AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRIZZLY MAY RIVER ......AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRIZZLY MAY RIVER PROJECT 077-08 W4M Report Prepared for: GRIZZLY OIL SANDS ULC Prepared by: MATRIX SOLUTIONS

AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRIZZLY MAY RIVER PROJECT 077-08 W4M

Report Prepared for: GRIZZLY OIL SANDS ULC

Prepared by: MATRIX SOLUTIONS INC.

December 2013 Calgary, Alberta

Suite 200, 150 - 13 Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2R 0V2 Phone: 403.237.0606 Fax: 403.263.2493 www.matrix-solutions.com

16351-514 Air R-1213 final.docx ii Matrix Solutions Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVE .................................................................................................................. 1 3 EMISSION SOURCES ......................................................................................................................... 1

3.1 Project Emission Sources .................................................................................................... 2 3.1.1 Boiler Packages ...................................................................................................... 2 3.1.2 Electrical Generators (Gensets) ............................................................................. 2 3.1.3 Low Pressure Truck Loading Flare ......................................................................... 2 3.1.4 High Pressure Flare Stacks ..................................................................................... 2

3.2 Baseline Emissions in the Modelling Domain ..................................................................... 2 4 ALBERTA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY OBJECTIVES ................................................................................. 3 5 MODELLING APPROACH .................................................................................................................. 3

5.1 Meteorology ....................................................................................................................... 4 5.2 Transport and Dispersion Model ........................................................................................ 5

5.2.1 Modelling Domain ................................................................................................. 5 5.2.2 Terrain Features ..................................................................................................... 6 5.2.3 Building Effects ...................................................................................................... 6 5.2.4 NOX to NO2 Conversion .......................................................................................... 6 5.2.5 Acid Deposition Modelling ..................................................................................... 7

5.3 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 7 6 CALPUFF MODELLING RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 8

6.1 Project Case ........................................................................................................................ 8 6.2 Application Case.................................................................................................................. 9 6.3 Upset/Emergency Scenarios ............................................................................................. 10

6.3.1 Boiler Trip Upset Case .......................................................................................... 10 6.4 Summary of CALPUFF Predictions .................................................................................... 10

7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ...................................................................................................... 10 8 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................... 11 9 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 12

FIGURES FIGURE 1 Air Modelling Plot Plan FIGURE 2 Background Emission Sources within the Modelling Domain FIGURE 3 Wind Rose at the Project Based on CALMET Predictions (10 m Above Grade) FIGURE 4 Topography within the Modelling Domain FIGURE 5 Maximum Predicted 1-h Average (9th- highest) NO2 (OLM) Concentration

Contours - Project Case FIGURE 6 Maximum Predicted Annual Average NO2 (OLM) Concentration Contours - Project

Case

16351-514 Air R-1213 final.docx iii Matrix Solutions Inc.

FIGURE 7 Maximum Predicted 1-h (9th-highest) Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Project Case

FIGURE 8 Maximum Predicted 24-h Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Project Case FIGURE 9 Maximum Predicted 30-day Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Project Case FIGURE 10 Maximum Predicted Annual Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Project Case FIGURE 11 Maximum Predicted 24-h Average PM2.5 Concentration Contours - Project Case FIGURE 12 Maximum Predicted 1-h Average (9th-highest) NO2 (OLM) Concentration

Contours - Application Case FIGURE 13 Maximum Predicted Annual Average NO2 (OLM) Concentration

Contours - Application Case FIGURE 14 Maximum Predicted 1-h Average (9th-highest) SO2 Concentration

Contours - Application Case FIGURE 15 Maximum Predicted 24-h Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Application Case FIGURE 16 Maximum Predicted 30-day Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Application Case FIGURE 17 Maximum Predicted Annual Average SO2 Concentration Contours - Application Case FIGURE 18 Maximum Predicted 24-h Average PM2.5 Concentration Contours - Application Case

TABLES TABLE 1 Stack Parameters and Emissions Associated with the Project (Excluding the Flare

Stacks) TABLE 2 Pseudo-parameters and Emissions Associated with the Project Flare Stacks TABLE 3 Fuel Compositions (in Mole Fraction) at May River Facility TABLE 4 Summary of Modelled Existing and Approved Point Sources Within the Modelling

Domain TABLE 5 Summary of Planned Sources Within the Modelling Domain TABLE 6 Background Monitoring Values TABLE 7 Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQO) TABLE 8 Dimensions of the Significant Buildings at the Project TABLE 9 Dimensions of the Significant Tanks at the Project TABLE 10 Predicted Maximum Ground Level Concentrations for May River Facility in Normal

Operating Scenario TABLE 11 Predicted Maximum Ground Level Concentrations for May River Facility for Upset

Scenario TABLE 12 GHG Emission Factors TABLE 13 Comparison of Project GHG Emissions to Alberta and Canada-wide Totals

ATTACHMENT ATTACHMENT A CALMET and CALPUFF Modelling Inputs

16351-514 Air R-1213 final.docx 1 Matrix Solutions Inc.

1 INTRODUCTION Matrix Solutions Inc. conducted an air quality assessment to support Grizzly Oil Sands ULC in their application to Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD) for the May River SAGD Project, located in 076-08, 077-08 and 077-09 W4M.

The project will use steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) technology to produce up to 12,000 bpd (1,908 m3/d) of bitumen for 37 years. The central processing facility (CPF) will be located in a portion of 077-08 and 077-09 W4M, approximately 14 km northwest of Conklin, Alberta.

The air quality assessment was conducted in compliance with the ESRD requirements, according to the recently issued Air Quality Model Guideline (AQMG; GoA 2013).

2 ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVE This report identifies and quantifies sulphur dioxide (SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO) and fine particulate matter less than 2.5 µm in diameter (PM2.5) emissions associated with the operations of the CPF. It describes the local terrain and meteorology, details of the air quality dispersion modelling approach and summarizes the air quality dispersion model predictions due to project emissions. The air quality predictions are compared to the Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQO; ESRD 2013). In addition, air quality due to the combined effects from the project and the baseline concentrations was assessed in the Application Case. Finally, the total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from project operations were estimated and compared to the Alberta-wide and the Canada-wide GHG totals for 2011.

3 EMISSION SOURCES The emissions from the CPF are a result of fuel gas combustion equipment including the boiler packages, natural gas gensets, a low pressure (LP) truck loading flare and two high pressure (HP) flares. The CPF plot plan showing the locations of the emission sources, buildings and tanks is presented on Figure 1.

Table 1 presents the stack parameters and emission rates associated with each emission source, except for the flare stacks, that are presented in Table 2. Details regarding each of the emission sources within the CPF boundary are presented in the following subsections.


3.1 Project Emission Sources

3.1.1 Boiler Packages

Two 100.1 MW boiler packages are proposed for the project. The boilers will be fuelled by mixed fuel gas composed of reservoir-produced gas and sweet pipeline natural gas. The composition of the mixed fuel gas is provided in Table 3. Both boilers will operate continuously and are sources of SO2, NOX, CO and PM2.5.

3.1.2 Electrical Generators (Gensets)

Two 29.39 MW natural gas-fired gensets will power the facility. The composition of the sweet pipeline natural gas is provided in Table 3, and does not contain sulphur. Both generators will operate continuously and are sources of NOX, CO and PM2.5.

3.1.3 Low Pressure Truck Loading Flare

The facility has one LP flare for disposal of gasses produced during truck loading, located northeast of the main production trains. The flared gas is expected to be variable and no detailed gas analysis is available before construction. Grizzly provided emissions parameters for the LP flare based on hybrid gas composition and volumetrics. The LP flare will operate intermittently based on truck loading schedules, but has been modelled as a continuous source and will emit SO2, NOX, CO and PM2.5.

3.1.4 High Pressure Flare Stacks

Each of the two main production trains has an HP flare stack associated with it, for a total of two HP flares at the CPF. Each stack will be fuelled by sweet pipeline natural gas (Table 3). Both stacks will operate as continuous pilots and emit NOX, CO and PM2.5.

In the event of a boiler trip (Upset Case), the mixed gas associated with the boiler packages will be redirected to the HP flare stacks. The gas composition associated with this Upset Case is identical to the mixed gas fuel composition presented in Table 3. The frequency of a boiler shut-down is anticipated to be twice a year with an estimated duration of 1 hour. The modelled Upset Case considers the simultaneous failure of both trains and will result in the emission of SO2, NOX, CO and PM2.5.

3.2 Baseline Emissions in the Modelling Domain The AQMG (GoA 2013) indicates that all existing nearby sources within a minimum distance of 5 km from the proposed facility should be considered in an air quality modelling assessment. A 50 km × 50 km modelling domain, centred on the project, identified 170 existing and approved industrial point emission sources. The source locations relative to the project are presented on Figure 2. A summary of emissions from modelled existing and approved industrial point sources and the planned, but not modelled, industrial point sources within the modelling domain are listed in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. Planned


industrial sources in Table 5 were based on public disclosure of projects in the Canadian Oilsands Navigator, Athabasca Region (Oilsands Review 2013).

A local ambient monitoring concentration was added to the results of the modelled industrial emissions and represents the baseline concentration for the assessment. The added monitoring concentration represents contributions from the naturally occurring sources, nearby sources, and unidentified, possibly distant sources and is calculated on the basis of a 90th percentile for refined air quality assessments (GoA 2013).

Ambient monitoring data for 2012 from Anzac and Fort McMurray Athabasca Valley ambient stations (Table 6) were processed according to the AQMG (GoA 2013). The Anzac (NO2, PM2.5 and SO2 concentrations) and Fort McMurray Athabasca Valley (CO concentrations) stations are 87 km and 119 km north of the project, respectively, but represent the closest continuous monitoring stations in the Wood Buffalo Environmental Association (WBEA) Airshed. Within the WBEA Airshed, CO is only monitored at the Fort McMurray Athabasca Valley station; concentrations from this station were used for CO only.

4 ALBERTA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY OBJECTIVES The ESRD has developed the AAAQO (ESRD 2013) for the Province of Alberta based on an evaluation of scientific, social, technical and economic factors. The ambient objectives refer specifically to ambient concentrations and they can be expressed in units of micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3) and parts per billion (ppb). The objectives also represent a range of averaging periods that address potential short-term exposure responses (i.e., 1-hour or 24-hours) and long-term chronic exposures (i.e., 30-day or annual). It should be noted that the 1-hour PM2.5 guideline that is based on the Canada-wide standard, is not intended to be used to determine the adequacy of a facility design or to evaluate the compliance and performance of a facility. Therefore, the 1-hour PM2.5 guideline is not used for assessing air quality effects. The air quality objectives relevant to this project are provided in Table 7.

5 MODELLING APPROACH One of the refined dispersion models recommended by ESRD, CALPUFF (version 6.42), was used to predict maximum ground level concentrations of SO2, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), CO and PM2.5. The CALPUFF model uses a three dimensional (3D) meteorological field created by the CALMET meteorological pre-processor with turbulence in the atmosphere represented by similarity scaling and plume dispersion in the convective condition represented by a probability density function (PDF). The similarity scaling approach takes advantage of a more recent understanding of planetary boundary layer behaviour. It treats turbulence as a continuous parameter and considers the influence of surface roughness and vegetation on plume dispersion and contaminant deposition. The PDF algorithm accounts for the balance between upward and downward drafts in the vertical layer and simulates plume dispersion in the convective condition. The CALMET model was run using the 5-year


(2002 to 2006) MM51 dataset obtained from the ESRD. Summary tables identifying the CALPUFF and CALMET switches/options used (and any variations from regulatory defaults) are presented in Attachment A.

The following subsections provide a detailed description of the modelling approach.

5.1 Meteorology Meteorological parameters such as atmospheric stability, mixing height, wind direction and wind speed determine plume transportation and dispersion. The CALMET meteorological program provides representative temporally and spatially varying wind, temperature, and turbulence fields for the CALPUFF dispersion model.

The CALMET diagnostic wind field module contains options that allow the use of wind fields produced by MM5 as an initial guess field (Scire et al. 2000). The prognostic module in CALMET adjusts the initial guess field for finer scaled terrain and land cover features combined with surface observations to produce a refined wind field. The use of these features is dictated by the IPROG model option setting required by the AQMG (GoA 2013). No surface stations with meteorological data appropriate for modelling were located within the modelling domain.

Figure 3 presents the wind rose based on the CALMET predictions at the CPF. The wind rose is a histogram in a polar format that indicates frequencies that the wind blows from and is based on a 16 point compass. The wind rose indicates predominant westerly and southwesterly winds at the project.

For this modelling application, the CALMET meteorological model predictions for the modelling domain are based on:

• the 5-year (2002 to 2006) MM5 wind and temperature profiles generated on 12 km grids, that were obtained from ESRD

• regional terrain elevations and spatially varying land use information

• seasonal varying surface cover (based on surface characteristics outlined in the AQMG (GoA 2013), including a fifth season to differentiate between winter months with and without snow)

The wind fields created by the CALMET model were used in the CALPUFF modelling.

1 MM5 is a prognostic wind field model with four-dimensional data assimilation produced by Penn State/NCAR.


5.2 Transport and Dispersion Model Air dispersion models, including CALPUFF, provide a scientific means of relating industrial emissions to ground level pollutant concentrations at receptors through the use of mathematical equations that simulate plume transportation, dispersion, chemical transformation, and deposition. Dispersion models can address a range of spatial scales (hundreds of metres to thousands of kilometres) and temporal scales (sub-hourly to yearly).

As a part of the regulatory approval process, regulatory agencies require the use of dispersion modelling to assess air quality resulting from air emissions. Various dispersion models are available for ground level concentration predictions. The appropriate selection of a model depends on project-specific needs. In response to the regulatory use of these models, formal objectives regarding the selection and application of these models have been developed (GoA 2013; U.S. EPA 2005).

The CALPUFF dispersion model was selected for this assessment to predict the ground level concentrations of SO2, NO2, CO and PM2.5 due to the project under normal operating and upset scenarios. The cumulative effects due to the project, baseline and existing and approved industrial emission sources were also assessed.

5.2.1 Modelling Domain

The modelling domain should include measurable effects of the project alone and in combination with other activities. The predicted ground level concentrations at the boundary of the modelling domain should be less than 10% of the applicable AAAQO or baseline concentration, whichever is higher (GoA 2013). To satisfy both requirements, a 50 km × 50 km modelling domain (Figure 4) was selected.

A series of Cartesian gridded receptors was selected for the modelling domain. The grid spacing of the receptors is as follows:

• 20 m spacing at the CPF boundary

• 50 m for a 2.5 km × 2.5 km area centred on the CPF

• 250 m for a 6 km × 6 km area centred on the CPF

• 500 m for a 12 km × 12 km area centred on the CPF

• 1 km for a 20 km × 20 km area centred on the CPF

• 2 km for all other areas in the modelling domain

The density of the receptor spacing meets the requirements of the AQMG (GoA 2013). A total of 4,610 Cartesian receptors were selected.


5.2.2 Terrain Features

Terrain and land use features (such as surface roughness, land cover and vegetation) greatly affect atmospheric turbulence and local meteorological circulation. Atmospheric turbulence creates eddies for plume dispersion. Local meteorological circulation determines the local transportation pathway of the plume. Both effects influence the maximum ground level concentrations at receptors.

Figure 4 presents the terrain for the modelling domain. The CPF is located in a hilly region at an elevation of 612 m above sea level (asl). The minimum elevation in the domain is at the northeastern edge of the model domain with an elevation of approximately 455 m asl. The peak in the modelling domain is approximately 23 km south of the project at 733 m asl.

5.2.3 Building Effects

Where stack heights are less than 2.5 times the height of adjacent buildings, it is more likely that plumes from those stacks be carried down into building wakes (U.S. EPA 1988). The CALPUFF model can account for these building wake effects. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) Building Profile Input Program for PRIME (BPIP PRIME) was used to process the building information and to prepare the building downwash data for input into CALPUFF.

Building wake effects were considered for project emissions. Tanks and buildings that produce wake effects for the modelled emission sources are the:

• produced water tanks

• boiler feedwater tanks

• dilbit storage tanks for both trains

Depending on wind directions, other buildings can also have minor effects. Figure 1 presents the locations of the buildings and the CPF emission sources.

The dimensions for CPF buildings and tanks are provided in Tables 8 and 9, respectively.

5.2.4 NOX to NO2 Conversion

Ambient air quality objectives exist for NO2 rather than total NOX that is considered for emission rate calculations. The approach used for this assessment to convert NOX to NO2 was the ozone limiting method (OLM). The OLM assumes that the conversion of NOX to NO2 in the atmosphere can be limited by the ambient ozone (O3) concentration. The following equations were used in the conversion calculation:

• If 0.9 [NOX] is greater than the ambient O3 concentration then [NO2] = 0.1 [NOX] + [O3].

• If 0.9 [NOX] is less than the ambient O3 concentration then [NO2] = [NOX].


• The second equation is conditionally equivalent to the total conversion approach, since there is sufficient ozone to effectively complete the conversion of NOX to NO2.

In the application of the OLM, the above relationships are calculated on a ppb basis, with appropriate conversion constants for concentrations given in units of micrograms per cubic metre (μg/m3) provided in the AQMG (GoA 2013).

The default rural ozone data for Alberta, obtained from Appendix E of the AQMG (GoA 2013), was used in the application of the OLM method.

The eighth highest predicted hourly average concentrations in a year were considered to be outliers and disregarded (GoA 2013). The ninth highest values (equivalent to the 99.9th percentile) were, therefore, used as the basis for determining compliance with the hourly average ambient objectives. For this assessment, the 99.9th percentile hourly predictions are referred to as the “maximum” values in the assessment figures and tables provided in this report.

5.2.5 Acid Deposition Modelling

The CALPUFF model is capable of representing acid deposition from SO2 and NOx emissions in the modelling domain. Based on the following formula, presented in the AQMG (GoA 2013):

( )

+

+

×=+

1746642 32 d

temissionsNHtotaldtemissionsNOtotald

temissionsSOtotald

tH xequivalent

The H+ equivalent for the project was calculated as 0.0465 t/d. The project H+ equivalent is below the 0.175 t/d threshold that triggers the regional acid deposition modelling; therefore, acid deposition modelling was not conducted.

5.3 Summary The following summarizes the modelling approach for this assessment that was conducted in accordance with the Air Quality Model Guideline (GoA 2013):

• The CALMET model was used to provide 3D varying wind, temperature and turbulence fields for use by the CALPUFF dispersion model. The CALMET wind and temperature profiles were used as input data to the CALPUFF model.

• The CALPUFF model was applied with meteorological fields created by CALMET to predict 1-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, 30-day and annual averaged ground level concentrations, where applicable.

• The CALPUFF modelling domain extended to a 50 km × 50 km area centred on the project CPF. A total of 4,610 receptors were modelled.


• The CALPUFF model accounted for building wake effects for the project sources. The U.S. EPA BPIP PRIME was used to address the building wake effects for CALPUFF.

• The hourly rural ozone concentrations provided by ESRD were used for the OLM NOx to NO2 conversion calculation.

• The eight highest predicted hourly average concentrations in a year were considered to be outliers and disregarded. The ninth highest values (equivalent to the 99.9th percentile) were therefore used as the basis for determining compliance with the hourly average ambient objectives. For this assessment, the 99.9th percentile hourly predictions are referred to as the “maximum” values in the assessment figures and tables provided in this report. These high values were included in all other averaging periods.

• The project’s total H+ equivalent emission rate is below the threshold of 0.175 t/d; therefore, regional acid modelling was not conducted.

6 CALPUFF MODELLING RESULTS

6.1 Project Case The CALPUFF model was used to predict maximum concentrations for the averaging periods that correspond to the AAAQO within the modelling domain. The evaluation presented in this section considers the project emissions only and is referred to as the Project Case. The maximum predicted concentrations presented in this report are for receptors that are either on the CPF boundary or beyond.

The predicted maximum ground level concentrations are summarized in Table 10 and presented on Figures 5 to 11. To provide better visual resolution of the concentration contours due to the Project Case, the contours are presented for a 20 km × 20 km study area near the project. The predicted maximum concentrations due to the project occur at or near the CPF boundary. Concentration contours for CO are not provided in this report because modelled predictions are all below minimum contour at 10% of the AAAQO.

The modelling results for the Project Case indicate the following:

• The predicted maximum 1-hour (ninth highest) and annual average ground level NO2 concentrations, calculated using the OLM, are less than the respective AAAQO. The maximum NO2 concentrations are predicted to occur along the southwestern (for 1 hour averaging period) and southern (for annual averaging period) CPF boundary (Figures 5 and 6).

• The predicted maximum 1-hour (ninth highest), 24-hour, 30-day and annual average ground level SO2 concentrations are predicted to be less than the respective AAAQO. The maximum ground level


SO2 concentrations are predicted to occur on the southern boundary for the annual averaging period and on the southwestern CPF boundary for all other periods (Figures 7 to 10).

• The predicted maximum 1-hour (ninth highest) and 8-hour average ground level CO concentrations are predicted to be less than the respective AAAQO.

• The predicted maximum 24-hour average ground level PM2.5 concentration is predicted to be less than the AAAQO (Figure 11). The maximum predicted 24-hour average PM2.5 concentration is predicted to occur at the southwestern CPF boundary.

6.2 Application Case In the Application Case, modelling was undertaken to predict the effects of emissions from the project, the local ambient concentrations and existing and approved industrial emissions. A total of 170 industrial point sources were included in the CALPUFF modelling. The source locations relative to the project are presented on Figure 2. The emission parameters and emission rates of the modelled industrial point sources are summarized in Table 4. The planned industrial sources within the modelling domain, that were not modelled, are presented in Table 5. The predicted concentrations for the application case also include ambient monitoring concentrations that are summarized in Table 6. As with the Project Case, the Application Case contours are presented for the 20 km × 20 km study area only. Although contours for the whole modelling domain are not presented, no exceedances of the AAAQO were predicted within the larger modelling domain.

The predicted maximum ground level concentrations are presented in Table 10 and on Figures 12 to 18. As with the Project Case, the CO concentration contours are not provided in this report due to predictions below 10% of the AAAQO within the study area.

The modelling results for the Application Case indicate that:

• The maximum predicted 1-hour (ninth highest) and annual average ground level NO2 concentrations are less than the respective AAAQO (Figures 12 and 13). For both averaging periods, offsite sources dominate the NO2 concentrations, as indicated by maximum values that occur next to background sources rather than the project fenceline.

• The maximum predicted 1-hour (ninth highest), 24-hour, 30-day and annual average ground level SO2 concentrations are predicted to be less than the respective AAAQO (Figures 14 to 17).

• The maximum predicted 1-hour (ninth highest) and 8-hour average ground level CO concentrations are predicted to be less than the respective AAAQO.

• The maximum predicted 24-hour average ground level PM2.5 concentration is less than the AAAQO (Figure 18).


6.3 Upset/Emergency Scenarios

6.3.1 Boiler Trip Upset Case

In the event of a boiler trip, the mixed gas will be directed to the HP flare stack for flaring. The frequency of this event is assumed to be twice per year with a 1 hour duration.

The maximum predicted ground level concentrations resulting from this Upset Case are summarized in Table 11 and predicted to be less than the AAAQO.

6.4 Summary of CALPUFF Predictions The CALPUFF model predictions indicate the following:

• All predicted maximum ground level SO2, NO2, CO and PM2.5 concentrations due to project emissions under normal operating conditions (Project Case) are less than their applicable AAAQO.

• When local ambient concentrations and existing and approved industrial emissions are considered in addition to the normal project operations (Application Case), the predicted maximum ground level SO2, NO2, CO and PM2.5 concentrations are less than their applicable AAAQO.

• In the event a boiler trip causing the boiler mixed gas to be redirected to the HP flare, the maximum predicted ground level 1-hour NO2, SO2 and CO concentrations will be less than the AAAQO for both the Project and Application cases.

7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS When operating, the project will produce GHG emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from fuel combustion. Sweet pipeline natural gas and mixed fuel gas will be combusted and it is assumed that the equipment will be operating continuously. This will overestimate overall project GHG emissions as some equipment operates intermittently (e.g., the LP truck loading flare).

The emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) for sweet pipeline natural gas and mixed fuel gas were calculated stoichiometrically based on gas compositions, while the emissions of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) were calculated based on Environment Canada (2013a) emission factors (Table 12). The GHG emissions are expressed in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2E). Factors for global warming potential used in estimation of the CO2E of the GHG emissions are 1 for CO2, 21 for CH4 and 310 for N2O emissions, based on a 100-year time horizon (Environment Canada 2013b). The estimated GHG emissions from the project were compared to the Alberta-wide and Canada-wide GHG emission totals.

The total GHG emissions for the project are estimated to be 0.470 Mt/y CO2E. The GHG estimations are compared to the Alberta-wide total and Canada-wide total GHG estimations for 2011 (Environment


Canada 2013b) in Table 13. Project operations GHG emissions are estimated to be equivalent to 0.191% and 0.067% of the 2011 Alberta and Canada national totals, respectively. The project GHG emissions will not occur until the project is built and in operation.

8 SUMMARY The project will discharge gaseous and particulate emissions to the atmosphere. The emission sources include:

• two 100.1 MW boiler packages to generate steam

• two 29.39 MW natural gas-fired electrical generators (gensets)

• a truck loading LP flare

• two HP flare pilots

The CALPUFF dispersion model was used to predict maximum ground level concentrations due to project operations for averaging periods that correspond to the applicable AAAQO. The modelling approach accounts for building downwash, terrain features, chemical transformation and deposition. In addition, the combined effects of the project, local ambient concentrations and existing and approved industrial emission sources were also assessed. The CALPUFF modelling was conducted using 3D meteorological fields created by the CALMET model.

Based on the assessment of the project only sources (Project Case), the CALPUFF model predicted that ground level SO2, NO2, CO and PM2.5 concentrations will be less than their respective AAAQO. The assessment of the project, local ambient concentrations and the existing and approved emission sources (Application Case) indicated that the ground level SO2, NO2, CO and PM2.5 concentrations will be less than their respective AAAQO.

In the event of a boiler trip (Upset Case), the emitted SO2, NO2, CO and PM2.5 concentrations will meet the AAAQO.

The total GHG emissions for the project were estimated and compared to Alberta-wide and Canada-wide GHG totals for 2011. It is estimated that the GHG emissions due to the project operations would be equivalent to 0.191% and 0.067% of the 2011 province- and nation-wide totals, respectively.

In conclusion, emissions from the proposed operation of the project will meet the applicable AAAQO in both the Project and Application cases.


9 REFERENCES Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD). 2013. Alberta Ambient Air Quality

Objectives and Guidelines Summary. Issued February 2013. http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/5726.pdf

Canadian Associate of Petroleum Producers (CAPP). 2004. A National Inventory of Greenhouse Gas (GHG), Criteria Air Contaminant (CAC) and Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) Emissions by the Upstream Oil and Gas Industry. Volume 4, Methodology for CAC and H2S emissions. Viewed October 8, 2013. http://www.capp.ca/getdoc.aspx?DocId=86224&DT=NTV

Environment Canada. 2013a. Fuel Combustion (GHG Emissions Quantification Guidance). Viewed online, archived June 21, 2013. http://www.ec.gc.ca/ges-ghg/default.asp?lang=En&n=AC2B7641-1

Environment Canada. 2013b. National Inventory Report, 1990-2011, Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada. Executive Summary. ISSN: 1910-7064. Viewed August 2013. http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=A07ADAA2-E349-481A-860F-9E2064F34822

Government of Alberta (GoA). 2013. Air Quality Model Guideline. ISBN: 978-1-4601-0599-3 (online). Edmonton, Alberta. Effective October 1, 2013. http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8908.pdf

Oilsands Review. 2013. Canadian Oilsands Navigator, Athabasca Region. Updated September 25, 2013. http://navigator.oilsandsreview.com/listing

Scire J.S., Strimaitis D.G. and R.J. Yamartino. 2000. A User’s Guide for the CALPUFF Model (Version 5.0). Earth Technologies Inc.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) 2012. United States Environmental Protection Agency, AP 42, Fifth Edition Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources, http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42

United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 2005. Revision to the Guideline on Air Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General Purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions. Final Rule (40 CFR Part 51). Federal Register, Part III. November 9, 2005. http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/appw_05.pdf

United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1988. Good Engineering Practice Stack Height Regulations. CHAPTER 1200-3-24. Viewed August 2013. (Online). http://www.epa.gov/region4/air/sips/tn/CHAPT-24.pdf

http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/5726.pdf

http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=A07ADAA2-E349-481A-860F-9E2064F34822

http://www.ec.gc.ca/Publications/default.asp?lang=En&xml=A07ADAA2-E349-481A-860F-9E2064F34822

http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8908.pdf

http://navigator.oilsandsreview.com/listing

http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/guide/appw_05.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/region4/air/sips/tn/CHAPT-24.pdf

1I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

1-Air_

Mode

lling_

Plot_P

lan.m

xd

Date: Project:

Drawn:Reviewer:Technical:

05 Dec 2013 16351-514

Disclaimer: Prepared solely for the use of Grizzly Oil Sands asspecified in the accompanying report. No representation of any kindis made to other parties with which Grizzly Oil Sands has notentered into contract.

W. CroslandK. O'NeillS. Roberts

CPF BoundaryBuildingTank

# Emission SourceWatercourse

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

1 234

56789

10

1112

1314

1516171819

20

2122

2324

25

2627

282930

31

32

3334

35

363738

39

4041

42

4344

45

46

47

48

4950

51

Rg. 8Rg. 9

Twp.

77

483750 484000 484250 484500 484750

6168

000

6168

250

6168

500

6168

750

Air Modelling Plot Plan

May River SAGD Project

W

Figure

NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12N

1:4,000

75 0 75Metres

Reference:Data obtained from AltaLIS ©Government of Alberta used under license.

Label Name1 Produced Water Tank2 BFW Tank3 Surge Tank4 Slop Tank5 Dilbit Storage Tank6 Dilbit Storage Tank7 Dilbit Storage Tank8 Diluent Storage Tank9 Make-up Water Tank10 Disposal Water Tank11 Produced Water Tank12 BFW Tank13 Surge Tank14 Slop Tank15 Dilbit Storage Tank16 Dilbit Storage Tank17 Dilbit Storage Tank18 Diluent Storage Tank19 Make-up Water Tank20 Disposal Water Tank21 Central Control Building22 Maintenance Building23 Main Lab24 Comm. Tow er Building25 Pumphouse26 Electrical Building #127 ORF Room28 Sampling Room29 Electrical Pow er Generation Room30 Demulsif ier Tote Room31 CEMS Building32 Electrical Building #233 Pumphouse34 Electrical Building #135 ORF Room36 Sampling Room37 Electrical Pow er Generation Room38 Demulsif ier Tote Room39 CEMS Building40 Electrical Building #241 CPF Building42 Vapour Compressor Building43 CPF Building44 Vapour Compressor Building45 HP1 Flare46 HP2 Flare47 Truck Flare48 Boiler Pkg149 Boiler Pkg250 Genset 151 Genset 2

2I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

2-Bac

kgrou

nd_E

miss

ion_S

ource

s_wi

thin_

the_M

odell

ing_D

omain

.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514



CPF BoundaryStudy AreaModelling DomainCommunityWater BodyWatercourseHighwayRoad

"6 Background Emission Source

")

")

"6

"6"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6"6"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6 "6

"6"6

"6"6 "6"6

"6"6

"6"6 "6"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6

"6"6"6

"6"6

"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

"6"6"6

"6

"6"6

"6

"6 "6"6 "6"6"6 "6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6"6

Christina Lake

Conklin

Janvier

Rat Lake

SteepbankLake

ThornburyLake

KirbyLake

LittleFish Lake

GloverLake

UV881Christina River

Birch Creek

Waddell Creek

Jackfish River

Sunday Creek

Pony Creek

May River

Rg. 6Rg. 8Rg. 10Rg. 12 Rg. 9 Rg. 7Rg. 11 Rg. 5

Twp.

74Tw

p. 75

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78Tw

p. 79

Twp.

80

450000 455000 460000 465000 470000 475000 480000 485000 490000 495000 500000 505000 510000 515000

6145

000

6150

000

6155

000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

6180

000

6185

000

6190

000

6195

000

Background Emission Sources within the Modelling Domain


W

Figure


1:215,000

3 0 3Kilometres

Reference:Data obtained from GeoBase®, AltaLIS ©Government of Alberta used under license. GDMmidstream and transportation infrastructure data provided by IHS© 2013 used under license

3I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

3-Wind

_Ros

e_at_

the_P

rojec

t_Bas

ed_o

n_CA

LMET

_Pred

iction

s_10

mAbo

ve_G

rade.m

xd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514



Wind Rose at the Project Based on CALMET Predictions

(10 m Above Grade)


Figure

NORTH

SOUTH

WEST EAST3%

6%9%

12%15%

WIND SPEED (m/s)

>= 10.0 8.0 - 10.0 6.0 - 8.0 4.0 - 6.0 2.0 - 4.0 0.5 - 2.0

Calms: 3.18%

4I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

4-Top

ograp

hy_w

ithin_

the_M

odell

ing_D

omain

.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514



CPF BoundaryStudy AreaModelling DomainCommunityWater BodyWatercourseHighwayRoad

Elevation (mASL)High : 734

Low : 451

")

")

ChristinaLake

Conklin

Janvier

Rat Lake

SteepbankLake

ThornburyLake

KirbyLake

LittleFish Lake

GloverLake

UV881Christina River

Birch Creek

Waddell Creek

Jackfish River

Sunday Creek

Pony Creek

May River

Rg. 6Rg. 8Rg. 10Rg. 12 Rg. 9 Rg. 7Rg. 11 Rg. 5

Twp.

74Tw

p. 75

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78Tw

p. 79

Twp.

80

450000 455000 460000 465000 470000 475000 480000 485000 490000 495000 500000 505000 510000 515000

6145

000

6150

000

6155

000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

6180

000

6185

000

6190

000

6195

000

Topography within the Modelling Domain


W

Figure


1:215,000

3 0 3Kilometres


5I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

5-Max

imum

_Pred

icted

_1h_

Avera

ge_9

th_hig

hest-

NO2O

LM_C

onec

entra

rion_

Conto

urs_P

rojec

tCas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514



CPF BoundaryStudy AreaCommunityWater BodyWatercourseHighwayRoad

E Maximum NO2 1-h - 71.1 g/m3

NO2 Concentration g/m3

03075150225300

")

E

UV881

71.1g/m3

Christina River

Birch Cree

k

Pony Creek

Waddell Creek

Jack

fish R

iver

Sunday Creek

May River

ThornburyLake Conklin

Rg. 6Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7Rg. 11

Twp.

75Tw

p. 76

Twp.

77Tw

p. 78

Twp.

79

460000 465000 470000 475000 480000 485000 490000 495000 500000 505000

6155

000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

6180

000

6185

000

Maximum Predicted 1-h Average(9thHighest) NO2 (OLM) Concentration

Contours - Project Case


W

Figure


1:152,043

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake

2013 Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objective:300 g/m3

6I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

6-Max

imum

_Pred

icted

_Ann

ual_A

verag

e_NO

2OLM

_Con

ecen

tratio

n_Co

ntours

_Proj

ectC

ase.m

xd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514


R. LairdK. O'NeillS. Roberts


E Maximum NO2 Annual - 5.3 g/m3


04.510203045

")

EUV8815.3g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted Annual Average NO2 (OLM) ConcentrationContours - Project Case


W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


7I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

7-Max

imum

_Pred

icted

_1h_

Avera

ge_9

thHigh

est_S

O2_C

once

ntrati

on_C

ontou

rs_Pr

oject_

Case

.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum SO2 1-h - 147.0 g/m3

SO2 Concentration g/m3

045100225350450

")

E UV881147.0g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 1-h (9thHighest)Average SO2 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


8I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

8-Max

imum

_Pred

icted

_24h

_Ave

rage_

SO2_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_P

rojec

t_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514






012.55075100125

")

E UV88176.1g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 24-hAverage SO2 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


9I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

9-Max

imum

_Pred

icted

_30D

ay_A

verag

e_SO

2_Co

ncen

tratio

n_Co

ntours

_Proj

ect_C

ase.m

xd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum SO2 30 Day - 15.3 g/m3


0310152530

")

E UV88115.3g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 30 DayAverage SO2 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres

Reference:Data obtained from GeoBase®, AltaLIS ©Government of Alberta used under license. GDMmidstream and transportation infrastructure data provided by IHS© 2013 used under license.

Christina Lake


10I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

10-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_A

nnua

l_Ave

rage_

SO2_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_P

rojec

t_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum SO2 Annual - 5.5 g/m3


025101520

")

EUV881

5.5g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted AnnualAverage SO2 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


11I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

11-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_2

4h_A

verag

e_PM

2_5_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_P

rojec

t_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:

Drawn:Reviewer:Technical:05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum PM2.5 24-h - 7.2 g/m3

PM2.5 Concentration g/m3

0310152530

")

E UV8817.2g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 24-hAverage PM2.5 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


12I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

12-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_1

h_Av

erage

_9thH

ighes

t_NO2

_OLM

_Con

centr

ation

_Con

tours_

Appli

catio

n_Ca

se.m

xd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum NO2 1-h - 142.7 g/m3


03075150225300

")

E

UV881

142.7g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 1-h Average(9thHighest) NO2 (OLM) Concentration

Contours - Application Case


W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


13I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

13-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_A

nnua

l_Ave

raget_

NO2_

OLM_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_A

pplic

ation

_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum NO2 Annual - 15.5 g/m3


04.510203045

")

E

UV881

15.5g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted Annual Average NO2 (OLM) Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


14I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

14-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_1

h_Av

erage

_9thH

ighes

t_SO2

_Con

centr

ation

_Con

tours_

Appli

catio

n_Ca

se.m

xd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514






045100225350450

")

E UV881152.3g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 1-h Average (9th Highest) SO2 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


15I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

15-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_2

4h_A

verag

e_SO

2_Co

ncen

tratio

n_Co

ntours

_App

licatio

n_Ca

se.m

xd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514






012.55075100125

")

E UV88181.3g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 24-h Average SO2 Concentration



W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


16I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

16-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_3

0Day

_Ave

rage_

SO2_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_A

pplic

ation

_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum SO2 30 Day - 16.6 g/m3


0310152530

")

E UV88116.6g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 30 Day Average SO2 ConcentrationContours - Application Case


W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


17I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

17-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_A

nnua

l_Ave

rage_

SO2_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_A

pplic

ation

_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum SO2 Annual - 6.3 g/m3


025101520

")

EUV881

6.3g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted Annual Average SO2 ConcentrationContours - Application Case


W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


18I:\Griz

zlyOi

lSand

sULC

\1635

1\Figu

resAn

dTab

les\20

13\P

LT\R

eport

\Air\F

igure-

18-M

axim

um_P

redict

ed_2

4h_A

verag

e_PM

2_5_

Conc

entra

tion_

Conto

urs_A

pplic

ation

_Cas

e.mxd

Date: Project:


05 Dec 2013 16351-514




E Maximum PM2.5 24-h - 16.2 g/m3

PM2.5 Concentration g/m3

0310152530

")

E UV88116.2g/m3

Birch

Creek

Sunday Creek

Christina River

Jackfish River

May R

iver

Conklin

Rg. 8Rg. 10 Rg. 9 Rg. 7

Twp.

76Tw

p. 77

Twp.

78

475000 480000 485000 490000 495000

6160

000

6165

000

6170

000

6175

000

Maximum Predicted 24 hAverage PM2.5 ConcentrationContours - Application Case


W

Figure


1:85,000

2 0 2Kilometres


Christina Lake


Table 1 - Stack Parameters and Emissions Associated with the Project (Excluding the Flare Stacks)

Equipment115-X-01

Boiler Package215-X-01

Boiler Package140-X-01

Power Generator Set240-X-01

Power Generator Set

Operation Status Continuous Continuous Continuous ContinuousPower Rating (kW) 100.1 100.1 29.4 29.4Stack Coordinates (a) (m E) 484015.9 484087.2 484057.8 484129.1Stack Coordinates (a) (m N) 6168092.6 6168147.5 6168120.7 6168175.6Stack Height (b) (m) 22.9 22.9 18.0 18.0Stack Diameter (b) (m) 1.8 1.8 1.0 1.0Stack Gas Exit Velocity (b) (m/s) 18.4 18.4 11.0 11.0Stack Gas Temperature (b) (°C) 171 171 170 170Stack Gas Temperature (b) (K) 444 444 443 443

Fuel Type Mixed Gas Mixed GasSweet Pipeline Natural

GasSweet Pipeline Natural

GasSO₂ Emission Rate (g/s) (c) 6.272 6.272 0.000 0.000NOx Emission Rate (g/s) (d) 1.560 1.560 1.263 1.263CO Emission Rate (g/s) (d) 7.110 7.110 1.538 1.538PM2.5 Emission Rate (g/s) (e) 0.352 0.352 0.1347 0.1347

Notes:(a) Stack UTM Coordinates (NAD 83, Zone 12) based on plot plan information provided by Grizzly Oil Sands(b) Stack parameters provided by Grizzly Oil Sands(c) SO2 emission rates calculated based on an assumed 100% conversion of H2S to SO2 based on fuel gas composition(d) Emission rates were provided by Grizzly Oil Sands from equipment vendors(e) PM emission rate was calculated based on AP-42 emission factors (U.S. EPA 2012)

Table 2 - Pseudo-parameters and Emissions Associated with the Project Flare StacksLP Flare

Truck Loading Pilot Upset Pilot UpsetOperation Status Intermittent Continuous Emergency Continuous EmergencyFlare Stack Coordinates (a)(m E) 484153.09Flare Stack Coordinates (a) (m N) 6168440.10Flare Stack Height (m) 12.20Effective Flare Stack Height (b)(m) 13.2 27.7 36.325 27.7 36.325Flare Stack Diameter (m) 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20Pseudo-Stack Diameter (b) (m) 7.91 5.35 11.44 5.35 11.44Pseudo-Stack Gas Exit Velocity (b)

(m/s)0.2 0.1 2.8 0.1 2.8

Pseudo-Stack Gas Temperature (b) (K) 1320 1282 1287 1282 1287

Fuel Type Truck Loading Gas(c) Sweet Pipeline Natural Gas

Mixed GasSweet Pipeline Natural

GasMixed Gas

Gas Flow Rate (e) (103 m3/d) 6.900 2.000 250.000 2.000 250.000Net Heating Value (d) (MJ/m3) 51.19 33.27 34.2 33.27 34.2SO₂ Emission Rate (g/s) (f) 0.061 (i) 0.000 6.272 0.000 6.272NOx Emission Rate (g/s) (g) 0.003 (i) 0.026 2.900 0.026 2.900

CO Emission Rate (g/s) (g) 0.001 (i) 0.140 17.492 0.140 17.492PM2.5 Emission Rate (g/s) (h) 0.0003 (i) 0.050 6.268 0.050 6.268

Notes:(a) UTM Coordinates (NAD 83, Zone 12) of the flare stacks based on plot plan information provided by Grizzly Oil Sands. Two HP flares exist, one for each train.(b) The flaring pseudo-parameters were calculated using ERCB flaring spreadsheet (v.1.05).(c) Emissions and parameters provided by Grizzly Oil Sands based on hybrid gas composition and volumetrics(c) Value meets the ERCB Directive 60 heating value requirement (ERCB 2006).(d) Flow rates referenced to 15 °C and 101.325 Kpa.(e ) SO2 Emissions calculated base on 100% conversion of inlet Sulphur to SO2(f) Nox and CO emissions calculated based on AP-42 emission factors (U.S. EPA 2012)(g) PM2.5 emission rates calculated based on CAPP emission factors (CAPP 2004)(i) Emission rate provided by Grizzly oil sands based on hybrid gas composition and volumetrics.

Operating Parameter

28.0028.00

HP Flare 1 HP Flare 2

484093.526168014.31

484164.836168069.22

12/6/2013 16351-514 Tables-1213 final.xlsx

Table 3 - Fuel Compositions (in Mole Fraction) at May River Facility

Component Mixed Gas Sweet Pipeline Natural Gas

H2O 0.0057 0.0000N2 0.0120 0.0000H2S 0.0008 0.0000CO2 0.0211 0.0200C1 0.9456 0.9800C2 0.0009 0.0000C3 0.0004 0.0000iC4 0.0018 0.0000nC4 0.0017 0.0000iC5 0.0020 0.0000nC5 0.0024 0.0000C6 0.0030 0.0000C7+ 0.0026 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000

Notes:(a) Gas compositions provided by Grizzly Oil Sands


Table 4 - Summary of Modelled Existing and Approved Point Sources Within the Modelling Domain

Operator Facility Emission Source UTM mE UTM mN Elevation (m asl) Stack Height (m)Stack Diameter

(m)Exit Velocity

(m/s)Exit

Temperature (K)SO2 (g/s) NOx (g/s) CO (g/s) PM2.5 (g/s)

BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Compressor Station 487456 6170984 563 10.0 0.50 25.7 773 0.0000 0.4884 0.3183 0.0000BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Compressor Station 482577 6171800 584 5.5 0.40 1.8 204 0.0000 0.1157 0.0090 0.0088BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Compressor Station 482577 6171800 584 12.2 0.66 34.3 672 0.0000 10.3368 15.4421 0.0347BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Engine 492746 6170164 564 10.0 0.50 6.4 773 0.0000 0.7558 0.0405 0.0012BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Engine 485484 6171547 570 10.0 0.50 25.0 673 0.0000 0.0058 0.0093 0.0000BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Engine 483877 6173990 576 10.0 0.50 25.0 673 0.0000 2.3900 0.1007 0.0046BP Canada Energy Company Leismer Engine 478121 6175059 591 10.0 0.50 12.8 773 0.0000 3.4167 2.3646 0.0046Canadian Natural Resources LimitChard 11-28 Engine 507298 6192408 502 10.0 0.50 25.0 773 0.0000 1.6169 2.7222 0.0069

Canadian Natural Resources LimitChard S Lesimer 06-18 Engine 494228 6188757 568 10.0 0.50 25.0 773 0.0000 2.6632 4.4838 0.0116

Canadian Natural Resources LimitCompressor Station Compressor 505668 6187543 506 10.0 0.50 7.1 773 0.0000 1.9097 2.5231 0.0116

Canadian Natural Resources LimitCompressor Station Compressor 507712 6189173 482 10.0 0.50 7.1 773 0.0000 1.9097 2.5231 0.0116

Canadian Natural Resources LimitKirby North Glycol Heater 484905 6148498 672 8.0 0.90 8.0 523 0.0000 0.1667 2.0745 0.1877Canadian Natural Resources LimitKirby North Steam Generator 484860 6148483 671 27.0 1.60 20.0 423 0.4630 3.3611 29.7370 2.6905Canadian Natural Resources LimitKirby North Steam Generator 484871 6148495 671 27.0 1.60 20.0 423 0.4630 3.3611 29.7370 2.6905Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Cogenerator Unit 507486 6159780 574 32.0 3.34 22.7 473 0.7986 11.6667 16.2963 0.6481Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Cogenerator Unit 507471 6159808 574 32.0 3.34 22.7 473 0.7986 11.6667 16.2963 0.6481Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Flash Treater 507249 6159595 574 3.3 0.31 30.5 512 0.0000 0.0812 0.4167 0.0121Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Flash Treater 507259 6159598 574 3.3 0.31 30.5 512 0.0000 0.0812 0.4167 0.0121Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Flash Treater 507568 6159773 574 3.3 0.31 30.5 512 0.0000 0.0812 0.4167 0.0121Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Flash Treater 507578 6159778 574 3.3 0.31 30.5 512 0.0000 0.0812 0.4167 0.0121Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Glycol Heater 507380 6159601 574 9.2 0.91 9.6 474 0.0000 0.2889 1.4120 0.0349Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Glycol Heater 507387 6159605 574 9.2 0.91 9.6 474 0.0000 0.2889 0.1412 0.0349Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Glycol Heater 507614 6159704 574 9.2 0.91 9.6 474 0.0000 0.2894 1.4120 0.0347Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Glycol Heater 507623 6159709 574 9.2 0.91 9.6 474 0.0000 0.2889 1.4120 0.0349Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Incinerator 507483 6159023 570 60.0 0.90 8.2 811 18.5770 0.0353 0.1225 0.0000Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Preheater Exhaust 507487 6159050 570 6.1 0.20 6.5 873 0.0000 0.0123 0.0000 0.0000Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Preheater Exhaust 507485 6159053 570 6.1 0.20 6.5 873 0.0000 0.0123 0.0000 0.0000Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Preheater Exhaust 507483 6159057 570 6.1 0.20 6.5 873 0.0000 0.0123 0.0000 0.0000Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507036 6159450 574 32.9 1.68 23.3 463 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 506874 6159489 573 13.8 0.91 22.0 463 0.2662 0.6833 3.2986 0.0810Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 506880 6159498 573 26.6 1.37 27.0 463 0.7176 2.9167 9.1204 0.2315Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507169 6159613 574 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507162 6159626 574 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507155 6159639 574 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507147 6159652 574 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507130 6159682 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507123 6159691 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507116 6159709 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507109 6159722 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507092 6159752 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507084 6159766 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507077 6159779 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507070 6159792 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507062 6159805 573 32.0 1.83 26.3 442 1.3079 5.2662 16.4699 0.4282Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507436 6159817 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.0926 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507055 6159818 573 32.0 1.83 26.3 442 1.3079 5.2662 16.4699 0.4282Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507429 6159831 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.0926 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507412 6159861 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.0926 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507405 6159874 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.0926 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507397 6159887 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507390 6159901 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Steam Generator 507383 6159914 573 32.0 1.68 24.5 488 0.9259 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Utility Boiler 507433 6159068 570 8.0 0.55 5.0 483 0.0000 0.0812 0.2396 0.0121Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Glycol Heater 507565 6166983 579 9.2 0.91 9.6 474 0.0000 0.4722 1.4120 0.0347Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Glycol Heater 507565 6166992 579 9.2 0.91 9.6 474 0.0000 0.4722 1.4120 0.0347Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Process Glycol Heater 507936 6167110 579 14.0 0.81 21.4 483 0.0000 0.3704 1.7708 0.0463Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Slop Oil Treater Reheater 507495 6166992 579 3.3 0.31 30.5 512 0.0000 0.0833 0.4167 0.0116Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Slop Oil Treater Reheater 507495 6167004 579 3.3 0.31 30.5 512 0.0000 0.0833 0.4167 0.0116Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake SRU Preheater 507934 6167053 580 6.1 0.20 7.9 873 0.0000 0.0000 0.0116 0.0000Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507235 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507255 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507275 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507295 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507315 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507355 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507375 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009




(m)Exit Velocity

(m/s)Exit


Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507395 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507415 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Steam Generator 507435 6167162 579 32.0 1.68 24.6 488 0.0231 3.7500 11.7245 0.3009Cenovus Energy Inc. Narrows Lake Sulphur Incinerator 507115 6167058 579 29.0 0.91 15.0 811 22.9167 0.0116 0.0116 0.0000Devon Canada Corporation Chard Compressor Station 508197 6175417 610 10.0 0.50 10.5 773 0.0000 1.6470 0.0833 0.0003Devon Canada Corporation Chard 11-02 Booster Chard 11-02 Booster 501285 6176231 555 10.0 0.50 10.4 773 0.0000 1.6470 0.0833 0.0012

Devon Canada Corporation Devon Home Leismer Gas Gathering Compressor Station 499254 6170967 561 10.0 0.50 25.0 773 0.0000 1.4271 3.2338 0.0069

Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flare 503062 6152174 673 41.1 12.40 0.1 1273 0.0000 0.0023 0.0012 0.0000Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flare 500343 6153272 672 41.5 12.39 0.1 1273 0.0000 0.0023 0.0012 0.0000Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flare 508148 6153476 619 41.4 12.38 0.1 1273 0.0000 0.0023 0.0012 0.0000Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flash Treater 503133 6152048 674 6.0 0.15 23.2 443 0.0000 0.0752 0.0255 0.0023Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flash Treater 503133 6152050 674 6.0 0.15 23.2 443 0.0000 0.0752 0.0255 0.0023Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flash Treater 500200 6153285 673 6.2 0.15 23.2 443 0.0000 0.0752 0.0255 0.0023Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flash Treater 500199 6153286 673 6.2 0.15 23.2 443 0.0000 0.0752 0.0255 0.0023Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flash Treater 508009 6153512 620 6.0 0.15 23.2 443 0.0000 0.0752 0.0255 0.0023Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Flash Treater 508008 6153514 620 6.0 0.15 23.2 443 0.0000 0.0752 0.0255 0.0023Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Glycol Trim Heater 502989 6151940 678 6.7 0.71 27.7 399 0.0000 0.2222 0.2766 0.0255Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Glycol Trim Heater 502999 6151940 678 6.7 0.71 27.7 399 0.0000 0.2222 0.2766 0.0255Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Glycol Trim Heater 500189 6153457 672 6.2 0.71 27.7 399 0.0000 0.2222 0.2766 0.0255Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Glycol Trim Heater 500194 6153465 671 6.2 0.71 27.7 399 0.0000 0.2222 0.2766 0.0255Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Glycol Trim Heater 508028 6153684 617 6.7 0.71 27.7 399 0.0000 0.2222 0.2766 0.0255Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Glycol Trim Heater 508036 6153691 617 6.7 0.71 27.7 399 0.0000 0.2222 0.2766 0.0255Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 503235 6151932 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5810 0.2338Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 503247 6151932 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5810 0.2338Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 503259 6151932 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5810 0.2338Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 503271 6151932 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5810 0.2338Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 503283 6151932 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5810 0.2338Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 503295 6151932 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5810 0.2338Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 500332 6153106 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 500339 6153115 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 500026 6153239 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 500032 6153249 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 500039 6153259 673 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 500046 6153268 674 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 507813 6153481 620 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 507821 6153490 620 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 507830 6153498 620 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 507838 6153507 620 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 507846 6153515 620 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Jackfish Steam Generator 507855 6153524 620 28.9 1.83 15.5 443 3.8542 4.0833 2.5822 0.2303Devon Canada Corporation Kirby North Compressor Station 505784 6157210 597 10.0 0.30 43.8 773 0.0000 0.4630 1.6204 0.0174Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 5.8 0.26 8.1 728 0.0000 0.0116 0.0097 0.0009Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 5.8 0.26 8.1 728 0.0000 0.0116 0.0097 0.0009Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 5.8 0.26 8.1 728 0.0000 1.7940 3.0139 0.0077Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 5.8 0.26 8.1 728 0.0000 1.7940 3.0139 0.0077Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 6.4 0.38 32.8 728 0.0000 0.1157 0.0972 0.0088Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 6.4 0.38 32.8 728 0.0000 0.1157 0.0972 0.0088Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 6.4 0.38 32.8 728 0.0000 1.7940 3.0139 0.0077Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 13.8 0.59 35.8 644 0.0000 6.9919 0.5433 0.0001Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 13.8 0.59 35.8 644 0.0000 6.9919 0.5433 0.0001Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 13.8 0.59 35.8 644 0.0000 6.9919 0.5433 0.0001Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 13.8 0.59 35.8 644 0.0000 6.9919 0.5433 0.0001Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 13.8 0.59 35.8 644 0.0000 1.5266 0.1186 0.0000Devon Canada Corporation Leismer East Compressor Station 494777 6167326 567 13.8 0.59 35.8 644 0.0000 1.5266 0.1186 0.0000Devon Canada Corporation Leismer Stn 4 Booster Compressor Station 496406 6169752 559 10.0 0.50 32.1 773 0.0000 0.4630 1.1574 0.0347Devon Canada Corporation Leismer Stn 8 Booster Compressor Station 501693 6174206 560 10.0 0.50 32.1 773 0.0000 0.4583 1.1933 0.0035EnCana Corporation Compressor Station Compressor Station 472991 6190062 670 10.0 0.50 7.1 773 0.0000 1.9097 2.5231 0.0116EnCana Corporation Leismer 08-13 Compressor Station 483700 6188700 627 10.0 0.50 25.0 673 0.0000 1.1100 0.6979 0.0023

EnCana Corporation Leismer Compressor Station 11-27 Compressor 479500 6192500 678 10.0 0.50 25.0 673 0.0000 0.7616 3.6470 0.0023

Harvest Operations Corp. BlackGold Glycol Heater 501056 6159357 611 15.0 0.40 27.0 466 0.0000 0.1389 0.1169 0.0000Harvest Operations Corp. BlackGold Steam Generator 500996 6159358 612 30.0 1.50 27.0 483 1.5046 3.9722 2.5718 0.3559Harvest Operations Corp. BlackGold Steam Generator 501006 6159358 612 30.0 1.50 27.0 483 1.5046 3.9722 2.5718 0.3559

Ish Energy Ltd. Ish Energy Devenish Compressor station

Compressor Station 485988 6143072 675 10.0 0.50 25.0 773 0.0000 1.3947 1.2685 0.0139

Ish Energy Ltd. Kirby 02-30 Compressor Station 485989 6143073 675 10.0 0.50 17.0 773 0.0000 1.3796 1.2604 0.0139MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Glycol Heater 506701 6174727 602 15.0 1.52 10.2 618 0.0121 0.6389 0.8687 0.0815MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Glycol Heater 506700 6174763 602 15.0 1.52 10.2 618 0.0121 0.6389 0.8687 0.0815




(m)Exit Velocity

(m/s)Exit


MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake HP Flare 506902 6174959 604 54.0 7.19 0.0 1273 0.0000 0.0123 0.0926 0.0000MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake LP Flare 506902 6174532 600 54.0 7.19 0.0 1273 0.0000 0.0123 0.0926 0.0000MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506442 6174589 600 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174607 600 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174625 600 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174642 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506442 6174660 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506442 6174678 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506442 6174695 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174796 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174814 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174832 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174850 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174867 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174885 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123MEG Energy Corp. Christina Lake Steam Generator 506443 6174903 599 30.0 1.96 17.0 444 0.0347 3.8611 3.4025 0.3123Paramount Energy Operating Cor Leismer Compressor Stn. Compressor Engine 477480 6189226 677 10.0 0.50 25.0 773 0.0000 0.3808 0.3935 0.0058Paramount Energy Operating Cor Leismer Compressor Stn. Generator Engine 477480 6189226 677 10.0 0.50 25.0 773 0.0000 0.3808 0.3935 0.0058Paramount Energy Operating Cor Leismer Compressor Stn. Compressor Engine 477480 6189226 677 10.0 0.50 51.4 773 0.0000 2.3333 1.9086 0.0197Paramount Resources Ltd. Compressor Station Compressor 467119 6170683 689 10.0 0.50 19.3 773 0.0000 2.7778 0.6944 0.0000Paramount Resources Ltd. Compressor Station Compressor 497089 6189977 571 10.0 0.50 7.1 773 0.0000 1.9097 2.5231 0.0116Paramount Resources Ltd. Leismer Compressor Stn. Engine 471359 6190475 669 10.0 0.50 47.5 773 0.0000 0.7500 1.7361 0.0116Paramount Resources Ltd. Leismer Compressor Stn. Engine 477480 6189226 677 10.0 0.50 34.9 773 0.0000 4.0278 1.2940 0.0116Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Glycol Heater 471809 6185646 644 8.2 0.76 5.1 616 0.0000 0.0926 0.0541 0.0125Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Glycol Heater 472609 6185646 668 16.0 0.76 5.1 616 0.0000 0.0926 0.0579 0.0116Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh HP Flare 471946 6185545 644 32.0 3.78 0.1 1273 0.0000 0.0015 0.0116 0.0000Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh HP Flare 472746 6185545 670 32.0 3.78 0.1 1273 0.0000 0.0000 0.0116 0.0000Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh LP Flare 471946 6185546 644 32.0 1.89 0.1 1273 0.0000 0.0015 0.0062 0.0000Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Slop Treater 472007 6185728 644 9.3 0.32 11.0 532 0.0000 0.0185 0.0108 0.0031Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Slop Treater 472807 6185728 666 10.0 0.32 11.0 532 0.0000 0.0231 0.0116 0.0000Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471827 6185768 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471728 6185780 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471827 6185780 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471728 6185792 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471826 6185792 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471728 6185804 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Steam Generator 471826 6185804 644 27.0 1.68 16.7 444 0.6887 3.6111 2.3216 0.2945Statoil ASA Kai Kos Dehseh Sulphur Plant Process Heater 471878 6185758 644 16.0 0.76 5.1 616 0.0000 0.0926 0.0541 0.0125


Table 5 - Summary of Planned Sources Within the Modelling DomainOperator Facility Capacity Location

Canadian Natural Resources Limited Kirby North Phase 2 60,000 074-08W4Cenovus Energy Inc. Christina Lake Thermal Project Phase H 20,000 076-06W4Harvest Operations Corp. BlackGold Phase 2 50,000 076-07W4Notes:(a) Facility details obtained from the Oilsands Review (Oilsands Review 2013)

Table 6 - Background Monitoring ValuesAveraging Period SO2 (μg/m3) (a) NO2 (μg/m3) (a) CO (μg/m3) (b) PM2.5 (μg/m3) (a)

1 hour(c) 5.2 13.2 343.4 - 8 hour(c) - - 343.4 - 24 hour(c) 5.2 - - 9.0Monthly(c) 1.2 - - - Annual(c) 0.6 3.7 - -

Notes:(a) Data obtained from Anzac station(b) Data obtained from Fort McMurray Athabasca Valley monitoring station.(c) Averaging period values calculated based on guidance in AQMG 2013 (GoA, 2013)

Table 7 - Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives (AAAQO)Substances Averaging Period AAAQO (μg/m3) (a)

1‑h 45024‑h 12530‑day 30Annual 201‑h 300Annual 45

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 24‑h 301‑h 15,0008‑h 6,000

Notes:(a) Reference from the Alberta Ambient Air Quality Objectives and Guildelines Summary (ESRD 2013).

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Table 8 - Dimensions of the Significant Buildings at the ProjectBuilding ID Building Name Length (m)(a) Width (m)(a) Height (m) (a)

000-BU-001 Central Control Building 36.0 25.0 3.0000-BU-002 Maintenance Building 18.3 24.4 10.0000-BU-003 Comm. Tower Bldg 3.9 2.6 3.0000-BU-004 Main Lab 8.5 4.3 3.0100-BU-003 Pump House 35.6 11.8 7.3100-BU-004 Electrical Building 7.2 11.0 7.0100-BU-005 CPF Building(b) 66.4 22.0 7.5100-BU-006 Sampling Room 6.1 4.9 7.5100-BU-007 Electrical Power Generation Room 7.4 22.4 7.5100-BU-008 ORF Room(c) 18.0 7.3 5.0100-BU-009 Demulsifier Tote Room 6.8 4.2 5.3100-BU-010 Vapour Compressor Bldg(b) 7.5 12.8 7.3100-BU-011 CEMS Bldg 2.4 3.1 5.0100-BU-012 Electrical Building 7.2 4.8 7.0200-BU-003 Pump House 35.6 11.8 7.3200-BU-004 Electrical Building 7.2 11.0 7.0200-BU-005 CPF Building(b) 66.4 22.0 7.5200-BU-006 Sampling Room 6.1 4.9 7.5200-BU-007 Electrical Power Generation Room 7.4 22.4 7.5200-BU-008 ORF Room(c) 18.0 7.3 5.0200-BU-009 Demulsifier Tote Room 6.8 4.2 5.3200-BU-010 Vapour Compressor Bldg(b) 7.5 12.8 7.3200-BU-011 CEMS Bldg 2.4 3.1 5.0200-BU-012 Electrical Building 7.2 4.8 7.0Notes:(a) Dimensions in the table obtained from provided building plot plan(b) CPF and Vapour Compressor Buildings are polygonal, provided length and width are at longest points(c) ORF room is located on top of CPF, height is in addition to the height of the CPF.


Table 9 - Dimensions of the Significant Tanks at the ProjectTank ID Description Diameter (m)(a) Height (m)(a)

113-T-01 Produced Water Tank 7.0 14.6115-T-01 BFW Tank 7.0 14.6116-T-01 Surge Tank 7.0 14.6116-T-02 Slop Tank 7.0 14.6130-T-01A Dilbit Storage Tank 7.0 14.6130-T-01B Dilbit Storage Tank 7.0 14.6130-T-01C Dilbit Storage Tank 7.0 14.6130-T-02 Diluent Storage Tank 7.0 14.6130-T-03 Make-up Water Tank 7.0 14.6143-T-01 Disposal Water Tank 6.7 6.7213-T-01 Produced Water Tank 7.0 14.6215-T-01 BFW Tank 7.0 14.6216-T-01 Surge Tank 7.0 14.6216-T-02 Slop Tank 7.0 14.6230-T-01A Dilbit Storage Tank 7.0 14.6230-T-01B Dilbit Storage Tank 7.0 14.6230-T-01C Dilbit Storage Tank 7.0 14.6230-T-02 Diluent Storage Tank 7.0 14.6230-T-03 Make-up Water Tank 7.0 14.6243-T-01 Disposal Water Tank 6.7 6.7Notes:(a) Dimensions in the table provided by Grizzly Oil Sands and confirmed against provided plot plan


Table 10 - Predicted Maximum Ground Level Concentrations for May River Facility in Normal Operating ScenarioProject Case (a) Application (b) AAAQO

μg/m3 μg/m3 μg/m3

1‑hour (9th highest) 147.0 152.3 450.024‑hour 76.1 81.3 125.030‑day 15.3 16.6 30.0Annual 5.5 6.3 20.01‑hour (9th highest) 71.1 142.7 300.0Annual 5.3 15.5 45.01‑hour (9th highest) 81.8 838.1 300.0Annual 5.4 18.5 45.0

PM2.5 24‑hour 7.2 16.2 30.01‑hour (9th highest) 189.4 559.5 15000.08‑hour 173.6 532.2 6000.0

Note: (a) Project case results includes receptors at or beyond the plant boundary, no ambient or background concentrations are included(b) Application case results include receptors at or beyond the plant boundary, and include both background and ambient concentrations within the study area(c) NO2 (OLM) ‑ NO2 concentration calculated from NOx using Ozone Limiting Method.(d) NO2 (TCM) ‑ NO2 concentration calculated from NOx using Total Conversion Method.

Table 11 - Predicted Maximum Ground Level Concentrations for May River Facility for Upset ScenarioProject Upset

case(a)Application Upset

(b) AAAQO

μg/m3 μg/m3 μg/m3

1‑hour (9th highest) 101.2 110.1 450.024‑hour 36.4 42.6 125.030‑day 5.3 6.6 30.0Annual 2.9 3.7 20.01‑hour (9th highest) 3.4 142.7 300.0Annual 0.1 15.5 45.01‑hour (9th highest) 3.4 838.1 300.0Annual 0.1 18.5 45.0

PM2.5 24‑hour 3.4 12.4 30.01‑hour (9th highest) 20.8 559.5 15000.08‑hour 21.6 532.2 6000.0

Note: (a) Project case results for receptors at or beyond the plant boundary, no ambient or background concentrations are included(b) Application case results include receptors at or beyond the plant boundary, and include both background and ambient concentrations within the study area(c) NO2 (OLM) ‑ NO2 concentration calculated from NOx using Ozone Limiting Method.(d) NO2 (TCM) ‑ NO2 concentration calculated from NOx using Total Conversion Method.

Contaminant Average Period

Contaminant Average Period

SO2

SO2

NO2 (TCM) (d)

CO

CO

NO2 (TCM) (d)

NO2 (OLM) (c)

NO2 (OLM) (c)


Table 12 - GHG Emission Factors

GHG Emission Factor for Natural Gas Combustion (g/m3)

CO2 From Stoichiometry, based on fuel compositionCH4 0.037N2O 0.035Data Source: 2012 B.C. Best Practices Methodology for Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Table 13 - Comparison of Project GHG Emissions to Alberta and Canada-wide TotalsSource Total GHG Emissions (MtCO2E/y)

Alberta’s GHG Emissions (2011) 246

Canada’s GHG Emissions (2011) 702Estimated GHG Emissions for the Project 0.47

Project GHG Emissions as a percentage of: Percentage of Total GHG Emissions (%)Alberta‑Wide Total 0.191%Canada‑Wide Total 0.067%Data Source: Environment Canada 2011


ATTACHMENT A CALMET AND CALPUFF MODELLING INPUTS

16351-514 AttA-1213 final.docx 1 Matrix Solutions Inc.

ATTACHMENT A

CALMET AND CALPUFF MODELLING INPUTS

The CALMET and CALPUFF model input options and switches used in dispersion modelling for the Project are presented below:

Table A-1 Input Groups in the CALMET Control File

Input Group Description Applicable to Project?0 Input and output file names Yes 1 General run control parameters Yes 2 Map projection and grid control parameters Yes 3 Output options Yes 4 Meteorological data options Yes 5 Wind field options and parameters Yes 6 Mixing height, temperature and precipitation parameters Yes 7 Surface meteorological station parameters use mm5 only8 Upper air meteorological station parameters n/a, from mm5/3D9 Precipitation parameters n/a, from mm5/3D

Table A-2 CALMET Model Options Input Group 1

Parameter Default Project Comments IBYR - 2002 Starting yearIBMO - 1 Starting monthIBDY - 1 Starting dayIBHR - 0 Starting hourIBSEC - 0 Starting secondIEYR - 2006 Ending yearIEMO - 12 Ending monthIEDY - 31 Ending dayIEHR - 23 Ending hourIESEC - 0 Ending secondABTZ - UTC-0700 Base time zoneNSECDT 3,600 3600 Length of modelling time step, seconds IRTYPE 1 1 Compute wind fields and micrometeorological variablesLCALGRD T T Computer Special data fieldsITEST 2 2 Flag to stop run after SETUP phase MREG - 0 Test options to check if regulatory value conforms



Parameter Default Project Comments PMAP UTM UTM Map projectionFEAST - - Not used for UTM projectionFNORTH - - Not used for UTM projectionIUTMZN - 12 UTM zoneUTMHEM N N Hemisphere for UTM projection RLAT0 - - Not used for UTM projectionRLON0 - - Not used for UTM projectionXLAT1 - - Not used for UTM projectionXLAT2 - - Not used for UTM projectionDATUM WGS-84 NAR-C Datum-region for output coordinates (NAD83)NX - 60 No. X grid cellsNY - 60 No. Y grid cellsDGRIDKM - 1 Grid spacing (km)

XORIGKM - 453.591 Reference coordinate of SW corner of grid cell (1,1) -X coordinate (km)

YORIGKM - 6137.957 Reference coordinate of SW corner of grid cell (1,1) -Y coordinate (km)

NZ - 12 Vertical grid definition: Number of vertical layers

ZFACE -

0.,20.,40.,80.,120.,280.,520.,880.,1320.,1820.,238

0.,3000.,4000.

Vertical grid definition: Cell face heights in arbitrary vertical grid (m)



Parameter Default Project Comments Disk Output: LSAVE T T Save met. fields in the unformatted output files IFORMO 1 1 CALPUFF/CALGRID type fileLine Printer Output: LPRINT F F Not print meteorological fieldsIPRINF 1 1 Print intervals (hours)

IUVOUT (NZ) NZ*0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 Specify which layers of u,v wind component to print

IWOUT (NZ) NZ*0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 Specify which level of the w wind component to print

ITOUT (NZ) NZ*0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 Specify which levels of the 3-D temperature field to print

Meteorological fields to print to line printer:

Variable Print ?0 = no print 1 = print Comments

STABILITY 0 PGT stabilityUSTAR 0 Friction velocityMONIN 0 Monin-Obukhov length MIXHT 0 Mixing heightWSTAR 0 Convective velocity scale PRECIP 0 Precipitation rateSENSHEAT 0 Sensible heat fluxCONVZI 0 Convective mixing height

Testing and debug print options for micrometeorological module:LDB F F Not print input meteorological data and internal variablesNN1 1 1 First time step for which debug data are printed NN2 1 1 Last time step for which debug data are printed LDBCST F F Print distance to land internal variablesTesting and debug print options for wind field module:IOUTD 0 0 Control variable for writing the test/debug wind fields to disk filesNZPRN2 1 1 Number of levels, starting at surface, to print IPR0 0 0 Print the interpolated wind components IPR1 0 0 Print the terrain adjusted surface wind components

IPR2 0 0 Print the smoothed wind components and the initial divergence fields

IPR3 0 0 Print the final wind speed and directionIPR4 0 0 Print the final divergence fieldsIPR5 0 0 Print the winds after kinematic effects are added IPR6 0 0 Print the winds after the Froude number adjustment is madeIPR7 0 0 Print the winds after slope flows are added IPR8 0 0 Print the final wind field components


Table A-5 CALMET Model Option Input Group 4

Parameter Default Project Comments

Number of Surface & Precipitation Meteorological Stations:NOOBS 0 2 No surface, overwater or upper air observations (use MM5)NSSTA - 0 Number of surface stationsNPSTA - -1 Flag for use of MM5/3D.DAT precipitation Cloud Data Options: ICLOUD 0 4 Gridded cloud cover from Prognostic Rel. Humidity at all levelsFile Formats: IFORMS 2 2 Surface meteorological data file format IFORMP 2 2 Precipitation data file formatIFORMC 2 2 Cloud data file format Table A-6 CALMET Model Option Input Group 5

Parameter Default Project CommentsWind Field Model Options:IWFCOD 1 1 Diagnostic wind moduleIFRADJ 1 1 Compute Froude Number adjustmentIKINE 0 0 Not compute kinematic effectsIOBR 0 0 Not use O’Brien procedure for adjustment of the vertical velocityISLOPE 1 1 Compute slope flow effectsIEXTRP -4 1 No extrapolation is doneICALM 0 0 No extrapolate surface winds when calm

BIAS 0 0, 0, 0,

0, 0, 0, 0, 0,0,0

Zero bias leaves surface and upper air weights unchanged (1/R2 interpolation)

RMIN2 4 4

Minimum distance from nearest upper air station to surface station for which extrapolation of surface winds at surface station will be allowed (-1 = all surface stations be extrapolated)

IPROG 0 14 Use gridded prognostic wind field model output fields as input to the diagnostic wind field model (14=use winds from MM5.DAT file as initial guess field)

ISTEPPGS 3,600 3,600 Timestep (second) of the prognostic model input data IGFMET 0 0 Do not use coarse CALMET fields as initial guess fields Radius of Influence Parameters:

LVARY F F Do not use varying radius of influence

RMAX1 - 24 Maximum radius of influence over land in the surface layer (km)

RMAX2 - 24 Maximum radius of influence over land aloft (km) RMAX3 - 24 Maximum radius of influence over water (km)


Table A-6 CALMET Model Option Input Group 5 (Continued)

Parameter Default Project Comments Other Wind Field Input Parameters:

RMIN 0.1 0.1 Minimum radius of influence used in the wind field interpolation (km)

TERRAD - 12 Radius of influence of terrain features (km)

R1 - 6 Relative weighting of the first guess field and observations in the surface layer (km)

R2 - 6 Relative weighting of the first guess field and observations in the layers aloft (km)

RPROG - 0 Relative weighting parameter of the prognostic wind field data (km). Not used

DIVLIM 5.0E-6 5.0E-6 Maximum acceptable divergence in the divergence minimization procedure

NITER 50 50 Maximum number of iterations in the divergence minimization procedure

NSMTH (NZ) 2, (mxnz-1)*4

2,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4 Number of passes in the smoothing procedure

NINTR2 99 99 Maximum number of stations used in each layer for the interpolation of data to a grid point

CRITFN 1.0 1.0 Critical Froude number

ALPHA 0.1 0.1 Empirical factor controlling the influence of kinematic effects.Not used.

FEXTR2(NZ) 0.0 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0

Multiplicative scaling factor for extrapolation of surface observations to upper layers. Not used.

Barrier Information: NBAR 0 0 Number of barriers to interpolation of the wind fieldsKBAR NZ - Level (1 to NZ) up to which barriers apply Diagnostic Module Data Input Options:

IDIOPT1 0 0 Surface temperature (0 = compute internally from hourly surface observation or prognostic fields)

ISURFT -1 -1 Use a domain-average prognostic surface temperatures

IDIOPT2 0 0 Domain-averaged temperature lapse (0 = compute internally from prognostic fields)

IUPT -1 -1 Use 2-d spatially varying lapse rate

ZUPT 200 200 Depth through which the domain-scale lapse rate is computed (m)

IDIOPT3 0 0 Initial guess field winds (0 = computer internally from prognostic wind fields)

IUPWND -1 -1 -1 indicates 3-D initial guess wind fields

ZUPWND 1.0, 1000 1.0, 1000 Bottom and top of layer through which domain-scale winds are computed (m)




IDIOPT4 0 0 Observed surface wind components for wind field module (0 = read WS and WD from surf.dat)

IDIOPT5 0 0 Observed upper air wind components for wind field module Not used

Lake Breeze Information: LLBREZE F F Not use lake breeze module

NBOX - 0 Number of lake breeze regionsNot used

XG1 - 0 X Grid line 1 defining the region of interest Not used

XG2 - 0 X Grid line 2 defining the region of interest Not used

YG1 - 0 Y Grid line 1 defining the region of interest Not used

YG2 - 0 Y Grid line 2 defining the region of interest Not used

XBCST - 0 X Point defining the coastline in kilometres (Straight line)Not used

YBCST - 0 Y Point defining the coastline in kilometres (Straight line)Not used

XECST - 0 X Point defining the coastline in kilometres (Straight line)Not used

YECST - 0 Y Point defining the coastline in kilometres (Straight line)Not used

NLB - 0 Number of stations in the regionNot used

METBXID - 0 Station ID’s in the regionNot used


Parameter Default Project CommentsEmpirical Mixing Height Constants: CONSTB 1.41 1.41 Neutral, mechanical equationCONSTE 0.15 0.15 Convective mixing height equationCONSTN 2,400 2,400 Stable mixing height equationCONSTW 0.16 0.16 Over water mixing height equationFCORIO 1.0E-4 1.0E-04 Absolute value of Coriolis (1/s)

Spatial Averaging of Mixing Heights:

IAVEZI 1 1 Conduct spatial averaging

MNMDAV 1 1 Maximum search radius in averaging (grid cells) HAFANG 30 30 Half-angle of upwind looking cone for averaging (degree)ILEVZI 1 1 Layer of winds used in upwind averaging



Parameter Default Project CommentsConvective Mixing Height Options:

IMIXH -1 (EPA default) -1 Use Maul-Carson

THRESHL 0.0 0.0 Threshold buoyancy flux required to sustain convective mixing height growth overland

THRESHW 0.05 0.05 Threshold buoyancy flux required to sustain convective mixing height growth overwater (w/m3)

ITWPROG 0 0 Assume neutral conditions for overwater lapse rates in convective mixing height growth

ILUOC3D 16 16 Land use category ocean in 3D.DAT datasets (16 for mm5/3D data)Other Mixing Heights Variables:

DPTMIN 0.001 0.001 Minimum potential temperature lapse rate in the stable layer above the current convective mixing height (K/m)

DZZI 200 200 Depth of layer above current convective mixing height through which lapse rate is computed (m)

ZIMIN 50 50 Minimum overland mixing height (m)ZIMAX 3,000 3,000 Maximum overland mixing height (m)ZIMINW 50 50 Minimum over-water mixing height (m)ZIMAXW 3,000 3,000 Maximum over-water mixing height (m)Overwater Surface Fluxes Method and ParametersICOARE 10 10 COARE with no wave parameterizationDSHELF 0 0 Coastal/Shallow water length scaleIWARM 0 0 COARE warm layer computation switch. 0 = Off ICOOL 0 0 COARE col skin layer computation switch. 0 = Off

Relative Humidity Parameters:

IRHPROG 0 1 Use Prognostic RHTemperature Parameters: ITPROG 0 2 No surface or upper air observations, use MM5/3D.DAT for dataIRAD 1 1 Interpolation type, 1/RTRADKM 500 24 Radius of influence for temperature interpolation (km) NUMTS 5 5 Maximum number of stations to include in temperature interpolationIAVET 1 1 Conduct spatial averaging of temperatures (1 = yes) TGDEFB -.0098 -.0098 Default temperature gradient below the mixing height over water (K/m)TGDEFA -.0045 -.0045 Default temperature gradient above the mixing height over water (K/m)JWAT1 - 55 Beginning land use categories for temperature interpolation over waterJWAT2 - 55 Ending land use categories for temperature interpolation over waterPrecipitation Interpolation Parameters:

NFLAGP 2 2 Method of interpolation, 1/R2

Not used

SIGMAP 100 100 Radius of Influence (km)Not Used

CUTP 0.01 0.01 Minimum Precipitation rate cut-off (mm/h)Not used



No surface stations were used.

Station Name Abbreviation ID (a) UTM X(km)

UTM Y(km)

Time Zone

Anemometer Height

- - - - - - -

Note: (a) Station ID preceding with 7 is Environment Canada station

Table A-9 Input Groups in the CALPUFF Control File

Input Group Description Applicable to Project?0 Input and output file names Yes1 General run control parameters Yes2 Technical options Yes3a, 3b Species list Yes4 Map projection and grid control parameters Yes5 Output Options Yes6a, 6b, 6c Subgrid scale complex terrain inputs Not used7 Chemical parameters for dry deposition of gases Yes8 Size parameters for dry deposition of particles Yes9 Miscellaneous dry deposition parameters Yes10 Wet deposition parameters Yes11 Chemistry parameters Yes12 Misc. dispersion and computational parameters Yes13a, 13b, 13c, 13d Point source parameters Yes14a, 14b, 14c, 14d Area source parameters Yes15a, 15b, 15c Line source parameters Not used16a, 16b, 16c Volume source parameters Not used17a, 17b Non-gridded (discrete) receptor information Yes


Table A-10 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 1 – General Control Parameters

Parameter Default Project Comments METRUN 0 0IBYR 0 2002 Starting yearIBMO 0 1 Starting monthIBDY 0 1 Starting dayIBHR 0 0 Starting hourIBMIN 0 0 Starting minuteIBSEC 0 0 Starting secondIEYR 0 2006 Ending yearIEMO 0 12 Ending monthIEDY 0 31 Ending dayIEHR 0 23 Ending hourIEMIN 0 0 Ending minuteIESEC 0 3,600 Ending secondXBTZ - 7.0 Base time zoneNSECDT 3,600 3,600 Length of modelling time step

Table A-10 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 1 – General Control Parameters (Continued)

Parameter Default Project Comments NSPEC 5 10 Number of chemical speciesNSE 3 7 Number of chemical species to be emitted ITEST 2 2 Flag to stop run after SETUP phase MRESTART 0 2 Control flagNRESPD 0 0 Restart file updated every 24 hours METFM 1 1 Meteorological data formatMPRFFM 1 1 Meteorological profile data format AVET 60.0 60.0 Average time (minutes)PGTIME 60.0 60.0 PG Averaging time (minutes)IOUTU 1 1 Output units for binary concentration flux files (mass)

IOVERS 2 2 Output Dataset format for binary concentration and flux files (Dataset Version 2.2)


Table A-11 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 2 – Technical Options


MGAUSS 1 (EPA default) 1 Vertical distribution used in the near field – Gaussian distribution

MCTADJ 3 (EPA default) 3 Partial plume path adjustment MCTSG 0 0 Subgrid-scale complex terrain flag not modelledMSLUG 0 0 Near-field puffs not modelled as elongated slugsMTRANS 1 (EPA default) 1 Transitional plume rise modelled MTIP 1 (EPA default) 1 Stack tip downwash modelledMBDW 1 2 PRIME method utilized to simulate building downwashMSHEAR 0 0 Vertical wind shear above stack top not modelledMSPLIT 0 0 No puff splitting

MCHEM 3 3 Chemical mechanism flag. Transformation rates computed internally using (RIVAD/ARM3) scheme. Recommended by AB Model Guideline.

MAQCHEM 0 0 Aqueous phase transformation flag MWET 1 (EPA default) 1 Wet removal modelledMDRY 1 (EPA default) 1 Dry deposition modelledMTILT 0 0 Gravitational settling (plume tilt) not modelled

MDISP 2 2

Dispersion coefficients are computed from internally calculated sigma v, sigma w using micrometeorological variables (u*, w*, L, etc.). This option was used to take advantage of the local meteorology as used in the MM5 data. Allows for spatially varying dispersion coefficients, depending on the CALMET micrometeorology module and the land use classification which is more representative than the P-G stability class method.

MTURBVW 3 3 Use both sigma-v/sigma-theta and sigma-w to computer sigma-Y and sigma-Z

MDISP2 3 3

Dispersion coefficients are computed from internally calculated sigma v, sigma w using micrometeorological variables (u*, w*, L, etc.) when measured turbulence data is missing.


Table A-11 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 2 – Technical Options (Continued)


MTAULY 0 0 Draxler default was used for Lagrangian timescale for sigma-y

MTAUADV 0 0 No turbulence advection

MCTURB 1 1 Standard CALPUFF subroutine used to compute turbulence sigma-v & sigma-w using micrometeorological variables

MROUGH 0 (EPA default) 0 No PG sigma-y,z adj. for roughness

MPARTL 1 (EPA default) 1 Partial plume penetration of elevated inversion modelled for point sources

MPARTLBA 0 (EPA default) 0 Partial plume penetration of elevated inversion modelled for buoyant area sources

MTINV 0 0 Strength of temperature inversion computed from measured/default gradients

MPDF 1 (EPA default) 1

PDF used for dispersion under convective conditions. Simulates AERMOD-type dispersion by averaging the balance between upward- and down-drafts in the vertical column, which better represents turbulence based dispersion due to vertical air movement.

MSGTIBL 0 0 Sub-Grid TIBL module used for shore line Not used

MBCON 0 0 Boundary conditions (concentration) not modelled

MSOURCE 0 0 Individual source contributions, not applicable for prime method.

MFOG 0 0 Fog not modelledMREG 0 0 No checks are made

Table A-12 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 3 – Species List

CSPEC Modelled (0=no, 1=yes)

Emitted (0=no, 1=yes)

Dry Deposition (0=none,

1=computed-gas, 2=computed-particle,

3=user-specified)

Output Group Number

SO2 1 1 1 0SO4 1 0 2 0NO 1 1 1 0NO2 1 1 1 0HNO3 1 0 1 0NO3 1 0 2 0PM 1 1 0 0CO 1 1 0 0VOC 1 1 0 0NOX 1 1 1 0


Table A-13 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 4 – Map Projection and Grid Control Parameters

Parameter Default Project Comments PMAP UTM UTM Map projectionFEAST - - Not used for UTM projectionFNORTH - - Not used for UTM projectionIUTMZN - 12 UTM zoneUTMHEM N N Hemisphere for UTM projection RLAT0 - - Not used for UTM projectionRLON0 - - Not used for UTM projectionXLAT1 - - Not used for UTM projectionXLAT2 - - Not used for UTM projectionDATUM WGS-84 NAR-C Datum-region for output coordinates (NAD83)NX - 60 No. X grid cellsNY - 60 No. Y grid cellsNZ - 10 No. vertical layersDGRIDKM - 1.0 Grid spacing (km)XORIGKM - 453.591 Reference coordinates of SW corner of grid cellYORIGKM - 6137.957 Reference coordinates of SW corner of grid cellIBCOMP - 1 X index of LL cornerJBCOMP - 1 Y index of LL cornerIECOMP - 60 X index of UR cornerJECOMP - 60 Y index of UR corner

LSAMP T F Sampling grid is not used. Receptors modelled as discrete receptors

IBSAMP - - X index of LL cornerJBSAMP - - Y index of LL cornerIESAMP - - X index of UR cornerJESAMP - - Y index of UR cornerMESHDN - - Nesting factor of the sampling grid


Table A-14 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 5 – Output Options

Parameter Default Project Comments ICON 1 1 ConcentrationsIDRY 1 1 Dry fluxesIWET 1 1 Wet fluxesIT2D 0 0 2D temperatureIRHO 0 0 2D densityIVIS 1 0 Relative humidityLCOMPRS T T Use data compression option in output file

IQAPLOT 1 1 Create a standard series of output files suitable for plotting

IMFLX 0 0 Mass flux across specified boundaries for selected species to report

IMBAL 0 0 Mass balance for each species to report ICPRT 0 0 Print concentrationsIDPRT 0 0 Print dry fluxesIWPRT 0 0 Print wet fluxesICFRQ 1 1 Concentration print intervalIDFRQ 1 1 Dry flux print intervalIWFRQ 1 1 Wet flux print interval

IPRTU 1 3 Units for line printer output are in µg/m3 for concentration and µg/m2/s for deposition

IMESG 2 2 Messages tracking progress of run written to the screen

Species/

Group Concentrations Dry Fluxes Wet Fluxes Mass Flux

Printed? Saved on disk?



Saved on disk?

SO2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0SO4 0 1 0 1 0 1 0NO 0 1 0 1 0 1 0NO2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0HNO3 0 1 0 1 0 1 0NO3 0 1 0 1 0 1 0PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0CO 0 1 0 0 0 0 0VOC 0 1 0 0 0 0 0NOX 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

LDEBUG F F Logical for debug outputIPFDEB 1 1 First puff to trackNPFDEB 1 1 Number of puffs to trackNN1 1 1 Met. Period to start outputNN2 10 10 Met. Period to end output


Table A-15 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 6 – Subgrid-scale Complex Terrain Inputs

No Subgrid-scale Complex Terrain Modelled

Parameter Default Project Comments NHILL 0 0 Number of terrain featuresNCTREC 0 0 Number of special complex terrain receptors

MHILL - 2 Terrain and CTSG receptor data for CTSG hills input in CTDM format?

XHILL2M 1.0 1.0 Factor to convert horizontal dimensions ZHILL2M 1.0 1.0 Factor to convert vertical dimensions

XCTDMKM - 0 X-origin of CTDM system relative to CALPUFF coordinate system (km)

YCTDMKM - 0 Y-origin of CTDM system relative to CALPUFF coordinate system (km)

Table A-16 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 7 – Chemical Parameters for Dry Deposition of Gases

Species Diffusivity Alpha Star Reactivity Mesophyll Resistance

Henry’s Law Coefficient

SO2 0.1509 1,000 8 0 0.04NO 0.1345 1 2 25 18NO2 0.1656 1 8 5 3.5HNO3 0.1628 1 18 0 0.00000008NOX 0.1656 1 8 5 3.5

Table A-17 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 8 – Size Parameters for Dry Deposition of Particles

Species Name Geometric Mass Mean Diameter (Microns)

Geometric Standard Deviation (Microns)

SO4 0.48 2.0 NO3 0.48 2.0 PM 0.48 2.0

Table A-18 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 9 – Miscellaneous Dry Deposition Parameters

Parameter Default Project Comments RCUTR 30 30.0 Reference cuticle resistance (s/cm) RGR 10 10.0 Reference ground resistance (s/cm) REACTR 8 8.0 Reference pollutant reactivity

NINT 9 9 Number of particle-size intervals used to evaluate effective particle deposition velocity

IVEG 1 1 Vegetation state in un-irrigated areas


Table A-19 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 10 – Wet Deposition Parameters

Pollutant Liquid Precipitation Frozen PrecipitationSO2 3.0E-05 0.0E00 SO4 1.00E-04 3.0E-05 NO 0.0E00 0.0E00 NO2 0.0E00 0.0E00 HNO3 6.00E-05 0.0E00 NO3 1.00E-04 3.0E-05 NOX 0.0E00 0.0E00

Table A-20 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 11 – Chemistry Parameters

Parameter Default Project Comments MOZ 1 1 Used background ozone provided by AER RNITE1 0.2 0.2 Nighttime SO2 loss rateRNITE2 2.0 2.0 Nighttime NOx loss rateRNITE3 2.0 2.0 Nighttime HNO3 formation rateMH2O2 1 1 H2O2 data input option

BCKNH3 12*10

10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0, 10.0

Calpuff Default

BCKH2O2 12*1

1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00, 1.00

Monthly H2O2 concentrations

Table A-21 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 12 – Miscellaneous Dispersion and Computational Parameters


SYTDEP 550 (EPA default) 5.5E02

Horizontal size of puff (m) beyond which time-dependent dispersion equations (Heffter) are used to determine sigma-y and sigma-z

MHFTSZ 0 (EPA default) 0 Switch for using Heffter equation for sigma-z as above

JSUP 5 5 Stability class used to determine plume growth rates for puffs above the boundary layer

CONK1 0.01 0.01 Vertical dispersion constant for stable conditionsCONK2 0.1 0.1 Vertical dispersion constant for neutral/unstable conditions

TBD 0.5 0.5 Factor for determining Transition-point from Schulman-Scire to Huber-Snyder building downwash scheme

IURB1 10 10 Range of land use categories for which urban dispersion is assumed


Table A-21 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 12 – Miscellaneous Dispersion and Computational Parameters (Continued)


IURB2 19 19 Range of land use categories for which urban dispersion is assumed

Site characterization parameters for single-point Met data files: – not usedILANDUIN 20 20 Land use category for modeling domain, not usedZ0IN 0.25 0.25 Roughness length (m) for modeling domain, not usedXLAIIN 3.0 3.0 Leaf area index for modeling domain, not used ELEVIN 0.0 0.0 Elevation above sea level, not used XLATIN -999 0 Latitude (degrees) for met location, not used XLONIN -999 0 Longitude (degrees) for met location, not used Specialized information for interpreting single-point Met data files: - not usedANEMHT 10 10 Anemometer height (m)ISIGMAV 1 1 Form of lateral turbulence data in PROFILE.DAT fileIMIXCTDM 0 0 Choice of mixing heightsXMXLEN 1.0 1.0 Maximum length of slug (met. grid units)

XSAMLEN 1.0 1.0 Maximum travel distance of a puff/slug (in grid units) during one sampling step

MXNEW 99 99 Maximum number of slugs/puffs release from one sourceduring one time step

MXSAM 99 99 Maximum number of sampling steps for one puff/slug during one time step

NCOUNT 2 2 Number of iterations used when computing the transport wind for a sampling step that includes gradual rise

SYMIN 1.0 1.0 Minimum sigma-y for a new puff/slug (m) SZMIN 1.0 1.0 Minimum sigma-z for a new puff/slug (m)

SZCAP_M 5.0E06 5.0E06 Maximum sigma-z (m) allowed to avoid numerical problem in calculating virtual time or distance

SVMIN

Land: .50, .50 .50, .50, .50, .50

Water: .37, .37, .37, .37, .37, .37

(EPA default)

Land: .50, .50 .50, .50, .50, .50

Water: .37, .37, .37, .37, .37, .37

Default minimum turbulence velocities sigma-v for each stability class over land and over water (m/s)

SWMIN

Land: .20, .12, .08, .06, .03, .016

Water: .20, .12, .08, .06, .03, .016

Land:.20, .12, .08, .06, .03, .016

Water: .20, .12, 08, .06, .03, 016

Default minimum turbulence velocities sigma-w for each stability class over land and over water (m/s)

CDIV 0.0, 0.0 0.0, 0.0 Divergence criterion for dw/dz across puff used to initiate adjustment for horizontal convergence (1/s)

NLUTIBL 4 4 Search radius (number of cells) for nearest land and water cells used in the subgrid TIBL module

WSCALM 0.5 0.5 Minimum wind speed (m/s) allowed for non-calm conditionsXMAXZI 3000 3000 Maximum mixing height (m)XMINZI 50 50 Minimum mixing height (m)


Table A-21 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 12 – Miscellaneous Dispersion and Computational Parameters (Continued)


WSCAT 1.54, 3.09, 5.14, 8.23,

10.8

1.54, 3.09, 5.14, 8.23,

10.8 Default wind speed classes

PLX0 .07, .07, .10, .15, .35, .55

.07, .07, .10, .15, .35, .55

Default wind speed profile power-law exponents for stabilities 1-6

PTG0 0.020, 0.035 0.020, 0.035 Default potential temperature gradient for stable classes E, F (degK/m)

PPC .50, .50, .50, .50, .35, .35

.50, .50, .50, .50, .35, .35 Default plume path coefficients for each stability class

SL2PF 10 10 Slug-to-puff transition criterion factor equal to sigma-y/length of slug

NSPLIT 3 3 Number of puffs that result every time a puff is split

ZISPLIT 100 100 Split is allowed only if last hour’s mixing height (m) exceeds a minimum value

ROLDMAX 0.25 0.25 Split is allowed only if ratio of last hour’s mixing ht to the maximum mixing ht experienced by the puff is less than a maximum value

NSPLITH 5 5 Number of puffs that result every time a puff is split

SYSPLITH 1.0 1.0 Minimum sigma-y (grid cells units) of puff before it may be split

SHSPLITH 2 2 Minimum puff elongation rate (SYSPLITH/hr) due to wind shear, before it may be split

CNSPLITH 1.0E-07 1.0E-07 Minimum concentration (g/m^3) of each species in puff before it may be split

EPSSLUG 1.0E-04 1.0E-04 Fractional convergence criterion for numerical SLUG sampling integration

EPSAREA 1.0E-06 1.0E-06 Fractional convergence criterion for numerical AREA source integration

DSRISE 1.0 1.0 Trajectory step-length (m) used for numerical rise integration

HTMINBC 500 500 Minimum height (m) to which BC puffs are mixed as they are emitted

RSAMPBC 10 10 Search radius (km) about a receptor for sampling nearest BC puff

MDEPBC 1 1 Near-surface depletion adjustment to concentration profile used when sampling BC puffs?

Table A-22 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 13 – Point Source Parameters

Parameter Default Project Comments NPT1 - Vary Number of point sources modelled as provided in the report IPTU 1 1 Units used for point source emissions, g/s

NSPT1 0 0 Number of source-species combinations with variable emissions scaling factors provided (13d)

NSPT2 - 0 Number of point sources with variable emission parameters provided in external file


Table A-23 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 14 – Area Source Parameters

Parameter Default Project CommentsNAR1 - Vary See report for # of area sources modelled IARU 1 1 Units for area source emissions, g/m2/s

NSAR1 0 0 Number of source-species combinations with variable emissions scaling factors provided (14d)

NAR2 - 0 Number of buoyant polygon area sources with variable location and emission parameters

Table A-24 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 15 – Line Source Parameters

No line source modelled


NLN2 - 0 Number of buoyant line sources with variable location and emission parameters

NLINES - 0 Number of buoyant line sourcesILNU 1 1 Units used for line source emissions

NSLN1 0 0 Number of source-species combinations with variable emissions scaling factors provided in 15c

MXNSEG 7 7 Maximum number of segments used to model each lineNLRISE 6 6 Number of distances at which transitional rise is computedXL - 0 Average building lengthHBL - 0 Average building heightWBL - 0 Average building widthDXL - 0 Average line source widthFPRIMEL - 0 Average buoyancy parameter

Table A-25 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 16 – Volume Source Parameters

No Volume source modelled

Parameter Default Project CommentsNVL1 - 0 Number of volume sources with parameters provided in 16b, cIVLU 1 1 Units used for volume source emissions in 16b

NSVL1 0 0 Number of source-species combinations with variable emissions scaling factors in 16c

NVL2 - 0 Number of volume sources with variable location and emission parameters

Table A-26 CALPUFF Model Options Input Group 17 – Non-gridded (Discrete) Receptor Information

Parameter Default Project CommentsNREC - 4610 Number of non-gridded receptors modelled


REFERENCE Government of Alberta (GoA). 2013. Air Quality Model Guideline. Edmonton, Alberta. Viewed October 1,

2013. http://environment.alberta.ca/01004.html

AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRIZZLY MAY RIVER ......AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRIZZLY MAY RIVER PROJECT 077-08 W4M Report Prepared for: GRIZZLY OIL SANDS ULC Prepared by: MATRIX SOLUTIONS

Documents