FINAL Engineering Site Visit Report for 

Georgia Power’s Plant Yates 

Newnan, GA 

Prepared for:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Engineering and Analysis Division

Office of Water 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

Washington, DC 20004 

Prepared by:

Eastern Research Group, Inc. 

14555 Avion Parkway 

Suite 200 

Chantilly, VA 20151-1102 

June 27, 2007 

EPA Contract No. 68-C02-095 

Work Assignment 4-22
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

1.0 SITE VISITED AND DATE .......................................................................................... 1 

2.0 ATTENDEES.............................................................................................................. 1 

3.0 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES.............................................................................. 1 

4.0 PLANT DESCRIPTION................................................................................................ 2 

5.0 PLANT OPERATIONS................................................................................................. 3 

5.1 Coal Preparation.......................................................................................... 3 

5.2 Biofouling Control...................................................................................... 4 

5.3 Make-up Water ........................................................................................... 4 

5.4 Nitrogen Oxide Controls............................................................................. 4 

5.5 Particulate Control ...................................................................................... 5 

5.6 FGD System................................................................................................ 5 

6.0 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT ................................................................................. 9 

6.1 Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater Treatment....................................... 9 

6.2 Monitoring Data........................................................................................ 11 

7.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 12 

Appendix A LIST OF ATTENDEES 

Appendix B PICTURES FROM SITE VISIT 

Appendix C MONITORING DATA PROVIDED BY PLANT YATES 
ii

LIST OF TABLES 

Page 

A-1 List of Attendees................................................................................................. A-1 

C-1 Yates FGD Wastewater (JBR Slurry Collected on 9/28/2005) ...........................C-1 

C-2 TSS NPDES Monitoring Data .............................................................................C-2 

C-3 2004 Ash Pond Blowdown Grab Sample ............................................................C-3 

C-4 2005 Ash Pond Blowdown Grab Sample ............................................................C-4 

C-5 2006 Ash Pond Blowdown Grab Sample ............................................................C-5 
iii

LIST OF FIGURES 

Page 

5-1 Diagram of the Chiyoda Jet-Bubbling Reactor® FGD System...............................8 

6-1 Wastewater Flow Diagram for the FGD System at Plant Yates............................10 

B-1 Chiyoda Jet-Bubbling Reactor®..........................................................................B-1 

B-2 FGD Stack............................................................................................................B-1 

B-3 FGD Viewing Port ...............................................................................................B-2 

B-5 Gypsum Ponds and Gypsum Stacking Area ........................................................B-3 

B-6 Final Gypsum Pond at Plant Yates ......................................................................B-3 
1 

1.0 SITE VISITED AND DATE

Georgia Power’s Plant Yates 

708 Dyer Road 

Highway Alt 27 

Newnan, GA 30263 

December 11, 2006 

2.0 ATTENDEES

 Appendix A lists the attendees. 

3.0 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

 Section 304(m) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires EPA to develop and 

publish a biennial plan that establishes a schedule for the annual review and revision of national 

effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) required by CWA section 304(b). During 

EPA’s 2005/2006 review of ELGs, EPA determined that the steam electric power generating 

point source category (40 CFR Part 423) is the second-largest discharger of toxic-weighted 

pollutants. EPA’s analyses indicated that the toxic-weighted loadings are predominantly driven 

by metals present in wastewater discharges, and that the wastestreams contributing the majority 

of the metals are associated with air pollution controls. Other potential sources of metals include 

coal pile runoff, metal/chemical cleaning wastes, coal washing, and certain low volume wastes. 

 In presenting the findings of the 2005/2006 study, EPA noted certain data 

limitations affect the Agency’s estimate of the potential hazard posed by discharges from this 

category and, therefore, EPA determined that further review of these discharges during the 

2007/2008 ELG planning cycle is warranted. Due to the limited resources and time available for 

conducting this study, EPA is concentrating its efforts for the 2007/2008 study on better 

characterizing pollutant sources and available pollution control technologies/practices for the 

pollutants responsible for the majority of the toxic-weighted pollutant loadings from steam 

electric facilities. This will focus the review on wastewater discharges from coal-fired power 

plants. 
2 

 EPA intends to review overall plant operations and better understand the various 

wastewater sources present at steam electric plants. This review is expected to largely focus on 

ash handling wastes, wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastes, coal pile runoff, and final 

effluent. 

 EPA and its contractor, Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG), conducted a site 

visit to Georgia Power’s Plant Yates on December 11, 2006. The purpose of the visit was to: 1) 

gather information about the operation of wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) systems, the 

wastewater discharges from these FGD systems, and the wastewater management practices used 

to control the discharges from these systems; and 2) evaluate the feasibility of collecting and 

analyzing wastewater samples to characterize certain waste streams. 

4.0 PLANT DESCRIPTION

 Georgia Power’s Plant Yates began operation in Newnan, Georgia in September, 

1950, when Unit 1 came on line. Unit 2 began commercial operation shortly after Unit 1 in 

November, 1950. From 1952 to 1958, the plant increased its capacity by installing Units 3, 4, 

and 5. Units 6 and 7 were the last units to be installed at the plant in 1974. Today, Plant Yates 

operates these seven generating units, with a total capacity of 1,250 megawatts (MW). On a 

yearly average, the plant generates approximately 50 percent of its available capacity. The plant 

is located on approximately 2,400 acres of land in Newnan, GA alongside the Chattahoochee 

River. The plant employs approximately 300 people. 

 Units 1-5 were initially built with once-through cooling systems; however, in 

2004, the plant retrofitted each unit with a recirculating cooling system. The plant changed the 

cooling system operation due to a fish kill down stream on the Chattahoochee River that was 

attributed to the plant. The cooling tower structure for Units 1-5 is now the United States’ 

largest single-structure cooling tower. Units 6 and 7 were originally installed with recirculating 

cooling systems; therefore, they did not require a retrofit in 2004. 

 In 1992, Plant Yates retrofitted Unit 1 with an advanced FGD system. The 

retrofit was a joint project conducted by the Department of Energy (DOE), Electric Power 
3 

Research Institute (EPRI), and Southern Company, the largest investor-owned utility in the 

United States and Georgia Power’s parent company. The plant installed the Chiyoda 

Corporation’s Thoroughbred-121 advanced FGD process for the entire flue gas generated by 

Unit 1, which is a 110-MW pulverized coal-fired boiler. The system includes the Jet-Bubbling 

Reactor® scrubber system (described in Section 5.6). This project was the first Chiyoda JetBubbling Reactor® demonstration completed in the United States. Due to the relatively small 

scale of the FGD system at Plant Yates, the scrubber has since been used for many projects, 

including several mercury control projects sponsored by DOE and EPRI. 

5.0 PLANT OPERATIONS

 The Plant Yates site visit focused on the FGD system on Unit 1 and the 

wastewaters associated with the system. EPA and ERG did not observe the other plant 

operations or their wastewater discharges. Plant Yates personnel did discuss several of the other 

process operations with EPA and ERG and these are presented in the site visit report; however, 

the majority of this site visit report focuses on the Unit 1 FGD system. According to the plant, 

most of the process operations at Plant Yates are similar to the operations at Georgia Power’s 

Plant Wansley (see the Plant Wansley site visit report for more details). For a general 

description of the steam electric power generation process, see Section 3.2.1 of the Interim 

Detailed Study Report for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. 

5.1 Coal Preparation

 All seven generating units at Plant Yates have coal-fired boilers. Plant Yates uses 

eastern bituminous coal that has a one-percent sulfur content. Trains deliver coal to the plant, 

each carrying approximately 10,000 tons of coal from Kentucky. The plant unloads the coal and 

transports it to the storage coal pile via conveyor belts. The coal pile contains between a 25- and 

30-day supply of coal. From the coal pile, the plant transfers the coal to a series of bunkers, 

which contain a one-day supply of coal for each unit. The plant then feeds the coal to the 

pulverizers where the coal is crushed into a fine flammable powder and blown into the boilers. 

The plant uses approximately 5,500 tons of coal per day for the seven units. 
4 

5.2 Biofouling Control

 Plant Yates uses chlorine for biofouling control of each of the seven cooling water 

condensers. The closed-loop cooling tower system is dosed year round. When the plant adds 

chlorine to the cooling water for biofouling control, the plant also isolates (shuts down) its 

cooling system blowdown. After closing the cooling tower blowdown valves, chlorine gas is 

injected to reach a concentration of 0.2 to 0.5 mg/L. The plant typically waits about 12 hours 

after the chlorine has been applied until the total residual chlorine (TRC) concentration is less 

than the method detection level of 0.01 mg/L, which is verified by the plant before reopening the 

valves and discharging the cooling water blowdown from the system. Each of the cooling water 

condensers receives chlorine biofouling control approximately every other day. 

5.3 Make-up Water

 Plant Yates uses fresh river water from the Chattahoochee River as make-up for 

some of the plant’s operations, such as the limestone slurry preparation, quenching the flue gas, 

and make-up water for the FGD system. Plant Yates treats the river water prior to using it within 

the process. This treatment consists of a physical separation process (i.e., clarification and 

filtration). The filter backwash water is combined with other low-volume wastewaters and 

pumped to the ash pond. 

5.4 Nitrogen Oxide Controls

 Plant Yates is located in Atlanta’s ozone non-attainment area, which requires the 

plant to meet strict nitrogen oxide emission limits during the ozone season. To meet these strict 

limits, Plant Yates installed low-NOx burners and over-fire air systems on units 4, 5, 6, and 7. In 

addition to these technologies, in 1999, Plant Yates retrofitted all seven units with the capability 

to burn natural gas; therefore, during the ozone season, May through September, the units burn 

natural gas in conjunction with coal to reduce the formation of NOx. 
5 

5.5 Particulate Control

 Plant Yates Unit 1 operates an electrostatic precipitator (ESP), which removes fly 

ash and other particulates from the flue gas prior to the FGD scrubber. The ESP uses high 

voltage to generate an electric charge on the particles contained in the flue gas. The charged 

particles then collect on a metal plate with an opposite electric charge. As the particles begin to 

layer on the metal plates, the plates are tapped/rapped to loosen the particles, which fall into a 

collection hopper. 

 There is no wastewater generated from the operation of the ESP; however, the 

plant uses a wet fly ash handling system. The fly ash that is collected from the ESP is 

continuously sluiced from the collection hopper. The ash sluice water is drawn from the ash 

pond and is recycled continuously from the pond to the hoppers and back. There are no 

particular water quality requirements for the ash sluice water. 

5.6 FGD System

 Plant Yates Unit 1 operates a Jet-Bubbling Reactor® FGD system, manufactured 

by Chiyoda Corporation. The FGD system uses a limestone-in-water slurry as the sorbent used 

to scrub sulfur dioxide from the flue gas. This system is different from traditional scrubbers 

(e.g., counter-current flow columns using trays or packing) in that the flue gas is sparged into a 

reservoir bath of the absorbent liquid, forming a jet-bubbling layer in a shallow upper region of 

the absorbent bath. Air is also introduced in a lower region of the absorbent bath to provide a 

stream of fine oxygen-containing gas bubbles throughout the vessel. For a description of the 

FGD process and the chemical reactions involved, see Section 3.2.1.6 Interim Detailed Study 

Report for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. Figures B-1 and B-2, 

in Appendix B, present pictures of the scrubber and the FGD stack, respectively. 

 Prior to entering the scrubber, the plant quenches the flue gas with ash pond sluice 

water in a gas cooling section of the system, which cools the gas and prevents a wet-dry interface 

from occurring between the absorbent liquid and the flue gas. After the flue gas is quenched, the 

plant saturates it with an amount of absorbent liquid from the scrubber. 
6 

 From the gas cooling section, the flue gas enters the scrubber chamber formed by 

an upper deck plate and a lower deck plate. Figure 5-1 presents a diagram of the Chiyoda JetBubbling Reactor® used at Plant Yates. Sparger tubes are contained in the lower deck plate and 

protrude downward into a reservoir of the absorbent liquid. As the flue gas enters the scrubber, 

it is forced to enter the sparger tubes and injected directly into the absorbent liquid. Because the 

flue gas is sparged into the absorbent liquid, it ensures good gas-liquid contact. The high flow of 

the flue gas causes a turbulent bubbling in the scrubber. Figure B-3, in Appendix B, presents a 

picture of the FGD viewing port which allows one to view the bubbling in the reactor. In 

addition, the plant feeds air to the scrubber to force oxidation of the sulfite product into gypsum, 

a more useful by-product. The flue gas bubbles out of the absorbent liquid and exits the top of 

the scrubber through gas riser tubes that bypass the entering scrubber chamber. The cleaned flue 

gas then passes through a mist eliminator prior to being released out of the stack. 

 The inlet flue gas sulfur dioxide concentration to the FGD system varies 

depending on the fuel content; therefore, it is difficult for the plant to operate the FGD system to 

control the sulfur dioxide concentration at the outlet. Instead, the plant operates the FGD system 

to maintain a constant removal efficiency. Plant Yates’ FGD system achieves a 98 percent 

removal of sulfur dioxide from the flue gas. The plant controls the removal efficiency by 

varying the gas side pressure drop across the scrubber, which is controlled by changing the 

volume of absorbent liquid within the scrubber. A higher absorbent liquid level in the scrubber 

increases the gas-liquid surface area, which increases the sulfur dioxide removal. The plant 

continuously measures the flue gas sulfur dioxide concentration at the inlet to the FGD system. 

These measurements are used to determine the limestone-in-water slurry requirements for the 

system. The plant recalibrates these requirements every two days. 

 The rate at which the limestone slurry is introduced into the scrubber is also used 

to control the operating pH of the system, which impacts the sulfur dioxide removal efficiency. 

An increase in the limestone slurry feed rate increases the pH of the system. A higher pH in the 

system results in a higher sulfur dioxide removal efficiency because the higher alkalinity results 

in a more rapid neutralization of the absorbed sulfur dioxide. 
7 

 To control the primary operating parameters of the scrubber system (i.e., the 

volume of the absorbent liquid, the chlorides concentration, and the solids concentration), 

gypsum slurry is intermittently withdrawn from the bottom of the scrubber and sent to the 

gypsum slurry transfer tank. From the gypsum slurry transfer tank, the plant pumps the gypsum 

slurry to the gypsum ponds. Although the gypsum slurry is only intermittently withdrawn from 

the scrubber, it is continuously pumped to the gypsum ponds to avoid settling in the transfer 

lines. For this reason, the plant continuously recycles the gypsum pond water to the gypsum 

slurry transfer tank. 

 

 The Chiyoda scrubber used at Plant Yates is constructed with a fiberglass frame, 

which is ideal for recirculating the gypsum pond water back to the scrubber since it can tolerate 

relatively high chloride concentrations (up to 20,000 ppm). The plant uses a mixture of fresh and 

recycled gypsum pond water as the scrubber make-up water. The scrubber make-up water must 

meet the follow criteria to be used in the scrubber: 

y <300 ppm hardness; 

y <100 ppm TSS; 

y <100 ppm chlorides; 

y <10 ppm COD; and 

y <5 ppm BOD. 

The chloride concentration in the scrubber needs to be maintained to less than 20,000 ppm; 

however, it is usually below this level because the coal used has a low chlorine content. In 

addition, the absorbent liquid within the scrubber is maintained at a 30-percent solids 

concentration. 
8 

Flue Gas

Clean 

Flue Gas

Li

Gypsum 

Slurry

Air

Upper Deck Plate

Lower Deck Plate

Absorbent Liquid 

Level

Figure 5-1. Diagram of the Chiyoda Jet-Bubbling Reactor® FGD System
9 

6.0 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT

 EPA and ERG observed the discharges from the FGD scrubber and the treatment 

of these wastewater discharges. As discussed in Section 5.0, EPA and ERG did not observe all 

of the plant operations, nor did EPA and ERG observe all of the wastewater sources and 

discharges. This section describes FGD wastewater treatment operations at Plant Yates. 

6.1 Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater Treatment

 Figure 6-1 presents a wastewater flow diagram for the wastewater associated with 

the FGD system at Plant Yates. The gypsum slurry from the transfer tank is transferred to the 

gypsum ponds. Gypsum is a by-product of the FGD process, and is contained in the wastewater 

discharged from the FGD process. For a description of the chemical reactions involved in the 

FGD process, see Section 3.2.1.6 Interim Detailed Study Report for the Steam Electric Power 

Generating Point Source Category. 

 The gypsum ponds at Plant Yates are lined with high-density polyethylene. Plant 

Yates uses a technique known as “gypsum stacking” to dewater the gypsum. Within the gypsum 

ponds, the gypsum in the slurry settles to the bottom of the pond. As gypsum begins to fill the 

ponds, the plant excavates the gypsum out of the pond with a backhoe and stacks it in an area 

around the pond, which increases the height of the pond embankment. Figure B-4, in Appendix 

B, presents a picture of the first gypsum pond at Plant Yates. The gypsum in these stacks is 

dewatered through gravity as the water flows down into the pond and through evaporation as the 

sun dries the gypsum piles. The gypsum is also washed by rainfall during the process. 

 The final gypsum product is approximately 90 percent solids. In 1996, the state 

of Georgia issued Plant Yates a Plant Food Permit that allows the plant the unrestricted sale of its 

ash-free gypsum for agricultural use (e.g., soil amendment). The plant does not wash the 

gypsum prior to selling it off site. Plant personnel noted that, in the future, Georgia Power’s 

plants that plan to produce marketable gypsum will most likely combine gypsum wash water 

with other FGD wastewater and gypsum sluice water, and use this combined wastewater as 

make-up scrubber water.
10 

Flue Gas

Limestone 

Slurry

Clean 

Flue Gas

Air

FGD 

Scrubber

Gas 

Cooler ESP

Recycle Gypsum 

Pond Water

Gypsum 

Slurry Gypsum 

Slurry 

Transfer 

Tank

Gypsum 

Pond 3

Gypsum 

Pond 1

Gypsum 

Pond 2

Em

Figure 6-1. Wastewater Flow Diagram for the FGD System at Plant Yates 
11 

 The gypsum slurry wastewater flows through three gypsum ponds, each one fed 

to the next by gravity. Figure B-5, in Appendix B, presents a picture of the FGD gypsum ponds 

and the gypsum stacking area. Figure B-6, in Appendix B, presents a picture of the third and 

final gypsum pond. The wastewater from the final gypsum pond is reused throughout the 

process with the exclusion of high-temperature operations (e.g., use as boiler water), due to the 

dissolved solids that are present in the pond water. The dissolved solids in the pond water would 

scale and form deposits on the equipment at high temperatures. Some of the recycled gypsum 

pond water is used as make-up to the FGD scrubber system, dilution water to the gypsum slurry 

transfer tank, and a water supply for limestone grinding and slurry preparation. 

 The plant typically recycles all of the wastewater from the gypsum ponds back to 

the plant’s operations, but they also have the capability to transfer the gypsum pond effluent to 

the ash ponds to prevent the overflow of the gypsum ponds during excessive rainfall events. To 

ensure the pumps are working properly, the plant tests the pumps that transfer the gypsum pond 

wastewater to the ash ponds once per month. Due to evaporation loss and the typical levels of 

rainfall, the plant does not typically need to transfer the gypsum pond effluent to the ash ponds; 

therefore, every month, there is only a small amount of wastewater that is sent to the ash ponds 

and ultimately discharged. Plant Yates discharges approximately 60,000 gallons of gypsum 

pond water to the ash ponds every month during the testing of the emergency overflow pumps. 

The plant does not monitor the gypsum slurry or the recycled gypsum pond water; therefore, 

EPA cannot characterize the FGD wastewaters from this plant at this time. 

6.2 Monitoring Data

 Plant Yates provided EPA with monitoring data for a few of the wastewaters 

generated by the plant. Table C-1, in Appendix C, presents monitoring data for the FGD slurry 

from the JBR collected on September 28, 2005. Table C-2, in Appendix C, presents total 

suspended solids (TSS) monitoring data for the ash pond blowdown and the ash pond emergency 

overflow from January 2004 through February 2007. Tables C-5 through C-7, in Appendix C, 

present metals monitoring data for the ash pond blowdown for three separate grab samples. 
12 

7.0 REFERENCES

1. Burford, David P. 1997. Southern Company Services, Inc. Chiyoda 

Thoroughbred CT-121 Clean Coal Project at Georgia Power’s Plant Yates: 

Phase II Results. Birmingham, AL. Available online at: 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/97/97cct/cct_pdf/97CCT3_3.P

DF. 

2. Georgia Power. Plant Yates. GP9901571. Available online at: 

http://www.southerncompany.com/gapower/about/pdf/Plant%20Yates%20brochu

re%20FINAL.pdf. 

3. Southern Company R&EA. 2006. FGD and SCR – An Overview. December 11. 

4. Southern Company Services, Inc. 1997. Demonstration of Innovative 

Applications of Technology for the CT-121 FGD Process at Georgia Power’s 

Plant Yates: Final Report, Volume 1. SCS C-90-00284. Birmingham, AL. 

January. Available online at: 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cctc/cctdp/bibliography/demonst

ration/pdfs/ct121/CT121_vol1_1997.pdf. 

5. U.S. EPA. 2006. Interim Detailed Study Report for the Steam Electric Power 

Generating Point Source Category. EPA-821-R-01-015. Washington, DC. 

November. DCN 03401. 
Appendix A 

LIST OF ATTENDEES 
A-1 

Table A-1. List of Attendees 

Name Organization (Representing) Telephone E

Donna Hill Southern Company (205) 257 5234 dbhill@sNick Irvin Southern Company Russel Noble Southern Company Bill Evans Georgia Power David Parks Georgia Power Mike Knowles Georgia Power – Plant Yates Lindy Johnson Tennessee Valley Authority (423) 751 3361 lpjohnsPaul Chu Electric Power Research Institute (650) 855-2812 PCHULiz Aldridge Hunton & Williams (804) 788 8549 ealdridgeKristy Bulleit Hunton & Williams (202) 955 1547 kbulleitJosh Hall EPA/Office of Water (202) 566 1002 hall.joRon Jordan EPA/Office of Water (202) 566 1003 jordan.roKarrie-Jo Robinson-Shell EPA/Region 4 (404) 562 9308 shell.karrLeslie Churilla ERG (Contractor to EPA) (404) 634 0038 leslie.chuT.J. Finseth ERG (Contractor to EPA) (703) 633 1698 thomas.fi
Appendix B 

PICTURES FROM SITE VISIT 
B-1

Figure B-1. Chiyoda Jet-Bubbling Reactor® 

Figure B-2. FGD Stack 
B-2

Figure B-3. FGD Viewing Port 

Figure B-4. Gypsum Pond at Plant Yates 
B-3

Figure B-5. Gypsum Ponds and Gypsum Stacking Area 

Figure B-6. Final Gypsum Pond at Plant Yates
Appendix C 

MONITORING DATA PROVIDED BY PLANT YATES 
C-1

Table C-1. Yates FGD Wastewater (JBR Slurry Collected on 9/28/2005) 

Constituent Units Concentration MDL 

Group A 

BOD Not analyzed 

Chemical Oxygen Demand Not analyzed 

Total Organic Carbon mg/L 0.593 0.30 

TSS mg/L 4 1.0 

Flow gpm 2,000 

Ammonia (as N) mg/L 0.55 0.01 

Temperature (Field) °C 34.4 

pH SU 4.49 

Group B 

Bromide mg/L 7.42 0.02 

Chlorine, Total Residual Not analyzed 

Color PCU 8 

Fecal Coliform Not analyzed 

Fluoride, Total mg/L 62.3 0.01 

Nitrate-Nitrite (as N) mg/L 0.01 0.01 

Oil and Grease Not analyzed 

Ortho-Phosphorus (as P) Total mg/L 0.24 0.01 

Sulfate (as SO4) mg/L 1549.5 1.0 

Sulfide (as S) Not analyzed 

Sulfite (as SO3) Not analyzed 

Surfactants Not analyzed 

Aluminum, Total mg/L 15.8 0.018 

Barium, Total mg/L 0.271 0.002 

Boron, Total mg/L 30.1 0.003 

Cobalt, Total mg/L 0.037 0.004 

Iron, Total mg/L 1.88 0.003 

Magnesium, Total mg/L 276 0.026 

Molybdenum, Total mg/L 0.031 0.01 

Manganese, Total mg/L 1.81 0.004 

Tin, Total mg/L 0.014 0.002 

Titanium, Total mg/L 0.107 0.003 

Group B – Section 1 

Antimony, Total mg/L 0.032 0.012 

Arsenic, Total mg/L 0.013 0.005 

Beryllium, Total mg/L 0.003 0.001 

Cadmium, Total mg/L 0.033 0.002 

Chromium, Total mg/L 0.076 0.001 

Copper, Total mg/L 0.143 0.005 

Lead, Total mg/L 0.004 0.004 

Mercury, Total mg/L 0.021 0.0002 

Nickel, Total mg/L 0.124 0.004 

Selenium, Total mg/L 0.551 0.005 

Silver, Total mg/L <0.006 0.006 

Thallium, Total mg/L 0.013 0.007 

Zinc, Total mg/L 1.70 0.004 

Cyanide, Total Not analyzed 

Phenols, Total Not analyzed 
C-2

Table C-2. TSS NPDES Monitoring Data 

NPDES Operations Monitoring Report data excerpts 

1/1/04 through 2/28/07 

Outfall 01 Outfall 01 Outfall 02 

 (continued) 

Date TSS (mg/L) Date TSS (mg/L) Date TSS (mg/L) 

1/5/2004 2 7/5/2005 4 9/17/2004 6 

1/20/2004 1 7/18/2005 8 

2/2/2004 2 10/3/2005 9 3/28/2005 21 

2/16/2004 4 10/17/2005 0 3/29/2005 10 

3/1/2004 2 11/7/2005 8 4/1/2005 **562 

3/15/2004 2 11/21/2005 5 4/2/2005 25 

4/5/2004 0 12/5/2005 8 7/11/2005 18 

4/19/2004 3 12/19/2005 8 7/12/2005 40 

5/3/2004 5 

5/17/2004 2 1/3/2006 1 

6/7/2004 6 2/6/2006 5 

6/21/2004 12 2/20/2006 12 

Outfall 01 – Final Plant Discharge 

(Ash Pond Blowdown)

7/6/2004 7 3/6/2006 8 

7/26/2004 1 3/20/2006 2 

8/2/2004 11 4/3/2006 4 

Outfall 02 – Ash Pond Emergency 

Overflow 

8/16/2004 6 4/17/2006 3 

9/7/2004 6 5/1/2006 3 

9/20/2004 13 5/15/2006 1 Total Suspended Solids 

10/4/2004 3 6/5/2006 4 EPA Method 160.2 

10/18/2004 1 6/20/2006 1 Reporting limit = 1 mg/l 

11/1/2004 3 7/5/2006 6 

11/15/2004 5 7/17/2006 8 Permit Limits: Avg. 30 mg/l 

12/6/2004 5 8/7/2006 6 Max 100 mg/l 

12/20/2004 6 8/21/2006 4 

 9/5/2006 6 

1/3/2005 4 9/18/2006 10 

1/17/2005 12 10/2/2006 13 

1/18/2005 3 10/16/2006 10 

** Emergency 

overflow 

due to large 

storm event 

2/7/2005 2 11/6/2006 21 

2/21/2005 2 11/16/2006 12 

3/2/2005 4 12/4/2006 6 

3/21/2005 2 12/18/2006 5 

4/4/2005 12 

4/18/2005 11 1/2/2007 6 

5/2/2005 4 1/16/2007 8 

5/16/2005 2 2/5/2007 4 

6/6/2005 6 2/19/2007 6 

6/20/2005 2 
C-3

Table C-3. 2004 Ash Pond Blowdown Grab Sample 

November 15, 2004 

Ash Pond Blowdown Discharge 

Chemical 

Intake Concentration 

Form 2C, 2/22/02 

(mg/L) 

Discharge 

Concentration 

(mg/L) 

Discharge 

Flow 

(MGY) 

Antimony <0.05 <0.05 

Arsenic <0.03 0.071 7906 

Barium 0.02 0.093 

Beryllium <0.01 <0.01 

Chromium <0.01 0.0050 

Cobalt <0.04 0.0031 

Copper <0.02 0.022 

Lead <0.025 <0.025 

Manganese 0.10 0.17 

Mercury <0.0005 <0.0005 

Nickel <0.02 0.0076 

Selenium <0.04 <0.04 

Silver <0.01 0.0022 

Thallium <0.05 <0.05 

Vanadium N/A 0.030 

Zinc 0.02 0.0099 
C-4

Table C-4. 2005 Ash Pond Blowdown Grab Sample 

December 5, 2005 

Ash Pond Blowdown Discharge 

Chemical 

Intake Concentration 

Form 2C, 2/22/02 

(mg/L) 

Discharge 

Concentration 

(mg/L) 

Discharge 

Flow 

(MGY) 

Ammonia 0.2 0.4 

Antimony <0.05 0.017 7884 

Arsenic <0.03 0.32 

Barium 0.02 0.19 

Beryllium <0.01 0.0011 

Cadmium <0.01 <0.0010 

Chromium <0.01 0.0071 

Cobalt <0.04 0.0052 

Copper <0.02 0.043 

Lead <0.025 <0.0070 

Manganese 0.10 0.21 

Mercury <0.0005 <0.000064 

Nickel <0.02 0.013 

Selenium <0.04 0.032 

Silver <0.01 <0.0030 

Thallium <0.05 0.005 

Vanadium N/A 0.022 

Zinc 0.02 0.046 
C-5

Table C-5. 2006 Ash Pond Blowdown Grab Sample 

December 4, 2006 

Ash Pond Blowdown Discharge 

Chemical 

Intake Concentration 

Form 2C, 2/22/02 

(mg/L) 

Discharge 

Concentration 

(mg/L) 

Discharge 

Flow 

(MGY) 

Ammonia 0.2 0.3940 

Antimony <0.05 0.0088 7884 

Arsenic <0.03 0.0490 

Barium 0.02 0.1800 

Beryllium <0.01 0.0005 

Cadmium <0.01 0.0005 

Chromium <0.01 0.0028 

Cobalt <0.04 0.0023 

Copper <0.02 0.0260 

Lead <0.025 0.0015 

Manganese 0.10 0.1800 

Mercury <0.0005 0.000026 

Nickel <0.02 0.0120 

Selenium <0.04 0.0590 

Silver <0.01 0.0030 

Thallium <0.05 0.0030 

Vanadium N/A 0.0520 

Zinc 0.02 0.0250