# Analysis of the Sulfur Dioxide

Measurements from the C olumbia Lake NJ Monitor



# Draft

February 28, 201 1

Bureau of Technical Services Division of Air Quality New Jersey Dept. of Environmental ProtectionNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 2 

## Executive Summary
NJDEP evaluated data from a sulfur dioxide ( SO2

### ) air quality monitor located 1.2 miles northeast of the coal

-fired Portland power plant in Knowlton Township, Warren County, New Jersey

at the Columbia Lake Wildlife Management Area

. Between September 23, 2010 and February

17, 2011, the monitor measured 1

-hour SO2 

### concentrations that exceeded the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS threshold on nine days. A trajectory analysis was used to determine the cause of the high monitored concentrations that exceeded the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS during four episodes when concurrent hourly emissions data was available. The analysis found that Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 were the likely cause of each high sulfur dioxide episode at the monitor. The other large source in the area, Martins Creek Power Plant, was either not operating or emitting sulfur dioxide at very low levels during the exceedance hours. In addition, the highest 10 1

-hour sulfur dioxide concentrations monitored between September 23, 2010 and February 17, 2011 were compared to an estimate of what AERMOD would predict at that location. AERMOD predictions were generally lower than the measured 1

-hour concentrations at the monitor. 

## Purpose of This Analysis This report examines the elevated 1

-hour concentrations being measured at the nearby New Jersey

Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP) SO2 

### monitor located at the Columbia Lake Wildlife Management Area (WMA), New Jersey

. Between September 23, 2010 and February 17, 2011, there were nine days where measured 1

-hour SO2 

### concentrations at the Columbia Lake WMA ambient air monitor exceeded the 1

-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of 75 ppb.
A trajectory analysis was done to deter mine the cause of the elevated 1

-hour SO2 

### concentrations at this monitor. These air trajectories were calculated during the hours when measured SO2 

### concentrations at the monitor were above 75 ppb and the concurrent SO2 

### hourly emission rates data was available. Because this necessary hourly emissions data from the Portland and Martins Creek Power Plants is currently only available through December 31, 2010, only four of the nine exceedance days could be evaluated in this report. Predictions of the impacts from actual and allowable SO2 

### emissions from the Portland Power Plant to 1

-hour SO2 

### concentrations in the vicinity of the Columbia Lake WMA monitor are documented in the NJDEP Bureau of Technical Services reports: AERMOD Modeling Analysis of the 1

-Hour Sulfur Dioxide Impacts Due to Emissions from the Portland Generating Station (July 30, 2 010

. This document is an exhibit in NJDEP’s supplemental 126 Petition dated September 17, 2010

. Using the modeling techniques and assumptions described in this report, AERMOD was run in several different emission scenarios and its predictions of the 10 highest 1

-hour concentrations at the monitoring location were compared to the 10 highest measured values.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 3 

## One
-Hour Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards
EPA finalized a new 1

-hour standard at 19 6 ug/m3 

### (75 ppb) on June 3, 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 35,581. The new standard was established in the form of the 99th percentile of the annual distribution of the daily maximum 1

-hour average concentrations. 75 Fed. Reg. 35,550. When a full year with 365 days of data is available, the 99th 

### percentile will be represented by the fourth

-highest daily maximum 1

-hour concentration. 

## Columbia Lake WMA Ambient Air Monitor
The Columbia Lake WMA ambient air monitor is located in Knowlton Township, Warren County

NJ. It is approximately

1.9 km (1.2 miles) to the northeast of the Unit 1 and 2 stacks at Portland Power Plant. Figure 1 shows the locations of the monitor and power plant relative to each other. The monitor is 490 ft above mean sea

-level (amsl), approximately

200 ft higher than Unit 1 and Unit 2’s stack base elevation of 294 ft amsl. NJDEP modeled the impacts of Portland’s emissions in the area where the monitor is located. The findings are exhibits to NJDEP’s November 17, 2010 126 petition and documented in the following report : AERMOD Modeling Analysis of the 1

-Hour Sulfur Dioxide Impacts Due to Emissions from the Portland Generating Station (July 30, 2010) This modeling analysis predicts relatively high SO2 

### impacts in the area where the monitor is located.
The hourly SO2 

### data collected from September 23, 2010 to February 17 , 201 1 is shown graphically in Figure 2. A listing of the same data in table format is given in Appendix A. The monitoring data from the Columbia Lake WMA indicates there is a relatively low background level of SO2 

### in the area. Superimposed on this low background are the occurrences of frequent, very high, short

-term SO 2 

### concentrations . This pattern strongly suggests the existence of a nearby, high emitting point source of SO2 

### emissions

. The variations in meteorology and, to a lesser extent, source emissions , result in the monitoring pattern seen in Figure 2. There is a low baseline overlaid with frequent spikes as opposed to one of a continual measurement of high SO2 

### concentrations with little variation

. The monitoring data indicates that since the monitor began operation on September 23, 2010, there are nine days when there is at least one hour with a measured SO2 

### concentration that exceeds the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS. As listed in Appendix A, these days were September 24, 2010, September 29, 2010, October 30, 2010, December 30, 2010, January 22, 2011 , January

24 , 2011, February

13, 2011, February

14, 2011, and February 16, 2011. The emissions information needed to conduct the trajectory analysis was available for the episodes on four of these days: September 24, September 29, October 30, 2010 and December 30, 2010.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 4 Figure 1 . Location of Columbia WMA Air Monitoring Station in Relation to the Portland Power Plants (Warren County NJ, Northampton County PA)

Figure 2. Hourly

Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations from the Columbia Lake WMA MonitorNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 5 

## Sources of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions in the Vicinity of the Portland Power Plant and the Columbia Lake WMA Monitor There are two large sources of SO2 

### emissions located within 15 miles of the Columbia Lake WMA monitor, Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 located 1.9 km (1.18 miles) to the southwest, and the Martins Creek Power Plant Units 3 and 4 , located 14 km (8.7 miles) to the south

- southwest. Figure 3 shows the monitor’s location relative to the two large power plants. In 2009, the total SO2 

### emissions from Portland Power Plant were 30,465 tons. All but 0.4 tons of these emissions were from Units 1 and 2. Unit 5 at Portland Power Plant, a 150 MW simple

-cycle turbine, operates infrequently and normally fires natural gas. Between 2007 to 2010, on average Unit 1 operated 6,595 hours per year and Unit 2 operated 7,022 hours per year. The total 2009 SO2 

### emissions from Martins Creek Power Plant were 1,095 tons. These emissions are from the large oil

-fired Units 3 and 4 at the facility. Units 3 and 4 operate much more infrequently

than Units 1 and 2 at Portland Power Plant. The average annual operating hours at Martins Creek between 2007 and 2010 was 1,039 hours for Unit 3 and 584 hours for Unit 4. The hourly emissions of SO2 

### from Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 and the Martins Creek Power Plant Units 3 and 4 were taken from the EPA Clean Air Markets web site (http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/emissions/).NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 6 Figure 3. Location of Columbia WMA Air Monitoring Station in Relation to Portland and Martins Creek Power Plants (Warren County NJ, Northampton County PA)

The other SO2 

### sources in the region are either much smaller and/or more distant from the Columbia Lake WMA monitor than the Portland Power Plant and the Martins Creek Power Plant. In New Jersey, the facilities in Warren, Sussex, Morris and Hunterdon Counties in New Jersey

that emitted more than 1 ton/y r of SO2 

### in 2009 are listed in Table 1 . The emissions from the sources listed in the table are far below the roughly 31,000 tons/year of SO2 

### Portland Power Plant has emitted in recent years. The largest, Warren County District Landfill located approximately 11.8 km from the Columbia Lake WMA monitor, emits 25.9 tons/y r, 0.08 percent of the Portland Power Plant’s total 2009 emissions.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 7 Table 1 . 2009 Sulfur Dioxide Emissions f rom Facilities in Warren, Sussex, and Hunterdon Counties in New Jersey

FACILITY NAME COUNTY MUNICIPALITY SO 2 

### (TPY) Warren County

District Landfill Warren Oxford 25.9 Covanta Warren Energy

Resource Co. L.P. Warren Oxford 10.6 Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Warren Phillipsburg 4.7 Mars Chocolate NA LLC Warren Hackettstown 4.3 Warren County

Landfill Energy, LLC Warren Oxford 3.6 Mallinckrodt Baker Inc. Warren Phillipsburg 1.2 Sussex County

Municipal Utilities Auth. Sussex Lafayette 2.1 Hamms Landfill Energy

Recovery

Project Sussex Lafayette 1.1

In Pennsylvania, besides the Portland and Martins Creek Power Plants, the other sources in the area that emitted more than 20 tons/y r of SO 2 

### in 2009 are listed in Table 4. 2009 is the latest actual emissions data available in the PADEP eFACTS data base. As can be seen in Table 2 , these sources are more distant and emit much less than the Portland Power Plant. The Green Knight/Plainfield Landfill Gas, which emits only 0.15 percent of Portland’s annual emissions, is located 12 miles west of the Portland Power Plant. The other four sources in the table are all located to the southwest of the Columbia Lake monitor along a 14 mile east

-west line located approximately 4 miles north, and centered on, Bethlehem PA
Table 2 . 2009 Sulfur Dioxide Emissions f rom Facilities in Northampton County PA Facility Name Municipality Distance from Columbia Lake WMA Monitor SO 2



### (TPY) Hercules Cement Co. Stockertown 19 mi 1,862 Keystone Portland Cement East Allen Township 25 mi 685 ESSROC Nazareth 22 mi 799 Northampton Generating Station Northampton 28 mi 490 Green Knight/ Plainfield Landfill Gas Plainfield Township 13 mi 46



## Air Trajectory Analysis and HYSPLIT Model The trajectory

analysis was conducted with the NOAA Air Resources Laboratory ’s (ARL) HYSPLIT Trajectory Model. Access to the interactive trajectory model is available at: http://ready.arl.noaa.gov/. Below is a description of the HYSPLIT model from the web site:NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 8 The Air Resources Laboratory ’s HYbrid Single

-Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory

(HYSPLIT) model is a complete system for computing both simple air parcel trajectories and complex dispersion and deposition simulations. The model calculation method is a hy brid between the Lagrangian approach, which uses a moving frame of reference as the air parcels move from their initial location, and the Eulerian approach, which uses a fixed three

-dimensional grid as a frame of reference. In the model, advection and diffusion calculations are made in a Lagrangian framework following the transport of the air parcel, while pollutant concentrations are calculated on a fixed grid. Through a joint effort between NOAA and Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology, the model uses advection algorithms, updated stability and dispersion equations, a graphical user interface, and the option to include modules for chemical transformations. HYSPLIT can be run interactively on ARL’s READY (Real

-time Environmental Applications and Display sYstem) web site, or it can be installed on a PC and run using a graphical user interface. The model is designed to support a wide range of simulations related to the atmospheric transport and dispersion of pollutants and hazardous materials, as well as the deposition of these materials (such as mercury) to the Earth’s surface. Some of the applications include tracking and forecasting the release of radioactive material, volcanic ash, wildfire smoke, and pollutants from various stationary and mobile emission sources. Operationally, the model is used by NOAA’s National Weather Service through the National Centers for Environmental Prediction and at local weather forecast offices. Several forecast meteorological data sets are available at the web site to use with the HYSPLIT Trajectory

Model. Because of its denser grid spacing, the NAM (Eta) 12 km grid forecast meteorological data was selected for use in this analysis. The following start location coordinates were input into HYSPLIT to estimate the forward and backward air trajectories: Columbia Lake WMA Monitor; latitude = 40.924607 N, longtitude = 75.067825 W Portland Power Plant; latitude = 40.909797 N longitude = 75.07875 W All times referenced in the trajectory analysis below are based on local time Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) or Eastern Standard Time (EST) , not Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) or Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). EDT is

- 4 hours different than GMT or UTC. EST is

- 5 hours different than GMT or UTC. Trajectories were calculated at three heights above ground level. One trajectory represents a parcel of air located 221 meters above ground. This is the approximation of the height of the plume emitted from the Portland Power Plant stacks (121 meter stack height and a 100 meter plume rise). A second trajectory was tracked for a parcel of air 10NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 9 meters above ground (the lowest height allowed by the HYSPLIT Trajectory Model). This level is used to represent the height of the Columbia Lake WMA monitor. A third trajectory of 100 meters was also used in order to better track the SO 2 

### transport at a height between the plume height and the monitor’s height. The trajectories at the three different levels were calculated for a one hour period. The large dots on some of the trajectories indicate the distance traveled in a 5 minute increment of time during that hour. The closer the circles are to each other, the lower the wind speed. The SO2 

### emitted from the Portland Power Plant stacks will initially start near the 221 meter level above ground (i.e., plume height). However, as the plume is advected downwind towards the Columbia Lake WMA monitor, it will quickly move to the 100 meter level as the terrain rises and the plume disperses vertically downward . As the plume approaches the monitor it will reach the 10 m level (i.e., ground

-level)

. Therefore, the path of SO2 

### emitted from the Portland Power Plant stack plumes traveling and dispersing horizontally

and vertically towards the Columbia Lake WMA monitor is best represented by a combination of the 10 meter and 100 meter trajectories. The NAM (Eta) 12 km forecast meteorological data was selected for use in this analysis because of the data options in HYSPLIT, it provides the finest grid resolution. However, a 12 km grid resolution will sometimes have difficulty giving an exact representation of the wind directions at the scale of this report (1.9 km between Portland Power Plant and the Columbia Lake monitor). In addition, the plume will spread laterally as it is transported downwind due to dispersion. Lack of an exact match of the air trajectory from Portland to the monitor does not imply the source is not impacting the monitor.


## Evaluation of the Episodes Episode I (September 24, 2010) The first episode occurred on September 24 , 2010 during the middle of the day. The 1

- hour SO2 

### concentrations measured during this episode exceeded the new 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS for four hours . The measured values before, during, and after the exceedances are listed in Table 3

. The SO2 

### values measured during this episode are shown graphically in Figure 4

. The hourly SO2 

### emissions from the Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 and the Martins Creek Power Plant Units 3 and 4 starting at Hour 10 (10 am) on September 24, 2010 and continuing through 2 pm are also listed in Table 3. As can be seen, the hourly emissions from Portland Units 1 and 2 were significant during this time period. The values range from 50 to 60 percent of each unit’s maximum allowable emission rate (Unit 1 allowable emission rate = 5,820 lbs/hr, Unit 2 allowable emission rate = 8,900 lbs/hr). During the period of monitored exceedances of the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS, the emissions from Martins Creek Units 3 and 4 were negligible.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 10 Table 3
. Hourly Measured Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations at the NJDEP Columbia Lake WMA Monitor
- Hours 10 thru 15 September 24, 2010 a 

### Hour (EDT) SO 2



### (ppb) SO 2



### (μg/m3

### ) Portland

Unit 1 (lbs/hr) Portland

Unit 2 (lbs/hr) Martins Creek

Units 3 & 4 (lbs/hr) 10 35 91 2,985 4,771 40 11 98 256 3,140 5,447 44 12 109 285 3,133 5,995 44 13 136 355 3,005 4,933 77 14 89 233 3,034 4,858 243 15 69 179 3,231 5,103 1,809
a. Exceedance of 1

-Hour SO 2 NAAQS of 75 ppb (196 ug/m3) in bold.



### 7 35 109 89 69

18

98

6 136

4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 

### September 24,2 010 EpisodeSulfur Dioxide Conc. (ppb)



### Figure 4 . Hourly

Sulfur Dioxide Measurements at the Columbia Lake Monitor from 8:00 to 17:00 September 24, 2010.

Figures 5 through 8 show the forward, downwind trajectories of three parcels of air at different heights starting at the Portland Power Plant stacks

. The four hours shown are those when the Columbia WMA monitor recorded 1

-hour SO2 

### above the 75 ppb threshold. The circles on the three trajectories indicate the distance transported downwind every 5 minutes.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 11 Figure 5 shows the first hour of this episode (11 am) when the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS threshold of 75 ppb was exceeded. While there is some directional wind shear, there is a relatively consistent moderate wind speed at all three levels. The plume star ts on a trajectory that would carry

the plume to the east of the monitor, but is brought back towards the west at the lower levels. This pattern continues during the next three hours, as shown by

the trajectories in Figures 6 through 8

.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 12 Figure 5
. S eptember 24, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 11am EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 98ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 13 Figure 6
. September 24, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 12pm EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 109 ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 14 Figure 7
. September 24, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory fromthe Portland Power Plant (starting time of 1pm EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 136 ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 15 Figure 8
. September 24, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 2pm EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 89 ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 16 Episode II (September 29, 2010)
A 1

-hour high SO2 

### episode that occurred on September 29, 2010 was evaluated. The SO2 

### concentrations monitored from hours 10 thru 14 EDT (10:00 am to 2 :59 pm EST) on September 29, 2010 are listed in Table 4 . During hour 11 the measured 1

-hour SO2 

### concentration in this episode exceeds the 1 hour SO2 

### NAAQS. The SO2 

### values measured bef ore, during, and after this one hour exceedance are shown graphically in Figure 9. The hourly SO2 

### emissions from the Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 and Martins Creek Power Plant Units 3 and 4 during Episode II are also listed in Table 2. Portland Unit ’s 1 and 2 emitted between 50

- 60 percent of their allowable SO2 

### during this episode. Martins Creek Units 3 and 4 were not in operation.
Table 4
. Hourly Measured Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations at the NJDEP Columbia Lake WMA Monitor
- Hours 1 0 thru 1 4 September 29, 2010 Hour (EST) SO 2 

### (ppb) SO 2 

### (μg/m3

### ) Portland

Unit 1 (lbs/hr) Portland Unit

2 (lbs/hr) Martins Creek

Units 3 & 4 (lbs/hr) 10 14 37 3,117 4,926 0 11 92 240 3,197 4,951 0 12 46 120 2,700 4,327 0 13 22 58 3,154 4,854 0 14 5 13 3,218 4,993 0
a. Exceedance of 1

-Hour SO 2 NAAQS of 75 ppb (196 ug/m3) in bold.

0.022 0.014 0.092

0.046

0.005 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.040 0.060 0.080 0.100 0.120 0.140 0.160

9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 Septem ber 29,2010 Ep is odeSulfur Dioxide Conc. (ppm)NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 17 Figure 9 . Hourly

Sulfur Dioxide Measurements at the Colombia Lake Monitor from 9:00 to 14:00 September 29, 2010. Figure 1 0 shows the three forward trajectories of the air at different heights for the one hour during this episode that the monitor’s measurement exceeded the 1

-hour 75 ppb threshold. Little directional or speed wind shear is shown. The wind speed at all three levels is relatively low, approximately 3 mph. The plume trajectory carries directly

to the monitor.

Figure 1 0
. September 29, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 11 am EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 92 ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 18 Episode III (October 30, 2010) The extended period of high SO2 

### concentrations that occurred on October 30, 2010 was evaluated. The SO2 

### concentrations monitored from hours 7

- 23 EDT (7:00 am to 1 1 :59 pm EDT) on October 30 , 2010 are listed in Table 5

. During three of the hours of this episode the measured 1

-hour SO2 

### concentration exceeded the 1 hour SO2 

### NAAQS. The concentration on hour 20 ( 1 83 ppb or 479 ug/m3 

### ) is the highest 1

-hour concentration measured between September 23 and February 17 , 201 1

. Inaddition, the 1

-hour SO2 

### concentration measured on hours 13 and 21 also exceed the 1

-hour NAAQS. The SO2 

### values measured during this episode are shown graphically in Figure 11. Portland Unit’s 1 and 2 emitted between approximately 25

- 45 percent of its allowable SO2 

### during the exceedances of the NAAQS that occurred during this episode, while Unit 2 emitted between approximately 35

- 45 percent of its allowable SO2 

### emission rate. These emissions Units 1 and 2 are lower than Episodes I and II. As in the previous episodes, Martins Creek Units 3 and 4 were not in operation.

Table 5 . Hourly Measured Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations at the NJDEP Columbia Lake WMA Monitor
- Hours 7 thru 23 October 30, 2010 Hour (EST) SO 2



### (ppb) SO 2



### (μg/m3

### ) Portland

Unit 1 (lbs/hr) Portland

Unit 2 (lbs/hr) Martins Creek

Units 3 & 4 (lbs/hr) 7 3 8 1,830 3,728 0 8 22 58 2,477 3,788 0 9 72 189 2,594 3,830 0 10 31 81 2,618 4,011 0 11 3 8 2,579 3,752 0 12 61 160 1,688 3,428 0 13 83 217 1,553 3,359 0 14 7 18 1,542 2,024 0 15 8 21 1,527 1,960 0 16 5 13 1,514 2,087 0 17 6 16 1,946 3,824 0 18 3 8 2,818 4,276 0 19 68 178 2,527 3,805 0 20 183 479 2,552 3,848 0 21 149 390 2,202 3,449 0 22 39 102 1,599 2,812 0 23 3 8 1,667 2,085 0
a. Exceedance of 1

-Hour SO 2 NAAQS of 75 ppb (196 ug/m3 ) in bold.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 19

33 31 61 83 68 183
149

39 3 3 6 5 8 7 3 3 72

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

7: 00 AM 9:

00 11 :0 0 AM 1: 00 PM 15

:00 17

:00 19 :00 21 :00 23 :00



### Octo ber 30,2 010 EpisodeSulfur Dioxide Conc. (ppb)



### Figure 11. Hourly

Sulfur Dioxide Measurements at the Colombia Lake Monitor from 7:00 to 23:00 October 3 0, 2010.

The trajectory

for the first hour of exceedance (hour 13) is shown in Figure 12. Though not shown to be directly impacting the monitor, the winds are in a general direction that transports the plume towards the monitor. The winds are relatively strong with no vertical wind shear. Unfortunately, there is no NAM wind trajectory data available from the HYSPLIT web site for the other two hours episode when the 1

-hour NAAQS is exceeded (hours 20 and 21). Data is available from the previous hour, hour 19 (7 pm). The trajectories for this hour are shown in Figure 13. The trajectories at all three levels are toward the monitor.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 20 Figure 12
. October 30, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 1 pm EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 83 ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 21 Figure 13
. October 30, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 7 pm EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 68 ppb , next hour (8 pm) = 183 ppmNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 22 Episode IV (December 30, 2010) The final episode evaluated occurred on December 30, 2010 during the middle of the day

. The 1

-hour SO2 

### concentrations measured during this episode exceeded the new 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS during one hour, hour 12 (EST)

. The measured values before, during, and after the exceedances are listed in Table 6

. The hourly SO2 

### emissions from the Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 and Martins Creek Power Plant Units 3 and 4 during Episode IV are also listed in Table 6

. Unit 1’s SO2 

### emissions were at approximately 55 percent of its allowable rate when high SO2 

### values were measured at the monitor. The emissions from Unit 2 were dropping from 45 percent of its allowable in the previous hour to 0 percent in the subsequent hour after exceedance . The Martins Creek units were not in operation. The SO2 

### values measured before, during, and after this episode are shown graphically in Figure 14

.

Table 6
. Hourly Measured Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations at the NJDEP Columbia Lake WMA Monitor
- Hours 9 thru 15 December 30, 2010 Hour (EDT) SO 2



### (ppb) SO 2



### (μg/m3

### ) Portland

Unit 1 (lbs/hr) Portland

Unit 2 (lbs/hr) Martins Creek

Units 3 & 4 (lbs/hr) 9 0 0 3,992 6,365 0 10 17 45 3,890 6,158 0 11 56 147 3,403 3,942 0 12 83 217 3,330 1,713 0 13 39 102 3,213 0 0 14 8 21 3,255 0 0 a. Exceedance of 1

-Hour SO 2 NAAQS of 75 ppb (196 ug/m3 ) in bold.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 23 17 56 83

39

8 8 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

9: 00 11: 00 13: 00 15: 00 De cem ber

3 0,2 010 EpisodeSulfur Dioxide Conc. (ppb)



### Figure 14. Hourly

Sulfur Dioxide Measurements at the Colombia Lake Monitor from 10:00 to 16:00 December 30, 2010.

Figure 15 shows the three forward trajectories of the air at different heights for the one hour during this episode that the monitor’s measurement exceeded the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS level of 75 ppb. A great deal of vertical directional and speed wind shear is shown. The wind speeds at the 10m level are low, approximately 3 mph. As the plume travels down through the atmosphere , the lower level winds transport it in a westerly direction towards the monitor.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 24 Figure 15
. December 30, 2010 Forward 1
-Hour Trajectory from the Portland Power Plant (starting time of 11 am EDT) Red Line = 10 meter above ground trajectory (approximate monitor height) Blue Line = 100 meter above ground trajectory Green Line = 221 meter above ground trajectory (approximate initial plume height)
Columbia Lake WMA Monitor = 83 ppbNJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 25 

## C omparison of the Concentrations Measured at the C olumbia Lake WMA Ambient Air Monitor with AERMOD Model Predictions
Predictions of the 1

-hour SO2 

### impacts from SO2 

### emissions from the Portland Power Plant are documented in the NJDEP Bureau of Technical Services reports: AERMOD Modeling Analysis of the 1

-Hour Sulfur Dioxide Impacts Due to Emissions from the Portland Generating Station (July

30, 2 010). Using the model setup and assumptions described in this document, an additional AERMOD model run was conducted with a receptor located at the Columbia Lake WMA monitor. To our knowledge, meteorological data suitable for use in AERMOD that is concurrent with the September 23, 2010 to February 17, 2011 monitoring period is not being collected at this time

. Therefore, concentrations at the Columbia Lake WMA monitor had to be estimated using the September 23, 1993 to February 17, 1994 meteorological data. Three emission scenarios were modeled. Emission Scenario #1 (Average Emissions) The first scenario used the average hourly SO2 

### emission rates of Portland Units 1 and 2 during the period when Columbia Lake WMA monitoring is available. The hourly SO2 

### emissions data is only

available from 2010; there is no 2011 data

. Therefore, concentrations at the Columbia Lake WMA monitor were estimated using the average hourly SO2 

### emission rate of Portland Units 1 and 2 from September through December 201 0. As in the trajectory analysis, the hourly emissions of SO 2 

### from Portland Power Plant Units 1 and 2 and the Martins Creek Power Plant Units 3 and 4 were obtained from the EPA Clean Air Markets web site (http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/emissions/). The average hourly SO2 

### emission rate from September through December 2010 was as follows: Unit 1 = 1,749 lb/hr (30 percent of the allowable emission rate of 5,820 lb/hr), Unit 2 = 3,426 lb/hr (38.5 percent of the allowable emission rate of 8,900 lb/hr) The average hourly

heat input for the two units in MMBtu was also available from the EPA Clean Air Markets web site. The average hourly heat input during the September through December 2010 time period was as follows : Unit 1 = 665 MMBtu/hr (40 percent of the maximum heat input of 1,657 MMBtu/hr), Unit 2 = 1,281 MMBtu/hr (51 percent of the maximum heat input of 2 , 512 MMBtu/hr)
The exit velocity of each stack will be a function of the unit’s heat input. Therefore, each unit’s maximum load exit velocity was reduced by 60 percent for Unit 1 and 49 percent for Unit 2. Using these adjusted emission rates and exit velocities , the AEMOD model was run and predictions made at the location of the Columbia Lake WMA monitor.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 26 Emission Scenario #2 (50 Percent of Allowable Emissions) The trajectory

analysis found that during the monitored exceedances of the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS, Portland Units 1 and 2 on average typically were emitting SO2 

### at approximately 50 percent of their allowable rate. Therefore, AEMOD model was run with Portland Units 1 and 2 were emitting SO2 

### at 50 percent of their allowable rate. The exit velocities from the previous scenario were also used. Emission Scenario #3 (Allowable Emissions) The third scenario was run using the allowable SO2 

### emission rate of both Unit 1 and Unit 2 and an exit velocity

representative of 100 percent load. Results Table 7 compares the 10 highest AERMOD 1

-hour predictions for the three emission scenarios with the top 10 monitored 1

-hour SO2 

### concentrations

. Because the time period of the meteorology

(September 23, 1993 thru February 17, 1994) is not the same year as the monitoring data (September 23, 2010 thru February 17, 2011), these results should be considered an approximation of model accuracy in reproducing observed concentrations at the Columbia Lake WMA monitor. That said, AERMOD using the Emission Scenario #1 (average actual SO2 

### emissions) and Emission Scenario #2 (50 percent of allowable SO2 

### emissions) predict lower concentrations than the monitored values

. Emission Scenario #3 (allowable SO2 

### emissions) provides the most accurate model predictions

. This suggests that in the reports: AERMOD Modeling Analysis of the 1

-Hour Sulfur Dioxide Impacts Due to Emissions from the Portland Generating Station (July 30, 2010), the model predictions made assuming Portland Unit 1 and 2 are emitting at their allowable SO2 

### emission rate may most accurately reflect actual SO2 

### concentrations in the vicinity of the plant. Table 7. Comparison of Top 1 0 AERMOD Predicted 1
-Hour SO 2 

### Concentrations to Monitored Values a, b 

### Ranked 1

-Hour SO2 

### Modeled

Avg. SO2 

### Emissions (ug/m3

### ) Modeled 50 % of

Allowable SO2 

### Emissions (ug/m3

### ) Modeled

Allowable SO2 

### Emissions (ug/m3

### ) Monitored

Concentrations (ug/m3

### ) 1 312 44 3 774 480 2 206 296 463 427 3 189 271 405 390 4 162 234 337 356 5 139 202 289 349 6 133 200 259 291 7 131 192 259 286 8 130 189 257 275 9 125 182 246 257 10 125 181 245 241
# of Exceedence Days 2 4 10 9

a. Model predictions based on meteorology from Sept. 23, 1993 through Feb. 17, 1994. b. Monitored values measured from Sept. 23, 2010 through Feb. 17, 2011.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 27 CONCLUSION Monitoring data from the Columbia Lake Wildlife Management Area in Knowlton Township, Warren County, New Jersey showed exceedances of the 1

-hour SO2 

### NAAQS on nine days between September 23, 2010 and February 17, 2011. Of these nine exceedances, four episodes when concurrent hourly emissions data was available were evaluated. NJDEP’s trajectory analysis combined with hourly emissions data determined that the Portland Power Plant in Northampton County, Pennsylvania was the likely cause of these exceedances . In addition, a comparison of AERMOD model runs with the monitoring data showed that AERMOD generally predicted lower concentrations than the monitored values. AERMOD predictions were most accurate when compared to allowable SO2 

### emission rates at Portland’s Units 1 and 2 suggesting that the allowable SO2 

### emission rates most accurately reflect actual SO2 

### concentrations at the Plant.NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 28



# Appendix A
Hourly Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations Measured at the Columbia Lake WMA Monitor (September 23, 2010 through February 17, 2011)NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 29 Date hr

0 hr 1 hr 2 hr 3 hr 4 hr 5 hr 6 hr 7 hr 8 hr 9 hr 10 hr 11 hr 12 hr 13 hr 14 hr 1 5 hr 16 hr 17 hr 18 hr 19 hr 20 hr 21 hr 22 hr 23 MAX 9/23/2010 **   **  **   **  **   **  41 15 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 41 9/24/2010 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 6 7 35 98 109 136 89 69 18 4 2 2 2 1 1 1 136 9/25/2010 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 9/26/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 9/27/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9/28/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 16 5 9 3 1 1 0 0 0 16 9/29/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 92 46 22 5 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 9/30/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 0 7 10/1/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/2/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/3/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/4/2 010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10/5/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/6/2010 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 36 10 35 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 10/7/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/8/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 **  1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10/9/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10/10/200 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10/11/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/12/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/13/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/14/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/15/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/16/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/17/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 10/18/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/19/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 15 10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 10/20/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 27 38 6 66 39 27 31 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 66 10/21/2010 0 5 25 7 0 0 44 57 58 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 10/22/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/23/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 5 14 8 7 5 4 4 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 14 10/24/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 6 2 19 28 14 7 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 28 10/25/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 17 52 28 14 32 33 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 30 52 10/26/2010 2 1 0 **  **   0 0 0 4 **  **   **  **   **  **   0 4 10/27/2010 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 30 Date hr

0 hr 1 hr 2 hr 3 hr 4 hr 5 hr 6 hr 7 hr 8 hr 9 hr 10 hr 11 hr 12 hr 13 hr 14 hr 15 hr 16 hr 17 hr 18 hr 19 hr 20 hr 21 hr 22 hr 23 MAX 10/28/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 41 28 40 67 65 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 67 10/29/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 **  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10/30/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 22 72 31 3 61 83 7 8 5 6 3 68 183 149 39 3 183 10/31/2010 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/1/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/2/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/3/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 22 11 19 72 43 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 72 11/4/2010 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/5/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/6/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/7/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/8/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 **   **  **   **  **   **  0 11/9/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/10/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/11/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/12/2010 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11/13/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/14/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/15/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 12 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 11/16/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/17/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11/18/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 11/19/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/20/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/21/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11/22/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 12 4 16 28 16 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 11/23/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 24 33 17 16 10 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 33 11/24/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/25/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 70 22 16 10 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 11/26/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 12 11/27/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 11/28/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/29/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 **  0 0 0 0 32 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 11/30/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/1/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 31 Date hr

0 hr 1 hr 2 hr 3 hr 4 hr 5 hr 6 hr 7 hr 8 hr 9 hr 10 hr 11 hr 12 hr 13 hr 14 hr 15 hr 16 hr 17 hr 18 hr 19 hr 20 hr 21 hr 22 hr 23 MAX 12/2/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   **  ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/3/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   **  **   **  **   **  ** ** 0 12/4/2010   **  **   **  **   **  **   **  ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/5/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/6/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/7/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/8/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/9/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/10/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 12/11/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 7 8 52 58 7 4 1 1 1 0 4 6 2 58 12/12/2010 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 16 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 16 12/13/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/14/2010 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/15/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/16/2010 0 0 0 0 1 2 11 38 5 5 54 20 35 8 36 5 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 54 12/17/2010 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 12/18/2010 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 3 2 5 32 22 14 4 8 4 1 1 0 0 0 32 12/19/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 12/20/2010 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12/21/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/22/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/23/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/24/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/25/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/26/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/27/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/28/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 **  ** ** 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12/29/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12/30/2010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 56 83 39 8 8 9 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 83 12/31/2010 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 23 71 9 6 6 5 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 71 1/1/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 7 12 16 33 16 3 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 33 1/2/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1/3/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/4/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 4 7 8 30 19 5 1 2 4 4 3 2 0 0 30 1/5/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 32 Date hr

0 hr 1 hr 2 hr 3 hr 4 hr 5 hr 6 hr 7 hr 8 hr 9 hr 10 hr 11 hr 12 hr 13 hr 14 hr 15 hr 16 hr 17 hr 18 hr 19 hr 20 hr 21 hr 22 hr 23 MAX 1/6/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 12 20 35 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 35 1/7/2011 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 10 2 4 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1/8/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 23 22 6 5 2 2 3 3 2 1 0 23 1/9/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/10/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 **  **   **  0 1/11/2011 **   **  **   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1/12/2011 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 7 7 6 5 1 0 0 **  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1/13/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/14/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1/15/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 6 4 21 5 5 18 14 2 2 2 2 2 21 1/16/2011 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1/17/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 2 4 1/18/2011 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1/19/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1/20/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 1/21/2011 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1/22/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 20 43 133 21 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 133 1/23/2011 0 0 1 0 2 5 11 10 8 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 1/24/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   163 33 76 32 57 7 2 2 3 4 5 6 163 1/25/2011 6 6 7 9 6 5 4 8 6 8 21 14 33 28 27 13 6 6 5 4 4 5 4 4 33 1/26/2011 4 3 4 5 4 5 6 7 6 6 6 6 5 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 7 1/27/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/28/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 6 26 26 21 15 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 26 1/29/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 42 13 15 14 3 1 2 2 2 1 0 0 42 1/30/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1/31/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/1/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/2/2011 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 **  **   **  ** ** 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 2/3/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 1 0 1 2/4/2011 2 6 4 2 4 3 2 2 4 11 11 19 13 15 4 31 44 17 4 4 3 1 1 1 44 2/5/2011 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 10 8 5 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 12 7 0 12 2/6/2011 4 5 3 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2/7/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 12 37 21 50 46 7 16 17 16 8 3 1 0 0 50 2/8/2011 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 ** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/9/2011 0 0 0 0 0 ** 1 1 26 7 9 3 42 33 54 48 4 1 12 7 35 30 14 ** 54NJDEP Division of Air Quality 2/28/2011

Bureau of Technical Services 

### 33 Date hr

0 hr 1 hr 2 hr 3 hr 4 hr 5 hr 6 hr 7 hr 8 hr 9 hr 10 hr 11 hr 12 hr 13 hr 14 hr 15 hr 16 hr 17 hr 18 hr 19 hr 20 hr 21 hr 22 hr 23 MAX 2/10/2011 1 6 4 4 4 4 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 6 6 15 15 2/11/2011 22 31 40 7 3 ** 2 2 3 18 51 66 ** 49 54 37 7 2 3 3 3 2 1 1 66 2/12/2011 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 3 20 8 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2/13/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 61 78 85 111 56 71 71 11 3 1 11 1 1 1 111 2/14/2011 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 4 23 38 78 38 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 2/15/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0   0 **  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/16/2011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 32 64 105 33 39 21 33 1 4 1 1 0 0 0 1 105 2/17/2011 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 3



### ** = missing or bad data