ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
EPA-330/2-76-024
Characterization and Evaluation
of Wastewater Sources
United States Steel Corporation
D uquesne Plant
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
DENVER, COLORADO
AND
REGION III. PHILADELPHIA. PENNSYLVANIA
MAY 1976
% m
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Enforcement
CHARACTERIZATION AND EVALUATION OF WASTEWATER SOURCES
UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION
DUQUESNE PLANT
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA
February 26 - March 6, 1976
May 1976
National Enforcement Investigations Center - Denver, Colorado
and
Region III - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
1 of 140
-------
CONTENTS
I INTRODUCTION 4
II SUMMARY 8
III EVALUATION PROCEDURES 18
IV FINDINGS OF IN-PLANT MONITORING .... 22
OUTFALL 111 22
OUTFALL 211 37
OUTFALL Oil 39
OUTFALL 112 43
OUTFALL 012 44
OUTFALL 013 45
OUTFALL 114 49
OUTFALL 014 56
PRIMARY SCALE PITS 58
OUTFALL 015 63
OUTFALL 016 66
OUTFALL 017 68
WATER INTAKE 69
V MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 73
OUTFALL 111 82
OUTFALL Oil 82
OUTFALL 012 83
OUTFALL 013 83
OUTFALL 114 84
OUTFALL 014 84
OUTFALL 016 84
REFERENCES 85
APPENDICES
A RECONNAISSANCE REPORT 87
B CHAIN OF CUSTODY PROCEDURES .... 126
C DYE DILUTION TECHNIQUE FOR FLOW
MEASUREMENT 136
D ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES, QUALITY
CONTROL 138
2 of 140
-------
TABLES
1 Sampling Summary 19
2 Comparison of Rated Capacity with Actual
Production During NEIC Survey 23
3 Daily Production 24
4 Field Measurements and Analytical Data 26
5 Oil and Grease and Phenolic Data 28
6 Metals and Fluoride Data 32
7 Summary of Self-Monitoring Data 34
8 Comparison of USSC Self-Mom toring Data and
NEIC Survey Data (Outfall 111) 35
9 Treatment Efficiency of Blast Furnace
Thickener 36
10 Comparison of USSC-Proposed Limitations and
NEIC Survey Results (Outfall 111) 38
11 Comparison of USSC Sel f-Momtoring Data and
NEIC Survey Data (Outfall 211) 40
12 Comparison of Daily Average Pollutant Loads
and Field Measurements (Outfalls 111 plus 211
vs. Outfall Oil) 42
13 Comparison of Average USSC and City of Duquesne
Loads Discharged to Outfall 013 47
14 Comparison of USSC Sel f-Momtoring and
NEIC Survey Data (Outfall 114) 51
15 Field Measurements and Analytical Data
BOP Thickener Influents 53
16 Oil and Grease and Phenolics Data
BOP Thickener Influents 54
17 Metals and Fluoride Data
BOP Thickener Influents 55
18 Treatment Efficiency of BOP Thickener 57
19 Comparison of NEIC Monitoring Results
(Outfall 114 vs Outfall 014) 59
20 Treatment Efficiency of Primary Mill Scale
Pits (TSS and Metals) 61
21 Treatment Efficiency of Primary Mill Scale
Pits (Oil and Grease) 62
22 Comparison of USSC Self-Monitoring Data and
NEIC Survey Data (Outfall 015) 65
23 Comparison of USSC Self-Monitoring Data and
NEIC Survey Data (Outfall 016) 67
24 Comparison of USSC Self-Monitoring Data and
NEIC Survey Data (Outfall 017) 70
25 Comparison of USSC-Proposed Limitations and
NEIC Survey Results (Outfall 017) 71
26 Instantaneous Flow Measurements
(Feb. 26-Mar. 6, 1976) 74
27 Recommended Monitoring Requirements 79
FIGURES
1 Plant Layout, Schematic (Iron and Steel Area). . 5
2 Plant Layout, Schematic (Finishing Area) .... 6
3 of 140
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The United States Steel Corporation (USSC) National-Duquesne Works
is composed of two separate plants, the National Plant and the Duquesne
Plant on the east and west banks, respectively, of the Monongahela
River. The plants are about 8 km (13 mi) upstream of the confluence of
the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The
Duquesne Plant is primarily an iron and steel production facility with
some finishing operations. Steel-making began at Duquesne about 1886
with the construction of a small Bessemer converter shop and a blooming
mill. Since then the plant has been expanded and updated with the
latest addition being the No. 6 blast furnace in 1963. The plant became
part of the U. S. Steel Corporation in 1901. Present major operations
include blast furnaces producing basic iron; basic oxygen furnaces (BOF)
and an electric furnace complex manufacturing steel; 21-inch,* 36-inch*
and 46-inch* hot rolling mills which manufacture slabs, blooms, billets
and rounds; No. 5 bar mill which manufactures bars and rounds; and
special heat treating and steel conditioning facilities. Ancillary
facilities include an oxygen plant, granulated slag operation and water
treatment plant [Figs. 1, 2].
Production capacity at Duquesne as reported by USSC officials is
6,979 m. tons (7,697 tons)/day basic iron, 7,000 m. tons (7,700 tons)/day
BOF steel, 727 m. tons (800 tons)/day electric furnace steel and 4,780
m. tons (5,258 tons)/day of hot formed and rolled primary and finished
steel, mostly billets, bars and rounds. Industrial water is pumped from
the Monongahela River through a single intake located upstream of all
wastewater outfalls. Total average water usage is reported as approximately
* Metric equivalents: 53.3-, 91.4-, 116.8-cm
4 of 140
-------
Flguro ?. Plant layout and Sthometle Flow Diagram - USSC Dvqutinf Plant' Iron and Stool Area
cn
O
o
-------
Figure 2. Hani Layout and Sthomatlt Flow Diagram « USSC D
tr>
o
-Ck
O
-------
o
424,000 m /day (112 mgd).1 Wastewater is discharged through seven major
outfalls* (Oil, 012, 013, 014, 015, 016 and 017) and four intermediate
outfalls (111, 211, 112 and 114) [Figs. 1, 2]. All wastewaters are
discharged untreated with the exception of process wastes from the blast
furnaces, BOF, primary mills and bar mill. Blast furnace and BOF
process wastewaters are treated for solids removal by gravity thickening
and vacuum filtration of sludge. Scale pits are installed for the
removal of mill scale from primary and bar mill wastewaters.
U. S. EPA Region III, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, requested the
National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) to conduct an in-
tensive survey of wastewater discharges to the Monongahela River
from U.S. Steel Corporation facilities. Treatment facilities and
wastewater discharges were evaluated at the USSC Duquesne Plant during
February 23-March 6, 1976. All outfalls were monitored for three
consecutive days: outfalls 015, 016 and 017 from February 26-29 and
outfalls Oil, 111, 211, 012, 013, 014 and 114 from March 3-6. Outfall
112 was not active during the investigation.
* Outfall numbers refer to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit outfall numbers.
-------
II. SUMMARY
Wastewater discharges and treatment facilities at USSC Duquesne
were monitored for three consecutive days during February 26-March
6, 1976. Outfalls 015, 016 and 017 and the primary mill scale pits
were evaluated from February 26-29. Outfalls 111, 211, Oil, 012,
013, 114 and 014 were monitored along with the blast furnace thick-
ener and the basic oxygen process (BOP) thickener from March 3-6.
Treatment facility evaluations included influent and effluent
sampling to determine removal efficiencies. The raw water intake
was monitored from February 26-29 and March 3-6. Outfall flows
were measured using the dye dilution technique. Batch discharges
to outfall 013 from the USSC water treatment plant and the City of
Duquesne discharge to outfall 016 were estimated. Twenty-four-hour
flow-weighted composite samples were collected from all sampling
points except the water intake, BOP thickener influent, and water
treatment plant batch discharges where samples were equal-volume
composited.
During the survey, production was approximately 76% of overall
plant capacity. Major plant operations were producing the fol-
lowing percent of their rated capacity.
Blast furnaces 61 %
Basic oxygen furnaces 78%
Electric furnaces 93%
Primary mill 87%
No. 5 bar mill 127%
All or a portion of each major plant operation discharges waste-
water to one or more of the outfalls monitored. Major plant opera-
tions associated with each outfall were producing at the following
percent of their rated capacity.
8 of 140
-------
Outfall
111
61%
Outfall
211
84%
Outfal1
Oil
73%
Outfall
112
0%
Outfall
012
78%
Outfall
013
36%
Outfall
114
78%
Outfall
014
78%
Outfall
015
87%
Outfal1
016
93%
Outfall
017
127%
3. Blast furnace process wastewaters consisting primarily of venturi
gas washer flows are treated by gravity thickening and discharged
to outfall 111. From March 3-6, 1976, the thickener accomplished
the following average percent removals.
Total suspended solids 97%
Settleable solids 67%
Total iron 97%
Zinc 95%
Oil/grease 73%
Phenolics 55%
Thickener effluent (outfall 111) flow measured by NEIC averaged
o
24,000 m /day (6.4 mgd). The major pollutants discharged were
suspended solids, ammonia (NH^-N), phenolics, cyanide (CN), total
iron (Fe) and zinc (Zn). The pH ranged from 5.9 to 7.4. Limitations
proposed by USSC are compared with NEIC survey findings:
Parameter USSC Proposed Limitations NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
1,412
3,106
4,236
9,318
1,900
4,200
2,600
5,700
nh3-n
Phenolics
1,054
2,320
3,162
6,960
500
1,100
630
1,400
96
211
288
633
13
29
21
48
CNt
200
440
600
1,320
150
330
210
470
cn'
-
-
-
-
86
190
130
290
Fe
-
-
-
-
180
390
230
500
Zn
•
•
•
**
140
300
180
390
t Proposed limitations are net values except TSS which is gross value
9 of 140
-------
NEIC survey results are within the range of USSC self-monitoring
data for January-October 1975.
4. Discharge from the blast furnace No. 4 granulated slag pit (outfall
211) averaged 16,000 m /day (4.3 mgd) and the pH ranged from 5.2 to
7.3. Major pollutants discharged were suspended solids and ammonia.
USSC proposed limitations are compared with NEIC survey results:
Parameter
USSC Proposed Limitations
NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS+
3,459 7,610 10,377 22,830
3,500 7,700 6,200 14,000
nh3-n++
- -
32 70 47 100
t Gross values
tt Net values
NEIC survey results are within the range of USSC self-monitoring
data for the period January-October 1975.
5. Outfalls 111 and 211 discharge along with No. 6 blast furnace
cooling water to main outfall Oil. The outfall Oil sewer is
interconnected with the outfall 012 sewer. The outfall Oil moni-
toring results are wastewater characteristics upsewer of the
3
interconnection with outfall 012. Flow averaged 190,000 m /day
(51 mgd), 44% greater than the average flow reported by USSC.
Survey findings indicated that the average daily total cyanide and
amenable cyanide loads discharged through outfall 011 were 360% and
490% greater, respectively, than the sum of loads from outfalls 111
and 211. The sum of average daily total iron and zinc loads from
outfalls 111 and 211 were significantly less than discharged
through outfall 011. Average daily total suspended solids and
ammonia loads discharged from outfall 011 were 42% and 29% less,
respectively, than the sum of loads from outfalls 111 and 211.
10 of
-------
Average daily pollutant loads discharged were:
Parameter
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
2,400
5,300
NH,-N
390
850
CN^
550
1,200
cn!
430
930
o/6
0
0
Phenolics
12
27
FeT
300
660
Fel
15
33
Zn
190
410
The pH ranged from 6.6 to 8.3. USSC has proposed that the pH not
be less than 6.0 and that no other parameters be limited.
6. Outfall 012 discharges overflow from the No. 1 blast furnace slag
pit (outfall 112) and condenser cooling water from the oxygen
plant. In addition, outfall Oil is interconnected to outfall 012
and a portion of Oil wastewater is discharged through outfall 012.
NEIC monitoring results for outfall 012 refer to wastewater char-
acteristics upsewer of the interconnection. Flow averaged 150,000
o
m /day (41 mgd), 20% greater than the average flow measured by
USSC. Survey findings indicated that suspended solids and oil/grease
(0/G) were discharged at the following net average daily rates:
Parameter
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
3
440
970
0/G
1
200
300
The pH ranged from 6.7 to 8.3 although USSC self-monitoring data
indicates a pH range of 7.3 to 11. USSC has proposed that the pH
not be less than 6.0 and that no other limitations be established.
7. Cooling water from No. 1, 3 and 4 blast furnaces is discharged to
outfall 013 along with USSC water treatment plant wastewaters. In
addition, City of Duquesne wastewaters are discharged through
11 of 140
-------
outfall 013. During the survey, samples of City wastewater in-
dicated the presence of sanitary sewage. City flow averaged 4,400
m /day (1.2 mgd) and contained primarily suspended solids, ammonia
and oil/grease. A single grab sample of City wastewater was col-
lected March 4, 1976 and analyzed for organic compounds. Results
indicated the presence of organic compounds at the following con-
centrations:
Compound mg/1
Alkanes, 8 species, Cq to C,. MD.060
Alpha terpineol 0.230
Caffeine 0.030
Dibutylphthalate 0.022
Diethylphthalate 0.008
Diisobutylphthalate 0.015
Hexadecanol 0.020
Isoborneol -vO.020
Octadecanol 0.033
Para-Cresol 0.015
Tetradecanol 0.045
Filter backwash and solids blowdown from the USSC water treatment
plant are returned to the receiving water contrary to EPA policy
and result in an average daily discharge of 1,030 kg (2,366 lb)/day
suspended solids. The net USSC flow averaged 32,000 m^/day (8.5
mgd). Average daily net pollutant loads from USSC sources are
compared with daily loads from City sources for suspended solids,
ammonia, oil/grease and total iron.
Parameter USSC City
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
3,300
7,300
590
1,300
nh3-n
t
-
22
48
0/G
30
60
420
910
FeT
71
160
8.9
19
t Discharge load was less than intake load.
12 of
-------
Survey findings were within the range of USSC self-monitoring data.
The terminus of outfall 013 was sampled for organics March 4, 1976.
Results indicated the presence of a single organic compound, alpha
terpineol, at a concentration of 0.030 mg/1. Instantaneous flows
measured at the time organic samples were collected indicated that
90% of the alpha terpineol originated in City of Duquesne wastewater.
8. Process wastes from the basic oxygen furnaces (BOF) are treated by
gravity thickening and discharged through outfall 114. The thick-
ener accomplished the following average percent removals during
March 3-6, 1976:
Total suspended solids 99.1%
Settleable solids 99.8%
Total cyanide 81%
Total iron 98%
Zinc 95%
Fluoride 35%
Oil/grease 15%
Thickener effluent (outfall 114) averaged 8,700 m^/day (2.3 mgd).
Major pollutants discharged were suspended solids, total iron and
fluoride. The pH ranged from 10.8 to 11.7. USSC has proposed that
outfall 114 be limited for gross total suspended solids, dissolved
iron, and pH. Proposed limitations are compared with survey
results as follows:
Parameter
USSC Proposed Limitations
NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kq/day lb/day
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kq/da.y lb/day
TSS
4,101 9,022 12,303 27,066
470 1,000 550 1,200
FeT
- -
88 190 110 230
Fen
7 mg/1
0.16 mg/1 0.35 mg/1
F1
- -
77 170 92 200
pH
Shall not be less than 6.0
Range 10.8-11.7
+ Proposed limitations are gross values.
13 of 140
-------
NEIC survey results are within the range of USSC self-monitoring
data for January-October 1975.
9. Cooling water from the BOP shop combines with outfall 114 and is
3
discharged through main outfall 014. Flow averaged 36,000 m /day
(9.6 mgd), and settleable solids ranged from 8 to 35 ml/1 and
averaged 18 ml/1. Pollutants of primary significance were suspended
solids and total iron. Comparison of pollutant loads from outfalls
114 and 014 indicate that average suspended solids and total iron
loads of 1,800 kg (4,000 lb)/day and 50 kg (100 lb)/day, respectively,
were present in the cooling water discharged to outfall 014.
Parameter
Outfall 114 Outfall 014
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
190 410 2,000 4,400
Fei
75 170 125 270
USSC has proposed that the pH not be less than 6.0. During the
survey the pH ranged from 10.0 to 11.4. Limitations have not been
proposed by USSC for any other parameters. USSC conducted self-
monitoring for flow, temperature and pH. NEIC survey results for
these parameters are within the range of USSC self-monitoring data
for January-October 1975.
10. Primary mill wastewater is discharged through outfall 015 after
passing through individual scale pits associated with the 21-, 36-
and 46-inch mills. The three scale pits were evaluated to deter-
mine their efficiency in removing settleable solids, suspended
solids, total iron, dissolved iron, zinc and oil/grease. Although
results indicated insignificant removals, representative samples
could not be collected for settleable solids, suspended solids,
total iron and zinc. The heavier solids in the scale pit influents
were not well mixed but were carried entirely in the bed load of
the influent streams. NEIC did not sample the bed load. Dissolved
14 of 140
-------
iron and oil/grease removals were not significant. The pH of
effluent from the 21- and 46-inch mill scale pits exceeded 9.0 and
ranged from 6.4 to 9.6 and 6.6 to 11.0, respectively.
Total flow through outfall 015 averaged 85,000 m^/day (22 mgd) and
the pH ranged from 7.5 to 10.2. Net suspended solids and oil/grease
concentrations both averaged 2 mg/1. USSC has proposed that
outfall 015 be limited for suspended solids, oil/grease and pH.
Proposed limitations are compared with NEIC survey results.
Parameter
USSC Proposed Limitations
NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
19,100 42,021 57,300 126,063+
160 370 480 l.lOO1
0/G
1,395 3,070 4,186 9,210+++ 200 600 600 1,800
pH
Shall not be less than 6.0
Range 7.5-10.2
t Proposed as a net limitation until June Z03 1977 cmd a gross
limitation thereafter.
ft NEIC results for TSS are not representative.
ttt Gross limitation
Although primary mill production was 87% of its rated capacity, the
USSC-proposed limitations greatly exceed survey results. NEIC
findings are within the range of USSC self-monitoring data for
January-October 1975.
11. USSC discharges electric furnace shop wastewaters to a City of
Duquesne sewer terminating in outfall 016. Although City flow was
not measured and sampled due to limited access at upsewer location,
NEIC personnel estimated the flow at 4,200 m /day (1.1 mgd). The
o
total discharge from outfall 016 averaged 25,000 m /day (6.6 mgd).
The pH ranged from 7.1 to 9.4 and the settleable solids from 0.1 to
0.8 ml/1. USSC-proposed net limitations for outfall 016 are
compared with NEIC survey results:
15 of
-------
Parameter
USSC Proposed Limitations
NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
Daily Averaqe Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
PH
693 1,524 2,079 4,572
Shall not be less than 6.0
280 620 630 1,400
Range 7.1-9.4
t Proposed limitations are net values.
The electric furnaces were operating at 93% of rated capacity but
average suspended solids loads discharged were only about 40% of
the USSC-proposed limitations. NEIC survey results are within the
range of USSC self-monitoring data for January-October 1975.
12. The No. 5 bar mill, heat treating operations, and rinse waters from
the sulfuric acid pickling operation discharge wastewater to
outfall 017. During the survey, flow averaged 31,000 m /day (8.2
mgd) and the pH ranged from 7.3 to 9.5. USSC-proposed limitations
are compared with NEIC survey results below:
Parameter USSC Proposed Limitations NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
3,864
8,500 11,592 25,500
290 660 620
1,400
0/G
300
660 900 1,980
20 60 40
100
FeD
-
7.0 mg/1
tt
PH
Shall
not be less than 6.0
Range 7.3-9.5
t The USSC-proposed limitations call for gross values until June 30s
1977 after which TSS and O/G values would be net.
tt Daily results showed discharge concentrations less than intake
values.
With the exception of pH and dissolved iron, NEIC survey results
were within the range of USSC self-monitoring data for January-
October, 1975. Less than 10% of the USSC-proposed limitations for
16 of
-------
suspended solids, 0/G and dissolved iron were discharged during the
survey, although bar mill production exceeded its rated capacity.
USSC monitoring procedures currently include grab sampling and
single, instantaneous flow measurements at all monitoring locations
except the intake and outfall 112 where 24-hour composite samples
are collected. Because of the widely varying flow, grab sampling
and single instantaneous flow measurements are not sufficient to
characterize the wastewater quality or determine total daily loads.
It is recommended that continuous flow measurement facilities be
installed for all process wastewater outfalls (111, 211, 112 and
114). In addition, the installation of continuous flow measurement
facilities at outfall 014 is feasible and necessary. Twenty-four-
hour monitoring at outfalls Oil, 012, 013, 015, 016 and 017 should
include a minimum of eight equally spaced instantaneous flow
measurements and eight sample portions collected at equally spaced
intervals and composited on a flow proportional basis.
17 of
-------
III. EVALUATION PROCEDURES
A reconnaissance inspection of the Duquesne Plant was conducted
September 23-27, 1975, to evaluate processing operations, sampling
locations, and waste treatment facilities [Appendix A]. Based on recon-
naissance findings and information provided by USSC, a survey was conducted
to evaluate and characterize wastewater discharges. From February 23-
March 6, 1976 wastewater discharges were sampled and treatment facilities
evaluated. Dates sampled, sample type, and parameters evaluated are
presented in Table 1. All sampling, field measurements and laboratory
analyses were conducted using NEIC chain-of-custody procedures [Appen-
dix B].
Intake water flows are measured and recorded by USSC using venturi
flow tubes and continuous recording charts. Wastewater flows are period-
ically measured by USSC using a lithium chloride solution as a tracer.
A known concentration of lithium chloride is injected at a known rate
for five minutes. Samples are collected downstream of the injection
point and the lithium concentration determined. The flow calculated
from this information represents an instantaneous flow at the time of
sampling. During the survey, NEIC measured flows from all outfalls by
the dye dilution method [Appendix C] using Rhodamine WT dye. Dye was
continuously injected and flow determinations were made every three
hours. The resulting eight flow readings for each 24-hour sampling
period were averaged to determine the daily flow.
Additional flow determinations were made during the survey. Waste-
water from the City of Duquesne is also discharged from outfalls 013 and
016. City flow to outfall 013 was measured using the dye dilution
technique. City flow to outfall 016 was not measured due to limited
18 of 140
-------
Station.Description Date Sampled
Water Intake Feb. 26-29, Mar. 3-6
B.F. thickener Influent Mar.'3-6
and effluent (111)
No. 4 8.F. granulated slag Mar. 3-6
pit overflow (211)
B.F. thickener effluent, Mar. 3-6
No. 4 B.F. granulated slag
pit overflow and cooling
water from No. 6 B.F.(Oil)
Discharge from overflow box Mar. 3-6
adjacent to Linde Oxygen
Plant (012)
Upsewer flow from City of Mar. 3-6
Duquesne to Outfall 013
B.F. No. 4 cooling water Mar. 3-6
and upsewer flow from City
of Duquesne (013)
Water Treatment Plant - Mar. 4 & 5
filter backwash to Outfall 013
Water Treatment Plant - Mar. 4
solids blowdown to Outfall 013
Rake classifier influent to Mar. 3-6
_« BOP thickener
V£>
O
^ Gas cooling tower slurry Mar. 3-6
^ influent to BOP thickener
Table 1
SAMPLING SUMMARY
VSSC DUQUESNE PLANT
February 26-March 6, 1976
Type of Sample
Parameters
24-hr equal-volume composite
Grab
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
24-hour flow-weighted composite
Grab
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
Equal-volume composite over
period of discharge (i.e. 30 mln.)
Equal-volume composite over
period of discharge (i.e. -v 30 min.)
24-hr equal-volume composite
Grab
24-hr equal-volume composite
Grab
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, fluoride
Settleable solids,+t oil and grease,* phenols,*
organics**
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable sol ids,oil and grease,* phenols*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols,*
orgamcs**
TSS
Settleable solids,+t oil and grease*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, COD
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, COD
Settleable solids,t+ oil and grease,* phenols,*
organics**
TSS, settleable solids
TSS, settleable solids
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, fluoride
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, fluoride
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols*
-------
Table 1 (Continued)
SAMPLING SUMMARY
Station Description
Date Sampled
Type of Sample
Parameters
Filtrate Influent to BOP
Thickener
Mar. 3-6
24-hr equal-volume composite
BOP thickener effluent (114) Mar. 3-6
BOP thickener effluent and Mar. 3-6
BOP cooling water (014)
21" mill scale pit influent Feb. 26-29
and effluent
36" mill scale pit Influent Feb. 26-29
and effluent
46" mill scale pit influent Feb. 26-29
and effluent
Effluents from 21", 36" and Feb. 26-29
46" primary mill scale pits (015)
Electric furnace discharges Feb. 26-29
and upsewer flow from City
of Duquesne (016)
No. 5 Bar Mill and heat Feb. 26-29
treating discharges (017)
Grab
24-hr
Grab
24-hr
Grab
24-hr
Grab
24-hr
Grab
24-hr
Grab
24-hr
Grab
24-hr
flow-weighted composite
flow-weighted composite
flow-weighted composite
flow-weighted composite
flow-weighted composite
flow-weighted composite
flow-weighted composite
Grab
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved Iron, zinc, fluoride
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, fluoride
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols*
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, fluoride
tt
oil and grease,* phenols,'
Settleable solids,
organics*
TSS, total and dissolved iron, 2inc
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease*
TSS, total and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable solids, oil and grease*
TSS, total and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease*
TSS, total and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable solids,+t oil and grease,* organics**
TSS, ammonia, total and amenable cyanide, total
and dissolved iron, zinc, fluoride
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols,* organics**
TSS, total and dissolved iron, zinc
Settleable solids,++ oil and grease,* phenols,* organics**
t For 24-hr composite samples, beginning date is day sampling began. Ending date ie day final 24-hr composite samples came off. Sampling
day was 6 a.m.-6 a.m.
tt Settleable solids were grab sampled once daily.
* Three grab samples were collected per 24-hr sampling day.
** A 8ingle grab sample for organics was collected from each station during monitoring. Two grab samples were collected from the water
intake, one during each 3-day sampling period.
-------
access upsewer of USSC input. The flows of intermittent batch dis-
charges from the USSC water treatment plant to outfall 013 were esti-
mated based on their frequency and volume.
Samples were manually collected every three hours and composited
over each 24-hour period based on instantaneous flows measured concur-
rently. The 24-hour compositing and flow measurement period was from 6
a.m. to 6 a.m. The water intake and basic oxygen process (BOP) thick-
ener influents were composited on an equal-volume basis. Grab samples
for oil/grease and phenols were collected three times per day, while
settleable solids were grab sampled once daily. Samples for organic
analyses were collected once from each main outfall except outfall 012
and twice from the water intake. Field measurements for pH and tempera-
ture were made periodically at each station. All samples for oil/
grease, settleable solids and total suspended solids (TSS) were analyzed
at the NEIC mobile laboratory at the McKeesport Wastewater Treatment
Plant. The remaining analyses [Table 1] were performed at the NEIC
laboratories in Denver, Colorado. All samples were analyzed in accordance
with NEIC analytical quality control procedures [Appendix D].
Treatment efficiencies of the blast furnace thickener and the BOP
thickener were evaluated through concurrent influent and effluent
sampling. In addition, the three scale pits at the primary mill, though
constructed primarily for scale recovery rather than water pollution
control, were evaluated to determine treatment efficiency. Instantaneous
flows through each of these facilities were measured during sampling.
21 of 140
-------
IV. FINDINGS OF IN-PLANT MONITORING
Major processing segments of the Duquesne Plant were in operation
during the NEIC survey with the exception of the No. 1 and 3 blast
furnaces and the slag pit associated with blast furnace No. 1. The
plant was producing approximately 76% of its overall capacity. Com-
parison of individual process production with individual process capacity
[Table 2] indicates that overall production was down about 2% from
levels during January-November 1975 [Table 3], Overall plant production
capacity is compared below with actual daily production.
Overall NEIC Survey, Jan.-Nov. 1975
Process Capacity Production Avg. Production
m.tons tons m.tons tons m.tons tons
Blast Furnaces 6,979
7,677
4,257
4,683
6,093
6,702
B0F 7,000
7,700
5,445
5,989
5,184
5,702
Electric Furnaces 727
800
675
742
423
465
Primary Mill 4,041
4,445
3,502
3,852
2,757
3,033
No. 5 Bar Mill 739
813
942
1,036
650
715
t See reference 4
Monitoring results are tabulated by sampling location and discussed by
individual outfall. Results of organic analyses are discussed under
outfalls 013 and 016, the only two discharges in which organic compounds
were found.
OUTFALL 111
Gas cleaning operations associated with each of the four blast
furnaces generate process wastewaters. USSC has estimated that approxi-
3
mately 5,700 m /day (1.5 mgd) of process wastewaters are discharged from
22 of 140
-------
Table 2
COMPARISON OF RATED CAPACITY WITH ACTUAL PRODUCTION DURING NEIC SURVEY
USSC DUQUESNE
Daily . Actual Production/day^
Rated Capacity
3/3
3/4
3/5
3/6
Unit
m.tons
tons
m.tons
tons
m.tons
tons
m.tons
tons
m.tons
tons
No. 1 B.F.
1,093
1,202
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No. 3 B.F.
1,247
1,372
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No. 4 B.F.
1,790
1,969
1,459
1,605
1,522
1,674
1,553
1,708
1,477
1,625
No. 6 B.F.
2,849
3,134
2,964
3,260
2,412
2,653
2,805
3,085
2,839
3,123
BOF
7,000
7,700
5,854
6,439
5,076
5,584
5,699
6,269
5,150
5,665
Electric Furnace
727
800
657
723
570
627
705
776
764
840
2/26
2/27
2/28
2/29
Primary Mill
4,041
4,445
3,276
3,604
3,166
3,483
3,251
3,576
4,315
4,747
No. 5 Bar Mill
739
813
•1,165
1,281
720
792
0
0
0
0
Pickling
545
600
++
+t
ft
tt
Data provided by USSC (References 1,2). Production day ie 11 p.m. to 11 p.m. for all except electrio
^ furnace which is 12 p.m. to 12 p.m.
Data not provided by USSC.
-------
Table 3
DAILY PRODUCTION AT USSC DUQUESNE*
January-November 1975
Minimum Maximum Average
Parameter Net tons/day
m.tons
tons
m.tons
tons
m.tons
tons
Basic Iron Production
No. 1 B.F.
643
707++
1,093
1,202
881
969
No. 3 B.F.
914
1,005
1,247
1,372
1,062
1,168
No. 4 B.F.
969
1,066
1,790
1,969
1,361
1,497
No. 6 B.F.
1,949
2,144
2,849
3,134
2,789
3,068
Total
4,475
4,922
6,979
7,677
6,093
6,702
BOF Steel Production
3,184
3,502
7,021
7,723
5,184
5,702
Electric Furnace Steel
Production
0
0
753
828
423
465
Hot Forming Production
21" Mill
125
138
1,277
1,405
451
496
36" Mill
961
1,057
2,900
3,190
1,726
1,899
46" Mill
171
188
2,038
2,242
580
638
No. 5 Bar Mill
414
455
775
853
650
715
Pickling Production
2.6
2.9
481
529
198
218
^ Data provided by USSC1
Daily values are computed from minimum, maximum and average weekly
production figures. Therefore, total blast furnace production
numbers are not actual because minimum, maximum and average week
for each blast furnace did not necessarily occur at the same time.
24 of 140
-------
3
each of blast furnaces No. 1, 3 and 4 and approximately 8,700 m /day
(2.3 mgd) from blast furnace No. 6.3 During NEIC monitoring, No. 1 and
3 blast furnaces were not operating. Production from No. 4 and 6
furnaces averaged 4,257 m. tons (4,683 tons)/day, 92% of their combined
rated capacity1* and 61% of the production capacity of all four furnaces.
Blast furnace process wastewaters are discharged to a 27 m (90 ft)
diameter gravity thickener. USSC reported that polymer is added to the
thickener influent as a flocculating agent;1 however, during the survey
no polymer addition facilities could be located by USSC officials.
Thickener underflow is dewatered on disk-type vacuum filters. Filtrate
is returned to the thickener. USSC personnel reported that sludge was
dewatered 16 hr/day (i.e., swing turn and night turn) and recycled to
the thickener influent channel 8 hr/day during the survey.
NEIC monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate that thickener
q
effluent flow was essentially constant, averaging 24,000 m /day (6.4
3
mgd), 45% greater than the 17,000 m /day (4.4 mgd) average flow measured
by USSC [Table 7]. USSC and NEIC data indicate comparable results for
all parameters monitored except phenolics. The average USSC phenolics
concentration is seven times greater than the average concentration
determined by NEIC [Table 8]. The pollutants of major significance
discharged from outfall 111 were total suspended solids (TSS), ammonia
(NH^-N), total cyanide (CNy), amenable cyanide (CN^), phenolics, total
iron (Fey) and zinc {In).
The treatment efficiency of the blast furnace thickener was evaluated
by NEIC. Influent flows were sampled and composited on a flow-weighted
basis. The thickener was very efficient (average of >90%) in removing
total suspended solids, total iron and zinc [Table 9]. In addition, an
average of greater than 50% of the settleable solids, oil and grease and
phenolics were removed. Ammonia, cyanide and dissolved iron removals
were negligible.
25 of 140
-------
Station Date® Flowb pH Temp. Settleable
;cr1ptton m3/day mg(J Range Ranee Solids
x ]q3 I w tni/1j
Water Intake
2/27
7.2-8.0
11 5-12
0.1
2/28
6.2-6.8
11.8-13.5
0.9
2/29
6.7-7.4
10-13
0.1
3/4
6.9-8.2
11.5-16.0
<0.1
3/5
6.7-7.2
12.5-16.0
<0 1
3/6
6.0-7.3
14.5-16.5
<0.1
Blast Furnace
3/4
24
6.3
6.5-7.4
37-42
<0.1
Thickener
3/5
25
6.5
6.0-6.9
32-50
37
Effluent (111)
3/6
24
6.4
5.9-6.4
33-39
<0.1
3/4
3/5
3/6
No. 4 B.F.
3/4
8.4
2.2
6.8-7.2
30-37
<0.1
Granulated
3/5
18
4.9
5.2-7.1
20-45
<0.1
Slag Pit
3/6
22
5.8
5.9-7.3
20-48
0.1
Overflow (211)
3/4
3/5
3/6
111 plus 211
3/4
180
48
6.6-7.3
19-25
0.2
plus No. 6
3/5
190
50
6.6-8.3
22.5-26
<0.1
B.F. Cooling
3/6
210
56
6.7-7.7
21-25
0.1
Water (Oil)
3/4
3/5
3/6
Discharge from
3/4
140
37
6.9-8.3
18-20
<0.1
overflow box at
3/5
160
42
6.7-7.4
19-22
<0.1
Linde Oxygen
3/6
160
43
6.8-7.5
20-22
<0.1
Plant (012)
3/4
3/5
3/6
Upsewer flow
3/4
6.2
1.6
7.0-11.5
12-13
7.5
from City of
3/5
4.0
1.1
6.9-8.3
12-15
3
Ouquesne to
3/6
3.0
0.8
6.9-7.9
10.5-14
5
Outfall 013
No. 4 B.F.
3/4
35
9.1
7.1-9.4
17-20
0.5
Cooling Water
3/5
39
10
7.0-10.2
16-20
0.4
and upsewer flow
3/6
40
10
6.9-9.0
17-20
0.2
from City of
Ouquesne (013)
3/4
3/5
28
34
7.5
8.9
r\j
3/6
35
9.2
CTi
Table 4
MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYTICAL DATA
USSC DUQUESHE
February 26 - March 6, 1976
Gross
TSS
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Amenable Cyanide
mg/1 kg/day lb/day mg/1 kg/day lb/day mg/1 kg/day lb/day mg/1 kg/day lb/day
r,
75
0.27
0.01
<0.01
G
110
0.31
0 02
0 01
G
27
0.24
<0.01
<0.01
G
24
0.34
0.01
'O.olj
G
52
0.35
0.03
0 01
G
20
0.36
0.07
0.01
G
110
2,600
5,700
27
640
1,400
9.0
210
470
5-5d
130
290
r,
59
1,500
3,200
20
490
1,100
6.5
160
350
4.0
99
220
G
70
1,700
3,700
16
390
850
3.2
7 7
170
1.2
29
64
N
86
2,000
4,500
27
630
1,400
9.0
210
470
5.5
130
290
n
7
170
380
20
480
1,100
6.5
160
350
4.0
98
220
N
50
1.200
2,700
16
380
830
3.1
76
170
1.2
29
63
G
39
330
720
3"1rf
26
57
0.17
1.4
3.1
0 05"
0.42
0.92
li
210
3,900
8,500
1.8?
33
73
0.08
1.5
3.2
0.02"
0.37
0.81
r.
280
6,200
14,000
2.5*
55
121
0.24
5.3
11 7
<0.01
<0.22
<0.48
N
15
130
280
2.8
23
51
0 16
1.3
2.9
0.05
0.42
0.92
N
160
2,900
6,400
1 4
27
59
0.05
0.92
2.0
0.01
0.18
0.40
N
260
5,700
13,000
2 1
47
100
0.17
3.8
8 3
e
-
-
G
33
6,000
13,000
1.6
290
630
3.5
630
1,400
2.6*
470
1,000
r,
55
10,000
23,000
3 0
570
1,300
3.0
570
1,300
2.5
480
1,000
G
43
9,200
20,000
2.4
510
1,100
2.2
470
1,000
1.7
360
800
N
9
1,600
3,600
1.3
230
500
3 5
630
1,400
2.6
470
1,000
N
3
570
1,300
2.6
500
1,100
3.0
560
1,200
2.5
470
1,000
N
23
4,900
11,000
2.0
430
960
2 1
450
1,000
1.7
360
790
G
16
2,300
5,000
0.375
52
120
0.02
2.8
6.2
<0.01*1
<1.4
<3.1
G
54
8,600
19,000
0 45*
71
160
0.02
3.2
7.0
0.01
1.6
3.5
G
26
4,300
¦9,400
0.45
74
160
0.05
8.2
18
0.01
1.6
3.6
N
s
-
_
0.03
4.3
9.4
0.01
1.4
3. \
0
0
0
N
2
320
700
0.10
16
35
e
-
-
0
0
0
N
6
990
2,200
0.09
15
33
e
-
-
0
0
0
r,
150
940
2,100
5.1*
32
70
0.10
0 62
1.4
<0.01*
<0.06
<0.13
G
150
600
1,300
4.8®
19
42
0.06
0.24
0.53
o or
0.04
0.09
G
77
230
520
4.6"
14
31
0.02
0.06
0.13
0.01
0.03
0.07
G
180
6,200
14,000
0.44
15
34
0.02
0.69
1.5
<0.01*
<0.34
<0.76
G
110
4,300
9,400
0.50
19
43
0.01
0.39
0.85
<0.01
<0.40
<0.87
G
35
1,400
3,100
0.62
25
54
0.06
2.4
5.2
0.01
0.40
0.87
N
162
4,600
10,000
e
_
e
_
.
0
0
0
N
53
1,800
3,900
e
-
-
e
6
-
-
e
-
-
N
n
380
840
0
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
-------
Table 4 (Continued!
FIELD MEASUREMENTS ADD ANALYTICAL DATA
Station
Description
Date*9
Flow6
Settleable
TSS
Aumonla
Amenable Cyanide
tn'/day
x 103
mgd
Range
Range
(°C)
Solids
(ml/1)
y/neX.c
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/l
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
1b/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
3/4
8.0
2.1
11.3-11.7
34-45
0.1
r,
69
550
1,200
0.78
6.2
14
0.02
0.16
0.35
<0.01^
<0.08
<0.18
3/5
9.9
2.6
11.0-11 7
37-44
<0.1
G
49
490
1,100
0 72
7.2
16
0.04
0.40
0.88
0.02
0.20
0.44
3/6-
8.1
2.2
10.8-11.5
35-42
<0.1
r.
44
360
790
0.95
7.7
17
0.01
0 08
0.18
<0.01
<0.08
<0.18
3/4
N
45
360
790
0.44
3.5
7.8
0.01
0.08
0.18
<0.01^
<0.08
<0.18
3/5
N
e
-
-
0.37
3.7
8.1
0.01
0.10
0.22
0.01"
0 10
0.22
3/6
N
24
200
430
0.59
4.8
11
s
-
-
0
0
0
3/4
35
9.2
10.4-11.4
25-53
8
r,
82
2,900
6,300
0.37
13
28
0 02
0.70
1.5
<0.01^
<0.35
<0.77
3/5
35
9.3
10.0-11.3
23-55
35
r,
84
3,000
6,500
0.40
14
31
0.01
0.35
0.77
^.Ol*
<0.35
<0.78
3/6
39
10.4
10.3-11.0
22-50
12
r,
94
3,700
8,200
0.45
18
39
0.04
1.6
3.5
<0.01
<0.39
<0.87
3/4
N
58
2,000
4,400
0.03
1.0
2.3
0.01
0.35
0.76
0
0
0
3/5
N
32
1,100
2,500
0 05
1.8
3.9
a
-
-
a
-
-
3/6
N
74
2.900
6,400
0 09
3.6
7.8
a
-
-
e
-
-
2/27
82
22
8.5-10.0
12.5-17
0.4
G
66
5,400
12,000
2/28
93
24
7.5-9.0
12-15.5
0.1
r,
49
4,600
10,000
2/29
83
22
7.6-10.2
12-18.5
<0.1
n
33
2,800
6,100
2/27
N
e
_
2/28
N
e
-
-
2/29
N
6
480
1,100
2/27
21'
5.5
7.6-9.0
15-20.5
0.8
r.
85
1,800
3,900
0.70
15
32
0.04
0.84
1.8
0.03
0.63
1.4
2/28
24
6.3
7.1-8.6
14-22.5
0.1
G
45
1,100
2,400
0.71
17
37
0.01
0.24
0.53
<0.01
<0.24
<0.53
2/29
30
7.9
7.4-9.4
14-20
0.4
r,
48
1,400
3,200
0.67
20
44
0.03
0.90
2.0
0.02
0.60
1.7
2/27
n"
10
210
460
0.43
9
20
0.03
0.63
1.4
0.02
0.4
0.9
2/28
N
e
-
-
0.40
10
21
a
-
_
0
0
0
2/29
N
21
630
1,400
0.43
13
28
0.02
0.60
1.3
0.01
0.3
0.7
2/27
30
7.8
7.7-9.5
18-21
0.2
r,
96
2,900
6,300
2/28
35
9.3
7.6-8.6
13-20
<0.1
G
38
1,300
2,900
2/29
29
7.6
7.3-8.6
12-15
<0.1
r,
36
1,000
2,300
2/27
N
21
620
1,400
2/28
N
e
-
-
2/29
N
9
260
570
BOP Thickener
Effluent (114]
BOP Cooling
Water and
Thickener
Effluent (014)
Discharge from
Zl", 36" and 46"
primary mil Is
(015)
Discharge from
Electric Furnace
and upsewer flow
from Ci ty of
Duquesne (016)
No. 5 Bar Hill
and Heat Treatlm
Discharges (017)
ro
-j
4=»
O
3 Data is the day the sample was conposited (i.e., 24-hour composite 0600 September 27 to 0600 September 28 wag dated September 28.
° Daily average flous are average of eight instantaneous flous during 24-hour sampling period,
c Net valjee baaed on gross concentrations minus intake concentrations. Upsewer load uaa also subtracted from Outfall 01! since upseuer flat wan
neaaured.
**Sanples exceeded recoimended holding time due to rerouting of airline flight from Pittsburgh to Denver uhen
Denver airport was closed due to blizzard.
9 Net concentration is negative value therefore load uao not calculated.
Upeevcr flou to (326 uao not measured or sampled due to United access to sever. Upacuer flou uas visually estimated
by IIEIC 4,200 m /day (1.1 mgd).
®Nat values determined by subtracting intake concentrations from gross concentrations for entire flou.
-------
Table 5
OIL AND CREASE AND PHENOLIC DATAf
USSC DUQVESNE
February 26-March 6, 1976
Station Qate y^me Instantaneous Flow++ Oil and Grease+++ Phenolics
Description m3/day x 103 mgd mg/1 kg/day lb/day ug/1 kg/day lb/day
Water Intake
2/26
1520
2
6
2/26
1820
3
<5
2/27
0010
3
<5
Daily Average
3
<5
2/27
1523
6
6
2/27
1806
4
<5
2/28
2400
6
<5
Daily Average
5
<5
2/28
1520
<1
5
2/28
1810
<1
<5
2/29
0005
<1
<5
Daily Average
<1
<5
3/3
1700
<1
<5
3/3
1850
<1
<5
3/4
0030
<1
<5
Daily Average
<1
<5
3/4
1645
6
3/4
1830
4
<5
3/5
0030
5
<5
Daily Average
5
<5
3/5
1615
4
<5
3/5
1850
4
<5
3/6
0020
6
<5
Daily Average
5
<5
Blast Furnace
3/3
1500
35
9.3
2
70
200
1,200
42
93
Thickener
3/3
1835
26
6.8
2
50
100
860
22
49
Effluent (111)
3/4
0040
3.2
0.83
<1
<3.2
<6.9
no
0.35
0.76
Gross Daily Average
2
40
100
720
21
48
Net Daily Average
1
20
50
720
21
48
3/4
1505
31
8.1
4
100
300
150
4.6
10
3/4
1815
34
9.0
3
100
200
540
18
40
3/5
0040
22
5.8
4
90
200
640
14
31
Gross Daily Average
4
100
200
440
12
27
Net Daily Average
*
-
-
440
12
27
3/5
1500
12
3.3
5
60
100
39
0.48
1.1
3/5
1810
36
9.4
6
200
500
230
8.2
18
3/6
0015
19
5.1
7
100
300
350
6.7
15
Gross Daily Average
6
100
300
200
5.1
11
Net Daily AVerage
1
20
50
200
5.1
11
No. 4 Blast
3/3
1500
10
2.8
1
10
20
8
0.08
0.2
Furnace
3/3
1900
3.0
0.80
<1
<3
<7
<5
<0.02
<0.03
Granulated
3/4
0115
6.9
1.8
<1
<7
<20
9
0.06
0.1
Slag Pit
Gross Daily Average
<1
<7
<20
<7
<0.05
<0.1
Overflow {211)
Net Daily Average
0
0
0
<2
<0.01
<0.02
3/4
1600
16
4.1
11
170
380
5
0.08
0.2
3/4
1845
23
6.0
4
90
200
-------
Table 5 (Continued)
OIL AND GREASE AND PHENOLIC DATA+
Station
Description
Date Time
,t+
Oil and Grease
m
Phertolics
Instantaneous Flow
m3/day x 103 mgd mg/1 kg/day lb/day pg/1 kg/day lb/day
No. 4 Blast
3/5
1530 35
9.1
7
200
500
**
.
Furnace
3/5
1905 8.2
2.2
5
40
90
<5
<0.04
<0.09
Granulated Slag
3/6
0045 25
6.6
7
200
400
<5
<0.1
<0.3
Pit 0verflow(211)
Gross Daily Average
6
100
300
<5
<0.04
<0.09
(Continued)
Net Daily Average
1
20
50
0
0
0
111 plus 211
3/3
1635 170
44
<1
<200
<400
140
24
52
plus No. 6
3/3
1830 220
58
<1
<200
<500
86
19
42
Blast Furnace
3/4
0230 180
47
2
400
800
33
5.9
13
Cooling Mater
Gross Daily Average
<1
<300
<600
86
16
36
(Oil)
Net Daily Average
0
0
0
81
15
34
3/4
1620 200
53
5
1,000
2,000
85
17
37
3/4
1820 190
51
5
1,000
2,000
92
18
39
3/5
0020 190
50
3
600
1,000
64
12
27
Gross Daily Average
4
900
2,000
80
16
34
Net Daily Average
*
-
-
75
15
32
3/5
1615 270
71
5
1,000
3,000
11
3.0
6.5
3/5
1840 200
54
6
1,000
3,000
67
14
30
3/6
0015 160
41
5
800
2,000
50
7.8
17
Gross Daily Average
5
900
3,000
43
8.3
18
Net Daily Average
0
0
0
38
7.3
16
Discharge from 3/3
Overflow Box at 3/3
Linde Oxygen 3/4
Plant (012)
1625 95 25 2 200 400
1810 170 46 2 300 800
0050 160 44 3 500 1,000
Gross Daily Average 2 300 700
Net Daily Average 1 200 400
Upsewer Flow
from City of
Duquesne to
Outfall 013
3/4
1615
140
37
2
300
600
3/4
1840
180
48
3
500
1,000
3/5
0040
140
38
2
300
600
Gross Daily Average
2
400
700
Net Daily Average
*
0
0
3/5
1635
200
54
6
1,000
3,000
3/5
1905
170
44
9
1,000
3,000
3/6
0040
110
30
6
700
1,000
Gross Daily Average
7
900
2,000
Net Daily Average
2
300
600
3/3
1515
3.0
0.78
380
1,100
2,500
39
0.12
0.26
3/3
2035
3.3
0.86
640
2,100
4,600
35
o.n
0.25
3/4
0210
4.8
1.3
3
10
30
13
0.06
0.14
Daily Average
340
1,100
2,400
29
0.10
0.22
3/4
1515
3.4
0.89
14
47
100
34
o.n
0.25
3/4
1950
3.8
1.0
43
160
360
40
0.15
0.33
3/5
0140
3.4
0.89
8
30
60
27
0.09
0.20
Daily Average
22
79
170
34
0.12
0.26
3/5
1505
3.0
0.78
31
92
200
37
0.11
0.24
3/5
1955
2.9
0.76
34
98
220
47
0.14
0.30
3/6
0135
2.4
0.63
16
39
85
29
0.07
0.15
Dai ly Average
27
76
170
38
0.11
0.23
29 of 140
-------
Table S (Continued)
OIL AND GREASE AND PHENOLIC DATA+
Station Instantaneous Flowt+ Oil and Grease++t Phenolics
Description m3/day x 103 mgd mg/1 kg/day lb/day ng/1 kg/day lb/day
No. 4 Blast
Furnace Cooling
Hater and
Upsewer Flow
from City of
Duquesne (013)
BOP Thickener
Effluent (114)
BOP Cooling
Water and
Thickener
Effluent (014)
Discharge from
21",36" and 46"
Primary Mills
(015)
3/3
1645 39
10
2
80
200
5
0.2
0.4
3/3
1835 37
9.8
5
200
400
5
0.2
0.4
3/4
0030 42
11
2
80
200
<5
<0.2
<0.5
Gross Daily Average
3
100
300
<5
<0.2
<0.4
Net Daily Average
*
-
-
0
0
0
3/4
1630 32
8.4
4
100
300
11
0.3
0.8
3/4
1830 39
10
4
200
300
**
-
-
3/5
0025 49
13
3
100
300
<5
<0.2
<0.5
Gross Daily Average
4
100
300
<5
<0.2
<0.4
Net Daily Average
*
-
-
0
0
0
3/5
1615 35
9.2
8
300
600
6
0.2
0.5
3/5
1845 34
9.0
7
200
500
7
0.2
0.5
3/6
0015 39
10
7
300
600
5
0.2
0.4
Gross Daily Average
7
300
600
6
0.2
0.5
Net Daily Average
2
90
170
*
-
-
3/3
1545 9.4
2.5
2
20
40
5
0.05
0.1
3/3
2020 7.8
2.1
<1
<10
<20
6
0.05
0.1
3/4
0130 9.8
2.6
<1
<10
<20
12
0.10
0.30
Gross Daily Average
<1
<10
<20
8
0.07
0.1
Net Daily Average
0
0
0
3
0.03
0.04
3/4
1545 7.8
2.1
4
30
70
10
0.080
0.17
3/4
1914 8.4
2.2
2
20
40
9
0.08
0.2
3/5
0115 8.7
2.3
2
20
40
9
0.08
0.2
Gross Daily Average
3
20
50
9
0.08
0.2
Net Daily Average
*
-
-
4
0.04
0.09
3/5
1530 7.8
2.1
6
50
100
16
0.12
0.27
3/5
1930 8.5
2.3
.6
50
100
10
0.085
0.19
3/6
0110 7.2
1.9
7
50
100
12
0.090
0.19
Gross Daily Average
6
50
100
13
0.10
0.22
Net Daily Average
1
10
10
8
0.06
0.1
3/3
1610 28
7.4
0
0
0
<5
<0.1
<0.3
3/3
2000 36
9.6
2
70
200
<5
<0.2
<0.4
3/4
0120 35
9.1
4
100
300
<5
<0.2
<0.4
Gross Daily Average
3
60
200
<5
<0.2
<0.4
Net Daily Average
2
40
100
0
0
0
3/4
1600 36
9.5
2
70
200
6
0.2
0.5
3/4
1855 36
9.6
3
100
200
<5
<0.2
<0.4
3/5
0100 34
9.0
4
100
300
<5
<0.2
<0.4
Gross Daily Average
3
90
200
<5
<0.2
<0.4
Net Daily Average
*
-
-
0
0
0
3/5
1550 43
11
7
300
700
6
0.3
0.6
3/5
1915 29
7.7
6
200
400
<5
<0.1
<0.3
3/6
0055 30
8.0
7
200
500
6
0.2
0.4
Gross Daily Average
7
200
500
<6
<0.2
<0.4
Net Daily Average
2
60
100
1
0
<0.1
2/26
1535 87
23
3
300
600
<5
<0.4
<1
2/26
1845 70
18
3
200
500
<5
<0.3
<0.8
2/27
0040 85
22
4
300
700
<5
<0.4
<0.9
Gross Daily Average
3
300
600
<5
<0.4
<0.9
Net Daily Average
0
0
0
0
0
0
30 of
-------
Table S (Continued)
OIL AND GREASE AND PHENOLIC DATA+
Station
Description
tt
Date Time
Oil and Grease
t+t
Phenolics
Instantaneous Flow
m3/day x 103 mgd mg/1 kg/day lb/day yg/1 kg/day lb/day
Discharge from
21", 36" and 46"
Primary Mills
(015)(Cont.)
2/27 1535 92
2/27 1830 89
2/28 0020 83
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
2/28 1520 99
2/28 1925 84
2/29 0115 90
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
Discharge from
Electric Furnace
and Upsewer
FTow from City
of Duquesne
(016)
No. 5 Bar Mill
and Heat
Treating
Discharges (017)
2/26 1550 14
2/26 1905 45
2/27 0055 22
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
2/27 1545 33
2/27 1845 19
2/28 0035 24
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
2/28 1540 27
2/28 1850 39
2/29 0045 43
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
2/26 1520 33
2/26 1825 24
2/27 0020 29
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
2/27 1525 37
2/27 1815 35
2/28 0005 35
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
2/28 1505 28
2/28 1905 25
2/29 0100 28
Gross Daily Average
Net Daily Average
24
23
22
26
22
24
3.8
12
5.9
8.8
5.0
6.3
7.1
10
11
8.7
6.2
7.6
9.8
9.2
9.1
7.4
6.7
7.4
4
2
2
3
*
<1
<1
25
8
7
5
5
4
5
2
8
4
5
6
1
<1
<1
<1
<1
0
4
6
4
5
2
5
5
7
6
1
1
<1
<1
<1
0
400 800
200
400
200
400
300
500
100
200
100
200
2,000
5,000
700
2,000
600
1,800
70
200
200
500
90
200
100
300
40
100
300
600
80
200
100
300
200
400
30
70
<30
<60
<40
<90
<40
<90
<40
<90
0
0
100
300
100
300
100
300
100
300
40
100
200
400
200
400
200
500
200
400
30
70
30
60
<30
<60
<30
<60
<30
<60
0
0
<5
<5
<5
<5
0
<5
10
<5
0
15
6
6
9
4
5
7
8
7
2
~~~
5
<5
<3
*
<5
<5
<5
<5
0
<5
<5
<5
<5
0
~**
<5
<5
<3
*
<0.5
<1
<0.4
<1
<0.4
<0.9
<0.4
<1
0
0
<0.4
<0.9
0.90
2.0
<0.4
<0.9
0
0
0.21
0.47
0.3
0.6
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.4
<0.2
<0.5
<0.1
<0.3
<0.2
<0.4
<0.1
<0.3
<0.1
<0.3
<0.1
<0.3
0
0
<0.2
<0.4
<0.2
<0.4
<0.2
<0.4
<0.2
<0.4
0
0
<0.1
<0.3
<0.1
<0.3
<0.1
<0.2
t All data are based on grab samples. Sampling day is from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
ft Loads are calculated using instantaneous flows. Daily flows are average of eight
instantaneous flows during 24-hour sampling period.
ttt Freon extractable material.
tttt Net values are computed based on gross daily average concentrations minus daily average
¦ intake water concentrations. Upsewer load was also subtracted from Outfall 013.
* Gross concentrations are less than intake concentrations and/or upsewer concentrations
and thus net concentrations and loads are not meaningful.
** Sample bottle was broken in shipment.
*** Sample not analyzed because holding time was exceeded.
31 of 140
-------
Table 6
METALS AND FLUORIDE DATA
USSC DVQUESNE
February 26 - March 6, 1976
Station
Description
Date
Flow
,+t
J/day mgd
x UP
Net+++ mg/1
Total Iron
kg/daylb/day
Dissolved Iron
mg/1 kg/day lb/day
Zinc
mg/1 kg/day lb/day
Fluoride
mg/1 kg/day lb/day
Water Intake
2/27
3.7
0.03
0.06
0.15
2/28
6.5
0 11
0.10
0.11
2/29
2.2
0.06
0.05
0.10
3/4
1.5
0.03
0.07
0 10
3/5
1.7
0 01
0 07
0.12
3/6
1.1
0 01
0.07
0.11
Blast Furnace
3/4
24
6.3
G
11.1
260
580
0 95
23
50
7 6
180
400
Thickener
3/5
25
6.5
G
7.1
170
380
0.65
16
35
4.9
120
270
Effluent (111)
3/6
24
6.4
G
8.2
200
440
0.27
6.5
14
4.7
110
250
3/1
N
9.6
230
500
0.92
22
48
7.5
180
390
3/5
N
5 4
130
290
0 64
16
35
4.8
120
260
3/6
N
7.1
170
380
0.26
6.3
14
4.6
110
250
No. 4 B.F.
3/4
8.3
2.2
G
1.8
15
33
0.02
0.17
0.37
0.10
0.84
1.8
Granulated
3/5
18
4.9
G
2.3
42
93
0.01
0.18
0.40
0.07
1.3
2.8
Slag Pit
3/6
22
5.8
G
2.0
44
97
0.07
1.5
3.4
0.08
1.8
3.9
Overflow (211)
3/4
N
0.3
2.5
5.5
*
-
-
0.03
0.25
0.55
3/5
N
0.6
11
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
3/6
N
0.9
20
44
0 06
1.3
2.9
0.01
0.22
0.49
111 plus 211
3/4
180
48
G
3.3
600
1,300
0.18
32
71
1.6
290
640
plus No. 6
3/5
190
50
G
3.3
630
1,400
0 05
9 5
21
0.93
180
390
B F. Cooling
3/6
210
56
G
2.4
510
1,100
0.05
11
23
0.63
130
300
Water (Oil)
3/4
N
1.8
320
710
0.15
27
60
1.6
280
620
3/5
N
1.6
300
670
0 04
7 6
17
0.86
160
360
3/6
N
1.3
280
610
0.05
11
23
0.56
120
260
Discharge from
3/4
140
37
G
1.4
200
440
0 02
2.8
6.2
0.07
9.9
22
overflow box
3/5
160
42
G
1.5
240
520
0.02
3.2
7.0
0.07
11
24
at Linde Oxygen
3/6
160
43
G
1.4
230
510
0.03
4.9
11
0.07
12
25
Plant (012)
3/4
N
*
-
-
*
-
-
0
0
0
3/5
N
+
-
-
0 01
1.6
3.5
0
0
0
3/6
N
0.3
49
110
0.03
4.9
11
0
0
0
Upsewer flow
3/4
6.2
1.6
G
3.0
19
41
0.30
1.9
4.1
0.24
1.5
3 3
from City of
3/5
4.0
1.1
G
1.1
4.4
9.8
0.04
0.16
0.35
0.14
0.56
1.2
Duquesne to
3/6
3.0
0.80
G
1.1
3.4
7.4
0.05
0.15
0.34
0.14
0.43
0.94
Outfall 013
-------
Table 6 (Continued)
METALS AND FLUORIDE DATA
Station
Description
Date+
Flow++
Gross
Total Iron
Dissolved
Iron
Z1nc
Fluoride
m'/day
x 10*
mgd
et mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
No. 4 B.F.
3/4
35
9.1
G
6.4
220
490
0.01
0.35
0.76
0.26
9.0
20
Cooling Water
3/5
39
10
G
2.5
97
210
0.34
13
29
0.10
3.9
8.5
and upsewer
3/6
40
10
G
1.6
63
140
0.01
0.40
0.87
0 09
3.6
7.9
flow from City
of Duquesne
3/4
29
7.5
N
5.6
160
350
*
_
_
0.19
6.6
14
(013)
3/5
35
8.9
N
1.0
34
74
0 37
13
28
0.03
1.2
2.6
3/6
37
9.2
N
0.5
20
44
0 01
0 40
0.87
0.02
0 79
1.7
BOP Thickener
3/4
8.0
2.1
G
12.7
100
220
0 07
0.56
1.2
0.16
1.3
2.8
8.9
71
160
effluent (114)
3/5
9.9
2.6
G
10 6
110
230
0 35
3.5
7.7
0 12
1.2
2.6
9.2
92
200
3/6
8.1
2.2
G
6 7
55
120
0 05
0.41
0.90
0.16
1.3
2.9
8.4
68
150
3/4
N
11.2
90
200
0 04
0 32
0 70
0.09
0 72
1.6
8.8
71
160
3/5
N
8.9
89
200
0.34
3.4
7.5
0.05
0 50
1.1
9.1
90
200
3/6
N
5.6
46
100
0.04
0.33
0.72
0.09
0.73
1.6
8.3
68
150
BOP Cooling
3/4
35
9.2
G
5.7
200
440
0.02
0.70
1.5
0.12
4.2
9 2
1.9
66
150
water and
3/5
35
9.3
G
5.4
190
420
0.01
0.35
0.77
0.09
3.2
7.0
2.0
70
150
thickener
3/6
39
10
G
3.5
140
300
0.02
0.79
1.7
0 09
3 6
7.8
1.8
71
160
effluent (014)
3/4
N
4.2
150
320
*
-
_
0.05
1.7
3.8
1.9
66
150
3/5
N
3.7
130
290
0
0
0
0.02
0.70
1.5
1.9
66
150
3/6
N
2.4
95
210
0 02
0.79
1.7
0.02
0.79
1.7
1.7
67
150
Discharge from
2/27
82
22
G
4 8
390
870
0.04
3.3
7.2
0 06
4.9
11
21", 36" and
2/28
93
25
G
5.8
540
1,200
0 02
1.9
4.1
0.07
6.5
14
46" primary
2/29
80
21
G
1.8
140
320
0 02
1.6
3.5
0 04
3.2
7.0
mills (015)
2/27
N
1.1
90
200
0 01
0.82
1.8
0
0
0
2/28
N
*
_
-
~
-
.
*
_
_
2/29
N
*
-
-
*
-
-
#
-
-
Discharge from
2/27
21
5.5**
G
5 0
110
230
0 13
2.7
6.0
0.10
2.1
4 6
0.19
4.0
8.8
Electric Furnace
2/28
24
6.3
G
3.6
86
190
0.08
1.9
4.2
0.12
2 9
6.3
0.14
3.4
7.4
and upsewer
2/29
30
7.9
G
2.6
78
170
0.08
3.4
5.3
0.08
2.4
5.3
0.14
4.2
9.2
flow from City
of Duquesne
(016)
2/27 •
N***
1.3
27
60
0.10
2.1
4.6
0.04
0.84
1.8
0.04
0.84
1.8
2/28
N
*
-
-
~
-
-
0.02
0 48
1.1
0.03
0.72
1.6
2/29
N
0.40
12
26
0.02
0.60
1 3
0 03
0.90
2.0
0.04
1.2
2.6
No. 5 Bar Mill
2/27
30
7.8
G
6.6
200
430
0 02
0.59
1.3
0 08
2.4
5.2
and Heat
2/28
35
9.3
G
3.9
140
300
0 03
1.1
2.3
0.07
2.4
5.4
Treating
2/29
29
7.6
G
2.5
72
160
0 03
0.86
1.9
0.07
2.0
4.4
Discharges (017)
2/27
N
2.9
86
190
*
_
0.02
0.59
1.3
2/28
N
*
-
-
*
-
.
*
_
.
2/29
N
0.30
8 6
19
*
-
0 02
0.57
1.3
Date is the day the saryple was composited (i.e., 24-hour conpoeite 0600 September 27 to 0600 September 26 was dated September 28.
Daily average flows are average of exght inetantccneoue flows during 24-hour sampling period.
Vet values based on gross concentrations minus intake concentrations. Upsewer load was also subtracted from Outfall 013 since upsewer
flow was measured.
Uet corcentration is negative value therefore load was not calculated.
Upsewer.flow to 016 was not measured or sampled due to limited access to sewer. Upsewer flow was visually estimated by NE1C at
4,200 m /dcy (1.2 mgd).
Met values determined by subtracting intake concentrations from gross concentrations for entire flow.
CO
CO
O
—h
t
tt
ttt
-------
Tab to 7
SUMMARY OF SELF-MONITORING DATA
USSC DUQUESNE
January-October 197S
Outfall
Flow*
Temperature
PH
TSS
011 and
Grease
Phenols NH^-N
cnt
<*A
m3 x
103/day
mgd
°C
°F
mg/1
011
Average
Range*
Samples
108
44.7-203
8
28.5
11.8-53.6
26
21-40
16
79
70-104
7.0
7.2-7.6
16
111
Average
Range
Samples
17
10-26
6
4 4
2.7-6.9
39
17-47
20
102
63-117
7.5
6.7-8.8
20
53
**-1,022
20
3.2 29
0.02-12.4 3.3-60
22 17
3.2
0.3-13.7
20
3.1
0.2-13.0
21
211
Average
Range
Samples
12
6.1-21
7
3.1
1.6-5.5
9.3
8.1-11.0
6
74
**-524
20
012
Average
Range
Samples
129
73.8-190
9
34.1
19.5-50.2
28
17-70
17
82.7
63-158
7.9
7.3-11
17
112
Average
Range
Samples
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.1
9.8
8.3-11.1
7
W*
**-30
30
013
Average
Range
Samples
15
4.2-20
10
3.9
1.1-5.4
24
19-32
13
75.5
66-89.6
8.2
7.3-9.8
13
1.7
**-5.3
7
014
Average
Range
Sanples
33
26-38.
2
10
8.6
6.8-10.1
37
28-47
18
98.5
82-117
10.9
9.1-11.8
14
114
Average
Range
Samples
10
4.9-21
11
2.7
1.3-5.5
11.2
9.0-12.1
22
225
**-3,764
19
0.074
**-0.1
20
015
Average
Range
Samples
84.0
28-196
14
22.2
7.5-51.7
20
6.1-35
24
68
43-95
9 4
8.2-11.6
24
26.9
**-132
20
**
**-9.8
60
016
Average
Range
Samples
22
11-40.
1
10
5.7
2.9-10.6
20
7.5-36
24
67.9
46-96.8
8.1
4.3-9.9
21
9.0
**-73
20
**
**-115
60
017
Average
Range
Samples
31
20-51.
1
12
8.3
5.2-13.5
23
7.2-38
24
74
45-100.4
8 2
6.6-9.3
22
30.3
**-112
20
2.7
**-276
60
0.026
**-0.24
13
1.6
0.02-7
10
Intake
Average
Range
Samples
401
282-492
16
105.9
74.6-130
20
12-29
15
67.3
54-84
7.8
7.4-8.6
8
42 3
5.5-153.9
13
10.12
0.13-89.5
12
0.17 0.64
0-0.039 0-1.4
13 14
0.007
0-0.03
12
0.004
0-0.03
13
0.117
0.03-0.2
10
CO
-P»
J*
O
t Only measured flows are tabulated except for outfall 732 which to cotinated flow.
tt Average ie average of monthly averages for all outfalls. All concentrations are net.
* Rarge is maxima and minima of individual measurements for all outfalls.
** Concentration of discharge was less than that of intake.
-------
Table 8
COMPARISON OF USSC SELF-MONITORING DATA AND NEIC SURVEY DATA'
OUTFALL 111
USSC DUQUESNE
USSC
NEIC++
Parameter
Concentration
Concentration
Load
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
53
48
1,100
2,500
NhL-N
29
21
500
1,100
cnt
3.2
6.2
150
330
CNa
3.1
3.6
86
190
0/G
-
1
10
30
Phenolics
3.2
0.45
13
29
Fej
-
7.4
180
390
-
0.61
15
32
Zn
5.6
140
300
Field Measurements
USSC
NEIC
pH Range
6.7-8.8
5.9-
7.4
Temperature Range °C
17-47
32-
50
Settleable Solids Range ml/1
-
<0.1-
37
Average Flow
m /day x 10
17
24
mgd
4.4
6.4
+ USSC and NEIC data, excluding field measurementss are net
values (i.e. discharge-intake). USSC self-monitoring data
is for the period January-October 1975.
tt NEIC data3 excluding field measurementsj are average of three
consecutive days of monitoring from March Z-63 1976.
35 of 140
-------
Table 9
TREATMENT EFFICIENCY OF BLAST FURNACE THICKENER
USSC DUQUESNE
March 3-6, 1976
Concentration1 i
Parameter
Date
Influent
mg/1
Effluent
mg/1
Removal
TSS
3/4++
2,000
110
94
3/5
2,600
59
98
3/6
2,650
70
97
Average
2,400
80
97
Settleable
3/3
31+++
<0.1
100
Sol ids
3/4
32
37
*
3/5
45
<0.1
100
Average
36
12
67
NH--N
3/4
29
27
*
0
3/5
20
20
0
3/6
16
16
0
Average
22
21
*
3/4
7.0
9.0
*
3/5
8.8
6.5
26
3/6
5.0
3.2
36
Average
6.9
6.2
10
cna
3/4
3.8**
5.5**
*
H
3/5
4.3**
4.0**
7
3/6
<0.01
1.2
*
Average
2.7
3.6
2.3
FeT
3/4
200
11.1
94
1
3/5
260
7.1
97
3/6
340
8.2
98
Average
270
8.8
97
FeD
3/4
0.92
0.95
*
V
3/5
0.91
0.65
29
3/6
0.40
0.27
32
Average
0.74
0.62
16
Zn
3/4
78
7.6
90
3/5
96
4.9
95
3/6
156
4.7
97
Average
110
5.7
95
0/G
3/4
7
2
71
3/5
11
4
64
3/6
27
6
78
Average
15
4
73
Phenolics
3/4
2.0
0.72
64
3/5
0.88
0.44
50
3/6
0.16
0.20
*
Average
1.0
0.45
55
+ All concentrations are gross values
tt Date is the day the sample was composited except for settleable
solids, 0/G, and phenols. Settleable solids were grab sampled
once per sampling day (i.e. 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.). 0/G and
phenolics were grab sampled three times per sampling day.
ttt Settleable solids are reported in ml/l
* Percent removal not calculated because effluent concentration
exceeded influent concentration.
** Samples exceeded recomvended holding time due to rerouting of
airline flight from Pittsburgh to Denver when Denver airport
ua8 closed due to blizzard.
-------
USSC has proposed changes to their National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit for interim and final effluent limita-
tions. USSC reports that the proposed changes in interim limitations
are being requested "to more accurately describe the quality of the
current discharge." Proposed changes in final limitations are being
requested because USSC believes that the installation of best practicable
control technology (recycle of blast furnace process wastes) will not
meet the existing permit limitations.5 Comparison of USSC-proposed
changes with NEIC monitoring results [Table 10] indicates that all
parameters except average daily total suspended solids were within the
interim limitations proposed to be effective until the completion of
recycle facilities. Ammonia, phenolics and total cyanide loads were
47%, 14% and 75%, respectively, of the daily average proposed limitations.
Comparison of NEIC data with proposed final limitations shows that,
again, only total suspended solids limits were exceeded. The basis for
the substantial increase in the USSC-proposed interim and final limitations
for ammonia is unknown.
OUTFALL 211
Slag from blast furnace No. 4 is granulated and sold for use
primarily as a road base material. Outfall 211, the overflow from the
slag pit, is a continuous discharge. During casting, molten slag flows
to the slag pit from which it is intermittently removed by clam shell.
The intermittent discharge of molten slag into the pit and removal of
granulated slag causes a highly variable flow through outfall 211. Slag
pit overflow is discharged untreated to the Monongahela River through
outfall Oil [Fig. 1]. During NEIC monitoring, blast furnace No. 4 was
operating at 84% of its capacity.
NEIC monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate that outfall 211
discharged a net average of 2,900 kg (6,600 lb)/day total suspended
solids and 32 kg (70 lb)/day ammonia. Other pollutants monitored were
37 of 140
-------
Table 10
COMPARISON OF USSC-PROPOSED LIMITATIONS
AND NEIC SURVEY RESULTS
OUTFALL 111
USSC DUQUESNE
Parameter USSC Proposed Limitations NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
"f +4-
Present to Completion of Facility >
TSS
1,412
3,106
4,236
9,318
1,900
4,200
2,600
5,700
nh3-n
1,054
2,320
3,162
6,960
500
1,100
630
1,400
Phenols
96
211
288
633
13
29
21
48
cnt
200
440
600
1,320
150
330
210
470
cna
-
-
-
-
86
190
130
290
Fe
-
-
-
-
180
390
230
500
Zn
-
-
-
-
140
300
180
390
Completion of Facility
to Expiration+++
TSS
553
1,216
1,659
3,648
1,900
4,200
2,600
5,700
nh3-n
1,323
2,910
3,969
8,730
510
1,100
640
1,400
Phenols
42.3
93
126.9
279
13
29
21
48
cnt
-
-
-
-
150
330
210
470
cna
118
260
354
780
86
190
130
290
Fe
-
-
-
-
210
470
260
580
Zn
-
-
-
_
140
310
180
400
^ All loads are net except TSS which is gross.
This refers to completion of recycle facilities.
All loads are gross values.
38 of 140
-------
discharged in negligible quantities. During three days of monitoring,
daily flow ranged from 8,400 m^/day (2.2 mgd) to 22,000 m^/day (5.8 mgd)
3
and averaged 16,000 m /day (4.3 mgd).
Comparison of USSC self-monitoring data with NEIC survey results
[Table 11] indicates that USSC average total suspended solids and flow
values are approximately 50% and 40% less, respectively, than NEIC
values, while pH levels are greater than observed during the survey.
USSC has proposed effluent limitations for outfall 211. According
to USSC, the proposed limits are intended to "more accurately describe
the quality of the current discharge."5 USSC-proposed limitations are
compared as follows with NEIC survey findings.
Parameter
USSC Proposed Limitations
NEIC Survey Data
Daily Averaqe Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
Daily Averaqe Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS+
++
NH3-NtT
3,459 7,610 10,377 22,830
3,500 7,700 6,200 14,000
32 70 47 100
f Gross values
ft Net values
USSC has proposed that limitations be effective on outfall 211 only
until the completion of facilities. It is assumed by NEIC that this
refers to the completion of recycle facilities for blast furnace process
wastewaters including slag pit overflow.
OUTFALL 011
Discharges from outfalls 111 and 211 combine with cooling water
from the No. 6 blast furnace and discharge to the river through outfall
011 [Fig. 1]. During maximum production, process wastewaters from No. 1
and 3 blast furnaces discharge to outfall 011 through outfall 111;
however, during the NEIC survey these furnaces were not operating. With
39 of 140
-------
Table 11
COMPARISON OF USSC SELF-MONITORING DATA AND NEIC SURVEY DATAf
OUTFALL 211
USSC DUQUESNE
USSC NEIC++
Parameter
Concentration
Concentration
Load
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day lb/day
TSS
74
145
2,900 6,600
nh3-n
-
2.1
32 70
CNt
-
0.13
2.0 4.4
CNa
-
0.02
0.20 0.44
0/G
-
1
20 50
Phenolics
-
0
0 0
PeT
-
0.6
11 24
-
0.02
o
-p»
o
Zn
0.01
0.16 0.35
Field Measurements
USSC
NEIC
pH Range
8.1-11.0
5.2-7.3
Temperature Range °C
-
20-48
Settleable Solids Range ml/1
-
<0.1
Average Flow
m /day x 10
12
16
mgd
3.1
4.3
t USSC and NEIC data, excluding field measurements, are net
values (i.e. discharge-intake). USSC self-monitoring data is
for the period January-October 1975.
tt NEIC dataj excluding field measurements, are average of three
consecutive days of monitoring from March 3-63 1976.
40 of 140
-------
the exception of blast furnace process wastewaters (outfall 111), all
wastewaters from outfall Oil are discharged untreated.
USSC officials reported, and NEIC dye testing confirmed, that
outfalls Oil and 012 are interconnected [Fig. 1]. USSC personnel in-
dicated that due to the elevation differential, a limited flow of waste-
water from the Oil sewer is discharged through outfall 012. Testing by
NEIC showed that dye introduced at outfalls 111 and 211 is completely
mixed in the wastewater flow by the time it reaches outfall Oil, a
travel time of approximately four minutes. According to plans supplied
by USSC, the interconnection between outfalls Oil and 012 is located
within 45 m (150 ft) of the terminus of both outfalls. It is reasonable
to conclude that dye introduced at outfalls 111 and 211 is completely
mixed by the time it reaches the interconnection point. Moreover, the
dye concentration at the terminus of outfall Oil was used to calculate
the flow in the Oil sewer upstream of its connection with outfall 012.
In this report, flows indicated for outfall 011 are actual measured
flows just upsewer of the connection with outfall 012.
During NEIC sampling, blast furnaces 4 and 6 were operating at 92%
of their combined capacity. Based on production capacity, with all four
furnaces operating at capacity, process wastes from No. 4 and 6 blast
furnaces represented about 61% of the maximum discharge to outfall 011.
Comparison of daily average loads discharged from outfall 011 with the
sum of loads from outfalls 111 and 211 [Table 12] should provide rela-
tively close correlation inasmuch as the parameters monitored are pri-
marily pollutants present in blast furnace process wastewaters.
The comparison, however, does not indicate a close correlation.
Total suspended solids and ammonia loads discharged at outfall 011 were
42% and 29% less, respectively, than the sum of loads from outfalls 111
and 211. On the other hand, total cyanide and amenable cyanide loads at
outfall 011 were 270% and 400% greater, respectively, than the sum of
41 of
-------
Table 12
COMPARISON OF DAILY AVERAGE POLLUTANT LOADS AND FIELD MEASUREMENTS
OUTFALLS 111 PLUS 211 vs. OUTFALL Oil
USSC DUQUESNE
Parameter
Outfall 111
plus 211
Outfal1
011
kg/day
lb/day
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
4,000
9,100
2,400
5,300
NH3-N
530
1,200
390
850
CNt
150
330
550
1,200
cna
86
190
430
930
0/6
30
80
0
0
Phenolics
13
29
12
27
FeT
190
410
300
660
FeD
15
33
15
33
Zn
140
300
190
410
Field Measurements
Outfall 111
plus 211
Outfall
,011
pH Range
5.2-7.4
6.6-8.3
Temperature Range °C
20-50
19-26
Settleable Solids
Range (ml/1)
<0.1-37
<0.1-0.2
Average Flow (m /day
x 103) 40
(mgd) 10.7
190t+
51
f All pollutant loads are net values
tt Flow present in Outfall Oil sewer upsewer of interconnection
with outfall 012.
42 of 140
-------
loads from outfalls 111 and 211. Similarly, total iron and zinc loads
were significantly greater at outfall Oil.
The difference in oil/grease loads is only apparent because the
concentration change was 1 mg/1 (i.e. within the accuracy of the test).
The substantial increase in cyanide, iron and zinc indicates that
process wastewaters in addition to outfalls 111 and 211 or contaminated
cooling waters are reaching outfall Oil. Average suspended solids loads
[Table 12] as well as other daily pollutant loads [Table 4] decreased
significantly for reasons unknown to NEIC. The decrease in ammonia
loads occurred only on March 4 of the three days sampled, again for
reasons unknown to NEIC.
Date
(Mar.)
nh3-n
Loads
111
+ 211
on
kg/day
lb/day
kg/day
lb/day
4
660
1,500
230
500
5
520
1,200
500
1,100
6
440
950
430
960
USSC self-monitoring data [Table 7] indicates that instantaneous
measured flows averaged 108,000 m /day (28.5 mgd), 44% less than measur-
ed during the survey. NEIC flow values for outfall Oil include that
portion of the flow discharged through outfall 012 [Fig. 1]. USSC has
proposed that outfall 011 not be limited for any parameters except pH
and that the pH not be less than 6.0.
OUTFALL 112
The No. 1 blast furnace granulated slag pit overflow (outfall 112)
discharges untreated wastewater to outfall 012. During the survey,
blast furnace No. 1 was not operating, outfall 112 was inactive and
sampling was not conducted. USSC reports a flow of 400 m /day (0.1
mgd), pH of 8.3 to 11.1 and total suspended solids concentrations of
43 of 140
-------
<30 mg/1 [Table 7]. USSC has proposed gross limitations for tota,l
suspended solids as follows:
Daily average 50 mg/1
Daily maximum 150 mg/1
OUTFALL 012
Once-through cooling water from the oxygen plant and overflow from
the blast furnace No. 1 granulated slag pit (outfall 112) is discharged
to main outfall 012. In addition, a portion of the flow from the outfall
Oil sewer is discharged through outfall 012 [Fig. 1]. During the survey,
blast furnace No. 1 was not operating and there was no discharge from
the granulated slag pit (outfall 112). The oxygen plant operated through-
out NEIC sampling, supplying oxygen to the BOP shop. The BOP shop
production averaged 78% of its rated capacity during the survey.
Outfall 012 was monitored by NEIC upsewer of its interconnection
with outfall Oil. In this report, monitoring results for outfall 012
refer to characteristics of the wastewater upsewer of the intercon-
nection with outfall Oil. Sampling results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicated
an average flow of 150,000 m /day (41 mgd) and a pH range of 6.7 to 8.3.
Temperature ranged from 18 to 22°C while intake water temperature was
11.5 to 16.5°C. The average net total suspended solids and oil/grease
loads discharged were:
Parameter
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
3
440
970
0/G
1
200
300
USSC self-monitoring data [Table 7] shows an average flow of 129,000
q
m /day (34.1 mgd) ranged in temperature from 17 to 70°C. The pH ranged
from 7.3 to 11. USSC did not monitor for total suspended solids or
oil/grease.
44 of 140
-------
USSC has proposed that outfall 012 not be limited for any parameters
except pH (i.e., shall not be less than 6.0) and that monitoring for
flow and temperature be conducted monthly until "the completion of
facilitiesMonitoring of amenable cyanide is also proposed for the
period following completion of facilities until expiration of the NPDES
permit.5
OUTFALL 013
Cooling water from No. 1, 3 and 4 blast furnaces is discharged to
outfall 013 along with filter backwash and settled sludge from the USSC
water treatment plant. Outfall 013 is a combined sewer containing
wastewater from the City of Duquesne. City flow was measured and sampled
as it entered USSC property. Water treatment plant discharges were
intermittent and were sampled where they enter the 013 sewer. During
the survey, blast furnaces 1 and 3 were not operating. No. 4 blast
furnace production during monitoring was 36% of the rated capacity of
No. 1, 3 and 4 furnaces combined.
Sampling of the City wastewater indicated the presence of sanitary
sewage. Survey results [Tables 4, 5, 6] showed the flow averaged 4,400
3
m /day (1.2 mgd). Total suspended solids, ammonia and oil/grease were
present in the following average daily concentrations and loads:
Parameter
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
130
590
1,300
nh3-n
4.8
22
48
0/G
130
420
910
Of nine grab samples collected for oil and grease, seven had concen-
trations less than 44 mg/1, one was 380 mg/1 and the other 640 mg/1. In
addition, field measurements for pH were 11.4 and 11.5 on two occasions
45 of 140
-------
while 22 other readings ranged from 6.9 to 8.4. These findings show
that industrial wastes are intermittently discharged to the sewer.
A single grab sample of City wastewater was collected on March 4,
1976 for organic analysis. Results indicated the presence of the
following organic compounds:
Compound
Concentration
(mg/1)
f
Alkanes, 8 species, Cq to C,. 0.060
Alpha terpineol 0.230
Caffeine 0.030
Dibutylphthalate 0.022
Diethylphthalate 0.008
Diisobutylphthalate 0.015
Hexadecanol 0.020,
Isoborneol 0.020
Octadecanol 0.033
Para-Cresol 0.015
Tetradecanol 0.045
t Approximate concentration
Outfall 013 was sampled at the river downsewer from all USSC inputs.
The City contribution and the intake contribution was subtracted from
the results and the net USSC input was computed [Tables 4, 5, 6],
Comparison of USSC and City contributions [Table 13] indicated that USSC
flow averaged 32,000 m^/day (8.5 mgd), 88% of the total flow through
outfall 013. In addition, the comparison indicates that the major
pollutant inputs by USSC are total suspended solids and iron. On a net
concentration basis, USSC wastewater averaged 75 mg/1 total suspended
solids and 2.4 mg/1 total iron.
A grab sample for organic compounds was collected from outfall 013
on March 4, 1976. A single organic compound, alpha terpineol, was
present at a concentration of 0.030 mg/1. As previously tabulated,
alpha terpineol was present in the City of Duquesne wastewater at a
46 of
-------
Table 13
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE USSC AND CITY OF DUQUESNE LOADS+
DISCHARGED TO OUTFALL 013
USSC DUQUESNE
March 3-6, 1976
Parameter
USSC
City of Duquesne
kg/day lb/day
kg/day
lb/day
TSS
3,300 7,300++
590
1,300
NH~-N
ttt
22
48
cnt
ttt
0.31
0.69
CNa
ttt
0.02
0.05
0/G
30 60
420
910
Phenolics
ttt
0.11
0.24
FeT
71 160
8.9
19
FeD
4.5 9.6
0.74
1.6
Zn
2.9 6.1
0.83
1.8
Flow m /day
32,000
4,400
mgd
8.5
1.2
t USSC loads are net values [i.e. gross-(intake +
City)"]. City loads are gross.
tt Includes 1,000 kg/day (2,400 lb/day) from the
USSC water treatment plant.
ttt Discharge load was less than intake load.
-------
concentration of 0.230 mg/1. Instantaneous flows measured at the time
the organic samples were collected indicated the City was discharging
3,800 m3/day (1.0 mgd) and the total flow from outfall 013 was 32,000
m /day (8.4 mgd). Mass loading rates at these flows indicate that 90%
of the alpha terpineol originated from unknown sources in the City of
Duquesne.
Plant personnel indicated that previous to the NEIC survey, USSC
did not monitor City input to outfall 013. Therefore, self-monitoring
data [Table 7] is the result of sampling the combined discharge.
3
The USSC water treatment plant treats an estimated 6,100 m /day
(1.6 mgd) for use in the plant boilers [Appendix A]. Chemicals in-
cluding lime, soda ash and sodium aluminate, are added, mixed and the
solids are allowed to settle on a batch basis. Clear water is then
decanted, filtered and distributed. Solids removed during settling and
filtration are returned to the receiving water contrary to EPA policy.6
Four settling tanks of approximately 2,040 m (539,000 gal) capacity
each were in use during the survey. According to USSC plant personnel,
570 m3 (150,000 gal) of settled sludge is discharged to outfall 013 an
average of once per week from each of the four tanks. The average daily
solids blowdown discharge is therefore 325 m (86,000 gal). Plant
personnel reported that an average of two filters are backwashed daily,
resulting in a discharge of 78.5 m3 (20,750 gal)/filter or 157 m3
(41,500 gal)/day.
Solids blowdown and filter backwash discharges were each sampled
by NEIC. The duration of each discharge was 15 to 30 minutes and
samples consisted of equal-volume portions collected at 2- to 3-minute
intervals. Samples were analyzed for settleable and suspended solids
with the following results:
48 of
-------
Parameter
Filter ,
Backwash
Sol ids
B1owdown
Settleable solids (ml/1)
TSS (mg/1)..
(kg/day )
(lb/day)
1.2
190
30
66
29
3,200
1,000
2,300
t Average of two samples. Individual results were:
settleable solids 1.0 and 1.5 ml/l3 TSS 160
and 220 rng/l.
tt Loads are gross values and are based on coverage
daily filter backwash discharge of 157 m
(41,500 gal) and average daily solids blowdown
discharge of 325 m (86,000 gal).
The solids blowdown discharge accounted for approximately 97% of the
suspended solids from the water treatment and occurred for a 20 to 30
minute period resulting in a flow of 27,000 to 41,000 m^/day (7.2 to 11
mgd). Instantaneous flow readings at the terminus of outfall 013 did
not indicate flow changes of this magnitude. Therefore, outfall 013
monitoring results [Table 4] do not include the impact of water treat-
ment plant discharges. Moreover the total suspended solids load from
USSC sources to outfall 013 averaged 3,300 kg (7,300 lb)/day, approxi-
mately 32% of which was from the water treatment plant.
USSC has proposed that outfall 013 be limited only for pH (>6.0)
and that monthly monitoring be required for flow and temperature.
OUTFALL 114
Approximately 90% of the steel production capacity at the Duquesne
Plant is present in the BOP facilities. Process wastewaters from the
BOP shop include gas cleaning flow from the rake classifier and gas
cooling tower slurry. Following treatment, these wastewaters are
discharged through outfall 114. During the NEIC survey, the BOP shop
was operating at approximately 78% of its production capacity.
49 of 140
-------
Process wastewaters are treated in a 25 m (85 ft) diameter by 2.6 m
(8 ft 8 in) side water depth (SWD) gravity thickener. Polymer is added
to enhance settling characteristics. Settled solids are continuously
dewatered on drum-type vacuum filters and filtrate is returned to the
thickener. There are three different sources of thickener influent, two
of which are the result of BOP shop operations. The three sources are:
gas cleaning flow from the rake classifier; gas cooling tower slurry;
and bar mill scarfer electrostatic precipitator (ESP) flow. Each thick-
ener influent source discharges continuously except the bar mill scarfer
ESP.
NEIC monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate that the flow
through outfall 114 ranged from 8,000 to 9,900 m^/day (2.1 to 2.6 mgd)
and averaged 8,700 m /day (2.3 mgd). The pH and temperature ranged from
10.8 to 11.7 and 34 to 45 °C, respectively. The main pollutants dis-
charged were total suspended solids, total iron and fluoride. USSC
self-monitoring data [Table 7] is compared with NEIC survey data in
Table 14. Particularly notable is the difference in total suspended
solids concentrations. NEIC survey results indicated net total suspended
solids levels from 0 to 45 mg/1 while USSC self-monitoring results of 19
samples ranged from 0 to 3,764 mg/1 and averaged 225 mg/1, almost 10
times the average concentration observed during the survey.
The BOP thickener was evaluated for pollutant removal efficiency.
Influent flows, except the bar mill scarfer ESP discharge, were sampled
and composited on an equal-volume basis, while thickener effluent was
composited on a flow-weighted basis. USSC officials indicated the flow
from the bar mill scarfer ESP was only 40 to 80 liters (10 to 20 gal)/min,
about 1% of the flow measured in outfall 114 during the survey. Flow
from the two major influent lines to the thickener was estimated by
NEIC. The gas cleaning flow from the rake classifier discharges into
the thickener center well by gravity. NEIC determined the slope and
size of the pipeline and measured the depth of flow every time a sample
was collected. From this information an estimated flow was calculated.
50 of 140
-------
Table 14
COMPARISON OF USSC SELF-MONITORING AND NEIC SURVEY DATAf
OUTFALL 114
USSC DUQUESNE
USSC
NEIC++
Parameter
Concentration
Concentration
Load
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day lb/day
TSS
225
23
190
410
NH--N
-
0.47
4.0
9.0
cnt
-
0.01
0.06
0.13
cna
-
0
0
0
0/G
-
0
0
0
Phenolics
-
0.005
0.04
0.08
FeT
-
8.6
75
170
FeD
0.074
0.14
1.4
3.0
Zn
-
0.08
0.65
1.4
F1
•
CO
76
170
Field Measurements
USSC
NEIC
pH Range
9.0-12.1
10.8-11
.7
Temperature Range °C
-
35-45
Settleable Solids Range ml/1
-
<0.1-0.
1
Average Flow
m /day x 10
10
8.7
mgd
2.7
2.3
t USSC and NEIC data3 excluding field measurements, are net
values (i.e. discharge-intake). USSC self-monitoring data
is for the period January-October 1975.
tt NEIC dataj excluding field measurements, are average of three
consecutive days of monitoring from March 3-6, 1976.
51 of 140
-------
Gas cooling tower slurry was pumped continuously to the thickener by a
single centrifugal pump. The pumping rate was estimated based on pump,
piping, and elevation information gathered. Estimated average daily
influent flow from both sources is compared below with the measured
effluent flow:
Date
Rake
Classifier
3
m /day mgd
Gas Cooling
Tower SI urr.y
3
m /day mgd
Total
Estimated
Influent
3
m /day mgd
Measured
Effluent
3
m /day mgd
3/4
3,200 0.85
2,350 0.62
5,600 1.47
7,900 2.1
3/5
3,400 0.90
2,350 0.62
5,800 1.52
9,800 2.6
3/6
3,000 0.79
2,350 0.62
5,300 1.41
8,300 2.2
The estimated total influent flow averaged approximately 35% less than
the measured effluent flow. For purposes of calculating pollutant
loads, influent flow from each of the two sources was adjusted upward
equivalent to the sources' percentage of the total flow. Based on the
above figures, the rake classifier accounted for an average 58% of the
total influent flow and gas cooling tower slurry 42%, resulting in
adjusted flows of:
Rake
Gas Cooling
Total
Date
Classifier
Tower Slurry
Flow
3
m /day mgd
3
m /day mgd
3
m /day mgd
3/4
4,600 1.2
3,350 0.9
8,950 2.1
3/5
5,700 1.5
4,150 1.1
9,850 2.6
3/6
4,800 1.3
3,500 0.9
9,300 2.2
Influent sampling [Tables 15, 16, 17] indicated that TSS and total iron
are the major pollutants discharged to the BOP thickener. Influent
total suspended solids and total iron concentrations averaged greater
than 5,000 mg/1 and 400 mg/1, respectively.
52 of
-------
Table IS
FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND ANALYTICAL DATA
BOP THICKENER INFLUENTS
USSC DUQUESNE
March 3-6, 2376
Station
Description
Date+
now++
pH
Temp.
Settleable
Gross^/
TSS
Ammonia
Total Cyanide
Amenable Cyanide
m3/day
x 103
mgd
Range
Range
(°c)
Sol ids
(ml/1)
^/Net
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
3/4
4.6
1.2
10.9-11.4
32-70
70
G
1,100
5,000
11,000
0.61
2.8
6.1
0.02
0.09
0.2
0.01*
0.04
0.10
3/5
5 7
1.5
6.9-11.4
35-64
60
G
9,700
55,000
120,000
0.83
4.7
10
0.17
0.97
2.1
0.01*
0.06
0.1
3/6
4.8
1.3
6.8-11.1
23-64
29
G
4,200
21,000
46,000
0.53
2.6
5.7
0.14
0.69
1.5
0.02
0.1
0.2
Average
5.0
1.3
3/4
3.4
0.9
6.3-7.4
37-55
40
G
4,920
17,000
37,000
0.86
2.9
6.5
0.14
0.48
1.1
0.01*
0.03
0.08
3/5
4.2
1.1
5.3-11.1
31-62
55
G
6,580**
27,000
60.000
1.5
6.2
14
0.15
0.62
1.4
0.02*
0.08
0.2
3/6
3.5
0 9
6.0-9.2
23-50
80
G
8,230
28,000
62,000
0.99
3.4
7.4
0.25
0.85
1.9
0.01
0.03
0.08
Average
3.7
1.0
3/4
8.0
2.1
22,000
48,000
5.7
13
0.57
1.3
0.07
0.18
3/5
9 9
2.6
82,000
180,000
11
24
1.6
3.5
0.14
0.3
3/6
8.3
2.2
49,000
108,000
6.0
13
1.5
3.4
0.13
0.28
Average
8 7
2.3
51,000
112,000
7.6
17
1.2
2.7
0.11
0.25
Gas cleaning
flow from rake
classifier
Gas cooling
tower slurry
Total of
Influents
t Date is the day the samples uas conposited (i.e., 24-hour composite 0600 March 3 to 0600 I'arch 4 was dated March 4).
tt Fierce are estincte of average flcrj during coupling day and are based on theoretical calculations using known data (i.e., water depth and elope
of gravity lines, pjrq? size and total pimping head for pressure line).
* Scrple ucs atjzljzed after the recorr.ended holding time because cormercial aircraft from Pittsburgh to Denver was rerouted due to blizzard
conditions at Denver. Tabulated result represents minimum value due to possible deterioration of sample.
** Sarrple exceeded ma^inum holding tune and was not analyzed. Concentration tabulated is average of the 3/4 and 3/6 results.
tn
to
-------
Table 16
OIL AND CREASE AND PHENOLICS DATA*
BOP THICKENER INFLUENTS
USSC DUQUESNE
March 3-6, 1976
Station n . T. Average Flow^ Oil and Grease^* Phenolics
Description w^TdayxTO3 mgd mg/1 kg/day lb/day pg/1 kg/day lb/day
Gas cleaning flow
3/3 1530
4.6
1.2
<1
<5
<10
7
0.03
0.07
from Rake
3/3 2010
4.6
1.2
<1
<5
<10
<5
<0.02
<0.05
classifier
3/4 0115
4.6
1.2
*
<5
<0.02
<0.05
Gross Daily
Average
<1
<5
<10
<5
<0.02
<0.05
3/4 1525
5.7
1.5
<1
<6
<10
5
0.03
0.06
3/4 1900
5.7
1.5
<1
<6
<10
9
0.05
0.1
3/5 0100
5.7
1.5
1
6
10
5
0.03
0.06
Gross Daily
Average
<1
<6
<10
6
0.04
0.07
3/5 1515
4.8
1.3
7
30
80
9
0.04
0.1
3/5 1920
4.8
1.3
4
20
40
+
-
-
3/6 0100
4.8
1.3
5
20
50
*
-
-
Gross Daily
Average
5
20
50
3
0.01
0.03
Gas cooling tower
3/3 1535
3.4
0.9
2
7
20
<5
<0.02
<0.04
slurry
3/3 1925
3.4
0.9
<1
<3
<8
<5
<0.02
<0.04
3/4 0125
3.4
0.9
<1
<3
<8
<5
<0.02
<0.04
Gross Daily
Average
<1
<3
<8
<5
<0.02
<0.02
3/4 1535
4.2
1.1
1
4
9
8
0.03
0.07
3/4 1910
4.2
1.1
1
4
9
6
0.02
0.06
3/5 0105
4.2
1.1
23
96
210
*
-
-
Gross Daily
Average
8
35
76
5
0.02
0.04
3/5 1520
3.5
0.9
6
20
50
20
0.068
0.15
3/5 1925
3.5
0.9
6
20
50
16
0.054
0.12
3/6 0105
3.5
0.9
6
20
50
24
0.082
0.18
Gross Daily
Average
6
20
50
20
0.068
0.15
Total of influents
3/4
8.0
2.1
<8
<18
<0.04
<0.07
3/5
9.9
2.6
35
76
0.06
0.11
3/6
8.3
2.2
40
100
0.08
0.18
Average
8.7
2.3
25
59
0.05
0.1
All data are based on grab samples. Sampling day is from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Flows are estimate of average flou during sampling day and are based on theoretical
calculations using known data (i.e. water depth and slope of gravity lines, pump size and
...j. total pumping head for pressure line).
Freon extractable material.
* Sample bottle was broken in shipment.
** Sample not analysed because holding time was exceeded.
54 of 140
-------
Table 17
METALS AND FLUORIDE DATA
BOP THICKENER INFLUENTS
USSC DUQUESNE
March Z-6, 1976
Station
Description
Date+
Flow++
Gross
Net
Total Iron
Dissolved
Iron
Z1nc
Fluoride
mJ/day
x 103
mgd
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
Gas cleaning
3/4
4.6
1.2
G
190
860
1,900
0.07
0.3
0.7
0.91
4.1
9.1
8.0
36
80
flow from rake o/t-
classifier '
5.7
1.5
G
620
3,500
7,800
0.04
0.2
0.5
3.8
22
48
9.6
54
120
3/6
4.8
1.3
G
500
2,500
5,400
0.06
0.3
0.6
2.0
10
22
9.2
45
100
Average
5.0
1.3
Gas cooling
3/4
3.4
0.9
G
780
2,700
5,900
0.04
0.1
0.3
3.0
10
23
20
68
150
tower slurry
3/5
4.2
1.1
G
920++t
3,800
8,400
0.04+++0.2
0.4
4.0+++
17
37
17
71
160
3/6
3.5
0.9
G
1,060
3,600
8,000
0.05
0.2
0.4
5.1
17
38
22
75
170
Average
3.7
1.0
Total of
3/4
8.0
2.1
G
3,600
7,800
0.4
1.0
14
32
100
230
influents
3/5
9.9
2.6
G
7,300
16,000
0.4
0.9
39
85
120
280
3/6
8.3
2.2
G
•
6,100
13,000
0.5
1.0
27
60
120
270
Average
8.7
2.3
5,700
12,000
0.4
1.0
27
59
110
260
Date is the day the samples was composited (i.e., 24-hour composite 0600 March 3 to 0600 March 4 was dated March 4).
Flows are estimate of average flow during sampling day and are based on theoretical calculations using known data (i.e., water
depth and slope of gravity lines, pump size and total pumping head for pressure line).
Sample was not shipped to Denver. Concentration tabulated is average of the 3/4 and 3/6 results.
on
tn
-------
Based on influent and effluent loads the thickener efficiency was
95% or greater for TSS, settleable solids, total iron and zinc [Table
18]. In addition, the thickener removed an average of 81% of the total
cyanide. These efficiencies are only rough estimates however because
thickener influents were equal-volume composited.
USSC has proposed that interim effluent limitations in the NPDES
permit be changed "to more accurately reflect the quality of the current
discharge." In addition, USSC has proposed that final limitations be
the same as initial limitations because USSC believes that "no additional
control should be required for the term of the permit."5 USSC has
proposed gross limitations for total suspended solids, dissolved iron
and pH. The proposed limitations compared to NEIC survey findings are
listed below:
Parameter USSC Proposed Limitations NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
4,101
9,022
12,303 27,066
470 1,000
550 1,200
FeT
-
-
-
88 190
110 230
FeD
-
-
7 mg/1
0.16 mg/1
0.35 mg/1
F1
-
-
-
77 170
92 200
PH
Shall
not be
less than 6.0
Range 10.8-11.7
The daily average and daily maximum suspended solids loads discharged
were only 11% and 4%, respectively, of the proposed limitation, despite
the fact that the BOP shop was producing at 78% of its production capacity.
OUTFALL 014
Cooling water from the BOP shop is discharged untreated along with
effluent from the BOP thickener (outfall 114) to the Monongahela River
56 of 140
-------
Table 18
TREATMENT EFFICIENCY OF BOP THICKENER
USSC - DUQUESNE
March 3-6, 1976
Load* %
Parameter Date Influent Effluent Removal
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
3/4
22,000
48,000
550
1,200
97.5
3/5
82,000
180,000
490
1,100
99.4
3/6
49,000
108,000
360
790
99.3
Average
51,000
112,000
470
1,000
99.1
Settleable
3/4
40-
•70
0.
1
Solids
3/5
55-
-60
<0.
1
Range
3/6
29-
¦80
<0.
1
Average
56
<0.
1
99.8
NH,-N
3/4
5.7
13
6.2
14
ttt
0
3/5
11
24
7.2
16
33
3/6
6.0
13
7.7
17
ttt
Average
7.6
17
7.0
16
6
CN,
3/4
0.57
1.3
0.16
0.35
73
1
3/5
1.6
3.5
0.40
0.88
75
3/6
1.5
3.4
0.08
0.18
95
Average
1.2
2.7
0.21
0.47
81
CN.
3/4
0.07
0.18
<0.08
<0.18
0
n
3/5
0.14
0.3
0.20
0.44
ttt
3/6
0.13
0.28
<0.08
<0.18
36
Average
0.11
0.25
<0.12
<0.27
ttt
feT
3/4
3,600
7,800
100
220
97
I
3/5
7,300
16,000
110
230
99
3/6
6,100
13,000
55
120
99
Average
5,700
12,000
88
190
98
FeD
3/4
0.4
1.0
0.56
1.2
ttt
Lt
3/5
0.4
0.9
3.5
7.7
ttt
3/6
0.5
1.0
0.41
0.90
10
Average
0.4
1.0
1.5
. 3.3
ttt
In
3/4
14
32
1.3
2.8
91
3/5
39
85
1.2
2.6
97
3/6
27
60
1.3
2.9
95
Average
27
59
1.3 ,
2.8
95
F1
3/4
100
230
71
160
30
3/5
120
280
92
200
29
3/6
120
270
68
150
44
Average
110
260
77
170
35
0/G
3/4
<8
<18
<10
<20
ttt
3/5
35
76
20
50
34
3/6
40
100
50
100
0
Average
25
59
<20
<50
15
Phenolics
3/4
<0.04
<0.07
0.07
0.1
ttt
3/5
0.06
0.11
0.08
0.2
ttt
3/6
0.08
0.18
0.10
0.22
ttt
Average
0.05
0.1
0.08
0.17
ttt
^ All loads are gross values
Settleable solids are reported in ml/l. The range of settleable
solids refers to the results fowid in the three influents sampled.
Effluent load exceeded influent load-
Si of 140
-------
through outfall 014. As noted earlier, BOP shop production was 78% of
rated capacity during the survey.
Monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicated that flow averaged
36,000 m^/day (9.6 mgd) and ranged from 35,000 to 39,000 m^/day (9.2 to
10.4 mgd). The pH and temperature ranged from 10.0 to 11.4 and 22 to
55°C, respectively. Settleable solids ranged from 8 to 35 ml/1 and
averaged 18 ml/1. Suspended solids and total iron loads averaged 2,000
kg/day (4,400 lb/day) and 125 kg/day (270 lb/day), respectively. Of
additional significance was the elevated j*H of the outfall 014 discharge.
Comparison of NEIC monitoring results for outfalls 114 and 014
[Table 19] show the cooling water contained average suspended solids and
total iron loads of 1,800 kg (4,000 lb)/day and 50 kg (100 lb)/day,
respectively. The BOP shop cooling water therefore is the major source
of suspended solids in outfall 014 contributing approximately 10 times
the load discharged from the BOP thickener (outfall 114). Settleable
solids in outfall 014 were all derived from cooling water. In addition,
the BOP shop cooling water contributed 37% of the total iron load dis-
charged through outfall 014. Although the pH of outfall 014 was less
than that of outfall 114, it appears that BOP shop cooling water, which
accounts for 81% of the flow from outfall 014, is also elevated in pH.
USSC conducts limited self-monitoring of outfall 014. Flow, tempera-
ture and pH are measured and results [Table 7] are similar to NEIC
findings. USSC has proposed that the pH of outfall 014 not be less than
6.0.
PRIMARY MILL SCALE PITS
The 21-, 36- and 46-inch primary rolling mills are housed in a
common building and discharge to outfall 015. Direct contact cooling
water removes mill scale from the heated steel pieces and can be
58 of 140
-------
Table 19
COMPARISON OF NEIC MONITORING RESULTS*
OUTFALL 114 vs. OUTFALL 014
USSC DUQUESNE
March 3-63 1976
Outfall 114
Outfall
014
Parameter
Concentration Load
Concentration
Load
mg/1
kg/day lb/day
mg/1
kg/day lb/day
TSS
23
190
410
55
2,000 4,400
NhL-N
0.47
4.0
9.0
0.06
2.1 4.7
cnt
0.01
0.06
0.13
0
0 0
cna
0
0
0
0
0 0
0/G
0
0
0
1
30 100
Phenol
0.005
0.04
0.08
0
0 0
FeT
8.6
75
170
3.4
125 270
FeD
0.14
1.4
3.0
0.01
0.26 0.57
Zn
0.08
0.65
1.4
0.03
1.1 2.3
F1
8.7
76
170
1.8
66 150
Field Measurements
Outfall 114
Outfall 014
pH Range
10.8-11.7
10.0-11.4
Temperature Range °C
35-45
22-55
Settleable Solids Range (ml/1)
<0.1-0.1
8-35
Average Flow
(m /day
x 10"*)
8.7
36
(mgd)
2.3
9.6
t Excluding field measurements s results are net values and are average
of three consecutive days of monitoring from March 3-6, 1976.
59 of 140
-------
contaminated by lubricating oils from the rolling machines. These
process wastes from each mill are discharged to separate scale pits
[Fig. 2]. The scale pits, designed to remove mill scale, have a
theoretical detention time of approximately 30 minutes. Only the 21-
inch mill scale pit is equipped for oil removal where a rope-type
skimming device removes approximately 420 liters (110 galj/week.1
NEIC monitored influent and effluent from each of the scale pits
for three consecutive days, February 26-29, 1976. During monitoring,
primary mill production averaged 3,651 m. tons (4,016 tons)/day,1 90%
of its rated capacity of 4,040 m. tons (4,445 tons)/day.
Flow was measured using the dye dilution technique [Appendix C].
Results [Table 20] indicate that daily flow averaged 24,000 ni^/day (6.3
mgd), 19,000 m^/day (5.1 mgd) and 52,000 m^/day (13.7 mgd), respectively,
through the 21-, 35- and 46-inch mill scale pits. Samples for total
suspended solids and metals were composited on a flow-weighted basis.
Sampling results [Tables 20, 21] indicate that the scale pits discharged
low net quantities of TSS and metals. Moreover, there was no net in-
crease above intake water values in any of the pollutants except oil/grease.
However, USSC reports that an average monthly total of 3,714 m. tons
(4,085 tons) of scale were removed from the scale pits during the period
January to November 1975.1 This was an average of 124 m. tons (136
tons)/day. Assuming scale was distributed proportional to flow, this
would amount to a net concentration of 1,300 mg/1 of suspended solids.
NEIC findings showed suspended solids and total iron concentrations
essentially that of intake water. This indicates that the material
picked up in the descaling step is heavy and is not suspended at the
velocities experienced in the scale pit influent flumes - the location
at which influent samples were collected. NEIC monitoring results
further show that while the scale pits are well designed for scale
removal, they are not necessarily effective for the removal of other
suspended solids.
60 of 140
-------
Tab la 20
TREATMENT EFFICIENCY OF PRTSIART MILL SCALE PITS
TSS AND METAT£
USSC DUQUESNE
February 26-29, 1976
Station
Oate+
Flow+t
pHm
Settleable
Sol ids
Gross
TSS*
Total Iron
Dissolved
Iron
Zinc
Description
mT/day
x 103
mgd
Range
ml/1
Net
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
*
lb/day
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
rag/1
kg/day
lb/day
21-Inch Hill
Scale Pit
Influent
Eff1uent
I Removal
2/27
2/27
2/27
22
22
5.8
5.8
6.5-8.3
7.3-9.0
1 0
0 6
40
G
G
91
81
11
1,800
3,900
5.4
4 3
20
95
210
0 02
0 01
50
0.22
0.49
0.09
0.11
*•
2.4
5.4
Influent
Ef f1uent
5 Removal
2/28
2/28
2/28
26
26
7 0
7.0
6.4-8.1
7.4-9 6
<0.1
<0.1
0
G
G
65
41
27
1,100
2,400
5.4
3 4
37
90
200
0 17
0 02
88
0.53
1.2
0.1
0.07
36
1.8
«.l
Influent
Effluent
1 Removal
2/29
2/29
2/29
23
23
6.1
6.1
7 3-7.4
7.5-9.6
<0.1
<0.1
0
G
G
17
40
**
920
2,000
2 2
2.3
**
53
120
0 02
0 03
#*
0 69
1.5
0.05
0 05
**
1.4
3.0
Average I
Removal
13
13
19
46
12
36-Inch Kill
Scale Pit
Influent
Effluent
£ Removal
2/27
2/27
2/27
18
18
4.7
4.7
6 7-8.8
7.7-8 7
0 2
0 4
**
G
G
85
90
**
1,600
3,500
4 6
4 7
*•
83
180
0 02
0 02
0
0.36
0.78
0 09
0.09
0
1.6
3.5
Influent
Eff1uent
\ Removal
2/28
2/28
2/28
20
20
5.3
5.3
6.6-8 1
7.8-8 6
<0.1
<0.1
0
G
G
49
49
0
990
2,200
4.2
4.2
0
85
190
<0 02
0 12
#*
2.4
5.3
0.09
0.08
0
1.6
3.5
Infl uent
Effluent
I Removal
2/29
2/29
2/29
20
20
5.2
5.2
7.2-7 9
7.6-8.4
0.1
<0 1
0
G
G
49
48
2
940
2,100
3 0
2.9
3
57
120
0 02
0 02
0
0.39
0.86
0.07
0.05
29
0.98
2.1
Average I
Renoval
0
1
1
0
13
46-Inch Mill
Scale Pit
Influent
Effluent
t Pemoval
2/27
2/27
2/27
47
47
12
12
6.9-10.5
8.8-10 5
0.1
0 5
**
G
G
110
no
0
5,200
11,000
12.7
10 4
18
490
1,100
0 04
0 02
50
0.94
2.1
0.03
0.07
12
3.3
7.2
Influent
Effluent
: Removal
2/28
2/28
2/28
59
59
16
16
6 6-9.7
8 8-10.5
<0.1
<0.1
0
G
G
83
80
4
4,700
10.000
12.3
7 9
36
470
1,000
0 04
<0 02
50
<1.2
<2.6
0.08
0 08
12
3.3
7.2
Influent
Effluent
• Removal
2/29
2/29
2/29
51
51
13
13
7.2-10.8
8.2-11.0
2 2
2.2
0
G
G
65
53
18
2,700
5,900
4.8
5.0
**
250
560
0.02
<0 02
0
<1.0
<2.2
0.08
0.08
0
4.7
10
Average X
Removal
0
7
18
33
4
Total of Scale
Pit Effluents 2/27
2/28
2/29
87
105
94
22.5
28.3
24.3
G
G
G
8,600
6,800
4,600
18,000
15,000
10,000
670
640
360
1,500
1,400
800
1.5
4.4
1.2
3.4
6.5
2.4
7.3
8 1
6.0
16
18
13
2/27
2/28
2/29
Average
95
25
N
N
N
2,200
**
2,100
1,400
4,000
4,500
2,800
540
460
260
420
1,200
1.000
580
930
**
3.1
0.3
l.l
4 1
0.4
1.5
1.3
0.6
«*
0.6
3
2
2
t Date io the day the oanple vao conrpooited (i.e t 24-hour conpoeite 0600 September 27 to 0600 September 28 uoa dated September 28)»
ft Daily average floua are average of eight instantaneous flous during 24-hour senphng period.
ttt The te-rperatwe of influent and effluent fron each scale pit dob measured every three hours. All readings ranged from 11.0-21»0°C in the influent
to the 46-inch /(ill Scale Pit, February 28 at 103S houre.
* Only effluent loads were calculated.
Effluent concentration exceeded influent concentration
-------
Table 21
TREATMENT EFFICIENCY OF PRIMARY MILL SCALE PITS
OIL AND CREASE
USSC DUQVESNE
February 26-29, 1976
Station Description
Date
Time*
Instantaneous Flow
Influent
Effluent
mJ/day
mgd
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day
lb/day
21-Inch Mill Scale Pit
2/26
1530
21
5.4
3
6
100
300
2/26
1935
23
6.1
4
11
250
560
2/27
0140
23
6.0
5
5
100
300
Average
7
200
400
2/27
1620
22
5.8
6
5
100
200
2/27
1905
23
6.1
5
8
200
400
2/28
0055
22
5.9
5
3
70
100
Average
5
100
200
2/28
1555
26
6.9
<1
2
50
100
2/28
1820
23
6.0
1
3
70
100
2/29
0010
23
6.1
2
4
90
200
Average
3
70
100
36-Inch Mill Scale Pit
2/26
1648
18
4.6
4
4
70
200
2/26
2010
18
4.8
5
5
90
200
2/27
0145
17
4.6
5
4
70
150
Average
4
80
180
2/27
1630
21
5.5
3
3
60
100
2/27
1915
21
5.7
4
4
90
200
2/28
0105
19
5.0
3
5
100
200
Average
4
100
200
2/28
1610
22
5.7
4
2
40
100
2/28
1825
' 18
4.8
5
2
40
80
2/29
0020
19
5.0
2
3
60
100
Average
2
50
90
46-Inch Mill Scale Pit
2/26
1715
43
11
6
4
200
400
2/26
2030
36
9.6
5
5
200
400
2/27
0200
44
12
5
4
200
400
Average
4
200
400
2/27
1640
65
17
4
1
70
100
2/27
1930
41
11
2
3
100
300
2/28
0120
56
15
3
4
200
500
Average
3
100
300
2/28
1620
58
15
4
<1
<60
<100
2/28
1840
36
9.6
1
1
40
80
2/29
0035
37
9.7
1
<1
<40
<80
Average
<1
<50
<90
Total of Scale Pit
Effluents
2/27
480
980
2/28
300
700
2/29
120
190
Average
300
620
t Time indicated is time at which effluent samples was collected. Influent was sampled within an
average of 20 minutes of time effluent samples was collected.
62 of 140
-------
Field measurements [Table 20] show that the effluent pH from the
21-and 46-inch scale pits as 9.0. The effluents from the 21- and 46-
inch mill scale pits had a maximum pH of 9.6 and 11.0, respectively.
USSC self-monitoring data reports a maximum pH of 11.6 in outfall 015
[Table 7].
Oil/grease concentrations [Table 21] show that the scale pits were
ineffective in removing oil and grease. Results further show that oil
removal facilities at the 21-inch mill scale pit were also ineffective.
Average daily scale pit influent concentrations are compared below with
effluent and intake concentrations.
Parameter
2/27
2/28
2/29
3-day
Average
21-inch Scale Pit influent
4
5
1
3
36-inch Scale Pit influent
5
3
4
4
46-inch Scale Pit influent
5
3
2
3
Influent average
5
4
2
4
21-inch Scale Pit effluent
7
5
3
5
36-inch Scale Pit effluent
4
4
2
3
46-inch Scale Pit effluent
4
3
<1
2
Effluent average
5
4
2
4
Intake water average
3
5
<1
3
This comparison indicates that during the survey, 0/G in the scale pit
effluent averaged 1 mg/1 greater than intake water concentrations.
Furthermore, average daily influent and effluent concentrations were the
same.
OUTFALL 015
Effluent from the three primary mill scale pits is discharged to
the Monongahela River through outfall 015. As previously mentioned,
primary mill production during February 26-29, 1976 was 90% of its rated
capacity.
63 of 140
-------
NEIC monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate that none of the
pollutants monitored were discharged in significant quantities above
intake values except oil/grease. A grab sample for oil/grease collected
February 29 contained 25 mg/1, resulting in a mass discharge rate of 600
kg (1,800 lb)/day. All other oil/grease samples contained insignificant
quantities. On two of the three days sampled, the pH exceeded 10. USSC
self-monitoring data [Table 7] also indicate elevated pH conditions at
outfall 015. A comparison of NEIC monitoring results with USSC self-
monitoring data [Table 22] indicate that while average flow was the
same, USSC reports greater concentrations of total suspended solids than
were observed during the survey. It is further noted that USSC pH levels
ranged up to 11.6 compared to a maximum pH of 10.2 during the survey.
As noted in the previous section, high pH readings were found in the 21-
inch and 46-inch mill scale pit effluents. The cause of the elevated pH
was not provided by USSC personnel.
USSC has proposed that existing NPDES permit limitations be changed
"to more accurately describe the quality of the current dischargej" and
to eliminate the requirement for additional controls after June 30,
1977. The proposed average daily limitations for total suspended solids
and oil/grease are approximately 100 times and 5 times, respectively,
greater than the values obtained during the survey.
Parameter USSC Proposed Limitations NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS 19,100 42,021 57,300 126,063* 160 370 480 1,100
0/G 1,395 3,070 4,186 9,210tT 200 600 600 1,800
pH Shall not be less than 6.0 Range 7.5-10.2
t Proposed as a net limitation until June 30, 1977 and a gross
limitation thereafter.
tt Gross limitation.
64 of
-------
Table 22
COMPARISON OF USSC SELF-MONITORING DATA AND NEIC SURVEY DATAf
OUTFALL 015
USSC DUQUESNE
USSC
NEIC++
Parameter
Concentration
Concentration
Load
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day lb/day
TSS
27
2
160 370
0/G
ttt
2
200 600
Phenolics
-
0
0 0
FeT
-
0.4
30 70
FeD
-
0.003
0.27 0.6
Zn
0
0 0
Field Measurements
USSC
NEIC
pH Range
8.2-11.6
7.5-10.2
Temperature Range °C
6.1-35
12-18.5
Settleable Solids Range ml/1
-
<0.1-0.4
Average Flow
m /day x 10
84
85
mgd
22.2
22
t USSC and NEIC data, excluding field measurements} are net
values (i.e. discharge-intake). USSC self-monitoring data is
for the period January-October 1975.
tt Average of three consecutive days of monitoring from
Feb. 26-293 1976.
+++ Discharge less than intake concentration.
65 of 140
-------
OUTFALL 016
The electric furnace shop discharges cooling water and vacuum
degassing condensate to a City of Duquesne storm sewer which traverses
USSC property. No treatment is provided prior to discharge. The terminus
of the storm sewer (outfall 016) is submerged except when the river is
at low stage. Upsewer access is limited to a single manhole at which
wastewater from the electric furnace shop joins storm sewer water pre-
cluding discrete sampling of the City flow. A manhole downsewer from
all reported USSC input is used for routine self-monitoring by USSC.
During the NEIC survey from February 26-29, 1976 production averaged
674 m. tons {741 tons)/day, 93% of the reported capacity.1 The terminus
of outfall 016 was submerged and NEIC sampled at the previously described
downsewer manhole. Upsewer monitoring of City wastewater was not con-
ducted due to limited access, although the City flow was estimated by
NEIC.
Monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate that with the exception
of total suspended solids and ammonia negligible quantities of pollutants
were discharged. Flow at the outfall 016 sampling point averaged 25,000
o
m /day (6.6 mgd). City flow was estimated based on observations at the
upsewer manhole and additional sewer design data including sewer slope
and cross-section. NEIC estimated that 4,200 m /day (1.1 mgd) was
discharged by the City through outfall 016.
The net discharge of total suspended solids and ammonia averaged
280 kg (620 lb)/day and 11 kg (23 1b)/day, respectively. In addition,
settleable solids averaged 0.4 ml/1 and the pH exceeded 9 on one of the
three days monitored. A comparison of USSC self-monitoring data with
NEIC data [Table 23] indicates very similar results. USSC also reported
that the pH reached a minimum of 4.3 and a maximum of 9.9. A grab
sample for organic analysis was collected on February 27, 1976 from the
66 of 140
-------
Table 23
COMPARISON OF USSC SELF-MONITORING DATA AND NEIC SURVEY DATAf
OUTFALL 016
USSC DUQUESNE
USSC
NEIC++
Parameter
Concentration
Concentration
Load
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day
1b/day
TSS
9.0
10
280
620
NFL-N
-
0.42
11
23
cnt
-
0.02
0.41
0.9
CNa
-
0.01
0.2
0.5
0/G
•k
1
20
60
Phenolics
-
0.002
0.1
0.1
Fej
-
0.6
13
29
-
0.04
0.9
2.0
Zn
-
0.03
0.74
1.6
F1
"
0.04
0.92
2
Field Measurements
USSC
NEIC
pH Range
4.3-9.9
7.1-9.
4
Temperature Range °C
7.8-36
14-22.5
Settleable Solids Range ml/1
-
0.1-0.8
Average Flow
m /day x lO^ **
22
25
mgd
5.7
6.6
t USSC and NEIC data3 excluding field measurements3 are net
values (i.e. discharge-intake). USSC self-monitoring data is
for the period January-October 1975.
tt NEIC data3 excluding field measurements3 are average of three
consecutive days of monitoring from March 3-6} 1976.
* Less than intake concentration ^
** NEIC flow values include an estimated 4,200 m /day (1.1 mgd)
City flow.
67 of 140
-------
outfall 016 sampling point. A single organic compound, alpha terpineol,
was detected at a concentration of 0.015 mg/1.
USSC has proposed changes in their NPDES permit to "more accurately
describe the current discharge," and to eliminate the requirement of
additional control after June 30, 1977.5 The proposed net limitations
are compared below with NEIC survey results:
Parameter
USSC Proposed Limitations
NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS
pH
693 1,524 2,079 4,572
Shall not be less than 6.0
280 620 630 1,400
Range 7.1-9.4
OUTFALL 017
Process wastewaters from the No. 5 bar mill and cooling water from
heat treating operations are discharged to the Thompson Run Culvert
which, in turn, discharges to the river. Also associated with the No. 5
bar mill and reportedly discharging to outfall 017 is a pickling operation
employing sulfuric acid. In addition to USSC wastewaters, Thompson Run
Culvert carries City Sewage Treatment Plant effluent and groundwater
seepage. Sampling was conducted from a manhole providing access to the
sewer carrying plant wastewaters prior to their confluence with Thompson
Run Culvert [Fig. 2].
Wastewater treatment is limited to a scale pit approximately 6 m
long x 3 m wide x 1.3 m deep (20 x 10 x 4.5 ft) located at the No. 5
bar mill. The scale pit does not include oil removal facilities.
During the survey, the No. 5 bar mill was in operation two turns
per day for two of the three days sampled. Production during operation
at the bar mill averaged 942 m. tons (1,036 tons)/day while heat treating
68 of 140
-------
processed an average of 269 m. tons (296 tons)/day. Production at the
bar mill was approximately 127% of its rated capacity. The rated capacity
and survey production rate for the heat treating process is unknown by
NEIC.
Monitoring results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate that only limited
quantities of pollutants were discharged. The net total suspended
solids and total iron concentrations were 10 mg/1 and 1.1 mg/1, re-
3
spectively. Average daily flow ranged from 29,000 to 35,000 m /day (7.6
to 9.3 mgd) and pH ranged from 7.6 to 9.5. Comparison of USSC self-
monitoring data with NEIC survey results [Table 24] indicate that USSC
reported significantly greater concentrations of total suspended solids,
oil/grease and dissolved iron. NEIC flow and pH results were similar to
USSC self-monitoring data.
USSC has proposed changes in NPDES effluent limitations for outfall
017. Comparison of the proposed limitations to NEIC survey findings
[Table 25] indicate that the daily average discharge of total suspended
solids and oil and grease during the survey was only 3% and 9%, respectively,
of the proposed limitations. In addition, net dissolved iron concentrations
were less than intake values on each of the three days sampled [Table 6],
WATER INTAKE
The Duquesne Plant is served by a single water intake upstream of
all outfalls [Fig. 1]. Eight pumps provide a total pumping capacity of
950,000 m /day (250 mgd) [Appendix A]. USSC reports that an average of
3
424,000 m /day (112 mgd) of intake water was pumped during January-
October 1975. The maximum daily rate for the same period was 534,000
m^/day (141 mgd).1
Three traveling intake screens are backflushed by a spray header
system to remove debris which is then returned to the receiving water.
69 of 140
-------
Table 24
COMPARISON OF USSC SELF-MONITORING DATA AND NEIC SURVEY DATAf
OUTFALL 017
USSC DUQUESNE
USSC
NEICf+
Parameter
Concentration
Concentration
Load
mg/1
mg/1
kg/day lb/day
TSS
30.3
10
290 660
cnt
0.026
-
-
0/G
2.7
1
20 60
Phenol
-
0
0 0
FeT
-
1.1
32 70
FeD
1.6
ttt.
-
Zn
0.01
0.39 0.87
Field Measurements
USSC
NEIC
pH Range
6.6-9.3
7.3-9.5
Temperature Range °C
7.2-38
12-21
Settleable Solids Range ml/1
-
<0.1-0.2
Average Flow
m /day x 10
31
31
mgd
8.3
8.2
+ USSC and NEIC data} excluding field measurements, are net
values (i.e. discharge-intake).
tt NEIC dataj excluding field measurements3 are average of three
consecutive days of monitoring from March 3-6, 1976.
+tt Discharge concentrations were less than intake concentrations.
70 of 140
-------
Table 25
COMPARISON OF USSC PROPOSED LIMITATIONS
AND NEIC SURVEY RESULTS
OUTFALL 017
USSC DUQUESNE
+
Parameter USSC Proposed Limitations NEIC Survey Data
Daily Average Daily Maximum Daily Average Daily Maximum
kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day kg/day lb/day
TSS 3,864 8,500 11,592 25,500
0/G 300 660 900 1,980
Fe^ - 7.0 mg/1
•J*
The USSC proposal calls for the proposed limitations to be gross
values until June 30, 1977 after which TSS and 0/G values would
^ be net.
Daily results showed discharge concentrations less than intake
values.
71 of 140
290
20
660
60
ft
620 1,400
40 100
-------
o
Backflush water amounts to about 4,900 m /day (1.3 mgd). The return of
solids to the receiving water once they have been removed is contrary to
EPA policy6 and constitutes an unofficial discharge.
USSC plant officials agreed to provide copies of intake water flow
measurement charts at the end of the survey. Subsequently, however, the
charts were not provided, for reasons unknown to NEIC. Sampling of
intake water was conducted on a time-composite basis. Monitoring
results [Tables 4, 5, 6] indicate the average characteristics shown in
Table 26. During NEIC monitoring, average net daily flow from outfalls
011-017 [Table 4] totaled 552,000 m^/day (145.8 mgd), 3% greater than
the maximum daily rate reported in 1975.
72 of 140
-------
V. MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
Monitoring requirements as discussed in this section include both
sampling and flow measurement. Currently USSC collects grab samples for
self-monitoring purposes at all monitoring locations except the intake
and outfall 112 where 24-hour equal-volume composite samples are auto-
matically collected. USSC measures and records intake flows continuously
with venturi flow meters and circular charts. All other flows are
measured instantaneously using lithium tracing techniques.
During the NEIC survey, the dye dilution technique [Appendix C] was
used to measure wastewater flows at all outfalls monitored. The outfall
structures were not suitable for the temporary installation of standard
flow measurement devices by NEIC. Flow measurements were made by NEIC
every three hours during each sampling day. Instantaneous measurements
indicated flow from individual outfalls varied markedly during the
sampling period [Table 26].
Continuous flow measurement is recommended for outfalls 111, 211,
112, 114 and 014 [Table 27]. Standard flow measurement and recording
equipment can be installed at these outfalls without major excavation
inasmuch as outfalls are all within approximately 3 m (10 ft) of exist-
ing grade. Moreover, single instantaneous flow measurements as currently
made by USSC are of little value in determining daily wastewater flows
and pollutant loads discharged.
Intermittent flow measurement is recommended for outfalls Oil, 013,
015, 016 and 017 [Table 27]. Standard flow measurement devices may be
installed; however, access to outfalls 011 and 016 is limited but the
flow can be measured using tracing techniques. Dye tracing equipment is
available for continuous flow measurement and recording. Equipment
73 of 140
-------
Table 26
INSTANTANEOUS FLOW MEASUREMENTS
USSC DUQUESNE
February 26 - March 6, 1976
Station
Date
Time
Flow
Date
Time
Flow
md/day
mgd
mVday
mgd
Outfal1
3-3
0725
17
4.5
3-4
2115
21
5.6
111
3-3
0910
34
9.0
3-5
0040
22
5.8
3-3
1205
15
4.0
3-5
0330
30
8.0
3-3
1500
35
9.3
Average
25
6.5
3-3
1835
26
6.8
3-3
2135
27
7.2
3-5
0610
33
8.7
3-4
0040
3.0
0.8
3-5
0915
23
6.0
3-4
0350
32
8.4
3-5
1215
21
5.6
Average
24
6.3
3-5
1505
12
3.3
3-5
1810
36
9.4
3-4
0600
21
5.6
3-5
2055
28
7.4
3-4
0910
20
5.3
3-6
0015
19
5.1
3-4
1210
18
4.7
3-6
0335
21
5.6
3-4
1505
31
8.1
Average
24
6.4
3-4
1815
34
9.0
Outfall
3-3
0700
17
4.5
3-4
2140
15
4.0
211
3-3
0950
11
2.8
3-5
0030
19
4.9
3-3
1255
10
2.7
3-5
0300
t
t
3-3
1610
11
2.8
Average
18
4.9
3-3
1900
3.0
0.80
3-3
2200
5.7
1.5
3-5
0600
T
t
3-4
0115
6.8
1.8
3-5
0935
25
6.7
3-4
0417
2.3
0.62
3-5
1305
21
5.6
Average
8.4
2.2
3-5
1530
34
9.1
3-5
1905
8.3
2.2
3-4
0630
14
3.8
3-5
2115
18
4.8
3-4
0935
20
5.3
3-6
0045
25
6.6
3-4
1230
22
5.9
3-6
0345
22
5.7
3-4
1600
16
4.1
Average
22
5.8
3-4
1845
23
6.0
Outfal1
3-3
0640
260
68
3-5
2125
200
54
Oil
3-3
1050
91
24
3-5
0020
190
50
3-3
1320
160
44
3-5
0355
190
50
3-3
1635
170
44
Average
190
50
3-3
1830
220
58
3-3
2210
180
48
3-5
0710
230
61
3-4
0040
180
48
3-5
1015
250
66
3-4
0350
180
48
3-5
1315
220
57
Average
180
48
3-5
1615
270
71
3-5
1840
200
54
3-4
0750
190
51
3-5
2130
200
54
3-4
1005
170
45
3-6
0015
160
41
3-4
1335
180
47
3-6
0330
180
46
3-4
1620
200
53
Average
210
56
3-4
1820
190
51
74
74 of 140
-------
Table 26 (Continued)
INSTANTANEOUS FLOW MEASUREMENTS
Station
Date
Time
Flow
Date
Time
Flow
m^/day
mgd
mVday
mgd
Outfal1
3-3
0630
150
41
3-4
2130
170
45
012
3-3
1040
120
30
3-5
0040
140
38
3-3
1310
110
28
3-5
0410
140
38
3-3
1625
95
25
Average
160
42
3-3
1810
170
46
3-3
2200
180
46
3-5
0820
190
50
3-4
0050
160
44
3-5
1025
200
52
3-4
0405
150
39
3-5
1245
180
46
Average
140
37
3-5
1635
200
54
3-5
1905
160
44
3-4
0740
160
43
3-5
2140
160
44
3-4
1005
160
42
3-6
0040
110
30
3-4
1300
170
44
3-6
0345
100
27
3-4
1615
140
37
Average
160
43
3-4
1840
180
48
City
3-3
0750
4.2
1.1
3-4
2015
2.1
0.56
Discharge
3-3
0915
3.7
0.97
3-5
0140
3.4
0.89
to 013
3-3
1210
3.6
0.96
3-5
0450
2.2
0.58
3-3
1515
3.0
0.78
Average
4.0
1.1
3-3
2035
3.3
0.86
3-3
2310
23
6.2
3-5
0620
2.5
0.66
3-4
0210
4.9
1.3
3-5
0920
3.7
0.98
3-4
0455
4.2
1.1
3-5
1205
3.3
0.86
Average
6.2
1.6
3-5
1505
3.0
0.79
3-5
1955
2.9
0.76
3-4
0730
8.3
2.2
3-5
2225
5.3
1.4
3-4
0915
5.3
1.4
3-6
0135
2.4
0.64
3-4
1205
3.8
1.0
3-6
0425
1.5
0.39
3-4
1515
3.7
0.99
Average
3.0
0.80
3-4
1950
3.8
1.0
Outfall
3-3
0655
16
4.3
3-4
2120
40
11
013
3-3
1105
29
7.7
3-5
0025
49
13
3-3
1330
27
7.2
3-5
0350
51
13
3-3
1645
39
10
Average
39
10
3-3
1835
37
9.8
3-3
2210
53
14
3-5
0715
42
11
3-4
0030
42
11
3-5
1015
38
10
3-4
0350
33
8.8
3-5
1310
47
12
Average
35
9.1
3-5
1615
35
9.2
3-5
1845
34
9.0
3-4
0600
t
t
3-5
2120
40
11
3-4
1010
24
6.4
3-6
0015
39
10
3-4
1340
36
9.5
3-6
0330
42
11
3-4
1630
32
8.4
Average
40
10
3-4
1830
39
10
75
-------
Table 26 (Continued)
INSTANTANEOUS FLOW MEASUREMENTS
Outfall
114
Outfall
014
21" Scale
Pit
Effluent
Date
Time
Flow
Date
Time
Flow
m3/day
mgd
mVday
mgd
3-3
0720
7.6
2.0
3-4
2150
11
2.9
3-3
0940
7.2
1.9
3-5
0115
8.7
2.3
3-3
1250
6.1
1.6
3-5
0415
16
4.3
3-3
1545
9.5
2.5
Average
9.9
2.6
3-3
2020
7.9
2.1
3-3
2250
8.7
2.3
3-5
0645
11
3.0
3-4
0130
9.8
2.6
3-5
0940
9.8
2.6
3-4
0435
7.6
2.0
3-5
1230
6.0
1.6
Average
8.0
2.1
3-5
1530
7.9
2.1
3-5
1930
8.3
2.2
3-4
0650
9.5
2.5
3-5
2210
8.3
2.2
3-4
0935
11
2.9
3-6
0110
7.2
1.9
3-4
1230
7.2
1.9
3-6
0405
6.1
1.6
3-4
1545
7.9
2.1
Average
8.1
2.2
3-4
1915
8.3
2.2
3-3
0730
36
9.6
3-4
2140
33
8.7
3-3
0945
39
10
3-5
0100
34
9.0
3-3
1300
32
8.4
3-5
0420
34
9.0
3-3
1610
28
7.4
Average
35
9.3
3-3
2000
36
9.6
3-3
2240
44
12
3-5
0700
42
11
3-4
0120
34
9.1
3-5
0950
45
12
3-4
0420
29
7.6
3-5
1250
56
15
Average
35
9.2
3-5
1550
43
11
3-5
1915
29
7.7
3-4
0710
35
9.2
3-5
2200
33
8.6
3-4
0950
36
9.6
3-6
0055
30
8.0
3-4
1245
36
9.6
3-6
0355
36
9.5
3-4
1600
36
9.5
Average
39
10.4
3-4
1855
36
9.6
2-26
_
22
5*8tt
2-27
2150
22
5.9
2-26
-
22
5.8
2-28
0055
22
5.9
2-26
1350
20
5.4
2-28
0305
25
6.7
2-26
1630
20
5.4
Average
26
7.0
2-26
1935
23
6.1
2-26
2230
24
6.3
2-28
0650
25
6.5
2-27
0140
23
6.0
2-28
1015
22
5.9
2-27
0405
22
5.8
2-28
1250
20
5.4
Average
22
5.8
2-28
1555
26
6.9
2-28
1820
23
6.0
2-27
0725
26
7.0
2-28
2110
23
6.0
2-27
1005
22
5.7
2-29
0010
23
6.1
2-27
1345
47
12
2-29
0305
22
5.9
2-27
1620
22
5.8
Average
23
6.1
2-27
1905
23
6.1
76
76 of 140
-------
Table 26 (Continued)
INSTANTANEOUS FLOW MEASUREMENTS
36" Scale
Pit
Effluent
46" Scale
Pit
Effluent
Outfal1
015
Date
Time
Flow
Date
Time
Flow
mVday
mgd
ma/day
mgd
2-26
18
4 7+t
i +
4.7
2-27
2155
19
5.0
2-26
-
18
2-28
0105
19
5.0
2-26
1405
17
4.5
2-28
0315
22
5.7
2-26
1648
18
4.7
Average
20
5.3
2-26
2010
18
4.8
2-26
2250
19
5.1
2-28
0705
21
5.5
2-27
0145
17
4.6
2-28
1030
19
5.1
2-27
0415
17
4.5
2-28
1310
18
4.8
Average
18
4.7
2-28
1610
22
5.7
2-28
1825
18
4.8
2-27
0740
22
5.7
2-28
2115
20
5.2
2-27
1020
19
5.1
2-29
0020
19
5.0
2-27
1355
21
5.5
2-29
0310
20
5.2
2-27
1630
21
5.5
Average
20
5.2
2-27
1915
19
5.1
2-26
.
47
12++
12+t
2-27
2240
46
12
2-26
-
47
2-28
0120
56
15
2-26
1415
59
16
2-28
0325
51
14
2-26
1715
43
11
Average
59
16
2-26
2030
36
9.6
2-26
2310
56
15
2-28
0715
65
17
2-27
0200
44
12
2-28
1045
79
21
2-27
0405
43
12
2-28
1325
75
20
Average
47
12
2-28
1620
58
15
2-28
1840
36
9.6
2-27
0810
55
14
2-28
2130
5.7
1.5
2-27
1035
60
16
2-29
0035
37
9.7
2-27
1415
97
26
2-29
0325
49
13
2-27
1640
65
17
Average
51
13
2-27
1930
42
11
2-26
_
82
22++
22+t
2-27
2125
83
22
2-26
_
82
2-28
0020
83
22
2-26
1300
92
24
2-28
0355
95
25
2-26
1535
87
23
Average
93
24
2-26
1845
70
18
2-26
2145
77
20
2-28
0620
92
24
2-27
0040
85
22
2-28
0950
90
24
2-27
0330
82
22
2-28
1345
86
23
Average
82
22
2-28
1520
99
26
2-28
1925
84
22
2-27
0630
97
26
2-28
2200
47
12
2-27
0940
91
24
2-29
0115
90
24
2-27
1255
110
30
2-29
0405
81
21
2-27
1535
92
24
Average
83
22
2-27
1830
89
23
77
-------
Table 26 (Continued)
INSTANTANEOUS FLOW MEASUREMENTS
Station
Date
Time
Flow
Date
Time
Flow
m3/day
mgd
mVday
mgd
Outfal1
2-26
0805
24
6.4
2-28
2140
20
5.3
016
2-26
0925
13
3.5
2-28
0035
24
6.3
2-26
1315
12
3.1
2-28
0335
47
12
2-26
1550
14
3.8
Average
24
6.3
2-26
1905
45
12
2-26
2215
12
3.3
2-28
0630
28
7.5
2-27
0055
22
5.9
2-28
0950
21
5.5
2-27
0350
25
6.5
2-28
1225
16
4.1
Average
21
5.5
2-28
1540
27
7.1
2-28
1850
39
10
2-27
0650
16
4.3
2-28
2140
28
7.3
2-27
0945
16
4.1
2-29
0045
43
11
2-27
1320
16
4.2
2-29
0335
37
9.9
2-27
1545
33
8.8
Average
30
7.9
2-27
1845
19
5.0
Outfall
2-26
0740
34
9.0
2-27
2115
37
9.9
017
2-26
0950
30
7.8
2-28
0005
34
9.1
2-26
1230
32
8.4
2-28
0345
30
7.9
2-26
1520
33
8.7
Average
35
9.3
2-26
1825
23
6.2
2-26
2130
' 28
7.3
2-28
0605
34
9.1
2-27
0020
29
7.6
2-28
0925
30
8.0
2-27
0320
29
7.6
2-28
1220
24
6.4
Average
30
7.8
2-28
1505
28
7.4
2-28
1905
25
6.7
2-27
0610
34
9.0
2-28
2150
26
7.0
2-27
0925
35
9.3
2-29
0100
28
7.4
2-27
1230
38
10
2-29
0345
31
8.3
2-27
1525
37
9.9
Average
29
7.6
2-27
1815
35
9.2
t Flow not determined
tt Average of last 6 instantaneous flows
78 of 140
-------
Table 27
RECOMMENDED MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
USSC DUQUESNE
Outfall
Number
Effluent
Parameter
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
111
211
Oil
112
012
013
TSS
NH~-N
CIC
z7
Phlnol
pH
Temperature
Flow
TSS
NH,-N
CfC
PH'
Temperature
Flow
TSS
NHn-N
CIC
Zn^
Phlnol
pH
Temperature
Flow
TSS
NHo-N
CNy
PH1
Temperature
Flow
pH
Temperature
Flow
TSS
NH3-N
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
Continuous
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
Continuous
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/week
/month
/month
/month
/month
/month
Continuous
/month
/month
/month
/month
/month
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
3 grab samples/24 hr
Grab
Grab
Measured
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
Grab
Measured
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
3 grab samples/24 hr
Grab
Grab
Measured
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
Grab
Measured
Grab
Grab
Estimated
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
79 of
-------
Table 27 (Continued)
Outfall
Number
Effluent
Parameter
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
013 (Cont.)
Water
Treatment
Plant**
114
014
015
016
o/5
PH
Temperature
Flow
1/month
1/month
1/month
1/month
1/month
TSS
PH
Temperature
Flow
TSS
FeT
F11
pH
Temperature
Flow
;t
TSS
Fen
F1
PH
Temperature
Flow
TSS
Fe,
o/£
PH
Temperature
Flow
TSS
Zn
PH
Temperature
Flow
Settled Solids
1/month
1/month
1/month
1/month
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
Continuous
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
Continuous
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
24-hr flow-weighted composite
3 grab samples/24 hr
Grab
Grab
Measured
ft
Filter Backwash
TSS 1/month
pH 1/month
Temperature 1/month
Flow 1/month
Equal-volume composite
Grab
Grab
Estimated
Equal-volume composite
Grab
Grab
Estimated
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
Grab
Measured
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
Grab
Measured
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
3 grab samples/24 hr
Grab
Grab
Measured
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
Grab
Grab
Measured
ft
80 of
-------
Table 27 (Continued)
Outfall
Number
Effluent
Parameter
Measurement
Frequency
Sample Type
017
TSS
Fey
5/8
pH
Temperature
Flow
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
1/week
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
24-hr flow-weighted composite
3 grab samples/24 hr
Grab
Grab
Measured
t 24-hr flow-weighted composite samples shall consist of a minimum
of 8 sample portions collected at equally spaced intervals (i.e.
every 3 hr).
ft Flow measurement to consist of a minimum of 8 readings equally
spaced over the 24-hr sampling period.
* Upsewer monitoring should also be conducted at the same frequency
and for the same parameters to determine City of Duquesne input.
** Intermittent discharges to outfall Oil. Composite shall be
collected during the backwashing of 1 filter/month and the discharge
of 1 tank of settled solids/month.
81 of 140
-------
costs are approximately $2,700-$3,000.* In addition, a suitable tracer
such as Rhodamine WT dye would cost about $2.00/day per 3,800 m /day (1
mgd) of flow.
Recommended monitoring requirements with respect to effluent
parameters, measurement frequency and sample type are tabulated by
outfall [Table 27]. Significant parameters for process wastewaters are
from the EPA Development Document for Steel Making.7 Where specific
additional rationale exists for the recommended monitoring requirements,
it is addressed by outfall. Where no additional rationale exists, the
outfall is not discussed.
OUTFALL 111
The present sampling location is a manhole on the blast furnace
thickener effluent line located approximately 18 m (60 ft) from the
thickener effluent. This manhole also receives overflow from the
thickener influent pumping station in the event lift pumps malfunction.
The samples would not be representative if the lift station were over-
flowing during sample collection. Therefore, USSC should install an
alarm on the lift station to immediately signal plant personnel when
overflowing occurs. Monitoring for total iron and zinc is required
inasmuch as significant quantities of each metal were discharged during
the survey.
OUTFALL Oil
Outfall Oil, presently sampled at the river discharge, is frequently
submerged making sampling impossible. USSC should provide access to the
* Costs do not include maintenance3 extra parts, manpower, protective
structures or power.
82 of 140
-------
Oil sewer such that sampling can be conducted during high water. USSC
drawing No. 23529 indicates a manhole located within 15 m (50 ft) of the
terminus of outfall Oil which should be an acceptable monitoring point
during high water. Monitoring for all process wastewater parameters is
required because NEIC findings indicated the presence of quantities of
cyanide, total iron and zinc in excess of quantities present in outfalls
111 and 211.
OUTFALL 012
Currently outfall 012 is sampled at its terminus. High water
frequently submerges the sampling point. In addition blast furnace
wastewaters [outfall Oil] are mixed with outfall 012 due to the previously
described interconnection [Fig. 1], Monitoring requirements [Table 27]
are conditional based on the sampling point being moved upsewer of the
Oil interconnection.
OUTFALL 013
USSC presently monitors outfall 013 only at its terminus. During
the survey an acceptable sampling point was located and used to monitor
the City of Duquesne contribution. Intermittent discharges from the
USSC water treatment plant were also monitored. In order for USSC to
determine their average net discharge through outfall 013, monitoring at
all three of these locations is necessary.
Upsewer flow from the City of Duquesne may be estimated. Monitor-
ing for oil and grease and ammonia [Table 27] is necessary inasmuch as
these parameters were present in significant quantities in the City
wastewater. USSC water treatment plant discharges from filter backwash-
ing and solids blowdown account for approximately one-third of the daily
average TSS load to outfall 013 and must be monitored.
83 of 140
-------
OUTFALL 114
The monitoring location currently used is subject to surface runoff
in the event of significant precipitation. When USSC installs permanent
flow measurement facilities, the design should provide for an adequate
sampling location. Total iron was discharged in significant quantities
during the NEIC survey and is therefore included in the monitoring
requirements [Table 27].
OUTFALL 014
Monitoring for process wastewater parameters is required because it
is apparent from survey results [Table 19] that BOP shop cooling water
is contaminated with significant quantities of suspended solids and
total iron. Continuous flow measurement is feasible through the in-
stallation of a standard flow measurement device at the terminus of
outfall 014.
OUTFALL 016
City of Duquesne wastewater is discharged to outfall 016 but
currently not monitored by USSC. During the NEIC survey, a suitable
site for monitoring City input was not located and City wastewater was
not monitored. USSC should investigate further and determine if a
location exists at which City flows can be sampled. An acceptable
alternative to the above is for USSC to monitor their discharges before
they reach the 016 sewer.
84 of
-------
REFERENCES
1. Letter - Jan. 26, 1976 with attachments from Mr. James L. Hamilton
III, Manager, Environmental Control - Water, United States Steel
Corp., to Mr. S. R. Wassersug, Director, Enforcement Division, U.
S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, Philadelphia, Pa.
2. Letter - Aug. 1, 1975 with attachments from Mr. James L. Hamilton
III, Manager, Environmental Control - Water, United States Steel
Corp. to Mr. S. R. Wassersug, Director, Enforcement Division, U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, Philadelphia, Pa.
3. Information provided by United States Steel Corp. to EPA Region
III, Philadelphia, Pa., for development of NPDES permit.
4. Letter - April 23, 1976, from Mr. James L. Hamilton III, Manager,
Environmental Control - Water, United States Steel Corp. to Mr. F.
L. Voigt, Enforcement Division, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, Philadelphia, Pa.
5. Original Request for Adjudicatory Hearing as Amended, United States
Steel Corp., Dec. 13, 1974.
6. Interim Effluent Guidance for NPDES Permits, June 1972, Office of
Permit Programs, USEPA, Washington, D.C.
7. Development Document for the Steel Making Segment of the Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category, Feb. 1974, USEPA Effluent
Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C.
85 of 140
-------
APPENDICES
A Duquesne Works Reconnaissance
B Chain of Custody Procedures
C Dye Dilution Technique for Flow Measurement
D Analytical Procedures, Quality Control
86 of 140
-------
APPENDIX A
Duquesne Works Reconnaissance
87 of 140
-------
REPORT ON EPA RECONNAISANCE/INSPECTION OF SEPTEMBER 23-27, 1975 AND PRE-
LIMINARY EVALUATION FOR PROSPECTIVE NEIC FIELD SAMPLING SURVEY, U.S. STEEL
CORPORATION, DUQUESNE STEEL PLANT, DUQUESNE, PA.
The Duquesne Steel Plant is combined with the National Steel Plant on
the other side of the Monongahela River to give a single management unit
known as the National-Duquesne Works of U. S. Steel. The Duquesne Plant is
situated about 12.5 miles above the Ohio River at Pittsburgh. Duquesne is
fairly well integrated with blast furnaces producing basic iron; the manu-
facturing of steel by the Basic Oxygen Process and also a series of electric
furnaces; primary hot rolling of steel into slabs, blooms, billets and rounds
via 46-inch, 36-inch, and 21-inch mills; manufacturing of bars and rounds in
a No. 5 bar mill; and special heat treating and steel conditioning facilities.
Duquesne produces much of the steel for the National Plant. Capacity pro-
duction at Duquesne has been cited as: 7550 TPD basic iron, 8100 TPD of BOP
steel, 800 TPD of electric furnace steels, and 6100 TPD of hot formed and »
rolled primary and finished steels, mostly billets, bars and rounds.
Water intake or the sum of wastewater and cooling water discharges for
the Duquesne Plant are in the range of 90 to 120 MGD with September 1975 fig~
ures approximating 105-110 MGD. Duquesne would seem to have a lesser degree
of waste treatment as compared to the National Plant. Waste outfalls at
Duquesne are situated in such manner as to be seriously impacted by high River
stages.
Duquesne has seven permitted outfalls, i.e. Oil to 017; four intermedi-
ate sampling locations i.e. Ill, 211, 112 and 114; a water intake sampling
point; plus a number of storm sewers through USSC property. Waste loads are
somewhat evenly distributed through various outfalls at Duquesne with the
more important outfalls comprising 011, 012, 014, 016 and 017- A contemplated
field sampling survey for Duquesne is tentatively visualized involving 14 or
less primary stations. Assuming reasonably dry weather, only one of the lo-
cations might be significantly impacted by the River whereby the Sampling
probably would need to be moved upstream on the particular sewer network.
88 of 140
-------
Attendees: Persons making inspection of the Duquesne Plant during
September 23"26, 1975> are listed previously in the USSC,
National Plant reconnaisance report written by NE1C
BACKGROUND
A significant part of the background and production information for
this plant was covered in a previous NEIC report on the National Steel
(part of the overall National-Duquesne Works)P1 ant. The Duquesne mill more
or less came into existence around 1886 when a small Bessemer converter shop
together with a blooming mill was constructed at the Duquesne site to pro-
duce rails for the Nation's early railroads. These Works were sold to the
Allegheny-Bessemer Co. in 1888, which in turn were sold to Andrew Carnegie
in 1890. Between 1890 and 1910, Duquesne was equipped with six blast furnaces;
two open hearth shops, bloom and billet mills and five bar mills giving a
large capacity in semi-finished steel shapes. In 1901, the Andrew Carnegie
holdings became part of the U.S. Steel Corporation.
From 1910 to 1930, new bar mills and an electric furnace were added.
In 19^1 due to the war effort, a complete electric furnace complex and one
of the more advanced heat treating and finishing shops in the U.S. were con-
structed. Additional electric furnace capacity was added in the 1950's,
primary mills came on line in 1959, the large "Dorothy" blast furnace (No. 6)
was finished in 1963* and the two-furnace BOP facility was made available in
1963- In 1969, the Duquesne Plant was consolidated with USSC's National
tubular operations under a single management.
PRODUCTION
The Duquesne Plant is important in three main areas: 1) producing
blast furnace pig iron; 2) manufacturing steel by the BOP and electric fur-
nace processes; and 3) operating hot-formed steel rolls yielding blooms,
billets and other semi-finished structural shapes and a bar mill producing
steel in final product form. It was previously indicated in the National
report that roughly 2/3 of the Duquesne steel remains at Duquesne for sub-
sequent working whereas 1/3 is shipped over to National. Capacity or maxi-
mum production at Duquesne has been previously given 'as approximating:
89 of 140
-------
7,550 TPD iron
8,900 TPD steel from BOP and electric furnaces.
6,100 TPD hot-formed semi-finished and fin-
ished steel products
Duquesne is said to be operating with some 3>000 employees and pre-
sently running 50-65% of capacity (probably closer to 50%). General pro-
cess operations have already been described in the National Plant report
but will be further amplified below. Total water intake and waste dis-
charges at Duquesne are in the order of 110 to 120 MGD,to and from the
Monongahela River. The plant is on the Monogahela River and roughly situ-
ated 12-13 miles upstream of the juncture of the Mon and Allegheny Rivers
in downtown Pittsburgh. Various waste outfalls and their contributing
sources are tabulated in the following.
PRELIMINARY OUTFALL DESCRIPTION
The draft NPDES permit and Fact Sheet of December 197^ describe
Duquesne outfalls as running from 011 through 017 plus the intermediate
stations of 111, 211, 112 and 11^, for a total of 11 outfalls and/or moni-
toring points.
The 011 Outfall situated to the rear or east of the Linde Oxygen Plant
constitutes a combined flow generally from the Blast Furnace area. We note,
that only Blast Furnace Nos. ^ and 6 were operational during our inspection.
Tom Johns does not expect Blast Furnaces Nos. 1 and 3 to come on line any-
time in the forseeable future. The draft permit describes 31-^ MGD coming
down to the Oil sector but 5-9 MGD is diverted over to the 012 outfall sec-
tor leaving 25-5 MGD out of Outfall 011. The 31MGD was reported as origi-
nating from:
18.0 MGD cooling waters from No. 6 Blast Furnace (Dorothy)
6.6 MGD(untreated7)slag pit waters from No. A Blast
Furnace.
k.S MGD process water(presumably from gas cleaning oper-
ations), i.e. 1.5 MGD from each of Blast Furnace
Nos. 1, 3 and 4. This *t.5 MGD is treated in a
thickener - settler before release
2.3 MGD process water (from gas cleaning) associated
with No. 6 Blast Furnace passing through same
thickener - settler as mentioned directly above.
The 18.0 MGD Blast Furnace No. 6 cooling water flow magnitude appears
high especially considering figures received from Wei skircher during the
90 Of 140
-------
week of September 22 of 2.1 MGD venturi scrub flows and 5.0 MGD cooling
water flows. If the 18 MGD were reduced to 5 MGD, total Oil flow would
amount to 12.5 MGD instead of 25-5 MGD.
There are no Interim Permit limitations for Oil. Final limits in-
clude Gross concentration maximums for cyanide A and Oil/Grease.
The 111 Sampling Location was described as the effluent coming off
the above th i ckenef-5£ttl61* 5W& made up of 6.8 MGD gas cleaning process
waters as a total from the four existing blast furnaces. This value does
not take in account some flow reduction necessarily due to sludge under-
flows being drawn off the bottom of the clarifier. Permit Limitations for
111 include Net loads given for TSS, ammonia, phenolics, and total and
Cyanide A.
The 211 Sampling Location was defined as overflow effluent from the
slag pit serving the No. 4 blast furnace and having a flow capacity rating „
of 6.6 MGD. Permit Limitations are for Net TSS loads, only.
The 012 Outfal1 is situated to the rear and directly east of the Linde
Oxygen Plant. Out fa 11s 012 and Oil at the River are actually side by side
and within a few feet of each other. This outfall was rated in the draft
NPDES permit as 57.6 MGD comprising:
45*0 MGD cooling waters from the Linde Oxygen production
pi ant
5.9 MGD blast furnace(excess) process and cooling water
flows diverted from the Oil sewer line.
6.5 MGD overflow effluent(untreated?)from the slag pit
serving No. 1 Blast Furnace.
NPDES permit limitations for 012 include maximum allowable Gross temperature
and Cyanide A, but only after June ?977-
The 112 Sampling Location was defined as the overflow effluent from
the slag pit serving the No. 1 Blast Furnace and having a flow rating of
6.5 MGD.
For the above two sewer systems of 011 and 012, the 011 sewer network
was essentially written on allowable NET loads except for Gross concentra-
tions at the 011 station. The 012 sewer network was written for Gross con-
centrations but only on TSS.
The 013 Outfal1 comprises a city sewer believed to come down Duquesne
Avenue from the SW which combines with a series of Blast Furnace cooling
waters including 4.0 MGD from No. 1 Furnace; 4.0 MGD from No. 3 Furnace
(Nos. 1 £ 3 units not currently operational); and 4.5 MGD from the No. 4
Blast Furnace. The draft NPDES permit gives an indicated flow of 12.5 MGD
91 of
-------
for Outfall 013 and only temperature and Oil/Grease Gross concentration
limits through the duration of the permit.
The 01A Outfal1 receives two spent streams but all flows essentially
deri ve"'frofl "he Duquesne Plant BOP shop. The first of these is 6.9 MGD
cooling waters from the Basic Oxygen Furnace sector. To this is added
approximately 1.1 MGD overflow from a thickener serving wet gas cleaning on
the BOP unit. During our visit it was furthermore indicated by the Company
that the Grant Street storm sewer also passes through the juncture box re-
ceiving the other two flows. The draft NPDES permit gives a total flow of
7.9 MGD for this sewer network.
The 114 Sampling Location represents the BOP thickener effluent upon
leaving the sett Ier-claritier and before entering the main 014 sewer network.
The draft permit for 014 provides only temperature limits and then only after
June, 1977. Limitations for 114 include immediate Net TSS load allowables
and Gross dissolved iron concentrations. The same type of parameters and
limits are cited after June 1977*
The 015 Outfall is reported to serve the three Duquesne primary hot
ro11ing mills, ihese include the 46 inch mill more or less followed by the
36 inch mill, then followed by the 21 inch mill. Respective spent process
flows treated by scale pits and discharging from the three mills are stated
as 11.0 HGD from the 46 inch mill, 2.5 MGD from the 36 inch mill (scale pit),
and 2.3 MGD from the 21 inch mill, for a total wastewater flow of 15-S MGD.
Treatment on the 015 sewer network consists of the various available scale
pits and some rudimentary oil skimming. Permit limitations on the 015 system
include Net TSS and Oil/Grease loads and Gross Oil/Grease and temperature con-
centration maximums.
The 016 Outfall serves the Electric Furnace steel production sector in-
cluding cooling waters of up to 3*2 MGD, and untreated process flows of up to
2.1 MGD from the vacuum degasing operations found in the electric furnace
building. A city storm sewer is also shown to be connected to the 016 sewer
line thought by USSC to be either the Hamilton Street or the Whitfield Street
system. The permit flow for 016 amounts to 5-3 MGD. The 016 Outfall inter-
cepts the Monongahela River a very short distance downstream of 015. These
two sewers are in very close proximity duplicating a similar situation at
011 - 012. Net and Gross permit parameters for 016 are of the same type as
for the 015 Outfal1.
The 017 Outfall encompasses the bottom or most northerly end of the
Duquesne mi I I property and picks up the Thompson Run (natural) drainage course
which is piped under USSC property for its lowermost one-quarter mile before
emptying into the Mon River, together with process effluents from the No. 5
bar mill treated via scale basin(s), and various process or contact effluents
from heat treating end finishing facilities (the latter mostly if not totally
for bars and rounds). Thompson Run above Steel property receives final efflu-
92 Of 140
-------
ents from the city of Duquesne contact stabilization activated sludge treat-
taant plant. Data on Duquesne municipal wastewater flows and characteristics
are tentatively planned to be collected by NEIC in the future. Permit flows
via 017 are shown to be 5.8 MGD which comprises 2.8 MGD from heat treating
sources and 3.0 MGD from the No. 5 bar mill complex. Limitations in the
NPDES draft permit provide for Net TSS and Oil/Grease loads, and Gross Oil/
Grease, dissolved iron, total cyanide and temperature concentration maximums.
The draft permit specifies USSC sampling of their Waste contributions before
these flows enter into the Thompson Run storm collection conduit.
SPECIFIC PROCESS OPERATIONS, PLANT INSPECTION
Air Pollution Controls at Duquesne
On the air pollution control side, Tom Johns, Chief Engineer explained
since the early 19701s there has been installation of 1) A Bag House on the
electric furnace building; 2) An Electrostatic Precipitator on the ^6 inch
mill automatic scarfer finished in early 1975; and 3) Various improvements
made and still continuing at the BOP Shop. The electric furnace operations
were said to previously obliveratc the city with black smoke. The present
bag house system is reported to give high overall treatment performance.
The precipitator on the ^6-inch mill scarfer is likewise reported functioning
well. Johns stated in the BOP sector, they are now catching about 99 percent
of the particulates. Before when they were balancing the fans, efficiency
of removal dropped to about 6^-66%. Now they shut the BOP shop down when
the balancing work is done. During our week at Duquesne, the BOP shop was
not operating during the first shift but was coming up about noon (i.e, 2
shift operation). Sometimes a pinkish cast was said to exist by Johns
(appeared to be red to us) but USSC, Duquesne,is still said to be within ex-
isting county air pollution control limitations. Additional fan capacity is
being added to withdraw more roof top emissions originating from the furnaces
in the BOP Shop. Johns admits some smoke is escaping the roof monitors.
They have also recently completed construction of a roof baffle off one of
the BOP furnaces. Personnel are monitoring the No. 1 Furnace with a damper,
and results so far are encouraging. There are two BOP furnaces or kettles
at Duquesne, each rated at 215 tons steel per turnover (heat) with a turn-
over occurring about every 50 minutes. After experimental work is completed
on Furnace No. 1, the Company plans to move to Furnace No. 2 with improve-
ments. These procedures if implemented fully, are thought capable of re-
ducing roof emissions up to two-thirds. Transfer of materials from the sub-
ladle over to the regular charging ladle appears to cause a majority of the
emissions in the BOP shop. There was discussion of further installation of
a bag house at the BOP building together with installation of a hood over- the
two metal pits and fan system leading to the bag house.
93 Of
-------
Other significant sources of air pollution at Duquesne include the
21-inch conditioning yard and the hand scarfing (via torches) sector in-
side the 21-inch conditioning building. Duquesne also employs three grind-
ers for handling select pieces of steel inside the steel conditioning
building which seems to contribute to air pollution. Nevertheless the
latter sector is classified as a zero wastewater discharge site. We noted
at the southern end of the Duquesne yards a further fugitive dust problem
prevailing in the vicinity of the raw materials conveying and handling
systems.
Air problems with the FeMn operations at National were mentioned in
our subsequent discussions with Johns and V/eiski rcher. The most serious
air problem is perhaps that associated with the pouring of the molten FeMn
into the sand cast beds causing heavy airborne emissions at times so heavy
as to blanket the city street alongside the plant. These omissions are
possible up to seven times daily. Continuing air problems are also report-
ed present attendant with normal operations of the No. 1 FeMn blast fur-
nace at National which is functional seven days a week.
Normal Shift Operations at Duquesne
The Blast Furnaces and BOP shop both operate 7 days a week, the blast
furnaces continuously and the Basix Oxygen Furnaces 2 turns daily. The Pri-
mary mills are functional about 10 turns/week and the No. 5 bar mill 12 to
15 turns weekly. It is however noted the No. 5 mill is generally down on
the weekends. Conversely some of the primary mills operate the weekend but
are down on one or more weekdays. The hot and/or cold cutting saws seem to
operate most often 8 hours on and k hours off. The electric furnaces run
about 10 turns a week going on the weekends but down on one or more weekdays.
We were told the Duquesne Steel Mill produces very little if any of its own
power on site and practically all power comes from the outside i.e., other
USSC plants. The Nos. 6 and 7 old bar mills were closed at Duquesne a con-
siderable time in the past, the essential equipment pulled, and only the
buildings remain. Of the blast furnaces, No. 2 is no more. Nos. 1 and 3
were last operational 9-12 months past. Nos. k and 6 were functioning dur-
ing our inspection. All four furnaces are straight basic iron furnaces.
Tom Johns declared that there was very little chance of either the No. 1 or
3 units being brought on line in the next 9 months and there is current talk
of possibly even pulling down No. k. There was uncertainty among USSC people
whether cooling waters were still running through the Nos. 1 and 3 Blast Fur-
naces at this time. All open hearth steel-making operations have long ceas-
ed at Duquesne.
Upstream Plant Activities and Sewer Lines
A Center Street city storm sewer is reported to traverse USSC property
intersecting the Mon River in the vicinity of the old Pig Casting Machine and
Ladle House. We did not find this sewer, our task made more difficult by Steel
94 of 140
-------
having no information on this sewer, the River stage being exceptionally
high during our inspection visit, and the River bank because of its steep-
ness offering little view of the shoreline. Photographs taken from an EPA
river boat run of June 21, 1975 showed an unidentified discharge flowing
into the main River close to this same site.
The 011/012 Outfalls and Duquesne Blast Furnace Systems
The NPDES permit Fact Sheet and accompanying rationale cite the Oil
Outfall as having a capacity flow of 37-3 MGD whereas our calculations and
the plant schematic show only 25.5 MGD. Weiskircher during our inspection
gave a probable spent flow for Oil of about 20.0 MGD but said the effluent
could vary from 18 to MGD. By virtue of lithium chloride measurements,
USSC from their self-monitoring data has reported flow rates for Oil from
11.8 to 53-6 MGD; a second month's data shows respective flows of 17-7 to
21.2 MGD; and a single flow of 2*4.0 MGD was obtained for June, 1975- USSC
normally conducts lithium chloride flow measurements in the 011 sewer system
twice a month.
A 90 ft. diameter settler-thickener is the key element on the 011 sew-
er network. Blast Furnaces Nos. 1, 3 and k each contribute 1.5 MGD venturi
wet gas scrubbing effluent to this thickener. Weiskircher considers these
flows as representing reasonably good numbers. The No. 6 blast furnace con-
tributes another 2.3 MGD wet gas scrub waters to this settler. Effluent
from the 90 ft. diameter clarifier is normally about 6.6 - 6.8 MGD but even
Weiskircher admitted with Nos. 1 and 3 units down, these Settled flows (at
Station 111) should be significantly less. A Betz flocculator is utilized
in the No. 6 BF thickener.
The No. 1 Blast Furnace is equipped with a dry dust catcher with the
gases then going to the venturi scrubber serving the Nos. 3 and Blast Fur-
nace units. The Nos. 3 and A furnaces have a common venturi wet scrubber
followed by a cooling tower for cooling these gas streams. The No. 6 fur-
nace has its own dust catcher, venturi scrubber and gas stream cooling tower.
Cleaned gases off.the cooling tower are generally sent back to the Blast Fur-
nace stoves and/or to the Duquesne boiler house. The bulk of the cooling
flows apparently originate from the cooling tower(s) and are sent to the
River untreated. A rough schematic of water flows around the No. 6 Blast
Furnace gas cleaning circuit as provided us by USSC personnel the week of
September 22, is provided below. The venturi scrub waters as mentioned above
find their way to the thickener. Fans and stacks more or less comprise the
remainder of the assemblage. USSC may be measuring influent flows to the
thickener separately from the No. 6 BF unit, and the combined Nos. 3 and
BF venturi scrub steam.
95 of
-------
Venturi
FAN
CLEANED GASES
5.0 MGD
cooling
1 water
| flows
2.1 MGD to
""" I hi ckener"
No. 6 BLAST FURNACE GAS CLEANING SYSTEM (BOP Gas Clean-
ing System may be quite similar to No. 6 Circuit
Described above).
Design data given the State in 1963~196^ shows the thickener to be
90 ft. in diameter by 9 ft. deep intended to handle an incoming flow of
1200 gpm ^ 1.7** MGD. At this flow, waste detention time was given as 7*2
hours. The discharge from the thickener was expected te contain 85 to
100 mg/1 TSS. We note that actual flows reported entering the No. 6 Blast
Furnace thickener are considerably larger than the 1.7^ MGD design flow
ci ted above.'
We further note in certain State file materials dated 6/20/7^ and
6/27/7^ that a schematic of a proposed recycle system for the Nos. lf3»*»
and 6 Blast Furnaces at Duquesne is given. The new system envisions two
90 ft. diameter thickeners each receiving 3050 gpm (*t.A2 MGD) gas cleaning
scrub waters plus vacuum filter filtrate return. The thickener overflows
are merged with blast furnace cooling waters (the filter at 7|000 gpm =
10.1A MGD) giving a total of 19.00 MGD going to a proposed cooling tower.
A 10 percent bleed off was assumed from this system equating to 1.89 MGD
representing a final discharge from both the 011 and 012 Outfalls. The fi1
ter cake off the vacuum filters were destined for the sinter plant.
96 Of
-------
Slag off the No. 1 Furnace is spray-treated and deposited in a slag pit.
USSC indicates their preference for air cooling but it is reported that Du-
quesne Slag cannot wait long enough before hauling out this slag material,
Weiskircher estimates drainage from the BF No. 1 slag pit of 100,000 gpd when
the No. 1 Furnace is operating. This slag pit discharge is to be monitored
under conditions of the NPDES draft permit as Station 112. The materials
accompanying the NPDES permit indicate waste flows for 112 as high as 6.7
MGD which appears to be many-fold the actual values.
Slag from the No. 3 Blast Furnace is reported to be deposited in
"thimbles" and taken to Taylor Dump by the Duquesne Slag Company, No dis-
charge is believed to originate from these slag operations. Slag from the
No. k Furnace is quenched in water bath compartments yielding granulated
slag. The overflow from this system is measured and sampled at Station 211c
The granulated slag pit is operated in a manner whereby service water is per-
mitted to run continuously into the slag basin. High-pressure water Is uti-
lized during the 6 or so slag coatings daily to move the slag into the center
of the basin. The high-pressure sprays may only be on for a total of about
one hour per day. If flows were determined during the time of high pressure
sprays, flow rate could conceivably be as high as 6.6 MGD, the value given
in the draft permit materials. However the average daily flow Is probably
closer to 2.0 to 2.5 MGD. The Company employs lithium chloride measurements
at 211. Granulated slag is essentially removed by clam shell from the quench
basin(s) into receiving trucks at the No. 4 Blast Furnace site. Slag from
the No. 6 Blast Furnace is cast into hard slag beds. Excess water in this
sub-system is recycled to a small reservoir and back to Steel's slag cir-
cuit. Slag pits have been recently rebuilt in the No. 6 Blast Furnace sec-
tor. Water is drawn down to the south end of the basin or pit where it is
dissipated via percolation. The No. 6 slag handling system is considered
to have no wastewater discharges. The 90 ft. diameter thickener is said by
USSC personnel to be receiving less waste inflows because of the Nos. 1 and
3 Blast Furnaces in down position.
USSC described the thickener effluent or "111" sampling as being con-
ducted in the effluent launder off the thickener. This settler is semi-
enclosed and contains a very warm flow. The Company has added lithium ch-
loride to this effluent launder and sequentially measured the chemical at
the next downstream manhole, cooling water flows off the No. 6 cooling tow-
er are bypassed around this thickener to the Oil sewer system. Thickener
sludges are vacuum filtered, the filter cake being deposited on the ground
until such time as it is transported away by truck. Filtrate is returned to
the No. 6 thickener-settler. We presume materials off the dry dust catchers
are recovered for reuse at the Saxenberg sinter plant whereas vacuum filter
cakes are all taken to sanitary landfill or dumping grounds. Filter cake is
permitted to directly mix with yard waters which is a highly-unsatisfactory
practi ce.
97 of 140
-------
A manhole directly north and approximately 50 ft. away from the No. 6
BF thickener receives both the thickener overflow plus cooling tower spent
waters as depicted below. Lithium chloride added at the No. 6 thickener is
Mon River
To Oil
From No. 6
Sewer
System
Thickener
Cooling
Tower
Flows
98 of
-------
said to require only 5 minutes before reaching the River via Oil (or
possibly even the 012 sewer system). The alternate point for lithium
chloride addition is at the Blast Furnace No. slag system, i.e. at or
ahead of sampling location 211 (has also been added directly to the gran-
ulated slag water quench basin). The 211 sampling manhole or box man-
hole is situated at the SE corner of the No. b granulated slag pit as shown
below. The rectangular opening in the 211 MH cover approximates 13" * 10".
The sewer served by 211 is estimated to be 3 to h ft. in diameter. Depth
to water level is about 12 feet. If one needs to climb up to granulated
slag quench basins, the area must first be cleared for CO gas and it would
be best to obtain concise clearance from the Company before proceeding.
99 of 140
-------
Inspection was made of the No. 1 Blast Furnace area and Sampling Lo-
cation 112. This station is directly east of the No. I Furnace and slag
pits and directly north of the Linde Oxygen Plant. While in this area we
also inspected a point where excess cooling waters from Blast Furnace Nos.
1, 3 and k are brought to ground elevation before being discharged to the
013 sewer system. The appropriate schematic is given:
112-";
Slag Pit
To 013^
Excess
Pooling
Waters
from B.F.
#1,3 & 4
appear here
Linde
02 1Plant
Water
Treatmen
The Company employs the Pro-Tech sampler for monitoring the 112 lo-
cation. The 112 manhole is approximately 10 ft. to water and accessible.
The concensus of observations made at 112 was that there was little or no
flow movement through this point. The Company has yet to make an initial
sampling of 112. The 112 No. I Furnace slag overflow has been estimated by
U5SC at 100,000 gpd, but only when the No. 1 Furnace is operating. We prob-
ably can install a weir-recorder and sand-bag this location if 112 were to
operate during any future ME 1C survey.
The hot well of the Linde Oxygen Plant was next visited. The hot
well is on the NW side of the Linde Plant. USSC adds lithium chloride at
this point for flow measurement on the 012 sewer. The draft NPDES permit
materials describe the Linde Plant as having cooling water flows of k$.0 HGD,
100 Of
-------
or 87 percent of the total 57-6 MGD reported for the 012 Outfall. USSC
indicates flow time is only 2 minutes from the Linde Plant hot well to
the River.
For the 012 Outfall, i.e. the terminus of the sewer, the NPDES per-
mit Fact Sheet and Technical Rationale specify a total flow of 37-7 MGD.
Our calculations show 57-6 MGD including a carryover of 5-9 MGD from the
Oil to the 012 drainage systems and assuming that the Linde Oxygen Plant
contributes in the area of *»5.0 MGD cooling waters as reported by the Com-
pany. It was explained that the Oil Outfall invert is simply higher than
the 012 invert. Two months of Company flow data for the 012 Outfall show
flows of 30 to *»9 MGD one month, 19*5 to 23-3 MGD for another month, and
20.0 MGD determined from a single value in June 1975. Weiskircher indi-
cated a current flow for 012 in the area of ^0.0 MGD.
The 011 and 012 Outfalls are only about 10 feet apart where they en-
ter the River. Both were submerged during our inspection of the week of
September 22, 1975. Both are generally above River level which was the
situation observed during the EPA river boat run of June 21, 1975. USSC
customarily samples both via drop bucket off the River bank. At normal
River stage, the two outfalls could be sampled by NEIC by boat from the
River side. These sewers intersect the River at the rear of the Mainten-
ance Shop, i.e. a brick building directly abutting a white building close
to the point where an overhead line from the Duquesne mill joins onto a
Clairton oxygen(?) line suspended at the top of the River bank (as reported
by USSC). The 012 Outfall is an arch brick sewer as observed at the River.
Both the 011 and 012 Outfalls contain sizeable wastewater flows.
Central Boiler House Located Between Linde Oxygen Plant (on the North) and
No. 4 Blast Furnace (on the South)
Boiler feed supply receives treatment by lime and hot soda addition,
settling and filtration. Boiler house condensates and/or blowdowns apparent-
ly are routed to either the 011 or 012 sewer systems but it is not clear which.
High and low pressure steam are produced, respectively at 250 pounds and 130
pounds.
Plant Water Intake and Pumping Station
The Duquesne Plant water works and screen backwashes are located up-
stream of both Outfalls Oil and 012, more or less to the rear of the Central
Boiler House. The River water is brought in through coarse bar screens follow-
ed by three travelling screens in parallel. After passing through the screens,
the water is directed into two channels. Screen backwash exits from the pump
intake station via two launders which combine into a single launder before
cascading into the River. The flow schematic is shown on the following page.
A walkway is available enabling sampling and flow measurement of the screen
backwash, if desired. Abundant water was being used for screen backwashing
101 Of 140
-------
Ri ver
Screen
Travel1ing
creens
i i
i i
s. J is To Pump
N House
\
purposes during our visit. Only one of the 3 travelling screens was going
the day of the inspection. USSC has no discharge application for this
screen backwash.
The water intake pump house was located directly west of the intake
structure. Eight pumps are more or less available. Pumps Nos. 1 and 2 on
the north side of the pump house are both electric each rated at 15»000 gpm.
Pumps 4, 5, 6 and 7 in the middle area of the pump house are steam-driven and
have a capacity rating of 25,000 gpm each pump. Pumps 8 and 9 on the south
side of the pump house are either steam or electric (presumably one of each)
each having a full rating of 36,500 gpm. Total maximum pumping capacity
(from the above figures) equates to 173,000 gpm = 250.7MGD. During our in-
spection, pumps in operation included Nos. 1, k, 5, 7 and 8. Charts attach-
ed to each of the pumps provided actual flow rates as follows:
No. 5 Unit - 15,000 gpm
No. 7 Un i t - 1^,500 gpm
No. 8 Unit - 15,000 gpm
No. k Unit - 15,000 gpm
No. 1 Unit - 14,000 gpm
Total = 73,500 gpm ^ 106.5 MGD (checks
reasonably close vs.
waste discharge total
of 107-5 MGD given by
Weiski rcher).
Pumps Nos. 1 and 2 are said to principally serve the blast furnace area
of the Duquesne Plant. Pumps 8 and 9 appear to principally serve the Linde
Oxygen Plant. For purposes of calculating Net NPDES permit loads at Duquesne,
the Company samples off the discharge side of No. 5 (No- 4?) Pump. A spigot
is available which is left open a short time before sampling. A similar
sampling spigot is reported off the No. I Pump. USSC usually collects 50 cc
102 of 140
-------
composite samples (every 13 minutes reported) via a Pro-Tech automatic
sampler or equivalent devise. Except for the water intake samples and
112 samples (if and when taken), all other self-monitoring sampling by
USSC is believed to be by grab means. Parameters of concern on the wa-
ter intake include TSS and Oil/Grease. Venturi flow tubes are thought
to be available for each pump. In addition to the above, city water is
used at the Duquesne Plant but rates were unknown at the time of our
visit. City water is thought used for sanitary needs but for little
else at USSC, Duquesne. On the other hand, sanitary wastes from the
Duquesne Plant are said to be completely segregated and received and
treated by the Sanitary Authority of the City of Duquesne.
013 Outfall and Various Blast Furnace Cooling Waters
Outfall 013 serves to collect various cooling water flows from the
Nos. I, 3 and A Blast Furnaces plus an unspecified flow via an unidenti-
fied city storm sewer thought to be entering the top end of the 013 drain-
age network. Sketches accompanying the NPDES draft permit describe the
013 Outfall as containing 12.5 MGD made up of 4.0 MGD from Blast Furnace
Unit No. 1, 4.0 MGD from Unit No. 3> and 4.5 MGD from Unit No. 4. The
Fact Sheet attendant to the NPDES permit however summarizes the 013 Out-
fall as discharging only 6.8 MGD. We were unsuccessful in locating any
access manhole on the upstream storm sewer anywhere on Steel property.
In later discussion with city people, Friday afternoon, September 26, it
was indicated to us the sewer in question may be the Wyle Ave. sewer pro-
ceeding east down the hill, making a left angle turn at Duquesne.Ave. and
shortly thereafter cutting through Steel properly more or less under Camp
Avenue. City personnel cited the terminus of this sewer as being egg-
shaped which is t rue of the 013 Outfall. The city completely disavowed
any responsibility whatsoever for any and all storm sewers once within
the property confines of USSC. Weiskircher described the 013 Outfall as
presently running in the order of 5*0 MGD. Company lithium chloride
measurements have given flows from 2 to 8 MGD.
It was previously mentioned that the steel mill water treatment
pi ant is tributary to the 013 sewer. Water treatment plant sludge and
other discards are added to the 013 sewer upstream of the Blast Furnace
cooling water line. The WTP consists of five outside chemical mix tanks
plus seven rapid sand filters in a closed building. Treated water is
currently estimated around 1.6 MGD and is destined for use in the Duquesne
boi1er house.
Of the 5 large tanks, each of 539»000 gallon capacity, 4 are em-
ployed for chemical mix and treatment, and the fifth is used for water
storage. The chemically-treated waters are allowed to settle in the same
tank, the waters then decanted and sent through the sand and gravel fil-
ters. The Company presently utilizes three of the chemical mix tanks;
103 of 140
-------
these are strictly operated on a batch basis. The water treatment tanks
are said to be blown down once weekly, but more frequent blowdown is
highly likely. Concerning the various sand filters, the No. 1 unit
appeared to be permanently out of service, and No. 8 was never installed
or had been previously removed. Of the remaining six filter units, two
were in full use and one on full standby during our inspection. The
treatment plant operator stated that tannic acid coloring in the water was
relatively high the end of September 1975- He is presently backwashing
the filters twice a day with these spent flows going to the 013 sewer net-
work. The operator according to his observations indicated on September 25
the River stage had come up about 6 feet over previous conditions.
EPA, Region III has apparently given preference for sampling the ex-
cess blast furnace cooling water flows after the small holding sump but
before the 013 storm sewer as depicted below. USSC is adding lithium
Mon River
here
chloride to the overflow from the BF cooling water sump.
Major Company sampling is performed at the end of the 013 sewer. A
ladder is available enabling one to reach the very end of the sewer. This
sewer may possibly be rated by walking into the sewer a short distance and
installing necessary equipment. The 013 Outfall is oval or egg-shaped
approximately 7 ft. high by k 1/2 ft. across at its widest point. Depth of
flow was judged about 6 inches. During the EPA river boat run of June 21,
the outfall was high and dry, whereas the week of September 22, 1975, the
sewer was only a few inches above the level of the River. The outfall was
observed to have good flow. The 013 line enters the River to the rear of
the north end of the lime storage (white) building at the end of the con-
crete wall set in place on top of the river bank.
BOP Shop and 01 ^"Outfall
The draft NPDES permit and support materials describe the 01 Outfall
as containing 8.0 MGD wastewater flow arising as 6.9 MGD cooling waters from
104 Of 140
-------
BOP operations and 1.1 MGD gas cleaning flows being treated in a thick-
ener-clarifier before release to the 01k sewer. Weiskircher during our
inspection visit indicated the 8.0 MGD was a reasonably good flow figure
as confirmed by USSC lithium chloride measurements. During the week of
September 22, 1975, we also learned a Grant Avenue city storm sewer
apparently ties into the 014 Outfall.
At the time of BOP construction, various USSC design data were call-
ing for annual production of 1.5 million tons steel. Assuming 350 pro-
duction days, this equates to *1,300 TPD steel. Assuming 5 days operation
per week, average steel production would be 5»770 TPD. These numbers com-
pare to the capacity production figures 8,100 TPD BOP steel given in the
NPDES draft permit. Current (Sept. 1975) production is probably not much
more than 1/2 the capacity levels. Heat time or tap to tap time on the
basic oxygen furnaces ranges from 40 to 50 minutes depending upon the type
of steel being produced. The oxygen lance blowing time is about 20 minutes
per heat. Percent molten metal into the Duquesne BOP Shop runs around 85
percent. From the mouth of the BOP kettle, gases are collected into
a water-cooled hood and sequentially cooled by sprays in a quenching
chamber.
Data given the State in the mid-19601s describes the cooled gases as
being carried over to the gas cleaning plant directly adjacent to the BOP
building. According to this information, the gases pass through dual ven-
turi scrubbers in parallel. Ahead of or synonymous with the Venturis is a
standpipe serving as a small settler and recycle point. Overflow from the
standpipe is routed either to the quenching chamber, the Venturis or River
discharge; and underflows are pumped to a following thickener-settler, Ven-
turi scrub waters are sent to the thickener-clarifier but some flows may be
recycled ahead of the thickener back to the Venturis. At the time of de-
sign, approximately 600 gpm was said to be entering the thickener but to
accommodate expansion, the unit was eventually designed to receive 1750 gpm =
2.54 MGD. Sludges off the bottom of the thickener are received into two
drum-type vacuum filters, with filtrates being returned to the settler.
The BOP thickener unit is 85 ft. in diameter x 8 ft - 8 in. SWD and
providing a detention of 4.3 hours at 2.54 MGD. Influent to the thickener
was expected to contain around 27,200 rng/1 TSS and the effluent less than
100 mg/1 TSS. No chemicals are reported added to the BOP thickener. Fil-
ter cake from the vacuum filters was designed to be reused at the sinter
plant or stored for future reclaiming. This filter cake is presently being
deposited onto the ground below the filter house and being subjected to
yard runoff and washdown. The filter cake is currently being trucked in
semi-wet form to landfill. During our inspection overland runoff was
occurring from the B0F sector and finding its way down the hill into the
Mon River at the base of Grant Avenue. Initially it was thought an oil
spill had taken place because of the intense black color of the runoff.
Approximately 10-15 minutes after this observation was reported to Weis-
kircher, the flow stopped. A schematic of this process sector is depicted
on the following page.
105 Of 140
-------
USSC has added lithium chloride to the launder of the 85 ft. diameter
BOP thickener and measured salt concentration at the Collection Manhole
in order to obtain estimates of thickener overflow. The Company collects
samples out of the final effluent launder on the south side of the thick-
ener and this point is known as Sampling Location 114 in the draft NPDES
permit. This sampling point is approximately 50 feet from the collection
manhole. Flow values by USSC at the 114 location (1-2 x per month) have
ranged from 2.0 to 2.2 MGD.
USSC has also added lithium chloride at the above-mentioned manhole
and subsequently measured the salt concentration at the terminus of the
014 Outfall for estimating total flow in the 014 Outfall. The 014 Outfall
flows have ranged from 7*9 to 8.2 MGD. For self-monitoring purposes,
the Company generally samples 014 at the end of the pipe below the River
bank via drop bucket (± 40 ft. drop). This outfall at the River is situ-
ated about 200 ft. north of the north end of the BOP building. Outfall
106 Of
-------
01^ was freely discharging (and thereby accessible in spite of high
River stage) during our inspection visit of the week of September 22,
1975. This point may best be sampled by boat during any future NEIC
survey. A short distance downstream of the 01A Outfall is located a
floating dock for off-loading fuel oil into the Duquesne Plant, then
East Grant Avenue, followed by the City of Duquesne Waterworks. The
waterworks will be described later in our report.
We searched for a suspected manhole thought to be existing near or
within the control-electrical building just north of the BOP shop said to
be placed over the Grant Avenue storm sewer line, but were unsuccessful
in locating such access point.
Significant floating metal particles were very much evident walking
around the BOP operations and gas cleaning facilities. The floating
particles are thought to constitute a safety hazard to anyone without
shop-type safety glasses.
Miscellaneous Activities Including Skull Cracker, Off-Load Fuel Oil
Station, and Duquesne Waterworks
The Skull Cracker facility takes old and/or obsolete ingot molds,
thimbles, bottoms, etc. and breaks these articles into scrap metal for
eventual reuse and manufacture of steel.
The fuel oil receiving floating dock at Duquesne is moored off-
shore in the River just about at the end of Grant Avenue if this road
were extended. We noticed oil boom spread on the shoreline just down
river of Grant Avenue and considerable oil boom footage stored in the
alley between the Skull Cracker and the City of Duquesne water treat-
ment plant. At the foot of the alley and the NW corner of the moored
dock we observed an open pipe ashore fairly well hidden but not flowing
USSC personnel could provide no information on possible waste source
contributions, If any, to this potential outfall. The blackish dis-
charge previously described as coming from the BOP area, was finding
its way to the River at almost the precise location of this outfall pipe.
107 of 140
-------
The Duquesne Waterworks is uniquely located at the center of USSC,
Ouquesne property. Weiskircher was not positive but bciieves Duquesne
owns the small sector of land upon which their water treatment plant is
located. Water is received from a series of artesian wells located at
and alongside the River shoreline. We observed some of these wells in
the vicinity of Outfalls 015 and 016. Preliminary information obtained
from the city indicates about 1.5 MGD water are treated at this site by
means of lime chemical addition, settling, multi-media (i.e. sand-gravel-
charcoal) filtration and chlorination. Mr. Ray Mickle is the Plant Super-
intendent. We were unable by visual sighting to determine the point where
by blowdowns, filter backwashes, etc. are discharged from the water plant
into the Mon River. During our USSC inspection, the River was highly tur-
bid making such sighting difficult. This discharge may be offshore a
significant distance. Additional data is sought from the city.
Outfall 015 Containing Scale Pit Effluents from the 46^lnch, 36-lnch and
21-Inch Primary Rolling Mills
The draft NPDES permit Fact Sheet and technical rationale show a
combined waste flow through the 015 Outfall of 22.7 MGD whereas our cal-
culations describe a total flow of 15-8 MGD made up of 11.0 MGD from the
46-inch mill, 2.5 MGD from the 36-inch mill, and 2.3 MGD from the 21-inch
mill. Weiskircher, the week of September 22, 1975 indicated a probable
015 flow rate around 22.0 MGD. The Company determines waste flow both by
using lithium chloride and the Manning formula and applying all necessary
calculations at the end of the 015 line.' This outfall is generally above
the normal River stage. Flow values determined by USSC in August 1975
were 15 MGD and 27 MGD. Capacity production for the three mills has been
given previously as 5»000 TPD hot formed billets and blooms, but not in-
frequently ,hot-formed slabs are rolled mostly destined for the USSC Home-
stead Mill. We were not able to obtain separate production for each of
the three mills although production of the 46-inch mill is undoubtedly
the highest. It was reported that approximately 34% of the 46-inch mill
production on an average basis is passed through the automatic scarfing
machine. The degree of scarfing seems to depend mostly upon customer
specifications. Automatic scarfing is a relatively quick operation
requiring 30 seconds or less. The outer surface of the steel is burn-
ed off with an acetylene-natural gas mixture producing an intense
blue-white, very hot flame.
The primary rolling mills are preceded by a total of 32 soak pits.
The 46-inch mill comprises essentially a reversing, 2-high stand; the
36-inch mill, a reversing 2-high stand mostly turning out 12 to 13 inch
square billets; and the 21-inch mill is a 4-stand, straight-through fin-
ishing facility. Most of the steel finished out of the 46-inch mill
consecutively then passes through the 36-inch mill.
108 of 140
-------
On Friday, September 26, we passed through the multi-pass, single-
Stand 46-inch mill which was manufacturing slabs at the time of our in-
spection. The three mills are roughly configured as follows:
*016
1015 N-^,.
PRIMARY MILL BUILDING
-21 in. Mi 11 -
-36 in. Mill
Scarfer
-46 in. Mill
Soaking Pitjj
Bldg.
21" Mill
Scale Pit
~
36" Mill
Scale Pit
46" Mill
Scale Pit
109 of 140
-------
Another layout of the primary mill building especially the ^6-inch
mi 11 is gi ven below:
Product Out
From 46" mTTT
Flow
Scale
Pit
21" Mill
36" Mill
Crop ends depositee
here
Shearer
Single Stand
46" Mill
Material
Flow
Plan view of the 2-sompartment, 46-inch mill scale pit is illustrated:
Influent b-+ 18'H
Effluent
T
+27'
~
B
Approx. half the a
surface covered f
f
1
with globules
orease/oil
U
a No oi1
1 on
1 surface
+ 75'
-el
Water level in the ^6-inch mill scale appeared to be at least 'lO ft.
down from the top wall. Judging by previous dredgings of the basin de-
posited alongside the pit, it is judged the basin had been cleaned in the
last day or two. This basin is not equipped with any type of oil skimmer
and USSC personnel indicated the old skimming assembly had been removed.
Depositing the scale and debris removed from the pit onto the ground would
seem to constitute poor waste management and control practice.
According to design specs within the State files, this scale pit is
83 ft. x 25 ft. x lA ft. deep; is designed to receive a flow of 6,700 gpm =
9.6^ MGD; and provide a waste detention time for this flow of 32.5 minutes.
The original design specs call for oil skimming facilities to be present
on each of the three scale pits at the primary rolling mills.
110 of
-------
Continuing down through the 36-inch mill, processing was inter-
mittent; plan views of the 36-inch mill and Its scale basin are given
be 1ow:
Product
of 36-inVMill
ojlL
SI ow
cool
Boxes
21-inch Mill
Shearer
Single Stand
36 in. Mill
Material
Flow
The 36-inch mill scale pit is illustrated in the following. Design
specs contained in the State files indicate the 36 inch mill scale basin
is 75 ft. x 25 ft. x 9.5 ft. deep, is intended to handle a process waste
flow of ^,000 gpm - 5-77 MGD, and provide a waste detention time of 33-^
minutes. This basin appeared to be at least AO feet down to water level.
There was no oil skimmer on the 36 in. mill basin, and we were told this
device had been transferred to the 21-inch mill basin. The Slow-Cool
Slow-
cool
Boxes
[nfluent
Baffle Wall
—2 Compartment Scale —
Removal Basin, 36-in. mill
Large
Pilinqs
of Scale
iPe$h1s
Y t
46-inch
mill product
transfer
out
111 of 140
-------
boxes referred to in the schematic are used for controlled cooling of
the semi-finished, hot-rolled steel pieces. Heated gas is bled into
the tanks to enable slow cool-down at intermediate temperature levels.
V/e next viewed the 21-inch mill which was rolling square cross-
section bars approximately 18 to 20 ft. long via a ^-stand mill assem-
bly, followed by a flying shear, the pieces being arranged in parallel
at the end of the line before product transfer outside the mill building.
Immediately fol laving the *t-stand assembly, the product can be cut
apart either by the flying shear or cold saws on an alternate parallel
line. The cold saws were not operating during our inspection visit.
The 21 inch mill scale basin is configured below. According to design
21-inch Mill Scale Pit.
Influent
All clean, new adsorbent,
"sorbol" recently spread on
ground
g-g^~^0il collection barrels
Rope, tube oil
assembly for
skimming oil off
basin surface
Debris
+65' spread over
ml'"
ConsiderJ
able
Floating
oil in |
this com-
partment
Slow-Cool
Tanks laid
atop the basin
Effluent
Di recti on
Presumed
specs in the State files, this scale basin is approximately 62.5 ft. x
25 ft. x 13-5 ft. deep. We note that field-derived dimensions do not
correspond to the design data. Design flow was given as 5,000 gpm =
7.2 MGD and the facility was intended to provide a waste detention of
31.6 minutes. From our field observations, depth to water level in the
basin was judged to be about 40 feet. The plant operator present dur-
ing our inspection of the 21-inch mill said "Sorbol" has been put down
on the ground, the day prior to our visit because one of the (55 gal.)
collection barrels had overflowed. The collected waste oil is screen-
ed by the scavenger picking up the oil and subsequently sent to a re-
112 of 140
-------
refiner. The oil skimming device has been in place in the 21-in. mill
basin approximately 2 months and is made by Oil Skimmer, Inc. out of
Cleveland, Ohio. USSC still considers this device an experimental unit.
Roughly a barrel of oil is collected every second day. Nylon or poly-
propylene tubing (3A in. dia.) or equivalent impregnated with oil is
vertically brought up and around a pair of wheels. A scrapper arm wipes
off the oil into a box receptacle, the oil then flowing into a receiver
barrel.
Concerning the primary rolling mill scale pits, the scale is said
to be removed approximately once a week by clamshell, generally on Thurs-
days. The recovered scale is reported to be taken to the Saxenberg
sinter plant or direct to blast furnaces. With reduced production,
frequency of scale cleaning may be further reduced. Blast furnace oper-
ators prefer not to receive this material. USSC themselves profess the
need for better recovery efficiency of oils. The bar mill scale pit was
said to experience greater amounts of oil than the primary rolling mill
scale basins.
The 015 Outfall at the River was viewed both from on top and below
the River bank. The plant has the habit of stringing a long line of rail-
road cars in front of the 015 and 016 Outfalls thereby effectively block-
ing access to 015 and 016 from above. The 015 Outfall can however be
reached from below by walking a considerable distance along the shoreline
from the Duquesne Waterworks down river. The 015 Outfall in spite of high
River stage was freely discharging during our visit. This outfall exits
out of a 5 ft. diameter pipe onto a concrete apron and has a reasonably
heavy flow. Depth of flow was estimated around 12 inches but velocity was
extremely high. A ladder is available for negotiating the River bank down
to the 015 (and 016) Outfall when the railroad is not blocked. The 015
Outfall is directly below a concrete abutement structure along the tracks.
One of city's artesian wells is situated a short distance upstream of 015
on the shoreline.
USSC measures flow at 015 both by the lithium chloride technique and
the Manning formula. Lithium chloride is generally added at the ^6-inch
mill scale mill and measured at the end of the outfall. The 015 Outfall
is usually sampled by USSC at the end of the pipeline close to the River
but in the event the River stage is extraordinarily high, the sampling
point is moved back up the 015 sewer to a manhole immediately west of the
railroad tracks. The manhole was judged to be approximately 30 feet to
water level. At the River we observed that Outfalls 015 and 016 are only
about 70 feet apart. Outfall 016 reached off the same ladder as 015» was
apparently submerged during our visit of September 26.
113 of
-------
016 Outfall - Electric Furnaces and Vacuum Degassing
For various reasons, we visited neither the electric furnace build-
ing nor vacuum degassing operations the week of September 22, 1975. Cap-
acity production has been given as 800 TPD for electric furnace steel
production. We were not able to collect any production figures on vac-
uum degassing. Stainless is made in the electric furnace shop but lately
stainless manufacture has been minimal. The stainless when present
eventually finds its way through the primary mills and the No. 5 Bar Mill
at Duquesne.
The NPDES draft permit and various support materials cite wastewater
flows of 5.3 - 5.8 MGD for 016. Weiskircher,the week of September 22,
1975 stated that average flows for this sewer network may be as high as
6.0 MGD. In August, 1975 the flow for 016 was 5-3 MGD. The 016 line re-
ceives up to 3-2 MGD cooling waters from the electric furnace shop, to-
gether with 2.1 MGD vacuum degassing condensate process flows, plus what-
ever flow may be present in an upstream city storm sewer intersecting
USSC property. The latter believed to be either the Hamilton or Whitfield
Street sewer. We note that directly SE of the Electric Furnace Shop is
located the Steel Conditioning Plant and directly east of this is located
two MG Fuel Oil storage tanks. The Steel Conditioning Building Is the
site of three grinding machines cited previously in this report as contri-
buting to significant air pollution. Fortunately no water is used and the
latter building is reported to have zero wastewater discharge. The Fuel
Oil storage tanks are relevant to the 016 Outfall in that 016 Outfall was
the announced site of a previous severe oil spill caused by a break from
the fuel oil storage area. Partial evidence of this spill is still re-
maining in the River bottoms area at 016.
Vacuum degassing process waters are said to originate from two units.
Steam is used to pull vacuum and materials are apparently condensed via
barometric(s) yielding the subject waste stream. Vacuum degassing is de-
scribed as a highly intermittent operation perhaps 1-2 hours daily but
then again not every day. A vacuum cast per se requires only about 10
minutes. Cooling waters from the five electric furnaces are classified
by Steel as NCCW.
We inspected a manhole on the NE side of the electric furnace build-
ing said to be carrying only vacuum degasser water flows just before en-
tering the Hamilton or Whitfield Street sewer. This connection is shown
on the following page. A reasonably strong flow was present in this line.
114 of 140
-------
i016
Mon River
\ Downstream Manhole
?/Ncw Baghouse
J «-ii II "ft
Manhole
^¦^Transformer Steel Conditioninq
Complex L
B Electric Furnace
S Plant
'Upstream Manhole
Manhole Section
"Dead"
Pipeline
uum Deqas.
-Flow
\st
orm sewer
This particular manhole contains only vacuum degasser steam conden-
sed flows, has been used by Steel for lithium chloride additions, but no
samples have been collected from this point.- The baghouse adjacent to
the electric furnace building is served by 3 "dirty air" delivery system
with fans. The total air flow passing through 2h baghouses is given as
1,712,000 acfm.
The next downstream manhole on 016 represents the only access point
to the 016 line between the River and the baghouse station. This manhole
is located directly in back of and east of the baghouse complex, is quite
deep i.e., 30-'r0 feet, and contains extremely fast-moving flows. This
manhole ^ 2.5 ft. diameter is reported to be used by USSC both for lith-
ium chloride addition and for waste sampling (contains the entire 016
flow). Since the end of the 016 sewer at the River is submerged during
*Draft NPDES seems to specify this location for collection of self-moni-
toring data.
115 of 140
-------
all but the driest of weather conditions, the MH east of the baghouse
is used for self-monitoring sampling. This MH is also deployed as the
measurement point for lithium chloride added at the vacuum degassing
MH. It also becomes the lithium chloride addition point when it is
possible to measure lithium chloride down at the River.
As mentioned previously, 016 is not accessible from the top of the
River bank whenever a string of railroad cars is placed in front of the
015-016 Outfalls, which apparently is fairly frequent. On September 26,
upon descending the ladder down to River level, we were able to see
little tangible evidence of the 016 discharge (which was completely sub-
merged) except possibly for an oil sheen in the proximity of the outfall.
During the EPA river boat run of June 21, 1975, the 016 outfall was hid-
den in a grove of trees, its precise location not known at that time, and
was thereby visually undetected.
We searched for and finally located an upstream storm sewer control
on the 016 Hamilton Street sewer inside of USSC property just south of
the Hamilton Street plant gate. This manhole is in a parking lot on
line and 126 feet south of the gate house and on line and 80 ft. north
of a Kentucky Fried Chicken establishment on the main road. The MH is
just a few feet off an access road inside the parking lot. Unfortunate-
ly \»'c could not raise the MH cover because an automobile was striding the
manhole.
017 Outfall Serving USSC No. 5 Bar Mill, Heat Treating and Finishing, and
Thompson Run Drainage which in Turn Receives City of Duquesne SIP Effluents.
U.S. Steel measures its 017 contribution via an internal plant sew-
er at a manhole a few hundred feet from the Thompson Run Culvert running
underground through USSC property. The 017 sampling location is on the
main plant sewer south of a series of office buildings but also directly
north of Shipping Building No. 3 and the No. 5 bar mill and heat treating
and finishing facilities. The draft NPDES permit and support materials
lists 017 as comprising 5.1 to 5-7 MGD waste flow whereas Weiskircher,
the v/eek of September 22, 1975 cited a flow for 017 of 6.5 MGD. The per-
mit further lists capacity production of 1,100 TPD hot forming at the
No. 5 Bar Mill. Virtually no other process information was provided in
the permittee's application on the 017 waste system. Flow schematics
from the permittee shows 3-0 MGD process waste flows from a scale pit at
the No. 5 bar mill; 2.5 MGD untreated process flows originating from
heat treating, and 5-8 MGD at the terminus of the Thompson Run Sewer at
the River. A schematic of this system is depicted on the following page.
116 Of 140
-------
Monongahela River
Reheat/Preheat
Furnaces
Hillside
Percolation
Cascades over
Hillside
Major processing reported on the 017 sewer line comprises the No. 5
Bar Mill. The bar mill consists of 2 finishing stands together with cold
saws. The first stand is probably a 3~high reversing mill machine; we
counted five passes through the first stand. In our walk through the bar
mill, a descaling machine was believed present. Cold saws serve to cut
the steel sections into the desired lengths. Both square and rounds.-, cross-
section finished steel were seen.
The scale pit at the No. 5 bar mi 11,from specs in the State files> is
approximately 20 ft. x 10 ft. x b ft. - 6 inches deep. At a maximum flow
rate of 3900 gpm = 5-62 MGD, waste detention time would be 1.7 minutes.
Flows from the No. 5 bar mill appear considerably lower than the cited
design values. The scale pit is roughly configured on the following page.
No oil skim device was seen. A manhole on the NW side of the No. 5 bar
mill has been used for lithium chloride addition but during our inspec-
tion, the MH was covered by four buckets containing crop ends. Depth to
water level in the MH is reported as 30 ft. or greater. Lithium chloride
117 of 140
-------
Covered 1
by metal pcs-buckets
can also be added at a MH on the north side of Shipping Building No. 3j
and subsequently measured at the (bottom) 017 MH east of the office build-
ings (see sketch).
Inside and at the east end of the Bar Stocking and Finish building
we inspected bars and/or rounds undergoing "brightening" via pickling in
a series of three tanks, two containing sulfuric acid and a third serv-
ing as a rinse vat. A 15 ton crane is used to convey bars and rounds
(20 to 30 pes. at a time) in and out of the tanks as illustrated. We wit-
nessed rounds being dipped in Tank No. 1 followed by rinsing in Tank No. 2,
Overhead
Spent Acid
Tanks(3)
Outer
Wall
jn~/\cTcT i a'n'k' tj (funrinq)
the pieces being carried to the west side of the building, piled, and air
dried. There was considerable spillage of acid over the sides of Tank
118 Of 140
-------
No. I when the crane load was Immersed Into the vat. The pieces being
withdrawn from the No. 2 Rinse Tank were receiving further rinsing by
manual hosing-down of the various steel pieces while still suspended
from the crane. Acid rinses and escaping spent acids plus scale pre-
sumably all end up in the main sewer leading to 017- Concentrated
spent acids are pumped outside to three overhead storage tanks. This
spent acid is eventually disposed of by scavenger service. We could
obtain no further details on the pickling of steel. Pickling operations
had not previously been reported by the company to Region 111.
Across from the No. 5 Bar Hill, cursory inspection was made of
Quench and Temper lines inside the Heat Treating and Finishing build-
ings primarily for the final finishing of Duquesne rounds and bars.
Operations mostly consist of contact quenching. A G.E. Quench line
was seen on the east side of the "Heat Treating and Finishing Facility"
building involving of I and water quenching. On the far or west side of
the same building was installed a "Salem" Quench line involving water
quench only. Steel personnel report that there is complete recycling of
oils used in the Quench circuits. A "Rust" Quench line was seen on the
north side of the building but this system was said to be no longer in
use. These conditioning or quench waters bypass any and all scale pits
and flow more or less directly to the 017 main plant sewer. General
practice is to quench the pieces being treated in oil or water bath,,
reheat the steel sections, then slow cool and/or anneal in annealing
boxes or equivalent. Only a small part of National-Duquesne bars appar-
ently pass through this heat treating plant.
According to city personnel at the Duquesne secondary STP, Thomp-
son Run Culvert can be walked the entire length underground. City per-
seonnel indicate there are multiple discharges from USSC into Thompson
Run Culvert besides the known plant sewer described by Steel as the 017
line. During the week of September 22, 1975> the terminus of the Thomp-
son Run Culvert was stated as definitely being submerged by the Mon River.
At the time of the EPA river boat run on June 21st, this culvert was
fully open and flowing freely. In June 1975, considerable scale solids
buildup was noted at the end of the culvert deposited across a fan-like
delta on the shores of the River. Steel reports previous scale clean-
out of the bottom end of Thompson Run Culvert. This relatively large
outfall is roughly situated below the RR tracks and River bank a few
hundred yards SE of a RR terminal complex on the Steel side. Also across
the River and slightly upstream of 017, we noted a yellow-black float-
ing caisson box which should serve to further locate this outfall. NEIC
sampling Is indicated at the end of this outfall during reasonably dry
weather. Detailed data should be secured from the city on character-
istics and flow magnitude of discharges coming from both the municipal
STP and the Waterworks.
119 of
-------
The manhole cover was raised on the Company's 017 sampling point.
This manhole is located on the main plant sewer serving the No. 5 Bar
Hill and associated heat treating facilities and directly south of an
office complex otherwise identified as a "dirty" yellow building. The
manhole was judged perhaps 30 ft. deep containing relatively high levels
of volatile solvents or equivalent. This manhole is located directly
in the sidewalk leading up to the fore-mentioned building(s).
Downstream Water Supplies
The North Versailles water supply is reported directly across the
River from the USSC, Duquesne steel works. The city of Duquesne with-
draws its water supply at almost the same location but from a series
of moderate-depth artesian wells. The next downstream water supply
that possibly could be impacted by the USSC, Duquesne discharges is the
Borough of Braddock about one mile downstream. Braddock provides soften-
ing, filtration and chlorination of its supply.
120 of 140
-------
SUGGESTED SAMPLING POINTS FOR PROSPECTIVE NEIC FIELD SAMPLING
OF USSC, DUQUESNE STEEL MILL, DUQUESNE, PA.
Primary Locations
Station 111, effluent from thickener treatment of Blast Furnace
wet scrubbing waters, at final collection point in
launder of the 90 ft. diameter thickener.
Station 211, granulated slag pit overflow from No. k Blast Fur-
nace unit, at Company manhole SE of granulated slag
basins.
Excess cooling waters from Blast Furnace Nos. 1, 3 and b at cooling
water holding sump north of BF No. 1 and east of Water
Treatment Plant prior to entry into 013 sewer.
011 Outfall at River ^
012 Outfall at River
(2)
Water Intake off discharge side of No. 5 Pump at Water Intake
Pump House.
013 Outfall at River ^
114 effluent from thickener treatment of BOP wet scrubbing waters,
at final collection point in launder of the 85 ft.
diameter thickener.
014 Outfall at River ^
015 Outfall at River ^
016 Outfall at manhole downstream of baghouse on electric furnace
bui1 ding. O
(1) This outfall at River normally submerged in part or all.
(2) This sampling point or outfall not affected by River stage during
reasonably dry weather.
121 of 140
-------
Thompson Run just prior to its entering USSC property and entering
underground culvert.
017 at Company sampling point, i.e. manhole south of office build-
ings on main plant internal sewer.
(2)
Thompson Run Culvert at mouth, i.e. intersection with River. v '
Secondary Locations
Station 112, slag pit overflow from No. 1 Blast Furnace
Center Street storm sewer in area of old (?) pig casting machine
Upstream control on storm sewer contributing to Outfall 013
Upstream control on Grant St. storm sewer
Upstream control on storm sewer contributing to Outfall 016,
presumed to be either Hamilton St. or Whitfield St.
storm sewer.
(2) This sampling point or outfall not affected by River stage during
reasonably dry weather.
122 of 140
-------
M O.WON/ 6A H £ LA
PlVER ¦¦
: : /
1 ,
016
^ OlS
! ' f
; ¦ 1
\ 1
jS Man hole.
21- Xr) M,li
| pr«oo ery
f? o Ji •
3 6-Tn WiII
Scale -
SCRAP J3LD<3.
SHIPPING
,BUILDJN6
\ 0
?ll "VX>0
O) 7 (Sftm-
V'
IhaM P_l/,
VI
8:
• PICKimG-
£R'GHTEnIN£>
"Scalo Pre
heat TRCATIN5-Finishing FAd.
WEST HEAT TREATING BLDS,
Railirfa^s
; Mills <- r
I Scar/tr ~ \
i 46 -Tn ' , Mill
rV
¦Sca/c \
P.f
Furnace
£'d^, |
! I
RAIL l?OAXl
G
StYipptfl
Flic I 0«J
Q 7anK
/S"tord.
-------
mTs n. . u
i tfoRTH
1 ~
(Xf-xo^^r-1
-------
!.$, STEEL. .CORP,.
DUQUeSME ST EEL. MILL
TiUQUCSUE f>A
She*t 3of 3 I i fcga
-------
APPENDIX B
Chain of Custody Procedures
126 of 140
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office Of Enforcement
NAT10NAI ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
Building 53, Bo* 2522/, Denver Federal Center
Denver, Colorado 80225
July 24, 1974
CHAIN OF CUSTODY PROCEDURES
General:
The evidence gathering portion of a survey should be characterized by the
minimum number of samples required to give a fair representation of the
effluent or water body from which taken. To the extent possible, the quan-
tity of samples and sample locations will be determined prior to the survey.
Chain of Custody procedures must be followed to maintain the documentation
necessary to trace sample possession from the time taken until the evidence
is introduced into court. A sample is in your "custody" if:
1. It is in your actual physical possession, or
2. It is in your view, after being in your physical possession, or
3. It was in your physical possession and then you locked it up in
a manner so that no one could tamper with it.
All survey participants will receive a copy of the survey study plan and will
be knowledgeable of its contents prior to the survey. A pre-survey briefing
will be held to re-appraise all participants of the survey objectives, sample
locations and Chain of Custody procedures. After all Chain of Custody samples
are collected, a de-briefing will be held in the field to determine adherence
to Chain of Custody procedures and whether additional evidence type samples
are required.
Sample Collection:
1. To the maximum extent achievable, as few people as possible should
handle the sample.
2. Stream and effluent samples shall be obtained, using standard field
sampling techniques.
3. Sample tags (Exhibit I) shall be securely attached to the sample
container at the time the complete sample is collected and shall
contain, at a minimum, the following information: station number,
station location, date taken, time taken, type of sample, sequence
number (first sample of the day - sequence No. 1, second sample -
sequence No. 2, etc.), analyses required and samplers. The tags
must be legibly filled out in ballpoint (waterproof ink).
127 of 140
-------
Chain of Custody Procedures (Continued)
Sample Collection (Continued)
4. Blank samples shall also be taken with preservatives which will
be analyzed by the laboratory to exclude the possibility of
container or preservative contamination.
5. A pre-printed, bound Field Data Record logbook shall be main-
tained to record field measurements and other pertinent infor-
mation necessary to refresh the sampler's memory in the event
he later takes the stand to testify regarding his action's
during the evidence gathering activity. A separate set of field
notebooks shall be maintained for each survey and stored in a
safe place where they could be protected and accounted for at
all times. Standard formats (Exhibits II and III) have been
established to minimize field entries and include the date, time,
survey, type of samples taken, volume of each sample, type of
analysis, sample numbers, preservatives, sample location and
field measurements such as temperature, conductivity, DO, pH,
flow and any other pertinent information or observations. The
entries shall be signed by the field sampler. The preparation
and conservation of the field logbooks during the survey will
be the responsibility of the survey coordinator. Once the
survey is complete, field logs will be retained by the survey
coordinator, or his designated representative, as a part of the
permanent record.
6','. The field sampler is responsible for the care and custody of the
samples collected until properly dispatched to the receiving lab-
oratory or turned over to an assigned custodian. He must assure
that each container is in his physical possession or in his view
at all times, or locked in such a place and manner that no one can
tamper with it.
7. Colored slides or photographs should be taken which would visually
show the outfall sample location and any water pollution to sub-
stantiate any conclusions of the investigation. Written documenta-
tion on the back of the photo should include the signature of the
photographer, time, date and site location. Photographs of this
nature, which may be used as evidence, shall also be handled
recognizing Chain of Custody procedures to prevent alteration.
Transfer of Custody and Shipment:
1. Samples will be accompanied by a Chain of Custody Record which
Includes the name of the survey, samplers signatures, station
number, station location, date, time, type of sample, sequence
number, number of containers and analyses required (Fig. IV).
When turning over the possession of samples, the transferor and
transferee will sign, date and time the sheet. This record sheet
128 of 140
-------
Chain of Custody Procedures (Continued)
allows transfer of custody of a group of samples in the field,
to the mobile laboratory or when samples are dispatched to the
NFIC - Denver laboratory. When transferring a portion of the
samples identified on the sheet to the field mobile laboratory,
the individual samples must be noted in the column with the
signature of the person relinquishing the samples. The field
laboratory person receiving the samples will acknowledge receipt
by signing in the appropriate column.
2. The field custodian or field sampler, if a custodian has not
been assigned, will have the responsibility of properly pack-
aging and dispatching samples to the proper laboratory for
analysis. The "Dispatch" portion of the Chain of Custody Record
shall be properly filled out, dated, and signed.
3. Samples will be properly packed in shipment containers such as
ice chests, to avoid breakage. The shipping containers will be
padlocked for shipment to the receiving laboratory.
4. All packages will be accompanied by the Chain of Custody Record
showing identification of the contents. The original will accom-
pany the shipment, and a copy will be retained by the survey
coordinator.
5. If sent by mail, register the package with return receipt request-
ed. If sent by common carrier, a Government Bill of Lading should
be obtained. Receipts from post offices and bills of lading will
be retained as part of the permanent Chain of Custody documentation
6. If samples are delivered to the laboratory when appropriate person-
nel are not there to receive them, the samples must be locked in
a designated area within the laboratory in a manner so that no
one can tamper with them. The same person must then return to the
laboratory and unlock the samples and deliver custody to the
appropriate custodian.
Laboratory Custody Procedures:
1. The laboratory shall designate a "sample custodian." An alternate
will be designated in his absence. In addition, the laboratory
shall set aside a "sample storage security area." This should be
a clean, dry, isolated room which can be securely locked from the
outside.
2. All samples should be handled by the minimum possible number of
persons.
3. All incoming samples shall be received only by the custodian, who
will indicate receipt by signing the Chain of Custody Record Sheet
129 of 140
-------
Chain of Custody Procedures (Continued)
accompanying the samples and retaining the sheet as permanent
records. Couriers picking up samples at the airport, post
office, etc. shall sign jointly with the laboratory custodian.
4. Immediately upon receipt, the custodian will place the sample
in the sample room, which will be locked at all times except
when samples are removed or replaced by the custodian. To the
maximum extent possible, only the custodian should be permitted
in the sample room.
5. The custodian shall ensure that heat-sensitive or light-sensitive
samples, or other sample materials having unusual physical
characteristics, or requiring special handling, are properly
stored and maintained.
6. Only the custodian will distribute samples to personnel who are
to perform tests.
7. The analyst will record in his laboratory notebook or analytical
worksheet, identifying information describing the sample, the
procedures performed and the results of the testing. The notes
shall be dated and indicate who perfomed the tests. The notes
shall be retained as a permanent record in the laboratory and
should note any abnormalities which occurred during the testing
procedure. In the event that the person who performed the tests
is not available as a witness at time of trial, the government
may be able to introduce the notes in evidence under the Federal
Business Records Act.
8. Standard methods of laboratory analyses shall be used as described
in the "Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for Analysis of
Pollutants," 38 F.R. 28758, October 16, 1973. If laboratory
personnel deviate from standard procedures, they should be prepared
to justify their decision during cross-examination.
9. Laboratory personnel are responsible for the care and custody of
the sample once it is handed over to them and should be prepared
to testify that the sample was in their possession and view or
secured in the laboratory at all times from the moment it was
received from the custodian until the tests were run.
10. Once the sample testing is completed, the unused portion of the
sample together with all identifying tags and laboratory records,
should be returned to the custodian. The returned tagged sample
will be retained in the sample room until it is required for trial.
Strip charts and other documentation of work will also be turned
over to the custodian.
130 of 140
-------
Chain of Custody Procedures (Continued)
11. Samples, tags and laboratory records of tests may be destroyed
only upon the order of the laboratory director, who will first
confer with the Chief, Enforcement Specialist Office, to make
certain that the information is no longer required or the samples
have deteriorated.
131 of 140
-------
EXHIBIT I
EPA, NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
Station No.
Dato
Time
Soquonco No.
Station Location
firal-i
Comjv
.BOD
.Solids
.COD
.Nutnonts
X
Samplers.
_Melals
_Oi! and Greaso
_D.O.
.Bad.
_Ollior
Romarta / Preservative):
Front
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
NATIONAL FNFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER.
BUILDING 53, BOX 25227, DENVER FEDERAL CENTER
DENVER, COLORADO 80225
Back
132 of 140
-------
EXHIBIT II
FOR
SURVEY, PHASE.
DATE
rYPE OF SAMPLE.
ANALYSES REQUIRED
STATION
NUMBER
STATION DESCRIPTION
ULI
ZD
o
>
<
i—
o
UJ
¦z
<
>—
¦Z
o
u
gl
>-
PRESERVATIVE
go
OJ
—¦ o
—h
O
REMARKS
-------
31
Samplers:
FIELD DATA RECORD
STATION
NUMBER
DATE
TIME
TEMPERATURE
°C
CONDUCTIVITY
£tmhos/cm
pH
S.U.
DO.
mg/1
Goge H».
or Flow
Fl. or CFS
1
-------
EXHIBIT IV
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office Of Enforcement
NATIONAL ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER
Building 53, Box 25227, D'.'iwer Federal Center
Denver, Colorado 80225
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD
SURVEY
SAMPLERS: (Signofure/
STATION
NUMBER
STATION LOCATION
DATE
TIME
SAMPLE 1YPE
SEO
NO
NO OF
CONTAINERS
ANALYSIS
REQUIRED
Wo'er
Aa
Comp
Giab
Relinquished by: fSignafu/e^
Relinquished by: (Signaimc)
Received by: (signoiurej
Received by: (S.gnotu,cj
Dalc/Ti
mc
Date/Time
Relinquished by: (Sigrio/meJ
Received by: (Signature)
Date/Time
Relinquished by: (SignofureJ
Received by Mobile Laboratory for field
analysis. (Signo/urci
Dale/Time
Dispatched by: (Signature)
Date/Time
Received for Laboratory by:
Date/Tinu
Method of Shipment.
Distribution' Ong — Accompany Shipment
I Copy—Survey Coordinator Field Files
135 of 140
r.pn .
-------
APPENDIX C
Dye Dilution Technique for Flow Measurement
136 of 140
-------
DYE DILUTION TECHNIQUE FOR FLOW MEASUREMENT
Flow determinations were made using dye dilution with fluorometric
detection technique. In this procedure, a dye of known concentration is
injected at constant rate upstream of the sample site, an adequate
distance to insure mixing. Samples are collected and the dye concen-
tration is determined by a fluorometer. Knowing the dye injection rate,
initial dye concentration, and concentration after the dye has mixed
with the wastewater flow, the flow can be calculated.
The G. K. Turner Model III fluorometer was used. Calibration of
the fluorometer was accomplished daily using dye standards prepared in
the NEIC laboratory. Rhodamine WT dye was used due to its low sorptive
tendency and stability under varying pH conditions.
Background investigations of all stations were conducted to deter-
mine if any substances in the waste stream would fluoresce in the range
that could induce errors in flow determinations. Background samples
were taken each time samples for flow determination were collected. The
fluorescence measured on background samples was subtracted from the
fluorescence measured on the flow samples.
Special precautions taken to insure against interference in flow
measurements consisted of: 1) cuvettes triple rinsed with distilled
water between each sample; 2) cuvettes cleaned daily with solvent; 3)
cuvettes filled with distilled water and fluorescence measured twice
daily to insure against contamination from operator handling; 4) fluoro-
meter checked for "0" reference between each reading and after use,
using "0" reference blank; 5) all readings were taken on upward movement
of indicator to eliminate any error due to gear "slop;" and 6) rubber
gloves were worn when handling raw dye to avoid contamination during
fluorometer operation.
137 of
-------
APPENDIX D
Analytical Procedures and Quality Control
-------
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES AND QUALITY CONTROL
Samples collected during this survey were analyzed, where appro-
priate, according to procedures approved by EPA for the monitoring of
industrial effluents.* The analytical procedures for characterizing
trace organic chemical pollutants are described below. The remaining
procedures are listed in the following table.
Parameter
Method
Reference
A1, Cr, Fe, Atomic absorption
Pb, Sn, Zn, Cu
TSS
Cyanide
Phenol
Gravimetric
Distillation,
colorimetric
Automated colori-
metric
Ammonia Automated phenate
Oil and grease Freon extraction
BOD
Hexavalent
chromium
Serial dilution
(Winkler-Azide)
Colorimetric
EPA Methods for Chemical
Analyses of Water and
Wastewater, 1971, p 83
ibid., p 278
ibid., page 41
EPA Methods for Chemical
Analyses of Water and
Wastes, 1974, p 243
ibid., page 168
Standard Methods, 13th Ed.,
p 254
ibid., page 489
ibid., page 429
* Federal Register3 Vol. 40, do. Ills June 3, 1975
139 of 140
-------
Samples for organic chemical pollutant analysis were collected in
clean, solvent-rinsed one-gallon glass containers. These samples were
air-freighted to Denver and extracted with methylene chloride. The
extract was dried with anhydrous sodium sulfate, concentrated, exchanged
into acetone and analyzed by hydrogen flame ionization gas chromatography.
Those samples that showed adequate response were set aside for character-
ization by combined gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The
GC/MS analyses were carried out with a Finnigan Model 1015 Quadropole
Mass Spectrometer and a Systems Industries Model 150 computerized data
system. Mass spectra were compared to data files in the NIH Computer
System and also to listing in the Eight Peak Index of Mass Spectra,
Second Edition, 1974, compiled by the Mass Spectrometry Data Center.
All 'identifications are considered preliminary until authentic standards
of the suspected chemical compounds can be obtained and analyzed under
similar conditions to match the mass spectrum and gas chromatographic
retention time. This procedure does not detect highly volatile organic
chemical pollutants since their presence is masked by the extraction
solvent.
Reliability of the analytical results was documented through an
active Analytical Quality Control Program. As part of this program,
replicate analyses were normally performed with every tenth sample to
ascertain the reproducibility of the results. In addition, where appropriate,
every tenth sample was spiked with a known amount of the constituents to
'be measured and reanalyzed to determine the percent recovery. These
results were evaluated in regard to past AQC data on the precision,
accuracy and detection limits of each test. On the basis of these
findings, all analytical results reported for the survey were found to
be acceptable with respect to the precision and accuracy control of this
1aboratory.
140 of 140
------- |