Report - Department of Environment Regulation...air quality assessment for the Utah Point facility (the Project) due to a planned increase in throughput. The purpose of the air quality

www.pacific-environment.com

Final Report

Pilbara Ports Authority Utah Point Air Quality Assessment Update

Document Control Number: AQU-WA-003-21742 Date: 16 March 2017

Pilbara Ports Authority

Document Control Number: AQU-WA-003-21742

21742_PPA_Utah_AQA_Update_R03 Proprietary information for Pilbara Ports Authority only. Property of Pacific Environment Limited.

i

Project Name: Pilbara Ports Authority Utah Point Air Quality Assessment Update


Prepared For: Pilbara Ports Authority

Approved For Release By:

Disclaimer & Copyright: This report is subject to the copyright statement located at www.pacific-environment.com © Pacific Environment Operations Pty Ltd ABN 86 127 101 642

Table 0.1. Document Control

Version Date Comment Prepared by Reviewed by

01 09.03.2017 Draft report

02 15.03.2017 Final report

03 16.03.2017 Final report

Adelaide 35 Edward Street, Norwood SA 5067 PO Box 3187, Norwood SA 5067 Ph: +61 8 8332 0960 Fax: +61 7 3844 5858 Brisbane

Level 19, 240 Queen Street Brisbane Qld 4000 Ph: +61 7 3004 6400 Fax: +61 7 3844 5858

Melbourne

Level 17, 31 Queen Street Melbourne Vic 3000 Ph: +61 3 9036 2637 Fax: +61 2 9870 0999

Perth

Level 1, Suite 3 34 Queen Street, Perth WA 6000 Ph: +61 8 9481 4961 Fax: +61 2 9870 0999

Sydney Head Office

Suite 1, Level 1, 146 Arthur Street North Sydney, NSW 2060 Ph: +61 2 9870 0900 Fax: +61 2 9870 0999




ii

Disclaimer Pacific Environment acts in all professional matters as a faithful advisor to the Client and exercises all reasonable skill and care in the provision of its professional services.

Reports are commissioned by and prepared for the exclusive use of the Client. They are subject to and issued in accordance with the agreement between the Client and Pacific Environment. Pacific Environment is not responsible for any liability and accepts no responsibility whatsoever arising from the misapplication or misinterpretation by third parties of the contents of its reports.

Except where expressly stated, Pacific Environment does not attempt to verify the accuracy, validity or comprehensiveness of any information supplied to Pacific Environment for its reports.

Reports cannot be copied or reproduced in whole or part for any purpose without the prior written agreement of Pacific Environment.

Where site inspections, testing or fieldwork have taken place, the report is based on the information made available by the client or their nominees during the visit, visual observations and any subsequent discussions with regulatory authorities. The validity and comprehensiveness of supplied information has not been independently verified and, for the purposes of this report, it is assumed that the information provided to Pacific Environment is both complete and accurate. It is further assumed that normal activities were being undertaken at the site on the day of the site visit(s), unless explicitly stated otherwise.




iii

Executive Summary Pacific Environment was commissioned by Pilbara Ports Authority (PPA) to update the air quality assessment for the Utah Point facility (the Project) due to a planned increase in throughput. The purpose of the air quality assessment is to update the prediction of the potential impact on ambient air quality within Port Hedland, in particular the ground level concentration of particles (as PM10), with the proposed throughput of 24.1 Million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) and 26.51 Mtpa using the validated PHIC model (AERMOD). This report summarises the assessment of air quality impacts associated with the operation of the Project.

Overview of Assessment For the purpose of the air quality assessment, the Project comprises PPA facilities and associated infrastructure. The key pollutant assessed is particles (as PM10).

Air quality assessment criteria provide the framework to assess the effects of existing and predicted emissions on the community and the environment (i.e. environmental impact). Air quality assessment criteria are based on the published Port Hedland Dust Management Taskforce (Taskforce) criteria of 70 µg/m3 for particles as PM10 (24-hour average) with no more than 10 exceedances per year) (DSD, 2010) at the Taplin Street monitor.

Emissions were modelled from two proposed operating scenarios: proposed export of 24.1 Mtpa (Scenario 1) and proposed export of 26.51 Mtpa (Scenario 2). In addition, model results have also been presented for the approved 21 Mtpa (Base Case) and will be used to understand the relative impact due to the introduction of additional tonnages through the Port.

Modelled ground level concentrations for PM10 have been compared to the Taskforce criteria in order to determine the potential impact on the environment. This assessment has considered the potential impact attributable to the Project, as well as the cumulative impact (i.e. the Project in conjunction with the existing emission sources in the Port Hedland area). The assessment has been made generally across the model domain, as well as at key sensitive receptor locations.

Air quality emissions were modelled using the Port Hedland Industry Council Cumulative Air Model (PHIC CAM) AERMOD. This model has been adopted by PHIC in order to provide industries with a consistent approach to the estimation and modelling of particle emissions in Port Hedland.

Key Findings of Assessment

Particles (as PM10) were modelled to represent the potential impact on the community, with an assessment being made at Taplin Street, considered to be the key sensitive receptor location




iv

(Table ES 0.1). The results from the two proposed operating scenarios have been grouped into the following three categories:

Project contribution in isolation of other emission sources.

Existing air quality (third party sources) determined based on approved third party operations.

Cumulative impact on Port Hedland with the inclusion of the project (existing air quality and the inclusion of the Project).

Project Impact in Isolation of Other Emission Sources The modelling results for the Project in isolation of other emission sources indicate that at Taplin Street:

In comparison to the base case scenario, a reduction in the maximum 24-hour PM10 is noted for both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. The higher levels noted for base case (31 µg/m3) attributed to a one off event contributed due to combination of sources in operation and prevailing meteorology. On comparing the 99th percentile 24-hour PM10, no variation is noted (from Base case) for Scenario 1 while a slight increase by 1 µg/m3 is noted for Scenario 2. The relative impact from Base Case due to Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 at Taplin Street is minimal.

No exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 are predicted to occur at Taplin Street.

When the nominated background concentration of PM10 was included (consistent with PHIC CAM), it was noted that at the key sensitive receptor (Taplin Street):

the highest 24-hour maximum PM10 concentration remains unchanged across all three scenarios.

one exceedance of the PM10 24-hour criteria was predicted for Base Case at this receptor which is attributable to background impacts; no variation in the number of exceedances is noted for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.

Cumulative Impact The Project was modelled in conjunction with an estimate of existing emissions in the Port Hedland airshed (including background concentrations), to determine the potential cumulative impact on the environment following the introduction of the Project. Modelled ground level concentrations for the key pollutants have been compared to ambient air quality assessment criteria.

The cumulative modelling results indicated that at the key sensitive receptor (Taplin Street):

the highest 24-hour maximum PM10 concentration is 202 µg/m³ across all 3 scenarios indicating the impact that background concentrations have across the airshed. It is to be noted that based on outcome of the PHIC CAM Work (PEL, 2015), the 24-hour




v

AERMOD results predicted at Taplin Street can be considered a reasonable reflection of actual monitored air quality.

The number of exceedances of the PM10 24-hour criteria is predicted to be 8 and 7 for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 respectively. In comparison to the Base Case scenario, the number of exceedances for Scenario 1 increases by one while it remains the same under Scenario 2. This variation in the number of excursions between the two expansion scenarios can be attributed to the variation in incoming material through the port. In comparison to the Base case, there is no change in the number of exceedances for Scenario 2. It is noted that based on the outcome of PHIC CAM work (PEL, 2015), the number of excursions predicted is a reasonable reflection of actual monitored air quality.

Overall, when compared to the Base Case Scenario, no variation in impact is predicted for PM10 concentrations at Taplin Street due to Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.




vi

Table ES 0.1: Project Model Results Summary at Taplin Street (µg/m3)

Project in isolation Project with 2013 Background Cumulative Impact

Criteria Base Case

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Base Case

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Base Case

Scenario 1 Scenario 2

24hr Average of 70µg/m3

31 17 18 191 191 192 206 207 207

Maximum 10 allowable exceedances

0 0 0 1 1 1 7 8 7




1

Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................... iii

Overview of Assessment ..................................................................................................... iii Key Findings of Assessment ............................................................................................... iii Project Impact in Isolation of Other Emission Sources ....................................................... iv Cumulative Impact ............................................................................................................... iv

1. Introduction .................................................................................................. 5 1.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Scope of Work .......................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Structure of Report ................................................................................................... 6

2 Study Approach and Assessment Methodology ...................................... 7 2.1 Climate assessment methodology ........................................................................... 7 2.2 Emission Estimation Process ................................................................................... 7 2.3 Operational Scenarios .............................................................................................. 7

2.3.1 Scenario 1 ......................................................................................................... 7 2.3.2 Scenario 2 ......................................................................................................... 8

2.4 Emission Estimation and Dispersion Modelling........................................................ 8 2.4.1 Emissions model/inventory................................................................................ 8 2.4.2 Meteorological model ........................................................................................ 8 2.4.3 Dispersion model ............................................................................................... 9 2.4.1 Background Air Quality ...................................................................................... 9

2.5 Ambient Air Quality Assessment Criteria ............................................................... 10 2.6 Sensitive Receptors ................................................................................................ 10

3 Emission Estimation .............................................................................. 12 3.1 Emission Sources ................................................................................................... 12

3.1.1 Truck Unloading and Stacking ........................................................................ 13 3.1.2 Reclaiming and Ship Loading ......................................................................... 13 3.1.3 Control Efficiency ............................................................................................ 14 3.1.4 Wind Erosion ................................................................................................... 15 3.1.5 Emissions Profile for PPA ............................................................................... 15

4 Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling Results ........................................... 17 4.1 Base Case Scenario ............................................................................................... 17

4.1.1 Case A – The Project emission in isolation of all other emission sources ...... 17 4.1.2 Case B - Cumulative Emissions arising from the Base Case Scenario in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the background air quality ........... 21

4.2 Scenario 1............................................................................................................... 23 4.2.1 Case A – The Project emission in isolation of all other emission sources ...... 24 4.2.2 Case B - Cumulative Emissions arising from the Scenario 1 in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the background air quality .............................. 28

4.3 Scenario 2............................................................................................................... 30 4.3.1 Case A – The Project emission in isolation of all other emission sources ...... 30




2

4.3.2 Case B - Cumulative Emissions arising from the Scenario 2 in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the background air quality .............................. 35

4.4 Summary of Results ............................................................................................... 37

5 Conclusions ........................................................................................... 39 5.1 Particles as PM10 .................................................................................................... 39

6 Reference .............................................................................................. 40

Appendix A .................................................................................................... 41 Emissions Estimation Flowchart (PHIC CAM Appendix G) ................................................ 42

Appendix B .................................................................................................... 46

Appendix C .................................................................................................... 51

Appendix D .................................................................................................... 56




3

List of Figures Figure 1-1 Project site location and existing third party operations ............................................ 5 Figure 2-1: Discrete Sensitive Receptor Locations .................................................................. 11 Figure 3-1: PPA Emission Sources .......................................................................................... 12 Figure 3-2: Calculated PM10 Emission Rates for Scenario 1 – with emission controls ............ 16 Figure 3-3: Calculated PM10 Emission Rates for Scenario 2 – with emission controls ............ 16 Figure 4-1 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Base Case project impact (Project standalone-excluding background) ........................................................................................... 20 Figure 4-2 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Base Case project impact (Project standalone-including background) ............................................................................................ 21 Figure 4-3: Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Cumulative Impact (All Sources) .............. 23 Figure 4-4 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 1 (Project standalone-excluding background) ............................................................................................................. 26 Figure 4-5 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 1 (Project standalone-including background)............................................................................................................... 27 Figure 4-6: Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Cumulative Impact Scenario 1 (All Sources) ................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 4-7 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 2 (Project standalone-excluding background) ............................................................................................................. 33 Figure 4-8 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 2 (Project standalone-including background)............................................................................................................... 34 Figure 4-9: Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Cumulative Impact Scenario 2 (All Sources) ................................................................................................................................... 36

List of Tables Table 0.1. Document Control ....................................................................................................... i Table ES 0.1: Project Model Results Summary at Taplin Street (µg/m3) .................................. vi Table 1.1: Currently approved throughput volume at Utah Point – L8937/2015/1. .................... 6 Table 2.1: Emission estimation source for each product type. ................................................... 7 Table 2.2: Model Scenario 1 - proposed throughput volume assumptions at Utah Point. ......... 8 Table 2.3: Model Scenario 2 – proposed throughput volume assumption at Utah Point. .......... 8 Table 2.4: Modelled tonnage of additional operations in the Port Hedland airshed. .................. 9 Table 2.5: Summary of Assessment Criteria Adopted ............................................................. 10 Table 2.6: Discrete Sensitive Receptor Locations .................................................................... 10 Table 3.1: Estimate of Annual Particle Emissions from the Project ......................................... 13 Table 3-2: Ship loading rates by Material type ......................................................................... 14 Table 3-3: PPA Emission Estimation ........................................................................................ 14 Table 4.1: Base Case Scenario in Isolation (Excluding 2013 background) – PM10 ................. 18 Table 4.2: Base Case Scenario in Isolation (Including 2013 background) – PM10 .................. 19 Table 4.3: Base Case Scenario Cumulative Impact – PM10 ..................................................... 22 Table 4.4: PPA Scenario 1 Isolation (Excluding 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures) .............................................................................................. 24 Table 4.5: PPA Scenario 1 in Isolation (Including 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures) .............................................................................................. 25 Table 4.6: PPA Scenario 1 Cumulative Impact – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures at PPA) ..................................................................................................................... 28 Table 4.7: PPA Scenario 1 Cumulative Impact at Taplin Street (with & without additional abatement) ................................................................................................................................ 30




4

Table 4.8: PPA Scenario 2 Isolation (Excluding 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures) .............................................................................................. 31 Table 4.9: PPA Scenario 2 in Isolation (Including 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures) .............................................................................................. 32 Table 4.10: PPA Scenario 2 Cumulative Impact – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures at PPA) ..................................................................................................................... 35 Table 4.11: PPA Scenario 2 Cumulative Impact at Taplin Street (with & without additional abatement) ................................................................................................................................ 37 Table 4.12: Summary of results - at Taplin Street .................................................................... 38




5

1. Introduction 1.1 Background Pilbara Ports Authority (PPA) owns and operates the Utah Point Port Facility in Port Hedland. The facility consists of 13 stockpiles in Stockyard 1 (SY1) and two stockpiles in Stockyard (SY2). Product is delivered to PPA’s Utah Point Multi-User Bulk Handling Facility via road trains, loaded via radial stackers and reclaimed via front end loaders (FELs). The Project location relative to the town of Port Hedland is shown in Figure 1-1.

PPA has engaged Pacific Environment Limited (PEL), to conduct atmospheric dispersion modelling for two proposed model scenarios:

increased tonnage to 24.1 Million tonnes per annum (Mtpa) and a future growth scenario of 26.51 Mtpa.

Figure 1-1 Project site location and existing third party operations

PPA is currently licensed under Environmental Protection Act licence L8937/2015/1 (L8937) to export 21.35 Mtpa from Utah Point. The currently approved throughput volume for Utah Point is outlined in Table 1.1.




6

Table 1.1: Currently approved throughput volume at Utah Point – L8937/2015/1.

Product Type Volume (annual) Iron Ore up to 21,350,000 tonnes (exported)

Manganese ore up to 2,000,000 tonnes (exported)

Chromite ore up to 350,000 tonnes (exported)

Total Volume (aggregate of all ores) 21,350,000 tonnes (exported)

1.2 Scope of Work The purpose of the study is to assess the potential air quality impacts associated with the proposed increase in throughput at Utah Point.

The scope of work for this project includes:

Conducting atmospheric dispersion modelling for both SY1 and SY2 using source emissions data collected at Utah Point in 2014 (PEL, 2015b) for proposed export of 24.1 Mtpa (Scenario 1) and potential future growth of 26.51 Mtpa (Scenario 2) throughput volumes; and

Determining the changes in predicted ground level concentrations within Port Hedland (at Taplin Street) as a result of the Project when compared to;

o Currently approved throughput volumes for Utah Point, and o The outputs of the cumulative air dispersion model commissioned by the Port Hedland

Industries Council.

1.3 Structure of Report This report details the methodology adopted in undertaking the assessment including the sources of emissions, emission estimation, modelling approach adopted. It also summarises the potential impacts to the air environment arising from the proposed operation of the Project under two operating scenarios. The report documents the:

Study approach and methodology (Section 2) Quantification of emissions (dust in the form of PM10) from the Project (Section 3) Atmospheric dispersion modelling of the emissions, using the Port Hedland Industries Council

Cumulative Model (PHIC CAM) (Section 4) An evaluation of the incremental change in air quality and impact to the air environment from

the Project (Section 4) Conclusions (Section 5).

The Appendices contain relevant extracts from the PHIC CAM report (PEL, 2015).




7

2 Study Approach and Assessment Methodology

This section outlines the approach applied in the assessment of ambient air quality. It includes the methodology applied to defining the meteorological characteristics of the project area important to the assessment, the emission estimation techniques, the dispersion model parameters, and the ambient assessment criteria selected for the purposes of determining the significance of the dispersion model results, and therefore the potential impact. Any deviations from the agreed PHIC Model methodology are identified and explained.

2.1 Climate assessment methodology The climate and meteorological characteristics of the region control the dispersion, transformation and removal (or deposition) of pollutants from the atmosphere (i.e. ambient air quality). For the purposes of understanding the local climatology, the development of the PHIC CAM included an assessment of the meteorological parameters recorded in the region during 2013 (calendar year data). The PHIC CAM analysis of climate and meteorological characteristics of the region (PEL, 2015) has been adopted in this assessment without change.

The methodology for emission estimation and dispersion modelling is described in more detail below.

2.2 Emission Estimation Process The approach to estimate emission from all different product types is outlined in Table 2.1. The emission estimation process has been undertaken once for each scenario.

Table 2.1: Emission estimation source for each product type.

Product Type Emission Estimation Source Iron Ore

Utilise emissions data collected during field measurement at Utah Point in 2014 (PEL, 2015b) In the absence of site specific emissions data, reference will be made to National Pollution Inventory (NPI)

Manganese ore

Chromite ore

Spodumene ore

2.3 Operational Scenarios Modelling has been undertaken for two operational growth scenarios:

Scenario 1 - proposed export of 24.1 Mtpa

Scenario 2 - proposed export of 26.51 Mtpa

2.3.1 Scenario 1 The proposed operational Scenario 1 assumes the following throughput volume at Utah Point (Table 2.2):




8

Table 2.2: Model Scenario 1 - proposed throughput volume assumptions at Utah Point.




Spodumene ore up to 3,000,000 tonnes (exported)


2.3.2 Scenario 2 The proposed operational Scenario 2 assumes the following throughput volume at Utah Point (Table 2.3):

Table 2.3: Model Scenario 2 – proposed throughput volume assumption at Utah Point.




Spodumene ore up to 3,000,000 tonnes (exported)


2.4 Emission Estimation and Dispersion Modelling 2.4.1 Emissions model/inventory

Emissions from all key sources associated with the Project have been identified according to accepted methods. An emissions inventory has been developed for the Project. Emissions of particles from the Project have been estimated consistent with the PHIC CAM flow chart (Appendix A). Emissions have been estimated for one year of operations, and are based on two operational scenarios.

Emissions for all non-project key sources in the region are based on the PHIC CAM (PEL, 2015). To retain individual company confidentiality of this information, these specific details have not been disclosed to PPA, and are not reported.

The air quality assessment has taken into account only the operational phase impacts of the Project i.e. emissions associated with the construction phase of the Project are not considered. Further details are provided in Section 3.

2.4.2 Meteorological model The meteorology applied within a dispersion model is a key factor for the effectiveness or representativeness of the dispersion model outputs. Both upper air and surface information are needed for modelling (or assumptions). For the purposes of this assessment, the meteorological model and configuration from the PHIC CAM (PEL, 2015) has been adopted without change.




9

2.4.3 Dispersion model For this assessment, air dispersion modelling has been conducted using the PHIC CAM as configured for AERMOD (PEL, 2015). The model has been used to predict ground level concentrations across the model domain and at nominated sensitive receptor locations (specifically Taplin Street). The air quality impacts associated with the Project were considered in isolation of other emission sources. The background PM10 concentration was based on the model configuration as defined for Port Hedland in the PHIC CAM (PEL, 2015). The existing air quality was based on the model configuration as defined for Port Hedland in the PHIC CAM (PEL, 2015). An assessment of the potential cumulative impact of emissions due to these other emissions sources in the region in conjunction with the Project was also undertaken to assess the potential cumulative impacts. The tonnages from other operations within the region that were modelled as part of this assessment are presented in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: Modelled tonnage of additional operations in the Port Hedland airshed.

Product Type Volume (annual) BHP Billiton Iron Ore (BHPBIO) 270Mtpa

Fortescue Metals Group (FMG) 175Mtpa

Roy Hill (RH) 55Mtpa

North West Infrastructure (NWI) 50Mtpa

The reported constraints and limitations of PHIC CAM were taken into account when interpreting the model results.

Particular considerations for the use of PHIC CAM when assessing hourly results is that PHIC CAM:

may over-predict concentrations at Richardson Street may under-predict the maximum concentration at Kingsmill Street and Taplin Street, though

the remaining concentrations may be slightly over predicted.

Particular considerations for the use of PHIC CAM when assessing 24-hour results is that PHIC CAM:

may over-predict concentrations at Richardson Street the modelled results at Kingsmill Street and Taplin Street are considered reasonable reflections

of actual monitored air quality the prediction of the number of excursions of the interim target is considered to be a reasonable

reflection at Taplin Street.

The PHIC CAM was configured to predict the ground-level concentrations on a rectangular grid. The model domain was defined with the Southwest corner of the grid cell to be at 657,000 East and 7,740,000 North at 500m grid resolution.

2.4.1 Background Air Quality The background air quality adopted for this assessment is based on the approach developed for the PHIC CAM Model (PEL, 2015) and is described below.

A simplistic methodology was adopted whereby the minimum hourly concentration recorded in 2013 across stations at BoM, South Hedland, Richardson Street, Kingsmill Street, Taplin Street, Neptune Place and FI_Admin was taken as the background concentration, provided that in that hour there was at least a measurement from either South Hedland or BoM. This ensured that if there was only data for a particular hour from either Richardson Street or Taplin Street then that particular hour was not assigned as a background concentration.




10

The purpose of the background file is to represent the dust concentrations that would occur in the local airshed if the port facilities, i.e., BHP Billiton Iron Ore, Fortescue Metals Group (FMG), Pilbara Ports Authority (PPA), Roy Hill (RH) and North West Infrastructure (NWI) were not there.

2.5 Ambient Air Quality Assessment Criteria Modelled ground level concentrations for particles (as PM10) have been compared to ambient air quality assessment criteria in order to determine the potential impact on Port Hedland. This assessment has considered the potential impact attributable to the Project, as well as the cumulative impact (i.e. in conjunction with the existing emission sources in the area). The assessment has been made generally across the model domain, as well as at key sensitive receptor locations identified as being representative or important for assessment.

The Port Hedland Dust Management Taskforce (Taskforce) has specified an interim guideline of 70µg/m3 for PM10 (24-hour average) with 10 exceedances per year. This guideline is determined at the Taplin Street monitoring station (DSD, 2010).

A summary of the assessment criteria adopted in this study is shown in Table 2.5.

Table 2.5: Summary of Assessment Criteria Adopted

Air Quality Impact Assessment Criteria

PM10 Taskforce (DSD, 2010) 70µg/m3 (24-hour)

Maximum 10 exceedances a year

2.6 Sensitive Receptors The discrete receptor locations adopted are consistent with those of the PHIC CAM Model (PEL, 2015). These locations are listed in Table 2.6 and shown in Figure 2-1, and are used for interpreting the model results.

Table 2.6: Discrete Sensitive Receptor Locations

Location ID

Receptor Name Easting (m) Northing (m)

1 Harbour 664,350 7,753,240 2 Richardson St 664,763 7,753,402 3 BMX 665,281 7,753,352 4 Kingsmill St 665,508 7,753,450 5 Hospital 665,870 7,753,420 6 Taplin St 667,030 7,753,435 7 St Celia's 667,292 7,753,390 8 Holiday Inn 667,780 7,753,480 9 Shop 668,050 7,753,280 10 All Seasons 668,140 7,753,530 11 Council 668,450 7,753,640 12 Neptune Pl 669,441 7,754,077 13 Primary School 670,631 7,754,008 14 South Hedland 666,600 7,743,439 15 Wedgefield 665,526 7,747,107




11

Figure 2-1: Discrete Sensitive Receptor Locations




12

3 Emission Estimation This section outlines the emission estimation process used to develop the emission inventory for the Project. It includes the emissions from all material handling operations at the Utah Point port facility. The emission estimation process generally follows the approach detailed in the PHIC CAM Flowchart (PEL, 2015) . An extract is provided in Appendix A. Additional details are provided below.

3.1 Emission Sources The key emission sources for the operating phase of the Project are considered to be associated with:

material loading from front end loader material unloading from

o bunkers o stackers

material transfer o by conveyors o transfer stations

ship loaders wind erosion from stockpiles and open areas.

A map of the emission sources at PPA is shown in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1: PPA Emission Sources

A summary of the estimated annual emissions from PPA for Scenario 1 (24.1 Mtpa) and Scenario 2 (26.51 Mtpa) are presented in Table 3.1. Reductions to account for dust abatement controls have been




13

assigned to emission sources based on NPI (2012). This approach is consistent with the PHIC CAM Study (PEL, 2015).

Table 3.1: Estimate of Annual Particle Emissions from the Project

Project Activity Emission Factor PM10 (kg/year)

Scenario 1 (24.1 Mtpa)

Scenario 2 (26.51 Mtpa)

Truck unloading 0.0043kg/t 48,089 52,235

Stacking 0.002kg/t (high moisture)

0.03kg/t (low moisture)

141,665 145,114

Front End Loaders Reclaiming 0.012kg/t 66,751 73,472

Transfer Stations 0.002kg/t (high moisture)


30,619 33,968

Ship Loading 0.002kg/t (high moisture)


29,027 31,751

Conveying 0.6 g/s 46,565 49,956

Wind Erosion sources See Section 3.1.4 51,248 52,209

TOTAL 413,965 438,705

3.1.1 Truck Unloading and Stacking A factor of 140 tonnes per truck was used to estimate the total ore unloaded into the facility. This daily tonnage was converted into an hourly format and split amongst the corresponding bunkers. A summary of incoming tonnage used by commodity type is presented in Table 2.2 and Table 2.3 for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 respectively.

The product throughput through the 15 bunkers and 13 stackers operating in any one hour was multiplied by the appropriate emission factors and control efficiency outlined in Table 3-3.

The control efficiency has been sourced from the Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Mining (EETM for Mining) (NPI, 2012). This approach is consistent with the PHIC CAM (PEL, 2015). This emission rate in kg/tonnes was then converted to g/s to provide an emission rate of PM10 from each of the sources.

3.1.2 Reclaiming and Ship Loading The material loading rates adopted are detailed in Table 3-2. These loading rates were assigned based on a random number to a reclaimer or ship loading operation. The material processed by front end loaders (FEL) operating in any one hour was multiplied by the appropriate emission factors and control efficiencies outlined in Table 3-3.

The control efficiency has been sourced from the EETM for Mining (NPI, 2012). This approach is consistent with the PHIC CAM work (PEL, 2015). This emission rate in kilograms per tonne (kg/tonne) was then converted to grams per second (g/s) to provide an emission rate of PM10 from each of the sources.




14

Table 3-2: Ship loading rates by Material type

Commodity Scenario 1 (tonnes/ hour)

Scenario 2 (tonnes/ hour)

Reference

Atlas Iron Ore 4,847 5,234 Provided by PPA

PMI Iron Ore 4,410 5,186 Provided by PPA

CML Manganese 3,535 Calculated (PEL, 2015)

CML Chromite 2,400 Calculated (PEL, 2015)

Spodumene RoM Ore 3,000 Calculated (PEL, 2015)

3.1.3 Control Efficiency The suite of dust controls currently utilised by PPA on its various material handling operations and their control factors are detailed in Table 3-3.

Table 3-3: PPA Emission Estimation

Source Type Control Efficiency (%)

Emission Estimation Equation (kg/tonne)

Equation Reference

Control Status

Truck Unloading

70% control for three sided enclosure

0.0043 (excl control)

EETM for Mining Section 1.1.6

Existing

Stackinga 50% reduction for water sprays; 25% for variable height

High moisture – 0.002

EETM for Mining Pg 20 Table 3

Existing

Low moisture – 0.03

Existing

Reclaiming 50% reduction for water sprays

0.012 EETM for Mining Section 1.1.2

Existing

Conveying No reduction 0.6 (PEL, 2015b) Existing Transfer stationsa

90% reduction for enclosures



Existing


Existing

Shiploading 75% reduction for telescopic chute



Existing


Wind erosion 50% reduction for water sprays

Section 3.1.4 Section 3.1.4 Existing

Note: The assumption has been made that iron ore has a high moisture content 90% of the time and a low moisture

content 10% of the time.

For the proposed upgrade PPA will also incorporate the following dust abatement strategies into the operations:

A water truck on stand-by during shiploading operations to ensure that the area in which the front end loaders (FEL) are operating is well watered. This results in an additional reduction to the FEL emissions from 50% to 75% (for level 2 watering as per Table 4 in the NPI EETM for Mining).

A reduction in the shiploading tonnage rate of 50% when the wind direction is between 247° and 267° and the wind speed is greater than 2m/s.




15

3.1.4 Wind Erosion The EETM for Mining specifies a default wind erosion emission factor of 0.2kg/ha/hr. The Pilbara region exhibits higher wind erosion potential and reference made to additional studies undertaken in the region (SKM, 2005). The wind erosion emissions factors were calculated using Equation 1. The wind speed threshold (WS0) and k constant used were 6 m/s and 4.3x10-07 respectively for iron ore and 7.7 m/s and 5.9x10-07 for Manganese. From Equation 1, the average PM10 emission rate was estimated to be 0.7 kg/ha/hr, which is greater than the default emission factor of 0.2 kg/ha/hr provided in EETM for Mining.

All stockpiles and active open areas were assumed to be susceptible to wind erosion in this assessment.

Equation 2 was used to estimate the PM10 rate (g/s) which was used when setting up an hourly varying emission file for the stockpiles and open areas.

Equations 1 and 2 were used to calculate the rate of emission of PM10 from wind erosion.

Equation 1

𝐸𝐹𝑃𝑀10 = 𝑘 [𝑊𝑆3 × (1 − 𝑊𝑆0

2

𝑊𝑆2)] 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑊𝑆 > 𝑊𝑆0

𝐸𝐹𝑃𝑀10 = 0 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑊𝑆 < 𝑊𝑆0

Where:

EFPM10 = Emission factor for PM10 (g/m²/s)

WS = Wind speed (m/s)

WS0 = Threshold for dust lift off (m/s)

k = A constant

Equation 2

𝐸𝑃𝑀10(𝑔/𝑠) = 𝐸𝐹𝑃𝑀10 × 𝐴 × (100 − 𝐶𝐸𝑃𝑀10

100)

Where:

EPM10(g/s) = Emission factor for PM10 (g/s)

EFPM10 = Emission factor for PM10 (g/m²/s)

A = Total exposed (m²)

CE = Overall control efficiency of PM10 (%)

3.1.5 Emissions Profile for PPA The top 20 sources (by the 99th percentile) from the PPA operations are presented in Figure 3-2 and Figure 3-3 for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 respectively. From both scenarios, it can be observed that




16

emissions from ship loading, wind erosion and reclaimers contribute to the largest emission rates of sources from operations at PPA.

Figure 3-2: Calculated PM10 Emission Rates for Scenario 1 – with emission controls

Figure 3-3: Calculated PM10 Emission Rates for Scenario 2 – with emission controls

The source characteristics used in the model are presented in Appendix B while the emission statistics of every source from PPA are presented in Appendix C.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Emis

sio

n R

ate

(g

/s)

Maximum

99 Percentile

95 Percentile

90 Percentile

75 Percentile

Average

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Emis

sio

n R

ate

(g

/s)

Maximum

99 Percentile

95 Percentile

90 Percentile

75 Percentile

Average




17

4 Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling Results

This assessment has used the PHIC CAM to estimate the air quality impacts associated with the Project. Particles, as PM10 was modelled (24-hour average) with results presented at the fifteen discrete receptors. In addition contours are presented across the model domain.

Results are presented for the following three modelling scenarios

Base Case Scenario (21.35 Mtpa) – this represents the currently approved operating scenario for PPA and is presented to understand the relative impact from the proposed operating scenario 1 and scenario 2.

Project Scenario 1 (24.1 Mtpa).

Project Scenario 2 (26.51 Mtpa).

Model results for the aforementioned operating scenarios have been grouped into the following categories:

Case A – The Project emission from the respective scenario (base case, scenario 1 or scenario 2) in isolation of all other emission sources (both including and excluding the stated PHIC CAM 2013 measured ambient background air quality).

Case B - The Estimate Cumulative Emissions arising from the Project scenario in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the PHIC CAM 2013 measured ambient background air quality.

4.1 Base Case Scenario This section presents the model results for the approved 21.35 Mtpa operating scenario. The predicted ground level concentrations of particles as PM10 are presented at fifteen receptors together with contour maps showing the modelled ground level concentration of PM10.

4.1.1 Case A – The Project emission in isolation of all other emission sources

The model results for PM10 from the approved Base Case Scenario (in isolation of all other sources and excluding 2013 background concentrations) are summarised in Table 4.1 and shown in Figure 4-1. The results indicate that:

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration of 68 µg/m3 is predicted to occur at the Harbour receptor with the 99th percentile predicted concentration at 63 µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 31 µg/m3 with the 99th percentile predicted to be 13µg/m3. This drop in concentrations indicates the maximum concentration predicted at Taplin Street is probably a one off event attributed to a combination of emission variability and prevailing wind direction.




18

There are no modelled exceedances of the Taskforce criteria at any of the receptors under this scenario (maximum 10 exceedances per year).

Table 4.1: Base Case Scenario in Isolation (Excluding 2013 background) – PM10

ID Receptor Name

Modelled Concentration (µg/m3)

Maximum 99th percentile

95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average

Exceedances(a) > 70 µg/m3

1 Harbour 68 63 45 35 22 16.3 N/A

2 Richardson St 62 38 26 20 12 9.2 N/A

3 BMX 38 30 20 15 8 6.5 N/A 4 Kingsmill St 35 25 17 13 6 5.4 N/A 5 Hospital 32 23 15 12 5 4.4 N/A 6 Taplin St 31 13 8 6 3 2.5 0 7 St Celia's 28 11 6 5 3 2.2 0 8 Holiday Inn 28 10 6 5 2 1.9 0 9 Shop 20 9 5 4 2 1.7 0 10 All Seasons 26 9 5 4 2 1.7 0 11 Council 22 8 5 4 2 1.5 0 12 Neptune Pl 11 6 4 3 1 1.1 0

13 Primary School 13 5 3 2 1 0.8 0

14 South Hedland 6 3 1 1 0 0.3 0

15 Wedgefield 14 5 2 2 1 0.7 0 Note: (a) The Exceedance count is stipulated for the Taplin Street location. All other site counts are for information purposes only.

The model results for PM10 from the Base Case Scenario (in isolation of all other sources and including the 2013 background concentrations) are summarised in Table 4.2 and shown in Figure 4-2. The results indicate that:

The Taskforce criterion is predicted to exceed once at Taplin Street. The single excursion of the Taskforce target is solely a result of the background concentrations (maximum 10 exceedances per year).

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration of 212 µg/m3 is predicted to occur at the Harbour receptor, with the 99th percentile predicted concentration at 92 µg/m3. Also note that the maximum background concentration is 183 µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 191 µg/m3 with the 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) predicted to be 59 µg/m3.




19

Table 4.2: Base Case Scenario in Isolation (Including 2013 background) – PM10

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 212 92 74 62 46 38.2 N/A 2 Richardson St 204 72 56 48 36 31.0 N/A 3 BMX 205 62 48 43 34 28.4 N/A 4 Kingsmill St 205 61 45 41 33 27.3 N/A 5 Hospital 205 62 43 39 32 26.3 N/A 6 Taplin St 191 59 39 35 28 24.4 1 7 St Celia's 188 58 39 35 28 24.1 1 8 Holiday Inn 187 58 38 34 28 23.8 1 9 Shop 185 57 39 35 27 23.6 1 10 All Seasons 186 57 38 34 27 23.5 1 11 Council 186 57 38 33 27 23.4 1 12 Neptune Pl 187 56 37 33 26 22.9 1

13 Primary School 184 56 37 33 26 22.7 1

14 South Hedland 184 53 37 32 25 22.2 1

15 Wedgefield 185 53 37 33 26 22.6 1

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1

Note: (a) The Exceedance count is stipulated for the Taplin Street location. All other site counts are for information purposes only.




20

Figure 4-1 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Base Case project impact (Project standalone-excluding background)




21

Figure 4-2 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Base Case project impact (Project standalone-including background)

4.1.2 Case B - Cumulative Emissions arising from the Base Case Scenario in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the background air quality

The model results for PM10 from the base case in conjunction with all other sources (cumulative impact) are summarised in Table 4.3 and shown in Figure 4-3. The results indicate that:




22

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration is predicted to occur at the Harbour receptor (231 µg/m3) with the 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) concentration estimated to be 143 µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 202 µg/m3, though it should be noted that the maximum background concentration is 183 µg/m3. The 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is predicted to be 79 µg/m3.

The Taskforce criterion (maximum 10 exceedances per year) is achieved under this scenario at Taplin Street.

Table 4.3: Base Case Scenario Cumulative Impact – PM10

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 231 143 117 104 84 70.5 N/A 2 Richardson St 225 145 102 89 69 60.1 N/A 3 BMX 221 121 93 81 65 56.1 N/A 4 Kingsmill St 222 110 91 78 61 52.4 N/A 5 Hospital 217 107 82 71 57 48.0 N/A 6 Taplin St 202 79 65 56 44 36.8 7 7 St Celia's 200 73 60 52 43 35.5 6 8 Holiday Inn 198 70 56 49 40 32.9 4 9 Shop 199 67 55 48 39 32.6 2 10 All Seasons 197 68 53 46 38 31.6 2 11 Council 197 66 50 45 37 30.6 2 12 Neptune Pl 196 60 47 40 34 28.2 1

13 Primary School 192 60 44 39 32 27.0 1

14 South Hedland 189 63 48 39 30 26.5 1

15 Wedgefield 196 106 77 66 47 40.3 33

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1





23

Figure 4-3: Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Cumulative Impact (All Sources)

4.2 Scenario 1 The predicted ground level concentrations of particles as PM10 at the key sensitive receptor locations are presented for Scenario 1 in the following sections. The modelled concentration statistics are presented at 15 discrete receptors. Contour maps showing the modelled ground level concentration of PM10 are also presented.




24

Further, this section also presents an analogy of the impact due to the proposed additional dust abatement at PPA (Section 3.1.3). Model results are presented at Taplin St both with and without the proposed additional abatements (Section 3.1.3) and the results discussed in Section 4.2.2.


The model results for PM10 from Scenario 1 (24.1 Mtpa in isolation of all other sources and excluding 2013 background concentrations) are summarised in Table 4.4 and shown in Figure 4-4. The results indicate that:

The highest 24-hour concentration is predicted to occur at the Harbour and is estimated to be around 91µg/m3. The 99th percentile value at this receptor is 73µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 12 µg/m3 with the 99th percentile predicted to be 9µg/m3.

There are no modelled exceedances of the Taskforce criteria across all receptors (maximum 10 exceedances per year).

Table 4.4: PPA Scenario 1 Isolation (Excluding 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures)

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 91 73 42 34 18 15.0 N/A

2 Richardson St 83 44 24 20 10 8.6 N/A


13 Primary School 4 3 2 2 1 0.7 0

14 South Hedland 6 2 1 1 0 0.3 0

15 Wedgefield 14 6 3 2 1 0.7 0 Note: (a) The Exceedance count is stipulated for the Taplin Street location. All other site counts are for information purposes only.

The model results for PM10 from the proposed Scenario 1 (in isolation of all other sources and including the 2013 background concentrations) are summarised in Table 4.5 and shown in Figure 4-5. The results indicate that:

The highest (maximum 24-hour) concentration is predicted to occur at Harbour (211µg/m3) – again noting that the maximum background concentration is 183 µg/m3.




25

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 191 µg/m3 with the 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) predicted to be 59 µg/m3.

The Taskforce criterion is predicted to be exceeded once at Taplin Street. The single excursion of the Taskforce target is solely a result of the background concentrations.

Table 4.5: PPA Scenario 1 in Isolation (Including 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures)

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 211 101 70 60 43 36.9 N/A

2 Richardson St 204 74 55 45 36 30.4 N/A


13 Primary School 184 56 37 32 26 22.6 1

14 South Hedland 183 53 37 32 25 22.2 1

15 Wedgefield 184 53 37 33 26 22.6 1

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1





26

Figure 4-4 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 1 (Project standalone-excluding background)




27

Figure 4-5 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 1 (Project standalone-including background)




28

4.2.2 Case B - Cumulative Emissions arising from the Scenario 1 in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the background air quality

The model results for PM10 from the PPA Scenario 1 in conjunction with all other sources (cumulative impact) are summarised in Table 4.6 and shown in Figure 4-6. The results indicate that:

The highest PM10 (maximum 24-hour) concentration is predicted at Harbour and equates around 230µg/m3 while the 99th percentile value is 150µg/m3. Again it needs to be noted that the maximum background concentration is 183 µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 202 µg/m3; the 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 81 µg/m3.

The Taskforce criterion (Maximum 10 exceedances per year) is achieved under this scenario at Taplin Street.

Table 4.6: PPA Scenario 1 Cumulative Impact – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures at PPA)

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 230 150 121 103 81 69.2 N/A

2 Richardson St 225 144 101 88 68 59.5 N/A


13 Primary School 193 59 44 38 32 26.8 1

14 South Hedland 188 63 49 39 30 26.5 1

15 Wedgefield 194 107 77 67 47 40.4 34

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1





29

Figure 4-6: Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Cumulative Impact Scenario 1 (All Sources)

The model results at Taplin from the PPA Scenario 1 in conjunction with all other source (cumulative impact) are presented (Table 4.7) for both with and without the proposed additional abatement measures outlined in Section 3.1.3.

It can be observed from Table 4.7 that the introduction of the additional controls, as outlined in Section 3.1.3, results in a reduction of 0.5µg/m3 in the annual average concentration at Taplin St. In Table 4.7 it is apparent that the number of predicted excursions reduces by three with the introduction of the additional abatement strategy. This highlights that reductions in emissions can have the potential to reduce the number of predicted excursions. It should be noted that the existing background




30

concentrations are elevated which can reduce the impact that emission reductions from export facilities will have in the region.

Table 4.7: PPA Scenario 1 Cumulative Impact at Taplin Street (with & without additional abatement)

Details Modelled Concentration (µg/m3)


95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average

Exceedances > 70 µg/m3

No additional abatement 203 82 64 55 44 37.0 11

With additional abatement

202 81 62 55 44 36.5 8

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1

4.3 Scenario 2 The predicted ground level concentrations of particles as PM10 at the key sensitive receptor locations are presented for Scenario 2 in the following sections. The modelled concentration statistics are presented at 15 discrete receptors. Contour maps showing the modelled ground level concentration of PM10 are also presented.

Further, this section also presents an analogy of the impact due to proposed additional dust abatement at PPA. Model results are presented at Taplin St both with and without the proposed additional abatements (Section 3.1.3) and the results discussed in Section 4.3.2.


The model results for PM10 from Scenario 2 (in isolation of all other sources and excluding 2013 background concentrations) are summarised in Table 4.8 and shown in Figure 4-7. The results indicate that:

The highest 24-hour concentration is predicted to occur at Harbour and is estimated to be around 91µg/m3. The 99th percentile value at this receptor is 72µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin St is estimated to be 12 µg/m3 with the 99th percentile predicted to be 9µg/m3.

There are no modelled exceedances of the Taskforce criteria at Taplin St.

The model results for PM10 from the proposed Scenario 2 (in isolation of all other sources and including the 2013 background concentrations) are summarised in Table 4.9 and shown in Figure 4-8. The results indicate that:

The highest (maximum 24-hour) concentration is predicted to occur at Harbour (212 µg/m3) again noting that the maximum background concentration is 183 µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 191 µg/m3. The 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) is predicted to be 59 µg/m3, which is significantly below the maximum, indicating that the background concentration has a dramatic effect on ground level concentrations.




31

The Taskforce criterion is predicted to exceed once at Taplin Street. The single excursion of the Taskforce target is solely a result of the background concentrations.

Table 4.8: PPA Scenario 2 Isolation (Excluding 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures)

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 91 72 44 36 21 16.0 N/A 2 Richardson

St 85 43 24 20 11 9.1 N/A

3 BMX 47 32 18 14 8 6.3 N/A 4 Kingsmill St 44 28 15 12 6 5.2 N/A 5 Hospital 29 23 11 10 5 4.1 N/A 6 Taplin St 12 9 7 6 3 2.3 0 7 St Celia's 14 9 6 5 3 2.1 0 8 Holiday Inn 10 8 6 4 2 1.7 0 9 Shop 22 7 4 4 2 1.6 0 10 All Seasons 9 7 5 4 2 1.5 0 11 Council 8 6 4 4 2 1.4 0 12 Neptune Pl 6 4 3 3 1 1.0 0 13 Primary

School 5 3 2 2 1 0.8 0

14 South Hedland

7 3 1 1 0 0.3 0

15 Wedgefield 15 6 3 2 1 0.8 0 Note: (a) The Exceedance count is stipulated for the Taplin Street location. All other site counts are for information purposes only




32

Table 4.9: PPA Scenario 2 in Isolation (Including 2013 background) – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures)

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 212 98 69 63 45 37.9 N/A

2 Richardson St 205 75 55 46 36 31.0 N/A


13 Primary School 184 56 37 33 26 22.6 1

14 South Hedland 184 53 37 32 25 22.2 1

15 Wedgefield 184 53 37 33 26 22.6 1

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1

Note: (a) The Exceedance count is stipulated for the Taplin Street location. All other site counts are for information purposes only




33

Figure 4-7 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 2 (Project standalone-excluding background)




34

Figure 4-8 Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration PPA Scenario 2 (Project standalone-including background)




35

4.3.2 Case B - Cumulative Emissions arising from the Scenario 2 in conjunction with PHIC CAM third party sources and the background air quality

The model results for PM10 from the PPA Scenario 2 in conjunction with all other sources (cumulative impact) are summarised in Table 4.10 and shown in Figure 4-9. The results indicate that:

The highest PM10 (maximum 24-hour) concentration is predicted at Harbour and is approximately 231µg/m3. The 99th percentile value is 150µg/m3.

The highest PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted at Taplin Street is estimated to be 202 µg/m3 with the 99th percentile PM10 (24-hour) concentration predicted to be 81 µg/m3. This highlights the impact that background concentrations have within this airshed.

The Taskforce criterion (maximum 10 exceedances per year) is achieved under this scenario at Taplin Street. When the number of excursions of the taskforce criteria in this scenario are compared to the base scenario (Table 4.3) it is apparent that it is predicted that there will be no increase in the number of excursions.

Table 4.10: PPA Scenario 2 Cumulative Impact – PM10 (inclusive of additional abatement measures at PPA)

ID Receptor Name



95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average


1 Harbour 231 150 120 104 83 70.2 N/A

2 Richardson St 226 144 101 88 69 60.1 N/A


13 Primary School 193 60 44 39 32 26.9 1

14 South Hedland 188 63 49 39 30 26.5 1

15 Wedgefield 195 107 78 67 47 40.4 34

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1

Note: (a) The Exceedance count is stipulated for the Taplin Street location. All other site counts are for information purposes only




36

Figure 4-9: Maximum 24-hour PM10 concentration Cumulative Impact Scenario 2 (All Sources)

The model results at Taplin Street from the PPA Scenario 2 in conjunction with all other sources (cumulative impact) are presented (Table 4.11) both with and without the additional abatement measures proposed.

It can be observed from Table 4.11 that the introduction of the additional controls, as outlined in Section 3.1.3, results in a reduction of 0.6µg/m3 in the annual average concentration at Taplin Street. In Table 4.11 it is apparent that the number of predicted excursions reduces by four with the introduction of the additional abatement strategy. This ensures that the predicted number of excursions at Taplin Street is the same as that predicted to occur for the base scenario (Table 4.3).




37

Table 4.11: PPA Scenario 2 Cumulative Impact at Taplin Street (with & without additional abatement)

Details Modelled Concentration (µg/m3)


95th percentile

90th percentile

70th percentile

Annual Average

Exceedances > 70 µg/m3

No additional abatement 203 82 64 55 44.88 37.2 11

With additional abatement

202 81 62 55 44 36.6 7

2013 background 183 53 36 32 25 21.9 1

4.4 Summary of Results A consolidated summary of the modelling results for all scenarios, at the Taplin Street receptor, is presented in Table 4.12. From this table the following can be summarised:

Project in isolation;

- The maximum concentration predicted for the Base Case is 31µg/m3 while the maxima predicted for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 are both 12µg/m3 (Table 4.12). The higher levels noted for the Base case scenario could be attributed to a one off event due to a combination of sources in operation and the prevailing atmospheric conditions.

- No exceedances are predicted to occur at Taplin Street under Base Case, Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.

Project including background;

- With the introduction of the PHIC CAM 2013 background, a slight reduction in the predicted concentrations for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 is observed, when compared to the base case. This can be attributed to the additional abatements proposed at PPA.

- No increase in number of exceedances is predicted (from Base Case) due to Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.

Cumulative Scenario;

- With the introduction of PHIC CAM 2013 background, and other third party sources in the region, the following can be observed: - In comparison to the base case scenario, (with exception of 99th percentile), a slight

reduction in the 24hr PM10 concentrations is predicted to occur for both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.

- In comparison to the Base case scenario, Scenario 1 results in a slight increase in the number of exceedances (increases by 1) while no variation is noted in the number of exceedances predicted for Scenario 2.




38

Table 4.12: Summary of results - at Taplin Street

24-hour concentrations Project in Isolation Project + Background Cumulative

Base Case Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Base Case Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Base Case Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Maximum 31 12 12 191 191 191 202 202 202 99th percentile 13 9 9 59 59 59 79 81 81 95th percentile 8 7 7 39 39 38 65 62 62 90th percentile 6 5 6 35 34 35 56 55 55 70th percentile 3 3 3 28 28 28 44 44 44 Annual Average 2.5 2.1 2.3 24.4 24.0 24.1 36.8 36.5 36.6 Exceedances > 70 µg/m3 0 0 0 1 1 1 7 8 7




39

5 Conclusions For the purpose of the air quality assessment, the Project comprises PPA facilities and associated infrastructure. The key pollutant assessed is particles (as PM10).

Modelled ground level concentrations for the key pollutants (particles as PM10) have been compared to ambient air quality assessment criteria in order to determine the potential impact on Port Hedland. The assessment has considered the potential impact attributable to the Project, as well as the cumulative impact (i.e. in conjunction with the existing emission sources in the area). The assessment has been made generally across the model domain (contour maps), as well as at key sensitive receptors, consistent with those of the PHIC CAM.

5.1 Particles as PM10 This comparison has shown that the particle emissions from PPA Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, when operated and managed according to the current design and proposed additional abatements, will not cause an increase in impact (compared to the base case) at Taplin Street.

The 24-hour maximum concentration of PM10, predicted at the key sensitive receptor (Taplin Street) under both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 (Project only impact) are 12µg/m3 (approximately 17% of the assessment criteria) and no exceedances are predicted.

The introduction of the background in the isolation scenarios results in no additional excursions of the Taskforce criteria at Taplin Street.

When considering the cumulative impact, changes may be evident with a slight reduction in the 24-hour concentrations predicted under both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. It is also noted that based on outcome of the PHIC CAM work (PEL, 2015), the 24-hour AERMOD results predicted at Taplin Street can be considered a reasonable reflection of actual monitored air quality.

The number of exceedances for Base Case scenario, Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 are 7, 8 and 7 respectively. The slight increase noted in number of exceedances for Scenario 1 (in comparison to the base case) could be attributed to the variation in incoming material through the port and/or updated emission factors adopted following site specific measurements (Section 3). In comparison to the Base case, there is no change in the number of exceedances for Scenario 2. It is noted that based on the outcome of PHIC CAM Work (PEL, 2015), the number of excursions predicted is a reasonable reflection of actual monitored air quality.

Overall, when compared to the Base Case Scenario, no significant variation in impact is predicted for PM10 concentrations at Taplin Street due to Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.




40

6 Reference DSD, 2010. Department of State Development, Port Hedland Air Quality and Noise Managemnt Plan, The Port Hedland Dust Management Taskforce Report, s.l.: s.n.

NPI, 2012. Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Mining Version 3.1, s.l.: s.n.

PEL, 2015b. Utah Point Site Specific Dust Emission Estimation, s.l.: Pilbara Ports Authority.

PEL, 2015. Port Hedland Cumulative Air Model - Model Comparison. Report prepared by Pacific Environment for the Port Hedland Industries Council. Perth, Western Australia, Australia, s.l.: s.n.




41

Appendix A Emission Estimation




42

Emissions Estimation Flowchart (PHIC CAM Appendix G) This section is an extract from the Port Hedland Industries Council Cumulative Air Model report (PHIC CAM report; PEL, 2015). It contains the flow chart for the calculation of the emissions along with additional information that was used in the emission estimation process.

As stated in PHIC CAM report (PEL, 2015), this flowchart is to be used for all subsequent assessments in Port Hedland taking into account the following factors:

All potential dust sources within the proposed facility should be modelled. Calculated emission file for a facility must be an hourly variable file. PHIC will not accept any

modelling that assumes a constant emission rate for each source over an entire year.

Therefore, based on this requirement the flowchart process has been adhered to when determining the emission estimates for the Project.


Document Control Number: AQU-WA-003-21742 21742_PPA_Utah_AQA_Update_R03

Proprietary information for Pilbara Ports Authority only. Property of Pacific Environment Limited.

43




44




45

Please note that Section A.3, A.4, A.5 are direct extracts from the PHIC CAM report (PEL, 2015).




46

Appendix B Source Characteristics




47

Source ID Description Easting

(m)

Northing

(m)

Sigma Y (m)

Sigma Z (m)

Base elevation

(m)

Effective height (m)

UPTUL1 Unloading Trucks - Atlas

663,114

7,752,784

2.8 0.5 6.03 1


663,200

7,752,676

2.8 0.5 6.79 1

UPTUL3 Unloading Trucks –

Manganese

663,290

7,752,565

2.8 0.5 6.47 1

UPTUL4 Unloading Trucks –

Manganese

663,361

7,752,476

2.8 0.5 6.62 1

UPTUL5 Unloading Trucks - Chromite

663,434

7,752,384

2.8 0.5 6.28 1

UPTUL6 Unloading Trucks -

Spodumene

663,493

7,752,247

2.8 0.5 5.27 1

UPTUL7 Unloading Trucks -

Spodumene

663,413

7,752,182

2.8 0.5 6.42 1

UPTUL8 Unloading Trucks - PMI

Iron

663,290

7,752,273

2.8 0.5 6.18 1


Iron

663,219

7,752,364

2.8 0.5 5.71 1


Iron

663,140

7,752,457

2.8 0.5 6.04 1

UPTUL11 Unloading Trucks - Atlas_Fe

663,054

7,752,567

2.8 0.5 6.88 1

UPTUL12 Unloading Trucks - Atlas_Fe

662,986

7,752,655

2.8 0.5 7 1


Iron

662,907

7,752,752

2.8 0.5 7.57 1


663,034

7,752,926

2.8 0.5 6.55 1


663,179

7,752,844

2.8 0.5 6.28 1

UPSTK1 Stacker – Atlas 663,083

7,752,744

11.6 3.7 6.32 8

UPSTK2 Stacker - Atlas 663,166

7,752,633

11.6 3.7 6.41 8

UPSTK3 Stacker – Manganese

663,272

7,752,503

11.6 3.7 5.31 8

UPSTK4 Stacker – Manganese

663,337

7,752,425

11.6 3.7 7 8

UPSTK5 Stacker - Chromite

663,410

7,752,348

11.6 3.7 6.13 8

UPSTK6 Stacker - Spodumene

663,454

7,752,291

7.0 3.7 5.56 8

UPSTK7 Stacker - Spodumene

663,368

7,752,224

7.0 3.7 5.58 8

UPSTK8 Stacker - PMI Iron

663,332

7,752,319

11.6 3.7 6.51 8


663,259

7,752,399

11.6 3.7 6.72 8




48


(m)

Northing

(m)

Sigma Y (m)

Sigma Z (m)

Base elevation

(m)



663,196

7,752,491

11.6 3.7 5.69 8

UPSTK11 Stacker - Atlas_Fe

663,088

7,752,614

11.6 3.7 6.49 8

UPSTK12 Stacker - Atlas_Fe

663,028

7,752,683

11.6 3.7 7 8


662,945

7,752,785

11.6 3.7 7.04 8


7,752,933

11.6 3.7 6.3 8


7,752,869

11.6 3.7 6.66 8

UPREC1 Reclaimer – Atlas

663,075

7,752,735

11.6 1.4 6.43 3

UPREC2 Reclaimer - Atlas

663,157

7,752,621

11.6 1.4 6.29 3

UPREC3 Reclaimer – Manganese

663,100

7,752,624

11.6 1.4 6.36 3

UPREC4 Reclaimer – Manganese

663,042

7,752,693

11.6 1.4 7 3

UPREC5 Reclaimer - Chromite

663,262

7,752,493

11.6 1.4 5.54 3

UPREC6 Reclaimer - Spodumene

663,328

7,752,413

11.6 1.4 6.96 3

UPREC7 Reclaimer - Spodumene

663,398

7,752,335

11.6 1.4 6.04 3

UPREC8 Reclaimer - PMI Iron

663,439

7,752,274

11.6 1.4 5.38 3


663,396

7,752,252

11.6 1.4 5.13 3


663,340

7,752,327

11.6 1.4 6.5 3

UPREC11 Reclaimer - Atlas_Fe

663,268

7,752,408

11.6 1.4 6.85 3

UPREC12 Reclaimer - Atlas_Fe

663,206

7,752,501

11.6 1.4 5.45 3


662,961

7,752,798

11.6 1.4 6.97 3


663,039

7,752,959

11.6 1.4 6.87 3


663,237

7,752,838

11.6 1.4 6.37 3

S14_TS_A Transfer Station - UPTS1

663,483

7,752,805

3.7 1.4 8.4 3

S15_TS_A Transfer Station - UPTS2

663,788

7,752,712

3.7 1.4 1 3

S16_SL_A Ship Loader UPSL1

663,834

7,752,784

14.0 4.7 0 10

CV02A_A CV02a 663,332

7,752,684

20.0 0.7 6.93 1.5

CV02B_A CV02b 663,461

7,752,781

20.0 0.7 8 1.5

CV03A_A CV03a 663,562

7,752,794

20.0 0.7 7.96 1.5

CV03B_A CV03b 663,704

7,752,755

20.0 0.7 5.14 1.5




49


(m)

Northing

(m)

Sigma Y (m)

Sigma Z (m)

Base elevation

(m)


CV04A_A CV04a 663,138

7,752,943

20.0 0.7 6.1 1.5

CV04B_A CV04b 663,311

7,752,846

20.0 0.7 6.27 1.5

S14_TS_B Transfer Station - UPTS1

663,483

7,752,805

3.7 1.4 8.4 3

S15_TS_B Transfer Station - UPTS2

663,788

7,752,712

3.7 1.4 1 3

S16_SL_B Ship Loader UPSL1

663,834

7,752,784

14.0 4.7 0 10

CV02A_B CV02a 663,332

7,752,684

20.0 0.7 6.93 1.5

CV02B_B CV02b 663,461

7,752,781

20.0 0.7 8 1.5

CV03A_B CV03a 663,562

7,752,794

20.0 0.7 7.96 1.5

CV03B_B CV03b 663,704

7,752,755

20.0 0.7 5.14 1.5

S14_TS_C Transfer Station - UPTS1

663,483

7,752,805

3.7 1.4 8.4 3

S15_TS_C Transfer Station - UPTS2

663,788

7,752,712

3.7 1.4 1 3

S16_SL_C Ship Loader UPSL1

663,834

7,752,784

14.0 4.7 0 10

CV02A_C CV02a 663,332

7,752,684

20.0 0.7 6.93 1.5

CV02B_C CV02b 663,461

7,752,781

20.0 0.7 8 1.5

CV03A_C CV03a 663,562

7,752,794

20.0 0.7 7.96 1.5

CV03B_C CV03b 663,704

7,752,755

20.0 0.7 5.14 1.5

S14_TS_D Transfer Station - UPTS1

663,483

7,752,805

3.7 1.4 8.4 3

S15_TS_D Transfer Station - UPTS2

663,788

7,752,712

3.7 1.4 1 3

S16_SL_D Ship Loader UPSL1

663,834

7,752,784

14.0 4.7 0 10

CV02A_D CV02a 663,332

7,752,684

20.0 0.7 6.93 1.5

CV02B_D CV02b 663,461

7,752,781

20.0 0.7 8 1.5

CV03A_D CV03a 663,562

7,752,794

20.0 0.7 7.96 1.5

CV03B_D CV03b 663,704

7,752,755

20.0 0.7 5.14 1.5

S14_TS_E Transfer Station - UPTS1

663,483

7,752,805

3.7 1.4 8.4 3

S15_TS_E Transfer Station - UPTS2

663,788

7,752,712

3.7 1.4 1 3




50


(m)

Northing

(m)

Sigma Y (m)

Sigma Z (m)

Base elevation

(m)


S16_SL_E Ship Loader UPSL1

663,834

7,752,784

14.0 4.7 0 10

CV02A_E CV02a 663,332

7,752,684

20.0 0.7 6.93 1.5

CV02B_E CV02b 663,461

7,752,781

20.0 0.7 8 1.5

CV03A_E CV03a 663,562

7,752,794

20.0 0.7 7.96 1.5

CV03B_E CV03b 663,704

7,752,755

20.0 0.7 5.14 1.5

S19 Wind erosion Stockpiles

Spodumene

663,469

7,752,276

25.9 3.7 5.4 8


Spodumene

663,385

7,752,206

27.4 3.7 5.78 8

S21 Wind erosion Stockpiles PMI

Iron

663,235

7,752,399

46.7 3.7 6.54 8


Manganese

663,325

7,752,458

46.5 3.7 6.45 8

S23 Wind erosion Stockpiles PMI

Iron

662,927

7,752,796

25.6 3.7 7.01 8


Atlas

663,038

7,752,648

32.2 3.7 7 8


Atlas

663,112

7,752,722

40.8 3.7 6.18 8


Atlas

663,055

7,752,938

38.6 3.7 6.49 8

S27 Wind erosion Open1

663,206

7,752,865

31.3 3.7 6.64 8




51

Appendix C Emission Estimation




52

Source Id Maximum (g/s)

99th Percentile

(g/s)

95th Percentile

(g/s)

90th Percentile

(g/s)

70th Percentile

(g/s) Average

(g/s)

UPTUL1 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL2 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL3 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.03

UPTUL4 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.03

UPTUL5 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.02

UPTUL6 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17

UPTUL7 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17

UPTUL8 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL9 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL10 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL11 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL12 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL13 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL14 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPTUL15 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.11

UPSTK1 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.15

UPSTK2 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.15

UPSTK3 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.03 0.04

UPSTK4 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.03 0.04

UPSTK5 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03

UPSTK6 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.24 0.27

UPSTK7 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24

UPSTK8 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPSTK9 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPSTK10 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPSTK11 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.15

UPSTK12 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.15

UPSTK13 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPSTK14 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.15

UPSTK15 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.15

UPREC1 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.19

UPREC2 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.21

UPREC3 5.89 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05

UPREC4 5.89 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05

UPREC5 4.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03

UPREC6 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.13

UPREC7 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.13

UPREC8 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14

UPREC9 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13

UPREC10 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15

UPREC11 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.20

UPREC12 8.08 3.23 1.62 0.00 0.00 0.19

UPREC13 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14

UPREC14 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.21

UPREC15 8.08 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17

S14_TS_A 4.04 4.04 2.02 0.27 0.27 0.27

S15_TS_A 4.04 4.04 2.02 0.27 0.27 0.27

S16_SL_A 10.10 10.10 5.05 0.67 0.67 0.68

CV02A_A 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.13

CV02B_A 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.13

CV03A_A 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.13

CV03B_A 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.13

CV04A_A 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.06

CV04B_A 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.06




53


99th Percentile

(g/s)

95th Percentile

(g/s)

90th Percentile

(g/s)

70th Percentile

(g/s) Average

(g/s)

S14_TS_B 3.68 3.68 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.12

S15_TS_B 3.68 3.68 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.12

S16_SL_B 9.19 9.19 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.29

CV02A_B 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.10

CV02B_B 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.10

CV03A_B 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.10

CV03B_B 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.10

S14_TS_C 2.95 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

S15_TS_C 2.95 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

S16_SL_C 7.36 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06

CV02A_C 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV02B_C 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV03A_C 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV03B_C 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

S14_TS_D 2.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

S15_TS_D 2.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

S16_SL_D 5.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV02A_D 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

CV02B_D 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

CV03A_D 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

CV03B_D 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

S14_TS_E 2.50 2.50 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.06

S15_TS_E 2.50 2.50 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.06

S16_SL_E 6.25 6.25 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.16

CV02A_E 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

CV02B_E 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

CV03A_E 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

CV03B_E 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

S19 21.08 2.90 0.33 0.08 0.00 0.12

S20 10.44 2.13 0.37 0.11 0.00 0.09

S21 46.32 9.12 0.64 0.01 0.00 0.32

S22 56.98 9.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31

S23 15.95 3.14 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.11

S24 26.00 5.12 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.18

S25 39.89 7.85 0.55 0.01 0.00 0.28

S26 21.48 4.23 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.15

S27 10.00 1.97 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.07




54


99th Percentile

(g/s)

95th Percentile

(g/s)

90th Percentile

(g/s)

70th Percentile

(g/s) Average

(g/s)

UPTUL1 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL2 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL3 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.03

UPTUL4 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.03

UPTUL5 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.02

UPTUL6 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17

UPTUL7 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17

UPTUL8 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL9 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL10 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL11 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL12 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL13 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL14 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPTUL15 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.09 0.12

UPStk1 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.05 0.17

UPStk2 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.05 0.17

UPStk3 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.03 0.04

UPStk4 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.03 0.04

UPStk5 0.44 0.44 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03

UPStk6 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.24 0.27

UPStk7 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24

UPStk8 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPStk9 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPStk10 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPStk11 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.05 0.17

UPStk12 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.05 0.17

UPStk13 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.74

UPStk14 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.05 0.17

UPStk15 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.05 0.17

UPRec1 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.20

UPRec2 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.21

UPRec3 5.89 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05

UPRec4 5.89 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05

UPRec5 4.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03

UPRec6 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.13

UPRec7 5.00 2.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.13

UPRec8 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13

UPRec9 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15

UPRec10 7.35 2.94 1.47 0.00 0.00 0.16

UPRec11 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.22

UPRec12 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.22

UPRec13 7.35 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16

UPRec14 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.24

UPRec15 8.08 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.24

UPTS1 4.04 4.04 4.04 0.27 0.27 0.31

UPTS2 4.04 4.04 4.04 0.27 0.27 0.31

UPSL1 10.10 10.10 10.10 0.67 0.67 0.77

CV02a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14

CV02b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14

CV03a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14

CV03b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14

CV04a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.08

CV04b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.08




55


99th Percentile

(g/s)

95th Percentile

(g/s)

90th Percentile

(g/s)

70th Percentile

(g/s) Average

(g/s)

UPTS1 3.68 3.68 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.14

UPTS2 3.68 3.68 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.14

UPSL1 9.19 9.19 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.34

CV02a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.11

CV02b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.11

CV03a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.11

CV03b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.11

UPTS1 2.95 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

UPTS2 2.95 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

UPSL1 7.36 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06

CV02a 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV02b 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV03a 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV03b 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

UPTS1 2.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

UPTS2 2.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

UPSL1 5.00 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02

CV02a 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

CV02b 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

CV03a 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

CV03b 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

UPTS1 2.50 2.50 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.06

UPTS2 2.50 2.50 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.06

UPSL1 6.25 6.25 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.16

CV02a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

CV02b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

CV03a 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

CV03b 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.07

S19 21.08 2.90 0.33 0.08 0.00 0.12

S20 20.89 2.87 0.32 0.08 0.00 0.12

S21 46.32 9.12 0.64 0.01 0.00 0.32

S22 56.98 9.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31

S23 15.95 3.14 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.11

S24 26.00 5.12 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.18

S25 39.89 7.85 0.55 0.01 0.00 0.28

S26 21.48 4.23 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.15

S27 10.00 1.97 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.07




56

Appendix D Model Input File




57

**

****************************************

**

** AERMOD Input Produced by:

** AERMOD View Ver. 9.1.0

** Lakes Environmental Software Inc.

** Date: 10/01/2017

** File: C:\Jobs\21742\Receptor\PPA_28MTPA\PPA_28MTPA.ADI

**

****************************************

**

**

****************************************

** AERMOD Control Pathway

****************************************

**

**

CO STARTING

TITLEONE Run4 AERMET - PPA all

MODELOPT CONC DRYDPLT WETDPLT BETA LOWWIND2

AVERTIME 1 24 ANNUAL

POLLUTID PM_10

RUNORNOT RUN

ERRORFIL PPA_28MTPA.err

CO FINISHED

**

****************************************

** AERMOD Source Pathway

****************************************

**

**

SO STARTING

** Source Location **

** Source ID - Type - X Coord. - Y Coord. **

LOCATION UPTUL1 VOLUME 663113.780 7752784.230 6.030

** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Mang


** DESCRSRC Mang


** DESCRSRC Chromite


** DESCRSRC Spodumene







58

** DESCRSRC PMI Iron






** DESCRSRC Atlas_Fe






** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas

LOCATION UPSTK1 VOLUME 663082.750 7752743.880 6.320

** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Mang


** DESCRSRC Mang




















** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas

LOCATION UPREC1 VOLUME 663074.770 7752735.490 6.430

** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas




59


** DESCRSRC Mang


** DESCRSRC Mang




















** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas

LOCATION S14_TS_A VOLUME 663483.010 7752805.080 8.400

** DESCRSRC UPTS1

LOCATION S15_TS_A VOLUME 663788.220 7752712.450 1.000

** DESCRSRC UPTS2

LOCATION S16_SL_A VOLUME 663833.570 7752784.020 0.000

** DESCRSRC UPSL1

LOCATION CV02A_A VOLUME 663332.000 7752684.000 6.930

** DESCRSRC CV02a

LOCATION CV02B_A VOLUME 663461.000 7752781.000 8.000

** DESCRSRC CV02b


** DESCRSRC CV03a


** DESCRSRC CV03b


** DESCRSRC CV04a


** DESCRSRC CV04b

LOCATION S14_TS_B VOLUME 663483.010 7752805.080 8.400

** DESCRSRC UPTS1

LOCATION S15_TS_B VOLUME 663788.220 7752712.450 1.000

** DESCRSRC UPTS2

LOCATION S16_SL_B VOLUME 663833.570 7752784.020 0.000




60

** DESCRSRC UPSL1

LOCATION CV02A_B VOLUME 663332.000 7752684.000 6.930

** DESCRSRC CV02a

LOCATION CV02B_B VOLUME 663461.000 7752781.000 8.000

** DESCRSRC CV02b

LOCATION CV03A_B VOLUME 663562.000 7752794.000 7.960

** DESCRSRC CV03a

LOCATION CV03B_B VOLUME 663704.000 7752755.000 5.140

** DESCRSRC CV03b

LOCATION S14_TS_C VOLUME 663483.010 7752805.080 8.400

** DESCRSRC UPTS1

LOCATION S15_TS_C VOLUME 663788.220 7752712.450 1.000

** DESCRSRC UPTS2

LOCATION S16_SL_C VOLUME 663833.570 7752784.020 0.000

** DESCRSRC UPSL1

LOCATION CV02A_C VOLUME 663332.000 7752684.000 6.930

** DESCRSRC CV02a

LOCATION CV02B_C VOLUME 663461.000 7752781.000 8.000

** DESCRSRC CV02b

LOCATION CV03A_C VOLUME 663562.000 7752794.000 7.960

** DESCRSRC CV03a

LOCATION CV03B_C VOLUME 663704.000 7752755.000 5.140

** DESCRSRC CV03b

LOCATION S14_TS_D VOLUME 663483.010 7752805.080 8.400

** DESCRSRC UPTS1

LOCATION S15_TS_D VOLUME 663788.220 7752712.450 1.000

** DESCRSRC UPTS2

LOCATION S16_SL_D VOLUME 663833.570 7752784.020 0.000

** DESCRSRC UPSL1

LOCATION CV02A_D VOLUME 663332.000 7752684.000 6.930

** DESCRSRC CV02a

LOCATION CV02B_D VOLUME 663461.000 7752781.000 8.000

** DESCRSRC CV02b

LOCATION CV03A_D VOLUME 663562.000 7752794.000 7.960

** DESCRSRC CV03a

LOCATION CV03B_D VOLUME 663704.000 7752755.000 5.140

** DESCRSRC CV03b

LOCATION S14_TS_E VOLUME 663483.010 7752805.080 8.400

** DESCRSRC UPTS1

LOCATION S15_TS_E VOLUME 663788.220 7752712.450 1.000

** DESCRSRC UPTS2

LOCATION S16_SL_E VOLUME 663833.570 7752784.020 0.000

** DESCRSRC UPSL1

LOCATION CV02A_E VOLUME 663332.000 7752684.000 6.930

** DESCRSRC CV02a

LOCATION CV02B_E VOLUME 663461.000 7752781.000 8.000

** DESCRSRC CV02b

LOCATION CV03A_E VOLUME 663562.000 7752794.000 7.960

** DESCRSRC CV03a




61

LOCATION CV03B_E VOLUME 663704.000 7752755.000 5.140

** DESCRSRC CV03b

LOCATION S19 VOLUME 663468.930 7752275.850 5.400







** DESCRSRC Mang




** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Atlas


** DESCRSRC Open1

** Source Parameters **

SRCPARAM UPTUL1 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL2 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL3 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL4 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL5 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL6 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL7 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL8 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL9 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL10 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL11 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL12 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL13 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL14 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPTUL15 1.0 1.000 2.790 0.465

SRCPARAM UPSTK1 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK2 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK3 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK4 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK5 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK6 1.0 8.000 6.980 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK7 1.0 8.000 6.980 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK8 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK9 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK10 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK11 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK12 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK13 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721




62

SRCPARAM UPSTK14 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPSTK15 1.0 8.000 11.630 3.721

SRCPARAM UPREC1 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC2 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC3 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC4 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC5 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC6 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC7 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC8 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC9 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC10 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC11 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC12 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC13 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC14 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM UPREC15 1.0 3.000 11.630 1.395

SRCPARAM S14_TS_A 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S15_TS_A 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S16_SL_A 1.0 10.000 13.950 4.651

SRCPARAM CV02A_A 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV02B_A 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03A_A 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03B_A 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV04A_A 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV04B_A 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM S14_TS_B 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S15_TS_B 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S16_SL_B 1.0 10.000 13.950 4.651

SRCPARAM CV02A_B 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV02B_B 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03A_B 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03B_B 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM S14_TS_C 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S15_TS_C 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S16_SL_C 1.0 10.000 13.950 4.651

SRCPARAM CV02A_C 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV02B_C 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03A_C 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03B_C 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM S14_TS_D 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S15_TS_D 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S16_SL_D 1.0 10.000 13.950 4.651

SRCPARAM CV02A_D 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV02B_D 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03A_D 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03B_D 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM S14_TS_E 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395

SRCPARAM S15_TS_E 1.0 3.000 3.720 1.395




63

SRCPARAM S16_SL_E 1.0 10.000 13.950 4.651

SRCPARAM CV02A_E 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV02B_E 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03A_E 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM CV03B_E 1.0 1.500 20.000 0.698

SRCPARAM S19 1.0 8.000 25.930 3.721

SRCPARAM S20 1.0 8.000 27.410 3.721

SRCPARAM S21 1.0 8.000 46.680 3.721

SRCPARAM S22 1.0 8.000 46.510 3.721

SRCPARAM S23 1.0 8.000 25.560 3.721

SRCPARAM S24 1.0 8.000 32.230 3.721

SRCPARAM S25 1.0 8.000 40.750 3.721

SRCPARAM S26 1.0 8.000 38.554 3.721

SRCPARAM S27 1.0 8.000 31.325 3.721

PARTDIAM UPTUL1 1 4 7 9















PARTDIAM UPSTK1 1 4 7 9















PARTDIAM UPREC1 1 4 7 9








64











PARTDIAM S14_TS_A 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S15_TS_A 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S16_SL_A 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02A_A 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02B_A 1 4 7 9





PARTDIAM S14_TS_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S15_TS_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S16_SL_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02A_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02B_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03A_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03B_B 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S14_TS_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S15_TS_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S16_SL_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02A_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02B_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03A_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03B_C 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S14_TS_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S15_TS_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S16_SL_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02A_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02B_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03A_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03B_D 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S14_TS_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S15_TS_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S16_SL_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02A_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV02B_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03A_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM CV03B_E 1 4 7 9

PARTDIAM S19 1 4 7 9





65








MASSFRAX UPTUL1 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL2 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL3 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL4 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL5 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL6 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL7 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL8 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL9 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL10 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL11 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL12 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL13 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL14 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPTUL15 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK1 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK2 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK3 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK4 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK5 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK6 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK7 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK8 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK9 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK10 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK11 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK12 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK13 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK14 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPSTK15 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC1 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC2 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC3 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC4 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC5 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC6 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC7 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC8 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC9 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC10 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC11 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC12 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2




66

MASSFRAX UPREC13 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC14 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX UPREC15 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S14_TS_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S15_TS_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S16_SL_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02A_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02B_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03A_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03B_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV04A_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV04B_A 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S14_TS_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S15_TS_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S16_SL_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02A_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02B_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03A_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03B_B 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S14_TS_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S15_TS_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S16_SL_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02A_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02B_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03A_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03B_C 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S14_TS_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S15_TS_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S16_SL_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02A_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02B_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03A_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03B_D 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S14_TS_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S15_TS_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S16_SL_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02A_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV02B_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03A_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX CV03B_E 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S19 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S20 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S21 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S22 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S23 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S24 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S25 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S26 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2

MASSFRAX S27 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.2




67

PARTDENS UPTUL1 1 1 1 1















PARTDENS UPSTK1 1 1 1 1















PARTDENS UPREC1 1 1 1 1















PARTDENS S14_TS_A 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S15_TS_A 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S16_SL_A 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02A_A 1 1 1 1




68

PARTDENS CV02B_A 1 1 1 1





PARTDENS S14_TS_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S15_TS_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S16_SL_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02A_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02B_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03A_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03B_B 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S14_TS_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S15_TS_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S16_SL_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02A_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02B_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03A_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03B_C 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S14_TS_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S15_TS_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S16_SL_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02A_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02B_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03A_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03B_D 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S14_TS_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S15_TS_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S16_SL_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02A_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV02B_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03A_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS CV03B_E 1 1 1 1

PARTDENS S19 1 1 1 1









HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT UPTUL1 UPTUL2 UPTUL3





HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT UPSTK1 UPSTK2 UPSTK3





69




HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT UPREC1 UPREC2 UPREC3





HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S14_TS_A S15_TS_A S16_SL_A

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV02A_A CV02B_A CV03A_A

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV03B_A CV04A_A CV04B_A

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S14_TS_B S15_TS_B S16_SL_B

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV02A_B CV02B_B CV03A_B

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV03B_B S14_TS_C S15_TS_C

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S16_SL_C CV02A_C CV02B_C

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV03A_C CV03B_C S14_TS_D

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S15_TS_D S16_SL_D CV02A_D

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV02B_D CV03A_D CV03B_D

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S14_TS_E S15_TS_E S16_SL_E

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV02A_E CV02B_E CV03A_E

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT CV03B_E S19 S20

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S21 S22 S23

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S24 S25 S26

HOUREMIS 28MTPA_R3.TXT S27

SRCGROUP Atlas_Fe UPTUL1 UPTUL11 UPTUL12 UPTUL14 UPTUL15 UPSTK1 UPSTK2

SRCGROUP Atlas_Fe UPSTK11 UPSTK12 UPSTK14 UPSTK15 UPREC1 UPREC2 UPREC11

SRCGROUP Atlas_Fe UPREC12 UPREC14 UPREC15 S14_TS_A S15_TS_A S16_SL_A

SRCGROUP Atlas_Fe CV02A_A CV02B_A CV03A_A CV03B_A CV04A_A CV04B_A S24

SRCGROUP Atlas_Fe S25 S26 UPTUL2

SRCGROUP PMI_Fe UPTUL8 UPTUL9 UPTUL13 UPSTK8 UPSTK9 UPSTK10 UPSTK13

SRCGROUP PMI_Fe UPREC8 UPREC9 UPREC10 UPREC13 S14_TS_B S15_TS_B S16_SL_B

SRCGROUP PMI_Fe CV02A_B CV02B_B CV03A_B CV03B_B S21 S23 UPTUL10

SRCGROUP Manganes UPTUL3 UPTUL4 UPSTK3 UPSTK4 UPREC3 UPREC4 S14_TS_C

SRCGROUP Manganes S15_TS_C S16_SL_C CV02A_C CV02B_C CV03A_C CV03B_C S22

SRCGROUP Chromite UPTUL5 UPSTK5 UPREC5 S14_TS_D S15_TS_D S16_SL_D CV02A_D

SRCGROUP Chromite CV02B_D CV03A_D CV03B_D

SRCGROUP Spodumen UPTUL6 UPTUL7 UPSTK6 UPSTK7 UPREC6 UPREC7 S14_TS_E

SRCGROUP Spodumen S15_TS_E S16_SL_E CV02A_E CV02B_E CV03A_E CV03B_E S19

SRCGROUP Spodumen S20

SRCGROUP Open S27

SRCGROUP ALL

SO FINISHED

**

****************************************

** AERMOD Receptor Pathway

****************************************

**

**

RE STARTING




70

INCLUDED PPA_28MTPA.rou

RE FINISHED

**

****************************************

** AERMOD Meteorology Pathway

****************************************

**

**

ME STARTING

SURFFILE 6866_Run6a_6Feb2015.SFC

PROFFILE 6866_Run6a_6Feb2015.PFL

SURFDATA 0 2013

UAIRDATA 54321 2013

SITEDATA 1 2013

PROFBASE 9.0 METERS

ME FINISHED

**

****************************************

** AERMOD Output Pathway

****************************************

**

**

OU STARTING

RECTABLE ALLAVE 1ST

RECTABLE 1 1ST

RECTABLE 24 1ST

POSTFILE 24 ALL PLOT PPA_28MTPA.AD\24_GALL.POS 31

** Auto-Generated Plotfiles

PLOTFILE 1 ALL 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1GALL.PLT 32

PLOTFILE 24 ALL 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1GALL.PLT 33

PLOTFILE 1 Atlas_Fe 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1G001.PLT 34

PLOTFILE 24 Atlas_Fe 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1G001.PLT 35

PLOTFILE 1 PMI_Fe 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1G002.PLT 36

PLOTFILE 24 PMI_Fe 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1G002.PLT 37

PLOTFILE 1 Manganes 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1G003.PLT 38

PLOTFILE 24 Manganes 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1G003.PLT 39

PLOTFILE 1 Chromite 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1G004.PLT 40

PLOTFILE 24 Chromite 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1G004.PLT 41

PLOTFILE 1 Spodumen 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1G005.PLT 42

PLOTFILE 24 Spodumen 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1G005.PLT 43

PLOTFILE 1 Open 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\01H1G006.PLT 44

PLOTFILE 24 Open 1ST PPA_28MTPA.AD\24H1G006.PLT 45

PLOTFILE ANNUAL ALL PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00GALL.PLT 46

PLOTFILE ANNUAL Atlas_Fe PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00G001.PLT 47

PLOTFILE ANNUAL PMI_Fe PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00G002.PLT 48

PLOTFILE ANNUAL Manganes PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00G003.PLT 49

PLOTFILE ANNUAL Chromite PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00G004.PLT 50

PLOTFILE ANNUAL Spodumen PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00G005.PLT 51

PLOTFILE ANNUAL Open PPA_28MTPA.AD\AN00G006.PLT 52




71

SUMMFILE PPA_28MTPA.sum

OU FINISHED

**

****************************************

** Project Parameters

****************************************

** PROJCTN CoordinateSystemUTM

** DESCPTN UTM: Universal Transverse Mercator

** DATUM World Geodetic System 1984

** DTMRGN Global Definition

** UNITS m

** ZONE -50

** ZONEINX 0

**

Documents

Report - Department of Environment Regulation...air quality assessment for the Utah Point facility (the Project) due to a planned increase in throughput. The purpose of the air quality