# Results of the December 20-21, 2011

Sulfuric Acid Mist, Sulfur Dioxide, and Particulate Matter Performance Tests at the United Taconite, LLC Facility Located in Forbes, Minnesota
Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046)


# MPCA AQD File No. 869A Air Emissions Permit No. 13700113-005 Barr Project No. 23/69-1260.00

Prepared for United Taconite, LLC Forbes, Minnesota

January 2012

### i



## Results of the December 20-21, 2011 Sulfuric Acid M ist, Sulfur Dioxide, and Particulate Matter Performance Tests a t 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 Appendices23691260 

### ii List of Tables
Table 1 Particulate Matter Test Results – Line 1 Wa ste Gas Stack (SV046)-Solid Fuel Table 2 EPA Method 8 Test Results – Line 1 Waste Ga s Stack (SV046)-Solid Fuel Table 3 EPA Method 8 Test Results – Coal Line 1 Was te Gas Stack (SV046)-Natural Gas Table 4 Derivation of SAM to SO 2 

### Ratios – Line 1 (SV046)

List of Figures Figure 1 Test Port Locations – Line 1 Waste Gas Sta ck (SV046, EU040) Figure 2 Traverse Point Locations – Line 1 Waste Ga s Stack (SV046, EU040)

List of Appendices Appendix A Report Calculations and Nomenclature Appendix B Field Data Sheets Appendix C Laboratory Reports and Sample Chain of C ustody Appendix D Calibration Data Appendix E Visual Emissions Certificate Appendix F Cylinder Gas Certifications Appendix G Process Operating Data Appendix H Stack Test Plan Appendix I Project Participants and Contact Informa tion23691260 

### v 

# Executive Summary

Barr Engineering Company conducted performance test s on the Line 1 kiln (EU040) waste gas stack (SV046) at the United Taconite, LLC production faci lity located in Forbes, Minnesota. Tests were completed for determination of sulfuric acid mist ( SAM), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ), total particulate matter (TPM), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diame ter of 2.5 microns or less (PM 2.5 

### ), and particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns o r less (PM 10 

### ). Tests were conducted on December 20, 2011 for SAM, SO 2 

### , and particulates while the kiln was burning solid f uel. Sulfuric acid mist and SO 2 

### testing was performed again on December 21, 2011 w hile the kiln was firing on natural gas. The purpose of these tests was to determine particulate emissions and the ratio of SAM to SO 2 

### emissions after construction modifications to burn solid fuel were made to EU040, as authorized by Air Emission Permit No. 13700113-005. The test results are summa rized in the following Executive Summary Tables. 

## Executive Summary Tables EPA Method 5,9 and 202 Average Test Results
Test Date 12/20/2011 Fuel Condition Solid Fuel Volumetric Airflow Rate, DSCFM 292,000 Concentration, gr/dscf Dry Catch Only 0.0047 Dry Catch Plus Organic Condensibles (TPM) 0.0050 TPM Concentration Limit 0.0070 PM 2.5 

### (= PM 10 

### ) 0.0094 PM 2.5 

### (= PM 10 

### ) Limit 0.0139 Emission Rate, lb/hr Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 12 Dry Catch plus Organic Condensibles (TPM) 13 TPM Emission Rate Limit 42 PM 2.5 

### (= PM 10 

### ) 23 Opacity, % (Limit 20%) 023691260 

### vi 

## Executive Summary Tables (Continued)

EPA Method 8 Average Test Results Source Line 1 Waste Stack Stack Vent No. SV046 Emission Unit EU040 Test Date 12/20/2011 Fuel Condition Solid Fuel Volumetric Airflow Rate, DSCFM 302,000 Concentration, lb/dscf Sulfuric Acid Mist 5.6 x 10 -7 

### Sulfur Dioxide 1.4 x 10 -5 

### Emission Rate, lb/hr Sulfuric Acid Mist 10 Sulfur Dioxide 258 Percent Sulfuric Acid Mist to Sulfur Dioxide 3.9

EPA Method 8 – Gas Condition Average Test Results Source Line 1 Waste Gas Stack Stack Vent No. SV046 Emission Unit EU040 Test Date 12/21/2011 Fuel Condition Natural Gas Volumetric Airflow Rate, DSCFM 306,000 Concentration, lb/dscf Sulfuric Acid Mist 2.3 x 10 -7 

### Sulfur Dioxide, 2.0 x 10 -6 

### Emission Rates, lb/hr Sulfuric Acid Mist 4.2 Sulfur Dioxide 37 Percent Sulfuric Acid Mist to Sulfur Dioxide 11.923691260 

### 1 

# Introduction

Barr Engineering Company conducted performance test s on the Line 1 kiln (EU040) waste gas stack (SV046) at the United Taconite, LLC production faci lity located in Forbes, Minnesota. Tests were completed for determination of sulfuric acid mist ( SAM), sulfur dioxide (SO 2 

### ), total particulate matter (TPM), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diame ter of 2.5 microns or less (PM 2.5 

### ), and particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns o r less (PM 10 

### ). Tests were conducted on December 20, 2011 for SAM, SO 2 

### , and particulates while the kiln was burning solid f uel. Sulfuric acid mist and SO 2 

### testing was performed again on December 21, 2011 w hile the kiln was firing on natural gas. The purpose of these tests was to determine particulate emissions and the ratio of SAM to SO 2 

### emissions after construction modifications to burn solid fuel were made to EU040, as authorized by Air Emission Permit No. 13700113-005.
A test plan, dated September 8, 2011, was submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) prior to testing. The test plan was discuss ed in a pretest meeting held on September 19, 2011. Attendees of the pretest meeting were Candice Maxwe ll of UTAC, Tom Kuchinski of Barr Engineering and Andy Place of the MPCA. A test plan approval l etter was provided on September 30, 2011 by Andy Place. Testing was initially scheduled for Oc tober 18-20, 2011, but was delayed until December 20-21, 2011 due to issues with the coal mill result ing in the inability to burn 100% coal consistently

. The MPCA was notified of schedule changes. Copies of the test plan, MPCA approval letter, and communications are provided in Appendix H.

Dan Koschak led the Barr test team. Candice Maxwel l and Lisa Weidemann of UTAC provided coordination between the test team and process oper ations. The tests were not witnessed by a representative of the MPCA. A list of project part icipants is provided in Appendix I.
The testing consisted of three one-hour test runs f or determination of SAM and SO 2 

### concentrations and emission rates during both solid fuel and natural g as firing conditions. Particulate matter results we re determined by performing three one-hour runs only d uring the solid fuel condition. A single one hour visible emissions test was conducted during the sol id fuel condition. Field data, along with other supporting documentation, are located in the append ices.23691260 

### 2 

# Results Summary

Table 1 presents the results of the particulate mat ter test for Line 1 waste gas stack (SV046). This test was conducted simultaneously with the SAM and SO 2 

### testing on December 20, 2011 while the kiln was firing on solid fuel. The total particulate matter (filterable plus organic condensables, TPM) concentration was 0.0050 grains per dry standard cu bic foot (gr/dscf), resulting in an emission rate o f 13 lb/hr. The primary PM 2.5 

### /PM 10 

### concentrations were determined using the combined m ass of filterable matter, organic condensable, and inorgan ic condensable particulate matter from the EPA Method 5/202 sample train assuming all particulate is PM 2.5 

### /PM 10 

### . The results for both particulate size fractions of PM 2.5 

### and PM 10 

### were 0.0094 gr/dscf. The TPM, PM 2.5 

### , and PM 10 

### concentrations comply with the respective permitted limits. One 60 minut e test using EPA method 9 to determine opacity was performed during run one of the particulate testing runs. The test results are not summarized as all readings were zero percent. A copy of the field da ta sheet is located in Appendix B.
Table 2 presents the results of the SAM and SO 2 

### test on December 20, 2011 while the kiln was firin g on solid fuel. The SAM emission rate at average was 1 0 pounds per hour (lb/hr), and the SO 2 

### emission rate was 258 lb/hr.
Table 3 presents the results of the SAM and SO 2 

### test on December 21, 2011 while the kiln was firing on natural gas. The SAM emission rate at average was 4.2 pounds per hour (lb/hr), and the SO 2 

### emission rate was 37 lb/hr.
Table 4 provides a summary of SAM and SO 2 

### calculated data to verify the ratios used in the p ermit application that resulted in permit 13700113-005. The ratio of SAM: A SO2 emission rate was 0.039 during solid fuel combustion and 0.119 during natur al gas combustion. The ratio of sulfur in solid fu el that converts to SO 2 

### versus SAM was 98.3: 1.7
No testing difficulties or process delays were note d during these performance tests.
The tests were performed at or above production rat es identified in the test plan while the Line 1 furnace was firing solid fuel and natural gas. The process operating data is detailed in Appendix G, along with MPCA required process operating data for ms and solid fuel analysis data. Solid fuel samples were collected during each test run on December 20, 2011 by UTAC and analyzed by Twin Ports Testing. Results of the fuel analysis are located in Appendix G- Process Operating Data.23691260 

### 3 

# Process Description

Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (EU040)
The Line 1 pelletizing process uses an Allis Chalme rs rotary kiln (serial number B-41301), which is 120 feet in length with an 18’ 6” diameter. The pe llets pass through the kiln where they are heated t o approximately 2,400 degrees Fahrenheit. The heated gases from the kiln are mixed with recouped hot air from the pellet cooler. This air is used to dr y the green pellets prior to the kiln in the prehea t zones. The waste gas particulates are controlled with a Du con venturi scrubber (222 Type VVO).
The process rate on December 20, 2011 test while co mbusting solid fuel averaged 287 long tons per hour (LTPH) greenball feed. The process rate on De cember 21, 2011 test while combusting natural gas averaged 286 LTPH greenball feed. This satisfies the permit requirement to test at a greenball feed rate of greater than or equal to 250 LTPH.
Scrubber water flow rate and scrubber pressure drop were monitored during each test run. Scrubber water flow on December 20, 2011 averaged 4,157 gall ons per minute (gpm), and the pressure drop averaged 21.8 inches of water column (in. w.c.). D uring the natural gas fired testing on December 21, 2011, scrubber water flow averaged 4,154 gpm and pr essure drop averaged 21.7 in. w.c.
Process parameters monitored during testing, as pe r the stack test plan, can be located in Appendix G

.23691260 

### 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 1-2.

Location SV# Distance to

upstream Disturbance, (diameters) Distance to

downstream Disturbance, (diameters) Number of

ports Number of

Points

SV046 ~8.0 2.0 4 12


### Volumetric airflow determinations were performed in accordance with EPA Method 2 using an S type pitot tube. Airflows were determined in conjunctio n with the EPA Methods 8 and 5/202 tests.
Oxygen and carbon dioxide compositions of the Line 1 kiln waste gas stack was determined by modified EPA Method 3A. An integrated sample of dr y stack gas was collected in a Tedlar bag through the duration of each test run. The bag samples wer e analyzed using a Servomex Model 1440 oxygen and carbon dioxide analyzer calibrated with EPA Pro tocol gases. Copies of calibration gas certifications are located in Appendix F.
Stack gas moisture content was determined by the pe rformance of EPA Method 4, in conjunction with the EPA Methods 8 and M5/202 sample trains.

SAM and SO 2 

### concentrations were determined with EPA Method 8. The sample train configuration, sample and sample recovery was completed per the me thod. The hydrogen peroxide reagent was prepared fresh daily on-site. Sample trains were p urged with ambient air after the test runs. Sample s were analyzed by Enthalpy Analytical using the titr ation method.
Visible emissions were determined by a certified ob server following EPA Method 9. A copy of the field data sheet is located in Appendix B. The obs erver opacity certification is located in Appendix E.
Particulate concentrations were determined using EP A Method 5/202(post January 1, 2011). The sample train configuration, sample and sample recov ery was completed as method procedure states. The fractions of the EPA Method 5/202 sample train were combined and used to represent PM 2.5 

### and PM 10 

### . A copy of the sample chain of custodies and lab oratory reports are located in Appendix C.

EPA Methods 1-4, 8, 9, and 5 can be found in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A. EPA Method 202 is located in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix M.

# TablesCliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 1

PARTICULATE MATTER TEST RESULTS Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046)

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H 2 O 21.9 22 21.4 21.8 Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 4161 4154 4156 4157 Test Date 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 --- Test Period 1353 - 1501 1548 - 1700 1742 - 1851 --- Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60 Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 138 138 137 138 Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 13.1 12.7 13.2 13.0 Particulate Loading, g

Dry Catch 0.0124 0.0096 0.0122 0.0114 Organic Condensibles 0.0013 0.0003 0.0008 0.0008 Condensibles Organic and Inorganic 0.0136 0.0098 0.010 5 0.0113

Total 0.0261 0.0194 0.0228 0.0227 Air Flow Rate acfm 401,000 396,000 402,000 400,000 scfm 337,000 332,000 338,000 336,000

Fuel Condition: Solid Fuel

scfm 337,000 332,000 338,000 336,000 dscfm 293,000 290,000 293,000 292,000 Sample Volume acf 38.48 38.00 38.95 38.48 dscf 37.70 36.83 37.63 37.39

Isokinetic Variation, % 98.8 97.4 98.5 98.2 Particulate Concentration, gr/dscf

Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 0.0051 0.0040 0.0050 0.0047 Dry Catch + Organic Condensibles (TPM) 0.0056 0.0041 0.0053 0.0050

Total- PM 2.5 /PM 10 0.0107 0.0081 0.0093 0.0094 Particulate Emissions Rate, lb/hr

Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 13 10 13 12 Dry Catch + Organic Condensibles (TPM) 14 10 13 13

Total- PM 2.5 /PM 10 27 20 23 23 Process Rates Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 288 289 285 287 Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 228 230 229 229 Total Particulate Emission Rate, lb/LT Greenball 0.0 93 0.070 0.082 0.082 Total Particulate Emission Rate, lb/LT Fired Pellet 0.117 0.088 0.102 0.103

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 2

EPA METHOD 8 TEST RESULTS Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046)

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H 2 

### O 21.9 22 21.4 21.77 Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 4161 4154 4156 4157 Test Date 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 --- Test Period 1354 - 1502 1549 - 1701 1743 - 1852 --- Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60 Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 140 140 140 140 Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 11.6 13.0 11.5 12.0 EPA Method 8 laboratory Results, ug

SO 3 

### /SO 4 

### -Sulfuric Acid Mist 8,560 14,700 9,890 11,050

SO 2 

### 293,000 276,000 281,000 283,000 Air Flow Rate acfm 404,000 406,000 421,000 410,000 scfm 338,000 339,000 352,000 343,000 dscfm 298,000 295,000 312,000 302,000

Fuel Condition: Solid Fuel

dscfm 298,000 295,000 312,000 302,000 Sample Volume acf 43.90 45.00 45.95 44.95 dscf 43.23 43.59 44.68 43.83 Isokinetic Variation, % 96.7 98.4 95.6 96.9 Concentration, lb/dscf

SO 3 

### /SO 4 

### -Sulfuric Acid Mist 4.4E-07 7.4E-07 4.9E-07 5.6E-07

SO 2 

### 1.5E-05 1.4E-05 1.4E-05 1.4E-05 Emissions Rate, lb/hr

SO 3 

### /SO 4 

### -Sulfuric Acid Mist 7.8 13 9.1 10

SO 2 

### 267 247 259 258 Ratio sulfuric acid mist to SO 2 

### , % 2.9 5.3 3.5 3.9 Process Rate Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 288 289 285 287 Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 228 230 229 229

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite, LLC Forbes, Minnesota

TABLE 3

EPA METHOD 8 TEST RESULTS Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046)

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average Scrubber - Pressure Drop, in. H 2 

### O 21.6 21.7 21.7 21.7 Scrubber - Water Flow Rate, gal/min 4156 4150 4155 4154 Test Date 12/21/2011 12/21/2011 12/21/2011 --- Test Period 750 - 857 923 - 1029 1100 - 1206 --- Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60 Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 142 143 143 142 Avg. Moisture Content, %V/V 11.0 11.7 11.1 11.3 EPA Method 8 laboratory Results, ug

SO 3 

### /SO 4 

### -Sulfuric Acid Mist 3,250 6,070 4,710 4,677

SO 2 

### 48,900 37,000 37,600 41,200 Air Flow Rate acfm 419,000 419,000 417,000 418,000 scfm 345,000 345,000 343,000 344,000 dscfm 307,000 305,000 305,000 306,000 Sample Volume January 25, 2012

Fuel Condition: Natural Gas

acf 45.52 46.89 45.84 46.08 dscf 44.55 45.24 44.22 44.67

Isokinetic Variation, % 96.6 99.0 96.6 97.4

Concentration, lb/dscf

SO 3 

### /SO 4 

### -Sulfuric Acid Mist 1.6E-07 3.0E-07 2.3E-07 2.3E-07

SO 2 

### 2.4E-06 1.8E-06 1.9E-06 2.0E-06

Emissions Rate, lb/hr

SO 3 

### /SO 4 

### -Sulfuric Acid Mist 3.0 5.4 4.3 4.2

SO 2 

### 45 33 34 37

Ratio sulfuric acid mist to SO 2 

### , % 6.6 16 13 12 Process Rates Green Ball Feed Rate, LTPH 285 286 286 286 Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 231 233 234 233

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite January 24, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Parameter firing solid fuel firing natural gas Fired Pellet Production Rate, LT pellets/hr 229 233 SAM Emission Rate, lb SAM/hr 10.0 4.2 SO 2 

### Emission Rate 258 37.3 Ratio of SAM:SO 2 

### Emission Rates 0.039 0.119 S in SAM, lb S/hr 3.28 1.38 S in SO 2 

### , lb S/hr 129 18.7 Total S from ore and solid fuel, lb S/hr 132

S in SAM in ore per unit production, lb S/LT pellet s 0.0059 S in SO 2 

### in ore per unit production, lb S/LT pellets 0.080

S in SAM from ore, lb S/hr 1.36 S in SO 2 

### from ore, lb S/hr 18.4 S in SAM from solid fuel, lb S/hr 1.92 S in SO 2 

### from solid fuel, lb S/hr 111 S from solid fuel, lb S/hr 113 % of S in solid fuel that converts to SAM 1.7% % of S in solid fuel that converts to SO 2 

### 98.3% Ratio of S in solid fuel that converts to SO 2 

### vs SAM 98.3 : 1.7 TABLE 4

DERIVATION OF SAM TO SO 2 

### RATIOS

Line 1 (SV046)

Assume all S produced while firing 100 % natural ga s comes from the ore. This should relate to the pel let 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:

# Figures

# Appendices

# Appendix A
Report Calculations and NomenclatureCliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co. United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Compo sition, Moisture Content, and Particulate Emissions EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 5, 202 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test Date - - 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 Test Period - - 1353 - 1501 1548 - 1700 1742 - 1851 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 121.40 121.40 121.40 Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.57 28.57 28.57 Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -1.75 -1.75 -1.75 Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 138 138 137 Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 38.48 38.00 38.95 Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 0.9902 0.9902 0.9902 Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 1.38 1.38 1.44 Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 51 57 59 Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840 Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 1.328 1.311 1.330 Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 110 104 112 Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 11 10 10 Orsat Results, Dry Basis Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 2.10 1.80 2.00 Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.0 18.5 18.1 Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 79.9 79.7 79.9 Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.179 0.179 0.179 Run Time theta min 60 60 60 Particulate Loading Dry Catch Mdry g 0.0124 0.0096 0.0122 Wet Catch Organic Fraction (used for TPM calculatio n) M org g 0.0013 0.0003 0.0008 202 CPM result (organic plus inorganic) M CPM g 0.0136 0.0098 0.0105 Total (Dry Catch + 202 CPM result) Mn g 0.0261 0.0194 0.0228

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 598 598 597 Tsr = Tsf + 460 Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.44 28.44 28.44 Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6 Duct Area A Sq. ft 80.383 80.383 80.383 A = L x W/144 Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 37.70 36.83 37.63 Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr) Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 13.13 12.72 13.24 MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04 715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100 Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 29.06 29.03 29.04 Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.60 27.63 27.58 Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100) Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 83.23 82.13 83.33 Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5) Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 401,417 396,108 401,898 Qa = 60 x Vs x A Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 337,100 332,457 337,787 Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92) Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 292,851 290,174 293,055 Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92) Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000175 0.000175 0.000175 An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144) Isokinetic Variation I % 98.8 97.4 98.5 I = (0.0945xTsrxVm)/(PsxVsxAn x theta x(1-(MC/100)) ) Particulate Concentration Dry Catch Cs(dry) = 15.432 x M dry / Vmstd Cs(dry) gr/dscf 0.0051 0.0040 0.0050 Wet Catch Org Cs(org) = 15.432 x M org / Vmstd Cs(or g) gr/dscf 0.0005 0.0001 0.0003 TPM Cs(TPM)= 15.432 x (Mdry + M org)/ Vmstd Cs(TPM) g r/dscf 0.0056 0.0041 0.0053 202 CPM = 15.432 x M-CPM/ Vmstd Cs(cpm) gr/dscf 0.0056 0.0041 0.0043 Total Cs = 15.432 x Mn / Vmstd Cs gr/dscf 0.0107 0.0081 0.0093 Filterable Particulate Emissions Rate, Dry Catch On ly E(lb/hr) = Cs(dry) x Qd x 60 / 7000 Edry lb/hr 12.8 10.0 12.6 TPM Particulate Emissions Rate, Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch E(lb/hr) = Cs(dry)+Cs (org) x Qd x 60 / 7000 Edry+org lb/hr 14.1 10.3 13.4 Total Particulate Emissions Rate (PM 2.5/PM10), Dry Catch+202 CPM E(lb/hr) = Cs x Qd x 60 / 7000 Etot lb/hr 26.8 20.2 23.5Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co. United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Compo sition, Moisture Content, and sulfuric acid mist EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 8
Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) Fuel Condition: Solid Fuel Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test Date - - 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 Test Period - - 1354 - 1502 1549 - 1701 1743 - 1852 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 121.40 121.40 121.40 Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.57 28.57 28.57 Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -1.75 -1.75 -1.75 Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 140 140 140 Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 43.90 45.00 45.95 Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 0.9922 0.9922 0.9922 Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 2.14 2.24 2.36 Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 51 59 57 Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840 Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 1.337 1.340 1.394 Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 106 115 106 Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 15 23 17 Orsat Results, Dry Basis Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 2.10 1.80 2.00 Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.0 18.5 18.1 Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 79.9 79.7 79.9 Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.192 0.192 0.192 Run Time theta min 60 60 60 EPA Method 8 SO3/SO4 M-SO3/SO4 ug 8560 14700 9890 SO2 M-SO2 ug 293000 276000 281000

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 600 600 600 Tsr = Tsf + 460 Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.44 28.44 28.44 Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6 Duct Area A Sq. ft 80.383 80.383 80.383 A = L x W/144 Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 43.23 43.59 44.68 Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr) Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 11.64 12.97 11.47 MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04 715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100 Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 29.06 29.03 29.04 Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.77 27.60 27.78 Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100) Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 83.67 84.16 87.20 Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5) Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 403,537 405,880 420,542 Qa = 60 x Vs x A Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 337,516 339,381 351,934 Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92) Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 298,221 295,355 311,551 Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92) Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000201 0.000201 0.000201 An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144) Isokinetic Variation I % 96.7 98.4 95.6 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(SO 3/SO4) lb/dscf 4.4E-07 7.4E-07 4.9E-07 SO2 lb/dscf = M-SO2 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO2) lb/dscf 1.5E-05 1.4E-05 1.4E-05 SO3/SO4 emission Rate SO3/SO4 Edry = Cs(SO3/SO4) x Qd x 60 SO3/SO4 Edry l b/hr 7.8 13.2 9.1 SO2 Emission Rate Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch SO2 Edry = Cs(SO2) x Qd x 60 SO2 Edry lb/hr 267 247 259 Sulfuric Acid Mist percent of Total SO2 emissions
Fraction sulfuric acid mist= (SO3/SO4 Edry)/(SO2 Ed ry) x 100 Fraction H2SO4 % 2.9 5.3 3.5Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co. United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Determination of Volumetric Airflow Rate, Gas Compo sition, Moisture Content, and sulfuric acid mist EPA Methods 2, 3, 4, 8
Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) Fuel Condition: Natural Gas Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test Date - - 12/21/2011 12/21/2011 12/21/2011 Test Period - - 750 - 857 923 - 1029 1100 - 1206 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 121.40 121.40 121.40 Barometric Pressure Pbar in. Hg 28.23 28.23 28.23 Stack Static Pressure Pg in. H2O -1.75 -1.75 -1.75 Average Stack Temperature, dry bulb Tsf degrees F 142 143 143 Actual Dry Gas Meter Volume Vm cubic feet 45.52 46.89 45.84 Dry Gas Meter Calibration Factor Y - 0.9922 0.9922 0.9922 Average Orifice Meter Pressure Drop DH in H2O 2.25 2.36 2.31 Average Meter Temperature Tmf degrees F 48 55 55 Pitot Tube Coefficient Cp - 0.840 0.840 0.840 Average Square Root of Velocity Head (DP)^0.5 - 1.379 1.377 1.372 Volume of Water Vapor Condensed in Impingers Vwc ml 105 118 109 Mass of Water Vapor Collected in Desiccant Vwsg g 12 9 8 Orsat Results, Dry Basis Carbon Dioxide %CO2 %v/v 2.00 2.10 2.00 Oxygen %O2 %v/v 18.0 18.1 18.1 Carbon Monoxide + Nitrogen - %v/v 80.0 79.8 79.9 Nozzle Diameter Dn in 0.192 0.192 0.192 Run Time theta min 60 60 60 EPA Method 8 SO3/SO4 M-SO3/SO4 ug 3250 6070 4710 SO2 M-SO2 ug 48900 37000 37600

Calculated Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Average Absolute Stack Temperature (R) Tsr degrees R 602 603 603 Tsr = Tsf + 460 Stack Pressure Ps in Hg 28.10 28.10 28.10 Ps = Pbar + Pg / 13.6 Duct Area A Sq. ft 80.383 80.383 80.383 A = L x W/144 Meter Volume at Standard Conditions Vmstd cubic feet 44.55 45.24 44.22 Vmstd = 17.64 x Vm x Y x ((Pbar +(DH/13.6))/Tmr) Average Moisture Content of Stack Gas MC % Vol 11.00 11.67 11.08 MC = ((.04707 x Vwc+.04715*Vwsg)/((.04707 x Vwc+.04 715*Vwsg) + (Vmstd)) x 100 Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, dry Md lb/lbmol 29.04 29.06 29.04 Md = (0.44x(%CO2))+(0.32x(%O2))+(0.28x(%N2+%CO)) Molecular Weight of Stack Gas, wet Ms lb/lbmol 27.83 27.77 27.82 Ms = Md x (1-(MC/100))+18 x (MC/100) Average Stack Gas Velocity Vs ft/sec 86.87 86.93 86.54 Vs = 85.49 x Cp x (dP)^0.5 x ((Tsr/(Ps x Ms))^0.5) Actual Volumetric Flowrate Qa acfm 418,980 419,270 417,362 Qa = 60 x Vs x A Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qs scfm 345,427 344,998 343,190 Qs = Qa x (528/(Ts+460)) x (Ps/29.92) Dry Volumetric Flowrate at Standard Conditions Qd dscfm 307,416 304,728 305,180 Qd = Qa x (1-(MC/100)) x (528/Tsr) x (Ps/29.92) Nozzle Cross-Sectional Area An sq. ft 0.000201 0.000201 0.000201 An =( 3.14 x Dn^2) /(4 x 144) Isokinetic Variation I % 96.6 99.0 96.6 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(SO 3/SO4) lb/dscf 1.6E-07 3.0E-07 2.3E-07 SO2 lb/dscf = M-SO2 x 2.20462^-9/Vmstd Cs(SO2) lb/dscf 2.4E-06 1.8E-06 1.9E-06 SO3/SO4 emission Rate SO3/SO4 Edry = Cs(SO3/SO4) x Qd x 60 SO3/SO4 Edry l b/hr 3.0 5.4 4.3 SO2 Emission Rate Dry Catch+Organic Wet Catch SO2 Edry = Cs(SO2) x Qd x 60 SO2 Edry lb/hr 44.6 33.0 34.3 Sulfuric Acid Mist percent of Total SO2 emissions
Fraction sulfuric acid mist= (SO3/SO4 Edry)/(SO2 Ed ry) x 100 Fraction H2SO4 % 6.6 16.4 12.5

# Appendix B

Field Data SheetsBarrEPA METHOD 5 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-8, , P-5 Pitot TubeNo. 4-3Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9902Bar.Press. 28.57 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 11 in. HgDate 12/20/11 Test 1 Run # 1 Orifice H@1.8931 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 8 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 4 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1353 692.281 5.0 696.00 2.100 1.61 3.43 695.71 * 138 * * * 51 51 182 10.0 699.45 2.100 1.62 3.46 699.17 * 138 * * * 49 513 15.0 702.41 1.400 1.08 2.82 702.00 * 137 * * * 50 514 20.0 705.72 1.950 1.51 3.33 705.33 * 137 * * * 50 515 25.0 709.00 1.800 1.39 3.20 708.53 * 138 * * * 51 516 30.0 711.71 1.250 0.96 2.67 711.20 * 138 * * * 52 517 35.0 714.88 1.850 1.43 3.25 714.45 * 138 * * * 51 508 40.0 718.33 2.100 1.62 3.46 717.91 * 138 * * * 53 509 45.0 721.09 1.200 0.93 2.62 720.53 * 137 * * * 53 5010 50.0 724.37 2.050 1.59 3.42 723.95 * 137 * * * 53 5011 55.0 727.83 2.200 1.70 3.54 727.50 * 138 * * * 54 5012 60.0 730.76 1.400 1.08 2.83 730.33 * 138 * * * 55 50End Time 1501Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.38Avg Ts= 137.67Avg Tm= 51.17Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 420459 Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. 3-6 Final wt., g 94 10 106 0 1066Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.179 Initial wt., g 0 0 100 0 1055Difference 94 10 6 0 11 121BarrEPA METHOD 5 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-8, 0, P-5 Pitot Tube No. 4-3Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9902Bar.Press. 28.57 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/20/11 Test 1 Run # 2 Orifice H@1.8931 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 9 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 4 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1548 731.001 5.0 734.20 1.950 1.53 3.36 734.36 * 139 * * * 53 53 182 10.0 737.64 2.100 1.65 3.50 737.86 * 139 * * * 53 533 15.0 740.60 1.450 1.14 2.91 740.77 * 139 * * * 55 534 20.0 743.85 1.900 1.50 3.34 744.11 * 137 * * * 56 545 25.0 747.22 1.950 1.54 3.39 747.50 * 138 * * * 58 546 30.0 749.90 1.150 0.91 2.61 750.10 * 138 * * * 59 557 35.0 753.18 1.800 1.43 3.27 753.37 * 138 * * * 58 568 40.0 756.40 1.800 1.43 3.27 756.64 * 138 * * * 61 569 45.0 759.23 1.300 1.04 2.79 759.43 * 138 * * * 61 5710 50.0 762.70 2.100 1.68 3.55 762.97 * 137 * * * 61 5711 55.0 766.24 2.150 1.71 3.59 766.56 * 138 * * * 62 5712 60.0 769.00 1.200 0.96 2.68 769.24 * 137 * * * 62 57End Time 1700Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.38Avg Ts= 138.00Avg Tm= 56.71Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 420461 Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. 3-6 Final wt., g 90 4 110 0 1037Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.179 Initial wt., g 0 0 100 0 1027Difference 90 4 10 0 10 114BarrEPA METHOD 5 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-8, 0, P-5 Pitot Tube No. 4-3Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9902Bar.Press. 28.57 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/20/11 Test 1 Run # 3 Orifice H@1.8931 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 10 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 4 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1742 769.501 5.0 772.90 1.950 1.56 3.41 772.91 * 138 * * * 56 57 182 10.0 776.40 2.100 1.68 3.54 776.46 * 137 * * * 57 573 15.0 779.23 1.300 1.04 2.79 779.25 * 137 * * * 58 574 20.0 782.60 1.950 1.56 3.42 782.67 * 137 * * * 58 575 25.0 785.91 1.800 1.44 3.29 785.96 * 137 * * * 59 576 30.0 788.65 1.250 1.00 2.74 788.70 * 137 * * * 60 577 35.0 791.88 1.800 1.44 3.29 791.99 * 138 * * * 59 578 40.0 795.30 2.150 1.72 3.59 795.58 * 138 * * * 61 579 45.0 798.36 1.350 1.09 2.85 798.44 * 137 * * * 61 5810 50.0 801.80 2.050 1.65 3.52 801.96 * 136 * * * 62 5811 55.0 805.52 2.350 1.89 3.77 805.73 * 137 * * * 63 5812 60.0 808.45 1.400 1.13 2.92 808.65 * 137 * * * 62 58End Time 1851Run Time 60 Avg DH= 1.44Avg Ts= 137.17Avg Tm= 58.50Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 420462 Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. 3-6 Final wt., g 98 4 110 0 1076Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.179 Initial wt., g 0 0 100 0 1066Difference 98 4 10 0 10 122BarrEPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-4, , P-6 Pitot TubeNo. 5-2Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9922Bar.Press. 28.57 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/20/11 Test 1 Run # 1 Orifice H@2.1658 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1354 870.561 5.0 874.60 2.150 2.53 4.03 874.59 * 140 * * * 47 46 182 10.0 878.57 2.200 2.59 4.08 878.67 * 140 * * * 50 463 15.0 881.85 1.450 1.71 3.32 881.99 * 140 * * * 51 464 20.0 885.41 1.900 2.24 3.81 885.79 * 140 * * * 51 465 25.0 889.25 2.000 2.36 3.90 889.70 * 141 * * * 55 476 30.0 892.51 1.200 1.42 3.04 892.73 * 140 * * * 55 477 35.0 896.40 2.050 2.43 3.97 896.71 * 140 * * * 54 478 40.0 900.31 1.900 2.25 3.82 900.52 * 141 * * * 56 489 45.0 903.38 1.150 1.37 2.98 903.50 * 140 * * * 55 4810 50.0 906.75 2.100 2.50 4.03 907.53 * 139 * * * 55 4811 55.0 911.00 2.200 2.61 4.12 911.65 * 140 * * * 58 4912 60.0 914.46 1.400 1.67 3.30 914.95 * 140 * * * 58 50End Time 1502Run Time 60 Avg DH= 2.14Avg Ts= 140.08Avg Tm= 50.54Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. NA Impinger 1 2 3 4Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 126 150 130 0 1045Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.192 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 0 1030Difference 26 50 30 0 15 121BarrEPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-4, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9922Bar.Press. 28.57 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/20/11 Test 1 Run # 2 Orifice H@2.1658 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1549 923.711 5.0 927.70 2.050 2.51 4.04 927.75 * 141 * * * 55 54 182 10.0 931.72 2.200 2.69 4.19 931.95 * 141 * * * 61 543 15.0 935.22 1.400 1.73 3.37 935.31 * 140 * * * 62 544 20.0 939.03 2.050 2.53 4.08 939.39 * 140 * * * 62 545 25.0 942.95 1.900 2.35 3.93 943.32 * 140 * * * 66 556 30.0 946.11 1.250 1.55 3.20 946.52 * 140 * * * 65 557 35.0 950.22 2.100 2.60 4.14 950.66 * 141 * * * 63 578 40.0 954.34 1.950 2.42 3.99 954.65 * 140 * * * 66 579 45.0 957.39 1.150 1.43 3.08 957.73 * 140 * * * 65 5710 50.0 961.11 2.100 2.61 4.15 961.88 * 140 * * * 64 5711 55.0 965.22 2.200 2.73 4.25 966.13 * 140 * * * 63 5712 60.0 968.71 1.450 1.80 3.44 969.57 * 140 * * * 61 57End Time 1701Run Time 60 Avg DH= 2.24Avg Ts= 140.25Avg Tm= 59.21Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 3" GFF Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 137 153 125 0 1054Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.192 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 0 1031Difference 37 53 25 0 23 138BarrEPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-4, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9922Bar.Press. 28.57 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/20/11 Test 1 Run # 3 Orifice H@2.1658 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1743 971.441 5.0 975.60 2.300 2.76 4.25 975.69 * 138 * * * 55 54 18.52 10.0 979.67 2.400 2.87 4.33 980.01 * 140 * * * 60 553 15.0 983.08 1.500 1.80 3.44 983.46 * 140 * * * 61 544 20.0 987.15 2.200 2.65 4.17 987.62 * 140 * * * 62 535 25.0 991.22 2.100 2.53 4.07 991.69 * 140 * * * 63 546 30.0 994.54 1.350 1.63 3.27 994.97 * 139 * * * 61 547 35.0 998.50 2.100 2.53 4.07 999.04 * 140 * * * 63 548 40.0 1002.45 2.050 2.47 4.03 1003.07 * 141 * * * 63 549 45.0 1005.90 1.400 1.69 3.33 1006.40 * 139 * * * 62 5410 50.0 1009.67 2.250 2.71 4.22 1010.62 * 140 * * * 61 5411 55.0 1013.58 2.400 2.89 4.35 1014.97 * 140 * * * 60 5412 60.0 1017.39 1.500 1.80 3.44 1018.41 * 140 * * * 59 54End Time 1852Run Time 60 Avg DH= 2.36Avg Ts= 139.75Avg Tm= 57.42Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 3" GFF Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 134 150 122 0 1046Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.192 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 0 1029Difference 34 50 22 0 17 123BarrEPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 1Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-4, , P-6 Pitot TubeNo. 5-2Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9922Bar.Press. 28.23 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/21/11 Test 1 Run # 1 Orifice H@2.1658 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 0750 23.601 5.0 27.55 2.100 2.42 3.93 27.53 * 140 * * * 36 36 182 10.0 31.67 2.350 2.70 4.15 31.68 * 141 * * * 48 393 15.0 35.27 1.700 1.99 3.58 35.26 * 141 * * * 52 404 20.0 39.16 2.100 2.46 4.00 39.26 * 141 * * * 53 415 25.0 43.05 2.000 2.35 3.91 43.17 * 142 * * * 54 436 30.0 46.42 1.300 1.53 3.16 46.33 * 142 * * * 55 437 35.0 50.53 2.150 2.54 4.07 50.40 * 141 * * * 56 438 40.0 54.53 2.000 2.36 3.93 54.33 * 142 * * * 55 469 45.0 57.69 1.350 1.60 3.23 57.57 * 142 * * * 55 4610 50.0 61.48 2.100 2.48 4.03 61.60 * 142 * * * 55 4711 55.0 65.42 2.150 2.55 4.09 65.69 * 141 * * * 55 4712 60.0 69.12 1.700 2.01 3.63 69.32 * 143 * * * 55 48End Time 0857Run Time 60 Avg DH= 2.25Avg Ts= 141.50Avg Tm= 47.83Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. NA Impinger 1 2 3 4Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 122 157 126 0 1050Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.192 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 0 1038Difference 22 57 26 0 12 117BarrEPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 2Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-4, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9922Bar.Press. 28.23 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 10 in. HgDate 12/21/11 Test 1 Run # 2 Orifice H@2.1658 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 0923 79.381 5.0 83.51 2.200 2.70 4.21 83.59 * 143 * * * 52 49 182 10.0 87.71 2.350 2.88 4.34 87.93 * 143 * * * 59 493 15.0 91.41 1.600 1.97 3.61 91.54 * 143 * * * 61 504 20.0 95.76 2.200 2.72 4.24 95.79 * 143 * * * 57 505 25.0 99.89 2.100 2.59 4.13 99.92 * 143 * * * 63 516 30.0 103.27 1.400 1.74 3.40 103.31 * 143 * * * 63 527 35.0 107.39 2.050 2.55 4.11 107.42 * 143 * * * 59 528 40.0 111.29 1.900 2.35 3.95 111.37 * 142 * * * 61 529 45.0 114.79 1.400 1.74 3.39 114.77 * 143 * * * 60 5210 50.0 118.52 2.050 2.55 4.11 118.87 * 141 * * * 58 5311 55.0 122.60 2.200 2.72 4.24 123.12 * 143 * * * 59 5312 60.0 126.27 1.500 1.86 3.51 126.63 * 142 * * * 58 53End Time 1029Run Time 60 Avg DH= 2.36Avg Ts= 142.67Avg Tm= 55.25Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 3" GFF Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 137 154 127 0 1085Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.192 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 0 1076Difference 37 54 27 0 9 127BarrEPA METHOD 8 - FIELD DATA SHEET - RUN 3Engineering CompanyProject Cliffs Natural Resources Train C-4, 0, P-6 Pitot Tube No. 5-2Cp 0.840 Sample Train Leak Rate, cfm:Sample Location SV046 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack MeterY 0.9922Bar.Press. 28.23 in. Hg Pretest 0.000 at 12 in. HgDate 12/21/11 Test 1 Run # 3 Orifice H@2.1658 Stat Press. -1.75 in. H2O Posttest 0.000 at 15 in.HgOperators DJK/RMP Probe Length 5 ft.Probe Liner Type: Glass OtherSampleIdeal SampleOxygenSample 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, ft3in. H2O in. H2OVm, ft3Vm, ft3 in. Hg Ts,°FOutlet Inlet OutletStart Time 1100 133.561 5.0 137.48 2.150 2.62 4.16 137.72 * 143 * * * 54 52 182 10.0 141.60 2.250 2.73 4.24 141.96 * 144 * * * 59 523 15.0 145.03 1.500 1.83 3.48 145.44 * 143 * * * 61 524 20.0 149.15 2.050 2.51 4.08 149.52 * 143 * * * 56 515 25.0 153.15 2.000 2.43 4.01 153.53 * 143 * * * 62 526 30.0 156.49 1.400 1.72 3.37 156.90 * 143 * * * 62 537 35.0 160.59 2.150 2.64 4.19 161.09 * 143 * * * 61 528 40.0 164.67 2.000 2.44 4.03 165.12 * 144 * * * 61 529 45.0 168.03 1.400 1.71 3.37 168.49 * 143 * * * 60 5210 50.0 171.88 2.150 2.63 4.18 172.66 * 142 * * * 55 5111 55.0 175.66 2.100 2.55 4.10 176.77 * 143 * * * 57 5212 60.0 179.40 1.600 1.95 3.59 180.36 * 143 * * * 55 52End Time 1206Run Time 60 Avg DH= 2.31Avg Ts= 143.08Avg Tm= 55.25Integrated Gas Sampling Data :MOISTURE RECOVERY DATA :Box No. NA Leak Rate NA cc/min Filter No. 3" GFF Impinger1 2 3 4 Desiccant TotalBag No. NAO2ReadingNA % Nozzle No. Glass Final wt., g 128 156 125 0 1058Bag Vol. NAO2Analyzer No.NA Nozzle Dn. 0.192 Initial wt., g 100 100 100 0 1050Difference 28 56 25 0 8 117

# Appendix C
Laboratory Reports and Sample Chain of CustodyCliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite, LLC January 17, 2012 Forbes, MN Results of Gravimetric Particulate Analysis Line 1 Waste Gas Stack SV046 December 20, 2011

Parameter Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Reagent Blank Train Blank

Method 5/201A Particulate Mass Determination Air Filter Particulate Net Mass Maf g 0.00968 0.00883 0.01079 -0.00012 Probe Rinse Particulate Net Mass Mpw, Mpwb g 0.00353 0.00156 0.00245 0.00161 Probe Rinse Volume Vpw, Vpwb ml 100 100 125 150 Probe Rinse Blank Correction 1 Cpw g 0.00080 0.00080 0.00100 Cpw =Vpw x Mpwb/Vpwb Probe Rinse Blank Corrected Mass Mpwc g 0.00273 0.00076 0.00145 Mpw =Mpw -Cpwc Filterable Particulate Mass Mdry g 0.01241 0.00959 0.012 24 Mdry =Maf +Mpwc

Method 202 Particulate Mass Determination Organic Particulate Analysis Impinger Rinse Net Mass Mmc, Mmcb g 0.00309 0.00212 0.00259 0.00182 Impinger Rinse Volume Vmc, Vmcb ml 370 340 365 340 Impinger Rinse Blank Correction 2 Cmc g 0.00182 0.00182 0.00182 Cmc =Vmc x Mmcb/Vmcb Organic Particulate Mass Morg g 0.00127 0.00031 0.00077 Morg =Mmc -Cmc
Inorganic Particulate Analysis Impinger Contents Net Mass Mwf, Mwfb g 0.01336 0.01093 0.01065 0.0015 Impinger Contents After Aliquot Vwf, Vwfb ml 585 675 645 585 Stack Moisture Vwc ml 110 104 112 DI Impinger Charge and Rinse Vdi ml 575 671 633 Vdi =Vwf -Vwc Inorganic Particulate Mass Mio g 0.01336 0.01093 0.01065 Mio =Mwfc x (Vwf+Vb)/Vwf

Determination of NH 4 + Retained in Sample by Titration Normality of NH 4 OH N 0.1041 Volume of Solution Titrated Vst ml 100 100 100 Volume of Titrant Vt ml 0.45 0.70 0.40 NH 4 Addition Mass Mc g 0.000798 0.001241 0.000709
m c =17.03 x Vt x N /1000 Inorganic Particulate Mass (titrated) Miorg g 0.01256 0 .00969 0.00994 Miorg =Mio -Mc Total CPM for EPA Method 202 organic plus Inorganic blank corrected to train bla nk, limited to 2 mg Combined CPM 0.01565 0.01182 0.01253 Combined Train Blank Mass actual 0.00332 Maxmimum Train Blank Correction allowed 0.00200 0.002 00 0.00200 CPM train blank corrected mass 0.01365 0.00982 0.01053 1 Blank correction will be limited to 0.001% of the solvent weight K, correction factor for SO 4 0.35400 2 organic fraction blank corrected per EPA Method 202 pre Jan 1 2011 for comparison to MN rules for TPM Organic Train blank

Inorganic Train Blank

### S AMPLES 

### C OLLECTED 

### B Y 

### DJK 

### A NALYZED 

### O N 

### : 12/21 

### A NALYSIS 

### P ERFORMED 

### B Y 

### TYL
Run Filter ID Description Gross Weight Date/Time Tare Weight Date/Time Uncorrected Net Mass (g) Total Preliminary Results 0.65245 12/22/2011 10:05 0.64283 8/17/2011 11:34 0.65251 12/22/2011 16:07 0.64276 8/18/2011 9:30 0.02966

0.64870 12/22/2011 10:06 0.63980 8/17/2011 11:36 0.64867 12/22/2011 16:08 0.63991 8/18/2011 9:32 0.02345

0.65087 12/22/2011 10:07 0.64007 8/17/2011 11:38 0.65089 12/22/2011 16:09 0.64010 8/18/2011 9:33 0.02648

0.63914 12/22/2011 10:07 0.63949 8/17/2011 11:39 0.63914 12/22/2011 16:11 0.63904 8/18/2011 9:33 0.00481



## L ABORATORY 

## R EPORT 

## P ARTICULATE 

## T ESTING 

## F RONT 

## H ALF 

## G RAVIMETRIC 

## R ESULTS
C LIENT 

### United Taconite, LLC.

Light Yellow 

### T EST 

### D ATE 

### 12/20/2011 

### S OURCE 

### I D 

### Line 1 Waste Gas Stack SV046

0.00968 

### S AMPLING 

### L OCATION 

### Stack 

### A IR 

### F ILTERS: 

### 4 INCH 

### GFF

R1 

### P ROJECT 

### N O. 

### 23/69-1260.01 200 004 

### T EST 

### T1

R2 420461 Light Yellow 0.00883 420459

-0.00012 R3 420462 Light Yellow 0.01079

R0 420463 Blank 0.63914 12/22/2011 16:11 0.63904 8/18/2011 9:33 0.00481

Run Beaker ID Description Gross Weight Date/Time Tare Weight Date/Time Uncorrected Net Mass (g) Solvent

Volume (ml) Is There Evidence of Sample Loss? 101.74209 12/22/2011 9:50 101.73858 11/7/2011 14:34 101.74170 12/22/2011 16:01 101.73815 11/8/2011 8:12

102.68785 12/22/2011 9:51 102.68639 11/7/2011 14:35 102.68776 12/22/2011 16:03 102.68609 11/8/2011 8:11

105.89171 12/22/2011 9:53 105.88925 11/7/2011 14:36 105.89153 12/22/2011 16:04 105.88910 11/8/2011 8:10

1.30822 12/26/2011 21:55 1.30662 11/16/2011 15:05 1.30825 12/27/2011 9:46 1.30663 11/17/2011 8:15 -0.00012

No 0.00353 100 

### P ROBE 

### W ASH: 

### A CETONE

R1 150 Light Particulate

0.00156 R0 420463 Blank

100 No

R3 429 Light Particulate 0.00245 125 R2 50 Light Particulate

R0 T648 Slight residue 0.00161 No

150 No



### R EMARKS

PAGE 1 OF 2 1/17/2012

### A NALYZED 

### O N 

### 12/21 

### A NALYSIS 

### P ERFORMED 

### B Y 

### MDM3

Run Beaker ID Description Gross Weight Date/Time Tare Weight Date/Time Uncorrected Net Mass (g) Solvent

Volume (ml) Is There Evidence of Sample Loss? 1.29543 12/26/2011 21:54 1.29236 11/16/2011 15:04 1.29542 12/27/2011 9:46 1.29232 11/17/2011 8:15

1.30548 12/26/2011 21:51 1.30338 11/16/2011 15:03 1.30552 12/27/2011 9:48 1.30337 11/17/2011 8:16

1.29705 12/26/2011 21:49 1.29445 12/21/2011 14:50 1.29708 12/27/2011 9:49 1.29450 12/22/2011 8:48

1.30330 12/26/2011 21:48 1.30275 12/21/2011 14:49 1.30336 12/27/2011 9:49 1.30276 12/22/2011 8:49

1.29947 12/26/2011 21:44 1.29768 12/21/2011 14:48



## L ABORATORY 

## R EPORT 

## P ARTICULATE 

## T ESTING 

## B ACK 

## H ALF 

## G RAVIMETRIC 

## R ESULTS
C LIENT 

### United Taconite, LLC.



### S OURCE 

### I D 

### Line 1 Waste Gas Stack SV046 

### P ROJECT 

### N O. 

### 23/69-1260.01 200 004 

### T EST 

### T1 

### T EST 

### D ATE 

### 12/20/2011



### S AMPLING 

### L OCATION 

### Stack 

### H EXANE 

### E XTRACT 

### (O RGANIC 

### )

R1 T649 Slight residue No

R2 T650 Slight residue 0.00212 340 No 0.00309 370

R3 T651 Slight residue 0.00259 No

R0 T652 Slight residue 0.00057 150 No 365

1.29947 12/26/2011 21:44 1.29768 12/21/2011 14:48 1.29951 12/27/2011 9:50 1.29766 12/22/2011 8:50

Run Beaker ID Description Gross Weight Date/Time Tare Weight Date/Time Uncorrected Net Mass (g) Solvent

Volume (ml) Is There Evidence of Sample Loss? 1.31076 12/26/2011 22:02 1.29740 12/21/2011 14:47 1.31072 12/27/2011 9:42 1.29736 12/22/2011 8:51

1.31495 12/26/2011 22:03 1.30404 12/21/2011 14:46 1.31498 12/27/2011 9:43 1.30402 12/22/2011 8:52

1.30077 12/26/2011 22:07 1.29012 12/21/2011 14:45 1.30075 12/27/2011 9:44 1.29010 12/22/2011 8:53

1.28649 12/26/2011 22:01 1.28632 12/21/2011 14:43 1.28650 12/27/2011 9:44 1.28632 12/22/2011 8:53

1.30087 12/26/2011 21:58 1.29936 12/21/2011 14:40 1.30088 12/27/2011 9:46 1.29938 12/22/2011 8:54 Slight residue 0.00182 340 No



### W ATER 

### F RACTION 

### (I NORGANIC 

### )

R1 T655 White residue 0.01336 585 No R000 T654

No R2 T656 White residue 0.01093 675 No

R3 T657 White residue



### Inorganic Titration Performed? Yes Remarks: No R0 T658 White residue 0.00018 0.01065 645

150 No

R000 T660 White residue 0.00150 585

PAGE 2 OF 2 1/17/2012

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite, LLC Forbes, Minnesota

Fuel Condition: Coal

IPA Impinger

Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 mg, SO3/SO4 8.56 14.70 9.89

Impinger results, SO2 fraction

Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 mg SO2 293 276 281

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite, LLC Forbes, Minnesota

Fuel Condition: Natural Gas

IPA Impinger

Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 mg, SO3/SO4 3.25 6.07 4.71

Impinger results, SO2 fraction

Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 mg SO2 48.9 37.0 37.6

# Appendix D

Calibration Data

### Routine Dry Gas Meter Calibration Control Module: C-4 Leak checks Barometric Press. -- 29 .27 Date: 12/12/11 Negative -- ok >5 W.C. Previous Y -- 1.00 42 Technician: TJW2 Positive -- ok > 15 in.Hg Previous Delta H -- 2.1428
Orifice Wet Test Wet Test Dry Gas Meter Orifice Diff Volume, Meter Volume Coefficient Coefficient Pressure H Ft 3 

### Inlet Outlet Temp, °F Ft 3 

### Y dH@ Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 0.500 7822.00 76.0 74.0 70.0 864.800 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7827.00 76.0 74.0 70.0 869.900 13 21 0.50 Total Average Average Average Total Minutes

5.00 76.0 74.0 70.0 5.100 13.35 0.9884 2.0307

75.0 Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 1.000 7791.00 75.0 73.0 70.0 833.470 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7796.00 75.0 73.0 70.0 838.540 9.0 36.44 1.00 Total Average Average Average Total Minutes

5.00 75.0 73.0 70.0 5.070 9.61 0.9911 2.1073

74.0 Tm Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 2.000 7797.00 76.0 73.0 70.0 839.560 Dry Gas Meter Elapsed Temp, °F Time of Cal. Point

2.000 7797.00 76.0 73.0 70.0 839.560 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7802.00 77.0 73.0 70.0 844.600 6 58.91 2.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 76.5 73.0 70.0 5.040 6.98 0.9960 2.2258

74.8 Tm Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 3.000 7803.00 77.0 73.0 70.0 845.620 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7808.00 77.0 73.0 70.0 850.660 5.0 41.65 3.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 77.0 73.0 70.0 5.040 5.69 0.9939 2.2208

75.0 Tm Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 4.000 7810.00 77.0 74.0 70.0 852.680 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7820.00 77.0 74.0 70.0 862.770 9.0 55.47 4.00 Total Average Average Average Total

10.00 77.0 74.0 70.0 10.090 9.92 0.9914 2.2445

75.5 Tm Average 0.9922 2.1658

M5APR.WQ1Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co. United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate M ethod (ALT-009) Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

Control Module C-4 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test date - - 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 Test period - - 1354 - 1502 1549 - 1701 1743 - 1852 Total run time t min 60 60 60 Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter V m acf 43.9 45.0 45.9 Absolute average dry gas meter temp T m °F 50.5 59.2 57.4 Absolute average dry gas meter temp T m °R 510.2 518.9 517.1 Barometric pressure P b inches Hg 28.6 28.6 28.6 Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75) 2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm 2 0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 Average orifice meter differential ∆ h avg in. H 2 O 2.14 2.24 2.36 Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H @ in. H 2 O 2.17 2.17 2.17 Dry molecular weight of stack gas M d lb/lb-mole 29.06 29.03 27.78 Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00 Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.6 0 Dry gas meter calibration check value Y qa Dimensionless 1.0219 1.0297 1.0552 Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 0.9922 0.992 2 0.9922
Average of Y qa 's from test run series 1.0356 Dry gas meter calibration factor 0.9922 % difference between average Y qa 's and Y -4.38% (must be within ± 5%) 

### ) ( 29

6. 13 ( 0319 .0 t

@ avg d avg b m

m qa 

### h M h P H T V Y ∆ • ∆ + ∆ ⋅ =Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co. United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate M ethod (ALT-009) Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

Control Module C-4 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test date - - 12/21/2011 12/21/2011 12/21/2011 Test period - - 750 - 857 923 - 1029 1100 - 1206 Total run time t min 60 60 60 Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter V m acf 45.5 46.9 45.8 Absolute average dry gas meter temp T m °F 47.8 55.3 55.3 Absolute average dry gas meter temp T m °R 507.5 514.9 514.9 Barometric pressure P b inches Hg 28.2 28.2 28.2 Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75) 2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm 2 0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 Average orifice meter differential ∆ h avg in. H 2 O 2.25 2.36 2.31 Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H @ in. H 2 O 2.17 2.17 2.17 Dry molecular weight of stack gas M d lb/lb-mole 29.04 29.06 29.04 Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00 Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.6 0 Dry gas meter calibration check value Y qa Dimensionless 1.0135 1.0155 1.0283 Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 0.9922 0.992 2 0.9922
Average of Y qa 's from test run series 1.0191 Dry gas meter calibration factor 0.9922 % difference between average Y qa 's and Y -2.71% (must be within ± 5%) 

### ) ( 29

6. 13 ( 0319 .0 t

@ avg d avg b m

m qa 

### h M h P H T V Y ∆ • ∆ + ∆ ⋅ =

### THERMOCOUPLE ID C-4-I Cal Date: 1/13/2011 

### CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2
REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-010 5-2 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 69 149 Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610 Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 480 529 609 Difference (degrees) 0 1 1 % Diff Abs. T 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 

## THERMOCOUPLE CALIBRATION

Meter In or 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-4-I Regression R Squared = 0.999998

-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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-4-I Regression R Squared = 0.999998

### THERMOCOUPLE ID C-4-O Cal Date: 1/13/2011 

### CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2
REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-010 5-2 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 or 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-4-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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-4-O Regression R Squared = 0.999989

### PYROMETER CALIBRATION

Pyrometer Number: C-4 

### 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 997 948 Reference (°F) Reference (°C) Reading

898 848 798 748 698 649 598 549 498 448 400 204 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: 398 348

-1 -51 299 249 199 150 99 50Routine Dry Gas Meter Calibration Control Module: C-8 Leak checks Barometric Press. -- 29 .24 Date: 11/4/2011 Negative -- ok >5 W.C. Previous Y -- 0.9884 Technician: AGA Positive -- ok > in.Hg Previous Delta H -- 1.8860

. Orifice Wet Test Wet Test Dry Gas Meter Orifice Diff Volume, Meter Volume Coefficient Coefficient Pressure H Ft 3 Inlet Outlet Temp, F Ft 3 Y dH@ Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 0.500 7377.00 75.0 70.0 74.0 96.860 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7382.00 74.0 71.0 74.0 101.860 12 34.75 0.50 Total Average Average Average Total Minutes

5.00 74.5 70.5 74.0 5.000 12.58 0.9959 1.8442

72.5 Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 1.000 7382.50 74.0 71.0 74.0 102.360 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7387.50 73.0 72.0 73.5 107.370 8.0 57.06 1.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 73.5 71.5 73.8 5.010 8.95 0.9932 1.8623

72.5 Tm Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 2.000 7388.00 73.0 72.0 73.5 107.875 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7393.00 73.0 72.0 73.0 112.900 6 25 2.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 73.0 72.0 73.3 5.025 6.42 0.9887 1.9087

Dry Gas Meter Elapsed Temp, F Time of Cal. Point

5.00 73.0 72.0 73.3 5.025 6.42 0.9887 1.9087

72.5 Tm Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 3.000 7394.00 73.0 72.0 73.0 113.905 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7399.00 74.0 72.0 73.0 118.930 5.0 15.69 3.00 Total Average Average Average Total

5.00 73.5 72.0 73.0 5.025 5.26 0.9871 1.9232

72.8 Tm Nominal Initial Initial Initial Initial Initial 4.000 7400.00 74.0 72.0 73.0 119.940 Actual Final Final Final Final Final Minutes SEC

7410.00 74.0 72.0 73.0 129.980 9.0 7.37 4.00 Total Average Average Average Total

10.00 74.0 72.0 73.0 10.040 9.12 0.9861 1.9273

73.0 Tm Average 0.9902 1.8931Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co. United Taconite, LLC January 25, 2012 Forbes, Minnesota

Emission Measurement Center (EMC) Approved Alternate M ethod (ALT-009) Alternative Method 5 Post-Test Calibration

Control Module C-8 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) Input Data Symbol Units Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Test date - - 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 12/20/2011 Test period - - 1353 - 1501 1548 - 1700 1742 - 1851 Total run time t min 60 60 60 Total sample volume measured by dry gas meter V m acf 38.5 38.0 39.0 Absolute average dry gas meter temp T m °F 51.2 56.7 58.5 Absolute average dry gas meter temp T m °R 510.8 516.4 518.2 Barometric pressure P b inches Hg 28.6 28.6 28.6 Conversion factor (29.92/528)(0.75) 2

--- (in Hg/°R) cfm 2 0.0319 0.0319 0.0319 Average orifice meter differential ∆ h avg in. H 2 O 1.38 1.38 1.44 Orifice meter calibration coefficient ∆ H @ in. H 2 O 1.89 1.89 1.89 Dry molecular weight of stack gas M d lb/lb-mole 29.06 29.03 29.04 Dry molecular weight of air --- lb/lb-mole 29.00 29.00 29.00 Specific gravity of mercury --- Dimensionless 13.60 13.60 13.6 0 Dry gas meter calibration check value Y qa Dimensionless 1.0013 1.0201 1.0177 Dry gas meter calibration factor Y Dimensionless 0.9902 0.990 2 0.9902
Average of Y qa 's from test run series 1.0130 Dry gas meter calibration factor 0.9902 % difference between average Y qa 's and Y -2.31% (must be within ± 5%) 

### ) ( 29

6. 13 ( 0319 .0 t

@ avg d avg b m

m qa 

### h M h P H T V Y ∆ • ∆ + ∆ ⋅ =

### THERMOCOUPLE ID C-8-I Cal Date: 1/26/2011 

### CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: AGA
REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-010 5-2 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 70 149 Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610 Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 481 530 609 Difference (degrees) -1 0 1 % Diff Abs. T 0.2% 0.0% 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-8-I Regression R Squared = 0.999992

-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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-8-I Regression R Squared = 0.999992

### THERMOCOUPLE ID C-8-O Cal Date: 1/26/2011 

### CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: AGA
REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-010 5-2 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 70 149 Reference Temp (deg R) deg F + 460 480 530 610 Probe Temp (deg R), deg F + 460 481 530 609 Difference (degrees) -1 0 1 % Diff Abs. T 0.2% 0.0% 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-8-O Regression R Squared = 0.999992

-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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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-8-O Regression R Squared = 0.999992

### PYROMETER CALIBRATION

Pyrometer Number: C-8 

### Date: 1/20/2011 Pyrometer Reference: CL-300-1000F 

### Technician: AGA

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 Reference (°F) Reference (°C) Reading
1002 952 902 852 802 752 702 652 600 549 498 448 400 204 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: 399

49 0 -50 349 300 251 200 150 98

### THERMOCOUPLE ID TC5-2 Cal Date: 1/7/2011



### CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2
REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-010 5-2 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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

### THERMOCOUPLE ID TC4-3 Cal Date: 1/8/2011 

### CALIBRATION TECHNICIAN: MMK2
REFERENCE STANDARDS DATE Hart Scientific 9103-A s/n A1B289 Report No. T10-010 5-2 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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 1700THERMOCOUPLE 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

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite December 20, 2011 Forbes, Minnesota

Nozzle Calibration L1 WGS (SV046)

Nozzle Calibration Nozzle No. Glass Used for Runs: 1

- 3

Point Measurement, inches 1 0.191 2 0.192 3 0.193 Average 0.192

Test Date 12/20/2011 Date Measured: 12/20/2011 Technician: DJK Signature:

### Cliffs Natural Resources Barr Engineering Co.

United Taconite December 20, 2011 Forbes, Minnesota

Nozzle Calibration L1 WGS (SV046)

Nozzle Calibration Nozzle No. 3-6 Used for Runs: 1

- 3

Point Measurement, inches 1 0.180 2 0.179 3 0.179 Average 0.179

Test Date 12/20/2011 Date Measured: 12/20/2011 Technician: DJK Signature:

### 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 - BA.09 Field Barometer Barr Office

Date Technician Time Altimeter ID Time Barometric Pressure Station

Pressure Condition Remarks NWS Observation

10/17/11 DJK 21:53 30.12 DJK 22:52 28.67 28.66 In Calibration As Found 12/16/11 TYL 8:53 30.34 DJK 944 28.93 28.88 In Calibration As Found 1/4/12 DJK 9:53 29.95 DJK 10:55 28.55 28.49 In Calibration As Found

# Appendix E

Visual Emissions Certificate

# Appendix F Cylinder Gas Certification

# 	

  

###    

### !!" #$



### %&'(&)*+!,-+!. /00123 &))+4'56'77)6'5+89 ::';+&)9'+&<9=> ,1?+@ABC+D&'7 4>6'&-+BE+//31?2!11 F?/!G+01!2!?/?  



# HI	IJKLMN 

# OPQQRL	STUSTPV

W/1+9X+CY)6'5Z+=[>+++\+++6[7)Z6>7-+8+?!/,2,! / ]^9'7;++_F?/GW/12W,0+++\+++`&X;++_F?/GW/12!31 +++\+++aaabZc9::<&))6'bc9< 

### defgh ijk # l    m  $ #$# $ $jin ok$k  #$

jk$ $ $jik#$$ $pq#jqr q#k   $k strtu v$ $k i ijk #kn !+YZ65 ijk # /+F3+Z:>+c(+w:G 8&)x9'+>69X6>7 !y!,y! y!/y!3 ?b31+z+b?+{ 8|D}E~4+; 8801?3

C7)6&=++W0 y!/y! ?b31+{ ^7)<&=+89'>(c:6[6:* "&Z+8^)9<9:95)&Y^* &)6&'+B9>7=+13 +0b0+{ $ 

j$$j#$ ?b31+{ ?b33+{ "B}C @X*57' !y!,y! y!/y!3 ?b33+z+b/+{ 8|D}E~4+; 88/0

C7)6&=++E9'7 y!/y! ?b33+{ ^7)<&=+89'>(c:6[6:* "&Z+8^)9<9:95)&Y^* &)6&'+B9>7=+10 +b1+{ $ 

j$$j#$ ?b33+{ "B}C E6:)957' &=&'c7 ^7+9'=*+=6&x6=6:*+9w+:^6Z+c9<Y&'*+w9)+5&Z+a^6c^+w& 6=Z+:9+c9<Y=*+a6:^+:^6Z+&'&=*Z6Z+Z^&==+x7+)7Y=&c7<7 ':+9)+)7&'&=*Z6Z+:^7)79w+x*+:^7+c9<Y&'*+a6:^9(:+7X: )&+c9Z:b r 

### %b+b+B&))6' BbCb8&=^9(' $ $ji$#  ^7+&x9[7+&'&=*Z7Z+a7)7+Y7)w9)<7>+6'+&cc9)>&'c7+a6: ^+])9c7>()7+"+9w+:^7+4]+)&c7&x6=6:*+])9:9c9=-+7 Y9):+E(<x7)+4]2Wy?,y!-+>&:7>+ C7Y:7<x7)+??,b ^7+&x9[7+&'&=*Z7Z+&)7+6'[&=6>+6w+:^7+c*=6'>7)+Y)7Z Z()7+6Z+=7ZZ+:^&'+/+YZ65b

# 	

  

###    

### !"!"# $%



### &'()*"+*", !-."./" 011*23453661534*78 993:*0183*0;8(< =>-*?@AB*C036 2<530+*AD*!!E>-/">> F-!"G*H>"/"-!-  



# IJ	JKLMNO 

# PQRRSM	TUVTUQW

.!>*8X*BY1534Z*([<***\***5[61Z5<6+*7*-"!=/=" ! ]^836:**_F-!G.!>/.=H***\***`0X:**_F-!G.!>/"E> ***\***aaabZc899;01153bc8; 

### %dedef ghi $ j    k  % $%$ % %hgl mi%i  $%

hi% % %hgi$%% %no$hop o$i   %i qrprs t% %i g ghi $il "*YZ54 ghi $ !*FE*Z9<*c'*u9G 701v83*<58X5<6 !w">w" .w.w"E Eb-!*x*b*y 7zC{D|2*}: 77""..

B6150(*}*.H .w.w" Eb-!*y ~^61;0(*783<'c95[59) #0Z*7^18;898410Y^) 01503*A8<6(*>E *>bH*y % 

h%%h$% Eb-!*y Eb-.*y #A{B ?X)463 .wEw" .wEw"E "b.!*x*b""*y 7zC{D|2*}: 77HHH"E

B6150(*}*D836 .wEw" "b.!*y ~^61;0(*783<'c95[59) #0Z*7^18;898410Y^) 01503*A8<6(*>H *"Eb-E*y % 

h%%h$% "b..*y "b.!*y #A{B D5918463 0(03c6 ~^6*83()*(50v5(59)*8u*9^5Z*c8;Y03)*u81*40Z*a^5c^*u0 5(Z*98*c8;Y()*a59^*9^5Z*030()Z5Z*Z^0((*v6*16Y(0c6;6 39*81*16030()Z5Z*9^6168u*v)*9^6*c8;Y03)*a59^8'9*6X9 10*c8Z9b p 

### &b*~b*A01153 AbBb70(^8'3 % %hg%$  ~^6*0v8[6*030()Z6Z*a616*Y61u81;6<*53*0cc81<03c6*a59 ^*]18c6<'16*#*8u*9^6*2]*~10c60v5(59)*]1898c8(+*6 Y819*D';v61*2]/.w-=w"+*<096<* B6Y96;v61*--=b ~^6*0v8[6*030()Z6Z*016*53[0(5<*5u*9^6*c)(53<61*Y16Z Z'16*5Z*(6ZZ*9^03*!*YZ54b

# Appendix G
Process Operating DataForm 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. NO: If no, explain:

3.

4.

5.

Run 1 Average 288 287 228 229.0

5.34 5.08

6 Fired Pellets, LTPH Process Parameter: list type and units

229

4.77 SV046/EU040

Fuel Input (list units) Coal, TPH

12/20/2011

Run 3 285 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack - Coal

Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH

United Taconite, LLC Process Equipment Number/Identification: Test Date(s): Company Name:

Process Equipment Description: Were the process and control equipment operated consistent w ith 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 pe r hour, wet or dry basis) while combusting (list fuel type(s) and See Attached Include copy of production records or instrumentati on 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, ave rages, or as Run 2 289 230

5.14 ratios as appropriate

Heat Input (10 6 British thermal units/hour)

6

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

• ESP: Number and identity of operating field(s) Run 1 Average 4161 4157 21.9 21.8

Run 1 Average

aq-f6-ST05 Form ST-05 , Page 1 of 1 Monitor (list averaging basis): Scrubber Flow, gpm

APC and parameter monitored Run 3 4156 4154

Run 3 List pollutant & averaging basis.--should reflect p ermit Continuous Opacity Monitor(list hourly average) Monitor (list averaging basis): Run 2

22.0 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 :( ° F in , ° F out ) and Thermal Incinerator: ( ° F temperature )

Scrubber Pressure Drop, in. w.c. 21.4

Note: This form provides only a summary of the operating cond itions 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 Summarize control equipment operating data documented during testing. Values reported should reflect maximum, minimum, ave rages, or as approved in the test plan. (See test plan and approval letter)

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

### Cliffs Natural Resources

United Taconite, LLC Forbes, MN Line 1 Waste Gas Stack SV046 Process Data - Coal Barr Engineering 1/16/2011

dP Water Flow Airflow Airflow Greenball Fired Pellets Fuel Use Start Time End Time inches GPM ACFM SCFM LTPH LTPH cfm or stph 12/20/11 13:54 12/20/11 14:09 21.9 4160 384216 322651 288 228 5.34 12/20/11 14:09 12/20/11 14:24 21.9 4159 385752 323838 285 226 5.34 12/20/11 14:24 12/20/11 14:39 21.9 4156 382355 320913 288 230 5.34 12/20/11 14:39 12/20/11 14:54 21.9 4166 384045 322211 289 229 5.34 12/20/11 14:54 12/20/11 15:09 21.9 4162 382993 321363 287 227 5.34

Run 1 Average 21.9 4161 383872 322195 288 228 5.34 12/20/11 15:49 12/20/11 16:04 21.9 4156 382970 321174 290 231 4.80 12/20/11 16:04 12/20/11 16:19 22.0 4156 384312 322431 290 231 4.94 12/20/11 16:19 12/20/11 16:34 22.0 4162 385523 323578 287 230 5.37 12/20/11 16:34 12/20/11 16:49 22.0 4154 384617 322920 288 230 5.32 12/20/11 16:49 12/20/11 17:04 22.0 4145 383258 321767 290 230 5.28

Run 2 Average 22.0 4154 384136 322374 289 230 5.14 12/20/11 17:43 12/20/11 17:58 19.8 4162 385059 323469 284 227 4.77 12/20/11 17:58 12/20/11 18:13 21.7 4156 386908 325076 284 228 4.77 12/20/11 18:13 12/20/11 18:28 21.7 4161 382593 321472 287 230 4.77 12/20/11 18:28 12/20/11 18:43 21.8 4148 384015 322548 285 229 4.77 12/20/11 18:43 12/20/11 18:58 21.9 4155 382790 321597 285 229 4.77

Run 3 Average 21.4 4156 384273 322833 285 229 4.77Form 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. NO: If no, explain:

3.

4.

5.

Run 1 Average 285 286 231 233

2741 2728

6 Include copy of production records or instrumentati on 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, ave rages, or as Run 2 286 233

2713 ratios as appropriate

Heat Input (10 6 British thermal units/hour) Company Name:

Process Equipment Description: Were the process and control equipment operated consistent w ith 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 pe r hour, wet or dry basis) while combusting (list fuel type(s) and See Attached SV046/EU40

Fuel Input (list units) Natural Gas, cfm

12/21/2011

Run 3 286 Line 1 Waste Gas Stack - Gas

Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH

United Taconite, LLC Process Equipment Number/Identification: Test Date(s):

Process Parameter: list type and units

234

2730 Fired Pellets, LTPH

6

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

• ESP: Number and identity of operating field(s) Run 1 Average 4156 4154 21.6 21.7

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, ave rages, or as approved in the test plan. (See test plan and approval letter)

Note: This form provides only a summary of the operating cond itions 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 21.9 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 :( ° F in , ° F out ) and Thermal Incinerator: ( ° F temperature )

Scrubber Pressure Drop, in. w.c. 21.7 Run 2

Run 3 List pollutant & averaging basis.--should reflect p ermit Continuous Opacity Monitor(list hourly average) Monitor (list averaging basis): Monitor (list averaging basis): Scrubber Flow, gpm

APC and parameter monitored Run 3 4155 4150

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

### Cliffs Natural Resources

United Taconite, LLC Forbes, MN Line 1 Waste Gas Stack SV046 Process Data - Gas Barr Engineering 1/16/2011

dP Water Flow Airflow Airflow Greenball Fired Pellets Fuel Use Start Time End Time inches GPM ACFM SCFM LTPH LTPH cfm or stph 12/21/11 7:50 12/21/11 8:05 21.5 4159 382478 320072 285 231 2760 12/21/11 8:05 12/21/11 8:20 21.5 4151 385092 322422 286 232 2755 12/21/11 8:20 12/21/11 8:35 21.6 4154 387147 323961 283 229 2759 12/21/11 8:35 12/21/11 8:50 21.6 4157 386949 323827 284 230 2724 12/21/11 8:50 12/21/11 9:05 21.7 4159 390578 326822 286 231 2709

Run 1 Average 21.6 4156 386449 323421 285 231 2741 12/21/11 9:23 12/21/11 9:38 21.8 4142 388402 324616 285 232 2710 12/21/11 9:38 12/21/11 9:53 21.8 4149 389196 325383 286 232 2704 12/21/11 9:53 12/21/11 10:08 21.9 4168 389052 325318 287 234 2706 12/21/11 10:08 12/21/11 10:23 22.0 4144 386745 323697 284 231 2708 12/21/11 10:23 12/21/11 10:38 21.9 4147 387431 324185 287 233 2740

Run 2 Average 21.9 4150 388165 324640 286 233 2713 12/21/11 11:00 12/21/11 11:15 22.0 4153 388017 324145 288 235 2779 12/21/11 11:15 12/21/11 11:30 21.9 4141 386878 323246 285 234 2775 12/21/11 11:30 12/21/11 11:45 21.0 4172 385872 322565 287 234 2775 12/21/11 11:45 12/21/11 12:00 21.9 4149 386366 322787 287 235 2665 12/21/11 12:00 12/21/11 12:15 21.9 4161 388662 324847 282 231 2656

Run 3 Average 21.7 4155 387159 323518 286 234 2730

### As outlined in the test plan submitted to MPCA on 9 /9/2011 and approved by MPCA on 9/30/11, the

following is a description of any necessary work do ne within 30-days prior to the test. The Line 1 furnace was down for repairs from 12/5/1 1 through 12/8/11. During this time, several pelle t quality and process stability issues were addressed including grate repairs , a new seal on the coal f eed line, an additional roll segment to the greenball f eed zone, and a new burner tip. The grate repairs and roll segment helped to improve pellet quality issue s. The new seal on the coal feed line replaced a temporary fix that had been implemented to address coal leakage. The burner tip was replaced to help address material build up that was occurring within the kiln.
During this same timeframe, the Line 1 scrubber und erwent routine maintenance, which included inspecting of the scrubber, patching several small holes in the ducting, and installing additional inspection ports. In addition, baffle walls were i nstalled on the demister tanks of the Line 1 scrubb er to ensure even air flow distribution to the demist pan els.	
	
 



   ! !"! #  !"	
	$ 

### %&'()*+,(- ./%-012134445346 7889&+,(- 2

:;<=>?@AB?C>?@ADEF@=>EDD>A?@G<BH=><==H@= 

### IJK&L*-

MN
OOPQRPNRSTQRMS
M
 

### TUV SW
X
 Y  Z**&L*K(L-

[
#
\] ^_+,(-

 !" `]
#
		
 :abc>defghij:>cakll>je:>mi>nionedgfid>ipfio:>bj>qgl l 

### /rs'J&+t&*rKJ8 /rs'J&+u(v+,(-++++++ /rs'J&+tr*&- /rs'J&+t&8KvLr*K(L-++ /rs'J&+wKs&- /rs'J&+%&x(vLKy&z+Z8- Z))K{rJ+tr*&- 

### w&8*+%&89J*8 |_7/w.%} Z/+ |}w~_t .,7w/ %}} %}I}7}t |(K8*9)&+3+w(*rJ PY`   Z8 PY`!  "" " (Jr*KJ&+|r**&) PY`  K&z+Ir)(L++tK&)&Lx& /9J9)+ PY`!   ! /_ M]XX]
 X$$ ! ,&*+IrJ+rJ9&+r*+I(L8*+^)&889)& T ! [ T ! [ )(88+IrJ+rJ9&+r*+I(L8*+(J PY`" [    PY`" UX   Ir)(L PY`  ~z)(v&L ,K*)(v&L _v&L PY`"  IJ()KL& PY`"! $ J9()KL& PY`" $ |&)x9) PY`"!! $ /(zK9s+_Kz&+KL+Z8 PY`"! $ ~r)zv)({&+)KLzrKJK*+7Lz&PY` 
V 

### I(ss&L*8 

# ZLrJ*KxrJ+w&8*+%&'()*\
WP
	 Y]]
 !! 

### !! MTPNPM\S" M]X !!	
	
 



   ! !"! #  !"	
	$ 

### %&'()*+,(- ./%-012134445345 6778&+,(- 2

9:;<=>?@A>B=>?@CDE?<=DCC=@>?F;AG<=;<<G?< 

### HIJ&K*-

LM
NNOPQOMQRSPQLR
L
 

### STU RV
W
 X  Y**&K*J(K-

Z
#
[\ ]^+,(-

 !" _\
#
		
 9`ab=cdefghi9=b`jkk=id9=lh=mhnmdcfehc=hoehn9=ai=pfk k 

### /qr'I&+s&*qJI7 /qr'I&+t(u+,(-++++++ /qr'I&+sq*&- /qr'I&+s&7JuKq*J(K-++ /qr'I&+vJr&- /qr'I&+%&w(uKJx&y+Y7- Y))JzqI+sq*&- 

### v&7*+%&78I*7 {^6/v.%| Y/+ {|v}^s .,6v/ ~%|| %|H|6|s {(J7*8)&+3+v(*qI OX_   Y7 OX_!    (Iq*JI&+{q**&) OX_  ~J&y+Hq)(K++sJ&)&Kw& /8I8)+ OX_!   " /^ L\WW\
 W$$ ! ,&*+HqI+qI8&+q*+H(K7*+])&778)& S ! Z S ! Z )(77+HqI+qI8&+q*+H(K7*+(I OX_" Z "  OX_" TW   Hq)(K OX_  }y)(u&K ,J*)(u&K ^u&K OX_"  HI()JK& OX_"! $ ~I8()JK& OX_" $ {&)w8) OX_"!! $ /(yJ8r+^Jy&+JK+Y7 OX_"! $ }q)yu)(z&+)JKyqJIJ*+6Ky&OX_ 
U 

### H(rr&K*7 

# YKqI*JwqI+v&7*+%&'()*[
VO
	 X\\
 !! 

### !! LSOMOL[R L\W !!	
	
 



   ! !"! #  !"	
	$ 

### %&'()*+,(- ./%-012134445341 6778&+,(- 2

9:;<=>?@A>B=>?@CDE?<=DCC=@>?F;AG<=;<<G?< 

### HIJ&K*-

LM
NNOPQOMQRSPQLR
L
 

### STU RV
W
 X  Y**&K*J(K-

Z
#
[\ ]^+,(-

 !" _\
#
		
 9`ab=cdefghi9=b`jkk=id9=lh=mhnmdcfehc=hoehn9=ai=pfk k 

### /qr'I&+s&*qJI7 /qr'I&+t(u+,(-++++++ /qr'I&+sq*&- /qr'I&+s&7JuKq*J(K-++ /qr'I&+vJr&- /qr'I&+%&w(uKJx&y+Y7- Y))JzqI+sq*&- 

### v&7*+%&78I*7 {^6/v.%| Y/+ {|v}^s .,6v/ ~%|| %|H|6|s {(J7*8)&+3+v(*qI OX_  ! Y7 OX_!  " " (Iq*JI&+{q**&) OX_  ~J&y+Hq)(K++sJ&)&Kw& /8I8)+ OX_!    /^ L\WW\
 W$$ ! ,&*+HqI+qI8&+q*+H(K7*+])&778)& S ! Z S ! Z )(77+HqI+qI8&+q*+H(K7*+(I OX_" Z !  OX_" TW "  Hq)(K OX_  }y)(u&K ,J*)(u&K ^u&K OX_"  HI()JK& OX_"! $ ~I8()JK& OX_" $ {&)w8) OX_"!! $ /(yJ8r+^Jy&+JK+Y7 OX_"! $ }q)yu)(z&+)JKyqJIJ*+6Ky&OX_ 
U 

### H(rr&K*7 

# YKqI*JwqI+v&7*+%&'()*[
VO
	 X\\
 !! 

### !!! LSOMOL[R! L\W !!

# Appendix H

Stack Test Plan1 

### Ryan Pantzke

From: Place, Andrew (MPCA) [andrew.place@state.mn.us] Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 11:06 AM To: Maxwell, Candice A. Cc: Tom Kuchinski; Palzkill, Steven (MPCA) Subject: Test Plan Approval Attachments: Electronic Submittals Guidance Document.Approval.pd f; Operating Data Summary for Combustion Sources.doc; Operating Data Summary for Process Sources.doc; TEST REPORT CERTIFICATION.doc; TEST REPORT MICROFICHE SU BMITTAL.doc; Utac, EU 040 SAM, PM, 10-11.docx



### Candice,
The forms for the upcoming performance test on EU04 0 are attached with this email. Please read the app roval over prior to the test to ensure you are in agreement wi th the conditions surrounding the test.
Print a copy of this email as verification of the a pproval 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 fre e to call.
Thanks,
Andy Place Performance Test Coordinator Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 651-757-2652 Andrew.Place@state.mn.usaq-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 – Section Manager , Environmental Affairs Address: 1200 West Highway 16, Forbes, MN 55738 Phone: (218) 744-7849 Unit(s) to be tested: Line 1 Pellet Induration (EU040) for SAM and partic ulate Scheduled for: October 17, 2011 at the facility loc ated in: Forbes, Minnesota.

**Test Plan** Submitted on (date): September 9, 2011 Discussed on (date): September 29, 2011
**Your test plan has been approved by the Minnesota P ollution Control Agency (MPCA) as follows:**  Shortened test notification approved Test plan approved without modification Test plan approved with the following provisions:

1. Operate scrubber at or below the current operating limits to avoid a more stringent rate being placed as a limit. The facility may operate at lower rates if they wish to reduce the limit.

2. 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 t hat required by the current air permit must also be reported. Deviations ultimately need to be reported on the fa cility’s semiannual deviation and annual compliance certification forms.

3. Electronic submittal of the test report will be con sidered acceptable as allowed by the letter from th e MPCA dated March 3, 2010. In addition to the information relat ing to the test required by the letter also please include the emission unit(s) tested and the test date(s) as par t of the notification email.

**4.** If CD continues to be submitted label should includ e: Facility Name, AQ File No., Emission Unit Design ator, 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: September 30, 2011 Andrew Place, Pollution Control Specialist Compliance and Enforcement Unit Minnesota Pollution Control Agencyaq-f6-08

5/1/07 Page 2 of 2



### Please contact me at 651-757-2652 if you have any q **uestions regarding this approval.** Please be aware that enforcement action will be tak en for performance test failures indicating emissio ns above applicable limits (excess actual emissions to the environment). Failu res commonly result in assessment of a monetary pen alty. Upon the first test failure, the Company should take immediate measures to minimize emissions. The measures taken should b e documented, as they will become part of the record of corrective action s. Hard Copy Performance Test Reports and Microfiche o r 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: Tom Kuchinski, Barr Engineering Co. (email) Steve Palzkill, MPCA (email)

## Test Plan For A Taconite Production Facility United Taconite, LLC Forbes, Minnesota

Date Test Plan created/revised: September 8, 2011 Scheduled Test Dates: Week of October 17, 2011
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 14 th 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 no more than 180 days after r esuming operation of EU 040 following the modification of EU 040 authorized by Air Emission P ermit No. 13700113-005 to verify the ratio of sulfuric acid mist to sulfur dioxide used in the ap plication for Air Emission Permit No. 13700113- 005. Testing is to be conducted while firing only s olid fuel and again while firing only natural gas. A test for particulate matter (TPM), PM 2.5 

### , PM 10 

### , opacity, and sulfuric acid mist will be performed while firing only solid fuel. A test for sulfuric acid mist will be performed while firing only natur al gas. The table below provides the emissions units’ plant nomenclature and permit identification. Stack drawings showing stack dimensions and test port ori entation and locations relative to airflow disturbances are attached

.
Process unit nomenclature Emissions unit number Stack vent

number Group No.

Line 1 Pellet Induration EU040 SV046 --

### 2

PART II: Testing Requirements
The following table identifies pollutants to be det ermined; applicable emissions limit and units, and associated regulation for each emissions unit a nd stack vent



### .
Process unit nomenclature Limitation Basis of Pollutant

Tested Pollutant Tested/Permit Limit Specific Methods/Procedures Required Citation Line 1 Waste Gas Stack (SV046) (EU040) Sulfuric Acid Mist/Sulfur Dioxide 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 Sulfuric Acid Mist/Sulfur Dioxide less than or equal to 6.25 tons using 30- day Rolling Sum rolled daily. Sulfuric Acid

Mist/Sulfur Dioxide Testing will be performed during two fuel firing conditions (solid fuel and natural gas only) EPA Method 1-4, 8 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix A
Total Particulate Matter: Title I Condition: To avoid classification as a major modification under 40 CFR Section 52.21 and Minn. R. 7007.3000; Minn. R. 7011.0610, subp.1(A)(1) and Minn. R. 7011.0710, subp. 3; Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 2 and 14

PM 2.5 

### and PM 10 

### Title I Condition: To avoid classification as a major modification under 40 CFR Section 52.21 and Minn. R. 7007.3000; Minn. R. 7007.0800, subps. 2 and 14

Opacity Minn. R. 7011.0610, subp.

1(A)(2) Total Particulate

Matter: less than or equal to 0.0070 grains/dry standard cubic foot using 3-hour Average (standard cubic feet of exhaust gas). Compliance with this limit also demonstrates compliance with Minn. R. 7011.0610, subp.1(A)(1) and Minn. R. 7011.0710, subp. 3.

PM 2.5 

### and PM 10 

### : less than or equal to 0.0139 grains/dry standard cubic foot using 3-hour Average (standard cubic feet of exhaust gas)
Opacity less than or equal to 20 percent opacityexcept for one sixminute period per hour of not more than 60 percent opacity. Particulate Matter:

(testing conducted on solid fuel only)
EPA Method 1-5 40 CFR 60 Appendix A

and Method 202 for condensible particulate

Three 60 minute test runs to collect >32 dscf. All fractions of sample train (filterable + organic and inorganic condensibles) will be used to represent PM 10 

### and PM 2.5



### Opacity One 60- minute test to determine opacity by EPA Method 9 40 CFR 60 Appendix A

### 3

Part III: Operating Conditions

Process equipment description for units to be teste d Emission Unit #(s) Stack Vent # Description EU040 SV046 Line 1 pellet 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

EU040 (Line 1) Greenball feed rate Long Tons per hour 15 minutes 250

Solid fuel input Tons/hour 15 minutes 4-7

Natural Gas usage-Max SCFM 15 minutes To be determined

Control equipment ID Control equipment

description Monitored parameters Control device parameters recorded at minimum of 15 minute intervals during the test CE056, SV046 Wet scrubber high efficiency w/out lime Scrubber water flow rate, gpm.
Pressure drop across each scrubber, inches w.c
Data collected during particulate testing on solid fuel will be used to establish daily minimum pressure drop and water flow rate



### Part IV: Test Methods All tests will be performed using the following USE PA reference test methods.

Test methods Method 1 Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationa ry Sources. Once per location Method 2 EPA Method 2 for stack gas velocity and vo lumetric flow rate. One

determination per sulfuric acid mist test run. Method 3 /3A EPA Method 3 or modified 3A to determi ne stack gas molecular weight at

the Line 2 Waste Gas stacks. Integrated stack gas samples will be collected in Tedlar bag and analyzed with instrumen t calibrated per EPA Method 3A.

### 4

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

performed in conjunction with sulfuric acid mist. Method 5 EPA Method 5 for the determination of filterable pa rticulate matter. Three

test runs of 60 minutes each and obtaining >32 dscf sample volume. Condensible Particulate Method 202 Condensible particulates determined from using the dry impinger method in

conjunction with the EPA Method 5.

EPA Method 9 Visible emission determined with one 6 0 minute test consisting of 240

readings by certified opacity observer weather cond itions permitting. Method 8 Sulfuric Acid Mist/SO 2 

### EPA Method 8 for the determination of sulfuric acid mist and sulfur dioxide.

Three tests run each to determine sulfuric acid mis t and sulfur dioxide concentrations.



### Part V: Continuous Emissions Monitors SO 2 

### and NOx CEMS systems are located on the Line 1 Was te Gas Stack.


### 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.


### Test Dates: tests scheduled for October 18-20, 2011. The proposed tes t schedule follows 1 

### :
Monday October 17, 2011 Tuesday

October 18, 2011 Wednesday

October 19, 2011 Thursday

October 20, 2011 Friday

October 21, 2011
Travel/Setup Line 1 WGS (SV046)

3 - runs for sulfuric acid mist /SO 2 

### on Gas

0700-1500 Line 1 WGS

(SV046)

3 - runs for sulfuric acid mist /SO 2 

### on Solid Fuel

0700-1500 Line 1 WGS (SV046)

3 - runs for PM/PM 2.5 

### , PM 10 

### a one 1-hour opacity

0700-1600 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 teleph one. 

### Maintenance: A description of any necessary work done within 30 days prior to the test and the normal maintenance schedule followed will be includ ed in the test report. 

### Test Reports: One hard copy and one electronic copy in .pdf forma t on CD of the test report will be submitted to the MPCA on or before 45 days from last test date of the mobilization. 

### Test plans and report submittals will be addressed to:

Andrew Place

### 5

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 inform ation 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 (SV046, EU040) c: Dan Koschak—Barr Engineering Company2 

### Cc: 'Tom Kuchinski'; Weidemann, Lisa L.; Dan Koschak Subject: RE: Test Postponement


### Good Morning Andy,
United Taconite is going to try and complete the Li ne 1 PM and SAM testing this week that was original ly scheduled for October but was postponed. Please let us know if y ou need any additional information or would like to hold another pre-test meeting.
Thank you,

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: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 12:58 PM To: Maxwell, Candice A. Subject: Test Postponement


### Candice,
Sorry, I listened to your message before going to a meeting this morning and then forgot to get back t o you. Thank you for the update. I guess when you have a new date s et, let me know. I don’t think I have any other qu estions at this time.
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



### ___________________________________________________ _______________________________________

____________ This electronic message and any attachments include d with this message are for the exclusive use of th e individual or entity to which it is intended to be addressed. This message may contain information tha t is privileged or confidential and thereby exempt and protected from unauthorized disclosure under ap plicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended r ecipient, or an employee or agent responsible for d elivering the message to the intended recipient, be aware that an y disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copyin g of this communication, or the use of its contents, is not a uthorized and is strictly prohibited. If you have r eceived this communication and are not the intended recipient, p lease notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original message from your e-mail system.1 

### Ryan Pantzke

From: Maxwell, Candice A. [Candice.Maxwell@CliffsNR.com] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 7:20 AM To: Place, Andrew Cc: Dan Koschak; Tom Kuchinski Subject: Line 1 SAM / PM Test Plan Attachments: Line 1 Waste Gas (SV046) PM and SAM Test Protocol.d ocx; Line 1 Test Port Location.pdf



### Good Morning Andy,
Attached is United Taconite’s test plan for SAM, PM , and Opacity testing on Line 1. Please let me kno w if you have any questions or require any additional information.
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 include d with this message are for the exclusive use of th e individual or entity to which it is intended to be addressed. This message may contain information tha t is privileged or confidential and thereby exempt and p rotected from unauthorized disclosure under applica ble law. If the reader of this message is not the intended r ecipient, or an employee or agent responsi ble for delivering the message to the intended recipient, be aware that an y disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copyin g of this communication, or the use of its contents, is not a uthorized and is strictly prohibited. If you have r eceived this communication and are not the intended recipient, p lease notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original message from your e-mail system.

___________________________________________________ _______________________________________

____________

# Appendix I
Project Participants and Contact Information#23691092 

# Project Participants and Contact Information

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Andrew Place – Performance Test Coordinator

United Taconite, LLC Candice Maxwell – Section Manager – Environmental A ffairs Lisa Weidemann – Environmental Coordinator

Barr Engineering Company Tim Russell – Vice President/Chemical Engineer Tom Kuchinski – Stack Test Supervisor Dan Koschak – Senior Air Quality Technician/Project Manager Ryan Pantzke – Air Quality Technician Tom Leier – Air Quality Technician Matt Morrison – 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 6 Forbes, MN 55738 (218) 744-7849 Candice.Maxwell@cliffsNR.com Barr Engineering Co. Dan Koschak Sr. Air Quality Technician Barr Engineering Company 3128 14 th 

### Ave East Hibbing, MN 55746 (218) 262-8635 dkoschak@barr.com