From: Thomas Finseth

To: Wang, Daisy

Date: 4/9/2013 4:06 PM

Subject: Fwd: Re: Draft Hatfield's Ferry and Fort Martin Site Visit Notes

>>> <jlapcev@firstenergycorp.com> 4/2/2013 12:55 PM >>>

TJ,

Yes, as stated in my e

- mail below, we do not consider the "notes" to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)." I believe the

disclaimer at the bottom of the string of e

- mails was likely attached to your original e

- mail and was more to the point of erra nt

e

- mails and not to a claim that the material was CBI. I trust this satisfies your concerns. Let me know if you need anything further.

Joe Lapcevic

Senior Scientist

(724) 838

– 6099 work

(234) 678

– 2385 fax

FirstEnergyCorp.

800 Cabin Hill Drive

Greensburg, PA 15601

- 1689

From: "Thomas Finseth" <Thomas.Finseth@erg.com>

To: <jlapcev@firstenergycorp.com>

Date: 03/27/2013 01:13 PM

Subject: Re: Draft Hatfield's Ferry and Fort Martin Site Visit Notes

Joe,

We are in the process of finalizing our documentation for the proposed ELG and we came across the email below,

which we want to include in the docket as documentation of your comments on the site visit notes. Your email

states that the site visit notes ar e not CBI; however, the email itself contains the disclaimer at the bottom stating

that the email contains confidential information. Therefore, could you please confirm whether your email below

(and also your email in response to this question) actually c ontain confidential information?

Thank you for you time.

TJ Finseth

>>> <jlapcev@firstenergycorp.com> 11/5/2012 5:32 PM >>>

TJ,

We have reviewed the subject notes and except for the following comments

the notes accurately reflect conditions at the time of the site visits. As

to whether these notes need to be classified as Confidential Business

Information (CBI), since all of the information contained in the notes was

submitted at one time or another to the state permitting authorities, the

notes do not need to be treated as CBI.

Fort Martin Site Visit

- February 4, 2010

* Page 1

- Plant Overview

- Allegheny Energy Supply's ownership of Fort Martin Power Station

was transferred over to Monongahela Power Company as part of

the funding for FGD construction. I don't have the exact date, but

believe that transfer occurred prior to your February 2010 site visit.

* Page 2 last bullet

- EPA Region III's letter required testing for sulfates, not

sulfites as listed in the notes.

* Page 4 Highlighted question

- The cutoff chloride concentration for determining where to send

the primary hydrocyclone overflow is 10,000

- mg/L. Below 10,000

- ppmoverflow goes to reclaim tank, greater than 10,000

- ppm chloride level is

sent to the secondary hydrocyclone.

* Page 6 Highlighted question

- The design mercury level would be the level in Table 2

- Professional Guarantees for the FGD Wastewater Treatment System. The

permitted mercury limit is imposed at the combined wastewater outfall 002

(FGD

- WWTP and Station's other "low volume wastewater"

treatment system). The limits are 0.0244 μ g/L monthly average and 0.049 μ

g/L daily maximum, however, these limits where stayed pending the

outcome of ou r permit appeal and have not yet been resolved.

Hatfield's Ferry Site Visit

- February 3, 2010

* Page 2

- Plant Overview

- There is only one constructed wetland treatment system that

contains various treatment cells for differing purposes.

* Pag e 2

- FGD System

- As clarification, the FGD system is capable of recycling up to

50

- percent of the wastewater flows from Hatfield's wastewater treatment

lagoon system.

* Highlighted question on page 3

- Filtrate from the vacuum filters i s transferred to the reclaim

tank.

* Page 5

- second bullet

- As clarification, the average daily discharge flow from the

FGD

- WWTP (IMP

- 306) is typically about 120

- gpm.

* Page 5

- last bullet

- Outfall 006 is also monitored for total dissolved solids (TDS)

and has limits at Outfall 006 for oil & grease, mercury, and TDS. These

parameters were omitted from the notes.

Please don't hesitate to call if you have any questions regarding t his

information.

Thanks,

Joe Lapcevic

Note new e

- mail address: jlapcev@firstenergycorp.com

Senior Scientist

(724) 838

– 6099 work

(234) 678

– 2385 fax

FirstEnergyCorp.

800 Cabin Hill Drive

Greensburg, PA 15601

- 1689

From: "Thomas Finseth" <Thomas.F inseth@erg.com>

To: <jlapcev@firstenergycorp.com>

Cc: <alicea.jezebele@epa.gov>, <Jordan.Ronald@epamail.epa.gov>,

"Deborah Bartram" <Deborah.Bartram@erg.com>, <wcannon@firstenergycorp.com>

Date: 10/05/2012 12:22 PM

Subject: Draft Hatfield 's Ferry and Fort Martin Site Visit Notes

Joe,

Representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Eastern

Research Group (contractor to EPA) visited Allegheny Energy's Hatfield'sFerry and Fort Martin Steam Electric Plants on February 3 and 4, 2010,

respectively, to gather information for the Agency's rulemaking and

identify potential sampling points for its sampling program. The draft

site visit notes and associated attachments summarizing the processes

observed and the information collected during the site visits are being

shipped to you via FedEx for delivery Monday morning. Please review these

documents paying particular attention to accuracy and any potential

confidential business information (CBI) concerns. Duri ng the site visits,

some of the information was flagged as potential CBI; therefore, when

reviewing the notes, please identify the specific CBI, if any, contained

within the notes.

Please note that there are a few outstanding questions contained withi n

the notes. Specific questions are embedded and highlighted in the text of

the draft site visit notes. Following receipt of your comments, EPA will

finalize the notes for inclusion in the record associated with the

proposed revisions to the steam elec tric effluent guidelines.

EPA requests that you provide comments on the draft site visit notes by

October 29, 2012. If comments are not received by this date, EPA will

assume that the notes are accurate and that there are no CBI concerns

regarding the information included in the notes. You may send your

comments to Jezebele Alicea via e

- mail (if not CBI) at

alicea.jezebele@epa.gov, or by mail to:

Regular Mail

Jezebele Alicea

Engineering & Analysis Division (4303T)

1200 Pennsylvania Ave ., NW

Washington, DC 20460

Federal Express

Jezebele Alicea

Engineering & Analysis Division

EPA West/Connecting Wing (Rm 6231P)

1301 Constitution Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20004

Please feel free to contact Jezebele at (202) 566

- 1755 if you have any

questio ns about the draft site visit notes.

Sincerely,

TJ Finseth

ERG

14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200

Chantilly, VA 20151

(703) 633

- 1698 (phone)

(703) 263

- 7479 (fax)

thomas.finseth@erg.com

----------------------------------------- The information contained in this message is intended only for the

personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If

the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an

agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipien t, youare hereby notified that you have received this document in error

and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of

this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify us immediately, an d delete

the original message.