air quality management reportnovobordecf.co.za/03 air quality reports/46513_sonae... ·...

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT REPORT

Quarter One: January - March 2015

Sonae Novobord (Pty) Ltd

2015/05/15

Project number: 46513 Dated: 2015/05/15 2 | 32 Revised:

Quality Management

Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3

Remarks Report

Date 15 May 2015

Prepared by N. Enslin

Signature

Checked by C. de Bree

Signature

Authorised by B. Keiser

Signature

Project number 46513

Report number 1 of 4

File reference 46513_Sonae Novobord Air Quality Management Report Q1 2015_2015 05 15.docx

3 | 32

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT REPORT

Quarter One: January - March 2015

2015/05/15

Client

Sonae Novobord (Pty) Ltd. Rocky Drift, 1 Heidelberg Road, Nelspruit, 1201 Tel: +27 13 758 1280 Fax: +27 13 758 1134 http://www.sonae.co.za

Consultant

WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd. South View Block Bryanston Place 199 Bryanston Drive Bryanston 2191 South Africa Tel: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1381 www.wspenvironmental.co.za

Registered Address

WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd. South Africa 1995/008790/07 South View Block, Bryanston Place, 199 Bryanston Drive, Bryanston, 2191, South Africa


Table of Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 7

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 8

2 Regulatory Framework - Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.1 National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (39 of 2004) .............................................................. 8

2.2 Dust Deposition ....................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Particulate Matter ................................................................................................................................................. 10

2.4 Formaldehyde ....................................................................................................................................................... 11

3 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................... 11

3.1 Dust Deposition ..................................................................................................................................................... 11

3.2 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) ................................................................................................... 13

3.3 Formaldehyde ....................................................................................................................................................... 14

4 Results and Discussion ........................................................................................................................................... 17

4.1 Meteorological Data ............................................................................................................................................. 17 4.1.1 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 17 4.1.2 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................................... 18

4.2 Dust Deposition ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2.1 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2.2 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................................... 24

4.3 Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) ..................................................................................................................... 24 4.3.1 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 24 4.3.2 Sonae1 ........................................................................................................................................................... 24 4.3.3 Sonae2 ........................................................................................................................................................... 25 4.3.4 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................................... 27

4.4 Formaldehyde ....................................................................................................................................................... 27 4.4.1 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 27 4.4.2 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................................... 28

5 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................ 29

5.1 Dust Fallout ........................................................................................................................................................... 29

5.2 Particulate Matter ................................................................................................................................................. 29

5.3 Formaldehyde ....................................................................................................................................................... 29

6 References ............................................................................................................................................................. 30

Appendix A: Dust Fallout Data ....................................................................................................................................... 31

5 | 32

List of Figures

Figure 1: Sampling positions for dust deposition gauges at the Sonae Novobord White River facility. All sites

can be classified as ‘Non-residential’ with the exception of SNBAQ11, SNBAQ13 and SNBAQ14, which are

‘Residential’.......................................................................................................................................................... 12

Figure 2: Pictorial representation of a continuous dust analyser (Osiris™) installed at Sonae Novobord .......... 13

Figure 3: Osiris locations on the fenceline of Sonae Novobord. ......................................................................... 14

Figure 4: On-site passive samplers positioned on the fence line of the Sonae Novobord, White River facility.

SNF denotes fenceline sites ................................................................................................................................ 15

Figure 5: Off-site passive samplers positioned at community sites. SNC denotes community sites .................. 16

Figure 6: Meteorological data recorded during January, February and March 2015 for Sonae Novobord ......... 17

Figure 7: Monthly wind roses for January, February and March 2015, together with a wind rose for the complete

Quarter One of 2015 ............................................................................................................................................ 18

Figure 8: Dust fallout rates for January, February and March 2015 .................................................................... 19

Figure 9: Comparison of organic versus inorganic dust deposition rates for January 2015 ............................... 21

Figure 10: Comparison of organic versus inorganic dust deposition rates for February 2015 ............................ 21

Figure 11: Comparison of organic versus inorganic dust deposition rates for March 2015 ................................ 22

Figure 12: Three-month rolling averages of dust fallout rates for November, December 2014 and January 2015

............................................................................................................................................................................. 22

Figure 13: Three-month rolling averages of dust fallout rates for December 2014, January and February 2015

............................................................................................................................................................................. 23

Figure 14: Three-month rolling averages of dust fallout rates for January, February and March 2015 .............. 23

Figure 15: PM10 data recorded by the Osiris at the Sonae2 monitoring location for Quarter One. Orange bars

represent days on which maintenance occurred ................................................................................................. 25

Figure 16: PM2.5 data recorded by the Osiris at the Sonae2 monitoring location for Quarter One. Orange bars

represent days on which maintenance occurred. ................................................................................................ 26


List of Tables

Table 1: Acceptable Dust Fallout Rates as per the National Dust Control Regulations (GNR 827, 1 November

2013) .......................................................................................................................................................................9

Table 2 : Rollout of National Ambient Air Standards for Particulate Matter (PM10) ............................................. 10

Table 3: Rollout of National Ambient Air Standards for Particulate Matter (PM2.5) ............................................. 10

Table 4: Dust fallout site descriptions and classifications at Sonae Novobord ................................................... 12

Table 5: Exceedence summary of dust fallout rates at Sonae Novobord year-to-date ....................................... 20

Table 6: Exceedences of the 24-hour average PM10 standard recorded at Sonae2 in 2015 (Note: Sonae2 is

located on-site) .................................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 7: Exceedences of the 24-hour average PM2.5 standard recorded at Sonae2 in 2015 (Note: Sonae2 is

located on-site) .................................................................................................................................................... 26

Table 8: Formaldehyde sampling results from the March 2015 survey .............................................................. 27

Table 9: Dust fallout rates monitored at locations for all months at Sonae Novobord ........................................ 31

7 | 32

Executive Summary WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd has been commissioned to monitor various air quality impacts in and around the

Sonae Novobord (Pty) Ltd White River plant since 2008 to current. During a three-month period, from January

to March 2015 (Quarter One), dust deposition (fallout) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) were monitored

around the plant. The following conclusions were drawn from the monitoring campaigns:

Dust Deposition

Results for Quarter One of 2015 indicate that dust fallout was low at all sites, with no exceedences of either the

non-residential or residential standards. The highest dust fallout was recorded at SNBAQ07, although dust

fallout levels were well below the non-residential standard. The SNBAQ07 sample point is located adjacent to

the woodchip piles that constitute a significant source of fugitive dust, with this location frequently recording the

highest dust fallout rates. As such, Sonae has developed a strategy to reduce wood dust originating from the

woodchip stockpile. Sonae is planning on installing a retractable chute on one of the down pipes as an initial

test to identify the improvement of dust fallout, with the aim of completing the installation within 2015. Should

the installed chute reduce fallout and the outcome be deemed the correct viable solution, Sonae will continue

with Phase 2 of the project.

Particulate Matter

PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations measured during Quarter One of 2015 at the Sonae2 monitoring location

demonstrate compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards over a 24-hour period. No

exceedences of either the PM10 or PM2.5 24-hour standard were experienced at Sonae2. Currently, the running

annual PM10 average at Sonae2 is approaching the annual standard.

Data recovery during the quarter was low at the Sonae1 monitoring location due to numerous power failures.

The instrument was removed from the field at the end of March due to a pump failure. Data recovery at Sonae2

was above the required 80% for the quarter.

WSP recommends the following:

■ Sonae purchase a spare instrument as a replacement unit to ensure improved data recovery when

instruments fail;

■ Sonae investigate the power supply at all locations ensuring there are no faults causing the power outages;

■ Sonae test the UPS systems at each Osiris ensuring their optimal operation.

Formaldehyde

Limited formaldehyde results are available for Quarter One due to a fault experienced with the samplers sent to

the Eurofins laboratory in Denmark. As such, an additional sampling campaign has been undertaken from 06 –

14 May 2015. The available results from the co-location samplers located at SNF02 and SNF05 indicate that

formaldehyde concentrations are compliant with the chronic (annual) ATSDR minimum risk level.


1 Introduction Sonae Novobord (Pty) Ltd (hereafter referred to as Sonae Novobord) currently operates a Medium Density

Fibre Board (MDF) and Particle Board (PB) production facility in White River, Mpumalanga. WSP

Environmental (Pty) Ltd (WSP) was appointed to monitor the ambient air quality in and around the White River

plant for the 2015 period. This quarterly air quality monitoring report details the results of monitoring undertaken

during January to March 2015 (Quarter One).

Dust deposition, suspended particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and formaldehyde (vapour phase) were

monitored during the quarter. All parameters were monitored in terms of the requirements of the NEMA Section

24G Environmental Management Plan (EMP, June 2009) and Record of Decision (RoD - 2008) as well as the

current SA Regulatory Framework (as and where applicable).

2 Regulatory Framework - Air Quality 2.1.1 National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act (39 of 2004)

The current National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 (NEMAQA), which repealed the

Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act of 1965 (APPA), came into effect on 11 September 2005, initially with

exclusions of certain sections such as the licensing of listed activities. However, the Atmospheric Pollution

Prevention Act has now been repealed in full as discussed below. Key features of current legislation include:

Decentralisation of air quality management responsibilities.

Identification and quantification of significant emission sources that then need to be addressed.

Development of ambient air quality targets as goals for driving emission reductions.

The use of source-based (command-and-control) measures in addition to alternative measures, including market incentives and disincentives, voluntary programmes, and education and awareness.

The promotion of cost-optimized mitigation and management measures.

Stipulation of air quality management planning by authorities, and emission reduction and management planning by sources.

Access to information and public consultation.

The NEMAQA introduced a management system based on ambient air quality standards and corresponding emission limits to achieve them. Two significant regulations stemming from NEMAQA have been promulgated recently, which are:

■ GNR 1210 on 24 December 2009 (Government Gazette 32816) National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004) National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

■ GNR 248 on 31 March 2010 (Government Gazette 33064) National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004) List of Activities Which Result in Atmospheric Emissions Which Have or May Have a Significant Detrimental Effect on the Environment, Including Health, Social Conditions, Economic Conditions, Ecological Conditions or Cultural Heritage.

The new National ambient standards for air quality were based primarily on guidance offered by two standards

set by the South African National Standards (SANS), namely:

■ SANS 69:2004 Framework for implementing National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

■ SANS 1929:2005 Ambient air quality – Limits for common pollutants.

9 | 32

SANS 69:2004 makes provision for the establishment of air quality objectives for the protection of human health

and the environment as a whole. Such air quality objectives include limit values, alert thresholds and target

values.

SANS1929:2005 uses the provisions in SANS 69 to establish air quality objectives for the protection of human

health and the environment, and stipulates that limit values are initially set to protect human health. The setting

of such limit values represents the first step in a process to manage air quality and initiate a process to

ultimately achieve acceptable air quality nationally. The limit values presented in this standard are intended as

information to be used in air quality management but have only become enforceable as revised under GNR

1210 since 24 December 2009. National ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants generally have

specific averaging periods; compliance dates (timeframes), permissible frequency of exceedences and

reference methods.

2.2 Dust Deposition

Dust deposition, commonly referred to as fallout or nuisance dust, has been observed to be of concern at and

around sawmills and wood processing plants.

Air quality standards and guidelines are specified in the NEM:AQA; the South African National Standards

(SANS) 69 Framework for Setting and Implementing National Ambient Air Quality Standards; as well as the

SANS 1929:2005 Ambient Air Quality - Limits for Common Pollutants. The priority pollutants as defined by the

Act are sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), ozone (O3), benzene

(C6H6), lead (Pb) and carbon monoxide (CO). Most recently (01 November 2013), the legislated standards for

dust fallout were promulgated by the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs in the form of the NEM:AQA

National Dust Control Regulations (GNR 827). These newly promulgated regulations are based on the SANS

standards and present acceptable/allowable dust fallout rates for both residential and non-residential areas.

These dust fallout rates, which were used in this study to assess compliance, are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Acceptable Dust Fallout Rates as per the National Dust Control Regulations (GNR 827, 1 November 2013)

Restriction Areas Dust fallout rate (D),

(mg/m2/day) 30 day average

Permitted frequency of exceeding dust fallout rate

Reference Method

Residential Area D < 600 Two within a year, not sequential

months ASTM D1739

Non-Residential Area 600 < D < 1,200 Two within a year, not sequential

months ASTM D1739

As stated in Section 21 of the Listed Activities and Associated Emission Standards identified in terms of Section

21 of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act No. 39 of 2004), Government

Gazette, 31 June 2010, a three-month running average must not exceed the limit value for adjacent land use

according to dust fallout standards promulgated in terms of section 32 of the NEMAQA, 2004 (Act No. 39 of

2004), in principal wind directions.

If the above regulations are exceeded, it must be noted that a dust fallout monitoring report must be submitted

to the licensing authorities. Within three months after the submission of the report to the authorities, Sonae

must develop and submit a dust management plan to the air quality officer for approval. Such a plan must:

■ Identify all possible sources of dust within the affected site;

■ Detail the best practicable measures to be undertaken to mitigate dust emissions;

■ Detail an implementation schedule;

■ Identify the line management responsible for implementation;

■ Incorporate the dust fallout monitoring plan; and


■ Establish a register for recording all complaints received by the person regarding dust fallout, and for

recording follow up actions and responses to the complainants.

Once the dust management plan is approved by the authority (air quality officer), the plan must be implemented

within a month, with an implementation progress report being submitted to the air quality officer at agreed time

intervals.

2.3 Particulate Matter

With regard to the setting of limit values for particulate matter, the following is recognised:

■ Different types of particles can have different harmful effects on human health;

■ There is evidence that risks to human health associated with exposure to man-made PM10 and PM2.5 are higher than risks associated with exposure to naturally occurring particles in ambient air; and

■ As far as they relate to PM10 and PM2.5, action plans and other reduction strategies should aim to reduce concentrations of fine particles as part of the total reduction in concentrations of particulate matter.

Stringent Limit and Target Values for particulate matter (expressed in μg/m³) have been suggested as

guidelines in SANS 1929:2005. These were developed by a panel of experts on the basis of best international

practice. The latest regulations pertaining to PM10 and PM2.5 emanating from NEMAQA (GNR 1210) were

promulgated in 2009 and 2012 respectively and stipulate a phased approach towards the implementation of

National Ambient Air Quality Standards as tabulated below (Table 2 and Table 3).

Table 2 : Rollout of National Ambient Air Standards for Particulate Matter (PM10)

Averaging Period Concentration (µg/m³) Permissible Exceedences

(per calendar year) Compliance Date

24-hour 180 4 Prior to 1 April 2010

24-hour 120 4 1 April 2010 – 31 December 2014

24-hour 75 4 1 January 2015

Annual 60 0 Prior to 1 April 2010

Annual 50 0 1 April 2010 – 31 December 2014

Annual 40 0 1 January 2015

Table 3: Rollout of National Ambient Air Standards for Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

Averaging Period Concentration (µg/m³) Permissible Exceedences

(per calendar year) Compliance Date

24-hour 65 4 Immediate – 31 December 2015

24-hour 40 4 1 January 2016 – 31 December 2029

24-hour 25 4 1 January 2030

Annual 25 0 Immediate – 31 December 2015

Annual 20 0 1 January 2016 – 31 December 2029

Annual 15 0 1 January 2030

It must be noted that from a legal standpoint, only standards promulgated under the National Environmental

Management Air Quality Act (Act 39 of 2004) are applicable during the relevant timeframes as stipulated above.

In addition, the ambient air quality standards are to be used to identify priority areas which require the attention

of the regulatory authorities. It needs to be stressed that the ambient air quality standards will not be used for

prosecution, but as a guide for action by the relevant local authorities.

11 | 32

2.4 Formaldehyde

There are currently no National Standards for assessment of ambient formaldehyde levels. From best

international practice, formaldehyde is to be assessed against the latest recognised international standards

(Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry Minimum Risk Levels (ATSDR MRLs)) until South African

Standards are promulgated. The ATSDR MRL for chronic (long-term; > one year) formaldehyde exposure is 9.8

µg/m3. The acute ATSDR MRL (short term; < 14 days) exposure level is 49.2 µg/m

3.

Ambient formaldehyde levels are measured using passive samplers provided and analysed by accredited

international (ISO) laboratories. It is noted that the science of formaldehyde monitoring in ambient air is subject

to continuous review to ensure that monitoring methodologies are in-line with current international best practice.

3 Methodology

3.1 Dust Deposition

Sonae Novobord has implemented an on-going monitoring program for the assessment of nuisance dust

deposition. The reference method recommended in SANS 1929:2005 is the ASTM D1739 methodology. This

technique makes use of fallout gauges (dust buckets), which are essentially open containers (or cylindrical

buckets), partially filled with water and algaecide, and left at designated sites for a stipulated timeframe to

collect solid and liquid particles that are typically greater than 10 μm in diameter.

Coarser dust particles that settle out under gravity have been viewed as a cause of nuisance during site

observations over the past few years. Dust gauges are deployed as indicated in Figure 1. The dust that

deposits in the gauges originates from a number of sources. The analytical laboratory is requested to quantify

the proportion of carbonaceous dust in the total dust sample as a conservative estimate of the proportion of

organic (wood) to inorganic (silica) matter. To achieve this, the total dust sample is weighed and then the

carbonaceous material is burned off at 500°C in a loss on ignition (LOI) test. The remaining sample is weighed

to determine the non-combustible silica type dust. The difference in weight compared to the original sample

indicates the approximate proportion of wood dust. Table 4 presents site descriptions, site classifications and

coordinates of each location.


Table 4: Dust fallout site descriptions and classifications at Sonae Novobord

Site Name Type of sampler Classification Latitude Longitude

SNBAQ 01 Single bucket Non-residential 25°22'46.14"S 30°59'4.14"E











SNBAQ 12 Single bucket Residential 25°22'46.18"S 30°59'17.34"E



Figure 1: Sampling positions for dust deposition gauges at the Sonae Novobord White River facility. All sites can be classified as ‘Non-residential’ with the exception of SNBAQ11, SNBAQ13 and SNBAQ14, which are ‘Residential’.

13 | 32

3.2 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5)

Particulate matter has been continuously monitored over time at the Sonae Novobord Facility using two

OsirisTM

continuous dust monitors. The OsirisTM

analyser is capable of measuring a number of size fractions

simultaneously, namely TSP, PM10, PM2.5 and PM1. The instrument is also equipped with a wind monitor that

allows for emissions to be correlated with wind speed and wind direction data, making it possible for recorded

dust emissions to be traced back to the probable source of the emissions. Permanent units have been installed

at two locations as stipulated in the AQMP and RoD.

The two locations are described as follows, with reference to the site map (Figure 3):

■ Sonae1: located approximately midway on the western fence line (‘downwind’) alongside the visitors car park;

■ Sonae2: located near the corner of the northern and eastern fence lines (‘upwind’) in the salvage yard; and

Figure 2: Pictorial representation of a continuous dust analyser (Osiris™) installed at Sonae Novobord

Wind vane

Osiris

Power supply


Figure 3: Osiris locations on the fenceline of Sonae Novobord.

3.3 Formaldehyde

The passive sampling technique chosen to monitor formaldehyde (CH2O) is based on the molecular diffusion of

gases. It is therefore referred to as ‘diffuse’ or ‘passive’ sampling interchangeably. Twelve (12) samplers are

strategically positioned on site and in surrounding community areas (Figure 4 and Figure 5). Identical sampler

sites were used for all previous monitoring surveys in 2012. They are ideally positioned at a height of

approximately 1.5 metres above the ground, to measure in the breathing zone. Gas molecules diffuse into the

samplers, where they are quantitatively collected on an impregnated filter or absorbent material, giving a

concentration value integrated over the exposure time. The duration for which the samplers are required to be

exposed to the gas molecules depends on the indicator being monitored, the anticipated concentration range

and the stability of the indicator in the sampling medium. The monitoring of formaldehyde required that the

samplers were exposed for a period of approximately one week due to the concentration range and the stability

of the volatiles in the sampling medium.

The samplers used in this survey are manufactured by RadielloTM

and analysed by Eurofins Product Testing

A/S in Denmark. In addition, two co-located samplers were supplied and analysed by the IVL Swedish

Environmental Research Institute (IVL); and deployed over the same exposure period. Historically, samplers

from different suppliers have been used; this follows from the inter-laboratory comparisons that were deemed

useful to provide confidence in the data (discussed in the EIA Specialist Studies and subsequently at the ECF).

All laboratories used by WSP are SANAS and/or ISO accredited, whilst only accredited European laboratories

are currently used for analysis of formaldehyde samples from Sonae, owing to the sensitivity around this

pollutant.

15 | 32

Formaldehyde monitoring at the plant was conducted on one occasion during the quarter. All samplers

(including the two formaldehyde co-location samplers) were deployed for seven (7) days at the end of March.

Twelve samplers were collected and sent to the Eurofins laboratory in Denmark for analysis, while the two co-

location formaldehyde samplers were sent to IVL in Sweden for analysis.

Figure 4: On-site passive samplers positioned on the fence line of the Sonae Novobord, White River facility. SNF denotes fenceline sites


Figure 5: Off-site passive samplers positioned at community sites. SNC denotes community sites

17 | 32

4 Results and Discussion

4.1 Meteorological Data

4.1.1 Results

Meteorological conditions affect how pollutants emitted into the air are directed, diluted and dispersed within the

atmosphere. Since the specialist EIA studies were conducted in 2008, a fully equipped Davis Vantage Pro IITM

weather station has been measuring various meteorological parameters on-site. This data assists with

interpretation of recorded levels of all monitored pollutants and provides data for dispersion modelling. Figure 6

illustrates the daily rainfall, average temperature and relative humidity for Quarter One of 2015. Data recovery

during this monitoring period was 98%.

Figure 6: Meteorological data recorded during January, February and March 2015 for Sonae Novobord

Wind roses are useful for illustrating the prevailing meteorological conditions of an area, indicating wind speeds

and directional frequency distributions. In the following wind roses, the colour of the bar indicates the wind

speed while the length of the bar represents the number of hours that winds blow from a certain direction. Wind

roses using the on-site weather station data for the Quarter One monitoring period are shown in Figure 7.


January 2015 February 2015

March 2015 Quarter 1 of 2015

Figure 7: Monthly wind roses for January, February and March 2015, together with a wind rose for the complete Quarter One of 2015

4.1.2 Discussion

During summer and autumn, the eastern portion of South Africa typically experiences high temperatures with

more frequent rainfall events. A high occurrence of precipitation events were recorded during the monitoring

period, with approximately 41.4, 71.4 and 33.0 mm of precipitation experienced in January, February and

March, respectively. Daily average temperatures ranged between 18.7°C and 27.8°C for the monitoring period.

Humidity fluctuated throughout the monitoring period, ranging from 29% to 51%.

As per Figure 7, winds during the first Quarter originated predominantly from the south-east. Wind speeds

were slow to moderate, with speeds infrequently exceeding 6 m/s during the monitoring period. High

occurrences of calm conditions (defined as wind speeds less than 1 m/s) were experienced during the month.

19 | 32

4.2 Dust Deposition

4.2.1 Results

Dust deposition monitoring was conducted in accordance with the requirements outlined in the National Dust

Control Regulations. The dust buckets are typically deployed for a period of thirty (30) days (± 2 days) per

monitoring period and the results are compared with the National Dust Control Regulations shown in Figure 8.

Dust fallout recorded during January, February and March was analysed by Intertek Testing Services.

The dust fallout rates measured at each site during the Quarter One period is graphically compared with the

NEM:AQA residential and non-residential standards below. It is important to note the following:

1. Sample points which fall within a residential area (SNBAQ 11, SNBAQ 13, and SNBAQ 14) should

be compared against the NEM:AQA residential standard (600 mg/m2/day) and;

2. The remaining sample points which fall within industrial areas should be compared against the

NEM:AQA non-residential standard (1,200 mg/m2/day).

4.2.1.1 Dust Deposition Rates for Quarter 1 of 2015

Figure 8 presents a summary of the DFO rates attained at each sample point for January, February and March

2015.

Figure 8: Dust fallout rates for January, February and March 2015

Dust fallout was low at all sites, with no exceedences of the non-residential standard (1200 mg/m2/day)

recorded at the non-residential sites during Quarter One. The highest dust fallout rates were recorded at

SNBAQ07 which is located adjacent to the woodchip stockpiles that constitute a significant source of fugitive

dust. No exceedences were recorded at the DFO units located in the residential zones during Quarter One,

with all sites remaining compliant with the residential standard (600 mg/m2/day). Table 5 presents a summary

of dust fallout exceedences recorded at each location to date.


Table 5: Exceedence summary of dust fallout rates at Sonae Novobord year-to-date

Sample Location

Classification DFO Standard (mg/m²/day)

Exceedences (Year To Date)

Compliant Comments

SNBAQ 01 Non-Residential 1,200 0 Yes None











SNBAQ 12 Residential 600 0 Yes None



Refer to Appendix A, Table 9, for a detailed breakdown of dust fallout rates monitored at Sonae Novobord

4.2.1.2 Organic versus Inorganic Dust Deposition Rates for Quarter 1 of 2015

Figure 9, Figure 10 and Figure 11 present the results obtained for the organic and inorganic composition tests

performed for each dust fallout sample for each month of Quarter One. The label above each column indicates

the organic content fallout in the month.

21 | 32

Figure 9: Comparison of organic versus inorganic dust deposition rates for January 2015

Figure 10: Comparison of organic versus inorganic dust deposition rates for February 2015


Figure 11: Comparison of organic versus inorganic dust deposition rates for March 2015

4.2.1.3 Rolling Average Dust Deposition Rates for Quarter 1 of 2015

Figure 12: Three-month rolling averages of dust fallout rates for November, December 2014 and January 2015

23 | 32

Figure 13: Three-month rolling averages of dust fallout rates for December 2014, January and February 2015

Figure 14: Three-month rolling averages of dust fallout rates for January, February and March 2015


SNBAQ 07 measured the highest DFO rates, although dust fallout levels were below the non-residential dust

fallout standard during the Nov-Dec-Jan rolling average, Dec-Jan-Feb rolling average and Jan-Feb-Mar rolling

average. All other DFO units located in the non-residential zoned areas remain compliant with respect to the

non-residential standard. All DFO units located in the residential zones were compliant with the residential

standard during all rolling average periods.

4.2.2 Discussion

With reference to Figure 8, the highest dust fallout rates were recorded at SNBAQ 07 although dust fallout

levels fell below the non-residential standard for the months of January, February and March 2015. This unit

frequently records the highest dust fallout rates due to the adjacent woodchip stockpiles. As such, Sonae has

developed a strategy to reduce wood dust originating from the woodchip stockpile. Sonae is planning on

installing a retractable chute on one of the down pipes as an initial test to identify the improvement of dust

fallout, with the aim of completing the installation within 2015. Should the installed chute reduce fallout and the

outcome be deemed the correct viable solution, Sonae will continue with Phase 2 of the project. With reference

to Table 5, two exceedences of the standard, not in sequential months, are permitted at a location. Currently,

no exceedences of either the residential or non-residential standards have been recorded.

With respect to the proportion of organic (wood dust) to inorganic (mineral) particulates that constitute the total

dust fallout, the organic content is low at all sites (Figure 9, Figure 10 and Figure 11). A small portion of the

dust measured at sites around the chipper and wood yard are organic, whilst a much lower organic portion at

many of the other sites proves that wood-processing (Sonae) is not solely responsible for dust in the area; a fair

amount of silica type dust is also being entrained from exposed lands, possibly harvested forestry

compartments and road traffic disturbances.

Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14, indicate that the three month rolling averages for the sampling sites are

compliant with their respective dust fallout standards.

4.3 Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5)

4.3.1 Results

The OsirisTM

continuous dust monitor is capable of measuring a number of size fractions simultaneously,

namely: TSP, PM10, PM2.5 and PM1. Concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 are included below as this is the size

range for which health effects are internationally accepted and are therefore used for compliance assessment

in terms of the National standards for ambient air quality.

The Osiris instruments are equipped with wind monitors that allow for peak concentrations to be correlated with

wind speed and wind direction data, making it possible for peaks to be traced back to the probable source. As

described in Section 3.2, two instruments are deployed on the Sonae Novobord fenceline, the results of which

are presented below. The PM10 and PM2.5 data have been graphically presented using the 24-hour averages for

each day to enable a comparison with the current National ambient 24-hourly average standards (75 µg/m3 for

PM10 and 65 µg/m3 for PM2.5), while the annual running average is included for comparison against the annual

standard (40 µg/m3 for PM10 and 25 µg/m

3 for PM2.5).

4.3.2 Sonae1

The area in which Sonae1 is located has historically been known to record the highest particulate matter

concentrations since monitoring began. It is important to note that according to dispersion modelling for the

Sonae site and from previous experience, this is a ‘worst-case’ fence line site and is not a reflection of the

overall ambient environment; i.e. it is near the typically downwind peak ground-level plume concentration

position as predicted by the dispersion model.

25 | 32

4.3.2.1 PM10 Concentrations

Missing data: A number of power outages were experienced during the quarter, which resulted in date stamp

errors causing data losses on the unit. As a result, no PM10 data is availble for Quarter One.The instrument was

removed from the field on 31 March 2015 due to a pump failure.

4.3.2.2 PM2.5 Concentrations

Missing data: A number of power outages were experienced during the quarter, which resulted in date stamp

errors causing data losses on the unit. As a result, no PM2.5 data is available for Quarter One. The instrument

was removed from the field on 31 March 2015 due to a pump failure.

4.3.3 Sonae2

Sonae2 is located in an area which has shown to record elevated levels of particulate matter. Although this

station is not a worst-case fenceline site, the data recorded by this instrument serves as typically upwind

concentrations; as predicted by the dispersion model. Nonetheless it remains imperative that PM10 and PM2.5 be

monitored in this region of the site so as to fully quantify Sonae’s impact on the surrounding environment.

Results from Sonae2 for Quarter One are presented graphically below. The PM10 and PM2.5 data recovery for

Sonae2 during Quarter One was 87.1%.

4.3.3.1 PM10 Concentrations

Figure 15: PM10 data recorded by the Osiris at the Sonae2 monitoring location for Quarter One. Orange bars represent days on which maintenance occurred


Table 6: Exceedences of the 24-hour average PM10 standard recorded at Sonae2 in 2015 (Note: Sonae2 is located on-site)

Quarter (2015) 24-Hour Average

Exceedences Compliant (4 Exceedences Permitted

in a Calendar Year)

Quarter 1 (Jan – Mar 2015) 0 Yes

Total To Date 0 Yes

4.3.3.2 PM2.5 Concentrations

Figure 16: PM2.5 data recorded by the Osiris at the Sonae2 monitoring location for Quarter One. Orange bars represent days on which maintenance occurred.

Table 7: Exceedences of the 24-hour average PM2.5 standard recorded at Sonae2 in 2015 (Note: Sonae2 is located on-site)

Quarter (2015) 24-Hour Average

Exceedences Compliant (4 Exceedences Permitted

in a Calendar Year)

Quarter 1 (Jan – Mar 2015) 0 Yes

Total To Date 0 Yes

Missing data: A power outage was experienced at the end of December 2014, resulting in a date stamp error

causing data loss from 01 – 08 January 2015.

27 | 32

4.3.4 Discussion

With reference to Figure 15 and Figure 16, no exceedences of either the PM10 or PM2.5 24-hour standards

were recorded at Sonae2 during Quarter One. However, the annual PM10 running average at Sonae2 is

currently approaching the annual average PM10 standard. The annual PM2.5 running average is compliant with

the annual average PM2.5 standard.

Data recovery at Sonae1 was 0% while Sonae2 was above the required 80% for Quarter One. Power outages

were experienced at the Sonae1 unit, resulting in time stamp and data losses for the entire period. At Sonae2,

the data loss experienced at the beginning of January was due to a power outage experienced in December

2014.

WSP has previously recommended that Sonae purchase a new monitoring instrument which can replace a

faulty instrument in the field. The current instruments are old, so the frequency of faults and failures are likely to

increase, resulting in poor data recovery. Furthermore, a number of power failures were experienced during the

quarter, which was the major cause for data loss. WSP recommends that Sonae investigate all power supply

sources at each monitoring location to ensure there are no supply faults, as well as conducting tests on the

UPS systems installed at the Osiris’s.

4.4 Formaldehyde

4.4.1 Results

Twelve (12) RadielloTM

formaldehyde samplers were deployed during the month of March (31 March – 07 April

2015). The samples were sent for analysis at the Eurofins Product Testing A/S in Denmark. Additionally, two

co-located samplers were deployed at the following locations: SNF02 and SNF05. The co-location samplers

were supplied and analysed by IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute (IVL). However, due to a fault

experienced with the samplers sent to the Eurofins laboratory, no results are available for Quarter One, with the

exception of the co-location samplers. As such, an additional sampling campaign has been undertaken from 06

– 14 May 2015.

The available results are illustrated in Table 8. Included are the recommended ATSDR acute (short-term) and

chronic (long-term) exposure standards. All values are calculated in µg/m3.

Table 8: Formaldehyde sampling results from the March 2015 survey

Station Code Station Location March 2015 March 2015 Annual average

Acute Standard < 14 days

Chronic Standard > 1 year

Sampler Site Description

Radiello IVL Last 4 quarters µg/m

3 µg/m

3

Laboratory Eurofins IVL

SNF01 Car park on western fence line

Not Available - N/A 49.4 9.8

SNF02 Truck stop and loading yard

Not Available 3.8 N/A 49.4 9.8

SNF03 Southern corner, near intersection


SNF05 Western corner, adjacent R40

Not Available 1.4 N/A 49.4 9.8

SNF06 Salvage yard Not Available - N/A 49.4 9.8

SNF07 Wood chip yard, mid-north fence line


SNC02 Next to the church Not Available - N/A 49.4 9.8

SNC03 Industrial packing area adjacent R40



SNC04 Penryn College Not Available - N/A 49.4 9.8

SNC06 Bundu Lodge Not Available - N/A 49.4 9.8

SNC07 Wood works manufacturers


SNC08 Mi-Hi Furniture Manufacturers


4.4.2 Discussion

Limited formaldehyde results are available for Quarter One. The available results from the co-location samplers

located at SNF02 and SNF05 indicate that formaldehyde concentrations are compliant with the chronic (annual)

ATSDR minimum risk level.

29 | 32

5 Conclusions From the monitoring performed in and around the Sonae Novobord facility during Quarter One of 2015, the following key conclusions can be made regarding dust deposition (fallout rate) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5).

5.1 Dust Fallout

Results for Quarter One of 2015 indicate that dust fallout was low at all sites, with no exceedences of either the

non-residential or residential standards. The highest dust fallout was recorded at SNBAQ07, although dust

fallout levels were well below the non-residential standard. The SNBAQ07 sample point is located adjacent to

the woodchip piles that constitute a significant source of fugitive dust, with this location frequently recording the

highest dust fallout rates. As such, Sonae has developed a strategy to reduce wood dust originating from the

woodchip stockpile. Sonae is planning on installing a retractable chute on one of the down pipes as an initial

test to identify the improvement of dust fallout, with the aim of completing the installation within 2015. Should

the installed chute reduce fallout and the outcome be deemed the correct viable solution, Sonae will continue

with Phase 2 of the project.

5.2 Particulate Matter

PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations measured during Quarter One of 2015 at the Sonae2 monitoring location

demonstrate compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards over a 24-hour period. No

exceedences of either the PM10 or PM2.5 24-hour standard were experienced at Sonae2. Currently, the running

annual PM10 average at Sonae2 is approaching the annual standard.

Data recovery during the quarter was low at the Sonae1 monitoring location due to numerous power failures.

The instrument was removed from the field at the end of March due to a pump failure. Data recovery at Sonae2

was above the required 80% for the quarter.

WSP recommends the following:

■ Sonae purchase a spare instrument as a replacement unit to ensure improved data recovery when

instruments fail;

■ Sonae investigate the power supply at all locations ensuring there are no faults causing the power outages;

■ Sonae test the UPS systems at each Osiris ensuring their optimal operation.

5.3 Formaldehyde

Limited formaldehyde results are available for Quarter One due to a fault experienced with the samplers sent to

the Eurofins laboratory in Denmark. As such, an additional sampling campaign has been undertaken from 06 –

14 May 2015. The available results from the co-location samplers located at SNF02 and SNF05 indicate that

formaldehyde concentrations are compliant with the chronic (annual) ATSDR minimum risk level.


6 References Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (2010). Minimal Risk Levels for Hazardous

Substances. Available online at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/mrllist.asp.

Department of Environmental Affairs (2013). National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, 2004 (Act

No.39 of 2004). National Dust Control Regulations (R.827). 1 November 2013.

Republic of South Africa (1965). Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Act, No. 45 of 1965. Available online at:

http://www.environment.gov.za.

Republic of South Africa (2004). National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act, No. 39 of 2004.

Available online at: http://www.environment.gov.za.

Standards South Africa (2005). Ambient air quality – Limits for common pollutants. South African National

Standard 1929:2005.

31 | 32

Appendix A: Dust Fallout Data Table 9: Dust fallout rates monitored at locations for all months at Sonae Novobord

Sample Location

Classification Dust Fallout (mg/m

2/day)

Compliant (Year-to-Date)

Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15

SNBAQ 01 Non-residential 283.94 220.44 251.75 Yes











SNBAQ 12 Residential 72.78 84.11 112.60 Yes



WSP Environmental (Pty) Ltd. South View Block Bryanston Place, 199 Bryanston Drive Bryanston 2191 South Africa Tel: +27 11 361 1380 Fax: +27 11 361 1381 www.wspenvironmental.co.za

air quality management reportnovobordecf.co.za/03 air quality reports/46513_sonae... ·...

Documents