P. 1
Dust Suppression on Wyoming’s Coal Mine Haul Roads

Dust Suppression on Wyoming’s Coal Mine Haul Roads

|Views: 2,527|Likes:
Published by bookwormvn
An article about mine rehabilitation
An article about mine rehabilitation

More info:

Published by: bookwormvn on Nov 12, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/11/2014

pdf

text

original

Dust Suppression on Wyoming’s Coal Mine Haul Roads

Literature Review Recommended Practices and Best Available Control Measures – BACM Dust Suppressant Selection Guides

A Manual

prepared for: Industries of the Future Converse Area New Development October, 2004 by: Temple Stevenson

Cover photos: courtesy of Triton Coal – Tony Trouchon (photographer)

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction I. II. Literature Review: Fugitive Dust and Its Control Recommended Practices and Best Available Control Measures Table 2.1 Figure 2.1 Table 2.2 iii 1

21

Dust Control Operations Recommendations 25 Sample Air Event Outline 26 Best Available Control Measures BACM (Recommendations) For Controlling Fugitive Dust on Mine Haul Roads 28 31 33 41 57 61 63 67 73 77 81

III.

Dust Suppression Selection Guides Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 3.3 Dust Suppression Products Dust Suppression Applications Guide Dust Suppression on Mine Haul Roads Cost Worksheet (available in excel)

Appendices Appendix A: Dust Suppression Survey and Results Appendix B: Dust Control Plan and Self Inspection Checklists Appendix C: Palliative Selection Matrix (Thompson) Appendix D: Palliative Selection Matrix (Bolander and Yamada) Appendix E: Fugitive Dust Bibliography

i

ii

Introduction Fugitive dust emissions are increasingly becoming a problem for Wyoming’s surface coal mines located in a windy semi-arid environment where the average wind speed is 13.4 miles per hour and the average rainfall is a mere 14 inches with some of the highest evaporation rates in the nation. Fugitive dust emissions are a nuisance in coal mines; dust impairs visibility, affects the health of employees, increases wear and tear of equipment, and increases road maintenance and costs. Current drought conditions, elevated wind speeds, compliance with air quality and clarity standards impacted by particulate emissions, a predicted increase in coal production, and increased Coal Bed Methane operations has heightened the concern. Dust from surface coal mine operations also has the potential to negatively impact Federal Class I Air Quality Areas in the region, such as Badlands and Wind Cave National Parks and the Northern Cheyenne American Indian Area. While no visibility impairment in these Class I areas is currently attributable to any Wyoming source, it is anticipated that strategies to maintain a status of minimal impact will be of notable value to the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) and the State of Wyoming in the development of its Regional Haze SIP(State Implementation Plan), due by Dec 31, 2008 (Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for Visibility Protection: Review Report, 2003). It is the intent of this report to contribute to a better understanding of fugitive dust and its mitigation, so that efficient and effective management strategies for suppressing it can be implemented. The report includes four segments: I. Literature Review; II. Recommended Practices and Best Available Control Measures -BACM; III. Dust Control Suppressant Selection Guides; and an Appendices containing a fugitive dust bibliography and document examples.

iii

iv

I. Literature Review: Fugitive Dust and its Control Sources and Impact of Dust Generated by Surface Coal Mines Haul roads, over-burden piles, drilling and blasting, coal transfers 93% of the total dust and loading, and topsoil handling are all contributing factors of emissions from a coal strip mine could be dust generation in a coal mine. A South African study conducted in an arid climate similar to Wyoming’s by Thompson and Visser contributed to coal transport or haul roads (2002) titled “Benchmarking and Management of Fugitive Dust Emissions From Surface Mine Haul Roads,” determined that 93% of the total dust emissions from a coal strip mine could be contributed to coal transport or haul roads. Figure 1. illustrates their findings of the contributions of specific sources of fugitive dust as a percentage of the total fugitive dust generated by a surface coal mine.
Fig. 1 Percentage contribution to total dust emissions (Thompson & Visser 2002)

Assessing the source and impact of dust to determine the need to increase watering, decrease speed, use dust suppressing chemicals (also known as palliatives), or regraveling is constricted by a lack of problem solving methodology that takes into account the complexity of various interactions. The interactions include traffic volume, weight, climate, and more according to Thompson & Visser (2002). They add, “most surface mine operators agree that dust-free roads are desirable, but find it difficult to translate this into cost-effective management and mitigation.” This same study found that regular watering and the application of chemical suppressants in conjunction with optimal aggregate surfaces is the only effective option for controlling fugitive dust emissions on haul roads. The most harmful types of fugitive dust to the respiratory system are those that are under 10 microns in diameter, known as PM10’s. Because they are most harmful, they are the

1

most monitored. Another common measurement involves total suspended particulates’ or TSP’s. Total suspended particulates refer to the total amount of solid particulates and liquid droplets suspended in the air, regardless of particle size (Ferguson et al., 1999). Wyoming has been monitoring PM10 emissions to meet Federal standards since 1989, before that TSP’s were the only monitored emission.
According to EPA officials, exceedences of the 24 hour standard for particulate matter in southern Campbell County escalated substantially over the last 15 years; from 0 incidents during 1990-2000 to 19 incidents from 2001-03.

Dust Suppression Planning When a coal mine is in the process of implementing a dust suppression plan, cost analysis plays a large role in product selection. When looking at a product, an overall cost analysis should be taken into account. According to Bolander and Yamada (1999) in a report for the US Forest Service entitled “Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide,” a successful dust control program should not only reduce total dust emissions, but it should also reduce maintenance costs. Some dust control products have proven that they can significantly reduce overall road maintenance costs and thus achieve an overall savings. At the same time additional preparation and a change in maintenance practices must be accounted for. A booklet published by Environment Australia, a branch of Australia’s Department of the Environment and Heritage, Dust Control Best Practice Environment Management in Mining (1998), explains the benefit of a dust control plan as “a long-term view of dust control has proven consistently cost effective. Mine planning has a particularly important role to play in dust control. Applying controls after the problems arise is often difficult, impractical or costly.” Haul Roads/Unpaved Roads Fugitive dust is derived from a variety of sources; nonpoint sources such as un-vegetated soils, and specific sources such as haul roads (Environment Australia 1998). Dust generation can be defined as the process by which particulate matter becomes airborne. The amount of dust that becomes airborne is a function of various factors; including the susceptibility of the surface material to wind and water erosion, and the erosive actions of haul trucks (Thompson & Visser 2002). If this latter human activity coincides with unfavorable weather conditions, the result can be greatly increased dust emissions (Ferguson et al., 1999). Haul roads generate significant amounts of dust emissions (EPA Fugitive Dust, 1992; Thompson and Visser, 2002). There have been several studies completed to estimate the emission rates of PM10 on unpaved roads. According to Bolander and Yamada (1999) in the US Forest Sevice Report, Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide, the following dust generation factors should be considered when designing a dust control plan:

2

Dust Generation Factors:
• • • • • •

Vehicle Speed Number of Wheels Per Vehicle Traffic Volume Particle Size Distribution of the Aggregate Compaction of the Surface Material Surface Moisture Climate

Researchers from the Desert Research Institute at the University of Nevada determined that a vehicle traveling on a untreated unpaved road at a speed of approximately 25 mph generates between 0.59 to 2.00 lbs of PM10 emissions per vehicle miles traveled (VMT) (Gillies et al. 1999). When that vehicle’s speed was increased to 35 mph the emission rates increased to 1.85 to 3.04 lbs. PM10 VMT with an uncertainty of 0.23 lbs. PM10 VMT. Other studies have found similar emission results. Flocchini et al.(1994) suggest that reducing vehicle travel speeds on unpaved roads from 40km/hr to 24 km/hr reduced PM10 emissions by 42 + 35%. The Environmental Protection Agency, reporting in Compilation of Air Pollutants Emission Factors Volume 1 Ch 13, AP-42 (1998), found that emission of fugitive dust on haul roads is highly correlated with vehicle weight and silt content of the surface material. The study reported that a silt content mean of 8.4% of fines on a haul road while a mean of 24% was found on a freshly graded haul road. This indicates a significant increase in fines after a road has been graded. In addition to these factors the EPA also suggests that other traffic characteristics should be considered; such as the cornering of trucks, the road’s bearing strength, and grade (EPA, 1998, AP-42). They also suggest a complete examination into climate conditions like freeze/thaw cycles and monthly average wind speeds. Effective dust control on haul roads in the Powder River Basin is complicated by the fact that stretches of road, constructed of less than optimal aggregates, are subject to high traffic volume by heavy haul trucks, which requires continuous grading and the frequent addition of new surface material. Wearing of surface material is related to a number of factors including wind speed at the road surface, traffic volume and tonnage, type of road aggregate, compaction of the road, amount of spillage, and climate (Thompson & Visser 2002). In addition to haul roads and related travel areas such as truck parking lots, stockpile/reclaim areas also contribute to total dust emissions, but are usually much more difficult to control. (EPA Fugitive Dust, 1992). The EPA has devised numerous equations to estimate emissions both from unpaved roads and from storage piles. These equations can be found in “Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information Document for Best Available Control Measures,” published by the EPA in September of 1992.

3

In a report by the U.S Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories Gebhart et al.(1999) noted that chemical suppressants should be considered as a secondary solution in controlling dust. “A properly maintained road with adequate drainage to create a hard road surface should be the first step and must be implemented to the greatest extent possible. The best way to avoid a dust problem is to properly maintain the surface, and that is achieved by grading and shaping for cross sectional crowning which prevents dust generation caused by excessive road surface wear.” It should be noted that this study had to contend with heavy vehicles with tracks, such as tanks, which reduced the efficiency and cost effectiveness of any dust suppressant. Effectiveness of Dust Suppressant Measures on Unpaved Roads When analyzing dust control effectiveness it is hard to Chemical dust suppressants determine a product’s direct impact due to the large number generally provide a PM10 of compounding variables (traffic volume, truck weight and control efficiency of about speed, road type, etc.). This is further compounded by the 80% when applied at regular intervals of two weeks to one fact that there is not a uniform standard for determining dust month (EPA, AP-42, 1998). suppressant effectiveness (North Carolina Department of The effectiveness of dust Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality suppressants however, (2003). Most assessments available are based on qualitative depends on the dilution rate, data not quantitative data (Sanders & Addo, 1993). “Without the application rate, the time between applications, the any quantitative dust measurement, it is difficult if not amount, weight and speed of impossible to assess the economics and lasting value of dust traffic, meteorological palliation methods,” (Sanders & Addo, p.11, 1993). There conditions, and road are generally two areas of study concerning measuring or characteristics. analyzing dust. The first is atmospheric modeling and prediction, and the second is field measurements and quantifications (Sanders & Addo, 1993). Field studies are generally more helpful in determining actual effectiveness; however there are numerous factors that need to be considered. Because of the diversity of site characteristics, it is difficult to recommend a suppressant that will work well in all situations. In many instances the only gauge of the effectiveness of a product is either the results from manufacturer’s testing or testimonials from previous users (Engle, 2004). Even then it is hard to determine if the product is going to work in a particular area with possibly a different aggregate type.

4

The following is a summary of some of the significant studies that have been conducted regarding the relative effectiveness of dust control measures. Thomas Sanders, et al.(1997) conducted a study at Colorado State University on unpaved road sections in Larimer County, Colorado to try to determine the relative effectiveness of the three commercially available dust suppressants. These researchers evaluated the effectiveness of lignosulfonate (lignin’), calcium chloride (CaCl2), and magnesium chloride (MgCl2) against a section left untreated. They based their evaluation on three fundamental measurements; traffic volume, fugitive dust emissions, and total aggregate loss and used these measurements to calculate a cost analysis. After taking 15 dust samples over a test period of 4.5 months they found that all three of the treated sections outperformed the untreated section. Total aggregate loss was significantly higher for the untreated section, in fact it was 3 times more than the MgCl2, 2.7 times the lignin’, and 2 times the CaCl2. Relative fugitive dust emissions were also highest on the untreated section. Based on cost to replace aggregate lost, traffic volume, cost of maintenance, and cost of suppressants they concluded that lignin’ and MgCl2 had an identical cost per mile per year of $21 vehicle, while CaCl2 was at $26 and the untreated was up to $36. They produced the following chart to highlight the cost analysis. (ADT is the average daily traffic).

(Sanders, et al. p. 396, 1997)

Based on these results, the group concluded that under high temperature and low relative humidity lignosulfonate appears to lessen the amount of dust produced. They also found that lignosulfonate and MgCl2 had the least total aggregate loss at 1.0 t/mi/yr/vehicle. The study found a 28-42% reduction in annual maintenance cost for the treated sections compared to the untreated sections. However, during a personal interview with this author on March 30, 2004, Dr. Sanders stated that he felt the MgCl2 was the superior product based on cost and long term effectiveness (Sanders, 2004). 5

In a laboratory study, Epps and Ehsan (2002) compared aggregates from Wyoming, Texas, and Arizona to determine the effectiveness of water, CaCl2 and MgCl2 at controlling dust. They used a crushed gravel stone from Wyoming in one segment of the study. This gravel contained approximately 9.9% fines, less than both the Texas and Arizona samples. They prepped the aggregates by allowing them to cure for 2 days at 32C and 35% relative humidity. They then sprayed the samples with water at a rate of 1.8 L/m2 to reduce the surface tension and increase the rate of penetration, and next applied magnesium chloride to one sample, calcium chloride to another, and water only to another sample. They found that applying chemical palliatives (MgCl2 and CaCl2) to the Wyoming aggregate had a statistically significantly effect on reducing erosion caused by wind. This, they determined was related to the fact that the chemicals kept the surface wet even in windy conditions. The authors found no real difference between the MgCl2 and CaCl2, but noted that both lose their effectiveness over time. Next they evaluated the effectiveness of the chemicals in a simulated traffic experiment. They found that a 38% solution of CaCl2 and a 30% solution of MgCl2 applied to the Wyoming aggregate significantly reduced erosion caused by traffic compared to an aggregate sample that was only treated with water. They concluded that the application of CaCl2 or MgCl2 greatly enhanced dust control on unpaved roads in comparison to water or no treatment and that there is not a significant difference between the two chemicals. Gillies et al. (1999) from the Desert Research Institute at the University of Nevada and the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District evaluated the effectiveness of four dust suppressants over a 14 month study. The suppressants that were tested included a biocatalyst stabilizer (EMC2), a polymer emulsion (Soil Sement), a petroleum emulsion with polymer (Choerex PM), and a nonhazardous crude-oil-containing material. The study identified an equation to calculate suppressant control efficiency, which they define as “the percent reduction in emissions between the treated and untreated sections:”
Efficiency= 1-(treated emission factor/untreated emission factor)

This study determined that estimating suppressant efficiency can be done using some simple methods in place of expensive monitoring. The authors determined that a measurement of the bulk silt loading and the surface strength can provide an effective and inexpensive assessment of a suppressants effectiveness to reduce PM10 emissions. A suppressant treated surface that can achieve bulk silt content less that 20 g/m2 is considered to be 90% effective at suppressing PM10 emissions. Further, if that surface can maintain flexibility (measured by a penetrometer) and can resist brittle failure then the suppressant is predicted to maintain effectiveness longer (Gillies, et al. 1999). Effectiveness results The bio-catalyst (EMC2) was only 39% effective one week after the initial application and 0% effective after 11 months. The acrylic copolymer was 95% effective after one week and approximately 85% after 11 months. The bitumen product was 95% effective after one week, 75% after 3 months, and 53% after 11 months.

6

The EPA has created an equation to determine the PM10 emission factor for unpaved roads. This accuracy of this equation, however, is still under some question, particularly related to vehicle speed (Muleski/MRI 2002). Also this equation is designed around average traffic weight, and does not account for heavier trucks (e.g. haul trucks).
E=2.6 (Silt/12)^0.8 (Weight/3)^0.4 / (Moisture/0.2)^0.3) E= Silt = Weight = Moisture =

PM10 unpaved road dust emission factor for all vehicle classes silt content, material less than 75 µm in the surface material average weight of the vehicle fleet (tons) surface moisture content (%) (EPA, AP-42, 1998)

The addition of moisture into the equation is fairly recent (Countess, 2001). It was added based on the recognition that climate and moisture play a large part in overall emissions from unpaved roads. An older version of this equation included variables for the number of wheels and speed, but re-analysis proved the variable not to be statistically significant (Countess, 2001). However, when using this model in an industrial setting it may be important to account for total wheels, traffic volume, and speed as variables. In addition, some feel that the type of aggregate should be included as it can often account for the long term amount of fines in the road surface. Dust Suppressants Road dust suppressants have evolved notably. Second and third generation products are now solving not only the dust problem but also cost efficiency, environmental, and labor issues (Engle, 2004). Positive results are now coming from even the toughest desert and drought environments where past products have failed (Engle, 2004). While EPA (AP42, 1998) testing has shown that chemical dust suppressants can be effective (80% PM10 reduction when applied at regular intervals) there is not a single, cure-all solution. Some products work better in certain climates, various road surfaces, and under different traffic volumes, and each product comes with various advantages and limitations. Dust suppressants are effective based on the fact that they agglomerate the fine particles in a road surface, binding the surface particles together, and increasing the density of the haul road surface material (Bolander & Yamada, 1999). If fines are lost as dust on an unpaved road it leads to the coarse material coming loose and can then be thrown or washed away. This can result in a road full of corrugations and potholes that require expensive maintenance (Sanders & Addo, 1993). “The main goal of a dust control is to stabilize the road surface; reducing the rate of aggregate loss and money spent annually in replacement,” (Sanders & Addo, 1993). Dust control additives are beneficial not only at reducing dust emissions, but they also improve the compaction and stability of the road. According to Epps and Ehsan (2002) there are numerous factors related to the effectiveness of a dust palliative including application rate, method of application, moisture content of the surface material during application, palliative concentrations fines content, mineralogy of the aggregate, and environmental conditions. 7

Surface treatments to control dust emissions fall under two categories, wet suppression and chemical stabilization (EPA, AP-42, 1998). Wet suppression includes watering and the application of surfactants that keep the road surface wet. Chemical stabilization involves an attempt to change the physical characteristic of the road. Unlike watering, chemical suppressants require less reapplication and many act to form a hardened road surface (EPA, AP-42, 1998). The addition of a wetting agent or larger sized particles reduces erodibility only at the interface of the surface and the impact vehicles (Thompson & Visser 2002). Dust control measures lose effectiveness on a scale ranging from immediately to weeks. The palliative effects of water decays from 100% to 0% in a matter of hours while chemicals applied to control dust may decay over several days or weeks so it is important to understand the expected effectiveness of the product that you are working with (Thompson & Visser 2002). A report issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the South Dakota Local Transportation Assistance Program states that in areas of high traffic volume, the cost of dust control can more than pay for itself. This is based on the fact that a good dust control agent can not only reduce material lost from the road, but also reduce the need for blade maintenance (Skoreth & Selim 2000). The same study determined that when a dust suppressant is not working well aggregate fines are lost, leaving only gravel size particles on the road, which leads to the formation of a washboard surface, reduced skid resistance, and potholes. The addition of agents (water or chemical) to reduce erodibility is based on the principle of increasing binding of the fines and gravel. (Thompson & Visser 2002). According to “Surface Mine Dust Control” by John Organiscak, et al. (2003), the best dust control plan should be dependent on the type of aggregate you have on your haul road. Selecting a dust suppressant, according to Sanders (1993) should depend not only on its performance characteristics, but also on the type of traffic and volume, roadway conditions, and the costs involved to achieve the desired level of control. In the following selection and application guide, Bolander and Yamada (1999) suggest that selecting suppressants involves determining not only cost but cost effectiveness. They have devised the following list of benefiting factors that should be considered when selecting a dust palliative. Palliative Factors • • • • Coherence of the Dust Particles (to themselves or larger particles) Resistance to Traffic Wear Aggregate Retention Long-term Effectiveness (Bolander & Yamada, 1999)

8

Water Water assists in maintaining the compaction and strength of the road aggregate and reduces the potential loss of road material (Thompson & Visser 2002). Water is attractive because it is seen as a cost effective alternative, however the cost soon escalates with the addition of expensive equipment and operating costs. Data from the EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors Volume 1, Ch 13, AP-42 (1998) shown here in Figure 1.1 suggests that small increases in moisture content (1 to 2 moisture level) initially results in large increases in control efficiency (from 0% to 75%) but beyond which additional efficiency grows slowly with increased watering (requires 2.5x more water to increase effectiveness to 95%) significantly reducing cost effectiveness at the upper levels. Figure 1.1 Dust Control Efficiency of Water

Similarly, a study by Rosbury and Zimmer (1983) found that watering once per hour has an efficiency of 40% in controlling dust, but when that rate is doubled the efficiency increases only by 15% to 55%. Re-application is required at frequent intervals dependent on environmental conditions. Water retention in the Powder River Basin is generally poor due to high temperatures and wind speeds as well as low relative humidity. Increasing

9

water scarcity and cost adds to the scenario making water a temporary and typically un-economical solution. Thompson and Visser (2002), based on the context of the arid South African coal mines, determined the degree of dust control achieved by watering is a function of the amount of water applied, time between applications, traffic volumes, weather conditions, wearing-course material, and the extent of water penetration into the wearing course. They determined that on an average degree of dustiness, a 50% reapplication is required at three hour intervals in the winter and every hour and a half in the summer. These intervals decrease with the addition of weight per vehicle, number of wheels, traffic volume, and climate conditions. Thompson and Visser (2002) also found that traffic volume negatively correlated with total dustiness; which they explained based on observation, that higher traffic volumes led to more compaction of the wearing course and the removal of most loose material on the sides of the road as well as spillage from the vehicle. They also determined that vehicles lower to the ground with many wheels tend to cause an increase in dust based on the increase in wind shear. Precipitation can greatly reduce dust emissions. Normally a rainfall resulting in at least 0.1 inch is assumed to suppress all emissions. However during a hot, dry summer’s day a rain of that same amount may only reduce emissions for hours as opposed to days (Countess, 2001). Chlorides Chlorides are salts that act as water attracters and absorbers; as hygroscopic compounds, they draw moisture out of the air to keep the road surface damp, although there is no physical binding (Skoreth & Selim 2000).
Chlorides are the most commonly used products for haul road dust control. A study by Rosbury and Zimmer (1983) showed that the highest control efficiency measured for a chemical dust suppressant (at that time), 82%, was for CaCl2 two weeks after application, then decreased over time. The average during the initial two weeks was approximately 50%. After five weeks, the control efficiency declined to less than 20%.

The most common salts used to control dust are calcium chloride (CaCl2) and magnesium chloride (MgCl2). When determining which is most effective, it’s ability to produce a brine under adverse conditions such as high wind speeds, low humidity, or high traffic volumes is the best indicator (Sanders, 1993). CaCl2 Calcium Chloride (CaCl2) has been used as a dust control and road stabilizing agent for the last century (Epps & Ehsan, 2002). CaCl2 has deliquescent and hygroscopic properties causing the chemical to have a

10

high affinity to water; increasing the tension of water molecules between soil particles. When applied the chemical increases the adhesive bond between particles resulting in retention of particles. According to Epps et al.(2002) CaCl2 has a wider range of effectiveness in regards to temperature than magnesium chloride and loses its hygroscopic property at a temperature of 25C if the relative humidity drops below 32%. Calcium Chloride comes in three forms; flake at 77-80% purity, pellet 9497% purity, and a clear liquid at 35-38% purity (Bolander & Yamada, 1999). Calcium Chloride is favored over Magnesium Chloride in areas or seasons of higher humidity, but it is not as effective in long dry spells (Bolander & Yamada, 1999). This chemical can significantly lower the freezing point of a water solution. In fact at 30% solution can have a freezing point of -60F (Larkin Laboratory, 1986). Because of this property several coal mines choose to use CaCl2 during the winter. MgCl2 Magnesium chloride is a by-product of potash production and is only available in the liquid form (Ferguson et al., 1999). When determining if CaCl2 or MgCl2 is more effective there are contradictory findings and statements. It seems the more recent studies are coming to the conclusion the MgCl2 is outperforming CaCl2,. According to Epps and Eshan (2002) MgCl2 is more effective than CaCl2 in increasing the surface tension of water molecules. Bolander and Yamada (1999) found that MgCl2 is considered to be the best water absorbing product for drier climates because the chemical starts to absorb water from the air at 32% relative humidity regardless of the temperature. The product also increases the aggregate surface tension, creating a very hard road when the surface is dry, more so than CaCl2. Both CaCl2 and MgCl2 are known to be corrosive to metals, because they attract moisture to the surface and thus prolong the period of erosion (Bolander & Yamada, 1999). A positive attribute of both of these chemicals is that each allows a maintenance crew to re-grade and re-compact with little concern for surface moisture loss. Gebhart et al.(1999) state that these salts provide the most satisfactory blend of application ease, cost, and dust control for semi-arid, semi-humid climates. Organic/Non-Bituminous Chemicals Compounds under this category include lignosulfonate, sulphite liquors, tall oil pitch, pine tar, and vegetable oils. These products generally perform well in arid environments but are not very effective when applied to aggregate surface material with few fines (Gebhart, et al., 1999). These dust control agents can be

11

very sticky and may harbor an unappealing odor. They often fail after heavy rains due to their water soluble, organic nature (Gebhart, et al., 1999). These products currently appear expensive, but the cost benefit equation continually changes. As a rule, they tend to be environmentally friendly. One compound with some supporting literature is lignosulfonate (lignin’). Lignin’ Lignin’ or lignosulfonate is a by-product of the paper making process and is regarded to be generally safe environmentally because of the fact that it is an organic product. This product performs very well under arid conditions. It binds particles together to increase the strength of the road and remains effective during long dry spells with low humidity (Bolander & Yamada, 1999). One of lignin’s weaknesses is that it is highly soluble in water, and its surface binding properties can be destroyed by heavy rain. It also has a tendency to stick to passing vehicles and is difficult to remove from painted surfaces (Frazer, 2003). Lignin is most effective and shows the greatest longevity when the road has been scarified and the product has been mixed into the aggregate (Sanders & Addo, 1997). However, it is this same scarification process that reduces the current use of lignin’ on some haul roads, as the perceived costs of the down-time due to scarification and curing appears prohibitive. A study using lignin’ on Pikes Peak’s unpaved roads conducted by Sanders and Addo (1998) revealed that the lignin was 2.7 more effective at suppressing dust than water. After spring snowmelt, 8 months after application, there were indications that the Lignin’ was still functioning in a good proportion of the test sections. Petroleum Products Petroleum products include asphalt emulsions (modified and not), dust oils/dust fluids, and petroleum resin emulsions. These products may be effective in a variety of climates; however, because they are by-products of petroleum and waste oils, they may contain toxic materials with significant environmental effects, and are not considered safe unless they have been processed to remove toxins (Gebhart, et al., 1999). These products are usually very expensive and like the organic products, are very sticky and have a foul smell. Petroleum products are film forming and dust binding. They coat the dust particles and form a cohesive membrane that attaches each to adjacent particles. This results in a chained bond of large agglomerates that are too heavy to be dislodged by wind (James Informational Media, Inc., 2000).

12

Emulsified Asphalts Emulsified Asphalts work to control dust, but their use is very limited and the product must be applied with specialized equipment (Skorseth and Selim 2000). The soil type and density of the road surface can greatly affect the rate at which a petroleum product penetrates the road. Roads that have been scarified to loosen the aggregate achieve the greatest amount of soil penetration. If the road has not been scarified the use of products with low viscosities will be ineffective (Bolander, Yamada 1999). Polymers Polymers such as polyvinyl acrylics and acetates work by binding the surface particles together to form a semi-rigid film on the surface. Polymers are considered suitable for use under a wide range of climate and soil conditions and are most effective in environments that receive 8 to 40 inches of precipitation a year. Generally, a light compaction of the road after application of a polymer is recommended unless the product is mixed into the road surface (Bolander, Yamada 1999). Polymers are considered to be most effective on lightly trafficked areas. These types of palliatives are usually non-toxic and environmentally friendly (Gebhart, et al., 1999). Electro-Chemical Stabilizers Electro-Chemical stabilizers include sulphonated petroleum, ionic stabilizers and bentonite. They are not likely to leach out and are stated to be very effective at reducing dust emissions in clay or sandy aggregate types. These products work well under a variety of climate conditions; however, many of these products have not been tested using standard laboratory tests under field conditions. Small scale trials should be performed to determine site specific efficiency prior to larger scale usage (Gebhart, et al., 1999). Surfactants Essentially surfactants are additives that make water wetter, reduce surface tension and allow better penetration of the palliative. At least one product (Haul Road Dust Control) claims a cumulative effect, whereby each new application boosts the effectiveness of the previous levels. Several manufacturers of surfactants recommend prewetting of the roadbed, for their products to perform optimally. Similarly, Epps and Ehsan (2002) used prewetting in their laboratory study of aggregates and erosion. There is a slight trend within mine operations in the Powder River Basin to use highly diluted applications of MgCl2 and CaCl2 in all water applications, instead of a surfactant.

13

There are environmental concerns associated with the use of certain surfactants. (refer to page 17 of this document for a discussion of these impacts) Other Commercial Products A list of commercial products is posted by The New Mexico Environment/ Department of Air Quality Bureau, which can be accessed on the web at http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/dust_control.html and in Table 3.1 of this report. There are some products listed here that are not included in this literature review. Classification of every product is not possible in part due to lack of a literature history and to the proprietary nature of the commercial formulas. Mechanical Stabilization Mechanical or road stabilization is the mixing of two or more substrate materials to create a road surface that has the correct fine gradient and plasticity. This method does not involve the application of chemicals although they can be used in addition to the stabilization. One of the most effective substrate mixtures involves the addition of clays to a gravel and sand aggregate. The clay binds to the fine particles, and improves the roads stability and longevity. “When a gravel road resists lateral displacement during traffic, it is said to be mechanically stable, notes Gebhart, et al. (1999). This resistance is provided by the natural forces of cohesion and internal friction that exist in the soil.” Importance of Appropriate Dust Suppressant Application Appropriate application of a selected product is key to the overall effectiveness of a dust control plan. “It can translate either into success or costly wastefulness, failure, and more difficult maintenance down the line,” according to David Engle (2004), author of “Road Maintenance Techniques and Products Have Made Great Strides.” Engle also emphasizes timing as a critical component to successful application. He suggests an initial application during the narrow window between the spring rains and the start of the summer drought; “Keeping an eye on the weather forecast is critical; many expensive applications have been ruined by rainfall.” Not only is the timing of the application crucial, but the manner in which the product is applied is just as important - if not more so. Sanders and Addo (1993) describe two ways in which suppressants are most typically applied; mixed-in-place and spray methods. The mixed in place method involves mixing the suppressants with the road aggregate. When this application procedure is used it not only suppresses dust but it also provides for an improved road surface resulting in reduced maintenance costs. Spraying involves the high pressure application of the material to the road surface. Topical spraying is effective for short periods of time, though, resulting in the need for reapplications throughout the season (Sanders & Addo, 1997). It is usually wise to try a test section to determine how well the product is going to work on a specific gravel, and what type of application works best (Skorseth & Selim, 2000).
Almost all suppressants have a greater longevity and effectiveness when applied to a road that has been properly prepared, scarified, and the suppressant is mixed in with the aggregate and then compacted to a 6-inch thick wearing course (Sanders & Addo, 1997).

14

Another key application principle was identified by Bolander and Yamada (1999). They suggest that adequate penetration of the dust suppressant into the surface material is imperative. This penetration should be 3/8 to 3/4 of an inch in depth. Proper penetration will reduce the loss of palliative from surface wear and allow the surface to resist leaching. The process imparts cohesion, and resists aging. Bolander and Yamada (1999) in the USFS Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide, provide the following suggestions for applying dust suppressants: Application Tips • • • • • • Scarifying Sanders et al. (1997) include scarification of the road surface in their list of important techniques to be considered when applying dust suppressants and particularly specify the technique when using lignin. Organiscak et al. (2003) suggest that when using chlorides it is beneficial to loosen 1-2 inches of the road aggregate uniformly to allow the chemical to penetrate evenly. And like Bolander and Yamada (1999), the group stresses proper road preparation as a key to the effectiveness of a dust palliative, especially creating a good crown and drainage when using a chloride. They also state that when using a chloride the roadway should not be compacted before applying the chemicals and the road should be kept at optimum moisture before application, this allows the product to be absorbed quickly and evenly. For some suppressants it is recommended to keep traffic off the road surface for two to three hours after application to allow the product to absorb and cure (Skorseth & Selim, 2000). This characteristic is expected to be considered a limitation by mine engineers, who would have difficulty justifying the necessary down time involved on mine haul roads (see survey results, Appendix A). Grading after application also partially destroys the effect of many dust suppressants (Ferguson et al., 1999). Because of this, grading should be postponed after heavy application of suppressant for as long as possible. The EPA has recommended that a diluted reapplication be applied periodically (2 weeks to a month) to control loose surface material. They also state that weather related Repair unstable surface, grade (to a adequate depth) immediately prior to application Apply suppressants (especially salts) immediately after the wet season Apply after a rain, or spray the road before application, to ensure materials are more moist and thus more workable Adhere to manufactures recommendations on minimum application rate, compaction and curing time Use a pressure distributor to evenly distribute the suppressant Water frequently and lightly, not infrequently and heavily

15

application schedules should be considered prior to implementing a dust control program (EPA Fugitive Dust, 1992). The type of road aggregate is one factor that determines the type of dust control that is most effective. Organiscak et al. (2003) recommend effective applications for various road types in their article “Surface Mine Dust Control.” In road surfaces with poor size gradation, water is the only effective solution because chemical suppressants (most of which are water soluble) cannot compact the surface or form a new surface because they will leach. In sand they recommend bitumens because of the fact that they are not water soluble. On a road with good gradation all chemical suppressants can be used, and on a road with too much silt the road should just be rebuilt, as no dust control will be effective (Organiscak, et al., 2003). If a haul road is left untreated by a dust suppressant aggregate replacement will become necessary over shorter periods of time and maintenance will be required more frequently (Epps & Ehsan, 2002). Education and Training In addition to using prescribed application procedures, John Watson and Judith Chow (2000) from the Desert Research Institute suggest that the success of a dust control problem depends on outreach and education programs for contractors and public works agencies. In a coal mine, education should be extended to maintenance personnel. Environmental Impacts The major environmental concern when using dust suppressants is contamination of ground and surface water. Thomas Piechota, an assistant engineering professor at University of Nevada Las Vegas was quoted in Lance Frazer’s “Down with Road Dust (Innovations)” as saying it doesn’t matter what suppressant is used, there will always be some level of water quality impact (Frazer, 2003). Peichota noted that petroleum compounds were more harmful than suppressants such as magnesium chloride. Another area of impact he mentioned is the fact that the suppressants are creating a somewhat impenetrable road surface, which will increase runoff, which has its own hydrologic impacts. There is some potential for off-site plant damage during periods of heavy rainfall (Ferguson et al., 1999). All necessary precautions should be followed to unsure that these chemicals are kept away from water sources.

16

The following photo taken in June of 2004 in Larimer County, Colorado between Lyons and Estes Park strongly suggests runoff from a highway treated with a 30% solution of Sodium Chloride (rock salt) and sand may be impacting ponderosa and other pines (Anon’ CoDOT, 2004).

While no Wyoming coal mines use Sodium Chloride to treat dust on haul roads that we know of, the expected negative publicity from this environmental impact (near Boulder) may carryover into other road salts such as MgCl2 and CaCl2 which are heavily used. There is no scientific evidence yet of the actual cause of the tree damage, but the die-off appears to be confined to an area within 50’of the roadway for 20 plus miles, strongly suggesting road runoff and/or exhaust fumes as contributing factors. Conversely, few Wyoming coal mine haul roads traverse timbered acreage, limiting this specific impact. Surfactants, on the other hand, may pose some environmental concerns. M. Warhurst (1995) in a report to Friends of the Earth, England, outlines toxicity concerns with alkylphenol ethoxylate (APEO) surfactants, and calls for a more widespread ban on their use (The surfactant is currently banned in several European countries). He recommends the replacement of APEOs with linear alcohol ethoxylate surfactants, which are readily biodegradable according to Consultants in Environmental Sciences Ltd (CES, 1993).

17

Works Cited Anonymous Colorado Department of Transportation Official. Personal Interview with Author. June, 2004. Boulder, CO. Bolander, P., Yamada, A. (November 1999). “Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide.” United Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Technology and Development Program. San Dimas Technology and Development Center, San Dimas, California. Countess, R. et al. 2001. Methodology for Estimating Fugitive Windblown and Mechanically Resuspended Road Dust Emissions Applicable for Regional Air Quality Modeling. Paper in International Emission Inventory Conference, "One Atmosphere, One Inventory, Many Challenges." Denver, CO, April 30. (Power point presentation slides) Engle, D. (2004). “Bidding Farwell to Dusty Roads, Road Maintenance Techniques and Products Have Made Great Strides,” Forester Communications, Erosion Control January/February 2004. www.forester.net Environment Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage (1998). “Dust Control Best Practice Environment Management in Mining.” Sustainable Industry/Sustainable Minerals. Environmental Protection Agency 450/2-92-005 (1992). “Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information Document for Best Available Control Measures.” Office of Air Quality, Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Environmental Protection Agency (1998). “Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, AP-42. ” Volume 1, Ch 13, Unpaved Roads. Office of Air Quality, Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Epps, Amy, Ehsan, M. (2002). “Laboratory Study of Dust Palliative Effectiveness.” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. September/October 2002 p.427-435. Frazer, Lance (2003). “Down with Road Dust (Innovations),” National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Env Health Perspectives Dec. 2003 V111 i16 pA892(A). Ferguson, J.H. et al. (1999). “Fugitive Dust: Nonpoint Sources.” Agricultural MU Guide. University of Missouri-Columbia. Agricultural Publication G1885. Gebhart, D.L., Denight, M.L., Grau, R.H., (1999). “Dust Control and Technology Selection Key.” U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Land Management Laboratory, Resource Mitigation and Protection Division; and the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Pavements Division. James Informational Media, Inc (2000).“Better Roads, a Look at Dust Control and Road Stabilizers.” Better Roads Magazine www.betterroads.com/articles/prod500.htm

18

Larkin Laboratory (1986). “Calcium Chloride and Magnesium Chloride for Dust Control.” 1691 N. Swede Rd. Midland Michigan 48640 N. Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality (2003). “Economic Analysis of Particulates from Fugitive Dust Emissions Sources.” Organiscak, J.A., et al. (2003). “Chapter 5. Surface Mine Dust Control.” In Handbook for Dust Control in Mining, Center for Disease Control, IC # 9465. Rosbury, K.D., Zimmer, R.A. (1983). “Cost-Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on Unpaved Haul Roads, Volume 1: Results, Analysis, and Conclusions.” PEDCo Environmental, Inc. U.S. Bureau of Mines. Sanders, T. (2004). Personal Interview conducted by Temple Stevenson on the campus of Colorado State University, March 30, 2004. Sanders, T.G., Addo, J.Q. (2000). “Experimental Road Dust Measurement Device.” Journal of Transportation Engineering, November/December 2000. Sanders, T.G., Addo, J.Q. (1998). Pikes Peak Road Dust Project. Colorado State University. Sanders, T., Addo, J.Q., Ariniello, A., Heiden, W.F. (1997). “Relative Effectiveness of Road Dust Suppressants.” Journal of Transportation Engineering September/October 1997. p 393-397. Sanders, T.G., Addo, J.Q. (1997). “Effectiveness and Environmental Impact of Road Dust Suppressants.” MC Report NO. 94-28, Mountain Plains Consortium. Skorseth, K., Selim, A.A (2000). Gravel Road Maintenance and Design Manual. South Dakota Local Transportation Assistance Program. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Thompson R.J., Visser, A.T. (2002). “Benchmarking Management of Fugitive Dust Emissions From Surface-Mine Haul Roads.” Transaction of the Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 111/April, pp A28-A35. Watson, J.G., Chow, J.C. (2000). “Reconciling Urban Fugitive Dust Emissions Inventory and Ambient Source Contribution Estimates: Summary of Current Knowledge and Needed Research.” Desert Research Institute, Energy and Environmental Engineering Center. DRI Document No. 6110.4F Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for Visibility Protection- Review Report. 2003. Prepared by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division

19

20

II.

Recommended Practices and Best Available Control Measures

Best practices for dust control in a Wyoming surface coal mine simply means utilizing the most practical and effective methodology that is currently available. In many cases best practices can be achieved by appropriate planning and or the identification and control of dust sources as they are identified. According to “Dust Control Best Practices Environmental Management in Mining” prepared by Australia’s Department of the Environment and Heritage, best practices for dust control in a surface mine operation should include: Planning The identification of potential sources of dust A prediction of dust levels likely to occur An evaluation of the effect of the dust The incorporation of the dust predictions and control measures into mine planning and design Observation Observations of point sources which can be readily identified Dust emission rates based on qualitative estimates and models Controlling An aware workforce Integration of dust control into operations planning (construction, topsoil stripping, blasting) Intergrading dust control provisions into work practices (use of chemical palliatives) Monitoring and feedback dust emissions Efforts based on observational and qualitative assessments Awareness of current methods and technology used for dust control (Environment Australia, 1998, p.8-9) The most effective, consistent and cost effective dust suppression strategy is a long term plan that looks to control dust before the problem arises. Applying dust controls after the problem arises is impractical and costly. Because of this, mine planning has a very significant role to play in dust control (Environment Australia, 1998).

21

Dust Control Strategies When developing a dust suppression plan there should be a set of standardized procedures for application and maintenance. Standardized application this will minimize confusion on how the product is applied and maximize the product’s effectiveness. A sound set of road application and maintenance procedures will result in safer working conditions, a decrease in actual maintenance work, in addition to a decrease in overall road dust emissions. The following quote prepared for the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories, highlights the fact that controlling road dust emissions should be seen as a process, not just the application of chemical palliatives. “The best way to avoid dust problems is to ensure that roads are properly maintained by surface grading and shaping for cross-sectional crowning to prevent excessive road surface wearing and consequent dust generation. Chemical dust suppressants are considered a secondary solution, to be used only when maintenance practices have been implemented to the greatest extent possible,” (Gebhart, et al. 1999, p. 10)

Gebhart, et al. (1999) recognize three major types of dust control methods including: (1) Construction and Maintenance; (2) Mechanical Stabilization; and (3) Chemical Palliatives. Construction and Maintenance Good construction and maintenance practices are fundamental to providing durable and erosion resistant trafficked surfaces in dust-prone areas. Due to environmental and traffic deterioration of the aggregate surface haul roads require frequent maintenance. Gebhart, et al. (1999) suggest that the following construction and maintenance steps be performed to prevent dust emissions on unpaved roads: Use of a well graded aggregates consisting of an adequate amount of fines that can be used as cohesive binders. Retention of a crown on the road surface to provide adequate drainage. Drainage for the wearing surface, shoulder, and verge. Proper compaction of the wearing surface after the addition of aggregate and grading. Reduced maintenance grading during dry weather conditions. Creating adequate surface drainage should be provided in order to minimize damage caused by moisture. Standing water in the roadway will lead to surface softening and failure (Skorseth, Selim 2000).

22

Compaction of the road after adding aggregate and grading will increase the density and strength of the wearing surface as well as retention of larger aggregates (Gebhart, Denight, Grau, 1999). Mechanical stabilization A road is considered stable when it resists lateral displacement caused by traffic. Mechanical stabilization is achieved by mixing soils of two or more gradations. This type of resistance is attributed to the natural forces of cohesion and the internal friction that are present in the soil (Gebhart, et al. 1999). Dust control products often have an added benefit of increasing soil stabilization. According to Skorseth and Selim (2000) in “Gravel Road Maintenance and Design Manual,” soil stabilization will control the loss of fines from the road surface that typically result in distresses such as wash-boarding and reduced skid resistance. This type of unstable road becomes hard to maintain and hauling in new road aggregate with a higher percentage of fines becomes expensive. Aggregate loss can be as much as one ton of aggregate per mile per year on a typical unpaved county road for each vehicle that passes over a road daily (Sanders, Addo, 1998) and losses would be substantially higher on haul roads. A reduction in blade maintenance is another benefit of using a dust control product. When the road remains tightly bound and stable it will require less maintenance (Skorseth, Selim 2000). Manufactures recommend a delay in blading for as long as possible once a product has been applied because blading can reduce or remove the dust control product from the road. Chemical Palliatives The use of chemical palliatives should be used in conjunction with the two other methods, especially if mechanical stabilization is cost-prohibitive and high dust emissions persist. When chemical dust palliatives are maintained over a long-term basis there can be a 50-75% or more reduction in dust generation. Gebhart, et al. (1999) feel that the dust control methods should be applied in the order discussed here: (1) construction and maintenance, (2) mechanical stabilization, and (3) chemical palliatives in order to reduce dust emissions successfully. Applying Chemical Palliatives Before applying any dust suppressant, at minimum basic road maintenance needs to be performed. Preparing a road before the application of chemical palliatives should include the construction of a good crown on the driving surface, good shoulder drainage, and a fresh blading of the road surface to remove any potholes or other imperfections (Skorseth, Selim 2000). In addition scarifying the road in order to loosen the soil a minimum of one to two inches can be done. This will leave a uniform depth of loose aggregate across the road will allow even and fast penetration of the dust control product into the road surface. Several authors and product distributors have cited the need for scarification because of the added depth of saturation it can provide. This deeper saturation is directly related to increased dust control effectiveness. Although there may be some added costs and

23

time associated with scarification, in the long run it is generally believed the extended life and increased effectiveness of the product outweighs the initial application preparation costs. The following list is a compilation of recommendations by Bolander and Yamada (1999) for applying dust control products from numerous authors and product distributors. Suppressant Application Tips • • • • • • Repair unstable surface, grade (to a adequate depth) immediately prior to application Scarify the road to loosen the surface material to allow for even penetration of the product into the soil Apply suppressants (especially salts) immediately after the wet season (apply directly after a rain or pre-wet the surface prior to application) Adhere to manufacturer’s recommendations on minimum application rate, compaction and curing time Use a pressure distributor and realign the water nozzles on the application truck to ensure a even distribution of the suppressant Water frequently and lightly, not infrequently and heavily

Water as a Palliative and its application Applying water on problem areas provides immediate but short term results. This inexpensive method of dust control is recommended as a short-term solution to dust emission problems (Gebhart, et al.,1999). Water is effective at controlling dust emissions because the water surrounds and adheres to the dust particle making it difficult for the dust particles to move. However, under continual wetting conditions a pumping of the fine to the roads wearing surface may occur (Gebhart, et al.,1999). Excessive moisture on unpaved roads can lead to negative effects including a reduction in the strength of the road bed, road deformation under vehicle loading, and an increased potential for brittle failure which produces smaller particles that can then be crushed by vehicle tires (Rosbury and Zimmer, 1983). In the EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors Volume 1, Ch 13, AP-42 (1998) it is noted that small increases in moisture content result in large increases in control efficiency, but only up to a point, beyond which additional efficiency grows slowly with increased watering. Water droplet size has been shown to be an important factor in dust suppression effectiveness (Gambatese, James 2001). If water droplets are too large, smaller dust particles generally just slipstream around the droplets without actually making contact. If the droplets are too small they just mix and circulate with the dust particles without actually wetting them. Small droplets may be negatively affected by wind and surface tension. An optimal water droplet size for surface impaction of fine 24

particulate agglomeration is approximately 500 um. To create an effective water spray system hollow cone nozzles which produce the greatest control of dust while minimizing clogging should be used. Angling the nozzles on the truck body in a horizontal angle or lower will protect the droplets from wind. Application practices issues There can be other problems that inhibit the effectiveness of using a dust control palliative. These include a lack of communication between water truck operators, applying a product where not needed (such as shoulders and berms), and confusion as to the desired outcome of using the product. The information in the following chart is taken from a presentation prepared by Rose Haroian, Environmental Manager for the Powder River Coal Company; and is helpful in addressing some of the operational problems that are encountered when using a dust palliative and or water to suppress dust. Problem Table 2.1 Dust Control Operations Recommendations Solution

Water trucks aren’t synchronized

Communicate between water trucks to determine where watering has and hasn’t taken place Maintain an understanding of what the desired goal of watering is, and have indicators that determine when the roads need watered. Sometimes the visual indicators are not accurate.

Operators are seeking dust elimination rather than dust control

Roads treated with dust control products are being watered too much Coal Dust caused by spillage Over watering creates more dust Spraying water in high wind Soft Spots Sprayers are not properly positioned Watering inappropriate areas such as berms Blades blade off watered areas Blades blade rock and chemicals into ditches

Newly treated roads only need water when they become visibly dusty. Do not attempt to apply water to coal spills, clean up the spillage instead Communication needs to occur between the blade and water truck operators, don’t water where it is not needed Adjust speed and location on the road to account for wind. Don’t over water, spot watering in the same location will cause road problems Modify sprayer locations to ensure the angles are optimizing the desired spray area Watch where you are watering. Relocate if needed. If this does not work turn off the outside sprayer. Blades should only blade where it is necessary Carry windrows across the road. Do not leave chemicals and scoria in the ditch

25

Real Time Data - Monitoring Visual indicators to perceive dust emissions problems are a useful technique, however it is hard to keep an eye on dust emissions 24 hours a day. The collection of real-time dust emission data from air quality monitors is important. A reliable PM10 emission inventory is required for the state’s SIP and is logical so that source specific dust control measures can be taken. The dust may be coming from an overburden pile or a county or coal bed methane (CBM) road, so automatic watering of the haul road would be inappropriate. The use of real-time data incorporated with the notification of personnel and a record of where the dust is coming from as well as weather conditions can create can create a higher understanding and accountability of dust emission exceedences. The monitoring network for particulate emissions in the Powder River Basin is extensive; operating since 1989, according to Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for Visibility Protection: 2003 Review Report (Wyo DEQ, 2003). Additional monitoring, including that of meteorological data is conducted at IMPROVE (Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments) locations. Figure 2.1 illustrates a sample protocol used by one mine to be followed based on various types of exceedences and events (aided by real-time data).
Figure 2.1 Sample Air Event Outline: Air Event Logging and Action Levels (_____________Mine, WY) If ug/m level = 300 (over 1 hr) (1) notify production supervisor Supervisor’s actions include: ensure adequate water trucks operating record water usage for this shift ensure problem areas are addressed notify____________________ If ug/m level = 80 (24 hr rolling average) (1) notify production supervisor Supervisor’s actions include: Same as above, plus: Estimate wind speed and direction Consider modifying plant operations contributing to dust Inspect dust generating segments of operation to ensure proper dust control Document conditions including offsite impacts, meteorological conditions Document actions taken Take photographs to document primary sources of dust (on or off site) Notify Senior Environmental Engineer if cause of dust event cannot be identified If ug/m level = 100 (24 hr) (1) Notify Operations Manager(OM), who will notify Sr. environmental engineer (SEE)and production coordinator(PC). (2) Notify General Manager (GM) if curtailment of operations is expected If ug/m level=150 (excursion event) (1) Notify the ____ Environmental Manager as well as OM, SEE, and PC, and GM. (2) Contact the Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality by phone Actions to consider Curtail production operations Contact neighbors contributing to dust impact (county roads, landowners Water/suppress dust on any identified problem areas Document actions taken If ug/m level=120 (24 hr) (1) Notify same as above (150 level) Contact ____ Environmental Manager Contact ____ President Contact the Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality by phone

26

Properly applying and maintaining a dust control product can be more important than selecting the perfect one because the manner in which a product is used directly relates to how effective the product will be. Cost-effective dust control depends not only on application but also on proper maintenance and regular reapplication. Properly using a dust control product can reduce the amount of grading that is required, decrease the amount of road aggregate that is lost, and reduce vehicle wear and tear. Ultimately all of these benefits result in a savings of time and money, which is illustrated in Table 3.2 of this manual. A BACM recommendation from Dona An~a County, New Mexico (2000) can be summarized as Smart Timing and involves the timing of either operations or palliative application so as to prevent the most likely exceedences due to meteorological conditions. The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ, 2001) notes that technological and economic feasibility is a valid criteria for determining BACM and adds that BACM will change as new products and approaches are proven technologically and economically feasible. Gaffney and Shimp (1997), in a report for the California Air Resources Board, call for improved GIS technology to calculate and spatially analyze emissions. In compiling BACM recommendations, the author visited with mine engineers. To ascertain the opinions of surface coal mine engineers in the Powder River Basin relative to dust suppression on haul roads a survey was developed and distributed. Five responses were recorded and are summarized in Appendix A. of this report.

27

Best Available Control Measures (BACM) Recommendations The following control measure recommendations have surfaced from a thorough review of the literature and analysis of the fugitive dust situation facing Wyoming surface coal mines. Mine representatives, agents from the Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality, and Region 8 of the EPA, and other appropriate parties should review and discuss the strategies for technological and economic feasibility and expected effectiveness before a final BACM list is completed. Table 2.2 Best Available Control Measures - BACM (Recommendations) For Controlling Fugitive Dust on Mine Haul Roads
Keywords Monitoring Reporting Monitoring Reporting Controlling Inventory Monitoring Controlling, Documenting Documenting controlling Communication training, communication Monitoring Modeling Controlling Controlling Controlling Recommended Practice Develop a protocol (similar to example given in Figure 2.1) for notification of appropriate plant personnel and environmental agencies (e.g. Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality) in reaction to various dust events. Develop a report template for documenting and reporting dust events Be prepared to supplement current water truck fleet with rental/vendor trucks to ensure no exceedences occur Use real time g/h TEOM samplers to make adjustments in mine operations as necessary Develop a chemical suppressant regimen that effectively and consistently controls dust. Be prepared to justify this regimen by monitored and documented use to determine effectiveness at varying climatic conditions. Become aware of emerging technologies. Closely document water usage along with climatic conditions (current effectiveness of water is hard to determine due to lack of reliable data) Share successes and failures with other mine engineers, as dust is a regional issue, not a site issue. Periodically conduct personnel appropriate training in dust monitoring and suppression. Ensure communication across all levels of operation. Maintain at least one person on site who is certified in opacity monitoring or contract with a vendor certified in opacity monitoring Seek to prevent dust rather than react to it. Include weather forecasting into dust event predictions Incorporate GIS modeling into dust control planning. Maintain equipment in optimal condition (e.g. spray nozzles) Follow proven or recommended palliative application procedures (e.g. surface prep, application rates and times, curing, compaction and grading) Take action to reduce spillage from haul trucks, as coal and overburden spillage destabilizes the road and significantly reduces the effect of palliatives. Maintain optimal roadbed conditions.

28

Works Cited Bolander, P., Yamada, A. (November 1999). “Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide.” United Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Technology and Development Program. San Dimas Technology and Development Center, San Dimas, California. Dona Ana County, New Mexico. (2000) “Suggested Best Available Control Measures (BACM) for Reducing Windblown Dust from Manmade Sources in Dona Ana County.” Report. Environment Australia (1998). “Dust Control Best Practices Environmental Management in Mining.” Australia Government, Department of the Environment and Heritage. www.deh.gov.au/industry/industry-performance/minerals/booklets/dust/dust1.html Gaffney, P., Shimp D. (1997). “Improving PM10 Emission Inventories.” Report to California Air Resources Board, Technical Support Division. Gambatese, John A., James, David E. (2001). “Water Suppression Using Truck-Mounted Water Stray Systems.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management V. 137 n1. Gebhart, D.L., Denight, M.L., Grau, R.H., (1999). “Dust Control and Technology Selection Key.” U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Land Management Laboratory, Resource Mitigation and Protection Division; and the U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Pavements Division. Haroian, Rose, and Best Practices Team (2003). “Haul Road Dust Suppression, Key Issues and Solution.” Powder River Coal Company. Rosbury, K.D., Zimmer, R.A. (1983). “Cost-Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on Unpaved Haul Roads, Volume 1: Results, Analysis, and Conclusions.” PEDCo Environmental, Inc. U.S. Bureau of Mines. Sanders, T., Addo, J.Q., Ariniello, A., Heiden, W.F. (1997). “Relative Effectiveness of Road Dust Suppressants.” Journal of Transportation Engineering September/October 1997. p 393-397. Skorseth, K., Selim, A.A (2000). Gravel Road Maintenance and Design Manual. South Dakota Local Transportation Assistance Program. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Thompson R.J., Visser, A.T. (2002). “Benchmarking Management of Fugitive Dust Emissions From Surface-Mine Haul Roads.” Transaction of the Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 111/April, pp A28-A35.

29

30

III. Dust Suppression - Selection Guides The information supplied throughout this section is intended to provide a convenient resource for the reader, so as to serve as a starting point for a discussion of various features and applications of dust suppressants. The data are not necessarily comprehensive or complete. It is the user’s responsibility to thoroughly research and compare products and vendors to determine which can provide high quality results and services. Vendors are not equally reliable, or comparable, relative to timeliness, price or their adherence to recommended application procedures. It is also the user’s responsibility to determine the extent of environmental impacts associated with a given product or application procedure. A vendor’s claim of nontoxicity should not be considered rigorous proof. As a rule, there is a lack of detailed studies on dust suppressant effectiveness and their impact on the environment and human health (Frazer, 2003). It is not the intent of this document to endorse any product or vendor and any that have been referenced were cited only because of their willingness to provide published information.

TABLE 3.1 DUST SUPPRESSION PRODUCTS, is a compilation of known products, categories and types, as well as contacts where more information on the product can be located. Selection of a dust control product should include a consideration of the manufacturer’s recommended application procedure. Many times a product is not selected if it requires extensive application procedures that under the normal operations of a coal mine cannot be performed. Examples of such procedures include extensive road preparation causing a cessation of operations and/or a prolonged curing time. Additional selection criteria for dust palliatives should include how the product will perform under high traffic volume and weight, site specific weather conditions, length of time the product will be effective, how it works on different types of aggregates, effectiveness on steep slopes, and in extreme temperatures, and other criteria depending on individual needs.

31

32

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category Bentonite Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor Bio Cat 300-1 Central Oregon Bentonite Regional Distributor Phone number 541-477-3351 Web site Citation/author

Bentonite Clay Additives Bentonite Montmorillonite Enzymes Enzymes Enzymes Enzymes Electrochemical Ionic Sulfonated Oils Sulfonated Oils Sulfonated Oils Sulfonated Oils Organic colloids modified polysaccaride

Pelbon

American Colloid Co.

800-426-5564 847-392-4600

Volclay Stabilite Bio Cat 300-1

American Colloid Co. Soil Stabilization Produces

708-392-4600 800-523-9992 800-523-9992 800-523-9992 714-593-1034 800-444-7741 831-684-1148 604-684-8072 503-678-1216 800-317-1968 800-527-9919 615-365-4480 www.cypherltd.com Frazer, Lance 2003 Ntl. Institute of Env Health Sciences Gillies et al. 1999, Watson et al. 1996

Soil Stabilization Products Co., Inc Soil Stabilization Products Co., EMCSQUARED Inc Perma-Zyme The Charbon Group. Inc. 11X Enzymes Plus, Div of Anderson UBIX No. 0010 Affiliates Terrastone Morrhead Group CBR Plus, Inc. (Canada) Earth Sciences Products Corp. Dallas Roadway Products, Inc. Mantex Cypher USA

CBR Plus Condor SS SA-44 System Settler Dust Stop

33

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category Lignosulfonate Lignosulfonate Lignosulfonate Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor generic CalBinder DC-22 California-Fresno Oil Co. Dallas Roadway Products, Inc. Regional Distributor Phone number 209-486-0220 800-317-1968 Web site Citation/author Sanders, et al 1997

Lignosulfonate

DC-9112

GE Water Technologies

GE Betz Inc.

605-642-3147 www,gewater.com 866-439-8272

Lignosulfonate Lignosulfonate Lignosulfonate Lignosulfonate Organic NonPetroleum Molasses/Sugar Beet

Dustac Dustac-100 Polybinder RB Ultra Plus Dust Down

Georgia Pacific West, Inc. Georgia Pacific West, Inc. Jim Good Marketing Roadbind America Inc. Amalgamated Sugar Co.

360-733-4410 360-733-4410 805-746-3783 888-488-4273 208-733-4104

Tall Oil Emulsion Dust Control E

Pacific Chemicals, Inc/ Lyman Dust Control

604-828-0218 800-952-6457

Tall Oil Emulsion Dustrol Ex

Pacific Chemicals, Inc/ Lyman Dust Control ArrMaz Custom Chemicals, Inc. Schommer & Sons Winter Haven FL Portland, Oregon Greeenland Corp.

604-828-0218 800-952-6457

Tall Oil Emulsion Road Oyl Vegetable Oils Dust Control Agent SS

863-293-7884 www.roadproductscorp.com 888-682-6040

Vegetable Oils

Soapstock

Kansas Soybean Association Indiana Soybean Association

800-328-7390 800-735-0195

34

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor Any major asphalt supplier Any major asphalt supplier Lyondell Petrochemical Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. Pacific Northern Industrial Fuels Actin Inc. East Chicago, Ind Witco Corp. Chandler AZ 800-423-8434 800-321-0699 www.midwestind.com 206-284-4421 219-397-5020 800-494-8287 530-241-1364 909-829-0505 Gillies et al. 1999 Watson et al. 1996 Regional Distributor Phone number Web site Citation/author

Asphalt Emulsion CSS-1 Cutback Dust Oil/Dust Fluids Dust Oil/Dust Fluids Dust Oil/Dust Fluids Modified Asphalt Emulsion Modified Asphalt Emulsion Modified Asphalt Emulsion Modified Asphalt Emulsion MC-70 Duo Prime Oil EnviroKleen Fuel Oil Asphotac Coherex DOPE-30 Penetrating Emulsion Primer (PEP) Pennz Suppress-D

Organic Petroleum

Morgan Emultech, Inc. Kock Asphalt Co

Modified Asphalt Emulsion Modified Asphalt Emulsion Modified Asphalt Emulsion Modified Asphalt Emulsion

American Refining Group

EnVirotech Services Inc Greeley, CO

814-368-1200 www.pennzsuppress.com 307-369-3878

Midwwest Research Instititute for the EPA, 1998

Petro Tac Road Pro Sandstill

Sytech Products Toledo OH Midwest Industrial Supply Energy Systems Associates

800-537-0288 800-321-0699 703-503-7873

35

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category wetting additive wetting additive wetting additive wetting additive with both ionic and anionic properties wetting additive with both ionic and anionic properties wetting additive with both ionic and anionic properties wetting additive, latex based sealant Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor aklyphenol BASF Chemical Division, Mt. ethoxylates Olive, NJ Haul Road Dust Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. Control TerraBond Water Wetter TerraBond Industries-Fluid Sciences, LLC Golden West Industries, Wright, Wyoming Golden West Industries, Wright, Wyoming Golden West Industries, Wright, Wyoming Regional Distributor Phone number Web site Citation/author Warhurst,Michael 1995

800-543-1740 www.basf.com Fairmont Supply Co Green River, WY 307-875-2492 www.midwestind.com 888-356-7847 www.terrabond.net

D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC Tech Report, 1996

Chem-Loc 101

Golden West Industries Heber City, UT

800-321-dust

Surfactant

Chem-Loc 102

Golden West Industries Heber City, UT

800-321-dust

Chem-Loc 411

Golden West Industries Heber City, UT

800-321-dust

DusTreat DC9136

GE Betz, GE Water Technology

www.gewater.com

36

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category Acrylic copolymer Acrylic copolymer Combination of Polymers copolymer Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor Dust Buster Midwest Industrial Supply HR51 Environmental Products and Envirotac II Applications, Inc. Top Shield DustShield Base Seal Internationa, Inc. Soil-LOC, Inc, Scottsdale, AZ DirtGlue Enterprises Soilworks, LLC Gilbert AZ Regional Distributor Fairmont Supply Co Green River WY Phone number Web site Citation/author

307-875-2492 www.midwestind.com 888-674-9174 www.envirotac.com 800-729-6985 888-828-7300 www.soil-shield.com 888-606-6108 www.dirtglue.com 800-545-5420 www.soiltac.com 888-356-7847 www.terrabond.net 800-835-9844 800-368-4115 970-223-4998 972-234-8565 561-969-0400

polymer emulsion DirtGlue polymer emulsion Soiltac

TerraBond Dust TerraBond Industries-Fluid polymer emulsion Cap Sciences, LLC Polyvinyl Acetate Aerospray 70A Cytec Industries Polyvinyl Acetate Soil Master WR Vinyl Acrylic Vinyl Acrylic Synthetic Polymer Emulsions Vinyl Acrylic Vinyl Acrylic Vinyl Acrylic Vinyl Acrylic Earthbound L ECO-110 Liquid Dust Control Marloc PolyPavement Soil Seal Environmental Soil Systems, Inc. Earth Chem Inc. Chem-crete Enviroseal Corp. Reclamare Corp. PolyPavement Company Soil Stabilization

323-954-2240 800-523-9992

37

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor Regional Distributor Phone number Web site Citation/author Gillies et al 1999, D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC Tech Report, 96 Watson et al. 1996

Vinyl Acrylic

Soil Sement

Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc.

800-321-0699

Vinyl Acrylic

Soiloc-D

Hercules Environmental

800-815-7668 770-303-0878

Vinyl Acrylic Vinyl Acrylic

TerraBond PolySeal Top Seal

TerraBond Industries-Fluid Sciences, LLC Soils Control International

888-356-7847 www.terrabond.net 817-526-5550 D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC Tech Report, 1996

polyacrylamides combined with Tri-PAM super absorbents

US Marine Corps

970-330-0281 908-464-1500

Vernon Prevatt, D. Hart (USMC brief)

38

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Type Suppressant Category blend of calcium chloride and magnesium chloride calcium chloride calcium chloride calcium chloride calcium chloride magnesium chloride magnesium chloride magnesium chloride magnesium chloride Manufacturer or Primary Product NAME Distributor Regional Distributor Phone number Web site Citation/author

Dust Fyghter

Midwest Industrial Supply

800-321-0699

D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC Tech Report, 1996

Calcium Chloride liquid generic Dowflake Liquidow Chlor-tex DustGard Dust-Off magnesium chloride

General Chemical

800-668-0433 www.gogenchem.com

Sanders, et al 1997 Sanders, et al 1997

Dow Chemical Dow Chemical Soil-Tec North American Salt Company Cargill Salt

Oxford, Inc. Moyie Springs, ID

208-267-2297 www.dow.com 800-447-4369 702-873-2023

Dust Busters, Evanston 307-789-3878 www.nasalt.com , WY 800-553-7879 Dust Busters, Evanston 307-789-3878 , WY

Sanders, et al 1998

Water absorbing

Magnesium chloride (90%) and 10% Dust Eliminator Brody Chemical surfactant (ethoxylated nonly phenol) Magnesium chloride and proprietery corn based additive sodium chloride sodium chloride Caliber DCA2000

Brody Chemical-Casper 800-488-2436 www.brodychemical.com WY

Glacial Technologies

EnVirotech Services Inc Greeley, CO (multiple dust control products)

800-369-6878 www.envirotechservices.com

Engle, David 2004. in Erosion Control

IMC Salt Morton Salt

IMC Salt Morton International

800-323-1641 312-807-2000

39

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSION APPLICATIONS GUIDE, is a product selection tool, compiled from published sources. This particular guide assembles products in general categories with the addition of application guidelines, environmental issues, application notes, limitations and attributes where known. The reader again should be cautioned that the table cannot be considered complete or comprehensive. It is probable that there are more substantial differences within a product category than is implied within the table. Since new products are continually being developed, the information compiled in Table 3.2 is incomplete from that perspective as well. Users are encouraged to work with vendors in testing new products….and just as importantly, in sharing the results. Detailed case studies with less proprietary data are needed.

40

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Clay Additives

Bentonite

unknown (but quality road construction is considered crucial to dust control)

generally unknown but no reported vegetation or freshwater impacts

1 to 3% of road material by dry weight

1 treatment every 5 years

agglomerates fine dust may become particles. slippery when Generally wet if high fines increases the occur. dry strength of material under dry conditions clay fines needed for best performance. Requires long Needs time to curing time. set up/cure limited life span Test on-site prior to large scale applications changes characteristics of clay size particles. Generally effective regardless of climate conditions. Least likely to leach out.

Electro-chemical

Enzymes or Sulfonated Oils

low; 39% after one week and 0% after 11 months (Gillies et al.)

some products are highly acidic in highly diluted at 1:600 their undiluted in some cases but no form. Needs application rate known product specific analysis

?

Organic colloids

modified polysaccharide

biodegradable

41

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Dust Oil/Dust Fluids

85% initial

claimed non hazardous but with all petroleum based products .46 gal/sq yd there is the potential for hydrocarbon contamination.

MRI test cured down time for for 45 hrs with curing was no traffic extensive

42

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Organic Petroleum can range from .1 to 1 blade mixing for gal per sq yd for initial stabilized roads app and less for and rolling reapps

95% after one week Modified Asphalt and 53% after 11 Emulsion months (Gillies et al.)

not good in high pH soils in dry conditions may not retain resilience. Can be become crusty and fragment under traffic and wet condition weather. specific Some products 2 rolling required are difficult to mechanically maintain Can sprayed be mixed with fresh or salt water. Waste oils contain toxic materials and must be processed to remove these toxins. Odorous. Sticky

binds or agglomerates surface particles because of asphalt adhesive properties. Some are film forming Waterproofs the road. Non toxic, non corrosive Effective in a multitude of environments Considered relatively expensive (Gephart).

43

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Lignosulfonate

80% range

No strong water quality issues although BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) may be high upon leaching into a small stream

.09 gal/sq yd initial followed by 3 maintenance doses of .045gal/sq yd annual

scarify to a depth of 4", prewet, mix insitu, compact

Product may stick to vehicles. On site mixing is costly. Effectiveness No cure time reduced by suggested by heavy rains. at least one Becomes vendor. When slippery when 3 maintenance doses prewetting the wet and brittle at a rate of .01 gal/ft2 road the use when dry. of surfactant Difficult to may be maintain a hard beneficial. surface. Less effective on igneous, crushed gravel and medium to low fines. Odorous.

Binds road surface particles. Under dry conditions it increases the dry strength of material. Retains effectiveness under long dry periods. Performs best in arid and semiarid conditions. Can be reshaped in soils with high amounts of clay.

44

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Organic Nonpetroleum several products shown to have low 135 degree F .25 to .5 gal per sq yd impact on heated initial freshwater aquatic application environments

Vegetable Oils

cost of heated application trailers may be the warmer the prohibitive, agglomerates product the limited 1 the surface faster the geographic particles penetration availability oxidizes rapidly and then becomes brittle.

Tall Oil Emulsion

claimed to be suitable for environmentally sensitive areas but mostly unknown

.3 to 1 gal per sq yd at 1:4 dilution rate

several days of cure time suggested by at laid down like least one asphalt, mixed vendor. Difficult 1 with crushed to maintain a stone hard surface. Effective in a wide range of aggregates

Adheres surface particles together. Greatly increases dry strength of material under dry conditions. Limited number of treatments needed.

45

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Surfactant

wetting additive (some have ionic and anioinc properties) Also includes some latex based sealants

akylphenol ethoxylates have issues related to biodegradability and human impacts (9-10 mole nonyl phenol ethoxylates have site specific and been banned in dependant on Europe due to conditions impacts on human endocrine system) also used to extinguish coal fires generally claimed nonhazardous

site prep is more dependant on primary suppression agent and not surfactant

Diluted at rates of 1:1000 or less and then applied either with primary suppressant or with water only makes water wetter

46

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Acrylic copolymer

80% after 12 mo and 95% after 8 for vinyl acrylic (one result) 95% claimed non after one week and hazardous 85% after 11 months (Gillies et al.)

site specific

scarifying and grading and mixed insitu and compacted followed by topical application for extreme protection the product needs to be mixed insitu

do not store or apply below at least 30% freezing do solids, addition not apply during of surfactant or when rain is may enhance expected in 24 penetration hrs test bed cured for 7 days

polyacrylamidce s combination with super absorbents

reduced dust by 8090% at helicopter none listed landing sites in the desert

1 lb for every 150 ft.

product is applied with a fertilizer spreader then raked and saturated with water at a rate of 1 gallon per 5 sq/ft. Then topped with an emulsion

application not varies commercially depending on available soil pH

47

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Synthetic Polymer Emulsions

polymer emulsion

environmentally safe and biodegradable no known water 1 gal undiluted per 50 quality or plant sq ft impacts but needs product specific analysis

May require specialized equipment for mixing in with soil if not applied topically

can apply either sprayed difficult to topically or maintain a hard mixed in surface place, followed by compaction

binds surface particles because of glue like properties

48

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Vinyl Acrylic

80% on average environmentally after 12 months safe 95% after 8 months

Scarification recommended as the product runs easily grade, scarify, apply 1st coat, roll, apply 2nd .5 gal/sq yd most application and typical one product roll again grade suggests .75 gal/ sq top 3-6 inches of yd (1st coat) followed soil. Best when by 1:15 at .5gal/sq yd applied to a moist surface and optimal soil moisture at least one product does not recommend prewetting

varies: one vendor suggests road use can be resumed soon after application, other vendors suggest product needs to cure for 812 hrs at 72 deg F. Two step application followed by compaction suggested for all soil types

curing/drying time is typically recommended do not apply below 36-40 deg F. Not recommended for highly trafficed surfaces

binds soil particles together may include a dye so applicators can better ascertain coverage Generally considered nontoxic. Best on lightly trafficed surfaces

49

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

calcium chloride less than MgCl2

long term may use result in water quality degradation in runoff conditions Freshwater aquatics species may develop .4 gal/sq yd or chloride concentrations; negligible if proper buffer zones exist. Similar impacts on trees as Mag Chloride.

can be topically sprayed or mixed in place (requires scarifying)

50

At 77o F, It starts to absorb water at 29% RH. At 100o F, it starts to absorb water at 20% RH. corrosive to metal (corrosive Lower freezing point than inhibitors can be added) It MgCl2. Treated roads can be requires a regraded and minimum RH level to absorb recompacted moisture from with less impact on product the air. Does works better in not perform as capability winter than Performs better well as MgCl2 4-Feb some other over long, dry than MgCl2 in products high humidity. spells. Rainwater tends Moderately priced. Lowers to leach out the freezing soluble point of the road chlorides. Slippery when moisture and helps prevent wet if a high amount of fines frost heaving, thus reducing are present. road maintenance. Provides greater density with less compaction effort

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

More Water absorbing calcium chloride deliquescence than MgCl2, (flake) up to 98% for 1-5 days

All chlorides pose a potential hazard to offsite plants 1.5% by weight of after a heavy aggregate rainfall. same as liquid CaCl2.

tightly blade and pre-wet

works well on steep slopes no 2nd application needed grading only

51

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

magnesium chloride

generally high

corrosive, water shed quality issues can be minimized with adequate buffer zone. Affects pine, hemlock, poplar, ash, spruce and maple. Potential concerns with spills. (surfactant additive (particularly nonyl phenol ethoxlates) and/or other proprietary additives may also have impacts)

.5 gal/sq yd initial maintenance is .3 gal/sq yd (some mines using very diluted ratios (1%) instead of surfactants with normal watering recommended application rates vary by road type with gravel the lowest per sq yd and clay the highest

52

Absorbs water from the air at 32% RH independent of corrosive to temperature. metal may Harder surface have limited than CaCl2. effectiveness on Treated roads coal fines can be regraded Requires varying and combinations addition of recompacted water, used (e.g. with less impact especially if different on product surfactants or below 32% capability relative additives; Effective in drier humidity. 2-3 full treatments per including climates. similar ratios Rainwater and Reasonable season of CaCl2 and over-watering cost. Less tend to leach MgCl2. maintenance out soluble Several mines needed chlorides switch to (Sanders). necessitating CaCl2 in Generally reapplication. If provides the Winter roads contain a best high fine combination of content, they application ease, may become durability, cost slippery when and dust control wet. for semi-arid, semi-humid and humid climates (Gephart et al.)

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

Water

water

Low (40%) at typical rate. When rate of use is doubled, effectiveness may increase to 90% for short durations, sometimes as low as 12 minutes increases siltation EPA, AP-42 (1998) requires large notes that moisture quantities ratio of 2 equates to 75% efficiency. Significant increases in moisture ratio are needed to increase efficiency to 95% (e.g. 2.5 times)

light watering preferred and numerous applications

blading and repeated reapplications as needed site specific

evaporation necessitates numerous reapplications controls dust for a limited time, (as low as 12 minutes in high temp and wind conditions). labor intensive. Expensive over long term use when all costs are considered. Can pump fines to the surface

agglomerates the surface particles and is normally readily available. Can have positive immediate results and is generally considered inexpensive as a short term dust control

53

TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE PM 10 effectiveness The author cannot verify that all levels listed are Environmental time averaged; Impact the method preferred by MRI for its ability to show true effectiveness.

Suppressant Type

Suppressant Category

Recommended application rate (general vendor recommendations documentation of effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Site preparation and or maintenance needed

# of applications per year (general vendor recommendations Site specific documentation of notes effectiveness on haul roads is often inadequate)

Limitations

Attributes

The above list and all other materials supplied throughout this document are intended to provide a convenient source of information for the reader, so as to serve as a starting point for a discussion of various features and applications.....but the data is not necessarily fully comprehensive or complete. It is the user's responsibility to thoroughly research and compare products and vendors to determine which can provide high quality results and services. Vendors are not necessarily equally reliable, or comparable relative to timeliness, price and their adherence to recommended application procedures. It is not the intent of this document to endorse any product or vendor and any that have been referenced were cited because of their willingness to provide information only. The reader is referred to the following sources for additional selection guides: Ferguson, John, W. Downs, D. Pfost. 1999. Fugitive Dust: NonPoint Sources, Agriculture MU Guide, U of MO BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand is a measure of the amount of biodegradeable organic material present in a sample of water. 5mg/L or less is desireable. Bolander, Peter, and A. Yamada. 1999. Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide. USFS Sanders, Thomas, and J. Addo. 1993. Effectiveness and Environmental Impact of Road Dust Suppressants, Mountain Plains Consortium Thompson, R.J. and A. T. Visser 2002. Benchmarking and management of fugitive dust emissions from surface mine haul roads. Table 1 Palliative Selection Matrix Gebhart, Dick, M. Denight, and R. Grau. 1999. Dust Control Guidance and Technology Selection Key, US Army Construction Engineering Research Lab. Specific test results (effectiveness) for dust suppressants can also be found in the following sources: EPA. 1998. Compilation Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, Volume I, Fifth Edl, Section 13.2.2, Unpaved Roads. Research Triangle Park, NC Cowherd.C. Jr. et al., 1988. Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources, EPA-450/3-88-008, US.EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC Muleski, G. E., et al., 1984. Extended Eval' of Unpaved Road Dust Suppressants in the Iron and Steel Industry, EPA-600/2-84-027, EPA, OH Cowherd.C. Jr. and J. S. Kinnsey. 1986. Indentification, Assessment and Control of Fugitive Dust Particulate Emissions, EPA-600/8-86-023, EPA, OH Muleski, G.E. and C. Cowherd, Jr., 1986. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Chemical Dust Suppressants on Unpaved Roads, EPA-600/2-87-102, EPA, OH Gillies, et al. 1999. Long Term Efficiencies of Dust Suppression to Reduce PM 10 Emissions From Unpaved Roads , JAWMA, 49, 3-16

54

TABLE 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET, is a price and product comparison worksheet. Users can explore various costing scenarios with the excel spreadsheet, but should be cautioned that all data included involves estimates. Reliable pricing data are very difficult to obtain. First of all, there are a multitude of variables affecting price, and as many affecting the selection of a given product and application. Secondly, we were not able to ascertain the price of all dust suppressants that are currently being used in Wyoming coal mines. When the price of a product has been provided by a vendor or end user and is felt to be reasonably accurate it was included. However, costs of product and application measures vary significantly by location and situation. Down time for example is a substantial cost that undoubtedly prohibits the use of certain suppressants but is difficult to measure. Actual costs per mine need to be calculated and used instead. Down time estimates for delays on a main railway line for coal trains was $1 million per hour (UP: Oct 2, 1998, Perkins, Wyoming). The cost and amount of road maintenance needed, such as grading, and compacting are also estimates, ascertained from the 2004 USFS Cost Estimating Guide for Road Construction. The USFS estimates were doubled for use on wider haul roads. The frequency of the maintenance required for various suppressant types is generally unknown, and is always situationally dependant. The figures provided are adjustments made to data supplied by Sanders, 1997. The suppressant tested with the lowest aggregate loss was lignosulfonate. The difference in aggregate loss compared to lignosulfonate was calculated as a percentage and this adjustment ratio used to estimate the need for road maintenance. CaCl2 for example was estimated to need 148% more blading and related road maintenance than lignosulfonate based on Sanders’ findings of 148% more aggregate loss. The worksheet is intended to help the user recognize some of the costs beyond initial application. Other costs that may have been overlooked for a given site or product and can be added by users. Users are referred to the USFS publication, Bolander et al.(1999) Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide (pp.13-14) for additional costing worksheets. It is apparent that more detailed records are needed in order to better ascertain the cost effectiveness of a given product or application method. Application rates for example are an important factor in product effectiveness, as is the frequency of repeat applications, yet most of the information supplied by vendors is in ranges so wide as to be unusable. Similarly, more detailed reporting of water usage would assist in the determination of water’s effectiveness and cost.

55

56

A 1 2
Suppressant Type water

B

C
water absorbing

D

E

F
organic petroleum Lignosulfonate (Lignin)

G

H
synthetic polymer

I

Table 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET
electro chemical Enzymes Acrylic co Ionics polymers Sulfonated vinyl acrylics oils

Suppressant category

water

CaCl2

flake CaCl2

MgCl2

3
Product Examples many examples have proprietary ingredients and varying application recommendations that may enhance peformance beyond general category product (mi = mile, Lignin'=Lignosulfonate, agg' = aggregate, $0=intential illustration of no data) DustGard DustFyghter DustOff Brody Chem Caliber DCA 2000, etc

Modified Asphalt Emulsion

Water

Soil Sement Terrastone PennzSuppre Dust Shield BioCat ss Road Dirt Glue Oyl, Coherex EMC2 DB- HR51

4
Cost per undiluted unit (gal, ton,etc.)

5 6

.02/gal 0.30/gal (in place) USFS (Sanders) na 10000 gal/mile (Vendor) 1:2 .4gal/sq yd (USFS) 9293 $0.0396 18867 $2,788 $200 $377 $160 $680

$ 284/ton (vendor) na 1.9lb/sq yd (USFS) 133760 $0.2700 0 $19,008 $0 $0 $680

.30/gal (Sanders) 1:2

.90-1.30/gal avg (vendor) 1:1 1:4

Dilution rate

application rate of diluted mixture

.5gal/sq yd

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

.085gal/sq yd x 2 apps reapps .5gal/sq yd at .045 sq yd 11968 $0.3000 $11,968 $21,120 $200 $239 $102 $1,700 $1,760 $860 7040 28160

amount of undiluted product/mile (gal, or lbs) Product cost per sq yd Water portion of mixture in gal/mi initial app Product cost per mile initial app pre wetting/mi (USFS 2004, vendor) 10,000 gal/mi initial app water portion of mixture (gal x .02/gal) USFS surfactant (wetting additive) $85/10000gal initial app scarification/mi (USFS,2004) 1730/mi initial app blading/mi (USFS,2004) 680/mi initial appl mix in place (USFS,2004)(blade rate x 2) 1760/mi initial app rolling/compacting (if separate event) 860/mi initial app miscellaneous costs (detours) initial app curing (down time cost per mile) acrylics and polymers expected to be significantly higher due to projected curing time recommended by vendors, but actual value is uknown. INITIAL APPLICATION SUBTOTAL (sum of rows 11-20)

10000 $200 $200 $85 $680

11616 $0.0495 23,584 $3,485 $200 $472 $200 $680

$563 $239

$0 $0

$0 $0

20 21

$1,165

$4,206

$19,688

$5,037

$25,981

$803

$0

$0

57

A 1 2
Suppressant Type water

B

C
water absorbing

D

E

F
organic petroleum Lignosulfonate (Lignin)

G

H
synthetic polymer

I

Table 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET
electro chemical Enzymes Acrylic co Ionics polymers Sulfonated vinyl acrylics oils $0 $0 $0 $0

Suppressant category

water

CaCl2

flake CaCl2

MgCl2

3 22 23 24 25 26 27
1st reapplication (50% initial product rate but full cost of app) USDA and product vendors 2nd reapplication (repeat of 1st reapplication) 3rd reapplication (see North Carolina Div of Air Q) 4th reapplication 5th reapplication 6th reapplication Annual Maintenance blading (USFS,2004) $680/mi x 52 weeks/yr (cost shown is once/wk/mi for Lignin rated lowest in agg' loss by Sanders, 1997 (Others adjusted by maintenance ratio:row 32) Water estimate based on one mine's use of 81.76 mil gallons per year(haul road length of 5 miles, 75% of water use on roads) Maintenance water (@ .5 gal/sq yd/day)would equal 12848000 gal Water for Lignin' rate of .13gal/sq yd/day is based on vendor recommendation. Water only double rate based on NC Div of Air Quality. Thompson and Visser 2002 and Rosbury and Zimmer 83 , and USDA FS suggest watering intervals of 30 min during peak season which is 8 months per year. Winter interval: every 3 hrs. (.082 per pass x 6 average passes) Maintenance water cost/mile annually (USFS) 29 estimated water use levels x $200/10000gal Uses Row $70,720 $2,812 $2,812 $2,812 $10,184 $3,295 $3,295

Modified Asphalt Emulsion $803 $803

$15,421 $15,421

$52,374

$35,360

$36,359

$35,360

28

24528000

12264000

12264000

12264000

3188640

29 30 31

$490,560

$245,280

$245,280

$245,280

$63,773

Maintenance aggregate replacement (Sanders 1997. Modified for haul trucks, 120' haul road and aggregate cost in place of $11.57/ton) Adjustments (Sanders, 1997) used difference in aggregate loss to justify additional maintenance (water only adjustment based on NC Div of Air Q, Thompson and Visser and Rosbury and Zimmer). Flake CaCl2 based on mine engineer performance evaluation Intangibles surfactant $85/10000gal of water (if used) suppressant at 1% solution 100gal/10000gal tanker ($30) TOTAL annual cost per mile application and maintenance

$1,831,610

$1,356,458

$915,805

$941,680

$915,805

200.00%

148.12%

100.00%

102.83%

100.00%

32 33 34 35 36

$0 $208,488 $2,602,543

$0 $36,792 $1,703,544

$0 $104,244 $1,330,561

$0 $36,792 $1,271,737

$0 $27,103 $1,098,865

$0 $0 $2,408

$0 $0 $0

$0 $0

58

A 1 2
Suppressant Type water

B

C
water absorbing

D

E

F
organic petroleum Lignosulfonate (Lignin)

G

H
synthetic polymer

I

Table 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET
electro chemical Enzymes Acrylic co Ionics polymers Sulfonated vinyl acrylics oils

Suppressant category

water

CaCl2

flake CaCl2

MgCl2

3 37 38 39 40 41

Modified Asphalt Emulsion

Sources: USFS Cost Estimating Guide for Road Construction 2004 USDA FS Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide Sanders, Thomas et al. 1997. Relative Effectiveness of Road Dust Suppressants Average haul truck = 550,000lbs(equal to 100 vehicles) 216 haul trucks per day (9x24) X 3.6 to adjust for 120' road. Aggregate replacement $11.57/ton for crushed rock in place (adjust for scoria as known) Thompson, R.J and A.T.Visser. 2002. Benchmarking and management of fugitive dust emissions from surface mine haul roads. Rosbury, K.D., and R. A. Zimmer. 1983. Cost Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on Unpaved Haul Roads, PEDCO Environmental, Inc., US Bureau of Mines North Carolina Dept of Env and Nat Resources Div of Air Quality. 2003. Economic Analysis of Particulates from Fugitive Dust Emissions Sources vendors (product vendors and specific mine information (anon')

42 43 44 45 46

59

60

APPENDICES

61

62

Appendix A: Dust Suppression Survey and Results

63

64

Dust Suppression Survey (Results)
The following inquiry will assist the researcher in compiling a recommendation of “best practices” for dust abatement on mine haul roads. Although the results will be tabulated, your name or company will not be associated with your response. 1. Please indicate your primary chemical dust suppressant MgCl2 (3), CaCl2 (1), PennzSuppress (1) 2. Please use the following criteria to explain why you use the Primary product you selected in Q1. Check all that apply and add any other reasons that are not listed. _5__ can be applied with no down time for haul trucks _4 _ is readily available locally _2__ is one of a limited list of available products offered by our area vendors _4__ appears to be more cost effective than other options _4__ appears to be environmentally safe _4__ can be applied with standard equipment (water trucks) by our employees _3__ in addition to suppressing dust, the product seems to improve or maintain the road surface drivability and/or slows breakdown and need for grading _2__ requires minimal staff training to adequately apply _1__ (your criteria)_Vender maintains automated system_________________ ___ (your criteria)_______________________________________________ ___ (your criteria)_______________________________________________ 4. Do you currently use a surfactant to improve the efficiency of the water and/or your primary suppressant? _1__yes __4_no If yes _ChemLoc 102 (1)____ (product) 5. A few mines no longer use a surfactant but use a very diluted application of their primary suppressant instead. Please comment on your mine’s use of either a surfactant or a very diluted product with general watering: -1000gal. of MgCl2/45,000gal. water, 3 loads every 2 or 3 days -Surfactant used in each truck load -We use diluted product on haul roads that we grade a lot -Stronger on outlying roads -Intend to use diluted MgCl2 with general watering in the future 6. Would you recommend your primary product (by cost and performance) to be used by other mines for haul road dust suppression? Explain: -MgCl2- Yes, low cost -MgCl2- Yes, when properly applied, and minimal blading afterwards product provides effective low cost suppression compared to alternatives -CaCl2- Cost effective with good results -PennzSuppress- Depends on the mine, cost is prohibitive. However, the dealer support and maintenance is critical to our operation. -MgCl2- Cheapest available product that meets the DEQ/AQD requirements. 65

7. What, in your opinion is the biggest problem or limitation in using your primary product for haul road dust suppression now and in the future? -No problem with MgCl2. Issue is maintenance and upkeep of haul roads. - Product (CaCl2) is brought in by railroad into Gillette. Railroad does not put a priority on locating RR cars so vendor can off-load product. Sometimes, the RR cars w/product sit in the yard for a week before the vendor can access them. - MgCl2- Educating the workforce that unnecessary grading of the road rapidly reduces the effectiveness of the treatments. Secondary concern is availability of the product as more industries move to use it in the face of continuing drought. - Spillage from haul trucks covers the chemical and makes it inefficient -PennzSuppress- Cost 8. Have you tried other road dust suppression products that you were unsatisfied with? Which ones and why? - Tried emulsified tree resin, stuck to vehicle parts causing paint to chip. - EMC2 did not work at all -Unichem 9. If you have discontinued the use of a product which performed well please explain here: - MgCl2, expensive to have shipped to the mine. Not simple or automated for us to use. Contractors don’t want to use their tanks because of fear of corrosive behavior. 10. Please rank the following in the order that presents the biggest challenges to dust suppression at your coal mine. (1 being the highest, 5 being the lowest (rank only 5 of 6)). To determine rank, average scores were calculated. Items ranked #1 = 5 points, #2 = 4 points, #3 = 3 points, #4 = 2 points, #5 = 1 point, unranked = 0 points. Rank __3.8____ (1) Cost of suppressants __2.8__ (2) Monitoring Data (to show effectiveness of suppressant and when reapplication is necessary) __2.4____ (3) Employee training __2____ (4) Proper Application _ 2____ (4) Other (describe) Rail delivery issues; Spillage 1.8___ (5) Need for a better product Summary: Five surveys were returned. The majority of respondents reported using MgCl2. In the ranking of challenges Other issues were selected twice, and in both instances the issue was ranked of highest importance for that mine. Overall the Other category ranked tied for fourth.

66

Appendix B: Dust Control Plan and Self Inspection Checklists

67

68

________________________________________________________________________

Air Quality of Idaho: Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Information

Developing a Dust Prevention and Control Plan
Keeping potential fugitive dust problems under control is an everyday job. Plan ahead by developing a dust prevention and control plan as follows: 1. • Identify all potential fugitive dust emission sources. Start with a facility site plan map. Record all paved haul roads, unpaved haul roads, stockpiles, material transfer points, material conveyances, parking lots, staging areas, and other open areas subject to wind erosion. Indicate prevailing wind direction on your map. Study daily traffic volumes Determine whether roads and open areas are used frequently or occasionally. Consider daily routine modifications that will reduce traffic in some areas or eliminate it altogether Assign dust control methods. Determine the appropriate dust control method for each sources identified from your facility. If desired, color –code your map to indicate which dust control method to apply where. 3. Determine frequency pf application. For each source and each control method identified, determine how frequently dust control treatments should be applied. Develop a SelfInspection Checklist to record the scheduled applications. (See below). 4. Record all dust control activities. It is a good practice to record your dust control activities on your checklist, along with the daily weather information, such as average wind speed and direction, temperature, rainfall, etc. Recording the information will enable you to monitor and evaluate the success of your efforts. 5. Monitor your dust control efforts. You will need to monitor your dust control activities on a regular basis to ensure that the measures taken are adequately controlling fugitive dust.

2.

69

Self-Inspection Checklist
Use a self-inspection checklist to help incorporate the routine tasks of fugitive dust control into your daily schedule. The checklist serves as a job reminder on a daily basis and as a record of your efforts to keep dust problems to a minimum. You can identify problem areas before they get out of hand, and anticipate adjustments for seasonal changes or unforeseen circumstances. The sample checklists on the following pages can be used to document dust control methods as well as weather conditions. It is recommended that you use a checklist for each source of fugitive dust emissions.

Example Dust Control Plan
Fugitive Dust Sources: Unpaved Haul Roads
Control Method: Frequency of Application: Record - Keeping: Monitoring of Control Efforts Special Considerations: Chemical Dust Suppressant Every three months or as needed Date suppressant applied and area covered Roads monitored daily • Traffic limited on haul roads by placing product near the entrance of facility • Speed limit of 10 miles per hour on facility grounds

70

Example Self-Inspection Checklist: Fugitive Dust Control Method Log Fugitive Dust Source: Unpaved Haul Roads
Date 4-1-02 6-1-02 8-1-02 10-1-02 12-1-02 Time 7 am 7 am 7 am Control Method Magnesium Chloride applied Magnesium Chloride applied Comments All haul roads on facility grounds Entrance of facility/stock pile area only All haul roads on facility grounds

Magnesium Chloride applied See weather log See weather log

Self-Inspection Checklist: Weather Log
Date Temperature 55 F (high) 50 F (high) 56 F (high) 52 F (high) 10-2-02 10-8-02 10-15-02 10-22-02

Wind Speed/ Direction 5 mph 8 mph

Amt. of Rainfall 0.10 inch 0.0 inch 0.05 inch 0.0 inch

Comments Wet, cloudy, cold Wet, cloudy, cold Wet, cloudy, cold Wet, cloudy, cold

8 mph 7 mph

Best Management Practices: Fugitive Dust Control Methods
To control fugitive dust emissions, the Idaho Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) and representatives of the rock crushing industry have developed Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the following fugitive dust generating sources: Paved public roads Unpaved haul roads Conveyor transfer points and screening operations Crushers and grinding mills Stockpiles Although directed at the rock crushing industry in particular, many of these practices are applicable to mining and mineral processing facilities, sand and gravel operations, and concrete asphalts batch plants as well. The recommendations specific to haul roads follow:

71

Unpaved Haul Roads Fugitive dust control methods for unpaved haul roads include: • Limit vehicle traffic on unpaved haul roads; • Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved haul roads. If a speed limit is imposed, post signs along the haul road route, clearly indicating the speed limit. Place signs so they are visible to vehicles entering and leaving the sites of operations. • Apply water to the surface of the unpaved road. Control runoff so it odes not saturate the surface of the unpaved haul road and cause trackout. If runoff is not or cannot be controlled, try applying gravel to the surface of the unpaved haul road over an area sufficient to control trackout • Improve aggregate on the surface of the unpaved haul road; and • Apply an environmentally safe chemical dust suppressant to the surface of the unpaved haul road.

72

Appendix C: Dust Palliative Selection Matrix (Thompson and Visser)

73

74

The following chart by Thompson and Visser (2002) provides additional comparisons on the perceived performance of several dust palliatives relative to plasticity, slope, traffic volumes and applications. (“Benchmarking of Fugitive Dust Emissions from SurfaceMine Haul Roads” p. A29.)

75

76

Appendix D: Dust Palliative Selection Matrix (Bolander and Yamada, USFS)

77

78

The Product Selection Chart prepared by Peter Bolander and Alan Yamada for U.S. Forest Service’s Technology and Development Program is published in “Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide” and can be found online at http://www.wsdot. wa.gov/TA/T2Center/DustGuide.pdf. This table offers information for dust suppression selection based on use/traffic volumes, surface material, and climatic conditions.

Notes: (1) May require higher or more frequent application rates, especially with high truck volumes (2) Greater than 20 days with less than 40% relative humidity (3) May become slippery in wet weather (4) May leach out in heavy rain (5) SS-1 or CSS-1 with only clean, open-graded aggregate (6) Road mix for best results

(Bolander, Yamada p.12 1999) 79

80

Appendix E: Dust Suppression Bibliography (T. Stevenson, 2004)

81

82

Primary Author Arizona Dept of Environmental Quality Associated Press International

Authors

Title Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Air quality exceptional and natural events policy PM10 best available control measures

Year

Name of Journal or Publication

Name of Publisher

URL

2001

EPA Watching Dust From Mines, Roads

2003

Associated Press State and Local Wire

Associated Press

Australia Dept of the Environment and Heritage Axetell, Ken, Jr. Stensland, G.J; Gatz, D.F.

Dust Control, Best Practices Environmental Management in Mining, Australia

Sustainable Industry; 98 Sustainable Minerals

Australia Government; Department of the Environment and Heritage EPA

www.deh.gov.au/industry/industryperformance/minerals/booklets/d ust/dust1.html

Banard, W.R.

Survey of Fugitive Dust from Coal Mines Development of Emission Factors for Unpaved Roads: Implications of the New PM10 regulations. Transactions, PM10 Implementation of Standards Improved fugitive dust PM10 emissions estimates for trends Development of emission factors for unpaved roads Arrest that Fugitive Dust! Quantifying the Environmental Impact of Particulate Deposition from Dry Unpaved Roadways User's Guide: Fugitive Dust Control Demonstration Studies

78 EPA 68014489 Air Pollution Control Association

88

Barnard, W.

Transactions, Standards and Air and Waste 92 Non-Traditional Particulate Management Source Controls Association 88 Transactions, PM10 Implementation Standards Air Pollution Control Association Forester.net http://www.forester.net/ecm_0203 _arrest.html

Barnard, W.R. Baxter, Roberta

2003 Erosion Control unpublished Master's thesis Iowa State University 85 EPA Transportation Research Record

Becker, D.C.

Beggs, T. W.

EPA National Research Council

Berthelot, C.

Carpentier, A.

Gravel Loss characterization and Innovative Preservation Treatments of Gravel Roads: Saskatchewan, Canada Assessment of Road Carpet for Control of Fugitive Emissions from Unpaved Roads

2003

Blackwood, T. R.

79 EPA Proceedings - ARTBA-NACE Conference Local Transportation

EPA

Blanc, T.R.

Lingosulfonate Stabilization

83

Primary Author

Authors Chitwood, L.; Steele, H.M.;

Title Lessons learned from the failure of a bituminous surface treatment in central Oregon Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide A Guideline to Liquid Spray Applications for Erosion Contol, Dust Abatement, and Tackifiers Chemical Additives for Dust Control - What We've Used and What We've Learned

Year

Name of Journal or Publication Transportation Research Record Forest Service Technology and Development Program

Name of Publisher National Research Council San Dimas Technology and Development Center

URL

Bolander, P.

Bolander, P., Yamada, A.

99

Bolander, Peter

96 U.S. Forest Service

Bolander, Peter

96

USDA Forest Service, Portland Oregan

Carnes, D. H.

The control of fugitive emissions using windscreens Cut costs by controlling dust; heavy haulroad dust can stir up haulage and maintenance problems Control of Fugitive Dust from mining haul roads Center for dirt and gravel road studies

Third Symposium on the Transfer and Utilization of 82 Particulate Control Technology, Vol IV. 96 Coal Age, vol 104, n 12

USEPA

Carter, R.

Champlin, Robert L.

78 EPA

University of Wyoming, Institute of Energy and Environment National Research Council

Colbert, W.

Natural Systems Approach to preventing environmental harm from unpaved roads Overview of Regional Transportation Planning Agency Process to Identify and Implement Best Available Control Measures in Support of the PM10 Plan for the San Joaquin Valley Methodology for Estimating Fugitive Windblown and Mechanically Resuspended Road Dust Emissions Applicable for Regional Scale Air Quality Monitoring Cost Effectiveness of road dust controls

2003

Transportation Research Record, v 1, n 1819

Council of Fresno County Government

2002

http://www.fresnocog.org/aqmodeling/bacm/bacm.htm

Countess, Richard

Western Governor's Western Governor's 2001 Association Contract 30203Association 9

Cowherd, C

82 EPA Report

EPA

84

Primary Author Cowherd, C Cowherd, C.

Authors Kinsey, J.S. et al.

Title Identification, Assessment and Control of fugitive dust particulate emissions Development of Emissions Factors for Fugitive Dust Sources Development of Methodology and emission inventory for fugitive dust for the regional air pollution study. Fine Particle Components of PM10 From Fugitive Dust Sources Fugitive Dust Emissions Profiling Data for open fugitive dust sources Prepared for US EPA, Emission Factors and Inventory Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Road Dust Suppressants Fugitive Dust from Vehicles Traveling on unpaved roads Fugitive Dust Control Techniques and Businesses

Year

Name of Journal or Publication 86 EPA Report 74 EPA EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Name of Publisher EPA

URL

Cowherd, C.

Guenther, C.M.

76

Cowherd, C. Cowherd, C.

Kuyhendal, W.B.

Air & Waste 97 Management Assoc. 1997 Proceeding 96 MRI

Cowherd, C.

99 EPA, MRI

CTIC

Colorado Transportation 89 Information Center, Bulletin #3 76 EPA

Dept. of Civil Engineering, Colorado State Universtiy EPA New Mexico Dept of Environmental Air Quality Bureau Sierra Research www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/dus t_control.html

Cuscino, Thomas

Dubyk, S.

2004 website Maricopa Association of Governments Report

Dulla, R.G.

Withycombe, E

Particulate control measure feasibility STUDY Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information Document for Best Available Control Measures

97

Dunkins, R.

92 EPA Environ. Sci. Technol. 10, 1046-1048

Dyck, R.I Eaton, R.A; Engle, David Englehart, P.J.

Strukel, J.J.

Fugitive Dust Emissions From Trucks on Unpaved Roads

76

Gerard, S; Gate, Rating Unsurfaced Roads D.W. Road Maintenance Techniques and Products Have Made Great Strides Open fugitive dust PM10 control strategies Muleski, G.E. study EC/R Inc. NC Control Techniques for Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources, Vol 1

88 Army Corps of Engr. 2004 Forester Communications January/Feburary Forester.net Midwest Research Institute EPA

80 Study

EPA

EPA 450381005a

85

Primary Author

Authors

Title Control Techniques for Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources, Vol 2 40 CFR Part 52: SIPs for Lead Nonattainment - IIB: Reasonable Available Control Measures (draft)

Year

Name of Journal or Publication EPA 450381005b

Name of Publisher

URL

EPA

EC/R Inc. NC

EPA

EPA Western Regional Air Partnership Midwest Research Institute Midwest Research Institute

92 EPA

EPA

EPA

40 CFR Part 5: Regional Haze Regulations Vol. 64, No. 126, July Compilation of Air Pollution Emissions Factors Volume 1, AP-42, Chapter 13 Unpaved Roads Emission Factor Domumentation for AP-42 Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads

1999 Federal Register

EPA

www.wrapair.org/309/index.html

EPA

EPA

Emission Factor and Inventory Group

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42 /ch13

EPA

1998 EPA final report

EPA

USEPA Region 8 - State Implementation Wyo Dept of EQ Plan - Wyoming - Section 14 - Control of Particulate Emissions Emission Control Technologies and emission factors for unpaved road fugitive emissions Midwest Research Institute Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads EPA's Interpretation of the HSWA prohibition on the use of hazardous waste as a dust suppressant National Air pollutant emission trends, procedures Review of Surface Coal Mining Emission Factors Laboratory Study of Dust Palliative Effectiveness Fugitive Dust:Nonpoint Sources Moon, K. C, and Evaluation of fugitive dust control methods in Zeldin, M. the Coachella Valley

98

Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality

https://yosemite.epa.gov/R 8/R8Sips.nsf/Wyoming?O penView

EPA

87 EPA

EPA (The Center)

EPA

1998 EPA final report

EPA

EPA

85 EPA

EPA

EPA EPA Epps, A. Ferguson, John H. Fitz, D. R. Eshan, M.

2000 EPA EPA 2002 Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering MU Ag Guide Proceedings Air and Waste Management Association

EPA http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42 /ch11/final/c11s09.pdf

Univeristy of Missouri Extension Air and Waste Management Association

93

86

Primary Author Fitz, D. R.

Authors

Title Evaluation of Watering to control dust in high winds Field Study to Determine limits of best available control methods for fugitive dust under high wind conditions.

Year

Name of Journal or Publication

Name of Publisher

URL

2000 JAWMA

Fitz, D. R.

96 CE-CERT Document

University of California

Fitz, D.R

Bumiller, K

Evaluation of Watering to Control Dust in High Winds Down with Road Dust (innovations) Dust Stop Runoff of oils from rural roads treated to suppress dust Analysis on Emission Factor of Fugitive Dust from Road Traffic Dust Suppression using a truck-mounted water spray system Recommendations for Improving Western Vistas: Report of the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission to the US EPA

2000 JAWMA 50, 570-577 Environmental Health Perspectives National Institute on Environmental Health Sciences EPA

Frazer, Lance Freeston, Frank J. Fu, L. Leung, D.Y.C.

2003

72 EPA 97 J. Environmental Science 9, 501

Gambatese, J.

James, D

Journal of Construction 2001 Engineering and Management, V 137, n1

American Society of Civil Engineers

GCVTC

96 Reports to the EPA

Western Governor's Association

Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission

Gebhart, Dick L.

Denight, M., Grau, R.H.

Dust Control Guidance and Technology Selection Key

99

US Army Construction Engineering Research Labratories, Land Management Laboratory

Gebhart, Dick L.

Thomas Hale Dust Control Material Performance on and Kim Unsurfaced Roadways and Tank Trails Michaels-Busch

96 USAEC Technical Report

US Army Construction Engineering Research http://aec.army.mil/usaec/technol ogy/dustcontrol.pdf Labratories, Land Management Laboratory

87

Primary Author

Authors Watson, J.G.; Rogers, C.F.; DuBois D.W.; Chow, J.C.; Langston, R.; Sweet, J.

Title

Year

Name of Journal or Publication

Name of Publisher

URL

Gillies, J.A.

Long-Term Efficiencies of Dust Suppression to Reduce PM10 Emissions From Unpaved Roads

Journal of the Air and Waste Air and Waste 99 Management Association 49, Management 3-16 Association

JAWMA Paper: Long-Term Efficiencies of Dust Suppressants to Reduce PM10 Emissions from unpaved roads

Grantz, D.A

Wind Barriers Offer Short-Term Solution to Fugitive Dust Mostafa, N.; Hawkins, A.

98 California Agric., 53, 14 Proceedings, International 96 Confrence on Air Pollution from Agricultural Operations Regional Air Quality Council, Harding Lawson Denver Colorado Associates http://www.pirnie.com/docs/resou rces_pubs_air_may00_6.html

Hagen, L.J.

PM10 Generation by Wind Erosion.

Harding Lawson Associates

Evaluation of PM10 Emissions Factors for Paved Roads Prepared for Regional Air Quality Council, Denver, CO Overview of Fugitive Dust Emissions

91

Hewitt-Daly, Mary

2000 Successful Farming, v 87, n 11 Iowa Hwy. Res. Board Proj. HR-151

Malcolm Pirnie

Holmberg, M.

Soy Oil Ready to Eat Your Dust Bergerson, K.L; Mission Oriented Dust Control and Surface Fox, D.E; Denny, Improvement Processes for Unpaved Roads. C.K.; Handy, Final Report R.L. Assessment of the current status of the environmental aspects of fugitive dust sources associated with mining Jackson, Washington State Chip and Seal Study N.;Mahoney, J.;

89

Hoover, J.M.

81

Hubbard, S. J.

76 EPA

PEDCO-Environmental Specialists National Research Council www.aggman.com/0703_pages/0 703marketing.html

Jackson, D. James Informational Media

90

Transportation Research Record

Taming the Haul Road Dust Demon

2003 AGGMAN

Mercur Media, Inc

Johnson, T.

Gillette, D.A.; Schwiesow, R.

Fate of Dust Particles from Unpaved Roads Under Various Atmoshperic Conditions.

Precipitation Scavenging and Hemisphere Publishing Atmosphere-Surface 92 Co., Washington, 933Exchange. Edited by S. 948 Schwartz and W.G. N. Slinn

88

Primary Author Jutze, G. A.

Authors Axetell, K.

Title Investigation of Fugitive dust, Volume I Sources, emissions and control. Investigation of Fugitive dust, Volume II Control Strategy and regulatory approach. Investigation of Fugitive Dust Sources Emission and Control Rule 402: Fugitive Dust, Kearn County Air Pollution Control District Chemical Dust Suppressants: a list of products and suppliers, Kern County Air Pollution Control District Control Technology for sources of Pm10 Road Dust Suppressants Compared

Year

Name of Journal or Publication 74 EPA

Name of Publisher EPA

URL

Jutze, G. A.

Axetell, K.

74 EPA

EPA

Jutze, G.A. KCAPCD Kern County Air Pollution Control District Kinsey, J.S. Kirchner, Henry W, P.E.

et al.

74 EPA 93 website www.arb.ca.gov/DRDB/KER/CUR HTML/R402.HTM Kern County Air http://www.kernair.org/complianc Pollution Control District e_assistance.htm EPA

2003 website 85 EPA Public Works, Vol. 119, No. 88 13 Trans., Soc. Of Min. Engr. Of AIME, 274-2001

Lane, D.D.

Baxter, T.E.; Cuscino, T.; Cowand, C, Jr.;

Use of Laboratory Methods to Quantify Dust Suppressants Effectiveness

84

Larkin Laboratory

Calcium Chloride and Magnesium Chloride for Dust Control Evaluation of Dust Controls used on upaved haul roads Unpaved Road Emission Impact

Larkin Laboratory 1691 N. 86 Swede Rd. Midland Michigan 48640 83 Report U.S. Bureau of Mines Arizona Dept of Environmental Quality http://www.mriresearch.org/Rese archServices/Environment/Measu rement/FugitiveDust.asp Air Quality General N 1, March Minnesota Pollution Control Age

McCoy, J.F. Midwest Research Institute

91 Report

Midwest Research Institute

Fugitive Dust Source Characterization

99

Minnesota Pollution Control

Fugitive Dust Control Surface Treatments at Industrial Facilities: Water treatment considerations Estimation of PM10 dust fluxes from emissions factors for different fugitive dust sources.

2002

MND Associates

EPA, Emissions Factors and Research Triangle Park, Inventor Group, Office of Air 99 NC; MND Associates, Quality Planning and Toronto Standards

89

Primary Author

Authors

Title

Year

Name of Journal or Publication 93 Aerosol Sci. Technol 19, 330338 Transportation Research Record

Name of Publisher

URL

Mollinger, A.M

Nieutwstadt, Model Experiments of the Resuspension F.T.M.; Scarlett, Caused By Road Traffic B. USDA Forest Service Niemeirer, Debbie, Limanond, Thirayoot Stabilizing unpaved roads with calcium chloride A Stochastic Framework for Estimating Unpaved Road VMT for PM10 Mobile Emissions Inventories PM10 Emissions From Public Unpaved Roads in Rural Arizona. Transactions, PM 10 Standards and Nontraditional Particulate Source Controls Definition of the Long-Term Control Efficiency of Chemical Dust Suppressants applied to unpaved roads Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Chemical Dust Suppressants on Unpaved Roads Extended Evaluation of Unpaved Road Dust Suppressants in the Iron and Steel Industry Implementation and Determination of Best Available Control Measures for Reducing Windblown Dust from Manmade Sources in Dona Ana County, California The Effects of Vechicle Activity on Particle Resuspension

Monlux, S.

2003

National Research Council University of California Davis Dept. of Civil and Env. Engineering

Morey, Jennifer E.

2001

Muleski, G.E

Stevens, K.M.

92

Air and Waste Management Association

Muleski, G.E.

85 EPA

EPA

Muleski, G.E.

87 EPA

EPA

Muleski, G.E.

84 EPA

EPA

New Mexico Environment Department - Air Quality Bureau Branson, J.R.; Nicholoson, K.W. Giess, P.; Cannell, M. North Carolina Division of Air Quality

2000

New Mexico Environment www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/dus Department - Air Quality t_control.html Bureau J. Aerosol Sci. 20, 14251428 North Carolina Division of Air Quality Department of Environmental and Natural Resources EPA

89

Cost Analysis Chart Agenda Item 18 Economic Analysis of Particulates From Fugitive Dust Emission Sources Reasonable Available Control Measures for Fugitive Dust Sources

2003

http://daq.state.nc.us/search.sht ml

Ohio EPA

80 Report

90

Primary Author

Authors Page, S.J.; Cecala, A.B.; Kissell, F.N.

Title Surface Mine Dust Control Chapter 5 (includes Haul road dust control)

Year

Name of Journal or Publication Surface Mine Dust Control 83 EPA University of Wyoming, 95 Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering

Name of Publisher

URL

Organiscak, J.A. Orlemann, J. A.

Fugitive Dust Control Technology Strength and Density Modification of Thomas, V.; Palmer, James T Unpaved Road Soils Due to Chemical Boresi, Arthur P. Additives, MPC Report No. 95-39 Van Ed, J; J. Potential Environmental Impacts of Dust Piechota, T. (ed) Batista, K. Stave, Suppressants: "Avoiding Another Times D. James Beach" Expert Panel Summary, EPA No More Brownouts:Dust Abatement in Support of Tactical Helicopter Operations Guidelies for Development of Control Strategies in Areas with Fugitive Dust Problems Cost and benefits of road dust control in Seattle's Industrial valley Cost and Benefits of Road Dust Control in Seattle's Industrial Industrial Valley Cost-effectiveness of dust controls used on unpaved haul roads. Vol I. Cost-effectiveness of dust controls used on unpaved haul roads. Vol II (data). Effectiveness and Environmental Impact of Road Dust Suppressants. MPC-94-28. Fargo, ND. Mountain Plains Consortium, USDOT. Ado, J.Q.; Ariniello, A.; Heiden, W.F. Relative Effectiveness of Road Dust Suppressants NEAP Controls (BACM determination for Industrial Fugitive Dust Sources-Unpaved Road Control) Portland Road Dust Demonstration Project. Appendix.

EPA

2002`

UNLV, EPA (600/R-04/031)

UNLV, EPA

http://www.epa.gov/nerles d1/cmb/pdf/dust.pdf

Prevatt, C.V.

Hart, D. E.

2003 Marine Corps Gazette

Marine Corps Association

Richard, George

Safriet, D. W. Mangold, H. A; Rossano, A. T.

77 EPA

EPA

Roberts, J.W. Roberts, J.W. Rosbury, K. D

75 JAPCA Journal of the Air Pollution Association, Vol 25 #9 83 Report U.S. Bureau of Mines

Zimmer, R. A.

Rosbury, K. D

83 Report (contract J0218021)

U.S. Bureau of Mines

Sanders, T. G.

93

Mountain Plains Consortium Proceedings

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members /2003/111-16/innovations.html

Sanders, T. G.

97

Journal of Transportation Engineering, Sept/Oct South Dakota Dept of Environment and Natural Resources Air Quality Report - Dept of Public Works City of Portland http://www.state.sd.us/denr/DES/ AirQuality/NEAP/neapcontrols.ht m

Schultz, Brad

2004

Seton, Johnson and Odell, Inc

83

91

Primary Author Singer, Rexford D. Singer, Rexford D. Singh, Vivek

Authors

Title Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources Environmental Evaluation of Dust Suppressants Hydrologic Impacts of Disturbed Lands Treated with Dusts Suppressants Gravel Roads- Maintenance and Design Manual Section IV. Dust Control and Stabilization Solving the Next Impediment to Coal Bed Methane Development in the Powder River Basin (Abstract) Experimental Road Dust Measurement Device

Year

Name of Journal or Publication 88 EPA 82 EPA Journal of Hydrologic Engineering

Name of Publisher

URL

Bureau of Mines, USDInterior

Skorseth, K.

Selim, A.

South Dakota Local 2000 Transportation Assistance Program (SD LTAP)

http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/gra velroads/sec4.pdf

States, J.

Steward, M., Brown, T.

2004 Journal of Transportation 2000 Engineering, November/December Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy, 2002 Section A: Mininng Industry, 111 28-34 Coal-the future, 12th International Confrence on 2000 Coal Research (Sandt on: S.A.I.M.M., 2000) 53-60. Symp. Series S26 Transportation Research 99 Record (TRR) 1652, 1999, 217-24 2001 J. Mine Vent.Soc.S.Afr., 54(1), 18-30 Collieries SubCommittee Final Report for Project COL 467

Thomas, S., Addo, J.

Thompson, R.J.

Visser, A.T.

Benchmarking and Management of Fugitive Dust Emissions from Surface-Mine Haul Roads

Thompson, R.J.

Visser, A.T.

Evaluation and Modeling of Haul Road Dust Palliatives

Thompson, R.J.

Visser, A.T.

Mangement of Unpaved Road Networks on Opencast mines Mine Haul Road Fugitive Dust Emission and Exposure Characterisation The Reduction of the Safety and Health Risks Associated with the Generation of Dust on Strip Coal Mine Haul Roads Inspector's Guide for fugitive dust emission sources: causes and control techniques, recommendations and examples

Thompson, R.J.

Visser, A.T.

Thompson, R.J.

Visser, A.T.

Pretoria: Safety in Mines 2000 Research Advisory Committee, 2000

Torrez, Lucien

84 EPA

EPA

92

Primary Author

Authors

Title Dust Suppression with Less Water: Pollution Prevention Case Study (using Soil-Sement) Los Alamos Ntl. Laboratory Cost-Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on Unpaved Mine Haul Roads Guidelines for Cost Effective Use and Application of Dust Palliatives Case Study: Coal Mine Road Dust is Controlled in 12-mile Trial with DusTreat Program GE Betz Western Energy Company Study, Haul Road Dust Control Status Jacobs Ranch, GE Betz Study on Dust, Graphs Chapter 8 Transportation Conformity Reference Guide - PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Year

Name of Journal or Publication

Name of Publisher US Dept of Energy Office of Environmental Mgmt

URL

U. S. Dept of Engergy U.S. Bureau of Mines UMA Engineers, Planners and Surveyors Undlin, David

US Dept Energy Fact Sheet

83

Report for U.S.B.M. by Pedco Environmental Inc.

Roads and Transportation 87 Association of Canada (RTAC) 2003 GE Betz

Undlin, David Undlin, David US Dept of Transportation Pardyjak, E.R.; Seshadri, G.

2003 GE Betz 2003 GE Betz US Dept of Transportation http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environm ent/conformity/ref_guid/partii.htm

2003 Federal Highway Adm

Veranth, J.M

Vehichle-Generated Fugitive Dust Transport: Analytic Models and Field Study An environmental assessment of alkylphenol ethoxylates and alkylphenols

2003

Atmos.Environ., 37(16), 22952303 Friends of the Earth (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/e thoxylates_alkylphenols.pdf

Warhurst, Michael Chow, J.C.; Gillies, J.; Rodgers, C.F.; Langston, R.

1995 Report

Watson, J.G.

Effectiveness Demonstration of Fugitive Dust Control Methods for Public Unpaved Roads and Shoulders Fugitive Dust Emissions Reconciling Urban Fugitive Dust Emissions Inventory and Ambient Source Contributions Estimates: Summary of Current Knowledge and Needed Research

96

Air and Waste Management Assoc. 1996 Proceeding Air Pollution Engineering Manual Van Nostrand Reinhold, NY

Watson, J.G.

2000

Watson, J.G.

Chow, Judith

2000

Desert Research Institute Document 6110.4F

Desert Research Institute

93

Primary Author

Authors

Title Establishment of Acceptable Dusting Criteria for Aggregate Surface Roads The Contribution of Road Sanding and Salting Material on Amibient PM 10 Concentrations Dust Control on Rural Roads

Year

Name of Journal or Publication 72 USDA Forest Service Administration Study 7110

Name of Publisher

URL

Wellman, E.A.

Barraclough, S.

Winema National Forest

Wittorff, D.N. Wrage, R Shouse, S.

94 A&WMA and US EPA Report Iowa State Extension

Zielinska, B

McDonald, J; Hayes, T; Chow, Northern Front Range Air Quality Study: J.C.; Fujita, E.M. Volume B Source Measurement and Watson, J. G. A look at dust control and road stabilizers (buyer's guide - several summarizing articles)

98 DRI Report

Desert Research Institute

2000 Better Roads University of Kansas Rural Transp. Fact Sheet No. Transp. Ctr. Lawrence 84-02. T2 Program Kansas

A look at dust control and road stabilizers

Controlling Dust on Unpaved Roads Controlling Dust: Which Materials should you use? Dust Contol, Road Maintenance Costs Cut With Calcium Chloride Dust control fights erosion Guidelines for use and application of dust palliatives How to control dust on an unpaved, unstable road Review of recent developments in surface dressing

89

98 Better Roads, v68, n 6 90 Public Works, Vol. 121. No.6 92 Better Roads, v 62, n 10 90 Public Works, Vol 21, n 1 Better Roads, v68, n 6 92 Highways and transportation, vol 39, n 9

94

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->