United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 79-NMM-11A
April 1980
Air
Non Metallic Minerals
Stone Processing
Emission Test Report
Vulcan Materials
Company
Helena, Alabama
-------
SET 1838/18HU 01 0180
VISIBLE EMISSIONS FROM
NON-METALLIC MINERAL PROCESSING
VULCAN MATERIALS, HELENA, ALABAMA
79-NMM-ll-A
EPA Contract No. 68-02-2813
Work Assignments 39 & ^0
Prepared For:
Emission Measurement Branch
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Attn: Mr. J. E. McCarley
Mail Drop 13
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
January 1980
SCOTT EHVIROMENTAL- SERVICES
A Division Of
SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
Plumsteadville, Pennsylvania 189^9
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS, VULCAN MATERIALS, ALABAMA 6
APPENDIX A - FIELD DATA SHEETS
APPENDIX B - FIELD TEST LOG
APPENDIX C - LABORATORY DATA SHEETS - STONE MOISTURE DETERMINATIONS
APPENDIX D -.EPA CERTIFICATION FOR METHOD 9 OBSERVERS
APPENDIX E - EPA REFERENCE METHODS 9 AND 22
APPENDIX F - PROCESS DATA
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180 . P&Be X
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Clean Air Act of 1971 mandates that Standards of Performance
be established for new stationary air pollution sources. Establishment of
these standards requires that an emission data base be developed for each
source category. This data base is used as a guide for the establishment
of Performance Standards which will minimize air quality degradation and
yet not be impossible to attain. ^
One stationary source category for which standards are being
developed is non-metallic mineral processing. This industry is engaged in
the processing of mineral ores obtained from open pit surface mining. The
ores are transferred, crushed and screened to produce specific size grades
of rock which is used primarily in highway construction.
The crushing, screening and material transferring operations
generate fugitive mineral dust emissions which, because they are fugitive,
are difficult to quantify at their source by existing air sampling methods.
Visual determinations of the opacity of the released dust, however, are a
workable means of estimating fugitive dust emission generation.
Under work assignment from the Emission Measurement Branch of
the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Environmental
Technology, Inc. participated in a test project which consisted of visible
emission observations conducted at various emission points in five non-
metallic mineral processing facilities. Visible emissions observations at
each of the subject emission points were conducted according to EPA Reference
Methods 9 and 22; "Visual Determination 6f the Opacity of Emissions from
Stationary Sources" and "Visual Determination of Fugitive Emissions from
Material Processing Sources", respectively. The actual parameters under
which each emission point observation was conducted were varied to accommo-
date process and weather variables. Method 9 was used without any modifica-
tion. The only modification used with Method 22 consisted of changing the
observational threshold from zero opacity as specified in the Method to a
suitable upscale opacity threshold at 5% increments. A set of readings
for a minimum of 20 minutes, was made at every test point with a zero
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18M 0.1 0180 Page 2
visible threshold for EPA-22. In those instances where essentially constant
emissions were observed at a zero threshold during the first set of obser-
vations, a higher threshold was selected for subsequent observation sets.
The test plan specified visible observations by both test methods
for two hours at each test point. Since Method 22 requires constant
observation by the reader it was decided to limit reading time to individual
sets no longer than 30 minutes. This was done in order to prevent observer
eye fatigue from adversely affecting visible emissions determinations.
Observations by both EPA Method 9 and EPA Method 22 were conducted
simultaneously at all test locations.
Non-metallic mineral processing is not typically a continuous
operating process. Lapses in material processing are most frequent at the
primary crusher. In order to assure realistic emissions observations, actual
material processing was required to be in progress for a minimum of 75$ of
the visible emissions observational periods. Material processing was timed
separately and any data set failing to meet the minimum 75$ time requirement
was considered invalid.
Simultaneous visible emissions observations were made at the Vulcan
plant in Helena, Alabama by a plant employee and by contract personnel from
TRC at all five plants tested.
The TRC testing was requested by the industry association. Copies
of this test information are available upon request.
The non-metallic mineral processing plants, the test points
observed and test dates were as follows:
Program A
Plant: Vulcan Materials
Location: Helena, Alabama
Product: Crushed Stone
Dates: October 2 through k, 1979
Test Points: 1. Primary Crusher
2. Untested (Surge Conveyor)
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18UH 01 0180
Program A - Continued
Page 3
Program B
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
Test Points:
Program C
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
Test Points:
Program D
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
3. Impact Crusher Screen
k. Impact Crusher
5. Final Screens
6. Cone Crusher
T. Transfer Point
Castle Concrete Company
Colorado Springs, Colorado .
Crushed Limestone
October 8 through 11, 1979
1. Primary Crusher
2. Initial Screens
3. Transfer Point
U. Untested (Reclaim Tunnel)
5. Secondary Screens
6. Cone Crusher
T. Final Screens.
Brannan Sand and Gravel Company
Denver, Colorado
Sand and Gravel
October 11, 15 & 16, 1979
1. Initial Screens
2. Primary Crusher
3. Transfer Point
U. Secondary Screens
5. Cone Crusher
6. Final Screens
7A & 7B Transfer Points
Vulcan Materials
Garrisonville, Virginia
Crushed Granite
October 22 through 25, 1979
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180
Page k
Program E
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
Test Points:
Program D - Continued
Test Points: 1. Primary Crusher
2. Initial Screens
3. It.5 ft. Cone Crusher
It. Secondary Screens
5. 5-5 ft. Cone Crusher
6. Transfer Point
7. Transfer Point
Flintkote Corporation
Frederick, Maryland
Crushed Limestone
October 26, 29 & 30, 1979
1. Primary Crusher
2. Transfer Point
3. Initial Screens
It. Cone Crusher
5. Storage Bin
The participants in each of the programs consisted of the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Scott Environmental Technology, Inc.
(SET), The Research Corporation (TRC), CGA and representatives of the subject
plants. The SET personnel on site during all programs were under the direction
of Mr. Joseph Wilson, Field Supervisor. The balance of the Scott test crew
were Mr. Jeff Castor (Programs A, B & C), Mr. David Combe (Programs A, B, C,
D & E), Mr. Joseph Marino (Programs A, B, C, D, & E), and Mr. Bruce Markley
(Programs B, C, D & E).
Other test participants were:
Vulcan, ALA: Vulcan - Allen Blake
TRC - Louis Clark, Randall Kauffman
EPA - Roy Neulicht, John Brown
CGA - Bob Greenberg.
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180 Page 5
Castle Concrete & TRC - Louis Clark, Jim Nedry
Brannan Sand & __, T , _,
_ n EPA - John Brown
Gravel:
Vulcan, VA: CGA - Bob Greenberg, Tom Henderson
TRC - Louis Clark, Jim Nedry
EPA - John Brown
Flintkote: CGA - Tom Henderson
TRC - Louis Clark, Jim Nedry
EPA - John Brown
The results of the test program at Vulcan Materials, Helena,
Alabama are summarized in this report.
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180 Page 6
2.0 SUMMARY'OF RESULTS - VULCAN MATERIALS, ALABAMA
Vulcan Materials is a mineral processing facility located in
Helena, Alabama, approximately 10 miles south of Birmingham, Alabama. The
plant produces crushed stone used primarily for road construction purposes.
The processing operation is located in the bottom of an open quarry. The
quarried materials are carried by truck to the upper rim of the pit where
they are dumped into hoppers which feed the processing equipment. The
finished product is transported back out of the quarry by belt conveyor.
A schematic of the process is shown in Figure 2. A.
Following a safety briefing and familiarization tour, seven points
as shown in Figure 2. A were selected for observation. Six of the seven
points were tested between the 2nd and Uth-of October, while Test Point 2
(TP-2), the surge pile conveyor, was omitted due to time and weather con-
straints and plant scheduling. The six points tested are:
TP-1 Primary (Jaw) Crusher
TP-3 Initial Screen
TP-U Impact Crusher
TP-5 Final Screens
TP-6 Cone Crusher
TP-T Conveyor.
Observational difficulties at this plant included interferences
resulting from visible water mist generated by the water sprays. In addi-
tion, there was occasional interference from wind-blown dust from other
sources; e.g. support structures and nearby equipment.
Summaries .of the test data are presented in the following tables.
Table 2.1 summarizes the results of the Method 9 and Method 22.observations,
The data in Table 2.2 represents Method 9 data expressed as the percent of
observation time that emissions exceeded various opacity levels. Conven-
tional Method 9 six-minute opacity averages are shown in Table 2.3.
Table 2.4 presents the moisture content of non-metallic mineral samples
collected during the test program. Observational conditions are diagrammed
in Figures 2.B through 2.-G.
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180
Page 7
\ x \ x \ x \ x \
. J
Primary Crusher
Primary Surge Conveyor
(Not Tested)
Impact Crusher Screen
Impact Crusher
Screen
Crusher
Transfer Point
INDICATES LOCATION OF
SPRAY BARS
V /
Tectinoiogy
Inc.
FIGURE 2.A
Flow Diagram
Vulcan Materials Company Helena, Alabama
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 8
TABLE 2.1
VISIBLE EMISSION SUMMARY
VULCAN MATERIALS
HELENA, ALABAMA
Percent 'of
Exceeded "X"
Method 22
Time
Period
.Test Point 1,
1440-1500
1505-1525'
1545-1605
1609-1629
1635-1655
Avg. (X = 10)
Test Point 3,
1430-1530
Test Point 4,
0848-0908
0915-0935
0944-1004
Avg. (X = 15)
Test Point 5,
1035-1055
1105-1125
1130-1150
Avg. . .
Test Point 6,
1041-1111
1126-1156
1202-1232-
1349-1419
Avg.
Observed
Time (min)
Observer
"X"
1
2
Time Emissions Average
Percent Opacity Opacity
Method 9
Observer
3
4
Method 9
Observer
3
4
Primary Crusher, 10/2/79
20
20
20
20
20
Impact Crusher
60
Impact Crusher
20
20
20
Final Screens,
20
20
20
Cone Crusher,
30
' 30
30
30
0
10
10
10
10
10
69
38
15
19
31
26
59
48
35
45
48
44
66
40
'
18
29
74
40
33
.35-
19
32
10
13
10
12
13
13
10
13
10
12
Screen, 10/3/79
15
, 10/4/79
0 .
15 '
15
15
10/3/79
0
0
0
10/2/79
10
10
10
10
67
78
10
13
12
0-
<1 .
xl
0
93
92
44
76
23
96
23
58
41
<1
0
0
0
96
94
53
1
61
1
100
0
0
0
0
3
0
1
16
13
16
0
11
1
100
0
4
2
0
0
0
0
83
79
68
0
58
10
9
10
11
11
0
<1
0
<1
8
9
9
1
7
"10
12
11
7
9
0
0
0
0
20 .
16
15
2
13
Test Point 7, Transfer Point, 10/3/79
1324-1424 60 0
Scott Environmental Technobsy Inc
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 9
TABLE 2.2
METHOD 9/TIME CORRELATION
VULCAN MATERIALS"
HELENA, ALABAMA
Test Period
Test Point
1440-1500
1505-1525
1545-1605
1609-1629
1635-1655
Observer
!.,_ Primary Crusher,
3
' 4
3
4
3
4
3
4
3
4
Notes
10/2/79
.
Percent of Time
Emissions Exceeded "X" Opacity
"X"
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
66
74
93.
100
95
87
97
95
92
91
57
62
76
85
72
67
70
67
85
59
45
51
40
40
18
32
31
35
18
19
26
35
20
29
2
12
9
25
6
6
22
6
17
5
1
17
1
1
9
2
' 5
2
1
11
. 1
1
1
5 1
Test Point 3, Impact Crusher Screen, 10/3/79
1430-1530
3
4
100
100
Test Point 4, Impact Crusher, 10/4/79
0848-0908
0915-0935
0944-1004
3
4
3
4
3
4
Test Point 5, Final Screens, 10/3/79
1035-1055
1105-1125
1130-1150
3
4
3
4
3
4
0
0
3
0
0
0'
82
79
19
15
100
100
100
100
100
100
99
60
100
76
99
87 .
44
14
10
14
33
24
1
1
'Scott Environmental Technology Inc
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 10'
TABLE 2.2 (Continued)
METHOD 9/TIME CORRELATION
VULCAN MATERIALS (CONTINUED)
HELENA, ALABAMA
Test Period
Observer
Notes
Test Point 6,
1041-1111
1126-1156
1202-1232
1349-1419
Cone Crusher, 10/2/79
3
4
3
4
3
4
3
4
Test Point 7, Transfer Point, 10/3/79
1324-1424 3
Percent of Time
Emissions Exceeded "X" Opacity
10
"X"
15 20
89
100
96.
100
98
100
90
40
46
92
61
97
59
99
10
1
16
83
13
79
.16
68
3
66
4
34
3
28
39
1
7
8
25 30 35
14
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 11
TABLE 2.3
METHOD 9 - SIX MINUTE AVERAGES
Vulcan Materials Company
Helena, Alabama
TP-1 TP-2 TP-3 TP-4 TP-5
Impact
Primary Not Crusher Impact Final
Crusher Tested Screen Crusher Screens
Observer Observer Observer Observer Observer
Run 3 43 43 43 43 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
#
**
9
7
14
14
13
11-
10
6*
8**
9
11
12
12
8
10
10 .
' 8
3-min.
2-min.
13 10 13 15 10 0
11 8 10 11 -7 0
15 9 8 11 7 0
IT 8 9 11 10 0
11 8 10 11 10 0
11 12 9 10 8 0
11 13 9 10 13 0
10 12 10 11 13 0
13 10 10 13 10 0
10 10 11 11 90
15
18
10
8
10
11
5
average
average
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TP-6
Cone
Crusher
Observer
3 4
4
5
9
11
9
10
9
7
10
8
8
13
7
8
8
1
0
0
0
1
11
18
22
25
23
17
16
15
15
16
15
21
13
13
15
4
2
1
1
4
TP-7
Transfer
Point
Observer
3 4
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 12
TABLE 2.4
ROCK SAMPLE MOISTURE CONTENT
Vulcan Materials
Helena, Alabama
Sample
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Sample
Date
10/2/79
10/3/79
10/3/79
10/3/79
10/2/79
10/3/79
Sample Source
Primary Crusher
(TP-1)
Impact Crusher
Screens (TP-3)
Impact Crusher
(TP-4)
Final Screens
(TP-5)
Cone Crusher
(TP-6)
Transfer Point
Gross
Weight
(g)
554.8
865.9
901.8
858.7
715.7
1158 .
% Moisture
0.60
0.39 -
0.50
0.68
0.31
0.82
(TP-7)
Scott Environmental Technology !nc
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page 13
O
Plan
WD - Variable
WS - 0-2 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- 10'
Background -
Equipment structure
and quarry wall
Key
X~ point of emission
~?~ observer location
- sun position
Elevation
iii* Inc.
FIGURE 2.B
Test Point #1 Primary Crusher
Vulcan Materials Co. Helena, Alabama
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page Ik
0
Plan
WD - South
WS - 0-4 mph
Clear .
Test Point Ht.
- 40'
Background - sky
Key
X-point of emissions
~' observer location
- sun position
Elevation
V>Ğ^ *?*& '**&''*' **'* _
V^>;, ;J U'j 0 Tecnnoicqy
rv *. I Ğ11 ' iğ t-i , yj
Inc.
FIGURE 2.C
Test Point #3 Impact Crusher Screen
Vulcan Materials Co. Helena, Alabama
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180
Page 15
W
o
O
Plan
WD - Variable
WS - 0-2 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht. - 6'
Elevation
Background - trees
at horizon
- Key
X- point of emissions
£- observer .position
- sun position
Elvircnnental
Technology
Inc.
FIGURE 2.D
Test Point #4 Impact Crusher
Vulcan Materials Co. Helena. Alabama
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0.180
Page 16
Plan
WD - Variable
WS - 0-2 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- 5 0'
Elevation
Background - support
structure & sky
Key
X - point of emissions
£?- observer location
-Q- sun position
Technology
Inc.
FIGURE 2.E
Test Point #5 Final Screens
Vulcan Materials Co. Helena, Alabama
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page 17
A/
Plan
WD - West
WS - 5 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- lo1
Elevation
Background - support
structure
Key
X - point of emissions
£?- observer location
Q- sun position
nsntai
}j Technology
& Inc.
FIGURE 2.F
Test Point #6 Cone Crusher
Vulcan Materials Co. Helena, Alabama
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page 18
V
I
Plan
WD - Variable
WS - 0-2 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- 10'
Elevation
Background - sky and
conveyor
Key
X- point of emissions
?- observer location
~ sun position
Inc.
FIGURE 2.G
Test Point #7 Transfer Point
Vulcan Materials Co. Helena,. Alabama
------- |