Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Report: September Richards Bay Clean Air Association

Transcription

1 T0107 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Report: September 2010 Prepared for the Richards Bay Clean Air Association AQ0002 September 2010 SGS Environmental Services 1 of 62 6 Sookhai Place, Derby Downs, Westville, 3630 PO Box 416 Durban 3600 Tel: Fax: Internet: info@ecoserv.com

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report summarises the sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ), total reduced sulphur (TRS) and fine particulate (PM-10) monitoring data gathered by the RBCAA monitoring network for the month of September The monitoring network consists of 10 stations: Arboretum Brackenham CBD (situated in the Sports Complex) Harbour West (near the western entrance to the harbour) Scorpio (intersection of John Ross Highway and West Central Arterial) Mtunzini St Lucia Airport (at Richards Bay Airport) Bayside (next to Bayside Aluminium) RBM (situated at Richards Bay Minerals) Figure A: RBCAA s monitoring network 2 of 62

3 SO 2 is measured at Arboretum, Brackenham, CBD, Scorpio, and Harbour West, Total TRS at CBD and PM-10 at Brackenham, CBD, Mtunzini and St Lucia. Meteorology is measured at all stations with the exception of CBD. The ambient air monitoring system, maintained by SGS Environmental Services, is accredited to ISO 17025:2005 for the measurement of SO 2 by the South African National Accreditation Service (SANAS). The measurement of other pollutants reported does not fall within this accreditation. The applicable quality controls and measurement methods are listed in Appendix 1. South African limits and standards Air quality limits and thresholds are fundamental to effective air quality management, providing the link between the potential source of atmospheric emissions and the user of that air at the downwind receptor site. Ambient air quality limits indicate generally safe exposure levels for the majority of the population, including the very young and the elderly, throughout an individual s lifetime. Table A: South African limit values and standards Organisation Variable 10-min average Hourly average Daily average Monthly average Annual average NEMAQA [a] SO2 500 µg/m³ [c] 350 µg/m³ [d] 125 µg/m³ [e] - 50 µg/m³ [f] 191 ppb [c] 134 ppb [d] 48 ppb [e] - 19 ppb [f] NEMAQA [a] PM µg/m³ [e] - 50 µg/m³ [f] SANS [b] PM µg/m³ [e] - 40 µg/m³ [f] Notes: [a] SA Government Gazette (published 24 th December 2009) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 [b] SABS Draft South African National Standard SANS1929:2009 [c] Not to be exceeded more than 526 times in one year. [d] Not to be exceeded more than 88 times in one year. [e] Not to be exceeded more than 4 times in one year. [f] Not to be exceeded. 3 of 62

4 SO 2 Exceedances There was one measured exceedance of the NEMAQA Hourly Standard, no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA 10-minute or daily standards. Table B: SO 2 exceedances SO2 Exceedances Guideline Station Date Value (ppb) Apportionment NEMAQA hourly standard Harbour West 2010/09/ Hillside Aluminium 100% TRS Odour Threshold Exceedances There are no guidelines or standards for TRS; however the odour threshold for H 2 S is 4.5 ppb. TRS 10-minute averages exceeded this threshold 16 times. PM-10 Exceedances There were four measured exceedances of the SANS PM-10 Daily Standard, no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA Daily Standard. Table C: PM-10 exceedances PM-10 Exceedances Guideline Station Date Value (μg/m³ TEOM) Apportionment SANS Daily (75μg/m³) CBD 2010/09/ % umhlatuze SANS Daily (75μg/m³) St Lucia 2010/09/ % Fire SANS Daily (75μg/m³) CBD 2010/09/ % Fire SANS Daily (75μg/m³) Brackenham 2010/09/ % Fire 4 of 62

5 Dispersion Modelling Richards Bay Clean Air Association It must be noted that the HAWK Model predictions show areas that may have experienced exceedances within the month of September It is not practical to measure SO 2 concentrations in a dense grid and, as a result the HAWK Model is used as a predictive measure for determining the levels of SO 2 in Richards Bay. There may not be any measured exceedances during any month; however this does not mean that there were no exceedances. The concentration maps are important in that they show the areas where no monitoring equipment exists, but may have experienced exceedances. The Model output is set to predict the maximum SO 2 concentrations and, therefore, the worst-case scenario, which may not always be the case in a particular area. Details of the model parameters are provided in Appendix 3. A limitation of dispersion models is their inability to adequately account for highly complex, rapidly varying spatial and temporal meteorological systems, such as calms, coastal fumigation, sea / land breeze recirculation and mountain and valley winds, particularly in complex terrain or near coastal boundaries. The US EPA considers the range of uncertainty to be -50% to 200% for models applied to gently rolling terrain. The accuracy improves with fairly strong wind speeds and during neutral atmospheric conditions. Dispersion modelling results can be compared with monitored values in order to improve the accuracy or calibrate models using percentiles. An investigation using July 2007 data compared the measured values to the 98 th, 99 th and 100 th percentile. The investigation concluded that the 99 th percentile more closely approximated measured values. The RBCAA has therefore decided to use the 99 th percentile across all averaging periods. 5 of 62

6 Figure B: Inter-annual comparison of RBCAA annual average SO 2 Richards Bay Clean Air Association Figure A is an inter-annual comparison of annual average SO 2. Since 2005 there has been a downward trend in measured annual average SO 2 concentrations (Arboretum 46%, Brackenham 68%, CBD 25%, Harbour West 52% (since 2006) and Scorpio 47%). The reduction in emissions is most likely related to a reduction in production which could be the result of a number of reasons, including load shedding, the increase in the cost of electricity and the downturn in the economy. We therefore strongly recommend that the emission inventory for Richards Bay, done in 2004, be revisited. In May 2008 Bayside Aluminium reduced its production and it s emissions by 53% (from 4454 tpa to 2102 tpa); the effects of this on measurements at, the closest stations (Harbour West and Scorpio) are noticeable. 6 of 62

7 Figure C: Wind roses for Arboretum (September 2010 and 2009) (a) Arboretum wind rose September 2010 Richards Bay Clean Air Association The average wind speed in September 2010 was 3.9 m/s with 3.7% calms. Predominant winds blew from two sectors: NW to NNE and SSE to SSW; most of the higher speed winds (>8 m/s) were from the sector: S to SSW. (b) Arboretum wind rose September 2009 The average wind speed in September 2009 was 3.6 m/s, with 6.7% calms. Predominant winds blew from two sectors: NNW to N and S to SW, most of the higher speed winds (>8 m/s) were from the sector: SSE to SSW. 7 of 62

8 Richards Bay Clean Air Association Figure D: September 2010 maximum predicted daily average SO2 concentration (regional) Figure E: September 2010 maximum predicted daily average SO2 concentration (local) 8 of 62

9 Maximum predicted daily average concentrations The model predicted maximum daily average SO 2 concentrations greater than the NEMAQA SO 2 Daily Average Standard (48 ppb) over Felixton, Hillside Aluminium and Mondi Richards Bay. The half-guideline includes parts of Bayside Aluminium, the CBD, Foskor and Richards Bay Minerals. Figure F: September 2010 maximum daily average SO 2 concentration and prediction There were no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA SO 2 Daily Average Standard (48 ppb). Daily average predicted values at all stations were within accepted dispersion modelling norms (-50% to 200%) except for Harbour West and Scorpio which were under predicted and Brackenham which was over predicted. Compared to the measurements, predicted values at CBD, Harbour West and Scorpio were lower, at Arboretum similar, and at Brackenham higher. Under predictions imply higher than normal emissions for the time interval concerned. 9 of 62

10 SO 2 data There was one measured exceedance of the NEMAQA Hourly Standard, no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA 10-minute or daily standards. Table D: Maximum and monthly average SO 2 concentrations Maximum SO2 concentrations Station 10 Minute Average Hourly Average Daily Average Monthly Average Guideline (191 ppb) Guideline (134 ppb) Guideline (48 ppb) Guideline (19 ppb) % of guideline 36% 39% 31% 14% Arboretum (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/13 07: /09/13 07: /09/ /09 % of guideline 13% 14% 8% 7% Brackenham (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/13 07: /09/13 07: /09/ /09 % of guideline 34% 40% 30% 20% CBD (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/15 09: /09/13 02: /09/ /09 % of guideline 80% 110% 100% 47% Harbour West (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/14 07: /09/14 07: /09/ /09 % of guideline 84% 80% 55% 31% Scorpio (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/01 12: /09/01 12: /09/ /09 Trends for measured SO 2 concentrations are contained in Section of 62

11 TRS data There are no guidelines or standards for TRS; however the odour threshold for H 2 S is 4.5 ppb. TRS 10-minute averages exceeded this threshold 9 times. Table E: Maximum and monthly average TRS concentrations Maximum TRS concentrations Station 10 Minute Average Hourly Average Daily Average Monthly Average (Threshold 4.5 ppb) (Threshold 4.5 ppb) (Threshold 4.5 ppb) (Threshold 4.5 ppb) % of H₂S odour threshold 602% 147% 40% 13% CBD (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/03 07: /09/03 07: /09/ /09 Trends for measured TRS concentrations are contained in Section 4. PM-10 data There were four measured exceedances of the SANS PM-10 Daily Standard, no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA Daily Standard. Table F: Maximum and monthly average PM-10 concentrations Maximum PM-10 concentrations Station 10 Minute Average Hourly Average Daily Average Monthly Average (Guideline 75μg/m³) (Guideline 40μg/m³) % of guideline % 95% Brackenham µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/26 16: /09/26 17: /09/ /09 % of guideline % 93% CBD µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/15 09: /09/15 08: /09/ /09 % of guideline % 90% Mtunzini µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/21 15: /09/21 15: /09/ /09 % of guideline % 75% St Lucia µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/15 12: /09/15 12: /09/ /09 Trends for measured PM-10 concentrations are contained in Section of 62

12 Air quality complaints There were 8 air quality complaints received for the month of September 2010 (see Appendix 4). The historical count of complaints by month is reflected below. There were 11 complaints logged during the same period last year. Figure G: Comparison of number of air quality complaints per month Figure H: Air quality complaints by source 12 of 62

13 Network data capture and operation Data capture shows the percentage of the month where the station as a whole was operational, while the SO 2, PM-10, and TRS data capture indicate the percentage of valid data received from the respective analysers for the month. Data capture for September 2010 is shown in the table below. Table G: Ambient air quality data capture Data capture (%) for RBCAA system Station Data (%) SO 2 (%) PM-10 (%) TRS (%) Arboretum Brackenham CBD Harbour West Scorpio Mtunzini St Lucia Average Notes: Target 80%, Good 90%, Excellent 95% Station, SO 2, PM-10 and TRS data capture for September 2010 was above target. 13 of 62

14 REPORT DETAILS REFERENCE AQ002 REPORT TITLE Monthly Report: September 2010 DATE SUBMITTED September 2010 CLIENT Sandy Camminga Richards Bay Clean Air Association PO Box Richards Bay 3900 Tel: (035) PREPARED BY: Lance Coetzee 6 Sookhai Place Derby Downs Westville Durban, 3630 Tel: (031) info@ecoserv.com SIGNED APPROVER Signed: Lance Coetzee Project Manager STATUS NOTICE Signed: Grant Ravenscroft Technical Signatory Final This document is issued by the Company under its General Conditions of Service accessible at Attention is drawn to the limitation of liability, indemnification and jurisdiction issues defined therein. Any holder of this document is advised that information contained hereon reflects the Company s findings at the time of its intervention only and within the limits of Client s instructions, if any. The Company s sole responsibility is to its Client and this document does not exonerate parties to a transaction from exercising all their rights and obligations under the transaction documents. Any unauthorized alteration, forgery or falsification of the content or appearance of this document is unlawful and offenders may be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 14 of 62

15 TABLE OF CONTENTS Description Page 1 INTRODUCTION 19 2 METEOROLOGY 22 3 MONITORING AND MODELLED RESULTS FOR SO Ambient Air Quality Standards Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and Maximums Monthly Average Information Daily Average Information Hourly Average Information minute Average Information Diurnal Trend 44 4 MONITORED RESULTS FOR TRS Ambient Air Quality Standards Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and Maximums Monthly Average Information Daily Average Information Hourly Average Information minute Average Information Diurnal Trend 50 5 MONITORED RESULTS FOR PM Ambient Air Quality Standards Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and Maximums Monthly Average Information Daily Average Information Diurnal Trend 55 6 COMPLIANCE WITH GUIDELINES 56 7 AIR QUALITY COMPLAINTS Field Observations Distribution of Complaints by Source Distribution of Complaints by Region Distribution of Complaints by Type 62 APPENDIX 1 Quality Assurance Statement APPENDIX 2 Network data capture and operation APPENDIX 3 Dispersion simulation inputs APPENDIX 4 Air Quality Complaints Log APPENDIX 5 Case Studies 15 of 62

16 LIST OF FIGURES Description Page Figure 1.1: RBCAA s monitoring network 19 Figure 2.1: Wind roses for Arboretum (September 2010 and 2009) 22 Figure 3.1: Long term monthly average SO2 concentrations 27 Figure 3.2: Monthly average SO2 concentration and prediction (September 2010) 28 Figure 3.3: Predicted monthly average SO2 concentration (regional) 29 Figure 3.4: Predicted monthly average SO2 concentration (local) 30 Figure 3.5: Maximum daily average SO2 concentration and prediction 32 Figure 3.6: Maximum predicted daily average SO2 concentration (regional) 33 Figure 3.7: Maximum predicted daily average SO2 concentration (local) 34 Figure 3.8: Daily average SO2 concentration 35 Figure 3.9: Maximum hourly average SO2 concentration and prediction 36 Figure 3.10: Maximum predicted hourly average SO2 concentration (regional) 37 Figure 3.11: Maximum predicted hourly average SO2 concentration (local) 38 Figure 3.12: Hourly average SO2 concentration 39 Figure 3.13: Maximum 10-minute average SO2 concentration and prediction 40 Figure 3.14: Maximum predicted 10-minute average SO2 concentration (regional) 41 Figure 3.15: Maximum predicted 10-minute average SO2 concentration (local) 42 Figure 3.16: 10-minute average SO2 concentration 43 Figure 3.17: Diurnal SO2 trends 44 Figure 4.1: Long term monthly average TRS concentrations 46 Figure 4.2: Daily average TRS at CBD 47 Figure 4.3: Hourly average TRS at CBD 48 Figure 4.4: 10-minute average TRS at CBD 49 Figure 4.5: Diurnal TRS trend at CBD 50 Figure 5.1: Long term monthly average PM-10 concentrations 53 Figure 5.2: Daily average PM-10 at Brackenham and CBD 54 Figure 5.3: PM-10 diurnal trend 55 Figure 6.1: SO2 exceedances per month Figure 6.2: SO2 exceedances per month Figure 6.3: SO2 exceedances per month Figure 6.4: SO2 exceedances per month Figure 6.5: SO2 exceedances per month Figure 7.1: Comparison of number of complaints per month 59 Figure 7.2: Distribution of complaints by source 60 Figure 7.3: Distribution of complaints by source YTD 60 Figure 7.4: Distribution of complaints by region 61 Figure 7.5: Distribution of complaints by region YTD 61 Figure 7.6: Distribution of complaints by type 62 Figure 7.7: Distribution of complaints by type YTD of 62

17 LIST OF TABLES Description Page Table 1.1: Ambient air quality standards for SO Table 1.2: Ambient air quality standards for PM Table 3.1: Ambient air quality standards for SO Table 3.2: SO2 Exceedances Table 3.3: SO2 Maximums Table 4.1: TRS Maximums Table 5.1: Ambient air quality standards for PM Table 5.2: PM-10 Exceedances Table 5.3: PM-10 Maximums Table.1: Ambient air quality data capture Table.2: Arboretum SO2 analyser zero and span checks Table.3: Arboretum station log Table.4: Arboretum status report Table.5: Brackenham SO2 analyser zero and span checks Table.6: Brackenham station log Table.7: Brackenham status report Table.8: CBD SO2 analyser zero and span checks Table.9: CBD station log Table.10: CBD status report Table.11: Harbour West SO2 analyser zero and span checks Table.12: Harbour West station log Table.13: Harbour West status report Table.14: Scorpio SO2 analyser zero and span checks Table.15: Scorpio station log Table.16: Scorpio status report of 62

18 ABBREVIATIONS Degrees C Degrees Celsius µg/m 3 Microgram per cubic metre CH 3 -S-CH 3 Dimethyl sulphide CH 3 S-H Methyl mercaptan CH 3 -S-S-CH 3 Dimethyl disulphide DEAT Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (RSA) E East ENE East north east ESE East south east g/s Grams per second K Kelvin m Metres m/s Metres per second N North NE North East NEMAQA National Environmental Management Air Quality Act NNE North north east NNW North north west NW North west PM-10 Fine particulate matter ppb Parts per billion RBCAA Richards Bay Clean Air Association S South SANAS South African National Accreditation Service SANS South African Standards SE South east SO 2 Sulphur dioxide SSE South south east SSW South south west SW South west tpa Tons per annum TRS Total reduced sulphur US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency W West WD Wind direction WNW West north west WS Wind speed WSW West south west 18 of 62

19 1 INTRODUCTION This report summarises the sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ), total reduced sulphur (TRS) and fine particulate (PM-10) monitoring data gathered by the RBCAA monitoring network for the month of September The monitoring network consists of 10 stations: Arboretum Brackenham CBD (situated in the Sports Complex) Harbour West (near the western entrance to the harbour) Scorpio (intersection of John Ross Highway and West Central Arterial) Mtunzini St Lucia Airport (at Richards Bay Airport) Bayside (next to Bayside Aluminium) RBM (situated at Richards Bay Minerals) Figure 1.1: RBCAA s monitoring network 19 of 62

20 SO 2 is measured at Arboretum, Brackenham, CBD, Scorpio, and Harbour West, TRS at CBD and PM-10 at Brackenham, CBD, Mtunzini and St Lucia. Meteorology is measured at all stations with the exception of CBD. The monitoring system, as maintained by SGS Environmental Services, is accredited by the South African National Accreditation Service (SANAS) for the measurement of SO 2. Applicable quality controls and measurement methods are listed in Appendix 1. Measured results pertain to instantaneous samples drawn from air passing the above fixed stations, and care should be taken when extrapolating these results to surrounding areas. All results are reported at standard temperature and pressure. Measured SO 2 concentrations over various time scales are compared to percentile concentrations predicted by the Hawk Air Pollution Dispersion Model. The Hawk Model SO 2 concentrations are based on ambient meteorological conditions and an emission inventory. Opinions, interpretations, meteorological data and Hawk Model findings presented in this report do not form part of the SANAS accreditation. Modelled SO 2 concentrations, using the Hawk Dispersion Model, are presented and results are compared to the monitored concentrations. 20 of 62

21 It is also the intention of this report to highlight certain incidents and exceedances of air quality standards. The National Environment Management Air Quality Act (NEMAQA), Schedule 2 Standards for SO 2 (Act 39 of 2004, published 24 February 2006) are listed in Table 1.1 below. Table 1.1: Ambient air quality standards for SO 2 Organisation Variable 10-min average Hourly average Daily average Monthly average Annual average NEMAQA [a] SO2 500 µg/m³ [c] 350 µg/m³ [d] 125 µg/m³ [e] - 50 µg/m³ [f] 191 ppb [c] 134 ppb [d] 48 ppb [e] 19 ppb [f] Notes: [a] SA Government Gazette (published 24 th December 2009) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 [c] Not to be exceeded more than 526 times in one year. [d] Not to be exceeded more than 88 times in one year. [e] Not to be exceeded more than 4 times in one year. [f] Not to be exceeded. Additional pollutants measured, as part of the RBCAA monitoring programme, include TRS and PM-10; the results of which are presented in Section 4 and 5 of this report. The NEMAQA, Schedule 2 Standards for PM-10 (Act 39 of 2004, published 24 February 2006) are listed in Table 1.2. Table 1.2: Ambient air quality standards for PM-10 Organisation Variable 10-min average Hourly average Daily average Monthly average Annual average NEMAQA [a] PM µg/m³ [e] - 50 µg/m³ [f] SANS [b] PM µg/m³ [e] - 40 µg/m³ [f] Notes: [a] SA Government Gazette (published 24 th December 2009) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 [b] SABS Draft South African National Standard SANS1929:2009 [e] Not to be exceeded more than 4 times in one year. [f] Not to be exceeded. 21 of 62

22 2 METEOROLOGY Figure 2.1: Wind roses for Arboretum (September 2010 and 2009) (a) Arboretum wind rose September 2010 The average wind speed in September 2010 was 3.9 m/s with 3.7% calms. Predominant winds blew from two sectors: NW to NNE and SSE to SSW; most of the higher speed winds (>8 m/s) were from the sector: S to SSW. (b) Arboretum wind rose September of 62

23 The average wind speed in September 2009 was 3.6 m/s, with 6.71% calms. Predominant winds blew from two sectors: NNW to N and S to SW, most of the higher speed winds (>8 m/s) were from the sector: SSE to SSW. 23 of 62

24 3 MONITORING AND MODELLED RESULTS FOR SO 2 In this section of the report, SO 2 concentrations measured at the fixed monitoring stations and SO 2 concentrations calculated by the Hawk Dispersion Model are compared. The Hawk Dispersion Model uses meteorological and topographical data, and an emission inventory to simulate the prevailing conditions in order to estimate the concentration of SO 2 at any given point within the area of interest. This requires the use of certain assumptions, resulting in a variation between the modelled and measured SO 2 concentrations presented. The concentration maps generated using the Hawk Model represent the cumulative concentrations predicted at receptor grid points by means of concentration isopleths, averaged over the required time period. The predicted concentrations in these dose maps may vary from actual concentrations. All modelled concentrations are reported at the 99 th percentile, unless otherwise stated. The national annual average standard of 19 ppb is the basis for comparison for monthly averaging, as there is no monthly average SO 2 standard. This results in the comparison of modelled and guideline SO 2 concentrations being more conservative. Limitations of dispersion models are their inability to account for highly complex, rapidly varying spatial and temporal meteorological systems such as calms, coastal fumigation, sea / land breeze recirculation, and mountain and valley winds, particularly in complex terrain or near coastal boundaries. The US EPA considers the range of uncertainty to be -50% to 200% for models applied to gently rolling terrain. The accuracy improves with fairly strong wind speeds and during neutral atmospheric conditions. Dispersion modelling results can be compared with monitored values in order to improve the accuracy or calibrate models using percentiles. 24 of 62

25 An investigation in July 2007 compared the measured values to the 98 th, 99 th and 100 th percentile. The investigation concluded that the 99 th percentile more closely approximated measured values. The RBCAA has therefore decided to use the 99 th percentile across all averaging periods. Previously, the 99 th percentile was used for monthly, daily and hourly averaging periods while the 100 th percentile for was used for 10-minute averaging periods. The extent of the effects on maximum 10-minute concentration maps will therefore appear greatly reduced. This does not indicate that there has been any reduction in emissions or improvement in air quality. 3.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards Ambient air quality standards for SO 2 are listed below. Table 3.1: Ambient air quality standards for SO 2 Organisation Variable 10-min average Hourly average Daily average Monthly average Annual average NEMAQA [a] SO2 500 µg/m³ [c] 350 µg/m³ [d] 125 µg/m³ [e] - 50 µg/m³ [f] 191 ppb [c] 134 ppb [d] 48 ppb [e] 19 ppb [f] Notes: [a] SA Government Gazette (published 24 th December 2009) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 [c] Not to be exceeded more than 526 times in one year. [d] Not to be exceeded more than 88 times in one year. [e] Not to be exceeded more than 4 times in one year. [f] Not to be exceeded. 25 of 62

26 3.2 Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and Maximums There was one measured exceedance of the NEMAQA Hourly Standard, no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA 10-minute or daily standards. Table 3.2: SO 2 Exceedances SO2 Exceedances Guideline Station Date Value (ppb) Apportionment NEMAQA hourly standard Harbour West 2010/09/ Hillside Aluminium 100% Table 3.3: SO 2 Maximums Maximum SO2 concentrations Station 10 Minute Average Hourly Average Daily Average Monthly Average Guideline (191 ppb) Guideline (134 ppb) Guideline (48 ppb) Guideline (19 ppb) % of guideline 36% 39% 31% 14% Arboretum (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/13 07: /09/13 07: /09/ /09 % of guideline 13% 14% 8% 7% Brackenham (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/13 07: /09/13 07: /09/ /09 % of guideline 34% 40% 30% 20% CBD (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/15 09: /09/13 02: /09/ /09 % of guideline 80% 110% 100% 47% Harbour West (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/14 07: /09/14 07: /09/ /09 % of guideline 84% 80% 55% 31% Scorpio (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/01 12: /09/01 12: /09/ /09 26 of 62

27 3.3 Monthly Average Information Long term monthly average SO 2 concentrations are shown below. Figure 3.1: Long term monthly average SO 2 concentrations 27 of 62

28 3.3.1 Monthly average concentration and prediction The monthly average SO 2 measured at each of the RBCAA stations, and the Hawk predicted average for the month are shown below. The monthly average for the same period the previous year (where available) is also provided. Figure 3.2: Monthly average SO 2 concentration and prediction (September 2010) When compared to the previous year, monthly average SO 2 concentrations at all stations were similar (within 2.0 ppb or 10%). There were no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA SO 2 Annual Average Standard (19 ppb). Monthly average predicted values at all stations were within accepted dispersion modelling norms (-50% to 200%). Compared to the measurements, predicted values at Scorpio were lower, and at Arboretum, Brackenham, CBD and Harbour West similar (within 2.0 ppb or 10%). 28 of 62

29 3.3.2 Predicted monthly average concentration Figure 3.3: Predicted monthly average SO 2 concentration (regional) 29 of 62

30 Figure 3.4: Predicted monthly average SO 2 concentration (local) 30 of 62

31 The model predicted monthly average concentrations greater than the NEMAQA SO 2 Annual Average Standard (19 ppb) over the Felixton, Hillside Aluminium and Mondi Richards Bay. The half-guideline includes parts of Bayside Aluminium, the CBD, Foskor, the Port of Richards Bay and Richards Bay Minerals. 31 of 62

32 3.4 Daily Average Information Richards Bay Clean Air Association Maximum daily average concentration and prediction Figure 3.5: Maximum daily average SO 2 concentration and prediction There were no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA SO 2 Daily Average Standard (48 ppb). Daily average predicted values at all stations were within accepted dispersion modelling norms (-50% to 200%) except for Harbour West and Scorpio which were under predicted and Brackenham which was over predicted. Compared to the measurements, predicted values at CBD, Harbour West and Scorpio were lower, at Arboretum similar, and at Brackenham higher. Under predictions imply higher than normal emissions for the time interval concerned. 32 of 62

33 3.4.2 Maximum predicted daily average concentration Figure 3.6: Maximum predicted daily average SO 2 concentration (regional) 33 of 62

34 Figure 3.7: Maximum predicted daily average SO 2 concentration (local) 34 of 62

35 The model predicted maximum daily average SO 2 concentrations greater than the NEMAQA SO 2 Daily Average Standard (48 ppb) over Felixton, Hillside Aluminium and Mondi Richards Bay. The half-guideline includes parts of Bayside Aluminium, the CBD, Foskor and Richards Bay Minerals Daily average trend Figure 3.8: Daily average SO 2 concentration 35 of 62

36 3.5 Hourly Average Information Maximum hourly average concentration and prediction Figure 3.9: Maximum hourly average SO 2 concentration and prediction There was one measured exceedance of the NEMAQA SO 2 Hourly Average Standard (134 ppb); the case study for this exceedance is attached (Appendix 5). Hourly average predicted values at all stations were within accepted dispersion modelling norms (-50% to 200%) except for Harbour West which was under predicted. Compared to the measurements predicted values at CBD, Harbour West and Scorpio were lower, and at Arboretum and Brackenham higher. Under predictions imply higher than normal emissions for the time interval concerned. 36 of 62

37 3.5.2 Maximum predicted hourly average concentration Figure 3.10: Maximum predicted hourly average SO 2 concentration (regional) 37 of 62

38 Figure 3.11: Maximum predicted hourly average SO 2 concentration (local) Richards Bay Clean Air Association 38 of 62

39 The model predicted maximum daily average SO 2 concentrations greater than the NEMAQA SO 2 Standard (134 ppb) over Felixton, Hillside Aluminium and Richards Bay Minerals. The half-guideline includes parts of Alton, Arboretum Extension, Bayside Aluminium, the CBD, Foskor and Mondi Richards Bay Hourly average trend Figure 3.12: Hourly average SO 2 concentration 39 of 62

40 minute Average Information Maximum 10-minute average concentration and prediction Figure 3.13: Maximum 10-minute average SO 2 concentration and prediction There were no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA SO 2 10-minute Average Standard (191 ppb). Predicted 10-minute average values for all stations were within normal dispersion modelling norms (-50% to 200%) except for Harbour West which was under predicted. Compared to the measurements, predicted values at CBD, Harbour West and Scorpio were lower, at Arboretum similar and at Brackenham higher. Under predictions suggest higher than normal emissions for the time interval concerned. 40 of 62

41 3.6.2 Maximum predicted 10-minute concentration Figure 3.14: Maximum predicted 10-minute average SO 2 concentration (regional) 41 of 62

42 Figure 3.15: Maximum predicted 10-minute average SO 2 concentration (local) Richards Bay Clean Air Association 42 of 62

43 The model did not predict maximum 10-minute average SO 2 concentrations greater than the NEMAQA 10-minute Standard (191 ppb). The half-guideline includes parts of Bayside Aluminium, the CBD, Felixton, Hillside Aluminium, Mondi Richards Bay and Richards Bay Minerals. Figure 3.16: 10-minute average SO 2 concentration 43 of 62

44 3.7 Diurnal Trend Richards Bay Clean Air Association Diurnal SO 2 trends for the RBCAA network are shown below. Figure 3.17: Diurnal SO 2 trends 44 of 62

45 4 MONITORED RESULTS FOR TRS TRS are measured at CBD station. Total reduced sulphur compounds, often associated with rotten egg or cooked cabbage odour, refer to a gaseous mixture of compounds consisting mainly of hydrogen sulphide (H 2 S), methyl mercaptan (CH 3 S-H), dimethyl sulphide (CH 3 -S-CH 3 ) and dimethyl disulphide (CH 3 -S-S-CH 3 ). While there are other ambient TRS compounds, these four are the most common, abundant and the ones generally referred to in discussions about TRS. Once released into the atmosphere, oxidation products of TRS compounds, such as sulphuric acid, contribute to the acidity of the environment. The most commonly reported health concerns related to TRS substances are nausea and headaches, although each component has its own characteristics and effects. 4.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards There are no guidelines or standards for TRS; however the odour threshold for H 2 S is 4.5 ppb. TRS 10-minute averages exceeded this threshold 16 times. 4.2 Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and Maximums Table 4.1: TRS Maximums Maximum TRS concentrations Station 10 Minute Average Hourly Average Daily Average Monthly Average (Threshold 4.5 ppb) (Threshold 4.5 ppb) (Threshold 4.5 ppb) (Threshold 4.5 ppb) % of H₂S odour threshold 602% 147% 40% 13% CBD (ppb) Date & time 2010/09/03 07: /09/03 07: /09/ /09 45 of 62

46 4.3 Monthly Average Information Long term monthly average TRS concentrations are shown below. Figure 4.1: Long term monthly average TRS concentrations 46 of 62

47 4.4 Daily Average Information Richards Bay Clean Air Association Daily Average Trend The daily average TRS trend at CBD is shown below. Figure 4.2: Daily average TRS at CBD 47 of 62

48 4.5 Hourly Average Information Richards Bay Clean Air Association Hourly Average Trend The hourly average TRS trend at CBD is shown below. Figure 4.3: Hourly average TRS at CBD 48 of 62

49 minute Average Information Minute Average Trend The 10-minute average TRS trend at CBD is shown below. Figure 4.4: 10-minute average TRS at CBD 49 of 62

50 4.7 Diurnal Trend Richards Bay Clean Air Association The diurnal TRS trend at CBD network is shown below. Figure 4.5: Diurnal TRS trend at CBD 50 of 62

51 5 MONITORED RESULTS FOR PM-10 PM-10 refers to the measurement of particulate matter of less than 10 microns. TEOM s (particulate analysers) at Brackenham, CBD, Mtunzini and St Lucia stations measure PM-10 data continuously. 5.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards Ambient air quality standards for PM-10 are listed below. Table 5.1: Ambient air quality standards for PM-10 Organisation Variable 10-min average Hourly average Daily average Monthly average Annual average NEMAQA [a] PM µg/m³ [e] - 50 µg/m³ [f] SANS [b] PM µg/m³ [e] - 40 µg/m³ [f] Notes: [a] SA Government Gazette (24 th December 2009) in terms of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act 39 of 2004 [b] SABS Draft South African National Standard SANS1929:2009 [e] Not to be exceeded more than 4 times in one year. [f] Not to be exceeded. 51 of 62

52 5.2 Compliance with Ambient Air Quality Standards and Maximums There were four measured exceedances of the SANS PM-10 Daily Standard, no measured exceedances of the NEMAQA Daily Standard. Table 5.2: PM-10 Exceedances PM-10 Exceedances Guideline Station Date Value (μg/m³ TEOM) Apportionment SANS Daily (75μg/m³) CBD 2010/09/ % umhlatuze SANS Daily (75μg/m³) St Lucia 2010/09/ % Fire SANS Daily (75μg/m³) CBD 2010/09/ % Fire SANS Daily (75μg/m³) Brackenham 2010/09/ % Fire Table 5.3: PM-10 Maximums Maximum PM-10 concentrations Station 10 Minute Average Hourly Average Daily Average Monthly Average (Guideline 75μg/m³) (Guideline 40μg/m³) % of guideline % 95% Brackenham µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/26 16: /09/26 17: /09/ /09 % of guideline % 93% CBD µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/15 09: /09/15 08: /09/ /09 % of guideline % 90% Mtunzini µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/21 15: /09/21 15: /09/ /09 % of guideline % 75% St Lucia µg/m 3 TEOM Date & Time 2010/09/15 12: /09/15 12: /09/ /09 52 of 62

53 5.3 Monthly Average Information Long term monthly average PM-10 concentrations are shown below. Figure 5.1: Long term monthly average PM-10 concentrations 53 of 62

54 5.4 Daily Average Information Richards Bay Clean Air Association Daily Average Trend Figure 5.2: Daily average PM-10 at Brackenham and CBD 54 of 62

55 5.5 Diurnal Trend Richards Bay Clean Air Association The diurnal trend for PM-10 at CBD and Brackenham stations is shown in below. Figure 5.3: PM-10 diurnal trend 55 of 62

56 6 COMPLIANCE WITH GUIDELINES Figures 6.1 to 6.5 show total numbers of SO 2 standard exceedances per month measured at the RBCAA monitoring stations from 2006 to Figure 6.1: SO 2 exceedances per month of 62

57 Figure 6.2: SO 2 exceedances per month 2009 Richards Bay Clean Air Association Figure 6.3: SO 2 exceedances per month of 62

58 Figure 6.4: SO 2 exceedances per month 2007 Richards Bay Clean Air Association Figure 6.5: SO 2 exceedances per month of 62

59 7 AIR QUALITY COMPLAINTS 7.1 Field Observations There were 8 air quality complaints received for the month of September 2010 (see Appendix 4). The historical count of complaints by month is reflected below. There were 11 complaints logged during the same period last year. Figure 7.1: Comparison of number of complaints per month 59 of 62

60 7.2 Distribution of Complaints by Source Figure 7.2: Distribution of complaints by source Figure 7.3: Distribution of complaints by source YTD 60 of 62

61 7.3 Distribution of Complaints by Region Figure 7.4: Distribution of complaints by region Richards Bay Clean Air Association Figure 7.5: Distribution of complaints by region YTD 61 of 62

62 7.4 Distribution of Complaints by Type Figure 7.6: Distribution of complaints by type Richards Bay Clean Air Association Figure 7.7: Distribution of complaints by type YTD 62 of 62

63 APPENDIX 1 Quality Assurance Statement The SO 2 concentrations reported are determined by a United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) equivalent method EQSA SO 2 and TRS measurements allow for a maximum precision error of 10% of the reported value. A tolerance around the zero point of plus or minus 5 ppb is allowed. All effort is made to reduce the error to a minimum. In terms of quality assurance standards, data collection must be above 80% to be valid for statistical analysis. Test Range Action Zero Span Zero 0 to 2 ppb Leave as is. -2 to 0 ppb Set to zero. -5 to -2 ppb and 2 to 5 ppb Adjust data set to re-zero all data Outside above limits invalidate and recalibrate. Span Plus or minus 3% deviation. -10 to -3% and 3 to 10% deviation. Outside above limits invalidate and recalibrate. If specific reason can be identified for deviation, data may be adjusted. Leave as is. Scale data set by opposite corresponding percentage. If specific reason can be identified for deviation, data may be adjusted. Note that the system is accredited for the measurement of SO 2 only. The accreditation does not include the measurement of TRS, PM-10, or meteorological variables (e.g. wind, temperature). All opinions, interpretations and Hawk Model findings detailed in this report do not form part of the accreditation.

64 APPENDIX 2 Network data capture and operation Ambient Air Quality Data Capture Data capture shows the percentage of the month where the station as a whole was operational, while the SO 2, PM-10, and TRS data capture indicate the percentage of valid data received from the respective analysers for the month. Data capture for September 2010 is shown in the table below. Table.1: Ambient air quality data capture Data capture (%) for RBCAA system Station Data (%) SO 2 (%) PM-10 (%) TRS (%) Arboretum Brackenham CBD Harbour West Scorpio Mtunzini St Lucia Average Notes: Target 80%, Good 90%, Excellent 95% Station, SO 2, PM-10 and TRS data capture for September 2010 was above target.

65 Network Operation General The RBCAA s Minivol was set up at St Lucia monitoring station on 1 September 2010 After a set of new diaphragms were installed into the sampling pump. An electrical problem occurred at the Mtunzini mobile monitoring station which caused that the power to the trailer had to be switched off on 28 September An electrician was taken out to the monitoring station and the trailer was properly earthed. A separate electrical distribution box, donated by the manager of the fish farm was then installed to ensure that the trailer has its own dedicated earth leakage and circuit breaker. The faulty sensors at the met stations have been ordered and will be replaced with the next bi annual calibrations scheduled for 18 to 21 October 2010.

66 Arboretum Richards Bay Clean Air Association Table.2: Arboretum SO 2 analyser zero and span checks Station Check 2010/09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/30 Arboretum Zero Deviation (ppb) SO 2 Span Reference (ppb) Analyzer Span Actual (ppb) Serial Number Span Deviation (ppb) API-1980 Span deviation (%) 0.5 % 1.4 % 0.5 % -0.5 % 0.5 % Notes: Quality Assurance Objectives: Precision ±15%, Completeness >80%, Level 1 Span ±15%, Zero ±10 ppb *Explanation under log for the station concerned Table.3: Arboretum station log Date Action 2010/09/03 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/10 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/17 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/24 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/30 Station check completed, no problems found. Table.4: Arboretum status report Status Valid Data Invalid Data SO % 0.3 % Temp 99.9 % 0.1 % Internal Temp 99.9 % 0.1 % WD 99.9 % 0.1 % WS 99.9 % 0.1 %

67 Brackenham Richards Bay Clean Air Association Table.5: Brackenham SO 2 analyser zero and span checks Station Check 2010/09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/30 Brackenham Zero Deviation (ppb) SO 2 Span Reference (ppb) Analyzer Span Actual (ppb) Serial Number Span Deviation (ppb) B Span deviation (%) 0.0 % 0.0 % -3.2 % -3.2% -5.6 % Notes: Quality Assurance Objectives: Precision ±15%, Completeness >80%, Level 1 Span ±15%, Zero ±10 ppb *Explanation under log for the station concerned Table.6: Brackenham station log Date Action 2010/09/03 Station check completed, no problems found. The data logger PC stopped logging data on 2 September 2010 and only resumed after the PC was rebooted on 3 September 2010 at 08: /09/10 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/17 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/24 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/30 Station check completed, no problems found. The large difference in span measurements will be investigated. Table.7: Brackenham status report Status Valid Data Invalid Data SO % 2.0 % PM % 2.0 % Temp 98.2 % 1.8 % Internal Temp 98.2 % 1.8 % WD 98.2 % 1.8 % WS 98.2 % 1.8 %

68 CBD Richards Bay Clean Air Association Table.8: CBD SO 2 analyser zero and span checks Station Check 2010/09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/30 CBD Zero Deviation (ppb) SO 2 Span Reference (ppb) Analyzer Span Actual (ppb) Serial Number Span Deviation (ppb) M1912-M714 Span deviation (%) 0.0 % 0.4 % 0.4 % 0.4 % 0.0 % CBD Zero Deviation (ppb) TRS Span Reference (ppb) Analyzer Span Actual (ppb) Serial Number Span Deviation (ppb) M1238-M860 Span deviation (%) 0.6 % 1.7 % 1.7 % 1.1 % 1.1 % Notes: Quality Assurance Objectives: Precision ±15%, Completeness >80%, Level 1 Span ±15%, Zero ±10 ppb *Explanation under log for the station concerned Table.9: CBD station log Date Action 2010/09/03 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/10 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/17 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/24 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/30 Station check completed, no problems found. Table.10: CBD status report Status Valid Data Invalid Data SO % 0.2 % TRS 99.4 % 0.6 % PM % 2.7 % Internal Temp % 0.0 %

69 Harbour West Richards Bay Clean Air Association Table.11: Harbour West SO 2 analyser zero and span checks Station Check 2010/09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/30 Harbour West Zero Deviation (ppb) SO 2 Span Reference (ppb) Analyzer Span Actual (ppb) Serial Number Span Deviation (ppb) B Span deviation (%) 0.0 % 1.2 % 1.2 % 2.4% 3.6 % Notes: Quality Assurance Objectives: Precision ±15%, Completeness >80%, Level 1 Span ±15%, Zero ±10 ppb *Explanation under log for the station concerned Table.12: Harbour West station log Date Action 2010/09/03 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/10 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/17 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/24 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/30 Station check completed, no problems found. Table.13: Harbour West status report Status Valid Data Invalid Data SO % 0.1 % Temp % 0.0 % Internal Temp % 0.0 % WD % 0.0 % WS % 0.0 %

70 Scorpio Richards Bay Clean Air Association Table.14: Scorpio SO 2 analyser zero and span checks Station Check 2010/09/ /09/ /09/ /09/ /09/30 Scorpio Zero Deviation (ppb) SO 2 Span Reference (ppb) Analyzer Span Actual (ppb) Serial Number Span Deviation (ppb) M1238-M860 Span deviation (%) -1.4 % -1.7 % -1.4 % -1.4 % -2.4% Notes: Quality Assurance Objectives: Precision ±15%, Completeness >80%, Level 1 Span ±15%, Zero ±10 ppb *Explanation under log for the station concerned Table.15: Scorpio station log Date Action 2010/09/03 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/10 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/17 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/24 Station check completed, no problems found. 2010/09/30 Station check completed, no problems found. Table.16: Scorpio status report Status Valid Data Invalid Data SO % 0.2 % Temp % 0.0 % Internal Temp % 0.0 % WD % 0.0 % WS % 0.0 %

71 APPENDIX 3 Dispersion simulation inputs Source Emission Data Table.7.17: Source emission summary Group SO 2 Emission Rate (g/s) SO 2 Emission Rate (tpa) SO 2 Emission (%) AAFC % Bayside Aluminium % Foskor % Hillside Aluminium % Huletts % Mondi Felixton % Mondi RB % RBM % TATA Steel % Exxaro % Total %

72 Table 7.18: Point source emission parameters Group Description Source No LoX (m) LoY (m) Model X (m) Model Y (m) Base Elevation (m) Release Height Above Ground (m) SO 2 Emission Rate (g/s) Stack Gas Exit Temperature ( C) Stack Gas Exit Temperature (K) Stack Gas Exit Velocity (m/s) Stack Inside Diameter At Release Height (m) AAFC Boiler Bayside Aluminium Primary No Bayside Aluminium Primary No Bayside Aluminium Primary No Bayside Aluminium Carbon Stack Bayside Aluminium GTC Stack Foskor Acid Plant Foskor Boiler Hillside Aluminium GTC Hillside Aluminium GTC Hillside Aluminium GTC Hillside Aluminium GTC Hillside Aluminium GTC Hillside Aluminium FTC Huletts Boiler Mondi Felixton Babcock Mondi Felixton JT Boiler Mondi Felixton Oil Burner Mondi RB Lime Kiln Mondi RB Incinerator Mondi RB Power Boiler RBM Smokers RBM Char Plant RBM MSP (Drier) RBM Miscellaneous Exxaro Tank

73 Table 7.19: Area source emission parameters Group Description Source No LoX (m) LoY (m) Model X (m) Model Y (m) Base Elevation (m) Release Height Above Ground (m) SO 2 Emission Rate (g/s) SO 2 Emission Rate (g/s/m 2 ) Length of The X Side Of The Area (m) Length of The Y Side Of The Area (m) Orientation Angle From North ( ) Initial Vertical Dim. of The Plume Bayside Aluminium Potrooms Hillside Aluminium Potrooms

74 Dispersion model settings Table 7.20: Dispersion model meteorological parameters Dispersion Coefficients Urban Airport Brackenham Met Stations Used Harbour West Scorpio Roughness Length 1.2 Table 7.21: Dispersion model setup parameters Averaging Time 10 minutes Resolution Medium Averaging Options Highest short term average Highest hourly average Highest daily average Annual average Maximum Concentration Calculation Don t calculate with every cycle Divergence Criterion 0.1 Wind directional change for full mass balance calculation 5 degrees Wind directional change for full mass balance calculation 0.1 m/s Interpolation Radius of Influence 1000 m Barrier Limiting Height 10 Maximum Puff Separation Distance 50 m Puff Diffusion Update Time Interval 60 s Puff Advection Update Time Interval 60 s Dosage Time Step Time Interval 60 s

75 APPENDIX 4 Air Quality Complaints Log No. Complainant Date and time Location Description Results Resolution 1 Sandy 2010/09/06 RBM Excessive flaring at RBM : Michelle Boshoff Resolved - Camminga 22:30 RBM. responded: RBM Richards Bay ( ) was venting intermittently from Furnace 3 at the time of the complaint. When venting occurs the gas flared is furnace gas which is carbon monoxide and particulate matter. The gas is burned at the tip of the flare stack giving rise to the visible flames. The burning converts the carbon monoxide into carbon dioxide; the particulate content is reduced by burning as any combustible particulates are also consumed in Minerals 2 Sandy Camminga ( ) 3 Sandy Camminga ( ) 4 June Sandy Camminga ( ) 2010/09/06 22: /09/11 23: /09/13 08: /09/25 07:25 Veldenvlei, 33 Heideheuwel John Ross Higway Background burnt match type odour Mondi odour & bad stack the flame. Mondi RB: Candice Webb responded. Based on wind direction and stable mill conditions prior to the time of the complaint, it is unlikely that Mondi was the source of the odour. Foskor: Dhireen Ramsaroop responded: There were no upset conditions experienced on the plant, however based on wind direction Foskor could have impacted on the odour. Mondi RB: Candice Webb responded. Prior to the complaint, no process upsets were experienced at the mill. However, wind direction indicated the odour may have originated from the Mondi effluent plant, we are currently investigating the cause of the odour. Nseleni Awful Smell Mondi RB: Candice Webb responded. For any odour emanating from Mondi, to have impacted on Nseleni, the wind direction would have had to have been between 175 and 205 deg, however, wind direction at this time was between 237 and 264 deg. In addition, no process upsets were recorded prior to the time of the complaint. Mondi is unlikely to have been the source of this odour. Veldenvlei, 33 Heideheuwel AWFUL Mondi guava odour causing nausea. Mondi RB: Candice Webb responded. A flange leak on the Softwood gas cooler condensor Resolved - Foskor Resolved - Mondi Richards Bay Unresolved Resolved - Mondi Richards Bay

76 No. Complainant Date and time Location Description Results Resolution has been identified as the source of the odour, repairs have currently been scheduled. 6 R Camminga ( ) 7 K Camminga ( ) 8 R Camminga ( ) 2010/09/25 07: /09/25 07: /09/28 07:45 Veldenvlei, 33 Heideheuwel Veldenvlei, 33 Heideheuwel Port of Richards Bay AWFUL Mondi guava odour causing nausea. AWFUL Mondi guava odour causing nausea. Bad stack Foskor (photo attached) Mondi RB: Candice Webb responded. A flange leak on the Softwood gas cooler condensor has been identified as the source of the odour, repairs have currently been scheduled. Mondi RB: Candice Webb responded. A flange leak on the Softwood gas cooler condensor has been identified as the source of the odour, repairs have currently been scheduled. Foskor: Dhireen Ramsaroop responded: The stack in the photo is that of the phosphoric acid plant. What you see in the picture is purely steam/ water vapour being given off which is a normal part of the process. During the hours of early morning and late afternoon the steam from the stack would appear more visible due to the lower ambient temperatures. Also against a cloudy sky the steam appears slightly grayish. Further more due to problems with our rock supply the entire operation of Foskor is running at a reduced minimal production capacity. Resolved - Mondi Richards Bay Resolved - Mondi Richards Bay Resolved - Foskor

77 APPENDIX 5 Case Studies

78 Case Study for Exceedance: 1 st Request September 2010 Prepared for the Richards Bay Clean Air Association AQ002 SGS Environmental Services 1 of 6 6 Sookhai Place, Derby Downs, Westville, 3630 PO Box 416 Durban 3600 Tel: Fax: Internet: info@ecoserv.com

79 Case Study REFERENCE AQ002 REPORT TITLE Case Study Report 01 DATE SUBMITTED September 2010 CLIENT Sandy Camminga PREPARED BY: SIGNED REPORT DETAILS Richards Bay Clean Air Association PO Box Richards Bay 3900 Tel: (035) Lance Coetzee 6 Sookhai Place Derby Downs Westville Durban, 3630 Tel: (031) info@ecoserv.com APPROVER STATUS NOTICE Lance Coetzee Signed: Grant Ravenscroft Signed: Grant Ravenscroft Final This document is issued by the Company under its General Conditions of Service accessible at Attention is drawn to the limitation of liability, indemnification and jurisdiction issues defined therein. Any holder of this document is advised that information contained hereon reflects the Company s findings at the time of its intervention only and within the limits of Client s instructions, if any. The Company s sole responsibility is to its Client and this document does not exonerate parties to a transaction from exercising all their rights and obligations under the transaction documents. Any unauthorized alteration, forgery or falsification of the content or appearance of this document is unlawful and offenders may be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 2 of 6

80 Case Study TABLE OF CONTENTS Description Page 1 INTRODUCTION Scope of Work Methodology 4 2 Scorpio 2010/09/14 08: of 6

81 Case Study 1 INTRODUCTION These assessments have been completed at the request of the Richards Bay Clean Air Association (RBCAA). The RBCAA monitors air quality and weather in Richards Bay on a continuous basis. It has established a network of monitoring stations as well as an atmospheric dispersion modelling tool, the Hawk. Sources of odour can be identified based on actual meteorological conditions, as in this report. 1.1 Scope of Work SGS Environmental Services understanding of the scope of this report is to provide information as part of the investigation into the following SO 2 exceedance. Table 1.1: Exceedances SO 2 Exceedances Guideline Station Date Value (ppb) NEMAQA hourly standard Harbour West 2010/09/14 08: Methodology This report may include case study simulations using the Hawk Dispersion Model bearing in mind the limitations of the model. The model uses actual weather conditions, including changes in wind direction, and average emissions to determine source contributions. 4 of 6

82 Case Study 2 SCORPIO 2010/09/14 08:00 Figure 2.1: Dispersion modelling at 2010/09/14 07:00 Figure 2.2: Dispersion modelling at 2010/09/14 07:30 5 of 6

83 Figure 2.3: Dispersion modelling at 2010/10/14 08:00 Richards Bay Clean Air Association Case Study An exceedance of the DEAT SO 2 hourly standard was measured at Harbour West on the 14 th of September between 07:00 and 08:00. Dispersion modelling at the start of the exceedance, halfway through and at the time the exceedance was recorded is shown in Figures 1.1 to 1.3. The simulations based on SO 2 emissions from the RBCAA emission inventory apportion contributions to this exceedance as follows. Table 2.1: Apportionment Time Apportionment Stacks 07:00 Hillside Aluminium 100% GTC1 29%, GTC2 11%, GTC3 25%, GTC4 5%, GTC5 30% 07:30 Hillside Aluminium 100% GTC1 15%, GTC2 3%, GTC3 18%, GTC4 24%, GTC5 40% 08:00 Hillside Aluminium 100% GTC1 24%, GTC2 7%, GTC3 21%, GTC4 18%, GTC5 30% Exceedance Hillside Aluminium 100% 6 of 6