# Results of July 12,2005Performance Tests on the Step IIAgglomeratorLine 

# 4 Waste Gas Stack (SV118)for ParticulateMatter, Visible Emissions, Fluoride, SulfurDioxide, Carbon Monoxide, and Volatile Organic Compounds at the U.S. Steel Facility Locatedin Mt. Iron, Minnesota MPCA AQD FileNo. 26A AirEmissions PermitNo. 13700005-003/004 BarrProjectNo. 23/69-927005 Prepared for 

# u.s. Steel Corporation

- Minnesota Ore Operations Mt. [ron, Minnesota August2005



# BARR

# Results of July 12, 

# 2005Performance Tests on the Step IIAgglomeratorLine 4 

# Waste GasStack (SV118)forParticulateMatter, Visible Emissions, Fluoride, SulfurDioxide, Carbon Monoxide, and Volatile Organic Compounds at the U.S. Steel Facility Locatedin Mt. Iron, Minnesota MPCA AQD File No. 26A AirEmissions PermitNo. 13700005-003/004 BarrProjectNo. 23/69-927005 Prepared for 

# u.s. Steel Corporation

- Minnesota Ore Operations Mt. Iron, Minnesota August2005



# BARR 4700 West 77th Street Minneapolis, MN55435 Ph••., (952) 832-2600 Fox: (952) 832-2601

# IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

## Results of July 12,2005 Performance Test on the Step II Agglomerator Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SV118) for Particulate

Matter, Visible Emissions, Fluoride, Sulfur Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, and Volatile Organic Compounds at the U.S. Steel Facility Located in Mt. Iron, Minnesota Table of Contents Report Certification iii Certification ofSampling Procedures: iii Certification ofAnalytical Procedures: iii Certification ofTest Reportby Testing Company: iii Certification ofTest Reportby Owner or Operator ofEmission Facility: .iv Executive Surmnary v Introduction I Results Surmnary 2 Agglomerator Line 4 (SVI18) 2 Process Description 3 StackTest Procedures and Methods .4

2369927005

### Table I Table 2 Table 3 Table 4

Figure I Figure 2 List of Tables Particulate Test Results - Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SYI18) Fluoride Test Results - Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SYI18) Sulfur Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, and Volatile Organic Compounds Test Results - Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SYI18) Summary ofData Collected During Stack Testing

List of Figures TestPortLocations - Step II Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SYl18) Traverse Point Locations - Step II Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SYl18)
List of Appendices Appendix A AppendixB Appendix C AppendixD Appendix E AppendixF Appendix G AppendixH Appendix I Appendix J

#2369927005 

### Report Calculations and Nomenclature Field Data Sheets Laboratory Reports and Sample Chain ofCustody Instrument Output Calibration Data Cylinder Gas Certifications Visible Emissions Evaluator Certifications Process Operating Data StackTest Plan Proj ect Participants

ii

# Report Certification
Certification of Sampling Procedures: I certify under penalty oflaw that the sampling procedures were performed in accordance with the approved test plan and that the data presented in this test report are, to the best ofmy knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. All exceptions are listed and explained below.

Date 1. Testing was not conducted as scheduled during the May mobilization due to process problems
. ./ //./. / Signature:

# /~n**A'<--C-'~** Tom Kuch(nski Sr. Air Quality Technician Barr Engineering Co. 

## Certification of Analytical Procedures: I certify under penalty oflaw that the analytical procedures were performed in accordance with the requirements ofthe test methods and that the data presented for use in the test report were, to the best ofmy knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. All exceptions are listed and explained below.

ichard Berg Sr. Air Quality Technician BarrEngineering Co. Signa



## Certification of Test Report by Testing Company: I certify under penalty oflaw that this test report and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the test information submitted. Based on my inquiry ofthe person or persons who performed sampling and analysis relating to the performance test, the information submitted in this test report is, to the best ofmy knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. All exceptions are listed and explained below. Signature: Tom KuchinSki Sr. Air Quality Technician Barr Engineering Co. #2369927005 iii

## Certification of Test Report by Owner or Operator of Emission Facility: I certify under penalty oflaw that the information submitted in this test report accurately reflects the operating conditions at the emission facility during this performance test and describes the date and nature ofall operational and maintenance activities that were performed on the process and control equipment during the month prior to the performance test. Based on my inquiry ofthe person or persons who performed the operational and maintenance activities, the information submitted in this test report is, to the best ofmy knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. All exceptions are listed and explained below.

Signature:

#2369927005 i1

## !)l~-Iu'1Ai Chrissy Bartovich Environmental Control Engineer U.S. Steel Corporation/ Minnesota Ore Operations

IV 

### Date

# Executive Summary

Barr Engineering Company performed emissions tests at U.S. Steel Corporation Minnesota Ore Operations' Step II Agglomerator facility located in Mt. Iron, Minnesota. Tests were performed on the Line 4 waste gas stack (SVI18) for determination oftotal particulate matter, particulate matter less than 10 microns, visible emissions, fluoride, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide and total volatile organic compounds. The purpose ofthe testing was to satisfy requirements ofU.S. Steel's Minnesota Air Emissions Permit 13700005-003 andpending Permit 13700005-004. Test dates, results and emissions limits are presented in the Executive Summary Table. Process rates for all tests were within the process rates set in the test plan.

#2369927005
vEXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE TESTPARAMETER EPA Methods 1·5, and 202, EPA Method 9, Method 6C, Method 10, Method 13B, Method 25A AVERAGE TESTRESULTS Test Location Line 4 Waste Gas (SV118) Test Date 7/12/05 Particulate Concentration, gr/dscf Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 0.0084 Dry Catch Plus Organic Condensibles 0.0085 Dry Catch Plus Organic Plus Aqueous Phase 0.0173 Condensibies Particulate Emissions Limit, grldscf1.3 0.026 Particulate Emissions Rate, Ib/hr Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 31 Dry Catch Plus Organic Condensibles 31 Dry Plus Organic Plus Aqueous Phase 63 Condensibles Particulate Emissions Limit, Iblhr2,3 47 Visible Emissions, % Opacity 0 Visible Emissions Limit, % Opacity 3 <20 Fluoride Concentration, Ib/dscf 2.9E-08 Emissions Rate, ib/hr 0.78 Sulfur Dioxide Concentration, ppm 30 Emissions Rate, Ib/MMBtu 0.66 SulfurDioxide Emissions Limit, IblMMBtu 3 4 Carbon Monoxide Concentration, ppm 6.5 Emissions Rate, Ib/hr 13 Volatile Organic Compounds Concentration, ppm 2.6 VOC Emissions Rate, Ib/hr 3.1 Line 4 waste gas stack meets the total particulate compliance concentration limit determined from Minn. Rules 7011.0735 Tabie 2. Determinations are made using the sum of filterable and organic condensibles measured in the stack gas. 2 Total particulate compliance emissions limit calculated from Minn. Rules 7011.0730. Determinations are made using the sum of fiiterable and organic condensibles measured in the stack gas. 3 Emissions limits are in Minntac's Title V permit 13700005-003.

#2369927005
VI

# Introduction

Barr Engineering Co. performed emissions tests at U.S. Steel Corporation

- Minnesota Ore Operations' Agglomerator facilities located in Mt. Iron, Minnesota. The testing was performed on the Step II Line 4 waste gas stack (SYI18) for the determination oftotal particulate matter (PM), particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM]o), visible emissions (YE), fluoride (F), sulfur dioxide (S02), carbon monoxide (CO) and total volatile organic compounds (YOC). Source Equipment Permit Permit Green Ball Type Group Stack Feed Rates Number Vent LTPH Number Line 4 Waste Wet GRP010 SV118 525 to 625 Gas Stack scrubber



### The tests were performed to demonstrate compliance with the facility's Minnesota Air Emissions Permit 1370005-003 and pending Title 

### Y/PSD Permit 1370005-004. The Line 4 testing was originally scheduled for the week ofMay 16, 2005. The test was rescheduled to July 12 due to process operation difficulties, tester availability and scheduled down time for the process line. The MPCA was notified by email about the testing delay. Communications documenting the delay along with a copy of the March 8, 2005 test plan and MPCA approval letter are located in Appendix I. 

### Applicable emissions limits for Group 010 Agglomerator Lines 4-5 are determined by Minn. Rule 7011.0610 Subp.l(A)(I) for particulate matter concentration and Minn. Rule 7011.0610 Subp.I(A)(2) for visible emissions under permit 1370005-003. Tom Kuchinski led the Barr test team. Chrissy Bartovich, Ray Potts and Ron Braski of U.S. Steel provided test coordination with facility operations. The performance tests were not witnessedby the MPCA. A list ofprojectparticipants is provided in Appendix J.

#2369927005 I

# Results Summary

Results ofthe emissions performance test are summarized in the Executive Summary Tables. The particulate emissions results are presented for filterable particulate emissions, filterable plus organic particulate emissions, and total particulate emissions-filterable, organic condensibles, and inorganic condensibles. Filterable plus organic particulate emissions results are used when determining compliance with the particulate emissions (PM) limit in the Minnesota Rules. Emissions of particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM

## ,o ) are determined using the filterable plus organic and inorganic condensible particulates. The exhaust from the scrubbers is too wet to allow PMl o determination by Method 201A. 

## Agglomerator Line 4 (SV118) Results ofthe Line 4 waste gas stacktests performed on July 12 are presented in Table I for particulate matter, Table 2 for fluoride and Table 3 for gaseous pollutants. The stackcomplies with the Minn. Rules 7011.0715 Subp. I(A) for particulate matter emissions. Emissions limits were determined from Minn. Rules 7011.0735 at an average airflowrate of425,000 dry standard cubic feet per minute (dscfm), and from Minn. Rules 7011.0730 at the average fired pellet production rate of464 long tons perhour (LTPH). Fluoride emissions were 0.78 pounds per hour (lb/hr). Emissions ofthe gaseous pollutants; sulfur dioxide (S02), carbon monoxide (CO) and volatile organic compounds (VOe) met the proposed limits in the Title VIPSD permit. Opacity ofvisible emissions observations were conducted concurrently with PM test run 1. The opacity observation results are not summarizedbecause all observations were zero. The opacity data is included in Appendix B.
Run 1 ofthe fluoride and run 3 ofthe particulate testingwere invalidated due to sample problems which introduced unrepresentative particulate into the sample train. The problem was recognized at the time ofsample collection and a fourth run was performed for each pollutantto replace the invalidated run. The result ofthe runs in question are provided in the appendices to demonstrate the inconsistency ofloading andjustification for not including the run in the reported averages.

#2369927005 2

# Process Description

The Agglomerator grate-kiln systems consist offour primary components; the dryer, preheat furnace, kiln and cooler. Green pellets from the balling drums enter the grate, supported by a slotted grate. The grate is divided into three sections: two for drying and one for preheating the pellets. Hot process gases are passed through the bed ofgreen pellets on the grate in order to first dry and then preheat them. The grate then transports the pellets into the rotary kiln. In 

### the kiln the pellets are tumbled and indurated (heat hardened) by heating them to 2450 of. 

### The pellets are then discharged into an annular cooler with slotted traveling pallets. Ambient air is passed through the bed ofpellets in the cooler to cool the pellets and recover heat. The waste gas stacks are controlled for particulates by intermediate drop-outboxes, impingement plates, and cyclones. In 

### addition, Line 4 waste gas emissions are controlledby wet scrubbers for particulate emissions. Sampling was performed at the rooflevel and after all control equipment. Operating parameters were recorded for each test run. The parameters included fuel usage, green pellet feed rate (LTPH), fired pellet production rate (LTPH), scrubberpressure drop inches of water column (in. wc.) and scrubber water flow gallons per minute (gpm). Summaries ofthe process operating data are provided Table 4 and in Appendix H. The kiln was fired on a combination ofgas and wood. The line was producing acid pellets. Fuel analysis data is provided in appendix 

### H.

#2369927005 3

# Stack Test Procedures and Methods
Testing was performed from ports meeting USEPA Method 1 criteria. A 24-point traverse was performed on the Line 4 (SVI18) waste gas stack. The traverses were performed from four ports for particulate and fluoride measurements. Sample port location and traverse point detail are provided in Figures 1-2. Volumetric airflow determinations were performed in accordance with Method 2 using an Svtype pitot tube. Airflows were determined in conjunction with the Method 5 and Method l3B performance tests. Stack gas compositions were determined by Method 3A. Stack gas moisture content was determined by the performance ofEPA Method 4, in conjunction with the Method 5 and Method l3B performance tests. Particulate concentrations and emission rates were determined in accordance with Method 5. Particulate concentrations include condensible particulate matter collected in the backhalfofthe sample train. Condensible particulate matter was determined using Method 202. The impinger contents were purged with nitrogen gas in the field and titrated with ammonia hydorxide in the lab to neutralize acids. Minnesota total particulate matter (PM) was determined from the sum offilterable and condensible organic particulate. Particulate matter less than 10 microns (PMlO) was determined by adding inorganic condensible particulate to the filterable plus organic particulate. Determination of opacity ofvisible emissions was made by Method 9. Opacity reader certification documentation is provided in Appendix G. Fluoride emissions were determined by Method l3B with filtration occurring after the liquid condensation. Gaseous pollutant emissions were determined by Method 6C for sulfur dioxide, Method 10 for carbon monoxide, and Method 25A for volatile organic compounds. Gaseous emissions rates were determined in conjunction with Method l3B airflows. The USEPA performance test methods cited in this report are found in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, except for Method 202, which is found in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix M.

#2369927005 4

# TablesU. S. Steel Minnesota Ore Operations Mt. Iron, Minnesota TABLE 1 PARTICULATE TEST RESULTS Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SV118) Barr Engineering Co. August 22, 2005

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 4 Averaae Test Date 7/12/2005 7/12/2005 7/12/2005 ... Test Period 1000·1109 1155·1305 1925 - 2021 

# ._- Test Duration, min. 60 60 45 55 Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 125 124 124 124 Avg. Moisture Content, %VN 13.6 13.3 13.6 13.5 Particulate Loading, g Dry Catch 0.0246 0.0237 0.0174 0.0219 Organic Condensibles 0.0003 0.0001 0.0006 0.0003 Aqueous Phase Condensibles 0.0180 0.0160 0.0299 0.0211 Total 0.0429 0.0398 0.0479 0.0493 Air Flow Rate acfm 589,000 582,000 557,000 576,000 scfm 502,000 497,000 475,000 491,000 dscfm 433,000 431,000 410,000 425,000 Sample Volume acf 48.63 48.77 35.43 44.28 dscf 44.42 43.98 32.00 40.13 Isokinetic Variation, % 

## I 101.5 101.1 103.0 101.9 Particulate Concentration, gr/dscf Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 0.0085 0.0083 0.0084 0.0084 Dry Catch + Organic Condensibles 0.0086 0.0083 0.0087 0.0085 Dry Catch Only + Organic Condensibles + 0.0149 0.0140 0.0231 0.0173

Aqueous Phase Condensibles (Total) Particulate Emission Rate, Ib/hr Dry Catch Only (Filterable) 32.0 31.0 30.0 31.0 Dry Catch + Organic Condensibles 32.0 31.0 30.0 31.0 Dry Catch + Organic Condensibles + 55.0 52.0 81.0 62.7 Aqueous Phase Condensibles Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH 588 584 588 587 Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 465 463 463 464 Total Particulate Emission Rate, Ib/LT Greenball 0.09 0.09 0.14 0.11 Total Particulate Emission Rate, Ib/LT Fired Pellet 0.12 0.11 0.17 0.14 Note: Run 3 omitted due to sampling error. Note: Run 4 shortened run time due to process upsetU.S. Steel Minnesota Ore Operations Mt. Iron, Minnesota TABLE 2 FLUORIDE TESTRESULTS Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SV118) Barr Engineering Co. Augus122,2005

Parameter Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Average Test Date 7/12/2005 7/12/2005 7/12/2005 

# -- Test Period 1155·1306 1600 - 1716 1755 - 1905 

## --- Test Duration, min. 60 60 60 60 Avg. Stack Temperature, deg.F 120 121 119 120 Avg. Moisture Content, %VN 11.9 11.5 11.9 11.7 Fluoride Sample Loading, ug (as F") 408 418 315 380 Air Flow Rate acfm 594,000 591,000 590,000 592,000 scfm 511,000 508,000 507,000 509,000 dscfm 450,000 449,000 447,000 449,000 Sample Volume acf 32.66 32.13 32.68 32.49 dscf 29.16 28.67 29.16 29.00 Isokinetic Variation, % 99.6 98.1 100.3 99.3 Fluoride Concentration, Ib/dscf 3.1E-08 3.2E-08 2.4E-08 2.9E-08 Fluoride Emission Rate, Ib/hr 0.83 0.87 0.64 0.78 Greenball Feed Rate, LTPH 584 595 594 591 Fired Pellet Production Rate, LTPH 463 472 471 469 Fluoride Emission Rate, (lb/LT, Green ball Feed) 0.0014 0.0015 0.0011 0.0013 Fluoride Emission Rate, (lb/LT, Fired Pellets) 0.0018 0.0018 0.0014 0.0017 Note: Run 1 omitted due to sampling errorU.S. Steel Minnesota Ore Operations Mt. Iron, Minnesota TABLE 3 Barr Engineering Co. August 22, 2005

SULFUR DIOXIDE, CARBON MONOXIDE AND VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS TEST RESULTS Line 4 Waste Gas Stack (SV118)

Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Averaae Test Date 7/12/2005 7/12/2005 7/12/2005 -- Test Period 1000-1108 1155-1305 1601-1716 -- Air Flow Rate ACFM 585,000 594,000 591,000 590,000 SCFM 502,000 511,000 508,000 507,000 DSCFM 440,000 450,000 449,000 446,000 EPA Method 6C Results S02 Concentration, PPM 33 25 32 30 S02 Emission Rate, Ib/hr 144 111 144 133 S02 Emission Rate, Ib/MMBtu 0.67 0.60 0.70 0.66 EPA Method 10 Results CO Concentration, PPM 6.2 5.7 7.8 6.5 CO Emission Rate, Ib/hr 11.8 11.1 15.3 12.7 EPA Method 25A Results VOC Concentration, PPM (wet) as propane 3.9 2.6 1.4 2.6 VOC Emission Rate, Ib/hr as propane 4.4 3.0 1.7 3.0 Heat Input, MMBtu/hr 214 184 206 202TABLE 4 DATA COLLECTED DURING STACK TESTING line 4 July 12, 2005 Acid Pellet Production

Waste Gas Stack line 4 Feed Rates Fired Pellet Fuel Data Wet Scrubber Start End To Drums

# I To Grate Production Wood 

### I Gas MBTUH 

### I Total 

### DP 

# I GPM Run/Pollutant Date Time Time LTPH LTPH LTPH MBTUH I Grate 

### I Kiln I MBTUH 

### PM - gases 12-Jul 10:00 11:09 588 522 465 90.61 0.00 123.88 214.49 11.09 2985 PM - gases 12-Jul 11:55 13:06 584 520 463 85.83 0.00 98.29 184.12 11.20 2991 PM - gases 12-Jul 16:00 17:16 595 531 472 94.91 0.00 111.38 206.29 11.21 2985 PM 12-Jul 19:25 20:21 588 520 463 93.36 0.00 102.09 195.45 11.00 2987 Fluoride 12-Jul 17:55 19:05 594 529 471 95.22 0.00 95.76 190.98 11.23 2985 Average 

### 590 524 467 90.5 0.0 106.3 201.6 11.15 2987 Based on 10-minute averages that approximately align with the test times. Note: Gas meter was in error - read 17.67% low. Corrected values are shown

# Figures4 TEST PORTS @ 

### 90 DEGREES 

### 114.0' ID 

# I

# I
34'


## o 5' _ - ROOF LINE



## _**-+~-=t--** 

## - -

NOT TO SCALE FAN 

# -- - i**~52'**



### TEST PORT LOCATIONS US STEEL MINNESOTA ORE OPERATIONS MOUNTAIN IRON, MN STEP 2 AGGLOMERATOR LINE 4 WASTE GAS STACK (SV118) FIGURE 1

# • • 

# • • •


# •

•

• • • 

# • •



# •
• • 

# • 

# • • • 

# • 

# • 

# •••

NO. OF TEST PORTS PORT LENGTH PORT DIAMETER NO. OF TRAVERSE POINTS DUCT DIAMETER 

### 4 

### 22.0"

6.0"



### 24 168.0" 

### POINT INSERTION DEPTH IN

.. 

### 1 3.58 2 11.25 3 19.84 4 29.78 5 42.00 6 

### 59.75

NOT TO SCALE 

### TRAVERSE POINT LOCATIONS US STEEL MINNESOTA ORE OPERATIONS MOUNTAIN IRON, MN STEP 2 AGGLOMERATOR LINE 4 WASTE GAS STACK (SV118) FIGURE 2

# Appendices

# AppendixA Report Calculations andNomenclatureCalculationEquations - EPA Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, and 10

Systembias adjustment on source concentrationindicatedbythe analyzer.

where:



## C mA is the adjusted source concentration, ppm(dry) is the average concentration indicatedby the analyzer, ppm(dry) is the average of the initial and final system calibrationresponses of the zero gas, ppm is the average ofthe initial and fmal systemcalibrationresponses of the upscale gas, ppm is the certifiedconcentration ofthe upscale calibration gas, ppm
Convert source concentration into emissionrate(lb/br). 

### C _MWxCppm



# ( -!"L)
- 24.04 dscm

where: 

# C(.!"1LJ dscm 

### MW

24.04 E(lblhr) 6.242xI0-8 

### Qd 60 amount ofcompound, by weight(mg), per dry standard cubic meter ofair is the molecular weight of the gaseous compound where Mw > 64 SO, 46 NO, 28 CO 34 TRS (Assume H,S Molecular Weight) is the molar volume ofgas at 68 OF and 29.92 in Hg, L'g-mole emissionrate of gaseouscompound inpounds perhour is the conversion factor from mg/m' to Ib/ft' flow rate ofdry gas at standard conditions in cubic feetper minute, dscfrn is the conversion factorfrom minutes to hours

P:\Z AIRSAMPLING\TempJates\Reports\Equations\analyzereq.docEmissionrate ofpounds per MMBtuheat input. E(lblh') Heat Input(MMBtu/hr) E(lblMMBtu)

## =-----'=='---- Heat Input from operating data summary

P:\ZAIRSAMPLING\Templates\Reports\Equations\analyzereq.docCalculation Equations - EPA Method 25A Systembias adjustment on source concentration indicatedby the analyzer.

where:



## C mA is the adjusted source concentration, ppm(dry) is the average concentrationindicatedby the analyzer, pprn(dry) is the average ofthe initial and final systemcalibrationresponses of the zero gas, ppm is the average ofthe initial and fmal system calibrationresponses of the upscale gas, ppm is the certified concentration ofthe upscale calibration gas, ppm
Couvert source concentration into emissionrate(lblbr). 

### C =MWxCppm

### (~~) 24.04



### EOb1h' ) 

## =(6.242X

### 10·8

# )xC(mg)

# x 60

# x Qs
.em where: 

# C(!!!K)
.em 

### MW

24.04 E(lb/hr) 6.242xlO·8 

### Qs 60 amount ofcompound, by weight(mg), per standard cubic meter of air the molecular weight ofcarbon (x) the uumber ofcarbons in calibration gas used whereMW= 12 carbon 24 ethane 44 propane (C3H8) is the molar volume ofgas at 68 'F and 29.92 in Hg, L'g-mole emission rate ofgaseous compound in pounds perhour is the conversionfactor from mg/nr' to lb/tt' flow rate of gas at standard conditions in cubic feet per minute, scfin is theconversionfactorfromminutes tohours

P:\ZAIRSAMPLING\Templates\Reports\Equations\analyzereq.doc