January 2019 Our Ref: RE: Air Quality Impact Assessment - Major Mackenzie Drive EA, Highway 400 to Jane Street

Transcription

1 January 2019 Our Ref: RE: Air Quality Impact Assessment - Major Mackenzie Drive EA, Highway 400 to Jane Street As a supplementary document to the Air Quality Impact Assessment for the Major Mackenzie Drive EA, this letter provides an overview of the rationale for the choice of assessment category. The Air Quality Impact Assessment was completed using a full Category 1 in order to be compliant with the draft protocol that was provided by the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) for Traffic Related Air Pollution, specifically road widening from 4 to 6 lanes. The draft protocol notes that a full assessment is appropriate in this regard. Parsons Inc.

2 The Regional Municipality of York Major Mackenzie Drive EA - Highway 400 to Jane Street Air Quality Impact Assessment Issue and Revision Record Rev Date Originator Checker Approver Description A A A January 08, 2019 September 25, 2018 August 3, 2018 Signatures: Emma Benko Dennis Hsu Emma Benko Dennis Hsu Emma Benko Dennis Hsu Daryl Horansky Saad Syed MECP Review Daryl Horansky Saad Syed Final Daryl Horansky Saad Syed Draft This document has been prepared on behalf of The Regional Municipality of York for the titled Project or named part thereof and should not be relied upon or used for any other project without an independent check being carried out as to its suitability and prior written authorization of Parsons being obtained. Parsons accepts no responsibility or liability for the consequence of this document being used for a purpose other than the purposes for which it was commissioned. Any person using or relying on the document for such other purpose agrees and will by such use or reliance be taken to confirm their agreement to indemnify Parsons for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Parsons accepts no responsibility or liability for this document to any party other than the person by whom it was commissioned, or its representative. To the extent that this Report is based on information supplied by other parties, Parsons accepts no liability for any loss or damage suffered by the client, whether through contract or tort, stemming from any conclusions based on data supplied by parties other than Parsons and used by Parsons in preparing this Report. Page i

3 Executive Summary The Regional Municipality of York (York Region) is undertaking a Schedule C Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for improvements to Major Mackenzie Drive from Highway 400 to Jane Street in the City of Vaughan. York Region has retained Parsons to complete an Air Quality Impact Assessment (AQIA) based on the Preliminary Preferred Design Concept. The AQIA is part of a Class Environmental Assessment (EA), as a Schedule C project under the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Process, to assess the air quality impacts of the Project. A credible worst-case analysis has been undertaken for this AQIA. The Project s contribution to air quality and the background concentrations vary from day to day, depending on meteorological conditions and operational characteristics. One of the common analytical responses to this issue is the credible worst-case analysis. It is based on the concept that a project is acceptable under all conditions if it is acceptable under a credible worst-case condition (MTO, 2012). This analysis consisted of dispersion modelling and incorporation of representative ambient background concentrations. Conclusions from the assessment of the Project s emissions and its related effects on air quality and greenhouse gases (GHGs) are as follows: 1. The future Full-Build scenario results in slightly higher contaminant concentrations compared to the No-Build scenario at the most affected receptors near the Project. This is due to the additional road lanes and resulting increased traffic capacity of Major Mackenzie Drive as a result of the Project. The overall increase is very small, with a maximum single contaminant increase of 1.8% of the background concentration being attributable to the Project, and an average of all contaminant increases of 0.3% of the background concentrations as a result of the Project. 2. For all scenarios examined, all contaminants, with the exception of NO2, benzene and benzo(a)pyrene, have their predicted maximum concentrations at sensitive receptors within the study area below applicable air quality thresholds when combined with the respective 90 th percentile ambient background concentrations. 3. Only the annual benzene, PM2.5 and NO2, and 24 hour and annual benzo(a)pyrene concentrations are above air quality thresholds; however, the 90 th percentile ambient background concentrations are already above their respective thresholds without any contribution from the Project. There is no significant contribution from the operation of the Project on the concentration of these contaminants. The elevated ambient background levels of these contaminants are widespread across Southern Ontario. The future Full- Build cumulative impacts, although in exceedance of PM2.5, NO2, benzo(a)pyrene and benzene thresholds, have a net reduction in these compounds compared to the Current Scenario. 4. The Project is predicted to have a small contribution to local GHG emissions and the contribution of the Project to regional GHG emissions is negligible. Construction air quality mitigation and monitoring requirements have been provided in this report. Operational air quality impacts of the Project, as determined in this AQIA, do not warrant further consideration of mitigation or monitoring. Page ii

4 Table of Contents Executive Summary... ii Glossary of Terms and Acronyms... v 1. Introduction Project Description Study Objectives Study Area Methodology Approach Contaminants of Concern Air Quality Thresholds Background Air Quality Conversion of Nitrogen Oxides to Nitrogen Dioxide Credible Worst-Case Analysis Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling Modelling Scenarios Receptors Traffic Data and Fleet Composition Emission Factors Source Parameters for Dispersion Modelling Results and Discussion Local Air Quality Effects (Projects Effects) Local Air Quality Effects (Cumulative Effects) Discussion Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change Analysis Local Assessment Regional Assessment Construction and Operation Assessment Conclusions References List of Figures Figure 1-1: Air Quality Impact Assessment: Study Area... 3 Figure 2-1: Air Quality Impact Assessment: Location of Air Monitoring Stations Figure 2-2: Air Quality Impact Assessment: Location of Sensitive Receptors Page iii

5 List of Tables Table 2-1: Applicable Air Quality Thresholds for Contaminants of Concern... 6 Table 2-2: Air Monitoring Stations for Contaminants of Concern... 7 Table 2-3: Summary of Ambient Background Concentrations within the Study Area... 9 Table 2-4: Road Traffic Data Current Scenario: AM and PM Table 2-5: Road Traffic Data Future No-build Scenario: AM and PM Table 2-6: Road Traffic Data Future Full-Build Scenario: AM and PM Table 2-7: MOVES Input Parameters Table 2-8: MOVES Output Emissions Factors for Year 2018 and 2041: AM Table 2-9: MOVES Output Emissions Factors for Year 2018 and 2041: PM Table 3-1:Summary of Project s Contribution to COC Concentrations at the Most Affected Sensitive Receptor (Project Effects) Table 3-2:Summary of Maximum Predicted COC Concentrations at the Most Affected Sensitive Receptor (Cumulative Effects) Table 3-3: GHG Emission Generated from Vehicular Activity in the Study Area Table 4-1: Summary of Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Monitoring for Air Quality Table 6-1: AM Current Emissions - Free Flow Table 6-2: PM Current Emissions - Free Flow Table 6-3: AM Current Emissions - Idle Table 6-4: PM Current Emissions - Idle Table 6-5: AM No-Build Emissions - Free Flow Table 6-6: PM No-Build Emissions - Free Flow Table 6-7: AM No-Build Emissions - Idle Table 6-8: PM No-Build Emissions - Idle Table 6-9: AM Full-Build Emissions - Free Flow Table 6-10: PM Full-Build - Free Flow Table 6-11: AM Full-Build Emissions - Idle Table 6-12: PM Full-Build Emissions - Idle List of Appendices Appendix A: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data Appendix B: Most Affected Receptors Appendix C: Emission Factors Appendix D: Air Quality Impact Assessment Guidance for Schedule C Municipal Road Class EAs Page iv

6 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms AADT AAQC AQIA B(a)P CAAQS CH4 CO COC CO2 CO2eq EA EAA ECCC EF EPR g/h GHG HC kg/h km/h lb lb/h l/h m m/s MOECC MOVES Annual Average Daily Traffic Ambient Air Quality Criteria Air Quality Impact Assessment Benzo(a)pyrene Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards Methane Carbon Monoxide Contaminants of concern Carbon Dioxide Carbon Dioxide equivalent Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment Act Environment and Climate Change Canada Emission Factor Environmental Project Report Grams per hour Greenhouse Gas Hydrocarbon Kilograms per hour Kilometres per hour Pound Pounds per hour Litres per hour Metre Metres per second Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator Page v

7 Mt MTO NAPS NMHC N2O NO2 NO NOx O3 OLM PAH PM2.5 PM PPM US EPA UTM VOC μg/m 3 Mega-Tonnes Ministry of Transportation National Air Pollution Surveillance Non-methane hydrocarbon Nitrous Oxide Nitrogen Dioxide Nitric Oxide Nitrogen Oxides Ozone Ozone Limiting Method Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Respirable Particulate Matter Particulate Matter Parts Per Million United States Environmental Protection Agency Universal Transverse Mercator Volatile Organic Compound Micro-gram per cubic metre Page vi

8 1. Introduction The Regional Municipality of York (York Region) is undertaking a Schedule C Environmental Assessment (EA) Study for improvements to Major Mackenzie Drive from Highway 400 to Jane Street in the City of Vaughan (the Project). The environmental effects of the Project will be assessed following the Air Quality Impact Assessment Guidance for Schedule C Municipal Road Class Environmental Assessments (EA), as prescribed by the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). The assessment is limited to road traffic emissions sources. York Region has retained Parsons to complete an Air Quality Impact Assessment (AQIA) for the Project. 1.1 Project Description The Region of York s Transportation Master Plan (TMP) identified improvements to Major Mackenzie Drive in the Road Network Plan between Highway 27 and Jane Street. The TMP recommends improvements be accommodated by widening the roadway corridor to include six lanes with transit/hov and separated cycling facilities. Following an evaluation of alternative design concepts for the corridor, widening the corridor to 6 lanes with active transportation facilities was carried forward as the Preliminary Preferred Design concept. 1.2 Study Objectives The purpose of this AQIA is to assess the effect of the Project s operations on local air quality, upon full implementation in future years. In addition, the AQIA study quantifies the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to the Project, qualitatively investigates the construction emissions, and reviews mitigation and potential monitoring programs. This report documents the assumptions, methodologies, analyses, and results of the study, providing information useful for interpreting the Project s potential environmental effects. The objectives of this AQIA are: To predict the concentrations of contaminants of concern resulting from road traffic along Major Mackenzie Drive from Jane Street to Highway 400 at the Project for three scenarios: 1. Current Scenario: conditions currently within the Project study area (2018); 2. No-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area with no Project; and, 3. Full-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area, including lane expansion of Major Mackenzie Drive from four lanes to six lanes, acceleration lane on East-South on ramp to Highway 400, increased traffic capacity on Major Mackenzie Drive, and with the Project completed. To predict the combined effect of the Project and ambient background concentrations at sensitive receptors; and To use these predictions to assess potential local and regional effects of the Project according to applicable guidelines. To satisfy the study objectives, existing and planned sensitive receptors within the study area of the Project were confirmed and documented. The predicted air quality effects of the Project at these receptors have been assessed and compared to air quality threshold limits. A sensitive Page 1

9 receptor for air quality is defined by the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) in Ontario Regulation 419/05 - Air Pollution - Local Air Quality (O. Reg. 419/05), Section 30(8) as a: Place or residence; Child care facility; Health care facility; Senior citizen s residence; Long-term care facility; or Educational facility. 1.3 Study Area The AQIA study area is bound by one kilometre around the Project footprint, as shown in Figure 1-1. Predicted local air quality effects associated with roadways tend to drop off significantly at downwind distances greater than 300 meters; therefore, the sensitive receptors included in this assessment are limited to within 300 meters of the Project footprint. Page 2

10 Figure 1-1: Air Quality Impact Assessment: Study Area Page 3

11 2. Methodology Local air quality effects were assessed by estimating contaminant concentrations resulting from road traffic emissions in three scenarios: 1. Current Scenario: conditions currently within the Project study area (2018); 2. No-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area with no Project; and, 3. Full-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area, including lane expansion on Major Mackenzie Drive from four lanes to six lanes, acceleration lane on the east-south on ramp to Highway 400, increased traffic capacity on Major Mackenzie Drive, and with the Project completed. The methodology for this AQIA is outlined in the MOECC Central Region Technical Support Section Air Quality Impact Assessment Guidance for Schedule C Municipal Road Class EAs, included in Appendix D, with additional guidance from the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) Environmental Guide for Assessing and Mitigating the Air Quality Impacts and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Provincial Transportation Projects (the MTO Guideline, MTO 2012). The assessment relies on atmospheric dispersion modelling. Guidance pertaining to the technical aspects of the modelling are from the MOECC Air Dispersion Modelling Guideline for Ontario (MOECC, 2017). 2.1 Approach For the three scenarios, road traffic was utilized to determine local effects of the Project on sensitive receptors within the Project study area. The effects have been compared to applicable air quality thresholds. The air quality thresholds represent target levels and are not specifically enforceable. Operations considered in the study area for the current scenario and future scenarios include passenger cars and heavy trucks. The assessment was conducted using an emission rate calculation method for various motor vehicle activities in the study area for each scenario. The CAL3QHCR model was used to determine the dispersion of the motor vehicle emissions associated with the three scenarios. CAL3QHCR is a United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) air dispersion model that has the ability to predict contaminant concentrations at a given receptor point taking into account meteorological conditions, vehicular emissions, traffic volume and traffic signalization. Road traffic emissions were modelled through emission factors (EF) generated by US EPA model MOVES Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator 2014a. This model is the US EPA s latest program for estimating vehicle emissions and is approved by the MOECC for estimating vehicle emissions in Ontario. MOVES modelling was performed for each contaminant for the months of January and July, which yield the worst-case emissions due to extreme temperatures. The maximum emission rate between these two months was selected for use in dispersion modelling for the entire 5-year meteorological period. For the purpose of a cumulative assessment, the modelled concentrations from the CAL3QHCR dispersion model from the three scenarios include the ambient background concentrations and the resulting values were compared to the most stringent air quality threshold in order to evaluate the potential for an adverse effect. Page 4

12 The potential for an adverse effect is considered to exist when the modelled concentration and the ambient background concentration, when summed for a contaminant exceed the air quality threshold at a sensitive receptor. If the ambient background concentration of a contaminant already exceeds the threshold, then a potential for an adverse effect already exists, without considering the Project. 2.2 Contaminants of Concern Contaminants of concern (COC) assessed in this AQIA include: Particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometre (µm) (PM2.5); Particulate matter less than 10 micrometre (µm) (PM10); Volatile organic compounds (VOCs): acetaldehyde, acrolein, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and formaldehyde; Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): benzo(a)pyrene as a surrogate; Nitrogen dioxide (NO2): nitrogen oxides (NOX) correction using available ozone (O3) calculations for conversion of nitric oxide (NO) to NO2; Carbon monoxide (CO); and Carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq). A qualitative assessment was undertaken for: Total Suspended Particulate (TSP). 2.3 Air Quality Thresholds In order to assess the effects of the Project, the predicted cumulative effects at sensitive receptors were compared to guidelines established by government agencies. As recommended by the MTO, comparisons of predicted cumulative pollution concentrations of COCs with the Ontario Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQC) and the Canadian Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS, formerly the Canada Wide Standards) are necessary to assess the need for mitigation (MTO, 2012). The Ontario AAQC list desirable concentrations of contaminants in air, based on protection against adverse effects on health and/or the environment. AAQCs are developed by the MOECC and have varying time weighted averaging periods (e.g., annual, 24 hour, one hour, and 10 minutes) appropriate for the adverse effect that they are intended to protect against (i.e., acute or chronic). The adverse effects considered may be related to health, odour, vegetation, soiling, visibility, or corrosion. AAQCs may be changed from time to time based on the state-of-the-science for a particular contaminant (MOECC, 2012). The CAAQS are health-based air quality objectives for pollutant concentrations in outdoor air. Under the Air Quality Management System, ECCC and Health Canada have established air quality standards for fine particulate matter, which is a concern to human health. These standards are more stringent and more comprehensive than the previous Canada Wide Standards that the CAAQS replace. The new CAAQS were established by the Federal government in 2013 and provide more stringent objectives for outdoor air quality in Canada. The CAAQS include a long-term (annual) target for PM2.5. Applicable standards include the 2020 proposed CAAQS standards for PM2.5. The annual standard is based on the 98 th percentile ambient measurement (24 hour), averaged over three years. Page 5

13 PM2.5 The AAQC and CAAQS are collectively referred to as air quality thresholds in this AQIA. An exceedance of one of the air quality thresholds will cause mitigation to be considered, assuming the air quality threshold is not already exceeded by the ambient background concentration of a contaminant. Table 2-1 summarizes the air quality thresholds: Table 2-1: Applicable Air Quality Thresholds for Contaminants of Concern Contaminant Averaging Time Threshold Value (µg/m³) Source 24 hour 28 CAAQS 24 hour 27 CAAQS (2020) Annual 10 CAAQS Annual 8.8 CAAQS (2020) PM10 24 hour 50 AAQC one hour 400 AAQC one hour 119 CAAQS (2020) NO2 one hour 83 CAAQS (2025) 24 hour 200 AAQC Annual 24 CAAQS (2025) CO one hour AAQC eight hour AAQC Acrolein one hour 4.5 AAQC 24 hour 0.4 AAQC Benzene 24 hour 2.3 AAQC Annual 0.45 AAQC 1,3-Butadiene 24 hour 10 AAQC Annual 2 AAQC Acetaldehyde 30 minutes 500 AAQC 24 hour 500 AAQC Formaldehyde 24 hour 65 AAQC Benzo(a)pyrene 24 hour AAQC Annual AAQC The air quality thresholds represent desirable levels of contaminants in ambient air and are not enforceable within any of the jurisdictions. They represent a road map for ambient air quality provincially (i.e. AAQC) and nationally (i.e. CAAQS). The air quality threshold value for each contaminant and its applicable averaging period were used to assess the predicted effect at sensitive receptors. As per the MTO Guideline, the cumulative concentration of each pollutant will be compared with the provincial AAQC for gas-phase pollutants and the CAAQS for particulate matter (MTO, 2012). The applicable averaging periods for the contaminants are based on 30 minute, one hour, eight hour, 24 hour, and annual exposures. The different averaging periods for contaminants are based on adverse effects to human health, vegetation or animals. These effects are indicated within the AAQC (MOECC, 2012). As previously mentioned, CAAQS threshold values are based on adverse impacts to human health only. Page 6

14 2.4 Background Air Quality Concentrations of the COCs resulting from background sources were estimated by analysing historical monitoring data from ECCC National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) stations as well as MOECC air monitoring stations in the vicinity of the Project. Data was collected from these stations for the most recent available year. The locations of the selected stations are presented in Figure 2-1. The background data time period varies for each COC based on availability of quality assured data from ECCC and the MOECC. The station information and period of analysis are listed in Table 2-2. More detailed analysis of ambient air monitoring data is available in Appendix A. Contaminant of Concern Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Particulate Matter (PM10) 1 Table 2-2: Air Monitoring Stations for Contaminants of Concern Station ID Station Name (Location) Availability of Data MOECC Toronto East Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) MOECC Toronto East Carbon Monoxide (CO) MOECC Toronto 125 Resource Road Ozone (O3) MOECC Toronto 125 Resource Road Acrolein NAPS Toronto (Ruskin/Perth Street) Benzene NAPS Toronto (461 Kipling Ave) ,3-Butadiene NAPS Brampton (Main Street N) Acetaldehyde, Formaldehyde Benzo(a)pyrene NAPS NAPS NAPS Egbert CARE Toronto (461 Kipling Avenue) Toronto ( 1 Etona Court) Note: (1) PM10 was not monitored at the Oakville station so a MOECC approved ratio of 0.54 μg/m 3 PM10 per 1 μg/m 3 PM2.5 was used as an estimation. Note: (2) NAPS and NAPS are approximately 2 km apart. The 90 th percentile background concentration for each COC was determined from the stations listed in Table 2-2. The average concentrations recorded above the 90 th percentile are considered outliers and are removed from calculations to avoid extreme, rare and transient events. The 90 th percentile over the five year data set is considered to be representative of ambient background conditions for averaging periods of 30 minutes, one hour, eight hours, and 24 hours. For COCs with an annual averaging period, the highest recorded annual mean over the five years of data from the designated ambient station was used. Since the selected NAPS and MOECC monitoring stations are in locations with significant road traffic in close proximity, the resulting ambient background concentrations are considered to be adequate to account for nearby sources of local air pollution unrelated to the Project. Table 2-3 summarizes background concentrations in the area of the Project. Ozone, although not a COC directly as it is not emitted from vehicle exhausts, is included in Table 2-3 as it was utilized to determine the ability to form NO2 from vehicular NOX emissions (described in detail in the Section 2.5 of this AQIA). The ambient background concentrations presented in Table 2-3 were aggregated with the predicted Project concentrations to account for cumulative effects. Page 7

15 The air quality thresholds are summarized in Table 2-3 to allow for a comparison to the existing ambient background concentrations within the study area. If the existing ambient background concentration of a contaminant already exceeds the air quality thresholds, then a potential for an adverse effect already exists without considering the Project. In Table 2-3, 24 hour benzo(a)pyrene and annual NO2, PM2.5, benzene and benzo(a)pyrene ambient background concentrations exceed the applicable air quality thresholds. The elevated ambient background levels of these contaminants are a widespread occurrence across urban Ontario, and levels are desired to be decreased by the MOECC. The desire to decrease levels of these contaminants is demonstrated by the MOECC posting their intent in 2009 to introduce new reduced AAQC for benzene and benzo(a)pyrene which took effect in This change saw for the first time the MOECC setting the AAQC to equal the point of impingement criteria imposed on industrial facilities, in an effort to bring ambient levels of these pollutants down across urbanized portions of Ontario. Similarly, this effort to decrease emissions is seen with the NO2 CAAQS, in 2025 stricter limits will be enforced. In an effort to follow the most stringent guidelines the 2025 CAAQS metrics were applied to the Project. Page 8

16 Table 2-3: Summary of Ambient Background Concentrations within the Study Area Contaminant Period Unit Threshold Maximum Minimum Median Background Value % of Threshold PM hour µg/m % PM2.5 Annual µg/m % PM hour µg/m % NO2 one hour µg/m % NO2 24 hour µg/m % NO2 Annual µg/m % CO one hour µg/m 3 36, % CO 8 hour µg/m 3 15, % O3 one hour µg/m O3 24 hour µg/m Acrolein one hour µg/m Acrolein 24 hour µg/m % Benzene 24 hour µg/m % Benzene Annual µg/m % 1,3 Butadiene 24 hour µg/m % 1,3 Butadiene Annual µg/m % Acetaldehyde 30 minutes µg/m Acetaldehyde 24 hour µg/m % Formaldehyde 24 hour µg/m % B(a)P 24 hour µg/m % B(a)P Annual µg/m % Notes: (1) PM10 was not monitored, MOECC approved ratio of 0.54 μg/m3 PM10 per 1 μg/m3 PM2.5 was used as an estimation (2) Ozone (O3) concentrations were used to calculate the NO to NO2 conversion using the Ozone Limiting Method (See Section 2.5). - : Insufficient data to estimate these values. Page 9

17 Figure 2-1: Air Quality Impact Assessment: Location of Air Monitoring Stations Page 10

18 2.5 Conversion of Nitrogen Oxides to Nitrogen Dioxide When nitrogen oxides (NOX) are emitted in diesel exhaust, their initial composition is dominated by nitric oxide (NO). Approximately 90% of the emissions of NOX are in the form of NO. Once in the ambient air, NO is irreversibly oxidized by ground level ozone (O3) to produce nitrogen dioxide (NO2) as follows: NO + O 3 NO 2 + O 2 NO2 is a COC with established air quality thresholds, so the concentration of NO2 is important to quantify for the Project. For the purpose of this assessment, a simplified version of the Ozone Limiting Method (OLM) was used to estimate the maximum short-term NO2 concentrations resulting from emissions of NOX. The one hour and 24 hour NOX concentrations predicted by CAL3QHCR were compared to the average 90 th percentile measured ambient ozone (O3) concentrations, for the same averaging time period, from ambient monitoring stations in Table 2-2. The OLM method assumes that if the concentration of NO (90% of the modelled NOX) is less than the available 90 th percentile ambient O3, then all of the NO is converted to NO2 as follows: If 0.9NO x (ppm) < O 3 (ppm), then NO 2 (ppm) = NO x (ppm) If the concentration of NO (90% of the modelled NOX) is greater than the available 90 th percentile ambient O3, then there is not enough O3 to convert all of the NO to NO2, so the following relationship applies: If 0.9NO x (ppm) > O 3 (ppm), then NO 2 (ppm) = 0.1NO x (ppm) + O 3 (ppm) The conservative nature of this method assumes that the peak NOX emissions from the dispersion modelling occur simultaneously with the 90 th percentile peak of O3, to maximize the amount of NO2 that could be formed. 2.6 Credible Worst-Case Analysis The COC concentrations from modelling the Project were aggregated with background 90 th percentile concentrations. The results were compared to the applicable air quality thresholds in order to evaluate the potential for adverse effects. This approach accounts for the cumulative effect of the Project s emissions in combination with ambient background concentrations. A credible worst-case analysis has been undertaken for this assessment. The contribution from the Project and the ambient background concentrations can vary widely from day to day, depending on meteorological conditions and operational characteristics. One of the common analytical responses to this issue is the credible worst-case analysis. It is based on the concept that a project is acceptable under all conditions if it is acceptable under a credible worst-case condition (MTO, 2012). For each COC, the 90 th percentile concentration from the ambient background monitoring data was used to represent the peak ambient background condition. The aggregate of the maximum modelled Project contribution and the 90 th percentile ambient background concentration was compared to the applicable air quality threshold. If the credible worst-case analysis indicates that a significant number of sensitive receptors may be subject to air quality that does not meet Page 11

19 the ambient air quality thresholds, then a more detailed analysis will be conducted for that specific community or receptor. Otherwise, no further local air quality effects assessment is required (MTO 2012). 2.7 Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling Dispersion models use mathematical formulations to represent the atmospheric processes that transport and disperse air contaminants. This AQIA involves the use of the CAL3QHCR air dispersion model. CAL3QHCR is MTO and MOECC s preferred road traffic dispersion model, designed to predict air contaminant concentrations at receptor locations within several kilometers of a linear emission source such as a roadway. CAL3QHCR is the enhanced version of the CAL3QHC model. CAL3QHCR allows for Tier I and Tier II modeling approaches. Tier I requires a full year of hourly meteorological data in place of the one hour of artificial meteorological data that are commonly entered into CAL3QHC model. One hour of vehicular emissions, traffic volume and signalization data are also entered as is done when using CAL3QHC. Tier II requires the same meteorological data as used in the Tier I approach, however the vehicular emissions, traffic volume and signalization data are more detailed and reflect traffic conditions for each hour of a week. Tier I modelling was performed in this study. For this AQIA, five years of pre-processed regional meteorological data for Central Region (Toronto, York-Durham Region and Halton-Peel Region) was obtained from the MOECC. Two meteorological datasets are required in order to perform dispersion modelling analysis using the CAL3QHCR model: upper air data (i.e., measurements recorded at various heights above the surface by weather balloons released twice per day); and surface data (i.e., hourly measurements recorded ten meters above grade). Surface data was obtained from the Toronto Pearson International Airport (ID 61587) station for the years Using the surface data, upper air data was generated through RAMMET View, a US EPA preprocessor used to prepare meteorological data for CAL3QHCR. When generating the upper air data, urban surface parameters were selected. This takes into account the heat island effect of being in a highly urbanized area, as opposed to open fields and forests which do not create the heat island effect. The heat island effect is best described as the absorption and slow release of heat from paved and concrete surfaces due to exposure to energy from the sun (i.e., heat). One year of hourly metrological data is required to run a Tier I CAL3QHCR model. The year that resulted in the worst-case results was determined to be 1997 and was used for modelling. The full year span captures a sufficient range of varying meteorological conditions. The worstcase year coupled with the Tier I modeling method allows for a conservative representation of the contaminant concentrations. The CAL3QHCR model is able to generate values for a one hour, 8-hour averaged CO or 24 hour and annual block averaged PM concentrations. The hourly concentrations were estimated based on hourly emission rates from sources. The model calculates concentrations over one year (one value for each hour) and presents the maximum hourly value. In order to produce the appropriate MOECC averaging times scaling factors were needed to obtain 24-hour and annual values. 2.8 Modelling Scenarios There are three modelling scenarios: 1. Current Scenario: conditions currently within the Project study area (2018): Page 12

20 This scenario represents the conditions currently within the Project study area. In this scenario the vehicular traffic traveling along Major Mackenzie Drive within the study area was modeled. The traffic volumes were obtained from the Traffic Report prepared by Parsons in 2018 as part of the EA Study. Traffic volumes at peak hours (8 AM and 5 PM) as identified in the Traffic Report were included in the model for morning and evening scenarios. It was concluded based on the traffic volume details that a split of 97% cars and 3% heavy vehicles occupied the road. Emission factors for the current 2018 year were generated with MOVES and used in the model. 2. No-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area with no Project: This scenario represents the do nothing future scenario in In this scenario, the traffic volume is the same as the Current scenario because the roads are at maximum capacity. The traffic volumes at peak hours (8 AM and 5 PM) as identified by the Traffic Report were included in the model for morning and evening scenarios. The roadway parameters remained the same as the current scenario. Emission factors for the 2041 year were generated with MOVES and used in the model. 3. Full-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area, including lane expansion of Major Mackenzie Drive from four lanes to six lanes, increased traffic capacity on Major Mackenzie Drive, and with the Project completed: This scenario represents the Project built to completion in In this scenario, Major Mackenzie Drive is widened from four lanes to six lanes between the intersection of Jane Street and Highway 400. The traffic volume is the 2041 modelled traffic volume from the Traffic Report prepared by Parsons in 2018 as part of the EA Study based on a regional 1% annual population growth plus 1 to 1.5% study area development annual growth rate is used for Major Mackenzie Drive in this scenario. The traffic volume at peak hours (8 AM and 5 PM) were included in the model for morning and evening scenarios. The remainder of the roadway that was not modified from the construction of the Project maintained the same parameters as the Current and No-Build Scenarios. Emission factors for the 2041 year were generated with MOVES and used in the model. 2.9 Receptors The Project s air quality effects were predicted at sensitive receptors within the study area, as shown in Figure 1-1. All sensitive receptors identified within the study area have been included in this assessment. Sensitive receptors for the dispersion model were identified from municipal zoning and the Region of York Open Data Catalogue within the study area and confirmed with aerial imagery. In the event that land is zoned for a sensitive receptor, but aerial imagery confirmed that land is vacant or a different land use, a sensitive receptor was included at these locations because a receptor could exist there in the future. Within the study area residences and child care, health care, long-term care and educational facilities were identified as sensitive receptors within the model. These receptors include all identified future proposed developments including the Vaughan Healthcare Centre Precinct. In addition, a uniform receptor grid with 30 meter spacing covering the entire study area was included for any receptors that were not initially identified, but only included in the assessment if an existing or potential future sensitive receptor was identified at those locations. Page 13

21 The locations of all sensitive receptors and the 6 most affected sensitive receptors are shown in Figure 2-2; and the addresses, UTM coordinates and the distance from the center of the approximate project footprint for the 6 most affected sensitive receptors are provided in Appendix B. Per standard practice, all receptors were placed at an assumed breathing height of 1.5 meters above the ground. Page 14

22 Figure 2-2: Air Quality Impact Assessment: Location of Sensitive Receptors Page 15

23 2.10 Traffic Data and Fleet Composition The hourly traffic along Major Mackenzie Drive within the Project boundary is the emission source modelled for the Project. The traffic for the Current scenario was obtained from the Traffic Report prepared by Parsons in 2018 as part of the EA Study. The hourly traffic for the Current and Future No-Build scenarios is based on the traffic counts conducted at the major intersections in 2016 within the Project study area. For the Future Full-Build scenario, the future traffic volumes were estimated by applying a standard 1% annual growth rate plus 1 to 1.5% study area development annual growth rate to the 2016 traffic volume. In all three scenarios, AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes were modelled. Table 2-4 displays the hourly traffic compositions for the Current scenario, and Table 2-5 and Table 2-6 display the Future No-Build and Future Full-Build scenario s hourly traffic composition, respectively. Table 2-4: Road Traffic Data Current Scenario: AM and PM Segment Description Hourly Traffic Cars Heavy Duty Posted Speed Vehicle Limit (km/hr) Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway North/East/West Southbound Ramp from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway North/East/West Southbound Ramp from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Jane Street from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Jane Street from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Amusement Drive from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Amusement Drive 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway Southeast/southwest Ramp from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 Southeast/southwest Ramp from 5 pm to 6 pm Page 16

24 Table 2-5: Road Traffic Data Future No-build Scenario: AM and PM Link Description Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 North/East/West Southbound Ramp from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 North/East/West Southbound Ramp from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Jane Street from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Jane Street from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Amusement Drive from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Amusement Drive from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 Southeast/southwest Ramp from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 Southeast/southwest Ramp from 5 pm to 6 pm Hourly Heavy Duty Cars Traffic Vehicle Speed (km/hr) Table 2-6: Road Traffic Data Future Full-Build Scenario: AM and PM Link Description Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 South Ramp from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 South Ramp from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Jane Street from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Jane Street from 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Amusement Drive from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Amusement Drive 5 pm to 6 pm Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 Southeast/southwest Ramp from 8 am to 9 am Major Mackenzie Drive and Highway 400 Southeast/southwest Ramp from 5 pm to 6 pm Hourly Heavy Duty Cars Traffic Vehicle Speed (km/hr) Page 17

25 2.11 Emission Factors To estimate emissions from road traffic traveling along Major Mackenzie Drive, emission factors for the contaminants of concern were generated by the US EPA model MOVES 2014a. The MOVES model is the MTO and MOECC recommended model for road traffic assessments. MOVES is a state-of-the-science emission modelling system that estimates emissions for mobile sources at the national, county, and project level for criteria pollutants, GHGs, and air toxics. MOVES provides estimates of current and future emission rates from motor vehicles based on a variety of factors such as local meteorology and vehicle fleet composition. For this study, MOVES was used to estimate vehicle emissions based on vehicle type, model year, and vehicle speed. Table 2-7 specifies the major inputs into MOVES. Table 2-7: MOVES Input Parameters Parameter Input Scale and Geographical Bounds Pollutants Years Hours Meteorology Source Use Types and Fuel Combinations Road Type Vehicle Age Distribution Fuel Formulation Custom County Domain PM2.5, PM10, CO2 equivalent, CO, NOx, Acetaldehyde, Formaldehyde, 1,3-Butadiene, Benzene, Benzo(a)pyrene and Acrolein 2018 (existing) and 2041 (future) 8 am and 5 pm Temperature and Relative Humidity from Buttonville Monitoring Station (WMO 71639) for January and July 2015 and 2016, respectively. Passenger Vehicles (Gasoline) and Combination Short-haul Truck (Diesel) Urban Unrestricted Access MOVES defaults based on years selected Niagara County (The closest geographical location to the Project) EFs were generated for the Current scenario (2018) and the future No-Build and Full-Build scenarios (2041). All EFs were based on the highest value calculated for the months of January and July. Associated hourly meteorological data (temperature and relative humidity) for those months were collected from the Buttonville Municipal Airport Station in 2015 and January and July were used to consider two extremes as they resulted in worst-case estimates of EFs for most contaminants due to reduced operating efficiency in cold/hot weather. For some contaminants, such as VOCs, the EFs are normally higher during warmer conditions due to a lower evaporative component at cold temperatures. The following emissions sources were included in this air quality assessment: Emissions from vehicles travelling along Major Mackenzie Drive, including: Emissions due to Vehicle Idling; and Emissions due to Vehicles Travelling along the road. The EFs were calculated in custom county domain scale and for each type of activity (i.e., idling and travelling) were generated for the selected road type and vehicle types. The MOVES model has the capability to provide EFs for each speed range. For example, travelling vehicles are assumed to have a maximum speed of 50 km/h. This is a conservative assumption as not all vehicles travel at that speed. For idling activities, the common approach is to use the EFs Page 18

26 for the first speed range (zero to four km/h) and multiply it by half of the average speed (two km/h). Summaries of MOVES EFs for AM and PM peak hours are summarized in Table 2-8 and Table 2-9, respectively. Table 2-8: MOVES Output Emissions Factors for Year 2018 and 2041: AM Contaminant Cars Trucks Free Flow (g/vmt) Idle (g/vmt) Free Flow(g/VMT) Idle (g/vmt) 2018 PM PM Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Acrolein 2.078E Benzene ,3-Butadiene Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde Benzo(a)pyrene 9.227E E PM PM Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Acrolein 2.53E E Benzene ,3-Butadiene E Acetaldehyde 2.26E Formaldehyde 4.94E Benzo(a)pyrene 9.72E E Notes: 1 Corrected for re-suspended road dust. Page 19

27 Table 2-9: MOVES Output Emissions Factors for Year 2018 and 2041: PM Contaminant Cars Trucks Free Flow (g/vmt) Idle (g/vmt) Free Flow(g/VMT) Idle (g/vmt) 2018 PM PM Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Acrolein 2.19E E Benzene ,3-Butadiene Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde Benzo(a)pyrene 9.74E E PM PM Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Acrolein 2.688E E E-05 Benzene ,3-Butadiene E Acetaldehyde 2.321E Formaldehyde 5.085E Benzo(a)pyrene 1.032E E Notes: 1 Corrected for re-suspended road dust Source Parameters for Dispersion Modelling Dispersion models are utilized to predict how a contaminant concentration changes as it moves through the atmosphere. The concentration of a contaminant at a specific receptor is a function of a variety of parameters including meteorological conditions in the vicinity of the source, contaminant emission rate(s) and physical characteristics of the source. Atmospheric dispersion models use a combination of data inputs for these parameters in conjunction with mathematical algorithms that describe both the temporal and spatial variation of contaminants as they move away from the source (MOECC, 2017). Some of these model inputs were discussed in Section 2.7. The most significant and user-controlled data input into the dispersion model is the emission rates and associated source parameters. An accurate and effective collection of emission rates and source parameters result in better prediction of concentrations at receptors. 3. Results and Discussion 3.1 Local Air Quality Effects (Projects Effects) The air dispersion modelling results for the selected COCs at the most affected sensitive receptor in each scenario are reported in this section. This section includes predicted results for the following three scenarios: 1. Current Scenario: conditions currently within the Project study area (2018); 2. No-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area with no Project; and, Page 20

28 3. Full-Build Scenario: 2041 horizon future conditions within the Project study area, including lane expansion of Major Mackenzie Drive from four lanes to six lanes, acceleration lane on east-south on ramp to Highway 400, increased traffic capacity on Major Mackenzie Drive, and with the Project completed. The results for each scenario were evaluated at all sensitive receptors but only the most affected sensitive receptors are presented. Only the worst-case receptor is assessed within this AQIA as long as they are below the air quality thresholds. If the worst-case receptors are above the air quality thresholds, and the ambient background levels are below the air quality thresholds, then additional affected receptors are identified. All of the dispersion modelling outputs were hourly. Where the threshold was on an hourly basis, the maximum hourly result was reported. If the threshold was on a daily (24 hour) or annual basis, a conversion using the maximum hour was performed. The following equation was used to perform this conversion: Where: C 0 = C t x ( t n 1 ) t 0 Co = the concentration at the averaging period t0 Ct = the concentration at the averaging period t1 t1 = averaging period t1 to = averaging period t0 n = 0.28 or approved value The modelling results for the COCs for the most affected sensitive receptor is reported in Table 3-1. The highest contaminant concentrations occurred at seven different receptors, which are displayed in Figure 2-2 and listed in Appendix B. The changes in air quality are determined from Table 3-1. The comparison of the modelling results between the 2041 No-Build scenario and 2018 Current scenario indicates the effect on local air quality of reduced traffic emissions with a newer vehicle fleet. The comparison between the Full-Build and No-Build scenarios determines the effect on local air quality of the Project, which is lane expansion of Major Mackenzie Drive from four lanes to six lanes, acceleration lane on east-south on ramp to Highway 400, increased traffic capacity on Major Mackenzie Drive and other road configuration changes associated with the Project. The cumulative effects are compared with air quality thresholds in Table 3-1 and Error! Reference source not found. and no additional exceedances of the thresholds due to the Project were identified. There are very small increases to compliant concentrations with a maximum contaminant increase of 1.8% of the background concentration occurring for hourly CO. The maximum Project contribution to the concentration of contaminants already exceeding their threshold from ambient background concentrations is predicted to be 0.016% of the background concentration. As such the proposed Project is predicted to have a very small effect on the ambient pollutant concentrations in the study area that does not require the consideration of mitigation. It should be noted that comparison of the modelling results between 2018 and 2041 scenarios also reflects a decrease in air quality thresholds. Page 21