### \. *,*' St.Louis

County (WPCP) AmerenUE-Meramec MO-0000361 MO-000043 

# .{t4{:$

It€l cxmrhan, Coverntr ' stcPhen M' Ivlahfsl' Distor



# OF NATURAT RESOURCES .'- DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 10805 St. Louis Regional Office Sunset Office Drive, Suite 100 St. Louis, MO 63t27-n38

614) 301-7100 FAX 614) Nr-7r07 

### June 29, 200O
Mr. Bob Wusder Ameren Services One Ameren Plaza 1901 Chouteau

Avelrue P.O.Box 66149,

MC 602 St.Louis,

MO 6315C6149 DearMr. Wussler: On Jnne23,2000, an inspection was made

of the waste'water,

storowater, and cooling

water discharges

from the AmerenUE

Meramec andRush Island

Power Plants

in St. Louis andJefferson Counties. The findings

sfthe inspection

andcorresponding

c-omm€Nlts

are attached. Ifyou haveany question regarding tliJ report, please

contact me at the St. Louis Regional Office at (314) 301- 7100. Sincerely, 

## srfilurs REGIoNAL

oFFIcE 

# W5\J*{ PaulT. Schell Environmental

Specialist PTS/bkk Enclosure WPCP Mr. Mchael Smallwood, Ameren Services Nick Von Feldt,AmerenServices

& MCrcEO Pffi 

### c:AmerenUE Rush Island power plant 100Big Hollow Road Festus, MO 63028 NPDES Permit Number MO-0000043 INTRODUCTION: On June 23,2000, an inspection was conducted

of the wastewateroutfalls and wastewater treatment

plant located at the Rush Island Power Plant in.Iefferson County, Missouri. Mr' Michael Smallwood,Mr. Nick Von Feldt, and Mr. Bob Wussler represented the facility. Mr. Paul Schellrepresented the MDNR. The investigation

included a review of the Department's files to assess

the State Operatingpermit compliance

statusand covered

the one-year

period immsdfalsl, preceding the inspection. The facility has a valid State OperatingPermit (MO-0000043) with an expiratlon date of August 26, 2004. FINDINGS AND COMMENTS: The discharge

monitoring reports for the non-contactcooling water effluent (Outfall 001) show that the effluentwas in compliance with the permitted limits for the period rwiewed. At the time of the inspection

the effluent had the same appearance

asthe receiving

waters. Observation

of the receivingriver revealed no visible adverse

effectsof the efiluent. The discharge

monitoring reports for the ashpond discharge (Outfall 002) indicatethat the effluentwas in compliance with the permittedlimits for the period reviewed. At the time of the inspection,

the effluent appeared

clear and did not appear to have an adverse

effect on the receivingriver. The dischargemonitoring reports for the wastewater treatment facility (Outfall 003) show that the effluent met permit limits during the period being reviewed. At the time of the inspection, there was some

floc and floating scum in the clarifier. The efiluent appeared clearwith no malodor and did not appear

to have an adverse

effect on the receiving river at the time of the inspection. The discharge

monitoring reports for the storm water drain (Outfall 004) indicatethat the efiluent was rneeting

permitted limits during the period reviewed.This outfall no longer has a permit limit for this permit cycle. The companyhas elected to use Best Management Practices

(BNrp) There was no discharge

from this outfall at the time of the inspection. 

### R{\t prepare4

Rr: 

# \furSJ,.( PaulT. Schell Environmental

Specialist 

# out", G

bQfa^oo r>APPENDIX 7 DATA INPUT SIEaT FoR WQIS

INSPECTTONS acility I D Permit Number Facility Name 

# 66t

' t/V0 - 00000q5 ourrarr z 00l,002,

oag / oo't, DW



# , h'*'tt^"tE - ft,al*Ur'-.,r/ LegaI city Deecrip NF/y.eec.5.T31N,&l{ River 

### 07tL/o/oI-o,-o<) Name: tra/i//4 county z Te4/-4-ttattaoez r1-- Inspector: {'T-5 fnspection Date: HQIS Input Date: Type of Inspectlon (check only one): cS

_ Comprehensive inspection, earnple taken (f&E Manual's class 3 inspectlon) cE X Comprehenaive insSlection, no eample taken (I&E Manualre class 3 inepection) AI Abbreviated inspectlon (f&E Manualra clasg 2 inspectlon) cP - Inspection or investigation in response to a complaint fNSPECTION DATA (check all that aeoLv)
co E_ Facility in compliance Nco- Facility not in compliance

NocP No Construction Permit cToP - Certified operator ie required but not employed ELV - Facill-ty is'not meetJ-ng effluent limlts based on Dt{Rs or recent eampling BYP - Evidence of bllpaseJ.ng at facility or in collection aystem NoLA - clasE f facilily is operating without the required LoA/permit NoP? - Facility is digcliarglng without'a permit (lncludes land appl. facilities) sgv - Schedule of.compliance ig not being met REV - Reporting (e.g. D!fR) or other standard conditions not being met sDv - sludge dispoaal etandard violatlofr SIc - Sludge or eolids tlere obeerved in creek or around.outfall soP - Stream has other obeerv:hle problems due to this dlscharge swoP - No etormwater outfalle permitted HBF Holdine baeln is within one foot of overflow from a no-dlscharge aystem LL - Lagoon is leaking baeed on geologic evaluation or water balance inforrnation LAV Wastewater Lrrlgation Broblems sDP- Sludge disposal probleme PTv Pretreatment probleme OMP operaEion and-maLntenance problems SNo Stream was not observed during inspection oT - other (apecify) COMPLIANCE TRI,CKING (comelete all that al]ply NOVRI Notice of Vlolation lggued on: Reach No: 5 Lt'{ o

Facitlty owner directed to submit DMRs' engineering report, plans and specs., conet. permit, etc., by: Facility owner directed to return to compliance by:

_ other; describe belowi reoPonse date ig: Follow-u.p vieit/inepection echeduled for: ( yr. /mo
. /day I / / RRER2
FRCR3 OTRR4 :'.. /IR5 WPCP - Rev. 12-15-93

# w

St. LouisCounty

(WP) AmerenUE-Meramec

Power Plant MO-0000361

Mam Blunt, Governor . Doyle Childers' Director



# T OF NAIURAL RESOURCES www.dnr.mo.gov 

### April3,2006
Steven S.Weiss, Envir. Scientist Ameren Services One AmerenPlaza 1901 Chouteau Avenue P.O. Box 66l4g,MC

602 St.Louis,

MO 63166-6149 Dear Mr. Weiss: On March 15,2006,

Mr. Scott

Hoffman of the St. Louis Regional Office conducted

a water pollutioninspection

of the wastewater,

storm water, and cooling water discharges

from the AmerenUE

Meramec

Power Plantto determine compliance

with federal

and Missouri water pollutionregulations. Findings of Mr. Hoffrnan's

inspection

are detailed in the enclosed

inspection

report. Should you have any questions

about your inspection

report, please call Mr. Hoffrnan

at (314) 416-2960

or you maywrite him at the St. Louis Regional Office, 7545S. Lindbergh Blvd., Suite 210, St. Louis, MO 63125. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, ST.LOUISREGIONAL OFFICE 

# rnzw
Mike Struckhoff 

### Regional Director 

# Ms/ryiJrjh

# --€tsEnclbs\rei c: Water Pollution Branch Catherine

Hodges, Water PollutionEnforcement St. LouisCounty

HealthDepartment "._,.p,."*.AmerenUE-Meramec powerplant 8200 Fine Road St.Louis,MO 63129 NPDES permit #MO-0000361 INTRODUCTION: on March 15,2006,Mr. Scott Hoffrnan of the St. Louis Regional office conducted

an inspection

ofthe wastewater,

storm water, andcooling

water discharges

from theAmerenUE-Meramec powerplant

to determine

compliance

with federal

and state water pollution standards

andregulations.

Mr. Hoftnan was accompanied

on the inspection

by Mr. Steven

Weiss, Environmental

ScientiJ, AmerentIE

Services. The inspection

included a reviewof our department files andDischarge

MonitoringReports

(DMR') from thefacility to assess compliance

statui with the facility's State

(Water) Operaiing

permit. Paperwork

andreports

reviewed were from theperiod

January - December-zoos.

Thefacility's operating permit expired in May 2005

anda renewal

application

*u, ,ubritted to the department asrequired

at that time' Thefacility's newwastewater operatini p*it is cunently

out for publit comment

andis awaiting final reviedissuance

from the permit

section of the water Polluiion

control program

in JefFerson

City. FINDINGS

AND COMMENTS: DMRsfor the non-contact cooling water (Outfalls 001& }}2)indicated

thatthe effluent

wasin compliance

with permitlimits. Observation of the receiving

iiver showed

no visible adverse

effects of/fromthe effluent. The effluent pipe wasnot submerged

ind was visible. ?Nry for the ash

pond discharge

and storm water (Outfall003) indicated

thatthe effluent

from this discharge

wasalsoin compliance

with permit

limits for the period

reviewed.

The effluent

appeared clear andthe receivingstream

was clearwith both showing no adverse

effects from the effluent. Since

the summer of 2000, the pondhas

only received

bottom ash, soaccumulation

of cenospheres

i not a problem. DMRS for the extended

aeration wastewater

plant (Outfall 004)

showed thatthe effluent

was alsoin compliance

with permit limits for the period reviewed.

At theiime of the inspection, the mixed liquor was graybrown

with no foam. There

was also some small floc in the clarifiei. The effluent weir had a few spots

of algae that need to be cleaned

and there appeared to be adequate

aeration andmixing in the aeration chamber.

Whilethe olantappeared to beopiiating correctly, attention should begivenlo the operation andmaintenance

of thetreatment

plant to ensure problems with permit limits do not occur as theydid several

years ago. DYRt for the emergency overflow(Outfall005)

show thatthere wasno discharge

during the period reviewed and there wasno discharge

during the inspection. DMRsfor the caisson

sump andscreen

wash discharge

(Outfall 006)showed

thatthe effluent

met permitted

limits during

the period

reviewed.

There wasno effluent

discharging

during the inspection. PerSpecial

Condition

#15of the facility's operating permit, monitoring

for storm water discharges

from Outfalls 007 & 008are

waived for this permit

cycle as longas

AmerenUE

uses BestManagement Practices (BMPs) onthese outfalls.If problems

occur, monitoring

will be re-established

by the department.

Per the draft permit,

AmerenllE

will conduct

periodic inspections

of these outfalls to determine

effectiveness

of the BMps.AmerenUFMeramec PowerPlant (WP) NarrativeReport April3,2006 Page 2 lastly, DMR5 for the fly ashpond-storm waterdischarge

showed trat tlre effluent was in compliance with p"r*ii limits except

foione "*"e"a*c" for Total Suspended _solids CrSs) on July 12,2005- Additional attention shouldbe given to the operation ind maintenance

of equipment

o prevent

any reoccurrence. Whole Efiluent Toxicity (WET) tests for Oufalls 001, 002, 003, & 009 are conducted annually as required.

# ?oC r SFe.,,* werss

PermitNumber:

MO - OOOO=5G f Outfall(s): Facility mt BF.{.;a
Facility Name: 

### v\Aors.^. U€ - i ArrtiNllJt'/ DATA INPUT SHEET FOR WQIS

INSPECTIONS 

# P

ec 

# 9\ o,xo, aolF oo1 Legal Description: CitvName: 

## 5+. Larts County: 

## 8{ Lqri s Inspection

Date: 5 i f / * *aIS Input Date: Inspector: R ScottHoffman Type of Inspection

(check only one): CS fomprehensive inspection, sample taken (I & E Manual's Class 3 inspection) CE t/ Comprehensive inspection,

no sample

taken (I & E Manual's Class 3 inspection) AI

_ Abbreviated inspection (I & E Manual's Class

2 inspection) CP Inspection or investigation in response to a complaint INSPECTION DATA (Check all that applv) ,/ CO V Facility in compliance

NOCP CTOP ELV BYP NOLA NOPT 

## scv REV SDV SIC SOP SWOP HBF - Eoldi"g basinis within onefoot of overflowfrom a no-discharge system LL Lagoon is leakingbased on geologic

evaluation

or water balance

information LAV

_ Wastewater irrigation problems SDP

_ Sludge

disposal problems PTV

_ Pretreahent problems OMP_ Operation and maintenance problems SNO

_ SFeam not observed during inspection Other (specify) COMPLIANCE TRACKING (Comolete all that applv) NOVRl_Notice of Violation issued on Facility owner directed to submit DMRs, engineering report, plans and specs.,

construction permit, etc. by: FRCR3_FaciIity ovv-ner directed to return to compliance by OTRR4 Other; describe below; responsedate is: VlRs_Follow-up visit/inspection scheduled for: 

# oh4 oto I -o7o*{ L RoP: SLr,ouis ofP{ o(oZofu

NCO Facility not in compliance

_ No construction

permit

_ Certified operator requird, but not employed
- Facility not meeting eflluent limits based

on DMRs or recent

sampling

_ Evidence

of bypassing

at facility or in collection system

_ Cless I facility is operafing without the required LoA/permit
- Facility is dischargingwithout a permit (includes land application facilities)

_ Schedule

of Compliance

not beingmet Reporting (e.g. DMR) or other standard conditions not being met Sludge disposalstandard violation Sludge or solidswere observed in creek or around oudall

_ S&eam

hasother observable

problems

dueto this discharge

_ No stormwater

ouffdls permitted

(year/month/day) t l

:,:i':\ t:"'ll t t

# t:k

Jefferson County (WP) AmerenUE-Rush

IslandPower

Plant MO-0000043

Jeremiah \il (Jay) Nixon, Governor . Mark N. Templeton, Director 

# T OF NATURAL RESOURCES
www.dnr.mo.gov



### April29,2009 Steven S.Weiss,

Envir. Scientist Ameren Services l90l Chouteau

Avenue P.O. Box 66149,

MC 602 St. Louis, MO 63166-6149 Dear Mr. Weiss: OnApril 23,2009,

Mr. Scott

Hoffman of the St.Louis

Regional Officeconducted

a water pollutioninspection

of thewastewater,

storm water, and cooling water discharges

from the AmerenUE

- Rush Island Power Plant to determine

compliance

with federal

andMissouri

water pollution regulations. Findings of Mr. Hoffman's

inspection

are detailed in theenclosed

inspection

report. Should you have

any questions

about your inspection

report, please

call Mr. Hoffmanat (314) 416-2960 or you maywrite him at the St. Louis Regional Office,7545

S. Lindbergh Blvd., Suite 210, St.Louis,

MO 63125. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, ST.LOUISREGIONAL OFFICE 

# 0t{bJElq Mike Struckhoff Regional Director MSiRS.ryjh

## -(sftEnclosrhes
c: CatherineHodges,Water Pollution Branch-Enforcement Jefferson

County Health Department o&u Michael J. Smallwood, SeniorEngineer,

ArnoFEoUEAmeren UE-Rush Island Power Plant 100 Bis Hollow Road Festu*s, MO 63028 NPDES Permit #MO-0000043 INTRODUCTION: On April 23, ZOO1,Mr. Scott Hoffman of the St. Louis Regional Office conductedan inspection of the wastewater,

storm water, and cooling water discharges from the AmerenUE-Rush Island Power Plant to determinecompliance with federal and state water pollution standards and regulations. Mr. Hoffman was accompanied

on the inspection

by Mr. Steve

S.Weiss,and Mr. Dan Wenk, both of AmerenUE Services' The inspection included a review of our department files and Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) from the facility to assess compliance status

with the facility's State (water) Operating Permit. Paperwork and reports reviewed were from the period January 2008 - February 2009. The facility's operating permit was isiued in October 2OO4 andwill expireon Septemb er 30,2009. A State

Water Pollution Operating permit renewal application has been submitted and is under review. Reports indicated that the Rush Island plant was meeting its permit limits/requirementsexcept for an Exception Report in March 2008 for a discharge

from the clean water gravity filter during maintenance, an Exception Report in November 2008 for a discharge(leak) from #3 Condensate Storage Tank, and an Exception Report in August 2008 for low pH in the effluent from the ash pond. All problems were identified, fixed and/or resolved quickly. FINDINGS AND COMMENTS: DMRs for the non-contact cooling water (Outfall #l) indicated that the effluent was in compliance with permit limits for the period reviewed. Observationof the Mississippi fuver showed no visible adverse iffects of/from the cooling water effluent. The water level of the Mississippi River was high due to spring rains. The actual outfall pipe is usually below water (as was the caseduring the inspection) and could not be observed. DMRs for the ash pond discharge(Outfall #2) indicated that the effluent from this discharge was also in compliance with permit limits except for an exceedance for low pH noted in August 2008. The discharge valvi stuck open causingthe CO2 injection system to not shut off during periods of no dischargecausing low pH in the dischargedeffluent. Again, the outfall pipe was under water in the Mississippi fuver and could not be physically observed. DMRs for the flow from the sewage treatment plant (Outfall #3) showedthat the effluent was also in compliance

with permit limits. At the time of the inspection, the mixed liquor was very darkbrown with no foam and no odor. The dark color may indicate that the wastewater

system's

micro-organisms

may be stressed.Operatorsneedto ensure that the micro-organisms have enough nutrients and are not poisoned with chemicals

to ensure

the WWTF can operate as designed

until the plant is replaced. A State Construction Permit #22-7 685 has been issued to replacethe current WWTF. The replacement project hasbeen

delayed andwill not start

until sometime

in 2010.Aeration andmixing in the aeration chamber appeared

to be operating normally, and effluent weir was free of solids. The effluent is discharged(piped) directly from the treatment plant into the Mississippi River. Due to high water on the river, the actual effluentpipe usually is and was underwater.Monitoring samples aretakenfrom the discharge "well" before exiting the wastewater plant (underground)into the Mississippi. Outfall #4 (storm water outfall) still exists,but does not have a permit limit and is not monitored continuously due to the implementation of Best ManagementPractices(BMPs) by AmerenUE and minimal risk to the waters of the state. There was no discharge from the outfall during the inspection, and quarterly inspectionsof this discharge point are conductedand documented as required.AmerenllE-Rush Island PowerPlant(WPP)Na:rative Report Aprll27,2009 Page2
Sludge reporting is also submitted

annually asrequired. While there

are no permitlimits or monitoring requirements

for sulfate

levels from the plant,

the sulfates aremonitored

on a quarterly

basis and those monitored

levels wereshown

to vary widely from 40mg/L to 150mg/L through theyear. Per engineers

at AmerenUE's

corporate

office,these

variations

were/are due to Mississippi

River levels,

rainfall amounts,

typeof fuel burned,

electric generation

levels, andpond retention time.

Date: April27" 2009 Environmental Speciali st III St. Louis Regional Office RS}V *<Arr<ut-tt / DATA INPUT SEEET FORWQIS

INSPECTIONS

_ No construction

perrnlt

_ Certified operator required, but not employed

_ Facility not meeting effluent limits based

on DMRs or recent

_ Evidence

of bypassing

at facility or in collection system

_ Class I facllity is operating without the required LoA/permtt

_ Facility is discharging without a permit (inctudes land facilities)

_ Schedule

of Compllance

not being met

_ Reporting (e.g.

DMR) or other standardconditions Sludge disposal standard

violstion Sludge or solids were observed

in creekor

_ Streamhasother observable problems this dlscharge

_ No stormwater

outfalls permitted IIBF _Ilolding basin is within onefoot of a no-discharge system FacilirylD: (50( 1,?. t I rl r l4ra-u-<-r r \4&r ' 

## permitNumber:,

t ***.^t- Z**l.T'h*r|],i

D^-:t:a. tt^--- r--.> Facility Name:

outfall

LL

_ Lagoon is leaking based on geologic LAV

_ Wastewrter irrigation problems or water balance information SDP

_ Sludge

disposal problems PTV

_ Preheatnent problems OMP_Operation and SNO

_ Stream not observed d inspection OT _Other (specify)

NOYRI Notice tion issued on owner directedto submit DMRs, engiireering report, and specs.,

construction

permi! etc.by: owner directed to return to compliance by Other; describe

below; response

date is: VlRs-Follow-up visiUinspection scheduled

for: WPCP -Rev. l2llil93 

## Legal Descripuon:

nl E 7.f S --f'f3"r,'.1, ,a 7E-*"er Reach yo. c+ t4 ot o ( - z3 eoo l City Name: F-.'{rr-> Counr.v: I-[D

rt -!vquf.'.#ROP:St.Louis lnspection

oate: "1f zs/ oa wers Input Date: Inspector:R scottEoffman Type of Inspection(check only one): !! -gomprehensive inspection, sample taken (I & E Manual's Class 3 inspection) CE vzlComprehensive inspection,

no sample

taken Q & E Manual's Class 3 inspection) AI

_ Abbreviated inspection G & E Manual's Class

2 inspection) CP Inspection

or investigation

in response

to a complaint INSPECTION DATA (Check atl that apotv) -/' CO 'l/Facility in compliance NCO Facility not in compliance NOCP CTOP ELV BYP NOLA NOPT 

## scv REV 

## sDv SIC 

### soP swoP being met

(year/month/day) II

tl tt