# Power Plant Monitoring Data Collected
Under Clean Water Act Section 308 Authority (“CWA 308 Monitoring Data”)
Sampling Episode s 65 6 5

- 6575

Prepared for:



## U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Engineering and Analysis Division
Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20460

Prepared by:



### Eastern Research Group, Inc. 14555 Avion Parkway
Suite 200 Chantilly, VA 20151

30 Ma y 201 2

EPA Contract No. 68

- C

- 02

- 095 Work Assignment 9

- 291 As part of EPA’s sampling program for the steam electric effluent guidelines rulemaking

, EPA required eleven steam electric power plants to collect wastewater samples for use in determining the pollutant characteristics of the wastewaters and the performance of the associated wastewater treatment systems

. The wastewater samples were sent to EPA

- contracted laboratories for analysis. This report describes the samples collected and t he laboratory analyses performed, and presents the analytical results for the wastewater samples.

The plants selected for this sampling program included the following:

**•** Samples of FGD wastewater from the seven plants that were included in EPA’s onsite field sampling program:

o Appendix A: Duke Energy Carolina’s Belews Creek Steam Station

,

o Appendix B: We Energies’ Pleasant Prairie Power Plant

,

o Appendix C: Duke Energy’s Miami Fort Station

,

o Appendix D: Duke Energy Carolina’s Allen Steam Station

,

o Appendix E: Mirant Mid

- Atlantic, LLC’s Dickerson Generating Station

,

o Appendix F: RRI Energy’s Keystone Generating Station

,

o Appendix G: Allegheny Energy’s Hatfield’s Ferry Power Station

,

**•** Samples from four plants not included in EPA’s onsite field sampling program:

o A ppendix H: Kansas City Power & Light’s Iatan Station (untreated and treated wastewater from a FGD vapor

- compression evaporation system),

o Appendix I: Tampa Electric Company’s Polk Station (wastewater from the gasification process),

o Appendix J: Wabash Valley Power Association’s Wabash River Station (wastewater from the gasification process), and

o Appendix K: Appalachian Power Company’s Mountaineer Plant (wastewater from a pilot

- scale carbon capture system).

The seven plants included in EPA’s onsite sampling pr ogram were required to collect four sets of samples over a four or five month period, with no samples collected within four weeks of each other. The samples were to be collected from the same sample location as the samples collected by EPA during the onsi te field sampling program, unless an alternative sample location was approved by EPA. The four additional plants included in this CWA 308 monitoring program were required to collect four consecutive days of samples, similar to the approach used during EPA ’s onsite sampling program. For each of these four additional plants, EPA specified the location where samples were to be collected, based on system knowledge acquired during site visits to the plants or discussions with plant technical staff. Each of the appendices include a process flow diagram depicting the wastewater sampling locations.

The analytes included in the CWA 308 monitoring program were identical to the EPA onsite sampling program, except that dissolved metals, dissolved mercury, and dissolve d hexavalent chromium were not sampled/analyzed. Table 1 presents the analytes included in the

CWA 308 monitoring program and the analytical method used for each analyte. The samples2 were collected using clean sampling techniques (i.e., EPA Method 1669) to limit potential contamination from the sampling activities.

Table 1 . Analytical Methods

Parameter Method Number

Classicals

Biochemical o xygen d emand (BOD 5 ) SM 5210 B

Chemical o xygen d emand (COD) EPA 410. 4

Total s uspended s olids (TSS) SM 2540 D

Total d issolved s olids (TDS) SM 2540 C

Sulfate EPA 300.0

Chloride EPA 300.0

Ammonia as n itrogen EPA 350.1

Nitrate/ n itrate as n itrogen EPA 353.2 Total Kjeldahl n itrogen (TKN) EPA 351.2

Total p hosphorus EPA 365. 1

Total c yanide SM 4500 CN E

Total Metals Mercury EPA 1631 E

A ntimony, a rsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, manganese, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and vanadium EPA 200.8 with collision cell

Aluminum, barium, beryllium, boron, calcium, cobalt, iron, magnesium, molybdenum, sodium, tin, titanium , and zinc EPA 200.7

A letter describing the requirements of the CWA 308 monitoring program and instructions for the sample collection activities were sent to each of the 11 plants in July or August, 2010. Each letter specified dates for which the samples should be collected; however, many of the specific dates were revised after the letters were distributed to provide the plants with enough time to prepare for the sampling and also to adjust for outages and other operational

con cerns to ensure that the samples collected were representative of normal operations. The letter distributed to each plant is included in Section 1 for each of the appendices.

For each of the 11 plants, except Dickerson and Mountaineer, EPA or its contrac tor, ERG, conducted an on

- site audit of one set of the sample collection activities to confirm that the samples were collected following the instructions provided by EPA. A memorandum describing the findings/observations from the on

- site audits is include d in Section 2 for each of the appendices.

In addition to collecting and shipping the samples to EPA

- contracted laboratories, the plants were also required to provide engineering data regarding the plants operation (e.g., power generation, wastewater flow rates, unit configurations) during the sampling period. Additionally, the individual responsible for directing or supervising the sample collection and the engineering data preparation of the sampling program was required to certify that the samples were collected appropriately and the engineering data are accurate and complete. A copy of the signed certification statement is included in Section 3 for each of the appendices and the engineering data associated with each plant are included in Section 4 for each of the appendices.3 As shown in Table 1, the samples collected as part of the CWA 308 monitoring program were analyzed for classical analytes and total metals. The total mercury samples were analyzed by Frontier Global Sciences (Frontier). The merc ury samples were subjected to a room temperature bromine monochloride digestion prior to analysis using a method

- compliant bubbler

system.

For the total mercury samples collected from sample points representing the effluent from

wastewater treatment syste ms
, the plants collected four individual grab samples that were composited by Frontier and analyzed as one sample. Frontier composited these samples by combining the entire sample bottle for each of the four individual grab samples prior to digestion

and analysis; however, if one or more of the grab samples were received with limited volume, equal volumes from each individual grab sample were combined for the composite analysis.

The total metals by EPA Method 200.7 were analyzed by TestAmerica Laboratorie s

– Denver (TestAmerica). The total metals samples were preserved to a pH <2 at least 24 hours prior to being subjected to a heated nitric acid digestion according to SW846 Method 3010A.

The total metals by EPA Method 200.8 were also analyzed by TestAme rica. The total metals samples were preserved to a pH <2 at least 24 hours prior to being subjected to a closed vessel, heated nitric acid and hydrochloric acid digestion according to EPA Method 1638.

The classical analytes were analyzed by TestAmerica an d were digested, prepared, and analyzed according to the methods specified in Table 1.

The analytical data are included in Section 5 for each of the appendices. The analytical data are presented in tables that provide the following information:

**•** Analytical results for each set of samples collected at a sampling location, including a

calculated 4

- set average;

**•** Summary of the 4

- set average concentrations among the various sampling locations; and

**•** Analytical results for each individual sample point.

P lease note that although the Dickerson Generating Station collected four sets of samples, as required, EPA only analyzed three sets of samples because of resource constraints

.

ERG chemists conducted quality control reviews of the analytical data and creat ed data review narratives to describe problems encountered during the analyses and the quality of the data submitted by the laboratories. The data review narratives are included in Section 6 for each of the appendices. Note that because multiple plants w ere analyzed in the same analytical batches, the same narrative may apply to multiple plants and therefore, may be included in multiple appendices. This ensures that each appendix contains all narratives associated with the samples from that plant.