United States Office of Air Quality EMB Report 79-NMM-11B
Environmental Protection Planning and Standards April 1980
Agency Research Triangle Park NC 27711
Air
i
Non Metallic Minerals
Stone Processing
Emission Test Report
Castle Concrete
Company
Colorado Springs,
Colorado
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
VISIBLE EMISSIONS FROM
NON-METALLIC MINERAL PROCESSING
CASTLE CONCRETE COMPANY
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
79-NMM-ll-B
EPA Contract No. 68-02-2813
Work Assignments 39 & ^0
Prepared For:
Emission Measurement Branch
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Attn: Mr. J. E. Me Car ley.
Mail Drop 13
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
January 1980
SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
A Division Of
SCOTT ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, INC.
Plumsteadvilie, Pennsylvania 189^9
Scott Environmental Technology Inc
-------
SET 1838/18U 01 0180
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS, CASTLE CONCRETE, COLORADO 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 Techndogy Ine
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180 Page 1
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 gardes
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, of 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 visible
threshold for EPA-22. In those instances where essentially constant
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180 Page 2
emissions vere observed at a zero threshold during the first set of observa-
tions, 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 observa-
tion 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 4, 1979
Test Points: 1. Primary Crusher
2. Untested (Surge Conveyor)
3. Impact Crusher Screen
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
SET 1838/18U1+01 0180
Page 3
Test Points (Program A)
Program B
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
Test Points:
Program C
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
Test Points:
Program D
Plant:
Location:
Product:
- Continue.d
k. Impact Crusher
5. Final Screens
6. Cone Crusher
7. 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
7- 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
k.. Secondary Screens
5. Cone Crusher
6. Final Screens
7A & 7B Transfer Points
Vulcan Materials
Garrisonville, Virginia
Crushed Granite
Scott Environmental Technology fnc
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page
Program D - Continued
Dates:
Test Points:
October 22 through 25, 1979
1. Primary Crusher
2. Initial Screens
3. ^.5 ft. Cone Crusher
k. Secondary Screens
5. 5.5 ft. Cone Crusher
6. Transfer Point
T. , Transfer Point
Program E
Plant:
Location:
Product:
Dates:
Test Points:
Flintkote Corporation
Frederick, Maryland
Crushed Limestone
October 26, 29 & 30, 1979
1. Primary Crusher
2. Transfer Point
3. Initial Screens
U. 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), GCA and representatives of the sub-
ject 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 (Pro-
grams A, B, C, D & E), Mr. Joseph Marino (Programs A, B, C, D, & E), and
Mr. Bruce Markley (Programs B, C, D & E).
Other participants were:
Vulcan - ALA. Vulcan - Allen Blake
GCA - Bob Greenberg
TRC - Louis Clark, Randall Kauffman
. EPA - Roy Neulicht, John Brown
Scott.Environmental Technology Inc
-------
SET 1838/18HU 01 0180
Castle Concrete &
Brannan Sand & Gravel
Page 5
GCA - Bob Greenberg
TRC - Louis Clark, Jim Nedry
EPA - John Brown
GCA - Bob Greenberg, Tom Henderson
TRC - Louis Clark, Jim Nedry
EPA - John Brown
GCA - Tom Henderson
TRC - Louis Clark, Jim Nedry
EPA - John Brown
The results of the test program at Castle Concrete Company,
Colorado, are summarized in this report.
Vulcan, Virginia
Flintkote
Scott Environmental Technology Inc.
-------
1838/18M 01 0180 Page 6
2.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS - CASTLE CONCRETE COMPANY., COLORADO
Castle Concrete Company, located just northwest of Colorado
Springs, Colorado, processes non-metallic minerals used primarily in high-
way construction. The ore is obtained from an open mining operation at
the top of a mountain, and the process equipment is permanently installed
in a descending arrangement from the mine site to the bottom of the mountain.
The processed rock is accumulated in bins at the lower level for subsequent
truck loading.
This facility processes two grades of rock. The "stock" "white"
rock is run approximately 80$ of the time, and "red" rock represents about
20% of the production. Visible emissions generated by the red rock were
observed to be significantly higher than those seen from the white rock.
Figure 2.A presents a schematic of the process and indicates the points
tested.
Following a safety briefing and facility tour, seven points were
selected by the Project Officer for observation:
TP-1 Primary (Ja.w) Crusher
TP-2 Initial Screen
TP-3 Conveyor Transfer
TP-U Reclaim Tunnel (not observed)
TP-5 Secondary Screen
TP-6 Secondary (Cone) Crusher
TP-T Finishing Screens.
The reclaim tunnel, TP-lj, was omitted as a test point because its
indoor location had insufficient lighting. The other six points were ob-
served during the period from October 8th to the llth. .
Less than ideal sun angle was a difficulty encountered at this
plant, limiting the observation at some sites to specific times of the day.
The secondary cone crusher (TP-6) is positioned on the edge of a
canyon wall so physical access is available on only one side which faces
the Autumn sun most of the day. An occasional gross interference resulted
from wind-blown dust from the ground and surge piles.
Scott Environmental "fechnobgy Inc
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180 , Page 7
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 parameters are illustrated in
Figures 2.B through 2.G.
Scott EnvironmentalTechrxDfogy Inc
-------
fa:..
O >fl
9) M
01 O
rt
H-"
fl>
H-
O 0)
O iQ
(D
rt
(D
O
I
ft)
O
O
n
to
D.
O
cn
H-
3
O
O
M
O
H
0)
hr]
M
O
C
to
W
77-;
TP-1 Primary Crusher
TP-2 Initial Screens
TP-3 Transfer Point
TP-4 Reclaim Tunnel Transfer Point
(Not Tested)
TP-5 Secondary Screens
TP-6 Cone Crusher
TP-7 Final Screens
0 INDICATES SPRAY BARS
> »00 ftet
V'-^ COARSE
' ORE
STOCKPILE
OVERSIZE
PRODUCT BINS
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 9
TABLE 2.1.
VISIBLE EMISSION SUMMARY
CASTLE.CONCRETE COMPANY
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
1
r
Percent of Time Emissions
Exceeded "X" Percent Opacity
Method 22
Time
Period
Test Point 1,
*
* 1300-1330
0935-1005
1010-1040
1100-1130
Avg. (X = 10)
Test Point 2',
1010-1040
0820-0856
Avg. (X = 0)
1049-1119
1125-1155
Avg. (X = 10)
.Test Point 3,
0851-0921
0931-1001
Avg. (X = 0)
1338-1408
1415-1445
Test Point 5,
0848-0918
0940-1010
1015-1045
1057-1127
Avg. (X = 0)
Observed
Time (min)
Primary Crusher
30
30
30
30
Initial
30
30
30
30
Transfer
30
30
30
30
R
W
W
W
Screens
R
W
R
R
Point,
R
R
R
R
"X"
, 10/10/79
0
0 .
10
10 _
10
, 10/10/79
0
0
10
10
10 '
10/10/79
o-
0
0
10
15
Observer
1 2
-
77
31
10
5
8
-
34
u
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
TABLE 2.1 (Continued)
VISIBLE EMISSION SUMMARY
CASTLE CONCRETE COMPANY (CONTINUED)
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
Page 10
» Percent 'of Time Emissions
, ' Exceeded "X" Percent Opacity
Method 22 Method 9
Time
Period
Test Point
0750-0820
0735-0756
0807-0832
1500-1523
0730-0752
Test Point
1250-1320
1330-1400
1407-1437
1451-1521
Observed
Time (min)
6, Cone Crusher,
30 W
21 W
25 R
23 R
22 R
R
7, Final Screens
- 30 W
30 W
30 W
30 W
Observer Observer
"X"
10/8/79,
0
15
15
15
15
15
, 10/8/79
0
0
0
0
1
2
10/10/79,
93
91
100
85
100
95
0
0
0
0
95
72
88
95
97'
93
o.
0
0
0
_3
10/11/79 '
92
56
100
99
100
100
0
0
0
0
4
94
78
100
100
100
100
0
1
0 .
0
Average
Opacity
Method 9
Observer
_3
15
18
26
27
28
27
0
0
0
0
4
15
20
25
26
34
28
. 0
<1
0
b
Avg.
R = Red Stone
W = White Stone
Scott Environmental Technokxiv Inc
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 11
TABLE 2.2
METHOD 9/TIME CORRELATION
CASTLE CONCRETE COMPANY
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
Percent of Time.
Emissions Exceeded "X" Opacity
Test Period
'Test Point
1300-1330
0935-1005
1010-1040
1100-1130
Test Point
1010-1040
1049-1119
1125-1155
0820-0832
0836-0856
Test Point
0851-0921
0931-1001
1338-1408
1415-1445 .
Observer Notes
1, Primary Crusher, 10/10/79 -
.4 Red Rock(10/10)
3
0
5
10
"X"
15 20 25
30
10/11/79
83
88
4 White Rock (10/11) 26
3
4
3
4
3
2, Initial Screens, 10/10/79 -
3 Red Rock (10/10)
4
3
4
3
4
3 White Rock(10/ll)
4
3, Transfer Point, 10/10/79
3 Red Rock
4
3
4
3
4-
3
4
76
23
90
19
54
68
78
6
32
13
23
9
23
47
56
2
14
4
18
3
8
17 2
32 13 3
.
3 2
2
321
2 1
321
1
1
10/11/79
13
61
18
88
-16
49
1'
33
18
17
77
85
84
81
81
79 "
3
1
52
13
63
60
68
53
74
68
10
1
34
33
. 49
26
56
31
-
2
9
10
25 7 5
5
28 7
6
1
{ST)F ' Scott Environmental Techndosy Inc
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 12
TABLE 2.2 (Continued)
METHOD 9/TIME CORRELATION
CASTLE CONCRETE COMPANY (CONTINUED)
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO
Percent of Time
Emissions Exceeded "X" Opacity
Test Period
Observer
Notes
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
T-ejst Point 5,
0848-0918
0940-1010
1015-1045
1057-1127
Test Point 6,
0750-0820
0735-0756
0807-0832
1500-1523
0730-0752
Test Point 7,
1250-1320
1330-1400
1407-1437
1451-1521
Secondary Screens, 10/8/79
3 . White Rock
4
3
4
3
. 4
3 '
4
0
6
0
28
0
28
0.
11
Cone Crusher, 10/8/79, 10/10/79,
3 White Rock(10/8)
4
3 (10/10/79)
4
'3" Red Rock
4
3
4
3 Red Rock(10/ll)
4
Final Screens, 10/8/79
3 White Rock
4
3
4
3
4
3
4
92
94
100
100
100
100
100
100'
100
100
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
10/11/79
91
92
100
100
100
100
99
100
100
100
86
78
95
99
100
100
99
100
100
100
38
47
56
78
100
100
99
100
100'
100
3
19
14
94 26
78 13
98 53
77 33 2
96 57 8
97 88 74 29
10
Scott Environmental Technology Inc
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page 13
TABLE 2.3
METHOD 9 - SIX MINUTE AVERAGES
Castle Concrete Company
Colorado Springs, Colorado
TP-1
Primary
Crusher
Observer
Run 3 4
1 11
2 11
3 6
4 12
5 12
6 3
7 2
8 1
9 2
10 1
11 1
12 1
13 2
14 3
15 3
16 3
17 2
18 2
19 1
20 1
21
* Four
** Five
11
14
8
18
17
5
9
4
8
6
6
7
8
12
10
6
6
5
2
3
minute
TP-2
Initial
Screens
Observer
3 4
1
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
2
t
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
average
3
3
2
3
5
10
8
k
9
7
5
3
4
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
TP-3 TP-4 TP-5
Transfer Not Secondary
Point Tested Screens
Observer Observer Observer
343434
0
<1
1
2
1
10
9
8
8
8
10
9
14
13
12
11
12
12
14
13
0
1
1
2
1
12
10
8
9 .
9
7
7
10
8
9
9
10
9
10
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<1
1
!*'#
2
2
-------
SET 1838/1844 01 0180
Page
TABLE 2.4
ROCK SAMPLE MOISTURE CONTENT
Castle Concrete Company
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Sample
No.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Sample
Date
10/11/79
10/10/79
10/10/79
10/8/79
10/8/79
10/10/79
'lO/10/79
10/8/79
Sample Source
Primary Crusher
(TP-1)
Initial Screens
(TP-2)
Transfer Point
(TP-3)
Secondary Screens
(TP-5)
Cone Crusher
(TP-6)
Cone Crusher
(TP-6)
Conveyor Prior to
(TP-6)
Final Screens
Gross
Weight
(?)
607.3 (W)
747.9 (R)
595.3 (R)
550.2 (W)
1014 (W)
511.6 (R)
687.7 (R)
853.9 (W)
% Moisture
6.1
0.34
0.67
3.4
2.7
1.0
0.45
7.6
(TP-7)
(W)-Denotes White Rock
(R) Denotes Red Rock
Scott Environmental "fechnofogy !nc
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180
Page 15
Plan
N
WD - South
WS - 5-10 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- 4'
-A////////11 / I
o
Elevation
:Q
Background - Sky at
horizon
Key
X - point of emissions
£?- observer location
Or sun position
Environmental
u Technology
FIGURE 2.B
Test Point #1 Primary Crusher
Castle Concrete Co. Colorado Springs, Colorado
-------
.SET 1838/18HU 01 0180
Page 16
Plan
h/
I
,WD - Variable
WS - 0-5 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- 50'
O
O
O
Elevation
Background - Sky
Key
X- point of emissions
- observer location
c sun position
TecTioiccy
Inc.
FIGURE 2.C
Test Point #2 Initial Screens
Castle Concrete Co. Colorado' Springs, Colorado
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page 1?
N
c 1338-1^5
Plan
A 0852-0921
B 0931-1001
WD - Variable
WS - 0-2 mph
Clear
Test Point Ht.
- 5'
O o o~ Q
o
o
Elevation
O
Background. -
A - quarry wall
B - Conveyor hopper
C - Sky & hopper
Key
X- Point of emissions
observer location
j- sun position
",", Eiviror.memal
-*.r Technology
^m'-at Inc..
FIGURE 2.D
Test Point #3 Transfer Point
Castle Concrete Co. Colorado -Springs, Colorado
-------
SET 1838/18M 01 0180
Page 18
Plan
N
WD - Southwest
WS - 0-5 mph
Cloudy
Test Point Ht. - 15'
OOP O O ~Q
Background - hillside
at horizon and road
surface.
Key
X- point of emissions
?- observer location
sun position
Q 000,0 O
Elevation
^nV-ilJ TecMciogy
Inc.
FIGURE 2.E
Test Point #5 Secondary Screens
Castle Concrete Co. Colorado Springs, Colorado
-------
SET 1838/18UU 01 0180
Page 19
Plan
J
WD - Southwest
WS - 0-5 mph
Cloudy
Test Point Ht.,
- 5'
O
o
CT
GOO OOP
Elevation
Background - conveyor
wall & support structure
Key
X- point of emissions
?- observer location
- sun position
Inc.'
FIGURE 2.F . ...
Test Point #6 Cone Crusher
Castle Concrete Co. Colorado Springs, Colorado
-------
SET 1838/18U1* 01 0180
Page 20
r
8
Plan
WD - Southwest
WS - 0-5 rnph
Overcast
Test Point Ht. - U0'
Elevation
Background - sky
Key
X- point of emissions
?- observer location
- sun position
'A^ Inc.
FIGURE 2.G
Test Point #7 Final Screens ..
Castle Concrete Co. Colorado Springs, Colorado
------- |