United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
EMB Report 80-MET-7
May 1980
Air
Metallic Minerals

Emission Test Report
Homestake Mining
Company
Lead, South Dakota

-------
          York Services Corporation
          • Energy and Environmental Systems Engineering
          • Atmospheric Sciences Services
          • Emission Measurement Services
                                                     One Research Drive
                                                     Stamford, Connecticut 06906
                                                     Telephone: (203) 325-1371
                                                     TWX: 710-474-3947
            ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
               EMISSIONS MEASUREMENT BRANCH
                        ESED, MD-13
     RESEARCH  TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA   27711
                        FINAL REPORT
EMISSIONS TEST PROGRAM:   GOLD  ORE PROCESSING  INDUSTRY
                        CONDUCTED AT
                 HOMESTAKE MINING COMPANY
                    LEAD,  SOUTH  DAKOTA
              EPA CONTRACT NUMBER 68-02-2819
                    TASK ASSIGNMENT 22
               EPA PROJECT NUMBER 80-MET-7
              YRC PROJECT NUMBER 01-9517-22
                    NOVEMBER 12,  1980
          A Subsidiary of York Research Corporation

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                               Paqe
List of Figures                                                 iii
List of Tables                                                   iv
Preface  -                                                        vii

1.0  INTRODUCTION                                                 1

2.0  SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS                       3
     2.1  Introduction
     2.2  Particulate Emissions
     2.3  Particle Size Distribution
     2.4  Visible Emissions
     2.5  Fugitive Emissions
     2.6  Process Samples
     2.7  Trace Element Analysis

3.0  PROCESS INFORMATION                                         35
     3.1  Process Description
     3.2  Process Operation

4.0  SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS OBSERVATION LOCATIONS      41
     4.1  Introduction
     4.2  Particulate Sampling Locations
     4.3  Particle Size Distribution
     4.4  Visible and Fugitive Emissions
          Observation Locations

5.0  SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES                          57
     5.1  Introduction
     5.2  Preliminary Measurements
     5.3  Gas Composition
     5.4  Particulate
                             -i-

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS (Con't)
     5.5  Particle Size Distribution
     5.6  Process Samples
     5.7  Visible Emissions
     5.8  Fugitive Emissions

6.0  APPENDICES
     6.1  Computer Data Printouts - Particulate Tests
     6.2  Calculation Formulae
     6.3  Particle Size Distribution
          6.3.1  Computer Printouts
          6.3". 2  Field Data Sheets
          6.3.3  Laboratory Results
     6.4  Field Data Sheets - Particulate Tests
     6.5  Field Data Sheets - Visible and Fugitive
          Emissions Observations
     6.6  Calibration Data
          6.6.1  Visible Emissions Certificates
          6.6.2  Orifice and Meter Calibration Data
          6.6.3  Pitot Tube Calibration Data
          6.6.4  Nozzle Calibration Data
     6.7  Laboratory Results
          6.7.1  Discussion of Analytical Methods
          6.7.2  Summary of Laboratory Data
     6.8  Project Participants
     6.9  Work Assignment
                             -11-

-------
                        LIST OF FIGURES
2-1  Particle Size Distribution - Primary Crusher Inlet          19
2-2  Particle Size Distribution - Conveyor Transfer Inlet        21
2-3  Particle Size Distribution - Ore Storage Reclaim Inlet      23
2-4  Particle Size Distribution - Baghouse Outlet                25
3-1  Flow Diagrm,  Komestake Mining Company,  Lead,  SD             36
4-1  Sampling Point Location - Primary Crusher Inlet             43
4-2  Illustrations of Primary Crusher Inlet Sampling Location    44
4-3  Sampling Point Location - Conveyor Transfer Inlet           45
4-4  Illustrations of Conveyor Transfer Inlet Sampling Location  46
4-5  Sampling Point Location - Ore Storage Reclaim Inlet         48
4-6  Illustrations of Ore Storage Reclaim Inlet Sampling
     Location                                                    49
4-7  Sampling Point Location - Baghouse Outlet                   50
4-8  Illustrations of Baghouse Outlet Sampling Location          51
4-9  Visible and Fugitive Emissions Observation Locations -
     Primary Crusher Inlet                                       53
4-10 Visible and Fugitive Emissions Observation Locations -
     Conveyor Transfer Inlet and Grizzly Screens Area            54
4-11 Visible and Fugitive Emissions Observations Locations -
     Baghouse Outlet Stack and Crusher Building (Overlook)       55
5-1  Particulate Sampling Train                                  59
5-2  Andersen Stack Sampler                                      65
5-3  Andersen Sampling Train                                     66
                              -in-

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES
                                                               Paqe
1-1  Summary of Emissions Testing Program                        2
2-1  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Primary  Crusher Inlet
     (English Units)                                              8
2-2  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Primary  Crusher Inlet
     (Metric Units)                                              9
2-3  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Conveyor Transfer Inlet
     (English Units)                                             10
2-4  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Conveyor Transfer Inlet
     (Metric Units)                                             11
2-5  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Ore Storage Reclaim
     Inlet (Bnglish Units)                                      12
2-6  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Ore Storage Reclaim
     Inlet (Metric Units)                                       13
2-7  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Baghouse Outlet
     (English Units)                                             14
2-8  Summary of Emission Test Results  -  Baghouse Outlet (Metric
     Units)                                                     15
2-9  Particulate and Emission Data Summary - Gases  Entering and
     Exiting the Baghouse (English Units)                       16
2-10 Particulate and Emission Data Summary - Gases  Entering and
     Exiting the Baghouse (Metric Units)                        17
2-11 Summary of Particle Size Distribution Testing  - Primary
     Crusher Inlet                                              18
2-12 Summary of Particle Size Distribution Testing  - Conveyor
     Transfer Inlet                                             20
2-13 Summary of Particle Size Distribution Testing  - Ore
     Storage Reclaim Inlet                                      22
2-14 Summary of Particle Size Distribution Testing  - Baghouse
     Outlet                                                     24
2-15 Summary of Visible Emissions Observations - Primary
     Crusher Inlet                                              26
2-16 Summary of Visible Emissions Observations - Conveyor
     Transfer Inlet                                             27
                             -iv-

-------
                     LIST OF TABLES (Con't)
2-17 Summary of Visible Emissions Observations - Grizzly
     Screen Area                                                 28
2-18 Summary of Visible Emissions Observations - Baghouse
     Outlet                                                      29
2-19 Summary of Visible Emissions Observations - Crusher
     Building                                                    30
2-20 Summary of Fugitive Emissions Observations                  31
2-21 Summary of Laboratory Analysis on Process Samples           32
2-22 Trace Element Concentrations                                33
3-1  Manometer Readings of Baghouse                              39
                             -v-

-------
                            PREFACE
The work reported herein was conducted by personnel from the
York Research Corporation (YRC), the TRW Consulting Division
(TRW), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

The scope of the work, issued under EPA Contract No. 68-02-
2819, work assignment No. 22, was under the supervision of the
YRC Project Director, Mr. James W. Davison.  Mr. Roger A.
Kniskern of YRC served as Project Manager and was responsible
for summarizing the test and analytical data in this report.
Analyses of all samples were performed at the YRC laboratory in
Stamford, Connecticut under the direction of Mr. Robert Q.
Bradley.  One particulate sample was then analyzed for trace
metals by Ledoux and Company, Teaneck, NJ.

The TRW Engineering consultants were responsible for monitoring
the process operations and collecting process samples during
the testing program.

The cooperation and guidance of Mr. Frederick D. Fox, Environ-
mental Director of the Homestake Gold Mine in Lead, South
Dakota, contributed greatly to the success of the test pro-
gram.

Mr. Dennis Holzschuh, of the Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Emission Measurement Branch, EPA, served as Tech-
nical Manager and was responsible for coordinating the emission
test program.
                                -vii-

-------
1.0  INTRODUCTION

York Research Corporation (YRC) was contracted by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to perform an
emission test program at a gold ore processing plant.  This re-
quest was based on a pretest survey conducted during the week
of November 5, 1979.  The test program was conducted at the
Homestake Gold Mine in Lead, South Dakota from January 14
through January 17, 1980.  The objective of the test program
was to provide data useful in the determination of an appropri-
ate level at which to set the New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) for the metallic mineral processing industry.

The test program consisted of sampling and analysis of particu-
late emissions'generated by crushing, screening, conveying and
storage operations.  Samples were collected for determination
of particulate emission rate and trace element concentration,
particle size distribution and ore moisture content.  In addit-
ion, visible emissions methods were used to arrive at average
percent opacity and fugitive emission frequency results.  Table
1-1 presents the sequence of testing.
                                -1-

-------
              TABLE 1-1
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS TESTING PROGRAM
        HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
        LEAD,  SOUTH DAKOTA
•*
DATE
1/15/80
1/16/80
1/16/80
T.P.#
4
2
3
1
9
5
6
7
8
4
2
3
1
9
5
6
7
8
4
2
3
1
9
5
6
7
8
EPA 0
METHOD o
5
5
5
5
9
9
9
9
9
5
5
5
5
9
9
9
9
9
5
5
5
5
9
9
9
9
9
&
&
&
&
•
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
&
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
TIME
o o o o ooooo
o o o o ooooo
O r-l 
-------
2.0  SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION OF TEST RESULTS

     2.1  Introduction

     The results of the emission test program conducted at the
     Homestake Gold Mine in Lead,  South Dakota are presented
     throughout this section.  Tables 2-1 through 2-22 and
     Figures 2-1 through 2-4 summarize the results of the tests
     for the following parameters!

          •    Particulate Emissions
          •    Trace Element Concentration
          •    Particle Size Distribution
          •    Visible and Fugitive Emissions
          •  •  Process Samples

     These results are discussed briefly in this section, and
     detailed discussions are presented in Section 5.0, "Sam-
     pling and Analytical Procedures" and in various related
     appendices.  Particulate samples were collected
     simultaneously at the following test locations:  Secondary
     Crusher Inlet, Conveyor Transfer Inlet, Ore Storage
     Reclaim Inlet, and Baghouse Outlet.  Preliminary pitot
     traverses and moisture measurements were made at each
     sampling location and the test parameters for isokinetic
     sampling were determined based on these data.

     Several problems were encountered during the test pro-
     gram.  The actual flow rate in the stack at the Ore Stor-
     age Reclaim Inlet had increased after the preliminary
     measurements had been made.  After sampling for 30 minutes
     into the first test, the test engineers became aware of
     this increased velocity.  To compensate for this increased
     velocity and to maintain proper isokinetic sampling, the
     nozzle was replaced with one of a smaller diameter.
                              -3-

-------
Other problems were also encountered with the mining pro-
cess during the second and third tests which had a major
effect on the entire test program.  Extremely wet ore
emanating from the mine caused blinding of the bags in the
baghouse.  Approximately two hours were required while the
bags were manually lanced by mine operators before each
test.  Also, the mine operators periodically needed to
provide the miners with supplies which required several
hours.  In addition, at approximately 1350 daily, there
was a change in plant personnel causing a slowdown or halt
in process operation.  It took over one hour for plant
operations to return to normal.  Finally, the plant was
closed on Thursdays for maintenance purposes, which
prohibited testing on that day.
        •
In order to avoid serious delays with the test program,
several modifications to the sampling procedures were
made.  The sampling time at every inlet location was de-
creased significantly from five minutes per traverse point
to three minutes per traverse point.  At the outlet loca-
tion, the sampling time was decreased further to two min-
utes per traverse point.  These sampling modifications al-
lowed for successful completion of the test program while
maintaining proper isokinetic sampling.

2.2  Particulate Emissions

The results for the particulate sampling at the four test
locations are summarized in.Tables 2-1 through 2-8.  A
summary of the emissions entering and exiting the baghouse
appears in Tables 2-9 and 2-10.  The stack volumetric flow
rates for the inlet columns represent the sum of the indi-
vidual volumetric flow rates measured for the Primary
Crusher Inlet, Conveyor Transfer Inlet and Ore Storage
Reclaim Inlet locations during that particular test.
                         -4-

-------
The additional data presented in Tables 2-9 and 2-10, with
the exception of total particulate measured in Ib/hr
(English) and Kg/hr (metric), represent the average of the
data collected at the three inlet locations for each test
run.  The total particulate emission rate for the inlet,
measured in Ib/hr (English) and Kg/hr (metric),
constitutes the sum of the particulate matter sampled for
each test at the three inlet locations.

The collection efficiency of the baghouse is also included
in Tables 2-9 and 2-10.  These calculations are based on
particulate concentration, measured in gr/SCFD.

2.3  Particle Size Distribution
        •
Three particle size distribution tests were conducted at
each of the following locations:  Primary Crusher Inlet,
Conveyor Transfer Inlet and Ore Storage Reclaim Inlet.
Only one test, with a duration of 137 minutes, was re-
quired at the Baghouse Outlet location.  Tables 2-11
through 2-14 and Figures 2-1 through 2-4 display the re-
sults of these tests.  Composite plots of the particle
size distribution for tests 1, 2 and 3 at each location
are presented.

The initial test conducted at the Ore Storage Reclaim In-
let produced results which were not representative of the
existing process conditions.  Therefore, this test was not
included when compositing the particle size distribution
data for this location.

2.4  Visible Emissions

Visible emissions observations were performed simultane-
ously at the following test locations:  Primary Crusher
Inlet, Conveyor Transfer Inlet, Grizzly Screens Area, Bag-
                         -5-

-------
house Outlet and Exterior of Crusher Building.  The emis-
sions were observed while particulate sampling-was being
conducted.  Summaries of these observations appear in
Tables 2-15 through 2-19, and the locations from which
these emissions were being observed are shown  in Section
4.4, Figures 4-9 trough 4-11.  The average opacity ob-
served for any of the five test locations did  not exceed
zero percent.  The field data sheets for these observations
may be found in Appendix 6.5.

2.5  Fugitive Emissions

Fugitive emissions observations were performed simultane-
ously with the opacity observations at the following test
locations:  Primary Crusher, Conveyor Transfer Area,
Grizzly Screen Area,  and Exterior of Crusher Building.  No
fugitive emissions were observed at the baghouse outlet.
The results of the observations are summarized in Table
2-20, and the location from which these emissions were
being observed are shown in Section 4.4, Figures 4-9
through 4-11.  There were considerable fugitive emissions
observed at the primary crusher, resulting in emission
frequencies exceeding ten percent.  However, at the
remaining test locations, the frequency of emissions rarely
exceeded zero percent.

2.6  Process Samples

Ore samples were taken by TRW personnel to ascertain whether
a correlation might be made between ore moisture content and
uncontrolled (inlet)  and controlled (outlet) emission
factors.   Grab samples of the gold ore were taken from the
following process streams:  (1) conveyor outlet from primary
crusher,  (2) conveyors at entrance to grizzly screens
(composite sample), (3)  beneath grizzly screen (north), (4)
                        -6-

-------
     beneath grizzly screen (south).  The moisture content at
     each of the sample points for each of the three test runs
     are shown in Table 2-21.

2.7  Trace Element Analysis

     One particulate sample was analyzed for trace elements.
     The filter from the Primary Crusher Inlet, Test 1 was
     analyzed for various elements by spark source mass
     spectroscopy (SSMS).  The results of these analyses appear
     in Table 2-22.*
* The results for more than one test program were reported.
  The results for this test program are circled on the report,
  see Appendix 6.7.2.
                             -7-

-------
                              TABLE 2-1
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                        PRIMARY CRUSHER INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (ENGLISH UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, 8F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Ton/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Ib/ton ore

Test 1
1-15-80
1155-1520

123.62

1.5

67.9

1828
94.6

2971.5




1840.73
0.22930
3.59
0.0290

Test 2
1-16-80
1015-1233

86.87

1.9

65.0

1904
97.2

2992.5




1599.15
0.28349
4.63
0.0371

Test 3 Average
1-16-80 	
1435-1600 	

79.99 96.83

1.6 1.7

70.0 67.6

1938 1890
96.3 96.0

2992.5 2985.5




2164.09 1867.99
0.41663 0.30981
6.92 5.05
0.0555 0.0406
i
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
                              -8-

-------
                              TABLE 2-2
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                        PRIMARY CRUSHER INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (METRIC UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DNm^)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
•
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNm3/min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Mg/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DNm3
kg/hr
kg/Mg ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1155-1520
3.50
1.5
19.9
52
94.6
2699



1840.73
524.73
1.63
0.0145
Test 2
1-16-80
1015-1233
2.46
1.9
18.3
54
97.2
2654



1599.15
648.74
2.10
0.0190
Test 3
1-16-80
1435-1600
2.27
1.6
21.1
55
96.3
2654



2164.09
953.40
3.14
0.0284
Average
2.74
1.7
19.8
54
96.0
2669



1867.99
708.96
2.29
0.0206
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
                               -9-

-------
                              TABLE 2-3
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                      CONVEYOR TRANSFER INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (ENGLISH UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Ton/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Ib/ton ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1210-1540
61.77
2.1
68.9
4335
106.1
2971.5



1080.63
0.26942
10.01
0.0808
Test 2
1-16-80
1020-1236
49.06
1.5
68.7
5455
105.3
2992.5



1433.80
0.45011
21.05
0.169
Test 3
1-16-80
1445-1612
42.19
3.0
68.9
4887
107.2
2992.5



707.13
0.25810
10.81
0.0867
Average
51.00
2.2
68.8
4893
106.2
2985.5



1073.85
0.32588
13.96
0.112
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
                               -10-

-------
                              TABLE 2-4
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                       CONVEYOR TRANSFER INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD,  SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (METRIC UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DNm3)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, *C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNm3/min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Mg/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DNm3
kg/hr
kg/Mg ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1210-1540
1.75
2.1
20.5
123
106.1

2699



1080.63
616.53
4.54
0.0403
Test 2
1-16-80
1020-1236
1.39
1.5
20.4
154
105.3

2654



1433.80
1030.03
9.55
0.0864
Test 3
1-16-80
1445-1612
1.19
3.0
20.5
138
107.2

2654



707.13
590.63
4.90
0.0443
Average
1.44
2.2
20.5
139
106.2.

2669



1073.85
745.73
6.33
0.0569
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
                               -11-

-------
                              TABLE 2-5
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                      ORE STORAGE RECLAIM INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (ENGLISH UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, *F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Ton/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Ib/ton ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1151-1539
90.82
2.2
55.7
7791
108.5
2971.5



238.25
0.04040
2.70
0.0218
Test 2
1-16-80
1022-1235
41.14
1.6
67.3
7874
100.2
2992.5



161.81
0.06058
4.09
0.0328
Test 3
1-16-80
1435-1602
46.39
1.9
62.1
8417
105.7
2992.5



102.40
0.03399
2.45
0.0196
Average
59.45
1.9
61.7
8027
104.8
2985.5



167.49
0.04499
3.08
0.0248
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.

-------
                              TABLE 2-6
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                      ORE STORAGE RECLAIM INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (METRIC UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DNm5)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, *C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNm3/min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Mg/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DNm3
kg/hr
kg/Mg ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1151-1539
2.57
2.2
13.2
221
108.5

2699



238.25
92.44
1.22
0.0108
Test 2
1-16-80
1022-1235
1.16
1.6
19.6
223
100.2

2654



161.81
138.62
1.85
0.0167
Test 3
1-16-80
1435-1602
1.31
1.9
16.7
238
105.7

2654



102.40
77.79
1.11
0.0100
Average
1.68
1.9
16.5
227
104.8

2669



167.49
102.95
1.40
0.0126
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
                               -13-

-------
                              TABLE 2-7
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                           BAGHOUSE OUTLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (ENGLISH UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, »F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Ton/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Ib/ton ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1157-1531
114.18
1.6
60.4
17476
104.3

2971.5



59.25
0.00799
1.20
0.0097
Test 2
1-16-80
1019-1249
87.57
1.9
60.0
18669
104.7

2992.5



43.25
0.00761
1.22
0.0098
Test 3
1-16-80
1434-1618
81.77
1.4
60.0
18422
106.3

2992.5



21.25
0.00411
0.65
0.0052
Average
94.51
1.6
60.1
18189
105.1

2985.5



41.44
0.00657
1.02
0.0082
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
bDry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
                               -14-

-------
                              TABLE 2-8
                  SUMMARY OF EMISSION TEST RESULTS
                           BAGHOUSE OUTLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                           (METRIC UNITS)
Date
Time
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DNm5)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, fC
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNm3/min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Production Rate
(Mg/24 Hours)
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg
gr/DNm3
kg/hr
kg/Mg ore
Test 1
1-15-80
1157-1531

3.23

1.6

15.8

495
104.3

2699




59.25
18.29
0.54
0.0048
Test 2
1-16-80
1019-1249

2.48

1.9

15.5

529
104.7

2654




43.25
17.40
0.55
0.0050
Test 3
1-16-80
1434-1618

2.32

1.4

15.6

522
106.3

2654




21.82
9.40
0.29
0.0026
Average

2.68

1.6

15.6

515
105.1

2669




41.44
15.03
0.46
0.0041
aDry Normalized Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
bDry Normalized Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
                              -15-

-------
                                             TABLE 2-9
                               PARTICULATE AND EMISSION DATA  SUMMARY
                              GASES ENTERING AND EXITING THE  BAGHOUSE
                                        HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                                        LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                                          (ENGLISH UNITS)
Location
Date
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DSCF)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °F
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DSCFM)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
gr/DSCF
Ib/hr
Run 1
Inlet Outlet
1-15-80
92.07 114.18
1.93 1.6
64.2 60.4
13954 17476
103.1 104.3



0.17971 0.00799
16.3 1.20
Run 2
Inlet Outlet
1-16-80
59.02 87.57
1.7 1.9
67.0 60.0
15233 18669
100.9 104.7



0.26473 0.00761
29.77 1.22
Run 3
Inlet Outlet
1-16-80
56.19 81.77
2.2 1.4
67.0 60.0
15242 18422
103.1 106.3



0.23624 0.00411
20.18 0.65
Average
Inlet Outlet
	
69.09 94.51
1.0 1.6
66.0 60.1
14810 18189
102.4 105.1



0.22689 0.00657
22.09 1.02
Collection Efficiency
Percent c 95.55 97.13 98.26 96.98
aDry Standard Cubic Feet at 68°F, 29.92 inches Hg.
t>Dry Standard Cubic Feet Per Minute at 68°F, 29.92  inches  Hg.
GCollection Efficiency Based on Particulate Concentration  in gr/DSCF.

-------
                                              TABLE 2-10
                                PARTICULATE  AND  EMISSION  DATA SUMMARY
                              GASES  ENTERING  AND  EXITING THE BAGHOUSE
                                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                                         LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
                                           (METRIC UNITS)
Location
Date
Volume of Dry Gas
Sampled (DNm3)a
Percent Moisture By
Volume
Average Stack
Temperature, °C
Stack Volumetric Flow
Rate (DNm3/min)b
Percent Isokinetic
Total Particulate
Filter Catch and
Front Half Acetone
Wash
mg/DNm3
Kg/hr
Run 1
Inlet Outlet
1-15-80
2.61 3.23
1.9 1.6
17.9 15.8
396 495
103.1 104.3



411.23 18.29
7.39 0.54
Run 2
Inlet Outlet
1-16-80
1.71 2.48
1.7 1.9
19.4 15.5
431 529
100.9 104.7



605.80 17.40
13.5 0.55
Run 3
Inlet Outlet
1-16-80
1.59 2.32
2.2 1.4
19.4 15.6
431 522
103.1 106.3



540.61 9.40
9.15 0.29
Average
Inlet Outlet
	
1.95 2.68
1.9 1.6
18.9 15.6
420 515
	 105.1



519.21 15.03
10.02 0.46
Collection Efficiency
Percent c 95.55 97.13 98.26 96.98
aDry Standard Cubic Meters at 20°C, 760mm Hg.
t>Dry Standard Cubic Meters Per Minute at 20°C,  760mm Hg.
cCollection Efficiency Based on Particulate Concentration  in

-------
                            TABLE 2-11
            SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TESTS
              CONDUCTED ON THE PRIMARY CRUSHER INLET
                       HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                       LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
Total Particle
Test . Particulate Size
Test Time, Concentration, Range,
Number Date Timea Min.. gr/DSCF Microns
Mass in
Size Range,
%

1 1/16/80 1024-1037 30 0.18874 >11.78
1124-1131 11.78-7.35
1149-1154 7.35-4.98
4.98-3.39
3.39-2.17
2.17-1.08
1.08-0.66
0.66-0.44
<0.44
2 1/16/80 1208-1228 30 0.22348 >14.25
14.25-8.89
8.89-6.03
6.03-4.11
4.11-2.64
2.64-1.32
1.32-0.81
0.81-0.54
<0.54
3 1/16/80 1244-1304 20 0.28446 >14.37
14.37-8.97
8.97-6.08
6.08-4.14
4.14-2.66
2.66-1.33
1.33-0.82
0.82-0.54
<0.54
28.23
10.75
6.29
3.15
1.37
1.00
0.58
0.26
48.37
61.48
17.92
11.02
3.62
3.52
1.85
0.46
0.06
0.06
44.65
11.28
11.02
10.16
10.56
8.77
2.90
0.65
0.01
See field data sheets for plant shutdown intervals,
                               -18-

-------
IOO.O
 90.0
    99.99   99.9 99.8
                 99 98
                                   FIGURE 2-1
                          PARTICLE  SIZE DISTRIBUTION
                         COMPOSITE  OF TESTS 1,2  and 3
                             PRIMARY CRUSHER INLET
                              HOMESTAKE. GOLD MINE
                               LEAD,  SOUTH  DAKOTA
                         95
                                                                   1  0.5  02 0.1 0.05  0.01
                                                                                  100.0
  0.1
Legend 0—

        Ell!
                  Test  1
                  Test  2
                  Test  3
                                        -19-
                                                                                   0.2
    0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2  0.5  1   2    5   10   20   30 40 50  60  70  80    90  95    98  99    99.8 99.9   99.99

      	CUMULATIVE  PER CENT BY WEIGHT LESS  THAN(Dp)
                                                                                   O.I

-------
                               TABLE 2-12
              SUMMARY OF'PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION. TESTS
                CONDUCTED  ON THE CONVEYOR TRANSFER INLET
                          HOMESTAKE  GOLD MINE
                          LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
Total
Test Particulate Particle
Test Time, Concentration, Size Range,
Number Date Time3 Min. gr/DSCF Microns
1 1/16/80 1732-1752 20 0.09451 >12.93
12.93-8.07
8.07-5.47
5.47-3.72
3.72-2.39
2.39-1.19
1.19-0.73
0.73-0.48
< 0.48
2 1/16/80 1800-1820 20 0.13018 >13.53
13.53-8.44
8.44-5.72
5.72-3.90
3.90-2.50
2.50-1.25
1.25-0.76
0.76-0.50
<0.50
3 1/16/80 1824-1832 21 0.37751 >12.97
1852-1857 12.97-8.09
1901-1908 8.09-5.48
5.48-3.73
3.73-2.39
2.39-1.20
1.20-0.73
0.73-0.48
<0.48
Mass in Size
Range ,
%
43.76
16.70
14.51
10.61
7.31
5.10
0.91
0.00
1.10
46.35
19.77
15.16
8.98
5.62
3.67
0.45
0.00
0.00
62.90
19.29
8.27
5.45
2.58
1.39
0.12
0.00
0.00
See field data sheets for plant shutdown intervals
                                  -20-

-------
IOO.O
 90.0
    99.99
                                    FIGURE 2-2
                           PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
                          COMPOSITE OF TESTS 1,2  and 3
                            CONVEYOR TRANSFER INLET
                              HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                               LEAD, SOUTH  DAKOTA
         99.9 99.8
                  99  98
                         95
                             90
                                  80
                                                                    1  0.5  0.2 0.1 C.OS  0.01
  0.1
    0.01 0.05 0.1 0.2  0.5  1
                             10
                                  20  30  40  50  60  70  80
                                                         90   95
                                                                 98  99
                                                                         99.8 99.9
Legend
1
A —
0 —
Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
                       CUMULATIVE  PER CENT BY  WEIGHT LESS THAN(Dp)
                                        -21-
                                                                                    100.0
                                                                                    9O.O
                                                                                     0.2
                                                                                 99.99
                                                                                     O.I

-------
                               TABLE  2-13
               SUMMARY  OF  PARTICLE  SIZE  DISTRIBUTION TESTS
              CONDUCTED ON THE ORE STORAGE RECLAIM INLET
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                          LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
Total
Particulate Test Particle
Test Concentration, Time, Size Range,
Number Date Time gr/DSCF Min. Microns
lb 1/16/80 1538-1558 0.00210 ' >12.57
1603-1618 12.57-7.84
1623-1638 50 7.84-5.31
5.31-3.62
3.62-2.32
2.32-1.16
1.16-0.71
0.71-0.45
2 1/16/80 1648-1738 0.00621 50 >12.75
12.75-7.96
7.96-5.39
5.39-3.67
3.67-2.35
2.35-1.17
1.17-0.72
0.72-0.46
<0.46
3 1/16/80 1742-1832 0.01043 50 >12.59
12.59-7.86
7.86-5.32
5.32-3.62
3.62-2.32
2.32-1.16
1.16-0.71
0.71-0.45
<0.45
Mass in
Range ,
%
77.38
22.62
0
0
0
0
0
0
54.24
20.81
12.32
3.83
4.55
1.76
1.04
0.83
0.62
66.15
11.03
9.10
4.30
2.18
2.24
1.43
2.81
0.75
See field data sheet for plant shutdown intervals.

Results not representative of existing process conditions and should
therefore be disregarded.
                                 -22-

-------
                                    FIGURE  2-3
                          PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
                          COMPOSITE OF TESTS 2  AND  3
                          ORE STORAGE  RECLAIM INLET
                              HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                               LEAD, "SOUTH  DAKOTA;
                                                                       0.5  0.2 0.1 0.05  0.01
                                                                                     100.0
SOD
ZOO
                                                                                      30O
                                                                                      200
                                                                                      10.0
                                                                                      9.0

                                                                                      ao

                                                                                      7.0

                                                                                      6.0

                                                                                      8.0


                                                                                      4.0


                                                                                      3.0




                                                                                      2.0
                                                                   a
                                                                   Q

                                                                   OT

                                                                   O
                                                                   (C
                                                                   O
                                                                   UJ
                                                                   N
                                                                   UJ

                                                                   O
                                                                   p
                                                                   ec

                                                                   a.
0.2
                                                                                       1.0
                                                                                       0.9

                                                                                       0.8

                                                                                       0.7

                                                                                       0.6

                                                                                       0.9


                                                                                       O.4
                                                                                       0.9
                                                                                       0.2
 0.1
   0.01  0.05 0.1 0.2  O5  1   2
                             10   -20  30 40 50  60  70   80   90  95   98  99
                                                                           99.8 99.9   99.99
     Legend
              Q— Test  3
CUMULATIVE PER CENT BY  WEIGHT LESS  THAN(Dp)


                   -23-

-------
                                TABLE 2-14
                     SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION TEST
                      CONDUCTED ON BAGHOUSE OUTLET
                          HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                           LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
Total Particle
Test Particulate Size
Test Time, Concentration, Range,
Number Date Time3 Min. gr/DSCF Microns
1 1/15/80 1201-1308 0.00229 >15.75
1319-1349 15.75-9.83
1404-1405 ' 9.83-6.66
1452-1531 137 6.66-4.53
4.53-2.90
2.90-1.45
1.45-0.89
0.89-0.59
<0.59

Mass in
Size Range,
%
92.06
3.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.44
0.00
0.00
0.00
See field data sheets for plant shutdown intervals.
                                   -24-

-------
                                   FIGURE 2-4
                          PARTICLE  SIZE  DISTRIBUTION
                                BAGHOUSE  OUTLET
                              HOMESTAKE  GOLD MINE
                               LEAD,- SOUTH DAKOTA
  99.99    99.9 99.8
                99  98   95  90
                                80   70
                                                                          0 005 0.01 ,oo.O
O.I
                                                                                   0.2
  0.01  0.05 0.1 0.2  0.5  1   2    5   10   20   30  40 SO  60  70  80    90   95   96  99     99.8 99.9   99.99

                     CUMULATIVE  PER  CENT  BY WEIGHT  LESS THAN(Dp)
                                                                                   O.I
                                        -25-

-------
                              TABLE 2-15

             SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
                       PRIMARY CRUSHER INLET
                        HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                        LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
DATE
TIME3
TEST NO.
Six Minute
Interval
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1/15/80
1155-1523
1

0
0
0
0
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1/16/80
1020-1236
2
.Average Opacity, %
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Oc
-
-
-
-
1/16/80
1435-1603
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ob
-
•
-
-
See Field Data Sheet for plant shutdown intervals.

Based on 4 minute interval.

Based on 3 minute interval.
                                -26-

-------
                              TABLE. .2-16

             SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSION OBSERVATIONS
                      CONVEYOR TRANSFER INLET
                        HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                        LEAD,  SOUTH DAKOTA
DATE
TIMES
TEST NO.
Six Minute
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

16

17
18
19
20
1/15/80
1151-1517
1
Interval
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0

0
0
0
0
1/16/80
1020-1236
2
Average Opacity. %
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
b
0





1/16/80
1435-1612
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
h
0



See field data sheets for plant shutdown intervals.

Based on 2 minute interval.
                                -27-

-------
                              TABLE 2-17

             SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
                        GRIZZLY SCREEN AREA
                        HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                        LEAD,  SOUTH DAKOTA
DATE
TIMEa
TEST NO.
Six Minute
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1/15/80
1151-1517
1
Interval
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1/16/80
1018-1237
2
Averaqe Opacity, %
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
-
-
—
1/16/80
1435-1612
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
-
-
—
See Field Data Sheet for plant shutdown intervals.
                                -28-

-------
                            TABLE 2-18
             SUMMARY  OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS  OBSERVATIONS
                          BAGHOUSE OUTLET
                       HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                       LEAD,  SOUTH  DAKOTA
Date
Time
Test No.
Six Minute
Intervals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1/15/80
1155-1350
1455-1523
1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1/16/80
1015-1036
1121-1247
2
Average Opacity, %
" *•
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
oa
-
-
-
-
-
1/16/80
1413-1617
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ob
-
-
-
-
-
Based on 1 min. observation interval.
Based on 2 min. observation interval.

-------
                              TABLE 2-19
              SUMMARY OF VISIBLE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
                          CRUSHER BUILDING
                        HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                        LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
DATE
TIMEa
TEST NO.
Six Minute
Interval.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
1/15/80
1154-1409
1

0
0
0
0
. o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1/16/80
1025-1232
2
Average Opacity, %
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1/16/80
1444-1620 .
3

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0





See field data sheets for plant shutdown intervals.
                                 -30-

-------
                    TABLE  2-20

   SUMMARY OF FUGITIVE EMISSIONS OBSERVATIONS
              HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
              LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
LOCATION
Primary Crusher
Inlet
Conveyor Transfer
Inlet
Grizzly Screen
Area
Crusher
Building
DATE
1/15/80
1/16/80
1/16/80
1/15/80
1/16/80
1/16/80
1/15/80
1/16/80
1/16/80
1/15/80
1/16/80
1/16/80
TIME3
1155-1523
1020-1236
1435-1603
1151-1516
1020-1236
1435-1612
1155-1517
1018-1237
1435-1612
1154-1409
1025-1232
1444-1544
a See Field Data Sheets for plant shutdown
Emission Frequency = emission time
ACCUMULATED
OBSERVATION
TIME (SEC)
7200
5460
5220
7200
5460
5820
7200
7560
5820
7200
7200
7200
intervals ,
i nn
• ACCUMULATED
EMISSION
TIME (SEC) EMISSION FREQUENCY, %
806 11.2
393 7.2
633 12.7
0 0
0 0
0 0
16 <1
4 <1
1 <1
0 0
15 <1
0 0

observation time

-------
                            TABLE 2-21

                 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS

                       ON PROCESS SAMPLES

                      HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE

                       LEAD, SOUTH DAKOTA
Location
        % Moisture
Conveyor Outlet from
   Primary Crusher

Conveyors preceeding
Grizzly Screens
  (composite sample)

Beneath GrizzTy Screen
  (North)

Beneath Grizzly Screen
  (South)
                              Test!
4.5
1.4
1.4
5.2
            Test 2
4.3
0.9
0.4
4.8
           Test 3
2.2
3.1
1.4
6.8
                              -32-

-------
                             TABLE 2-22
                    TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS
                         HOMESTAKE GOLD MINE
                         LEAD,  SOUTH DAKOTA
             Element
    Concentration in
Particulate Sample* (ppm)
             ZINC	     M
             COPPER	    10.
             NICKEL	   100.
             COBALT	;	     2.
             IRON	     M
             MANGANESE	•	     M
             CHROMIUM	     5.
             VANADIUM	    20.
             TITANIUM	   500.
             SCANDIUM	     2.
             CALCIUM	     M
             POTASSIUM 	     M
             CHLORINE	    10.
             SULFUR	  1000.
             PHOSPHORUS	   100.
             SILICON 	     M
             ALUMINIUM 	     M
             MAGNESIUM 	     A
             SODIUM 	     M
             FLUORINE	     2.
             CARBON 	    	
             BORON	     2.
             BERYLLIUM	•	     A
             LITHIUM	     5.
             URANIUM	   < 1.
             THORIUM	  < 1.
             BISMUTH	   < 1.
             LEAD	    50.
             THALLIUM	   < 1.
             MERCURY	   < 2.
             GOLD	   < 1.
             PLATINUM	   < 2.
             IRIDIUM	   < 1.
             OSMIUM	   < 2.
*  Primary Crusher Inlet Filter Sample from Test  1.
A  Matrix Interference
M  Signifies Major Constituent of Sample
                              -33-

-------
            TABLE 2-22 (Con't)
Element
    Concentration in
Particulate Sample* (ppm)
REHENIUM	    < 2.
TUNGSTEN	    < 2.
TANTALUM	    < 1.
HAFNIUM	    < 2.
LUTETIUM	    < 0.2
YTTERBIUM	    < 1.
THULIUM	    < 0.2
ERBIUM	    < 1.
HOLMIUM	    < 0.2
DYSPROSIUM	    < 1.
TERBIUM	    < 0.2
GADOLINIUM	    < 1.
EUROPIUM	    < 1.
SAMARIUM	    < 1.
NEODYMIUM	     10.
PRASEODYMIUM 	      5.
CERIUM	     10.
LANTHANUM	•	      5.
BARIUM	    500.
CESIUM	    < 1.
IODINE	    < 1.
TELLURIUM	    < 1.
ANTIMONY	     10.
TIN	    < 1.
INDIUM	    < 2.
CADMIUM	    < 2.
SILVER	    < 1.
PALLADIUM	    < 2.
RHODIUM	    < 1.
RUTHENIUM	    < 2.
MOLYBDENUM	•	    < 2.
NIOBIUM	      2.
ZIRCONIUM	     20.
YTTRIUM	     10.
STRONTIUM	    1000.
RUBIDIUM	    100.
BROMINE	    < 0.5
SELENIUM	    < 0.5
ARSENIC	    1000.
GERMANIUM	    < 2.
GALLIUM	      i.
                  -34-

-------
3.0  PROCESS DESCRIPTION

3.1  Process Description

    .A schematic flow diagram for the processing of gold ore at
     Homestake mine is shown in Figure 3-1.  Gold ore, which is
     mined underground, is loaded into nine 10-ton capacity
     rectangular ore skips and hoisted to the surface where the
     dry crushing operation takes place.  Ore is mined from two
     shafts (the Yates and the Ross), each of which is equipped
     with its own surface primary, secondary, and tertiary
     crushing operation.  The two operations at these shafts
     are nearly identical in that they both have one primary
     gyratory crusher, one 7-foot standard Symons secondary
     cone crusher,  one 7-foot shorthead Symons tertiary cone
     crusher and nearly identical enclosing structures.  Ore is
     transported to the mill from both shafts by trains through
     enclosed passageways.

     Emission measurements were made only at the Ross shaft
     operations.  The emissions are controlled by a baghouse.
     The Yates shaft is controlled by a low energy dry cyclone
     (4-6 inch pressure drop).  The baghouse at the Ross shaft
     controls emission from the secondary and teriary crusher,
     conveyor transfer, and ore storage operations.  The
     primary crusher is a 30-inch gyratory crusher, fed by a
     chain feeder directly from the ore skips, reducing the ore
     to <6-inch size.  The ore travels by an open conveyor to
     the secondary crusher and then is conveyed to and passed
     over a vibrating screen set to allow <3/8-inch size so it
     can pass through the vibrating screen and into the ore
     storage area.   From the storage bins, the ore is
     transported by an enclosed conveyor to the mill where wet
     processing begins.
                             -35-

-------
                                 	LEGEND	

                                    "> -Ore Row
                                 	> - Dust Emissions
                                  TP  -Test Points
                                         1-4:Method 5
                                         5-7,9:Methods 9422
                                         SrMethod 9
     /^TAND
    / SYMONS
    \SECOND
                    TP-9 (V.E. outside crusher building)
             FLOW DIAGRAM
Homestake Mining Co., Lead, South Dakota
                 figure 3-1
                    -36-

-------
Water content of the ore remains at 1.5 to 2 percent
throughout the crushing operation because no water is added
during this process.

The preceeding description includes all steps leading up  to
the wet processing which includes milling, recovery, and
refining.  There are no drying operations.

Milling is performed by four rod mills and four ball mills
with full load capacity of 5400 tons per day.  This process
mills and separates the ore into two fractions:

      Sand  - 54% + 200 mesh         59% of ore
              46% - 200 mesh
          •
      Slime - 95% - 325 mesh         41% or ore
               5% - 200 to 325 mesh

Gold is recovered from the sand and slime fractions by
gravity concentration and cyanidation.  There are 35
cyanidation vats, each holding 750 to 780 tons of material.

Gold, as free gold, precipitates and the steel wool gold
sponge are sent to the refinery where they are mixed with
suitable fluxes and smelted to remove iron, zinc, and copper
impurities.  The resulting crude bullion is further refined
to separate silver and the last races of impurities.  The
final product is 250 troy ounce bars representing the
mining, hoisting, crushing, grinding, and cyanidation of
2,170,000 pound of ore.  Again, the milling, recovery,  and
refining are wet processes not included in the scope of
work.

Two thousand nine hundred ton/day of mine tailings not
backfilled are collected and pumped 16,000 feet  (487 feet in
                          -37-

-------
elevation) to the Grizzly Gulch Impoundment.  Impoundment
water is recycled to the mine.

The baghouse that was tested is a Sky-Kleen "HT" Continuous
Duty Bag Collector controlling dust generated from the
crushing, transferring, and storing of ore.  The baghouse
has a design capacity of 24,000 cfm at 708F.  The baghouse
uses 210 16 oz. dacron felt filter bags each 6-inch in
diameter and 96 inches long.  The filtering area is 2,625
square feet and the air to cloth ratio is 9.14:1.  Bag
cleaning is accomplished by sequential air pulsing of the
filter bags, automatically controlled by a solidstate timer.

The baghouse has a maximum pressure drop of 6 inches W.G.
which is measured by a manometer.  If the manometer reading
gets much higher than the maximum level, the bags are
cleaned by manual air lancing.  The pressure drop of the
baghouse was checked at 1/2 hour intervals.  Table 3-1 shows
the readings for the three test runs.

3.2  Process Operation

The production rates for the crushing, screening, transfer,
and storage operations for the Ross shaft processing stream
did not vary over the length of the tests on January 15 and
16.  Their production rates for these two days were 2699
Mg/day (2971.5 tons/day) and 2654 Mg/day (2992.5 tons/day),
respectively.
                           -38-

-------
          TABLE 3-1




MANOMETER READINGS OF BAGHOUSE


January













January











January











Time

15, 1980 - Test #1
11:57
12:19
12:40
12:59
13:15
13:28
14:05
14:25
14:33
14:56
15:10
15:27
15:36
16, 1980 - Test #2
09:35
10:03
10:17
10:30
10:50
11:05
11:25
11:42
12:02
12:24
12:40
16, 1980 - Test #3
14:34
14:45
15:05
15:20
15:40
15:56
16:10
16:25
16:45
18:00
18:33
Pressure Differential
(inches of water)

4.7
5.1
5.5
5.7
5.9
6.0
6.2
6.4
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.2
7.4

2.2
2.9
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.9
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.9
5.1

3.6
3.8
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
5.3
5.5
              -39-

-------
4.0  SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND EMISSIONS OBSERVATION  LOCATIONS

     4.1  Introduction

     Emission sampling was conducted on  the  primary crusher,
     conveyor transfer and ore storage reclaim  operations  of
     the Homestake Gold Mine  in Lead, South  Dakota.  The emis-
     sions produced by these  operations  are  vented to a bag-
     house.  The baghouse outlet duct was  also  tested so that a
     collection efficiency for the  baghouse  could  ultimately  be
     calculated.

     The locations of the particulate test ports  and the sam-
     pling points at each test site were determined in accor-
     dance with guidelines outlined in EPA Method  1 (Sample and
     Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources)-*-.   This section
     also presents detailed descriptions of  the particle size
     sampling locations and opacity observation and fugitive
     emissions observation location.  It should be noted that
     the sampling procedure of the  particulate  tests was modi-
     fied in order to avoid testing delays and  incompletion of
     the program.  The sampling times per  traverse point were
     reduced by two minutes for the inlet  locations and one
     minute for the outlet location during the  second test.

     4.2  Particulate Sampling Locations

          Primary Crusher Inlet

          The sampling ports  for the primary crusher inlet are
          located in the duct which vents  particulate emissions
          from the crusher outlet  to the baghouse.  The inner
          diameter of the duct at  this  location is 13.5
          inches.  The ports  are perpendicular  to  each other,

     -'•All test methods cited  in this report  are from "Standards
      of Performance for New  Stationary  Sources,  Appendix A",
      Federal Register, Volume 42  No. 160, August  13, 1977.

                              -41-

-------
and are located 21 inches  from  a  downstream disturb-
ance and 45 inches upstream  from  a  bend  in  the duct
(see Figures 4-1 and 4-2).

Twenty-eight traverse points, 14  in each  port, were
sampjLed for five minutes each during the  first test.
During the second test,  the  sampling time was  reduced
to three minutes per point.  The  entire  third  run was
also based on three minutes  per point  of  sampling.
The resulting times of  the three  tests were 140 min-
utes, 92 minutes and 84 minutes,  respectively.

Conveyor Transfer Inlet

Following the secondary  and  tertiary crushing  pro-
cesses, conveyors transfer ore  to separation
screens.  The sampling  ports for  the conveyor  trans-
fer inlet are located in the duct which  vents  from
the collection hoods of  the  transfer drops  to  the
baghouse.  Two ports, separated by  approximately 90
degrees, are located 25  inches  from an upstream dis-
turbance and 46 inches  from  a downstream  disturb-
ance.  At this location, the inner  diameter of the
duct is 19.5 inches (see Figures  4-3 and  4-4).

Sixteen traverse points were sampled in  each port.
The sampling time for the  first test was  five  minutes
per point.  This time was  changed to three  minutes
per point during the second  test, remaining at three
minutes per point throughout the  third test.  The
total sampling time for  tests one,  two and  three was
140 minutes, 89 minutes  and  84  minutes,  respec-
tively.
                    -42-

-------
SAMPLING POINT

       1
       2
       3
       4
       5
       6
       7
       8
       9
      10
      11
      12
      13
      14
DISTANCE FROM DUCT WALL  (INCHES)
               1,
               1,
               1
   00
   14
   ,69
 2.28
 2.97
 3.82
 5.06
 8.44
 9.68
10.53
11.22
11.81
12.35
12.50
                        FIGURE 4-1

                  SAMPLING POINT LOCATION

                   PRIMARY CRUSHER INLET
                            -43-

-------

 13.5
  i
                Port B
                                 Flow
                        To Baghouse
a
                Port A
21
                              45
                 FIGURE  4-2

  ILLUSTRATIONS OF PRIMARY  CRUSHER INLET
               SAMPLING  LOCATION
                     -44-

-------
SAMPLING POINT

      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
     10
     11
     12
     13
     14
     15
     16
DISTANCE FROM DUCT WALL  (INCHES)
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
7
12
13
15
16
17
17
18
19
.31
.95
.66
.44
.30
.29
.52
.31
.19
.98
.21
.20
.06
.84
.54
.19
                        FIGURE  4-3

                  SAMPLING POINT  LOCATION
                   CONVEYOR TRANSFER  INLET
                            -45-

-------
              Port B
From
collection
hoods
                 FIGURE 4-4
ILLUSTRATIONS OF CONVEYOR TRANSFER INLET

              SAMPLING LOCATION


                    -46-

-------
Ore Storage Reclaim Inlet

The ore storage reclaim  inlet  is  a  bin  which  retains
processed ore prior to further  refining.   Sampling
ports for this operation are situated 90  degrees  to
each other, in a duct venting  emissions from  the  bin
to the baghouse.  At this  location  the  inner  duct
               s
diameter is 16.5 inches.   The  upstream  and downstream
disturbances from the ports are 98  inches and 34
inches, respectively (see  Figures 4-5 and 4-6).

Fourteen traverse points were  sampled in  each port
for five minutes per point during the first test  and
for three minutes per point during  the  second and
third tests.  These sampling times  resulted in total
test times of 140 minutes  for  the first test  and  84
minutes for the second and third  tests.

Baghouse Outlet

The baghouse outlet duct vents  controlled emissions
from the baghouse to the atmosphere.  The rectangular
duct has inner dimensions  of 65.5 inches  in width and
17.5 inches in height.   The upstream disturbance  from
the two sampling ports is  approximately 58 inches
(see Figures 4-7 and 4-8).  Forty-eight traverse
points were sampled for  three  minutes per point  for
the first test, resulting  in a  total test time of 144
minutes.  During the second test, the sampling time
was reduced to two minutes per  point; the total  sam-
pling time was 103 minutes.  The  sampling time re-
mained at two minutes per  point throughout the third
test, resulting- in a total sampling time  of 96 minu-
tes.
                    -47-

-------
SAMPLING POINT

      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
     10
     11
     12
     13
     14
DISTANCE FROM DUCT WALL  (INCHES)
0.
1.
2.
2.
3.
4.
6.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
15.
81
40
06
79
63
67
19
31
83
87
71
44
10
69
                        FIGURE  4-5

                 SAMPLING POINT LOCATION
               ORE STORAGE RECLAIM  INLET
                            -48-

-------
                                                                /\
                                                      98"

                                                                    s
                                                               16.5"
                                                           Port A
                                                                  34"
                                                                        Port  B
                         FIGURE 4-6




ILLUSTRATIONS OF ORE STORAGE RECLAIM INLET SAMPLING LOCATION

-------
                                                    Two four  inch
                                                    diameter  ports
SAMPLING POINT
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
     10
     11
     12
     13
     14
     15
     16
     17
     18
     19
     20
     21
     22
     23
     24
DISTANCE FROM DUCT WALL
        (INCHES)
                          FIGURE  4-7
        1
        4.
  ,36
  ,09
 6.82
 9.55
12.28
15.01
17.74
20.47
23.20
25.93
28.66
31.39
34.12
36.85
39.58
42.31
45.04
47.77
50.50
53.23
55.96
58.69
61.42
64.15
          SAMPLING POINT LOCATION-BAGHOUSE  OUTLET
                             -50-

-------
  Duct exits the wall
                   FIGURE 4-8




ILLUSTRATIONS OF BAGHOUSE OUTLET SAMPLING  LOCATION





                       -51-

-------
4.3  Particle Size Distribution

The sampling -point used for particle  size  distribution  at
each test location was determined by  selecting  the  tra-
verse point which represents  the average velocity within
that duct.
                       o
4.4  Fugitive Emissions and Opacity Observation Locations

One fugitive emissions observer and one opacity observer
were positioned at each of the following locations:

     •    Conveyor Transfer Inlet
     •    Grizzly Screen Area
     •    Primary Crusher Conveyor Area
     •    Crusher Building (Overlook)

Only an opacity observer was  evaluating emissions at  the
baghouse outlet stack.  The locations are  shown in  Figures
4-9 through 4-11.  Observations at these locations  were
performed concurrently with EPA Method 5 testing.
                      -52-

-------
                    FIGURE  4-9


VISIBLE AND FUGITIVE  EMISSIONS  OBSERVATION LOCATIONS
                  PRIMARY CRUSHER •
               Conveyor
                 Belt
                          Secondary
                            Crusher
                                              r
                                                        Observers'
                                                        Location
                                                  Stairs
                                                 j
                                        ' :. Lower
                                        ;  Floor"
                                   --G-a-t-wa-ik-—
                       -53-

-------
                    .  FIGURE 4-10

VISIBLE AND FUGITIVE EiMISSIONS OBSERVATION LOCATIONS
  CONEYOR  TRANSFER INLET AND  GRIZZLY SCREENS AREA
•Garaae Door
                                  Dust
                                Collection
                                  Hoods
                                 Conveyor
                                 Transfer
                                 Observers
                                 Location
                                  Grizzly
                                  Screens
                                          (  .
                                tO\
                                o •
                                      r
                                        Grizzly Screen Area
                                        Observers'  Location
                           -54-  '

-------
                        FIGURE  4-11

 VISIBLE AND FUGITIVE EMISSIONS OBSERVATION LOCATIONS

BAGHOUSE OUTLET  STACK AND CRUSHER BUILDING (OVERLOOK).
                                     CRUSHER BUTLDIJrfG OBSERVERS'
                                              CAT/ON (2nd half)
                Outlet Sta
                Observer's
                Location
                       o
                       o
                       
-------
5.0  SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

     5.1  Introduction

     This section describes the sampling and analytical  pro-
     cedures used by YRC at the Homestake Gold Mine  in Lead,
     South Dakota in January, 1980.  Only brief descriptions
     and modifications of standard test procedures will  be  pre-
     sented here.  Details are contained in Appendices 6.1
     through 6.7.

     5.2  Preliminary Measurements

          Gas Velocity and Temperature

          Gas velocity and temperature were measured  at  each
          location in accordance with guidelines outlined  in
          EPA Method 2 (Determination of Stack Gas Velocity and
          Volumetric Flow Rate).

          A precalibrated type "S" pitot tube and a  thermo-
          couple were rigidly attached to each sampling  probe.
          The velocity pressure was measured on an inclined,
          vertical, dual manometer, and the temperature  on  a
          pyrometer.  Measurements were recorded at  each  tra-
          verse point.

          Moisture Determination

          The percent by volume of moisture of the stack  gas  at
          each test location was determined in accordance  with
          guidelines outlined in EPA Method 4 (Determination  of
          Moisture Content in Stack Gases).

          A sample of gas was extracted from each test location
          at one traverse point for a period of thirty min-
                           -57-

-------
     utes.  Dry gas meter  readings  and  inlet and outlet
     temperature readings  were  recorded  every five min-
     utes.  The moisture content  of the  stack gas was de-
     termined from  the  volume of  excess  water in the im-
     pingers and the  temperature  and  meter readings.

5.3  Gas Composition

The gas composition at  each  test  location  was determined
in accordance with  guidelines outlined  in  EPA Method 3
(Gas Analysis for Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen,  Excess Air and
Dry Molecular Weight).

Since no combustion was  involved  in the  process, the gas
composition at each test location was assumed to be air.
A Fyrite Analyzer,  which determines carbon dioxide and
oxygen content, was used to  verify  this  assumption.

5.4  Particulate

The particulate concentrations  were determined at each
test location in accordance  with  guidelines  outlined in
EPA Method 5 (Determination  of  Particulate Emissions from
Stationary Sources).

     Sampling

     The sampling train  consisted of  a  nozzle, stainless
     steel probe, heated sample box which  contained the
     filter, four impingers, vacuum pump,  dry gas meter
     and calibrated orifice  (Figure 5-1).

     The nozzle was rigidly  connected to the probe, and
     the probe consisted of  a 5/8 inch O.D.  tubing which
     was wrapped with heater tape to  prevent condensa-
     tion.  Attached  to  the  probe was a  precalibrated type
                      -58-

-------
                                  PARTICULATE
              FIGURE 5-1

              SAMPLING  TRAIN
                                                    Coarse
                                                    control
                                                    valve
                                     The rmome ters
        Stack
         wall
 i
 S   Pitot
 1  .   tube
Sampling —
1 nozzle
      Stack
  thermocouple
                              Inclined manometer
                                  (AP)
                                                          Air-tight
                                                            pump
                  Pyrometer
Impinger
  train
                                                 Check
                                                 valve
                                        Dry gas
                                         meter
                                     Inclined
                                     manometer
                                       (A h)
Vacuum gauge
                                              Ice
                                              bath
    ES - 089

-------
"S" pitot  tube  and  a  thermocouple used to monitor the
velocity pressure and  temperature.

The probe  was connected  to  a  heated  sample box which
contained  a  tared fiberglass  filter  encased in a
coarse, fritted glass  filter  holder.   The filter
holder was sealed with heat-resistant tape and
secured in the  sample  box with U-type clamps.   The
ball joints  of  the  filter holder  were thoroughly
coated with  silicone  grease in order  to insure the
presence of  a vacuum.  The  temperature of the  sample
box was maintained  at  248°F + 25°F  throughout  the
test program.

The probe  and heater  box were connected to the impin-
ger assembly by means  of a  flexible  sample line.  The
four impingers  were of the  Greenburg-Smith design and
were connected  in series.   The first  impinger  was
initially  filled with  100 milliliters of distilled
water.  The  second  impinger was a standard Greenburg-
Smith impinger  containing 100 ml  of  distilled  water.
The third  and fourth  impingers were  identical  to the
first, the third being left dry while the fourth con-
tained 300 grams of dry  indicating-type silica gel.
From the fourth impinger the  effluent stream flowed
through a  check valve, flexible rubber vacuum  tubing,
a vacuum gauge, a needle valve, a leakless vacuum
pump and a dry  gas  meter.   The impingers were  ar-
ranged in  an insulated box  and surrounded by ice.

A calibrated orifice  completed the  train and was used
to measure instantaneous flow rates.   The dual mano-
meter across the calibrated orifice was an inclined
vertical type,  graduated in hundredths of an inch of
water from 0 to 0.1 inch and  in tenths of an inch
from 1 to  10 inches.
                  •60-

-------
During the test, the following data were  recorded  at
each traverse point:

     •    Traverse point number
     •    Sampling time  (min.)
     •    Clock time (24-hour clock)
     •    Dry gas meter  reading  (Vm/  ft^)
     •    Velocity pressure  (APS/  in.  H2°)
     o    Desired pressure drop  across  orifice  (AH,
          in. H2o)
     •    Actual pressure drop across  orifice  (AH,
          in. H20)
     e    Stack temperature  (Ts / °F)
     •    Dry gas meter  temperature-inlet  (Tm,  °F)
          and outlet (Tm, °F)
     •    Pump Vacuum  (in. Hg)
     •    Sample box temperature (°F)
     •    Impinger temperature (°F)

The relationship of the Ap reading with the £H  read-
ing is a function of the following variables:

     •    Orifice calibration factor
     •    Gas meter temperature
     •    Moisture content of flue gas
     •    Ratio of flue  gas  pressure  to barometric
          pressure
     •    Stack temperature
     «    Sampling nozzle diameter

A nomograph was used to  correlate  all  of  the  above
variables such that a  direct  relationship  between Ap
and AH could be determined by the  test  technician  and
isokinetic conditions  could  be maintained.   Initial
and final leak checks  were performed  on the  sampling
train prior to sampling  and  upon completion  of  each
                  -61- -'

-------
test to confirm the presence of a vacuum.  These
measurements were recorded on the data sheets.

Sample Recovery

Upon completion of the test, the samples were recov-
ered in the following manner:

Container #1 - The filter was removed from the filter
               holder and placed in its original con-
               tainer.

Container #2 - The nozzle, probe and front half fil-
               ter holder were brushed and washed
               with acetone three times.  The wash
               was collected in a grass jar.

Container #3 - The silica gel was returned to its
               original container.

Container #4 - A blank sample of the acetone from the
               field supply was collected in a glass
               jar.

Each sample container was sealed and labeled with the
date, test location,  test number and contents.  All
glass sample jars had Teflon lined lids.  The volume
of water in the first three impingers was measured
and recorded on the data sheets and the water was
discarded.
                   -62-

-------
     Analysis

     Each sample was analyzed in the following manner:

     Container #1 - The filter was removed from its sealed
                    container and placed on a tared watch
                    glass.   The filter and watch glass
                    were dessicated with anhydrous CaSC>4
                    and weighed to a constant weight.   The
                    weight  was recorded to the nearest
                    0.01 mg.

     Container #2 - The acetone washings were transferred
                    to a tared beaker.  The acetone was
                    evaporated at ambient temperature and
                    pressure, and then the beaker was des-
                    sicated and weighed to a constant
                    weight.  The weight was recorded to
                    the nearest 0.01 mg.

     Container #3 - The silica gel was weighed on a beam
                    balance and the weight was recorded to
                    the nearest 0.1 gram.

     Container #4 - The acetone blank was transferred to a
                    tared beaker.  The acetone was evap-
                    orated at ambient temperature and
                    pressure, and then the beaker was des-
                    sicated and weighed to a constant
                    weight.  The weight was recorded to
                    the nearest 0.01 mg.  This weight was
                    subtracted from the final weight of
                    the contents of container #2 to obtain
                    the net weight of particulate in the
                    acetone wash.

The filter from the Primary Crusher Inlet, Test 1 was then
analyzed for trace elements by SSMS.
                         -63-

-------
5.5  Particle Size Distribution

     Sampling

     Samples for particle size distribution  analysis  were
     collected at each location using  an  Andersen  Cascade
     Impactor.  The impactor consists  of  multiple  stages
     which collect different particle  sizes,  as  shown in
     Figure 5-2.  Each stage consists  of  an  orifice  of
     specific diameter above a collection plate.   The ori-
     fice sizes of each stage are  different  and  are  ar-
     ranged in descending order,  the  largest  being stage
     one.  A modified impinger of  the  Greenburg-Smith de-
     sign filled with 300 grams of dry indicating-type
     silica gel, was placed between  the Andersen  sampler
     and the pump to dessicate the gas entering  the  pump.
     The sampling system was set  up  as shown  in  Figure
     5-3.  The stack conditions were  determined  and  the
     sample was extracted isokinetically.

     As the sample flows through  each  orifice,  and is de-
     flected off of a glass fiber  substrate  filter placed
     on the collection plate, particles of a  specific size
     become impacted on the substrate  while  the  remaining
     particles entrained in the gas  stream proceed to the
     next collection stage.  The  range of particle sizes
     retained on the substrate varies  according  to the
     velocity of the gas (as determined by the  sampling
     rate and orifice diameter),  the  gas  viscosity and the
     particle density.  Since the  orifices are  arranged in
     descending diameters, the gas velocity  increases and
     the particle size collected  on  each  stage  decreases.
                            -64-

-------
                                   FIGURE 5-2

                             ANDERSEN   STACK  SAMPLER
              BACKUP
              FILTER
                PLATED,
                HOLDER
                                                     JET  STAGE  (9 TOTAL)
                                                    SPACERS
                                                   GLASS FIBER
                                                   COLLECTION
                                                   SUBSTRATE
                                                                     NOZZLE
                                                                       INLET
                                                                          CORE
ES-095
-65-

-------
                                           FIGURE  5-3

                                 ANDERSEN  SAMPLING   TRAIN
CTi

1
    ANDERSEN
     SAMPLER
                      STACK
                      'WALL
                                 IMPINGER
                                                               PUMP
GAS METER
  ORIFICE
MANOMETER
  ES-094

-------
     Sample Recovery

     The fiberglass substrate filters were returned to
     their original containers.   Prior to sealing the con-
     tainers with adhesive tape, the particulate matter on
     the individual jet stages and spaces for each stage
     was carefully brushed off into the corresponding
     filter container.

     Analysis

     The fiberglass substrate filters were removed from
     their sealed containers and placed individually on
     tared watch glasses.  The filters and watch glasses
     were dessicated with anhydrous CaSC>4 and weighed to a
     constant weight.   The net weight gain was recorded to
     the nearest 0,01  mg.

5.6  Process Samples

     Sample Recovery

     Grab samples of the ore were collected at four loca-
     tions by TRW engineers during each of the three par-
     ticulate tests.  The samples were placed in sealed,
     air-tight plastic bags, which were subsequently
     placed in another sealed and labeled, air-tight,
     plastic bag.

     Analysis

     A representative  sample was weighed to the nearest
     0.01 gram and transferred to a tared aluminum pan.
     The sample was dried for 24 hours at 103°C.  The
     dried sample was  dessicated and reweighed to the
     nearest 0.01 gram.  The weight loss was calculated
                         -67-

-------
     and the percent moisture determined  according  to  the
     equation:

          % Moisture =     Weight Loss	 x  100
                       Initial Sample Weight

5. 7  Visible Emissions

The visible emissions were determined in  accordance with
guidelines outlined in EPA Method 9  (Visual Determination
of the Opacity of Emissions from Stationary Sources).

5.8  Fugitive Emissions

The fugitive emission frequencies were determined in ac-
cordance with guidelines outlined in EPA Method  22  (Visual
Determination of Fugitive Emissions  from Material Process-
ing Sources).
                        -68-

-------
                       PROJECT 01-9517-22
Prepared By:
Reveiwed By:
                              Martha M. Murray      HI_/
                              Project Scientist
                              Emissions Measurement Department
                              Roge/ffA. Kniskern
                              Project Manager
                              Emissions Measurement ..Department
Approved By:
Approved By:
:T&	..
                              Jam.es W. Davison
                                   President
                               technical Operations
                              Peter L. Cashman
                              Executive-Vice President

-------