Results of the April 12-13, 2011 Sulfuric Acid 

Mist and Sulfur Dioxide Performance Tests 

at the United Taconite, LLC Facility Located 

in Forbes, Minnesota 

Line 2 Waste Gas Stack 2A (SV048) 

Line 2 Waste Gas Stack 2B (SV049) 

MPCA AQD File No. 869A 

Air Emissions Permit No. 13700113-005 

Barr Project No. 23/69-1092.06 

Prepared for 

United Taconite, LLC 

Forbes, Minnesota

April 2011
i 

Results of the April 12-13, 2011 Sulfuric Acid Mist and Sulfur Dioxide 

Performance Tests at the United Taconite, LLC Facility Located in 

Forbes, Minnesota 

Table of Contents 

Report Certification...................................................................................................................................... iii

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... v

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1

Results Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 2

Process Description ....................................................................................................................................... 3

Stack Test Procedures and Methods ............................................................................................................. 4

Tables 

Figures 

Appendices 
23691092.06 

ii 

List of Tables 

Table 1 EPA Method 8 Test Results – Line 2 Waste Gas Stack – 2A (SV048)-Gas 

Table 2 EPA Method 8 Test Results – Line 2 Waste Gas Stack – 2B (SV049)-Gas 

Table 3 EPA Method 8 Test Results – Line 2 Waste Gas Stack – 2A (SV048)-Solid Fuel 

Table 4 EPA Method 8 Test Results – Line 2 Waste Gas Stack – 2B (SV049)-Solid Fuel 

Table 5 Derivation of SAM to SO2 Ratios – Line 2 (SV048 and SV049) 

 

List of Figures 

Figure 1 Test Port Locations – Line 2A Waste Gas Stack (SV048, EU042) 

Figure 2 Traverse Point Location – Line 2A Waste Gas Stack (SV048, EU042) 

Figure 3 Test Port Locations – Line 2B Waste Gas Stack (SV049, EU042) 

Figure 4 Traverse Point Location – Line 2B Waste Gas Stack (SV049, EU042) 

List of Appendices 

Appendix A Report Calculations and Nomenclature 

Appendix B Field Data Sheets 

Appendix C Laboratory Reports and Sample Chain of Custody 

Appendix D Calibration Data 

Appendix E Cylinder Gas Certifications 

Appendix F Process Operating Data 

Appendix G Stack Test Plan 

Appendix H Project Participants and Contact Information 


23691092.06 

v 

Executive Summary 

Barr Engineering Company conducted sulfuric acid mist (SAM) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions 

performance tests on the Line 2 kiln (Emission Unit 042) 2A (SV048) and 2B (SV049) waste gas stacks 

at the United Taconite, LLC taconite production facility located in Forbes, Minnesota. The two waste 

gas stacks were tested simultaneously on April 12, 2011 while the Line 2 kiln was burning natural gas 

and again on April 13, 2011 while furnace was firing on solid fuel. 

The purposes of these tests were to determine the ratio of SAM to SO2 emissions to use with Line 2 SO2

continuous emissions monitors (CEM) data to demonstrate ongoing compliance with 30 day rolling 

average SAM limit and to verify the ratio of SAM to SO2 used in the permit application. The testing 

was completed prior to commencement of construction for modifications to Line 1 furnace (EU040) to 

burn solid fuel as authorized by Air Emission Permit No. 13700113-005. Results of the tests performed

are summarized in the Executive Summary Table. 

 
23691092.06 

vi 

Executive Summary Tables 

EPA Method 8 - Gas Condition Average Test Results 

Source Line 2 WGS – 2A Line 2 WGS – 2B 

Stack Vent No. SV048 SV049 

Emission Unit EU042 

Test Date 4/12/2011 

Volumetric Airflow Rate, DSCFM 305,000 309,000 

Concentration 

Sulfuric Acid Mist, lb/dscf 2.3 x 10-7 2.8 x 10-7

Sulfur Dioxide, lb/dscf 1.2 x 10-6 6.8 x10-6

Emission Rates 

Sulfuric Acid Mist, lb/hr 4.2 5.1 

Sulfur Dioxide, lb/hr 21.9 12.6 

Sulfuric Acid Mist Combined Emissions, lb/hr 9.3 

Sulfur Dioxide Combined Emissions, lb/hr 34.5 

Ratio Sulfuric Acid Mist : Sulfur Dioxide 0.300 

EPA Method 8 – Solid Fuel Condition Average Test Results 

Source Line 2 WGS – 2A Line 2 WGS – 2B 

Stack Vent No. SV048 SV049 

Emission Unit EU042 

Test Date 4/13/2011 

Volumetric Airflow Rate, DSCFM 312,000 317,000 

Concentration 

Sulfuric Acid Mist, lb/dscf 4.9 x 10-7 6.4 x 10-7

Sulfur Dioxide, lb/dscf 2.1 x 10-5 1.8 x 10-5

Emission Rate 

Sulfuric Acid Mist, lb/hr 9.1 12.2 

Sulfur Dioxide, lb/hr 391 342 

Sulfuric Acid Mist Combined Emissions, lb/hr 21.3 

Sulfur Dioxide Combined Emissions, lb/hr 734 

Ratio Sulfuric Acid Mist : Sulfur Dioxide 0.029 
23691092 

1 

Introduction 

Barr Engineering Company conducted sulfuric acid mist (SAM) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions 

performance tests at the Line 2 kiln (Emission Unit 042) 2A (SV048) and 2B (SV049) waste gas stacks 

at the United Taconite, LLC (UTAC) taconite production facility located in Forbes, Minnesota. The 

two waste gas stacks were tested simultaneously on April 12, 2011 while kiln was burning natural gas 

and again on April 13, 2011 while the kiln was firing on solid fuel. The purposes of these tests were to 

determine the ratio of SAM to SO2 emissions to use with Line 2 SO2 continuous emissions monitors 

(CEM) data to demonstrate ongoing compliance with 30 day rolling average SAM limit and to verify 

the ratio of SAM to SO2 used in the permit application. The testing was completed prior to 

commencement of construction for modifications to Line 1 furnace (EU040) to burn solid fuel as 

authorized by Air Emission Permit No. 13700113-005. 

A test plan dated December 22, 2010 was submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

(MPCA) prior to testing. Testing was initially scheduled for January 12, 2011. The testing was 

delayed several times due to problems with achieving maximum solid fuel feed to the furnace. The 

testing was discussed with Andy Place of the MPCA several times leading up to the actual testing 

performed. A test plan approval letter was provided January 24, 2011 by Andrew Place. Subsequent 

modifications to the testing approach were discussed with Andy Place and are documented in e-mail 

correspondence provided in Appendix G. Copies of the original test plan and approval form are also 

provided in Appendix G. 

Dan Koschak led the Barr test teams. Candice Maxwell and Lisa Weidemann of UTAC provided 

testing coordination. The tests were not witnessed by a representative of the MPCA. A list of project 

participants is provided in Appendix H. 

The testing consisted of three one-hour test runs at each stack for determination of SAM and SO2

concentrations and emission rates by EPA Method 8. The tests were performed simultaneously for each 

fuel condition at the Line 2 (EU042) waste gas stacks (2A SV048 and 2B SV049) as required in the 

permit. Test results are located in the following section. Field data along with other supporting 

documentation are located in the appendices. 
23691092 

2 

Results Summary 

Tables 1 and 2 present the results of the SAM and SO2 tests for Line 2 waste gas stack 2A (SV048) and 

2B (SV049), respectively. These tests were conducted on April 12 while the kiln was firing on 100 

percent natural gas. The total emission rate from Emission Unit 042 of SAM is 9.3 pounds per hour 

(lb/hr) and the SO2 emission rate is 34.5 lb/hr. 

Tables 3 and 4 present the results of the SAM and SO2 tests for Line 2 waste gas stack 2A (SV048) and 

2B (SV049), respectively. These tests were conducted on April 13 while the kiln was firing on 100 

percent solid fuel. The total emission rate from Emission Unit 042 of SAM is 21.3 lb/hr and the SO2

emission rate is 734 lb/hr. 

Table 5 presents a summary of the emission unit combined SAM and SO2 emissions and calculated 

ratios. The SAM to SO2 ratio while firing on natural gas is 0.300. The ratio of SAM to SO2 while 

firing on solid fuel is 0.029. Table 5 also includes calculated data for verification of ratios used in the 

permit application. 

No testing difficulties or process delays were noted during the performance tests. 

The tests were performed at normal production rates while the Line 2 furnace was firing natural gas and 

solid fuel. The process operating data are summarized in Tables 1-4 and the detailed process data are

located in Appendix F along with MPCA required process operating data forms and solid fuel analysis 

data. Solid fuel samples were collected during each test run on April 13, 2011 by UTAC and analyzed 

by Twin Ports Testing. Results of the fuel analysis are located in Appendix F- Process Operating Data. 
23691092 

3 

Process Description 

Line 2A and B Waste Gas Stacks (EU042, SV048, SV049) 

The Line 2 pellet induration is an Allis Chalmers rotary kiln (serial number B-41301), which is 130 feet 

in length with a 21’ 6” diameter. The pellets pass through the kiln where they are heated to 

approximately 2400 degrees Fahrenheit. The heated gases from the kiln are mixed with recouped hot 

air from the pellet cooler. This air is used to dry the green pellets prior to the kiln in the preheat zones. 

The waste gases are divided into two sides which are served by identical Ducon venturi scrubbers (Size

825/222 Type VVO), Side A (CE050, SV048) and Side B (CE049, SV049). 

 
23691092 

4 

Stack Test Procedures and Methods 

Testing was performed from ports meeting EPA Method 1 criteria. The Method 1 criteria are listed in 

the table below. Sample port location and traverse point details are provided in Figures 1-4. 

Location SV# Distance to 

upstream 

Disturbance, 

(diameters) 

Distance to 

downstream 

Disturbance, 

(diameters) 

Number of 

ports 

Number of 

Points 

SV048 ~7.9 2.1 4 12 

SV049 ~7.9 2.1 4 12 

Volumetric airflow determinations were performed in accordance with EPA Method 2 using an S type 

pitot tube. Airflows were determined in conjunction with the EPA Method 8 test. 

Oxygen and carbon dioxide compositions of the Line 2 kiln 2A and 2B waste gas stacks were 

determined by modified EPA Method 3A. An integrated sample of dry stack gas was collected in a 

Tedlar bag through the duration of each test run. The samples were analyzed using a Servomex Model 

1440 oxygen and carbon dioxide analyzer calibrated with EPA Protocol gases. Copies of calibration 

gas certifications are located in Appendix E. 

Stack gas moisture content was determined by the performance of EPA Method 4, in conjunction with 

the EPA Method 8 sample trains. 

SAM and SO2 concentrations were determined with EPA Method 8. The sample train configuration, 

sample and sample recovery was completed per the method. The hydrogen peroxide reagent was 

prepared fresh daily on-site. Sample trains were purged with ambient air after the test runs. Samples 

were analyzed by Enthalpy Analytical using the titration method. A copy of the sample chain of 

custody and laboratory report is located in Appendix C. 

EPA Methods 1-4 and 8 can be found in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. 
Tables
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 1

EPA METHOD 8 TEST RESULTS

2A Waste Gas Stack (SV048) - Gas

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average

Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H2O 11.4 10.9 10.9 11.1

Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 2,412 2,412 2,413 2,412

Test Date 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 ---

Test Period 858 - 1004 1148 - 1253 1405 - 1509 ---

Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60

Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 136 137 138 137

Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 12.1 12.7 13.1 12.6

EPA Method 8 Laboratory Results, μg

SO3

/SO4 3,600 2,870 3,270 3,247

SO2 15,800 15,400 20,000 17,067

Air Flow Rate

acfm 419,000 413,000 414,000 415,000

scfm 353,000 348,000 348,000 350,000

dscfm 310,000 304,000 302,000 305,000

Sample Volume

acf 32.58 33.36 33.62 33.19

dscf 31.65 31.52 31.22 31.46

Isokinetic Variation, % 98.7 100.2 99.9 99.6

Concentration, lb/dscf

SO3/SO4 2.5E-07 2.0E-07 2.3E-07 2.3E-07

SO2 1.1E-06 1.1E-06 1.4E-06 1.2E-06

Emissions Rate, lb/hr

SO3

/SO4 4.7 3.7 4.2 4.2

SO2 20.5 19.7 25.6 21.9

Process Rates

Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 630 641 643 638

Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 507 510 514 510
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 2

EPA METHOD 8 TEST RESULTS

2B Waste Gas Stack (SV049) - Gas

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average

Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H2O 10.2 9.7 9.7 9.9

Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 2,499 2,496 2,498 2,498

Test Date 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 ---

Test Period 856 - 1006 1148 - 1255 1405 - 1511 ---

Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60

Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 129 135 137 134

Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 13.5 13.2 14.0 13.6

EPA Method 8 Laboratory Results, μg

SO3

/SO4 4,310 3,530 4,450 4,097

SO2 9,280 9,570 11,400 10,083

Air Flow Rate

acfm 427,000 425,000 414,000 422,000

scfm 364,000 359,000 349,000 357,000

dscfm 315,000 312,000 300,000 309,000

Sample Volume

acf 34.45 34.10 33.61 34.05

dscf 33.43 32.81 31.92 32.72

Isokinetic Variation, % 101.6 100.8 101.9 101.5

Concentration, lb/dscf

SO3/SO4 2.8E-07 2.4E-07 3.1E-07 2.8E-07

SO2 6.1E-07 6.4E-07 7.9E-07 6.8E-07

Emissions Rate, lb/hr

SO3

/SO4 5.4 4.4 5.5 5.1

SO2 11.6 12.0 14.2 12.6

Ratio of Sulfuric Acid Mist to SO2, % 46 37 39 41

Process Rates

Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 630 640 643 638

Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 507 510 514 510
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 3

EPA METHOD 8 TEST RESULTS

2A Waste Gas Stack (SV048) - Solid Fuel

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average

Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H2O 11.5 11.5 11.3 11.4

Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 2,412 2,411 2,412 2,412

Test Date 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 ---

Test Period 836 - 941 1034 - 1141 1240 - 1344 ---

Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60

Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 135 135 135 135

Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 12.3 12.2 12.5 12.3

EPA Method 8 Laboratory Results, μg

SO3

/SO4 7,390 7,260 6,310 6,987

SO2 303,000 312,000 287,000 300,667

Air Flow Rate

acfm 419,000 421,000 419,000 420,000

scfm 355,000 357,000 355,000 356,000

dscfm 311,000 313,000 311,000 312,000

Sample Volume

acf 33.88 34.37 33.36 33.87

dscf 31.75 32.10 31.10 31.65

Isokinetic Variation, % 98.8 99.2 96.9 98.3

Concentration, lb/dscf

SO3/SO4 5.1E-07 5.0E-07 4.5E-07 4.9E-07

SO2 2.1E-05 2.1E-05 2.0E-05 2.1E-05

Emissions Rate, lb/hr

SO3

/SO4 9.6 9.4 8.3 9.1

SO2 393 403 379 391

Ratio of Sulfuric Acid Mist to SO2, % 2.4 2.3 2.2 2.3

Process Rates

Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 646 646 643 645

Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 520 520 512 517
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 4

EPA METHOD 8 TEST RESULTS

2B Waste Gas Stack (SV049) - Solid Fuel

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average

Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H2O 10.3 10.3 10.0 10.2

Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 2,497 2,496 2,499 2,497

Test Date 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 ---

Test Period 836 - 943 1034 - 1141 1240 - 1346 ---

Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60

Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 126 124 125 125

Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 11.8 13.1 12.0 12.3

EPA Method 8 Laboratory Results, μg

SO3

/SO4 9,630 10,400 8,940 9,657

SO2 272,000 283,000 256,000 270,333

Air Flow Rate

acfm 420,000 415,000 422,000 419,000

scfm 362,000 358,000 364,000 361,000

dscfm 319,000 311,000 320,000 317,000

Sample Volume

acf 33.67 33.87 33.90 33.81

dscf 33.05 33.09 33.10 33.08

Isokinetic Variation, % 99.2 101.8 99.0 100.0

Concentration, lb/dscf

SO3/SO4 6.4E-07 6.9E-07 6.0E-07 6.4E-07

SO2 1.8E-05 1.9E-05 1.7E-05 1.8E-05

Emissions Rate, lb/hr

SO3

/SO4 12.3 12.9 11.4 12.2

SO2 347 352 328 342

Ratio of Sulfuric Acid Mist to SO2, % 3.5 3.7 3.5 3.6

Process Rates

Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 646 646 643 645

Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 520 520 512 517
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Parameter firing solid fuel firing natural gas

Fired Pellet Production Rate, LT pellets/hr 517 510

SAM Emission Rate, lb SAM/hr 21.3 9.3

SO2

 Emission Rate 734 34.5

Ratio of SAM:SO2 Emission Rates 0.029 0.300

S in SAM, lb S/hr 6.96 3.03

S in SO2, lb S/hr 367 17.3

Total S from ore and solid fuel, lb S/hr 374

S in SAM in ore per unit production, lb S/LT pellets 0.0059

S in SO2

 in ore per unit production, lb S/LT pellets 0.034

S in SAM from ore, lb S/hr 3.07

S in SO2

 from ore, lb S/hr 17.5

S in SAM from solid fuel, lb S/hr 3.89

S in SO2 from solid fuel, lb S/hr 349

S from solid fuel, lb S/hr 353

% of S in solid fuel that converts to SAM 1.1%

% of S in solid fuel that converts to SO2 98.9%

Ratio of S in solid fuel that converts to SO2

 vs SAM 98.9 : 1.1

TABLE 5

Assume all S produced while firing 100 % natural gas comes from the ore. This should relate to the 

pellet production rate:

Multiply the lb S/LT pellets from natural gas (i.e., a measure of S from the ore) by the LT pellets/hr when 

firing solid fuel:

Line 2 (SV048 and SV049)

DERIVATION OF SAM TO SO2 RATIOS
Figures




Appendices
Appendix A

Report Calculations and Nomenclature
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 27, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Composition, Moisture Content, and sulfuric acid mist

EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 8

TEST 1

2A WGS (SV048)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test Date - - 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 4/12/2011

Test Period - - 858 - 1004 1148 - 1253 1405 - 1509

Number of Sample Ports - - 4 4 4

Number of Traverse Points - - 12 12 12

Duct Dimensions (diameter or Length x Width) D, L X W inches 147.00 147.00 147.00

Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.52 28.52 28.52

Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -0.38 -0.38 -0.38

Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 136 137 138

Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 32.58 33.36 33.62

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 1.0046 1.0046 1.0046

Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 0.94 0.94 0.95

Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 62 76 86

Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840

Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 0.946 0.933 0.932

Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 88 92 91

Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 5 6 10

Orsat Results, Dry Basis

Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 1.0 1.0 1.0

Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.7 18.6 18.6

Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 80.3 80.4 80.4

Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.193 0.193 0.193

Run Time theta min 60 60 60

Method 8 Lab Results

SO3/SO4 M-SO3/SO4 ug 3,600 2,870 3,270

SO2 M-SO2 ug 15,800 15,400 20,000

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 596 597 598

Tsr = Tsf + 460

Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.49 28.49 28.49

Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6

Duct Area A Sq. ft 117.859 117.859 117.859

A = L x W/144

Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 31.65 31.52 31.22

Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr)

Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 12.10 12.65 13.10

MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 28.91 28.90 28.90

Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) 

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.59 27.52 27.48

Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100)

Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 59.19 58.47 58.50

Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5)

Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 418,547 413,451 413,658

Qa = 60 x Vs x A

Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 352,850 348,311 348,048

Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92)

Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 310,172 304,237 302,442

Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92)

Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000203 0.000203 0.000203

An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144)

Isokinetic Variation I % 98.7 100.2 99.9

I = (0.0945xTsrxVm)/(PsxVsxAn x theta x(1-(MC/100)))

Method 8 Concentrations

SO3/SO4 lb/dscf = M-SO3/SO4 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO3/SO4) lb/dscf 2.5E-07 2.0E-07 2.3E-07

SO2 lb/dscf = M-SO2 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO2) lb/dscf 1.1E-06 1.1E-06 1.4E-06

SO3/SO4 emission Rate

SO3/SO4 Edry = Cs(SO3/SO4) x Qd x 60 SO3/SO4 Edry lb/hr 4.7 3.7 4.2

SO2 Emission Rate

Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch

SO2 Edry = Cs(SO2) x Qd x 60 SO2 Edry lb/hr 20.5 19.7 25.6

Sulfuric Acid Mist percent of Total SO2 emissions

Fraction sulfuric acid mist= (SO3/SO4 Edry)/(SO2 Edry) x 100 Fraction H2SO4 % 22.8 18.6 16.4
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite LLC April 27, 2011

Forbes, MN

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Composition, Moisture Content, and sulfuric acid mist

EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 8

TEST 2

2B WGS (SV049)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test Date - - 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 4/12/2011

Test Period - - 856 - 1006 1148 - 1255 1405 - 1511

Number of Sample Ports - - 4 4 4

Number of Traverse Points - - 12 12 12

Duct Dimensions (diameter or Length x Width) D, L X W inches 146.25 146.25 146.25

Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.52 28.52 28.52

Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -0.56 -0.56 -0.56

Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 129 135 137

Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 34.45 34.10 33.61

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 1.0052 1.0052 1.0052

Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 1.11 1.07 1.02

Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 63 67 74

Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840

Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 0.978 0.970 0.941

Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 105 99 103

Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 6 7 7

Orsat Results, Dry Basis

Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 1.00 1.00 0.90

Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.7 18.7 18.7

Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 80.3 80.3 80.4

Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.193 0.193 0.193

Run Time theta min 60 60 60

Method 8 Lab Results

SO3/SO4 M-SO3/SO4 ug 4,310 3,530 4,450

SO2 M-SO2 ug 9,280 9,570 11,400

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 589 595 597

Tsr = Tsf + 460

Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.48 28.48 28.48

Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6

Duct Area A Sq. ft 116.659 116.659 116.659

A = L x W/144

Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 33.43 32.81 31.92

Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr)

Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 13.52 13.20 13.96

MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 28.91 28.91 28.89

Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) 

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.43 27.47 27.37

Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100)

Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 60.95 60.79 59.17

Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5)

Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 426,657 425,498 414,177

Qa = 60 x Vs x A

Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 364,305 359,146 348,517

Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92)

Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 315,057 311,735 299,865

Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92)

Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000203 0.000203 0.000203

An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144)

Isokinetic Variation I % 101.6 100.8 101.9

I = (0.0945xTsrxVm)/(PsxVsxAn x theta x(1-(MC/100)))

Method 8 Concentrations

SO3/SO4 lb/dscf = M-SO3/SO4 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO3/SO4) lb/dscf 2.8E-07 2.4E-07 3.1E-07

SO2 lb/dscf = M-SO2 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO2) lb/dscf 6.1E-07 6.4E-07 7.9E-07

SO3/SO4 emission Rate

SO3/SO4 Edry = Cs(SO3/SO4) x Qd x 60 SO3/SO4 Edry lb/hr 5.4 4.4 5.5

SO2 Emission Rate

Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch

SO2 Edry = Cs(SO2) x Qd x 60 SO2 Edry lb/hr 11.6 12.0 14.2

Sulfuric Acid Mist percent of Total SO2 emissions

Fraction sulfuric acid mist= (SO3/SO4 Edry)/(SO2 Edry) x 100 Fraction H2SO4 % 46.4 36.9 39.0
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 27, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Composition, Moisture Content, and sulfuric acid mist

EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 8

TEST 3

2A WGS (SV048)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test Date - - 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 4/13/2011

Test Period - - 836 - 941 1034 - 1141 1240 - 1344

Number of Sample Ports - - 4 4 4

Number of Traverse Points - - 12 12 12

Duct Dimensions (diameter or Length x Width) D, L X W inches 147.00 147.00 147.00

Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.60 28.60 28.60

Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -0.38 -0.38 -0.38

Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 135 135 135

Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 33.88 34.37 33.36

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 1.0046 1.0046 1.0046

Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 0.99 1.00 0.99

Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 82 84 85

Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840

Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 0.950 0.956 0.950

Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 90 86 86

Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 5 9 8

Orsat Results, Dry Basis

Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 1.7 1.8 1.7

Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.5 18.4 18.6

Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 79.8 79.8 79.7

Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.193 0.193 0.193

Run Time theta min 60 60 60

Method 8 Lab Results

SO3/SO4 M-SO3/SO4 ug 7,390 7,260 6,310

SO2 M-SO2 ug 303,000 312,000 287,000

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 595 595 595

Tsr = Tsf + 460

Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.57 28.57 28.57

Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6

Duct Area A Sq. ft 117.859 117.859 117.859

A = L x W/144

Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 31.75 32.10 31.10

Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr)

Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 12.35 12.23 12.46

MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 29.01 29.02 29.02

Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) 

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.65 27.68 27.64

Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100)

Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 59.22 59.57 59.22

Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5)

Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 418,809 421,229 418,794

Qa = 60 x Vs x A

Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 354,856 356,856 354,744

Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92)

Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 311,042 313,216 310,555

Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92)

Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000203 0.000203 0.000203

An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144)

Isokinetic Variation I % 98.8 99.2 96.9

I = (0.0945xTsrxVm)/(PsxVsxAn x theta x(1-(MC/100)))

Method 8 Concentrations

SO3/SO4 lb/dscf = M-SO3/SO4 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO3/SO4) lb/dscf 5.1E-07 5.0E-07 4.5E-07

SO2 lb/dscf = M-SO2 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO2) lb/dscf 2.1E-05 2.1E-05 2.0E-05

SO3/SO4 emission Rate

SO3/SO4 Edry = Cs(SO3/SO4) x Qd x 60 SO3/SO4 Edry lb/hr 9.6 9.4 8.3

SO2 Emission Rate

Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch

SO2 Edry = Cs(SO2) x Qd x 60 SO2 Edry lb/hr 392.7 402.7 379.1

Sulfuric Acid Mist percent of Total SO2 emissions

Fraction sulfuric acid mist= (SO3/SO4 Edry)/(SO2 Edry) x 100 Fraction H2SO4 % 2.4 2.3 2.2
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite LLC April 27, 2011

Forbes, MN

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Composition, Moisture Content, and sulfuric acid mist

EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 8

TEST 4

2B WGS (SV049)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test Date - - 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 4/13/2011

Test Period - - 836 - 943 1034 - 1141 1240 - 1346

Number of Sample Ports - - 4 4 4

Number of Traverse Points - - 12 12 12

Duct Dimensions (diameter or Length x Width) D, L X W inches 146.25 146.25 146.25

Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.60 28.60 28.60

Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -0.55 -0.55 -0.55

Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 126 124 125

Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 33.67 33.87 33.90

Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 1.0052 1.0052 1.0052

Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 1.07 1.08 1.10

Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 58 61 61

Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840

Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 0.972 0.959 0.977

Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 92 91 90

Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 2 15 6

Orsat Results, Dry Basis

Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 1.60 1.50 1.60

Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.6 18.6 18.6

Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 79.8 79.9 79.8

Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.193 0.193 0.193

Run Time theta min 60 60 60

Method 8 Lab Results

SO3/SO4 M-SO3/SO4 ug 9,630 10,400 8,940

SO2 M-SO2 ug 272,000 283,000 256,000

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 586 584 585

Tsr = Tsf + 460

Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.56 28.56 28.56

Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6

Duct Area A Sq. ft 116.659 116.659 116.659

A = L x W/144

Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 33.05 33.09 33.10

Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr)

Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 11.81 13.11 12.01

MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 29.00 28.98 29.00

Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) 

Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.70 27.54 27.68

Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100)

Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 60.06 59.33 60.36

Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5)

Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 420,413 415,301 422,479

Qa = 60 x Vs x A

Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 361,835 358,149 364,132

Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92)

Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 319,117 311,211 320,390

Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92)

Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000203 0.000203 0.000203

An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144)

Isokinetic Variation I % 99.2 101.8 99.0

I = (0.0945xTsrxVm)/(PsxVsxAn x theta x(1-(MC/100)))

Method 8 Concentrations

SO3/SO4 lb/dscf = M-SO3/SO4 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO3/SO4) lb/dscf 6.4E-07 6.9E-07 6.0E-07

SO2 lb/dscf = M-SO2 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO2) lb/dscf 1.8E-05 1.9E-05 1.7E-05

SO3/SO4 emission Rate

SO3/SO4 Edry = Cs(SO3/SO4) x Qd x 60 SO3/SO4 Edry lb/hr 12.3 12.9 11.4

SO2 Emission Rate

Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch

SO2 Edry = Cs(SO2) x Qd x 60 SO2 Edry lb/hr 347.4 352.1 327.8

Sulfuric Acid Mist percent of Total SO2 emissions

Fraction sulfuric acid mist= (SO3/SO4 Edry)/(SO2 Edry) x 100 Fraction H2SO4 % 3.5 3.7 3.5
Appendix B

Field Data Sheets


Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-1, , P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV048 2A Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0046 Bar.Press. 28.52 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/12/11 Test 1 Run # 1 Orifice H@ 1.794 Stat Press. -0.38 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 10 in. Hg

Operators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °°F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 0858 636.94

1 5.0 639.73 0.980 1.01 2.85 639.79 * 136 * * * 58 58 18.52 10.0 642.62 1.000 1.05 2.92 642.72 * 136 * * * 58 573 15.0 645.25 0.810 0.85 2.63 645.35 * 136 * * * 59 584 20.0 648.02 0.920 0.97 2.81 648.16 * 135 * * * 59 585 25.0 650.73 0.880 0.92 2.74 650.90 * 137 * * * 61 586 30.0 653.19 0.690 0.72 2.43 653.33 * 137 * * * 62 597 35.0 655.88 0.950 1.00 2.86 656.19 * 136 * * * 63 608 40.0 658.53 0.950 1.00 2.86 659.06 * 138 * * * 65 619 45.0 661.19 0.820 0.87 2.67 661.73 * 135 * * * 66 62

10 50.0 663.94 0.970 1.03 2.91 664.64 * 137 * * * 67 6311 55.0 666.80 0.940 1.00 2.87 667.51 * 137 * * * 68 6412 60.0 669.52 0.860 0.91 2.75 670.26 * 137 * * * 69 65

End Time 1004Run Time 60 Avg DH= 0.94 Avg Ts= 136.42 Avg Tm= 61.58Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. - Final wt., g 124 140 114 1057 1067.5

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1047 1063

Difference 24 40 14 10 4.5 92.5
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-1, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV048 2A Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0046 Bar.Press. 28.52 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/12/11 Test 1 Run # 2 Orifice H@ 1.794 Stat Press. -0.38 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 10 in. Hg

Operators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1148 678.19

1 5.0 681.02 0.970 1.04 2.95 681.14 * 137 * * * 73 73 18.32 10.0 684.00 0.940 1.01 2.91 684.05 * 137 * * * 74 733 15.0 686.84 0.870 0.94 2.80 686.86 * 137 * * * 75 734 20.0 689.65 0.910 0.98 2.87 689.73 * 137 * * * 75 735 25.0 692.33 0.880 0.95 2.82 692.55 * 137 * * * 77 746 30.0 694.94 0.770 0.83 2.65 695.20 * 137 * * * 78 757 35.0 697.72 0.870 0.94 2.82 698.02 * 137 * * * 78 758 40.0 700.51 0.850 0.92 2.79 700.80 * 137 * * * 79 759 45.0 703.04 0.720 0.78 2.57 703.37 * 137 * * * 79 76

10 50.0 705.88 0.920 1.00 2.91 706.28 * 136 * * * 80 7711 55.0 708.80 0.950 1.03 2.96 709.24 * 137 * * * 81 7712 60.0 711.55 0.820 0.89 2.75 711.99 * 136 * * * 81 78

End Time 1253Run Time 60 Avg DH= 0.94 Avg Ts= 136.83 Avg Tm= 76.21Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. - Final wt., g 124 140 118 1067 1073

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1057 1067.5

Difference 24 40 18 10 5.5 97.5
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-1, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV048 2A Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0046 Bar.Press. 28.52 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/12/11 Test 1 Run # 3 Orifice H@ 1.794 Stat Press. -0.38 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 10 in. Hg

Operators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1405 720.17

1 5.0 723.07 0.960 1.03 2.96 723.13 * 138 * * * 81 81 18.32 10.0 725.80 0.960 1.03 2.97 726.10 * 138 * * * 83 823 15.0 728.48 0.840 0.91 2.79 728.88 * 137 * * * 84 824 20.0 731.31 0.880 0.95 2.85 731.74 * 137 * * * 85 835 25.0 734.15 0.840 0.91 2.79 734.53 * 138 * * * 86 836 30.0 736.75 0.730 0.79 2.60 737.13 * 138 * * * 87 847 35.0 739.61 0.910 0.99 2.92 740.05 * 136 * * * 88 858 40.0 742.50 0.880 0.96 2.87 742.92 * 138 * * * 89 869 45.0 745.18 0.770 0.84 2.69 745.61 * 138 * * * 89 86

10 50.0 748.10 0.910 0.99 2.93 748.53 * 137 * * * 89 8611 55.0 751.02 0.970 1.06 3.02 751.55 * 138 * * * 90 8712 60.0 753.79 0.800 0.87 2.75 754.30 * 138 * * * 91 87

End Time 1509Run Time 60 Avg DH= 0.94 Avg Ts= 137.58 Avg Tm= 85.58Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. - Final wt., g 126 138 120 1073 1017.5

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1067 1008

Difference 26 38 20 6 9.5 99.5


Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-5, S-2, P-4 Pitot Tube No. 4063-6 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV049 2B Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0052 Bar.Press. 28.52 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/12/11 Test 2 Run # 1 Orifice H@ 1.9533 Stat Press. -0.56 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 6 in. Hg

Operators TAK, MJN Probe Length 4 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °°F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 0856 729.80

1 5.0 732.82 1.100 1.25 3.06 732.86 * 126 * * * 60 58 18.72 10.0 735.82 1.050 1.21 3.02 735.88 * 125 * * * 61 593 15.0 738.56 0.870 1.00 2.75 738.62 * 126 * * * 62 594 20.0 741.82 1.250 1.44 3.30 741.92 * 126 * * * 63 605 25.0 745.16 1.250 1.43 3.29 745.21 * 130 * * * 64 616 30.0 747.97 1.000 1.15 2.95 748.16 * 129 * * * 65 617 35.0 750.88 0.970 1.12 2.91 751.07 * 130 * * * 65 628 40.0 753.69 0.990 1.14 2.94 754.01 * 130 * * * 66 639 45.0 756.40 0.850 0.97 2.72 756.73 * 136 * * * 66 63

10 50.0 759.16 0.750 0.87 2.57 759.30 * 126 * * * 65 6311 55.0 761.75 0.800 0.92 2.64 761.94 * 132 * * * 66 6312 60.0 764.25 0.690 0.80 2.47 764.41 * 127 * * * 66 63

End Time 1006Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.11 Avg Ts= 128.58 Avg Tm= 62.67Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF 3" Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 132 143 118 1433 1067

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1421 1061

Difference 32 43 18 12 6 111
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-5, S-2, P-4 Pitot Tube No. 4063-6 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV049 2B Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0052 Bar.Press. 28.52 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/12/11 Test 2 Run # 2 Orifice H@ 1.9533 Stat Press. -0.56 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 5 in. Hg

Operators TAK, MJN Probe Length 4 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1148 775.40

1 5.0 778.30 0.990 1.13 2.93 778.33 * 126 * * * 65 66 18.92 10.0 781.30 1.100 1.24 3.07 781.40 * 135 * * * 65 653 15.0 784.20 0.900 1.01 2.78 784.17 * 135 * * * 65 654 20.0 787.40 1.250 1.41 3.27 787.44 * 135 * * * 66 655 25.0 790.58 1.200 1.34 3.20 790.64 * 139 * * * 67 656 30.0 793.48 0.970 1.09 2.88 793.52 * 138 * * * 68 667 35.0 796.30 0.940 1.08 2.87 796.39 * 126 * * * 68 668 40.0 799.10 0.990 1.11 2.91 799.30 * 139 * * * 69 679 45.0 801.80 0.820 0.92 2.66 801.96 * 139 * * * 70 67

10 50.0 804.50 0.820 0.93 2.66 804.62 * 136 * * * 70 6711 55.0 807.20 0.780 0.88 2.59 807.21 * 139 * * * 70 6812 60.0 809.50 0.630 0.71 2.33 809.55 * 138 * * * 71 68

End Time 1255Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.07 Avg Ts= 135.42 Avg Tm= 67.04Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 130 141 118 1443 1074

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1433 1067

Difference 30 41 18 10 7 106
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-5, S-2, P-4 Pitot Tube No. 4063-6 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV049 2B Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0052 Bar.Press. 28.52 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/12/11 Test 2 Run # 3 Orifice H@ 1.9533 Stat Press. -0.56 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 5 in. Hg

Operators TAK, MJN Probe Length 4 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1405 818.60

1 5.0 821.50 0.960 1.09 2.90 821.50 * 138 * * * 71 71 18.92 10.0 824.45 0.980 1.12 2.93 824.43 * 138 * * * 72 713 15.0 827.12 0.850 0.97 2.74 827.17 * 136 * * * 73 714 20.0 830.30 1.100 1.27 3.13 830.29 * 132 * * * 74 725 25.0 833.20 1.100 1.26 3.11 833.41 * 139 * * * 75 726 30.0 836.10 0.950 1.08 2.90 836.30 * 139 * * * 75 727 35.0 839.05 0.880 1.01 2.79 839.10 * 137 * * * 76 738 40.0 841.90 0.900 1.03 2.82 841.92 * 140 * * * 76 739 45.0 844.66 0.850 0.97 2.74 844.66 * 140 * * * 77 74

10 50.0 847.29 0.734 0.85 2.56 847.22 * 136 * * * 77 7411 55.0 849.80 0.730 0.84 2.55 849.77 * 139 * * * 78 7512 60.0 852.21 0.660 0.77 2.44 852.21 * 133 * * * 78 75

End Time 1511Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.02 Avg Ts= 137.25 Avg Tm= 73.96Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 129 148 118 1451 1081

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1443 1074

Difference 29 48 18 8 7 110


Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-1, , P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV048 2A Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0046 Bar.Press. 28.60 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. Hg

Date 04/13/11 Test 3 Run # 1 Orifice H@ 1.794 Stat Press. -0.38 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Operators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °°F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 0836 765.00

1 5.0 767.90 0.970 1.05 2.97 767.97 * 135 * * * 80 78 18.52 10.0 770.76 1.000 1.09 3.04 771.01 * 136 * * * 80 783 15.0 773.46 0.790 0.86 2.70 773.71 * 134 * * * 82 794 20.0 776.28 0.920 1.01 2.92 776.64 * 135 * * * 82 795 25.0 779.05 0.930 1.02 2.94 779.58 * 135 * * * 83 806 30.0 781.65 0.820 0.90 2.77 782.35 * 132 * * * 84 817 35.0 784.35 0.920 1.01 2.93 785.28 * 136 * * * 84 818 40.0 787.15 0.910 1.00 2.92 788.20 * 136 * * * 85 829 45.0 789.80 0.740 0.81 2.64 790.84 * 135 * * * 86 83

10 50.0 792.57 1.000 1.10 3.07 793.91 * 136 * * * 81 8311 55.0 796.03 1.000 1.10 3.05 796.96 * 136 * * * 87 8412 60.0 798.88 0.860 0.95 2.85 799.81 * 135 * * * 88 84

End Time 0941Run Time 60 Avg DH= 0.99 Avg Ts= 135.08 Avg Tm= 82.25Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 122 134 122 1024 1011

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1012 1006

Difference 22 34 22 12 5 95
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-1, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV048 2A Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0046 Bar.Press. 28.60 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. Hg

Date 04/13/11 Test 3 Run # 2 Orifice H@ 1.794 Stat Press. -0.38 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 12 in. Hg

Operators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1034 805.84

1 5.0 808.85 0.970 1.06 3.01 808.85 * 133 * * * 83 83 18.32 10.0 811.82 1.000 1.09 3.05 811.91 * 135 * * * 83 823 15.0 814.64 0.840 0.92 2.80 814.70 * 134 * * * 83 834 20.0 817.47 0.910 0.99 2.91 817.61 * 136 * * * 84 835 25.0 820.25 0.890 0.97 2.88 820.49 * 136 * * * 84 836 30.0 822.88 0.720 0.79 2.59 823.09 * 135 * * * 85 837 35.0 825.77 0.970 1.06 3.01 826.10 * 136 * * * 86 838 40.0 828.61 1.000 1.09 3.06 829.16 * 136 * * * 86 839 45.0 831.33 0.820 0.90 2.77 831.93 * 135 * * * 86 84

10 50.0 834.39 1.050 1.15 3.14 835.07 * 135 * * * 86 8411 55.0 837.31 1.000 1.09 3.06 838.13 * 136 * * * 86 8412 60.0 840.21 0.830 0.91 2.79 840.92 * 135 * * * 87 84

End Time 1141Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.00 Avg Ts= 135.17 Avg Tm= 84.08Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 122 139 116 1033 1073

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1024 1064

Difference 22 39 16 9 9 95
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-1, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV048 2A Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0046 Bar.Press. 28.60 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. Hg

Date 04/13/11 Test 3 Run # 3 Orifice H@ 1.794 Stat Press. -0.38 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 9 in. Hg

Operators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1240 848.86

1 5.0 851.82 0.970 1.07 3.04 851.90 * 134 * * * 82 82 18.32 10.0 854.79 1.000 1.09 3.05 854.95 * 136 * * * 83 833 15.0 857.60 0.870 0.96 2.86 857.81 * 132 * * * 83 824 20.0 860.48 0.960 1.05 2.99 860.80 * 135 * * * 84 835 25.0 863.38 0.910 1.00 2.92 863.71 * 136 * * * 85 836 30.0 866.01 0.770 0.84 2.69 866.40 * 135 * * * 86 837 35.0 868.85 0.940 1.03 2.97 869.37 * 136 * * * 86 848 40.0 871.37 0.870 0.95 2.86 872.23 * 136 * * * 81 849 45.0 873.73 0.780 0.85 2.69 874.92 * 136 * * * 88 85

10 50.0 876.57 0.970 1.07 3.03 877.95 * 135 * * * 90 8711 55.0 879.43 0.990 1.09 3.07 881.02 * 136 * * * 90 8712 60.0 882.22 0.820 0.91 2.79 883.82 * 136 * * * 92 88

End Time 1344Run Time 60 Avg DH= 0.99 Avg Ts= 135.25 Avg Tm= 85.04Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 122 140 118 1039 1081

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1033 1073

Difference 22 40 18 6 8 94


Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-5, S-2, P-4 Pitot Tube No. 4-3 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV049 2B Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0052 Bar.Press. 28.60 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/13/11 Test 4 Run # 1 Orifice H@ 1.9533 Stat Press. -0.55 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 6 in. Hg

Operators TAK, MJN Probe Length 4 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °°F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 0836 861.80

1 5.0 864.80 1.050 1.19 2.97 864.77 * 124 * * * 56 55 18.72 10.0 867.70 1.100 1.24 3.04 867.81 * 124 * * * 56 563 15.0 870.40 0.920 1.04 2.79 870.60 * 124 * * * 57 564 20.0 873.35 1.200 1.36 3.18 873.78 * 124 * * * 58 565 25.0 876.20 1.100 1.25 3.05 876.84 * 124 * * * 59 566 30.0 879.40 1.000 1.13 2.91 879.75 * 125 * * * 60 567 35.0 882.10 0.880 1.00 2.73 882.48 * 125 * * * 60 578 40.0 881.90 0.950 1.07 2.83 885.31 * 129 * * * 61 579 45.0 887.60 0.870 0.98 2.71 888.02 * 132 * * * 61 58

10 50.0 890.44 0.780 0.88 2.58 890.60 * 127 * * * 61 5811 55.0 892.90 0.800 0.91 2.62 893.21 * 124 * * * 61 5812 60.0 895.47 0.750 0.85 2.53 895.74 * 125 * * * 61 58

End Time 0943Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.07 Avg Ts= 125.58 Avg Tm= 58.00Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF 3" Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 132 135 115 1398 1031

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1388 1029

Difference 32 35 15 10 2 94
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-5, S-2, P-4 Pitot Tube No. 4-3 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV049 2B Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0052 Bar.Press. 28.60 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/13/11 Test 4 Run # 2 Orifice H@ 1.9533 Stat Press. -0.55 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 7 in. Hg

Operators TAK, MJN Probe Length 4 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1034 905.13

1 5.0 908.10 1.050 1.23 3.04 908.17 * 124 * * * 60 59 18.92 10.0 911.05 1.000 1.17 2.97 911.14 * 124 * * * 60 593 15.0 913.77 0.870 1.02 2.77 913.90 * 124 * * * 61 604 20.0 916.70 1.100 1.29 3.12 917.02 * 124 * * * 61 595 25.0 919.60 1.050 1.23 3.04 920.06 * 124 * * * 61 606 30.0 922.50 0.950 1.11 2.90 922.96 * 124 * * * 62 607 35.0 925.31 0.850 1.00 2.74 925.70 * 124 * * * 62 608 40.0 928.30 1.000 1.17 2.97 928.67 * 124 * * * 62 609 45.0 931.10 0.900 1.05 2.82 931.49 * 126 * * * 62 60

10 50.0 933.80 0.760 0.89 2.59 934.08 * 125 * * * 61 6011 55.0 936.40 0.780 0.91 2.62 936.70 * 125 * * * 62 6012 60.0 939.00 0.760 0.89 2.59 939.29 * 125 * * * 62 60

End Time 1141Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.08 Avg Ts= 124.42 Avg Tm= 60.54Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 136 127 118 1408 1046

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1398 1031

Difference 36 27 18 10 15 106
Barr EPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3

Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-5, S-2, P-4 Pitot Tube No. 4-3 Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:

Sample Location SV049 2B Waste Gas Stack Meter Y 1.0052 Bar.Press. 28.60 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 15 in. Hg

Date 04/13/11 Test 4 Run # 3 Orifice H@ 1.9533 Stat Press. -0.55 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 6 in. Hg

Operators TAK, MJN Probe Length 4 ft. Probe Liner Type: Glass Other

Sample Ideal Sample Oxygen

Sample Time Actual Velocity Orifice Point Ideal Train Stack Sample Train Temperatures, °F Content,

Point DT Meter Vol Head DP, DH Volume Meter Vol Vacuum Temp Filter Probe Impinger Meter Meter %

Vm, ft3 in. H O in. H 2 O2 Vm, ft3 Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°F Outlet Inlet Outlet

Start Time 1240 950.40

1 5.0 953.50 1.150 1.32 3.14 953.54 * 124 * * * 59 59 18.92 10.0 956.70 1.100 1.25 3.07 956.61 * 125 * * * 60 593 15.0 959.35 0.870 0.99 2.73 959.34 * 124 * * * 61 594 20.0 962.58 1.200 1.37 3.21 962.56 * 124 * * * 61 595 25.0 965.70 1.200 1.37 3.21 965.77 * 124 * * * 61 606 30.0 968.30 0.950 1.09 2.86 968.63 * 124 * * * 62 607 35.0 971.10 0.930 1.07 2.83 971.46 * 124 * * * 62 608 40.0 973.80 0.970 1.10 2.88 974.34 * 129 * * * 62 609 45.0 976.56 0.880 1.01 2.75 977.09 * 126 * * * 63 61

10 50.0 979.20 0.750 0.86 2.55 979.64 * 124 * * * 63 6111 55.0 981.83 0.820 0.94 2.67 982.31 * 124 * * * 63 6112 60.0 984.30 0.720 0.83 2.50 984.80 * 125 * * * 63 61

End Time 1346Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.10 Avg Ts= 124.75 Avg Tm= 60.83Integrated Gas Sampling Data : MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. GFF Impinger 1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NA O2 Reading NA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 134 144 108 1412 1052

Bag Vol. NA O2 Analyzer No. NA Nozzle Dn. 0.193 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 1408 1046

Difference 34 44 8 4 6 96


Appendix C

Laboratory Reports and Sample Chain of Custody
Barr Engineering Company 

7390 Ohms Lane 

Edina, MN 55439-2330

Client # 23/69-1092 

Analytical Report 

(0411-91)

EPA Method 8 (Titrations) 

Sulfuric acid mist/Sulfur trioxide 

Sulfur dioxide 

Enthalpy Analytical, Inc. 

Phone: (919) 850 - 4392 / Fax: (919) 850 - 9012 / www.enthalpy.com 

2202 Ellis Road Durham, NC 27703 - 551

Compound Sample ID / Catch Weight (mg)

2A WGS SV048 on 4/12/11

T1 R1 T1 R2 T1 R3

Sulfuric acid mist/Sulfur Trioxide 3.60 2.87 3.27

Sulfur Dioxide 15.8 15.4 20.0

2B WGS SV049 on 4/12/11

T2 R1 T2 R2 T2 R3

Sulfuric acid mist/Sulfur Trioxide 4.31 3.53 4.45

Sulfur Dioxide 9.28 9.57 11.4

2A WGS SV048 on 4/13/11

T3 R1 T3 R2 T3 R3

Sulfuric acid mist/Sulfur Trioxide 7.39 7.26 6.31

Sulfur Dioxide 303 312 287

2B WGS SV049 on 4/13/11

T4 R1 T4 R2 T4 R3

Sulfuric acid mist/Sulfur Trioxide 9.63 10.4 8.94

Sulfur Dioxide 272 283 256

T2 R0 Blank

IPA H2O2

Sulfuric acid mist/Sulfur Trioxide 0.0307 ND

Sulfur Dioxide 0.0951

Company

Analyst

Parameters

Barr Engineering Co.

EO

EPA Method 8 

Client #

Job #

# Samples

23/69-1092

0411-91

12 Runs, 1 Blank

0411-91 res 4/20/2011
Summary of Results





Results
Narrative Summary
Enthalpy Analytical Narrative Summary 

Company Barr Engineering Company Client # 23/69-1092

Analyst EO Job # 0411-91

Parameters EPA Method 8 # Samples 12 Runs, 1 Blank 

Custody Bryan Tyler received the samples on 4/15/11 after being relinquished by 

Barr Engineering Company. The samples were received at 18.9 C in 

good condition. Prior to, during, and after analysis, the samples were 

kept under lock with access only to authorized personnel by Enthalpy 

Analytical, Inc. 

Analysis The samples were analyzed for sulfuric acid mist (including sulfur 

trioxide) and sulfur dioxide using the analytical procedures in EPA 

Method 8, Determination of Sulfuric Acid and Sulfur Dioxide 

Emissions from Stationary Sources (40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A). 

The samples were titrated using a barium chloride solution prepared in 

the lab. The normality was determined according to the procedures 

described in the method. The samples were titrated to a pink endpoint 

using a thorin indicator.

QC Notes Replicate titrations were performed with the titrant volumes meeting the 

QC criteria of within 1% or 0.02 mL, whichever is greater. 

Reagent blanks were received and analyzed with these samples. 

Calculations Sulfuric acid mist (H2SO4) calculations 

C H2SO4 = (N)(Vt -Vb)(Vsol/Va)(49.04)

Where: 

 C H2SO4 Catch weight as sulfuric acid (mg) 

 N Normality of the barium chloride titrant 

 Vt Volume of the titrant used to achieve pink endpoint 

 Vb Titrant volume to achieve pink endpoint w/Lab IPA 

 Vsol Volume of the entire sample solution 

 Va Volume of the aliquot taken for the titration 

 49.04 Equivalent weight for sulfuric acid
Enthalpy Analytical Narrative Summary 

(continued)

Calculations

(continued)

Sulfur dioxide (SO2) calculations 

CSO2 = (N)(Vt-Vb)(Vsol/Va)(32.03)

Where: 

 C SO2 Catch weight as sulfur dioxide (mg) 

 N Normality of the barium chloride titrant 

 Vt Volume of the titrant used to achieve pink endpoint 

 Vb Titrant volume to achieve pink endpoint w/Lab IPA 

 Vsol Volume of the entire sample solution 

 Va Volume of the aliquot taken for the titration 

 32.03 Equivalent weight for sulfur dioxide.

Reporting Notes Samples are analyzed using a micro-burette to conserve sample and 

reduce waste. The burette is 1/10 the volume of that specified in EPA 

Method 6. Results are reported in milligrams (mg) catch. 

These analyses met the requirements of the NELAC Standard. Any 

deviations from the requirements of the reference method or NELAC 

Standard have been previously noted in the report narrative. The results 

presented in this report are representative of the samples as provided to 

the laboratory.

Enthalpy Analytical, Inc. is nationally accredited to perform EPA 

Method 8 for compliance purposes by the Louisiana Department of 

Environmental Quality’s Louisiana Environmental Laboratory 

Accreditation Program (LELAP), certificate number 04010. 
General Reporting Notes 

The following are general reporting notes that are applicable to all Enthalpy Analytical, Inc. data 

reports, unless specifically noted otherwise.

The acronym MDL represents the Minimum Detection Limit. Below this value the laboratory cannot 

determine the presence of the analyte of interest reliably. 

The acronym LOQ represents the Limit of Quantification. Below this value the laboratory cannot 

quantitate the analyte of interest within the criteria of the method. 

The acronym ND following a value indicates a non-detect or analytical result below the MDL. 

The letter J following a value indicates an analytical result between the MDL and the LOQ. A J flag 

indicates that the laboratory can positively identify the analyte of interest as present, but the value 

should be considered an estimate. 

The letter E following a value indicates an analytical result exceeding 100% of the highest calibration 

point. The associated value should be considered as an estimate. 

The acronym DF represents Dilution Factor. This number represents dilution of the sample during the 

preparation and/or analysis process. The analytical result taken from a laboratory instrument is 

multiplied by the DF to determine the final undiluted sample results. 

The addition of MS to the Sample ID represents a Matrix Spike. An aliquot of an actual sample is 

spiked with a known amount of analyte so that a percent recovery value can be determined. This shows 

what effect the sample matrix may have on the target analyte, i.e. whether or not anything in the sample 

matrix interferes with the analysis of the analyte(s). 

The addition of MSD to the Sample ID represents a Matrix Spike Duplicate. Prepared in the same 

manner as an MS, the use of duplicate matrix spikes allows further confirmation of laboratory quality 

by showing the consistency of results gained by performing the same steps multiple times. 

The addition of LD to the Sample ID represents a Laboratory Duplicate. The analyst prepares an 

additional aliquot of sample for testing and the results of the duplicate analysis are compared to the 

initial result. The result should have a difference value of within 10% of the initial result (if the results 

of the original analysis are greater than the LOQ). 

The addition of AD to the Sample ID represents an Alternate Dilution. The analyst prepares an 

additional aliquot at a different dilution factor (usually double the initial factor). This analysis helps 

confirm that no additional compound is present and coeluting or sharing absorbance with the analyte of 

interest, as they would have a different response/absorbance than the analyte of interest. 

The Sample ID LCS represents a Laboratory Control Sample. Clean matrix, similar to the client sample 

matrix, prepared and analyzed by the laboratory using the same reagents, spiking standards and 

procedures used for the client samples. The LCS is used to assess the control of the laboratory’s 

analytical system. Whenever spikes are prepared for our client projects, two extra spikes are prepared. 

The extras (randomly chosen) are labeled with the associated project number and kept in-house at the 

appropriate temperature conditions. When the project samples are received for analysis, the LCSs are 

analyzed to confirm that the analyte could be recovered from the media, separate from the samples 

which were used on the project and which may have been affected by source matrix, sample collection 

and/or sample transport. 
General Reporting Notes 

(continued)

Significant Figures: Where the reported value is much greater than unity (1.00) in the units expressed, 

the number is rounded to a whole number of units, rather than to 3 significant figures. For example, a 

value of 10,456.45 ug catch is rounded to 10,456 ug. There are five significant digits displayed, but no 

confidence should be placed on more than two significant digits. 

Manual Integration: The data systems used for processing will flag manually integrated peaks with 

an “M”. There are several reasons a peak may be manually integrated. These reasons will be identified 

by the following two letter designations. The peak was not integrated by the software “NI”, the peak 

was integrated incorrectly by the software “II” or the wrong peak was integrated by the software 

“WP”. These codes will accompany the analyst’s manual integration stamp placed next to the 

compound name. 
Sample Custody


This Is The Last Page

Of This Report.
Appendix D

Calibration Data
Routine Dry Gas Meter Calibration

Control Module: C-1 Leak checks Barometric Press. -- 29.21

Date: 04/08/11 Negative -- ok >15 W.C. Previous Y -- 1.0020

Technician: MDM3 Positive -- ok >5 in.Hg Previous Delta H -- 1.8072

Orifice Wet Test Wet Test Dry Gas Meter Orifice

Diff Volume, Meter Volume Coefficient Coefficient

Pressure H Ft3

Inlet Outlet Temp, °F Ft3Y dH@

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

0.500 5191.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 605.925

Actual Final

5197.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 611.845 14 33.91

0.50 Total Average Average Average Total Minutes

6.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 5.920 14.57 1.0065 1.7076

68.0

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

1.000 5198.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 612.830

Actual Final

5203.00 69.0 68.0 71.0 617.755 8.0 44.47

1.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 68.5 68.0 71.0 4.925 8.74 1.0074 1.7713

68.3 Tm

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

2.000 5185.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 600.015

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5190.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 604.940 6 13.63

2.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 68.0 68.0 71.0 4.925 6.23 1.0044 1.7979

68.0 Tm

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial

3.000 5205.00 69.0 68.0 71.0 619.725

Cal. Point

Dry Gas Meter

Temp, °F

Elapsed

Time of

Control Module 1

3.000 5205.00 69.0 68.0 71.0 619.725

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5210.00 69.0 68.0 71.0 624.655 5.0 7.6

3.00 Total Average Average Total

5.00 69.0 68.0 71.0 4.930 5.13 1.0019 1.8278

68.5 Tm

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

4.000 5212.00 69.0 68.0 71.0 626.620

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5222.00 70.0 69.0 71.0 636.455 8.0 58.47 .

4.00 Total Average Average Average Total

10.00 69.5 68.5 71.0 9.835 8.97 1.0028 1.8653

69.0 Tm Average 1.0046 1.7940

Control Module 1
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate Method (ALT-009)

Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

TEST 1

Control Module C-1

2A Waste Gas Stack (SV048)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test date - - 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 4/12/2011

Test period - - 858 - 1004 1148 - 1253 1405 - 1509

Total run time t min 60 60 60

Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter Vm acf 32.6 33.4 33.6

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °F 61.6 76.2 85.6

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °R 521.3 535.9 545.3

Barometric pressure Pb inches Hg 28.5 28.5 28.5

Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75)2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm20.0319 0.0319 0.0319

Average orifice meter differential ∆ havg in. H2O 0.94 0.94 0.94

Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H@ in. H2O 1.79 1.79 1.79

Dry molecular weight of stack gas Md lb/lb-mole 28.91 28.90 28.90

Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00

Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.60

Dry gas meter calibration check value Yqa Dimensionless 1.0202 1.0094 1.0115

Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 1.0046 1.0046 1.0046

Average of Yqa's from test run series 1.0137

Dry gas meter calibration factor 1.0046

% difference between average Yqa's and Y -0.90%

(must be within ± 5%)

( )

29

13 6.

(

t .0 0319

@

avg

avg d

b

m

m

qa h

h M

H P

T

V

Y • ∆

∆

∆ +

⋅

=
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate Method (ALT-009)

Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

TEST 3

Control Module C-1

2A Waste Gas Stack (SV048)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test date - - 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 4/13/2011

Test period - - 836 - 941 1034 - 1141 1240 - 1344

Total run time t min 60 60 60

Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter Vm acf 33.9 34.4 33.4

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °F 82.3 84.1 85.0

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °R 541.9 543.8 544.7

Barometric pressure Pb inches Hg 28.6 28.6 28.6

Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75)2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm20.0319 0.0319 0.0319

Average orifice meter differential ∆ havg in. H2O 0.99 1.00 0.99

Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H@ in. H2O 1.79 1.79 1.79

Dry molecular weight of stack gas Md lb/lb-mole 29.01 29.02 29.02

Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00

Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.60

Dry gas meter calibration check value Yqa Dimensionless 1.0224 1.0148 1.0416

Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 1.0046 1.0046 1.0046

Average of Yqa's from test run series 1.0263

Dry gas meter calibration factor 1.0046

% difference between average Yqa's and Y -2.16%

(must be within ± 5%)

( )

29

13 6.

(

t .0 0319

@

avg

avg d

b

m

m

qa h

h M

H P

T

V

Y • ∆

∆

∆ +

⋅

=
THERMOCOUPLE ID C-1-I

Cal Date: 1/14/2011

CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: AGA

REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE

Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-0105-2 1/5/2010

Hart Scientific 9140 s/n A1B086 Report No. T10-0105-1 1/5/2010

Temperature Calibration Points 20 70 150

Reference Deg F (To) 20 70 150

Probe Temp (deg F) 20 69 150

Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610

Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 480 529 610

Difference (degrees) 0 1 0

% Diff Abs. T 0.0% 0.2% 0.0%

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Meter In

TRACEABILITY LABORATORY

Hart Scientific

Hart Scientific

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-1-I

Regression R Squared = 0.999997

-20 1200

Technician signature

QA signature

FAHRENHEIT 

CALIBRATION RANGE

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-1-I

Regression R Squared = 0.999997
THERMOCOUPLE ID C-1-O

Cal Date: 1/14/2011

CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: AGA

REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE

Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-0105-2 1/5/2010

Hart Scientific 9140 s/n A1B086 Report No. T10-0105-1 1/5/2010

Temperature Calibration Points 20 70 150

Reference Deg F (To) 20 70 150

Probe Temp (deg F) 22 69 148

Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610

Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 482 529 608

Difference (degrees) -2 1 2

% Diff Abs. T 0.4% 0.2% 0.3%

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Meter Out

TRACEABILITY LABORATORY

Hart Scientific

Hart Scientific

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-1-O

Regression R Squared = 0.999964

-20 1200

Technician signature

QA signature

FAHRENHEIT 

CALIBRATION RANGE

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-1-O

Regression R Squared = 0.999964
PYROMETER

CALIBRATION

Pyrometer Number: C-1 Date: 1/14/11

Pyrometer Reference: CL-300-1000F Technician: TJW2

Pyrometer o F

Pass/Fail

1000 538 Pass

950 510 Pass

900 482 Pass

850 454 Pass

800 427 Pass

750 399 Pass

700 371 Pass

650 343 Pass

600 316 Pass

550 288 Pass

500 260 Pass

450 232 Pass

601

551

499

449

752

701

652

1001

951

901

851

Reference (°F) Reference (°C) Reading

801

400 204 Pass

350 177 Pass

300 149 Pass

250 121 Pass

200 93 Pass

150 67 Pass

100 38 Pass

50 10 Pass

0 -18 Pass

-50 -46 Fail

Pass/Fail based on +/- 0.75% of Renkin value

Unit not to be used at range in which failure occurred

Technician signature:

QA signature:

0

-45

200

150

98

49

399

350

301

251
Routine Dry Gas Meter Calibration

Control Module: C-5 Leak checks Barometric Press. -- 29.05

Date: 04/07/11 Positive -- ok >5 W.C. Previous Y -- 1.0009

Technician: MDM3 Negative ok > 15 in.HgPrevious Delta H -- 1.9498

Orifice Wet Test Wet Test Dry Gas Meter Orifice

Diff Volume, Meter Volume Coefficient Coefficient

Pressure H Ft3Inlet Outlet Temp, °F Ft3Y dH@

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

0.500 5141.00 71.0 70.0 71.0 696.425

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5146.00 72.0 71.0 71.0 701.345 12 51.06

0.50 Total Average Average Average Total Minutes

5.00 71.5 70.5 71.0 4.920 12.85 1.0150 1.9157

71.0

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

1.000 5147.00 72.0 71.0 70.5 702.340

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5154.00 73.0 72.0 70.5 709.295 12.0 48.72

1.00 Total Average Average Average Total

7.00 72.5 71.5 70.5 6.955 12.81 1.0068 1.9356

72.0 Tm

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

2.000 5135.00 70.0 69.0 71.0 690.480

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5140.00 71.0 70.0 71.0 695.435 6 33.34

2.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 70.5 69.5 71.0 4.955 6.56 1.0021 1.9978

70.0 Tm

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

Dry Gas Meter

Temp, °F

Cal. Point

Elapsed

Time of

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

3.000 5155.00 73.0 72.0 70.5 710.290

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5162.00 74.0 72.0 70.5 717.240 7.0 23.69

3.00 Total Average Average Average Total

7.00 73.5 72.0 70.5 6.950 7.39 1.0038 1.9327

72.8 Tm

Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial

4.000 5164.00 74.0 72.0 70.5 719.225

Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

5174.00 75.0 73.0 70.5 729.200 9.0 16.53

4.00 Total Average Average Average Total

10.00 74.5 72.5 70.5 9.975 9.28 0.9981 1.9847

73.5 Tm Average 1.0052 1.9533
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate Method (ALT-009)

Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

TEST 2

Control Module C-5

2B Waste Gas Stack (SV049)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test date - - 4/12/2011 4/12/2011 4/12/2011

Test period - - 856 - 1006 1148 - 1255 1405 - 1511

Total run time t min 60 60 60

Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter Vm acf 34.5 34.1 33.6

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °F 62.7 67.0 74.0

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °R 522.3 526.7 533.6

Barometric pressure Pb inches Hg 28.5 28.5 28.5

Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75)2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm20.0319 0.0319 0.0319

Average orifice meter differential ∆ havg in. H2O 1.11 1.07 1.02

Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H@ in. H2O 1.95 1.95 1.95

Dry molecular weight of stack gas Md lb/lb-mole 28.91 28.91 28.89

Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00

Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.60

Dry gas meter calibration check value Yqa Dimensionless 1.0029 0.9996 0.9973

Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 1.0052 1.0052 1.0052

Average of Yqa's from test run series 1.0000

Dry gas meter calibration factor 1.0052

% difference between average Yqa's and Y 0.52%

(must be within ± 5%)

( )

29

13 6.

(

t .0 0319

@

avg

avg d

b

m

m

qa h

h M

H P

T

V

Y • ∆

∆

∆ +

⋅

=
Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite April 29, 2011

Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate Method (ALT-009)

Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

TEST 4

Control Module C-5

2B Waste Gas Stack (SV049)

Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3

Test date - - 4/13/2011 4/13/2011 4/13/2011

Test period - - 836 - 943 1034 - 1141 1240 - 1346

Total run time t min 60 60 60

Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter Vm acf 33.7 33.9 33.9

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °F 58.0 60.5 60.8

Absolute average dry gas meter temp Tm °R 517.7 520.2 520.5

Barometric pressure Pb inches Hg 28.6 28.6 28.6

Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75)2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm20.0319 0.0319 0.0319

Average orifice meter differential ∆ havg in. H2O 1.07 1.08 1.10

Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H@ in. H2O 1.95 1.95 1.95

Dry molecular weight of stack gas Md lb/lb-mole 29.00 28.98 29.00

Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00

Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.60

Dry gas meter calibration check value Yqa Dimensionless 1.0030 1.0030 1.0105

Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 1.0052 1.0052 1.0052

Average of Yqa's from test run series 1.0055

Dry gas meter calibration factor 1.0052

% difference between average Yqa's and Y -0.03%

(must be within ± 5%)

( )

29

13 6.

(

t .0 0319

@

avg

avg d

b

m

m

qa h

h M

H P

T

V

Y • ∆

∆

∆ +

⋅

=
THERMOCOUPLE ID C-5-I

Cal Date: 1/13/2011

CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2

REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE

Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-0105-2 1/5/2010

Hart Scientific 9140 s/n A1B086 Report No. T10-0105-1 1/5/2010

Temperature Calibration Points 20 70 150

Reference Deg F (To) 20 70 150

Probe Temp (deg F) 21 69 149

Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610

Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 481 529 609

Difference (degrees) -1 1 1

% Diff Abs. T 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Meter In

TRACEABILITY LABORATORY

Hart Scientific

Hart Scientific

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-5-I

Regression R Squared = 0.999989

-20 1200

Technician signature

QA signature

FAHRENHEIT 

CALIBRATION RANGE

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-5-I

Regression R Squared = 0.999989
THERMOCOUPLE ID C-5-O

Cal Date: 1/13/2011

CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2

REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE

Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-0105-2 1/5/2010

Hart Scientific 9140 s/n A1B086 Report No. T10-0105-1 1/5/2010

Temperature Calibration Points 20 70 150

Reference Deg F (To) 20 70 150

Probe Temp (deg F) 21 69 149

Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610

Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 481 529 609

Difference (degrees) -1 1 1

% Diff Abs. T 0.2% 0.2% 0.2%

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Meter Out

TRACEABILITY LABORATORY

Hart Scientific

Hart Scientific

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-5-O

Regression R Squared = 0.999989

-20 1200

Technician signature

QA signature

FAHRENHEIT 

CALIBRATION RANGE

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID C-5-O

Regression R Squared = 0.999989
PYROMETER

CALIBRATION

Pyrometer Number: C-5 Date: 1/13/11

Pyrometer Reference: CL-300-1000F Technician: TJW2

Pyrometer o F

Pass/Fail

1000 538 Pass

950 510 Pass

900 482 Pass

850 454 Pass

800 427 Pass

750 399 Pass

700 371 Pass

650 343 Pass

600 316 Pass

550 288 Pass

500 260 Pass

450 232 Pass

599

548

497

447

751

700

650

1000

950

899

850

Reference (°F) Reference (°C) Reading

799

400 204 Pass

350 177 Pass

300 149 Pass

250 121 Pass

200 93 Pass

150 67 Pass

100 38 Pass

50 10 Pass

0 -18 Pass

-50 -46 Pass

Pass/Fail based on +/- 0.75% of Renkin value

Technician signature:

QA signature:

1

-49

200

151

98

49

398

348

300

251
THERMOCOUPLE ID TC4-3

Cal Date: 1/8/2011

CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2

REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE

Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-0105-2 1/5/2010

Hart Scientific 9140 s/n A1B086 Report No. T10-0105-1 1/5/2010

Temperature Calibration Points 32 212 400 650 Ambient

Reference Deg F (To) 32 212 400 650 70

Probe Temp (deg F) 34 212 398 650 70

Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 492 672 860 1110 530

Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 494 672 858 1110 530

Difference (degrees) -2 0 2 0 0

% Diff Abs. T 0.4% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0%

Is difference less than 1.5% at all 

measured points? YES

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

M-5 Probe

TRACEABILITY LABORATORY

Hart Scientific

Hart Scientific

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID TC4-3

Regression R Squared = 0.999974

Are extrapolated limits less than 1.5%? YES

-20 1200

Technician signature

QA signature

FAHRENHEIT 

CALIBRATION RANGE

If not acceptable, describe corrective action:

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID TC4-3

Regression R Squared = 0.999974
THERMOCOUPLE ID TC5-2

Cal Date: 1/7/2011

CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2

REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE

Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-0105-2 1/5/2010

Hart Scientific 9140 s/n A1B086 Report No. T10-0105-1 1/5/2010

Temperature Calibration Points 32 212 400 650 Ambient

Reference Deg F (To) 32 212 400 650 70

Probe Temp (deg F) 33 209 398 648 70

Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 492 672 860 1110 530

Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 493 669 858 1108 530

Difference (degrees) -1 3 2 2 0

% Diff Abs. T 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0%

Is difference less than 1.5% at all 

measured points? YES

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

M-5 Probe

TRACEABILITY LABORATORY

Hart Scientific

Hart Scientific

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID TC5-2

Regression R Squared = 0.99997

Are extrapolated limits less than 1.5%? YES

-20 1200

Technician signature

QA signature

FAHRENHEIT 

CALIBRATION RANGE

If not acceptable, describe corrective action:

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

THERMOCOUPLE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

REFERENCE TEMPERATURE, deg.R

THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Calibration Curve - Unit Under Test

Upper Limit of Calibration

Lower Limit of Calibration

Extrapolated Calibration Curve

THERMOCOUPLE ID TC5-2

Regression R Squared = 0.99997




Field Barometer Calibration

Calibration to National Weather Service at Chisholm-Hibbing Airport

Station elevation at Barr Hibbing Office 3128 14th Avenue East, Hibbing, MN 1460 ft.

Barometer: DJK

Field Barometer Barr Office

Date Technician Time Altimeter ID Time

Barometric 

Pressure

Station 

Pressure Condition Remarks

NWS Observation

3/16/11 RMP 16:05 29.76 DJK 16:11 28.35 28.35 In Calibration As Found

4/18/11 DJK 5:53 29.94 DJK 6:12 28.50 28.48 In Calibration As Found
Appendix E

Cylinder Gas Certifications


Appendix F

Process Operating Data
Form ST-05

Operating Data Summary For Process Sources

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Rd. N. Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 (651)-296-6300

6/9/06

Equipment & Operating Data

1. 

2. X NO: If no, explain:

3. 

4. 

5. 

ratios as appropriate 

Run 1 Average

630 638

507 510

3512 3465

211 208

6

Date(s) and procedure(s) of last maintenance/cleaning within 6 months: Remains unchanged from info. provided in test plan

Test Date(s): 4/12/2011 Process Equipment Number/Identification: WGS 2A (SV048)

Company Name: United Taconite, LLC

See attached

Process rate (amount of raw material or finished product per hour, wet or dry basis) while combusting (list fuel type(s) and 

Process Parameter: list type and units Run 2 Run 3

Process Equipment Description: Line 2 Induration Furnace

Were the process and control equipment operated consistent with normal procedures? YES:

Include copy of production records or instrumentation which indicates rate of production or operation of the equipment, i.e. units 

per hour, pounds per hour, pressure, air flow, etc.

Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH 641 643

Fired Pellets, LTPH 510 514

 

Fuel Input (list units) Natural Gas (cfm) 3371 3513

Heat Input (106 British thermal units/hour) 202 211

6 Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

• Baghouse, Cyclone, and Multi-clone: ∆P (in. w.c.)

• ESP: Number and identity of operating field(s)

Run 1 Average

11.41 11.1

2412.12 2412.4

Run 1 Average

aq-f6-ST05 Form ST-05, Page 1 of 1

Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

approved in the test plan. (See test plan and approval letter)

Examples of APC equipment and parameters generally monitored. Monitor as in test plan and/or approval letter.

• Scrubber (list type of scrubber): ∆P (in. w.c.) and feed rate (gpm and psig)

• Catalytic Incinerator :(°Fin ,°Fout) and Thermal Incinerator: (°Ftemperature)

APC and parameter monitored Run 2 Run 3

Scrubber Pressure Drop, (in. w.c.) 10.91 10.86

Scrubber Flow (gpm) 2412.11 2412.82

 

 

List pollutant & averaging basis.--should reflect permit Run 2 Run 3

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Note: This form provides only a summary of the operating conditions during the performance test. Additional and more detailed records are required 

to meet the requirements of Minn. R. 7017.2035, subp. 3. This form is to be submitted as part of the performance test report.

Continuous Opacity Monitor(list hourly average) 

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Abbreviations: APC-air pollution control gpm.-gallons per minute in. w.c.-inches of water column 

lbs.-pounds psig-pressure per square inch gauge ∆P- pressure drop
Form ST-05

Operating Data Summary For Process Sources

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Rd. N. Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 (651)-296-6300

6/9/06

Equipment & Operating Data

1. 

2. X NO: If no, explain:

3. 

4. 

5. 

ratios as appropriate 

Run 1 Average

630 638

507 510

3512 3465

211 208

6

Date(s) and procedure(s) of last maintenance/cleaning within 6 months: Remains unchanged from info. provided in test plan

Test Date(s): 4/12/2011 Process Equipment Number/Identification: WGS 2A (SV049)

Company Name: United Taconite, LLC

See attached

Process rate (amount of raw material or finished product per hour, wet or dry basis) while combusting (list fuel type(s) and 

Process Parameter: list type and units Run 2 Run 3

Process Equipment Description: Line 2 Induration Furnace

Were the process and control equipment operated consistent with normal procedures? YES:

Include copy of production records or instrumentation which indicates rate of production or operation of the equipment, i.e. units 

per hour, pounds per hour, pressure, air flow, etc.

Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH 641 643

Fired Pellets, LTPH 510 514

 

Fuel Input (list units) Natural Gas (cfm) 3371 3513

Heat Input (106 British thermal units/hour) 202 211

6 Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

• Baghouse, Cyclone, and Multi-clone: ∆P (in. w.c.)

• ESP: Number and identity of operating field(s)

Run 1 Average

10.23 9.9

2498.68 2497.8

Run 1 Average

aq-f6-ST05 Form ST-05, Page 1 of 1

Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

approved in the test plan. (See test plan and approval letter)

Examples of APC equipment and parameters generally monitored. Monitor as in test plan and/or approval letter.

• Scrubber (list type of scrubber): ∆P (in. w.c.) and feed rate (gpm and psig)

• Catalytic Incinerator :(°Fin ,°Fout) and Thermal Incinerator: (°Ftemperature)

APC and parameter monitored Run 2 Run 3

Scrubber Pressure Drop, (H2O) 9.74 9.73

Scrubber Flow (GPM) 2496.34 2498.24

 

 

List pollutant & averaging basis.--should reflect permit Run 2 Run 3

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Note: This form provides only a summary of the operating conditions during the performance test. Additional and more detailed records are required 

to meet the requirements of Minn. R. 7017.2035, subp. 3. This form is to be submitted as part of the performance test report.

Continuous Opacity Monitor(list hourly average) 

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Abbreviations: APC-air pollution control gpm.-gallons per minute in. w.c.-inches of water column 

lbs.-pounds psig-pressure per square inch gauge ∆P- pressure drop
Form ST-05

Operating Data Summary For Process Sources

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Rd. N. Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 (651)-296-6300

6/9/06

Equipment & Operating Data

1. 

2. X NO: If no, explain:

3. 

4. 

5. 

ratios as appropriate 

Run 1 Average

646 645

517 517

9.25 9.12

253 248

6

Include copy of production records or instrumentation which indicates rate of production or operation of the equipment, i.e. units 

per hour, pounds per hour, pressure, air flow, etc.

Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

Run 2

646

521

 

9.14

Heat Input (10 247 6 British thermal units/hour)

Company Name:

Process Equipment Description:

Were the process and control equipment operated consistent with normal procedures? YES:

Date(s) and procedure(s) of last maintenance/cleaning within 6 months: Remains unchanged from info. provided in test plan

Process rate (amount of raw material or finished product per hour, wet or dry basis) while combusting (list fuel type(s) and 

See attached

Fuel Input (list units) Coal (TPH) 

4/13/2011

Run 3

643

Line 2 Induration Furnace

Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH

United Taconite, LLC

Test Date(s): Process Equipment Number/Identification:

512

 

8.97

243

WGS 2A (SV048)

Fired Pellets, LTPH

 

Process Parameter: list type and units

6

• Baghouse, Cyclone, and Multi-clone: ∆P (in. w.c.)

• ESP: Number and identity of operating field(s)

Run 1 Average

11.49 11.4

2411.59 2411.6

Run 1 Average

aq-f6-ST05 Form ST-05, Page 1 of 1

Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

approved in the test plan. (See test plan and approval letter)

Note: This form provides only a summary of the operating conditions during the performance test. Additional and more detailed records are required 

to meet the requirements of Minn. R. 7017.2035, subp. 3. This form is to be submitted as part of the performance test report.

 

Run 2

 

 

 

Run 2

11.45

2411.43

Examples of APC equipment and parameters generally monitored. Monitor as in test plan and/or approval letter.

• Scrubber (list type of scrubber): ∆P (in. w.c.) and feed rate (gpm and psig)

• Catalytic Incinerator :(°Fin ,°Fout) and Thermal Incinerator: (°Ftemperature)

 

Scrubber Flow (gpm)

11.28

2411.7

 

APC and parameter monitored Run 3

List pollutant & averaging basis.--should reflect permit Run 3

Continuous Opacity Monitor(list hourly average) 

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Scrubber Pressure Drop, (in. w.c.)

Abbreviations: APC-air pollution control gpm.-gallons per minute in. w.c.-inches of water column 

lbs.-pounds psig-pressure per square inch gauge ∆P- pressure drop
Form ST-05

Operating Data Summary For Process Sources

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Rd. N. Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 (651)-296-6300

6/9/06

Equipment & Operating Data

1. 

2. X NO: If no, explain:

3. 

4. 

5. 

ratios as appropriate 

Run 1 Average

646 645

517 517

9.25 9.12

253 248

6

Date(s) and procedure(s) of last maintenance/cleaning within 6 months: Remains unchanged from info. provided in test plan

Test Date(s): 4/13/2011 Process Equipment Number/Identification: WGS 2A (SV049)

Company Name: United Taconite, LLC

See attached

Process rate (amount of raw material or finished product per hour, wet or dry basis) while combusting (list fuel type(s) and 

Process Parameter: list type and units Run 2 Run 3

Process Equipment Description: Line 2 Induration Furnace

Were the process and control equipment operated consistent with normal procedures? YES:

Include copy of production records or instrumentation which indicates rate of production or operation of the equipment, i.e. units 

per hour, pounds per hour, pressure, air flow, etc.

Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH 646 643

Fired Pellets, LTPH 521 512

 

Fuel Input (list units) Coal (TPH) 9.14 8.97

Heat Input (106 British thermal units/hour) 247 243

6 Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

• Baghouse, Cyclone, and Multi-clone: ∆P (in. w.c.)

• ESP: Number and identity of operating field(s)

Run 1 Average

10.26 10.2

2496.96 2497.3

Run 1 Average

aq-f6-ST05 Form ST-05, Page 1 of 1

Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, averages, or as 

approved in the test plan. (See test plan and approval letter)

Examples of APC equipment and parameters generally monitored. Monitor as in test plan and/or approval letter.

• Scrubber (list type of scrubber): ∆P (in. w.c.) and feed rate (gpm and psig)

• Catalytic Incinerator :(°Fin ,°Fout) and Thermal Incinerator: (°Ftemperature)

APC and parameter monitored Run 2 Run 3

Scrubber Pressure Drop, (H2O) 10.26 10.05

Scrubber Flow (GPM) 2495.87 2499.15

 

 

List pollutant & averaging basis.--should reflect permit Run 2 Run 3

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Note: This form provides only a summary of the operating conditions during the performance test. Additional and more detailed records are required 

to meet the requirements of Minn. R. 7017.2035, subp. 3. This form is to be submitted as part of the performance test report.

Continuous Opacity Monitor(list hourly average) 

Monitor (list averaging basis): 

Abbreviations: APC-air pollution control gpm.-gallons per minute in. w.c.-inches of water column 

lbs.-pounds psig-pressure per square inch gauge ∆P- pressure drop
GAS TEST

Greenball Fired Pellets Fuel Fuel

asking Coal Gas Line 2A L2A WG Line 2B L2B WG

start end LTPH LTPH TPH cfm dP Flow GPM dP Flow GPM

4/12/11 8:58 4/12/11 9:13 628.72 506.19 0.00 3511.85 11.43 2414.86 10.24 2507.57

4/12/11 9:13 4/12/11 9:28 633.67 509.82 0.00 3513.94 11.41 2408.88 10.23 2494.024/12/11 9:28 4/12/11 9:43 631.05 507.60 0.00 3512.53 11.43 2409.89 10.23 2496.264/12/11 9:43 4/12/11 9:58 627.96 505.59 0.00 3509.40 11.39 2414.85 10.20 2496.87

AVERAGE 630.35 507.30 0.00 3511.93 11.41 2412.12 10.23 2498.68

4/12/11 11:48 4/12/11 12:03 639.70 510.38 0.00 3506.36 10.83 2414.82 9.69 2498.064/12/11 12:03 4/12/11 12:18 637.58 506.15 0.00 3507.50 10.93 2407.91 9.77 2498.004/12/11 12:18 4/12/11 12:33 642.83 510.14 0.00 3395.28 10.89 2411.57 9.72 2494.664/12/11 12:33 4/12/11 12:48 643.45 512.05 0.00 3074.08 10.97 2414.15 9.80 2494.64

AVERAGE 640.89 509.68 0.00 3370.81 10.91 2412.11 9.74 2496.34

4/12/11 14:05 4/12/11 14:20 644.05 513.78 0.00 3510.10 11.02 2409.55 9.85 2495.384/12/11 14:20 4/12/11 14:35 644.23 514.54 0.00 3516.73 10.87 2411.96 9.74 2499.474/12/11 14:35 4/12/11 14:50 641.27 512.74 0.00 3511.56 10.82 2418.47 9.65 2496.824/12/11 14:50 4/12/11 15:05 643.08 514.18 0.00 3512.32 10.72 2411.30 9.68 2501.28

AVERAGE 643.16 513.81 0.00 3512.68 10.86 2412.82 9.73 2498.24

SV 48 SV 49

Run 1Run 2Run 3
Coal Test

Greenball Fired Pellets Fuel Fuel

asking Coal Gas Line 2A L2A WG Line 2B L2B WG

start end LTPH LTPH TPH cfm dP Flow GPM dP Flow GPM

4/13/11 8:39 4/13/11 8:54 644.37 514.80 9.22 0.00 11.47 2412.38 10.26 2497.59

4/13/11 8:54 4/13/11 9:09 645.22 515.35 9.16 0.00 11.50 2415.75 10.28 2504.764/13/11 9:09 4/13/11 9:24 647.71 518.63 9.30 0.00 11.46 2413.13 10.24 2492.594/13/11 9:24 4/13/11 9:39 647.14 519.89 9.31 0.00 11.50 2405.10 10.27 2492.91

AVERAGE 646.11 517.17 9.25 0.00 11.49 2411.59 10.26 2496.96

4/13/11 10:35 4/13/11 10:50 645.02 521.43 9.11 0.00 11.43 2415.60 10.19 2489.724/13/11 10:50 4/13/11 11:05 647.51 522.55 9.19 0.00 11.42 2410.99 10.28 2504.864/13/11 11:05 4/13/11 11:20 647.32 521.06 9.07 0.00 11.47 2407.97 10.31 2491.844/13/11 11:20 4/13/11 11:35 645.67 520.31 9.21 0.00 11.48 2411.14 10.27 2497.06

AVERAGE 646.38 521.33 9.14 0.00 11.45 2411.43 10.26 2495.87

4/13/11 12:40 4/13/11 12:55 647.11 515.16 8.44 0.00 11.27 2413.21 10.09 2496.054/13/11 12:55 4/13/11 13:10 643.17 511.79 8.89 0.00 11.25 2410.37 10.01 2505.834/13/11 13:10 4/13/11 13:25 646.02 514.60 9.19 0.00 11.30 2413.00 10.06 2497.304/13/11 13:25 4/13/11 13:40 635.95 504.93 9.35 0.00 11.29 2410.21 10.04 2497.40

AVERAGE 643.06 511.62 8.97 0.00 11.28 2411.70 10.05 2499.15

SV 48 SV 49

Run 1Run 2Run 3
During maintenance downtime from 3/13/2011 to 3/27/2011, the following was completed:

Maintenance on Line 2 scrubbers, including inspections, draining, and pressure washing, replacement of 

hoses and piping as necessary

General maintenance in the Line 2 kiln

Repair of Line 2 baffle walls



Appendix G

Stack Test Plan
From:                                         Maxwell, Candice A. [Candice.Maxwell@CliffsNR.com]

Sent:                                           Thursday, April 07, 2011 3:59 PM

To:                                               'Place, Andrew (MPCA)'

Cc:                                               Tom Kuchinski; Dan Koschak

Subject:                                     UTAC SAM Testing

  

Good Afternoon Andy,

  

United Taconite is planning to conduct the sulfuric acid mist (SAM) testing on Line 2 next week (4/11).  As we discussed on March 8,

2011, we plan on using Method 8 for the analysis.   

  

Please let me know if you would like to discuss anything else prior to next week’s testing.

  

Thanks!

Candice

  

   

Candice Maxwell

Section Manager ‐ Environmental Affairs

P 218.744.7849   F 218.744.7635   candice.maxwell@cliffsnr.com

CLIFFS NATURAL RESOURCES

United Taconite LLC

PO Box 180, Eveleth, MN 55734

  

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

This electronic message and any attachments included with this message are for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to

which it is intended to be addressed. This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential and thereby 

exempt and protected from unauthorized disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended 

recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, be aware that any 

disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, or the use of its contents, is not authorized and is 

strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication and are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 

immediately and permanently delete the original message from your e-mail system. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 1

file://P:\Mpls\23 MN\69\23691092 United Taconite 2010 Stack Testing\WorkFiles\April 2... 4/26/2011
From:                                         Place, Andrew (MPCA) [Andrew.Place@state.mn.us]

Sent:                                           Tuesday, March 08, 2011 2:30 PM

To:                                               Maxwell, Candice A.

Cc:                                               Tom Kuchinski; Dan Koschak

Subject:                                     RE: Test Plan Approval

  

Candice,

I am fine with this changes to the previous approval.  Thank you for the update.

Andy Place

Performance Test Coordinator

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Road

St. Paul, MN 55155‐4194

651‐757‐2652

Andrew.Place@state.mn.us

From: Maxwell, Candice A. [mailto:Candice.Maxwell@CliffsNR.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:48 AM 

To: Place, Andrew (MPCA) 

Cc: 'Tom Kuchinski'; Dan Koschak 

Subject: RE: Test Plan Approval

  

Good Morning Andy,

As we discussed this morning, we are tentatively planning to test Line 2A and 2B waste gas stacks the week of April 4th for sulfuric acid

mist (SAM).  We are planning to conduct the SAM testing using Method 8 to verify the ratios used in the permit calculations (the same

method the ratio was based on).

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks again for your time this morning.

Candice

   

Candice Maxwell

Section Manager - Environmental Affairs 

P 218.744.7849 F 218.744.7635 candice.maxwell@cliffsnr.com

CLIFFS NATURAL RESOURCES 

United Taconite LLC 

PO Box 180, Eveleth, MN 55734

From: Place, Andrew (MPCA) [mailto:Andrew.Place@state.mn.us] 

Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 1:58 PM 

To: Maxwell, Candice A. 

Cc: Tom Kuchinski; Dan Koschak; Palzkill, Steven (MPCA) 

Subject: Test Plan Approval

  

Candice,

The forms for the upcoming performance test on EU042 are attached with this email. Please read the approval over prior to the test to 

ensure you are in agreement with the conditions surrounding the test. 

Print a copy of this email as verification of the approval date. Additional forms and guidance may be found at 

http://www.pca.state.mn.us/air/performancetest.html . If you have any questions or comments, feel free to call.

  

Thanks,

  

  

  

  

Andy Place

Page 1 of 2

file://P:\Mpls\23 MN\69\23691092 United Taconite 2010 Stack Testing\WorkFiles\April 2... 4/26/2011
Performance Test Coordinator

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Road

St. Paul, MN 55155‐4194

651‐757‐2652

Andrew.Place@state.mn.us

  

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

This electronic message and any attachments included with this message are for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to

which it is intended to be addressed. This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential and thereby 

exempt and protected from unauthorized disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended 

recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, be aware that any 

disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, or the use of its contents, is not authorized and is 

strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication and are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 

immediately and permanently delete the original message from your e-mail system. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page 2 of 2

file://P:\Mpls\23 MN\69\23691092 United Taconite 2010 Stack Testing\WorkFiles\April 2... 4/26/2011
aq-f6-08 

5/1/07 Page 1 of 2 

Air Performance Test Form

Performance Test Plan Approval

Facility Information (please print)

Facility name: United Taconite, LLC AQ#: 869A 

Facility contact: Candice Maxwell 

Address: 1200 West Highway 16, Forbes, MN 55738 

Phone: (218) 744-7849 

Unit(s) to be tested: Lines 2A & 2B (SV048 & SV049) Title V Sulfur Acid Mist 

Scheduled for: January 12, 2011 at your facility located in: Forbes, Minnesota. 

Test Plan 

Submitted on (date): December 22, 2010 Discussed on (date): January 21, 2011 via email 

Your test plan has been approved by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) as follows: 

 Shortened test notification approved 

 Test plan approved without modification 

 Test plan approved with the following provisions: 

1. The test will be completed using a NCASI Method 8A sample train for three 1 hour runs. The samples will be 

analyzed by Ion Chromatography which is alternative to the listed method but is allowed by CTM13B. 

2. The two stacks will be tested simultaneously as required by the permit under two fuel firing scenarios (solid fuel 

and natural gas) 

3. The unit shall be operating at ≥630 long tons greenball/hour to avoid a throughput limit being set. 

4. Please be reminded all periods indicating noncompliance with emission limits must be reported to the MPCA. 

This includes any periods of engineering tests. Operating at a rate other than that required by the current air 

permit must also be reported. Deviations ultimately need to be reported on the facility’s semiannual deviation 

and annual compliance certification forms. 

5. Label on CD copy should include: Facility Name, AQ File No., Emission Unit Designator, and Test Date.

Attached Forms

 Operating Data Summary – Combustion Sources Operating Data Summary – Waste Combustors 

 Operating Data Summary – Process Sources Operating Data Summary – Asphalt Plants 

 Certifications Form Microfiche/CD-ROM Submittal Form 

 Performance Test Report Completeness Criteria 

Note: Forms are also available at www.pca.state.mn.us/air/performancetest.html

Approved by:

Date: January 24, 2010 

Andrew Place, Pollution Control Specialist 

Compliance and Enforcement Unit 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

Please contact me at 651-757-2652 if you have any questions regarding this approval. 

Please be aware that enforcement action will be taken for performance test failures indicating emissions above applicable limits 

(excess actual emissions to the environment). Failures commonly result in assessment of a monetary penalty. Upon the first test 
aq-f6-08 

5/1/07 Page 2 of 2 

failure, the Company should take immediate measures to minimize emissions. The measures taken should be documented, as they 

will become part of the record of corrective actions. 

Hard Copy Performance Test Reports and Microfiche or CD Copy submittals will be addressed to: 

Air Quality Compliance Tracking Coordinator 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

520 Lafayette Road North 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 

cc: Dan Koschak, Barr Engineering (email) 

 Steve Palzkill, MPCA (email) 

 AQ Correspondence File No. 869A 

 
Test Plan 

For A Taconite Production Facility

United Taconite, LLC

Forbes, Minnesota

Date Test Plan created/revised: December 22, 2010

Scheduled Test Dates: Week of January 10 or 24, 2010 (weather dependent)

PART I: General Information

Emissions facility 

location

Facility contact Testing company contact

United Taconite, LLC

1200 West Hwy 16

Forbes, Minnesota 

55738

Candice Maxwell

Section Manager - Environmental Affairs

United Taconite, LLC

P.O. Box 180

Eveleth, Minnesota 55738

(218)744-7849

(218) 744-7635 (fax)

Dan Koschak

Sr. Air Quality Technician

Barr Engineering Company

3128 14th Avenue East

Hibbing, MN 55746

(218)225-8635

Minnesota Air Emissions Permit Number: 13700113-005

AQD File Number: 869A

Reason emissions units are to be tested: 

Performance Test: Due before the start of actual construction on EU 040 for the project 

authorized by Air Emission Permit No. 13700113-005 while firing only solid fuel and another test 

while firing only natural gas to verify the ratio of sulfuric acid mist to sulfur dioxide used in the 

application for Air Emission Permit No. 13700113-005. The 2A and 2B stacks (SV048 and 

SV049) shall be tested simultaneously.

Two testing weeks have been listed as potential testing periods. This is due to concerns with 

possible cold weather affecting safety and method performance as well. 

The table below provides the emissions units’ plant nomenclature and permit identification. Stack 

drawings showing stack dimensions and test port orientation and locations relative to airflow 

disturbances are attached.

Process unit nomenclature Emissions unit 

number

Stack vent 

number

Group No.

East Line 2 Induration Stack 2A EU042 SV048 --

West Line 2 Induration Stack 2B EU042 SV049 --
2

PART II: Testing Requirements

The following table identifies pollutants to be determined; applicable emissions limit and units, 

and associated regulation for each emissions unit and stack vent.

Process unit 

nomenclature 

Limitation Basis of 

Pollutant Tested

Pollutant Tested/Permit 

Limit

Specific 

Methods/Procedures 

Required Citation

Line 2 Waste 

Gas Stack 

2A (SV048)

(EU042)

Title I Condition: 

Testing associated 

with a limit taken

to avoid classification 

as a major 

modification under 40

CFR Section 52.21 

and Minn. R. 

7007.3000; Minn. R.

7017.2020, subp. 1

EU042 Sulfuric Acid 

Mist:

less than or equal to 

15.4 tons using 30-day 

Rolling Sum rolled daily.

EU042 Sulfur Dioxide:

less than or equal to 

197 tons using 30-day 

Rolling Sum rolled daily

Sulfuric Acid Mist/Sulfur 

Dioxide

Testing will be performed

on EU042 Waste Gas 

Stacks SV048 and SV049 

simultaneously during two 

fuel firing conditions (solid 

fuel and natural gas only)

EPA Method 1-4

40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A

NCASI Method 8A or EPA 

Method 8 (see Part IV)

Line 2 Waste 

Gas Stack 

2B (SV049)

(EU042)

Part III: Operating Conditions

.

Process equipment description for units to be tested

Emission Unit #(s) Stack Vent # Description

EU042 SV048, SV049 Line 2 induration process waste gases

Process Parameters to be Monitored: all units to be tested at 90 percent or greater of 

maximum production

Emission Unit #(s) Process 

Parameter Units Frequency Range

EU042 (Line 2)

Greenball feed 

rate

Long Tons per 

hour 15 minutes >630

Finished pellet 

production rate, 

Long Tons per 

hour 15 minutes ~550

Solid fuel input Tons/hour 15 minutes ~7.0-9.0

Natural Gas 

usage

CFM 15 minutes ~4000 CFM
3

Control equipment 

ID

Control equipment 

description

Monitored parameters 

Control device parameters recorded at 

minimum of 15 minute intervals during the test

CE049, SV048

CE050, SV049

Wet scrubber high 

efficiency w/out lime

Scrubber water flow rate, gpm

Pressure drop across each scrubber, inches 

w.c.

Part IV: Test Methods

All tests will be performed using the following USEPA reference test methods.

Test methods

Method 1 Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources. Once per location

Method 2 EPA Method 2 for stack gas velocity and volumetric flow rate. One 

determination per sulfuric acid mist test run. 

Method 3 /3A EPA Method 3 or modified 3A to determine stack gas molecular weight at 

the Line 2 Waste Gas stacks. Integrated stack gas samples will be 

collected in Tedlar bag and analyzed with instrument calibrated per EPA 

Method 3A.

Method 4 EPA Method 4 for determination of moisture content in stack gas will be 

performed in conjunction with sulfuric acid mist.

Sulfuric Acid 

Mist/SO2

NCASI Method 8A

or EPA Method 8

NCASI Method 8A or EPA Method 8 for the determination of sulfuric acid 

mist and sulfur dioxide. Three tests run each to determine sulfuric acid mist 

and sulfur dioxide concentrations. The test method to be used is currently 

being researched and will be discussed in the pretest meeting.

Part V: Continuous Emissions Monitors

SO2 and NOx CEMS systems are installed on both stacks. To date neither CEMS has been 

certified. A RATA was completed on SV049 in November 2010.

Part VI: Other

Sulfuric acid mist (SAM) emissions will be reported in concentration and lb/hour. A ratio of SAM to 

sulfur dioxide will be provided. The test report will be submitted to the MPCA on or before 

February 28, 2010. 

Test Dates: tests scheduled for January 11-14 with January 24-28, 2010 as a backup dates 

depending on weather conditions. The proposed test schedule follows1

:

Monday

January 10, 2010

Tuesday

January 11, 2010

Wednesday

January 12, 2010

Thursday

January 13, 2010

Friday

January 14, 2010

Setup

1200-1600

Test 2A and 2B 

Waste Gas Stacks on 

solid fuel (SV048 

and SV049)

3 - runs for sulfuric 

acid mist /SO2

0700-1500

Test 2A and 2B 

Waste Gas Stacks 

on natural gas

(SV048 and SV049)

3 - runs for sulfuric 

acid mist /SO2

0700-1500
4

1 The test schedule may be modified prior to the test dates

United Taconite and Barr Engineering contacts will make themselves available for a pretest 

meeting prior 7 days in advance of the testing. At the preference of the MPCA, United Taconite

suggests the pretest meeting be conducted by telephone. 

Maintenance: A description of any necessary work done within 30 days prior to the test and the 

normal maintenance schedule followed will be included in the test report.

Test Reports: One hard copy and one electronic copy in .pdf format on CD of the test report 

will be submitted to the MPCA on or before February 28, 2010. 

Test plans and report submittals will be addressed to:

Andrew Place

Performance Test Coordinator

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

520 Lafayette Road

St. Paul, MN 55155-4194

Closing Remarks

If there are questions or comments about the information provided, please contact me by 

telephone or e-mail.

Candice Maxwell

Section Manager - Environmental Affairs

United Taconite, LLC

Attachments: 

Figure 1—Test port location drawings (SV048, EU042)

Figure 2—Test port location drawings (SV049, EU042)

c: Dan Koschak—Barr Engineering Company
Appendix H

Project Participants and Contact Information 
#23691092.06 007 

Project Participants and Contact Information 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Andrew Place – Performance Test Coordinator 

United Taconite, LLC

 Candice Maxwell – Section Manager - Environmental Affairs 

Jennifer Kruse– Process Engineer and Lab Supervisor

Lisa Weidemann – Environmental Coordinator 

Barr Engineering Company

Tim Russell – Vice President/Chemical Engineer 

Tom Kuchinski – Stack Testing Supervisor 

Dan Koschak – Senior Air Quality Technician/Project Manager 

Ryan Pantzke – Air Quality Technician 

Michael Norstrem – Air Quality Technician 

T.J. Webb – Air Quality Technician 

CONTACT INFORMATION 

MPCA 

Andrew Place 

Performance Test Coordinator 

Compliance and Enforcement 

Section—Industrial Division 

Minnesota Pollution Control 

Agency 

520 Lafayette Rd. N. 

Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 

(651) 296-7169

andrew.place@state.mn.us

United Taconite, LLC 

Candice Maxwell 

Section Manager - Environmental 

Affairs 

1200 West Hwy 16 

Forbes, MN 55738 

(218) 744-7849 

Candice.Maxwell@CliffsNR.com

Barr Engineering Co. 

Dan Koschak 

Sr. Air Quality Technician 

Barr Engineering Company 

3128 14th Ave East 

Hibbing, MN 55746 

(218) 262-8635 

dkoschak@barr.com