United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600 2 78-004\
July 1978
Research and Development
Source Assessment
Coal Refuse Piles,
Abandoned
Mines and Outcrops,
State of the Art

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:

      1.  Environmental Health  Effects Research
      2.  Environmental Protection Technology
      3.  Ecological Research
      4.  Environmental Monitoring
      5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.  Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7  Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8.  "Special" Reports
      9.  Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned  to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161

-------
                                     EPA-600/2-78-004v
                                     July 1978
            SOURCE ASSESSMENT:
            COAL  REFUSE PILES,
       ABANDONED  MINES AND  OUTCROPS
              State of the Art
                     by

     P. K. Chalekode and T.  R.  Blackwood
        Monsanto Research Corporation
             1515 Nicholas Road
             Dayton, Ohio 45407
           Contract No. 68-02-1874
               Project Officer

               John F. Martin
  Resource Extraction and Handling Division
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
           Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
     OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
           CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268

-------
                           DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory-Cincinnati, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, and approved for publication.  Approval does not signify
that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
                               ii

-------
                           FOREWORD
When energy and material resources are extracted, processed,
converted, and used, the related pollutional impacts on our
environment and even on our health often require that new and
increasingly more efficient pollution control methods be used.
The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory - Cincinnati
(lERL-Ci) assists in developing and demonstrating new and
improved methodologies that will meet these needs both effi-
ciently and economically.

This report contains an assessment of air emissions from coal
refuse piles, abandoned mines and outcrops.  This study was
conducted to provide a better understanding of the distribution
and characteristics of emissions from this source type.  Further
information on this subject may be obtained from the Extraction
Technology Branch, Resource Extraction and Handling Division.
                                David G. Stephan
                                    Director
                    Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
                                   Cincinnati
                                111

-------
                              PREFACE


 The  Industrial  Environmental  Research Laboratory  (IERL)  of  the
 U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency  (EPA) has the  responsibility
 for  insuring  that pollution control technology is available for
 stationary  sources  to meet the requirements of the  Clean Air Act,
 the  Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and solid  waste legis-
 lation.   If control technology is unavailable, inadequate,  or
 uneconomical, then  financial  support is provided for the develop-
 ment of the needed  control techniques for industrial and extrac-
 tive process  industries.  Approaches considered include  process
 modifications,  feedstock modifications, add-on control devices,
 and  complete  process substitution.  The scale of the control
 technology  programs ranges from bench- to full-scale demonstration
 plants.

 IERL has  the  responsibility for developing control  technology for
 a large number  of operations  (more than 500) in the chemical and
 related industries.  As in any technical program, the first step
 is to identify  the  unsolved problems.  Each of the  industries is
 to be examined  in detail to determine if there is sufficient
 potential environmental risk  to justify the development  of  con-
 trol  technology by  IERL.

 Monsanto Research Corporation (MRC) has contracted with  EPA to
 investigate the environmental impact of various industries  that
 represent sources of pollutants in accordance with EPA's respon-
 sibility, as outlined above.  Dr. Robert C. Binning serves  as MRC
 Program Manager in  this overall program, entitled "Source Assess-
 ment," which includes the investigation of sources  in each  of
 four  categories:  combustion, organic materials, inorganic materi-
 als,  and open sources.  Dr. Dale A. Denny of the Industrial
 Processes Division  at Research Triangle Park serves as EPA  Pro-
 ject  Officer for this series.  Reports prepared in this  program
 are of two types:   Source Assessment Documents and State-of-the-
Art Reports.

Source Assessment Documents contain data on pollutants from
 specific industries.  Such data are gathered from the literature,
government agencies, and cooperating companies.  Sampling and
analysis are also performed by the contractor when the available
information does not adequately characterize the source  pollu-
tants.  These documents contain all of the information necessary
for IERL to decide whether emissions reduction is necessary.
                                iv

-------
State-of-the-Art Reports include data on pollutants from specific
industries which are also gathered from the literature, govern-
ment agencies and cooperating companies.  However, no extensive
sampling is conducted by the contractor for such industries.
Sources in this category are considered by EPA to be of insuffi-
cient priority to warrant complete assessment for control tech-
nology decision-making.  Therefore, results from such studies
are published as State-of-the-Art Reports for potential utility
by the government, industry, and others having specific needs and
interests.

This State-of-the-Art Report contains data on air emissions from
coal refuse piles, abandoned mines and outcrops.  This project
was initiated by the Chemical Processes Branch of the Industrial
Processes Division at Research Triangle Park.  The project was
transferred to and completed by the Resources Extraction and
Handling Division, lERL-Cincinnati, where Mr. John F.  Martin
served as EPA Project Leader.
                                v

-------
                            ABSTRACT
This report describes a study of air pollutants emitted from
coal refuse piles, abandoned mines, and outcrops.  The potential
environmental effect of the source was evaluated using source
severity  (defined as the ratio of the maximum time-averaged
ground level concentration of an emission to a hazard factor).

Spontaneous combustion of coal results in the burning of coal
refuse piles, impoundments, abandoned mines, and outcrops.
There are 250 x 106 metric tons of burning refuse material.  The
amounts of refuse material in burning impoundments and of coal
burning in abandoned mines and outcrops are unknown.

A representative burning coal pile/impoundment is defined as one
with a volume of 1.7 x 106 m3 and an average in s-Ltu dry density
of 1.5 metric tons/m3, with about 21% of it burning.  Burning of
coal piles, impoundments, abandoned mines, and outcrops results
in emissions of various pyrolysis and combustion products such
as particulates, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide,
hydrogen  sulfide, ammonia, pqlycyclic organic materials (POM),
and hydrocarbons including benzene, toluene and xylene.  Trace
elements  such as arsenic, boron and mercury are also emitted.

Emissions from fires in coal refuse piles, abandoned mines, and
outcrops  contribute 0.001% of the particulates, 0.16% of the
nitrogen  oxides, 0.14% of the sulfur oxides, 0.14% of the hydro-
carbons and 4.9% of the carbon monoxide emitted nationally.  The
affected  population (defined as the number of persons potentially
exposed to concentrations of airborne materials which result in
a source  severity greater than 0.1) is 1,000 persons for nitrogen
oxides, 180 persons for hydrocarbons as CH^ equivalents, 6,700
persons for hydrogen sulfide, 3,900 persons for POM and zero
persons for total particulate, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide,
ammonia or mercury.

The main principle to control emissions is to cut off the source
of oxygen.  Control practices such as blanketing the pile with
incombustible material, quenching the burning pile with water,
filling underground mines with fly ash slurry, isolating the
burning pile/mine/outcrop, and building fire barriers have been
employed.
                                VI

-------
This report was submitted in partial fulfillment of Contract 68-
02-1874 by Monsanto Research Corporation under the sponsorship
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  The study covers
the period August 1975 to July 1977.

-------
                           CONTENTS
Foreword	ill
Preface	iv
Abstract	:	vi
Figures  	   x
Tables	   x
Abbreviations and Symbols  	  xi
Conversion Factors and Metric Prefixes 	 xii

   1.  Introduction  	   1
   2.  Summary	   2
   3.  Source Description  	   4
            Source definitions	  .   4
            Spontaneous Combustion of coal
              and coal refuse	   5
            Products of combustion .  	   7
            Factors affecting emissions  .... 	   8
            Geographical distribution  	   9
   4.  Emissions	  11
            Selected pollutants  	 ....  11
            Mass emissions and emission factors  	  11
            Definition of representative source  	  14
            Source severity and affected population  ....  14
            State and national emission burdens  	  15
   5.  Control Technology	17
            State of the art	17
            Future considerations  	  21
   6.  Growth and Nature of the Industry	22

References	!. . .  .  .  23
Appendices

   A.  Preliminary sampling data and results 	  26
   B.  Sample calculations of source severity and
         affected population	' ..........  35

Glossary	  38
                               IX

-------
                            FIGURES


Number                                                      Page

  1   Top and sectional views of plug barrier	20




                            TABLES
  1   Mass Emissions, National Burden, Source Severity
        and Affected Population for Emissions from
        Coal Refuse Piles 	   2

  2   Number of Burning Coal Refuse Piles, Impoundments,
        Abandoned Mines, and Outcrops in the United
        States, by State	10

  3   Characteristics of Criteria Pollutants Emitted
        from Coal Refuse, Abandoned Mines, and
        Outcrop Fires	12

  4   Polycyclic Organic Materials Emitted from Coal
        Refuse Fires, and their Carcinogenicity 	  12

  5   Emission Factors for Coal Refuse Fire Emissions ...  13

  6   Source Severity and Affected Population for
        Emissions from Coal Refuse Fires	15

  7   Mass Emissions from Coal Refuse Fires	15

  8   State and National Emission Burdens from Coal
        Refuse Fires (percent)  	  16

  9   Number of Coal Refuse Piles with Unknown
        Ownership, by State	22
                               x

-------
                    ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
D         — representative distance downwind  of  the  source



Dc _;      — distance downwind of the  source where  the severity

 S ~ °'1"   ". equals 0.1



NO     '   — nitrogen oxide emissions,,
  •X


POM       — polycyclic organic material(s)



S         •— source severity


        i t

SO        '— sulfur oxide emissions
  .'» '


TLV       -- threshold limit value



IT         — 3.14
                                xi

-------
            CONVERSION FACTORS AND METRIC PREFIXES
  To convert from

Degree Celsius  (°C)
Kilogram  (kg)
Kilometer2
Meter  (m)
Meter2  (m2)
Meter3  (m3)
Meter3
Metric ton
Second  (s)
(km2)
                      CONVERSION FACTORS
Degree Fahrenheit

Pound-mass
  (avoirdupois)
Mile2
Foot
Foot2
Foot3
Yard3
Pound-mass
Minute
           Multiply by

        t| = 1.8 t£ + 32
                   2.205

            3.861 x 10-1
                   3.281
             1.076 x 101
             3.531 x 1Q1
                   1.308
             2.205 x 103
            1.667 x 10"2
   Prefix   Symbol
            METRIC PREFIXES

         Multiplication
              factor
   Kilo
   Centi
   Milli
   Micro
  k
  c
  m
  y
  103
  io-2
  io-3
  10~6
                     Example
1 kg
1 cm
1 mg
l yg
1 x 103 grams
1 x 10~2 meter
1 x 10~3 gram
1 x 10~6 gram
Metric Practice Guide.  ASTM Designation E 380-74, American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
November 1974.  34 pp.
                              xii

-------
                            SECTION 1

                          INTRODUCTION
Waste material Separated from coal is piled into banks either
near the mine or near preparation plants, and is referred to as
coal refuse, gob, culm, or reject material.  Coal refuse can also
be disposed of in settling ponds or used as a fill material for
building impoundments for settling ponds.  Indiscriminate dumping
and/or poor maintenance of refuse may result in spontaneous
combustion and burning of refuse piles and impoundments.  Spon-
taneous combustion of coal is also associated with fires in
abandoned mines and outcrops.

An investigation of atmospheric emissions from burning coal
refuse piles, abandoned mines, and outcrops was conducted to
provide a better understanding of the distribution and character-
istics of emissions than had been previously available in the
literature.  Data collection emphasized the accumulation of suf-
ficient information to permit determination of the need for
developing or applying control technology.

This document contains information on the following items:

   • Magnitude and composition of emissions.

   • Hazard potential of emissions.

   • Geographical distribution and source severity.

   • State of the art and future considerations in air
     pollution control technology.

   • Projected growth of sources and its effect on source
     emissions.

-------
                             SECTION 2
                                s, •• •.
                              SUMMARY
 Spontaneous combustion of . epal results,in, the burning  off. coal   "••
 refuse piles,:impoundments, abandoned, mines, and  outcrops.   A
 Bureau of Mines survey shows that there are'271 burning refuse
 piles and impoundments and 441 burning abandoned  mines and  out- *'
 crops.  The states of Kentucky, West Virginia,, iand/Pennsylvania
 account for 63%,of burning coal refuse piles and  impoundments, . }
 and the states of Mpntana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New  Mexico"
 account £or 66% of burning abandoned mines, and outcrops*.  There
 are 250 x 106 metric tons9 of burning" refuse material.  The
 amounts of refuse material in burning impoundments  and, of coal
 burning in abandoned mines, and outcrops are unknownr.      .
    -*•     -,•'•'•(     '. :.        '
 Burning of. coal,pile,s, impoundments, abandoned mines and outcrops
 results in emissions of various .pyrolysis, and combustion products
 such as particulatesi;, nitrqgen qxides; sulfur'oxides;  carbon
 monoxide;  hydrogen sulf ide; ammonia; hydro/carbons, including ben-
 zene, toluene and xylene; and polycyclic  organic  materials  (POM).
 Trace elements .such, as., ars.enic, borqn and. mercury, are  also  emit-
 ted.   Table 1 gives the emission factors  for various pollutants.

         TABLE 1.   MASS EMISSIONS,'NATIONAL1BURDEN,  SdURCE
                   SEVERITY AND AFFECTED POPULATION  FOR
                  , EMISSJONS FROM COAL REFUSE PILES
Pollutant
Total particulates
Nitrogen oxides
Sulfur oxides
Hydrocarbon as
CHi, equivalents
Carbon monoxide
Hydrogen sulfide
Ammonia
Mercury
Polycyclic organic
materials
Emission factor,
kg/hr per
metric ton of
burning refuse
3.
6.
7.
6.
8.
3.
4.
4.
1.
4
7
4
7
7
0
3
6
3
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
'lO-7
ID'5
io-5
io-*
10-3
10-"
IO-5
io-9
IO-8
Representative ,
source emissions,
kg/yr

3.
3.
3.
4.
1.
2.


1
1
4
1
1
4
0


,600
x IO5
x IO5
x IO5
x IO7
x IO6
x 10s
21
59
i
U.S. emissions
metric tons/yr
190
3.4 x 10"
3.9 x 10"
3.4 x 10"
4.5 x IO6
1.6 x IO5
2.3 x 10"


National '' . Affected
, burden. Source : population,
% severity persons
'" 0.001 "' 0
0.16 ' 0
0.14 0
0.14 0
4.9 0
1
0
0
0
.0603'
.18 -
.05
.15
.09
.5
.0009
.01
.92
0
1,000
0
180
0
6,700
0
0
3,900
Note.—Blanks indicate that values are negligible.
 *1  metric ton = IO6 grams; conversion  factors  and metric system
  prefixes are presented in the prefatory  material.

-------
A representative burning coal pile/impoundment is defined  as  one
with a volume of 1.7 x 106 m3 and an average in  situ dry density
of 1.5 metric tons/m3, with about 21% of it burning.  The  repre-
sentative pile/impoundment is a byproduct of bituminous coal  min-
ing operations.  A representative abandoned mine/outcrop is not
defined due to lack of data.  Table 1 also shows the source se-
verity and affected population for various pollutants emitted
from representative sources.  The source severity is defined  as
the ratio of the time-averaged maximum ground level concentration
of an emission species to the hazard factor for  the species.  The
hazard factor is a value equal to the primary ambient air  quality
standard for criteria pollutants3 or a reduced threshold limit
value for noncriteria pollutants.  The affected  population is
defined as the number of persons around a representative source
who are exposed to concentrations of airborne materials which
result in a source severity greater than 0.1.

Emissions from fires  in coal refuse piles, abandoned mines, and
outcrops contribute 0.001% of the particulates,  0.16% of the
nitrogen oxides, 0.14% of the sulfur oxides, 0.14% of the  hydro-
carbons, and 4.9% of  the carbon monoxide emitted nationally.  The
following states have emissions of at least one  criteria pollu-
tant due to Burning piles, abandoned mines, and  outcrops that
exceed  1% of' state total emissions for that pollutant:  Alabama,
Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia,
Washington, and West  Virginia.  The national burdens for various
pollutants are also listed in Table 1.

Various practices have been developed to control emissions from
burning coal refuse piles, abandoned mines and outcrops.   The
main principle of control is to cut off the source of oxygen.
Control practices such as blanketing the pile with incombustible
material, quenching the burning pile with water, filling under-
ground mines with fly ash slurry, isolating the  burning pile/
mine/outcrop, and building fire barriers have been employed.
 Criteria pollutants  are particulates,  carbon monoxide,  nitrogen
 oxides, sulfur oxides, and hydrocarbons.

-------
                            SECTION 3

                       SOURCE DESCRIPTION
SOURCE DEFINITIONS

Coal Refuse Piles and Impoundments

Coal as it comes from the mine contains various amounts of impur-
ities such as slate, shale, bone, calcite, gypsum, clay and
pyrite which are removed prior to marketing.  These impurities
are referred to as coal refuse, culm, gob, or reject material.
Actual composition of a refuse pile depends upon the preparation
procedures, coal composition, and mining operations.

Coarse refuse, i.e., greater than 595 ym  (greater than 28 mesh),
is piled into banks either near the mine or near the preparation
plants.  Coal refuse is deposited by dump trucks, mine cars, con-
veyors or aerial trams.  Indiscriminate dumping of refuse and
poor maintenance of refuse piles may result in:  1) refuse being
piled directly on trees and shrubs; 2) the creation of voids in
the pile that allow free circulation of air; 3) piles having
very steep slopes, i.e., greater than 50%/ 4) extraneous refuse
such as used mine timbers, household neighborhood refuse, brat-
tice cloth, oily rags, etc., being deposited on the pile; and
5) deposition of refuse near mine openings or residential areas,
thereby increasing the chances of ignition and the hazards
associated with burning piles  (1).

Fine refuse, i.e., less than 595 ym  (less than 28 mesh), is often
pumped to impoundments or settling ponds as slurry and allowed
to settle, leaving clear water for recycling.  The refuse may
also be separated in filters or clarifiers.  The impoundments
are usually built with coal refuse as it is the cheapest fill
material available, but some impoundments are made of concrete.
The settled material is periodically removed and dumped on the
refuse pile.
(1) Sussman, V. H., and J. J. Mulnern.  Air Pollution from Coal
    Refuse Disposal Areas.  Journal of the Air Pollution control
    Association, 14(7):279-284, 1964.

-------
Abandoned Mines
             '•.
Abandoned coal mines are inactive, depleted underground coal
mines resulting from extracting the readily available coal.  Some
residual coal may be left as pillars to support the overburden.

Outcrops

A coal 6utcr9p is a coal bed that has come out to the surface due
to a combination of its flatness and the hilly topography.

SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION. OF COAL AND COAL REFUSE

Coal Refuse

Spontaneous heating of coal and coal refuse piles is mainly an
oxidation phenomenon involving coal, associated pyrite and impure
coal substances.  It is also influenced by the presence of mois-
ture.

The oxidation of carbonaceous and pyritic material in the coal
refuse is an exothermic reaction.  The temperature of a coal ref-
use pile or .portions of it will increase if the amount of circu-
lating air is sufficient to cause oxidation but insufficient to
allow for dissipation of heat.  The temperature of the refuse
then increases until ignition temperature is reached  (1).

Experimental evidence.has shown that the,heat of wetting of coal
is more than the heat of oxidation of coal. ; Thus, the presence
of moisture in the air accelerates the self-heating process in
coal refuse piles  (2) .
     - >    i ••        i
Coal containing a high percentage of textural moisture  (i.e.,
moisture retained in the pores of coal which does not cause it to
feel wet) loses the moisture on exposure to air, thus offering
the large surface of the pores for oxygen adsorption  (3) .

Oxidation of pyritic impurities in coal refuse piles is another
supplementary factor which enhances coal combustion.  Oxidation
of pyrite is a highly exothermic, reaction that increases the tem-
perature of the coal and thus increases its rate of oxidation.
The oxidation process requires the presence of moisture as shown
by the following equations:
 (2) Guney, M., D. J. Hodges, and, F. B. Kinsley.  An Investigation
    of the Spontaneous Heating of Coal and Gaseous Products.
    Mining Engineer  (London), 129(110):67-84, 1969.

 (3) Haslam, R. T., and R. P. Russell.  Fuels and Their Coflibustion,
    McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, New York^ 1926-   809 pp.

-------
                    FeS2 + 302 -> FeS04 + S02                   U)

      2FeS2 + 2H20 + 702 •* 2FeSOtt + 2H2SC\ - 2.69 MJ/g-mole    (2)

Other factors which affect combustion of-coal or coal refuse are;

   • External sources of heat such as steam pipes, sun's rays,  etc.

   • Coal particle size—small size exposes greater total surface
     area to oxidation, permitting more rapid oxidation, hut fine
     coal particles, through denser packing, can also reduce the
     flow of air and thus decrease the rate of oxidation.

Coal refuse piles are considered to be burning if they exhibit
the following indicators of burning:

   • Presence of smoke, fumes, flames, thermal waves above pile,
     fire glow, or
   • An internal temperature of 93°C and a history of increasing
     temperature.

Historically the U.S. Bureau of Mines has identified burning coal
refuse piles through observation of smoke, flames, fire glow,
fumes, or thermal waves above the pile.  However, a refuse pile
that is not presenting the above evidence may also be burning
internally, or be at a stage of thermal activity which will give
rise to pollutants, or cause the pile to spontaneously ignite at
some future date.  The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources has conducted limited infrared aerial surveys of refuse
piles which do not exhibit outward signs of combustion but for
which thermal activity is suspected.  It is their experience that
coal refuse piles exhibiting an increasing internal temperature
in excess of 93°C require extinguishment for protection of the
public health (personal communication with P.  Marcus, U.S. Bureau
of Mines, Division  of Environment, Washington, D.C.,  8 July 1975).

Abandoned Mines and Outcrops

Spontaneous combustion of coal in abandoned mines and outcrops is
also attributed to oxidation phenomena involving coal,  moisture
and pyritic impurities.  Other factors which influence coal
combustion are:

   •  Rank of coal—a low-rank coal such as subbitiuminous or
     high-volatile bituminous coal will be more susceptible
     than a high-rank coal such as low-volatile bituminous or
     anthracite coal (4).   This is because the low-ranked coals
     contain a greater amount of moisture and pyritic impurities,
     which enhance spontaneous combustion of coal.
(4)  Feng, K. K., R. N. Chakravorty, and T. S. Cochrane.  Spon-
    taneous Combustion - A Coal Mining Hazard.  CIM Bulletin,
    66(738):75-84, 1973.

-------
   •  The presence of faults in coal seams helps in the leakage
     of air because of weak or fractured strata conditions  (4).

   •  Strata temperature increases with depth; thus, oxidation
     rate will increase with depth, making the seam more vulner-
     able to spontaneous combustion (4).

Outcrops and abandoned coal mines are considered to be burning if
they show the following burning indicators:

   •  Presence of smoke, fumes, flames above outcrop or emitted
     from mine opening, or

   •  Thermal activity above an as yet undefined threshold value.

PRODUCTS OF COMBUSTION

Gases

As the temperature of a coal mass increases through self or
external heating, pyrolysis and carbonization occur and volatile
matter is released.  If there is sufficient oxygen and if the
temperature is high enough, the volatile matter, and solid resi-
due may ignite and burn; if not, the volatiles are released into
the atmosphere.  The volatile matter, in general, consists of
hydrocarbons, hydrogen, and carbon monoxide.  The products of
complete combustion are carbon dioxide and water vapor.  Oxides
of sulfur are emitted due to oxidation of pyrite materials in
coal.

Other gases which have been identified in emissions from coal com-
bustion are:  hydrogen sulfide; carbon disulfide; n-hydrocarbons
(methane, ethane, propane, butane);  olefins  (propylene,  butylene);
and aromatics  (phenol, benzene, toluene, xylene) (5).  These
gases are formed due to thermal cracking or condensation of the
volatile matter.

Particulates

Particulate emissions from refuse piles result from wind erosion
and from entrainment of unburned coal and fly ash in the gaseous
products of oxidation and combustion.  However, the major con-
tributors to particulate emissions are products of incomplete
combustion.  If the ratio of oxygen to volatile matter in coal
is too low, the hydrocarbon molecule is cracked to carbon and
hydrogen, with hydrogen burning to water and carbon suspended as
smoke.
 (5) Flann, R. C., and G. M. Lukaszewski.  The Prevention and
    Control of Burning in Waste Coal Dumps.  Proceedings of the
    Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy,
    238:11-29, 1971.

-------
The volatile matter can also condense into high molecular weight
liquid or solid aerosols.

No studies have been conducted to quantify the magnitude and com-
position of the particulate emissions.  However, data are avail-
able in the published literature on the hazardous constituents of
the particulate emissions such as arsenic, boron and POM
including benzo(a)pyrene (6, 7).

FACTORS AFFECTING EMISSIONS

Coal Refuse Piles

The following factors affect emissions from coal refuse piles:

   • Oxygen concentration in the pile, which is dependent on:

     - Particle size distribution of pile.

     - Type of surface of pile.
     - Wind speed.
   • Type of coal.

   • Relative humidity (of atmospheric air).

   • Moisture content of coal.

   • Type (mix) of refuse.
   • Temperature.

Abandoned Mines and Outcrops

The following factors affect emissions from abandoned mines and
outcrops:

   • Oxygen concentration,  which is affected by:

     - Air leakage through natural faults and cracks
       in coal seams.
     - Air leakage through cracks or holes caused by
       subsidence.

   • Type of coal.
(6) Duncan, L. J., E. L. Keitz, and E. P. Krajeski.  Selected
    Characteristics of Hazardous Pollutant Emissions, Volume II.
    MTR-6401, Mitre Corporation, McLean, Virginia, May 1973.
    331 pp.
(7) Particulate Polycyclic Organic Matter.  National Academy of
    Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1972.  361 pp.


                                8

-------
   • Depth of stratum.

   • Relative humidity  (of atmospheric air).

   • Moisture content of coal.

   • Temperature.

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION

There were 206 burning coal refuse piles and 65 burning impound-
ments in 13 coal producing states in 1972.  The states of West
Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Kentucky accounted for 84%
of the burning refuse piles, and West Virginia and Pennsylvania
accounted for 87% of the burning impoundments  (8).

No recent data are available on the tonnage of waste material
contained in coal refuse piles and impoundments.  However, a  1968
survey by the U.S. Bureau of Mines showed that about 250 x 106
metric tons of refuse material were contained in coal refuse
piles in the United States at that time  (9).

In January 1976 there were 441 fires in abandoned coal mines and
outcrops in 18 coal producing states.  The states of Montana,
Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico accounted for about 66% of
these fires (personal communications with D. L. Donner, U.S.
Bureau of Mines, Denver Mining Research Center, 10 December 1975,
and with M. 0. Magnuson, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh Mining
and Safety Research Center, 6 January 1976).  No attempts have
yet been made to quantify the tonnage involved in burning aban-
doned mines and outcrops.

Table 2 shows the number of burning refuse piles, impoundments,
abandoned mines and outcrops in the United States, by state.
(8) List of Coal Waste Banks.  U.S. Department of the Interior,
    Washington, D.C., June 15, 1972.  288 pp.
(9) McNay, L. M.  Coal Refuse Fires, An Environmental Hazard.
    Bureau of Mines IC-8515, U.S. Department of the Interior,
    Washington, D.C., 1971.  50 pp.
                                9

-------
TABLE 2.   NUMBER  OF BURNING COAL REFUSE PILES, IMPOUNDMENTS,
            ABANDONED MINES, AND  OUTCROPS IN  THE UNITED  STATES,
            BY STATE (8)a
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky
Maryland
Montana
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming
TOTAL
Refuse
Active
7
1

1
8
0
0
28
1
2
4
0
7

0
37

1

0
30
0
79
0
206
piles b
Inactive c
1
4


37
9
6
90

12
16
9
2

1
123

3

7
76
4
48
19
467
Impoundments
Active Inactive c
4 12
1



0 2

1 94

'


0 3


16 43

0 4

0 2
2 20
0 1
41 42
0 2
65 225
Abandoned
mines and
outcrops d

7
30

66


6
2
105
39
18
7
1

37
3

1
28
1
2
8
80
441
        Personal communications with D. L.  Donner and M. 0. Magnuson.
       b!972 data.
       0Indicates not presently burning but could burn.
       d!975 data.
       Note.—Blank areas indicate not reported.
                                 10

-------
                            SECTION 4

                            EMISSIONS
SELECTED POLLUTANTS

fires in coal refuse piles, abandoned mines, and outcrops result
in emissions of particulates, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,
nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and polycyclic organic matter.
In addition, trace elements such as mercury, arsenic, boron,
titanium, chromium, lead, copper, and manganese are also emitted.
However, the trace element concentrations are too low to affect
ambient air quality significantly  (see Appendix A).

Table 3 lists the health effects, atmospheric stabilities and
ambient air quality standards of emitted criteria pollutants.
Table 4 lists the various polycyclic organic materials (POM)
emitted from coal refuse fires and also indicates their carcino-
genicity.  For the purpose of calculations in this document, a
threshold limit value  (TLV®) of 1 pg/m3 was used for all POM's
irrespective of their carcinogenic characteristics.

MASS EMISSIONS AND EMISSION FACTORS

Coal Refuse Piles and Impoundments

Calculation of the source severity and the state and national
emission burdens necessitates a knowledge of the emission rate
for every source in the United States.  Conducting emission
measurements on a source-by-source basis was impractical due
to the large number of individual sources and the diversity of
source types.  A method was therefore developed to derive an
emission factor as kilograms of pollutant emitted per hour from
a cubic meter or a metric ton of burning coal refuse.  The
emission rate for each of the source types was then estimated as
the product of the emission factor and the quantity of burning
coal refuse.

A detailed literature survey was conducted to obtained published
data on coal refuse fire emissions as well as their composition.
However, no quantitative date were obtained, and a preliminary
sampling of emissions from a burning coal refuse pile was con-
ducted (see Appendix A for sampling details and results).  The
emission factors determined from the preliminary sampling  results
for criteria and noncriteria pollutants are displayed in Table 5


                                11

-------
 TABLE  3.   CHARACTERISTICS OF  CRITERIA  POLLUTANTS EMITTED  FROM
              COAL  REFUSE, ABANDONED MINE  AND OUTCROP FIRES
Ambient air quality standard
Compound
Particulates
Nitrogen
oxides
Carbon
monoxide
Primary
260 ug/m3 (for
24 hr).
100 pg/ra3 (annual
arithmetic mean).
10 mg/m3 (B-hr
value not to be
exceeded more
than once a year).
Secondary
150 pg/m3 (for
24 hr) .
Same as primary.
Same as primary.
Health effects
Depends on the
composition.
Dangerous irritant
to lungs.
Asphyxiating gas.
Atmospheric
Stable.
Contributes
chemical
Stable.
•'' (-.
stability

to photo-
smog.
• r '
Hydrocarbons
Sulfur oxides
160 pg/m3 (3 hr,
  from 6 a.m. to
  9 a.m.) .a
'80 Mg/m3 (annual
  arithmetic mean)
Same as primary.  Simple asphyxiants..
                             Same as primary.  Dangerous irritant.
                                           Synergistic effects
                                            with particulates
                                   :    '     unknown.
Contributes to phpto-
 . chemical smog.
                               Possible formation of
                                 sulfates.
aThere is no primary ambient air quality standard for hydrocarbons.  The value of 160 yg/m3
 used for hydrocarbons in this report is a recommended guideline for meeting the primary
 ambient air quality standard for photochemical oxidants.
    TABLE 4.   POLYCYCLIC ORGANIC  MATERIALS EMITTED  FROM COAL
                REFUSE FIRES,  AND THEIR CARCINOGENICITY
                       POM
                                     Carcinogenicity  (7)
       Dibenzothiophene
       Anthracene/phenanthrene
       MethyIanthracenes/phenanthrenes
       9-Me.thylanthracene
       Fiuoranthene
       Pyrene
       Benzo(c)phenanthrene
       Chrysene/benz(a)anthracene
       Dimethylbenzanthracenes  (isoiriers)
       Benzo(k or  b)fluoranthene
       Benzo(a)pyrene/benzo(e)pyrene/
         perylene
       3-Methylcholanthrene
       Dibenz(a,h  or  a,c)anthracene
       Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene
       7H-Dibenzo(c,g)carbazole
       Dibenzo(a,h or a,i)pyrene
                                    Unknown
                                    Not carcinogenic
                                    Unknown
                                    Unknown
                                    Not carcinogenic
                                    Not carcinogenic
                                    Strongly  carcinogenic
                                    Carcinogenic
                                    Strongly  carcinogenic
                                    Not carcinogenic
                                    Strongly  carcinogenic

                                    Unknown
                                    Strongly  carcinogenic
                                    Unknown
                                    Strongly  carcinogenic
                                    Strongly  carcinogenic
                                    12

-------
    TABLE 5.  EMISSION FACTORS FOR COAL REFUSE FIRE EMISSIONS
                                      Emission factors
                              kg/hr per
                            m3 of burning
  kg/hr per
metric ton of
	 Pollutant 	
Criteria pollutants :
Total particulates
Respirable particulates
Nitrogen oxides
Sulfur dioxide
Sulfur trioxide
Hy dr oc arbon s
Carbon monoxide
Noncriteria pollutants :
Ammonia
Hydrogen sulfide
Mercury
Polycyclic organic
materials
coal refuse
^^^^***^^^^~m~*mmmi**m*mmmmm^rm*fmm^^^^^^^m,^^^^^^^^^^m^mm

5.
1.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.

6.
4.
6.

1.

1
3
0
1
7
0
3

5
5
8
**
9

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X

10-7
10-8
io-4
lQ~k
io-7
io-4
IO-2

10~5
10~4
ID"9

^ Q
burnin

3.
8.
6.
7.
1.
6.
8.

4.
3.
4.

1.
g coal

4
7
7
4
8
7
7

3
0
6

3

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X

10-
10-
10-
10-
10-
10-
10-

10-
10"
10-

10-
refuse
^^^^^^^••m-^^^^^*

7
9
5
5
7
5
3

5
4
9

8

as kilograms/hour per cubic meter of burning refuse.  In tests
conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines the average in situ density
of coal piles was found to be 1.5 metric tons/m3  (10).  Using
this density value the emission factors were also calculated as
kilograms/hour per metric ton of burning refuse and included in
Table 5.

Emission factors for polycyclic organic materials refer only to
those emitted as particulates, not vapors.

Confidence levels cannot be quoted for the emission factors shown
in Table 5 due. to the limited nature of the preliminary sampling.
Detailed sampling of emissions involving a number of sources is
necessary to establish such levels.
(10)  Busch, R. A., R. R. Backer, and L. A. Atkins.  Physical Prop-
     erty Data on Coal Waste Embankment Materials.  Bureau of
     Mines RI-7964, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington,
     D.C., 1974.  142 pp.
                               13

-------
Abandoned Mines and Outcrops

An emission factor approach cannot be used to estimate emissions
from fires in abandoned mined and outcrops as it is impossible to
estimate or measure the volume/weight of burning coal in an aban-
doned mine or outcrop.  A number of sources across the United
States would have to be sampled and the mean emission rate deter-
mined for various pollutants.  Statewide and nationwide emissions
could then be estimated as the product of the mean emission rate
and the corresponding number of sources in each state.  This is
not within the scope of this report.

DEFINITION OF REPRESENTATIVE SOURCE

A representative coal refuse pile/impoundment was defined so as
to determine the source severity and affected population
described in Section 4.  This representative source has a volume
of 1.7 x 106 m3 and an average in situ dry density of 1.5 metric
tons/m3 with about 21% of it burning (8, 9).  The representative
pile/impoundment is defined as a byproduct of bituminous coal
mining operations.

SOURCE SEVERITY AND AFFECTED POPULATION

The source severity is defined as the ratio of the time-averaged
maximum ground level concentration of an emission species from
the representative source to the hazard factor for the species
(11).   The hazard factor is a value equal to the primary ambient
air quality standard for criteria pollutants or a reduced TLV for
noncriteria pollutants.  The affected population is defined as
the number of persons around a representative source who are ex-
posed to concentrations of airborne materials which result in a
source severity greater than 0.1.

Source severities due to and the population affected by emissions
of criteria and noncriteria pollutants from coal refuse fires are
shown in Table 6.  Sample calculations for source severity and
affected population are provided in Appendix B.  The representa-
tive distance is the distance from the source to the plant bound-
aries.  This is taken as 1.6 km.

The representative population density is defined as the average
population density around a burning coal refuse source.  This val-
ue is 46 persons/km2 and is based on the results of a survey con-
ducted by the Bureau of Mines on coal refuse piles  (9).
 (11)  Blackwood,  T.  R.,  and R.  A.  Wachter.   Source Assessment:
      Coal  Storage Piles.   Contract 68-02-1874,  U.S.  Environmental
      Protection  Agency,  Research  Triangle  Park, North Carolina,
      July  1977.   96  pp.

                                14

-------
        TABLE 6.   SOURCE SEVERITY AND AFFECTED  POPULATION
                   FOR EMISSIONS FROM COAL REFUSE  FIRES
  Type of pollutant
 Total particulates
 Nitrogen oxides
 Sulfur oxides
 Hydrocarbons
 Carbon monoxide
 Polycyclic organic
   materials
 Hydrogen sulfide
 Ammonia
 Mercury
Source severity
    3 x 10'1*
     0.18
     0.05
     0.15
     0.09

     0.92
     1.5
   9.0 x 10-4
    • 0.01
Affected population
            0
       1,000
            0
         180
            0

       3,900
       6,700
            0
            0
STATE AND "NATIONAL EMISSION BURDENS
Tables 7 and  8  display the state and national emission burdens
due to coal refuse burning.  The individual state  emissions are
the product of  the emission factor given in Table  5  and the total
quantity of coal  refuse for that state.  It is  assumed that about
21% of the pile is burning.
         TABLE  7.   MASS EMISSIONS FROM COAL REFUSE FIRES
Particulate
Amount of emissions,
coal refuse, metric
State 10 3 m3 tons/yr
Alabama
Colorado
Illinois
Kentucky
Maryland
Montana •
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
TOTALb
11,000
12,000
5,400
1,600
23
230
1,400
84,000a
2,100
2,800
2,300
67,000
190,000
10
11
S.I
15
0.02
0.22
1.3
79
2
2.6
2.2
63
190
Sulfur
oxide
emissions,
metric
tons/yr
2,200
2,400
1,100
320
5
47
280
17,000
420
570
470
14,000
39,000
Nitrogen
oxide
emissions,
metric
tons/yr
2,000
2,200
990
290
4
42
260
15,000
390
520
420
12,000
34,000
Total
hydrocarbon
emissions ,
metric
tons/yr
2,000
2,200
990
290
4
42
260
15,000
390
520
420
12,000
34,000
Carbon
monoxide
emissions,
metric
tons/yr
260,000
290,000
130,000
38,000
550
5,500
33,000
2,000,000
50,000
67,000
55,000
1,600,000
4,500,000
 9Includes 4,200 m3 of anthracite refuse.
  Totals may not add up to figures shown due to independent rounding.
                                15

-------
   TABLE 8.   STATE AND NATIONAL EMISSION BURDENS FROM COAL REFUSE FIRES
                                 (percent)

State Particulates
Alabama
Colorado 0.01
Illinois
Kentucky
Maryland
Montana
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia 0.03
TOTAL 0.001
Sulfur
oxides
0.25
4.9
0.05
0.03

0.01
0.01

0.58
0.27
0.13
0.17
2.1
0.14
Nitrogen
oxides
0.5
1.5
0.1
0.07

0.03
0.02

0.50
0.05
0.02
0.22
5.2
0.16
Total
hydrocarbons
0.31
1.1
0.05
0.09

0.02
0.02

1.7
0.40
0.14
0.12
10.0
0.14
Carbon
monoxide
14
33
2.0
3.2
0.04
0.90
0.63
0.03
54
12
4.3
3.3
3.2
4.9

Note.—Blanks indicate amounts  are  negligible.

-------
                            SECTION 5

                       CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
STATE OF THE ART

Coal Refuse Fires

Discussed below are several methods employed by state and federal
government agencies to control burning coal refuse piles.

Isolation—
The burning area is isolated from the remainder of the refuse
pile by trenches and is quenched with water or blanketed with
incombustible material.

Blanketing—
Some refuse piles are extinguished by leveling the top, then
sealing it and the sides with fine, incombustible material such
as fly ash, clay, quarry wastes, or acid mine drainage sludge.
Heavy seals of such material are necessary in order to avoid
erosion.  Use of clay is limited as it cracks over hot spots,
impairing the seal (12).

Grouting--
A slurry of water and finely divided incombustible material, such
as pulverized limestone, fly ash, coal silt or sand, is forced
into the burning pile so as to provide some cooling action and
also to fill the voids to prevent air from entering the pile.
The unit cost of controlling refuse pile fires using lime slurry
was $1.46/m3 of refuse, based on a 1969 study by the Pennsylvania
Department of Mines and Mineral Industries (13).
(12)  Corey, R. C., R. B. Engdahl, J. J. Foster, J. R. Garvey,
     and-H. C- Rose.  The Disposal of Coal Refuse.  Journal of
     the Air Pollution Control Association, 6(2):105-110, 1956.

(13)  Darkes, W. F.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 67A-4112D, Fails Slope Refuse Bank.  Department
     of Mines and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylva-
     nia, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, May 1970.  14 pp.
                                17

-------
Explosives—
Many burning piles have an impenetrable, ceramic-like, clinker
material surface which does not allow the penetration of slurries
and water.  In this case explosive charges are placed deep into
the bank through horizontally drilled holes.  The explosion
creates fissures in the fused covering material.  Water is then
applied through these crevices and the quenched material is
loaded out.  The overall cost of fire control using this method
was $2.86/m3 of material, based on a Pennsylvania Department of
Mines and Mineral Industries study in 1968  (14).

Spraying—
In this method water is sprayed over the entire refuse bank.
However, this is only a temporary solution as the pile reignites
and burns, often with renewed vigor, once the water spray is
stopped (15):  This procedure also creates the problem of runoff
from the refuse bank.

Accelerated Combustion and Quenching—
The burning refuse material is lifted by a dragline and dropped
through air into a water-filled lagoon 15 m to 30 m below for
the purpose of burning off the combustible material completely
during the drop.  Another dragline and bulldozers are used to
remove the quenched material from the lagoon floor and compact
it into a tight, dense fill material.  A disadvantage with this
method is the emission of particulate matter while the burning
refuse is falling.

Ponding Technique—
Retaining walls are constructed around the perimeter of a refuse
bank after subdividing the surface into a series of level dis-
crete areas or "rice paddies," and each area is filled with
water.  Though this method has a lower cost compared to other
methods, it has not proved successful.  Flooding with water may
cause explosions due to the formation of water gas.  Further,
penetration of water into the pile is poor - only about 0.6 m to
1 m deep  (15).

Cooling and Dilution—
Water is sprayed on the burning pile from multiple nozzles, and
the cooled refuse is mixed, by bulldozer, in a one-to-one volume
 (14) Mahinka, S. P.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 66A-4108D, Bellevue Baker Bank.  Department of
     Mines and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, August 1968.  34 pp.

 (15) Maneval, D. R.  Recent Advances in Extinguishment of Burn-
     ing Coal Refuse Banks for Air Pollution Reduction.
     American Chemical Society, Division of Fuel Chemistry,
     Preprints, 13(2):27-41, 1969.


                               18

-------
proportion with soil and/or burned out refuse from a nearby area.
The mixture is then compacted by heavy equipment  (15).  According
to an engineering survey in White Station, Pennsylvania, this
method of control was estimated to cost about $0.60/m3 of refuse
in 1968  (16).

Hydraulic Jets—
Projects conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the
Pennsylvania Department of Mines involved the application of
"hydraulic giants" or high velocity water connons to quench the
burning refuse material.  The quenched material was then relay-
ered and compacted by a dragline and bulldozer (15).  The unit
cost of the operation performed in 1968 was $0.98/m3 (17).

Abandoned Mines and Outcrop Fires

Abandoned mine and outcrop fires can be controlled by the var-
ious methods discussed below  (18).  The principle of control is
to isolate the burning material and prevent air from reaching it.

Loading Out—
This method involves digging out the burning and heated material,
then cooling it with water or spreading it on the ground.  This
method is effective if the fire is of recent origin or mild
enough to be accessible.

Fire Barriers—
A barrier of incombustible material is used to confine and
isolate the fire from the main body of coal.  The isolated area
is also surface sealed to extinguish the fire.
         ....-,_-    3

The barrier can be an open trench, between the fire area and the
threatened area, which is backfilled with incombustible material
such as earth, fly ash or granulated slag.

A plug barrier is used if the overburden is excessive, since it
is impractical to excavate a trench from outcrop to outcrop
(16) Mahinka, S. P.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 66A-4106D, White Station Bank.  Department of
     Mines and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, August 1968.  27 pp.
(17) Mahinka, S. P.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 66A-4109D, Marvine Bank.  Department of Mines
     and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, September 1968.  21 pp.
(18) Magnuson, M. 0.  Control of Fires in Abandoned Mines in the
     Eastern Bituminous Region of the United States.  Bureau of
     Mines IC-8620, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington,
     D.C., 1974.  53 pp.

                               19

-------
around  an  abandoned mine fire.  A  plug barrier starts at the  out-
crop and terminates when the overburden depth exceeds 20 m.   The
plug barrier is always used in conjunction with a surface seal.
A surface  seal on the fire side of the plug has been observed to
be effective in controlling abandoned  mine fires if the over-
burden  is  in excess of about 20 m  (17).   Figure 1 shows top and
sectional  views of a plug barrier.

                                         TOP OF
                                      PLUG BARRIER
       SURFACE AREA BETWEEN PLUG
   BARRIERS, USUALLY SURFACE SEALED
 BOTTOM OF
PLUG BARRIER
-COAL OUTCROP
                               TOP VIEW
                         SURFACE
            ^    -*1  P-  BOTTOM OF COAL BED
      PILLARS.TTUMPS,  3-6m
       OR SOL ID COAL
   3.6m  PILLARS, STUMPS,
        OR SOLID COAL
                             SECTIONA-A
    Figure  1.   Top and sectional views  of  plug barrier (17).

Flushing—
In this method the void spaces around an underground fire are
filled with water or an incombusible material such as fly ash.
The incombustible material can be applied  pneumatically or as a
slurry.

Surface Sealing--
This technique involves closing the surface openings to prevent
ventilation of the fire.  The surface seal is established by
plowing the surface to a depth of several  meters with an angle
dozer to create a blanket of pulverized earth that effectively
seals the surface.
                                20

-------
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS

An old adage, paraphrased "Prevention is better than cure," cer-
tainly applies to the case of controlling coal refuse fires.  The
U.S. Department of the Interior, Mining Enforcement and Safety
Administration, has recently adopted regulations that require
coal companies to dispose of coal refuse in such manner as to
obviate or minimize its ignition  (19).  Such preventive measures
include compaction and blanketing of the piles with an inert
material.

Other methods for the prevention of coal refuse fires are cur-
rently being studied.  These include injection or coating with
vermiculate and sodium bicarbonate, and the use of antioxidants
(15).

Different underground mining procedures can also be employed to
prevent fires  (20).

Integration of Coal Waste Disposal with the Retreat Mining
Method

In this approach about 40% to 60% of the coal is mined using
continuous mining, or coal cutting, machines.  This operation
leaves "rooms" or voids, where the coal was removed, and pillars
of coal which support the roof.  The "rooms" or voids are then
backfilled with coal refuse slurry which is allowed to solidify.
Barricades constructed at the lower end and sides of the back-
filled area hold back the refuse.  Thus the solidified refuse
supports the roof as the coal pillars are mined.  This procedure
is repeated until the mining has retreated to the mouth of the
mine.

Integration of Coal Waste Disposal with the Longwall Mining
Method

In longwall mining, the roof is held up by rows of movable
hydraulic jacks while the cutting machine shears the coal from
the seam.  The coal refuse can be backfilled into the mined void
either as a slurry or as a dry material by pneumatic backfilling.
Wooden props and wire netting materials are erected parallel to
the working area to hold the waste in place.
 (19) Final Environmental Statement:  Regulations Governing the
     Disposal of Coal Mine Waste, 30 CFR, Part 77, Sections
     77.215(h) through 77.217, FES 75-58.  U.S. Department, of
     the Interior, Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration,
     Washington, D.C., June 18, 1975.
 (20) Disposing of the Coal Waste Disposal Problem.  Appalachian
     Research and Defense Fund, Inc., Charleston, West Virginia,
     March 13, 1973.  98 pp.

                               21

-------
                            SECTION 6

                GROWTH AND NATURE OF THE INDUSTRY


As noted earlier, the U.S. Department of the Interior has recent-
ly adopted regulations that require coal companies to dispose
of coal refuse in such a manner as to prevent its ignition  (19).
The coal companies are also required to extinguish their existing
burning refuse piles.  These regulations, if properly enforced,
will decrease the incidence of coal refuse fires considerably.
However, a Bureau of Mines study shows that there are 37 burning
piles and 161 inactive coal piles whose owners are unknown  (9).
Table 9 presents a state-by-state listing of piles with unknown
ownership.

           TABLE 9.  NUMBER OF COAL REFUSE PILES WITH
                     UNKNOWN OWNERSHIP, BY STATE (9)

State
Alaska
Colorado
Maryland
Montana
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Utah
West Virginia
Wyoming
Total
Burning piles
0
2
1
1
2
0
2
25
0
4
0
37
Inactive piles
2
24
0
9
15
1
0
92
3
0
15
161

Assuming that fires in some or all coal refuse piles owned by
private companies and government agencies will be completely
extinguished, the number of burning piles in 1978 can vary from
0 to 198, which corresponds to a growth rate of 0% to 72%.


                                22

-------
                           REFERENCES
 1.   Sussman, V. H., and J. J. Mulhern.  Air Pollution from Coal
     Refuse Disposal Areas.  Journal of the Air Pollution Control
     Association, 14 (7):279-284,  1964.

 2.   Guney, M., D. J.  Hodges, and F. B. Kinsley.  An Investiga-
     tion of the Spontaneous Heating of Coal and Gaseous Pro-
     ducts.  Mining Engineer  (London), 129(110):67-84, 1969.

 3.   Haslam, R. T., and R. P. Russell.  Fuels and Their Combus-
     tion.  McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York,  New York, 1926.
     809 pp.

 4.   Feng, K. K., R. N. Chakravorty, and T.  S. Cochrane.  Spon-
     taneous Combustion - A Coal  Mining Hazard.   CIM Bulletin,
     66(738):75-84, 1973.

 5.   Flann, R. C., and G. M. Lukaszewski.  The Prevention and
     Control of Burning in Waste  Coal Dumps.  Proceedings of the
     Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 238:11-29,
     1971.

 6.   Duncan, L. J., E. L. Keitz,  and E. P. Krajeski.  Selected
     Characteristics of Hazardous Pollutant Emissions, Volume II.
     MTR-6401, Mitre Corporation, McLean, Virginia, May 1973.
     331 pp.

 7.   Particulate Polycyclic Organic Matter.   National Academy of
     Sciences, Washington, D.C.,  1972.  361 pp.

 8.   List of Coal Waste Banks.  U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D.C., June 15, 1972.  288 pp.

 9.   McNay, L- M.  Coal Refuse Fires, An Environmental Hazard.
     Bureau of Mines IC-8515, U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D.C., 1971.  50  pp.

10.   Busch, R. A., R.  R. Backer,  and L. A. Atkins.  Physical
     Property Data on Coal Waste Embankment Materials.  Bureau
     of Mines RI-7964, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washing-
     ton, D.C., 1974.   142 pp.
                               23

-------
11.  Blackwood, T. R., and R. A. Wachter.  Source Assessment:
     Coal Storage Piles.  Contract 68-02-1874, U.S. Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
     Carolina, July 1977.  96 pp.

12.  Corey, R. C., R. B. Engdahl, J. J. Foster, J. R. Garvey, and
     H. C. Rose.  The Disposal of Coal Refuse.  Journal of the
     Air Pollution Control Association, 6 (2):105-110, 1956.

13.  Darkes, W. F.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 67A-4112D, Fails Slope Refuse Bank,.  Department
     of Mines and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylva-
     nia, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, May 1970.   14 pp.

14.  Mahinka, S. P.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 66A-4108D, Bellevue Baker Bank.  Department of
     Mines and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, August 1968.  34 pp.

15.  Maneval, D. R.  Recent Advances in Extinguishment of Burning
     Coal Refuse Banks for Air Pollution Reduction.  American
     Chemical Society, Division of Fuel Chemistry, Preprints,
     13(2):27-41, 1969.

16.  Mahinka, S. P.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 66A-4106D, White Station Bank.  Department of
     Mines and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, August 1968.  27 pp.

17.  Mahinka, S. P.  Final Report, Experimental Extinguishment
     Project No. 66A-4109D, Marvine Bank.  Department of Mines
     and Mineral Industries, Commonwealth of  Pennsylvania,
     Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, September 1968.  21 pp.

18.  Magnuson, M. O.  Control of Fires in Abandoned Mines in the
     Eastern Bituminous Region of the United  States.  Bureau of
     Mines IC-8620, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington,
     D.C., 1974.  53 pp.
           '•}
19.  Final Environmental Statement:  Regulations Governing the
     Disposal of Coal Mine Waste, 30 CFR, Part 77, Sections
     77.215(h) through 77.217, FES 75-58.  U.S. Department of
     the Interior, Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration,
     Washington, D.C., June 18, 1975.

20.  Disposing of the Coal Waste Disposal Problem.  Appalachian
     Research and Defense Fund, Inc., Charleston, West Virginia,
     March 13, 1973.  98 pp.
                               24

-------
21.  Environmental Protection Agency - Standards of Performance
     for New Stationary Sources, Method 7.  Federal Register,
     36(247):24891-24895, 1971.

22.  Environmental Protection Agency - Standards of Performance
     for New Stationary Sources, Method 6.  Federal Register,
     36(247):24890-24891, 1971.

23.  Environmental Protection Agency - Standards of Performance
     for New Stationary Sources, Method 11.  Federal Register,
     39(47):9321-9323, 1974.

24.  Environmental Protection Agency - National Emission Stand-
     ards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Asbestos, Beryllium,
     and Mercury; Method 102.  Federal Register, 38(66):8840-
     8845,  1973.

25.  TLVs®  Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and
     Physical Agents in the Workroom Environment with Intended
     Changes for 1975.  American Conference of Governmental
     Industrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1975.  97 pp.
                                25

-------
                           APPENDIX A

              PRELIMINARY SAMPLING DATA AND RESULTS


The purpose of preliminary sampling was to obtain an estimate of
emissions and their composition with respect to hazardous pollu-
tants and thus form the basis for additional testing and sampling,
After the inspection of several piles, a burning coal refuse pile
was chosen for preliminary sampling on the basis that its emis-
sions were best representative of those from fires in coal refuse
piles, abandoned mines or outcrops - representative with respect
to the rank of coal as well as the quantity of coal refuse and
fraction burning.  In addition, the pile was located in an area
with conditions favorable for sampling.

SOURCE DESCRIPTION

The coal refuse pile selected is a byproduct of bituminous coal
mining operations.  The pile has a volume of 4.3 x 106 m3, and
about 9.6 x 105 m3 or 22% of it is burning.  The pile is smolder-
ing over a surface area of 52,000 m2 and emitting fumes through
holes with a total area of about 520 m2.  This refuse pile,
active for about 12 years, has been burning for the last 10
years.

Temperatures at different points within the burning pile vary
from about 80°C to about 470°C, both recorded at a depth of 1 m.
Temperatures as high as 540°C were also recorded within the pile
at a depth of 10 m and 1 m from the side of the pile.

SAMPLING METHODOLOGY

Two temporary stacks, each about 1.8 m high and 23 cm in dia-
meter, were forced into the burning pile to a depth of about 5 cm
to ensure a leakproof contact between the pile and the stack.
Figure A-l illustrates the setup.  Emissions from the stacks were
treated as point source emissions and were sampled for various
hazardous pollutants.  The mean value of the emission rates from
the two stacks was used to estimate the overall pile emissions
as follows:

Overall pile emission rate
                                   (surface area of pile through \
                                     which fumes are emitted     I
                                     inside area of the stack   /
                               26

-------
Figure A-l.  Temporary stacks used for sampling
             emissions from coal refuse piles.
                       27

-------
An emission factor for each pollutant was then calculated as the
overall pile emission rate divided by the volume of coal refuse
burning.

SAMPLING DATA AND RESULTS

Gas Flows

A unique procedure was employed to determine the gas flows.  A
stack was lifted off of the pile and held in that position until
it cleared of fumes.  The stack was then placed on the pile and
the time that elapsed until the fumes came out of the stack as a
visible plume was noted.  The height of the stack divided by the
elapsed time was taken as the average velocity of stack gases.

Table A-l shows the gas flows and temperatures for both stacks on
2 days of testing.

             TABLE A-l.  GAS FLOWS AND TEMPERATURES

Sample
Stack
Stack
Stack
Stack
1,
1,
2,
2,
day
day
day
day
1
2
1
2
Average gas
flow, m3/min
0.
0.
1.
0.
25
16
3
8
Average gas
temperature , ° C
31
32
61
54

       Average of four independent measurements for each
       stack on each day.

Total and Respirable Particulates

Two high-volume samplers were placed on the smoldering coal pile
and five runs were made.  A background sample was also taken
with a high-volume sampler placed about 600 m upwind of the
pile.  Each run (except the background run) lasted only about 60
min as the filter clogged within that time due to excessive
particulate loading.

Stack particulate emission rate was estimated as the product of
average stack gas flow and average particulate concentration as
determined by the high-volume samplers.  The fraction of respi-
rable particulates was determined by a particle count on two
high-volume filters. Table A-2 displays the results of high-
volume sampling.
                               28

-------
           TABLE A-2.  RESULTS OF HIGH-VOLUME SAMPLING
Sample
Run 1
Run 2
Run 3
Run 4
Run 5a
Background
Total particulate
concentration, yg/m3
1,277
1,180
1,826
1,284
215
55
Fraction
rable (<7


2.8
2.1

respi-
ym) , %





Average   (corrected
  for background)              1,337                  2.5
Note.—Blanks indicate not determined.

 The high-volume sampler for run 5 was placed near the edge of
 the pile and the low value is due to frequent changes in wind
 direction.  The reading was not considered in calculating the
 average value.

The average stack emission rate for total particulate was calcu-
lated as follows:

   • Mean stack gas flow for day 2 = 1/2(0.16 + 0.8)  = 0.48
     m3/min.
   « Average total particulate concentration corrected for back-
     ground concentration = 1,337 yg/m3.
   • Average stack emission rate = 1,337 x 10"9 kg/m3 • 0.48
     m3/min • 60 min/hr = 38.5 x 10~6 kg/hr.
   • Overall pile emission rate = 38.5 x 10"6 kg/hr • 520
     m2/0.041 m2 = 0.49 kg/hr where 520 m2 = area and 0.041 m2 =
     stack area.
   • Emission factor for total particulates =0.49 kg/hr *
     9.6 x 105 m3 = 5.1 x 10~7 kg/hr per m3 of burning refuse
     where 9.6 x 105 m3 is the amount of burning refuse.

Gaseous Emissions

Emission rates for gaseous pollutants were calculated as the pro-
duct of stack gas flow and the corresponding gas concentration.
Concentrations of gases were determined by using the standard
                               29

-------
methods shown  in  Table A-3 (21-24).   This table also displays
the overall pile  emission rate and emission factor for each  gas-
eous pollutant.

                   TABLE A-3.   SAMPLING RESULTS
Emission rates, kg/hr
Pollutant
Nitrogen oxides

Sulfur dioxide

Sulfur trioxide

Carbon monoxide
Total hydrocar-
bons as CHi,
equivalents
Benzene

Xylene

Toluene

Hydrogen
sulfide
Ammonia

Mercury

Stack 1
2.6

1.7

8.6

2.2


2.1
8.1

8.1

8.1


1.1
6.3

5.1

X lO-3

X 10-3

x 10-6

X 10-3


X lO-3
x 10-5

x 10~5

x 10~5


X 10-3
x 10-t

x 10-7

Stack 2
1.3 x ID"2

1.5 x 10~2

3.1 x 10-5

1.9


1.3 x 10~2
8.2 x 10-t

8.2 x 10-t

8.2 x 10-t


6.7 x 10-2
9.1 x lO-3

b

Mean
7.9 x 10-3

8.6 x 10-3

2.0 x 10~5

1.0


7.6 x lO-3
4.5 X 10-t

4.5 x 10-t

4.5 x 10-t


3.4 x 10-2
4.9 x 10-3

5.1 x 10-7

Overall pile
emission rate,
kg/hr
100

109

0.3

12,700


96
6

6

6


430
60

6 x lO-3

Emission factor,
kg/hr per m3
of burning refuse Sampling method
1.0

1.1

2.7

1.3


1.0
6.0

6.0

6.0


4.5
6.5

6.8

x 10-t

x 10-t

x 10-7

x 10-2


x 10-t
x 10~6

x 10"6

x 10~6


x 10-t
x 10-5

x 10-9

Federal Register
Method 7 (21)
Federal Register
Method 6 (22)
Federal Register
Method 6 (22)
Gas chromatography


Gas chromatography
Mass spectropho-
tometry
Mass spectropho-
tometry
Mass spectropho-
tometry
Federal Register
Method 11 (23)
S.ulfuric acid,
absorption
Federal Register
Method 102 (24)
 Questionable data; see discussion in Section 3.e of this appendix.
 Not determined.
Species  identified include sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, car-
bon monoxide,  ammonia,  hydrogen sulfide and hydrocarbons.  Table
A-4 shows  the  various forms of hydrocarbons emitted from the
coal refuse  pile.
 (21)  Environmental Protection Agency - Standards of Performance
      for New Stationary Sources, Method 7.  Federal Register,
      36(247):24891-24895, 1971.
 (22)  Environmental Protection Agency - Standards of Performance
      for New Stationary Sources, Method 6.  Federal Register,
      36(247) :24890-24891, 1971.
 (23)  Environmental Protection Agency - Standards of Performance
      for New Stationary Sources, Method 11.  Federal  Register  *
      39(47) :9321-9323, 1974.
 (24)  Environmental Protection Agency - National Emission Stand-
      ards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Asbestos, Beryllium,
      and Mercury;  Method 102.  Federal Register, 38(66) :8840-
      8845,  1973.
                                30

-------
     TABLE A-4.
HYDROCARBONS EMITTED FROM THE
BURNING COAL REFUSE PILE9
      Hydrocarbon
        Stack 1
         Day 1
         Run 1
Stack 2
 Day 1
 Run 1
Stack 2
 Day 1
 Run 2
Total concentration in
  stack gas, mg/m3
           27
  104
  106
Species
Aliphatic hydrocarbons
Olef inic/alcoholic
hydrocarbons
Dichloromethane
Aroma tics :
Benzene
Toluene
Xylene (s)
c 3 -Benzene

Cij -Benzene
Dimethyl phenol (s)

Methylnaphthalene (s)

c 2 -Naphthalene ( s )

c 3 -Naphthalene ( s )

ci-C3-Styrenes
X V ^*
Totald

20

10
_b

20
20
20
10
b

_b
h
u
b
\j
b
\j
b

100
Percent
50

20
_c

10
10
10
10
b

_b
h
\j
b

b
u L
c

100

30

20
_c

10
10
10
10
_b

_b
b

b

b-

c

100

^Figures quoted are order of, magnitude estimates.

 Less than 5%.

'Not detected.
 Total may not add up to 100 due to independent
 rounding.
                         31

-------
Concentrations of nitrogen oxides  (NOX) were determined by
taking grab samples of stack gases.  Sampling time for each grab
sample was about 2 min and three samples were taken at each
stack.  NOX concentrations at each stack varied from about 5 ppm
to 160 ppm.  These variations were unexplainable as no errors
were attributed to analysis or sample collection.  For the pur-
pose of the following calculations, the maximum concentration
values were used.

Sample Calculations, NOX Emissions

Stack 1:

   • Concentration of NOX in the stack:  169 ppm.
   • Average stack flow on day 1:  0.21 standard m3/min.
   • NOX emission rate = 169 ppm • (30 • 0-0413 mg/standard
     m3-ppm) • 0.21 standard m3/min • 10~6 kg/mg • 60 min/hr
     = 0.0026 kg/hr.

Stack 2:
     Concentration of NOX in the stack:
     Average stack flow on day 1:
      160 ppm.

1.1 standard m3/min.
   • NOX emission rate = 160 ppm •  (30 • 0.0413 mg/standard
     m3-ppm)  • 1.1 standard in3/min  • 10~6 kg/mg • 60 min/hr
     = 0.013 kg/hr.

   • Average for Stack 1 and Stack  2 = 0.5(0.0026 + 0.013)
     = 7.9 x 10~3 kg/hr.
   • Overall pile emission rate = 7.9 x 10~3 kg/hr
     • 520 m2/0.041 m2 = 100 kg/hr where 520 m2 is area through
     which fumes are emitted and 0.041 m2 is the stack area.
   • Emission factor is thus:  100 kg/hr T 9.6 x 105 m3
     = 1.0 x I0~^ kg/hr per m3 burning refuse.

Mercury

Federal Register Method 102 is used to estimate mercury emis-
sions (24).  This method involves absorption of mercury in
iodine monochloride solution and analysis using spectrophotometry.
Although a sampling time of 2 hr is recommended, the run lasted
only 3 min as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) present in the gases
liberated iodine which condensed on the walls and plugged the
tubing.   Detailed information is not available regarding the
interferences of sulfide and organic compounds.  There inter-
ferences should be quantified before using this method for any
future mercury sampling from coal refuse fires.
                               32

-------
POM and Trace Elements

Particulate samples collected  on high-volume sampler  filters
were analyzed for POM, arsenic,  boron, and trace elements.   The
results of  these analyses are  presented in Tables A-5 through
A-7.  The POM values quoted  in Table A-5 do not include  those
emitted in  the gaseous form.
      TABLE A-5.
ANALYSIS  OF  POLYCYCLIC ORGANIC MATERIAL
EMISSIONS FROM COAL REFUSE FIRES

POM
Dibenzothiophene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Methylanthracenes/phenanthrenes
9-Methylanthracene
F luor anthene
Pyrene
Benzo (c) phenanthrene
Chrysene/benz (a) anthracene
Dimethylbenzanthracenes (isomers)
Benzo (k or b) f luor anthene
Benzo (a)pyrene/benzo(e)pyrene/
perylene
3-Methylcholanthrene
Dibenz(a,h or a ,c) anthracene
Indeno(l, 2, 3-c,d)pyrene
7H-Dibenzo (c,g) carbazole
Dibenzo(a,h or a,i)pyrene
Total
Fraction present, %
Range Average
0.4
13 to 26 20
17 to 42 30
0.8
5
4.6
0.8
15 to 32 24
3 to 20 12
0.7 to 4 2.4
0.4 to 2.6 1.5
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
100
        Average concentration
          of POM in stack gas

        Average emission rate
          through stack

        Overall pile emission rate

        POM emission factor
                 50 vg/m3
                 1.4 x 10~6 kg/hr

                 0.02 kg/hr

                    1.9 x 10-8 kg/hr

                 m3 burning refuse pile
     Note.—Blanks indicate no range  reported.
                                 33

-------
   TABLE A-6.  ANALYSIS OF ARSENIC AND BORON
               EMISSIONS FROM COAL REFUSE FIRES
                   (percent)

Element
Arsenic
Boron
Sample 1

0.2
Sample 2
0.0003
0.1

       Note.—Blank indicates not detected.
TABLE A-7.
ANALYSIS OF TRACE ELEMENT EMISSIONS
FROM COAL REFUSE FIRES
        (percent)

Element
Silicon
Iron
Manganese
Magnesium
Aluminum
Calcium
Copper
Sodium
Titanium
Lead
Tin
Chromium
Vanadium
Sample 1
Major (20) a
0.3
<0.004
0.03
0.3
0.1
0.001
0.004
0.008




Sample 2
Major (30)3
1.0
<0.005
0.01
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.01
0.01
<0.005
0.005
0.01
<0.005

   Note.—Blanks indicate not detected.
    Figure in parentheses is a semi-
    quantitative estimate.
                        34

-------
                          APPENDIX B

 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS OF SOURCE SEVERITY AND AFFECTED POPULATION


SOURCE SEVERITY

The source severity, S, is defined as the ratio of the time-
averaged maximum ground level concentration of an emission
specie to the hazard factor.  The hazard factor is equal to the
primary ambient air quality standard for criteria3 pollutants
or to a reduced TLV  (i.e., TLV x 8/24 x 1/100) for noncriteria
pollutants.  The time-averaged maximum ground  level concentration
is related to the mass emission rate, Q (in g/s), of a pollutant
and to the height of emission release, and it is determined over
a specific time period.  For open sources, the effective height
of emissions is related to the representative distance, D, from
the source to the plant boundary.  For a representative burning
coal refuse pile, D was taken as 1,600 m.

Using the above approach, the equations shown in Table B-l were
used to determine the severity of pollutants from a representa-
tive burning coal refuse pile (11).

         TABLE B-l.  POLLUTANT SEVERITY EQUATIONS (11)
Pollutant
Particulate

Sulfur oxides

Nitrogen oxides

Hydrocarbon

Carbon monoxide

Noncriteria pollutant

Severity equation
S

S

S

S

S

S

= 4,020 Q
Dl.81
_ 2,170 Q
D1.81
_ 22,200 Q
D1-90
. 9,340 Q
D1-81
44J3 Q
D1.81
,. 316 Q

TLV*D* • ** *
(B-l)


-------
The method used to determine the values of S for criteria and
noncriteria emissions from a representative pile is illustrated
in the following sample calculations for a 1.7 x 106 m3 pile,
with 21% of the pile burning:
For NO :
      X
Emission rate = 1.0 x 10-1* kg/hr per m3 burning refuse  (Table 5)

/. Q = 1'° X 1°"tt kg/hr  • 1.7 x 106 m3  • 0.21 • 1,000 g/kg
              m3
   v 3,600 s/hr =9.9 g/s


   „ _ 22,200 Q _ 22,200 • 9.9   _ 1Q
   o — 	 — 	;	!	 — U.J.O
         D1-90      l
For HoS:
Emission rate = 4.5 x 10"^ kg/hr per m3 burning refuse  (Table 5)
/e Q = 4.5 x 10- * kg/hr  . ^ x [Q6 m3 . Q>21 . lfQQQ g/kg
             m3

   * 3,600 s/hr = 45 g/s

The threshold limit value for H2S is 15 mg/m3  (25) .


   s -        316 • 45        _ 1>5
       IfSOO1'811* • 15 x 10-3

AFFECTED POPULATION

The affected population designates the average number of persons
living in the area beyond the plant boundary and exposed to high
concentrations of a given emission from a source.  The affected
population thus resides in an annular area whose inside diameter
is the representative distance to the plant boundary  (taken as
1.6 km in this study) and whose outside diameter is the distance
corresponding to a source severity of 0.1 (i.e., DS = O.l)«
DC - n i ^-s calculated by use of a rearranged severity equation.
 o *"~ U • J,
(25) TLVs® Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and
     Physical Agents in the Workroom Environment with Intended
     Changes for 1975.  American Conference of Governmental  In-
     dustrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1975.  97 pp.

                               36

-------
For H2S:

                 D
                  S = 0.1 ~
                             \          /
                                              /I . 814
Hence, the affected area = -rr(72 - 1.62) = 147 km2.  The affected
population is equal to the product of the affected area and the
representative population density, i.e., affected population =
147 km2 • 46 persons/km2 = 6,700 persons.

The population affected by other pollutants above a severity of
0.1 is calculated in a similar manner.  For NOX, hydrocarbons
and polyc'yclic organic materials the affected populations to a
severity of 0.1 are 1,000, 180 and 3,900, respectively.
                                37

-------
                            GLOSSARY
affected population:  Number of persons exposed to concentrations
     of airborne materials which result in a source severity
     greater than 0.1.

carcinogen:  Chemical substance which causes cancer in animals
     or man.

criteria pollutants:  Emission species for which ambient air
     quality standards have been established; these include par-
     ticulates, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide,
     and nonmethane hydrocarbons.

emission burden:  Ratio of the total annual emissions of a pol-
     lutant from a specific source to the total annual state or
     national emissions of that pollutant.

emission factor:  Weight of material emitted to the atmosphere
     per hour from a unit volume or unit weight of burning
     material.

hazard factor:  Value equal to the primary ambient air quality
     standard for criteria pollutants or to a reduced TLV (i.e.,
     TLV • 8/24 • 1/100) for noncriteria pollutants.

noncriteria pollutants:  Emission species for which no ambient
     air quality standards have been established.

representative source:  Source whose operational characteristics
     and emission parameters are representative of burning coal
     piles, impoundments, abandoned mines, or outcrops.

source severity:  Ratio of the maximum mean ground level concen-
     tration of an emission species to the hazard factor for the
     species.

threshold limit value:  Concentration of an airborne contaminant
     to which workers may be exposed repeatedly, day after day,
     without adverse effect.
                               38

-------
                              TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                        (Please read Instructions on the revene before completing)
. REPORT NO.
  EPA-600/2-78-004v
                                                   3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITtt AND SUBTITLE

  SOURCE  ASSESSMENT:  COAL REFUSE PILES,
  ABANDONED MINES  AND  OUTCROPS, State of  the
  Art
                                                   6. REPORT DATE
                                                    July 1978 issuing date
                                                   8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 . AUTHOR(S)
  P. K.  Chalekode and T.  R.  Blackwood
                                                   8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
                                                    MRC-DA-707
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  Monsanto Research Corporation
  1515 Nicholas Road
  Dayton,  Ohio  45407
                                                   10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

                                                    1BB610
                                                   ILCdNTRACt/GRANTNO.'

                                                    68-02-1874
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
 Industrial Environmental Research Lab. - Cinn,OH
 Office of Research and Development
 U,S. Environmental Protection Agency
 Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
                                                   13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                    Task Final,  8/75 to 7/77
                                                   14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                      EPA/600/12
 IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
  IERL-Ci project leader for this  report is John F. Martin,  513/684-4417
 16. ABSTRACT
  This  report describes  a study of atmospheric  emissions from coal  refuse
  piles,  abandoned mines, and outcrops.  The  potential environmental
  effect  of the source was evaluated using  source severity  (defined as the
  ratio of the maximum time-averaged ground level concentration of  an emis-
  sion  to a hazard factor).   A representative burning coal pile/impoundment
  is defined as one with a volume of 1.7 x  106  m3 and an average  in-situ dry
  density of 1.5 metric  tons/m3, with about 21% of it burning.  Burning of
  coal  piles, impoundments,  abandoned mines,  and outcrops results in emis-
  sions of various pyrolysis and combustion products such as particulates,
  nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide,
  ammonia, polycyclic organic materials  (POM),  and hydrocarbons,  including
  benzene, toluene, and  xylene.  Trace elements such as arsenic,  boron,
  and mercury are also emitted.  Emissions  from fires in coal refuse piles,
  abandoned mines, and outcrops contribute  0.001% of the particulates,
  0.16% of the nitrogen  oxides, 0.14% of the  sulfur oxides, 0.14% of the
  hydrocarbons, and 4.9% of the carbon monoxide emitted nationally.
17.
                            KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
  Air  Pollution
  Hydrocarbons
  Carbon Monoxide
  Nitrogen Oxides
                       Sulfur Oxides
                                        b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Air Pollution Control
Stationary  Sources
Source Severity
Coal Refuse Piles
Abandoned Mines
Particulates
                                                                 COSATI Field/Group
                                                                   68D
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT


  RELEASE  TO PUBLIC
                                        19. SECURITY CLASS (Thtl Report)

                                          Unclassified	
                       21. NO. OF PAGES
                           51
                                        20. SECURITY CLASS (This page I
                                         Unclassified
                       22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (t-731
                                      39
                                                       *USGPO: 1978-657-060/1471 Region 5-11

-------