Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
APA1697
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION PROJECT No. 7114 HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM FINAL MONITORING AND QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT [g]~[Ri~~~[§~~®©@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE FINAL REPORT MARCH 19·85 DOCUMENT No. 1697 ...,. __ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY_-_ _____. .. •• it SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM FINAL REPORT Report by Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Prepared for Alaska Power Authority March 1985 . . I. II. I NT ROD UCTI ON • SUSITJA: HYDROELECTRIC PROJECt HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS • • • • • • • It • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Page I-1 A. Purpose • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I-1 B. Cooperating Agencies and Organizations • • • • • • • • • • I-1 C. Monitoring Program Design & Schedule • • • • • • • • • • • I-2 D. Summary of Monitoring Results • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I-2 E. Quality Assurance and Audits • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I-3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8 D a 8 8 8 • • • A. U.S. Clean Air A=t and Prevention of Significant B. c. Deterioration • • • • • • • Alaska Regulations .. • • • • Guidelines for PSD Monitoring • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8 • a e 8 a a e a • Cl D • a 8 8 e e • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . II-1 II-1 II-1 II-1 III. EXISTING AND PROPOSED SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION • • • • • • • • • III-1 PI£. v. A. B. c .. ~isting Sources • • • • • • • • • • • • • t • • • • o • • Proposed Point Sources • • • • • • • fi • • • • • • • • • • Potential Fugitive Dust Emission Sources ••••••••• SUMMARY OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA • • • • • • • • a • a • • a • • • A. B. Off-Site Reporting Station •••• On-Site Meteorological Data ,. • • • . . . . . . . . ~ . . . • • • • • • • • • 0 • • 1. Description of Meteorological Monitoring Station 2. Measured Meteorological Data RESULTS OF THE 1984 TSP MONITORiNG PROGRAM • 0 fl • • • • • • • • A. B. c. D. E. F. Watanc Campsite Samplers ••••••••••• ~ ••••• Susitna River Sampler ••••••••••••••• ~ ••• Monitoring Equipment Specifications ••••••••••• ~ 1s Hi-Vol Descriptions 2. Flowrate Calibration Equipment 3. Sampling Schedule TSP Monitoring Results •••••••••••••••••• Discussion of Air Quality and Meteorological Data •••• ~ C0r.1parison to State : ta.ndards • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • III-1 III-1 III-3 IV-1 IV-1 IV-1 V-1 V-1 V-2 V-2 V-5 V-7 V-14 VI. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM ••••• o • • • • • • • • • • • • • VI-l A. B. 6925 2/TuC 850305 Procedures and Protocols Data Recovery • • • • • • • • • • • • . l. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • VI-1 VI-1 h. TABLE c. Invalid Samples • • • • Do Audits • • • • • • • • E. System Precision • • VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION!) • • A. Sources of Air Pollution B. Meteorology • • • • • • c. Ambient VIII. REFERENCES 69252/TOC 850305 Monitoring • • • • • • • • • • OF • • • • • • • 0 • • • • .. CONTENTS Page • • • • • • • • • • .. • " • .. • VI ... ·l • • c • • • • • • • • • • • • • VI-2 • • • • • • • • • • • ~ • • • • VI-4 • • • • .. • • • 0 • • • • .. • VII-I • • • • • • • • ~ • • • • • • e VII-1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • VII-1 • • .. • D • • • • • • • • • • VII-I • • • • • • " • • • • • • • • .. VIII-I ii r III-1 IV-1 IV-2 IV-3 V-1 VI-1 69252/TOC 850305 !I SUSITNA l.lYDROELECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM FINAL REPORT LIST OF TABLES COMPARISON OF MEASURED MONTHLY WINDBLOWN DUST FACTORS AT W4TANA SITE WATANA MONTHLY SUMMER METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY NUMBER OF DAYS WITH PRECIPITATION GREATER THAN 0. 0 l INCH WATANA METEOROLOGY CORRESPONDING TO TSP SAMPLING SCHEDULE MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS Sill1MARY OF DATA LOSSES iii Page III-4 IV-4 IV-8 IV-9 V-6 VI-3 • III-1 III-2 IV-1 IV-2 IV-3 V-1 V-2 V-3 V-4a V-4b V-Sa V-Sb VI-1 VI-2 VI-3 VI-4 VI-5 69252/TOC 850308 SUS ITNA HYDRflELECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM F1N.A1 REPORT LIST OF FIGUReS V!CINITY MAP FOR THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOL SAMPLER LOCATION MAP WATANA CAMP HI-VOL STATION WATANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES (1984) WATANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES (1983) CONFIGURATION OF SUSITNA RIVER HI-VOL SAMPLING PLATFORM CONFIGURATIONS TSP CONCENTRATION VS. SA}~LE DATE TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION FOR SAMPLER 1 (CAMPSITE) TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION FOR SA~1PLER 3 (SUSITNA RIVER) TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED AND PRECIPITATION FOR SAMPLER 1 (CAMPSITE) TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED AND PRECIPITATION FOR SAMPLER 3 (SUSITNA RIVER) HI-VOL PROJECT AUDIT CHECKLIST HI-VOL FLOWRATE AUDIT FORM X AND R CHART FOR TSP MEASUREMENTS LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE LOG X AND R CHART FOR FLOWRATE . ~v Page III-2 III-5 IV-3 IV-5 IV-~6 V-3 V-4 V-9 V-10 V-11 V-12 V-13 VI-5 VI-6 VI-7 VI-8 VI-9 .. NOTICE ANY QUESTIONS.OR COMMENTS CONCERNING THIS REPORT SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY SUSITNA PROJECT OFF!rJ • I. INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE This report presents the final results of the 1984 air quality monitoring program for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project in central Alaska. To define the background ambient suspended particulate matter concentrations in the vh;init:y of the proposed dam site for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project, the Alaaka Power Authority operated thre~ High Volume (Hi-Vol) air sampl~rs from June through September 1984. Ba~kground data were requested by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) from the Alaska Power Authority (Power Authority) to support air pollution permits for construction of the hydroel~ctric project. Background data to determine existing ambient conditions are required to assess compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and to define the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) increment available for new source development. This report is the third and final report for the monitoring program. The first report, Hi-Volume Air Monitoring Program: Initial Monitoring and Quality Assurance Report (June 1984), described the methods to be used and quality assurance procedures to be implemented in the program. The second report, Hi-Volume Air Monitoring Program: Interim Monitoring and Quality Assurance Report (August 1984), summarized results of monitoring for the period May 30, 1984 through August 10, 1984 and the quality assurance audit. B. COOPEF~TING AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS The principal cooperating age·ncy for the monitoring program was the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). ADEC participated in the selection of Hi-Vol sampler sites prior to implementation of the monitoring 69252 850305 I-1 .. I LL program, ·examined the Quality Assurance manual developed in support of the program, and has been provided . preVl.OUS summaries of the monitoring program. C. MONITORING PROGRAM DESIGN AND SCHEDULE The Power Authority designed ar!ld operated the Susitna monitoring program based on the procedures and r~quirements contained in the Ambient Monitoring Guidelines for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (EPA . Selecting Sites for Monitoring Total Suspended Particulates Laboratory and quality assurance protocols were derived from Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems 1980) (EPA a.:ne (EPA and . l.n 1977A). gualit~ 1976). Although requirements for monitoring suspended particulate matter call for sampling at least once every sixth day (EPA 1980), all parties agreed to operation of the samplers at a frequency ryf once every third day schedule to increase the data captur.e over the minimurn time period. Hi-l!ol monitoring was performed only during the summer months, because that is the time most susceptible to wind-blown dust. The region is covered with snow during the winter, therefore windblown dust is negligible during that peri0d. ADEC agreed that the summer program would be sufficient to characteri?-e suspended particulate concentrations. D. SUMMARY OF MON~TORING RESULTS Based on the data obtained from the three Hi-Vol monitors operated at the proposed site of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project, it can be concluded thac the existing ambient air quality is very good. The· measured data are discussed in detail in Section V. The data are cons istet1t with those obtained in the most pristine environments and are characteristic of the global background particulate matter concentrations referenced in the Air guality Criteria for Particulate Matter (EPA-1981). The measured particulate concentrations at the three Hi-Vols ranged from 0. 99 to 12.8 micrograms per cubic meter ( ug/m3) for a 24 hour average. The h 1.ghes t geometric mean value for the three Hi-Vols was 4.57 ug/m3 • 69252 850308 I-2 .. . , L ,, b .. r ,,.J 'J! E. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND AUDITS Prior to establishing the ambient monitoring program on-site, a Quality Assurance Plan was established for the program consistent with the Ambient Monitoring Guidelines (EPA 1980). The Plan established the procedures for o~err~ing the monitoring program including sampler selection, equipment installation, calibration, maintenance, recording of data, and audits. An audit of the program operation was perforffied approximately at the mid-point of the four month period artd no Btdverse finding was noted. The quality assurance program is described in detail in Section VI. In accordance with the rules of ADEC (18 Alaska Administrative Code 50.300 (c)(l)), consultation and coordination were obtained prior to siting the samplers. ADEC personnel accompanied project personnel on a site selection vis it to the area and approved the Quality Assurance Plan as well as the Hi -Vol monitoring sites in late May 1984 • 69252 850305 I-3 • L ' t - . -' ~ ""'~ e~• ---~·...,.,~"""-·-~·•,.,,n--•---,--....-~-_..,,___,~_.~ _ _,..,.,._._._........__,.,._"'-..._ __ ~-·"~' _ __,....,.,~• II. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK A. U.S. CLEAN AIR ACT AND PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION The federal Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977, requires pre construction mouitoring of ambient air quality to satisfy the requirements for Prevention o·f Significant Deterioration (PSD) (Part C of the Act).. The purposes of preconstruction 111onitoring are to determine whether emissions from proposed new sources will result in exceeding either 1~bient Air Quality Standards or PSD increments, and to verify the accuracy of modeling estimates. Federal regulation$ establish minimum standards for preconstruction monitoring programs and provide guidance to states delegated authority to implement PSD (40 CFR 51). Alaska has full authority to implement the program and has several regulations more stringent than federal requirements~ B. ALASKA REGULATIONS ADEC has been delegated authority to implement the PSD program by EPA (48 FR p. 30623). The regulations concerning the implementatiDn of this program are contained primarily in the state regulations on Permit to Operate (18 AAC 50 .300). ADEC has authority to requiL'e the collection of ambient and meteorological monitoring d~i::a as a permit condition, and to requ1re approval of the monitoring net~ork prior to data collection~ C. GUIDELINES FOR PSD MONITORING To further define and clarify the requirements for ambient monitoring programs, EPA bas published Ambient Monitoring Guidelines for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (EPA 1980). The Guidelines detail siting criteria, data quality control proced11res, q~Iality assurance procedures, and data reporting requirements. Generally, the Guidelines specify which procedures are mandatory, which are to be determined on a case-by-case basis, and which are only recommended. 69252 850305 II-1 ' 1 III. EXISTING AND PROPOSED SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION A. EXISTING SOURCES The proposed site for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project is in a remote and undeveloped area of interior Alaska, away from traditional sources of air pollution. Figure III-1 is a map of the area within 150 miles of the site. The nearest major emission source is t:he coal-fired power plant at Healy, some 75 miles to the northwest. Based on the dist"'lnce and complex terrain between the power plant and the Watana site: there is no reason to believe that the power plant would significantly affect ambient air quality near the Watana site. Windblown fugitive dust is known to be a major problem in some regions of Alaska, especially those with fine glacial soils, arid conditions, and strong winds. The ADEC originally suspected that the Susitna area would be subject to windblown dust, so they required the ambient air monitoring described in this report. described in Section V, significant problem. B. PROPOSED POINT SOURCES As shown by the low measured TSP concentrations windblown dust at the Susitna site is not a Proposed facilities with point source emissions will include diesel-electric generators, a refuse incinerator, and twr concrete batch plants. A number of diesel generators will be used to provide a combined 16 MW of electrical power during the peak construction period. The combined generators will emit mor~ than 250 tons per year of nitrogen oxides. The ADEC has therefore ruled tha~ the Susitna Hydroelectric Project will be subject to P3D review during the air quality permitting by ADEC. The key pollutants that will be subject to review will include total suspended part-iculates (TSP), carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. 69252 8.50305 III-1 • k .. 'fl~~:·i;.cil _. ... '.r.):•;o "-'., . .,.,_ . .._.. ~~;~:~s: :· .. Flg"re 111-1 VICINITY MAP FOR THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 00£~~£ a(!~~~@@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE 111-2 .. ' . h" ----~------~-------------------------------L----------------·--~ • J .. b. "-'' -~ .• . ··~ ·-_, __ --.. --· --,.._ ··--~ ·-~. '"'---,.-·~"•·--~.-.....,_,.-, ... ~··----· .. -·.---.......·--~-------........._--_,_~ .. \-.....lL.:.-· -~- C. POTENTIAL FUGITIVE EMISSIONS SOURCES Fugitive dust potential is typically characterized by the Thornthwaite Precipitation Evaporation (P-E) index which is a measure of the net precipitation minus evaporation. Table III-1 lists the P-E values using data from the Watana site. High values indicate a high potential for windblown dust. The index when calculated for the Watana site shows the highest potential for wind-blown dust during spring and early summer, with a secondary peak potential in August. For that reason~ it was decided that .. suspended particulate. monitoring should only be performed in the summer • months as the representative worst-case period. Construction of the dam is assumed to require several unit operations which may be sources of fugitive dust emissions. These unit operations include: quarry operations, such as overburden removal, drillir.g and blasting, rock removal, and rock conveying; borrow area operation, in~luding overburden removal, soil loading into trucks, and soil hauling and conveying; gravel processing, including conveyo·r dumping, and gravel screening; and dam site operations, including fill placement and compaction. Several of the construction are.&\s are shown in Figure III-2o 69252 850305 III-3 • • ---. I 01 I I ' ;j ": • I ~ _ _, -/ :----ttrc::::.:::J::;;=-:--t---J---f:;..,..L-:::?'f---rJJ-,-~"-;-.·-~~~lUSITNA R!VER HI VOL 3_,_. (lee Fltlure 1-1) ,_--,_- WAT~NACA~I-=V~O-L~8~t\~tf~~~~~~~~~~~~rr~--~ I t AND 2 AND METEOROLOGICAL STATiON ,. ., ,. SCALE-FEET . -..____ LEGEND ' -r--~~-- A HI-VOL LOCATIONS ~------------------------------------~--------------~--------------------------~--,--------------------------..-------·--------·· HI-VOL SAMPLER LOCATION MAP Figure 111-2 (}0&00~/A a ~rnJ/1\~@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE 1.• • • J J • Wizard," manufactured by MRI, operated and maintained by R&M Consultants, Inc. for ;he Power Authority. The location of the mete!oroJ.ogical station is shown in Figure III-1 and in Figure III"-2. The station .i.s located at an elevation of approximately 2,200 feet MSL and is at appro:~Cimate UTM coordinates N 3,232,600 and E 748,950 in Alaska State Plane, Zone 4. The station is located about 100 yards from the Watana camp in an open, gradually sloping area on the north side of the Susi tna River. The wind sensors are approximately three meters above the ground. 2. Measured Meteorological Data Sununer weather patterns at the Watana site for the period 1980-1984 are shown in Table IV-1. The win1 regime at the Watana campsite is affected by local topography and seasonal influences. Early in the summer season, the winds are predominantly from the west. Later in the season, the winds rotate, having first a more northerly component, then an easterly component. Wind speed patterns at Wat.!'!na are fairly uniform throughout the sunnner, with average speeds at about 2o5 mps. The maximum wind gust occurred in May of 1980, when a peak speed of 16.5 mps was recorded. Precipitation at the Watana site also shows a seasonal pattern. Precipitation is low during May, then reaches a maximum in July or August. Liquid precipitation amounts decrease in the late sunnne!r season as the temperatures fall and snowfall begins to occur. Figure IV-2 shows mo1·e detail of wind conditions for the summer of 1984. These wind roses give the pt~rcent frequency of occurrence of wind speed and wind direction categories by month. Prevailing wind directions were west and north-northeast in May 1984, and strongly from the west in June and July. In August 1984, a secondary wind direction maximum developed in the northeast quadrant and by s~.;ptember a distinct easterly prevailing wind occurred. A similar pattern. occurred during 1981, as shown in Figure IV-3. The frequency of occurrence of m~asurable precipitation is also a key aspect of characterizing suspended particulate air quality conditionsc 69252 850308 IV-2 ,_ ,_ ,.., WEST: WEST: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .· NORTW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . e e e I • . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ,, .. . . . . souTH. NORTH ................ . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ~ .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l!. . . · .... ·. . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. soUr..;· . . . NORTH ........... . . . .. ............... . ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... . ........... . . . . . . ., ........ . . . . .. ....... " .... SOUTH . . . . · . . . · . MAY 1984 JULY 1984 . , SEPTEMBER 198~4 . . . . Figure IV-2 . ·-.· · . .· ·. W'AT ANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES (1984f.' ···5. NORTH .......... . . . JUNE 1984 . ........ . . . . . . . . .. . . . ...... . . ....... . . . . . . . . • •• "'SlC··lllC · · ·zn-~ · . ·sn·l'lC. . ·Sl'! • • • •EAST ...... . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . ... souTH .. ..~~R":~ .... AUGUST . . .... ._ .... . .. . . . . . . . . . ......... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .............. ··· .. 1984 . . . .. . ........ . . . . . . . .. souiH .. WIND SPEED CtvS> )•211 13-29 11-15 li-ta 3-5 1-3 • • .2-t t' CAL.ft ; / ''· 00£00~£ Q §®£~©@ SUSITNA JOINT VfNTURE Table IV-2 presents a. summary of the number of days, by month, when the daily total precipitation exceeded 0.01 inches. The frequency for July 1984 appears to be low, but a missing data period for that month may be responsible for this factor. A corrected July 1984 frequency would be 15 days. Meteorological conditions recorded for days when the TSP samplers were operating are shown in Table IV-3. Temperatures and wind speeds during the TSP monitoring p.:~riod were similar to historical values~ Prevailing wind directions also show the general east-west prevalence of wind directions on site. 69252 850308 V. RESULTS OF THE 1984 TSP MONITORING PROGRAM Background TSP concentrations were collected near the Watana damsite from May 30, 1984 to September 22, 1984c A set of two collocated Hi-Vol samplers was installed at the Watana field campsite, and one sampler was installed at the S~Jsitna River. The two sampling locations were depicted in Figure III-2. This section of the report describes the samplers and the site locations. It discusses the results of the monitoring program and compares these to the concurrent meteorological data. Finally, a discussion of the results in terms of applicable standards is provided. A. WATANA CAMPSITE SAMPLERS The two collocate~ Ri-Vols were established near the Watana campsite on May 29, 1984. These samplers measured baseline TSP concentrations in the ma~n plateau regions above the river. The location of the campsite Hi-Vols is shown in Figure III-2 and in Figure IV-1.. The samplers were located at coordinates Alaska State Plane, Zone 4, N 3,232,764 and E 748,863, and at an elevation of 2, 270 feet MSL. They were situated approximately 300 feet north of the existing Watana field camp, and 30 feet east of the existing water supply and electrical line that runs northward from the camp. The: Hi-Vols were well-situated in a location that provided a representative background TSP sample with a minimal chance of sample contamination caused by campsite emissions. The terrain near the samplers slopes upward very gently to the north. The ground cover around the samplers cons is ted of typical low tundra vegetation, and the nearest spA.rse trees were situated approximately 150 feet from the Hi-Vols. The emission sources at the field camp included a diesel electric gene~ator and a refuse incinerator. However, those emission sources were located approximately 300 feet south of the samplers, and the onsite meteorological data indicate that the sunnner winds seldom blow from the south. 69252 850308 V-1 ,. f'l' ; 1 '· '· L L L Date 1981 May June July August September 1982 May June July August September 1983 May June July August September TABLE III-1 COMPARISON OF MEASURED MONTHLY WINDBLOWN DUST FACTORS AT WATANA SITE Total Total Average Precipi-Evapora-Wind tat ion tion Speed P/E P (inches) E (inches) V (mph) Ratio 1.73 4.24 5.05 .4080 5.12 5.15 6e49 .9942 6 .. 73 2.44 5.59 2.7582 6.53 1.83 6.04 3.5683 3.04 1.16 5.14 2.6207 1.02 5.36 3 .. 44 5.12 6.04 .6719 4.29 4.30 5.36 .9977 2.29 3.81 4.47 .6010 3.97 2.06 5.36 1.9272 5.81 1.55 4.82 6.04 .3216 4.45 4.,36 4. 70 1.0206 4.65 2.55 4.47 1.8235 l.IMonthly "C" = (0.239)(V3)/(P/E)2. Based on Jutze 1978. 69252 850305 III-4 Monthly Dust Factor "C" 1/ 184.9 66.1 5.5 4.1 4.7 116.7 37.0 59.1 9.9 509.3 23.8 6.4 ----- • I J IV. SUMMARY OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA The Susitt'-9 Project is located in the Susitna River Basin. The area is bordered on the north and west by the Alaskan Range, to the east by the Copper River Lowlands and to the south by the Talkeetna Mount a ins. It is expected that topography significantly influences local wind patterns. A. OFF-SITE REPORTING STP.~ION The closest station from which long-term meteorological records are available is Talkeetna, located about 50 air miles to the southwest of the Watana site. Long-term climatic records for Talkeetna indicate that the climate of the region varies between continental and modified maritime climate (NOAA 1983). .Precipitation at Talkeetna is characteristic of a modified . mar1.ne climate and . l.S approximately 28 inches per year. 1'empet·atures at Talkeetna are continental in nature, with a maximum annual range cf -48°F to 91°F. The warmest period, with readings generally in the upper 60s and low 70s, is from June through mid-July. Cooler weather after mid-July usually results from increased cloudiness and precipitation during late ST .. nmner. Surface winds in steep valleys are greatly influenced by-local topography. At Talkeetna, the prevailing winds are northerly, parallel to the local valley orientation. The wind direction ?attern at Talkeetna is not expected to he representative of the winds at Watana, where the Susitna valley is oriented east-west. B~ ON-SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA 1. Description of Meteorological Monitoring Station Meteorological data has been collected at the Watana campsite since April, 1980 (Alaska Power Authority 1984). The station consists of a "Weather 69252 850305 IV-1 ,.r , "" ' ~., ____ ~·----= .. ·-~ -·----..-.·-·--·-··-·.,.,,..-.......... _.._..,.._,..__~--.....;.~.,.:__, ___ ._.:...._~--... ~~--e-· I . I I I I ~, Prevaiteng Summer Wind Direction Field Camp ( DleaeJ Gonera~or and lncin•ratof') •---- [)-- • .s _, .. • .. •• ~; Cl &: -.ICj C:l -.. Q 150' f I I I I 300' Collocated HI-Vol Sampler a Figure IV-1 r-----------·----------~---------------~----~ WATAN~\ CAMP HI-VOL STATION ------------------------------------·------·--~ IV-3 f'7,71 ~ A & M \':onsultants Meteoro!ogical Stat§on 00&00~~ = §@£@©@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE METEOROLOGICAL STATION LOCATOR MAP TABLE IV--1 WATANA MONTHLY SUMMER METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY TemEerature Maximum Year Month (oC) 198o.l/May 16.0 June July 23.9 August September 1981~./May 22.1 June 22.7 July 17.0 August September 14.5 1982l/May 15.6 June July 26.4 August 20.1 September 14.5 19834/May 20.1 June 26.1 July August September 1984-iiMay 16.2 June 21 .. 6 July 21.2 August 21 .. 5 September 15.5 1.1 Alaska PoTAer Authority l/Alaska ]./Alaska Pc,wer Authority Power Authority 4/Alaska Power Authority 2/R&M Consultants 1984 69252 850308 Minimum (oC) -5~,0 4.5 -2.2 -0.1 1.2 -13.3 -27.2 0.7 1.8 -5.6 -3.6 2.1 -7.4 0.6 3.1 -4.2 -3.0 1981 1982 1983 1984 Wind Prevailing Average Mean Direction Speed (oC) (Sector) (mps) 4.6 WSW 3.1 11.9 WSW 2.6 7.6 WSW 2.6 9.3 WSW 2o9 10.3 WS"kT 2.5 N 2.7 4o4 ENE 2.3 2.3 WSW 2.4 10.8 w 2.4 10.0 w 2.0 5 .,0 E 2.4 5.3 N 2.6 10.5 w 2.7 4.0 ENE 2.5 10.2 w 2.9 11.5 w 2.7 9.4 w 2.5 6.4 ENF. 2.5 IV-4 I ' , ~ 41 I Precipitation 41 Monthly Total (mm) 14.6 107.6 44.0 129.8 170.6 165.6 77.2 25.8 87.4 109.2 58.2 100.8 15.2 39.4 113.4 117.8 8-.o 62 .. 4 42.4 100.0 33.6 .. I I •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .· . . . . . . . . NORTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t' t t t t • tat • II · · sourt.f' · . . . ~TH ... . . . . . . . ,. ...... . . . .. . . . . . . . SOUTH NORTH ...... "' ............ . •••••••••••••• f' . ...... . . . . . . . MAY 1983 JULY 1983 ,,.. .. , .. •••• !!1. Jltll .. , · . . . . . . . ·[FIST SEPTEMBER 1883 . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ... ~ .... ' . ........ . ............. . . ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iCiiTH ... Figure IV-3 . . . . . . . . . . · . . . .· WAT ANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES . (1983) IV...S NORTM ................. . ............. . . . . ...... . . . . . .......... ....... . .. . .... . ...... . . . . . .. ...... . . . .. ........ . ... · ·sour.t· fQITH . . . .............. . ................. . . . ......... . e a a a a e e a II . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. SOiifw .. MIND PEED (fVS) Ia-I !I I• II 1-J .I-I . . .· . . · . . . JUNE 1983 AUGUST 1983 R & M Con1ultanta. Inc .. 198-4 00£00~£ = [!00£®©@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE .. 69252 850305 TABLE IV-2 NUMBER OF DAYS WITH PRECIPITATION GREATER THAN 0~01 INCH Year Month May June July August September 1lAlaska Power Authority 1984. ZIR&M Consultants 1984o No IV-8 19831/ 1984-~./ 7 6 14 14 18 9 11 11 data 10 r J , I ~. J J J j ... ~" .,. J .,._, . • TABLE IV-3 WATANA METEOROLOGY CORRESPONDING TO TSP SAMPLING SCHEDULE ;remEerature Maximum Minimum Date (oC) (oC) May 30, 1984 June 2, 1984 June 5 .. Tune 8 June 11 ,Tune 14 June 17 June 20 June 23 June 26 June 29 July 2, 1984 July 5 July 8 July 11 July 14 July 17 July 20 July 23 July 26 July 29 August 1, 1984 August 4 August 7 August 10 August 13 August 16 August 19 August 22 August 25 August 28 August 31 September 3 September 6 September 9 September 12 September 15 September 18 69252 850305 9.8 o.o 16.7 0.6 18.5 1.9 15.3 3.9 18.1 4 .. 3 15.8 2.1 14.7 5.1 18 .. 5 7.0 14 .. 6 6.0 15.2 6.9 15.3 9.3 11.9 6.6 19.6 8.8 14.3 6.2 14.2 6.4 11 .. 2 6.8 21.2 7.1 8.7 7.2 20.4 9.2 21.1 9.4 14.7 6.1 18.3 3.6 17.6 6.0 14.8 8.4 13.2 6 .. 3 7.7 2.4 8.9 -4.2 9.6 1.6 12.8 -1.6 11.9 4.5 15.5 -0.1 12.5 0 .. 8 13.2 5.3 7.7 1.9 Mean Wind Relative Prevailing Average Me en Humidity Direction Speed (oC) (Percent) (Sector) (mps) 4.9 64 E 3~2 8.7 28 N 2 .. 2 10.2 25 ENE 2.4 9.6 64 WNW 3 .. 6 11.2 46 WSW 3 .. 1 9.0 61 w 2.,8 9.9 62 w 2 .. 4 12.8 50 WNW 2.0 10.3 56 w 2.8 11.1 71 w 2 .. 8 12.3 60 WSW 2 .. 4 9.3 73 w 3.6 14.2 63• w 2 .. 2 10.3 45 NNE 2.5 10.3 49 WSW 2.3 9.0 74 WNW 3.2 14.2 51 N 1.9 8.0 87 w 3 .. 1 14 .t' 71 N 1.4 15 .. 3 44 rl 2.5 10.4 54 w 2.3 11.0 28 ESE 2.6 11.8 51 WNW 2.3 11.6 62 E 3.8 9.8 68 w 1.4 5.1 82 w 1.8 2.4 43 E 3.4 5.6 50 NE 2.2 5.6 47 NE 2.4 8.2 72 ESE 1.7 7.7 53 N 1.6 6.7 65 E 1.7 9.3 59 E 4.1 4.8 89 E 1.4 IV-9 Precipitation Daily Total 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.0 0.4 2.0 2.0 10.8 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 0 .. 2 0.0 0.0 s.o o.o 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 5.0 2.6 22.4 0.0 0.0 o.o 3.4 0.6 0.2 o.o 6.2 ,. .- ! f - .J I ,] J, .. B. SUSITNA RIVER SAMPLER The third Hi-Vol sampler and its diesel electric generator were ins tal led near the bank of the Susitna River on June 7, 1984. The location of this sampler relative to the proposed damsite is shown in Figure III-2 and Figure V-1. The Sus itna River Hi-Vol was requested by ADEC to determine whether windblown dust concentrations near the gravel bars are higher than the dust concentrations in the plateau regions near the campsite. The sampler was located at coordinates Alaska State Plane, Zone 4, N 3,226,900 and E 729,500, in a clearing north of the river at elevation 1,435 feet MSL. The diesel generator and its fuel tank were situated 76 feet northwest of the Hi-Vols, in a location that minimized the influence of the generator e~haust on the TSP measurements (see Figure V-1). The Hi-Vols had excellent exposure downstream and toward the river 3 with reasonably good exposure upstream and away from the river. C. MONITORING EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS 1. Hi-Vol Descriptions The three Hi-Vols were identical General Metal Works Model 2000 units. All three units were equipped with electromechanical seve~-day time switches and elapsed time indicators. The two collocated Hi-Vols (Units 1 and 2) at the Watana field camp were operated on continuous line power from the main camp generator. Unit 3 at the Susitna River was powered by a 5 kW Lamborghini diesel generator, with a 55-gal fuel tank. The Hi-Vols were mounted on sampling plat forms, as shown in Figure V-II. The filters on all three Hi~Vols were situated 8.5 feet above ground level. 69252 850305 V-2 .. ~ -. . . ' . . '·. ' • ., - \ ' ... _.. •1 • ) !_ • • 0 • > ' ~~ A • ''' ·, • II""" .. .. " ~ 'Co -. . ,.. . ,. . . • • ... ' • (') 0 z ..... l5 -.._ :0 > __. I --. -0 z 0 -n en IZ c en --I • z > :0 -< m :u :I: -I < 0 r ,. I j <0. c: ~ ~ ..... J .. ---·· . ··----------..-----::..-... ________ Ut. _________ ..:..,_-..;.;. Site locat1\ln: N 3,226,900 E 729~500 Alaska Plane Coord. Zone 4 Elev. 1435 Ft. HSL ""' Generator/ & fuel Tank Site layout NTS .. Cottonwood (approx. 35 ft.) Spruce (approx. 60 ft.) f N l l I l~ I • • I I 8 .. 5' I ... ..____ 1 o.o· ------. .... J Sampler 2 (Audit) Samp,.r 1 ( Repo_rtlng ) 5.0' I I COLLOCATED W AT ANA CAMP HI-VOLS I I I I f .. N--------,. ..... 1.5' 5.0' SUSITNA RIVER HI-VOL f ,_ ----~-.. Figure V-2 SUSiTNA HI-VOL SAMPLING PROGRAM I SAMPLING PLATFORM CONFIGURATIONS b V-4 ----~----~------------------------~--------~ fXI£00~£ = [;[ID£®©@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTUFIE 2. Flowrate Calibration Equipment The Hi-Vol flowrates were measured before and after the 24-hr sampling period using a Kurz Model 341 calibration unit. This unit is an elec- tronic, bot-wire anemometer mass flowmeter that directly indicates the sampler flowrate in standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM, 25C, 1 atm). The electronic flowmeter was factory calibrated at the midpoint of the sampling program. As an. additional spot check to ensure accurate f'lowrate measurements, the electronic flowmeter was checked biweekly again~t a standard critical orifice ("top hat") calibrator. 3.. Sampling Schedule ADEC spe~ified that the three Ri-Vols r3hould be run on a three-day sampling frequency. All three units were operated on a three-day schedule beginning . late l1ay early June through September 1984. The collocated units 1 1n or and 2 were operated fx-om midnight to midnight on the specified sampling days~ Unit 3 on the Susitna River was accessible only by helicopter and was powered by a diesel generator, and consequently .the unit was operated from 10:00 am on the designated \.lampling day to 10:00 aru the following day. D. TSP MONITORING RESULTS Results of the monitoring program are shown in Table V-1. The observation date and concentrations measured at each of the samp1 ing locations are given. The geometric mean values for each of the samplers are also provided in Table V-1. A measurement of negative filter weights w~s noted for a total of ten of the observations. This l~Tas determined to be the result of not completely removing loose filter lint from the filter.s prior to installation in the samples. Negative excluded from the subsequent analyses. 69252 850305 V-5 results and . . m1ss1ng data were .. Date 05/30/84 06/02/84 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 08/13/84 08/16/84 08/19/84 08/22/84 08/25/84 08i28/84 08/31/84 09/03/84 09/06/84 09/09/84 09/12/84 09/15/84 09/18/84 Geometric mean TABLK V-1 MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS (ug/m3) Watana Campsite_ Samplers Unit 1 Negative 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 3.06 5.62 1. 29 3.34 2.81 5.12 2¥77 Neg 4.46 9.82 3.34 3~99 1M04 1.57 4.11 1-89 4.30 3.96 4.96 6.51 Neg 3.48 Unit 2 Negative 0.33* Neg Neg 2.9* 0.05* Neg 3.35 2.22 2.27 6.83 3.04 6.53 3.79 2 .. 93 3.19 4.62 3.06 5.81 2.16 2.51 1.55 5.99 5.02 1.86 3.82 9.54 2.18 2.54 1.12 1.35 9.08 3.82 3.50 3.54 4.55 8!03 12.8 3.47 Percent Differe· ce 32 .. 6 95.4 22.8 27.5 -29.0 0.58 -18.3 4.4 -3.8 ,-1.0 -8.1 -48 .. 1 0 -3.4 -67.4 24.8 44.8 -17.0 -81.0 14.3 2.9 34.7 36.3 -7.7 14.0 -120.9 1.8 18.6 10.6 8.3 -23.3 Susitna River Unit 3 2.10* 7.39* 3.63* 1.34* 3.57 4.14 5.08 6.43 0.99 5!.98 4.03 4.51 5.32 6.11 3.33 7.99 5.15 3.01 6.92 5.33 6.45 4. 7 5 5.02 4.19 5.19 4.28 2.66 3.32 5.03 3.90 4.43 4.64 6.86 3.16 4.57 *Because of identified p~ob1ems with processing of the filters, these concentrations have not been included in the geometric mean value. 69252 850308 V-6 • The measured 24 hour TSP concentrations ranged· from 0. 99 to 12.8 ug/m3. Concentrations at the Susitna River (Unit 3) were consistently higher than those at the Watana Camp (Units 1 and 2). The geometric mean values for Samplers 1, 2, and 3 were 3.48, 3.47, and 4.57 ug/m3, respectively. A linear cc1rrelation coefficient for TSP measurements between the three units was calculated from these data. For Units 1 and 2, the linear correlation coefficient is 0.8261; between Units 1 and 3 the correlation is 0.5174; and between Units 2 and 3 the correlation is 0.2614. Another important aapect of air quality data relates to long-term changes in pollutant levels. Figure V-3 depicts the measured levels of TSP for each three-day interval in the observation period. Although the cQncentrations of TSP may be slightly higher during the late summer than during the early scmmer, th,e data indicate no strong trend during this period • . E. DISCUSS ION OF AIR QUALITY AND METEOROLOGICAL DATA It is important to describe the effects of local meteorological conditions on the observed background ambient air quality. The effects of wind speed, wind direction, and precipitation are all of importance. Figure V-4a and V-4b show the relation~hip between pr~vailing wind direction and measu,red TSP concentration at Ur.its l and 3. There is no apparent correlatit::>n between t~ind direction and background TSP concentration. These figures also demonstrate that prevailing winds blew either upriver or downriver during the summer 1.984 sampling period • . Figures V-5a and V-5b show the relationships between background TSP concentration, wind speed, and precipitation. There was no correlation between TSP and average wind speed. The most recent emission factors for windblown dust predict that wind erosion should be proportional to wind speed. If background TSP was caused by local wind erosion, then the regression line for TSP versus wirtd speed would have a positive slope. 69252 V-7 850305 .. As shown in Figures V-5a and V-5b, there was no strong positive regression slope measured at either the Watana Camp or at the Susitna River. It can, therefore> be conclud~d that the background TSP concentrations are not caused by local wind erosiono Figures V-5a and V-5b also show that there was little relationship between background TSP and daily precipitation. The emission factors for windblown dust predict that wind erosion should occur only on those days with no precipitation. However, there was no difference in background TSP at the Watana Camp on "precipitation days" versu~ "no precipitation days". At the Susitna River, background TSP was slightly higher on days with no rain. It can, therefore, be concluded that TSP concentrations at the Susitna site will be slightly decrea~ed by precipitation. 69252 850308 V-8 • .,= co 10 I I ., 7 I z • § • +· z Ill ~ .. 0 (.) .. = a JUN 1 ---WATANA CAMP(Sampler 1) •-- -IU81TNA RIVER (Sampler 3) JUL 1 ,A I \ I \ l ,, \ r., ' I \ I 1\ I \ I \ I I \ I \1 I \ I I \ I ~I \ I \ I AUG 1 SAMPLE DATE mJ&rru;g& a §00&~©@ TSP CONCENTRATIONS VS. SAMPLE DATE SUSiTNA -IOINT VENTURE 8EP 1 Figure V-3 . ' 10------------------------------------------ • I') • • E • ' c:a :J • • .. w _, • a. 2 • c fl.) • • •• • a. • • • (I) ... • • 3 • • •• • • • • • • 1 • 0 o 10 20 ao 40 so eo 70 ao eo 100 110 120 130 140 WIND DIRECTION, degrees ~----------·--------·----~~· --------------------------~~----------~ D:fl£00~£ a ~00£~@@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION FOR SAMPLER 1 (CAMPSITE) V-10 Figure V-4a 10--------------------------------------------------. I • • • "' • • E • ' • • m :I • • Cl) w • ~ • • • .a. 2 ~ • g) • a.. Ct? • • ... • • • I • • • ~-4--+-~~~~--~~~~~~-~---+.~+--+ ec 100 110 120 0 c 10 20 30 40 10 70 eo 10 130 140 WIND DIRECTION, degreet 00.£00(g£ ct fj(i)£~@@ . iSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION FOR SAMPLER 3 Figure V-4b SUSITNA JOIN';f 'i'fNTUAE (SUSITNA RIVER) V-11 .. (') E ..... Q ::J • ... w _, G. 2 c G) G. 0 .... 10~----~--------------------~--------------~--~----~ I 8 7 5 3 2 1 0 • 0 0 •••• • ••• 0 •••••••• • •••• ······ --•••••• 0 -----••e··· ------.... -... :.:& •.-:-.-::. 0 . -----;-• 0 ••••••• ----0 •••••• • • 0 0 0 • 0 • • • •••• • ••• • • •••••• 0 • 0 .3 .e .8 1.2 1 .. 1 1!11 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.8 4.2 WIND SPEED. m/sec KEY 0 = No Preelpltetf~n ---•No Precipitation• Correlation. r~ Oo:«l8B • = Precipitation •••••• •precipitation• Correlation, r=0 .. 413 00£00~£o ~00£~@ TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED AND PRECIPITATION FOR SAMPLER1 Figure v-sa SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE (CAMPSITE) V-12 ,.__,_ '-'~ • • ft 10-----------------------------------------------------, I-t- a-~ 0 7-r-0 0 00 • 0 0 ~-~~-~~--------------~------- 5--0 0 • • 80·~••s·········· O eee•••••• .. •••••••••Jl••• • • ••• ., •••••••••••••••••• 8 •• 4--• 0 ••••• 0 3-1- 2-T- 1 , __ 0 0 KEY 0= 1 I .3 --- •= •••••• I .e t I .I • I 1.~ No Precipitation I I I I 1.1 1.1 • 1 I 2.1 • I I l I I I 2.7 3.0 3.3 WIND SPEeD, m/aec •No Precipitation., Correlation, r=o.o 158 Precipitation •Preclplta tlon• <;~rrelatlon~ r=· 0.119 TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED AND PR~C!PITATION FOR SAMPLER 3 0 • 0 l I I I I 3.8 4.2 Figure V-5b SUSITNA JOtNT VENTURE (SUSITNA RIVER) . V-13 • L F. COMP.~RISON TO STATE STANDARDS The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation has promulgated ambient air quality standar~s for particulate matter in Alaska. The standards which must not be e..""Cceeded are an annual geometric mean TSP concentration of 60 ug/m3 and a 24-hour concentration of 150 ug/m3, not to be exceeded more than once per year. As expected in remote areas, the TSP monitoring data show that the background air quality is excellent. Geometric mean values are all below 5 ug/m3. The maximum observed 24-hour particulate concentration is 12.8 ug/m3o Both observations are far below the applicable standards. 69252 850305 V-14 • VI o Q1TALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM A. PROCEDURES AND PROTOCOLS Measurement of the mass concentration of suspended particulate matter in the ambient air for determining compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards requires use of the Reference Method for that pollutant; 40 CFR 50, Appendix B: Reference Method for the Determination of Suspended Particulate Matter in the Atmosphere (High-Volume Method). Use of the reference method in conjunction with a quality assurance program assures that measurements have adequate accuracy and reliability. Specific quality assurance procedures and forms used in the 1984 monitoring program are derived fran those in Volumes 1 and 2 of the Quality_Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems (EPA 1977b)~ These include controls and d<?cumentation of procurement and calibration of equipment, filter selection and preparation, sampling procedures, sample analysis, calculation and data reporting, and audit procedures. B. DATA RECOVERY Data recovery relates the number of valid samples to the number of possible samples during the monitoring period. The Quality Assurance Handbo~k defines availability to be the ratio of equipment uptime to the sum of the uptime and dot;n time. There is, however, no standard of performance of availability required for monitoring systems. The availability of the 1984 monitoring program was 96.5 percent. The overall recovery rate for the monitoring program including allowance for all invalid samples during the period is 91.0 percent. After June 17, the overall recovery rate was 97.8 percent. C. INVALID SAMPLES A summary of data losses is given in Table VI-1. Several samples tt~ere declared to be invalid early in the program due to reported negative filter 69252 850305 VI-1 • ,. weights (see Table V-1). This was determined to be the result of not completely removing loose filter lint from the filters prior to installation in the samplers. After being in the samplers for 24 hours, enough air had been pulled through the filters that some lint was also removed. The extremely. low concentration of particulate m?tter in the atmosphere was not sufficient to overcome the weight loss. The laboratory procedures were adjusted early in the program to correct this problem. D. AUDITS An audit is an independent assessment of the accuracy of the data. Independence requires that the auditor not be the person conducting the routine monitoring program and that audit standards and equipment be different from those used in monitoring. The system audit in Hi-Vol monitoring is mainly to evaluate the air flow rate, exposed filter weighing, and data processing. Of ~hese, air flow rate is the most likely to be a source of errors or to lack accuracy. Flow rate was calibrated with a critical orifice on several occasions during the program. An independent quality assurance audit: was conducted on July 31, 1984 in ~ccordance with the QA procedures described in Volume 1 "Initial Monitoring and Quality Assurance Report." The audit was conducted by Dr. Jean Marx of Frank Moo lin and Associates, Inc., a subcontractor of the Harza-Ebasco Sus itn~ Joint v·enture o The audit covered the following topics: o Laboratory procedures o Hi-Vo1 operations o Hi-Vol flow rate check. 'i'he standard checklist that was used during the audit is shown in Figure VI-1. Corrective at.;tion would have been taken had any nonconformances with procedures been noted. No nun~onformances were detected. The electronic flowmeter and "top hat" flowmeter that are used in the sit~ were both checked against a separate "top hat" calibrator that was brought to the site for the audit. The results of that audit are shown .; n r·igure VI-2. Both the reporting calibrator and the audit calibrator g~ve slightly lower values than did the electronic flowmeter. However. the audit and reporting calibrators gave nearly equal reporting calibrator was operated properly. 69252 VI-2 850305 readings, • d I • :tn. 1 cat ~ng that the TA.~LE VI-1 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 parlicle weights on exposed filters. Negative net particle weights on exposed 09/18/84 filters. Remarks The first set of filters were inadvertently not brushed to remove loose fibers before the initial weighing. Reason for negative weight is not known • Note: Total delta recol1ery from May 30, 1984 throu:gh September 18, 1984 = 91.0 percent;o 69252 850308 Total data 1.·ecovery from June 17, 1984 through 3eptember 18, 1984 = 97.8 percent. VI-3 Ea SYSTEM PRECI"ION The precision of the measured TSP concentrations between the two collocated samplers at the campsite is shown in Figure VI-3. The precision of the two collocated samples often did not satisfy the ! 15 percent limit set by the federal guidelines (EPA 1980). However, considering the extremely low measured TSP concentrations, it is unreasonable to expect the precision to consistently be within that limit. When sampling very low TSP concentrations with collocated Hi-Vols, :-:-elatively minor wind shiftt and very minor difficulties during sampling and filter processing ~!!~ cause apparently major precision problems. 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 VI -4. As shown in that figure, the reweight differences were c:ll \17ell within the .!. 5.0 mg precision limit set by the federal guidelines (EPA 1977b). The measured Hi-Vol flow rate using the Kurz Model 341 electronic flowmeter was periodically checked against the same flow rate using a standard critical orifice "top hat" flowmeter. The results of those flow rate checks are showr.l in Figure VI -5. The two measured flow rates were within the +7 .0 percent limits ;,\llowed under the federal guidelines (EPA 1979), except on July 31, 1984 when the flow rate difference was 7.9 percent. On that day, the flow rate check had to b0 conducted during a windy period, under conditions where the "top ha tu flowme ters are recognized to give unreliable results. 69252 850308 VI-4 .. i 1. 2. 3. 4. s. 6. 7. e. 9. 10. ll. 12. 13. • i-vol sampl7-{s are used in the network? . ~&..L 'ZGJ"-~ : ~. 0 {..,L ..Zooo -u.-i:.~ Ho often are the samplers run? (a) daily {b) once every 6 days (c) onc;e every 12 days (d) other ~ ~ ~ What type of filter and how many are beingsed? • • ~ ~ ( ll"1tL _I.L.ee.&-. ""- Are!' t.her any preexposure c tions run on the filters? What is the collection eff. ciency What is the calibration procedure ~W't~~ ~·" for your filter~? ~~--- for the hi-vol sampler? -'-¥-A ~ Which statement mos closely estimates the flow rate calibration? (a) once when purchased (b) once when purchased, then after every sampler modification (c) when purchased, then at regular intervals thereafter ----~e~---- Are flow rates measured before and after the sampling period? Yes X No --- Is there a log book for-each sampler for recording flo'-ls and times? Yes )( No ----Are filters conditioned before initial atld fin~~.l weighings? ::f'!=J , .... I; so, for how long? ~~ ~ !'-t what per~ent.- aj"eliumJ.dJ.ty.. 4 ... :,.1 ~-:;&'.if:? </X, k,..,..,.;.<;¢ Is the ba nee checked periodically? ~ If so,'how often? · . -· ~ . With wh~h standard weights? . . . . . . I/""ZZ:/JV Are all weighings and erial log book at the laboratory? 14. Wbat is the approximate time delay between sam e collection and the final weighing? ~-7 days Figure-Vl-1 SUSITNA HYnROZLECTRIC PROJECT HI-VOL PROJECT AUDIT CHECKLIST Vl-5 00&00?6£ = §CID&®©© SUSITNA JO~NT VENTURE ' J . i , I . I I I • I . . < -I CD I - I ::c _,, I < 0 -., .,..., • ·O :( .., Dt f'i> .,. > c a. -'• r+ '"f1 0 "'1 3 8 ~~ ~:?!) z~ )It 4..~ Q D ~Iii] <(g!J ~~ 2@il :D@ m@ '" Ambient Date Te.mpera ture T, OF OK - . 7/31/8~ Reporting 14°C 287 , Flowmeter -· co c: .., m· < -7/31/84 ' I 1\) Audit 14°C 287 ·flowmeter . • OK = oc + 273 nmHg = ~~ 4 x (in.Hg) I . Barometric Manometer Calculated Electron·lc flowrate Remarks Pressure ~H Orifice Flowmeter Deviation ~ (inches Flowrate Q~ QH (S) v H20) m.,/min ft 3 /min ft3/min (nmHg) 763 7.5 48.8 53.0 +7.9 Audit had t() ' be conducteG during gust~ weather con~ ditions . . 763 7.4 43.5 53 .. 0 +8.5 -- I " ft3/m!n = 35.3 x m3 /m1n Flow Deviation = 100 x (Q 5 -Qm)/Q 5 . ,.. • l . . PROJECT NAME: 8ualtna HydroaDectrlc Project I XJ MEASUREMENT PERFORMED: Wa~ana Camp TS1P Valuea )> . z MEASUREMENT UNITS: ....«g/m3 c :0 (') :I: )> JJ -4 :Mfll .:P.,a. .,. .,. .,, lei• .,1< "'' jllll jill I ., .. "''II riO ,. ,,. ,,. .II ,,. flli Ill , .. Ill .,, ... lit ~II .,.. ~~~· lei•• ., .. ., .. i-'•• ""' Ill 141 .,. INIIIIU llllfl <, , . I -o <0" - -~ ..... -~ ... iut e.er au ..... -lt.n "'·" " ... .... ~-... ll:J c: 'o -.... '·" ... , .... Ule .. ...... Ull .... .... . ... . ... .., .... .... ... , . ... . ... 1M . ... -~· .... -4 CD < '• -.... - - iM ~'-" -.... ~.e· ... , ji.ID ~t.e• .... .. ,. i"·" ji.UI lUI , .. .... . ... aJJI . ... .... .... .... "·'' . ... . ... "·" • ••• ... , 11.-.... .... "·" .... r. ... .... en I .,., (A) :f: It, ----ol!,l ., .. -.~'· ~"' -·· ••• :·•' •••• •••• .... . •.. ... • •••• .., ... . .. -u •(II -.... jl.ll .... .. .. '·' .. <~>' . .. .... •••• ... ... •' -. .. m )> i 10 -CIJ l ~ c: 4 I .to :0 .v ' !/ ·~~ m -~ 1\ ~ ... 30 ~ ~ 1\ ! m ca. u .,, 20 z· t --~~~ ; ---{j -~~ ) 8 10 (J~· 'h 0 1\ r • ~· .. ~ ~ ~ 0 .-I 1 H--" I'-'"'1 I I • N-< 1D· 'II . ' ' I -c 0 -0 ..... 20 - i t I 1\ I 4 ~ -l 1 I ~ u ! ( -' \ I ' '· "I I I 'I l .;) 40 I I /(, ' ~~~ eo I 4 ~D ) 4 _...__,.. ' '" ·1.( OPEN DOT {0) INlliCATES POINT BEYOND TH: GRAPH ,r,. I'E -4 j ... . . , ... • l l l I 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 5366-83 5366-93 Firs~ Weighing Second Weighing (grams) (grams) 3.5319 3.5319 3.5271 3.5268 3.4427 3.4422 3 4~nn 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 3.3977 3.3951 3.4077 3.4069 . - - Figure V!-4 . -. LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE LOG =·- . Vl-8 T. Difference (mg) Remark~ 0 Jn~xoo~~d Fi 1 ters -0.30 ~nexposed Filters - -0.50 Unexposed Filters -0.20 Unexposed Filters I -OoBO Unexposed Filters .. o.40 Unexposed Filters • -O.l Exposed Filters i -0.3 Exposed Filters I I +1.0 Exposed Filters I I ! j +0.3 Exposed Filters I ! I I -0.1 Exposed Filters . I • -0.3 Exposed Filters I I j I -2 .. 6 Unexposed Filter i I -0.8 Unexposed Filter I i . . ' - 00£00~£ a!!®&~@@ SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE . I ·i PIO.n:cr Susitna Hydroelectric Proj MEASUREMENT H·j Vol Flowrate Audits Mf;ASUJt!HEtrr SCFM -NA.."tt: • PEP.FORH£0 ,,.._. UNITS DATE 7/_~ 7/_14 7/31 6120 ><I t 1 ~ I~ 2 82 51.0 53.0 83 w :z :i l c . .: :;o ~ 1 . til n ~ ~ 2 48.CJ 48.~ 48.8 48.3 :c .. :J::-l ::0 -n -I -· __!t_ ~ .. , 4.3 7.0 co 7.1 .., c ~I 0 .... :0 CD ' :c < 11-t -I I :I II" I ! < 01 -+ln p! 0 ..... r-0" ~ -~ .., ' l N + ~ r-cr -~ 0 :c I ;o I ~ -0 --1 0" IT1 - )( - 5 0 0 ,.... -10. I •• .,,. • L oL I i--"0 I I ·-. ~~ -·· - -~~ .. z~ -~~ Q 0 . I ~(ji) I <@!J -: .... J I I 8 I ~ _I I . I I . ~· ~~ cUe-... . . ' I. •r ; . . ...... ,. ~ ·~ .. ,. •• . ~ 9; i . ~ ... tf tf 0 G _Jj I ~@A) ~ a. . ..._ u • la&J&J ~-~ ~@ oOu• @ U~.C -· .._ __ l rr 'I IL p ,, n ll IL VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A. SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION Because the Watana site is remote and undeveloped, no traditional sources of air pollution exist in the vicinity. The nearest major source of particulate matter is the coal-fired power plant at Healy, which is too far remov~d by both distance. and topographic features to affect the site. This conclusion was confirmed by the extremely low concentrations of total su.spen.ded particulate matter (TSP) measured during the summer of 1984. It was also apparent from the low TSP concentrations that the site is not subject to episodes of wind-blo'tY-n t= • • ... ug1t1.ve dust. Based on standard meteorological parameters, the monitoring period included the months most prone to wind-blown dust. B. METEOROLOGY Meteorological data were available from a three··meter tower near the Watana field camp. These data included precipitation, wind speed and direction, and several other parameters. C. AMBIENT MONITORING Air quality monitoring for suspended particulates was conducted from late May into September, 19,34. Resu~ts show that background concentrations of TSP are very low and will not present a problem in assessing impacts of facility construction on local air quality. The measured particulate CJncentrations at the three Hi-Vols ranged from 0.99 to 12.8 (ug/m3) for a 24-hour average. The highest geometric mean value for the three Hi-Vols was 4.57 ug/m3. 69252 850305 VII-1 il u !'\ i 1 u r-l l l u n ! ' 1 t L.J n l : u n l l u rl u n u n I ! LL n i ' i I w n ! i u u 1"'\ ' I L VIII. REFERENCES Alaska Administrative Code. 1983. Title 18, Environmental Conservation, Chapter 50. Alaska Air Quality Control Regulations. Revisions through October 30, 1983. Alaska Power Authority. 1984. Processed Climatic Data, October 1982 - September 1983, Volume IV, Watana Station, March 1984. Alaska Power Authority .. 1983. Processed Climatic Data, October 1981 - September 1982, Volume IV, Watana Station, March 1983. Alaska Power Authority. 1982 o Processed Climatic Data) October 1980 - September 1981~ Volume IV, Watana Station, March 1982. Alaska Power Authority. 1981. Processed Climatic Data, October 1979 - September 1980, Volume IV,_ Watana Stat ion, March 1981. Jutze, G.A. Sources. 1978., Factors Influencing Emissions from Fugitive Dust In: Symposium on Fugitive Emissions and Control. EPA, Hartford, CT. May 1976. R&M Consultants. 1984. Personal Communication. United States Code of Federal Regulations. of the Environment. Protection Prevention 1983. Title 40, Protect ion Agency. 1980. Ambient of Significant Deterioration United States Environmental Monitoring Guidelines for (PSD) (EPA-450/4-80-012). 1980. Research £riangle Park, NC. November 69252 8~0305 V!II-1 r1 1 , u n i ) LJ n LJ !"'"'! l l u n u ,.,~ ' ! : ' j r I ; L....:J n i t ' i u n lJ '1 I . LJ 0 fl I l i .~ u r-. , I l I ' ' L....i United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1977a. Selecting Sites for Monitoring Total Suspended Particulates (EPA-450/3-77-018). Research Triangle Park, NC. Revised December 1977. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1977b. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution }feasurement Sys terns, Volume II, Ambient Air Specific Methods (EPA-600/4-77-027a). Triangle Park, NC. May 1977. Research United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1975. Air Quality • Analysis Workshop, Volume I: Manual (EPA-450/3-75-080-a). Triangle Park) NC. November 1975. 69252 850305 VIII-2 Research