represents a consolidation of several NPDES-approved methods including Method 200.7
(inductively coupled plasma atomic emission (ICP) spectroscopy for trace elements) and Method
245.1 (mercury by cold vapor atomic absorption technique). Some industry-supplied results for
chromium, lead, nickel, and zinc were determined by Method 200.7. Other industry-supplied
results for metals were determined by Methods 239.2, 245.1,3120B, and 3130B, as discussed in
Sections 4.5.5 through 4.5.8.
Data reporting practices for Method 1620 analysis follow conventional metals
reporting practices used in other EPA programs, in which values are required to be reported at or
above the IDL. In applying Method 1620, each analytical laboratory participating in EPA's data
gathering efforts determines IDLs on a quarterly basis. The IDL is, therefore, laboratory-specific
and time-specific. Although Method 1620 contains MLs, these MLs predate EPA's recent
refinement of the ML concept described in Section 4.3. The ML values associated with Method
1620 are based on a consensus reached by EPA and laboratories during the 1980s regarding
levels that could be considered reliable quantitation limits when using Method 1620. These
limits do not reflect advances in technology and instrumentation since the 1980s. Consequently,
EPA used the IDLs as the lowest values for reporting purposes, with the general understanding
that reliable results can be produced at or above the IDL.
The Agency used the Method 1620 ML values as the baseline values for the metal
analytes, with the exception of lead. In Method 1620, lead has an ML of 5 ^g/L for graphite
furnace atomic absorption (GFAA) spectroscopy analysis; EPA determined, however, that it was
not necessary to measure down to such low levels, and that lead could instead be analyzed by
inductively coupled plasma atomic emission (ICP) spectroscopy. Consequently, for the purposes
of EAD's data gathering efforts, the required ML (and baseline value) for lead was adjusted to 50
//g/L. EPA used the laboratory-reported quantitated values and sample-specific quantitation
limits, which captured concentrations down to the IDLs, in calculating the long-term averages for
the pollutants of concern analyses.
4.5.3 Method 160.2,209C, and 2540D (Total Suspended Solids)
Total suspended solids (TSS) was determined by Method 160.2 for samples
collected by EPA and some samples collected by the industry. Industry also used Method 209C
'Keith, L.H., W. Crummett, J. Deegan, R.A. Libby, J.K. Taylor, G. Wentler. "Principles of Environmental
Analysis," Analytical Chemistry, Volume 55, 1983, Page 2217.
4-6
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
and 2540D to measure TSS. Methods 160.2 and 2540D are NPDES-approved and are essentially
identical methods. While it is not currently NPDES-approved, Method 209C for TSS appears in
the 15th and 16th editions of Standard Methods and was approved in the CFR in 1986. Since
then, the method numbers have been updated in more recent editions of Standard Methods and in
the CFR, but the analytical procedures in Method 209C are identical to those of Method 2540D.
Therefore, EPA determined that the data from all three methods should produce similar results
and thus are usable for the purposes of rulemaking development.
Because EPA used Method 160.2 for its sampling episodes, the Agency selected
the nominal quantitation limit of 4 mg/L from Method 160.2 as the baseline value. In calculating
the limitations and standards, EPA used the laboratory-reported quantitated values and sample-
specific quantitation limits. For the proposal, if the option long-term average for TSS was less
than the baseline value, EPA substituted the baseline value for the long-term average. In today's
rule, the option long-term averages were at or above the baseline value and thus no substitutions
were required.
4.5.4 Method 218.4 (Hexavalent Chromium)
For EPA sampling episodes, hexavalent chromium was determined by Method
218.4, an NPDES-approved procedure that utilizes atomic absorption for the determination of
hexavalent chromium after chelation and extraction. In developing the option long-term
averages for the pollutants of concern analyses, EPA included industry-supplied data for which
industry did not cite the analytical methods used. Industry also supplied data determined by
Method 3120B. Because of concerns about the use of this method (see Section 4.5.7), EPA
excluded these data from the calculation of the option long-term averages for the pollutants of
concern analyses.
In Method 218.4, the nominal quantitation limit or lower limit of the measurement
range is 0.01 mg/L. Because EPA used this method, this nominal quantitation limit was used as
the baseline value for all hexavalent chromium results.
4.5.5 Method 239.2 (Lead)
In its pollutants of concern analyses for lead, EPA included industry-supplied data
from Method 239.2. This NPDES-approved method utilizes atomic absorption as the
determinative technique to measure lead. Its nominal quantitation limit of 0.005 mg/L is
expressed in the method as the lower limit of the measurement range.10 For the pollutants of
concern analyses, EPA used the baseline value of 0.05 mg/L from Method 1620 (see Section
4.5.2).
,0This method refers to the lower value of the "optimum concentration range."
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
4.5.6 Method 245.1 (Mercury)
In developing the option long-term averages for the pollutants of concern analyses
for mercury, EPA included industry-supplied data from Method 245.1. This NPDES-approved
method utilizes cold vapor atomic absorption as the determinative technique to measure mercury.
Its nominal quantitation limit of 0.0002 mg/L is expressed in the method as the lower limit of
the measurement range." The industry-supplied mercury data included results lower than the
baseline value (see Section 4.5.2). EPA used these data as reported in its pollutants of concern
analyses.
4.5.7 Method 3120B (Chromium and Hexavalent Chromium)
Industry-supplied results for chromium and hexavalent chromium were
determined by Method 3120B, an inductively coupled plasma (ICP) method. Its nominal
quantitation limit of 0.01 mg/L is cited in the method as the lower limit of the measurement
range.
Method 3120B is NPDES-approved for chromium determination, and EPA
included these data in calculating the chromium option long-term averages for the pollutants of
concern analyses. None of the chromium data from Method 3120B had quantitated values or
sample-specific quantitation limits lower than the baseline value of 0.01 mg/L from Method 1620
(see Section 4.5.2).
Because of EPA's concerns about the quality of the hexavalent chromium
measurements from Method 3120B, EPA excluded these measurements from its pollutants of
concern analyses. Method 3120B is used for determination of total metals (including chromium),
but is not typically used for hexavalent chromium determination. It is technically possible to
analyze for hexavalent chromium by this method if, during sample preparation, the hexavalent
chromium is separated from other forms of chromium (i.e., Cr+3). After proposal, EPA contacted
the facility to determine if the appropriate procedures were followed in determining hexavalent
chromium concentrations, and to determine if all quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
criteria were met, but this information was not made available to EPA.
4.5.8 Method 3130B (Lead, Zinc)
Method 313 0B was used to determine lead and zinc in some industry-supplied
data. Method 3130B is an anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV) method that does not require
sample digestion. EPA excluded these data in its pollutants of concern analyses because the
associated laboratory reports and QA/QC data were not provided to EPA. This information was
necessary to determine whether samples were acid digested to ensure that lead and zinc
complexes were broken down to a detectable form and to reduce analytical interferences. Also, it
was not possible to determine whether the results were associated with acceptable laboratory and
matrix QA/QC. Furthermore, as there are no NPDES-approved ASV methods for the
1 'This method calls it a detection limit.
4-8
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
determination of lead or zinc in wastewater, EPA required additional information to assess
whether application of the ASV method to wastewater effluents analyzed was appropriate (i.e.,
not subject to substantial interferences).
4.5.9 Method 335.2 (Total Cyanide)
EPA and industry determined total cyanide using Method 335.2, an NPDES-
approved method. Method 335.2 uses either titrimetric or colorimetric procedures to measure
total cyanide. In addition to these data, EPA used data from one facility that used Methods 335.3
and 335.4. Method 335.2 is manual; Method 335.3 is automated; and Method 335.4 uses
different digestion. However, all three versions are similar and provide comparable results.
The nominal quantitation limit for Method 335.2 is expressed in the method as the
lower limit of the measurement range.12 Because EPA used Method 335.2, the Agency used its
nominal quantitation limit of 0.02 mg/L as the baseline value for all total cyanide results.
Although some laboratories have demonstrated that they can quantitate to lower levels, none of
the total cyanide data determined from Method 335.2 had quantitated values or sample-specific
quantitation limits lower than the baseline value.
For total cyanide, industry also used the NPDES-approved 4500-CN procedures
for sample analysis. In the listings of data for the proposal, EPA has identified this procedure
with three different references provided by industry: 4500-CNC; 4500 CN E; and 4500-CNE.
Method 4500-CNC refers to the distillation process used to prepare samples for analysis, and
Methods 4500 CN E and 4500-CNE refer to the colorimetric method of total cyanide
determination. EPA compared the data determined from these analyses to the baseline value of
0.02 mg/L associated with the nominal quantitation limit from Method 335.2. These values were
used as reported in calculating the limitations and standards.
4.5.10 Method 340.2 (Fluoride)
For samples collected by EPA, fluoride was determined by Method 340.2, an
NPDES-approved potentiometric method that uses a fluoride electrode. Industry did not supply
any additional data for this analyte. The nominal quantitation limit of 0.1 mg/L for Method
340.2 is expressed in the method as the lower limit of the measurement range.13 This nominal
quantitation limit was used as the baseline value for fluoride.
l2The method states that it is "sensitive to about 0.02 mg/L for the colorimetric procedure; the titrimetric procedure is
used for measuring concentrations above 1 mg/L;" hence, these values represent the lower limit of the measurement
range.
l3The method states that "Concentrations from 0.1... may be measured."
4-9
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
4.5.11 Methods 350.2,417/350.2, and 4500-NH3 (Ammonia as Nitrogen)
For EPA's sampling episodes, ammonia as nitrogen was determined by Method
350.2, an NPDES-approved method. Industry also supplied data determined by Methods
417/350.2 and 4500-NH3.
Method 350.2 uses either colorimetric, titrimetric, or electrode procedures to
measure ammonia. This method has a lower measurement range limit of 0.05 mg/L for the
colorimetric and electrode procedures, and a lower measurement range limit of 1.0 mg/L for the
titrimetric procedure. Rather than use different baseline values, EPA used 0.05 mg/L because it
represented a value at which ammonia as N can be reliably measured by several determinative
techniques in Method 350.2, as well as in other NPDES-approved methods.
One facility supplied concentration data and reported the method as '417/350.2.'
Based on additional information received from the facility, the method utilized is equivalent to
NPDES-approved Method 350.2; therefore, EPA included these data in its analyses.
Some facilities used the 4500-NH3 procedure. In the listings of data, EPA has
identified this procedure in four different ways: 4500-NH3; 4500NH, BE; 4500NH3-E; and 4500-
NH3F. With the exception of Method 4500-NH3, which is a general method citation applicable
to a group of specific methods, all these citations refer to NPDES-approved procedures for
ammonia as nitrogen. 4500-NH3-B refers to the primary distillation step performed prior to
analysis. 4500-NH3-E refers to the ammonia-selective electrode determinative technique, and
4500-NH3-F refers to the spectrophotometric determination of ammonia by reaction with
phenate.
EPA used the nominal quantitation limit of 0.05 mg/L derived from Method 350.2
as the baseline because this is the method associated with EPA's sampling episodes.
4.5.12 Methods 353.1,353.2, and 353.3 (Nitrate/Nitrite)
Nitrate/nitrite can be determined by three NPDES-approved methods, each of
which lists slightly different nominal quantitation limits that are expressed in the methods as the
lower limit of the measurement range. Methods 353.1 and 353.2 are automated colorimetric
procedures with quantitation limits of 0.01 and 0.05 mg/L, respectively. Method 353.3 is a
cadmium reduction, spectrophotometric procedure with a nominal quantitation limit of 0.01
mg/L. In the pollutant of concern analyses, EPA established the baseline value as the Method
353.1 quantitation limit of 0.01 mg/L.
4.5.13 Methods 4500-CN M and D4374-98 (Thiocyanate)
EPA and industry used the 4500-CN M procedure in determining the
concentrations of thiocyanate. In the listings of the data, EPA has identified this method in three
ways: 4500-CN; 4500-CN M.; and 4500CN-M. EPA has confirmed that the associated data
were all generated by Method 4500-CN M. The nominal quantitation limit for Method 4500-CN
4-10
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
M is cited in the method as the lower limit of the measurement range.14 Because EPA used
Method 4500-CN M, the Agency used its nominal quantitation limit of 0.1 mg/L as the baseline
value for all thiocyanate results. None of the thiocyanate data had quantitated values or sample-
specific quantitation limits lower than this baseline value.
Because there is no NPDES-approved method for thiocyanate, EPA proposed two
consensus standards, Method 4500-CN M (Reference 4-3) and D4374-98 (Annual Book of
ASTM Standards. Volume 11.02, 1999). Because EPA has not established any limitations for
thiocyanate in today's rule, the D4374-98 consensus standard is not included in today's rule.
4.5.14 Methods 625 and 610 (Naphthalene)
In developing the limitations and standards for naphthalene, EPA included
industry-supplied data from Method 625, an NPDES-approved GC/MS method for semivolatile
organics. This method's nominal quantitation limit is expressed as the lower limit of the
measurement range, typically the concentration of the lowest calibration standard. EPA selected
0.01 mg/L as the baseline value based on the ML for Method 1625 (see Section 4.5.1).
The industry-supplied naphthalene data from Method 1625 included quantitated
values or sample-specific quantitation limits lower than the baseline value in developing the
limitations and standards. EPA replaced these data with the value of the baseline value and
assumed that the measurements were nonquantitated.
While none of today's data were determined by Method 610, it is an NPDES-
approved method for naphthalene that is less susceptible to phenol interferences. In measuring
for compliance with today's limitations and standards for naphthalene, if a facility has a problem
with phenol in their wastewater, the laboratory can use the HPLC procedure in Method 610 to
achieve the required sensitivity. Also, see Section 4.6.
4.5.15 Method 8270 (Benzo(a)pyrene)
Industry supplied benzo(a)pyrene data generated from Method 8270. Although
Method 8270 is not NPDES-approved, EPA recognizes that a number of similarities exist
between Method 8270 and NPDES-approved methods. The estimated quantitation limit of 10
Mg/L for benzo(a)pyrene in Method 8270 is the same as Method 1625's ML which was used as
the baseline value for this analyte. This is consistent with Method 625, which has an ML of 10
Mg/L for benzo(a)pyrene. Many of the QC checks and procedures of Method 8270 are analogous
to procedures utilized by NPDES-approved methods, Method 625 in particular. However, one
major drawback for Method 8270 is that it only requires a subset of target analytes to be
evaluated in the matrix spike, while Method 625 requires a full target analyte matrix spike.
Furthermore, the calibration requirement in Method 8270 could be interpreted to mean that the
calibration standard should be at or below the known or anticipated regulatory compliance level.
14The method lists this value as the lower limit under "application" in natural waters or wastewaters.
4-11
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
Because of these concerns, EPA contacted the facility for more information about
its laboratory analyses. As explained in the proposal technical development document, EPA
could only reconsider its decision to exclude these data pending a full review of the laboratory
reports, including initial precision and recovery (IPR) analyses, instrument tunes, calibrations,
blanks, laboratory control sample (LCS) analyses, matrix spikes, surrogates, and all sample data.
However, this information was not provided to EPA. Because EPA has concerns about the
quality of the benzo(a)pyrene data generated by Method 8270, EPA excluded them from
developing the limitations and standards.
4.5.16 Methods 420.1 and 420.2 (Phenols (4AAP))
In EPA's database, the terms "total phenols" and "total recoverable phenolics" are
used synonymously. The term "total recoverable phenolics" is used in the titles of EPA Methods
420.1 to 420.4. While "total recoverable phenolics" could be considered a more accurate term
for what is measured in any of these related methods, both terms refer to an aggregate measure of
compounds with a phenol-like or "phenolic" structure. The use of the adjective "recoverable"
simply recognizes that there are some compounds that are not measured, as well as other related
compounds in this class. Thus, the method reports what can be recovered from the sample under
the conditions of the analysis. EPA uses the term phenols (4AAP) in today's rule.
The methods for the analysis of phenols (4AAP) employ the reagent
4-aminoantipyrine (4AAP), which reacts with phenolic compounds to produce a dark red
product, an antipyrine dye. The concentration of the phenolic compounds is determined by
measuring the absorbance of the sample at a wavelength of460 to 520 nm, depending on the
method. The methods are calibrated using a series of standards containing the single compound
phenol. EPA Methods 420.1 and 420.2, the two NPDES-approved methods, provide several
options for sample preparation and analysis, including a preliminary distillation designed to
remove interferences and a chloroform extraction procedure in Method 420.1 that is designed to
improve the sensitivity of the method. Both methods also provide information on the
concentrations of the calibration standards that may be prepared for a given set of procedural
options.
Each of these methods contains at least one set of options that will provide
sufficient sensitivity to meet the effluent guideline limitation for phenols (4AAP). Therefore, as
with any other compliance monitoring analysis, the permitted discharger is responsible for
communicating the requirements of the analysis to the laboratory, including the sensitivity
required to meet the regulatory limits associated with each analyte of interest. In turn, the
laboratory is responsible for employing the appropriate set of method options and a calibration
range in which the concentration of the lowest non-zero standard represents a sample
concentration lower than the regulatory limit for each analyte.
The methods themselves do not contain a required calibration range. Each
laboratory can, and does, establish a calibration range based on its use of the method. EPA used
a baseline value of 0.05 mg/L because this was the most commonly reported sample-specific
4-12
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
detection limit15 in EPA's sampling episode data. (These data included more concentrated
samples than effluent.)
4.6 Requirements for Laboratory Analysis for Compliance Monitoring
The permittee is responsible for communicating the requirements of the analysis
to the laboratory, including the sensitivity necessary to meet the regulatory limits associated with
each analyte of interest. In turn, the laboratory is responsible for employing the appropriate set of
method options and a calibration range in which the concentration of the lowest non-zero
standard represents a sample concentration lower than the regulatory limit for each analyte. For
example, EPA Methods 420.1 and 420.2 provide several options for sample preparation and
analysis, including a preliminary distillation designed to remove interferences and a chloroform
extraction procedure (Method 420.1) designed to improve the sensitivity of the method. Both
methods also provide information on the concentrations of the calibration standards that may be
prepared for a given set of procedural options. Each of these methods contains at least one set of
options that will provide sufficient sensitivity to meet the effluent guideline limitations for
phenols (4AAP). Thus, it is the responsibility of the permittee to convey to the laboratory the
required sensitivity to comply with the limitations. See Sierra Club v. Union Oil, 813 F.2d 1480,
1492 (9th Cir. 1987).
For organic compounds, such as 2,3,7,8-TCDF, naphthalene, and benzo(a)pyrene,
it may be necessary for laboratories to overcome interferences using procedures such as those
suggested in Guidance on the Evaluation, Resolution, and Documentation of Analytical
Problems Associated with Compliance Monitoring (EPA 821-B-93-001). The Monitoring
Guidance was developed in response to matrix interference problems encountered primarily in
development of the final rule for the Organic Chemicals, Plastics and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF)
category promulgated at 40 CFR Part 414. EPA consulted several laboratories that used different
strategies to analyze wastewaters (in-process, treated, untreated) from the OCPSF industry and
other industries. Wastewaters in the OCPSF industry presented a considerably greater challenge
than those in the iron and steel industry because of high loadings of inorganic substances,
suspended solids, and especially of organic compounds including monomers, polymeric
materials, intermediate chemicals, and manufactured products. As a result of the consultation
with the laboratories testing these more complex matrices, EPA found that nearly all matrix
interference problems could be eliminated. Therefore, EPA believes that laboratories and iron
and steel mills following the Monitoring Guidance should be able to eliminate any residual
matrix interference problems.
4.7 References
4-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water
and Wastes. EPA 821-C-99-004. Washington, DC, June 1999.
15For more than one hundred samples, the laboratories reported a lower sample-specific detection limit of 0.005
mg/L using Method 420.1.
4-13
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
4-2 American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and
Water Environment Federation. Standard Methods for the Examination by Water
and Wastewater. 18- Edition. Washington, DC, 1992.
4-3 American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and
Water Environment Federation. Standard Methods for the Examination by Water
and Wastewater. 20^ Edition. Washington, DC, 1998.
4-14
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
Table 4-1
Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
Analyte
Chemical
Abstract
Service
(CAS)
Number
Baseline
Value
(mg/L)
Samples
Collected and
Analyzed by
Method Used
to Analyze
Samples
Nominal
Quantitation
Value (mg/L)
for Method
Ammonia as Nitrogen
7664-41-7
0.05
EPA, Industry
350.2
0.05
Industry
417/350.2
0.05
4500-NHj
0.1(a)
4500-NH3F
0.1
4500NH, BE
0.8
45OONH3-E
0.8
Fluoride
16984-48-8
0.1
EPA
340.2
0.1
Hexane Extractable Material
(HEM)
C036
5
EPA
1664
5
Silica Gel Treated Hexane
Extractable Material (SGT-
HEM) (b)
C037
5
EPA
1664
5
Nitrate/Nitrite
C005
0.01
(c)
353.1
0.01
Thiocyanate
302-04-5
0.1
EPA
4500-CN
0.1
EPA
4500-CN M
0.1
Industry
4500CN-M
O.l
Proposed
D4374-98
0.0001
Total Cyanide
57-12-5
0.02
EPA, Industry
335.2
0.02
Industry
4500 CN E
0.005
4500-CNC
0.005(d)
4500-CNE
0.005
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
C009
4
EPA, Industry
160.2
4
Industry
160.2
4
209C
4
2540 D
4
Chromium
7440-47-3
0.01
EPA
1620
0.01
Industry
200.7
0.01
3120B
0.01
Hexavalent Chromium
18540-29-9
0.01
EPA, Industry
218.4
0.01
Industry
3120B
NA
4-15
-------
Section 4 - Analytical Methods and Baseline Values
Table 4-1 (continued)
Analyte
Chemical
Abstract
Service
(CAS)
Number
Baseline
Value
(mg/L)
Samples
Collected and
Analyzed by
Method Used
to Analyze
Samples
Nominal
Quantitation
Value (mg/L)
for Method
Lead
7439-92-1
0.05
EPA
1620
0.05
Industry
200.7
0.05
239.2
0.005
3130B
NA
Mercury
7439-97-6
0.0002
EPA
1620
0.0002
Industry
245.1
0.0002
Nickel
7440-02-0
0.04
EPA
1620
0.04
Industry
200.7
0.04
Selenium
7782-49-2
0.005
EPA
1620
0.005
Zinc
7440-66-6
0.02
EPA
1620
0.02
Industry
200.7
0.02
3130B
NA
Benzo(a)pyrene
50-32-8
0.01
EPA
1625
0.01
Industry
8270
0.01
Naphthalene
91-20-3
0.01
EPA
1625
0.01
Industry
625
0.01
Phenols (4AAP)
C020
0.05
EPA, Industry
420.1
(C)
420.2
(c)
2,3,7,8-
T etrachlorodibenzofuran
(TCDF)
51207-31-9
lOpg/L
EPA
1613B
lOpg/L
(a) For some of the industry-submitted data, "4500-NH3" was cited as the method used. This reference is vague in that it
potentially refers to seven different procedures. Consequently, EPA has listed the lowest of the measurement ranges cited in the
methods.
(b) SGT-HEM measures nonpolar material (i.e., n-hexane extractable material that is not absorbed by silica gel), the portion of
oil and grease that is similar to total petroleum hydrocaibons (TPH). -
(c) The method does not have a required calibration range. The baseline value is based upon the most frequently reported
sample-specific detection limit.
(d) Method 4500-CN-C is the distillation process by which to prepare samples for analysis by either 4500-CN-D or -E. Because
EPA does not have complete information on which determinative technique industry used, the quantitation limit reflected in the
citation for 4500-CN-C is the lower quantitation limit of the two procedures.
NA - Not available.
4-16
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
SECTION 5
DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRY
This section describes the iron and steel industry in the United States. Unless
otherwise noted, all estimates included in this section represent 1997 data collected in the U.S.
EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (EPA survey). EPA recognizes that the
estimates provided in this section do not necessarily reflect the current status of the iron and steel
industry in the United States; however,' EPA does not have a more recent comprehensive set of
data to use to describe the industry.
The United States is the third largest steel producer in the world, accounting for
12 percent of the international steel market. The iron and steel industry in the United States has
an annual steel output of approximately 117 million tons per year, and employs nearly 145,000
people (Reference 5-1). Based on estimates from the EPA survey, there are approximately 254
iron and steel sites in the United States; the 254 sites are owned by 115 companies. The types of
sites and the manufacturing operations conducted at these sites are described below.
5.1 Types of Sites
EPA classified manufacturing facilities in the iron and steel industry into the
following three types on the basis of raw material consumption and manufacturing processes:
integrated steel mills, non-integrated steel mills, and stand-alone facilities. This section provides
a general description of the types of sites, these processes conducted, the number of facilities and
locations, the types of steel processed, and the wastewater discharge practices for each type of
site. Figure 5-1 is a schematic drawing of the steelmaking, refining, and casting operations that
occur at iron and steel facilities. Figure 5-2 shows the various hot forming and finishing
operations that steel may undergo to form semi-finished or finished products.
Integrated steel mills produce molten iron in blast furnaces using coke, limestone,
beneficiated iron ore, and preheated air as the principal raw materials. Other raw materials used
to produce molten iron may include sinter, other iron-bearing materials, oxygen, and alternate
sources of carbon. These mills then charge the molten iron (or hot metal) and steel scrap to basic
oxygen furnaces (BOFs) to produce molten steel. Depending on final product specifications, the
molten steel then undergoes various refining steps prior to casting, hot forming, and finishing
operations. Several integrated mills also have cokemaking and sintering plants that produce raw
materials for blast furnace operations.
Non-integrated steel mills produce molten steel by melting steel scrap in electric
arc furnaces (EAFs). Some non-integrated steel mills also use high-quality iron materials such as
pig iron or direct-reduced iron along with scrap. As at integrated mills, the molten steel
undergoes various refining, casting, hot forming, and finishing operations.
5-1
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Stand-alone facilities do not produce molten steel and include certain raw material
preparation facilities and steel forming and finishing mills. A number of stand-alone operations
produce raw materials for ironmaking and steelmaking (e.g., by-product recovery and non-
recovery coke plants, sinter plants, and direct-reduced ironmaking plants). Steel forming and
finishing stand-alone mills conduct many of the same hot forming and steel finishing operations
conducted at integrated and non-integrated steel mills. The major types of stand-alone facilities
are described below:
• Coke plants and sinter plants manufacture feed materials for blast
furnaces.
• Direct-reduced ironmaking plants manufacture feed materials for EAFs.
• Hot forming mills receive cast products from integrated and non-integrated
steel mills. These facilities perform hot forming operations and,
depending on the product, a limited number may perform steel finishing
operations.
• Carbon steel finishing mills may perform acid pickling, cold forming and
annealing, acid and alkaline cleaning, electroplating, and hot coating on
carbon steel products received from other mills. Stand-alone stainless
steel finishing mills typically perform acid pickling and descaling and cold
forming and annealing operations on stainless steel products received from
other mills.
• Pipe and tube mills include:
— Facilities that manufacture butt-welded or seamless pipe and tube
through hot forming operations,
— Facilities that manufacture pipe and tube using cold forming
operations, such as electric resistance welding, and
— Facilities that receive pipe and tube and perform other operations,
such as drawing.
Only the stand-alone pipe and tube mills that manufacture butt-welded or
seamless pipe and tube through hot forming operations, as opposed to
those that perform cold forming and drawing operations on pipe and tube,
were evaluated as part of the iron and steel industry for the purpose of
developing effluent limitations and guidelines. Section 1 provides more
detail on the applicability of the iron and steel category.
5-2
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Table 5-1 presents EPA's national estimates of the numbers of iron and steel sites
by type in the United States. There are 20 integrated steel mills that account for approximately
60 percent of domestic annual raw steel production. Approximately 94 non-integrated steel mills
account for the remaining 40 percent of domestic annual raw steel production. There are
approximately 138 stand-alone facilities. Non-integrated steel mills are the largest group and
they outnumber integrated steel mills by more than four to one. Stand-alone finishing facilities
form the second largest group, and stand-alone hot forming facilities form the third largest group.
This reflects two trends in the industry over the past 25 years: (1) a shift of steel production from
older, larger integrated steel mills to newer, smaller non-integrated steel mills, and (2) the
emergence of specialized, stand-alone finishing facilities that process semi-finished sheet, strip,
bars, and rods obtained from integrated or non-integrated facilities.
Integrated steel mills are located primarily east of the Mississippi River in Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, and Alabama; one
integrated steel mill is located in Utah. Figure 5-3 shows the locations of integrated steel mills.
Stand-alone coke plants and coke plants at integrated steel mills are located in Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Kentucky, Alabama, and Utah. Figure 5-4
shows the locations of stand-alone and colocated coke facilities. Non-integrated steel mills are
located throughout the continental United States, as are stand-alone hot forming and finishing
mills.
Steel produced at integrated and non-integrated steel mills can be classified as
carbon steels, alloy steels, and stainless steels. Carbon steels owe their properties to varying
concentrations of carbon, with relatively low concentrations of alloying elements (less than 1.65
percent manganese, 0.60 percent silicon, and 0.60 percent copper). Alloy steels contain
concentrations of manganese, silicon, or copper greater than those for carbon steels, or other
specified alloying elements added to impart unique properties to the steel. Stainless steels are
corrosion resistant and heat resistant; the principal alloying elements for stainless steel are
chromium, nickel, and silicon. Steel is typically considered stainless steel when the chromium
content is 10 percent or greater.
Table 5-2 lists the types of steels manufactured or processed at integrated and
non-integrated steel mills and stand-alone hot forming, finishing, and pipe and tube. All
integrated steel mills produce carbon steels; some also produce alloy and stainless steels. EPA
estimates that 72 non-integrated steel mills, 26 stand-alone hot forming mills, 45 stand-alone
finishing mills, and 11 stand-alone pipe and tube mills produce or process carbon steels.
Steel mills discharge process wastewater directly to surface water (direct
discharge), to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) (indirect discharge), both directly and
indirectly, or not at all (zero or alternative discharge). Zero and alternative dischargers include
sites that do not discharge process wastewater and sites that are completely dry (i.e., do not use
water in iron and steel operations). Table 5-3 shows the discharge status of integrated and non-
integrated steel mills and stand-alone facilities. A single mill may discharge process wastewater
from one operation directly to surface waters and from another operation indirectly to a POTW.
5-3
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
All but one integrated mill discharge directly; two discharge both directly and indirectly. EPA
estimates that among the 94 non-integrated steel mills, 46 are direct dischargers, 32 are zero or
alternative dischargers, and 19 are indirect dischargers. For the 70 stand-alone finishing mills,
EPA estimates 34 indirect dischargers, 28 direct dischargers, and 11 zero or alternative
dischargers.
5.2 Manufacturing Operations
The following subsections describe the types of manufacturing operations
performed at integrated and non-integrated steel mills and stand-alone iron and steel facilities.
Table 5-4 lists the various manufacturing operations and EPA's national estimates of the number
of sites performing each operation, 1997 production, and 1997 production capacity.
5.2.1 Cokemaking
Cokemaking is the manufacture of metallurgical coke from coal. There are two
types of coke plants operated in the United States. By-product recovery coke plants recover
several chemical by-products from coke oven gas. Non-recovery or heat recovery coke plants do
not recover chemical by-products from the coke oven gas; the only by-product is heat, which is
used to generate steam and electric power. In 1997, there were 23 by-product recovery coke
plants and one non-recovery coke plant located in the United States (one additional non-recovery
coke plant started operation after 1997).
Coke is used to reduce iron oxide to metallic iron in both blast furnaces and
foundries; coke used for blast furnace operations is called furnace coke, and coke used for
foundry operations is called foundry coke. Presently, foundry coke is produced only by by-
product coke plants, and furnace coke is produced by both by-product recovery and non-recovery
coke plants. Of the 24 coke plants operating in 1997, 19 primarily produce blast furnace coke, 4
primarily produce foundry coke, and 1 routinely produces both. Merchant by-product
cokemaking operations provide more than 50 percent of the coke produced to operations,
industries, or processes other than ironmaking blast furnaces. Iron and steel by-product
cokemaking operations are those other than merchant cokemaking operations.
By-Product Recovery Coke Plants
By-product recovery coke plants comprise coal handling and preparation facilities,
one or more coke batteries (i.e., groups of 40 or more vertical, slot-type coke ovens located side
by side) equipped with coal charging and coke pushing equipment, coke oven gas collection and
cleaning facilities, by-product recovery systems, coke quenching stations, and associated air and
water pollution control facilities and solid waste processing operations.
Blends of high-, medium-, and low-volatile coals and other carbonaceous
materials are pulverized and screened to desired size and charged into the tops of coke ovens
with charging machines called larry cars. Different blends of coals are used to produce foundry
5-4
-------
APPENDIX E: Attachments for Section 14
Subcategory Abbreviations:
Abbreviation Subcategory
COKE_BYPROD
OTHER
Cokemaking, By-Product Segment
Other Operations
Option Abbreviations:
Abbreviation
DRI BPT
Option
Direct Iron Reduction, Option BPT
Other Abbreviations:
Abbreviation
CAS_NO
Est
LTA
ND
Obs
STD
V.F.
Definition
Chemical Abstract Service Number
Estimated
Long-Term Average
Non-Detect
Number of Daily Values;
OR Observed (e.g., Obs Mean)
Standard Deviation
Variability Factor
E-l
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
and furnace coke. The ovens are positive pressure ovens operated on a sequential batch basis.
The coal charge is heated in the absence of air to drive off volatile materials and water to leave
the carbonaceous residue called coke. The coking time is approximately 16 hours for furnace
coke and approximately 28 to 30 hours for foundry coke. Coking temperatures in the ovens
range from approximately 1,650 to 2,000°F (Reference 5-2).
When the coking cycle is completed, the oven doors are removed and the
incandescent coke is pushed from the oven into a rail car called a coke quench car. Plants
usually control air emissions from pushing operations with baghouses or wet scrubbers. The
quench car is positioned under a quench station where large volumes of water quench the coke.
All coke plants in the United States recycle and evaporate coke quench water, typically to
extinction. The coke is then sized and stored for future use. Relatively fine coke particles
collected in quench station sumps are called coke breeze. Coke breeze is reused as a charge
material for production of foundry coke or for sinter plant operations, or sold for other uses.
Figure 5-5 presents a typical by-product cokemaking process diagram. Processed
coke oven gas is ultimately used as a fuel for battery underfiring. Coke oven gas is scrubbed in
gas collector mains, which are located on top of the coke battery, with a fluid called flushing
liquor to condense tars and moisture derived from the coal. The flushing liquor is processed in
tar decanter tanks to separate tar from the flushing liquor stream. Flushing liquor is recycled to
the gas collector mains at a high rate. Primary gas coolers and electrostatic precipitators remove
additional tar from coke oven gas. Exhausters pull the coke oven gas through the primary
coolers and push the gas through the remainder of the by-product recovery plant. Final gas
coolers lower the coke oven gas temperature further; the location of the final coolers depend on
the types of by-products that are recovered at the plant.
Excess flushing liquor, also called waste ammonia liquor, is rejected from the
flushing liquor circuit and is the principal process wastewater stream generated at by-product
coke plants. Sludge collected at the bottom of the tar decanters is a listed hazardous waste and is
typically mixed with coke breeze and other carbonaceous material and recycled to the coke ovens
with the coal charge. The recovered tars are stored in tanks on site and sold as a by-product.
The by-product recovery cokemaking industry uses a variety of chemical
processing technologies to recover additional products from coke oven gas and waste ammonia
liquor, such as ammonia or ammonia compounds, sulfur and sulfur compounds, naphthalene,
crude light oils, and phenols. The following technologies are used:
• Recovery of ammonia and ammonia compounds. Ammonia formed during
by-product recovery cokemaking is recovered from both coke oven gas
and waste ammonia liquor that is condensed from the gas (Reference 5-3).
Ammonia is recovered from the waste ammonia liquor through
distillation; overhead vapors from the distillation process are combined
with the coke oven gas stream for further recovery of ammonia. Ammonia
may be scrubbed directly from coke oven gas with sulfuric acid to produce
5-5
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
ammonium sulfate crystals. Using the Phosam process, ammonia may
also be scrubbed directly from coke oven gas with phosphoric acid and
then stripped. The overhead vapor from the stripper is condensed to form
an aqueous ammonia feed for a fractionator, where anhydrous ammonia is
produced. Ammonia may also be scrubbed from coke oven gas using
water; the ammonia-rich water stream is generally sent to an ammonia
stripper to produce ammonia vapors. Vapors from the ammonia stripper
are typically combined with coke oven gas and can be combusted or
destructed, or can be used to generate ammonium sulfate crystals using
sulfuric acid or liquid ammonia using the Phosam process.
• Recovery of sulfur and sulfur compounds. Desulfurization systems
recover elemental sulfur or sulfur compounds from coke oven gas.
Techniques to remove sulfur include iron oxide boxes using Fe203 on
wood shavings, absorption and desorption with soda ash, Wilputte vacuum
carbonate systems, and Claus sulfur recovery systems.
• Recovery of naphthalene. Crystals of naphthalene are condensed from the
coke oven gas in the final cooler and recovered from the recirculating final
cooler wastewater by skimming, filtration, or centrifugation. Naphthalene
may be recovered by solidification at temperatures below 74°C (165°F).
• Recovery of crude light oils. Crude light oils are scrubbed from coke oven
gas with a recirculated wash oil solution. Crude light oil is an unrefined
oil rich in benzene, toluene, xylene, and solvent naphthas. The oil is
recovered for resale, reused as a solvent to recover phenolic compounds
from waste ammonia liquor, or further refined on or off site.
• Recovery of phenols. Liquid/liquid extraction with suitable solvents is a
common method to remove and recover phenols from waste ammonia
liquor. In liquid/liquid extraction, light oil or other suitable solvents
extracts phenolic compounds from waste ammonia liquor. The phenolized
solvent is separated and extracted with caustic to form sodium phenolate.
Because there is not a strong economic incentive, phenol recovery is not
commonly performed.
Non-Recovery Coke Plants
Non-recovery coke plants carbonize coal in large dome-shaped oven chambers.
The single non-recovery coke plant that was in operation in 1997 operates Jewell-Thompson
non-recovery coke batteries (Reference 5-4). Coal is charged to the ovens with a conveyor
charging machine. Volatile by-products generated during the cokemaking process are contained
in the ovens by negative pressure and are thermally destroyed, thus eliminating the need for a by-
products recovery plant. Combustion of these volatile components also provides some of the
5-6
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
heat for the cokemaking process. Air for combustion enters the ovens above the charge; the
temperature in the ovens can be controlled by regulating the flow of air into the ovens. The
volatile components are combusted in the sole flues beneath the cokemaking oven floors;
additional air may be added to the sole flues to aid combustion. The gas is collected in a
common waste heat tunnel above the ovens; the gas may then pass through an afterburner or a
scrubber before being discharged to the atmosphere at a temperature of 1,600°F. Heat from the
waste gases can be recovered to generate steam for electric power generation or for other uses.
Because non-recovery plants combust all materials evolved from the coal, there
are no by-products recovered other than heat in the waste gases and coke breeze. The pushing
and quenching operations are similar to those performed at by-product recovery coke plants.
Non-recovery cokemaking operations do not generate process wastewater other than boiler
blowdown and process storm water, which are typically disposed of by coke quenching.
5.2.2 Sintering
Sintering is a beneficiation process in which iron-bearing materials recovered
from other iron and steel operations are mixed with iron ore, limestone, and finely divided fuel,
such as coke breeze. During iron and steel production operations, blast furnaces, basic oxygen
furnaces, continuous casters, and hot forming mills generate large quantities of particulate matter
and other solids (e.g., fines, mill scale, flue dust, wastewater sludge). Sintering can recover a
large percentage of these iron-rich materials, provided the oil content is low enough to prevent
objectionable fumes. Sinter serves as a supplementary raw material for blast furnace operations.
Sinter plants consist of raw material handling facilities and raw material storage
bins, a sinter strand (traveling grate combustion device), a mixing drum for each sinter strand, a
windbox (draws air through the traveling grate), a discharge end, and a cooling bed for sintered
product. The iron-rich materials are mixed in sinter machines and charged to the traveling grate
at a depth of approximately one foot. The mixture is ignited, and air is drawn through the bed as
it travels toward the discharge end to promote combustion and fusing of the iron-bearing
materials. Sinter plants may operate either wet air pollution control systems or dry air pollution
control systems. In 1997, seven sites reported that they used wet air pollution control systems to
control air emissions from the sintering process, while two sites used dry air pollution control
systems.
5.2.3 Briquetting
Briquetting is an agglomeration process used to recycle and reuse fine materials
recovered from other iron and steel operations that otherwise could not be charged to blast
furnaces or steelmaking furnaces. The operation forms materials into discrete shapes of
sufficient size, strength, and weight for charging to a subsequent process (e.g., blast furnaces,
BOFs). Materials are similar to those charged to sintering operations, although they are usually
formed with the use of a binder and do not possess the strength of sintered products (Reference
5-5). Briquetting operations can be performed with or without heating the raw materials, and do
5-7
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
not generate process wastewater. EPA estimates that four facilities perform briquetting or
similar agglomeration processes.
5.2.4 Blast Furnace Ironmaking
Blast furnaces produce molten iron, which is charged to BOFs. The blast furnace
has several zones: a crucible-shaped hearth (bottom of the furnace), an intermediate zone called a
bosh (between the hearth and the stack), a vertical shaft called the stack (between the bosh and
furnace top), and the furnace top, which contains the mechanism for charging the furnace. The
hearth and bosh walls are lined with carbon-type refractory blocks, and the stack is lined with
high-quality fireclay bricks. To protect these refractory materials from burning out, cooling
water circulates through exterior plates, staves, or sprays. Blast furnaces range between 70 and
120 feet in height, with hearth diameters between 20 and 45 feet (Reference 5-6). The rated
capacity of blast furnaces ranges from under one million tons per year to over four million tons
per year. There are 20 integrated steel mills with blast furnace operations in the United States.
The raw materials charged to the top of the blast furnace include coke, limestone,
beneficiated iron ores or iron pellets, scrap, arid sinter. Iron pellets, the dominant burden material
(material charged to the furnace) in North America, include acid pellets and fluxed pellets, which
are typically produced at or near iron ore mine sites. A continuous feed of alternating layers of
coke, iron-bearing materials, and limestone are charged to the top of the furnace. Hot blast
(preheated air) at temperatures between 1,650 and 2,300°F and injected fuel (e.g., pulverized
coal, oil, natural gas) are blown into the bottom of the furnace (top of the hearth) through a bustle
pipe and tuyeres (orifices) located around the circumference of the furnace (Reference 5-6). The
preheated air reacts with the coke to produce the reducing agent, carbon monoxide. The reducing
gases ascend through the furnace to reduce the iron-bearing materials to produce the molten iron
and slag. The following chemical equations present a simplified summary of the chemical
reactions that occur in a blast furnace:
3Fe203 + H2 —> 2Fe304 + H20
3Fe203 + CO—> 2Fe304 + C02
Fe304 + H2 --> 3FeO + H20
Fe304 + CO-->3FeO + C02
FeO + H2 --> Fe + H20
FeO + CO—>Fe + C02
3Fe + CO ~> Fe3C + H20
3Fe + 2CO—> Fe3C + C02
C02 + C --> 2CO
H20 + C--> CO + H2
5-8
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
FeO + C —> Fe + CO
3Fe + C—> Fe3C
The molten iron, at approximately 2,800 to 3,000°F, accumulates in the hearth
and is tapped at regular intervals into refractory-lined cars for transport to the steelmaking
furnaces. Limestone is a fluxing agent that forms fluid slag to dissolve unwanted impurities in
the ore. Molten slag, which floats on top of the molten iron, is also tapped and processed for sale
as a by-product. Blast furnace slag uses include railroad ballast, aggregate in cement
manufacturing, and other construction uses. Wastewater or plant service water is used for slag
cooling or quenching. Nineteen of the 20 integrated facilities surveyed use water for slag cooling
at blast furnace operations.
The hot blast exits the furnace top as blast furnace flue gas in enclosed piping. A
combination of dry dust catchers and high-energy venturi scrubbers clean and cool the gas.
Stoves combust the cleaned gas to preheat the incoming air or the cleaned gas is used as fuel
elsewhere at integrated mills. Direct contact water is applied in the gas coolers and high-energy
scrubbers. All sites operating blast furnaces use wet air gas cleaning systems.
5.2.5 Direct-Reduced Ironmaking
Another method of producing iron is through direct reduction. Direct reduction
produces relatively pure iron in solid pellet form by reducing iron ore at a temperature below the
melting point of the iron produced. Direct-reduced iron (DRI) is produced through the same
chemical reactions presented in Section 5.2.4 for blast furnace ironmaking. DRI is used as a
substitute for scrap steel in EAF steelmaking to minimize contaminant levels in the melted steel
and to allow economic steel production when market prices for scrap steel are high. There were
two direct-reduced ironmaking plants in the United States operating in 1997 (an additional
direct-reduced ironmaking facility started operation after 1997).
DRI can be produced by several different types of processes (Reference 5-5). DRI
may be produced in shaft furnaces or fluidized beds, with the reducing gases generated outside of
the reduction furnace. DRI may also be produced in rotary kilns or shaft or hearth furnaces, with
the reducing gases generated inside the reduction furnace. Facilities in the United States use the
Midrex® process, which produces DRI in a shaft furnace with reducing gases produced outside
of the reduction furnace. The Midrex® process is discussed in more detail below.
The Midrex® process equipment consists of three main components: a direct-
reduction shaft furnace, a gas reformer, and a cooling-gas system. The direct-reduction shaft
furnace is divided into three zones: a preheat zone, a reduction zone, and a cooling zone. Iron
ore is charged into the top of the furnace and heated in the preheat zone with ascending gases
from the reduction zone. Reformed gas consisting of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, which
reduce the iron ore, flows into the reduction zone at a temperature of approximately 875 ° C; the
hydrogen and carbon monoxide are produced in the gas reformers from natural gas and scrubbed
5-9
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
reducing furnace top gas using a catalyst. The DRI formed in the reduction zone is cooled in the
cooling zone using direct-contact cooling gas. The cooling gas is scrubbed and then recycled.
DRI is continuously conveyed from the furnace through seal legs and screened to provide the
final product. Direct-reduced ironmaking facilities have wet air pollution control systems to
control furnace emissions and emissions from material handling and storage.
5.2.6 Steelmaking
Steelmaking in the United States is performed in either BOFs or EAFs. BOF and
EAF processes are batch operations with tap-to-tap (batch cycle) times of about 45 minutes for
BOFs and in the range of 1 hour to more than 1.5 hours for EAFs. BOFs typically produce high-
tonnage carbon steels and EAFs produce low-tonnage carbon, alloy, and stainless steels.
Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF)
The open hearth furnace process for steelmaking was replaced after World War II
with the basic oxygen process (BOP). This process involves blowing oxygen through a lance
into the top of a pear-shaped vessel. Lime addition to the charge removes phosphorus and sulfur
impurities in the form of slag. Compared with the open hearth furnace, which had tap-to-tap
times of 12 hours or more, steelmaking using BOP is a much quicker process. In addition, up to
35 percent of the charge could be steel scrap. After its invention, the BOP was modified. In
addition to blowing oxygen directly onto the charge, the process involved also blowing burnt
lime through the lance with the oxygen. This process allowed refining of pig iron smelted from
high-phosphorus ores. Another process modification, developed in Canada and Germany in the
mid-1960s, was the bottom-blown steelmaking process. This process used two concentric
tuyeres, the outer with hydrocarbon gas and the inner with oxygen. This new process became
know as Quelle-BOP (Q-BOP). Both the BOP and Q-BOP process are types of BOF
steelmaking used today.
The BOF steelmaking process refines the product of the blast furnace (molten
iron), which contains approximately 3.5 to 4.4 percent carbon, ^0.05 percent sulfur, and <0.04
percent phosphorus. In steelmaking operations, the furnace charge consists of approximately
two-thirds molten iron and one-third scrap steel. The furnace melts the charge and refines it by
oxidizing silicon, carbon, manganese, phosphorus, and a portion of the iron in the molten bath.
Various alloying elements are added to produce different grades of steel. Common alloying
elements include aluminum, boron, chromium, copper, magnesium, molybdenum, niobium,
nickel, silicon, and vanadium. The BOF allows close control of steel quality and the ability to
process a wide range of raw materials.
Vessels used in the BOF process are generally vertical cylinders surmounted by a
truncated cone. Typical heat sizes in BOFs range between under 100 tons per heat to over 300
tons per heat. Scrap and molten iron are first placed in the vessel. Oxygen is then injected into
the molten bath either through the top of the furnace (top blown), bottom of the furnace (bottom
blown), or both (combination blown). A violent reaction occurs immediately, bringing the
5-10
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
molten metal and hot gases into intimate contact, causing impurities to burn off quickly.
Management of furnace slag processes controls residual sulfur. The slag is separated and
removed from the molten steel. Alloys are added to the bath or as the steel is tapped (poured)
into ladles. Slag material is charged back to the blast furnace to recover iron or used as railroad
ballast. Similar to blast furnaces, BOF manufacturing facilities may use wastewater or plant
service water for slag cooling or quenching. Eighteen of the 20 integrated facilities surveyed use
water instead of air for slag cooling in BOF operations.
Off-gases from BOFs exit the vessel at temperatures of approximately 3,000°F.
This gas contains approximately 90 percent carbon monoxide, 10 percent carbon dioxide, and
may also contain ferrous oxide dust. BOF off-gas control systems include three types: semi-wet,
wet-open combustion, and wet-suppressed combustion. Semi-wet systems condition furnace off-
gases with moisture prior to processing in the electrostatic precipitators or baghouses. Wet-open
combustion systems admit excess air to the off-gas collection system, allowing carbon monoxide
to combust prior to high-energy wet scrubbing for air pollution control. Wet-suppressed
combustion systems do not admit excess air to the off-gas collection system prior to high-energy
scrubbing for air pollution control. BOF facilities use water for air pollution control systems
designed to treat furnace off-gases prior to release into the atmosphere (Reference 5-6).
Electric Arc Furnace (EAF)
The EAF is designed to produce specific grades of steel. The first EAFs
developed in the late 1800s and early 1900s could melt approximately one ton per heat. Typical
heat sizes in current EAFs range between under one ton per heat to over 350 tons per heat. EPA
estimates that 96 sites operate EAFs.
An EAF is a cylindrical vessel with a dish-shaped refractory hearth and three
electrodes that lower from the dome-shaped, removable roof. Shell diameters depend on the heat
size and range from 8 feet for a 10-ton vessel to 30 feet for a 300-ton vessel. Tar-bonded
magnesite bricks form the lining of the furnace. The walls typically contain water-cooled panels
that are covered to minimize heat loss. The electrodes may also be equipped with water cooling
systems (Reference 5-6).
EAF steelmaking consists of scrap charging, melting, refining, deslagging, and
tapping. In addition to scrap steel, the charge may include pig iron, DRI, and alloying elements.
As the steel scrap is melted, additional scrap may be added to the furnace. The EAF generates
heat by passing an electric current between electrodes through the charge in the furnace. Lime-
rich slag removes the steel impurities (e.g., silicon, sulfur, and phosphorus) from the molten
steel. Oxygen may be added to the furnace to speed up the steelmaking process. At the end of a
heat, the furnace tips forward and the molten steel is poured off. EAFs in the United States are
equipped with dry or semi-wet air pollution controls, and none discharge process wastewater.
5-11
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
5.2.7 Vacuum Degassing
Vacuum degassing is a refining process in which gases are removed from molten
steel prior to casting to produce steel of high metallurgical quality. Vacuum degassing is used to
control composition and temperature, remove oxygen (deoxidation) and hydrogen (degassing),
decarburize, and otherwise remove impurities from the steel. Vacuum degassers are common at
integrated and non-integrated mills that produce carbon, stainless, and certain alloy steels.
Vacuum degassers often operate as part of ladle metallurgy stations (discussed in Section 5.2.8),
where additional steel refining is conducted. EPA estimates that 44 sites operate vacuum
degassing systems.
Steam ejectors create the vacuum for most vacuum degassing units. Gases
removed from the molten steel come in contact with the injected steam, thereby contaminating
the condensate wastewater. While the molten steel is under vacuum, elements that have a
relatively higher vapor pressure volatilize and are present in the gases.
5.2.8 Ladle Metallurgy and Secondary Steelmaking
Ladle metallurgy and secondary steelmaking are steel refining operations that
molten steels undergo at atmospheric conditions (i.e., no vacuum is applied) prior to casting.
The purpose of ladle metallurgy and secondary steelmaking may include controlling gases in the
steel, adjusting concentrations of metallic or nonmetallic compounds (alloying), and adjusting
physical properties (e.g., temperature).
Common types of ladle metallurgy include argon or nitrogen bubbling and
stirring, argon-oxygen decarburization, lance injection, magnetic stirring, and other alloy addition
operations. Common types of secondary steelmaking include electroslag refining and other alloy
addition operations. None of sites that conduct ladle metallurgy and/or secondary steelmaking
reported generating or discharging process wastewater from these operations. EPA estimates that
103 sites use ladle metallurgy and/or secondary steelmaking; some sites may operate more than
one type of process. The following table lists the numbers of sites in 1997 performing various
types of ladle metallurgy and secondary steelmaking.
1997 National Estimate for Types of Ladle Metallurgy
and Secondary Steelmaking Processes
Type of Ladle Metallurgy or Secondary Steelmaking
Number of Sites
Argon bubbling
66
Argon-oxygen decarburization
16
Electroslag remelting
10
Lance injection
19
5-12
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Type of Ladle Metallurgy or Secondary Steelmaking
Number of Sites
Other (a)
37
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and
Short Surveys).
(a) Other types of ladle metallurgy include alloy addition, reheating, magnetic stirring, ladle
stirring, and carbon addition/adjustment.
5.2.9 Casting
Casting converts molten steel into a semi-finished product or shape that is suitable
for further processing. There are two main types of casting operations: continuous casting and
ingot casting. Molten steel is tapped from the BOF or EAF into ladles large enough to hold an
entire heat. The ladles are then processed in ladle metallurgy stations and/or vacuum degassers
prior to teeming (pouring) the steel into ingot molds or direct casting it into semi-finished shapes
using continuous casters. EPA estimates that 113 sites operate casters.
Continuous Casting
Continuous casting is the most efficient and most common method of casting
performed at steel mills. In the continuous casting process, molten steel is poured from the ladle
into a refractory-lined tundish. The molten metal from the tundish pours through nozzles into an
oscillating water-cooled copper mold, where the metal partially solidifies. The copper molds
oscillate to prevent the molten steel from sticking to their sides. Lubricants spray into the molds
to keep the steel moving through the mold. After passing through the water-cooled molds, the
partially solidified product passes into a secondary cooling zone, where sprays of contact water
cool the semi-finished product enough to solidify. The product then passes into the cut-off zone
where it is cut to the desired length.
Continuous casting machines are configured with either single or multiple strands,
which mold molten steel into the desired shapes. The three main types of continuous casters are
based on the shape of the cast product: billet, bloom, and slab. Billet casters form squares or
rounds between 3 and 7 inches thick and are multiple-strand casters (Reference 5-6); billet
casters also form steel for seamless tube production. Bloom casters form sections ranging
between 7 by 7 inches and 14.6 by 23.6 inches and are usually three-strand. Slab casters form
sections up to 12 inches thick and 100 inches wide, and are usually single- or twin-strands. In
addition, casters may form beams that are fed directly to I-beam or H-beam rolling mills. The
following table presents continuous casting products and the number of sites casting these
products in 1997.
5-13
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
1997 National Estimate For Types of Continuous Casting Products
Type of Cast Product
Number of Sites
Slab
28
Thin slab
8
Round billet
6
Rectangular or square billet
47
Bloom
12
Other (a)
7
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data
(Detailed and Short Surveys).
(a) Other types of cast products include beam blanks and near net-shape products.
Ingot Casting
Ingot casting involves teeming the molten steel into ingot molds, and then cooling
and stripping the ingots out of the molds. The ingots are then heated and rolled into blooms,
billets, or slabs during hot forming. Because continuous casting directly forms the molten steel
into blooms, billets, or slabs, increasing productivity and conserving energy, continuous casting
has replaced most ingot casting operations. Ingot casting is used typically for small, specialty
batches and for certain applications for producing plate. Twenty-two sites reported performing
ingot casting.
5.2.10 Hot Forming
Hot forming is a process in which preheated (typically in the range of 1,800°F),
solidified steel is reshaped through a series of forming steps in which mechanical pressure is
applied through work rolls (Reference 5-2). Hot formed products have numerous cross-sections,
lengths, and tonnages. While several different types of hot forming mills are in operation today,
they can be grouped into four types:
• Primary mills;
• Section mills;
• Flat mills (plate, hot strip, and sheet); and
• Pipe and tube mills (seamless and butt-weld).
In general, hot forming primary mills reduce ingots to slabs or blooms, or blooms
to billets. Section mills reduce billets to form rod, bar products, structural shapes (e.g., channels,
angles), or other forms. Flat mills reduce slabs to plates or strips. Pipe and tube mills form
seamless products from round billets and butt-welded products from strips.
5-14
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Hand chipping, machine chipping, manual scarfing, grinding, milling, and
machine scarfing are methods used to remove surface defects from blooms, billets, and slabs
prior to hot rolling. Scarfing removes a thin layer of the steel surface by localized melting and
oxidation. The process may be done manually (continuously moving an oxyacetylene torch
along the length of the product), or by a scarfing machine located near the entry of the hot
forming mill.
Flat mills, specifically hot strip mills, are the most common type of hot forming
mills at integrated steel mills. Hot rolled strip is formed from a slab, which is heated in one or
more furnaces. Scale is removed from the heated slab in a two-high rolling mill with vertical
rolls. The rolls loosen the scale, and high-pressure water jets remove the scale. The slab then
rolls through four-high roughing stands until it reaches a thickness of approximately 1.2 inches.
The slab then passes to the finishing train, where a crop-shear cuts both ends and high-pressure
steam jets remove scale. Six or seven four-high finishing stands roll the strip to a thickness
between 0.06 and 0.4 inches. Both the roughing and finishing stands are usually arranged in
tandem.
Butt-welded pipes and tubes are made from hot rolled strips with square or
slightly beveled edges called skelp. The width of skelp corresponds to the circumference of the
pipe, while the gauge corresponds to the wall thickness. Skelp is preheated to welding
temperature in a reheat furnace and drawn through a die or roll forming a cylindrical shape. The
edges are pressed together forming a butt-weld. Seamless pipes and tubes are usually made by a
piercing process. The process heats, pierces, and shapes a solid round bar or billet to the desired
diameter and wall thickness.
Forging is another type of steel forming where steel shapes are produced by
hammering or by processing in a press (Reference 5-7). Forging operations can be conducted on
cold, warm, or hot steel. Typically, ingots are forged into billets, flats, or rounds. Types of
forging include open die forging, impression die forging, ring rolling, and extrusion. Open die
forging is conducted with dies that do not completely confine the steel that is being shaped, and
is generally used to shape large parts, such as shafts, sleeves, and disks. Impression die forging is
conducted in a die that completely encloses the steel shape that is being formed; impression die
forging accounts for the majority of forging production. Ring rolling produces seamless rolled
rings in a variety of dimensions. Extrusion is conducted by placing a steel shape in a container
and compressing it until the steel travels through an opening to form an extruded product.
Secondary forging processes and special techniques, such as drawing, ironing, bending,
trimming, coining, and swaging, may also be conducted on steel shapes.
The following table presents the national estimate for types of hot forming
operations and the number of sites performing these operations in 1997.
5-15
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
1997 National Estimate for Hot Forming Operations
Hot Forming Operation
Number of Sites
Rolling mill
122
Pipe and tube mill
6
Forging
14
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry
Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
The following table presents the national estimate for types of hot forming
products and the number of sites producing these products in 1997.
1997 National Estimate for Hot Forming Products
Type of Hot Forming Product
Number of Sites
Bar
67
Beam (a)
8
Billet
25
Bloom (a)
7
Plate
21
Railroad rail (a)
4
Reinforcing bar
25
Rod
17
Sheet
11
Slab (a)
16
Small structural
23
Strip
25
Tube and pipe
21
Other (b)
44
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry
Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
(a) This estimate does not represent a national estimate of sites producing
this product because it is based on data from only the detailed survey.
Short surveys did not collect this level of detail on products.
(b) Other hot forming products include various miscellaneous product
shapes.
5-16
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Hot forming mills generally use water for scale breaking, flume flushing, and
direct contact cooling. The water often recirculates in cooling water systems. Sites may have
multiple hot forming contact water and/or rolling solution systems. Forging wastewater sources
are very similar to those for hot forming.
5.2.11 Finishing
Steel finishing operations follow hot forming operations; therefore, integrated
steel mills and those stand-alone steel finishing mills that receive steel from integrated steel mills
are most likely to perform steel finishing operations. Integrated steel mills in the United States
principally produce flat-rolled steel products that require finishing, such as hot rolled strip (hot
bands), pickled and oiled strip, cold rolled and annealed strip and sheet, hot coated strip
(principally zinc and zinc/aluminum), electroplated strip (principally chromium, tin, and zinc),
and plates. Several non-integrated steel mills produce flat-rolled products, but most produce bar
and bar products and small structural shapes. Non-integrated steel mills are more likely to ship
hot rolled products without further surface treatments or finishing.
The type of steel finishing operation is closely related to the type of steel
processed. For carbon steels, acid pickling with hydrochloric acid, cold forming and annealing,
temper rolling, acid and/or alkaline cleaning, hot coating, and electroplating are performed. For
stainless steels, descaling (molten salt bath and electrolytic sodium sulfate); sulfuric, nitric,
nitric/hydrofluoric acid and sometimes hydrochloric acid pickling; cold forming and annealing;
and temper rolling are likely to be performed. A number of steel finishing mills also perform
surface coating of electrical steels.
Acid Pickling and Descaling
Acid pickling and descaling operations clean the steel surface prior to further
processing (e.g., cold forming, application of protective and decorative coatings). The steel
surface must also be cleaned at various production stages to ensure that oxides that form on the
surface are not worked into the finished product, causing marring, staining, or other surface
imperfections.
The acid pickling process chemically removes oxides and scale from the surface
of the steel using water solutions of inorganic acids. While acid pickling is only one of several
methods of removing undesirable surface oxides, it is most widely used because of comparatively
low operating costs and ease of operation. Carbon steel is usually pickled with hydrochloric
acid; stainless steels are pickled with sulfuric, hydrochloric, nitric, and/or hydrofluoric acids.
The Agency estimates that 38 of the 69 acid pickling sites use hydrochloric acid, 33 use sulfuric
acid, 28 use hydrofluoric acid, and 28 use nitric acid. The pickling process uses various organic
chemicals that inhibit the acid from attacking the base metal while permitting it to attack the
oxides. Wetting agents improve the effective contact of the acid solution with the metal surface.
After the pickling bath, the steel passes through one or more rinse operations.
5-17
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Finishing mills that conduct pickling operations may regenerate or recover the
spent acid by removing the iron; acids can then be reused by the mill. Hydrochloric acid and
sulfuric acid are the more commonly regenerated or recovered acids, although stainless steel
finishing mills also recover nitric and mixed nitric/hydrofluoric acids.
Two common types of descaling operations are blast cleaning and salt bath
descaling. Blast cleaning (mechanical descaling) uses abrasives such as sand, steel, iron grit, or
shot to clean the steel surface. The abrasives come in contact with the steel using either a
compressed air blast cleaning apparatus or by a rotary-type blasting cleaning machine. Salt bath
descaling, a surface treatment operation, processes stainless or alloy steel products in molten salt
solutions. This operation uses the physical and chemical properties of molten salt baths to loosen
heavy scale from selected stainless and high-alloy steels; the scale is removed in subsequent
water-quenching steps. Two processes, oxidizing and reducing, are commonly referred to by the
names of proprietary molten salt descaling baths, Kolene® and Hydride®, respectively.
Descaling may also be performed using an electrolytic solution of sodium sulfate.
Of the 69 sites operating acid pickling and descaling systems, 41 reported using
wet air pollution control, and 14 reported using dry air pollution control. The remaining sites did
not report the use of pollution control.
Cold Forming
Cold forming involves cold rolling of hot rolled and pickled steels at ambient
temperatures to impart desired mechanical and surface properties in the steel. Cold rolling
operations reduce the thickness of the steel much less than it is reduced in hot forming
operations. Cold rolling imparts hardness to steel. The following table shows common products
formed during cold forming.
1997 National Estimate for Type of Cold Forming Product
Type of Cold Forming Product
Number of Sites
Plate
5
Sheet
21
Strip
47
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry
Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
Common cold rolling mills in the iron and steel industry include tandem and
temper mills. Tandem mills modify steel sheet properties, including strength, surface properties,
and thickness. They are typically used in a series of three to five stands. Temper mills slightly
improve the finish of steel sheet, such as shiny, dull, or grooved surfaces, and generally do not
modify shape or thickness; they primarily improve flatness, alter mechanical properties, and
5-18
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
minimize surface disturbances. Temper mills are typically used with only one or two stands
(Reference 5-8).
Sendzimir cold rolling mills, commonly referred to as Z-mills, are another type of
cold forming operation. Z-mills have various configurations, but generally steel passes through
work rolls that are supported and driven by first- and second-intermediate rolls. The mill design
allows for quick adjustments to vary the width, thickness, and hardness of the rolled steel. These
mills typically use hydraulic fluid or oil emulsions rather than aqueous rolling solutions.
Cold rolling operations generate heat that is dissipated by flooded lubrication
systems. These systems use palm oil or synthetic oils that are emulsified in water and directed in
jets against the rolls and the steel surface during rolling.
Surface Treatment and Annealing Operations
Surface treatment and annealing operations include alkaline cleaning, annealing,
hot coating, and electroplating. Facilities performing finishing operations often have a number of
these operations on a single line.
Alkaline cleaning removes mineral and animal fats and oils from the steel surface.
Caustic, soda ash, alkaline silicates, and phosphates are common alkaline cleaning agents.
Passing the steel through alkaline solutions of specified compositions, concentrations, and
temperatures is often enough to clean the product; however, for large-scale production or a
cleaner product, sites may use electrolytic cleaning. Adding wetting agents to the cleaning bath
also facilitates cleaning.
The annealing process heats steel to modify its bulk properties, which makes the
steel easier to form and bend. Steel is heated and kept at a designated temperature and then
cooled at a designated rate. Through the annealing process, the metal grain size increases, new
bonds are formed at the higher temperature, and the steel becomes more ductile. Sites perform
annealing through a batch or continuous process; they may follow annealing operations with a
water quench to cool the steel for further processing.
Steel coating operations, such as hot coating and electroplating, improve
resistance to corrosion or appearance. Hot coating operations involve immersing precleaned
steel into molten baths of tin, zinc (hot galvanizing), combinations of lead and tin (terne coating),
or combinations of aluminum and zinc (galvalume coating); any associated cleaning or fluxing
(used to facilitate metal application) steps prior to immersion; and any post-immersion steps
(e.g., chromium passivation). Based on survey responses, the metals used for hot coating
operations include zinc, zinc/aluminum alloy, aluminum, chromium, lead, antimony, tin/lead
alloy, and zinc/nickel alloy.
Electroplating uses electrodes to deposit a metal coating onto the steel.
Historically, electroplating at steel mills was limited to tin and chromium electroplating for food
5-19
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
and beverage markets and relatively low-tonnage production of zinc electroplated
(electrogalvanized) steel for the automotive market. New coatings consisting of combinations of
iron, nickel, and other metals have been developed. Based on survey responses, the metals used
for electroplating operations include zinc, chromium, tin, nickel, brass, cobalt, copper, nickel/tin
alloy, zinc/nickel alloy, and zinc/iron/aluminum alloy.
EPA estimates that, of the 98 sites performing surface treatment operations, 38
operate wet air pollution control systems and 16 operate dry systems.
5.3 References
5-1 American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI). Annual Statistical Report. Washington,
DC, 1998.
5-2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Preliminary Study of the Iron and Steel
Category: 40 CFR Part 420 Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards. EPA
821-R-95-037, Washington, DC, September 1995.
5-3 Association of Iron and Steel Engineers. The Making. Shaping and Treating of
Steel riOth edition). ISBN 0-930767-00-4, Pittsburgh, PA, 1985.
5-4 Knoerzer, Jeremy; Ellis, Charles E. The Design and Operation of Jewell's New
Nonrecoverv Coke Oven Batteries.
5-5 Association of Iron and Steel Engineers. The Making. Shaping and Treating of
Steel n 1th edition! Ironmaking Volume. Pittsburgh, PA, 1999.
5-6 Encyclopedia Britannica. Britannica.com. http:Wwww.britannica.com, Chicago,
IL.
5-7 The Forging Industry Association. The Forging Industry Association's How Are
Forgings Produced?, http://www.forging.org/facts/wwhy6.htm, 2000.
5-8 American Iron and Steel Institute. AISI's Everything You Always Wanted to
Know About Steel... A Glossary of Terms and Concepts. Courtesy of Michelle
Applebaum, Managing Director (Summer 1998). Salomon Smith Barney Inc,
http://www.steel.org/learning/glossary/, 2000.
5-20
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Table 5-1
1997 National Estimate of Types of Iron and Steel Sites in the United States
Type of Site
Total Number of Sites Operating in 1997
(% of Industry Total)
Integrated steel mill with coke plant
9 (3.5%)
Integrated steel mill without coke plant
11 (4.5%)
Stand-alone coke plant
15 (6.0%)
Stand-alone sintering plant
2 (<1%)
Stand-alone direct-reduced ironmaking plant
1 (<1%)
Non-integrated steel mill
94 (37%)
Stand-alone hot forming mill
39(15.5%)
Stand-alone finishing mill
70 (28%)
Stand-alone pipe and tube mill
11 (4.5%) -
TOTAL (a)
254
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys),
(a) Columns do not sum to totals because of rounding each number and because two sites are counted as one
integrated steel mill.
5-21
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Table 5-2
1997 National Estimate of Sites Producing or Processing Carbon, Alloy, or
Stainless Steel
Number of Sites Producing Each Type of
Steel
Type of Site (a)
Total Number
of Sites (a)
Carbon
Steel
Stainless Steel
Alloy Steel
Integrated steel mill with coke
plant
9
9
1
6
Integrated steel mill without
coke plant
11
11
2
5
Non-integrated steel mill
94
72
20
58
Stand-alone hot forming mill
39
26
10
19
Stand-alone finishing mill
70
45
24
21
Stand-alone pipe and tube mill
11
11
0
6
TOTAL
234
174
57
115
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys),
(a) The sum of the numbers of sites producing each steel type may not equal the total number of sites. Sites may
produce more than one steel type.
5-22
-------
Section 5 - Description of the Industry
Table 5-3
1997 National Estimate of Direct, Indirect,
and Zero or Alternative Discharging Sites
Type of Site
Total
Number
of Sites (a)
Number (%)
of Direct
Dischargers
Number (%)
of Indirect
Dischargers
Number (%)
of Zero or
Alternative
Dischargers (b)
Integrated steel mill with coke plant
9
8 (89%)
3 (33%)
0(c)
Integrated steel mill without coke
plant
11
11 (100%)
0(c)
0(c)
Stand-alone coke plant
15
9 (60%)
5 (33%)
1 (7%)
Stand-alone sintering plant
2
1 (50%)
0(c)
1 (50%)
Stand-alone direct-reduced
ironmaking plant
1
0(c)
1 (100%)
0(c)
Non-integrated steel mill
94
46 (49%)
19 (20%)
32 (34%)
Stand-alone hot forming mill
39
22 (56%)
6 (15%)
12(31%)
Stand-alone finishing mill
70
28 (40%)
34 (49%)
11 (16%)
Stand-alone pipe and tube mill
11
8 (72%)
3 (27%)
0(c)
TOTAL (d)
254
133 (53%)
70 (28%)
56 (22%)
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
(a) The sum of direct dischargers, indirect dischargers, and zero dischargers may not equal the total number of sites.
Sites may directly and indirectly discharge wastewater from their site.
(b) Zero dischargers include sites that do not discharge process wastewater and sites that are completely dry (i.e., do
not use water in iron and steel operations).
(c) Cells with a zero (0) value indicate that none of the survey respondents have the characteristic.
(d) Columns do not sum to totals because of rounding each number and because two sites are counted as one
integrated mill.
5-23
-------
Section 5 - Description o f the Industry
Table 5-4
1997 National Estimate of Actual Production and
Rated Capacity by Manufacturing Operation
Manufacturing Operation
Total Number
of Sites with this
Operation
Total 1997 Production
(million standard
tons)
Total 1997 Rated
Capacity
(million standard tons)
Cokemaking
24
20.4
22.6
Sintering
9
12.4
17.9
Blast furnace ironmaking
20
54.5
68.6
BOF steelmaking
20
65.9
78.3
EAF steelmaking
96
50.8
75.8
Vacuum degassing
44
18.0
39.1
Ladle metallurgy
103
102
157
Casting
113
110
142
Hot forming
153
127
177(a)
Acid pickling and descaling
69
48.3
67.9 (a)
Cold forming
103
72.8
105
Surface cleaning and
coating
98
35.3
40.1
Briquetting and other
agglomeration process
4
0.319
0.731
Direct-reduced ironmaking
2
0.581
1.56
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
(a) This estimate does not represent a national estimate of capacity because it is based on data only from the detailed
survey. Production capacity was not requested in the short survey.
5-24
-------
t-rt
I
to
KJ\
Mollen,
steel '
Ladle metallurgy
and vacuum
degassing
Continuous
casting machine
Solid Sleel
Ingot
molds
Solid
>
Steel
f
Ing
ots
Blooms
Billets
Slabs
Sent to further
on- or off-site
processing
(see Figure 5-2)
Sent to further
on- or off-site
processing
(see Figure 5-2)
Figure 5-1. Iron and Steelmaklng
Operations
FIG5-1
4/30/02
-------
Blooms
from
caster
Ingots or
Cast
Steel
Products
Primary rolling mills
(blooming,
slabbing, and billet
mills)
Blooms
Heating
furnaces
Slabs
from ¦
caster
Billets
from-
caster
Structural
mills
Rail mills
Structural shapes
(beams, angles, tees,
zees, channels, piling)
Rails and joint bars
(standard rails, crane
rails, joint bars)
Billets
Bar mills
Heating
furnaces
Rod mills
Bars
-~ (round, square,
hexagonal, octagonal,
flat, triangular, half round)
-~ Rods
Slabs
Billets
from ¦
caster
Seamless
pipe and
tube mills
Heating
furnaces
Skelp
mills
Skelp,
Continuous
butt weld
pipe/tube
mills
Pipe and tubes
Pickling,
cleaning
Pipe and tubes
Plate
mills
- Plates
Hot strip
mills
Descaling
1
Hot rolled sheet
and strip
Acid
pickling
Cold
forming
mills
nr~
Cold rolled
sheets and strip
itsv
P/
Sheets, coils
Alkaline
cleaning
Annealing
Finished
sheets, coils
f
Electroplating
Temper/
tandem/
Z-mills
Hot dip coating
Finished
sheets, coils
Figure 5-2. Forming and
Finishing Operations
FIG5 2
4/30/02
5-26
-------
Figure 5-3.
Integrated Steel Manufacturing Sites
Smaller stand-alone forming and finishing facilities are generally located near steel manufacturing sites.
-------
Figure 5-4.
Cokemaking Sites
00
¦ Stand-alone Nonrecovery (2 sites)
9 By-product Recovery Co-located at Integrated Steel Mills (9 sites)
A Stand-alone By-product Recovery (14 sites)
-------
Tar
Figure 5-5. By-Product Recovery
Cokemaking Process Diagram
FIG5-5
4/30/02
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
SECTION 6
SUBCATEGORIZATION
This section presents a discussion on subcategorization for today's iron and steel
effluent limitations guidelines and standards. Section 6.1 presents background on EPA's
subcategorization process and describes the factors EPA evaluated for this rulemaking. Section
6.2 presents information on the proposed subcategorization structure. Section 6.3 presents the
final subcategorization analyses, structure, and rational, and describes each of the subcategories
and segments.
6.1 Subcategorization Factors
The CWA requires EPA, in developing effluent limitations guidelines and
standards, to consider a number of different factors (Section 304(b)(2)(b), 33 U.S.C. § 1314
(b)(2)(B)). Among others, these factors include
• Age of equipment and facilities;
• Location;
• Size of site;
• Manufacturing processes employed;
• Wastewater characteristics; and
• Non-water quality environmental impacts.
One way the Agency has taken some of these factors into account is by breaking
down categories of industries into separate classes of similar characteristics. This recognizes the
major differences among companies within an industry that may reflect, for example, different
manufacturing processes or other factors.
EPA considered all the relevant factors in developing the subcategorization
structure for the existing iron and steel regulation, which is based on manufacturing operation
and/or product produced. In developing today's final rule for the iron and steel industry, EPA
reviewed the existing subcategorization structure to determine whether it is still appropriate.
EPA used information from industry survey data, EPA site visits, sampling data, and public
comments (discussed in Chapter 2) to re-evaluate and consider each of the statutory factors listed
above as they affect the current industry.
For both the proposed and final rule, EPA concluded that, like the existing
subcategorization structure, the majority of these factors do not support subcategorization. EPA
first evaluated the age of facilities with respect to production-normalized wastewater discharge
rates (volume of water discharged with respect to production). The comparison between the age
of the facilities and the respective process wastewater discharge rates showed no relationships
between mill age and the volume of process wastewater discharged. Therefore, the Agency
determined that the age of facilities and equipment did not have an impact on wastewater
generation or discharge. The Agency's analysis of age versus wastewater discharge rate are
6-1
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
located in the administrative record for the rule. (See DCNs IS10357, IS10359, IS10362, and
IS 10441 of Section 14.1 of the Administrative Record.)
Similarly, the Agency also evaluated age with respect to installing or upgrading
wastewater treatment equipment and found that while a site or a plant may have been operating
for several decades, manufacturing and treatment system upgrades regularly occur. In certain
cases, older sites actually have modern wastewater treatment systems and have demonstrated
model BAT treatment. Consequently, the Agency has determined that subcategorization was not
warranted on the basis of age. (See DCNIS04614 of Section 5.2 of the Administrative Record.)
The Agency analyzed location of the sites with respect to the amount of process
wastewater discharged. While the Agency realizes that facilities located in arid and semi-arid
regions of the country have greater opportunity for decreased discharge flow rates due to water
loss from evaporation, the flow allowances used to develop the final regulation have been
determined to be achievable in any region of the country. Therefore, the Agency determined that
location was not a significant criterion for subcategorization. The data from EPA's analysis of
location versus wastewater discharge rate are located in the administrative record for this rule.
(See DCNs IS10357, IS10359, IS10362, and IS10441 of Section 14.1 of the Administrative
Record.)
While larger iron and steel sites discharge greater total volumes of wastewater, the
size of a site (e.g., acreage, number of employees) did not have an impact on production-
normalized wastewater discharge rates or pollutant concentrations. Consequently, the Agency
determined that size was also not a significant factor for subcategorization. (See DCNs IS 10357,
IS10359, IS10362, and IS 10441 of Section 14.1 of the Administrative Record.)
Similarly, EPA evaluated non-water quality impacts, such as solid waste and air
emission effects, and determined that non-water quality environmental impacts did not constitute
a basis for subcategorization in the final rule. A detailed discussion of non-water quality impacts
is presented in Section 15.
Of all the subcategorization criteria, EPA identified manufacturing processes as
the most significant factor affecting the final subcategorization structure because it had the
greatest impact on wastewater generation and characteristics. In addition, EPA used type of
product and wastewater characteristics, including flow rates with respect to production and type
of pollutant present, to segment within each subcategory. A detailed discussion of wastewater
sources, pollutant loadings, option selection, regulated pollutants, and production-normalized
flow rates for each segment is presented in Sections 1,9,11, 12, and 13 of this document.
Since many of the elements considered for subcategorization, including statutory
factors, have not changed since the 1982 rule, refer to Volume I of the Technical Development
for the 1982 regulation (pages 155 to 163, EPA 440/1-82/024, May 1982) for a more detailed
review of the above factors.
6-2
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
6.2 Proposed Subcategorization
On December 27,2000, EPA proposed a subcategorization structure that was
significantly different from the structure in the 1982 iron and steel rule (see 65 FR 65 FR 81964,
81974-81975). The Agency proposed to revise the subcategorization structure to create seven
subcategories of iron and steel facilities based on co-treatment of compatible waste streams. This
would have replaced the present structure of 12 subcategories. EPA proposed the following
seven subcategories:
Subpart
Subcategory
Segment
Subpart A
Cokemaking Subcategory
By-Product Recovery
Non-Recovery
Subpart B
Ironmaking Subcategory
Blast Furnace
Sintering
Subpart C
Steelmaking Subcategory
Subpart D
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Mills Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart E
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming Operations Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart F
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy
Stainless
Subpart G
Other Operations Subcategory
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking
Forging
Briquetting
The Agency proposed to consolidate sintering and ironmaking into a single
"ironmaking subcategory." Additionally, the Agency consolidated steelmaking processes
combining basic oxygen furnace (BOF), vacuum degassing, and continuous casting into the
"steelmaking subcategory." The Agency also attempted to separate integrated mills hot forming
operations from non-integrated mills operations (electric arc furnace steelmaking, vacuum
degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming). Unlike the 1982 rule, EPA proposed to
consolidate operations such as salt bath descaling, acid pickling, and other finishing operations
into a single "steel finishing subcategory." In addition, one new subcategory, "other operations
subcategory," has been created to regulate direct-reduced ironmaking, briquetting, and forging.
In addition to the revised subcategory structure, EPA proposed segmentation
changes in the proposed cokemaking, ironmaking (sintering), integrated steelmaking, integrated
and stand-alone hot forming, non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming, and finishing
subcategories. First, EPA proposed to combine two 1982 segments in the cokemaking
subcategory, "iron and steel" and "merchant," into a single "by-product recovery" segment
because differences in wastewater flow rates observed in the 1982 rulemaking are no longer
apparent within the current population of by-product coke plants. In addition to combining all
by-product recovery cokemaking operations into one segment, the Agency also proposed a new
6-3
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
"non-recovery" segment to accommodate the two non-recovery coke plants. Second, for the
proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, the non-integrated steelmaking and
hot forming subcategory, and the steel finishing subcategory, EPA proposed segmenting based on
whether facilities primarily make stainless or carbon/alloy steels.
The Agency proposed this subcategorization structure to reflect not only the
modern state of the industry, in terms of both process and wastewater management, but also the
experience that the Agency and other regulatory entities have gained from implementing the
1982 iron and steel effluent limitations guidelines and standards. EPA also expected that the
revised subcategorization structure would simplify the regulatory process and reflect
co-treatment of compatible wastewaters, which is currently practiced by the industry. As a result,
many of the proposed subcategories would have included various operations that are regulated
under different segments or subcategories in the 1982 rule.
Table 6-1 presents a comparison of the 1982 subcategorization structure and the
structure EPA proposed on December 27, 2000. For a detailed discussion of the proposed
subcategorization, see Section 6 of the Development Document for the Proposed Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Point Source Category, EPA 831-B-OO-Ol 1, December 2000.
6.3 Final Subcategorization
While EPA did not receive any comments specific to the proposed
subcategorization structure, the Agency did receive a number of comments on the change in
segmentation for the cokemaking subcategory. The comments opposed EPA's proposal to drop
the segmentation of "iron and steel" and "merchant" coke plants; however, the comments agree
with EPA's assessment that production process and wastewaters from these types of plants coke
plants are similar. The Agency also evaluated potential economic differences among these plants
in order to see whether they justified retaining the 1982 segmentation. Although some difference
in facility size was observed, EPA did not find substantial differences in profitability or other
factors that might affect economic achievability. Some commenters also expressed confusion
regarding the segmentation of stainless and carbon/alloy steels.
Following proposal, the Agency re-evaluated the economic conditions and
technology bases of the proposed rule. The Agency decided to promulgate new or revised limits
for only three subcategories (cokemaking, sintering, and other operations), and for segments
within two others (ironmaking and steelmaking). These decisions similarly affected the final
subcategorization structure. Due to the small number of subcategories affected by today's rule,
the Agency has decided to retain the 1982 subcategory structure with the addition of an "other
operations subcategory." As a result, the final rule covers the following 13 subcategories:
6-4
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Subcategory
Description
Subcategory A
Cokemaking (includes by-product recovery and non-recovery
operations)
Subcategory B
Sintering (includes wet and dry air pollution control operations
Subcategory C
Ironmaking
Subcategory D
Steelmaking (includes basic oxygen furnace and electric arc
furnace operations)
Subcategory E
Vacuum degassing
Subcategory F
Continuous casting
Subcategory G
Hot forming
Subcategory H
Salt bath descaling
Subcategory I
Acid pickling
Subcategory J
Cold forming
Subcategory K
Alkaline cleaning
Subcategory L
Hot coating
Subcategory M
Other operations (includes forging, direct-reduced ironmaking,
and briquetting operations)
For the cokemaking subcategory, this final rule combines the "iron and steel" and
"merchant" segments into a newly-created "by-product recovery" cokemaking segment for most
regulatory purposes, although EPA is retaining the "iron and steel" and "merchant" segments for
purposes of reflecting the existing BPT/BCT limitations. EPA is also creating a new
cokemaking segment for non-recovery operations and a new sintering segment for dry air
pollution control systems. Because the promulgated rule makes no change to subcategorization
for the steelmaking, hot forming, vacuum degassing, casting, or various finishing operations, the
segmentation for these operations in the 1982 rule remains applicable. Finally, the Agency is
creating a new subcategory, the "other operations subcategory." The complete final
subcategorization structure is presented in Table 6-2. A detailed discussion of each subcategory,
in the structure of the 2000 proposal follows.
6.3.1 Proposed Subpart A: Cokemaking
Cokemaking turns carbon in raw coal into metallurgical coke, which is
subsequently used in the ironmaking process. There are two types of cokemaking operations: by-
product recovery and non-recovery. In by-product coke plants, metallurgical coke is produced by
distilling coal in refractory-lined, slot-type ovens at high temperatures in the absence of air. In
non-recovery coke plants, coal is made into coke in negative pressure, higher temperature coke
ovens.
6-5
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
In by-product coke operations, the moisture and volatile components generated
from the coal distillation process are collected and processed to recover by-products, such as
crude coal tars, light crude oil, etc. Non-recovery cokemaking facilities use higher temperature
ovens which destroy volatile organics, and they do not recover any by-products.
In by-product recovery coke plants, wastewater such as waste ammonia liquor is
generated from moisture contained in the coal charge to the coke ovens, and some wastewater is
generated from the by-product recovery operations. The non-recovery coke plants, on the other
hand, do not generate process wastewater other than boiler blowdown and process storm water,
which are typically disposed of by coke quenching.
The 1982 regulation segmented by-product recovery cokemaking into "iron and
steel" and "merchant" coke plants. "Iron and steel" cokemaking was defined at 420.11(d) and
"merchant" cokemaking was defined at 420.11(c). The term "iron and steel" means those by-
product recovery cokemaking operations other than merchant cokemaking operations.
"Merchant" means those by-product recovery cokemaking operations which provide more than
fifty percent of the coke produced to operations, industries, or processes other than iron making
blast furnaces associated with steel production. The proposed subdivision was created to reflect
different wastewater volume generation rates between coke plants located at integrated steel
plants and at merchant coke plants.
In December 2000, EPA proposed to combine the iron and steel and merchant
cokemaking segments into a single segment: by-product recovery cokemaking. EPA proposed
this change because its analyses showed that wastewater generation and characteristics, and
pollution prevention and wastewater treatment technology effectiveness for the two segments
were similar. In 1982, EPA determined that the model flow rates for "iron and steel" coke plants
and merchant coke plants, including control water, were 153 gpt and 170 gpt, respectively.
However, EPA did not observe these differences in wastewater generation rates when analyzing
the current survey data.
Comments opposed EPA's proposal to drop the segmentation on the basis of "iron
and steel" and "merchant" coke plants based on economic considerations. However, the
comments agreed with EPA's assessment that production process and wastewaters characteristics
and flow rates from merchant coke plants are similar to those from the integrated "iron and steel"
facilities. The Agency evaluated potential economic differences between "merchant" and "iron
and steel" facilities and found no substantial differences in profitability or other factors which
might affect economic achievability, although some difference in facility size was observed.
This facility size was not significant and not considered adequate for subcategorization. (See
DCN IS11044 of Section 15.1.4, and DCNIS10362 of Section 14.1, of the Administrative
Record.)
Consequently, for the cokemaking subcategory, today's rule combines the "iron
and steel" and "merchant" segments into a newly-created "by-product recovery" cokemaking
segment for most regulatory purposes, although EPA is retaining the "iron and steel" and
"merchant" segments for purposes of reflecting the existing BPT limitations. EPA concluded
6-6
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
that this was appropriate because the production processes, wastewater characteristics,
wastewater flow rates, and economic impacts from all by-product recovery cokemaking
operations, including merchant facilities, are similar.
The non-recovery cokemaking segment includes non-recovery cokemaking
processes that have either existed for many years or are currently emerging in the industry. Other
than low-volume boiler blowdown and process area storm water, non-recovery cokemaking
processes do not generate wastewater like the by-product recovery processes do. This major
difference in wastewater flow necessitated the segmentation of this subcategory.
6.3.2 Proposed Subpart B: Ironmaking
In ironmaking, blast furnaces are used to produce molten iron, which makes up
about two-thirds of the charge to basic oxygen steelmaking furnaces. The raw materials charged
to the top of the blast furnace include coke, limestone, refined iron ores, and sinter. Preheated air
is blown into the bottom of the furnace and exits the furnace top as blast furnace gas in enclosed
piping. The off-gas is cleaned and cooled in a combination of dry dust catchers and high-energy
venturi scrubbers. Direct contact water used in the gas coolers and high-energy scrubbers
comprises nearly all of the wastewater from ironmaking blast furnace operations.
Sinter plants upgrade the iron content of ores and recover iron from a mixture of
wastewater treatment sludges, mill scale from integrated steel mills, and fine coke particles (also
known as coke breeze) from cokemaking operations. In sinter plants, the iron source mixture is
combined with limestone and charged to a furnace. Sinter of suitable size and weight is formed
for charging to the blast furnace. Wastewaters are generated from wet air pollution control
devices on the wind box and discharge ends of the sinter furnace. No process wastewater is
generated by dry air pollution control systems.
The 1982 regulation distinguished sintering and blast furnace operations as two
separate subcategories, sintering and ironmaking, respectively. In 2000, EPA proposed to
combine these two subcategories together into a single "ironmaking" subcategory. EPA
proposed this change because survey responses indicated that facilities with both operations
generate wastewater with similar characteristics and tended to co-mingle these wastewaters
before treatment1. However, EPA concluded that it was still appropriate to distinguish between
the two in terms of model system flow rates and manufacturing process, and proposed to divide
the ironmaking subcategory into the sintering and blast furnace segments. The Agency proposed
to further divide the sintering segment due to differences in wastewater generation, as discussed
below.
Sinter facilities use two types of air pollution control systems to treat air
emissions from sinter plants: wet and dry. Sinter plants that operate dry air pollution controls do
'An exception is that EPA found dioxins and furans in wastestreams from sinter operations with wet air pollution
control systems and in blast furnace wastewaters cotreated with sintering wastewaters. No measurable dioxins and
furans were found in treated blast furnace wastewater only.
6-7
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
not generate process wastewater. Data from the surveys indicate that approximately a third of
these plants employ dry air pollution controls. EPA proposed to establish a segment for sintering
plants with dry air pollution control and designate the discharge requirements to be zero
discharge of pollutants.
In response to comments received on the proposal, EPA generally concluded it
was not appropriate to revise the existing limitations and standards for the proposed ironmaking
subcategory (with the exception of codifying an ammonia waiver). Consequently, EPA is
similarly retaining the existing subcategorization structure for sintering and ironmaking.
However, EPA did not receive any comments opposing the segmentation of sintering on the basis
of air pollution control systems. Therefore, the final rule creates two segments the sintering
subcategory: dry air pollution control and wet air pollution control.
6.3.3 Proposed Subpart C: Integrated Steelmaking
The 1982 iron and steel regulation included separate subcategories for
steelmaking, vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming. In 2000, EPA proposed a
revised subcategorization structure that recognized the differences between integrated and non-
integrated steelmaking facilities. The Agency proposed segregating steelmaking operations at
integrated plants and non-integrated plants to simplify the structure of the regulation and because
different wastewater generation rates were observed between integrated and non-integrated
plants. This proposed structure included combining certain operations at integrated facilities
from the existing steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting operations into an
"integrated steelmaking subcategory." The following provides a general description of each of
these operations.
BOFs are one of two types of furnaces used in steelmaking in the United States2.
They are typically used for high tonnage production of carbon steels at integrated mills.
Integrated steel mills use BOFs to refine a metallic charge consisting of approximately two-thirds
molten iron and one-third steel scrap. Facilities use three types of air pollution control systems to
treat furnace off-gases from BOF steelmaking operations: semi-wet air pollution controls, wet-
open combustion air pollution controls, and wet-suppressed combustion air pollution controls.
Each type of air pollution control system operates in a different manner and generates different
wastewater flow rates. However, the wastewater characteristics are similar. Twenty-four BOF
shops are operated at 20 integrated steel plants and one non-integrated steel plant. Of the 24
BOF shops, eight use semi-wet air pollution control systems, eight use wet-open combustion air
pollution control systems, seven use wet-suppressed combustion air pollution control systems,
and one uses a combination wet-open/wet-suppressed combustion air pollution control system.
Vacuum degassing is a batch process where molten steel is subjected to a vacuum
for composition control, temperature control, deoxidation, degassing, decarburization, and the
removal of impurities from the steel. Oxygen and hydrogen are the principal gases removed
2The other type is an electric arc furnace (EAF), which is typically used to produce low-tonnage carbon, alloy, and
stainless steels at non-integrated mills.
6-8
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
from the steel. In most degassing systems, the vacuum is provided by barometric condensers;
thus, direct contact between the gases and the barometric water occurs.
Likewise, ladle metallurgy is also a batch process where molten steel is refined in
addition to, or in place of, vacuum degassing. These operations include argon bubbling,
argon-oxygen decarburization (AOD), electroslag remelting (ESR), and lance injection. These
additional refining operations do not generate any process water.
Casting is generally a continuous process where molten steel is shaped while
cooling into semi-finished shapes after the vacuum degassing and/or ladle metallurgy processes.
The continuous casting machine includes a receiving vessel for molten steel, water-cooled molds,
secondary cooling water sprays, containment rolls, oxygen-acetylene torches for cutoff, and a
runout table. Wastewater is generated by a direct contact water system used for spray cooling
and for flume flushing to transport scale from below the caster runout table. The other main
casting operation type is ingot casting, in which molten steel is poured into ingot molds.
Under the proposed structure, wastewaters from basic oxygen furnace operations
were included with wastewaters from vacuum degassing operations and continuous casting
operations to make up the "integrated steelmaking subcategory." Hot forming operations that
took place either at integrated mills or were not associated directly with steelmaking operations
were to be covered by the "integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory." Wastewaters
from electric arc furnaces were included with wastewaters from vacuum degassing operations,
continuous casting operations and hot forming operations to make up the "non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming subcategory." This proposed subcategory is discussed in more
detail in Section 6.3.5 below.
After considering comments to the proposal and conducting a thorough re-
evaluation of the costs, pollutant reductions, and economic achievability of the proposed
subcategorization structure, EPA, for the most part, is not promulgating new effluent limitations
guidelines and standards for the proposed "integrated steelmaking subcategory." (EPA is
promulgating a provision for one segment whereby permit writers or pretreatment control
authorities can establish alternative limitations on a best professional judgement basis.)
Therefore, EPA is not adopting the proposed subcategorization structure. Changing the
subcategorization structure only made sense when EPA believed it would promulgate new limits
and standards for the new subcategory. Consequently, this final rule maintains the current
subcategorization structure in regards to steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting.
However, EPA is revising the segments of the 1982 steelmaking subcategory so
that they cover the following operations:
• Electric arc furnace steelmaking - semi-wet;
• BOF steelmaking - wet-suppressed combustion (retained);
6-9
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
• BOF steelmaking - wet-open combustion, and electric arc furnace
steelmaking-wet; and
• BOF steelmaking - semi-wet.
63.4 Proposed Subpart D: Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Hot forming is a process that heats ingots, blooms, billets, slabs, or rounds to
rolling temperatures so that the products will form under mechanical pressure into semi-finished
shapes for further hot or cold rolling or as finished shapes. Process water is used for scale
breaking, flume flushing, and direct contact cooling.
Integrated and stand-alone hot forming operations include hot forming processes
at integrated steel plants and stand-alone hot forming mills. Four different types of hot forming
mills are operated at integrated and stand-alone facilities: flat mills (hot strip and sheet mills and
plate mills), primary mills (slabbing and blooming mills), section mills (bar and rod mills), and
hot formed pipe and tube mills. The existing regulation segregates the hot forming subcategory
into four different segments based on differences in flow rates: primary mills, section mills, flat
mills, and pipe and tube mills.
The proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory includes hot
forming processes that takes place at integrated mills or at locations that were not associated
directly with steelmaking operations (stand-alone hot forming mills). EPA proposed two
segments, carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel, for this subcategory because of differences in
pollutants present in the wastewater and because facilities typically combine these types of
wastewaters together for treatment.
However, for today's final rule, EPA has not adopted limits and standards for the
proposed "integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory." Therefore, EPA is not adopting
the proposed subcategorization structure. Changing the subcategorization structure only made
sense when EPA believed it would promulgate new limits and standards for the new subcategory.
Consequently, the final rule maintains the existing hot forming subcategory.
63.5 Proposed Subpart E: Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
As explained in Section 6.3.3 above, in 2000, EPA proposed a revised
subcategorization structure that recognized the differences between integrated and non-integrated
steelmaking facilities. The Agency proposed segregating steelmaking operations at integrated
plants and non-integrated plants to simplify the structure of the regulation and because different
wastewater generation rates were observed between integrated and non-integrated plants. This
proposed structure included combining certain operations at non-integrated facilities from the
existing steelmaking, vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming subcategories into
a "non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory." The following provides a general
description of non-integrated steelmaking. Section 6.6.3 provides descriptions of the other
operations included in this subcategory.
6-10
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Non-integrated steelmaking in this proposed subcategory is achieved with the use
of electric arc furnaces (EAF). EAFs melt and refine a metallic charge of scrap steel to produce
low tonnage carbon, alloy, and stainless steels at non-integrated mills. In addition, most mills
operate EAFs with dry air cleaning systems, which produce no process wastewater discharges.
There are a small number of wet and semi-wet systems.
Departing from the structure of the 1982 regulation, EPA proposed the non-
integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory as a means to simplify the regulatory
structure by grouping the basic steelmaking (electric arc furnace, vacuum degassing, and
continuous casting) and forming operations performed at non-integrated plants under one
subcategory. EPA proposed to combine these operations into one subcategory because of similar
wastewater pollutant characteristics and the potential for cotreatment of these wastewaters.
Substantially lower wastewater flow rates are demonstrated at non-integrated facilities, due to
their lower water application rates, use of high-rate water recycle systems, and good water
management practices.
As in the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, EPA proposed two
segments, carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel, in this subcategory due to differences in
wastewater pollutant characteristics. The Agency believed this approach would be helpful in
simplifying the existing regulation was appropriate because of the similar wastewater
characteristics, demonstrated flows, and treatment systems applied at these mills. For additional
details of the proposed subcategorization structure and rational, see Section 6 of the
Development Document for the Proposed Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category,
EPA 831-B-00-011, December 2000.
For today's final rule, EPA has not adopted limits and standards for the proposed
"non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory." Therefore, EPA is not adopting the
proposed subcategorization structure. Changing the subcategorization structure only made sense
when EPA believed it would promulgate new limits and standards for the new subcategory.
Consequently, the final rule maintains the existing subcategorization structure in regards to
steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting.
6.3.6 Proposed Subpart F: Steel Finishing
Since extensive cotreatment of steel finishing wastewaters is currently practiced
by the industry, the Agency proposed to simplify the regulatory structure for steel finishing
operations by combining them into a single subcategory, steel finishing, because of the
compatibility of wastewaters for treatment. The proposed steel finishing subcategory included
salt bath and ESS descaling, acid pickling, cold forming, alkaline cleaning, continuous annealing,
hot coating, and electroplating at integrated, non-integrated, and stand-alone facilities. EPA
proposed to divide this subcategory into carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel segments to
reflect variations in the wastewater pollutant characteristics and flow rates. The following
provides a general description of the operations included in the proposed steel finishing
subcategory and additional information on the proposed structure and EPA's rational is located in
6-11
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Section 6 of the Development Document for the Proposed Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point
Source Category, EPA 831-B-00-011, December 2000.
Salt bath descaling is the oxidizing and reducing using molten salt baths to
remove heavy scale from specialty and high-alloy steels. Process wastewaters originate from
quenching and rinsing operations conducted after processing in the molten salt baths.
Electrolytic sodium sulfate (ESS) descaling is performed on stainless steels for essentially the
same purposes as salt bath descaling.
Acid pickling is the use of acid solutions of various acids to remove oxide scale
from the surfaces of semi-finished products prior to further processing by cold rolling, cold
drawing, and subsequent cleaning and coating operations. Process wastewaters include spent
pickling acids, rinse waters, and pickling line fume scrubber water.
Cold forming is the shaping of metal products conducted on hot rolled and pickled
steels at ambient temperatures to impart desired mechanical and surface properties in the steel.
Process wastewater characteristics result from using synthetic or animal-fat based rolling
solutions, many of which are proprietary.
Hot coating is a process where pre-cleaned steel is immersed into baths of molten
metal. Hot coating is typically used to improve resistance to corrosion, and for some products, to
improve appearance and ability to hold paint. Wastewaters result principally from cleaning
operations prior to the molten bath.
For today's final rule, EPA has not adopted limits and standards for the proposed
"steel finishing subcategory." Therefore, EPA is not adopting the proposed subcategorization
structure. Changing the subcategorization structure only made sense when EPA believed it
would promulgate new limits and standards for the new subcategory. Consequently, the final
rule maintains the existing subcategorization structure in regards to salt bath descaling, acid
pickling, cold forming, alkaline cleaning, and hot coating.
63.7 Proposed Subpart G: Other Operations
In 2000, EPA proposed to create a new subcategory, the "other operations
subcategory," which included the following operations: direct-reduced ironmaking, forging, and
briquetting. These manufacturing operations are not covered by the existing rule, but are directly
related to iron and steel production and are performed at iron and steel sites.
The direct-reduced ironmaking (DRI) process produces relatively pure iron by
reducing iron ore in a furnace below the melting point of the iron produced. DRI is used as a
substitute for scrap steel in the non-integrated steelmaking process to minimize contaminant
levels in the melted steel and to allow economic steel production when market prices for scrap
are high. Process wastewaters are generated from air pollution control devices, but contain
insignificant toxic pollutants.
6-12
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
The briquetting process of agglomeration forms materials into discrete shapes of
sufficient size, strength, and weight so that the material can serve as feed for subsequent
processes. Briquetting does not generate process wastewater.
Forging is a hot forming operation in which a metal piece is shaped by hammering
or by processing in a hydraulic press. Process wastewaters are generated from direct contact
cooling water, but contain insignificant toxic pollutants.
As explained in its proposal, the Agency determined that it was appropriate to
segment this subcategory on the basis of manufacturing operation. Therefore, the Agency
proposed to segment the subcategory into DRI, forging and briquetting.
The Agency received no comments on the proposed subcategorization structure
and determined it was appropriate to establish limits for this subcategory. Consequently, the
final rule includes this additional subcategory for "other operations."
6-13
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Table 6-1
Subcategory Comparison of the 1982 and Proposed Regulations
1982 Regulation
Proposed Regulation
A. Cokemaking
A. Cokemaking
B. Sintering
B. Ironmaking
C. Ironmaking
D. Steelmaking
C. Integrated
Steelmaking
E. Non-Integrated
Steelmaking and
Hot Forming
E. Vacuum Degassing
F. Continuous Casting
G. Hot Forming
D. Integrated and
Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
H. Salt Bath Descaling
F. Steel Finishing
I. Acid Pickling
J. Cold Forming
K. Alkaline Cleaning
L. Hot Coating
G. Other Operations
6-14
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Table 6-2
Final Subcategorization
Subcategory
Segment
Manufacturing Process
A
Cokemaking
By-Product Recovery
—
Non-Recovery
—
B
Sintering
Dry Air Pollution Control
—
Wet Air Pollution Control
—
C
Ironmaking
Iron Blast Furnace
—
D
Steelmaking
Basic Oxygen Furnace
Semi-Wet
Wet-Suppressed Combustion
Wet-Open Combustion
Electric Arc Furnace
Semi-Wet
Wet
E
Vacuum Degassing
—
—
F
Continuous Casting
—
—
G
Hot Forming
Primary
Carbon and Specialty Mills
Without Scarfers
Carbon and Specialty Mills
With Scarfers
Section
Carbon Mills
Specialty Mills
Flat
Hot Strip and Sheet Mills
Carbon Plate Mills
Specialty Plate Mills
Pipe & Tube Mills
—
6-15
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Table 6-2 (Continued)
Subcategory
Segment
Manufacturing Process
H
Salt Bath Descaling
Oxidizing
Batch: Sheet, Plate
Batch: Rod, Wire, Bar
Batch: Pipe, Tube
Continuous
Reducing
Batch
Continuous
I
Acid Pickling
Sulfuric Acid
Rod, Wire, Coil
Bar, Billet, Bloom
Strip, Sheet, Plate
Pipe, Tube, Other
Fume Scrubber
Hydrochloric Acid
Rod, Wire, Coil
Strip, Sheet, Plate
Pipe, Tube, Other
Fume Scrubber
Acid Regeneration
Combination Acid
Rod, Wire, Coil
Bar, Billet, Bloom
Strip, Sheet, Plate -
Continuous
Strip, Sheet, Plate - Batch
Pipe, Tube, Other
Fume Scrubber
6-16
-------
Section 6 - Subcategorization
Table 6-2 (Continued)
Subcategory
Segment
Manufacturing Process
J
Cold Forming
Cold Rolling
Recirculation: Single Stand
Recirculation: Multi Stand
Combination
Direct Application: Single
Stand
Direct Application: Multi
Stand
Cold Worked Pipe & Tube
Water Solutions
Oil Solutions
K
Alkaline Cleaning
Batch
—
Continuous
—
L
Hot Coating
Galvanizing, Terne and Other
Metal Coatings
Strip, Sheet, and
Miscellaneous Products
Wire Products and Fasteners
Fume Scrubbers
—
M
Other Operations
Direct Iron Reduction
—
Forging
—
Briquetting
—
6-17
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
SECTION 7
WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION
This section presents information on water use and wastewater generation
practices associated with iron and steel manufacturing operations, identifies pollutants of concern
(POCs), and presents untreated process wastewater characterization data for the POCs. Section
7.1 presents water use, wastewater sources, wastewater generation rates, and wastewater
discharge practices for the seven operations that EPA had proposed as subcategories. (Although
EPA did not adopt a new subcategorization scheme as proposed, EPA is using that structure in
this section to facilitate comparison to the proposal.) Section 7.2 describes EPA's methodology
for selecting POCs and identifies the POCs that EPA had considered for each proposed
subcategory and segment. Section 7.3 presents untreated process wastewater characterization
data collected during EPA's sampling program for the POCs, to the extent that it does not
disclose confidential business information. Section 7.4 presents references used in this section.
7.1 Water Use and Wastewater Generation and Discharge
The principal uses of process water by iron and steel manufacturing processes
include cooling and cleaning of process off-gases, direct cooling of coke and slag, direct cooling
and cleaning of steel, product rinsing, process solution makeup, and direct cooling of process
equipment. Most of the water used by the iron and steel industry is for non-contact cooling of
processing equipment. Water is also used for steam and power generation.
Process wastewaters are any wastewaters that come into direct contact with the
process, product, by-products, or raw materials for the manufacturing of iron and steel. Process
wastewaters also include wastewater from slag quenching, equipment cleaning, air pollution
control devices, rinse water, and contaminated cooling water. Sanitary wastewater and storm
water are not considered process wastewaters. Non-contact cooling wastewaters are cooling
waters that do not directly contact the processes, products, by-products, or raw materials; these
wastewaters are not considered process wastewaters. Non-process wastewaters are those
generated by non-process operations such as utility wastewaters (water treatment residuals, boiler
blowdown, air pollution control wastewaters from heat recovery equipment, and water generated
from co-generation facilities), treated or untreated wastewaters from ground water remediation
systems, dewatering water for building foundations, and other wastewater streams not associated
with production processes.
In this section, the term wastewater discharge flow rates refers to the volume of
wastewater that is generated and then discharged by individual process operations; the
wastewater discharge flow rate does not include the volume of wastewater that is recycled back
to the process. For example, many iron and steel operations such as hot forming include high-
rate recycle water systems where the vast majority of water is recirculated, while the relatively
small blowdown stream is routed to wastewater treatment. In this example, the blowdown
stream comprises the wastewater discharged from this process. EPA provides the wastewater
discharge flow rates in this section for several reasons. First, because the rule is mass-based,
7-1
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
both the wastewater discharge rate and the effluent concentration are important components to
determine compliance. Second, wastewater discharge flow rates provide information to permit
writers to better understand water use and discharge practices by the iron and steel industry, and
to iron and steel site personnel to identify opportunities for water conservation at their facilities.
This document generally presents wastewater flow ranges and medians based on
the data reported by the iron and steel industry in response to the industry survey. EPA analyzed
the reported flow rates to determine process water flows at each site and used these data to
calculate ranges and medians. EPA identified and resolved discrepancies in reported process
water flows wherever possible by performing water flow balances from all data reported in the
questionnaire and by contacting site personnel. EPA presents median flow rates in this section
instead of mean flow rates because the median better represents typical operation of water
systems because the median is not influenced as much as the mean by extremely high flow rates.
Presenting median flow rates also allows EPA to reveal as much information as possible without
compromising confidential business information.
The following subsections further describe process water use, process wastewater
sources, and process wastewater discharge flow rates for each proposed iron and steel
subcategory. Non-contact cooling water, sanitary water, storm water, and non-process waters are
not further discussed. Table 7-1 provides EPA's estimates for the annual process wastewater
discharge rate by operation and discharge type (direct or indirect) and the number of zero or
alternative dischargers for each operation. The estimates provided below are based on data
collected in the U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (EPA Survey).
7.1.1 Cokemaking Operations
The cokemaking subcategory covers the by-product recovery and non-recovery
cokemaking segments. The water use and wastewater generation sources for cokemaking
operations are described below.
Water Use
Both types of cokemaking operations use large volumes of water for coke
quenching; the water application rates required for quenching are balanced between the need to
quench the incandescent coke, and the need to leave enough heat in the coke to evaporate water
trapped within it. Water used for coke quenching is typically plant service water (i.e., the plant's
water supply), non-contact cooling water, or treated coke plant wastewater. The Agency does not
advocate quenching coke with untreated wastewater because of the potential for air pollution and
ground water contamination associated with this practice. To the Agency's knowledge, coke
quenching with untreated process wastewaters is no longer practiced at any of the coke plants
that responded to the industry survey. Since all U.S. coke plants recycle and evaporate coke
quench water, a minimum amount of wastewater is generated from coke quenching operations.
Excess coke quenching water is a reported wastewater source at two by-product recovery plants.
Standard industry practice is to recycle coke quenching water to extinction; adequate controls can
eliminate process wastewater discharges from coke quenching.
7-2
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Several by-product recovery cokemaking facilities also use plant service water for
wet air pollution control (WAPC) of cokemaking processes such as larry coal car charging, coke
pushing, by-product recovery, and coke handling, crushing, and blending. WAPC water is
typically recirculated. Other water uses in the by-product recovery cokemaking process include
coke oven gas cooling and steam heating.
Process Wastewater Sources for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking
By-product recovery cokemaking operations generate wastewater from a number
of sources. The greatest volume of wastewater generated at by-product recovery plants is waste
ammonia liquor. Ammonia liquor is used to scrub coke oven gas to condense tars and moisture
and is recycled at a high rate. Excess or waste ammonia liquor, comprising coal moisture and
volatile compounds released from the coal during the coking process, is removed and sent to
treatment. Waste ammonia liquor has high concentrations of ammonia, cyanide, sulfide,
benzene, and phenols (Reference 7-1). Waste ammonia liquor flow rates reported in response to
the survey range from 26 gallons per ton (gpt) to 270 gpt, with a median flow rate of 69 gpt.
These flow rates are higher than would be expected based on a conservation of mass analysis of
coal moisture and a comparison to the values reported for the 1982 rulemaking effort. Therefore,
EPA concludes that the reported flow rates include a combination of wastewaters from other
sources. Section 13.3.1 describes waste ammonia liquor flow rates in more detail and provides
the basis of EPA's conclusion that a representative waste ammonia liquor flow rate is
approximately 36 gpt.
Nearly all by-product recovery plants reported one or more other sources of
wastewater, which are commingled with excess ammonia liquor for subsequent treatment. These
wastewater sources include the following:
• Coke oven gas desulfurization;
• Crude light oil recovery;
• Ammonia still operation;
• Coke oven gas condensates;
• Final gas coolers;
• Barometric condensers;
• National emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP)
controls for benzene;
• WAPC devices; and
• Other miscellaneous process wastewater.
7-3
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Below are detailed descriptions of these wastewater sources and wastewater discharge flow rates
as reported in response to the industry survey. Note that, although the reported flow rates
represent the sites' best estimates of source-specific discharge flow rates, EPA identified
inconsistencies in reported wastewater discharge flow rate data from coke plants that EPA could
not resolve. The data reported herein reflect what was reported by the industry in the
questionnaires.
Approximately 40 percent of by-product recovery plants reported operating coke
oven gas desulfurization systems that generate process wastewater. Desulfurization wastewater
is composed of condensed moisture in the gas stream, and wastewater discharge flow rates
reported in response to the survey range from <1 gpt to 55 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate
of 13 gpt.
Approximately 70 percent of by-product recovery plants reported generating
wastewater from crude light oil recovery operations. Distillates from the wash oil still and
subsequent separation equipment are condensed and decanted to recover oil by-products.
Condensates removed from product decanters comprise the crude light oil recovery wastewater
stream. Wastewater discharge flow rates vary depending on the degree of separation and
recovery (crude or refined), and the extent of wastewater recirculation. Reported wastewater
discharge flow rates range from approximately 3 gpt to 71 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate
of 20 gpt.
Steam used for operation of ammonia stills condenses and adds to the volume of
the still effluent. The volume of steam can be minimized through use of heat exchangers on the
still effluent. Most ammonia stills are operated with caustic addition for pH control, while some
are operated with lime or soda ash. Solutions of these chemicals also add to the discharge flow.
Twelve sites reported wastewater flow from the ammonia stills; reported wastewater discharge
flow rates range from 0.03 gpt to 87 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 9 gpt.
Coke oven gas condensates are generated by a variety of gas cooling and by-
product recovery operations. While some sites reported coke oven gas condensates as a
component of their reported wastewater ammonia liquor discharge flow rates, or as specific by-
product recovery discharge flow rates, others reported coke oven gas condensate discharge flow
rates separately. Reported coke oven gas condensate discharge flow rates ranged from <1 gpt to
15 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 1.5 gpt.
Final gas coolers generate wastewater from direct contact cooling coke oven gas
with water sprays that dissolve any remaining soluble gas components and physically flush out
condensed naphthalene crystals. Only one of the surveyed by-product recovery plants
specifically reported final gas cooler discharge flow rates separately from other reported
wastewater flow rates (e.g., waste ammonia liquor or coke oven gas condensates). This plant
reported a final cooler blowdown rate of 12 gpt. EPA estimates that typical final cooler
wastewater volumes range from 2 gpt to 12 gpt based on wastewater discharge flow data
collected from this site and from data collected for development of the 1982 regulation
(Reference 7-1).
7-4
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Some plants use vacuum crystallizers to form and remove ammonia sulfate
crystals. Barometric condensers are used to create a vacuum in the crystallizer systems, which
results in the generation of condensate wastewater. None of the surveyed by-product recovery
plants specifically reported barometric condenser discharge flow rates separately from other
reported wastewater flow rates; however, approximately 60 percent of by-product recovery plants
reported recovery of ammonium sulfate. Two plants reported generating ammonia recovery
wastewater, and one plant reported generating blowdown from the saturator/crystallizer, which
may or may not include barometric condenser wastewater. EPA estimates that typical barometric
condenser wastewater volumes range from 1 gpt to 18 gpt based on wastewater discharge flow
data collected from these sites and data collected for development of the 1982 regulation
(Reference 7-1).
Approximately 20 percent of by-product recovery plants reported generating
wastewater from NESHAP control systems for benzene emissions at by-product recovery plants.
NESHAP controls are site-specific and are designed to minimize emissions during cokemaking
and by-product recovery. An example of a NESHAP control system that generates wastewater is
water seals on storage and process tanks, although most plants use gas blanketing. Reported
NESHAP wastewater discharge flow rates cannot be disclosed to prevent compromising
confidential business information.
Approximately 50 percent of by-product recovery plants reported generating
wastewater from WAPC devices used to control emissions from operations such as coal
charging, coke pushing, by-product recovery, and coal drying. Wastewater from WAPC devices
may contain high concentrations of suspended solids (Reference 7-1). WAPC water is typically
recirculated, with the system blowdown comprising the wastewater stream. Standard industry
practice is to dispose of WAPC wastewater from coal charging and coke pushing by coke
quenching. The Agency supports this practice because these types of WAPC wastewater do not
contain volatile pollutants found in waste ammonia liquor and other untreated wastewaters and
would not result in transfer of these pollutants to the atmosphere. Reported coke pushing WAPC
wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 1.2 gpt to 119 gpt, with a median discharge flow
rate of 27 gpt (the flow rates include water being used for coke quenching). Relatively few by-
product recovery plants perform WAPC of emissions from by-product recovery and coal drying;
WAPC wastewaters generated by these operations are routed to wastewater treatment.
Approximately 40 percent of by-product recovery plants reported generating
miscellaneous wastewaters. Reported wastewater sources were site-specific and discharge flow
rates ranged from <1 gpt to 72 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 12 gpt. Examples of
reported wastewater sources include: ovens basement, furnace condensate, tar storage drainage,
coal yard drainage, exhauster and flare stack seals, floor drains, drip legs, and lab sink waste. In
addition to these sources, approximately 25 percent of plants reported generating small volumes
(<1 gpt) of equipment cleaning and washdown water. Many sites have improved their collection
of miscellaneous wastewaters since the promulgation of the 1982 regulation. The Agency
believes that collecting and treating these wastewaters prior to discharge is necessary to ensure
compliance with the regulation.
7-5
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
In summary, by-product recovery cokemaking plants generate process wastewater
from a variety of sources. Reported total plant process wastewater discharge flow rates ranged
from 55 gpt to 281 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 118 gpt. These reported flow rates
include the process wastewater sources described above, but exclude other wastewater sources
that may be commingled with process wastewater for treatment, such as contaminated ground
water, control water for subsequent biological treatment, WAPC water suitable for coke
quenching, and cooling tower blowdown. WAPC water used for coke quenching is also not
included in the discharge flow rate.
Process Wastewater Sources for Non-Recovery Cokemaking
Non-recovery cokemaking operations do not generate process wastewater.
Process area storm water and boiler blowdown, which are typically disposed of by coke
quenching at non-recovery facilities, are not considered process waters. In addition, EPA does
not consider wastewater associated with waste heat recovery and reuse from co-generation
facilities, such as WAPC wastewater, boiler blowdown and cooling tower blowdown to be
process wastewater subject to this rule.
7.1.2 Sintering and Ironmaking Operations
Separate discussions are provided below for sintering and blast furnace
ironmaking segments of the proposed ironmaking subcategory. In the final rule, these operations
continue to be regulated in separate subcategories.
Sintering
The sintering process primarily uses water to add to the sinter mix to attain the
desired moisture content. The typical water source is plant service water, which is also used by
most plants as makeup water for WAPC of sintering processes such as the sintering stand
windbox and material processing. Other water uses are site-specific and include sinter cooling,
belt sprays, and equipment cleaning and washdown.
The primary wastewater source for sintering operations is WAPC system
wastewater. Seven sites reported in their survey response that they used WAPC systems to
control air emissions from the sintering process, while two sites used dry air pollution control
(DAPC) systems. WAPC wastewater is recirculated, and the system blowdown is discharged.
All of the sinter plants generating process wastewater reported using wet scrubbers to control
wind box emissions, and some sites also reported using scrubbers to control emissions at the
discharge end of the sinter strand. Reported WAPC wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from
0 gpt to 452 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 73 gpt. Sites that use dry air pollution
control do not generate process wastewater.
Facilities identified other sources of sintering wastewater in the industry surveys,
including sinter cooling water, belt sprays, and equipment cleaning water. EPA believes that
7-6
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
these miscellaneous wastewaters are discharged with the WAPC blowdown because the survey
respondents did not provide flow rate data for these sources.
Blast Furnace Ironmaking
Blast furnace ironmaking primarily uses water in wet gas cleaning and cooling
systems designed to clean and cool the furnace off-gas prior to its use as a fuel in the blast
furnace stoves. Water is recirculated at a high rate. Other water uses include water addition to
adjust the moisture content of the burden, slag quenching, and gas seals. Source water may be
provided by plant service water, but often consists of treated blast furnace wastewater, other
process wastewater, slag quench wastewater, or gas seal wastewater.
Blowdown from the high-energy scrubbers and gas coolers is the primary
wastewater from blast furnace ironmaking. Reported gas cleaning system wastewater discharge
flow rates ranged from 1.5 gpt to 2,182 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 15 gpt. Blast
furnace gas seal wastewater is also a significant wastewater source; however, common industry
practice is to reuse blast furnace gas seal wastewater as makeup for the gas cleaning system.
Among survey respondents that reported separate gas seal wastewater discharge flow rates, flow
rates ranged from <1 gpt to 156 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 15 gpt.
Pump seals, blast furnace drip legs, equipment cleaning water, and excess slag
quenching wastewater are other, relatively minor sources of process wastewater. Common
industry practice is to reuse these wastewater streams as makeup for the gas cleaning system.
Five sites achieve zero discharge and five sites achieve reduced discharge of blast
furnace wastewater by using all or a portion of the gas cleaning blowdown for slag quenching.
One additional site achieves zero discharge by discharging gas cleaning blowdown to one unlined
and one synthetically lined pond where the wastewater infiltrates and evaporates. The Agency
does not advocate using untreated gas cleaning blowdown for slag quenching in unlined slag pits
because of the potential for ground water contamination and air pollution associated with this
practice.
7.13 Integrated Steelmaking Operations
Separate discussions are provided below for the following manufacturing
processes within the integrated steelmaking subcategory that EPA had proposed: basic oxygen
furnace steelmaking, ladle metallurgy, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting.
Six of 20 integrated steelmaking sites operate combined wastewater treatment
and/or recycle systems for vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and/or hot forming operations.
The common characteristics of the process wastewater from each of these operations allow the
sites to commingle and treat the wastewater simultaneously.
7-7
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) Steelmaking
The primary use of water and primary source of wastewater in BOF steelmaking
are air pollution control systems designed to treat furnace off-gases prior to release into the
atmosphere. Each BOF shop uses one of three types of WAPC systems: semi-wet, wet-
suppressed combustion, or wet-open combustion (one shop uses a combination of WAPC
systems). Semi-wet systems apply water to the furnace off-gases to partially cool and condition
the off-gases prior to particulate removal in an electrostatic precipitator. Both wet-suppressed
and wet-open systems use wet scrubbers for gas cooling and conditioning and for particulate
removal. Wet-suppressed systems are high-energy wet scrubbing systems that limit excess air
entering the furnace mouth, minimizing carbon monoxide combustion and thus minimizing the
volume of gas requiring treatment. Wet-open systems are gas cleaning systems that admit excess
air to allow the combustion of carbon monoxide prior to high-energy scrubbing. Plant service
water is the predominant water source for all three system types. Other minor wastewater
sources are site-specific and include excess slag quench water, hood cooling water losses,
cooling tower blowdown, and equipment cleaning water.
EPA analyzed BOF steelmaking wastewater discharge flow rates based on the
type of WAPC system used because of differences in water recycle rates and wastewater
discharge rates. Eight of the 24 BOF shops active in 1997 operated semi-wet air pollution
control systems. Reported wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 124 gpt, with a
median discharge flow rate of 22 gpt. Wastewater is generally not recirculated. Two BOF shops
reported zero discharge of process wastewater, while two additional BOF sites reported discharge
rates of <6 gpt. Sites achieve zero or relatively low discharges from semi-wet systems by
balancing the applied water with water that evaporates in the conditioning process. Although the
1982 regulation designates semi-wet air pollution control as zero discharge (Reference 7-1),
currently not all of the sites are able to achieve this discharge status because of safety
considerations and because the level of control required to attain zero discharge is difficult to
maintain at all times. Some sites operate their semi-wet systems with excess water, which is
subsequently discharged, to flush the air pollution control ductwork and prevent the buildup of
debris within the ductwork. If this wet debris accumulates, it has the potential to fall back into
the BOF, causing explosions and process upsets. The Agency recognizes the benefits of using
excess water in these systems.
Seven BOF shops operate wet-suppressed combustion air pollution control
systems. All of the shops recirculate air pollution control wastewater at a high rate. Reported
wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 14 gpt to 97 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate
of 34 gpt. Five of these BOF shops use carbon dioxide injection in the high-rate recycle system
to reduce wastewater blowdown requirements. Carbon dioxide injection allows carbonates to
precipitate in the treatment system clarifiers (in effect water softening), thus minimizing the need
for blowdown from the system.
Eight BOF shops (at seven sites) operate wet-open combustion air pollution
control systems. All of the shops recirculate air pollution control wastewater at a high rate.
Reported wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 201 gpt, with a median discharge
7-8
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
flow rate of 95 gpt. One shop achieves zero discharge of process wastewater by using carbon
dioxide injection, which eliminates the need for system blowdown because 100 percent of the
water is recirculated. Two additional shops achieve wastewater discharge flow rates less than the
median rate by using carbon dioxide injection to reduce system blowdown requirements.
Ladle Metallurgy
None of the estimated 103 sites that conduct ladle metallurgy operations reported
generating or discharging process wastewater from these operations. Water is used and
discharged by vacuum degassers that often operate as part of ladle metallurgy stations. Water use
and wastewater discharge by vacuum degassing is discussed below.
Vacuum Degassing
The vacuum generating system is the primary use of water and primary source of
wastewater in vacuum degassing systems. Steam ejectors create a vacuum in vacuum degassing
systems; condensate wastewater is generated from this process. Molten steel exhaust comes in
contact with the injected steam, thereby contaminating the condensate wastewater. Wastewater
is recirculated at a high rate; blowdown is the vacuum degassing wastewater stream. Makeup
water for the system is generally plant service water. Reported wastewater discharge flow rates
ranged from 0 gpt to 735 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 44 gpt. No other sources of
wastewater were reported.
Continuous Casting
The primary use of water and primary source of wastewater in continuous casting
are direct contact spray cooling (secondary cooling) of the partially solidified product as it exits
the mold to produce a solid product. (Primary cooling and equipment cooling are non-contact
cooling systems, which are not discussed in this section.) As the cast product surface oxidizes,
scale is washed away by the cooling water. The spray water also becomes contaminated with oils
and greases that are released by hydraulic and lubrication systems. Wastewater is recirculated at
a high rate; blowdown comprises the continuous casting wastewater stream. Makeup water for
the system is generally plant service water; however, some sites also use non-contact cooling
water or treated process wastewater. Reported continuous caster wastewater discharge flow rates
ranged from 1 gpt to 1,836 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 35 gpt.
Another use of water and source of wastewater is flume flushing. As the cast
product is placed on the run-out tables for final cooling, additional scale flakes off and drops
beneath the tables. Some sites sluice this scale to the spray cooling water pit. Reported flume
flushing wastewater discharge rates cannot be disclosed to prevent compromising confidential
business information. Other minor wastewater sources were site-specific and include equipment
cleaning water, torch table wastewater, and granulator water.
Non-process wastewater sources often treated with process wastewater include
low-volume losses from closed caster mold and machine cooling water systems.
7-9
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
7.1.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Operations
EPA identified contact water systems used for scale removal, roll and machinery
cooling, product cooling, flume flushing, and other miscellaneous uses during the hot forming
process as the primary use of water and primary wastewater source. EPA uses contact water
systems as a generic term because there are many different sources of contact water within a hot
forming mill. Sites may have multiple hot forming contact water systems.
Certain contact wastewaters are common to all hot forming operations, regardless
of mill type (i.e., primary, section, flat, and pipe and tube). When the hot steel product is being
rolled, iron oxide scale forms on the surface of the hot steel. The scale is removed by direct
contact high-pressure sprays (gauge pressure of approximately 1,000 - 2,000 pounds per square
inch) that release water before each roll pass of the product. Low-pressure spray cooling water is
used to prevent the mill stand rolls and the table rolls from overheating as the hot steel passes
over or in between them. Scale removal and cooling wastewater are discharged beneath the
rolling mill to trenches called flumes. Sites sluice this scale (flume flushing wastewater) to the
scale pits.
Hot strip mills use large quantities of direct contact water, referred to as laminar
flow, to cool the strip on the run-out table after it has been rolled on the final mill finishing
stands. Laminar flow is a method in which a nonturbulent water flow is applied over the entire
surface of the strip to effect uniform surface cooling and to prevent strip distortion. This water is
relatively clean and is often recycled because of its large volume. In addition, low-pressure spray
is also applied at the downcoiler to allow proper strip coiling.
Makeup water for contact water systems is generally plant service water; however,
many sites also use non-contact cooling water or treated process wastewater. At most facilities
that discharge direct contact wastewater (30 of 38), wastewater is recirculated at a high rate, and
system blowdown is the resulting wastewater stream requiring treatment. However, some mills
operate multiple contact water systems (e.g., nonlaminar and laminar cooling) and not all systems
are recirculating. In addition, some facilities operate multiple hot forming mills, but not all mills
recirculate contact wastewater. Other miscellaneous, low-volume wastewater sources reported
by a significant number of facilities include wastewater collected in basement sumps, roll shop
wastewater, and equipment cleaning and washdown wastewater. The range of and median
wastewater discharge flow rates for wastewaters generated by hot forming operations at.
integrated and stand-alone hot forming sites are listed below.
7-10
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Wastewater Source
Range of Discharge Flow
Rates
(gpt)
Median Discharge Flow
Rate
(gpt)
Contact wastewater
Oto 17,299
231
Basement sumps
0 to 108
4
Roll shop wastewater
Oto 21
0.01
Equipment cleaning and washdown wastewater
Oto 76
<0.5
Scarfer emissions control wastewater is generated by a minority of facilities that
operate wet scarfer emissions control. Only a portion of mills perform scarfing, and the majority
of these mills either do not control scarfer emissions or operate dry emissions control. Exhaust
gases from scarfers contain metal fumes comprising mainly iron oxides and the alloying elements
of the steel. Because gases are saturated when exiting the scarfer hood, one of three wet
emissions control systems is generally used: wet precipitator (intermittent spray wash), wet
precipitator (continuous wash), and high energy venturi scrubber. Only two facilities specifically
reported generating scarfer WAPC wastewater; both discharge flow rates were <10 gpt.
Finally, additional hot forming operations performed by some mills that generate
contact cooling wastewater include hydraulic edging, hot shearing, die cooling, scarfer cooling,
and saw cooling. EPA believes that these wastewaters are discharged with contact cooling
wastewater because the survey respondents did not provide flow rate data for these sources.
7.1.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Operations
The proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory included
two segments, carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel, because of differences in pollutants
present in the wastewaters. EPA did not find discernable differences in water use practices,
wastewater sources, and wastewater discharge flow rates between the segments; therefore, this
discussion does not distinguish between the two segments. However, separate discussions are
provided below for the following manufacturing processes within the subcategory: electric arc
furnace (EAF) steelmaking, ladle metallurgy, vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot
forming.
Approximately 67 percent of sites operate recycle systems specific to one type of
operation. The remaining 33 percent of sites operate treatment and/or recycle systems for
combined wastewater site operations, including vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot
forming. The common characteristics of the process wastewater from each of these operations
allows the sites to commingle and treat their wastewater simultaneously.
Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) Steelmaking
The Agency evaluated data from 69 survey respondents that reported that they
performed non-integrated steelmaking operations. The analysis included a total of 76 EAF shops
7-11
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
and 132 EAFs. All EAFs in the United States are equipped with dry or semi-wet air pollution
controls, and none discharge process wastewater. (One EAF shop has a wet scrubber system that
functions as a backup.) Dry systems clean furnace off-gases without adding water to the gas
cleaning system. Semi-wet systems apply water to the furnace off-gases to partially cool and
condition the off-gases prior to particulate removal in an electrostatic precipitator. Sites achieve
zero wastewater discharge from semi-wet systems by balancing the applied water with water that
evaporates in the conditioning process. Non-contact cooling water is the predominant water
source; however, some facilities use treated process water and plant service water. Wastewater is
not recirculated.
Ladle Metallurgy
None of the 83 sites that perform ladle metallurgy and/or secondary steelmaking
reported generating or discharging process wastewater from these operations. Water is used and
discharged by vacuum degassers that often operate as part of ladle metallurgy stations. Water use
and wastewater discharge by vacuum degassing is discussed below.
Vacuum Degassing
The vacuum generating system is the primary use of water and primary source of
wastewater in vacuum degassing systems. Steam ejectors create a vacuum in the vacuum
degassing systems; condensate wastewater is generated from this process. Molten steel exhaust
comes in contact with the injected steam, thereby contaminating the condensate wastewater.
Wastewater is recirculated at a high rate, and blowdown is the vacuum degassing wastewater
stream. Sources of makeup water for the recirculation system include non-contact cooling water,
plant service water, and treated or untreated process wastewater. Reported wastewater discharge
flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 116 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 19 gpt. The only
other reported wastewater sources were boiler blowdown, cooling water leaks/spills, and mold
cleaning water; each of these sources were reported by a single facility.
Continuous Casting
The primary use of water and primary source of wastewater in continuous casting
are direct contact spray cooling (secondary cooling) of the partially solidified product as it exits
the mold to produce a solid product. (Primary cooling and equipment cooling are non-contact
cooling systems, which are not discussed in this section.) As the cast product surface oxidizes,
scale is washed away by the cooling water. The spray water also becomes contaminated with oils
and greases that are released by hydraulic and lubrication systems. Wastewater is recirculated at
a high rate, and blowdown is the continuous casting wastewater stream. Sources of makeup
water for the recirculation system include non-contact cooling water, plant service water, ground
water, and treated or untreated process wastewater. Reported continuous caster wastewater
discharge flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 603 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 18 gpt.
Four sites reported generating equipment cleaning and washdown wastewater.
Wastewater discharge rates for this source were <0.5 gpt. No additional process wastewater
7-12
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
sources were reported. Non-process wastewater sources often treated with process wastewater
include losses from closed caster mold and machine cooling water systems.
Hot Forming
EPA identified contact water systems used for scale removal, roll and machinery
cooling, product cooling, flume flushing, and other miscellaneous uses during the hot forming
process as the primary use of water and primary wastewater source. EPA uses contact water
systems as a generic term because there are many different sources of contact water within a hot
forming mill. Sites may have multiple hot forming contact water systems. Section 7.1.4
describes water use and wastewater sources for hot forming operations in detail. Reported
contact wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 11,644 gpt, with a median
discharge flow rate of 39 gpt. Discharge flow rates for other common wastewater sources,
including basement sumps, roll shop, equipment cleaning and washdown, and scarfer cooling and
emissions control cannot be disclosed because it would compromise confidential business
information.
Additional reported wastewater sources were site-specific, often generated by only
one facility. Examples include lubricating, hot saw, and rail head hardening. Reported flow
rates are not disclosed to prevent compromising confidential business information.
Non-process wastewater from hot forming operations that is treated with process
wastewater includes non-contact cooling water from reheat furnaces, which is sometimes
included in the process water recycle loop or recycled separately with a blowdown to the process
water loop.
7.1.6 Steel Finishing Operations
The steel finishing subcategory, as proposed by EPA, included two segments,
carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel, because of differences in pollutants present in the
wastewaters. EPA also identified several manufacturing process divisions between the proposed
segments. Separate discussions are provided below for the following manufacturing processes:
acid pickling, cold forming, alkaline cleaning, stand-alone continuous annealing, hot coating, and
electroplating.
Acid Pickling
For this analysis, EPA defines acid pickling as also including alkaline cleaning
and salt bath and electrolytic sodium sulfate (ESS) descaling operations when performed on a
line that includes acid pickling. In a small number of instances, continuous annealing operations
with an associated water quench take place on acid pickling lines. In these instances, EPA
considered discharge from the annealing rinse as a wastewater from acid pickling lines.
EPA identified three major uses of water and sources of wastewater from acid
pickling lines: rinse water, pickle liquor, and WAPC devices. Rinse water comprises the largest
7-13
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
volume of wastewater from acid pickling lines to wastewater treatment. Multiple rinse tanks
operated in series are used to clean the acid solution that carries over from acid pickling
operations. Some sites operate countercurrent cascade rinsing whereby rinse water flows from
one tank to another in the direction opposite of the product flow. Fresh water is added to the
rinse tank located farthest from the pickling tanks. Although countercurrent cascade rinsing can
reduce water use significantly, some sites operate once-through rinsing systems to maintain
product quality.
Pickling is often performed in multiple tanks operated in series whereby acid
solution cascades from the last tank to the first. Fresh acid and makeup water are added to the
first pickling tank, and spent pickle liquor from the final pickling tank is blowdown. Spent
pickle liquor is composed primarily of acid that is no longer an effective pickling agent. Spent
pickle liquor may be regenerated on site, contract hauled off site, or discharged to wastewater
treatment.
WAPC devices are located on acid pickling lines and at acid regeneration plants.
Approximately 50 percent of WAPC systems recirculate wastewater, while 50 percent use once-
through wastewater.
The range of and median wastewater discharge flow rates for selected wastewaters
generated by acid pickling operations of strip and sheet (the predominant products) are listed
below.
Wastewater Source
Range of Discharge Flow
Rates
(gpt)
Median Discharge Flow
Rate
(gpt)
Carbon and Alloy Strip/Sheet - Hydrochloric Acid
Pickling rinse wastewater
Oto 1,374
63
Pickling solution wastewater
0 to 870
6
WAPC
0 to 809
14
Carbon and Alloy Strip/Sheet - Sulfuric Acid
Pickling rinse wastewater
Oto 310
7
Pickling solution wastewater
Oto 24
8
WAPC wastewater
6 to 343
108
Stainless Strip/Sheet
Pickling rinse wastewater
Oto 8,172
258
Pickling solution wastewater
Oto 1,704
3
WAPC wastewater
Oto 11,507
97
7-14
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Other minor sources of wastewater reported by sites include process wastewater
from other operations on the acid pickling lines (e.g., spent process baths and rinses from salt
bath descaling); raw material handling, preparation, and storage; tank clean-outs; wet looping
pits; equipment cleaning water; sumps; and pump seals. Except for blowdown from surface
cleaning tanks, these wastewater sources are noncontinuous with minimal contribution to the
total wastewater flow.
The Agency identified six sites that have acid pickling wastewaters contract
hauled; these sites do not discharge acid pickling wastewater.
Cold Forming
The primary use of water in cold forming operations is in the contact spray water
and rolling solution systems, and the primary cold forming wastewater is the blowdown from
these systems. For purposes of analyzing wastewater flow rates, the Agency made no distinction
between contact spray water systems and rolling solution systems, which can include blowdown
from roll and/or roll table spray cooling and product cooling. Other reported sources of
wastewater include equipment cleaning water, wastewater from roll shops, and basement sumps.
The range of and median wastewater discharge flow rates for wastewaters generated by cold
forming operations are listed below.
Wastewater Source
Range of Discharge Flow
Rates
(gpt)
Median Discharge Flow
Rate
(gpt)
Carbon and Alloy
Multiple stand, combination
3 to 319
115
Multiple stand, direct application
0 to 5,856
199
Carbon and Alloy (continued)
Multiple stand, recirculation
Oto 1,237
14
Single stand, direct application
0 to 360
2
Single stand, recirculation
Oto 76
7
Stainless
Multiple stand, recirculation
Oto 30
11
Single stand, direct application
Not disclosed to prevent
compromising confidential
business information
Not disclosed to prevent
compromising
confidential business
information
Single stand, recirculation
Oto 82
5
7-15
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Some carbon and alloy cold forming operations achieve zero discharge from their
recycle system(s) through either contract hauling or discharge to other processes, such as acid
pickling, casting, hot forming, vacuum degassing, and other cold forming operations.
Alkaline Cleaning
For this analysis, EPA defines alkaline cleaning operations as also including
annealing operations performed on the same line. As a result, this segment includes both stand-
alone alkaline cleaning lines and continuous annealing/alkaline cleaning lines.
The primary uses of water and primary sources of wastewater identified for
alkaline cleaning operations are blowdown from the alkaline cleaning solution tanks and rinse
water used to clean the alkaline cleaning solution from the steel. The range of and median
wastewater discharge flow rates for solution blowdown and rinse wastewaters generated by
alkaline cleaning of strip and sheet (the predominant products) are listed below.
Wastewater Source
Range of Discharge Flow
Rates
(gpt)
Median Discharge Flow
Rate
(gpt)
Carbon and Alloy Steel, Strip/Sheet
Cleaning solution blowdown
Oto 1,118
3
Cleaning rinse wastewater
0 to 2,271
162
Stainless Steel, Strip/Sheet
Cleaning solution blowdown
0.3 to 3,566
18
Cleaning rinse wastewater
39 to 15,082
2,257
Other reported minor sources of wastewater include: rinse water from annealing
operations (when operated with a water quench), brush scrubbing, tank clean-outs, roll shop, and
equipment cleaning and washdown water.
Continuous Annealing
For this analysis, EPA defines continuous annealing operations as those
continuous annealing operations not on the same process line with other operations such as
alkaline cleaning or acid pickling (i.e., stand-alone continuous annealing operations). Stand-
alone continuous annealing operations are divided into two categories: lines that do not use
water to quench the steel after the annealing process, and lines that do. Continuous annealing
lines that operate without a water quench do not generate process wastewater. Sites with
continuous annealing lines that operate with a water quench reported discharge flow rates
ranging from <1 gpt to 672 gpt, with a median discharge flow rate of 21 gpt. A few quenching
sites also reported generating small volumes of solution blowdown (<1 gpt).
7-16
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Hot Coating
For this analysis, EPA defines hot coating as also including acid cleaning,
annealing, alkaline cleaning, and other surface cleaning and preparation operations performed on
the same line as a hot coating operation. Hot coating operations are performed on carbon and
alloy steels only. The primary use of water and primary source of wastewater from hot coating
operations are surface preparation operations, such as acid and alkaline cleaning, that the steel
undergoes before hot coating. Twenty-four sites operate a total of 40 hot coating lines. Four of
these operations reported a discharge from their hot coating tanks, but did not provide any flow
data. Thirty-nine of the operations have a rinse following the coating operation. Rinse
wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 4,044 gpt, with a median discharge flow
rate of 182 gpt. Tank clean-outs, fume scrubbers, and equipment cleaning are other sources of
wastewater reported by several sites.
Two of the lines reported operating without a discharge via contract hauling of
process wastewater.
Electroplating
For this analysis, EPA defines electroplating lines as also including annealing,
alkaline cleaning, acid cleaning, and other surface cleaning and surface preparation operations on
the same line. Twenty-two sites reported performing electroplating on a total of 42 lines.
The primary uses of water and primary sources of wastewater from electroplating
operations are acid and alkaline cleaning operations performed on the same process line, which
generate solution blowdown and rinse wastewater. Wastewater discharge flow rates for
electroplating operations vary by the type of metal applied and the product type. Some sites
operate countercurrent cascade rinsing and other flow reduction techniques to conserve water;
however, other sites require once-through rinsing to ensure product quality. At these sites,
thorough rinsing after acid cleaning is critical for proper adhesion of the plating. The range and
median wastewater discharge flow rates by metal type for these wastewater streams are listed
below. Wastewater discharge flow rates for plate electroplating are not disclosed to prevent
compromising confidential business information.
Wastewater Source
Range of Discharge Flow Rates
(gpt)
Median Discharge Flow Rate
(gpt)
Chrome/Tin Electroplating
Cleaning solution blowdown
0 to 8,938
1.5
Cleaning rinse wastewater
0 to 54,444
154
Other Metals Electroplating
Cleaning solution blowdown
Oto 74,691
5.3
Cleaning rinse wastewater
Oto 1,554
26
7-17
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Other minor wastewater sources reported by several sites include electroplating
solution blowdown and rinse water, plating solution losses, fume scrubbers, tank clean-outs,
equipment cleaning, and spills/leaks.
7.1.7 Other Operations
The Other Operations Subcategory includes segments for direct-reduced
ironmaking, forging, and briquetting.
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI)
Three DRI plants provided industry survey data. One plant was operated at a non-
integrated site and two were operated as stand-alone DRI sites. WAPC systems, used to control
furnace emissions and emissions from material handling and storage, are the primary reported
use of water and primary source of wastewater for DRI operations. All three sites recirculate
WAPC wastewater. WAPC wastewater discharge flow rates ranged from 0 gpt to 64 gpt, with a
median discharge flow rate of 2.2 gpt.
Forging
Contact water is the primary use of water and primary source of process
wastewater from forging operations. Contact water is used for flume flushing, descaling, die
spray cooling, and product quenching. Forging wastewater sources and generation are very
similar to those for hot forming; Section 7.1.5 describes water use and wastewater sources for hot
forming operations in detail. Reported forging contact wastewater discharge flow rates ranged
from 0 gpt to 1,110 gpt, with a median wastewater discharge flow rate of 117 gpt.
Other minor wastewater sources reported include hydraulic system wastewater,
equipment cleaning water, and basements sumps.
Briquetting
The Agency found that briquetting operations do not generate or discharge process
wastewater.
7.2 Identification of Pollutants of Concern (POCsl
This section presents the approach used for identifying POCs and lists the POCs
that EPA considered for this rulemaking. EPA presents this information using the subcategories
as proposed. Memoranda describing the POC identification in more detail and the data used to
identify the POCs are located in the Iron and Steel Administrative Record (Section 5.4, DCN
IS05030 and Section 14.3, DCN IS10616). EPA used the POCs for each subcategory to screen
pollutants for possible regulation; Section 12 describes the selection of regulated pollutants for
each subcategory from the list of POCs. EPA also used the POCs to calculate pollutant loadings
and removals and to perform an environmental assessment for each subcategory.
7-18
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
To identify POCs, EPA used analytical data for over 300 analytes collected during
sampling episodes conducted by EPA at 18 iron and steel facilities; in addition, EPA used
analytical data from 2 dioxins/fiirans sampling episodes to confirm the presence of dioxins/furans
in sintering wastewater. Section 3 provides more details on EPA's sampling program, the
analytical methods used, and the individual analytes analyzed for during the sampling episodes.
In general, EPA analyzed wastewater samples for conventional pollutants (pH, total suspended
solids, and biochemical oxygen demand), bulk nonconventional pollutants, volatile and
semivolatile organic pollutants, metals, and dioxins and fiirans. The list of pollutants analyzed
for each subcategory depended on the types of pollutants EPA expected to find in wastewater
discharged from operations in the subcategory; pollutants not analyzed for a particular
subcategory are noted in the subcategory-specific subsections below.
EPA used the following general criteria for selecting POCs for each subcategory:
• EPA considered three pollutants as POCs for all manufacturing processes:
total suspended solids (TSS), oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM), and total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM). These
pollutants are important wastewater characteristics and are important
indicators of wastewater treatment system performance in many
applications in the steel industry.
• EPA did not evaluate pH as a candidate POC since pH is not expressed in
terms of quantity or concentration. However, the pH level is an important
wastewater characteristic and an important indicator of wastewater
treatment system performance in many applications in the steel industry.
• Except where specifically noted, EPA excluded the following pollutants
from consideration as POCs for all manufacturing processes because they
are either dissolved substances or common elements found in wastewater:
total dissolved solids (TDS), calcium, chloride, sodium, total sulfide, and
sulfate.
In addition to the general criteria listed above, EPA used the following
methodology to identify POCs. First, EPA eliminated from consideration all pollutants not
detected in untreated wastewater samples from specific manufacturing processes during EPA's
18 sampling episodes. Table 7-2 presents the list of 147 pollutants that were not detected in any
manufacturing-process-specific untreated wastewater samples. For the remaining pollutants,
EPA reviewed its data from untreated wastewater samples from individual manufacturing
processes to identify pollutants present in wastewaters from each process. EPA identified POCs
for each manufacturing process using the following criteria:
• The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the
minimum level (ML, also referred to as baseline value (see Section 4))
concentration in at least 10 percent of all untreated process wastewater
7-19
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
samples. This criterium ensures that the pollutant was present at treatable
concentrations at sites where EPA evaluated treatment performance.
• The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples
was greater than the mean detected concentration in source water samples.
This criterium ensures that pollutants are generated by the manufacturing
process rather than merely reflecting background pollutant concentrations.
Using the criteria above, EPA developed segment- and/or operation-level POC
lists for each of the seven subcategories. The following subsections present tables that list the
POCs for each subcategory/segment. The following subsections also present tables for each
subcategory listing the pollutants that were detected in at least one untreated process wastewater
sample, but failed the POC for the subcategory. These additional tables, together with Table 7-2
and the POC tables document the status of all the pollutants analyzed in untreated process
wastewater samples for each subcategory.
Note that while EPA evaluated POCs based on an assessment of untreated process
wastewater data at the subcategory, segment, or operational level, certain tables provided in this
section represent assessments at the subcategory level only in order to be concise. As a result,
certain information presented in the subcategory-level tables may appear contradictory. For
example, for the steel finishing subcategory, mercury is shown in Table 7-16 as both not detected
and as detected, but not greater than 10 times the minimum level in at least 10 percent of
samples. In this case, mercury was not detected in any untreated wastewater samples for certain
steel finishing operations, but was detected at low levels in other steel finishing operations. See
the memoranda describing the POC identification located in the Iron and Steel Administrative
Record (Section 5.4, DCNIS05030 and Section 14.3, DCNIS10616) for detailed information
presented by subcategory/segment/operation.
7.2.1 Cokemaking Subcategory
The cokemaking subcategory is divided into two segments: by-product recovery
and non-recovery. EPA did not identify POCs for the non-recovery segment because non-
recovery cokemaking operations do not generate process wastewater. The identification of POCs
for the by-product segment is discussed below.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from four by-product cokemaking
facilities (a total of 4 sampling points and 16 samples) to identify POCs for the by-product
segment of the cokemaking subcategory. EPA did not analyze by-product cokemaking
wastewater samples for hexavalent chromium because EPA did not expect this pollutant to be
present at treatable concentrations in cokemaking wastewaters. Table 7-3 presents pollutants that
were detected in iron and steel untreated process wastewater, but not identified as POCs for this
subcategory.
7-20
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-4 lists the POCs identified for this segment. EPA identified 68 POCs
using the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected total Kjeldahl nitrogen
(TKN), weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide, thiocyanate, and nitrate/nitrite as POCs.
TKN, WAD cyanide, and thiocyanate could not be evaluated using the criteria
presented in Section 7.2 because no minimum levels are specified for these analyses. EPA
selected these three pollutants as POCs because they are widely present in cokemaking
wastewater (each was detected in 100 percent of EPA's cokemaking untreated wastewater
samples). Nitrate/nitrite failed the screening criteria in Section 7.2 because the mean detected
concentration of nitrate/nitrite was greater in source water samples than in untreated wastewater
samples. However, EPA selected nitrate/nitrite as a POC because it is an important indicator of
biological treatment effectiveness.
7.2.2 Ironmaking Subcategory
The proposed ironmaking subcategory was divided into the following two
segments: sintering and blast furnace ironmaking. Because the characteristics of sintering and
blast furnace ironmaking wastewater are different, EPA identified different POCs for the two
proposed segments. The POCs for each segment are discussed below. EPA did not analyze
sintering and blast furnace ironmaking wastewater samples for biochemical oxygen demand and
hexavalent chromium because EPA did not expect these pollutants to be present at treatable
concentrations in ironmaking wastewaters. Table 7-5 presents pollutants that were detected in
iron and steel untreated process wastewater, but not identified as POCs for this subcategory.
Sintering
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from two sintering facilities (a total of 2
sampling points and 10 samples) to identify POCs for sintering. Table 7-6 lists the POCs
identified for this segment. EPA identified 62 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2.
In addition, EPA selected TKN, WAD cyanide, and thiocyanate as POCs.
TKN, WAD cyanide, and thiocyanate could not be evaluated using the criteria
presented in Section 7.2 because no minimum levels are specified for these analyses. EPA
selected these three pollutants as POCs because they are widely present in sintering wastewater
(each was detected in 100 percent of EPA's sintering untreated wastewater samples).
Dioxins and furans were detected during the two sampling episodes conducted by
EPA. To confirm that dioxins and furans are present in sintering wastewaters, EPA collected
additional sampling data in collaboration with the American Iron and Steel Institute. These data,
while not included in this POC analysis, further characterized the presence and amount of
dioxins and furans in sintering wastewater and confirmed EPA's data.
7-21
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Blast Furnace Ironmaking
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from three blast furnace ironmaking
facilities (a total of 4 sampling points and 20 samples) to identify POCs for blast furnace
ironmaking. Table 7-7 lists the POCs identified for this segment. EPA identified 24 POCs using
the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected TKN, WAD cyanide, and
thiocyanate as POCs.
TKN, WAD cyanide, and thiocyanate could not be evaluated using the criteria
presented in Section 7.2 because no minimum levels are specified for these analyses. EPA
selected these three pollutants as POCs because they are widely present in blast furnace
wastewater (each was detected in at least 60 percent of EPA's blast furnace ironmaking untreated
wastewater samples).
7.2.3 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
The proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory included the following
manufacturing processes that generate process wastewater: basic oxygen furnace (BOF)
steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting. Because wastewaters from these three
manufacturing processes are commonly cotreated, the list of POCs for this subcategory includes
all pollutants identified as POCs for any of the three manufacturing processes. EPA did not
analyze steelmaking wastewater samples for biochemical oxygen demand, total organic carbon,
total sulfide, cyanide, thiocyanate, and hexavalent chromium because EPA did not expect these
pollutants to be present at treatable concentrations in steelmaking wastewaters. Table 7-8
presents pollutants that were detected in iron and steel untreated process wastewater, but not
identified as POCs for this subcategory.
EPA identified a total of 28 POCs for this subcategory. The POCs for each
specific manufacturing process are discussed below; Table 7-9 lists the POCs identified for the
proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory and for each manufacturing process.
EPA reviewed untreated steelmaking wastewater data from three BOF
steelmaking facilities (a total of 7 sampling points and 28 samples) to identify POCs for BOF
steelmaking operations. EPA identified 28 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2.
EPA reviewed untreated vacuum degassing wastewater data from two BOF
steelmaking facilities performing vacuum degassing (a total of two sampling points and six
samples) to identify POCs for vacuum degassing operations. EPA identified 15 POCs using the
criteria presented in Section 7.2.
EPA reviewed untreated continuous casting wastewater data from three BOF
steelmaking facilities performing continuous casting (a total of 3 sampling points and 14
samples) to identify POCs for continuous casting operations. EPA identified 12 POCs using the
criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected lead as a POC. Lead failed the
screening criteria in Section 7.2 because the mean detected concentration of lead was not greater
7-22
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
than 10 times the minimum level. However, EPA selected lead as a POC because industry-
supplied effluent data indicate that lead was detected in 129 of the 262 samples (49 percent) from
integrated continuous casting operations. In addition, EPA selected lead as a POC for continuous
casting operations because it is regulated under the 1982 regulation (Reference 7-1) and data
collected in support of the 1982 regulation indicate it is present in wastewater discharged from
continuous casting operations.
7.2.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
The proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory was divided
into two segments: carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel. Because the characteristics of hot
forming wastewater are affected by steel type, EPA identified different POCs for the two
segments. The POCs for each segment are discussed below. EPA did not analyze integrated and
stand-alone hot forming wastewater samples for dioxins and furans, cyanide, thiocyanate,
biochemical oxygen demand, total sulfide, and hexavalent chromium because EPA did not
expect these pollutants to be present at treatable concentrations in hot forming wastewaters.
Table 7-10 presents pollutants that were detected in iron and steel untreated process wastewater,
but not identified as POCs for this subcategory.
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming - Carbon and Alloy Steel
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from two carbon and alloy steel
integrated hot forming facilities (a total of 4 sampling points and 15 samples) to identify POCs
for hot forming operations. Table 7-11 lists the POCs identified for this segment. EPA
identified 10 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected lead as a
POC. Lead failed the screening criteria in Section 7.2 because the mean detected concentration
of lead was not greater than 10 times the minimum level. However, EPA selected lead as a POC
because industry-supplied effluent data indicate that lead was detected in 38 of the 168 samples
(23 percent) from integrated and stand-alone hot forming operations.
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming - Stainless Steel
EPA did not sample any stainless steel integrated or stand-alone hot forming
facilities. EPA did sample stainless steel non-integrated hot forming operations. Since the hot
forming processes performed and type of steel formed are identical for the stainless steel
segments, EPA transferred the 15 POCs from the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming
subcategory to the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, stainless steel segment,
(see Section 7.2.5 for a discussion of the selection of these POCs). Table 7-12 lists the POCs for
this segment.
7.2.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
The proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory was
divided into two segments: carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel. Because the characteristics
of the steelmaking and hot forming wastewater generated are affected by steel type, EPA
7-23
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
identified different POCs for the two segments. The POCs for each segment are discussed in the
following subsections. EPA did not analyze non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming
wastewater samples for dioxins and furans, cyanide, thiocyanate, biochemical oxygen demand,
and total sulfide because EPA did not expect these pollutants to be present at treatable
concentrations in non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming wastewaters. Table 7-13 presents
pollutants that were detected in iron and steel untreated wastewater, but not identified as POCs
for this subcategory.
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming - Carbon and Alloy Steel
The non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory, carbon and alloy
steel segment included the following manufacturing processes that generate wastewater: vacuum
degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming. Because wastewaters from these manufacturing
processes are commonly cotreated, the list of POCs for the entire segment includes all pollutants
identified as POCs for any of the manufacturing processes. EPA identified a total of 15 POCs
for this segment. The POCs for each specific manufacturing process are discussed below; Table
7-14 lists the POCs identified for this segment, and for each manufacturing process.
EPA did not identify POCs for vacuum degassing because EPA did not sample
non-integrated vacuum degassing operations during its sampling program. Based on process
chemistry and the steel material processed, EPA determined that it is unlikely that wastewater
associated with this operation would contain pollutants not identified as POCs in the other
manufacturing processes in this segment. POCs identified for continuous casting and hot
forming apply to vacuum degassing.
EPA reviewed untreated continuous casting wastewater data from three non-
integrated steelmaking facilities performing continuous casting on carbon and alloy steel (a total
of three sampling points and three samples) to identify POCs for continuous casting operations.
EPA identified 12 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected
lead and zinc as POCs. Lead failed the screening criteria in Section 7.2 because the mean
detected concentration of lead was not greater than 10 times the minimum level. Zinc failed
because the mean detected concentration of zinc was greater in source water samples than in
untreated wastewater samples. However, EPA selected lead and zinc as POCs because industry-
supplied effluent data indicate that lead was detected in 65 of the 72 samples (90 percent) and
zinc was detected in 70 of the 72 (97 percent) from non-integrated continuous casting operations
on carbon and alloy steel. In addition, EPA selected lead and zinc as POCs for continuous
casting operations because both pollutants are regulated under the 1982 regulation (Reference
7-1) and data collected in support of the 1982 regulation indicate that these pollutants were
present in wastewater discharged from continuous casting operations (no distinction was made
between steel type in the 1982 regulation).
EPA reviewed untreated hot forming wastewater data from three non-integrated
steelmaking facilities conducting hot forming on carbon and alloy steel (a total of three sampling
points and three samples) to identify POCs for hot forming operations. EPA identified 11 POCs
using the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected lead and zinc as POCs.
7-24
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Lead failed the screening criteria in Section 7.2 because it was not detected in EPA's sampling
program. Zinc failed because the mean detected concentration of zinc was not greater than 10
times the minimum level. EPA selected lead and zinc as POCs because industry-supplied
effluent data indicate that lead was detected in 229 of the 237 samples (97 percent) and zinc was
detected in 200 of the 237 (84 percent) from non-integrated hot forming operations on carbon
and alloy steel.
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming - Stainless Steel
The proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory, stainless
steel segment included the following manufacturing processes that generate wastewater: vacuum
degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming. Because wastewaters from these manufacturing
processes are commonly cotreated, the list of POCs for the entire segment includes all pollutants
identified as POCs for any of the manufacturing processes. EPA identified a total of 22 POCs for
this segment. The POCs for each specific manufacturing process are discussed below; Table 7-
15 lists the POCs identified for this segment and for each manufacturing process.
EPA did not identify POCs for vacuum degassing because EPA did not sample
non-integrated vacuum degassing operations during its sampling program. Based on process
chemistry, EPA determined that it is unlikely that wastewater associated with this operation
would contain pollutants not identified as POCs in the other manufacturing processes this
segment. POCs identified for continuous casting and hot forming apply to vacuum degassing.
EPA reviewed untreated continuous casting wastewater data from two non-
integrated steelmaking facilities performing continuous casting of stainless steel (a total of two
sampling points and seven samples) to identify POCs for continuous casting operations. EPA
identified 19 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected lead and
zinc as POCs. Lead failed the screening criteria in Section 7.2 because it was not detected in
EPA's sampling program. Zinc failed because the mean detected concentration of zinc was not
greater than 10 times the minimum level. EPA selected lead and zinc as POCs because industry-
supplied effluent data indicate that lead was detected in 12 of the 13 samples (92 percent) and
zinc was detected in 13 of the 13 samples (100 percent) from non-integrated continuous casting
operations on stainless steel. In addition, EPA selected lead and zinc as POCs for continuous
casting operations because both pollutants are regulated under the 1982 regulation (Reference 7-
1) and data collected in support of the 1982 regulation indicate that these pollutants were present
in wastewater discharged from continuous casting operations (no distinction was made between
steel type in the 1982 regulation).
EPA reviewed untreated hot forming wastewater data from two non-integrated
steelmaking facilities performing hot forming of stainless steel (a total of two sampling points
and seven samples) to identify POCs for hot forming operations. EPA identified 15 POCs for
hot forming using the criteria presented in Section 7.2.
7-25
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
7.2.6 Steel Finishing Subcategory
The proposed steel finishing subcategory was divided into two segments: carbon
and alloy steel and stainless steel. Because the characteristics of the steel finishing wastewater
generated are affected by steel type, EPA identified different POCs for the two segments. The
POCs for each segment are discussed below. EPA did not analyze steel finishing wastewater
samples for dioxins and furans, cyanide, thiocyanate, biochemical oxygen demand, and total
sulfide because EPA did not expect these pollutants to be present at treatable concentrations in
steel finishing wastewaters. Table 7-16 presents pollutants that were detected in iron and steel
untreated wastewater, but not identified as POCs for this subcategory.
Steel Finishing - Carbon and Alloy Steel
The proposed steel finishing subcategory, carbon and alloy steel segment included
the following manufacturing processes that generate wastewater: acid pickling, cold forming,
alkaline cleaning, stand-alone continuous annealing, hot coating, and electroplating. Because
wastewaters from these manufacturing processes are commonly cotreated, the list of POCs for
the entire segment includes all pollutants identified as POCs for any of the manufacturing
processes. EPA identified a total of 37 POCs for this segment. The POCs for each specific
manufacturing process are discussed below; Table 7-17 lists the POCs identified for this segment
and for each manufacturing operation.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from four facilities performing acid
pickling on carbon and alloy steel (a total of 5 sampling points and 19 samples) to identify POCs
for acid pickling operations. EPA identified 18 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2;
in addition, EPA selected sulfate as a POC. EPA selected sulfate as a POC because it is present
in sulfuric acid pickling wastewater, which EPA did not sample.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from two facilities performing cold
forming on carbon and alloy steel (a total of 3 sampling points and 14 samples) to identify POCs
for cold forming operations. EPA identified 25 POCs using the criteria presented in Section 7.2;
in addition, EPA selected zinc as a POC. Zinc failed the screening criteria in Section 7.2 because
the mean detected concentration of zinc in source water was greater than in untreated
wastewater. However, EPA selected zinc as a POC because zinc is regulated under the 1982
regulation (Reference 7-1).
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from two facilities performing alkaline
cleaning on carbon and alloy steel (a total of 4 sampling points and 12 samples) to identify POCs
for alkaline cleaning operations. EPA identified 12 POCs for alkaline cleaning using the criteria
presented in Section 7.2.
EPA did not identify POCs for stand-alone continuous annealing for carbon and
alloy steel because EPA did not sample any annealing quenching operations during its sampling
program. However, because quenching is simply a direct-contact water cooling process with no
chemicals involved, EPA determined that wastewater associated with this operation is unlikely to
7-26
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
contain pollutants not identified as POCs in other finishing manufacturing process operations.
POCs identified for the other finishing processes apply to continuous annealing.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from two facilities performing hot
coating on carbon and alloy steel (a total of two sampling points and six samples), including
chromium-bearing rinsing operations, to identify POCs for hot coating operations. EPA
identified 22 POCs for hot coating using the criteria presented in Section 7.2.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from four facilities performing
electroplating on carbon and alloy steel (a total of 6 sampling points and 24 samples) to identify
POCs for electroplating operations. The types of electroplating operations sampled include zinc,
zinc-nickel, tin (chromium-bearing), and chromium. EPA identified 19 POCs for electroplating
using the criteria presented in Section 7.2.
Steel Finishing - Stainless Steel
The proposed steel finishing subcategory, stainless steel segment included the
following manufacturing processes that generate wastewater: acid pickling and descaling, cold
forming, alkaline cleaning, and stand-alone continuous annealing. Because wastewaters from
these manufacturing processes are commonly cotreated, the list of POCs for the entire segment
includes all pollutants identified as POCs for any of the manufacturing processes. EPA identified
a total of 49 POCs for this segment. The POCs for each specific manufacturing process are
discussed below; Table 7-18 lists the POCs identified for this segment and for each
manufacturing operation.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from two facilities performing acid
pickling, electrolytic sodium sulfate (ESS) descaling, and salt bath descaling on stainless steel (a
total of 5 sampling points and 22 samples) to identify POCs for acid pickling and descaling
operations. EPA identified 30 POCs for acid pickling and descaling. EPA identified 29 POCs
using the criteria presented in Section 7.2; in addition, EPA selected cyanide as a POC. EPA
selected cyanide as a POC because it is present in reducing salt bath descaling wastewater
(Reference 7-1), which EPA did not sample.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from one facility performing cold
forming on stainless steel (a total of 2 sampling points and 10 samples) to identify POCs for cold
forming operations. EPA identified 40 POCs for cold forming using the criteria presented in
Section 7.2.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from one facility performing alkaline
cleaning on stainless steel (a total of one sampling point and five samples) to identify POCs for
alkaline cleaning operations. EPA identified 10 POCs for alkaline cleaning using the criteria
presented in Section 7.2.
EPA did not identify POCs for stand-alone continuous annealing for stainless
steel because EPA did not sample any annealing quenching operations during its sampling
7-27
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
program. However, because quenching is simply a direct-contact water cooling process with no
chemicals involved, EPA determined that wastewater associated with this operation is unlikely to
contain pollutants not identified as POCs in other finishing manufacturing process operations.
POCs identified for the other finishing processes apply to continuous annealing.
7.2.7 Other Operations Subcategory
The other operations subcategory is divided into three segments: direct-reduced
ironmaking (DRI), forging, and briquetting. The POCs for each segment are discussed below.
EPA reviewed untreated wastewater data from one facility performing DRI
operations (a total of one sample) to identify POCs for DRI operations. EPA did not analyze
DRI wastewater samples for dioxins and furans, cyanide, thiocyanate, biochemical oxygen
demand, and total sulfide because EPA did not expect these pollutants to be present at treatable
concentrations in DRI wastewaters. Table 7-19 presents pollutants that were detected in iron and
steel untreated wastewater, but not identified as POCs for this subcategory. EPA identified 10
POCs for the DRI segment using the criteria presented in Section 7.2. Table 7-20 lists the POCs
identified for the DRI segment.
Based on an analysis of industry-supplied data, EPA determined that the principal
pollutants from forging are TSS and oil and grease. EPA did not identify any specific priority
and nonconventional POCs for forging because EPA lacked data for these pollutants.
Briquetting operations do not discharge process wastewater; therefore, EPA did
not identify POCs for the briquetting segment.
7.3 Untreated Process Wastewater Characterization Data for Pollutants of
Concern
Tables 7-21 through 7-27 present untreated process wastewater characterization
data for POCs for each subcategory in the iron and steel industry, to the extent that it does not
disclose confidential business information. Data presented in these tables include for each
pollutant the number of times analyzed, number of times detected, percentage of samples
detected greater than 10 times minimum level, mean concentration of detects, median
concentration of detects, detection limit range, and the minimum level. Data from all sampling
points representing a particular subcategory were combined to calculate the mean and median
detected concentrations. The mean and the median concentrations were calculated for each
pollutant using only data from samples where the pollutant was detected; data from samples
where the pollutant was not detected were not used to calculate the mean and median
concentrations.
As discussed in Section 7.2, POCs were identified based on an assessment
performed at the subcategory, segment, or operation level, while the untreated process
wastewater characterization data are presented in Tables 7-22 through 7-28 at the subcategory
level. EPA chose to present untreated process wastewater characterization data at the
7-28
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
subcategory level to present as much information as possible without compromising confidential
business information. As a result, certain information presented in these tables may not appear to
meet the criteria for selecting POCs presented in Section 7.2. For example, Table 7-27 for the
steel finishing subcategory shows that selenium is detected at concentrations greater than 10
times the minimum level in 3 percent of the samples (compared to 10 percent of samples as
specified by the POC selection criteria). In this case, selenium met the POC criteria for a subset
of the steel finishing operations shown in Tables 7-17 and 7-18.
7.4 References
7-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for Effluent
Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source
Category. EPA 440/1-82/024, Washington, DC, May 1982.
7-29
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-1
1997 National Estimate of Annual Discharge from Manufacturing Operations by Discharge Type
¦
OJ
o
Manufacturing Operation
Total
Number of
Sites (a)
Total Annual
Discharge Rate
(1,000 gallons per
year)
Number (%)
of Direct
Dischargers
Annual Discharge Rate
for Direct Dischargers
(1,000 gallons per
year)
Number (%) of
Indirect
Dischargers
Annual Discharge Rate for
Indirect Dischargers (1,000
gallons per year)
Number (%) of
Zero
Dischargers (b)
Cokemaking
24
3,031,000
14(58%)
2,450,000
8 (33%)
581,000
2 (8%)
Sintering
9
2,110,000
4 (44%)
2,110,000
0 (0%) (c)
0(c)
5 (56%)
Blast fumace ironmaking
20
7,914,000
13 (62%)
7,630,000
1 (5%)
284,000
7 (33%)
BOF steelmaking
20
6,371,110
17(81%)
6,370,000
1 (5%)
1,110
3(14%)
EAF steelmaking
96
0(c)
3 (3%)
0(c)
2 (2%)
0(c)
92 (96%)
Vacuum degassing
44
1,270,000
26 (59%)
1,250,000
4 (9%)
20,000
14(32%)
Ladle metallurgy
103
0(c)
0 (0%) (c)
0(c)
0 (0%) (c)
0(c)
103(100%)
Continuous Casting
113
10,573,000
53 (47%)
10,100,000
17(15%)
473,000
43 (38%)
Hot forming
153
140,772,000
87 (57%)
140,000,000
29(19%)
772,000
39 (25%)
Acid pickling and descaling
69
13,755,000
50 (72%)
13,400,000
14(20%)
355,000
7(10%)
Cold forming
103
9,479,600
39 (38%)
9,420,000
16(16%)
59,600
52 (50%)
Surface cleaning and coating (d)
98
14,519,000
53 (54%)
13,800,000
33 (34%)
719,000
14(14%)
Briquetting or other
agglomeration process
4
0(c)
0 (0%) (c)
0(c)
0 (0%) (c)
0(c)
4(100%)
Direct-reduced ironmaking
2
119,000
1 (50%)
78,600
1 (50%)
40,500
0 (0%)
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
(a) The sum of direct, indirect, and zero dischargers may not equal the total number of operations. Sites may discharge wastewater both directly and indirectly from their manufacturing operations.
(b) Zero dischargers include operations that do not discharge process wastewater (either by 100 percent recycle/reuse or by alternative discharge practices, such as contract hauling or evaporation) and
operations that are completely dry.
(c) Cells with a zero (0) indicate that none of the survey respondents have the characteristic; however, it is possible for nonsurveyed facilities to have the characteristic.
(d) Surface cleaning and coating operations include: alkaline cleaning, stand-alone continuous annealing, hot coating, and electroplating.
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-2
Pollutants Not Detected in Untreated Wastewater Samples (a)
Pollutant Name
Nonconventional Metals
Cadmium, Dissolved
Cobalt, Dissolved
Silver, Dissolved
Thallium, Dissolved
Tin, Dissolved
Vanadium, Dissolved
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acrolein
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl) Ether
Bromodichloromethane
Bromomethane
4-Bromophenyl Phenyl Ether
Butyl Benzyl Phthalate
Chlorobenzene
Chloroethane
2-Chloroethylvinyl Ether
Chloromethane
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Chlorophenol
4-Chlorophenylphenyl Ether
Di-n-butyl Phthalate
1,2-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,4-Dichlorobenzene
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine
1,1-Dichloroethane
1,1 -Dichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene
2,4-Dichlorophenol
1,2-Dichloropropane
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotoluene
2,6-Dinitrotoluene
Di-n-octyl Phthalate
Di-n-propylnitrosamine
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorobutadiene
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Hexachloroethane
Isophorone
2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
Pentachlorophenol
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
T etrachloroethene
T etrachloromethane
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
7-31
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-2 (Continued)
Pollutant Name
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Vinyl Chloride
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
o-Anisidine
Aramite
Benzanthrone
1 -Bromo-2-chlorobenzene
1 -Bromo-3-chlorobenzene
Chloroacetonitrile
p-Chloroaniline
2-Chloro-1,3 -butadiene
4-Chloro-2-nitroaniline
1 -Chloro-3-nitrobenzene
3-Chloropropene
5-Chloro-o-toluidine
Crotonaldehyde
Crotoxyphos
p-Cymene
2,4-Diaminotoluene
1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane
1,2-Dibromoethane
3,5-Dibromo-4-hydroxy-benzonitrile
Dibromomethane
2,3-Dichloroaniline
trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene
2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline
2,3-Dichloronitrobenzene
2,6-Dichlorophenol
1,3-Dichloropropane
1,3-Dichloro-2-propanol
cis-1,3-Dichloropropene
1,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane
Diethyl Ether
3,3 '-Dimethoxybenzidine
p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene
7,12-Dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
1,4-Dinitrobenzene
Diphenyl Ether
Diphenyldisulfide
Ethyl Cyanide
Ethyl Methacrylate
Ethyl Methanesulfonate
Ethylenethiourea
Hexachloropropene
2-Hexanone
Iodomethane
Isobutyl Alcohol
2-Isopropylnaphthalene
Isosafrole
Longifolene
Malachite Green
7-32
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-2 (Continued)
Pollutant Name
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
Mestranol
Methapyrilene
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Methyl Methacrylate
Methyl Methanesulfonate
2-Methylbenzothioazole
3-Methylcholanthrene
4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)
2-Methyl-2-propenenitrile
2-(Methylthio)benzothiazole
1,5-Naphthalenediamine
1,4-Naphthoquinone
2-Nitroaniline
3-Nitroaniline
4-Nitroaniline
4-Nitrobiphenyl
N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine
N-N itrosodiethylamine
N-Nitrosomethylethylamine
N-Nitrosomethylphenylamine
N-Nitrosomorpholine
N-Nitrosopiperidine
5-Nitro-o-toluidine
Pentachlorobenzene
Pentachloroethane
Pentamethylbenzene
Phenacetin
Phenothiazine
1 -Phenylnaphthalene
Pronamide
2-Propen-l-ol
Safrole
Squalene
1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene
1,1,1,2-T etrachloroethane
2,3,4,6-T etrachlorophenol
Thioacetamide
Thioxanthe-9-one
1,2,3 -T richlorobenzene
T richlorofluoromethane
2,3,6-T richlorophenol
2,4,5-T richlorophenol
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
1,2,3-T rimethoxybenzene
2,4,5-T rimethylaniline
Triphenylene
Tripropyleneglycol Methyl Ether
Vinyl Acetate
(a) Pollutant not detected in any untreated wastewater samples during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling episodes.
7-33
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-3
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (f)
Chloride
Chloride is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Sulfate
(e)
Except where noted, sulfate is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
TDS is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Sulfide
Total sulfide is not selected as a POC
for any subcategory
Priority Metals
Antimony
~
Beryllium
~
~
Cadmium
~
Chromium
~
~
Copper
~
Lead
~
~
Nickel
~
~
Silver
~
Thallium
~
Zinc
~
~
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
~
~
Barium
~
~
Calcium
~
~
Calcium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
7-34
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-3 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Cobalt
/
/
Iron
/
Magnesium
/
Manganese
/
Molybdenum
/
Sodium
Sodium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Tin
Titanium
/
Vanadium
/
Yttrium
/
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acrylonitrile
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
/
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
/
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
/
Chloroform
/
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
/
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
/
Dibromochloromethane
/
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
/
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
/
Methylene Chloride
/
Nitrobenzene
/
2-Nitrophenol
/
4-Nitrophenol
/
N-N itrosodiphenylamine
/
T ribromomethane
/
7-35
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-3 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
/
Trichloroethene
/
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetophenone
/
alpha-Terpineol
/
4-Aminobiphenyl
/
Benzenethiol
/
Benzoic Acid
/
Benzyl Alcohol
/
n-Decane
/
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
/
N,N-Dimethylformamide
/
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
/
Dimethyl Sulfone
/
1,4-Dioxane
/
Diphenylamine
/
n-Docosane
/
n-Dodecane
/
n-Hexacosane
/
Hexanoic Acid
/
1-Methylfluorene
/
n-Octacosane
/
Resorcinol
/
n-Tetracosane
/
n-Tetradecane
/
n-Triacontane
/
1,3,5-Trithiane
/
7-36
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-3 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Dioxin and Furans
2,3,7,8-
T etrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
Nonconventional Dioxins and Furans
1,2,3,7,8-
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
1,2,3,4,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
1,2,3,6,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
1,2,3,7,8,9-
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
Heptachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
Octachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
2,3,7,8-
T etrachlorodibenzofuran
/
1,2,3,7,8-
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
~
2,3,4,7,8-
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
/
1,2,3,4,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
/
1,2,3,6,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzofiiran
/
1,2,3,7,8,9-
Hexachlorodibenzofiiran
/
2,3,4,6,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
/
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
/
7-37
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-3 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Dioxins and Furans (continued)
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
/
Octachlorodibenzofuran
/
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from this segment.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this segment
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals, nonconventional organic pollutants, and
nonconventional dioxins and fiirans.
7-38
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-4
Pollutants of Concern
Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Conventional pollutants
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day (BOD5)
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day (BODs) - carbonaceous
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Nonconventional pollutants, other (a)
Amenable cyanide
Ammonia as nitrogen
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Fluoride
Nitrate/nitrite
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM)
Thiocyanate
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Total phenols
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
Priority metals
Arsenic
Mercury
Selenium
Nonconventional metals
Boron
Priority organic pollutants
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzene
Benzidine
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(ghi)perylene
Chrysene
7-39
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-4 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Priority organic pollutants (cont.)
1,2-Dichloroethane
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Ethylbenzene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Indeno( l,2,3-cd)pyrene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Toluene
Nonconventional organic pollutants
Aniline
2,3-Benzofluorene
beta-Naphthylamine
Biphenyl
2-Butanone
Carbazole
Carbon disulfide
Dibenzofuran
Dibenzothiophene
4,5-Methylene phenanthrene
2-Methylnaphthalene
1 -Methylphenanthrene
m- + p-Xylene
m-Xylene
1-Naphthylamine
n-Eicosane
n-Hexadecane
n-Octadecane
o-Cresol
o- + p-Xylene
o-Toluidine
o-Xylene
7-40
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-4 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Nonconventional organic pollutants (cont.)
p-Cresol
Perylene
2-Phenylnaphthalene
2-Picoline
2-Propanone
Pyridine
Styrene
Thianaphthene
Other priority pollutants
Total cyanide
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-41
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-5
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Ironmaking Subcategory (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH (SU)
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (J)
Chloride
Chloride is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Sulfate
(e)
Except where noted, sulfate is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
TDS is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Sulfide
/
Total sulfide is not selected as a POC
for any subcategory
Priority Metals
Antimony
/
Beryllium
/
Nonconventional Metals
Barium
/
Calcium
Calcium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Cobalt
/
Sodium
Sodium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Tin
/
Vanadium
/
Yttrium
/
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
/
Acenaphthylene
/
Acrylonitrile
/
Anthracene
BF
S
Benzene
/
7-42
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-5 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
Benzidine
~
Benzo(ghi)perylene
BF
S
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
/
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
/
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
/
Chloroform
S
BF
BF
4-Chloro-3-methyIphenol
/
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
BF
S
Dibromochloromethane
/
1,2-Dichloroethane
/
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
/
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
/
Ethylbenzene
~
Fluorene
BF
S
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
BF
s
Methylene Chloride
/
Naphthalene
S
BF
Nitrobenzene
/
2-Nitrophenol
BF
S
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
~
Toluene
/
T ribromomethane
~
1,1,1 -T richloroethane
~
Trichloroethene
/
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetone
/
Acetophenone
~
alpha-Terpineol
~
4-Aminobiphenyl
BF
S
7-43
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-5 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
Aniline
/
Benzenethiol
/
2,3-Benzofluorene
BF
S
Benzoic Acid
BF
S
Benzyl Alcohol
BF
s
Biphenyl
/
Carbazole
BF
s
Carbon Disulfide
/
n-Decane
/
Dibenzofuran
BF
s
Dibenzothiophene
BF
s
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
/
N,N-Dimethylformamide
BF
s
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
BF
s
Dimethyl Sulfone
BF
s
1,4-Dioxane
/
Diphenylamine
/
n-Dodecane
BF
s
n-Hexacosane
BF
s
Hexanoic Acid
/
/
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
/
4,5-Methylene
Phenanthrene
/
1-Methylfluorene
/
2-Methylnaphthalene
BF
s
1 -Methylphenanthrene
BF
s
alpha-Naphthylamine
/
beta-Naphthylamine
/
n-Octacosane
BF
s
Perylene
/
7-44
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-5 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
2-Phenylnaphthalene
/
2-Picoline
~
Resorcinol
~
Styrene
~
n-Tetradecane
BF
S
Thianaphthene
~
o-Toluidine
S
BF
n-Triacontane
BF
S
1,3,5-Trithiane
~
m-Xylene
~
m- + p-Xylene
~
o-Xylene
/
o- + p-Xylene
/
Priority Dioxins and Furans
2,3,7,8-
T etrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
/
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from all segments/operations within
the subcategory, while letter codes indicate the specific segment/operation which correspond to the criterium. The
following letter codes apply: BF- blast furnace ironmaking; S - sintering.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this subcategory.
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-45
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-6
Pollutants of Concern
Ironmaking Subcategory - Sintering Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Nonconventional pollutants, other (a)
Amenable cyanide
Ammonia as nitrogen
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Fluoride
Nitrate/nitrite
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM)
Thiocyanate
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Total phenols
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
Priority metals
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
Boron
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Titanium
7-46
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-6 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Priority organic pollutants
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Fluoranthene
4-Nitrophenol
Phenanthrene
Phenol
Pyrene
Nonconventional organic pollutants
n-Docosane
n-Eicosane
n-Hexadecane
n-Octadecane
n-Tetracosane
o-Cresol
p-Cresol
Pyridine
Nonconventional dioxins and furans
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Octachlorodibenzofuran
Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
7-47
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-6 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Nonconventional dioxins and furans (cont.)
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
Other priority pollutants
Total cyanide
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals, nonconventional organic pollutants, and
nonconventional dioxins and furans.
7-48
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-7
Pollutants of Concern
Ironmaking Subcategory - Blast Furnace Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Nonconventional pollutants, other (a)
Amenable cyanide
Ammonia as nitrogen
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Fluoride
Nitrate/nitrite
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM)
Thiocyanate
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
Priority metals
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
Boron
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Titanium
Nonconventional dioxins and furans
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Other priority pollutants
Total cyanide
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional dioxins and furans.
7-49
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH (SU)
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (f)
Chloride
Except where noted, chloride is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Sulfate
(e)
Except where noted, sulfate is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
Except where noted, TDS is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
(e)
VD, CC
Total Recoverable
Phenolics
VD, CC
BOF
Priority Metals
Arsenic
~
Selenium
VD
BOF
CC
Thallium
~
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Antimony, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Arsenic, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Barium
/
7-50
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Barium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Beryllium, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Boron
/
Boron, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Calcium
VD
Except where noted, calcium is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Calcium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Chromium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Copper, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Iron, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Lead, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Magnesium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Manganese, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Mercury, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
7-51
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Molybdenum, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Nickel, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Selenium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Sodium
Except where noted, sodium is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Sodium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Titanium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Yttrium
VD
BOF, CC
Yttrium, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Zinc, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
/
Acenaphthylene
/
Acrylonitrile
/
Anthracene
/
Benzene
/
Benzidine
/
Benzo(a)anthracene
/
B enzo(b) fluoranthene
/
7-52
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
~
Benzo(ghi)perylene
~
Benzo(a)pyrene
~
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
~
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
~
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
~
Chloroform
~
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
~
Chrysene
~
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
/
Dibromochloromethane
/
1,2-Dichloroethane
/
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
/
2,4-Dimethylphenol
VD, CC
BOF
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
/
Ethylbenzene
/
Fluoranthene
/
Fluorene
/
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
/
Methylene Chloride
/
Naphthalene
VD, CC
BOF
Nitrobenzene
/
2-Nitrophenol
VD, CC
BOF
4-Nitrophenol
/
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
/
Phenanthrene
/
Pyrene
/
7-53
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
Toluene
/
Tribromomethane
/
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
/
Trichloroethene
YD, CC
BOF
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetone
VD, CC
BOF
Acetophenone
/
alpha-Terpineol
/
4-Aminobiphenyl
/
Aniline
/
Benzenethiol
/
2,3-Benzofluorene
/
Benzoic Acid
/
Benzyl Alcohol
/
Biphenyl
/
Carbazole
/
Carbon Disulfide
/
o-Cresol
VD, CC
BOF
p-Cresol
VD, CC
BOF
n-Decane
/
Dibenzofuran
/
Dibenzothiophene
/
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
/
N,N-Dimethylformamide
/
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
/
Dimethyl Sulfone
/
1,4-Dioxane
/
Diphenylamine
s
7-54
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
n-Docosane
/
n-Dodecane
/
n-Eicosane
/
n-Hexacosane
/
n-Hexadecane
/
Hexanoic Acid
/
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
/
4,5-Methylene
Phenanthrene
/
1 -Methylfluorene
/
2-Methylnaphthalene
/
1 -Methylphenanthrene
/
alpha-Naphthylamine
/
beta-Naphthylamine
/
n-Octacosane
/
n-Octadecane
/
Perylene
/
2 -Phenylnaphthalene
/
2-Picoline
/
Pyridine
VD, CC
BOF
Resorcinol
/
Styrene
VD, CC
BOF
n-Tetracosane
/
n-Tetradecane
/
Thianaphthene
/
o-Toluidine
/
n-Triacontane
/
1,3,5-Trithiane
/
m-Xylene
/
7-55
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
m- + p-Xylene
/
o-Xylene
/
o- + p-Xylene
/
Priority Dioxins and Furans
2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
Nonconventional Dioxins and Furans
1,2,3,7,8-
Pentachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
1,2,3,4,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
1,2,3,6,7,8-
Hexach lorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
1,2,3,7,8,9-
Hexachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
Heptachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
Octachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin
BOF
BOF
2,3,7,8-
T etrachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
1,2,3,7,8-
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
2,3,4,7,8-
Pentachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
1,2,3,4,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
1,2,3,6,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
7-56
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-8 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Dioxins and Furans (continued)
1,2,3,7,8,9-
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
2,3,4,6,7,8-
Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-
Heptachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
Octachlorodibenzofuran
BOF
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from all segments/operations within
the subcategory, while letter codes indicate the specific segment/operation which correspond to the criterium. The
following letter codes apply: BOF - basic oxygen furnace steelmaking; VD - vacuum degassing; CC - continuous
casting.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this subcategory.
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals, nonconventional organic pollutants, and
nonconventional dioxins and furans.
7-57
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-9
Pollutants of Concern
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
BOF
Steelmaking
Vacuum
Degassing
Continuous
Casting
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as
hexane extractable material
(HEM)
~
~
~
Total suspended solids (TSS)
~
~
~
Nonconventional
pollutants, other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
~
~
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
~
~
~
Fluoride
~
~
~
Nitrate/nitrite
~
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material
(SGT-HEM)
~
~
~
Total organic carbon (TOC)
~
~
Priority metals
Antimony
~
~
Beryllium
~
Cadmium
~
Chromium
~
Copper
~
~
Lead
~
~
~
Mercury
~
Nickel
~
Silver
~
Zinc
~
~
~
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
~
~
~
Cobalt
~
Iron
~
~
~
Magnesium
~
Manganese
~
~
~
Molybdenum
~
~
~
Tin
~
~
Titanium
~
~
Vanadium
~
Priority organic
pollutants
Phenol
~
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
7-58
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-10
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH (SU)
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (f)
Chloride
/
Chloride is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Nitrate/Nitrite (N02 +
N03-N)
/
/
Sulfate
(e)
Except where noted, sulfate is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
/
TDS is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
(e)
/
Total Recoverable
Phenolics
/
Priority Metals
Arsenic
/
Beryllium
/
Cadmium
/
Mercury
/
Selenium
/
Silver
/
/
Thallium
/
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
/
/
Barium
/
/
Boron
/
/
Calcium
/
Calcium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Cobalt
/
7-59
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-10 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Magnesium
/
/
Sodium
/
Sodium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Tin
/
Vanadium
/
Yttrium
/
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
/
Acenaphthylene
/
Acrylonitrile
/
Anthracene
/
Benzene
/
Benzidine
/
Benzo(a)anthracene
/
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
/
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
/
Benzo(ghi)perylene
/
Benzo(a)pyrene
/
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
/
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
/
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
/
Chloroform
/
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
/
Chrysene
/
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
/
Dibromochloromethane
/
1,2-Dichloroethane
/
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
/
2,4-Dimethylphenol
/
7-60
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-10 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
~
Ethylbenzene
~
Fluoranthene
~
Fluorene
~
Indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene
~
Methylene Chloride
~
Naphthalene
~
Nitrobenzene
~
2-Nitrophenol
~
4-Nitrophenol
~
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
~
Phenanthrene
/
Phenol
~
Pyrene
/
Toluene
/
Tribromomethane
~
1,1,1 -T richloroethane
/
Trichloroethene
~
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetone
~
Acetophenone
~
alpha-Terpineol
~
4-Aminobiphenyl
~
Aniline
/
Benzenethiol
/
2,3-Benzofluorene
/
Benzoic Acid
~
Benzyl Alcohol
/
Biphenyl
/
Carbazole
/
Carbon Disulfide
~
7-61
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-10 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
o-Cresol
/
p-Cresol
/
n-Decane
/
Dibenzofuran
/
Dibenzothiophene
/
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
/
N,N-Dimethylformamide
/
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
/
Dimethyl Sulfone
~
1,4-Dioxane
/
Diphenylamine
/
n-Docosane
/
n-Dodecane
/
n-Eicosane
/
n-Hexacosane
/
n-Hexadecane
V
Hexanoic Acid
/
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
/
4,5-Methylene
Phenanthrene
/
1-Methylfluorene
/
2-Methylnaphthalene
/
1 -Methylphenanthrene
/
alpha-Naphthylamine
/
beta-Naphthylamine
/
n-Octacosane
/
n-Octadecane
/
Perylene
/
2-Phenylnaphthalene
/
2-Picoline
/
7-62
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-10 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
Pyridine
/
Resorcinol
/
Styrene
/
n-Tetracosane
/
n-Tetradecane
/
Thianaphthene
/
o-Toluidine
/
n-Triacontane
/
1,3,5-Trithiane
/
m-Xylene
/
m- + p-Xylene
/
o-Xylene
/
o- + p-Xylene
/
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from integrated and stand-alone hot
forming operations on carbon and alloy steel. EPA did not sample integrated and stand-alone hot forming operations
for stainless steelmaking operations; therefore, data on this table only apply to the integrated and stand-alone hot
forming subcategory, carbon and alloy steel segment.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this subcategory.
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-63
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-11
Pollutants of Concern
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Nonconventional pollutants, other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Fluoride
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM)
Priority metals
Lead
Zinc
Nonconventional metals
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenum
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
7-64
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-12
Pollutants of Concern
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Nonconventional pollutants, other (a)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Fluoride
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM)
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Priority metals
Antimony
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Zinc
Nonconventional metals
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Titanium
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
7-65
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Non-integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH (SU)
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (J)
Chloride
Except where noted, chloride is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Sulfate
(e)
Except where noted, sulfate is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
Except where noted, TDS is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
(e)
Total Recoverable
Phenolics
/
Priority Metals
Arsenic
/
Beryllium
/
Cadmium
CC-S, HF-
S, HF-C
CC-C
Mercury
/
Selenium
HF-C
CC-S, HF-S,
CC-C
Silver
CC-S, HF-
S, HF-C
CC-C
Thallium
CC-S, CC-
C, HF-C
HF-S
7-66
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum, Dissolved
CC-C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Antimony, Dissolved
CC-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Arsenic, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Barium
HF-S, CC-S,
CC-C, HF-C
CC-S
Barium, Dissolved
(e)
CC-S, CC-C,
HF-C
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Beryllium, Dissolved
CC-S, CC-
C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Boron, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Calcium
CC-S
CC-S
Except where noted, calcium is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Calcium, Dissolved
(e)
CC-S
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Chromium, Dissolved
HF-C
(e)
HF-S
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Cobalt
CC-C
CC-S, HF-S,
HF-C
Copper, Dissolved
HF-S, CC-
C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Iron, Dissolved
(e)
CC-C, HF-C
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
7-67
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Lead, Dissolved
CC-S, HF-
S, HF-C
(e)
CC-C
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Magnesium
~
Magnesium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Manganese, Dissolved
(e)
CC-C, HF-C
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Mercury, Dissolved
CC-S, HF-
S, CC-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Molybdenum, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Nickel, Dissolved
CC-C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Selenium, Dissolved
CC-C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Sodium
Except where noted, sodium is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Sodium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Tin
HF-S, HF-C
CC-S, CC-C
Titanium, Dissolved
HF-S, CC-
C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Vanadium
HF-S
CC-S, CC-C,
HF-C
Yttrium
CC-S, CC-
C, HF-C
HF-S
HF-S
7-68
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Yttrium, Dissolved
HF-S, CC-
C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Zinc, Dissolved
CC-S, CC-
C, HF-C
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted
for in the total metal analysis
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
/
Acenaphthylene
/
Acrylonitrile
/
Anthracene
/
Benzene
/
Benzidine
/
Benzo(a)anthracene
/
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
/
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
/
Benzo(ghi)perylene
/
Benzo(a)pyrene
/
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
/
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
/
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
/
Chloroform
/
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
/
Chrysene
/
D ibenzo(a,h)anthracene
~
D ibromochloromethane
HF-S, CC-
C, HF-C
CC-S
1,2-Dichloroethane
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
~
2,4-Dimethylphenol
~
7-69
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
~
Ethylbenzene
~
Fluoranthene
~
Fluorene
/
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
/
Methylene Chloride
~
Naphthalene
~
Nitrobenzene
/
2-Nitrophenol
~
4-Nitrophenol
/
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
~
Phenanthrene
~
Phenol
~
Pyrene
~
Toluene
~
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
~
Trichloroethene
/
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetone
CC-C, HF-C
CC-S, HF-S
Acetophenone
~
alpha-Terpineol
~
4-Aminobiphenyl
~
Aniline
/
Benzenethiol
~
2,3-Benzofluorene
~
Benzoic Acid
HF-C
CC-S, HF-S,
CC-C
Benzyl Alcohol
HF-S
CC-S, CC-C,
HF-C
Biphenyl
~
Carbazole
/
7-70
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
Carbon Disulfide
/
o-Cresol
/
p-Cresol
/
n-Decane
/
Dibenzofuran
/
Dibenzothiophene
/
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
/
N,N-Dimethylformamide
/
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
/
Dimethyl Sulfone
/
1,4-Dioxane
/
Diphenylamine
/
n-Docosane
/
n-Dodecane
/
n-Eicosane
/
n-Hexacosane
/
n-Hexadecane
/
Hexanoic Acid
/
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
/
4,5-Methylene
Phenanthrene
/
1-Methylfluorene
/
2-Methylnaphthalene
/
1 -Methylphenanthrene
/
alpha-Naphthylamine
/
beta-Naphthylamine
/
n-Octacosane
/
n-Octadecane
/
Perylene
/
7-71
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-13 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at
Low
Concentration
(c)
Source
Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
2-Phenylnaphthalene
~
2-Picoline
~
Pyridine
~
Resorcinol
~
Styrene
~
n-Tetracosane
~
n-Tetradecane
~
Thianaphthene
~
o-Toluidine
~
n-Triacontane
~
1,3,5-Trithiane
~
m-Xylene
~
m- + p-Xylene
~
o-Xylene
~
o- + p-Xylene
~
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from all segments/operations within
the subcategory, while letter codes indicate the specific segment/operation which correspond to the criterium. The
following letter codes apply: CC-S - continuous casting, stainless steel; HF-S - hot forming, stainless steel; CC-C -
continuous casting, carbon and alloy steel; HF-C - hot forming, carbon and alloy steel.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this subcategory.
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-72
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-14
Pollutants of Concern
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Continuous Casting
Hot Forming
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
~
~
Total suspended solids (TSS)
~
~
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
~
~
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
~
~
Fluoride
~
~
Nitrate/nitrite
~
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-
HEM)
~
~
Total organic carbon (TOC)
~
~
Priority metals
Copper
~
Lead
~
~
Zinc
~
~
Nonconventional metals
Boron
~
Iron
~
~
Manganese
~
~
Molybdenum
~
~
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
Note: EPA did not identify POCs for vacuum degassing because EPA did not sample non-integrated vacuum
degassing operations during its sampling program. POCs identified for continuous casting and hot forming apply to
vacuum degassing.
7-73
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-15
Pollutants of Concern
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Continuous Casting
Hot Forming
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
~
~
Total suspended solids (TSS)
~
~
Nonconventional
pollutants, other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
~
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
~
~
Fluoride
~
~
Nitrate/nitrite
~
Total petroleum hydrocarbons
measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-
HEM)
~
~
Total organic carbon (TOC)
~
~
Priority metals
Antimony
~
Chromium
~
~
Copper
~
~
Lead
~
Nickel
~
~
Zinc
~
~
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
~
Boron
~
Hexavalent chromium
~
Iron
~
~
Manganese
~
~
Molybdenum
~
~
Titanium
~
~
Priority organic pollutants
Tribromomethane
~
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
Note: EPA did not identify POCs for vacuum degassing because EPA did not sample non-integrated vacuum
degassing operations during its sampling program. POCs identified for continuous casting and hot forming apply to
vacuum degassing.
7-74
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-16
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Steel Finishing Subcategory (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH (SU)
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (f)
Chloride
~
Chloride is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
~
TDS is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
~
(e)
Priority Metals
Beryllium
/
~
Mercury
~
~
Silver
~
~
/
Thallium
~
/
Nonconventional Metals
Calcium
/
/
Calcium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Sodium
/
~
Sodium is not selected as a POC for
any subcategory
Yttrium
~
~
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
~
Acenaphthylene
~
Acrylonitrile
/
Anthracene
~
Benzene
~
/
Benzidine
~
Benzo(a)anthracene
~
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
~
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
~
7-75
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-16 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
Benzo(ghi)perylene
/
Benzo(a)pyrene
/
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
/
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
/
Chloroform
/
/
/
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
/
Chrysene
/
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
/
Dibromochloromethane
/
1,2-Dichloroethane
/
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
/
2,4-Dimethylphenol
/
/
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
/
/
Fluoranthene
/
Fluorene
/
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
/
Methylene Chloride
/
/
Nitrobenzene
/
2-Nitrophenol
/
4-Nitrophenol
/
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
/
/
Phenanthrene
/
/
Pyrene
/
T ribromomethane
/
Trichloroethene
/
/
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetophenone
/
/
4-Aminobiphenyl
/
Aniline
/
Benzenethiol
/
7-76
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-16 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
2,3-Benzofluorene
~
Benzyl Alcohol
~
/
Biphenyl
~
/
Carbon Disulfide
~
/
Carbazole
/
o-Cresol
~
p-Cresol
~
n-Decane
~
/
Dibenzofuran
~
Dibenzothiophene
~
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
~
Dimethyl Sulfone
~
1,4-Dioxane
~
Diphenylamine
/
/
n-Hexacosane
~
/
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
~
/
4,5-Methylene
Phenanthrene
~
1 -Methylfluorene
y
1 -Methylphenanthrene
s
alpha-N aphthylamine
s
beta-Naphthylamine
s
n-Octacosane
s
Perylene
s
2-Phenylnaphthalene
s
2-Picoline
s
Pyridine
s
Resorcinol
s
Styrene
/
Thianaphthene
/
o-Toluidine
~
7-77
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-16 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
n-Triacontane
/
~
1,3,5-Trithiane
/
m- + p-Xylene
/
o-Xylene
/
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from at least one of the
segments/operations within the subcategory. EPA did not incorporate segment/operational-level detail in this table
because EPA sampled 14 different operations for this subcategory. See Section 5.4, DCNIS05030 of the iron and
steel administrative record for detailed information presented by subcategory/segment/operation.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this subcategory.
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-78
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-17
Pollutants of Concern
Steel Finishing Subcategory - Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Acid
Pickling
Cold
Forming
Alkaline
Cleaning
Hot
Coating
Electro-
plating
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as
hexane extractable material
(HEM)
~
~
~
~
~
Total suspended solids
(TSS)
~
~
~
~
~
Nonconventional
Ammonia as nitrogen
~
~
~
~
~
pollutants, other (a)
Chemical oxygen demand
(COD)
~
~
~
~
~
Fluoride
~
~
~
~
~
Nitrate/ni trite
~
~
~
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons measured as
silica gel treated-hexane
extractable material (SGT-
HEM)
~
~
~
~
~
Total organic carbon (TOC)
~
~
~
~
~
Total phenols
~
Sulfate
~
Priority metals
Antimony
~
Arsenic
~
~
~
Chromium
~
~
~
~
Copper
~
~
~
~
~
Lead
~
~
Nickel
~
~
~
~
Selenium
~
Zinc
~
~
~
~
~
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
~
~
Boron
~
Hexavalent chromium
~
~
Iron
~
~
~
~
~
7-79
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-17 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Acid
Pickling
Cold
Forming
Alkaline
Cleaning
Hot
Coating
Electro-
plating
Nonconventional metals
(cont.)
Manganese
~
~
~
~
~
Molybdenum
~
~
Tin
~
Titanium
~
~
~
~
Priority organic
pollutants
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
~
1,1,1 -T richloroethane
~
Nonconventional organic
pollutants
alpha-Teipineol
~
Benzoic acid
~
n-Dodecane
~
n-Eicosane
~
n-Hexadecane
~
n,n-Dimethylformamide
~
n-Octadecane
~
n-Tetradecane
~
2-Propanone
~
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Note: EPA did not identify POCs for stand-alone continuous annealing because EPA did not sample annealing
quenching operations during its sampling program. POCs identified for the other finishing processes apply to
continuous annealing.
7-80
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-18
Pollutants of Concern
Steel Finishing Subcategory - Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Acid Pickling
and Descaling
Cold
Forming
Alkaline
Cleaning
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as
hexane extractable material
(HEM)
~
~
~
Total suspended solids (TSS)
~
~
~
Nonconventional
Ammonia as nitrogen
~
~
~
pollutants, other (a)
Chemical oxygen demand
(COD)
~
~
~
Fluoride
~
~
~
Nitrate/ni trite
~
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons measured as
silica gel treated-hexane
extractable material (SGT-
HEM)
~
~
~
Total cyanide
~
Total organic carbon (TOC)
~
~
Total phenols
~
Priority metals
Antimony
~
~
Arsenic
~
~
Cadmium
~
~
Chromium
~
~
Copper
~
~
Lead
~
Nickel
~
~
Selenium
~
Zinc
~
~
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
~
~
Barium
~
Boron
~
Cobalt
~
Hexavalent chromium
~
~
Iron
~
~
~
7-81
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-18 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Acid Pickling
and Descaling
Cold
Forming
Alkaline
Cleaning
Nonconventional metals
(cont.)
Magnesium
~
~
Manganese
~
~
~
Molybdenum
~
~
Tin
~
~
Titanium
~
~
~
Vanadium
~
Priority organic
pollutants
Ethylbenzene
~
Naphthalene
~
Phenol
~
Toluene
~
Nonconventional organic
pollutants
Benzoic acid
~
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
~
Hexanoic acid
~
2-Methylnaphthalene
~
m-Xylene
~
n-Docosane
~
n-Dodecane
~
n-Eicosane
~
n-Hexadecane
~
n-Octadecane
~
n-Tetracosane
~
n-Tetradecane
~
o- + p-Xylene
~
2-Propanone
~
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Note: EPA did not identify POCs for stand-alone continuous annealing because EPA did not sample annealing
quenching operations during its sampling program. POCs identified for the other finishing processes apply to
continuous annealing.
7-82
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19
Pollutants Not Identified as Pollutants of Concern
Other Operations Subcategory - Direct-Reduced Ironmaking Segment (a)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Conventional Pollutants
pH (SU)
(e)
pH is not selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (f)
Chloride
Except where noted, chloride is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Nitrate/Nitrite (N02 +
N03-N)
/
Sulfate
(e)
/
Except where noted, sulfate is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Dissolved Solids
(TDS)
(e)
Except where noted, TDS is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
(TKN)
(e)
Total Organic Carbon
(TOC)
/
Total Recoverable
Phenolics
/
Priority Metals
Antimony
~
Arsenic
~
Beryllium
~
Cadmium
~
Chromium
~
Copper
~
Lead
~
Mercury
~
Nickel
~
Selenium
/
Silver
~
7-83
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Metals (continued)
Thallium
/
Zinc
S
/
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum, Dissolved
(e)
S
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Antimony, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Arsenic, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Barium
S
Barium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Beryllium, Dissolved
S
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Boron
/
Boron, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Calcium
Except where noted, calcium is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Calcium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Chromium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Cobalt
/
Copper, Dissolved
S
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
7-84
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
NonconventionalMetals (continued)
Iron, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Lead, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Magnesium
/
Magnesium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Manganese, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Mercury, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Molybdenum
/
Molybdenum, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Nickel, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Selenium, Dissolved
~
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Sodium
Except where noted, sodium is not
selected as a POC for any
subcategory
Sodium, Dissolved
(e)
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Tin
/
Titanium, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Vanadium
/
Yttrium
/
7-85
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Metals (continued)
Yttrium, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Zinc, Dissolved
/
Dissolved metals are not considered
POCs because they are accounted for
in the total metal analysis
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
/
Acenaphthylene
/
Acrylonitrile
/
Anthracene
/
Benzene
/
Benzidine
/
Benzo(a)anthracene
/
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
/
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
/
Benzo(ghi)perylene
/
Benzo(a)pyrene
/
Bis(2-
chloroethoxy)methane
/
Bis(2-chloroethyl) Ether
/
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
Phthalate
/
Chloroform
/
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol
/
Chrysene
/
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
/
Dibromochloromethane
/
1,2-Dichloroethane
/
trans-1,3-
Dichloropropene
/
2,4-Dimethylphenol
/
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
/
7-86
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
Ethylbenzene
/
Fluoranthene
~
Fluorene
/
Indeno(l ,2,3-cd)pyrene
/
Methylene Chloride
/
Naphthalene
/
Nitrobenzene
~
2-Nitrophenol
~
4-Nitrophenol
/
N-Nitrosodiphenylamine
/
Phenanthrene
~
Phenol
/
Pyrene
~
Toluene
~
T ribromomethane
/
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
/
Trichloroethene
~
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Acetone
~
Acetophenone
/
alpha-Terpineol
/
4-Aminobiphenyl
/
Aniline
/
Benzenethiol
~
2,3-Benzofluorene
~
Benzoic Acid
~
Benzyl Alcohol
~
Biphenyl
/
Carbazole
~
Carbon Disulfide
/
o-Cresol
/
7-87
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
p-Cresol
/
n-Decane
/
Dibenzofiiran
/
Dibenzothiophene
/
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-
benzoquinone
/
N,N-Dimethylformamide
/
3,6-
Dimethylphenanthrene
/
Dimethyl Sulfone
/
1,4-Dioxane
~
Diphenylamine
/
n-Docosane
/
n-Dodecane
/
n-Eicosane
/
n-Hexacosane
/
n-Hexadecane
/
Hexanoic Acid
/
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
/
4,5-Methylene
Phenanthrene
/
1-Methylfluorene
/
2-Methylnaphthalene
/
1 -Methylphenanthrene
/
alpha-Naphthylamine
/
beta-Naphthylamine
/
n-Octacosane
/
n-Octadecane
/
Perylene
/
2-Phenylnaphthalene
/
2-Picoline
/
Pyridine
/
7-88
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-19 (Continued)
Pollutant
Not
Detected
(b)
Detected at Low
Concentration
(c)
Source Water
Contaminant
(d)
Comments
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
Resorcinol
~
Styrene
~
n-Tetracosane
~
n-Tetradecane
~
Thianaphthene
~
o-Toluidine
~
n-Triacontane
~
1,3,5-Trithiane
~
m- + p-Xylene
~
o-Xylene
~
(a) Pollutants were detected in at least one untreated wastewater sample during EPA's 18 iron and steel sampling
episodes. Check marks in a column indicate that the criterium applies to data from this segment.
(b) Pollutant was not detected in untreated process wastewater samples from any operations in this segment.
(c) The pollutant was detected at greater than or equal to 10 times the minimum level concentration in less than 10
percent of all untreated process wastewater samples.
(d) The mean detected concentration in untreated process wastewater samples was less than or equal to the mean
detected concentration in source water samples.
(e) Pollutant does not have a specified minimum level.
(f) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-89
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-20
Pollutants of Concern
Other Operations Subcategory - Direct-Reduced Ironmaking Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Nonconventional pollutants, other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Fluoride
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-
hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM)
Nonconventional metals
Aluminum
Iron
Manganese
Titanium
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
7-90
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-21
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment (a)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Minimum
Level
Conventional Pollutants
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day (BODs)
16
16
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day (BODs)
- carbonaceous
16
15
94
2
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
16
16
69
5
Total suspended solids (TSS)
16
16
25
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
16
13
81
0.02
Ammonia as nitrogen
16
16
100
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
16
16
100
5
Fluoride
16
16
100
0.1
Nitrate/nitrite
16
15
75
0.05
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as
silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)
16
16
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Thiocyanate
16
16
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
16
16
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Total organic carbon (TOC)
16
15
94
1
Total phenols
16
16
100
0.05
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
16
16
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Priority Metals
Arsenic
16
15
25
0.01
Mercury
16
12
31
0.0002
Selenium
16
16
100
0.005
Nonconventional Metals
Boron
16
16
13
0.1
7-91
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-21 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Minimum
Level
Priority Organic Pollutants
Acenaphthene
16
12
63
0.01
Acenaphthylene
16
16
100
0.01
Anthracene
16
16
100
0.01
Benzene
16
16
100
0.01
Benzidine
9
1
11
0.05
Benzo(a)anthracene
16
11
63
0.01
Benzo(a)pyrene
15
10
60
0.01
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
15
10
53
0.01
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
15
7
33
0.01
Benzo(ghi)perylene
15
5
27
0.02
Chrysene
16
10
56
0.01
1,2-Dichloroethane
16
2
13
0.01
2,4-Dimethylphenol
16
16
100
0.01
Ethylbenzene
16
8
19
0.01
Fluoranthene
16
16
100
0.01
Fluorene
16
16
100
0.01
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
16
5
25
0.02
Naphthalene
16
16
100
0.01
Phenanthrene
16
16
100
0.01
Phenol
16
16
100
0.01
Pyrene
16
16
100
0.01
Toluene
16
16
100
0.01
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Aniline
16
10
63
0.01
2,3-Benzofluorene
16
3
13
0.01
beta-Naphthylamine
15
4
13
0.05
Biphenyl
16
9
56
0.01
2-Butanone
16
5
13
0.05
Carbazole
16
16
100
0.02
Carbon disulfide
16
6
19
0.01
Dibenzofiiran
16
16
100
0.01
Dibenzothiophene
16
10
56
0.01
4,5-Methylene phenanthrene
16
9
44
0.02
2-Methylnaphthalene
16
13
75
0.01
7-92
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-21 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Minimum
Level
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (continued)
1 -Methy lphenanthrene
16
4
19
0.01
m- + p-Xylene
15
15
100
0.01
m-Xylene
1
1
100
0.01
1-Naphthylamine
16
10
63
0.01
n-Eicosane
16
5
25
0.01
n-Hexadecane
15
5
33
0.01
n-Octadecane
16
5
25
0.01
o-Cresol
16
16
100
0.01
o- + p-Xylene
1
1
100
0.01
o-Toluidine
16
5
31
0.01
o-Xylene
15
11
53
0.01
p-Cresol
16
16
100
0.01
Perylene
16
5
19
0.01
2-Phenylnaphthalene
16
10
63
0.01
2-Picoline
15
15
100
0.05
2-Propanone
16
16
94
0.05
Pyridine
16
16
100
0.01
Styrene
15
15
100
0.01
Thianaphthene
16
14
88
0.01
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
16
16
100
0.02
(a) Mean, median, and detection limit range concentrations not disclosed to prevent compromising confidential business
information.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
7-93
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-22
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Ironmaking Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
30
12
0
13.2
13.1
5-6
5
Total suspended solids (TSS)
30
30
97
1320
586
Not Applicable
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
24
20
46
0.24
0.229
0.005
0.02
Ammonia as nitrogen
30
30
100
85.9
61.4
Not Applicable
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
30
27
90
1370
356
10-20
5
Fluoride
30
30
100
31.9
18.6
Not Applicable
0.1
Nitrate/nitrite
30
29
90
4.29
3.6
1.6
0.05
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)
30
10
Not Applicable
11.5
12.8
5-6
Not
Applicable
Thiocyanate
30
22
0
11.5
0.605
0.1
Not
Applicable
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
26
26
Not Applicable
82.8
50.4
Not Applicable
Not
Applicable
Total organic carbon (TOC)
30
25
67
19.6
21.2
10
1
Total phenols
30
21
3
0.206
0.135
0.05-0.1
0.05
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
30
25
Not Applicable
0.184
0.0387
0.002
Not
Applicable
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-22 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Priority Metals
Arsenic
30
27
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.01
Cadmium
30
24
23
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.005
Chromium
30
28
37
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.01
Copper
30
24
23
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.025
Lead
30
30
83
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
0.05
Mercury
30
14
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.0002
Nickel
30
27
7
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.04
Selenium
30
19
33
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.005
Silver
30
11
7
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.01
Thallium
30
23
33
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.01
Zinc
30
30
100
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
0.02
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
30
30
90
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
0.2
Boron
30
30
50
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
0.1
Iron
30
30
100
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
0.1
Magnesium
30
30
47
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
5
Manganese
30
30
100
(a)
(a)
Not Applicable
0.015
Molybdenum
30
28
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.01
Titanium
30
29
77
(a)
(a)
(a)
0.005
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-22 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Priority Organic Pollutants
Benzo(a)anthracene
18
2
11
0.135
0.135
0.01
0.01
Benzo(a)pyrene
18
2
11
0.119
0.119
0.01
0.01
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
18
2
11
0.35
0.350
0.01
0.01
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
18
1
6
0.15
0.150
0.01-0.1
0.01
Chrysene
18
2
11
0.233
0.233
0.01
0.01
2,4-Dimethylphenol
18
6
6
0.0608
0.0413
0.01-0.1
0.01
Fluoranthene
18
5
11
0.143
0.0152
0.01
0.01
4-Nitrophenol
18
5
6
0.223
0.0860
0.05-0.5
0.05
Phenanthrene
18
6
11
0.0693
0.0172
0.01
0.01
Phenol
18
9
33
0.221
0.135
0.01
0.01
Pyrene
18
2
11
0.205
0.205
0.01
0.01
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
n-Docosane
18
1
6
0.115
0.115
0.01-0.1
0.01
n-Eicosane
18
2
11
0.162
0.162
0.01
0.01
n-Hexadecane
18
2
11
0.168
0.168
0.01
0.01
n-Octadecane
18
2
11
0.145
0.145
0.01
0.01
n-Tetracosane
18
1
6
0.2
0.2
0.01-0.1
0.01
o-Cresol
18
7
6
0.0691
0.026
0.01-0.1
0.01
p-Cresol
18
7
6
0.0905
0.0604
0.01-0.1
0.01
Pyridine
18
9
17
0.0965
0.072
0.01
0.01
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-22 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Nonconventional Dioxin and Furans (concentrations in pg/L)
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofiiran
12
5
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
12
4
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
12
6
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
12
4
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
12
4
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
12
2
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
12
4
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
12
2
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
12
3
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
12
3
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
Octachlorodibenzofuran
12
5
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
100
Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
12
10
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
100
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofiiran
12
4
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
12
4
17
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
12
2
8
(a)
(a)
(a)
50
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
12
5
33
(a)
(a)
(a)
10
Other Priority Pollutants
Total Cyanide
29
24
45
0.306
0.348 0.005
0.02
(a) Mean, median, and detection limit range concentrations not disclosed to prevent compromising confidential business information.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals, nonconventional organic pollutants, and nonconventional dioxins and fiirans.
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-23
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
42
15
0
12.6
11.25
5-6.25
5
Total suspended solids (TSS)
43
43
79
5040
958
Not Applicable
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
42
33
79
0.665
0.5
0.1-1
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
42
41
71
229
97
20
5
Fluoride
43
42
98
23.3
15.8
0.2
0.1
Nitrate/nitrite
42
41
69
1.99
1.98
0.01
0.05
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)
43
8
Not Applicable
11.2
8.38
5-6.25
Not
Applicable
Total organic carbon (TOC)
42
12
19
136
26.2
10
1
Priority Metals
Antimony
48
34
19
0.134
0.0855
0.002-0.03
0.02
Beryllium
48
3
6
0.0683
0.066
0.001
0.005
Cadmium
48
30
29
0.12
0.0368
0.001-0.005
0.005
Chromium
48
44
56
1.3
0.103
0.01
0.01
Copper
48
41
52
1.02
0.437
0.009-0.01
0.025
Lead
48
48
65
8.62
1.68
Not Applicable
0.05
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-23 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Priority Metals (continued)
Mercury
48
26
6
0.00077
0.00056
0.0002
0.0002
Nickel
48
31
31
0.425
0.39
0.017-0.02
0.04
Silver
48
30
23
0.101
0.0597
0.005
0.01
Zinc
48
47
75
355
27.9
0.01
0.02
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
48
48
60
4.77
3.17
Not Applicable
0.2
Cobalt
48
22
6
0.153
0.103
0.009-0.011
0.05
Iron
48
48
98
2490
237
Not Applicable
0.1
Magnesium
48
48
40
213
28
Not Applicable
5
Manganese
48
48
90
59.7
11.1
Not Applicable
0.015
Molybdenum
48
45
58
0.56
0.255
6.04
0.006
Tin
48
41
33
0.412
0.18
0.002-0.005
0.03
Titanium
48
45
33
0.412
0.193
0.004
0.005
Vanadium
48
27
33
0.732
0.627
0.009-0.01
0.05
Priority Organic Pollutants
Phenol
23
13
17
0.0747 1 0.024
0.01-0.0227
0.01
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-24
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations
(mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
15
15
13
31.5
20.1
Not Applicable
5
Total suspended solids (TSS)
15
15
27
30.5
22
Not Applicable
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
15
4
20
1.11
0.61
1
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
15
15
73
72
63
Not Applicable
5
Fluoride
15
15
53
1.21
1.33
Not Applicable
0.1
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)
15
12
Not Applicable
29.2
21.9
5.36-5.52
Not
Applicable
Total organic carbon (TOC)
15
11
7
5.62
6.46
10
1
Priority Metals
Antimony
15
9
0
0.00866
0.0081
0.004-0.02
0.02
Chromium
15
10
7
0.0371
0.0188
0.002-0.0022
0.01
Copper
15
10
0
0.0172
0.015
0.0012-0.002
0.025
Lead
15 .
5
0
0.0114
0.006
0.015-0.028
0.05
Nickel
15
9
0
0.0964
0.0934
0.004-0.007
0.04
Zinc
15
6
27
0.384
0.508
0.0028-0.004
0.02
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-24 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations
(mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
15
15
80
14.1
6.42
Not Applicable
0.1
Manganese
15
15
20
0.0898
0.058
Not Applicable
0.015
Molybdenum
15
15
27
0.0646
0.034
Not Applicable
0.01
Titanium
15
1
0
0.0068
0.0068
0.0009-0.004
0.005
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-25
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations
(mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
20
12
10
27.3
17.4
5-6.75
5
Total suspended solids (TSS)
20
18
50
81.4
51
4
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
20
9
45
0.255
0.21
0.06-1
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
20
20
85
157
90
Not Applicable
5
Fluoride
20
20
80
56.8
11.5
Not Applicable
0.1
Nitrate/nitrite
20
16
40
2.6
0.49
0.01-0.05
0.05
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)
20
11
Not Applicable
18.8
10.3
5-6.75
Not Applicable
Total organic carbon (TOC)
20
20
70
37.8
26.1
Not Applicable
1
Priority Metals
Antimony
20
14
20
0.0948
0.0188
0.002-0.02
0.02
Chromium
. 20
18
65
1.19 .
0.445
0.001
0.01
Copper
20
17
25
0.219
0.194
0.009-0.011
0.025
Lead
20
1
0
0.386
0.386
0.001-0.002
0.05
Nickel
20
18
70
1.62
0.783
0.028
0.04
Zinc
20
17
20
1.82
0.1
0.01
0.02
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-25 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations
(mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
20
19
10
0.66
0.413
0.037
0.2
Boron
20
20
25
0.944
0.455
Not Applicable
0.1
Hexavalent Chromium
14
8
36
0.181
0.15
0.01
0.01
Iron
20
20
100
32.9
7.69
Not Applicable
0.1
Manganese
20
20
80
0.548
0.450
Not Applicable
0.015
Molybdenum
20
20
85
4.33
4.05
Not Applicable
0.01
Titanium
20
12
10
0.0325
0.0123
0.003-0.005
0.005
Priority Organic Pollutants
T ribromomethane
18
3
6
0.11
0.0939
0.01
0.01
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
Note: EPA did not identify POCs for vacuum degassing because EPA did not sample non-integrated vacuum degassing operations during its sampling program. POCs
identified for continuous casting and hot forming apply to vacuum degassing.
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-26
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM)
112
72
32
4110
50.0
5-14.1
5
Total suspended solids (TSS)
110
97
63
2490
110
4
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
110
76
69
15.6
1.31
0.1-1
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
110
103
74
9890
213
.5-20
5
Fluoride
110
108
55
185
1.5
0.3
0.1
Nitrate/nitrite
110
102
54
209
0.948
0.05-0.25
0.05
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM)
112
58
Not Applicable
1080
124
5-14.1
Not Applicable
Sulfate
109
103
Not Applicable
1110
84
2-10000
Not Applicable
Total organic carbon (TOC)
110
61
37
158
34
1-500
1
Total phenols
111
43
8
1.52
0.15
0.005-0.1
0.05
Priority Metals
Antimony
112
65
5
0.077
0.0328
0.002-0.04
0.02
Arsenic
112
73
13
0.0489
0.0276
0.001-0.02
0.01
Cadmium
112
39
55
0.0849
0.0168
0.001-0.01
0.005
Chromium
112
104
63
221
0.359
0.009-0.01
0.01
Copper
112
98
49
1.99
0.430
0.008-0.1
0.025
Lead
112
88
12
2.38
0.0258
0.002
0.05
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-26 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Priority Metals (continued)
Nickel
112
94
42
10.6
0.371
0.016-0.018
0.04
Selenium
112
15
3
0.0351
0.022
0.002-0.02
0.005
Zinc
112
104
63
40.3
0.309
0.008-0.01
0.02
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
112
84
23
3.57
0.459
0.031-0.065
0.2
Barium
112
112
1
0.113
0.0313
Not Applicable
0.2
Boron
112
41
24
13.8
2.16
0.027-0.054
0.1
Cobalt
112
56
11
0.246
0.0635
0.009-0.12
0.05
Hexavalent chromium
84
24
17
9.03
5.2
0.01-0.1
0.01
Iron
112
112
96
1270
107.5
Not Applicable
0.1
Magnesium
112
111
9
24.8
10.8
0.073
5
Manganese
112
111
71
11.7
1.07
0.001
0.015
Molybdenum
112
99
29
0.428
0.0476
0.002-0.003
0.01
Tin
112
89
8
0.29
0.0417
0.002-0.03
0.03
Titanium
112
86
39
2.81
0.0595
0.003-0.005
0.005
Vanadium
112
62
9
0.314
0.061
0.007-0.01
0.05
Priority Organic Pollutants
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
94
6
2
0.301
0.0577
0.01-10
0.01
.1,1,1 -T richloroethane
92
2
2
0.333
0.333
0.002-0.112
0.01
Ethylbenzene
92
5
5
0.565
0.298
0.002-0.01
0.01
Naphthalene
94
6
6
0.624
0.230
0.01-10
0.01
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-26 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Priority Organic Pollutants (continued)
Phenol
94
4
2
0.161
0.120
0.01-10
0.01
Toluene
92
3
1
0.0587
0.0156
0.002-0.01
0.01
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
alpha-Terpineol
94
2
2
0.664
0.664
0.01-10
0.01
Benzoic acid
94
11
9
7.23
1.33
0.05-50
0.05
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-benzoquinone
94
10
1
0.397
0.258
0.099-99
0.099
Hexanoic acid
94
13
6
0.171
0.0776
0.01-10
0.01
2-Methylnaphthalene
94
5
1
0.0874
0.0692
0.01-10
0.01
m-Xylene
35
5
11
0.459
0.232
0.002-0.01
0.01
n-Docosane
94
8
4
0.305
0.246
0.01-10
0.01
n-Dodecane
94
14
5
1.69
0.051
0.01-1
0.01
n-Eicosane
94
15
13
1.34
0.133
0.01-1
0.01
n-Hexadecane
94
14
14
6.85
0.193
0.01-1
0.01
N,N,-Dimethylformamide
94
3
3 .
0.125
0.119
0.01-10
0.01
n-Octadecane
94
16
14
3.26
0.132
0.01-1
0.01
n-Tetracosane
94
9
6
0.155
0.181
0.01-10
0.01
n-Tetradecane
94
12
3
2.94
0.0368
0.01-1
0.01
o- + p-Xylene
35
5
11
0.245
0.129
0.002-0.01
0.01
2-Propanone
92
27
11
1.02
0.369
0.00998-0.05
0.05
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-26 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide (b)
Not
available
Not
available
Not available
Not
available
Not
available
Not available
Not available
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) EPA did not analyze for cyanide in finishing wastewaters; however, EPA selected cyanide as a POC for the finishing subcategory because it may be present in reducing
salt bath descaling wastewaters.
Note: EPA did not identify POCs for stand-alone continuous annealing because EPA did not sample annealing quenching operations during its sampling program. POCs
identified for the other finishing processes apply to continuous annealing.
-------
Section 7 - Wastewater Characterization
Table 7-27
Untreated Process Wastewater Characteristics for Pollutants of Concern
Other Operations Subcategory - Direct-Reduced Ironmaking Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Number of
Times
Analyzed
Number of
Times
Detected
Percentage of Samples
Detected Greater Than
lOx Minimum Level
Detected
Concentrations (mg/L)
Detection Limit
Range for
Nondetects
Minimum
Level
Mean
Median
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease measured as hexane
extractable material (HEM) (a)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Total suspended solids (TSS)
1
1
100
450
450
Not Applicable
4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
1
1
0
13.9
13.9
Not Applicable
0.01
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
1
1
100
68
68
Not Applicable
5
Fluoride
1
1
100
14.2
14.2
Not Applicable
0.1
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated-hexane extractable
material (SGT-HEM) (a)
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
1
1
100
8.18
8.18
Not Applicable
0.2
Iron
1
1
100
112
112
Not Applicable
0.1
Manganese
1
1
100
3.77
3.77
Not Applicable
0.015
Titanium
1
1
100
0.0839
0.0839
Not Applicable
0.005
(a) Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable material (HEM) and total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as silica gel treated-hexane extractable material
(SGT-HEM) were not detected in DRI wastewaters; however, EPA considers HEM and SGT-HEM to be POCs for all iron and steel industry wastewaters.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals.
ND - Not detected.
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
SECTION 8
POLLUTION PREVENTION AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
This section describes the pollution prevention and wastewater treatment
technologies that are used by the iron and steel industry to prevent the generation of wastewater
pollutants or reduce the discharge of wastewater pollutants. EPA considered various
combinations of these technologies as the basis for the effluent limitations and guidelines and
standards evaluated for the final rule for the iron and steel industry. To evaluate these
technologies, EPA developed a database of the following:
• In-process technologies and process modifications;
• Process water recycle technologies;
• Process wastewater discharge flow rates;
• End-of-pipe wastewater treatment technologies; and
• Treated process wastewater effluent quality.
EPA collected most data from industry surveys, analytical and production surveys, and the EPA
wastewater sampling programs. The Agency also used other data sources, such as industry trade
journals, online databases, and other publications. Section 3 describes these sources.
The processes used in manufacturing steel products use a significant amount of
water, as described in Section 7. Common pollutants found in iron and steel wastewater include:
scale; metal fines and dissolved metals; oil and grease; suspended solids; organic compounds
such as benzo(a)pyrene, naphthalene, and total phenols; and inorganic pollutants such as
ammonia, cyanide, and nitrates/nitrites. Consequently, the iron and steel industry uses
wastewater minimization, pollution prevention, and wastewater treatment technologies to reduce
both water use and pollutant discharge loadings for these pollutants of concern. These
technologies achieve these reductions by retarding pollutant buildup and improving water quality
to allow greater reuse; reducing the volume of wastewater treated and discharged; prolonging
process bath life, enabling sites to spend less on process bath makeup and reduce bath treatment
and disposal costs; and improving treated effluent quality by enhanced wastewater treatment.
Iron and steel facilities use a wide variety of technologies to treat wastewater
generated on site and for pollution prevention. The technologies are grouped into the following
four categories, as discussed in this section:
• Section 8.1 - Wastewater Minimization and Pollution Prevention
Technologies;
• Section 8.2 - Process Modifications;
• Section 8.3 - Treatment Technologies; and
• Section 8.4 - Best Management Practices.
8-1
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-1 summarizes the various technologies discussed in Sections 8.1 and 8.2, as well as the
applicable subcategories for each technology. Table 8-2 summarizes the various wastewater
treatment and sludge handling technologies discussed in Section 8.3, as well as the applicable
subcategories for each technology.
8.1 Wastewater Minimization and Pollution Prevention Technologies
This section discusses the following various types of waste minimization and
pollution prevention technologies:
• Section 8.1.1 - High-Rate Recycle;
• Section 8.1.2 - Countercurrent Cascade Rinsing;
• Section 8.1.3 - Acid Reuse, Recycle, and Recovery;
• Section 8.1.4 - Extension of Process Solution Life; and
• Section 8.1.5- Evaporation with Condensate Recovery.
8.1.1 High-Rate Recycle
High-rate recycle systems consist of a water recirculation loop that recycles
approximately 95 percent or more of the water from a process for reuse. High-rate recycle
systems are commonly used in the iron and steel industry for product cooling and cleaning, as
well as for air pollution control, in the following iron and steel operations: blast furnace
ironmaking, sintering, basic oxygen furnace (BOF) steelmaking, vacuum degassing, continuous
casting, and hot forming operations. Virtually all systems require a portion of the recirculated
water to be continuously discharged (blowdown) to prevent contaminants from accumulating.
This blowdown stream is then treated at an end-of-pipe treatment system or discharged to surface
water or a publicly owned treatment works (POTW). Well-designed and operated high-rate
recycle systems can significantly reduce the volume of wastewater discharged and the amount of
fresh water added to the system as makeup by maximizing the recycle rate.
Various physical/chemical treatment technologies are used within high-rate
recycle systems, such as solids removal devices, cooling devices, and water softening
technologies, to improve water quality prior to reuse. Improved water quality allows recycle
rates to significantly increase, which in turn allows blowdown rates and pollutant loadings
discharged to significant decrease. Common pollutants in iron and steel wastewater from the
operations listed above include: total suspended solids (TSS), oil and grease (O&G), ammonia,
cyanide, organic compounds such as phenols, and metals; recycle loop treatment systems are
designed to remove these pollutants. Recycle system treatment technologies commonly used for
each process operation are listed below. Section 8.3 provides additional information regarding
the design, operation, and performance of each treatment unit.
Specific treatment and water cooling units commonly included in high-rate
recycle systems differ from operation to operation. Blast furnace ironmaking and sintering
operations commonly use clarification to remove solids. Additionally, blast furnace ironmaking
high-rate recycle systems also use cooling towers to control temperature prior to recycle. Wet-
8-2
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
open and wet-suppressed BOF steelmaking high-rate recycle systems use classifiers and clarifiers
to remove solids, followed by cooling towers prior to recycle. These BOF systems can also use
carbon dioxide injection to remove hardness from the wastewater, thus minimizing scale
accumulation, which reduces blowdown requirements. Typical vacuum degassing high-rate
recycle systems consist of clarifiers and cooling towers prior to recycle, with blowdown treated
individually or with commingled blowdown from continuous caster and/or BOF steelmaking
recycle systems. Typical continuous casting high-rate recycle systems include a primary scale pit
followed by a clarifier for additional solids removal. The clarifier may be followed by a
polishing filter. Most of the continuous casting wastewater is then cooled and recycled. Typical
components of hot forming high-rate recycle systems are scale pits with oil skimming,
clarification or filtration to remove additional O&G and solids, and cooling towers prior to
recycle.
In summary, high-rate recycle systems allow approximately 95 percent or more of
process wastewater to be recycled, which significantly reduces makeup water requirements and
process wastewater discharge flow rates. Recycle loop water treatment enables sites to further
increase recycle rates by improving recycle water quality and reducing blowdown requirements.
Well-designed and operated high-rate recycle systems are an important component of EPA's
technology options considered for the final rule, as discussed in Section 9, because they reduce
both the volume of process wastewater discharged and the loading of pollutants of concern in
iron and steel wastewater.
8.1.2 Countercurrent Cascade Rinsing
Countercurrent cascade rinsing refers to a series of consecutive rinse tanks that are
plumbed to cause water to flow from one tank to another in the direction opposite of the product
flow. Fresh water flows into the rinse tank located farthest from the process tank and overflows
(i.e. cascades), in turn, to the rinse tanks closer to the process tank. This technique is called
countercurrent rinsing because the product and the rinse water move in opposite directions. Over
time, the first rinse becomes contaminated with drag-out solution and reaches a stable
concentration that is lower than the process solution. The second rinse stabilizes at a lower
concentration, which enables less rinse water to be used than if only one rinse tank were in place.
The more countercurrent cascade rinse tanks (three-stage, four-stage, etc.), the less rinse water is
needed to adequately remove the process solution. This differs from a single, once-through rinse
tank where the rinse water is composed of fresh water that is discharged after use without any
recycle or reuse.
The rinse flow rate needed to adequately dilute drag-out solution depends on the
concentration of process chemicals in the initial process bath, the concentration of chemicals that
can be tolerated in the final rinse tank to meet product specifications, the amount of drag-out
carried into each rinse stage, and the number of countercurrent cascade rinse tanks. These factors
are expressed in Equation 8-1 below:
8-3
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
c
\ ' /
where:
Vr =
Flow through each rinse stage, gal/min;
Co =
Concentration of the contaminant(s) in the initial process bath,
mg/L;
cf =
Tolerable concentration of the contaminant(s) in the final rinse to
give acceptable product cleanliness, mg/L;
n =
Number of rinse stages used; and
vD =
Drag-out carried into each rinse stage, expressed as a flow,
gal/min.
This mathematical rinsing model is based on complete rinsing (i.e., removal of all
contaminants from the product) and complete mixing (i.e., homogeneous rinse water in each
rinse stage). Under these conditions, each additional rinse stage can reduce rinse water use by 90
percent. These conditions are not achieved unless there is sufficient residence time and agitation
to obtain complete mixing in the rinse tank. For less efficient rinse systems, each added rinse
stage reduces rinse water use by 50 to 75 percent.
Countercurrent cascade rinsing systems have a higher capital cost than once-
through rinsing systems and require more space due to the additional rinse tanks. Also, in
countercurrent cascade rinsing, the relatively low flow rate through the rinse tanks may not
provide the needed agitation for drag-out removal. In such cases, air or mechanical agitation may
be required to increase rinsing efficiency.
Countercurrent cascade rinsing is used in steel finishing operations, including acid
pickling, alkaline cleaning, electroplating, and hot dip coating. Unlike intermediate steel
processing steps, such as continuous casting and hot forming, steel finishing operations require
the steel to be relatively contaminant-free for processing. For this reason, high-rate recycle
systems do not provide adequate water quality for steel finishing operations. For those steel
finishing operations that can tolerate low levels of contaminants introduced by rinse water,
countercurrent cascade rinsing provides effective rinsing while also minimizing fresh water
requirements and wastewater discharge flow rates.
8.1.3 Acid Reuse, Recycle, and Recovery Systems
Acid reuse, recycle, and recovery systems are used extensively in the industry at
sites that perform acid pickling. Virtually all sites use fume scrubbers to capture acid gases and
prevent acid gas emissions. Many facilities also recover spent acid to reduce makeup acid
requirements and to reduce spent acid treatment and/or disposal costs. Typical industrial acid
8-4
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
reuse and recovery systems include fume scrubbers, hydrochloric acid regeneration, sulfuric acid
recovery, and acid purification. These technologies are described below.
Fume Scrubber Water Recycle
The steel finishing industry commonly uses fume scrubbers to capture acid gases
from pickling tanks. Scrubber water, which may contain a dilute caustic solution, is neutralized
and continuously recirculated to adsorb acid. Makeup water is added to replace water lost
through evaporation and water that is blown down to end-of-pipe metals treatment. Blowdown is
necessary to prevent salts buildup. Fume scrubber recirculation systems significantly reduce the
volume of scrubber water discharged to wastewater treatment.
Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration
This process used in steel finishing operations consists of thermal decomposition
of spent pickle liquor, which contains free hydrochloric acid, ferrous chloride, and water. The
liquor is heated to remove some of the water through evaporation and to concentrate the solution.
The concentrated solution is then further heated at 925 °C to 1,050°C in a "roaster." At this
temperature, water is completely evaporated and the ferrous chloride decomposes into iron oxide
(ferric oxide, Fe203) and hydrogen chloride (HC1) gas. Equation 8-2 below shows the
decomposition process:
4 FeCl2 + 4 H20 + 02 > 8 HC1 + 2 Fe203 (8-2)
The iron oxide is separated and removed from the system for off-site recovery or
disposal. The hydrogen chloride gas is reabsorbed in water (sometimes rinse water or scrubber
water is used), to produce hydrochloric acid solution (generally from 15 to 21 percent HC1),
which is reused in the pickling operation. There are several types of "roaster" processes in
operation. The basic differences among the processes are the design and operation of the
roaster/reactor and the recovery equipment (Reference 8-1).
Sulfuric Acid Recovery
To recover sulfuric acid in steel finishing operations, spent pickle liquor high in
iron content is pumped into a crystallizer, where the iron is precipitated (under refrigeration or
vacuum) as ferrous sulfate heptahydrate crystals. As the crystals are formed, water is removed
with the crystals, and the free acid content of the solution increases to a level that is useable in
the pickling operation. The crystals are separated from solution, and the recovered acid is
pumped back into the pickling tank. The by-product ferrous sulfate heptahydrate is commercially
marketable. The crystals are dried, bagged, and marketed, or sold in bulk quantities. Ferrous
sulfate, commonly referred to as "copperas," is used in appreciable quantities in numerous
industries, including the manufacture of inks, dyes, paints, fertilizers, and magnetic tapes. It is
also used as a coagulant in water and wastewater treatment (Reference 8-1).
8-5
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Acid Purification and Recycle
Acid purification technology is used to process various acid pickling solutions,
such as sulfuric acid and nitric/hydrofluoric acids used in stainless steel finishing mills. Acid is
purified by adsorption on a bed of alkaline anion exchange resin that separates the acid from the
metal ions. Acid is desorbed from the resin using water. The process begins by passing spent
acid upward through the resin. A metal-rich, mildly acidic solution passes through the resin and
is collected at the top of the bed. Water is then pumped downward through the bed and desorbs
the acid from the resin. The purified acid solution is collected at the bottom of the bed. When
the acid is effectively purified, it is withdrawn from the bed and recycled back to the process.
Acid purification and recycle reduces nitrate discharges and the overall volume of acid pickling
wastewater discharged because spent acid is not discharged to wastewater treatment. This
technology can theoretically recover approximately 80 percent of the free acid remaining in a
spent acid treatment solution; however, industrial experience with acid purification systems have
not yielded the predicted recovery rate. EPA received comments on the proposed rule indicating
that acid purification units reduce nitric acid consumption by as little as 12 percent.
8.1.4 Extension of Process Solution Life
Prolonging solution life reduces the investment in additional process solutions and
time spent replacing spent process solutions. Iron and steel facilities use filtration, magnetic
separation, and ion exchange technologies to extend process solution life. Filtration and
magnetic separation technologies are described below while ion exchange is described in Section
8.3.1.
In-Tank Filtration
Steel finishing electroplating and alkaline cleaning operations use in-tank filters to
extend process bath life by removing contaminants in the form of suspended solids.
Recirculating cold forming operations also use filters to remove contaminants from the rolling
solution. Paper, cloth, or plastic filters remove accumulated suspended solids or precipitant.
Solids are usually disposed of off site. Devices such as granular activated carbon filters remove
dissolved contaminants, such as organic constituents.
Magnetic Separation of Fines in Cold Rolling Solution
Magnetic separators are sometimes used in the iron and steel industry to extend
the life of cold rolling solutions. Magnetic separators are installed in either rolling solution
collection tanks or in a side-stream system connected to these tanks. The most effective systems
use vertical or horizontal configurations of magnetic rods to remove metal fines. Well-designed
magnetic separators can control the iron content in the rolling solutions to below 100 parts per
million (Reference 8-2). Solids are usually shipped offsite for disposal.
8-6
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
8.1.5 Evaporation with Condensate Recovery
Evaporation is a wastewater minimization technology that steel finishing mills can
use to recover electroplating chemicals such as chrome, nickel, and copper that are lost to
electroplating rinse water. There are two basic types of evaporators: atmospheric and vacuum.
Atmospheric evaporators, the more prevalent type, are relatively inexpensive to purchase and
easy to operate. Vacuum evaporators are mechanically more sophisticated and are more energy-
efficient. Vacuum evaporators are typically used when evaporation rates greater than 50 to 70
gallons per hour are required. Additionally, with vacuum evaporators, evaporated water can be
recovered as a condensate and reused on site.
Electroplating rinse water is evaporated to concentrate drag-out metals. The
resulting concentrated solution of these metals is then returned to the process bath. A
disadvantage of evaporation-based recovery is that, in addition to drag-out, unwanted
contaminants are returned to and accumulate in the electroplating process bath. For this reason,
deionized water is preferred as rinse water to prevent introducing contaminants from the rinse
water in the process bath. Another disadvantage of evaporation is that the process is energy-
intensive, which may make evaporation cost prohibitive for some applications.
8.2 Process Modifications
Process modifications can reduce or eliminate wastewater generation at a facility.
EPA identified three process modification technologies for use with acid pickling processes.
Although the Agency is not aware of significant domestic use of these technologies, all are
effectively used by foreign steel facilities. These technologies, effluent-free pickling with acid
regeneration, nitric-acid-free pickling, and effluent-free exhaust cleaning, are described below.
Table 8-1 summarizes the various technologies discussed in Section 8.2 as well as the applicable
subcategories for each technology.
8.2.1 Effluent-Free Pickling Process with Fluid Bed Hydrochloric Acid
Regeneration
This pickling process is operated such that no wastewater is discharged as spent
pickle liquor, rinse wastewater, and scrubber water from a hydrochloric acid pickling line. The
process is configured as a closed system that uses a fluidized bed reactor "roaster" configuration
(hydrochloric acid regeneration is explained in detail above) to thermally decompose spent pickle
liquor to hydrochloric acid and iron oxide (Reference 8-3). Figure 8-1 illustrates the fluidized
bed acid regeneration system.
Spent pickle liquor is fed via a settling tank and venturi loop into the fluidized bed
inside the reactor. The fluidized bed consists of granulated iron oxide. Residual acid and water
are evaporated at 850°C and the iron chloride is converted to hydrochloric acid gas. Growth and
new formation of iron oxide grains in the fluidized bed are controlled so that a dust-free
granulated product is obtained. The iron oxide grains can be used as a raw material to
8-7
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
manufacture other products (e.g., as an additive for the production of magnetic tapes, abrasives,
tiles, glass, cosmetics and pigments).
Since the fluidized bed process operates at approximately 850°C, rinse and
scrubber water from the pickle line can be used at the regeneration plant to cool fluidized bed
off-gases, which contain hydrochloric acid vapor and a small amount of iron oxide dust. The off-
gases are cooled to approximately 100°C in a venturi scrubber. The thermal energy of the off-
gases is used to concentrate the pickling liquor by evaporation before it is fed to the reactor.
From the venturi scrubber, the cooled gas stream goes to the absorber, where hydrogen chloride
is absorbed with rinse water from the pickling line and fresh water to produce hydrochloric acid.
The acid can be recycled directly to the pickling process or placed in a storage tank for later use.
Once the fluidized bed off-gases have passed through the scrubbing stages and mist collector, the
off-gases are virtually free of hydrochloric acid and are released to the atmosphere.
8.2.2 Nitric-Acid-Free Pickling
Nitrate is a pollutant of concern for stainless steel acid pickling operations where
nitric acids and combinations of nitric and hydrofluoric acids are used as surface treatments for
various grades of stainless steels. Nitric-acid-free pickling requires the same equipment as
conventional acid pickling processes, as well as agitating the bath to circulate fresh acid to the
metal surface. The process is also compatible with acid regeneration. The Agency is aware of a
proprietary commercial technology that uses a nitric-acid-free solution that contains an inorganic
mineral acid base, hydrogen peroxide, stabilizing agents, wetting agents, brighteners, and
inhibitors. See DCNs IS04072 and IS04075 in Section 5.5.1 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking
Record for more information.
8.2.3 Effluent-Free Exhaust Cleaning
Stainless steel pickling operations using mixed acid, nitric acid, or hydrofluoric
acid produce exhaust gases that contain nitrogen oxide and hydrogen fluoride. Wet air pollution
control (WAPC) devices are typically used to treat these exhaust gases, thereby generating
wastewater. The Agency is aware of steel finishing mills that operate a commercially available
technology that uses selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology to treat exhaust gases from
stainless steel pickling operations in lieu of WAPCs (Reference 8-4). The SCR system injects
anhydrous ammonia into the gas stream prior to a catalyst to reduce NOx to nitrogen and water.
The most common types of catalysts are either a metal oxide, noble metal, or zeolite.
8.3 Treatment Technologies
This section discusses the following wastewater treatment technologies used at
iron and steel facilities for recycle system water treatment prior to recycle and reuse, and/or end-
of-pipe wastewater treatment prior to discharge to surface water or a POTW:
8-8
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
• Section 8.3.1 - Physical/Chemical Treatment;
• Section 8.3.2 - Biological Treatment; and
• Section 8.3.3 - Sludge Handling.
Table 8-2 summarizes the wastewater treatment and sludge handling technologies discussed in
this section, as well as the applicable subcategories for each technology.
8.3.1 Physical/Chemical Treatment
The iron and steel industry extensively uses physical/chemical treatment
technologies. Physical/chemical treatment can effectively remove iron and steel pollutants such
as TSS, O&G, heavy organics (tars), ammonia, cyanide, and metals. Physical/chemical treatment
is not effective in treating dissolved organic and inorganic compounds. The physical/chemical
treatment technologies are described in the following order:
• Equalization;
• Tar Removal;
• Free and Fixed Ammonia Stripping;
• Cooling Technologies;
• Cyanide Treatment Technologies;
• Oily Wastewater Treatment Technologies;
• Carbon Dioxide Injection;
• Metals Treatment Technologies;
• Solids Separation Technologies; and
• Polishing Technologies.
Equalization
Equalization is a critical treatment component in achieving consistent wastewater
treatment performance for end-of-pipe treatment systems. Equalization dampens fluctuations
(reduces variability) in flow and influent wastewater quality. Equalization also eliminates shock
loadings of inhibitory substances that would decrease treatment system efficiency and
performance. Key design parameters for equalization are the required tank volume (i.e.
wastewater residence time) and adequate mixing to enhance wastewater homogeneity. Two
types of mixing are typically used in equalization systems: conventional top or side-mount
impeller mixers and a pump system that continuously removes a portion of the wastewater from
the tank and reintroduces it into the untreated wastewater flow.
Constant solids loading can improve the effluent quality and thickening
performance of clarifiers. Equalization improves the performance of chemical precipitation
systems as a result of improved chemical feed control and process reliability. Eliminating rapid
flow increases to gravity clarification equipment lessens the chance of disrupting the sludge bed.
For multimedia filtration systems, equalization results in a constant media filtration surface area
requirement and more uniform filter-backwash cycles. Equalization prior to biological treatment
dampens flow fluctuations to prevent a 'wash out' of the microorganisms. Equalization also
8-9
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
prevents shock loadings of compounds that are toxic to the microorganisms. Iron and steel
facilities typically operate equalization systems to simultaneously achieve both flow and
chemical equalization.
Tar Removal
Tar decanters are used to recover oil and tar. The decanter is a rectangular steel
tank, which is inclined at one end for solids removal. The tar and process liquor mixture enter
the decanter and flow into a trough, which minimizes agitation of the mixture. The mixture then
overflows to the main compartment where the velocity is reduced to allow the tar to separate
from the process liquor and settle. The process liquor flows over a fixed weir to leave the
decanter, while the tar is removed from the bottom of the decanter through an adjustable seal, the
decanter valve. An optional mechanical filter can be placed on the tar decanter effluent to further
separate residual tar and oil from the process liquor. The multiple tube filter uses a filter element
made from porous aluminum oxide ceramic that can remove particulate as fine as 0.3 microns
with flow rates of approximately 2 gallons per minute per square foot (gal/min/ft2). At the end of
each filtration cycle, collected solids are removed from the filter by backwashing. Removing the
large-chained organic compounds that comprise tar significantly reduces the carbonaceous
biochemical oxygen demand (CBODs).
The iron and steel industry uses this treatment technology to treat the excess
ammonia liquor generated during cokemaking operations. It separates tar and oil from the liquor,
which is generally further treated in an ammonia stripping system.
Free and Fixed Ammonia Stripping
Free and fixed ammonia distillation, also referred to as stripping, involves
transferring gas (ammonia) dissolved in a liquid (wastewater) into a gas stream (steam). When
ammonia is present in both a free (NH3) and fixed form (NH4+), two stages or 'legs' are necessary
for optimal removal efficiency. Figure 8-2 depicts an ammonia distillation column. The
illustration shows both a free and fixed leg in one column. This configuration is common, but
the industry also commonly uses two separate columns, one for each leg.
In the free leg, ammonia-rich liquor is pumped to the top of a tray-type distillation
tower, also referred to as a still, and steam is injected into the base. As the rising steam passes
through the boiling ammonia liquor moving down the tray tower, free ammonia is transferred
from the liquid to the gas phase, eventually passing out the top of the tower. The hot, ammonia-
rich steam is collected, cooled, and typically treated with sulfuric acid to form ammonium
sulfate, a by-product that can be shipped off site for use as a fertilizer. Liquid collected from the
bottom of the free leg is mixed either in a mix tank or inline with a basic solution, such as
sodium hydroxide or soda ash, to raise the pH prior to the fixed leg. This step converts fixed
ammonia to free ammonia as shown in the following equation:
NH4+ + NaOH—> NH3 + H20 + Na+ (8-3)
8-10
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
The fixed leg then removes the converted ammonia in the same manner as the free leg. Liquid
from the bottom of the fixed leg is cooled and transferred to a holding tank prior to further on-
site treatment to remove any residual ammonia, or before discharge to a POTW.
Ammonia stripping also removes cyanide, phenols, and other volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) typically found in cokemaking wastewater. Free cyanide, a component of
total cyanide, is removed in the free leg, while VOCs, including phenols, are removed in both the
free and fixed legs.
Based on data from EPA's iron and steel sampling program, well-operated
ammonia distillation systems can remove approximately 99 percent of the ammonia from the
waste stream. Additionally, the sampling data show typical removals of total cyanide and
phenols of approximately 98 and 26 percent, respectively. The data also indicate other VOCs,
found at low concentrations in the influent to the still, are removed to near or below the detection
limit. The efficiency of the distillation tower is related to the number of trays (transfer units) that
the liquid must pass over before reaching the bottom. Therefore, the higher the tower, the more
trays and the greater the ammonia removal efficiency. The tower diameter is a function of the
flow rate to the system. Spent ammonia liquor flows reported in industry surveys range from 30
to 360 gallons per minute (gpm). Ammonia distillation towers in the cokemaking industry
typically range in height from 30 feet to over 100 feet, contain 20 to 30 trays, and have diameters
ranging between 4 and 8 feet.
Cooling Technologies
Cooling technologies are used to attain water temperatures appropriate to facilitate
end-of-pipe treatment and for reuse in high-rate recycle systems. Blast furnace, vacuum
degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming operations use cooling methods in recirculation
systems. By-product recovery cokemaking plants also commonly use cooling prior to biological
treatment systems to prevent water temperatures detrimental to biomass.
• Cooling Towers. Cooling towers allow for temperature control for recycle
process waster. Counterflow induced draft cooling towers are common in
the iron and steel industry. The counterflow arrangement is superior to the
cross-flow tower for greater cooling ranges (Reference 8-5). Performance
of a given cooling tower is governed by the ratio of the weights of air to
water and the time of contact between water and air. The time of contact
is governed largely by the time required for the water to discharge from the
nozzles and fall through the tower to the basin. The time of contact is
therefore obtained in a given type of unit by varying the height of the
tower. Figure 8-3 illustrates a typical cooling tower. Cooling towers are
also used in end-of-pipe treatment systems. Cooling towers used in
ironmaking and steelmaking treatment systems cool 100-130°F water to
approximately 75-85°F.
8-11
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
• Shell-and-Tube Heat Exchangers. This is an indirect contact device that
facilitates the transfer of heat from one fluid stream to another.
Counterflow, shell-and-tube heat exchangers are common in the iron and
steel industry. Liquid to be cooled or heated is pumped through tubes that
run the length of the heat exchanger's shell while another liquid to be
cooled or heated is pumped through the shell and passes over the tubes.
Baffles placed along the shell direct the flow in the shell over the tubes to
promote turbulence and support tubes in horizontal units. Heat exchangers
cool cokemaking wastewater from approximately 150-200° F to under
100°F prior to biological treatment.
Cyanide Treatment Technologies
Several treatment technologies are available and demonstrated to treat cyanide-
containing wastewater and are used either as cyanide pretreatment or as a wastewater polishing
step. In biological treatment, many microorganisms can acclimate to relatively high
concentrations of cyanides and have been documented to successfully treat wastewater with
cyanide concentrations up to 30 mg/L (Reference 8-6). However, in these cases, cyanide-
containing wastewater is typically treated to remove cyanide as add-ons to biological treatment.
Cyanide treatment technologies used by or applicable to the iron and steel industry are described
below.
• Alkaline and Breakpoint Chlorination. Alkaline chlorination is used to
destroy cyanide, and to a lesser extent, ammonia, and phenolics in
wastewater. Alkaline chlorination uses sodium hypochlorite or chlorine
gas in a carefully controlled pH environment to remove cyanide and
ammonia; however, the system is operated to optimize cyanide removal at
the expense of ammonia removal. The process oxidizes cyanide to
bicarbonate and nitrogen gas, and ammonia to nitrogen gas, hydrochloric
acid, and water, as illustrated by the following chemical reactions
(Reference 8-6):
Cyanide:
CN" + ocr —> CNO" + cr (8-4)
CNO" + 1.50C1" —> HCO3- + 1/2N2 + 1.5C1- + 1/2H+ (8-5)
Ammonia:
2NH4+ + 3HOC1 —> N2 + 3H20 + 3HC1 + 2H+ (8-6)
The equipment consists of two reaction tanks, each with an agitator and a
pH and oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) controller. The first step
(tank 1) of the reaction oxidizes cyanides to cyanate. To effect the
8-12
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
reaction, sodium hypochlorite or chlorine is metered into the reaction tank
as necessary to maintain the ORP at 350 to 400 millivolts, and aqueous
sodium hydroxide is added to maintain a pH of 10 to 11. This pH dictates
that most of the cyanide exists in the CN" form, rather than as the highly
toxic hydrogen cyanide (HCN) form. In the second step (tank 2), the ORP
and the pH level are maintained at 600 millivolts and 8 to 9, respectively,
to oxidize cyanate to carbon dioxide and nitrogen. Each step has an
agitator designed to provide approximately one turnover per minute.
Alkaline chlorination can be performed at ambient temperature, can be
automatically controlled, and is capable of reducing effluent levels of
cyanide to below detection. However, the reaction must occur at carefully
controlled pH levels and has the possibility of chemical interferences when
treating mixed wastes. Cyanide readily forms complexes with a number of
metals, including zinc, iron, nickel, and cadmium, which are frequently
found in iron and steel wastewater. These complexes reduce the
effectiveness of alkaline chlorination treatment. Therefore, the
effectiveness of the unit depends on the pretreatment and segregation of
cyanide waste streams and the careful control of pH. The size and type of
system solely depends on the cyanide waste stream flow volume (See
Section 14.5 of the Iron and Steel Administrative Record for additional
information regarding sizing of alkaline chlorination systems). In addition
to wastewater segregation and careful pH control, another disadvantage of
alkaline chlorination is that oxidation of organic compounds using
chlorine has the potential to form trihalomethanes. Additionally, there are
several safety concerns associated with the handling of chlorine gas and
with the gas feed systems. This technology can be used to treat cyanide
from by-product recovery cokemaking, blast furnace, and sintering
operations.
Breakpoint chlorination is similar to alkaline chlorination in terms of
equipment and controls, but distinctly different in terms of the operating
pH (7 to 8) and the targeted pollutant (ammonia). Breakpoint chlorination
is operated to optimize ammonia removal at the expense of cyanide
removal, although incidental removals of cyanide and phenols will occur.
Breakpoint chlorination uses the same treatment chemicals (chlorine or
sodium hypochlorite) as alkaline chlorination, and the ammonia and
cyanide chemical reactions are the same as those shown in Equations 8-4
through 8-6. Advantages of breakpoint chlorination are that treatment can
be performed at ambient temperature, can be automatically controlled, and
is capable of reducing effluent levels of ammonia to below detection.
Disadvantages include an increase in dissolved solids of the wastewater
and the potential for oxidation of organic compounds to form
trihalomethanes, which are suspected carcinogens. Additionally, there are
several safety concerns associated with the handling of chlorine gas and
8-13
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
with the gas feed systems. Breakpoint chlorination can be used to treat
both cokemaking and blast furnace ironmaking wastewater.
• Cyanide Precipitation. Cyanide precipitation combines cyanide in
wastewater with iron to form an insoluble iron-cyanide complex that can
be precipitated and removed by gravity settling. The process is illustrated
by the following chemical reaction:
3CN" + Fe+3 —> FeCN3 (8-7)
Excess iron is typically added as ferric sulfate (Fe2(S04)3) and the pH is
adjusted to approximately 4.5 using sulfuric acid to optimize cyanide
precipitation. Following complex formation, polymer is added to
flocculate the iron-cyanide particulates, allowing them to settle in a gravity
clarifier. Effluent from the gravity clarifier can be adjusted-to a neutral pH
prior to discharge, or the pH can be raised to approximately 9 to
precipitate any residual metals. Industry survey data indicate that cyanide
precipitation systems coupled with multimedia filtration can achieve
effluent cyanide concentrations of approximately 1 mg/L. The iron and
steel industry uses a proprietary cyanide precipitation technology to treat
cokemaking wastewater.
• Ozone Oxidation. Cyanide removal can be accomplished through ozone
oxidation. Ozone gas is bubbled through a wastewater solution containing
cyanide. A portion of the ozone in the gas phase is transferred to the
liquid where it reacts with cyanide, converting it to cyanate. Additional
ozone reacts with the cyanate for complete conversion to nitrogen gas,
ammonia, and bicarbonate as shown by the reactions below:
CN" + 03 —> CNCT + 02 (8-8)
3CNO" + 203 + 20H" + 2H20 —> 3HCOf + NH3 + N2 + 202 (8-9)
The reaction rate is limited by mass-transfer of ozone to the liquid, the
cyanide concentration, and temperature (Reference 8-7). Ozone is not
effective in treating metallocyanide complexes, such as ferrocyanide,
unless ultraviolet light is added to the reaction vessel. Ozone also oxidizes
other iron and steel pollutants of concern, such as ammonia and various
organic compounds.
One advantage of ozone over chlorine is the type of residuals formed.
Oxidation of organic compounds using chlorine has the potential to form
trihalomethanes, which are suspected carcinogens. Ozone oxidation of
organic compounds forms short chained organic acids, ketones, and
aldehydes instead. Equipment required for ozone oxidation of cyanides
8-14
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
includes an ozone generator, gas diffusion system, a mixed reaction tank,
and off-gas controls to prevent the release of unreacted ozone. The major
disadvantages of ozone oxidation are the operating costs and the capital
costs of the ozone generating and transfer equipment and off-gas control
system. EPA is not aware of any iron and steel facilities using ozone
treatment for cyanide.
Oily Wastewater Treatment Technologies
Hot forming and cold rolling operation wastewater contain high levels of O&G.
For hot forming operations, scale pits and roughing clarifiers fitted with oil skimmers remove
nonemulsified O&G from high-rate recycle systems. These technologies are discussed in the
solids separation technologies subsection. Oily wastewater generated by cold rolling operations
contain some emulsified oils that require chemical treatment prior to removal. Characteristics of
emulsified oils vary widely, depending on the types of oils used in the process. The following
describes technologies commonly used to remove both emulsified and nonemulsified oils.
• Gravity Flotation. Oil skimming via gravity flotation can be used for
nonemulsified oil treatment. The wastewater is processed in a tank or
basin of sufficient size and design to allow the oil to separate and rise to
the surface. Typical wastewater residence times vary from 0.5 to over an
hour. At the surface, the oil is retained by the underflow baffles and
removed. Common devices used to separate nonemulsified oils include
disk, belt, and rotating drum oil skimmers, and coalescers.
Skimming is a simple method to separate floating oil from wastewater.
Skimming devices are typically mounted onto the side of a tank and
operate on a continuous basis. The disk skimmer consists of a vertically
rotating disk (typically 12 to 24 inches in diameter) that is partially
submerged into the liquid of a tank (typically to a depth of 4 to 12 inches
below the liquid surface). The disk continuously revolves between spring-
loaded wiper blades that are located above the liquid surface. The
adhesive characteristics of the floating oil cause the oil to adhere to the
disk. The oil is removed from the disk as the disk surface passes through
the wiper blades and is diverted to a run-off spout for collection.
Maximum skimming rates typically range from 2 to 10 gallons per hour of
oil. Belt and drum skimmers operate in a similar manner, with either a
continuous belt or rotating drum partially submerged in a tank. As the
surface of the belt or drum emerges from the liquid, the oil that adheres to
its surface is scraped (drum) or squeezed (belt) off and diverted to a
collection vessel.
Coalescers are typically designed as tanks containing a coalescing media
that accelerates phase separation. The media in the coalescers is a material
such as polypropylene, ceramic, or glass, which attracts oil in preference to
8-15
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
water (i.e., oleophilic). Oily wastewater passes through the unit and the oil
adheres to the coalescing media. The oil forms droplets that conglomerate
and rise to the surface of the tank where they are removed by a skimming
device or weir (Reference 8-8). Gravity flotation is commonly used in the
iron and steel industry to remove nonemulsified oils from hot forming and
continuous casting wastewaters.
Oil/Water Separation. The American Petroleum Institute (API) separator
is the most commonly used type of oil/water separator to remove
nonemulsified oils. The API oil/water separator is typically a rectangular
basin, designed with baffles to trap sediments and retain floating oils, that
can achieve 150-micron droplet oil removal as per API standards. This
separator is used for wastewater containing nonemulsified oil with heavy
solids content or when long retention times are required. Standard
configurations of these systems include surface oil skimmers, sloped
bottoms, and augers to remove collected sludge. Figure 8-4 presents an
oil/water separator. Standard API oil/water separators can reduce solids
concentrations to less than 100 mg/L. Oil/water separators are commonly
used in the iron and steel industry to remove nonemulsified oils from hot
forming, steel finishing, and forging wastewaters.
Emulsion Breaking Followed by Dissolved Air Flotation. If wastewater
contains emulsified oils, it must undergo chemical treatment to separate
the oils from solution prior to further treatment steps. Chemical treatment
breaks up stable oil/water emulsions (oil dispersed in water, stabilized by
electrical charges and emulsifying agents). A stable emulsion will not
separate without chemical treatment. Chemical emulsion breaking is used
to treat wastewater streams containing emulsified coolants and lubricants.
This technology is also used to treat cleaning solutions that contain
emulsified oils.
The major equipment needed for chemical emulsion breaking includes
reaction chambers with agitators, chemical storage tanks, chemical feed
systems, pumps, and piping. Factors to be considered for breaking
emulsions are type of chemicals, dosage and sequence of addition, pH,
mixing, heating requirements, and retention time. Chemicals such as
polymers, alum, ferric chloride, and organic emulsion breakers break
emulsions by neutralizing repulsive charges between particles,
precipitating or salting out emulsifying agents, or weakening the interfacial
film between the oil and water so it is readily broken. Reactive cations
(e.g., H+, Al+3, Fe+3) and cationic polymers are particularly effective in
breaking dilute oil/water emulsions. Once the charges have been
neutralized or the interfacial film broken, the small oil droplets and
suspended solids either adsorb on the surface of the floe that is formed or
break out and float to the top. Different types of emulsion-breaking
8-16
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
chemicals are used for different types of oils. If more than one chemical is
necessary, the sequence of addition can affect both breaking efficiency and
chemical dosages.
Wastes generated by chemical emulsion breaking include surface oil and
oily sludge, which are usually contract hauled for disposal by a licensed
contractor. If the recovered oil has a sufficiently low percentage of water,
the oil may be burned for its fuel value or processed and reused.
Dissolved air flotation following chemical emulsion breaking is an
effective method of oil removal. With dissolved air flotation, air is
injected into a fluid under pressure. The amount of air that can dissolve in
a fluid increases with increasing pressure. When the pressure is released,
the air comes out of solution as bubbles that attach to O&G particles, thus
"floating" the O&G to the surface. There are two types of operational
modes for dissolved air flotation systems, full flow pressurization and
recycle pressurization. In full flow pressurization, all influent wastewater
is pressurized and injected with air. The wastewater then enters the
flotation unit where the pressure is relieved and bubbles form, causing the
O&G to rise to the surface. In a recycle pressurization system, part of the
clarified effluent is recycled back to the influent of the dissolved air
flotation unit, then pressurized and supersaturated with air. The recycled
effluent then flows through a pressure release valve to the flotation unit.
Figure 8-5 illustrates a typical dissolved air flotation unit.
Dissolved air flotation systems can achieve O&G removal efficiencies of
90% or greater. Emulsion breaking with dissolved air flotation requires
more equipment, supervision, and control than gravity flotation and API
separators; however, this technology is more efficient in removing O&G,
especially nonemulsified oils. Emulsion breaking followed by dissolved
air flotation is commonly used in the iron and steel industry to treat
emulsified coolants, lubricants, and cleaning solutions.
• Ultrafiltration. Ultrafiltration is a pressure-driven membrane process that
separates emulsified oils without the need for chemical emulsion breaking.
Using an applied pressure difference across a membrane, wastewater and
small compounds (oil and other contaminants) pass through the membrane
and are collected as permeate while larger compounds (emulsified oils) are
retained by the membrane and are recovered as concentrate.
Ultrafiltration is used in the iron and steel industry to remove materials
ranging from 0.002 to 0.2 microns or molecular-weights from 500 to
1,000,000 (e.g., oil emulsion and colloidal silica) (Reference 8-9).
Prefiltration of the ultrafiltration influent is commonly used to remove
large particles and free oil to prevent membrane damage and membrane
8-17
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
fouling. Many ultrafiltration membranes are typically made of
homogeneous polymer or copolymer material. The transmembrane
pressure required for ultrafiltration typically ranges between 15 to 200
pounds per square inch and depends on membrane pore size.
Ultrafiltration generates a concentrated oil phase that is 2 to 5 percent of
the influent volume (Reference 8-10). Oily concentrates are typically
contract hauled or incinerated and the permeate (water phase) can either be
treated further to remove water soluble metals and organic constituents or
directly discharged, depending on local and state requirements.
The ultrafiltration system includes pumps and feed vessels, piping or
tubing, monitoring and control units for temperature, pressure and flow
rate, process and cleaning tanks, and membranes. Membranes are
specifically designed to handle various waste stream parameters, including
temperature, pH, and chemical compatibility. Membranes can be
purchased in several different configurations, including hollow fiber,
tubular, flat plate, and spiral wound (Reference 8-9). The configuration
selected for each application depends on the type of application. For
example, tubular membranes are commonly used to separate suspended
solids, whereas spiral wound membranes are used to separate oil from
water. The spiral wound design ultrafiltration membranes have a high
membrane packing density and effective mass transfer characteristics.
Ultrafiltration is more effective at removing emulsified oils than
previously discussed technologies, and has a smaller design "foot print"
than emulsion breaking/dissolved flotation systems. However,
replacement membranes are expensive, and the technology requires more
operator attention than gravity flotation and API separator systems.
Ultrafiltration is commonly used in the iron and steel industry to treat
emulsified coolants, lubricants, and cleaning solutions.
Carbon Dioxide Injection
Carbon dioxide injection is one method of removing scale-forming metal ions
(hardness) that accumulate in water recirculation systems from BOF recycle water. Carbonate
precipitation occurs in the recycle system through injection of carbon dioxide (C02) prior to
clarification. Carbon dioxide is injected through a very fine bubble diffusion assembly, which is
located in a basin with a minimum water depth of 10 feet. Liquid C02 can be stored on site and
preheated prior to injection to create C02 gas. A series of baffles or a mixer directly above the
C02 injection point help keep the bubbles submerged as long as possible.
Carbon dioxide can also be introduced by a pressurized solution feed system
(PSF). The PSF system is designed to utilize 95 percent of the C02 feed gas. The gas is forced
into a solution under high pressure to maintain the gas in solution until it is injected into the
8-18
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
wastewater. The carbonated solution, which is now carbonic acid and excess C02, is injected
through a specially designed injector that maintains the PSF system pressure. This allows excess
C02 gas, if any, to be released and immediately consumed by the wastewater. Both C02 delivery
systems form carbonic acid and bicarbonate alkalinity as illustrated by Equation 8-10 below:
H20 + C02 > H2C03 > H+ + HCCV (8-10)
Carbonate reacts with magnesium and calcium ions to form insoluble precipitate, which is
removed in a subsequent clarifier, as shown in Equation 8-11:
Ca2+ + Mg2+ + 2HC03 + heat -—> CaC03 i + C02 + HzO (8-11)
Carbon dioxide injection is commonly used by the iron and steel industry to
reduce effluent hardness levels to 10 to 15 mg/L as CaC03 in BOF recycle systems. However,
the layout of an existing recycle system may not allow installation of carbon dioxide storage for
the injection system. Carbon dioxide injection systems require regular maintenance and testing
of automatic controllers and calibration of electrodes to ensure system reliability.
Metals Treatment Technologies
Dissolved and total metals are present in high-rate recycle system blowdown
wastewater from blast furnace, sintering, BOF, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting
operations at levels that may require treatment before discharge. Pickling, electroplating, and
other steel finishing processes also generate wastewater containing dissolved and total metals.
Chemical precipitation followed by gravity sedimentation is the treatment
technology most commonly used by the industry to remove dissolved and total metals from
wastewater. When chromium VI is present in the wastewater, hexavalent chromium reduction is
commonly used as a pretreatment step prior to hydroxide precipitation for hexavalent-chromium-
bearing wastewater generated by steel finishing operations. Below is a discussion of hexavalent
chromium reduction and chemical precipitation.
• Hexavalent Chromium Reduction. Reduction is a chemical reaction in
which electrons are transferred from one chemical (the reducing agent) to
the chemical being reduced (the oxidizing agent). Sulfur dioxide,-sodium
bisulfite, sodium metabisulfite, and ferrous sulfate form strong reducing
agents in water. Iron and steel finishing sites use them to reduce
hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form, which allows the metal to be
removed from solution by chemical precipitation. The reaction in these
processes is illustrated by the following sulfur dioxide reaction (reduction
using other reagents is chemically similar):
2H2Cr04 + 3S02 —> Cr2(S04)3 + 2H20 (8-12)
8-19
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
An operating pH level between 2 and 3 is typical. At pH levels above 5,
the reduction rate is slow and oxidizing agents such as dissolved oxygen
and ferric iron interfere with the reduction process by consuming the
reducing agent. However, depending upon the initial pH, a significant
amount acid may be required to lower and maintain the target pH.
Figure 8-6 presents a hexavalent chromium reduction system. Typical
treatment involves retention in a reaction tank for 45 minutes. The
reaction tank is equipped with pH and ORP controls. Sulfuric acid is
added to maintain a pH of approximately 2.0, and a reducing agent is
metered to the reaction tank to maintain the ORP at 250 to 300 millivolts.
The reaction tank is equipped with an impeller designed to provide
approximately one bath volume per minute.
Chemical reduction of hexavalent chromium is a proven technology
widely used at iron and steel finishing sites to reduce hexavalent
chromium concentrations prior to chemical precipitation. Operation at
ambient conditions requires little energy, and the process is well suited to
automatic control.
Chemical Precipitation. Chemical precipitation involves removing
metallic contaminants from aqueous solutions by converting soluble,
heavy metals to insoluble salts. The precipitated solids are then removed
from solution by flocculation followed by sedimentation and/or filtration.
Precipitation is caused by the addition of chemical reagents that adjust the
pH of the water to the minimum solubility of the metal. The standard
reagents include the following:
— Lime (calcium hydroxide),
— Caustic (sodium hydroxide),
— Magnesium hydroxide,
— Soda ash (sodium carbonate),
— Trisodium phosphate,
— Sodium sulfide, and
— Ferrous sulfide.
These reagents precipitate metals as hydroxides, carbonates, phosphates,
and sulfides. The majority of iron and steel sites use lime or caustic for
precipitation. Metals commonly removed from solution by precipitation
include arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury,
nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc.
Figure 8-7 shows a typical chemical precipitation process for metals
removal. A chemical precipitant is added to the metal-containing water in
a stirred reaction vessel. The dissolved metals are converted to an
8-20
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
insoluble form by a chemical reaction between the soluble metal and the
precipitant. The suspended particles are then flocculated and either settled
in a clarifier or removed via a membrane filter. Granular media filtration
can be used for wastewater polishing to remove remaining suspended
metal precipitates.
Hydroxide precipitation is the predominant type of chemical precipitation
used by the iron and steel industry. Hydroxide precipitation normally
involves using calcium hydroxide (lime), sodium hydroxide (caustic), or
magnesium hydroxide as a precipitant to remove metals as insoluble metal
hydroxides. The reaction is illustrated by the following equation for
precipitation of a divalent metal using sodium hydroxide:
Metar + 2NaOH —> Metal(OH)2 + 2Na+ (8-13)
The effluent metals concentration attained by hydroxide precipitation
depends on the metals present, precipitant used, the reaction conditions
(especially pH), and the presence of other materials that may inhibit
precipitation. Hydroxide precipitation achieves greater than 95% removal
of metals found most frequently in industry wastewater, such as lead and
zinc.
The solubility of the metal is directly related to the pH of its environment.
Many metals can form low solubility hydroxides in the pH range of 8.5 to
11.5. However, several metallic compounds such as lead, zinc, nickel, and
copper are amphoteric and exhibit a point of minimum solubility. Any
further addition of alkali can drastically increase the solubility of the
compound. Different metals have various minimum solubility points,
which can pose a challenge when aqueous waste streams have highly
variable metal compositions. Figure 8-8 shows the minimum solubilities
of some common metals at various pH values (Reference 8-11). Figure 8-
8 was developed based on empirical studies using single metal solutions in
reagent-free water. Minimum metal solubilities in complex wastewater
may differ from those shown in Figure 8-8.
The solubility curves in Figure 8-8 indicate that achieving the minimum
solubility of all metals at a single operating pH would be difficult. At a
pH at which the solubility of one metal hydroxide may be minimized, the
solubility of another may be relatively high. In most cases, a pH between
9 and 11, selected on the basis of jar tests or operating experience with the
water, produces an acceptable effluent quality. For a waste containing
several metals, however, more than one precipitation/sedimentation stage
with different pH control points may be necessary to remove all the metals
of concern to the desired level. In practice, however, iron and steel
8-21
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
facilities generally use only one-stage precipitation optimized for greatest
removal of targeted metals.
Incidental iron coprecipitation also occurs at facilities discharging spent
hydrochloric and/or sulfuric acid to treatment. Pollutants of concern
(metals) are enmeshed by the iron precipitates, and subsequently removed
during a solids removal step. Some facilities add ferric chloride or ferric
sulfate to induce coprecipitation.
Removal of precipitated metals typically involves adding flocculating
agents or polymers to destabilize the hydrodynamic forces that hold the
particle in suspension. For a continuous system, polymer is normally
added in-line between the reaction tank and the flocculation tank. In the
flocculation tank, the mixer is slowed to promote agglomeration of the
particles until their density is greater than water and they settle from
solution in the clarifier.
• Ion Exchange. Ion exchange is a reversible chemical reaction that
exchanges ions (typically metals) in a feed stream for ions of like charge
on the surface of an ion-exchange resin. Resins are broadly divided into
cationic or anionic types. Typical cation resins exchange H+ for other
cations, while anion resins exchange OH" for other anions. Figure 8-9
shows a typical ion exchange system. Many types of process wastewater
are excellent candidates for ion exchange, including the rinse water from
plating processes of lead, nickel, tin, tin-lead, chromium, and zinc.
Ion exchange can be used for steel finishing water recycling and/or metal
recovery. For water recycling, cation and anion columns are placed in
series. The feed stream is deionized and the product water is reused for
rinsing. The regenerant from the cation column typically contains metal
species (with the exception of chromium, which is captured in the anion
column), which can be recovered in elemental form. The anion
regenerant, which does not contain metals, is typically discharged to end-
of-pipe wastewater treatment. When metal recovery is the only objective,
a single or double cation column unit containing selective resin is used.
These resins attract divalent cations while allowing monovalent cations to
pass, a process usually referred to as metal scavenging. Water cannot be
recycled because contaminants other than the target cations remain in the
stream exiting the column.
Ion exchange equipment ranges from small, manual, single-column units
to multicolumn, highly automated units. For continuous service, two sets
of columns are necessary. One set handles the service flow, while the
other set is regenerated. Thus, two-column metal scavenging and four-
column deionizing systems are common. Automatic systems direct the
8-22
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
wastewater flow and initiate regeneration with little or no operator
interaction. Equipment size is based on flow volume and concentration.
Resin capacity varies but often ranges from 1 to 2 pounds per cubic feet.
Columns are typically sized to handle wastewater flow for at least a period
of time equal to the time required for regeneration. Automatic systems are
sized to provide continuous service. Regeneration volume typically ranges
from 2 to 4 resin bed volumes of a dilute acid or caustic.
Other similar technologies that could be applied to pickling and
electroplating wastewater generated by steel finishing operations include
electrowinning and reverse osmosis. Electrowinning can recover metals
from ion exchange regenerants and return the metals to the plating bath.
Reverse osmosis is a membrane technology that can be used to recover
metal salts and generate a treated water stream that can be recycled for use
as a rinse water. Neither of these technologies were reported in industry
survey responses as a metals recovery technology; however, these
technologies are commonly used in similar electroplating operations and
are therefore applicable to the iron and steel finishing industry. For more
information on these processes, refer to the Development Document for
the Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Metal
Products and Machinery Point Source Category (Reference 8-10).
Solids Separation Technologies
Iron and steel facilities generate many types of solid wastes, including scale,
biosolids, precipitate from cyanide and chemical precipitation systems, and solids from filtration
backwash. The most common types of solids separation technologies used are scale pits,
classifiers, and clarifiers.
• Scale Pits with Oil Skimming. Scale pits provide primary sedimentation
and oil separation for recycle process water. Scale pits remove large,
easily settleable iron scale. Pits are scraped or dredged to remove iron
scale for reuse or disposal in a landfill on or off site. Oil is typically
skimmed from the surface of the wastewater by a rope or belt skimmer and
collected for off-site reclamation.
• Classifiers. Classifiers provide additional primary sedimentation for
recycle process water. Solids are removed using screw or rake systems
and typically disposed of on or off site.
• Clarification/Sedimentation. Gravity sedimentation in clarifiers is a
common method of solids removal used in recycle and end-of-pipe
treatment systems. Figure 8-10 depicts a typical clarifier. To improve the
performance of high-efficiency and roughing clarifiers, coagulants such as
polymers are added. These coagulant aids enhance solids removal by
8-23
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
aiding in the formation of larger, more readily settleable particles. High-
efficiency clarifiers are used for end-of-pipe treatment and within water
recycle systems that do not need water quality that is equivalent to filtered
effluent for reuse in manufacturing processes. Systems with large amounts
of scale or suspended solids need to pump contact cooling waters that
collect in scale pits to a roughing clarifier for coarse solids removal prior
to filtration, cooling, and recirculation.
Two important design parameters for roughing and high-efficiency
clarifiers include the surface area of the clarifier and the detention time.
Both high-efficiency and roughing clarifiers are normally designed on the
basis of a surface-loading rate expressed as gallons per day per square foot
of surface area (gal/day/ft2) and provide 90 to 150 minutes of detention
based on the average flow rate (Reference 8-5). The surface-loading rate
depends on the type of material to be separated. The table below shows
the range of surface loading rates for high-efficiency clarifiers (Reference
8-12).
Suspension
Range gal/day/ft2
Peak Flow gal/day/ft2
Activated sludge solids
590 - 785
1,460
Alum floe
613 - 1,200
1,200
Iron floe
613 - 1,200
1,200
Lime floe
730- 1,460
1,460
Untreated wastewater
613-1,200
1,200
However, unlike more efficient clarifiers, roughing clarifiers are designed
to remove large solids that rapidly settle. Therefore, surface loading rates
may be three to four times those observed for high-efficiency clarifiers
presented in the table. When the area of the tank has been established, the
detention period in the tank is governed by the water depth.
Open-top circular or rectangular shaped clarifiers are typically used for
sedimentation of biological treatment solids (also referred to as secondary
clarification). For sedimentation of iron-cyanide solids, inclined tube or
lamella clarifiers are commonly used. Depending on land availability and
wastewater flow rates, open-top, inclined tube, or lamella clarifiers are
used for sedimentation of metal hydroxides generated from treatment of
ironmaking, steelmaking, and steel finishing wastewater. The inclined
tubes in the clarifier are oriented at angles varying between 45 and 60
degrees from the horizontal plane. Although the tube may be shaped in
many forms, rectangular or square shapes are more common. Water enters
the tank and solids settle to the tank bottom. As the water continues
8-24
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
upward through the tubes, additional solids settle on the lower side of the
tube. The clarified effluent continues up through the tube and passes over
the weir. The solids collect and agglomerate on the lower side of the tube
and, because of the tube inclination, slide downward through the tube.
They then drop back into the settling tank, where they collect on the
bottom, and are scraped away into a sludge hopper before discharge to a
sludge thickener. The surface area or "foot print" covered by the lamella
plates is typically 65 to 80 percent of that required for a circular clarifier.
Their design promotes laminar flow within the tubes, which enhances
solids settling, even when the water throughput is relatively high.
However, short circuiting or flow surges can reduce clarifier effectiveness.
Lamella clarifiers are commonly used in the iron and steel industry to
clarify steel finishing wastewater. Ironmaking and steelmaking
wastewater treatments systems have substantially higher flows than
finishing systems, and therefore use common circular clarifiers.
Microfiltration for Precipitated Metals Removal One alternative to
conventional clarifiers for removal of insoluble solids, following chemical
precipitation systems, is microfiltration. Microfiltration has been observed
at facilities manufacturing metal products and machinery and could
potentially be used to remove solids from chemical precipitation effluents
at iron and steel facilities (Reference 8-10). Microfiltration is a pressure-
driven membrane process used to separate solution components based on
molecular size and shape. Using an applied pressure difference across a
membrane, solvent (wastewater) and small solute (pollutants) species pass
through the membrane and are collected as permeate while larger
compounds are retained by the membrane and are recovered as
concentrate.
Microfiltration is used to remove materials ranging from 0.1 to 1.0-
microns (e.g., colloidal particles, heavy metal particulates and their
hydroxides). Numerous microfiltration membranes are isotropic in
morphology and are typically made of homogeneous polymer material.
Prefiltration is advisable for suspended solids loads above 200 mg/1. The
transmembrane pressure required for microfiltration typically ranges
between 3 to 50 pounds per square inch (psi) and depends on membrane
pore size.
Microfiltration generates a concentrated suspended solid slurry that is
typically discharged to dewatering equipment, such as a sludge thickener
and filter press. The permeate can either be treated further for pH
adjustment or be directly discharged, depending on local and state
requirements. The microfiltration system includes pumps and feed
vessels, piping or tubing, monitoring and control units for temperature,
pressure and flow rate, process and cleaning tanks, and membranes.
8-25
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Membranes are specifically designed to handle various waste stream
parameters, including temperature, pH, and chemical compatibility.
Membranes can be purchased in several different configurations, including
hollow fiber, tubular, flat plate, and spiral wound (Reference 8-9). The
configuration selected for each application depends on the type of
application. For example, tubular membranes are commonly used to
separate suspended solids, whereas spiral wound membranes are used to
separate oils from water. The tubular design microfiltration membranes
are the least likely to foul with heavy suspended solids loadings and are
easy to clean. Microfiltration is more effective at solids removal and has a
smaller design "foot print" than conventional clarifiers. However,
replacement membranes are expensive, and the technology requires more
operator attention than a clarifier.
Polishing Technologies
Polishing technologies are the final treatment steps designed to remove residual,
low concentrations of target pollutants from iron and steel wastewater prior to discharge.
Examples of polishing technologies include multimedia filters following clarification to remove
small concentrations (less than 20 mg/L) of entrained suspended solids, or carbon adsorption to
remove trace concentrations of organic pollutants remaining in cokemaking wastewater
following biological treatment. The following paragraphs describe each of these polishing
technologies observed at iron and steel facilities.
• Multimedia Filtration (Mixed-Media Filtration). Multimedia filtration,
one of the oldest and most widely applied types of filtration used to
remove suspended solids from wastewaters, uses a bed of granular
particles as the filter medium. Figure 8-11 illustrates a multimedia filter.
The bed may consist of one type of medium (e.g., sand) of varying particle
size or different types of media (e.g., sand and gravel, sand and anthracite)
with differing densities and different particle sizes (Reference 8-12).
Multimedia filters can be more efficient but more expensive and complex
than single-media filters. The filter bed is contained within a basin or tank
and is supported by an underdrain system, which allows the filtered liquid
to be drawn off while retaining the filter medium in place. As suspended
particle-laden water passes through the bed of the filter medium, particles
are trapped on top of and within the bed. When the pressure drop across
the filter is large enough to impede flow, it is cleaned to remove solids by
backwashing, whereby wash water is forced through the bed in the reverse
direction of original fluid flow. Backwashing causes the bed to become
fluidized, with solids being entrained and discharged with wash water.
The backwash water is typically sent to clarifiers or gravity thickeners to
remove the solids. For dual media filters, the filtration rate varies from 2
to 8 gpm/ft2 with bed depths ranging from 24 to 48 inches.
8-26
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
While multimedia filtration is a proven technology for fine particle
removal, the system requires proper attention to monitoring, maintenance,
and backwash cycles to maximize filter efficiency. Bed shrinkage is a
potential problem for filters. When the media grains (typically sand)
become covered by a slime coating, this causes the bed to compact and
possibly to develop cracks. These cracks may allow unfiltered wastewater
to pass through the bed. Also, air binding, caused by a release of nitrogen
and/or oxygen gases dissolved in the wastewater, creates air bubbles in the
bed, which may interfere with the filtration rate.
Granular media filters are used to remove suspended solids from
cokemaking wastewater following biological treatment, and from high-rate
recycle cooling water and blowdown water from blast furnace ironmaking,
sintering, continuous casting, and hot forming operations.
Granular Activated Carbon. Granular activated carbon (GAC) removes
dissolved organic compounds from wastewater streams via adsorption.
Adsorption is a natural process by which molecules of a dissolved
compound collect on and adhere to the surface of an adsorbent solid.
Adsorption occurs when the attractive forces at the carbon surface
overcome the attractive forces of the liquid. Activated carbon is a well-
suited medium for this process due to its large internal surface area, high
attraction to adsorbates (pollutants to be removed), and hydrophobic
nature (i.e., water will not occupy bonding sites and interfere with the
adsorption of pollutants). Pollutants in the wastewater bond to the
activated carbon grains until all the surface bonding sites are occupied.
When all bonding sites are occupied, the carbon is considered to be
"spent." Spent carbon requires regeneration, which reduces adsorption
capacity. After several regenerations, the carbon is disposed.
A granular carbon system generally consists of vessels in which the carbon
is placed, forming a "filter" bed. Vessels are usually circular for pressure
systems or rectangular for gravity flow systems. For wastewater treatment,
activated carbon is packed into one or more filter beds or columns. Typical
treatment systems consist of multiple filter beds in series. Wastewater
flows through the filter beds and is allowed to come in contact with all
portions of the activated carbon. The activated carbon in the upper portion
of the column is spent first (assuming operation is downflow mode), and
progressively lower regions of the column are spent as the adsorption zone
moves down the unit. When pollutant concentrations at the bottom of the
column begin to increase above acceptable levels, the entire column is
considered spent and must be replaced.
All vessels are equipped with carbon removal and loading mechanisms to
allow spent carbon to be removed and new material to be added. Vessels
8-27
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
are backwashed periodically to remove the accumulated suspended solids
in the filter bed. Surface wash and air scour systems can also be used as
part of backwash cycle. Activated carbon systems may include on-site
carbon storage vessels and thermal regeneration facilities, or off-site
vendors may provide these services.
Activated carbon effectively removes a wide range of soluble organic
compounds, and can produce a high-quality effluent. However, activated
carbon beds must be backwashed periodically to avoid a buildup of head
loss from solids accumulation. This backwash must then be treated prior
to discharge. Additionally, the bed must be regenerated once the carbon is
spent. If the regeneration is not performed on site, the spent carbon is sent
to off-site vendors. Activated carbon adsorption is used as a polishing
treatment step to remove residual concentrations of phenol and
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) from cokemaking wastewater
following biological treatment.
8.3.2 Biological Treatment
Biological treatment uses bio-oxidation to remove organic materials from
wastewater. Microorganisms under aerobic conditions use the organic materials as substrates,
thus removing them by microbial respiration and synthesis (Reference 8-13). Biological
treatment with nitrification also incorporates ammonia removal via conversion to nitrate by
biological processes. Biological denitrification then converts the nitrate to nitrogen gas.
Biological nitrification and denitrification treatment systems are described below.
Biological Treatment via Conventional Activated Sludge. Biological
treatment uses microorganisms to consume, and thereby destroy, organic
compounds as a food source. The organic compounds are used as both a
carbon and energy source for these microbes. The microbes also require
supplemental nutrients, such as ammonia and phosphorus, for growth. If
ammonia removal is required, nitrification can be incorporated into an
activated sludge biological treatment system. Nitrification is the aerobic
process of converting ammonia to nitrite and then to nitrate. Biological
treatment and nitrification is typically conducted in a conventional
activated sludge system configured with an aeration tank, a clarifier, and
return sludge equipment. Figure 8-12 presents a process flow diagram of a
typical activated sludge biological treatment system. Diffused or
mechanical aeration achieves the aerobic environment in the reactor and
also serves to maintain the mixed liquor in a completely mixed regime.
After a specified period of time, the mixture of new bacterial cells and old
bacterial cells passes into a clarifier where the cells are separated from the
treated wastewater. A portion of the settled cells is recycled to maintain
the desired concentration of organisms in the reactor, and a portion is
wasted.
8-28
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
In the nitrification process, the ammonium ion is converted to nitrate in
two steps by autotrophic bacteria (Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter,
respectively), as summarized by the following reactions (Reference 8-12):
NH4+ + 3/2 02 —-> N02" + 2H+ + H20 (8-14)
N02- + '/2 02—>N03- (8-15)
In addition to obtaining energy from the reaction shown above, the
bacteria assimilate a portion of the nitrogen into the cell tissue as shown
by the following reaction:
4C02 + HCOj- + NH4+ + H20 —> C5H7N02 + 502 (8-16)
As shown in Equation 8-16, the nitrifying autotrophic bacteria use carbon
dioxide and bicarbonate as a carbon source. Supplemental bicarbonate is
introduced to the system through soda ash addition. Phosphorous is
another key chemical required for biological growth. Biomass typically
contains two percent phosphorous; therefore, phosphoric acid is normally
added to the system as a nutrient.
The most important factor in controlling the activated sludge system is the
sludge retention time (SRT). Industry data indicate that an SRT range of
50 to 100 days for cokemaking biological treatment is typical. Other
significant factors affecting activated sludge systems include hydraulic
retention time (HRT), the BOD/TKN (total Kjeldahl nitrogen) ratio, food-
to-microorganism ratio (F/M), dissolved oxygen concentration (DO),
temperature, and pH. Typical values for a few of these factors are shown
below.
HRT (hr)
F/M
Basin
DO (mg/L)
Basin
Temperature (°F)
Basin
pH
48
0
1
o
2-4
40-100
6-9
These factors, along with influent ammonia and nitrite concentrations, are
important for nitrification. Biological treatment in the iron and steel
industry is limited to treatment of cokemaking wastewater to remove
nutrients and dissolved organic matter. By-product recovery cokemaking
operations generate wastewater containing nutrients such as ammonia and
dissolved organic matter, including phenols, VOCs, and PAHs. Biological
treatment with nitrification can reduce organic concentrations to near non-
detect; and can reduce ammonia concentrations in cokemaking wastewater
to approximately 3 mg/L, as demonstrated by data provided in industry
survey responses.
8-29
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
• Biological Treatment via Sequencing Batch Reactor. A sequencing
batch reactor (SBR) is a fill-and-draw activated sludge system capable of
treating the same types of wastewater as a conventional activated sludge
system. The main difference is that conventional activated sludge systems
treat the wastewater simultaneously in separate tanks, while an SBR
system carries out the processes sequentially in the same reactor tank.
All SBR systems follow the sequence: fill, react, settle, draw, idle. Figure
8-13 illustrates the operation cycle of an SBR system. The fill step adds
wastewater to the reactor and lasts approximately 25 percent of the full
cycle time. Aeration begins during the react step. This step, similar to
aeration tanks in a conventional activated sludge system, biodegrades
organics and if operated to achieve nitrification, converts the ammonium
ion to nitrate. The react step uses approximately 35 percent of the full
cycle time. The settle step allows solids separation to occur, providing a
clarified supernatant to be discharged as effluent. Settling accounts for
approximately 20 percent of the full cycle time. The clarified, treated
water is removed during the draw step. This step accounts for
approximately 15 percent of the full cycle time. Idle is the last step. The
purpose of the idle step in a multitank system is to provide time for one
reactor to complete its fill cycle before switching to another unit. Sludge
wasting also occurs during the idle step (Reference 8-14). Effective
nitrification requires longer reaction and sludge retention times than for
removal of only organic compounds.
SBR systems have many advantages over conventional activated sludge
systems. An SBR tank serves as an equalization basin during the fill step
and therefore can tolerate greater peak flows and/or shock loadings
without degradation of effluent quality. The mixed liquor solids (biomass)
cannot be washed out by hydraulic surges, since they can be held in the
tank as long as necessary. Additionally, no return activated sludge
pumping is required, because the mixed liquor is always in the reactor.
The effluent quality of an SBR is also comparable to a conventional
activated sludge system. However, because the discharge of effluent is
periodic, it is possible, within limits, to hold the effluent until it meets
specified requirements. Disadvantages to SBRs include the necessity of
sophisticated timers and level sensors to control the process sequences and
difficulties involved in controlling the draw step to minimize the discharge
of floating or settled sludge. Also, aeration equipment can plug during the
settle, draw, and idle steps.
• Biological Treatment via Attached Growth/Fixed Film. Attached
growth/fixed film biological filtration is an alternative to a conventional
activated sludge system or SBR. The biological processes for pollutant
removals are the same; the difference is that the microorganisms adhere to
8-30
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
the surface of a rigid supporting media. Biological filtration systems also
provide physical filtration, thereby removing solids from the wastewater.
Wastewater enters the bottom of the filters through a feed distribution
header and flows upward through the submerged media and support.
Filter bed mediums and supporting materials may include granular
particles, gravel, crushed stone, or other packing material. The microbes
attached to the medium contact the wastewater and absorb organics and
nitrogen for growth. The bed medium also filters out solids and suspended
microorganisms. The biological filter must be periodically backwashed to
prevent hindered wastewater flow. The backwash, consisting of solids and
microorganisms, is settled in a clarifier or thickener. Benefits of
biological filtration include dependability of the system, and a smaller
design "foot print" than required by conventional activated sludge systems.
However, biological filtration systems require proper attention to
monitoring, maintenance, and backwash cycles to maximize efficiency,
and are more costly than conventional activated sludge systems.
Effective nitrification in attached growth/fixed film systems requires
longer contact times and lower hydraulic loading rates than for typical
operation to remove organic compounds only. This is typically
accomplished in the design of the biofiltration system. Deeper
biofiltration beds increase contact time, thereby, enhancing nitrification.
• Biological Denitrification. Denitrification is a metabolic process in which
nitrate is converted to nitrogen gas in the presence of a combined hydrogen
source and a lack of free oxygen. The bacteria that reduce nitrate are
facultative heterotrophs of the genera Pseudomonas, Micrococcus,
Achromobacter, and Bacillus (Reference 8-12). The reaction involves the
transfer of electrons from organic carbon (oxidation) to nitrate (reduction)
promoting its conversion to nitrogen gas. The biochemical pathway in
which nitrate is substituted for oxygen as the final electron acceptor in the
electron transport chain is thermodynamically less favorable than if
oxygen were the final electron acceptor. In the presence of free oxygen,
denitrification ceases and typical aerobic oxidation predominates.
Denitrification is typically referred to as anoxic respiration since it is an
aerobic process in the absence of free oxygen.
The anoxic process, like the aerobic process, utilizes organic carbon to
maintain cellular respiration and synthesis of biomass. The carbon can be
derived from either the endogenous decay of biomass or from an external
source, such as added methanol or organic materials already in the waste.
The majority of denitrification systems operating in the United States use
methanol as their carbon source. The equations below show the balanced
stoichiometric reactions for converting nitrate to nitrogen gas with either
8-31
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
methanol (Equation 8-17) or acetic acid (Equation 8-18) as the carbon
source (Reference 8-15).
N03-+ 1.08 CH3OH + H+—>
0.065 C5H702N + 0.47 N2 + 0.76 C02 + 2.44 H20 (8-17)
NCV + 0.65 CH3COOH—>
0.5 N2+ 1.3 C02 + 0.9 H20 + 0.8 OH" (8-18)
Biological denitrification (anaerobic) can be used to treat cokemaking
wastewater following biological nitrification. For denitrification of
cokemaking wastewater, two treatment options are applicable: 1) an end-
of-pipe unit in which all the flow from the biological nitrification system
enters the denitrification system; or 2) a recycle system in which a portion
of the effluent from the biological nitrification system is returned to the
beginning of the treatment system and mixed with untreated wastewater.
Figure 8-14 presents denitrification systems. For the end-of-pipe
denitrification system, a supplemental carbon source such as methanol is
required to convert nitrate to nitrogen gas. For the recycle system, recycle
equipment and tanks are required to handle recycle volumes approximately
3 to 4 times the original wastewater flow.
8.3.3 Sludge Handling
Solids are removed by a number of the treatment technologies used by the iron
and steel industry including 1) biological treatment and cyanide precipitation of cokemaking
wastewater, 2) clarifiers for treatment of high-rate recycle water in the ironmaking and
steelmaking processes, including backwash from multimedia filters, and 3) chemical
precipitation and multimedia filtration of high-rate recycle blowdown and steel finishing process
waters for metals removal, including backwash from multimedia filters. Dilute sludges from
each of these processes are often concentrated by gravity thickening prior to dewatering by a
variety of presses and filters. Filter cake collected from the dewatering equipment may be further
processed by sludge dryers to remove additional moisture. The following paragraphs describe
the technologies used to reduce the volume of treatment sludges generated by iron and steel
facilities.
• Gravity Thickening. Gravity thickening is a physical liquid-solid
separation technology commonly used by the industry to dewater
wastewater treatment sludge. Figure 8-15 shows a typical gravity
thickener. Sludge is fed from a primary settling tank or clarifier to a
thickening tank, where gravity separates the supernatant from the sludge,
increasing the sludge density. The supernatant is returned to the primary
settling tank. The thickened sludge that collects on the bottom of the tank
is pumped to additional dewatering equipment or contract hauled for
disposal.
8-32
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Gravity thickeners are generally used by facilities where the sludge is to be
further dewatered by a mechanical device, such as a filter press.
Increasing the solids content in the thickener substantially reduces capital
and operating costs of the subsequent dewatering device and also reduces
the hauling cost. Typically, gravity thickeners produce sludge with 8 to 10
percent solids by weight (Reference 8-16). Thickening is not a viable
technology for sludges that have a consistency that hinders thickening.
Gravity thickeners are commonly used in all iron and steel industry
wastewater treatment systems to thicken dilute sludge.
• Rotary Vacuum Filtration. Rotary vacuum filtration is commonly used in
the industry for sludge dewatering. The rotary vacuum precoat filter
consists of a perforated plate steel drum deck covered with a filter cloth.
A diatomaceous earth precoat is used to prevent small suspended particles
from passing through the filter and into the center of the drum where
filtrate is removed. A scraper is used to shave filter cake from the surface
of the diatomaceous earth precoat filter, preventing the filter cake from
reaching a thickness that would not adhere to the filter. Figure 8-16
depicts a rotary vacuum filter. Rotary drum filters typically rotate between
0.25 and 6.5 revolutions per minute (RPMs), depending on the
concentration of suspended solids in the wastewater (Reference 8-12).
Filtrate that passes through the filter cake and diatomaceous earth precoat
enters the center of the vacuum drum and is collected in horizontal pipes
connected to a center drain shaft. Solids collected from ironmaking rotary
vacuum filters can be recycled to sintering operations to recover iron. The
performance and the life of the filter depend on the filter medium. Also, if
the cake is not removed properly from the filter, the cake build-up will
eventually cause the filter to clog. Rotary vacuum filters are commonly
used in the iron and steel industry to dewater sludges from blast furnace
and sintering treatment systems.
• Pressure Filtration. The plate-and-frame filter press is commonly used
for sludge dewatering in the iron and steel industry. Figure 8-17 illustrates
a plate-and-frame filter press. A filter press consists of a series of parallel
plates pressed together by a hydraulic ram (older models may have a hand
crank), with cavities between the plates. The filter press plates are covered
with a filter cloth and are concave on each side to form cavities. At the
start of a cycle, a hydraulic pump clamps the plates tightly together and a
feed pump forces a sludge slurry into the cavities of the plates. The liquid
(filtrate) escapes through the filter cloth and grooves molded into the
plates and is transported by the pressure of the feed pump (typically
around 100 psi) to a discharge port. The solids are retained by the cloth
and remain in the cavities. This process continues until the cavities are
packed with sludge solids. An air blow-down manifold is used on some
units at the end of the filtration cycle to drain remaining liquid from the
8-33
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
system, thereby improving sludge dryness and aiding in the release of the
cake. The pressure is then released and the plates are separated.
The sludge solids or cake is loosened from the cavities and falls into a
hopper or drum. A plate filter press can produce a sludge cake with a
dryness of approximately 25 to 40 percent solids for metal hydroxides
precipitated with sodium hydroxide (caustic), and 35 to 60 percent solids
for metal hydroxides precipitated with calcium hydroxide (lime). The
solids content attained depends on the length of the drying cycle. Filter
presses are available in a wide range of capacities (0.6 ft3 to 20 ft3). A
typical operating cycle is from 4 to 8 hours, depending on the dewatering
characteristics of the sludge. Units are usually sized based on one or two
cycles per day (Reference 8-12). The maintenance requirements of a plate
filter press are lower than other sludge dewatering technologies. However,
plate filter presses are more expensive and are operated in batches;
therefore, sludge must be held between batches. Plate filter presses are
commonly used in the iron and steel industry to dewater sludges from
steelmaking and steel finishing treatment systems.
Belt Filtration. The belt pressure filter consists of two continuous belts
set one above the other. Sludge is fed in between the two belts. Three
process zones exist. First, the sludge passes through the drainage zone
where dewatering is effected by the force of gravity. Then, the sludge
passes into the pressure zone where pressure is applied to the sludge by
means of rollers in contact with the top belt. Finally, the sludge is passed
to the shear zone where shear forces are used to bring about the final
dewatering. The dewatered sludge is then removed by a scraper. Belt
filtration can produce a sludge cake with a dryness of approximately 25 to
30 percent solids (Reference 8-17). Belt filters produce very dry cake, low
power requirement, and continuous operation. The main disadvantages
are short media life and a filtration rate sensitive to incoming sludge. Plate
filter presses are commonly used in the iron and steel industry to dewater
by-product recovery cokemaking biological treatment sludges.
Centrifugation. A sludge dewatering device collects wet sludge in a cone-
shaped drum. The drum is rotated to generate centrifugal forces to
concentrate solids to the walls of the drum. These solids are continually
removed from the centrifuge by an auger, screw conveyor, or similar
device. Centrifugation dewaters sludges, reducing the volume and creating
a semi-solid cake. Centrifugation of sludge can typically achieve a sludge
of 20 to 35 percent solids (Reference 8-12). Centrifuges are compact,
need little space, and can handle sludges that might otherwise plug filter
cloth. The disadvantages include complexity of maintenance, abrasion
problems, and centrate (liquid) high in suspended solids. Centrifuges are
8-34
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
infrequently used in the iron and steel industry to dewater sludges from
blast furnace, steelmaking, and finishing treatment systems.
• Sludge Drying. Wastewater treatment sludges are often hauled off site to
disposal sites. The transportation and disposal costs depend primarily on
the volume of sludge. Therefore, sludge dehydration following dewatering
can further reduce the volume of the sludge and the overall disposal cost.
The solids content of the sludge dewatered on a filter press is usually in
the range of 25 to 60 percent. Dehydration equipment can produce a waste
material with a solids content of approximately 90 percent (Reference 8-
12).
There are several design variations for sludge dehydration equipment. A
commonly used type is a sludge drying unit that uses an auger or conveyor
system to move a thin layer of sludge through a drying region and
discharge it into a hopper. Various heat sources are used for sludge
drying, including electric, electric infrared, steam, and gas. Some
continuous units are designed such that the sludge cake discharge from a
filter press drops into the feed hopper of the dehydration unit, making the
overall dewatering process more automated. System capacities range from
less than 1 tf/hr to more than 20 tf/hr of feed. Sludge dehydration
equipment requires an air exhaust system due to the fumes generated
during drying. Energy requirements for sludge drying can be costly, but
depend on the water content of the sludge and the efficiency of a given
unit. Sludge drying are infrequently used in the iron and steel industry to
dewater sludges from steelmaking and steel finishing treatment systems.
8.4 Best Management Practices fBMPs)
There are many plant maintenance and good housekeeping management practices
used at iron and steel facilities that reduce the need for treatment, which saves costs: routine
monitoring, training and supervision, production planning and sequencing, process or equipment
modification, raw material and product substitution or elimination, and loss prevention and
housekeeping (Reference 8-18). These alternatives are discussed below:
• Routine Monitoring. Routine monitoring and record keeping of
pollutants and treatment systems performance enables sites to
continuously evaluate treatment system performance and detect and
remediate problems early. For example, cokemaking facilities analyze
effluent wastewater samples for total phenolics as part of a daily
monitoring routine to help identify and respond to potential upset
conditions.
• Flow Management Good flow management practices reduce pollutant
discharges to receiving waters or a POTW. Controlling and treating runoff
8-35
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
from raw material storage piles, EAF dust collection areas, and blast
furnace and steelmaking slag processing sites is important. Managing of
storm water from process areas through collection and treatment, use as
makeup water, or use as control water for cokemaking biological treatment
reduces pollutant discharges to adjacent water bodies. Also control and
treatment of leachate and groundwater contamination from blast furnace
slag pits and coke batteries, coke quench tower sumps, and by-product
recovery areas should be addressed. Cascade of blowdowns from
compatible noncontact cooling water and water recycle systems minimizes
wastewater treatment requirements. Good flow control of rinse water flow
rates minimizes wastewater generation and discharge.
• Training and Supervision. Training and supervision ensures that
employees are aware of, understand, and support the company's waste
minimization goals. These goals are translated into practical information
that will enable employees to minimize waste generation by properly and
efficiently using tools, supplies, equipment, and materials.
• Production Planning and Sequencing. Production is planned to
minimize the number of processing steps and eliminate unnecessary
procedures (e.g., plan production to eliminate additional cleaning steps
between incompatible operations).
• Process or Equipment Modification. Processes and equipment are
modified to minimize the amount of waste generated (e.g., reducing drag-
out by slowing the withdrawal speed of the product, installing electrolytic
recovery units).
• Raw Material and Product Substitution or Elimination. Where possible,
raw materials or products are replaced with other materials that produce
either less waste and/or less toxic waste (e.g., replacing chromium-bearing
solutions with non-chromium-bearing and less toxic solutions,
consolidating types of cleaning solutions and machining coolants).
• Oil Management and Preventive Maintenance. Where possible, sites
remove oil in wastewater recirculation systems, recycle used oil, and
ensure integrity of process area containment systems. Sites should have
surveillance and corrective action programs for oil discharges from large
noncontact cooling water flows.
• Loss Prevention and Housekeeping. Preventive maintenance and
managing equipment and materials minimizes leaks, spills, evaporative
losses, and other releases. Examples include inspecting the integrity of
tanks on a regular basis, using chemical analyses instead of elapsed time or
amount of product processed as the basis for disposal of a solution, and
8-36
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
controlling spillage from loading stations for rolling solutions and pickling
acids. Solution testing is one important loss prevention alternative. The
chemical makeup of cleaning solutions changes over time due to
evaporative losses, water addition, drag-out of cleaning chemicals,
consumption of bath chemistry, chemical reactions, and drag-in of
impurities. Because of these factors, cleaning baths lose strength,
performance declines, and solutions require disposal. Many sites operate
cleaning baths with a schedule consisting of three steps: formulate, use,
and discard. This procedure can be expensive and inefficient from a
production standpoint, and creates large volumes of waste. For this
reason, sites should frequently determine the strength of the cleaning
solution and appropriate chemical additions needed to prolong solution
use. By implementing a program of testing and record keeping, sites can
reduce the disposal frequency of cleaning baths.
• Waste Segregation and Separation. Mixing different types of wastes or
mixing hazardous wastes with nonhazardous wastes is avoided.
Recyclable materials are not mixed with incompatible materials or wastes.
For example, hexavalent-chromium-bearing wastewater is segregated for
pretreatment.
8.5 References
8-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for Effluent
Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source
Category. EPA/440/1 -82/024, Washington, DC, May 1982.
8-2 Keyser, A. G., K. F. Kunkel, and L. A Snedaker. "Impact of Rolling Emulsion
Contaminants on Downstream Surface Quality." AISE Steel Technology, p. 43,
September 1998.
8-3 Rituper, R., "High-Performance Effluent-Free Pickling Plants with Fluid Bed
Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration." Iron and Steel Engineer. November 1995.
8-4 "Waste-Free Exhaust Air Cleaning In Stainless Steel Pickling Plant."
Metallurgical Plant And Technology International (Germany), vol. 16, no. 5,
October 1993.
8-5 Perry's Chemical Engineers Handbook. Sixth Edition. McGraw-Hill Inc., New
York, NY, 1984, pp. 6-8,12-15 to 12-17, and 25-57.
8-6 Benefield, L. and J. Judkins. Process Chemistry for Water and Wastewater
Treatment. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1982.
8-37
-------
8-7 Mauk, C. E. "Chemical Oxidation of Cyanide Species by Ozone with Irradiation
from Ultraviolet Light." Trans. Society of Mining Engineers. Volume 260. 1976,
pg 279.
8-8 Great Lakes Environmental. Equipment Guide for Oil Water Separators and
Industrial Wastewater Treatment Equipment Systems. Addison, IL, July 1996.
8-9 Freeman, H. M. Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Treatment and
Disposal. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1989.
8-10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for the
Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Metal Products
and Machinery Point Source Category. EPA-821-B-00-005, Washington, DC,
December 2000.
8-11 LaGrega, M. D., P. Buckingham, and J. Evans. Hazardous Waste Management.
McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1994, p. 192.
8-12 Eckenfelder, W. W. Principals of Water Quality Management. CBI Publishing
Company, Inc., Boston, MA, 1980.
8-13 Reynolds, T. and P. Richards. Unit Operations and Processes in Environmental
Engineering. PWS Publishing Company, Boston, MA, 1996.
8-14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sequencing Batch Reactors. EPA/625/8-
86/011, Washington, DC, October 1986.
8-15 Metcalf and Eddy. Inc. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment. Disposal Reuse.
Third Edition. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, NY, 1991.
8-16 Hoffland Environmental, Inc. HEI Sludge Thickener.
http://www.hofflandenv.com/Equipment_Line/Sludge_Thickener.htm.
8-17 Hoftstra Engineering University Web Page. Sludgenet.
http://147.45.150.5/~mgelfa20/sendesin/pagel. htm.
8-18 Freeman. H.M. Hazardous Waste Minimization. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York,
NY, 1990.
8-38
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-1
Wastewater Minimization, Pollution Prevention, and Process Modification
Technologies
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Wastewater Minimization and Pollution Prevention
High-rate recycle of
wastewater
A closed loop system the recycles approximately 95
percent or more of water for reuse. Typically used
in conjunction with treatment to allow more water
to be reused. High-rate recycle is well
demonstrated in each of the applicable
subcategories.
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone
Hot Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming
Other Operations
Countercurrent
cascade rinsing
Cascading rinsing system that uses consecutive
rinse tank to reduce the amount of water necessary
for rinsing.
Steel Finishing
Fume scrubber recycle
Wet air pollution control system used to capture
acid gases. Water is neutralized and continuously
recirculated. This system can significantly reduce
the volume of water discharged from WAPC
equipment.
Steel Finishing
Hydrochloric acid
regeneration
Hydrochloric acid recovery system that heats spent
pickle liquor to decompose iron oxide into ferric
oxide and hydrogen chloride (HC1). The HC1 is
reabsorbed in water and returned to the process
bath. The process reduces the amount of spent acid
generated by the facility. Also reduces the amount
of neutralization treatment chemicals needed and
the mass of chlorides discharged.
Steel Finishing
Sulfuric acid recovery
Sulfuric acid recovery system that precipitates and
removes iron as ferrous sulfate from the spent
pickle liquor. The resulting sulfuric acid can be
returned to the process bath. This process reduces
the amount of spent acid generated by the facility.
Also reduces the amount of neutralization treatment
chemicals needed and the mass of sulfates
discharged.
Steel Finishing
Acid purification and
recycle
Nitric/hydrofluoric acid is purified by adsorption on
a bed of alkaline anion exchange resin that
separates the acid from metal ions. Acid is
desorbed from the resin with water and returned to
the process bath. This process can reduce the
amount of spent acid generated by the facility. Also
reduces the amount of neutralization treatment
chemicals needed and the mass of anions such as
nitrate, sulfate, and fluoride discharged.
Steel Finishing
8-39
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-1 (Continued)
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Wastewater Minimization and Pollution Prevention (continued)
In-tank filtration
Paper, cloth, cartridge, or plastic filters used to
extend process bath life or to remove solids from
cold rolling solutions.
Steel Finishing
Magnetic separation of
fines in cold rolling
solution
Magnetic separators are installed in rolling solution
collection tanks or in a side-stream system to extend
the life of rolling solutions.
Steel Finishing
Evaporation with
condensate recovery
Energy-intensive and can have cross-media
impacts. Not included in the technology options.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone
Hot Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming
Steel Finishing
Process Modifications
Effluent-free pickling
process with fluid bed
hydrochloric acid
regeneration
Uses both the hydrochloric acid regeneration
system and fume scrubber water to achieve zero
discharge for hydrochloric acid pickling operations.
A fluidized bed reactor is used to regenerate the
acid (see description above). Fume scrubber water,
used to cool the fluidized bed off-gases, is
evaporated rather than blown down to end-of-pipe
treatment.
Steel Finishing
Nitric-acid-free
pickling
This proprietary technology uses a nitric-acid free
solution containing an inorganic mineral base,
hydrogen peroxide, stabilizing agents, wetting
agents, brighteners, and inhibitors for stainless steel
pickling/ This system can reduce the amount of
nitrate/nitrite generated by the facility.
Steel Finishing
Effluent-free exhaust
cleaning
Exhaust gases from stainless steel pickling are
treated by a selective catalytic reduction (SCR)
technology in lieu of a wet air pollution control
device. Anhydrous ammonia is injected into the
gas stream prior to a catalyst to reduce NOx to
nitrogen and water. This would eliminate
wastewater generated from scrubbing of exhaust
gases from stainless steel pickling operations.
Steel Finishing
8-40
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-2
Wastewater Treatment and Sludge Handling Technologies
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Physical/Chemical Treatment
Equalization
Tank that dampens fluctuations in flow and
influent wastewater quality. Equalization will
enhance performance of downstream equipment.
Equalization is an end-of-pipe treatment
technology.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Tar removal
Recovers tar and oil though settling. This
technology is demonstrated in the cokemaking
industry, and improves the performance of free
and fixed ammonia stills. Tar removal is an
end-of-pipe treatment technology.
Cokemaking
Free and fixed
ammonia distillation
(stripping)
A column is used to remove ammonia with
steam to transfer from the ammonia from liquid
to the gas phase. Free ammonia is removed
first, followed by conversion of fixed ammonia
to free ammonia (using sodium hydroxide or
soda ash), and subsequently removed. Free and
fixed ammonia distillation is an end-of-pipe
treatment technology.
Cokemaking
Cooling towers
Cooling towers control water temperature
through contact of air with the water. Cooling
towers are used in both in-process and end-of-
pipe treatment systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Other Operations
Shell-and-tube heat
exchangers
Indirect contact device that transfers heat from
one fluid to another. Shell-and-tube heat
exchangers are most common. Heat exchangers
are used in end-of-pipe treatment systems.
Cokemaking
Alkaline
chlorination/
breakpoint
chlorination
Alkaline chlorination oxidizes cyanide with
incidental removals of ammonia and phenolics.
Cyanide is converted to cyanate and then to
bicarbonate and nitrogen using chlorine or
sodium hypochlorite. Breakpoint chlorination
targets ammonia with incidental removals of
cyanide and phenolics. Ammonia is oxidized to
nitrogen using chlorine or sodium hypochlorite.
These technologies are end-of-pipe systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
8-41
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Physical/Chemical Treatment (continued)
Cyanide precipitation
Proprietary technology that adds iron to
cyanide-laden wastewater to precipitate an
insoluble iron-cyanide complex. Cyanide
precipitation is an end-of-pipe treatment
technology.
Cokemaking
Ozone oxidation
Ozone oxidizes cyanide to bicarbonate and
nitrogen. Ozone also oxidizes other iron and
steel pollutants of concern, such as ammonia and
organic compounds. This technology is
considered end-of-pipe treatment.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Gravity flotation
Nonemulsified oil is allowed to rise to the
surface of the wastewater and is removed by an
oil skimmer. Typical skimming devices include
disk, belt, and drum skimmers. Gravity flotation
is used for in-process and end-of-pipe treatment.
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Oil/water separation
Wastewater containing nonemulsified oil enters
a basin with inclined plates that trap the oil for
removal. An API separator is the most common
type of oil/water separator. Oil/water separators
are typically used for end-of-pipe treatment.
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Chemical emulsion
breaking and
dissolved air flotation
Chemical emulsion breaking (CEB) is used for
emulsified oily wastewaters. Chemicals are
added to a mix tank to break the emulsions.
Typically CEB is followed by dissolved air
flotation (DAF) which injects air into the
wastewater to cause the oil to rise to the surface.
The oil can then be mechanically removed. CEB
and DAF are end-of-pipe treatment
technologies.
Steel Finishing
Ultrafiltration
Ultrafiltration is a pressure-driven membrane
process to separate emulsified oils from
wastewater without CEB. Ultrafiltration is an
end-of-pipe treatment technology.
Steel Finishing
Carbon dioxide
injection
Carbon dioxide is injected into the wastewater
to remove hardness and regulate pH of wet-open
and wet-suppressed BOF recycle systems. This
allows more water to be reused in the recycle
system. Carbon dioxide injection is used as part
of in-process treatment.
Integrated Steelmaking
8-42
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Physical/Chemical Treatment (continued)
Hexavalent
chromium reduction
Hexavalent chromium is reduced using sulfur
dioxide, sodium bisulfite, sodium metabisulfite,
or ferrous sulfate. Reduction allows chromium
to be removed from solution by subsequent
chemical precipitation. This is an end-of-pipe
treatment technology.
Steel Finishing
Chemical
precipitation
Removes metals from wastewater by converting
soluble metals to insoluble salts. Typically lime,
caustic, or magnesium hydroxide is used as the
precipitant. Chemical precipitation is an end-of-
pipe treatment technology.
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Ion exchange
Ion exchange is a reversible chemical reaction
that exchanges ions in wastewater for ions of
like charge on the surface of the ion exchange
resin. When the resin is regenerated, the
captured ions are concentrated and removed for
disposal or reuse. Metals from plating rinses
can be recovered using ion exchange. This can
be an in-process or end-of-pipe treatment
technology.
Steel Finishing
Scale pits with oil
skimming
Scale pits are used for primary sedimentation of
large particles from wastewater. This
technology is typically used in high-rate recycle
systems. Therefore, this is an in-process
technology.
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Classifiers
Classifiers use screw or rake systems for
primary solids removal in recycle systems.
Therefore, this is an in-process technology.
Integrated Steelmaking
Other Operations
Clarification/
sedimentation
Solids are removed by gravity sedimentation in
clarifiers. Clarifiers may be either rectangular
or circular and are designed with a hydraulic
residence time sufficient for solids removal.
This technology can be used with both in-
process or end-of-pipe treatment systems.
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
8-43
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Technology
Description
| Applicable Subcategories
Physical/Chemical Treatment (continued)
Microfiltration
Solids are separated from wastewater using a
pressure-driven membrane process. This
technology can be used with both in-process or
end-of-pipe treatment systems.
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Multimedia filtration
Multimedia filtration uses a bed of granular
particles as the filter medium for solids removal.
When the pressure drop across the filter is large
enough to impede flow, it is cleaned by forcing
wash water through the bed in the reverse
direction of original wastewater flow.
Multimedia filtration can be used as in-process
or end-of-pipe treatment. Also called mixed-
media filtration.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Granular activated
carbon (GAC)
GAC removes dissolved organic compounds
from wastewater streams via adsorption. The
organic compound collects on and adheres
(bond) to the surface of the carbon. When all
bonding sites are occupied, the carbon is
considered "spent" and must be regenerated to
remove the accumulation organic compounds.
GAC is an end-of-pipe treatment technology.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Biological Treatment
Biological
nitrification using
conventional
activated sludge
Biological nitrification uses microorganisms to
convert ammonia to nitrate in an aerobic
environment using a conventional activated
sludge system. Wastewater and the
microorganisms are aerated in a reactor for a
specified period of time and then settled in a
clarification unit. A portion of the
microorganisms are recirculated to the reactor,
and a portion is wasted. This is an end-of-pipe
treatment technology.
Cokemaking
Biological
nitrification using
sequencing batch
reactors (SBRs)
SBRs use the same biological processes as a
conventional activated sludge biological
nitrification system. The difference is that all
steps of the process are carried out in one tank.
An SBR is an end-of-pipe treatment technology.
Cokemaking
8-44
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Biological Treatment (continued)
Biological
nitrification using
attached growth
Attached growth systems use the same
biological processes as a conventional activated
sludge biological nitrification system. The
difference is that the microbes are attached to a
rigid supporting media. An attached growth
system is an end-of-pipe treatment technology.
Cokemaking
Biological
denitrification
Denitrification also uses the metabolic processes
of microorganisms to convert nitrate to nitrogen
gas. This process must be conducted in the
absence of oxygen for denitrification to occur.
This is an end-of-pipe treatment technology.
Cokemaking
Sludge Treatment and Disposal
Gravity thickening
Sludge is fed from a clarifier or settling tank into
the thickener where gravity separates the
supernatant from the sludge, increasing the
sludge density. The thickened sludge is further
dewatered by other equipment of disposed.
Thickening can dewater sludge from in-process
or end-of-pipe treatment systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Rotary vacuum
filtration
A rotary vacuum filter consists of a perforated
plate steel drum covered with a filter cloth. A
diatomaceous earth precoat is used to prevent
small suspended particles from passing through
the filter to the center of the drum where filtrate
is removed. The drum picks up sludge as it
rotates. A scraper is used to remove filter cake
from the surface of the earth precoat to prevent a
thickness that would not adhere to the filter.
Rotary vacuum filtration can dewater sludge
from in-process or end-of-pipe treatment
systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Pressure filtration
A series of parallel plates, covered with filter
cloth, are filled with sludge and then pressed
together by a hydraulic ram. The liquid (filtrate)
escapes through the filter cloth while the solids
are retained. The sludge is then collected in a
hopper or drum for disposal. Pressure filtration
can dewater sludge from in-process or end-of-
pipe treatment systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
8-45
-------
Section 8 - Treatment Technologies
Table 8-2 (Continued)
Technology
Description
Applicable Subcategories
Sludge Treatment and Disposal (continued)
Belt filtration
Sludge is fed between two continuous belts set
one above another. The sludge passes through
three process zones: the drainage zone
(dewatering by gravity), pressure zone
(dewatering by pressure of rollers on the belts),
and the shear zone (final dewatering through
shear forces). The dewatered sludge is removed
by a scraper. Belt filters are typically used to
dewater sludge from an end-of-pipe biological
treatment system.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Centrifugation
Sludge is pumped into a cone-shaped drum.
The drum is rotated to generate centrifugal
forces to concentrate solids to the walls of the
drum. These solids are continuously removed
by an auger, or screw conveyer. Centrifuges can
dewater sludge from in-process or end-of-pipe
treatment systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Sludge drying
Sludge is heated to remove excess liquid.
Various design variations exist; the most
common sludge drying unit uses an auger or
conveyer to move a thin layer of sludge through
a drying region and discharge it to a hopper.
Sludge drying can dewater sludge from in-
process or end-of-pipe treatment systems.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
Other Operations
Best Management Practices
Best management
practices
Many plant maintenance and good housekeeping
management practices can reduce wastewater or
pollutant generation, and the need for treatment,
and help maximize process efficiency.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Steel Finishing
8-46
-------
Cyclone
Fluidized bed
reactor
Iron
oxide
Venturi
scrubber
Absorber
Separating
tank
Fuel Air
Off-gas
A
J,
Mist collector
Chimney
Scrubbing column
Fresh water
Rinse water
Regenerated acid
Waste pickle liquor
Figure 8-1. Illustration of a
Fluidized Bed Acid
Regeneration Process
-------
Sources: Site visit, U.S. Steel Gary Works, Gary, Indiana.
Association of Iron and Steel Engineers, The Making. Shaping, and Treating of Steel.
ISBN 0-930767-00-4; Pittsburgh, PA; 1985.
Figure 8-2. Typical Free and
Fixed Ammonia Distillation
Column
-------
oo
vo
Warm air and evaporated water
t
In
Spray .
water
t
Cool ~
air -
Cooled . _ET
water
return ~
a
^
Sources: Davis & Spence Pty Ltd. Cooling Tower, http://www.davisandspence.com.au/photo.htin.,
Marley Cooling Towers. Cooling Tower Performance: Basic Theory and Practice.
http://www.marleyct.com/pdf_forms/CTII-l.pdf
Figure 8-3. Typical Cooling
Tower
CTower
11/05/01
-------
Oil
Skimmer
Oil
Retention
Baffle
Wastewater flow
Sludge flow
Figure 8-4. Typical Oil/Water
Separator
O/WSep
10/03/00
-------
Flocculant
Addition
00
1
¦trea^
TVeated
Effluent
Holding
Tank
Recyclo Pump
Air Injection
Sludge
(to dewaterlng)
wastewater flow
sludge flow
Figure 8-5. Typical Dissolved Air
Flotation System
DAF
10/03/01
-------
Reducing Ageril
(Sulfer Dioxide, Sodium Bisulfite,
Sodium Metablsulflte or Ferrous Sulfate)
Hexavalerit
Chromium—Bearing
Wastewater from
Unit Operations
Inlet (Influent)
Mixer
pH
Meter
Oxidation—Reduction
Potential (ORP) Meter
Reaction
Tank
ORP=250-300 millivolts
pH=2
Outlet (Effluent)
Trivalent Chromium-
Bearing Wastewater
-*-To Chemical Precipitation
and Sedimentation
Figure 8-6. Typical Hexavalent
Chromium Reduction System
Hexchrome
10/31/01
-------
Ferric
sulfate
(optional)
Lime or
caustic
Untreated
wastewater
Polymer
Sulfuric
acid
~
Rap
d mix
t£
nk
Overflow
Treated
effluent
n Filter
////////////
222222222222
press
>
f
Solids
Figure 8-7. Process Flow Diagram
of a Typical Chemical Precipitation
System for Metals Removal
PPT
10/03/00
-------
10'
101
10c
Oi
E
10"1
_Q
O
CO
102
10'
3 i
10"
L \
/Pb
\ Zn
I \
i \
• \
¦\ \
i i
;
^ Ag
\ Cu
*
\
\ / Ni
i
!
:
i
.
/y :d
8 9 10
pH
11 12
Figure 8-8. Minimum Solubilities
of Various Metals Hydroxides
Solubility
10/03/00
8-54
-------
Fresh Alkaline
Regenemnt
Anion
Column
Non-Molal
-*¦ Bearing
Rogenorant
\ ». Effluent
Figure 8-9. Typical Ion
Exchange System
ChemPpt
11/01/01
-------
Oporatlng Platform
Food Woll
Surfaco
Sklmmor
mm
Scum Though
Scum
Pit
Sludgo Rako
Contor Cago
Sludge Pipe
Ovorflow Wolr
Clarified Effluent
Channel
Influent Pipe
Figure 8-10. Typical Clarification
System
CLARIFIER
10/03/01
-------
8-57
-------
Nutrients/
pH control
Untreated
wastewater
Equa ization
Aerobic combined
carbon oxidation
and nitrification
Air
Return sludge
>- Treated effluent
Waste activated
sludge to
dewatering
Figure 8-12. Process Flow
Diagram of a Typical Biological
Treatment System
Bio
10/03/00
-------
INFLUENT
PURPOSE/OPERATION
AJR
QN/OFF
ADD
SUBSTRATE
REACT
ON /"CYCLE
reaction
TIME
AIR
OFF
CLARIFY
AIR
OFF
REMOVE
EFFLUENT
IDLE
Arn
ON/OFF
WASTE
'SLUDGE
Figure 8-13. Typical Sequencing
Batch Reactor Operation for One
Cycle
SBR
4/03/02
8-59
-------
A. End-of-pipe denitrification system using an external carbon source
Methanol
Untreated
wastewater
n
Equalization
Aerobic combined
oxidation
nitrification zone
1
Anoxic
denitrification
zone
t
Air
Clarifier
Return sludge
B. Recycle denitrification system using untreated wastewater as a carbon source
Mixed liquor recycle
Untreated
wastewater
Aerobic combined
oxidation
nitrification zone
t
Air
Aerobic
nitrogen gas
stripping zone
Return sludge
Treated
effluent
Treated
effluent
Figure 8-14. Process Flow
Diagram of Typical Biological
Denitrification Systems
Denlt
10/03/00
-------
Sludge from
Chemical Precipitation
00
1
ON
Supernatant Back
to Chemical Precipitation
Thickened Sludge to
Contract Haul or to
Sludge Dewatering
Figure 8-15. Typical Gravity
Thickener
THICKENER
9/27/00
-------
Scraper
s\ud9e 0oWafor///^
^ LJ > ^
$/'Wgo Load^
> Flltrale
Vessel
Holding
Wot Sludge
i>
Figure 8-16. Typical Vacuum
Filtration System
VacFllt
10/03/01
-------
00
1
CT\
Sludge
Flow In
Figure 8-17. Typical Plate-and-
Frame Filter Press
FilterPress
10/03/01
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
SECTION 9
TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS CONSIDERED AS THE BASIS OF THE REGULATION
This section presents the technology options considered by EPA as the basis for
the final effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the iron and steel industry. The
limitations and standards discussed in this section are Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available (BPT), Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT), Best
Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT), New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS), Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES), and Pretreatment Standards for
New Sources (PSNS).
In developing the final regulation, EPA used a focused rulemaking approach,
conducting several data gathering and analysis activities concurrently and assessing only a
limited number of technology options. This is unlike the traditional approach where EPA
conducts these efforts consecutively and considers a wider range of wastewater management and
treatment technology options. This focused rulemaking approach is feasible for the iron and steel
regulation because the Agency has acquired a good understanding of the industry, its associated
pollutants, and the available control and treatment technologies from its prior rulemaking efforts.
EPA evaluated responses to industry surveys, data collected from Agency site visits and
sampling episodes, and technical literature to determine "state-of-the-art" pollution control
technologies to form the bases of the technology options considered for the final rule. EPA's
technology options incorporate pollutant control technologies that demonstrate effective use in
the iron and steel industry (i.e., consistent effluent quality with a high degree of pollutant
reduction for pollutants of concern, supported by analytical data), minimize water use, and result
in minimal non-water quality environmental impacts. The Agency did not perform detailed
analyses on pollution control technologies that, after preliminary analyses, were determined to
require significant capital and operating and maintenance costs without substantial pollutant
removals. Because of the focused rulemaking approach, generally only one option (in addition to
a regulatory option not to revise) is presented for each subcategory. Furthermore, the presented
option usually is an improvement in water management and operation of the wastewater
treatment technologies that are currently used by the industry.
Extensive stakeholder involvement was also an important element of the focused
rulemaking process. EPA met with industry representatives, citizen and environmental groups,
and other stakeholders at various stages of the rulemaking process to discuss the preferred
technology options and to identify issues of concern. Input from stakeholders allowed EPA to
refine its final technology options.
While EPA establishes effluent limitations guidelines and standards based on a
particular set of in-process and end-of-pipe treatment technology options, EPA does not require a
discharger to use these technologies. Rather, the technologies that may be used to treat
wastewater are left entirely to the discretion of the individual treatment plant operator, as long as
the facility can achieve the numerical discharge limitations and standards, as required by Section
§301(b) of the Clean Water Act. Direct and indirect dischargers can use any combination of
9-1
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
process modifications, in-process technologies, and end-of-pipe wastewater treatment
technologies to achieve the effluent limitations guidelines and standards.
Sections 9.1 through 9.7 present descriptions of the technology options evaluated
for the final effluent limitations guidelines and standards in each subcategory. Tables 9-1
through 9-7 show the in-process and end-of-pipe treatment used in industry as reported in the
U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (detailed and short surveys).
9.1 Cokemaking
9.1.1 By-Product Recovery Cokemaking
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
EPA is not revising any existing BPT limitations for the by-products recovery
segment of this subcategory (which, in the 1982 regulation, was divided between "iron and steel"
and "merchant" coke plants).
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
EPA is not revising any existing BCT limitations for the by-products recovery
segment of this subcategory (which, in the 1982 regulation, was divided between "iron and steel"
and "merchant" coke plants) because EPA identified no technologies that achieve greater
removals of conventional pollutants than the technology basis for the current BPT and that pass
the BCT cost test.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
Of the iron and steel subcategories, by-product recovery cokemaking has the
widest range of treatment technologies used by the industry. During the development of this
rulemaking, EPA considered four BAT options for direct discharging by-product recovery
cokemaking facilities. The four options rely on a combination of physical/chemical and
biological treatment to reduce the discharge of pollutants from by-product recovery cokemaking
facilities. The four technology options are:
• Option 1 (BAT-1):
Option 2 (BAT-2):
Emission control scrubber blowdown to coke
quench stations, oil and tar removal, flow
equalization prior to ammonia distillation
(stripping), free and fixed ammonia distillation
(stripping), indirect cooling, flow equalization
before biological treatment, biological treatment and
secondary clarification, and sludge dewatering;
BAT-1 treatment with cyanide precipitation and
sludge dewatering prior to biological treatment;
9-2
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
• Option 3 (BAT-3): BAT-1 with breakpoint chlorination following
biological treatment; and
• Option 4 (BAT-4): BAT-3 with multimedia filtration and granular
activated carbon after breakpoint chlorination.
As discussed in the 2000 proposal, EPA dropped BAT-2 and BAT-4 from further
consideration because BAT-2 is a proprietary technology which would make costs and economic
achievability difficult to predict, and BAT-4 achieves pollutant removals equivalent to BAT-3
but was much more costly. Therefore, for the final rule, EPA considered only BAT-1 and BAT-3
as the basis for revising the cokemaking subcategory effluent limitations guidelines and
standards. Figures 9-1 and 9-2 show the BAT-1 and BAT-3 treatment systems considered for the
13 direct discharging by-product recovery cokemaking facilities. The following discussion
explains each option in further detail.
BAT-1 is based on free and fixed ammonia distillation (stripping), or ammonia
stills, and biological treatment with nitrification. Free and fixed ammonia distillation (stripping)
is designed to remove free and fixed forms of ammonia and cyanide. In addition, it can also
remove significant amounts of volatile and semi-volatile organics, such as naphthalene.
Ammonia stills are tray-type distillation towers that use steam to strip the ammonia out of the
waste ammonia liquor. Stills typically have two 'legs' for maximum ammonia removal. First,
free ammonia is removed in the free leg, followed by conversion of the fixed ammonia by
addition of lime, sodium hydroxide or soda ash. The converted ammonia is then removed in the
fixed leg. The effectiveness of ammonia distillation depends greatly on efficient tar removal and
equalization prior to the still. The efficiency of the still corresponds to the number of trays that
the liquid must pass over before reaching the bottom. The tower diameter is a function of the
wastewater flow rate. As shown in Table 9-1, 12 of the 13 direct discharging facilities use
ammonia stills.
A second key component, biological treatment with nitrification, is designed to
remove any additional ammonia, cyanide, phenol, and organic pollutants such as benzo(a)pyrene
and naphthalene. The effectiveness of biological treatment depends on proper equalization and
influent temperature prior to the biological treatment tank. Many sites use equalization tanks and
heat exchangers ahead of the aeration basin. The sludge retention time (SRT) is also a key
component for efficient operation. Nitrification is needed to remove ammonia. Efficient
clarification following biological treatment is required to collect the microorganisms (activated
sludge) for return to the aeration basin, as well as to lower the solids content in the effluent.
Sound monitoring and operation of the biological system is also necessary. Air diffusers must be
checked and cleaned to provide a consistent dissolved oxygen supply in the aeration basin.
Excess biomass (sludge) must be wasted to maintain a constant microbe population in the
system.
Biological treatment, used by 12 of the 13 direct dischargers, is the most common
treatment technology at by-product recovery coke manufacturers. Ten of these sites use
9-3
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis o f the Regulation
conventional activated sludge systems; two sites use biofiltration as shown in Table 9-1. One
direct discharger uses physical-chemical treatment rather than biological treatment.
BAT-3 is the same as BAT-1 with an additional breakpoint chlorination step.
Breakpoint chlorination uses sodium hypochlorite or chlorine gas in a carefully controlled pH
environment to remove ammonia, although incidental removals of cyanide and phenols will
occur. The ammonia oxidizes to nitrogen gas, hydrochloric acid, and water; cyanide oxidizes to
bicarbonate and nitrogen gas. The breakpoint chlorination reaction must occur at carefully
controlled pH levels and has the possibility of chemical interferences when treating mixed
wastes. Although U. S. cokemaking facilities do not use breakpoint chlorination, foreign
facilities have successfully used this technology to treat cokemaking wastewater. EPA ultimately
rejected BAT-3 for the reasons set forth in Section VIII.A.3.a of the preamble to the final rule.
For the final iron and steel regulation, EPA established BAT limitations for the
by-product cokemaking subcategory based on BAT-1. EPA has concluded that the BAT-1
treatment system represents the best available technology economically achievable for this
segment of this subcategory. There are several reasons supporting this conclusion. First, the
BAT-1 technology is readily available to all cokemaking facilities. Approximately 75 percent of
the facilities in this segment currently use it. Second, the BAT-1 technology will ensure a high
level of removal of all cokemaking pollutants of concern. Well-operated free and fixed ammonia
stills will remove gross amounts of ammonia-N, cyanide, and many organic pollutants while
biological treatment with nitrification followed by secondary clarification will remove more
ammonia-N, total phenolics (4AAP), and other organic constituents of the wastewater to low
levels. Third, adoption of this level of control would represent a significant reduction in
conventional, nonconventional, and toxic pollutants discharged into the environment by facilities
in this subcategory. Even though 75 percent of the facilities currently employ this technology,
EPA predicts significant removals attributable to this rule because the limitations reflect
substantial improvements in how these technology components are designed and operated.
Finally, EPA has evaluated the economic impacts associated with this technology and found it to
be economically achievable.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The Agency also evaluated options BAT-1 and BAT-3 for new sources. For the
final iron and steel regulation, EPA established NSPS for by-product cokemaking subcategory
based on BAT-1. EPA ultimately rejected BAT-3 for the reasons set forth in Section VIII.A.3.a
of the preamble to the final rule. EPA considers BAT-1 as the "best" demonstrated technology
for new sources in the by-product segment of the subcategory. EPA concluded that the chosen
technology does not present a barrier to entry because 75 percent of existing facilities currently
employ the technology. The Agency considered energy requirements and other non-water quality
environmental impacts and found no basis for any different standards than the selected NSPS.
Therefore, EPA is promulgating NSPS for the by-products recovery cokemaking segment that are
identical to BAT for toxic and non-conventional pollutants, while also promulgating TSS, oil and
grease (measured as HEM), and pH limitations, using the same technology basis.
9-4
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
EPA considered four PSES options for indirect discharging by-product recovery
cokemaking facilities. The four options rely on physical/chemical or biological treatment or a
combination of both to reduce the discharge of pollutants from by-product recovery cokemaking
facilities. For PSES, treatment is performed to ensure that pollutants discharged by the industry
do not "pass through" POTWs to waters of the United States or interfere with POTW operations
or sludge disposal practices. The four technology options are:
• Option 1 (PSES-1): Emission control scrubber blowdown to coke
quench stations, oil and tar removal, flow
equalization prior to ammonia stripping, free and
fixed ammonia stripping, and post ammonia
stripping equalization;
• Option 2 (PSES-2): PSES-1 treatment with cyanide precipitation,
sludge dewatering, and multimedia filtration;
• Option 3 (PSES-3): Equivalent to BAT-1; and
• Option 4 (PSES-4): Equivalent to BAT-3.
As discussed in the 2000 proposal, EPA dropped PSES-2 and PSES-4 from
consideration because PSES-2 is a proprietary technology which would make costs and economic
achievability difficult to predict, and PSES-4 achieves pollutant removals equivalent to PSES-3
but was much more costly. Therefore, for the final rule, EPA considered only PSES-1 and
PSES-3 as the basis for the by-product segment of the cokemaking subcategory pretreatment
standards. Figures 9-3 and 9-4 show PSES-1 and PSES-3 considered for the eight indirect
discharging by-product recovery cokemaking facilities. The following discussion explains each
option in further detail.
PSES-1 is based on free and fixed ammonia distillation (stripping), or ammonia
stills. See the discussion of ammonia stills under BAT above for additional information
regarding the design, operation, and effectiveness of these units in removing the cokemaking
pollutants of concern. As shown in Table 9-1, seven of the eight indirect discharging sites in this
subcategory use free and fixed ammonia distillation systems. One site uses an air stripping unit
rather than an ammonia still.
PSES-3 is the same as PSES-1 with the addition of biological treatment with
nitrification for increased pollutant removal. PSES-3 is equivalent to BAT-1 for direct
discharging facilities. See the previous BAT section for a discussion of this technology.
For the final iron and steel regulation, EPA established PSES limitations for by-
product cokemaking subcategory based on PSES-1. EPA rejected PSES-3 because it determined
that the option was not economically achievable for indirect dischargers in this segment. EPA
9-5
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
concluded that PSES-1 represents the most appropriate basis for pretreatment standards for the
following reasons. First, PSES-1, in combination with treatment occurring at the receiving
POTWs, will substantially reduce the levels of all cokemaking pollutants of concern. Well-
operated free and fixed ammonia stills will remove gross amounts of ammonia-N, cyanide, and
some organic pollutants such as the volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds, while the
activated sludge biological treatment at the POTWs will remove additional ammonia-N, cyanide,
naphthalene, and the other organic constituents of the wastewater to low levels. Second, EPA
has considered the compliance costs associated with this option and determined they are
economically achievable.
EPA is also establishing a mechanism by which by-product cokemaking facilities
discharging to POTWs with nitrification capability would not be subject to the pretreatment
standard for ammonia-N. This is because EPA has determined that ammonia-N does not pass
through such POTWs. See Section 12 for more information.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
The Agency also evaluated options PSES-1 and PSES-3 as the technology basis
for indirect discharging new sources. For the final iron and steel regulation, EPA established
PSNS limitations for by-product cokemaking subcategory based on PSES-3. This option
achieves the greater removals of the two options considered for the final rule. EPA considered
the cost of PSES-3 technology for new facilities in this segment. EPA concluded that such costs
are not so great as to constitute a barrier to entry, as demonstrated by the fact that three of the
eight currently operating indirect discharging facilities are using these technologies. The Agency
considered energy requirements and other non-water quality environmental impacts and found no
basis for any different standards than the selected PSNS.
EPA is also establishing a mechanism by which by-product cokemaking facilities
discharging to POTWs with nitrification capability would not be subject to the pretreatment
standard for ammonia-N. This is because EPA has determined that ammonia-N does not pass
through such POTWs. See Section 12 for more information.
9.1.2 Non-Recovery Cokemaking
All non-recovery cokemaking sites reported zero discharge of process wastewater
in industry survey responses. Because non-recovery cokemaking operations do not discharge any
process wastewater, the Agency concludes that non-recovery cokemaking operation itself
represents the best practicable technology currently available and that no discharge of process
wastewater pollutants is a reasonable BPT limitation. For the same reason, the Agency
concludes that there are no costs associated with achieving this limitation, and expects that no
additional pollutant removals attributable to this segment will occur. Accordingly, EPA
considered zero discharge as the only technology option for non-recovery cokemaking facilities
for BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. EPA identified no technologies that can achieve
greater removals of toxic, conventional, and nonconventional pollutants than those that are the
basis for BPT (i.e., zero discharge).
9-6
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
9.2 Ironmaking and Sintering
In the final rule, EPA is not changing the subcategory structure for the ironmaking
and sintering subcategories. However, as explained in Section 1, EPA performed all the analyses
on the proposed subcategory structure. Therefore, this section discusses the technology options
considered for the proposed ironmaking subcategory, which includes the sintering and blast
furnace segments.
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
EPA did not consider any revision to the existing BPT limitations for the
ironmaking subcategory. For the sintering subcategory, EPA is creating two new segments. The
segment, sintering operations with wet air pollution control, is a recodification of what was
formerly subcategory-wide limitations. The second segment, sintering operations with dry air
pollution control, is new. EPA is establishing BPT limitations for the sintering operations with
dry air pollution control segment of the sintering subcategory. These limitations are: no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants. See Section 7.1.2 for more information about what
constitutes process wastewater for this segment. Because sintering operations with dry air
pollution control do not generate any process wastewater, the Agency concludes that sintering
operation with dry air pollution control itself represents the best practicable technology currently
available and that no discharge of process wastewater pollutants is a reasonable BPT limitation.
For the same reason, the Agency concludes that there are no costs associated with achieving this
limitation, and expects that no additional pollutant removals attributable to this segment will
occur. Accordingly, EPA considered zero discharge as the only technology option for the
sintering operations with dry air pollution control segment of the sintering subcategory for BPT,
BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. EPA identified no technologies that can achieve greater
removals of toxic, conventional, and nonconventional pollutants than those that are the basis for
BPT (i.e., zero discharge).
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
EPA is not revising any existing BCT limitations for ironmaking because there are
no technologies that achieve greater removals of conventional pollutants than the technology
basis for the current BPT and that pass the BCT cost test.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
Wastewater from blast furnace ironmaking and sintering operations contain
similar pollutants of concern. Sites with both operations typically cotreat wastewater. Therefore,
with the exception of cooling towers, which apply to blast furnace operations only, EPA
considered the same technology options for both ironmaking and sintering operations for the
final rule. The option, BAT-1, relies on improved high-rate recycle and physical/chemical
treatment to reduce the discharge of pollutants from blast furnace ironmaking and sintering
operations. The technology basis for BAT-1 is solids removal with high-rate recycle and metals
9-7
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
precipitation, cooling tower, breakpoint chlorination, and multimedia filtration of blowdown
wastewater. Figure 9-5 presents the BAT-1 technology option evaluated by the Agency.
High-rate recycle coupled with recycle treatment, consisting of solids removal via
clarification and cooling, are key components of the BAT-1 option because they allow
wastewater to be reused, thereby reducing wastewater discharge volumes and pollutant loadings.
Common pollutants in blast furnace wastewater removed by the high-rate recycle system
treatment components include total suspended solids (TSS), ammonia, cyanides, phenolic
compounds, and metals. Wastewater from sintering operations also contains these pollutants,
along with oil and grease (O&G) and dioxins and furans. As shown in Table 9-2, all 14 of the
blast furnace ironmaking and sintering sites use high-rate recycle with clarification; 11 of 14 use
cooling towers.
Metals in wastewater blowdown are further treated by metals precipitation.
Metals precipitation removes metallic contaminants from the wastewater by converting soluble,
heavy metals to insoluble salts, typically metal hydroxides. The precipitated solids are then
removed by sedimentation and filtration. The metal hydroxides are formed through chemical
addition of lime, caustic, magnesium hydroxide, or soda ash. As shown in Table 9-2, 9 of the 14
blast furnace ironmaking and sintering sites use blowdown metals precipitation.
Breakpoint chlorination uses sodium hypochlorite or chlorine gas in a carefully
controlled pH environment to remove ammonia, although incidental removals of cyanide and
phenols will occur. See the BAT-3 discussion for by-product recovery cokemaking in Section
9.1.1 for more information concerning breakpoint chlorination. As shown in Table 9-2,2 of the
14 blast furnace ironmaking and sintering sites uses breakpoint chlorination.
Finally, multimedia (mixed media) filtration polishes treated effluent and removes
dioxins and furans from sintering wastewater. A granular media contained in a bed remove
suspended solids from the wastewater. When the pressure drop across the filter, caused by solids
accumulation in the bed, is large enough to impede flow, the bed is cleaned by backwashing.
Backwashing forces wash water through the bed in the reverse direction of original flow,
removing accumulated solids. As shown in Table 9-2, 5 of the 14 blast furnace ironmaking and
sintering sites use multimedia filtration.
During four sampling episodes, EPA found several of the dioxin and furan
congeners in both the raw and treated wastewater from sinter plants operating wet air pollution
control technologies. EPA concludes that multimedia filtration will remove all the dioxin/furan
congeners to below the method detection limit. Dioxins and furans are hydrophobic compounds
that tend to adhere to solids present in a solution. Multimedia filtration, which is designed to
remove solids, will also remove the dioxins/furans adhering to solids as well. EPA has data from
two sampling episodes at sinter plants demonstrating that filtration of wastewater samples
containing dioxins and furans at treatable levels will reduce their concentrations to nondetectable
levels. This is true even for raw wastewater that has undergone no other treatment. Currently
none of the sintering sites use multimedia filtration to treat sintering wastewater prior to
commingling with any non-sintering and non-blast furnace wastewaters.
9-8
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Increased high-rate recycle is the major difference between the BAT-1 technology
basis and the 1982 technology basis. Representatives from Ispat-Inland Steel commented during
EPA/industry meetings subsequent to proposal that using pulverized coal injection (PCI) at Ispat-
Inland's No. 7 furnace has led to severe corrosion in the Bischoff scrubber used for gas cleaning.
Operators have had to increase the blowdown rate from 43 gpt in 1997 to approximately 70 gpt
to control high chloride levels and minimize corrosion.
Based on this comment, EPA evaluated the reported injection rates for pulverized
and granulated coal (PCI/GCI) in 1997. All but two sites with furnaces using PCI/GCI reported
PNFs at or below 70 gpt in 1997. One of these sites operates a high-rate recycle system that is
not optimized for minimal blowdown, and the second site does not have a high-rate recycle
system. PNFs below 25 gpt were reported for furnaces at two sites using PCI/GCI.
To obtain additional information to further evaluate the potential impact of
PCI/GCI on the achievability of the model PNF, EPA contacted representatives of Ispat-Inland
Steel, Bethlehem Steel, and U.S. Steel to review current blast furnace operations and operating
practices to minimize corrosion in blast furnace treatment and recycle systems. Contact reports
are included in the Iron and Steel Administrative Record (Section 14.1, DCN IS 10359). The
focus of the review was furnaces using PCI, and the objective was to collect information for use
in determining appropriate blowdown rates for blast furnace operations using PCI/GCI.
Site personnel provided detailed descriptions and supporting data demonstrating
that corrosion has become a significant issue with using PCI to increase furnace productivity.
Site contacts indicated that it is likely that PCI use as a coke substitute will increase the
concentrations of chlorides and the potential for corrosion. Furnace operators report that chloride
concentrations in the range of 1,500 to 2,000 mg/L are tolerable with increased treatment of the
recirculating water with corrosion inhibitors. This range can be maintained with the model PNF
of 70 gpt developed for the 1982 rule.
Based on this evaluation, EPA has determined BAT-1 is not the best available
technology for existing blast furnace ironmaking operations. EPA is therefore leaving unchanged
all BAT limitations currently in effect for the sintering and ironmaking subcategories. However,
as proposed, EPA is promulgating a new limitation for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF)
for sintering operations with wet air pollution control systems in the sintering subcategory. The
technology basis for the 2,3,7,8-TCDF limitation is multimedia filtration (in addition to the
technology basis adopted in the 1982 rule), which was proposed as part of BAT-1.
Survey responses indicate that it is common practice for facilities to combine their
sintering wastewater with other iron and steel wastewaters prior to discharge to the receiving
water body. This practice dilutes dioxin and fiiran concentrations to levels below the analytical
method detection limit. Because EPA wants to ensure that dioxin and furan congeners are
removed from the wastewater and not simply diluted (to ensure that the limitations reflect the
actual reductions that can be achieved using the BAT technology), EPA is applying the
technology option at a point after commingling with any sintering or blast furnace operation
wastewater, but prior to mixing with process wastewaters from processes other than sintering and
9-9
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis o f the Regulation
ironmaking, non-process wastewaters or non-contact cooling water, if such water(s) are in an
amount greater than 5 percent by volume of the sintering process wastewaters.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The Agency also evaluated option BAT-1 for new sources. For the same reasons
discussed under BAT, EPA is leaving unchanged NSPS currently in effect for the ironmaking
subcategory. EPA is promulgating a new limitation for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for sintering operations
with wet air pollution control systems. The technology basis for the 2,3,7,8-TCDF limitation is
multimedia filtration (in addition to the technology basis adopted in the 1982 rule). All other
new source limitations for sintering operations with wet air pollution control remain unchanged.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
The Agency evaluated only one option, PSES-1, for indirect discharging sites.
The PSES-1 option is equivalent to BAT-1, but without breakpoint chlorination and multimedia
filtration. Figure 9-6 presents the PSES technology option evaluated by the Agency. For the
same reasons discussed under BAT, EPA is leaving unchanged existing pretreatment standards
for the ironmaking subcategory, although EPA is establishing a mechanism by which ironmaking
facilities discharging to POTWs with nitrification capability would not be subject to the
pretreatment standard for ammonia-N. This is because EPA has determined that ammonia-N
does not pass through such POTWs.
However, EPA is promulgating a new limitation for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for sintering
operations with wet air pollution control systems. The technology basis for the 2,3,7,8-TCDF
limitation is multimedia filtration (in addition to the technology basis adopted in the 1982 rule),
which was proposed as part of BAT-1. All other existing standards remain unchanged. EPA is
also establishing a mechanism by which sintering facilities discharging to POTWs with
nitrification capability would not be subject to the pretreatment standard for ammonia-N. This is
because EPA has determined that ammonia-N does not pass through such POTWs. However, to
EPA's knowledge, there are no existing indirect dischargers of sintering wastewater.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
The Agency also evaluated option PSES-1 for new sources. For the same reasons
discussed under BAT, EPA is leaving unchanged all PSNS for ironmaking subcategories, except
to establishing a mechanism by which ironmaking facilities discharging to POTWs with
nitrification capability would not be subject to the pretreatment standard for ammonia-N. This is
because EPA has determined that ammonia-N does not pass through such POTWs.
However, as proposed, EPA is promulgating a new limitation for 2,3,7,8-TCDF
for sintering operations with wet air pollution control systems. The technology basis for the
2,3,7,8-TCDF limitation is multimedia filtration (in addition to the technology basis adopted in
the 1982 rule), which was proposed as part of BAT-1. All other existing standards remain
unchanged. EPA is also establishing a mechanism by which sintering facilities discharging to
9-10
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
POTWs with nitrification capability would not be subject to the pretreatment standard for
ammonia-N. This is because EPA has determined that ammonia-N does not pass through such
POTWs. However, to EPA's knowledge, there are no existing indirect dischargers of sintering
wastewater.
9.3 Integrated Steelmaking
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
EPA did not consider any revision to the existing BPT limitations for the
operations included in the proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory.
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
EPA did not consider revising any existing BCT limitations for the operations
included in the proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory because there are no technologies
that achieve greater removals of conventional pollutants than the technology basis for the current
BPT and that pass the BCT cost test.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
EPA considered one technology option evaluated for this subcategory for
treatment of wastewater associated with basic oxygen furnace (BOF) steelmaking, vacuum
degassing, and continuous casting operations at direct discharging integrated steelmaking
facilities, whether treated individually or cotreated. Industry survey responses indicate that
cotreatment is a common practice, but depends largely on the proximity of manufacturing
processes. The option relies on both in-process high-rate recycle systems and physical/chemical
treatment commonly used in the industry to reduce the discharge of pollutants of concern from
BOF, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting operations. The BAT-1 technology option is:
BAT-1
— BOF systems: high-rate recycle using a high-volume classifier for
primary solids removal, followed by a high-efficiency clarifier for
solids removal with sludge dewatering, carbon dioxide injection
prior to clarification in wet-open combustion and wet-suppressed
combustion BOF recycle systems to remove scale forming ions,
and a cooling tower; blowdown treatment by metals precipitation,
— Vacuum degassing systems: high-rate recycle using a high-
efficiency clarifier for solids removal with sludge dewatering, and
a cooling tower; blowdown treatment by metals precipitation, and
— Continuous casting systems: high-rate recycle using a scale pit with
oil removal to recover mill scale and remove O&G, a roughing
9-11
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
clarifier for coarse solids removal with sludge dewatering,
multimedia filtration for polishing, and a cooling tower; blowdown
treatment by metals precipitation.
Blowdown from each of these high-rate recycle systems can be treated in separate metals
precipitation systems or cotreated. Figure 9-7 presents the BAT-1 option evaluated by the
Agency.
BAT-1 is based on high-rate recycle and associated treatment for solids removal,
watering softening, and water cooling prior to reuse; metals in high-rate recycle blowdown are
removed by metals precipitation and filtration. High-rate recycle coupled with recycle treatment,
consisting of solids removal (via scale pits and clarification) and cooling, are key components of
the technology option because they allow wastewater to be reused, thereby reducing wastewater
discharge volumes and pollutant loadings. Common pollutants in BOF, vacuum degassing, and
continuous casting wastewater removed by the high-rate recycle system treatment components
include total suspended solids (TSS), oil and grease (O&G), and metals. As shown in Table 9-3,
20 of the 21 integrated steelmaking facilities use high-rate recycle systems with treatment.
Scale accumulation in wet-open and wet-suppressed BOF recycle systems dictate
blowdown rates. Carbon dioxide injection removes scale-forming ions (hardness) from the
recycle water, which allows higher recycle rates and less blowdown. Wet-open and wet-
suppressed recycle systems also use carbon dioxide injection to control pH. As shown in Table
9-3, 5 of the 21 integrated steelmaking facilities use carbon dioxide injection in BOF high-rate
recycle systems.
Metals in wastewater blowdown are further treated by metals precipitation.
Metals precipitation removes metallic contaminants from the wastewater by converting soluble,
heavy metals to insoluble salts, typically metal hydroxides. The precipitated solids are then
removed by sedimentation. The metal hydroxides are formed through chemical addition of lime,
caustic, magnesium hydroxide, or soda ash. As shown in Table 9-3, 7 of the 21 integrated
steelmaking sites use blowdown metals precipitation.
Finally, multimedia (mixed media) filtration polishes treated effluent. A granular
media contained in a bed remove suspended solids from the wastewater. When the pressure drop
across the filter, caused by solids accumulation in the bed, is large enough to impede flow, the
bed is cleaned by backwashing. Backwashing forces wash water through the bed in the reverse
direction of original flow, removing accumulated solids. As shown in Table 9-3,18 of the 21
integrated steelmaking sites use multimedia filtration.
All sites with ladle metallurgy operations reported zero discharge of process
wastewater in industry survey responses. Accordingly, EPA considered zero discharge as the
only technology option for ladle metallurgy operations.
EPA is not promulgating effluent limitations and standards because it determined
the option was not economically achievable. The proposed option when considered together
9-12
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
with options for other subcategories resulted in a significant economic impact that EPA
determined is unreasonable. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all BAT limitations currently
in effect for operations included in the proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory, with one
exception.
EPA is promulgating revised BPT, BAT, BCT, and PSES limitations and
standards for one segment of the steelmaking subcategory - basic oxygen furnaces with semi-wet
air pollution control. This is consistent with what was appeared in the proposal (65 FR 81980)
and the February 14,2001 Notice (66 FR 10253-54), although rather than establishing a specific
limitation, EPA has allowed the permit authority or pretreatment control authority to determine
limitations based on best professional judgment, when safety considerations warrant. The
Agency believes best professional judgment will allow the permit authority or pretreatment
control authority to reflect the site-specific nature of the discharge. EPA is doing this because,
although the 1982 regulation requires basic oxygen furnace semi-wet air pollution control to
achieve zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants, currently not all of the sites are able to
achieve this discharge status because of safety and operational considerations. The Agency
recognizes the benefit of using excess water in basic oxygen furnaces with semi-wet air pollution
control systems in cases where safety considerations are present. The Agency justifies the
increased allowance in this case because of the employee safety and manufacturing
considerations (reduced production equipment damage and lost production). EPA estimates that
the industry will incur no costs due to this change. EPA could identify no potential adverse
environmental impacts associated with the potential discharge.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The Agency also evaluated option BAT-1 for BOF steelmaking, vacuum
degassing, and continuous casting operations, and zero discharge for ladle metallurgy operations,
in the integrated steelmaking subcategory. EPA is not promulgating effluent limitations and
standards based on this technology because, when considered together with options for other
subcategories, EPA determined that it would result in an unacceptable economic impact. Except
as noted below, EPA is leaving unchanged all NSPS currently in effect for operations included in
the proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory.
In the case of electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control, the Agency
is promulgating NSPS, PSES, and PSNS limitations and standards of zero discharge of process
wastewater pollutants. The 1982 regulation previously established BPT, BCT, and BAT
limitations of zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants for electric arc furnaces with semi-
wet air pollution control. EPA identified no discharges from electric arc furnaces with semi-wet
air pollution control and received no comments regarding the establishment of zero discharge of
process wastewater pollutants for this segment. EPA estimates that the industry will incur no
costs due to this change since all known facilities are currently achieving compliance with zero
discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
9-13
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
EPA considered one technology option for this subcategory for treatment of
wastewater associated with BOF steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting
operations at indirect discharging integrated steelmaking facilities. This option, PSES-1, is
equivalent to BAT-1 and relies on both in-process high-rate recycle systems and
physical/chemical treatment commonly used in the industry to reduce the discharge of pollutants
of concern from BOF, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting operations. Figure 9-7 presents
the PSES technology option evaluated by the Agency.
In addition, all sites with ladle metallurgy operations reported zero discharge of
process wastewater in industry survey responses. Accordingly, EPA considered zero discharge
as the only technology option for ladle metallurgy operations.
EPA is not promulgating effluent limitations and standards based on this
technology because it determined that it was not economically achievable. The proposed option
when considered together with options for other subcategories resulted in a significant economic
impact that EPA determined is unreasonable. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all PSES
limitations currently in effect for operations under the proposed integrated steelmaking
subcategory, except for steelmaking subcategory-basic oxygen furnaces with semi-wet air
pollution control, which is described above under BAT and electric arc furnaces with semi-wet
air pollution control, which is described under NSPS.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
The Agency also evaluated option PSES-1 for BOF steelmaking, vacuum
degassing, and continuous casting operations, and zero discharge for ladle metallurgy operations,
in the integrated steelmaking subcategory. EPA is not promulgating effluent limitations and
standards based on this technology because, when considered together with options for other
subcategories, EPA determined that it would result in an unacceptable economic impact.
Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all PSNS currently in effect for operations included in the
proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory, except for electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air
pollution control, which is described under NSPS.
9.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
EPA did not consider revising any existing BPT limitations for operations
included in the proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory.
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
EPA is not revising any existing BCT limitations for operations included in the
proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory because it did not identify any
9-14
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
technologies that achieve greater removals of conventional pollutants than the technology basis
for the current BPT and that pass the BCT cost test.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
EPA evaluated equivalent technology options for each segment of this
subcategory: carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel. The option relies on both in-process high-
rate recycle systems and physical/chemical treatment commonly used in the industry to reduce
the discharge of pollutants of concern from hot forming operations. The BAT-1 technology
includes high-rate recycle using a scale pit with oil skimming, a roughing clarifier with oil
skimming, sludge dewatering, a multimedia filter for polishing, and a cooling tower to lower the
water temperature to acceptable levels to reuse and treatment of blowdown with multimedia
filtration. For both segments, high-rate recycle and treatment of wastewater from contact water
systems used for scale removal, roll cooling, product cooling, flume flushing, and other
miscellaneous sources (e.g., roll shops, basement sumps) is common. Figure 9-8 presents the
BAT technology option evaluated by the Agency.
BAT-1 is based on high-rate recycle and associated treatment for solids removal,
and water cooling prior to reuse. High-rate recycle coupled with recycle treatment, consisting of
solids removal (via scale pits, clarification, and filtration) and cooling, are key components of the
technology option because they allow wastewater to be reused, thereby reducing wastewater
discharge volumes and pollutant loadings. Common pollutants in hot forming wastewater
removed by the high-rate recycle system treatment components include total suspended solids
(TSS) and oil and grease (O&G). As shown in Table 9-4, 25 of the 32 direct discharging
facilities in this subcategory use high-rate recycle systems with treatment.
Multimedia (mixed media) filtration removes solids not removed by scale pits and
clarification. A granular media contained in a bed removes suspended solids from the
wastewater. When the pressure drop across the filter, caused by solids accumulation in the bed,
is large enough to impede flow, the bed is cleaned by backwashing. Backwashing forces wash
water through the bed in the reverse direction of original fluid flow, removing accumulated
solids. As shown in Table 9-4, 9 of the 32 direct discharging facilities in this subcategory use
multimedia filtration.
EPA is not adopting limits and standards based on this technology because it
determined that it was not economically achievable. EPA has determined that the impact is
unacceptable in view of the precarious financial situation of the proposed subcategory as a
whole. Moreover, many facilities are already at or below discharge levels of the proposed
effluent limitations guidelines and standards, and EPA has no reason to believe that facilities will
reverse this trend and increase pollutant discharges above the 1997 levels in EPA's record
database.
9-15
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The Agency also evaluated option BAT-1 for new sources. However, EPA is not
promulgating NSPS based on this technology option, because EPA has determined that the
economic impact of this option is unacceptable in view of the precarious financial strength of the
affected facilities. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all NSPS currently in effect for
operations included in the proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
EPA proposed not to revise the current PSES for each segment. At proposal, EPA
considered identical technology options for each segment of this subcategory: carbon and alloy
steel and stainless steel. The option, PSES-1, is equivalent to BAT-1 and relies on both in-
process high-rate recycle systems and physical/chemical treatment commonly used in the
industry to reduce the discharge of pollutants of concern from hot forming operations. Figure 9-8
presents the PSES technology option evaluated by the Agency. Table 9-4 shows that three of the
five indirect discharging facilities in this subcategory use high-rate recycle systems with
treatment.
Consistent with its position at proposal, EPA is not revising PSES limitations for
the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory based on this technology option. EPA's
reasons are set forth in the preamble to the proposed rule. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged
all PSES limitations currently in effect for operations that would have been covered in the
proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
The Agency also evaluated option PSES-1 for new sources. However, EPA is not
promulgating PSNS based on this technology option for the reasons described above for PSES.
Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all PSNS currently in effect for operations included in the
proposed integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory.
9.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
EPA did not consider any revision to the existing BPT limitations for the non-
integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory.
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
EPA is not revising any existing BCT limitations for operations included in the
proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory because there are no
technologies that achieve greater removals of conventional pollutants than the technology basis
for the current BPT and that pass the BCT cost test.
9-16
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
EPA evaluated one technology option for treatment of wastewater associated with
vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming operations at non-integrated steelmaking
and hot forming facilities, whether treated individually or cotreated. Industry survey responses
indicate that cotreatment is a common practice at non-integrated mills. The BAT-1 technology
option relies on both in-process high-rate recycle systems and physical/chemical treatment to
reduce the discharge of pollutants of concern from vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and
hot forming operations, and applies to both industry segments: carbon and alloy steel and
stainless steel. The BAT-1 technology option is:
BAT-1
— Continuous casting systems: high-rate recycle using a scale pit with
oil removal to recover mill scale and remove O&G, a roughing
clarifier for coarse solids removal with sludge dewatering,
multimedia filtration for polishing, and a cooling tower,
— Vacuum degassing systems: wastewater cotreated in the
continuous casting system, roughing clarifier with sludge
dewatering, and a cooling tower,
— Hot forming systems: high-rate recycle using a scale pit with oil
removal to recover mill scale and remove O&G, a roughing
clarifier for coarse solids removal with sludge dewatering,
multimedia filtration for polishing, and a cooling tower, and
— Combined thin slab casting/hot forming systems: high-rate recycle
using a scale pit with oil removal to recover mill scale and remove
O&G, a roughing clarifier for coarse solids removal with sludge
dewatering, multimedia filtration for polishing, and a cooling
tower.
For both segments, high-rate recycle and treatment of wastewater from vacuum
degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming operations at non-integrated facilities are
common. Figure 9-9 shows the BAT option evaluated by the Agency for non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming sites. This figure applies for both segments.
The Agency realizes that many sites may be configured such that the combined
treatment of operations may not be possible. In such cases, separate treatment equipment for
manufacturing processes, as required, equivalent to the combined treatment system would
achieve model treatment system effluent quality. EPA considered these variables when costing
sites for treatment systems, as discussed in Section 10.
9-17
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
BAT-1 is based on high-rate recycle and associated treatment for solids removal
and water cooling prior to reuse. High-rate recycle coupled with recycle treatment, consisting of
solids removal (via scale pits, clarification, and filtration) and cooling, are key components of the
technology option because they allow wastewater to be reused, thereby reducing wastewater
discharge volumes and pollutant loadings. Common pollutants in vacuum degassing, continuous
casting, and hot forming wastewater removed by the high-rate recycle system treatment
components include TSS and O&G. As shown in Table 9-5,30 of the 35 direct discharging
facilities in this subcategory use high-rate recycle systems with treatment.
Multimedia (mixed media) filtration removes solids not removed by scale pits and
clarification. A granular media contained in a bed removes suspended solids from the
wastewater. When the pressure drop across the filter, caused by solids accumulation in the bed,
is large enough to impede flow, the bed is cleaned by backwashing. Backwashing forces wash
water through the bed in the reverse direction of original fluid flow, removing accumulated
solids. As shown in Table 9-5, 25 of the 35 direct discharging facilities in this subcategory use
multimedia filtration.
All sites with electric arc furnaces (EAFs) and ladle metallurgy stations reported
zero discharge of process wastewater in industry survey responses. Accordingly, EPA used zero
discharge as the only technology option for EAF and ladle metallurgy operations.
However, EPA is not promulgating BAT limitations for non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming subcategory based on these technology options. Judging from the
installation costs and the pollutant reductions associated with these treatment technologies, EPA
concluded that the technology simply was not the best available to achieve pollutant removals
(EPA estimated that the technology could remove approximately 230 pound-equivalents (lb-eq)
per year at an estimated cost of $2,069 per lb-eq for direct discharging stainless segment, and
3,891 pound-equivalents per year at an estimated cost of $941 per lb-eq in the direct discharging
carbon and alloy segment). Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all BAT limitations currently
in effect for operations included in the proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming
subcategory.
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
EPA evaluated BAT-1 for vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming
operations, and zero discharge for EAFs and ladle metallurgy, for new sources. The Agency also
evaluated a second technology option based on zero discharge for all non-integrated steelmaking
and hot forming operations. EPA selected the zero discharge option as the basis of the proposed
NSPS for this subcategory.
Based on additional information provided in comments received on the proposed
rule, EPA determined that it is not always possible, or even desirable, for non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming sites to operate their manufacturing processes to achieve zero
discharge. The Agency has identified technical barriers to achieving zero discharge via
9-18
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
evaporative uses such as electrode spray cooling and slag quenching, particularly for hot forming
wastewater.
EPA is leaving unchanged all NSPS currently in effect for operations included in
the proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory, with the exception of
electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control. For those operations, the Agency is
promulgating NSPS standards of zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants. EPA identified
no discharges from electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control and received no
comments regarding the establishment of zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants for this
segment. EPA estimates that the industry will incur no costs due to this change since all known
facilities are currently achieving compliance with zero discharge of process wastewater
pollutants.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
EPA considered one technology option for this subcategory for treatment of
wastewater associated with vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming operations at
indirect discharging non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming facilities. This option, PSES-1,
is equivalent to BAT-1 and relies on both in-process high-rate recycle systems and
physical/chemical treatment to reduce the discharge of pollutants of concern from vacuum
degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming operations. Figure 9-9 presents the PSES
technology option evaluated by the Agency. Table 9-5 shows that 10 of the 11 indirect
discharging facilities in this subcategory use high-rate recycle systems with treatment; 3 of the 6
use multimedia filtration for polishing. Two sites also discharge both directly and indirectly;
both use high-rate recycle systems with treatment and multimedia filtration.
In addition, all sites with EAFs and ladle metallurgy stations reported zero
discharge of process wastewater in industry survey responses. Accordingly, EPA used zero
discharge as the only technology option for EAF and ladle metallurgy operations.
EPA did not propose and is not promulgating PSES limitations for the non-
integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory-carbon and alloy segment. EPA is not
promulgating PSES for the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory-stainless
segment based on these technology options. Judging from the installation costs and the pollutant
reductions associated with the treatment technologies, EPA concluded that the technology simply
was not the best available to achieve pollutant removals (EPA estimated that the technology
could remove approximately 78 pound-equivalents per year at an estimated cost of $ 1,970 per lb-
eq for the indirect discharging stainless segment). Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all
PSES currently in effect for operations included in the proposed non-integrated steelmaking and
hot forming subcategory, except as described below.
In the case of electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control, the Agency
is promulgating PSES and PSNS of zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants. The 1982
regulation previously established BPT, BCT, and BAT limitations of zero discharge of process
wastewater pollutants for electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control. (EPA is
9-19
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
modifying the BPT, BAT, and BCT portions of this segment only to eliminate references in the
title to basic oxygen furnace steelmaking-semi-wet.) EPA identified no discharges from electric
arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control and received no comments regarding the
establishment of zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants for this segment. EPA
estimates that the industry will incur no costs due to this change since all known facilities are
currently achieving compliance with zero discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
EPA evaluated PSES-1 for vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot
forming operations, and zero discharge for EAFs and ladle metallurgy, for new sources. The
Agency also evaluated a second technology option based on zero discharge for all non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming operations. EPA selected the zero discharge option as the basis of
the proposed PSNS for this subcategory.
Based on additional information provided in comments received on the proposed
rule, EPA determined that it is not always possible, or even desirable, for non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming sites to operate their manufacturing processes to achieve zero
discharge. The Agency has identified technical barriers to achieving zero discharge via
evaporative uses such as electrode spray cooling and slag quenching, particularly for hot forming
wastewater.
EPA is leaving unchanged all PSNS currently in effect for operations included in
the proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory, except in the case of
electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control, which is described above under PSES.
9.6 Steel Finishing
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
EPA did not consider any revision to the existing BPT limitations for operations
included in the proposed steel finishing subcategory.
Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
EPA is not revising any existing BCT limitations for the operations included in
the proposed steel finishing subcategory because there are no technologies that achieve greater
removals of conventional pollutants than the technology basis for the current BPT and that pass
the BCT cost test.
Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
EPA evaluated separate technology options for this subcategory for the two
segments: carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel. The carbon and alloy steel segment
technology options control pollutant discharges for wastewater from acid pickling (typically with
9-20
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
hydrochloric or sulfuric acids) and associated annealing, cold forming, alkaline cleaning, hot
coating, and electroplating operations. The stainless steel segment technology options control
pollutant discharges for wastewater from salt bath and electrolytic sodium sulfate (ESS)
descaling, acid pickling (typically with sulfuric, nitric, and nitric/hydrofluoric acids), annealing
operations, cold forming, and alkaline cleaning.
For both segments, EPA's technology options include both in-process
technologies and end-of-pipe wastewater treatment. BAT-1 in-process technologies include
countercurrent rinsing, recycle of fume scrubber water, and reuse of acid (acid regeneration,
purification, recycle, or recovery) for flow reduction. Flow reduction via countercurrent rinsing
and recycle of fume scrubber are key in-process components of the technology option because
they minimize water use, thereby reducing wastewater discharge volumes and pollutant loadings.
BAT-1 end-of-pipe treatment includes oil removal for segregated oily wastes, flow equalization,
hexavalent chromium reduction of hexavalent-chromium-bearing streams, metals precipitation
for all waste streams, gravity clarification, and sludge dewatering. As shown in Table 9-6,14 of
the 56 direct discharging facilities in this subcategory use countercurrent rinsing; 33 recycle fume
scrubber water; and 55 use metals precipitation. Figures 9-10 and 9-11 show the BAT
technology options for the carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel segments, respectively; the
technology options for both segments are identical.
The stainless steel segment includes both countercurrent rinsing and recycle of
fume scrubber water for flow reduction, with an additional technology, acid purification. Acid
purification uses an anion exchange resin to remove acid from metal ions in spent pickle liquor.
The acid is desorbed with water and recycled to the process bath. This reduces wastewater
discharge volumes and pollutant loadings. As shown in Table 9-6, 7 of the 56 direct discharging
facilities in this subcategory use acid purification.
Common pollutants in steel finishing wastewater include TSS, O&G, and metals.
Oil removal, hexavalent chromium reduction (when present), and metals precipitation are key
end-of-pipe treatment components of the technology option because they remove these
pollutants. Oily waste streams should be segregated and pretreated prior to commingling with
other steel finishing wastewater. Many steel facilities use oil/water separators (for nonemulsified
oils) or chemical emulsion breaking (for emulsified oils) to remove oil. As shown in Table 9-6,
26 of the 56 direct discharging steel finishing facilities use oil removal.
Hexavalent chromium-bearing wastewater streams should also be segregated and
pretreated. Hexavalent chromium reduction is a chemical process (using sulfur dioxide, sodium
bisulfite, sodium metabisulfite, or ferrous sulfate) where the chromium is reduced to the trivalent
form. Once in this form, chromium can be effectively removed by metals precipitation. As
shown in Table 9-6,23 of the 56 direct discharging steel finishing facilities use hexavalent
chromium reduction.
Metals in wastewater are treated by metals precipitation. Metals precipitation
removes metallic contaminants from the wastewater by converting soluble, heavy metals to
insoluble salts, typically metal hydroxides. The precipitated solids are then removed by
9-21
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
sedimentation. The metal hydroxides are formed through chemical addition of lime, caustic,
magnesium hydroxide, or soda ash. As shown in Table 9-6, 55 of the 56 direct discharging steel
finishing facilities use metals precipitation.
Subsequent to the proposed rule, EPA comprehensively reviewed the analyses
performed to determine the model flow rates and long-term average pollutant concentrations
(LTAs). Sections 13 and 14 describe EPA's revised analyses, with additional documentation
provided in the final rulemaking record. As part of this reanalysis for the steel finishing
subcategory, and in response to comments on the proposed regulation, EPA conducted additional
site visits to three steel finishing facilities for three purposes:
• To assess how rinse water flow rates for steel finishing operations were
selected by the sites and how these relate to product quality considerations;
• To determine typical flow control equipment and necessary monitoring
practices to operate finishing lines efficiently and obtain relevant cost data;
and
• To identify modifications to the finishing lines required to achieve the
effluent limitations considered by EPA for the final rule.
EPA's subsequent analyses for steel finishing concluded that the model flow rates were not
technically achievable for all facilities.
Therefore, EPA is not promulgating BAT limitations based on these technology
options because the flow reductions that were an integral part of the technology interfered with
product quality, thus indicating that the technology was not the best available for steel finishing
operations. Moreover, after considering comments objecting to EPA's methodology at proposal
of estimating costs, EPA performed a new cost analysis. Judging from the retrofit costs and the
costs associated with necessary production shutdown during installation of new treatment
technologies, EPA concluded that the technology simply was not the best available to achieve
pollutant removals.
EPA did not promulgate limitations for the stainless finishing subcategory for the
same reasons listed for the carbon and alloy finishing segment, with one additional reason.
Commenters with experience operating acid purification units stated that they experienced
neither the level of pollutant removal nor the cost savings EPA had envisioned in the analysis
supporting the proposal. The recognition of this fact had an adverse impact both on the effluent
reduction benefit and the projected cost of this technology option. Therefore, EPA is leaving
unchanged all BAT limitations currently in effect for operations included in the proposed steel
finishing subcategory.
9-22
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
The Agency also evaluated option BAT-1 for new sources for both industry
segments. However, EPA is not promulgating NSPS based on these technology options for the
same reasons discussed under BAT. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all NSPS limitations
currently in effect for operations included in the proposed steel finishing subcategory.
Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
EPA evaluated technology options separately for this subcategory for the two
segments: carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel. For both segments, EPA's technology
options include both in-process technologies and end-of-pipe wastewater treatment. For each
segment, PSES-1 is identical to BAT-1 for the segment. Figures 9-10 and 9-11 show the PSES
technology options for the carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel segments, respectively. As
presented in the figures, the technology options for both segments are identical.
The PSES-1 in-process technologies include countercurrent rinsing, recycle of
fume scrubber water, and reuse of acid (acid regeneration, purification, recycle, or recovery) for
flow reduction. As shown in Table 9-6,10 of the 32 indirect discharging steel finishing facilities
use countercurrent rinsing; 14 recycle fume scrubber water; and 5 use acid purification. PSES-1
end-of-pipe treatment includes oil removal for segregated oily wastes, flow equalization,
hexavalent chromium reduction of hexavalent-chromium-bearing streams, metals precipitation
for all waste streams, gravity clarification, and sludge dewatering. As shown in Table 9-6, 9 of
the 32 indirect discharging steel finishing facilities use oil removal; 5 use hexavalent chromium
reduction; and 20 use metals precipitation.
However, EPA is not promulgating PSES based on these technology options for
the same reasons discusses under BAT. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all PSES
limitations currently in effect for operations included in the proposed steel finishing subcategory.
Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
The Agency also evaluated option PSES-1 for new sources for both industry
segments. However, EPA is not promulgating PSNS based on these technology options for the
same reasons discussed under BAT. Therefore, EPA is leaving unchanged all PSNS limitations
currently in effect for operations included in the proposed steel finishing subcategory.
9.7 Other Operations
The other operations subcategory is comprised of three segments: briquetting,
direct-reduced ironmaking (DRI), and forging. EPA evaluated BPT options for these operations
because the Agency is considering limits for the first time for these segments.
9-23
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
9.7.1 Briquetting
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
The four existing briquetting sites in the United States reported zero discharge of
process wastewater in industry survey responses. Accordingly, EPA used zero discharge based
on dry air pollution controls as the only technology option considered for briquetting operations
for BPT, BCT, BAT, NSPS, PSES, and PSNS. EPA identified no technologies that can achieve
greater removals of toxic, conventional, and nonconventional pollutants than those that are the
basis for BPT (i.e., zero discharge). EPA established these limitations because briquetting
operations do not generate any process wastewater. For this reason, the Agency concludes that
there are no costs associated with these limitations and standards. Furthermore, EPA projects no
additional pollutant removals attributable to this segment.
9.7.2 Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI)
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
The BPT technology option includes high-rate recycle with solids removal using a
classifier and clarifier, cooling, sludge dewatering, and treatment of blowdown with multimedia
filtration. Figure 9-12 shows the BPT technology option for DRI.
High-rate recycle coupled with recycle treatment (consisting of solids removal
using a classifier and clarifier) and cooling, are key components of the technology option because
they allow wastewater to be reused, thereby reducing wastewater discharge volumes and
pollutant loadings. Common pollutants in DRI wastewater removed by the high-rate recycle
system treatment components include TSS and metals.
Suspended solids in wastewater blowdown are removed by multimedia (mixed
media) filtration prior to discharge. A granular media contained in a bed removes suspended
solids from the wastewater. When the pressure drop across the filter, caused by solids
accumulation in the bed, is large enough to impede flow, the bed is cleaned by backwashing.
Backwashing forces wash water through the bed in the reverse direction of original fluid flow,
removing accumulated solids. The DRI site operating in 1997 reported using high-rate recycle
technology for wastewater generated from DRI WAPC, and using multimedia filtration for
blowdown treatment, as shown in Table 9-7.
The Agency has determined that this treatment system represents the best
practicable technology currently available and should be the basis for the BPT limitation for the
following reasons. First, this technology option is one that is readily applicable to all facilities in
this segment. Second, the adoption of this level of control would represent a significant
reduction in pollutants discharged into the environment by facilities in this subcategory (EPA is
not able to disclose the estimated amount of pollutant reduction because data aggregation and
other masking techniques are insufficient to protect information claimed as confidential business
information.) Third, the Agency assessed the total cost of water pollution controls likely to be
9-24
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
incurred for this option in relation to the effluent reduction benefits and has determined these
costs were reasonable.
EPA did not find significant levels of priority or nonconventional pollutants in
DRI wastewater; therefore, EPA did not consider options for BAT. For NSPS, the same
technology basis as BPT technology was considered. EPA did not identify any technically
feasible options that provide greater environmental protection. In addition, EPA concluded these
technology options do not present a barrier to entry because all facilities currently employ the
technologies. The Agency considered energy requirements and other non-water quality
environmental impacts and found no basis for any different standards than the selected NSPS.
Therefore, EPA is adopting NSPS limitations for the DRI segment of the other operations
subcategory based on the same technology selected as the basis for BPT for this segment.
EPA identified only conventional pollutants in forging wastewaters at treatable
levels. These pollutants do not pass through when discharged to POTWs from facilities within
this subcategory.
9.7.3 Forging
Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
The BPT technology for forging operations consists of high-rate recycle, oil/water
separation, and treatment of blowdown with multimedia filtration multimedia filtration. Figure
9-13 shows the BPT technology option for forging.
High-rate recycle coupled with oil removal are key components of the technology
option because they allow wastewater to be reused, thereby reducing wastewater discharge
volumes and pollutant loadings. O&G is the most common pollutant in forging wastewater. As
shown in Table 9-7, four of five forging sites use oil removal equipment.
Suspended solids in wastewater blowdown are removed by multimedia (mixed
media) filtration prior to discharge. A granular media contained in a bed remove suspended
solids from the wastewater. When the pressure drop across the filter, caused by solids
accumulation in the bed, is large enough to impede flow, the bed is cleaned by backwashing.
Backwashing forces wash water through the bed in the reverse direction of original fluid flow,
removing accumulated solids. As shown in Table 9-7, one of the five forging sites uses
multimedia filtration.
The Agency has concluded that this treatment system represents the best
practicable technology currently available and should be the basis for the BPT limitation for the
following reasons. First, this technology option is one that is readily applicable to all facilities in
this segment. Second, the Agency assessed the total cost of water pollution controls likely to be
incurred for this option in relation to the effluent reduction benefits (pollutant removals of
approximately 3,500 pounds) and determined these costs were reasonable.
9-25
-------
, Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
EPA did not find significant levels of priority or nonconventional pollutants in
forging wastewater; therefore, EPA did not consider options for BAT. For NSPS, the same
technology basis as BPT technology was considered. EPA did not identify any technically
feasible options that provide greater environmental protection. In addition, EPA concluded these
technology options do not present a barrier to entry because all facilities currently employ the
technologies. The Agency considered energy requirements and other non-water quality
environmental impacts and found no basis for any different standards than the selected NSPS.
Therefore, EPA is adopting NSPS limitations for the forging segment of the Other Operations
subcategory based on the same technology selected as the basis for BPT for this segment.
EPA identified only conventional pollutants in forging wastewaters at treatable
levels. These pollutants do not pass through when discharged to POTWs from facilities within
this subcategory. Therefore, EPA is not promulgating pretreatment standards for this segment.
9-26
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-1
Wastewater Treatment Technologies Reported by Industry Survey
Respondents for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Sites
Number of By-Products Recovery Cokemaking
Surveyed Sites Using the Technology
Treatment Technology
Direct Discharge
(13 total sites)
Indirect Discharge
(8 total sites)
Tar/oil removal
12
3
Flow equalization before ammonia still
11
4
Free and fixed ammonia still (a)
12
7
Cooling
10
2
Cyanide precipitation
1
2
Breakpoint chlorination (b)
0
0
Flow equalization before biological treatment or after
ammonia still
12
5
Biological treatment by conventional activated sludge
10
2
Biological treatment by biological filtration
2
0
Biological treatment by sequential batch reactors
0
1
Multimedia or sand filtration
4
1
Carbon adsorption
4
0
Sludge dewatering
11
2
(a) One indirect discharger operates an air stripping unit instead of an ammonia still.
(b) Although this technology is not practiced by industry survey respondents, the Agency is aware of one site in
North America that practices breakpoint chlorination.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-27
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-2
High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies
Reported by Industry Survey Respondents for
Blast Furnace Ironmaking and Sintering Sites
Treatment Technology
Number of Blast Furnace Ironmaking
and Sintering Surveyed Sites
Using the Technology
(14 total sites) (a)
High-Rate Recycle
Clarifier
14
Cooling tower
11
Sludge dewatering
12
Blowdown Treatment
Metals precipitation
9
Breakpoint chlorination
2
Multimedia filtration (b)
5
Granular activated carbon
1
(a) Includes three sites that cotreat blast furnace and sintering wastewater and one site that treats sintering wastewater
only.
(b) Multimedia filtration of recycled flow or low-volume blowdown flow.
Note: Summary includes direct and indirect dischargers.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-28
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-3
High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies Reported by
Industry Survey Respondents for Integrated Steelmaking Sites
Treatment Technology
Number of Integrated Steelmaking
Surveyed Sites Using the Technology
(21 total sites) (a)
High-Rate Recycle
Classifier (b)
12
Scale pit (c)
20
C02 injection
5
Clarifier
19
Cooling tower (d)
19
Sludge dewatering
13
Blowdown Treatment
Metals precipitation
7
Multimedia filtration (e)
18
(a) One site is a non-integrated mill with a BOF.
(b) Classifier used for BOF wastewater only except for one site that uses for continuous casting wastewater.
(c) Scale pit for continuous caster wastewater only.
(d) Cooling tower used for vacuum degassing and continuous caster wastewater.
(e) Multimedia filtration of recycled flow or low-volume blowdown flow.
Note: Summary includes direct and indirect dischargers and excludes zero discharge treatment systems.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-29
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-4
High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies
Reported by Industry Survey Respondents for
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Sites
Treatment Technology
Number of Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming Surveyed Sites Using the Technology
Direct Discharge
(32 total sites)
Indirect Discharge
(5 total sites)
High-Rate Recycle
Scale pit
25
2
Clarifier
17
3
Sludge dewatering
11
¦ 0
Cooling tower
20
3
Blowdown Treatment
Metals precipitation
2
0
Multimedia filtration (a)
9
0
Once-Through Treatment (b)
Scale pit
8
1
Clarifier
0
0
Sludge dewatering
0
0
Multimedia filtration
0
0
(a) Multimedia filtration of recycled flow or low-volume blowdown flow.
(b) Once-through treatment applies to eight sites.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-30
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-5
High-Rate Recycle and Blowdown Treatment Technologies
Reported by Industry Survey Respondents for
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Sites
Treatment Technology
Number of Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Surveyed Sites Using the Technology
Direct Discharge
(35 total sites)
Indirect Discharge
(11 total sites)
Direct &
Indirect
Discharge
(2 sites)
High-Rate Recycle
Scale Pit with oil skimming
30
10
2
Clarifier
18
2
2
Cooling tower (a)
25
8
2
Blowdown Treatment
Metals precipitation
8
1
1
Multimedia filtration (b)
25
3
2
Once-Through Treatment (c)
Scale pit
2
0
0
Clarifier
1
0
0
Cooling Tower
1
0
0
(a) Cooling tower used for vacuum degassing and/or continuous casting wastewater.
(b) Multimedia filtration of recycled flow or low-volume blowdown flow.
(c) Once-through treatment only applies to two sites, both direct dischargers.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-31
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-6
In-Process and End-of-Pipe Wastewater Treatment Technologies Reported by
Industry Survey Respondents for Steel Finishing Sites
Treatment Technology
Number of Steel Finishing
Sites Surveyed Using the Technology
Direct Discharge
(56 total sites)
Indirect Discharge
(32 total sites)
In-Process Treatment
Countercurrent rinsing
14
10
Recycle of fume scrubber water
33
14
Acid purification and recycle (a)
7
5
End-of-Pipe Treatment
Oil removal (b)
26
9
Flow equalization
34
19
Hexavalent chromium reduction (c)
23
5
Metals precipitation
55
20
Gravity sedimentation/clarification
55
17
Sludge dewatering
52
18
(a) Applies to sites with sulfuric acid and nitric/hydrofluoric acid baths for stainless products.
(b) Oil removal technologies in place were primarily oil water separators and oil skimming; however, one site used
ultrafiltration.
(c) Applies to sites with hexavalent-chromium-bearing wastewater.
Note: 47 sites reported using fume scrubbers.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-32
-------
Section 9 - Technology Options Considered as the Basis of the Regulation
Table 9-7
High-Rate Recycle Equipment and Blowdown Wastewater Treatment
Technologies Reported by Industry Survey Respondents for
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI) and Forging Sites
Treatment Technology
Number of Sites Surveyed
Using the Technology
DRI
(1 site)
High-Rate Recycle
Classifier and clarifier
1
Cooling Tower
1
Blowdown Treatment
Multimedia Filtration
1
Forging
(5 sites)
Oil Removal (a)
4
Multimedia Filtration
1
(a) Oil removal may be used as high-rate recycle or blowdown treatment.
Note: Summary includes direct and indirect dischargers.
Source: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys).
9-33
-------
Blowdown from
scrubbers on
preheat and
charging
Miscellaneous
process
wastes
Waste
ammonia
liquor
Benzol plant
wastes
Final cooler
blowdown
Ammonia
sulfate
crystallizer
blowdown
Ground-
water
remediation
Ammonia and
acid gases to
coke oven gas
A
n
Equa ization
Tar
NaOH
To tar
decanters
~
Equal zation
Steam
Scrubbers on
pushing
emission control
fl
00
Blowdown to
quench station
¦ un p
Pi!
calinity/pH
control
~
PH
ontt^tgnk
Nutrient
addition
Single stage
aeration basin
t
Air
Rett
..Treated
effluent
rn sludge
Thickener
~
To coke
ovens
Figure 9-1. BAT-1 for By-Product
Recovery Cokemaking
BAT-1
9/25/00
-------
Alkaline Chlorination
BAT-1
effluent—~
from
clarifier
i r
To existing
sludge
dewatering
Figure 9-2. BAT-3 for By-Product
Recovery Cokemaking
BAT-3
9/25/00
OCrM
Sodium
-------
n
Equal
zation
JgL.
Tar
NaOH
Ammonia and
acid gases to
coke oven gas
A
Treated
effluent
Steam
w Blowdown to
quench station
Flgur
Product
e 9-3. PSES-1 for By-
Recovery Cokemaking
PSES-1
9/25/00
«*EPA
-------
VO
¦
u>
-4
Blowdown from
scrubbers ori
preheat arid
charging
Miscellaneous
process
wastes
Waste
ammonia
liquor
Benzol plant
wastes
Final cooler
blowdown
Ammonia
sulfate
crystallizer
blowdown
Ground-
water
remediation
Equivalent to BAT-1
Ammonia and
acid gases to
coke oven gas
A
XI
Equa ization
Tar
NaOH
-61
Alkalinity/pH
control
To tar
decanters
"8-
3
3
Equal
s
zation
E
p
conlrc
i
llank
Steam
Scrubbers on
pushing
emission control
a
A A
00
urr p
pil
Blowdown to
quench station
Nutrient
addition
^Treated
effluent
Figure 9-4. PSES-3 for By-Product
Recovery Cokemaklng
PSES-3
9/25/00
-------
f
u»
00
Polymer
Blast
furnnce
untreated
wastewater i k
Polymer
Sinter plant
untreated >
wastewater i k
pH control
J3
Equal ration
-------
Polymer
NaOH
pH control
Treated
effluent
Solids
Figure 9-6. PSES-1 for
Ironmaking (Blast Furnace and
Sintering Operations)
IRNMAK1
9/27/00
-------
so
o
-------
Recycle for ^
flume flushing
Untreated
wastewater from
descaling sprays,
roll cooling, -
product cooling,
and miscellaneous
sources
Blowdown
Treatment
Backwash to
sludge thickener
3^1
Filtration
V_
Recycle to ^
mill
JUL
Cooling
tower
100 gal/ton
J-
Treated
effluent
Figure 9-8. BAT-1 and PSES-1 for
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming (All Segments)
HTFRMSA
9/27/00
3.EPA
-------
VO
ife
2222,
Vacuum
degassing
untreated
wastewater
Continuous
casting
spray water
system
Untreated
wastewater from
hot forming
descaling sprays,
roll cooling,
product cooling,
and miscellaneous
sources
Blowdown
11 gal/ton for continuous casting*
10 gal/ton for vacuum degassing
Treated
effluent
Solids
Figure 9-9. BAT-1 and PSES-1 for
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and
Hot Forming (All Segments)
' 120 gal/ton for combined treatment of hot forming
and thin slab casting wastewater
NONINT1
9/27/00
-------
Polymer
Ume H2SO4
I „ I.
_Q_
Equal
zatlon
Ctahfc)
adju tment
I
Rapl 1 mix
ta
Flocci ilation
ik
Treated
effluent
To landfill
Figure 9-10. BAT-1 and PSES-1 for
Carbon and Alloy Steel Finishing
CAR FINISH
9/27/00
-------
Ferrous
sulfate
pH control
Salt bath
descaling
Hexavalent
chromium
reduction
Acid pickling
HNOj/HF, HNOj
H2SO,/HF, h2so„
other
Cleaning and Surface
Preparation
Alkaline cleaning
Acid cleaning
Surface preparation for
drawing operations
Surface preparation for
annealing operations
n
Equa
ization
Ume h2so4
1„ I.
Polymer
adju tment
ct«ifc> I
wi n
!
r n
Rapl
I
1 mix
Flocct
ta
ilatlon
lk
Holding tank
H2SO4 Polymer
. u v n
Emu Ision
br^akigg-t^ink
Oil
t
Alfl separator
Treated
effluent
To landfill
£
Cold rolling
Batch dumps
A i
1 <
1
1
k
Rolling 0
conditions
and recyc
1
1
ig
e
1.4
y
Solids
Figure 9-11. BAT-1 and PSES-1
for Stainless Steel Finishing
SPEC FIN
9/27/00
-------
12HR
I Blowdown
Treatment
Recycle to ^
process
Untreated
wastewater
Classifier
Solids
Solids
Backwash to
backwash
holding tank to
vacuum filter
A
pH control
^ Treated
effluent
Figure 9-12. BPT-1 for Direct
Reduced Ironmaking
~Rl
9/27/00
-------
Recycle to
process
Oil
A
Untreated
wastewater
API separator
-o
Y
Filtration
V_
ix:
{K
T
Backwash to
existing
thickener
Backwash
supply tank
Treated
effluent
Figure 9-13. BPT-1 for Forging
FORGING
9/27/00
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
SECTION 10
INCREMENTAL INVESTMENT AND OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
FOR THE REGULATION
This section presents EPA's estimates of incremental investment costs and
incremental operating and maintenance costs for the iron and steel industry to comply with the
technology options considered and described in Section 9. EPA estimated the compliance costs
for each technology option in order to determine potential economic impacts on the industry.
EPA also weighed these costs against the effluent reduction benefits resulting from each
technology option. All estimates are based on data collected for the calendar year 1997. Section
11 presents Agency estimates of corresponding annual pollutant loadings and removals for each
technology option. The Agency is reporting estimates of potential economic impacts associated
with the total estimated annualized costs of the regulation separately (Reference 10-1).
Section 10.1 describes EPA's methodology to estimate costs to achieve the
effluent quality for each technology option in each subcategory. Section 10.2 summarizes the
results of the cost analyses, by subcategory (arranged according to the proposed
subcategorization), for each technology option evaluated.
10.1 Methodology
EPA developed site-specific cost estimates using data collected from industry
survey responses and Agency site visits and sampling episodes. Section 3 provides more
information on Agency data collection efforts. EPA also solicited data from vendors of various
wastewater treatment technologies, obtained data collected by state agencies, surveyed the
technical literature, and enlisted the services of an engineering and design firm that has installed
wastewater treatment equipment in the iron and steel industry. The Agency also revised
subcategory or specific facility cost estimates, as appropriate, to incorporate comments submitted
in response to the proposed rule. Section 10.2 discusses these revisions.
As discussed in Section 9, the Agency developed technology options for each iron
and steel subcategory. When evaluating costs associated with these technology options, EPA
considered the following components of each technology option:
• Effluent concentrations. EPA used data from sites with treatment
technologies representing each technology option to develop model
effluent concentrations for each regulated pollutant in a subcategory.
Using these same datasets, EPA calculated long-term average effluent
concentrations (LTAs) and variability factors for the development of
limitations and standards. The Agency re-evaluated LTAs for certain
subcategories after proposal. EPA's cost estimates incorporated LTAs
revised after proposal. Section 14 discusses the development of LTAs and
variability factors for each technology option. Section 12 discusses the
regulated pollutants for each subcategory. The Agency used data supplied
10-1
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
through industry survey responses and other sources to determine LTAs of
each regulated pollutant reported by all of the sites evaluated in the costing
analysis.
• Treatment technology. EPA considered the in-process controls, pollution
prevention measures, and end-of-pipe treatment units comprising each
technology option as model pollution control technologies.
• Production-normalized flow rates (PNFs). EPA developed model PNFs
representing appropriate process water management and water
conservation practices for each technology option. When developing
model PNFs, the Agency took into account the nature of subcategory
process operations, the rates at which water was applied to processes,
recirculating process water quality requirements, and good water
management practices. The Agency re-evaluated model PNFs after
proposal. EPA's cost estimates incorporated PNFs revised after proposal.
For more information on the development of model PNFs, refer to Section
13.
The Agency considered these components of each technology option to judge
whether wastewater treatment units, entire treatment or high-rate recycle systems, or
modifications in operating practices would be necessary for individual sites to achieve model
pollutant loadings for a particular technology option. EPA calculated model pollutant loadings
by multiplying the model PNFs and model LTAs discussed in Sections 13 and 14, respectively.
For each technology option, EPA compared the model pollutant loadings for each regulated
pollutant with baseline loadings calculated for each site to assess water management practices
and wastewater treatment performance at sites. The Agency calculated pollutant loadings for
each site from the sources identified in Section 11. If it determined that a site exceeded the
model pollutant loadings for a technology option, then EPA compared the technology in place
and its operation at the site with the technology basis for the option. EPA evaluated industry
survey responses to determine wastewater treatment technologies used at sites. Tables 9-1
through 9-7 in Section 9 summarize the results of the technology-in-place analysis for each iron
and steel subcategory. EPA then determined the amount of investment, operating and
maintenance, and/or one-time costs for those equipment items, water management practices, or
operating and maintenance practices that would be incurred if sites in each subcategory were to
implement the model technology options.
Sites can use many possible combinations and variations of the treatment system
components of the technology bases considered to achieve the effluent limitations and standards
considered for this rule. In some instances, the Agency observed that sites operate additional or
equivalent treatment technologies to those considered for this rule.
For some survey respondents, effluent concentration data were not available for
certain regulated pollutants or available effluent concentration data corresponded to outfalls that
contained substantial amounts of noncontact cooling water or non-process wastewater. In these
10-2
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
cases, the Agency used PNFs and technology in place solely to assess pollution control
performance.
Several survey respondents reported cotreating wastewater generated from
manufacturing operations associated with multiple subcategories at a wastewater treatment plant
that discharged treated effluent through a single, permitted outfall. In these cases, EPA
compared the sum of the model pollutant loadings for each applicable subcategory to the
pollutant loadings calculated from effluent concentration and flow data corresponding to these
combined treatment outfalls. Where it determined that a site exceeded the sum of the applicable
model pollutant loadings, EPA estimated the cost to treat and/or recycle wastewater from each
applicable subcategory in separate treatment and/or high-rate recycle systems consisting of the
applicable model treatment technologies.
EPA developed an electronic design and cost model to estimate costs using the
methodology described above. Sections 10.1.1,10.1.2, and 10.1.3 describe how EPA developed
cost equations for use in this model to estimate investment, operating and maintenance, and one-
time costs associated with various pollution control technologies, respectively. For certain blast
furnace, continuous casting, and hot forming operations lacking high-rate recycle systems, EPA
developed cost estimates on a site-specific basis independent of the cost model noted above (see
Section 10.1.1).
EPA estimated costs for the iron and steel industry for the base year 1997. The
Agency included sites (or operations) in the costing analysis if a site operated at least one day
during the 1997 calendar year. Even if a site (or operation) shut down after 1997, it was retained
in the costing analysis, except for one site. This site shut down operations after 1997 and EPA
was unable to verify costing assumptions and the site's reported high flow; therefore, this site was
removed from the costing analysis. However, if a site (or operation) commenced after 1997,
EPA did not include the site (or operation) in the costing analysis. For some sites, 1997 data did
not represent normal operating conditions; for those sites, EPA used data from alternate years.
Several sites operated during only part of 1997 because of strikes, shut downs, or start-ups. For
these sites, EPA used production, analytical, and flow rate data from years that the sites indicated
were representative of normal operations. If sites installed or significantly altered wastewater
treatment systems after 1997, EPA used the data that represented the wastewater treatment
configurations as of 1997. For more information regarding the use of 1997 data in EPA's
analyses, refer to Section 3.
EPA excluded from the cost analysis sites reporting zero discharge of wastewater.
The Agency assumed that these sites will continue to operate in this manner and that effluent
limitations will not apply to them because no process wastewater is discharged to POTWs or
surface waters.
10.1.1 Investment Costs
For each wastewater treatment facility in each subcategory, EPA determined the
equipment items necessary to achieve the model pollutant loadings following the methodology
10-3
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
described in Section 10.1. The Agency estimated investment costs for the following
components:
• Equipment: Purchased equipment items, including freight;
• Installation: Mechanical equipment installation, piping installation,
civil/structural work (site preparation and grading, construction of
equipment foundations and structural supports), materials and labor to
construct buildings or enclosed shelters, and electrical and process control
instrumentation;
• Indirect costs: Costs for temporary facilities during construction and
installation, spare parts, engineering procurement and contract
management, commissioning and start-up, and labor costs for site
personnel to oversee equipment installation (owner team costs); and
• Contingency: Additional costs to account for unforeseen items in vendor
and/or contractor estimates.
The Agency developed investment cost estimates using the following data
sources:
• Engineering and Design Firm. EPA enlisted an engineering and design
firm to estimate investment costs for design flow rates spanning the range
of actual industry flow rates for the following treatment systems, which
comprise various technology options considered for this rulemaking:
— Granular activated carbon filtration of cokemaking wastewater
(component of BAT-4, by-product recovery cokemaking segment),
— Breakpoint chlorination of cokemaking wastewater (component of
BAT-3 and PSES-4, by-product recovery cokemaking segment),
— Metals precipitation of blast furnace and sintering wastewater
(component of BAT-1 and PSES-1, ironmaking subcategory),
— Breakpoint chlorination of blast furnace and sintering wastewater
(component of BAT-1, ironmaking subcategory),
— Metals precipitation of basic oxygen furnace steelmaking, vacuum
degassing, and continuous casting wastewater (component of
BAT-1 and PSES-1, integrated steelmaking subcategory), and
— Polishing of wastewater through multimedia filtration (component
of BAT-4, by-product recovery cokemaking segment; BAT-1,
10-4
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
ironmaking subcategory; sintering subcategory; BAT-1 and PSES-
1, integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory; and BAT-1
and PSES-1, non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming
subcategory).
The engineering and design firm developed investment costs for these
treatment systems by determining equipment requirements and
specifications according to the specified design flow rates. The firm did
not use cost factors to estimate installation costs; instead, it provided line-
item estimates for mechanical equipment installation, piping installation,
equipment foundations (including site preparation and grading), equipment
structural support, buildings, and electrical and process control
instrumentation. Figures 10-1 through 10-6 present these treatment
systems and Table 10-1 presents the assumptions used to develop these
cost estimates. These assumptions represent typical considerations for
add-on treatment technologies for existing wastewater treatment systems
and are based on EPA's examination of industry survey responses, Agency
site visits, and engineering and design firm experience. Tables 10-2
through 10-13 present corresponding design specifications and itemized
cost sheets. Note that installation costs were based on a union labor rate of
$60 per hour, which is based on an engineering and design firm's
experience with actual wastewater treatment installations in the iron and
steel industry. EPA then developed equations for use in the computerized
cost model as described below.
To estimate investment costs for treatment systems and units other than
those specified above, EPA used cost data obtained from capital cost
survey responses and vendor quotes (described below) in conjunction with
cost factors. The engineering and design firm developed cost factors to
estimate installation costs associated with the following:
— Shipping of equipment,
— Labor for mechanical equipment installation,
— Site preparation and grading,
— Equipment foundations and structural support,
— Buildings to house treatment equipment and provide enclosed
shelter,
— Purchase and installation of piping,
— Electrical and process control instrumentation,
10-5
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
— Temporary facilities during construction and installation,
— Spare parts,
— Engineering procurement and contract management,
— Commissioning and start-up,
— Labor costs for site personnel to oversee equipment installation,
and
— Contingency costs.
Table 10-14 lists the cost factors that EPA used, in conjunction with cost
data from capital cost survey responses and vendor quotes, to estimate
installed costs of various treatment systems and units for this rulemaking.
Note that EPA based these cost factors on an evaluation of past project
costs and budgetary estimates for actual wastewater treatment installations
in the iron and steel industry. Furthermore, these cost factors reflect
installation costs based on typical union labor rates and durations. The
Agency estimated the investment costs of treatment units for various
design flow rates by multiplying the purchased equipment cost (developed
from vendor and capital cost survey data, as described below) by
approximately 355 percent (the sum of the cost factors listed in Table
10-14). EPA then plotted investment cost versus the design flow rate to
develop cost equations for use in its cost model. The Agency performed a
regression analysis on this data and determined that a linear relationship
was the 'best fit' between the costs and flow rates in the flow ranges
considered. For treatment units that were costed across a wide range of
flow rates, EPA extrapolated separate lines for incremental flow ranges.
Otherwise, the Agency used the median cost per gallon per minute to
estimate investment costs.
• Vendor and Capital Cost Survey Data. The Agency developed cost
estimates for purchased equipment and ancillary equipment (pumps,
piping, sumps, etc.) for various sizes of the technology basis components
for each option using data from capital cost survey responses and vendor
quotes. As described above, EPA used this cost data in conjunction with
cost factors to estimate investment costs.
Table 10-15 summarizes the investment cost equations used to estimate costs for
technology option components, the applicable subcategories and technology options, and the
sources of these estimates (engineering and design firm or capital cost surveys and vendor
information). Additional information on the development of cost equations for equipment items
10-6
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
derived from capital cost survey and vendor data are located in Section 14.5 of the Iron and Steel
Administrative Record, DCN IS 10825.
EPA identified several sites with once-through wastewater treatment systems that
would need to invest in high-rate recycle systems to achieve model PNFs for some technology
options. EPA determined equipment items necessary to achieve high-rate recycle and gathered
site-specific information from Agency surveys, site visits, and sampling episodes conducted
during this rulemaking. Because these systems are complex and not amenable to a standardized
costing approach, the Agency requested the engineering and design firm to estimate investment
costs on a site-specific basis using available site-specific information and data.
When estimating costs for sites for entire high-rate recycle or wastewater
treatment systems (which would likely need significant land area), the Agency took into account
land availability, when such data were available. For sites for which EPA estimated costs for
add-on technologies needing minimal space, the Agency assumed, based on its experience in
visiting many industrial sites, that additional space for those technologies was available near
existing wastewater treatment systems.
EPA sized wastewater treatment components for each site according to flow rates
reported in the industry survey responses. When industry survey responses indicated that
existing treatment systems also treated non-process water such as ground water, storm water, or
noncontact cooling water, the Agency also included those flows. While EPA does not believe
that these other sources should be treated with process water in all cases, flow rates from these
sources were included to adequately size wastewater treatment components. For sites that EPA
estimated would install new blowdown treatment systems to achieve model treatment system
effluent quality, the Agency sized these blowdown treatment systems according to model PNFs
(in gallons per ton). EPA sized these blowdown treatment systems by multiplying a site's
reported production rate by the model PNF.
10.1.2 Operating and Maintenance Costs
EPA developed estimates of incremental operating and maintenance costs by
evaluating operating and maintenance cost data from the detailed and short surveys,
supplemented with data from other sources, specified below. EPA used data reported in survey
responses when available. The Agency estimated operating and maintenance costs for the
following items:
• Labor. Labor costs associated with general operating and maintenance of
treatment equipment. EPA used a labor rate of $29.67 per hour to convert
the labor requirements of each technology into annual costs. The Agency
obtained a base labor rate from the Monthly Labor Review, which is
published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of
Labor (Reference 10-2). The Agency averaged monthly values for 1997
for production labor in the blast furnace and basic steel products categories
to obtain a base labor rate of approximately $20.90 per hour. Forty-two
10-7
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
percent of the base labor rate was then added for overhead. EPA derived
this percentage to account for medical and dental insurance, vacation, sick
leave, unemployment tax, workman's compensation, and retirement
benefits to obtain the $29.67-per-hour labor rate. The Agency based this
percentage on typical employer costs for hourly employees. Industry
survey responses indicated labor rates between $13.00 and $85.64. The
median labor rate reported by industry surveys was $28.95.
Data collected from industry survey responses, site visits, and other
contacts with the industry show that the great majority of wastewater
treatment systems are staffed on a 24-hour basis. This includes complex
wastewater treatment systems for by-product recovery cokemaking,
ironmaking, and steelmaking operations; hot forming operations with
mechanical treatment systems; steel finishing operations where wastewater
from multiple processes are cotreated; and treatment facilities that cotreat
wastewater generated from manufacturing operations from multiple
subcategories. Consequently, the Agency used 24-hour staffing as the
baseline labor staffing complement, where applicable. EPA estimated
incremental labor hours associated with the assigned wastewater treatment
system upgrades based on additional operating and maintenance
requirements. These additional labor hours were then multiplied by the
$29.67-per-hour labor rate to assess incremental labor cost impacts of the
technology options.
Maintenance. Costs (excluding labor costs) associated with upkeep of
equipment, repairs, operating supplies, royalties, and patents. When these
costs could not be estimated based on industry survey responses, the
Agency assumed annual maintenance costs to be 6 percent of the
investment cost of equipment (Reference 10-3). Maintenance costs
reported by industry ranged from 0.2 percent to 6.3 percent of investment
costs. The median maintenance cost, as a percentage of investment costs,
reported by industry was 1.1 percent.
Chemicals. Costs for chemicals used for various high-rate recycle and
wastewater treatment technologies. EPA evaluated industry survey
responses to determine chemical usage rates for well-operated treatment
and recycle systems. When costs for chemicals could not be estimated
based on industry survey responses, the Agency obtained chemical prices
from vendors or from the Chemical Marketing Reporter from December
1997 (Reference 10-4), as follows:
— Sodium hydroxide (50 percent wet weight): $0.15 per pound,
— Sulfuric acid (98 percent solution): $0,043 per pound,
10-8
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
— Sodium bisulfite (dry crystals in bags): $0,325 per pound,
— Sodium hypochlorite (100 percent, typically purchased as a 12
percent solution): $1.47 per pound,
— Polymer, generic (dry pellets in bags or 5-gallon pails): $0.20 per
pound,
— Biocide: $0,004 per gallon,
— Scale inhibitor: $0.19 per pound,
— Lime (hydrated lime powder in 100 pound bags): $0,035 per
pound,
— Soda ash (powder in 100-ton hopper cars): $0.05 per pound, and
— Ferric sulfate (solid in bags): $0.0705 per pound.
• Energy. Incremental energy requirements and costs associated with
operation of additional pollution control equipment. In general, additional
energy requirements were a result of new or upgraded high-rate recycle
and treatment systems equipped with electric motors to drive water pumps,
chemical mixers, aeration equipment such as blowers and compressors,
and cooling tower fans. When energy costs for equipment could not be
estimated based on industry survey responses, EPA obtained electricity
prices from the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information
Administration's average industrial electrical costs in 1998 (Reference 10-
5). The average electrical cost to industrial users between 1994 and 1997
was $0,047 per kilowatt hour (kWh). Section 15 presents the estimated
energy requirements and a more detailed discussion of the methodology
used to develop these estimates for each technology option. The median
electrical cost reported in industry surveys was $0.04 per kWh.
• Sludge/Residuals (Hazardous/Nonhazardous) Disposal. Cost of
disposing of generated sludge. The Agency calculated incremental sludge
generation rates associated with each technology option. Section 15
presents the methodology and results for this analysis. After considering
sludge generation rates, sludge disposal destinations, and sludge disposal
costs, the Agency determined that the incremental cost associated with
sludge disposal for any technology option would be impacted by less than
0.5 percent. Therefore, EPA has not included costs associated with sludge
disposal in cost estimates, except for incremental costs associated with
sludge disposal for technology options PSES-3 and PSES-4 of the by-
product recovery cokemaking segment of the cokemaking subcategory.
10-9
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
The Agency calculated site-specific sludge disposal costs for these
technology options because several sites would generate and dispose of
sludge associated with biological treatment, where no sludge of this nature
was previously generated at the sites.
• Sampling/Monitoring. Incremental sampling and monitoring costs to
determine compliance with permits or performance of treatment systems.
Because of the operational complexity associated with breakpoint
chlorination, biological treatment, and cyanide precipitation, the Agency
estimated additional costs to sample and monitor treatment performance.
The basis for these costs are provided in Section 14.5 of the Iron and Steel
Administrative Record, DCN IS 10825. EPA also estimated additional
compliance sampling and monitoring costs for 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzofuran, which is not currently regulated under 40 CFR
420, at sinter plants because of the significant costs associated with these
analyses. These costs were estimated to be $ 12,000 per year per site based
on analyses using EPA Method 1613B at a monitoring frequency of once
per month. The Agency did not incorporate monitoring cost savings
realized at cokemaking sites attributable to the elimination of benzene as a
regulated pollutant for BAT limits. EPA did not include in its analysis
additional costs incurred by existing indirect discharge sites to monitor for
naphthalene (which typically occurs monthly at an estimated cost of
$1,500); however, this additional cost is offset by a monitoring cost
savings realized through the elimination of total phenolics (4AAP) as a
regulated pollutant for PSES. Monitoring frequency requirements for total
phenolics are typically once per week and are estimated to cost
approximately $2,100 annually per site. For the direct-reduced
ironmaking and forging segments of the other operations subcategory,
EPA did not incorporate additional monitoring costs for analyses for total
suspended solids and oil and grease because of the low costs associated
with these analyses and because most sites in this subcategory currently
monitor for these pollutants.
Table 10-16 presents the equations used to calculate incremental operating and
maintenance costs for additional treatment equipment, along with the range for which the
equations are applicable. The table footnotes listed on the last page of Table 10-16 provide
information sources and/or assumptions used in developing the cost equations. A more detailed
description of the development of these costs for each equipment item is provided in Section
14.5 of the Iron and Steel Administrative Record, DCN IS 10825.
10.1.3 One-Time Costs
One-time costs are non-capital costs that cannot be depreciated because they are
not associated with property that can deteriorate or wear out. For tax purposes, a one-time non-
capital cost is expensed in its entirety in the year it is incurred. When estimating costs for the
10-10
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
industry to comply with the regulatory options considered for this rulemaking, EPA incorporated
one-time costs into cost analyses in instances described below.
When assessing costs for technology options consisting of biological treatment for
the cokemaking subcategory and chemical precipitation for the steel finishing subcategory, EPA
found that analytical data from some survey responses showed that, despite having treatment
equipment equivalent to a technology option, PNFs or effluent concentrations of certain facilities
exceeded model values. In such cases, the Agency evaluated pollution control system design and
operating parameters to determine additional investment and operating and maintenance costs
necessary to achieve the model PNFs and LTAs. If a site's design and operating parameters were
not equivalent to model operating parameters or if these parameters were not provided in a site's
survey response, the Agency allocated a one-time cost for hiring an outside consultant to upgrade
wastewater treatment system performance (e.g., improve site operation and maintenance to
optimize biological treatment system performance) in addition to capital and operating and
maintenance costs associated with this upgrade.
Optimizing the performance of a biological treatment system at cokemaking sites
requires an extensive analysis of both operating parameters and treatment chemistry. This type
of an analysis usually requires an engineering consultant spending one to two weeks on site as
well collecting daily data on influent and effluent concentrations, alkalinity, sludge wasting rates,
mixed liquor volatile solids concentrations in the aeration basin, nutrient additions, temperature,
and dissolved oxygen requirements for up to 28 days at the facility. Based on the data collected
from this analysis, the consultant can recommend operational and/or design changes that will
improve the system performance. Once the changes suggested by the consultant have been made,
it may take several weeks to several months for the system to stabilize enough to verify that it
can achieve the target effluent quality. EPA estimated consultant costs to range between $80,000
and $100,000 for sample collection, data analysis, engineering design and operational changes,
and measuring the impact of the operational and design changes on system performance. Such
an analysis may result in one or many modifications to the treatment system. For the purpose of
estimating costs, EPA selected design and operational modifications related to four treatment
system parameters for sites with biological treatment systems that do not achieve model
treatment performance: aeration capacity, alkalinity, nutrient addition, and system control.
Additional information on these parameters and the basis for the one-time, capital, and operating
and maintenance costs associated with these modifications are located in Section 14.5 of the Iron
and Steel Administrative Record, DCN IS 10825.
Optimizing the performance of a chemical precipitation treatment system at a steel
finishing site typically requires an extensive analysis of both operating parameters and treatment
chemistry by a trained engineering consultant. The consultant uses bench-scale jar testing as a
tool to optimize treatment system performance. Jar testing involves adding various chemical
precipitants and polymers to small amounts of a representative wastewater to determine which
most reduces overall effluent metals and suspended solids concentrations. Tests at various pHs
and chemical dosages are also conducted. Jar testing is usually conducted at an off-site
laboratory by trained chemists. Typical costs consist of sample collection, jar testing, laboratory
analyses of lead and zinc, and preparation of a treatability report by the laboratory. In addition to
10-11
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
jar testing costs, the consultant may spend one to three weeks on site collecting daily data on
influent and effluent concentrations, chemical additions, pH variations, and wastewater flow
patterns. Based on the data collected from the on-site analysis, coupled with the jar testing
results, the consultant can recommend design and/or operational changes to improve the
performance of the system. EPA estimated the total consultant cost in this case to be $40,000 to
$65,000. This estimate is based on the following: a maximum of450 hours of direct labor (180
hours of field work, 270 hours of office work) at a labor rate of $100 per hour; approximately
$5,000 for airfare, food, lodging, car rental, and other direct costs (equipment rental, analytical
costs, telephone costs); $10,000 for preparation of a treatability report based on jar testing and
analyses; and $5,000 for miscellaneous expenses. For the purpose of estimating costs for sites
with chemical precipitation systems that do not achieve model treatment performance, EPA also
assumed an additional annual cost equal to 15 percent of sites' existing annual costs to account
for design and operational modifications to polymer feed and pH control systems. EPA did not
develop more detailed cost estimates for these instances because these refinements would not
impact the Agency's final action for the steel finishing subcategory.
For the steel finishing subcategory, EPA also estimated one-time costs associated
with lost revenue for down time during installation of countercurrent rinse tanks for steel
finishing lines. Based on industry comments, the Agency assumed lost line revenue of
approximately $900,000 per line. This estimate is based on a down time of 21 days for tank
installation, an average of $448/ton of cold rolled coil sheet steel, and a median production rate
of 95 tons/day per line (Reference 10-6).
For technology options incorporating high-rate recycle in the ironmaking,
integrated steelmaking, integrated and stand-alone hot forming, and non-integrated steelmaking
and hot forming subcategories, EPA evaluated PNFs and recycle technology in place to
determine whether a site required investment and operating and maintenance costs for flow
reduction to achieve the model effluent pollutant loadings. The Agency found several instances
where facilities have installed high-rate recycle systems, but the discharge flow rates exceeded
the model PNFs. If the system was equipped with excess capacity to recirculate the incremental
flow necessary to achieve the model PNF, EPA did not assign an investment cost for new
equipment in the main treatment and recycle circuit. In cases where the increase in recycle rate
was minimal with respect to the total recirculating flow rate, EPA assigned a one-time cost for
consultant and mill services to evaluate the treatment and recycle system and to modify water
management practices and operations to achieve the model PNF. If the treatment and recycle
system lacked sufficient hydraulic capacity to recirculate the incremental flow necessary to
achieve the model discharge flow rate, EPA sized and costed additional process water treatment
and recycle equipment for the main treatment and recycle circuit.
The Agency assumed that the one-time costs for flow reduction would include
relatively minor costs associated with controlling makeup water flow rates and eliminating
sources of extraneous water and did not assign incremental operation and maintenance costs.
The Agency assumed the increased costs associated with modifying the recycle rate would be
minimal and offset by likely savings in process water chemical treatment. In addition, EPA
assumed one-time costs for minimal improvements in wastewater treatment performance or
10-12
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
recycle rates to be $50,000. This estimate is based on a 10-week study, comprising 400 hours of
direct labor (160 hours of field work and 240 hours of office work) at a labor rate of $100 per
hour; approximately $5,000 for airfare, food, lodging, car rental, and other direct costs
(equipment rental, analytical costs, telephone costs); and $5,000 for miscellaneous expenses.
EPA did not develop more detailed cost estimates for these instances because these refinements
would not impact the Agency's final action for the subcategories with high-rate recycle as a
component of a technology option.
10.2 Results
This section presents EPA's national estimates of incremental investment and
operating and maintenance costs by technology option for each industry subcategory. Agency
cost estimates for this rulemaking are factored estimates and are believed to be accurate within
±25 to ±30 percent (Reference 10-3). Site-specific cost estimates are documented by subcategory
in Section 14.6 of the Administrative Record: by-product recovery cokemaking (DCN IS 10721),
sintering (DCN IS 10705), ironmaking (DCN IS 10717), integrated steelmaking (IS 10694),
integrated and stand-alone hot forming (DCN IS 10830), non-integrated steelmaking and hot
forming (DCN IS 10697), steel finishing (DCN IS 10702), and other operations (DCN IS 10706).
10.2.1 Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery and Non-Recovery
Segments
The Agency estimated the cost impacts for a total of four BAT and PSES
technology options for 20 by-product recovery cokemaking sites in the United States that
discharge wastewater. Of these 20 sites, 12 are direct dischargers and 8 are indirect dischargers.
The table below summarizes the technology options evaluated after proposal. To incorporate
comments submitted in response to the proposed rule, EPA revised cost estimates associated
with the BAT-1, BAT-3, PSES-1, and PSES-3 technology options to account for costs associated
with installing free and fixed ammonia distillation systems and minimizing and reducing
extraneous flows, when applicable. The Agency revised cost estimates for BAT-3 to incorporate
costs to install and operate multimedia filtration following breakpoint chlorination, which is
consistent with the treatment configuration of the site operating this technology. EPA did not
further consider technology options BAT-2, BAT-4, PSES-2, and PSES-4 after proposal, as
discussed in Section 9. Therefore, the Agency did not revise cost estimates for these options and
cost estimates for options BAT-1, BAT-3, PSES-1, and PSES-3 are presented in Table 10-17.
Technology Options for By-Product Recovery Segment
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
BAT-3
PSES-1
PSES-3
Tar/oil removal
~
~
~
~
Equalization/ammonia still feed tank
~
~
~
~
Free and fixed ammonia still
~
~
~
~
Temperature control
~
~
~
Equalization tank
~
~
~
~
10-13
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
BAT-3
PSES-1
PSES-3
Biological treatment with secondary clarification
~
~
~
Sludge dewatering
~
~
~
Breakpoint chlorination (2-stage)
~
Multimedia filtration
~
BAT-1
EPA analyzed long-term average effluent data, treatment system flow rates, and
wastewater treatment operating parameters provided in industry survey responses from all 13
direct dischargers. The Agency estimated that:
• One site would install additional aeration capacity for biological treatment
in order to achieve the model treatment concentration for ammonia as
nitrogen. Based on operating and design parameters reported by this site,
the Agency concluded that the current operating hydraulic retention time
(HRT) and solids retention time (SRT) at this site are insufficient to
consistently achieve the model pollutant loadings. Consequently, the
Agency estimated investment costs for additional biological treatment
basin capacity required to achieve a 50-hour HRT and an SRT of 100 days,
which are based on industry survey responses from by-product recovery
cokemaking sites with model treatment and performance. EPA also
estimated that this site would replace an existing free and fixed ammonia
distillation system and install an equalization tank ahead of the ammonia
stills to minimize influent and effluent variability for ammonia as nitrogen.
• Three sites would upgrade and optimize existing biological treatment
systems.
• One site would install a free ammonia distillation system.
• Two sites would install additional biological treatment filters and operate
existing ammonia stills at a lower operating pH, possibly requiring
relocation of the sodium hydroxide injection point.
One site would upgrade and optimize an existing biological treatment
system, reroute benzol plant wastewaters to an existing equalization tank,
and install a free and fixed ammonia distillation system.
One site would install a tar removal system, heat exchanger, biological
treatment equalization tank, a final cooler to reduce noncontact cooling
water to biological treatment, a new sewer to route only ammonia still
effluent and control water to biological treatment, and a spare pump for
coke quench water return to eliminate runoff to biological treatment in the
10-14
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
event of primary pump failure or maintenance. This site would also
upgrade controls on an existing ammonia distillation system, increase the
frequency of biological treatment monitoring, and replace a boiler water
preheater to eliminate a leak of boiler water to the process water collection
system.
• One site would install biological treatment equalization tanks.
• One site does not operate biological treatment following ammonia
distillation. Instead, this site operates an ammonia still followed by a
dephenolization system, sand filtration, and granular activated carbon
filtration. The Agency assumed that this site would install an ammonia
distillation equalization tank and biological treatment equalization tank,
demolish an old blast furnace area to accommodate installation of a
biological treatment system to replace an existing physical chemical
treatment system, and replace direct cooling of hot oil decanter with an
indirect heat exchanger to reduce the discharge flow rate. Although these
improvements would require a significant investment, the Agency
estimated that this site would realize annual operating and maintenance
cost savings.
• Two sites would not incur any costs.
BAT-3
In addition to the costs associated with BAT-1, EPA estimated that all 13 direct
dischargers would install breakpoint chlorination systems in order to achieve BAT-3 model
effluent pollutant loadings. The Agency estimated that nine of these sites would also install
multimedia filtration systems. EPA revised cost estimates associated with breakpoint
chlorination systems to incorporate comments submitted in response to the proposed rule. EPA
included costs for a sodium hypochlorite delivery and feed system, as well as costs to comply
with Uniform Fire Code standards, to account for safety considerations of chlorination systems.
The Agency also incorporated additional costs for insulation, heat tracing, air dryers, an extra 200
feet of piping, a sodium bisulfite storage tank, and software for process control and
instrumentation. Table 10-5 presents the revised cost estimates.
PSES-1
Of the eight indirect dischargers, two use ammonia stills followed by biological
treatment (conventional activated sludge systems) and one uses biological treatment (sequencing
batch reactors) followed by air stripping. Two sites operate an ammonia still followed by
cyanide precipitation; one of these sites also operates a sand filtration system following cyanide
precipitation. The remaining three sites operate an ammonia still. Two of the eight sites
discharge to POTWs with nitrification capability and would therefore qualify for a waiver for
ammonia as nitrogen limits. The Agency estimated that:
10-15
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
• One site would install an equalization tank following an existing ammonia
distillation system and incur costs for additional steam and caustic;
• One site would incur costs to minimize non-process wastewater infiltration
and wastewater generated from crude light oil recovery operations;
• One site would install an equalization tank and a free and fixed ammonia
distillation system;
• One site would install an equalization tank prior to an existing ammonia
distillation system and incur costs to eliminate non-process water
infiltration;
• One site would install equalization tanks prior to and after ammonia stills
and incur costs for additional steam and caustic;
• One site would optimize and upgrade an existing biological treatment
system instead of installing a new ammonia distillation system to reduce
effluent ammonia loadings; and
• Two sites would not incur any costs.
PSES-3
The Agency estimated that five sites would install biological treatment systems in
order to comply with PSES-3. The Agency estimated investment costs of installing biological
treatment systems designed and operated based on a 50-hour HRT and an SRT of 100 days, along
with associated equalization, clarification and sludge handling systems. EPA also estimated that
three sites with existing biological treatment would incur a one-time cost in order to improve
system performance.
Non-Recovery Segment
The Agency is aware of one non-recovery cokemaking plant that operated in
1997. This site does not discharge process wastewater and would therefore not incur any costs in
order to comply with this rule.
10.2.2 Ironmaking and Sintering Subcategories
Of the 20 integrated sites in the United States, 9 discharge only blast furnace
wastewater and 3 discharge commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater. The Agency is
also aware of one stand-alone sinter plant that operated in 1997 and discharged wastewater. Of
the 14 sites that discharge blast furnace or sinter plant wastewater, 9 operate dedicated blast
furnace treatment systems (one is an indirect discharger), 3 operate combined sintering and blast
10-16
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
furnace treatment systems, 1 cotreats wastewater from sintering, blast furnace, and other iron and
steel manufacturing processes, and 1 operates a dedicated sinter plant treatment system.
EPA performed two separate costing analyses for the ironmaking and sintering
subcategories. The first analysis was similar to that performed by EPA for the proposed rule,
where sintering was a segment within the ironmaking subcategory. The second analysis was
based on developing revised limitations within the existing regulatory structure, which includes
sintering as a separate subcategory. These two analyses are described below.
Ironmaking Subcategory
The table below summarizes the technology options for treatment of blast furnace
and sintering wastewater, whether cotreated or treated separately. The BAT-1 option consists of
multimedia filtration to remove dioxin/furans and is discussed in Section 9.2. Under this option,
sites would have to monitor for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF) at a point prior to
commingling with wastewater from any non-sintering or non-blast-furnace operations, with the
exception that facilities may commingle ancillary non-blast-furnace wastewater (comprising 5
percent of total flow or less) with sintering wastewater. For the purpose of this analysis, EPA
continued to use the proposed subcategorization in which ironmaking and sintering operations
were combined into a single subcategory with different segments. Agency cost estimates for
these options are discussed in the subsections below and presented in Table 10-18.
Technology Options for Ironmaking Subcategory
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
PSES-1
Clarifier
~
~
Sludge dewatering
~
~
Cooling tower (blast furnace only)
~
~
High-rate recycle
~
~
Blowdown treatment
Metals precipitation
~
~
Breakpoint chlorination (2-stage)
~
Multimedia filtration
~
BAT-l/PSES-1
EPA evaluated industry survey responses from 13 direct dischargers and 1 indirect
discharger. EPA revised cost estimates for these technology options to incorporate comments
submitted in response to the proposed rule. The Agency determined necessary equipment
modifications without assuming that facilities would reapply for and be granted 301(g) variances
during permit renewal. EPA also revised cost estimates associated with breakpoint chlorination
to incorporate costs for a sodium hypochlorite delivery and feed system as well as costs to
10-17
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
comply with Uniform Fire Code standards to account for safety considerations of chlorination
systems. The Agency also incorporated additional costs for insulation, heat tracing, air dryers, an
extra 200 feet of piping, a sodium bisulfite storage tank, and software for process control and
instrumentation. Table 10-9 presents the revised cost estimates for breakpoint chlorination. For
the sites evaluated for options BAT-1 and PSES-1 (13 direct discharge sites were evaluated for
BAT-1 and one indirect discharge site was evaluated for PSES-1), the Agency estimated that:
• Two sites with existing once-through treatment systems would install
high-rate recycle systems to achieve the model PNF. In addition, EPA
estimated that one of these sites would install a blowdown treatment
system comprising metals precipitation, solids handling, breakpoint
chlorination, and multimedia filtration, while the other site would install a
blowdown treatment system comprising metals precipitation, solids
handling, and multimedia filtration. To estimate the investment costs for
high-rate recycle systems, the Agency used an engineering and design firm
(independent of the electronic cost model) for each site.
• One site would install a blowdown multimedia filtration system.
• One site would install two breakpoint chlorination systems for two
separate treatment systems and also incur one-time costs to increase
recycle rates.
• One sites would incur a one-time cost to modify operating practices and
incur additional annual operating and maintenance costs.
• Four sites would install a blowdown treatment system comprising metals
precipitation, solids handling, breakpoint chlorination, and multimedia
filtration; one of these sites would also install an additional cooling tower,
piping, and pump station to increase recycle, while another of these sites
would also incur a one-time cost to increase recycle.
• One site would install a blowdown treatment system comprising
breakpoint chlorination and multimedia filtration.
• One site would install a blowdown treatment system comprising
breakpoint chlorination and multimedia filtration and incur a one-time cost
increase recycle.
• Two sites would install a blowdown treatment system comprising
breakpoint chlorination and multimedia filtration and install an additional
cooling tower, piping, and pump station to increase recycle.
10-18
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Sintering Subcategory
For the sintering subcategory, EPA evaluated revising the current regulation to
add limitations and standards for one additional pollutant, 2,3,7,8-TCDF, while keeping the rest
of the limits unchanged. For this analysis, EPA considered a technology basis composed of
multimedia filtration to remove chlorinated dioxin and furan congeners from sintering
wastewater, prior to commingling sintering wastewater with wastewater from any non-sintering
or non-blast-furnace operations (with the exception that facilities may commingle ancillary non-
blast-furnace wastewater comprising 5 percent of the total flow or less). EPA evaluated industry
survey responses from five direct dischargers; EPA identified no indirect discharging sintering
facilities.
To incorporate comments submitted in response to the proposed rule, the Agency
revised its cost estimates for multimedia filtration systems to include costs for insulation, heat
tracing, an extra 200 feet of piping, and software for process control and instrumentation. Table
10-13 presents the revised costs for multimedia filtration systems. For this analysis, EPA
estimates that four sites would install a multimedia filtration system and solids handling system
and one site would install a chemical precipitation system, solids handling system, and
multimedia filtration system.
10.2.3 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
According to industry survey responses, there are 20 integrated sites with basic
oxygen furnaces (BOFs) and continuous casting operations. Thirteen of these sites have vacuum
degassing operations. The Agency is also aware of one non-integrated site that operates a BOF.
EPA estimated incremental costs for these 21 sites. The table below summarizes the technology
options for control of treatment of wastewater from BOF, vacuum degassing, and continuous
casting operations, whether cotreated or treated separately. Agency cost estimates for these
options are discussed in the subsection below and presented in Table 10-19.
Technology Options for Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
PSES-1
Classifier (BOF only)
~
~
Scale pit with oil skimming
(continuous casting only)
~
~
Carbon dioxide injection (wet-suppressed
and wet-open combustion BOFs only)
~
~
Clarifier
~
~
Sludge dewatering
~
~
Multimedia filtration (a) (continuous
casting only)
~
~
10-19
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
PSES-1
Cooling tower (vacuum degassing and
continuous casting)
~
~
High-rate recycle
~
~
Blowdown treatment
Metals precipitation
~
~
(a) May be used in recycle circuit or as blowdown treatment.
BAT-l/PSES-1
The Agency estimated that 16 of the 21 sites would install a total of 25 blowdown
metals precipitation systems to achieve BAT-l/PSES-1 model Pollutant loadings. Based on
industry comments, EPA revised metals precipitation costs to include an equalization tank with a
mixer, a rapid mix tank, a flocculation tank, conventional clarifiers, and software/process control
costs in lieu of an equalization tank followed by a reactor clarifier with sodium hydroxide and
polymer feed systems. EPA estimated that four treatment systems at four sites would not incur
any costs.
In addition to the costs discussed above, the Agency estimated that:
• Seven sites would install a total of eight carbon dioxide injection systems
to increase recycle rates for wet-suppressed or wet-open combustion BOF
recycle systems;
• Three sites would install additional piping and pump stations to increase
recycle rates of four recycle systems;
• Eight sites would install additional cooling towers, piping, and pump
stations to increase recycle rates for nine recycle systems;
• Seven sites would incur one-time costs to increase recycle rates of seven
recycle systems by an average of 1.5 percent;
• One site would install a high-rate recycle system to replace a once-through
treatment system (the engineering and design firm prepared a cost estimate
for this site independently of the cost model); and
• One site would incur costs to eliminate various noncontact cooling water
leaks into existing treatment systems (the site provided a cost estimate).
Note that multiple cost items summarized above may apply to one site. Therefore, the sum of the
sites from each bullet does not equal the total number of sites evaluated for this option.
10-20
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
10.2.4 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
The Agency estimated that 44 carbon steel integrated and stand-alone hot forming
sites discharge wastewater to surface waters in the United States and 6 sites discharge wastewater
to POTWs. EPA estimated that the three integrated and stand-alone hot forming sites that
manufacture stainless steel products are indirect dischargers. No survey respondent with
stainless steel hot forming operations reported directly discharging wastewater.
The table below summarizes the technology options evaluated for the carbon and
alloy steel and stainless steel segments of this subcategory. Agency cost estimates for these
options are discussed in the subsections below and presented in Table 10-20.
Technology Options for Integrated and Stand-Alone
Hot Forming Subcategory
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
PSES-1
Scale pit with oil skimming
~
~
Roughing clarifier with oil removal
~
~
Sludge dewatering
~
~
Multimedia filtration (a)
~
~
High-rate recycle
~
~
Blowdown treatment
Multimedia filtration (a)
~
~
(a) May be used in recycle circuit or as blowdown treatment.
BAT-1 (Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that 13 of the 44 sites would install a total of 14 high-rate
recycle systems to replace existing partial recycle or once-through treatment systems. The
Agency used an engineering and design firm to estimate investment costs (independently of the
cost model) to install 12 high-rate recycle systems. One of these estimates included costs to
segregate hot forming and finishing wastewater that was cotreated in an end-of-pipe system. The
Agency distributed costs associated with this modification to the integrated and stand-alone hot
forming subcategory and steel finishing subcategory according to the relative percentage of
wastewater flow reported by this site from both subcategories. The Agency used cost estimates
submitted in response to the proposed rule to estimate investment costs to install the other two
high-rate recycle treatment systems.
In addition to the wastewater treatment modifications mentioned above, the
Agency also estimated that:
• Six sites would install blowdown multimedia filtration systems;
10-21
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating; and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
• Seven sites would install blowdown multimedia filtration systems, cooling
towers, pump stations, and piping;
• Three sites would install a total of five blowdown multimedia filtration
systems and would incur one-time costs for flow reduction;
• Six sites would install cooling towers, pump stations, and piping; and
• Twelve treatment systems at a total of 12 sites would not incur any costs to
comply with BAT-1.
Note that multiple cost items summarized above may apply to one site. Therefore, the sum of the
sites from each bullet does not equal the total number of sites evaluated for this option. The
Agency estimated that 12 of the sites mentioned above would install multimedia filtration
systems to treat blowdown flow rates less than 50 gallons per minute (gpm). Based on vendor
information obtained for small-scale multimedia filtration systems, the Agency estimated an
investment cost of $200,000 would be required to purchase and install each of these systems.
PSES-1 (Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment)
Of the six indirect discharging carbon steel integrated and stand-alone hot forming
sites, the Agency estimated that two sites would install blowdown filtration systems to treat flow
rates less than 50 gpm and incur a one-time cost for flow reduction. EPA estimated that four
sites would not incur any costs to comply with PSES-1.
PSES-1 (Stainless Steel Segment)
Of the three indirect discharging stainless steel sites, the Agency estimated that
two sites would install blowdown filtration systems and one site would incur a one-time cost for
flow reduction.
10.2.5 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
The Agency estimated that 40 carbon steel mini-mills discharge wastewater from
vacuum degassing, continuous casting, or hot forming operations, whether cotreated or treated
separately, to surface waters of the United States and 16 discharge wastewater from these
operations to POTWs. The Agency also estimated that four stainless steel mini-mills discharge
wastewater from vacuum degassing, continuous casting, or hot forming operations, whether
cotreated or treated separately, to surface waters of the United States and five discharge
wastewater from these operations to POTWs.
The table below summarizes the technology options evaluated for the carbon and
alloy steel and stainless steel segments of this subcategory. Agency cost estimates for these
options are discussed in the subsections below and presented in Table 10-21.
10-22
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Technology Options for Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
PSES-1
Scale pit with oil skimming (continuous casting
and hot forming only)
~
~
Clarifier
~
~
Sludge dewatering
~
~
Cooling tower
~
~
Multimedia filtration (a)
~
~
High-rate recycle
~
~
Blowdown treatment
Metals precipitation (a)
Multimedia filtration (a)
~
~
(a) May be used in recycle circuit or as blowdown treatment.
BAT-1 (Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that two sites would replace existing once-through
treatment systems with high-rate recycle systems. An engineering and design firm prepared cost
estimates for these sites independently of the cost model. EPA also estimated that:
• Twelve sites would install a total of 17 blowdown multimedia filtration
systems;
• Four sites would install blowdown multimedia filtration systems, cooling
towers, pump stations, and piping and incur one-time costs;
• Two sites would install blowdown multimedia filtration systems and incur
one-time costs for flow reduction;
• Eight sites would install cooling towers, pump stations, and piping for a
total of 13 recycle systems;
• Four sites would install cooling towers, pump stations, and piping for a
total of five recycle systems and incur one-time costs; and
• Thirteen sites would incur one-time costs for flow reduction at 22 recycle
systems.
10-23
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
EPA estimated that all of the multimedia filtration systems mentioned above would treat less
than 50 gpm of wastewater. The Agency believes that 14 treatment systems at a total of 13 sites
would not incur any costs to comply with BAT-1. Note that multiple cost items summarized
above may apply to one site. Therefore, the sum of the sites from each bullet does not equal the
total number of sites evaluated for this option.
PSES-1 (Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that two sites would install a blowdown multimedia
filtration system; one site would install a blowdown multimedia filtration system and a cooling
tower, pump station, and piping and incur one-time costs; six sites would install blowdown
multimedia filtration systems and incur one-time costs; and three sites would install cooling
towers, pump stations, and piping. EPA estimated that seven of the multimedia filtration systems
mentioned would treat less than 50 gpm of wastewater. The Agency believes that 11 treatment
systems at a total of 10 sites would not incur any costs to comply with PSES-1. Note that
multiple cost items summarized above may apply to one site. Therefore, the sum of the sites
from each bullet does not equal the total number of sites evaluated for this option.
BAT-1 (Stainless Steel Segment)
EPA estimated that one site would replace an existing once-through treatment
system with a high-rate recycle system. An engineering and design firm prepared a cost estimate
for this site independently of the cost model. The Agency also estimated that one site would
install separate two multimedia filtration systems to treat less than 50 gpm of wastewater and
incur one-time costs, one site would incur one-time costs for flow reduction, and one site would
not incur any costs to comply with BAT-1.
PSES-1 (Stainless Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that one site would install two multimedia filtration
systems at two separate treatment systems to treat less than 50 gpm of wastewater and incur one-
time costs, two sites would install cooling towers, pump stations, and piping, and two sites would
not incur any costs to comply with PSES-1.
10.2.6 Steel Finishing Subcategory
The Agency estimated that 51 carbon steel and 19 stainless steel finishing mills
discharge wastewater to surface waters in the United States and 31 carbon steel and 14 stainless
steel finishing mills discharge wastewater to POTWs.
The table below summarizes the technology options evaluated for the carbon and
alloy steel and stainless steel segments. Comments submitted in response to the proposed rule
provided information to the Agency on the efficiency and performance of acid purification
technology, which indicated EPA substantially overestimated the capability of acid purification
units (APUs) in the proposed rule. Therefore, EPA also estimated costs and pollutant removals
10-24
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
without APUs as a component of the technology option. Estimates excluding APUs as a
technology option component resulted in substantially higher costs with lower pollutant removals
than those estimated at proposal.
Technology Options for Steel Finishing Subcategory
Treatment Unit
BAT-1
PSES-1
In-Process Controls
Countercurrent rinses
~
~
Recycle of fume scrubber water
~
~
Wastewater Treatment
Oil removal
~
~
Hydraulic and waste loading
equalization
~
~
Hexavalent chromium reduction
~
~
Metals precipitation
~
~
Clarification
~
~
Sludge dewatering
~
~
The Agency evaluated PNFs from manufacturing lines at each site for comparison
with model PNFs. For lines with PNFs within 25 percent of the model PNF, EPA allocated a
one-time cost to sites to achieve model PNFs. The Agency assumed relatively minor costs are
associated with controlling rinse water flow rates to achieve these flow reductions and would be
included in the one-time cost.
For manufacturing lines with PNFs greater than 25 percent, the Agency estimated
costs to install countercurrent rinse tanks at $150,000 per line. This estimate is based on
installation of an additional 10,000-gallon rinse tank with associated pumps and blowers for bath
agitation. Furthermore, EPA did not assign incremental operating and maintenance costs for
installation of countercurrent rinse tanks. The Agency assumed that operating and maintenance
costs incurred because of installation of these tanks would be minimal and offset by likely
savings in rinse water usage and process water chemical treatment. Comments submitted in
response to the proposed rule indicated that these costs would vary greatly with each site,
depending on the presence of adequate space on process lines for additional tanks, and that down
time associated with such process modifications would be significantly more that EPA estimated
at proposal. In response to this comment, EPA revised its cost estimates associated with the
installation of countercurrent rinse tanks to include a one-time cost of $900,000 per line for lost
line revenue.
10-25
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
EPA did not modify the methodology discussed above further because these
modifications would not impact the Agency's final action for the steel finishing subcategory. In
response to comments received on the proposed rule regarding infeasibility of model PNFs
because of product quality concerns, EPA did evaluate possible concentration-based effluent
limitations for this subcategory. However, pollutant removals associated with this evaluation
were too small to justify the projected costs. Agency cost estimates for the evaluated technology
options, except for the consideration of concentration-based limitations, are discussed in the
subsections below and presented in Table 10-22.
BAT-1 (Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment)
Based on industry survey responses, EPA estimated that six sites would incur a
one-time cost to optimize existing metals precipitation systems. The Agency assumed a 15-
percent increase in annual operating and maintenance costs for these sites. EPA estimated that
four sites would require wastewater treatment modifications and incur flow reduction costs. The
Agency also costed one site to segregate hot forming and finishing wastewater that was cotreated
in an end-of-pipe system. The Agency used an engineering and design firm to estimate this cost.
This estimate was prepared independently of the cost model. EPA distributed costs associated
with this modification to the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory and steel
finishing subcategory according to the relative percentage of wastewater flow reported by this
site from both subcategories.
In addition to the in-process control and wastewater treatment modifications
mentioned above, the Agency also estimated that:
• Three sites would install countercurrent rinse tanks on a single line;
• Seven sites would install countercurrent rinse tanks and incur a one-time
cost for flow reduction;
• Nine would incur one-time costs to achieve model PNFs; and
• Twenty-one sites would not incur any costs to comply with BAT-1.
PSES-1 (Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that six sites would require wastewater treatment
modifications to achieve model effluent pollutant loadings. EPA estimated costs for five of these
sites to install metals precipitation systems, clarifiers, and associated sludge handling systems
and for the other site to install a clarifier.
In addition to the wastewater treatment modifications mentioned above, the
Agency also estimated that:
• Five sites would incur a one-time cost for flow reduction on a single line;
10-26
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
• Two sites would install a countercurrent rinse tank on a single line;
• One site would install a countercurrent rinse tank on a single line, incur a
one-time cost, and incur a 15-percent increase in annual operating and
maintenance costs to optimize existing metals precipitation systems;
• One site would install countercurrent rinse tanks on multiple lines; and
• Sixteen sites would not incur costs to comply with PSES-1.
BAT-1 (Stainless Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that two sites would incur a one-time cost for flow
reduction for a single line. In addition to these in-process modifications, the Agency also
estimated that:
• Six sites would install countercurrent rinse tanks on multiple lines and
incur a one-time cost for flow reduction;
• Eight sites would install countercurrent rinse tanks on multiple lines and
incur a one-time cost and a 15-percent increase in annual operating and
maintenance costs to optimize existing metals precipitation systems; and
• Three sites would not incur costs to comply with BAT-1.
PSES-1 (Stainless Steel Segment)
The Agency estimated that three sites would incur one-time costs, a 15-percent
increase in annual operating and maintenance costs to optimize existing metals precipitation
systems, and additional costs for flow reduction. In addition, the Agency estimates that:
• Two sites would incur a one-time cost and a 15-percent increase in annual
operating and maintenance costs to optimize existing metals precipitation
systems;
• One site would incur one-time costs for flow reduction; and
• Eight sites would not incur costs to comply with PSES-1.
10.2.7 Other Operations Subcategory
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI) Segment
The table below presents the BPT technology option evaluated for this segment.
EPA is not discussing or presenting cost estimates because data aggregation or other masking
10-27
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
techniques are insufficient to protect confidential business information. The Agency evaluated
effluent total suspended solids concentrations reported by sites, PNFs, and technology in place to
determine appropriate costs to achieve model pollutant loadings.
Technology Options for DRI Segment
Treatment Unit
BPT
Classifier
~
Clarifier
~
Sludge dewatering
~
Cooling tower
~
High-rate recycle
~
Blowdown treatment
Multimedia filtration
~
Forging Segment
Of the eight direct discharging forging operations and four indirect discharging
forging operations, the Agency estimated that two sites would install a blowdown multimedia
filtration system and incur a one-time cost to achieve the model loadings and two sites would
install a blowdown multimedia filtration system. The Agency also estimated that four sites
would not incur costs to comply with BPT. EPA assigned a one-time cost of $20,000 for
consultant and mill services to evaluate how to modify contact water management practices to
achieve the model PNF for forging. Forging operations at iron and steel sites are small-scale
operations that range in production from 500 to 90,000 tons of steel per year. Sites estimated to
incur a one-time cost forge well below 20,000 tons of steel per year. Consequently, the Agency's
estimate is based on a short-term study, consisting of 150 hours of direct labor (50 hours of field
work and 100 hours of office work) at a labor rate of $100 per hour. The Agency also estimated
approximately $2,500 for airfare, food, lodging, and other direct costs (equipment rental,
analytical costs, telephone costs) and $2,500 for miscellaneous expenses. Table 10-23 presents
Agency cost estimates for the BPT option.
10-28
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Technology Options for Forging Segment
Treatment Unit
BPT
High-rate recycle
~
Blowdown treatment
Oil/water separator
~
Multimedia filtration
~
Briquetting Segment
The Agency is aware of four sites with briquetting operations active in 1997.
These sites do not discharge process wastewater and would therefore not incur any costs in order
to comply with this rule.
103 References
10-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Economic Analysis of the Final Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point
Source Category. EPA 821-R-02-006, Washington, DC, April 2002.
10-2 U.S. Department of Labor. Monthly Labor Review. Washington, DC, 1997.
10-3 Perry, R. and Green, D. Perry's Chemical Engineer's Handbook. Sixth Edition.
McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1984.
10-4 Chemical Market Reporter. Schnell Publishing Company, December 1997.
10-5 U.S. Department of Energy. Electric Power Annual 1998. Volume I.
Washington, DC, 1998.
10-6 U.S. Department of Commerce. Current Industrial Reports. Steel Mill Products -
1997. MA33B, September 1998.
10-29
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-1
Assumptions Used to Develop Cost Estimates in Tables 10-2 through 10-13
Category
Assumption
Spatial limitations
Additions to the wastewater treatment system will be located within 500 feet of the
existing system.
An approximate length of 500 feet is used for the supply of water to the new water
treatment facility.
Equipment is located so that the length between processing tanks, sumps, and
processing equipment will be within 20 feet.
Outfalls or sewers leading to outfalls are located within 300 feet of the exit of the new
water treatment facility.
Motors are located within 150 feet from motor control center, 160 feet of conduit per
motor, 260 feet of control cable per motor.
Solids handling
Sludge or filter backwash generated from add-on treatment systems will be thickened
and dewatered with existing equipment in existing high-rate recycle systems, except for
blast furnace and sintering operations, where separate sludge dewatering facilities were
costed for blowdown treatment systems to segregate high zinc-content sludges from
wastewater sludges that may be recycled to the blast furnaces.
Civil/structural costs
Site preparation is minimal; no major demolition, excavation of existing foundations or
movement of railroad tracks.
Soil conditions are such that no piles are required.
No excavation of hazardous materials.
Piping/installation
Blended labor rate of $60 per hour, consistent with union labor rates, for personnel
performing equipment installation.
1,000 feet of 2-inch carbon steel pipe has been included for plant air distribution.
There is no allowance for an air compressor.
Pipe has been sized to keep the water velocity less than 8 feet per second.
2-inch nominal piping and under is priced as schedule 80 threaded carbon steel.
Pipe over 2 inches is priced as standard schedule carbon steel pipe with welded joints.
316 stainless steel pipe is used for chlorine, caustic, and acid piping.
Costs for supports and painting are included.
10% of the total cost allowed for manual valves.
Electrical/process
control instrumentation
5% of the total cost allowed for instrumentation.
Electrical and other utility services are available at the site.
10-30
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-2
Design Specifications for Cokemaking Granular Activated
Carbon Model Treatment Systems
Item
Type
100,000 gpd
400,000 gpd
2,700,000 gpd
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Pump station 1
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1.5 HP
2 pumps
7.5 HP
2 pumps
40 HP
Pump station 2
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/3 HP
2 pumps
1/3 HP
2 pumps
2 HP
Filter backwash pump
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
5 HP
2 pumps
5 HP
2 pumps
2 BHP
Equalization basin
Concrete
1
3,500 ft3
1
13,500 ft3
1
90,000 ft3
Sump 1
Concrete
1
450 ft3
1
700 ft3
1
4,000 ft3
Backwash surge basin
Concrete
1
450 ft3
1
700 ft3
1
4,000 ft3
Activated carbon
system
Filters
2
4* x 3V
7.5 HP
2
T x 77
7.5 HP
3
15'x 10/
20 HP
10-31
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-3
Estimated Investment Costs for Cokemaking Granular Activated Carbon
Model Treatment Systems (100,000 - 2,700,000 gpd)
100,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Activated carbon system
2
$80,000
$160,000
equipment
Activated carbon
1
$5,000
$5,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,100
$2,200
Pump station 2
2
$2,500
$5,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$3,000
$6,000
Total freight
$5,300
Subtotal
$183,500
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Activated carbon system
2
$11,000
$22,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$2,000 .
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$58,000
$58,000
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$10,200
$10,200
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Activated carbon system
1
$27,400
$27,400
Equalization basin
1
$66,600
$66,600
Sump 1
1
$19,000
$19,000
Backwash surge basin
1
$19,000
$19,000
10-32
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-3 (continued)
100,000 gpd
Installation
Equipment structural support
(cont.)
Pump station 1 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$2,000
$2,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$8,000
$8,000
Buildings
Activated carbon system
1
$21,000
$21,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$48,100
$48,100
Control/instrumentation
1
$40,600
$40,600
Building services
1
$4,400
$4,400
Subtotal
$360,300
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$5,400
Spare parts (1.5%)
$8,200
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$65,300
Commissioning (3%)
$16,300
Owner team (10%)
$54,400
Subtotal
$149,600
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$693,400
Contingency (20%)
$138,700
Total Project Cost
$832,100
400,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Activated carbon system
2
$90,000
$180,000
equipment
Activated carbon
1
$15,000
$15,000
Pump station 1
2
$6,400
$12,800
Pump station 2
2
$1,100
$2,200
Filter backwash pumps
2
$6,500
$13,000
Total freight
$6,700
Subtotal
$229,700
10-33
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-3 (continued)
400,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Activated carbon system
2
$12,000
$24,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$91,100
$91,100
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$16,100
$16,100
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Activated carbon system
1
$35,000
$35,000
Equalization basin
1
$152,300
$152,300
Sump 1
1
$22,000
$22,000
Backwash surge basin
1
$22,000
$22,000
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$2,000
$2,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$8,000
$8,000
Buildings
Activated carbon system
1
$28,000
$28,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$48,100
$48,100
Control/instrumentation
1
$40,600
$40,600
Building services
1
$5,800
$5,800
Subtotal
$514,000
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$7,400
Spare parts (1.5%)
$11,200
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$89,200
Commissioning (3%)
$22,300
Owner team (10%)
$74,400
Subtotal
$204,500
10-34
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-3 (continued)
400,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$948,200
Contingency (20%)
$189,600
Total Project Cost
$1,137,800
2,700,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Activated carbon system
3
$86,000
$258,000
equipment
Activated carbon
1
$100,000
$100,000
Pump station 1
2
$10,600
$21,200
Pump station 2
2
$3,000
$6,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Total freight
$11,600
Subtotal
$399,800
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Activated carbon system
3
$12,000
$36,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$175,400
$175,400
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$31,000
$31,000
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Activated carbon system
1
$60,100
$60,100
Equalization basin
1
$657,400
$657,400
Sump 1
1
$59,100
$59,100
Backwash surge basin
1
$59,100
$59,100
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$12,000
$12,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$12,000
$12,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$4,000
$4,000
Buildings
Activated carbon system
1
$54,000
$54,000
10-35
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-3 (continued)
2,700,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Electrical and process control
(cont.)
Power/equipment
1
$82,500
$82,500
Control/instrumentation
1
$44,400
$44,400
Building services
1
$11,300
$11,300
Subtotal
$1,310,300
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$17,100
Spare parts (1.5%)
$25,700
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$205,200
Commissioning (3%)
$51,300
Owner team (10%)
$171,000
Subtotal
$470,300
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$2,180,400
Contingency (20%)
$436,100
Total Project Cost
$2,616,500
10-36
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-4
Design Specifications for Cokemaking
Breakpoint Chlorination Model Treatment Systems
Item
Type
100,000 gpd
400,000 gpd
2,700,000 gpd
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Pump station 1
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
1.5 HP
2 pumps
10 HP
Pump station 2
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
15BHP
Pump station 3
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
2 HP
2 pumps
15 HP
Pump station 4
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
2 HP
2 pumps
15 HP
Pump station 5
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1.5 HP
2 pumps
5 HP
2 pumps
30 BHP
pH adjust pump
Diaphragm
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
Clarifier pump
Progressive capacity
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
2
5 BHP
NaOH pump 1
Diaphragm/ANSI
2
2 HP
(diaphragm)
2
2 HP (ANSI)
2
2 HP (ANSI)
NaOH pump 2
Diaphragm
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
Equalization basin
Concrete
1
4,000 ft3
1
13,500 ft3
1
90,000 ft3
Reactor clarifier
Mild steel
1
12' diameter *
12' side
1
22 ft diameter
x 12 ft side
1
60' diam.
Chlorination
mixing tank
Concrete/lined
1
lOftx lOftx
5 ft/5 HP
1
20 ft x lOftx
10ft/ 15HP
2
25 ft x 20 ft x
13 ft/2 @20 HP
Chlorination
system
Building
1
10 ft x 9 ft x
20ft/3 HP
1
10 ft x 9 ft x
20 ft/ 3 HP
1
15 ft x 20 fix 20
ft/ 2 @ 3 HP
Retention tank
Concrete/lined
1
50 ft x lOftx
10ft
1
50 ft x 20 ft x
20 ft
1
100 ft x 50 fix
25 ft
Dechlorination
tank
Concrete/lined
1
lOftx lOftx
5 ft/5 HP
1
20 ft x lOftx
10 ft/15 HP
2
25 fix 20 fix 13
ft/ 2 @ 20 HP
Dechlorination
system
Building/tank pad
1
8 ft x 8 ft x 15
ft/ lOftx 10ft
1
8 ft x 8 ft x 15
ft/10ftx 10ft
1
8ftx8ftxl5fl/
10 ft x 10 ft
NaOH tank 1
Carbon steel
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10'diameter x 10'
side
FRP - Fiberglass, reinforced plastic.
ANSI - American National Standards Institute.
10-37
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5
Estimated Investment Costs for Cokemaking
Breakpoint Chlorination Model Treatment Systems (100,000 - 2,700,000 gpd)
100,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Reactor clarifier
1
$40,000
$40,000
equipment
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$33,200
$33,200
NaOH tanks
2
$10,000
$20,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 3
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 4
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 5
2
$1,100
$2,200
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Clarifier pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH pumps 1
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH pumps 2
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$3,800
Subtotal
$130,000
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Reactor clarifier
1
$100,000
$100,000
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$10,000
$10,000
NaOH tanks
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 3
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 4
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 5
2
$1,500
$3,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
10-38
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
100,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Piping installation
(cont.)
Piping/supports
1
$70,500
$70,500
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$123,400
$123,400
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$18,100
$18,100
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/ clarifier pumps
1
$8,800
$8,800
NaOH pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH tanks
1
$4,200
$4,200
Chlorination mixing tank
1
$20,500 .
$20,500
Chlorination system
1
$12,600
$12,600
Retention tank
1
$110,800
$110,800
Dechlorination mixing tank
1
$20,500
$20,500
Dechlorination system
1
$12,500
$12,500
pH adjust pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Equalization basin
1
$59,100
$59,100
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 3 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 4 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 5 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Buildings
Chlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Dechlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$99,400
$99,400
Control/instrumentation
1
$90,300
$90,300
UFC compliance costs
1
$250,600
$250,600
Building Services (includes sodium hypochlorite
storage and delivery costs)
1
$3,900
$3,900
Subtotal
$1,082,500
10-39
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
100,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$12,100
Spare parts (1.5%)
$18,200
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$145,400
Commissioning (3%)
$36,400
Owner team (10%)
$121,200
Subtotal
$333,300
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,545,200
Contingency (20%)
$309,000
Total Project Cost
$1,854,200
400,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Reactor clarifier
1
$52,000
$52,000
equipment
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$118,800
$118,800
NaOH tanks
2
$10,000
$20,000
Pump station 1
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 2
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 3
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 4
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 5
2
$5,100
$10,200
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Clarifier pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH pumps 1
2
$5,000
$10,000
NaOH pumps 2
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$8,000
Subtotal
$274,800
10-40
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
400,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Reactor clarifier
1
$105,000
$105,000
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$35,600
$35,600
NaOH tanks
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 3
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 4
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 5
2
$2,000
$4,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
NaOH pumps 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$123,900
$123,900
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$128,800
$128,800
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$25,400
$25,400
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/clarifier pumps
1
$19,300
$19,300
NaOH pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH tanks
1
$4,200
$4,200
Chlorination mixing tank
1
$41,000
$41,000
Chlorination system
1
$12,900
$12,900
Retention tank
1
$221,600
$221,600
Dechlorination mixing tank
1
$41,000
$41,000
Dechlorination system
1
$12,900
$12,900
pH adjust pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Equalization basin
1
$175,500
$175,500
10-41
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
400,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
(cont.)
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$6,000
$6,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Pump station 3 platform
1
$6,000
$6,000
Pump station 4 platform
1
$6,000
$6,000
Pump station 5 platform
1
$12,000
$12,000
Buildings
Chlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Dechlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$99,500
$99,500
Control/instrumentation
1
$90,300
$90,300
UFC compliance costs
1
$250,600
$250,600
Building Services (includes sodium hypochlorite
storage and delivery costs)
1
$4,700
$4,700
Subtotal
$1,774,500
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$17,700
Spare parts (1.5%)
$26,600
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$212,900
Commissioning (3%)
$53,200
Owner team (10%)
$177,500
Subtotal
$488,000
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$2,262,500
Contingency (20%)
$452,500
Total Project Cost
$2,715,100
10-42
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
2,700,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Reactor clarifier
1
$155,000
$155,000
equipment
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$798,000
$798,000
NaOH tanks
2
$10,000
$20,000
Pump station 1
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 2
2
$10,500
$21,000
Pump station 3
2
$10,500
$21,000
Pump station 4
2
$10,500
$21,000
Pump station 5
2
$11,000
$22,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Clarifier pumps
2
$5,500
$11,000
NaOH pumps 1
2
$8,500
$17,000
NaOH pumps 2
2
$3,500
$7,000
Total freight
$33,500
Subtotal
$1,148,900
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Reactor clarifier
1
$300,000
$300,000
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$239,400
$239,400
NaOH tanks
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 3
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 4
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 5
2
$2,500
$5,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
10-43
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
2,700,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Piping installation
(cont.)
Piping/supports
1
$226,200
$226,200
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$142,400
$142,400
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$40,200
$40,200
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/clarifier pumps
1
$78,800
$78,800
NaOH pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH tanks
1
$5,300
$5,300
Chlorination mixing tank
2
$97,400
$194,800
Chlorination system
1
$32,800
$32,800
Retention tank
1
$1,000,800
$1,000,800
Dechlorination mixing tank
2
$97,400
$194,800
Dechlorination system
1
$11,500
$11,500
pH adjust pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Equalization basin
1
$657,400
$657,400
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 3 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 4 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 5 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Buildings
Chlorination system
1
$6,000
$6,000
Dechlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$195,800
$195,800
Control/instrumentation
1
$117,000
$117,000
UFC compliance costs
1
$250,600
$250,600
Building Services (includes sodium hypochlorite
storage and delivery costs)
1
$12,300
$12,300
Subtotal
$3,783,900
10-44
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-5 (continued)
2,700,000 gpd
Category
Item Quantity Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$47,400
Spare parts (1.5%)
$71,100
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$568,900
Commissioning (3%)
$142,200
Owner team (10%)
$474,100
Subtotal
$1,303,700
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$6,044,500
Contingency (20%)
$1,208,900
Total Project Cost
$7,253,400
10-45
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-6
Design Specifications for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment Systems for
Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
Item
Type
150,000 gpd
750,000 gpd
2,000,000 gpd
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Pump station 1
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
7.5 HP
Pump station 2
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
2 HP
2 pumps
10 HP
2 pumps
25 HP
Clarifier pump
Diaphragm/ANSI
2
1/3 HP
(diaphragm)
2
1 HP
(diaphragm)
2
1/2 HP (ANSI)
Filter press pump
Diaphragm
2
1/3 HP
2
1/3 HP
2
3BHP
NaOH pump
ANSI
2
1/3 HP
2
1/2 HP
2
1.5 BHP
Acid pump
Diaphragm
2
1/3 HP
2
1/3 HP
2
3BHP
Sump
Concrete
1
10 ft3
1
40 ft3
1
80 ft3
Equalization basin
Concrete
1
5,100 ft3
1
26,000 ft3
1
67,000 ft3
Reactor clarifier
Mild steel
1
15 ft diameter
x 12 ft side/
1 HP & 2.5
HP
1
35 ft diameter
x 12 ft side/
1 HP & 5 HP
1
51 ft diameter x
12 ft side/2 HP &
10 HP
Clarifier overflow
Concrete
1
450 ft3
1
1,260 ft3
1
14,000 ft3
NaOH tank
Carbon steel
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
Acid tank
FRP
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
pH control tank
Stainless
1
90 ft3/! HP
1
450 te/lHP
1
1,200 ft73 HP
Filter press
Pneumatic
1
18 ft * 7 ft x
6 ft/10 HP &
7.5 HP
1
18 ft x 7 ft x
6 ft/10 HP &
7.5 HP
I
18ftx7ftx6ft/
10 HP & 7.5 HP
FRP - Fiberglass, reinforced plastic.
ANSI - American National Standards Institute.
10-46
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-7
Estimated Investment Costs for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment
Systems for Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
(150,000 - 2,000,000 gpd)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Reactor clarifier
1
$40,000
$40,000
equipment
pH control tank
1
$8,900
$8,900
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
Filter press
1
$175,000
$175,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$3,000
$6,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,200 .
$4,400
Filter press pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
NaOH pumps
2
$5,500
$11,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$8,900
Subtotal
$306,000
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Reactor clarifier
1
$110,000
$110,000
pH control tank
1
$2,300
$2,300
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$1,000
$4,000
Filter press
1
$52,500
$52,500
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter press pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
10-47
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-7 (continued)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Piping installation
(cont.)
Piping/supports
1
$83,500
$83,500
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$144,600 .
$144,600
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$13,800
$13,800
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/overflow tank
1
$37,800
$37,800
Clarifier pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
pH control tank
1
$1,800
$1,800
Acid/NaOH tanks and pumps
1
$14,000
$14,000
Filter press
1
$7,000
$7,000
Equalization basin
1
$90,300
$90,300
Sump/filter press pumps
1
$6,700
$6,700
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$2,000
$2,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$82,200
$82,200
Control/instrumentation
1
$78,800
$78,800
Subtotal
$759,800
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$10,700
Spare parts (1.5%)
$16,000
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$127,900
Commissioning (3%)
$32,000
Owner team (10%)
$106,600
Subtotal
$293,200
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,358,900
Contingency (20%)
$271,800
Total Project Cost
$1,630,700
10-48
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-7 (continued)
750,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Reactor clarifier
1
$75,000
$75,000
equipment
pH control tank
1
$23,500
$23,500
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
Filter press
1
$175,000
$175,000
Pump station 1
2
$5,500
$11,000
Pump station 2
2
$8,000
$16,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
Filter press pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
NaOH pumps
2
$8,000
$16,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$11,200
Subtotal
$383,500
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Reactor clarifier
1
$162,000
$162,000
pH control tank
1
$6,000
$6,000
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$1,000
$4,000
Filter press
1
$52,500
$52,500
Pump station 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter press pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$137,000
$137,000
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$145,300
$145,300
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$20,100
$20,100
10-49
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-7 (continued)
750,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
(cont.)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/overflow tank
1
$59,000
$59,000
Clarifier pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
pH control tank
1
$5,300
$5,300
Acid/NaOH tanks and pumps
1
$14,000
$14,000
Filter press
1
$7,000
$7,000
Equalization basin
1
$257,600
$257,600
Sump/filter press pumps
1
$7,500
$7,500
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$82,200
$82,200
Control/instrumentation
1
$78,800
$78,800
Subtotal
$1,076,800
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$14,600
Spare parts (1.5%)
$21,900
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$175,200
Commissioning (3%)
$43,800
Owner team (10%)
$146,000
Subtotal
$401,500
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,861,900
Contingency (20%)
$372,400
Total Project Cost
$2,234,300
10-50
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-7 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Reactor clarifier
1
$130,000
$130,000
equipment
pH control tank
1
$47,400
$47,400
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
Filter press
1
$175,000
$175,000
Pump station 1
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 2
2
$9,500
$19,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$5,500
$11,000
Filter press pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
NaOH pumps
2
$8,500
$17,000
Acid pumps
2
$7,500
$15,000
Total freight
$14,300
Subtotal
$491,100
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Reactor clarifier
1
$253,000
$253,000
pH control tank
1
$12,000
$12,000
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
Filter press
1
$52,500
$52,500
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,500
$5,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Filter press pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$174,200
$174,200
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$149,800
$149,800
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$24,600
$24,600
10-51
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-7 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
(cont.)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/overflow tank
1
$224,800 .
$224,800
Clarifier pumps
1
$7,000
$7,000
pH control tank
1
$10,500
$10,500
Acid/NaOH tanks and pumps
1
$17,500
$17,500
Filter press
1
$8,700
$8,700
Equalization basin
1
$508,300
$508,300
Sump/filter press pumps
1
$12,500
$12,500
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$6,000
$6,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$105,900
$105,900
Control/instrumentation
1
$78,800
$78,800
Subtotal
$1,719,100
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$22,100
Spare parts (1.5%)
$33,200
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$265,200
Commissioning (3%)
$66,300
Owner team (10%)
$221,000
Subtotal
$607,800
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$2,818,000
Contingency (20%)
$563,600
Total Project Cost
$3,381,600
10-52
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-8
Design Specifications for Breakpoint Chlorination Model Treatment Systems
for Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
Item
Type
150,000 gpd
750,000 gpd
2,000,000 gpd
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Pump station 1
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1 HP
2 pumps
4HP
2 pumps
10 HP
Pump station 2
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
7.5 HP
Pump station 3
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
7.5 HP
Pump station 4
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
7.5 HP
pH adjust pump
Diaphragm
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
2
3 HP
NaOH pump
Diaphragm
2
1/2 HP
2
1/2 HP
2
1/2 HP
Equalization basin
Concrete
1
5,100 ft3
1
25,000 ft3
1
67,000 ft3
Chlorination
mixing tank
Concrete
1
11 fix lOftx
5 ft/5 HP
1
20 ftx 15 ftx
10 ft/20 HP
1
25 ft x 20 ft x 15
ft/3 @20HP
Chlorination
system
Building
1
10 ftx 9 ftx
20 ft/3 HP
1
10 ft x 9 ft x
20 ft/3 HP
1
15 ft x 20 ft x 20
ft/2 @3 HP
Retention tank
Concrete
1
50ftx 11 ftx
10ft
1
50 ft x 30 ft x
20 ft
1
80 ft x 50 ft x 20
ft
Dechlorination
tank
Concrete
1
11 ftx lOftx
5 ft/5 HP
1
20 ftx 15 ftx
10 ft/20 HP
1
25 ftx 20 ftx 15
ft/3 @ 20 HP
Dechlorination
system
Building/tank pad
1
8 ft x 8 ft x 15
ft/10 ft x 10 ft
1
8 ft x 8 ft x 15
ft/10 ftx 10 ft
1
8 ftx 8 ftx 15
ft/10 ftx 10 ft
Dechlorination
system sodium
bisulfite storage
tank
Fiberglass/tank
foundation
1
400 gal
1
1,000 gal
1
7,000 gal
NaOH tank
Carbon steel
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
FRP - Fiberglass, reinforced plastic.
ANSI - American National Standards Institute.
10-53
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9
Estimated Investment Costs for Breakpoint Chlorination Model Treatment
Systems for Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
(150,000 - 2,000,000 gpd)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$41,700
$41,700
equipment
NaOH tanks
2
$10,000
$20,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,500'
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 3
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 4
2
$1,500
$3,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Sodium bisulfite storage tank
1
$4,500
$4,500
NaOH pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$2,600
Subtotal
$89,600
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$12,500
$12,500
NaOH tanks
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 3
2
$1,500 •
$3,000
Pump station 4
2
$1,500
$3,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$74,700
$74,700
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$119,000
$119,000
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$18,800
$18,800
10-54
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9 (continued)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
(cont.)
Equipment foundations
NaOH pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
NaOH tanks
1
$4,200
$4,200
Chlorination mixing tank
1
$25,100
$25,100
Chlorination system
1
$12,600
$12,600
Retention tank
1
$118,500
$118,500
Dechlorination mixing tank
1
$25,100
$25,100
Dechlorination system
1
$12,500
$12,500
pH adjust pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Equalization basin
1
$77,800
$77,800
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$4,000.
$4,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 3 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 4 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Buildings
Chlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Dechlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$71,900
$71,900
Control/instrumentation
1
$67,300
$67,300
UFC compliance costs
1
$250,600
$250,600
Building Services (includes sodium hypochlorite
storage and delivery costs)
1
$4,800
$4,800
Subtotal
$944,400
10-55
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9 (continued)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$10,300
Spare parts (1.5%)
$15,500
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$124,100
Commissioning (3%)
$31,000
Owner team (10%)
$103,400
Subtotal
$284,400
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,318,400
Contingency (20%)
$263,700
Total Project Cost
$1,582,000
750,000 gallon per day
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$193,500
$193,500
equipment
NaOH tanks
2
$10,000
$20,000
Pump station 1
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 2
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 3
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 4
2
$5,000
$10,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Sodium bisulfite storage tank
1
$5,300
$5,300
NaOH pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$8,800
Subtotal
$276,400
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$58,100
$58,100
NaOH tanks
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 3
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 4
2
$2,000
$4,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
10-56
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9 (continued)
750,000 gallon per day
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Piping installation
(cont.)
Piping/supports
1
$127,000
$127,000
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$122,800
$122,800
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$24,900
$24,900
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
NaOH pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
NaOH tanks
1
$4,200
$4,200
Chlorination mixing tank
1
$64,800
$64,800
Chlorination system
1
$12,600
$12,600
Retention tank
1
$385,100
$385,100
Dechlorination mixing tank
1
$64,800
$64,800
Dechlorination system
1
$12,600
$12,600
pH adjust pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Equalization basin
1
$264,400 ¦
$264,400
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Pump station 3 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Pump station 4 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Buildings
Chlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Dechlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$74,000
$74,000
Control/instrumentation
1
$67,300
$67,300
UFC compliance costs
1
$250,600
$250,600
Building Services (includes sodium hypochlorite
storage and delivery costs)
1
$6,600
$6,600
Subtotal
$1,608,700
10-57
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9 (continued)
750,000 gallon per day
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$19,500
Spare parts (1.5%)
$29,300
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$234,500
Commissioning (3%)
$58,600
Owner team (10%)
$195,400
Subtotal
$537,300
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$2,422,400
Contingency (20%)
$484,500
Total Project Cost
$2,906,900
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$506,100
$506,100
equipment
NaOH tanks
2
$10,000
$20,000
Pump station 1
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 2
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 3
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 4
2
$9,000
$18,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Sodium bisulfite storage tank
1
$13,300
$13,300
NaOH pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$20,700
Subtotal
$640,900
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Chlorination/dechlorination mixing systems
1
$151,800
$151,800
NaOH tanks
2
$1,000
$2,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 3
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 4
2
$2,500
$5,000
pH adjust pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
10-58
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Piping installation
(cont.)
Piping/supports
1
$156,900
$156,900
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$126,700
$126,700
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$28,900
$28,900.
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
NaOH pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
NaOH tanks
1
$4,200
$4,200
Chlorination mixing tank
1
$120,300
$120,300
Chlorination system
1
$31,100
$31,100
Retention tank
1
$746,600
$746,600
Dechlorination mixing tank
1
$120,300
$120,300
Dechlorination system
1
$12,500
$12,500
pH adjust pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Equalization basin
1
$544,900
$544,900
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 3 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 4 platform
1
$16,000
$16,000
Buildings
Chlorination system
1
$6,000
$6,000
Dechlorination system
1
$2,000
$2,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$114,000
$114,000
Control/instrumentation
1
$86,500
$86,500
UFC compliance costs
1
$250,600
$250,600
Building Services (includes sodium hypochlorite
storage and delivery costs)
1
$10,500
$10,500
Subtotal
$2,614,800
10-59
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-9 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item Quantity Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$34,500
Spare parts (1.5%)
$51,800
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$413,900
Commissioning (3%)
$103,500
Owner team (10%)
$344,900
Subtotal
$948,400
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$4,204,100
Contingency (20%)
$840,800
Total Project Cost
$5,044,900
10-60
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-10
Design Specifications for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment Systems for
Basic Oxygen Furnace, Vacuum Degassing, and Continuous Casting
Wastewater
Item
Type
150,000 gpd
750,000 gpd
2,000,000 gpd
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Pump station 1
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
7.5 HP
Pump station 2
Vertical turbine
2 pumps
2 HP
2 pumps
10 HP
2 pumps
B
25 HP
Clarifier pumps
Diaphragm/ANSI
2 pumps
1/3 HP
(diaphragm)
2 pumps
1 HP
(diaphragm)
2 pumps
1/2 HP (ANSI)
NaOH pump
ANSI
2 pumps
1/3 HP
2 pumps
1/2 HP
2 pumps
1.5 BHP
Acid pump
Diaphragm
2 pumps
1/3 HP
2 pumps
1/3 HP
2 pumps
3 BHP
Equalization basin
Steel/Mixer
1
5,100 ft7l.5HP
1
26,000 ftV5 HP
1
67,000 ft3/10 HP
pH adjustment
tank
Steel/Mixer
1
300 ftVl.75HP
1
1,500 ft'/S.SHP
1
3,500 ft*/7.5HP
Flash mix tank
Steel/Mixer
1
50 ft70.3HP
1
200 ft7l.l7HP
1
500 ft>/3.5HP
Flocculation tank
Steel/Mixer
1
300 fP/l HP
I
1,500 ftV5 HP
1
3,500 tf/10 HP
Clarifier
Mild Steel
1
15 ft diameter
x 12 ft side/
1 HP & 2.5 HP
1
35 ft diameter x
12 ft side/
1 HP & 5 HP
51 ft diameter x
12 ft side/2 HP
& 10 HP
Clarifier overflow
Concrete
1
450 tea HP
1
1,260 ftVlO HP
1
14,000 ff/20 HP
NaOH tank
Carbon steel
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 Aside
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
Acid tank
FRP
2
10 ft diameter
x 10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
2
10 ft diameter x
10 ft side
pH control tank
Stainless
1
90 ft3/!HP
1
450ftJ/lHP
1
1200 ftV3 HP
FRP - Fiberglass, reinforced plastic.
ANSI - American National Standards Institute.
10-61
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11
Estimated Investment Costs for Metals Precipitation Model Treatment
Systems for Basic Oxygen Furnace, Vacuum Degassing, and Continuous
Casting Wastewater (150,000 - 2,000,000 gpd)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Mixer (for equalization basin)
1
$23,000
$23,000 .
equipment
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$5,000
$5,000
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$18,300
$18,300
Clarifier
1
$94,500
$94,500
pH control tank
1
$8,900
$8,900
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
pH adjust tank
1
$11,300
511,300
Mixer (for pH adjust tank)
1
$8,500
$8,500
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$3,000
$6,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
NaOH pumps
2
$5,500
$11,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$7,100
Subtotal
$245,400
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Mixer (for equalization basin)
1
$1,400
$1,400
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$1,000
$1,000
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$1,000
$1,000
Clarifier
1
$40,500
$40,500
pH control tank
1
$2,300 '
$2,300
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$1,000
$4,000
pH adjust tanks
1
$1,000
$1,000
Mixer (for pH adjust tank)
1
$500
$500
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
10-62
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11 (continued)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
(cont.)
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$1,500.
$3,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$82,800
$82,800
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$142,700
$142,700
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$13,700
$13,700
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Clarifier/overflow tank
1
$37,800
$37,800
Clarifier pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$800
$800
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$2,000
$2,000
pH control tank
1
$1,800
$1,800
Acid/NaOH tanks and pumps
1
$14,000
$14,000
pH adjust tank
1
$2,000
$2,000
Equalization basin
1
$90,300
$90,300
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$2,000
$2,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$68,400
$68,400
Control/instrumentation
1
$63,500
$63,500
Software
1
$28,000
$28,000
Subtotal
$626,000
10-63
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11 (continued)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$8,700
Spare parts (1.5%)
$13,100
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$104,600
Commissioning (3%)
$26,100
Owner team (10%)
$87,100
Subtotal
$239,600
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,111,000
Contingency (20%)
$222,200
Total Project Cost
$1,333,200
750,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Mixer (for equalization basin)
1
$50,000
$50,000
equipment
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$18,000
$18,000
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$49,000
$49,000
Clarifier
1
$155,000
$155,000
pH control tank
1
$23,500
$23,500
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
pH adjust tank
1
$34,500
$34,500
Mixer (for pH adjust tank)
1
$10,000
$10,000
Pump station 1
2
$5,500
$11,000
Pump station 2
2
$8,000
$16,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$3,500
$7,000
NaOH pumps
2
$8,000
$16,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,200
$4,400
Total freight
$13,000
Subtotal
$447,400
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Mixer (for equalization basin)
1
$1,400
$1,400
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$1,000
$1,000
10-64
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11 (continued)
750,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$1,500
$1,500
(cont.)
Clarifier
1
$70,000
$70,000
pH control tank
1
$6,000
$6,000
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$1,000
$4,000.
pH adjust tank
1
$1,000
$1,000
Mixer (for pH adjust tank)
1
$500
$500
Pump station 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
NaOH pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$136,300
$136,300
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$145,400
$145,400
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$20,000
$20,000
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Clarifier/overflow tank
1
$59,000
$59,000
Clarifier pumps
1
$3,500
$3,500
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$1,300
$1,300
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$6,200
$6,200
pH control tank
1
$5,300
$5,300
Acid/NaOH tanks and pumps
1
$14,000
$14,000
pH adjust tank
1
$6,200
$6,200
Equalization basin
1
$257,700
$257,700
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$68,400
$68,400
10-65
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11 (continued)
750,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Control/instrumentation
1
$63,500
$63,500
(cont.)
Software
1
$28,000
$28,000
Subtotal
$931,200
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$13,800
Spare parts (1.5%)
$20,700
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$165,400
Commissioning (3%)
$41,400
Owner team (10%)
$137,900
Subtotal
$379,200
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,757,700
Contingency (20%)
$351,500
Total Project Cost
$2,109,300
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Mixer (for equalization basin)
1
$110,000
$110,000
equipment
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$25,500
$25,500
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$96,400
$96,400
Clarifier
1
$238,000
$238,000
pH control tank
1
$47,400
$47,400
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
pH adjust tank
1
$74,900
$74,900
Mixer (for pH adjust tank)
1
$16,000
$16,000
Pump station 1
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 2
2
$9,500
$19,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$5,500
$11,000
NaOH pumps
2
$8,500
$17,000
Acid pumps
2
$7,500
$15,000
Total freight
$21,800
Subtotal
$750,000
10-66
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Mixer (for equalization basin)
1
$2,000
$2,000
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$1,000
$1,000
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$1,500
$1,500
Clarifier
1
$102,000
$102,000
pH control tank
1
$12,000-
$12,000
Acid/NaOH tanks
4
$10,000
$40,000
pH adjust tank
1
$1,200
$1,200
Mixer (for pH adjust tank)
1
$500
$500
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,500
$5,000
Clarifier pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
NaOH pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Acid pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$127,100
$127,100
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$153,000
$153,000
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$63,500
$63,500
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Reactor clarifier/overflow tank
1
$224,800
$224,800
Clarifier pumps
1
$7,000
$7,000
Flash mix tank (with mixer)
1
$2,800
$2,800
Flocculation tank (with slow speed mixer)
1
$13,000
$13,000
pH control tank
1
$10,500
$10,500
Acid/NaOH tanks and pumps
1
$17,500
$17,500
pH adjust tank
1
$13,000
$13,000
Equalization basin
1
$508,300
$508,300
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$6,000
$6,000
10-67
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-11 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Pump station 2 platform
1
$8,000
$8,000
(cont.)
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$92,100
$92,100
Control/instrumentation
1
$63,500
$63,500
Software
1
$28,000
$28,000
Subtotal
$1,519,300
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$22,700
Spare parts (1.5%)
$34,000
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$272,300
Commissioning (3%)
$68,100
Owner team (10%)
$226,900
Subtotal
$624,100
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$2,893,400
Contingency (20%)
$578,700
Total Project Cost
$3,472,000
10-68
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-12
Design Specifications for Multimedia Filtration Model Treatment Systems
Item
Type
150,000 gpd
500,000 gpd
2,000,000 gpd
7,500,000 gpd
20,000,000 gpd
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Number
Size
Pump station t
Horizontal split
2 pumps
1.5 HP
2 pumps
5 HP
2 pumps
20 HP
2 pumps
25 HP
2 pumps
60 HP
Pump station 2
Diaphragm/
Vertical turbine (a)
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
1 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
2 pumps
3 HP
Filter backwash
pump
Vertical turbine
2
1.5 HP
2
3 HP
2
10 HP
2
10 HP
2
20 HP
Sump 1
Concrete
1
450 ft3
1
800 ft3
1
3,000 ft3
1
3,000 ft3
1
6,000 ft3
Filter backwash
surge basin
Concrete
1
450 ft3
1
800 ft5
1
3,000 ft3
1
3,000 ft3
1
6,000 ft3
Filtration system
Sand pressure
2
6 ft diameter
x 9 ft side/
7.5 HP
2
8 ft diameter
x 9 ft side/
7.5 HP
2
12 ft diameter
x 9 ft side/ 20
HP
8
12 ft diameter
x 9 ft side/ 20
HP
8
16' diam. x
9' side/ 60
HP
(a) Diaphragm pumps (150,000 gpd - 500,000 gpd); vertical turbine pumps (2,000,000 - 20,000,000 gpd).
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13
Estimated Investment Costs for Multimedia Filtration Model Treatment
Systems (150,000 - 20,000,000 gallons per day)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Filters
2
$100,000
$200,000
equipment
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,200
$4,400
Filter backwash pumps
2
$3,000
$6,000
Total freight
$6,400
Subtotal
$219,800
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Filters
2
$11,000
$22,000
Pump station 1
2
$1,500
$3,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$87,800 -
$87,800
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$116,100
$116,100
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$14,600
$14,600
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Filtration plant
1
$81,900
$81,900
Sump 1
1
$19,000
$19,000
Filter backwash surge basin
1
$19,000
$19,000
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$3,500
$3,500
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$4,000
$4,000
Buildings
Filtration plant
1
$24,500
$24,500
10-70
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
150,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
(cont.)
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$43,600
$43,600
Control/instrumentation
1
$40,600
$40,600
Building services
1
$5,100
$5,100
Software
1
$30,000
$30,000
Subtotal
$525,700
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$7,500
Spare parts (1.5%)
$11,200
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$89,500
Commissioning (3%)
$22,400
Owner team (10%)
$74,600
Subtotal
$205,200
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$950,500
Contingency (20%)
$190,100
Total Project Cost
$1,140,600
500,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
equipment
Filters
2
$105,000
$210,000
Pump station 1
2
$5,000
$10,000
Pump station 2
2
$3,500
$7,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$5,000
$10,000
Total freight
$7,100
Subtotal
$244,100
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Filters
2
$13,000
$26,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,000
$4,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$1,500
$3,000
10-71
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
500,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Piping installation
(cont.)
Piping/supports
1
$121,600"
$121,600
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$118,000
$118,000
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$17,400
$17,400
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Filtration plant
1
$97,800
$97,800
Sump 1
1
$22,000
$22,000
Filter backwash surge basin
1
$22,000
$22,000
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$7,000
$7,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$4,000
$4,000
Buildings
Filtration plant
1
$28,000
$28,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$43,600"
$43,600
Control/instrumentation
1
$40,600
$40,600
Building services
1
$5,800
$5,800
Software
1
$30,000
$30,000
Subtotal
$598,800
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$8,000
Spare parts (1.5%)
$12,600
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$101,200
Commissioning (3%)
$25,300
Owner team (10%)
$84,300
Subtotal
$231,800
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,074,700
Contingency (20%)
$214,900
Total Project Cost
$1,289,600
10-72
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Filters
2
$107,500
$215,000
equipment
Pump station 1
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 2
2
$1,500
$3,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$9,000
$18,000
Total freight
$7,600
Subtotal
$261,600
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Filters
2
$12,000
$24,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$ 1,500"
$3,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$2,000
$4,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$197,400
$197,400
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$122,700
$122,700
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$28,500
$28,500
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Filtration plant
1
$212,300
$212,300
Sump 1
1
$53,200
$53,200
Filter backwash surge basin
1
$53,200
$53,200
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$10,500
$10,500
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$8,000
$8,000
Buildings
Filtration plant
1
$60,000
$60,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$68,800
$68,800
Control/instrumentation
1
$44,400
$44,400
Building services
1
$12,500
$12,500
Software
1
$32,000
$32,000
Subtotal
$943,500
10-73
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
2,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$12,100
Spare parts (1.5%)
$18,100
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$144,600
Commissioning (3%)
$36,200
Owner team (10%)
$120,500
Subtotal
$331,400
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$1,536,500
Contingency (20%)
$307,300
Total Project Cost
$1,843,800
7,500,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Filters
8
$107,500
$860,000
equipment
Pump station 1
2
$9,000
$18,000
Pump station 2
2
$5,000
$10,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$9,000
$18,000
Total freight
$27,200
Subtotal
$933,200
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Filters
8
$12,000
$96,000
Pump station 1
2
$2,500
$5,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$2,500
$5,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$319,500
$319,500
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$137,700
$137,700
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$45,600
$45,600
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
10-74
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
7,500,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Installation
Filtration plant
1
$337,200
$337,200
(cont.)
Sump 1
1
$53,200
$53,200
Filter backwash surge basin
1
$53,200
$53,200
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$10,500
$10,500
Pump station 2 platform
1
$4,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$8,000
$8,000
Buildings
Filtration plant
$95,000
$95,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$130,300
$130,300
Control/instrumentation
1
$63,500
$63,500
Building services
1
$19,800
$19,800
Software
1
$42,000
$42,000
Subtotal
$1,429,500
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$23,600
Spare parts (1.5%)
$35,400
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
$283,500
Commissioning (3%)
$70,900
Owner team (10%)
$236,300
Subtotal
$649,700
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$3,012,400
Contingency (20%)
$602,500
Total Project Cost
$3,614,900
10-75
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
20,000,000 gpd
Category
Item
Quantity
Rate
Cost
Major
Filters
8
$107,500
$860,000
equipment
Pump station 1
2
$25,000
$50,000
Pump station 2
2
$5,000
$10,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$10,000
$20,000
Total freight
$28,200
Subtotal
$968,200
Installation
Mechanical equipment installation
Filters
8
$12,000
$96,000
Pump station 1
2
$4,000
$8,000
Pump station 2
2
$2,000
$4,000
Filter backwash pumps
2
$4,000
$8,000
Piping installation
Piping/supports
1
$525,300
$525,300
Insulation and heat tracing
1
$152,500
$152,500
Control valves/instrumentation
1
$73,600
$73,600
Civil/structural (includes costs associated with site preparation and grading)
Equipment foundations
Filtration plant
1
$466,700
$466,700
Sump 1
1
$83,600
$83,600
Filter backwash surge basin
1
$83,600 "
$83,600
Equipment structural support
Pump station 1 platform
1
$14,000
$14,000
Pump station 2 platform
1
$14,000
$14,000
Filter backwash pumps
1
$10,000
$10,000
Buildings
Filtration plant
1
$132,000
$132,000
Electrical and process control
Power/equipment
1
$177,100
$177,100
Control/instrumentation
1
$63,500
$63,500
Building services
1
$27,500
$27,500
Software
1
$42,000
$42,000
Subtotal
$1,981,300
10-76
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-13 (continued)
20,000,000 gpd
Category
Item Quantity Rate
Cost
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%)
$29,500
Spare parts (1.5%)
$44,200
Engineering procurement and contract management (12%)
5353,900
Commissioning (3%)
$88,500
Owner team (10%)
5295,000
Subtotal
$811,100
Total costs
Total direct and indirect costs
$3,760,600
Contingency (20%)
5752,100
Total Project Cost
$4,512,700
10-77
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-14
Cost Factors to Determine Investment Costs
Category
Item
Cost Factor
(% of equipment cost)
Direct costs (a)
Equipment cost
100
Freight
3
Installation labor
.40
Site preparation
15
Equipment foundations and structural support
40
Buildings
15
Piping
35
Electrical and process control
30
Subtotal
278
Indirect costs
Temporary facilities (1%) (b)
3
Spare parts (1.5%) (b)
4
Engineering procurement and contract management
(12%) (b)
34
Commissioning and start-up (3%) (b)
8
Owner team (10%) (b)
28
Subtotal (27.5% of subtotal of direct costs)
77
Total project cost
355
(a) Direct cost factors are based on actual wastewater treatment installations in the iron and steel industry and include
contingency costs.
(b) Percentage of subtotal of direct costs; standard factors used by engineering and design firm.
10-78
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-15
Iron and Steel Investment Cost Equations
Equipment
Investment Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of
Validity
Source(s)
Biological nitrification
(chemicals include soda ash,
phosphoric acid, polymer, and
defoaming agent)
($): 22,013 x flow (gpm)
Cokemaking
50 to 500
gpm
Capital cost survey
Biological treatment upgrade
($): 1,575.5 x flow (gpm)
Cokemaking
30 to 500
gpm
Capital cost survey,
trade association
Tar removal
($): 2,491 x flow (gpm)
Cokemaking
50 to 200
gpm
Vendor, site
information
Flow equalization tank
(prior to ammonia stripping and
biological nitrification)
($): 1440 x flow (gpm) = V (gal)
If Vis
£ 250,000 gal, then investment ($) = 1.09 x 250,000
s 500,000 gal, then investment ($) = 1.09 x 500,000
s 750,000 gal, then investment ($) = 1.09 x 750,000
£ 1,000,000 gal, then investment ($) = 1.09 x 1,000,000
5 1,250,000 gal, then investment ($) = 1.09 x 1,250,000
Cokemaking
250,000 to
1,250,000
gallons
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Free and fixed ammonia still
($): 11,749 x flow (gpm)+ 513,178
Cokemaking
40 to 400
gpm
Capital cost survey,
site information,
trade association
information
Clarification of activated sludge
($): 782.4 x flow rate (gpm)
Cokemaking
20 to 90 ft
diameter
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-15 (continued)
Equipment
Investment Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of
Validity
Source(s)
Heat exchanger
($): 933 x flow rate (gpm)
Cokemaking
20 to 300
gpm of hot
water flow;
influent
temp:
MOT;
effluent
temp: 80°F
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Sludge thickening of activated
sludge and metal hydroxides
($): 168.3 x flow (gpm) + 213,320 where flow is through
thickener
Cokemaking
Steel finishing
0.5 to 1,390
gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Belt filter press
($): 814 x flow (gpm) where flow is through biological
nitrification
Cokemaking
4 to 14
tons/day of
wet sludge
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Cyanide precipitation
(chemicals include ferric
sulfate, sulfuric acid, polymer,
and sodium hydroxide)
($): 762.36 x flow (gpm) + 113,338
Sulfuric acid feed system: 88.816 x flow (gpm) + 35,692
Ferric sulfate feed system: 79.059 x flow (gpm) + 23,332
Polymer feed system: 68.132 x flow (gpm) + 12,061
Sodium hydroxide feed system: 14.306 x flow (gpm) + 35,927
Cokemaking
40 to 400
gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Breakpoint chlorination of
cokemaking wastewater
(including sodium hypochlorite,
sodium hydroxide, polymer,
and sodium bisulfite feed
systems)
($): 2,927.5 x flow (gpm) + 2,000,000
Cokemaking
88 to 2,340
gpm
Engineering and
design firm
Sludge thickening for iron-
cyanide sludge
($): 63,261 x flow (gpm) + 144,799
Cokemaking
40 to 400
gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Plate and frame filter press
($): 117.6 x flow (gpm) + 47,553 (cokemaking)
($): 1,340.8 x flow (gpm) + 47,553 (steel finishing)
Cokemaking
Steel finishing
104 to 1,390
gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-15 (continued)
Equipment
Investment Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of
Validity
Source(s)
Multimedia filtration
($): 488.19 x flow (gpm) + 1,134,220 (50 to 5,200 gpm)
103.43 x flow (gpm) + 3,000,000 (> 5,200 gpm)
Cokemaking
Sintering
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Integrated and stand-alone
hot forming
Non-Integrated steelmaking
and hot forming
Other operations
50 to
>5,200 gpm
Engineering and
design firm
Granular activated carbon
($): 950.31 x flow (gpm) + 848,478
Cokemaking
88 to 2,340
gpm
Engineering and
design firm
Chemical precipitation
($)
($)
($)
1,384.7 x flow (gpm) + 1,503,370 (ironmaking)
1,545.5 x flow (gpm) + 951,003 (integrated steelmaking)
748.02 x flow (gpm) + 162,686 (steel finishing)
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Steel finishing
104 to 1,390
gpm
Engineering and
design firm
(ironmaking,
integrated
steelmaking),
vendor information
(steel finishing)
Breakpoint chlorination of blast
furnace and sintering
wastewater
($): 2,729.4 x flow (gpm) + 1,000,000
Ironmaking
104 to 1,390
gpm
Engineering and
design firm
Vacuum filtration
($): 1.13 x (sludge generation (lbs/day)) + 151,037 where
sludge generation is 26 lbs/day/gpm
Ironmaking
104 to 1,390
gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Carbon dioxide injection
system
($)
($)
($)
101,511 <2,400 gpm
106,125 2,400 to 5,600 gpm
1 15,353 > 5,600 gpm
Integrated steelmaking
< 2,400 to
> 5,600
gpm
Vendor, site
information
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-15 (continued)
Equipment
Investment Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of
Validity
Source(s)
Cooling tower
($): 32.17 x flow (gpm) + 234,335
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Integrated and stand-alone
hot forming
Non-Integrated steelmaking
and hot forming
500 to
60,000 gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Recycle pump station
($): 11.58 x flow (gpm) + 123,145
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Integrated and stand-alone
hot forming
Non-Integrated steelmaking
and hot forming
6,900 to
35,000 gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
Lime feed system
($): 50.591 x flow (gpm) + 27,665
Sintering
Ironmaking
Steel finishing
104 to 1,390
gpm
Vendor information
Inclined plate clarification
($): 508.3 x flow (gpm) + 33,538
Steel finishing
50 to 400
gpm
Capital cost survey,
vendor information
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16
Iron and Steel Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Cost Equations
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Biological nitrification
(chemicals include soda ash,
phosphoric acid, polymer,
and defoaming agent)
Electrical ($/yr): 810 x flow (gpm)
Chemicals ($/yr): 639 x flow (gpm)
O&M labor ($/yr): DPY x HPD x $29.67/hr = 260,000
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 * investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 60,000
Sludge disposal ($/yr): cost included with belt filter O&M
Cokemaking
50 to 500 gpm
Biological treatment
upgrade
Electrical ($/yr): 288 * flow (gpm)
Chemicals ($/yr):
— Soda ash: 164 x flow (gpm)
— Phosphoric acid: 19.4 x flow (gpm)
O&M labor ($/yr): 0, upgrade includes costs for automated control
systems, no added O&M is expected
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Cokemaking
30 to 500 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
o
oo
4^
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Tar removal
Electrical ($/yr): (0.0158 * flow (gpm) + 2.3551)kW * HPD * DPY *
$0.047/kWh
Chemicals ($/yr): 0
O&M labor ($/yr): 0.5 hrs/day x DPY x $29.67/hr = 5,415
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 * investment cost
Cokemaking
50 to 200 gpm
Flow equalization tank
(prior to ammonia stripping
and biological nitrification)
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
(0.092 HP/gpm x flow (gpm)) * 0.7456 kW/HP x DPY x HPD x
$0.047/kWh where flow is ammonia still flow or biological treatment
system flow (as applicable)
Chemicals ($/yr): 0
O&M labor ($/yr): DPY * 1.5 hrs/day * $29.67/hr = 16,250
Maintenance equipment and vendors (c) ($/yr):
5,534 x (flow (gpm)/100 gpm) where flow is ammonia still flow
or biological treatment system flow (as applicable)
Cokemaking
250,000 to 1,250,000
gallons
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section JO - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Free and fixed ammonia
still
Electrical ($/yr): 82 x flow (gpm)
Steam ($/yr):
— 1,581 x flow (gpm)
—3,215 x flow (gpm)
Chemicals ($/yr):
— Caustic soda: 1,404 x flow (gpm)
O&M labor ($/yr): DPY x 6 hrs/day x $29.67/hr = 70,000
Maintenance equipment and vendors ($/yr) (a): 0.06 x investment cost
Sampling/monitoring ($/yr): DPY * $52/day = 18,980
Cokemaking
40 to 400 gpm
Clarification of activated
sludge
Electrical, chemical, O&M labor, maintenance equipment, and vendor
costs included with biological nitrification O&M
Cokemaking
20 to 90 ft diameter
Heat exchanger
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
(0.0746 x flow (gpm)) kWh x HPD x DPY x $0.047/kWh
O&M labor (d) ($/yr): 1 hr/wk x 52 wk/yr x $29.67/hr = 1,540
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Cokemaking
20 to 300 gpm of hot
water flow;
Influent temp: 140°F;
Effluent temp: 80°F
Abbreviations:
HPD -
DPY -
24 hours of operation per day.
365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
0
1
oo
os
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Sludge thickening of
activated sludge and metal
hydroxides
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
(Flow (gpm)/35 x 5) x 0.7456 kW/HP * HPD x DPY x $0.047/kWh
where flow is 4% of flow to the clarifier
Chemicals ($/yr): (costs included with biological nitrification for
activated sludge; costs included with chemical precipitation and
clarification for metal hydroxides)
O&M labor ($/yr): DPY/2 x 1 hour/day x $29.67/hr = 5,415
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Sludge disposal ($/yr): (applies to PSES-3 and PSES-4 only,
cokemaking subcategory; cost included with belt filter O&M)
Cokemaking
Steel finishing
0.5 to 1,390 gpm
Belt filter press
Electrical, chemical, O&M labor, maintenance equipment, and vendor
costs included with biological nitrification O&M
Sludge disposal ($/yr):
24 lbs/day/gpm x flow (gpm) x DPY x $0.0025/lb
Cokemaking
4 to 14 tons/day of wet
sludge
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Cyanide precipitation
(includes sludge thickener
and filter press O&M costs;
chemicals include ferric
sulfate, sulfuric acid,
polymer, and sodium
hydroxide)
Electrical ($/yr): 6.67 * flow (gpm)
Chemicals ($/yr): 989.75 * flow (gpm) (all chemicals)
O&M labor ($/yr): 1,343.6 * flow (gpm)
Maintenance equipment and vendors ($/yr): 250 * flow (gpm)
Monitoring ($/yr): 2,000
Cokemaking
40 to 400 gpm
Sludge thickening for iron-
cyanide sludge
All O&M costs are included with cyanide precipitation
Cokemaking
40 to 400 gpm
Plate and frame filter press
Electrical ($/yr): 1,200
Chemicals ($/yr): (costs are included in O&M for cyanide precipitation
for cokemaking; costs are included in O&M for chemical feed systems
for steel finishing)
O&M labor ($/yr): $29.67/hr x 3 hrs/day x DPY = 32,490
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 * investment cost
Cokemaking
Steel finishing
40 to 400 gpm
Polymer feed system
All O&M costs are included where polymer is used.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Steel finishing
40 to 1,390 gpm
Ferric sulfate feed system
All O&M costs are included with cyanide precipitation.
Cokemaking
40 to 400 gpm
Sodium hydroxide feed
system
All O&M costs are included where sodium hydroxide is used.
Cokemaking
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
40 to 400 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
0
1
00
00
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Sulfuric acid feed system
All O&M costs are included where sulfuric acid is used.
Ironmaking
Integrated Steelmaking
40 to 400 gpm
Breakpoint chlorination
Electrical (b) ($/yr): 90.6 x flow (gpm)
Chemicals (e) ($/yr):
— Sodium hypochlorite:
6.43 x flow (gpm) x (mg/L CN x 8.5 + mg/L NH4 x 7.4)
— Sodium hydroxide: 7.9 x flow (gpm)
— Sulfuric acid: 83.6 x flow (gpm)
— Sodium bisulfite:
1.82 x flow (gpm) x (mg/L CN x 1.7 + mg/L NH4 x 1.5)
O&M labor ($/yr):
1 hr/shift x 3 shifts/day x DPY x $29.67/hr = 32,490
Maintenance equipment and vendors ($/yr): 250 x flow (gpm)
Monitoring ($/yr): 2,000
Cokemaking
88 to 2,340 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Multimedia filtration
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
[(0.0504 x flow (gpm) + 1.0139] * 8,760 hrs/yr x $0.047/kWh
Chemicals ($/yr): 0
O&M Labor ($/yr): 1.5 hrs/day x DPY x $29.67/hr = 16,240
Maintenance equipment and vendors ($/yr) (a): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): NA
Cokemaking
Sintering
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Integrated and stand-
alone hot forming'
Non-Integrated
steelmaking and hot
forming
Other operations
< 50 gpm to
>5,200 gpm
Granular activated carbon
Electrical (b) ($/yr): 9.6 x flow (gpm)
Chemicals ($/yr): NA
O&M labor ($/yr): 8.13 * flow (gpm)
Maintenance equipment and vendors ($/yr): 1228.6 x flow (gpm)
Monitoring ($/yr): 60 x flow (gpm)
Cokemaking
88 to 2,340 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
o
VD
O
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Chemical precipitation
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
[(0.0934 x flow (gpm)) + 0.7763]HP x 0.7456 kW/HP x DPY x
HPD x $0.047/kWh
Chemicals ($/yr):
— Lime
flow (gpm) x 1,440 min/day x 0.0004 lbs/gal x DPY x $0.035/lb
(ironmaking, steel finishing)
— NaOH
flow (gpm) x 1,440 min/day x 0.0033 lbs/gal x DPY x $0.15/lb
(integrated steelmaking)
— Polymer
flow (gpm) x 1,440 min/day x 0.00005 lbs/gal x DPY x $0.20/lb
(ironmaking, integrated steelmaking)
DPY x flow (gpm) x 1,440 min/day x 0.000018 lbs/gal x $0.20/lb
(steel finishing)
O&M labor ($/yr):
3 shifts/day x 4 hrs/shift x DPY x $29.67/hr = 29,955
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): NA
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Steel finishing
104 to 1,390 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Breakpoint chlorination of
blast furnace and sintering
wastewater
Electrical (b) ($/yr): 79.8 * flow (gpm)
Chemicals ($/yr):
— Sodium hypochlorite
0.0027 lbs/gal x flow (gpm) x 1,440 min/day x DPY x 1.47 $/lb
— Sulfuric acid
0.0006 lbs/gal x flow (gpm x 1,440 min/day x DPY x 0.043 $/lb
— Sodium bisulfite (f)
(0.00054 lbs/gal) x flow (gpm) x ]440 min/day x DPY x (104
g/mol NaHSOj/ 81 g/mol HS03) x $0.325/lb
O&M labor ($/yr):
1 hr/shift x 3 shifts/day x DPY x $29.67/hr = $32,490
Maintenance Equipment and Vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 2,000
Ironmaking
104 to 1,390 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
o
vjD
NJ
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Vacuum filtration
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
[(0.0002 x (sludge generation (lbs/day)) + 3.49 l]kW x DPY x HPD *
$0.047/kWh
Chemicals ($/yr):
234 lbs/day x DPY x $0.21/lb (diatomaceous earth) = 17,936
O&M labor ($/yr):
DPY x 3 shifts/day x 4 hr/shift x $29.67/hr = 32,489
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 0
Ironmaking
104 to 1,390 gpm
Carbon dioxide injection
system
Electrical (b) ($/yr): 181 kWh/day x DPY x $0.047/kWh = 3,105
Chemicals ($/yr): 0.5 lbs/day/gpm x flow (gpm) x $0.081/lb (carbon
dioxide)
O&M labor ($/yr): DPY x 2 hr/day x 4 hr/shift x $29.67/hr = 21,659
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 0
Integrated steelmaking
< 2,400 to > 5,600 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
o
vo
u>
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Cooling tower
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
[((0.035 x flow (gpm))/3.5 gpm/ft) + ((flow (gpm) x 40
feet)/(3,960 * 0.75))] x 0.7456kW/HP x DPY x HPD x $0.047/kWh
Chemicals (g) ($/yr):
— Biocide:
$4.00 x cooling tower flow (gpm) x 10 minutes/1,000 x DPY/2
— Scale inhibitor:
0.02 lbs/day/gpm x cooling tower flow (gpm) x DPY x $0.19/lb
O&M labor ($/yr):
((1.5 hrs/day x DPY x $29.67/hr) + (4 persons x 40 hrs/person x
$29.67/hr)) = 20,990
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 0
Ironmaking
Integrated steelmaking
Integrated and stand-alone
hot forming
Non-Integrated
steelmaking and hot
forming
500 to 60,000 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
©
4^
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Recycle pump station
Electrical (b) ($/yr):
(0.0631 x flow (gpm) + 2.0227)HP x 0.7456 kW/HP x HPD x DPY x
$0.047/kWh
Chemicals ($/yr): 0
O&M labor ($/yr): 40 hrs/yr x $29.67/hr =1,191
Maintenance equipment and vendors ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 0
Integrated and stand-
alone hot forming
Non-Integrated
steelmaking and hot
forming
6,900 to 35,000 gpm
Lime feed system
All O&M costs are included in chemical precipitation
Sintering
Ironmaking
Steel finishing
104 to 1,390 gpm
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10- Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-16 (continued)
Equipment
Cost Equation
Applicable Subcategory
Range of Validity
Inclined plate clarification
Electrical (b) ($/yr): 0
Chemicals ($/yr): 0
O&M labor ($/yr): DPY/2 xlhrx $29.67/hr = 5,415
Maintenance equipment and vendors (a) ($/yr): 0.06 x investment cost
Monitoring ($/yr): 0
Steel finishing
50 to 400 gpm
Notes:
(a) Annual maintenance equipment and vendor costs approximately 6% of investment cost per Perry's Chemical Engineers Handbook. Sixth Edition (Reference 10-3).
(b) Electrical costs calculated from equipment horsepower and operational period.
(c) Assumes annual replacement of recirculation pump.
(d) Estimated from information provided by vendor.
(e) Chemical costs for sodium hypochlorite and sodium bisulfite based on stoichiometric requirements. Sodium hydroxide and sulfuric acid requirements based on sample
preservation data.
(f) Bisulfite concentration based on stoichiometric requirement plus 20% excess.
(g) Typical scale inhibitor and biocide concentrations estimated by chemical vendor.
NA - Not applicable.
Abbreviations:
HPD - 24 hours of operation per day.
DPY - 365 days of operation per year.
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-17
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Cokemaking Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Option
Investment Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
BAT-1
26.0
4.6
0.4
BAT-3
67.5
7.2
0.4
PSES-1
6.1
1.5
0.1
PSES-3
23.4
5.0
0.3
Table 10-18
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Ironmaking and
Sintering Subcategories
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Options
Investment
Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
BAT-1 and PSES-1
(ironmaking subcategory)
52.6
7.8
0.4
Sintering subcategory
11.0
1.3
0
Table 10-19
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Options
Investment Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
BAT-1 and PSES-1
43.4
8.4
0.3
10-96
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-20
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Integrated and
Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Option
Investment Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
BAT-1
141.3
19.7
0.2
PSES-1
0.3
0.1
. 0.1
Stainless Segment (a)
PSES-1
0.3
0.1
0.1
(a) No sites reported direct discharge of wastewater within the stainless segment.
Table 10-21
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Option
Investment Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
BAT-1
44.4
5.2
1.9
PSES-1
10.8
1.1
0.4
Stainless Steel Segment
BAT-1
4.0
0.5
0.1
PSES-1
1.0
0.1
0.1
10-97
-------
Section 10 - Incremental Investment and Operating and Maintenance Costs for the Regulation
Table 10-22
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Option
Investment Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
BAT-1
21.4
4.8
34.5
PSES-1
4.5
1.0
12.6
Stainless Steel Segment
BAT-1
6.0
1.6
36.9
PSES-1
1.0
0.4
6.0
Table 10-23
Summary of Incremental Costs for the Other Operations Subcategory
(in millions of 1997 dollars)
Option
Investment Cost
Operating and
Maintenance Cost
One-Time Cost
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking Segment
BPT
(a)
(a)
(a)
Forging Segment
BPT
0.1
0.02
0.03
(a) Data aggregation or other masking techniques are insufficient to protect confidential business information.
10-98
-------
System Flows (gpm)
Design Influents
1
2
3
4
5
6
100,000 gpd
70
70
52
9 (avg) 225 (max)
9 (avg) 225 (max)
9
400,000 gpd
280
280
250
15(avg)350(max)
15 (avg) 350 (max)
15
2,700,000 gpd
1875
1875
1625
125 (avg) 1500 (max)
125 (avg) 1500 (max]
125
Sumpl
v v
jj farboo
system
.3r
Filer
backwuh
pumpe
®
>¦ To outfall
Figure 10-1. Activated Carbon
System for By-Products Recovery
Cokemaking Wastewater
GAC
10/27/00
-------
Hypochlorite
tank
Sodium
hypochlorite
pump
Existing biological
treatment system
Retention
tank
(HRT=5 hr)
Pump
station 4
Sodium
btsulllto tanh
Sodium
blsuffite
pump
HRT=Hydraulic residence time.
-Q
(HRT=
Dechlo Inatfon
1/2 hr)
CD
System Flows (g
pm)
Design Influents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
150,000 gpd
70
19
89
1
3
87
1
88
88
88
750,000 gpd
280
75
355
3
10
348
5
353
353
353
2,000.000 gpd
1875
500
2375
5
70
2310
30
2340
2340
2340
Pump
station 5
To outfall
a
pHidjust
metering
pumpi
Figure 10-2. Breakpoint
Chlorinatlon for By-Products
Recovery Cokemaking Wastewater
COKE
10/20/00
-------
NaOH
tank
Add
tank
V-ff
Add
pump
Retention
tank
pH control
tank
©
To outfall
pumps
System Flows (g
pm)
Design Influents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
150,000 gpd
105
30
135
5
130
2
132
750,000 gpd
525
140
665
20
645
10
655
2,000,000 gpd
1390
370
1760
40
1720
30
1750
Figure 10-3. Blowdown Metals
Precipitation for Ironmaking
Wastewater
IRNMAK
10/20/00
-------
NaOH
tank
NaOH
pump
Existing high-rate
recycle treatment
system
©
Blowdown
Hypochlorite
tank
Mdn
Sodium
hypochlorite
pump
Equalzation
and pH
control
Pump
station 1
_n
ChJorinati in mbdng
tanks (HR'
=1/2 hrs)
c
System Flows
gpm)
Design Influents
1
2
3
4
5
150,000 gpd
105
5
110
110
110
750,000 gpd
525
10
535
535
535
2.000.000 aod
1390
25
1415
1415
1415
Sodium
bisulfite tank
Sodium
blsulflte
pump
Pump
station 2
Pump
station 3
' n
©
Pump
station 4
©
Retention
tank
(HRT=5 hrc)
Dechk
(HRT=
o
linadon
1/2 hr)
b
To outfall
a.
PH
metering
pumps
Figure 10-4. Breakpoint
Chlorination for Ironmaking
Wastewater
IRNMAK
10/20/00
-------
Add
pump
System Flows (gpm)
Design Influents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
150,000 gpd
105
30
135
5
130
2
132
750,000 gpd
525
140
665
20
645
10
655
2,000,000 gpd
1390
370
1760
40
1720
30
1750
Figure 10-5. Blowdown Metals
Precipitation for Steeimaking
Wastewater
STEEL
10/20/00
-------
To outfall
System Flows (gpm)
Design Influents
1
2
3
4
5
6
150,000 gpd
105
105
95
10 (avg) 226 (max)
10 (avg) 226 (max)
10
500,000 gpd
350
350
333
17 (avg) 402 (max)
17 (avg) 402 (max)
17
2,000,000 gpd
1390
1390
1265
125 (avg) 1500 (max)
125 (avg) 1500 (max)
125
7,500,000 gpd
5200
5200
4670
330 (avg) 1500 (max)
330 (avg) 1500 (max)
330
20,000,000 gpd
13900
13900
13230
670 (avg) 3000 (max]
670 (avg) 3000 (max)
670
Figure 10-6. Filtration of
Wastewater from All
Subcategories
FILT
10/22/00
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
SECTION 11
POLLUTANT LOADINGS
This section presents annual pollutant loadings and removal estimates for the iron
and steel industry for each regulatory option considered for the final rule for each subcategory.
(Regulatory options are described in Section 9.) EPA estimated the pollutant loadings and
removals from iron and steel sites to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment technologies, to
estimate benefits gained from removing pollutants discharged from sites, to estimate costs to
achieve such reductions, and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the regulatory options in
reducing the pollutant loadings. Key terms for pollutant loadings and removals are defined
below:
• Baseline loadings - Pollutant loadings, in pounds per year (lbs/yr), in iron
and steel wastewater being discharged to surface water or to publicly
owned treatment works (POTWs) in 1997.
• Treated loadings - Also referred to as post-compliance loadings, they are
the estimated pollutant loadings in iron and steel wastewater after
implementation of the promulgated rule or regulatory option. EPA
calculated these loadings assuming that all iron and steel sites would
operate their wastewater treatment and pollution prevention technologies
to achieve the option model LTAs and model PNF.
• Pollutant removals - The difference between baseline loadings and treated
loadings for each regulatory option.
This section discusses the methodology that EPA used to estimate pollutant
loadings and presents the resultant estimated baseline and treated loadings and pollutant
removals as follows:
• Section 11.1 discusses the data sources that EPA used to estimate pollutant
loadings and removals;
• Section 11.2 discusses the general methodology EPA used to estimate
baseline pollutant loadings;
• Section 11.3 discusses the general methodology EPA used to estimate
treated pollutant loadings;
• Section 11.4 discusses the general methodology EPA used to estimate
pollutant removals;
11-1
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
• Section 11.5 discusses how the costing analysis affects the loadings
analysis;
• Section 11.6 presents an example calculation of the baseline and treated
pollutant loadings and pollutant removals;
• Sections 11.7 through 11.14 present the specific methodologies used to
estimate pollutant loadings and the resulting pollutant removals for each
subcategory; and
• Section 11.15 presents the references used in this section.
11.1 Sources and Use of Available Data
EPA used data from several sources to estimate baseline and treated pollutant
loadings. These sources included:
• EPA site visits;
EPA sampling episodes at iron and steel sites;
EPA requests for additional data after proposal;
Industry responses to the U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel
Industry Data, also referred to as the detailed survey;
Industry responses to the U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel
Industry Data (Short Form), also referred to as the short survey;
Industry responses to the U.S. EPA Analytical and Production Data
Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data, also
referred to as the Analytical & Production Survey; and
Publicly available National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and pretreatment permit application data.
Section 3 discusses data sources used to develop this regulation in detail.
EPA used flow rate data from the industry surveys and pollutant concentration
data from the sources listed above to calculate the pollutant loadings. EPA defined the types of
pollutant concentration data as follows:
• Survey Summary Data - Industry self-monitoring data supplied by sites in
the detailed and short surveys. These data are a 1997 annual average.
11-2
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
• Industry Self-Monitoring Data (ISMD) - Self-monitoring data (typically
daily monitoring report data) submitted with the Analytical and Production
Survey, detailed survey, or short survey, sent as a result of EPA's request
subsequent to survey submittal, or submitted during a site visit.
• Sampling Data - Data collected during EPA's wastewater sampling
program.
• Permit Application Data - Publicly available NPDES and pretreatment
permit application data. These data were only used where necessary (i.e.,
if self-monitoring or sampling data did not sufficiently represent operating
conditions or if no other data were available for the site).
Depending on the source and type of data, the Agency treated pollutant
concentration data below the sample detection limit differently. For EPA sampling data, when
concentrations were below the sample detection limit, EPA used the reported sample detection
limit as the concentration for that pollutant. For ISMD, when concentrations were below the
sample detection limit, the Agency used what the site reported as the sample detection limit.
When sites provided survey summary data, EPA used the average concentrations that the sites
submitted, which could have been calculated by several methods. Of those sites that submitted
survey summary data, 26 percent used the method detection limit as the concentration for that
pollutant; 26 percent used the sample detection limit; 7 percent used one-half the method
detection limit; 3 percent used one-half the sample detection limit; and 38 percent used zero.
Using zero as the concentration for the pollutant estimated the minimum amount of the pollutant,
and using the method or sample detection limit estimated the maximum amount.
11.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
Using industry survey responses, EPA determined which subcategories and
segments apply to each site based on the manufacturing operations in place. EPA calculated the
baseline pollutant loadings for a specific facility using the production-normalized process
discharge flow rate for each manufacturing operation and the concentration of pollutants in its
effluent obtained from the data sources described in Section 11.1. Section 11.2.1 through 11.2.6
provides additional detail regarding the calculations of baseline pollutant loadings.
However, EPA did not have data for every facility to calculate baseline pollutant
loadings. In some cases, EPA did not have data for all pollutants of concern (POCs). In other
cases, the data EPA had did not represent iron and steel industry wastewater only. In addition,
some facilities commingle iron and steel wastewater with storm water or ground water prior to
monitoring for compliance; pollutant concentration data from these facilities do not represent
baseline pollutant concentrations from the iron and steel manufacturing process. In all of these
cases, facility-supplied data were insufficient for use in estimating baseline loadings. As a
surrogate for site-specific baseline pollutant concentrations, EPA averaged available baseline
concentrations from facilities in a subcategory or segment and used this average to estimate
pollutant concentrations where site-specific data were not available. Section 11.2.2 describes
11-3
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
EPA's methodology for calculating subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations in detail.
11.2.1 Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
To calculate baseline concentrations, if a site provided both ISMD and survey
summary data for the same pollutant, then the Agency used the ISMD and excluded the survey
summary data because the survey summary data were an average of pollutant concentration data
for the entire year calculated using a variety of methods described in Section 11.1. If a site had
sampling data in addition to ISMD for the same pollutant, then EPA first averaged the sampling
data and ISMD for the pollutant separately, and then averaged the resulting data averages
together.1 If only sampling data were available, then EPA used the sampling data average. EPA
used permit application data only when no other data were available.
When sites provided ISMD for 19972, the Agency calculated an arithmetic
average of all the data for the loadings analysis. When sites provided survey summary data
(where results were already averaged), the Agency used those data. For permit application data,
sites monitored multiple times for some pollutants but only one time for other pollutants. EPA
used the permit application data as reported.
11.2.2 Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
After calculating site-specific baseline concentrations for each pollutant, EPA
calculated a single set of average baseline pollutant concentrations for each subcategory or
segment.3 To calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations, EPA
averaged applicable site-specific average baseline concentration data for all sites together in each
subcategory or segment, except conventional pollutants. For conventional pollutants, the Agency
calculated separate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for direct and
indirect dischargers because the POTW treats conventional pollutants; therefore, the
concentrations for conventional pollutants for indirect dischargers would be expected to be
higher than for direct dischargers. If no data were available for conventional pollutants for either
direct or indirect dischargers, then EPA used the same average baseline pollutant concentration
'When calculating average pollutant concentrations using both sampling data and ISMD, EPA did not eliminate any
sampling data or industry self-monitoring data prior to averaging them, even if they were duplicate samples (from the
same day and sampling point).
JEPA used data that were representative of the sites' treatment system in 1997. If a site provided data from a year
other than 1997, EPA used the data only if it was representative of the treatment system in 1997 (e.g., if the site had
any treatment system upgrades after 1997, the data from after 1997 were not used).
3For cokemaking, EPA calculated a separate set of subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for
sites with ammonia stills only and for sites with ammonia stills and biological treatment. For ironmaking and
sintering, EPA calculated a separate set of subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for sites
with blast furnace wastewater only and sites with commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater.
11-4
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
for both types of dischargers. The average baseline pollutant concentrations were used to
calculate the baseline pollutant loadings when no data for a POC were available for a site. For
example, if no cokemaking data were available for total cyanide for a site, EPA calculated the
baseline pollutant loading for total cyanide for that site using the average baseline concentration
for total cyanide, which in turn was calculated using all the applicable total cyanide data
submitted by cokemaking facilities.
For some pollutant parameters, EPA performed a logic check to ensure that
average concentrations of pollutants derived from different datasets or data transfers did not
violate certain rules for bulk parameters. For example, many sites had industry self-monitoring
data for oil and grease (measured as hexane extractable material), or O&G; however, they did not
have industry self-monitoring data for total petroleum hydrocarbons (measured as silica gel
treated-hexane extractable material), or TPH. Before using the subcategory-specific average
baseline concentration for TPH to fill the gap in the data, EPA compared it to the site's data for
O&G. In some cases, the subcategory-specific average baseline concentration for TPH was
greater than the site's concentration for O&G, which would be illogical because TPH is a subset
of O&G. In these cases, EPA used the site's concentration for O&G as the concentration for
TPH. The data logic checks for each site were the following rules:
• Phenol could not have a concentration higher than total phenols;
• Amenable cyanide or weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide could not
have a concentration higher than total cyanide;
• TPH could not have a concentration higher than O&G; and
• Hexavalent chromium could not have a concentration higher than total
chromium.
If one of the above rules was violated, EPA adjusted one concentration, always
deferring to the site's data. EPA encountered the following data conflicts and resolved them as
shown below.
Conflict
EPA Action
The site-specific concentration for a bulk
parameter is less than the transferred average
baseline concentration for a pollutant within
the bulk parameter.
Use the site-specific concentration as the baseline concentration
for both the bulk parameter and the pollutant within the bulk
parameter.
The site-specific concentration for a
pollutant within a bulk parameter is greater
than the transferred average baseline
concentration for a bulk parameter.
Use the site-specific concentration as the baseline concentration
for both the pollutant within the bulk parameter and the bulk
parameter.
11-5
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Conflict
EPA Action
From the EPA sampling data, the site
concentration for total recoverable phenols is
less than the site concentration for phenol
(no industry self-monitoring data are
available for either pollutant).
The method for phenol is a gas chromatograph/mass
spectrometry (GC/MS) method. The method for total
recoverable phenols is a colorimetric method (Reference 10-1).
The GC/MS method is expected to be more accurate than the
colorimetric method; therefore, use the concentration of phenol
for both parameters.
11.2.3 Cotreatment of Wastewater
Some sites cotreat their wastewater from multiple subcategories, as discussed in
Section 10. Cotreatment is any site treatment system that receives wastewater from more than
one subcategory. For sites that cotreat their wastewater, EPA used the following methodology to
determine which baseline concentration data are appropriate for each subcategory:
• EPA determined if cotreatment outfall data and/or subcategory-specific
internal monitoring data are available. Cotreatment outfall data are
pollutant data from a sampling point after the cotreatment system.
Subcategory-specific internal monitoring data are pollutant data from a
sampling point after an in-process treatment system that treats the
subcategory-specific wastewater only, and before end-of-pipe cotreatment.
• If no cotreatment or subcategory-specific data were available for a facility,
then EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for the facility.
• If dilution water entering the cotreatment system and subcategory-specific
treatment system was greater than 10 percent, then EPA did not use the
site data because they do not represent treated effluent for that
subcategory. EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline
pollutant concentrations for that site.
• If wastewater sources from other subcategories exceeded 10 percent of the
influent for a facility in a particular subcategory, then EPA did not use the
cotreatment outfall data. EPA similarly used the subcategory-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations for that site.
If the cotreatment outfall data were not available or not used for the above
reasons, then EPA used the subcategory-specific internal monitoring data. The Agency used these
data, regardless of the additional treatment at the cotreatment system, to determine if any costs
for treatment upgrades to the subcategory-specific wastewater treatment system were needed to
meet the limitations. As an example, one site has both cotreatment and internal monitoring data,
and the cotreatment system is expected to remove considerable amounts of POCs. The site's
cotreatment data are not used because 34% of the wastewater is dilution water. This site is
estimated to incur costs to upgrade its subcategory-specific wastewater treatment system, not its
11-6
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
cotreatment system for the reasons described in Section 10. Therefore, the internal monitoring
data are used because the limitations would apply only to the effluent from the subcategory-
specific wastewater treatment system.
11.2.4 POCs Included in the Pollutant Loadings Analysis
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for only a subset of the POCs identified in
Section 7. From the list of POCs in Section 7, EPA eliminated pollutants that were never
detected in the baseline effluent for any site, by subcategory and segment. EPA used data from
its sampling program and industry self-monitoring data to determine which POCs were never
detected in the effluent; however, for many POCs (particularly organic compounds), the only
available data were from EPA's sampling program. EPA excluded undetected POCs because the
pollutant removals calculated would be zero (i.e., EPA did not calculate or assume any pollutant
removals less than the detection limit). Table 11-1 lists the POCs that were not detected in the
effluent at any site for each subcategory and segment. In addition, EPA eliminated POCs from
the pollutant loadings analysis that did not pass certain influent editing criteria discussed in
Section 14. Table 11-2 lists these pollutants.
For the cokemaking and integrated steelmaking subcategories, EPA also
considered in its pollutant loadings and removals analyses the percent removals for POCs by the
model BAT/PSES treatment sites. (Section 14 discusses selection of model BAT/PSES
treatment facilities.) These percent removals show the extent to which POCs were being
removed by the treatment technology. For some POCs, the BAT/PSES treatment facilities
showed no removals (i.e., the percent removal was zero or negative). Furthermore, if a particular
POC showed no removal at all the BAT/PSES treatment facilities, then EPA concluded that the
model treatment technology does not remove the POC. Therefore, for these POCs, EPA set the
treated pollutant loadings equal to the baseline pollutant loadings to reflect the fact that the
pollutant removals would be zero. See the memorandum titled "Percent Removal Estimates and
Their Effect on LTA and Pollutant Removal Calculations", document number IS 10849 in
Section 14.7 of the rulemaking record for additional detail regarding use of this criteria in the
loadings analyses. Section 12 and 14 provide more information on how the percent removals
were calculated.
For the remaining subcategories, EPA did not consider percent removals as a
component of the loadings analyses. See document number IS 10849 in Section 14.7 of the
rulemaking record for an assessment of the impact that the percent removals would have had on
the estimated pollutant removals for the final rule. The impacts are not significant and they
would not have changed any of EPA's decisions for the final rule.
11.2.5 Sites and Data Used in the Pollutant Loadings Analysis
EPA estimated both baseline and treated pollutant loadings for the iron and steel
industry for the base year 1997. The Agency included sites (or operations) that operated during
the 1997 calendar year in the cost and loadings analyses, if the site operated at least one day
during the 1997 calendar year. Even if a site (or operation) shut down after 1997, it was retained
11-7
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
in the costing and pollutant loadings analyses, except for one site. This site shut down operations
after 1997 and EPA was unable to verify costing assumptions and the site's reported high flow;
therefore, this site was removed from the costing and loadings analyses, but its data were used to
calculate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for some subcategories.
Also, if a site (or operation) commenced after 1997, EPA did not include the site (or operation)
in the costing or pollutant loadings analyses. See Section 3.1 for additional information
regarding EPA's use of 1997 as the base year for its analyses for this rule. Furthermore, if a site
did not discharge wastewater to surface water or a POTW in 1997 (e.g., recycles all of its
wastewater), then EPA excluded the site from the pollutant loadings analysis. See Table 5-3 in
Section 5 for additional information regarding the number of zero or alternative discharging sites.
For some sites, 1997 data did not represent normal operating conditions;
therefore, data for alternate years were used according to what the sites specified as their
representative time period. For example, EPA was aware of several sites that had operated
during only part of 1997 because of strikes, shut-downs, or start-ups. For these sites, EPA used
production, analytical, and flow rate data from years that the sites indicated were representative
of normal operations. However, if sites installed or significantly altered wastewater treatment
systems either during or after 1997, EPA used the data that represented their 1997 wastewater
treatment configuration. Also, at least one site changed its discharging status after 1997; EPA
used the site's discharge status in the base year 1997 in its analyses for the reasons discussed in
Section 3.1.
EPA was aware of a unique case in which a site's industry self-monitoring data
from 1997 conflicted with industry self-monitoring data from 1996 by an order of magnitude.
EPA contacted the site and, at their suggestion, used three years of analytical data to better
represent the treatment system performance.
11.2.6 Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
As noted above, baseline pollutant loadings represent the current loadings for each
site before implementation of the model technology. In the industry survey, most sites reported
flow rates and some sites reported baseline concentration data. Sites reported flow from
operations in either gallons per minute or gallons per day, along with the corresponding days per
year and hours per day, as necessary. EPA used the flows and productions as reported by the
sites to calculate the PNF. For pollutant concentrations, EPA used the analytical data submitted
by each site. If no data were submitted for a site or a pollutant, the subcategory-specific average
baseline pollutant concentrations for the subcategory or segment were used. For each pollutant,
EPA estimated the baseline pollutant loadings for each site's operations in a subcategory, using
Equation 11-1:
BL Load = BL PNF x PROD x BL Cone x Unit Conversion Factor (11-1)
11-8
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
where:
BL Load
BLPNF
PROD
BL Cone
Unit Conversion Factor
Site or operation baseline pollutant loadings
discharged to surface water or POTW by a
site, lbs/yr;
Site or operation process wastewater
baseline PNF, gal/ton;
Site or operation average production during
1997, assuming 365 days per year4, tons/yr;
Site or operation baseline concentration, or
average baseline concentration if no data
provided for that pollutant, mg/L; and
8.345(10"6) lbs/gal/(mg/L).
For each site, EPA determined which manufacturing operations in each
subcategory and segment generate wastewater and calculated pollutant loadings for each
operation. For example, for integrated steelmaking, one site could have one basic oxygen
furnace (BOF) and two continuous casting operations. For this example, EPA would determine
the PNF and site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the BOF. EPA would
then perform a separate but similar determination and calculation for the casting operations.
These baseline loadings would then be summed to calculate the baseline pollutant loadings for
the subcategory for the site. Some subcategories do not have more than one operation; therefore,
EPA did not have to sum the pollutant loadings and removals to calculate the baseline, treated,
and removal loadings for each site.
For indirect dischargers, EPA also accounted for treatment at the POTW prior to
discharge to surface waters using the following equation:
BL LoadpoTW = (1
POTW % Removal) x (BL Load)
(11-2)
where:
BL Load,
POTW
BL Load
POTW % Removal =
Site or operation baseline pollutant loadings
discharged to surface water after treatment at the
POTW, lbs/yr;
Site or operation baseline pollutant loadings
discharged to the POTW from Equation 11-1 for
each indirect discharger, lbs/yr; and
Percent removal, shown in Table 11-3.
4EPA converted sites' annual reported productions to daily productions normalized to a 365 day production year to
allow comparisons between facilities.
11-9
-------
Section II - Pollutant Loadings
Most of the POTW percent removal values are based on data from the Fate of
Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works and National Risk Management
Research Laboratory fNRMRL) Treatability Database and are discussed in Section 12
(References 11-1 and 11-2). The baseline and treated pollutant loadings and associated removals
for indirect dischargers presented in this section represent discharge from POTWs to receiving
streams using the above equation.
For each subcategory and segment, EPA multiplied the pollutant loadings for each
site or operation by the survey weight and estimated the total industry baseline loadings for each
subcategory and segment using the following equation:
Weighted BL Load = £ (BL Load x SW) (11-3)
where:
Weighted BL Load = Industry baseline pollutant loadings for a
subcategory, lbs/yr;
BL Load = Site or operation baseline pollutant loadings from
Equation 11-1 for direct dischargers and from
Equation 11-2 for indirect dischargers, lbs/yr; and
SW = Survey weight, listed in Table A-4 of Appendix A
of this document.
11.3 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings
Treated pollutant loadings are estimates of pollutant loadings for each site that
would result after implementation of the model technology options. EPA estimated treated
pollutant loadings representing each option using model PNFs and long-term average effluent
concentrations (LTAs). Section 13 describes the determination of the model PNFs and Section
14 describes the calculation of the model LTAs. For all subcategories (except the cokemaking
subcategory), EPA did not calculate model LTAs for all POCs. To calculate the treated pollutant
loadings, EPA calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT performance data for use as a surrogate for
the model LTA when no model LTA was calculated for a POC.
11.3.1 Treated Pollutant Loadings Calculation
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for each site in the subcategory using the
following equation:
Treated Load = PNF x PROD x LTA x Unit Conversion Factor (11-4)
11-10
-------
Section J J - Pollutant Loadings
where:
Treated Load
PNF
PROD
LTA
Unit Conversion Factor
Site or operation treated pollutant loadings
as a result of implementing a particular
technology option, lbs/yr;
Model PNF, gal/ton;
Site or operation average production during
1997, assuming 365 days per year5, tons/yr;
Model LTA for each option, mg/L; and
8.345(10"6) lbs/gal/(mg/L).
If a site's or operation's baseline concentration for a particular pollutant was less
than the model LTA for a particular option, then EPA did not estimate any removal associated
with further concentration reduction for that pollutant (i.e., EPA set the LTA equal to the site's
baseline concentration). If a site's or operation's PNF was lower than the model PNF, then EPA
did not estimate any removal associated with further flow reduction (i.e., EPA set the PNF equal
to the baseline PNF). Finally, in some cases, EPA used the site's baseline PNF or baseline
pollutant concentrations to calculate the treated pollutant loadings, even though they exceed the
model PNF or model LTAs, because the site did not exceed the model loading. These cases are
dependent upon EPA's costing analysis as described in Section 11.5.
EPA adjusted the site's or operation's treated pollutant loading by the POTW
percent removal for indirect dischargers, according to Equation 11-2. Using this equation, EPA
calculated the treated pollutant loadings discharged to the surface water, after the wastewater is
treated by the POTW.
After determining a site's or operation's treated pollutant loadings, EPA
multiplied the site's or operation's treated pollutant loadings by the survey weight and estimated
the treated pollutant loadings for each subcategory and segment using Equation 11-3.
11.4 Pollutant Removals Calculation
EPA estimated pollutant removals for each subcategory using the baseline
pollutant loadings and treated pollutant loadings, as shown in the following equation:
Removal Load = BL Load - Treated Load (11-5)
5EPA converted sites' annual reported productions to daily productions normalized to a 365 day production year to
allow comparisons between facilities.
11-11
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
where:
Removal Load = Site or operation pollutant loadings removed for a
site or operation as a result of implementing a
particular technology option, for each pollutant,
lbs/yr;
BL Load = Site or operation baseline pollutant loadings
calculated by Equation 11-1, lbs/yr; and
Treated Load = Site or operation treated pollutant loadings as a
result of implementing a particular technology
option as calculated by Equation 11-4, lbs/yr.
Since the pollutant removals calculated using Equation 11-5 represent the
removals for each site or operation before treatment at the POTW, EPA summed the removals
for each site and adjusted the site's removal loading by the POTW percent removal for indirect
dischargers, according to Equation 11-2. Using this equation, EPA calculated the amount of
pollutants removed from the surface water by implementing each technology option.
After determining a site's removal loading, EPA multiplied the site removal
loading by the survey weight and estimated the removal loading for each subcategory and
segment, using Equation 11-3.
11.5 How the Costing Analysis Coordinates with the Method Used to Calculate
Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
Section 10 describes how EPA evaluated whether a site currently performs as well
as or better than the model technology for an option, using the model LTAs and model PNF to
calculate the model loading. To do this EPA calculated the baseline pollutant loading for each
site for the regulated pollutants and compared it to the model loading to determine if the site
currently meets the limitations. Then, EPA allocated costs to the site if the site did not meet the
model loading for a regulated pollutant. Section 10 discusses the costing analysis in more detail.
The costing analysis affects the loadings analysis because EPA based the calculation of treated
loadings on the costing decisions presented in Section 10. If a site performed as well as or better
than the model technology for pollutants considered for regulation, treated pollutant loadings
remained unchanged from baseline pollutant loadings and the resultant pollutant removals were
zero for that site. Similarly, costs were zero for that site. If the site did not perform as well as
the model technology, EPA estimated treated loadings and pollutant removals for the site, based
on the reduced PNF and/or upgrade to treatment in place. Specifically, to achieve treated effluent
quality, EPA allocated costs to sites for the following scenarios: 1) install or improve wastewater
treatment to reduce effluent pollutant concentrations, 2) reduce wastewater flow rates through
recycling or in-process controls, or 3) improve wastewater treatment and reduce flow rates.
These decisions directly affected how EPA estimated the treated pollutant loadings for each site
and technology option. In scenario 1, EPA estimated costs for sites to improve wastewater
treatment and set treated pollutant concentrations equal to the model LTAs. In scenario 2, EPA
estimated costs for sites to reduce wastewater flow rates to achieve the model PNF and set the
11-12
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
treated PNF equal to the model PNF. In scenario 3, both the treated pollutant concentrations and
treated PNF were set equal to the model LTAs and PNF, respectively.
11.6 Example Calculation
The following example calculation shows the steps EPA used to calculate the
baseline pollutant loadings, treated pollutant loadings, and pollutant removals.
11.6.1 Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Step 1. Identify available site-specific average baseline pollutant
concentration data.
The first step is identifying the available data that are representative of the
subcategory. For this example, EPA identified data for two hypothetical sites that comprise the
integrated steelmaking subcategory. Site A is a direct discharger and Site B is an indirect
discharger.
Available Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentration Data
Site
Operation
Discharge
Status
Baseline Zinc
Concentration (mg/L)
Baseline Lead
Concentration (mg/L)
Site A
Continuous Casting (CC)
Direct
0.13
Not available
Site A
Wet-Suppressed Basic
Oxygen Furnace (BOF-WS)
Direct
Not available
0.15
Site B
Vacuum Degassing (VD)
Indirect
0.67
0.5
Site B
Continuous Casting (CC)
Indirect
0.12
0.01
Step 2. Calculate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations to fill data gaps.
EPA calculated subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for
integrated steelmaking using available data as described in Section 11.2.2. The subcategory-
specific average baseline pollutant concentrations were used to fill in data gaps for each site (i.e.,
used in place of "not available" in above table). The subcategory-specific average baseline
pollutant concentrations were calculated below, using the data from the table in Step 1.
11-13
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentration Data
Discharge
Average Zinc Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Lead Concentration
(mg/L)
Direct, Indirect (a)
0.31
0.22
(a) Average calculated using data from direct and indirect dischargers for all pollutants, except conventional
parameters, which were calculated separately for direct and indirect dischargers.
Step 3. Calculate the baseline loadings for each operation and site.
EPA calculated the baseline pollutant loadings for each operation and POC using
Equation 11-1 and the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, the baseline PNF, and production for each operation presented in the table below.
Production, Baseline PNFs, Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations,
and Baseline Loadings for Each Site
Site
Operation
Production
(tons/yr) (a)
Baseline
PNF
(gal/ton)
Baseline Zinc
Concen-
tration
(mg/L)
Baseline Lead
Concen-
tration
(mg/L)
Baseline
Zinc
Loading
(Ibs/yr)
Baseline
Lead
Loading
(lbs/yr)
Site A
CC
2,190,000
1,800
0.13
0.22 (b)
4,276
7,237
Site A
BOF - WS
2,555,000
17
0.31 (b)
0.15
112
54.4
Site B
VD
1,095,000
64
0.67
0.5
392
292
Site B
CC
912,500
20
0.12
0.01
18.3
1.52
(a) Production in tons/yr = Production in tons/day multiplied by 365 days.
(b) Subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentration used.
Then, EPA summed the baseline loadings for each operation for each site.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings for Each Site
Site
Baseline Zinc Loading (lbs/yr)
Baseline Lead Loading (lbs/yr)
Site A
4,388
7,291
Site B (a)
410
294
(a) The baseline pollutant loadings presented for this site represent the pollutant loadings discharged to the POTW.
11-14
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
11.6.2 Treated Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Step 1. Review costing analysis for each site.
EPA used the following analysis for the hypothetical Sites A and B from Section
11.6.1 for both its pollutant removal and costing estimates:
• Site A: This site has two separate treatment systems that treat continuous
casting (CC) and basic oxygen furnace - wet-suppressed (BOF-WS)
wastewater. EPA identified and estimated costs for upgrades to both
treatment systems that it believed were necessary to achieve the model
pollutant loadings (i.e., model LTAs multiplied by the model PNF) for
lead and zinc. For the CC treatment system, these upgrades included
treatment to reduce the concentration of lead and zinc and flow reduction
because the site exceeded both the model LTAs and model PNF. EPA
estimated costs for these upgrades to achieve the model pollutant loading.
See Section 10. For the BOF-WS treatment system, the upgrades included
treatment to reduce the concentration of lead and zinc because the site
exceeded the model LTAs, but flow reduction was not necessary because
the baseline PNF was less than the model PNF; therefore, the site achieves
the model pollutant loading when it reduces the lead and zinc
concentrations to the model LTA. EPA estimated costs for these upgrades
to achieve the model pollutant loading.
• Site B: This site has two separate treatment systems for the vacuum
degassing (VD) and CC wastewater. EPA identified the upgrades to the
VD treatment system that it believed were necessary to achieve the lead
and zinc model loading. These upgrades included treatment to remove
lead and zinc and flow reduction because the site exceeded both the model
LTAs and model PNF. EPA estimated costs for these upgrades. See
Section 10. EPA did not estimate any compliance costs for the CC system
because the CC treated effluent achieves the model pollutant loadings.
Step 2. Calculate the treated pollutant loadings for each operation and site.
Using the analysis described above, model LTAs, and model PNF presented in the
table below, EPA calculated the treated pollutant loadings for each operation using Equation
11-4.
11-15
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Production, Model LTAs, Model PNFs, and Treated Pollutant Loadings
for Each Operation
Site
Operation
Model
Zinc
LTA
(mg/L)
Model
Lead
LTA
(mg/L)
Model
PNF
(gal/ton)
Production
(tons/yr) (a)
Treated Zinc
Loading
(lbs/yr)
Treated Lead
Loading
(lbs/yr)
Site A
CC
0.121
0.0141
25
2,190,000
55.3
6.44
Site A
BOF - WS
0.121
0.0141
17(b)
2,555,000
43.9
5.11
Site B
VD
0.121
0.0141
13
1,095,000
14.4
1.67
Site B
CC
0.12(b)
0.01 (b)
20 (b)
912,500
18.3
1.52
(a) Production in tons/yr = Production in tons/day multiplied by 365 days.
(b) These site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations and PNFs were less than the model LTAs and
model PNF; therefore, EPA used the sites' data to calculate the treated pollutant loadings.
EPA summed the treated pollutant loadings for each operation to calculate the
treated pollutant loadings for each site.
Treated Pollutant Loadings for Each Site
Site
Treated Zinc Loading (lbs/yr)
Treated Lead Loading (lbs/yr)
Site A
99.2
11.6
Site B (a)
32.7
3.19
(a) The treated pollutant loadings presented for this site represent the pollutant loadings discharged to the POTW.
11.63 Pollutant Removals Calculation
Step 1. Subtract the treated pollutant loadings from the baseline pollutant
loadings to calculate the pollutant removals.
Using Equation 11-5 and the baseline and treated pollutant loadings calculated in
Sections 11.6.1 and 11.6.2, respectively, EPA calculated the pollutant removals for each
operation for each hypothetical site.
11-16
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals for Each Operation
Site
Operation
Baseline
Zinc
Loadings
(lbs/yr)
Treated
Zinc
Loadings
(lbs/yr)
Zinc
Removals
(lbs/yr)
Baseline
Lead
Loadings
(lbs/yr)
Treated
Lead
Loadings
(lbs/yr)
Lead
Removals
(lbs/yr)
Site A
CC
4,276
55.3
4,221
7,237
6.44
7,231
Site A
BOF - WS
112
43.9
68.1
54.4
5.11
49.3
Site B (a)
VD
392
14.4
378
292
1.67
290
Site B (a)
CC
18.3
18.3
0
1.52
1.52
0
(a) The pollutant removals presented for this site represent the pollutant removals before treatment of the POTW.
Step 2. Calculate the pollutant removals for each site.
EPA summed the pollutant removals for each operation to calculate the pollutant
removals for each site.
Pollutant Removals for Each Site
Site
Zinc Removal (lbs/yr)
Lead Removal (lbs/yr)
Site A
4,289
7,279
Site B (a)
378
290
(a) The pollutant removals presented for this site represent the pollutant removals before treatment at the POTW.
Step 3. Calculate the baseline pollutant loadings, treated pollutant loadings,
and pollutant removals for the integrated steelmaking subcategory.
To calculate the pollutant loadings and removals for the integrated steelmaking
subcategory, EPA multiplied the pollutant loadings and removals for each site by the survey
weight using Equation 11-3. For indirect dischargers only, EPA applied Equation 11-2 to
calculate the pollutant loadings and removals after treatment at the POTW for each site. Finally,
EPA summed the pollutant loadings and removals for each site for the integrated steelmaking
subcategory.
11-17
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Weighted Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Site
Survey
Weight
Pollutant
POTW %
Removal
Weighted (a)
Baseline
Loading (lbs/yr)
Weighted (a)
Treated Loading
(lbs/yr)
Weighted (a)
Removal
(lbs/yr)
Site A
1.03448
Zinc
NA •
4,539
103
4,436
Site A
1.03448
Lead
NA
7,543
12.0
7,531
Site B
1
Zinc
79%
86.2
6.9
79.3
Site B
1
Lead
77%
67.6
0.734
66.8
NA - Not applicable because this site is a direct discharger.
(a) Weighted indicates that the survey weights have been applied. For indirect dischargers, the loadings presented
represent what is discharged to surface water as calculated using Equation 11-2. The toxic weighting factor was not
applied.
Therefore, for the integrated steelmaking subcategory, the amount of lead and zinc
removed by the model technology for direct dischargers is 7,530 lbs/yr and 4,437 lbs/yr,
respectively. For indirect dischargers, the amount of lead and zinc removed by the model
technology is 66.7 lbs/yr and 79.4 lbs/yr, respectively. Note that to simplify this example, only
two sites were included. Generally, there are many sites in a subcategory and the removals for
sites with the same discharge status (e.g., direct and indirect) would be summed for each
pollutant to calculate the pollutant reduction for the option.
After calculating the pollutant removals for each subcategory, EPA used these
removals to evaluate the effectiveness, environmental benefits, and cost effectiveness of each
regulatory option.
11.7 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Cokemaking Subcategory
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 20 by-product recovery cokemaking sites:
12 direct dischargers and 8 indirect dischargers. One site shut down operations after 1997 and
EPA was unable to verify costing assumptions and the site's reported high flow; therefore, this
site was removed from the costing and loadings analyses. Non-recovery cokemaking sites are
zero dischargers; therefore, EPA did not calculate pollutant loadings or removals for these sites.
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 35 of the 72 POCs. Thirty of the POCs were
not included in the loadings analysis because they were not detected in by-product recovery
cokemaking effluent (listed in Table 11-1). Four of the remaining POCs were excluded because
they failed the influent editing criteria (listed in Table 11-2). See Section 14 for more
information regarding the influent editing criteria. Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day was
excluded because it was a duplicate of another parameter (biochemical oxygen demand 5-day -
carbonaceous). Amenable cyanide and fluoride were inadvertently left out of the loadings
analysis. See the "Pollutant Loadings and Removals Inaccuracies" memorandum, document
11-18
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
number IS 10831 in Section 14.7 of rulemaking record for more information regarding these
inaccuracies in the loadings model. In summary, no pollutant loadings or removals were
calculated for a total of 37 POCs.
EPA calculated percent removals for the cokemaking subcategory using the
influent and effluent data for the model BAT treatment facilities. For the BAT-1 option,
nitrate/nitrite and total suspended solids (TSS) had negative percent removals for all the model
facilities; therefore, no removals were calculated for these POCs. For the PSES-1 option, phenol
and TSS had negative percent removals for all model facilities; therefore, no removals were
calculated for these POCs. See Sections 12 and 14 for more information regarding the percent
removals.
11.7.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each by-product recovery
cokemaking facility using available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline
pollutant concentrations, the baseline PNFs, and the manufacturing operation production
obtained from the industry surveys.
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each by-product recovery cokemaking site. EPA used
applicable effluent concentration data from all 20 sites: 12 direct dischargers and 8 indirect
dischargers. Fourteen sites provided industry self-monitoring data, nine sites provided survey
summary data, and EPA collected data for three sites. EPA had data from multiple sources from
five sites (e.g., two sites provided survey summary and industry self-monitoring data, two sites
provided industry self-monitoring and EPA sampling data, and one site provided survey
summary and EPA sampling data) that represented by-product recovery cokemaking wastewater.
To calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the two sites that
submitted survey summary and industry self-monitoring data, EPA used the industry self-
monitoring data. When no industry self-monitoring data were available for a POC, EPA used
survey summary data for that POC. To calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for the remaining sites, EPA averaged the site's multiple data sets together. All
20 sites in the pollutant loadings analysis had baseline concentration data for ammonia as
nitrogen. Seventeen of the sites also monitored for total cyanide and total recoverable phenolics.
Several sites monitored for benzo(a)pyrene, benzene, and naphthalene, and TSS. For many
pollutants, particularly many of the priority organic constituents, the only available data were
from EPA sampling episodes.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
11-19
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
available for a site. To calculate subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations for by-
product recovery cokemaking, EPA examined technology in place: 11 of the 12 direct
dischargers had ammonia stills and biological treatment in place, and 1 site had an ammonia still
followed by physical/chemical treatment (dephenolizer, sand filter, and clarifier). All of the eight
indirect dischargers had ammonia stills, but three also had biological treatment. EPA calculated
the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentration for two types of sites: those
with ammonia stills and biological treatment in place and those with ammonia stills only.
To calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations for sites
with ammonia still treatment only, EPA used five data sets from the five indirect dischargers
with ammonia stills only (no direct dischargers operate ammonia stills only). For 23 of the 35
POCs included in the analysis, no data were available from these sites; therefore, EPA used the
ammonia still effluent sampling data from four by-product recovery cokemaking sites with
ammonia stills and biological treatment to calculate subcategory-specific average baseline
concentrations for these remaining POCs because these data are representative of sites without
biological treatment (i.e., ammonia stills only). For POCs where data were available for both the
five sites with only ammonia stills and the four sites with ammonia stills and biological
treatment, all the data were averaged together. Table 11-4 presents the subcategory-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations for sites with ammonia stills only.
For sites with both ammonia stills and biological treatment, EPA calculated
subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations by averaging 22 data sets for 16 sites,
including industry self-monitoring data for some pollutants and biological treatment effluent
sampling data from three by-product recovery cokemaking treatment systems for all pollutants.
EPA included data from a site that shut down its operations after 1997 to calculate the average
baseline concentrations because the data are representative of sites with both ammonia stills and
biological treatment. EPA calculated a separate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentration for TSS for direct and indirect dischargers. For the indirect dischargers, data were
not available for BOD 5-day (carbonaceous) and O&G; therefore, EPA used the subcategory-
specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the direct dischargers for these
conventional POCs. Table 11-4 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for sites with both ammonia stills and biological treatment. EPA used the
averages presented in this table to calculate the pollutant loadings for the BAT-1 and PSES-1
options only. See the "Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Cokemaking Subcategory"
memorandum, document number IS 10836 in Section 14.7 of the rulemaking record, for the
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations used for the BAT-3 and PSES-3
options. See the "Pollutant Loadings and Removals Inaccuracies" memorandum, document
number IS 10831 in Section 14.7 of the rulemaking record, for more information regarding the
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations used for the BAT-3 and PSES-3
options.
The direct discharger with physical/chemical treatment in place provided survey
summary data for ammonia as nitrogen, benzene, benzo(a)pyrene, naphthalene, total cyanide,
total recoverable phenols, and TSS. Summary data were not available for the remaining POCs.
In the 1982 iron and steel technical development document, EPA presented data for a site that
11-20
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
had physical/chemical treatment similar to the treatment used by this direct discharger. Data
from the 1982 technical development document were preferentially used to represent the site-
specific average baseline concentrations for 11 of the remaining POCs. For the remaining POCs,
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations from sites with ammonia
stills and biological treatment in place because the concentrations of these pollutants were similar
to or less than other pollutant concentrations discharged by the site with physical/chemical
treatment. The site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations used for this site are not
disclosed to prevent compromising confidential business information.
Cotreatment
Two of the by-product recovery cokemaking sites discharge their wastewater to
cotreatment systems. Although both of these sites provided cotreatment outfall data, EPA did
not use these data because cokemaking wastewater comprised less than 90 percent of the influent
to cotreatment. Both of these sites also provided cokemaking effluent data (i.e., data from an
internal monitoring point following dedicated in-process cokemaking wastewater treatment
before entering cotreatment). EPA used these data for both sites because EPA costed for
upgrades to the dedicated cokemaking wastewater treatment systems at these sites to achieve the
model effluent pollutant loadings.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations,
baseline PNFs and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for the by-product
recovery cokemaking segment using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. For indirect dischargers, EPA
further adjusted the pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at
the POTW. Tables 11-5 and 11-6 present the baseline pollutant loadings for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively, in the cokemaking subcategory.
11.7.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the by-product recovery cokemaking
segment using the model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1 presents the
model PNFs for the by-product recovery cokemaking segment. See the "Pollutant Loadings and
Removals for the Cokemaking Subcategory" memorandum, DCN IS 10836 in Section 14.7 of the
rulemaking record, for more information regarding the LTAs. For indirect dischargers, EPA
adjusted the treated pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at
the POTW. Tables 11-5 and 11-6 present the treated pollutant loadings for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively, in the cokemaking subcategory.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the by-product recovery cokemaking
segment as the difference between the treated and baseline pollutant loadings using Equation 11-
5. The pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 346,000 lbs/yr for conventional pollutants,
approximately 718,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants, and 30,200 lbs/yr for priority
11-21
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
pollutants. The pollutant removals for BAT-3 were 1,070,000 lbs/yr for conventional pollutants,
approximately 1,080,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants, and 56,900 lbs/yr for priority
pollutants. For PSES-1, the pollutant removals were 260,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional
pollutants and 4,390 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. For PSES-3, the pollutant removals were
approximately 562,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants and 24,400 lbs/yr for priority
pollutants. Tables 11-5 and 11-6 present the pollutant removals for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively, in the cokemaking subcategory.
The flow reduction for direct dischargers was 41.2 million gallons per year, a two-
percent reduction. For indirect dischargers, the flow reduction was 50.2 million gallons per year,
a nine-percent reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the cokemaking subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Cokemaking
Subcategory memorandum in Section 14.7 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record, DCN
IS10836.
11.8 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Ironmaking Subcategory
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for the 15 ironmaking sites that generate and
discharge process wastewater: 14 direct dischargers and 1 indirect discharger. Ten of the sites
discharged only blast furnace wastewater, four sites discharged commingled blast furnace and
sintering wastewater, and one site discharged only sintering wastewater.
For wastewater streams from blast furnace operations, EPA estimated pollutant
loadings for 25 of the 27 POCs. For sites with commingled blast furnace and sintering
wastewater, EPA combined the POCs for the blast furnace and sintering segments for a total of
67 POCs. EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 45 of these 67 POCs. For wastewater streams
from only sintering operations, EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 43 of the 65 POCs. The
remaining POCs (listed in Table 11-1) were excluded from the pollutant loadings analysis
because they were never detected in ironmaking effluent.
11.8.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each ironmaking facility using
available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations, the
baseline PNFs, and the manufacturing operation production obtained from the industry surveys.
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each operation in the ironmaking subcategory. EPA
used applicable effluent concentration data from eleven direct dischargers and one indirect
discharger to calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations. Eight sites
provided ISMD, two sites provided survey summary data, and EPA had sampling data for four
11-22
-------
Section II - Pollutant Loadings
sites (two of these sites also provided ISMD). For two sites, EPA had multiple data sets (e.g.,
ISMD and EPA sampling data) that represented one operation or where the wastewater from the
blast furnace and sintering operations was combined for treatment. To calculate the site-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations for each site, EPA averaged the site's multiple data sets
together. For two of the sites with sampling data, EPA had data for only dioxins and furans. Ten
sites had site-specific average baseline concentration data for ammonia as nitrogen, lead, and
zinc; nine sites had data for total cyanide; and eight sites had data for TSS. Three sites with blast
furnace wastewater only did not provide monitoring data, and EPA had no sampling data for
those sites.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
available for an operation. For the ironmaking subcategory, EPA calculated the subcategory-
specific average baseline pollutant concentrations based on the type of wastewater discharged.
Different subcategory-specific averages were calculated for sites with blast furnace wastewater
only and sites with commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater.
For sites that discharged blast furnace wastewater only, EPA used ten data sets
from nine sites: seven direct dischargers, one indirect discharger, and one zero (i.e., alternative)
discharger. To expand the size of the data set, EPA used sampling data from a site located in
Canada and the alternative discharging site because the data are representative of blast furnace
ironmaking wastewater. (EPA did not calculate pollutant loadings and removals for the
Canadian site or the alternative discharger because the Canadian site is outside the scope of this
U.S. regulation and the alternative discharger does not discharge wastewater.) Data were not
available for the indirect discharger for the conventional pollutants O&G or TSS; therefore, for
this site, EPA used the average of available data from direct dischargers for these POCs. Table
11-7 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for sites that
discharge blast furnace wastewater only.
For sites that discharged commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater, EPA
used the available data from two direct dischargers that commingled their blast furnace and
sintering wastewater to calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline concentration for
POCs other than dioxins and furans. These two sites provided a total of three applicable effluent
data sets: sampling data and ISMD data from one site and ISMD data from the other site. For
dioxins and furans, EPA calculated subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations using
dioxin and furan sampling data from a site with commingled blast furnace and sintering
wastewater and from a site with sintering wastewater only. Table 11-8 presents the subcategory-
specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for sites with commingled blast furnace and
sintering wastewater.
11-23
-------
Section 11- Pollutant Loadings
The site that discharged sintering wastewater only had sampling data available for
all POCs; therefore, EPA did not calculate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for this site.
Cotreatment
Five of the ironmaking sites discharged their wastewater to cotreatment systems.
Although four of these sites provided cotreatment effluent data, EPA did not use any of these
data because ironmaking wastewater comprises less than 90 percent of the influent to
cotreatment. Two of the four sites with cotreatment effluent data also provided ironmaking
effluent data (i.e., data from an internal monitoring point following dedicated in-process
ironmaking wastewater treatment before entering cotreatment). One site provided only
ironmaking effluent data. Although the cotreatment systems at these sites provide additional
wastewater treatment, the data from the internal monitoring points were used to calculate
baseline loadings for all three sites because EPA costed for upgrades to the dedicated ironmaking
wastewater treatment systems at these sites to achieve the model effluent pollutant loadings.
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the other two
sites.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings
For sites that commingled their blast furnace and sintering wastewater, EPA
estimated pollutant loadings and removals for both the blast furnace wastewater and sintering
wastewater. EPA used this method in order to accurately estimate the pollutant loadings
discharged by the commingled stream (e.g., the treatment system effluent concentration
represents both blast furnace and sintering wastewater). EPA multiplied the combined
wastewater effluent pollutant concentrations by the blast furnace wastewater flow and production
to determine the blast furnace effluent pollutant loadings, and then multiplied the same effluent
pollutant concentrations by the sintering wastewater flow and production to determine the
sintering pollutant loadings. For example, Site X has a blast furnace and a sintering operation.
The site reported the flow rate and production for each operation separately, but provided the
treatment system effluent pollutant concentrations for the combined wastewater stream. EPA
calculated pollutant loadings and removals for the blast furnace and sintering operations at Site X
separately, using the PNF and production for each operation and the effluent pollutant
concentrations for the combined wastewater stream. Finally, EPA summed the pollutant
loadings and removals for the two operations to calculate the total pollutant loadings for the site.
Using the site-specific and subcategoiy-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, baseline PNFs, and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for
the ironmaking subcategoiy using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. For indirect dischargers, EPA
further adjusted the baseline pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account for additional
removals at the POTW. Tables 11-11 and 11-12 present the baseline pollutant loadings for direct
and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the ironmaking subcategoiy.
11-24
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
11.8.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the ironmaking subcategory using
the model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1 presents the model PNFs for
this subcategory. For the ironmaking subcategory, EPA calculated model LTAs for the regulated
pollutants only. For the remaining POCs, EPA calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT
performance data. See DCNIS10933 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for more
information. Tables 11-9 and 11-10 present the arithmetic means of BAT performance data for
sites with blast furnace wastewater only and sites with commingled blast furnace and sintering
wastewater, respectively. For indirect dischargers, EPA also adjusted the pollutant loadings
using Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at the POTW. Tables 11-11 and 11-12
present the treated pollutant loadings for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the
ironmaking subcategoiy.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the ironmaking subcategory as the
difference between the treated and baseline loadings using Equations 11-5. The pollutant
removals for BAT-1 were 2,620,000 lbs/yr for conventional pollutants, 9,810,925 lbs/yr for
nonconventional pollutants, and 100,570 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. The pollutant removals
for PSES-1 were approximately 43,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants and 76.7 lbs/yr for
priority pollutants. Tables 11-11 and 11-12 present the pollutant removals for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively, in the ironmaking subcategory.
The flow reduction for direct dischargers was 8.3 billion gallons per year, an 86-
percent reduction. The indirect discharger had a flow reduction of 55 million gallons per year, a
70-percent reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the ironmaking subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Ironmaking
Subcategory memorandum in Section 14.7 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record, DCN
IS10837.
11.9 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Sintering Subcategory
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for the five sintering sites that generate and
discharge process wastewater: five direct dischargers and zero indirect dischargers. Four of the
sites discharged commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater, and one site discharged
sintering wastewater only.
For commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater streams, EPA combined
the POCs for the blast furnace and sintering segments for a total of 67 POCs. EPA estimated
pollutant loadings for 45 of these 67 POCs. For wastewater streams from only sintering
operations, EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 43 of the 65 POCs. The remaining POCs (listed
in Table 11-1), were excluded from the pollutant loadings analysis because they were never
detected in sintering effluent.
11-25
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
11.9.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each sintering facility using
available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations, the
baseline PNFs, and the manufacturing operation production obtained from the industry surveys.
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each operation in the sintering subcategory. EPA used
seven effluent concentration data sets from five direct dischargers to calculate the site-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations. Three sites provided industry self-monitoring data and
EPA collected sampling data for four sites (two of the four sites also provided ISMD). For two
sites, EPA had multiple data sets (e.g., industry self-monitoring data and EPA sampling data) that
represented one operation or where the wastewater from the blast furnace and sintering
operations was combined for treatment. To calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for each site, EPA averaged the site's multiple data sets together. EPA had dioxin
and furan data for four of the five sites. Sampling data were collected for all POCs at two sites
and for only dioxins and furans at two sites.
Determination of Subcategory-Speciflc Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
available for an operation. For the sintering subcategory, EPA calculated the subcategory-
specific average baseline pollutant concentrations based on the type of wastewater discharged.
EPA calculated subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for sites that
commingle their sintering and blast furnace wastewater (i.e., data from the site that discharged
sintering wastewater only were not included in the average). The site that discharged sintering
wastewater only had sampling data available for all POCs; therefore, EPA did not calculate
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for this site.
To calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for
sites that commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater, EPA used three data sets from two
direct discharging sites for all POCs, except dioxins and furans. Sampling data were available
for one site with commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater. For dioxins and furans,
EPA calculated subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations using data from two sites:
one site with sintering wastewater only and one site with commingled sintering and blast furnace
wastewater. Table 11-13 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations used for sites that commingled their sintering and blast furnace wastewater.
11-26
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Cotreatment
Two sintering sites discharge their wastewater to cotreatment systems. One site
provided cotreatment effluent data; however, EPA did not use these data because sintering
wastewater represented less than 4% of the influent to cotreatment. The other site did not
provide cotreatment effluent data. Sintering effluent sampling data (i.e., data from an internal
monitoring point following dedicated in-process sintering wastewater treatment before entering
cotreatment) were available for both sites. EPA used the data from the internal monitoring points
to calculate the baseline pollutant loadings for both sites, even though the cotreatment systems
provide additional treatment of the wastewater. These data were used because EPA costed for
upgrades to the sites' dedicated sintering wastewater treatment systems to achieve the model
effluent pollutant loadings.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
For sites that commingled their blast furnace and sintering wastewater, EPA
estimated pollutant loadings and removals for both the blast furnace wastewater and sintering
wastewater. EPA used this method in order to accurately estimate the pollutant loadings
discharged by the commingled wastewater stream (e.g., the treatment system effluent
concentration represents both blast furnace and sintering wastewater). EPA multiplied the
combined wastewater effluent pollutant concentrations by the blast furnace wastewater flow and
production to determine the blast furnace effluent pollutant loadings and then multiplied the
same effluent pollutant concentrations by the sintering wastewater flow and production to
determine the sintering pollutant loadings. For example, Site X has a blast furnace and a
sintering operation. The site reported the flow rate and production for each operation separately,
but provided the treatment system effluent pollutant concentrations for the combined wastewater
stream. EPA calculated pollutant loadings and removals for the blast furnace and sintering
operations at Site X separately, using the PNF and production for each operation and the effluent
pollutant concentrations for the combined wastewater stream. Finally, EPA summed the
pollutant loadings and removals for the two operations to calculate the total pollutant loadings for
the site.
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, baseline PNFs, and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for
the sintering subcategory using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. Table 11-15 presents the baseline
pollutant loadings for direct dischargers in the sintering subcategory.
11.9.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the sintering subcategory using the
model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1 presents the model PNFs for this
subcategory. EPA calculated removals for only dioxins and furans using the analytical minimum
levels as the treated effluent concentration (listed in Table 11-14) for dioxins and furans for the
11-27
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
sintering subcategory. Table 11-15 presents the treated pollutant loadings for direct dischargers
in the sintering subcategory.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the sintering subcategory as the difference
between the treated and baseline pollutant loadings using Equation 11-5. For the sintering
subcategory, EPA calculated removals only for dioxins and furans because those were the only
parameters treated by the technology option under consideration. Therefore, the pollutant
removals for BAT-1 were 0 lbs/yr for conventional pollutants and 0.00138 lbs/yr for priority and
nonconventional pollutants. Table 11-15 presents the pollutant removals for direct dischargers in
the sintering subcategory.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the sintering subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Sintering
Subcategory memorandum in Section 14.7 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record, DCN
IS10844.
11.10 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Integrated Steelmaking
Subcategory
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for the 19 direct dischargers with integrated
steelmaking operations. There were no indirect dischargers in the integrated steelmaking
subcategory. In addition, one integrated steelmaking site shut down operations permanently after
1997, and EPA was unable to verify costing assumptions and the site's reported high flow;
therefore, this site was not included in the costing and loadings analyses.
The integrated steelmaking subcategory includes the following operations: basic
oxygen furnace (BOF) steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting. Sites with BOF
processes may operate semi-wet, wet-open, or wet-suppressed air pollution control systems.
Under the 1982 regulation, BOF operations with semi-wet air pollution control systems are
required to achieve zero discharge; therefore EPA did not calculate pollutant loadings or
removals for these operations. Section 5 describes in more detail the different types of BOF air
pollution control systems. Of the 19 integrated steel sites, 8 generate wastewater from all three
operations, 4 from BOF steelmaking and continuous casting, 3 from vacuum degassing and
continuous casting, 1 from BOF steelmaking only, and 3 from continuous casting only. EPA
calculated pollutant loadings and removals for BOF, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting
wastewater streams separately for each site.
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 19 of the 28 POCs for the integrated
steelmaking subcategory. Two POCs were not included in the loadings analysis because they
were not detected in integrated steelmaking effluent (listed in Table 11-1). Seven of the
remaining nine POCs were excluded because they failed the influent editing criteria (listed in
Table 11-2). See Section 14 for more information regarding the influent editing criteria and
DCN IS 10899 in Section 14.7 of the rulemaking record for the results of this analysis that were
used for the pollutant loadings analysis.
11-28
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
EPA calculated percent removals for the integrated steelmaking subcategory using
the influent and effluent data for the model facilities. For the BAT-1 option, nitrate/nitrite had
negative percent removals for all the model facilities; therefore, EPA did not calculate pollutant
removals for this POC. See Sections 12 and 14 for more information regarding the percent
removals.
11.10.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each integrated steelmaking facility
using available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations,
baseline PNFs and the manufacturing operation production obtained from the industry surveys.
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each operation in the integrated steelmaking
subcategory. EPA used applicable effluent concentration data from 11 direct dischargers to
calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations. Nine sites provided ISMD,
two sites provided survey summary data, and EPA collected sampling data for three sites. Eight
of the nineteen sites did not provide any data and EPA did not have sampling data for these sites.
For three sites, EPA had multiple data sets (e.g., industry self-monitoring data and EPA sampling
data) that represented one operation or where the wastewater for several operations was
combined for treatment. To calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations
for each site, EPA averaged the site's multiple data sets together. All 11 sites that provided
applicable effluent data had site-specific average baseline concentration data for lead and zinc;
10 sites additionally provided applicable data for TSS. For 13 of the POCs, EPA only had
sampling data for three sites.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as
surrogates for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC
were available for an operation. For the integrated steelmaking subcategory, EPA calculated the
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations using sampling data from 3 sites
and industry self-monitoring data from 10 sites. EPA sampled BOF and continuous casting
wastewater from two sites, and BOF, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting wastewater from
one site. Table 11-16 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations
for the integrated steelmaking subcategory.
Cotreatment
Twelve of the integrated steelmaking sites discharge their wastewater to
cotreatment systems. Although 11 of these sites provided cotreatment effluent data, EPA did not
use these data because steelmaking wastewater comprised less than 90 percent of the total flow
11-29
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
through the cotreatment system; therefore, EPA considers the data to be not representative of
steelmaking wastewater. In addition, at six of these sites, dilution water comprised more than 10
percent of the influent to cotreatment.
For seven of these sites, EPA had no other data; therefore, EPA used the
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations. Four of these sites also provided
integrated steelmaking internal monitoring data (i.e., data from an internal monitoring point
following dedicated in-process steelmaking wastewater treatment before entering cotreatment).
Although the cotreatment systems at these sites provide additional wastewater treatment, the data
from the internal monitoring points were used to calculate baseline loadings for all four sites
because EPA costed for upgrades to the dedicated integrated steelmaking wastewater treatment
systems at these sites to achieve the model effluent pollutant loadings. For one site, EPA had no
data available; therefore, the Agency used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations to calculate the baseline loadings.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, baseline PNFs, and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for
the integrated steelmaking subcategory using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. Table 11-18 presents the
baseline pollutant loadings for direct dischargers in the integrated steelmaking subcategory.
11.10.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for integrated steelmaking sites using the
model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1 presents the model PNFs for this
subcategory. EPA calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT performance data for each POC for
this subcategory (presented in Table 11-17). See DCNIS10587 in Section 14.10 of the
rulemaking record for more information. Table 11-18 presents the treated pollutant loadings for
direct dischargers in the integrated steelmaking subcategory.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the integrated steelmaking subcategory as
the difference between the treated and baseline pollutant loadings using Equation 11-5. The
pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 892,000 lbs/yr for conventional pollutants, 4,310,000 lbs/yr
for nonconventional pollutants, and 42,700 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. Table 11-18 presents
the pollutant removals for direct dischargers in the integrated steelmaking subcategory.
The overall flow reduction for direct dischargers was 6.2 billion gallons per year,
a 65-percent reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the integrated steelmaking subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory memorandum in Section 14.7 of the Iron and Steel
Rulemaking Record, DCN IS 10838.
11-30
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
11.11 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming Subcategory
EPA estimated the pollutant loadings and removals for 36 discharging integrated
and stand-alone hot forming sites: 34 carbon and alloy steel and 2 stainless steel. Of the 34
carbon and alloy steel sites, 31 discharged directly and 3 discharged indirectly. Of the two
stainless steel sites, both discharged indirectly. These sites represent a total industry population
of approximately 52 sites (49 carbon and alloy steel and 3 stainless steel sites). One integrated
and stand-alone hot forming site shut down all operations permanently after 1997, and EPA was
unable to verify costing assumptions and the site's reported high flow; therefore, EPA removed
this site from the costing and loadings analyses. EPA estimated pollutant loadings for all 11
POCs for the carbon and alloy steel segment and all 15 POCs for the stainless steel segment.
11.11.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for integrated and stand-alone hot
forming sites using available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, the baseline PNFs and the manufacturing operation production obtained from the
industry surveys.
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each operation in the integrated and stand-alone hot
forming subcategory. EPA used applicable effluent concentration data from 16 sites in the
carbon and alloy segment: 1 indirect discharger and 15 direct dischargers. Eleven of the sites
provided ISMD, five of the sites provided survey summary data, and EPA collected sampling
data for three sites (all three sites also supplied industry self-monitoring data). Neither of the two
stainless steel sites provided effluent data for the integrated and stand-alone hot forming
subcategory. Three sites provided multiple data sets (e.g., two sites submitted industry self-
monitoring and EPA sampling data and one site provided industry self-monitoring and permit
application data) that represented the same operation or where the wastewater for several
operations was combined for treatment. To calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for each site, EPA averaged the site's multiple data sets together. Of the 16 sites,
15 sites had site-specific average baseline concentration data for TSS, 10 sites additionally had
data for iron, 7 sites additionally had data for zinc, and 6 sites additionally had data for lead.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
available for an operation. To calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, EPA averaged
11-31
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
available site-specific average baseline pollutant concentration data for the carbon and alloy and
stainless steel segments separately.
For the carbon and alloy steel segment, 16 direct dischargers and 1 indirect
dischargers provided a total of 23 applicable effluent data sets used to calculate the subcategory-
specific average baseline pollutant concentrations. EPA used sampling effluent data from one of
the Canadian sites because the data were representative of the integrated and stand-alone hot
forming subcategory. (Pollutant loadings and removals were not calculated for the Canadian site
because it was outside of the scope for this U. S. regulation.) For the subcategory-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations for indirect dischargers, data were not available for one
conventional pollutant, O&G. For this pollutant, EPA used the subcategory-specific average
baseline concentration for the direct dischargers as the average for indirect dischargers. Table
11-19 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the
integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, carbon and alloy steel segment.
For the stainless steel segment, no sites provided applicable effluent data;
therefore, EPA transferred hot forming effluent data from the non-integrated steelmaking and hot
forming subcategory, stainless steel segment to calculate the subcategory-specific average
baseline pollutant concentrations. It was reasonable to transfer these data because water use and
wastewater characteristics of stainless steel hot forming operations at non-integrated steel mills
are similar to those at integrated and stand-alone hot forming mills. EPA did not transfer
continuous casting effluent data from the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming
subcategory, stainless steel segment because the integrated and stand-alone hot forming
subcategory applies only to hot forming operations. Instead, EPA used the effluent data from
only the hot forming operations. EPA used four hot forming effluent data sets from three sites:
sampling data for a direct discharger and an indirect discharger and ISMD for an indirect
discharger. Table 11-20 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, stainless steel
segment.
Cotreatment
Ten sites discharge their integrated and stand-alone hot forming wastewater to
cotreatment systems and all of these sites provided cotreatment effluent data. For two of these
sites, EPA used cotreatment effluent data to calculate baseline pollutant loadings. EPA did not
use cotreatment effluent data for the remaining eight sites because either dilution water
comprised greater than 10 percent of the influent to cotreatment or hot forming wastewater
comprised less than 90 percent of the influent to cotreatment. One of the sites whose cotreatment
effluent data were not used also provided hot forming effluent data (i.e., data from an internal
monitoring point following dedicated in-process hot forming wastewater treatment before
entering cotreatment). Although the cotreatment system provides additional treatment of this
wastewater, the data from the internal monitoring point were used to calculate baseline pollutant
loadings because EPA costed for upgrades to the site's dedicated hot forming wastewater
treatment system to achieve the model effluent pollutant loadings. The remaining seven sites did
11-32
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
not provide any other data; therefore, EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline
pollutant concentrations to calculate the baseline pollutant loadings.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, baseline PNFs, and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for
the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. For
indirect dischargers, EPA also further adjusted the pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to
account for additional removals at the POTW. Tables 11-23 and 11-24 present baseline pollutant
loadings for direct and indirect dischargers in the carbon and alloy segment, respectively. Table
11-25 presents baseline pollutant loadings for indirect dischargers in the stainless steel segment.
11.11.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the integrated and stand-alone hot
forming subcategory using the model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1
presents the model PNFs for this subcategory. For the carbon and alloy steel segment, EPA
calculated model LTAs for the regulated pollutants only. For the remaining POCs, EPA
calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT performance data (presented in Table 11-21). See DCN
IS 10933 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for more information. For the stainless steel
segment, no performance data were available; therefore, EPA transferred the LTAs from the non-
integrated steelmaking and hot forming, stainless steel segment, which are presented in Table 11-
22. It was reasonable to transfer these data because water use and wastewater characteristics of
stainless steel hot forming operations at non-integrated steel mills are similar to those at
integrated and stand-alone hot forming mills. For indirect dischargers, EPA adjusted the treated
pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at the POTW. Tables
11-23 and 11-24 present treated pollutant loadings for direct and indirect dischargers in the
carbon and alloy segment, respectively. Table 11-25 presents the treated pollutant loadings for
indirect dischargers in the stainless steel segment.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the integrated and stand-alone hot forming
subcategory as the difference between the treated and baseline pollutant loadings, using Equation
11-5. For the carbon and alloy steel segment, the pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 35,300,000
lbs/yr for conventional pollutants, 12,290,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants, and 92,200
lbs/yr for priority pollutants. For PSES-1, the pollutant removals for the carbon and alloy steel
segment were 5,610 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants and 9.14 lbs/yr for priority pollutants.
Tables 11-23 and 11-24 present pollutant removals for direct and indirect dischargers in the
carbon and alloy segment, respectively.
For the stainless steel segment, the pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 0 lbs/yr for
nonconventional and priority pollutants because there were no direct dischargers. For the
stainless steel segment, the pollutant removals for PSES-1 were approximately 1,270 lbs/yr for
11-33
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
nonconventional pollutants and 164 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. Table 11-25 presents pollutant
removals for indirect dischargers in the stainless steel segment.
The flow reduction for the carbon and alloy steel segment direct dischargers was
120 billion gallons per year, a 95-percent reduction. The flow reduction for the carbon and alloy
steel segment indirect dischargers was 57.1 million gallons per year, a 50-percent reduction. The
flow reduction for the stainless steel segment indirect dischargers was 15.7 million gallons for
the year, a 90-percent reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the integrated and stand-alone hot forming subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and
Removals for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory memorandum in Section
14.7 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record, DCN IS 10839.
11.12 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Non-Integrated Steeimaking and
Hot Forming Subcategory
EPA calculated pollutant loadings for the 48 discharging non-integrated
steelmaking and hot forming sites: 42 carbon and alloy steel and 6 stainless steel sites. Of the 42
carbon and alloy steel sites, 31 discharged directly, 10 discharged indirectly, and 1 discharged
directly and indirectly. Of the six stainless steel sites, three discharged directly, two discharged
indirectly, and one discharged directly and indirectly. These sites represent a total industry
population of approximately 65 sites.
The non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory includes the
following operations: vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot forming. Of the 48 non-
integrated steelmaking and hot forming sites, 10 generated wastewater from all three operations,
28 from continuous casting and hot forming, 3 from vacuum degassing and hot forming, 4 from
hot forming only, 2 from continuous casting only, and 1 from vacuum degassing only.
EPA estimated pollutant loadings for all 15 POCs for the carbon and alloy steel
segment and for 21 of the 22 POCs for the stainless steel segment. One POC for the stainless
steel segment, tribromomethane, was never detected in the effluent at any stainless steel sites
and, therefore, was not included in the loadings analysis.
11.12.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each non-integrated steelmaking
and hot forming facility using available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline
pollutant concentrations, the baseline PNFs, and the manufacturing operation production
obtained from the industry surveys.
11-34
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each operation in the non-integrated steelmaking and
hot forming subcategory. EPA used applicable effluent concentration data for 18 carbon and
alloy steel sites and 3 stainless steel sites to calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations. Twelve sites provided industry self-monitoring data, 10 sites provided survey
summary data, 1 site provided permit application data, and EPA collected sampling data for 3
sites. For three sites, EPA had multiple data sets (i.e., one site had self-monitoring and EPA
sampling data, one site had survey summary and EPA sampling data and the remaining site had
self-monitoring and permit application data) that represented one operation. To calculate the
site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the site that provided self-monitoring
and permit application data, EPA used the industry self-monitoring data only. To calculate the
site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the remaining two sites, EPA averaged
the sites' multiple data sets together. One non-integrated site provided data for a pressure casting
operation. EPA did not use these data to calculate the site-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations because pressure casting operations are not covered by this regulation. Twenty-
six of the surveyed sites did not provide effluent concentration data, and EPA had no sampling
data for these sites. Most of the sites that provided data monitored for lead, total suspended
solids, and zinc. Several also monitored for copper and O&G.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
available for an operation. For the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory,
EPA calculated separate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the
carbon and alloy and stainless steel segments.
For the carbon and alloy steel segment, 12 direct dischargers, 7 indirect
dischargers, and 1 site that discharges both directly and indirectly provided a total of 25
applicable effluent data sets used to calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations. One of the direct dischargers did not begin operation until after 1997. However,
to expand the size of the data set, EPA included this site's data in the calculation of the
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations because the data are
representative of carbon and alloy steel sites. EPA also used data from a pressure casting
operation at one site to calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for the carbon and alloy steel segment of the non-integrated subcategory because
the data represent non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming wastewater characteristics. Table
11-26 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations used for the 15
POCs for both direct and indirect dischargers.
For the stainless steel segment, one direct discharger and two indirect dischargers
provided a total of seven applicable effluent data sets used to calculate the subcategory-specific
11-35
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
average baseline pollutant concentrations. Table 11-27 presents the subcategory-specific average
baseline pollutant concentrations used for the 21 POCs for both direct and indirect dischargers.
Cotreatment
Two non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming sites discharged their
wastewater to cotreatment systems. These sites did not provide cotreatment effluent data or non-
integrated steelmaking and hot forming effluent data (i.e., data from an internal monitoring point
following dedicated in-process non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming wastewater treatment
before entering cotreatment). EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations to calculate pollutant loadings for these sites.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations, baseline PNFs, and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for
the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. For
indirect dischargers, EPA further adjusted the pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account
for additional removals at the POTW. Tables 11-30 and 11-32 present the baseline pollutant
loadings for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the carbon and alloy steel segment.
Tables 11-31 and 11-33 present the baseline pollutant loadings for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively, in the stainless steel segment.
For some sites, industry survey information were insufficient to calculate a site's
baseline PNF; therefore, EPA used the model PNF to estimate baseline pollutant loadings for that
site.
11.12.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the non-integrated steelmaking and
hot forming subcategory using the model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table
13-1 presents the model PNFs for this subcategory. Table 11-28 presents the LTAs for the
carbon and alloy steel segment. See DCN IS 10927 of Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for
more information. For the stainless steel segment, EPA calculated model LTAs for the regulated
POCs only. For the remaining POCs, EPA calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT performance
data (presented in Table 11-29). See DCN IS10933 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record
for more information. For indirect dischargers, EPA further adjusted the pollutant loadings using
Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at the POTW. Tables 11-30 and 11-32 present
the treated pollutant loadings for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the carbon and
alloy steel segment. Tables 11-31 and 11-33 present the treated pollutant loadings for direct and
indirect dischargers, respectively, in the stainless steel segment.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the non-integrated steelmaking and hot
forming subcategory as the difference between the baseline and treated pollutant loadings using
11-36
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Equation 11-5. For the carbon and alloy steel segment, the pollutant removals for BAT-1 were
2,850,000 Ibs/yr for conventional pollutants, approximately 447,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional
pollutants, and 12,600 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. For PSES-1, the pollutant removals were
approximately 1,380 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants and 67.6 lbs/yr for priority pollutants.
Tables 11-30 and 11-32 present the pollutant removals for direct and indirect dischargers,
respectively, in the carbon and alloy segment.
For the stainless steel segment, the pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 17,100
lbs/yr for conventional pollutants, 52,400 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants, and 2,440 lbs/yr
for priority pollutants. For PSES-1, the pollutant removals were approximately 27,400 lbs/yr for
nonconventional pollutants and 722 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. Tables 11-31 and 11-33
present the pollutant removals for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the stainless
steel segment.
For carbon and alloy steel sites, EPA estimated the flow reductions for direct
dischargers to be 14.8 billion gallons per year, an 89-percent reduction. For carbon and alloy
indirect dischargers, EPA estimated the flow reduction to be 137 million gallons per year, a 23-
percent reduction. For stainless steel sites, EPA estimated the flow reductions for direct
dischargers to be 101 million gallons per year, a 48-percent reduction. For stainless steel indirect
dischargers, EPA estimated the flow reduction to be 104 million gallons per year, an 89-percent
reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and
Removals for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming memorandum in Section 14.7 of
the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record, DCN IS 10840.
11.13 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
EPA estimated the pollutant loadings and removals for 84 discharging steel
finishing sites: 63 carbon and alloy steel and 21 stainless steel sites. Of the 63 carbon and alloy
steel sites, 41 discharged directly, 21 discharged indirectly, and 1 discharged both directly and
indirectly. Of the 21 stainless steel sites, 11 discharged directly, 7 discharged indirectly, and 3
discharged both directly and indirectly. These sites represent a total industry population of
approximately 110 sites. One steel finishing site shut down all operations permanently after
1997 and EPA was unable to verify costing assumptions and the site's reported high flow;
therefore, EPA removed this site from the costing and loadings analyses.
For the pollutant loadings analysis, the steel finishing subcategory includes the
following operations: acid pickling, cold forming, alkaline cleaning, continuous annealing, hot
coating, and electroplating. Of the 84 steel finishing sites included in the loadings analysis, 45
sites had cold forming operations, 57 sites had acid pickling operations, 21 sites had alkaline
cleaning operations, 26 sites had hot coating operations, 23 had electroplating operations, 7 sites
had annealing operations, and 3 sites had descaling operations. Most of the sites in the steel
finishing subcategory had multiple operations.
11-37
-------
Section II - Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated pollutant loadings and removals for 29 of the 37 POCs in the
carbon and alloy steel segment and 32 of the 49 POCs in the stainless steel segment. The
remaining POCs (listed in Table 11-1) were not included in the loadings analysis because these
POCs were never detected in steel finishing effluent.
11.13.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each steel finishing facility using
available site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations, the
baseline PNFs, and manufacturing operation production obtained from the industry surveys.
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for the each operation in the steel finishing subcategory.
For the carbon and alloy steel segment, EPA used applicable effluent data for 26 sites: 19 direct
dischargers and 7 indirect dischargers. Ten sites provided survey summary data, 16 sites
provided ISMD, and EPA collected sampling data for 4 sites (all 4 sites also provided ISMD).
For the stainless steel segment, EPA used applicable effluent data for 13 sites: 9 direct
dischargers and 4 indirect dischargers. Six sites provided survey summary data, five sites
provided ISMD, and two sites provided sampling data. For five carbon and alloy steel sites, EPA
had multiple data sets (e.g., one site had two industry self-monitoring data sets and fours sites
had sampling data and industry self-monitoring data) that represented one operation or where the
wastewater for several operations was combined for treatment. To calculate the site-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations for each site, EPA averaged the site's multiple data sets
together.
Of the 26 carbon and alloy steel sites, 25 sites had data for zinc, 23 sites had data
for TSS, and 22 sites had data for lead. All 13 stainless steel sites had data for chromium and
nickel. Of the 13 stainless steel sites, 10 sites had data for TSS, 9 sites had data for copper, and 8
sites had data for lead and zinc.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
available for an "operation. To calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations
for the steel finishing subcategory, EPA averaged available site-specific average baseline
concentration data for the carbon and alloy and stainless steel segments separately.
For the carbon and alloy steel segment, 18 direct dischargers and 8 indirect
dischargers provided a total of 35 applicable effluent data sets used to calculate the subcategory-
specific average baseline concentrations. In addition, to expand the size of the data set, EPA
used effluent data from a Canadian mill to calculate subcategory-specific average baseline
11-38
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
concentrations for the carbon and alloy segment because EPA considers data from this site to
represent carbon and alloy steel finishing wastewater characteristics. (EPA did not calculate
pollutant loadings and removals for this site because it is outside the scope of this U.S.
regulation.) Table 11-34 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for the steel finishing subcategory, carbon and alloy steel segment.
For the stainless steel segment, nine direct dischargers and four indirect
dischargers provided a total of 14 applicable effluent data sets used to calculate the subcategory-
specific average baseline concentrations. For the subcategory-specific average baseline
concentrations for indirect dischargers, data were not available for one conventional pollutant,
O&G. For this pollutant, EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline concentration for
the direct dischargers as the average for indirect dischargers. Table 11-35 presents the
subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for the steel finishing subcategory,
stainless steel segment.
One site in the steel finishing subcategory is a carbon and alloy steel site with a
stainless steel operation. To simplify the pollutant loadings and removal analyses for this site,
EPA used the carbon and alloy steel segment POCs for both the carbon and alloy steel and
stainless steel operations. Since this site did not provide effluent data for the stainless steel
operation, EPA used subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations for the stainless steel
segment to fill data gaps for this site. However, because some POCs in the carbon and alloy steel
segment are not stainless steel POCs, EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline
concentrations for the carbon and alloy steel segment to fill the remaining data gaps.
Cotreatment
Eleven of the steel finishing sites discharged their wastewater to cotreatment
systems. Ten of these sites provided cotreatment effluent data. EPA used the cotreatment
effluent data to calculate baseline pollutant loadings for one site because steel finishing
wastewater comprises 99.5 percent of the influent to cotreatment for this site. EPA did not use
the cotreatment effluent data for nine sites because either dilution water comprised greater than
10 percent of the influent to cotreatment or steel finishing wastewater comprised less than 90
percent of the influent to cotreatment; therefore, EPA considers the data to be not representative
of steel finishing wastewater.
For eight of the nine remaining sites with cotreatment data, EPA had no other
data; therefore, EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations.
One of the nine sites with cotreatment data also provided steel finishing effluent data (i.e., data
from an internal monitoring point following dedicated in-process steel finishing wastewater
treatment before entering cotreatment). For this site, EPA used the steel finishing data because
these data were used to determine that this site achieves model loadings and no treatment system
upgrades are necessary. For the one site that did not provide cotreatment effluent data, EPA had
no other data; therefore, EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations to calculate baseline pollutant loadings.
11-39
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
For some sites in the steel finishing subcategory, industry survey information was
insufficient to calculate an operation's baseline PNF; therefore, EPA calculated a surrogate PNF
to calculate the baseline pollutant loadings. EPA calculated surrogate PNFs by transferring PNFs
from other sites with similar operations and production within a segment/subcategory.
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline concentrations,
baseline PNFs, and production, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for the steel finishing
subcategory using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. For indirect dischargers, EPA further adjusted the
baseline pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at the POTW.
Tables 11-38 and 11-40 present the baseline pollutant loadings for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively, in the carbon and alloy steel segment. Tables 11-39 and 11-41 present
the baseline pollutant loadings for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the stainless
steel segment.
11.13.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the steel finishing subcategory using
the model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1 presents the model PNFs for
this subcategory. Table 11-36 presents the arithmetic mean of BAT performance data for each
POC for the carbon and alloy steel segment. See DCN IS 10813 in Section 14.10 of the
rulemaking record for more information. For the stainless steel segment, EPA calculated LTAs
for the regulated pollutants only. For the remaining POCs, EPA calculated the arithmetic mean
of BAT performance data (presented in Table 11-37). See DCN IS10933 in Section 14.10 of the
rulemaking record for more information. For indirect dischargers, EPA further adjusted the
treated pollutant loadings using Equation 11-2 to account for additional removals at the POTW.
For the site that is a carbon and alloy steel finishing site with a stainless steel finishing operation,
EPA used stainless steel segment LTAs for the stainless steel POCs and used the carbon and
alloy steel segment LTAs for the remaining POCs to calculate the treated pollutant loadings.
Tables 11-38 and 11-40 present the treated pollutant loadings for direct and indirect dischargers,
respectively, in the carbon and alloy steel segment. Tables 11-39 and 11-41 present the treated
pollutant loadings for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the stainless steel segment.
EPA calculated poliutant removals for the steel finishing subcategory as the
difference between the treated and baseline pollutant loadings, using Equation 11-5. For the
carbon and alloy steel segment, the pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 1,850,000 lbs/yr for
conventional pollutants, 758,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants, and approximately
54,500 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. The pollutant removals for PSES-1 were 5,340 lbs/yr for
nonconventional pollutants and 458 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. Tables 11-38 and 11-40
present the pollutant removals for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in the carbon and
alloy steel segment.
11-40
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
For the stainless steel segment, the pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 844,000
lbs/yr for conventional pollutants, approximately 22,040,000 lbs/yr for nonconventional
pollutants, and 36,800 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. The pollutant removals for PSES-1 were
127,900 lbs/yr for nonconventional pollutants and 323 lbs/yr for priority pollutants. Tables 11-
39 and 11-41 present the pollutant removals for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively, in
the stainless steel segment.
The flow reduction for the carbon and alloy steel segment direct dischargers was
11.7 billion gallons per year, a 44-percent reduction. The flow reduction for the carbon and alloy
steel segment indirect dischargers was 305 million gallons per year, a 29-percent reduction. The
flow reduction for the stainless steel segment direct dischargers was 2.84 billion gallons per year,
a 46-percent reduction. The flow reduction for the stainless steel segment indirect dischargers
was 57.6 million gallons per year, a 23-percent reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the steel finishing subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Steel
Finishing Subcategory memorandum in Section 14.7 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record,
DCN IS 10841.
11.13.3 Alternative Methodology to Estimate Pollutant Loadings and Removals for
the Steel Finishing Subcategory
EPA performed an additional analysis for the steel finishing subcategory, carbon
and alloy steel segment, to determine the pollutant loadings and removals using concentration-
based limitations. EPA used the same general methodology to calculate pollutant loadings and
removals for this analysis, except flow reductions were not calculated (i.e., the model PNFs were
set equal to the baseline PNFs for all operations and sites).
Using this alternative methodology, for the carbon and alloy steel segment, the
pollutant removals for BAT-1 were 94,500 lbs/yr for nonconventional and priority pollutants.
For PSES-1, the pollutant removals were 766 lbs/yr for nonconventional and priority pollutants.
11.14 Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Other Operations Subcategory
EPA calculated pollutant loadings for the one direct-reduced iron (DRI) site and
five forging sites that generate and discharge process wastewater for the BPT option. These sites
represent a total industry population of approximately nine sites for the BPT option. EPA did not
calculate pollutant loadings for indirect dischargers because BPT limitations are not applicable.
For DRI, EPA estimated pollutant loadings for 7 of the 10 POCs. Three POCs
were not included in the analysis for the following reasons: one POC was never detected in DRI
effluent (listed in Table 11-1) and two POCs failed the influent editing criteria (listed in Table
11-2). See Section 14 for more information regarding the influent editing criteria. For forging,
EPA estimated pollutant loadings and removals for O&G and TSS.
11-41
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
11.14.1 Methodology Used to Estimate Baseline Pollutant Loadings
EPA estimated baseline pollutant loadings for each facility using available site-
specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations, the baseline PNFs
and the manufacturing operation production obtained from the industry surveys. .
Determination of Site-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
EPA calculated site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations to
determine baseline pollutant loadings for each operation in the other operations subcategory. For
the DRI segment, EPA used two effluent data sets from one direct discharger to calculate the
site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations. One site provided industry self-
monitoring data, and EPA collected sampling data for the same site. For the forging segment,
EPA used three effluent data sets from two direct dischargers to calculate the site-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations. Two sites provided industry self-monitoring data.
One DRI site and one forging site submitted multiple data sets (i.e., the DRI site had industry
self-monitoring data and EPA sampling data and one of the forging sites provided industry self-
monitoring data and survey summary data) that represented one operation or where the
wastewater for several operations was combined for treatment. To calculate the site-specific
average baseline pollutant concentrations for the DRI site, EPA averaged the site's multiple data
sets together. For the forging site, EPA used the industry self-monitoring data and when no
industry self-monitoring data were available for a POC, EPA used survey summary data.
Determination of Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant
Concentrations
EPA used the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations as a
surrogate for site-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations when no data for a POC were
available for an operation. To calculate the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for sites with forging operations, EPA used the three data sets from two sites.
Table 11-42 presents the subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant concentrations for
forging operations. EPA did not calculate subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations for sites with DRI operations because there was only one direct discharger with
DRI operations, and this site supplied data for all the POCs.
Baseline Pollutant Loadings Calculation
Using the site-specific and subcategory-specific average baseline pollutant
concentrations and baseline PNFs, EPA calculated baseline pollutant loadings for the other
operations subcategory using Equations 11-1 and 11-3. Because EPA established only BPT
limitations, EPA did not calculate baseline pollutant loadings for indirect dischargers. Tables 11-
45 and 11-46 present the baseline pollutant loadings for the DRI and forging segments,
respectively.
11-42
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
11.14.2 Methodology Used to Estimate Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals
EPA estimated treated pollutant loadings for the other operations subcategory
using the model PNFs and LTAs as shown in Equation 11-4. Table 13-1 presents the model
PNFs for this subcategory. For the DRI segment, EPA calculated model LTAs for regulated
pollutants only. See DCN IS 10933 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for more
information. For the remaining POCs, EPA calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT performance
data. See DCN IS 10895 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for more information. Table
11-43 presents the arithmetic means of BAT performance data for the DRI segment. For the
forging segment, EPA calculated the arithmetic mean of BAT performance data for each POC
(presented in Table 11-44). See DCN IS 10814 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for
more information. Because EPA established only BPT limitations, EPA did not calculate treated
pollutant loadings for indirect dischargers. Tables 11-45 and 11-46 present the treated pollutant
loadings for the DRI and forging segments, respectively.
EPA calculated pollutant removals for the other operations subcategory as the
difference between the treated and baseline pollutant loadings using Equation 11-5. For DRI, the
pollutant removals for BPT were 1,380 lbs/yr for conventional pollutants and approximately
5,680 lbs/yr nonconventional pollutants. For forging, the pollutant removals for BPT were 3,570
lbs/yr for conventional pollutants. Tables 11-45 and 11-46 present the pollutant removals for the
DRI and forging segments, respectively.
For DRI, EPA estimated a 30-percent reduction in flow. For forging, EPA
estimated flow reductions to be 4.6 million gallons per year, a 27-percent reduction.
For more information regarding the calculation of pollutant loadings and removals
for the other operations subcategory, see the Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the Other
Operations Subcategory memorandum in Section 14.7 of the Iron and Steel Rulemaking Record,
DCN IS 10843.
11.15 References
11-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly
Owned Treatment Works. EPA 440/1-82/303, Washington, D.C., September
1982.
11-2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Risk Management Research
Laboratory fNRMRL) Treatability Database Version 5.0. Cincinnati, OH, 1994.
11-3 American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and
Water Environment Federation. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater 19th Edition, Washington, D.C., 1995.
11-43
-------
Section 11- Pollutant Loadings
11-4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for Effluent
Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source
Category. Volume 1. EPA 440/1-82/024, Washington, D.C., May 1982.
11-44
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-1
Pollutants of Concern Not Detected in Effluent at Any Site
Subcategory
Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant by Concern
Cokemaking
By-Product
Recovery
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (a)
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Cokemaking
Priority organic pollutants
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Benzidine
Benzo(ghi)perylene
1,2-Dichloroethane
Ethylbenzene
Fluorene
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Toluene
Nonconventional organic
2,3 -benzofluorene
pollutants
beta-Naphthylamine
Biphenyl
2-Butanone
Carbazole
Carbon disulfide
Dibenzothiophene
4,5-Methylene phenanthrene
1 -Methylphenanthrene
1-Naphthylamine
m- + p-Xylene
m-Xylene
n-Hexadecane
o- + p-Xylene
o-Xylene
Perylene
11-45
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-1 (Continued)
Subcategory
Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant by Concern
Cokemaking
(cont.)
By-Product
Recovery
Cokemaking
(cont.)
Nonconventional organic
pollutants (cont.)
2-Picoline
Styrene
Thianaphthene
Non-recovery
Cokemaking
NA
NA
Ironmaking
Blast Fumace
Ironmaking
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (a)
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Nonconventional organic
pollutants
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
Sintering
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (a)
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Priority metals
Silver
Priority organic pollutants
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
Pyrene
Nonconventional organic
pollutants
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
n-Docosane
n-Eicosane
n-Hexadecane
n-Octadecane
n-Tetracosane
Octachlorodibenzofuran
Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
11-46
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-1 (Continued)
Subcategory
Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant by Concern
Integrated
NA
Priority metals
Beryllium
Steelmaking
Nickel
Integrated and
Stand-Alone Hot
Carbon and
Alloy Steel
(b)
(b)
Forming
Stainless Steel
(b)
(b)
Non-Integrated
Steelmaking and
Carbon and
Alloy Steel
(b)
(b)
Hot Forming
Stainless Steel
Priority organic pollutants
Tribromomethane
Finishing
Carbon and
Priority metals
Selenium
Alloy Steel
Priority organic pollutants
1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
Nonconventional organic
Benzoic acid
pollutants
n-Eicosane
n,n-Dimethylformamide
n-Octadecane
n-Tetradecane
Stainless Steel
Priority metals
Cadmium
Selenium
Nonconventional metals
Vanadium
Priority organic pollutants
Ethylbenzene
Naphthalene
Phenol
Toluene
Nonconventional organic
Benzoic acid
pollutants
2,6-Di-tert-butyl-p-benzoquinone
2-Methylnaphthalene
m-Xylene
n-Docosane
n-Eicosane
n-Octadecane
n-Tetracosane
11-47
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-1 (Continued)
Subcategory
Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant by Concern
Finishing (cont.)
Stainless Steel
(cont.)
Nonconventional organic
pollutants (cont.)
n-Tetradecane
o- + p-Xylene
Other Operations
DRI
Nonconventional metals
Titanium
Forging
(c)
(c)
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) No POCs were excluded for this segment.
(c) EPA did not identify POCs for forging.
NA - Not applicable.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-48
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-2
Pollutants of Concern That Failed the Influent Editing Criteria
Subcategory
Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Cokemaking
By-Product Recovery
Cokemaking
Priority metals
Arsenic
Nonconventional metals
Boron
Priority organic pollutants
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Nonconventional organic
pollutants
o-Toluidine
Non-recovery
Cokemaking
NA
NA
Ironmaking
Blast Furnace
Ironmaking
(a)
(a)
Sintering
(a)
(a)
Integrated
Steelmaking
NA
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (b)
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH)
Priority metals
Antimony
Mercury
Silver
Nonconventional metals
Cobalt
Priority organic pollutants
Phenol
Integrated and Stand-
Alone Hot Forming
Carbon and Alloy Steel
(a)
(a)
Stainless Steel
(a)
(a)
Non-Integrated
Steelmaking and Hot
Forming
Carbon and Alloy Steel
(c)
(c)
Stainless Steel
(a)
(a)
Finishing
Carbon and Alloy Steel
(a)
(a)
Stainless Steel
(a)
(a)
11-49
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-2 (Continued)
Subcategory
Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Other Operations
DRI
Conventional pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (b)
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH)
Forging
(d)
(d)
(a) EPA did not apply the influent editing criteria to these segments. See Section 14.7, DCN IS 10834 in the rulemaking record
for a detailed discussion of application of the influent editing criteria.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(c) EPA did not apply the influent editing criteria to the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming carbon and alloy segment
because paired data were not available.
(d) EPA did not identify POCs for forging.
NA - Not applicable.
Note: This table does not include POCs listed in Table 11-1.
11-50
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-3
POTW Percent Removals
Pollutant
Percent
Removal
Data Source
Conventional Pollutants
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day
(BOD5) - carbonaceous
91%
Transfer from BOD5 (50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML)
Oil and grease (O&G)
87%
Used O&G percent removal (50-POTW Study - data >10
x ML)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
90%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Amenable cyanide
93%
Transfer from WAD cyanide
Ammonia as nitrogen
39%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
81%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Fluoride
54%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewaters)
Nitrate/nitrite (N02 + N03-N)
90%
Transfer from TKN
Thiocyanate
70%
Transfer from total cyanide
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
90%
Based on data from POTWs receiving iron and steel
wastewater
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
87%
Used O&G percent removal (50-POTW Study - data >10
X ML)
Total organic carbon (TOC)
70%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Total phenols
77%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
93%
Based on data from POTW receiving iron and steel
wastewater
Priority Metals
Antimony
67%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Arsenic
66%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Beryllium
61%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
Cadmium
90%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Chromium
80%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Copper
84%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Lead
77%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Mercury
90%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Nickel
51%
50-POTW Study - data > 10 x ML
Selenium
34%
NRMRL Treatability Database (domestic wastewater)
Silver
88%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Thallium
54%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Zinc
79%
50-POTW Study - data >10 * ML
11-51
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-3 (Continued)
Pollutant
Percent
Removal
Data Source
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
91%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Barium
55%
50-POTW Study - data >2 * ML
Boron
24%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Cobalt
10%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Hexavalent chromium
6%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Iron
82%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Magnesium
14%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Manganese
36%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Molybdenum
19%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Tin
43%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Titanium
92%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Vanadium
8%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Priority Organic Pollutants
Benzene
95%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Benzo(a)anthracene
98%
NRMRL Treatability Database (domestic wastewater)
Benzo(a)pyrene
95%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
95%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
95%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
60%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Chrysene
97%
NRMRL Treatability Database (domestic wastewater)
2,4-Dimethylphenol
51%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Fluoranthene
42%
50-POTW Study - data >2 x ML
Naphthalene
95%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Phenanthrene
95%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Phenol
95%
50-POTW Study - data >10 x ML
Pyrene
84%
NRMRL Treatability Database (domestic wastewater)
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
alpha-Terpineol
94%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
Aniline
93%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Benzyl alcohol
78%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Carbazole
62%
CWT Project: Generic Removal Group: Anilines
Dibenzofuran
98%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Hexanoic acid
84%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
2-Methylnaphthalene
28%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
n-Dodecane
95%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
n-Eicosane
92%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
11-52
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-3 (Continued)
Pollutant
Percent
Removal
Data Source
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants (cont.)
n-Hexadecane
71%
CWT Project: Generic Removal Group: n-Pariffins
n-Octadecane
71%
CWT Project: Generic Removal Group: n-Pariffins
o-Cresol
53%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
o-Toluidine
93%
Transfer from aniline
p-Cresol
72%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
2-Phenylnaphthalene
85%
Centralized Water Treaters (CWT) Project - no source
listed
2-Propanone
84%
NRMRL Treatability Database (all wastewater)
Pyridine
95%
NRMRL Treatability Database (industrial wastewater)
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
83%
Transfer from 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDF (Source: NRMRL)
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
70%
50-POTW Study - data >10 * ML
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA's Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works and U.S. EPA's NRMRL
Treatability Database (References 11-1 and 11-2).
11-53
-------
Section 11- Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-4
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Cokemaking Subcategory
By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Segment (a)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of
Discharge
Ammonia Stills
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Ammonia Stills and
Biological Treatment
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day
(BOD5) - carbonaceous
Direct
(b)
69.4
Indirect
1,220
69.4 (c)
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
(b)
5.15
Indirect
21.8
5.15 (c)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
(b)
52.5
Indirect
69.8
143
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (d)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
95.6
52.9
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
2,414
357
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct, Indirect
0.670
81.2
Thiocyanate
Direct, Indirect
234
6.45
Total Kj eldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Direct, Indirect
190
87.7
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct, Indirect
798
27.7
Total phenols
Direct, Indirect
277
2.01
Weak acid dissociable (WAD)
cyanide
Direct, Indirect
0.974
2.58
Priority Metals
Mercury
Direct, Indirect
0.00179
0.000473
Selenium
Direct, Indirect
0.826
0.496
Priority Organic Pollutants
Benzene
Direct, Indirect
0.0106
0.00512
Benzo(a)anthracene
Direct, Indirect
0.0686
0.0125
Benzo(a)pyrene
Direct, Indirect
0.0683
0.0112
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Direct, Indirect
0.0610
0.00761
Chrysene
Direct, Indirect
0.0756
0.0123
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Direct, Indirect
1.77
0.00910
11-54
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-4 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of
Discharge
Ammonia Stills
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Ammonia Stills and
Biological Treatment
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Priority Organic Pollutants (cont.)
Fluoranthene
Direct, Indirect
0.0834
0.0150
Naphthalene
Direct, Indirect
0.0504
0.0117
Phenanthrene
Direct, Indirect
0.0553
0.00910
Phenol
Direct, Indirect
131
0.0276
Pyrene
Direct, Indirect
0.0661
0.0139
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Aniline
Direct, Indirect
2.93
0.0102
Dibenzofuran
Direct, Indirect
0.0338
0.0101
2-Methylnaphthalene
Direct, Indirect
0.0336
0.0147
n-Eicosane
Direct, Indirect
0.191
0.0101
n-Octadecane
Direct, Indirect
0.386
0.0101
o-Cresol
Direct, Indirect
12.3
0.0120
p-Cresol
Direct, Indirect
71.4
0.0103
2-Phenylnaphthalene
Direct, Indirect
0.0676
0.0102
2-Propanone
Direct, Indirect
0.0547
0.0506
Pyridine
Direct, Indirect
0.160
0.0103
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
Direct, Indirect
2.80
5.58
(a) EPA used these averages for the BAT-1 and PSES-1 options only.
(b) All of the sites that have ammonia still treatment only are indirect dischargers.
(c) For these conventional pollutants, no data were available for indirect sites; therefore, EPA used the average
baseline concentration for the direct discharging sites for indirect discharging sites.
(d) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Fo11ow-Ud to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-55
-------
Section 11- Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-5
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline
Load
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1
Treated
Load
Discharged
to Surface
Water
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-3
Treated
Load
Discharged
to Surface
Water
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1
Pollutant
Removals
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-3
Pollutant
Removals
(Ibs/yr) (a)
Conventional Pollutants
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day
(BOD5) - carbonaceous
1,250,000
907,000
735,000
343,000
674,000
Oil and grease (O&G)
90,600
87,600
87,600
2,980
2,980
Total suspended solids (TSS)
593,000
593,000
203,000
0
390,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
1,930,000
1,590,000
1,030,000
346,000
1,070,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
453,000
35,700
4,370
417,000
448,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
3,650,000
985,000
853,000
2,670,000
2,800,000
Nitrate/nitrite
1,740,000
1,740,000
1,400,000
0
331,000
Thiocyanate
311,000
10,200
10,200
301,000
301,000
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
1,140,000
491,000
465,000
653,000
680,000
Total organic carbon (TOC)
379,000
260,000
255,000
119,000
124,000
Total phenols
1,720
742
539
979
1,180
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
37,400
37,100
35,400
363
363
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (c)
2,500,000
1,790,000
1,410,000
718,000
1,080,000
Priority Metals
Mercury
4.71
3.41
3.34
1.31
1.38
Selenium
4,800
3,260
3,170
1,550
1,630
Total Priority Metals
4,800
3,260
3,170
1,550
1,630
Priority Organic Pollutants
Benzene
78.7
67.5
70
11.3
11.8
Benzo(a)anthracene
178
156
154
21.4
4.67
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
138
136
135
2.62
3.39
Benzo(a)pyrene
164
135
134
29.3
28.8
Chrysene
176
156
154
20
4.67
2,4-Dimethylphenol
154
151
158
3.42
4.57
11-56
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-5 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline
Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1
Treated
Load
Discharged
to Surface
Water
(lbs/yr)
BAT-3
Treated
Load
Discharged
to Surface
Water
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
BAT-3
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr) (a)
Priority Organic Pollutants (cont)
Fluoranthene
198
159
156
39.6
4.26
Naphthalene
184
163
144
21.7
47
Phenanthrene
154
151
158
3.42
4.57
Phenol
320
192
158
128
163
Pyrene
190
158
156
31.5
4.26
Total Priority Organic Pollutants
1,930
1,620
1,580
312
281
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Aniline
164
158
158
5.54
6.1
o-Cresol
180
156
155
23.6
25
p-Cresol
160
154
154
5.15
5.72
Dibenzofuran
162
158
158
4.08
4.57
n-Eicosane
162
158
157
4.36
5.17
2-Methylnaphthalene
216
161
158
54.9
57.2
n-Octadecane
162
158
157
4.36
5.17
2-Phenylnaphthalene
163
159
159
3.77
3.78
2-Propanone
811
787
786
24.2
24.5
Pyridine
165
158
158
6.28
6.86
Total Nonconventional Organic
Pollutants
2,350
2,210
2,200
136
144
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cvanide
74,400
46.100
19.600
28.300
55,000
(a) BAT-3 pollutant removals were calculated using a previous version of the estimated baseline pollutant loadings.
Hence, the listed pollutant removals do not exactly reflect the difference between the baseline pollutant loadings and
the BAT-3 treated pollutant loadings. This minor inconsistency has no impact on EPA's decisions for this industry
segment for the final rule. See document number IS 10831 in Section 14.7 of the rulemaking record for further
information.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(c) Total does not include COD, TKN, TOC, total phenols, or WAD cyanide.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-57
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-6
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the By-Product Recovery Cokemaking Segment
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1
Treated Load
Discharged
from POTW
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-3
Treated Load
Discharged
from POTW
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
PSES-3
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr) (a)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
301,000
106,000
8,050
195,000
293,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
1,440,000
998,000
64,600
443,000
1,380,000
Nitrate/nitrite
15,600
15,600
15,600
28.1
28.1
Thiocyanate
193,000
172,000
1,410
20,900
191,000
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
73,600
65,600
13,900
8,040
59,700
Total organic carbon (TOC)
732,000
598,000
23,600
134,000
709,000
Total phenols
204,000
166,000
34.7
38,600
204,000
Weak acid dissociable (WAD)
cyanide
411
383
383
28
28
Total Nonconventional
Pollutants, Other (c)
510,000
294,000
25,100
216,000
484,000
Priority Metals
Mercury
0.618
0.484
0.112
0.134
0.506
Selenium
2,400
2,170
908
228
1,490
Total Priority Metals
2,400
2,170
908
228
1,490
Priority Organic Pollutants
Benzene
2.01
1.4
1.14
0.605
0.897
Benzo(a)anthracene
4.58
3.86
0.894
0.718
3.6
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
9.85
7.84
2.01
2.01
7.84
Benzo(a)pyrene
11.3
6.96
2.24
4.33
9.04
Chrysene
7.49
6.1
1.34
1.39
6.02
2,4-Dimethylphenol
2,600
1,390
22
1,210
2,580
Fluoranthene
161
82.7
26
78.6
130
Naphthalene
8.01
4.08
2.25
3.93
5.81
Phenanthrene
9.14
5.74
2.24
3.39
6.99
Phenol
15,200
15,200
2.24
0
15,200
Pyrene
35.9
20.7
7.18
15.2
27.5
Total Priority Organic
Pollutants
18,000
16,700
69.5
1,320
18,000
11-58
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-6 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1
Treated Load
Discharged
from POTW
(lbs/yr)
PSES-3
Treated Load
Discharged
from POTW
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
PSES-3
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr) (a)
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Aniline
615
492
3.14
123
612
o-Cresol
17,300
14,900
21.1
2,420
17,300
p-Cresol
59,800
18,900
12.6
41,000
59,800
Dibenzofuran
2.41
1.93
0.898
0.477
1.51
n-Eicosane
47.3
36
3.58
11.2
43.7
2-MethylnaphthaIene
92.5
48.5
32.4
44
60.1
n-Octadecane
341
114
13
226
328
2-Phenylnaphthalene
33.2
29
6.82
4.25
26.4
2-Propanone
41.6
36.4
35.8
5.16
5.79
Pyridine
24.9
11
2.24
13.9
22.7
Total Nonconventional Organic
Pollutants
78,300
34,600
132
43,800
78,200
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
8,130
5,290
3,280
2,840
4,860
(a) PSES-3 pollutant removals were calculated using a previous version of the estimated baseline pollutant loadings.
Hence, the listed pollutant removals do not exactly reflect the difference between the baseline pollutant loadings and
the PSES-3 treated pollutant loadings. This minor inconsistency has no impact on EPA's decisions for this industry
segment for the final rule. See document number IS 10831 in Section 14.7 of the rulemaking record for further
information.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(c) Total does not include COD, TKN, TOC, total phenols, or WAD cyanide.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-59
-------
Section II - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-7
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Ironmaking Subcategory
Blast Furnace Wastewater Only
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
5.54
Indirect
5.54 (a)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
34.8
Indirect
34.8 (a)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
Direct, Indirect
0.105
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
60.1
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
274
Fluoride
Direct, Indirect
9.89
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct, Indirect
2.45
Thiocyanate
Direct, Indirect
0.148
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Direct, Indirect
112
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct, Indirect
12.6
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
Direct, Indirect
0.0150
Priority Metals
Chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.00691
Copper
Direct, Indirect
0.00654
Lead
Direct, Indirect
0.0541
Nickel
Direct, Indirect
0.0214
Selenium
Direct, Indirect
0.003
Zinc
Direct, Indirect
0.779
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct, Indirect
0.171
Boron
Direct, Indirect
1.21
Iron
Direct, Indirect
4.29
Magnesium
Direct, Indirect
59.5
Manganese
Direct, Indirect
1.76
Molybdenum
Direct, Indirect
0.0408
Titanium
Direct, Indirect
0.00380
11-60
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-7 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration (mg/L)
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
Direct, Indirect 0.606
(a) The indirect discharger did not provide data for these conventional POCs; therefore, EPA used the average
baseline concentrations for the direct dischargers.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-61
-------
Section II - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-8
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Ironmaking Subcategory
Commingled Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge (a)
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
5.88
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
28.7
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
Direct
0.0240
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct
58.8
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct
42.6
Fluoride
Direct
14.1
Nitrate/ni trite
Direct
7.29
Thiocyanate
Direct
0.116
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Direct
51.6
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct
12.9
Total phenols
Direct
0.0431
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
Direct
0.0179
Priority Metals
Arsenic
Direct
0.00460
Cadmium
Direct
0.00627
Chromium
Direct
0.0151
Copper
Direct
0.00798
Lead
Direct
0.0374
Mercury
Direct
0.000221
Nickel
Direct
0.0159
Selenium
Direct
0.00701
Thallium
Direct
0.0577
Zinc
Direct
0.611
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct
0.586
Boron
Direct
0.363
Iron
Direct
2.62
Magnesium
Direct
27.1
11-62
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-8 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge (a)
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Nonconventional Metals (cont)
Manganese
Direct
0.307
Molybdenum
Direct
0.0381
Titanium
Direct
0.00160
Priority Organic Pollutants
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Direct
0.0100
Fluoranthene
Direct
0.0100
4-Nitrophenol
Direct
0.0500
Phenanthrene
Direct
0.0100
Phenol
Direct
0.0100
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
1.24E-07
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
9.40E-08
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
8.24E-08
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
6.80E-08
o-Cresol
Direct
0.0100
p-Cresol
Direct
0.0100
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
9.16E-08
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
1.27E-07
Pyridine
Direct
0.0215
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
8.13E-08
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
Direct
0.0696
(a) Sites with commingled blast fumace and sintering wastewater included only direct dischargers; therefore, EPA
did not calculate average baseline pollutant concentrations for indirect dischargers.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
Note: For sites with commingled blast fumace and sintering wastewater, EPA combined the POCs for the blast
furnace and sintering segments.
11-63
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-9
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Ironmaking Subcategory
Blast Furnace Wastewater Only
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
BAT-1
5.88 (a)
PSES-1
5.88 (a)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BAT-1
18.7
PSES-1
18.7
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
BAT-1
0.0244
PSES-1
0.0244
Ammonia as nitrogen
BAT-1
0.280 (a)
PSES-1
72.5 (a)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BAT-1
42.9
PSES-1
42.9
Fluoride
BAT-1
14.0
PSES-1
14.0
Nitrate/nitrite
BAT-1
7.31
PSES-1
7.31
Thiocyanate
BAT-1
0.118
PSES-1
0.118
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
BAT-1
65.7
PSES-1
65.7
Total organic carbon (TOC)
BAT-1
13.2
PSES-1
13.2
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
BAT-1
0.0171
PSES-1
0.0171
Priority Metals
Chromium
BAT-1
0.0149
PSES-1
0.0149
Copper
BAT-1
0.00840
PSES-1
0.00840
Lead
BAT-1
0.00338
PSES-1
0.0169
11-64
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-9 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Priority Metals (cont)
Nickel
BAT-1
0.0160
PSES-1
0.0160
Selenium
BAT-1
0.00750
PSES-1
0.00750
Zinc
BAT-1
0.0368 (a)
PSES-1
0.843 (a)
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
BAT-1
0.586
PSES-1
0.586
Boron
BAT-1
0.365
PSES-1
0.365
Iron
BAT-1
2.58
PSES-1
2.58
Magnesium
BAT-1
27.1
PSES-1
27.1
Manganese
BAT-1
0.308
PSES-1
0.308
Molybdenum
BAT-1
0.0386
PSES-1
0.0386
Titanium
BAT-1
0.00160
PSES-1
0.00160
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
BAT-1
1.45 (a)
PSES-1
0.0725
(a) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated pollutants
only.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Fo11ow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-65
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-10
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Ironmaking Subcategory
Commingled Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Hexane extractable material (HEM)
BAT-1
5.88 (a)
PSES-1
5.88 (a)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BAT-1
18.7
PSES-1
18.7
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
BAT-1
0.0244
PSES-1
0.0244
Ammonia as nitrogen
BAT-1
0.280 (a)
PSES-1
72.5 (a)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BAT-1
42.9
PSES-1
42.9
Fluoride
BAT-1
14.0
PSES-1
14.0
Nitrate/nitrite
BAT-1
7.31
PSES-1
7.31
Thiocyanate
BAT-1
0.118
PSES-1
0.118
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
BAT-1
65.7
PSES-1
65.7
Total organic carbon (TOC)
BAT-1
13.2
PSES-1
13.2
Total phenols
BAT-1
0.0100 (a)
PSES-1
0.0100
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
BAT-1
0.0171
PSES-1
0.0171
Priority Metals
Arsenic
BAT-1
0.00460
PSES-1
0.00460
Cadmium
BAT-1
0.00636
PSES-1
0.00636
Chromium
BAT-1
0.0149
PSES-1
0.0149
11-66
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-10 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Priority Metals (cont.)
Copper
BAT-1
0.00840
PSES-1
0.00840
Lead
BAT-1
0.00338
PSES-1
0.0169.
Mercury
BAT-1
0.000223
PSES-1
0.000223
Nickel
BAT-1
0.0160
PSES-1
0.0160
Selenium
BAT-1
0.00750
PSES-1
0.00750
Thallium
BAT-1
0.0578
PSES-1
0.0578
Zinc
BAT-1
0.0368 (a)
PSES-1
0.843 (a)
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
BAT-1
0.586
PSES-1
0.586
Boron
BAT-1
0.365
PSES-1
0.365
Iron
BAT-1
2.58
PSES-1
2.58
Magnesium
BAT-1
27.1
PSES-1
27.1
Manganese
BAT-1
0.308
PSES-1
0.308
Molybdenum
BAT-1
0.0386
PSES-1
0.0386
Titanium
BAT-1
0.00160
PSES-1
0.00160
Priority Organic Pollutants
Fluoranthene
BAT-1
0.0100
PSES-1
0.0100
Phenanthrene
BAT-1
0.0100
PSES-1
0.0100
Phenol
BAT-1
0.0100
PSES-1
0.0100
11-67
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-10 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Priority Organic Pollutants (cont.)
2,4-Dimethylphenol
BAT-1
0.0100
PSES-1
0.0100
4-Nitrophenol
BAT-1
0.0500
PSES-1
0.0500
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
o-Cresol
BAT-1
0.0100
PSES-1
0.0100
p-Cresol
BAT-1
0.0100
PSES-1
0.0100
Pyridine
BAT-1
0.0193
PSES-1
0.0193
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5.0E-08
PSES-1
5.0E-08
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5.0E-08
PSES-1
5.0E-08
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5.0E-08
PSES-1
5.0E-08
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5.0E-08
PSES-1
5.0E-08
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5.0E-08
PSES-1
5.0E-08
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5.0E-08
PSES-1
5.0E-08
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
1.0E-08 (a)
PSES-1
1.0E-08 (a)
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
BAT-1
1.45 (a)
PSES-1
0.0725
(a) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated pollutants
only.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pojlutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Ut> to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-68
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-11
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Ironmaking Subcategory
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline
Load (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals
(Ibs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
452,000
63,600
389,000
Total suspended solids (TSS)
2,380,000
153,000
2,230,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
2,830,000
217,000
2,620,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Amenable cyanide
6,130
263
5,870
Ammonia as nitrogen
4,770,000
3,090
4,760,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
15,300,000
471,000
14,800,000
Fluoride
912,000
140,000
773,000
Nitrate/nitrite
333,000
62,100
270,000
Thiocyanate
10,900
1,290
9,650
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
7,230,000
618,000
6,610,000
Total organic carbon (TOC)
1,020,000
141,000
875,000
Total phenols
1,250
74.5
1,180
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
1,280
180
1,100
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
6,030,000
206,000
5,810,000
Priority Metals
Arsenic
135
34.3
101
Cadmium
185
46.7
138
Chromium
783
133
649
Copper
580
83
497
Lead
3,970
37.3
3,930
Mercury
6.34
1.65
4.7
Nickel
1,550
172
1,380
Selenium
367
63.1
304
Thallium
1,790
430
1,360
Zinc
55,600
404
55,200
Total Priority Metals
65,000
1,410
63,600
11-69
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-11 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline
Load (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
25,600
4,980
20,600
Boron
72,800
4,010
68,800
Iron
295,000
28,200
267,000
Magnesium
3,840,000
299,000
3,540,000
Manganese
100,000
3,390
96,900
Molybdenum
3,170
414
2,760
Titanium
245
17.6
227
Total Nonconventional Metals
4,340,000
340,000
4,000,000
Priority Organic Pollutants
2,4-Dimethylphenol
289
74.5
215
Fluoranthene
286
74.5
211
4-Nitrophenol
1,490
373
1,120
Phenanthrene
287
74.5
212
Phenol
289
74.5
215
Total Priority Organic Pollutants
2,640
671
1,970
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
0.000616
0.0000745
0.000542
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
0.00157
0.000373
0.0012
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
0.0017
0.000373
0.00133
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
0.00158
0.000373
0.00121
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
0.00154
0.000373
0.00117
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofiiran
0.00149
0.000373
0.00112
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
0.00169
0.000373
0.00132
o-Cresol
285
74.5
211
p-Cresol
286
74.5
212
Pyridine
646
144
502
Total Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
1,220
293
925
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
38,000
2,960
35,000
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include amenable cyanide, COD, TKN, TOC, total phenols, or WAD cyanide.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-70
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-12
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Ironmaking Subcategory
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated Load
Discharged from
POTW (Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a
Amenable cyanide
4.86
0.344
4.52
Ammonia as nitrogen
14,400
4,390
10,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
34,400
1,640
32,800
Fluoride
3,010
917
2,090
Nitrate/nitrite
162
49.4
113
Thiocyanate
29.4
7.14
22.2
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
7,410
1,320
6,080
Total organic carbon (TOC)
2,500
762
1,740
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
0.694
0.212
0.483
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
17,600
5,360
12,200
Priority Metals
Chromium
0.914
0.279
0.635
Copper
0.692
0.211
0.481
Lead
15.2
0.784
14.4
Nickel
6.93
1.58
5.35
Selenium
1.31
0.399
0.91
Zinc
11.1
3.39
7.72
Total Priority Metals
36.1
6.64
29.5
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
10.2
3.1
7.07
Boron
608
55.9
552
Iron
511
93.6
417
Magnesium
33,800
4,700
29,100
Manganese
745
39.7
705
Molybdenum
21.9
6.3
15.6
Titanium
0.201
0.0258
0.175
Total Nonconventional Metals
35,700
4,900
30,800
11-71
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-12 (Continued)
PSES-1 Treated Load
Baseline Load
Discharged from
PSES-1 Pollutant
Pollutant of Concern
(Ibs/yr)
POTW (lbs/yr)
Removals (lbs/yr)
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
51.6
4.38
47.2
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include amenable cyanide, COD, TKN, TOC, or WAD cyanide.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-72
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-13
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations
for the Sintering Subcategory
Commingled Blast Furnace and Sintering Wastewater
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge (a)
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
5.88
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
28.7
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Amenable cyanide
Direct
0.0240
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct
58.8
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct
42.6
Fluoride
Direct
14.1
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct
7.29
Thiocyanate
Direct
0.116
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
Direct
51.6
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct
12.9
Total phenols
Direct
0.0431
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
Direct
0.0179
Priority Metals
Arsenic
Direct
0.00460
Cadmium
Direct
0.00627
Chromium
Direct
0.0151
Copper
Direct
0.00798
Lead
Direct
. 0.0374
Mercury
Direct
0.000221
Nickel
Direct
0.0159
Selenium
Direct
0.00701
Thallium
Direct
0.0577
Zinc
Direct
0.611
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct
0.586
Boron
Direct
0.363
Iron
Direct
2.62
Magnesium
Direct
27.1
Manganese
Direct
0.307
11-73
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-13 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge (a)
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Nonconventional Metals (cont)
Molybdenum
Direct
0.0381
Titanium
Direct
0.00160
Priority Organic Pollutants
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Direct
0.0100
Fluoranthene
Direct
0.0100
4-Nitrophenol
Direct
0.0500
Phenanthrene
Direct
0.0100
Phenol
Direct
0.0100
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
1.24E-07
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
9.40E-08
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
8.24E-08
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
6.80E-08
o-Cresol
Direct
0.0100
p-Cresol
Direct
" 0.0100
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
9.16E-08
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
1.27E-07
Pyridine
Direct
0.0215
2,3,7,8-T etrachlorodibenzofuran
Direct
8.13E-08
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
Direct
0.0696
(a) Sites with commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater included only direct dischargers; therefore, EPA
did not calculate average baseline pollutant concentrations for indirect dischargers.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Note: For sites with commingled blast furnace and sintering wastewater, EPA combined the POCs for the blast
furnace and sintering segments.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-74
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-14
Minimum Levels Used as Treated Effluent Concentrations for the
Sintering Subcategory (a)
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Minimum Level (mg/L)
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5E-08
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5E-08
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5E-08
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5E-08
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5E-08
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
5E-08 '
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran
BAT-1
1E-08
(a) EPA calculated pollutant removals for only dioxins and furans for the sintering subcategory; therefore, for all
other POCs, the treated effluent concentration was set equal to the baseline effluent concentration and LTAs were
not needed for this calculation.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-75
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-15
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant
Removals for the Sintering Subcategory Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals
(Ibs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
167,000
167,000
0
Total suspended solids (TSS)
456,000
456,000
0
Total Conventional Pollutants
623,000
623,000
0
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Amenable cyanide
685
685
0
Ammonia as nitrogen
1,720,000
1,720,000
0
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
1,220,000
1,220,000
0
Fluoride
404,000
404,000
0
Nitrate/nitrite
206,000
206,000
0
Thiocyanate
3,320
3,320
0
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
1,470,000
1,470,000
0
Total organic carbon (TOC)
368,000
368,000
0
Total phenols
1,250
1,250
0
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
510
510
0
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
2,330,000
2,330,000
0
Priority Metals
Arsenic
135
135
0
Cadmium
185
185
0
Chromium
427
427
0
Copper
243
243
0
Lead
1,090
1,090
0
Mercury
6.34
6.34
0
Nickel
449
449
0
Selenium
213
213
0
Thallium
1,790
1,790
0
Zinc
18,300
18,300
0
Total Priority Metals
22,800
22,800
0
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
16,800
16,800
0
Boron
10,600
10,600
0
Iron
74,300
74,300
0
11-76
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-15 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Magnesium
775,000
775,000
0
Manganese
9,730
9,730
0
Molybdenum
1,080
1,080
0
Titanium
49.1
49.1
0
Total Nonconventional Metals
888,000
888,000
0
Priority Organic Pollutants
2,4-Dimethylphenol
289
289
0
Fluoranthene
286
286
0
4-Nitrophenol
1,490
1,490
0
Phenanthrene
287
287
0
Phenol
289
289
0
Total Priority Organic Pollutants
2,640
2,640
0
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofiiran
0.000616
0.000285
0.000332
1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofiiran
0.00157
0.00142
0.000152
2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofiiran
0.0017
0.00142
0.000281
1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofiiran
0.00158
0.00142
0.000161
1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofiiran
0.00154
0.00142
0.000118
2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofiiran
0.00149
0.00142
0.0000658
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofiiran
0.00169
0.00142
0.000272
o-Cresol
285
285
0
p-Cresol
286
286
0
Pyridine
646
646
0
Total Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
1,220
1,220
0.00138
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
1,940
1,940 0
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include amenable cyanide, COD, TKN, TOC, total phenols, or WAD cyanide.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-77
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-16
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
15.8
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct
0.375
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct
31.3
Fluoride
Direct
38.7
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct
1.04
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct
8.89
Priority Metals
Cadmium
Direct
0.00493
Chromium
Direct
0.0102
Copper
Direct
0.0173
Lead
Direct
0.0694
Zinc
Direct
0.802
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct
1.07
Iron
Direct
4.41
Magnesium
Direct
21.6
Manganese
Direct
0.288
Molybdenum
Direct
0.387
Vanadium
Direct
0.0134
Tin
Direct
0.00746
Titanium
Direct
0.00716
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-78
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-17
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BAT-1
7.49
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
BAT-1
0.142
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BAT-1
21.2
Fluoride
BAT-1
15.5
Nitrate/nitrite
BAT-1
1.95
Total organic carbon (TOC)
BAT-1
9.14
Priority Metals
Cadmium
BAT-1
0.00100
Chromium
BAT-1
0.0101
Copper
BAT-1
0.0100
Lead
BAT-1
0.0141
Zinc
BAT-1
0.121
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
BAT-1
0.228
Iron
BAT-1
1.17
Magnesium
BAT-1
56.5
Manganese
BAT-1
0.0673
Molybdenum
BAT-1
0.656
Tin
BAT-1
0.00390
Titanium
BAT-1
0.00605
Vanadium
BAT-1
0.0145
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
11-79
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-18
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Total suspended solids (TSS)
1,120,000
225,000
892,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
24,000
5,940
18,100
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
2,670,000
714,000
1,960,000
Fluoride
2,720,000
591,000
2,130,000
Nitrate/nitrite
104,000
104,000
0
Total organic carbon (TOC)
716,000
246,000
470,000
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
2,850,000
701,000
2,150,000
Priority Metals
Cadmium
249
37
211
Chromium
813
277
536
Copper
1,120
289
831
Lead
3,640
416
3,230
Zinc
41,200
3,330
37,900
Total Priority Metals
47,000
4,350
42,700
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
62,800
9,800
53,000
Iron
279,000
38,700
240,000
Magnesium
2,550,000
725,000
1,830,000
Manganese
16,000
2,330
13,600
Molybdenum
33,200
11,000
22,300
Tin
523
144
379
Titanium
571
175
396
Vanadium
1,130
404
731
Total Nonconventional Metals
2,940,000
788,000
2,160,000
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD or TOC.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-80
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-19
Subcategory-Speciflc Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
6.98
Indirect
6.98 (a)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
36.8
Indirect
516
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
0.673
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
57.4
Fluoride
Direct, Indirect
4.37
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Direct, Indirect
6.95
Priority Metals
Lead
Direct, Indirect
0.0197
Zinc
Direct, Indirect
0.0754
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
Direct, Indirect
8.28
Manganese
Direct, Indirect
0.0648
Molybdenum
Direct, Indirect
0.0544
(a) For this conventional pollutant, no data were available for the indirect site; therefore, EPA used the average
baseline concentration for the direct discharging sites.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-81
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-20
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Indirect
39.8
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Indirect
71.8
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Indirect
173
Fluoride
Indirect
5.85
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Indirect
47.7
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Indirect
8.50
Priority Metals
Antimony
Indirect
0.101
Chromium
Indirect
0.0815
Copper
Indirect
0.0861
Nickel
Indirect
1.02
Zinc
Indirect
2.90
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
Indirect
3.43
Manganese
Indirect
0.400
Molybdenum
Indirect
7.21
Titanium
Indirect
0.00651
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-IJp to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-82
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-21
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
BAT-1, PSES-1
6.58 (a)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BAT-1, PSES-1
9.88 (a)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.615
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BAT-1, PSES-1
36.5
Fluoride
BAT-1, PSES-1
1.33
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
BAT-1, PSES-1
5.69
Priority Metals
Lead
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0120
Zinc
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0879 (a)
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
BAT-1, PSES-1
2.45
Manganese
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0308
Molybdenum
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0890
(a) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated pollutants
only.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-83
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-22
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment (a)
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
PSES-1
9.20 (b)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
PSES-1
7.27 (b)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (c)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
PSES-1
44.6
Total organic carbon (TOC)
PSES-1
11.2
Fluoride
PSES-1
14.9
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
PSES-1
7.13
Priority Metals
Antimony
PSES-1
0.260
Chromium
PSES-1
0.0251 (c)
Copper
PSES-1
0.00904
Nickel
PSES-1
0.108 (c)
Zinc
PSES-1
0.0710
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
PSES-1
. 0.658
Manganese
PSES-1
0.0492
Molybdenum
PSES-1
1.23
Titanium
PSES-1
0.00900
(a) EPA transferred LTAs for this segment from the stainless segment of the non-integrated steelmaking and hot
forming subcategory.
(b) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated
pollutants only.
(c) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-84
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-23
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
7,520,000
357,000
7,170,000
Total suspended solids (TSS)
28,900,000
799,000
28,100,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
36,400,000
1,160,000
35,300,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
700,000
36,200
664,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
50,500,000
2,180,000
48,300,000
Fluoride
4,440,000
93,800
4,340,000
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
7,420,000
318,000
7,100,000
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
5,140,000
130,000
5,000,000
Priority Metals
Lead
20,400
767
19,600
Zinc
75,900
3,320
72,600
Total Priority Metals
96,300
4,090
92,200
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
7,330,000
165,000
7,170,000
Manganese
69,300
1,920
67,400
Molybdenum
55,800
2,540
53,200
Total Nonconventional Metals
7,460,000
169,000
7,290,000
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD or TPH.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-85
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-24
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Removals for the
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated Load
Discharged from
POTW (Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
393
191
202
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
10,400
4,550
5,880
Fluoride
1,920
723
1,200
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
864
405
459
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
2,310
914
1,400
Priority Metals
Lead
1.99
1.55
0.438
Zinc
16.7
8.01
8.7
Total Priority Metals
18.7
9.56
9.14
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
4,710
534
4,170
Manganese
39.6
16.1
23.5
Molybdenum
42.1
21.1
21
Total Nonconventional Metals
4,790
571
4,210
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD or TPH.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-86
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-25
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated Load
Discharged from
POTW (lbs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
4,780
339
4,440
Fluoride
392
38.8
353
Total organic carbon (TOC)
2,080
48.6
2,040
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
161
15
146
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
392
38.8
353
Priority Metals
Antimony
4.86
0.481
4.38
Chromium
2.38
0.0724
2.3
Copper
2.01
0.0209
1.99
Nickel
72.5
0.764
71.7
Zinc
88.8
5.51
83.3
Total Priority Metals
171
6.85
164
Nonconventional Metals
Iron
89.9
6.15
83.8
Manganese
37.4
2.46
34.9
Molybdenum
851
57.6
794
Titanium
0.076
0.00751
0.0684
Total Nonconventional Metals
978
66.2
913
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, or TOC.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-87
-------
Section II - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-26
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the Non-
Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
5.11
Indirect
13.7
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
17.7
Indirect
24.0
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
0.267
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
68.8
Fluoride
Direct, Indirect
0.41
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct, Indirect
0.2
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct, Indirect
16.4
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Direct, Indirect
4.16
Priority Metals
Copper
Direct, Indirect
0.0794
Lead
Direct, Indirect
0.0187
Zinc
Direct, Indirect
0.0862
Nonconventional Metals
Boron
Direct, Indirect
0.0766
Iron
Direct, Indirect
2.61
Manganese
Direct, Indirect
0.304
Molybdenum
Direct, Indirect
0.0318
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-88
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-27
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the Non-
Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
7.28
Indirect
31.3
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
11.9
Indirect
53.4
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
0.688
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
125 .
Fluoride
Direct, Indirect
48.6
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct, Indirect
2.75
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct, Indirect
36.9
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Direct
7.28(b)
Indirect
7.39
Priority Metals
Antimony
Direct, Indirect
0.0653
Chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.180
Copper
Direct, Indirect
0.0807
Lead
Direct, Indirect
0.0415
Nickel
Direct, Indirect
0.783
Zinc
Direct, Indirect
1.71
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct, Indirect
0.514
Boron '
Direct, Indirect
1.05
Hexavalent chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.0852
Iron
Direct, Indirect
3.87
Manganese
Direct, Indirect
0.333
Molybdenum
Direct, Indirect
8.16
11-89
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-27 (Continued)
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Concentration (mg/L)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Titanium
Direct, Indirect
0.0069
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) The O&G average concentration for direct discharging sites was used as the TPH average concentration for
direct discharging sites because the average baseline concentration for TPH was greater than the O&G average
baseline concentration. A pollutant within a bulk parameter cannot be greater than the bulk parameter.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-90
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-28
LTAs for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT Performance
Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
BAT-1, PSES-1
8.43
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BAT-1, PSES-1
16.7
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.615
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BAT-1, PSES-1
36.5
Fluoride
BAT-1, PSES-1
1.33
Nitrate/nitrite
BAT-1, PSES-1
(b)
Total organic carbon (TOC)
BAT-1, PSES-1
(b)
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
BAT-1, PSES-1
5.69
Priority Metals
Copper
BAT-1, PSES-1
(b)
Lead
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00590
Zinc
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0746
Nonconventional Metals
Boron
BAT-1, PSES-1
(b)
Iron
BAT-1, PSES-1
4.06
Manganese
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0308
Molybdenum
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0890
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) EPA did not calculate an arithmetic mean of BAT performance data for this POC due to a lack of applicable
effluent data.
11-91
-------
Section 11- Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-29
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the Non-Integrated
Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT Performance
Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
BAT-1, PSES-1
8.78
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BAT-1, PSES-1
6.36
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.200
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BAT-1, PSES-1
44.6
Fluoride
BAT-1, PSES-1
14.9
Nitrate/nitrite
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0571
Total organic carbon (TOC)
BAT-1, PSES-1
11.2
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
BAT-1, PSES-1
7.13
Priority Metals
Antimony
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.255
Chromium
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0251 (b)
Copper
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00904
Lead
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0143
Nickel
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.108 (b)
Zinc
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0846
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.109
Boron
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.292
Hexavalent chromium
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0164
Iron
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.558
Manganese
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0492
Molybdenum
BAT-1, PSES-1
1.23
Titanium
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00900
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated
pollutants only.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-92
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-30
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
747,000
85,300
662,000
Total suspended solids (TSS)
2,430,000
237,000
2,190,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
3,180,000
322,000
2,850,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
37,700
4,360
33,300
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
9,550,000
926,000
8,620,000
Fluoride
57,100
6,440
50,600
Nitrate/nitrite
27,800
27,800
0
Total organic carbon (TOC)
2,270,000
2,270,000
0
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
571,000
60,700
510,000
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
123,000
38,600
83,900
Priority Metais
Copper
11,100
11,100
0
Lead
2,470
193
2,280
Zinc
11,400
1,080
10,300
Total Priority Metals
25,000
12,400
12,600
Nonconventional Metals
Boron
10,700
10,700
0
Iron
362,000
41,600
320,000
Manganese
43,100
3,770
39,300
Molybdenum
4,420
498
3,920
Total Nonconventional Metals
420,000
56,600
363,000
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, or TOC.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-93
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-31
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
12,800
6,650
6,140
Total suspended solids (TSS)
21,300
10,300
11,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
34,100
17,000
17,100
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a
Ammonia as nitrogen
1,170
551
618
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
213,000
102,000
111,000
Fluoride
82,100
44,400
37,700
Nitrate/nitrite
4,270
2,120
2,150
Total organic carbon (TOC)
63,700
30,300
33,400
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
12,500
6,460
6,020
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
87,500
47,100
40,500
Priority Metals
Antimony
126
73.9
52.1
Chromium
296
156
140
Copper
130
64.2
65.5
Lead
64
31.7
32.3
Nickel
1,250
611
637
Zinc
2,810
1,310
1,510
Total Priority Metals
4,680
2,250
2,440
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
873
447
426
Boron
1,800
931
870
Hexavalent chromium
143
76.3
66.6
Iron
6,130
3,110
3,020
Manganese
538
261
277
Molybdenum
13,700
6,480
7,200
11-94
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-31 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Titanium
12.1
6.43
5.69
Total Nonconventional Metals
23,200
11,300
11,900
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, or TOC.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-95
-------
Section 11- Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-32
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings for the
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated
Load Discharged
from POTW (lbs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
815
629
186
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
65,400
43,200
22,200
Fluoride
946
730
216
Nitrate/nitrite
100
100
0
Total organic carbon (TOC)
24,700
24,700
0
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
2,710
2,090
618
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
1,860
1,460
402
Priority Metals
Copper
58.4
58.4
0
Lead
22.6
12.8
9.71
Zinc
122
64
57.9
Total Priority Metals
203
135
67.6
Nonconventional Metals
Boron
292
292
0
Iron
2,310
1,800
518
Manganese
976
541
434
Molybdenum
230
201
29.4
Total Nonconventional Metals
3,810
2,830
981
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, or TOC.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-96
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-33
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline
Load (Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated
Load Discharged
from POTW (lbs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
422
30.9
391
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
22,800
1,770
21,000
Fluoride
20,500
1,460
19,000
Nitrate/nitrite
288
17.1
271
Total organic carbon (TOC)
10,700
805
9,900
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
906
80.7
826
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
21,200
1,510
19,700
Priority Metals
Antimony
19.7
1.6
18.1
Chromium
32.9
1.59
31.3
Copper
12
0.612
11.3
Lead
9.43
0.478
8.96
Nickel
357
23.9
333
Zinc
334
15.2
319
Total Priority Metals
765
43.4
722
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
43.6
3.25
40.3
Boron
749
58.4
691
Hexavalent chromium
72.2
3.82
68.4
Iron
657
45.9
611
Manganese
204
14.4
190
Molybdenum
6,570
447
6,120
Titanium
0.524
0.0508
0.473
Total Nonconventional Metals
8,300
573
7,720
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, or TOC.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-97
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-34
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration
(mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
nd
Indirect
nd
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
nd
Indirect
nd
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
2.00
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
106
Fluoride
Direct, Indirect
0.931
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct, Indirect
0.700
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct, Indirect
31.8
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Direct, Indirect
6.02
Total phenols
Direct, Indirect
0.125
Priority Metals
Antimony
Direct, Indirect
0.0249
Arsenic
Direct, Indirect
0.00632
Chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.0334
Copper
Direct, Indirect
. 0.0475
Lead
Direct, Indirect
0.0191
Nickel
Direct, Indirect
0.235
Zinc
Direct, Indirect
0.143
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct, Indirect
0.354
Boron
Direct, Indirect
0.0763
Hexavalent chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.0204
Iron
Direct, Indirect
0.854
Manganese
Direct, Indirect
0.0575
Molybdenum
Direct, Indirect
0.0311
Tin
Direct, Indirect
0.0438
Titanium
Direct, Indirect
0.00420
11-98
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-34 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average
Baseline Concentration
(mg/L)
Priority Organic Pollutants
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Direct, Indirect
0.0184
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
alpha-Terpineol
Direct, Indirect
0.0310
n-Dodecane
Direct, Indirect
0.0199
n-Hexadecane
Direct, Indirect
0.0193
2-Propanone
Direct, Indirect
0.139
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
nd - This information is not disclosed to prevent compromising confidential business information.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-99
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-35
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
nd
Indirect
nd
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
nd
Indirect
nd
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
Direct, Indirect
18.0
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
Direct, Indirect
44.3
Fluoride
Direct, Indirect
112
Nitrate/nitrite
Direct, Indirect
506
Total organic carbon (TOC)
Direct, Indirect
10.2
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
Direct, Indirect
6.20
Total phenols
Direct, Indirect
0.0517
Priority Metals
Antimony
Direct, Indirect
0.0140
Arsenic
Direct, Indirect
0.00489
Chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.138
Copper
Direct, Indirect
0.0218
Lead
Direct, Indirect
0.0282
Nickel
Direct, Indirect
0.278
Zinc
Direct, Indirect
0.0315
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
Direct, Indirect
0.0730
Barium
Direct, Indirect
0.0179
Boron
Direct, Indirect
0.142
Cobalt
Direct, Indirect
0.0114
Hexavalent chromium
Direct, Indirect
0.0335
Iron
Direct, Indirect
0.947
Magnesium
Direct, Indirect
21.7
Manganese
Direct, Indirect
0.136
11-100
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-35 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific
Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Molybdenum
Direct, Indirect
0.449
Tin
Direct, Indirect
0.00340
Titanium
Direct, Indirect
0.00440
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Hexanoic acid
Direct, Indirect
0.0150
n-Dodecane
Direct, Indirect
0.0189
n-Hexadecane
Direct, Indirect
0.0258
2-Propanone
Direct, Indirect
0.0502
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
Direct, Indirect
0.608
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
nd - This information is not disclosed to prevent compromising confidential business information.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Fo11ow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-101
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-36
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of
Operation (a)
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
12.1
Total suspended solids (TSS)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
12.8
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
1.81
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
131
Fluoride
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.780
Nitrate/nitrite
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.476
Total organic carbon (TOC)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
36.6
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
6.29
Total phenols
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0754
Priority Metals
Antimony
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0133
Arsenic
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00169
Chromium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0144
Copper
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0122
Lead
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00654
Nickel
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0314
Zinc
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0718
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0876
Boron
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0937
Hexavalent chromium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0104
Iron
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.667
Manganese
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0799
Molybdenum
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0225
Tin
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00833
11-102
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-36 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of
Operation (a)
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Titanium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00433
Priority Organic Pollutants
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0100
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
alpha-Terpineol
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0321
n-Dodecane
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0105
n-Hexadecane
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0117
2-Propanone
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.185
(a) Operation types include: acid pickling, alkaline cleaning, annealing, cold forming, descaling, electroplating, and
hot dip coating.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
11-103
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-37
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Steel Finishing Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of
Operation (a)
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
6.20 (b)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
3.42
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (c)
Ammonia as nitrogen
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
11.7(b)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
14.4
Fluoride
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
16.3 (b)
Nitrate/nitrite
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
93.9
Total organic carbon (TOC)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
3.43
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
5.89
Total phenols
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0500
Priority Metals
Antimony
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00691
Arsenic
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00173
Chromium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.104(b)
Copper
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0231
Lead
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00250
Nickel
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0436 (b)
Zinc
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00474
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0763
Barium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00833
Boron
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.151
Cobalt
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0120
Hexavalent chromium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0800 (b)
Iron
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0693
Magnesium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
1.32
Manganese
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00100
Molybdenum
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
1.03
Tin
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00300
Titanium
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.00400
11-104
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-37 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Type of
Operation (a)
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
Hexanoic acid
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.028
n-Dodecane
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0421
n-Hexadecane
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0669
2-Propanone
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.05
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
All
BAT-1, PSES-1
0.0160
(a) Operation types include: acid pickling, alkaline cleaning, annealing, cold forming, descaling, electroplating, and
hot dip coating.
(b) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated
pollutants only.
(c) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-105
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-38
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
2,030,000
1,090,000
943,000
Total suspended solids (TSS)
1,900,000
990,000
910,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
3,930,000
2,080,000
1,850,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
465,000
258,000
206,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
22,300,000
11,800,000
10,500,000
Fluoride
234,000
102,000
133,000
Nitrate/nitrite
329,000
81,200
248,000
Total organic carbon (TOC)
6,460,000
3,310,000
3,150,000
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
1,340,000
754,000
586,000
Total phenols
27,300
14,600
12,700
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
1,030,000
441,000
587,000
Priority Metals
Antimony
5,250
2,660
2,590
Arsenic
1,260
598
660
Chromium
8,320
4,990
3,330
Copper
8,880
3,990
4,900
Lead
3,870
2,100
1,770
Nickel
46,200
21,700
24,500
Zinc
25,000
10,300
14,800
Total Priority Metals
98,800
46,300
52,600
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
70,100
33,000
37,100
Boron
16,100
8,520
7,580
Hexavalent chromium
4,030
2,000
2,020
Iron
181,000
91,900
89,300
Manganese
12,200
6,480
5,750
Molybdenum
6,330
3,030
3,300
11-106
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-38 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Tin
8,680
4,090
4,600
Titanium
939
529
409
Total Nonconventional Metals
299,000
150,000
150,000
Priority Organic Pollutants
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
3,800
1,930
1,870
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
alpha-Terpineol
6,290
3,210
3,070
n-Dodecane
4,100
2,080
2,020
n-Hexadecane
4,060
2,100
1,960
2-Propanone
28,500
14,700
13,900
Total Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
43,000
22,100
21,000
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, TOC, or total phenols.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-107
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-39
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (lbs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
373,000
185,000
188,000
Total suspended solids (TSS)
998,000
342,000
656,000
Total Conventional Pollutants
1,370,000
527,000
844,000
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
945,000
381,000
564,000
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
2,250,000
793,000
1,460,000
Fluoride
5,270,000
1,680,000
3,580,000
Nitrate/nitrite
25,100,000
8,060,000
17,100,000
Total organic carbon (TOC)
518,000
185,000
333,000
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
317,000
166,000
151,000
Total phenols
2,640
1,400
1,240
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
31,300,000
10,100,000
21,200,000
Priority Metals
Antimony
702
282
420
Arsenic
211
88.5
122
Chromium
6,990
3,020
3,970
Copper
1,160
592
571
Lead
1,070
405
666
Nickel
12,800
4,160
8,680
Zinc
1,270
484
788
Total Priority Metals
24,200
9,030
15,200
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
3,750
1,990
1,750
Barium
902
355
547
Boron
7,290
3,630
3,660
Cobalt
587
316
271
Hexavalent chromium
1,960
825
1,140
Iron
43,400
13,500
29,900
11-108
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-39 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BAT-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Magnesium
1,090,000
306,000
783,000
Manganese
>7,110
1,820
5,290
Molybdenum
23,900
11,800
12,000
Tin
174
87.8
86
Titanium
225
115
110
Total Nonconventional Metals
1,180,000
340,000
838,000
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
n-Dodecane
992
504
488
n-Hexadecane
1,370
682
683
Hexanoic acid
782
404
378
2-Propanone
2,570
1,380
1,190
Total Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
5,710
2,970
2,740
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
29,900
8,300
21,600
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, TOC, or total phenols.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-109
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-40
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated
Load Discharged
from POTW (lbs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
10,400
7,280
3,100
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
168,000
118,000
50,000
Fluoride
3,700
2,610
1,090
Nitrate/nitrite
586
407
178
Total organic carbon (TOC)
79,700
55,400
24,200
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
6,840
4,850
1,990
Total phenols
239
166
73.5
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
14,700
10,300
4,370
Priority Metals
Antimony
71.6
50.6
21
Arsenic
21.6
15.1
6.57
Chromium
53.9
37.4
16.6
Copper
84.9
53.7
31.1
Lead
37.2
25.8
11.5
Nickel
931
652
279
Zinc
247
174
73
Total Priority Metals
1,450
1,010
439
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
265
184
81.5
Boron
500
353
147
Hexavalent chromium
161
112
48.6
Iron
1,270
882
392
Manganese
308
215
93.6
Molybdenum
226
162
64.1
Tin
270
206
64
Titanium
2.9
2.05
0.854
Total Nonconventional Metals
3,000
2,120
892
11-110
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-40 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated
Load Discharged
from POTW (Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Priority Organic Pollutants
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
122
103
18.8
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
alpha-Terpineol
17.2
12.5
4.74
n-Dodecane
9.74
7.2
2.53
n-Hexadecane
55.2
40.9
14.3
2-Propanone
187
131
56.6
Total Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
269
192
78.2
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, TOC, or total phenols.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-111
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-41
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Steel Finishing Subcategory
Stainless Steel Segment Indirect Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated
Load Discharged
from POTW
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a)
Ammonia as nitrogen
22,700
15,400
7,320
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
17,400
10,300
7,110
Fluoride
113,000
58,000
55,200
Nitrate/nitrite
105,000
58,300
46,600
Total organic carbon (TOC)
6,360
3,780
2,580
Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
1,670
1,260
409
Total phenols
24.6
18.7
5.92
Total Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
241,000
132,000
109,000
Priority Metals
Antimony
9.54
6.07
3.47
Arsenic
3.79
2.06
1.73
Chromium
70.3
22.7
47.7
Copper
6.15
4.49
1.66
Lead
39.6
24.2
15.4
Nickel
147
39.1
108
Zinc
26.4
13.1
13.4
Total Priority Metals
303
112
191
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
13.6
10.4
3.16
Barium
16.7
10.5
6.18
Boron
224
172
51.9
Cobalt
21.3
16.4
4.94
Hexavalent chromium
65.1
50
15.1
Iron
694
527
167
Magnesium
38,500
20,200
18,400
Manganese
116
27.7
88.3
Molybdenum
753
578
175
11-112
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-41 (Continued)
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1 Treated
Load Discharged
from POTW
(lbs/yr)
PSES-1
Pollutant
Removals
(lbs/yr)
Nonconventional Metals (cont.)
Tin
4.01
2.96
1.05
Titanium
0.728
0.542
0.186
Total Nonconventional Metals
40,400
21,600
18,900
Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
n-Dodecane
1.96
1.5
0.454
n-Hexadecane
15.5
11.9
3.6
Hexanoic acid
4.97
3.81
1.15
2-Propanone
16.6
12.7
3.87
Total Nonconventional Organic Pollutants
39.0
29.9
9.07
Other Priority Pollutants
Total cyanide
325
194
132
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD, TPH, TOC, or total phenols.
Note: Survey weights and POTW percent removals were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in
this table (i.e., represents what is discharged to the receiving stream).
11-113
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-42
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline Pollutant Concentrations for the
Other Operations Subcategory Forging Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Type of Discharge
Subcategory-Specific Average Baseline
Concentration (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
Direct
3.35
Total suspended solids (TSS)
Direct
32.10
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-114
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-43
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Other Operations Subcategory
DRI Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT
Performance Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BPT
7.51 (a)
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (b)
Ammonia as nitrogen
BPT
13.4
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
BPT
15.6
Fluoride
BPT
14.2
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
BPT
0.0403
Iron
BPT
2.40
Manganese
BPT
1.25
(a) EPA's statisticians calculated this LTA at proposal. The statisticians calculated the LTAs for regulated pollutants
only.
(b) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-115
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-44
Arithmetic Means of BAT Performance Data for the
Other Operations Subcategory
Forging Segment
Pollutant of Concern
Option
Arithmetic Mean of BAT Performance
Data (mg/L)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
BPT
7.78
Total suspended solids (TSS)
BPT
6.50
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Detailed and Short Surveys), U.S.
EPA Analytical and Production Data Follow-Up to the Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Analytical
and Production Survey), and U.S. EPA Iron and Steel Industry Wastewater Sampling Program, 1997-1999.
11-116
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-45
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings and Pollutant Removals
for the Other Operations Subcategory
DRI Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BPT Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BPT Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Total suspended solids (TSS)
4,580
3,190
1,380
Nonconventional Pollutants, Other (a
Ammonia as nitrogen
8,270
5,770
2,500
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
9,630
6,720
2,910
Fluoride
8,770
6,120
2,650
Total Nonconventional Pollutants,
Other (b)
17,000
11,900
5,150
Nonconventional Metals
Aluminum
24.9
17.4
7.52
Iron
968
676
293
Manganese
772
538
233
Total Nonconventional Metals
1,760
1,230
534
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Total does not include COD.
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-117
-------
Section 11 - Pollutant Loadings
Table 11-46
Summary of Baseline and Treated Pollutant Loadings Pollutant Removals for
the Other Operations Subcategory
Forging Segment
Direct Dischargers
Pollutant of Concern
Baseline Load
(Ibs/yr)
BPT Treated Load
Discharged to Surface
Water (Ibs/yr)
BPT Pollutant
Removals (Ibs/yr)
Conventional Pollutants
Oil and grease (O&G)
480 ,
352
129
Total suspended solids (TSS)
5,990
2,560
3,440
Total Conventional Pollutants
6,470
2,910
3,570
Note: Survey weights were applied to the pollutant loadings and removals presented in this table.
11-118
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
SECTION 12
REGULATED POLLUTANTS
This section describes the selection of pollutants being regulated by the revised
effluent limitations guidelines and standards for current Subpart A (cokemaking) and Subpart B
(sintering), and the newly promulgated effluent limitations guidelines and standards for new
Subpart M (other operations). Regulated pollutants are pollutants for which EPA establishes
numerical effluent limitations and standards. EPA selected pollutants for regulation based on the
following factors: applicable Clean Water Act provisions regarding the pollutants subject to each
statutory level; the pollutants of concern (POCs) identified for each subcategory and segment;
and cotreatment of compatible wastewater from different manufacturing operations. This section
describes the methodology and rationale EPA used to select the subset of regulated pollutant
parameters from the list of pollutants of concern.
12.1 Regulated Pollutant Selection Methodology for Direct Dischargers
The list of POCs for each subcategory represents those pollutants that are present
at treatable concentrations in a significant percentage of untreated wastewater samples from that
subcategory; the selection of POCs for each subcategory is presented in Section 7 of this
document. Effluent monitoring for all POCs is not necessary to ensure that iron and steel
wastewater pollution is adequately controlled, since many of the pollutants originate from similar
sources, have similar treatabilities, are removed by similar mechanisms, and are treated to similar
concentrations. Therefore, it may be sufficient to monitor for one pollutant as a surrogate or
indicator of several others.
From the POC list for each regulated subcategory, EPA selected a subset of
pollutants for establishing numerical effluent limitations. EPA considered the following factors
in selecting regulated pollutants from the list of POCs for each subcategory:
• The pollutant was detected in the untreated wastewater at the BAT
facility/facilities at treatable levels in a significant number of samples.
This was the same methodology applied in calculating long-term averages
(LTAs) and is discussed in Section 14.
• The pollutant is not used as a treatment chemical in the selected treatment
technology option. EPA excluded all pollutants that may serve as
treatment chemicals: aluminum, boron, fluoride, iron, magnesium,
manganese, and sulfate (several other pollutants are commonly used as
treatment chemicals but were already excluded as POCs). EPA eliminated
these pollutants because regulation of these pollutants could interfere with
their beneficial use as wastewater treatment additives.
• The pollutant is not considered a nonconventional bulk parameter. EPA
excluded many nonconventional bulk parameters, such as chemical
12-1
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
oxygen demand (COD), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total organic
carbon (TOC), nitrate/nitrite, and total petroleum hydrocarbons measured
as silica gel treated hexane extractable material (SGT-HEM). In general,
EPA excluded these parameters because it determined it is more
appropriate to target specific compounds of interest rather than a
parameter that measures a variety of pollutants for this industry. The
specific pollutants that comprise the bulk parameter may or may not be of
concern; if specific pollutants are of concern, they are usually considered
individually.
• The pollutant is not considered to be volatile. EPA excluded almost all
volatile pollutants because they are likely to be volatilized if they reach
certain treatment system unit operations such as chemical precipitation or
biological treatment. Volatile pollutants are not considered treated by
some unit operations. For purposes of this evaluation, a pollutant was
considered to be volatile if its Henry's Law Constant is greater than 10"4
atm-m3/mol. If EPA could not obtain a Henry's Law Constant for a
particular pollutant, it assumed the pollutant was not volatile.
• The pollutant is effectively treated by the selected treatment technology
option. EPA excluded all pollutants for which the selected treatment
option was ineffective (i.e., pollutant concentrations remained the same or
increased across the treatment system).
• The pollutant is not adequately controlled through the regulation of
another pollutant. This consideration depends on the pollutants of concern
and the technology basis for the limitations. Generally, EPA selected at
least one pollutant from each pollutant group considered for regulation to
ensure control of all remaining POCs in the pollutant group, For example,
when one or more metals is selected for regulation for a chemical
precipitation system, EPA presumes that controlling those metals will
control all other metals considered for regulation.
• The model technology is designed to treat the pollutant. The Agency did
not regulate POCs for which the model treatment technology was not
designed or intended to treat (e.g., chemical .precipitation systems are not
designed to treat organic constituents, so EPA would not select organic
constituents for regulation at options using only chemical precipitation).
EPA did not regulate these pollutants because these technologies can not
consistently achieve the effluent concentrations.
The following subsections describe EPA's pollutant selection analysis for the
cokemaking, sintering, and other operations subcategory.
12-2
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
12.1.1 Cokemaking Subcategory
The cokemaking subcategory covers the non-recovery and by-product recovery
cokemaking segments.
Non-Recovery Segment
EPA established zero discharge of pollutants for the non-recovery segment of the
cokemaking subcategory (BPT, BCT, BAT, and NSPS). Therefore, it did not apply its pollutant
selection methodology to this segment.
By-Product Recovery Segment
This rule establishes BAT limitations for five pollutants: ammonia as nitrogen
(ammonia-N), total cyanide, phenols (4AAP), benzo(a)pyrene, and naphthalene. It establishes
NSPS limitations for the same five pollutants plus TSS, pH, and oil and grease measured as
hexane extractable material (O&G). These limitations and standards are based primarily on
ammonia stills and biological treatment with nitrification for direct dischargers. The regulated
pollutant selection criteria matrix for the 72 POCs considered for regulation for the by-product
recovery segment is illustrated in Table 12-1. The following discussion explains the rationale
used to select which of the 72 POCs to regulate at BAT/NSPS.
• Conventional Pollutants: EPA identified biochemical oxygen demand,
O&G, and TSS as POCs. These pollutants are not subject to BAT
limitations and are adequately controlled by existing BPT/BCT
limitations. EPA selected O&G, TSS, and pH as regulated pollutants for
new sources, however.
• Nonconventional Bulk Parameters: EPA identified and excluded the
following five nonconventional bulk parameters: chemical oxygen
demand (COD), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total organic carbon
(TOC), nitrate/nitrite, and SGT-HEM.
However, EPA established final regulations for the nonconventional bulk
parameter for phenols (measured as 4 amino-antipyrene (4AAP))1 rather
than the proposed regulation of the compound phenol as measured with a
gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer (GC-MS). EPA decided to
continue to regulate phenols (measured as 4AAP) and is not making the
change as proposed. The data in the record show that there are two
primary phenolic compounds present in iron and steel wastewater: phenol
and 2,4-dimethylphenol. Furthermore, the data show that by controlling
phenols (4AAP), both of these compounds are effectively controlled.
Compliance monitoring costs are lower for the bulk parameter for phenols
'Throughout this document and in this rulemaking record, EPA also refers to this as total phenols or total phenolics.
12-3
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
(4AAP) than for the compound phenol. Furthermore, since it takes longer
to obtain laboratory results for phenol (GC-MS), EPA does not want to
discourage routine monitoring of phenols (4AAP) that allows a mill to
identify and respond quickly to potential upset conditions.
Volatile Pollutants: For purposes of this evaluation, a pollutant was
considered to be volatile if its Henry's Law Constant is greater than 10"4
atm-m3/mol. The Henry's Law Constants for the organic POCs (those
analyzed using Methods 1624 and 1625) are listed in Table 12-2. If EPA
could not obtain a Henry's Law Constant for a particular pollutant, it
assumed the pollutant was not volatile.
The Agency has developed National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1990 that controls air emissions from cokemaking operations (58 FR
57898, October 1993). The Agency also proposed maximum achievable
control technology air emission standards for pushing, quenching, and
battery stacks at cokemaking plants. These regulations are currently
scheduled for promulgation in December 2002. By-products recovery
operations in the cokemaking subcategory remove the majority of
hazardous air pollutants through processes that collect tar, heavy and light
oils, ammonium sulfate and elemental sulfur. Ammonia removal by steam
stripping could generate a potential air quality issue if uncontrolled;
however, ammonia stripping operations at cokemaking facilities capture
vapors and convert ammonia to either an inorganic salt or anhydrous
ammonia, or destroy ammonia. The vapors are combined with coke oven
gases and recycled back to the coke oven battery.
EPA identified 23 volatile pollutants as POCs for this segment. There are
essentially three dominant processes that affect the removal of pollutants
from wastewater within the selected BAT/NSPS treatment system unit
operations: air stripping, adsorption to solids or the biomass, and
biodegradation. The extent to which each process contributes to the
removal of pollutants from wastewater can vary significantly. It is a
function of both the physical and chemical characteristics of each .
pollutant, as well as the conditions present in each treatment unit
operation. The higher a substance's Henry's Law Constant, the more
likely that compound is to migrate from water to steam in the ammonia
still. Unlike many technologies considered during the development of
effluent guidelines, this technology does not achieve removal of volatile
pollutants by volatilization into the air. The ammonia still portion of the
model technology captures and recovers the steam.
Consequently, EPA selected one volatile pollutant, naphthalene, for
regulation. EPA retained naphthalene for regulation because it is a
12-4
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
semivolatile compound and a good indicator of removal in the ammonia
recovery system as well as biological treatment effectiveness. The
Henry's Law Constant for naphthalene is 4.6 x 10^ atm-m3/mol which is
slightly higher than EPA's criteria for identifying volatile compounds ~
greater than 10"4 atm m3/mol. By regulating naphthalene, EPA is confident
that the other 22 volatile pollutants will be effectively removed in the
treatment system.
• Treatment Chemicals: EPA identified and eliminated one POC that is also
used as a treatment chemical: boron.
• Pollutants Not Detected at Treatable Levels: 10 of 18 pollutants identified
as Not Detected at Treatable Levels were excluded from regulation. These
pollutants are: arsenic, 2-butanone, benzidine, benzo(ghi)perylene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, beta-naphthylamine, indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene, o-
toluidine, perylene, and 1-naphthylamine. Boron, SGT-HEM, and six
volatile compounds were already eliminated.
• Pollutants Not Treated Consistently: EPA eliminated three pollutants,
selenium, mercury, and thiocyanate, because none of the treatment systems
EPA considered were designed to achieve consistent effluent
concentrations of these pollutants. Nitrate/nitrite was already eliminated.
• Pollutants Controlled By Regulation of Others: EPA eliminated amenable
and WAD cyanide because they are controlled by total cyanide. Similarly,
EPA eliminated phenol and 2,4-dimethylphenol because they are
controlled by phenols (4AAP).
The remaining pollutants are all non-volatile organic compounds. As
explained above, EPA had already selected naphthalene, a semi-volatile
pollutant, for regulation. EPA additionally selected benzo(a)pyrene as a
regulated pollutant as an indicator of effective biological treatment. While
naphthalene can be removed to low levels using ammonia stripping alone,
consistent benzo(a)pyrene levels require effective biological treatment.
EPA selected benzo(a)pyrene as an indicator of biological treatment
because of its toxicity, chemical structure, physical properties, and
frequency of detection in cokemaking wastewaters.
EPA then eliminated the remaining twenty organic pollutants because
controlling phenols (4AAP), benzo(a)pyrene, and naphthalene will
effectively control these POCs, too; the chemical structure and physical
properties of the regulated pollutants cover the spectrum of non-volatile
organics found in cokemaking wastewaters.
12-5
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
12.1.2 Sintering Subcategory
For this final rule, EPA concluded it was inappropriate to revise the pollutants
currently regulated in this subcategory. However, it did establish additional limitations and
standards for one new pollutant in the wet air pollution control system segment of the sintering
subcategory, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF). The limit for this pollutant is based on the
addition of multi-media filtration to the technology basis for the existing BAT/NSPS limitations.
2,3,7,8-TCDF is one of a number of extremely toxic congeners of the dioxin/furan
family of compounds. During EPA sampling episodes, several of these congeners were found in
both the raw and treated wastewater from sinter plants operating wet air pollution control
technologies. EPA decided to use 2,3,7,8-TCDF as an indicator parameter for the whole family
of dioxin/furan congeners for several reasons. First, 2,3,7,8-TCDF is the most toxic of the
congeners found in treated sintering wastewater. Second, 2,3,7,8-TCDF was the most prevalent
of the dioxin/furan congeners in these waste waters. Finally, 2,3,7,8-TCDF is chemically similar
to the other dioxin/furan congeners and its removal will similarly indicate removal of the other
congeners.
12.1.3 Other Operations Subcategory
The other operations subcategory is comprised of three segments: direct-reduced
ironmaking (DRI), forging, and briquetting.
Direct-Reduced Iron Segment BPT, BCT, and NSPS
For the direct-reduced iron (DRI) segment of the other operations subcategory,
EPA established BPT, BCT, and NSPS for TSS and pH. The technology basis for these
limitations and standards is: solids removal, clarification, high-rate recycle, and filtration of
blowdown wastewater. EPA selected TSS because it is a key indicator of the performance of the
technology basis. EPA regulated pH because the pH of discharge water is of concern because of
its potential impact on the receiving body of water.
The Agency did not regulate any priority or nonconventional pollutants for BPT,
BCT, BAT or NSPS. EPA only identified ten pollutants that passed the selection criteria for
POCs. These are O&G, TSS, ammonia-N, COD, fluoride, SGT-HEM, aluminum, iron,
manganese, and titanium. Of these, EPA eliminated SGT-HEM and COD because they are
nonconventional bulk parameters. EPA also eliminated the three treatment chemicals
(aluminum, iron, and manganese). EPA eliminated titanium because it was not found in the
effluent at any DRI site (see Table 11-1). EPA eliminated fluoride because it is not effectively
treated by the technology basis and ammonia-N because it was detected at relative low
concentrations in untreated DRI wastewater, 13.9 mg/1. Finally, EPA eliminated O&G because it
was no detected at treatable levels at the model facilities.
12-6
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Forging Segment BPT, BCT, and NSPS
For the forging segment of the other operations subcategory, EPA established
BPT, BCT, and NSPS for pH, O&G, and TSS. Based on an analysis of industry provided data,
EPA determined that the principal pollutants from forging operations are O&G, TSS, and metals.
EPA did not identify any specific priority and nonconventional POCs because EPA lacked data
for these pollutants. Contact water and hydraulic system wastewater comprise most of the
process wastewater from forging operations. The model technology is comprised of high-rate
recycling, oil/water separation, and filtration of blowdown wastewater which effectively controls
O&G and TSS for this segment. EPA regulated pH because the pH of discharge water is of
concern because of its potential impact on the receiving body of water.
Briquetting Segment BPT, BCT, BAT, and NSPS
For the briquetting segment, EPA established BPT, BCT, BAT, and NSPS. These
limitations and standards are: no discharge of process wastewater pollutants.
12.2 Regulated Pollutant Selection Methodology for Indirect Dischargers
Unlike direct dischargers whose wastewater will receive no further treatment once
it leaves the facility, indirect dischargers send their wastewater to publicly owned treatment
works (POTWs) for further treatment. However, POTWs typically install secondary biological
treatment systems that are designed to control conventional pollutants (biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD), TSS, O&G, pH, and fecal coliform), the principal parameters in domestic
sewage. Except for nutrient control for ammonia and phosphorus, POTWs usually do not install
advanced or tertiary treatment technology to control priority and nonconventional pollutants,
although secondary biological treatment systems may achieve significant removals for some
priority pollutants. Instead, the Clean Water Act envisions that implementation of pretreatment
programs and industrial compliance with categorical pretreatment standards will adequately
control toxic and nonconventional pollutants in municipal effluents.
Therefore, for indirect dischargers, before establishing national technology-based
pretreatment standards, EPA examines whether the pollutants discharged by the industry "pass
through" POTWs to waters of the United States or interfere with POTW operations or sludge
disposal practices. Generally, to determine if pollutants pass through POTWs, EPA compares
the percentage of the pollutant removed by well-operated POTWs achieving secondary treatment
with the percentage of the pollutant removed by facilities meeting the BAT effluent limitations.
A pollutant is determined to "pass through" POTWs when the median percentage removed by
well-operated POTWs is less than the median percentage removed by direct dischargers
complying with BAT effluent limitations. In this manner, EPA can ensure that the combined
treatment at indirect discharging facilities and POTWs is at least equivalent to that obtained
through treatment by direct dischargers.
This approach to the definition of pass-through satisfies two competing objectives
set by Congress: (1) that standards for indirect dischargers be equivalent to standards for direct
12-7
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
dischargers, and (2) that the treatment capability and performance of POTWs be recognized and
taken into account in regulating the discharge of pollutants from indirect dischargers. Rather
than compare the mass or concentration of pollutants discharged by POTWs with the mass or
concentration of pollutants discharged by BAT facilities, EPA compares the percentage of the
pollutants removed by BAT facilities to the POTW removals. EPA takes this approach because a
comparison of the mass or concentration of pollutants in POTW effluents with pollutants in BAT
facility effluents would not take into account the mass of pollutants discharged to the POTW
from other industrial and non-industrial sources, nor the dilution of the pollutants in the POTW
effluent to lower concentrations from the addition of large amounts of other industrial and
non-industrial water.
In selecting the regulated pollutants under the pretreatment standards, EPA starts
with the priority and nonconventional pollutants regulated for direct dischargers under BAT for
each subcategory and submits those pollutants to the pass-through test. Those pollutants that
EPA determines pass through POTWs are the pollutants EPA proposes to regulate.
For the final iron and steel rule, EPA revised limitations for metallurgical
cokemaking and sintering operations, and codified new limitations for direct-reduced
ironmaking, briquetting, and forging. EPA conducted the POTW pass-through analysis for all
regulated pollutants for by-product recovery cokemaking. EPA did not conduct its traditional
POTW pass-through analysis for non-recovery cokemaking and briquetting because limitations
for these operations for direct dischargers consist of no discharge of process wastewater
pollutants to waters of the U.S2. For sintering, EPA is promulgating new limitations for only one
parameter, 2,3,7,8-TCDF, leaving unchanged the existing limitations for all other parameters.
Accordingly, EPA's POTW pass-through analysis for sintering is limited to consideration of
2,3,7,8-TCDF. Finally, EPA did not conduct the POTW pass-through analysis for direct-reduced
ironmaking and forging because TSS and O&G are the only regulated pollutants for direct
dischargers.
The following subsections present the POTW pass-through analysis:
• Methodology for determining BAT percent removals;
• Methodology for determining POTW percent removals; and
• Results of the POTW pass-through analysis.
12.2.1 Methodology for Determining BAT Percent Removals
To calculate BAT percent removals for the final iron and steel rule, EPA started
with the same datasets used to calculate the long-term averages (LTAs) for the selected BAT or
NSPS technology option. EPA then used the following methodology to calculate the percent
removal:
2To ensure standards for indirect dischargers be equivalent to limitations for direct dischargers, EPA similarly
designates standards for these subcategories and segments as zero discharge.
12-8
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
1) For each pollutant and each site for which EPA had paired influent and
effluent data, EPA averaged the influent data and effluent data to give an
average influent and effluent concentration, respectively.
2) EPA calculated percent removals for each pollutant for each site from the
average influent and effluent concentrations using the following equation:
, Average Influent Concentration - Average Effluent Concentration , /1 <-> i \
Percent Removal = 2 x 100 (12-1)
Average Influent Concentration
3) If EPA calculated percent removals for multiple BAT sites for a pollutant,
EPA used the median percent removal for that pollutant from the facility-
specific percent removals as the BAT option percent removal.
12.2.2 Methodology for Determining POTW Percent Removals
EPA generally calculated pollutant percent removals at POTWs nationwide from
two available data sources:
• Fate of Priority Pollutants in Publicly Owned Treatment Works,
September 1982, EPA 440/1-82/303 (50 POTW Study); and
• National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) (formerly
called the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) database).
When available for a pollutant, EPA used data from the 50 POTW Study. For those pollutants
not covered in the 50 POTW Study, EPA used NRMRL data. The 50 POTW Study presents data
on the performance of 50 well-operated POTWs that employ secondary treatment to remove
toxic pollutants. EPA edited the data to minimize the possibility that low POTW removals might
simply reflect low influent concentrations instead of treatment effectiveness. The criteria used in
editing the 50-POTW study data for this rule are listed below (same applicable criteria applied in
the Centralized Waste Treatment (CWT) rulemaking):
1) Substitute the standardized pollutant specific analytical ML for values
reported as "not detected," "trace," "less than (followed by a number)," or
a number less than the standardized ML; and
2) Retain pollutant influent and corresponding effluent values if the average
pollutant influent level is greater than or equal to 10 times the pollutant
minimum analytical detection limit (ML).
For each POTW that had data pairs that passed the editing criteria, EPA calculated
its percent removal for each pollutant using Equation 12-1. EPA then used the median value of
12-9
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
all the POTW pollutant specific percent removals as the nationwide percent removal in its pass-
through analysis.
The NRMRL database, used to augment the POTW database for the pollutants
that the 50 POTW Study did not cover, is a computerized database that provides information, by
pollutant, on removals obtained by various treatment technologies. The database provides the
user with the specific data source and the industry from which the wastewater was generated.
For each of the pollutants regulated at BAT that were not found in the 50-POTW database, EPA
used data from portions of the NRMRL database. EPA applied the following editing criteria
(also used by the CWT rulemaking):
1) Only treatment technologies representative of typical POTW secondary
treatment operations (activated sludge, activated sludge with filtration,
aerated lagoons) were used;
2) Only information pertaining to domestic or industrial wastewater were
used;
3) Pilot-scale and full-scale data were used, while bench-scale data were
eliminated; and
4) Only data from peer-reviewed journals or government reports were used.
Using the NRMRL pollutant removal data that passed the above criteria, EPA
calculated the average percent removal for each pollutant.
For the pollutant 2,3,7,8-TCDF, no data were available in the 50 POTW Study or
the NRMRL Treatability Database. For 2,3,7,8-TCDF, the POTW percent removal was
transferred from two other dioxin/fiiran compounds, 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD and 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
HPCDF (Reference: Transportation Equipment Cleaning Rulemaking Record (Section 18.4):
data source listed as NRMRL Treatability Database).
12.2.3 Results of POTW Pass-Through Analysis
The following subsections provide the results of EPA's pass-through analyses for
the by-product recovery cokemaking subcategory.
By-Product Recovery Cokemaking
As explained above, in conducting its traditional pass-through analysis, EPA
compares the pollutant's percent removal by direct dischargers complying with BAT to the
pollutant's percent removal by well-operated POTWs achieving secondary treatment. Since the
technology bases for PSNS and BAT are equivalent, EPA concluded its traditional pass-through
analysis is appropriate to use in evaluating PSNS. The following table presents a comparison of
12-10
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
BAT percent removals and POTW percent removals for the by-product recovery segment in the
cokemaking subcategory using the methodology described above.
Preliminary POTW Pass-Through Analysis
Cokemaking (By-Product Recovery Segment) - PSNS
Pollutant
BAT %
Removal
POTW %
Removal
(Reference)
BAT% Removal >
POTW %
Removal?
Does Pollutant
Pass Through?
Ammonia-N
98%
39% (a)
Yes
Yes
Benzo(a)pyrene
96%
95% (b)
Yes
Yes
Naphthalene
2 99.9%
95% (a)
Yes
Yes
Phenols (4AAP)
2 99.9%
77% (a)
Yes
Yes
Total Cyanide
99%
70% (a)
Yes
Yes
(a) Source: U.S. EPA's 50 POTW Study, with data editing criteria such that only data pairs (influent and effluent)
with influent £ 10 x ML were used. (See W-00-25, Section 5.4, DCNIS04612).
(b) Souce: U.S. EPA's NRMRL database. (See W-00-25, Section 5.4, DCN IS04620).
However, for this final rule, EPA has concluded that it is inappropriate for EPA to
base its PSES pass-through analysis on the selected BAT technology basis for direct dischargers
in this segment. The BAT technology consists of: oil and tar removal, equalization, fixed and
free ammonia stripping, heat exchanger, equalization tank, biological treatment with nitrification
followed by secondary clarification. The selected PSES technology basis for the final standards
(PSES1) is similar to the BAT technology but does not include biological treatment with
nitrification and secondary clarification. Because EPA determined the addition of a biological
treatment system is not economically achievable for existing indirect dischargers, EPA has
concluded that the proper technology basis for the pass-through analysis is the BAT-equivalent
for indirects, in this case PSES1. The following table presents a comparison of BAT-equivalent
percent removals and POTW percent removals for PSES in the by-product recovery segment in
the cokemaking subcategory.
Preliminary POTW Pass-Through Analysis
Cokemaking (By-product Recovery Segment) - PSES
Pollutant
BAT-
Equivalent %
Removal
POTW %
Removal
(Reference)
BAT%
removal >
POTW %
Removal?
Does Pollutant
Pass Through?
Ammonia-N
76%
39% (a)
Yes
Yes
Benzo(a)pyrene
85.6%
95% (b)
No
No
Naphthalene
99.9%
95% (a)
Yes
Yes
12-11
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Pollutant
BAT-
Equivalent %
Removal
POTW %
Removal
(Reference)
BAT%
removal >
POTW %
Removal?
Does Pollutant
Pass Through?
Phenols (4AAP)
25.6%
77% (a)
No
No
Total Cyanide
99.5%
70% (a)
Yes
Yes
(a) Source: U.S. EPA's 50 POTW Study, with data editing criteria such that only data pairs (influent and effluent)
with influent £ 10 x ML were used. (See W-00-25, Section 5.4, DCNIS04612).
(b) Source: U.S. EPA's NRMRL database. (See W-00-25, Section 5.4, DCN IS04620).
In addition, as described below, EPA concluded its traditional analysis was not
appropriate for phenols (4AAP) and ammonia-N discharged to POTWs that nitrify.
Phenols (4AAP) (PSES/PSNS):
Based on the POTW pass-through analysis shown above, EPA would establish
PSNS for phenols (4AAP) for the byproducts segment of the cokemaking subcategory.
However, for this final rule, as explained in the February 14, 2001 iron and steel notice (66 FR
10257), EPA used an alternate procedure to determine whether or not the phenolic compounds
would pass-through for wastewater from by-product recovery cokemaking operations.
This notice explained that EPA planned to determine pass-through for phenol for
the cokemaking subcategory using a methodology previously developed for phenol in the
Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) guideline (pages III-6 and 7, and
Appendix III-A, May 1993 Supplement to the OCPSF DD [EPA 821-R-93-007]). Under this
methodology, EPA determined in the OCPSF rule that phenol did not pass through because
phenol is highly biodegradable and is treated by POTWs to the same non-detect levels (10 parts
per billion (ppb) or 10 ng/L) that the OCPSF direct dischargers achieve. Like the OCPSF direct
dischargers, the cokemaking direct dischargers receive significantly higher influent phenol
concentrations than the POTWs, with the result that the direct dischargers showed higher
removals than the performance at the POTWs. Consequently, EPA concluded it was appropriate
to apply this alternate pass-through methodology for phenolic compounds in by-product recovery
cokemaking wastewaters also and accordingly determined that phenols (4AAP) in by-product
recovery cokemaking discharges does not pass through.
Ammonia-N (PSES/PSNS):
EPA received many comments concerning its pass-through methodology for
ammonia-N. Some commenters noted that many POTWs incorporate nitrification into their
operation and that EPA's POTW percent removal estimates where not representative of those
types of operations. EPA agrees and had concluded that ammonia-N discharges in iron and steel
wastewaters do not pass-through POTWs that nitrify. EPA is defining nitrification capability as
described in the following paragraph.
12-12
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
POTWs with nitrification capability oxidize ammonium salts to nitrites (via
Nitrosomas bacteria) and then further oxidize nitrites to nitrates via Nitrobacter bacteria to
achieve greater removals of ammonia than POTWs without nitrification. Nitrification can be
accomplished in either a single or two-stage activated sludge system. In addition, POTWs that
have wetlands which are developed and maintained for the express purpose of removing
ammonia with a marsh/pond configuration are also examples of having nitrification capability.
Indicators of nitrification capability are: (1) biological monitoring for ammonia oxidizing
bacteria (AOB) and nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) to determine if the nitrification is occurring,
and (2) analysis of the nitrogen balance to determine if nitrifying bacteria reduce the amount of
ammonia and increase the amount of nitrite and nitrate.
Final Pass-Through Analysis for By-Product Recovery Cokemaking:
The following table lists the final determination for the POTW pass-through
analysis in the by-product recovery cokemaking segment for existing and new indirect
dischargers.
Final POTW Pass-Through Analysis
Cokemaking (By-Product Recovery Segment) - PSES/PSNS
Pollutant
Does Pollutant Pass
Through-PSES?
Does Pollutant Pass
Through-PSNS?
Ammonia-N
Yes (a)
Yes (a)
Benzo(a)pyrene
No
Yes
Naphthalene
Yes
Yes
Phenols (4AAP)
No
No
Total Cyanide
Yes
Yes
(a) EPA determined ammonia-N does not pass through POTWs that nitrify.
Sintering
The following table presents a comparison of BAT percent removals and POTW
percent removals for the wet air pollution control system segment of the sintering subcategory
using the traditional methodology described above.
12-13
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
POTW Pass-Through Analysis
Sintering Subcategory - PSES/PSNS
Pollutant
BAT % Removal
POTW % Removal
(Reference)
Does Pollutant Pass
Through?
2,3,7,8-TCDF
99%
83 % (a)
Yes
(a) POTW% removal assumed to be equivalent to the percent removal for 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD and 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-
HPCDF (Reference: NRMRL Treatability Database).
12-14
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Table 12-1
Pollutants Considered for Regulation for Direct Dischargers
Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Bulk
Parameter
Volatile
Parameter
Treatment
Chemical
Not Detected
at Treatable
Levels
Not
Effectively
or
Constantly
Treated
Controlled
Through
Regulation
of Another
Parameter
Conventional pollutants
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day (BODs)
~
Biochemical oxygen demand 5-day (BOD,) -
carbonaceous
~
Oil and grease measured as hexane extractable
material (O&G)
~ (b)
Total suspended solids (TSS)
~ (b)
Nonconventional pollutants,
other (a)
Amenable cyanide
~
Ammonia as nitrogen (ammonia-N)
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
~
Fluoride
~
Nitrate/nitrite
~
~
Phenols (4AAP)
~ (c)
Thiocyanate
~
Total petroleum hydrocarbons measured as
silica gel treated hexane extractable material
(SGT-HEM)
~
~
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN)
~
Total organic carbon (TOC)
~
Weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide
~
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Table 12-1 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Bulk
Parameter
Volatile
Parameter
Treatment
Chemical
Not Detected
at Treatable
Levels
Not
Effectively
or
Constantly
Treated
Controlled
Through
Regulation
of Another
Parameter
Priority metals
Arsenic
~
Mercury
~
Selenium
~
Nonconventional metals
Boron
~
~
Priority organic pollutants
Acenaphthene
~
Acenaphthylene
~
Anthracene
~
Benzene
~
~
Benzidine
~
Benzo(a)anthracene
~
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
~
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
~
Benzo(ghi)perylene
~
Chrysene
~
1,2-Dichloroethane
~
~
2,4-Dimethylphenol
~
Ethylbenzene
~
Fluoranthene
~
Fluorene
~
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
~
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Table 12-1 (Continued)
K)
I—*
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Bulk
Parameter
Volatile
Parameter
Treatment
Chemical
Not Detected
at Treatable
Levels
Not
Effectively
or
Constantly
Treated
Controlled
Through
Regulation
of Another
Parameter
Priority organic pollutants
(continued)
Naphthalene
~
Phenanthrene
~
~
Phenol
~
Pyrene
~
Toluene
~
~
Nonconventional organic
constituents
Aniline
~
~
2,3-Benzofluorene
~
~
beta-Naphthylamine
~
~
Biphenyl
~
~
2-Butanone
~
Carbazole
~
Carbon disulfide
~
~
Dibenzofiiran
~
/
~
Dibenzothiophene
~
~
4,5-Methylene phenanthrene
~
2-Methylnaphthalene
~
~
1 -Methy lphenanthrene
~
~
m- + p-Xylene
~
~
m-Xylene
~
~
1-Naphthylamine
~
~
n-Eicosane
~
~
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Table 12-1 (Continued)
Pollutant Group
Pollutant of Concern
Bulk
Parameter
Volatile
Parameter
Treatment
Chemical
Not Detected
at Treatable
Levels
Not
Effectively
or
Constantly
Treated
Controlled
Through
Regulation
of Another
Parameter
Nonconventional organic
constituents (continued)
n-Hexadecane
~
~
n-Octadecane
~
~
o-Cresol
~
o- + p-Xylene
~
~
o-Toluidine
~
o-Xylene
~
~
p-Cresol
~
Perylene
~
2-Phenylnaphthalene
~
~
2-Picoline
~
2-Propanone
~
Pyridine
~
Styrene
~
~
Thianaphthene
~
Other priority pollutant
Total cyanide
(a) Nonconventional pollutants other than nonconventional metals and nonconventional organic pollutants.
(b) Already regulated for existing dischargers.
(c) EPA regulated phenols (4AAP) also referred to as total phenols as an indicator of the compounds phenol and 2,4-dimethylphenol.
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Table 12-2
Henry's Law Constants for Organic Pollutants of Concern
Cokemaking Subcategory - By-Product Recovery Segment
Pollutant
Henry's Law Constant
(atm • m3/mol) (a)
Volatile Parameter?
1,2-Dichloroethane
9.14E-04
Y
1 -Methylphenanthrene
> 1E-04
Y
2,3-Benzofluorene
> 1E-04
Y
2,4-Dimethylphenol
1.70E-05
2-Methylnaphthalene
7.98E-04
Y
2-Phenylnaphthalene
> 1E-04
Y
2-Picoline
(b)
4,5-Methylene Phenanthrene
(b)
Acenaphthene
9.10E-05
Acenaphthylene
(b)
Acetone
2.10E-05
alpha-Naphthylamine
1.11E-07
Aniline
> 1E-04
Y
Anthracene
8.60E-05
Benzene
5.55E-03
Y
Benzidine
3.88E-11
Benzo(a)anthracene
1.00E-06
Benzo(a)pyrene
4.90E-07
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
1.22E-05
Benzo(ghi)perylene
3.31E-07
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
3.87E-05
beta-Naphthylamine
(b)
Biphenyl
4.80E-04
Y
Carbazole
-------
Section 12 - Regulated Pollutants
Table 12-2 (Continued)
Pollutant
Henry's Law Constant
(atm • m3/mol) (a)
Volatile Parameter?
Dibenzofiiran
> 1E-04
Y
Dibenzothiophene
4.40E-04
Y
Ethylbenzene
6.60E-03
Y
Fluoranthene
6.50E-06
Fluorene
6.40E-05
Indeno( 1,2,3-cd)pyrene
1.60E-06
m- + p-Xylene
7.00E-03
Y
m-Xylene
7.18E-03
Y
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
2.70E-05
n-Eicosane
> 1E-04
Y
n-Hexadecane
> 1E-04
Y
n-Octadecane
> 1E-04
Y
Naphthalene
4.60E-04
Y
o- + p-Xylene
7.00E-03
Y
o-Cresol
1.60E-06
o-Toluidine
1.98E-06
o-Xylene
7.00E-03
Y
p-Cresol
1.00E-06
Perylene
3.65E-06
Phenanthrene
2.26E-04
Y
Phenol
4.54E-07
Pyrene
5.10E-06
Pyridine
2.10E-06
Styrene
2.80E-03
Y
Thianaphthene
(b)
Toluene
6.66E-03
Y
(a) Henry's Law Constants were obtained from the Development Document for the CWT Point Source Category.
(b) Volatility information not available.
12-20
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
SECTION 13
PRODUCTION-NORMALIZED FLOWS
This section describes the data sources and methodology EPA used to select the
model production-normalized flows (PNFs) that EPA used to calculate the limitations and
standards considered for the final rule. EPA considered good water management practices and
decreased wastewater discharge volumes, which it considers to be key components of effective
pollution control, in its selection of the model PNFs. Section 13.1 briefly describes the data
sources (Section 3 discusses this in more detail) and gives a general overview of EPA's
evaluation and selection of facility datasets that are the basis for selection of the model PNFs.
Section 13.2 provides a general overview of EPA's selection of the model PNFs. Sections 13.3
through 13.9 provide detailed discussions of EPA's determination of the model PNFs for each
subcategory. Table 13-1 summarizes the model PNFs selected for each subcategory.
13.1 Overview of Data Selection
To develop the PNFs, EPA used wastewater flow and production data reported by
facilities in response to industry surveys. Specifically, EPA used 1997 wastewater discharge
flow and production data reported for each manufacturing process (e.g., cokemaking, hot
forming, surface coating). In the case of cokemaking, manufacturing process flow data were also
supplemented by reported treatment system effluent flow data.
EPA expressed the PNFs in terms of gallons of wastewater discharged per ton of
production (gpt) for all production operations. EPA normalized reported wastewater discharge
flow rates by production because this allows direct comparison of wastewater discharge flow
rates among facilities regardless of facility size. However, for certain wet air pollution control
devices associated with steel finishing operations, EPA expressed PNFs in gallons per minute
(gpm) since they are independent of production.
Except as noted, EPA used flow and production data reported by all facilities
without editing or screening the data. The exceptions include data from a few facilities for a few
operations where information was insufficient (i.e., incomplete) to calculate PNFs.
EPA used the industry survey data to identify every source of process wastewater
generated by a manufacturing operation. EPA did not include non-process wastewater sources in
calculating site-specific PNFs for the following reasons: (1) EPA calculated the amount of
wastewater directly generated from manufacturing operations that displayed wastewater
characteristics requiring treatment, and (2) non-process wastewater does not directly contact
processed or raw materials as part of the manufacturing operations, and often does not need
treatment. The largest source of non-process wastewater is noncontact cooling water, but other
sources include storm water and ground water. The exception is non-process wastewater that
enters the process wastewater systems as makeup water, is reused as process water, incorporated
into the process water system, and captured in the process wastewater discharge flows. EPA
supports reusing of noncontact cooling water and other non-process wastewater to reduce fresh
13-1
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
water requirements in process operations. Accordingly, EPA included these flows in determining
the site-specific PNFs. In developing the model PNFs, EPA did not consider noncontact cooling
water and other non-process wastewaters that are commingled with process wastewater. The
decision not to use these non-process wastewaters is consistent with EPA's past practice and with
the implementation of effluent limitations in permits and pretreatment control mechanisms.
EPA recognizes that storm water, ground water, and certain other non-process
wastewaters from iron and steel sites can become contaminated with a variety of pollutants from
raw materials and finished products and may require treatment before discharge. Consequently,
EPA provided §420.08 in the final regulation, which allows permitting authorities to provide for
increased loadings for non-process wastewater defined in §420.02 in NPDES permits and
pretreatment control mechanisms using best professional judgement (BPT), but only to the extent
such non-process wastewaters result in an increased flow.
Some sites achieve zero discharge of process wastewater from all manufacturing
operations by evaporation or contract hauling. In these cases, EPA did not use a PNF of zero, but
rather used the wastewater blowdown rates reported by these facilities for each manufacturing
process (e.g., vacuum degassing, casting, and hot forming). EPA changed its methodology after
proposal in response to comments. EPA developed this methodology to ensure that the selected
regulatory PNFs generally would not be based on evaporation or contract hauling of process
wastewater. Other sites achieve zero discharge from a particular manufacturing process by using
wastewater as process makeup water for other processes. In these cases (with a few exceptions
described below), EPA did not assign a PNF of zero, but instead used the volume of blowdown
water from these operations in its PNF analysis. This methodology is consistent with that used
by EPA at proposal.
For certain manufacturing operations, such as acid pickling and alkaline cleaning,
contract hauling of wastewater streams (e.g., spent pickling or cleaning solutions) is common
practice and was considered by EPA in its PNF analysis. In these cases, including wastewater
sources that are not discharged in the analysis would result in a high bias of regulatory PNFs.
EPA did not want to develop a flow allowance in the effluent limitations for process wastewater
streams that are seldom, if ever, discharged. Additionally, for certain manufacturing operations
such as acid pickling and alkaline cleaning, reusing wastewater streams within the same finishing
line is common practice, and EPA considered this practice in its PNF analysis. For example,
pickling rinsewater may be reused as pickling bath makeup water or returned to the process bath.
EPA did not want to double count the portion of rinsewater that is reused in its PNF analysis;
therefore, the Agency did not include this recycle water in its calculation of the finishing PNFs.
Note that these practices generally pertain to only a small portion of acid pickling and alkaline
cleaning wastewater discharges.
13.2 Overview of PNF Selection
This section describes the general methodology EPA used to select the model
PNFs. For each process operation, EPA first performed an engineering assessment of all
available wastewater discharge data for all sites in each subcategory or segment and initially
13-2
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
determined the model PNFs based on the best performing mills within a given subcategory or
segment. EPA generally considered model PNFs that are currently achieved by a minimum of 30
percent of facilities as a reasonable initial assessment of the best performers. Next, EPA assessed
whether all facilities within any given segment can achieve the selected PNFs. For this
assessment, EPA considered a variety of factors that may affect the ability of facilities to achieve
the model PNFs, such as type of process used, products produced, age of equipment and
facilities, geographic location, size, and non-water quality environmental impacts. EPA also
considered combinations of these factors and evaluated the pollutant control upgrades that EPA
judged would be necessary for facilities to attain the model PNFs. In addition, EPA considered
whether any individual facilities achieve the model PNFs and long-term averages (LTAs)
simultaneously (development of the model LTAs is described in Section 14), but did not include
this factor as a requirement in determining the model LTAs and PNFs. EPA adjusted its initial
determination of the model PNFs as necessary based on this assessment.
In response to comments on the proposed rule, EPA also evaluated the effect of
seasonal variation on PNFs. Monthly production and daily flow data were available for five
sites, including four integrated steelmaking sites and one stand-alone finishing site. EPA did not
observe a consistent relationship between season and water use. Although factors such as water
system operation and control, product variations, type of product, maintenance schedules, and
storm-water volumes may mask any association between season and water use, it is more likely
that there is no seasonal variation for these processes.
EPA's methodology for selecting the model PNFs independent from the model
LTAs is very similar to that used for the 1982 rule (and for many other rules developed for other
industrial point source categories) and is reasonable. Comments submitted on the proposed rule
suggested alternative approaches to determine the model PNFs, such as use of various statistical
analyses. However, the results of the commenter's statistical analysis demonstrate that adopting
such an approach would generate unreasonably high PNFs that are not technology-based (i.e., do
not represent the best available technology) and do not consider other factors required by the
CWA. (See EPA's response to comments submitted by the Steel Manufacturer's Association,
DCN IS 10230, comment excerpts 2 and 12). Therefore, EPA disagrees with commenters that a
statistical analysis is the best methodology to develop the model PNFs and has retained the
methodology described above.
13.3 Subpart A: Cokemaking Subcategory
The cokemaking subcategory includes two segments: by-product recovery
cokemaking and non-recovery cokemaking. EPA evaluated wastewater discharge flow rates
separately for each segment as described in the following subsections.
13.3.1 By-Product Recovery Cokemaking
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 23 sites that generate process
wastewater (14 stand-alone by-product recovery coke plants and 9 by-product recovery coke
plants at integrated mills) to develop the model PNF. One site is a zero discharger; this site
13-3
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
disposes of its wastewater by a combination of coke quenching and deep-well injection. The
Agency evaluated these 23 sites to develop a profile of the wastewater generated at by-product
recovery cokemaking facilities.
By-product recovery coke plants generate a variety of process wastewater streams
as described in detail in Section 7.1.1. As a starting point for developing the model PNF for the
final rule, EPA considered the model PNF developed for the 1982 rule. EPA's approach for the
1982 rule in developing the model PNF was to first evaluate PNFs for each of the component
flows listed in the table below. See Volume II of the 1982 Development Document (Reference
13-1). The sum of those component PNFs formed the base BAT PNF of 103 gpt for plants
without biological treatment (i.e., most indirect discharge plans and one direct discharge plan);
and 153 gpt for plants with biological treatment. The production basis was tons of coke
produced and did not consider coke breeze production. For most coke plants, survey responses
for the 1982 regulation provided sufficient detail on component flows to permit detailed
assessments of each component flow.
Process Wastewater Flow Component
1982 Regulation
2002 Final
Rule
Base flows applicable to all plants
Iron & Steel
Merchant
All coke plants
Waste ammonia liquor
32
36
32
Crude light oil recovery
25
28
25
Final gas cooler condensate
10
12
10
Coke oven gas condensate
Not considered
Not considered
3
Barometric condenser blowdown
3
5
3
Steam/caustic for ammonia still
13
15
10
Miscellaneous
20
24
20
NESHAPs controls
Not considered
Not considered
10
Base flow
103
120
113
Control water - biotreatment
50
50
50
Base flow with control water
153
170
163
Optional flows up to maximum amounts shown
Wet coke oven gas desulfiirization
25
25
15
Indirect ammonia recovery
60
60
NA
Unregulated WAPC flows
Not considered
Not considered
Design basis
Coke plant ground-water remediation
Not considered
Not considered
Design basis
Process area storm water
Not considered
Not considered
Design basis
13-4
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Next, EPA assessed the 1997 survey data for each of the component flows to
determine whether 1982 PNFs were still applicable and achievable. The results of this
assessment are summarized here, and detailed support documentation is located in the Iron and
Steel Administrative Record (Section 14.1, DCNIS10362 and Section 14.1, DCNIS10824 in the
rulemaking record). Note that, for this assessment, EPA used a revised production basis of tons
of coke plus coke breeze produced. Coke breeze production ranges widely from 1.3 percent to
7.9 percent of total production for furnace coke producers and 5.6 percent to 8.9 percent for
foundry coke producers. Consequently, EPA believes that total production measured as coke
plus coke breeze provides a more representative and more comparable measure of total coke
produced. Based on this reassessment, EPA found no basis for revising many of the component
flows. For other component flows, EPA considered whether current reported flow rates
warranted development of revised component PNFs.
A principal limitation of the 1997 survey data centered around reported waste
ammonia liquor flows. Waste ammonia liquor represents the moisture in the coal charged to the
coke ovens, generally 7 percent to 9 percent by weight. Unlike other coke plant process
wastewaters and process wastewaters from other iron and steel operations, waste ammonia liquor
is a flow derived from the raw material. Many coke producers reported the total of their
ammonia still effluent flows as waste ammonia liquor. Waste ammonia liquor flow rates
reported in response to the 1997 industry survey ranges from 26 to 270 gpt, with a median flow
rate of 69 gpt. Where data were reported for coal charged and coal moisture, EPA estimated
waste ammonia liquor flows based on reported coal moisture data (Section 14.1, DCN IS10882
in the rulemaking record). Such data was reported for 6 coke facilities. These results are
comparable to those reported in the 1982 Development Document, and are considerably less than
the waste ammonia liquor flows reported in the 1997 survey without consideration of coal
moisture data. Taking into consideration coal moisture data, EPA decided to retain the waste
ammonia liquor PNF from the 1982 rule, 32 gpt, for the final rule.
EPA's assessment of the 1997 industry survey data also supported retaining the
following additional 1982 component flows: 25 gpt for crude light oil recovery, 10 gpt for final
gas cooler condensate, 3 gpt for barometric condenser condensate, and 20 gpt for miscellaneous
flows.
EPA developed an additional component flow of 3 gpt for coke oven gas
condensates, which was not considered in 1982. This represents the average reported flow for
coke oven gas condensates. This additional flow allowance was offset by a reduction of 3 gpt in
the flow for ammonia still steam and caustic based on 1997 industry survey data. The 1982 flow
allowance for ammonia still steam and caustic was 13 gpt. The average flow reported in 1997
for caustic solution from ammonia stills was less than 1 gpt, while the average flow reported in
1997 for steam condensate from ammonia stills was 9 gpt. Thus, EPA selected an allowance of
10 gpt for ammonia still steam and caustic. Finally, EPA developed an additional component
flow of 10 gpt for NESHAPs control water, which was not considered in 1982. This represents
both the median and the average reported flow for NESHAPs control water.
13-5
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
EPA retained the 1982 rate of 50 gpt for control water used in optimizing coke
plant biological treatment systems. This control water allowance is based on control water use
reported by several plants, including one of the sites that operates model BAT wastewater
treatment. EPA compared the PNFs achieved by sites with and without biological treatment,
which demonstrated that sites with biological treatment use more water, in the form of control
water. Accordingly, as described in the February 14,2001 Notice of Data Availability (66 FR
10253), EPA has removed the control water flow allowance from the base PNF. Instead, EPA
provided this additional flow allowance only to those plants that operate coke plant biological
treatment systems. This change will result in more stringent limitations applicable to by-product
recovery coke plants that do not operate coke plant biological treatment systems.
The net result of EPA's assessment was a revision of the base PNF from 103 gpt
to 113 gpt (excluding control water). This represents an increase of 10 gpt from the 1982 flows;
however, considering that the production basis for these PNFs includes both coke and coke
breeze, these PNFs represent a slightly greater increase in absolute flow than 10 gpt.
The final rule also provides additional flow allowances of 50 gpt for control water
for operation of biological treatment (described above), 15 gpt for wet coke oven gas
desulfurization systems (revised from 25 gpt provided in the 1982 rule), and permit writer-
derived flows for other wet air pollution control systems (except those from coal charging and
coke pushing emission controls), coke plant groundwater remediation systems, and storm water
from the immediate process area. EPA's revision of the flow allowance for wet coke oven gas
desulfurization is based on EPA's assessment of flow rates reported in the 1997 survey response.
The average reported flow rate for wet coke oven gas desulfurization was 15 gpt. The final rule
does not provide a flow allowance for indirect ammonia recovery, which was considered in the
1982 rule, because this technology is no longer used.
EPA had proposed to increase the base PNF by 5 gpt to provide an allowance for
process area storm water. For the final rule in response to comments, EPA has changed the
method of accounting for process area storm water to better address the variability in storm water
management practices at coke plants and allow for expected future increases in treating storm
water from process areas. Specifically, EPA removed the 5 gpt stormwater flow allowance and
instead provided a provision at §420.07(d) to allow permit writers to determine a more accurate
allowance for storm water based on each site individually. Section 17 provides guidance to
permit writers on providing reasonable stormwater allowances.
EPA excluded from its PNF analysis wastewater generated from wet air pollution
control (WAPC) devices used to control emissions from operations such as coal charging, coke
pushing, and by-product recovery. For WAPC wastewaters from coal charging and coke
pushing, standard industry practice is to dispose of these wastewaters by coke quenching. The
Agency supports this practice because these WAPC wastewaters, unlike some other untreated
process wastewaters, do not contain volatile pollutants. Only two sites generate by-product
WAPC wastewaters; therefore, EPA did not include this flow in its determination of the base
PNF for the entire industry segment.
13-6
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Finally, EPA performed a comprehensive assessment to determine whether any
factors would prevent a facility from achieving the selected PNF. EPA included the factors listed
in the CWA and others identified by proposal commenters. These factors are process, age of
equipment and facilities, location, size, and non-water quality environmental impacts such as
energy. Each is discussed in more detail below.
Process - Two types of coke are produced at by-product recovery cokemaking
sites: blast furnace coke and foundry coke, with foundry coke requiring a longer coking time.
The cokemaking plants are also either stand-alone or collocated with integrated iron and steel
mills. All coke plant types (i.e., furnace, foundry, stand-alone, and collocated) are demonstrated
to achieve the PNF performance level.
EPA also did not identify any basis to distinguish between merchant (i.e., stand-
alone) coke producers and integrated coke facilities. Although merchant coke producers are
smaller and produce less coke, this difference is accounted for in the calculation of a production-
normalized flow. Furthermore, EPA's analysis shows that some merchant coke producers
achieve the model PNF, demonstrating that the model PNFs are achievable.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - One site began battery operations in
1903 and 1913 and has not had a major rebuild since then. This site's PNF is more than double
the PNF performance level. This plant is unique because of its obvious antiquated operation and
control equipment as observed during engineering site visits. However, EPA determined that
these antiquated systems do not preclude the plant from achieving the PNF performance level.
This site should be able to meet the PNF with tighter operation practices and repairs to the
system. EPA considered the costs required for this site to achieve PNF performance level in its
analyses for the final rule.
Otherwise, sites without biological treatment that achieve the 113-gpt
performance level and sites with biological treatment that achieve the 163-gpt performance level
include both the oldest and the newest systems.
Location - EPA compared cokemaking site location to performance. Sites
without biological treatment that achieve the 113-gpt performance level and sites with biological
treatment that achieve 163 gpt are located in a variety of areas, including arid and semi-arid
regions and northern and southern regions.
Size - EPA compared cokemaking production to performance. Sites without
biological treatment that achieve 113 gpt and sites with biological treatment that achieve 163 gpt
include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts are not a significant consideration for cokemaking. Because the model
PNF has been largely retained from the 1982 rule, any impacts have already occurred. The
incremental non-water quality environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with
achieving the model PNF are minimal. One plant that was believed to have limitations on
13-7
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
cooling tower operations was determined to have no limits or restrictions for cooling tower air
emissions.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the cokemaking sites whose wastewater
treatment performance data were used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. All
three BAT treatment technology sites meet the model PNF.
13.3.2 Non-Recovery Cokemaking
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for two stand-alone non-recovery coke
plants; one of these plants began operations after 1997, but was used in the flow rate analysis to
increase the dataset. Section 7.1.1 describes water use and wastewater generation at non-
recovery coke plants. Neither site generates process wastewater related to cokemaking, other
than boiler blowdown and process area storm water, which are typically disposed of by coke
quenching. Therefore, EPA has designated non-recovery cokemaking as a zero discharge
operation.
13.4 Subpart B: Ironmaking Subcategory
The proposed ironmaking subcategory has three segments: sintering with wet air
pollution controls, sintering with dry air pollution controls, and blast furnace ironmaking. EPA
evaluated wastewater discharge flow rates separately for each segment as described in the
following subsections. The results of this evaluation are summarized here, and detailed support
documentation is located in the Iron and Steel Administrative Record (Section 14.1, DCN
IS10359 and Section 14.1, DCN IS10824 in the rulemaking record). Note that, for the final rule,
EPA decided to retain the subcategorization structure from the 1982 rule, which includes
separate subcategories for sintering and ironmaking operations. Except for sintering, the final
rule retains the limitations and standards from the 1982 rule. EPA promulgated a new limitation
for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran for sintering operations with wet air pollution controls. This
section describes the model PNFs that EPA developed for technology options considered for the
final rule, but ultimately rejected.
13.4.1 Sintering With Wet Air Pollution Controls
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for six sintering plants with WAPC in
operation in 1997 to develop the model PNF considered for the final rule for this industry
segment. Of these six sintering plants, one plant has since changed to dry air pollution control
and another plant has shut down. Of the four remaining plants, three cotreat sintering wastewater
with blast furnace wastewater, and one cotreats sintering wastewater with other steelmaking
wastewaters.
The primary process wastewater source for sintering operations is WAPC system
wastewater, and EPA considered reported WAPC discharge flow rates to determine the model
PNF. Facilities identified other sources of sintering wastewater in the 1997 survey, including
sinter cooling water, belt sprays, and equipment cleaning water. The Agency believes these
13-8
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
wastewaters are discharged with the WAPC blowdown because respondents did not provide flow
rate data for these sources.
Review of the dataset suggests three possible model PNFs: 7, 75, and 110 gpt.
These correspond to recycle rates of 99.6 percent, 96.9 percent, and 90.3 percent, respectively.
EPA rejected a PNF of 7 gpt because of substantial costs required to achieve this performance
level and concerns whether all plants could achieve this. However, a PNF of 110 gpt does not
represent the greatly improved performance achieved by sinter plants since the 1982 regulation.
Therefore, EPA initially considered 75 gpt as the model PNF for three reasons. First, the
performance level is representative of well-operated, high-rate recycle systems. Second, the
performance level represents a significant improvement in performance from the current
regulation. Third, a significant portion of the plants operating in 1997, two of the six plants or 33
percent, achieve the performance level, suggesting it is demonstrated and achievable. Of the
plants that achieve the performance level, one is stand-alone and one is a combined wastewater
treater.
Next, EPA assessed the following factors to determine whether any suggested that
a model PNF of 75 gpt is not technically achievable.
Process - The two plants used to select the model PNF are representative of other
sinter operations in that they generate wastewater from emissions control from the windbox and
other sources typical of sinter plants operating WAPC systems. EPA did not receive any
comments on the proposed rule suggesting that sintering process considerations affect the
technical achievability of the model PNF, nor is it aware of any such considerations that would
impact the technical achievability of the model PNF..
Age of equipment and facilities involved - Review of the dataset indicates that age
is not a significant factor in selecting a model PNF. All of the plants began operations within 30
years of each other. Of the two plants that achieve the model PNF, one is among the oldest
plants and the other is not. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor for selecting a PNF
for sintering.
Location - Sinter plants are located predominantly in the midwestem part of the
country, with one located in the east. The two plants that achieve the model PNF are both
located in the Midwest. However, EPA did not collect, nor did industry provide, any information
or data that indicates location is a significant factor in selecting a PNF.
Size - EPA compared sinter plant production to performance. Sites achieving the
model PNF of 75 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
sintering. Because the wastewater discharged from sintering operations makes up such a small
portion of the wastewater discharged at sites with sintering, any incremental non-water quality
costs associated with increasing recycle rates at these sites are minimal.
13-9
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Finally, EPA considered whether the plant whose wastewater treatment
performance data were used to develop the model LTAs achieves the model PNF or operates a
high-rate recycle system. The plant does not achieve the model PNF, but does operate a high-rate
recycle system (operated at less than capacity). Current NPDES permits issued under the 1982
regulation do not require optimization of recycle systems and minimizing blowdown rates to the
level considered by EPA for the final rule. Although EPA considers the model PNF to be
demonstrated and achievable by all plants, several plants do not achieve the model PNF and have
had no incentive to do so.
13.4.2 Sintering With Dry Air Pollution Controls
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for two sinter plants; one of these plants
converted from wet to dry air pollution controls after 1997, but completed their survey response
based on the revised process. Neither plant reported generating any process wastewater;
therefore, EPA has designated sintering with dry air pollution controls as a zero discharge
operation.
13.4.3 Blast Furnace Ironmaking
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for each blast furnace wastewater
treatment system in operation in 1997 to develop the ironmaking model PNF considered by EPA
for the final rule. Depending on the site, these systems treat wastewater from one or more blast
furnaces; some sites operate more than one ironmaking wastewater treatment system. EPA
calculated and evaluated PNFs for a total of 24 wastewater treatment systems servicing a total of
41 blast furnaces. One furnace was not in operation in 1997 and was not included in the PNF
analysis.
Blast furnaces generate a variety of process wastewater streams, as described in
detail in Section 7.1.2. Blowdown from the high-energy scrubbers and gas coolers are the
primary wastewater source from blast furnace ironmaking, and common industry practice is to
reuse other ironmaking process wastewaters as makeup for the gas cleaning system. Accordingly,
EPA developed the model PNF considered for the final rule for ironmaking based on reported
gas cleaning system blowdown rates.
To facilitate review of this relatively large dataset, EPA plotted the PNF of each
blast furnace water system against its PNF and percent recycle. Based on a review of the plot,
EPA considered 25 gpt, which corresponds to a recycle rate of approximately 98 percent or
greater, as an initial determination of the model PNF. EPA had three reasons for this. First, the
performance level is representative of well-operated, high-rate recycle systems. Second, the
performance level represents a significant improvement in performance from the current
regulation. Third, a significant portion of the blast furnace water systems operating in 1997, 8 of
the 24 systems operating in 1997 or 33 percent, achieve the performance level, suggesting it is
demonstrated and achievable.
13-10
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Note that six ironmaking wastewater treatment systems achieve zero discharge
and four ironmaking wastewater treatment systems achieve reduced discharge of blast furnace
wastewater by using all or a portion of gas cleaning blowdown for slag quenching. One
additional system achieves zero discharge by discharging gas cleaning blowdown to one unlined
and one synthetically lined pond where the wastewater infiltrates the ground and evaporates. The
Agency did not consider selecting a model PNF based on zero discharge because it does not
believe that the practice of using untreated gas cleaning blowdown for slag quenching in unlined
slag pits constitutes BAT, because this practice can cause ground-water contamination and air
pollution.
Next, EPA assessed the following factors to determine whether any suggested that
a model PNF of 25 gpt is not technically achievable.
Process - Since promulgation of the 1982 regulation, there have been many
advances in blast furnace operations, most of which are associated with use of supplemental
carbonaceous fuels to replace a portion of the coke charge and other injectants. The principal
process difference among blast furnaces is raw materials used, which is influenced by many
factors including size (and age) of the furnace, availability of sinter, and changes in prices for
natural gas and other injectants such as pulverized and granulated coal.
Representatives from Ispat-Inland Steel commented during EPA/industry
meetings subsequent to proposal that using pulverized coal injection (PCI) at Ispat-Inland's No. 7
furnace has led to severe corrosion in the Bischoff scrubber used for gas cleaning. Operators
have had to increase the blowdown rate from 43 gpt in 1997 to approximately 70 gpt to control
high chloride levels and minimize corrosion.
Based on this comment, EPA evaluated the reported injection rates for pulverized
and granulated coal (PCI/GCI) in 1997. All but two sites with furnaces using PCI/GCI reported
PNFs at or below 70 gpt in 1997. One of these sites operates a high-rate recycle system that is
not optimized for minimal blowdown, and the second site does not have a high-rate recycle
system. Two sites using PCI/GCI reported PNFs below 25 gpt.
To obtain additional information to further evaluate the potential impact of
PCI/GCI on the achievability of the model PNF, EPA contacted representatives of Ispat-Inland
Steel, Bethlehem Steel, and U.S. Steel to review current blast furnace operations and operating
practices to minimize corrosion in blast furnace treatment and recycle systems. Contact reports
are included in the Iron and Steel Administrative Record (Section 14.1, DCNIS10359 in the
rulemaking record). The review focused on furnaces using PCI; the objective was to collect
information to help determine appropriate blowdown rates for blast furnace operations using
PCI/GCI.
Site personnel provided detailed descriptions and supporting data demonstrating
that corrosion has become a significant issue with using PCI to increase furnace productivity.
Site contacts indicated that it is likely that PCI use as a coke substitute will increase in the future,
thus increasing the concentrations of chlorides and the potential for corrosion. Increased use of
13-11
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
PCI at any size furnace may become more attractive during periods when natural gas prices are
high. Furnace operators report that chloride concentrations in the range of 1,500 to 2,000 mg/L
are tolerable with increased treatment of the recirculating water with corrosion inhibitors. Site
personnel indicated that this range can be maintained with the model PNF of 70 gpt developed
for the 1982 rule.
Commenters also indicated that blast furnaces operating with high top pressures
(generally greater than 20 psig) would not be able to meet the model PNF. Consequently, EPA
evaluated the relationship between blast furnace top pressure and PNF and found a correlation
between the two. Four blast furnace systems that operate with high top pressures do not achieve
the model PNF. These four furnaces are the newest, largest furnaces in operation; they all also
use PCI. Therefore, consideration of PCI in selecting a model PNF coincidentally addresses
possible issues related to high top pressures and the technical achievability of the model PNF.
Finally, commenters discussed the impact of high-rate recycle on wastewater total
dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations and resulting scaling of equipment. Industry attendees at
the EPA/Industry meeting on April 24,2001 mentioned studies that were performed to evaluate
scaling issues. EPA requested copies of these studies, but the reports were not provided to the
Agency. During the meeting, attendees indicated that a blowdown rate of 70 to 100 gpt is
required to avoid scaling problems. However, a large percentage of sites have been operating
high-rate recycle systems at blowdown rates significantly less than this level and managing water
chemistry effectively. EPA considered costs for increased dosage of water additives such as
scale inhibitors. Lacking further substantiating data, EPA concludes that TDS/scaling issues do
not significantly affect the technical achievability of the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - Systems that achieve the model PNF
include both the oldest and newer furnaces. However, blast furnaces must be rebuilt from time to
time to replace refractories and worn mechanical equipment and to implement process upgrades.
Major rebuilds historically have occurred about every 7 years, but current practice is to extend
the time between rebuilds to 10 years and longer. Facilities do repairs and minor upgrades more
frequently. Because of the extensive nature of these rebuilds, the age of a blast furnace may be
best represented by the date of the last major rebuild. Again, systems that achieve the model
PNF are not correlated to the period of time since the last major rebuild.
Age is indirectly related to the ability to maintain low PNFs. Based on facility
contacts, relatively high rates of PCI are more likely to be used in the larger, newer furnaces than
in the smaller, older furnaces. (EPA notes that the newest furnaces have been in production for
more than 20 to nearly 40 years.) As a result, EPA selected a model PNF that is achievable by
both the older and newer furnaces.
Location - Most blast furnace operations in the United States are located in the
midwestern part of the country (western Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana
and Illinois). One furnace is located in the East, one in the Southeast, and one in the West. The
primary engineering factors related to attaining low blowdown rates are: (1) isolation of
noncontact cooling waters from the process water system; (2) isolation of excessive amounts of
13-12
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
storm water and other extraneous sources of makeup water; (3) surge capacity to address
hydraulic imbalances during furnace start-ups and shut downs; (4) adequate recirculating water
cooling capacity; and, (5) control of circulating water chemistry to address fouling, scaling, and
corrosion. EPA did not collect, nor did industry provide, any information or data that indicates
that these factors are related to location to such a degree that EPA would consider segmentation
on the basis of location.
Size - EPA compared blast furnace production to performance. Sites achieving
the model PNF of 25 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts associated with achieving low PNFs are atmospheric emissions of
particulate matter from evaporation and drift from cooling towers and secondary environmental
and energy impacts from manufacturing and using of recirculating water treatment chemicals.
Differences in these factors over the relatively narrow range of PNFs under consideration (25 to
70 gpt) are not a significant consideration. Any impacts have already occurred because most
blast furnaces have high-rate recycle systems. The incremental non-water quality environmental
impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the model PNF are minimal.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the plants whose wastewater treatment
performance data were used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF, operate a high-
rate recycle system, or operate PCI/GCI. Among these sites, one achieves the model PNF and
all operate high-rate recycle systems. One site uses PCI.
Following its evaluation of the technology options for the final rule, EPA has
retained a model PNF of 25 gpt for the reasons stated above. However, EPA agrees with the
commenters that the model PNF developed for ironmaking is not technically achievable by all
facilities in the subcategory for the reasons described previously. For this and other reasons
stated in the preamble and elsewhere in this document, EPA has decided not to revise limitations
and standards for ironmaking.
13.5 Subpart C: Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
The proposed integrated steelmaking subcategory includes the following
manufacturing operations conducted at integrated steel mills: basic oxygen steelmaking, ladle
metallurgy, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting. In addition, within basic oxygen
steelmaking operations EPA also considers the following three processes: semi-wet pollution
controls, wet-open combustion, and wet-suppressed combustion. EPA evaluated wastewater
discharge flow rates separately for each process operation as described in the following
subsections. The results of this evaluation are summarized here, and detailed support
documentation is located in the Iron and Steel Administrative Record (Section 14.1, DCN
IS 10441 and Section 14.1, DCN IS10824 in the rulemaking record). Note that, for the final rule,
EPA decided to retain the subcategorization structure from the 1982 rule, which includes
separate subcategories for steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting. With the
exception of semi-wet basic oxygen furnaces (BOFs), EPA also decided to retain the limitations
13-13
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
and standards from the 1982 rule. This section describes the model PNFs that EPA developed
for technology options considered for the final rule, but ultimately rejected.
Six of the 20 integrated steelmaking sites operate combined wastewater treatment
and/or recycle systems for vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and/or hot forming operations.
To calculate the site-specific PNF for a particular manufacturing operation that shares a
combined treatment and/or recycle system with one or more other manufacturing operations,
EPA apportioned the total system wastewater discharge flow by the percentage of the total
treatment and/or recycle system influent wastewater flow from that process.
13.5.1 Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) Steelmaking
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 24 integrated BOF shops in operation
in 1997 to develop the steelmaking model PNFs that EPA considered for the final rule. Of the 24
BOF shops, 8 operate semi-wet air pollution control systems, 8 operate wet-open air pollution
control systems, 7 operate wet-suppressed air pollution control systems, and 1 operates a
combination wet-open/wet-suppressed air pollution control system.
Blowdown from air pollution control systems is the primary wastewater source
from BOF steelmaking. Other minor process wastewater sources are site-specific and are either
reused as makeup for the air pollution control systems or discharged separately to treatment.
EPA excluded ground water from its PNF analysis; pollutant discharge allowances for these
wastewaters are provided by regulatory mechanisms other than the limitations and standards
considered by EPA for the final rule, as described in Section 13.1.
Semi-Wet Air Pollution Control
EPA first ordered the semi-wet BOF shops by PNF and assessed the distribution.
Based on the distribution, EPA initially considered 10 gpt as the model PNF because a
significant portion of the shops, four of the eight or 50 percent, currently achieve the performance
level, suggesting it is widely demonstrated and achievable.
Note that two sites reported zero discharge of process wastewater, while one site
reported a discharge of 1 gpt. Sites achieve zero or relatively low discharges from their semi-wet
systems by balancing the applied water with water that evaporates in the conditioning system.
Although the 1982 regulation designates semi-wet air pollution control as zero discharge,
currently not all sites are able to achieve this because of safety considerations. Some sites
operate their semi-wet systems with excess water, which is subsequently discharged, to flush the
air pollution control duct work and prevent the buildup of debris within the ductwork. If this wet
debris accumulates, it has the potential to fall back into the BOF, causing explosions and process
upsets. The Agency recognizes the benefit of using excess water in these systems and, therefore,
did not consider selecting a model PNF based on zero discharge.
Next, EPA assessed the following factors to determine whether any suggested that
a model PNF of 10 gpt is not technically achievable.
13-14
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Process - EPA assessed the type of wet air pollution control used compared to
performance. As discussed above, four of the eight BOF shops using semi-wet air pollution
control achieve the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of each BOF shop to the PNF. All eight of these shops began production between
1959 and 1970. Shops that achieve the model PNF include both the oldest and the newest of
these mills. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor for selecting a PNF for BOFs with
semi-wet air pollution controls.
Location - EPA compared mill location and performance. Seven of the eight
mills using semi-wet air pollution controls are located in the Midwest. The one mill with semi-
wet air pollution control located outside the Midwest (Alabama) does not achieve the model
PNF; however, EPA did not collect, nor did industry provide, any information or data that
indicates this is due to location in a southern region.
Size - EPA compared production of BOFs with semi-wet air pollution controls to
performance. Sites achieving the model PNF of 10 gpt include both the largest and smallest
sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to water conservation are not a significant consideration for BOF
steelmaking with semi-wet air pollution control. Any impacts have already occurred because
most BOFs either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle systems in
other processes (e.g., vacuum degassing, continuous casting, hot forming). The incremental non-
water quality environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the
model PNF are minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
shops might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the BOF shops whose wastewater
treatment performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The
two BAT treatment technology sites operate a total of six BOF shops, none of which operates a
semi-wet air pollution control device.
Wet-Open Air Pollution Control
EPA first ordered the wet-open BOF shops by PNF and assessed the distribution.
Review of the distribution suggested possible model PNFs of 0,46, 86, and 103 gpt. These
correspond to recycle rates of approximately 100 percent, 91.7 percent, 98.2 percent, and 88.3
percent, respectively. EPA rejected model PNFs of 0 and 46 gpt because of substantial costs
needed to achieve these performance levels and concerns regarding technical achievability by all
13-15
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
facilities. However, a model PNF of 103 gpt does not represent the greatly improved
performance commonly achieved by mills since the 1982 regulation. Therefore, EPA initially
considered 86 gpt as the model PNF for three reasons. First, the performance level is
representative of well-operated high-rate recycle systems. Second, the performance level
represents a significant improvement in performance from the current regulation. Third, a
significant portion of the systems, four of the eight systems or 50 percent, currently achieve the
performance level, suggesting it is widely demonstrated and achievable. A model PNF of 86 gpt
is more than four times that considered by EPA for the proposed rule.
Next, EPA assessed the following factors to determine whether any suggested that
a model PNF of 86 gpt is not technically achievable.
Process - EPA compared the type of wet air pollution control used to
performance. As discussed above, four of the eight BOF shops using wet-open air pollution
control achieve the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of each BOF shop to PNF. All eight of these BOF shops using wet-open air pollution
control began production within a relatively short period of time between 1964 and 1973;
therefore, the range of ages is not significant. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor for
selecting a PNF for BOFs with wet-open air pollution controls.
Location - BOF shops with wet-open air pollution control are not widely
dispersed throughout the United States. Therefore, a comparison of location to performance is
not relevant.
Size - EPA compared production of BOFs with wet-open wet air pollution
controls to performance. Sites achieving the model PNF of 86 gpt include both the largest and
smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
BOF steelmaking with wet-open air pollution control. Any impacts have already occurred
because most BOFs either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle
systems in other processes (e.g., vacuum degassing, continuous casting, hot forming). The
incremental non-water quality environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with
achieving the model PNF are minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
shops might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the BOF shops whose wastewater
treatment performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The
13-16
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
two BAT treatment technology sites operate a total of two BOF shops with wet-open air
pollution control, both of which achieve the model PNF. Both operate recycle systems and use
carbon dioxide injection in reducing blowdown rate.
Wet-Suppressed Air Pollution Control
EPA first ordered the wet-suppressed BOF shops by PNF and assessed the
distribution. Review of the distribution suggested possible model PNFs of 22 and 48 gpt. These
correspond to recycle rates of approximately 98.2 and 92 percent, respectively. EPA rejected a
model PNF of 48 gpt because it does not represent the greatly improved performance commonly
achieved by mills since the 1982 regulation. Therefore, EPA initially considered 22 gpt as the
model PNF for three reasons. First, the performance level is representative of well-operated
high-rate recycle systems. Second, the performance level represents a significant improvement in
performance from the current regulation. Third, a significant portion of the systems, three of the
seven systems or 43 percent, currently achieve the performance level, suggesting it is widely
demonstrated and achievable.
Next, EPA assessed the following factors to determine whether any suggested that
a model PNF of 22 gpt is not technically achievable.
Process - EPA assessed the type of wet air pollution control used compared to
performance. As discussed above, three of the seven BOF shops using wet-suppressed air
pollution control achieve the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of each BOF shop to the PNF. Mills that achieve the model PNF include older mills.
The oldest mill does not achieve the model PNF; however, EPA estimated costs for this facility
to achieve the model PNF including costs to increase the BOF shop recycle rate from 87.9
percent to greater than 98 percent. EPA is not aware of any reason why age would impact the
technical achievability of the model PNF.
Location - EPA compared system location to performance. Systems that achieve
the model PNF are located mainly in the Midwest, as are most of the BOF shops using wet-
suppressed air pollution control. Shops located outside the Midwest that do not achieve the
model PNF use recycle rates less than 98 percent. EPA costed these mills to increase their
recycle rates to greater than 98 percent. EPA is not aware of any reason why location would
impact the technical achievability of the model PNF.
Size - EPA compared production of BOFs with wet-suppressed air pollution
controls to performance. Sites achieving the model PNF of 22 gpt include both the largest and
smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
BOF steelmaking with wet-suppressed air pollution control. Any impacts have already occurred
13-17
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
because most BOFs have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle systems in
other processes (e.g., vacuum degassing, continuous casting, hot forming). The incremental non-
water quality environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the
model PNF are minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
shops might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the BOF shops whose wastewater
treatment performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The
two BAT treatment technology sites operate one BOF shop with wet-suppressed air pollution
control. This site does not achieve the model PNF. This site does operate a high-rate recycle
system, but at a recycle rate of less than 98.2 percent.
13.5.2 Ladle Metallurgy
None of the sites that use ladle metallurgy reported generating or discharging
process wastewater from this operation; therefore, EPA has designated ladle metallurgy as a zero
discharge operation.
13.5.3 Vacuum Degassing
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 14 integrated vacuum degassing
systems to develop the model PNF that EPA considered for the final rule. Blowdown from the
vacuum generating system was the only reported source of process wastewater.
EPA first ordered the vacuum degassing systems by PNF and assessed the
distribution. Review of the distribution showed a smooth progression of PNFs ranging from 0 to
177 gpt with no clear indicator of "best" performance. EPA rejected potential model PNFs
ranging from 0 to 7 gpt because of substantial costs required to achieve this performance level
and concerns regarding technical achievability by all facilities. As an initial determination of the
model PNF, EPA considered 13 gpt, which corresponds to a general recycle rate of
approximately 99 percent. EPA considers this performance to be representative of well-operated,
high-rate recycle systems in this segment. The performance level also represents a significant
improvement in performance from the current regulation. Third, a significant portion of the
mills, 4 of the 11 mills or 36 percent, currently achieve the performance level, suggesting it is
widely demonstrated and achievable.
Next, EPA assessed whether the model PNF of 13 gpt is technically achievable.
Process water recycle systems at integrated mills are typically operated by mill personnel, and the
chemistry within the systems is most often managed by chemical suppliers on a contract basis.
Based on review of survey information and follow-up contacts with environmental control
personnel and their chemical suppliers, EPA concluded that process water recycle system flows
13-18
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
are often managed at levels below maximum design capacity. In other words, mills in this
circumstance have some available hydraulic capacity to pump and cool more water through the
systems than they currently process. Additionally, at many mills, the chemical suppliers
determine blowdown rates and recycle system chemistry, with the proviso that they have to stay
within permit limits. Current NPDES permits issued under the 1982 regulation do not require
optimizing recycle systems and minimizing blowdown rates to the level of the model PNFs
considered for the final rule. Although the PNFs discussed in this section are well demonstrated
for all operations in this subcategory, many mills do not achieve the PNFs and have had no
incentive to do so.
Next, EPA assessed the following specific factors to determine whether any
suggested that a model PNF of 13 gpt is not technically achievable.
Process - EPA compared the type of vacuum degassing system used (i.e.,
Ruhrstahl-Heraeus, RH-OB, argon stirring, RH-KTB, vacuum tank degassing, VCP-KIB,
induction stirring and MAN GHH VCP Vacuum Circulation Process) to performance. Both
Ruhrstahl-Heraeus and vacuum tank degassing are demonstrated to achieve the model PNF.
EPA cannot adequately assess whether these other systems can achieve the necessary recycle rate
and model PNF because of the limited amount of data on their performance level and recycle
rates. Additionally, several non-integrated sites using these types of vacuum degassing systems
achieve the model PNF considered by EPA for integrated sites. EPA is not aware of any
technical reasons why these systems at integrated sites would not be able to achieve the model
PNF, and EPA has not received any comments suggesting that the type of vacuum degassing
system used affects the technical achievability of the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of vacuum degassing systems to the PNFs. Only one system began operations before
1987, but it is also not operating BAT model treatment technology. The relatively high PNF for
this system is the result of leaks into the system, and EPA estimated costs required to mitigate
these leaks. Otherwise, there is no correlation between the age of equipment and PNF.
Location - EPA compared system location to performance. The majority of
systems analyzed are located in the Midwest. The one system located in a southern region does
not achieve the model PNF, but it also does not achieve a recycle rate of 99 percent. EPA is not
aware of any reason why this system or any other in a southern region would not achieve a
recycle rate of 99 percent and the corresponding model PNF.
Size - EPA compared vacuum degasser production to performance. Sites
achieving the model PNF of 13 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
vacuum degassing. Any impacts have already occurred because most integrated vacuum
degassing operations either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle
systems in other processes (e.g., BOFs, continuous casting, hot forming). The incremental non-
13-19
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
water quality environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the
model PNF are minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
systems might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the sites whose wastewater treatment
performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The two BAT
treatment technology sites operate a total of two vacuum degassers, one of which achieves the
model PNF. This degasser operates a high-rate recycle system with BAT treatment. The
remaining BAT treatment technology site also operates a high-rate recycle system, but at a
recycle rate of less than 99 percent.
13.5.4 Continuous Casting
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 31 integrated continuous casting
systems to develop the model PNF that EPA considered for the final rule. EPA included in its
PNF analysis reported discharge flow rates for process wastewaters, including contact spray
cooling, flume flushing, and equipment cleaning wastewaters. EPA did not include non-process
wastewater sources, such as low-volume losses from closed caster mold and machine cooling
water systems, in its PNF analysis, for the reasons discussed in Section 13.1.
EPA first ordered the continuous casting systems by PNF and assessed the
distribution. Review of the distribution suggested a model PNF of 5 gpt. EPA rejected potential
model PNFs ranging from 0 to 5 gpt because of substantial costs required to achieve this
performance level and concerns regarding technical achievability by all facilities. EPA initially
considered the model PNF selected for the 1982 rule as the model PNF for this rule, 25 gpt,
which corresponds to a general recycle rate of approximately 97.4 percent. EPA considers this
performance to be representative of well-operated, high-rate recycle systems in this segment.
Finally, a significant portion of the systems, 12 of the 24 systems or 50 percent, currently achieve
the performance level, suggesting it is widely demonstrated and achievable.
Next, EPA assessed whether the model PNF of 25 gpt is technically achievable.
Process water recycle systems at integrated mills are typically operated by mill personnel, and the
chemistry within the systems is most often managed by chemical suppliers on a contract basis.
Based on review of survey information and follow-up contacts with environmental control
personnel and their chemical suppliers, EPA concluded that process water recycle system flows
are often managed at levels below maximum design capacity. In other words, mills in this
circumstance have some available hydraulic capacity to pump and cool more water through the
systems than they currently process. Additionally, at many mills, the chemical suppliers
determine blowdown rates and recycle system chemistry, with the proviso that they have to stay
within permit limits.
13-20
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Next, EPA assessed the following specific factors to determine whether any
suggested that a model PNF of 25 gpt is not technically achievable.
Product Cast - EPA compared the type of product cast (i.e., billet, bloom, slab,
thin slab, slab/bloom) to performance. The table below demonstrates that billet and slab process
types achieve the model PNF.
Product Cast
Percentage of Facilities
Achieving Target PNF
Billet
100%
Bloom
0%
Slab
42%
Thin Slab
0%
Slab/Bloom
0%
One site casts a combination of slabs and blooms, making it difficult to assess
whether the model PNF is achievable by combination slab and bloom casters.
The two bloom casters achieve PNFs greater than 25 gpt. Both sites combine
bloom casting wastewater with wastewaters from the BOF, vacuum degassing and other
continuous casting operations. Both systems operate recycle systems. One site's treatment
consists of a cooling tower, water filters, oil skimmer and scale pit. The other site operates a
recycle system with treatment consisting of a cooling tower, water filter, oil skimmer, scale pit,
and gravity thickener. Both sites with bloom casters can achieve the model PNF by increasing
recycle rates from the combined treatment system.
One site casts thin slabs, making it difficult to assess whether the model PNF is
achievable by thin slab casters. EPA created a separate segment for thin slab producers,
including both integrated and non-integrated mills, based on industry trends toward thinner
products that may require higher PNFs. Section 13.7.6 presents EPA's analyses for thin slab
producers.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of continuous casting systems to PNFs. Systems that achieve the model PNF include
both the oldest and the newest systems. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor for
selecting a PNF for continuous casting operations at integrated mills.
Location - EPA compared system location to performance. Systems that achieve
the model PNF are located in a variety of areas, including arid and semi-arid regions and northern
and southern regions.
13-21
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Size - EPA compared continuous caster production controls to performance. Sites
achieving the model PNF of 25 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
continuous casting. Any impacts have already occurred because most integrated continuous
casters either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle systems in other
processes (e.g., vacuum degassing or hot forming). The incremental non-water quality
environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the model PNF are
minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
systems might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the mills whose wastewater treatment
performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The two BAT
treatment technology sites operate a total of six continuous caster systems, four of which achieve
the model PNF. Of the remaining two continuous casters, one does not operate a high-rate
recycle system, and one operates a high-rate recycle system, but at a recycle rate less than 97.4
percent.
13.6 Subpart D: Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory1
Fifty-seven integrated and stand-alone sites indicated in their industry survey
responses that they conducted hot forming operations; EPA identified 71 hot forming operations
at integrated and stand-alone mills that were active in 1997. The Agency was unable to analyze
data from three processes due to incomplete industry survey responses.
The Agency identified spray water, used for cooling and descaling of the steel
during the hot forming process, as the primary wastewater source. For this subcategory, EPA
uses spray water as a generic term because there are many different sources of spray water within
a hot forming mill. Spray water includes the following: high-pressure descaling sprays, roll
and/or roll table spray cooling, die spray cooling, scarfer emissions control, hot shear spray
cooling, flume flushing, low-pressure/laminar flow cooling, and product cooling on runout
tables. Other sources of wastewater included in the development of the model PNFs were roll
shop wastewater, wastewater collected in basement sumps, scarfer water, and equipment cleaning
water.
The Agency did not include non-process wastewater sources in determining the
model PNF, as discussed in Section 13.1. Non-process wastewater from hot forming operations
'EPA did not perform a reanalysis of the model PNFs for this subcategory for the final rule, because it would not
affect the Agency's final decision. This discussion reflects the analyses from proposal.
13-22
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
that is often treated with process wastewater includes noncontact cooling water from reheat
furnaces.
During the analysis, the Agency determined that 12 of the 57 sites operate
combined wastewater treatment and/or recycle systems for their hot forming operations. To
calculate the site-specific PNF for a particular manufacturing operation that shares a combined
treatment and/or recycle system with one or more other manufacturing operations, EPA prorated
the total system wastewater discharge flow by the percentage of the total treatment and/or recycle
system influent wastewater flow from that process.
EPA selected the model flow rate based on wastewater treatment systems
operating with 96 percent recycle. The Agency determined that systems operating with this level
of recycle were the best performing mills in the subcategory. EPA selected 100 gpt as the model
PNF for integrated and stand-alone hot forming. Twenty-one of the 68 operations reported PNFs
less than or equal to 100 gpt, including 7 operations that reported zero discharge. All of the
operations currently meeting the model PNF operate high-rate recycle systems with recycle rates
of at least 95 percent. The mills used to develop the model flow rate are representative of
integrated and stand-alone hot forming mills across the industry: they generate wastewater from a
variety of sources, including contact water, rolls shops, and basement sumps; they hot form a
range of products (e.g., strip, plate, pipe, tube, bar); and they are located in different geographic
locations. For those operations with recycle systems that are not achieving the model flow rate,
the Agency included sufficient costs to upgrade all of the systems to achieve this rate. For those
operations with once-through treatment systems, the Agency included sufficient costs to install
and operate high-rate recycle systems that could achieve the model flow rate.
The Agency did not select zero discharge as the model PNF for integrated and
stand-alone hot forming sites due to the costs. The Agency determined that the capital costs
involved with retrofitting existing recycle systems to operate at a 100-percent recycle rate would
be cost-prohibitive.
13.7 Subpart E: Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
The proposed non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming subcategory includes
the following manufacturing operations conducted at non-integrated steel mills: electric arc
furnace (EAF) steelmaking, ladle metallurgy, vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and hot
forming. EPA evaluated wastewater discharge flow rates separately for each process operation as
described in the following subsections. The results of this evaluation are summarized here, and
detailed support documentation is located in the Iron and Steel Administrative Record (Section
14.1, DCNIS10357 and Section 14.1, DCN IS 10824 in the rulemaking record). EPA proposed
two segments within this subcategory, carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel, because of
differences in pollutants present in the wastewaters. EPA did not find discemable differences in
water use, wastewater sources, and wastewater discharge flow rates between the segments;
therefore, this discussion of the development of model PNFs does not distinguish between the
two segments.
13-23
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Note that for the final rule, EPA decided to retain the subcategorization structure
and limitations and standards from the 1982 rule, which includes separate subcategories for
steelmaking, vacuum degassing, and continuous casting. This section describes the model PNFs
that EPA developed for technology options considered for the final rule, but ultimately rejected.
Approximately one-third of non-integrated sites operate combined wastewater
treatment and/or recycle systems for vacuum degassing, continuous casting, and/or hot forming
operations. Non-integrated mills commonly cotreat these process wastewaters. The common
characteristics of the process wastewater from each operation allow the sites to commingle and
treat the wastewater. To calculate the site-specific PNF for a particular manufacturing operation
that shares a combined treatment and/or recycle system with one or more other manufacturing
operations, EPA prorated the total system wastewater discharge flow by the percentage of the
total treatment and/or recycle system influent wastewater flow from that process.
13.7.1 Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) Steelmaking
The Agency evaluated data from 69 facilities that indicated in their industry
survey response that they perform non-integrated steelmaking. The analysis included a total of
76 EAF shops and 132 EAFs. All EAFs in the United States are equipped with dry or semi-wet
air pollution controls, and none discharge process wastewater. (One EAF shop has a wet
scrubber system that functions as a backup.) Based on this evaluation, EPA has designated EAF
steelmaking as a zero discharge operation.
13.7.2 Ladle Metallurgy
None of the sites that use ladle metallurgy reported generating or discharging
process wastewater from this operation; therefore, EPA has designated ladle metallurgy as a zero
discharge operation.
13.7.3 Vacuum Degassing
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 29 non-integrated vacuum degassing
systems to develop the model PNF that EPA considered for the final rule. Available data were
insufficient to calculate PNFs for three of these systems. Blowdown from the vacuum generating
system was the only reported source of process wastewater.
EPA first ordered the vacuum degassing systems by PNF and assessed the
distribution. Review of the distribution suggested model PNFs of approximately 0,4 and 23 gpt.
These correspond to recycle rates of approximately 100 percent, 99.5 percent or greater, and 99.0
percent or greater, respectively. EPA rejected potential model PNFs of 0 and 4 gpt because of
substantial costs needed to achieve these performance levels and concerns regarding technical
achievability by all facilities. However, a model PNF of 23 gpt does not represent the
performance demonstrated by mills since the 1982 regulation. Therefore, EPA initially
considered 10 gpt as the model PNF for three reasons. First, the performance level is
representative of well-operated, high-rate recycle systems in this segment. Second, the
13-24
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
performance level represents a significantly lower discharge flow rate than that demonstrated in
1982. Third, the PNF is widely demonstrated and achievable, as evidenced by the fact that 13 of
the 26 systems, or 50 percent, achieve the performance level.
Next, EPA assessed whether the model PNF of 10 gpt is technically achievable.
Process water recycle systems at non-integrated mills are typically operated by mill personnel,
and the chemistry within the systems is most often managed by chemical suppliers on a contract
basis. Based on review of survey information and follow-up contacts with environmental control
personnel and their chemical suppliers, EPA concluded that process water recycle system flows
are often managed at levels below maximum design capacity. In other words, mills in this
circumstance have some available hydraulic capacity to pump and cool more water through the
systems than they currently process. Additionally, at many mills, the chemical suppliers
determine blowdown rates and recycle system chemistry, with the proviso that they have to stay
within permit limits. Current NPDES permits issued under the 1982 regulation do not require
optimizing recycle systems and minimizing blowdown rates to the level of the model PNFs
considered for the final rule. Although the PNFs discussed in this section are well demonstrated
for all operations in this subcategory, many mills do not achieve the PNFs and have had no
incentive to do so.
EPA also assessed the following specific factors to determine whether any
suggested that a model PNF of 10 gpt is not technically achievable.
Process - EPA compared the type of vacuum degasser system used (i.e., argon
stirring, ladle, tank, stream, vacuum arc remelt, ladle refining, vacuum induction, recirculation,
Ruhrstahl-Heraeus) to performance. All process types, with the exception of stream, are
demonstrated to achieve the model PNF. The performance levels achieved by the two stream
systems are 19 and 32 gpt, respectively. The recycle rate achieved by one of the stream systems
is unknown, and the recycle rate achieved by the second stream system is 98.9 percent.
Currently, this system is not operating at capacity. An increase in recycle rate to 99.4 percent or
greater would allow the system to achieve the model PNF. EPA is not aware of any technical
reasons why stream systems would not be able to achieve the model PNF, and EPA has not
received any comments suggesting that the type of vacuum degasser system used affects the
technical achievability of the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of vacuum degassing systems to the PNFs. Systems that achieve the model PNF
include both the oldest and the newest systems. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor
for selecting a PNF for vacuum degassing operations at non-integrated mills.
Location - EPA compared geographical location to performance. Systems that
achieve the model PNF are located in a variety of areas, including arid and semi-arid regions and
northern and southern regions.
Size - EPA compared vacuum degasser production to performance. Sites
achieving the model PNF of 10 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
13-25
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
vacuum degassing. Any impacts have already occurred because most non-integrated vacuum
degassing operations either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle
systems in other processes (e.g., casting or hot forming). The incremental non-water quality
environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the model PNF are
minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
systems might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the sites whose wastewater treatment
performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. None of the
four BAT treatment technology sites operates vacuum degassers; however, EPA concludes that
the model LTAs are technically achievable for all sites in this subcategory for the reasons
discussed in the Agency's reassessment of the model LTAs for the final rule (Section 14 and
elsewhere in the rulemaking record).
13.7.4 Continuous Casting
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 76 non-integrated continuous casting
systems to develop the model PNF that EPA considered for the final rule. Available data were
insufficient to calculate PNFs for two additional systems. In its PNF analysis, EPA included
reported discharge flow rates for process wastewaters, including contact spray cooling and
equipment cleaning wastewaters. EPA did not include non-process wastewater sources, such as
low-volume losses from closed caster mold and machine cooling water systems, for the reasons
discussed in Section 13.1.
EPA first ordered the continuous casting systems by PNF and assessed the
distribution. Review of the distribution suggested model PNFs of 0,4,11, and 18 gpt. These
correspond to recycle rates of approximately 100 percent, 99.6 percent and greater, 99.3 percent
and greater, and 98.9 percent and greater, respectively. EPA rejected PNFs of 0 and 4 gpt
because of substantial costs needed to achieve this performance level and concerns regarding
technical achievability by all facilities. EPA also rejected a PNF of 18 gpt because it does not
represent the demonstrated performance commonly achieved by mills. Therefore, EPA initially
considered 11 gpt as the model PNF for three reasons. First, the performance is representative of
well-operated, high-rate recycle systems in this segment. Second, the performance level
represents a significantly lower flow rate for casters than that considered in 1982. Finally, a
significant portion of the continuous casting systems, 32 of the 76 systems or 42 percent,
currently achieve the performance level, suggesting it is widely demonstrated and achievable.
Next, EPA assessed whether the model PNF of 11 gpt is technically achievable.
Process water recycle systems at non-integrated mills are typically operated by mill personnel,
13-26
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
and the chemistry within the systems is most often managed by chemical suppliers on a contract
basis. Based on review of survey information and follow-up contacts with environmental control
personnel and their chemical suppliers, EPA concluded that process water recycle system flows
are often managed at levels below maximum design capacity. In other words, mills in this
circumstance have some available hydraulic capacity to pump and cool more water through the
systems than they currently process. Additionally, at many mills, the chemical suppliers
determine blowdown rates and recycle system chemistry, with the proviso that they have to stay
within permit limits. Current NPDES permits issued under the 1982 regulation do not require
optimizing recycle systems and minimizing blowdown rates to the level of the model PNFs
considered for the final rule. Although the PNFs discussed in this section are well demonstrated
for all operations in this subcategory, many mills do not achieve the PNFs and have had no
incentive to do so.
Next, EPA assessed the following specific factors to determine whether any
suggested that a model PNF of 11 gpt is not technically achievable.
Product Cast - EPA compared the type of product cast (i.e., billet, bloom, slab,
thin slab, other, various) to performance. All process types are demonstrated to achieve the
model PNF as summarized below.
Product Cast
Percentage of Facilities
Achieving Model PNF
Billet
42%
Bloom
29%
Slab
50%
Thin Slab
40%
Other
50%
Various
43%
Although a significant percentage of thin slab producers currently achieve the
model PNF, EPA created a separate segment for thin slab products. This decision was based on
industry product trends toward thinner products that may need higher PNFs and is described in
detail in Section 13.7.6.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of continuous casting systems to the PNFs. Systems that achieve the model PNF
include both the oldest and the newest systems. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor
for selecting a PNF for continuous casting operations at non-integrated mills.
Location - EPA compared system geographical location to performance. Systems
that achieve the model PNF are located in a variety of areas, including arid and semi-arid regions
and northern and southern regions.
13-27
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Size - EPA compared continuous caster production to performance. Sites
achieving the model PNF of 11 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
continuous casting. Any impacts have already occurred because most non-integrated continuous
casters either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle systems in other
processes (e.g., vacuum degassing or hot forming). The incremental non-water quality
environmental impacts and energy consumption associated with achieving the model PNF are
minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
systems might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the mills whose wastewater treatment
performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The three BAT
treatment technology sites operate a total of four continuous caster systems, three of which are
thin slab casting systems. The one conventional continuous caster system does not achieve the
model PNF. This system operates a high-rate recycle system, but at a recycle rate of less than
99.3 percent. Both of the BAT sites operating thin slab casters achieve the combined continuous
casting and hot forming model PNF considered for that segment of the industry.
13.7.5 Hot Forming
EPA analyzed industry survey responses for 98 non-integrated hot forming mills
to develop the model PNF that EPA considered for the final rule. Available data from four other
mills were insufficient to calculate PNFs. In its PNF analysis, EPA included reported discharge
flow rates for process wastewaters, including contact spray cooling, scarfer emissions control,
flume flushing, blowdown from roll shop wastewater, wastewater collected in basement sumps,
scarfer water, and equipment cleaning and wash-down water. EPA did not include non-process
wastewater sources, such as noncontact cooling water from reheat furnaces, which is sometimes
included in the process water recycle loop or recycled separately with a blowdown to the process
water loop, for the reasons discussed in Section 13.1.
EPA first ordered the hot forming mills by PNF and assessed the distribution.
Review of the distribution showed a smooth progression of PNFs up to 285 gpt with no clear
indicator of "best" performance. EPA rejected PNFs less than 50 gpt because of substantial costs
required to achieve this performance level and concerns regarding technical achievability by all
facilities. EPA initially considered 50 gpt as the model PNF, which corresponds to a general
recycle rate of approximately 99 percent. EPA considers this performance to be representative of
well-operated, high-rate recycle systems in this segment. The performance level also represents a
significantly lower flow than those used to develop the 1982 rule, which is based on partial rather
than high-rate recycle. Finally, a significant portion of the hot forming mills, 47 of the 98 mills
13-28
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
or 48 percent, currently achieve the performance level, suggesting it is widely demonstrated and
achievable.
Next, EPA assessed whether the model PNF of 50 gpt is technically achievable.
Process water recycle systems at non-integrated mills are typically operated by mill personnel,
and the chemistry within the systems is most often managed by chemical suppliers on a contract
basis. Based on review of survey information and follow-up contacts with environmental control
personnel and their chemical suppliers, EPA concluded that process water recycle system flows
are often managed at levels below maximum design capacity. In other words, mills in this
circumstance have some available hydraulic capacity to pump and cool more water through the
systems than they currently process. Additionally, at many mills, the chemical suppliers
determine blowdown rates and recycle system chemistry, with the proviso that they have to stay
within permit limits. Current NPDES permits issued under the 1982 regulation do not require
optimizing recycle systems and minimizing blowdown rates to the level of the model PNFs
considered for the final rule. Although the PNFs discussed in this section are well demonstrated
for all operations in this subcategory, many mills do not achieve the PNFs and have had no
incentive to do so.
Next, EPA assessed the following specific factors to determine whether any
suggested that a model PNF of 50 gpt is not technically achievable.
Product Formed - EPA compared the type of mill (i.e., primary, section, flat, and
pipe and tube) to performance. All process types, with the exception of pipe and tube mills, are
demonstrated to achieve the model PNF as summarized below.
Mill Type
Percentage of Facilities
Achieving Model PNF
Primary
25%
Section
60%
Flat
30%
Pipe and Tube
0%
Four sites operate a total of seven pipe and tube mills with PNFs ranging from 77
to 22,319 gpt. Four of these mills (at two sites) operate recycle systems. One mill operates a
recycle system with no treatment at a recycle rate of 92 percent and achieves a PNF of 77 gpt.
The other three mills recycle from the same treatment system at a rate of 94.9 percent and
achieve PNFs of 281, 590 and 730 gpt. Treatment consists of a clarifier, cooling tower, sludge
dewatering, scale pit, and filter for the recycle system achieving 94.9 percent.
The overall lack of high-rate recycle and treatment systems at pipe and tube mills,
and their relatively high PNFs, suggest that the existing performance at these mills is uniformly
inadequate. EPA is not aware of any technical reasons why these mills would not be able to
achieve the model PNF. Although comments submitted in response to the proposed rule
13-29
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
indirectly suggest that the type of hot forming mill affects the resulting PNF, they provide no
technical basis for their contention that pipe and tube mills require a higher PNF (e.g., product
quality, process considerations). Therefore, EPA believes that pipe and tube mills can achieve
the model PNF.
Although a significant percentage of thin slab producers currently achieve the
model PNF, EPA created a separate segment for thin slab products. This decision was based on
industry product trends toward thinner products that may require higher PNFs and is described in
detail in Section 13.7.6.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - EPA compared the first year of
operation of hot forming mills to PNFs. Systems that achieve the model PNF include both the
oldest and the newest systems. Thus, age is not considered a significant factor for selecting a
PNF for hot forming operations at non-integrated mills.
Location - EPA compared mill geographical location to performance. Systems
that achieve the model PNF are located in a variety of areas, including arid and semi-arid regions
and northern and southern regions.
Size - EPA compared hot forming mill production to performance. Sites
achieving the model PNF of 50 gpt include both the largest and smallest sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
hot forming. Any impacts have already occurred because most non-integrated hot forming mills
either have high-rate recycle systems or discharge to high-rate recycle systems in other processes
(e.g., vacuum degassing or casting). The incremental non-water quality environmental impacts
and energy consumption associated with achieving the model PNF are minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
mills might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the mills whose wastewater treatment
performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. The three BAT
treatment technology sites operate a total of three hot forming mills, two of which are operated in
combination with thin slab casters. The one hot forming mill not associated with a thin slab
caster does not achieve the model PNF. This site operates a recycle system, but it is operated at a
rate below 99 percent. Additionally, one hot forming mill with treatment beyond BAT achieves
a PNF of 14 gpt. Both of the BAT sites operating thin slab casters achieve the combined
continuous casting and hot forming model PNF considered for that segment of the industry.
13-30
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
13.7.6 Combined Thin Slab Casting and Hot Forming
This section discusses EPA's rationale for considering a separate industry
segment for thin slab producers for the final rule. For this new segment, EPA developed a
combined thin slab casting and hot forming model PNF for use in its analyses for the final rule.
The principal difference between conventional slab casting and thin slab casting is
that the cast product is typically 2 inches thick rather than 8 to 10 inches thick. This allows for
an abbreviated hot forming process to produce flat-rolled sheet. Conventional hot strip mills
operated by steel producers include: reheat furnaces where cast slabs are heated most often from
ambient temperature (i.e., cold) to rolling temperature; scale breakers; a series of roughing
stands; a series of finishing stands; a laminar flow strip cooling section; and strip coilers. With
thin slab casting, the hot rolling process includes a tunnel furnace where slab temperature is
normalized to rolling temperature, one or more intermediate rolling stands, a series of finishing
stands, a laminar flow strip cooling section, and strip coilers. The savings in investment cost,
land requirements, energy requirements and labor are considerable with thin slab casting.
Most thin slab producers have combined treatment and recycle systems for caster
spray water and hot strip mill contact water systems. The volume of applied flows and recycle
system flows for these facilities is considerably higher than for the remainder of the non-
integrated segment, which is dominated by bar products. This is particularly true for the hot
forming operations and results from the high volumes of water needed to operate the strip
finishing stands and laminar flow strip cooling systems. The overall recycle rates for the thin
slab caster are in the range of 96.9 percent to 99.8 percent, with most mills in the range of 98
percent. For the hot mills, the corresponding recycle rates are around 99 percent. For these
reasons, EPA considered and evaluated for the final rule a combination thin slab casting and hot
forming model PNF.
To develop the combination thin slab casting and hot forming model PNF, EPA
analyzed industry survey responses from eight thin slab producers, which include seven non-
integrated mills and one integrated mill. EPA calculated site-specific combined thin slab casting
and hot forming PNFs using process water blowdown rates from each of the thin slab caster and
hot forming mill complexes. These Agency normalized blowdown rates to the combination of
the tons of steel cast and processed in the hot strip mill, which is essentially twice the amount of
steel cast. Some mills report differences in casting and hot forming production that ostensibly
account for yield losses in the hot strip mill, while others report the same production for both
units. Next, EPA ordered the mills by the combined PNF and assessed the distribution. Review
of the distribution showed a smooth progression of PNFs ranging from 0 to 522 gpt with no clear
indicator of "best" performance. EPA rejected potential model PNFs less than 120 gpt because
of substantial costs needed to achieve this performance level and concerns regarding technical
achievability by all facilities, particularly considering industry product trends toward thinner
products that may require higher PNFs. Therefore, EPA initially considered 120 gpt as the model
PNF for three reasons. First, the performance is representative of well-operated, high-rate
recycle systems in this segment. Second, the performance level represents a significantly lower
flow for continuous casting and hot forming than that considered in 1982. Finally, a significant
13-31
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
portion of the thin slab producers, five of the eight mills or 63 percent, currently achieve the
performance level, suggesting it is widely demonstrated and achievable.
Next, EPA assessed whether the model PNF of 120 gpt is technically achievable.
Process water recycle systems at non-integrated and integrated mills are typically operated by
mill personnel, and the chemistry within the systems is most often managed by chemical
suppliers on a contract basis. Based on review of survey information and follow-up contacts
with environmental control personnel and their chemical suppliers, EPA concluded that process
water recycle system flows are often managed at levels below maximum design capacity. In
other words, mills in this circumstance have some available hydraulic capacity to pump and cool
more water through the systems than they currently process. Additionally, at many mills, the
chemical suppliers determine blowdown rates and recycle system chemistry, with the proviso that
they have to stay within permit limits. Current NPDES permits issued under the 1982 regulation
do not require optimizing recycle systems and minimizing blowdown rates to the level of the
model PNFs considered for the final rule. Although the PNFs discussed in this section are well
demonstrated for all operations in this subcategory, many mills do not achieve the PNFs and have
had no incentive to do so.
Next, EPA assessed the following specific factors to determine whether any
suggested that a model PNF of 120 gpt is not technically achievable.
Product Cast - All eight mills produce thin slab products, and five of these mills
currently achieve the model PNF.
Age of equipment and facilities involved - All eight of the thin slab producers
began production within a relatively short period of time between 1989 and 1997; therefore, the
range of ages is not significant.
Location - EPA compared system geographical location to performance. Systems
that achieve the model PNF are located in a variety of areas, including arid and semi-arid regions
and northern and southern regions.
Size - EPA compared both continuous caster and hot forming production to
performance. Sites achieving the model PNF of 120 gpt include both the largest and smallest
sites.
Non-water quality environmental impacts, including energy - Non-water quality
environmental impacts related to high-rate recycle systems are not a significant consideration for
continuous casting. Any impacts have already occurred because the thin slab producers currently
operate high-rate recycle systems. The incremental non-water quality environmental impacts and
energy consumption associated with achieving the model PNF are minimal.
Next, EPA evaluated whether a combination of the factors listed above at specific
systems might impact the technical achievability of the model PNF. EPA found that the
13-32
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
combination of factors at mills that achieve the model PNF is comparable to the combination of
factors at mills that do not achieve the model PNF.
Finally, EPA considered whether any of the mills whose wastewater treatment
performance data EPA used to develop the model LTAs achieve the model PNF. Two of the
three BAT treatment technology sites produce thin slab products, and both sites achieve the
model PNF.
13.8 Subpart F: Steel Finishing Subcategory2
The Agency established the carbon and alloy steel and stainless steel segments for
the steel finishing subcategory because of differences in pollutants present in the wastewater.
EPA also identified several manufacturing process divisions between the segments. Below are
separate discussions for acid pickling, cold forming, alkaline cleaning, stand-alone continuous
annealing, hot coating, and electroplating.
13.8.1 Acid Pickling
The Agency analyzed data from the 61 sites (integrated, non-integrated, and stand-
alone) that indicated in their industry survey responses that they performed acid pickling.
Because some plants operate more than one acid pickling line, the number of process lines
analyzed was 130. The Agency was unable to analyze data from three lines due to incomplete
industry survey responses.
For the regulatory alternatives considered by EPA for the final rule, EPA defined
acid pickling lines to include alkaline cleaning and salt bath and electrolytic sodium sulfate
(ESS) descaling operations that occur on the line that includes acid pickling. In a small number
of instances, continuous annealing operations with an associated water quench take place on acid
pickling lines. In these instances, EPA included discharge from the annealing rinse as a
wastewater source from acid pickling lines. The Agency also evaluated acid regeneration
operations to determine the volume of wastewater generated and discharged during these
operations.
During the analysis, the Agency identified three major sources of wastewater from
acid pickling lines. The first is rinse water used to clean the acid solution from the steel. Rinse
water comprises the largest volume of wastewater from acid pickling lines to wastewater
treatment operations. The second is spent pickle liquor, a solution composed primarily of acid
that is no longer an effective pickling agent. The third major source of wastewater is generated
by the WAPC devices located above the pickling tanks. Other minor sources of wastewater
included in the development of model PNFs were process wastewater from other operations (e.g.,
salt bath descaling) on the acid pickling lines (spent process baths and rinses); raw material
handling, preparation, and storage; tank clean-outs; and equipment cleaning water. Except for
2EPA did not perform a reanalysis of the model PNFs for this subcategory for the final rule, because it would not
affect the Agency's final decision. This discussion reflects the analyses from proposal.
13-33
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
blowdown from surface cleaning tanks, these wastewater sources are noncontinuous sources of
wastewater that minimally contribute to the total wastewater flow.
When responding to the industry survey, sites had the option of indicating several
different discharge destinations for process wastewater. These destinations included the
following: on-site regeneration and reuse, discharge to another process or rinse, discharge to
treatment, discharge without treatment to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), discharge
to privately owned treatment works (PrOTWs), recycle and reuse, and several zero discharge
methods including contract hauling. If a discharge was listed as recycle and reuse, discharge to
another process or rinse, or zero discharge or alternative disposal method, such as contract
hauling, EPA did not use the discharge in developing the model PNF. Several sites often
responded that discharges were split between discharge to treatment and zero discharge methods
of disposal such as contract hauling, but did not provide the portion of flow going to each. In
these cases, EPA accounted for all of the flow in model PNF development.
The Agency analyzed data from 219 WAPC devices (fume scrubbers) that were
reported as being operated on acid pickling lines. After reviewing the 1997 industry survey data
and comparing it to the data used to develop the 1982 rule, the Agency determined that the model
flow rate of 15 gpm in the 1982 rule is still applicable.
The following tables list the model PNFs for carbon and alloy and stainless steel
pickling operations. The Agency did not identify any sites that performed plate pickling
operations on carbon and alloy steels. Consequently, the Agency transferred the model plate
pickling flow rate from the Stainless Steel Segment to the carbon and alloy steel hydrochloric
and sulfuric acid plate pickling manufacturing operations. Similarly, the Agency did not identify
any sites that performed pipe and tube pickling operations on stainless steels, and, transferred the
model specialty steel pipe and tube flow rate from the 1982 development document.
Carbon and Alloy Steel Hydrochloric Acid Pickling Model Flow Rates
Carbon and Alloy Hydrochloric
Acid Pickling
Model
PNF(gpt)
Operations Currently Operating
at or Below the Model PNF
Number of
Operations Analyzed
Strip, sheet
50
18
48
Bar, billet, rod, coil
490 (a)
1
1
Pipe, tube
1,020 (a)
2
3
Plate
35(b)
N/A
0
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15(a)
8
14
(a) Value transferred from the 1982 development document.
(b) Value transferred from Stainless Steel Segment.
13-34
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Carbon and Alloy Steel Sulfuric Acid Pickling Model Flow Rates
Carbon and Alloy Sulfuric Acid
Pickling
Model
PNF (gpt)
Operations Currently Operating
at or Below the Model PNF
Number of
Operations Analyzed
Strip, sheet
230
4
10
Bar, billet, rod, coil
280 (a)
2
7
Pipe, tube
500 (a)
1
1
Plate
35 (b)
N/A
0
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15(a)
34
' 60
(a) Value transferred from the 1982 development document.
(b) Value transferred from Stainless Steel Segment.
Stainless Steel Acid Pickling Model Flow Rates
Stainless Steel Acid Pickling
Model
PNF (gpt)
Operations Currently Operating
at or Below the Model PNF
Number of
Operations Analyzed
Strip, sheet
700
19
50
Bar, billet, rod, coil
230 (a)
1
2
Pipe, tube
770 (a)
0
0
Plate
35
3
3
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15(a)
36
54
(a) Value transferred from 1982 development document.
EPA selected a model flow rate of 50 gpt for hydrochloric acid pickling of strip or
sheet because 18 of the 48 process lines were demonstrating this model flow rate. The Agency
selected a model flow rate below the median value of 79 gpt for hydrochloric acid pickling of
strip and sheet, because the better performing mills are achieving this discharge rate. EPA
selected 230 gpt as the model flow rate for sulfuric acid pickling of strip and sheet instead of the
median PNF of 265 gpt. The Agency concluded that the selected flow rate roughly
approximating, but slightly lower than, the median PNF is well demonstrated and achievable for
all operations in the segment. The remaining model flow rates for hydrochloric acid pickling and
sulfuric acid pickling were either transferred from the 1982 development document or from the
Stainless Steel Segment (pickling).
EPA selected 700 gpt as the model flow rate for stainless steel acid pickling of
strip and sheet instead of the median PNF of 874 gpt. The Agency considers the sites achieving
the model flow rate (38 percent of the total) to be the better performing operations in this
segment. EPA selected 35 gpt for stainless steel acid pickling of plate instead of the median of
33 gpt. Each of the sites that pickles plate was already achieving this flow rate and the Agency
13-35
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
determined that it would be cost-prohibitive to reduce the flow rate further. EPA transferred the
remaining model flow rates for stainless steel acid pickling from the 1982 development
document.
The Agency identified six zero discharge acid pickling lines during its analysis of
the acid pickling subcategory. The Agency did not select zero discharge as the model flow for
any of the acid pickling operations because sites would have to use options such as contract
hauling of waste to achieve zero discharge. In addition, the Agency concluded that it was not
feasible to achieve zero discharge on an industry-wide basis.
The Agency analyzed data from WAPC devices (e.g., absorber vent scrubbers)
that acid regeneration operations reported operating. After reviewing the 1997 industry survey
data and comparing it to the data used for the 1982 regulation, the Agency determined that the
model flow rate of 100 gpm contained in the 1982 rule is still applicable.
13.8.2 Cold Forming
The Agency considered data from the 64 sites (integrated, non-integrated, stand-
alone) that reported performing cold forming in their industry survey responses. Because some
plants operate more than one cold forming operation, the total number of operations analyzed
was 234. The Agency was unable to analyze data from two operations due to incomplete
industry survey responses.
During the analysis, the Agency identified blowdown from the contact water and
rolling solution systems as the primary source of wastewater. For the purposes of this
manufacturing operation, the Agency made no distinction between contact spray water systems
and rolling solution systems, which can include blowdown from roll and/or roll table spray
cooling and product cooling. Other sources of wastewater included in the development of model
PNFs were equipment cleaning water, wastewater from roll shops, and basement sumps.
The following table presents the selected model PNF, number of operations
currently operating at the model PNF, and number of lines analyzed for carbon and alloy cold
forming operations. Each of the selected model flow rates for carbon and alloy cold forming,
except for single stand, recirculation, is slightly above the median PNF for each operation. EPA
determined that it would be cost-prohibitive for all sites to achieve the median flow rate. For
single stand, recirculation, EPA selected a flow rate below the median of 7 gpt. The Agency
concluded that it was appropriate for single stand, recirculation, to have a lower flow rate than
single stand, direct application. Therefore, EPA selected the model flow rate based on the three
best performing mills in the category. The Agency did not select zero discharge as the model
PNF for carbon and alloy cold forming operations because sites with a discharge from their
recycle system(s) achieved zero discharge through either contract hauling or discharge to another
process. The Agency concluded that contract hauling of waste is a not a universally applicable
wastewater management approach and also recognizes that discharge to another process is not a
viable option at all sites.
13-36
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Carbon and Alloy Steel Cold Forming Model Flow Rates
Carbon and Alloy Cold
Forming
Model
PNF(gpt)
Operations Currently Operating
at the Model PNF
Number of
Operations Analyzed
Single stand, recirculation
1
3
18
Single stand, direct application
3
15
26
Multiple stand, recirculation
25
16
28
Multiple stand, direct application
275
11
19
Multiple stand, combination
143
5
8
The following table presents the selected model PNF, number of operations
currently operating at the model PNF, and number of operations analyzed for stainless cold
forming. The selected model flow rates for stainless cold forming are slightly above the median
flow rates. EPA determined that it would be cost-prohibitive for all sites to achieve the median
flow rate. The Agency did not select zero discharge as the model PNF for stainless steel cold
forming operations for the reasons cited above. After reviewing the industry survey data, the
Agency did not identify any sites operating multiple stand, direct application, or multiple stand,
combination, rolling mills for stainless steels. The Agency transferred the model flow rates for
these operations from the Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment, because of similarities in the
manufacturing processes.
Stainless Steel Cold Forming Model Flow Rates
Stainless Steel Cold Forming
Model
PNF(gpt)
Operations Currently Operating
at the Model PNF
Number of Sites
Reporting
Single stand, recirculation
3
7
13
Single stand, direct application
35
1
1
Multiple stand, recirculation
16
6
7
Multiple stand, direct application
275 (a)
N/A
0
Multiple stand, combination
143 (a)
N/A
0
(a) Value transferred from the Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment
N/A = Not applicable.
13.8.3 Alkaline Cleaning
The Agency considered data from the 32 sites (integrated, non-integrated, and
stand-alone) that indicated in their industry survey response that they performed alkaline cleaning
operations on stand-alone process lines that do not have other processes such as pickling or
coating. Because some plants operate more than one stand-alone alkaline cleaning operation, the
total number of operations analyzed was 49. The Agency was unable to analyze data from one
operation due to an incomplete survey response.
13-37
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
EPA has defined alkaline cleaning operations to include annealing operations on
the same line; as a result, this segment includes both stand-alone alkaline cleaning lines and
continuous annealing/alkaline cleaning lines. The Agency included annealing rinses, when
present, in determining PNFs for the alkaline cleaning lines.
The primary sources of wastewater identified for alkaline cleaning operations
were blowdown from the alkaline cleaning solution tanks and rinse water used to clean the
alkaline cleaning solution from the steel. Other minor sources of wastewater included the
following: rinse water from annealing operations (when operated with a water quench); runoff
from raw material handling, preparation, and storage; tank clean-outs; and equipment cleaning
and wash down water.
When developing the model PNF for alkaline cleaning, the Agency included all
process wastewater flows that were conveyed to treatment. If a wastewater discharge was
contract hauled or recycled and reused, the Agency did not include the flow in the development
of the model PNF. If a site's industry survey response indicated that a flow was both contract
hauled and discharged to treatment, but did not specify the portion of flow going to each, the
Agency used the combined flow to develop the PNF. Each of the selected model flow rates for
alkaline cleaning approximates the median flow rate.
EPA selected 320 gpt as the model PNF for alkaline cleaning of carbon and alloy
steel strip and sheet. Twelve of the 24 lines reported PNFs of less than 320 gpt. None of these
sites reported lines operating without a discharge.
EPA selected 20 gpt as the model PNF for alkaline cleaning of carbon and alloy
steel pipe and tube. Four of the six sites reported lines with PNFs of less than or equal to 20 gpt.
One site reported operating without a discharge by contract hauling its wastewater. The Agency
did not select zero discharge as the model flow for alkaline cleaning of pipe and tube because
sites would have to use disposal methods such as contract hauling to achieve zero discharge.
EPA selected 2,500 gpt as the model PNF for alkaline cleaning of stainless strip.
Nine of the 15 sites reported lines with PNFs of less than or equal to 2,500 gpt. None of the sites
reported operating without a discharge. The Agency did not identify any sites that practiced
alkaline cleaning of stainless steel pipe and tube. EPA transferred the model pipe and tube flow
rate of 20 gpt from the Carbon and Alloy Steel Segment.
13.8.4 Continuous Annealing
The Agency considered data from the 11 sites that indicated in their industry
survey responses that they performed stand-alone continuous annealing operations (i.e., not on
the same process line with operations such as alkaline cleaning or acid pickling). Because some
sites operate more than one stand-alone continuous annealing operation, the total number of
operations analyzed was 28. The Agency was unable to analyze data from two operations due to
incomplete survey responses.
13-38
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Stand-alone continuous annealing operations only include annealing operations
that are not considered to be part of any other finishing line operated by the site. Annealing
operations with a water quench that generate a discharge on acid pickling, cold forming, hot
coating, alkaline cleaning, and electroplating lines are included in the model flow rate for these
operations. Both the Carbon and Alloy Steel and Stainless Steel Segments have stand-alone
continuous annealing operations that are divided into two categories: lines that do and lines that
do not use water to quench the steel after the annealing process.
EPA selected 20 gpt (the median flow rate) as the model PNF for stand-alone
continuous annealing with a water quench. Seven of the 14 lines with a water quench reported
PNFs of less than or equal to 20 gpt. None of the sites reported operating without a discharge.
Stand-alone continuous annealing lines that operate without a water quench do not generate
process wastewater and have been designated as a zero-discharge operation.
13.8.5 Hot Coating
The Agency considered data from the 26 sites (integrated, non-integrated, and
stand-alone) that indicated in their industry survey responses that they performed hot coating.
Because some plants operate more than one hot coating line, the total number of lines analyzed
was 40. The Agency was unable to analyze data from five lines due to incomplete survey
responses. Hot coating operations are performed on carbon and alloy steels only. EPA has
defined hot coating lines as including acid cleaning, annealing, alkaline cleaning, and other
surface cleaning and preparation operations on the same line.
The primary source of wastewater from hot coating operations is the surface
preparation operations, such as acid and alkaline cleaning, that the steel undergoes before hot
coating. Four of the operations reported a discharge from their hot coating tanks. Thirty-two of
the operations reported having a rinse following the coating operation. Tank clean-outs, fume
scrubbers, and equipment cleaning are other sources of wastewater reported by a number of sites.
Wastewater Flow Rates
The Agency analyzed data from WAPC devices that were reported as being
operated on hot coating lines. After reviewing the 1997 industry survey data and comparing it to
the data used for the 1982 rule, the Agency determined that the model flow rate of 15 gpm
contained in the 1982 rule is still applicable.
In developing the model PNF, the Agency only considered flow rates that were
conveyed to treatment systems. When responding to the industry survey, sites had the option of
indicating if they discharged process wastewater to treatment and/or disposed of it via several
different zero discharge methods. If a site listed a zero discharge disposal method for a
discharge, EPA did not use that discharge in the development of the model PNF. If a site's
industry survey response indicated that a flow was both discharged to treatment and disposed of
using a zero discharge method, but did not specify the portion of flow rate going to each, the
Agency used the combined flow to develop the PNF.
13-39
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
EPA selected 550 gpt as the model PNF for hot coating operations. Twenty-eight
of the 40 lines reported having PNFs of less than or equal to 550 gpt. Two of the lines reported
operating without a discharge by using contract hauling. EPA determined that it would be cost-
prohibitive for all sites to achieve the median PNF of 182 gpt. The Agency did not select zero
discharge as the model flow for hot coating because sites would have to use disposal methods
such as contract hauling to achieve zero discharge.
13.8.6 Electroplating
The Agency considered data from the 23 sites (integrated, non-integrated, and
stand-alone) that indicated in their industry survey responses that they performed electroplating.
Because some plants operate more than one electroplating line, the total number of operations
analyzed was 44. The Agency was unable to analyze data from two operations due to incomplete
survey responses. EPA has defined electroplating lines as annealing, alkaline cleaning, acid
cleaning, and other surface cleaning and surface preparation operations on the same line.
The primary sources of wastewater from electroplating operations are acid and
alkaline cleaning operations performed on the same process line, plating solution losses, and
fume scrubbers. Tank clean-outs and equipment cleaning are other sources of wastewater
reported by a number of sites.
The Agency analyzed data from WAPC devices that were reported as being
operated on electroplating lines. After reviewing the 1997 industry survey data and comparing it
to the data used for the 1982 regulation, the Agency determined that the model flow rate of 15
gpm contained in the 1982 effluent guidelines is still applicable.
In developing the model PNF, the Agency only considered flow rates that were
conveyed to treatment systems. When responding to the industry survey, sites had the option of
indicating whether they discharged their process wastewater to treatment and/or disposed of it via
several different zero discharge disposal methods. If a site listed a zero discharge disposal
method for discharge, EPA did not use that discharge in the development of the model PNF. If a
site's industry survey response indicated that a flow was both discharged to treatment and
disposed of using a zero discharge method, but did not specify the portion of flow going to each,
the Agency used the combined flow to develop the PNF.
The model PNF for electroplating operations varies by the type of metal applied
and the product type. The Agency chose a model PNF of 1,100 gpt for tin and chromium lines
plating strip steel. Ten of the 20 lines reported PNFs equal to or less than 1,100 gpt. The
Agency chose a model PNF of 550 gpt for lines plating strip steel with metals other than tin or
chromium. Sixteen of the 20 lines reported PNFs equal to or less than 550 gpt. EPA determined
that it would be cost-prohibitive for all sites to achieve the median PNF of 214 gpt. The Agency
chose a model PNF of 35 gpt for electroplating of steel plate. Because the data for plate
electroplating are confidential, they are not presented here. EPA concluded that the selected flow
rates are achievable by well-operated electroplating operations.
13-40
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
13.9 Subpart G: Other Operations3
The subcategory the Agency proposes for other operations encompasses segments
for direct-reduced ironmaking, forging, and briquetting.
13.9.1 Direct-Reduced Ironmaking (DRI) Segment
Three DRI plants provided industry survey data. One plant was operated at a non-
integrated site and two were operated as stand-alone DRI sites. One plant began operations after
1997, but was considered for the development of the model flow rate. WAPC systems are the
only reported process wastewater source for DRI operations. The WAPCs control furnace
emissions and emissions from material handling and storage.
An evaluation of the three sites that conducted DRI operations found that they
recycle scrubber wastewater. Based on the practice of wastewater recycle, the Agency selected a
model PNF of 90 gpt; two of the three DRI plants are achieving this model flow rate.
13.9.2 Forging Segment
The Agency determined that forging operations are similar to other hot forming
operations with respect to wastewater characteristics based on process considerations. Contact
water and hydraulic system wastewater comprise most of the process wastewater from forging
operations. Contact water is used for flume flushing, descaling, die spray cooling, and product
quenching. Some sites identified equipment cleaning water and basements sumps as other
sources of wastewater from forging operations.
EPA calculated PNFs for 15 forging operations based on available industry survey
data. The Agency based its development of model treatment for forging operations on similar
wastewater treatment for hot forming operations. As with hot forming, the Agency determined
that wastewater treatment systems treating forging wastewaters demonstrate a recycle rate of 96
percent. High-rate recycle is a principle component of forging wastewater treatment and EPA
used it to select a model flow rate. EPA selected a model PNF of 100 gpt for forging operations.
This model flow rate is demonstrated at nine of the 15 forging operations that were analyzed.
13.9.3 Briquetting Segment
The Agency found that briquetting operations do not generate or discharge process
wastewater. Therefore, the Agency has designated briquetting as a zero discharge operation.
JEPA did not perform a reanalysis of the model PNFs for this subcategory for the final rule, because it would not
affect the Agency's final decision. This discussion reflects the analyses from proposal.
13-41
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
References
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for Effluent
Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source
Category. Volume II. EPA 440/1-82/024, Washington, DC, May 1982.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Development Document for Effluent
Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source
Category. Volume I. EPA 440/1-82/024, Washington, DC, May 1982.
13-42
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Table 13-1
Model PNF by Subcategory
Subcategory and Manufacturing Processes
Model PNF (gpt)
Cokemaking
By-product recovery without biological control
113
By-product recovery with biological control
163
Non-recovery
0
Ironmaking
Sintering with wet air pollution controls
75
Sintering with dry air pollution controls
0
Blast furnace ironmaking
25
Integrated Steelmaking
Basic oxygen furnaces
Semi-wet air pollution control
10
Wet-open air pollution control
86
Wet-suppressed air pollution control
22
Ladle metallurgy
0
Vacuum degassing
13
Continuous casting
25
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming
100
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming
Electric arc furnaces
0
Ladle metallurgy
0
Vacuum degassing
10
Continuous casting
11
Hot forming
50
Combined thin slab casting and hot forming
120
Carbon and Alloy Hydrochloric Acid Pickling
Strip, sheet
50
Bar, billet, rod, coil
490
Pipe, tube
1,020
Plate
35
Acid regeneration (gal/min)
100
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15
Carbon and Alloy Sulfuric Acid Pickling
Strip, sheet
230
Bar, billet, rod, coil
280
Pipe, tube
500
Plate
35
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15
13-43
-------
Section 13 - Production-Normalized Flows
Table 13-1 (Continued)
Subcategory and Manufacturing Processes
Model PNF (gpt)
Stainless Steel Acid Pickling
Strip, sheet
700
Bar, billet, rod, coil
230
Pipe, tube
770
Plate
35
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15
Carbon and Alloy Cold Forming
Single stand, recirculation
1
Single stand, direct application
3
Multiple stand, recirculation
25
Multiple stand, direct application
275
Multiple stand, combination
143
Stainless Steel Cold Forming
Single stand, recirculation
3
Single stand, direct application
35
Multiple stand, recirculation
16
Multiple stand, direct application
275
Multiple stand, combination
143
Carbon and Alloy Alkaline Cleaning
Strip, sheet
320
Pipe, tube
20
Stainless Steel Alkaline Cleaning
Strip, sheet
2,500
Pipe, tube
20
Continuous Annealing
20
Hot Coating
All types
550
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15
Electroplating
Tin/chrome - strip, sheet
1,100
Other metals - strip, sheet
550
Plate
35
Fume scrubber (gal/min)
15
Other Operations
Direct-reduced ironmaking
90
Forging
100
Briquetting
0
13-44
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
SECTION 14
LIMITATIONS AND STANDARDS: DATA SELECTION AND CALCULATION
This section describes the data sources, data selection, data conventions, and
statistical methodology used by EPA in calculating the long-term averages, variability factors,
and limitations. The effluent limitations and standards1 for cokemaking, sintering, and other
operations subcategories and options are based on long-term average effluent values and
variability factors that account for variation in treatment performance within a particular
treatment technology over time.
Section 14.1 gives a brief overview of data sources (a more detailed discussion is
provided in Section 3) and describes EPA's evaluation and selection of facility datasets that are
the basis of the limitations. Section 14.2 provides a more detailed discussion of the selection of
BAT facility datasets for cokemaking, sintering, and other operations subcategories and options.
For those proposed subcategories that EPA decided not to revise, Sections 5.8 and 14.10 of the
record contains descriptions of the development of long-term averages for pollutant removal
analysis. Section 14.3 describes excluded and substituted data. Section 14.4 presents the
procedures for data aggregation. Section 14.5 describes data editing criteria used to select
episode datasets in calculating the long-term averages and limitations. Section 14.6 provides an
overview of the limitations. Sections 14.7, 14.8, and 14.9 describe procedures for estimation of
long-term averages, variability factors, and concentration-based limitations into the production-
normalized limitations. Section 14.10 describes the procedures used to determine the
concentration-based limitations for naphthalene for PSES. The attachments for Section 14 are
provided in Appendix E.
14.1 Overview of Data Selection
To develop the long-term averages, variability factors, and limitations, EPA used
wastewater data from facilities with components of the model technology for each subcategory
and option. These data were collected from two sources, EPA's sampling episodes, herein
referred to as "sampling episodes" and industry's self-monitoring data, herein referred to as "self-
monitoring episodes." Because daily variability cannot be determined from summary data (e.g.,
monthly averages) as reported in the survey, EPA did not consider any facilities that provided
only summary data. EPA qualitatively reviewed the data from the sampling and self-monitoring
episodes and selected episodes to represent each option based on a review of the production
processes and treatment technologies in place at each facility. EPA only used data from facilities
that had some or all components of the model technologies for the option (model technologies
for each option are described in Section 9).
Generally, if EPA selected data from a sampling episode, it also selected any self-
monitoring episode data submitted from the same treatment system from the same facility.
EPA's sampling episodes typically provided data for all of the regulated pollutants (see
'In the remainder of this chapter, references to 'limitations' includes 'standards.'
14-1
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Section 12). In contrast, the industry self-monitoring data were only for a limited subset of
pollutants (most facilities monitor only for pollutants specified in their permits). EPA analyzed
the data from each episode separately in calculating the limitations. This is consistent with
EPA's practice for other industrial categories. Data from different sources generally characterize
different time periods and/or different chemical analytical methods. After proposal, EPA
received comments questioning the validity of the above approach to keeping the episodes
separate. For a more detailed discussion on the analysis EPA performed to address the
comments, see Section 14.2.1 cokemaking discussion.
In developing the promulgated limitations, EPA generally used the self-
monitoring data when they were measured by analytical methods specified in or approved under
40 CFR Part 136 that facilities are required to use for compliance monitoring. Section 4
describes all but one of the exceptions to this general rule. The remaining exception was EPA's
exclusion of all industry self-monitoring data for oil and grease because facilities generally used
methods which require freon, an ozone-depleting agent, as an extraction solvent. For the samples
collected in its sampling episodes, EPA used a more recent method, Method 1664, which uses
normal hexane («-hexane) as the extraction solvent and measures oil and grease (O&G) as
hexane extractable material (HEM). EPA developed the O&G limitations solely on the HEM
measurements from Method 1664.
EPA received a number of comments on the ability of existing facilities to achieve
both the long-term averages and the production-normalized flows (PNFs). The following
paragraphs describe EPA's methodologies in selecting the BAT facilities and the datasets upon
which the Agency based its long-term averages and its updated data editing procedures for long-
term average and variability calculations. Section 14.2 provides more details about the BAT
facility and dataset selection for each subcategory. For a discussion of PNFs, see Section 13 of
this document.
First, EPA evaluated each dataset to determine what technology or series of
technologies the data represented. In this manner, EPA eliminated many datasets because they
did not represent a technology basis considered during development of this rule. In a few
instances, EPA included data from facilities that employ technologies in addition to the
technology bases being considered. In these cases, EPA had data from intermediate sampling
points representing the model technologies; in other words, the data EPA employed reflected
application of only the technologies under consideration. Next, EPA reviewed the remaining
datasets to ensure that each facility was effectively operating its technologies. For example, EPA
eliminated facilities that experienced repeated operating problems with their treatment systems or
have discharge points located after addition of significant amounts (i.e., greater than 10 percent
by volume) of non-process water.
For the datasets that remained, EPA performed a detailed review of the data and
all supporting documentation accompanying the data. This includes both EPA sampling episodes
and self-monitoring episodes. EPA performed this review to ensure that the selected data
represent a treatment system's normal operating conditions and to ensure that the data accurately
14-2
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
reflect the performance expected by the BAT treatment systems. Thus, EPA excluded data that
were collected while a facility was experiencing exceptional incidents or upsets.
After determining the datasets to be included to calculate long-term averages and
variability for each technology option under consideration for the final rule, EPA applied further
data editing criteria on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis. For facilities where EPA possessed paired
influent and effluent data, it performed a long-term average test. The test looks at the influent
concentrations to ensure a pollutant is present at sufficient concentration to evaluate treatment
effectiveness. If a pollutant failed the test (i.e., was not present at a treatable concentration), EPA
excluded the data for that pollutant at that facility from its long-term average and variability
calculations. In this manner, EPA would ensure that its limitations resulted from treatment and
not simply the absence of that pollutant in the wastestream. See Section 14.5 for a detailed
discussion and Appendix C for the results of the LTA test. In many cases, however, industry
supplied EPA with effluent data, but not the corresponding influent data. In these cases, EPA
used the effluent data without performing a long-term average test. EPA decided to use these
data for two reasons. First, EPA wanted to include as much data as possible in its calculations.
Second, the vast majority of pollutants for which industry supplied self-monitoring data are
pollutants regulated in the existing iron and steel regulation; EPA has already established the
presence of the regulated pollutants in treatable levels in iron and steel wastestreams. Therefore,
EPA is confident that these effluent data represent effective treatment and not the absence of the
pollutant in the wastestream.
Finally, EPA reviewed the remaining data on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis to
determine if any data values appeared to be unreasonable and suitable for possible exclusions.
These exclusions, along with justifications, are described in detail in the next section. Sections
5.8 and 14.10 of the record describes the data exclusions for those proposed subcategories that
EPA decided not to revise.
14.2 Episode Selection for Each Subcategory and Option
This section describes the data selected for each pollutant for each technology
option in each subcategory. See Section 9 for those options for which EPA is proposing no
discharge of process wastewater pollutants to waters of the United States.
In the following sections and the public record, EPA has masked the identity of
the episodes and sampling points to protect confidential business information (CBI). EPA
sampling episodes are identified as ESExx and the industry self-monitoring episodes as ISMxx
where "xx" is a unique two-digit number assigned to each episode (for example, ESE01 and
ISM51). The sampling points are identified with SP-c where "c" is a character (for example, SP-
A). The daily data and sampling points corresponding to these episodes are listed in Appendix
C. Attachment 14-1 in Appendix E provides summary statistics for all episodes, sorted by
subcategory and option.
14-3
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
14.2.1 Cokemaking Subcategory
For the by-product recovery segment in the cokemaking subcategory, as described
in the following subsections, EPA is promulgating limitations based on BAT-1 and PSES-1. The
data for the BAT-1 option were used to calculate the limitations for direct dischargers. (The
technical components for BAT-1 are the same as those for PSES-3.) The data from the PSES-1
options were used to calculate the standards for indirect dischargers.
BAT-1 (PSES-3)
The BAT-1 option technology was used as the basis for the limitations for direct
dischargers in the by-product recovery segment. EPA determined that all but two of the direct-
discharging facilities with processes in the by-product recovery segment have the model
technology associated with the BAT-1 option, namely ammonia stripping and biological
treatment with nitrification and secondary clarification. Of these facilities, EPA selected data
from three facilities that met the criteria described in Section 14.1. DCN IS 10816 in section
14.10 of the record discusses the facility selection process for the by-product recovery
cokemaking segment in detail. The selected data were from two sampling episodes (ESEO1 and
ESE02) and two self-monitoring episodes (ISM50 and ISM51). All the selected facilities treat
wastewater from by-product recovery operations as well as small amounts of ground water or
control water added for biological treatment optimization. One sampling episode and self-
monitoring episode were from the same facility. EPA analyzed the data from each episode
separately in calculating the limitations in order to be consistent with the Agency's traditional
practice for other industrial categories and because the two episodes were associated with
different analytical methods for some pollutants (e.g., naphthalene). Of the four episodes, EPA
further reviewed the data and applied the following data exclusions:
• ESE01 - The facility's ammonia data were excluded completely because
its influent concentrations during the five-day sampling event were
abnormally and consistently low. EPA obtained more influent data from
the plant and confirmed that the low levels of ammonia observed during
the sampling event do not reflect the plant's normal raw wastewater
characteristics. In addition, the facility's data for benzo(a)pyrene, O&G,
and TSS were excluded due to LTA test (see Appendix C for test results).
• ESE02 - The facility's data for TSS were excluded due to LTA test.
• ISM50 - EPA excluded the ammonia data for the time periods of 1/22/96-
3/26/96 and 12/23/96-1/14/97 because these data values were unusually
high. Furthermore, plant personnel confirmed that the biological system
was down during the above two time periods because of nitrifier upset. In
addition, the Agency also excluded the ammonia data for the time period
9/10/00-10/31/00 because the detected values were abnormally high and
the plant personnel confirmed that the facility's gas handling and chemical
recovery system failed during that time period.
14-4
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
EPA excluded all benzo(a)pyrene data from this episode because of
concerns about the analytical methods (see Section 4.4.15, DCNs IS07040
and IS07051 in Sections 8.4 and 8.5 of the proposal record). In addition,
the Agency also excluded the O&G data from this episode because the
facility did not use Method 1664.
• ISM51 — EPA excluded all the data dated after March 1, 1998 because the
facility operated a treatment system different from the BAT-1 model
technology starting from that date. As a result, the data from this facility
were not used to develop the limits for benzo(a)pyrene, and naphthalene.
In addition, EPA also excluded all the total cyanide data, as measured by
SM4500. EPA excluded the first six of the eight data values, which were
all reported as detected at the same value of 12 mg/L, due to concerns
about the level of precision attained by the laboratory. Data are seldom
reported at the same value unless they are non-detected or close to the
lowest level that can be measured by the chemical analytical method,
which in this case was 0.02 mg/L. EPA also excluded the last two of the
eight data values (8 and 8.7 mg/L) because these were also measured by
SM4500. EPA concluded that all results were probably unreliable from
this method during the self-monitoring episode.
Lastly, EPA excluded all TSS data from this episode because the facility
discharged indirectly prior to March 1998. As a result, the facility's
discharge limits for TSS prior to March 1998 would expected to be high
because POTWs are specifically designed and operated to treat pollutants
such as TSS.
In summary, the episodes selected for each regulated pollutant in the by-product
recovery segment of the cokemaking subcategory are as follows:
• Ammonia as Nitrogen — EPA had concentration data from one sampling
episode ESE02, and two self-monitoring episodes (ISM50 and ISM51).
• Benzo(a)pyrene — EPA used data from its sampling episode ESE02 to
develop the promulgated limitations for BAT-1.
• Naphthalene — EPA calculated the limitations using the data from
episodes ESE01, ESE02, and ISM50.
• Phenols (4AAP) — EPA used data from all four episodes.
• Total Cyanide - For the total cyanide standards, EPA used data from one
facility, representing sampling episode (ESE01) and one self-monitoring
episode (ISM50), to establish the limits. EPA did this to address
14-5
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
commenters' concern that the total cyanide limits are not achievable. This
facility demonstrated the highest influent concentration of total cyanide.
Therefore, EPA concluded that if this facility can achieve the limit, then
the other facilities should be able to do the same. See DCN IS 10884 in
Section 14.10 of the rulemaking record for a more detailed discussion.
• O&G - For new direct dischargers, EPA used concentration data from its
sampling episode (ESE02) for O&G measured as HEM. As explained in
Section 14.1, industry did not measure O&G as HEM and thus none of the
self-monitoring episodes were included in calculating the O&G
limitations.
• TSS — For new direct dischargers, EPA used concentration data from one
self-monitoring episode (ISM50).
PSES-1
The PSES-1 option technology (mainly ammonia stripping) was used as the basis
for the limitations for indirect dischargers. Eight facilities (corresponding to eight episodes) had
the PSES-1 option technology. Of these facilities, EPA selected data from three facilities that
met the criteria described in Section 14.1. DCN IS10816 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking
record discusses the facility selection process for the by-product recovery cokemaking segment in
detail. Two of these episodes were EPA sampling episodes (ESE01 and ESE02) and one was
self-monitoring episode (ISM54). EPA also included total cyanide data from ISM50 because the
facility submitted three years of daily total cyanide measurements representing PSES-1
technology. None of the facilities commingled cokemaking wastewater with wastewater from
other subcategories.
The direct dischargers represented in the two sampling episodes had employed the
model technology that was the basis for the pretreatment standards. EPA used their data to
calculate the pretreatment standards in conjunction with data from the indirect discharger
(ISM54). EPA used data from these direct discharging facilities because EPA had data from
intermediate sampling points representing the PSES-1 model technologies. However, for
ammonia as nitrogen, EPA did not use data from ESE01 and ESE02 because the effluent at the
intermediate sampling points, i.e., after ammonia still and before biological treatment, would not
realistically represent effluent from an indirect discharger. Since biological treatment provides
additional removal of ammonia, facilities with add-on biological treatment tend not to remove
ammonia completely in the ammonia stripping step. As a result, EPA used the data from the
indirect discharger (ISM54) to calculate the PSES-1 pretreatment standards for ammonia as
nitrogen.
For total cyanide, EPA used data from ISM50. See the total cyanide discussion in
the BAT-1 section. EPA excluded the total cyanide data for 2/04/99 because it was at least two
orders of magnitude higher than the rest of the data, which represented five years worth of self-
monitoring. Plant personnel suspected that the value is a typographical error.
14-6
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
For naphthalene, EPA used all three sampling episodes to develop the proposed
pretreatment standards.
14.2.2 Sintering Subcategory
In October 2000, EPA proposed combining the sintering and ironmaking
subcategories from the 1982 regulation into a single subcategory to be known as ironmaking,
with a single technology basis. With the exception of cooling towers, which apply to blast
furnace operations only, EPA considered the same technologies for both segments. The basis for
the proposed ironmaking limits and standards for the sintering segment with wet air pollution
control system was: solids removal with high-rate recycle and metals precipitation, alkaline
chlorination, and mixed media filtration ofblowdown wastewater. This was known as
Ironmaking BAT1. Since EPA has determined that BAT1 is not the best achievable technology
for ironmaking (and, subsequently, sintering) operations (see preamble Section VIII.B). EPA has
also concluded that it is unnecessary to combine the two 1982 subcategories into a single
subcategory as proposed, because the final rule is not changing the 1982 limits and standards
except as noted below.
In the final rule, EPA promulgated an effluent limitation guideline and standard
for one parameter, 2,3,7,8-TCDF, for sintering operations with wet air pollution control, and left
unchanged the 1982 limits and standards for all other parameters in the sintering and ironmaking
subcategories. EPA chose to use 2,3,7,8-TCDF as an indicator parameter for the whole family of
dioxin/furan congeners for several reasons. First, 2,3,7,8-TCDF is the most toxic of the
congeners found in treated sintering wastewater. Second, 2,3,7,8-TCDF was one of the most
prevalent of the dioxin/furan congeners in these wastewaters. Finally, 2,3,7,8-TCDF is
chemically similar to the other dioxin/furan congeners and its removal will similarly indicate
removal of the other congeners.
The technology basis for new TCDF limitations and standards for the sintering
subcategory remains unchanged from the proposal, which is the same as the technology basis for
the 1982 regulations except for the addition of multimedia filtration. During four EPA sampling
episodes, several of these congeners were found in both the raw and treated wastewater from
sinter plants operating wet air pollution control technologies. Although none of the sampled
facilities has this technology in place, EPA concludes that multimedia filtration will result in the
removal of this congener, and thus all the dioxin/furan congeners, below the minimum level
specified in Method 1613, because dioxins and furans are hydrophobic compounds, meaning they
tend to adhere to solids present in a solution. Thus removal of the solids, which is accomplished
by multimedia filtration, will result in removal of the dioxins/furans adhering to them as well.
Furthermore, EPA has data from two sampling episodes at sinter plants demonstrating that
filtration of wastewater samples containing dioxins and furans at treatable levels will reduce their
concentrations to non-detectable levels (see DCN IS 10853 in Section 14.10 of the rulemaking
record for more information). This is true even for raw wastewater that has undergone no other
treatment. As a result, the TCDF limit is expressed as "
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
EPA is also promulgating, as proposed, a provision that the total recoverable
chlorine (TRC) BAT limitations or NSPS promulgated in 1982 apply only when sintering
process wastewater is chlorinated.
For indirect dischargers, sintering facilities discharging to POTWs with
nitrification capability would not be subject to the pretreatment standard for ammonia-N.
EPA is leaving unchanged all limitations currently in effect for the ironmaking
subcategory, except to delete the limitations for the obsolete ferromanganese blast furnaces.
EPA had proposed limits and standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for the ironmaking subcategory, but it
was to apply only to facilities that combined their blast furnace and sintering wastewater.
2,3,7,8-TCDF was not found in the blast furnace wastewater. Facilities with combined blast
furnace and sintering wastewater recycling systems may monitor for 2,3,7,8-TCDF after these
two waste streams are combined to ensure compliance, but before commingling with wastewaters
other than sintering or blast furnace wastewater. See Section 16.8.3 for more information
regarding the compliance monitoring location and an exception which allows commingling with
wastewaters other than sintering or blast furnace wastewater. By preserving the 1982
subcategorization scheme and promulgating limits and standards for the compound in the
sintering subcategory, EPA has addressed this issue, and is therefore not promulgating limits and
standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for the ironmaking subcategory.
14.2.3 Other Operations
The other operations subcategory has three segments: the direct-reduced
ironmaking (DRI) segment, the forging segment, and the briquetting segment. For the
briquetting segment, EPA is promulgating no discharge ofprocess wastewater pollutants to
waters of the United States as discussed in Section 9. The next two subsections describe the data
used to calculate the limitations for the remaining two segments.
Direct-Reduced Ironmaking
The DRI_BPT option technology is the basis for the limitations for the direct
dischargers in the direct-reduced ironmaking segment of the other operations subcategory. EPA
selected data from one facility that had the model technology for TSS (and met the criteria in
Section 14.1), which is the only regulated pollutant in this segment. This treatment system treats
water only from direct-reduced ironmaking processes (a small amount of storm water and
equipment cleaning water is also treated in the treatment system). For this facility, EPA had data
from one sampling episode (ESE10) and one self-monitoring episode (ISM65) that it used to
calculate the limitations for TSS. EPA included all of these data in calculating the TSS
limitations. O&G (measured by HEM) data from ESE10 were excluded from pollutant removal
evaluation because of LTA test.
14-8
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Forging
For the forging segment, EPA promulgated limitations for O&G and TSS for
direct dischargers. EPA did not sample forging operations or obtain any forging self-monitoring
data from facilities with the model technology. Because EPA has determined that the
characteristics of forging operation wastewater are similar to hot forming operation wastewater,
EPA transferred the limitations from both segments of the Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming Subcategory. The facilities used to develop the limits are ESE04, ESE07, and ESE09.
Because, depending on the materials used, the forging operations can create wastestreams similar
to either of the hot forming segments, EPA transferred the data from the two segments. For
ESE04, O&G and TSS data did not pass the LTA test and they were not included in the limits
development.
14.3 Data Exclusions and Substitutions
In some cases, EPA did not use all of the data described in Section 14.2 in
calculating the limitations. Other than the data exclusions and substitutions described in this
section and those resulting from the data editing procedures, EPA has used the data from the
episodes and sampling points presented in Appendix C.
In general, EPA used the reported measured value or sample-specific detection
limit in its calculations. However, there were instances where EPA substituted baseline values
(defined in Section 4) for reported values. In this case, EPA compared each laboratory-reported
sample result to a baseline value. In some situations, EPA substituted a larger value for the
measured value or sample-specific detection limit. This substitution is described in Sections
4.4.1 and 4.5.1. Appendix C and the minimums and maximums provided in Attachment 14-1 in
Appendix E list the data before these substitutions.
14.4 Data Aggregation
In some cases, EPA determined that two or more samples had to be
mathematically aggregated to obtain a single value that could be used in other calculations. In
some cases, this meant that field duplicates and grab samples were aggregated for a single
sampling point. In addition, for one facility, data were aggregated to obtain a single daily value
representing the facility's effluent from multiple outfalls. Appendix C lists the data after these
aggregations were completed and a single daily value was obtained for each day for each
pollutant.
In all aggregation procedures, EPA considered the censoring type associated with
the data. EPA considered measured values to be detected. In statistical terms, the censoring type
for such data was 'non-censored' (NC). Measurements reported as being less than some sample-
specific detection limit (e.g., <10 mg/L) were censored and were considered to be non-detected
14-9
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
(ND). In the tables and data listings in this document and the record for the rulemaking, EPA has
used the abbreviations NC and ND to indicate the censoring types.2
The distinction between the two censoring types is important because the
procedure used to determine the variability factors considers censoring type explicitly. This
estimation procedure modeled the facility datasets using the modified delta-lognormal
distribution. In this distribution, data are modeled as a mixture of two distributions. Thus, EPA
concluded that the distinctions between detected and non-detected measurements were important
and should be an integral part of any data aggregation procedure. (See Appendix B for a detailed
discussion of the modified delta-lognormal distribution.)
Because each aggregated data value entered into the modified delta-lognormal
model as a single value, the censoring type associated with that value was also important. In
many cases, a single aggregated value was created from unaggregated data that were all either
detected or non-detected. In the remaining cases with a mixture of detected and non-detected
unaggregated values, EPA determined that the resulting aggregated value should be considered to
be detected because the pollutant was measured at detectable levels.
This section describes each of the different aggregation procedures. They are
presented in the order that the aggregation was performed. That is, field duplicates were
aggregated first, grab samples second, and finally multiple outfalls.
14.4.1 Aggregation of Field Duplicates
During the EPA sampling episodes, EPA collected a small number of field
duplicates. Generally, ten percent of the number of samples collected were duplicated. Field
duplicates are two samples collected for the same sampling point at approximately the same time,
assigned different sample numbers, and flagged as duplicates for a single sampling point at a
facility.
Because the analytical data from each duplicate pair characterize the same
conditions at that time at a single sampling point, EPA aggregated the data to obtain one data
value for those conditions. The data value associated with those conditions was the arithmetic
average of the duplicate pair.
In most cases, both duplicates in a pair had the same censoring type. In these
cases, the censoring type of the aggregate was the same as the duplicates. In the remaining cases,
one duplicate was a non-censored value and the other duplicate was a non-detected value. In
these cases, EPA determined that the appropriate censoring type of the aggregate was
'non-censored' because the pollutant had been present in one sample. (Even if the other
laboratories can also report numerical results for specific pollutants detected in the samples as "right-censored."
Right-censored measurements are those that are reported as being greater than the highest calibration value of the
analysis (e.g., >1000 jig/L). None of the data used in calculating the limitations included any right-censored data.
14-10
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
duplicate had a zero value3, the pollutant still would have been present if the samples had been
physically combined.) Table 14-1 summarizes the procedure for aggregating the analytical
results from the field duplicates. This aggregation step for the duplicate pairs was the first step in
the aggregation procedures for both influent and effluent measurements.
14.4.2 Aggregation of Grab Samples
During the EPA sampling episodes, EPA collected two types of samples: grab and
composite. Typically, EPA collected composite samples. Of the pollutants promulgated for
regulation, O&G was the only one for which the chemical analytical method specifies that grab
samples must be used. For O&G, EPA collected multiple (usually four) grab samples during a
sampling day at a sampling point. To obtain one value characterizing the pollutant levels at the
sampling point on a single day, EPA mathematically aggregated the measurements from the grab
samples.
The procedure arithmetically averaged the measurements to obtain a single value
for the day. When one or more measurements were non-censored, EPA determined that the
appropriate censoring type of the aggregate was 'non-censored' because the pollutant was
present. Table 14-2 summarizes the procedure.
14.4.3 Aggregation of Data Across Outfalls ("Flow-Weighting")
After field duplicates and grab samples were aggregated, the data were further
aggregated across sampling points for different outfalls. This step was necessary for the facilities
where data from multiple sampling points were aggregated to obtain a single daily value
representing the episode's effluent from multiple outfalls. In aggregating values across sampling
points, if one or more of the values were non-censored, then the aggregated result was non-
censored (because the pollutant was present in at least one stream). When all of the values were
non-detected, then the aggregated result was considered to be non-detected. The procedure for
aggregating data across streams is summarized in Table 14-3. The following example
demonstrates the procedure for hypothetical pollutant X at an episode with three outfalls all from
the model technology on day 1 of the sampling episode.
Example of calculating an aggregated flow-weighted value:
Day Sampling Point Flow (gal) Concentration (|ig/L) Censoring
1 SP-A 10,000,000 10 ND
1 SP-B 20,000,000 50 NC
1 SP-C 5,000,000 100 ND
3This is presented as a 'worst-case' scenario. In practice, the laboratories cannot measure 'zero' values. Rather they
report that the value is less than some level (see Section 4).
14-11
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Calculation to obtain aggregated, flow-weighted value:
(10,000,000 gal X 10 ng/ L) + (20,000,000 gal x 50 ng / L) + (5,000,000 gal x lOOng/L)
10,000,000 gal+ 20,000,000 gal+5,000,000gal = 45'7 Pg/L
Because one of the three values was non-censored, the aggregated value of 45.7 |ig/L is non-
censored.
14.5 Data Editing Criteria
After excluding some data and aggregating the data, EPA applied data editing
criteria to select episode datasets to be used in calculating the long-term averages and limitations.
This criteria was specified by the 'long-term average test' (or LTA test).
EPA established the long-term average test to ensure that the pollutants were
present in the influent at sufficient concentrations to evaluate treatment effectiveness during the
episode. After the data aggregation, EPA compared the daily values of influent and their long-
term average to the baseline value described in Section 4. The influent had to pass a basic
requirement and one of the following two steps to pass the LTA test:
Step 1. At least 50% of the influent measurements in an episode were
detected at the levels that are any value equal to or greater than 10
times the baseline value (defined in Section 4).
Step 2. At least 50% of the influent measurements in an episode were
detected and the episode influent LTA was equal to or greater than
10 times the baseline value (defined in Section 4).
When the dataset at an episode failed both steps, EPA excluded the effluent data
for the episode in calculating the long-term averages, variability factors, and limitations for the
corresponding option in the subcategory. In this manner, EPA would ensure that its limitations
resulted from treatment and not simply the absence of that pollutant in the wastestream.
If influent data were unavailable for the episode, the effluent data were assumed to
pass the LTA test. EPA decided to use these data for two reasons. First, EPA wanted to include
as much data as possible in its calculations. Second, the vast majority of pollutants for which
industry supplied self-monitoring data are pollutants regulated in the existing iron and steel
regulation; EPA has already established the presence of the regulated pollutants in treatable
levels in iron and steel wastestreams. Therefore, EPA is confident that these effluent data
represent effective treatment and not the absence of the pollutant in the wastestream. See
Appendix C for the results of the LTA test.
14-12
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
14.6 Overview of Limitations
The preceding sections discuss the data selected as the basis for the limitations
and the data aggregation procedures EPA used to obtain daily values in its calculations. This
section provides a general overview of limitations before returning to the development of the
limitations for the iron and steel industry. This section describes EPA's objective for daily
maximum and monthly average limitations, the selection of percentiles for those limitations, and
compliance with final limitations. EPA has included this discussion in Section 14 because these
fundamental concepts are often the subject of comments on EPA's effluent guidelines regulations
and in EPA's contacts and correspondence with the iron and steel industry.
14.6.1 Objective
In establishing daily maximum limitations, EPA's objective is to restrict the
discharges on a daily basis at a level that is achievable for a facility that targets its treatment at
the long-term average. EPA acknowledges that variability around the long-term average results
from normal operations. This variability means that occasionally facilities may discharge at a
level that is greater than the long-term average. This variability also means that facilities may
occasionally discharge at a level that is considerably lower than the long-term average. To allow
for these possibly higher daily discharges, EPA has established the daily maximum limitation. A
facility that discharges consistently at a level near the daily maximum limitation would not be
operating its treatment to achieve the long-term average, which is part of EPA's objective in
establishing the daily maximum limitations. That is, targeting treatment to achieve the
limitations may result in frequent values exceeding the limitations due to routine variability in
treated effluent.
In establishing monthly average limitations, EPA's objective is to provide an
additional restriction to help ensure that facilities target their average discharges to achieve the
long-term average. The monthly average limitation requires continuous dischargers to provide
on-going control, on a monthly basis, that complements controls imposed by the daily maximum
limitation. In order to meet the monthly average limitation, a facility must counterbalance a
value near the daily maximum limitation with one or more values well below the daily maximum
limitation. To achieve compliance, these values must result in a monthly average value at or
below the monthly average limitation.
14.6.2 Selection of Percentiles
EPA calculates limitations based upon percentiles chosen with the intention, on
one hand, to be high enough to accommodate reasonably anticipated variability within control of
the facility and, on the other hand, to be low enough to reflect a level of performance consistent
with the Clean Water Act requirement that these effluent limitations be based on the "best"
technologies. The daily maximum limitation is an estimate of the 99th percentile of the
distribution of the daily measurements. The monthly average limitation is an estimate of the 95th
percentile of the distribution of the monthly averages of the daily measurements.
14-13
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
The 99th and 95th percentiles do not relate to, or specify, the percentage of time a
discharger operating the "best available" or "best available demonstrated" level of technology
will meet (or not meet) the limitations. Rather, the use of these percentiles relate to the
development of limitations. (The percentiles used as a basis for the limitations are calculated
using the products of the long-term averages and the variability factors as explained in the next
section.) If a facility is designed and operated to achieve the long-term average on a consistent
basis and the facility maintains adequate control of its processes and treatment systems, the
allowance for variability provided in the limitations is sufficient to meet the requirements of the
rule. The use of 99 percent and 95 percent represents a need to draw a line at a definite point in
the statistical distributions (100 percent is not feasible because it represents an infinitely large
value) and a policy judgment about where to draw the line that would ensure that operators work
hard to establish and maintain the appropriate level of control. In essence, in developing the
limitations, EPA has taken into account the reasonable anticipated variability in discharges that
may occur at a well-operated facility. By targeting its treatment at the long-term average, a well-
operated facility should be capable of complying with the limitations at all times because EPA
has incorporated an appropriate allowance for variability into the limitations.
In conjunction with the statistical methods, EPA performs an engineering review
to verify that the limitations are reasonable based upon the design and expected operation of the
control technologies and the facility process conditions. As part of that review, EPA examines
the range of performance by the facility datasets used to calculate the limitations. Some facility
datasets demonstrate the best available technology. Other facility datasets may demonstrate the
same technology, but not the best demonstrated design and operating conditions for that
technology. For these facilities, EPA will evaluate the degree to which the facility can upgrade
its design, operating, and maintenance conditions to meet the limitations. If such upgrades are
not possible, then the limitations are modified to reflect the lowest levels that the technologies
can reasonably be expected to achieve.
14.6.3 Compliance with Limitations
EPA promulgates limitations that facilities are capable of complying with at all
times by properly operating and maintaining their processes and treatment technologies.
However, the issue of exceedances or excursions (i.e., values that exceed the limitations) is often
raised by comments on limitations. For example, comments often suggest that EPA include a
provision that a facility is in compliance with permit limitations if its discharge does not exceed
the specified limitations, with the exception that the discharge may exceed the monthly average
limitations one month out of 20 and the daily average limitations one day out of 100. This issue
was, in fact, raised in other rules, including EPA's final Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and
Synthetic Fibers (OCPSF) rulemaking. EPA's general approach there for developing limitations
based on percentiles is the same in this rule, and was upheld in Chemical Manufacturers
Association v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 870 F.2d 177, 230 (5th Cir. 1989). The
Court determined that:
EPA reasonably concluded that the data points exceeding the 99th and 95th
percentiles represent either quality-control problems or upsets because there can
14-14
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
be no other explanation for these isolated and extremely high discharges. If these
data points result from quality-control problems, the exceedances they represent
are within the control of the plant. If, however, the data points represent
exceedances beyond the control of the industry, the upset defense is available,
id. at 230.
More recently, this issue was raised in EPA's Phase I rule for the pulp and paper
industry. In that rulemaking, EPA used the same general approach for developing limitations
based on percentiles that it had used for the OCPSF rulemaking and for today's rule. This
approach for the monthly average limitation was upheld in National Wildlife Federation, et al v.
Environmental Protection Agency. No. 99-1452, Slip Op. at Section III.D (D.C. Cir.) (April 19,
2002). The Court determined that:
EPA's approach to developing monthly limitations was reasonable. It established
limitations based on percentiles achieved by facilities using well-operated and
controlled processes and treatment systems. It is therefore reasonable for EPA to
conclude that measurements above the limitations are due to either upset
conditions or deficiencies in process and treatment system maintenance and
operation. EPA has included an affirmative defense that is available to mills that
exceed limitations due to an unforeseen event. EPA reasonably concluded that
other exceedances would be the result of design or operational deficiencies. EPA
rejected Industry Petitioners' claim that facilities are expected to operate processes
and treatment systems so as to violate the limitations at some pre-set rate. EPA
explained that the statistical methodology was used as a framework to establish
the limitations based on percentiles. These limitations were never intended to
have the rigid probabilistic interpretation that Industry Petitioners have adopted.
Therefore, we reject Industry Petitioners' challenge to the effluent limitations.
As that Court recognized, EPA's allowance for reasonably anticipated variability
in its effluent limitations, coupled with the availability of the upset defense, reasonably
accommodates acceptable excursions. Any further excursion allowances would go beyond the
reasonable accommodation of variability and would jeopardize the effective control of pollutant
discharges on a consistent basis and/or bog down administrative and enforcement proceedings in
detailed fact finding exercises, contrary to Congressional intent. See, e.g., Rep. No. 92-414, 92d
Congress, 2d Sess. 64, reprinted in A Legislative History of the Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972 at 1482; Legislative History of the Clean Water Act of 1977 at 464-65.
EPA recognizes that the preceding discussion is inconsistent with Appendix A in
two of the development documents for the 1982 rule. (The same appendix is attached to both
documents.) This appendix incorrectly implies that EPA condones periodic violations of
monthly average limitations in its statement that
... it would be expected that 95 percent of the randomly observed 30-day average
values from a treatment system discharging the pollutant at a known mean
concentration will fall below this bound. Thus, a well operated plant would be
14-15
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
expected, on the average, to incur approximately one violation of the 30-day
average limitation during a 20 month period.
This statement does not accurately reflect EPA's interpretation of its 1982 regulations, nor of
today's limitations. Rather, EPA expects that facilities will comply with promulgated
limitations at all times. If the exceedance is caused by an upset condition, the facility would
have an affirmative defense to an enforcement action if the requirements of 40 CFR 122.41(n)
are met. If the exceedance is caused by a design or operational deficiency, then EPA has
determined that the facility's performance does not represent the appropriate level of control
(best available technology for existing sources; best available demonstrated technology for new
sources). For promulgated limitations and standards, EPA has determined that such exceedances
can be controlled by diligent process and wastewater treatment system operational practices such
as frequent inspection and repair of equipment, use of back-up systems, and operator training and
performance evaluations.
14.7 Summary of the Limitations
The limitations for pollutants for each option are provided as 'daily maximums'
and 'maximums for monthly averages' (except for pH as described below). Definitions provided
in 40 CFR 122.2 state that the daily maximum limitation is the "highest allowable 'daily
discharge'" and the maximum for monthly average limitation (also referred to as the "average
monthly discharge limitation") is the "highest allowable average of'daily discharges' over a
calendar month, calculated as the sum of all 'daily discharges' measured during a calendar month
divided by the number of 'daily discharges' measured during that month." Daily discharges are
defined to be the "'discharge of a pollutant' measured during a calendar day or any 24-hour
period that reasonably represents the calendar day for purposes of sampling."
EPA has calculated four types of limitations for the iron and steel industry as
follows:
Type 1: Daily maximum and monthly average limitations expressed in
terms of allowable pollutant discharge (pounds) per unit of
production (short tons). Most of the limitations are of this type.
Type 2: The limitations for pH are specified as a range of values between 6
and 9. The limitations are discussed in Section 14.3 of the
rulemaking record at DCN IS 10885.
Type 3: Daily maximum limitations for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-furan
(TCDF) are expressed as less than the minimum level ("
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
once a month. EPA believes that a monthly monitoring frequency
is reasonable because 12 data points for 2,3,7,8-TCDF each year
will yield a meaningful basis for establishing compliance with the
promulgated 2,3,7,8-TCDF limitations and standards by presenting
long-term trends and short-term variability in 2,3,7,8-TCDF.
Type 4: For certain processes and discharge types (that is, some new
sources and indirect dischargers), EPA has determined that there
shall be no discharge of process wastewater pollutants to waters of
the United States. This requirement is discussed in Section 13.
The remainder of Section 14 mainly describes the development of the limitations
corresponding to Type 1. In this document and elsewhere, EPA refers to such limitations as
'production-normalized.' EPA has promulgated production-normalized limitations in terms of
daily maximums and maximum for monthly averages for all pollutants.
To derive the production-normalization limitations, EPA used the modified delta-
lognormal distribution to develop limitations based upon the concentration data ("concentration-
based limitations"). Section 14.8 describes the calculations for the concentration-based
limitations. Section 14.9 describes the conversion of these limitations to "production-normalized
limitations" using the model flow rates described in Section 13.
14.8 Estimation of Concentration-Based Limitations
In estimating the concentration-based limitations, EPA determines an average
performance level (the "option long-term average" discussed in the next section) that a facility
with well-designed and operated model technologies (which reflect the appropriate level of
control) is capable of achieving. This long-term average is calculated from the data from the
facilities using the model technologies for the option. EPA expects that all facilities subject to
the limitations will design and operate their treatment systems to achieve the long-term average
performance level on a consistent basis because facilities with well-designed and operated model
technologies have demonstrated that this can be done.
In the second step of developing a limitation, EPA determines an allowance for
the variation in pollutant concentrations when processed through extensive and well-designed
treatment systems. This allowance for variance incorporates all components of variability
including shipping, sampling, storage, and analytical variability. This allowance is incorporated
into the limitations through the use of the variability factors which are calculated from the data
from the facilities using the model technologies. If a facility operates its treatment system to
meet the relevant long-term average, EPA expects the facility will be able to meet the limitations.
Variability factors assure that normal fluctuations in a facility's treatment are accounted for in the
limitations. By accounting for these reasonable excursions above the long-term average, EPA's
use of variability factors results in limitations that are generally well above the actual long-term
averages.
14-17
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Facilities that are designed and operated to achieve long-term average effluent
levels used in developing the limitation should be capable of compliance with the limitations,
which incorporate variability, at all times.
After the proposal, EPA incorporated adjustments for autocorrelation into the
limitations for some pollutants. When data are said to be positively autocorrelated, it means that
measurements taken at specific time intervals (such as 1 day or 2 weeks apart) are related. To
determine if autocorrelation exists in the data, a statistical evaluation is required using many
measurements for equally spaced intervals over an extended period of time. Where such data
were available for the final rule, EPA performed a statistical evaluation of autocorrelation and if
necessary provided adjustments to the limitations as explained in DCN IS 12033 in Section 16.4
of the record. As a result of its evaluation of autocorrelation, EPA determined that adjustments
should be incorporated into the limitations for total cyanide and ammonia as nitrogen for the
cokemaking by-product recovery segment. EPA was only able to evaluate the autocorrelation in
some datasets selected as the basis for the limitations for those pollutants. Where a dataset was
insufficient for purposes of evaluating autocorrelation, EPA transferred the values it used in the
adjustment ("rho values") as shown in Attachments 14-5 and 14-6 in Appendix E. These
autocorrelation adjustments resulted in higher limitations for total cyanide and ammonia as
nitrogen. Appendix B explains autocorrelation and the adjustments for these limitations in
further detail. DCN IS12033 describes EPA's evaluation of autocorrelation in the episode
datasets.
The following sections describe the calculation of the option long-term averages
and option variability factors.
14.8.1 Calculation of Option Long-Term Averages
This section discusses the calculation of long-term averages by episode ("episode-
specific long-term average") and by option ("option long-term average") for each pollutant.
These long-term averages discussed in this section were used to calculate the limitations and as
the option long-term averages for the pollutants of concern.
First, EPA calculated the episode-specific long-term average by using either the
modified delta-lognormal distribution or the arithmetic average (see Appendix B). In
Attachment 14-2 in Appendix E, EPA has listed the arithmetic average (column labeled 'Obs
Mean') and the estimated episode-specific long-term average (column labeled 'Est LTA'). If
EPA used the arithmetic average as the episode long-term average, then the two columns have
the same value.
Second, EPA calculated the option long-term average for a pollutant as the
median of the episode-specific long-term averages for that pollutant from selected episodes with
the technology basis for the option (see Sections 14.1 and 14.2). The median is the midpoint of
the values ordered (i.e., ranked) from smallest to largest. If there is an odd number of values
(with n=number of values), then the value of the (n+l)/2 ordered observation is the median. If
14-18
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
there are an even number of values, then the two values of the n/2 and [(n/2)+l] ordered
observations are arithmetically averaged to obtain the median value.
For example, for subcategory Y option Z, if the four (i.e., n=4) episode-specific
long-term averages for pollutant X are:
Facility Episode-Specific Long-Term Average
A 20 mg/1
B 9 mg/1
C 16 mg/1
D 10 mg/1
then the ordered values are:
Order Facility Episode-Specific Long-Term Average
1 A 9 mg/1
2 B 10 mg/1
3 C 16 mg/1
4 D 20 mg/1
And the pollutant-specific long-term average for option Z is the median of the ordered values
(i.e., the average of the 2nd and 3rd ordered values): (10+16)/2 mg/1 = 13 mg/1.
The option long-term averages were used in developing the limitations for each
pollutant within each regulatory option.
14.8.2 Calculation of Option Variability Factors
In developing the option variability factors used in calculating the limitations,
EPA first developed daily and monthly episode-specific variability factors using the modified
delta-lognormal distribution. This estimation procedure is described in Appendix B. Attachment
14-2 in Appendix E lists the episode-specific variability factors.
After calculating the episode-specific variability factors, EPA calculated the
option daily variability factor as the mean of the episode-specific daily variability factors for that
pollutant in the subcategory and option. Likewise, the option monthly variability factor was the
mean of the episode-specific monthly variability factors for that pollutant in the subcategory and
option. Attachment 14-3 in Appendix E lists the option variability factors.
14.8.3 Transfers of Option Variability Factors
After estimating the option variability factors, EPA identified several pollutants
for which variability factors could not be calculated in some options. This resulted when all
14-19
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
episode datasets for the pollutant in the option had too few detected measurements to calculate
episode-specific variability factors (see data requirements in Appendix E). For example, if a
pollutant had all non-detected values for all of the episodes in an option, then it was not possible
to calculate option variability factors. When EPA could not calculate the option variability
factors, EPA selected variability factors from other sources to provide an adequate allowance for
variability in the limitations. This section describes these cases.
Table 14-4 lists the pollutants for which EPA was unable to calculate option
variability factors. The following paragraphs describe EPA's determination for each case.
For benzo(a)pyrene in the BAT-1 option of the Cokemaking Subcategory, EPA
transferred the option variability factors for naphthalene from the same option. EPA expects that
these two pollutants would have similar variability in the effluent concentrations because they are
chemically similar.
For O&G, because there were too few detected measurements, option variability
factors could not be calculated from data that passed the LTA test described in Section 14.5.
Because EPA expects that the variability in the effluent would be similar, EPA has used the
variability factors from an episode ESE01 in that option, which did not pass the LTA test.
14.8.4 Summary of Steps Used to Derive Concentration-Based Limitations
This section summarizes the steps used to derive the concentration-based
limitations. For each pollutant in an option for a subcategory, EPA performed the following
steps in calculating the concentration-based limitations:
Step 1. EPA calculated the episode-specific long-term averages and daily
and monthly variability factors for all selected episodes with the
model technology for the option in the subcategory. (See Section
14.2 for selection of episodes and Attachment 14-2 in Appendix E
for episode-specific long-term averages and variability factors.)
Step 2. EPA calculated the option long-term average as the median of the
episode-specific long-term averages. (See Attachment 14-3 in
Appendix E.)
Step 3. EPA calculated the option variability factors for each pollutants as
the mean of the episode-specific variability factors from the
episodes with the model technology. (See Attachment 14-3 in
Appendix E.) The option daily variability factor is the mean of the
episode-specific daily variability factors. Similarly, the option
monthly variability factor is the mean of the episode-specific
monthly variability factors.
14-20
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
For the pollutants for which Steps 1 and 3 failed to provide option
variability factors, EPA determined variability factors on a case-by-
case basis. (See Section 14.8.3 and Attachment 14-4 in Appendix
E.)
EPA calculated each concentration-based daily maximum
limitation for a pollutant using the product of the option long-term
average and the option daily variability factor. (See Attachment
14-3 in Appendix E.)
EPA calculated each concentration-based monthly average
limitation for a pollutant using the product of the option long-term
average and the option monthly variability factor. (See Attachment
14-3 in Appendix E.)
EPA compared the daily maximum limitations to the data used to
develop the limitations. EPA performed this comparison to
determine if EPA used appropriate distributional assumptions for
the data used to develop the limitations, in other words, whether
the curves EPA used provide a reasonable "fit" to the actual
effluent data.4
The next section describes the conversion of the concentration-based limitations
to the production-normalized limitations that are provided in the regulation.
14.9 Conversion to Production-Normalized Limitations
The previous discussions about the limitations were based upon concentration
data. The Part 420 regulation promulgated in 1982 and other previous mass-based regulations
have presented pollutant limitations in terms of kilograms of allowable pollutant discharge per
thousand kilograms of production (kg/kkg), also expressed as pounds of allowable pollutant
discharge per thousand pounds of production (lbs/1,000 lbs). In the proposal, EPA expressed the
limitations in terms of pounds of allowable pollutant discharge per ton of production (lbs/ton).
Because comments on the proposal urged EPA to return to the units previously used in Part 420
(i.e., kg/kkg or lbs/1000 lbs), EPA has used these units for the final rule.
This section describes the conversion from concentration-based limitations to the
production-normalized limitations in the regulation. This section also provides EPA's
methodology for determining the number of significant digits to use for the production-
normalized limitations.
4EPA believes that the fact that EPA performs such an analysis before promulgating limitations may give the
impression that EPA expects occasional exceedances of the limitations. This conclusion is incorrect. EPA
promulgates limitations that facilities are capable of complying with at all times by properly operating and
maintaining their treatment technologies.
Step 4.
Step 5.
Step 6.
Step 7.
14-21
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
14.9.1 Conversion from Concentration-Based Limitations
In calculating the production-normalized limitations, EPA used the concentration-
based limitations, the production flow rates, and the conversion factor. The concentration-based
limitations are calculated as described in the previous section and are listed in Attachment 14-3
in Appendix E. The following paragraphs briefly describe the production flow rates and the
conversion factor used to calculate the production-normalized limitations.
The production flow rates used in the calculation are expressed as production-
normalized flow rates (PNFs) in terms of gallons of water discharged per thousand pounds of
production (lbs/1,000 lbs) for all operations. The production-normalized flow rates are provided
in Attachment 14-4 in Appendix E (the derivation of these flow rates is explained in Section 13).
EPA used following conversion factor to obtain limitations expressed as pounds
per ton (lb/ton):
3.7854 L lb short ton _o L / gal short ton
conversion factor = , x , x „ „„„„„ =4.1727x10 , „
gal 453.593x 10 ng 2x1,000lb jjg/lb 1,0001b (14-2)
EPA used the production flows and the conversion factor to calculate each production-
normalized limitation using the following basic equation:
Production-normalized limitation =
Concentration-based limitation * Production-normalized flow rate x conversion factor
The following is an example of applying the conversion factor:
For the Cokemaking Subcategory option BAT-1, suppose the concentration-based
daily maximum limitation is 100 |ig/L. Using the production value of 113 gpt for
the Cokemaking Subcategory, the production-normalized daily maximum
limitation (limit,,,,) is:
100 ng 113 gal ,„_9L/gal short ton lb
LTA„„ = —:— x — x 4.1727 x 10"v —7- x = 0.00003131L
L short ton (ig/lb 1000 1b 10001b
pn
14.9.2 Significant Digits for Production-Normalized Limitations
After completing the conversions described in the previous section, EPA generally
rounded the production-normalized limitations to three significant digits. Because Section 14.3
of EPA method 1664A requires reporting of results for O&G below 10 mg/L to two significant
digits, EPA has rounded the production-normalized limitations for O&G to two significant digits
when the corresponding concentration-based limitation was less than 10 mg/L. EPA used a
rounding procedure where values of five and above are rounded up and values of four and below
are rounded down. For example, a value of 0.003455 would be rounded to 0.00346, while a
14-22
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
value of 0.003454 would be rounded to 0.00345. The production-normalized limitations listed in
Attachment 14-4 in Appendix E have three significant digits, except for some O&G limitations
which have two significant digits.
14.10 Naphthalene PSES
For the naphthalene pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES) in the
cokemaking subcategory (by-product recovery segment), EPA has selected 100 ng/L and 83.1
Hg/L as the concentration-based values used to calculate the final production-normalized daily
maximum standard and monthly average standard, respectively. These values are different than
the ones that EPA calculated applying the methodology described in the previous sections.
When EPA applied its methodology to the data from the three episodes that demonstrated
performance of the model technology, the resulting values of the daily maximum standard and
monthly average standard were 26.1 ng/L and 21.7 ng/L, respectively. This section provides
EPA's rationale for selecting different values for the final standards than those calculated from
the data from the three episodes, ESE01, ESE02, and ISM54.
14.10.1 Daily Maximum Standard
As one of its seven steps in developing the standards, EPA compared the value
that it had calculated for the daily maximum standard for naphthalene to the data used to develop
the calculated standard. When naphthalene was detected, all samples had concentration values
that were at or below 33 |i.g/L. When naphthalene was not detected, the sample-specific
minimum levels (MLs) generally were close to the method ML of 10 ng/L for Method 1625.
However, two of five samples from one EPA sampling episode, ESE02, were analyzed at a 10-
fold dilution due to the amount of phenol in the sample, which made it impossible to identify
naphthalene in the neat analysis. As a result of the 10-fold dilution of the samples, the sample-
specific MLs had values of 100 ng/L. In examining the data for the other EPA sampling episode,
ESE01, EPA determined that those samples also had high levels of phenol concentrations, even
though the laboratory obtained sample-specific MLs close to the method MLs. (See DCN
IS 12035 in Section 16.4 of the record.) Thus, EPA determined that facilities with the model
technology may have high levels of phenol that could interfere with the determination of
naphthalene concentrations in their effluent. Although the laboratory overcame the phenol
interferences in the five samples for one episode and succeeded in achieving sample-specific
MLs with values close to the method ML of 10 ng/L, for the other EPA sampling episode, it
could not do so for two samples. For the self-monitoring data for ISM54 that were determined
by Method 625 rather than Method 1625, the facility reported sample-specific detection limits
that were below the 10 ng/L.
While there was no evidence of any chromatographic peaks for naphthalene in the
chromatograms associated with the two diluted samples, the best that EPA can say with a high
degree of confidence is that the naphthalene concentrations were between zero (i.e., not present)
and 100 jig/L for these two samples. In order to demonstrate compliance with the naphthalene
standard, a sample would have to be analyzed with a sample-specific ML of at or below the
standard. Because EPA could not overcome the phenol interferences without diluting the two
14-23
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
samples, EPA cannot say with confidence that naphthalene samples can be analyzed with a
sample-specific minimum level of less than 100 (ig/L in every case. For this reason, EPA has
determined that 100 (ig/L should be the concentration-basis of today's daily maximum standard.
14.10.2 Monthly Average Standard
In establishing monthly average limitations and standards, EPA's objective is to
provide an additional restriction that supports EPA's objective of having facilities control their
average discharges at the long-term average. The monthly average limitation requires continuous
dischargers to provide on-going control, on a monthly basis, that complements controls imposed
by the daily maximum limitation. In order to meet the monthly average limitation, a facility must
counterbalance a value near the daily maximum limitation with one or more values well below
the daily maximum limitation. To achieve compliance, these values must result in a monthly
average value at or below the monthly average limitation. (This explanation of EPA's objective
was cited with approval by the Court as support in its decision in National Wildlife Federation, et
al. v. Environmental Protection Agency. No. 99-1452 (DC Cir.) (April 19, 2002)).
Consistent with EPA's objective for the monthly average standard, EPA has
determined that the concentration-based monthly average standard could be less than 100 (ig/L,
because EPA assumes that the facilities will monitor for naphthalene more than once a month. In
fact, EPA has assumed that facilities will monitor four times a month and has accounted for those
costs in this rule. In general, EPA expects that laboratories will usually be able to measure at
levels lower than 100 |ig/L, because most of the data supporting the standards demonstrated that
laboratories could overcome interferences in the samples. Thus, it has established a value at 83.1
p.g/L as the concentration-basis for the monthly average standard. In calculating this value, EPA
first estimated the long-term average as the ratio of the daily maximum standard of 100 |ig/L and
the daily variability factor of 2.101 calculated using the data from the three episodes. Second,
EPA calculated the monthly average standard as the product of the long-term average (47.596
p.g/L) and the monthly variability factor of 1.746 also calculated using the data from the three
episodes. This product was equal to 83.1 (ig/L which EPA established as the concentration-basis
for today's monthly average standard. This value of 83.1 ng/L is well above the largest
measured value of 33 ng/L. As described in Section 14.9, EPA then converted this value to a
production-normalized basis for today's regulation.
14-24
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection g.nd Calculation
Table 14-1
Aggregation of Field Duplicates
If the field duplicates are:
Censoring type
of average is:
Value of aggregate is:
Formulas for
aggregate value of
duplicates:
Both non-censored
NC
arithmetic average of measured values
(NC, + NC2)/2
Both non-detected
ND
arithmetic average of sample-specific
detection limits
(DL, + DL2)/2
One non-censored and one
non-detected
NC
arithmetic average of measured value
and sample-specific detection limit
(NC + DL)/2
NC - non-censored (or detected).
ND - non-detected.
DL - sample-specific detection limit.
14-25
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Table 14-2
Aggregation of Grab Samples
If the grab or multiple
samples are:
Censoring type of
Daily Value is:
Daily value is:
Formulas for Calculating
Daily Value:
All non-censored
NC
arithmetic average of measured
values
Znc,
i=l
n
All non-detected
ND
arithmetic average of sample-
specific detection limits
IDLi
i=l
n
Mixture of non-censored
and non-detected values
(total number of
observations is n=k+m)
NC
arithmetic average of measured
values and sample-specific
detection limits
k m
£NC1+XDLi
i=l i=l
n
NC - non-censored (or detected).
ND - non-detected.
DL - sample-specific detection limit.
14-26
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Table 14-3
Aggregation of Data Across Streams
If the n observations are:
Censoring type is:
Formulas for value of aggregate
All non-censored
NC
n
£ NCj x flow;
i=l
n
£ floWj
i=l
All non-detected
ND
n
DL; x floWj
i=l
n
Yj fl0Wi
i=l
Mixture of k non-censored and
m non-detected
NC
k m
£ NCj x flow; + £ DLj x flow;
i-I i=l
(total number of observations is
n=k+m)
n
Z flowi
i=l
NC - non-censored (or detected).
ND - non-detected.
DL - sample-specific detection limit.
14-27
-------
Section 14 - Limitations and Standards: Data Selection and Calculation
Table 14-4
Cases where Option Variability Factors Could Not be Calculated
Subcategory
Option
Pollutant
Source of Variability Factors
Cokemaking
BAT-1
Benzo(a)pyrene
Oil and Grease
naphthalene, same option
ESE01
14-28
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
SECTION 15
NON-WATER QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Sections 304(b) and 306 of the Clean Water Act require EPA to consider
non-water quality environmental impacts associated with effluent limitations guidelines and
standards. These impacts are the environmental consequences not directly associated with the
wastewater that may be associated with the regulatory options considered. In accordance with
these requirements, EPA has considered the potential impacts of the regulation on energy
consumption, air emissions, and solid waste generation. This section quantifies the non-water
quality environmental impacts associated with the final rule.
15.1 Energy Requirement Impacts
Table 15-1 compares the current and incremental energy requirements for the
subcategories for which EPA is promulgating new or revised effluent limitations. Table 15-2
provides a summary of the incremental energy requirements for all options and subcategories
considered for the final rule.
EPA estimated the amount of energy currently consumed by the iron and steel
industry from the values reported in the U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry
Data, and used survey weights to normalize the data to a national average.
EPA determined the incremental energy requirements only for those new
treatment units that EPA assumed would be necessary to comply with revised or new effluent
limitations or standards. In general, additional energy requirements are a result of the electric
motors in new or upgraded cooling water recycle and treatment systems to drive water pumps,
chemical mixers, aeration equipment such as blowers and compressors, and cooling tower fans.
EPA calculated energy requirements by summing the total horsepower (HP) needed for each
recycling or treatment step, converting horsepower to kilowatts (kW), and multiplying by the
operational time (hours). The equation below shows the conversion from total system
horsepower to annual electrical usage (Reference 15-1) in kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/year).
Energy Required = 0.7456 x HP x HPY (15-1)
HP
where:
HP = Total horsepower required by additional equipment; and
HPY = Hours per year of equipment operation.
15.1.1 Cokemaking Subcategory
This subcategory includes 12 direct dischargers and 8 indirect dischargers. As
shown in Table 15-1, EPA has selected options BAT-1 and PSES-1 as the options for the final
15-1
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
rulemaking for direct and indirect dischargers, respectively. The additional energy requirement of
16 million kWh/year for BAT-1 (Table 15-2) is attributed to four sites upgrading and optimizing
existing biological treatment systems; one site installing a free ammonia distillation system; two
sites installing additional biological treatment filters; two sites installing free and fixed ammonia
distillation systems; one site installing a tar removal system, heat exchanger, biological treatment
equalization tank, final cooler, and spare pump for coke quench water return, and upgrading
controls on an existing ammonia distillation system; two sites installing biological treatment
equalization tanks; two sites installing ammonia distillation equalization tanks; and one site
installing additional aeration capacity for biological treatment. The additional energy
requirement of 1 million kWh/year for PSES-1 (Table 15-2) is attributed to one site installing a
free and fixed ammonia distillation system, four sites installing equalization tanks for ammonia
distillation systems, and one site optimizing and upgrading an existing biological treatment
system. Based on the industry survey data, EPA estimates that the cokemaking subcategory
currently consumes more than 104 million kWh/year of energy. As such, the increased energy
consumption by the BAT-1 and PSES-1 treatment options is approximately 16 percent of the
total energy consumed by the subcategory (Table 15-1).
For the remaining options that EPA considered for the rulemaking, the increase in
energy requirements to 24 million kWh/year for BAT-3 is based on all 13 direct dischargers
installing breakpoint chlorination and 9 also installing multimedia filtration. For PSES-3, EPA
estimates additional energy requirements totaling 16 million kWh/year based on five sites
installing biological treatment systems.
Neither of the two non-recovery cokemaking facilities generate wastewater and,
therefore, EPA estimates there will be no additional energy requirements for this industry
segment.
15.1.2 Ironmaking Subcategory
This subcategory includes 15 direct dischargers and 1 indirect discharger. EPA
did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there are no additional energy
requirements for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the options EPA
considered for the proposed ironmaking and sintering segments, but ultimately rejected, for the
final rule.
EPA estimates an incremental energy requirement of 18 million kWh/year (Table
15-2) for BAT-1 based on the installation of 2 new high-rate recycle systems, 6 chemical
precipitation systems, 6 solids handling systems, 12 multimedia filtration systems, 12 breakpoint
chlorination systems, and 2 cooling towers and pumping stations. EPA does not expect the one
indirect discharger to need additional treatment units to comply with PSES-1; therefore, this
option would not have additional energy requirements. Based on industry survey data, EPA
estimates that the ironmaking subcategory currently consumes more than 115 million kWh/year
of energy. The increased energy consumption by the BAT-1 and PSES-1 treatment options would
be approximately 16 percent of the total energy consumed by the subcategory.
15-2
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
15.1.3 Sintering Subcategory
The sintering subcategory includes five direct dischargers. In the final rule, EPA
included limitations and standards for one additional parameter: 2,3,7,8-TCDF. The technology
basis for these limitations and standards is multimedia filtration in addition to the 1982
technology basis.
EPA estimates that this subcategory will consume approximately 4 million
kWh/year of additional energy (Table 15-2). EPA estimates that this increase in energy demand
will result from four sites installing a multimedia filtration system and solids handling system,
and one site installing a chemical precipitation system, solids handling system, and multimedia
filtration system. Based on industry survey data, sintering operations currently consume
approximately 17 million kWh/year of energy. The incremental energy demand represents a 24-
percent increase (Table 15-1). Note that sintering operations comprise only a small portion of the
total combined iron and steel operations conducted at these five sites. Therefore, the incremental
energy demand for sintering operations is insignificant as compared to the total combined energy
consumption at these sites.
15.1.4 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
This subcategory includes 20 direct dischargers and 1 indirect discharger. EPA
did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there are no additional energy
requirements for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the options EPA
considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
The Agency estimates that the additional energy requirement of 12 million
kWh/year (Table 15-2) for BAT-1 is the result of 25 chemical precipitation systems for treatment
of blowdown water, 8 carbon dioxide injection systems, 1 new continuous caster high-rate
recycle system, and modifications to 13 existing high-rate recycle systems to increase recycling
capacity. EPA estimates that indirect discharging integrated steelmaking facilities would not
need additional treatment units to upgrade to the model PSES-1 treatment system and, therefore,
no additional energy requirements are expected. The treatment and recycle systems currently
used by the industry include solids removal using a classifier and clarifier, induced draft cooling
towers for vacuum degassing and continuous casting wastewater, and pump stations to return the
treated and cooled water to the steelmaking process. The modified high-rate recycle systems
include additional cooling towers, piping, and pump stations to increase recycling capacity.
Chemical precipitation systems remove metals from the recycle system blowdown water and
include reaction tanks with mixers, clarifiers, thickeners, and filter presses. Carbon dioxide
injection systems, which include mixers and pressurized solution feed systems, remove scale-
forming metal ions (hardness) from basic oxygen furnace (BOF) recycle water in wet-open and
wet-suppressed combustion systems. Based on industry survey data, integrated steelmaking
facilities currently consume approximately 707 million kWh/year of energy. The incremental
energy demand would represent a 1.7-percent increase.
15-3
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
15.1.5 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
This subcategory includes 32 direct dischargers and 5 indirect dischargers. EPA
did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there are no additional energy
requirements for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the options EPA
considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
EPA estimates that 214 million kWh/year of additional electricity would be
necessary to comply with BAT-1. The Agency estimates that sites would install 14 high-rate
recycle systems to replace existing partial or once-through treatment systems, 13 cooling towers
and pumping stations to increase recycling capacity, and 18 multimedia filtration systems. For
PSES-1, EPA expects that two carbon manufacturing facilities and two stainless facilities would
install multimedia filters. As shown in Table 15-2, EPA estimated that indirect dischargers
would need an additional 0.04 million kWh/year of electricity to comply with this technology
option. The incremental increase in energy requirements due to BAT-1 and PSES-1 would
represent a 56-percent increase over the current subcategory requirements of 383 million
kWh/year, as reported in industry survey data.
15.1.6 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
This subcategory includes 34 direct dischargers, 12 indirect dischargers, and 2
sites that discharge both directly and indirectly. EPA did not revise limitations or standards for
this subcategory so there are no additional energy requirements for this subcategory. The
following discussion is based on the options EPA considered, but ultimately rejected, for the
final rule.
The additional 33 million kWh/year of energy that EPA estimates would be
required for BAT-1 (Table 15-2) for the non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming operations
are due to the addition of 25 multimedia filters, 3 new high rate recycle systems, and 22 cooling
towers and pumping stations to increase recycling capacity.
EPA estimates that an additional 0.5 million kilowatt-hours of energy would be
necessary to comply with PSES-1 for non-integrated steelmaking and hot forming sites (Table
15-2). EPA estimates that sites would install 11 multimedia filters in indirect discharging
systems. Six sites would need additional cooling towers, pipes, and pumping stations to increase
the recycling capacity of existing recycling systems. The incremental increase in energy
requirements due to the BAT-1 and PSES-1 options would represent a 8-percent increase over
the current subcategory requirement of440 million kWh/year, as reported in industry survey data.
15.1.7 Steel Finishing Subcategory
This subcategory includes 57 direct dischargers and 32 indirect dischargers. EPA
did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there are no additional energy
requirements for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the options EPA
considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
15-4
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
EPA estimates that 24 direct dischargers would install countercurrent rinse tanks
to consume approximately 5 million kWh/year of additional energy (Table 15-2). For indirect
dischargers, EPA estimates that an additional 0.1 kWh/year of energy would be required for four
finishing sites to install countercurrent rinse tanks to achieve PSES-1. Based on industry survey
data, steel finishing facilities currently consume approximately 260 million kWh/year of energy.
The incremental energy demand would represent a 2-percent increase.
15.1.8 Other Operations Subcategory
The other operations subcategory includes direct-reduced ironmaking (DRI),
forging, and briquetting operations. As shown in Table 15-1, EPA has selected the BPT-1 option
for the final rulemaking. EPA estimates that an additional 0.01 kWh/year will be required for
two forging facilities to install multimedia filters to meet BPT (Table 15-2). EPA estimates that
the DRI facility will not need additional treatment equipment to meet BPT. The briquetting
facilities do not discharge process wastewater; therefore, additional treatment equipment is not
needed to achieve the effluent limitations. The incremental increase in energy generation for the
other operations subcategory represents a 0.1-percent increase over the current subcategory
requirement of 8 million kWh/year (Table 15-1).
15.1.9 Energy Requirements Summary
Based on information provided in the industry surveys, the iron and steel industry
currently consumes approximately 2.0 billion kWh/year of energy for wastewater treatment.
EPA estimates that compliance with the final iron and steel regulation will result in a net increase
in energy consumption of 21 million kWh/year of electricity for the entire industry, or
approximately 1.1 percent of existing requirements.
In 1997, the United States consumed approximately 3,122 billion kWh of
electricity (Reference 15-2). The 21 million kWh/year increase in electricity as a result of the
final regulation corresponds to less than 0.001 percent of the national requirements. The increase
in energy requirements due to the implementation of the final rule will in turn increase air
emissions from the electric power generation facilities. The increase in air emissions is expected
to be proportional to the increase in energy requirements, or less than 0.001 percent.
15.2 Air Emission Impacts
Various subcategories within the iron and steel industry generate process waters
that contain significant concentrations of organic and inorganic compounds, some of which are
listed as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) in Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.
The Agency developed National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs)
under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, which addresses air emissions of HAPs for certain
manufacturing operations. Subcategories within the iron and steel industry where NESHAPs are
applicable include cokemaking (58 FR 57898, October 1993) and steel finishing with chromium
electroplating and chromium anodizing (60 FR 4948, January 1995).
15-5
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
For the cokemaking subcategory, EPA proposed maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) standards on July 3,2001 (66 FR 35326) for pushing, quenching, and
battery stacks at cokemaking plants. These regulations are currently scheduled for promulgation
in December 2002. Like effluent limitations guidelines and standards, MACT standards are
technology-based. The Clean Air Act sets maximum control requirements on which MACT
standards can be based for new and existing sources. By-product recovery operations in the
cokemaking subcategory remove the majority of HAPs through processes that collect tar, heavy
and light oils, ammonium sulfate, and elemental sulfur. Ammonia removed by steam stripping,
also referred to as free and fixed ammonia distillation, could generate a potential air quality issue
if uncontrolled; however, ammonia stripping operations at cokemaking facilities capture vapors
and convert ammonia to either an inorganic salt or anhydrous ammonia, or destroy the ammonia.
Ammonia stripping also removes cyanide, phenols, and other volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) typically found in cokemaking wastewater. The VOCs that are not destroyed during the
stripping process remain in the liquid ammonia still wastewater effluent stream for subsequent
biological treatment.
Biological treatment of cokemaking wastewater can potentially emit HAPs if
significant concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are present. To estimate the
maximum air emissions from biological treatment, EPA multiplied the individual concentrations
of VOCs in cokemaking wastewater entering the biological treatment system by the maximum
design flow (2.52 million gallons per day) and the maximum operational period (365 days/year)
reported in the U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data, and then summed the
emissions for all VOCs. The Agency determined the concentrations of the individual VOCs
entering the biological treatment systems, which include benzene, acetone, acrylonitrile, carbon
disulfide, and 1,1,2,2-TCA, from EPA sampling data. Using the conservative assumption that all
of the VOCs entering the biological treatment system are emitted to the atmosphere (no
biological degradation), the maximum VOC emission rate would be approximately 1,800 pounds
or 0.9 tons per year. (EPA can not disclose the concentrations or loadings for individual
pollutants because it would disclose confidential business information.) EPA believes that this is
an overestimate because VOCs can be degraded through biological treatment. EPA concludes
that, even if this likely overestimate of VOC emission rate were accurate, it is well below
threshold levels that would classify the site as a major source of VOCs (i.e., 25 tons for the
combination of all HAPs, or 10 tons for any individual HAP). Therefore, EPA's estimate would
be an acceptable rate of emissions that would not have a significant impact on the environment.
EPA did not identify any volatile pollutants of concern and identified 11
semivolatile pollutants of concern in untreated sintering wastewater. The incremental technology
basis for the sintering segment beyond the 1982 rule includes only multimedia filtration to
remove chlorinated dioxin and furan congeners from sintering wastewater. EPA estimates no
incremental air emissions for sintering operations.
EPA did not identify any volatile or semivolatile pollutants of concern in
untreated blast furnace wastewater, integrated and stand-alone hot forming wastewater, or other
operations wastewater. Therefore, EPA estimates no incremental air emissions for the
technology options evaluated for these subcategories for the final rule.
15-6
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
For the steel finishing subcategory, EPA identified several volatile and
semivolatile priority and nonconventional organic pollutants of concern in untreated wastewater
in both the carbon and alloy and stainless segments. The volatile organic pollutants of concern
for the carbon and alloy segment are 1,1,1-trichloroethane and 2-propanone and the semivolatile
priority organic pollutants are bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, alpha-terpineol, benzoic acid, n-
dodecane, n-eicosane, n-hexadecane, n-octadecane, and n-tetradecane. For the stainless segment,
the volatile organic pollutants of concern are ethylbenzene, toluene, m-xylene, o- + p-xylene, and
2-propanone. The semivolatile priority organic pollutants are naphthalene, phenol, 2,6-di-tert-
butyl-p-benzoquinone, hexanoic acid, 2-methylnaphthalene, n-docosane, n-dodecane, n-eicosane,
n-hexadecane, n-octadecane, n-tetracosane, and n-tetradecane. EPA estimated that sites in the
proposed steel finishing subcategory would install only countercurrent rinse tanks to achieve the
limitations considered by the Agency for the final rule. EPA estimated that these additional rinse
tanks would not significantly impact air emissions for steel finishing operations beyond the
current levels of emissions. EPA did not revise limitations and standards for the steel finishing
subcategory.
For the integrated and non-integrated steelmaking subcategories, the only organic
pollutant of concern detected in untreated BOF wastewater was phenol from stainless steel
product manufacturing. Phenol was detected at relatively low concentrations (0.012 mg/L to
0.33 mg/L). Because phenol is a semivolatile organic compound with a low Henry's Law
constant, it is not expected to partition to the air. No volatile pollutants of concern were detected
in any steelmaking wastewater sample. The other primary pollutants in the steelmaking process
wastewater are suspended solids, dissolved metals, and oils. Under ambient conditions, these
pollutants show insignificant volatilization because of their vapor pressure, even in open-top
treatment units. EPA did not revise limitations and standards for the integrated and non-
integrated steelmaking subcategories.
Wet air pollution control (WAPC) equipment is commonly used by facilities in a
number of iron and steel subcategories to control air emissions. None of the pollution
prevention, recycling, or wastewater technology options will have a negative impact on the
performance of these WAPC systems. In fact, some of the proposed pollution prevention
alternatives considered by EPA for the final rule may enhance the performance of these systems
by reducing pollutant loadings. Therefore, EPA does not expect any adverse air impacts to occur
as a result of the final regulation.
15.3 Solid Waste Impacts
A number of the final treatment technologies that comprise the technology basis
for the final rule will generate solid waste, including Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) hazardous and nonhazardous sludge and waste oil. Most solid waste generated by the
iron and steel industry is nonhazardous, except for certain treatment sludges generated by
electroplating operations in the steel finishing industry and iron-cyanide sludge generated during
treatment of cokemaking wastewater. Nonhazardous solid wastes include sludge from biological
treatment of cokemaking wastewater and sludge from multimedia filtration, chemical
precipitation, and clarification of iron and steelmaking wastewater. Federal and state regulations
15-7
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
require iron and steel facilities to manage their RCRA hazardous and nonhazardous sludges to
prevent releases to the environment.
The following subsections provide both current sludge generation rates estimated
from the industry surveys and the incremental increases estimated for option considered for each
iron and steel subcategory for this final rule. Incremental increases in sludge generation are
based on the pollutant loading and removal information provided in Section 11. Based on the
information summarized in Table 15-1, EPA estimates that annual sludge generation for all
subcategories affected by the final rule will increase by 0.2 percent.
15.3.1 Cokemaking Subcategory
Biological treatment with nitrification followed by clarification, which is the
primary technology basis for removal of ammonia, phenolics, and biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) from cokemaking wastewater will generate wastewater treatment sludge requiring
disposal or further processing. Table 15-3 shows additional sludge generation for all
cokemaking facilities for each of the technology options considered for the final rule.
EPA selected options BAT-1 and PSES-1 for the final rule for direct and indirect
dischargers, respectively. EPA estimates that compliance with BAT-1 will generate
approximately 150 tons (dry) per year of additional sludge and PSES-1 will generate an
additional 40 tons (dry) per year (Table 15-3). The additional sludge generation for the BAT-1
option is due to incremental ammonia removal via biological treatment, while the additional
sludge generation for PSES-1 is due to incremental ammonia removal via biological treatment at
sites that already operate biological treatment systems. Based on industry survey data, EPA
estimates that the cokemaking industry currently generates more than 53,000 tons per year (dry)
of sludge. As such, the increased sludge generated by the BAT-1 and PSES-1 treatment options
is approximately 0.4 percent of the total sludge currently generated by the industry (Table 15-1).
BAT-3, which was rejected as the technology basis for this final rule, generates a
greater amount of additional sludge than BAT-1 (410 tons per year (dry)) due to the removal of
total suspended solids (TSS) by the multimedia filters following biological treatment. The
Agency expects approximately 130 additional tons of sludge per year (dry) would be generated
for PSES-3. The incremental sludge generation is due to the addition of biological treatment to
the PSES-1 technology basis.
Neither of the two non-recovery cokemaking facilities generate wastewater and,
therefore, these facilities are not expected to generate additional sludge.
15.3.2 Ironmaking Subcategory
EPA did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there is no
additional sludge generation for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the
options EPA considered for the proposed ironmaking and sintering segments, but ultimately
rejected, for the final rule.
15-8
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
Ironmaking operations would generate additional wastewater treatment sludge as
a result of complying with both BAT-1 and PSES-1. BAT-1, which includes such sludge
generating treatment technologies as solids removal in the high-rate recycle system, clarification,
chemical precipitation, and multimedia filtration, would generate approximately 5,870 additional
tons/year (dry) of wastewater treatment sludge, as shown in Table 15-3. PSES-1, which includes
the same solids-generating treatment units as BAT-1 with the exception of multimedia filtration,
would generate an additional 40 tons per year (dry) of wastewater treatment sludge.
Industry survey estimates show that ironmaking operations generated
approximately 236,000 tons (dry) of mill scale, grit, and sludge in 1997. The BAT-1 and PSES-1
options for ironmaking would increase annual sludge generation by 5,910 tons/year, an increase
of approximately 2.5 percent.
153.3 Sintering Subcategory
As shown in Tables 15-1 and 15-3, EPA estimates that compliance with the
selected technology option will generate approximately 84 tons (dry) per year of additional
sludge. The additional sludge generation is due to multimedia filtration and chemical
precipitation. Based on the industry survey data, EPA estimates that the sintering industry
currently generates more than 100,000 tons per year (dry) of sludge. Therefore, the incremental
sludge generation represents a 0.1-percent increase in sludge generation.
153.4 Integrated Steelmaking Subcategory
EPA did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there is no
additional sludge generation for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the
options EPA considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
To comply with BAT-1, EPA estimates an additional 2,950 tons/year (dry) of
wastewater treatment sludge would be generated due to solids removal in the high-rate recycle
systems, clarification, multimedia filtration, and chemical precipitation (Table 15-3). Indirect
discharging integrated steelmaking facilities have the model treatment equipment in place and,
therefore, EPA would not expect them to generate additional sludge. Based on industry survey
data, integrated steelmaking operations currently generate approximately 740,000 tons/year of
mill scale, sludges, and filter cakes. The additional generation of sludge would represent a 0.4-
percent increase.
15.3.5 Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot Forming Subcategory
EPA did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there is no
additional sludge generation for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the
options EPA considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
The Agency estimates an additional 20,000 tons/year (dry) of sludge would be
generated to comply with BAT-1 due to solids removal in high-rate recycle systems, clarification,
15-9
-------
Section 75 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
and multimedia filtration (Table 15-3). EPA estimates that, to comply with PSES-1, indirect
dischargers would generate an additional 20 tons/year of sludge due to multimedia filtration.
Incremental sludge production is estimated to be a 6.1-percent increase over the current annual
sludge production of 326,000 tons/year, as reported in industry survey data.
15.3.6 Non-Integrated Steelmaking and Hot Forming Subcategory
EPA did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there is no
additional sludge generation for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the
options EPA considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
To comply with BAT-1 and PSES-1 for the non-integrated steelmaking and hot
forming subcategory, the Agency estimates an additional 1,400 tons/year (dry) of sludge for
BAT-1 and 10 tons/year for PSES-1 would be generated due to solids removal in high-rate
recycle systems, clarification, and multimedia filtration (Table 15-3). Treatment sludges from
BAT-1 and PSES-1 would increase solid waste production by approximately 0.1 percent over the
current 1,275,000 tons per year, as reported in industry survey data.
15.3.7 Steel Finishing Subcategory
EPA did not revise limitations or standards for this subcategory so there is no
additional sludge generation for this subcategory. The following discussion is based on the
options EPA considered, but ultimately rejected, for the final rule.
Steel finishing facilities generate both RCRA hazardous and nonhazardous
sludges. RCRA sludge may be classified as hazardous as a result of listing or characterization
based on the following information:
• If the site performs electroplating operations, the sludge resulting from
treatment of this wastewater is a RCRA F006 listed hazardous waste (40
CFR 260.11). If wastewater from other operations is mixed with the
electroplating wastewater and treated, all sludges generated from the
treatment of the combined wastewater are also RCRA F006 listed
hazardous wastes.
• Sludge generated from the treatment of wastewater associated with tin
plating on carbon steel and zinc plating on carbon steel is not a RCRA
listed hazardous waste.
• If the sludge from wastewater treatment exceeds the standards for the
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (i.e., is hazardous), or exhibits
other RCRA-defined hazardous characteristics (i.e., is reactive, corrosive,
or flammable), it is considered a characteristic hazardous waste (40 CFR
261.24).
15-10
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
Based on information collected during site visits and sampling episodes to iron
and steel operations, the Agency believes that the majority of sludge generated by steel finishing
sites would not be classified as hazardous. Information provided in the industry surveys
indicates that less than 5 percent of the total sludges and solid waste generated by finishing
facilities is hazardous under RCRA.
For carbon and alloy and stainless steel finishing sites, BAT-1 and PSES-1 consist
of in-process controls to limit water usage and recycle process chemicals, plus end-of-pipe
wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment includes oil removal, hexavalent chromium
reduction, hydraulic and waste loading equalization, metals precipitation, clarification, and
sludge dewatering. EPA estimates that direct dischargers (both carbon and alloy and stainless
steel) installing and modifying these treatment systems would generate approximately 2,150
tons/year (dry) of additional treatment sludge (Table 15-3). EPA estimates that indirect
dischargers would generate an additional 30 tons/year of wastewater treatment sludge. Industry
survey data indicate that finishing facilities currently generate over 790,000 tons per year (dry) of
sludge. The BAT-1 and PSES-1 options for steel finishing would increase annual sludge
generation by approximately 0.3 percent.
15.3.8 Other Operations Subcategory
The Agency estimates the other operations subcategory will generate an additional
3 tons/year (dry) of sludge to comply with the BPT effluent limits due to multimedia filtration
(Table 15-3). Treatment sludges from BPT will increase solid waste production by
approximately 0.1 percent over the current 2,500 tons/year, as shown in Table 15-1.
15.3.9 Solid Waste Impacts Summary
Based on information provided in the industry surveys, the iron and steel industry
currently generates approximately 3,522,500 tons/year of solid waste. EPA estimates that
compliance with the new or revised limitations in this final rule will result in a net increase in
sludge generation of 277 tons/year for the entire industry, or approximately 0.007 percent.
15.4 References
15-1 Perry's Chemical Engineers Handbook. Sixth Edition. McGraw Hill Press, 1984.
15-2 Energy Information Administration. Electric Power Annual 1998 Volume I,
Table Al.
15-11
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
Table 15-1
Summary of Current and Incremental Energy Requirements
and Sludge Generation by Subcategory
Energy Usage and Sludge Generation
Subcategory
Cokemaking
Sintering
Other
Total
Selected options
BAT-1
PSES-1
BAT-1
BPT
Current energy usage (a)
(million kilowatt hours/year)
104
17
8
129
Incremental energy usage
(million kilowatt hours/year)
17
4
0.01
21
% increase in energy requirement
16
24
0.1
16
Current sludge generation (a)
(tons/year)
53,000
100,000
2,500
160,000
Incremental sludge generation
(tons/year)
190
84
3
277
% increase in sludge generation
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.2
(a) U.S. EPA, U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Survey (Detailed and Short Surveys).
15-12
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
Table 15-2
Incremental Energy Requirements by Subcategory and Option
Subcategory
Incremental Energy Required (million kWh/year)
BAT-1
BAT-3
PSES-1
PSES-3
Cokemaking
16
24
1
16
Ironmaking
18
NA
0
NA
Sintering
4
NA
NA
NA
Integrated Steelmaking
12
NA
0
NA
Integrated and Stand-Alone
Hot Forming (a)
214
NA
0.04
NA
Non-Integrated Steelmaking
and Hot Forming (a)
33
NA
0.5
NA
Steel Finishing (a)
5
NA
0.1
NA
Other
0.01 (b)
NA
NA
NA
(a) Includes carbon, alloy, and stainless steel products.
(b) Based on BPT for direct-reduced iron, forging, and briquetting.
NA - Not applicable.
15-13
-------
Section 15 - Non-Water Quality Environmental Impacts
Table 15-3
Incremental Sludge Generation by Subcategory and Option
Subcategory
Incremental Sludge Generation (dry tons/year)
BAT-1
BAT-3
PSES-1
PSES-3
Cokemaking
150
410
40
130
Ironmaking
5,870
NA
40
NA
Sintering
84
NA
NA
NA
Integrated Steelmaking
2,950
NA
0
NA
Integrated and Stand-Alone Hot
Forming (a)
20,000
NA
20
NA
Non-Integrated Steelmaking and
Hot Forming (a)
1,400
NA
10
NA
Steel Finishing (a)
2,150
NA
30
NA
Other
3(b)
NA
NA
NA
(a) Includes carbon, alloy, and stainless steel products.
(b) BPT for DRI, forging, and briquetting.
NA - Not applicable.
15-14
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
SECTION 16
IMPLEMENTATION OF PART 420 THROUGH THE NPDES
AND PRETREATMENT PROGRAMS
This section presents an overview of implementation of Part 420 through the
NPDES and pretreatment programs. EPA promulgated the following revisions to Part 420:
• Revised effluent limitations guidelines and standards for by-product
cokemaking operations;
• New effluent limitations guidelines and standards for non-recovery
cokemaking operations;
• New effluent limitations guidelines and standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for
sintering operations with wet air pollution control systems;
• New effluent limitations guidelines and standards for sintering operations
with dry air pollution control systems;
• Ammonia (as N) waivers for cokemaking, sintering, and ironmaking
facilities that discharge to POTWs with nitrification capability;
• New alternative effluent limitations guidelines and standards for semi-wet
basic oxygen furnace (BOF) operations;
• New limitations for electric arc furnaces with semi-wet air pollution
control; and
• New effluent limitations guidelines and standards for direct-reduced iron,
briquetting, and forging operations.
EPA deleted obsolete effluent limitations guidelines and standards for beehive
cokemaking, ferromanganese blast furnace, and open heart steelmaking operations. EPA also
revised the applicability of the total recoverable chloride limitations for sintering operations with
wet air pollution control systems. The revised regulation also contains changes to the water
bubble rule and certain other changes affecting implementation through the NPDES and
pretreatment programs, as described later in this section.
Since permit writers, control authorities, and iron and steel facilities have been
implementing the existing rule, which is largely retained in the revised Part 420 promulgated
today, the focus of this section is primarily the implementation of the revisions to Part 420. EPA
will also publish a guidance manual that will provide additional examples of applying Part 420
and examples of applying best professional judgment and best management practices.
16-1
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
New and reissued Federal and State NPDES permits to direct dischargers must
include the effluent limitations promulgated today. The permits must require immediate
compliance with such limitations. If the permitting authority wishes to provide a compliance
schedule, it must do so through an enforcement mechanism. Existing indirect dischargers must
comply with today's pretreatment standards no later than three years after the publication date of
the rule. New direct and indirect discharging sources must comply with applicable limitations
and standards on the date the new sources begin operations. New direct and indirect sources are
those that began construction of iron and steel operations affected by today's rule after 30 days
after publication date of the rule. See 65 FR at 82027.
This section is organized as follows:
• Section 16.1 - Applicability of the revised Part 420;
• Section 16.2 - Changes in subcategorization structure and applicability;
• Section 16.3 - Subcategory-specific process wastewater sources;
• Section 16.4 - Calculating NPDES permit and pretreatment effluent
limitations;
• Section 16.5 - Application of best professional judgment;
• Section 16.6 - Water bubble;
• Section 16.7 - Ammonia waiver;
• Section 16.8 - Compliance monitoring;
• Section 16.9 - NPDES permit and pretreatment variances and exclusions;
and
• Section 16.10- References.
16.1 Applicability of the Revised Part 420
Section 420.01 presents the applicability of the revised Part 420. The revised
regulation is subcategorized as listed below and applies to facilities that manufacture
metallurgical coke (furnace coke and foundry coke); sinter; iron; steel and semi-finished steel
products, including hot and cold finished flat-rolled carbon and alloy and stainless steels; flat-
rolled and other steel shapes hot coated with other metals or combinations of metals; plates;
structural shapes and members; and hot rolled pipes and tubes.
16-2
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Subcategory
Facilities
A Cokemaking
By-product recovery coke plants
Non-recovery coke plants
B Sintering
Sinter plants
C Ironmaking
Ironmaking blast furnaces
D Steelmaking
Basic oxygen furnaces
Electric arc furnaces
E Vacuum Degassing
Vacuum degassing plants
F Continuous Casting
Continuing casting operations
G Hot Forming
Primary mills
Section mills
Hot strip and plate mills
Pipe and tube mills
H Salt Bath Descaling
Oxidizing operations
Reducing operations
I Acid Pickling
Sulfuric acid
Hydrochloric acid
Combination acid pickling
J Cold Forming
Cold rolling mills
Cold worked pipe and tube mills
K Alkaline Cleaning
Batch and continuous operations
L Hot Coating
Galvanizing
Galvalume
Other hot dip coatings
M Other Operations
Direct-reduced iron
Forging
Briquetting
EPA deleted certain manufacturing processes that had been included in the prior
Part 420 (promulgated in 1982 and revised in 1984) from this regulation because they are no
longer used in the United States:
• Beehive cokemaking;
• Ferromanganese blast furnaces; and
• Open hearth steelmaking furnaces.
EPA is also considering revising the applicability of Parts 420 and 433 (Metal
Finishing) to move certain steel finishing operations from these parts to Part 438 (Metal Products
& Machinery). EPA is examining this in the context of its Part 438 rulemaking. The steel
finishing operations in Part 420 that could be affected are:
16-3
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
• Surface finishing and cold forming of steel bar, rod, wire, pipe or tube;
• Batch electroplating on steel;
• Continuous electroplating and hot dip coating of long steel products (e.g.,
wire, rod, bar);
• Batch hot dip coating of steel; and
• Steel wire drawing.
These operations produce finished products such as bars, wire, pipe and tubes, nails, chain link
fencing, and steel rope.
The steel finishing operations in Part 433 that could be affected by the Part 438
rulemaking include continuous electroplating of flat steel products (e.g., sheet, strip, and plate).
EPA had proposed to move these electroplating operations to Part 420 but did not promulgate
this revised applicability for the reasons described in Section V.A.7 of the preamble for the final
rule.
16.2 Changes in Subcategorization Structure and Applicability
Table 16-1 compares the previous subcategorization of Part 420 to the revised
subcategorization of Part 420 based on this final rule. For the most part, EPA kept the same
subcategorization from the 1982 regulation in the revised regulation. The revisions to the final
rule by subcategory are listed below:
Subcategory A - Cokemaking
• Deletes beehive coke plants because that cokemaking technology is not
used in the United States.
• For BPT and BCT effluent limitations guidelines, maintains the 1982
subcategorization that distinguished between merchant and iron and steel
by-product recovery coke plants because EPA did not change those
effluent limitations. Adds non-recovery cokemaking as a new segment at
BPT and BCT to account for that cokemaking technology.
• For BAT, NSPS, PSES and PSNS, establishes new segments for by-
product recovery and non-recovery cokemaking. Based on review of
information from the 1997 survey, site visits, and EPA sampling episodes,
EPA determined that it is not appropriate to establish or maintain different
segments for merchant and iron and steel by-product recovery coke plants.
16-4
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Subcategory B - Sintering
• Adds segments to distinguish sintering operations with wet air pollution
control systems and sintering operations with dry air pollution control
systems.
Subcategory C - Ironmaking
• Deletes ferromanganese blast furnace operations because ferromanganese
is no longer produced in blast furnaces in the Unites States.
Subcategory D - Steelmaking
• Deletes open hearth steelmaking operations because that steelmaking
technology is no longer used in the United States.
Subcategory H - Salt Bath Descaling. Subcategory I - Acid Pickling. Subcategory J - Cold
Rolling, and Subcategory L - Hot Coating
• EPA is considering deleting segments designated in Table 16-1 by italics
from Part 420 and transferring them for regulation under Part 438 (Metal
Products and Machinery) as part of that rulemaking.
Subcategory M - Other Operations
• Adds a new subcategory and segments for direct-reduced iron, steel
forging, and briquetting operations.
163 Subcategorv-Speciflc Process Wastewater Sources
Part 420 regulates discharges of process wastewaters generated in all production
operations covered in the general and subcategory-specific applicability sections of the
regulation. EPA defines process wastewater at 40 CFR Part 122.2 as follows:
"... any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into direct
contact with or results from the production or use of any raw material,
intermediate product, finished product, byproduct or waste product."
As described below, permit writers and control authorities apply the effluent
limitations guidelines and standards in Part 420 on a mass basis using a reasonable measure of
actual production for the facilities being permitted. There are circumstances where facilities may
appropriately cotreat non-process wastewaters generated from ancillary operations with process
wastewaters. To accommodate such circumstances, EPA defined non-process wastewaters at
§420.02(r) as:
16-5
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
"... utility wastewaters (for example, water treatment residuals, boiler blowdown,
and air pollution control wastewaters from heat recovery equipment); treated or
untreated ground waters from groundwater remediation systems; dewatering water
from building foundations; and, other wastewaters not associated with a
production process."
§420.08 authorizes NPDES and pretreatment permit authorities to provide additional mass
discharge allowances for non-process wastewaters when such wastewaters are appropriately
cotreated with process wastewaters. EPA will publish a separate guidance document that
includes examples of appropriate cotreatment of process and non-process wastewaters.
Table 16-2 lists process and non-process wastewaters generated from
manufacturing and processing operations at facilities regulated by Part 420; it is not intended to
be an exhaustive list. Although not repeated in Table 16-2 for each subcategory, process
wastewaters that may be common to many manufacturing operations include equipment cleaning
and wash down waters. Common non-process wastewaters may include process water treatment
residuals, boiler blowdown, and storm water from the immediate process area. The presence of
these wastewaters and the need to cotreat them with process wastewaters is dependent on the
configuration of the individual steel mill.
16.4 Calculating NPDES Permit and Pretreatment Effluent Limitations
This section discusses the production basis of the effluent limitations and provides
examples for calculating NPDES and pretreatment permit limits where process wastewater
discharges from the same operation and same category are cotreated, where wastewater
discharges from operations in different subcategories are cotreated, and where there are
miscellaneous process wastewater discharges.
16.4.1 Production Basis
The limitations and standards promulgated today are expressed in terms of mass
(e.g., lbs/day or kg/day). This means that NPDES permit limitations derived from today's rule
similarly must be expressed in terms of mass. See 40 CFR 122.45(f). These requirements are for
direct discharging facilities. Similar requirements exist for indirect discharging facilities and are
found in 40 CFR 403.6(c)(3). In order to convert effluent limitations guidelines and standards
expressed as pounds/thousand pounds to a monthly average or daily maximum permit limit, the
permitting authority would use a production rate with units of thousand pounds/day. EPA's
regulations at 40 CFR 420.04, 122.45(b)(2), and 403.6(c)(3) require that NPDES permit and
pretreatment limits be based on a "reasonable measure of actual production," but do not define
the term. In its 2000 proposal, EPA solicited comment on whether to codify a definition of that
term in Part 420 for the iron and steel category. After considering the comments and reviewing
the rulemaking record, EPA has decided not to codify a definition of "reasonable measure of
actual production."
16-6
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Background
As explained above, the current iron and steel regulation does not define what
constitutes a "reasonable measure of actual production," although it offers the following
examples: "production during the high month of the previous year, or the monthly average for the
highest of the previous five years." See 40 CFR 420.04.
EPA believes that some NPDES permitting and pretreatment control authorities
have identified production rates that do not reflect a "reasonable measure of actual production"
specified at 122.45(b)(2)(I), 403.6(c)(3), and 420.04. In some cases, maximum production rates
for similar process units discharging to one treatment system were determined from different
years or months, which may provide an unrealistically high measure of actual production. In
EPA's view, this would occur if the different process units could not reasonably produce at these
high rates simultaneously.
In addition, industry stakeholders have also noted that permitting and pretreatment
control authorities interpret the reasonable measure of actual production inconsistently.
Accordingly, iron and steel industry stakeholders requested that EPA publish a consistent policy
on how to implement this requirement. Industry stakeholders have indicated that (1) in order to
promote consistency, EPA should codify the method used to determine appropriate production
rates for calculating allowable mass loadings, so that the permit writers can all use the same
basis; and (2) EPA should use a high production basis, such as maximum monthly production
over the previous five year period or maximum design production, in order to ensure that a
facility will not be out of compliance during periods of high production.
2000 Proposal
Because the "reasonable measure of actual production" concept is inconsistently
applied, EPA proposed in 2000 to include in its final iron and steel rulemaking specific direction
on making this determination. EPA solicited comment on four alternative approaches to
implement the "reasonable measure of actual production." See 65 FR at 82,029-31. Each
alternative excluded, from the calculation of operating rates, production from unit operations that
do not generate or discharge process wastewater. EPA proposed the following four alternative
definitions of reasonable measure of actual production: (A) include production only from units
that can operate simultaneously; (B) apply multi-tiered permit limits with different limits for
different rates of production as defined in Chapter 5 of U.S. EPA NPDES Permit Writers
Manual, EPA 833-B-96-003; (C) use the average daily production from the highest production
year during the previous five years; and (D) use one of the methods for monthly average limits
but use concentration limits for daily maximum limits.
Each alternative had its supporters and detractors in comments. Several
commenters preferred alternative A, but incorrectly described the alternative as the high month of
production over the past five years. No commenters provided data that showed they would be
unable to meet the proposed limits and standards under any of the four alternatives.
16-7
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Final Rule
At this time, EPA has decided not to revise Section 420.04 in any respect. EPA
has also decided not to codify a definition for the term "reasonable measure of actual production"
applicable to Part 420. The Agency has thoroughly evaluated all comments supporting other
interpretations and is not convinced that departing from past practices is justified here.
Consequently, EPA concludes that continuing to allow flexibility to permitting and pretreatment
control authorities to apply site-specific factors in determining a reasonable measure of
production is appropriate.
16.4.2 Calculating NPDES Permit and Pretreatment Limitations
When promulgating Part 420 in 1982, EPA recognized that cotreating compatible
wastewaters in the iron and steel industry is a cost-effective means of wastewater treatment. For
this revised rule, EPA carried forward the structure of the 1982 regulation to facilitate
cotreatment of compatible wastestreams in centralized treatment systems and to discourage
cotreatment of wastestreams that the Agency deems incompatible (e.g., cotreating by-product
recovery cokemaking and BOF steelmaking wastewaters, which could increase discharges of
toxic pollutants from cokemaking operations). The following table presents groups of
subcategories for which the regulation is structured to facilitate cotreatment.
Group 1
Cokemaking
Group 2
Ironmaking
Sintering
Blast furnaces
Group 3
Carbon Steel
Steelmaking
BOF steelmaking
Vacuum degassing
Continuous casting
Hot forming
Steel finishing
Group 4
Stainless Steel
Steelmaking
BOF steelmaking
Vacuum degassing
Continuous casting
Hot forming
Steel finishing
The Agency selected pollutants for regulation in each of these groups to allow
facilities to cotreat their wastestreams where feasible.
16-8
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
The NPDES permit regulations at § 122.45(h) provide that where it is not feasible
to impose effluent limitations at a final outfall discharging to a receiving water, the permit writer
may elect to impose the technology-based effluent limitations at an internal outfall or compliance
monitoring station. This is commonly done in NPDES permits for integrated steel mills where
treated process wastewater effluents are commingled with noncontact cooling waters and storm
waters prior to discharge to a receiving stream through a final outfall.
The remainder of this subsection provides two examples of how to calculate
NPDES permit and pretreatment effluent limitations for various combinations of iron and steel
manufacturing facilities. Permit writers and control authorities commonly calculate NPDES
permit and pretreatment effluent limitations from Part 420 using spreadsheets developed for
specific permitted final outfalls or wastewater treatment facilities limited at an internal
monitoring station. For example, Table 16-3 is an example spreadsheet that corresponds to
Example 1. The spreadsheet shows the daily maximum and monthly average mass loadings for
each process, calculated for each regulated pollutant. The resulting mass loadings for each
process are summed for each pollutant to determine the respective effluent limitations for the
pertinent outfall or wastewater treatment system.
Direct Dischargers
Example 1: Two iron and steel processes within the same category;
no nonregulatedprocess wastewater.
In this example, a facility has two blast furnaces and treats their process
wastewater in a dedicated blast furnace gas cleaning water treatment and recycle system. The
reasonable measure of actual production (NPDES permit production rate) is 4,500 tons/day for
one furnace and 3,900 tons/day for the other. The facility also has a sinter plant with wet air
pollution controls equipped with a dedicated treatment and recycle system. The facility
discharges blowdown from that recycle system into the blast furnace treatment and recycle
system; the only discharge from these operations is the blowdown from the blast furnace
treatment and recycle system. The NPDES production rate for the sinter plant is 4,100 tons/day.
Table 16-3 presents the calculations illustrating how the effluent limitations
guidelines are applied in this case. For this example, the total suspended solids (TSS) and oil and
grease (O&G) limitations reflect the BPT limitations from the 1982 regulation. Note that the
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran (TCDF) limitation applicable to sinter plant wastewater is
applied to the combined wastewater discharge from the sinter plant and blast furnaces as a daily
maximum concentration limit less than the defined minimum level of 10 parts per quadrillion
(ppq)-1
'Direct dischargers must demonstrate compliance with the effluent limitations and standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF at the
point after treatment of sinter plant wastewater separately or in combination with blast furnace wastewater, but prior
to mixing with any other process or non-process wastewaters or noncontact cooling waters in amounts greater than
five percent of the sintering process wastewater flow. See §420.29.
16-9
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Indirect Dischargers
40 CFR Part 403 classifies wastewater that can be discharged from industrial
facilities to POTWs as follows:
• Regulated - Wastewater regulated by categorical pretreatment standards,
such as those contained in Part 420;
• Unregulated - Wastewater that is not regulated by categorical pretreatment
standards and is not dilute wastewater; and
• Dilute - Sanitary wastewater, noncontact cooling water, boiler blowdown,
and other wastestreams listed in Appendix D to Part 403.
For indirect iron and steel dischargers whose wastestreams are not cotreated with
wastewater from other industrial categories, the control authority would derive mass-based
pretreatment limits from the final pretreatment standards similarly to how NPDES permit writers
derive limits for direct dischargers. Specifically, the pretreatment authority would apply the
pretreatment limits either at the point of discharge from the facility's wastewater treatment
facility or at the point of discharge to the POTW, whichever point the control authority
determines is appropriate based on site circumstances.
Where the above circumstances apply, and where there are other wastestreams
present that would be regulated under the Part 420, the pretreatment authority would calculate the
applicable pretreatment limits as described in Example 2. In this case, the pretreatment authority
would add incremental mass limits for these wastestreams, as allowed by §420.08, to the limits
derived for the regulated wastewater to determine the appropriate pretreatment limits.
Where facilities combine wastewaters regulated under Part 420 and dilute
wastewaters, the pretreatment authority can either: (1) apply the pretreatment limits at an internal
monitoring point where dilution is not a factor, under authority of §403.6(e)(2) and (4); or, (2)
apply mass-based pretreatment limits in terms at a location after the regulated and dilute
wastestreams are combined, provided the dilution is not enough to interfere with compliance
determinations.
Where facilities cotreat their iron and steel wastewaters with wastewaters from
other industrial categories that are regulated by other categorical pretreatment standards, the
pretreatment authority can either derive pretreatment standards for the combined wastestreams by
using a building-block approach or by using the "combined wastestream formula" provided at
§403.6(e) (see Equation 16-1). In most circumstances, pretreatment authorities use a building
block approach where mass pretreatment limits are derived from each regulation and added
together to develop a mass pretreatment limit for the combined wastewaters.
16-10
-------
where:
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
V C F F -F
C = ^ 11 x T ° (16-1)
' E F, F
CT = The alternate concentration limit for the combined wastestream,'
mg/L;
Cr = The categorical pretreatment standard concentration limit for a
pollutant in the regulated stream I, mg/L;
F, = The average daily flow of stream I, L/day;
Fd = The average daily flow from dilute wastestreams as defined in Part
403, L/day; and
Ft = The total daily flow, L/day.
See Reference 16-1 for more information on the combined wastestream formula.
As with direct dischargers, when the pretreatment standards applicable to one
category regulate a different set of pollutants than the standards applicable to another category,
the control authority must ensure that the guidelines are properly applied. If a pollutant is
regulated in one wastestream but not another, the control authority must ensure that the
nonregulated pollutant stream does not dilute the regulated pollutant stream to the point where
pollutants are not analytically detectable. If this level of dilution occurs, the control authority
most likely would establish internal monitoring points, as authorized under 40 CFR Part
403.6(e)(2) and (4). Alternatively, if there is reason to believe the pollutant in question is present
in the unregulated wastestream at some level, the pretreatment authority may derive supplemental
mass limitations for the pollutant in question in the unregulated wastestream using best
professional judgment (BPJ).
Example 2 describes how to calculate pretreatment limits for an indirect
discharging by-product recovery coke plant where process area storm water and groundwater
remediation flow are cotreated with regulated coke plant process wastewaters. In this case, the
permit writer would use a process area storm water flow allowance and a long-term average
groundwater flow rate to develop supplemental mass effluent limitations based on concentrations
used by EPA to develop the by-product recovery coke plant pretreatment standards. Those
supplemental mass effluent limitations are added to the categorical effluent limitations to
establish the final pretreatment limits applicable to the combined wastewaters. Permit writers
and control authorities would use this same approach for both direct and indirect dischargers
where compatible non-process wastewaters are present and are cotreated with process
wastewaters.
16-11
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Example 2: Indirectly discharging coke plant;
cotreatment of ground water from remediation project.
In this example, an indirect discharging by-product recovery coke plant has an
active ground water remediation project that generates a continuous flow of 35 gpm; this
wastestream contains benzene, phenol, ammonia as nitrogen, and other pollutants characteristic
of coke plant wastewater. Because the untreated ground water is compatible with untreated coke
plant process wastewater, EPA determined that it is appropriate to cotreat these two waste
streams. In this example, benzene in the ground water would be removed in the ammonia still
and returned to the coke oven gas; ammonia would be removed in the ammonia still and
downstream treatment; and phenol would be removed either at the coke plant (depending upon
the type of treatment provided) or at the POTW. The Agency has determined that phenol is
compatible with biological treatment at POTWs and does not pass through.
The coke plant is equipped with process area secondary containment for the by-
product recovery area and for the following bulk storage tanks: ammonia liquor, crude coal tar,
crude light oil, and untreated wastewater equalization tanks. The facility has the capability to
temporarily store a portion of the collected storm water in secondary containment structures and
control the rate storm water is pumped to the wastewater treatment system equalization tanks.
Based on review of historical daily coke plant wastewater treatment flow monitoring records and
daily plant rainfall data, the daily effluent flow was found to increase approximately 5 gpm for
one to two days following storm events ranging from 1.0" to 2" per 24 hours. Consequently a
process area storm water allowance of 5 gpm was included in the derivation of the pretreatment
limitations. Table 16-4 presents the calculations illustrating how the limitations are applied in
this case.
The approach used in this example has the same effect as applying the combined
wastestream formula from the pretreatment regulations reviewed above; however, the final rule
allows both direct and indirect dischargers to treat combinations of regulated and unregulated
wastestreams.
16.5 Application of Best Professional Judgement
Section 402(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the NPDES permit
regulations at § 122.44(a) and §125.3 allow permit authorities to use BPJ in the absence of
categorical effluent limitations to establish NPDES permit limitations. When developing the iron
and steel regulation, EPA attempted to minimize the need for BPJ determinations by taking into
account process wastewaters commonly generated at each manufacturing process and
miscellaneous process-related wastewaters (e.g., those generated in roll shops and from building
basement sumps). The Agency recognizes, however, that some sites may generate non-process
wastewaters that meet the definition of process wastewater (see §122.2) that were not accounted
for in the development of the effluent limitations guidelines and pretreatment standards for
existing sources. To assist permit writers in addressing such wastewaters and to minimize the
number of requests for fundamentally different factors variances, EPA added a definition of non-
process wastewaters at §420.02(r) and included at §420.08 a provision that authorizes permit
16-12
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
writers to provide for increased loadings for wastewater sources not included in the development
of the regulation, if these sources generate an increased discharge flow.
When developing NPDES and pretreatment limitations, permit writers and
pretreatment control authorities are authorized to use their best professional judgment to include
increased mass discharge allowances to account for certain non-process wastewaters when they
are appropriately cotreated with process wastewaters using best professional judgement. Non-
process wastewaters may include utility wastewaters (for example, water treatment residuals,
boiler blowdown, and air pollution control wastewaters from heat recovery equipment); treated
or untreated wastewaters from groundwater remediation systems; dewatering water for building
foundations; and other wastewater streams not associated with a production process. When
considering such non-process wastewaters, permit writers and pretreatment control authorities
should determine whether they contain process wastewater pollutants, or whether they would
simply be dilution flows. For example, wastewater from coke plant groundwater remediation
systems would be expected to contain coke plant wastewater pollutants, whereas building
foundation dewatering water would be expected to be relatively clean. In the former case, the
permit writer or pretreatment control authority may include additional mass discharges based on
the average groundwater remediation flow and the concentrations used by EPA to develop the
effluent limitations guidelines and standards in developing the mass limits. In the latter case, no
increase in mass discharges may be appropriate.
EPA has provided a definition of storm water in the immediate process area at
§420.02(t). EPA has included provisions in the regulation at §420.08 for permit writers and
pretreatment control authorities to provide for additional mass discharge allowances for process
area storm water, when they deem appropriate. With advances in storm water pollution
prevention and spill prevention and control, collecting and treating limited amounts of process
area storm water with process wastewaters is the most practicable and effective means of limiting
discharges of contaminated storm water. This is particularly the case for by-product recovery
coke plants, where contaminated storm water is typically collected from the following
operations: tar decanters, ammonia liquor storage, crude tar storage, crude light oil recovery
(benzol plant), crude light oil storage, ammonia recovery, ammonium sulfate recovery, and
others. Storm water collected from these areas often contains oil & grease and some of the
nonconventional and toxic pollutants associated with the by-product recovery processes (e.g.,
ammonia, cyanide, phenolic compounds, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons). As a result,
many coke plants commonly collect storm water from these areas and pump it to the process
wastewater equalization tank for treatment with process wastewaters. Because the levels of
contaminants and dissolved salts in the collected storm water are relatively low compared to
those found in process wastewaters, facilities can also temporarily use storm water in lieu of
uncontaminated water to optimize of biological treatment systems.
For other iron and steel processes, EPA believes it is prudent to collect storm
water from the area within outdoor wastewater treatment facilities, particularly where wastewater
treatment sludges are dewatered and handled at blast furnaces, sinter plants, steelmaking
operations, hot forming mills (scale and oil removal as well as wastewater treatment), and steel
finishing wastewater treatment plants.
16-13
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
EPA does not advocate unrestricted collection and treatment of process area storm
water with process waters, either at by-product recovery coke plants or at facilities in other
subcategories. For example, by-product recovery and non-recovery coke plants should use
conventional storm water control measures to handle coal and coke pile runoff, storm water from
the battery areas, and storm water collected away from the by-products recovery areas. Other
examples of storm water that would be either impracticable or uneconomic to treat in process
wastewater treatment facilities include building roof storm drainage from hot forming and steel
finishing mills and storm drainage from raw material storage areas and plant roadways.
For the steelmaking subcategory, EPA revised BPT, BAT, BCT, and PSES
limitations and standards for basic oxygen furnaces with semi-wet air pollution control. EPA has
allowed the permit authority or pretreatment control authority to determine limitations based on
best professional judgment, when safety considerations warrant. The Agency believes best
professional judgment will allow the permit authority or pretreatment control authority to reflect
the site-specific nature of the discharge. EPA is doing this because, although the 1982 regulation
requires basic oxygen furnace semi-wet air pollution control to achieve zero discharge of process
wastewater pollutants, currently not all of the sites are able to achieve this discharge status
because of safety and operational considerations which preclude some sites from balancing the
water applied for BOF gas conditioning with evaporative losses to achieve zero discharge. The
Agency recognizes the benefit of using excess water in basic oxygen furnaces with semi-wet air
pollution control systems in cases where safety considerations are present. The Agency justifies
the increased allowance in this case because of the employee safety and manufacturing
considerations (reduced production equipment damage and lost production).
16.6 Water Bubble
The "water bubble" is a regulatory mechanism provided in the current regulation
at 40 CFR 420.03 to allow for trading of identical pollutants at any single steel facility with
multiple compliance points. The bubble has been used at some facilities to realize cost savings
and/or facilitate compliance.
The water bubble provision in the 1982 rule had the following restrictions:
• Trades can be made only for like pollutants (e.g., lead for lead, not lead for
zinc);
• Alternative effluent limitations resulting from the application of the water
bubble must comply with applicable water quality standards;
• Each outfall must have specific, fixed limitations for the term of the
permit;
• Trades involving cokemaking and cold rolling operations are prohibited;
16-14
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Each trade must result in a minimum net reduction in pollutant loading (15
percent for TSS and O&G, and 10 percent for all other traded pollutants);
and
• Only existing sources may apply the water bubble.
The water bubble provisions from the 1982 regulation were carried forward in the
current regulation, with the modifications described in the preamble, including the following:
• Water bubble trades are allowed for new sources and for new Subpart M
operations;
• Water bubble trades for cokemaking and cold rolling operations are now
authorized;
• Water bubble trades for cokemaking operations are authorized only when
the alternative limitations are more stringent than the Subpart A
limitations otherwise applicable to those operations;
• Water bubble trades for O&G are prohibited;
• Water bubble trades for 2,3,7,8-TCDF in sintering operations are
prohibited; and
• Eliminate the minimum net reduction provisions (formerly Codified at 40
CFR 420.03(b)).
The water bubble provisions allow alternative effluent limitations where a facility,
in effect, trades pollutant discharges from one outfall or NPDES permit compliance monitoring
point to another. Unlike variances, facilities may request to apply the water bubble wherever
they can meet the conditions governing its use. Permit authorities are authorized to include
effluent limitations in water bubble trades in NPDES permits in permit applications and
renewals.
For the final rule, EPA is prohibiting trading of O&G between outfalls. EPA is
concerned that different process units may discharge different types of O&G, and that trading
might increase the amount of a more environmentally harmful type of O&G (e.g., petroleum-
based), while reducing the amount of a less harmful type (e.g., animal fats).
When estimating the incremental investment and operating and maintenance costs
associated with the final regulation, the Agency assumed that no facilities would use the water
bubble. Consequently, any use of the water bubble would represent cost savings.
16-15
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
16.7 Ammonia Waiver
For the final rule, EPA promulgated pretreatment standards for ammonia (as N)
for the cokemaking and sintering subcategories because of the high loads of ammonia in
wastewaters from those subcategories to POTWs that do not have nitrification capability.
However, EPA was aware that some POTWs treating wastewaters from these subcategories have
nitrification capability. EPA received several compelling comments supporting an ammonia
standard waiver in these cases and encouraging EPA to provide this mechanism for the
cokemaking, sintering, and ironmaking subcategories. No commenters opposed this mechanism.
EPA concludes that an ammonia standard waiver will be equally protective of the environment
and lead to potential savings for some iron and steel facilities. Thus, the final rule specifies that
ammonia (as N) pretreatment standards do not apply to cokemaking, ironmaking, and sintering
facilities discharging to POTWs with nitrification capability. As a further point of clarification,
EPA defines nitrification at §420.02(s) as follows:
"...means oxidation of ammonium salts to nitrites (via Nitrosomas bacteria) and
the further oxidation of nitrite to nitrate via Nitrobacter bacteria. Nitrification can
be accomplished in either: (1) a single or two-stage activated sludge wastewater
treatment system; or (2) wetlands specifically developed with a marsh/pond
configuration and maintained for the express purpose of removing ammonia-N.
Indicators of nitrification capability are: (1) biological monitoring for ammonia
oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) to determine if the
nitrification is occurring; and (2) analysis of the nitrogen balance to determine if
nitrifying bacteria reduce the amount of ammonia and increase the amount of
nitrite and nitrate."
While EPA has included the option of an ammonia waiver for those facilities
discharging to POTWs that nitrify, the Agency determined a certification requirement was
unnecessary in the final rule and that pretreatment control authorities can best determine whether
or not a POTW has nitrification capability. The pretreatment control authorities issuing POTW
individual control mechanisms to iron and steel facilities will determine whether pretreatment
standards for ammonia (as N) are applicable using the definition of nitrification provided at
§420.02(s) of the final rule.
16.8 Compliance Monitoring
Permit writers and control authorities must establish requirements for regulated
facilities to monitor their effluent to ensure that they are complying with permit limitations. As
specified in 40 CFR Parts 122.41, 122.44, and 122.48, all NPDES permits must specify
requirements for using, maintaining, and installing (if appropriate) monitoring equipment;
monitoring type, intervals, and frequencies that will provide representative data; analytical
methods; and reporting and record keeping. The NPDES program requires permittees (with
certain specific exceptions) to monitor for limited pollutants and report data at least once per
year. Control authorities must generally require similar monitoring techniques and frequencies
16-16
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
for indirect dischargers, but 40 CFR 403.12(e) requires twice per year reporting for industrial
users (rather than once per year for direct dischargers).
The NPDES permit regulations at §122.41 (j)(4) and the pretreatment regulations
at §403.12(g) require that facilities conduct sampling and analyses to monitor compliance
according to the techniques specified at 40 CFR Part 136, as amended. Table 16-5 presents the
sampling and analytical methods for those pollutants regulated under Part 420 (see Part 136 for
the specific analytical methods for sample handling, sample holding time, and approved sample
containers).
Except as noted below, the Agency has not promulgated specific monitoring
requirements or monitoring frequencies in the iron and steel regulation; therefore, permit
authorities may establish monitoring requirements and monitoring frequencies at their discretion.
Sections 16.8.1 through 16.8.3 provide guidance for establishing those requirements. EPA has
specified the point of compliance monitoring to demonstrate compliance with the pretreatment
standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for the sintering subcategory. This exception is described in Section
16.8.3.
16.8.1 Sample Types
EPA recommends flow-proportioned, 24-hour composite samples for the
following pollutants:
TSS;
• Ammonia (as N);
• Total cyanide;
• Total phenolics;
2,3,7,8-TCDF;
• Benzo(a)pyrene; and
• Naphthalene.
Part 136 requires facilities to collect grab samples for O&G. Several iron and
steel permits are written to require collection of three grab samples for O&G in a 24-hour
monitoring day, with the results averaged to represent a daily sample. The sample types for pH
can range from a one-time grab sample during a monitoring day for operations where pH is
usually not a control parameter (e.g., continuous casting, hot forming) to continuous sampling
where pH is a critical aspect of the wastewater to be treated or a critical control parameter for
operation of wastewater treatment facilities (e.g., steel finishing and other subcategories where
metals precipitation is a control technology).
16.8.2 Monitoring Frequency
The monitoring frequencies specified in iron and steel NPDES and POTW
permits vary depending upon the size of the facility, potential impacts on receiving waters,
compliance history, and other factors, including monitoring policies or regulations required by
16-17
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
permit authorities. A few iron and steel permits for large mills have required monitoring for all
regulated pollutants as frequently as five times per week. Other permits for less complex
facilities require twice monthly monitoring. When developing the revisions to Part 420, EPA
considered a monitoring frequency of once per week for regulated pollutants, except for 2,3,7,8-
TCDF, for which the Agency considered a monthly monitoring frequency. Most permits for iron
and steel facilities require facilities to continuously monitor and record their discharge flow rates
and report daily 24-hour total flow.
Facilities may monitor effluent more frequently than specified in their permits;
however, the results must be reported in accordance with § 122.41 (l)(4)(ii) for direct dischargers
or with §403.12(g)(5) for indirect dischargers.
16.8.3 Compliance Monitoring Locations
The NPDES permit regulations at §122.41(j)(l) require that monitoring samples
and measurements be representative of the monitored activity; §125.3(e) requires that
technology-based effluent limits be applied prior to or at the point of discharge. See also
§122.44(i) and § 122.45(h). The pretreatment regulations at §403.12(g)(3) are analogous to
NPDES permit regulations at §122.41(j)(l). The choice of monitoring location for use of the
combined wastestream formula is §403.6(e)(4). The pretreatment regulations at §403(d) prohibit
facilities from diluting their wastewater to meet categorical pretreatment standards. The
discharge from a wastewater treatment facility is usually a point where measurements will be
most representative of the treated effluent. Under circumstances where dilution with relatively
low volumes of noncontact cooling water or storm water will not interfere with compliance
determinations, permit writers may apply the technology-based effluent limits at the point of
discharge to a receiving water or to a POTW.
EPA specifies the point of compliance monitoring to demonstrate compliance
with the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for 2,3,7,8-TCDF for the sintering
subcategory (see §420.29). For sintering direct dischargers, compliance is determined at the
point after treatment of sinter plant wastewater separately or in combination with blast furnace
wastewater, but prior to mixing with process wastewaters from processes other than sintering and
ironmaking, non-process wastewaters, and noncontact cooling water in an amount greater than 5
percent by volume of the sintering process wastewaters. For sintering indirect dischargers,
compliance is determined at the point after treatment of sinter plant wastewater separately or in
combination with blast furnace wastewater, but prior to mixing with process wastewaters from
processes other than sintering and ironmaking, non-process wastewaters, and noncontact cooling
waters.
EPA has given permit writers the flexibility to apply pH effluent limitations at the
point of discharge from a wastewater treatment facility or at the point of discharge to a receiving
water (see §420.07). This mechanism is designed to prevent the need for facilities to reneutralize
their treated wastewater to a pH of 6.0 to 9.0 if they can achieve the same end by mixing treated
wastewater with nonregulated wastewater, such as large volumes of noncontact cooling water.
16-18
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
16.9 NPDES Permit and Pretreatment Variances and Exclusions
The CWA and the NPDES permit regulations allow certain variances from
technology-based effluent limitations guidelines and standards for exceptional cases. The water
bubble provisions of Part 420 allow alternative effluent limitations where a facility can trade
pollutant discharges from one outfall or NPDES permit compliance monitoring point to another.
Unlike variances, facilities may use the water bubble wherever they can meet the water bubble
conditions. The permit writer develops the variance and alternative limitations during the time of
draft permit renewal so that the variance and alternative limitations are subject to public review
and comment at the same time the entire permit is put on public notice. The variance and
alternative limitations remain in effect for the term of a permit, unless the permit writer modifies
it prior to expiration.
A permit applicant must meet specific data requirements before a variance is
granted. As the term implies, a variance is an unusual situation, and the permit writer should not
expect to routinely receive variance requests. The permit writer should consult 40 CFR §124.62
for procedures on making decisions on the different types of variances.
16.9.1 Economic Variances
Section 301(c) of the CWA allows a variance for nonconventional pollutants from
technology-based BAT effluent limitations due to economic factors, at the request of the facility
and on a case-by-case basis. There are no implementing regulations for §301 (c); rather, variance
requests must be made and reviewed based on the statutory language in §301(c). The economic
variance may also apply to nonguideline limits in accordance with 40 CFR §122.21(m)(2)(ii).
The applicant normally files the request for a variance from effluent limitations developed from
BAT guidelines during the public notice period for the draft permit. Other filing time periods
may apply, as specified in 40 CFR § 122.21(m)(2). The variance application must show that the
modified requirements:
1) Represent the maximum use of technology within the economic capability
of the owner or operator; and
2) Result in further progress toward the goal of discharging no process
wastewater.
Facilities in industrial categories other than utilities must conduct three financial
tests to determine if they are eligible for a 301(c) variance. Guidance for conducting the financial
tests is available from EPA's Office of Wastewater Management. Generally, EPA will grant a
variance only if all three tests indicate that the required pollution control is not economically
achievable, and the applicant makes the requisite demonstration regarding "reasonable further
progress."
With respect to the second requirement for a 301(c) modification, the applicant
must, at a minimum, demonstrate compliance with all applicable BPT limitations and pertinent
16-19
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
water-quality standards. In addition, the proposed alternative requirements must reasonably
improve the applicant's discharge.
16.9.2 Variances Based on Localized Environmental Factors
Section 301(g) of the CWA allows a variance for certain nonconventional
pollutants (ammonia, chlorine, color, iron, and total phenols) from BAT effluent limitations
guidelines due to local environmental factors. The discharger must file a variance application
that shows the following:
• The modified requirements result in compliance with BPT and water-
quality standards of the receiving stream.
• Other point or nonpoint source discharges will not need additional
treatment as a result of the variance approval.
• The modified requirements will not interfere with protection of public
water supplies or with protection and propagation of a balanced population
of shellfish, fish, and wildfowl, and will allow recreational activities in
and on the water. Also, the modified requirements will not result in
quantities of pollutants that may reasonably be anticipated to pose an
unacceptable risk to human health or the environment, cause acute or
chronic toxicity, or promote synergistic properties.
Section 301(g) also allows petitioners to add other nonconventional pollutants to
the variance list in their petition. The petitioner must demonstrate that the pollutants do not
exhibit the characteristics of toxic pollutants. Certain time restrictions and other conditions also
apply (see §301(g)(4)(C)).
Permit writers must review the request to ensure that it complies with each of the
requirements for this type of variance. The 301(g) variance request involves significant water-
quality assessment, including aquatic toxicity, mixing zone, and dilution model analyses, and the
possible development of site-specific criteria. In addition, the permit writer must assess many
complex human health effects, including carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, mutagenicity,
bioaccumulation, and synergistic propensities. Permit writers should use EPA's Draft 301^
Technical Guidance Manual (Reference 16-2) in assessing variance requests.
Several Section 301(g) variances have been granted for iron and steel facilities.
Most of these have been for ammonia as nitrogen and total phenols discharged from blast furnace
operations.
16.9.3 Central Treatment Provision
Under 40 CFR 420.01(b), the central treatment provision of the 1982 iron and
steel regulation, EPA identified 21 facilities that were temporarily excluded from the provisions
16-20
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
of Part 420 because of economic considerations. This exclusion would not be granted unless the
owner or operator of the facility requested the Agency to consider establishing alternative
effluent limitations and provided the Agency with certain information consistent with 40 CFR
420.01(b)(2) on or before July 26,1982. See 47 FR 23285 (May 27, 1982).
The Agency did not receive any comments supporting the removal of the central
treatment provision. Rather, commenters asked EPA to expand the provision because they were
concerned that the costs of the proposed rule would be too high if the limits and standards were
made more stringent. Commenters stated that economic conditions were similar to those in 1982
and that the central treatment provision should remain a viable compliance option in Part 420.
EPA disagrees with commenters that it should expand the central treatment
provision. Because of the prevailing economic situation in the iron and steel industry,
technological reasons in some subcategories, and performance issues in others, EPA has decided
to go forward with new or revised regulations for only four subcategories (cokemaking, sintering,
steelmaking, and a subcategory for other operations). The final rule has minimal impact on the
21 eligible mills. With the substantially reduced projected economic burden on the industry, the
Agency does not believe that expanding § 420.01(b)(2) is necessary.
The final rule leaves the central treatment provision (§ 420.01(b)(2)) unchanged
from the 1982 regulation. This allows any mill whose permit is based on this provision to
continue to use it, but does not extend the provision to any additional mills.
16.10 References
16-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance Manual for the Use of
Production-Based Pretreatment Standards and the Combined Wastestream
Formula. EPA 833/B-85-201, Washington, DC, September 1985.
16-2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Draft 301(g) Technical Guidance
Manual. Washington, DC, 1984.
16-21
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-1
40 CFR Part 420 - Subcategorization
1982/1984 Part 420
Current Part 420
A. Cokemaking
By-product recovery cokemaking - iron and steel
By-product recovery cokemaking- merchant
Beehive cokemaking
A. Cokemaking
BPT, BCT
By-product recovery cokemaking - iron and steel
By-product recovery cokemaking - merchant
Non-recovery cokemaking
BAT, NSPS, PSES, PSNS
By-product recovery cokemaking
Non-recovery cokemaking
B. Sintering
B. Sintering
with wet air pollution control systems
with dry air pollution control systems
C. Ironmaking
Iron blast furnace
Ferromanganese blast furnace
C. Ironmaking
Iron blast furnace
D. Steelmaking
BOF, EAF - semi-wet
BOF - wet, suppressed combustion
BOF, open hearth, EAF - wet
D. Steelmaking
EAF - semi-wet
BOF - wet-open combustion
EAF - wet
BOF - wet-suppressed combustion
BOF - semi-wet
E. Vacuum Degassing
E. Vacuum Degassing
F. Continuous Casting
F. Continuous Casting
G. Hot Forming
Primary mills - carbon and specialty
without scarfing
with scarfing
Section mills
carbon
specialty
Flat mills
hot strip and sheet - carbon and specialty
carbon plate mills
specialty plate mills
Pipe and tube mills - carbon and specialty
G. Hot Forming
Primary mills - carbon and specialty
without scarfing
with scarfing
Section mills
carbon
specialty
Flat mills
hot strip and sheet - carbon and specialty
carbon plate mills
specialty plate mills
Pipe and tube mills - carbon and specialty
16-22
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-1 (Continued)
1982/1984 Part 420
Current Part 420
H. Salt Bath Descaling
H. Salt Bath Descaling
Oxidizing
Oxidizing
batch - sheet and plate
batch - sheet and plate
batch - rod and wire
batch - rod and wire
batch - pipe and tube
batch - pipe and tube
continuous
continuous
Reducing
Reducing
batch
batch
continuous
continuous
I. Acid Pickling
I. Acid Pickling
Sulfuric acid (spent acids & rinses)
Sulfuric acid (spent acids & rinses)
rod, wire and coil
rod, wire and coil
bar, billet and bloom
bar, billet and bloom
strip, sheet and plate
strip, sheet and plate
pipe, tube and other products
pipe, tube and other products
fume scrubbers
fame scrubbers
Hydrochloric acid (spent acids & rinses)
Hydrochloric acid (spent acids & rinses)
rod, wire and coil
rod, wire and coil
strip, sheet and plate
strip, sheet and plate
pipe, tube and other products
pipe, tube and other products
fume scrubbers
fame scrubbers
acid regeneration (absorber vent scrubber)
acid regeneration (absorber vent scrubber)
Combination acid pickling (spent acids & rinses)
Combination acid pickling (spent acids & rinses)
rod, wire and coil
rod, wire and coil
bar, billet and bloom
bar, billet and bloom
strip, sheet and plate- continuous
strip, sheet and plate- continuous
strip, sheet and plate - batch
strip, sheet and plate - batch
pipe, tube and other products
pipe, tube and other products
fume scrubbers
fume scrubbers
J. Cold Forming
J. Cold Forming
Cold rolling mills
Cold rolling mills
recirculation- single stand
recirculation- single stand
recirculation- multiple stands
recirculation- multiple stands
combination
combination
direct application - single stand
direct application - single stand
direct application - multiple stands
direct application - multiple stands
Cold worked pipe and tube
Cold worked pipe and tube
using water
using water
using oil solutions
using oil solutions
K. Alkaline Cleaning
K. Alkaline Cleaning
Batch
Batch
Continuous
Continuous
16-23
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-1 (Continued)
1982/1984 Part 420
Current Part 420
L. Hot Coating
Galvanizing, terne coating and other coatings
strip, sheet and miscellaneous products
Galvanizing and other coatings
wire products and fasteners
Fume Scrubbers
L. Hot Coating
Galvanizing, terne coating and other coatings
strip, sheet and miscellaneous products
Galvanizing and other coatings
wire products and fasteners
Fume Scrubbers
M. Other Operations
Direct-reduced iron
Forging
Briquetting
16-24
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-2
40 CFR Part 420 - Process and Non-Process Wastewaters
Manufacturing Operations
Process Wastewaters
Non-Process Wastewaters
A.
Cokemaking
By-product recovery
coke plants
Waste ammonia liquor
Coke oven gas desulfurization wastewater
Crude light oil wastewaters
Ammonia still operation wastewater
Coke oven gas condensates
Final gas cooler blowdown
Wastewater from barometric condensers
Wastewaters from NESHAP controls
Wastewater from wet air pollution control
Other miscellaneous process wastewaters
Biological treatment control water
Wastewaters from groundwater
remediation systems
Storm waters from the
immediate process area
Non-recovery coke plants
None
Process water treatment
residuals
Boiler blowdown
Wastewater from wet air
pollution control from heat
recovery
Storm waters from the
immediate process area
B.
Sintering
Wastewaters from wet air pollution control
Sinter cooling wastewater
Wastewaters from belt spray and equipment
cleaning
C.
Ironmaking
Wastewaters from blast furnace gas cooling
and gas cleaning operations
Blast furnace gas seal wastewater
Blast furnace drip leg wastewater
Wastewater from pump seals and equipment
cleaning
D.
Steelmaking
Wastewaters from semi-wet and wet air
pollution control systems
Wastewaters from BOF
groundwater remediation
systems
E.
Vacuum Degassing
Direct gas contact vacuum system water
F.
Continuous Casting
Direct contact spray system wastewater
Leaks from mold and machine cooling water
system
Flume flush wastewater
Wastewater from equipment cleaning
Wastewater from caster mold
and machine cooling
16-25
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-2 (Continued)
Manufacturing Operations
Process Wastewaters
Non-Process Wastewaters
G. Hot Forming
Descaling wastewater
Flume flush water
Direct contact roll cooling water
Direct contact product cooling water
Roll shop wastewaters
Leaks and losses from mill lubricating
systems
Scarfer emissions control wastewater
Wastewater from shear and saw cooling
Wastewater collected in basement sumps
Wastewater from equipment cleaning
Noncontact cooling water for
reheat furnaces
H. Salt Bath Descaling
Rinse waters
Fume scrubber water
Quench water
Drag-out and other losses from salt baths
I. Acid Pickling
Rinse waters
Fume scrubber waters
Spent acid solutions
Wastewater from wet looping pits
Leaks and spills collected in process area
secondary containment
Wastewater from raw materials handling
Wastewater from tank cleanouts
J. Cold Forming
Spent rolling solutions (rolling oils,
detergents, cleaners)
Roll shop wastewaters
Wastewater colleted in basement sumps
K. Alkaline Cleaning
Rinse waters
Spent cleaning baths
Wastewater from tank cleanouts
L. Hot Coating
Rinse waters
Fume scrubber waters
Acid and alkaline cleaning solution losses
Losses of coating line flux solutions
Wastewater from tank cleanouts
M. Other Operations
Direct-Reduced Iron
Briquetting
Forging
Wastewaters from wet air pollution control
none
Direct contact cooling water
Losses from hydraulic and lubricating
systems
16-26
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the
NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-3
Example 1: Application of 40 CFR Part 420
Direct Discharge Blast Furnaces and Sinter Plant
On
i
N>
-J
BPT/BAT
Production
Total Suspended Solids
Oil & Grease
Ammonia-N
Total Cyanide
Phenol
Operation
(tons/day)
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Units
Blast fumace A
§420.32(a)/§420.33(a)
4,500
0.0782
704
0.026
234
—
—
0.00876
79
0.00292
26.3
0.00175
15.8
0.000876
7.88
0.0000584
0.526
0.0000292
0.263
lbs/1,000 lb
lbs/day
Blast fumace B
§420.32(a)/§420.33(a)
3,900
0.0782
610
0.026
203
~
~
0.00876
68
0.00292
22.8
0.00175
13.7
0.00088
6.83
0.0000584
0.456
0.0000292
0.228
lbs/1,000 lb
lbs/day
Sintering
4,100
0.0751
0.025
0.015
0.00501
0.015
0.00501
0.003
0.0015
0.0001
0.0000501
lbs/1,000 lb
§420.22/§420.23
616
205
123
41.1
123
41.1
24.6
12.3
0.820
0.411
lbs/day
NPDES Permit Limits
Total Mass Limitations (lbs/day)
1,930
642
123
41.1
270
90.1
54.0
27.0
1.80
0.70
Total Mass Limitations (kg/day)
875
291
55.8
18.6
122
40.9
24.5
12.2
0.82
0.32
BPT/BAT
Production
Total Lead
Total Zinc
Total Residual Chlorine
2,3,7,8-TCDF
Operation
(tons/day)
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Units
Blast fumace A
4,500
0.000263
0.0000876
0.000394
0.000131
0.000146
--
--
--
lbs/1,000 lb
§420.32(a)/§420.33(a)
2.37
0.788
3.55
1.18
1.31
lbs/day
Blast furnace B
3,900
0.000263
0.0000876
0.000394
0.000131
0.000146
--
-
--
lbs/1,000 lb
§420.32(a)/§420.33(a)
2.05
0.683
3.07
1.02
1.14
lbs/day
Sintering
§420.22/§420.23
4,100
0.000451
3.70
0.00015
1.23
0.000676
5.54
0.000225
1.85
0.00025
2.05
~
-------
Section 16 - Implementation of Part 420 through the
NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-4
Example 2: Application of 40 CFR Part 420
Indirect Discharge Coke Plant
PSES - Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
Operation
Production
(tons/day)
Ammonia - N
Total Cyanide
Naphthalene
Units
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Maximum
Average
Cokemaking
40CFR 420.15(a)
4430
0.0333
0.0200
0.00724
0.00506
0.0000472
0.0000392
lbs/1,000 lb
295
177
64
45
0.418
0.347
lbs/day
Ground Water Remediation
35
gpm
70.6
42.5
15.4
10.7
26.1
21.7
mg/1
29.7
17.9
6.46
4.51
11
9.12
lbs/day
Process Area Storm Water
5
gpm
70.6
42.5
15.4
10.7
26.1
21.7
mg/1
4.24
2.55
0.923
0.644
1.57
1.3
lbs/day
Pretreatment Limitations
Total Mass Limitations (lbs/day)
329
198
71.5
50
12.9
10.8
Total Mass Limitations (kg/day)
149
89.6
32.4
22.7
5.87
4.88
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the
NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-5
List of Approved Test Methods for Pollutants Regulated Under the Final Rule
for the Iron and Steel Point Source Category
Parameter and Units
Method
EPA (a)
STD Method
18th ed.
ASTM
USGS (a)
Other
Conventional Pollutants
Total suspended solids, mg/L
Gravimetric, 103°-105°,
post washing of residue
160.2
2540 D
1-3765-85
Oil and grease, hexane extractable
material (HEM), mg/L
n-Hexane extraction and gravimetry (a)
1664, Rev.
A
pH, pH units
Eletrometric measurement, or
Automated electrode
150.1
4500 H+B
D1293-84(90)(A or B)
1-1586-85
973.41 (a)
Note (a)
Nonconventional Pollutants
2,3,7,8 TCDF (CAS 51207-31-9)
GC/MS
1613
Ammonia as nitrogen, mg/L
(CAS 7664-41-7)
Manual distillation (at pH 9.5) (a)
followed by...
Nesslerization
Titration
Electrode
Automated phenate, or
Automated electrode
350.2
350.2
350.2
350.3
350.1
4500-NHj B
4500-NHj C
4500-NHj E
4500-NHj F or G
4500-NH3 H
D1426-93(A)
D1426-93(B)
1-3520-85
1-4523-85
973.49 (a)
973.49 (a)
Note 7
Phenols, total, mg/L
Manual distillation (a) followed by:
Colorimetric (4AAP) manual, or
Automated (a)
420.1
420.1
420.2
Note (a)
Note (a)
Priority Pollutants
Cyanide, total, mg/L (CAS 57-12-5)
Manual distillation with MgCl2
followed by
Titrimetric, or
Spectrophotometric, manual or
Automated (a)
335.2 (a)
335.3 (a)
4500-CN C
4500-CN D
4500-CN E
D2036-91(A)
D2036-91(A)
1-3300-85
P-22 (a)
Benzo-a-pyrene (CAS 50-32-8)
GC
GC/MS
HPLC
610
625,1625
610
6410 B, 6440 B
D4657-92
16-29
-------
Section 16- Implementation of Part 420 through the
NPDES and Pretreatment Programs
Table 16-5 (Continued)
Parameter and Units
Method
EPA (a)
STD Method
18 th ed.
ASTM
USGS (a)
Other
Priority Pollutants (continued)
Naphthalene (CAS 91-20-3)
GC
GC/MS
HPLC
610
625,1625
610
6410 B, 6440 B
(a) - See 40 CFR Part 136 for footnotes and note references.
CAS: Chemical Abstracts Service.
16-30
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
SECTION 17
GLOSSARY
Acid Cleaning. Treatment of steel surfaces with relatively mild acid solutions to remove surface
dirt and light oxide coatings. Scale and/or heavy oxide removal is considered acid pickling (see
below). Acid cleaning operations are typically conducted for surface preparation prior to
application of hot dip or electrolytic metal coating and after cold forming and annealing
operations.
Acid Pickling. Scale and/or oxide removal from steel surfaces using relatively strong acid
solutions. Acid pickling operations are typically conducted after hot forming operations and
prior to subsequent steel finishing operations (e.g., cold forming, annealing, alkaline cleaning,
metal coatings).
Acid Regeneration. Treatment of spent acid solutions by thermal and/or chemical means to
produce usable acid solutions and iron-rich by-products.
Act. The Clean Water Act.
Administrator. The Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Agency. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (also referred to as "EPA").
Agglomeration. The process of binding materials. See definitions for briquetting, nodulizing,
pelletizing, and sintering.
Alkaline Cleaning. Application of solutions containing caustic soda, soda ash, alkaline silicates,
or alkaline phosphates to a metal surface primarily to remove mineral deposits, animal fats, and
oils.
Alloy. A substance that has metallic properties and is composed of two or more chemical
elements of which at least one is a metal.
Allov Steel. Steel is classified as alloy when the maximum of the range given for the content of
alloying elements exceeds one or more of the following: manganese, 1.65 percent; silicon, 0.60
percent; copper, 0.60 percent; or in which a definite range or a definite minimum quantity of any
of the following elements is specified or required within the limits of the recognized field of
constructional alloy steels: aluminum, boron, chromium (less than 10 percent), cobalt, lead,
molybdenum, nickel, niobium (columbium), titanium, tungsten, vanadium, zirconium, or any
other alloying element added to obtain a desired alloying effect.
Alloying Materials. Additives to steelmaking processes to improve the properties of the finished
products. Chief alloying elements in medium alloy steels are: nickel, chromium, manganese,
molybdenum, vanadium, silicon, and copper.
17-1
-------
Section 17- Glossary
Ammonia. Free and Fixed. Free ammonia is ammonia present in a form that is readily
dissociated by heat, such as ammonium carbonate. Fixed ammonia is ammonia present in a form
which requires the presence of a strong alkali to affect displacement of the ammonia from the
compound in which it is present, such as ammonium chloride.
Ammonia Liquor for Flushing Liquorl. An aqueous solution used to condense moisture and
tars from coke oven gas derived from coals charged to a by-product recovery coke oven battery.
Excess ammonia liquor, or waste ammonia liquor, is flushing liquor rejected from the flushing
liquor recirculating loop through the coke oven gas collecting mains and the coal tar decanter,
and generally comprises the free and bound moisture contained in the coal charge to the by-
product coke ovens. Weak ammonia liquor is ammonia liquor that has been processed in a free
or fixed ammonia distillation column (ammonia still) for ammonia recovery to the coke oven gas
stream prior to recovery of ammonium sulfate, anhydrous ammonia, or other by-product
ammonium compounds.
Ammonia Still. A steam-stripping column in which ammonia and acid gases (hydrogen cyanide,
hydrogen sulfide) are removed from waste ammonia liquor and other ammonia-containing
wastewaters. A "free" still operates with steam only, with no alkali addition, to remove ammonia
and acid gases. A "fixed" still is similar to a "free" still except lime, or more commonly sodium
hydroxide, is added to the liquor to liberate ammonia from its compounds so it can be steam
stripped.
Angle. A very common structural or bar shape with two legs of equal or unequal length
intersecting at 90 degrees.
Annealing. A heat treatment process in which steel is exposed to an elevated temperature in a
controlled atmosphere for an extended period of time and then cooled. Annealing is performed
to relieve stresses; increase softness, ductility, and toughness; and/or to produce a specific
microstructure in the steel.
Argon Bubbling. Injection of argon into molten metal for rapid and uniform mixing of alloys,
temperature homogenization, adjustment of chemical composition, and partial removal of non-
metallic inclusions. Argon bubbling methods include argon stirring, trimming, and rinsing.
Argon/Oxvgen Decarburization (AOD^. A process by which an electric arc furnace heat is
decarburized by blowing argon and oxygen into the steel at varying ratios.
AWOC. Ambient Water Quality Criteria.
Baghouse. A dry air pollution control device comprising an enclosure containing multiple fabric
filter elements (bags) for removal of particulate matter from gas streams.
Bar. Produced from ingots, blooms, or billets covering the following range: rounds, 3/8 to 8-1/4
inches inclusive; squares, 3/8 to 5-1/2 inches; round-cornered squares, 3/8 to 8 inches inclusive;
17-2
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
hexagons, 1/4 to 4-1/16 inches inclusive; flats, 13/64 inches and over in specified thicknesses
and not over 6 inches specified width.
Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF). Pear-shaped, refractory-lined vessel used to convert a charge of
molten iron and steel scrap into molten steel by the injection of high pressure oxygen into the
furnace bath.
Basic Oxygen Furnace fBOF) Shop. A building or structure containing one or more basic
oxygen furnaces and ancillary processes and equipment (e.g., hot metal desulfurization, hot metal
charging, scrap charging, oxygen and flux additions, furnace tapping, ladle preparation,
deslagging and slag handling, and primary and secondary air emission control equipment).
Basic Oxygen Steelmaking. Steelmaking process carried out in a basic lined furnace shaped like
a pear. High-pressure oxygen is blown vertically downward on the surface of the molten iron
through a water-cooled lance.
BAT. Best available technology economically achievable, as defined by section 304(b)(2)(B) of
the Clean Water Act. See also Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards.
Battery. See By-Product Recovery Coke Battery.
BCT. Best conventional pollutant control technology, as defined by section 304(b)(4) of the
Clean Water Act. See also Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards.
Beam. A member of the structural steel family. Beams come in three varieties: the standard H,
I, and the wide flange used for weight-supporting purposes.
Beneficiate. To upgrade the iron content of iron-bearing materials.
Billet. A semi-finished piece of steel formed by casting or from hot rolling an ingot or a bloom.
It may be square, but is never more than twice as wide as thick. Its cross-sectional area is usually
not more than 36 square inches.
Blast Cleaning. Abrasive grit blasting of steel to remove scale; used in place of or in
combination with acid pickling.
Blast Furnace. A large conical-shaped furnace used to reduce and melt iron-bearing materials to
molten iron as the primary product. By-products include combustible blast furnace gas and blast
furnace slag.
Blast Furnace Charge. The raw materials added to the blast furnace that react when heated to
produce molten iron. The principal raw materials charged to blast furnaces include coke,
limestone, beneficiated iron ores, and sinter.
17-3
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Blast Furnace Gas Seals. Water-flooded seals located on a blast furnace gas main for collection
and removal of blast furnace gas condensate from the blast furnace gas main. Blast furnace gas
seal water is contaminated with pollutants associated with blast furnace operations (e.g.,
ammonia-N, cyanide, phenolic compounds).
Bloom. A semi-finished piece of steel formed by casting or from hot rolling or forging of an
ingot. A bloom is square or not more than twice as wide as thick. Its cross-sectional area is
usually not less than 36 square inches.
Blowdown. The partial discharge of water from a recirculating process or cooling water system
to correct hydraulic imbalances in the recirculating system or to control concentrations of
substances in the recirculating water.
BMP. Best management practices, as defined by section 304(e) of the Clean Water Act or as
authorized by section 402 of the Clean Water Act.
BODs. Five-day biochemical oxygen demand. A measure of biochemical decomposition of
organic matter in a water sample. It is determined by measuring the dissolved oxygen consumed
by microorganisms to oxidize the organic contaminants in a water sample under standard
laboratory conditions of five days and 20 °C. BOD5 is not related to the oxygen requirements in
chemical combustion.
Bosh. The section of the blast furnace between the hearth and the stack, where melting of iron
starts.
BPT. Best practicable control technology currently available, as defined by section 304(b)(1) of
the Clean Water Act. See also Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards.
Briquetting. A hot or cold process that agglomerates (presses together) iron-bearing materials
into small lumps without melting or fusion. Used as a concentrated iron ore substitute for scrap
in EAFs.
Butt-Welded Pipe/Tube. A continuous strip of hot-rolled skelp that is heated, formed into a
circular shape, and then welded to form the pipe or tube.
Bv-Product Recovery Coke Battery. A coke-producing unit comprising numerous adjoining,
refractory-lined, slot-type ovens; coal charging and coke pushing facilities; coke quench stations;
and coke oven gas collecting mains.
Bv-Product Recovery Cokemaking. Process in which coal is distilled at high temperatures in
the absence of air to produce coke and recover the volatile compounds as by-products (e.g., crude
coal tar, crude light oil).
CAA. Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., as amended inter alia by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-549, 104 stat. 2394)).
17-4
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Carbon Steel. Steel that owes its properties chiefly to various percentages of carbon without
substantial amounts of other alloying elements. Steel is classified as carbon steel when no
minimum content of elements other than carbon is specified or required to obtain a desired
alloying effect and when the maximum content for any of the following do not exceed the
percentage noted: manganese, 1.65 percent; silicon, 0.60 percent; copper, 0.60 percent.
Cast Iron. The metallic product obtained by reducing iron ore with carbon at a temperature
sufficiently high to render the metal fluid and casting it in a mold.
Casting. (1) A term applied to the act of pouring molten metal into a mold. (2) The metal object
produced by such pouring.
Categorical Pretreatment Standards. Standards for discharges of pollutants to POTWs
promulgated by EPA, in accordance with Section 307 of the Clean Water Act, that apply to
specific process wastewater discharges from particular industrial categories (40 CFR 403.6 and
40 CFR 405 - 471).
CBI. Confidential Business Information.
CFR. Code of Federal Regulations, published by the U.S. Government Printing Office. A
codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the
executive departments and agencies of the federal government.
Channels. A common steel shape consisting of two parallel flanges at right angles to the web. It
is produced both in bar sizes (less than 3 inches) and in structural sizes (3 inches and over).
Clarifier. A wastewater treatment unit, usually a circular, cone-bottom steel or concrete tank
with a center stilling well and mechanical equipment at the bottom for settling and subsequent
removal of suspended solids from the wastewater stream. Clarifiers may also be equipped with
surface skimming devices to remove floating materials and oil.
Classifier. Mechanical device used to remove heavy or coarse particulate matter from a
wastewater stream.
Coating. The process of covering steel with another material, primarily for corrosion resistance.
COD. Chemical oxygen demand. A nonconventional, bulk parameter that measures the oxygen-
consuming capacity of refractory organic and inorganic matter present in water or wastewater.
COD is expressed as the amount of oxygen consumed from a chemical oxidant in a specific test
(see Method 410.1).
Coil. Steel sheet that is wound, usually rolled in a hot-strip mill. Coils are typically more than
one-quarter mile long; coils are the most efficient way to store and transport sheet steel.
17-5
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Coke. The carbon product resulting from the high-temperature distillation of metallurgical coals
in by-product recovery or non-recovery coke ovens.
Coke Breeze. Undersized coke particles (also referred to as coke fines) recovered from coke
screening operations and coke quenching stations. Coke breeze may be used as fuel in sintering
operations or may be sold as a by-product.
Coke Oven Gas. Hot gas released in the coke ovens, containing water vapor, hydrogen, methane,
nitrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrocarbons. Also contains contaminants that
may be recovered as by-products: tar vapors; light oil vapors (aromatics), consisting mainly of
benzene, toluene and xylene; naphthalene vapor; ammonia gas; hydrogen sulfide gas; and
hydrogen cyanide gas.
Coke Pushing. The transfer of hot coke from coke ovens into quench cars, using pusher-side
equipment such as a door remover and pusher.
Coke Quenching. Rapid cooling of hot coke using water.
Cold Forming. A forming operation in which the shape of the metal piece is changed by plastic
deformation at a temperature below that at which recrystallization occurs. The plastic
deformation can be effected by forging, rolling, extrusion, or drawing.
Cold Rolled Products. Flat-rolled products that have been finished by rolling the piece without
heating (at approximately ambient temperature).
Continuous Casting. The process of casting liquid steel directly into semi-finished shapes such
as slabs, billets, and rounds, thus eliminating ingot casting and associated ingot stripping,
reheating, and primary rolling operations.
Contract Haul. Collection of wastewater or sludge by a private disposal service, scavenger, or
purveyor in containers for subsequent transportation, treatment, and disposal off site.
Control Authority. The term "control authority" as used in section 403.12 refers to: (l)The
POTW if the POTW's submission for its pretreatment program (§403.3(t)(l)) has been approved
in accordance with the requirements of §403.11; or (2) the approval authority if the submission
has not been approved.
Control Water. Dilution water added to control toxicity prior to biological treatment systems.
Conventional Pollutants. The pollutants identified in section 304(a)(4) of the Clean Water Act
and the regulations thereunder (i.e., biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), total suspended solids
(TSS), oil and grease, fecal coliform, and pH).
17-6
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
CWA. Clean Water Act. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), as amended, inter alia, by the Clean Water Act of 1977
(Public Law 95-217) and the Water Quality Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-4).
Cyanide. Free. Fixed, and Total. Free cyanide is cyanide present in a form that is amenable to
chlorination, while fixed cyanide is present in a form that is not amenable to cyanide (e.g.,
cyanide complexes). EPA uses the term cyanide to mean total cyanide, which includes both the
free and fixed forms of cyanide.
Deep-Well Injection. Long-term or permanent disposal of untreated, partially treated, or treated
wastewaters by pumping the wastewater into underground formations through a bored, drilled, or
driven well.
Dephenolization. A coke plant by-product recovery process in which phenol is removed from
ammonia liquor and is recovered as sodium phenolate by liquid extraction and vapor
recirculation.
Descaling. The process of removing scale from the surface of steel. The most common method
of descaling is to crack the scale using roughened rolls and a forceful water spray (see also
electrolytic and salt bath descaling).
Desulfurization. Processes to remove sulfur compounds from coke oven gases and molten iron.
Coke oven gas desulfurization usually involves scrubbing the sulfur-rich gas stream with an
absorbent solution, with subsequent recovery of elemental sulfur from the solution. Hot metal
(molten iron) desulfurization involves treating the molten metal with lime, with subsequent
collection of sulfur-rich particulate matter in fabric filter emission control devices (baghouses).
Dioxin/furans. Chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (CDDs) and chlorinated dibenzofurans (CDFs)
are closely related families of highly toxic and persistent organic chemicals formed as unwanted
by-products in some commercially significant chemical reactions, during high-temperature
decomposition and combustion of certain chlorinated organic chemicals, during combustion of
natural materials, and through other reactions involving chlorine and organic materials. There
are 210 CDD/CDF compounds (or congeners) with four to eight chlorine substitutions.
Seventeen CDD/CDF congeners chlorinated at the 2,3,7,&8 lateral positions are among the most
biologically active and toxic CDDs/CDFs. 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD)
is the most toxic of the CDDs/CDFs. The relative toxicity of mixtures of CDDs/CDFs is
described through use of International Toxicity Equivalence Factors (I-TEFs/89).
Direct Application (Once-Through). In cold rolling, the use of water, detergent, rolling oil, or
other substance to remove loose organic compounds and fines, in which the substance is not
recirculated.
Direct Discharger. An industrial discharger that introduces wastewater to a water of the United
States with or without treatment by the discharger.
17-7
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Direct-Reduced Iron (DRD. Relatively pure iron produced by reduction of iron ore (pellets or
briquettes) below the melting point using gaseous (carbon monoxide-carbon dioxide, hydrogen)
or solid reactants. DRI is used as a substitute for scrap steel in EAFs to minimize contaminant
levels in the melted steel and to allow economic steel production when market prices for scrap
are high.
PL. Sample-specific detection limit.
Drawing. A forming operation in which metal is deformed by pulling the material through a die
by applying a tensile force applied on the exit side.
Dry Air Pollution Control Equipment. Control equipment in which gases are cleaned without
the use of water.
DSCFM. Dry standard cubic feet per minute. A standard unit for measuring gas flow.
EAD. EPA's Engineering and Analysis Division.
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards. Regulations promulgated by the U.S. EPA
under authority of Sections 301, 304, 306 and 307 of the Clean Water Act that set out minimum,
national technology-based standards of performance for point source wastewater discharges from
specific industrial categories (e.g., iron and steel manufacturing plants). Effluent limitations
guidelines and standards regulations are implemented through the NPDES permit and national
pretreatment programs and include the following:
• Best Practicable Control Technology Currently Available (BPT)
• Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT)
• Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT)
• New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)
• Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources (PSES)
• Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS)
The pretreatment standards (PSES, PSNS) are applicable to industrial facilities with process
wastewater discharges to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). The effluent limitations
guidelines and new source performance standards (BPT, BAT, BCT and NSPS) are applicable to
industrial facilities with direct discharges of process wastewaters to waters of the United States.
Electric Arc Furnace CEAF). A furnace in which steel scrap and other ferrous and nonferrous
materials are melted using electrical and chemical energy and converted into liquid steel.
Electric-Resistance-Welded Pipe/Tube. Pipe or tube formed from a plate or continuous strip of
steel that is formed into a circular shape and welded together using pressure and electrical
energy. Heat is generated by the resistance to current flow (either transformed or induced) across
the seam during welding.
17-8
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Electrolytic Descaling. The aggressive physical and chemical removal of heavy scale from
semi-finished specialty and high-alloy steels using electrolytic sodium sulfate solutions.
Electroplating. Operations including metal coating onto precleaned steel using an electric
current. Common metal coating types include chromium and tin. Electroplating improves
resistance to corrosion and, for some products, improves appearance and paintability.
Electroslag Remelting fESR>. A specialty steel-refining process used to produce ingots with
stringent composition requirements. In the process, one or more steel electrodes of about the
desired chemical composition are drip-melted through molten slag into a water-cooled copper
mold at atmospheric pressure.
Electrostatic Precipitator fESP). An air pollution control device that imparts an electrical
charge on solid particles in the gas stream, which are then attracted to an oppositely charged
collector plate. The collector plates are intermittently rapped to discharge the collected dust to a
hopper below.
End-of-Pipe (EQP^ Treatment. Refers to those processes that treat a facility waste stream for
pollutant removal prior to discharge.
EPA. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (also referred to as "the Agency").
Extrusion. A forming operation in which a material is forced, by compression, through a die
orifice.
Filtration. The passage of fluid through a porous medium to remove matter held in suspension.
Final Gas Cooler. A packed tower used for cooling coke oven gas by direct contact with water.
The gas is generally cooled to approximately 30°C (86°F) for recovery of light oil.
Finishing. Term used to generically describe steel processing operations conducted after hot
forming (e.g., acid pickling, scale removal, cold forming, annealing, alkaline cleaning, hot
coating, and electroplating).
Flat Products. Hot-rolled steel products including plate, strip, and sheet, that may or may not be
further finished (e.g., cold-rolled or acid pickled).
Flume Flushing. Process by which mill scale collected under hot forming mills and runout
tables of continuous casters is transported with water to scale pits for subsequent recovery.
Flushing Liquor. See ammonia liquor.
Flux. Material added to a blast furnace or steelmaking furnace for the purpose of removing
impurities from the molten metal.
17-9
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Forging. Hot-working of heated steel shapes (i.e., ingots, blooms, billets, slabs) by hammering
or hydraulic presses.
Forming. Operations in which the shape of a metal piece is changed by plastic deformation
(e.g., forging, rolling, extrusion, and drawing).
Foundry Coke. Coke produced for foundry operations.
Four-High Mill. A stand which has four rolls, one above the other. This kind of mill has two
working rolls, each of which is stiffened by a larger back-roll. Four high rolls are used only on
mills which roll flat products.
FR. Federal Register, published by the U.S. Government Printing Office. A publication making
available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by federal agencies.
Free Leg. That section of an ammonia still from which ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, carbon
dioxide, and hydrogen cyanide are steam distilled and returned to the gas stream without the
addition of an alkaline substance to release free ammonia.
Fugitive Emissions. Emissions that are expelled to the atmosphere in an uncontrolled manner.
Fume Scrubbers. See Wet Scrubbers.
Fundamentally Different Factors Variance. CWA Section 301(n>. The Administrator, with
the concurrence of the State, may establish an alternative requirement under Section 301(b)(2) or
Section 307(b) of the Clean Water Act for a facility that modifies the requirements of national
effluent limitation guidelines or categorical pretreatment standards that would otherwise be
applicable to such facility, if the owner or operator of such facility demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that the facility is fundamentally different with respect to the
factors (other than cost) specified in Sections 304(b) or 304(g) and considered by the
Administrator in establishing such national effluent limitation guidelines or categorical
pretreatment standards.
Furnace Burden. The solid materials charged to a blast furnace comprising coke, iron ore and
pellets, sinter, and limestone.
Furnace Coke. Coke produced for blast furnace operations.
Galvanizing. Application of zinc to the surface of steel primarily for corrosion protection. Zinc
may be applied by passing precleaned steel through a molten zinc bath (hot dip galvanizing) or
electrochemically (electrogalvanizing).
Ground Water. Water in a saturated zone or stratum beneath the surface of land or water.
17-10
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Hardness. Defined in terms of the method of measurement. (1) Usually, the resistance to
dentation. (2) Stiffness or temper of wrought products. (3) Machinability characteristics.
Hazardous Waste. Any material that meets the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
definition of "hazardous waste" contained in 40 CFR Part 261.
Hearth. In a reverberatory furnace, the portion that holds the molten metal or bath.
Heat. Quantity of steel manufactured per batch in a BOF or an EAF.
Hexane Extractable Material fHEIVP. A method-defined parameter (EPA Method 1664) that
measures the presence of relatively nonvolatile hydrocarbons, vegetable oils, animal fats, waxes,
soaps, greases, and related material that are extractable in the solvent n-hexane. This parameter
does not include materials that volatilize at temperatures below 85°C. EPA uses the term "HEM"
synonymously with the conventional pollutant oil and grease (O&G).
Hot Blast. Preheated air blown into the blast furnace through a bustle pipe and numerous
tuyeres located around the circumference of the furnace. Temperatures range from 550°C to
1,000°C, and pressures range from 2 to 45 atmospheres.
Hot Coating (Hot Dip Coating. Operations in which precleaned steel is immersed into baths
of molten metal. Common metal types include: tin, zinc (galvanizing), combinations of lead and
tin (terne coating), and combinations of aluminum and zinc (galvalume® coating). Hot coating
is typically used to improve resistance to corrosion, and for some products, to improve
appearance and paintability.
Hot Forming. Also known as hot working; a forming operation in which the shape of the metal
piece is changed by plastic deformation at a temperature above that at which recrystallization
occurs. The plastic deformation can be effected by rolling, extrusion, or drawing.
ICR. Information Collection Request.
Incineration. A controlled combustion process most commonly used to destroy solid, liquid, or
gaseous wastes.
Indirect Discharger. An industrial discharger that introduces wastewater into a POTW.
Ingot. A large block-shaped steel casting. Ingots are intermediates from which other steel
products are made. When continuous casters are not used, an ingot is usually the first solid form
the steel takes after it is made in a furnace.
Ingot Mold. Cast iron molds into which molten steel is teemed. After cooling, the mold is
stripped from the solidified steel, which is then reheated in soaking pits (gas or oil-fired furnaces)
prior to primary rolling into slabs or billets. Molds may be circular, square, or rectangular, with
17-11
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
walls of various thickness. Some molds are of larger cross-section at the bottom, whereas others
are larger at the top.
Integrated Steel Mill. A mill that makes steel by processing iron ore and other raw materials in
blast furnaces and BOFs, rather than EAFs as at non-integrated or mini-mills.
Iron. Primarily the name of a metallic element. In the steel industry, iron is the name of the
product of a blast furnace containing 92 to 94 percent iron, the product made by the reduction of
iron ore. Iron in the steel mill sense is impure and contains up to 4 percent dissolved carbon
along with other impurities.
Iron and Steel Coke Plant. By-product cokemaking operations that provide more than 50
percent of the coke produced to ironmaking blast furnaces associated with steel production.
Iron Ore. The raw material from which iron is made. It is primarily iron oxide with impurities
such as silica.
Ironmaking. The production of iron through the reduction of iron ore. In the United States, iron
is made in blast furnaces.
Ladle. A large vessel into which molten metal or molten slag is received and handled.
Ladle Metallurgy. A secondary step in the steelmaking process usually performed in a ladle
after the initial refining process in a steelmaking furnace (i.e., BOF, EAF) is complete. Ladle
metallurgy is conducted for one or more of the following purposes: to control gases in the steel;
to remove, add, or adjust concentrations of metallic or nonmetallic compounds (alloying); and to
adjust physical properties (e.g., temperature).
Landfill Leachate. Water or ground water collected from that portion of a solid or hazardous
waste landfill containing disposed of solid or hazardous wastes.
Larrv Car. A movable device located on top of a coke battery for receiving and charging
screened coal to coke ovens through charging holes located at the top of the ovens.
Lipht Oil. An unrefined, clear, yellow-brown oil with an approximate specific gravity of 0.889
produced as a by-product of by-product cokemaking operations. It contains varying amounts of
coal-gas products with boiling points ranging from about 40°C to 200°C and from which
benzene, toluene, xylene, and solvent naphthas are recovered.
Lime. Calcium oxide (CaO), produced by burning limestone (principally composed of calcium
carbonate (CaC03)) in a lime kiln. Lime is used as a flux (slagging agent) in BOF and EAF
steelmaking; limestone is used as a flux in blast furnaces for production of molten iron.
LTA. Long-term average. For purposes of the pretreatment standards, average pollutant levels
achieved over a period of time by a facility, subcategory, or technology option.
17-12
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Merchant Coke Plant. By-product cokemaking operations other than those at iron and steel
coke plants.
Hg/L. Micrograms/liter.
mg/L. Milligrams/liter.
Mill Scale. The iron oxide scale that breaks off of heated steel as it passes through a rolling mill.
The outside of the piece of steel is generally completely coated with scale as a result of being
heated in an oxidizing atmosphere.
Mini-Mill. See Non-Integrated Steel Mill.
Minimum Level (MIA The level at which an analytical system gives recognizable signals and
an acceptable calibration point.
Mixed-Media Filtration. A filtration technology which uses a bed of granular particles to
remove small concentrations of entrained solids from iron and steel wastewaters. The bed is
comprised of either particles of varying size or different types of media (e.g., sand, gravel,
anthracite). (Also referred to as multimedia filtration.)
Mold. A form or cavity into which molten metal is poured to produce a desired shape. See ingot
molds.
Multimedia Filtration. A filtration technology which uses a bed of granular particles to remove
small concentrations of entrained solids from iron and steel wastewaters. The bed is comprised
of either particles of varying size or different types of media (e.g., sand, gravel, anthracite).
(Also referred to as mixed-media filtration.)
Multiple Stand (Multi Standi. A type of cold rolling stand that has greater than one roll, one
above the other, used on flat products.
NAICS. The North American Industry Classification System, a system for classifying business
establishments adopted in 1997 to replace the old Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
system. NAICS is the industry classification system used by the statistical agencies of the United
States.
Naphthas. Any of several inflammable, volatile liquids produced by the distillation of coal, coal
tar, wood, petroleum, and other carbonaceous materials.
NESHAPs. The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs)
regulations set out at 40 CFR 61, Subpart J (6/6/89), Subpart L (9/14/89), Subpart BB (3/7/90),
and Subpart FF (3/7/90).
17-13
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Nitrification. The oxidation of ammonium salts to nitrites (via Nitrosomas bacteria) and the
further oxidation of nitrite to nitrate via Nitrobacter bacteria. Nitrification can be accomplished
in either (1) a single or two-stage activated sludge wastewater treatment system or (2) wetlands
specifically developed with a march/pond configuration and maintained for the express purpose
of removing ammonia-N. Indicators of nitrification capability are: (1) biological monitoring for
ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) to determine if the
nitrification is occurring; and (2) analysis of the nitrogen balance to determine if nitrifying
bacteria reduce the amount of ammonia and increase the amount of nitrite and nitrate.
Noncontact Cooling Water. Water used for cooling in-process and non-process applications
that does not come into contact with any raw material, intermediate product, by-product, waste
product (including air emissions), or finished product.
Nonconventional Pollutants. Pollutants other than those defined specifically as conventional
pollutants (identified in section 304(a) of the Clean Water Act) or priority pollutants (identified
in 40 CFR Part 423, Appendix A).
Nondetect Value (ND1. Samples below the level that can be reliable measured by an analytical
method. This is also known, in statistical terms, as left-censored (i.e., value having an upper
bound at the sample-specific detection limit and a lower bound at zero).
Non-Integrated Steel Mill (Mini-Miin. Steel mills that melt scrap metal in an EAF to produce
commodity products.
Non-Process Wastewater. Wastewaters generated by non-process operations such as utility
wastewaters (water treatment residuals, boiler blowdown, air pollution control wastewaters from
heat recovery equipment, and water generated from co-generation facilities), treated or untreated
wastewaters from ground water remediation systems, dewatering water for building foundations,
and other wastewater streams not associated with production processes.
Non-Recoverv Cokemaking. Production of coke from coal in which volatile components
derived from the coal are consumed in the process and by-products are not recovered.
NPDES Program. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program
authorized by Sections 307,318,402, and 405 of the Clean Water Act that applies to facilities
that discharge wastewater directly to U. S. surface waters.
NRDC. Natural Resources Defense Council.
NSPS. New source performance standards, under section 306 of the Clean Water Act. See also
Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards.
Oil and Grease fO&G). A method-defined parameter (EPA Method 413.1) that measures the
presence of relatively nonvolatile hydrocarbons, vegetable oils, animal fats, (EPA nitrous 413.1)
waxes, soaps, greases, and related materials that are extractable in Freon 113 (1,1,2-trichloro-
17-14
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
1,2,2-trifluoroethane). This parameter does not include materials that volatilize at temperatures
below 75°C. Oil and grease is a conventional pollutant as defined in section 304(a)(4) of the
Clean Water Act and in 40 CFR Part 401.16. Oil and grease is also measured by the hexane
extractable material (HEM) method (see Method 1664, promulgated at 64 FR 26315; May 14,
1999). The analytical method for TPH and oil and grease has been revised to allow for the use of
normal hexane in place of Freon 113, a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC). Method 1664 (Hexane
Extractable Material) replaces the current oil and grease Method 413.1 found in 40 CFR 136.
Oil Skimmer. A device that skims the top surface of wastewater to remove floating oil.
Open Hearth Furnace. A furnace for melting metal, in which the bath is heated by the
convection of hot gases over the surface of the metal and by radiation from the roof.
Oxidization. A chemical treatment that increases the positive valences of a substance. In a
limited sense, adding oxygen to a substance, as in oxidizing C to CO, CO to C02, Si to Si02, Mn
to MnO.
Pig Iron. Iron cast into the form of small blocks that weigh about 30 kilograms each. The
blocks are called pigs.
Pipe. A hollow, cylindrical product distinguished from tube by heavier wall thickness. Pipe is
usually measured by its inside diameter. Tube is generally measured by outside diameter.
Plant Service Water. City, well, or surface water that has not been used elsewhere on site (i.e.,
water prior to its use in a process or operation).
Plate. A flat-rolled finished steel product within the following size and/or weight limitations:
POC. Pollutant of concern.
Pollutant Loading. The quantity of a pollutant in the wastestream, in pounds per year.
Pollution Prevention. The use of materials, processes, or practices that reduce or eliminate the
creation of pollutants or wastes. It includes practices that reduce the use of hazardous and
nonhazardous materials, energy, water, or other resources, as well as those practices that protect
natural resources through conservation or more efficient use. Pollution prevention consists of
source reduction, in-process recycle and reuse, and water conservation practices.
Width
Thickness
Over 48 inches wide
Between 8 and 48 inches inclusive
Over 48 inches wide
Between 8 and 48 inches inclusive
0.180 inches or thicker
0.230 inches or thicker
7.53 lb/sq ft or heavier
9.62 lb/sq ft or heavier
17-15
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Polychlorinated Biphenvl (PCBl Compounds. Any of a family of halogenated aromatic
hydrocarbons that were produced and marketed in the United States as a series of complex
mixtures under the trade name Aroclor; any specific chemical included within the following
Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Numbers: 1336-36-3 (total PCBs), 12674-11-2 (Aroclor
1016), 11104-28-2 (Aroclor 1221), 11141-16-5 (Aroclor 1232), 53469-21-9 (Aroclor 1242),
12672-29-6 (Aroclor 1254), or 11096-82-5 (Aroclor 1260), see 40 CFR 302; or, any of 209
synthetic congeners of biphenyl with 1 to 10 chlorine substitutions.
Potable Water. Water that can be consumed; drinking water.
Priority Pollutants. The 126 toxic pollutants listed in 40 CFR Part 423, Appendix A.
Privately Owned Treatment Works (PrOTW). Any device or system owned and operated by
a private entity and used to store, treat, recycle, or reclaim liquid industrial wastes.
Process Wastewater. Any wastewaters that come into direct contact with the process, product,
by-products, or raw materials for the manufacturing of iron and steel. Process wastewaters also
include wastewater from slag quenching, equipment cleaning, air pollution control devices, rinse
water, and contaminated cooling water. Sanitary wastewater and storm water are not considered
process wastewaters. Non-contact cooling wastewaters are cooling waters that do not directly
contact the processes, products, by-products, or raw materials; these wastewaters are not
considered process wastewaters.
PSES. Pretreatment standards for existing sources of indirect discharges, under section 307(b) of
the Clean Water Act. See also Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards.
PSNS. Pretreatment standards for new sources of indirect discharges, under sections 307(b) and
(c) of the Clean Water Act. See also Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards.
Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW>. Any device or system owned and operated by a
public entity and used in the storage, treatment, recycling, or reclamation of liquid municipal
sewage and/or liquid industrial wastes. The sewerage system that conveys wastewaters to
treatment works is considered part of the POTW.
QA/OC. Quality Assurance/Quality Control.
Quenching. A process of rapid cooling from an elevated temperature by contact with liquids,
gases, or solids.
Recirculation. In cold rolling, use and recirculation of water, detergent, rolling oil, or other
substance to remove loose organic compounds and fines.
Reduction. A chemical treatment that decreases the positive valences of a substance. In a limited
sense, removing oxygen from a substance (e.g., reducing CO to C, C02 to CO, Si02 to Si, MnO
to Mn).
17-16
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Refining. Oxidation cycle for transforming hot metal (iron) and other metallics into steel by
removing elements present, such as silicon, phosphorus, manganese, and carbon.
Reheat Furnace. A gas-fired, refractory-lined furnace used to heat steel shapes for subsequent
hot forming operations.
Rod. A hot-rolled steel section, usually round in cross-section, produced as a final product or as
an intermediate product for subsequent production of wire and wire products.
Rolling. A forming operation that reduces the thickness of a metal piece by passing it between
two or more rolls.
Roughing Stand. The rolls used to break down the ingot, billet, or slab in the preliminary
rolling of metal products.
Runout Table. Area of a hot strip mill located after the finishing stands and before the coilers
where laminar-flow cooling is applied to the strip. Generally, for any hot forming mill, this area
of the mill is downstream of the last stand of work rolls. For continuous casters, this area of the
process is after the torch cut-off.
Salt Bath Descaling. The aggressive physical and chemical removal of heavy scale from semi-
finished specialty and high-alloy steels with molten salt baths or solutions containing neutral or
acidic salts.
Scale. Iron oxides that form on the surface of hot steel when the steel is exposed to an oxidizing
atmosphere.
Scale Pit. An in-ground rectangular (and in some instances, circular) basin constructed of
concrete to recover scale from process wastewaters used in hot forming and continuous casting
operations. Collected scale is mechanically removed and recovered for recycle to a sinter plant
or for sale as a by-product.
Scarfing. Removal of imperfections on the surface of semi-finished steel shapes using
oxygen/acetylene torches.
Scrap. Iron or steel discard, cuttings, or junk metal, that can be reprocessed.
Seamless Pipe/Tube. Tubular product produced by piercing (a hot forming process), which is
followed by further processing to achieve correct wall and size dimensions, or by extrusion for
small diameter products.
Secondary Steelmaking. The practice of redistributing steel that does not meet the original
customer's specifications because of a defect in its chemistry, gauge, or surface quality. Some
steel users may accept lower quality, off-spec steel, usually at a lower price.
17-17
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Section 301(g) Variance. The Administrator, with the concurrence of the State, may modify the
requirements of Section 301(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Water Act with respect to the discharge from
any point source of ammonia, chlorine, color, iron, and total phenols (4AAP) (when determined
by the Administrator to be a pollutant covered by Section 301(b)(2)(F)) and any other pollutant
which the Administrator lists under 301(g)(4). In the iron and steel industry, variances under
Section 301(g) have been granted for discharges of ammonia-N and phenols (4AAP) from
cokemaking and ironmaking operations. The variances granted under Section 301(g) must meet
certain conditions (e.g., the alternative discharges from BAT must meet local water quality
standards, cannot be less stringent than BPT, must not result in more stringent controls on other
dischargers, and must satisfy other environmental and human health concerns).
Semi-Finished Shapes. Steel in the form of ingots, blooms, billets, or slabs that are forge or
rolled into a finished product.
Semi-Wet Air Pollution Control Equipment. A gas cleaning system in which furnace off-
gases are conditioned with moisture prior to processing in electrostatic precipitators or
baghouses.
Sendzimir Mill. Type of cold rolling mill used to finish hot-rolled strip to a specific width,
thickness, and hardness.
Shear. In a steel mill, a machine that cuts steel products. Steel shears may be classified by: type
of drive (hydraulic and electric); type of work performed (cropping, squaring, slab, bloom, billet,
bar shears); type of mechanism (rotary, rocking, gate, guillotine, alligator shears); and movement
of work while shearing (flying shears).
Sheet. Steel produced in coils or in cut lengths within the following size limitations:
Width Thickness
Between 12 and 48 inches inclusive 0.1800 to 0.2299 inch
Over 12 inches 0.0449 to 0.1799 inch
SIC. Standard Industrial Classification, a numerical categorization scheme used by the U.S.
Department of Commerce to denote segments of industry. The SIC system was replaced in 1997
by the NAICS.
Silica Gel Treated Hexane Extractable Material (SGT-HEM). The freon-free oil and grease
method (EPA Method 1664) used to measure the portion of oil and grease that is similar to total
petroleum hydrocarbons. (Also referred to as nonpolar material (NPM)).
Single Stand. A type of cold rolling stand which has only one roll, used on flat products.
17-18
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Sinter. In blast furnace usage, lumpy material that has been prepared from flue dust, other iron-
bearing materials, lime, and coke breeze. The dust is agglomerated by heating it to a high
temperature. Sinter contains valuable amounts of combined iron.
Sintering. The process of burning a fuel (e.g., coke fines, coke breeze) with limestone fines and
a variety of fine iron-bearing materials including iron ore screenings, blast furnace gas cleaning
wastewater sludges, and mill scale to form an agglomerated product suitable to charge to a blast
furnace. The product is a clinker-like aggregate referred to as sinter or clinker.
Site. Generally one contiguous physical location at which manufacturing operations related to
the iron and steel industry occur. This includes, but is not limited to, cokemaking, ironmaking,
steelmaking, rolling, and finishing. In some instances, a site may include properties located
within separate fence lines, but located close to each other.
Skelp. Flat, hot-rolled steel strip or sheet used to manufacture welded pipe or tube products.
Slab. A semifinished block of steel formed from a rolled ingot or manufactured on a continuous
slab casting machine, with its width at least twice its thickness.
Slag. Vitrified mineral by-product produced in the reduction of metals from their ores. The
principal components of blast furnace slag are oxides of silica and alumina originating chiefly
with the iron-bearing materials and lime and magnesia originating with the flux. The major
components of steelmaking slags are calcium silicates, lime-iron compounds, and lesser amounts
of free lime and magnesia. Usually, slags consist of combinations of acid oxides with basic
oxides; neutral oxides are added to aid fusibility.
Sludge Dewatering. The mechanical or natural processes to remove free water from wastewater
sludges. Mechanical equipment used for sludge dewatering may include rotary or leaf vacuum
filters, filter presses, or belt filters. Wastewater sludges may be dewatered naturally in sludge
drying beds.
Specialty Steel. Steel products containing alloying elements that are added to enhance the
properties of the steel product when individual alloying elements (e.g., aluminum, chromium,
cobalt, columbium, molybdenum, nickel, titanium, tungsten, vanadium, zirconium) exceed 3
percent or the total of all alloying elements exceeds 5 percent.
Stainless Steel. A trade name given to alloy steel that is corrosion and heat resistant. The chief
alloying elements are chromium, nickel, and silicon in various combinations with possible small
percentages of titanium, vanadium, and other elements. By American Iron and Steel Institute
(AISI) definition, a steel is called "stainless" when it contains 10 percent or more chromium.
Staves. Cast iron or copper elements containing flow channels for cooling water that are
installed within the steel jacket of the bosh.
17-19
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Steel. A hard, tough metal composed of iron alloyed with carbon and other elements to enhance
hardness and resistance to rusting.
Strand. A continuous casting mold and its associated mechanical equipment. Also, a term
applied to the traveling grate of the sintering machine.
Strip. Steel produced in coils or in cut lengths within the following size limitations:
Surface Water. Waters of the United States as defined at 40 CFR 122.2.
Tandem Mill. A mill with a number of stands in succession; generally a cold rolling mill.
Tapping. Process of opening a taphole in a blast furnace to remove hot metal and slag; process
of pouring molten steel from a steelmaking furnace into a receiving ladle to transfer to a ladle
metallurgy station or continuous caster, or into a teeming ladle to pour into ingot molds.
Tar. Black, viscous organic matter removed from coke oven gas in recirculating flushing liquor
systems in the gas collector mains located on top of the by-product recovery coke battery. Tar is
subsequently recovered in a tar or flushing liquor decanter where most of the tar is separated
from recirculating flushing liquor by gravity.
Technical Development Document (TDD). Development Document for the Proposed Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Point Source Category.
Teeming. Pouring or casting of molten steel from a ladle into cast iron ingot molds of various
dimensions to cool and solidify the steel.
Temper Mill. Relatively light cold rolling process (< 1 percent thickness reduction) performed
to improve flatness, alter the mechanical properties of the steel, and minimize surface
disturbances. Temper mills are usually single-stand mills.
Total Organic Carbon (TOO. A nonconventional bulk parameter that measures the total
organic content of wastewater (EPA Method 415.1). Unlike five-day biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD5) or chemical oxygen demand (COD), TOC is independent of the oxidation state
of the organic matter and does not measure other organically bound elements, such as nitrogen
and hydrogen, and inorganics that can contribute to the oxygen demand measured by BOD5 and
COD. TOC methods utilize heat and oxygen, ultraviolet irradiation, chemical oxidants, or
combinations of these oxidants to convert organic carbon to carbon dioxide (C02). The C02 is
then measured by various methods.
Width
Thickness
Up to 3-1/2 inches inclusive
Between 3-1/2 and 6 inches inclusive
Between 6 and 12 inches inclusive
0.0255 to 0.2030 inch inclusive
0.0344 to 0.2030 inch inclusive
0.0449 to 0.2299 inch inclusive
17-20
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH). - A method-defined parameter that measures the
presence of mineral oils that are extractable in Freon 113 (l,l,2-trichloro-l,2,2-trifluoroethane)
and not absorbed by silica gel. The analytical method for TPH and oil and grease has been
revised to allow the use of normal hexane in place of Freon 113, a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC).
Method 1664 (Hexane Extractable Material) replaces the current oil and grease Method 413.1
found in 40 CFR 136. (Also referred to as nonpolar material (NPM).)
Traveling Grate. Part of a sinter machine or other agglomeration process consisting of zones
for drying, preheating, combustion, and cooling.
TRC. Total Residual Chlorine.
TSS. Total Suspended Solids.
Tube. A hollow, cylindrical product distinguished from pipe by thinner wall thickness. Tube is
usually measured by its outside diameter. Pipe is generally measured by inside diameter.
Tundish. A refractory-lined vessel located between the ladle and the continuous caster. Molten
steel is tapped from the ladle to the tundish to provide a stable flow of metal into the caster.
Tuyeres. Water-cooled openings located around the circumference of a blast furnace at the top
of the hearth through which the hot blast enters the furnace.
Utility Operations. The ancillary operations at a steel mill necessary for mill operations, but not
part of a production process (e.g., steam production in a boiler house, power generation, boiler
water treatment, intake water treatment).
Vacuum Degassing. A process to remove dissolved gases from liquid steel by subjecting it to a
vacuum.
Vacuum Ladle Degassing. A variation of vacuum degassing that includes induction stirring and
vacuum-oxygen decarburization.
Variability Factor (VF>. A variability factor is used in calculating a limitation to allow for
reasonable, normal variation in pollutant concentrations when processed through well-designed
and operated treatment systems. Variability factors account for normal fluctuations in treatment.
By accounting for these reasonable excursions about the long-term average, EPA's use of
variability factors results in limitations that are generally well above the actual long-term
average.
Venturi Scrubber. A wet air pollution control device that operates by causing intermixing of
particulates in a gas stream and water applied to the scrubber. The intermixing is accomplished
by rapid contraction and expansion of the gas stream and a high degree of turbulence in the throat
of the scrubber.
17-21
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Volatile Organic Compound (VOO. A measure of volatile organic constituents performed by
isotope dilution gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS), EPA Method 1624. The
isotope dilution technique uses stable, isotopically labeled analogs of the compounds of interest
as internal standards in the analysis.
Wastewater. See Process Wastewater.
Wastewater Treatment. The processing of wastewater by physical, chemical, biological, or
other means to remove specific pollutants from the wastewater stream or to alter the physical or
chemical state of specific pollutants in the wastewater stream. Wastewater is treated so it can be
discharged, recycled to the same process that generated the wastewater, or reused in another
process.
Water Bubble. Section 420.03, Alternative Effluent Limitations Under the "Water Bubble"
(commonly known as the "water bubble" rule) provides a regulatory flexibility mechanism to
allow trading of identical pollutants at any single steel facility with multiple compliance points.
See §420.03 and Section 17.6 for the specific provisions and restrictions of the water bubble.
Wet Air Pollution Control Equipment. Venturi, orifice plate, or other units used to bring
water into intimate contact with contaminated gas to remove contaminants from the gas stream.
Wet Precipitator. An air pollution control device that uses a spray water wash to cleanse the
fume residue that is collected dry on precipitator plates. Two types of wet precipitators can be
used: intermittent (on a timed cycle) or continuous.
Wet Scrubbers. Venturi or orifice plate units used to bring water into contact with the dirty gas
stream to remove pollutants.
Wet-Open Combustion Gas Cleaning System. A BOF gas cleaning system in which excess air
is admitted to the off-gas collection system, allowing carbon monoxide to combust prior to high-
energy wet scrubbing for air pollution control.
Wet-Suppressed Combustion Gas Cleaning System. A BOF gas cleaning system in which a
limited amount of excess air is admitted to the off-gas collection system prior to high-energy wet
scrubbing for air pollution control, thus minimizing combustion of carbon monoxide and the
volume of gas requiring subsequent treatment.
Windbox. Sintering machine device to draw air through the sinter strand to enhance the
combustion of fuel in the sinter mix.
Wire. Small-diameter steel section produced by cold drawing rod through one or more dies.
Work Rolls. Nongrooved rolls that come into contact with the piece of steel (slab, plate, strip,
sheet) being rolled.
17-22
-------
Section 17 - Glossary
Zero Discharge or Alternative Disposal Methods. Disposal of process and/or non-process
wastewaters other than by direct discharge to a surface water or by indirect discharge to a POTW
or PrOTW. Examples include incineration, deep well injection, evaporation on slag or coke, and
contract hauling.
17-23
-------
APPENDIX A
SURVEY DESIGN AND CALCULATION OF NATIONAL ESTIMATES
-------
APPENDIX A
SURVEY DESIGN AND CALCULATION OF NATIONAL ESTIMATES
In 1998, EPA distributed two industry surveys that were similar in content and
purpose. The first survey, entitled U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data
(detailed survey), was mailed to 176 iron and steel industry sites. The second survey, entitled
U.S. EPA Collection of 1997 Iron and Steel Industry Data (Short ForrrA (short survey), was
mailed to 223 iron and steel industry sites. Both surveys collected detailed technical and
financial information from iron and steel industry sites. The short form is an abbreviated version
of the detailed survey and was designed for those iron and steel sites that do not have
manufacturing processes found only at integrated and non-integrated mills. Section 3 of this
document describes these surveys in greater detail.
Section 1 of this appendix describes the sampling plan (identification of facilities
in the industry, sample design, selection of the sample, and out-of-scope and nonresponding
facilities). Section 2 of this appendix describes the calculation of sample weights. Section 3 of
this appendix describes the methodology for estimating national totals and their variance
estimates.
1.0 Sampling Plan
This section describes the development of the sampling plan, which includes
identification of the iron and steel industry, selection of the facilities to receive the detailed and
short surveys, and the treatment of out-of scope and nonresponding facilities.
1.1 Sampling Frame
To produce a mailing list of facilities for the detailed survey and short form, EPA
developed a sampling frame of the iron and steel industry. A sampling frame is a list of all
members (sampling units) of a population, from which a random sample of members will be
drawn for the survey. Therefore, a sample frame is the basis for the development of a sampling
plan to select a random sample. Using the sources identified in Table A-l, EPA developed a
sample frame of iron and steel facilities and divided it into 12 strata (categories) based on the
types of operations conducted at the facility. A sample frame size (N) is the total number of
members in the frame. Since the sample frame sufficiently covered the iron and steel population,
the frame size gave a good estimate of the population size (total number of elements in the
population.)
EPA cross-referenced the sources in Table A-l with one another to obtain facility
level information and to ensure the accuracy and applicability of each facility's information.
After removing the duplicate entries, EPA identified 822 candidate facilities to receive surveys.
These candidates include some facilities that EPA now proposes to include in the Metal Products
and Machinery (MP&M) Category and will be regulated under 40 CFR Part 438.
A-l
-------
1.2
Sample Design
To minimize the burden on the respondents to the industry surveys and improve
the precision of estimates from the survey, EPA grouped the facilities into 12 strata (categories),
with operations in each stratum expected to be similar. In general, the strata were determined by
EPA's understanding of the manufacturing processes at each facility. This grouping of similar
facilities is known as stratification. Table A-2 describes the stratification of the iron and steel
industry. The Agency also developed two "certainty strata," one for the detailed survey and one
for the short form (strata 5 and 8, respectively).
EPA selected a stratified random sample using the sampling frame. A stratified
random sample separates the eligible population into nonoverlapping strata, that are as
homogeneous as possible. Together these strata make up the whole eligible population. A
simple random sample is then selected from each stratum.
For the iron and steel industry surveys, there were 12 strata: seven for the detailed
survey and five for the short survey. Table A-2 includes the strata descriptions.
1.3 Sample Selection of Facilities
EPA selected 402 facilities out of the 822 facilities identified in the sample frame
is sample facilities to receive surveys. Table A-2 provides the frame size and sample size for
each of the 12 strata. Depending on the amount/type of information EPA determined it needed
for this rulemaking and the number of facilities in a stratum, the Agency either solicited
information from all facilities within a stratum (i.e., performed a census) or selected a random
sample of facilities within each stratum. EPA sent a survey to all the facilities in strata 5 and 8,
determining that it was necessary to capture the size, complexity, or uniqueness of the steel
operations present at these sites. EPA also sent surveys to all the facilities in strata 1 though 4
(all cokemaking sites, integrated steel sites, and all sintering and direct reduced iron sites)
because the number of sites is relatively low and because of the size, complexity, and uniqueness
of raw material preparation and steel manufacturing operations present. EPA statistically
sampled the remaining sites in strata 6, 7, and 9 through 12. The sample sizes were determined
to detect a relative difference of 30 percent on a proportion of 0.25 with 90 percent confidence
for a binary variable (e.g., a yes/no question)1. EPA used the following formula to calculate the
sample size for each stratum:
n = q^d'P)
* j + [Z' q/Cp)]
N
1 While many questions are not binary, this is a common assumption used in survey methodology.
A-2
-------
where:
nh = Number of samples to be selected from stratum h, and h=l ,2,..., 12;
p = True proportion being estimated (assuming to be 0.25);
q = i-p;
Z = Value obtained from the standard normal (Z) distribution. (For 90
percent confidence, this value is 1.645, which is 95th percentile of
standard normal distribution.)
d = Relative difference (assuming to be 0.3 or 30 percent); and
Nh = Total number of facilities in stratum h.
1.4 Out-of-Scope Sites and Response Rates
EPA mailed industry surveys to all of the facilities in the sample. After receiving
the industry survey, EPA determined that some facilities were "out-of-scope" or "ineligible"
because the regulation would not apply to them. After reviewing the survey responses, EPA
identified additional ineligible facilities. In all, EPA identified 203 of the 402 sample facilities as
ineligible. Over 75 percent of these facilities were ineligible because EPA is proposing that their
operations be regulated under the MP&M Category (see Section 1 of this document).
Of the remaining 199 facilities, 188 were eligible respondents, and 11 were
nonrespondents (i.e., did not return a survey). The overall unweighted response rate was 94
percent (188/199). Section 2 of this appendix provides detailed facility level response rates by
stratum. EPA made a nonrespondent adjustment to the weights, as described in Section 2 of this
appendix.
2.0 Calculation of Sample Weights
This section describes the methodology used to calculate the base weights, non-
response adjustments, and the final weights. The base weights and nonresponse adjustments
reflect the probability of selection for each facility and adjustments for facility level non-
responses, respectively. Weighting the data allows inferences to be made about all eligible
facilities, not just those included in the sample, but also those not included in the sample or those
that did not respond to the survey. Also, the weighted estimates have a smaller variance than
unweighted estimates (see Section 3 of this appendix for variance estimation.) In its analysis,
EPA applied sample weights to survey data.
2.1 Base Weights
The base weight assigned to each facility is the reciprocal of the probability that
the facility was sampled for the particular stratum. EPA took a census for strata 1 through 5 and
stratum 8; thus, the probability of selection for facilities in these strata is one. EPA selected a
simple random sample from strata 6 and 7 and strata 9 through 12. The probability of selection
for facility I from stratum h can be written as:
A-3
-------
PROBSEL.. = —
h Nh
where:
i = Facility i;
h = Any of the h= 1,2,..., 12 strata;
nh = Total sample size for stratum h\ and
Nh = Total frame size for stratum h.
The base weight is the inverse of this probability, and for facility 7 in stratum h
can be written as:
1 Nh
BASE WEIGHT. = = —
h PROBSEL nh
Table A-2 provides the sample size and frame size by stratum. Using stratum 6
from Table 3-1 as an example, the probability of selection for all sampled facilities in stratum 6
would be 40/69=57971. Thus, the base weight for all facilities in stratum 6 would be
1/.57971=1.725.
2.2 Facility Level Nonresponse Adjustment
EPA made a facility-level nonresponse adjustment to account for those facilities
that did not complete the industry surveys. Since the eligibility status of the nonrespondents was
unknown, EPA assumed that the eligibility status of the nonrespondents was proportional to the
known proportion of eligible respondents and ineligibles.
The facility-level nonresponse adjustment for stratum h was calculated as:
n.
NRAh = -±
rh
where:
rh = Number of sample facilities (eligible and ineligible facilities) in
stratum h responding to the detailed survey and short form.
For example, the nonresponse adjustment for stratum 6 can be calculated as
follows:
-------
Table A-3 provides the response status of the sampled cases and the base weight
and facility-level nonresponse adjustment by stratum. There were no eligible respondents in
stratum 12; therefore, EPA also assumed the nonrespondents to be ineligible.
2.3 Final Weights
The final facility weight is the product of the base weight and the facility-level
nonresponse adjustment. This can be written as:
FINALWTh = BASEWTh x NRAh
Again, using the example from stratum 6, the final facility weight would be:
1.725 x 1.02564= 1.76923
Ineligible facilities also have abase weight and nonresponse adjustments, and thus
an associated final weight. However, they represent only other ineligible facilities in this sample
frame. Therefore, their contribution to the national estimates are not of interest, and thus their
final weights are zeros.
Table A-4 provides the base weight, facility-level nonresponse adjustment factor,
and final weight for each facility by stratum.
3.0 Estimation Methodology
This section presents the general methodology and equations for calculating
estimates from the detailed survey and short form sampling efforts.
3.1 National Estimates
For each characteristic of interest (e.g., number of a particular operation using dry
air pollution control or annual discharge flow from a particular operation), EPA estimated totals
for the entire U.S. iron and steel industry ('national estimates'). Each national estimate, Yst, was
calculated as:
12 nh
Y„ - £ [FINALWTh ¦ £ yj
h=l i=l
where:
h = Stratum and h= 1,2,... 12 since there are 12 strata;
FINALWTh = Final weight for the stratum h\ and
yih = Ith value from the sample in stratum h.
A-5
-------
3.2
Variance Estimation
where:
The estimate of the variance for a national estimate can be calculated as follows:
L
Var(YIt) = £ FINALWTh2 ¦ FPC„ ¦ „„ • s„2
h = l
Yst = National estimate of number of facilities with the characteristic of
interest;
Number of strata (L= 12);
FPCh = l - (finite population correction for stratum h); and
Nh
nh
sh = —-!-r C " n>2)
"b " i i=i
(the estimate of the variance within stratum h where
hh
^lh is the sample mean of stratum h).
= ——
nh
The variance estimates can be used to calculate confidence intervals for the survey
estimates. The confidence interval comprises a lower confidence limit and an upper confidence
limit. The greater the variance, the wider the interval, and the lower the precision associated with
the estimate. A 95-percent confidence interval should be interpreted as follows: If many samples
were taken from the population of interest and a confidence interval were calculated from each
sample, 95 percent of the confidence intervals would contain the true value of what is being
estimated and 5 percent of the confidence intervals would not contain the true value. Thus, a 95-
percent confidence interval is interpreted as saying that the true value of the population can be
found by the random interval 95 percent of the time. The lower and upper 95-percent confidence
limits can be written as:
Lower 95-percent confidence limit = Ys( - (Z0025 • ^var(Yst))
Upper 95-percent confidence limit = Yst - (Z0025 • y'varfYs())
A-6
-------
where:
Zq 025 = Value obtained from the standard normal (Z) distribution. (For 95-
percent confidence interval, this value is 1.96, which is 97.5th
percentile of standard normal distribution.)2
When comparing estimates, if the confidence intervals overlap, there is no statistically significant
difference between the two estimates.
4.0 References
A-l Cochran, William G. Sampling Techniques , 3rd ed., New York: John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., 1977.
A-2 SAS®, The SAS System, SAS Institute Inc.
2When the national estimate is based on a sample size of less than 30, the appropriate value from the t distribution is
used instead of Z0 025 for calculating the upper and lower confidence limits.
A-l
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Table A-l
Sources Used For Development of Sample Frame
Association of Iron and Steel Engineers' 1997 Directory: Iron and Steel Plants
Volume 1, Plants and Facilities
Iron and Steel Works of the World (12th edition) directory
Iron and Steel Society's Steel Industry of Canada, Mexico, and the United States: Plant
Locations Map
American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute (Membership List)
American Galvanizers Association (Membership List)
American Iron and Steel Institute (Membership List)
American Wire Producers Association (Membership List)
Cold Finished Steel Bar Institute (Membership List)
Specialty Steel Industry of North America (Membership List)
Steel Manufacturers Association (Membership List)
Steel Tube Industry of North America (Membership List)
Wire Association International (Membership List)
Dun & Bradstreet Facility Index database
EPA Permit Compliance System (PCS) database
EPA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) database
Iron and Steelmaker Journal. "Roundup" editions
33 Metalproducing Journal. "Census of the North American Steel Industry"
33 Metalproducing Journal. "Roundup" editions
A-8
-------
Table A-2
Frame Sizes and Sample Sizes for the Iron and Steel Population Frame
Stratum
h
Stratum Description
Frame
Size
(Nh)
Sample
Size
(nh)
Detailed Survey Strata
1
Integrated steel facilities with cokemaking
9
9
2
Integrated steel facilities without cokemaking
12
12
3
Stand-alone cokemaking facilities
16
16
4
Stand-alone direct reduced ironmaking or sintering
facilities
5
5
5
Detailed survey certainty stratum
60
60
6
Non-integrated facilities (with and without finishing)
69
40
7
Stand-alone finishing and stand-alone hot forming
facilities
54
35
Short Survey Strata
8
Short survey certainty stratum
13
13
9
Stand-alone cold forming facilities
62
37
10
Stand-alone pipe and tube facilities
164
59
11
Stand-alone hot dip coating facilities
106
49
12
Stand-alone wire facilities
252
67
TOTAL:
822
402
A-9
-------
Table A-3
Response Status, Base Weight, and Facility-Level Nonresponse Adjustments
by Stratum
Stratum
(b)
Frame
Size
(N„
Sample
Size
(nh)
Response Status
Base
Weight
Facility Level
Nonresponse
Adjustment
Number of
Eligible
Number of
Ineligible
Number of
Nonrespondents
1
9
9
9
0
0
1.00000
1.00000
2
12
12
12
0
0
1.00000
1.00000
3
16
16
15
1
0
1.00000
1.00000
4
5
5
3
2
0
1.00000
1.00000
5
60
60
54
4
2
1.00000
1.03448
6
69
40
30
9
1
1.72500
1.02564
7
54
35
28
7
0
1.54286
1.00000
8
13
13
11
2 .
0
1.00000
1.00000
9
62
37
19
18
0
1.67568
1.00000
10
164
59
6
50
3
2.77966
1.05357
11
106
49
1
48
0
2.16327
1.00000
12
252
67
0
62
5
3.76119
0.00000
Total
822
402
188
203
11
A-10
-------
Table A-4
Base Weights, Facility-Level Nonresponse Adjustment Factors, and
Final Weights by Stratum
Stratum
Base Weight
Facility Level
Nonresponse
Adjustment
Final Weight
1
1.00000
1.00000
1.00000
2
1.00000
1.00000
1.00000
3
1.00000
1.00000
1.00000
4
1.00000
1.00000
1.00000
5
1.00000
1.03448
1.03448
6
1.72500
1.02564
1.76923
7
1.54286
1.00000
1.54286
8
1.00000
1.00000
1.00000
9
1.67568
1.00000
1.67568
10
2.77966
1.05357
2.92857
11
2.16327
1.00000
2.16327
12
3.76119
0.00000
0.00000
A-ll
-------
APPENDIX B
MODIFIED DELTA-LOGNORMAL DISTRIBUTION
-------
APPENDIX B
MODIFIED DELTA-LOGNORMAL DISTRIBUTION
B.l Basic Overview of the Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
B.2 Continuous and Discrete Portions of the Modified Delta-Lognormal
Distribution
B.3 Combining the Continuous and Discrete Portions
B.4 Autocorrelation
B.5 Episode-specific Estimates Under the Modified Delta-Lognormal
Distribution
B.5.1 Episode Data Set Requirements
B.5.2 Estimation of Episode-specific Long-Term Averages
B.5.3 Estimation of Episode-Specific Variability Factors
B.5.3.1 Estimation of Episode-specific Daily Variability Factors
B.5.3.2 Estimation of Episode-Specific Monthly Variability Factors
Assuming No Autocorrelation
B.5.3.3 Estimation of Episode-Specific Monthly Variability Factors
Assuming Autocorrelation
B.5.3.4 Evaluation of Episode-Specific Variability Factors
B.6 References
This appendix describes the modified delta-lognormal distribution and the estimation of
the episode-specific long-term averages and variability factors used to calculate the limitations
and standards.1 This appendix provides the statistical methodology that was used to obtain the
results presented in Section 14.
'In the remainder of this appendix, references to 'limitations' includes 'standards.'
B-l
-------
B.l Basic Overview of the Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
EPA selected the modified delta-lognormal distribution to model pollutant effluent
concentrations from the iron and steel industry in developing the long-term averages and
variability factors. A typical effluent data set from a sampling episode or self-monitoring episode
(see Section 12 for a discussion of the data associated with these episodes) consists of a mixture
of measured (detected) and non-detected values. The modified delta-lognormal distribution is
appropriate for such data sets because it models the data as a mixture of measurements that
follow a lognormal distribution and non-detect measurements that occur with a certain
probability. The model also allows for the possibility that non-detect measurements occur at
multiple sample-specific detection limits. Because the data appeared to fit the modified delta-
lognormal model reasonably well, EPA has determined that this model is appropriate for these
data.
The modified delta-lognormal distribution is a modification of the 'delta distribution'
originally developed by Aitchison and Brown.2 While this distribution was originally developed
to model economic data, other researchers have shown the application to environmental data.3
The resulting mixed distributional model, that combines a continuous density portion with a
discrete-valued spike at zero, is also known as the delta-lognormal distribution. The delta in the
name refers to the proportion of the overall distribution contained in the discrete distributional
spike at zero, that is, the proportion of zero amounts. The remaining non-zero, non-censored
(NC) amounts are grouped together and fit to a lognormal distribution.
EPA modified this delta-lognormal distribution to incorporate multiple detection limits.
In the modification of the delta portion, the single spike located at zero is replaced by a discrete
distribution made up of multiple spikes. Each spike in this modification is associated with a
distinct sample-specific detection limit associated with non-detected (ND) measurements in the
2Aitchison, J. and Brown, J.A.C. (1963) The Lognormal Distribution. Cambridge University Press, pages 87-99.
3Owen, W.J. and T.A. DeRouen. 1980. "Estimation of the Mean for Lognormal Data Containing Zeroes and Left-
Censored Values, with Applications to the Measurement of Worker Exposure to Air Contaminants." Biometrics,
36:707-719.
B-2
-------
database.4 A lognormal density is used to represent the set of measured values. This
modification of the delta-lognormal distribution is illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
Censor I no Type ——— nc —— ra>
The following two subsections describe the delta and lognormal portions of the modified delta-
lognormal distribution in further detail.
B.2 Continuous and Discrete Portions of the Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
In the discrete portion of the modified delta-lognormal distribution, the non-detected
values corresponding to the k reported sample-specific detection limits. In the model, 6
represents the proportion of non-detected values and is the sum of smaller fractions, 6,, each
representing the proportion of non-detected values associated with each distinct detection limit
value. By letting Df equal the value of the ia smallest distinct detection limit in the data set and
the random variable XD represents a randomly chosen non-detected measurement, the cumulative
4Previously, EPA had modified the delta-lognormal model to account for non-detected measurements by placing the
distributional "spike" at a single positive value, usually equal to the nominal method detection limit, rather than at
zero. For further details, see Kahn and Rubin, 1989. This adaptation was used in developing limitations and
standards for the organic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic fibers (OCPSF) and pesticides manufacturing
rulemakings. EPA has used the current modification in several, more recent, rulemakings.
B-3
-------
distribution function of the discrete portion of the modified delta-lognormal model can be
mathematically expressed as:
Pr(^)=y£«, A
d i=l
(2)
Var(XD) = jfj6,(Di-E<.XD))
° 1 = 1
(3)
The continuous, lognormal portion of the modified delta-lognormal distribution was used
to model the detected measurements from the iron and steel industry database. The cumulative
probability distribution of the continuous portion of the modified delta-lognormal distribution
can be mathematically expressed as:
Pr[Xc
ln(c) - //
(4)
where the random variable Xq represents a randomly chosen detected measurement, $ is the
standard normal distribution, and [i and a are parameters of the distribution.
The expected value, E(XC), and the variance, Var(Xc), of the lognormal distribution can
be calculated as:
£(Xc)=exp
/+T,
v z y
(5)
Var(Xc)=\E(Xc)^ |exp(o*2)-
(6)
B-4
-------
B.3 Combining the Continuous and Discrete Portions
The continuous portion of the modified delta-lognormal distribution is combined with the
discrete portion to model data sets that contain a mixture of non-detected and detected
measurements. It is possible to fit a wide variety of observed effluent data sets to the modified
delta-lognormal distribution. Multiple detection limits for non-detect measurements are
incorporated, as are measured ("detected") values. The same basic framework can be used even
if there are no non-detected values in the data set (in this case, it is the same as the lognormal
distribution). Thus, the modified delta-lognormal distribution offers a large degree of flexibility
in modeling effluent data.
The modified delta-lognormal random variable U can be expressed as a combination of
three other independent variables, that is,
where XD represents a random non-detect from the discrete portion of the distribution, Xc
represents a random detected measurement from the continuous lognormal portion, and Iu is an
indicator variable signaling whether any particular random measurement, u, is non-detected or
non-censored (that is, Iu=l if u is non-detected; Iu=0 if u is non-censored). Using a weighted
sum, the cumulative distribution function from the discrete portion of the distribution (equation
1) can be combined with the function from the continuous portion (equation 4) to obtain the
overall cumulative probability distribution of the modified delta-lognormal distribution as
follows,
U = IuXD+{l-Iu)Xc
(7)
i:Dt
-------
The expected value of the random variable U can be derived as a weighted sum of the
expected values of the discrete and continuous portions of the distribution (equations 2 and 5,
respectively) as follows
E(U) = SE(XD)+(l-S)E(Xc) (?)
In a similar manner, the expected value of the random variable squared can be written as
a weighted sum of the expected values of the squares of the discrete and continuous portions of
the distribution as follows
e{u2}=se\xI}+{1-s)e(xc) (10)
Although written in terms of U, the following relationship holds for all random variables, U, XD,
and Xq.
E{u2^ = Var(u) + {E(u)^ (n)
So using equation 11 to solve for Var(U), and applying the relationships in equations 9 and 10,
the variance of U can be obtained as
Var (U) = i(var(jrD) + [E(jrD)]2) + (l - ^Var(Xc) + [E(XC)]2) -[E((/)f (12)
B.4 Autocorrelation
Effluent data from wastewater treatment technologies may be autocorrelated. For
example, autocorrelation would be present in the data if the loading of a pollutant is relatively
high one day, and is likely to remain high the next, and possibly, succeeding days. The
measurements may be similar from one day to the next because of retention of wastewater in
basins, holding ponds, and other components of the wastewater system. For data with
autocorrelation, statistical time series are appropriate for modeling the data.
There are many time series models that might be considered for modeling wastewater
measurements. One method of modeling autocorrelation is by using an autoregressive lag-1
model, designated as an AR(1) model. The AR(1) model is a reasonable model for many series
of wastewater measurements. The AR(1) model has one parameter, p, the correlation between
B-6
-------
the measurements from successive sampling events, of which time intervals are equally spaced,
otherwise referred to as the lag-1 correlation. Unless specified, p is assumed to be zero.
The autocorrelation affects the mean and variance estimates for the data. The
autocorrelation adjustments account for the effects of autocorrelation on these estimates. These
adjustments are discussed in the following sections.
B.5 Episode-specific Estimates Under the Modified Pelta-Lognormal Distribution
In order to use the modified delta-lognormal model to calculate the limitations, the
parameters of the distribution are estimated from the data. These estimates are then used to
calculate the limitations.
The parameters 6j and 6 are estimated from the data using the following formulas:
where nd is the number of non-detected measurements, dj,j - 1 to nd, are the detection limits for
the non-detected measurements, n is the number of measurements (both detected and non-
detected) and I(-) is an indicator function equal to one if the phrase within the parentheses is true
and zero otherwise. The "hat" over the parameters indicates that they are estimated from the
data.
The expected value and the variance of the discrete portion of the modified delta-
lognormal distribution can be estimated from the data as:
(13)
n
(14)
B-7
-------
MXD) = ^ts{Di-E{xD))2
0 J=1
(15)
The parameters of the continuous portion of the modified delta-lognormal distribution, /J.
and crare estimated by
where xt is the iA detected measurement value and rtc is the number of detected measurements
(note that n = nd + nc), and g(Pc) adjusts the estimate of o2 for the effects of autocorrelation to
create an unbiased estimate for a2. The adjustment for autocorrelation is:
where pc is the correlation of the natural logarithm of detected measurements from successive
sampling events since the lognormal model is used for continuous measurements. Note that if
autocorrelation is not present in the data, g(pc)=l.
The expected value and the variance of the lognormal portion of the modified
delta-lognormal distribution can be calculated from the data as:
(16)
(18)
(19)
B-8
-------
Finally, the expected value and variance of the modified delta-lognormal distribution can
be estimated using the following formulas:
fop) = ^^ATbJ+^JTc)]2) +(w)(Kar(jrc)+[£(.rc)]2)-[£(!y)]2 (21)
Equations 18 through 21 are particularly important in the estimation of episode-specific
long-term averages and variability factors as described in the following sections. These sections
are preceded by a section that identifies the episode data set requirements.
B.5.1 Episode Data Set Requirements
The parameter estimates for the lognormal portion of the distribution can be calculated
with as few as two distinct detected values in a data set. (In order to calculate the variance of the
modified delta-lognormal distribution, two distinct detected values are the minimum number that
can be used and still obtain an estimate of the variance for the distribution.)
If an episode data set for a pollutant contained three or more observations with two or
more distinct detected concentration values, then EPA used the modified delta-lognormal
distribution to calculate long-term averages and variability factors. If the episode data set for a
pollutant did not meet these requirements, EPA used an arithmetic average to calculate the
episode-specific long-term average and excluded the dataset from the variability factor
calculations (because the variability could not be calculated).
In statistical terms, each measurement was assumed to be identically distributed within
the episode data set.
The next two sections apply the modified delta-lognormal distribution to the data for
estimating episode-specific long-term averages and variability factors for the iron and steel
industry.
(20)
B-9
-------
B.5.2 Estimation of Episode-specific Long-Term Averages
If an episode dataset for a pollutant meets the requirements described in the last section,
then EPA calculated the long-term average using equation 20. Otherwise, EPA calculated the
long-term average as the arithmetic average of the daily values where the sample-specific
detection limit was used for each non-detected measurement.
B.5.3 Estimation of Episode-Specific Variability Factors
For each episode, EPA estimated the daily variability factors by fitting a modified delta-
lognormal distribution to the measurements for each pollutant. In contrast, EPA estimated
monthly variability factors by fitting a modified delta-lognormal distribution to the monthly
averages for the pollutant at the episode. EPA developed these averages using the same number
of measurements as the assumed monitoring frequency for the pollutant. EPA is assuming that
all pollutants will be monitored weekly (approximately four times a month).5
B.5.3.1 Estimation of Episode-specific Daily Variability Factors
The episode-specific daily variability factor is a function of the expected value and the
99th percentile of the modified delta-lognormal distribution fit to the concentration values of the
pollutant in the wastewater from the episode. The expected value was estimated using equation
20 (the expected value is the same as the episode-specific long-term average).
The 99th percentile of the modified delta-lognormal distribution fit to each data set was
estimated by using an iterative approach. First, the pollutant-specific detection limits were
ordered from smallest to largest. Next, the cumulative distribution function, p, for each detection
limit was computed. The general form, for a given value c, was:
Compliance with the monthly average limitations will be required in the final rulemaking regardless of the number
of samples analyzed and averaged.
B-10
-------
(22)
where $ is the standard normal cumulative distribution function. Next, the interval containing
the 99th percentile was identified. Finally, the 99th percentile of the modified delta-lognormal
distribution was estimated. The following steps were completed to compute the estimated 99th
percentile of each data subset:
Step 1 Using equation 22, k values of p at c=Dm, m=l ,...,k were computed and labeled pm.
Step 2 The smallest value of m (m=l,...,k), such that pm > 0.99, was determined and labeled as
Pj. If no such m existed, steps 3 and 4 were skipped and step 5 was computed instead.
Step 3 Computed p* = Pj - 4-
Step 4 If p* < 0.99, then P99 = p.
else if p*_> 0.99, then
/
P99 = exp /} + ctO 1
1-8
1=1
(23)
v
where <&"' is the inverse normal distribution function.
Step 5 If no such m exists such that pm > 0.99 (m=l,...,k), then
F99 = exp /i +
-------
The episode-specific daily variability factor, VF1, was then calculated as:
(25)
B.5.3.2 Estimation of Episode-Specific Monthly Variability Factors Assuming No
Autocorrelation
EPA estimated the monthly variability factors by fitting a modified delta-lognormal
distribution to the monthly averages. Episode-specific monthly variability factors were based on
4-day monthly averages because the monitoring frequency assumed to be weekly (approximately
four times a month).
In order to calculate the 4-day variability factors (VF4), the assumption was made that the
approximating distribution of , the sample mean for a random sample of four independent
concentrations, was also derived from the modified delta-lognormal distribution.6 To obtain the
expected value of the 4-day averages, equation 20 is modified for the mean of the distribution of
4-day averages:
where D denotes the mean of the discrete portion of the distribution of the average of four
independent concentrations, (i.e., when all observations are non-detected values) and
c denotes the mean of the continuous lognormal portion (i.e., when any observations are
detected).
First, it was assumed that the detection of each measurement is independent (the
measurements were also assumed to be independent; see the following section for adjustments
6As described in Section 14.4, when non-detected measurements are aggregated with non-censored measurements,
EPA determined that the result should be considered non-censored.
i(j/4) = SA E(Xt)D +(l-Si)E(xi)c
(26)
B-12
-------
for autocorrelation). Therefore, the probability of the detection of the measurements is S4 =
Because the measurements are assumed to be independent, the following relationships hold:
e(u4 ) = £(£/)
Var(XD)
4
(27)
Substituting into equation 27 and solving for the expected value of the continuous portion
of the distribution gives:
E(U)-S< E(Xd)
(28)
1 -8l
Using the relationship in equation 20 for the averages of 4-day measurements and substituting
terms from equation 26 and solving for the variance of the continuous portion of gives:
Var(U)
Var(X4)c =
Var(XD)
•[£(*/>
l-S
7 (29)
Using equations 18 and 19 and solving for the parameters of the lognormal distribution
(x4)
describing the distribution of v 'c gives:
<74 = In
+ 1
and
/i4=to(£(jr4)c)-
-2
cr4
(30)
B-13
-------
In finding the estimated 95th percentile of the average of four observations, four non-
detects, not all at the same sample-specific detection limit, can generate an average that is not
necessarily equal to D1; D2,..., or Dk. Consequently, more than k discrete points exist in the
distribution of the 4-day averages. For example, the average of four non-detects at k=2 detection
limits, are at the following discrete points with the associated probabilities:
i
Pi
S1
1
A
8?
2
(3Dx+D2)/4
4 S?S2
3
(2Dj +2Z)2)/4
6S^S2
4
(Dl+3D2)/4
48^1
5
d2
st
When all four observations are non-detected values, and when k distinct non-detected
values exist, the multinomial distribution can be used to determine associated probabilities. That
is,
Pr
t uiD<
4!
ux \u2 \...uk ! 7=Jj
ri <*"'
(31)
where u, is the number of non-detected measurements in the data set with the D; detection limit.
The number of possible discrete points, k*, for k=l,2,3,4, and 5 are as follows:
k !l
1 1
2 5
3 15
4 35
5 70
B-14
-------
To find the estimated 95th percentile of the distribution of the average of four
observations, the same basic steps as for the 99th percentile of the distribution of the observations
given in section B.5.3.1, were used with the following changes:
Step 1 Change P99 to P95, and 0.99 to 0.95.
Step 2 Change Dm to Dm\ the weighted averages of the sample-specific detection limits.
Step 3 Change 8; to 6*.
Step 4 Change k to k\ the number of possible discrete points based on k detection limits.
2
Step 5 Change the estimates of 6, ^ and o2 to estimates of 64, , and 4 respectively.
. e(u4 )=e(u)
Then, using ^ ' v , the estimate of the episode-specific 4-day variability factor, VF4,
was calculated as:
VF4 = -i^- (32)
E(U)
B.5.3.3 Estimation of Episode-Specific Variability Factors For Monthly Averages
Assuming Autocorrelation
Autocorrelation in the successive measurements affects the variance of the monthly
averages. Therefore, autocorrelation must be accounted for when calculating the monthly
variability factors. The calculations of the monthly variability factors when the observations are
correlated assumes that the data follow the Lag-1 AR model discussed in Section B.4 and that all
values are detected. Reported detection limits for non-detected measurements are treated as
measured values in the continuous portion.
Assuming that all measurements are detected is equivalent to assuming that 8= 0, the
data have a lognormal distribution, and the equations for the continuous portion of the delta-
lognormal distribution can be adapted to describe all the data. Autocorrelation has been already
incorporated into the estimates of |i and o as in equation 16 and additional adjustment to the
B-15
-------
monthly variance
Var{u,)
from equation 27 is required. Once the following adjustment is
incorporated, the procedure described in the previous section can be used.
Using the Lag-1 AR model discussed in Section B.4 to model the effluent data, and
assuming that these effluent values follow a lognormal distribution with parameters // and a, the
variance of the monthly averages of autocorrelated values is approximated by:
where pA is the correlation of the natural logarithm of measurements from successive sampling
events of the same time intervals assuming all values are non-censored and S is the set of
sampling events (represented by sequential numbers) on which samples for the average are taken
and m is the number of sampling events in S. For a monthly average based on 4-day samples
collected a week apart, the resulting formula can be simplified to:
(33)
where f4 is the factor to adjust for the autocorrelation.
In general, the fm factor to adjust for autocorrelation can be written as:
(34)
(35)
B-16
-------
B.5.3.4 Evaluation of Episode-Specific Variability Factors
The parameter estimates for the lognormal portion of the distribution can be calculated
with as few as two distinct measured values in a data set (in order to calculate the variance);
however, these estimates can be unstable (as can estimates from larger data sets). As stated in
section B.5.1, EPA used the modified delta-lognormal distribution to develop episode-specific
variability factors for data sets that had three or more observations with two or more distinct
measured concentration values.
To identify situations producing unexpected results, EPA reviewed all of the variability
factors and compared daily to monthly variability factors. EPA used several criteria to determine
if the episode-specific daily and monthly variability factors should be included in calculating the
option variability factors. One criteria that EPA used was that the daily and monthly variability
factors should be greater than 1.0. A variability factor less than 1.0 would result in a unexpected
result where the estimated 99th percentile would be less than the long-term average. This would
be an indication that the estimate of G (the standard deviation in log scale) was unstable. A
second criteria was that not all of the sample-specific detection limits could exceed the values of
the non-censored values. All the episode-specific variability factors used for the limitations and
standards met first and second criteria. A third criteria was that the daily variability factor had to
be greater than the monthly variability factor. When this criteria was not met, the daily and
monthly variability factors were excluded.
B.6 References
Aitchison, J. and J.A.C. Brown. 1963. The Lognormal Distribution. Cambridge University
Press, New York.
Barakat, R. 1976. "Sums of Independent Lognormally Distributed Random Variables." Journal
Optical Society of America, 66: 211-216.
Cohen, A. Clifford. 1976. Progressively Censored Sampling in the Three Parameter Log-Normal
Distribution. Technometrics, 18:99-103.
B-17
-------
Crow, E.L. and K. Shimizu. 1988. Lognormal Distributions: Theory and Applications. Marcel
Dekker, Inc., New York.
Kahn, H.D., and M.B. Rubin. 1989. "Use of Statistical Methods in Industrial Water Pollution
Control Regulations in the United States." Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
Vol. 12:129-148.
Owen, W.J. and T.A. DeRouen. 1980. Estimation of the Mean for Lognormal Data Containing
Zeroes and Left-Censored Values, with Applications to the Measurement of Worker
Exposure to Air Contaminants. Biometrics, 36:707-719.
B-18
-------
APPENDIX C
DATA USED FOR DATA EDITING CRITERIA
FOR POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
1
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
Effl .
Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
1
ND
10 .00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1,2 -DICHLOROETHANE
107062
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1, 2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
1,2 -DICHLOROETHANE
107062
5
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1 -METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1 -METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1 -METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
1
ND
10 .00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
5
ND
10.40
NC
28.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
2,4 -DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,4 -DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
3
ND
10.00
NC
10,490.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,4 -DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
4
ND
10.00
NC
7,229.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
5
ND
10.40
NC
7,118.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
1
ND
50.00
NC
697.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
2
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
3
ND
50 .00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
4
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
5
ND
50.00
NC
682.50
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,150.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,020.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
NC
690.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
~ SP-C
SP-E
2 - METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
4
ND
10.00
NC
709.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.40
NC
733.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
2-PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
1
ND
10.00
NC
754.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
~ SP-C
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
o
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
infl.
Meas
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
3
ND
10.00
NC
200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
4
ND
10.00
NC
243.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2 -PHEMYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
5
ND
10.40
NC
342.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
2-PICOLINE
109068
1
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
2-PICOLINE
109068
2
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-PICOLINE
109068
3
ND
50.00
NC
14,990.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
2-PICOLINE
109068
4
ND
50.00
NC
12,790.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-PICOLINE
109068
5
ND
52.00
NC
10,064.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
1
ND
50.00
NC
13,410.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
2
ND
50.00
NC
13,050.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
3
ND
50.00
NC
9,716.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
4
ND
50.00
NC
14,020.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
2 -PROPANONE
67641
5
ND
50.00
NC
16,200.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
4 -METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
2
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
4-METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
3
ND
50 .00
ND
500.00
50 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
4
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
5
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,001.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
2
ND
10.00
NC
886.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
3
ND
10.00
NC
706.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
4
ND
10.00
NC
659.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
5
ND
10.40
NC
652.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
1.00
NC
0.25
0.05
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
0.15
NC
0.56
0.05
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
0.19
NC
0.21
0.05
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
0.32
NC
2.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
0.16
NC
1.20
0.05
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
1
ND
10.00
NC
19,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,150.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
3
ND
10.00
NC
16,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
4
ND
10.00
NC
6,450.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
5
ND
10.40
NC
15,600.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
1
ND
10.00
NC
021.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
2
ND
10.00
NC
751.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
3
ND
10.00
NC
174.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
*¦* Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
3
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESG01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
4
ND
10.00
NC
164.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
5
ND
10.40
NC
178.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
1
NC
9.00
NC
78.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
2
NC
5.60
NC
80.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
3
NC
9.10
NC
56.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
4
NC
7.20
NC
75.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
5
NC
5.60
NC
110.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
1
ND
10.00
NC
177
700.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
~SP-C
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
2
ND
10.00
NC
182
600.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
~ SP-C
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
3
ND
10.00
NC
158
900.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
4
ND
10.00
NC
174
000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
5
ND
10.00
NC
191
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
BENZIDINE
92875
1
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
BENZIDINE
92875
2
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZIDINE
92875
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
BENZIDINE
92875
4
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
BENZIDINE
92875
5
ND
52.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (A) ANTHRACENE
56553
1
ND
10.00
NC
336.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (A) ANTHRACENE
56553
2
ND
10.00
NC
355.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1
ND
10.00
NC
226.50
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
~SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
2
ND
10.00
NC
218.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
~SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
1
ND
10.00
NC
422.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
2
ND
10.00
NC
474.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
~SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step l and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria Cor Pollutants of Concern
4
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us<
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BENZO(K)FLUORANTHENE
207089
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
eseoi
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91590
1
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
2
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
eseoi
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
4
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
5
ND
52 .00
NC
667.60
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
1
ND
300.00
NC
1,710.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
2
ND
15. 00
NC
1,240.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
3
ND
15.00
NC
1,430.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
~ SP-C
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
4
NC
15.00
NC
1,510.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
5
ND
15.00
NC
1,270.00
2 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
1
ND
10.00
NC
168.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
2
ND
10.00
NC
155.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
1
ND
300.00
NC
2,460.00
2 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
2
ND
15.00
NC
1,360.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
3
ND
15.00
NC
1,470.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
4
NC
17.00
NC
1,220.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
5
ND
15.00
NC
1,440.00
2 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BORON
7440428
1
NC
509.50
NC
865.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BORON
7440428
2
NC
524.00
NC
842.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BORON
7440428
3
NC
494.50
NC
959.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BORON
7440428
4
NC
484.00
NC
690.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
BORON
7440428
5
NC
487.00
NC
690.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
CARBAZOLE
86748
1
ND
20.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+ SP-C
CARBAZOLE
86748
2
ND
20.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBAZOLE
86748
3
ND
20.00
NC
787.50
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBAZOLE
86748
4
ND
20.00
NC
782.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBAZOLE
86748
5
ND
20.80
NC
793.40
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
1
ND
10.00
NC
63.50
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
5
ND
10.00
NC
133.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
5
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Opt ion«BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Effl.
Amount
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
NC
36.50
NC
6,190.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
43.50
NC
6,900.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
27.50
NC
6,240.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
25.00
NC
6,840.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
25.00
NC
6,760.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
2
ND
10.00
NC
285.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,040.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
2
ND
10.00
NC
776.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
3
ND
10.00
NC
545.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
4
ND
10.00
NC
464.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
5
ND
10.40
NC
422.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
1
ND
10.00
NC
257.10
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E *
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
2
ND
10.00
NC
246.90
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
NC
421.30
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
NC
262.80
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
NC
584.10
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,453.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,404.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
3
ND
10.00
NC
359.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
4
ND
10.00
NC
327.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
5
ND
10.40
NC
362.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,615.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,413.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
3
ND
10.00
NC
628.90
10 . 00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
4
ND
10.00
NC
543.10
10 . 00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
5
ND
10.40
NC
563.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
6
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us
ID
Samp
Pt
samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
1
ND
10.00
NC
661.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
2
ND
10.00
NC
2,010.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
3
ND
10.00
NC
2,080.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
4
ND
10.00
NC
2,190.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
5
ND
10.00
NC
3,190.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
1
ND
0.20
NC
1.72
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
2
ND
0.20
NC
1.63
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
3
ND
0.20
NC
1.84
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
4
ND
0.20
NC
2.05
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
5
ND
0.20
NC
2.26
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10.40
ND
100 .00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
NC
25,776.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
2
ND
10.00
NC
28,270.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
3
ND
10.00
NC
19,990.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
4
ND
10.00
NC
19,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
5
ND
10.40
NC
18,368.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
350.50
ND
0.50
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
2
NC
109.50
NC
2.30
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
3
NC
101.50
NC
1.60
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
104.00
NC
1.60
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
98.00
NC
1.30
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
1
ND
10.00
NC
7,440.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
7
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
0
1
-J
infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
2
ND
10.00
NC
10,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
3
ND
10.00
NC
9,130.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
4
ND
10.00
NC
3,860.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
5
ND
10.40
NC
1,718.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
3
ND
10.00
NC
1,730.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
5
ND
10.40
NC
545.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
1
ND
10.00
NC
482.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
3
ND
10.00
NC
585.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
5
ND
10.00
NC
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
1
ND
5.90
NC
18.79
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
2
ND
5.73
NC
35.25
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
3
NC
5.72
NC
35.00
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
4
NC
12 .26
NC
20.75
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
5
NC
5.95
NC
26.75
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
1
ND
10.00
NC
6,030.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
2
ND
10.00
NC
8,200.00
10 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
3
ND
10.00
NC
8,920.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
4
ND
10.00
NC
6,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
5
ND
10.40
NC
914.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
5
ND
10 .40
NC
13.50
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
PHENANTHRENE
85018
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
PHENANTHRENE
85018
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PHENANTHRENE
85018
3
ND
10,00
NC
949.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PHENANTHRENE
85018
4
ND
10.00
NC
825.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PHENANTHRENE
85018
5
ND
10.40
NC
916.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PHENOL
108952
1
ND
10.00
NC
48,360.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PHENOL
108952
2
ND
10.00
NC
72,800.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
8
SubcategorynCOKEBYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
PHENOL
108952
3
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
PHENOL
108952
4
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
PHENOL
108952
5
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
1
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
2
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
3
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
4
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
5
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
1
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
2
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
3
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
4
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
5
ND
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
1
NC
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
2
NC
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
3
NC
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
4
NC
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
5
NC
ESE01
SP-E
SGT-HEM
CO 3 7
1
ESEOl
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
3
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
4
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
5
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
STYRENE
100425
1
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+ SP-C
STYRENE
100425
2
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
STYRENE
100425
3
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
STYRENE
100425
4
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
STYRENE
100425
5
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
1
NC
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
2
NC
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
3
NC
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
4
NC
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
5
NC
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
1
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
2
ND
ESEOl
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
10.00
NC
367,800.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
942.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
1,009.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
231.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
207.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.40
NC
240.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
40,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
28,100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
26,100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
32,100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.40
NC
28,600.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
112.00
NC
743.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
99.50
NC
783.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
104 .00
NC
693.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
109.00
NC
805.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
130.00
NC
615.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
NC
6.34
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
NC
5.90
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
5.61
NC
7.55
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
5.68
NC
13.00
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
6.02
NC
7.22
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
10 .00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
1,886.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
2,112.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.60
NC
784.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.47
NC
790.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.31
NC
740.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.22
NC
769.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.37
NC
657.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
15,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
16,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
NC
13,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
9
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
Q
vO
(continued)
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sampli
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
5
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
3
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
5
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
1
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
3
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
5
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
1
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
3
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
5
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
1
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
3
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
5
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
1
ESE01
SP-B
~SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
4
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
5
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
1
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
2
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
3
ESE01
SP-B
+ SP-C
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
4
Effl.
Meas
Type
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Effl.
Amount
10.00
10.00
2.71
3.94
3.92
3.30
3.20
2,975.00
5,795.00
5,755.00
6,140.00
5,850.00
4 .45
2.10
4.65
131.00
0.50
15.70
20.50
12.00
14.00
12 .00
0.05
0.05
0.09
0.05
0.07
22.50
45.50
64.00
19.00
14.00
58,069.50
239.00
492.00
62.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Infl.
Amount
15,230.00
15,980.00
1,040.00
1,800.00
1,240.00
1,300.00
1,600.00
3,330.00
5,470.00
5,870.00
5,650.00
4,830.00
622.00
2,660.00
24,700.00
914.00
928.00
50.00
1,930.00
1,820.00
2,080.00
2,090.00
651.00
603.00
836.00
554.00
569.00
16.00
22.00
12.00
12.00
4.00
1380000.00
848,000.00
700,000.00
1100000.00
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10.00
10.00
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.00
UG/L
UG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
P Y
P Y
P Y
P Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
Y Y
P Y Y
P Y Y
P Y Y
P Y Y
* Pass/Fall of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data UBed for Data Editing Criteria for PollutantB of Concern
10
Subcategory=C0KE_BYPR0D -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
US<
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-B
+SP-C
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
5
NC
49.40
NC
1090000.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
2
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
4
ND
10.00
ND
1
000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
5
ND
10.00
ND
1
000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
5
ND
10.00
NC
17.10
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
1
ND
10.00
NC
180.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
2
ND
10.00
NC
267.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
3
ND
10.00
NC
421.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
4
ND
10.00
NC
369.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
5
ND
10 . 00
NC
173.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UO/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
5
ND
10 .00
ND
10.00
10 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
1
ND
10.00
NC
4
533.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
2
ND
10.00
NC
4
432.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
3
ND
10.00
NC
4
542.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
4
ND
10.00
NC
587.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
2
ND
50.00
NC
133.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
3
ND
50.00
NC
122.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
4
ND
50.00
ND
5
000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
. N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
5
ND
50.00
ND
5
000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
10.00
NC
567.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
2
ND
10. 00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
4
ND
10.00
NC
478.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* PaBs/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Effl.
Amount
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
2
ND
10.00
NC
120.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
3
ND
10.00
NC
183.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
5
NC
11.30
NC
137.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
2-PICOLINE
109068
1
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-PICOLINE
109066
2
ND
50.00
NC
7,618.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-PICOLINE
109068
3
ND
50.00
NC
17,360.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-PICOLINE
109068
4
ND
50.00
NC
5,802.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
2-PICOLINE
109068
5
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2 -PROPANONE
67641
1
ND
50.00
NC
695.90
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
2-PROPANONE
67641
2
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
2-PROPANONE
67641
3
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2 -PROPANONE
67641
4
ND
50.00
NC
59,770.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
2-PROPANONE
67641
5
ND
50.00
NC
27,700.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
2
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
3
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
4
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
5
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
1
ND
10.00
NC
199.30
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
4
ND
10.00
NC
163.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
5
ND
10.00
NC
37.47
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
14.80
NC
1,480.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
14.95
NC
1,600.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
16.00
NC
1,690.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
20.30
NC
308.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
21.30
NC
340.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,160.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
3
ND
10.00
NC
3,190.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
4
ND
10.00
NC
3,560.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
12
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATi
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use(
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
1
ND
10.00
NC
1, 198.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
2
ND
10 .00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
3
ND
10.00
NC
302.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
4
ND
10.00
NC
998.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
ANTHRACENE
120127
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
1
NC
8.00
NC
40.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
2
NC
12.00
NC
45.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
3
NC
13 .00
NC
46.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
4
ND
6.00
NC
42.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
5
ND
6.00
NC
51.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BENZENE
71432
1
NC
10.87
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BENZENE
71432
2
NC
16.54
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BENZENE
71432
3
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BENZENE
71432
4
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BENZENE
71432
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BENZIDINE
92875
1
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
2
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
3
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
4
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
5
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
1
ND
10.00
NC
714.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
3
ND
10.00
NC
119.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553 »
4
ND
10.00
NC
523.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
5
ND
10.00
NC
85.46
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1
ND
10.00
NC
613-60
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
4
ND
10.00
NC
439.80
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
5
ND
10.00
NC
20.98
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
1
ND
10.00
NC
362.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
2
ND
10 .00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
4
ND
10.00
NC
541.40
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
5
ND
10.00
NC
47.61
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO(K)FLUORANTHENE
207089
1
ND
10. 00
NC
682.30
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
13
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Ef fl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Us«
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207009
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207009
4
ND
10.00
ND
1
000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
5
ND
10.00
NC
68.03
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91590
1
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
2
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
4
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
5
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
1
NC
83.30
NC
1
340.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
2
NC
27.85
NC
1
270.00
2 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
3
NC
12.30
NC
894.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
4
NC
11.90
NC
738.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
5
NC
21.00
NC
1
210.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
B1PHENYL
92524
1
ND
10.00
NC
155.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
BIPHENYL
92524
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
1
NC
55.55
NC
1
060.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
2
NC
21.25
NC
1
170.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
3
NC
9.60
NC
555.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
4
NC
10.30
NC
687.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
5
NC
15.70
NC
861.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
BORON
7440428
1
NC
370.00
NC
410.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BORON
7440428
2
NC
375.00
NC
400.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BORON
7440428
3
NC
360.00
NC
430.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
BORON
7440428
4
NC
420.00
NC
380.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
BORON
7440420
5
NC
350.00
NC
380.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86740
1
ND
20.00
NC
8
198.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
2
ND
20.00
NC
904.50
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
3
ND
20.00
NC
1
786.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
66740
4
ND
20.00
NC
5
188.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
5
ND
20.00
NC
961.90
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
1
ND
10.00
NC
78.30
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
2
ND
10.00
NC
138.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
14
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option«BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
US
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
3
ND
10.00
NC
124.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
5
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
NC
117 .50
NC
3,640.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
107.50
NC
4,050.00
3 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
112.00
NC
2,570.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
128.00
NC
2,330.00
3 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
137 .00
NC
3,830.00
3 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
1
ND
10.00
NC
690.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
3
ND
10.00
NC
125 .60
10. 00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
4
ND
10.00
NC
619.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
5
ND
10.00
NC
85.82
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,533.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
2
ND
10.00
NC
401.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
3
ND
10.00
NC
547.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
4
ND
10.00
NC
1,268.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
5
ND
10.00
NC
412.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
1
ND
10.00
NC
257.20
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
4
ND
10.00
NC
199.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
5
ND
10.00
NC
44.09
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
NC
15.18
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
2
ND
10.00
NC
11.99
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
NC
13.13
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
1
ND
10.00
NC
2,414.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
2
ND
10.00
NC
295.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
3
ND
10.00
NC
529.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
4
ND
10.00
NC
1,790.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
5
ND
10.00
NC
277.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,744.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
2
ND
10.00
NC
330.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
3
ND
10.00
NC
512.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
15
Subcategory=cOKE_BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl
Inffl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
US<
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
4
ND
10.00
NC
1,237.00
10 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
5
ND
10.00
NC
363.60
10 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
1
ND
10.00
NC
257.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
2
ND
10.00
NC
258.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
3
• ND
10.00
NC
246.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
4
ND
10.00
NC
25,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
5
ND
10.00
NC
26,200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
1
NC
0.10
NC
2.43
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
2
NC
0.12
NC
1. 97
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
3
NC
0.06
NC
2.22
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
4
NC
0.10
NC
2.19
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
5
NC
0.17
NC
1.95
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
10.00
NC
653.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
2
ND
10.00
NC
143.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
ND
10 .00
NC
250.70
10 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
4
ND
10.00
NC
210.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10.00
NC
83.31
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,159.00
10.00
UG/L
p
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-KEXADECANE
544763
2
ND
10.00
NC
337.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
ND
10.00
NC
495.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-KEXADECANE
544763
4
ND
10.00
NC
536.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.00
NC
237.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,687.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
2
ND
10.00
NC
504.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
ND
10.00
NC
1,069.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
4
ND
10.00
NC
944.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.00
NC
97.69
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
NC
40,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
2
ND
10.00
NC
16,810.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
3
ND
10.00
NC
18,240.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
. Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
4
ND
10.00
NC
43,500.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
5
ND
10.00
NC
23,260.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
45.40
NC
1.07
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
2
NC
55.10
NC
1.02
0.01
MG/L
p
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
3
NC
68.00
NC
0.88
0.01
MG/L
p
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
85.90
NC
0.75
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
16
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us<
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
112.00
NC
0.56
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95407
1
ND
10.00
NC
7,827.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
2
ND
10.00
NC
6,880.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
3
ND
10.00
NC
8,180.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
4
ND
10.00
NC
8,900.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
5
ND
10.00
NC
8,290.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
. N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
4
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
1
ND
10.00
NC
87 .20
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
2
ND
10. 00
NC
83.40
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
3
ND
10.00
NC
77.90
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
5
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10 .00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
OIL AND GREASE
C036
1
ND
5.49
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
OIL AND GREASE
C036
2
ND
5.62
NC
60.75
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
OIL AND GREASE
C036
3
ND
5.63
NC
75.08
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
1
ND
10.00
NC
12,290.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
2
ND
10.00
NC
11,680.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
3
ND
10.00
NC
13,820.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
4
ND
10.00
NC
15,040.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
5
ND
10.00
NC
14,400.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
4
ND
10.00
NC
153.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
1
ND
10 .00
NC
5,316.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
2
ND
10.00
NC
794 .80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
3
ND
10.00
NC
1,381.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
A
ND
10.00
NC
4,195.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
5
ND
10.00
NC
737 .80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
PHENOL
108952
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
17
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl
inffl.
Sample
Meas
Eff 1 .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us<
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
PHENOL
108952
2
NC
37.42
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
PHENOL
108952
3
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
PHENOL
108952
4
NC
72.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
PHENOL
108952
5
NC
17.79
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,944.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
2
ND
10.00
NC
249.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
3
ND
10.00
NC
465.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
4
ND
10.00
NC
1,635.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
5
ND
10.00
NC
220.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
1
ND
10.00
NC
28,500.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
~ SP-B
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
2
ND
10.00
NC
30,700.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
3
ND
10.00
NC
29,769.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
4
ND
10.00
NC
27,200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
5
ND
10.00
NC
6,560.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
1
NC
305.00
NC
980.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
2
NC
370.00
NC
860.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
3
NC
370.00
NC
830.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
4
NC
700.00
NC
1,300.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
5
NC
740.00
NC
1,400.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
2
NC
35.13
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
3
NC
39.63
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
4
NC
36.33
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
5
NC
33.53
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
1
ND
10.00
NC
137.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
3
ND
10.00
NC
196.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
4
ND
10.00
NC
165.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
5
ND
10.00
NC
236.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
1
NC
69.15
NC
25.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
2
NC
0.31
NC
32.70
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
3
NC
42.60
NC
19.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
4
NC
0.41
NC
20.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
5
NC
1.33
NC
27.20
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
TOLUENE
108883
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
TOLUENE
108883
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
18
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Us
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
TOLUENE
108883
4
ND
10 .00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
TOLUENE
108883
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
0.43
NC
35.60
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
N
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
0.53
NC
41.80
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
N
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
3
NC
0.74
NC
44.80
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
N
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
4
NC
0.50
NC
27.10
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
N
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
5
NC
0.72
NC
41.90
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
N
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
1
NC
2,585.00
NC
3,680.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
2
NC
2,745.00
NC
4,270.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
3
NC
3,020.00
NC
977.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
4
NC
4,120.00
NC
648.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
5
NC
12,500.00
NC
544.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
1
NC
15.50
NC
1,590.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
2
NC
19.80
NC
1,610.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
3
NC
14.40
NC
1,710.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
4
NC
45.30
NC
1,780.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
CO 21
5
NC
23.00
NC
1,890.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y'
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
1
NC
18.50
NC
602.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
CO 12
2
NC
15.80
NC
664.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
CO 12
3
NC
25.80
NC
835.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
4
NC
18.80
NC
604.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
5
NC
22.00
NC
666.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
0.01
NC
22.40
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
NC
0.01
NC
294.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
NC
0. 01
NC
287.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
CO 20
4
NC
0.01
NC
289.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
NC
0.01
NC
289.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
26.00
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
29.00
NC
20.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
33.00
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
4
NC
44.00
NC
23.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
5
NC
21.00
NC
15.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
1
ND
2.00
NC
48,400.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
2
ND
2 .00
NC
47,200.00
2 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
3
ND
2.00
NC
25,800.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
4
NC
2.99
NC
38,800.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used*Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
19
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD ¦
(continued)
Option»BATl
VO
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass
* *
ESB02
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
5
NC
138.00
NC
44,400.00
2 .00
UG/L
P P
Y
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
1.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
8
NC
1.12
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
15
NC
2 .00
0 . 05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
nitrogen
7664417
22
NC
10 . 70
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
29
NC
32.53
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
37
NC
1.40
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
43
NC
1.39
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
50
NC
7. 74
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
57
NC
71.60
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
64
NC
36.20
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
71
NC
36.40
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
70
NC
57.10
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
85
NC
30.90
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
92
NC
4 .60
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
99
NC
9.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
106
NC
3 .50
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
113
NC
3.33
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
120
NC
10.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
127
NC
3 .67
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
134
NC
1.90
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
141
NC
1.75
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
148
NC
3.29
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
155
NC
1.57
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
162
NC
1.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
169
NC
2.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
176
NC
1.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
183
NC
2.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
190
NC
2.24
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
197
NC
2.39
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
204
NC
1.96
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
211
NC
1.68
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
218
NC
2.17
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
225
NC
3.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
232
NC
2.90
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
239
NC
1.69
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
246
NC
4.29
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
253
NC
2.83
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
260
NC
2.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
267
NC
2.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
275
NC
1.62
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
281
NC
1.75
0.05
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
20
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility
Effl.
infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
266
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
295
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
302
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
309
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
316
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
323
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
330
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
337
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
344
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
351
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
358
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
365
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
372
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
379
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
15
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
366
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
22
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
393
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
29
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
400
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
36
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
407
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
43
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
414
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
50
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
421
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
57
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
428
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
64
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
435
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
71
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
442
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
78
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
449
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
85
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
456
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
92
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
463
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
99
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
470
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
106
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
477
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
113
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass .**
2.31
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
2.38
0.05
MG/L
Y
2.13
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.40
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.15
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.12
0.05
MG/L
Y
2.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.26
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.22
0.05
MG/L
Y
25.60
0.05
MG/L
N
62.00
0.05
MG/L
N
38.70
0.05
MG/L
N
14 .50
0.05
MG/L
N
3.20
0.05
MG/L
N
3.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.20
0.05
MG/L
N
1.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
2.10
0.05
MG/L
N
2.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.01
0.05
MG/L
N
1.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.65
0.05
MG/L
N
1.65
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.40
0.05
MG/L
N
1.40
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.90
0.05
MG/L
N
1.90
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.64
0.05
MG/L
N
1.64
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.79
0.05
MG/L
N
1.79
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.80
0.05
MG/L
N
1.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.29
0.05
MG/L
N
1.29
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.70
0.05
MG/L
N
1.70
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.33
0.05
MG/L
N
1.33
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.73
0.05
MG/L
N
1.73
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.68
0.05
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
21
Suboategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
484
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
120
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
491
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
127
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
498
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
134
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
505
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
141
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
512
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
148
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
519
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
155
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
526
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
162
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
533
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
164
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
535
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
165
ND
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
536
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
166
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
537
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
167
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
538
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
169
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
540
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
176
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
547
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
183
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
554
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
190
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
561
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
197
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
568
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
204
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
575
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
211
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
582
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
218
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
589
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
225
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
596
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
232
NC
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
603
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2* Pass
A *
1.68
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.79
0.05
MG/L
N
1.79
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.15
0.05
MG/L
N
1.15
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.54
0.05
MG/L
N
1.54
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.57
0.05
MG/L
N
1.57
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.24
0.05
MG/L
N
1.24
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.24
0.05
MG/L
N
1.24
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.80
0.05
MG/L
N
0.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.60
0.05
MG/L
N
0.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.10
0.05
MG/L
N
0.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.60
0.05
MG/L
N
0.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.60
0.05
MG/L
N
0.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.70
0.05
MG/L
N
1.70
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.05
0.05
MG/L
N
1.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.22
0.05
MG/L
N
1.22
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.26
0.05
MG/L
N
1.26
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.23
0.05
MG/L
N
1.23
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.29
0.05
MG/L
N
1.29
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.87
0.05
MG/L
N
0.87
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.40
0.05
MG/L
N
1.40
0.05
MG/L
Y
1.10
0.05
MG/L
N
1.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.56
0.05
MG/L
N
0.56
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; otherwise, UsecUY.
-------
f
Appendix C. Data U9ed for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Facility Effl.
0
1
to
to
ID
Samp Pt
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
s i fruu —
-LVJIl = Drt i J.
(continued)
Effl .
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
239
NC
1.28
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
610
NC
1.28
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
246
NC
1.15
0 .05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
617
NC
1.15
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
253
NC
1.09
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
624
NC
1.09
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
260
NC
1.23
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
631
NC
1.23
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
267
NC
1.50
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
638
NC
1.50
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
273
NC
1.65
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
644
NC
1.65
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
280
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
651
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
287
NC
1.47
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
658
NC
1.47
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
294
NC
1.16
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
665
NC
1.16
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
302
ND
1.01
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
673
NC
1.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
309
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
660
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
316
ND
1.20
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
687
NC
1.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
323
ND
1.43
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
694
NC
1.43
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
330
NC
1.05
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
701
NC
1.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
337
NC
1.40
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
708
NC
1.40
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
344
NC
0.95
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
715
NC
0.95
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
351
NC
1.57
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
722
NC
1.57
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
358
NC
0.80
0.05
MG/L
N
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
729
NC
0.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
736
NC
1.47
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
743
NC
1.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
750
NC
1.18
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
757
NC
1.70
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
764
NC
1.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
771
NC
1.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
766441
778
NC
1.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
23
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
o
to
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
nitrogen
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
nitrogen
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
nitrogen
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7664417
785
NC
1. 50
7664417
792
NC
1.64
7664417
799
NC
1.60
7664417
606
NC
1.44
7664417
814
ND
1.00
7664417
820
NC
1.10
7664417
827
NC
1.20
7664417
834
NC
1.40
7664417
841
NC
1.19
7664417
848
NC
1.40
7664417
855
NC
1.05
7664417
862
NC
1.40
7664417
869
NC
1.07
7664417
877
NC
1.16
7664417
884
NC
0.66
7664417
690
NC
1.98
7664417
897
NC
1.40
7664417
904
NC
1.47
7664417
911
NC
1.30
7664417
918
NC
1.11
7664417
925
NC
1.15
7664417
932
NC
1.40
7664417
939
ND
1.00
7664417
946
ND
1.00
7664417
953
NC
1.40
7664417
960
NC
0.99
7664417
967
NC
1.12
7664417
974
ND
1.00
7664417
981
ND
1.00
7664417
988
ND
1.00
7664417
995
NC
1.23
7664417
1002
NC
1.70
7664417
1009
NC
1.12
7664417
1016
NC
1.40
7664417
1023
NC
1.54
7664417
1030
NC
1.32
7664417
1037
ND
1.00
7664417
1044
NC
1.44
7664417
1051
ND
1.00
7664417
1058
NC
1.20
7664417
1065
NC
1.00
7664417
1073
NC
1.33
7664417
1080
NC
1.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
0. 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
24
Subcategory=C0KE_BYPR0D -- Option=BATi
(continued)
Effl.
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
n
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
^ ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
10B7
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1094
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1101
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1106
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1115
NC
1.60
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1122
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1129
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1136
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1143
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1150
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1157
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1164
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1171
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1178
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1185
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1192
NC
1.11
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1199
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1206
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1213
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1220
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1227
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1234
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1241
NC
1.28
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1248
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1255
NC
1.10
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1262
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1269
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1276
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1283
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1290
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1297
NC
1.36
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1304
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1311
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1318
ND
1. 00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1325
NC
1.11
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1332
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1339
NC
1.15
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1346
NC
1.07
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1353
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1360
NC
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1367
NC
1.44
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1374
ND
1.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1381
ND
1.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0. 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0. 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
25
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
Infl.
n
K)
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
ammonia
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7664417
1388
ND
1.00
7664417
1395
ND
1.00
7664417
1402
ND
1.00
7664417
1409
NC
1.10
7664417
1416
NC
1.40
7664417
1423
NC
1.30
7664417
1430
NC
2.10
7664417
1437
ND
1.00
7664417
1444
ND
1.00
7664417
1451
NC
1.40
7664417
1456
NC
1.12
7664417
1465
NC
1.12
7664417
1472
NC
2.20
7664417
1479
NC
4.27
7664417
I486
NC
1.03
7664417
1493
NC
1.10
7664417
1500
ND
1.00
7664417
1507
ND
1.00
7664417
1514
ND
1.00
7664417
1521
ND
1.00
7664417
1526
ND
1.00
7664417
1535
ND
1.00
7664417
1542
ND
1.00
7664417
1549
ND
1.00
7664417
1556
NC
1.00
7664417
1563
ND
1.00
7664417
1570
ND
1.00
7664417
1577
ND
1.00
7664417
1564
ND
1.00
7664417
1591
ND
1.00
7664417
1596
ND
1.00
7664417
1605
ND
1. 00
7664417
1612
ND
1.00
7664417
1619
NC
1.19
7664417
1626
NC
1.40
7664417
1633
NC
1.00
7664417
1640
ND
1.00
7664417
1647
NC
1.00
7664417
1654
ND
1.00
7664417
1661
ND
1.00
7664417
1666
ND
1.00
7664417
1675
ND
1.00
7664417
1662
ND
1.00
Infl.
Meas
infl.
Amount
Baseline step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 .05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
26
Subcategory»C0KEJ3YPR0D --
(continued)
Option*BATl
Effl.
0
1
a\
Facility Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1689
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1696
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1703
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1710
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1717
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1724
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1731
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1738
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1745
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1752
NC
1.10
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1759
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1766
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1773
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1780
NC
1.00
1SM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1787
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1794
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1801
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1808
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1815
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1822
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
8
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
15
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
22
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
29
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
37
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
43
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
50
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
57
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
64
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
71
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
78
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
85
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
92
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
99
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
106
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
113
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
120
ND
1.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
127
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
134
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
141
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
148
ND
1.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *'
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
27
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
n
i
NJ
-J
Effl .
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
155
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
162
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
169
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
176
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
183
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
190
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
197
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
204
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
211
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
216
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
225
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
232
NC
0.23
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
239
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
246
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
253
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
260
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
267
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
275
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
281
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
288
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
295
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
302
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
309
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
316
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
323
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
330
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
337
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
344
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
351
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
358
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
365
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
372
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
8
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
379
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
15
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
386
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
22
NC
1.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
393
NC
1.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
29
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
400
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
36
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
407
ND
0.20
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
inf 1.
Amount
Step Step
Value
Unit l*
2* Pass
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
28
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas—No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
43
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
414
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
50
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
421
ND
0 .20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
57
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
428
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
64
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
435
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
71
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
442
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
78
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
449
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
85
ND
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
456
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
92
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
463
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
99
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
470
ND
0.10
rN ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
106
ND
0.20
I ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
477
ND
0.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
113
ND
0.20
00 ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
484
ND
0.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
120
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
491
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
127
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
498
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
134
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
505
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
141
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
512
ND
0. 20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
148
NC
0.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
519
NC
0.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
155
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
526
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
162
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
533
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
164
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
535
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
165
ND
5 . 00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
536
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
166
ND
5.00
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
537
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
167
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
29
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
538
ND
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
169
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
540
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
176
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
547
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
183
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
554
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
190
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
561
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
197
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
568
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
204
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
575
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
211
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
582
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
218
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
589
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
225
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
596
ND
0.20
I ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
232
ND
0.20
^ ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
603
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
239
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
610
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
246
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
617
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
253
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
624
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
260
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
631
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
267
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
638
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
273
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
644
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
280
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
651
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
287
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
658
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
294
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
665
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
302
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
673
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
309
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
680
ND
0.20
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *<
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
30
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option*BATl
(continued)
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Ef f 1.
Meas
Type
0
1
LO
O
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
316
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
687
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
323
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
694
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
330
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
701
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
337
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
708
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
344
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
715
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
351
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
722
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
358
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
729
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
736
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
743
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
750
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
757
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
764
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
771
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
778
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
785
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
792
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
799
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
806
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
814
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
820
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
827
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
634
ND
ISMS0
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
841
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
848
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
855
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
862
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
869
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
877
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
884
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
890
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
897
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
904
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
911
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
918
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
925
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
932
ND
* Pass/Fail
of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average
** UsedaN if
data are excluded as described
in Section
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0 .20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.30
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.10
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.70
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.70
0.20
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
31
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
n
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount |
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
939
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
946
ND
0 .20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
953
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
960
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
967
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
974
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
981
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
988
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
995
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1002
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1009
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1016
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1023
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1030
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1037
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1044
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1051
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1058
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1065
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1073
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1080
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1087
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1094
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1101
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1108
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1115
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1122
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1129
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1136
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1143
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1150
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1157
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1164
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1171
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1178
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1185
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1192
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1199
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1206
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1213
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1220
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1227
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1234
NC
0.20
Inf 1.
Meas
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *<
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10 . 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for pollutants of Concern
32
Subcategory"COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
n
i
U>
K>
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1241
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1248
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1255
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1262
NC
0 .20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1269
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1276
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
12B3
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1290
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1297
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1304
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1311
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1318
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1325
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1332
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1339
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1346
NC
1.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1353
NC
1.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1360
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1367
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1374
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1301
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1388
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1395
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1402
NC
0.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1409
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1416
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1423
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1430
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1437
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1444
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1451
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1458
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1465
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1472
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1479
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1486
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1493
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1500
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1507
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1514
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1521
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1528
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1535
ND
0.20
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *1
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
33
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option=BATl
0
1
U>
U)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1542
NC
1.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1549
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1556
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1563
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1570
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1577
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1584
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1591
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1598
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1605
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1612
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1619
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1626
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1633
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1640
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1647
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1654
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1661
NC
0.70
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1666
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1675
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1682
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1689
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1696
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1703
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1710
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1717
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1724
NC
0.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1731
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1738
NC
0.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1745
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1752
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1759
NC
1.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1766
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1773
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1780
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1787
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1794
NC
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1801
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1808
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1815
ND
0.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
1822
ND
0.20
Infl.
Meas
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
NC
0.40
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *1
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
{continued)
n
i
OJ
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
8
ND
10 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
15
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
22
NC
2.30
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
29
NC
2 .10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
37
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
43
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
50
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
57
ND
10 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
64
ND
10 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
71
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
78
NC
17.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
85
NC
58 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
92
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
99
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
106
ND
10 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
113
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
120
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
127
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
134
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
141
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
148
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
155
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
162
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
169
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
176
ND
10 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
183
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
190
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
197
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
204
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
211
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
218
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
225
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
232
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
239
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
246
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
253
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
260
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
267
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
275
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
281
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
288
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
295
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
302
NC
1.90
Infl.
Meas
Type
infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
35
0
1
U>
L/l
"acility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
6ENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD •
(continued)
Cas_No
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
- Option=BATl
Effl.
ample
Meas
Effl .
Day
Type
Amount
309
ND
10.00
316
ND
10.00
323
ND
10.00
330
ND
10.00
337
ND
10.00
344
ND
10.00
351
ND
10.00
358
NC
1.40
365
ND
10.00
372
NC
9.10
379
ND
10.00
386
ND
10.00
393
ND
10.00
400
ND
10.00
407
ND
10.00
414
ND
10.00
421
ND
10.00
428
ND
10.00
435
ND
10.00
442
ND
10.00
449
ND
10.00
456
ND
10.00
463
ND
10.00
470
NC
1.00
477
ND
10.00
484
NC
1.80
491
ND
10.00
498
ND
10.00
505
ND
10.00
512
ND
10.00
519
NC
4.00
526
NC
1.00
533
NC
10.00
535
NC
1.00
536
NC
2.00
537
NC
2.00
538
NC
10 .00
540
NC
10.00
547
ND
10.00
554
ND
10.00
561
ND
10.00
568
NC
5.00
575
NC
2.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix c. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory-COKEBYPROD -- Option.BATl
(continued)
0
1
U>
ON
Ef fl.
Infl.
Facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
582
NC
2.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
589
NC
2.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
596
NC
6.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
603
NC
5.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
610
NC
6.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
617
NC
5.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
624
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
631
NC
3.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
638
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
644
NC
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
651
NC
3 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
658
NC
4 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
665
NC
1.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
673
NC
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
680
NC
14.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
687
NC
7 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
694
NC
3 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
701
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
708
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
715
NC
2 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
722
NC
12 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
729
NC
2 .00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
736
NC
1.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
743
NC
1.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
750
ND
10.00
10 . 00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
757
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
764
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
771
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
778
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
785
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
792
NC
1.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
799
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
806
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
814
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
820
NC
2.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
827
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
834
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
841
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
848
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
855
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
862
NC
2 .60
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
869
NC
4.70
10.00
UG/L
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
877
NC
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Step Step
1* 2* Pass
Used
* Pasa/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
37
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option=BATl
Facility. Eff 1.
0
1
U>
-J
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
50328
884
NC
11.00
50326
690
NC
18.00
50326
897
NC
10.00
50326
904
NC
5.00
50326
911
NC
3.00
50328
916
NC
4 .00
50328
925
NC
5.00
50326
932
NC
2.00
50326
939
NC
2 .00
50328
946
ND
10.00
50328
953
NC
2 .00
50326
960
NC
2 .00
50326
967
NC
4 .00
50328
974
ND
3.00
50326
961
ND
5.00
50328
986
NC
5.00
50328
995
NC
6.00
50326
1002
NC
7.00
50328
1009
NC
5.00
50328
1016
NC
8.00
50328
1023
NC
1.00
50328
1030
NC
2.00
50328
1037
NC
4.00
50328
1044
NC
1.00
50326
1051
NC
2.00
50328
1058
ND
10.00
50328
1065
NC
10.00
50326
1073
NC
10.00
50326
1060
NC
10.00
50326
1087
NC
10.00
50326
1094
NC
10.00
50326
1101
NC
7.00
50326
1108
NC
4 .00
50328
1115
ND
10.00
50326
1122
ND
10.00
50326
1129
ND
10.00
50326
1136
ND
10.00
50326
1143
NC
2 .00
50328
1150
NC
2.00
50328
1157
NC
3.00
50328
1164
NC
3.00
50328
1171
NC
10.00
50326
1178
NC
4.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
38
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD
(continued)
Option=BATl
Effl.
n
i
LO
00
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1185
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1192
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1199
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1206
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1213
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1220
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1227
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1234
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1241
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1248
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1255
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1262
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1269
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1276
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1283
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1290
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1297
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1304
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1311
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1318
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1325
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1332
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1339
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1346
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1353
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1360
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1367
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1374
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1381
NC
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1388
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1395
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1402
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1409
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1416
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1423
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1430
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1437
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1444
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1451
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1458
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1465
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1472
ND
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1479
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
4.00
2.00
2.00
10.00
4.00
10.00
19.00
12.00
11.00
27.00
21.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
36.00
26.00
15.00
7.00
52.00
16.00
10.00
6.00
5.00
3.70
5.70
7.60
10.00
5.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
11.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *'
10. 00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test {See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
39
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -
(continued)
Option»BATl
n
u>
VO
Ef f 1 .
Facility Eff1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Ca9 No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1466
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1493
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1500
NC
2.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1507
NC
2.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1514
NC
2 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1521
NC
1.80
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1528
NC
1.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1535
NC
2.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1542
NC
2 .50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1549
NC
2.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1556
NC
3.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1563
NC
4 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1570
NC
4 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1577
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1584
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1591
NC
2 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1598
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1605
NC
4.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1612
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1619
NC
0.70
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1626
NC
0.70
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1633
NC
1.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1640
NC
1.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1647
NC
0.50
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1654
ND
6.40
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1661
NC
7.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1668
ND
5.30
ISMSO
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1675
NC
1.60
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1662
NC
1.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1689
NC
1.20
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1696
NC
0.90
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1703
NC
0.70
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1710
NC
2.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1717
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1724
NC
2.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1731
NC
3.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1738
NC
2.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1745
NC
2.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1752
NC
2 .00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1759
ND
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1766
NC
1.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50328
1773
NC
2.10
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO
A
PYRENE
50326
1760
NC
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *'
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10 . 00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
40
o
¦
4*.
O
DIfKUU — u
(continued)
JC10n«BATl
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1707
NC
1.90
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1794
NC
2. 30
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1801
NC
1.90
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1808
NC
3.10
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1815
NC
2.50
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1822
NC
0.80
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
8
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
15
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
22
ND
20.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
29
ND
20.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
37
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
43
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
50
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
57
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
64
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
71
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
78
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
85
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
92
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
99
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
106
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
113
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
120
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
127
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
134
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
141
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
148
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
155
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
162
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
169
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
176
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
183
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
190
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
197
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
204
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
211
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
218
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
225
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
232
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
239
ND
10.00
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
246
ND
10.00
10.00
* Pass/Fail of Step
1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test
(See Section 14.5).
Step Step Used
Unit 1* 2* Pass **
UG/L N
UG/L N
UG/L N
UG/L N
UG/L N
UG/L N
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
UG/L Y
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
41
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -
(continued)
Option»BATl
0
1
-U
Ef f 1.
Facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
CaS_No
Day
Type
Amount |
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
253
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
260
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
267
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
275
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
281
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
288
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
295
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
302
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
309
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
316
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
323
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
330
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
337
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
344
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
351
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
358
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
365
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
372
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
8
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
379
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
15
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
. 386
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
22
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
393
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
29
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
400
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
36
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
407
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
43
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
414
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
50
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
421
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
57
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
428
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
64
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
435
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
71
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
442
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
78
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
449
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
85
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
456
ND
10.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10 . 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10 . 00
UG/L
Y
10 . 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10 . 00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
42
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
o
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
1
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
bo
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Cas_No
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
Effl .
ample
Meas
Effl.
Day
Type
Amount
92
ND
10.00
463
ND
10.00
99
ND
10.00
470
ND
10.00
106
ND
10.00
477
ND
10.00
113
ND
10.00
484
ND
10.00
120
ND
10.00
491
ND
10.00
127
ND
10.00
498
ND
10.00
134
ND
10.00
505
ND
10.00
141
ND
10.00
512
ND
10.00
148
ND
10.00
519
ND
10.00
155
ND
10.00
526
ND
10.00
162
NC
44 .00
533
NC
44 . 00
164
ND
10.00
535
ND
10.00
165
NC
100.00
536
NC
100.00
166
ND
10.00
537
ND
10.00
167
ND
10.00
538
ND
10.00
169
ND
10.00
540
ND
10 .00
176
ND
10.00
547
ND
10.00
183
ND
10.00
554
ND
10.00
190
ND
10.00
561
ND
10.00
197
ND
10.00
568
ND
10.00
204
ND
10.00
575
ND
10.00
211
ND
10.00
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *'
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UO/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10 .00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5) .
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
43
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
o
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
1
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
u>
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
US<
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass *
91203
582
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
218
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
589
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
225
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
596
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
232
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
603
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
239
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
610
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
246
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
617
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
253
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
624
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
260
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
631
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
267
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
638
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
273
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
644
NC
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
280
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
651
NC
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
287
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
658
NC
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
294
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
665
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
302
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
673
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
309
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
680
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
316
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
687
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
323
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
694
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
330
NC
35.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
701
NC
35.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
337
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
708
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
344
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
715
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
351
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
722
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
91203
358
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
91203
729
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
44
Facility Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
o
ISM50
SP-A
1
ISM50
SP-A
4^
ISM50
SP-A
4^-
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
ISM50
SP-A
infl.
Samp Pt
-- Subcategory-COKE
BYPROD -- Of
>tion«BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
NAPHTHALENE
91203
736
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
743
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
750
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
757
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
764
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
771
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
778
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
785
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
792
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
799
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
806
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
814
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
820
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
827
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
634
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
841
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
848
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
855
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
862
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
869
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
877
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
. 664
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
890
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
897
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
904
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
911
NC
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
918
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
925
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
932
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
939
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
946
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
953
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
960
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
967
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
974
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
981
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
986
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
995
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1002
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1009
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1016
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1023
ND
10.00
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1030
ND
10.00
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10 .00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Ueed=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
o
Ef f 1.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Ef fl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1037
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1044
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1051
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1058
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1065
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1073
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1080
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1087
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1094
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1101
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1108
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1115
ND
10 .00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1122
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1129
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1136
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1143
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1150
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1157
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1164
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1171
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1178
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1185
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1192
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1199
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1206
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1213
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1220
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1227
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1234
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1241
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1248
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1255
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1262
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1269
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1276
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1283
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1290
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1297
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1304
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1311
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1318
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1325
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1332
ND
10.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
46
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
o
as
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
CasNo
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1339
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1346
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1353
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1360
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1367
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1374
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1381
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1388
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1395
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1402
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1409
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1416
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1423
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1430
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1437
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1444
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1451
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1456
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1465
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1472
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1479
NC
1,630.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1486
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1493
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1500
NC
17.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1507
NC
12.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1514
NC
11.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1521
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1526
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1535
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1542
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1549
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1556
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1563
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1570
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1577
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1584
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1591
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1598
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1605
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1612
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1619
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1626
ND
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1633
ND
10.00
infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10 . 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
<1
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
91203
1640
ND
10 .00
91203
1647
ND
10.00
91203
1654
ND
10.00
91203
1661
ND
10.00
91203
1668
ND
10.00
91203
1675
ND
10.00
91203
1682
ND
10.00
91203
1689
ND
10.00
91203
1696
ND
10.00
91203
1703
ND
10.00
91203
1710
ND
10.00
91203
1717
ND
10.00
91203
1724
ND
10 .00
91203
1731
ND
10.00
91203
1738
ND
10.00
91203
1745
ND
10.00
91203
1752
ND
10.00
91203
1759
ND
10.00
91203
1766
ND
10.00
91203
1773
ND
10.00
91203
1780
ND
10.00
91203
1787
ND
10.00
91203
1794
ND
10.00
91203
1801
ND
10 . 00
91203
1808
ND
10.00
91203
1815
ND
10.00
91203
1822
ND
10 .00
CO 3 6
1
ND
5.00
C036
8
ND
5.00
CO 3 6
15
ND
5.00
C036
22
ND
5.00
C036
29
NC
5.00
C036
37
NC
5.00
C036
43
NC
6.00
C036
50
ND
5.00
C036
57
ND
5.00
C036
64
ND
5.00
C036
71
NC
5.00
C036
7B
NC
5.00
C036
85
ND
5.00
C036
92
ND
5.00
C036
99
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10 .00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
48
0
1
00
ouui-aicyui y=v_>«ix\-ni DirK^u — wj
(continued)
jcion=»/vii
Effl.
Infl.
facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
106
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
113
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
120
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
127
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
134
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
141
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
148
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
155
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
162
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
169
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
176
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
183
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
190
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
197
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
204
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
211
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
218
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
225
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
232
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
239
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
246
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
253
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
260
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
267
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
275
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
281
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
288
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
295
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
302
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
309
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
316
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
323
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
330
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
337
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
344
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
351
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
358
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
365
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
372
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
379
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
386
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
393
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
400
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
U9ed-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
49
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option=BATl
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
o
t
VO
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
407
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
414
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
421
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
428
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
435
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
442
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
449
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
456
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
463
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
470
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
477
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
464
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
491
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
496
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
505
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
512
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
519
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
526
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
533
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
540
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
547
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
554
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
561
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
566
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
575
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
582
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
589
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
596
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
603
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
610
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
617
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
624
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
631
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
638
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
644
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
651
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
658
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
665
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
673
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
680
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
687
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
694
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
701
ND
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
10.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
Infl. Baseline Step step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5. 00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
50
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
O
LA
O
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
Subcategory=COKE
BYPROD -- 0{
>tion=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
OIL AND GREASE
C036
708
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
715
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
722
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
729
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
736
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
74 3
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
750
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
757
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
764
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
771
NC
6.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
778
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
785
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
792
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
799
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
806
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
814
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
820
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
827
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
834
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
841
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
848
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
855
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
862
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
869
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
877
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
884
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
890
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
897
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
904
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
911
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
918
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
925
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
932
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
939
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
946
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
953
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
960
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
967
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
974
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
981
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
988
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
995
ND
5.00
OIL AND GREASE
C036
1002
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
ilue
Unit 1*
2* Pass *1
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
5 . 00
MG/L
N
5.00
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test {See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
51
SubcategoryaCOKE BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility Effl. Infl. Sample Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1009
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1016
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1023
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1030
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1037
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1044
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1051
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1058
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1065
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1073
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1060
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1087
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1094
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1101
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1108
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1115
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1122
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1129
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1136
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1143
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1150
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1157
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1164
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1171
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1178
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1185
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1192
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1199
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1206
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1213
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1220
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1227
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1234
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1241
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1248
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1255
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1262
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1269
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1276
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1283
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1290
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
1297
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1304
ND
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
5.00
5 .00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5 .00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5,00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5 . 00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
52
0
1
K>
auutoLcyuiyeLVMi Difnuu — U|
(continued)
JClOIlMBAri
Ef f 1 .
Infl.
Facility
Ef fl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1311
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1318
NC
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1325
NC
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1332
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1339
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1346
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1353
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1360
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1367
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1374
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1381
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1388
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1395
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1402
NC
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1409
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1416
ND
5. 00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1423
NC
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1430
NC
6.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1437
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1444
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1451
NC
14 .00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1456
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1465
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1472
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1479
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1486
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1493
NC
7.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1500
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1507
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1514
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1521
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1528
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1535
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1542
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1549
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1556
NC
7.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1563
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1570
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1577
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1584
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1591
NC
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1598
ND
5.00
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1605
ND
5.00
5.00
Step Step
Unit 1* 2* Pass
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Used
Pass/Fail of step 1 and step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
53
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility Effl. Infl. Sample Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1612
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1619
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1626
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1633
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1640
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1647
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1654
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1661
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1666
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1675
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1682
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1689
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1696
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1703
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1710
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1717
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1724
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1731
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1738
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1745
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1752
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1759
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
•1766
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1773
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1780
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1787
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1794
NC
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1801
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1808
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1815
ND
ISM50
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
1822
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
8
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
15
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
22
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
29
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
37
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
43
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
50
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
57
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
64
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
71
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2* Pas
3 **
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
6.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
6.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
5.00
5.00
MG/L
N
3.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.15
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.93
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.75
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
21.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
54
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATi
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
4^
Analyte Name
Cas No
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
78
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
85
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
92
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
99
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
106
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
113
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
120
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
127
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
134
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
141
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
148
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
155
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
162
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
169
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
176
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
183
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
190
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
197
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
204
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
211
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
218
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
225
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
232
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
239
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
246
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
253
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
260
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
267
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
275
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
281
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
288
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
295
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
302
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
309
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
316
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
323
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
330
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
337
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
344
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
351
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
358
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
365
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
2.30
2.20
2.38
1.90
2.00
2.00
2.63
3.26
3.13
2.50
2.30
2.40
1.77
1.84
1.49
5.07
5.80
2.33
1.81
1.91
2.13
1.63
1.93
2.39
1.84
2.21
2.52
1.63
1.50
1.50
0.78
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded a9 described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
1.15
1.30
1.08
1.50
1.18
1.58
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* PasE
i **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0,02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
55
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Ef f 1
Facility Eff1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
372
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
8
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
379
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
15
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
386
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
22
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
393
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
29
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
400
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
36
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
407
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
43
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
414
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
50
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
421
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
57
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
428
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
64
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
435
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
71
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
442
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
78
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
449
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
85
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
456
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
92
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
463
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
99
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
470
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
106
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
477
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
113
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
484
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
120
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
491
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
127
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
496
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
134
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
505
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
141
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
512
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
148
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
519
NC
Infl.
Ef f 1 .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use<
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
0.78
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.05
0.02
MG/L
N
1.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.81
0.02
MG/L
N
1.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.60
0.02
MG/L
N
1.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.60
0.02
MG/L
N
2.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.14
0.02
MG/L
N
2.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.67
0.02
MG/L
N
1.67
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.88
0.02
MG/L
N
1.88
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.44
0.02
MG/L
N
2 .44
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.60
0.02
MG/L
N
2.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.41
0.02
MG/L
N
2.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.32
0.02
MG/L
N
1.32
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.66
0.02
MG/L
N
1.66
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.44
0.02
MG/L
N
1.44
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.12
0.02
MG/L
N
1.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.49
0.02
MG/L
N
1.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.66
0.02
MG/L
N
1.66
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.24
0.02
MG/L
N
2.24
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.65
0.02
MG/L
N
1.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.13
0.02
MG/L
N
1.13
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.29
0.02
MG/L
N
1.29
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.48
0.02
MG/L
N
1.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
56
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
n
i
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
U\
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
o\
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
cyanide
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
Sample
Day
155
526
162
533
164
535
165
536
166
537
167
538
169
540
176
547
183
554
190
561
197
568
• 204
575
211
582
218
589
225
596
232
603
239
610
246
617
253
624
260
631
267
638
273
Ef fl.
Meas
Effl.
Inf 1.
Meas
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
NC
1.69
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.69
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.10
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
4 .10
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.70
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
3.20
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
3.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
2.20
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
2.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
2 .60
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
2.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.87
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.87
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.98
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.06
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.06
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.25
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.25
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.84
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
0.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.73
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.73
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.50
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.42
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.42
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.26
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.26
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.07
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.07
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.11
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.40
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.83
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
0.83
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.72
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.72
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.49
0.02
MG/L
N
NC
1.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
1.94
0.02
MG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
57
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option»BATl
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
InCl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Effl. Meas
Amount J Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Step Step
n
i
Lh
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
644
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
280
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
651
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
287
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
658
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
294
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
665
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
302
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
673
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
309
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
680
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
316
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
687
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
323
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
694
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
330
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
701
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
337
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
708
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
344
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
715
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
351
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
722
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
358
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
729
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
736
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
743
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
750
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
757
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
764
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
771
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
778
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
785
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
792
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
799
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
806
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
814
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
820
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
827
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
834
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
841
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
848
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
855
NC
1.00
0.79
0.93
1.56
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step l and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
58
Subcategory®COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
inf 1.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
862
NC
3.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
669
NC
2.69
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
877
NC
1.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
884
NC
2.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
890
NC
3 .00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
897
NC
2 .00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
904
NC
3 .00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
911
NC
2 .00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
918
NC
2.94
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
925
NC
2.71
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
932
NC
1.46
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
939
NC
1.27
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
946
NC
1.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
953
NC
1.82
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
960
NC
1.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
967
NC
1.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
974
NC
1.97
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
981
NC
1.38
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
986
NC
2.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
995
NC
5.66
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1002
NC
6.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1009
NC
3 .28
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1016
NC
3.43
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1023
NC
3.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1030
NC
2 .09
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1037
NC
1.89
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1044
NC
2.39
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1051
NC
2.15
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1058
NC
2.56
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1065
NC
2 .26
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1073
NC
2.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1080
NC
2.19
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1087
NC
2 .14
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1094
NC
1.89
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1101
NC
3.16
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1108
NC
3.08
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1115
NC
2.96
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1122
NC
2 .66
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1129
NC
2 .78
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1136
NC
2 .44
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1143
NC
2.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1150
NC
2.28
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1157
NC
2 .70
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
59
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Ef f 1
Facility Eff1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1164
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1171
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1178
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1185
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1192
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1199
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1206
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1213
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1220
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1227
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1234
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1241
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1248
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1255
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1262
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1269
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1276
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1263
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1290
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1297
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1304
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1311
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1318
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1325
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1332
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1339
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1346
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1353
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1360
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1367
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1374
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1381
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1388
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1395
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1402
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1409
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1416
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1423
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1430
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1437
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1444
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1451
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1458
NC
Infl.
Ef f 1.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
1.82
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.26
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.88
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.93
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.15
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.44
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.61
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.38
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.77
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
3 .54
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.97
0.02
MG/L
Y
2 . 58
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
2.76
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.52
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.59
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.97
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.51
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.88
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.91
0.02
MG/L
Y
1.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.62
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.86
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
60
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option*BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1465
NC
3.28
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1472
NC
3.22
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1479
NC
1.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1486
NC
2 .09
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1493
NC
1.64
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1500
NC
1 . 97
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1507
NC
2.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1514
NC
2.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1521
NC
3 .44
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1528
NC
2 .04
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1535
NC
2.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1542
NC
3 .26
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1549
NC
2.73
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1556
NC
3 .44
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1563
NC
2.95
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1570
NC
2 .58
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1577
NC
1.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1584
NC
2 .46
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1591
NC
3.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1598
NC
2.43
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1605
NC
2.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1612
NC
2 .41
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1619
NC
1.86
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1626
NC
2 .06
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1633
NC
2 .40
0. 02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1640
NC
2 .18
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1647
NC
2 .21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1654
NC
2.16
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1661
NC
2.61
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1668
NC
2.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1675
NC
2 .31
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1682
NC
1.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1689
NC
1.96
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1696
NC
3 .70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1703
NC
2 .07
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1710
NC
1.83
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1717
NC
3.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1724
NC
6.59
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1731
NC
7.59
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1738
NC
3.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1745
NC
4 .79
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1752
NC
10.73
0. 02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1759
NC
9.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used^Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
61
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl .
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1766
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1773
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1780
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1787
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1794
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1801
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1808
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1815
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1822
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
8
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
15
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
22
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
29
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
37
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
43
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
50
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
57
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
64
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
71
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
78
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
85
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
92
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
99
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
106
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
120
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
127
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
134
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
141
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
148
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
155
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
162
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
169
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
176
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
183
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
190
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
197
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
204
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
211
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
218
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
225
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
232
NC
Inf 1.
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
4.61
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.56
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.08
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.16
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.46
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0 .05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 . 01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0,05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0 .05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
62
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option«BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
239
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
246
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
253
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
260
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
267
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
275
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
281
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
268
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
295
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
302
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
309
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
316
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
323
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
330
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
337
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
344
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
351
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
356
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
365
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
372
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
8
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
379
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
IS
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
366
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
22
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
393
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
29
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
400
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
36
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
407
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
43
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
414
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
50
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
421
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
57
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
428
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
64
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
435
NC
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
71
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
442
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
78
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
449
NC
Inf 1.
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 .01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0. 02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 .01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.00
0.05
MG/L
N
0.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used®Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Mea9
Type
0
1
On
LO
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
85
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
456
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
92
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
463
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
99
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
470
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
106
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
477
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
113
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
484
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
120
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
491
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
127
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
498
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
134
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
505
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
141
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
512
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
148
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
519
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
155
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
526
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
162
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
533
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
164
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
535
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
165
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
536
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
166
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
537
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
167
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
538
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
169
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
540
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
176
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
547
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
183
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
554
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
190
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
561
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
197
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
568
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
204
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount J Type
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.04
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0 . 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0,05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
64
SubcategoryeCOKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
575
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
211
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
582
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
218
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
589
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
225
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
596
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
232
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
603
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
239
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
610
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
246
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
617
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
253
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
624
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
260
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
631
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
267
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
638
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
273
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
644
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
280
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
651
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
287
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
658
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
294
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
665
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
302
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
673
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
309
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
660
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
316
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
687
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
323
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
694
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
330
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
701
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
337
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
708
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
344
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
715
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
351
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
722
NC
Inf 1.
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0 . 05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
-
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 .01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
65
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
358
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
729
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
736
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
743
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
750
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
757
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
764
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
771
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
778
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
785
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
792
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
799
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
806
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
814
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
820
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
827
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
834
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
841
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
848
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
855
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
862
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
869
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
• 877
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
884
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
890
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
897
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
904
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
911
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
918
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
925
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
932
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
939
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
946
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
953
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
960
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
967
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
974
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
981
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
988
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
995
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1002
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1009
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1016
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 .01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
66
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
o
t
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
o\
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
On
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
Subcategory®COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
C020
1023
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1030
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1037
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1044
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1051
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1058
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1065
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1073
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1060
NC
0 .02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1087
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1094
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1101
NC
0 .02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1108
NC
0. 03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1115
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1122
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1129
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1136
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1143
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1150
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1157
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1164
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1171
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1178
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1185
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1192
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1199
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1206
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1213
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1220
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1227
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1234
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1241
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1248
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1255
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1262
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1269
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1276
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1283
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1290
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1297
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1304
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1311
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
C020
1318
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in L6ng-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
67
(continued)
Facility Effl.
0
1
Q\
-0
Inf 1.
Sample
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1325
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1332
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1339
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1346
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1353
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1360
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1367
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1374
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1381
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1388
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1395
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1402
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1409
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1416
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1423
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1430
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1437
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1444
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1451
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1458
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1465
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1472
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1479
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1486
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1493
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1500
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1507
XSM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1514
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1521
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1528
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1535
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1542
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1549
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1556
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1563
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1570
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1577
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1584
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1591
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1598
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1605
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1612
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1619
ion=BATl
Effl.
Inf 1.
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2* Pas
3 **
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.08
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0 .02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
68
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
0
1
Os
oo
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISMSO
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISMSO
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISMSO
ISMSO
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
oujjuducyuiyDifRUU —
(continued)
)tlon=BAi1
Ef f 1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1626
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1633
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1640
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1647
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1654
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1661
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1668
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1675
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1682
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1689
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1696
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1703
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1710
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1717
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1724
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1731
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1738
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1745
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1752
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1759
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1766
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1773
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
•1780
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1787
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1794
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1801
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1808
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1815
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1822
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
19.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
8
NC
22.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
15
NC
11.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
22
NC
103.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
29
NC
39.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
37
NC
33.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
43
NC
9.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
50
NC
13.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
57
NC
50.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
64
NC
3.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
71
NC
7.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
78
NC
572.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
85
NC
472.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
69
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -
(continued)
Option=BATl
0
1
On
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
92
NC
19.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
99
NC
39.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
106
NC
8.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
113
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
120
NC
3.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
127
NC
16.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
134
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
141
NC
6.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
148
NC
30.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
155
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
162
NC
9.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
169
NC
15.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
176
NC
27.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
183
NC
22.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
190
NC
13.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
197
NC
23.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
204
NC
19.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
211
NC
4.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
218
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
225
NC
19.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
232
NC
27.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
239
NC
7.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
246
NC
8.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
253
NC
20.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
260
NC
7.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
267
NC
27.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
275
NC
18.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
281
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
288
NC
37.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
295
NC
23.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
302
NC
13.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
309
NC
18.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
316
NC
3.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
323
NC
22.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
330
NC
21.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
337
NC
23.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
344
NC
7,00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
351
NC
14 . 00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
358
NC
13.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
365
NC
157.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
148.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
372
NC
148.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
8
NC
7.00
* Pas9/Fail of Step 1 and
Step 2 in Long
-Term Average Test
(See Se
Inffl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 . 00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, U9ed»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
n
i
o
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
379
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
15
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
386
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
22
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
393
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
29
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
400
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
36
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
407
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
43
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
414
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
50
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
421
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
57
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
428
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
64
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
435
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
71
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
442
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
78
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
449
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
85
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
456
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
92
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
463
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
99
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
470
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
106
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
477
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
113
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
484
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
120
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
491
NC
XSM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
127
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
498
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
134
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
505
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
141
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
512
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
148
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
519
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
155
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
526
NC
infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
7.00
4 .00
4 .00
4 . 00
4 .00
17.00
17.00
11.00
11.00
16.00
16.00
14 .00
14 .00
13 .00
13.00
19.00
19.00
4.00
4 .00
11.00
11.00
4 .00
4 .00
5.00
5.00
9 .00
9.00
12.00
12.00
9.00
9.00
6.00
6.00
4 .00
4 .00
6.00
6.00
5.00
5.00
12.00
12.00
22.00
22.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
N
4 .00
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise/ Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern 71
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
162
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
533
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
164
NC
9.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
535
NC
9.00
4 . 00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
165
NC
24.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
536
NC
24.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
166
NC
18.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
537
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
167
NC
4.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
538
NC
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
169
NC
9.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
540
NC
9.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
176
NC
5.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
547
NC
5.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
163
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
554
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
190
NC
3 .00
4 .00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
561
NC
3.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
197
NC
10 . 00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
566
NC
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
204
NC
11.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
575
NC
11.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
211
NC
13.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
562
NC
13.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
218
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
569
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
225
NC
29.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
596
NC
29.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
232
NC
33.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
603
NC
33.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
239
NC
22.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
610
NC
22.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
246
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
617
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
253
NC
15.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
624
NC
15.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
260
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISMSO
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
631
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
267
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
636
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
273
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
N
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
644
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
260
NC
15.00
4.00
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
651
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
287
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
658
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
294
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
665
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
302
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
673
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
309
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
680
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
316
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
687
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
323
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
694
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
330
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
701
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
337
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
708
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
344
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
715
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
351
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
722
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
358
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
729
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
736
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
743
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
750
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
757
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
764
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
771
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
778
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
785
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
792
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
799
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
806
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
814
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
820
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
827
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
834
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
841
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
848
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
855
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
862
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
869
NC
Infl .
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
15.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
8.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4 .00
MG/L
N
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
20.00
4.00
MG/L
N
20.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
49.00
4.00
MG/L
N
49.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
17.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
17.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
N
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
4.00
MG/L
N
5.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
13.00
4.00
MG/L
N
13.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
14 .00
4 .00
MG/L
N
14.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
27.00
4.00
MG/L
N
27.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
13 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
23 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
43.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
13.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
24.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
25.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
26.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
7.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
12.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
73
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
0
1
U>
Facility
Effl .
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas__No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
877
NC
40.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
884
NC
11.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
890
NC
16.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
897
NC
14.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
904
NC
13.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
911
NC
14 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
918
NC
8.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
925
NC
4 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
932
NC
34.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
939
NC
8.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
946
NC
11.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
953
NC
17.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
960
NC
14 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
967
NC
6.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
974
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
981
NC
6.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
988
NC
13 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
995
NC
15.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1002
ND
4.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1009
NC
8.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1016
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1023
NC
4 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1030
NC
4 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1037
NC
20.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1044
NC
4.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1051
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1058
NC
21.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1065
NC
7.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1073
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1080
NC
4.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1087
NC
4 .00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1094
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1101
NC
16.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1108
NC
18.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1115
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1122
NC
9.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1129
NC
6.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1136
NC
8.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1143
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1150
NC
6.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1157
NC
6.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1164
NC
10.00
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1171
NC
4 .00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 . 00
MG/L
Y
4 . 00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
74
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1178
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1185
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1192
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1199
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1206
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1213
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1220
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1227
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1234
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1241
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1246
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1255
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1262
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1269
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1276
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1283
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1290
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1297
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1304
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1311
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1318
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1325
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1332
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1339
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1346
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1353
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1360
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1367
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1374
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1381
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1388
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1395
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1402
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1409
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1416
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1423
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1430
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1437
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1444
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1451
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1458
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1465
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1472
NC
Effl. Meas Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount
Type Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
7.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
9.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
7.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
9.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
7.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
5.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
9.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
12.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
39.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
21.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
21.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
20.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
13.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
13.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
20.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
19.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
19.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
20.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5) .
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
75
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1479
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1486
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1493
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1500
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1507
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1514
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1521
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1528
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1535
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1542
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1549
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1556
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1563
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1570
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1577
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1584
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1591
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1598
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1605
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1612
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1619
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1626
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1633
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1640
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1647
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1654
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1661
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1668
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1675
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1682
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1689
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1696
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1703
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1710
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
1717
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1724
ND
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1731
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1738
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1745
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1752
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1759
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1766
NC
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1773
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Mea9
infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass **
38.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
34.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
15.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
11.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
7.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
12.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
17.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
7.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
46.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
30.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
26.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
21.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
64.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
32.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
25.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
14.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
28.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
15.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
9.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
17.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
29.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
38.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
76
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2* Pass
* *
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1780
NC
10 .00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1787
NC
13 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1794
NC
8.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1801
NC
11.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1808
NC
10.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1815
NC
18.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1822
NC
21.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
2.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
8
NC
1.90
0 . 05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
15
NC
3.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
22
NC
3.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
29
NC
3.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
36
NC
3.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
43
NC
3.50
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
50
NC
2.90
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
54
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
61
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
68
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
75
NC
2.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
82
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
89
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
96
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
103
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
110
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
118
NC
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
125
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
132
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
139
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
145
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
152
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
159
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
166
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
173
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
180
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
187
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
194
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
201
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
208
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
215
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
222
NC
2.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
229
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
236
NC
2.00
0.05
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
77
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
0
1
<1
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISMS1
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
ISM51
SP-A
BENZENE
cas_No
Day
Type
7664417
243
NC
7664417
250
NC
7664417
257
NC
7664417
264
NC
7664417
271
NC
7664417
278
NC
7664417
265
ND
7664417
292
NC
7664417
299
ND
7664417
306
NC
7664417
313
NC
7664417
320
NC
7664417
327
ND
7664417
334
NC
7664417
341
NC
7664417
346
ND
7664417
355
ND
71432
54
ND
71432
61
ND
71432
66
ND
71432
75
ND
71432
62
ND
71432
69
ND
71432
96
ND
71432
103
ND
71432
110
ND
71432
116
ND
71432
125
ND
71432
132
ND
71432
139
ND
71432
145
ND
71432
152
ND
71432
159
ND
71432
166
ND
71432
173
NC
71432
180
ND
71432
167
ND
71432
194
ND
71432
201
ND
71432
206
ND
71432
215
ND
71432
222
ND
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
00
00
00
00
00
00
1.00
1.00
2.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
l.OO
1.00
1.00
1.00
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
0.05
MG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
i
'¦K
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
-J
00
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZENE
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
BENZO(A)
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
PYRENE
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
71432
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
50328
Sample
Day
229
236
243
250
257
264
271
278
285
292
299
306
313
320
327
334
341
348
355
54
61
68
75
82
89
96
103
110
118
125
132
139
145
152
159
166
173
180
187
194
201
208
Effl.
Meas
Type
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
2 .00
3.50
2 .00
7.10
4 .00
3.00
1.00
0.90
2.50
0.70
0.30
0.30
0.70
0.80
0.40
0.50
0.20
0.40
0.80
0.70
1.60
1.80
0.34
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10 .00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
79
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
(continued)
0
1
-J
VO
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Ca9_NO
Day
Type
Amount
ISMS1
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
215
NC
0.46
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
222
NC
0.30
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
229
NC
0.29
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
236
NC
0.46
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
243
ND
0.09
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
250
NC
1.00
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
257
NC
0.30
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
264
NC
1.30
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
271
NC
1.80
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
278
NC
2.50
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
285
NC
2.80
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
292
NC
0.34
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
299
NC
1.30
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
306
NC
0.33
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
313
NC
0.40
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
320
NC
0.69
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
327
NC
0.48
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
334
NC
0.60
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
341
NC
1.30
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
348
NC
0.96
ISM51
SP-A
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
355
NC
0.63
ISM51
SP-A
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
C003
1
NC
8.00
ISM51
SP-A
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
C003
29
NC
12.00
ISM51
SP-A
MERCURY
7439976
1
ND
0.40
ISM51
SP-A
MERCURY
7439976
29
ND
0.40
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
54
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
61
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
68
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
75
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
82
ND
10.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
89
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
96
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
103
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
110
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
118
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
125
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
132
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
139
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
145
ND
5.00
ISM51
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
152
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10 .00
UG/L
N
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
0.20
UG/L
Y
0.20
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
80
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -
(continued)
Option=BATl
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
OO
o
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISMS1
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
91203
159
ND
5.00
91203
166
ND
5.00
91203
173
ND
5.00
91203
100
ND
5.00
91203
107
ND
5.00
91203
194
ND
5.00
91203
201
ND
5.00
91203
208
ND
5.00
91203
215
ND
5.00
91203
222
ND
5.00
91203
229
ND
5.00
91203
236
ND
5.00
91203
243
ND
5.00
91203
250
ND
5.00
91203
257
ND
5.00
91203
264
ND
5.00
91203
271
ND
5.00
91203
278
ND
5.00
91203
285
ND
5.00
91203
292
ND
5.00
91203
299
ND
5.00
91203
306
ND
5.00
91203
313
ND
5.00
91203
320
ND
5.00
91203
327
ND
5.00
91203
334
ND
5.00
91203
341
ND
5.00
91203
340
ND
5.00
91203
355
ND
5.00
7782492
54
NC
900.00
7782492
61
NC
1,500.00
7782492
68
NC
2,000.00
7782492
75
NC
2,200.00
7782492
82
NC
1,800.00
7782492
89
NC
1, 300.00
7782492
96
NC
1,500.00
7702492
103
NC
1,200.00
7702492
110
NC
1,900.00
7782492
118
NC
1,000.00
7782492
125
NC
720.00
7702492
132
NC
1,000.00
7702492
139
NC
1,100.00
infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
81
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
0
1
00
Effl
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
cas_No
Day
Type
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
145
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
152
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
159
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
166
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
173
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
180
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
187
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
194
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
201
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
208
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
215
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
222
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
229
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
236
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
243
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
250
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
257
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
264
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
271
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
278
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
285
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
292
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
. 299
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
306
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
313
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
320
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
327
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
334
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
341
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
348
NC
ISM51
SP-A
SELENIUM
7782492
355
NC
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
THIOCYANATE
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
302045
15
22
29
36
43
50
54
61
68
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
NC
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
1,300.00
790.00
1,400.00
1,300.00
1,100.00
1,200.00
1,200.00
1,800.00
1,800.00
1,200.00
780.00
800.00
730.00
1,400.00
1,300.00
1,600.00
1,100.00
2,400.00
1,800.00
1,100.00
990.00
990.00
1,400.00
920.00
720.00
660.00
900.00
980.00
1,600.00
1,600.00
1,700.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
1.00
1.00
1.20
1.10
1.00
1.00
1.10
1.00
0.04
0.11
0.09
alue
unit 1*
2* Pass **
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
5.00
UG/L
N
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
N
0.10
MG/L
N
0.10
MG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
82
Subcategory-COKE_BYPROD -- Option*BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass **
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
75
NC
0.11
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
82
NC
0.14
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
89
NC
0.14
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
96
NC
0.14
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
103
NC
0.13
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
110
NC
0.24
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
118
NC
0.28
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
125
NC
0.20
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
132
NC
0.17
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
139
NC
0.22
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
145
NC
0.20
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
152
NC
0.19
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
159
NC
0.47
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
166
NC
0.53
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
173
NC
0.48
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
180
NC
0.26
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
187
NC
0.44
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
194
NC
0.48
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
201
NC
1.40
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
208
NC
0.62
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
215
NC
0.53
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
222
NC
0.38
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
229
NC
0.62
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
236
NC
1.30
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
243
NC
0.55
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
250
NC
0.62
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
257
NC
0.61
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
264
NC
0.77
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
271
NC
0.71
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
278
NC
0.58
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
285
NC
0.48
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
292
NC
0.56
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
299
NC
0.63
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
306
NC
2.80
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
313
NC
0.48
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
320
NC
0.64
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
327
NC
0.39
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
334
NC
0.53
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
341
NC
0.31
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
348
NC
0.57
0.10
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
THIOCYANATE
302045
355
NC
0.78
o.io
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
12.00
0.02
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
83
- suDcacegory»uuKE bxfkuu -- U]
(continued)
>tlon-BATl
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
8
NC
12.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
15
NC
12.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
22
NC
12.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
29
NC
12.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
36
NC
12.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
43
NC
8.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
50
NC
8.70
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
54
NC
3.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
61
NC
5.90
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
68
NC
3.90
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
75
NC
8.60
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
82
NC
6.30
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
89
NC
5.10
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
96
NC
7.40
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
103
NC
4 .10
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
110
NC
7.20
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
118
NC
4.80
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
125
NC
4.90
0.02
0
1
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
132
NC
3.70
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
139
NC
3.50
0.02
00
u>
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
145
NC
3.40
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
152
NC
2.50
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
159
NC
2.80
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
166
NC
3.80
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
173
NC
3.30
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
180
NC
3.20
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
187
NC
5.70
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
194
NC
9.60
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
201
NC
8.40
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
208
NC
7.10
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
215
NC
1.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
222
NC
2.20
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
229
NC
1.90
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
236
NC
1.80
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
243
NC
7.10
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
250
NC
1.80
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
257
NC
3.50
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
264
NC
9.70
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
271
NC
6.00
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
278
NC
7.40
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
285
NC
4 .90
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
292
NC
4.90
0.02
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
299
NC
5.00
0.02
Step Step Used
Unit 1* 2* Pass **
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
a
i
OO
4^
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
Infl. Baseline
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
306
NC
2 .70
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
313
NC
1.40
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
320
NC
1.40
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
327
NC
1.50
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
334
NC
2.40
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
341
NC
2.30
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
348
NC
5.40
0 . 02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
355
NC
5.90
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
1
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
6
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
15
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
22
NC
0.08
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
29
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
36
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
43
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
50
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
54
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
61
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
66
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
75
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
62
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
• 89
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
N
ISMS1
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
96
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
103
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
110
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
118
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
125
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
132
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
139
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
145
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
152
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
159
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
166
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
173
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
160
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
187
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
194
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
201
NC
0.14
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
208
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
215
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
222
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
229
ND
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
85
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
0
1
OO
Lh
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51.
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
ISM51
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
PHENOLS
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
Cas_No
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C020
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
CO 09
CO 09
C009
C009
CO 09
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
CO 09
C009
Sample
Day
236
243
250
257
264
271
278
285
292
299
306
313
320
327
334
341
348
355
1
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
54
61
68
75
82
89
96
103
110
118
125
132
139
145
152
159
.lOnaBATl
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use<
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ND
0-01
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
ND
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
ND
0.01
0.05
MG/L
N
NC
130.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
190.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
200.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
210.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
170.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
150.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
190.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
150.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
34.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
110.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
200.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
170.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
120.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
90.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
82.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
42.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
80.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
36.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
44 .00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
48.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
42.00
4 .00
MG/L
N
NC
52.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
24.00
4.00
MG/L
N
NC
38.00
4.00
MG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
86
Subcategory-COKEBYPROD -- Option»BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
inf 1.
Sample
Ef f 1.
Meas
Effl.
0
1
OO
On
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
166
NC
32.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
173
NC
23.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
180
NC
23.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
187
NC
22.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
194
NC
61.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
201
NC
34 .00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
208
NC
51.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
215
NC
27.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
222
NC
13.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
229
NC
32.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
236
NC
73.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
243
NC
70.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
250
NC
70.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
257
NC
23.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
264
NC
82.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
suspended
SOLIDS
C009
271
NC
44 .00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
278
NC
110.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
suspended
SOLIDS
C009
285
NC
22.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
292
NC
20.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
299
NC
47.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
306
NC
33.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
313
NC
32.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
320
NC
10.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
327
NC
35.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
334
NC
34. 00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
341
NC
74 .00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
346
NC
55.00
ISM51
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
355
NC
76.00
infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
4 .00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Subcategory=COKE__BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
14 2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
5
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
67
3ubcategory=C0KE_BYPR0D -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Us
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
CasNo
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-METHYLPHEN ANTHRENE
832699
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-methylphenanthrene
632699
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
632699
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
1
NC
3
300.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10 . 00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
5
ND
10.60
NC
28.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
2
NC
1
306.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
3
NC
789.40
NC
10
490.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
4
ND
11.90
NC
7
229.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-E
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
5
NC
7
118.00
10 . 00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
1
ND
50.00
NC
697.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
2
ND
50.00
ND
5
000.00
50 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
4
ND
50.00
ND
5
ooo.oo
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-BUTANONE
78933
5
ND
50.00
NC
682.50
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
10.00
NC
1
150.00
10 . 00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
2
ND
10.00
NC
1
020.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
NC
690.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
4
ND
11.90
NC
709.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.60
NC
733.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
1
NC
304.00
NC
754.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
2
NC
135.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
3
NC
111.00
NC
200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
4
NC
90.44
NC
243.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
5
NC
43.46
NC
342.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
2-PICOLINE
109068
1
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
2-PICOLINE
109068
2
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
88
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option-PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Us
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-PICOLINE
109068
3
ND
50.00
NC
14,990.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-E
2-PICOLINE
109068
4
NC
12,790.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-PICOLINE
109068
5
ND
53 .00
NC
10,064.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
1
ND
50.00
NC
13,410.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
2
ND
50.00
NC
13,050.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
3
ND
50.00
NC
9,716.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2-PROPANONE
67641
4
ND
50.00
NC
14,020.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
2 -PROPANONE
67641
5
ND
50.00
NC
16,200.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
4-METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
4 -METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
2
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
4 -METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
4-METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
4
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
4 -METHYL-2 -PENTANONE
108101
5
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,001.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
2
ND
10.00
NC
888.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
3
ND
10.00
NC
706.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
4
ND
11.90
NC
659.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
5
ND
10.60
NC
652 .10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
0.50
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-A
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
0.84
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-A
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
1.30
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-A
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
2.30
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-A
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
1.10
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
1
NC
2,390.00
NC
19,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
2
NC
5,380.00
NC
1,150.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
3
NC
4,640.00
NC
16,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
4
ND
11.90
NC
6,450.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
eseoi
SP-A
SP-E
ANILINE
62533
5
NC
3,237.60
NC
15,600.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
1
NC
60.33
NC
821.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
2
ND
10.00
NC
751.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
3
NC
60.31
NC
174.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
4
ND
11.90
NC
164.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ANTHRACENE
120127
5
ND
10.60
NC
178.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
1
NC
62.00
NC
78.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
2
NC
83.00
NC
80.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
3
NC
104.00
NC
56.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory-COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us<
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas^No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
4
NC
111.00
NC
75.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ARSENIC
7440382
5
NC
77.00
NC
110.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
1
ND
10.00
NC
177
700.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
2
ND
10.00
NC
182
600.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
3
ND
10.00
NC
158
900.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
4
ND
10.00
NC
174
000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZENE
71432
5
ND
10.00
NC
191
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
BENZIDINE
92875
1
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
BENZIDINE
92875
2
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZIDINE
92875
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (A) ANTHRACENE
56553
1
NC
19.60
NC
336.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (A) ANTHRACENE
56553
2
NC
32.72
NC
355.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (A) ANTHRACENE
56553
3
NC
42.39
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (A) ANTHRACENE
56553
4
NC
51.50
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
5
NC
23.44
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1
ND
100.00
NC
226.50
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
2
ND
10.00
NC
218.20
10 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
3
NC
51.38
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
4
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-E
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
5
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
1
NC
27.98
NC
422.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
2
ND
10.00
NC
474.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
3
NC
90.14
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
4
NC
74 .17
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (B) FLUORANTHENE
205992
5
NC
42.96
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO(K)FLUORANTHENE
207089
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
4
NC
40.23
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
• N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
1
NC
102.90
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
2
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
3
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
4
NC
140.66
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
5
ND
53.00
NC
667.60
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
90
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option»PSESl
Effl.
infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
1
ND
1,200.00
NC
1,710.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
2
NC
891.00
NC
1,240.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
3
NC
894 .00
NC
1,430.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
4
ND
1,200.00
NC
1,510.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
5
ND
1,200.00
NC
1,270.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
1
ND
10.00
NC
168.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
2
ND
10.00
NC
155.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BIPHENYL
92524
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
1
NC
1,770.00
NC
2,460.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
2
NC
1,250.00
NC
1,360.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
3
NC
1,040.00
NC
1,470.00
2 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
4
ND
1,200.00
NC
1,220.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
5
ND
1,200.00
NC
1,440.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BORON
7440428
1
NC
746.00
NC
865.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
1 ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
BORON
7440428
2
NC
728.00
NC
842.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
eseoi
SP-A
SP-E
BORON
7440428
3
NC
640.00
NC
959.00
100 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
^ ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
BORON
7440428
4
NC
589.00
NC
690.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
BORON
7440428
5
NC
554 .00
NC
690.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
CARBAZOLE
86748
1
NC
2,897.50
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
CARBAZOLE
86748
2
NC
1,938.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBAZOLE
86748
3
NC
2,586.00
NC
787.50
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBAZOLE
86748
4
NC
2,741.76
NC
782.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBAZOLE
86748
5
NC
3,412.26
NC
793.40
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
1
NC
27.30
NC
63.50
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
2
NC
18.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
3
NC
23.00
ND
100.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
5
NC
108.00
NC
133.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
1
NC
3,150.00
NC
6,190.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
2
NC
2,540.00
NC
6,900.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
3
NC
2,740.00
NC
6,240.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
4
NC
2,440.00
NC
6,840.00
3 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
5
NC
2,460.00
NC
6,760.00
3 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOI
SP-A
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
1
NC
18.33
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Te9t (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
91
SubcategorysCOKE^BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
2
NC
30.92
NC
285.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
CHRYSENE
216019
3
NC
42.30
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
4
NC
52.01
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
CHRYSENE
218019
5
NC
23.99
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,040.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
2
ND
10.00
NC
776.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
3
ND
10.00
NC
545.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
4
ND
11.90
NC
464.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
5
ND
10.60
NC
422.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
1
ND
10.00
NC
257.10
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
2
NC
173.30
NC
246.90
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
3
ND
500.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
NC
421.30
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
NC
262.80
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
NC
564.10
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,453.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,404.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
3
NC
12.90
NC
359.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
4
ND
11.90
NC
327.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORANTHENE
206440
5
ND
10.60
NC
362.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORENE
06737
1
ND
10.00
NC
1,615.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,413.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
3
ND
10.00
NC
628.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
4
ND
11.90
NC
543.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
FLUORENE
86737
5
ND
10.60
NC
563.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
1
ND
10.00
NC
661.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
2
ND
10.00
NC
2,010.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
3
ND
10.00
NC
2,080.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
4
ND
10.00
NC
2,190.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
M+P XYLENE
179601231
5
ND
10.00
NC
3,190.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
1
NC
0.99
NC
1.72
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
2
NC
1.28
NC
1.63
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
92
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Inf 1.
0
1
vo
to
Facility
Effl .
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
3
NC
2 .04
NC
1.84
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
4
NC
3 .48
NC
2.05
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
MERCURY
7439976
5
NC
2 .22
NC
2.26
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
ug/l
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10. 00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
NC
25,776.00
10.00
ug/l
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
2
ND
10.00
NC
28,270.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
3
ND
10.00
NC
19,990.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
4
ND
11. 90
NC
19,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NAPHTHALENE
91203
5
ND
10.60
NC
18,368.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
0.84
ND
0.50
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
2
NC
0.74
NC
2.30
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
3
NC
0.74
NC
1.60
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
0.84
NC
1.60
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
1.05
NC
1.30
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
1
NC
57,300.00
NC
7,440.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
2
NC
20,800.00
NC
10,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
3
NC
8,790.00
NC
9,130.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
4
NC
3,236.80
NC
3,860.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-CRESOL
95487
5
NC
10,600.00
NC
1,718.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
3
ND
10.00
NC
1,730.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
93
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
5
ND
10.60
NC
545.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
1
ND
10.00
NC
482.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
3
ND
10.00
NC
585.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
O-XYLENE
95476
5
ND
10.00
NC
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
1
NC
17.50
NC
18.79
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
2
NC
6.67
NC
35.25
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
hseoi
SP-A
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
3
NC
8.16
NC
35.00
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
4
NC
9.26
NC
20.75
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
OIL AND GREASE
C036
5
NC
17 .50
NC
26 .75
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
1
NC
8,820.00
NC
6,030.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
2
NC
2,170.00
NC
8,200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
3
NC
4,120.00
NC
8,920.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
4
NC
1,999.20
NC
6, 340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
P-CRESOL
106445
5
NC
4,812.00
NC
914.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
1
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
4
ND
11.90
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PERYLENE
198550
5
ND
10.60
NC
13.50
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
PHENANTHRENE
85018
1
NC
26.48
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
PHENANTHRENE
85018
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PHENANTHRENE
85018
3
NC
19.22
NC
949.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PHENANTHRENE
85018
4
ND
11.90
NC
825.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PHENANTHRENE
85018
5
ND
10.60
NC
916.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PHENOL
108952
1
NC
371,200.00
NC
48,360.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PHENOL
108952
2
NC
277,700.00
NC
72,800.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-E
PHENOL
108952
3
NC
367,800.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
PHENOL
108952
4
NC
201,395.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
PHENOL
108952
5
NC
209,562.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
1
NC
16.76
NC
942 .40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
2
ND
10.00
NC
1,009.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
3
NC
15.96
NC
231.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
4
ND
11.90
NC
207.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5) .
** Used=.N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
SubcategorysCOKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
US
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRENE
129000
5
ND
10.60
NC
240.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
1
NC
14.80
NC
40,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
2
NC
97.30
NC
28,100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
3
ND
10.00
NC
26,100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
4
ND
11.90
NC
32,100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
PYRIDINE
110861
5
ND
10.60
NC
28,600.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
1
NC
793 .00
NC
743.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
2
NC
678.00
NC
783.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
3
NC
715.00
NC
693.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
4
NC
790.00
NC
805.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SELENIUM
7782492
5
NC
585.00
NC
615.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
1
NC
13.24
NC
6.34
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
2
ND
5.46
NC
5.90
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
3
NC
6.25
NC
7.55
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
4
ND
5.81
NC
13.00
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
SGT-HEM
C037
5
NC
5.86
NC
7.22
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE01
SP-A
STYRENE
100425
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
STYRENE
100425
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
STYRENE
100425
3
ND
10.00
NC
1,886.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
STYRENE
100425
4
ND
11.90
NC
2,112.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
STYRENE
100425
5
ND
10.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
1
NC
590.00
NC
784.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
2
NC
577.00
NC
790.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
3
NC
540.00
NC
740.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
4
NC
530.00
NC
769.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
THIOCYANATE
302045
5
NC
488.00
NC
657.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
1
ND
10.00
NC
15,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
2
ND
10.00
NC
16,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
10.00
NC
13,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
4
ND
10.00
NC
15,230.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOLUENE
108883
5
ND
10.00
NC
15,980.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
0.01
0.02
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
1,040.00
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
o
o
0.02
MG/L
N
ESEOl
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
1,800.00
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
3
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
95
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option»PSESl
Infl.
0
1
VO
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
US*
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE01
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
3
NC
1,240.00
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
4
NC
0.01
0.02
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
4
NC
1,300.00
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
5
NC
11.50
0.02
MG/L
N
ESE01
SP-E
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
5
NC
1,600.00
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
1
NC
5,910.00
NC
3,330.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
2
NC
6,960.00
NC
5,470.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
3
NC
7,480.00
NC
5,870.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
4
NC
6,950.00
NC
5,650.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
5
NC
6,890.00
NC
4,830.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
1
NC
208.00
NC
622.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
2
NC
124.00
NC
2,660.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
3
NC
178.00
NC
24,700.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
4
NC
7.00
NC
914 .00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
5
NC
140.00
NC
928.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
1
NC
907.00
ND
50.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
CO 12
2
NC
821.00
NC
1,930.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
3
NC
2,250.00
NC
1,820.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
CO 12
4
NC
799.00
NC
2,060.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
CO 12
5
NC
832.00
NC
2,090.00
1. 00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
691.00
NC
651.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
NC
475.00
NC
603.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
NC
467.00
NC
636.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
4
NC
336.00
NC
554.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
NC
375.00
NC
569.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE01
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
346.00
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
322.00
NC
22.00
4 .00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
376.00
NC
12.00
4 .00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
4
NC
156.00
NC
12.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
5
NC
266.00
NC
4.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
1
NC
1,800.00
NC
1380000.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
2
NC
2,080.00
NC
848,000.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
3
NC
2,240.00
NC
700,000.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C04 2
4
NC
6,250.00
NC
1100000.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEOl
SP-A
SP-E
WAD CYANIDE
C042
5
NC
2,570.00
NC
1090000.00
2 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1, 2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
96
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
EC f 1.
inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us<
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cag__No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
2
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
4
ND
10.00
ND
1
000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE
107062
5
ND
10.00
ND
1
000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
032699
1
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
4
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-METHYLPHENANTHRENE
832699
5
ND
10.00
NC
17.10
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
1
NC
253.00
NC
180.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
2
NC
241.00
NC
267.00 •
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
3
NC
191.00
NC
421.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
4
NC
417.00
NC
369.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
5
NC
124.00
NC
173.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,3-BENZ0FLU0RENE
243174
1
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
4
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,3-BENZOFLUORENE
243174
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
1
NC
1
036.00
NC
4
533.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
2
NC
820.40
NC
4
432.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
3
NC
499.40
NC
4
542.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
4
NC
1
116.00
NC
587.10
10. 00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
5
NC
1
060.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
2
ND
50.00
NC
133.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
3
ND
50.00
NC
122.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
4
ND
50.00
ND
5
000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-BUTANONE
78933
5
ND
50.00
ND
5
000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
100.00
NC
567.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
4
ND
100.00
NC
478.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
1
NC
57.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
2
NC
49.50
NC
120.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option-PSESl
(continued)
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Effl.
Amount
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
o
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
3
NC
30 . 50
NC
183.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
4
ND
100 .00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
5
NC
41.10
NC
137.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
2-PICOLINE
109068
1
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PICOLINE
109068
2
ND
50.00
NC
7,618.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PICOLINE
109068
3
ND
50.00
NC
17,360.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PICOLINE
109068
4
ND
500.00
NC
5,802.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
2-PICOLINE
109068
5
ND
50,00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PROPANONE
67641
1
ND
50.00
NC
695.90
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
2-PROPANONE
67641
2
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
2-PROPANONE
67641
3
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PROPANONE
67641
4
ND
50.00
NC
59,770.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
2-PROPANONE
67641
5
ND
50.00
NC
27,700.00
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
4 - METHYL - 2 - PENTANONE
108101
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
4 - METHYL-2 - PENTANONE
108101
2
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
4 -METHYL-2 - PENTANONE
108101
3
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
4
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE
108101
5
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
1
ND
100.00
NC
199.30
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
4
ND
100.00
NC
163.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
5
ND
10.00
NC
37.47
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
340.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
1,480.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
239.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
1,600.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
317.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
1,690.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
242.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
308.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
, Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
184.00
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
340.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,160.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
2
NC
2,520.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
3
NC
2,330.00
NC
3,190.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
4
NC
3,200.00
NC
3,560.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
98
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Mea9
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Ufl(
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Ca9_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANILINE
62533
5
NC
2,270.00
ND
10.00
10-00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,198.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
2
NC
39.02
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
3
ND
10.00
NC
302.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ANTHRACENE
120127
4
ND
100.00
NC
998.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
ANTHRACENE
120127
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
1
NC
38.00
NC
40.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
2
NC
45.00
NC
45.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
3
NC
39.00
NC
46.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
4
NC
45.00
NC
42 .00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ARSENIC
7440382
5
NC
39.00
NC
51.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BENZENE
71432
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BENZENE
71432
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BENZENE
71432
3
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BENZENE
71432
. 4
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BENZENE
71432
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BENZIDINE
92875
1
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
2
ND
50.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
3
ND
50.00
ND
5,000.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
4
ND
500.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F •
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZIDINE
92875
5
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
1
NC
70.69
NC
714.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
2
NC
37.92
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
3
NC
69.18
NC
119.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
4
ND
100.00
NC
523.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
5
NC
42.60
NC
85.46
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
1
NC
25.99
NC
613 .60
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
2
NC
16.18
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
3
NC
17.13
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
4
ND
100.00
NC
439.80
10.00
UG/L
F
P
, Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
5
NC
23.60
NC
20.98
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
1
NC
65.32
NC
362.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
2
NC
23.64
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
3
NC
27.42
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
4
ND
100.00
NC
541.40
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
5
NC
44.40
NC
47.61
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
99
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option«PSESl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Ef f 1.
Meas
Type
Ef f 1.
Amount
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount I value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
1
NC
56.94
NC
682.30
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO(K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
2
NC
46.34
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
3
NC
55.66
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
4
ND
100.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BENZO (K) FLUORANTHENE
207089
5
NC
39.69
NC
68.03
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
1
NC
192.30
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
2
NC
94.20
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
3
NC
147.50
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
4
ND
500.00
ND
500.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BETA-NAPHTHYLAMINE
91598
5
NC
121.10
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
1
NC
684.00
NC
1,340.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
2
ND
2
000.00
NC
1,270.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
3
NC
433.00
NC
894.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
4
NC
579.00
NC
738.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
5
NC
632.00
NC
1,210.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
1
ND
100.00
NC
155.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BIPHENYL
92524
4
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
BIPHENYL
92524
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
1
NC
405.00
NC
1,060.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
2
ND
2
000.00
NC
1,170.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
3
NC
378.00
NC
555.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
4
NC
480.00
NC
687.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
5
NC
554.00
NC
861.00
2.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BORON
7440428
1
NC
390.00
NC
410.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BORON
7440428
2
NC
380.00
NC
400.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BORON
7440428
3
NC
380.00
NC
430.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BORON
7440428
4
NC
390.00
NC
380.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
BORON
7440428
5
NC
430.00
NC
380.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
1
NC
3
340.00
NC
8,198.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
2
NC
2
357.00
NC
904.50
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
3
NC
2
416.00
NC
1,786.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
4
NC
3
084.00
NC
5,188.00
20 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBAZOLE
86748
5
NC
3
074.00
NC
961.90
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
100
Subcategory=coKE_BYPROD -- Option^PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
1
NC
18.40
NC
78.30
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
2
NC
15.90
NC
138.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
3
NC
18.50
NC
124.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
4
NC
17.90
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CARBON DISULFIDE
75150
5
NC
18.10
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
CO04
1
NC
1,830.00
NC
3,640.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
1,620.00
NC
4,050.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
1,470.00
NC
2,570.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
1,670.00
NC
2,330.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
1,630.00
NC
3,830.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
1
NC
79.88
NC
690.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHRYSENE
216019
2
NC
49.24
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
3
NC
59.22
NC
125.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
4
ND
100.00
NC
619.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
CHRYSENE
218019
5
NC
48.12
NC
85.82
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,533.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
2
ND
10.00
NC
401.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
3
NC
12.48
NC
547.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
4
ND
100.00
NC
1,268.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
5
ND
10.00
NC
412.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
1
ND
100.00
NC
257.20
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
3
NC
23.81
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
4
ND
100.00
NC
199.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
5
ND
10.00
NC
44.09
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
NC
15.18
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
2
ND
10.00
NC
11.99
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
NC
13.13
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
4
ND
10. oo
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
1
ND
100.00
NC
2,414.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
2
ND
10.00
NC
295.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
3
ND
10.00
NC
529.40
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
4
ND
100.00
NC
1,790.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORANTHENE
206440
5
ND
10.00
NC
277.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,744.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
101
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option-PSESl
(continued)
Effl .
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
us<
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
) *
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
2
ND
10.00
NC
330.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
3
ND
10.00
NC
512.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
4
ND
100.00
NC
1,237.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
FLUORENE
86737
5
ND
10.00
NC
363.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
1
ND
10.00
NC
257.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
2
ND
10.00
NC
258.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
3
ND
10.00
NC
246.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
4
ND
10.00
NC
25,300.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
M+P XYLENE
179601231
5
ND
10.00
NC
26,200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
1
NC
0.80
NC
2.43
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
2
NC
1.19
NC
1.97
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
3
NC
2.37
NC
2.22
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
4
NC
1.00
NC
2.19
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
MERCURY
7439976
5
NC
0.95
NC
1.95
0.20
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
100.00
NC
653.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
2
ND
10.00
NC
143.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
NC
568.20
NC
250.70
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
4
ND
100.00
NC
210.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10.00
NC
83.31
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,159.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
2
ND
10.00
NC
337.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
ND
10.00
NC
495.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
4
ND
100.00
NC
536.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.00
NC
237.60
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,687.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
2
ND
10.00
NC
504.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
NC
23.70
NC
1,069.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
4
ND
100.00
NC
944.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.00
NC
97.69
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
100.00
NC
40,340.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
. Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
2
NC
14.34
NC
16,810.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
3
ND
10.00
NC
18,240.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
4
ND
100.00
NC
43,500.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NAPHTHALENE
91203
5
NC
33.04
NC
23,260.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
1.15
NC
1.07
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
2
NC
0.98
NC
1.02
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
102
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
3
NC
0 .77
NC
0.88
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
0.68
NC
0.75
o.oi
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
0.44
NC
0.56
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
1
NC
5,640.00
NC
7,827.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
2
NC
5,055.00
NC
6,880.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
3
NC
4,480.00
NC
8,180.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
4
NC
6,040.00
NC
8,900.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-CRESOL
95487
5
NC
4,832.00
NC
8,290.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
1
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
2
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
3
ND
10.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
4
ND
100.00
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-TOLUIDINE
95534
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
1
ND
10.00
NC
87.20
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
2
ND
10.00
NC
83.40
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
3
ND
10.00
NC
77.90
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
4
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
O-XYLENE
95476
5
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
2
NC
10.46
NC
60.75
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
OIL AND GREASE
C036
3
NC
29.85
NC
75.08
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
OIL AND GREASE
C036
4
NC
9.46
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
1
NC
11,190.00
NC
12,290.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
2
NC
10,900.00
NC
11,680.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESEQ2
SP-C
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
3
NC
11,130.00
NC
13,820.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
4
NC
12,080.00
NC
15,040.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
P-CRESOL
106445
5
NC
11,070.00
NC
14,400.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
1
NC
16.80
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
2
NC
13.40
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
3
NC
11.60
ND
100.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
4
ND
100.00
NC
153.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
< N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PERYLENE
198550
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
1
ND
100.00
NC
5,316.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
2
ND
10.00
NC
794.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
3
ND
10.00
NC
1,381.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
4
ND
100.00
NC
4,195.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PHENANTHRENE
85018
5
ND
10.00
NC
737.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step l and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
103
Subcategory-COKE_BYPROD -- Opt ion-PSESl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Effl.
Amount
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit l* 2* Pass **
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
1
ND
100.00
NC
1,944.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
2
ND
10.00
NC
249.90
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
3
ND
10.00
NC
465.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
4
ND
100.00
NC
1,635.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRENE
129000
5
ND
10.00
NC
220.30
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
r
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
1
ND
100.00
NC
28,500.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
2
ND
10.00
NC
30,700.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
3
ND
10.00
NC
29,769.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
4
ND
100.00
NC
27,200.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
PYRIDINE
110861
5
ND
10.00
NC
6,560.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
1
NC
1
200.00
NC
980.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
2
NC
1
300.00
NC
860.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
3
NC
1
500.00
NC
830.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
4
NC
1
200.00
NC
1,300.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SELENIUM
7782492
5
NC
1
300.00
NC
1,400.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
2
NC
6.21
NC
35.13
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
3
NC
16 .41
NC
39.63
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
4
ND
5.67
NC
36.33
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
SGT-HEM
C037
5
ND
5.83
NC
33.53
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
1
ND
100.00
NC
137.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
2
ND
10.00
ND
1,000.00
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
3
ND
10.00
NC
196.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
4
ND
100.00
NC
165.80
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
STYRENE
100425
5
ND
10.00
NC
236.10
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
1
NC
26.90
NC
25.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
2
NC
1.92
NC
32.70
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
3
NC
17.70
NC
19.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
4
NC
28.00
NC
20.00
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
THIOCYANATE
302045
5
NC
7.26
NC
27.20
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOLUENE
108883
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UO/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOLUENE
108883
2
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOLUENE
108883
4
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOLUENE
108883
5
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
1.29
0.02
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, UsecUY.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
104
Subcategory-COKEBYPROD
(continued)
Option=PSESl
Effl.
Infl.
o
o
4^
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE02
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
35.60
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
2.05
0.02
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
41.00
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
3
NC
1.42
0.02
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
3
NC
44.80
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
4
NC
1.74
0 .02
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
4
NC
27.10
0.02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
5
NC
1.75
0.02
MG/L
N
ESE02
SP-D
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
5
NC
41.90
0. 02
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
1
NC
6
540.00
NC
3,600.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
2
NC
4
700.00
NC
4,270.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
3
NC
3
760.00
NC
977.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
4
NC
4
350.00
NC
648.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
5
NC
4
770.00
NC
544.00
10.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
1
NC
351.00
NC
1,590.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
2
NC
244.00
NC
1,610.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
3
NC
301.00
NC
1,710.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
4
NC
222.00
NC
1,780.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
5
NC
201.00
NC
1,890.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
CO 12
1
NC
362.00
NC
602.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
2
NC
353.00
NC
664.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
3
NC
326.00
NC
835.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
4
NC
362.00
NC
604.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
5
NC
326.00
NC
666.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
26.70
NC
22 .40
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
NC
267.00
NC
294.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
NC
198.00
NC
287.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
4
NC
203.00
NC
209.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
NC
199.00
NC
289.00
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
23.00
NC
16 .00
4 .00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
25.00
NC
20.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
. N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
31.00
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
4
NC
21.00
NC
23.00
4 .00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
5
NC
22.00
NC
15.00
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
1
NC
140.00
NC
48,400.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C'
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
2
NC
570.00
NC
47,200.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
3
NC
119.00
NC
25,800.00
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
105
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
O
O
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
4
NC
664.00
ESE02
SP-C
SP-D
WAD CYANIDE
C042
5
NC
604.00
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
1
NC
5.80
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
6.17
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
3
NC
5.55
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
4
NC
6.11
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
5
NC
5.36
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
6
NC
6.44
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
7
NC
6.70
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
6
NC
6.50
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
9
NC
5.76
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
10
NC
7.00
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
11
NC
5.80
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
12
NC
5.50
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
13
NC
5.60
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
14
NC
5.60
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
15
NC
7.10
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
16
NC
6.88
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
17
NC
5.63
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
18
NC
4 . 92
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
19
NC
4.11
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
• 20
NC
4.90
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
21
NC
4.30
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
22
NC
4.11
XSM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
23
NC
5.82
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
24
NC
5.61
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
25
NC
4.64
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
26
NC
5.42
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
27
NC
4.80
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
28
NC
5.40
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
29
NC
5.66
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
30
NC
4.60
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
31
NC
2.80
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
32
NC
2.83
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
33
NC
4.34
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
34
NC
3.30
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
35
NC
402.00
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
36
NC
4.37
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
37
NC
6.14
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
36
NC
5.22
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
39
NC
3.94
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
40
NC
4.95
Xnf 1.
Meas
NC
NC
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
38,600.00
44,400.00
ilue
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
2.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0. 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
,
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, UBed»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
106
OUUL<3l.ti^Ul.y"WMi DirRUU —
.lUIlBfOC.Si
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
41
NC
4.73
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
42
NC
7.27
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
S7125
43
NC
5.46
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
44
NC
5.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
S7125
45
NC
5.37
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
S7125
46
NC
4 .64
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
S7125
47
NC
5.59
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
48
NC
5.66
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
5712S
49
NC
5. 70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
S7125
50
NC
5.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
51
NC
5.07
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
52
NC
4.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
53
NC
5.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
54
NC
5.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
55
NC
5.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
56
NC
6.09
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
57
NC
5.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
58
NC
5.95
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
59
NC
5.64
0.02
MG/L
Y
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
60
NC
6.90
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
O
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
61
NC
5.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
Ch
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
62
NC
7. 20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
63
NC
7.15
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
64
NC
5.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
65
NC
4.66
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
66
NC
4.55
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
67
NC
4 .30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
66
NC
4.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
69
NC
3.91
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
70
NC
4.73
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
71
NC
4.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
72
NC
5.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
73
NC
4.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
74
NC
4.52
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
75
NC
3.57
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
i
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
76
NC
4.17
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
77
NC
8.24
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
78
NC
21.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
79
NC
10.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
80
NC
6.13
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
81
NC
5.95
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
62
NC
5.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
83
NC
5. 77
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
UsedeN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
107
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option=PSESl
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
n
o
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
84
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
85
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
86
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
87
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
88
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
89
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
90
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
91
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
92
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
93
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
94
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
95
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
96
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
97
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
98
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
99
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
100
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
101
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
102
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
103
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
104
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
105
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
106
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
107
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
108
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
109
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
110
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
111
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
112
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
114
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
117
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
118
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
119
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
120
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
121
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
122
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
123
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
124
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
125
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
126
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
127
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
128
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
129
NC
4 .30
5.23
4.00
5.33
4.85
6.49
10.00
17.50
8.80
9.70
7.82
3.82
6.84
4 .80
7.70
4.47
4.43
5.05
5.60
4 .21
4.43
5.10
5.20
6.20
8.10
5.64
5.36
5.14
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
Inf 1.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
6. 92
5.90
4.26
4.27
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
8.10
6.60
5.73
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
s
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
108
L>uu(,dLcijuryBLUivci tJifKUu — upi
(continued)
. lOnnfbtibl
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
130
NC
5.56
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
131
NC
4 .32
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
132
NC
4 .35
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
133
NC
4.98
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
134
NC
5.34
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
135
NC
5.68
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
136
NC
5.44
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
137
NC
5.20
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
138
NC
5.40
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
139
NC
5.60
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
140
NC
20.10
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
141
NC
9.30
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
142
NC
6.90
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
143
NC
5.61
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
144
NC
4 .57
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
145
NC
5.63
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
146
NC
5.53
0.02
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
147
NC
4.12
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
148
NC
5.20
0.02
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
149
NC
6 .01
0.02
O
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
150
NC
6.42
0.02
00
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
151
NC
6.27
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
• 152
NC
6.70
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
153
NC
6.29
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
154
NC
4 .33
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
155
NC
6 .15
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
156
NC
6 .08
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
157
NC
7.48
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
158
NC
5.17
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
159
NC
6.97
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
160
NC
5.27
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
161
NC
4.53
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
162
NC
4.39
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
163
NC
5.16
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
164
NC
5.94
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
165
NC
5.33
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
166
NC
4 .95
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
167
NC
3.93
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
168
NC
3.44
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
169
NC
3 .60
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
170
NC
3 .82
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
171
NC
4.46
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
172
NC
4 .52
0.02
Step Step
Unit 1* 2* Pass
MG/L
mg/l
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Used
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
109
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
1
I—*
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
O
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
VO
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Cas_No
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
Effl.
ample
Meas
Effl.
Day
Type
Amount
173
NC
4.05
174
NC
4.44
175
NC
5.00
176
NC
4.46
177
NC
4 .90
178
NC
4.86
179
NC
7.60
180
NC
6.79
161
NC
7.73
182
NC
9.70
183
NC
7.29
184
NC
7.56
185
NC
8.34
166
NC
6.95
187
NC
3.40
188
NC
7.25
189
NC
6.39
190
NC
7 .07
191
NC
24.70
192
NC
12 .17
193
NC
7.81
194
NC
4.89
195
NC
4.85
196
NC
5.30
197
NC
6.26
198
NC
6.29
199
NC
6.11
200
NC
5.62
201
NC
6.18
202
NC
4 .33
204
NC
4 .70
205
NC
5.26
206
NC
5.37
207
NC
4.87
208
NC
5.80
209
NC
7.55
210
NC
6.10
211
NC
6.00
212
NC
5.50
213
NC
5.30
214
NC
5.25
215
NC
5.53
216
NC
5.65
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0. 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used*Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
110
Subcategory«COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
217
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
218
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
219
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
220
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
221
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
222
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
223
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
224
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
225
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
226
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
227
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
228
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
229
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
230
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
231
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
232
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
233
NC
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
234
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
235
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
236
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
237
NC
O
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
238
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
239
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
240
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
241
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
242
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
243
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
244
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
245
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
246
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
247
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
248
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
249
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
250
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
251
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
252
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
253
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
255
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
256
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
257
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
258
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
259
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
260
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
5.24
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.88
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.95
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.01
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.47
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.37
0.02
MG/L
Y
2.39
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
4 .60
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.79
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
4 .48
0.02
MG/L
Y
4 .40
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
4 .47
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.66
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.67
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.83
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.79
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.88
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.35
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
10.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
10.56
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.68
0.02
MG/L
Y
3.87
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.63
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.38
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.69
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
111
Subcategory-COKEBYPROD --
(continued)
Option-PSESl
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
o
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
261
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
262
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
263
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
264
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
265
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
266
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
267
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
268
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
269
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
270
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
271
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
272
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
273
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
274
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
275
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
276
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
277
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
278
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
279
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
280
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
281
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
282
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
283
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
284
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
285
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
286
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
287
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
288
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
289
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
290
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
291
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
292
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
293
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
294
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
295
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
296
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
297
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
298
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
299
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
300
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
301
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
302
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
303
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
11.60
14.50
15.40
14.00
15.80
16.00
16.30
12.80
14.90
16.40
14.10
15.90
29.80
7.40
5.60
5.00
4.43
6.58
6.37
2.70
6.10
8.64
11.48
12.35
10.46
9.20
9.20
8.03
7.09
6.51
5.79
5.14
5.77
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
112
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
K)
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
Subcategory=C0KE_BYPROD -- Option«PSESi
(continued)
Cas_No
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
Effl.
ample
Meas
Effl.
Day
Type
Amount
304
NC
5.35
305
NC
5.20
306
NC
4.57
307
NC
5.17
308
NC
5.31
309
NC
5.54
310
NC
6.14
311
NC
5.55
312
NC
4 .69
313
NC
5.25
314
NC
4.90
315
NC
13 .90
316
NC
5.62
317
NC
5.81
318
NC
5.90
319
NC
6.19
320
NC
5.72
321
NC
6.15
322
NC
6 .60
323
NC
6 .08
324
NC
4.68
325
NC
3 .66
326
NC
5.00
327
NC
6.66
328
NC
6 .44
329
NC
6.20
330
NC
6.60
331
NC
5.35
332
NC
4.91
333
NC
4.90
334
NC
4 . 92
335
NC
3 .64
336
NC
4.30
337
NC
3.80
338
NC
4.10
339
NC
2.65
340
NC
3.65
341
NC
3.73
342
NC
5.27
343
NC
6 .66
344
NC
7.18
345
NC
5.39
346
NC
7 .26
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0-02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 .02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
113
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
OptionePSESl
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
o
u>
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
347
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
348
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
349
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
350
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
351
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
352
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
353
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
354
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
355
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
356
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
357
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
358
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
359
NC
ISMS0
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
360
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
361
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
362
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
363
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
364
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
365
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
366
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
367
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
368
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
369
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
370
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
371
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
372
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
373
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
374
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
375
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
376
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
377
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
378
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
379
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
380
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
381
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
382
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
383
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
384
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
385
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
386
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
387
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
388
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
389
NC
infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
.73
.82
.77
.82
.93
.91
5.70
5.10
8.67
6.46
6.28
4.79
6.04
6.00
4.96
.71
.90
.78
.20
.50
7.19
5.71
5.74
6.60
6.20
5. 96
6.00
7.20
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit l*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 .02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pasa/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
ouui.aLcyoLy=LyMi_DifKyu -- upi
.ion=foe.ax
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
390
NC
5.99
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
391
NC
5.84
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
392
NC
5.47
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
393
NC
5.24
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
394
NC
4.92
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
395
NC
3.51
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
396
NC
4 .61
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
397
NC
4.36
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
398
NC
4 .24
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
399
NC
4.60
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
400
NC
5.00
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
401
NC
4.59
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
402
NC
4.48
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
403
NC
4 .44
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
404
NC
4 .21
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
405
NC
5.99
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
406
NC
5.97
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
407
NC
6.78
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
408
NC
4.96
¦
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
409
NC
6.09
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
410
NC
5.62
-t*
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
411
NC
6.80
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
412
NC
6.76
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
413
NC
9.86
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
414
NC
9. 34
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
415
NC
6.10
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
416
NC
5.47
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
417
NC
5.62
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
418
NC
5.70
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
419
NC
5.50
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
420
NC
6.14
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
421
NC
6.30
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
422
NC
6.10
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
423
NC
6.26
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
424
NC
7.08
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
425
NC
5.87
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
426
NC
5.91
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
427
NC
5.95
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
428
NC
5.37
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
429
NC
5.70
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
430
NC
5.67
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
431
NC
5.96
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
432
NC
4 .40
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 .02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
mg/l
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 .02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
115
ROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
433
NC
4.75
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
434
NC
5.47
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
435
NC
5.51
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
436
NC
6.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
437
NC
4 . 92
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
436
NC
5.64
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
439
NC
5.35
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
440
NC
5.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
441
NC
5.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
442
NC
7.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
443
NC
9.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
444
NC
9.44
0 .02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
445
NC
5.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
446
NC
4.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
447
NC
5.25
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
446
NC
5.78
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
449
NC
6.44
0.02
MG/L
Y
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
450
NC
5.27
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
451
NC
2.79
0.02
MG/L
Y
t
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
452
NC
4.34
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
453
NC
4.51
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
454
NC
5.17
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
455
NC
5.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
456
NC
5.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
457
NC
5.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
458
NC
5.29
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
459
NC
5.22
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
460
NC
5.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
461
NC
5.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
462
NC
6.19
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
463
NC
6.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
464
NC
5.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
465
NC
5.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
466
NC
6.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
467
NC
5.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANtDE
57125
466
NC
5.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
469
NC
6.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
470
NC
7.18
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
471
NC
5.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
472
NC
5.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
473
NC
5.09
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
474
NC
5.08
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
475
NC
5.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teet (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
116
o
ON
?acility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
TDKR RYPROD -- nnt-inn.PSR.Q1
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
57125
476
NC
5.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
477
NC
5.58
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
478
NC
6.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
479
NC
6.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
480
NC
6.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
481
NC
6.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
482
NC
6.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
483
NC
5.32
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
484
NC
5.19
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
485
NC
5.47
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
486
NC
6.01
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
487
NC
7.56
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
488
NC
7.57
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
489
NC
5.96
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
490
NC
6.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
491
NC
7.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
492
NC
8.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
493
NC
7.53
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
494
NC
6.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
495
NC
7.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
496
NC
7.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
497
NC
6.77
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
498
NC
4 . 88
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
499
NC
4 . 34
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
500
NC
5.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
501
NC
5.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
502
NC
7.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
503
NC
7.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
504
NC
6.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
505
NC
5.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
506
NC
5.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
507
NC
5.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
508
NC
5.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
509
NC
5.93
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
510
NC
6.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
511
NC
6.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
512
NC
5.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
513
NC
5.50
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
57125
514
NC
5.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
515
NC
6.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
516
NC
5.79
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
517
NC
4 .90
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
518
NC
4.97
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsedeN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
117
ROD -- Opt ion=PSESl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
CasNo
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2* Pass
**
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
519
NC
4 .21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
520
NC
4 .34
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
521
NC
5.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
522
NC
5.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
523
NC
5.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
524
NC
5.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
525
NC
5.91
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
526
NC
6.09
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
527
NC
6.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
528
NC
6.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
529
NC
6.54
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
530
NC
5.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
531
NC
5.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
532
NC
6.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
533
NC
6.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
534
NC
5.87
0.02
MO/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
535
NC
6.24
0.02
MG/L
Y
o
ISM5Q
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
536
NC
4.47
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
537
NC
6.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
538
NC
6.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
539
NC
6.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
-0
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
540
NC
5.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
541
NC
5.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
542
NC
5.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
543
NC
5.96
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
544
NC
5.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
545
NC
5 .07
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
546
NC
6.08
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
547
NC
4 .90
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
548
NC
6.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
549
NC
5.27
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
550
NC
5.23
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
551
NC
5.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
552
NC
6.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
553
NC
6.69
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
554
NC
6.72
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
555
NC
6.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
556
NC
4 .82
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
557
NC
4.61
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
558
NC
5.18
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
559
NC
4 .88
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
560
NC
5.34
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
561
NC
5.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
118
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
o
oo
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
Infl.
Samp Pt
- Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Opt
(continued)
,ion=PSESl
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
562
NC
5.21
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
563
NC
5.26
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
564
NC
5.19
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
565
NC
5.22
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
566
NC
5.32
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
567
NC
5.82
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
568
NC
6.20
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
569
NC
6.20
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
570
NC
7.45
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
571
NC
7.18
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
572
NC
6.50
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
573
NC
5.22
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
574
NC
5.54
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
575
NC
5.94
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
576
NC
5.79
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
577
NC
5.52
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
578
NC
5.81
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
579
NC
5.09
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
580
NC
4.36
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
581
NC
6.06
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
582
NC
5.09
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
583
NC
6 .24
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
584
NC
6.13
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
585
NC
5.47
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
586
NC
5.23
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
587
NC
5.18
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
588
NC
5.67
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
589
NC
5.86
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
590
NC
5.81
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
591
NC
6.81
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
592
NC
6.16
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
593
NC
6.68
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
594
NC
6.37
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
595
NC
8.10
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
596
NC
6.98
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
597
NC
7.97
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
598
NC
10.30
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
599
NC
9.30
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
600
NC
8 .07
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
601
NC
7.11
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
602
NC
6.59
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
603
NC
6.86
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
604
NC
6.65
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long
-Term Average Test
(See Sec
Used=N
if data
are excluded as described in Section 14.3,
Otherwi
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0. 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 . 02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0 .02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
119
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option=PSESl
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
O
\o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
605
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
606
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
607
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
608
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
609
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
610
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
611
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
612
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
613
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
614
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
615
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
616
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
617
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
618
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
619
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
620
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
621
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
622
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
623
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
624
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
625
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
626
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
627
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
628
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
629
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
630
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
631
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
632
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
633
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
634
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
635
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
636
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
637
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
638
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
639
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
640
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
641
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
642
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
643
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
644
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
645
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
646
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
647
NC
infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
6.77
7.01
6.20
6.17
5.80
5.70
5.52
5.30
6.11
6.26
2.05
4 .80
5.60
6.62
8.96
10.78
12.29
14.94
19.20
19.31
19.21
16.70
16.80
16.30
18.88
19.00
21.70
24.20
21.40
19.05
13.80
12.80
10.50
11.17
10.39
8.42
6.69
7.13
6.87
12.20
8.60
17.50
10.43
Infl. Baseline
Amount |
Step Step
Used
slue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
120
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
{continued)
Option«PSESl
o
K>
O
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
648
NC
7 .91
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
649
NC
7.61
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
650
NC
9.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
651
NC
13 .20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
652
NC
15.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
XSM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
653
NC
23.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
654
NC
23 .54
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
655
NC
25.86
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
656
NC
20.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
657
NC
16 .80
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
658
NC
10 .77
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
659
NC
13 .82
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
660
NC
16.00
0. 02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
661
NC
18 .40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
662
NC
16.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
663
NC
16.87
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
664
NC
16.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
665
NC
13 .70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
666
NC
9 .70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
667
NC
9.97
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
668
NC
8 .52
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
669
NC
7 .88
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
* 670
NC
6.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
671
NC
4.77
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
672
NC
5.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
673
NC
7.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
674
NC
8.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
675
NC
9.52
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
676
NC
8.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
677
NC
8.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
678
NC
2.23
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
679
NC
9.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
680
NC
8.52
0.02
MG/L
Y
1SM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
681
NC
7.54
0.02
MG/L
Y
1SM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
682
NC
8.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
683
NC
9.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
684
NC
8 .97
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
685
NC
10.18
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
686
NC
10.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
687
NC
8.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
688
NC
7.78
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
689
NC
8.15
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
690
NC
8.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
egory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option-PSESl
(continued)
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
o
to
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
691
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
692
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
693
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
694
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
695
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
696
NC
ISM50
SP-B
total
CYANIDE
57125
697
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
696
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
699
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125"
700
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
701
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
702
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
703
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
704
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
705
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
706
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
707
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
708
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
709
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
710
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
711
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
712
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
713
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
714
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
715
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
716
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
717
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
718
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
719
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
720
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
721
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
722
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
723
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
724
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
725
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
726
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
727
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
728
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
729
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
730
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
731
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
732
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
733
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us<
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
*
8.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
17.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
9.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.51
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.32
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
15.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.82
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.28
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.98
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.29
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.37
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.07
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
7 .70
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.44
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.68
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.96
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.01
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.10
0.02
MG/L
,
Y
6.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.07
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
8.37
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.52
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
122
ouuc
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
755
NC
6.38
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
756
NC
5.81
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
757
NC
7.76
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
758
NC
4.01
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
759
NC
4 .65
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
760
NC
4 .74
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
761
NC
5.54
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
762
NC
6.93
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
763
NC
7.84
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
764
NC
7.94
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
765
NC
8.88
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
766
NC
10.54
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
767
NC
8.23
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
768
NC
7.01
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
769
NC
6.62
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
770
NC
4.85
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
771
NC
6.16
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
772
NC
6.10
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
773
NC
17.50
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
774
NC
8.86
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
775
NC
5.23
0.02
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
776
NC
6.65
0.02
Unit
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Step Step
Used
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
123
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
KJ
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
U)
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Cas_No
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
Effl.
ample
Meas
Effl.
Day
Type
Amount
777
NC
7.51
778
NC
7.80
779
NC
4.84
780
NC
5.88
781
NC
6.70
782
NC
7.29
783
NC
5.75
784
NC
5.79
785
NC
5.80
786
NC
8.80
787
NC
6.00
788
NC
6.28
789
NC
8.83
790
NC
8.66
791
NC
8.45
792
NC
7.48
793
NC
7.13
794
NC
7.98
795
NC
9.57
796
NC
8.84
797
NC
8.07
798
NC
15.60
799
NC
7.60
800
NC
6.36
801
NC
4.50
802
NC
12.60
803
NC
9.53
804
NC
9.81
805
NC
13.41
806
NC
9.70
807
NC
15.10
808
NC
12.10
809
NC
5.70
810
NC
5.19
811
NC
6.95
812
NC
6.31
813
NC
3.16
814
NC
5.93
815
NC
6.58
816
NC
3.10
817
NC
3.38
818
NC
2.66
819
NC
3.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
ilue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsecUN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
124
ouutaic^ui.y"WMi d i rntju —
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
620
NC
3.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
821
NC
2.67
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
822
NC
5.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
823
NC
3.07
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
824
NC
3.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
825
NC
3.55
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
826
NC
7.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
827
NC
6.14
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
828
NC
12.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
829
NC
11.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
830
NC
6.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
831
NC
6.38
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
832
NC
5.58
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
833
NC
4.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
834
NC
2.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
835
NC
6.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
836
NC
3 .95
0.02
MG/L
Y
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
837
NC
7.32
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
838
NC
7.77
0.02
MG/L
Y
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
839
NC
8.42
0.02
MG/L
Y
K>
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
840
NC
8.27
0.02
MG/L
Y
4^
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
841
NC
6.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
842
NC
7.47
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
843
NC
6.37
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
844
NC
6.46
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
845
NC
7.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
846
NC
13.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
847
NC
5.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
848
NC
6.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
849
NC
6.09
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
850
NC
6.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
851
NC
6.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
852
NC
7.91
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
853
NC
8.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
854
NC
7.76
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
855
NC
9.06
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
856
NC
8.94
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
857
NC
8.83
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
858
NC
15.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
859
NC
7.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
860
NC
12.99
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
861
NC
15.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
862
NC
14.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5}.
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
125
Subcategory»COKE_BYPROD -- Option*PSESl
(continued)
Ef f 1
Facility Eff1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
863
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
664
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
665
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
666
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
667
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
666
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
869
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
870
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
871
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
872
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
873
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
874
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
875
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
876
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
878
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
879
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
860
NC
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
881
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
882
NC
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
883
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
884
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
885
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
886
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
887
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
889
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
890
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
891
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
892
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
893
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
894
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
895
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
896
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
897
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
896
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
899
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
900
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
901
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
902
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
903
NC
ISMSO
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
904
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
905
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
906
NC
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
907
NC
Infl.
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass *
6.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.69
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.39
0.02
MG/L
Y
10.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
11.15
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
12.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.24
0.02
MG/L
Y
9.17
0.02
MG/L
Y
9.23
0.02
MG/L
Y
9.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.01
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.25
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.42
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.51
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.75
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.95
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.76
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
14.18
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.71
0.02
MG/L
Y
13.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.38
0.02
MG/L
Y
7.35
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.21
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.49
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.71
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.36
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.23
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.84
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.63
0.02
MG/L
Y
4.64
0.02
MG/L
Y
6.01
0.02
MG/L
Y
5.19
0.02
MG/L
Y
13.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
11.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
126
di tkuu — wpi
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
908
NC
5.37
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
909
NC
4.96
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
910
NC
5.54
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
911
NC
4.74
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
912
NC
4 .63
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
913
NC
6.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
914
NC
6.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
915
NC
6.42
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
916
NC
6.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
917
NC
6.32
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
918
NC
5.13
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
919
NC
5.46
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
920
NC
14. 14
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
921
NC
9.46
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
922
NC
7.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
923
NC
5.99
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
924
NC
4.64
0.02
MG/L
Y
o
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
925
NC
4.11
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
926
NC
5.12
0.02
MG/L
Y
1
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
927
NC
6.01
0.02
MG/L
Y
to
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
926
NC
6.99
0.02
MG/L
Y
ON
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
929
NC
7.41
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
' 930
NC
7.63
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
931
NC
7 . 39
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
932
NC
7.54
0.02
MG/L
Y
1SM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
933
NC
5.79
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
934
NC
4.85
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
935
NC
4.65
0.02
MG/L
Y
1SM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
936
NC
4.39
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
937
NC
3.97
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
938
NC
4 .40
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
939
NC
4.20
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
940
NC
4.92
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
941
NC
5.75
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
942
NC
6.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
943
NC
6.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
944
NC
5.77
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
945
NC
5.07
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
946
NC
5.45
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
947
NC
5.18
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
948
NC
5.08
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
949
NC
4.68
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM50
SP-B
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
950
NC
5.28
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
127
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp pt
Analyte Name
o
-J
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
ISM50
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
ISM54
SP-A
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
Cas_No
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
5*7125
57125
57125
57125
57125
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
766441
Sample
Day
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
2
8
15
22
29
36
43
50
57
64
71
78
85
92
ion=PSESl
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
NC
5.06
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.33
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.42
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.58
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.50
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.40
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.76
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.89
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
2 .10
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.30
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.70
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.60
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
4.90
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.81
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
5.80
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
6.10
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
6.40
0 .02
MG/L
Y
NC
7.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
6.48
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
7.24
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
7.91
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
7.31
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
14.00
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
29.30
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
22.40
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
32.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
37.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
12.60
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
23.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
25.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
23.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
30.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
18.30
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
15.40
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
19.80
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
20.50
0.05
MG/L
Y
NC
12.90
0.05
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing criteria for Pollutants of Concern
128
SubcategoryoCOKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
infl. Baseline
n
K>
OO
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
I SMS 4
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
ISM54
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
99
NC
12 .60
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
106
NC
16.40
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
113
NC
25.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
120
NC
32 .20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
127
NC
21.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
134
NC
41.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
141
NC
36 .40
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
148
NC
46.70
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
155
NC
52.10
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
162
NC
56 .00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
169
NC
47.30
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
176
NC
32.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
103
NC
12.10
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
190
NC
12.60
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
197
NC
29.40
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
204
NC
18.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
211
NC
21.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
218
NC
26.40
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
225
NC
21.30
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
232
NC
30.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
239
NC
18.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
246
NC
42.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
253
NC
13.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
260
NC
16.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
267
NC
23.70
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
274
NC
37.40
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
281
NC
11.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
288
NC
23.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
295
NC
9.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
302
NC
7.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
309
NC
13.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
316
NC
11.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
323
NC
28.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
330
NC
42.00
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
337
NC
36.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
344
NC
32.20
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
351
NC
30.80
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
358
NC
29.40
AMMONIA
AS
NITROGEN
7664417
365
NC
23.00
BENZENE
71432
32
NC
4 .00
BENZENE
71432
121
NC
1.40
BENZENE
71432
213
NC
4 .50
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 . 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0. 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0 . 05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
0.05
MG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
129
Subcategory-COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option-PSESl
o
K>
VO
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM54
SP-A
BENZENE
71432
305
NC
1.20
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
1
NC
585.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
32
NC
407.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
60
NC
569.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
91
NC
301.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
121
NC
864.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
152
NC
648.50
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
182
NC
645.50
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
213
NC
298.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
244
NC
350.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
274
NC
339.50
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
305
NC
419.00
ISM54
SP-A
BOD 5-DAY
(CARBONACEOUS)
C002
335
NC
715.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
1
NC
1,729.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
32
NC
1,464.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
60
NC
1,398.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
91
NC
1,729.50
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
121
NC
1,796.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
152
NC
1,613.50
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
182
NC
1,685.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
213
NC
1,105.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
244
NC
1,000.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
274
NC
1,430.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
305
NC
1,530.00
ISM54
SP-A
CHEMICAL
OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
335
NC
1,640.00
ISM54
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
9X203
32
ND
2.00
ISM54
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
9X203
121
NC
24.00
ISM54
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
9X203
213
NC
22.00
ISM54
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
9X203
305
ND
1.60
ISM54
SP-A
TOLUENE
108883
32
ND
2.50
ISM54
SP-A
TOLUENE
108883
121
ND
1.00
ISM54
SP-A
TOLUENE
108883
213
ND
1.00
ISM54
SP-A
TOLUENE
108883
305
ND
1.00
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
2
NC
0.62
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
8
NC
1.16
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
15
NC
1.88
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
22
NC
0.36
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
29
NC
0.40
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
2.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
3.00
MG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
130
O
U>
o
ouu<.atcyuj.y»LyM._DifKyu -- vpi
(continued)
.ion«*rocoi
Effl.
'acility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas__No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
36
NC
0.43
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
43
NC
0 .42
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
50
NC
0.57
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
57
NC
1.45
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
64
NC
1.45
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
71
NC
0.90
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
78
NC
0.61
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
85
NC
0.68
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
92
NC
0.64
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
99
NC
0.91
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
106
NC
0.96
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
113
NC
0.77
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
120
NC
0.49
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
127
NC
0.65
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
134
NC
1.21
ISM54
SP-A
total
CYANIDE
57125
141
NC
1.69
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
148
NC
2.07
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
155
NC
1.46
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
162
NC
1.62
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
169
NC
0.99
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
176
NC
1.06
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
183
NC
0.88
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
190
NC
0.82
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
197
NC
0.66
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
204
NC
0.84
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
211
NC
0.93
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
218
NC
0.84
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
225
NC
0.56
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
232
NC
0.69
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
239
NC
0.40
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
246
NC
1.09
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
253
NC
0.78
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
260
NC
0.61
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
267
NC
0.93
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
274
NC
1.28
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
281
NC
0.86
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
288
NC
1.00
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
295
NC
1.06
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
302
NC
0.78
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
309
NC
1.02
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
316
NC
0.74
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
323
NC
1 .12
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
330
NC
0.80
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0 . 02
MG/L
N
0 . 02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
mg/l
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
0.02
MG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded a9 described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
131
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Optlon=PSESl
Facility Effl.
o
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Ca s_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
337
NC
0.91
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
344
NC
0.82
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
351
NC
0.49
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
350
NC
0.58
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
365
NC
0.4S
0.02
MG/L
N
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
15
NC
172.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
43
NC
137.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
78
NC
134.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
99
NC
123.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
134
NC
193.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
162
NC
352.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
190
NC
320.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
225
NC
30.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
246
NC
79.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
253
NC
74 .00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
260
NC
130.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
267
NC
70.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
274
NC
119.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
281
NC
125.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
288
NC
140.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
295
NC
68.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
. 302
NC
127.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
309
NC
160.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
316
NC
150.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
323
NC
210.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
330
NC
140.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
337
NC
204.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
344
NC
193.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
351
NC
191.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
358
NC
160.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
365
NC
191.00
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
15
NC
28.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
43
NC
81.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
78
NC
52.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
99
NC
22.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
134
NC
36.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
162
NC
56.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
190
NC
63.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
225
NC
73.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
260
NC
71.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
ISM54
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
288
NC
141.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
132
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option-PSESl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Effl.
Amount
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ISM54
ISM54
SP-A
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
CO 09
C009
323
344
NC
NC
28.00
33.00
4 .00
4 .00
MG/L
MG/L
SubcategoryaFINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
o
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
Effl.
Inf 1.
Meas
Amount | Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4, A8-A11,A13
1,1,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
3
ND
10.00
ND
10 .00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
1
ND
99.00
ND
99.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
3
ND
99.00
ND
103.69
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
5
ND
99.00
ND
99.00
99.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
10 .00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.47
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
2 -PROPANONE
67641
1
ND
50 .00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
2 -PROPANONE
67641
3
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All, A13
2-PROPANONE
67641
5
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.47
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
ALUMINUM
7429905
1
NC
153.50
NC
79.94
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
ALUMINUM
7429905
2
NC
141.50
NC
79.83
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
ALUMINUM
7429905
3
NC
123.15
NC
105.18
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
ALUMINUM
7429905
4
NC
78.00
NC
103.73
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4, A8-All,A13
ALUMINUM
7429905
5
NC
125.00
NC
191.96
200.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
1.40
NC
1.25
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
9.54
NC
1.10
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
133
ibcategory=FiNiSHiNG -- Opt icn=CARBON_BATi
(continued)
Ef f 1.
Infl.
Facility
Ef fl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*i
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ANTIMONY
7440360
1
ND
16.50
NC
11.15
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
ANTIMONY
7440360
2
ND
16.50
NC
16.59
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ANTIMONY
7440360
3
ND
16.50
NC
16.14
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ANTIMONY
7440360
4
NC
4.20
NC
14.22
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
ANTIMONY
7440360
5
NC
3.50
NC
11.90
20.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ARSENIC
7440382
1
ND
1.00
NC
5.06
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ARSENIC
7440382
2
ND
1.00
NC
6.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
ARSENIC
7440382
3
ND
1.00
NC
6. 66
10. 00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ARSENIC
7440382
4
ND
1.00
NC
6.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
ARSENIC
7440382
5
ND
1.00
NC
7.94
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
BARIUM
7440393
1
NC
12.65
NC
21.21
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
BARIUM
7440393
2
NC
12.65
NC
22.76
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BARIUM
7440393
3
NC
12 . 90
NC
22.01
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BARIUM
7440393
4
NC
14 .00
NC
21.79
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BARIUM
7440393
5
NC
15.10
NC
21.35
200.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BENZOIC ACID
65850
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BENZOIC ACID
65850
3
ND
50.00
ND
52.37
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BENZOIC ACID
65850
5
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
BIS (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
3
ND
10.00
NC
10.98
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BORON
7440428
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BORON
7440428
2
ND
50.00
NC
52.06
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BORON
7440428
3
ND
50.00
NC
61.74
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BORON
7440428
4
ND
34.00
NC
38.33
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
BORON
7440428
5
ND
34.00
ND
34 .00
100.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CADMIUM
7440439
1
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CADMIUM
7440439
2
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CADMIUM
7440439
3
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
CADMIUM
7440439
4
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
CADMIUM
7440439
5
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
NC
66.00
NC
205.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
76.00
NC
334.86
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD C004
3
NC
56.00
NC
237.50
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
64.00
NC
341.43
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
76.00
NC
268.01
3.00
MG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
134
Subcategory-FINISHING -- OptioneCARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
Effl .
Amount
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHROMIUM
7440473
1
NC
4.05
NC
1,020.29
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHROMIUM
7440473
2
NC
5.85
NC
902.05
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHROMIUM
7440473
3
NC
9.50
NC
2,053.11
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHROMIUM
7440473
4
NC
11.25
NC
3,477.69
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
CHROMIUM
7440473
5
NC
15.40
NC
3,440.96
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COBALT
7440484
1
NC
10.05
ND
10.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COBALT
7440484
2
ND
10.00
NC
10.80
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
COBALT
7440484
3
ND
10.00
NC
14 .83
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COBALT
7440484
4
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
~ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COBALT
7440484
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COPPER
7440508
1
ND
10.00
NC
50.77
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COPPER
7440508
2
ND
10.00
NC
55.87
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COPPER
7440508
3
ND
10.00
NC
66.13
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
COPPER
7440508
4
ND
9.00
ND
9.00
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
COPPER
7440508
5
ND
9.00
NC
13.64
25.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4/A8-A11
A13
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
FLUORIDE
16984488
1
NC
0.22
NC
0.19
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
~ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
FLUORIDE
16984488
2
NC
0.22
NC
0.22
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
FLUORIDE
16984488
3
NC
0.22
NC
0.32
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
FLUORIDE
16984488
4
NC
0.34
NC
0.52
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
FLUORIDE
16984488
5
NC
0.25
NC
0.27
0.10
MG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
1
ND
10.00
NC
12.90
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
3
ND
10.00
NC
17.09
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
5
ND
10.00
NC
14 .35
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
1
ND
0.01
NC
0.41
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
2
ND
0.01
NC
0.38
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
3
ND
0.01
NC
0.67
0.01
MG/L
P
P
. Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
4
ND
0.01
NC
0.50
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
5
ND
0.01
NC
0.29
0.01
MG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
IRON
7439896
1
NC
301.00
NC
17,624.68
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
IRON
7439896
2
NC
361.00
NC
27,643.29
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
IRON
7439896
3
NC
334.50
NC
20,523.21
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
IRON
7439896
4
NC
486.50
NC
19,641.39
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
135
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
infl.
O
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4.A8-A11
A13
IRON
7439896
5
NC
1,500.00
NC
16,229.71
100.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
LEAD
7439921
l
ND
2 .00
NC
5.04
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
2 .00
NC
8.40
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
2 .00
NC
7.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
~ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
2 .00
NC
5.06
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
LEAD
7439921
5
ND
2 .00
NC
7.23
50.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MAGNESIUM
7439954
1
NC
8,970.00
NC
12,238.75
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MAGNESIUM
7439954
2
NC
8,640.00
NC
12,276.35
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
MAGNESIUM
7439954
3
NC
9,075.00
NC
12,406 .58
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MAGNESIUM
7439954
4
NC
10,035.00
NC
12,724 .38
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
MAGNESIUM
7439954
5
NC
10,400.00
NC
11,230 .03
5000.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
MANGANESE
7439965
1
NC
12.30
NC
287 .80
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MANGANESE
7439965
2
NC
10.60
NC
292 .98
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
9.00
NC
252 .14
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
MANGANESE
7439965
4
NC
21.00
NC
350.35
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MANGANESE
7439965
5
NC
78.40
NC
374 .64
15.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
1
NC
6.65
NC
32 .84
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
2
NC
4 .20
NC
31.52
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
3
NC
7.50
NC
31.99
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
~ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
4
NC
7.65
NC
27 .75
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
5
NC
6.70
NC
20.16
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4.A8-A11
A13
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
3
ND
10.00
ND
10 .47
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DECANE
124185
1
ND
10.00
NC
45.02
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DECANE
124185
3
ND
10.00
NC
43 .28
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DECANE
124185
5
ND
10.00
NC
28 .84
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DOCOSANE
629970
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DOCOSANE
629970
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.47
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
N-DOCOSANE
629970
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DODECANE
112403
1
ND
10.00
NC
21.81
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
N-DODECANE
112403
3
ND
10.00
NC
29.17
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
N-DODECANE
112403
5
NC
21.14
NC
14.64
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix c. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
136
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
ND
10 .00
NC
24.03
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
10 .00
NC
14 .54
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.47
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.00
NC
10.36
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4, A8-A11, A13
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
10 .00
NC
11.18
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
ND
10.00
NC
11.92
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11/A13
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
1
ND
10.00
NC
18.64
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
3
ND
10.00
NC
25.22
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-TETRADECANE
629594
1
ND
10.00
NC
12.48
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
N-TETRADECANE
629594
3
ND
10.00
NC
12 .82
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
N-TETRADECANE
629594
5
NC
178.81
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NAPHTHALENE
91203
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.47
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NAPHTHALENE
91203
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NICKEL
7440020
1
NC
19.95
NC
126.16
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NICKEL
7440020
2
NC
23 .60
NC
163.62
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NICKEL
7440020
3
NC
21.20
NC
244.46
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A9-A11,A13
NICKEL
7440020
4
NC
25.25
NC
248.92
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NICKEL
7440020
5
NC
42.70
NC
112.13
40.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
0.06
NC
0.17
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04.
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NITRATE/NITRITE
coos
2
ND
0.01
NC
0.09
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11/A13
NITRATE/NITRITE
coos
3
NC
0.01
NC
0.25
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
0.02
NC
0.10
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
0.04
NC
0.42
0.01
MG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
PHENOL
108952
1
ND
10.00
NC
40.87
10.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8~A11,A13
PHENOL
108952
3
ND
10.00
NC
83.90
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
PHENOL
108952
5
ND
10.00
NC
36.56
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
SELENIUM
7782492
1
ND
11.00
ND
5.75
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
SELENIUM
7782492
2
ND
11.00
ND
2.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All,A13
SELENIUM
7782492
3
ND
11.00
ND
2.84
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11,A13
SELENIUM
7782492
4
ND
11.00
ND
9.66
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
137
Subcategory.FINISHING -- Opt ion«CARB0N_BAT1
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
SELENIUM
7782492
5
ND
20.00
ND
2.00
5. 00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TIN
7440315
1
NC
10.20
NC
949.70
30.00
UG/L
•
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TIN
7440315
2
NC
44.00
NC
3,177.80
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TIN
7440315
3
NC
18.55
NC
1,320.40
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
~SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TIN
7440315
4
NC
7.10
NC
610.30
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
. SP-A4,A8-All
A13
TIN
7440315
5
NC
37.10
NC
1,454.41
30.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
TITANIUM
7440326
1
ND
5.00
NC
5.13
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TITANIUM
7440326
2
ND
5.00
NC
6.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TITANIUM
7440326
3
ND
5.00
NC
5.84
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TITANIUM
7440326
4
ND
5.00
NC
7.43
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TITANIUM
7440326
5
ND
5.00
NC
5.66
5.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
TOLUENE
108883
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOLUENE
108883
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
1
NC
7.46
NC
46 .43
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
2
NC
15.80
NC
42.29
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
3
NC
12.80
NC
49.24
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
CO 12
4
NC
11.60
NC
43 .36
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
CO 12
5
NC
11.60
NC
45.05
1.00
MG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
0.01
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
NC
0.09
NC
0.14
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
NC
0.09
NC
0.12
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4, A8-All
A13
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
4
NC
0.08
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
NC
0.04
NC
0.13
0.05
MG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
VANADIUM
7440622
1
ND
10.00
NC
22.46
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
VANADIUM
7440622
2
ND
10.00
NC
16.85
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
VANADIUM
7440622
3
ND
10.00
NC
18.65
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
VANADIUM
7440622
4
ND
10.00
NC
17.76
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
VANADIUM
7440622
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
35.95
NC
13,466.99
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+ SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ZINC
7440666
2
ND
10.00
NC
15,224.82
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
12.20
NC
24,605.26
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-All
A13
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
16.20
NC
331.44
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-F
+SP-G
SP-A4,A8-A11
A13
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
131.00
NC
1,859.88
20.00
UG/L
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0,F,G,H,N
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
1
ND
10.00
NC
1Q .01
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
138
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Infl.
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
ESE05
ESE05
ESE05
ESE05
SP-A +SP-B
SP-A +SP-B
SP-A +SP-B
SP-A +SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
n
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
i
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
u>
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
oo
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
Infl.
Samp Pt
SP-P,-M-O,F,G
-M-0,F,G
-M-0,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-0,F,G
-M-0,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-0,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
-M-O,F,G
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
SP-P
Sample
Meas
Eff 1.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
U9<
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
i *
,H
N
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
2
ND
10.00
NC
10.03
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
3
ND
10.00
NC
9.98
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
4
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
1
ND
99.00
ND
1
042.07
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
2
ND
99.00
ND
49.05
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
3
ND
99.00
ND
48.31
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
4
ND
99.00
ND
42.25
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
5
ND
99.00
ND
84.09
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
N
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
4
ND
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2-PROPANONE
67641
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
2-PROPANONE
67641
2
NC
69.95
NC
50.01
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
2 -PROPANONE
67641
3
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
2-PROPANONE
67641
4
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
.H
N
2-PROPANONE
67641
5
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
3
ND
10.00
ND
4 .88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
4
ND
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALUMINUM
7429905
1
ND
56.00
NC
900.24
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
ALUMINUM
7429905
2
NC
67.15
NC
1
058.47
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALUMINUM
7429905
3
NC
66.05
NC
715.11
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
ALUMINUM
7429905
4
NC
79.30
NC
426.32
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
, H
N
ALUMINUM
7429905
5
ND
56.00
NC
661.44
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
.H
N
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
0.15
NC
0.04
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
, H
N
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
0.20
NC
0.75
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
.H
N
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
0.47
NC
0.75
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
, H
N
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
0.43
NC
0.70
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
, H
N
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
0.45
*
NC
0.86
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
,H
N
ANTIMONY
7440360
1
ND
20.00
NC
0.29
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
,H
N
ANTIMONY
7440360
2
NC
21.05
NC
20.31
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
139
Subcategory»FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
inf 1.
o
u>
Facility Effl
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ANTIMONY
7440360
3
ND
20.00
NC
17.09
20. 00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ANTIMONY
7440360
4
ND
11.00
NC
18.26
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ANTIMONY
7440360
5
NC
13.00
NC
32.62
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ARSENIC
7440382
1
ND
1.00
NC
9.24
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ARSENIC
7440382
2
ND
5.50
NC
6.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ARSENIC
7440382
3
ND
5.50
NC
9.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ARSENIC
7440382
4
ND
1. 00
NC
4.40
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ARSENIC
7440382
5
ND
1.00
ND
10.15
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BARIUM
7440393
1
NC
6,20
NC
39.81
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BARIUM
7440393
2
NC
9.65
NC
48.82
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BARIUM
7440393
3
NC
6.05
NC
34.89
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BARIUM
7440393
4
NC
7.65
NC
33.95
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BARIUM
7440393
5
NC
7.70
NC
36.32
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BENZOIC ACID
65050
1
ND
61.00
ND
526.30
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BENZOIC ACID
65850
2
ND
50.00
ND
24.77
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BENZOIC ACID
65050
3
ND
50.00
ND
24 .40
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BENZOIC ACID
65050
4
ND
65.00
ND
26.66
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BENZOIC ACID
65850
5
ND
62.00
ND
42.47
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
1*7817
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
2
ND
10.00
NC
-17.71
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BIS (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
3
ND
10.00
ND
4.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BIS (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117017
4
ND
10.00
ND
4 .27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BORON
7440428
1
ND
41.00
ND
41.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BORON
7440428
2
ND
41.00
NC
43.12
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BORON
7440420
3
ND
41.00
ND
41.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BORON
7440428
4
ND
41.00
NC
41.58
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
BORON
7440428
5
NC
46.10
ND
41.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CADMIUM
7440439
1
ND
5.00
NC
2.80
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CADMIUM
7440439
2
ND
5.00
ND
5.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CADMIUM
7440439
3
ND
5.00
NC
1.66
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CADMIUM
7440439
4
ND
5.00
NC
1.36
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CADMIUM
7440439
5
ND
5.00
NC
4 .00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
1
NC
32.00
NC
534.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
2
NC
59.00
NC
472.47
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
3
NC
52.50
NC
475.55
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
140
Subcategory=FlNiSHlNG -- option=carbon_bati
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl
infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
68.00
NC
469.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
68.00
NC
481.50
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
1
NC
10.20
NC
499.33
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
2
ND
9.00
NC
8,246.19
10.00
UG/L
p
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
3
ND
9.00
NC
2,838.05
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
4
NC
18.55
NC
2,597.28
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
5
ND
9.00
NC
1,180.93
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COBALT
7440484
1
ND
10.00
NC
8.05
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COBALT
7440484
2
ND
10.00
NC
8.82
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COBALT
7440484
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COBALT
7440484
4
ND
10.00
NC
20.53
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COBALT
7440484
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COPPER
7440508
1
ND
8.00
NC
38.97
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COPPER
7440508
2
ND
8.00
NC
84 .64
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COPPER
7440508
3
ND
8.00
NC
123 .23
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COPPER
7440508
4
ND
8.00
NC
72.26
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
COPPER
7440508
5
ND
8.00
NC
83.27
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
2
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
4
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
FLUORIDE
16984488
1
NC
0.62
NC
0.81
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
FLUORIDE
16984488
2
NC
0.37
NC
0.67
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
FLUORIDE
16984488
3
NC
0.58
NC
1.32
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
FLUORIDE
16984488
4
NC
0.71
NC
0.86
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
FLUORIDE
16984488
5
NC
1.40
NC
0.68
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
1
ND
12.20
NC
105.25
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
3
NC
17.97
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
i N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
4
ND
13.00
ND
5.33
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
5
ND
12.40
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
1
ND
0.01
NC
0.01
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
2
ND
0.06
NC
0.91
0.01
MG/L
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
3
ND
0.01
NC
1.49
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O,F
G
H
N
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
4
NC
0.01
NC
0.87
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
141
Subcategory^FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl. Inf1.
Facility Effl
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0,
F,G,H,N
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
5
NC
o
o
NC
o
o
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
IRON
7439896
1
ND
14.00
NC
45,320.11
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
IRON
7439896
2
NC
309.50
NC
20,332.71
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
IRON
7439896
3
NC
508.50
NC
44,039.26
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
IRON
7439896
4
NC
608.00
NC
100.83
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
IRON
7439896
5
NC
435.50
NC
66,237.20
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O
F, G, H, N
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
2.00
NC
3 . 94
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
2.00
NC
11.46
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
2.00
NC
16.71
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
2.00
NC
13 .25
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
LEAD
7439921
5
ND
2.00
NC
8.78
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
MAGNESIUM
7439954
1
NC
10,260.00
NC
11,394.11
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MAGNESIUM
7439954
2
NC
9,995.00
NC
11,288.83
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MAGNESIUM
7439954
3
NC
10,050.00
NC
11,433.91
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
MAGNESIUM
7439954
4
NC
13,300.00
NC
11,624.66
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
O ESE05
I
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MAGNESIUM
7439954
5
NC
12,350.00
NC
13,148.39
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MANGANESE
7439965
1
NC
47.30
NC
288.62
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MANGANESE
7439965
2
NC
56.15
NC
295.34
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
68.95
NC
358.91
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MANGANESE
7439965
4
NC
66.20
NC
199.54
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
MANGANESE
7439965
5
NC
46.50
NC
310.70
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
1
NC
3.80
NC
7.74
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
2
NC
10.95
NC
23.55
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
3
NC
4.05
NC
9.63
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
4
NC
5.10
NC
15.92
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
5
ND
3.00
NC
14.56
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
2
ND
10.00
NC
1.85
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H,N
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
66122
3
ND
10.00
NC
-0.11
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
4
ND
10.00
NC
2.03
10.00
UG/L
F
F
. N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
66122
5
ND
10.00
ND
6.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
N-DECANE
124185
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
N-DECANE
124185
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
N-DECANE
124185
3
ND
10.00
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F,G,H,N
N-DECANE
124185
4
ND
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F, G, H, N
N-DECANE
124165
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
142
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
0
1
E
K)
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl .
Infl.
Meas
Baseline
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DOCOSANE
629970
1
ND
10.00
NC
100.63
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DOCOSANE
629970
2
ND
10.00
ND
4 .95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DOCOSANE
629970
3
ND
10.00
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DOCOSANE
629970
4
ND
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DOCOSANE
629970
5
ND
10.00
NC
11.43
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DODECANE
112403
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DODECANE
112403
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DODECANE
112403
3
NC
16.90
ND
4 .88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
-fSP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DODECANE
112403
4
ND
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-DODECANE
112403
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
10.00
NC
105.22
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-EICOSANE
112958
2
ND
10.00
ND
4 . 95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
ND
10.00
NC
186.22
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-EICOSANE
112958
4
ND
10.00
NC
93.80
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
10.00
NC
225.52
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-HEXADECANE
544763
2
ND
10.00
ND
4 .95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
NC
35.42
ND
4 .88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-HEXADECANE
544763
4
ND
10.00
ND
4 .27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.00
NC
451.01
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
10.00
NC
153.09
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-OCTADECANE
593453
2
ND
10.00
NC
15.96
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
ND
10.00
ND
4 .88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-OCTADECANE
593453
4
ND
10.00
NC
65.64
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.00
NC
103.78
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
1
ND
10.00
NC
100.75
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
3
ND
10.00
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
4
ND
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
5
ND
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
¦ N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRADECANE
629594
1
ND
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRADECANE
629594
2
ND
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-O
F
G
H
N
N-TETRADECANE
629594
3
ND
10.00
ND
4 .88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRADECANE
629594
4
ND
10.00
NC
33.98
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
N-TETRADECANE
629594
5
ND
10.00
NC
34.65
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test {See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
143
Subcategory=FlNlSHlNG -- Opt
(continued)
on=CARBON BAT1
o
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-O
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE0S
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P,-M-0
F
G
H
N
ESE05
SP-A +SP-B
SP-P, -M-0,F,G,H,N
Analyte Name
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NICKEL
NICKEL
NICKEL
NICKEL
NICKEL
NITRATE/NITRITE
NITRATE/NITRITE
NITRATE/NITRITE
NITRATE/NITRITE
NITRATE/NITRITE
PHENOL
PHENOL
PHENOL
PHENOL
PHENOL
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
SELENIUM
TIN
TIN
TIN
TIN
TIN
TITANIUM
TITANIUM
TITANIUM
TITANIUM
TITANIUM
TOLUENE
91203
91203
91203
91203
91203
7440020
7440020
7440020
7440020
7440020
C005
C005
CO 05
C005
C005
108952
108952
108952
108952
108952
7782492
7782492
7782492
7782492
7782492
7440315
7440315
7440315
7440315
7440315
7440326
7440326
7440326
7440326
7440326
108883
Sample
Day
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Effl.
Meas
Type
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
4 .27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
16.00
ND
16.00
40.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
46.30
NC
403.32
40.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
63.55
NC
1,512.32
40.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
42.85
NC
357.84
40.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
69.10
NC
1,226.13
40.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.02
NC
0.31
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.10
NC
0.56
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.16
NC
0.97
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.09
NC
0.40
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
0.13
NC
0.99
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
10.00
ND
105.26
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.32
ND
4.95
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
4.88
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
4.27
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
8.49
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
22.00
NC
0.95
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
2.70
NC
18.59
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
2.00
NC
30.63
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
2.00
NC
0.04
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
2 .15
NC
1.70
5.00
VJG/L
F
P
Y
Y
3.00
NC
449.57
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
3.00
NC
461.45
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
3.00
NC
877.72
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
3.00
NC
537.07
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
3.00
NC
557.63
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
4 .00
NC
7.65
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
4 .00
NC
28.41
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
4 .00
NC
10.94
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
4 .00
NC
12.26
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
4 .00
NC
-0.02
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
144
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp
Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOLUENE
108883
2
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H, N
TOLUENE
108883
4
ND
10. 00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F, G
H,N
TOLUENE
108883
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P
-m-o,f,g
H, N
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
1
ND
10.00
NC
10.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
2
ND
10.00
NC
10.14
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
3
ND
10.00
NC
10.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
4
ND
10.00
NC
11.93
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
5
ND
10.00
NC
11.01
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H, N
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
1
ND
0.05
NC
0.12
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
NC
0.07
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H, N
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
ND
0.05
ND
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
4
ND
0.05
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
ND
0.05
NC
0.15
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
VANADIUM
7440622
1
ND
10.00
NC
6.92
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
VANADIUM
7440622
2
ND
10.00
NC
12.17
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
VANADIUM
7440622
3
ND
10.00
NC
26.63
50 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
VANADIUM
7440622
4
ND
10.00
NC
6.84
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
VANADIUM
7440622
5
ND
10.00
NC
16.76
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
9.80
NC
892.20
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
ZINC
7440666
2
ND
8 .00
NC
1,602.02
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
11.90
NC
1,405.43
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H,N
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
18.40
NC
1,056.90
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE05
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-P
-M-O,F,G
H, N
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
9.00
NC
1,441.21
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE
71556
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L,M,P
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
1
ND
99.00
ND
108.05
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
3
ND
99.00
ND
368.29
99.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L,M, P
2,6-DI-TERT-BUTYL-P-BENZOQU
719222
5
ND
99.00
ND
99.00
99.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
5
ND
10.00
NC
10.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L,M,P
2-PROPANONE
67641
1
NC
550.19
NC
88.57
50 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L, M, P
2 -PROPANONE
67641
3
NC
556.35
NC
76.17
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
145
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option-CARBONBATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp
Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
2-PROPANONE
67641
5
NC
246 .12
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
1
NC
179.52
NC
51.85
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALPHA-TERPINEOL
98555
5
NC
39.22
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALUMINUM
7429905
1
ND
65.00
NC
185.78
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALUMINUM
7429905
2
ND
65.00
NC
212.45
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALUMINUM
7429905
3
NC
109.00
NC
171.69
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALUMINUM
7429905
4
ND
65.00
NC
657.12
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ALUMINUM
7429905
5
ND
65.00
NC
236.87
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
0.26
NC
7.33
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
0.46
NC
0.57
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
0.46
NC
4 . 97
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
0.36
NC
5.40
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
0.37
NC
4.81
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ANTIMONY
7440360
1
ND
2.00
NC
10.31
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ANTIMONY
7440360
2
NC
7.00
NC
27.26
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ANTIMONY
7440360
3
NC
10. 50
NC
11. 95
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ANTIMONY
7440360
4
NC
8.10
NC
8.78
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ANTIMONY
7440360
5
ND
20.00
NC
21.34
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ARSENIC
7440382
1
ND
1.00
NC
20.89
10 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ARSENIC
7440382
2
ND
1.00
NC
15.08
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ARSENIC
7440382
3
NC
1.60
NC
27.24
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ARSENIC
7440382
4
ND
1.00
ND
9.60
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ARSENIC
7440382
5
NC
1.70
NC
39.74
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BARIUM
7440393
1
NC
201.00
NC
193.47
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BARIUM
7440393
2
NC
322.00
NC
378.62
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BARIUM
7440393
3
NC
210.00
NC
230.26
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BARIUM
7440393
4
NC
184.00
NC
555.90
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BARIUM
7440393
5
NC
140.00
NC
326.19
200.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BENZOIC ACID
65850
1
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
' N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BENZOIC ACID
65850
3
ND
50.00
ND
186.01
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BENZOIC ACID
65850
5
ND
50.00
ND
50.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE
117817
5
ND
10.00
NC
17.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
146
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option-CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount I Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BORON
7440420
1
NC
126.00
NC
76.36
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BORON
7440428
2
NC
84 .80
NC
56.01
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BORON
7440428
3
NC
346.00
NC
271.17
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BORON
7440428
4
NC
298.00
ND
46.00
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
BORON
7440426
5
NC
110.00
NC
60.18
100.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CADMIUM
7440439
1
ND
5.00
ND
5.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CADMIUM
7440439
2
ND
5.00
ND
5.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CADMIUM
7440439
3
ND
5.00
ND
5.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CADMIUM
7440439
4
ND
5.00
NC
6.81
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CADMIUM
7440439
5
ND
5.00
NC
5.25
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
NC
205.00
NC
356.41
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
360.00
NC
230.41
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
338.00
NC
542.52
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
244.00
NC
474.37
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
215.00
NC
5,641.72
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHROMIUM
7440473
1
ND
10.00
NC
110.98
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHROMIUM
7440473
2
ND
10.00
NC
111 .77
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHROMIUM
7440473
3
ND
10.00
NC
103.07
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHROMIUM
7440473
4
ND
10.00
NC
193.01
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
CHROMIUM
7440473
5
ND
10.00
NC
112.54
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COBALT
7440484
1
ND
9.00
NC
10.10
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COBALT
7440484
2
ND
9.00
ND
9.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COBALT
7440484
3
ND
9.00
ND
9.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COBALT
7440484
4
ND
9.00
NC
12.90
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COBALT
7440484
5
ND
9.00
NC
10.37
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COPPER
7440508
1
ND
10.00
NC
71.12
25-00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COPPER
7440508
2
ND
10.00
NC
99.71
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COPPER
7440508
3
ND
10.00
NC
103.03
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COPPER
7440508
4
ND
10.00
NC
425.83
25.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
COPPER
7440508
5
ND
10.00
NC
173.05
25.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
ETHYLBENZENE
100414
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
FLUORIDE
16984488
1
NC
1.20
NC
2.44
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K
L
M
P
FLUORIDE
16984488
2
NC
1.00
NC
2.04
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
147
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
0
1
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
FLUORIDE
16984488
3
NC
2.00
NC
1.75
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
FLUORIDE
16984466
4
NC
3.00
NC
2.62
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K.L
M
P
FLUORIDE
16984488
5
NC
1.50
NC
3.03
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXANOIC ACID
142621
5
ND
10.00
NC
20.39
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
1
ND
0.01
0.01
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
2
ND
0.01
0.01
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
3
ND
0.01
0.01
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
4
ND
0.01
0.01
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-K,L
M
P
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
5
ND
0.01
0.01
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
IRON
7439896
1
NC
1,550.00
NC
77,353.29
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
IRON
7439896
2
NC
914.00
NC
76,594.05
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
IRON
7439896
3
NC
1,380.00
NC
69,068.88
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
IRON
7439896
4
NC
1,040.00
NC
92,930.84
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
IRON
7439896
5
NC
1,580.00
NC
65,179.01
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
2.00
NC
10.11
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
2.00
NC
63.17
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
LEAD
7439921
3
NC
2.20
NC
38.91
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
LEAD
7439921
4
NC
5.00
NC
62.75
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
LEAD
7439921
5
ND
2.00
NC
40.05
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
M-XYLENE
108383
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MAGNESIUM
7439954
1
NC
9,000.00
NC
8,717.60
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MAGNESIUM
7439954
2
NC
9,660.00
NC
9,500.28
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MAGNESIUM
7439954
3
NC
10,400.00
NC
9,126.37
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MAGNESIUM
7439954
4
NC
12,300.00
NC
9,801.50
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MAGNESIUM
7439954
5
NC
12,000.00
NC
9,344.67
5000.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MANGANESE
7439965
1
NC
174.00
NC
244.45
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
MANGANESE
7439965
2
NC
202.00
NC
407.03
15.00
UG/L
P
P
, Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
134.00
NC
341.49
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MANGANESE
7439965
4
NC
175.00
NC
494.59
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MANGANESE
7439965
5
NC
163.00
NC
347.49
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
1
NC
49.40
NC
29.73
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
2
NC
58.10
NC
41.14
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
3
NC
51.90
NC
35.86
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5) .
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern 148
¦ Subcategory-FINISHING -- OptionsCARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
4
NC
55.70
NC
60.30
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
5
NC
60.80
NC
58.50
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N,N-DIMETHYLFORMAMIDE
68122
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-DECANE
124185
1
ND
10.00
NC
25.13
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-DECANE
124185
3
ND
10.00
NC
416.70
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-DECANE
124185
5
ND
10.00
NC
52.29
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-DOCOSANE
629970
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-DOCOSANE
629970
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-DOCOSANE
629970
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-DODECANE
112403
1
ND
10.00
NC
192 .62
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-DODECANE
112403
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-DODECANE
112403
5
ND
10.00
NC
135.78
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-EICOSANE
112958
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-EICOSANE
112958
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-EICOSANE
112958
5
ND
10 .00
NC
222.32
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-HEXADECANE
544763
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-HEXADECANE
544763
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-HEXADECANE
544763
5
ND
10.00
NC
105.78
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-OCTADECANE
593453
1
ND
10.00
NC
51.54
,10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-OCTADECANE
593453
3
ND
10.00
NC
125.31
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-OCTADECANE
593453
5
ND
10.00
NC
37.37
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
3
ND
10.00
NC
38.41
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-TETRACOSANE
646311
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
N-TETRADECANE
629594
1
ND
10.00
NC
39.02
10.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-TETRADECANE
629594
3
ND
10.00
NC
107.12
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
N-TETRADECANE
629594
5
ND
10.00
NC
29.94
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
NAPHTHALENE
91203
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L
M
P
NAPHTHALENE
91203
3
ND
10.00
ND
37.20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L
M
P
NAPHTHALENE
91203
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
149
Subcategory*FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility Eff1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M, P
NICKEL
7440020
1
ND
17.00
NC
288.34
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
NICKEL
7440020
2
NC
23.80
NC
117.89
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
NICKEL
7440020
3
NC
21.30
NC
164 .24
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
NICKEL
7440020
4
NC
33.60
NC
380.44
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
NICKEL
7440020
5
NC
24.30
NC
222.72
40.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
3.04
NC
4.59
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
2
NC
2.84
NC
2 .16
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M, P
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
3
NC
0.14
NC
3.24
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M, P
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
0.22
NC
1.34
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
0.28
NC
1.22
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
0+P XYLENE
136777612
5
ND
10. 00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L, M, P
PHENOL
108952
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.91
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L, M, P
PHENOL
108952
3
ND
10.00
ND
37 .20
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L, M, P
PHENOL
108952
5
NC
10.73
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
SELENIUM
7782492
1
ND
20.00
NC
13.49
5.00
UG/L
N
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
SELENIUM
7782492
2
ND
2.00
NC
9.17
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
SELENIUM
7782492
3
ND
2.00
NC
14.23
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
SELENIUM
7782492
4
ND
2 .00
NC
12.07
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
SELENIUM
7782492
5
ND
2.00
ND
8.90
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TIN
7440315
1
ND
2.00
NC
4 .92
30.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TIN
7440315
2
ND
2.00
NC
8.14
30.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L, M, P
TIN
7440315
3
ND
2. 00
NC
5.98
30.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L,M, P
TIN
7440315
4
ND
2.00
NC
25.42
30.00
UG/L
P
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M, P
TIN
7440315
5
NC
2.20
NC
9.99
30.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M, P
TITANIUM
7440326
1
ND
4.00
NC
81.84
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TITANIUM
7440326
2
ND
4.00
NC
34.00
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TITANIUM
7440326
3
ND
4.00
NC
70.22
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TITANIUM
7440326
4
ND
4.00
NC
95.05
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TITANIUM
7440326
5
ND
4.00
NC
63.32
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOLUENE
108883
1
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOLUENE
108883
3
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOLUENE
108883
5
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
(TOC)
C012
1
NC
63.00
NC
47.62
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
(TOC)
C012
2
NC
124.00
NC
44 .39
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
(TOC)
C012
3
NC
99.00
NC
54 .43
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
150
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Us<
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass
*
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
4
NC
84.00
NC
30.81
1.00
MG/L
P P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
5
NC
70.00
NC
33.96
1.00
MG/L
P P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL PHENOLS
CO 20
1
ND
0.05
ND
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
2
ND
0.05
NC
0.08
0.05
MG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
3
NC
0.14
NC
0.23
0.05
MG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M,P
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
4
ND
0.05
ND
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M,P
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
5
ND
0.05
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
VANADIUM
7440622
1
ND
9.00
NC
10.72
50.00
UG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
VANADIUM
7440622
2
ND
9.00
NC
11.22
50.00
UG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
VANADIUM
7440622
3
ND
9.00
NC
10.07
50.00
UG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
VANADIUM
7440622
4
ND
9.00
NC
17.68
50.00
UG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
VANADIUM
7440622
5
ND
9.00
NC
10.90
50.00
UG/L
F F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
119.00
NC
33,152.85
20.00
UG/L
P P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
ZINC
7440666
2
NC
177.00
NC
37,880.11
20.00
UG/L
P P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L,M,P
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
280.00
NC
43,180.96
20.00
UG/L
P P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K, L, M, P
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
202.00
NC
34,497.00
20.00
UG/L
P P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-Q
SP-K,L, M, P
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
149.00
NC
47,994.90
20.00
UG/L
P P
Y
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
1
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
2
NC
14.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
3
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
4
ND
20.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
5
NC
17.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
6
NC
11.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
7
NC
23.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
8
NC
27.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
9
NC
23.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
10
NC
16.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
11
NC
13.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
12
NC
44.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
13
NC
86.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
14
NC
56.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
15
NC
16. 00
10.00
UG/L
,
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
16
NC
43.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
17
NC
33.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
18
NC
29.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
19
NC
33.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
20
NC
26.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
21
NC
45.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
22
NC
15.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used*N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
151
(continued)
*CARBON
BAT1
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
23
NC
17.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
24
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
25
NC
29.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
26
NC
74 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
27
NC
32.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
28
NC
24.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
29
NC
22.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
30
NC
21.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
32
NC
12 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
33
NC
63 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
34
NC
69.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
35
NC
28.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
36
NC
53.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
37
NC
54.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
38
NC
38.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
39
NC
20.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
40
NC
21.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
41
NC
43 .00
10. 00
UG/L
Y
o
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
42
NC
224.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
.
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
43
NC
23 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
KM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
44
NC
41.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
i—'
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
45
NC
28.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
46
NC
14.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
47
NC
42 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
48
NC
53 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
49
NC
117.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
50
NC
39.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
51
NC
49.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
52
NC
38 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
53
NC
97 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
54
NC
35 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
55
NC
40.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
56
NC
19.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
57
NC
39.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
58
NC
21.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
59
NC
166.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
60
NC
78.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
61
NC
20.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
62
NC
29.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
63
NC
28.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
64
NC
23 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
65
NC
19.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
66
NC
69.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used®Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
152
Facility
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
o
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
1
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
to
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
Subcategory=FlNiSHlNG
-- Option^
CARBON
_BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
CHROMIUM
7440473
67
NC
26.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
68
NC
40.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
69
NC
49.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
70
NC
30.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
71
NC
32 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
72
NC
35.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
73
NC
11.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
74
NC
37.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
75
NC
88.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
76
NC
42.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
77
NC
20.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
78
NC
24 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
79
NC
18.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
80
NC
26.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
81
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
82
NC
29.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
83
NC
24 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
84
NC
44 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
85
NC
39.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
86
NC
326 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
87
NC
34 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
88
NC
53.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
89
NC
101.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
90
NC
40.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
91
NC
73 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
92
NC
33.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
93
NC
46.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
94
NC
34.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
95
NC
34.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
96
NC
22.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
97
NC
28.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
98
NC
45.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
99
NC
26.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
100
NC
28.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
101
NC
48.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
102
NC
17.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
103
ND
10.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
104
NC
56.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
105
NC
38.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
106
NC
21.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
107
NC
33.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
108
NC
53 .00
10.00
UG/L
Y
CHROMIUM
7440473
109
NC
74.00
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
153
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
n
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
110
NC
62.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
111
NC
53.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
112
NC
47.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
113
NC
129.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
114
NC
30.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
115
NC
34.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
116
NC
56.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
117
NC
38.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
118
NC
12.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
119
NC
40.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
120
NC
35.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
121
NC
38.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
122
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
123
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
124
NC
11.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
125
NC
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
126
NC
36.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
127
NC
16,00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
128
NC
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
129
NC
11.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
130
NC
12.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
131
ND
15.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
132
NC
23.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
133
NC
38.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
134
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
135
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
136
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
137
NC
19.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
138
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
139
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
140
NC
12.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
141
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
142
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
143
NC
21.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
144
NC
32.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
145
NC
40.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
146
NC
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
147
NC
11.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
148
NC
23 .00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
149
NC
13 .00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
150
NC
18.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
151
NC
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
152
ND
10.00
* Pass/Fail of Step 1
and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test
(See Sec
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10,00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
154
Facility
Ef fl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISMS7
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
o
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
1
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
Lh
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7440473
153
ND
10.00
7440473
154
ND
10.00
7440473
155
NC
13.00
7440473
156
NC
16.00
7440473
157
NC
15.00
7440473
158
ND
10.00
7440473
159
ND
10.00
7440473
160
NC
14.00
7440473
161
NC
14.00
7440473
162
NC
25.00
7440473
163
NC
31.00
7440473
164
ND
10.00
7440473
165
NC
40.00
7440473
166
NC
12.00
7440473
167
NC
18.00
7440473
168
NC
12.00
7440473
169
NC
15.00
7440473
170
NC
17.00
7440473
171
NC
25.00
7440473
172
NC
18.00
7440473
173
NC
22.00
7440473
174
NC
12.00
7440473
175
NC
20.00
7440473
176
NC
23.00
7440473
177
NC
19.00
7440473
178
NC
31.00
7440473
179
ND
10.00
7440473
180
ND
10.00
7440473
181
ND
10.00
7440473
182
NC
22.00
7440473
183
NC
33.00
7440473
184
ND
10.00
7440473
185
ND
10.00
7440473
186
ND
10.00
7440473
187
NC
10.00
7440473
188
ND
10.00
7440473
189
ND
10.00
7440473
190
ND
10.00
7440473
191
ND
10.00
7440473
192
NC
18.00
7440473
193
NC
74 .00
7440473
194
ND
10.00
7440473
195
ND
10.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit l*
2* Pass •'
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
155
Subcategory®FINISHING -- Op t i on=CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
o
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
CHROMIUM
7440473
196
NC
42.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
197
NC
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
198
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
199
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
200
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
201
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
202
NC
23.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
203
NC
17.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
204
NC
13.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
205
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
206
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
207
NC
16.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
208
NC
32.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
209
NC
20.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
210
NC
12.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
211
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
212
NC
20.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
213
NC
27.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
214
NC
24 .00
CHROMIUM
7440473
215
NC
28.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
216
NC
18.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
217
NC
14 .00
CHROMIUM
7440473
. 218
NC
26.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
219
NC
15.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
220
NC
28.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
221
NC
19.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
222
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
223
NC
33.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
224
NC
38.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
225
NC
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
226
NC
24 .00
CHROMIUM
7440473
227
NC
23.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
228
NC
19.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
229
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
230
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
231
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
232
NC
21.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
233
NC
14.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
234
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
235
NC
22.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
236
ND
10.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
237
NC
13.00
CHROMIUM
7440473
238
NC
47.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pas
Used
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used~N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of concern
156
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
o
L/l
ON
Ef f 1.
Infl
Facility Effl.
In£l.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
239
ND
10.00
ISMS7
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
240
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
241
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
242
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
243
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
244
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
245
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
246
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
247
NC
51.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
248
NC
22 .00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
249
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
250
NC
57.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
251
NC
22.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
252
NC
17.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
253
NC
27.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
254
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
255
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
256
NC
31.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
257
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
258
NC
24 .00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
259
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
260
NC
22.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
261
NC
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
262
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
263
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
5
ND
5.00
I SMS 7
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
7
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
8
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
9
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
10
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
11
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
12
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
13
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
14
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
15
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
16
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
17
ND
5.00
Infl.
Amount
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10. 00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
157
Subcategory=FlNlSHlNG -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
o
Lh
-J
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
IB
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
19
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
20
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
21
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
22
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
23
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
24
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
25
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
26
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
27
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
28
NC
8.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
29
NC
12.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
30
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
32
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
33
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
34
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
35
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
36
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
37
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
38
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
39
ND
5 .00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
40
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
41
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
42
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
43
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
44
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
45
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
46
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
47
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
48
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
49
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
50
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
51
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
52
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
53
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
54
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
55
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
56
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
57
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
58
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
59
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
60
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
61
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
I Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
ouui.ai.cyviysr iriiDninu —
(continued)
LHKOUH BA11
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
62
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
63
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
64
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
65
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
66
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
67
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
68
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
69
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
70
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
71
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
72
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
73
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
74
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
75
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
76
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
77
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
78
ND
5.00
n
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
79
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
80
ND
5.00
i
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
81
ND
5.00
Ui
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
82
ND
5.00
oo
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
83
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
84
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
85
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
86
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
87
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
88
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
89
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
90
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
91
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
92
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
93
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
94
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
95
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
96
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
97
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
98
NC
7.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
99
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
100
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
101
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
102
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
103
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
104
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50 .00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50 .00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
159
O
VO
(continued)
bCARBON_BAT1
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
105
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
106
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
107
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
108
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
109
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
110
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
111
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
112
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
113
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
114
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
115
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
116
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
117
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
118
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
119
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
120
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
121
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
122
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
123
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
124
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
125
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
126
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
127
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
128
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
129
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
130
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
131
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
132
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
133
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
134
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
135
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
136
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
137
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
138
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
139
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
140
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
141
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
142
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
143
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
144
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
145
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
146
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
147
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
auui;dLt:yuiyBr inianinu -- uynun«
(continued)
'LhKDUN
Ef f 1.
Facility
Ef f 1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
148
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
149
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
150
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
151
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
152
ND
5 .00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
153
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
154
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
155
NC
11.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
156
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
157
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
156
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
159
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
160
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
161
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
162
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
163
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
164
ND
5.00
o
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
165
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
166
ND
5.00
1
~—*
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
167
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
168
ND
5.00
O
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
169
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
170
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
171
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
172
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
173
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
174
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
175
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
176
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
177
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
178
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
179
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
180
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
181
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
182
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
183
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
184
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
185
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
186
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
187
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
188
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
189
ND
5.00
ISM57
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
190
ND
5.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsedeN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
161
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
o
ON
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-
SP-
SP-
SP-
SP-
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
Effl
Sample
Meas
Cas_No
Day
Type
7439921
191
ND
7439921
192
ND
7439921
193
ND
7439921
194
ND
7439921
195
ND
7439921
196
ND
7439921
197
ND
7439921
198
ND
7439921
199
ND
7439921
200
ND
7439921
201
ND
7439921
202
ND
7439921
203
ND
7439921
204
ND
7439921
205
ND
7439921
206
ND
7439921
207
ND
7439921
208
ND
7439921
209
ND
7439921
210
ND
7439921
211
ND
7439921
212
ND
7439921
213
ND
7439921
214
ND
7439921
215
ND
7439921
216
ND
7439921
217
ND
7439921
218
ND
7439921
219
ND
7439921
220
ND
7439921
221
ND
7439921
222
ND
7439921
223
ND
7439921
224
ND
7439921
225
ND
7439921
226
ND
7439921
227
ND
7439921
220
NC
7439921
229
ND
7439921
230
ND
7439921
231
ND
7439921
232
ND
7439921
233
ND
Inf 1.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
00
00
00
00
00
00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
6.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
i **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
,
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
162
Subcategory=FlNiSHlNG -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
o
o\
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISMS7
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7439921
234
ND
5.00
7439921
235
ND
5.00
7439921
236
ND
5.00
7439921
237
ND
5.00
7439921
238
ND
5.00
7439921
239
ND
5.00
7439921
240
ND
5.00
7439921
241
ND
5.00
7439921
242
ND
5.00
7439921
243
ND
5.00
7439921
244
ND
5.00
7439921
245
ND
5.00
7439921
246
ND
5.00
7439921
247
ND
5.00
7439921
246
ND
5.00
7439921
249
ND
5.00
7439921
250
ND
5.00
7439921
251
ND
5.00
7439921
252
ND
5.00
7439921
253
ND
5.00
7439921
254
ND
5.00
7439921
255
ND
5.00
7439921
256
ND
5.00
7439921
257
ND
5.00
7439921
258
ND
5.00
7439921
259
ND
5.00
7439921
260
ND
5.00
7439921
261
ND
5.00
7439921
262
ND
5.00
7439921
263
ND
5.00
91203
1
ND
0.50
91203
3
ND
0.50
91203
6
ND
0.50
91203
8
ND
0.50
91203
11
ND
0.50
91203
13
ND
0.50
91203
16
ND
0.50
91203
18
ND
0.50
91203
21
ND
0.50
91203
23
ND
0.50
91203
26
ND
0.50
91203
28
ND
0.50
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used Cor Data Editing Criteria Cor Pollutants oC Concern
163
Facility ECC1.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
n
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
i
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ON
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
U>
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
3ubcategory=FINISHING -- Option*
(continued)
Sample
Cas_No Day
91203 32
91203 34
91203 37
91203 39
91203 42
91203 44
91203 47
91203 49
91203 52
91203 54
91203 57
91203 59
91203 62
91203 64
91203 67
91203 69
91203 72
91203 74
91203 77
91203 79
91203 62
91203 64
91203 87
91203 69
91203 92
91203 94
91203 97
91203 99
91203 102
91203 104
91203 107
91203 109
91203 112
91203 114
91203 117
91203 119
91203 122
91203 124
91203 127
91203 129
91203 132
91203 134
91203 137
'CARBON BAT1
Effl. Infl.
Meas Effl. Meas Infl.
Type Amount | Type Amount
NC 8.00
NC 0.12
ND 0.50
ND 0.50
ND 0.50
NC 0.58
NC 0.65
ND 0.25
ND 0.2 5
ND 0.25
ND 0.25
ND 0.25
ND 0.25
ND 0.25
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
NC 2.40
NC 1.70
NC 5.00
NC 2.10
NC 1.60
NC 6.00
NC 8.20
NC 1.10
NC 4.20
NC 1.10
NC 3.50
ND 0.30
NC 4.40
NC 1.60
NC 4.30
NC 4.80
NC 6.70
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
NC 5.40
ND 0.30
ND 0.30
Baseline Step Step Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
duui.d«.t:yuiysr inisnir^j
L IU1I:
V-HKDUn
(continued)
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
139
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
142
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
144
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
147
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
149
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
152
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
154
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
157
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
159
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
162
ND
0. 30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
164
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
167
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
169
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
172
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
174
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
177
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
179
ND
0.30
o
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
162
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
184
ND
0.30
. * .
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
187
ND
0. 30
On
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
189
ND
0.30
4^
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
192
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
194
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
197
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
199
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
202
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
204
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
207
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
209
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
212
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
214
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
217
ND
0.70
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
219
ND
0.90
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
222
NC
1.00
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
224
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
227
NC
0.60
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
229
NC
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
232
NC
0.60
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
234
NC
0.40
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
237
NC
0.60
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
239
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
242
ND
0.30
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
244
ND
0.30
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit l*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
165
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Opt ion«CARBON__BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp pt
Analyte Name
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
o
ON
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
247
NC
0 .80
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
249
ND
0.30
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
252
ND
0.30
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
254
ND
0.30
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
257
NC
1.20
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
259
ND
0.30
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
NAPHTHALENE
91203
262
NC
0.50
10.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
1
NC
0.01
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
3
NC
0.03
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
6
NC
0.05
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
e
NC
0.14
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
n
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
13
NC
0.13
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
16
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
18
NC
0.13
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
21
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
23
NC
0.21
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
26
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
28
NC
0.16
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
32
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
34
NC
1.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
37
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
39
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
42
NC
0.16
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
44
NC
0.14
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
47
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
49
NC
0.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
52
NC
0.20
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
54
NC
0.29
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
57
NC
0.29
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
59
NC
0.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
62
NC
0.17
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
64
NC
0.19
0.05*
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
67
NC
0.17
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
69
NC
0.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO20
72
NC
0.55
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
74
NC
0.10
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
77
NC
0.08
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
79
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
82
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
84
NC
0.13
0.05
MG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
87
NC
0.39
0.05
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
166
ouuoaic^uiy=rinxoninu — upLium
(continued)
stnKDUN
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Mea9
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
89
NC
0.11
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
92
NC
0.16
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
94
NC
0.11
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
97
NC
0.07
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
99
NC
0.16
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
102
NC
0.18
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
104
NC
0.18
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
107
NC
0.05
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
109
NC
0.06
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
112
NC
0.11
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
114
NC
0.07
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
117
NC
0.12
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
119
NC
0.05
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
122
NC
0.16
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
124
NC
0.09
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
127
NC
0.07
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
129
NC
0.08
0.05
o
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
132
NC
0.06
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
134
NC
0.04
0.05
1
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
137
NC
0.08
0 . 05
ON
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
139
NC
0.06
0.05
0\
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
142
NC
0.05
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
144
NC
0.10
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
147
NC
0.05
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
149
NC
0.06
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
152
NC
0.00
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
154
NC
0.03
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
157
NC
0.06
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
159
NC
0.07
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
162
NC
0.03
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
164
NC
0.08
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
167
NC
0.06
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
169
NC
0.05
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
172
NC
0.05
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
174
NC
0.02
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
177
NC
0.03
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
179
NC
0.04
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
182
NC
0.03
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
184
NC
0.02
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
187
NC
0.11
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
189
NC
0.07
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
192
NC
0.07
0.05
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
194
NC
0.04
0.05
Step Step Use
Unit 1* 2* Pass ••
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L , Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
MG/L Y
* Pass/Fail o£ Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
167
o
CT\
-J
Subcategory=F
INISHING -- Option-
continued)
=CARBON_BAH
PI
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
197
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
199
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
202
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
204
NC
0.13
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
207
NC
0.12
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
209
NC
0.13
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
212
NC
0.10
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
214
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
217
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
219
NC
0.11
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
222
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
224
NC
0.08
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
227
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
229
NC
0.07
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
232
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
234
NC
0. IB
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
237
NC
0.09
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
239
NC
0.10
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
242
NC
0.12
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
244
NC
0.08
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
247
NC
0 .07
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
249
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
« 252
NC
0.15
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
254
NC
0.14
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
CO 20
257
NC
0.12
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
259
NC
0.06
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
TOTAL
PHENOLS
C020
262
NC
0.02
0.05
MG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
1
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
2
NC
15.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
3
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
4
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
36.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
6
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
7
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
B
NC
21.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
9
NC
18.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
10
NC
11.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
11
NC
23.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
12
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
13
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
14
NC
14.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
15
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
* Pas9/Fail of Step 1 and Step
2 in Long-Term Average Test
(See Section 14.5).
** Used-N
if data
are excluded
as described in Section 14.3,
Otherwis
te, Used«Y.
Step Step
1* 2* Pas
Used
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
168
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
o
On
00
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Eff1.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
value
Unit
1* 2* Pass
* *
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
16
NC
15.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
17
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
ie
NC
18.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
19
ND
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
20
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
21
NC
26.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
22
NC
24 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
23
NC
15.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
24
NC
19.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
25
NC
24 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
NC
79.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
27
NC
102.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
NC
124.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
29
NC
157.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
30
NC
128.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
32
NC
45.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
33
NC
59.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
34
NC
47.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
35
NC
48.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
36
NC
42.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
NC
32.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
38
NC
27.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
39
NC
70.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
41
NC
85.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
98.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
43
NC
44.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
NC
66.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
45
NC
87.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
46
NC
75 . 00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
47
NC
28.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
48
NC
37.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
NC
122.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
NC
134.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
51
NC
318.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
52
NC
404.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
53
NC
176.00
20.00
UG/L
¦
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
54
NC
112.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
55
NC
104.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
56
NC
49.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
57
NC
44.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
58
NC
74.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
59
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
60
NC
41.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data U9ed for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
169
auuuraueyoiy=r iwianiwij - - upcion=
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID'
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
61
NC
28.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
62
NC
11.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
63
NC
18.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
64
NC
53.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
65
NC
18.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
66
NC
20.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
67
NC
37.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
68
NC
56.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
69
NC
48.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
70
NC
20.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
71
NC
27 . 00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
72
NC
13.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
73
NC
11.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
74
NC
24 .00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
75
NC
58.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
76
NC
42.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
77
NC
18.00
n
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
70
NC
26.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
79
NC
78.00
i
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
80
NC
49.00
On
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
81
NC
20.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
82
NC
28.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
83
NC
49.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
84
NC
61.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
85
NC
48.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
86
NC
111.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
87
NC
41.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
88
NC
25.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
89
NC
47.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
90
NC
28.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
91
NC
30.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
92
NC
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
93
NC
95.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
94
NC
48.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
95
NC
27.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
96
NC
18.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
97
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
98
NC
16.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
99
ND
10.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
100
NC
13.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
101
NC
32.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
102
NC
19.00
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
103
NC
26.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20 . 00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
170
Facility
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
n
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
-J
ISM57
SP-A
o
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Infl.
Samp Pt
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Meas
Analyte Name
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
Infl. Baseline
Used
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
7440666
104
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
105
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
106
NC
26.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
107
NC
26.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
108
NC
22 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
109
NC
72.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
110
NC
48.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
111
NC
106.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
112
NC
32.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
113
NC
82.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
114
NC
31.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
115
NC
27.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
116
NC
51.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
117
NC
24.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
118
NC
16.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
119
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
120
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
121
NC
19.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
122
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
123
NC
35.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
124
NC
38.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
125
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
• 126
NC
112.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
127
NC
23 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
128
NC
13.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
129
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
130
NC
18.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
131
NC
36.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
132
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
133
NC
33.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
134
NC
18.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
135
ND
25.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
136
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
137
NC
35.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
138
NC
36.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
139
NC
15.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
140
NC
14 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
141
NC
21.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
142
NC
78.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
143
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
144
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
145
NC
31.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
146
NC
35.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
171
egory=FINISHING -- Option=CARBON__B AT 1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Sample
Effl.
Meas
n
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
ISM57
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ZINC
7440666
147
NC
16.00
ZINC
7440666
148
NC
34 .00
ZINC
7440666
149
NC
28.00
ZINC
7440666
150
NC
17.00
ZINC
7440666
151
NC
13.00
ZINC
7440666
152
NC
26 . 00
ZINC
7440666
153
NC
28.00
ZINC
7440666
154
NC
79.00
ZINC
7440666
155
NC
26.00
ZINC
7440666
156
NC
66.00
ZINC
7440666
157
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
158
NC
19.00
ZINC
7440666
159
NC
13.00
ZINC
7440666
160
NC
95.00
ZINC
7440666
161
NC
11.00
ZINC
7440666
162
NC
23.00
ZINC
7440666
163
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
164
NC
15.00
ZINC
7440666
165
NC
16.00
ZINC
7440666
166
NC
24.00
ZINC
7440666
167
NC
21.00
ZINC
7440666
168
NC
15.00
ZINC
7440666
169
NC
14 .00
ZINC
7440666
170
NC
12.00
ZINC
7440666
171
NC
29.00
ZINC
7440666
172
NC
13.00
ZINC
7440666
173
NC
30.00
ZINC
7440666
174
NC
27.00
ZINC
7440666
175
NC
18.00
ZINC
7440666
176
NC
93.00
ZINC
7440666
177
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
170
NC
25.00
ZINC
7440666
179
NC
27.00
ZINC
7440666
180
NC
16.00
ZINC
7440666
181
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
182
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
183
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
184
NC
10.00
ZINC
7440666
185
NC
14.00
ZINC
7440666
186
NC
13.00
ZINC
7440666
107
ND
10.00
ZINC
7440666
100
NC
13.00
ZINC
7440666
109
NC
10.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20. 00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
172
Subcategory=FiNiSHiNG -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility
Ef fl.
ID
Samp
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
o
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
1 ¦
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
to
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
ISM57
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
Ef f 1.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ZINC
7440666
190
NC
17 .00
ZINC
7440666
191
NC
14 .00
ZINC
7440666
192
NC
23.00
ZINC
7440666
193
NC
24.00
ZINC
7440666
194
NC
14.00
ZINC
7440666
195
NC
44 .00
ZINC
7440666
196
NC
33 .00
ZINC
7440666
197
NC
50.00
ZINC
7440666
198
NC
11.00
ZINC
7440666
199
NC
14.00
ZINC
7440666
200
NC
12.00
ZINC
7440666
201
NC
15.00
ZINC
7440666
202
NC
51.00
ZINC
7440666
203
NC
11.00
ZINC
7440666
204
NC
21.00
ZINC
7440666
205
NC
56.00
ZINC
7440666
206
NC
55.00
ZINC
7440666
207
NC
28.00
ZINC
7440666
208
NC
15.00
ZINC
7440666
209
NC
18.00
ZINC
7440666
210
NC
14 .00
ZINC
7440666
211
NC
21.00
ZINC
7440666
212
NC
27.00
ZINC
7440666
213
NC
59.00
ZINC
7440666
214
NC
35.00
ZINC
7440666
215
NC
29.00
ZINC
7440666
216
NC
20.00
ZINC
7440666
217
NC
32 .00
ZINC
7440666
218
NC
27.00
ZINC
7440666
219
NC
26.00
ZINC
7440666
220
NC
19.00
ZINC
7440666
221
NC
22 .00
ZINC
7440666
222
NC
20.00
ZINC
7440666
223
NC
30.00
ZINC
7440666
224
NC
21.00
ZINC
7440666
225
NC
12.00
ZINC
7440666
226
NC
20.00
ZINC
7440666
227
NC
14.00
ZINC
7440666
228
NC
18.00
ZINC
7440666
229
NC
14.00
ZINC
7440666
230
NC
24 .00
ZINC
7440666
231
NC
16.00
ZINC
7440666
232
NC
31.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsedeN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
173
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
o
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
1
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
OJ
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
ISM57
SP-A
ZINC
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
ISM58
ISM58
ISMS8
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
CHROMIUM
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
7440666
233
NC
14
00
7440666
234
NC
21
00
7440666
235
NC
14
00
7440666
236
ND
10
00
7440666
237
NC
14
00
7440666
238
NC
14
00
7440666
239
NC
19
00
7440666
240
NC
65
00
7440666
241
NC
14
00
7440666
242
NC
24
00
7440666
243
NC
12
00
7440666
244
NC
19
00
7440666
245
NC
19
00
7440666
246
NC
12
00
7440666
247
NC
46
00
7440666
248
NC
39
00
7440666
249
NC
21
00
7440666
250
NC
47
00
7440666
251
NC
16
00
7440666
252
NC
19
00
7440666
253
NC
12
00
7440666
254
NC
49
00
7440666
• 255
NC
30
00
7440666
256
NC
43
00
7440666
257
NC
70
00
7440666
258
NC
102
00
7440666
259
NC
27
00
7440666
260
NC
47
00
7440666
261
NC
66
00
7440666
262
NC
27
00
7440666
263
NC
48
00
7440473
1
ND
50
00
7440473
2
ND
50
00
7440473
3
ND
50
00
7440473
4
ND
50
00
7440473
5
ND
50
00
7440473
6
ND
50
00
7440473
7
ND
50
00
7440473
8
ND
50
00
7440473
9
ND
50
00
7440473
10
ND
50
00
7440473
11
ND
50
00
2 in Long
-Term Average Test
(See
Section 14.5)
as described in Section 14.3,
Otherwise, Used»Y
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
i **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
,
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
174
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option-CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
o
-J
-U
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
12
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
13
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
14
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
15
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
16
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
17
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
18
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
19
ND
ISM50
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
20
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
21
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
22
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
23
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
24
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
25
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
26
ND
ISM50
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
27
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
28
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
29
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
30
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
31
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
32
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
33
NC
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
34
NC
ISMS8
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
35
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
36
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
37
NC
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
38
ND
ISM59
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
39
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
40
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
41
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
42
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
43
ND
ISM59
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
44
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
45
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
46
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
47
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
48
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
49
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
50
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
51
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
52
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
53
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
54
ND
Inf 1.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
120.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00 .
. UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step l and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
175
Facility Effl. Infl.
ID Samp Pt Samp Pt Analyte Name
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM56
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
o
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
1
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM56
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
Subcategory»FINISHING -- Option»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl .
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7440473
55
ND
50.00
7440473
56
ND
50.00
7440473
57
ND
50.00
7440473
58
ND
50.00
7440473
59
ND
50.00
7440473
60
ND
50.00
7440473
61
ND
50.00
7440473
62
ND
50.00
7440473
63
ND
50.00
7440473
64
ND
50.00
7440473
65
ND
50.00
7440473
66
ND
50.00
7440473
67
ND
50.00
7440473
68
ND
50.00
7440473
69
NC
50.00
7440473
70
NC
50.00
7440473
71
ND
50.00
7440473
72
ND
50.00
7440473
73
ND
50.00
7440473
74
ND
50.00
7440473
75
ND
50.00
7440473
76
ND
50.00
7440473
77
ND
50.00
7440473
78
ND
50.00
7440473
79
ND
50.00
7440473
80
ND
50.00
7440473
81
ND
50.00
7440473
82
ND
50.00
7440473
83
ND
50.00
7440473
84
ND
50.00
7440473
85
ND
50.00
7440473
86
ND
50.00
7440473
87
ND
50.00
7440473
88
ND
50.00
7440473
89
ND
50.00
7440473
90
ND
50.00
7440473
91
ND
50.00
7440473
92
ND
50.00
7440473
93
ND
50.00
7440473
94
ND
50.00
7440473
95
ND
50.00
7440473
96
ND
50.00
7440473
97
ND
50.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount |
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
t *-
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
,
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
* Used*N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
176
Facility
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
o
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
1
t—i
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
On
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
ISM58
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
Subcategory-FINISHING
-- Option^
CARBON_
BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use(
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
CHROMIUM
7440473
98
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
99
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
100
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
101
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
102
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
103
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
104
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
105
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
106
ND
50.00
. 10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
107
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
108
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
109
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
110
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
111
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
112
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
113
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
114
ND
50.00
10 .00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
115
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
116
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
117
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
118
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
119
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
120
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
121
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
122
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
123
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
124
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
125
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
126
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
127
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
128
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
129
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
130
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
131
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
132
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
133
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
134
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
135
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
136
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
137
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
138
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
139
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
CHROMIUM
7440473
140
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcat
^FINISHING -- Opt ion»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
ility Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Ef f 1.
Meas
Ef f 1.
o
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
SM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
141
ND
50.00
£SM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
142
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
143
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
144
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
145
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
146
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
147
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
148
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
149
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
150
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
151
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
152
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
153
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
154
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
155
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
156
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
157
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
158
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
159
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
160
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
161
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
162
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
163
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
164
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
165
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
166
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
168
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
170
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
171
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
172
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
173
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
174
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
175
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
176
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
177
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
178
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
179
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
180
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
181
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
182
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
183
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
184
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
185
ND
50.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *'
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
178
ouui.ai.c^uLysrinionintj — upLiuiu
(continued)
LrtRoun
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Use<
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2* Pass
**
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
186
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
187
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
188
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
189
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
190
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
191
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
192
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
193
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
194
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
195
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
196
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
197
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
198
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
199
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
200
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
201
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
202
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
203
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
(">
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
204
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
1
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
205
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
-J
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
206
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
00
rSM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
207
ND
50 .00
10.00
UG/L
N
1 -M58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
208
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
IS'*58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
209
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISh"8
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
210
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISMfi
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
211
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM5b
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
212
NC
120.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
213
NC
140.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
214
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
^P-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
215
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
CHROMIUM
7440473
216
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
S\ -A
CHROMIUM
7440473
217
NC
20.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP^ *
CHROMIUM
7440473
218
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-i
CHROMIUM
7440473
219
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
220
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
221
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
,
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
222
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
223
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
tSM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
224
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
SM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
225
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
3M58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
226
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
'M58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
227
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
M58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
228
ND
50.00
10.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
179
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day j Type
o
-J
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
229
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
230
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
231
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
232
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
233
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
234
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
235
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
236
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
237
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
238
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
239
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
240
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
241
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
242
ND
ISM59
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
243
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
244
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
245
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
246
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
247
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
248
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
249
ND
ISM59
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
250
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
251
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
252
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
253
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
254
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
255
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
256
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
257
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
258
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
259
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
167
ND
ISM58
SP-A
CHROMIUM
7440473
169
ND
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984498
4
NC
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
9
NC
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
14
NC
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
19
NC
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
24
NC
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
29
NC
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
34
NC
ISM59
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
39
NC
ISM59
SP-A
FLUORIDE
16984488
44
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
0.26
0.41
0.31
0.23
0.50
0.28
0.42
0.41
0.32
Infl.
Amount
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *'
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
10.00
UG/L
N
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
0.10
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Ueed-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
180
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
o
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
I
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
00
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
O
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
ISM58
SP-A
FLUORIDE
FINISHING -- Option=
(continued)
*CARB0N_
BAT1
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
CasNo
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
16984488
49
NC
0.38
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
54
NC
0.31
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
59
NC
0.48
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
64
NC
0.28
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
69
NC
0 .38
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
74
NC
0.54
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
79
NC
0.28
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
84
NC
0.47
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
89
NC
0.55
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
94
NC
0.32
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
99
NC
0.93
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
104
NC
0.37
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
109
NC
0.93
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
114
NC
0.29
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
119
NC
0.59
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
124
NC
0.40
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
129
NC
0.33
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
134
NC
0.23
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
139
NC
0.23
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
144
NC
0.32
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
147
NC
0.34
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
152
NC
0.31
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
157
NC
0.30
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
162
NC
0.38
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
172
NC
0.92
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
177
NC
0.35
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
182
NC
0 .48
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
187
NC
0.28
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
192
NC
0.24
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
197
NC
0.22
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
202
NC
0 .42
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
207
NC
0.63
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
212
NC
0.88
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
217
NC
0.26
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
222
NC
0.36
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
227
NC
0.28
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
232
NC
0.31
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
237
NC
0.30
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
242
NC
0.32
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
247
NC
0.30
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
252
NC
0.36
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
257
NC
0.43
0.10
MG/L
Y
16984488
167
NC
0.34
0.10
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C.
Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern 181
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
o
oo
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT
CHROMIUM
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
18540299
3
ND
0.01
18540299
8
ND
0.01
18540299
13
ND
0.01
18540299
18
ND
0.01
18540299
23
ND
0 .01
18540299
28
ND
0.01
18540299
33
ND
0.01
18540299
38
ND
0.01
18540299
43
ND
0.01
18540299
48
ND
0.01
18540299
53
ND
0.01
18540299
58
ND
0.01
18540299
63
ND
0.01
18540299
68
ND
0.01
18540299
73
ND
0.01
18540299
78
ND
0.01
18540299
83
ND
0.01
18540299
88
ND
0.01
18540299
93
ND
0.01
18540299
98
ND
0.01
18540299
103
ND
0.01
18540299
* 108
ND
0.01
18540299
113
ND
0.01
18540299
118
ND
0.01
18540299
123
ND
0.01
18540299
128
ND
0.01
18540299
133
ND
0.01
18540299
138
ND
0.01
18540299
143
ND
0.01
18540299
146
NC
0.02
18540299
151
ND
0.01
18540299
156
ND
0.01
18540299
161
ND
0.01
18540299
166
ND
0.01
18540299
171
ND
0.01
18540299
176
ND
0.01
18540299
181
ND
0.01
18540299
186
ND
0.01
18540299
191
ND
0.01
18540299
196
ND
0.01
18540299
201
ND
0.01
18540299
206
ND
0.01
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit l* 2* Pass **
0.01
0.01
0 .01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
Pa9s/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
182
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
o
oo
to
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
211
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
216
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
221
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
226
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
231
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
236
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
241
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
246
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
251
ND
ISM58
SP-A
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
256
ND
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
1
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
2
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
3
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
4
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
5
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
6
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
7
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
8
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
9
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
10
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
11
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
12
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
13
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
14
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
15
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
16
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
17
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
18
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
19
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
20
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
21
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
22
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
23
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
24
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
25
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
26
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
27
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
28
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
29
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
30
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
31
NC
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
32
NC
infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
630.00
780.00
690.00
840.00
440.00
500.00
580.00
380.00
330.00
370.00
300.00
300.00
480.00
350.00
510.00
920.00
940.00
490.00
300.00
420.00
520.00
960.00
450.00
990.00
360.00
430.00
780.00
690.00
670.00
680.00
560.00
700.00
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
0.01
MG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
100.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test {See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
183
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
o
00
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
IRON
7439896
33
NC
1
090.00
IRON
7439896
34
NC
3
010.00
IRON
7439896
35
NC
560.00
IRON
7439896
36
NC
1
170.00
IRON
7439896
37
NC
1
650.00
IRON
7439896
38
NC
1
050.00
IRON
7439896
39
NC
860.00
IRON
7439896
40
NC
410.00
IRON
7439896
41
NC
570.00
IRON
7439896
42
NC
870.00
IRON
7439896
43
NC
750.00
IRON
7439896
44
NC
340.00
IRON
7439896
45
NC
440.00
IRON
7439896
46
NC
470.00
IRON
7439896
47
NC
520.00
IRON
7439896
48
NC
760.00
IRON
7439896
49
NC
430.00
IRON
7439896
50
NC
390.00
IRON
7439896
51
NC
330.00
IRON
7439896
52
NC
1
120.00
IRON
7439896
53
NC
550.00
IRON
7439896
54
NC
1
020.00
IRON
7439896
55
NC
660.00
IRON
7439896
56
NC
800.00
IRON
7439896
57
NC
680.00
IRON
7439896
58
NC
380.00
IRON
7439896
59
NC
370.00
IRON
7439896
60
NC
660.00
IRON
7439896
61
NC
440.00
IRON
7439896
62
NC
430 .00
IRON
7439896
63
NC
400.00
IRON
7439896
64
NC
470.00
IRON
7439896
65
NC
300.00
IRON
7439896
66
NC
320.00
IRON
7439896
67
NC
470.00
IRON
7439896
68
NC
320.00
IRON
7439896
69
NC
1
150.00
IRON
7439896
70
NC
1
540.00
IRON
7439896
71
NC
310.00
IRON
7439896
72
NC
340.00
IRON
7439896
73
NC
830.00
IRON
7439896
74
NC
440.00
IRON
7439896
75
NC
860.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Useds-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
164
o
00
auutdLe^uiysriNianinu — \jpLioii*
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
76
NC
1,280.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
77
NC
790.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
78
NC
510.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
79
NC
390.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
80
NC
520.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
81
NC
310.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
82
NC
540.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
83
NC
470.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
84
NC
370.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
85
NC
410 .00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
86
NC
1,240.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
87
NC
760.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
88
NC
700.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
89
NC
430.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
90
NC
400.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
91
NC
360.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
92
NC
400.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
93
NC
330.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
94
NC
310.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
95
NC
510.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
96
NC
410.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
97
NC
360.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
98
NC
510.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
99
NC
300.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
100
NC
360.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
101
NC
340.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
102
NC
640.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
103
NC
300.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
104
NC
260.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
105
NC
300.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
106
NC
680.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
107
NC
800.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
108
NC
690.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
109
NC
1,040.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
110
NC
650.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
111
NC
1,160.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
112
NC
350.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
113
NC
450.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
114
NC
310.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
115
NC
360.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
116
NC
390.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
117
NC
560.00
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
118
NC
7,950.00
100.00
Step Step
Unit 1* 2* Pass
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Used
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
185
O
oo
(continued)
CARBON^
_BAT1
Effl.
Infl.
?acility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Usee
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
119
NC
360.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
120
NC
240.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
121
NC
430.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
122
NC
500.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
123
NC
270.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
124
NC
400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
125
NC
760.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
126
NC
940.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
127
NC
1,380.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
128
NC
390.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
129
NC
280.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
130
NC
360.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
131
NC
490.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
132
NC
470.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
133
NC
240.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
134
NC
200.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
135
NC
210.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
136
NC
240.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
137
NC
340.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
138
NC
200.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
139
NC
180.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
140
NC
340.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
141
NC
250.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
142
NC
380.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
143
NC
220.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
144
NC
230.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
145
NC
2,310.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
146
NC
150.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
147
NC
310.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
148
NC
310.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
149
NC
610.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
150
NC
2,310.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
151
NC
520.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
152
NC
280.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
153
NC
300.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
154
NC
420.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
155
NC
270.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
156
NC
590.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
157
NC
190.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
158
NC
550.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
159
NC
450.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
160
NC
360 .00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
IRON
7439896
161
NC
190.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
186
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option«CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
o
00
ON
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Infl.
Meas
Analyte Name Cas_No Day | Type Amount | Type
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Uaed=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise/ Used»Y.
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7439896
162
NC
280.00
7439896
163
NC
300.00
7439896
164
NC
300.00
7439896
165
NC
290.00
7439896
166
NC
360.00
7439896
168
NC
490.00
7439896
170
NC
380.00
7439896
171
NC
380.00
7439896
172
NC
380.00
7439896
173
NC
740.00
7439896
174
NC
720.00
7439896
175
NC
450.00
7439896
176
NC
530.00
7439896
177
NC
480.00
7439896
178
NC
630.00
7439896
179
NC
740.00
7439896
180
NC
720.00
7439896
181
NC
480.00
7439896
182
NC
1,100.00
7439896
183
NC
520.00
7439896
184
NC
630.00
7439896
185
NC
780.00
7439896
186
NC
520.00
7439896
187
NC
480.00
7439896
188
NC
500.00
7439896
189
NC
500.00
7439896
190
NC
630.00
7439896
191
NC
580.00
7439896
192
NC
390.00
7439896
193
NC
350.00
7439896
194
NC
810.00
7439896
195
NC
520.00
7439896
196
NC
420.00
7439896
197
NC
360.00
7439896
198
NC
580.00
7439896
199
NC
460.00
7439896
200
NC
320.00
7439896
201
NC
500.00
7439896
202
NC
420.00
7439896
203
NC
440.00
7439896
204
NC
760.00
7439896
205
NC
500.00
7439896
206
NC
1,300.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
167
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
o
oo
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
isMse
ISM56
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Subcategory«FlNlSHING
-- Option«
^CARBON
BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
IRON
7439896
207
NC
330.00
IRON
7439896
208
NC
800.00
IRON
7439896
209
NC
390.00
IRON
7439896
210
NC
1,180.00
IRON
7439896
211
NC
510.00
IRON
7439896
212
NC
2,440.00
IRON
7439896
213
NC
3,470.00
IRON
7439896
214
NC
630.00
IRON
7439896
215
NC
630.00
IRON
7439896
216
NC
560.00
IRON
7439896
217
NC
520.00
IRON
7439896
218
NC
340.00
IRON
7439896
219
NC
580.00
IRON
7439896
220
NC
300.00
IRON
7439896
221
NC
980.00
IRON
7439896
222
NC
300.00
IRON
7439896
223
NC
470.00
IRON
7439896
224
NC
1,080.00
IRON
7439896
225
NC
530.00
IRON
7439896
226
NC
440.00
IRON
7439896
227
NC
500.00
IRON
7439896
228
NC
500.00
IRON
7439896
229
NC
430.00
IRON
7439896
230
NC
900.00
IRON
7439896
231
NC
1,540.00
IRON
7439896
232
NC
500.00
IRON
7439896
233
NC
420.00
IRON
7439896
234
NC
630.00
IRON
7439896
235
NC
670.00
IRON
7439896
236
NC
700.00
IRON
7439896
237
NC
1,320.00
IRON
7439896
238
NC
560.00
IRON
7439896
239
NC
870.00
IRON
7439896
240
NC
850.00
IRON
7439896
241
NC
620.00
IRON
7439896
242
NC
450.00
IRON
7439896
243
NC
390.00
IRON
7439896
244
NC
1,500.00
IRON
7439896
245
NC
620.00
IRON
7439896
246
NC
430.00
IRON
7439896
247
NC
500.00
IRON
7439896
248
NC
500.00
IRON
7439896
249
NC
280.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
166
Subcategory»FINISHING -- Option¦CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
OO
oo
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
IRON
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
Cas_No
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439896
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
Sample
Day
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
167
169
15
90
145
201
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Meas
Effl.
Meas
infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
NC
460.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
890.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
1,370.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
920.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
910.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
520.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
340.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
650.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
1,140.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
780.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
230.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
NC
310.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ND
100.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ND
100.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ND
100.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ND
100.00
50.00
UG/L
N
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0 .02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
NC
0.04
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
189
Subcategory»FINISHING -- Opt ion=« CARBON_BAT 1
(continued)
Effl. infl.
Facility
Effl.
infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass **
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
26
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
27
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
28
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
29
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
30
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
31
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
32
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
33
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
34
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
35
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
36
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
37
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
38
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
39
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
40
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
41
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
42
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
o
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
43
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
44
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
1
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
45
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
OO
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
46
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
vo
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
47
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
48
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
49
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
50
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
51
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
52
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
53
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
54
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
55
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
56
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
57
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISMS8
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
58
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
59
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
60
NC
0.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
61
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
62
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
63
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
64
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
65
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
66
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
67
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
68
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used^N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
o
\D
O
ouDUdteyory»r-- uption
(continued)
slAKBUN BAT 1
Effl .
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
69
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
70
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
71
NC
0.04
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
72
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
73
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
74
NC
0.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
75
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
76
NC
0.04
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
77
NC
0.05
0. 02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
78
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
79
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
80
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
81
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
82
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
83
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
84
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
85
ND
0.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
86
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
87
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
88
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
89
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
90
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
91
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
92
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
93
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
94
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
95
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
96
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
97
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
98
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
99
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
100
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
101
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
102
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
103
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
104
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
105
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
106
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
107
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
108
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
109
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
110
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
111
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pa99/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
191
Facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
n
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
i
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
I—»
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM50
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Cas_No
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
Ef f 1.
ample
Meas
Effl.
Day
Type
Amount
112
ND
0.02
113
ND
0.02
114
ND
0.02
115
ND
0.02
116
ND
0.02
117
ND
0.02
118
ND
0.02
119
ND
0.02
120
ND
0.02
121
ND
0.02
122
ND
0.02
123
ND
0.02
124
ND
0.02
125
ND
0.02
126
ND
0.02
127
NC
0.03
128
ND
0.02
129
ND
0.02
130
ND
0.02
131
ND
0.02
132
ND
0.02
133
ND
0.02
134
ND
0.02
135
ND
0.02
136
ND
0.02
137
ND
0.02
138
ND
0.02
139
ND
0.02
140
NC
0.02
141
ND
0.02
142
ND
0.02
143
ND
0.02
144
ND
0.02
145
NC
0.03
146
ND
0.02
147
ND
0.02
148
ND
0.02
149
ND
0.02
150
ND
0.02
151
NC
0.04
152
ND
0 .02
153
ND
0.02
154
ND
0.02
inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Slue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
192
ouui.atcyui j ~ inisninu
-- upuiuin
BrtU
(continued)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
155
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
156
ND
0.02
ISMS6
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
157
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
158
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
159
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
160
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
161
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
162
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
163
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
164
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
165
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
166
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
168
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
170
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
171
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
172
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
173
ND
0.02
o
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
174
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
175
ND
0.02
1
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
176
NC
0 .02
VO
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
177
ND
0.02
N)
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
178
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
179
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
180
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
181
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
182
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
183
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
184
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
185
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
186
NC
0.06
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
187
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
188
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
189
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
190
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
191
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
192
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
193
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
194
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
195
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
196
NC
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
197
ND
0.02
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
198
NC
0.03
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
57125
199
ND
0.02
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit l*
2* Pass **
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
193
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
o
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
1 .
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
V©
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
ISM58
SP-A
TOTAL
CYANIDE
Subcategory=FINlSHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Mea9
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
CasNo
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
57125
200
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
201
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
202
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
203
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
204
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
205
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
206
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
207
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
208
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
209
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
210
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
211
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
212
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
213
NC
0.04
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
214
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
215
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
216
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
217
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
218
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
219
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
220
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
221
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
. 222
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
223
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
224
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
225
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
226
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
227
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
228
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
229
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
230
NC
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
231
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
232
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
233
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
234
NC
0.03
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
235
NC
0.04
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
236
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
237
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
238
NC
0.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
239
NC
0.04
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
240
NC
0.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
241
NC
0.05
0.02
MG/L
Y
57125
242
ND
0.02
0.02
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Teat (See Section 14.5).
* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
194
Subcategory=FlNlSHlNG -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Ef f 1.
ID Samp Pt
infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
o
vo
ISM58
ISM58
iSMse
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISMS8
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
Cas_No
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
57125
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
167
169
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
ND
NC
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
NC
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
0.02
0.05
0 .02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
Infl.
Amount
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
0.02
MG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20. 00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
195
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
24
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
25
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
27
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
28
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
29
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
30
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
31
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
32
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
33
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
34
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
35
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
36
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
NC
60.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
38
NC
60.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
39
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
40
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
41
ND
50.00
20,00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
42
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
43
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
45
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
46
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
47
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
48
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
51
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
52
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
53
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
54
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
55
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
56
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
57
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISMS8
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
58
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISMS8
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
59
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
60
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
61
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
62
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
63
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
64
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
65
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
66
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
N
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (see Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
196
ouucaicyuiyariflioninu —
(continued)
¦ LAKDUN
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
67
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
68
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
69
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
70
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
71
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
72
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
73
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
74
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
75
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
76
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
77
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
78
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
79
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
80
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
81
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
82
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
83
ND
50.00
o
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
84
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
85
ND
50.00
¦
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
86
ND
50.00
VO
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
87
ND
50.00
On
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
88
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
• 89
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
90
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
91
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
92
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
93
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
94
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
95
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
96
NC
60.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
97
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
98
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
99
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
100
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
101
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
102
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
103
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
104
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
105
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
106
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
107
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
108
ND
50. 00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
109
ND
50.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
UsedsN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
197
Subcategory=FlNlSHlNG -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
o
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
ISM58
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7440666
110
ND
50.00
7440666
111
ND
50.00
7440666
112
ND
50.00
7440666
113
ND
50.00
7440666
114
ND
50.00
7440666
115
ND
50.00
7440666
116
ND
50 . 00
7440666
117
ND
50.00
7440666
118
ND
50.00
7440666
119
ND
50.00
7440666
120
ND
50.00
7440666
121
ND
50.00
7440666
122
ND
50.00
7440666
123
ND
50.00
7440666
124
NC
100.00
7440666
125
ND
50.00
7440666
126
ND
50.00
7440666
127
ND
50.00
7440666
128
ND
50.00
7440666
129
NC
60.00
7440666
130
ND
50.00
7440666
131
ND
50.00
7440666
132
ND
50.00
7440666
133
ND
50.00
7440666
134
ND
10.00
7440666
135
ND
50.00
7440666
136
ND
50.00
7440666
137
ND
50.00
7440666
138
ND
50.00
7440666
139
ND
50.00
7440666
140
ND
50.00
7440666
141
ND
50.00
7440666
142
ND
50.00
7440666
143
ND
50.00
7440666
144
ND
50.00
7440666
145
NC
55.00
7440666
146
ND
50.00
7440666
147
ND
50.00
7440666
148
ND
50.00
7440666
149
ND
50.00
7440666
150
ND
50.00
7440666
151
ND
50.00
7440666
152
ND
50.00
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20 . 00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20 . 00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing criteria for Pollutants of Concern
198
auuwciL^uiysrinionin^ — upcxoii*
(continued)
¦ LMKBUN DAI 1
Ef f 1.
Facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
153
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
154
ND
50.00
ISM50
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
155
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
156
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
157
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
158
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
159
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
160
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
161
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
162
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
163
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
164
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
165
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
166
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
168
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
170
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
171
ND
50.00
a
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
172
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
173
ND
50.00
i
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
174
ND
50.00
v£>
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
175
ND
50.00
oo
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
176
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
177
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
178
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
179
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
180
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
181
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
182
NC
60.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
183
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
184
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
18S
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
186
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
107
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
188
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
109
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
190
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
191
ND
50.00
ISM50
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
192
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
193
ND
50.00
ISM50
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
194
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
195
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
196
ND
50.00
ISM50
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
197
ND
50.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutant9 of Concern
199
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option*CARBON_BATl
(continued)
o
VO
VO
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
198
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
199
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
200
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
201
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
202
ND
50.00
ISMS8
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
203
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
204
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
205
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
206
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
207
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
208
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
209
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
210
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
211
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
212
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
213
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
214
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
215
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
216
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
217
ND
10.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
218
ND
50 .00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
219
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
220
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
221
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
222
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
223
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
224
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
225
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
226
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
227
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
228
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
229
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
230
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
231
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
232
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
233
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
234
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
235
NC
100.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
236
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
237
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
238
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
239
ND
50.00
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
240
ND
50.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20 . 00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
U9ed«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
200
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
o
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
i
N)
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
o
ISM58
SP-A
ZINC
o
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
Subcategory^FINISHING -- Option»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7440666
241
ND
50.00
7440666
242
ND
50.00
7440666
243
ND
50.00
7440666
244
ND
50.00
7440666
245
ND
50.00
7440666
246
ND
50.00
7440666
247
ND
50.00
7440666
248
ND
50.00
7440666
249
ND
50.00
7440666
250
ND
50.00
7440666
251
ND
50.00
7440666
252
ND
50.00
7440666
253
ND
50.00
7440666
254
ND
50.00
7440666
255
ND
50.00
7440666
256
ND
50.00
7440666
257
ND
50.00
7440666
258
ND
50.00
7440666
259
ND
50.00
7440666
167
ND
50.00
7440666
169
ND
50.00
7440508
3
ND
20.00
7440508
4
NC
23 .00
7440508
8
ND
20.00
7440508
9
NC
61.00
7440508
15
ND
20.00
7440508
16
NC
25.00
7440508
21
ND
20.00
7440508
22
ND
20.00
7440508
28
ND
20.00
7440508
29
ND
20.00
7440508
35
ND
20.00
7440508
36
ND
20.00
7440508
42
ND
20.00
7440508
43
NC
29.00
7440508
49
ND
20.00
7440508
50
NC
22 .00
7440508
56
ND
20.00
7440508
57
NC
24.00
7440508
63
ND
20.00
7440508
64
ND
20.00
7440508
70
ND
20.00
Inffl.
Meas
Type
infl.
Amount
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
*• Ueed=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
201
Subcategory=FlNlSHlNG -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
p
to
o
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Ef fl .
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
71
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440506
77
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
78
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
84
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
85
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440500
91
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440500
92
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
98
NC
23.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
1SM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
99
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
105
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
106
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
112
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
113
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
119
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
120
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
126
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
127
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
131
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
134
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
140
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
141
ND
20.00
25-00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
147
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
148
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
154
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
155
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
161
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
162
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
167
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
169
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
175
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
176
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
182
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
183
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
189
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
190
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
196
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
197
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
203
NC
33.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
204
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
210
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
211
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
217
ND
20.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
218
NC
21.00
25.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
*+ Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
202
Subcategory»FINISHING -- Option-CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
0
1
to
o
to
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
224
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
225
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
231
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
232
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
238
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
239
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
245
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
246
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
252
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
253
ND
20.00
ISM 66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
259
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
260
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
266
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
267
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
273
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
274
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
280
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
281
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
287
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
288
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
294
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
295
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
301
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
302
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
308
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440506
309
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440506
315
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
316
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
322
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
323
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
328
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
329
NC
32.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
336
NC
38.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
337
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
343
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
344
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
350
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
351
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
356
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
357
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
363
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
COPPER
7440508
364
ND
20.00
infl.
Meas
infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25. 00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
25.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test {See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
203
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option=CARB0N_BAT1
(continued)
o
K)
O
U)
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
8
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
9
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
15
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
16
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
21
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
22
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
28
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
29
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
35
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
36
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
42
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
43
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
49
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
50
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
56
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
57
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
63
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
64
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
70
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
71
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
77
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
78
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
84
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
85
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
91
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
92
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
98
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
99
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
105
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
106
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
112
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
113
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
119
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
120
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
126
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
127
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
131
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
134
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
140
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
141
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
147
ND
20.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
204
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Option=CARBON__BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
0
1
to
o
ID
Samp Pt
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B .
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
ISM66
SP-B
Infl.
Samp Pt
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
LEAD
7439921
148
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
154
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
155
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
161
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
162
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
167
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
169
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
175
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
176
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
182
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
183
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
189
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
190
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
196
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
197
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
203
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
204
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
210
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
211
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
217
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
218
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
224
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
225
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
231
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
232
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
238
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
239
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
245
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
246
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
252
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
253
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
259
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
260
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
266
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
267
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
273
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
274
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
280
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
281
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
287
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
288
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
294
ND
20.00
LEAD
7439921
295
ND
20.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount |
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing criteria for Pollutants of Concern
205
Subcategory-FINISHING -- Opt i on «CARB0N_BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
301
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
302
ND
20.00
50 . 00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
308
ND
20.00
50 . 00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
309
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
315
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
316
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
322
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
323
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
328
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
329
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
336
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
337
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
343
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
344
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
350
NC
40.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
351
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
356
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
357
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
363
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
LEAD
7439921
364
ND
20.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
91.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
107.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
8
NC
25.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
9
NC
340.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
15
NC
162.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
16
NC
149.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
21
NC
121.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
22
NC
125.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
28
NC
39.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
29
NC
33.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
35
NC
80.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
36
NC
207.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
100.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
43
NC
82.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
49
NC
75.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
50
ND
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
56
NC
47.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
57
NC
87.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
63
NC
25.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
64
NC
79.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
70
NC
288.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
71
NC
450.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
206
0
1
K>
o
Os
auucaLeyuLysrinxoninu -- vyuiuns
(continued)
Effl.
facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas__No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
77
NC
121.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
78
NC
127.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
64
NC
103.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
65
NC
87.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
91
NC
65.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
92
NC
117.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
98
NC
210.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
99
NC
179.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
105
ND
20.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
106
NC
105.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
112
NC
110.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
113
NC
41.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
119
NC
58.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
120
NC
56.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
126
NC
27.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
127
NC
90.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
131
NC
212.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
134
NC
172.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
140
NC
234.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
141
NC
367.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
147
NC
321.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
148
NC
306.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
154
NC
274.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
155
NC
104.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
161
NC
159.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
162
NC
325.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
167
NC
26.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
169
NC
40.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
175
NC
107.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
176
NC
154.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
182
NC
224.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
183
NC
122.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
169
NC
193.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
190
NC
159.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
196
NC
55.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
197
NC
159.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
203
NC
421.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
204
NC
466.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
210
NC
237.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
211
NC
194.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
217
NC
231.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
216
NC
176.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
224
NC
141.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pass/Fall of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
207
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option=CARBON^BAT1
(continued)
0
1
NJ
O
-J
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Caa_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
225
NC
157.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
231
NC
193.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
232
NC
261.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
238
NC
67.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
239
NC
146.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
245
NC
29.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
246
NC
100.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
252
NC
127.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
253
NC
21.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
259
NC
142.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
260
NC
84.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
266
NC
196.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
267
NC
162.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
273
NC
93.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
274
NC
187.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
260
NC
69.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
261
NC
115.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
287
NC
323.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
286
NC
259.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
294
NC
86.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
295
NC
106.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
301
NC
238.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
302
NC
173.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
308
NC
79.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
309
NC
97.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
315
NC
80.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
316
NC
69.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
322
NC
54 .00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
323
NC
67.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
328
NC
29.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
329
NC
161.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
336
NC
156.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
337
NC
88.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
343
NC
246.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
344
NC
124.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
350
NC
110.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
351
NC
128.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
356
NC
85.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
357
NC
74.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
363
NC
125.00
ISM66
SP-B
ZINC
7440666
364
NC
127.00
ISM76 SP-E
LEAD
7439921
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20 . 00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Ueed»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
208
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
to
o
00
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
ISM76
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
SP-E
Analyte Name
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
FINISHING
-- nnfirmoraRRnN
BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
7439921
246
NC
3.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
7439921
254
NC
14.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
7439921
308
NC
6.40
50.00
UG/L
Y
7439921
324
NC
5.60
50.00
UG/L
Y
7439921
328
NC
5.10
50.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
3
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
8
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
14
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
22
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
28
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
35
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
42
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
49
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
56
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
63
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
70
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
77
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
84
NC
80.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
92
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
98
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
105
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
. 112
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
121
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
133
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
142
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
148
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
154
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
161
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
168
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
175
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
183
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
197
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
204
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
217
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
227
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
232
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
240
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
246
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
254
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
259
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
275
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
280
NC
40.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
209
Facility Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
ISM76
SP-E
ISM76
SP-E
ISM76
SP-E
ISM76
SP-E
Subcategory«FINISHING -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
\
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
Effl.
Infl
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
7440666
288
NC
20.00
7440666
295
NC
30.00
7440666
302
NC
30.00
7440666
326
NC
66.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1* 2*
Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
y
20.00
UG/L
y
20.00
UG/L
y
Subcategory«INT_STEEL -- Option»BATl ---
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ALUMINUM
7429905
1
NC
190.29
NC
13
349.99
200.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ALUMINUM
7429905
2
NC
319.36
NC
667.15
200.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ALUMINUM
7429905
3
NC
190.10
NC
7
564.70
200.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ALUMINUM
7429905
4
NC
245.32
NC
5
031.74
200.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ALUMINUM
7429905
5
NC
195.81
NC
4
272.55
200.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
NC
0.12
NC
0.30
0.05
MG/L
F
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
NC
0.17
NC
0.30
0.05
MG/L
F
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
0.16
NC
1.38
0.05
MG/L
F
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
0.14
NC
1.34
0.05
MG/L
F
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
0.11
NC
0.32
0.05
MG/L
F
P
Y
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P, Q,S,V
ANTIMONY
7440360
1
NC
40.49
NC
67.56
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
ANTIMONY
7440360
2
NC
62. 52
NC
63.82
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ANTIMONY
7440360
3
NC
49.88
NC
209.16
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ANTIMONY
7440360
4
NC
64 .05
NC
127.92
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
ANTIMONY
7440360
5
NC
57.65
NC
318.94
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
BERYLLIUM
7440417
1
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5 .00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
BERYLLIUM
7440417
2
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L, M, P, Q, S, V
BERYLLIUM
7440417
3
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
BERYLLIUM
7440417
4
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
BERYLLIUM
7440417
5
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
, N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
CADMIUM
7440439
1
ND
1.00
NC
206.72
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,0,S,V
CADMIUM
7440439
2
ND
1.00
NC
16.99
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P,Q,S,V
CADMIUM
7440439
3
ND
1.00
NC
103.58
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M, P,Q,S,V
CADMIUM
7440439
4
ND
1.00
NC
5.31
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M, P, Q, S, V
CADMIUM
7440439
5
ND
1.00
NC
6.98
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
• Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step
2 in Long
-Term Average Test
(See Section 14.
5) .
** Used-N if data are excluded
as described in Section 14.3,
Otherwise, Used
=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
210
Subcategory=INT_STEEL -- Option=BATl -
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility Effl.
infl
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp
Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
S,V
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
NC
22 .88
NC
605.48
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
S,v
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
17.84
NC
317.37
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C, D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s, V
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
16.88
NC
355.57
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
25.80
NC
217.60
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHEMICAL OXYGEN
DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
22 . 57
NC
109.35
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHROMIUM
7440473
1
NC
11.46
NC
5,127.24
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHROMIUM
7440473
2
NC
8.14
NC
244.53
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHROMIUM
7440473
3
NC
10.34
NC
2,346.09
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHROMIUM
7440473
4
NC
8.99
NC
1,886.50
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
CHROMIUM
7440473
5
NC
11.64
NC
357.27
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s, V
COBALT
7440484
1
NC
10.84
NC
139.26
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COBALT
7440484
2
ND
10.00
NC
17.15
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COBALT
7440484
3
ND
10.00
NC
77 .12
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COBALT
7440484
4
ND
10.00
NC
49.47
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COBALT
7440484
5
NC
10.90
NC
14.36
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COPPER
7440508
1
ND
10.00
NC
3,435.89
25.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s, V
COPPER
7440508
2
NC
11.48
NC
158.88
25.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s, V
COPPER
7440508
3
NC
10 .77
NC
1,364.28
25.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COPPER
7440508
4
ND
9.00
NC
813.12
25.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
COPPER
7440508
5
ND
9.00
NC
242.51
25.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
FLUORIDE
16984488
1
NC
13.12
NC
24.52
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
FLUORIDE
16984488
2
NC
14.31
NC
7.36
0 .10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
FLUORIDE
16984488
3
NC
11.46
NC
18.16
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
FLUORIDE
16984488
4
NC
20.24
NC
39.96
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
FLUORIDE
16984488
5
NC
18 .27
NC
32.14
0 .10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s, V
IRON
7439896
1
NC
2,516.12
NC
7399745.62
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
IRON
7439896
2
NC
647.60
NC
366,751.19
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
IRON
7439896
3
NC
608.42
NC
3703963.69
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
IRON
7439896
4
NC
1,180.18
NC
2638726.15
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
IRON
7439896
5
NC
886.92
NC
415,308.95
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
LEAD
7439921
1
NC
21.76
NC
21,408.65
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
LEAD
7439921
2
NC
7.96
NC
1,007.91
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
LEAD
7439921
3
NC
7 .92
NC
9,713.47
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
LEAD
7439921
4
NC
9.98
NC
6,932.93
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s,v
LEAD
7439921
5
NC
12.34
NC
926.92
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L
M
P
Q
s, V
MAGNESIUM
7439954
1
NC
49,216.65
NC
622,199.51
5000.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
211
Subcategory=INT_STEEL -- Option-BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,v
MAGNESIUM
7439954
2
NC
44,590.89
NC
53,626.61
5000.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,V
MAGNESIUM
7439954
3
NC
60,767.15
NC
540,504.80
5000.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,V
MAGNESIUM
7439954
4
NC
54,696.54
NC
383,307.44
5000.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,V
MAGNESIUM
7439954
5
NC
72,976.06
NC
71,732.43
5000.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L.M.P
Q
S,V
MANGANESE
7439965
1
NC
118.50
NC
194,497.16
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,V
MANGANESE
7439965
2
NC
53.12
NC
8,289.56
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,V
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
50.13
NC
79,105.06
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MANGANESE
7439965
4
NC
54.01
NC
59,436.07
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MANGANESE
7439965
5
NC
59.79
NC
12,294.30
15.00
UG/L
p
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MERCURY
7439976
1
ND
0.20
NC
2.26
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MERCURY
7439976
2
ND
0.20
NC
0.20
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MERCURY
7439976
3
ND
0.20
NC
0.45
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MERCURY
7439976
4
ND
0.20
NC
0.20
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MERCURY
7439976
5
ND
0.20
NC
0.29
0.20
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
1
NC
1,029.11
NC
2,934.55
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MOLYBDENUM
7439907
2
NC
1,074.41
NC
400.61
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MOLYBDENUM
7439907
3
NC
451.39
NC
422.73
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MOLYBDENUM
7439907
4
NC
444.56
NC
316.07
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
MOLYBDENUM
7439907
5
NC
279.51
NC
65.43
10.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
NICKEL
7440020
1
ND
17.00
NC
892.99
40.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
NICKEL
7440020
2
ND
17.00
NC
56.50
40.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s, v
NICKEL
7440020
3
ND
17.00
NC
455.25
40.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
S,v
NICKEL
7440020
4
ND
18.00
NC
334.06
40.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
NICKEL
7440020
5
ND
18.00
NC
74 .40
40.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
1
NC
2.56
NC
2.52
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
2
NC
1.09
NC
1.90
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s, v
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
3
NC
1.60
NC
2.32
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s, V
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
4
NC
1.73
NC
2.65
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
5
NC
1.95
NC
1.60
0.01
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
PHENOL
108952
1
ND
10.00
NC
73.07
10.00
UG/L
F
F
. N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
PHENOL
108952
3
ND
10.00
NC
70.66
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
PHENOL
108952
5
ND
10.00
NC
25.06
10.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
SILVER
7440224
1
ND
5.00
NC
266.10
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
SILVER
7440224
2
ND
5.00
NC
9.09
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
SILVER
7440224
3
ND
5.00
NC
98.02
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,P
Q
s,v
SILVER
7440224
4
NC
5.72
NC
61.04
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5) .
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
212
Subcategory=lNT_STEEL -- Option=BATl
(continued)
Effl. Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M,
P,Q,S,V
SILVER
7440224
5
ND
5.00
NC
12.75
10.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TIN
7440315
1
NC
3 .32
NC
915.12
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TIN
7440315
2
NC
4.46
NC
99.94
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TIN
7440315
3
NC
3 .71
NC
1,005.93
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P»Q»S,V
TIN
7440315
4
ND
4 .00
NC
329.29
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
p,q,s,v
TIN
7440315
5
ND
4.00
NC
117.72
30.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P, Q, S, V
TITANIUM
7440326
1
NC
5.85
NC
1,663.36
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TITANIUM
7440326
2
NC
6.07
NC
85.55
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TITANIUM
7440326
3
NC
5.73
NC
1,258.43
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TITANIUM
7440326
4
NC
5.57
NC
1,179.77
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q»S,V
TITANIUM
7440326
5
NC
7.02
NC
420.47
5.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
PiQ.S.V
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
1
ND
10.00
NC
42.62
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
2
ND
10.00
ND
10.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P. Q» S, V
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOC)
C012
3
ND
10.00
NC
181.27
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOO
C012
4
ND
10.00
NC
190.25
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
TOTAL ORGANIC
CARBON
(TOO
C012
5
NC
5.70
ND
10.00
1.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P#Q/S,V
VANADIUM
7440622
1
NC
15.34
NC
1,365.78
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
VANADIUM
7440622
2
NC
14.60
NC
84.86
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
VANADIUM
7440622
3
NC
12.39
NC
880.74
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
VANADIUM
7440622
4
NC
14.22
NC
749.59
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
VANADIUM
7440622
5
NC
16.10
NC
128.09
50.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
319.93
NC
2861326.10
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
ZINC
7440666
2
NC
54 .72
NC
30,142.60
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
44.13
NC
358,041.73
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
103.98
NC
241,489.70
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-A,B+C,D
SP-L,M
P,Q,S,V
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
84 .49
NC
23,380.99
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
3
NC
40.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
7
NC
27.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
14
NC
25.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
21
NC
19.00
50.00
UG/L
,
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
28
NC
66.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
35
NC
47.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
42
NC
15 .00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
49
NC
32.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
56
NC
17 .00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
63
NC
56.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
70
NC
236.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
213
Subcategory-INT_STEEL -- Option=BATl
(continued)
0
1
K)
U>
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
77
ND
10.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
84
NC
125.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
91
NC
59.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
96
NC
57.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
105
NC
79.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
112
NC
147.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
119
NC
38.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
126
NC
1,150.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
133
NC
262.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
140
NC
206.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
148
NC
176.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
154
NC
240.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
161
NC
336.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
168
NC
442.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
175
NC
195.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
162
NC
141.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
189
NC
364.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
196
NC
268.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
203
NC
210.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
210
NC
167.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
217
NC
43.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
224
NC
139.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
231
NC
142.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
239
NC
142.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
246
NC
107.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
252
NC
56.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
259
NC
69.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
266
NC
104.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
273
NC
82.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
280
NC
49.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
287
NC
49.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
294
NC
77.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
301
NC
91.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
308
NC
93.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
315
NC
95.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
322
NC
91.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
329
NC
89.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
336
NC
129.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
343
NC
86.00
ISM75
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
350
NC
222.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
357
NC
160.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
LEAD
7439921
364
NC
121.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50. 00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UQ/L
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data U9ed for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
214
o
to
£
— ouutaLeyuiy=xni_oiEE,L —
(continued)
,lon=DHi1
Effl.
?acility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
49.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
7
NC
41.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
14
NC
34 .00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
21
NC
22.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
28
NC
56.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
35
NC
66.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
30.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
49
NC
52.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
56
NC
34 .00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
63
NC
89.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
70
NC
157.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
77
NC
26.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
64
NC
176.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
91
NC
29.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
96
NC
105.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
105
NC
100.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
112
NC
118.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
119
NC
47.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
126
NC
146.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
133
NC
132.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
140
NC
150.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
146
NC
222.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
154
NC
327.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
161
NC
113.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
166
NC
237.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
175
NC
631.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
182
NC
60.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
189
NC
265.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
196
NC
272.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
203
NC
781.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
210
NC
524 .00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
217
NC
74.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
224
NC
141.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
231
NC
91.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
239
NC
224 .00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
246
NC
51.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
252
NC
74 .00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
259
ND
10.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
266
NC
124.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
273
NC
66.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
260
NC
83 .00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
267
NC
21.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
294
NC
55.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount |
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L ,
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
215
Subcategory=lNT_STEEL -
(continued)
Opt ion«BATl
Effl .
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM7 5
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
301
NC
85.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
308
NC
25.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
315
NC
45.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
322
NC
88.00
ISM7 5
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
329
NC
76.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
336
NC
66.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
343
NC
49.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
350
NC
183.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
357
NC
82.00
ISM75
SP-C
ZINC
7440666
364
NC
111.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount I Value Unit 1* 2* pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
Subcategory-INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON_BATl
o
N>
Effl .
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2* pass
* *
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
10.19
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
10.51
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
3
NC
12.52
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
4
NC
14 .40
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
5
NC
12.15
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
NC
11.22
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
7
NC
13.91
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
8
NC
12.74
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
9
NC
10.35
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
10
NC
30.94
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
11
NC
16.15
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
12
ND
11.06
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
1
NC
14.55
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
14
ND
13.90
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
15
NC
14.40
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
16
NC
15.87
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
17
ND
14.51
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
18
ND
13.38
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
19
ND
16.43
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
20
ND
13.65
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
21
ND
15.67
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
22
NC
14.41
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
23
NC
19.06
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
24
ND
12.17
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
k* Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix c. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
216
0
1
to
o\
ouuudueyoiy®iNi &ic.c.Lr -- upcion=
(continued)
=LAKBUN_
JSAT1
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
25
NC
12.55
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
26
ND
12.29
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
27
ND
11.84
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
28
ND
19.69
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
29
NC
14 .63
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
30
ND
14.47
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
16 .32
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
32
NC
17 .34
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
ND
13.29
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
7
ND
14 .24
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
ND
13.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
9
ND
14 .73
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
37
NC
21.70
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
38
NC
22.36
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
11
ND
14 .69
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
40
NC
18.14
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
41
NC
16 .65
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
42
NC
16.94
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
15
ND
14 .74
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
44
ND
15.44
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
45
NC
12.88
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
46
NC
13.69
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
47
NC
15.07
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
48
NC
11.11
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
49
NC
12.16
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
50
NC
12.45
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
51
NC
16.82
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
52
NC
22.40
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
20
ND
13.72
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
21
ND
13.31
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
22
ND
14 .54
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
56
NC
11.92
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
57
ND
12.19
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
58
ND
11.26
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
59
NC
15.36
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
60
NC
19.44
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
61
NC
12.29
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
62
NC
15.19
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
63
NC
23 .72
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
29
ND
12.02
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
30
ND
18.48
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
31
ND
12.19
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
32
ND
11.56
50.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
UsedaN if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
217
Subcategory*INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
0
1
K)
-J
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
7439921
68
NC
20.41
7439921
34
ND
11.77
7439921
70
NC
11.79
7439921
36
ND
13 .34
7439921
37
ND
12 .62
7439921
38
ND
13 .39
7439921
39
ND
12 .16
7439921
40
ND
11.23
7439921
76
NC
12.96
7439921
77
NC
13 .31
7439921
43
ND
11.57
7439921
44
ND
13 .65
7439921
80
NC
10.76
7439921
81
NC
10.99
7439921
82
ND
10.08
7439921
45
ND
11.29
7439921
84
ND
10.34
7439921
85
ND
12.52
7439921
86
ND
12.54
7439921
87
ND
12.63
7439921
88
ND
12.10
7439921
47
ND
12.66
7439921
48
ND
13.28
7439921
' 91
NC
12.98
7439921
92
ND
12.64
7439921
50
ND
14 . 34
7439921
94
NC
17.51
7439921
52
ND
14 .19
7439921
53
ND
12.63
7439921
54
ND
12.78
7439921
98
NC
14 .46
7439921
99
NC
12 .43
7439921
57
ND
12.09
7439921
58
ND
11.49
7439921
59
ND
10.39
7439921
60
ND
9.84
7439921
104
NC
11.32
7439921
62
ND
15.42
7439921
106
NC
10.99
7439921
64
ND
10.23
7439921
108
NC
14 .63
7439921
109
ND
9.35
7439921
110
ND
9.79
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
suuLdyi aiCiCjjj — upcion>
(continued)
« CAKBUW DAT1
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
111
NC
10.97
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
112
ND
9.22
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
113
ND
8.77
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
114
ND
8.95
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
115
ND
9.55
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
116
ND
10.40
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
117
ND
9.78
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
118
ND
12.14
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
119
ND
9.46
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
120
ND
11.24
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
65
ND
14 .92
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
66
ND
11.55
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
67
ND
15.22
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
68
ND
11.82
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
69
ND
8.05
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
70
ND
12.04
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
71
ND
11.71
o
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
128
ND
16.64
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
129
ND
14.31
1
to
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
130
ND
13 .14
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
131
ND
9.59
oo
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
132
ND
11 .82
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
133
ND
12.43
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
134
ND
12.73
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
135
ND
12.60
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
136
NC
14.92
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
137
NC
13.63
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
138
ND
12.07
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
139
ND
13.57
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
140
ND
12.41
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
141
ND
11.42
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
142
ND
13.07
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
143
ND
13.22
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
144
ND
12.54
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
145
ND
14.03
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
146
ND
12.65
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
147
ND
12 .13
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
148
NC
11.52
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
73
ND
12.88
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
150
ND
12.96
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
151
ND
12.39
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
152
ND
11. 33
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
153
ND
12.69
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount |
Baseline
Step Step
Used
value
Unit 1*
2* Pass •*
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UQ/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
219
Subcategory®INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
Facility
Effl
ID
Samp
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
o
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
1
to
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
vo
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
ISM60
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
LEAD
7439921
74
ND
13.30
LEAD
7439921
155
ND
12.71
LEAD
7439921
156
ND
14.06
LEAD
7439921
157
ND
13.21
LEAD
7439921
156
ND
13 .45
LEAD
7439921
159
ND
14.36
LEAD
7439921
160
ND
14.47
LEAD
7439921
75
ND
16.52
LEAD
7439921
76
ND
17.60
LEAD
7439921
163
ND
15.56
LEAD
7439921
77
ND
14 .73
LEAD
7439921
165
ND
13.71
LEAD
7439921
166
ND
14 .16
LEAD
7439921
167
NC
13.29
LEAD
7439921
166
NC
10.91
LEAD
7439921
169
ND
11.45
LEAD
7439921
170
ND
11.55
LEAD
7439921
171
ND
13.69
LEAD
7439921
172
ND
14 .76
LEAD
7439921
173
ND
14.04
LEAD
7439921
174
ND
13.45
LEAD
7439921
175
NC
16.69
LEAD
7439921
176
ND
14.53
LEAD
7439921
177
ND
13.69
LEAD
7439921
178
NC
15.07
LEAD
7439921
179
NC
13.34
LEAD
7439921
160
NC
13.64
LEAD
7439921
161
ND
13.26
LEAD
7439921
162
NC
13.20
LEAD
7439921
163
NC
11.62
LEAD
7439921
164
NC
13.27
LEAD
7439921
165
NC
13.66
LEAD
7439921
166
NC
13.69
LEAD
7439921
61
ND
13 .14
LEAD
7439921
166
NC
13.56
LEAD
7439921
169
ND
12.45
LEAD
7439921
190
ND
12.66
LEAD
7439921
191
ND
12.76
LEAD
7439921
192
ND
12.73
LEAD
7439921
63
ND
14.00
LEAD
7439921
64
ND
11.63
LEAD
7439921
195
ND
13.26
LEAD
7439921
65
ND
13 .42
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used'N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
220
0
1
O
(continued)
¦(.AKUUN
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
197
ND
12.49
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
198
ND
13.12
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
199
ND
13.28
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
200
ND
13 .64
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
201
ND
13 .28
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
86
ND
16.88
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
203
NC
15.78
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
204
ND
12 .25
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
205
NC
20.03
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
206
ND
11.30
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
207
ND
13.26
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
208
ND
17.68
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
209
ND
14.15
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
210
ND
13.31
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
211
ND
15.54
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
212
ND
14 .46
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
213
NC
22 .26
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
214
ND
14 .13
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
215
ND
22.51
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
74-39921
216
ND
17.52
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
87
ND
22.13
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
218
NC
17.78
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
89
ND
14 .45
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
90
ND
16.93
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
223
ND
18.80
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
224
ND
13.12
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
225
ND
17.05
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
226
ND
14 .23
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
227
ND
15.31
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
230
ND
14 .09
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
92
ND
14 .17
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
232
ND
14 .59
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
233
ND
22 .18
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
234
ND
13.92
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
237
ND
14.69
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
238
ND
12.20
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
239
ND
12.53
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
93
ND
13 .95
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
94
ND
13.63
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
244
ND
12.79
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
245
ND
13.98
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
246
ND
12 . 54
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
247
ND
14.42
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
221
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
o
t
K>
K>
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
Subcategory^INT STEEL
-- Option=
*CARB0N_
BAT1
(continued)
Effl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
LEAD
7439921
246
ND
12.10
LEAD
7439921
251
ND
16.39
LEAD
7439921
252
ND
12 .87
LEAD
7439921
253
ND
13 .67
LEAD
7439921
254
ND
12.96
LEAD
7439921
255
NC
15.22
LEAD
7439921
258
ND
16.09
LEAD
7439921
95
ND
22.39
LEAD
7439921
260
ND
15.07
LEAD
7439921
261
ND
15.79
LEAD
7439921
262
ND
15.37
LEAD
7439921
265
NC
15.23
LEAD
7439921
266
ND
15.60
LEAD
7439921
267
ND
13 .60
LEAD
7439921
268
ND
13 .34
LEAD
7439921
269
NC
15.97
LEAD
7439921
272
ND
17 .09
LEAD
7439921
273
ND
14 .16
LEAD
7439921
274
ND
13 .70
LEAD
7439921
275
ND
17.28
LEAD
7439921
276
ND
16.20
LEAD
7439921
279
NC
16.95
LEAD
7439921
280
ND
11.98
LEAD
7439921
281
ND
16.05
LEAD
7439921
282
ND
11.40
LEAD
7439921
263
NC
13.84
LEAD
7439921
286
ND
16.15
LEAD
7439921
97
ND
12 .77
LEAD
7439921
288
NC
13 .81
LEAD
7439921
269
ND
15.35
LEAD
7439921
290
ND
10.97
LEAD
7439921
293
NC
17 .71
LEAD
7439921
98
ND
16.66
LEAD
7439921
295
NC
14.58
LEAD
7439921
99
ND
14 .06
LEAD
7439921
297
ND
13 .62
LEAD
7439921
300
NC
16.32
LEAD
7439921
301
ND
11.82
LEAD
7439921
302
ND
12 .88
LEAD
7439921
303
ND
14.52
LEAD
7439921
304
ND
13 .29
LEAD
7439921
307
NC
13.53
LEAD
7439921
308
NC
12.21
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Ueed«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
222
Subcategory-INTSTEEL -- Option-CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
0
1
K)
K)
K)
Effl .
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
309
ND
13 .41
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
310
NC
23.79
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
311
NC
11.83
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
104
ND
11.67
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
105
ND
22 .56
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
316
ND
12.12
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
317
ND
13.56
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
318
NC
13 .81
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
321
ND
12.94
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
322
NC
20.75
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
323
NC
26.39
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
324
NC
14.20
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
325
NC
23.46
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
328
NC
14 .74
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
329
ND
14.27
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
330
NC
15.43
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
331
ND
14.15
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
332
NC
18.62
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
109
ND
13 . 54
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
110
ND
14.98
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
111
ND
14.30
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
112
ND
14.01
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
339
ND
11.26
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
342
NC
15.38
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
343
NC
17 . 56
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
344
NC
16.39
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
345
ND
14.65
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
346
NC
18.45
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
349
ND
14.80
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
350
ND
14.92
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
113
ND
10.45
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
352
ND
12.40
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
114
ND
15.71
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
356
NC
16.25
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
357
ND
15.05
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
350
NC
14.96
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
359
NC
16.52
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
360
NC
15.94
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
363
ND
15.15
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
364
ND
15.00
ISM60
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
365
NC
14.79
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ZINC 7440666 1
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
20.00 UG/L
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
223
Subcategory*INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON__BAT 1
(continued)
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Ef f 1 .
Sample Meas
Day | Type
0
1
to
to
u>
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
2
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
6
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
7
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
8
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
9
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
10
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
11
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
12
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
14
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
15
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
16
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
17
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
18
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
19
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
20
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
21
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
22
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
2
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
24
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
25
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
27
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
28
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
29
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
30
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
6
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
7
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
8
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
9
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
10
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
11
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
12
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
13
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
14
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
15
NC
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
NC
Infl.
Eff1. Meas
Amount | Type
63.99
107.19
100.25
182.00
85.99
130.45
92.91
56.93
259.76
169.92
98 .77
62.64
98.14
119.02
201.08
123.30
157.51
95.24
77.77
184.78
111.95
76.91
118.85
117.82
52.44
58.46
123.55
195.89
92.58
105.73
90.53
93.24
130.87
67.46
170.81
253.35
119.18
94.27
109.26
114.58
168.92
154.57
128.16
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
+* Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
224
Subcategory«INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
0
1
K)
K)
4^
Ef f 1.
Facility Eff1.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Ef f 1.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cae_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
45
NC
88.49
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
16
NC
99.53
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
47
NC
146.83
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
17
NC
93 .29
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
NC
98.65
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
NC
76.27
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
18
NC
101.83
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
19
NC
256.74
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
20
NC
116.20
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
21
NC
96.60
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
22
NC
135.79
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
23
NC
124.60
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
57
NC
83.67
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
58
NC
62.32
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
24
NC
65.47
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
25
NC
78 .89
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
NC
122.43
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
27
NC
176.76
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
28
NC
289.74
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
29
NC
133.25
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
30
NC
157.19
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
31
NC
145.77
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
32
NC
116.53
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
33
NC
283.96
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
34
NC
110.79
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
35
NC
116.52
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
36
NC
48.73
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
NC
62.32
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
38
NC
47.54
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
39
NC
63.92
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
40
NC
60.95
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
41
NC
86.96
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
131.37
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
43
NC
72.28
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
NC
138.17
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
80
NC
76.29
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
81
NC
63.96
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
82
NC
91.31
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
45
NC
58.36
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
84
NC
54.06
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
85
NC
82.70
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
86
NC
79.50
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
87
NC
92 .69
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit l*
2* Pass **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20. 00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3/ Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
225
Subcategory-INT_STEEL -- Opt ion»CARBON_BATl
(continued)
0
1
K)
K)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
88
NC
82 .46
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
47
NC
79.15
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
48
NC
151.25
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
NC
107.93
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
92
NC
95.49
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
NC
207.36
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
51
NC
147.01
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
95
NC
62.28
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
96
NC
74 .90
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
54
NC
77.32
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
55
NC
89.56
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
56
NC
73 .96
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
57
NC
65.86
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
58
NC
72.30
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
59
NC
71.64
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
60
NC
57.63
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
61
NC
56.89
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
62
NC
125.72
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
63
NC
56.41
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
107
NC
77.62
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
108
NC
99.32
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
109
NC
52.86
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
110
NC
51.72
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
111
NC
75.99
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
112
NC
59.05
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
113
NC
45.50
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
114
NC
27.46
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
115
NC
45.88
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
116
NC
61.75
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
117
NC
109.19
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
118
NC
137.96
ISH60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
119
NC
82.59
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
120
NC
115.63
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
65
NC
159.53
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
66
NC
80.18
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
67
NC
159.89
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
68
NC
75.95
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
69
NC
53 .38
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
70
NC
55.16
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
71
NC
62.06
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
128
NC
131.20
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
129
NC
146.77
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
130
NC
96.19
Infl.
Meas
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
226
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
o
K)
K)
On
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
ISM60
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Subcategory«INT STEEL -- Option«
(continued)
•CARBON
_BAT1
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step Step
Usee
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1* 2*
Pass **
7440666
131
NC
68.93
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
132
NC
66.52
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
133
NC
100 .42
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
134
NC
80.19
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
135
NC
77 .52
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
136
NC
105.55
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
137
NC
69.66
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
138
NC
74 .73
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
139
NC
132.10
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
140
NC
91.65
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
141
NC
68.71
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
142
NC
99.42
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
143
NC
87.11
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
144
NC
99.92
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
145
NC
119 .08
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
146
NC
119.12
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
147
NC
92.80
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
148
NC
70.93
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
73
NC
61.32
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
150
NC
77.81
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
151
NC
98.19
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
152
NC
77.75
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
153
NC
73.19
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
74
NC
75.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
155
NC
51.03
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
156
NC
86.55
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
157
NC
76.65
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
158
NC
106.41
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
159
NC
126.51
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
160
NC
114 .16
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
75
NC
140.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
76
NC
158.64
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
163
NC
145.41
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
77
NC
105.46
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
165
NC
63.91
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
166
NC
110.88
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
167
NC
96.25
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
168
NC
61.57
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
169
NC
49.16
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
170
NC
47.88
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
171
NC
63.98
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
172
NC
102.09
20.00
UG/L
Y
7440666
173
NC
88.51
20.00
UG/L
Y
Analyte Name
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used®Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
227
Subcategory=INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
0
1
K)
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount |
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
174
NC
64.73
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
175
NC
67.08
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
176
NC
92.96
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
177
NC
72.00
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
178
NC
82 .46
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
179
NC
57.27
1SM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
160
NC
155.68
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
161
NC
156.98
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
162
NC
128.60
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
163
NC
64.48
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
78
NC
56.49
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
79
NC
65.16
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
186
NC
66.24
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
81
NC
103.59
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
188
NC
107.99
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
189
NC
55.27
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
190
NC
35.61
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
191
NC
47.56
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
192
NC
65.06
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
83
NC
70.65
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
64
NC
40.66
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
195
NC
39.41
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
196
NC
23.78
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
197
NC
45 .70
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
198
NC
59.22
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
199
NC
39.89
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
200
NC
50.72
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
201
NC
32.84
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
86
NC
93.30
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
203
NC
36.94
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
204
NC
65.97
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
205
NC
209.71
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
206
NC
53.69
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
207
NC
42.45
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
206
NC
71.20
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
209
NC
52.80
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
210
NC
31.59
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
211
NC
56.07
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
212
NC
33.74
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
213
NC
267.56
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
214
NC
73.37
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
215
NC
183.52
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
216
NC
112.89
inf 1.
Meas
Infl. Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass
i **
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20. 00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20 . 00
UG/L
Y
20 . 00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20 .00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20 .00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used*N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used tor Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
228
ouut;ciueyoiy«j.«i — option*
(continued)
iLAKUUN
tJATl
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
87
NC
121.27
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
88
NC
93.37
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
89
NC
64.67
20.00
UG/L
* Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
90
NC
37.25
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
223
NC
71.94
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
224
NC
29.88
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
225
NC
53.36
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
226
NC
29.24
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
227
NC
24.33
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
230
NC
32.55
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
92
NC
33.79
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
232
NC
36.89
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
233
NC
95.93
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
234
NC
67.63
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
237
NC
67.32
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
238
NC
39.21
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
239
NC
35.51
20.00
UG/L
Y
o
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
240
NC
44 .29
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
94
NC
54.22
20.00
UG/L
Y
to
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
244
NC
94 .44
20.00
UG/L
Y
to
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
245
NC
143.41
20.00
UG/L
Y
oo
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
246
NC
84 .81
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
247
NC
84.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
248
NC
43.45
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
251
NC
77.55
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
252
NC
49.30
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
253
NC
80 . 52
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
254
NC
40.92
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
255
NC
67.89
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
258
NC
65.86
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
95
NC
56.45
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
260
NC
39.44
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
261
NC
52.01
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
262
NC
90.59
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
265
NC
50.65
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
266
NC
73.92
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
267
NC
66 .48
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
268
NC
47.42
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
269
NC
166.82
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
272
NC
65.06
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
273
NC
46.08
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
274
NC
45.13
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
275
NC
53.72
20.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
229
Subcategory=INT_STEEL -- Opt ion=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
0
1
to
to
SO
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
276
NC
44.71
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
279
NC
43 .21
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
260
NC
40.67
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
281
NC
42.42
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
282
NC
25.88
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
283
NC
64.65
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
286
NC
57.58
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
97
NC
35.05
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
288
NC
34.38
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
289
NC
36.23
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
290
NC
36.39
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
293
NC
81.60
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
98
NC
74 .86
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
295
NC
38.38
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
99
NC
52.52
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
297
NC
84 .40
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
300
NC
106.57
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
301
NC
79.56
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
302
NC
73.29
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
303
NC
41.59
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
304
NC
58.79
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
307
NC
64.95
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
308
NC
74.34
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
309
NC
68.39
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
310
NC
120.89
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
311
NC
46.41
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
104
NC
48. 96
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
105
NC
134.54
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
316
NC
43.59
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
317
NC
80.05
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
318
NC
114.99
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
321
NC
27.52
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
322
NC
57.60
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
323
NC
81.67
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
324
NC
45.76
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
325
NC
160.95
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
328
NC
88.58
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
329
NC
55.50
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
330
NC
20.51
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
331
NC
89.87
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
332
NC
194.59
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
335
NC
93.81
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
336
NC
59.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20. 00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20 . 00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
20.00
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
UG/L
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used«N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
230
Subcategory=INT_STEEL -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
337
NC
74 .01
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
112
NC
97.78
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
339
NC
62 .65
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
342
NC
70.34
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
343
NC
120.63
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
344
NC
145.61
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
345
NC
86.38
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
346
NC
198.67
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
349
NC
144.54
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
350
NC
117.91
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
351
NC
57.40
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
352
NC
59.24
20 . 00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
353
NC
125.83
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
356
NC
209.21
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
357
NC
111 .60
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
358
NC
119.99
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
359
NC
152.13
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
360
NC
196.37
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
363
NC
157.38
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
364
NC
121.32
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM60
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
365
NC
141.64
20.00
UG/L
Y
Subcategory«NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- Option»CARBON_BATl
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
2
NC
3,900.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
5
NC
6,200.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
1
NC
4,100.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
3
NC
5,200.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
4
NC
700.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
23
NC
2,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439096
20
NC
9,900.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
21
NC
2,300.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
22
NC
2,500.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
27
NC
670.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
24
NC
2,100.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
25
NC
5,500.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
26
NC
14,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
231
Subcategory=NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM
(continued)
Option«CARBON_BATl
n
i
to
u>
Effl.
Inf 1.
Facility
Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Inf 1.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
30
NC
10,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439096
32
NC
26,000-00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439696
28
NC
4,100.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
29
NC
18,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
31
NC
2,400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
36
NC
2,400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
33
NC
1,900.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
34
NC
4,500.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
35
NC
2,600.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
40
NC
710 .00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
37
NC
390.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
38
NC
970.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
39
NC
1,270.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
42
NC
6,300.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
45
NC
4,500.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
41
NC
1,700.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
43
NC
2,300.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
44
NC
3,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
49
NC
750.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
46
NC
420.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
47
NC
2,900.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
48
NC
9,100.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
53
NC
4,900.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
50
NC
1,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
51
NC
1,300.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
52
NC
4,600.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
6
NC
3,700.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
10
NC
3,400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
7
NC
4,400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
8
NC
2,200.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
9
NC
2,800.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
14
NC
2,700.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
11
NC
3,800.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
12
NC
1,600.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
13
NC
2,000.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
19
NC
260.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
15
NC
3,200.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
16
NC
2,400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
17
NC
1,400.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
IRON
7439896
18
NC
1,800.00
100.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
5
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
232
Subcategory«NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
n
K>
U)
Effl.
Facility Effl.
Inf 1.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
23
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
20
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
21
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
22
NC
11.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
27
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
24
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
25
NC
10.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
26
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
30
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
32
NC
8.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
28
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
29
NC
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
31
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
36
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
33
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
34
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
35
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
40
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
37
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
' 38
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
- LEAD
7439921
39
NC
6.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
42
NC
8.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
45
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
41
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
43
NC
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
44
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
49
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
46
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
47
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
48
NC
7. 00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
53
NC
6.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
50
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
51
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
52
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
10
NC
7.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
7
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
8
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
9
ND
5.00
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
14
ND
5.00
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Inf 1.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UQ/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
233
Subcategory«NONINT_STEEL__HOTFORM -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
infl.
Samp Pt
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
0
1
N>
U)
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
ISM72
SP-A
LEAD
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
, ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
ISM72
SP-A
OIL AND
GREASE
Cas_No
743992X
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
C036
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
CO 3 6
C036
C036
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
2
5
1
3
4
23
20
21
22
27
24
25
26
30
32
28
29
31
36
33
34
35
40
37
38
39
42
45
41
43
44
49
46
47
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount J Type
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
11.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5 .00
5.00
5.00
6.00
8.00
5.00
8.00
6.00
14.00
6.00
6.00
18.00
5.00
6 .00
5 .00
5.00
13.00
10.00
52.00
18.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
9.00
9.00
11.00
Infl.
Amount
baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1* 2*
Pass **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50 .00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50 .00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5 .00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5 . 00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.O0
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5 .00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step l and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutant9 of Concern
234
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
infl.
Samp Pt
n
i
K>
U>
4^
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
-- Subcategory=NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- C
(continued)
ption=
CARBON_BATl -
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Usee
Analyte Name
CaB_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
OIL AND GREASE
C036
48
NC
15.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
53
NC
19.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
50
NC
6.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
51
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
52
NC
6.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
6
NC
9.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
10
NC
11.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
7
NC
9.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
8
NC
10.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
9
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
14
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
11
NC
11.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
12
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
13
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
19
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
15
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
16
NC
6.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
CO 3 6
17
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND GREASE
C036
18
NC
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
11.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
5
NC
19.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
7 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
3
NC
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
4
NC
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
23
NC
10 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
20
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
21
NC
12.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
22
NC
12.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
21
NC
3.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
24
NC
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
25
NC
18.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
26
NC
25.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
30
NC
36.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
32
NC
53.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
26
NC
20.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
29
NC
52.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
31
NC
7.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
36
NC
9.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
33
NC
25.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
34
NC
3.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
35
NC
5.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
40
NC
3.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- Option-CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
o
K>
Us)
Ui
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas__I
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
ISM72
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
ISM72
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
ZINC
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
7440666
37
38
39
42
45
41
43
44
49
46
47
48
53
50
51
52
6
10
7
8
9
14
11
12
13
19
15
16
17
18
2
5
1
3
4
23
20
21
22
27
24
25
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
1.00
4 .00
6.00
37.00
12.00
4.00
13.00
15.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
10.00
23.00
14 .00
9.00
8.00
17.00
12.00
9.00
13 .00
13.00
7.00
8.00
8.00
19.00
7.00
10.00
8.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
20.00
UG/L
N
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
236
0
1
K>
U>
as
(continued)
KBUW_BA11
Effl.
Infl.
?acility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
30
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
32
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
28
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
29
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
31
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
36
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
33
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
34
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
35
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
40
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
ND
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
38
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
39
NC
100.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
45
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
41
NC
60.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
43
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
46
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
• ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
47
ND
50. 00
20. 00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
48
ND
50.00
20 .00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
53
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
51
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
52
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
6
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
10
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
7
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
8
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
9
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
14
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
11
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
12
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
13
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
19
NC
510.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
15
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
16
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
17
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM72
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
18
ND
50.00
20.00
UG/L
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
4.00
50.00
UG/L
Step Step
1* 2* Pass
Used
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory=NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
0
1
K>
U)
-J
Effl.
Facility
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
CasNo
Day
Type
Amount
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
21
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
18
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
19
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
20
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
25
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
22
NC
8.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
23
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
24
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
27
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
30
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
26
NC
15.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
28
ND
4.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
29
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
34
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
31
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
32
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
33
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
38
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
35
NC
12.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
36
NC
13.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
37
ND
6 .00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
40
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
43
NC
14.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
39
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
41
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
42
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
47
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
44
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
45
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
46
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
51
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
48
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
49
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
50
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
5
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
9
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
7
ND
6.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
8
NC
19.00
ISM73
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
13
ND
6.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass *
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
238
Subcategory«NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- Option=CARBON_BATl
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
0
1
to
u>
oo
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Analyte Name
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
LEAD
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
ISM73
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
Cas_No
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
7439921
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
C036
CO 3 6
Sample
Day
10
11
12
17
14
15
16
4
1
2
3
21
18
19
20
25
22
23
24
27
30
26
28
29
34
31
32
33
38
35
36
37
40
43
39
41
42
47
44
45
46
51
Effl.
Meas
Type
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
NC
ND
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
7. 00
5 . 00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
5. 00
5.00
7.00
9.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
6.00
12.00
7.00
13.00
7.00
9.00
5.00
6.00
5.00
5.00
Infl.
Amount
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
50 .00
UG/L
Y
50.00
UG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5 . 00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
239
Subcategory=NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM --
(continued)
Opt ion*CARBON_BATl
Facility Eff1.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Effl. Meas
Amount | Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount I Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
n
to
u>
vo
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
48
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
49
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
50
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
5
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
9
NC
7.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
6
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
7
NC
6.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
8
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
13
NC
7.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
10
NC
16.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
11
NC
7.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
12
NC
7.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
17
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
14
NC
9.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
15
NC
6.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
OIL AND GREASE
C036
16
ND
5.00
5.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
4
NC
14 .00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
12.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
22.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
21
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
18
NC
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
19
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
20
NC
18.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
25
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
22
NC
9.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
23
NC
16.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
24
NC
9.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
27
NC
5.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
30
NC
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
26
NC
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
28
NC
6.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
29
NC
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
34
NC
2.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
31
NC
3.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
32
NC
14.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
33
NC
7.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
38
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
35
NC
3.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
36
NC
8.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
37
NC
10.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
40
NC
15.00
4.00
MG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
240
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
K)
4^
O
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
ISM73
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
STEEL HOI
TORM -- C
)ption=
C ARBON__B AT 1 -
(continued)
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
43
NC
26.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
39
NC
33 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
41
NC
43.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
42
NC
46.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
47
NC
34 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
44
NC
20.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
45
NC
3 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
CO 09
46
NC
11.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
51
NC
21.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
48
NC
17.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
49
NC
24 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
50
NC
24 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
5
NC
14 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
9
NC
12.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
6
NC
37.00
4 .00
MG/L
Y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
7
NC
10 . 00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
8
NC
32.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
13
NC
34.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
10
ND
2.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
11
NC
43.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
12
NC
29.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
17
NC
26.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
14
NC
13.00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
15
NC
4 .00
4.00
MG/L
y
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
16
ND
2.00
4 .00
MG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
69.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
25.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
2
ND
10.00
20 . 00
UG/L
Y
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
27.00
20. 00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
21
NC
21.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
18
NC
30.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
19
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ZINC
7440666
20
NC
28.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
25
NC
55.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
22
NC
107.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
23
NC
27.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
24
NC
22.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
27
NC
25.00
20.00
UG/L
y
ZINC
7440666
30
NC
23 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ZINC
7440666
26
NC
13.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ZINC
7440666
28
NC
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ZINC
7440666
29
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
241
(continued)
jption=
CAKBON_BATl
Effl.
Infl.
Facility
Effl .
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl .
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
34
NC
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
31
NC
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
32
NC
49.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
33
NC
39.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
38
NC
221.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
35
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
36
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
40
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
43
NC
24.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
39
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
41
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
33.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
47
NC
13.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
NC
88.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
45
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
46
NC
28.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
51
NC
230.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
p
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
48
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
K)
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
ND
10.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
NC
36.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
i—*
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
31.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
9
NC
50.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
6
NC
100.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
7
NC
103.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
8
NC
338.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
13
NC
275.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
10
NC
143.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
11
NC
131.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
12
NC
186.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
17
NC
141.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
14
NC
134.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
15
NC
128.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM73
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
16
NC
150.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
6
NC
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
4
NC
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
24
NC
7.30
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
22
NC
5.50
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
29
NC
6.90
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
26
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
27
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
LEAD
7439921
31
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used-N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Infl.
Samp Pt
0
1
to
to
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
auutaLeyuiyanuwini^aifijiL nuiPUKM --
(continued)
;pcion=L«
KBUN_BATi
Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Usee
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass **
LEAD
7439921
30
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
42
NC
7.70
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
43
NC
26.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
34
NC
31.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
37
NC
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
38
NC
7.10
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
46
NC
11.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
44
NC
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
50
NC
7.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
49
NC
28.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
54
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
58
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
62
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
71
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
68
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
11
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
9
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
15
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
13
NC
5.90
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
19
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
17
ND
5.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
LEAD
7439921
20
NC
12.00
50.00
UG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
6
NC
11.98
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
1
NC
14.02
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
4
NC
14 . 93
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
5
NC
9.33
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
24
NC
11.11
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
21
NC
12.90
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
22
NC
12.93
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
23
ND
5.03
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
29
NC
8.84
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
25
NC
30.91
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
26
NC
15.88
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
27
NC
13.99
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
28
NC
12.04
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
31
NC
17.95
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
33
NC
12.05
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
30
NC
10.94
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
32
NC
27.90
5 .00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
42
NC
20.91
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
43
NC
23.59
5.00
MG/L
Y
OIL AND
GREASE
C036
34
NC
34.02
5.00
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
243
Subcategory»NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM
(continued)
Option=CARBON_BATl
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
NJ
4^
U)
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte
Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
37
NC
46.47
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
41
NC
10.92
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
46
NC
7.42
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
44
ND
5.00
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
45
NC
8 . 94
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
50
NC
15.03
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
56
ND
5.09
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
49
ND
5.00
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
52
NC
11.98
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
54
NC
10.02
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
65
NC
17.86
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
58
NC
18.97
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
60
NC
20.90
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
62
NC
25.95
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
70
NC
16.12
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
71
NC
13 . 72
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
67
NC
18.91
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
68
NC
22.12
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
7
NC
33.89
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
11
NC
10.01
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
8
NC
13.09
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
CO 3 6
9
NC
26.05
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
10
ND
5.04
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
15
NC
12.89
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
12
NC
18.08
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
13
NC
7.32
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
14
NC
12.04
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
19
NC
15.02
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
16
NC
9.83
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
17
NC
25.90
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
18
NC
16.99
ISM74
SP-A
OIL
AND
GREASE
C036
20
NC
9.22
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
ISM74
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
SOLIDS
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
C009
6
4
24
22
29
26
27
31
30
42
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
21.91
20.04
38.89
24.04
19.94
32.01
21.92
16.02
76.10
140.05
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Step Step
Used
alue
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
5.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
244
Subcategory«NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM
(continued)
- Option»CARBON_BATl
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
0
1
K)
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
43
NC
140.16
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
34
NC
150.00
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
35
NC
24.94
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
36
NC
17.06
XSM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
37
NC
157.75
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
31.91
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
38
NC
33 .86
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
39
NC
15.88
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
40
NC
26.05
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
46
NC
154 .89
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
13 .91
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
47
NC
21.06
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
44
NC
91.31
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
50
NC
109.95
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
55
NC
24 .86
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
48
NC
31.07
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
49
NC
99.97
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
51
NC
23.92
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
53
NC
31.02
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
54
NC
31.90
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
63
NC
35.05
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
57
NC
20.84
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
58
NC
31.96
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
59
NC
26.90
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
61
NC
35.05
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
62
NC
62.98
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
64
NC
28.93
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
71
NC
29.60
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
66
NC
29.45
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
68
NC
43 .98
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
69
NC
36 .67
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
11
NC
11.01
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
9
NC
23.97
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
15
NC
30.98
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
13
NC
130.02
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
19
NC
23.97
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
17
NC
58.98
ISM74
SP-A
TOTAL
SUSPENDED
SOLIDS
C009
20
NC
33.19
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
6
NC
41.00
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
21.00
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
24
NC
56.00
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
22
NC
27.00
Infl.
Meas
Type
Infl.
Amount
Baseline
Step Step
Used
Value
Unit 1*
2* Pass **
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 . 00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
4 .00
MG/L
Y
4.00
MG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
20.00
UG/L
Y
* Pa9s/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used«Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
245
Subcategory«NONINT__STEEL_HOTFORM -- Option«CARBON_BAT1
(continued)
0
1
K)
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl.
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit 1*
2*
Pass **
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
29
NC
34 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
26
NC
33 .70
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
27
NC
22.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
31
NC
25.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
30
NC
49.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
42
NC
150.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
43
NC
360.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
34
NC
340.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
37
NC
46.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
38
NC
54.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
46
NC
140.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
44
NC
93 . 00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
50
NC
98 . 00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
49
NC
240.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
54
NC
38 . 00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
58
NC
44 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
62
NC
41.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
71
NC
21.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
68
NC
51.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
11
ND
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
9
NC
33.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
15
ND
20.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
13
NC
61.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
19
NC
35.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
17
NC
49.00
20.00
UG/L
Y
ISM74
SP-A
ZINC
7440666
20
NC
110 .00
20.00
UG/L
Y
Subcategory»OTHER -- Option»DRl_BPT
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
ESE10
ESE10
ESE10
ESE10
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
SP-A
Infl.
Samp Pt
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
SP-B
Analyte Name
ALUMINUM
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
Cas_No
7429905
7664417
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD C004
FLUORIDE 16984488
Sample
Day
1
1
1
1
Effl.
Meas
Type
NC
NC
NC
NC
Effl .
Amount
40.30
13.40
15.60
14 .20
Infl.
Meas
Type
NC
NC
NC
NC
Infl.
Amount
8,180.00
13.90
68.00
14.20
Baseline Step Step Used
Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
200.00 UG/L
0.05 MG/L
3.00 MG/L
0.10 MG/L
* Pass/Pail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used»Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
246
Facility Effl.
Infl.
ID
Samp Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
ESE10
SP-A
SP-B
IRON
7439896
ESE10
SP-A
SP-B
MANGANESE
7439965
ESE10
SP-A
SP-B
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
ESE10
SP-A
SP-B
TITANIUM
7440326
ESE10
SP-A
SP-B
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option-DRl_BPT
(continued)
Effl.
Sample Meas
Day | Type
NC
NC
ND
ND
ND
Effl.
Amount
568.00
1,250.00
5.00
3 .00
4 .00
infl.
Meas
Type
NC
NC
ND
NC
NC
infl. Baseline Step Step used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
112,000.00
3,770.00
5.00
83.90
450.00
100.00 UG/L
15-00 UG/L
5.00 MG/L
5-00 UG/L
4.00 MG/L
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option-FORGING
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Effl.
Infl
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Us
ID
Samp Pt
Samp
Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
*
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
ND
20.00
NC
33.49
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+ SP-X
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
66.10
NC
47. 37
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
48 .30
NC
62.64
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
FLUORIDE
16984488
1
NC
0.16
NC
0.15
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
FLUORIDE
16984488
2
NC
0.24
NC
1.31
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
FLUORIDE
16984488
3
NC
0 . 21
NC
0.48
0.10
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
IRON
7439896
1
NC
790.00
NC
3,649.20
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
IRON
7439896
2
NC
1
620.00
NC
2,390.66
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
IRON
7439896
3
NC
3
030.00
NC
1,356.54
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
28.00
ND
28.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
LEAD
7439921
2
ND
15.00
ND
15.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
15.00
ND
15.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
1 N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
MANGANESE
7439965
1
NC
11.00
NC
24.33
15.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
MANGANESE
7439965
2
NC
17.60
NC
18.15
15.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
20.30
NC
15.36
15.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
1
NC
6.34
NC
10.08
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
247
Subcategory-OTHER -- Option=FORGING
(continued)
n
K>
4^
-4
Effl.
Infl.
Facility Eff1.
Infl
Sample
Meas
Effl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step
Step
Used
ID
Samp Pt
Samp
Pt
Analyte Name
Cas_No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
* *
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
2
NC
7.71
NC
9.39
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
3
ND
5.41
NC
7.93
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
SGT-HEM
C037
1
ND
5.39
NC
7.73
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
SGT-HEM
C037
2
NC
6.03
NC
8.13
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-W
+SP-X
SGT-HEM
C037
3
NC
6.66
5.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
TITANIUM
7440326
1
ND
1.00
ND
1.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
TITANIUM
7440326
2
ND
0.90
ND
0.90
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
TITANIUM
7440326
3
ND
0.90
ND
0.90
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1
ND
4 .00
NC
18.30
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
2
NC
15.00
NC
13.77
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
21.00
NC
12.14
4.00
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
ZINC
7440666
1
ND
4 .00
NC
4.39
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+ SP-X
ZINC
7440666
2
ND
2.80
ND
2.80
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE04
SP-E
SP-W
+SP-X
ZINC
7440666
3
ND
2 .80
ND
2.80
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
ND
0.10
NC
0.99
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
NC
0.51
NC
3.10
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
NC
0.13
NC
0.23
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
5
NC
0.18
NC
0.10
0.05
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
13 .00
NC
63.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
33.00
NC
59.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
41.00
NC
146.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
5
NC
26.00
NC
42.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
FLUORIDE
16984486
2
NC
1.40
NC
1.40
0.10
MG/L
P'
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
FLUORIDE
16984488
3
NC
3.90
NC
3 .90
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
FLUORIDE
16984488
4
NC
1.90
NC
1.50
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
FLUORIDE
16984488
5
NC
2.60
NC
2.40
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
IRON
7439896
2
NC
1,390.00
NC
30,500.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
IRON
7439896
3
NC
4,190.00
NC
42,300.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
IRON
7439896
4
NC
1,500.00
NC
49,500.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
IRON
7439896
5
NC
5,300.00
NC
34,000.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
LEAD
7439921
2
NC
12.10
NC
6.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
2 .00
NC
4.30
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
LEAD
7439921
4
NC
2.10
NC
13 .90
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
LEAD
7439921
5
NC
2 .10
NC
4.40
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used»N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used-Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Criteria for Pollutants of Concern
248
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option=FORGlNG
(continued)
Facility Effl.
ID Samp Pt
Inf 1.
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Sample
Day
Effl.
Meas
Type
Effl .
Amount
Inf 1.
Meas
Type
Infl. Baseline Step Step Used
Amount | Value Unit 1* 2* Pass **
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
MANGANESE
7439965
2
NC
40.20
NC
149.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
49.90
NC
193.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
MANGANESE
7439965
4
NC
38.30
NC
258.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
MANGANESE
7439965
5
NC
53.00
NC
163.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
2
ND
5.50
NC
34.50
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
3
NC
6.00
NC
26.75
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
4
NC
8.00
NC
163.00
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
5
NC
7 .03
NC
54.75
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-J
SGT-HEM
C037
2
NC
24.00
5.00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
SGT-HEM
C037
3
ND
5.00
NC
9.50
5.00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
SGT-HEM
CO 3 7
4
ND
5.50
NC
122.00
5.00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
SGT-HEM
C037
5
NC
6.67
NC
33.50
5.00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TITANIUM
7440326
2
ND
4 .00
NC
6.80
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TITANIUM
7440326
3
ND
4.00
ND
4.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TITANIUM
7440326
4
ND
4.00
ND
4.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TITANIUM
7440326
5
ND
4.00
ND
4.00
5.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
2
ND
4.00
NC
53.00
4.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
13 .00
NC
75.00
4.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
4
ND
4.00
NC
66.00
4.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
5
ND
4.00
NC
22.00
4.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
ZINC
7440666
2
NC
140.00
NC
547.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
246.00
NC
546.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
142 .00
NC
726.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE07
SP-A
SP-J
ZINC
7440666
5
NC
158.00
NC
470.00
20.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
1
ND
0.20
ND
0.20
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
2
ND
0.20
ND
0.20
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
3
ND
0.20
ND
0.20
0.05
MG/L
F
P
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
4
ND
0.20
ND
0.20
0.05
MG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
1
NC
88.00
NC
135.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
' Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
2
NC
19.50
NC
55.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
3
NC
32.00
NC
82.00
3 .00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
4
NC
33.00
NC
76.00
3.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
FLUORIDE
16984488
1
NC
11.05
NC
9.71
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
FLUORIDE
16984488
2
NC
18.65
NC
14.70
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
* Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
** Used=N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3? Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
Appendix C. Data Used for Data Editing Cri
eria for Pollutants of Concern
249
Facility Effl.
n
i
Infl.
Subcategory=OTHER -- Opt
(continued)
Samp
ID
Samp
Pt
Samp Pt
Analyte Name
Cas No
Day
Type
Amount
Type
Amount
Value
Unit
1*
2*
Pass
**
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
FLUORIDE
16984468
NC
13.55
NC
10.70
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
FLUORIDE
16984488
4
NC
17.80
NC
12.30
0.10
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
IRON
7439896
1
NC
905.00
NC
7,660.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-.F
IRON
7439896
NC
442.00
NC
7,540.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
IRON
7439896
3
NC
870.50
NC
6,470.00
100 .00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
IRON
7439896
4
NC
171.00
NC
3,030.00
100.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
LEAD
7439921
1
ND
2.00
ND
2.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
LEAD
7439921
ND
2.00
ND
2.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
LEAD
7439921
3
ND
2.00
ND
2.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
LEAD
7439921
4
ND
2.00
ND
2.00
50.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
MANGANESE
7439965
1
NC
47.60
NC
203 .00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
MANGANESE
7439965
NC
53.50
NC
340.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-F
MANGANESE
7439965
3
NC
53.90
NC
242.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
MANGANESE
7439965
4
NC
34.30
NC
130.00
15.00
UG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-F
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
1
NC
16.17
NC
78.00
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
ND
5.50
NC
20.00
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
CO 3 6
3
NC
9.00
NC
25.25
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-F
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
4
ND
5.00
NC
95.00
5.00
MG/L
P
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
SGT-HEM
C037
1
NC
10.83
NC
54.67
5.00
MG/L
P
F
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-F
SGT-HEM
C037
NC
11.25
5.00
MG/L
P
F
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
SGT-HEM
C037
3
NC
15.00
NC
21.00
5.00
MG/L
P
F
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-F
SGT-HEM
C037
4
NC
60.25
5.00
MG/L
P
F
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TITANIUM
7440326
1
ND
5.00
ND
5.00
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TITANIUM
7440326
ND
5.00
ND
5.00
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TITANIUM
7440326
3
NC
19.05
NC
216.00
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TITANIUM
7440326
4
ND
5.00
NC
6.70
5.00
UG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
1
NC
13.50
NC
53.00
4.00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
ND
4.00
NC
34.00
4.00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
3
NC
5.50
NC
39.00
4 .00
MG/L
F
P
Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
4
ND
4 .00
NC
39.00
4.00
MG/L
F
P
' Y
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-F
ZINC
7440666
1
NC
104.05
NC
121.00
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+SP-B
SP-F
ZINC
7440666
NC
61.50
NC
74.60
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-F
ZINC
7440666
3
NC
53.90
NC
62.20
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
ESE09
SP-A
+ SP-B
SP-F
ZINC
7440666
4
NC
56.60
NC
139.00
20.00
UG/L
F
F
N
Y
on=FORGING
Effl.
Meas
Effl.
Infl.
Meas
Infl.
Baseline
Step Step
Pass/Fail of Step 1 and Step 2 in Long-Term Average Test (See Section 14.5).
Used>N if data are excluded as described in Section 14.3; Otherwise, Used=Y.
-------
APPENDIX D
EPISODE-SPECIFIC LONG-TERM AVERAGES
FOR POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern
Subcategory OOKK_BYPROD — Option=BATl
ff
Obs
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Epioode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
1-NAPHTHYLAMIHB
134327
UG/L
ESK02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.000
2,4 -D1HETHYLPHEN0L
105679
U3/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10,080
10.080
0.179
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
S
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.040
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENB
91576
0G/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10,OBO
10.080
0.179
10,080
2 - PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
£12942
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
S
10,090
10.OBO
0.179
2 - PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
S12942
ua/L
ESE02
1625
5
4
10.260
10.260
0.581
10,170
2-PICOLINE
109068
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
50.400
50.400
0.894
2-PICOLINE
109068
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
S
50.000
50.000
o.ooo
50.200
2-PROPANONE
67641
UG/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
50.000
50.000
0.000
2-PROPANONE
67641
UG/L
ESE02
1624
5
5
50.000
50.000
o.ooo
50,000
ACENAPHTHBNE
83329
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10,OBO
0.179
ACEHAPHTHESE
83329
- UG/L
ESE02
. 1625 .. , .
S
S
10.D00
10.000
0.000
10.040
ahmcmia as nitrogen
7664417
HG/Ii
ESE02
350.2
5
0
17.470
17.648
3.775
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ISM50
350.2
244
73
1.418
1.402
0.712
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
HG/L
ISM51
SM4SO0NH3-E
8
0
2.838
2,978
0.833
2.97B
ANILINE
62533
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
ANILINE
62533
UG/L
ESB02
1625
5
5
10.000
10,000
O.OOO
10.040
anthracene
120127
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.OBO
10.080
0.179
ANTHRACENE
120127
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.040
BHNZENB
71432
UG/L
BSE01
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
BENZENE
71432
UG/L
ISH50
STA
265
160
0.433
0.420
0,688
5.210
BEHZ0 [A! ANTHRACENE
56553
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10,000
0,000
10.000
BENZO (A) FYRBNE
50328
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.000
BENZO (B) FLUORAHTHENE
205592
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10,000
10.000
0.000
1
10,000
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
MQ/L
BSB01
405.1
5
4
72.000
72.000
127.456
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
HQ/L
ESE02
405.1
5
0
31.270
32.189
30.195
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
COO 3
HQ/h
ISM51
SH5210 B
2
0
10.000
10.000
2,828
32.1B9
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
m/b
ESE01
405.1
5
4
72.400
72.400
127.235
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
MG/L
ESB02
SH5210
5
0
22.480
23.037
18.688
47.718
CARBAZOLE
86748
UG/L
ESEOl
1625
S
5
20.160
20.160
0.358
CARBAZOLE
06746
UG/L
E5E02
1625
S
s
20.000
20.000
0.000
20.080
-------
Appendix D, Episode-Specific Long-Terra Averages for Pollutants of Concern
— Subcategory=C0KEJ3YPR0D -- Option=BATl
(continued)
ft # Obs Est . Est.
Analyte CASINO Unit Episode Method Obs NDs Mean LTA STD
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
{COD
C004
MG/L
ESE01
410.4
5
0
31.500
31,671
0.000
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE02
410.4
5
0
120.400
120.514
11.932
CHRYSENE
218019
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.000
10.080
0.179
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10,000
0.000
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
FLIJORANTHENE
206440
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
io.obo
10.080
0.179
FLUORANTHENE
206440
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
FLUORENE
06737
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
FLUORENE
06737
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
M+P XYLENE
179601231
UG/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
M+P XYLENE
179601231
UG/L
ESE02
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
MERCURY
7439976
UG/L
ESE02
1620
5
0
0.109
0.111
0.043
MERCURY
7439976
UG/L
ISM51
245.1
2
2
0.400
0.400
0.000
N-EICOSANE
11295B
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
N-HEXADECANE
544763
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
N-OCTADECANE
593453
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ISM50
625
264
231
10.678
10.526
3.001
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESE01
353.1
5
0
152.700
153.137
90.717
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESE02
353.2
5
0
73.280
74,195
27.311
O-CRESOL
95487
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
O-CRESOL
95407
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
,10.000
10.000
0.000
0-XYLENE
95476
ua/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0*000
O-XYLENE
95476
UG/L
ESE02
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
OIL AND GREASE
C036
MG/L
ESE02
1664
3
3
5.502
5.502
0.070
P-CRESOL
106445
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.000
10.080
0.179
P-CRESOL
106445
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
2
Option
LTA
76.092
10.000
10.040
10.000
10.040
10.040
10.000
0.255
10.000
10,000
10.000
10.080
, 113,666
10.040
10.000
5.562
10.040
-------
Appendix d. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages lor Pollutants of Concern 3
Subcafcegory-COKE BY PROD
— Optlon-BATI
(continued)
H
H
Ob a
Get*
Est.
Option
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Ob 8
NDb
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
PHENANTHRBNE
85018
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
PHENANTHRBNE
85010
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10,000
10.000
0.000
10.040
PHENOL
108952
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
10,080
PYRENE
129000
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
PYRENE
129000
UG/L
BSE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.040
PYRIDINE
110B61
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
PYRIDINE
110861.
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.040
SELENIUM
7782492
UG/L
ESE01
1620
5
0
110.900
111.004
11.329
SELENIUM
7782492
UG/L
ESE02
1620
5
0
497.000
504.817
' 214.776
307.910
STYRENE
100425
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0.179
STYRENE
100425
UG/L
ESB02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.040
THIOCYANATE
302045
MG/L
ESE01
SM4500-CN M
5
0
0.391
0.397
0.158
THIOCYANATE
302045
MG/L
ESE02
SM4500 "
5
0
22.760
95,740 -
2645,244
THIOCYANATE
302045
MG/L
ISM51
SM4500CN-M
8
0
1.050
1.050
0.073
1.050
TOLUENE
108883
UG/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.000
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ESE01
335,2
5
0
3.414
3.460
0.750
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ISM50
325.2
265
9
2.513
2.471
1.200
2.965
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
MG/L
ESE01
160.1
5
0
5303,000
5379.131
1685.190
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
CO 10
MG/L
ESE02
160.1
5
0
4994.000
5027.606
3671.148
5203.368
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
MG/L
ESE01
351.3
5
1
28.540
38.243
230.933
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
MG/L
ESE02
251.3
5
0
23.600
22.875
11.499
31.059
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE01
415.1
5
0
14.840
14.902
3.366
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE02
415.1
5
0
20.180
20.247
3.811
» 17.574
TOTAL PHENOLS
CO 20
MG/L
ESE01
420.2
5
3
0.062
0.062
0.020
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ESE02
420.1
5
0
0.009
0.009
0.001
TOTAL PHENOLS
CQ20
MG/L
ISM50
420.2
264
6
0,017
0.017
0.010
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ISM51
420.1
8
0
0.061
0.061
0.015
0.039
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
COOS
MG/L
ISM50
NA
265
10
18,834
15.760
14.786
15.760
WAD CYANIDE
C042
UG/L
ESE01
1677
5
0
11782.3BO
27967.293
1694945.796
WAD CYANIDE
C042
UG/L
ESB02
1677
5
3
29.398
320.455
19831.446
14143.874
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern 4
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
#
#
obs
Est.
Est.
Option
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
1-NAPHTHYLAMINE
134327
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
0
245.200
250.220
116.156
250.220
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
UG/L
ESE01
1625
3
1
703.100
725.985
601.080
2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL
105679
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
0
906.360
920.903
315.182
823 .444
2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE
91576
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.500
10.500
0.825
10.500
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
0
136.780
143.797
114.856
2 -PHENYLNAPHTHALENE
612942
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
1
55.740
56.112
24 .665
99.955
2 -PICOLINE
109068
UG/L
ESE01
1625
4
4
50,750
50.750
1.500
2-PICOLINE
109068
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
230.000
230.000
246.475
140.375
2 -PROPANONE
67641
UG/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
50.000
50.000
0.000
2 -PROPANONE
67641
UG/L
ESE02
1624
5
5
50.000
50.000
0.000
50.000
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.500
10.500
0.825
ACENAPHTHENE
83329
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.000
46.000
49.295
28.250
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ISM54
4500NH, BE
53
0
25.766
26.059
13.185
26.059
ANILINE
62533
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
1
3131.900
3190.410
2082.719
ANILINE
62533
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
1
2084.000
2089.579
1059.300
2639.995
ANTHRACENE
120127
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
3
30.628
30.628
24 .251
ANTHRACENE
120127
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
4
51.804
51.804
45.564
41.216
BENZENE
71432
UG/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
BENZENE
71432
UG/L
ISM54
SM5030
4
0
2.775
2.974
2.319
6.487
BENZO(A)ANTHRACENE
56553
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
1
64.078
64 .689
24.227
64 .689
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
1
36.580
36.695
31.960
36.695
BENZO(B)FLUORANTHENE
205992
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
1
52.156
52.994
29.661
52.994
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
MG/L
ESE01
405.1
5
3
1077.000
1077.001
150.649
BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
C003
MG/L
ESE02
405.1
5
1
865.600
868.250
575.636
972.625
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
MG/L
ESE01
405.1
5
2
1292.000
1301.536
303.276
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
MG/L
ESE02
SM5210
5
1
763.400
764.710
621.679
BOD 5-DAY (CARBONACEOUS)
C002
MG/L
ISM54
405.1
12
0
511.792
514.879
194.042
764.710
CARBAZOLE
86748
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
0
2715.104
2728.426
570.643
CARBAZOLE
86748
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
0
2854.200
2861.807
455.648
2795.116
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
MG/L
ESE01
410.4
5
0
2666.000
2668.664
284.263
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern 5
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option-PSESl
(continued)
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Ob s
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE02
410.4
5
0
1644 .
000
1645 .
008
128.
,963
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ISM54
8000
12
0
1510.
000
1513 .
604
278 .
036
1645.
.008
CHRYSENE
218019
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
1
67.
292
67 .
576
20,
,551
67,
,576
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.
.500
10 ,
.500
0,
.825
DIBENZOFURAN
132649
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
4
46.
.496
46 .
.496
48,
.853
28
.498
DIBENZOTHIOPHENE
132650
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
4
48.
,762
48 .
,762
47,
. 112
48.
.762
FLUORANTHENE
206440
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
4
11.
,080
11.
,080
1.
.279
FLUORANTHENE
206440
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.
.000
46 ,
.000
49,
.295
28.
.540
FLUORENE
86737
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.
,500
10.
.500
0,
.825
FLUORENE
86737
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.
,000
46 .
.000
49
.295
28.
.250
M+P XYLENE
179601231
UG/L
ESEOl
1624
5
5
10.
.000
10.
.000
0,
.000
M+P XYLENE
179601231
UG/L
ESE02
1624
5
5
10.
,000
10 ,
.000
0.
.000
10.
.000
MERCURY
7439976
UG/L
ESE02
1620
5
0
1.
.262
1,
,273
0,
.561
1.
.273
N-EICOSANE
112958
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
4
157,
.640
157,
.640
233
.880
157
.640
N-HEXADECANE
544763
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.
.000
46,
. 000
49,
.295
46
.000
N-OCTADECANE
593453
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
4
48.
. 740
48 .
.740
47
.127
48
.740
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESEOl
1625
5
5
10,
.500
10,
.500
0
.825
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
3
51
.476
52
.363
40
.724
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ISM54
625
4
2
12,
.400
12 .
.411
10
.659
12
.411
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESEOl
353.1
5
0
0
.642
0.
. 843
0
.121
NITRATE/NITRITE
COOS
MG/L
ESE02
353.2
5
0
0,
.804
0
.818
0
.313
0
.831
O-CRESOL
95487
UG/L
ESEOl
1625
5
0
20145,
.360
22807,
.246
33193
.204
O-CRESOL
95487
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
0
5209.
.400
5216
.766
626
.853
14012
.006
O-XYLENE
95476
UG/L
ESEOl
1624
5
5
10,
.000
10,
.000
0
.000
O-XYLENE
95476
UG/L
ESE02
1624
5
5
10
.000
10
.000
0
.000
10
.000
OIL AND GREASE
C036
MG/L
ESE02
1664
3
0
16
.588
17
. 568
12
.418
17
.568
P-CRESOL
106445
UG/L
ESEOl
1625
5
0
4384
. 240
4542
.399
3060
.682
P-CRESOL
106445
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
0
11274
.000
11275
.710
453
.279
7909
.054
PHENANTHRENE
85018
UG/L
ESEOl
1625
5
3
15
.640
15
.759
6
.932
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern
6
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD --
(continued)
Option=PSESl
tf
Obs
Analyte
CASINO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
PHENANTHRENE
85018
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.000
46.000
49.295
30
PHENOL
108952
UG/L
ESE01
1625
4
0
264964.400
267406.335
77548.827
267406
PYRENE
129000
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
3
13.044
13.046
2.802
PYRENE
129000
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.000
46.000
49.295
29
PYRIDINE
110861
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
3
28.920
43.337
134.805
PYRIDINE
110861
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.000
46.000
49.295
44
SELENIUM
7782492
UG/L
ESE01
1620
5
0
712.200
713.431
90.070
SELENIUM
7782492
UG/L
ESE02
1620
5
0
1300.000
1300.985
118.832
1007
STYRENE
100425
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.500
10.500
0.825
STYRENE
100425
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
46.000
46.000
49.295
28
THIOCYANATE
302045
MG/L
ESE01
SM4500-CN M.
5
0
545.000
545.318
41.041
THIOCYANATE
302045
MG/L
ESE02
SM4500
5
0
16.356
21.452
34.535
283
TOLUENE
108883
UG/L
ESE01
1624
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
TOLUENE
108883
UG/L
ISM54
625
4
4
1.375
1.375
0.750
5
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ISM50
970
0
6.822
6.776
2 .696
6
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
MG/L
ESE01
160.1
5
0
6838.000
6843.599
592.954
TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS
C010
MG/L
ESE02
160.1
5
0
4824.000
4840.809
992.629
5842
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
MG/L
ESE01
351.3
5
0
131.400
230.900
581.311
TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN
C021
MG/L
ESE02
351.3
5
0
263.800
265.079
61.020
247
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE01
415.1
5
0
1121.800
1127.542
526.107
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE02
415.1
5
0
345.800
345.902
18.612
736
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ESE01
420.2
5
0
468.800
471.852
133.138
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ESE02
420.1
5
0
178.740
220.585
263.334
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ISM54
SM5530
26
0
153.538
156.553
85.272
220
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ISM54
SM2540-D
12
0
57.000
57.560
33.853
57
WAD CYANIDE
C042
UG/L
ESE01
1677
5
0
2988.000
3011.102
1580.567
WAD CYANIDE
C042
UG/L
ESE02
1677
5
0
421.000
473.090
480.609
1742
Option
LTA
-------
Appendix
D. Episode-Specific
Long-Term
Averages for
Pollutants of
Concern
7
Opt ion=CARBON
D1T1
#
#
Obs
Est.
Est.
Option
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ESE04
350.2
4
0
4 .698
5.303
5.963
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ESE05
350.2
5
0
0.340
0.354
0.203
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ESE07
350. 2
5
0
0.382
0.385
0.091
0.385
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE04
410.1
4
0
65.500
65.628
8.257
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE05
410.4
5
0
55.900
56.668
18.103
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE07
410.4
5
0
272.400
274.152
72.378
65.628
CHROMIUM
7440473
UG/L
ESE04
1620
4
0
7.663
7.904
3 .886
CHROMIUM
7440473
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
3
11.150
11.417
5.147
CHROMIUM
7440473
UG/L
ESE07
1620
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
CHROMIUM
7440473
UG/L
ISM57
200.7
262
62
28.714
27.800
22.016
10.708
COPPER
7440508
UG/L
ISM66
NA
106
95
21.047
21.042
4.381
21.042
FLUORIDE
16984488
MG/L
ESE07
340.2
5
0
1.740
1.768
0.805
FLUORIDE
16984488
MG/L
ISM58
SM407B
52
0
0.399
0.396
0.148
1.082
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
MG/L
ESE04
218.4
4
4
0. 010
0. 010
0. 000
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
MG/L
ESE05
218.4
4
2
0.011
0.011
0.001
HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM
18540299
MG/L
ISM58
SM3120
52
51
0. 010
0.010
0.001
0.010
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE04
1620
.4
0
370.750
372.490
77.602
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
1
375.100
379.417
220.390
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE07
1620
5
0
1292.800
1301.731
325.269
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ISM58
SM3130B
259
0
630.077
605.751
352.483
492.584
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ISM57
200.7
262
257
5.073
5.074
0.647
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ISM66
NA
106
105
20.189
20.189
1.943
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ISM76
NA
6
0
7.350
7. 539
4-379
7.539
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE04
1620
4
0
13.225
13.403
5.092
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
0
57.020
57.214
10.570
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE07
1620
5
0
169.600
170.009
25.488
57.214
N-DECANE
124185
UG/L
ESE07
1625
3
3
10.000
10.000
0.000
10.000
N-DODECANE
112403
UG/L
ESE07
1625
3
3
10.000
10.000
o.ooo
10.000
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ISM57
610
105
75
1.006
1.093
2.711
1.093
NICKEL
7440020
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
1
47.560
47.870
19.858
47.870
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESE04
353.3
4
1
0.024
0.027
0.032
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESE05
353.1
5
0
0. 099
0.114
0.111
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESE07
353.1
5
0
1.304
1.777
5.002
0.114
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern
8
Subcategory=FINISHING -- Option«= CARBON_BAT 1
(continued)
Analyte
CAS NO
Unit Episode Method
#
Obs
#
NDS
Obs
Mean
Est .
LTA
Est.
STD
Option
LTA
0
1
00
SELENIUM
7782492
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
2
6.170
7 .672
18.707
7.672
TIN
7440315
UG/L
ESE04
1620
4
0
19.963
21.420
20.177
TIN
7440315
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
5
3 .000
3.000
0.000
12 .210
TITANIUM
7440326
UG/L
ESE07
1620
5
5
4.000
4.000
0.000
4.000
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ISM58
SM41L
259
177
0.023
0.023
0.007
0.023
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE04
415.1
4
0
11.914
12.090
3.923
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE05
415.1
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE07
415.1
5
0
88.000
88.609
24 .440
12.090
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ISM57
420.2
105
0
0.113
0.113
0.099
0.113
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ESE04
1620
4
1
18.588
19.369
13.008
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ESE05
1620
5
1
11.420
11.523
4 .036
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ESE07
1620
5
0
185.400
187.229
61.905
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ISM57
200.7
261
25
36.268
34.596
28.287
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ISM66
NA
106
2
142.340
145.656
115.496
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ISM76
NA
41
0
36.732
36.679
12.958
35.638
Subcategory*INT
STEEL *
#
#
Obs
Est.
Est.
Option
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
ALUMINUM
7429905
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
228.176
229.094
52.616
229.094
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ESE04
350.2
5
0
0.142
0.142
0.025
0.142
CADMIUM
7440439
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
5
1.000
1.000
0.000
1.000
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
MG/L
ESE04
410.4
5
0
21.195
21.267
3.851
21.267
CHROMIUM
7440473
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
10.114
10.141
1.585
10.141
COPPER
7440508
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
3
10.050
10.052
1.005
10.052
FLUORIDE
16984488
MG/L
ESE04
340.2
5
0
15.481
15.565
3.705
15.565
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
1167.849
1189.443
746.587
1189.443
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
11.990
12.119
5.302
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern
Option=*BATl
id)
# # Obs
Subcategory=INT_STEEL -¦
(continued)
Est.
Option
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LTA
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ISM75
200.7
52
1
121.085
126 .470
123.161
69.294
MAGNESIUM
7439954
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
56449.620
56642.617
10909.132
56642.617
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
67.269
67 .635
24 .737
67.635
MOLYBDENUM
7439987
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
655.796
680.974
436.102
680.974
NICKEL
7440020
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
5
17.400
17.400
0.548
17.400
NITRATE/NITRITE
C005
MG/L
ESE04
353.1
5
0
1.947
1 .952
0.352
1.952
SILVER
7440224
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
4
5.144
5.144
0.322
5.144
TIN
7440315
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
2
3.898
3 .906
0.454
3.906
TITANIUM
7440326
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
6.047
6.052
0.550
6.052
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON (TOC)
C012
MG/L
ESE04
415.1
5
4
9.139
9 .139
1.925
9.139
VANADIUM
7440622
UG/L
ESE04
1620
5
0
14.529
14.544
1.442
14.544
ZINC
ZINC
7440666
7440666
UG/L
UG/L
ESE04
ISM75
1620
200.7
5
53
0
1
121.451
130.547
124.685
126.223
112.582
129.992
125.454
_STEEL --
Option=CARBON_
BAT1 -
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
#
Obs
#
NDS
Obs
Mean
Est.
LTA
Est.
STD
Option
LTA
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ISM60
200.7
323
224
14.133
14.128
2.835
14.128
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ISM60
200.7
323
0
90.514
90.564
47.442
90.564
- Cuknit-nnnmi MAMTkTT OTDOT U/VT C/-»D U DAT1
uwi-aicyui y -huh j.ii a &
-
ziu-i ^t,iuu-v.ni\uvn unn —•
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
#
Obs
#
NDs
Obs
Mean
Est .
LTA
Est.
STD
Option
LTA
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ISM72
200.7/9.4
53
0
4013.962
4065.715
4802.617
4065.715
LEAD
7439921
UG/L
ISM72
239.2/9.4
53
43
5.434
5.438
1.254
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern
10
Subcategory=NONINT_STEEL_HOTFORM -- Opt ion=CARBON__BATl
(continued)
Obs
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
LEAD
LEAD
7439921
7439921
UG/L
UG/L
ISM73
ISM74
239.2
200.7
51
30
45
14
6 .412
e. leo
6 .426
8.050
3.076
6.243
6.
OIL AND GREASE
OIL AND GREASE
OIL AND GREASE
C036
C036
C036
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
ISM72
ISM73
ISM74
1664
1664
1664
53
51
52
5
30
5
8 .698
6 .137
15.713
8 .433
6 .130
15.655
4.640
2 . 077
7 . 927
8.
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
C009
C009
MG/L
MG/L
MG/L
ISM72
ISM73
ISM74
160.2
160.2
160.2
53
51
46
1
2
0
13.019
16.529
46.665
12.980
17.374
47.168
11.200
16.909
37.820
17.
ZINC
ZINC
7440666
7440666
UG/L
UG/L
ISM73
ISM74
200.7
200.7
51
30
11
2
64.961
78 .423
66.122
74 .588
96.014
72.876
70.
Subcategory-
OTHER --
Option=DRI_BPT
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
#
Obs
#
NDs
Obs
Mean
Est.
LTA
Est.
STD
Opt
ALUMINUM
7429905
UG/L
ESE10
1620
1
0
40.300
40.300
40.
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ESE10
350.1
1
0
13.400
13 .400
13.
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND (COD
C004
MG/L
ESE10
410.2
1
0
15.600
15.600
15.
FLUORIDE
16984488
MG/L
ESE10
340.2
1
0
14 .200
14.200
14 .
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE10
1620
1
0
568.000
568.000
568.
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE10
1620
1
0
1250.000
1250.000
1250
TITANIUM
7440326
UG/L
ESE10
1620
1
1
3.000
3 .000
3
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ESE10
160.2
1
1
4.000
4.000
4
Option
LTA
Subcategory=OTHER -- OptioneFORGING
Analyte
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
CAS_NO
7664417
Unit Episode
MG/L ESE07
Method
350.2
#
Obs
#
NDs
Obs
Mean
0.230
Est.
LTA
Est.
STD
Option
LTA
0.246
-------
Appendix D. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages for Pollutants of Concern
11
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option=FORGING
(continued)
Obs
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
ND3
Mean
LTA
STD
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE04
410.4
3
1
44.800
45.274
20.789
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE07
410.4
4
0
28.250
29.442
15.626
CHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND
(COD
C004
MG/L
ESE09
410.4
4
0
43 .125
44.774
31.318
44
FLUORIDE
16904488
MG/L
ESE07
340.2
4
0
2.450
2 .509
1.155
FLUORIDE
16984466
MG/L
ESE09
340.2
4
0
15.263
15.387
3.830
8
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE04
1620
0
1813.333
1969.926
1490.139
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE07
1620
4
0
3095.000
3310.359
2586.466
IRON
7439896
UG/L
ESE09
1620
4
0
597.125
669.619
612.818
1969
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE07
1620
4
0
45.350
45.495
7.295
MANGANESE
7439965
UG/L
ESE09
1620
4
0
47.325
47.638
10.205
46
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
MG/L
ESE07
1664
4
1
6.633
6.651
1.105
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
MG/L
ESE09
1664
4
2
8.917
9.196
5.636
7
SGT-HEM
C037
MG/L
ESE07
1664
3
2
5.722
5.722
0.855
SGT-HEM
C037
MG/L
ESE09
1664
2
0
12.917
12.917
2.946
9
TITANIUM
7440326
UG/L
ESE09
1620
4
3
8.513
8.513
7.025
8
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ESE07
160.2
4
3
6.250
6.250
4.500
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ESE09
160.2
4
2
6.750
7.271
6. 187
6
ZINC
7440666
UG/L
ESE07
1620
4
0
171.500
172.678
46.553
172
Option
LTA
-------
APPENDIX E
ATTACHMENTS FOR SECTION 14
-------
APPENDIX E: Attachments for Section 14
Subcategory Abbreviations t
Abbreviat ion Sub cateaory
COKE_BYPROD
OTHER
Cokemaking, By-Product Segment
Other Operations
Option Abbreviations:
Abbreviation
DRI BPT
Option
Direct Iron Reduction, Option BPT
Other Abbreviations:
Abbreviation
CAS_NO
Est
LTA
ND
Obs
STD
V. F.
Definition
Chemical Abstract Service Number
Estimated
Long-Term Average
Non-Detect
Number of Daily Values,-
OR Observed (e.g., Obs Mean)
Standard Deviation
Variability Factor
E-l
-------
Attachment 14-1. Summary Statistics for Proposed Pollutants and Subcategories
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
Total
Obs
Obs
Mean
Std
Min
Max
Min
Max
Episode
Number
Num
Std
Median
Value
Dev
Value
Value
Value
Value
Analyte
Episode
Mean
Values
ND
Dev
Value
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
Unit
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
ESE02
17 .47
5
0
3.10
16.00
17.47
3.10
14 .80
21.30
MG/L
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
ISM50
1.42
244
73
0.99
1.12
1.60
1.14
0.10
10.20
1.00
1.00
MG/L
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
ISM51
2.94
8
0
0.65
3.05
2.94
0.65
1.90
3.80
MG/L
BENZO(A)PYRENE
ESE02
10.00
5
5
0.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
UG/L
NAPHTHALENE
ESE01
10.08
5
5
0.18
10.00
10.00
10.40
UG/L
NAPHTHALENE
ESE02
10.00
5
5
0.00
10.00
10.00
10.00
UG/L
NAPHTHALENE
ISM50
10.68
264
231
6.17
10.00
14.82
16.93
10.00
100.00
10.00
20.00
UG/L
OIL AND GREASE
ESE02
5.58
3
3
0.08
5.62
5.49
5.63
MG/L
TOTAL CYANIDE
ESE01
3 .41
5
0
0.52
3.30
3.41
0.52
2 .71
3.94
MG/L
TOTAL CYANIDE
ISM50
2 .51
265
9
1.74
2 .19
2.53
1. 77
0.72
21.40
1.50
2.52
MG/L
TOTAL PHENOLS
ESE01
0. 06
5
3
0. 02
0.05
0. 08
0. 02
0.07
0. 09
0. 05
0. 05
MG/L
TOTAL PHENOLS
ESE02
0.01
5
0
0.00
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.01
MG/L
TOTAL PHENOLS
ISM50
0.02
264
6
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.08
0.01
0.01
MG/L
TOTAL PHENOLS
ISM51
0.06
8
0
0.01
0.06
0.06
0.01
0.04
0.09
MG/L
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
ISM50
18 .83
265
10
47.14
11.00
19.42
47.96
3 .00
572.00
4.00
4.00
MG/L
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
Total
Obs
Obs
Mean
Std
Min
Max
Min
Max
Episode Number Num
Std
Median
Value
Dev
Value
Value
Value
Value
Analyte
Episode
Mean
Values
ND
Dev
Value
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
Unit
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
ISM54
25.77
53
0
11.48
23.80
25.77
11.48
7.00
56.00
MG/L
NAPHTHALENE
ESE01
10.50
5
5
0.82
10.00
10.00
11.90
UG/L
NAPHTHALENE
ESE02
51.48
5
3
45.13
33.04
23.69
13 .22
14 .34
33 .04
10.00
100.00
UG/L
NAPHTHALENE
ISM54
12.40
4
2
12 .27
12.00
23.00
1.41
22 .00
24.00
1.60
2.00
UG/L
TOTAL CYANIDE
ISM50
6. 82
970
0
3.26
5.99
6. 82
3.26
0.38
29. 80
MG/L
Subcategory=OTHER -- Opt ion=DRI_BPT
Analyte
Episode
Total Obs Obs Mean Std Min Max Min Max
Episode Number Num Std Median Value Dev Value Value Value Value
Mean Values ND Dev Value NC NC NC NC ND ND Unit
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
ISM65
ESE10
10.83
4 .00
11
1
7.20
10.00
4.00
10.83
7.20
3.00
27.00
4.00
MG/L
4.00 MG/L
-------
Attachment 14-1. Summary Statistics for Proposed Pollutants and Subcategories
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option-FORGING
Total
Obs
Obs
Mean
Std
Min
Max
Min
Max
Episode Number
Num
Std
Median
Value
Dev
Value
Value
Value
Value
Analyte
Episode
Mean
Values
ND
Dev
Value
NC
NC
NC
NC
ND
ND
Unit
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
ESE07
6.63
4
1
1.11
6.52
7.01
1.00
6.00
8 . 00
5.50
5.50
MG/L
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
ESE09
8.92
4
2
5.15
7.25
12.58
5.07
9.00
16.17
5.00
5.50
MG/L
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
ESE07
6.25
4
3
4 .50
4 .00
13.00
13 .00
13 .00
4.00
4.00
MG/L
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
ESE09
6.75
4
2
4.56
4.75
9.50
5.66
5.50
13.50
4.00
4 .00
MG/L
-------
Attachment 14-2. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages and Variability Factors
Assuming Underlying Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
#
#
Obs
Est.
Est.
1-Day
Monthly
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDS
Mean
LTA
STD
V.F.
V.F.
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ESE02
350.2
5
0
17.470
17.648
3.775
1 .599
1.317
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ISM50
350.2
244
73
1.418
1.402
0.712
2.834
1.577
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ISM51
SM4500NH3-E
8
0
2.938
2.978
0.833
1.824
1.412
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0.000
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.080
10.080
0. 179
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
5
10.000
10.000
0. 000
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ISM50
625
264
231
10.678
10.526
3.001
2 .325
1.297
OIL AND GREASE
C036
MG/L
ESE02
1664
3
3
5.582
5 .582
0.078
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ESE01
335.2
5
0
3 .414
3 .460
0.750
1.609
1.307
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ISM50
335.3/4
265
9
2.513
2 .471
1.200
2.637
1.667
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ESE01
420.2
5
3
0.062
0.062
0.020
2.090
1.288
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ESE02
420.1
5
0
0.009
0.009
0.001
1.469
1.148
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ISM50
420.2
264
6
0. 017
0.017
0.010
3.059
1.544
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
MG/L
ISM51
420.1
8
0
0.061
0.061
0.015
1.698
1.212
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ISM50
160.2
265
10
18.834
15.760
14.786
4.620
1.885
.pntfp RYPPon - •
_ rwst- i nn-PQPCIl
'vUi\Ci D X IrlWJL/
vUU Ivll — ruDOl
#
#
Obs
Est.
Est.
1-Day
Monthly
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
V.F.
V.F.
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
MG/L
ISM54
4500NH, BE
53
0
25.766
26.059
13.185
2.709
1.631
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE01
1625
5
5
10.500
10.500
0. 825
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ESE02
1625
5
3
51.476
52.363
40.724
.
NAPHTHALENE
91203
UG/L
ISM54
625
4
2
12.400
12.411
10.659
2.101
1. 746
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
MG/L
ISM50
335.2
970
0
6.822
6.776
2 .696
2.267
1.582
Subcategory-OTHER -- Option=DRI_BPT
# # Obs Est. Est. 1-Day Monthly
Analyte CAS_NO Unit Episode Method Obs NDs Mean LTA STD V.F. V.F.
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
CO 09
MG/L ISM65 160.2
MG/L ESE10 160.2
11 0 10.827 11.017 7.664 3.540 1.647
1 1 4.000 4.000
-------
Attachment 14-2. Episode-Specific Long-Term Averages and Variability Factors
Assuming Underlying Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option=FORGING
#
#
Obs
Est.
Est.
1-Day
Monthly
Analyte
CAS_NO
Unit
Episode
Method
Obs
NDs
Mean
LTA
STD
V. F.
V.F.
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
MG/L
ESE07
1664
4
1
6.633
6.651
1.105
1.441
1.142
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
C036
MG/L
ESE09
1664
4
2
8.917
9.196
5 .636
3 . 071
1.556
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ESE07
160.2
4
3
6.250
6.250
4 .500
TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS
C009
MG/L
ESE09
160.2
4
2
6.750
7.271
6.187
4 . 366
1.801
W
I
-------
Attachment 14-3. Concentration-Based Limitations
Assuming Underlying Modified Delta-Lognormal Distribution
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
Baseline
1-Day
Monthly
Monthly
Analyte
CAS Number
Value
Unit
LTA
V. F.
V. F.
Daily Limit
Limit
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
0.05
MG/L
2 . 98
2.09
1.44
6.21
4.28
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
10.00
UG/L
10.00
2.33
1.30
23.25
12.97
CYANIDE
57125
0.02
MG/L
2.97
2.12
1.49
6.30
4.41
NAPHTHALENE
91203
10.00
UG/L
10.08
2.33
1.30
23.44
13.07
OIL AND GREASE
C036
5.00
MG/L
5.58
2.57
1.39
14.34
7.76
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
0.05
MG/L
0.04
2.08
1.30
0.08
0.05
TSS
C009
4.00
MG/L
15.76
4.62
1.89
72.81
29.71
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
Baseline 1-Day Monthly Monthly
Analyte
CAS Number
Value
Unit
LTA
V.F.
V.F.
Daily Limit
Limit
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
0.05
MG/L
26.06
2.71
1.63
70.60
42.51
CYANIDE
57125
0.02
MG/L
6.78
2 .27
1.58
15.36
10.72
NAPHTHALENE1
91203
10.00
UG/L
47.59
2.10
1.75
100.00
83.10
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option=DRI_BPT
Baseline 1-Day Monthly Monthly
Analyte CAS Number Value Unit LTA V.F. V.F. Daily Limit Limit
TSS C009 4 MG/L 7.51 3.54 1.65 26.58 12.36
Subcategory=OTHER
Option=FORGING
Analyte
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
TSS
CAS Number
C036
C009
Baseline
Value
5
4
Unit
MG/L
MG/L
LTA
7.92
6.76
1-Day
V.F.
2.26
4.37
Monthly
V.F.
1.35
1.80
Daily Limit
17.87
29.52
Monthly
Limit
10.69
12.17
'See Section 14.10 for EPA's determination of these values.
-------
Attachment 14-4. Production-Normalized Limitations
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=BATl
tfl
i
-J
Analyte
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
CYANIDE
CYANIDE
NAPHTHALENE
NAPHTHALENE
General
Manufacturing
Production-
Production normalized
Production-
normalized
Production-
normalized
Monthly
Production-
normalized
Analyte
CAS Number
Process
Process
(gal/ton)
LTA
Daily Limit
Limit
Unit
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BY-PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.00140
0.00293
0.00202
LBS/1000LBS
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
BY-PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.00000472
0.0000110
0.00000612
LBS/1000LBS
BENZO(A)PYRENE
50328
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
CYANIDE
57125
BY-PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.00140
0.00297
0.00208
LBS/1000LBS
CYANIDE
57125
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
NAPHTHALENE
91203
BY-PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.00000475
0.0000111
0.00000616
LBS/1000LBS
NAPHTHALENE
91203
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
OIL AND GREASE
C036
BY-PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.0026
0.00676
0.0037
LBS/1000LBS
OIL AND GREASE
C036
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
BY-PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.0000183
0.0000381
0.0000238
LBS/1000LBS
TOTAL PHENOLS
C020
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
TSS
C009
BY- PRODUCT
N/A
113
0.00743
0.0343
0.0140
LBS/1000LBS
TSS
CO 09
NON-RECOVERY
N/A
0
LBS/1000LBS
Subcategory=COKE_BYPROD -- Option=PSESl
CAS Number
7664417
7664417
57125
57125
91203
91203
General
Process
BY-PRODUCT
NON-RECOVERY
BY-PRODUCT
NON-RECOVERY
BY-PRODUCT
NON-RECOVERY
Production-
Manufacturing Production normalized
Process (gal/ton) LTA
Production-
Production- normalized
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
113
0
113
0
113
0
0.0123
0.00319
0.0000224
normalized
Daily Limit
0.0333
0.00724
0.0000472
Monthly
Limit
0.0200
0.00506
0.0000392
Production-
normalized
Unit
LBS/1000LBS
LBS/1000LBS
LBS/1000LBS
LBS/1000LBS
LBS/1000LBS
LBS/1000LBS
-------
Attachment 14-4. Production-Normalized Limitations
Subcategory=OTHER -- Option=DRI_BPT
Analyte
TSS
CAS Number
C009
General
Process
N/A
Manufacturing
Process
N/A
Production
(gal/ton)
90
Production-
normalized
LTA
0.00282
Production-
normalized
Daily Limit
0.00998
Production-
normalized
Monthly
Limit
0.00465
Production-
normalized
Unit
LBS/1000LBS
Subcategory=OTHER -- Opt ion=FORGING
Analyte
OIL AND GREASE (HEM)
TSS
CAS Number
C036
CO 09
General
Process
N/A
N/A
Manufacturing
Process
N/A
N/A
Production
(gal/ton)
100
100
Production-
normal i zed
LTA
0.0033
0.00282
Production-
normalized
Daily Limit
0.00746
0.0123
Production-
normalized
Monthly
Limit
0.00446
0.00508
Production-
normalized
Unit
LBS/1000LBS
LBS/1000LBS
m
I
oo
-------
Attachment 14-5. Comparing Episode-Specific LTAs and Daily VFs
Before and After Autocorrelation Adjustment
Estimated
Estimated
LTA
VF
Estimated
Data
SUBCAT
ANALYTE
CAS_NO
OPTION
Episode
UNIT
Before
After
Before
After
RHOc
Collected
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BAT1
ESE02
MG/L
17.5197
17.6479
1.4753
1.5995
0.52169*
Daily
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BAT1
ISM50
MG/L
1.4006
1.4022
2.0103
2.0330
0.52169
Weekly
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BAT1
ISM51
MG/L
2.9525
2.9703
1.7000
1.0237
0.52169*
Weekly
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
PSES1
ISM54
MG/L
25.9763
26.0593
2.6756
2.7092
0.42957
Weekly
COKE BYPROD
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
BAT1
ESE01
MG/L
3 .4229
3 .4599
1.4214
1.6093
0.65723**
Daily
COKE BYPROD
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
BAT1
ISM50
MG/L
2.4663
2.4710
2.6254
2.6373
0.57393
Weekly
COKE BYPROD
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
PSES1
ISM50
MG/L
6.7740
6.7760
2.2636
2.2669
0.65723
Daily
•Transferred from ISM50; Assume value is daily for ESE02
••Maximum of ISM50 BAT-1 and PSES-1 values
-------
Attachment 14-6. Comparing Monthly VFs
Before and After Autocorrelation Adjustment
SUBCAT
ANALYTE
CAS_NO
OPTION
EPISODE
UNIT
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BAT1
ESE02
MG/L
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BAT1
ISM50
MG/L
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
BAT1
ISM51
MG/L
COKE BYPROD
AMMONIA AS NITROGEN
7664417
PSES1
ISM54
MG/L
COKE BYPROD
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
BAT1
ESE01
MG/L
COKE BYPROD
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
BAT1
ISM50
MG/L
COKE BYPROD
TOTAL CYANIDE
57125
PSES1
ISM50
MG/L
Estimated
Monthly VF
Before After
1.1500
1.4590
1.2126
1.4526
1.1344
1.4380
1.3554
1.3170
1.5774
1.4125
1.6312
1.3069
1.6671
1.5822
0.61291*
0.61291
0.61291*
0.42957
0.65723**
0.57033
0.65723
Transferred from ISM50? Assume value is daily for ESE02
~Maximum of ISM50 BAT-1 and PSES-1 values
------- |