Puma Energy Kwinana Bitumen Terminal
Supporting Information for Works Approval
Revision 1
27 February 2020
Puma Energy (Australia) Bitumen Pty Ltd
Supporting Information for Works Approval Puma Energy (Australia) Bit umen Pty Ltd
Supporting Information for Works Approval
i
Puma Energy Kwinana Bitumen Terminal
Project No: IW223800
Document Title: Supporting Information for Works Approval
Revision: 1
Document Status: Final
Date: 27 February 2020
Client Name: Puma Energy (Australia) Bitumen Pty Ltd
Project Manager: Lisa Boulden
Author: Lisa Boulden
File Name: SupportingInformation_2020-02-27_Rev1-NoAppendices-LB (2)DB.docx
Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited
ABN 37 001 024 095
8th Floor, Durack Centre
263 Adelaide Terrace
PO Box H615
Perth WA 6001 Australia
T +61 8 9469 4400
F +61 8 9469 4488
www.jacobs.com
© Copyright 2019 Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs.
Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.
Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the
provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance
upon, this document by any third party.
Document history and status
Revision Date Description Author Checked Reviewed Approved
A 19/12/19 Draft for Client Review LB LD MG MG
B 24/12/19 Final Draft for Client Approval LB LD MG MG
0 24/12/2019 Final for Submission to DWER LB LD MG MG
1 27/02/20 Revised Submission for DWER LB LD MG MG
Supporting Information for Works Approval
ii
Contents
1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Proposed Activities (Attachment 3A) ........................................................................................................................ 2
2.1 Existing Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 New Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2
2.2.1 Process Description ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2
3. Emissions, Discharges and Wastes (Attachment 6A) ............................................................................................. 6
3.1 Gaseous Emissions (Air Quality and Odour) ............................................................................................................................ 6
3.1.1 Existing Emissions .............................................................................................................................................................................. 6
3.1.2 Emissions from Proposed Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Noise Emissions .................................................................................................................................................................................. 8
3.3 Wastewater and Stormwater Discharges .................................................................................................................................. 8
3.4 Risk Assessment ................................................................................................................................................................................. 9
4. Siting and Location (Attachment 7) ......................................................................................................................... 11
5. Works Approval Fee Calculation (Attachment 9) ................................................................................................. 12
6. References ...................................................................................................................................................................... 13
Appendix A. Proof of Occupier Status and ASIC Company Extract
A.1 Proof of Occupier Status (Attachment 1A)
A.2 ASIC Company Extract (Attachment 1B)
Appendix B. Premises Maps (Attachment 2)
B.1 Aerial Photograph of the Site
B.2 Site Layout Plans
B.2.1 Current Site Layout
B.2.2 Proposed Site Layout and Emissions Points
B.2.3 Detailed Layout of New Infrastructure
B.3 Sensitive Receptors, Land Uses and Specified Ecosystems
Appendix C. Emissions Assessment Report (CETEC, 2019)
Appendix D. Hot Oil Heater Screening Assessment
D.1 Screening Concentrations
D.2 Screening Concentration Compared to Draft AGV
Supporting Information for Works Approval
iii
Important note about your report
This document has been prepared on behalf of Puma Energy (Australia) Bitumen Pty Ltd. The purpose of this
document is to provide additional and supporting information for the Bitumen Mixing Work Approval
application, in accordance with scope of services set out in the contract between Jacobs and the Client (Puma
Energy (Australia) Bitumen Pty Ltd).
In preparing this report, Jacobs has relied upon, and presumed accurate, any information (or confirmation of the
absence thereof) provided by the Client and/or from other sources. Except as otherwise stated in the report,
Jacobs has not attempted to verify the accuracy or completeness of any such information. If the information is
subsequently determined to be inaccurate or incomplete, then it is possible that our observations and
conclusions as expressed in this report may change.
This report should be read in full and no excerpts are to be taken as representative of the findings. No
responsibility is accepted by Jacobs for use of any part of this report in any other context.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
1
1. Introduction
In 2017/18, Puma Energy (Australia) Bitumen Pty Ltd constructed and commissioned a facility for the import,
storage and dispatch of finished grades of bitumen, the Puma Energy Kwinana Bitumen Terminal (the site). The
processes at site were simply to receive the bitumen, store it in heated tanks and load it into customer road
tankers as depicted in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Original Terminal Processes
Since the facility was not intended for mixing bitumen, it was not identified as a prescribed premise and no works
approval or licence was required. Puma Energy now wishes to upgrade the facility to enable mixing of bitumen at
the site. This will require the installation of additional infrastructure and repurposing of the existing storage
tanks to allow for in tank mixing of different grades of bitumen. A simplified process diagram for this is shown in
Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.2: Proposed Processes
A significant portion of the bitumen moving through the facility will continue to simply be received, stored and
loaded out. However, to provide further options for customers, additional grades of bitumen will be prepared
using the following mixing processes:
▪ Grade Mixing
Grade mixing will involve utilising the existing tanks, pumps and associated infrastructure to blend two
grades (i.e. different viscosities) of heated liquid bitumen from their source tanks together in the required
proportion in a third tank to achieve a desired grade of bitumen. Ratios will vary depending on the source
grades and required finish grade.
▪ Crumb Rubber Modified Bitumen (CRMB) Mixing
CRMB is prepared by mixing heated liquid with granules of recycled rubber made from used tyres and
conveyer belts. This will require the installation of a new, portable 25 Tonne capacity CRMB mixing unit and
a 100 Tonne CRMB storage tank.
▪ Polymer Modified Bitumen (PMB) Mixing
PMB is prepared by mixing heated liquid bitumen with (plastic) Polymer granules. This will require the
installation of a new, portable 25 tonne PMB mixing unit and a 100 tonne PMB storage tank.
Receive Store Loadout
Receive Store Mix Loadout
Supporting Information for Works Approval
2
2. Proposed Activities (Attachment 3A)
2.1 Existing Infrastructure
The existing infrastructure at the site consists of four storage tanks, hot oil heater and pumps housed within a
16.5m by 29.1m shed, hardstand driveway and road tanker loading facility, office and control building and
storage shed (Appendix B.2). Part of the Puma site is utilised by a separate entity, BSS (Bitumen Storage
Solutions Pty Ltd) which is a JV operation between SAMI Bitumen Technologies and Puma Energy (Bitumen)
Australia. The BSS operation is outside the scope of this application.
New pipework will connect the existing storage tanks with the new infrastructure. The hot oil system will be
expanded to service the new infrastructure.
2.2 New Infrastructure
New infrastructure will consist of:
▪ Stirrers installed to the existing storage tanks
▪ 1 portable, trailer mounted CRMB mixing unit
▪ 1 portable, trailer mounted PMB mixing unit
▪ Two activated carbon scrubber units
▪ Two new 100 tonne storage tanks, with stirrers
▪ Two new pumps, associated pipework and filters
▪ Optional Overhead shelter for the CRMB and PMB mixing units (the primary purpose of this shelter would
be to provide improved conditions for the operators. It is not linked to any pollution prevention measures
and the presence or absence of this shelter will not change the emissions and discharged from the site)
▪ Optional 55kL self-bunded tank for potential additive storage (C2 combustible liquid). Additives can be
supplied in 1000L IBCs (Intermediate Bulk Containers) however, for economic reasons Puma may elect to
store additive in a bulk tank. As this tank will be self-bunded and fully contained, its addition at a later stage
(post-construction and commissioning of the mixing units) is unlikely to change the emissions and
discharges from the site. The use of additives is already considered in this application.
The layout of the new infrastructure is shown in Appendix B.2. Proposed pipework is excluded from the drawing
for layout clarity.
2.2.1 Process Description
The CRMB and PMB mixing units are horizontal tanks, designed to contain 25 tonnes of finished product.
The process flow for both CRMB and PMB is described as follows with reference to Figure 2.1:
▪ The crumbed rubber or polymer is transferred from large bags into steel hoppers ready to add to the
mixture.
▪ Heated liquid bitumen, which comprises the majority of each 25 tonne batch, is transferred from one of the
source tanks into the mixing unit. Heaters positioned under the mixing unit maintain the temperature of the
bitumen. Depending on the grade being produced and customer requirements, additives (1-6%) may be
transferred into the tank. Additive may be either stored in a 55kL self bunded storage tank, or 1000 L
Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBC) positioned within the mixing unit bunded area.
▪ The helical mixer inside the tank rotates, agitating the mixture.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
3
▪ The bitumen is circulated using the pump and the crumbed rubber or polymer is induced into the
circulating mixture and returned to the mixing tank.
▪ The quantity of crumbed rubber or polymer added can be several tonnes but varies depending on the grade
of bitumen being produced.
▪ Once the full amount of crumbed rubber/polymer granules have been introduced into the batch, mixing
under heat will continue until the crumbed rubber/polymer granules are fully combined with the bitumen
and a consistent CRMB/PMB achieved. The process is expected to take approximately six hours.
▪ The batch may be passed through the mill to further homogenise the mixture
▪ The completed batch is then transferred either directly to the road tanker loading facility for despatch to
customers or to the storage tank where it will continue to be heated and stirred while held until despatch.
Note: more detailed drawings are available upon request, if required.
Figure 2.1: Schematic Diagram of CRMB/PMB Mixing Unit
Vapours from the CRMB/PMB mixer are extracted at the vent and drawn through a fume scrubbing system
designed to mitigate odours/pollutants from bitumen and modified bitumen fumes.
A schematic of the fume scrubbing system is shown in Figure 2.2 and the process is described below:
▪ The extraction fan draws the vapours from the vent at the top of the mixing unit into the fume scrubber unit.
▪ The fumes enter the scrubber via the knockout pot. The knockout pot is designed to remove excess
moisture or atomised liquid that might be suspended in the extracted vapour flow stream. The atomised
liquid condenses to the bottom of the pot.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
4
Figure 2.22: Schematic Diagram of Vapour Scrubbing Unit
▪ From the knockout pot, the vapours are piped to the fume treatment chamber which is a Stainless Steel
vessel containing a bed of a proprietary carbon filter medium designed to chemically adsorb the
pollutants/odour from the fumes. The fumes enter the chamber at the top and are drawn down through the
carbon bed, where the contaminants are adsorbed, and exit the chamber near the base.
▪ Having exited the carbon chamber, the treated vapours are drawn through the fan and directed up to
atmosphere for discharge at a height of 4m.
The following activities will be undertaken to monitor and verify the performance of the unit:
▪ General operator observation: Operators will be asked to take note of odours in the vicinity of the fume
scrubbers and report any increase in the presence of detectable odour during the course of daily operations.
▪ Drain Condensate: The knockout pot and fume treatment chamber will be drained regularly to remove any
condensate that may have accumulated. The draining frequency will initially be daily (when the unit is
operated) but will potentially be reduced less frequent over time based upon learning experience from
operating the units.
▪ Monitor Emissions: samples will be taken from the unit to verify its performance. It is proposed to establish
a monitoring frequency that is linked to the mixing unit volumetric throughput and which reflects learning
over time regarding the rate at which the performance of the unit deteriorates. Initially, monitoring events
are proposed at commissioning and subsequently after 4000 Tonnes produced for a given unit.
▪ Monitor pressure drop: an increase in resistance to air flow across the carbon bed will indicate filter medium
bed compaction resulting in reduced performance. At the time of commissioning, the initial pressure drop
will be measured and a limit will be established to indicate the need to inspect and possibly change the
filter medium. The limit will be established based on a 20% increase in the pressure drop across the filter
bed.
▪ Inspect Carbon Bed: The carbon bed will be inspected periodically by removing the roof to check for signs of
a thin layer of compaction forming on the top of the filter medium. This film can be broken to give a
prolonged filter medium life.
Waste from the vapour scrubbing unit will be managed as follows:
▪ Any drained condensate will be placed into a 1000L IBC. Periodically, the contents of the IBC will be
collected by an approved and licenced waste disposal contractor for disposal.
▪ The manufacturer advises that the filter medium is environmentally safe and environmentally non-
hazardous in its unreacted and reacted forms. A specialist company will be used to change the carbon and
dispose of the spent carbon to landfill in accordance with any relevant regulatory requirements.The
Supporting Information for Works Approval
5
frequency with which the carbon will be changed out will be established on a performance basis, using
information captured from the monitoring activities outlined.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
6
3. Emissions, Discharges and Wastes (Attachment 6A)
3.1 Gaseous Emissions (Air Quality and Odour)
Gaseous emissions, largely in the form of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC’s), will be generated by the CRMB
and PMB mixing units and from the new bitumen storage tanks. Existing emission sources consist of the existing
bitumen storage tanks, the road tanker loading facility and the hot oil heater. Map B.2.2 in Appendix B shows
the locations of the existing and proposed emissions sources.
The nearest residential area is 2.5 km to the south west, however there is a single residence attached to a bottle
shop and deli approximately 700 m to the south west. A recreational area (Wells Park) is also located 700 m to
the south west and across the road from the bottle shop. Gaseous emission from the site have the potential to
adversely affect the air quality of these locations.
A review of the average wind speeds and directions for the area was undertaken using data from the Medina
Research Centre (Bureau of Meteorology Site ID 009194) for the years 1983 to 2018. This showed that
afternoon winds (3 pm) are generally from the south west to north west, except for June when there is no clear
prevailing wind direction. Morning winds (9 am) are generally from the south to east between December and
April and north east to east between May and August. Morning winds between September and November show
no clear prevailing direction. Air quality at the nearest sensitive receptors may therefore be more likely to be
adversely affected by morning winds between May and August than at other times of the year.
3.1.1 Existing Emissions
Ambient air quality and odour monitoring was undertaken at the site in December 2019 (CETC, 2019; Appendix
C). The monitoring did not detect any VOCs, Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH)or Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) at
the boundary of the Puma site. Additionally, no complaints have been received by Puma in relation to air quality
or odour from the existing operations. This suggests that the current operation is not adversely affecting the air
quality of the local area.
The rate of receipt and loadout of the existing storage tanks will not change. The only change to the operation of
the existing infrastructure will be that two or more grades of bitumen may be pumped into each tank. As such,
the emissions profile from the existing infrastructure is unlikely to change.
Emissions from the hot oil heater have been estimated using the National Pollutant Inventory Emission
Estimation Technique Manual for Combustion in Boilers (DSEWPaC, 2011). Estimated emissions from the hot oil
heater have been assessed against the draft air quality guideline values provided in Department of Water and
Environmental Regulation’s (DWER) Draft Guideline – Air Emissions (DWER 2019) using the screening
assessment process outlined in the guideline. This assessment showed that the estimated emissions are all
below the screening tolerance and therefore considered negligible (Appendix D).
3.1.2 Emissions from Proposed Infrastructure
The likely gaseous emissions from the proposed infrastructure have been calculated in accordance with the
methods outlined in the following documents:
▪ National Pollutant Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Hot Mix Asphalt Manufacturing
(Environment Australia, 1999)
▪ National Pollutant Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Fuels and Organic Liquid Storage
Version 3.3 (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, 2012)
▪ AP 42, Fifth Edition Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors (US Environmental Protection Agency,
1995)
▪ Estimates of Air emissions from Asphalt Storage Tank and Truck Loading (Trumbore, 1999)
Supporting Information for Works Approval
7
A screening assessment of the likely emissions was undertaken using the screening process outlined in the Draft
Guideline – Air Emissions (DWER 2019). This assessment (Table 3.1 to Table 3.3) showed that emissions of VOCs
from the proposed infrastructure, when operating at both full capacity and the planned production rate, may be
significant and above the draft guideline value provided for “Asphalt (bitumen / petroleum) fumes”. In order to
reduce emissions from the proposed infrastructure, the CRMB and PMB mixing units as well as the two new
storage tanks will be connected to an activated carbon scrubber unit. The scrubber will remove a minimum of
95% of the VOCs with the resultant emissions well below both the draft guideline value and the screening
threshold (10% of the draft guideline value), as shown in Table 3.1 Table 3.2to Table 3.3. This will also
significantly reduce potential odour emissions from the new infrastructure. It should be noted that the method
used to calculate the emissions is likely to be conservative. As recent monitoring of the site did not detect VOCs
from the existing operations at the site boundary, it is reasonable to expect that actual emissions may be lower
than those estimated.
Table 3.1: Screening Assessment for Proposed Storage Tanks
Scenario Parameter Emissions
(g/s)
Screening Concentration (SC)
(µg/m3)
Draft Air Quality Guideline Value
(AGV) (SC % of Draft AGV)
Annual 24-hour 1 hour Annual 24-hour 1 hour
Total
Capacity
Total VOCs
no treatment 0.08 0.97 7.33 26.99 9 (299%)1
Total VOCs with
treatment 0.0024 0.03 0.22 0.81 9 (9%)1
Planned
Production
Rate
Total VOCs
no treatment 0.04 0.42 3.22 11.85 9 (132%)
Total VOCs with
treatment 0.0018 0.02 0.16 0.59 9 (6.59%)
Total
Capacity PM10 0.02 0.27 2.07 7.61 23 (1.2%) 46 (4.5%)
Planned
Production
Rate
PM10 0.01 0.12 0.91 3.34 23 (%) 46 (%)
Notes: 1 – Total VOCs compared against AGV for Asphalt (bitumen / petroleum) fumes.
Table 3.2: Screening Assessment for Proposed CRMB and PMB Mixers
Scenario Parameter Emissions
(g/s)
Screening Concentration (SC)
(µg/m3)
Draft Air Quality Guideline Value
(AGV) (SC % of Draft AGV)
Annual 24-hour 1 hour Annual 24-hour 1 hour
Total
Capacity
Total VOCs
no treatment 0.04 0.46 3.47 12.76 9 (142%)1
Total VOCs with
treatment 0.0011 0.01 0.10 0.38 9 (4.25%)1
Planned
Production
Rate
Total VOCs
no treatment 0.02 0.18 1.39 5.10 9 (56.7%)1
Total VOCs with
treatment 0.0008 0.009 0.07 0.26 9 (2.8%)1
Total
Capacity PM10 0.01 0.13 0.98 3.60 23 (0.56%) 46 (2.1%)
Planned
Production
Rate
PM10 0.004 0.05 0.39 1.44 23 (0.22%) 46 (1.97%)
Notes: 1 – Total VOCs compared against AGV for Asphalt (bitumen / petroleum) fumes.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
8
Table 3.3: Screening Assessment for All Proposed Infrastructure (Total for Tanks and Mixers)
Scenario Parameter Emissions Screening Concentration (SC)
(µg/m3)
Draft Air Quality Guideline Value
(AGV) (SC % of Draft AGV)
g/s Annual 24-hour 1 hour Annual 24-hour 1 hour
Total
Capacity
Total VOCs
no treatment 0.12 1.42 10.80 39.75 9 (442%) 1
Total VOCs with
treatment 0.0059 0.07 0.54 1.99 9 (22%) 1
Planned
Production
Rate
Total VOCs
no treatment 0.05 0.61 4.61 16.96 9 (188%) 1
Total VOCs
with treatment 0.0025 0.030 0.23 0.85 9 (9.42%) 1
Total
Capacity
PM10 0.03 0.40 3.05 11.21 23 (1.75%) 46 (6.62%)
Planned
Production
Rate
PM10
0.01 0.17 1.30 4.78 23 (0.74%) 46 (2.82%)
Notes: 1 – Total VOCs compared against AGV for Asphalt (bitumen / petroleum) fumes.
3.2 Noise Emissions
Current noise emissions from the site are generated by the pumps required to transfer bitumen into and out of
the storage tanks and to move hot oil through the heating pipework and from the hot oil heater itself. New
emissions sources from the proposed infrastructure are the CRMB and PMB mixers, the mill used to homogenise
the mixture and the pumps required to transfer bitumen to the mixers and to transfer the final product (CRMB
and PMB) to the storage tanks or loading gantry. The largest new noise source will be the mill. The mill vendor
has advised that it will produce a maximum noise level of 85dB at 1 m.
As the site is located within the Kwinana Industrial Area, and in accordance with the Environmental Protection
(Noise) Regulations 1997, the assigned noise levels detailed in Table 3.4 apply at all times of the day.
Table 3.4: Assigned Noise Levels for the Kwinana Industrial Area
LA 10 LA 1 LA max
75dB 85 dB 90 dB
No complaints have been received by Puma in relation to noise from the site. Noise monitoring to determine
existing noise levels was undertaken for the site in December 2019 (CETC, 2019; Appendix C). The monitoring
shows that current noise levels are below the thresholds identified in Table 3.4. As the expected noise emissions
from the proposed infrastructure (pumps, mixers and mill) will be below 85 dB (at 1 m) and given the distance
from the noise sources to the site boundary, there is expected to be no change to the measured noise levels at
the boundary of the site as a result of the new infrastructure.
3.3 Wastewater and Stormwater Discharges
Potentially contaminated rainwater runoff from the bunded area around tanks 103,104, 105 and 106 is
collected and directed to the spelceptor oil water separator (OWS) before being discharged to the infiltration
trench. The collection area is approximately 540 m2, so 100mm of rain would generate approximately 54 m3 of
runoff. The spelceptor OWS has a capacity of 40 m3/h. The rate at which water is released to the unit is
controlled by the operator via the bund valve. The spelceptor OWS provides treatment such that the discharged
water is less than 10 ppm.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
9
Runoff from other areas where bitumen/hot oil is handled (e.g. hot oil heater, heat exchanger, pumps, road
tanker loading facility) are roofed to avoid/minimise generation of effluent. Any potential loss of containment of
hot oil or bitumen within these areas can be cleaned up at the source and/or recovered from a blind sump.
Clean stormwater, from roadways and other areas on the site, drains directly to the infiltration trench.
For the proposed new infrastructure, the existing bunded area will be extended by 80 m2 to accommodate the
two new storage tanks. The concrete slab to provide secondary containment for the two mixing tanks will be
approx 260 m2 and for the two pumps, 20m2. These areas will be contained by kerbing; and will drain via a sump
and bund valve to the spelceptor OWS.
The result of the proposed changes is a net increase in the catchment area for potentially oily water from 540 m2
to 900 m2. The existing spelceptor will be capable of servicing the increased catchment area as rainwater is
contained within the bunded area and drained to the unit under operator supervision with the flowrate
controlled via the bund valve. The height of the bund wall/kerb around the mixing tanks includes an allowance
for a heavy storm in addition to the required spill containment quantity.
3.4 Risk Assessment
A risk assessment of the likely emissions and discharges has been undertaken (Table 3.5). This assessment
shows that risks associated with the proposed works have a risk rating no greater than medium with most risks
being low, indicating that they are acceptable, though some controls are required to reduce the likelihood of the
risk occurring.
Table 3.5: Risk Assessment of Likely Emissions and Discharges
Source Impact Controls Likelihood Consequence Rating
Air emissions
(VOCs and PAHs)
from existing
storage tanks
Reduced local air quality
at nearby residence and
recreational area
None – recent
monitoring did not
detect any VOC or PAH
emissions at the
boundary
Unlikely Slight Low
Air emissions from
new storage tanks
and mixing units
Reduced local air quality
at nearby residence and
recreational area
Activated carbon
scrubber operating at
minimum 95% efficiency
Rare Minor Low
Odour emissions
(H2S) from
existing storage
tanks
Reduced amenity at
nearby residence and
recreational area
None – recent
monitoring did not
detect any H2S
emissions at the
boundary
Unlikely Slight Low
Odour emissions
from new storage
tanks and mixing
units
Reduced amenity at
nearby residence and
recreational area
Activated carbon
scrubber operating at
minimum 95% efficiency
Rare Minor Low
Noise emissions
from existing
operations
Reduced amenity at
nearby residence and
recreational area
None – current
emissions are below
limits
Rare Slight Low
Noise emissions
from new
infrastructure
Reduced amenity at
nearby residence and
recreational area
None – emissions are
below limits
Rare Slight Low
Supporting Information for Works Approval
10
Source Impact Controls Likelihood Consequence Rating
Oil contaminated
stormwater
Contamination of
groundwater due to
infiltration of oily
stormwater
Stormwater from the site
is captured and treated
through an oil water
separator
Unlikely Minor Medium
Supporting Information for Works Approval
11
4. Siting and Location (Attachment 7)
The site is located within the Kwinana Industrial Area. A single residence is located approximately 700 m south
west of the site, behind a bottle shop and deli (Map B.3 in Appendix B). Wells Park is across the road from this
residence and also approximately 700 m south west of the site.
The site is within the Cockburn Groundwater Area proclaimed under the Rights in Water and Irrigation Act 1914
while the State Environmental (Cockburn Sound) Policy boundary is approximately 545 m west of the site. As all
stormwater from the site is captured and treated through the OWS prior to discharge to the infiltration basin, the
risk of contamination of the groundwater or Cockburn Sound is considered negligible.
As can be seen from Map B.3 in Appendix B, the site is located within the buffer area of the Sedgelands in
Holocene Dune Swales of the Southern Swan Coastal Plain Threatened Ecological Community (TEC). The closest
occurrence of the TEC is approximately 800 m south east of the site with other industrial premises between the
site and the TEC. No clearing is required as part of the proposed works and there will be no direct impact to this
TEC.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
12
5. Works Approval Fee Calculation (Attachment 9)
The total cost of the works associated with this works approval application is $4,500,000. This includes the
following costs:
▪ Procurement of the mixing units and storage tanks, piping and other ancillary materials
▪ Installation of the mixing units and activated carbon scrubber
▪ Installation and construction of the new storage tanks, including all footings, pads and bunding
▪ Installation of new pipework for transfer of bitumen to/from the mixing units, storage tanks and load out
facilities
▪ Expansion of the hot oil system to include the new storage tanks and mixing units
The works approval application has been calculated as follows:
▪ 125 fee units + (8 x 20 fee units [for every $500,000 above $500,000 in cost])
▪ 125 x $40.60 + (8 x (20 x $40.60)) → $5,075+(8 x $812) → $5,075+ $6,496 = $11,571
Supporting Information for Works Approval
13
6. References
Environment Australia (1999) National Pollutant Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Hot Mix
Asphalt Manufacturing. Government of Australia, Canberra
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2011) National Pollutant
Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Combustion in Boilers Version 3.6. Government of
Australia, Canberra
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (2012) National Pollutant
Inventory Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Fuels and Organic Liquid Storage Version 3.3. Government
of Australia, Canberra
Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (2019) Draft Guideline: Air Emissions. Government of
Western Australia, Perth.
Trumbore, D. (1999) Estimates of Air Emissions from Asphalt Storage Tanks and Truck Loading. Environmental
Progress 18:4 pp 250 – 259
US Environmental Protection Agency (1995) AP 42, Fifth Edition Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors,
Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources.
Supporting Information for Works Approval
14
Appendix A. Proof of Occupier Status and ASIC Company Extract
Supporting Information for Works Approval
17
Appendix B. Premises Maps (Attachment 2)
Supporting Information for Works Approval
18
B.1 Aerial Photograph of the Site
Prepared By: Lisa Boulden Date: 17 December 2019Datum: GDA94 (MGA50)Page Size: A4Scale: 1:2,500
Site Boundary
Exisitng InfrastructureStorage Tanks
Hot Oil Heater and Pumps
Inflitration Trench
Load Out Facility
Legend
Map B1 - Aerial Photograph of the Site
Supporting Information for Works Approval
19
B.2 Site Layout Plans
B.2.1 Current Site Layout
²
1
Supporting Information for Works Approval
20
B.2.2 Proposed Site Layout and Emissions Points
1
19274-DA-0001
Supporting Information for Works Approval
21
B.2.3 Detailed Layout of New Infrastructure
1
19274-DA-0002
Supporting Information for Works Approval
22
B.3 Sensitive Receptors, Land Uses and Specified Ecosystems
Prepared By: Lisa Boulden Date: 17 December 2019Datum: GDA94 (MGA50)Page Size: A4Scale:
6432500
6432500
6432000
6432000
6431500
6431500
6431000
6431000
383000
383000
383500
383500
384000
384000
384500
384500
Site Boundary
Sensitive Receptors
Threatened Ecological Communities
EPP Cockburn Protection Levels
RIWI Act, Groundwater Areas (DWER-034)
Legend
Map B4 - B.4 Sensitive Receptors, Land Uses andSpecified Ecosystems
Supporting Information for Works Approval
24
Appendix C. Emissions Assessment Report (CETEC, 2019)
Prepared By:
CETEC Pty Ltd, Unit 39, 11 Preston St, Como WA 6152 (08) 6102 0270
Prepared For:
360 Environmental Pty Ltd 10 Bermondsey St. West Leederville WA 60074
CETEC Pty Ltd ABN: 44 006 873 687 cetec.com.au Melbourne | Sydney | Brisbane | Perth | London
Perth:39/11 Preston St, Como WA
Preliminary Emissions Assessment Report
For
360 Environmental Pty Ltd
Airborne Emissions from Puma Energy Bitumen Plant,
Kwinana, WA.
Project Reference: P1912027
Engaged By: Chris Donnetti
Company: 360 Environmental Pty Ltd
Company Address: 10 Bermondsey St. West Leederville WA 60074
Site Address: Puma Bitumen Plant, Port Road, Kwinana Beach, WA 6167
Version: Final
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 2 of 40
CONSULTANT: REPORT COMMISIONED BY:
CETEC Pty Ltd
Airborne Emissions from Puma Energy Bitumen Plant, Kwinana, WA
Unit 39, 11 Preston St, Como WA 6152
Chris Donnetti from 360 Environmental Pty Ltd
10 Bermondsey St. West Leederville WA 60074
PROJECT: CETEC REF: CLIENT PO Ref ISSUE
Onsite Measurements of Bitumen Plant Emissions
P1912027 - Final
AMD DESCRIPTION INT REVIEWED DATE
1.0 Draft for Review CB MV/AVB/PDS 20/12/19
2.0 Preliminary CB AVB 24/12/19
3.0 For client Review CB MV/CB/AVB 4/2/2020
4.0 Final CB MV/CB 27/02/2020
Authors:
MEM, BEng (Env)
Consultant
BSc (Applied Chem), MRACI
Senior Consultant
Reviewers:
PhD, BSc(Hons) AIMM, ARACI, ISIAQ, ACA, AIRAH, FMA
Managing Director and Principal Consultant
PhD, BSc(Hons), MRACI
Principal Consultant - Dangerous Goods
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 3 of 40
CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4
Background ............................................................................................................. 4
Assessment Assumptions.......................................................................................... 5
Assessment Criteria .................................................................................................. 5
Scope .......................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Objectives ................................................................................................................ 7
Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 7
3.1 Quantitative Analysis ............................................................................................... 9
Gas Chromatography – mass spectrometry (GC-MS) ........................................................................................ 9
3.2 Qualitative Analysis ................................................................................................. 9
Photoionization Detector (PID) ......................................................................................................................... 9
Multi Gas Meter ............................................................................................................................................... 9
GrayWolf Particle Meter................................................................................................................................. 10
Sound Level Meter ......................................................................................................................................... 10
Results ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 19
APPENDIX A: LAB RESULTS .................................................................................................................................. 21
APPENDIX B: SAMPLING VOLUMES (Sorbent Tubes and Filters) .......................................................................... 39
DISCLAIMER........................................................................................................................................................ 40
COPYRIGHT......................................................................................................................................................... 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 4 of 40
Introduction
Background
CETEC Pty Ltd was engaged by Chris Donnetti from 360 Environmental Pty Ltd to conduct Onsite
Measurements for Noise and Airborne Emissions (including Dust) from the existing Puma Bitumen Plant
at Port Road, Kwinana Beach. The hazardous emissions listed in US EPA 454/R-00-019 Hot mix Asphalt
Plants, Emission Assessment Report (December 2000) were used as the basis of identifying compounds
that are representative of the emissions from a typical bitumen plant and the concentration range of
these materials in air. Only the tables in the US EPA reference relevant to the Kwinana plant were used,
which included in-loading of bitumen, storage, and out loading. The mixing and blending tables were
excluded.
The Bitumen Plant is a Dangerous Goods facility (DG Class 9) due to the emissions from hot bitumen
stored in the facility. Contaminant levels at the boundary of a premises are of primary concern in respect
to not impacting neighboring facilities and environment. It is therefore of primary concern to measure or
infer (by a more comprehensive analysis program) the concentrations at the boundary.
Measuring at the source as a prerequisite for calculating boundary emissions which would require access
to each tank and plant vent to measure each emission point with appropriate intrinsically safe equipment.
The Environmental Protection (Kwinana) (Atmospheric Wastes) Regulations 1992 contain Schedules 1 &
2 that nominate specific maximum levels for atmospheric pollutants. Similar regulations exist around
Noise within the Kwinana Industrial Area.
The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation Guideline for Air emissions (October 2019) was
referenced in regard to acceptable levels of Hazardous Emissions.
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 5 of 40
Locations for qualitative and quantitative data are shown in the figure below.
Figure 1: Bitumen Plant and Sampling locations
Assessment Assumptions
The following assumptions formed part of this assessment:
• The expected emission levels were estimated based on the US EPA Reference, the average
November and December wind speeds, and using the IH MOD model1 (to calculate the expected
boundary concentrations). This was necessary to range the sorbent tube and air flows.
• The average wind speed measured and published by the Bureau of Metrology (BOM) (for Garden
Island) is representative of the wind speed experienced by the plant.
Assessment Criteria
• The emissions from the neighboring tank farm (to the east boundary) and the SAMI bitumen
plant (on the north-west boundary) are excluded by taking the sorbent tube measurements
1 IH MOD is a mathematical model developed by the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA), which simulates Field Plume models using wind speed and emission rates to calculate the concentration of contaminants at a near and mid-points and at other varying distances from the source. https://www.aiha.org/public-resources/consumer-resources/topics-of-interest/ih-apps-tools
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 6 of 40
whilst the wind was impacting the site directly from the south or South- West (i.e. down-wind
of the plant).
• Sampling at a height of 11 metres is representative of the air crossing the boundary at this height
and a ground level measurement to measure the contribution from the out-loading facility and
the storage tanks is captured.
Table 1: Weather conditions for sampling days
Source (BOM)2
Parameters (average)
Temperature °C
Relative Humidity
%
Wind direction
Wind Speed Km/h
Wind speed km/h Daily
average
17/12/19 (9 am) 24.7 77 SW 20 29
17/12/19 (3 pm) 24.6 77 SSW 30
18/12/19 (9 am) 25.7 55 SSW 11 14
18/12/19 (3 pm) 28.2 51 W 19
19/12/19 (9 am) 21.2 88 NW 22 28
19/12/19 (3 pm) 23.2 53 W 32
20/12/19 (9 am) 26.3 44 E 32 26
20/12/19 (3 pm) 22.7 71 SW 20
2 http://www.bom.gov.au/places/wa/kwinana-beach/observations/garden-island/
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 7 of 40
Scope
To conduct this assessment, CETEC staff Charles Bucknell and Mayra Valladares attended site at the Puma
Bitumen Plant, Port Road, Kwinana Beach, WA 6167 (Figure 1) to collect samples of Poly Aromatic
Hydrocarbon PAH and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) samples using sorbent tubes and measured
air flow.
Total VOC, Sound levels, Sulphur Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulphide, Nitrogen Oxide, Nitrogen Dioxide and
particulates (PM 2.5, 10) were also collected during a four-day period with mobile instruments.
These materials are referred collectively as “Hazardous Air Pollutants’ (HAP).
2.1 Objectives
• Conduct field measurements in the vicinity of the plant (down-wind) to obtain baseline data of
the existing air quality to enable comparison with future levels.
• Conduct field measurements at the down-wind boundary of the plant using sorbent tubes to
collect HAP samples and have these analysed locally to reduce turn-around time.
• Conduct field measurements at the down-wind boundary of the plant using mobile equipment to
collect Total VOC, Sound levels, Sulphur Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulphide, Nitrogen Oxide, Nitrogen
Dioxide and particulates (PM 2.5, 10) measurements during a four-day period to benchmark
baseline conditions.
Methodology
Air was sampled using XAD-2 Sorbent Tubes (226-30-04) and a 37mm PTEF filter with air pumps to
measure the concentration of Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) and Charcoal tubes (226-09) Tubes for
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) at the boundary, down-wind of the plant and at two points; one
(approximately 11 metres high) and the other at ground level (both at Location A).
A reference sample was also taken up-wind of the plant (Location B). (See Figure 1)
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 8 of 40
Figure 2: Location of Samples Sites
Photo 1: Location A - High Level and Low-Level Sorbent Tube Sets
Photo 2: Location B - Battery powered Pump and Sorbent Tube Set on a Trolley South of the Plant
Photo 3: Location C – Under the Awning, adjacent to the Driver’s Facilities
Photo 4: Instruments at Location C
Photo 5: Sound Meter at Location C
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 9 of 40
Measurements were taken on the following days:
• 17th December instruments were set up to measure over a 5-day period (until 21st December).
Data from the Chemical, Particulate and Noise instruments conducting continuous monitoring
was downloaded each day.
• 17th December 2019 collect qualitative and quantitative PAH and VOC data from the site during
an 8-hour sampling period.
• Air pumps were used for 3 hours to sample approximately 35 Liters through the VOC sorbent
tubes and 6 hours to sample approximately 570 Liters through the PAH filters and sorbent tubes.
(See APPENDIX B)
3.1 Quantitative Analysis
The following method was used to analyse the tube samples.
Gas Chromatography – mass spectrometry (GC-MS)
GC-FID is an analytical technique which typically uses a Hydrogen/Air flame into which the carbon tubes
is passed to oxidise organic molecules and produces electrically charged particles (ions). The ions are
measured and produce an electrical signal which is then proportional to concentration.
Handheld portable instruments were used at ground level (Location C) to measure Total VOC, Sulphur
Dioxide, Hydrogen Sulphide, Nitrogen Oxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Particulates (PM 2.5, 10) and Sound levels.
A reference sample was also taken in the south-west boundary of the plant (Location D) for TVOC on the
18th December. (See Figure 1)
3.2 Qualitative Analysis
The following mobile equipment was used to measured qualitative data.
Photoionization Detector (PID)
The PID Detector is a hand-held portable instrument typically used to measure photo-ionizable Organic
Compounds and other gases in concentrations that range from sub parts per billion to 10 000 parts per
million (ppm). It is therefore not specific to any of the chemical species listed in Table 1. It also is not
calibrated against an overall VOC level detected via the sorbent tube method.
The benefit of this instrument is the real-time measurement of material in air as it will detect variations
in VOC (and other material) levels and relative differences in the plant.
Multi Gas Meter
The multi gas meter is portable detector used to detect and monitor hazardous levels of oxygen, toxic
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 10 of 40
and combustible gas, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The device can be equipped with 24
different sensors of which maximum 6 sensors can work simultaneously. Therefore, the benefit of this
instrument is the ability to collect large amount of data at limited time.
The sensors used for this project were for SO2, NOX, NO2 and H2S.
GrayWolf Particle Meter
GrayWolf is an advanced handheld device with 6 channels of simultaneous particle counting with the
particle size ranges from 0.3 µm to 10+ µm. The counting efficiency of the device is 50% for particles of
0.3 µm and 100% for particles of over 0.45 µm.
The device has a concentration limits of 4,000,000 particles/ft3 at 5% coincidence loss.
Sound Level Meter
Sound Level Meter is an advanced instrument for sound level monitoring and comprehensive data
analysis. The instrument used is a Class 1 device (being more accurate than Class 2) and the “A”-weighted
scale was used to record sound pressure dB(A)with a slow impulse time response.
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 11 of 40
Results
Table 2: Measured results levels of Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP)
Substance
Measured Results from Puma Kwinana
Location A Location B
Site 1 (µg) Site 2 (µg) Site 3 (µg)
PAHs (semi-volatile HAPs) on Sorbent Tube Below Limit of Detection
PAHs (semi-volatile HAPs) on PTFE3 Filter Below Limit of Detection
Volatile HAPs (VOC) on Sorbent Tube Below Limit of Detection
Site 1 and Site 2 are at Location A (Site 1 is elevated approximately 11 Metres, Site 2 is at ground level),
Site 3 is the reference sample taken at Location B (See Figure 1).
The comprehensive list of chemical species analysed are in the Appendix A. This report also lists the limits
of detection for each of these analytes.
The following Graphs and tables show the instrument readings over the period.
Figure 3: Sound Readings for 17th December 2019
3 PTFE (Polytetrafluoroethylene) Membrane Filters
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 12 of 40
Figure 4: Sound Readings for 18th December 2019
Figure 5: Sound Readings 19th December 2019
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 13 of 40
Figure 6: Sound Readings 20th December 2019
Table 3: Daily Sound levels results – Location C
Date Daily Average
(LdBA) Max / Min
(LdBA) Time
17/12/2019 55.0 73.7 1:56:03 PM
50.9 3:37:03 PM
18/12/2019 57.0 74.0 9:36:39 AM
52.4 10:17:39 AM
19/12/2019 56.9 68.5 11:11:20 AM
53.3 3:33:20 PM
20/12/2019 54.9 72.5 10:22:35 AM
51.6 3:55:35 PM
Measurement for Sound levels were mostly daily recorded until approximately 5 pm (approximate).
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 14 of 40
Figure 7: Particle Concentration in Air (≤2.5 Micron and ≤ 10Micron)
Table 4: Daily Dust (PM2.5, 10) results – Location C
Date
Total 2.5 PM Total 10 PM
Daily Average (µg/m3)
Max (µg/m3)
Time Daily
Average (µg/m3)
Max (µg/m3)
Time
17/12/2019 6.27 22.50 9:03 PM 29.41 377.68 6:33 PM
18/12/2019 4.86 16.66 11:43 PM 20.66 241.51 2:53 PM
19/12/2019 4.58 20.60 1:53 PM 23.35 148.72 5:38 PM
20/12/2019 3.46 16.81 1:23 AM 18.70 159.91 11:13 PM
21/12/2019 3.99 13.08 9:13 AM 18.10 184.82 9:13 AM
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 15 of 40
Figure 8: PID Readings (Quantitative Only)
Table 5: Daily monitoring results - TVOC- Qualitative only- Location C and D
Substance Location
Daily results for TVOC (Qualitative only) ppb
17/12/20 18/12/19 19/12/19 20/12/19 21/12/19
VOC (PID detector) C 125 155.84 163.81 165.84 148.87
D 157 NA NA NA NA
NA – No readings taken
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 16 of 40
Atmospheric Gaseous Pollutants
Figure 9: Sulphur Dioxide
Figure 10: Nitrogen Dioxide
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 17 of 40
Figure 11: Nitric Oxide
Figure 12: Hydrogen Sulphide
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 18 of 40
Table 6: Atmospheric Gas Daily monitoring - Qualitative only- Location C
Substance
Peak Daily (Qualitative only) ppm
17/12/20 18/12/19 19/12/19 20/12/19
SO2 0.00097 0.50208 0.00208 0.01052
NO 0.00115 0.78299 0.00431 0.01052
NO2 0.00208 0.78299 0.00431 0.01052
H2S 0.00264 1.15833 0.00431 0.01052
Measurement for Atmospheric gases for the 21/12/19 were not recorded as the equipment depleted the
battery and readings stopped.
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 19 of 40
Conclusions
Sorbent tubes were used to detect the presence of Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Volatile Organic
Compounds at the boundary of the Puma Kwinana site on the 17th December 2019. The results from the
laboratory analyses did not detect the presence of either groups of chemical species in the volumes
sampled.
According to the National occupational exposure limits (OELs)4, 5mg/m3 (5000 µg/m3) is the Limit for
bitumen emissions in Australia.
The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation guidelines for Air emissions stipulates 9 µg/m3
as the maximum (ambient) concentration for Asphalt (bitumen/petroleum) fumes over an averaging
period of 1 hour. The level of PAH (component of the fumes) is lower than the limit of detection for the
measurement over the sampling period. Therefore, the concentration levels at the Puma Bitumen Plant
in Kwinana are lower than the permissible 9 µg/m3. (Appendix B).
The one-day timeframe for sampling, combined with measurements at the site Boundary did not detect
significant concentrations of VOC or PAH products.
It is recommended that a more comprehensive analysis program is undertaken to identify these species
at source and to establish fully the background levels at the boundary via testing over an extended period.
The following tables detail the daily averages and the timing and level of maximums and minimums
Table 7: Allowable Noise Emissions
Date Daily Average
(LdBA) Max
(LdBA) Time
17/12/2019 55.0 73.7 1:56:03 PM
18/12/2019 57.0 74.0 9:36:39 AM
19/12/2019 56.9 68.5 11:11:20 AM
20/12/2019 54.9 72.5 10:22:35 AM
Allowable Noise Emissions5 80 All hours
Noise levels measured between the 17th and 21st December were acceptable under the regulations
4 Table 1.18 National occupational exposure limits (OELs) for bitumen emissions.
5 Environmental Protection (noise) Regulation 1997, Part 2 Division 1 r. 8 Table 1, Assigned levels (dB) LA1 for industrial and utility premises in the Kwinana Industrial Area.
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 20 of 40
governing the Kwinana Industrial Area - Area A6.
Table 8: Allowable concentration for Atmospheric Gases
Date
Peak Daily results (Qualitative only) ppm
SO2 NO NO2 H2S
17/12/2019 0.00097 0.50208 0.00208 0.01052
18/12/2019 0.00115 0.78299 0.00431 0.01052
19/12/2019 0.00208 0.78299 0.00431 0.01052
20/12/2019 0.00264 1.15833 0.00431 0.01052
Allowable concentration 0.08^ ND** 0.12* ND**
^Averaging period: 1 hour7 *Averaging period: 1 hour7 ** Not determined Inorganic Atmospheric gases levels were acceptable.
Average Daily Particulate levels (PM10) where between 18 and 30 µg/m3, which is approximately half the
allowable PM10 Level under the regulations.
Table 9: Allowable concentration for PM2.5 and PM10
Date
Total PM2.5 Total PM10
Daily Average (µg/m3)
Max (µg/m3)
Time Daily
Average (µg/m3)
Max (µg/m3)
Time
17/12/2019 6.27 22.50 9:03 PM 29.41 377.68 6:33 PM
18/12/2019 4.86 16.66 11:43 PM 20.66 241.51 2:53 PM
19/12/2019 4.58 20.60 1:53 PM 23.35 148.72 5:38 PM
20/12/2019 3.46 16.81 1:23 AM 18.70 159.91 11:13 PM
21/12/2019 3.99 13.08 9:13 AM 18.10 184.82 9:13 AM
Allowable concentration
25* 50*
*Averaging period: 1 hour8
6 Area A is the Area of Land on which heavy industry is located, http://www.epa.wa.gov.au/policies-guidance/environmental-protection-kwinana-atmospheric-wastes-policy-1999-and-environmental
7 Table 1: Standards and Goal for Pollutants other than Particles as PM2.5, National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure; and Table A1: Ambient air quality guideline for criteria pollutants, Air Emissions Guideline -Department of Water and Environmental Regulation, WA
8 Tables 1: Standards and Goal for Pollutants other than Particles as PM2.5 and Table 2: Advisory reporting
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 21 of 40
APPENDIX A: LAB RESULTS
Standards and Goal for Particles as PM10, National Environment Protection (Ambient Air Quality) Measure; and Table A1: Ambient air quality guideline for criteria pollutants, Air Emissions Guideline -Department of Water and Environmental Regulation, WA
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 22 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 23 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 24 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 25 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 26 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 27 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 28 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 29 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 30 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 31 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 32 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 33 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 34 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 35 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 36 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 37 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 38 of 40
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 39 of 40
APPENDIX B: SAMPLING VOLUMES (Sorbent Tubes and Filters)
Site Location Analyte Start Stop Time (Hr)
Flow (L/min)
Volume (L)
# PQL
ug/tube
Concentration µg/m3
1 A PAH 11:00 17:45 6.75 1.44 583.20 1 <1.7
VOC 11:00 14:00 3 0.198 35.64 5 <140
2 A PAH 11:30 17:45 6.25 1.5 562.50 1 <1.8
VOC 11:30 14:30 3 0.21 37.80 5 <132
3 B PAH 12:00 17:30 5.5 1.6 528.00 1 <1.9
VOC 12:00 15:00 3 0.19 34.20 5 <146
# PQL quoted is the lowest detectable level using the sorbent tube technique for the majority of the
analytes (see Appendix A).
P1912027_Puma Kwinana_F version Final Page 40 of 40
DISCLAIMER
CETEC has taken all reasonable care to ensure that the information contained in this report is accurate.
The report is based on data and information collected by CETEC personnel during location visits and
information accepted in good faith from various personnel associated with this work. However, no
warranty or representation can be given that the information and materials contained in it are complete
or free from errors or inaccuracies.
CETEC accepts no responsibility for any deficiency, misstatements or inaccuracies contained in this report
as a result of omissions, misinterpretation or fraudulent acts of the persons interviewed or contacted.
To the extent permitted by applicable laws, CETEC accepts no liability for any decision, action, loss,
damages or expenses of any kind including without limitation, compensatory, direct, indirect or
consequential damages, loss of data, income or profit, loss of or damage to property, or claims by third
parties howsoever arising in connection with the use or reliance on the information in this report. This
exclusion of liability shall also apply to damages arising from death or personal injury potentially caused
by the negligence of CETEC or any of its employees or agents.
By viewing this report, you are acknowledging that you have read and agree to the above disclaimer.
COPYRIGHT
The material in this report is protected by copyright, which is owned by CETEC. Users may view, print and
download the contents for personal use only and the contents must not be used for any commercial
purposes, without the express permission of 360 Environmental Pty Ltd and CETEC. Furthermore, the
material in this report, or any part of it, is not to be incorporated or distributed in any work or in any
publication in any form without the permission of 360 Environmental Pty Ltd and CETEC
Supporting Information for Works Approval
25
Appendix D. Hot Oil Heater Screening Assessment
Supporting Information for Works Approval
26
D.1 Screening Concentrations
Substance Emissions Screening Concentration (µg/m3)
kg/yr g/s Annual 24 hrs 1 hr max
CO 2050 0.07 0.78 5.92 21.78
NOx 1215 0.04 0.46 3.51 12.91
SO2 26.838 0.001 0.01 0.08 0.29
VOCs 134 0.004 0.05 0.39 1.42
PM2.5 180 0.01 0.07 0.52 1.91
PM10 180 0.01 0.07 0.52 1.91
PAHs 0.01555 0.00000049 0.000006 0.000045 0.00017
As 0.00487 0.00000015 0.0000019 0.000014 0.000052
Be 0.00002925 0.00000000 0.000000011 0.000000084 0.00000031
Cd 0.0268 0.00000085 0.000010 0.000077 0.00028
Cr (III) 0.0341 0.00000108 0.000013 0.000098 0.00036
Cu 0.0207 0.00000066 0.0000079 0.000060 0.00022
Pb 0.01215 0.00000039 0.0000046 0.000035 0.00013
Hg 0.0063 0.00000020 0.0000024 0.000018 0.000067
Ni 0.051 0.00000162 0.000019 0.00015 0.00054
Co 0.00198 0.00000006 0.00000075 0.0000057 0.000021
Mn 0.00925 0.00000029 0.0000035 0.000027 0.00010
Se 0.000575 0.00000002 0.00000022 0.0000017 0.0000061
Zn 0.7 0.00002220 0.00027 0.0020 0.0074
Furans and Dioxins 0.00000012 0.0000000000038 0.000000000046 0.00000000035 0.00000000128
D.2 Screening Concentration Compared to Draft AGV
Substance Period Screening
Concentration
(µg/m3)
Draft AGV
(µg/m3)
Screening
Concentration % of
Draft AGV
Screen Tolerance
(% of Draft AGV)
CO 1 hr max 21.78 30,000 0.073 <10
NOx Annual 0.46 56 0.826 <1
1 hr max 12.91 226 5.711 <10
SO2 Annual 0.01 54 0.019 <1
24 hr 0.08 210 0.037 <3
1 hr max 0.29 524 0.272 <10
PM2.5 Annual 0.07 7 0.978 <1
As Annual 0.0000019 0.003 0.069 <1
24 hr 0.000014 0.27 0.005 <3
1 hr max 0.000052 0.90 0.006 <10
Be 1 hr max 0.00000031 0.004 0.008 <10
Cd 1 hr max 0.00028 0.018 1.582 <10
Cr (III) 24 hr 0.000098 0.46 0.021 <3
1 hr max 0.00036 9 0.004 <10
Cu 24 hr 0.000060 0.92 0.006 <3
Supporting Information for Works Approval
27
Substance Period Screening
Concentration
(µg/m3)
Draft AGV
(µg/m3)
Screening
Concentration % of
Draft AGV
Screen Tolerance
(% of Draft AGV)
1 hr max 0.00022 18 0.001 <10
Pb Annual 0.0000046 0.46 0.0010 <1
Hg Annual 0.0000024 0.18 0.001 <1
1 hr max 0.000067 0.55 0.012 <10
Ni Annual 0.000019 0.003 0.080 <1
24 hr 0.00015 0.14 0.105 <3
1 hr max 0.00054 0.18 0.301 <10
Co 1 hr max 0.000021 3.70 0.0006 <10
Mn 24 hr 0.000027 0.14 0.019 <3
Se 1 hr max 0.0000061 0.92 0.0007 <10
Zn 24 hr 0.0020 46 0.016 <3
Furans and Dioxins 1 hr max 0.0000000013 0.000002 0.064 <10