Russian-Norwegian Ambient Air Monitoring in the Border Areas

REPORT

M-761 | 2017

Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas Updated joint report 2010 – 2015 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas Updated joint report 2010 – 2015

Executive institution: Summary: Federal State Budgetary Murmansk Administration The report presents the levels of sulphur dioxide for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (SO2) and heavy metals (nickel and copper) in ambient (Murmansk UGMS), Norwegian Institute for Air air at the Russian monitoring stations in Nikel and Research (NILU), Norwegian Environment Agency Zapoliarny and the Norwegian monitoring stations in Project manager for the contractor: Karpdalen abd Svanvik in 2010-2015. MUGMS and Oksana Chaus NILU use internationally well recognized state-of-

Contact person in the the-art methods for analyzing both SO2 and heavy

Norwegian Environment Agency: metals. Concerning SO2, the monitoring methods and Camilla Fossum Pettersen limit values are comparable. The sampling methods M-no: and limit values for heavy metals are different. It M-761 | 2017 makes it challenging to compare the results for heavy Pages: metals. The expert group exchange information and 37 knowledge, and try to achieve harmonized methods.

Publisher: Emissions of SO2 in ambient air have decreased over

Norwegian Environment Agency the last two decades, but elevated levels of SO2 were The project is funded by: observed in Nikel and Zapoliarny, exceeding the Russian Ministry of Climate and Environment norms. Monitoring results from the Norwegian border

Author(s): areas show that the levels of SO2 were exceeding the C. F. Pettersen, T. F. Berglen, H. Aronsen, S. Guttu, Norwegian air quality standards. The levels of heavy O. Chaus, A. Ustinova, T. Pavlova, T. D. Korotkova. metals did not exceed neither the Russian norms for Title – Norwegian and English: heavy metals, nor the Norwegian annual mean target Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the values for heavy metals. The registered levels of both border areas – Updated report 2010-2015 SO2 and heavy metals in ambient air were higher at 4 emneord: the Russian stations than the Norwegian stations. The

Nikel, SO2, Utslipp, Tungmetaller Russian monitoring stations are located closer to the 4 subject words: emission sources in Nikel and Zapoliarny.

Nikel, SO2, Emissions, Heavy metals

Front page: Photo: (copyright) Benjamin Flatlandsmo Berglen

Design: Skipnes Kommunikasjon AS Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Preamble

In February, 2016, at the IX meeting in Kirkenes (Norway), the Norwegian-Russian expert group on ambient air monitoring in the border areas agreed to make an updated version of the joint report on ambient air pollution. The previous (first) joint report contained monitoring data from the period 2008- 2012. This new report will contain monitoring data from the period 2010 – 2015.

Like the previous report, the present report is mainly focused on ambient air pollution of sulphur dioxide

(SO2) and heavy metals – nickel (Ni) and copper (Cu) in the border area between Russia and Norway.

The joint report has been prepared by C. F. Pettersen, H. Aronsen, S. Guttu (Norwegian Environment Agency), T. F. Berglen (Norwegian Institute for Air Research – NILU), O. Chaus, T. Pavlova, A. Ustinova, and T. Korotkova (Federal State Budgetary Murmansk Administration for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (Murmansk UGMS).

Oslo and Murmansk, 24th May, 2017

3 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Content

1. Introduction...... 5 2. Monitoring systems...... 5 2.1 Russian SO2 monitoring and limit values...... 6 2.2 Norwegian SO2 monitoring and limit values...... 7 2.3 Russian monitoring of heavy metals in air, limit values...... 8 2.4 Norwegian monitoring of heavy metals in air and limit values...... 9 2.5 Intercalibration...... 10 2.6 Discussion and conclutions on comparability of monitoring systems...... 10 2.6.1 SO2...... 10 2.6.2 Heavy metals...... 10 3. Monitoring results...... 10 3.1 Russian annual mean and monthly mean 2010-2015...... 10 3.2 Norwegian annual and monthly mean values of SO2 in 2010-2015...... 14 3.3 Russian annual mean heavy metal values in 2010-2015...... 17 3.4 Norwegian annual mean values of heavy metals for the years 2010-2015...... 19 4. Discussion ...... 19 5. Conclusions...... 21 6. References ...... 23 Appendix I ...... 24 Appendix II ...... 25

4 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

from the Norwegian Environment Agency, County 1. Introduction Governor of Finnmark, the Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU), Ministry of Natural resources Murmansk Region has a large concentration of mining and environment of Murmansk Region, Federal State and metal processing companies. The Pechenganikel Budgetary Institution Murmansk Administration for combined plant of the Kola Mining Company is located Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring in the town of Zapoliarny and settlement of Nikel in the (Murmansk UGMS). northwestern part of the Kola Peninsula, close to the Norwegian border. 2. Monitoring systems The results of the ambient air pollution monitoring show that emissions from the Pechenganikel plant In the territory of Murmansk Region, the Federal have an impact on the ambient air quality in the State Budgetary Murmansk Administration for border areas. Compounds of sulphur and heavy metals Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring released through by the industrial processes are (MUGMS) of the Federal Department of emitted into the ambient air, dispersed and transported Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring further away with the air masses. (Roshydromet) – is a competent authority authorized by the government to conduct, among other things,

In spite of a significant reduction of SO2 emissions environmental pollution monitoring and provide from the plants in Nikel and Zapoliarny achieved in the the authorities, industries and the public with period from 1970’s until now (from ca 400,000 tons information on the actual and forecast condition of the per year in the 1970’s down to ca 120 000 tons per environment and environmental pollution. year in 2015), the annual emmissions of SO2 from the plants are still approximately 5 times more than the The program of the Russian governmental monitoring 1 total annual SO2 emissions of Norway. includes discrete air sampling at monitoring stations 3-4 times a day. The concentrations of pollutants from The Russian and Norwegian ambient air monitoring industrial and automobile emissions in the ambient air has been performed since the 1970s, and a bilateral are determined. expert group on air monitoring was initiated and On the Russian side of the border, monitoring stations operated already during the years 1988 – 1994. are located in Zapoliarny and Nikel (Russia) (fig. 2.1). After a halt, the expert group was re-established in 2009 and is currently a part of the cooperation in the In Norway, the responsible state authority for framework of the Joint Norwegian-Russian commission environmental monitoring is the Norwegian on Environmental cooperation (DGS-2 project). Environment Agency. The monitoring program for air This report provides the results for the ambient air quality in the border area is funded by the Norwegian monitoring in the border areas in the period 2010 to Ministry of Climate and Environment and by the 2015. Norwegian Environment Agency. The purposes of the monitoring is to quantify the levels of pollutants The cooperation on air pollution monitoring in the (Sulphur and heavy metals) in air and precipitation border region is implemented through regular bilateral at the Norwegian side of the border areas between meetings between authorities and experts. The Russia and Norway, in order to ensure compliance with purpose of the cooperation is to achieve a common national and international regulations on air quality. understanding of the ambient air pollution situation Information on the air pollution situation is public and in the border areas including cooperation for inter- provided especially to the National environmental calibration of monitoring methods. authorities and to the local public in Finnmark. The monitoring of air pollution in the border areas is The expert group for coordination in border region air performed by the Norwegian Institute for Air Research quality monitoring includes representatives (NILU). Monitoring stations in the border areas are located in Svanvik, Karpdalen, and at Viksjøfjell 1 http://www.kolagmk.ru/ecology/aspects (Norway).

5 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Figure 2.1 Norwegian and Russian ambient air monitoring stations in the border areas.

Zapoliarny under a regional target program. The system is based on Russian C-105 gas analyzers (fabricated 2.1 Russian SO2 monitoring by St.Petersburg-based ZAO OPTEK) for continuous and limit values detection of SO2 mass concentration in the ambient air. The classical method of fluorescent spectroscopy is Murmansk UGMS has been monitoring ambient used in the gas analyzers. air in the Pechenga region since the 1970’s at two permanent stations in Nikel and one in Zapoliarny In 2014, additional information-and-measurement under the governmental monitoring program. The air complex systems for continuous control of sulfur is monitored for the following substances: nitrogen dioxide and nitrogen oxides in the ambient air were dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon oxide, particulate installed in Nikel and Zapoliarny, in the course of matter, formaldehyde, benzo(a)pyren, and heavy developing the Murmansk Territorial Automated metals (iron, copper, nickel, manganese, and lead). System for comprehensive monitoring of ambient air under the Regional Target Program Environment In 2009, continuous sulphur dioxide monitoring data Protection in Murmansk Region. measurement systems were installed in Nickel and

6 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

In continuous monitoring of sulphur dioxide and The limiting (defining) harm index describes the nitrogen oxides in the ambient air, the average specific character of the substance’s biological effect: measurements for 20 minutes are taken. In discrete reflectory and resorptive. sampling (3-4 times a day) at the monitoring station the air is pumped to the absorption tube for 20 Reflectory effectmeans a reaction by the upper respira minutes, then the taken sample is analyzed for sulphur tory passages’ receptors: smelling an odor, mucous dioxide. membrane irritation, respiratory distress etc. Such effects are observed during short-term impacts by In addition, chemical composition of atmospheric substances, that is why reflectory effect is taken as the precipitations is monitored at the station in Nikel, along basis for the maximum one-time MAC’s (20-30 min). with continuous meteorological observations. Resorptive effectmeans a possibility of general toxic, The results of the ambient air monitoring are mutagenic, carcinogenic and other effects depending included in the ‘Annual Report on Pollution in the on the duration of inhalation. To prevent resorptive Towns of Russia’ (http://www.meteorf.ru/product/ effects, the daily mean MAC’s (as a 24-hour maximum infomaterials/ezhegodniki) published by A.I. Voeykov’s and/or average during a lengthy period – a year or Main Geophysical Observatory (FGBU MGO) of more) are established. Rosgidromet, and are also provided to the Murmansk Region Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. The hazard class of substances for which both one- time and daily mean MAC’s have been established, is In Russia, air quality evaluation is performed in accord determined considering the possibility degree of the ance with the approved sanitary standards – GN effects which development under the influence of the 2.1.6.1338-03 “Maximum Allowable Concentrations specific substance is the most dangerous. (MAC) of pollutants in the ambient air in populated areas”. Table 2.1 shows the values of maximum one- In describing air pollution in towns, the average time and daily mean concentrations set for sulphur concentrations are compared to the daily mean MAC’s; dioxide. the 20-minutes concentrations are compared to one- time MAC’s. The maximum allowable concentration (MAC) of a pollutant in the ambient air of populated areas is a concentration that does not have a negative impact, 2.2 Norwegian SO2 direct or indirect, on the present or future generations, on the people’s working efficiency, on their well-being, monitoring and limit values and sanitary living conditions during the whole life. NILU – the Norwegian institute for air research has The standards are stipulated by way of maximum been monitoring air and precipitation quality in the one-time and daily mean MAC’s specifying the hazard border areas since 1974. In 1988 – 1991 there was class and limiting harm index as a basis for setting up a a common base line monitoring program conducted standard for a specific substance. at both sides of the border. Since then the number of stations has been reduced. Today there are two

Table 2.1: Maximum Allowable Concentrations (MAC) for pollutants in populated areas ambient air For Sulphure dioxide in ambient air in populated areas

Substance MAC (µg /m³) Limiting harm index Hazard class

Sulphur dioxide One-time maximum Daily mean

500 50 Reflectory and 3 resorptive

7 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

well-equipped stations at Svanvik and in Karpdalen. 2.3 Russian monitoring of Svanvik is located 8 km west of Nikel and Karpdalen is located 30 km north of Nikel (fig.2.1). Both stations heavy metals in air, limit have monitoring of SO2 in air (continuously), heavy metals in air and precipitation (weekly samples) and values meteorology (continuously). In addition there are passive SO2 samplers at Viksjøfjell (2 weeks sampling The permanent stations in Nikel and Zapoliarny time). are used for systematic monitoring of metals concentrations (iron, manganese, copper, nickel, The results are online in real-time and in annual reports lead) in the ambient air. The analyzed air is pumped (Berglen et al., 2013, in Norwegian, with a summary through the same filter at a rate of 0.1 m³/min for translated into Russian). 20-30 minutes 4-6 times a day, in equal periods of time. The volume of the pumped air at the filter with

Norwegian air quality threshold and limit values for SO2 a weekly exposure is at least 100m³. The laboratory are based on the EU Air Quality Directive 2008/50/EC measurement method is based on the measurement and implemented in Norwegian law, “FOR 2004-06- of selective absorption of the external radiation of the 01 nr 931: Forskrift om begrensning av forurensning atomic resonance lines of the determined metals by (forurensningsforskriften)” (in Norwegian only). The the atoms of metals in the flame (atomic absorption threshold and limit values are presented in table 2.2. spectrometry method).

Table 2.2: Norwegian threshold values for sulphur dioxide (SO2). For Sulphure dioxide in ambient air

Limit value1 Upper assessment Lower assessment Alert Threshold4 threshold2 threshold3

SO2 hourly mean value 350 µg/m³ 500µg/m³ for protection of human health

Number of allowed 24 exceedances per year

SO2 daily mean value 125 µg/m³ 75 µg/m³ 50 µg/m³ for protection of human health

Number of allowed 3 3 3 exceedances per year

SO2 winter season mean 20 µg/m³ 12 µg/m³ 8 µg/m³ value for protection of vegetation

SO2 annual mean 20 µg/m³ value for protection of vegetation

1 ’Limit value’ means a level fixed on the basis of scientific knowledge, with the aim of avoiding, preventing or reducing harmful effects on human health and/or the environment as a whole, to be attained within a given period and not to be exceeded once attained. 2 ‘upper assessment threshold’ means a level below which a combination of fixed measurements and modeling techniques and/or indicative measurements may be used to assess ambient air quality. 3 ‘lower assessment threshold’ means a level below which modeling or objective-estimation techniques alone may be used to assess ambient air quality. 4 Alert threshold” means a level beyond which there is a risk to human health from brief exposure for the population as a whole and at which immediate steps are to be taken.

8 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Table 2.3: Maximum allowable concentrations (MAC) of heavy metals in the ambient air of populated areas of Russia For heavy metals in ambient air in populated areas

Substance MAC Limiting harm index Hazard class

One-time maximum Daily mean

Copper Cu - 2000 ng/m3 Resorptive 2

Nickel Ni - 1000 ng/m3 Resorptive 2

Cadmium Cd - 300 ng/m3 Resorptive 1

Arsenic As - 300 ng/m3 Resorptive 1

Lead Pb 1,0 µg/m3 0,3 µg/m3 Resorptive 1

In respect of metals content the air quality evaluation 2.4 Norwegian monitoring is performed in accordance with the approved sanitary standards – GN 2.1.6.1338-03 “Maximum Allowable of heavy metals in air and Concentrations (MAC) of pollutants in the ambient air in populated areas”. limit values

Table 2.3 shows the values of maximum allowable daily Monitoring through sampling and analysis of heavy mean concentrations for copper and nickel. Weekly metals in air/dust at Svanvik started in 2008. In concentrations of metals are used for calculations of Karpdalen sampling of heavy metals in air started monthly mean and annual mean concentrations, which in 2011. The monitoring program also comprises are compared to the maximum allowable daily mean sampling and analysis of heavy metals in precipitation concentration. The daily mean MAC is approved as the at Svanvik and Karpdalen. sanitary and hygiene standard of a long-term (annual) mean concentration. The monitoring of heavy metals in air is a two-step process. First there is sampling at the stations. For The Hazard Class of substances which impact is limited air this means collection of dust at filters. At Svanvik by resorptive effect is defined considering the risk of and in Karpdalen NILU has a Kleinfiltergerät with a such effects development. PM10 impactor plate so that only particles smaller than 10 µm are collected at filters. Step 2 is to send the samples to NILU for analysis in the laboratory and hence determine the concentration.

Table 2.4: Norwegian threshold, limit and target values for heavy metals in air. For heavy metals in populated areas

Limit value Target value 1 Upper assessment Lower assessement threshold threshold

Nickel Ni annual mean 20 ng/m3 14 ng/m3 10 ng/m3

Arsenic As annual mean 6 ng/m3 3,6 ng/m3 2,4 ng/m3

Cadmium Cd annual mean 5 ng/m3 3 ng/m3 2 ng/m3

Lead Pb annual mean 0,5 µg/m3 0,35 µg/m3 0,25 µg/m3

1 ‘target value’ refers to a fixed level with the aim of avoiding, preventing or reducing harmful effects on human health and/or the environment as a whole, to be attained where possible over a given period.

9 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Limit values for Nickel, Arsenic and Cadmium are listed 2.6.2 Heavy metals as ‘target values’. This means a level fixed with the aim of avoiding, preventing or reducing harmful effects on The Russian and Norwegian sampling methods for human health and/or the environment as a whole, to heavy metals concentrations are different. In Russia air be attained where possible over a given period. is sampled with filters for further analysis of metals as part of particulate matter without size differentiation For copper Cu there is no target value as Cu is (gross dust). In Norway heavy metals concentration considered much less toxic in air than the other metals analysis is performed in the composition of particulate emitted from smelter activity. fraction PM10.

Furthermore, the air quality criteria given for heavy 2.5 Intercalibration metals in the Norwegian and Russian legislation are very much different both concerning limit values and Both FGBU Murmansk UGMS laboratory and NILU have concerning time resolution. In Norway, annual mean been participating in the international intercalibration target values are given for metals concentrations of chemical analysis methods of metals and major in a particulate fraction PM10. This is also the case ions in precipitation samples under the Joint European with EU regulations. In Russia, daily mean MAC’s are Monitoring and Evaluation Program (EMEP) since given for metals concentrations in particulate matter 2009. Results from the international intercalibration of (non-differentiated by the dust composition) without chemical analyses methods of heavy metals and major division into fractions. ions in precipitation samples are provided in Appendix I and II. The methods for analyzing heavy metals are comparable. Results from both monitoring programs are trustworthy and scientifically sound, but direct 2.6 Discussion and comparison of the heavy metals’ concentration levels on the Russian and Norwegian sides is possible, but conclutions on comparability challenging due to the differences in sampling in the two countries. Russia is making an effort to procure of monitoring systems PM10 sampling equipment, as a voluntary measure in order to achieve the same sampling method to improve the results of the cross border cooperation. 2.6.1 SO2

At present both FBGU Murmansk UGMS and NILU use continuous monitoring to quantify concentrations of

SO2. Although the monitors are different (API 100E 3. Monitoring results in Norway, OPTEC-C-105A in Russia) they both give results with high temporal resolution (seconds). The results are comparable and of similar high scientific 3.1 Russian annual mean standard. The concentrations from the monitors are calculated and reported as average over 10-minutes and monthly mean 2010- (Norway, NILU) and 20 minutes respectively (Russia, Murmansk UGMS). 2015

In order to compare the levels of SO2 in air at the In Russia, in order to describe the air pollution levels, Russian and the Norwegian stations the seasonal the Russian average concentrations of SO² are (summer, winter) mean values are also listed, see compared to the Russian mean daily MAC’s (50 µg/ tables 3.2 (Russia) and 3.5 (Norway), due to seasonal m3). One-time concentrations registered in 20-minute differences in the prevailing wind directions. time are compared to the maximum one-time MAC’s (500 µg/m³), according to the Russian sanitary standards.

10 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

According to Roshydrosmet assessment criterias, if when 13 episodes of concentrations exceeding 10 the pollutant’s concentration exceeds MAC 10 times MAC’s were observed. or more (> 5 000 µg/m3), the ambient air pollution is considered high. Elevated levels of ambient air pollution with sulphur dioxide are observed in periods of adverse weather Information on high ambient air pollution levels is conditions (stable conditions, very weak wind, ground delivered to Federal Service for Surveillance on use level inversion, low air temperature) facilitating of natural resources and environment protection accumulation of pollutants in the ground layer of the (Rosprirodnadzor Directorate for Murmansk Region), atmosphere. The observations data show that sulphur to Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights dioxide concentration in Nikel increases in periods Protection and Human Wellbeing (Rospotrebnadzor of northern winds, and in Zapoliarny – in periods of Directorate for Murmansk Region), Murmansk southern winds. Interregional Environmental Prosecutor’s Office, Murmansk Region Ministry for Natural Resources and According to climatic data, southern winds are most Environment, and to municipalities’ administrations for frequent in winter, and northern winds – in summer. administrative decision making. In the period 2010-2015, monthly mean In 2010-2015 the annual concentrations of sulphur concentrations of sulphur dioxide exceeding the norm dioxide observed in the ambient air of Zapoliarny and were observed in Zapoliarny in winter (the highest Nikel exceeded MAC. The annual mean concentrations monthly mean concentration – 5.6 MAC’s – was of sulphur dioxide in Nikel ranged 1.4 to 2.2 MAC’s in registered in December 2015) (fig. 3.2). Zapoliarny - 1.6 to 1.9 MAC’s (fig.3.1). Monthly mean concentrations of sulphur dioxide As illustrated in table 3.1, the maximum one-time exceeding the sanitary norm in Nikel are observed in concentration of sulphur dioxide in the ambient air summer (the highest concentration – 5 MAC’s in June in Zapoliarny reached 8 MAC’s in 2012, and in Nikel 2012) and in winter during adverse weather conditions – up to 14 MAC’s (high pollution level) in 2013 and (the highest concentration – 6 MAC’s in February 2015. The largest number of ambient air high pollution 2011) (Fig. 3.3). episodes in Nikel was observed in 2011 and 2015,

Table 3.1: Episodes with sulphur dioxide air pollution in Zapliarny and Nikel in 2010-2015. For Sulphure dioxide in ambient air in polluted areas

VALUE Nikel Zapoliarny

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Maximum 20-minute 5150 6410 4000 6854 6233 6908 3270 3400 3900 3698 3675 2767 (one-time) concen tration, µg/m3 (MAC =500 µg/m3)

In MAC’s 10 13 8 14 12 14 7 7 8 7 7 5

Number of 20-minute 1069 1183 759 809 782 894 854 720 977 1084 933 847 concentrations ≥ 500 µg/m3 (≥ 1 MAC)

Number of 20-minute 2 13 - 9 3 13 ------concentrations ≥ 5000 µg/m3 (≥ 10 MAC)

Annual mean 103 110 75 80 74 69 85 85 89 97 81 78 concentration, µg/m3 (MAC = 50 µg/m3)

In MAC’s 2.1 2.2 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.6 1.6

11 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Figure 3.1: Annual mean

120 concentrations of sulphur dioxide in the ambient air 100 of Nikel and Zapoliarny (µg/m³) in the period 80 2010-2015. - 3

g/m 60 μ

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Zapoliarny Nikel MAC

Figure 3.2: Monthly mean Zapolinary 2010-2015 concentrations of sulphur 300 dioxide in Zapoliarny in 2010-2015. 250

200 3 150 g/m μ

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 MAC

Figure 3.3: Monthly Nikel 2010-2015 mean concentrations of 300 sulphur dioxide in Nikel in 2010-2015 250

200 3 150 g/m μ

100

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 MAC

12 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas Updated Joint Report 2010 - 2015 2017 | M-[761] The highest level of sulphur dioxide concentration in the air in Nikel is observed on Babikova street (LMS Nikel, Station 91085) the area of Pechengskaya street is less polluted (PNZ No.5, Station 91110), which can be seen in the measurement diagram of the information-and-measurement Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761 complex systems for continuous monitoring of sulphur dioxide (fig.3.4).

Figure 3.4: One- time concentrations of sulphur dioxide in Nikel in 2015 (blue represents data sampled at Babikova station, and green represents data sampled at Pechengskaya station).

The highest level of sulphurFigure dioxide 3.4: One concentration-time concentrations in ofdioxide sulphur in ambient dioxide air in in Nikel Nikel in are 2015 higher (blue show that the represents data sampled at Babikova station, and green represents data the air in Nikel is observed on Babikova street (LMS concentrations in the ambient air of Nikel are higher in sampled at Pechengskaya station). Nikel, Station 91085) the area of Pechengskaya summer, and in Zapoliarny – in winter (Table 3.2). The street is less polluted Seasonal(PNZ No.5, analysis Station of91110), mean concentrationshighest of sulphur monthly dioxide mean concentration in ambient air of insulphur dioxide which can be seen in theNikel measurement are higher showdiagram that of thethe concentrationsin the ambient in the air ambient of Zapoliarny air of andNikel Nikel are in winter information-and-measurementhigher in summer,complex systems and in Zapoliarny for – amountedin winter (Tableto 2.8 MAC’s3.2). Theand highest2.5 MAC’s, respectively; in monthly mean concentration of sulphur dioxide in the ambient air of continuous monitoringZapoliarny of sulphur anddioxide Nikel (fig.3.4). in winter amountedsummer, to 2.8 1.4 MAC’s MAC’s and and 2.5 2.3 MAC’s, MAC’s. Seasonal analysis of meanrespectively; concentrations in summer, of sulphur 1.4 MAC’s and 2.3 MAC’s.

Table 3.2: Seasonal mean concentrations of sulphur dioxide in the ambient air, Nikel and Zapoliarny, 2010-2015.

Station Period SO2 Period SO2 April-September (µg/m3) October - March (µg/m3)

Nikel April – September 2010 97 October 2010- March 2011 125

April – September 2011 116 October 2011- March 2012 34 19 April – September 2012 95 October 2012 - March 2013 67

April – September 2013 91 October 2013 - March 2014 35

April – September 2014 91 October 2014 - March 2015 47

April – September 2015 101 October 2015 - March 2016 63

Zapoliarny April-September 2010 38 October 2010- March 2011 107

April-September 2011 61 October 2011- March 2012 138

April-September 2012 47 October 2012 - March 2013 128

April-September 2013 69 October 2013 - March 2014 90

April-September 2014 44 October 2014 - March 2015 123

April-September 2015 41 October 2015 - March 2016 111

13 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

throughout March the following year. Due to the 3.2 Norwegian annual and prevailing wind direction from south to north during wintertime, Karpdalen has the highest SO² values and monthly mean values of most frequent episodes of high values in the winter season. Karpdalen also receives pollution both from Nikel (in the south) and from Zapoliarny (in the south- SO2 in 2010-2015 east). The results from the Norwegian monitoring program are presented in annual reports. These reports The winter in 2014 was extraordinary in Svanvik, show results for monitoring periods between April due the high number of episodes (n=82) with

Table 3.3: Sulphur dioxide air pollution at Svanvik and in Karpdalen, 10-minutes values over 500 µg/m3, 2012-2015/2016.

Parameter Station 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 October - January - December March

Highest 10-minute Svanvik 1026 1064 3541 1119 750 concentration, μg/m3

Number of 10-minute 5 17 82 19 2 concentrations ≥ 500 μg/m3

Highest 10-minute Karpdalen 848 862 871 781 721 concentration, μg/m3

Number of 10-minute 32 52 46 52 75 concentrations ≥ 500 μg/m3

Table 3.4: Annual mean values of SO2, number of the days and number of hours above some values relevant for Norwegian air quality criteria.

Station Year Annual mean value No. days No. days No. hours µg/m3 >125 µg/m3 >50 µg/m3 >350 µg/m3

Nikel 2008 8,0 1 12 10

2009 6,8 0 17 3

2010 8,0 1 15 6

2011 7,3 0 14 6

2012 7,1 1 14 7

2013 7,6 2 11 15

2014 8,8 2 18 24

2015 7,5 0 13 8

Zapoliarny 2009 13,8 3 22 12

2010 20,4 13 39 73

2011 19,8 7 30 51

2012 16,6 6 35 15

2013 15,6 2 29 15

2014 13,2 3 24 15

2015 11,8 2 20 27

14 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

concentrations above 500 µg/m3. In Karpdalen, the at Svanvik typically are a factor 10 lower than in Nikel. number of episodes with concentration levels above Karpdalen has a higher annual average than Svanvik. 500 µg/m3 were at the top (n=75) during the winter in 2015/2016. A summary of the 10-minutes values Norwegian legislation on air quality has been violated are given in Table 3.3, sorted by calendar year. for the three previous years in Karpdalen (more than three days with daily mean over 125 µg/m3, and more

Annual mean values of SO2 are given in table 3.4, than 350 µg/m3 in 2010 and 2011). figure 3.4, and seasonal values are given in table 3.5. These results show that annual mean concentrations ussianNorweian amient air monitorin in te order areas pdated oint eport 21 215 21 M1 Norweian leislation on air uality as een violated or te tree previous years in arpdalen more tan tree days wit daily mean over 125 m3, 3 Table 3.5: Seasonal meanand concentrations more tan 35 of m sulphurin dioxide21 and in 211.the ambient air, Svanvik and Karpdalen, 2012-2015/2016. Table 3.5: Seasonal mean concentrations of sulphur dioxide in the ambient Station air, SvanvikPeriod and Karpdalen, 2012SO2 -2015/2016. Period SO2 April-September (µg/m3) October - March (µg/m3) Station Period SO2 Period SO2 Nikel April – September 2010April eptemer 7,4 (µg/m3)October 2010-ctoer March Marc 2011 8,5(µg/m3)

April – September 2011 7,2 October 2011- March 2012 6,1 vanvik April – eptemer 21 ,4 ctoer 21 Marc 211 8,5 April – September 2012 5,7 October 2012 - March 2013 7,9 April – eptemer 211 ,2 ctoer 211 Marc 212 ,1 April – September 2013April – eptemer8,7 212 October5, 2013ctoer - March 212 2014 Marc 2137,3 , April – September 2014April – eptemer8,6 213 October8, 2014ctoer - March 213 2015 Marc 2148,9 ,3 April – eptemer 214 8, ctoer 214 Marc 215 8, April – September 2015 8,5 October 2015 - March 2016 7,9 April – eptemer 215 8,5 ctoer 215 Marc 21 , Zapoliarny April-September 2010 7,4 October 2010- March 2011 39,1 Karpdalen Aprileptemer 21 ,4 ctoer 21 Marc 211 3,1 April-September 2011Aprileptemer12,0 211 October12, 2011-ctoer March 211 2012 Marc 21218,3 18,3 April-September 2012Aprileptemer8,1 212 October8,1 2012ctoer - March 212 2013 Marc 21326,2 2,2

April-September 2013Aprileptemer11,0 213 October11, 2013ctoer - March 213 2014 Marc 21418,3 18,3 Aprileptemer 214 ,4 ctoer 214 Marc 215 18,2 April-September 2014 6,4 October 2014 - March 2015 18,2 Aprileptemer 215 , ctoer 215 Marc 21 2,8 April-September 2015 6,7 October 2015 - March 2016 29,8

Figure 3.5: Mean annual concentration of SO² in ambient air at Svanvik and in Karpdalen (µg/m³) 2012 - 2015 (red line: the threshold value for annual mean value is 20 µg/m³).

Figure 3.5: Mean annual concentration of SO2 in ambient air at Svanvik and in Karpdalen (µg/m3) 2012 - 2015 (red line: the threshold value for annual mean value is 20 µg/m3). 15

22 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Table 3.6: Seasonal mean concentrations of sulphur dioxide in the ambient air, Svanvik and Karpdalen, 2012-2015/2016. Station Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec mean Nikel 2012 7,1 15,7 3,7 6,5 6,5 6,2 7,4 2,8 7,8 3,2 3,5 6,8 14,9 2013 7,6 1,0 8,1 11,5 4,8 11,3 15,8 2,3 6,5 12,6* 11,0 1,2 5,4 2014 8,8 12,0 7,0 7,0 2,9 13,6 7,6 7,1 13,8 6,8 17,3 0,8 8,8 2015 7,5 16,8 6,4 2,1 7,8 4,8 6,9 12,3 13,1 5,6 3,9 4,3 4,5

Zapoliarny 2012 16,6 31,2 17,6 18,5 14,6 3,6 2,9 3,7 10,4 13,9 5,7 23,9 52,2 Table 3.6: Annual and monthly mean values of SO2 for Svanvik and Karpdalen from2013 201215,6 - 2015.15,7 *Data coverage32,8 27,1 < 75% 16,1at Svanvik15,5 in September7,4 10,0 8,2 8,7 15,0 13,7 17,3 2013 and in Karpdalen in July 2015. 2014 13,2 32,3 25,6 6,5 4,0 8,1 4,6 4,8 6,6 10,4 16,4 1,9 37,2 Station Year Annual Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015mean11,8 34,0 8,7 9,1 8,7 7,3 2,7 3,9 * 10,4 5,7 4,2 26,1 18,1 Svanvik

Annual and monthly mean values of SO at Svanvik and m3 in December 2012. The values in Karpdalen are 2 Karpdalen monitoring stations are given in Table 3.6. At higher than in Svanvik in most of the months reported. Svanvik the monthly mean values of SO2 vary between At Svanvik high values may occur at all seasons. In Karpdalen 0,8 µg/m3 in November in 2014, and 16,8 µg/m3 in Karpdalen the highest values occur during winter. January 2015. In Karpdalen monthly mean values vary between 1,9 µg/m 3 (November 2014), and 52,2 µg/

Figure 3.6: Monthly mean values of SO² (µg/m3) at Svanvik in 2012 – 2015.

Figure 3.6: Monthly mean values of SO2 (µg/m3) at Svanvik in 2012 – 2015

Figure 3.7: Monthly mean values of SO² (µg/m3) in Karpdalen in 2012 – 2015.

Figure 3.7: –

3.3 Russian annual mean heavy metal16 values in 2010-2015

Figure 3.8:

Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

3.3 Russian annual mean The nickel concentration in the ambient air of Nikel heavy metal values in increased from 37 ng/m3 to 298 ng/m3, and copper concentration – from 23 ng/m3 to 205 ng/m3 in 2010-2015 the winter of 2015 as compared to the same period in 2010 (October – March). The sulphur dioxide According to monitoring data, in the period 2010- concentration in the same period doubled – from 34 2015 the annual mean concentrations of copper and µg/m3 to 63 µg/m3. nickel in the ambient air of Nikel and Zapoliarny did not exceed the Russian sanitary norms (for copper The nickel concentration in the ambient air of MAC = 2000 ng/m3; for nickel MAC = 1000 ng/m3). Zapoliarny increased from 50 ng/m3 to 260 ng/m3, However, increased concentrations of copper and and the copper concentration – from 23 ng/m3 to 177 nickel were observed in Nikel in 2014-2015 (fig.3.6). ng/m3 in the winter of 2015, compared to the period of 2010. In seasonal distribution, in 2010-2015 the nickel and copper concentrations were observed to increase In summer in 2010-2015 in the ambient air of Nikel in the ambient air of Zapoliarny and Nikel especially increase of copper concentration was observed in during winter time. 2014 to 127 ng/m3, and nickel – in 2015 to 166 ng/

Figure 3.8: Annual mean concentrations of copper ng/m3, in the ambient air of Cu Nikel and Zapoliarny in 2010-2015. 180 160 140 120 3 100 ng/m 80 60 40 20 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Zapolinary Nikel

Figure 3.9: Annual mean concentrations Ni of nickel ng/m3, in the ambient air of 200 Nikel and Zapoliarny in 2010-2015. 180 160 140 3 120

ng/m 100 80 60 40 20 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Zapolinarny Nikel

17 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Table 3.7: Seasonal mean concentrations of copper in the ambient air of Nickel and Zapoliarny in the period 2010-2015

Station Period Copper Period Copper April-September (ng/m3) October - March (ng/m3)

Nikel April-September 2010 37 October 2010- March 2011 23

April-September 2011 65 October 2011- March 2012 63

April-September 2012 63 October 2012 - March 2013 110

April-September 2013 62 October 2013 - March 2014 97

April-September 2014 127 October 2014 - March 2015 163

April-September 2015 92 October 2015 - March 2016 205

Zapoliarny April-September 2010 50 October 2010- March 2011 23

April-September 2011 50 October 2011- March 2012 35

April-September 2012 63 October 2012 - March 2013 38

April-September 2013 53 October 2013 - March 2014 37

April-September 2014 50 October 2014 - March 2015 78

April-September 2015 85 October 2015 - March 2016 177

Table 3.8: Seasonal mean concentrations of nickel in the ambient air of Nickel and Zapoliarny in the period 2010-2015.

Station Period Nickel Period Nickel April-September (ng/m3) October - March (ng/m3)

Nikel April-September 2010 62 October 2010- March 2011 37

April-September 2011 82 October 2011- March 2012 87

April-September 2012 95 October 2012 - March 2013 130

April-September 2013 50 October 2013 - March 2014 108

April-September 2014 138 October 2014 - March 2015 167

April-September 2015 166 October 2015 - March 2016 298

Zapoliarny April-September 2010 95 October 2010- March 2011 50

April-September 2011 93 October 2011- March 2012 83

April-September 2012 95 October 2012 - March 2013 72

April-September 2013 130 October 2013 - March 2014 42

April-September 2014 80 October 2014 - March 2015 133

April-September 2015 90 October 2015 - March 2016 260 m3. The concentrations of copper and nickel in the ambient air of Zapoliarny virtually did not change in summer (Table 3.7).

18 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

3.4 Norwegian annual concentrations than in Svanvik (this is also the case with SO ). mean values of heavy metals 2 for the years 2010-2015 4. Discussion Primarily, nickel (Ni) and copper (Cu), but also arsenic

(As) and cobalt (Co) are considered as trace metals The monitoring methods for SO2 from the Russian and from smelter activities. These four elements plus the Norwegian monitoring stations are consistent and lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), zink (Zn), chromium (Cr), comparable. The SO2 levels at the Russian stations are vanadium (V) and aluminium (Al) are sampled and considerably higher than the levels observed at the analyzed in air/dust particles, at in Svanvik and in Norwegian stations, as they are located closer to the Karpdalen in the Norwegian monitoring program. emission sources in Nikel and Zapoliarny. Sampling of elements in air began in Svanvik in autumn 2008 and in Karpdalen in 2011. As it can be seen from the figures 3.2 (Zapoliarny) and 3.5 (Karpdalen) there is a clear seasonal variation in the

In Svanvik, daily sampling for heavy metal analysis was levels of SO2. This is because the monitoring stations performed until 2011, and filters exposed to wind are located north of the emission source (Zapoliarny, from the east, were analyzed. This type of sampling and for Karpdalen, Nikel is also an important source), gave maximum daily concentrations, but not the mean which is in the prevailing wind direction. Nikel and value. From 2011, filters from Svanvik and Karpdalen Svanvik show no such seasonal pattern, as these were (and still are) exposed for one week, and all filters stations are located, respectively, south and west of are analyzed. This type of exposure design, gives long the smelter in Nikel. term mean values (seasonal mean and annual mean).

The results from Svanvik and Karpdalen are presented A comparison of the seasonal means for SO2 shows in table 3.8. that the levels in Nikel (located south of the smelter) are around 16 times higher than the levels in Svanvik The seasonal mean values in Karpdalen show higher (located west of the smelter) during summer and

Table 3.9: Seasonal mean values of copper in air at Svanvik and in Karpdalen. Source: ebas.nilu.no (data available for free).

Station Period Copper Period Copper April-September (ng/m3) October - March (ng/m3)

Nikel April–September 2010 8,61 October 2010- March 2011 9,07

April-September 2011 18,67 October 2011- March 2012 4,86

April-September 2012 8,18 October 2012 - March 2013 10,34

April-September 2013 10,25 October 2013 - March 2014 6,83

April-September 2014 6,53 October 2014 - March 2015 5,65

April-September 2015 5,46 October 2015 - March 2016 6,47

Zapoliarny April-September 2011 October 2011- March 2012 7,55

April-September 2012 9,67 October 2012 - March 2013 27,63

April-September 2013 12,27 October 2013 - March 2014 9,24

April-September 2014 5,17 October 2014 - March 2015 9,70

April-September 2015 5,75 October 2015 - March 2016 8,91

April-September 2015 85 October 2015 - March 2016 177

19 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Table 3.10: Seasonal mean values of nickel in air at Svanvik and in Karpdalen. Source: ebas.nilu.no (data available for free).

Station Period Nickel Period Nickel April-September (ng/m3) October - March (ng/m3)

Nikel April – September 2010 14,09 October 2010- March 2011 13,79

April-September 2011 20,17 October 2011- March 2012 4,52

April-September 2012 7,97 October 2012 - March 2013 10,21

April-September 2013 10,67 October 2013 - March 2014 6,73

April-September 2014 8,67 October 2014 - March 2015 7,06

April-September 2015 7,29 October 2015 - March 2016 8,43

Zapoliarny April-September 2011 October 2011- March 2012 7,20

April-September 2012 9,63 October 2012 - March 2013 27,56

April-September 2013 13,17 October 2013 - March 2014 8,03

April-September 2014 6,42 October 2014 - March 2015 11,06

April-September 2015 6,96 October 2015 - March 2016 9,61

April-September 2015 90 October 2015 - March 2016 260

around 5 to 9 times higher in winter. When comparing Karpdalen levels are around 1.2 to 2.7 times higher the levels in Zapoliarny and Karpdalen (both stations than Svanvik. are located north of the emission sources), the SO2 levels in Zapoliarny are around 5 to 8 times higher, with Neither the Russian nor the Norwegian legislation are no marked seasonal variation in the ratios. We also see violated with respect to heavy metals in the period that the annual SO2 means in Zapoliarny vary between from 2010 to 2015, despite significant differences in 25 % lower and 30% higher than the levels in Nikel. limit values.The differences in sampling methods and

Similarly, the SO2 levels in Karpdalen are betweeen 2 to approved criteria of air pollution make the work more 3 times higher than the levels in Svanvik. complicated.

The Russian legislation with respect to SO2 is The differences in methods of sampling of particles violated at both Russian monitoring stations. Also for heavy metal analyses (total vs. smaller than 10 the Norwegian legislation is violated in Karpdalen µm) may partly explain the differences in the observed where the daily mean values of 125 µg/m3 have been levels. Since the Russian stations are located closer to exceeded more than three days per year in the years the emission sources, the samples may consist of a 2010-2012. larger share of coarse particles. Also the close vicinity to the smelters contributes to explain the higher levels Comparing the levels of nickel in air shows that the observed at the Russian stations. levels in Zapoliarny are approximately 3 to 12 times higher than in Karpdalen, and 7 to 18 times higher in Nikel than in Svanvik. Looking at the levels of copper in Nikel and Svanvik shows that the seasonal means are 8 to 13 times higher in Nikel, and it looks like the differences are slightly higher in winter than summer. Comparing the levels in Zapoliarny with Karpdalen shows that the differences are less, around 1.5 to 6.5. For heavy metals, the seasonal mean levels in Nikel and Zapoliarny are, at large, almost the same, while

20 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

8. The sampling methods, regulations and limit values 5. Conclusions for metals in air are different in the two countries. In Norway annual mean target values are given 1. Both Murmansk UGMS and NILU use state-of- for metals concentrations in a particulate fraction

the-art methods for both SO2 and heavy metals PM10. In Russia daily mean MAC’s are given for monitoring. These methods are internationally well metals concentrations in particulate matter (non- recognized. Both participating institutes performed differentiated by the dust composition) without with satisfactory results for most analyses of division into fractions. The methods for analyzing heavy metals in the 2014 EMEP intercomparison heavy metals are comparable. Results from exercise. Both institutes have highly qualified both monitoring programs are trustworthy and personnel. scientifically sound, but direct comparison of the heavy metals’ concentration levels on the Russian

2. The monitoring results on SO2 in the air from and Norwegian sides is possible, but challenging the monitoring stations in the border areas are due to the differences in sampling in the two consistent and comparable. The results from the countries. Russian and Norwegian monitoring programs give a good description of the state of air pollution in this 9. The measured seasonal levels for heavy metals region. have been between 3 and 18 times higher on the Russian side for nickel and between 1.5 and 13 3. According to the Russian border area monitoring times for copper. Two reasons that can explain this data, in the period 2010-2015 elevated levels of are that the Russian stations are located closer sulphur dioxide pollution were observed in Nikel to the emissions sources, and that the Russians and Zapoliarny. The Russian norms are exceeded samples are analyzed for total particulate matter. each year, according to the Russian monitoring stations data. 10. It is recognized that the two countries have different limit values for heavy metals, and 4. According to the Norwegian border area consequently a different perception on what monitoring data, in the period 2010-2015, constitutes high and low levels of heavy metals

Norwegian legislation for SO2 has been violated concentrations. several times in Karpdalen. 11. The heavy metals concentrations in the border 5. The concentrations of the monitored metals area are also interpreted differently by the two including copper and nickel in Russia do not exceed sides. Values that are considered acceptable when the Russian sanitary norms. calculated on a yearly basis by the Russian side may be considered unacceptable on a yearly basis 6. Measured levels of heavy metals in air at the by the Norwegian side. Norwegian stations did not exceed Norwegian target values. 12. The cooperation in the expert group is perceived as meaningful and of great professional value to

7. Despite SO2 emissions have decreased over the both parties. Future work should be aiming at

last two decades, high levels of SO2 in ambient air further harmonization of monitoring methods and can still be observed, more often at the Russian the reporting and presentation of the monitoring monitoring stations, than on the Norwegian side. results. Generally, levels are much higher at the Russian monitoring stations, due to the fact that they are located closer to the emission sources. Seasonal

means for the last three years for SO2 have been between 5 to 16 times higher at the Russian stations, than at the Norwegian stations.

21 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Figure 5.1: Annual mean SO2 concentrations at Russian and Norwegian monitoring stations for the period 2010-2015. The red line is the Russian limit value (MAC), and the red dotted line represents the Norwegian limit value for protection of vegetation

Figure 5.1: Figure 5.1: Figure 5.2: Annual mean concentrations for copper (Cu) at Russian and Norwegian monitoring stations in the border region for the period 2010-2015.

Figure 5.2:

Figure 5.2: Figure 5.3: Annual mean concentrations for nickel (Ni) at Russian and Norwegian monitoring stations in the border region for the period

2010-2015.

Figure 5.3:

Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

6. References

Further references and reading can be found in the reports listed below.

1. Report of the current status and protection of the environment in Murmansk Region. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Murmansk Region (2010-2015). http://mpr.gov-murman.ru/activities/okhrana- okruzhayushchey-sredy/00.condition/index.php

2. Review of the environment status and pollution in the Russian Federation. Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment of the Russian Federation. Rosgidromet. (2010-2015) http:// www.meteorf.ru/product/infomaterials/90/

3. Annual Report Status of Ambient Air Pollution in Towns in the Territory of Russia (2010-2014) FSBI GGO Rosgidromet. http://www.meteorf.ru/product/infomaterials/ ezhegodniki/

4. Database Municipalities’ Data, Federal Service of State Statistics. http://www.gks.ru/dbscripts/ munst/munst47/DBInet.cgi

5. GN 2.1.6.1338-03 Sanitary Standards ‘Maximum Allowable Concentrations (MAC) of Pollutants in the Ambient Air in Populated Areas’. Federal Service of Surveillance in Protection of Consumers’ Rights and Human Welfare. http://www.gosthelp. ru/text/GN216133803Predelnodopust.html

6. Berglen, T.F., Dauge, F., Andresen, E., Haugsbakk, I., Nilsson, L.O., Ofstad, T., Tønnesen, D., Vadset, M., Våler, R.L. (2013) Grenseområdene Norge- Russland. Luft- og nedbørkvalitet, april 2012-mars 2013. Kjeller (NILU OR 42/2013).

7. EU Air Quality Directive:

8. WHO Air Quality Guidelines: Norwegian legislation: http://www.lovdata.no/for/sf/md/xd- 20040601-0931.html[URL30-09-2013] http://www.handboka.no/Sak/Forskrifter/Foru/ Fore/fu20g.htm [URL 30-09-2013]

23 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Appendix I

Table A1: Results from the 2014 EMEP – Analytical intercomparison for heavy metals, for Murmansk UGMS laboratory.

EMEP – Analytical intercomparison of heavy metals in precipitation 2014

Laboratory 179, Murmansk Environmental Monitoring Center, Murmansk (Russian Federation)

Heavy metals in precipitation (H-samples) EMEP Sample Reported Expected Standard Determinand Mean value Z score quality name value value deviation norm ¤ H1 4.56 5 5.046 0.652 -0.744 S H2 5.72 6 5.992 0.547 -0.497 S As H3 0.242 0.3 0.39 0.232 -0.639 S H4 0.65 0.9 0.939 0.088 -3.275 Q H1 0.8 0.6 0.601 0.052 3.825 U H2 0.74 0.55 0.551 0.043 4.364 U Cd H3 0.11 0.08 0.086 0.02 1.203 Q H4 0.08 0.06 0.061 0.01 1.851 Q H1 4.92 5 4.969 0.28 -0.175 S H2 8.08 8.4 8.379 0.627 -0.476 S Cr H3 0.77 0.85 0.818 0.124 -0.39 S H4 0.71 0.8 0.814 0.059 -1.778 S H1 8.28 7.5 7.42 1.007 0.854 S H2 6.75 7 6.896 0.488 -0.298 S Cu H3 0.76 0.9 0.889 0.148 -0.873 S H4 0.92 0.9 0.886 0.13 0.261 S H1 8.39 8 7.841 0.404 1.358 S H2 10.52 10.4 10.364 0.631 0.248 S Ni H3 0.66 0.5 0.592 0.175 0.386 Q H4 1.26 1.2 1.175 0.137 0.62 S H1 19.9 23 22.494 1.219 -2.127 S H2 20.6 23.5 23.18 1.916 -1.346 S Pb H3 1.59 1.1 1.173 0.353 1.183 Q H4 1.26 1 0.999 0.169 1.539 Q H1 110.89 110 112.65 7.215 -0.244 S H2 112.65 115 117.897 7.706 -0.681 S Zn H3 7.8 8 8.697 1.972 -0.455 S H4 9.1 9.5 10.391 1.482 -0.871 S If your laboratory reported values as less than the detection limit, and your detection limit equal or is lower than the expected value, ½ DL is taken as the reported value in further calculations. ¤ EMEP quality norm; the letters in the column indicates: S – Satisfactory: Your result deviates less than ±25% of the expected value for samples H2 and H4, and less than ±15% for samples H1 and H3 Q – Questionable: Your result deviates between ±25-50% of the expected value for samples H2 and H4, and less than ±15% for samples H1 and H3 U – Unsatisfactory: Your result deviates more than ±50% of the expected value for samples H2 and H4, and less than ±15% for samples H1 and H3 B – Blank: You reported either no value or the detection limit

Deltaker i CIENS og Framsenteret / Associated with CIENS and the Fram Centre ISO-sertifisert etter / ISO certified according to NS-EN ISO 9001/ISO 14001 NILU – Norsk institutt for luftforskning NILU – Norsk institutt for luftforskning e-mail: [email protected] PO Box 100 Framsenteret / The Fram Centre [email protected] NO-2027 KJELLER, Norway NO-9296 TROMSØ, Norway Internet: www.nilu.no www.nilu.no Phone: +47 63 89 80 00/Fax: +47 63 89 80 50 Phone: +47 77 75 03 75/Fax: +47 77 75 03 76 Bank: 5102.05.19030 Besøk/visit: Instituttveien 18, 2007 Kjeller Besøk/visit: Hjalmar Johansens gt. 14, 9007 Tromsø Foretaksnr./Enterprise no. 941705561

Vennligst adresser post til NILU, ikke til enkeltpersoner/Please reply to the institute.

24 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

Appendix II

Table AII Results from the 2014 EMEP – Analytical intercomparison for heavy metals, for NILU.

–

Laboratory 15, Norwegian Institute for Air Research NILU (Norway)

EMEP Sample Reported Expected Standard Determinand Mean value Z score quality name value value deviation norm ¤ H1 5.02 5 5.046 0.652 -0.039 S H2 6.01 6 5.992 0.547 0.033 S As H3 0.3 0.3 0.39 0.232 -0.389 S H4 0.9 0.9 0.939 0.088 -0.446 S H1 0.6 0.6 0.601 0.052 -0.022 S H2 0.53 0.55 0.551 0.043 -0.476 S Cd H3 0.08 0.08 0.086 0.02 -0.289 S H4 0.06 0.06 0.061 0.01 -0.07 S H1 5 5 4.969 0.28 0.111 S H2 8.4 8.4 8.379 0.627 0.034 S Cr H3 0.85 0.85 0.818 0.124 0.254 S H4 0.8 0.8 0.814 0.059 -0.241 S H1 7.4 7.5 7.42 1.007 -0.02 S H2 6.9 7 6.896 0.488 0.009 S Cu H3 0.9 0.9 0.889 0.148 0.072 S H4 0.88 0.9 0.886 0.13 -0.047 S H1 8.1 8 7.841 0.404 0.64 S H2 10.5 10.4 10.364 0.631 0.216 S Ni H3 0.5 0.5 0.592 0.175 -0.528 S H4 1.2 1.2 1.175 0.137 0.182 S H1 22.8 23 22.494 1.219 0.251 S H2 23.5 23.5 23.18 1.916 0.167 S Pb H3 1.2 1.1 1.173 0.353 0.077 S H4 1 1 0.999 0.169 0.004 S H1 108 110 112.65 7.215 -0.644 S H2 115 115 117.897 7.706 -0.376 S Zn H3 8.8 8 8.697 1.972 0.052 S H4 10 9.5 10.391 1.482 -0.264 S If your laboratory reported values as less than the detection limit, and your detection limit equal or is lower than the expected value, ½ DL is taken as the reported value in further calculations. ¤ EMEP quality norm; the letters in the column indicates: S – Satisfactory: Your result deviates less than ±25% of the expected value for samples H2 and H4, and less than ±15% for samples H1 and H3 Q – Questionable: Your result deviates between ±25-50% of the expected value for samples H2 and H4, and less than ±15% for samples H1 and H3 U – Unsatisfactory: Your result deviates more than ±50% of the expected value for samples H2 and H4, and less than ±15% for samples H1 and H3 B – Blank: You reported either no value or the detection limit

Vennligst adresser post til NILU, ikke til enkeltpersoner/Please reply to the institute.

25 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

26 Russian-Norwegian ambient air monitoring in the border areas | M-761

27 Norwegian Environment Agency Telephone: +47 73 58 05 00 | Fax: +47 73 58 05 01 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.environmentagency.no Postal address: P.O. Box 5672 Sluppen, NO-7485 Trondheim Visiting address Trondheim: Brattørkaia 15, 7010 Trondheim Visiting address Oslo: Grensesvingen 7, 0661 Oslo

The Norwegian Environment Agency is working for a clean and diverse environment. Our primary tasks are to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, manage Norwegian nature, and prevent pollution. We are a government agency under the Ministry of Climate and Environment and have 700 employees at our two offices in Trondheim and Oslo and at the Norwegian Nature Inspectorate’s more than sixty local offices.

We implement and give advice on the development of climate and environmental policy. We are professionally independent. This means that we act independently in the individual cases that we decide and when we communicate knowledge and information or give advice.

Our principal functions include collating and communicating environmental information, exercising regulatory authority, supervising and guiding regional and local government level, giving professional and technical advice, and participating in international environmental activities.