odour impact assessment for a medical cannabis grow

Odour Impact Assessment for a Medical Cannabis Grow Facility 5809 5th Line, New Tecumseth, Ontario

Prepared for: Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP

Site Address: 5809 5th Line New Tecumseth, Ontario L9R 1V2

Prepared by:

Reviewed by:

Xiaoxi (Winnie) Song, M.Sc., P.Eng. Senior Environmental Engineer Bridget Mills, P.Eng. Senior Environmental Engineer

BCX File No. 1384‐03.01

Date:

December 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On behalf of the tenants of 5809 5th Line, New Tecumseth, Ontario (Property), Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP (Gowling) requested BCX Environmental Consulting (BCX) to prepare an Odour Impact Assessment (Study) for their medical cannabis (also termed medical marihuana) grow facility (Facility) on the Property. The purpose of this Study is to provide technical input to support the Facility’s planning application (Application) for the Property. The Property is authorized by Health Canada as the location of a registered Facility with a maximum allowable limit of 1752 cannabis plants. The Facility consists of an all‐season, winter and summer production area. The Property is zoned Agricultural (A1) in the Town of New Tecumseth Zoning By‐law No. 126 of 2014. To provide the required technical input for the Application, a quantitative Study has been prepared to determine potential odour impacts, if any, at the closest sensitive human receptors per the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks’ (Ministry’s) Technical Bulletin: Methodology for Modelling Assessments of Contaminants with 10‐minute Average Standards and Guidelines under O. Reg. 419/05 (September 2016). The Study was performed using the Ministry’s approved air dispersion model AERMOD (AERMOD 19191). The odour emission inventory was developed using odour source testing as recommended by the Technology Standard Section of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (Ministry). A total of thirty‐five (35) offsite representative receptors were assessed. The model predicts that the Facility is expected to meet the Ministry Odour Guideline at all offsite receptors when the Facility operates at its allowable limit of 1752 plants with carbon filtration systems installed for all production areas.

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Background and Approach ............................................................................. 1

1.2 Ministry Odour Guideline ........................................................................................... 1

1.3 Property Description .................................................................................................. 1

1.4 Process Description .................................................................................................... 2

2.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNIFICANT ODOUR SOURCES .................................................... 3

3.0 ODOUR EMISSION ESTIMATION AND MAXIMUM EMISSIONS SCENARIO ..................... 4

3.1 Emission Estimation Methodology ............................................................................. 4

3.2 Maximum Emissions Scenario .................................................................................... 4

4.0 ODOUR MODELLING ASSESSMENT USING AERMOD .................................................... 6

4.1 Model Selection and Use ............................................................................................ 6

4.2 Meteorology ............................................................................................................... 6

4.3 Terrain ........................................................................................................................ 6

4.4 Modelling Domain and Receptors .............................................................................. 6

4.5 Source Parameters ..................................................................................................... 7

5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................... 9

6.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................. 11

7.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 12

LIST OF TABLES Table 3‐1: Source and Contaminant Identification Summary ..........................................................3 Table 4‐1: AERMOD Source Input Parameters .................................................................................8 Table 5‐1: Modelling Results Summary ......................................................................................... 10

LIST OF FIGURES (APPENDIX A) Figure 1: Site and Receptor Location Map Figure 2: Site Layout Figure 3A/3B: Dispersion Modelling Configuration

APPENDICES Appendix A Figures Appendix B Odour Source Testing Report Appendix C Emission Calculation Sheet Appendix D Wind Roses

Odour Impact Assessment December 2020 Medical Cannabis Grow Facility Page 1 BCX File: 1384‐03.01

1.0 INTRODUCTION On behalf of the tenants of 5809 5th Line, New Tecumseth, Ontario (Property), Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP (Gowling) requested BCX Environmental Consulting (BCX) to prepare an Odour Impact Assessment (Study) for their medical cannabis (also termed medical marihuana) grow facility (Facility) on the Property. The purpose of this Study is to provide technical input to support the Facility’s planning application (Application) for the Property.

1.1 Project Background and Approach The Property is authorized by Health Canada as the location of a registered Facility with an maximum allowable limit of 1752 cannabis plants (i.e. 4 registrations, 438 plants per registration). The Facility consists of an all‐season, winter and summer production areas. The Property is zoned Agricultural (A1) in the Town of New Tecumseth Zoning By‐law No. 126 of 2014. To provide the required technical input for the Application, a quantitative odour impact assessment has been prepared. The Study was performed using the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks’ (Ministry’s) approved air dispersion model (AERMOD [Version 19191]) with a site‐specific odour emission inventory and the representative meteorological and terrain data. The odour emission inventory was developed using emission factors derived from odour source testing for individual cannabis plants as recommended by the Ministry’s Technology Standards Branch. Per the Ministry’s Technical Bulletin: Methodology for Modelling Assessments of Contaminants with 10‐minute Average Standards and Guidelines under O. Reg. 419/05 (September 2016), the maximum 10‐min modelled odour results were compared to the Ministry Odour Guideline as described below.

1.2 Ministry Odour Guideline The Ministry Odour Guideline requires that the maximum 10‐min modelled odour concentration at any sensitive human receptor should be no greater than 1 OU/m3 for no more than 0.5% of the time based on a five consecutive‐year meteorological dataset. Sensitive human receptors are defined as “locations where human activities regularly occur” including residences, hospitals, retirement homes and hotels (i.e., “full‐time” receptors). Other sensitive receptors can also include places where the public has access to during certain time periods of the day and/or seasons such as schools, commercial plazas, recreational facilities, childcare centres, and places of worship (i.e., “part‐time” receptors). 1.3 Property Description The Property is located on the southside of 5th Line between 10th Sideroad and 15th Sideroad in New Tecumseth, Ontario.


As shown in Figure 1 (see Appendix A), the immediate surrounding land uses (within a 1‐kilometre radius) are agricultural and rural residential with the closest residence located approximately 240 metres from the west property line. The closest offsite “part‐time” sensitive receptor is the Tecumseth South Central Public School, more than 1 kilometre away from the property. A detailed site layout showing the location of the Facility and Property boundary is presented as Figure 2 (Appendix A).

1.4 Process Description The Facility consists of an all‐season, winter and summer production areas with a maximum approved capacity of 1752 plants at any one time. The all‐season production area (Source ASPA in Figure 2) consists of three (3) heated greenhouses. All steel‐framed greenhouses are enclosed by plastic wraps on all sides with only a man‐door size opening on either end for access. The air inside the greenhouse is treated by a carbon filtration system to remove odours prior to being vented passively to the outside. These greenhouses are used for propagation in the colder months (i.e. November to April) and cultivation in the warmer months (i.e. May to October). The winter production area consists of two (2) heated buildings (Sources WPA1 and WPA2 in Figure 2). These buildings have their own HVAC systems that control the indoor temperature and moisture levels. In each building indoor air is treated using an odour control system equipped with carbon filters prior to being exhausted to the outside via side vents (i.e. total of four filters/vents for the two buildings) as illustrated in Figure 2. These buildings are used for cultivation in the colder months (November to April) only. The robust seedlings are transferred from the all‐season production area to individual pots inside the two buildings. The plants are grown in several stages to allow monthly harvesting with the final harvesting taking place in April. The summer production area (Source SPA in Figure 2) consists of twelve (12) greenhouses which are identical to those in the all‐season production area. A carbon filtration system (similar to the all‐season production area system) will be installed in each of the twelve (12) seasonal greenhouses before the start of the next summer growing season (May 2021). These greenhouses are not heated and are used for cultivation in the warmer months (i.e. May to October) only. In May, the robust seedlings from the all‐season production area are transferred to the summer and the all‐season production areas at the same time and continue to grow until harvest (i.e. October). There are no cultivation activities in the summer production area during the colder months (i.e. November to April). The carbon filters in all production areas are regularly replaced as per the manufacturer’s recommendations to minimize odours.


2.0 IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNIFICANT ODOUR SOURCES The significant odour sources for different time periods and plant growing stages are identified in Table 2‐1 below. For the summer months (May to October), the potential sources of odours at the Facility are the three (3) all‐season greenhouses in the all‐season production area and twelve (12) summer greenhouses in the summer production area (Sources ASPA and SPA in Figure 2), all controlled by carbon filtration systems. For the remaining colder months (November to April), the potential sources of odours at the Facility are:

(i) the three (3) heated all‐season greenhouses in the all‐season production area (Source ASPA), all controlled by carbon filtration systems; and

(ii) the four (4) building vents for the two heated buildings in the winter production area (Sources WPA1 and WPA2), all controlled by carbon filtration systems.

All greenhouses are enclosed by plastic wraps on all sides with only a man‐door size opening on either end for access. All doors associated with the two heated buildings remain closed at all times except when being used for ingress/egress. There are no other openings associated with these buildings.

Table 2‐1: Source and Contaminant Identification Summary

Included in

Modelling?

Source

I.D.Period Source Description

Plant Growing

Stage

General

Location

Significant?

(Yes or No)

SPA May to August

Summer Production Area consisting of 12

greenhouses, each controlled by a carbon

filtration system to remove odours

Young plants See Figure 2 Odour Yes

SPASeptember to

October

Summer Production Area consisting of 12

greenhouses, each controlled by a carbon


Flowering plants See Figure 2 Odour Yes

ASPA May to August

All‐season Production Area, consisting of 3

heated greenhouses, each controlled by a

carbon filtration system to remove odours

Young plants See Figure 2 Odour Yes

ASPASeptember to

October




Flowering plants See Figure 2 Odour Yes

ASPANovember to

April




Seedlings See Figure 2 Odour Yes

WPA1November to

April

Winter Production Area, consisting of 1 side

vent from building #1, controlled by a carbon


Young and

flowering plantsSee Figure 2 Odour Yes

WPA2November to

April

Winter Production Area, consisting of 3 side

vents from building #2, controlled by a carbon


Young and

flowering plantsSee Figure 2 Odour Yes

Facility Operations

Source InformationExpected

Contaminants


3.0 ODOUR EMISSION ESTIMATION AND MAXIMUM EMISSIONS SCENARIO

3.1 Emission Estimation Methodology An odour emission inventory was developed using emission factors derived from odour source testing data collected at a similar facility on October 8th, 2020. The odour source testing program was completed using the methodologies recommended by the Ministry’s Technology Standards Branch and as described in the Ontario Source Testing Code. The odour samples were sent to a certified Ontario odour testing laboratory for analysis on the same day. A total of eleven (11) odour samples (including two blanks) were taken of individual plants in two growing stages (i.e. young plants and flowering plants) and of three available plant species. Seedlings were not available at the time of the test. For each test, one plant was placed inside a flux chamber at a time of odour sampling. Details of the odour source testing program are presented in Appendix B. Odour emission factors (OU/s/plant) were developed for the two growing stages (young plants and flowering plants) using the source testing data. Site specific odour emission rates for each growing stage at the Facility were then estimated using the appropriate emission factor multiplied by the number of plants in that growing stage. Since seedlings were not available at the time of the source testing, the emission factor for the young plants was conservatively used for seedlings. This approach is very conservative because young plants are more odorous than seedlings. The emission calculation sheet detailing the assumptions and methodologies is presented in Appendix C.

3.2 Maximum Emissions Scenario As described in Section 1.1 of this report, the Facility is permitted to grow up to 1752 cannabis plants (i.e., 4 licences of 438 plants, equivalent to 90g of dried cannabis) at any one time under the Health Canada Registrations. BCX, however, conservatively assessed the potential odour impacts of 1860 plants (i.e., rounded up based on 4 potential licences of 463 plants). This is to account for a potential increase in the daily consumption limit prescribed by doctors from 90g to 95g which is equivalent to 463 plants per licence. The maximum emissions scenario, therefore, conservatively assumes:

‐ From May to October, the Facility grows a maximum of 1860 plants in the 3 all‐season

greenhouses in the all‐season production area and 12 summer greenhouses in the summer production area.

‐ From November to May, the Facility grows a maximum of 900 plants in the 2 buildings in the winter production area and 960 seedling plants in the 3 all‐season greenhouses in the


all‐season production area. It was conservatively assumed that all 900 plants in the buildings are mature flowering plants.

‐ The air inside each of the two buildings is treated by a carbon filtration system, exhausting via side vent(s) to the outside, 24 hours per day.

‐ The 15 greenhouses are each controlled by a carbon filtration system exhausting to the outside, 24 hours per day.


4.0 ODOUR MODELLING ASSESSMENT USING AERMOD 4.1 Model Selection and Use Air dispersion modelling for this Assessment was undertaken using the Ministry’s approved AERMOD model (version 19191).

The model calculates maximum hourly concentrations, which were used to provide maximum 10‐minute average concentrations using local meteorological data. AERMOD is a Ministry approved steady‐state Gaussian plume dispersion modelling system that can be used to assess pollutant concentrations from a wide variety of complex industrial settings including multiple stacks, fugitive emissions, and building wake effects. The AERMOD modelling system was developed by the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model Improvement Committee (AERMIC) and consists of two pre‐processors (AERMET and AERMAP) and the dispersion model, AERMOD. AERMET is a general‐purpose meteorological pre‐processor which uses surface and upper air meteorological conditions together with surface characteristics to calculate the boundary layer parameters needed by AERMOD. AERMAP is the terrain pre‐processor used to calculate a representative terrain‐influenced height associated with each receptor within the modelling domain.

4.2 Meteorology The Ministry supplied meteorological data set for the central region (Toronto_Crops_19191) was used for the AERMOD dispersion model. This data set is representative of the site from both the local climate and surrounding land use perspectives. Wind roses for different growing periods are provided in Appendix D. The wind roses show the distribution of wind directions and wind speeds from the surface data. Throughout the year, the majority of the sensitive receptors are upwind of the Facility (i.e. winds are not blowing from the facility to the receptors). This is especially true in September and October when odour levels are expected to be highest.

4.3 Terrain The terrain data used, cdem_dem_031D.tif, UTM Zone 17, was downloaded from Canadian Digital Elevation Model Data on the Ministry’s website.

4.4 Modelling Domain and Receptors A set of 35 discrete flagpole offsite receptors were included in the modelling exercise to assess the Facility’s potential odour impacts on nearby offsite sensitive receptors at a height of 1 metre (i.e. average nose level). The locations of the receptors, buildings and modelling sources are identified in Figures 3A and 3B (Appendix A).


4.5 Source Parameters For this modelling assessment, the greenhouses were modelled as volume sources due to their fugitive nature. The building vents for the two buildings were modelled as capped/horizontal point sources. Building downwash was, therefore, considered for these point sources. The physical parameters of the modelling sources are summarized in Table 4‐1. A multiplier of 1.65 was included in the model source input which converts the averaging period for the modelling results from 1 hour to 10 minutes.


Table 4‐1: AERMOD Source Input Parameters

Odour Odour Odour

1 hr 1 hr 1 hr

May to

August

September

to October

November

to Aprilm m m m/s K m m m m m

VOLUME ASPA1 ASPAAll Season

Production Area53.20 89.39 53.20 256.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599578.9 4877514.4


Production Area53.20 89.39 53.20 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599588.4 4877470.0


Production Area53.20 89.39 53.20 255.6 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599591.4 4877517.1


Production Area53.20 89.39 53.20 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599601.2 4877472.7


Production Area53.20 89.39 53.20 255.2 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599602.9 4877519.7


Production Area53.20 89.39 53.20 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599612.3 4877475.0

VOLUME SPA7 SPASummer

Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599590.6 4877464.4


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.3 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599599.5 4877420.2


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599602.1 4877467.1


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.3 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599611.5 4877422.2


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599613.9 4877469.1


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.1 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599623.4 4877424.4


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 255.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599625.1 4877471.2


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599634.4 4877426.8


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.4 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599637.5 4877473.7


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.8 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599647.1 4877429.0


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.7 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599648.4 4877475.8


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.2 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599657.8 4877431.3


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599601.6 4877411.8


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599611.2 4877367.1


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599613.5 4877414.0


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.4 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599622.8 4877369.5


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599625.2 4877416.4


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.1 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599634.7 4877371.9


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 254.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599636.7 4877418.8


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.0 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599646.3 4877374.3


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.8 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599648.2 4877421.2


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 252.5 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599657.8 4877376.4


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 253.1 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599659.5 4877423.3


Production Area53.20 89.39 0.00 252.2 1.0 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1.1 2.1 4.6 599669.0 4877378.4

POINT WPA1 WPA1

Winter

Production Area

Building 1 Vent 1

0.00 0.00 50.15 254.9 3.0 0.3 12.0 295.2 CAPPED ‐ ‐ ‐ 599580.3 4877557.2

POINT WPA2A WPA2

Winter

Production Area

Building 2 Vent 1

0.00 0.00 58.51 255.7 7.0 0.3 12.0 295.2 HORIZONTAL ‐ ‐ ‐ 599577.2 4877535.2

POINT WPA2B WPA2

Winter

Production Area

Building 2 Vent 2

0.00 0.00 58.51 255.8 2.0 0.3 12.0 295.2 CAPPED ‐ ‐ ‐ 599577.7 4877532.7

POINT WPA2C WPA2

Winter

Production Area

Building 2 Vent 3

0.00 0.00 58.51 255.0 7.0 0.3 12.0 295.2 CAPPED ‐ ‐ ‐ 599594.5 4877538.7

‐

‐

May to August ‐

September to October ‐

November to April ‐

Base elevations were extracted from AERMAP.

All sources are elevated (Release Height > 0).

Growth between the months of May to August, seedlings and/or young plants

Growth between the months of September to October, mature plants

Growth between the months of November to April, conservatively assuming mature plants (however, typically will include seedlings)

Stack

Release

Type

Emission Rate

(OU/s) Base

Elevation

Release

Height

Above

Grade

Stack Inner

Diameter

Exit

Velocity

Stack Exit

Temperature

Initial

Lateral

Dimension

Initial

Vertical

Dimension

Length

of Side

X

Coordinate

Y

CoordinateSource

Type

Modelling

Source ID

Source

ID

Modelling Source

Description


5.0 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The modelled maximum 10‐minute average concentrations are presented in tabular format for select sensitive receptors (Table 5‐1). The receptor locations are presented in Figure 1. As presented in Table 5‐1, the Facility is expected to meet the Ministry’s odour guideline at all nearby sensitive human receptors (i.e. less than 1 OU/m3 for 99.5% of the time using a five‐year meteorological dataset).


Table 5‐1: Modelling Results Summary

Easting Northing

R1 Neighbouring Property 310 599587.38 4877867.30 1.77 0.2%

R2 Neighbouring Property 490 599929.70 4877900.11 0.83 ‐

































S35 School 1280 598314.10 4877370.78 0.13 ‐

(3) Receptor concentrations are measured at a height of 1 metre.

(2) Per the Ministry's Methodology for Modelling Assessments of Contaminants with 10‐Minute Average Standards and Guidelines

under O.Reg. 419/05 (September 2016) , if the modelled maximum 10‐min concentrations at any human receptors are no greater

than the odour guideline of 1 OU/m3 for no more than 0.5% of the time on an annual basis, no offsite odour impacts are

expected from the Facility.

Receptor Description

(1) Measured from Winter Production Area 1 (WPA1)

Maximum 10‐minute

Concentration at

Receptor

(OU/m3)

AERMOD v19191

Distance from Source

to Receptor(1)

(m)

UTM Coordinates (m)

Contaminant Odour

Receptor

Number

Frequency over

1 OU/m3

(%)

43848

10 min

1 (2)

Air Dispersion Model Used

Total Number of Hours Modelled

Averaging Period

Ministry Odour Guideline (OU/m3)


6.0 LIMITATIONS

The assessment, conclusions and recommendations in this report are based on the information provided by the tenants of the Property and their representatives; BCX’s professional opinion; and BCX’s past experience modelling odour impacts. In particular, the conclusions of this study assume that:

‐ the carbon filters are regularly inspected and replaced as per manufacturer’s recommended schedule;

‐ A carbon filtration system will be installed in each greenhouse for the summer production area before May 2021;

‐ no changes will be made to the configuration and parameters of the Facility’s ventilation system including the carbon filters and side vents; and

‐ the total number of plants does not exceed 1860. BCX accepts no responsibility for any deficiencies, misstatements, or inaccuracies contained in this report as a result of omissions, or misinterpretations by the tenants of the Property and their representatives. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of by the tenants of the Property and their representatives.


7.0 REFERENCES Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (Ministry), Air Dispersion Modelling

Guideline for Ontario, February 2017. Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (Ministry), Technical Bulletin: Methodology

for Modelling Assessments of Contaminants with 10‐minute Average Standards and Guidelines under O. Reg. 419/05 (September 2016).

Appendix A

Figures

LEGEND

Receptor - School

Property Line

Main Entrance

Receptor - Residence

SITE AND LOCATION MAPRECEPTOR

5809 5th Line, New Tecumseth, Ontario, L9R 1V2

O I

A

DOUR MPACT

SSESSMENT FIGURE

1

Drawn By:

MO

Date:

November 2020

Dwg:

13 -0 .0184 3 _1

13 -0 .0184 3

File No.:

N

R34

S35

R6

R7R8

R9

R10

R11

R12

R13

R14

R15

R16

R17

R19

R21R23

R25

R27

R29

R18

R20

R22

R24

R26

R28

R31

R32

R33

R1R2 R3R4R5

Main Entrance

599652 m E, 4877730 m N)(

Main Entrance

599652 m E, 4877730 m N)(

R305 0 m0250 m0 m

SITE LAYOUT

5809 5th Line, New Tecumseth, Ontario, L9R 1V2

O I

A

DOUR MPACT

SSESSMENT

2

FIGURE

Drawn By:

MO

November 2020

Date:

13 -0 .01 284 3 _

Dwg:

File No.:

13 -0 .0184 3

N

5 0 m0250 m0 m

LEGEND

Source ID

Property Line

Road

WPA

5th Line

ASPA

SPA

SPA

WPA1

WPA2

Winter

Production Area

All-season

Production Area

Summer

Production Area

C:\Modelling\1384-03.01\1-NewTecumseth-Odour_arrangedforfigure\NewTecumseth.iscAERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software

SCALE:

0 0.2 km

1:9,344

PROJECT NO.:

1384-03.01

DATE:

2020-11-25

MODELER:

COMPANY NAME:

COMMENTS:

5908 5th LineNew Tecumseth, OntarioL9R 1V2

PROJECT TITLE:

Figure 3A: Dispersion Modelling Configuration

SOURCES:

34

RECEPTORS:

35

5809

MOstronic

Rectangle

AERMOD View - Lakes Environmental Software C:\Modelling\1384-03.01\1-NewTecumseth-Odour_arrangedforfigure\NewTecumseth.isc

SCALE:

0 0.02 km

1:775

PROJECT TITLE:

Figure 3B: Dispersion Modelling Configuration

COMMENTS:


COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

DATE:

2020-12-02

PROJECT NO.:

1384-03.01

SOURCES:

34

RECEPTORS:

35

Appendix B

Odour Source Testing Report

VES VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC.

October 19th, 2020

BCX Environmental Consulting 109 Main St S, Newmarket, ON L3Y 3Y8 Attention: Xiaoxi Song Regarding: Odour Source Testing Report for Individual Cannabis Plants

Valley Environmental Services Inc. (VES) has been contracted by BCX to perform an Odour Source Testing Program to develop representative odour emission factors for various cannabis plant species at different growth stages. The source testing program took place at a cannabis grow facility located at 19883 Woodbine Avenue, in East Gwillimbury, Ontario on October 8th, 2020. For questions or concerns regarding this report, please contact Nick LaValle at 905-830-0136, or by email at [email protected]. Sincerely,

Nick LaValle, B.A. C.E.T President Valley Environmental Services

1

SUMMARY OF ODOUR SOURCE TESTING PROGRAM The objective of this odour source testing program is to develop representative odour emission factors for various marihuana plant species at different growth stages (including both young plants and flowering plants) by measuring odour levels of available individual cannabis plants at a typical medical cannabis grow facility. The testing results can be used to develop odour emission factors (ou/s/plant) which can then be used to develop an odour emission inventory for a grow facility. The testing program was conducted October 8th, 2020. The odour source testing matrix is shown in Table 1. Details of the source testing program including the methodology, results and sampling and analytical procedures are detailed in the sections below.

Table 1: Testing Program Sampling Location

No. of Runs

Sample/Type Pollutant

Sampling Method

Sample Run Time (min)

Analytical Method

Analytical Laboratory

Flux Chamber 1

Velocity Traverse

OSTC Method 2 10 Pitot VES

1 Molecular

Weight OSTC Method 3 10 Wet Chemical VES

1 Moisture Content OSTC Method 4 10 Wet Dry bulb VES 1 Odour OSTC Method 6 10 Olfactometer PINCHIN

SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS

Table 2: Summary of Testing Results Purple Kush

Sample ID Status

Size

EG-BB-T1 Blank N/A

EG-PKL-T2 Flowering

Large

EG-PKM-T3 Flowering Medium

EG PKS-T4 Flowering Medium

Odour Concentration (ou/m3) Emission rate (ou/s)

31 .43

596 8.34

420 5.88

843 11.8

Oxygen Concentration (%)

20.9

20.9

20.9

20.9

Stack Conditions Temperature (°C) Duct Diameter (m) Duct Height (m) Flow Rate (m3/s) Actual Flow Rate (am3/s) Velocity (m/s) Moisture (%)

13.0 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

14.0 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

16.2 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

16.4 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

Note: * Flow rate is expressed in dry gas at 25C and 101.325 KPa ** Concentration is expressed based on 25C and 101.325 KPa

2

Table 3: Summary of Testing Results Black Diamond

Sample ID Status

Size

EG-BB-T1 Blank N/A

EG-BDL-T5 Flowering

Large

EG-BDM-T6 Non-flowering

Small

EG BDS-T7 Non-flowering

Small Odour Concentration (ou/m3) Emission rate (ou/s)

31

0.43

317 4.44

275 3.85

257 3.59


20.9

20.9

20.9

20.9


13.0 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

14.3 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

12.8 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

12.5 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0


Table 4: Summary of Testing Results

Sample ID Status

Size

EG-BB-T11 Blank N/A

EG-BCL-T8 Flowering Medium

EG-BCM-T9 Non-flowering

Medium

EG BCS-T10 Non-flowering

Medium Odour Concentration (ou/m3) Emission rate (ou/s)

48

0.67

257 3.59

257 3.59

223 3.12


20.9

20.9

20.9

20.9


13.0 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

12.5 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

11.2 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0

11.2 0.07 1.0

0.014 0.014

3.1 1.0


3

SOURCE TESTING PROGRAM 1.0 OBJECTIVE The objective of this odour source testing program is to develop representative odour emission factors for various cannabis plant species at different growth stages (including both young plants and flowering plants) by measuring odour levels of available individual cannabis plants at a typical cannabis grow facility. The testing results can be used to develop odour emission factors (ou/s/plant) which can then be used to develop an odour emission inventory for a grow facility. 2.0 METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW Performing stack testing is not possible in certain situations (e.g. vents are not accessible, no active ventilation for buildings, no cannabis plants inside the buildings at the time of the test, etc.). VES, therefore, consulted the Technology Standards Branch of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) to identify an acceptable alternative methodology for these situations. The Technology Standards Branch recommended measuring odour levels of individual cannabis plants using a flux chamber. For each test, one single plant was placed in the flux chamber for a 10-minute conditioning period before odour sampling (see Picture 1). Sampling of the exhaust of the cabinet was undertaken following a 10-minute conditioning period according to the Ontario Source Testing Code (OSTC) (see Picture 2).

Picture 1 – Flowering Plant in Flux Chamber

Picture 2 – Odour Sample Setup

4

The sampling procedure was completed for a total of 9 plants at different growing stages and of different available species as summarized in Tables 2 to 4. A total of two blank samples were also taken as part of this sampling program. The testing results will be used to develop odour emission factors (ou/s/plant) for different growing stages (flowering and young plants) which will then be used to develop odour emission inventory based on the number of plants cannabis facilities where stack source testing is not possible. 3.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES Sampling was conducted in accordance with the following methodologies. The methods were performed as published except for the clarifications and/or deviations described below. OSTC Method 1 - Sampling Locations The Ontario Source Test Code (Ministry of Environment Standards Development Branch 2010). Method ON-1 was referenced for stack setup and sample points. Sampling was conducted on the outlet of the cabinet exhaust and was an ideal distance away from disturbances. OSTC Method 2 - Stack Flowrate and Velocity Measurement The Ontario Source Test Code (Ministry of Environment Standards Development Branch 2010). Method ON-2 was referenced for stack flowrate and velocity measurements. Velocity and temperature measurements were conducted with a Standard pitot and K-type thermocouple. Measurements were taken and averaged over all of the sample points for pressure, temperature and static pressure. All pressure measurements were measured on a micromanometer and the temperatures was measured on a calibrated temperature reader. All pitot’s were calibrated in a wind tunnel as per OSTC. Thermocouple readings were also taken at the ideal location. Volumetric flowrate calculations were completed using the cross-sectional area measurement of the stack with velocity measurements. OSTC Method 3 – Molecular Weight Measurement The Ontario Source Test Code (Ministry of Environment Standards Development Branch 2010). Method ON-3 was referenced for molecular weight measurements. Oxygen measurements were conducted using an integrated bag sample which was analyzed by wet chemical fyrites. OSTC Method 4 – Moisture Level Measurement The Ontario Source Test Code (Ministry of Environment Standards Development Branch 2010). Method ON-4 was referenced for Moisture Level measurement. Moisture level measurement was

5

conducted using wet bulb/dry bulb method with temperatures evaluated on the appropriate psychometric chart. OSTC Method 6 – Odour Level Measurement The Ontario Source Test Code (Ministry of Environment Standards Development Branch 2010). Method ON-6 was referenced for Odour level measurement. This method is intended to determine the odour concentration of undefined mixtures of gaseous odorants of a gas stream in a stack, duct and area source. The samples were collected undiluted by evacuated lung, and were evaluated using dynamic olfactometry with a panel of human assessors (odour panel evaluation technique). The procedure developed for the cabinet was as follows:

1. Blank bag taken at beginning of sample program from empty cabinet. 2. Plant placed in cabinet and allowed to acclimate for 10 minutes. 3. Cabinet fan turned on to begin evacuating cabinet with outdoor air. Flow through the

cabinet is from bottom to top. 4. The flow data was taken at the outlet of the cabinet exhaust which was induced with a

35cfm inline fan 5. Undiluted odour sample taken on exhaust outlet. 6. Cabinet purged for 10 minutes prior to next sample.

UNDILUTED – EVACUATED LUNG SAMPLING PROCEDURE In this case that stack temperatures and moisture content were low and it was determined that the stack gas odour concentration is within the dilution range of the olfactometer, the evacuated lung sampling procedure was utilized. Apparatus The odour sample collection system was capable of drawing a sample at a nominal rate of 1 litre per minute. A pump was used to evacuate a rigid leak-free vessel creating negative pressure which draws a sample of stack gas from the gas stream, through a sample probe, into a sample bag contained within the vessel. TEST MATRIX AND RESULTS The number of tests completed and the methods used are summarized in Table 1. Odour results for all plants are detailed in the attachment and summarized in Tables 2-4. The odour laboratory report prepared by Pinchin Environmental is also attached.

Attachments: Data Sheets and Lab Report

Odour Testing Results Summary

Sample ID Strain SizeFlowering

Status

Concentration

(OU/m3)

Actual Flow Rate

(m3/s)

Emission Rate

(OU/s)Check

Emission

Rate w

Blank

Removed

(OU/s)

BB‐T1 Blank ‐ Blank 31 0.014 0.43 0.43 ‐

PKL‐T2 PK L F 596 0.014 8.34 8.34 7.79

PKM‐T3 PK M F 420 0.014 5.88 5.88 5.33

PKS‐T4 PK M F 843 0.014 11.8 11.80 11.25

BDL‐T5 BD L F 317 0.014 4.44 4.44 3.89

BDM‐T6 BD S NF 275 0.014 3.85 3.85 3.30

BDS‐T7 BD S NF 257 0.014 3.59 3.60 3.04

BCL‐T8 BC M F 257 0.014 3.59 3.60 3.04

BCM‐T9 BC M NF 257 0.014 3.59 3.60 3.04

BCS‐T10 BC M NF 223 0.014 3.12 3.12 2.57

BB‐T11 Blank ‐ Blank 48 0.014 0.67 0.67 ‐

F ‐ Flowering; NF ‐ Non‐Flowering

© 2020 Pinchin Ltd.

FINAL

Odour Evaluation Report 2470 Milltower Court, Mississauga, ON L5N 7W5

Prepared for:

Valley Environmental 160 Pony Drive Newmarket, ON L3Y 7B6

October 9, 2020

Pinchin File: 212886-100920

Odour Evaluation Report October 9, 2020 2470 Milltower Court, Mississauga, ON Pinchin File: 212886-100920 Valley Environmental FINAL

© 2020 Pinchin Ltd. Page i

Issued to: Issued on: Pinchin File: Issuing Office:

Valley Environmental October 9, 2020 212886-100920 Mississauga, ON

Author: Rebecca Wakoli, B.Sc., EPt Project Technologist 289.971.7865 [email protected]

Reviewer: Mary Mekhail, P.Eng., M.Eng. Project Engineer 905.363.1400 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


© 2020 Pinchin Ltd. Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EVALUATION SAMPLE & TIMING SUMMARY .............................................................................. 1

2.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................. 1

2.1 Laboratory Methodology ....................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Odour Evaluation Parameters .............................................................................................. 2

2.2.1 Odour Threshold Values – Detection Threshold (DT) ........................................... 2

3.0 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................... 3

4.0 TERMS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................ 4

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I Odour Evaluation Data Sheets

APPENDIX II Odour Evaluation Quality Assurance


© 2020 Pinchin Ltd. Page 1 of 4

1.0 EVALUATION SAMPLE & TIMING SUMMARY

Pinchin Ltd. (Pinchin) was contracted to determine the detection threshold (DT) of air samples submitted

to Pinchin’s Odour Laboratory located in Mississauga, Ontario. The particulars of the odour panel were as

follows:

Client Name: Valley Environmental

No. of Samples Delivered: Eleven (11) samples

Date Samples Received: October 09, 2020

Condition of the Sample Bags on Arrival: No condensation or leaks detected

No. of Samples Analyzed: Eleven (11)

Date of Odour Panel Analysis: October 09, 2020

Time of Odour Panel Analysis: 9:01 – 11:52 AM

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 Laboratory Methodology

All samples were evaluated in accordance with British Standard, BS EN 13725:2003, “Air quality –

Determination of odour concentration by dynamic olfactometry”, using an AC’SCENT International

triangular forced-choice, ascending concentration, dynamic dilution Olfactometer. A listing of Standard

Practices to which the evaluations conform is provided in Appendix II.

The AC’SCENT Olfactometer was calibrated according to the manufacturer’s guidelines on the day of

sample evaluation. The CHEMFLUOR® PTFE tubing through which the odour sample is presented to the

panellists was replaced prior to the assessment session. All sample delivery lines were purged

continuously with odour free air between sample presentations.

A panel of five trained assessors was employed in the evaluation of the odour samples. Each panel is

screened for accuracy and repeatability following the procedures outlined in BS EN 13725:2003, utilizing

50 ppm n-butanol calibration gas prior to sample evaluation. The geometric mean of the individual

threshold estimates for 50 ppm n-butanol was determined to be between 20 and 80 ppb/v.

The odour samples were presented to the panellists using the “triangular forced-choice” method,

described by ASTM E679-04, “Standard Practice for Determination of Odor and Taste Thresholds By a

Forced-Choice Ascending Concentration Series Method of Limits”. Each panellist evaluated the odour by

“sniffing” the diluted odour samples presented by the Olfactometer. At each dilution level, the panellist



“sniffed” three sample presentations, two of which were blank, odour free samples and one that contained

the odorous air. The panellist was then asked to identify which of the three presentations was different

from the other two by recording a “guess”, “detect” or “recognize” response as defined by ASTM E679-04.

A “guess” response was recorded when the assessor could not distinguish between any of the

presentations. A “detect” response was recorded when the assessor could differentiate the odorous

sample from the two blanks, and “recognize” was recorded when the assessor could identify and describe

the odorous sample.

As per BS EN 13725:2003, each sample assessment began with the Olfactometer diluting the odorous

sample to sub-detection levels. The odour sample and two blanks were then presented to one panellist,

who “sniffed” the three presentations and recorded their response. The concentration of odorous gas was

then doubled and re-presented to the same assessor with two blanks. Again, the assessor “sniffed” the

three presentations and recorded their response. The process continued with the concentration of

odorous gas increasing until the panellist had correctly detected the odour in at least two consecutive

presentations as described by BS EN 13725:2003. The process was repeated for each panellist until all

samples were evaluated.

Sample analysis was conducted “blind”; neither the panellist nor the test administrator knew which port

would deliver the odour sample. Panellist’s results were recorded and analyzed using AC’SCENT

DataSense Olfactometry software integrated with the Olfactometer. The software incorporates an Access

database program designed specifically for olfactometry laboratories and is compatible with international

olfactometry standards including BS EN 13725:2003 and ASTM E679-04.

As part of laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QAQC), test results were retrospectively

screened in accordance with BS EN 13725:2003. As the standard requires, each assessor’s individual

threshold estimate (ZITE) was compared to the panel’s average threshold, with the ratio between the

individual threshold estimate and the panel average threshold represented as ∆Z. Assessors having a ∆Z

greater than 5.0 or lower than -5.0, were eliminated from the results. The purpose was to exclude panel

members that showed deviant responses due to health factors or specific hyperosmia or anosmia for the

odour of the analyzed sample. Where screening was required, both the screened and unscreened results

were provided.

2.2 Odour Evaluation Parameters

2.2.1 Odour Threshold Values – Detection Threshold (DT)

The detection threshold (DT) is the dilution ratio at which 50% of the panellists correctly detected the

odour. DT, as defined by ASTM E679-04, is synonymous with the MECP Draft definition of an odour

threshold value (ED50) and the BS EN 13725:2003 definition of odour concentration (COD). That is, the DT



represents the amount of dilution required for the odour to be just detectable. Since DT values are

dimensionless, pseudo-dimensions of odour units per unit volume (i.e. odour units per cubic metre

(ou/m3)) are often used for reporting purposes.

In accordance with BS EN 13725:2003, individual threshold estimates (ZITE) were calculated as the

geometric mean of the lowest dilution ratio where the odour could not be detected and the dilution ratio at

which the panellist correctly detected the odour. Where a detection response could not be established at

the Olfactometer’s dilution limit, it was assumed that the panellist would have detected the odour at a

dilution ratio half that of the limit, and the ZITE was calculated. The sample odour concentration (COD) was

then calculated as the geometric mean of the ZITE values.

3.0 RESULTS

The odour threshold value results for detection threshold (DT) are presented in Table 1. Where

appropriate, the DT values have been adjusted for field pre-dilution reported by the client. The adjusted

DT values are recorded as DTNET. Datasheets are provided in Appendix I.

Table 1 – Odour Threshold Value Results

Client: Valley Environmental Test Reference No.:

Pinchin Project No.: 212886 Evaluation Date:

Field Number/ Round of Evaluation CommentsDescription Anlaysis Time DT DTnet DT DTnet DT DTnet

1 26 26

2 39 39

1 639 639

2 556 556

1 365 365

2 483 483

1 734 734

2 968 968

1 317 317

2 317 317

1 275 275

2 275 275

1 239 239

2 275 275

1 275 275

2 239 239

1 239 239

2 275 275

1 207 207

2 239 239

1 44 44

2 51 51

275

257

257

420

843

317

275

257

25710:54 - 11:07 AM

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

420

843

317

9:36 - 9:50 AM

9:51 - 10:02 AM

EG-T6 BDM

EG-T7 BDS

EG-T8 BCL

10:03 - 10:18 AM

10:19 -10:34 AM

10:35 - 10:53AM

1

:1

:1

:1

:1

:1

:1

1

1

1

1

1

n/a n/a4848

FactorLab No. Dilution Average Screened Average

212886-100920

9-Oct-20

n/a n/aEG-T1 BB

EG-T9 BCM

PO20-212886-S2387

PO20-212886-S2388

PO20-212886-S2395 EG-T11 BB :1 11:35 - 11:52 AM1

PO20-212886-S2394 1 :1 11:21 - 11:34 AMEG-T10 BCS

PO20-212886-S2393 1 :1 11:08 - 11:20 AM

PO20-212886-S2389

PO20-212886-S2390

PO20-212886-S2391

PO20-212886-S2392

EG-T3 PKM

EG-T4 PKS

EG-T5 BDL

PO20-212886-S2386 1 :1 9:21 - 9:35 AM 596 596 n/a n/a

PO20-212886-S2385 1 :1 9:01 - 9:20 AM 31 31

EG-T2 PKL

257 257 n/a n/a

223 n/a n/a223



Odour Evaluation Report Nomenclature

DT Detection Threshold

DTNET Detection Threshold adjusted for field dilution

* This report may not be reproduced except in full, without written authorization from the laboratory.

4.0 TERMS AND LIMITATIONS

This work was performed subject to the Terms and Limitations presented or referenced in the proposal for

this project.

Information provided by Pinchin is intended for Client use only. Pinchin will not provide results or

information to any party unless disclosure by Pinchin is required by law. Any use by a third party of

reports or documents authored by Pinchin or any reliance by a third party on or decisions made by a third

party based on the findings described in said documents, is the sole responsibility of such third parties.

Pinchin accepts no responsibility for damages suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or

actions conducted. No other warranties are implied or expressed.

J:\212000s\0212886.000 ValleyEnvironmental,160PonyDr,ERC,ODOUR\Deliverables\Odour Panels\October 09, 2020\212886 -100920 Valley Environmental Odour Report.docx

Template: European Detection Threshold Determination, ERC, March 6, 2020

APPENDIX I Odour Evaluation Data Sheets


(11 Pages)

Olfactometer Evaluation ResultsAC'SCENT International Olfactometer Page 1 of 1

Description : 1:1

Sampling Date : 10/8/2020Sampling Time :

Sample Collector : Valley Environmental

Sample Source : unknown

Chemical : N/A

Concentration (ppm) :

Sample Comments :

Test Name : Valley Environmental Test No. : 212886-100920

Test Method : Triangular Forced Choice

Flow Rate (lpm) : 20 Sniff Time (sec) : 3Sample Information

Specific Chemical Concentration Data

Final Results

1.53 1.50 0.75

0.25 0.21 0.00

34 31 6

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold

G D RResponse Key:1 = Incorrect Guess2 = Correct Guess5 = Incorrect Detection6 = Correct Detection7 = Incorrect Recognition8 = Correct Recognition

Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2385 Field No. : EG-T1 BB

Test Administrator : Rebecca Wakoli

Test Date : 10/9/2020

Assessor/Round Log G Log D Log R

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 1.65 1.651

14853-1917 1 2 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.752

14853-1914 1 2 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.751

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 1.95 1.652

14853-1916 1 1 1 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.751

14853-1916 1 1 6 6 1.65 1.652

14853-01 2 1 2 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.751

14853-01 1 1 6 6 1.95 1.952

14853-1918 2 1 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.751

14853-1918 1 2 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.752

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition

Friday, October 09, 2020 AC'SCENT DATA ENSES® TMOlfactometry Software


Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.93 2.78 0.00

0.24 0.25 0.00

843 596 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2386 Field No. : EG-T2 PKL


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 2 6 6 2.87 2.561

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 3.17 3.171

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 3.17 3.172

14853-1916 2 2 6 6 3.17 2.561

14853-1916 2 2 6 6 3.17 2.562

14853-01 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-01 2 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : n/a


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.78 2.62 0.00

0.25 0.31 0.00

596 420 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2387 Field No. : EG-T3 PKM


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 2 2 6 6 2.87 2.261

14853-1917 1 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.262

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 3.17 3.172

14853-1916 1 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.261

14853-1916 2 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

14853-01 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.561

14853-01 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1918 1 2 6 6 3.17 2.872

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.96 2.93 0.00

0.29 0.24 0.00

903 843 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2388 Field No. : EG-T4 PKS


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 3.47 3.171

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 3.17 3.172

14853-1916 1 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.561

14853-1916 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-01 1 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.561

14853-01 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 3.17 3.171

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 3.17 3.172

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.59 2.50 0.00

0.30 0.24 0.00

391 317 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2389 Field No. : EG-T5 BDL


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.561

14853-1917 1 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 3.17 2.872

14853-1916 1 2 6 6 2.87 2.561

14853-1916 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

14853-01 1 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-01 1 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1918 1 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.261

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.65 2.44 0.00

0.35 0.30 0.00

450 275 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2390 Field No. : EG-T6 BDM


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 2 2 6 6 2.87 2.261

14853-1917 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.262

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 3.17 2.871

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1916 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1916 1 2 6 6 2.87 2.562

14853-01 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.261

14853-01 1 2 1 6 6 1.95 1.952

14853-1918 1 2 6 6 2.87 2.561

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.47 2.41 0.00

0.32 0.30 0.00

295 257 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2391 Field No. : EG-T7 BDS


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 1 1 6 6 1.95 1.951

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1916 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1916 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.262

14853-01 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-01 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.561

14853-1918 1 2 6 6 2.87 2.562

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.44 2.41 0.00

0.26 0.26 0.00

275 257 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2392 Field No. : EG-T8 BCL


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.561

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1916 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1916 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.262

14853-01 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-01 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.53 2.41 0.00

0.27 0.26 0.00

340 257 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2393 Field No. : EG-T9 BCM


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1917 2 2 6 6 2.87 2.262

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.871

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1916 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.261

14853-1916 1 1 6 6 2.56 2.562

14853-01 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-01 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.262

14853-1918 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

2.56 2.35 0.00

0.38 0.29 0.00

364 223 1

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2394 Field No. : EG-T10 BCS


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.261

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 3.17 2.871

14853-1914 1 1 6 6 2.87 2.872

14853-1916 2 2 6 6 2.87 2.261

14853-1916 2 1 6 6 2.26 2.262

14853-01 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.261

14853-01 2 2 6 6 2.87 2.262

14853-1918 2 2 1 6 6 1.95 1.951

14853-1918 1 2 6 6 2.56 2.262

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition



Description : 1:1




Chemical : N/A


Sample Comments :





Final Results

1.80 1.68 0.75

0.29 0.17 0.00

63 48 6

Avg. Log Value

Std. Dev.

Threshold


Lab No. : PO20-212886-S2395 Field No. : EG-T11 BB


Test Date : 10/9/2020


14853-1917 1 2 6 6 1.95 1.651

14853-1917 1 1 6 6 1.65 1.652

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 2.26 1.951

14853-1914 1 2 6 6 2.26 1.952

14853-1916 2 1 2 6 6 1.95 1.651

14853-1916 1 1 1 6 6 1.65 1.652

14853-01 1 1 1 6 6 1.65 1.651

14853-01 1 2 1 6 6 1.65 1.652

14853-1918 2 2 1 6 6 1.35 1.35 0.751

14853-1918 1 1 6 6 1.65 1.652

0.30 0.60 1.21 2.42 4.84 9.7 19.3 38.7 77.34 159.65 319.42 638.83 1276 2551.1

20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069 20,069

Dilution Level

Sample Volume

Total Volume

Dilution Ratio 66,234 33,206 16,603 8,302 4,151 2,075 1,038 519 259 126 62.8 15.731.4 7.9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Geometric Mean 93,669 46,898 23,480 11,740 5,870 2,935 1,468 734 367 181 89 22.244.4 11.1

Log (Geo. Mean) 4.97 4.67 4.37 4.07 3.77 3.47 3.17 2.87 2.56 2.26 1.95 1.351.65 1.05

10/9/2020

Calibration Date :

THRESHOLDS

G = Guess

D = Detection

R = Recognition


APPENDIX II Odour Evaluation Quality Assurance


(1 Page)

Odour Evaluation Report Appendix II 2470 Milltower Court, Mississauga, ON Pinchin File: 212886-100920 Odour Evaluation Quality Assurance FINAL


1.0 ODOUR EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE

• Odour evaluations conducted at the Pinchin Odour Laboratory conform to the procedures

outlined in the British Standard, BS EN 13725:2003, “Air quality – Determination of odour

concentration by dynamic olfactometry” and are in accordance with ASTM (American

Society for Testing and Materials) Standard Practice E679-04, Determination of Odor and

Taste Thresholds by a Forced-Choice Ascending Concentration Series of Limits.

• The AC’SCENT Dynamic Dilution Forced-Choice Triangle Olfactometer complies with

all aspects of the ASTM E679-04 standard as well as the operational requirements of the

British Standard, BS EN 13725:2003, “Air quality – Determination of odour concentration

by dynamic olfactometry”.

• The detection threshold values are reported as defined by ASTM E679-04 and BS EN

13725:2003.

• Assessors are selected and trained in accordance with BS EN 13725:2003.

• The Pinchin Odour Laboratory is managed based on the requirements of the International

Organization for Standardization (ISO) International Standard ISO 17025:2005, “General

requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories”.

• Samples are consumed during the evaluation and all sample bags are destroyed 48

hours after transmittal of the Preliminary Odour Evaluation Results, unless otherwise

specified.

Appendix C

Emission Calculation Sheet

Cannabis Emission Rate - Mature, Flowering Plants (1) Cannabis Emission Rate - Young, Non-flowering Plants (1)

Black Diamond = 3.89 Black Diamond = 3.17 OU/sBlue Cheese = 3.04 Blue Cheese = 2.80 OU/sPurple Kush = 8.12 Average = 2.98 OU/s

Average = 5.01 OU/s

Source I.D. PeriodAveraging

Period

Odour Emission Factor

(OU/s/Plant)

Additional Control Efficiency

(%)

Emission Rate(OU/s)

Data Quality

Estimation Technique

SPA May to August 1 hr 2.98 71% 1276.77 Average ST

SPA September to October 1 hr 5.01 71% 2145.32 Average ST

ASPA May to August 1 hr 2.98 71% 319.19 Average ST

ASPA September to October 1 hr 5.01 71% 536.33 Average ST

ASPA November to April 1 hr - 71% 319.19 Average ST

WPA1 November to April 1 hr 5.01 95% 50.15 Average ST

WPA2 November to April 1 hr 5.01 95% 175.52 Average ST

Period 1595.96Period 2681.65Period 544.86

Sample Calculation - Odour from SPA (May to August)Emission Rate (OU/s) = 2.98 OU x 1488.0 plants x (1- 71% )

sEmission Rate (OU/s) = 1276.8 OU

s(1) The average of the blank tests/background has been subtracted from each odour test result.

September to OctoberNovember to April

Total Odour Emission Rate (OU/s)Total Odour Emission Rate (OU/s)

Winter Production Area, consisting of 3 side vents from building #2, controlled by a carbon filtration system to remove odours

Odour 700

May to AugustTotal Odour Emission Rate (OU/s)

OdourWinter Production Area, consisting of 1 side vent from building #1, controlled by a carbon


Odour

200

1488

Calculation Sheet 1Odour Emission Rates

Source Description Contaminants

OU/sOU/sOU/s

Maximum Number of Plants

Odour emission factors were developed using the average odour emision rates for individual plants from source testing (see Appendix B of this report). The source testing program was conducted using the Company's plants in two growing stages (young and flowering) and of three strains. The odour emission rate was estimated using these emission factors mutiplied by the maximum number of plants.

Seedlings were not available at the time of the odour testing. Emission factors for young plants were conservatively used to estimate odour emissions from seedlings. Typically, the flowering stage, which is the most odorous stage, starts four (4) months after seedlings are planted and lasts until harvest (i.e. September to October for the summer production area). For the winter production area, although plants grow in stages, the flowering emission factor was very conservatively used to estimate emissions from these buildings. For the all-season and summer production areas, the plants were assumed to flower in September and October.

An odour removal efficiency of 95% was applied to all carbon filters. A capture efficiency of 75% was assumed for the carbon filters serving the production areas which are enclosed by plastic wraps on all sides with only two man-door size openings on both ends for access (i.e. Control efficiency for carbon filters in all-season and summer production areas = 75% x 95% = 71%).

Emission Rate (Odour) (OU/s) = Odour Emission Factor (OU/s/plant) x Number of Plants x (1 - Control Efficiency,%)

All-season Production Area, consisting of 3 heated greenhouses, each controlled by a carbon filtration system to remove odours

Odour -

Summer Production Area consisting of 12 greenhouses, each controlled by a carbon filtration system to remove odours

Summer Production Area consisting of 12 greenhouses, each controlled by a carbon filtration system to remove odours


Odour 372

1488


Odour 372

Odour

Appendix D

Wind Roses

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Ministry Regional Meteorological Data - Toronto CropsNovember to April

COMMENTS:


COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

DATE:

2020-11-06

PROJECT NO.:

1384-01.03

NORTH

SOUTH

WEST EAST

2.13%

4.26%

6.39%

8.52%

10.6%

WIND SPEED (m/s)

>= 11.10

8.80 - 11.10

5.70 - 8.80

3.60 - 5.70

2.10 - 3.60

0.50 - 2.10

Calms: 0.00%

TOTAL COUNT:

21733 hrs.

CALM WINDS:

0.00%

DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 1996-01-01 - 00:00End Date: 2000-12-31 - 23:59

AVG. WIND SPEED:

4.41 m/s

DISPLAY:

Wind SpeedDirection (blowing from)


WIND ROSE PLOT:

Ministry Regional Meteorological Data - Toronto CropsMay to August

COMMENTS:


COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

DATE:

2020-11-06

PROJECT NO.:

1384-01.03

NORTH

SOUTH

WEST EAST

2.16%

4.32%

6.48%

8.64%

10.8%

WIND SPEED (m/s)

>= 11.10

8.80 - 11.10

5.70 - 8.80

3.60 - 5.70

2.10 - 3.60

0.50 - 2.10

Calms: 0.00%

TOTAL COUNT:

14715 hrs.

CALM WINDS:

0.00%

DATA PERIOD:


AVG. WIND SPEED:

3.50 m/s

DISPLAY:



WIND ROSE PLOT:

Ministry Regional Meteorological Data - Toronto CropsSeptember to October

COMMENTS:


COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

DATE:

2020-11-06

PROJECT NO.:

1384-01.03

NORTH

SOUTH

WEST EAST

2.63%

5.26%

7.89%

10.5%

13.2%

WIND SPEED (m/s)

>= 11.10

8.80 - 11.10

5.70 - 8.80

3.60 - 5.70

2.10 - 3.60

0.50 - 2.10

Calms: 0.00%

TOTAL COUNT:

7310 hrs.

CALM WINDS:

0.00%

DATA PERIOD:


AVG. WIND SPEED:

3.65 m/s

DISPLAY:


odour impact assessment for a medical cannabis grow

Documents