SUSITNA
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
PROJECT No. 7114
HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
FINAL MONITORING AND QUALITY
ASSURANCE REPORT
FINAL REPORT
[g]~[Ri~~~[§~~®©@
MARCH 19·85
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
DOCUMENT No. 1697
. .,_
. _ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY_-______.
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
FINAL REPORT
Report by
Harza-Ebasco
Susitna Joint Venture
.
Prepared for
Alaska Power Authority
••
March 1985
it
SUSITJA: HYDROELECTRIC PROJECt
HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
FINAL REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
I NT ROD UCTI ON • • •
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
II.
•
• • • •
•
•
•
c.
• • • • • • • • • • • • •
•
•
•
•
•
• • • • • • • • • •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
8
D
a
8
8
8
• • •
U.S. Clean Air A=t and Prevention of Significant
Deterioration • • • • • • •
Alaska Regulations .. • • • • a e
a
a
e
a
•
Guidelines for PSD Monitoring e • • • • • • • • •
•
B.
•
Purpose • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Cooperating Agencies and Organizations
Monitoring Program Design & Schedule •
Summary of Monitoring Results • • • • •
Quality Assurance and Audits • • • • •
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK • • •
A.
It
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
8
•
Cl
D
•
a
8
8
e
•
•
•
•
•
.
III.
B.
c.
PI£.
v.
c.
D.
E.
F.
VI.
B.
..
III-1
III-1
III-3
•
•
•
•
•
6925 2/TuC
850305
t
•
•
•
•
fi
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
a
•
a
•
•
a
•
• •
•
........ ...
Off-Site Reporting Station • • • •
On-Site Meteorological Data ,. • • •
1.
Description of Meteorological Monitoring Station
2.
Measured Meteorological Data
~
•
•
•
•
•
0
fl
•
•
• • • • • •
V-1
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 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
V-1
V-2
V-2
o
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Procedures and Protocols • • • • • • • • • • • •
Data Recovery • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
.
l.
•
•
•
0
•
•
•
•
IV-1
IV-1
•
•••••
•
IV-1
•
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
A.
II-1
II-1
II-1
Sources • • • • • • • • • • • • •
o
•
•
Proposed Point Sources • • • • • • •
Potential Fugitive Dust Emission Sources • • • • • • • • •
~isting
RESULTS OF THE 1984 TSP MONITORiNG PROGRAM •
A.
B.
II-1
III-1
SUMMARY OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA •
A.
B.
I-1
I-1
I-2
I-2
I-3
• • • • • •
EXISTING AND PROPOSED SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION • • •
A.
Page
I-1
•
• • • • •
• • • • •
V-5
V-7
V-14
VI-l
VI-1
VI-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
c.
Do
E.
Invalid Samples • • • • • •
Audits • • • • • • • • • •
System Precision • •
• •
c.
~
..
VII-I
Sources of Air Pollution • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • e
Meteorology • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Ambient Monitoring • • • • • •
. •
• • • • • • • • • •
VII-1
VII-1
VII-I
.
VIII-I
VIII. REFERENCES
• • •
0
•
• • •
• • •
0
• • • •
~
D
•
• • • • • • •
..
• • • • • • " • • • • • • • •
h.
69252/TOC
850305
..
• • . • " • . •
• • • • • • • •
• • •
• • • •
•
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION!)
A.
B.
• • • • • • • •
• • c • • • • •
• • • • • • • •
Page
VI . .·l
VI-2
VI-4
ii
!I
r
SUSITNA l.lYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
FINAL REPORT
LIST OF TABLES
Page
III-1
COMPARISON OF MEASURED MONTHLY WINDBLOWN DUST
FACTORS AT W4TANA SITE
III-4
IV-1
WATANA MONTHLY SUMMER METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY
IV-4
IV-2
NUMBER OF DAYS WITH PRECIPITATION GREATER THAN 0. 0 l INCH
IV-8
IV-3
WATANA METEOROLOGY CORRESPONDING TO TSP SAMPLING SCHEDULE
IV-9
V-1
MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS
VI-1
Sill1MARY OF DATA LOSSES
69252/TOC
850305
V-6
VI-3
iii
•
SUS ITNA HYDRflELECTRIC PROJECT
HI-VOLUME AIR MONITORING PROGRAM
F1N.A1 REPORT
LIST
OF FIGUReS
III-1
V!CINITY MAP FOR THE SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Page
III-2
III-2
HI-VOL SAMPLER LOCATION MAP
III-5
IV-1
WATANA CAMP HI-VOL STATION
IV-3
IV-2
WATANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES (1984)
IV-5
IV-3
WATANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES (1983)
IV-~6
V-1
CONFIGURATION OF SUSITNA RIVER HI-VOL
V-3
V-2
SAMPLING PLATFORM CONFIGURATIONS
V-4
V-3
TSP CONCENTRATION VS.
V-9
V-4a
TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION FOR SAMPLER 1
(CAMPSITE)
V-10
TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION FOR
(SUSITNA RIVER)
V-11
V-4b
V-Sa
SA}~LE
DATE
SA~1PLER
3
TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED AND PRECIPITATION
FOR SAMPLER 1 (CAMPSITE)
V-12
TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED AND PRECIPITATION
FOR SAMPLER 3 (SUSITNA RIVER)
V-13
VI-1
HI-VOL PROJECT AUDIT CHECKLIST
VI-5
VI-2
HI-VOL FLOWRATE AUDIT FORM
VI-6
VI-3
X AND R CHART FOR TSP MEASUREMENTS
VI-7
VI-4
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE LOG
VI-8
VI-5
X AND R CHART FOR FLOWRATE
VI-9
V-Sb
69252/TOC
850308
.
~v
.
NOTICE
ANY QUESTIONS.OR COMMENTS CONCERNING
THIS REPORT SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO
THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
SUSITNA PROJECT OFF!rJ
•
I.
A.
INTRODUCTION
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 Alaaka Power Authority operated
the Susitna Hydroelectric Project,
thre~
High Volume (Hi-Vol) air
Ba~kground
from June through September 1984.
sampl~rs
data were requested by the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) from the Alaska Power
Authority
(Power
construction of
Authority)
the
to
hydroel~ctric
support
air
pollution
permits
for
Background data to determine
project.
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.
first
report,
Hi-Volume Air Monitoring Program:
The
Initial Monitoring and
Quality Assurance Report (June 1984), described the methods to be used and
quality assurance procedures to be implemented in the program.
report, Hi-Volume Air Monitoring Program:
Assurance Report
period
May
30,
(August
1984
1984),
The second
Interim Monitoring and Quality
summarized results of monitoring for
through August
10,
1984 and
the
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
program, ·examined the Quality Assurance manual developed in support of the
program,
and
been
has
.
summaries
preVl.OUS
provided
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
Guidelines
r~quirements
contained in the Ambient Monitoring
.
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (EPA 1980) and l.n
for
.
Selecting Sites
for Monitoring Total Suspended Particulates
Laboratory and quality assurance protocols were derived
Assurance
Handbook
for
Air
Pollution
Measurement
(EPA 1977A).
from a.:ne gualit~
Systems
(EPA
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.
winter,
The region is covered with snow during the
therefore windblown dust
is negligible during that peri0d.
ADEC
agreed that the summer program would be sufficient to characteri?-e suspended
particulate concentrations.
D.
MON~TORING
SUMMARY OF
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
discussed
in
ambient
detail
air quality
in
is
very good.
Section V.
The
data
are
The· measured
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
particulate concentrations at
micrograms
per
cubic meter
the
( ug/m3)
Matter
(EPA-1981).
three Hi-Vols ranged
for
a
24 hour
The
measured
from 0. 99 to 12.8
average.
The h 1.ghes t
geometric mean value for the three Hi-Vols was 4.57 ug/m3 •
..
I
LL
69252
850308
I-2
.
'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
including
the monitoring
program
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.
assurance program is described in detail in Section VI.
the
rules
of
ADEC
(18
Alaska
Administrative
Code
The quality
In accordance with
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 •
.
,
L
,,
b ..
69252
850305
I-3
r
,,.J
•
~
.
'
""'~ e~• ---~·...,.,~"""-·-~·•,.,,n--•---,--....-~-_..,,___,~_.~ _
_,..,.,._._._........__,.,._"'-..._ __~-·"~'_
L
II.
'
t -
A.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
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
1~bient
new sources will result in exceeding either
Air Quality Standards or
PSD increments, and to verify the accuracy of modeling estimates.
regulation$
establish
minimum
standards
for
preconstruction
Federal
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
B.
requirements~
ALASKA REGULATIONS
ADEC has
been
delegated authority
(48 FR p. 30623).
program are
to
the PSD program by EPA
The regulations concerning the
contained
primarily
Operate (18 AAC 50 .300).
in
the
requ1re approval of the monitoring
C.
GUIDELINES FOR PSD MONITORING
To
further
and
implementatiDn of this
state regulations
on Permit
to
ADEC has authority to requiL'e the collection of
ambient and meteorological monitoring
define
implement
clarify
d~i::a
net~ork
the
as a permit condition, and to
prior to data
requirements
for
collection~
ambient monitoring
programs, EPA bas published Ambient Monitoring Guidelines for Prevention of
Significant
Deterioration
(EPA
criteria, data quality control proced11res,
data
reporting
requirements.
basis, and which are only recommended.
II-1
Guidelines
q~Iality
Generally,
procedures are mandatory, which are
69252
850305
The
1980).
the
detail
siting
assurance procedures, and
Guidelines
specify
to be determined on a
which
case-by-case
__,....,.,~•
III.
A.
EXISTING AND PROPOSED SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION
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
strong winds.
subject
those with
described in this report.
in
glacial
soils, arid conditions,
and
The ADEC originally suspected that the Susitna area would be
to windblown dust,
described
fine
Section V,
so they required the ambient air monitoring
As shown by the low measured TSP concentrations
windblown
dust
at
the
Susitna site
is
not
a
significant problem.
B.
PROPOSED POINT SOURCES
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.
emit
mor~
ruled
tha~
The combined generators will
than 250 tons per year of nitrogen oxides.
The ADEC has therefore
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.
'
1
69252
8.50305
III-1
•
'fl~~:·i;.cil
.
_..
'.r.):•;o
"-'., .,.,_ . .._..
~~;~:~s:
k ..
:· ..
Flg"re 111-1
VICINITY MAP FOR THE SUSITNA
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
00£~~£ a(!~~~@@
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
h"
111-2' . ..
----~------~-------------------------------L----------------·--~
•
-~ .• . ··~ ·- _, __ -- .. --· -- ,.._ ··-
-~ ·-~.
"-''
'"'---,.-·~"•·--~.-.....,_,.-,...~··----·.. -·.---.......·--~-------........._--_,_~..\-.....lL.:.-·-~-
J
C.
POTENTIAL FUGITIVE EMISSIONS SOURCES
Fugitive
dust
Precipitation
potential
is
Evaporation
typically
(P-E)
precipitation minus evaporation.
data
from
the Watana site.
windblown dust.
index
characterized
which
is
a
by
the
measure
Thornthwaite
of
the
net
Table III-1 lists the P-E values using
High values
indicate a
high potential
for
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.
suspended particulate. monitoring
•
For that
..
should only
reason~
it was decided that
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
construction are.&\s are shown in Figure III-2o
..
69252
850305
b.
III-3
compaction.
Several
of
the
•
.
-
I
..____
'
r--~~--
I
'
;j
•
":
I
~
_
_,
-/
:----ttrc::::.:::J::;;=-:--t---J---f:;..,..L-:::?'f---rJJ-,-~"-;-.·-~~~lUSITNA R!VER HI VOL 3_,_.
(lee Fltlure 1-1)
,_-,_-
--
. I
01
WAT~NACA~I-=V~O-L~8~t\~tf~~~~~~~~~~~~rr~--~
I
t AND 2 AND
METEOROLOGICAL
STATiON
,.
.,
,.
SCALE- FEET
LEGEND
A
HI-VOL LOCATIONS
~------------------------------------~--------------~--------------------------~--,--------------------------­
.
.-------·--------··
HI-VOL SAMPLER LOCATION MAP
Figure 111-2
(}0&00~/A a ~rnJ/1\~@
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
1.•
•
•
•
Wizard," manufactured by MRI, operated and maintained by R&M Consultants,
Inc. for ;he Power Authority.
J
The location of the mete!oroJ.ogical station is shown in Figure III-1 and in
Figure III"-2.
J
The station .i.s located at an elevation of approximately 2,200
feet MSL and is at
appro:~Cimate
Alaska State Plane, Zone 4.
Watana camp in an open,
Susi tna River.
UTM coordinates N 3,232,600 and E 748,950 in
The station is located about 100 yards from the
gradually sloping area on the north side of the
The wind sensors are approximately three meters above the
ground.
2.
Measured Meteorological Data
Sununer weather patterns at
shown in Table IV-1.
the Watana
site for
the period 1980-1984 are
The win1 regime at the Watana campsite is affected by
local topography and seasonal influences.
winds are predominantly
from
the west.
Early in the summer season, the
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.
Watana site also shows a seasonal pattern.
then reaches
Precipitation is low during May,
a maximum in July or August.
decrease in the late sunnne!r season as
Precipitation at the
Liquid precipitation amounts
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
by
s~.;ptember
northeast
quadrant and
occurred.
A similar pattern. occurred during 1981, as shown in Figure IV-3.
The frequency of occurrence of
a distinct easterly
m~asurable
prevailing wind
precipitation is also a key aspect
of characterizing suspended particulate air quality conditionsc
69252
850308
IV-2
. . . . . . .. ..
.... .NORTW
.. ....... ..
.. . ... . ...
NORTH
... ..........
JUNE 1984
.
........
.
..
..
... ...... .
MAY 1984
,
. ....... .
. . . . . ..
•
•EAST
WEST:
e
e e
I
•
. . .. . . . .
. . . .. . . .
. . . ... . .
. . . . . .. . . ..
..
,, . .
......
.. ...... . .
... . . . . . . .
~
. .......... .
. . . ...
.. souTH.
souTH ..
NORTH
................
... . . ..... ... ...
...... .. ...
.. ...... .
..
....... l!.
JULY 1984
...
.
·-.·
·.
.·
,_
.·.... ·..
.... ....
,
.. .. .:. . . ..
.. . .. . .. ... . ..
. .. .
...
.. soUr..;·
.
.AUGUST
.... .... ... ··· ..1984
. ... .....
..
.........
·.
.
.....
.. .. ..
........ ..
·.
..............
... ......... .
...
SEPTEMBER
NORTH
.. ........... ...
...............
..~~R":~ ....
._
~
,_
•• "'SlC··lllC
· ·zn-~. ·
.·Sl'! ··sn·l'lC.
•
•
•
.
.. . .. ............ .
.. ·.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.· ..
. .. souiH ..
..
WIND SPEED
CtvS>
198~4
)•211
13-29
11-15
WEST:
,..,
.. ..
.......
....... .. ...
..
......... ... .
.
.. . ............ .
...
........... ...,
.......... .... ...
"
SOUTH
li-ta
3-5
1-3
•
.2-t
•
t'
CAL.ft
;''·
/
Figure IV-2
W'AT ANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES
(1984f.'
···5.
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.
appears
to
be
low,
but
a
responsible for this factor.
missing
data
The frequency for July 1984
period
for
that month
may
be
A corrected July 1984 frequency would be 15
days.
Meteorological
conditions
recorded
operating are shown in Table IV-3.
TSP monitoring
p.:~riod
for
days
when
the
TSP
samplers
were
Temperatures and wind speeds during the
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
III-2.
River.
This
locations.
The
section of
two
sampling
locations were depicted
the report describes
the samplers
in Figure
and
the site
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~
29, 1984.
Ri-Vols were established near the Watana campsite on May
These samplers measured baseline TSP concentrations in the
plateau regions above the river.
ma~n
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.
gently
to
the north.
The
terrain near the samplers slopes upward very
The ground cover around
typical low tundra vegetation, and
included
a
diesel
electric
cons is ted of
the nearest spA.rse trees were situated
approximately 150 feet from the Hi-Vols.
camp
the samplers
The emission sources at the field
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
TABLE III-1
'·
COMPARISON OF MEASURED MONTHLY WINDBLOWN
DUST FACTORS AT WATANA SITE
Date
'·
L
L
Average
Wind
Speed
V (mph)
P/E
Ratio
4.24
5.15
2.44
1.83
1.16
5.05
6e49
5.59
6.04
5.14
.4080
.9942
2.7582
3.5683
2.6207
184.9
66.1
5.5
4.1
4.7
1.02
3 .. 44
4.29
2.29
3.97
5.12
4.30
3.81
2.06
5.36
6.04
5.36
4.47
5.36
.6719
.9977
.6010
1.9272
116.7
37.0
59.1
9.9
1.55
4.45
4.65
4.82
4.,36
2.55
5.81
6.04
4. 70
4.47
.3216
1.0206
1.8235
509.3
23.8
6.4
Total
Precipitat ion
P (inches)
Total
Evaporation
E (inches)
Monthly
Dust
Factor
"C" 1/
1981
May
June
July
August
September
1.73
5.12
6 .. 73
6.53
3.04
1982
May
June
July
August
September
1983
L
May
June
July
August
September
l.IMonthly "C" = (0.239)(V3)/(P/E)2.
69252
850305
----Based on Jutze 1978.
III-4
•
I
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
J
Copper River Lowlands and to the south by the Talkeetna Mount a ins.
It is
expected that topography significantly influences local wind patterns.
A.
The
OFF-SITE REPORTING
closest
records
are
available is Talkeetna, located about 50 air miles to the southwest of
the
Watana site.
station
STP.~ION
from
which
long-term
meteorological
Long-term climatic records for Talkeetna indicate that the
climate of the region varies between continental and modified
climate (NOAA 1983).
modified
.
mar1.ne
maritime
.Precipitation at Talkeetna is characteristic of a
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
nmner.
ST ..
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).
69252
850305
IV-1
The station consists of a "Weather
'
~.,
,.r ___ ._.:...._~--. . ~~--e-·
,
""
____ ~·----=.. ·-~ -·- ---..-.·-·--·-··-·.,.,,..-.. . . . ._.._..,.._,..__~--.....;.~.,.:__,
150'
I
I
.I
Prevaiteng
Summer Wind
Direction
Collocated
HI-Vol
Sampler a
.s
_,•
....•
I
••
~;
-..
-
Cl
I
&:
. ICj
C:l
Q
I
f
I
I
I
300'
~,
f'7,71
~
A & M \':onsultants
Meteoro!ogical
Stat§on
Field Camp
( DleaeJ Gonera~or
and lncin•ratof') • - - - -
[)-Figure IV-1
r-----------·----------~---------------~----~
WATAN~\ CAMP HI-VOL STATION
------------------------------------·------·--~
IV-3
00&00~~ =§@£@©@
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
I
,'
METEOROLOGICAL STATION LOCATOR MAP
TABLE IV--1
~
WATANA MONTHLY SUMMER METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY
41
Year
Month
198o.l/May
June
July
August
September
TemEerature
Maximum
Minimum
(oC)
(oC)
Mean
(oC)
Wind
Prevailing
Average
Direction
Speed
(Sector)
(mps)
-5~,0
4.6
WSW
3.1
14.6
23.9
4.5
11.9
WSW
2.6
107.6
22.1
22.7
17.0
-2.2
-0.1
1.2
7.6
9.3
10.3
14.5
-13.3
4o4
WSW
WSW
WS"kT
N
ENE
2.6
2o9
2.5
2.7
2.3
44.0
129.8
170.6
165.6
77.2
15.6
-27.2
2.3
WSW
2.4
26.4
20.1
14.5
0.7
1.8
-5.6
10.8
10.0
5 .,0
w
w
E
2.4
2.0
2.4
25.8
87.4
109.2
58.2
100.8
19834/May
June
July
August
September
20.1
26.1
-3.6
2.1
5.3
10.5
w
1984-iiMay
June
July
August
September
16.2
21 .. 6
21.2
21 .. 5
15.5
-7.4
0.6
3.1
-4.2
-3.0
4.0
10.2
11.5
9.4
6.4
June
July
August
September
1982l/May
June
July
August
September
N
ENE
w
w
w
ENF.
41
(mm)
16.0
1981~./May
I
Precipitation
Monthly Total
2.6
2.7
15.2
39.4
113.4
117.8
2.5
2.9
2.7
2.5
2.5
8-.o
62 .. 4
42.4
100.0
33.6
1.1 Alaska PoTAer Authority 1981
l/Alaska Pc,wer Authority 1982
]./Alaska Power Authority 1983
4/Alaska Power Authority 1984
2/R&M Consultants 1984
69252
850308
IV-4
..
.. . . ... ...
.. . . .NORTH
.. ...........
..........
I
..
I
.·
..
..
t'
t
t
t
t
•
tat
•
.. .
II
··sourt.f' ·
~TH
..
.
... ...
. .·
..
,. ,,.. ..,
.................
.......... .
e a a a a e e a
·.
II
·[FIST
.. ..... . .. ..·
........ . . ..
..... ........
... ... .... ... ..
. .. . . . . .
.. .
..
SOUTH
.. SOiifw ..
...
SEPTEMBER
...... NORTH
"' ............ .
.., ..
..
......... ...
.
.
..
.
. .... .
·
.
. . .. . ...... . .. ..
.. .. .
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • f'
1883
.. ... ......... .. ..
.. .. ..... ....
..
.
......... .
..
..
.............
...............
.... . . iCiiTH ... ..
~
AUGUST
1983
•••• !!1. Jltll
......
.. ..
..
.
··sour.t·
... ..
fQITH
...............
.
JULY 1983
...
. ..
..
....... .
......... ...
.......... ...
.. ·.
. ..
..
.............. .
......... ...
..........
.......
JUNE 1983
...... ..
. .. . .
. .. . ..... ..
... . .. . . . ...
•.
NORTM
.................
MAY 1983
MIND PEED
(fVS)
Ia- I !I
I• II
'
1-J
.I-I
R & M Con1ultanta. Inc.. 198-4
Figure IV-3
WAT ANA CAMPSITE MONTHLY WIND ROSES
.
(1983)
00£00~£ =[!00£®©@
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
IV...S
..
TABLE IV-2
NUMBER OF DAYS WITH PRECIPITATION
GREATER THAN
0~01
INCH
Year
Month
19831/
May
7
6
June
14
14
July
18
9
August
11
11
September
No data
1lAlaska Power Authority 1984.
ZIR&M
69252
850305
1984-~./
Consultants 1984o
IV-8
10
TABLE IV-3
r
WATANA METEOROLOGY CORRESPONDING TO TSP SAMPLING SCHEDULE
Wind
Mean
Average
Prevailing
Relative
;remEerature
Speed
Direction
Humidity
Maximum
Minimum
Me en
(oC)
(oC)
(oC)
(mps)
(Sector)
(Percent)
Date
J
,I
~.
J
J
J
j
...
~"
.,.
.,._,J
.
•
64
28
25
64
46
61
62
50
56
71
60
E
3~2
0.6
1.9
3.9
4 .. 3
2.1
5.1
7.0
6.0
6.9
9.3
4.9
8.7
10.2
9.6
11.2
9.0
9.9
12.8
10.3
11.1
12.3
N
2 .. 2
2.4
3 .. 6
3 .. 1
2.,8
2 .. 4
2.0
2.8
2 .. 8
2 .. 4
0.8
0.0
0.0
1.8
0.0
1.0
0.4
2.0
2.0
10.8
0.0
11.9
19.6
14.3
14.2
11 .. 2
6.6
8.8
6.2
6.4
6.8
9.3
14.2
10.3
10.3
9.0
73
63•
45
49
74
w
w
3.6
2 .. 2
2.5
2.3
3.2
0.0
7.4
0.0
0 .. 2
0.0
21.2
8.7
7.1
7.2
14.2
8.0
51
87
N
w
1.9
3 .. 1
0.0
s.o
20.4
9.2
14 .t'
71
N
1.4
o.o
21.1
14.7
18.3
17.6
14.8
13.2
7.7
8.9
9.6
9.4
6.1
3.6
6.0
8.4
6 .. 3
2.4
-4.2
1.6
15 .. 3
10.4
11.0
11.8
11.6
9.8
rl
2.4
5.6
44
54
28
51
62
68
82
43
50
2.5
2.3
2.6
2.3
3.8
1.4
1.8
3.4
2.2
0.0
1.6
0.0
0.0
5.0
2.6
22.4
0.0
0.0
12.8
11.9
15.5
12.5
13.2
7.7
-1.6
4.5
-0.1
0 .. 8
5.3
1.9
5.6
8.2
7.7
6.7
9.3
4.8
47
72
53
65
59
89
2.4
1.7
1.6
1.7
4.1
1.4
o.o
May 30, 1984
June 2, 1984
June 5
..Tune 8
June 11
,Tune 14
June 17
June 20
June 23
June 26
June 29
9.8
16.7
18.5
15.3
18.1
15.8
14.7
18 .. 5
14 .. 6
15.2
15.3
July
July
July
July
July
July
July
July
July
July
2, 1984
5
8
11
14
17
20
23
26
29
August
August
August
August
August
August
August
August
August
August
August
1, 1984
4
7
10
13
16
19
22
25
28
31
September
September
September
September
September
September
3
6
9
12
15
18
69252
850305
o.o
Precipitation
Daily Total
5.1
ENE
WNW
WSW
w
w
WNW
w
w
WSW
NNE
WSW
WNW
w
ESE
WNW
E
w
w
E
NE
NE
ESE
N
E
E
E
3.4
0.6
0.2
o.o
6.2
IV-9
,.
.-
!
B.
SUSITNA RIVER SAMPLER
f -
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.
located
at
coordinates
Alaska
State Plane,
Zone 4,
The sampler was
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
on
.J
I
,]
the
TSP measurements
(see Figure V-1).
The Hi-Vols
had
e~haust
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.
three units were equipped with electromechanical
elapsed time indicators.
seve~-day
All
time switches and
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.
..
J,
69252
850305
V-2
.
•
.,
.
-
. ,..
\
'
II"""
..._..
•1
..
~
•
.
)
..
~•
!_"
•
,.
'Co
-.
.
.
.
0
-
•
>
.
•
'
'
~~
A
•
...
.
.
•
'
'·.
•
'
' ' ' ·,
•
..
--
-··
. ··-
- - - - - - - - - . . - - - - - : : . . - . . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Ut._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..:..,_-..;.;.
(')
0
z
.....
.l5
._
Site locat1\ln:
-0z--.
:0
>
__.
I
j
0
..
f
N 3,226,900
E 729~500
Alaska Plane Coord.
I
Zone 4
Elev. 1435 Ft. HSL
<0.
-n
en
c
c:
~
~
.....
IZ z-
en
-I
•
""'
Generator/
& fuel Tank
>
-m<:0
:u
-<
:I:
I
0
r
J
Site layout
NTS
Cottonwood
(approx. 35 ft.)
Spruce
(approx. 60 ft.)
l
lI
l~
I
N
•
,.
•
I.....____ 1o.o· ------.....
J
Sampler 2
(Audit)
I
Samp,.r 1
( Repo_rtlng )
8 ..5'
I
5.0'
I
COLLOCATED W AT ANA CAMP HI-VOLS
I
..
I
N--------,......
I
I
1.5'
I
5.0'
SUSITNA RIVER HI-VOL
f
f,_----~-..
I
Figure V-2
SUSiTNA HI-VOL SAMPLING PROGRAM
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
period using a Kurz Model 341 calibration unit.
tronic,
bot-wire
anemometer
mass
flowmeter
24-hr sampling
This unit is an electhat
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,
electronic
the
flowmeter
was
checked
biweekly
again~t
a
standard critical orifice ("top hat") calibrator.
3..
Sampling Schedule
spe~ified
ADEC
frequency.
.
that the three Ri-Vols r3hould be run on a three-day sampling
All three units were operated on a three-day schedule beginning
1n late l1ay or early June through September 1984.
The collocated units 1
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
given.
the samp1 ing locations are
The geometric mean values for each of the samplers are also provided
in Table V-1.
A measurement of negative filter weights
total of ten of the observations.
not
each of
completely
installation
in
removing
the
loose
samples.
This
filter
l~Tas
lint
Negative
w~s
noted for a
determined to be the result of
from
results
the
and
filter.s
. .
m1ss1ng
prior
data
to
were
excluded from the subsequent analyses.
69252
850305
V-5
..
•
TABLK V-1
MEASURED TSP CONCENTRATIONS (ug/m3)
Susitna River
Watana Campsite_ Samplers
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
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
Unit 2
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
1M04
1.57
4.11
1-89
4.30
3.96
4.96
6.51
Neg
3.48
3.47
2.81
5.12
2¥77
Neg
4.46
9.82
3.34
3~99
Unit 3
Negative
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
3.34
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
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. 75
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
2.10*
7.39*
3.63*
1.34*
3.57
4.14
5.08
6.43
0.99
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
units
cc1rrelation coefficient
was
calculated
from
for
these
TSP measurements between the
data.
For Units
1 and 2,
the
three
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.
relation~hip
Figure V-4a and V-4b show the
between
and measu,red TSP concentration at Ur.its
correlatit::>n between
figures
also
t~ind
l
pr~vailing
and 3.
wind direction
There is no apparent
direction and background TSP concentration.
demonstrate
that
prevailing
winds
blew
either
These
upriver
or
downriver during the summer 1.984 sampling period •
.
Figures
V-5a
and
concentration,
between
for
TSP
wind speed.
regression
69252
850305
wind
and
windblown
V-5b
speed,
average
dust
show
the
and
wind
predict
relationships
precipitation.
speed.
that wind
The most
between
background
There was
recent
erosion should be
TSP
no correlation
emission
factors
proportional
to
If background TSP was caused by local wind erosion, then the
line
for
TSP versus
wirtd speed would have a positive slope.
V-7
..
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.
therefore>
be
conclud~d
that
the background
It can,
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
69252
decrea~ed
by precipitation.
V-8
850308
•
10
- - - WATANA CAMP(Sampler 1)
I
•- -
-
IU81TNA RIVER (Sampler 3)
I
.,
I
7
.,=
co
z •
I
§ • +·
zIll
~
.=
0
,,
I
I
I
I
I
~I
..
I
,A
\
\
l
\
r.,
'
I
1\
\
I \ I
\
I \1
\ I
\ I
\ I
\
\I
(.)
a
JUN 1
JUL 1
AUG 1
8EP 1
SAMPLE DATE
mJ&rru;g& a §00&~©@
SUSiTNA -IOINT VENTURE
TSP CONCENTRATIONS VS. SAMPLE DATE
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
':Im
•
•
Cl)
w
~
•
.a.
2
~
g)
a..
•
...
Ct?
I
•
•
•
•
•
• •• •
• •
• •
• •
•
•
0 ~-4--+-~~~~--~~~~~~-~---+.~+--+­
c
10
20
30
40
10 eo
70
10
ec 100 110 120 130 140
WIND DIRECTION, degreet
fj(i)£~@@ . iSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND DIRECTION
FOR SAMPLER 3
JOIN';f 'i'fNTUAE
00.£00(g£
SUSITNA
ct
(SUSITNA RIVER)
V-11
Figure V-4b
10~----~--------------------~--------------~--~----~
I
8
..
7
• 0
(')
0
E
.....
Q
::J
...•
_,w
G.
5
•••• •••
0
2
•
•••••••• ••••
c
G)
G.
0
······
•
•••••• ••e···
- .... -
- - -0- - - - - - ... :.:& •.-:-.-::.
0
. -----;- •
----
....
0
•••••••
0
•••••• •••• ••••
•
•
3
•
•
• •
•
0
.3
.e
.8
1.2
1 .. 1
1!11
2.1
2.4
••••••
•
2
1
•
0
0
0
0
0
--
2.7
3.0
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£~@
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
TSP CONCENTRATION VS. WIND SPEED
AND PRECIPITATION FOR SAMPLER1
(CAMPSITE)
V-12
Figure
v-sa
10-----------------------------------------------------,
I-t0
a-~
•
0
7-r-
0
0
0
•
•
ft
00
~-~~-~~--------------~------0 0
•
•
5-80·~••s·········· eee•••••• .. •••••••••Jl•••
O
•
4--
• ••• . ,•••••••••••••••••• 8 ••
•
•
•
0
3-1-
0
•••••
•
0
•
2-T-
,__
1
0
1
0
0
I
.3
I
.e
t
I
I
1.~
.I
I
I
1.1
I
I
1.1
1
I
I
I
2.1
2.7
3.0
I
l
I
I
3.3
l
I
I
3.8
I
I
4.2
WIND SPEeD, m/aec
,.__,_
KEY
--•=
0=
'-'~
••••••
No Precipitation
•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
SUSITNA JOtNT VENTURE
Figure V-5b
(SUSITNA. RIVER)
V-13
•
COMP.~RISON
F.
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
background air quality is excellent.
ug/m3.
ug/m3o
TSP monitoring
data
show
that
the
Geometric mean values are all below 5
The maximum observed 24-hour
particulate concentration is 12.8
Both observations are far below the applicable standards.
L
69252
850305
V-14
•
•
VI o
A.
Q1TALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
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
controls
filter
and
d<?cumentation of procurement
selection
and
preparation,
sampling
and
1977b)~
These include
calibration of
procedures,
sample
equipment,
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.
program was 96.5
percent.
The availability of the 1984 monitoring
The overall recovery
rate for
the monitoring
program including allowance for all invalid samples during the period is
91.0 percent.
C.
After June 17, the overall recovery rate was 97.8 percent.
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
This was
(see Table V-1).
determined to be
the result of not
completely removing loose filter lint from the filters prior to installation
in the samplers.
been
pulled
After being in the samplers for 24 hours, enough air had
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
Independence requires
routine
monitoring
different
from
that
of
the
accuracy
of
the
data.
the auditor not be the person conducting the
program
those
assessment
used
and
that
audit
in monitoring.
standards
The
and
equipment
system audit
be
in Hi-Vol
monitoring is mainly to evaluate the air flow rate, exposed filter weighing,
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
and data processing.
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."
Frank Moo lin
and Associates,
Sus itn~ Joint v·enture o
The audit was conducted by Dr. Jean Marx of
Inc.,
a
subcontractor of
the Harza-Ebasco
The audit covered the following topics:
o
Laboratory procedures
o
o
Hi-Vo1 operations
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.
VI-2.
The results of that audit are shown .; n r·igure
lower values
reporting
than did the electronic
calibrators
gave
nearly
flowmeter.
equal
reporting calibrator was operated properly.
69252
850305
g~ve
Both the reporting calibrator and the audit calibrator
VI-2
However.
readings,
the audit and
• d 1 cat ~ng
:tn.
I
slightly
•
that
the
TA.~LE
VI-1
SUMMARY OF DATA LOSSES
Date
Type of Data
Remarks
05/30/84
Negative net parlicle
The first set of filters were
06/02/84
weights on exposed
inadvertently not brushed to
06/05/84
filters.
remove loose fibers before the
06/08/84
initial weighing.
06/17/84
Negative net particle
Reason for negative weight
08/10/84
weights on exposed
is not known •
09/18/84
filters.
Note:
Total delta recol1ery from May 30, 1984 throu:gh September 18, 1984
= 91.0
percent;o
Total data 1.·ecovery from June 17, 1984 through 3eptember 18, 1984
= 97.8 percent.
69252
850308
VI-3
SYSTEM PRECI"ION
Ea
The precision of the measured TSP concentrations between the two collocated
samplers at the campsite is shown in Figure VI-3.
! 15
collocated samples often did not satisfy the
federal
guidelines
(EPA
1980).
However,
The precision of the two
percent limit set by the
considering
the
extremely
low
measured TSP concentrations, it is unreasonable to expect the precision to
consistently
be
within
that
limit.
concentrations with collocated Hi-Vols,
very minor difficulties
during
When
sampling
very
:-:-elatively minor wind
sampling and
low
TSP
shiftt
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
critical orifice "top hat" flowmeter.
are
showr.l in Figure VI -5.
The
same
flow
rate
using
a
standard
The results of those flow rate checks
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.
day,
On that
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-vol sampl7-{s are used in the network?
1.
2.
~&..L 'ZGJ"-~
Ho
often are the samplers run?
: ~.
0
{..,L
..Zooo
.
-u.-i:.~
(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.&- . ""•
4. Are!' t.her any preexposure c
tions run on the filters?
s. What is the collection eff. ciency for your filter~? ~~---­
6. What is the calibration procedure for the hi-vol sampler?
-'-¥-A
~
~W't~~
~·"
flow
7. Which statement mos closely estimates the
rate calibration? (a) once when purchased (b) once when
purchased, then after every sampler modification (c) when
purchased, then at regular intervals thereafter ----~e~---e. Are flow rates measured before and after the sampling period?
Yes
X
No
9. Is there a log book for-each sampler for recording flo'-ls and
times? Yes
)(
No
10. 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,..,..,.;.<;¢
~
If so,'how
ll. Is the ba nee checked periodically?
often?
· . - .· ~ ..
With wh~h
standard
.
. . weights?
.
3.
---
---
-
I/""ZZ:/JV
12.
13.
14.
Are all weighings and erial
log book at the laboratory?
Wbat is the approximate time delay between sam
and the final weighing?
~- 7
days
e collection
i
Figure- Vl-1
SUSITNA HYnROZLECTRIC PROJECT
HI-VOL PROJECT AUDIT CHECKLIST
00&00?6£ =§CID&®©©
SUSITNA
Vl-5
JO~NT
VENTURE
Ambient
Te.mpera ture
T,
OF
OK
Date
.i
::c
_,,
,I
-.,
' J
I
.
,-·
• ·O
..,
.,.
Dt
<
-
c>
a.
CD
287
763
7.5
48.8
53.0
+7.9
Remarks
53 .. 0
+8.5
Audit had t()
be conducteG
during gust~
weather con~
ditions . .
'
m·
f'i>
I
Reporting 14°C
Flowmeter
co
c:
..,
:(
-<
7/31/8~
.
.,...,
I
I
Electron·lc flowrate
Flowmeter Deviation
(S)
QH
3
ft /min
I
<
0
. I
.•
v
Barometric Manometer
Calculated
~H
Pressure
Orifice
(inches
Flowrate Q~
~
H
0)
m.,/min ft 3 /min
(nmHg)
2
' I
1\)
-'•
r+
7/31/84
Audit
14°C
·flowmeter
287
763
43.5
7.4
'"f1
0
"'1
I
3
-
I
"
8
~~
I
~:?!)
z~
.
)It
4..~
Q
D
•
~Iii]
= oc + 273
nmHg = ~~ 4 x
<(g!J
~~
2@il
:D@
m@
'"
3
I
3
ft /m!n = 35.3 x m /m1n
OK
(in.Hg)
.
.
Flow Deviation =
100 x (Q 5 - Qm)/Q 5
,..
•
l
I
.
.
PROJECT NAME: 8ualtna HydroaDectrlc Project
MEASUREMENT PERFORMED: Wa~ana Camp TS1P Valuea
XJ
.
)>
z
c
MEASUREMENT UNITS: ....«g/m3
:0
(')
:I:
)>
JJ
-4
<,
, .
<0"
:Mfll .:P.,a.
-o
c:
ll:J ....
CD
~
-4
<
(A)
It,
:f:
m
)> i
10
CIJ
c:
:0
m
~
m
z·
---{j
r
.,,ca.
...
20
-8•
(J~·
.-•
I
.....
"I~~~
/(,
'"
·1.(
,r,.
I'E
,. ,,. ,,.
au
.II
,,.
Ule
ji.ID ~t.e•
flli
Ill
,
Ill
Ull
ji.UI lUI
.. .
-
..
'
lit
~II
Ill 141
-
I
!/
~
~~
·~~1\
..
~~
~~
'"'1
u
0
-
40
I
0
t
'
4
I
I
l
4~
1
(
!
'
\I
I
'
-
I
1\
;
1\
I
0
i
~~~
)
'h
H--"
.
!
1\
u
-
'II
eo _...__,..
~-
4
I 1 I'-
~
I
-
~·
20
<~>'
jl.ll
•(II
. .
.
INIIIIU llllfl
1M
..
aJJI
.~'·
1D·
I
.;)
riO
e.er
~
0
N-<
'
-c
-
..
., "''II
10
~
I
ol!,l
.v
30
t
jillI
l~
.to
-
jllll
~.e·
iM
I
.. .,, ...
.,.. ~~~· lei•• .,.. .,.. i-'•• ""' .,.
- ... iut '·" ..., ..... .... . ...... .... .... ... ... .., - lt.n "... .... .... ..., .... ... ... .... ... "'·"
- .... ..., .... ..,. i"·" , .... ... .... .... .... .... "·'' ... ... •••• ..., 11.-.... .... ....r.... ....
"·"
"·"
- .~"' -·· ••• :·•' •••• •••• .... .•.. ... • •••• .., ... .. -u - .... .... .... '·' .. . .. .... •••• ... ...•' -
"''
.....
'o - - - ....
'• - .... - - ~'-"
- - - - .,.
~·
.,.,en
.,. .,. .,, lei• .,1<
''I·
l
I
'
~D
I
)
4
'
OPEN DOT {0) INlliCATES POINT BEYOND TH: GRAPH
-4
...j
.
.
...
,
T.
-
.
Filter
No.
Second Weighing
(grams)
Weighing
(grams)
Firs~
Difference
Remark~
(mg)
Jn~xoo~~d
Fi 1ters
~nexposed
Filters
5366-10
3.5319
3.5319
0
5366-20
3.5271
3.5268
-0.30
3.4427
3.4422
-0.50
Unexposed Filters
4~nn
3.4498
-0.20
Unexposed Filters
-
•
5366-28
5366-38
...
3
I
5366-55
3.5187
3.5179
-OoBO
Unexposed Filters
5366-66
3.4803
3.4799
..o.40
Unexposed Filters
5366-32
3.4731
3.4730
-O.l
Exposed Filters
5366-46
3.5015
3 . 50.12
-0.3
Exposed Filters
I
5366-48
3.5089
3.5099
+1.0
Exposed Filters
II
5366-82
3.4859
3.4862
+0.3
Exposed Filters
5366-66
3.4842
3 .. 4841
-0.1
Exposed Filters
l
l
5366-65
....
I
I
!
I
.
I
I
•
3.5054
3.5057
Exposed Filters
-0.3
I
I
j
I
i
5366-83
3.3977
3.3951
-2 .. 6
Unexposed Filter
5366-93
3.4077
3.4069
-0.8
Unexposed Filter i
.
-
l
.
-
-
Figure V!-4
.
.
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE LOG
=·. Vl-8
I
I
.
I
.-
i
!
•
l
•
'
00£00~£ a!!®&~@@
.
SUSITNA JOINT VENTURE
j
I
PIO.n:cr Susitna Hydroelectric Proj MEASUREMENT H·j Vol Flowrate Audits
,,.._.
• PEP.FORH£0
NA.."tt:
·i
DATE
~
:z
c
:i.:
:;o
n
..,
-I
~I
p!
0
:0
:c
11-t
I
<
0
.
-n
c....
CD
-·
co
6120
82
51.0
53.0
83
~
1
~
~ 2
l
Mf;ASUJt!HEtrr
UNITS
SCFM
.
.
48.CJ
48.~
48.8
48.3
..
4.3
7.1
7.0
__!t_
~
,
'
-<01!
-'
I
..... +ln
r-
..,
0"
N
r-
cr
0
:c
;o
I
7/31
l
til
:c
::0
7/_14
tw I~ 12
><I
:J::-
7/_~
-
--
+
-
~
I
~
--1
)(
0
0
,....
•
-
:I
II"
-~ l
0
0"
IT1
~
~
I
- 5
I
-10.
L
••oL
.,,.
I
i-
"0
I
I
~~
~~
-··
-
..
~(ji)
<@!J
~~
~@A)
~@
@
.
-
z~
~~
Q 0
.
·-
I
-:cUe....
tf tf 0
~
G
a. ...._ u
la&J&J
oOu•
U~.C
I
J
•
... .. '
~-~
-·
I
I. •r
;
. . ...... ,.
I
8
_Jj
I
~
. ,. I••
_I
~ ·~
I__
.._
.
. I
~ 9;I
i .. ~~· ...
VII.
A.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
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.
conclusion was
confirmed
by
the
extremely
low
concentrations
of
This
total
su.spen.ded particulate matter (TSP) measured during the summer of 1984.
was also apparent
subject
to
It
from the low TSP concentrations that the site is not
episodes
of
t=
• •
... ug1t1.ve
wind-blo'tY-n
dust.
Based
on
standard
meteorological parameters, the monitoring period included the months most
prone to wind-blown dust.
l
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
rr
IL'I
,,p
n
ll
IL
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
VIII.
REFERENCES
r-l
ll
u
n
!
'
1 t
Alaska
Administrative
Conservation,
Chapter
Code.
50.
Title
1983.
18,
Environmental
Alaska Air Quality Control
Regulations.
L.J
Revisions through October 30, 1983.
n
l:
u
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.
n
u
l
l
Alaska Power Authority.
September
1981~
1982 o
Volume IV, Watana Station, March 1982.
Alaska Power Authority.
rl
u
n
u
n!
Processed Climatic Data) October 1980 -
1981.
Processed Climatic Data, October 1979 -
September 1980, Volume IV,_ Watana Stat ion, March 1981.
Jutze,
G.A.
Sources.
1978.,
In:
Hartford, CT.
Factors
Influencing Emissions
from Fugitive
Symposium on Fugitive Emissions and Control.
Dust
EPA,
May 1976.
I
LL
R&M Consultants.
1984.
Personal Communication.
United States Code of Federal Regulations.
Title 40, Protect ion
1983.
of the Environment.
n
i
w
i
I'
ni
u
!
United
States
Monitoring
(PSD)
Environmental
Guidelines
for
(EPA-450/4-80-012).
Protection
Prevention
Research
1980.
u
69252
1"'\
'
I
L
8~0305
V!II-1
Agency.
of
1980.
Significant
£riangle
Park,
Ambient
Deterioration
NC.
November
1r1,
u
n
i
)
LJ
n
LJ
United States Environmental Protection Agency.
for
Monitoring
Total
Suspended
Research Triangle Park, NC.
Selecting Sites
1977a.
Particulates
(EPA-450/3-77-018).
Revised December 1977.
!"'"'!
l l
u
n
u
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
1977b.
Quality
Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution }feasurement Sys terns, Volume II,
Ambient
Air
Specific
Triangle Park, NC.
Methods
Research
(EPA-600/4-77-027a).
May 1977.
,.,~
'
'!r
j
I ;
:
L....:J
nt
i
u
'
i
United
States
Analysis
Environmental
Workshop,
Triangle Park) NC.
Protection
Volume I:
Manual
November 1975.
n
lJ
'1
I .
LJ
0
fl
I
i
l
.~
u
r-.
, I
l I
'L....i'
69252
850305
VIII-2
Agency.
1975.
•
Air
(EPA-450/3-75-080-a).
Quality
Research