Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0039-0045
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2003-08-28T04:00Z

1
Date:
June
4,
2003
Subject:
Telephone
Conference
Summary
­
EPA
and
representatives
from
the
taconite
industry
From:
Conrad
Chin,
EPA
Chris
Sarsony,
Alpha­
Gamma
To:
Docket
OAR­
2002­
0039
I.
Purpose
The
primary
purpose
of
the
meeting
was
to
resolve
any
outstanding
technical
issues
related
to
industry's
public
comments.
This
conference
call
was
the
continuation
of
previous
discussions
from
conference
calls
held
on
April
21,
May
1,
May
9,
May
15,
and
May
28.

II.
Date
June
4,
2003
III.
Attendees
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Steve
Fruh,
OAQPS/
ESD/
MG
Conrad
Chin,
OAQPS/
ESD/
MG
Taconite
industry
representatives
Rhonda
Ross,
Warner
Norcross
&
Judd
Don
Ahola,
Empire
Mining
John
Meier,
Cleveland­
Cliffs
Gus
Josephson,
Ispat
Inland
Mining
Dave
Skolasinski,
Northshore
Mining
Brad
Anderson,
EVTAC
Dave
Crouch,
Cleveland­
Cliffs
LaTisha
Gietzen,
National
Steel
Larry
Salmela,
U.
S.
Steel
Andrea
Hayden,
Hibbing
Taconite
Alpha­
Gamma
Technologies
Chuck
Zukor
Chris
Sarsony
OAR­
2002­
0039
IV­
E­
9
2
IV.
Discussion
Parametric
Monitoring
°
A
representative
from
Empire
Mining
expressed
his
concern
about
the
costs
associated
with
the
installation
of
pressure
gauges
as
required
for
the
parametric
monitoring
of
wet
scrubbers.
The
EPA
responded
that
during
the
May
28
conference
call
industry
agreed
that
the
monitoring
of
pressure
drop
for
wet
scrubbers
is
not
overly
burdensome.

°
A
representative
from
EVTAC
stated
that
it
does
not
have
a
data
logging
system
for
its
non­
furnace
control
devices.
Therefore,
parametric
monitoring
is
currently
performed
manually
by
operators.
At
present
EVTAC
only
performs
parametric
monitoring
and
records
the
data
once
a
day,
as
required
in
title
V.
The
proposed
Taconite
NESHAP
requires
the
industry
to
record
the
data
once
every
15
minutes.
EVTAC
is
concerned
it
would
cause
a
tremendous
burden
on
its
workers.
EVTAC
informed
EPA
that
its
does
have
a
data
logging
system
for
its
furnaces.

°
Northshore
stated
that
it
also
does
not
have
a
data
logging
system
for
its
non­
furnace
sources.

°
The
EPA
informed
the
industry
that
collecting
parametric
data
at
a
15­
minute
interval
is
a
common
practice
and
the
cost
burden
of
installing
the
data
logging
system
will
be
included
in
the
cost
impact
analysis.

°
A
representative
from
Inland
informed
EPA
that
the
pressure
drop
of
its
furnace
varied
over
time.
In
addition,
many
processing
conditions
beyond
the
control
of
the
plant
affect
pressure
drop.
Inland
is
concerned
that
the
pressure
drop
established
as
the
operating
limit
during
the
initial
compliance
test
would
be
difficult
to
comply
with
over
time.
Inland
would
like
to
be
able
to
use
data
collected
before
promulgation
to
establish
the
operating
limit.
The
EPA
requested
that
Inland
provide
histograms
of
its
pressure
drop
for
the
past
twelve
months.
In
addition,
Inland
would
consider
using
alternative
monitoring
parameters
in
lieu
of
pressure
drops.