Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1696u . f n krJ Q f1 2 w ' ~· Q n ~ ~. ~ ~ 0 I ~. ~-· l c L ' " t t: " t L r----------------------·=-..,.._·-----. ~ SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION PROJECT No. 7114 HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM INTERIM MONITORING AND QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT FINAL REPORT I}{]£(R1~~c::::l@.@~@(g@ AUGUST.1984 . SUSITNA JOIN<~ VENTURE DOCUMENT 1696 L ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY--- • • .. I I I I I I l SUSITNl~ HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Document No. 1696 Susitna File No. 4.8.2 HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROG.RAM INTERIM MONITORING AND QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Report by Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Prepared for Alaska Power Authority Final Report August 1984 I I I I I I £ t [ [ l L L l l L !. l L. ~ t' : 1 • ~--•••''''~ .... ,,.~--•--•• ,,,_,,;.,_,_,,,_ ·•--••··'-·<-',,><-·<>o•••·--·~·-'--'·-••-~·-"'""'""' ,<;__;.\,_,, '-' NOTICE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS CONCERNING THIS REPORT SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORIIY I I I I I I ! I [ l · PREFACE This report has been submitted by the Alaska Power Authority to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conser7ation. It presents the preliminary results of the monitoring program measur1ng the existing backround concentrations of total suspended particulates at the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project site, as required by the federal ambient moni taring r~quirements for Prevention of Significant Deterioration reviews. ! I I I I I I I [ I' ;. w~ ~· it j~ i6 i .. ....... ~~ .I:~ t ~;h SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOL AIR MONITORING PROGRAM TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA AND QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT I INTRODUCTION II MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS III QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS A~ DATA RECOVERY B. HI-VOL PRECISION c. FILTER WEIGHING PRECISION D. IN-FIELD HI-VOL FLOW RATE CHECKS E. QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT REFERE~~CES . ~ Page 1 2 4 4 4 4 8 12 I I I I I I l l l l iw r; ~ Number 1 2 IST OF TABLES Title Measured TSP Concentrat.ions Summary of Data Losses .. l.l. LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number · Title 1 X and R Chart for TSP Measurements 2 Laboratory Quality Assurance Log 3 X and R Chart for Hi-Vol Flowrate 4 Hi-Vol Project Audit Checklist 5 Hi-Vel Flowrate Audit Form r M .. iii I. INTRODUl!TION The Alaska Power Authority (Power Authority) has proposed to construct the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Estimates Jf air pollutant emissions during - construction indicate that the emissions from the 1temp.orary diesel electric generators may be high enough to require submittal of a Permit to Construct with Prevention of Significant Deterioration ('PSD) review to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). Section 18 AAC 50. 300(c)(l) of the Alaska Air Quality Control Regulations requires, as part of a PSD rev1.ew, submittal o£ ambient air quality data for those pollutants which are present at the site in "significantn background concentrations. ADEC has indicated that because the Susitna ~rojeclt site is located far from any industrial emission sources, total suspended particulates (TSP) caused by natural windblown dust is the only significant air contaminant at the site (ADEC, 1984). The monitorin5 program includes three consecutive reports to Al)EC. Tne first report entitled "Initial Monitoring and Quality Assurance Report 11 was filed with ADEC in July 1984. This report "Data and Quality Assurance Progress Report" is the second report. The final report will be submitted in October 1984. This report presents the preliminary results of the air quality monitoring program conducted at the Watana campsite for the period May 30, 1984 to August 10, 1984. This monitoring program was established to measure baseline values of total suspended particulates (TSP) with the field program initiated on May 29, 1984. Two monitoring locations were established, the first near the existing Watana field campsite, and the second at the Susitna River. Two collocated high volume samplers were located at the campsite and designated as Unit 1 (reporting) and Unit 2 (audit). A single high volume sampler was located at the river site and designated as Unit 3. 67372 840830 1 .. B r I. !L I I ·~ r:~ II. MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS All of the hi-vol samplers were operated on a three-day schedule beginning on May 30, 1984. T~.\e collocated Units 1 and 2 were operated from midnight to midnight on the specified sampling days. Because Unit 3~ located on the Susitna River, is accessible only by helicopter, it was operated from 10:00 A.M. on the designated sampling day to 10:00 A.M. the following day. Twenty-five samples were collected at Units 1 and 2. Twenty-two· samples were collected at Unit 3. Results of the program through August 10 are presented in Table 1. No values of over 10 ug/m3 were recorded during the program. Individual ·samples range from a minimum va~ue of 1. 29 ug/m3 recorded by Unit 1, to a max1mum value of 7. 99 ug/m3 recorded by Unit 3. Tne geometric mean of all samples collected to date is 3.38 ug/m3 for Unit 1, 3.33 ug/m3 for Unit 2, and 4.76 ug/m3 for Unit 3. 67372 RLLOR~n 2 ll bl ~· t Date 05/30/34 06/02/~'14 06/05/84 06/08/84 . 06/11/84 06/14/84 06/17/84 06/20/84 06/23/84 06/26/84 06/29/84 07/02/84 07/05/84 07/08/84 07/11/84 07/14/84 07/17/84 07/20/84 07/23/84 07/26/84 07/29/84 08/01/84 08/04/84 08/07/84 08/10/84 Geometric Mean Unit 1 ·Neg Neg Neg 2.45* 4.29* 1.09* Neg 4.34 3.06 1.76 6.87 2.57 6.83 3.65 2.90 2.95 3 .. 12 3.05 5.62 1.29 3.34 2.81 5.12 2.77 Ne~ 3.38 TABLE 1 MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS (ug/m3) Watana Campsite Samplers Susitna River Unit 2 Percent Differen~~ Unit 3 Neg 0.33* Neg Neg 2.1Q-i.;• :l.9* 32.6 7.39* 0.05* 95.! .. 3.63* Neg 1 .. 34* 3.35 22.8 3.57 2 .. 22 27.5 4 .. 14 2.27 -29~Q 5.08 6.83 0.58 6 .. 43 3.04 -18.3 0.99 6.53 4~4 5.98 3 .. 79 -3.8 4.03 2.93 -1.0 4.~1 3.19 -8.1 5o32 4.62 -48.1 6 .. 11 3.06 0 3.33 5 .. 81 -3.4 7.99 2.16 -67 .. 4 5 .. 15 2 .. 51 24 .. 8 3.01 1.55 44.8 6 .. 92 5 .. 99 -17.0 5 .. 33 5.02 -81 .. 0 6 .. 45 1.86 4.75 3.33 4.76 *Because of identified problems with processing of the filters, these concentrations have not been included in the geometric mean value .. 67372 840830 3 ~-,~-~" ----- r I' I' ~ I b f l w ~·. __ ,__, ·..:_:.:....::..-.:.:.,.-::::.:.,.::.~-~..;:;..,:s,;:-.::::::;.~.:--.....:::.:;;:::::.,;.:.:;::.;:::-,;.:,~.-:.:;:-..:.:.:.:;!....:.:~.:. -······ III. QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS A. DATA RECOVERY During the period May 30, 1984 through August 10, 1984 a total of 72 hi-vol fi 1 ter samples filters showed were collected. Of those samples, "negative weights." The total data nine of the ex posed recovery during the period May 30, 1984 through August 10, 1984 was o8 percent. The data losses are sunnnarized in Table 2. Most of the "negative weights" occurred at the start of the program. If data -from the first four sampling days are not included in the data losses, then the overall pr~ject•data recovery improves significantly, to 95 percent. B. HI-VOL PRECISION The precision of the measured TSP concentration between the two collocated samplers at the campsite is shown in Figure 1. The precision of the two collocated samples often did not satisfy the ~ 15 percent limit set by the federal guidelines (EPA 198i)). · However, considering the extremely low ·measured TSP concentrations to date, it is unreasonable to expect the precision to consistently be within that limit. When sampling very low particle concentrations with collocated hi-vols, relatively minor wind shifts and very minor difficulties during sampling and filter processing can cause apparently major precision problems. C. FILTER WEIGHING PP~CISION Ten percent of the new and exposed filters were redessicated and reweighed to confirm the precision of the filter processing. The results of the filter reweighing are shown in Figure 2. As shown in ·that figure, the reweight differences were all well wichin the .:': 5.0 mg precision limit set by the federal guidelines (EPA 1979). 67372 4 0/,f'IQ"lf'l ~' . ' ~ r~ ~ . : t! ~ TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF DATA LOSSES Date 05/30/84 06/02/84 06/05/84 06/08/84 06/17/84 08/10/84 Type of Data Negative net particle weight$ on exposed filters# Negative net particle weights on exposed filters. Remarks The first set of filters were inadvertently not brushed to remove loose fibers before the initial weighing. Reason for negative weight ~s not known. Note: Total data recovery from May 30, 1984 through August 10, 1984 = 89 percent. Total d~ta recovery from June 11, 1984 through August 10) 1984 = 95 percent. >< > :z 0 ;o n :c ):» A:J "T1 -i .... tC "'T1 c 0 .., ;o rD -f _, tn " ::s: I'T1 ):» tn c: ;o ~ r.1 :z -4 VJ • • PROJECT MEASUREMENT Watana Camp ISP Values Susitna Hvdroelectric Proi PERFORMED Nl\!4£ DATE ~ -w >, li " ~ :::» til ~ ~ >, dl --+20 > ........ ·5/~~ 1 2 - J 1 2 - J - '7 z. 6/5 i l.f'6 (,j, b/N ~ --1..'15 Li.l..1 1.0~ 0.~} --2/~1 o.os ---t33 +~5 ..... 6Jn b/zo 6/z3 6Ju "lz? 7Jz, 1'15 . 1"fv, 1/11 1/t'f 1711 -'J,3lJ 3.oh 1.1l, c;l ?;1-Z,5J b,'¥3 '3,(,5 il.CIO Z,<J5 '3.12. . . -.3.35 1.1..t z.u (;,j3 3.01/-6.53 3.'¥1 z,'J3 3.1't '1·6Z -ff.zz.~ _.Z1.5 -2/.0 •o.{, li·3 tlj,~ -3.~ -t,o --~·,, "''lA -. ..1.. ---~~. •1 ..,,. -~ ,.:;;-'" ,. MEASUREMENT UNITS 1/z.o 7-J~ 1/zt "1/z.Cf 1'6/l Sjq '3f1-'l/lo 3.01. 5.,l f.z.q 3.~ z.-a1 5,,z 2.11 - 3.0(, 5.'6\ l•51 z,st ,.55 5.~~ 5!~~ /. ?>(., .,.r .....,.._,. ~ ··~.3.tf--{,~ +25" "lJS -rt -st - • j-~ T N ~ 1------~ -~.;;;: -~---~-~-----_, -...... ~-----.... -I--~-~ .......... ->- • +10 --- )( 0 0 -I 0 -10 . -20 - -:r.., .. c::Uc:-v v 0 • ~ ~ .... u '«.a~ .a~ oOue u ~II( - - ...:::!:. - - --1-. ;_ ._ -;_ ~-L.. -L---;:;;;; - I ~ I ____:•_ I r~ • l • ~· ~ ... -. -~ • -.-~ -. -. ' • -. ' ,. ~-== ~-'-~.-~-.... -.... ' --..:;;;;;-; AP. -1 .I II --. 11 I. -=-· I I . I .. • ' '. ' .~ 1-- 1-- -::;;; 1~ rT 1l ·f-._ -._ ~ i--._ -~-~--t-. tl 1l -, ~ ' ~ ' ~ -. ., -'£ T ' T T ' -.,.- ~ ' "-= "-'--. t= ' T ' .. !,. ,.• :•,,' ...... I • I ,! . ~· ~'I I. •I ' ' •• ' 'UJ . JJ. I l l l l • • .. ~· ,,_., """ "" -·-... .. ..... --··.-~~-~--..;_-..,.._,. ___ -:_~.,..-:,. .. __ :::.::.._,..,_~ ____ , ____ ~__,:;:.:...:.....;_ _____ ~-. ·····-··"··-'·.::; .. ; .:....:.: .~._;.:.;: ______ ,'.:_.___:~~:~...;-;_ ___ _...__:;_ ~-:.-<-"'~ ~~··- rr, i' l L~ rr·; ·~ I 1 .. L.~ Filter No. 5366-10 5366-20 5366-28 5366-38 5366-55 5366-66 5366-32 5366-46 5366-48 5366-82 5366-66 5366-65 . Firs! Weighing Second W£;i ghing {grams) (grams) ·. 3.5319 3.5319 3 .. 5271 3 .• 5268 3.4427 3.4422 3 4500 3.4498 3.5187 3.5179 3.4803 3.4799 3.4731 3.4730 - 3.5015 3. 50.12 3.5089 3.5099 3.4859 3.4862 3.4842 3.4841 3.5057 3.5054 ~ ~ ' Figure 2 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE LOG .• . Difference ! (mg) Remarks ·. 0 Jnexno~ed Filters -0.30 Unexposed Filters -0.50 Unexposed Filters -0.20 Unexposed Filter~ l -0.80 Unexposed Filters -0.40 Unexposed Filters . -0.1 Exposed Filters . I -0.3 Exposed Filters I I +1.0 Exposed Filters I 1 ' +0.3 Exposed Filters I ! I I -0.1 Exposed Filters I . ' -0.3 Exposed Filters j I : i I I I l ! i fXJ£00~£ Q §®£®©@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE f'J1 ·.lli ·~ L - D. IN-FIELD HI-VOL FLO~ RATE CHECKS The measured hi-vol flow rate using the Kurz Model 341 electronic flowmeter was periodically checked against the same flow rate us~ng a standard critical orifice "top hat" flowmeter. The results of those flow rate checks are shown in Figure 3. The two measured flow rates were within the +7 percent limits allowed under the federal guidelines (EPA 1979), exc.ept on July 31, 1984 when the flow rate check had to be conducted during a windy period, under conditions where the "top hat 11 flowme ters are recognized to give unreliable results. E. QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT An independent quality ·assurance audit was conducted on July 31, 1984, ~n accordance with the QA procedures described in the "Initial Monitoring and Quality Assurance Report. 11 The audit was conducted by Jean Marx of the Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture. The evaluation form that was used during the audit is .shown in Figure 4. considered during the audit: 0 0 0 Laboratory procedures; Hi-vol operations; and Hi-vol flow rate check. The following aspects were The electronic flowmeter and "top hat" flowmeter that are used at the site were both checked against a separate "top hat" calibrator that was brought to the site for the audit. The results of that independent flow rate check are shown in Figure 5. In ~ccordance with the flow rate calibration procedures described in the "Initial Monitoring and Quality Assurance Report 11 , the Kurz electronic flowmeter is being recertified by the manufacturer. 67372 840830 8 .. • . --1r-~-(['"-~ ry==> rr~ rr-=-[£;;--~ If'''_, (f;::::~ c-::: , "'\ rc-~ 1c:::1 tc~-1 :r~~ lc"'::3 k~~ II :£ i ' tl::::: h';:!. ~ __ _,,..j t l' I . I PROJECT Proj HEASURtH£N1,• Hi ~Q] F]g~rate lludit~ •• MtASU"EHEtrr Susitna Hldroelectric -"" SCFM NA."'E • PERFORHE~· UNITS i DATE 11/2 . 1JttJ. 1/3\ 8/)D . >< ~ 1 . > 5 2 5Z. Sl.o ~3.o 53 ... :z :3 c J . :0 ~I 1 . I ~ . rJ ., ~ N 2 lfl,o !ffl,g ~.g 't1.3 X _!jo > J ::tJ -1 .., d +5,~ t'/.3 1'"1~~ +1.o .... --L-I . 'TI tC . . 0 1:: ;:o "'1 fD •. :X: ..... I I l_ _I • .l I w < -+10. 0 r-r-0' ........ ,] ~· ,-..a. :zq ...., N + ~---r-cY """' 0 :c I I - ::0 - ):It r-0 -1 0 ,., ... _ >< -5...,:_ . 0 . 0 ..-7 -10--I •• ., ... " L ... I ----:---o -,) ,I -I , I . --·--~~ --- i , .. l !!!~ - i~ t5~ . - D I ~(jij) I <~ : ~ .. I I I I . , I I • I ,!. ~~ I ~~ c:Uc-~.' . . . ' I. •r •1 t • ._"' • I' , ''"''" . • • • '. . . ... . ,. . u ., 0 " __ Jj __ j_ ~~ ~ ~ .... u ' . ~.,&.1 I ~@ oOuo @ U~< • • • .. • I r_r : tl U.! I fl\ UJ . I rn I>' JJ 1 .. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. .· of hi-vol sampl~s are used in the network? '-n-,~· 't:J-'L~ ; ':n-,~ -2oao ~ Ho often are the samplers run? (a) daily (b) once every . 6 days (c) once every 12 days (d) other ~ ~ ~ What type of filter and how man~ are bein~ed? '-<"2:.--~L' • • ---C ~ -( tl?U.. ... ~ • tr1U- Ar ther any preexposure c ecks ~or pin holes or imperfec- tions run on the filters?~ ~ c:L..~ ~.L. · ..;~~~f-- \Vhat is the collection eff~ciency for your filters? What is the calibration procedure for the hi-vol sampler? _?k_~,.;-:-,~~ ~ .. ...l. ~-¥,A * Which statement rnos closely estimates the Jncy of flow rate calibration? (a) once when purchased (b} once when purchased, then after every sampler modification (c) when purchased, then at regular intervals thereafter -----~~------ Are flow rates measured before and after the sampling period? Yes X No 9. Is there a log book for each sampler for recording flows and times? Yes _ X No _ 10. 11 .. II 12. How often are the hi-vol filters weighed? How are the data from these weigliings handled? 13. Are all weighings and serial log book at the labor&tory? ~ zL .LJ- 14. What is t...lJe approximate time delay between sa11 e coJ.lection and the final weighing? ~-7 days Figure 4 · SUSITNA HYORO~LECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOL PROJECT AUDIT CHECKLIST APPENDIX A G=D&OO~& o @00&~©© SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE • • .. Ambient Barometric Manometer Calculated Electronic Flowrate Remarks Date Temperature Pressure ~H Orifice Flowmeter Deviation T&.. ~ (inches Flowrate Qc: Q (%) OF OK (nmHg) H?O) mJ/min ft 3/min 3 M L. ft /min - :r ~. ' i < 0 7/31/84 .. _ __, "T1 ., Reporting 14°C 287 763 7.5 48.8 53.0 +7.9 Audit had to __, ...J. Flowmeter be conducted ·o lQ . ~ c: during gusty '"1 '"1 01 f1) weather con-rt- fl) ditions 01 ):» 7/31784-" ,... -.._ a. Audit 14°C 287 763 7.4 43.5 53.0 +8~5 -'• rt-Flowmeter "T1 0 '"1 3 I ' ' 25 ' ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ : .... ~ Q 0 -· ~fMJ OK = oc + 273 ft 3/min = 35.3 x mJ/min Flow Deviatic!1 = <@!1 100 X (Qm-Qs)/Qm ~b nmHg = 25.4 x (in. Hg) -4~ . ~@ j m@ --• . • • .. r j -' ' REFERENCES Alaska DEC. Letter from Leonard Verrelli to Jon FErguson of the Alaska Power Authority, June 8, 1984. EPA. 1979. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume II -Ambient Air Specific Methods. Section 2.2., Reference Method for the Determination of Suspended Pa~ticulates. EPA-600/4-77-027a. Revised July 1979. EPA. 1980. Ambient Monitoring Guidelines for Prevention of Significant Deterioration. EPA-450/4-80-102. 67372 840830 12 ..