LEAD AIR QUALITY MODEL

ARECIBO AREATABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 I ntroduction.......

................................................................. 1

1.1 Model.

....... ............................................................... ....... 2 1.2 Meteorology.

............................................................... ...... 2 1.3 Receptors

................................................................ ..... ....... 3

1.4 Results...

................................. ....................................... ... 4

1.5 Conclusion

......................................................... ..... ........... 10

APPENDIX A

A

- 1 INITIAL LATERAL (σ

zο ) AND VERTICAL DIMENSIONS (σ yο )

A

- 2 ALL SOURCES DAILY/MONTHLY RESULTS OVER 0.15 UG/M3

A

- 3 VOLUME/AREA SOURCES MODEL MONTHLY RESULTS OVER 0.15

UG/M 3

A

- 4 VOLUME/AREA SOURCES MODEL DAILY RESULTS OVER 0.15

UG/M 3

A

- 5 HIGH DAILY LEAD CONCENTRATIONS IMPACT A REA

A

- 6 LEADPOST OUTPUT FILELIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Facility Stack, Volume and Area Source s

................................... 3 Figure 2: Receptor Grids................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Lead Daily Modeling Concentrations,

Stack/Volume & Area Sources................................................ 6 Figure 4: Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations,

Stack/Volume & Area Sources................................................ 6 Figure 5: Lead Daily Modeling Concentrations,

Volume Source...

................................................ ......... .. .. ..... 7

Fi gure 6: Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations,

Volume Source.................................................................. 7 Figure 7: Lead Daily Modeling Concentrations,

Area Source...................................................................... 8 Figure 8: Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations,

Area Source.................. .................................................... 8 Figure 9: Lead Daily Modeling Concentrations, Stack................................ 9 Figure 10: Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations, Stack............................ 9LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Arecibo Lead Air Quality Model Results.................................... 51.0 Introduc tion

In January 2010 a new source oriented lead air quality monitor was establish at Arecibo as part of the new air quality standard for lead of 0.15μg/m 3 . On June
2010, the new NAAQS was exceed ed according with the data capture by this new

lead monitor and in June 2011 EPA design the Arecibo area as non

- attainment for the lead rolling 3

- month average NAAQS.

As required by the new NAAQS and SIP regulation, the emissions inventory for

lead was revised and a lead air quality model was performed in the Arec ibo a rea. The following document presents the results of this air model ing study.

The facilities that more emit lead in Arecibo area are Battery Recycling and

PREPA Cambalache. A modeling study was executed with the emissions of these

two sources t rying to identify the origin of the lead standard violation. The model

used was AERMOD and this is the current preferred EPA model for air quality modeling studies

.

The preliminary modeling results indicate that the primary source causing th e high

lead concen tration is Battery Recycling, the concentrations from PREPA

Cambalache were below the standard or negligible . The refined modeling using only the lead emissions from Battery Recycling showed that the source has the major contribution to th e high monitorin g concentration.

The lead emissions used in the modeling were submitted by Battery Recycling during the permit process and were reviewed by the permit personnel

. A site

- visit

was done with the GPS personnel to take and revise the coordinates and

dimens ions of the facility buildings and the emission points. One year of on

- site meteorological data was used in the study and it was captured during 1992

- 1993,

in the PREPA Cambalache Station.

Three types of lead emission poi nts were m odel ed in the Battery R ecycling facility

. Th e emission points were the stack , the fugitive emissions from the main process building and the fugitive emissions due to the material handling an d transport across the facility property

.2

1.1 Model

The model used in the stu d y was AERMOD. Battery R ecycling emission points

were divided in two categories, stack and fugitive emissions

. The l ead potential

emissions emitted through the stack are 0.59 tons/yr

. The stack emissions are those captured by the control equipment insid e the main process building. The main process lead fugitive emissions a r e those that the control equipment do not capture during the smelting process and escape to the environment through the open areas of the building . T h e other lead fugitive emission s are outside the main process building from the vehicular movement du ring the transport and handling of

materials

. T he fugitive emissions inside th e main process building are 0.353 tons/yr and the fugitive emissions due to handling and transport of materia l are 0.27 tons/yr.

Tw o types of emission sources were used to model the fugitive emissions

, volume

and area. The volume source option was used to model t he fugitive emissions inside the main process building that the control equipment does not capture

. The building was modeled as a volume source because is not open completely like an

area source

. The initial lateral and vertical dimensions of the building and the

center coordinates were determined through GPS, see Appendix A

- 1

.

T he area source was u sed to model the emissions generated from the vehicle

movement between the carbon, scrap and soda ash storages

. A fourteen

- vertex polygon was created covering the area that the facility vehicles tran sit daily

between the se storages , approximately 4742 m 2

. This is a conservative scenario

but i t wa s the best modeling approximation of these fugitive emissions that could

be use at this moment, with the available data

.

The fa cility is under construction and some changes have been made to the main

process bu ilding and the storage area s that are not seen in the current aerial photos

. Figure 1 shows the f

acility with the property fenceline, stack, volume and area

source s

.

1.2 Meteorology

One year of on

- site meteorological data from 1992

- 1993 collected in t he PREPA Cambalache station was used in the model. The data was processed using the AERMET new version that incorporates two surface characteristics in cases of on

site missing data. Meteorological data from San Juan station was used for the

substitution of the on

- site missing data.3

1.3 Receptors

The terrain area that surrounds Battery Recycl ing is flat rural area with some elevated terrain at 4 km approximately to the south west /south east . Two receptor grids were used for the study, one of 25 0 meters a nd a refined grid of 100 m eters

. AERMOD model uses AERMAP to process the terrain data and the receptor elevations are subtracted from the DEM maps. The UTM coordinates for the grids

were southwest corner 7 39500 East/20 38 000 North and north eas t corner 746 500

East/2045750 North for the 250 meters and southwest corner 742750 East/2042000

North and northeast corner 742950 East/2043000 N orth for the 100 meters

. Figure 2 shows the receptor grid s

.

Figure 1: Facility Stack, Volume and Area Sources

Figure 2: Receptor Grids4

1.4 Results

The modeling results showed v iolations of the rolling 3

- month average lead

standard caused by the emissions of the area and the volume source s

. The volume source emissions have the major contributio n to the rolling 3

- month ave rage

. The

emissions of the volume and area source s caused high daily and monthly lead

concentration results , see Appendix es A

- 3 and 4

. The stack lead emissions do not

c aused any violation of the standard , see Figures 9 and 10

. The highest first highest value was used to have a conservative scenario

.

Two periods were evaluated

, daily and monthly. The model daily value was used because the EQB lead monitoring station registers the concentrations daily and i t i s a way to determine how close the model pr edictions are to the monitored value

. Leadpost processor was use d for the calculation of the rolling 3

- month average using the monthly modeling results

.

Background concentration was omitted because EQB does not have an other nearby lead air quality moni tor that could be representative of the area and background

emissions are presumed negligible because besides PREPA Cambalache, there are

no other lead emissions sources nearby Battery Recycling

. The model results are presented in Table 1.

The results sh ow that the highest lead concentration comes from the emissions of the volume source in both periods. These values were registered inside the facility

property, at the same receptor as the rolling 3

- month average. The area source has high daily and month ly lead concentrations but the contribution to the rolling 3

- month average was minor.

Other high lead concentrations were registered nearby the facility. Figures 3 and 4 show the modeling concentration isopleths with the contribution of all the facilit y lead emissions, for the daily and monthly results, respectively. Appendix A

- 3 shows the rolling 3

- month average of 3.32 ug/m 3 at 743500 East/2042000 North. The rolling 3

- month average of the volume source at this location was 3.088 ug/m 3

and the area s ource rolling 3

- month average was 0.232 ug/m 3 . A copy of the leadpost output file is in Appendix A

- 6

.5 Table 1: Arecibo Lead Air Quality Model Results

Emission

Point Model

Group Id Daily Model

Result ug/m 3 Monthly

Model Result ug/m 3 Rolling 3

-

Month A verage ug/m 3 Coordinates

East North

Stack BR 0.090

- - 743150 2042100

Volume

Source Fugitive 8.89

- - 743500 2042000

Area

Source Handling 8.19

- - 743450 2042100

All All 9.31

- - 743450 2042100

Emission

Point Model

Group Id Daily Model

Result ug/m 3 Monthly

Model Result ug/m 3 Rolling 3

-

Month Average ug/m 3 Coordinates

East North

Stack BR

- 0.031

- 743250 2042000

Volume

Source Fugitive

- 3.70

- 743500 2042000

Area

Source Handling

- 2.33

- 743450 2042100

All All

- 3.87

- 743500 2042000

Emission

Point Model

Group Id Daily Model

Result ug/m 3 Monthly

Model Result ug/m 3 Rolling 3

-

Month Average ug/m 3 Coordinates

East North

Stack BR

- - 0.000 743500 2042000

Volume

Source Fugitive

- - 3.088 743500 2042000

Area

Source Handling

- - 0. 232 743500 2042000

All All

- - 3.32 743500 20420006

Figure 3: Lead Daily Modeling Concentrations

, Stack/Volume & Area Sources

Figure 4 : Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations

, Stack/Volume & Area Sources7

Figure 5: Lead Daily Modeling Con centrations, Volume Source

Figure 6: Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations, Volume Source8

Figure 7: Lead Daily Modeling Concentrations, Area Source

Figure 8 : Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations, Area Source9

Figure 9: Lead Daily Modeling Concen trations, Stack

Figure 10: Lead Monthly Modeling Concentrations, Stack10

1.5 Conclusion

The model results showed high daily lead concentrations up to 4 km f rom the

source , see Appendix A

- 2

. The Appendix A

- 5 shows a 4 km radio that includes

the areas o f the w ards in Arecibo municipality that could be impacted wit h the s e daily high lead concentratio ns. The monthly violations extend up to 2 km from the

source , see Appendix A

- 2

.

According to the modeling study, the Battery Recycling fugitive emissions were the major contributor s to the high lead concentrations in the area . The major

contribution t o the rolling 3

- month average is from the emissions of the main

process building but the emissions from the handling and transport of material by

itself , cause a violation of the lead rolling 3

- month average

.APPENDIX AA

- 1

INITIAL LATERAL (σ

zο ) AND VERTICAL DIMENSIONS (σ yο )

σ zο = 68.57 meters/4.3 = 15.94 m

σ yο = 14.5 meters/2.15 = 6.74 mA

- 2

ALL SOURCES DAILY/MONTHLY RESULTS OVER 0.15 UG/M 3A

- 3

VOLUME/AREA SOURCES MODEL MONTHLY RESULTS OVER 0.15

UG/M 3A

- 4

VOLUME/AREA SOURCES MODEL DAILY RESULTS OVER 0.15 UG/M 3A

- 5 HIGH DAILY LEAD CONCENTRATIONS IMPACT AREAA

- 6 LEADPOST OUTPUT FILE