Fort Air Partnership Ambient Air Monitoring Network 2010 Annual Technical Report Network and Data Summary

FAP Technical Working Group March 30, 2011

Executive Summary

Network overview During 2010 Fort Air Partnership (FAP) operated nine continuous ambient air quality monitoring stations. Of these nine, Station 401-Josephburg Road was in operation from Jan – March 2010 and Bruderheim Air Quality Monitoring (AQM) Station was operated from April – December 2010. At the end of 2010, parameters measured in the FAP network on a continuous basis included:

 Sulphur dioxide (SO2)  Hydrogen sulphide (H2S)  Nitrogen oxides (NO, NOx, and NO2)  Total hydrocarbons (THC)  Non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC)  Methane (CH4)  Ammonia (NH3)  Carbon monoxide (CO)  Ethylene (C2H4)  Ground level ozone (O3)  Respirable particulates (PM2.5)  Inhalable particulates (PM10)  Benzene (C6H6)  Toluene (C6H5CH3) 3  Ethylbenzene (C6H5CH2CH3)  Xylene (C6H4(CH3)2 (Total of o-, m-, and p-isomers)  Styrene (C6H5CH=CH3)  Barometric pressure (BP)  Relative humidity (RH)  Ambient Temperature (T)  Wind Speed and Direction (WS and WD)

FAP continued to operate a regional passive monitoring network in 2010, monitoring for sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3) and hydrogen sulphide (H2S). Five new passive monitoring sites were added in June, bringing the total to 62 sites.

Network Changes in 2010

FAP made several improvements to the infrastructure and equipment in the monitoring network in 2010. Station 401-Josephburg Road was decommissioned at the end of March 2010, and the ethylene monitor was moved to Ross Creek. The monitors for oxides of nitrogen, hydrocarbons, and wind speed and direction were moved to the new monitoring

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 i

station in the Town of Bruderheim. New monitoring for sulphur dioxide, ozone, and fine particulate matter were also added to this station.

FAP replaced older monitors for oxides of nitrogen, sulphur dioxide and ozone at the Elk Island AQM Station, with new ones acquired through the National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) monitoring program. In May, FAP installed a new Synchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate (SHARP) monitor at the Fort Saskatchewan station to comply with new NAPS monitoring standards.

A precipitation collector was installed at Elk Island Park to collect precipitation samples for analysis for Alberta Environment‟s acid deposition monitoring program.

Five new H2S and SO2 passive monitoring sites were added to comply with new approval requirements. The new sites were selected to further populate FAP‟s passive monitoring grid plan. New O3 and NO2 passive samplers were added to several passive monitoring sites.

Air Quality Events and Exceedances Summary

There were several exceedances of Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQO) in the FAP network during 2010.

 Ammonia: One 1-hour AAAQO exceedance at Ross Creek, source assigned to local industry.

 SO2: Forty-two 1-hour AAAQO exceedances and six 24-hour exceedances were reported at Redwater Industrial throughout the year. Many of them occurred in December, source assigned to local industry.

 NO2: One 1-hour AAAQO exceedance at Redwater Industrial, local industry source (perhaps from idling trucks staged in the area).

 PM2.5: There were thirty-nine 24-hour AAAQO exceedances throughout the network and 183 1-hr Guideline exccedances. Most of the events were regional and observed at multiple stations.

o January 2010: AAAQO exceedances were reported at Lamont County, Fort Saskatchewan, and Redwater Industrial AQM Stations. o February 2010: AAAQO Exceedance was reported at Lamont County. PM2.5 concentrations were elevated regionally. o May 2010: 1-hr exceedances were reported at all stations, and one 24- hr exceedance at Redwater Industrial due to smoke from local brush fires at Opal, AB.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 ii

o August 2010: Twenty-two 24-hour PM2.5 AAAQO exceedances and 110 1-hr exceedances occurred over several days at all FAP stations due to smoke from British Columbia forest fires. o November 2010: Two 1-hr exceedances at two different stations. o December 2010: Twelve 24-hour PM2.5 AAAQO exceedances and 22 1-hr exceedances were reported across the region. FAP did not identify a specific cause.

Air Quality Index Summary

The Air Quality Index was reported from four stations in 2010:

Air Quality Index in FAP region in 2010 AQI Good Fair Poor Very Poor Station Name Hours Monitor (AQI 0-25) (AQI 26-50) (AQI 51-100) (AQI >100) ed % Hours % Hours % Hours % Hours

Bruderheim1 4656 92.3 4296 6.6 305 0.7 35 0.2 10

Elk Island 8091 95.4 7722 4.5 363 0.1 6 0.0 0 Fort 8754 94.1 8238 5.4 470 0.4 36 0.1 10 Saskatchewan Lamont County 8711 91.9 8008 7.5 655 0.3 28 0.1 9 * AQI hourly ratings may not add up to 100 due to rounding. 1Bruderheim reported for part of a year

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 iii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary...... i Network overview ...... i Network Changes in 2010 ...... i Air Quality Events and Exceedances Summary ...... ii Air Quality Index Summary ...... iii List of Tables ...... ii List of Figures ...... iii Abbreviations ...... iv Units of Measurement ...... v

Introduction ...... 1 The FAP Organization (2010) ...... 1 The Technical Working Group ...... 2

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Program ...... 3 2010 Continuous Monitoring Network ...... 3 Network Overview ...... 3 Continuous Monitoring and Reporting Requirements ...... 5 Evaluating the Network Monitoring Objectives ...... 5 Continuous Monitoring Site Descriptions ...... 9 Monitoring Station Coordinates ...... 14 Continuous Monitoring Methods ...... 14 Data Acquisition Procedures ...... 17 Data Quality Control Procedures ...... 17 Data Validation Processes ...... 18 Compliance Reporting Protocol ...... 18 Data Reporting Protocol ...... 19 Continuous Monitoring Performance Measures ...... 20 Continuous Monitoring Uptime ...... 20 CASA Data Submission Timeliness Report...... 20 CASA Data Warehouse Data Quality Assessment ...... 21 2010 Station Audit ...... 21 2010 Passive Monitoring Network ...... 23 Passive Monitoring Description ...... 23 2010 FAP Passive Monitoring Network ...... 24 Passive Monitoring Site Selection ...... 24 Passive Monitoring for Compliance to EPEA Approvals ...... 27

2010 Monitoring Results ...... 28 2010 Exceedances Summary ...... 28 2010 Ambient Air Monitoring Data ...... 30 2010 Continuous Monitoring Results ...... 30 Air Quality Index (AQI) ...... 30 Carbon Monoxide ...... 32 Sulphur Dioxide ...... 33 Oxides of Nitrogen ...... 36

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 i

Hydrogen Sulphide ...... 39 Ozone ...... 41 Inhalable and Respirable Particulates (PM10 and PM2.5) ...... 43 Ammonia ...... 45 Hydrocarbons ...... 47 Ethylene ...... 49 Other Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) ...... 50 2010 Passive Monitoring Results ...... 52 Sulphur Dioxide ...... 52 Hydrogen Sulphide ...... 54 Nitrogen Dioxide ...... 55 Ozone ...... 57

Other Technical Airshed Programs and Activities ...... 59 Action toward Regional Airshed Monitoring ...... 59 Monitoring Network Assessment Plans ...... 59

PM&O3 Management and the Capital Airshed Partnership (CAP) ...... 60

Appendices ...... 61 Appendix B: FAP Monitoring Objectives ...... 62 Appendix C: Technical Working Group Members ...... 71 Technical Working Group Members ...... 72 Appendix D: Monitoring Stations and Corresponding Approvals ...... 78 Table D-1: FAP monitoring stations and corresponding EPEA Approvals (Dec. 31, 2010) ...... 79 Table D-2: Industry Participants in FAP (Dec. 31, 2010) ...... 80 Appendix E: AMD Annual Reporting Requirements ...... 81

List of Tables Table 1: FAP continuous monitoring stations and parameters 2010 ...... 6 Table 2: Continuous monitoring station locations ...... 14 Table 3: Continuous monitoring methods, limits, and sampling details (Dec 31, 2010) ...... 15 Table 4: Network Average Uptime (percent) ...... 20 Table 5: Data On-time submission to CASA Data Warehouse, 2010 ...... 20 Table 6: FAP Passive monitoring sites in 2010 ...... 25 Table 7: Passive Monitoring Compliance Requirements (December 31, 2010) ...... 27 Table 8: AAAQO exceedances in FAP airshed ...... 28 Table 9: Air Quality Index as Calculated in Alberta...... 30 Table 10: Air Quality Index in FAP region in 2010 ...... 30 Table 11: Fort Saskatchewan monthly average CO concentrations (ppm) in 2010 ...... 32 Table 12: Fort Saskatchewan annual average CO concentrations (ppm) - historical ...... 32 Table 13: Number of CO exceedances in FAP Airshed - historical ...... 32 Table 14: Annual average and one-hour maximum SO2 concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) ...... 33 Table 15: Monthly average SO2 concentrations (ppb) in 2010 ...... 34 Table 16: Monthly maximum SO2 concentrations (ppb) in 2010 ...... 34 Table 17: Annual average SO2 concentrations (ppb) - historical ...... 34 Table 18: Number of SO2 exceedances in FAP Airshed - historical ...... 35

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 ii

Table 19: Annual average and one-hour maximum NO2 concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) ...... 36 Table 20: Monthly average concentrations of NO2 (ppb) in 2010 ...... 37 Table 21: Monthly maximum one-hour concentration of NO2 (ppb) in 2010 ...... 37 Table 22: Number of NO2 exceedances of AAAQO in FAP airshed ...... 37 Table 23: Historical NO2 annual averages (ppb): ...... 38 Table 24: Annual average and one-hour maximum H2S concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) ...... 39 Table 25: Monthly average H2S (ppb) at continuous monitoring stations (2010) ...... 39 Table 26: Monthly maximum H2S (ppb) at continuous monitoring stations (2010) ...... 39 Table 27: H2S exceedances table ...... 40 Table 28: Monthly average ozone concentrations (ppb) in 2010 ...... 41 Table 29: Monthly maximum Ozone concentration (ppb) in 2010 ...... 42 3 Table 30: Annual average PM2.5 concentrations (g/m ), with percentiles (2010) ...... 43 Table 31: Average Hourly Particulate Matter (g/m3) in 2010 ...... 44 Table 32: Maximum Hourly Particulate Matter (g/m3) in 2010 ...... 44 Table 33: Annual average and maximum Ammonia concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) ..45 Table 34: Monthly average ammonia concentrations (ppb) in 2010 ...... 45 Table 35: Maximum 1-hr ammonia concentrations (ppb) in 2010, by month ...... 46 Table 36: Historical annual average NH3 trends (ppb) ...... 46 Table 37: Average Hydrocarbons (ppm) in 2010 ...... 47 Table 38: Monthly average ethylene (ppb) in 2010 ...... 49 Table 39: Maximum 1-hour average concentration ethylene (ppb) 2010, by month ...... 49 Table 40: BTEX/S monitoring results 2010 ...... 51 Table 41: 2010 Passive Monitoring Monthly Average: SO2 (ppb) ...... 52 Table 42: 2010 Passive Monitoring Monthly Average: SO2 (ppb) ...... 54 Table 43: 2010 Passive monitoring data: NO2 (ppb) ...... 55 Table 44: 2010 Passive Monitoring Data: Ozone (ppb) ...... 57

List of Figures Figure 1: Monitoring sites at December 31, 2010 ...... 7 Figure 2: Map Detail: FAP monitoring in the vicinity of industry sites ...... 8 Figure 3: Passive Monitor in the field ...... 23 Figure 4: One-hour THC station comparison, late 2010 ...... 48 Figure 5: Passive monitoring: 2010 Annual average concentration: SO2 (ppb) ...... 53 Figure 6: Passive monitoring: 2010 average concentration: NO2 (ppb) ...... 56 Figure 7: Passive monitoring: 2010 average concentration: Ozone (ppb) ...... 58

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 iii

Abbreviations

24-hours A calendar day, beginning at midnight AAAQG Alberta Ambient Air Quality Guideline AAAQO Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objective AENV Alberta Environment AMD Air Monitoring Directive, 1989 and 2006 Amendments to the Air Monitoring Directive (AMD 2006) AQM Air Quality Monitoring BTEX/S Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and styrene Calm 1-hour average wind speed is lower than 5 km/hour CAP Capital Airshed Partnership CASA Clean Air Strategic Alliance

CH4 Methane CWS Canada-Wide Standard EPEA Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (Alberta) FAP Fort Air Partnership

H2S Hydrogen sulphide MST Mountain Standard Time NAPS National Air Pollution Surveillance NMHC Non-methane hydrocarbons

NH3 Ammonia

NO2 Nitrogen dioxide NO Nitric oxide

NOx Oxides of nitrogen

NOy Reactive oxides of nitrogen OMP Ozone Management Plan

O3 Ground level ozone

PM10 Particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 10 µm in diameter, referred to as inhalable particles

PM2.5 Particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 µm in diameter, referred to as respirable particles QA/QC Quality assurance / quality control

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 iv

SO2 Sulphur dioxide THC Total hydrocarbons VOC Volatile organic compound WD Wind direction WS Wind speed

Units of Measurement

µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter km/hr kilometers per hour ppb parts per billion by volume ppm parts per million by volume

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 v

Introduction

The FAP Organization (2010)

The Fort Air Partnership (FAP) is a registered not-for-profit society established in 1997 to operate an air quality monitoring network in a 4,500 square kilometre area northeast of Edmonton that includes Fort Saskatchewan, Gibbons, Bon Accord, Bruderheim, Lamont, Redwater, Waskatenau, Thorhild, and Elk National Island Park. In November 2000, FAP became the fourth airshed in Alberta recognized by the Clean Air Strategic Alliance (CASA).

FAP is a multi-stakeholder group with members from industry, government, and the public. FAP members see the benefit of sitting down together and working through issues in order to fulfill its mission.

The FAP Board holds monthly meetings that are open to the public. Decisions of the Board and its committees are made by consensus. As part of the overall business planning process, the Vision and the Mission statements of the organization were reviewed and modified in 2010. FAP‟s updated vision is “Public, industry and government have a clear shared understanding of ambient air quality in the region”. The organization‟s mission has also been revised as follows; “To operate a regional network to monitor and report credible and comprehensive ambient air quality information.”

During 2010 FAP continued to evolve toward a governance organizational structure, with the Board of Directors establishing policy and direction for the organization, and contracted staff and committees managing the operational details in accordance with the set direction. FAP continued to operate with several committees: an Executive Committee, a Technical Working Group (TWG), a Communications Committee and a Governance Committee, which all make recommendations to the FAP Board. FAP‟s operations are managed by an Executive Director, with staff consisting of a Technical Director, a Communications Director, an Administrative Assistant, and a contracted air monitoring service provider who performs monitoring equipment maintenance, calibration, and data reporting. Fort Air Partnership‟s monitoring and communications programs are funded by the Northeast Capital Industrial Association, Alberta Environment, Alberta‟s Industrial Heartland Association, and by others through project- specific grants.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 1

The Technical Working Group

The TWG is primarily responsible for oversight of the implementation and operation of the monitoring network and provides technical guidance to FAP. The TWG regularly meets to review the data and the network operation to ensure that appropriate protocols are in place to assure data quality.

TWG members represent a wide range of technical air quality roles from industry, Environment Canada, Alberta Environment, government health agencies, FAP‟s primary monitoring contractor, and members of the public. Committee members have substantial combined experience including monitoring technology, analysis, laboratory, quality systems, and regulatory reporting. Additionally, the TWG membership draws upon outside expertise from industry, air quality consultants, academia and government. Members of the TWG collaborate with other air monitoring agencies in Alberta and Canada.

A list of TWG committee members on December 31, 2010 can be found in Appendix C. Lists of industry approval holders participating in FAP, as required in many cases by Environmental and Protection Enhancement Act (EPEA) approval clauses, can be found in Appendix D.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 2

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Program

2010 Continuous Monitoring Network

Network Overview

During 2010 Fort Air Partnership (FAP) operated nine continuous ambient air quality monitoring stations in an area northeast of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Seven of the stations operated for the entire year, one was decommissioned during the year and another was commissioned during 2010.

 Five stations were established as compliance stations, with locations and parameters specified in regulatory industrial approvals, with a primary objective to monitor ambient air quality in the immediate vicinity of petrochemical and refinery facilities. These stations are Range Road 220 AQM Station, Ross Creek AQM Station, Scotford 2 AQM Station, and Redwater Industrial AQM Station. Station 401-Josephburg Road AQM Station operated for the first three months of the year, but was decommissioned at the end of March and equipment was redeployed in the Bruderheim AQM Station and at Ross Creek AQM Station.

 Lamont County AQM Station operates as a compliance station, required by regulatory approval, but unlike the other compliance stations, Lamont County is not in close proximity to an industry site. The primary monitoring objective of this station is to monitor the effects of multiple emission sources on air quality.

 The Fort Saskatchewan AQM Station is located in the City of Fort Saskatchewan. This station has a long history of operation by Alberta Environment and is part of the National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) monitoring network. The primary objective of this station is to monitor ambient air quality where people live, to provide trending information, and for compliance to Alberta‟s Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQOs) and Canada-Wide Standards.

 Elk Island AQM Station is located in a National Park and also is part of the NAPS monitoring network. The primary objective of this station is to monitor air quality in a protected area that is downwind of a major Canadian city and near two Industrial clusters.

 FAP‟s newest station was commissioned in Bruderheim in April/May 2010. The primary objective for this station is to monitor ambient air quality where people live.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 3

Parameters measured in the FAP network on a continuous basis include:

 Sulphur dioxide (SO2)  Hydrogen sulphide (H2S)  Nitrogen oxides (NO, NOx, and NO2)  Total hydrocarbons (THC)  Non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC)  Methane (CH4)  Ammonia (NH3)  Carbon monoxide (CO)  Ethylene (C2H4)  Ground level ozone (O3)  Respirable particulates (PM2.5)  Inhalable particulates (PM10)  Benzene (C6H6)  Toluene (C6H5CH3) 3  Ethylbenzene (C6H5CH2CH3)  Xylene (C6H4(CH3)2 (Total of o-, m-, and p-isomers)  Styrene (C6H5CH=CH3)  Barometric pressure (BP)  Relative humidity (RH)  Ambient Temperature (T)  Wind Speed and Direction (WS and WD)

The parameters that are monitored at each station are shown in Table 1. Monitoring sites are mapped in Figures 1 and 2.

FAP also operates a passive monitoring network with sites that measure monthly average concentrations of SO2, O3, NO2 and H2S.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 4

Continuous Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

FAP‟s monitoring and reporting program was originally designed to meet licensing requirements of industrial facilities in the region, with Alberta Environment‟s Fort Saskatchewan AQM Station and Elk Island AQM Station added to form a monitoring network. Monitoring protocols were structured to meet the requirements of Alberta Environment‟s Air Monitoring Directive, 1989 and 2006 Amendment. Several industrial facilities hold Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (EPEA) approvals and are required to perform ambient air quality monitoring as part of their conditions to operate. Until recently, very prescriptive monitoring requirements have been detailed in industrial approvals; they specified the parameters monitored and the monitoring locations (usually very near the industrial facility). The FAP continuous monitoring stations, with the corresponding Approval holders that were in effect during 2010 are listed in Appendix D.

Evaluating the Network Monitoring Objectives

Prior to 2009, the primary monitoring objective for the majority of FAP‟s monitoring stations was to monitor for compliance purposes, meeting the regulatory needs of EPEA Approval holders. New approvals clauses have allowed FAP the flexibility and responsibility to define monitoring objectives for the stations that it operates. In order to efficiently use resources and evaluate the effectiveness of the FAP monitoring network, it is important to first define the monitoring objectives for the network, and then assess the monitoring network‟s effectiveness to achieve the monitoring objectives.

The FAP TWG has begun to redefine the monitoring objectives of the network. Broad categories of monitoring objectives are to:

 Establish regulatory compliance  Evaluate population exposure to air pollutants  Understand historical trends  Track spatial distribution of pollutants  Characterize geographic locations or sources  Inform air quality management activities  Validate data quality

The monitoring objectives and development of longer-view network monitoring plans will be more fully developed after obtaining feedback from a monitoring network assessment in 2011.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 5

Table 1: FAP continuous monitoring stations and parameters 2010 Station 401 Bruderhm Redwater Lamont Fort Range (through Scotford 2 Ross Creek (start April Elk Island Industrial County Saskatche Road 220 March 2010) wan 2010)

Wind speed and          wind direction

Air temperature        

Relative humidity  

Barometric pressure   

Ammonia (NH3)      

Carbon monoxide  (CO)

Ethylene (C2H4)  

Ground-level ozone     (O3) Total hydrocarbons     (THC)

Non-methane    hydrocarbons (n(NmHC). Methane (CH4)   

Hydrogen sulphide    (H2S) Oxides of Nitrogen         (NOx) Nitric oxide (NO)        

Nitrogen dioxide         (NO2) Inhalable   particulates (PM10) Respirable      particulates (PM2.5) Sulphur dioxide         (SO2)

Benzene (C6H6) 

Toluene (C7H8) 

Ethylbenzene  (C8H10)

Xylene (C24H30) 

Styrene (C8H8) 

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 6

Figure 1: Monitoring sites at December 31, 2010

To find a clear, multi-layer, fine resolution map of the airshed that you can download and view self-selected layers, visit www.fortair.org.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 7

Figure 2: Map Detail: FAP monitoring in the vicinity of industry sites

Strathcona Industrial Area Alberta’s Industrial Heartland Area Continuous Monitoring Stations 46. Suncor Energy Inc (a,b,c) 1. Agrium (Redwater) 47. Air Products 2. Access Pipeline (a,b) 1. Redwater Industrial 48. Rio Tinto-Alcan 3. Evonik Degussa 2. Elk Island 49. Gibson Energy (a,b) 4. Provident Energy (a,b) 3. Fort Saskatchewan 50. Pembina Pipeline Corp. 5. Shell Canada (a,b) 4. Scotford 51. Kinder Morgan 6. Shell Chemicals 5. Ross Creek 52. Enbridge Pipelines (a,b) 7. Air Liquide 6. Range Rd 220 53. Alberta Envirofuels 8. Suncor 7. Station 401 54. Imperial Oil (Strathcona) 9. Gulf Chemicals 8. Lamont 55. Scaw -AltaSteel Ltd. 10. Enbridge Stonefell 9. Scotford 2 11. Atco Gas 10. Bruderheim 12. Altalink LP 11. Hwy 21 TWP 534 13. Canexus 14. Triton 15. Canadian Heartland Real Estate 16. Keyera (a,b) Passive Monitoring Station 17. PetroGas 18. BP Canada 19. Dow Chemical 20. Praxair 21. Sherritt 22. Agrium (Ft Saskatchewan) 23. Bunge Canada 24. Canadian Bioenergy 25. Sturgeon Industrial Park

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 8

Continuous Monitoring Site Descriptions

Elk Island AQM Station Primary monitoring objective: To understand the air quality impacts of a large Canadian city on a protected area. For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see table in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: PM2.5, SO2, ground level ozone, NO/NOx/NO2, wind speed and wind direction. The station also reports Air Quality Index. FAP has been operating this station and reporting data to the CASA data warehouse since January 2003. This station was designated a National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) station in 2008.

Site Description: This station is located within the boundaries of Elk Island National Park, between the administration building and Astotin Lake, near the west entrance to the park. It is an open area, with some shrubs and small trees nearby.

Station Changes (2010): During 2010, FAP replaced older monitors for NO/NOx/NO2, SO2 and O3 with new monitors acquired through the National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) monitoring program. The measurement study for reactive oxides of nitrogen (NOy) was ended. In November 2010, a wet acid deposition monitoring site was added to collect precipitation samples for Alberta Environment‟s acid deposition monitoring program.

Fort Saskatchewan AQM Station Primary monitoring objective: To monitor air quality where people live and to establish air quality compliance to the AAAQOs. With the longest operational history and data record in the FAP network, it is an important station for understanding historical trends. It is a designated NAPS station. For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see table in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: Ammonia, carbon monoxide, ground level ozone, hydrogen sulphide, NO/NOx/NO2, PM2.5, SO2, wind speed and direction. The station also reports Air Quality Index.

Site description: This station is in the Airshed‟s largest population center (population: 15,000). It is located

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 9

adjacent to a residential area of the City of Fort Saskatchewan near 92nd Street and 96th Avenue, 80 metres west of Highway 15, a major traffic artery, with an annual average daily traffic count (2008) of 16,140 vehicles per day (Alberta Transportation, http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/2639.htm). FAP has been operating this station and reporting data to the CASA data warehouse since January 2003, although data is available from the CASA Data Warehouse back to 1993.

Station changes (2010): In May 2010, FAP installed a new Federal Equivalent Method Synchronized Hybrid Ambient Real-time Particulate (SHARP 5030) PM2.5 monitor at the Fort Saskatchewan AQM station to comply with NAPS standards.

Lamont County AQM Station

Primary monitoring objective: To understand impacts of multiple pollutant sources in the region, which may include sources from Alberta‟s Industrial Heartland and from Strathcona industrial area, as well as from other sources in the City of Edmonton. This site was selected because modeling indicated that this elevated area of the region may experience higher concentrations of SO2. For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see table in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: ozone, PM2.5, PM10, SO2, H2S, NO/NOx/NO2, methane and non-methane hydrocarbons, relative humidity, wind speed and direction. The site reports Air Quality Index. FAP has been operating this station and reporting data to the CASA data warehouse since January 2003.

Site description: This station is located in a rural area in a hay field, several kilometres away from industrial facilities and other large pollutant sources, approximately 6 km east of the town of Lamont. The station is on a hill (elevation 723 meters), 1.5 kilometers south of Highway 15, 250 metres west of Range Road 202.

Station changes (2010): New O3 and H2S analyzers replaced older devices in early 2010. A hydrogen generator was installed to provide a safe source of hydrogen for the hydrocarbons monitor.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 10

Range Road 220 AQM Station

Primary monitoring objective: To monitor the impacts of local industrial emissions on air quality. For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see table in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: Ammonia, ethylene, total hydrocarbons, non-methane hydrocarbons, NO/NOx/NO2, SO2, barometric pressure, wind speed and direction.

Site description: This site was originally a compliance station, shared among several industrial approval holders but is now operated as a FAP regional station. It is located in an open area along the facility fence line east of the Dow Chemical ethylene production facilities. FAP has been operating this station and reporting data to the CASA data warehouse since January 2003.

Station changes (2010): A new structure was ordered to replace the old one and will be installed in early 2011.

Redwater Industrial AQM Station

Primary monitoring objective: To monitor the impacts of local industrial emissions on air quality. Further monitoring objectives are listed in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: ammonia, NO/NOx/NO2, PM2.5, SO2, ambient temperature at 2m and 10m, relative humidity, wind speed and direction.

Site description: The station is located adjacent to the truck loading area along the western fence line of the Agrium Redwater Fertilizer Plant, adjacent to Highway 643. It is approximately twelve kilometres south of the community of Redwater, Alberta. FAP has been operating this station and reporting data to the CASA data warehouse since 2004.

Station changes (2010): Precipitation monitoring was no longer a site requirement and was removed in 2010.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 11

Ross Creek AQM Station

Primary monitoring objective: To monitor the impacts of local industrial emissions on air quality. Ross Creek AQM Station is an EPEA compliance station, shared among several industrial Approval holders (see tables in Appendix C for details). For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see table in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: Ammonia, NO/NOx/NO2, SO2, ethylene, barometric pressure, solar radiation, temperature at 2 metres and 10 metres, vertical wind speed, wind speed and direction.

Site description: The station is located west of the Sherritt Fort Saskatchewan site, between the industrial facility and the City of Fort Saskatchewan. FAP has been operating this station and reporting data to the CASA data warehouse since January 2003.

Station changes (2010): The ethylene monitor from the decommissioned Station 401- Josephburg Road was moved to Ross Creek during 2010.

Scotford 2 AQM Station

Primary objective: To monitor the impacts of local industrial emissions on air quality. The Scotford 2 station is an EPEA compliance station, shared among four industrial Approval holders (see Tables in Appendix C for details). For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see table in Appendix B.

Continuous parameters monitored: H2S, SO2, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene (o-, m- and p- isomers), styrene, wind speed and direction, ambient temperature. In August and September 2010, a short-term methane monitoring study was done to try to understand possible local biogenic sources of methane and H2S.

Site description: The monitoring site is located to the east of industrial facilities, and to the south of the proposed BA Upgrader on Range Road 213, just south of Township Road 560. The station is located on an open area with a slightly undulating landscape. The monitoring station has been operating at this site since late December 2006.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 12

Station 401-Josephburg Road AQM Station (decommissioned March 2010) Primary objective: to monitor the impacts of local industrial emissions on air quality. Initially, Station 401-Josephburg Road AQM Station was an EPEA compliance station, shared among several industrial Approval holders (see tables in Appendix C for details).

Continuous parameters measured: NOx/NO2/NO, ammonia, ethylene, wind speed and direction.

Site Description: The site was located in an open area within one to two kilometres of industrial facilities and was within 1.6 km of the Ross Creek AQM Station.

Station changes (2010): The station was considered a good candidate to decommission in 2010 due to redundancy with similar nearby monitoring. Each of the analyzers in the station has been redeployed more effectively in the Airshed. The justification for this is discussed in “Strategy for a New Air Quality Monitoring Station in Bruderheim, Alberta”, available at www.fortair.org.

Bruderheim AQM Station (commissioned April 2010)

During 2009, FAP received approval from Alberta Environment to more effectively redeploy most of the analyzers from the Station 401-Josephburg Road AQM Station to a new location in the Town of Bruderheim. Monitors for NO/NO2/NOx, hydrocarbons and wind were moved from Station 401-Josephburg Road in early April 2010. FAP added monitoring for PM2.5, PM10, O3 and SO2 to the network at Bruderheim during May 2010. The station also reports an Air Quality Index.

Primary Monitoring Objective: To monitor ambient air quality where people live. For a complete list of monitoring objectives, see tables in Appendix B.

Continuous Parameters Monitored: NO/NO2/NOx, methane, non-methane and total hydrocarbons, PM2.5, PM10, O3, SO2, ambient temperature, wind speed and direction. The station also reports the Air Quality Index.

Site Description: The station is located near downtown, behind the businesses on Queen Street in the Town of Bruderheim.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 13

Monitoring Station Coordinates

Longitude and latitude coordinates for the FAP monitoring stations are found in Table 2.

Table 2: Continuous monitoring station locations Monitoring Station Latitude Longitude Bruderheim 53.80012N 112.92780W Elk Island 53.68236N 112.86806W Fort Saskatchewan 53.69883N 113.22319W Lamont County 53.76036N 112.88017W Range Road 220 53.75245N 113.12582W Redwater Industrial 53.84369N 113.09922W Ross Creek 53.71622N 113.19994W Scotford 2 53.80118N 113.05088W Station 401 – Josephburg Rd 53.71540N 113.17259W

Continuous Monitoring Methods

Continuous monitoring methods are generally prescribed by the AENV Air Monitoring Directive. Details of the FAP network methods are summarized in Table 3.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 14

Table 3: Continuous monitoring methods, limits, and sampling details (Dec 31, 2010)

Instrument Lower Make and Units of Range Detection Method Of Calibration Parameter Model Measure Sampling Frequency (per Approval) Limit Detection Method ppb 1-second samples, 0 – 500 ppb 1 ppb Multipoint mass Sulphur Dioxide Teco 43C or 43i Pulsed or stored in 1-hour and or 0.4ppb RMS flow dilution of EPA (SO ) fluorescence 2 ppm 1-minute averages 0 - 1.000 ppm 0.5ppb RMS protocol gas

Pulsed Dynamic dilution Hydrogen ppb 1 - second samples, 0-100 ppb 1 ppb Teco 45C fluorescence with compressed Sulphide or stored in 1-hour and or with gas or permeation (H S) ppm 1-minute averages 0 - 0.1 ppm 0.4 ppb RMS 2 converter device

ppb 1-second samples, 0-500 ppb 0.4 ppb Dynamic dilution Nitrogen Dioxide Teco 42C Chem or stored in 1-hour and or 0.4 ppb using compressed (NO ) Teco 17C iluminescence 2 ppm 1-minute averages 0-1.000 ppm 0.5ppb RMS gas

Chem 1 - second samples. 0 - 2 ppm iluminescence Dynamic dilution Ammonia Data stored in 1 hr, Teco 17C ppm or 0.4 ppb with total using compressed (NH ) 5 min, and 1 min 3 0 - 10 ppm nitrogen gas averages converter 1 - second samples. ppb 0 – 500 ppb 1.0 ppb Ozone Data stored in 1 hr, Ultraviolet O Reference Teco 49C or or 3 (O ) 5 min, and 1 min photometrics Bench 3 ppm 0 - 0.5 ppm 0.5ppb RMS averages 1 - second samples. Carbon Dynamic dilution Data stored in 1 hr, Gas filter Monoxide Teco 48C ppm 0 – 50 ppm 0.04 ppm using compressed 5 min and 1 min correlation (CO) gas averages 0 – 20 ppm 20 ppb Hydrocarbons Sample cycles occur MHC Methane Gas Dynamic Z/S using (MHC - nMHC TECO 55C ppm every 2.5 minutes (24 0 – 20 ppm 50 ppb chromatography compressed gas or THC) samples per hour) nMHC nMHC 0 – 40 ppm THC (as propane) FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 15

Instrument Lower Make and Units of Range Detection Method Of Calibration Parameter Model Measure Sampling Frequency (per Approval) Limit Detection Method Particulates 1 - second samples. Continuous

PM2.5 Data stored in 1 hr, 3 3 weighing of Pre weighed filter TEOM 1400AB 3 0 - 450 /m 0.2 /m (preheated to µg/m 5 min and 1 min µg µg sample method

30C) averages filter Hybrid beta Continuous sampling, 3 Particulates SHARP 5030 3 3 0.2 /m attenuation Factory µg/m data stored in 1-min 0-1000 µg/m µg PM (at Fort Sask) and 2.5 and 1-hr averages nephelometer

Particulates Continuous sampling, 3 Grimm 180 3 3 0.2 /m PM µg/m data stored in 1-min 0-1000 µg/m µg Spectrometry Factory 2.5 (at Bruderheim) PM10 and 1-hr averages

Particulates Relative BAM 1020 3 3 3 PM µg/m 1 hour averages 0 - 1000 /m 1 /m concentration by Factory 2.5 (Lamont County) µg µg PM beta attenuation 10

Benzene, Gas Sample cycles every Dynamic dilution Toluene, Spectras chromatography ppb 15 minutes (4 samples 0 - 100ppb 0.02ppb using compressed Ethylbenzene, GC955 with FID per hour) gas Xylene, Styrene detection

Met One 0 - 100km/hr 0.9 km/hr 3 cup 1 - second samples Wind Speed anemometer Known RPM km/hr data stored in 1 hour, Wind Direction Climatronics 0 - 360 degrees Threshold and wind vane Standard or 5 min, and 1 min (WS / WD) or Factory averages RM Young 0 - 540 degrees 0.9 km/hr ultrasonic degrees Temperature Met One 1 - second samples -50 to +50 +/-1 degree Resistance Reference Std Celsius Barometric Vaisalla mmHg 500 - 900 mmHg +/-2 mmHg Reference Std Pressure Data stored in 1 hour, 5 min, and 1 min Relative Met One % 0 – 100% +/-1 % Reference Std Humidity averages FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 16

Data Acquisition Procedures

Air quality monitoring instrumentation sends a voltage output to a data logger as soon as it is measured, where the voltage is converted to engineering units. One-minute average and hourly-average data increments are retrieved hourly from the data logger through the internet via microwave polling or by telephone.

After the hourly poll, automatic alarm set points trigger a notification to technicians of any data that is outside of a predetermined range, (including levels that might exceed the AAAQOs). The technician will assess the situation and notify Alberta Environment and local facility operators as necessary.

Data Quality Control Procedures

In order to assure data collection quality and operational uptime, the following general procedures are performed:

 Gas analyzers are subjected to a zero and single point calibration automatically on a daily basis.

 A daily review of the data is performed, where results of the daily zero and single point calibration from each analyzer are evaluated. Data is inspected for anomalies and technicians are dispatched to investigate as necessary.

 The data acquisition system flags data that is outside normal operating ranges for further review.

 Alarm set-points are automatically triggered for parameters that are subject to regulatory compliance.

 Each analyzer is subjected to a multi-point calibration on a monthly basis. Calibration reports are retained and copies are submitted to Alberta Environment monthly.

 Alberta Environment audits each analyzer once a year, verifying that monitoring is performed properly according to the Air Monitoring Directive. Auditors also make suggestions for improvements to the monitoring program.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 17

Data Validation Processes

 Data validation occurs monthly.

 FAP uses one-minute data to calculate hourly, daily, and monthly averages.

 Data is baseline-corrected by interpolation between consecutive valid zero points.

 Data are plotted and reviewed together, comparing complementary or related parameters within a station.

 Information in the station logs, the daily zeroes and spans, and calibration reports are considered.

 Outliers, flat lines and other data irregularities are investigated.

 Data flags are applied as required.

Compliance Reporting Protocol

Compliance reporting required by Alberta Environment is accomplished in a number of ways:

 Exceedances of AAAQOs are reported as soon as they are known to Alberta Environment‟s Environmental Service Response Centre, and are followed up with further information and a corrective action letter within 7 days, as appropriate.

 Instrument operational time below 90% in a month is reported to Alberta Environment‟s Environmental Service Response Centre as soon as it is known, and followed up with further information and a corrective action letter within 7 days as appropriate.

 An ambient air quality monitoring report is delivered monthly and a summary report is prepared annually for the Director of Alberta Environment‟s Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Branch, as prescribed by the Air Monitoring Directive.

 This Technical Annual Report, together with AMD-required data tables provided by FAP‟s contractor, serves to meet the requirements of an Annual Compliance Report. It documents the status of the monitoring network and summarizes the regional air monitoring results.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 18

Data Reporting Protocol

The data is reported in several ways:

 Live, unvalidated data is reported hourly on the FAP website at: http://www.fortair.org/airquality_data.asp

 Live, unvalidated data is reported hourly and retained for 45 days at Alberta Environment‟s near real-time website at: http://www.envinfo.gov.ab.ca/airquality/

 If the Air Quality Index approaches Poor quality, medical officers from the local health authority are notified by Alberta Environment. They decide whether to issue a public health advisory.

 Validated historical data, suitable for use in reports, is available from the CASA data warehouse website at: http://www.casadata.org/

 Passive monitoring data tables are available at http://www.fortair.org/airquality_reports.php and at www.casadata.org

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 19

Continuous Monitoring Performance Measures

Continuous Monitoring Uptime In 2010 the average monthly uptime of all instrumentation in the network was over 98%. There were a few specific instances where individual instrument operation uptime fell below 90% during a month due to equipment malfunction. These instances were reported and corrected.

Table 4: Network average uptime (percent) 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 Network Average 99.10 98.17 99.00 98.90 99.13 98.72 95.30 Uptime

CASA Data Submission Timeliness Report

All of the 2010 FAP air quality monitoring station data has been submitted to the CASA data warehouse, as shown in Table 5. Most of the time data was submitted by the recommended end-of-month submission date. Submissions were sometimes delayed to perform additional quality checks or to debug CASA‟s new data submission process, implemented in 2010.

Table 5: Data on-time submission to CASA Data Warehouse, 2010 Station Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Bruderheim NA NA NA √ 2 √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Elk Island 1 4 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Fort Saskatchewan-92 St 3 4 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ and 96 Ave Lamont County 3 4 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Range Road 220 3 4 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Redwater Industrial 3 4 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Ross Creek 71 41 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Scotford 2 3 4 1 √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ = all station data was submitted by month-end. Number = how many days past the end of the month the final data was submitted to CASA.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 20

CASA Data Warehouse Data Quality Assessment

To ensure that data submitted by Airsheds to the CASA Data warehouse is credible and of high quality, Alberta Environment commissioned a data quality assessment. The purpose of this data quality assessment was to establish a baseline by which to monitor continuous improvement and for Alberta Environment to adhere to its data quality system.

The province-wide, comparative assessment included two years of data for seven parameters at seventeen continuous air quality monitoring sites, and included FAP‟s Lamont County AQM Station and the Fort Saskatchewan AQM Station. In September 2009, FAP was asked to provide raw, unvalidated data to a third-party consultant for this assessment of the CASA data submissions. The third-party consultant then compared unvalidated data to the data that was submitted to CASA.

The consultant reported that most data reviewed appeared to be defensible. There were few data quality issues, and most identified by the consultant were labelled “low priority”. A few hours of “high priority” issues were identified at each of the stations in the Province, but represented a very small percentage of the data reviewed. After reviewing the items identified by the consultant, FAP found that in most cases, the data FAP submitted were documented and defensible, and in accordance with standard validation procedures.

FAP did take action on some of the consultant‟s recommendations. In 2010 FAP began to archive 1-minute raw and validated data in addition to having FAP‟s contractor store the data. FAP contributes to the Data Quality Committee that Alberta Environment initialized, to help to clearly define and standardize ambient air quality data validation processes used throughout the Province.

2010 Station Audit

The FAP monitoring stations were audited by Alberta Environment auditors from September 27 - October 1, 2010 to ensure that monitoring practices comply with the Air Monitoring Directive. These audits are rigorous, where each analyzer is challenged at multiple points with audit quality gases. In addition to challenging the analyzers, the auditors identify opportunities for improvement.

Of 33 analyzers that were challenged, 31 of them passed the audit. In one case, a recent calibration error caused an audit failure of the NOx analyzer at Elk Island and was corrected immediately after the audit. Another audit failure occurred because of instability in the non-methane portion of the analyzer at Fort Saskatchewan. The analyzer had responded well during its most recent calibration, but an internal valve

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 21

began to fail in the interim. The faulty analyzer was replaced within a few days of the audit and the valve that caused the instability was repaired.

During the audit visit, the Range Road 220 AQM Station was not audited. This station audit is pending the commissioning of a new monitoring station structure. The BTEX analyzer at Scotford 2 was not audited, but an audit was requested by FAP and is pending.

FAP received an audit closure letter on November 3, 2010 for the items that were audited. Audit summary reports and the audit correspondence and closure letter are posted on the FAP website at www.fortair.org.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 22

2010 Passive Monitoring Network

Passive Monitoring Description

Passive monitoring is a cost-effective solution for monitoring air quality at locations where continuous monitoring is not practical. Passive sampling devices can monitor air pollutants without the need for electricity, data loggers or pumps. Passive sampling devices are lightweight, portable and relatively simple to operate. No active movement of air through the sampler is necessary. Passive sampling involves the exposure of a reactive surface to the air, and transfer of the pollutant occurs by diffusion from the air to the surface. The surface consists of a solid chemical compound or a filter that is impregnated with a reactive solution. Samplers are typically exposed for periods of one month, and analysis is completed in a laboratory.

A major advantage of using a passive sampling system is that a network of multiple samplers can be used over a large area to determine the spatial variation of pollutant levels. Passive samplers are also useful for looking at long-term trends of air pollutants at specific locations. However, since a sample is exposed for a month, events that last for a short time period may be "averaged out".

Figure 3: Passive monitor in the field

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 23

2010 FAP Passive Monitoring Network

FAP operates a network of passive monitors that measure sulphur dioxide (SO2), hydrogen sulphide (H2S), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone (O3) on a monthly basis. Samples are exchanged within two days of the first of each month and sent to a laboratory for analysis. Data is published on the FAP website and is summarized in Annual Reports to the community. Ambient air monitoring results are also submitted for compliance purposes to Alberta Environment by the end of the month following the month the sample was exposed and are available in the CASA Data Warehouse.

Passive Monitoring Site Selection

FAP passive samplers monitor for monthly average concentrations of pollutants. In the FAP network they are intended to gather information over a broad spatial area and to measure trends over time. Sites are not selected based on a high likelihood of impingement, but rather on a spatial grid to establish a picture of comparative air quality throughout the Airshed. A few passive monitoring sites are located near local emission sources instead of on a regional basis, which should be considered when interpreting the data.

Passive monitoring site numbers 1 to 10 were selected by FAP and deployed in July 2005 to collect air quality data in communities that did not have continuous monitoring stations. Site numbers 11 to 30 were selected and operated by Shell Canada for EPEA approval compliance purposes, but these were turned over to FAP in 2006 to incorporate into the network. The Technical Working Group developed a plan for future growth of the passive monitoring network, with the intent to achieve a better understanding of regional air quality. The future sites have been mapped on approximately a one township by one township spatial grid within the Airshed. As resources (or regulatory requirements) for passive monitors become available, these grid points may be populated with passive monitors.

Site numbers 31 to 40 were placed according to this grid pattern to meet EPEA Approval requirements for ten (out of a total of twenty) passive monitoring sites required for the BA Upgrader. These were deployed in August 2006. Site numbers 41 to 43, and 46 to 47 were deployed for Keyera Energy and Provident Energy compliance monitoring in November 2007. Site 45 was added to meet an Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) requirement for the Shell Upgrader Expansion, also in November 2007.

Site numbers 48 through 56 were located in the northern portion of the Airshed, aligned with the selected grid pattern, beginning in August 2008 to meet approval requirements of the BA Upgrader. Site 57 was co-located with the Scotford 2 continuous monitoring station as a data quality assurance tool for H2S and SO2 passive monitors. Passive site 58 was co-located with the Fort Saskatchewan AQM Station in May 2009 as a passive monitoring quality assurance tool to compare NO2 and O3 passive monitoring results with the respective continuous monitors.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 24

Site numbers 59 through 63 were deployed in June 2010 to meet EPEA Approval requirements for five additional SO2 and H2S passive sites for the Shell Scotford Upgrader Expansion. Previous years‟ passive monitoring isopleth maps indicated some relatively large spatial gaps in areas that seemed to have a large O3 and NO2 gradient, so additional NO2 and O3 passive monitors were also deployed at sites 21, 34, 59, 60 and 62.

The site coordinates and parameters measured at each passive monitoring site are listed in Table 6. Some sites are named if there is a recognizable nearby landmark or reference. To locate other sites, see the map in Figure 1.

Table 6: FAP passive monitoring sites in 2010

Site FAP Site Longitude Latitude SO2 H2S O3 NO2 1 W of Hwy 21 -113.24888 53.59520 x x x 2 N of Ardrossan -113.10185 53.58852 x x x 3 NE of Bruderheim -112.88692 53.86683 x x x x 4 Waskatenau -112.77622 54.09875 x x x x 5 Thorhild -113.13310 54.15233 x x x 6 Redwater -113.11392 53.95558 x x x x 7 Bon Accord -113.42423 53.83382 x x x 8 Gibbons -113.31595 53.83163 x x x 9 Hu-Haven -113.20488 53.77050 x x x 10 Fort Augustus -113.18698 53.75200 x x x 11 -113.04892 53.83195 x x 12 -113.02542 53.86578 x x 13 -112.97532 53.83252 x x 14 -113.02553 53.80367 x x 15 -112.97650 53.80435 x x 16 SE Bruderheim -112.92638 53.79203 x x 17 -113.04987 53.75262 x x 18 -113.00046 53.75253 x x 19 -112.92608 53.75167 x x 20 -112.87668 53.75937 x x 21 -112.97538 53.70850 x x x x 22 -112.87693 53.68760 x x 23 -112.92647 53.66333 x x 24 -113.08574 53.81873 x x 25 -113.17547 53.76000 x x 26 -113.14945 53.80352 x x 27 -113.00035 53.88125 x x 28 -112.95077 53.90445 x x 29 -112.94830 53.94908 x x 30 S of Redwater -113.10012 53.93430 x x 31 -113.10838 53.81068 x x 32 -113.13220 53.83328 x x 33 -113.24816 53.74508 x x x x 34 -113.48362 53.74538 x x x x 35 -113.47893 53.82511 x x x x 36 -113.22421 53.65760 x x x x FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 25

Site FAP Site Longitude Latitude SO2 H2S O3 NO2 37 -113.22356 53.86307 x x 38 -112.67866 53.92182 x x x x 39 -112.67831 53.83245 x x x 40 -112.70287 53.74522 x x x x 41 -113.39769 53.91981 x x x x 42 N of Redwater -113.02451 54.00701 x x 43 Keyera Site -113.16707 53.74515 x x 45 Residence -113.06388 53.77449 x 46 Josephburg Agplx -113.06930 53.71279 x x 47 SE Corner FAP -112.71777 53.54142 x x x x 48 -113.02866 54.09348 x x 49 -112.86401 54.00712 x x 50 -112.84794 54.18045 x x 51 NE corner of FAP -112.72578 54.26767 x x 52 -113.05190 54.26824 x x 53 NW corner of FAP -113.40039 54.26812 x x 54 -113.22367 54.18151 x x 55 -113.37483 54.10185 x x 56 -113.22475 54.00706 x x 57 Scotford 2 colocate -113.05088 53.80118 x x 58 Fort Sask colocate -113.22319 53.69883 x x 59 Partridge Hill -113.09843 53.65791 x x x x 60 Twp 534 & RR210 -112.95166 53.59954 x x x x 61 TWP 534 & RR195 -112.77896 53.59954 x x 62 TWP 542 & RR191 -112.68102 53.65779 x x x x 63 Elk Island Park -112.83537 53.65783 x x

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 26

Passive Monitoring for Compliance to EPEA Approvals

FAP performs passive monitoring on behalf of approval holders, per Table 7. Air quality monitoring reports are submitted monthly to Alberta Environments Director of Environmental Monitoring and Evaluation Division. Data is archived in the CASA data warehouse.

Table 7: Passive monitoring compliance requirements (December 31, 2010) Passive Monitoring Facility EPEA Approval Number Network Shell Canada Ltd. Scotford Upgrader (25 sites H2S, 25 sites SO2) 49587-01-00 (Plus one SO2 site for EUB approval) Provident Energy 9995-02-00 (2 sites H2S, 2 sites SO2) 61 monitoring locations SO2 BA Energy Heartland 53 monitoring locations H2S Bitumen Upgrader 203303-00-00 (20 sites H2S, 20 sites SO2) Keyera Energy 10235-02-00 (4 sites H2S, 4 sites SO2) BP Canada Energy Company Fort Saskatchewan 10081-02-00 Fractionation Plant (2 sites H2S, 2 sites SO2) FAP Airshed Monitoring There are no EPEA 28 monitoring locations NO2 program requirement to monitor NO2 FAP Airshed Monitoring There are no EPEA 27 monitoring locations O3 Program requirement to monitor O3

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 27

2010 Monitoring Results

2010 Exceedances Summary

Exceedances of the Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQOs) reported in the FAP Airshed during 2010 are listed in Table 8:

Table 8: AAAQO exceedances in FAP airshed Parameter Measured 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004

Ammonia (NH3) 1-hr 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Benzene (C6H6) 1-hr 0 1 1 0 n/a n/a n/a

Carbon Monoxide 1-hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (CO) 8-hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ethyl benzene 3 1-hr 0 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a (C6H5CH2CH3) 1-hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ethylene (C2H4) 3-day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Annual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hydrogen Sulphide 1-hr 0 11 0 10 0 1 3 1 (H2S) 24-hr 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1-hr 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nitrogen dioxide 24-hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (NO2) Annual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ozone (O3) 1-hr 0 3 1 0 3 0 1 Styrene 3 1-hr 0 0 6 0 n/a n/a n/a (C6H5CH=CH3) 1-hr 42 8 15 14 1 19 19

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) 24-hr 6 1 1 1 0 1 3 Annual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Particulate Matter 2 24-hr 39 6 4 2 n/a n/a 4 Fine (PM2.5) 3 Toluene (C6H5CH3) 1-hr 0 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a o-Xylene 3,4 1-hr 0 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a (C6H4(CH3)2) Xylenes (-o, -m and 1-hr 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a -p isomers)

1 FAP reported 12 1-hr exceedances of H2S in 2007, but when the significant digits were considered, only ten were exceedances of the AAAQO. 2 Alberta Environment implemented a 24-hr AAAQO objective for PM2.5 during Fall 2007. 3BTEX/S monitoring began in January 2007. 4 There is no AAAQO for o-xylene. Late in 2009 equipment upgrades were made to measure and report total xylenes. Reporting of total xylenes began in 2010.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 28

There were several exceedances of Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQO) in the FAP network during 2010.

 Ammonia: One 1-hour AAAQO exceedance at Ross Creek, source assigned to local industry.

 SO2: Forty-two 1-hour AAAQO exceedances and six 24-hour exceedances were reported at Redwater Industrial throughout the year. Many of them occurred in December, source assigned to local industry.

 NO2: One 1-hour AAAQO exceedance at Redwater Industrial, local industry source (perhaps from idling trucks staged in the area).

 PM2.5: There were thirty-nine 24-hour AAAQO exceedances throughout the network and 183 1-hr Guideline exccedances. Most of the events were regional and observed at multiple stations.

o January 2010: AAAQO exceedances were reported at Lamont County, Fort Saskatchewan, and Redwater Industrial AQM Stations. o February 2010: AAAQO Exceedance was reported at Lamont County. PM2.5 concentrations were elevated regionally. o May 2010: 1-hr exceedances were reported at all stations, and one 24- hr exceedance at Redwater Industrial due to smoke from local brush fires at Opal, AB. o August 2010: Twenty-two 24-hour PM2.5 AAAQO exceedances and 110 1-hr exceedances occurred over several days at all FAP stations due to smoke from British Columbia forest fires. o November 2010: Two 1-hr exceedances at two different stations. o December 2010: Twelve 24-hour PM2.5 AAAQO exceedances and 22 1-hr exceedances were reported across the region. FAP did not identify a specific cause.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 29

2010 Ambient Air Monitoring Data

2010 Continuous Monitoring Results

Air Quality Index (AQI) The Alberta AQI is calculated using the formulas shown in Table 9. The AQI number for each of the parameters below is a calculated value. The highest calculated value for each of these five pollutants determines the AQI for that hour. Table 9: Air Quality Index as calculated in Alberta Parameter Name Concentration Units Formula

If x ≤ 13 ppm AQI = 1.92 x Concentration Carbon Monoxide If x > 13 ppm AQI = (1.47 x Concentration) + 5.88 If x ≤ 0.05 ppm AQI = 500 x Concentration Ozone If 0 .05 < x ≤ 0.08 ppm AQI = (833 x Concentration) - 16.67 If x > 0 .08 ppm AQI = (714 x Concentration) - 7.14 Sulphur Dioxide All ppm AQI = 147.06 x Concentration If x ≤ 0.21 ppm AQI = 238.09 x Concentration Nitrogen Dioxide If x > 0.21 ppm AQI = (156.24 x Concentration) + 17.19 3 Respirable Particulate If x ≤ 30 µg/m AQI = 0.8333 x Concentration Matter (PM2.5) If x > 30 µg/m3 AQI = (0.5 x Concentration) + 10

From these calculated AQI ratings, the air quality is considered to be Good, Fair, Poor or Very Poor. The Air Quality Index as reported from FAP stations is listed in Table 10: Table 10: Air Quality Index in FAP region in 2010

AQI Hours Good Fair Poor Very Poor Station Name Monitored (AQI 0-25) (AQI 26-50) (AQI 51-100) (AQI >100) % Hours % Hours % Hours % Hours

Bruderheim 4656 92.3 4296 6.6 305 0.7 35 0.2 10 Elk Island 8091 95.4 7722 4.5 363 0.1 6 0.0 0 Fort 8754 94.1 8238 5.4 470 0.4 36 0.1 10 Saskatchewan Lamont 8711 91.9 8008 7.5 655 0.3 28 0.1 9 County * AQI hourly ratings may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

At the Elk Island, Fort Saskatchewan, and Lamont County AQM stations, Fair, Poor or Very Poor AQI values are typically based on either ozone or PM2.5; high AQI values are seldom based on carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide or nitrogen dioxide.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 30

Episodes of Fair, Poor or Very Poor AQI were due to the following reasons: ozone during the late afternoon and evening hours during hot summer days, PM2.5 during inversion periods in winter months, or due to fine particulate matter in the smoke from the Opal fires in May 2010 and the British Columbia fires in August 2010.

Poor air quality occurred concurrently at all FAP AQI monitoring sites during August 2010, when smoke from British Columbia fires caused very high concentrations of fine particulate matter throughout Alberta.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 31

Carbon Monoxide The AAAQOs for carbon monoxide are:

 1-hour average concentration 13 ppm  8-hour average concentration 5 ppm

Carbon monoxide is present in small amounts in the atmosphere, chiefly as a product of volcanic activity but also from natural and man-made fires. The burning of fossil fuels also contributes to carbon monoxide production.

When air quality monitoring concentrations in the FAP region for 2010 are compared to the AAAQOs, it was observed that maximum concentrations of CO occurred in August 19 during episode of intense smoke from the British Columbia fires, and was about 17% of the 1-hr objective.

Monthly, annual and exceedance statistics are in Tables 11 – 13:

Table 11: Monthly average CO concentrations (ppm) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Monthly average 0.4 0.3 03 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 Monthly maximum 1.8 1.1 1.2 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.5 2.2 0.6 0.8 1.5 1.7

Table 12: Annual average CO concentrations (ppm) - historical

2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

Fort Saskatchewan 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

Table 13: Number of CO exceedances in FAP Airshed - historical 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

1-hour objective 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8-hr objective 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 32

Sulphur Dioxide

The AAAQOs for sulphur dioxide during 2010 were:

 1-hour average concentration 172 ppb  24-hour average concentration 57 ppb  Annual average concentration 11 ppb

Sources of SO2 in the airshed are primarily industrial sources, both from within the FAP boundary and outside of it.

When air quality monitoring concentrations in the FAP region for 2010 are compared against the AAAQOs, it was observed that:

 The 1-hour AAAQO for SO2 was exceeded at the Redwater Industrial AQM Station forty-two times during 2010.  The 24-hour AAAQO for SO2 was exceeded on six days at the Redwater Industrial AQM station.  The highest annual average concentration of SO2 in the FAP network was at Redwater Industrial AQM station. See Table 15.

At most monitoring locations within the FAP network, the sulphur dioxide concentrations are well below AAAQOs. In 2010 the only monitoring location to exceed the 1-hour and 24-hr SO2 AAAQO was the Redwater Industrial AQM Station.

Summary statistics of SO2 concentrations recorded in 2010 at individual FAP stations are presented in Table 15 - 17. Exceedances are summarized in Table 18.

Table 14: Annual average and one-hour maximum SO2 concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) Station Average P50 P95 P99 Maximum Elk Island 1 0 2 5 26 Fort Saskatchewan 1 1 2 6 21 Lamont County 1 0 4 10 38 Range Road 220 1 0 3 8 31 Redwater Industrial 6 1 27 128 432 Ross Creek 1 0 4 9 43 Scotford 2 1 0 4 9 39

Interpretation example for percentile figures: 95% of the time, the 1-hour SO2 concentration at Fort Saskatchewan AQM Station was lower than 2 ppb.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 33

Table 15: Monthly average SO2 concentrations (ppb) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 Elk Island 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Fort Saskatchewan 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 Lamont County 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 Range Road 220 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 Redwater Industrial 6 3 2 5 6 6 3 3 8 7 6 19 Ross Creek 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 Scotford 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Table 16: Monthly maximum SO2 concentrations (ppb) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 7 14 9 10 8 71 29 26 Elk Island 12 12 11 4 11 8 7 12 6 9 4 26 Fort Saskatchewan 11 15 19 7 17 21 15 14 6 14 14 7 Lamont County 20 23 19 10 8 11 7 19 9 15 19 38 Range Road 220 6 23 22 11 19 31 8 9 7 14 19 13 Redwater Industrial 161 119 72 278 271 313 53 137 432 299 169 427 Ross Creek 10 17 15 10 43 25 16 14 19 27 18 18 Scotford 2 4 9 15 13 35 19 16 31 17 16 39 16

Table 17: Annual average SO2 concentrations (ppb) - historical 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Elk Island 1 1 1 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a Fort 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Saskatchewan Lamont County 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 Range Road 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 220 Redwater 6 4 4 4 3 4 5 2 Industrial Ross Creek 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 Scotford 2 1 1 1 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a: SO2 was not measured at this site during this period

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 34

Table 18: Number of SO2 exceedances in FAP Airshed - historical 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

1-hour objective 42 8 15 13 1 19 19 1 24-hr objective 6 1 1 1 0 1 3 0 Annual objective 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

For further information about the distribution of SO2 concentrations within the airshed, refer to Passive Monitoring Results: Sulphur Dioxide.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 35

Oxides of Nitrogen

AAAQOs for NO2 are:

 1-hour average concentration 212 ppb  24-hour average concentration 106 ppb  Annual average concentration 32 ppb

NO2 in ambient air can be attributed to several sources. Major contributors include vehicular traffic and residential heating, in addition to industrial sources.

When air quality in the FAP region during 2010 is compared against the AAAQOs, it is observed that:

 There was one exceedance of the 1-hour AAAQO for NO2. The maximum one- hour concentration was 231 ppb at the Redwater Industrial AQM Station.  There were no exceedances of the 24-hour AAAQO for NO2.  The annual average concentration at each FAP station was well below the AAAQO. The maximum annual average NO2 concentration monitored was 10 ppb at the Ross Creek AQM station.  While there is no AAAQO for monthly average concentrations of NO2, the monthly averages values are useful to show that variation in NO2 concentrations is seasonal. The maximum monthly NO2 values occur during the months of December, January and February. (Refer to Table 20). Possible reasons for this are lower atmospheric mixing heights and/or increased emissions during cold weather.

Summary statistics of NO2 recorded in 2010 are summarized in Tables 19 to 23:

Table 19: Annual average and one-hour maximum NO2 concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) Annual Station P50 P95 P99 Maximum Average Bruderheim1 5 0 20 30 40 Elk Island 3 0 10 30 50 Fort Saskatchewan 10 10 30 40 60 Lamont County 4 0 20 30 60 Range Rd 220 8 10 30 40 60 Redwater Industrial 9 10 30 90 231 Ross Creek 9 10 30 40 70 1Bruderheim operated for only nine months in 2010.

Interpretation example for percentile figures: 95% of the time, 1-hour NO2 concentration at Range Road 220 station is less than 30 ppb.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 36

Table 20: Monthly average concentrations of NO2 (ppb) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 2 3 2 3 6 10 11 Elk Island 5 5 4 1 1 0 1 1 1 3 5 8 Fort Saskatchewan 19 19 13 5 6 5 3 4 6 10 15 16 Lamont County 8 8 5 1 0 1 2 2 1 4 7 8 Range Road 220 14 14 10 4 5 5 4 4 5 8 11 12 Redwater Industrial 15 14 10 8 8 7 4 3 4 9 15 12 Ross Creek 18 17 12 4 5 4 3 3 5 10 15 15 Station 401 17 13 10 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Table 21: Monthly maximum one-hour concentration of NO2 (ppb) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 10 20 30 20 20 30 40 40 Elk Island 30 40 50 10 20 10 10 20 20 20 40 40 Fort Saskatchewan 60 50 50 40 30 20 20 20 30 40 50 50 Lamont County 40 50 60 20 20 20 10 20 20 30 30 40 Range Road 220 60 50 50 30 30 20 20 30 30 40 40 50 Redwater Industrial 70 50 60 60 50 20 20 20 40 70 231 90 Ross Creek 70 50 50 40 30 20 20 30 30 40 50 50 Station 401 70 50 50 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Table 22: Number of NO2 exceedances of AAAQO in FAP airshed 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

1-hour objective 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

24-hr objective 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Annual objective 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 37

Table 23: Historical NO2 annual averages (ppb): Station 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

Elk Island 3 4 4 3 n/a 4 n/a n/a Fort 10 12 12 12 11 12 11 13 Saskatchewan Lamont County 4 5 4 3 3 4 3 3

Range Road 220 8 8 10 8 7 9 6 7 Redwater 9 10 10 8 8 9 7 10 Industrial Ross Creek 9 12 14 11 13 13 10 27

Nitric oxide (NO) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are also measured at FAP monitoring stations. Data for these parameters are available through the CASA data warehouse at www.casadata.org.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 38

Hydrogen Sulphide

The AAAQOs for H2S are:  1-hour average concentration 10ppb  24-hour average concentration 3ppb When air quality monitoring data is compared against the AAAQOs, it is observed that:

 There were no exceedances of the 1-hour AAAQOs for H2S at any FAP AQM Station in 2010.

 H2S concentrations are generally very low. Ninety-five percent of the time they were lower than 1 ppb. The one hour average, maximum and percentile concentrations of hydrogen sulphide recorded in 2010 at individual stations are summarized in the Tables below:

Table 24: Annual average and one-hour maximum H2S concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) Station Average P50 P95 P99 Maximum

Fort Saskatchewan 0 0 1 2 3.9 Lamont County 0 0 0 1 5.6 Scotford 2 0 0 1 2 9

Table 25: Monthly average H2S (ppb) at continuous monitoring stations (2010)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Fort 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Saskatchewan Lamont County 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

Scotford 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 26: Monthly maximum H2S (ppb) at continuous monitoring stations (2010)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Fort Saskatchewan 4 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 Lamont County 4 5 6 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Scotford 2 3 1 1 1 2 9 6 7 1 1 1 2

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 39

Table 27: H2S exceedances table

2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004

24- 24- 24- 24- 24- 24- 24- 1-hr 1-hr 1-hr 1-hr 1-hr 1-hr 1-hr hr hr hr hr hr hr hr

Fort 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Saskatchewan Scotford n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 1 0 3 0 Scotford 2 0 0 10 0 0 0 101 1 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Lamont 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 County 1 FAP reported twelve 1-hr exceedances of H2S in 2007, but when the significant digits were considered, only ten were actual exceedances of the AAAQO. n/a – not applicable. FAP did not measure this parameter during this period

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 40

Ozone

The AAAQO for ozone is:  1-hour average concentration 82 ppb When air quality monitoring results in the FAP region were compared against the AAAQO, it was observed that:  There were no exceedances of the 1-hour AAAQO for ozone at any of the FAP stations. There is a national standard for ozone. In June 2000, the federal, provincial, and territorial governments (except Quebec) signed the Canada-Wide Standards (CWS) for Particulate Matter and Ozone. The CWS and related provisions for ozone are:

 A CWS of 65 ppb, 8-hour averaging time  Achievement to be based on the 4th highest measurement annually, averaged over 3 consecutive years, with provisions to “back out” naturally occurring ozone events. Alberta Environment performs the assessment and has determined that Canada-wide Standards were not exceeded for ozone in Alberta during the 2001-2007 assessment period. A planning trigger was exceeded, however, and an air quality management plan was developed. A discussion of the status of the Ozone Management Plan and its implementation can be found in later sections of this report.

Summary statistics of O3 concentrations at FAP monitoring stations are shown in the following table:

Table 28: Monthly average ozone concentrations (ppb) in 2010

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 34 31 24 24 20 22 n/a n/a Elk Island 19 28 31 40 37 31 22 22 21 25 22 20 Fort Saskatchewan 12 19 23 33 30 30 22 22 18 17 15 12 Lamont County 22 32 34 41 38 35 27 26 24 26 25 22

The highest monthly average concentrations tend to occur during the spring months, when the overall background levels are highest. The highest maximum one-hour values tend to occur later in the summer, during hot summer afternoons under low wind conditions. Peak concentrations for ozone are relevant because of the potential health effects.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 41

The maximum one-hour values for O3 by month are listed in Table 29: Table 29: Monthly maximum Ozone concentration (ppb) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 67 67 60 71 52 44 n/a n/a Elk Island 40 46 52 66 73 60 53 65 53 43 40 38 Fort Saskatchewan 38 43 52 60 70 72 59 67 52 44 39 32 Lamont County 42 48 52 66 70 62 58 66 55 43 40 42

For further information about O3 concentrations throughout the airshed, see Passive Monitoring Results: Ozone, found in later sections of this report.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 42

Inhalable and Respirable Particulates (PM10 and PM2.5)

The AAAQO for PM2.5 is:  24-hour average concentration 30 µg/m3

There is also an air quality Guideline for PM2.5: 3  1-hour average concentration PM2.5 80 µg/m (This is a guideline figure, not to be used for compliance reporting purposes. However, a one-hour average concentration of 80 µg/m3 will cause AQI to be “Poor”).

There is no AAAQO for PM10. When air quality monitoring data in the Fort Air Partnership region are compared against the AAAQO, it is observed that there were thirty-nine 24-hour AAAQO exceedances and 183 1-hr Guideline exccedances throughout the network. Most of the events were regional and observed at multiple stations.

 January 2010: 24-hr exceedances were reported at Lamont County, Fort Saskatchewan, and Redwater Industrial AQM Stations.  February 2010: Exceedances were reported at Lamont County. PM2.5 concentrations were elevated regionally.  May 2010: 1-hr exceedances were reported at all stations, and one 24-hr exceedance was reported at Redwater Industrial due to smoke from local brush fires at Opal, AB.  August 2010: Twenty-two 24-hour PM2.5 AAAQO exceedances and 110 1-hr exceedances occurred over several days at all FAP stations due to smoke from British Columbia forest fires.  November 2010: Two 1-hr exceedances at two different stations.  December 2010: Twelve 24-hour PM2.5 AAAQO exceedances and 22 1-hr exceedances were reported across the region. FAP did not identify a cause.

The average and maximum one-hour, daily and annual concentrations of PM2.5 recorded in 2010 at individual FAP stations are shown in the following tables. 3 Table 30: Annual average PM2.5 concentrations (g/m ), with percentiles (2010) Station Average P50 P95 P99 Maximum

Elk Island 5 2.6 14 36 448 Fort Saskatchewan 9 5 25 57 >10001 Lamont County 9 6 27 53 953 Redwater Industrial 7 4 22 46 449 1Range of instrument was exceeded during smoke event of August 19, 2010.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 43

Table 31: Average particulate matter (g/m3) in 2010

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

PM2.5 Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 8 8 7 22 5 9 8 17 Elk Island 5 5 3 3 4 4 4 16 2 3 4 6 Fort Saskatchewan 9 7 5 4 7 8 5 24 3 6 8 16 Lamont County 10 14 12 4 5 6 7 20 5 7 9 14 Redwater Industrial 9 7 6 5 8 7 5 17 3 5 6 9

PM10 Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 18 18 13 29 11 27 15 19 Lamont County 16 20 19 12 13 14 14 28 8 20 10 14

Table 32: Maximum 1-hr average particulate matter (g/m3) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

PM2.5 Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 141 42 33 493 32 57 60 121 Elk Island 40 32 20 11 91 57 36 448 25 30 84 61 Fort Saskatchewan 107 67 38 31 137 84 25 >1000 76 34 103 137 Lamont County 62 81 61 16 94 28 31 953 22 35 74 99 Redwater Industrial 72 32 40 40 373 89 44 449 28 67 60 63

PM10 Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a n/a 458 157 78 541 232 257 107 151 Lamont County 38 92 36 82 109 91 103 60 150 131 82 74

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 44

Ammonia

The AAAQO for ammonia is:

 1-hour average concentration 2000 ppb

Sources of ammonia in the airshed are primarily from industrial sources in the production of fertilizer, but can also be formed from natural sources such as the decay of plant material and animal waste.

When air quality monitoring data in the FAP region are compared to the AAAQO, it is observed that:

 There was one exceedance of ammonia recorded in 2010 at the Ross Creek Station.

Average and maximum concentrations are summarized in Tables 33 to 36.

Table 33: Annual average and maximum Ammonia concentrations (ppb), with percentiles (2010) Station Average P50 P95 P99 Maximum Bruderheim 2 1 7 13 98 Fort Saskatchewan 5 3 12 27 172 Range Road 220 3 0 12 30 175 Redwater Industrial 14 5 45 188 1846 Ross Creek 10 0 50 191 2442 Example for interpretation: 95% of the time ammonia concentration at Fort Saskatchewan Station was lower than 12 ppb.

Table 34: Monthly average ammonia concentrations (ppb) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 3 2 Fort 9 7 7 4 5 4 3 3 2 3 2 4 Saskatchewan Range Road 220 4 5 8 3 4 2 0 6 3 1 2 2 Redwater 11 12 10 27 16 8 8 13 6 14 16 22 Industrial Ross Creek 4 6 6 5 11 10 5 15 5 5 4 8 Station 401 – 3 2 8 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Josephburg Rd

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 45

Table 35: Maximum 1-hr ammonia concentrations (ppb) in 2010, by month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 43 98 24 29 28 52 15 32 19 Fort 108 172 93 41 67 61 78 39 55 61 69 55 Saskatchewan Range Road 147 175 65 42 78 51 49 115 46 46 44 34 220 Redwater 271 101 95 90 338 116 71 646 191 842 1846 343 Industrial Ross Creek 374 146 2442 416 373 489 214 326 1488 513 313 117 Station 401 – 92 126 323 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Josephburg Rd

Table 36: Historical annual average NH3 trends (ppb) Station 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 Fort Saskatchewan 5 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 Range Road 220 3 0 6 1 0 0 n/a n/a Redwater Industrial 14 11 20 11 14 14 16 12 Ross Creek 10 7 4 7 5 4 n/a n/a Station 401-Jburg n/a 8 5 2 4 5 n/a n/a Rd .

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 46

Hydrocarbons There are no AAAQOs for concentrations of total hydrocarbons, methane, or nonmethane hydrocarbons.

„Total hydrocarbons‟ (THC) refer to a broad family of chemicals that contain carbon and hydrogen atoms. Total hydrocarbons are the sum of non-reactive and reactive hydrocarbons.

The major reactive hydrocarbon in the atmosphere is methane. Major worldwide sources of atmospheric methane include wetlands, ruminants such as cows, energy use, landfills, and burning biomass such as wood. Methane is the primary component of natural gas.

The reactive hydrocarbons consist of many volatile organic compounds, some of which react with oxides of nitrogen in the atmosphere to form ozone. While Alberta does not have ambient air quality objectives for total hydrocarbons, the oxidation of hydrocarbons in the atmosphere contributes to an increased amount of nitrogen oxides and ozone, which do have objectives. Additionally, there are objectives for specific reactive hydrocarbons such as benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, styrene and ethylene.

Hydrocarbon concentrations are summarized in the Table 37 and 38:

Table 37: Average hydrocarbons (ppm) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg

Total Hydrocarbons (ppm) Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.5 n/a Fort 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 Saskatchewan Range Road 220 2.5 2.5 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.2

Methane (ppm) Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 2.0 2.0 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.3 n/a Lamont County 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9

Range Road 220 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.1 Non-methane Hydrocarbons (ppm) Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.1 0.2 n/a

Lamont County 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Range Road 220 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 47

Table 38: Maximum hydrocarbons (ppm) in 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Hydrocarbons (ppm) Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 4.5 4.6 5.8 5.3 4.7 4.5 7.9 6.0 8.0 Fort 3.7 3.6 3.4 4.0 2.7 3.2 3.2 3.3 2.4 3.4 3.7 5.0 Saskatchewan Range Road 220 4.6 4.0 3.7 2.7 3.4 3.3 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.5 3.5 4.0 Methane (ppm) Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.8 4.2 4.7 4.8 Lamont County 3.0 2.5 2.9 2.1 2.1 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 3.2 3.2 Range Road 220 3.9 3.6 3.2 2.5 3.2 3.2 2.6 2.6 2.5 3.1 3.1 3.5 Non-methane Hydrocarbons (ppm) Bruderheim n/a n/a n/a 1.8 0.7 3.8 3.0 0.8 0.9 5.5 3.3 5.2 Lamont County 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.7 Range Road 220 1.2 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.4 0.6 0.7

Although the average and maximum hydrocarbons are similar at the various monitoring sites, Bruderheim measures hydrocarbon “spikes” that the other stations do not. This can best be illustrated graphically, comparing Bruderheim total hydrocarbons to hydrocarbons at Fort Saskatchewan and Range Road 220. General baseline trends are similar, but Bruderheim does measure additional peaks that are not observed at the other sites.

Possible sources of the hydrocarbons peaks are local oil wells and batteries, residential or local business sources, a gas station, a wastewater lagoon, or some other source.

Figure 4: One-hour THC station comparison, late 2010

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 48

Ethylene

The AAAQOs for ethylene are: o 1-hour average 1044 ppb o 3-day average 40 ppb o Annual mean 26 ppb

When air quality monitoring results are compared against the AAAQOs for ethylene, it is observed that:

o There were no one-hour exceedances of ethylene in 2010. o The maximum one-hour concentration measured was 245 ppb (23% of the objective). o The annual average was highest at Range Road 220, and did not exceed the annual average objective for ethylene.

Table 38: Monthly average ethylene (ppb) in 2010 Ann Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Range Road 3.1 2.3 1.6 1.6 0.9 1.3 0.9 1.0 0.6 0.9 2.0 1.2 1.5 220 Ross Creek 1.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.3 2.0 0.6

Table 39: Maximum 1-hour average concentration ethylene (ppb) 2010, by month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Range Road 37 28 25 22 9 7 59 16 13 7 91 121 220 Ross Creek 41 6 22 4 4 2 8 19 4 18 43 245

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 49

Other Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, o-xylene, mp-xylene, total xylene and styrene

The Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives for BTEX/S are as follows:

 Benzene 1-hr: 9ppb (C6H6)

 Toluene 1-hour: 499 ppb (C6H5CH3) 24-hour: 106 ppb

 Ethyl benzene 1-hour: 460 ppb (C6H5CH2CH3)

 Xylenes 1-hour: 529 ppb o-, m- and p- isomers 24-hour: 161 ppb (C6H4(CH3)2)

 Styrene 1-hour: 52 ppb (C6H5CH=CH2)

When air quality monitoring results are compared against the AAAQOs for the BTEX/S, it is observed that:

 There were no exceedances of the one -hour AAAQO for any of the BTEX/S chemicals.  There were no 24-hr AAAQO exceedances for any of the BTEX/S chemicals.

BTEX/S has been measured on a semi-continuous (four samples per hour) basis at the Scotford 2 AQM station since January 2007. In the past, FAP had been measuring only the o-xylene isomer for xylenes, but in March 2010 FAP upgraded and reconfigured the equipment to monitor for the mp-xylene isomers as well. FAP now reports a “total xylenes” figure which is the sum of m-, o- and p-isomers of xylene and is directly comparable to the AAAQO.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 50

Table 40: BTEX/S monitoring results 2010 m-, p- Total Ethyl 2 o- 2 Benzene Xylene Xylene Styrene Toluene benzene Xylene

Zero or below lower 77.1% 86.6% 90.9% 91.8% 88.5% 89.8% 70.7% detection limit 0 < x ≤ 5 ppb 17.1% 7.6% 3.1% 2.4% 5.5% 4.3% 23.4% 5 < x ≤ 10 ppb 0.02% 0 0 0 0 0.02% 0.1% x >10 ppb 0 .01% 0 0 0 0 0 No data1 5.8% 5.8% 6.0% 5.8% 6.0% 5.6% 5.8% Maximum (ppb) 9 41 0.6 0.8 0.8 8.9 7.7 AAAQO (ppb) 9 460 n/a n/a 529 52 499 1No data due to calibration periods and maintenance 2Total and -m, -p xylenes reporting began March 2010

Each of the benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, and styrene (BTEX/S) concentrations measured were zero or below the limit of detection more than 71% of the time, and all but one hourly measurement were below 10 ppb for the year. Maximum measured values were very low compared to the selected detection range (0-100 ppb) of the instrument.

Since the start up of the device in 2007, the Synspec 655 GC Analyzer has been optimized and calibrated for measuring relatively high concentrations of BTEX/S because expectations of compliance monitoring were to compare data against relatively high AAAQOs. However, the measured concentrations of each of the BTEX/S components have been very low. In 2011, FAP expects to seek approval to reconfigure the analyzer to calibrate at a lower detection range and produce more accurate data at these very low measured concentrations.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 51

2010 Passive Monitoring Results

Sulphur Dioxide

Passive monitoring results from 2010 are summarized in Table 42.

Table 41: 2010 Passive monitoring monthly averages: SO2 (ppb)

n/a: no sample Reportable Detection Limit: 0.02 ppb

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 52

The annual average concentration of SO2 at each monitoring site was used to develop a concentration map in Figure 4. Darkened areas of the map indicate areas that are likely to experience higher average monthly concentrations of SO2. The unusual contour shapes are a reminder that the isopleth contours are a graphical representation of interpolated values. The measurements were taken only at monitoring sites, which are represented by the red dots on the map.

Figure 5: Passive monitoring: 2010 Annual average concentration: SO2 (ppb)

This isopleth map is a graphical representation of annual average concentrations from several monitoring sites. The isopleth lines are interpolated between these points and are more approximate where there are fewer monitoring sites, or at the edges of the airshed.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 53

Hydrogen Sulphide

H2S passive monitoring data for 2010 is summarized in Table 43.

Since the concentrations are relatively uniform throughout the region, isopleth mapping is not a useful tool for characterizing spatial distribution of H2S.

Table 42: 2010 Passive monitoring monthly averages: H2S (ppb)

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 54

Nitrogen Dioxide

NO2 passive monitoring data for 2010 is summarized in Table 43.

Table 43: 2010 Passive monitoring monthly averages: NO2 (ppb)

Reportable detection limit: 0.1 ppb

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 55

Monthly average concentrations of NO2 vary throughout the region. The higher concentrations in the lower left corner of Figure 6 indicate that a higher annual average concentration of NO2 was measured in the southwest of the Airshed.

Figure 6: Passive monitoring: 2010 average concentration: NO2 (ppb)

This isopleth map is a graphical representation of annual average concentrations from several monitoring sites. The isopleth lines are interpolation between these points and are more approximate where there are fewer monitoring sites, or at the edges of the airshed.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 56

Ozone

Ozone passive monitoring data for 2010 is summarized in Table 46.

Table 44: 2010 Passive monitoring monthly averages: Ozone (ppb)

Reportable detection limit: 0.1 ppb

Annual average ozone concentrations vary throughout the region. They are likely lower in the central area of the Airshed due to the presence of nitrogen oxides, which have the effect of lowering ozone concentrations during the night through NOx titration chemistry. During daylight hours, these same nitrogen oxides are precursors to the formation of ozone.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 57

Figure 7: Passive monitoring: 2010 average concentration: Ozone (ppb)

This isopleth map is a graphical representation of annual average concentrations from several monitoring sites. The isopleth lines are interpolated between these points and are more approximate where there are fewer monitoring sites or near the airshed boundaries.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 58

Other Technical Airshed Programs and Activities

Action toward Regional Airshed Monitoring

Airsheds like FAP have incorporated individual industrial Air Quality Monitoring stations into a network, consolidating monitoring data and methods, and reporting data to a public archive. In addition to preparing the required individual compliance monitoring station reports, FAP compiles annual results to review the network as a whole in documents such as this Annual Technical Report.

As a result of viewing the network of stations collectively, FAP is making progress toward better understanding ambient air quality in the region and throughout the province.

 By operating and mapping a network of passive monitors, FAP has developed information about the regional distribution of SO2 and NO2 throughout the Airshed.

 FAP has identified redundant monitoring and deployed monitoring resources more effectively throughout the airshed.

 FAP is interested in promoting data of consistent quality throughout the province and contributes to Alberta Environment‟s Data Quality Committee. The purpose of the committee is to define consistent data handling procedures so that all contributors to the CASA data warehouse provide data of known quality.

Monitoring Network Assessment Plans

During 2010, the TWG revisited the monitoring objectives of FAP‟s ambient air quality network with the intent to have an assessment of the monitoring network completed in 2011. The group has drafted a Request for Proposal and has solicited air quality monitoring expert opinions to prepare for this assessment.

FAP wishes to maximize the informational value of our monitoring network in a cost effective and sustainable way, to ensure we understand the spatial distribution of pollutants, to identify and appropriately react to regional trends and emerging air quality issues, to provide the necessary information to evaluate population exposure to air pollutants, to improve our ability identify and apportion pollutant sources, and to provide suitable information for validating dispersion modeling that appropriately reflects ambient air quality.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 59

PM&O3 Management and the Capital Airshed Partnership (CAP)

Under Alberta‟s Particulate Matter and Ozone (PM&O3) Management Framework, a Capital Region Ozone Management Plan was required to ensure that air quality levels in the Capital Region remain better than the Canada-Wide Standard (CWS) established by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. FAP, together with West Central Airshed Society, Alberta Capital Airshed Alliance and Alberta Environment, agreed to take a leadership role in engaging stakeholders in the development of an ozone management plan to keep ozone levels below Canada-Wide Standards. An Ozone Management Plan (OMP) for the Capital Region was developed and submitted in 2008.

In 2009, CAP obtained the resources to commission an assessment of ozone monitoring in the region. The first objective of the work was to determine whether the current air monitoring network was adequate for providing an understanding of ozone formation and transport in the Edmonton Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) and surrounding areas. The second objective was to assess trends in ozone and/or ozone precursors to determine whether future exceedances of the Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives or the CWS for ozone are likely. The analysis was informed by data from existing monitoring stations in the region and an assessment report was prepared, entitled Evaluation of Regional Ozone Monitoring Network and Analysis of Data to Determine Trends, March 2010, which can be found at www.fortair.org.

The report identified a monitoring gap upwind and downwind of Edmonton, and recommended further monitoring should be done for these locations. The report also identified a need to better understand volatile organic compound (VOC) precursors to ozone. In 2010 CAP implemented several monitoring recommendations, including adding continuous monitoring at New Sarepta, Barrhead, and Sedgewick. VOC monitoring, for the purpose of understanding ozone precursors and ozone formation, was performed at New Sarepta and Barrhead.

CAP also commissioned three additional reports with the following objectives: a) to find out what progress has been made toward ozone management commitments, b) to compile knowledge of the current state of ozone in the province, and c) to identify other jurisdiction‟s successful ozone management actions.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 60

Appendices

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 61

Appendix B: FAP Monitoring Objectives

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 62

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 63

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 64

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 65

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 66

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 67

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 68

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 69

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 70

Appendix C: Technical Working Group Members

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 71

Technical Working Group Members (as of Dec 31, 2010)

Yayne-abeba Aklilu, Ph.D. Maurice Ouellet Senior Air Quality Specialist Environmental Technologist (Air & Noise) Alberta Environment Shell Canada Ltd.

Doug Bertsch Keith Purves VP Regulatory Affairs FAP Chair and Public Member NorthWestUpgrading Fort Air Partnership

Nadine Blaney, B.Sc. Dave Reid, CET Executive Director Air Quality Project Manager Fort Air Partnership AGAT Laboratories

Wendy Brown Ludmilla Rodriguez, M.Eng, P.Eng., CPHI(C) Head of Environment Provincial Advisor - Air Total E&P Canada Ltd. Alberta Health Services

Marcella deJong, P.Eng. Darcy Walberg Environmental Regulatory Affairs Canadian EH&S Specialist Dow Chemical Canada ULC Agrium Inc.

Paula Horn Joy Wesley, MSc. Eng., EIT Environmental Technologist Public Member Shell Scotford Manufacturing Fort Air Partnership

Monique Lapalme Air Quality Technician Meteorological Service of Canada Corresponding members

Melanie Larsen, P.Eng. Laurie Danielson, PhD., P.Chem. Technical Director Executive Director Fort Air Partnership Northeast Capital Industrial Association

Shelley Morris Merry Turtiak, MSc., CPHI(C) Air Monitoring Systems Technologist Scientist, Surveillance and Assessment Alberta Environment Alberta Health and Wellness

Jennifer Nisbet, B.Sc. Environmental Advisor Sherritt International Corporation

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report – March 2011 72

Appendix D: Monitoring Stations and Corresponding Approvals

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report 78

Table D-1: FAP monitoring stations and corresponding EPEA Approvals (Dec. 31, 2010) EPEA Approval FAP AQM Station Name Facility Number

Shell Canada Energy Lamont County AQM Station 49587-01-00 Scotford Upgrader

Shell Canada Energy 49587-01-00 Scotford Upgrader

Shell Canada Products Scotford 59-02-00 Oil Refinery Scotford 2 AQM Station Shell Chemicals Canada Ltd. 9767-02-00 Styrene and MEG Plant

BA Energy 203303-00-00 Heartland Bitumen Upgrader

Redwater Industrial AQM Agrium 210-02-00 Station Redwater Fertilizer Plant

There are no EPEA approvals that specifically reference Ross Creek AQM Station this monitoring station.

Station 401-Josephburg Road There are no EPEA approvals that specifically reference AQM Station this monitoring station.

There are no EPEA approvals that specifically reference Range Road 220 AQM Station this monitoring station.

Fort Saskatchewan There are no EPEA approvals that specifically reference Alberta Environment AQM this monitoring station. Station

There are no EPEA approvals that specifically reference Elk Island AQM Station this monitoring station.

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report 79

Table D-2: Industry Participants in FAP (Dec. 31, 2010)

A. Through participation on the FAP Board of Directors

 Dow Chemical Canada ULC  Shell Scotford

B. Through participation in the Technical Working Group

 Agrium  Dow Chemical Canada ULC  Shell Scotford  Sherritt International Corp.

C. As funders of FAP through Northeast Capital Industrial Association

 Agrium Fort Saskatchewan  Agrium Redwater  Air Liquide Canada Inc.  Aux Sable Canada  BA Energy Inc.  BP Canada Energy Company  Dow Chemical Canada ULC  Enbridge Pipelines Inc.  Evonik Degussa Canada Inc.  Gulf Chemicals & Metallurgical Corporation  Hazco Environmental Services  Keyera Energy  Kinder Morgan (Terasen) Heartland Terminal  Marsulex Inc.  MEGlobal Canada Inc.  North West Upgrading Inc.  Praxair Canada Inc.  Provident Energy Inc.  Shell Scotford  Sherritt International Corp.  Sulzer Metco (Canada) Inc.  Total E&P Canada Ltd.  Suncor  Umicore

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report 80

Appendix E: AMD Annual Reporting Requirements

Note:

Air Monitoring Directive Annual Reporting requirements (Frequency Distribution Tables) can be found on an accompanying CD, filed by AQM Station name. These multiple page reports are available electronically upon request: [email protected].

FAP Ambient Air Monitoring Network: 2010 Annual Technical Report 81