United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA 600 2-78 004x
SeU'mb^r 1 978
Research and Development
Source  Assessment
Open Mining of  Coal
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-600/2-78-004X
                                                      September  1978
                     SOURCE ASSESSMENT:
                     OPEN MINING OF COAL
                      State of the Art
                              by

S. J. Rusek, S. R. Archer, R. A. Wachter, 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.
                               11

-------
                            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 im-
proved methodologies that will meet these needs both efficiently
and economically.

This report contains an assessment of air emissions from the open
mining of coal.  This study was conducted to provide a better
understanding of the distribution and characteristics of emis-
ions from this industry.  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
                                m

-------
                             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 legisla-
tion.  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 mater-
ials, and open sources.  Dr. Dale A. Denny of the Industrial Pro-
cesses Division at Research Triangle Park serves as EPA Project
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 spe-
cific 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 for
specific industries.


                               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.
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
the open mining of coal.  This study was completed for the Ex-
traction Technology Branch of the Resource Extraction and Han-
dling Division, lERL-Cincinnati.  Mr. John F. Martin served as
EPA Project Leader.
                                v

-------
                            ABSTRACT


This  report describes  a  study  of  air  pollutants  emitted  from the
open  mining of  coal.   The  potential environmental  effect of  the
source was evaluated using source severity values  (source sever-
ity is the ratio of the  maximum time-averaged  ground  level con-
centration of an emission  to its  hazard factor).

Open  coal mining is a  major method of mining coal  in  the United
States.  Approximately one-half of the 546 x 106 metric  tons of
the raw coal produced  in 1972  was mined by open mining methods
 (strip and auger).  The  representative source  was  defined in this
study as a mine producing  108  x 103 metric tons of raw coal  per
year  and having an area  of 2.0 km2.   The representative  mine has
a life expectancy of 20  years, a  stripping ratio of 13.6 m
overburden/m coal, an  annual land disturbance  of 98.5 x  103  m2,
and is located  in the  Midwest  (Illinois or Indiana).

Respirable dusts, the  only hazardous  emissions, are generated
from  five unit  operations  and  from wind erosion; the contribu-
tions from these sources to the total dust loading are:   coal
transport and unloading, 40%;  blasting, 30%; coal  loading, 14%;
drilling, 12%;  coal augering,  1%;  and wind erosion, 3%.   The
respirable particulate  (<7ym)  for the open coal  mining  industry
in 1972 amounted to 3,600  metric  tons.  The emission factors for
the unit operations indicate that 13  g of respirable dust are
emitted per metric ton of  coal mined.  The total dust severity
from the representative  source is 1.0 x 10~3,  the  coal dust
severity is 0.036, and the  overburden dust severity is 0.014.

Control technology in open  coal mining has been implemented  for
drill rigs, haul roads,  and coal  refuse piles.  Cyclones and
water sprays are used on the larger drills to  control particu-
lates.  Most states enforce water spraying of  haul roads to  re-
duce dust and improve  safety.  Control of gaseous  pollutants from
stagnant coal piles is achieved by shielding the piles from  wind,
applying cooling process,  or removing the carbonaceous material.
The open coal mining industry  is  experiencing  a high growth  rate
(3.5% per year), and the growth factor for the industry  (1978
emissions/1972  emissions)  is 1.23.

This report was submitted  in partial  fulfillment of Contract No.
63-02-1874 by Monsanto Research Corporation under  the sponsorship
of the U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency.   The  study  covers
the period September 1974  to July 1975, and the work was com-
pleted in September 1977.

                               vi

-------
                            CONTENTS


Foreword	iii
Preface	iv
Abstract	vi
Figures	viii
Tables	   ix
Abbreviations and Symbols  	    x
Conversion Factors and Metric Prefixes 	  xii

    1.  Introduction 	  1
    2.  Summary	2
    3.  Source Description 	  5
            Process description  	  5
            Factors influencing emissions  	 13
            Geographical distribution  .   	 17
    4.  Emissions	22
            Selected pollutants	22
            Definition of representative source  	 30
            Source severity  	 33
    4.  Control Technology 	 35
            State of the art	35
            Future considerations  	 36
    5.  Growth and Nature of the Industry	38
            Present and emerging technology  	 38
            Industry production trends 	 46

References	48
Appendices

    A.  Strip and auger mining techniques from the standpoint
          of regional variability  	 54
    B.  Respirable dust emission factor derivation and
          supportive data	60
    C.  Input data, derivations, and sample calculations
          pertaining to mass emission rates and represen-
          tative source definition 	 69

Glossary	73
                               vii

-------
                             FIGURES
Number                                                      Page
  1       Open coal mining cycle of events and associated
            unit operations	   7
  2       Textural classification chart  (U.S. Department
            of Agriculture) and comparison of particle
            size scales	11
  3       Typical Western U.S. coal-bearing strata  ....  12
  4       Coal production by P-E region and population
            density	19
  5       Particle size distribution of overburden dust .  .  26
  6       Surface coal mine size frequency distribution .  .  32
  7       Surface coal mine production by mine size ....  32
  8       Front-end loader  	  41
  9       Scraper (self-propelled unit)  	  42
 10       Straight bulldozer  	  43
 11       Rotary drill with dust control equipment  ....  45
                               vni

-------
                             TABLES
Number
  1       Unit Operations Classification for Open Coal
            Mining in the United States 	   6
  2       Analyses of Selected Coals of Various Ranks ...   8
  3       Concentrations of Trace Elements in Coal  ....   9
  4       State Production of Surface-Mined Coal by Pro-
            duction Ranking for 1972	18
  5       Overburden Dust Composition  from an Illinois
            Strip Mine	23
  6       Emission Factors for Open Coal Mining	27
  7       Total Emission Rates of Respirable Dusts from
            Open Coal Mining by State  and Nationwide  ...  29
  8       Ratio of Total Emission Rates of Respirable
            Dusts from Open Coal Mining to Total Particu-
            lates, State and Nationwide 	  29
  9       Contribution to Respirable Mining Dust Emissions
            from Each Source Within the Mine	30
 10       Growth of Surface Mining	38
                               IX

-------
                    ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

A         —total area of the mine
An        —annual land disturbance
A.        —number of acres of surface coal land disturbed
            per state per year
BCD       —background
C         —constant
D         —representative distance from source
Dip        —total dosage
e.        —emission factor for wind erosion in the jth state
E^        —emission factor for the ith unit operation
F         —primary standard for particulates
K         —constant
P         —average annual coal production
P.        —state coal production for 1972
          —production rate for representative mine
Q         —emission rate
Qc        —emission rate of coal dust from representative source
QjK       —amount of respirable dust emitted from surface coal
            mines of the jth coal state,
            for K = 1, Qji = total respirable dust rate
            for K = 2, Qj2 = respirable coal dust rate
            for K = 3, Qj 3 = respirable overburden dust rate
Qo        —emission rate of silica-containing overburden dust
Qp        —emission rate of particulate from representative
            source
QT        —total release
Sc        —coal dust severity from open coal mining
So        —silica-containing overburden dust severity from open
            coal mining
Sp        —total respirable particulate (<7 ym) severity from
            open coal mining

-------
Sj^        — stripping ratio

T         — life expectancy

u         — wind speed

XKJ       — composition of respirable dust in the jth coal  state,
            weight fraction coal or overburden
            for K = 1, KIJ = 1.0
            for K = 2, X2j = 0.927
            for K = 3, X3j = 0.073
X         — concentration contribution of a unit operation

     „    --time-averaged maximum ground level concentration
     p        _    . •  i .
     *      of particulates
          --lateral dispersion coefficient
            O  = Ax°'90^ where A is a stability constant
az        — vertical dispersion coefficient
            CTZ = AxB
            constants
            CTZ = AxB + C where A, B, and C are stability
T.E.       — sum of the appropriate emission factors per state
                               XI

-------
             CONVERSION FACTORS AND METRIC PREFIXES

                       CONVERSION FACTORS
To convert from

Centimeter (cm)
Joule (J)
Kilogram (kg)

Kilogram (kg)
Kilometer2 (km2)
Meter (m)
Meter2 (m2)
Meter3 (m3)
Metric ton
Radian (rad)
                    To
        Foot
        British thermal unit
        Pound-mass
          (avoirdupois)
        Ton (short, 2,000 Ib mass)
        Mile2
        Foot
        Foot2
        Foot3
        Pound-mass
        Degree (°)
                             Multiply by

                             3.281 x 10~2
                             9.479 x 10-1*

                                    2.204
                             1.102 x 10~3
                             3.860 x 10-1
                                    3.281
                              1.076 x 101
                              3.531 x 101
                              2.205 x 103
                              5.730 x 101
   Prefix

   Mega
   Kilo
   Centi
   Milli
   Micro
Symbol

  M
  k
  c
  m
  y
  METRIC PREFIXES

Multiplication
	factor	

     106
     103
     ID'2
     10~3
     10~6
      Example
1 MJ
1 kg
1 cm
1 mm
= 1 x
      106 joules
= 1 x 103 grams
= 1 x 10~2 meter
= 1 x 10~3 meter
= 1 x 10~6 meter
 Standard for Metric Practice.  ANSI/ASTM Designation E 380-76e,
 IEEE Std 268-1976, American Society for Testing and Materials,
 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, February 1976.  37 pp.
                               Xll

-------
                            SECTION 1

                          INTRODUCTION


Open coal raining encompasses strip and auger mining of coal that
lies near the earth's surface, and it is used extensively in all
of the coal bearing areas of the United States.  This industry
constitutes a source of air pollution in the form of respirable
dusts.  The objective of this work was to assess the environ-
mental impact of open coal mining and to produce a reliable and
timely Source Assessment Document for use by EPA in deciding on
the need for emissions reduction.

This document summarizes information relating to the emissions
from open coal mining.  The areas studied were:  1) process and
subprocess unit operations; 2) source sites; 3) mass emissions,
state and nationwide; 4) effects on air quality; 5) state of the
art and future considerations in pollution control technology;
and 6) projected growth and anticipated technological develop-
ments of the industry.

Emission factors were developed for seven mining unit operations
and for the wind erosion emission sources that are characteristic
of the industry.  These emission factors were used to compile the
estimated effects on air quality.

-------
                           SECTION 2

                             SUMMARY


Open coal mining is a major method of mining coal in the United
States.  Approximately one-half of the 546 x 106 metric tons
of the raw coal produced in 1972 was mined by open mining methods
(strip and auger).   Most of the open-mined coal was produced in
the Eastern and Interior provinces (86%)  with the balance pro-
duced in the Rocky Mountain province (14%).   Nearly 50% of the
coal produced in 1972 was obtained by open mining in three
states:  Kentucky,  Ohio, and Illinois.  A total of 16 states out
of a possible 23 were considered in this study.  The seven
excluded states accounted for less than 1% each of the total
annual production.

Open coal mining is characterized by a series of seven unit
operations or subprocesses involving excavation of overburden,
removal of the coal, and coal transport.  Respirable dusts, the
only hazardous emissions, are generated in five of the subpro-
cesses.  The unit operations and their contributions to the total
dust loading are:  coal transport unloading, 40%; blasting, 30%;
coal loading, 14%;  drilling, 12%; and coal augering, 1%.  These
unit operations contribute nearly 97% of the respirable dust
emissions.  The balance is attributed to wind erosion  (3%).

The respirable particulate  (less than 7 ym)  emissions for the
open coal mining industry in 1972 amounted to 3,600 metric tons.
All emission rates and contributions are based on assumed
emission factors.  The emission factors for the unit operations
indicate that 13 g of respirable dust are emitted per metric ton
of coal mined.  An average of 0.019 g of respirable dust is
emitted via wind erosion of the mined surface per second per
square kilometer of mined land.  Estimates of the error in the
wind erosion factor were not possible.

The respirable dust from open coal mining is composed of 93%
coal and 7% overburden.  The representative free silica content
of the overburden is 20%, while coal averages 3%  (all values
being percent by weight).
 1 metric ton equals 106 grams; conversion factors and metric
 system prefixes are presented in the prefatory material.

-------
Emissions from the open coal mining industry constitute 0.019%
of national emissions of particulates.  Four of the 16 states
have emissions of respirable dust exceeding 0.1% of the state
total particulates.  These states are Wyoming  (0.17%), Kentucky
(0.15%), West Virginia  (0.13%), and North Dakota (0.11%).

A severity factor, S, was defined to indicate the hazard poten-
tial of the emission source:


                         = Xmax
                            F

where Xmax ^s the time-averaged maximum ground level concentra-
tion of each pollutant emitted from a representative open coal
mining source, and F  (the primary ambient air quality standard
for criteria pollutants) is a "corrected" threshold limit value
for non-criteria pollutants.

The representative source was defined as a mine producing
108 x 103 metric tons of raw coal per year and having an area
of 2.0 km2.  The representative mine has a life expectancy of
20 years, a stripping ratio of 13.6 m overburden/m coal, an
annual land disturbance of 98.5 x 103 m2, and is located in the
Midwest (Illinois or Indiana).  The total dust severity is
1.0 x 10~3, the coal dust severity is 0.036, and the overburden
dust severity is 0.014.

Control technology in open coal mining has been implemented for
drill rigs, haul roads, and coal refuse piles.  Cyclones and
water sprays are used on the larger drills to control particu-
lates.  Most states enforce water spraying of haul roads to
reduce dust and improve safety.  Control of gaseous pollutants
(carbon monoxide, CO; hydrocarbons; and nitrogen oxides, NOx)
from stagnant coal piles is achieved by shielding the piles
from the wind, applying cooling processes, or removing the
carbonaceous material.  Although it is not practiced directly
as a method for air pollution control, the judicious placement
of explosive delays in blasting rounds can reduce dust by
efficient fragmentation  (small pieces of coal).  No control
technology is applied to other facets of the industry.

The application of chemical or water sprays during unit opera-
tions such as coal transport/unloading, loading, and augering
is one viable alternative for suppression of dust during open
coal mining.  Windbreaks can effectively reduce visible dust
emissions from coal and overburden wind erosion.  The control
problem is complicated by the lack of available technology for
the reduction of respirable dust (less than 7 pm).

The open coal mining industry is experiencing a high growth rate
(3.5% per year) primarily because of rapid development of rich

-------
coal lands west of the Mississippi River.  The open production of
raw coal will increase to 312 x 106 metric tons in 1978.  Dust
emissions are expected to increase proportionately because there
are no signs of control technology, if available, being applied
to this industry.  The growth factor for the industry (1978 emis-
sions/1972 emissions)  is 1.23.

-------
                            SECTION 3

                       SOURCE DESCRIPTION
PROCESS DESCRIPTION

Emission Sources

Open mining of coal involves withdrawing and winning coal from
surface or near subsurface coal deposits.  In 1972, 263 x 106
metric tons, or nearly  50% of the raw coal produced in the
United States, was obtained by open mining (1).  Two methods are
used in open coal mining:  the first and most common is strip
mining; the second is auger mining.  Strip mining, also known
as opencast mining, accounted for 95% of the surface-mined raw
coal produced in 1972  (1).  Auger mining is more correctly
termed a secondary or auxiliary method because it is utilized
to extract coal where stripping operations become uneconomical.
This method accounted for the remaining 5% of the surface-mined
raw coal produced in 1972  (1) .

Strip mining is used in all 23 of the open coal mining states; '
auger mining is utilized  in 8.  In 1972, there were 2,309 strip
mining operations and 574 auger mining operations in the
United States  (1).  The average capacity of strip mines is
107.6 x 103 metric tons (1972)  (1).  Although less than 10% of
the strip mines had capacities over 181 x 103 metric tons, they
accounted for 70% of the  1972 strip production.  The average
capacity of the auger mines is 24,600 metric tons  (1972)  (1).
The 90% of the auger operations with capacities less than
50 x 103 metric tons accounted for 54% of the 1972 auger coal
production.

The United States Bureau of Mines has defined the terms "strip
mining" (open-cast mining) and "auger mining" (2).  These defini-
tions are presented in Appendix A.  Auger mining is a straight-
forward coal mining method, and techniques do not vary across
the United States.   Conversely, strip mining techniques vary
(1)  1974 Keystone Coal Industry Manual.  G. F. Nielsen, ed.
    McGraw-Hill,  Inc., New York, New York, 1974.  859 pp.

(2)  A Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms.
    P. W.  Thrush, ed.  U.S. Department of the Interior, Washing-
    ton, D.C.,  1968.  1269 pp.

-------
widely depending on  the characteristics of  the coal seam  deposits.
Appendix A  summarizes the various  strip mining techniques that are
practiced,  and describes the current equipment utilized in both
strip and auger coal mining.
The differences in strip mining techniques  are defined by the
types and  combinations of equipment used  in the mining operation.
The relationship between emissions and the  different mining
methods must be reconciled.   Although entire mining operations
may vary from one  region of  the country to  another, they  share
common unit operations.  Unit operations  are defined as distinct
and self-contained processes which are used to perform the exca-
vation and/or transport functions  involved  in coal mining.   Unit
operations  in the  mining sense are construed as subprocesses in-
volving one or more items of equipment.   Table 1  classifies unit
operations  into the basic functions, and  lists the equipment
normally associated with each.  Figure 1  depicts  the unit opera-
tions of open coal mining as they  relate  to the overall mining
process.
            TABLE 1.  UNIT OPERATIONS CLASSIFICATION FOR
                       OPEN COAL MINING IN THE UNITED STATES
   Unit operation
                     Materials handled
                                     Class
                                               Function
                                                             Prime movers
 Drilling
 Overburden stripping
 Coal loading

 Coal transport/unloading
 Blasting
 Coal augering
 Reclamation
Coal, overburden  Primary operation
Overburden      Primary operation
Coal

Coal
Coal, overburden
Coal
Overburden
Primary operation

Primary operation
Primary operation
Secondary operation
Secondary operation
             Excavation
             Excavation
Excavation

Transport
Excavation
Excavation
Excavation and
 transport
Rotary drill
   •i •  a     ^  -i a
Dragline, power shovel,
 bucket wheel excavator,
 tractor-scraper, bulldozer.
 loading shovel, front-end
 loader
Bulldozer, loading shovel,
 front-end loader , ^ power
 broom
Haul truck
Explosives
Auger
                3
Dragline, tractor-scraper,
 bulldozer,3 front-end
 loader, grader
  Denotes major equipment type in specific unit operation.
Emissions  of dust  occur during each of the  unit operations.   The
emission sources are comprised of  the five  primary and two secon-
dary unit  operations shown  in Table 1, and  wind erosion.
Source Composition
Coal and overburden,  the emissions  source,  are exceedingly com-
plex,  widely variable entities.

-------
                           CONTINUE DRILLING UNTIL GEOLOGIC CHARACTER AND
                             ECONOMIC EXTENT OF RESERVES ARE KNOWN




1.
CONCURRENT EXPLORATORY
DRILLING
PRIME MOVER
ROTARY DRILL
•



UNFAVORABLE
                  2.

             OVERBURDEN STRIPPING

            PRIME MOVERS
            DRAGLINE
            POWER SHOVEL
            BUCKET WHEEL EXCAVATOR
            TRACTOR-SCRAPER
            BULLDOZER
            LOADING SHOVEL
            FRONT-END LOADER
                   OPTIONAL SUBOPERATIONS
              NOTE: ASSOCIATED UNIT OPERATIONS AND ADDITIONAL
                 INFORMATION ARE SHOWN IN TABLE 1.
                                           C END CYCLED)
            Figure 1.   Open coal mining cycle  of events
                         and associated  unit operations.

There are four major  ranks of  coal:   1)  lignite, 2) bituminous,
3)  subbituminous, and 4)  anthracite  (3).  In  1972, anthracite
accounted for less than 1.2% of the coal used in the United
States (2, 4)  and only 2% of the surface-mined coal of  all
ranks (1).   Therefore, anthracite will not be considered in this
report.
(3) A.S.T.M.  Standards  on Coal  and Coke.   ASTM Designation
    D  388-38,  American  Society  for Testing and Materials,
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,  September 1948.   p. 80.

(4) Minerals  Yearbook,  1972; Volume I:  Metals,  Minerals,  and
    Fuels.  U.S.  Department of  the Interior, Washington,  D.C.,
    1974.   1370  pp.

-------
The chemical and physical properties  of coal vary widely between
deposits,  seams in the  deposits, and  within sections  of the seam
strata.   Typical chemical analyses of certain U.S.  coals of var-
ious  ranks are listed in Table 2.  The major elements and compo-
nents in coals are carbon, hydrogen,  oxygen, sulfur,  nitrogen,
and ash.  The variability in ash content of coals is  important
from  a respirable dust  viewpoint.  The free silica  content in
coal  is directly related to ash content (5).  From  Table 2 it can
be seen that the ash content varies from 3.0% to 11.2%.  In addi-
tion  to the major elements, there exist a myriad of trace ele-
ments.   Brown, Jacobs,  and Taylor have studied trace  elements in
coal  and their data are presented in  Table 3 (6).   The crustal
abundance of selected elements, which refers to the concentration
of trace elements in the overburden,  is also included (7).


   TABLE 2.   ANALYSES OF  SELECTED COALS OF  VARIOUS RANKS  (5)3
                       ("As  received" basis)
Proximate analysis, %
b
Rank
Bituminous :
Low-volatile
Medium-volatile
High-volatile A
High-volatile A
High-volatile B
High-volatile B
High-volatile C
High-volatile C
State

West Virginia
West Virginia
Pennsylvania
Kentucky
Ohio
Kentucky
Illinois
Indiana
Seam

Pocahontas No. 3
Sewell
Pittsburgh
Elkhorn
Middle Kittanning
No. 6
No. 2
No. 6
Mois-
ture

3.5
3.1
2.6
3.1
8.2
7.2
12.1
12.4
Volatile
matter

18.2
25.0
30.0
35.0
36.1
39.8
40.2
36.6
Fixed
carbon

74.4
66.8
58.3
58.9
48.7
48.8
39.1
42.3
Ash

3.9
5.1
9.1
3.0
7.0
4.2
8.6
8.7
Car-
bon

84.0

76.6
79.2
68.4
71.5
62.8
63.4
Ultimate analysis.
Hydro-
gen

4.8

5.2
4.7
5.6
5.8
5.9
5.7
Oxy-
gen

5.6

6.2
10.0
16.4
14.3
17.4
18.6
Sul-
fur

0.6
1.3
1.3
0.6
1.2
2.6
4.3
2.3
%
Nitro-
gen

1.1

1.6
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.0
1.3
Heating
value ,
MJ/kg

33.8
33.2
31.6
33.2
28.3
30.1
26.7
26.5
Subbituminous:
 Subbituminous A or high-
 volatile bituminous C   Wyoming    Uncorrelated    16.5   34.2   38.1  11.2
 Subbituminous B      Wyoming    Monarch      23.2   33.3   39.7  3.8
 Subbituminous C      Wyoming    Uncorrelated    24.6   27.7   39.9  7.8
54.6
    6.4 33.8
2.1
0.4
1.1
              1.0
22.6
21.9
20.0
Lignite :
Lignite
North Dakota Beulah 34.8 28.2 30.8 6.2 42.4 6.7 43.3 0.7 1.7 16.8

 Blanks indicate data not reported in reference.

 According to A.S.T.M. method of classification.
(5)  Chemical Engineers' Handbook,  Fourth Edition.   J.  H. Perry,
    ed.  McGraw-Hill Book Company,  New York, New York, 1963.
    1650 pp.

(6)  Brown, R., M.  L. Jacobs, and H.  E. Taylor.   A Survey of the
    Most Recent  Applications of  Spark Source Mass Spectrometry.
    American Laboratory, 4(11):29-40, 1972.

(7)  Abernethy, R.  F.,  M. J. Peterson, and F. H.  Gibson.  Spectro-
    chemical Analyses  of Coal Ash for Trace Elements.   Bureau  of
    Mines RI-7281,  U.S. Department of the Interior,  Washington,
    D.C., July 1969.  30 pp.

-------
TABLE 3.  CONCENTRATIONS OF TRACE ELEMENTS IN COAL

Element
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Bismuth
Bromine
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Cerium
Chlorine
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Fluorine
Gallium
Germanium
Iodine
Iron
Lanthanum
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Neodymium
Nickel
Niobium
Phosphorus
Potassium
Praseodymium
Rubidium
Samarium
Scandium
Selenium
Silicon
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfur
Tellurium
Titanium
Uranium
Vanadium
Yttrium
Zinc
Zirconium
Crustal
ppm in abundance (7) ,
Coal (6) ppm
Major
0.30
69
0.2
0.30
42
0.19
4,000
13
130
4.5
2.3
25
5.7
8.7
0.33
0.20
1,600
5-8
3.9
4,500
30
3.0
8.3
2.7
20
380
410
4.7
3.0
1.7
1.3
0.32
Major
0.22
5,000
100
6,100
0.25
620
1.9
12
7.7
10
76
Major
1.8
425
0.2

10.0

60

100
25
55
15
1.5

30
13
950
1.5
28
75
20

90

22

Major
375




135
33
70
165

        Blanks indicate data not reported in
        reference.        A

-------
The overburden is composed primarily of soil and minerals  (rock).
Sand, silt, and clay are the basic constituents of soil.   Soil
categories and the defined particle size ranges of soils are
shown in Figure 2 (8).  This discussion will be limited solely
to hazardous components of rock and soil, namely siliceous
materials.

Both soil and rock contain amounts of free silica, which occurs
in soils mainly in the form of quartz, Si02  (9, 10).  Quartz
silica is found in alluvial soils, various types of sedimentary
rocks, and residual crystalline rocks.  Free silica occurs as
opal  (including opal pseudomorphic afterplant cells -- phytol-
iths), chalcedonite, agate, flint, chert, and cristobalite, which
is predominant in the lavas of the San Juan coal district  of
Colorado  (2) .  It is also found in the form of amorphous sheets
and as aggregates with amorphous iron and aluminum oxide gel.

Igneous rock, shale, or sandstone is frequently encountered in
surface coal mining.  A typical representation of coal-bearing
strata of the Western United States is shown in Figure 3  (11).
Igneous rock contains an average of 12% free silica as quartz
(12), shale averages 22.3%, and sandstone averages 66.8%.

There is no distinct separation of coal and overburden in  surface
coal mining.  Figure 3 shows that coal seams are stratified.
Thus, mining produces a composite of varying amounts of coal and
overburden.
  (8) Brunner, D. R., and D. J. Keller.  Sanitary Landfill Design
     and Operation.  Report SW-65ts, U.S. Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency, Washington, B.C., 1972.  p. 16.

  (9) Jahr, D. J.  Proposed Threshold Limit Values for Dusts Con-
     taining Free Silica.  Staub Reinhaltung der Luft  (in
     English), 33:86-90, February 1973.
 (10) Chemistry of the Soil, Second Edition.  F. E. Bear, ed.
     Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York, New York, 1965.
     502 pp.

 (11) Shoemaker, J. W., E. C. Beaumont, and F. E. Kottlewski.
     Strippable Low-Sulfur Coal Resources of the San Juan Basin
     in New Mexico and Colorado.  Memoir No. 25, New Mexico
     Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Socorro, New Mexico,
     1971.

 (12) Foth, H. D., and L. M. Turk.  Fundamentals of Soil Science/
     Fifth Edition.  John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York,
     1972.  442 pp.

                                10

-------
                                  100
        100    90    80    70    60    50    40     30    20    10
SIEVE OPENINGS IN INCHES
      3 2 l'/2 i 3/<  'A 3/e
  SAND - 2.0 TO 0.05mm DIAMETER
  SILT - 0.05 TO 0.002mm DIAMETER
  CLAY - SMALLER THAN 0.002mm DIAMETER


COMPARISON OF PARTICLE SIZE SCALES

         U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS
   4     10   20   40 60     200
n
USDA

uses
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
GRAVEL

GRAVEL
Coarse | Fine Coa
Hill I i I i linn i i
1 II 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
SANO
Veryl 1
coarsep0"6! Med
Fine


__ SIIT CLAY
Tory" 3ILI l-LAT
fine

SAND
rse| Medium | Fine
1 1 III

SILT OR CLAY
II III II
    100  50
                  10
                                                 0.05   0.02 0.01  0.005  0.002  0.001
                                  0.5
                                              0.074
                               GRAIN SIZE, mm
   Figure  2.   Textural  classification chart  (U.S.  Department
                 of Agriculture)  and comparison of particle
                 size  scales  (8).
                                      11

-------
Meters
  0



 3.0-



 6.1-



 9.2-



12.2-



15.2-



18.3-



21.4-
24.4-
27.4-
30.5-
33.6-
36.6-
39.6-
SOIL, BROWN, SANDY

SHALE, GRAY WEATHERED

SANDSTONE, ORANGE


SHALE, GRAY, YELLOW, HIGHLY WEATHERED

SHALE, DARK GRAY
SANDSTONE, GRAY, VERY FINE-GRAINED, TR.
SANDSTONE, LIGHT GRAY, VERY FINE-GRAINED


COAL

SHALE, BROWN-GRAY, GRAY

SHALE, GRAY, SANDY

SHALE, GRAY
SHALE, BROWN
COAL
SHALE, BROWN

SHALE, GRAY, BROWN, SANDY
             SANDSTONE, GRAY VERY FINE-GRAINED,
               CLAY CEMENTED
SANDSTONE, GRAY VERY FINE-GRAINED,
  STREAKS OF SHALE

SHALE, GRAY SANDY
SHALE, GRAY GREEN, BROWN, SANDY
SHALE, GRAY, BLUE-GREEN, SANDY




SHALE, BROWN

COAL
45.8-
48.8-
54.9-
58.0-
61.0-
                                                        64.0-
                                                        67.1-
                                                        70.2-
                                                       73.2-
                                                       76.2-
SHALE, BROWN


SANDSTONE, GRAY VERY FINE-GRAINED,
  CLAY CEMENTED

SHALE, GRAY


COAL

SHALE, GRAY, GRAY-GREEN

SANDSTONE, WHITE, FINE-GRAINED
SHALE, BROWN
COAL
COAL, STREAKS OF SHALE, LIGHT BROWN

SHALE, BROWN-BLACK, CARBONACEOUS
COAL
SHALE, BROWN-BLACK, CARBONACEOUS
COAL
SHALE, BROWN

SHALE, GRAY
                                                        SANDSTONE, GRAY  VERY FINE-GRAINED,
                                                           SILTY
                                                        SHALE, GRAY, LOCALLY SANDY
                                                       79.3-

                                                        Total Depth =80.2m
   Figure  3.    Typical Western  U.S.   coal-bearing  strata   (11).
                                              12

-------
Coalbed gas is emitted to the atmosphere during  the mining  opera-
tion.  The primary constituents are methane  (63% to 99%), carbon
dioxide, and trace amounts of C2_5 hydrocarbons  (13,  14).   As
coal weathers in mined-out portions of the workings,  it  slowly
oxidizes to CO and carbon dioxide  (C02).

Explosive detonations represent another source of atmospheric
emissions.  The predominant blasting agent in surface mining is
ANFO  (ammonium nitrate and fuel oil)  (15-17).  ANFO accounted
for over 90% of the 431 x 103 metric tons of explosives used by
the coal industry in 1972 (17).  A typical blasting mixture con-
sists of 94.5% by weight ammonium nitrate (NIUNOa) and 5.5% by
weight fuel oil.  Toxic byproducts of the explosive reaction are
CO, nitrous oxide (NO), and nitrogen dioxide (NOa) fumes (18).


FACTORS INFLUENCING EMISSIONS

Open coal mining is a complex emissions source with respirable
dust emissions emanating from seven possible unit operations
within the mine  (see Table 1)  plus windblown dust as a result of
mining activity.  This section identifies the parameters which
influence the generation of respirable dust from wind forces and
from each of the seven unit operations.  Respirable dust is the
only pollutant type considered in the study of open coal mining.
Minor emission sources and the reasons for their exclusion are
discussed in Section 4.
 (13) Kim. A. G.  The Composition of Coalbed Gas.  Bureau of Mines
     RI-7762 (PB 221 574), U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D-C., May 1973.  13 pp.

 (14) Krickovic, S., and C. Findlay.  Methane Emission Rate Stu-
     dies in a Central Pennsylvania Mine.  Bureau of Mines
     RI-7591 (PB 206 359), U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D-C., 1971.  9 pp.
 (15) Surface Mining, E. P. Pfleider, ed.  American Institute
     of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Ingineers, Inc.,
     New York, New York, 1972.  1048 pp.
 (16) Woodruff, S. D.  Methods of Working Coal and Metal Mines,
     Volume 3.  Pergamon Press, New York, New York, 1966.  571 pp.

 (17) 1972 Census of Mineral Industries  (SIC 1211) , Bituminous
     Coal and Lignite.  MIC72(P)-12A-1, U.S. Department of Com-
     merce, Washington, D.C., April 1974.  7 pp.

 (18) Chaiken, R. F., E. B. Cook, and T. C. Ruhe.  Toxic Fumes
     from Explosives; Ammonium Nitrate-Fuel Oil Mixtures.  Bureau
     of Mines RI-7867  (PB 233 496), U.S. Department of the Inte-
     rior, Washington, D-C., May 1974.  29 pp.


                               13

-------
Emission Parameters for Wind Erosion of Mined Land

As wind blows across the surface of a coal mine, respirable par-
ticles consisting of coal and soil become entrained.  The major
parameters governing respirable dust particle movement from open
coal mining surfaces are the size distribution of particles in
the soil and the local climatic factors  (wind, moisture, tempera-
ture) .  Minor parameters include the soil surface roughness, dis-
tance across the field, distance sheltered by barriers, and form
of vegetation on the surface.  Woodruff and Siddoway  (19) have
confirmed Chepil's original assumptions and experimental work on
the mechanisms describing the air entrainment of dust particles
of all sizes from soils.  Jenne (20) summarized Chepil's
mechanisms of movement of individual particles on a soil surface
as:  1) sliding or rolling of particles along the surface (sur-
face creep); 2) movement by leaps and bounds  (saltation); and
3) movement by airborne transport (suspension).  The larger
particles  (greater than 100 ym) are affected mostly by saltation
with some surface creep.  Particles closer in size to the
respirable range (less than 50 ym) are readily dislodged, and
large volumes are carried into suspension by impacts from larger
grains moving in saltation (20).  Impaction of larger particles
releases smaller adsorbed particles because the cohesive forces
are weakened.

Climatic factors, such as wind speed, temperature, and precipita-
tion, affect the respirable dust emissions from soil.  Thorn-
thwaite (21) combined the effects of temperature and precipita-
tion into a single parameter called the precipitation-evaporation
index  (P-E index).   Under saturated soil moisture conditions
there are no respirable emissions at any wind speed.  Neither
the functionality relating the climatic factors to the respirable
dust emission rate nor the exact mathematical functionalities
for each of the seven unit operations which follow are known.

Emission Parameters for Rotary Drilling

Rotary bit drills are used to bore holes in overburden and/or
coal (see Figure 11, Section 6).  The holes are filled with an
(19) Woodruff, N. P., and F. H. Siddoway.  A Wind Erosion Equa-
     tion.  Soil Science Society of America, Proceedings, 29(5):
     602-608, 1965.

(20) Jenne, D. E.  An Analysis of High Volume Particulate Samp-
     ling Data in Benton, Franklin, and Walla Walla Counties of
     Washington - 1970, 1973.  Benton-Franklin-Walla Walla
     Counties Air Pollution Control Authority, Hanford, Washing-
     ton, June 1974.  37 pp.

(21) Thornthwaite, C. W.  Climates of North America According to
     a New Classification.  Geographical Review, 21:633-655,
     March 1931.

                                14

-------
explosive and shot.  This unit operation involves a  single equip-
ment type.  The drill bit, which employs compressed  air through
its hollow core to remove cuttings and to cool the bearings  (15) ,
produces respirable dust.  The rate of uncontrolled  emissions  is
influenced by the complex interaction of the rate of bore hole
descent, bulk moisture content of material worked, diameter  of
bore hole, downthrust applied to the drill bit, amount of air
supplied to the bit, and size distribution of material in the
cuttings.  The continuous comminution of particles by the shear-
ing action of the drill bit generates respirable emissions  (less
than 7 ym).

Emission Parameters for Overburden Stripping

The unit operation of overburden stripping is simple in nature,
involving the removal of topsoil and consolidated or unconsoli-
dated material above the coalbed.  However, seven different  types
of equipment are utilized throughout the industry (see Table 1),
the dragline and the power shovel being the predominant types.
Although the equipment varies widely in physical appearance, it
performs the same function.  The respirable emissions from each
equipment type are influenced by common parameters.  The vari-
ables affecting the quantity of respirable dust emitted are  bulk
moisture content of soil, size distribution of particles in  the
undisturbed material, struck volumetric capacity,9 and the effi-
ciency of stripping, which accounts for variability  in emission
rates between equipment types.  The efficiency is inversely  pro-
portional to cycle time per metric ton of material excavated.
The cycle time per metric ton for a given piece of equipment is
the time required to load, swing, and dump a quantity of mate-
rial.  For example, the efficiency of stripping is lower for a
dragline than for a stationary front-end loader of comparable
size because the dragline has a longer cycle time (15).

Emission Parameters for Coal Loading

Coal loading entails the removal and dumping of coal from the
exposed coal seam.  It is a complex unit operation requiring four
types of equipment; the loading shovel and front-end loader  are
predominant  (see Table 1).  The generation of respirable dust
from this operation is a function of the coal's brittleness
(commonly called the Hardgrove Grindability) and moisture con-
tent, size distribution of loosened coal, efficiency of loading
(similar to efficiency of stripping overburden), and the struck
volume capacity of the loading machine.  The Hardgrove Grindabil-
ity Index of coal is a number between 0 and 100 showing the  rela-
tive hardness or the friability of coal in relation  to a standard
coal with a grindability index of 100 (2) .
 The capacity of a mine car, tram, hopper, or wagon to the  flat
 surface at the edges  (2).

                               15

-------
Emission Parameters for Coal Transport/Unloading

This single equipment type unit operation consists of trucking
the coal to the dump site  (usually located near the mine tipple).
Emissions of respirable dust are generated by the truck tires on
the haul road en route to the tipple and back to the loading
point, and by the dumping of coal at the mine tipple.  Wind
erosion of the coal in the truck en route to the mine tipple is
insignificant (22).  The respirable emissions due to vehicular
movement on the unpaved dry haul roads are influenced by vehicle
speed, vehicle dimensions, number and width of the wheels, parti-
cle size distribution and moisture content of the unpaved road
surface, and distance of unpaved road round trip from loading
point to tipple.

Respirable dust is also generated during unloading of the coal at
the tipple.  The emissions from coal unloading are a function of
the same factors as those that affect loading emissions with the
exception of the unloading efficiency parameter.  The unloading
efficiency term is absent because only trucks are used in this
unit operation.  The influencing parameters for coal unloading
are the struck volume of the coal truck, moisture content of the
coal, Hardgrove Grindability, and the size distribution of coal
within the truck.

Emission Parameters for Blasting Coal and Overburden

Blasting is a separate and distinct unit operation which gener-
ates respirable dusts.  It is employed to loosen overburden and/
or coal prior to removal.  The mass emission rate for blasting
depends on the quantity of charge used, the number of holes
fired, the diameter of the holes, the average millisecond (ms)
delay time between hole firings, the bulk moisture content of the
soil or coal and the particle size distribution of the bulk soil
or coal (post blast).  The millisecond delay time between hole
firings is an important parameter in predicting rock fragmenta-
tion characteristics.  Langefors and Kilhstrom  (23) report that
blasting delays less than 10 ms produce an abundance of small
rock fragments  (less than 40 cm) while delays greater than 10 ms
produce large fragments.  Delay time is included as a parameter
related to respirable dust mass emissions, because it is assumed
that the generation of respirable dust will be proportional to
the degree of fragmentation.
 (22) Blackwood, T. R., and P. K. Chalekode.  Source Assessment:
     Transport of Sand and Gravel.  Contract 68-02-1320, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
     North Carolina.  (Preliminary document submitted to the EPA
     by Monsanto Research Corporation, November 1974.)  86 pp.

 (23) Langefors, U., and B. Kihlstrom.  The Modern Technique of
     Rock Blasting.  John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York,
     1963.  405 pp.

                               16

-------
Emission Parameters for Auxiliary Operations - Coal Augering

The parameters governing horizontal augering into the remaining
highwall are similar to those of rotary drilling.  This unit
operation involves a single equipment type, namely the single or
multiple coal auger.  The auger, unlike the drill, supplies no
air to the auger tip to remove coal cuttings.  Rather, the coal
is fed out of the hole with action similar to that of a wood-
boring drill.  The factors influencing respirable dust emissions
are the rate of penetration into the coal seam, bulk coal mois-
ture, diameter of auger, number of augers, sidethrust applied to
auger, and the size distribution of coal resulting from augering.

Emission Parameters for Auxiliary Operations - Reclamation

Reclamation of strip-mined lands involves recontouring the
depleted open pit to specific state requirements.  This operation
typically involves a variety of equipment types to smooth over
the displaced overburden spoil banks.  The dragline-bulldozer
combination is chosen as representative of the industry since
it is used at over 50% of the mines.  The dragline employed has
a lower capacity than those utilized in stripping.  The smaller
dragline excavates the required fill material so that the bull-
dozer can level the mined workings.  This method permits stra-
tegic placement of valuable topsoil.  The emission rate for the
reclamation unit operation is thus a function of two equipment
types:  bulldozer and dragline.  As such, the parameters influ-
encing dust generation from overburden stripping by dragline are
directly applicable.  The emissions from bulldozers are functions
of blade width, horsepower, bulk moisture content of soil, and
size distribution of particles in the soil.

GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION

Surface coal mining occurs in 23 of the 48 conterminous states;
16 of these states produced over 95% of the strip-mined coal and
over 99% of the auger-mined coal in 1972.  The 16 states are
listed in Table 4, which includes the 7 states that were not con-
sidered because of their low productivity  (each state accounted
for less than or equal to 1% of the total production).  The strip
mining method was predominant in the 16 states studied; 94% of
the surface coal was strip mined.  Auger mining accounted for 6%
of the surface production.  Kentucky was the leading producer of
surface coal in 1972.  The combined tonnage of the second and
third largest producers, Ohio and Illinois, respectively, approx-
imately equaled that of Kentucky.

Figure 4 depicts P-E regions  (U.S. Weather Bureau county group-
ings within states) that are major producers of surface coal.  It
also indicates 1972 surface coal production by P-E region and
associated population density per region.  The P-E regions were
chosen as geographical boundaries because climatic data are
organized on a P-E regional basis.


                               17

-------
        TABLE 4.  STATE PRODUCTION OF SURFACE-MINED COAL
                  BY PRODUCTION RANKING FOR 1972  (1)
                         (103 metric tons)

Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
State
Kentucky
Ohio
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Indiana
West Virginia
Alabama
Wyoming
Virginia
Montana
New Mexico
North Dakota
Tennessee
Missouri
Texas
Arizona
Strip
tonnage
50,599
30,914
30,665
23,826
22,229
17,328
11,954
9,514
7,198
7,442
6,563
6,016
4,638
4,129
3,670
2,680
Strip
%
20.3
12.4
12.3
9.5
8.9
6.9
4.8
3.8
2.9
3.0
2.6
2.4
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.1
Auger
tonnage
8,089
563
0
492
0
2,702
44
0
1,905
0
0
0
255
0
0
0
Auger
%
57.3 '
4.0
0
3.5
0
19.2
0.3
0
13.5
0
0
0
1.8
0
0
0
Total
58,688
31,477
30,665
24,318
22,229
20,030
11,998
9,514
9,103
7,442
6,563
6,016
4,893
4,129
3,670
2,680
Total
%
22.3
11.9
11.6
9.2
8.4
7.6
4.5
3.6
3.4
2.8
2.5
2.3
1.9
1.6
1.4
1.0
Total of 16 highest
  ranked states
239,365   95.8   14,050   99.6  253,415   96.1
The following states are not considered in this report
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Total
Washington
Oklahoma
Colorado
Maryland
Kansas
Iowa
Arkansas
of states
ranked 17 to 23
2,
2,
2,
1,
1,



10,
364
301
224
302
113
453
381

138
0-
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.

4.
9
9
9
6
4
3
2

2
0
0
0
59
0
0
0

59
0
0
0
0.4
0
0
0

0.4
2
2
2
1
1



10
,364
,301
,224
,361
,113
453
381

,197
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.

3.
9
9
8
5
4
2
1

9

In general, coal is surface mined in areas remote from popula-
tion concentration.  Comparison of the location of surface mines
to population density by P-E region indicates that surface mining
occurs in regions with population densities as low as 0.48 per-
sons/km2 (western states) and in regions as high as 145 persons/
km2 (eastern states).  The average population density for the
surface coal industry is 27 persons/km2.
                                18

-------
                             NOTE:  UPPER FIGURES SHOW COAL
                                    PRODUCTION; LOWER FIGURES
                                    SHOW POPULATION DENSITY.
Figure  4.   Coal production by P-E  region
            (1Q3 metric tons strip  and auger)
            and population density.
                       19
(continued)

-------
       CEMTBM. I E,ST CBimAL [jji^nrnuu.
                   I  PUINS
                   NOTE:  UPPER  FIGURES SHOW COAL
                          PRODUCTION;  LOWER FIGURES
                          SHOW POPULATION DENSITY.
Figure  4   (continued)
              20

-------
                   NOTE:  UPPER FIGURES SHOW COAL
                         PRODUCTION; LOWER FIGURES
                         SHOW POPULATION DENSITY.
Figure 4  (continued)
            21

-------
                            SECTION 4

                            EMISSIONS
SELECTED POLLUTANTS

Major Emissions

The emissions from surface coal mining consist entirely of fugi-
tive dusts, specifically coal dust and overburden dust.  The
effects of long-term exposure to coal and overburden dusts are
not well documented for surface coal mines.  In contrast, the
health hazards associated with each of these emission types in
related industries are well defined.  The inhalation and reten-
tion of coal dust in the lungs of underground coal miners can
result in the development of pneumoconiosis (black lung disease)
(24-28).  Pneumoconiosis, also known as potter's or miner's
asthma, can result in death by massive fibrosis of lung tissue
(2).  While it is not implied that health hazards to surface
coal workers are comparable to those of deep coal miners, this
discussion will serve to illustrate the potential health hazard
(24) Cheng, L.  Formation of Airborne-Respirable Dust at Belt
     Conveyor Transfer Points.  American Industrial Hygiene Asso-
     ciation Journal, 34(12):540-546, 1973.

(25) Corn, M., F. Stein, Y. Hammad, S. Manekshaw, R. Freedman,
     and A. M. Hartstein.  Physical and Chemical Properties of
     Respirable Coal Dust from Two United States Mines.  American
     Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 34 (7):279-285, 1973.

(26) Sweet, D. V., W- E. Grouse, J. V. Crable, J. R. Carlberg,
     and W. S. Lainhart.  The Relationship of Total Dust, Free
     Silica, and Trace Metal Concentrations to the Occupational
     Respiratory Disease of Bituminous Coal Miners.  American
     Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 35(8):479-488, 1974.

(27) Schlick, D. P.  Respirable Dust Sampling Requirements Under
     the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.  Bureau
     of Mines IC-8484, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washing-
     ton, D.C., July 1970.  35 pp.

(28) Cheng, L., and P. P. Zukovich.  Respirable Dust Adhering to
     Run-of-Face Bituminous Coals.  Bureau of Mines RI-7765, U.S.
     Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., 1973.  10 pp.

                               22

-------
to surface coal workers and the rationale behind the  selection
of coal dust as one of the two characteristic pollutants.

The threshold limit value  (TLV®) for coal dust ranges from
0.5 mg/m3 to 2.0 mg/m3 as defined by the ACGIH  (29).   The var-
iability of the TLV depends on the percent of quartz  in the dust.
A TLV of 2.0 is used when the quartz  (SiO2) content is less than
5.0% by weight.  If the quartz content of the respirable dust is
greater than 5.0%, a TLV of 10/(% quartz + 2) is recommended.
The latter TLV is also applicable for quartz-predominating dusts.

The primary hazard of  the  dust  generated  from handling overburden
is its  free silica content (quartz,  cristobalite,  tridymite,
etc.).   The composition  of the  particulates  emitted during over-
burden  handling  is displayed  in Table  5.   These  data  represent
overburden dusts  from  an Illinois  strip mine.  The predominantly
hazardous component, as  in coal dust,  is  free silica  as indicated
by the  quartz  levels.  No  fibrous  constituents  (asbestos, serpen-
tine  quartz, etc.) were  found in any of the  dusts.

           TABLE 5.  OVERBURDEN DUST COMPOSITION FROM
                     AN  ILLINOIS STRIP MINE
                              (wt %)
            Element/
            compound
 Sample
   1
  Sample
    2
                  Sample
                    3
            Silicon
            Iron
            Aluminum
            Calcium
            Sodium
            Magnesium
            Titanium
            Manganese
            Chlorine
            Sulfur
            Potassium
            Si02
               (quartz)
 5 to 10   5 to 10
4
8
2
0.
0,
      5
      2
10 to 15
10 to 15

   16
    0.5
    4
    2
    0.5
    0.09
10 to 15
   10

   20
5 to 10

   2
   6
   0.8
   0.5
   0.8
   4
  10

  23
 (29) TLVs® Threshold Limit Values  for Chemical  Substances  and
     Physical Agents in the Workroom Environment with  Intended
     Changes for 1973.  American Conference of  Governmental  In-
     dustrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1973.   94  pp.
                                 23

-------
The prolonged inhalation of dusts containing free silica may
result in the development of a disabling pulmonary fibrosis most
commonly known as silicosis.  The action of free silica on the
lungs results in diffuse, nodular fibrosis which is progressive
and may continue to increase for several years after exposure is
terminated  (2).  The clinical onset of uncomplicated silicosis is
shortness of breath on exertion, sometimes accompanied by dry
cough.  Where the disease advances, the shortness of breath be-
comes more acute and the cough more troublesome.  Further pro-
gress of the disease results in marked fatigue, loss of appetite,
pleuritic pain, and total incapacity to work.  Extreme cases may
eventually result in death from destruction of the lung tissues.

The ACGIH has suggested a TLV of 10/(% quartz + 2) mg/m3 for res-
pirable dusts containing quartz in the form of free silica  (29).
Cristobalite- and tridymite-containing dusts have values one-half
that calculated from the quartz formula.

Assuming that the biological effects of the composite dust  (coal
+ overburden) are additive, a composite TLV may be defined  (29).
For coal containing less than 5% by weight quartz, the TLV in
mg/m3 of the composite respirable dust is given by:
     TLV
                         5.OX  +  (1-X  )(Zi + 2.0)
         Coal  <5% Si02
                                   10.0                       (2)
where  X  = wt  fraction of respirable coal dust in
            composite dust
       Zi = wt  % of pure respirable quartz dust in
            noncoal dust

If the coal contains more than 5% by weight quartz, the TLV of
coal dust becomes that of quartz-bearing dust.  The composite TLV
is then:
     TLV
10.0                  (3)
                         X  (Z2 + 2.0) +  (1-X  )(Zi + 2.0)
         Coal  >5% Si02
where  Z2 = wt % of pure respirable quartz dust in  coal dust

When toxic impurities  (i.e., coal or Si02) do not represent more
than 1.0% by weight of the composite dust, the TLV becomes that
of an "inert" dust  (10.0 mg/m3) and would be treated as total
particulates of criteria pollutants  (29).

Minor Emission Sources

The specific emission sources excluded  from this environmental
source assessment, because they were not considered to be

                                24

-------
characteristic of open coal mining, are discussed  in  this  section.
Respirable particulates and gaseous emissions  (NOx/ CO,  and hy-
drocarbons) from diesel-powered equipment were not selected as
characteristic because these emissions constitute  a mobile source
where control technology is generally available or in the process
of development.

Gaseous emissions from other operations were excluded.   Examples
are toxic gases  (NO, N02, CO) that are formed by the  detonation
of ammonium nitrate-fuel oil mixtures  (18).  Trace quantities of
these gases were detected in confined quarters such as under-
ground mines  (18).  Open field sampling and chemical  analyses
were performed to determine the presence of hazardous constitu-
ents  (including NO, N02, and CO) in samples of gases  from the
blasting unit operation.  Results indicate that these compounds
are not present in measurable quantities.  As a result,  toxic
fumes from blasting are not considered an environmental  hazard.

The hydrocarbons and other gases released from coal as it is
mined represent another gaseous emission source.   These  gases are
predominantly methane  (98%) with traces (1 ppm to  20 ppm) of
ethylene, propane, propylene, butanes, pentanes, hydrogen, heli-
um, oxygen, and nitrogen  (13, 14, 30).  Thus, it is reasonable to
assume that all coalbed gas is pure methane.  A survey conducted
in 1973 indicated that a total of 6.08 x 106 m3 of methane is
released from U.S. underground coal mines daily (30).  Using the
total 1973 underground coal tonnage production of  273.5  x 106
metric tons, the emission ratio of methane per metric ton of coal
is about 3.9 kg/metric ton.  Assuming that the production of
methane is the same for surface coal, a nationwide emission rate
of 31.3 g/s is estimated for the surface coal industry.  This
emission rate constitutes 23% of the total mass emission rate
from the industry  (as noted later in this section).  However,
methane gas is hazardous only from the standpoint  of asphyxiation
(TLV = 1,000 ppm)  (29).  Coalbed gas was therefore neglected as
an emission source because of the low hazard associated with it.
The severity associated with this gas was calculated for the
representative source  (mean size coal mine)  and was found to be
0.0033 (national emission burden of 0.0038% of total hydrocarbon
emissions).

The gases  (CO and CO2) formed by the slow oxidation of coal as it
weathers in mined-out portions of the workings and in storage
piles are considered minor.  Preliminary work has  shown  that
these gases can be neglected as an emissions source for  coal
 (30) Irani, M. C., et al.  Methane Emission from U.S. Coal Mines
     in 1973, A Survey.  Supplement to Bureau of Mines IC-8558,
     U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, B.C., December
     1974.  52 pp.


                                25

-------
storage piles near power plants  (31).   Exclusion of this emission
source is further justified because  coal  is seldom stored at
surface mines and does not remain  uncovered for the length of
time necessary to generate measurable  quantities of gas (31).

Particle Size Analysis
                               \
The particle size distribution of  overburden dust was determined
from presurvey samples gathered during sampling at one mine.
Filters from high-volume samplers  were observed using optical
microscopy techniques  (32), and the  number  of particles in random
fields were counted.  Results are  shown in  Figure 5.   The log-
normal distribution indicates the  presence  of processes which
continuously comminute particles;  i.e., unit operations.   Parti-
cle sizing of coal dust was not performed.
                  100
                  1.0
                  o.i
                                   OVERBURDEN
                            I  1  I I  I  I
           Figure  5.
 10  20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90  95  98  99
   CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY, % of number


Particle size distribution of
overburden dust (log-normal).
(31) Blackwood, T. R., and R. A. Wachter.   Source  Assessment:
     Coal Storage Piles.  Contract  68-02-1874,  U.S.  Environmental
     Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio.   July 1977,  84 pp.

(32) Blackwood, T. R., T. F. Boyle, T.  L.  Peltier, J.  V.
     Pustinger, and D. L. Zanders.  Fugitive  Dust  from Mining
     Operations - Appendix.  Contract  68-02-1320,  Task 10,  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency,  Research  Triangle Park,
     North Carolina.   (Final report submitted to the EPA by
     Monsanto Research Corporation, September,  1975.)   65 pp.
                               26

-------
Emission Factors

Exact calculation of the  state and national emission rates of
respirable  dust presupposes  knowledge of the emission rate for
every mine  in the country.   The large number of  strip and auger
mines precludes the gathering of such data  (23,  26).   A method
was developed in this study  to obtain estimated  statistical emis-
sion factors from field sampling for each of the seven character-
istic unit  operations and wind erosion  (see Appendix B).   The
emission  factor is useful in predicting emission rates over large
areas.  Multiplying the emission factors by appropriate weighting
factors yields the emission  rate.   A summary of  the  rounded emis-
sion factors developed is presented in Table 6.   The wind erosion
emission  factors were obtained from the methods  presented by
Woodruff  and Siddoway  (18).   Although the literature values com-
puted per state account for  both respirable and  nonrespirable
particle mass emissions,  the values obtained can be  considered
"worst  case" estimates for respirable dust.  The unit operation
emission  factors were obtained solely from field sampling as no
data were available in the literature.  Besides  the  methodology,
Appendix  B  summarizes the assumptions used to arrive at these
estimated emission factors.   Error estimates given are at the 95%
confidence  level.

          TABLE 6.  EMISSION  FACTORS FOR OPEN COAL MINING
For unit operations For wind erosion
Unit No. of
operation samples
Drilling 4
Overburden stripping 6
Coal loading 4
Coal transport and
unloading 3
Blasting 2
Coal augering -c
Reclamation 4

Total





Emission 95% Emission
factor. Standard Confidence factor,
g/metrio ton deviation interval" State [ (g/s • Jtm2)103lb
1.6 0.63 1.0 Alabama
-c -c -c Arizona
2.0 1.4 2.3 Illinois
Indiana
5.4 2.8 7.0 Kentucky
4.28 0.13 ±1.6 Missouri
°'P "c ~° North Dakota
- New Mexico
Ohio
13 - - Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
West Virginia
Wyoming
7.47
56.2
11.7
6.05
7.47
11.7
52.0
56.2
7.47
7.47
11.7
89.0
7.47
7.47
56.2
        Note.—Data may not add to totals due to independent rounding.
        Estimate of the confidence interval from observed population standard deviation using "student t"
        distribution.
        Not included in total.
        CNot applicable.
        Estimated from drilling emission factor.
        Total emission factor on a national basis.


Mass Emission Rates and  Contribution to Total Air  Emission


The statewide emission rate of  respirable dusts from surface coal
mining  was  estimated from the unit operation emission factors
multiplied  by the state  annual  coal production plus the state
acreage disturbed,  multiplied by the wind erosion  emission
                                  27

-------
factor.  A composition term was  included  to  arrive  at the emis-
sion rates for coal dust and overburden dusts.   Samples  of coal
mine dusts collected during field  sampling indicate that the res-
pirable dust contains on the average  93%  coal  and 7% overburden
dusts.  The emission rates can be  expressed  mathematically as:

                                               6
            Q.v = A.e.Xv. + 3.17 x 10~8 P.XV.  Y" E.           (4)
             j•"•    J J -^J                 J •"•J  '^TI   -L


where  Q.^ = amount of respirable dust emitted from surface
             coal mines of the jth coal state, g/s
             for K = 1, Q.J = total respirable dust rate

             for K = 2, Q-2 = respirable  coal dust  rate

             for K = 3, Q.  = respirable  overburden dust  rate
                         J 3
       X .  = composition of respirable dust  in the  jth coal
         -^    state, weight fraction coal  or  overburden
             for K = 1, X,. = 1.0
for

for
K =

K =
2,

3,
X

.
= 0.
93
ZD
X
3
j
= 0.
07
        A. = number of acres of surface coal land disturbed
         •^   per state per year, km2
        P. = state annual coal production, metric tons/year

        E. = emission factor for the ith unit operation,
             g/metric ton coal
        e. = emission factor for wind erosion in the jth
         -^   state, g/s-km2

The rates of respirable particulate emissions of each  type
 (total, coal,  and  overburden) due  to open mining of  coal were
calculated from Equation  4 for  each of the  16 major  surface  min-
ing states  (j  = 1  to 16)  to arrive at the national loading.  The
resulting state and national mass  emission  rates from  open coal
mining are presented in Table 7.   Coal dust  is  the major emis-
sion component, constituting 93% of the total emissions.  The
total respirable dust rate for  open coal mining is 114 g/s.

Table 8 shows the respirable dust  rate as compared with the  total
state and national particulate loadings.  Open  coal mining con-
tributes more than 0.1% of each state's particulate emissions
burden in Kentucky, North Dakota,  West Virginia, and Wyoming; it
contributes less than 0.1% of the  burden in each of the remain-
ing 12 states.

Table 9 shows the contribution to  the national  open coal mining
rate from the various unit operations and windblown sources  with-
in surface mines.   The unit operations of blasting, coal trans-
port/unloading, and coal loading account for over 85%  of the

                                28

-------
to
    TABLE  7.   TOTAL EMISSION  RATES OF RESPIR-
               ABLE DUSTS FROM OPEN COAL MINING
               BY STATE AND NATIONWIDE3
Total dust,
V
j Location g/s, K=l
1 Alabama
2 Arizona
3 Illinois
4 Indiana
5 Kentucky
6 Missouri
7 Montana
8 New Mexico
9 North Dakota
10 Ohio
11 Pennsylvania
12 Tennessee
13 Texas
14 Virginia
15 West Virginia
16 Wyoming
Total
Other states
Nationwide
5.13
1.18
13.15
9.39
25.07
1.82
3.61
2.86
2.70
15.88
10.55
2.15
1.70
3.91
8.73
4.13
109.8
4.26
114.06
Coal dust,
V
g/s, K=2
4.78
1.09
12.29
8.84
23.39
1.68
3.19
2.66
2.47
12.58
9.78
1.98
1.54
3.64
8.07
3.84
101.8
4.0
105.8
Overburden
dust, Q ,
g/s, K=3
0.35
0.09
0.86
0.55
1.68
0.14
0.42
0.20
0.23
3.3
0.77
0.17
0.16
0.27
0.66
0.29
8.00
0.26
8.26
TABLE 8.   RATIO OF TOTAL EMISSION RATES OF
           RESPIRABLE DUSTS FROM OPEN COAL
           MINING TO TOTAL PARTICULATES,
           STATE AND NATIONWIDE3

1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Total dust,
Location % , K=l
Alabama
Arizona
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky
Missouri
Montana
New Mexico
North Dakota
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
West Virginia
Wyoming
Nationwide
0.013
0.051
0.036
0.040
0.145
0.028
0.042
0.088
0.108
0.028
0.018
0.017
0.009
0.026
0.129
0.173
0.019
Coal dust,
%, K=2
0.012
0.047
0.034
0.037
0.135
0.026
0.037
0.082
0.099
0.022
0.017
0.015
0.008
0.024
0.119
0.161
0.018
Overburden
dust,
%, K=3
0.001
0.004
0.002
0.003
0.010
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.009
0.006
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.010
0.012
0.001

                                                     Based on assumed emission factors.
      Based on assumed emission rates.

-------
emissions, while overburden stripping, reclamation, and coal
augering account for less than 1% of the emissions of respirable
dust.
        TABLE 9.  CONTRIBUTION TO RESPIRABLE MINING DUST
                  EMISSIONS FROM EACH SOURCE WITHIN THE MINE
                (percent of national mining total)


                                CoalOverburdenTotal
                 Source         dust     dust     dust
Wind erosion
Drilling
Overburden stripping
Coal loading
Coal transport and
unloading
Blasting
Coal augering
Reclamation
1.6
5.8
0
14

40
30
1
0
1.6
5.8
0
0

0
0
0
0
3 '
12
0
14

40
30
1
0
            National total      93       7         100


           Based on assumed emission factors.

           Data may not add to totals due to independent
           rounding.

The emission factors (EjJ  were estimated from field data as was
XKJ.  Coal production rates per state, Pj, are those given in
Table 4 as reported by the United States Bureau of Mines (1).
Values for state land disturbed annually by surface mining, Aj,
were supplied in part by Paone, et al. (33), and partially by
estimates made using the average coal stripping ratio per state
and the associated production found in a recent United States
Bureau of Mines report (34).  Sample calculations and all input
data are shown in Appendix C.

DEFINITION OF REPRESENTATIVE SOURCE

The representative surface coal mine is a single facility where
94% of  the  coal  is  mined via  strip  mining methods  and 6%  is mined
via coal augering  (U.S. average, see Table 4).  All surface
(33) Paone, J., J. L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.  Land Utiliza-
     tion and Reclamation in the Mining Industry, 1930-1971.
     Bureau of Mines IC-9642, U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D.C., 1971.  148 pp.

(34) Strippable Reserves of Bituminous Coal and Lignite in the
     United States.  Bureau of Mines IC-8531, U.S. Department of
     the Interior, Washington, D.C., 1971.  148 pp.

                                30

-------
mining facilities have common methods of extracting  coal  from  the
ground; the sizes and amounts of equipment differ.   It  is there-
fore assumed that respirable dust emissions are directly  propor-
tional to the size of the mine.

The lack of heterogeneity within the surface coal industry indi-
cates that a representative source may be defined by size of
mine.  Based on the 2,225 strip coal mines operating in the
United States in 1972, the mean mine size was 108 x  103 metric
tons/yr.  The mean was chosen instead of the most frequently
occurring size  (i.e., the mode) for reasons which are illustrated
in Figures 6 and 7.  The frequency of occurrence of  mines  of the
six defined size classes (U.S. Bureau of Mines) is shown  in
Figure 6.  Of the 2,225 mines, 44% fall into the class yielding
between 9 x 103 and 45 x 103 metric tons of coal per year.  This
class produced only 10.3% of the total surface coal  as shown in
Figure 7; 56% of the coal was produced by mines yielding more
than 450 x 103 metric tons/yr.  The mean size lies between these
two extremes.  Additionally, the mean size was chosen over the
mode because the mines would become larger to offset the cost of
control technology, should it be developed for surface coal min-
ing.  This would change the skewed distribution shown in Figures
6 and 7 into a more normal Gaussian distribution.

The representative source mine of 108 x 103 metric tons has unit
operations to the extent predicted by the mean emission para-
meters indicated in Table 9.  The distribution of average emis-
sions within the industry is an indication of activity.   Thus,
13% of the activity within the representative mine is devoted to
drilling, and 13%, 38%, 32%, and 1%, are devoted to  coal loading,
coal transport/unloading, blasting, and coal augering, respect-
ively.  The average production weighted wind erosion emission
factor calculated from data in Table 6 is 0.019 g/s  • km2 which
indicates that the representative mine is located in either
Illinois or Indiana.

The area of the representative mine is generally defined by its
production rate, stripping ratio, and life expectancy.  The
representative mine has a life expectancy of 20 years based on
averages compiled by the United States Bureau of Mines (35).  The
average stripping ratio is 13.6 m of overburden per meter of
coal.  A relationship was developed which computes the average
mine size, expressed as:

                   A = 5.45 x 10~8  (T)(P)(SR)                 (5)
(35) Coal Analyses of Model Mines for Strip Mining of Coal in the
     United States.  Bureau of Mines IC-8535, U.S. Department of
     the Interior, Washington, D.C., 1972.  115 pp.

                                31

-------
   70
   60
   50
  . 40
 >-
 o
 a

 £ 30
   20
    10
                                  MEAN
    103
104
     105

SIZE, metric tons/yr
106
10'
Figure 6.   Surface coal mine  size  frequency distribution.
       70
       60
      50
     o
     P 40
      20
      10
                                 MEAN
       0     i  i  I t{~l l~jT I  	I  I	1 It _ >,- JJ |^^^_^_ J__^_t__l_ At I II I


       103           104            105            106
                              SIZE, metric tons/ yr
        Figure 7.   Surface coal mine production by

                     mine  size  (1972  tonnage basis).
                                 32

-------
where   A = total area of the mine, km2
        T = life expectancy, yr
        P = average annual coal production, metric  ton/yr
       S  = stripping ratio, m/m


The representative mine has an area of 2.0 km2.   The  area  mined
per year by the representative mine is 98.5 x  103 m2.  Appendix  C
contains the derivation of Equation 5.

SOURCE SEVERITY

The maximum severity from the representative open coal mine was
determined for each dust emission  (coal, overburden,  and total).
The severity is defined as the_time-averaged maximum  ground level
concentration of a pollutant  (xmax) divided by the  primary stand-
ard, F.  Using a severity model  (36) based on  Turner's dispersion
model  (37) and an average wind speed of  4.5 m/s and class  C sta-
bility  (U.S. average), the following equation  was determined  for
total particulates from open sources:
                Sp =  mgX/ P =  4,020 Qp D-1'18^


where       S  = total particulate  (<7 ym)  severity  from open
             "   coal mining  (dimensionless)
            Q  = emission rate  of particulate from represen-
             "   tative  source, g/s
       _     D = representative distance  from source, m
       X       = time-averaged maximum ground level  concen-
        max, p   tration of particulates, g/m3
            F  = primary standard for particulates,  g/m3
             P

The model for coa! dust  (less than 5% quartz) severity is ex-
pressed mathematically as (36):

                   S  =  1.58 x  105 Q  D"1' 18Lf                 (7)
                    C               C
 (36)  Blackwood, T. R.  Final Report Outline of the Source Assess-
      ment Document. Contract 68-02-1874, U.S. Environmental Pro-
      tection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
      (Report submitted by Monsanto Research Corporation, May
      1975.)   16 pp.
 (37)  Turner, D. B.  Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates
      Public Health Service Publication No. 999-AP-26, U.S.
      Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Cincinnati,
      Ohio, 1969.  52 pp.

                                 33

-------
where  S  = coal dust severity from open coal mining
            (dimensionless)
       Q  = emission rate of coal dust from representative
            source, g/s

Finally, the model for overburden dusts containing free silica
is  (36):

                   S  = 7.05 x 105 Q  D-1>811+                (8)


where  S  = silica-containing overburden dust severity from
            open coal mining  (dimensionless)
       Q  = emission rate of silica-containing overburden
            dust, g/s

Equation 7 was developed for coal containing the U.S. average of
3%  free silica  (TLV = 2 mg/m3); Equation 8 was developed for
overburden dust containing the U.S. average of 20% free silica
(TLV =0.44 mg/m3).

The first estimate of severity was made at the physical bound-
aries of the representative mine where the severity is highest
because of the inverse distance relationship.  The representative
source had an area of 2.0 km2, and the representative distance
to  the boundary was 792 m.  Equation 4 was used to compute the
emission rates Qp, Qc, and Qo where these were as follows:


                       Q  = 0.0455 g/s

                       Q  = 0.0418 g/s
                        \*r
                       Q  = 3.70 x 10~3 g/s


The severities computed for total dust, coal dust, and over-
burden were 1.0 x 10~3, 0.036, and 0.014, respectively.
                                34

-------
                            SECTION 5

                       CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
STATE OF THE ART

Emissions from open mining activities are generated from two
sources, mining unit operations and wind entrainment.  Air pollu-
tion at surface mines is a facet of the coal industry for which
virtually no control technology or techniques have been estab-
lished.  Air pollution control, except for mine refuse piles,
drills, and haul roads, has never been implemented.

Mine refuse piles are accumulations of wastes from the coal min-
ing operation.  These wastes contain carbonaceous material which
is susceptible to spontaneous combustion.  There are three
methods of control:  1) removal of oxygen, 2) lowering of kind-
ling temperature, and 3) removal of carbonaceous material.
These methods of control are accomplished, respectively, by
coating or otherwise shielding the pile from air currents, by
applying cooling processes, and by cleaning the refuse to remove
the carbonaceous matter.  Piles are shielded from air currents
by layer piling, piling with clay, sealing with clay and fly ash,
digging out and backfilling, and using trenches for storage
piles  (38).

When pile fires occur they are extinguished by flooding, blanket-
ing, slurry injection, compacting, loading out, and sealing.
Water and bulldozers also have been used to isolate the burning
sections.  However, extinguishment can generate additional
pollutants.

Drilling of blast holes using compressed air is an example of an
equipment-related source of emissions.  A variety of cyclones and
baghouses are available for control of dust.  Dust control during
blasting is allied closely with control of the blasting practice.
Well-planned, delayed shots will result in complete combustion
of the explosives.
(38) Maneval, R. 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.

                                35

-------
Emissions from wind entrainment are primarily generated  from the
loading and hauling of the coal and overburden.  Rubber-tired
equipment generates more dust than do crawler units.  Asphalt
mixtures are applied at some facilities for two reasons:  to de-
crease the haulage time of the trucks and to suppress the dust.
Most states enforce water spraying of haul roads to reduce dust
and improve operator safety.

Stockpiles are a source of wind-entrained emissions at surface-
mined sites.  The size of these piles, however, is kept  to a
minimum, with coal loaded onto the transport units as soon as
possible.  Control techniques available are discussed in depth
in the document entitled, "Source Assessment:  Coal Storage
Piles" (31).

FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS

Emissions from various sources in open mining may be controlled
by applying the research and development of related areas.   The
"mechanical" dust created by the movement of equipment over  the
soil and coal, along with the dust generated by the loading  and
dumping of these materials, may be controlled by the application
of a "chemical" spray (39).  The chemical spray consists of  a
dilute water solution of a surfactant or other chemical agent.
Water will not wet coal dust because of the difference in their
surface tensions.  If the surface tension of the water is
reduced by addition of a surfactant or other wetting agent,  it
will then wet the dust.   The spray solution is applied from
headers directed over the source of the emissions.  This tech-
nology may be applied to the travel and handling operations  of
the equipment; however,  its cost-effectiveness in relation to
open mining activities has not been studied.

Coal loaded in trucks may generate dust.  This source has been
controlled (40) by covering the material with tarpaulins or
spraying with a chemical agent.  The dumping operation emits ad-
ditional dust which has been controlled through the use of en-
closures placed over the dump area.  Application of these control
methods to open mining activities may also prove successful.

Wind entrainment generates fugitive dust from a variety of
sources within the mine area.  Control may be accomplished by
good housekeeping procedures.  Mine roads may be controlled  by
(39) No More Coal-Dust Problem for Georgia Power.  Power, 105(7)
     184-185, 1961.

(40) Minnick, L. J.  Control of Particulate Emissions from  Zinc
     Plants - A Survey.  Journal of the Air Pollution Control
     Association, 21 (4):195-200, 1971.


                               36

-------
coating with either water or an emulsified asphalt  (41).  Asphalt
should be used in areas where water may evaporate rapidly.  As-
phalt is usually applied to "out of the pit" roads  since its
effect on flotation and coal recovery may be adverse.  Water
spray trucks may work well in the pit area.  Roadways have been
coated with calcium chloride at underground mines,  and this may
work satisfactorily at surface mines.  The construction of berms,
the planting of suitable ground cover and windbreaks, erection of
fencing, and minimum disturbance of vegetation can  shield areas
from wind entrainment (40).  Cleaning of stripped rock by mechan-
ical or hand sweeping has also been applied.

In general, however, control technology development has not been
of serious concern to the surface mining industry.
 (41) Herde, R. S.  Dust Control on Mine Roads.  Mining Congress
     Journal,  51:90-92, July  1965.
                               37

-------
                           SECTION 6

                GROWTH AND NATURE OF THE INDUSTRY
PRESENT AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGY

The popularity of any particular mining technique is illustrated
by the "metric tons per man-shift" production level.  In 1960,
the average bituminous coal production was:  1) 20.8 metric tons/
man-shift for strip mining, 2) 28.5 metric tons/man-shift for
auger mining, and 3) 9.6 metric tons/man-shift for underground
mining (16).  The growth of open  (surface) mining since 1920 is
shown in Table 10.

            TABLE 10.  GROWTH OF SURFACE MINING (42)


Total coal
produced /
Year 10 6 metric tons
1920
1930
1940
1950
1960
1970
1972
597.6
487.1
464.7
508.4
394.0
555.7
546.6
Percent
surface
mined
1.7
4.2
9.7
24.1
31.7
43.9
48.9
Percent
deep
mined
98.3
95.8
90.3
75.9
68.3
56-1
51.1

There are three basic methods of  stripping  coal  (16).   In the
first, a single stripping  shovel  traveling  on  the  exposed coal
seam digs and removes the  overburden  ahead  of  it and  piles it in
the cut from which coal has previously been removed.   In  the
second, a single dragline  traveling on a bench above  the  coal
strips overburden to widen the bench  for its travel way for the
next cut and removes the highwall bench over which it has trav-
eled to expose the coal seam.  In the third, a shovel and a drag-
line are used in tandem with both traveling on exposed coal.   The
shovel, working ahead of the dragline, removes the lower  bench
to expose the coal seam and piles the spoil in the cut from which
(42) Dials, G. E. ,  and E. C. Moore.
     ment, 16(7):18-24, 1974.
The Cost of Coal.  Environ-
                                38

-------
coal has previously been removed.   The  dragline  removes  the upper
portion of the overburden  to  form  another  bench  and casts  the
spoil behind the shovel.   Numerous combinations  of  shovels, drag-
lines, bulldozers, scrapers,  and other  types  of  equipment  are
used throughout the industry.   Stripping methods are discussed
further in Appendix A.

There are two types of augering operations presently in  use (16):
1) augering highwalls left by stripping operations,  and  2)  auger-
ing outcrop coal.

In planning an open mining activity, one of the  first tasks is
testing the material to determine  its specific characteristics.
Factors such as bank weight and volume  (before excavation),  loose
weight and volume  (after excavation), density, and  swell factor
are analyzed.  Open mining operations then begin with the  acqui-
sition of the land based on prior  knowledge of surface topo-
graphy, overburden, seam characteristics, etc.   Plant location is
then influenced by access  to transportation,  sufficient area,
refuse disposal sites, and shortest haulage distance to the
cleaning plant.  The economics  of  open mining are ultimately
determined by the stripping ratio.

In mining coal, the value  of the equipment used  is directly re-
lated to its production potential.  Machines are used to their
maximum effectiveness since this increases the standard of  pro-
duction and decreases the  manual labor costs.  The machine  that
will provide the greatest  production at the lowest cost will
generally be the one selected for  the job.  Determination of the
production potential is based on the type of material to be
handled and the capabilities of the machine.  Equipment charac-
teristics such as struck capacity, nominal heaped capacity, and
fill factor express the amount  of material that  the equipment
container will hold.   Material  is  generally classified as easy,
medium, hard, and very hard, and the energy requirements of the
equipment must be correlated with  the material classification.
These factors all govern the choice of the equipment described
below.

Shovels

Shovels are used for the removal,  dumping, and loading of over-
burden and/or coal.  The shovel has evolved from a very crude
device to a highly sophisticated piece of equipment.  This  has
resulted from the continual improvement in design and adherence
to the basic operating principles  that resulted  from the in-
creased demand for production.  The main concern, therefore, is
the bucket, and everything is designed to promote its maximum
effectiveness.

Power shovels are classified by the  "struck" capacities of  their
buckets.  Shovel buckets generally range in size from 14 m3  to


                                39

-------
107 m3  (15).  Every bucket size has a corresponding  "depth  of
cut" which  is the height of the material bank that will  fill the
bucket.  Shovels presently available make it possible to mine
deposits which could not previously be considered.   To remove
the material, a powerful steam or electric motor is  needed.  The
larger  shovels in use are generally electric or diesel-electric
(43).   Most of the recently purchased shovels are electric  be-
cause they  are more economical and convenient to use than are
diesel-electric (44).  Diesel-powered units are used where
greater mobility is required.

A shovel has an average equipment capability of 83%, with the
larger  shovels being more efficient.  Shovels are generally used
where the material is too rough for other prime movers.  They
require little surface preparation, less labor, and  exhibit a
longer  operating time than other equipment (15).  The shovel
works a cylindrical pattern of:  1) loading the bucket,  2)  swing-
ing to  a dump point, 3) dumping the load, and 4) swinging back
for the next cut (16) .

Draglines

Draglines are also utilized for the removal, dumping, and loading
of overburden and/or coal.  They are designed to dig below  the
level of the machine and must be placed on solid ground  (45).
Draglines are used in the excavation of the "easy" to "hard"
material classes of overburden.  Smaller units are generally
used for the loading of trucks since the larger units do not
have loading preceision.  Buckets of the larger draglines can
cast the overburden at any point on a 6.28 rad circle.

As with shovels, dragline buckets are classified by their struck
capacities.  These bucket capacities range from 0.3 m3 to 168 m3.
Draglines also follow a cylindrical pattern of:  1)  dragging the'
bucket and filling, 2)  hoisting and swinging to the dump point,
3) dumping the load, 4) lowering and swinging back the empty
bucket, and 5)  casting the bucket for the next load  (15).

Today, electric motors are used on draglines because they provide
greater power than other types, are easily controlled, and  are
economical.  Diesel-electric engines are utilized when greater
mobility is required.  The smaller draglines rely solely on
diesel power for mobility.
(43) Marion Power Shovel Introductory Brochure.  Marion Power
     Shovel Company, Marion, Ohio, 1968.

(44) Tractors and Scrapers Versus Shovels and Trucks.  Mining
     Congress Journal.  52:42-45, January 1966.

(45) Carson, B. A.  General Excavation Methods.  F. W. Dodge
     Corporation, New York, New York, 1961.  pp. 96-122.


                               40

-------
Draglines have greater  range  and adaptability than other prime
movers.  They will dig  deeper box cuts (greater overburden), can
handle moist material,  and  are not restricted by the pit dimen-
sions.  Because of location outside of the pit, the dragline is
not dependent on the  floor  quality and is safe from pit floodings
or landslides  (45).

The size of draglines doubled between 1954 and 1966.  This trend
is exemplified by the recent  development of a dragline with a
168 m3 bucket which weighs  24 metric tons (46).

Bucket Wheel Excavators

Wheel excavators are  elaborate machines that can be used only in
specialized situations.  They are most successful in areas that
do not require blasting.  Excavators can work continuously below,
above, or at the working  level in tandem with belt conveyors
which economically transport  the material.  This lowers the cost
of the power required since it extends the discharge radius of
the unit  (15).

Wheel excavators are  unsatisfactory for the following reasons:
they exhibit a low operating  efficiency;  they have difficulty in
handling hard materials;  they require extensive surface prepara-
tion; and they have less  flexibility than the draglines or
shovels  (15).  In addition, they require a higher capital cost
and demand a greater  labor  force than do other excavators.

Front-end Loaders

Front-end  (F-E) loaders (see  Figure 8) are used at almost all
mining activities because of  their production capability, versa-
tility, and adaptability.
                       PISTON FOR BUCKET ROTATION
                                                    BUCKET
            ENGINE
                             LIFTING PISTON

                   Figure 8.   Front-end loader.
 (46)   Big  Muskie:   King of the Giants.  Coal Age, 74(12):50-61
       1969.

                                 41

-------
The F-E loader was originally  a modified tractor with arms and a
bucket attached, but it now has a  specially designed frame.
Steady improvements in design  have corresponded with the accept-
ance of the F-E loader.   It is well suited  to  the handling of
stockpiled material or well-blasted rock.   When equipped with
rubber tires, it is an efficient haulage unit  for short dis-
tances.

Bucket capacities range from 0.4 m3  to  12.2 m3.   F-E loaders with
buckets greater than 3 m3 are  all  tire  mounted.   Crawler-mounted
units are used on difficult surfaces, but they  are slow moving
and are used to transport material only over short distances.
The rubber-tired units are faster  and more  agile.

Scraper

Scrapers  (see Figure 9) are available in a  variety of designs and
capacities that can be used in any mining system.   They are  gen-
erally used for handling material  in refuse or  stockpiles (47).
Scrapers are presently available in four models:   hoe,  box,
crescent, and folding  (48).  The digging and hauling qualities of
a unit are functions of its weight,  blade curvature,  and harnes-
sing of the rope pull which is the only adjusting piece of equip-
ment on the machine.
                  EJECTOR
          PUSHER BLOCK
                       BOWL-/ CUTTING EDGE-^ LAPRON
            Figure 9.  Scraper  (self-propelled unit).

Scrapers are used as auxiliary equipment when overburden  is  to be
moved hundreds of meters.  This is done when the  soil  is  loose or
relatively soft, as in the upper portion of the overburden.
Scraper operation is complex and cyclical, requiring the  coor-
dination of man and machine.  Scrapers are rated  by  their struck
and/or heaped capacity.
(47) Young, G. I.  Elements of Mining.  McGraw-Hill  Book Company,
     New York, New York, 1946.  414 pp.

(48) Wetson, J. A.  Guide to the Selection of Mine Scrapers.
     Engineering and Mining Journal,  168:173-175, January 1967.
                               42

-------
The selection of a scraper  depends  on the type of tractor that
will pull the unit.  The  self-propelled unit shown in Figure 9
provides vastly improved  haulage  speeds.   Four-wheel drive units
are the newest innovation.   They  can be used on steeper grades
and they provide greater  pulling  power than do the older types.

Bulldozers

A bulldozer  (see Figure 10)  is  also an evolution of the tractor,
with a curved steel blade attached  to the front by pivotal arms.
The blade can be lowered, raised, or tilted by means of adjoining
cables or rams.
                                          LIFT ARM
                                                BLADE
                                                EDGE OR KNIFE
                                          PUSH ARM

             Figure 9.   Scraper (self-propelled unit).

Bulldozers are  currently  used for numerous  activities  such as
land clearing and  preparation,  maintenance  and clearance of haul-
age roads, cleanup for  shovels  and draglines,  maintenance of
spoil piles, ripping and  stump  removal,  and various  other strip-
ping activities  (49).   Dozers are generally used when  the soil
does not have to be pushed  more than 100 m.

There are six types of  dozers on the market:   1)  straight bull-
dozers, 2) angle dozers,  3)  tilt dozers, 4)  push dozers, 5) U-
shaped dozers,  and 6) other modifications (50).   The main con-
trolling factor in the  selection of equipment  is the condition
and type of  material being  excavated.   Dozers  are available with
 (49) Warren, P. J.   Tractor  Dozers  Blaze the Trail.   Rock Pro-
     ducts,  66:84-86,  94-96,  March  1963.

 (50) Adler,  Y., and  H.  E.  Naumann.   Analyzing Excavation and
     Materials Handling Equipment.   Research Division Bulletin
     No. 53, Virginia  Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg,
     Virginia, February 1970.   230  pp.

                                 43

-------
crawlers or wheels.  The crawlers are generally used for the rip-
ping, land clearing and preparation, and cleaning activities,
whereas wheeled dozers are used for spreading the overburden
because of their increased mobility and speed.  Crawler tractors
are used on the harder soils where greater traction  (strength) is
required to push material over short distances.  Wheel dozers are
used if the material is loose and is to be pushed over long dis-
tances  (51).  Production rates of 230 m3/hr to 350 m3/hr can be
expected for wheeled dozers since they are faster and have more
frequent loadings.  Crawler dozers have rates of 115 m3/hr to
185 m3/hr but are less costly than wheeled units since the latter
need to be heavier  (52).

Recently developed bulldozers of the four-wheel drive, rubber-
tired version are more amenable to high production and have
better traction.  The large crawler units were developed for use
as rippers, and they can be substituted for blasting in shales
and sandstones.

Coal Augers

Augering of coal is accomplished with either single or multiple
auger units that can dig up to 67 m deep and produce from 180 to
270 metric tons/day.  Augering is performed on seams where there
is a constant pitch and no strains of interfacing material to
cause equipment breakage.  It is done in a patterned manner which
effectuates the greatest removal of coal.

Drills

Drills presently in use are predominantly the rotary types  (53).
Rotary drills use compressed air to remove the cuttings from bore
holes of 12 cm to 38 cm in diameter.  The thicker the overburden,
the larger the diameter of the drill used and the fewer the holes
required.  Newer drills have self-contained dust control appara-
tus as shown in Figure 11  (54).  Tilt features are available that
enable angled and horizontal drilling to be performed when rocks
are near the surface.
 (51) Rubber-Tired Dozer Was a Busy Rig.  Roads and Streets,
     102:165, November 1959.

 (52) Rodonsky, J.  Track and Wheels in the Open-Pit  - Where  Do
     They Perform Best?  Engineering and Mining Journal,  158:
     87-89, April 1957.

 (53) Guides for Successful Stripping.  Coal Age,  67:186-205,
     July 1962.

 (54) Harwood, C. F., and T. P. Blaszak.  Characterization and
     Control of Asbestos Emissions from Open  Sources.   EPA-650/2-
     74-090, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research  Tri-
     angle Park, North Carolina, December 1974.   195 pp.

                                44

-------
                          CENTER LINE OF HOLE
                           AND ROTARY DRIVE
                    LAZY SUSAN
        EXHAUST FAN
         3,000cfm
 ACCESS DOORS
 36 BAGS SLY
TYPE BAG FILTER
HYDRAULIC
  JACK
       HINGED
     REAR FLAP OF
     RUBBER SKIRT
             	RUBBER
           HYDRAULIC JACK-7   SKIRT
   Figure  11.   Rotary drill with dust  control equipment  (54).

The newer  method of inclined drilling  is gaining wider acceptance
in the industry due to its greater  toe and back breakage, better
fragmentation,  use of fewer explosives/metric ton small diameter
of holes required, and greater overburden throwing distances  (16).

Automation of  drills to speed up the process, to keep pace with
the increased  tempo of mining production, has met with limited
success  (55).   Development of such  drills is particularly needed
because of the lack of skilled manpower available for operation
of the drills  presently in use.

Haulage Equipment

The size of haulage units may vary  over a large range since the
units are  matched to the capacity of the loading rigs.  A general
rule of thumb  in the industry is to use trucks having a capacity
which is four  to five times that of the dipper capacity of the
loading units.
(55) Li, T. M.   Rotary Drilling with  Automated Controls - New
     Force in Open-Pit Blast Hole Production.   Coal Age, 79(8):
     82-89, 1974.
                                  45

-------
 In  applications where haulage roads are steep,  individual elec-
 tric  drives  are sometimes connected to each wheel.   Engines up to
 522 kW are common among haulage units, which are diesel powered.
 Over  the  years,  the  cost of  haulage has decreased as the size of
 haulers and  the quantity of  coal hauled have increased.   Fuel
 consumption  averages more than 1.85 x  10 3  m3/km.   The  increased
 use of tandem-drive  axle and dual rear wheels has cut the costs
 and increased  production.  In addition,  the use  of  paved haul
 roads has cut  down travel times and increased productivity.
 Larger haulage units,  up to  200 metric tons,  are now being util-
 ized,  and the  trend  is toward even larger units.

 Blasting

 The most  commonly used blasting explosive,  ANFO,  is  a mixture of
 ammonium  nitrate and fuel  oil,  usually in the proportion of
 454 kg of NH^NOa  to  2.2  kg to 2.7 kg of  fuel  oil.  At smaller
 facilities the explosive is  usually bagged,  and  the  fuel oil  is
 poured over  the  bags at  the  drill site.  Larger  facilities have
 mixing plants  and the  mixture is  transported  to  the  drill  site
 where  it  is  either poured  into  the  holes or blown in using com-
 pressed air.   Pneumatic  loading of  horizontal drill  holes  is  a
 new technique  that may replace  the  need  to  hand or mechanically
 tamp  the  charge  (56).  The holes  are spaced according to  their
 size,  the overburden thickness, and the  type  of rock.

 A slurry  blasting agent  of ammonium nitrate,  sodium  nitrate,  a
 high  explosive sensitizer, and  water has recently been developed
 which  may replace ANFO.

 INDUSTRY  PRODUCTION  TRENDS

 Coal Development

 The trend in the  coal  industry  is to increase the open mining
 proportion of  production.  The  introduction of multiple-headed
 augers has increased the production rate of auger mining.  The
 use of the "haulback"  method  of strip  mining  has made this method
 of  extraction  more environmentally  acceptable.  With over  70%  of
 the nation's coal reserves lying  in the western states,  the
 growth for this region is anticipated  to extend into  the  21st
 century.  Conventional equipment will  be used to mine these re-
 serves, but it will  require larger booms for  greater  spoil reach.

With coal reserves growing, the demand for  larger capacity mining
units has increased.    Larger  units are being  introduced  each  year
(56) Murray, J. R., and J. W. Francis.  Consol Tries Pneumatic
     Bulk Loading of Horizontal Drill Holes.  Coal Age, 79(1):
     64-65, 1974.

                               46

-------
to cope with the increased amounts of rock and dirt that must be
removed.  Despite the higher cost of larger units, the overall
cost for mining a cubic meter of overburden with them is lower
than that of the smaller machinery.  Thus, over the years, the
average depth of overburden removed to expose coal seams will
steadily increase.  Since most western coals are relatively low
in sulfur content and occur in thicker seams than in the east,
this area has become more environmentally and economically
attractive.

Growth Factor

The total annual surface coal production predicted for 1978 is
312 x 106 metric tons based on projections made by the National
Petroleum Council in 1973  (57).  This forecast assumes a sus-
tained growth rate of 3.5% per year.  The emissions are expected
to increase in proportion to the growth due to the assumed lack
of further control technology implementation.  The growth factor,
defined as the ratio of 1978 emissions of respirable dust to 1972
emissions of respirable dust, is 1.23.
 (57) U.S. Energy Outlook - Coal Availability.  A Report by the
     Coal Task Group of the Other Energy Resources  Subcommittee
     of the National Petroleum Council's Committee  on U.S. Energy
     Outlook, Washington, B.C., 1973.  p.  287.
                               47

-------
                           REFERENCES
 1.  1974 Keystone Coal Industry Manual.  G. F. Nielsen, ed.
     McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, New York, 1974.  859 pp.

 2.  A Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms.
     P. W. Thrush, ed.  U.S. Department of the Interior, Wash-
     ington, D.C., 1968.  1269 pp.

 3.  A.S.T.M. Standards on Coal and Coke.  ASTM Designation
     D 388-38, American Society for Testing and Materials,
     Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, September 1948.  p. 80.

 4.  Minerals Yearbook, 1972; Volume I:  Metals, Minerals, and
     Fuels.  U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. ,
     1974.  1370 pp.

 5.  Chemical Engineers' Handbook, Fourth Edition.  J. H. Perry,
     ed.  McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, New York, 1963.
     1650 pp.

 6.  Brown, R. , M. L. Jacobs, and H. E. Taylor.  A Survey of the
     Most Recent Applications of Spark Source Mass Spectrometry .
     American Laboratory, 4(11):29-40, 1972.

 7.  Abernethy, R. F. , M. J. Peterson, and F. H. Gibson.  Spec-
     trochemical Analyses of Coal Ash for Trace Elements.  Bureau
     of Mines RI-7281, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washing-
     ton, D.C., July 1969.  30 pp.

 8.  Brunner, D. R. , and D. J. Keller.  Sanitary Landfill Design
     and Operation.  Report SW-65ts, U.S. Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency, Washington, D.C., 1972.  p. 16.

 9.  Jahr, D. J.  Proposed Threshold Limit Values for Dusts Con-
     taining Free Silica.  Staub Reinhaltung der Luft  (in
     English), 33:86-90, February 1973.

10.  Chemistry of the Soil, Second Edition.  F. E. Bear, ed.
     Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York, New York, 1965.
     502 pp.
                                48

-------
11.  Shoemaker, J. W., E. C. Beaumont, and F. E. Kottlewski.
     Strippable Low-Sulfur Coal Resources of the San Juan Basin
     in New Mexico and Colorado.  Memoir No. 25, New Mexico
     Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Socorro, New Mexico,
     1971.

12.  Foth, H. D.,  and L. M. Turk.  Fundamentals of Soil Science,
     Fifth Edition.  John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York,
     1972.  442 pp.

13.  Kim. A. G.  The Composition of Coalbed Gas.  Bureau of Mines
     RI-7762 (PB 221 574), U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D.C., May 1973.  13 pp.

14.  Krickovic, S., and C. Findlay.  Methane Emission Rate
     Studies in a Central Pennsylvania Mine.  Bureau of Mines
     RI-7591 (PB 206 359), U.S. Department of the Interior, Wash-
     ington, D.C., 1971.  9 pp.

15.  Surface Mining.  E. P. Pfleider, ed.   American Institute of
     Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, Inc.,
     New York,  New York, 1972.  1048 pp.

16.  Woodruff,  S.  D.  Methods of Working Coal and Metal Mines,
     Volume 3.   Pergamon Press, New York,  New York, 1966.
     571 pp.

17.  1972 Census of Mineral Industries (SIC 1211),  Bituminous
     Coal and Lignite.  MIC72(P)-12A-1, U.S. Department of Com-
     merce, Washington, D.C., April 1974.   7 pp-

18.  Chaiken, R. F., E. B. Cook, and T. C. Ruhe.  Toxic Fumes
     from Explosives; Ammonium Nitrate-Fuel Oil Mixtures.   Bureau
     of Mines RI-7867  (PB 233 496), U.S. Department of the Inte-
     rior, Washington, D-C., May 1974.  29 pp.

19.  Woodruff,  N.  P., and F. H. Siddoway.   A Wind Erosion  Equa-
     tion.  Soil Science Society of America, Proceedings,  29(5):
     602-608, 1965.

20.  Jenne, D.  E.   An Analysis of High Volume Particulate  Sam-
     pling Data in Benton, Franklin, and Walla Walla Counties of
     Washington -  1970, 1973.  Benton-Franklin-Walla Walla
     Counties Air  Pollution Control Authority,  Hanford, Washing-
     ton, June 1974.  37 pp.

21.  Thornthwaite, C. W.  Climates of North America According to
     a New Classification.  Geographical Review, 21:633-655,
     March 1931.
                               49

-------
22.   Blackwood, T. R., and P. K. Chalekode.  Source Assessment:
     Transport of Sand and Gravel.  Contract 68-02-1320, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
     North Carolina.  (Preliminary document submitted to the EPA
     by Monsanto Research Corporation, November 1974.)  86 pp.

23.   Langefors, U-, and B. Kihlstrom.  The Modern Technique of
     Rock Blasting.  John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York,
     1963.  405 pp.

24.   Cheng, L.  Formation of Airborne-Respirable Dust at Belt
     Conveyor Transfer Points.  American Industrial Hygiene Asso-
     ciation Journal, 34 (12):540-546, 1973.

25.   Corn, M., F. Stein, Y. Hammad, S. Manekshaw, R. Freedman,
     and A. M. Hartstein.  Physical and Chemical Properties of
     Respirable Coal Dust from Two United States Mines.  American
     Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 34 (7):279-285, 1973.

26.   Sweet, D. V., W. E. Grouse, J. V. Crable, J. R. Carlberg,
     and W. S. Lainhart.  The Relationship of Total Dust, Free
     Silica, and Trace Metal Concentrations to the Occupational
     Respiratory Disease of Bituminous Coal Miners.  American
     Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 35 (8):479-488, 1974.

27.   Schlick, D. P.  Respirable Dust Sampling Requirements Under
     the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.  Bureau
     of Mines IC-8484, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washing-
     ton, D.C., July 1970.  35 pp.

28.   Cheng, L., and P. P. Zukovich.  Respirable Dust Adhering to
     Run-of-Face Bituminous Coals.  Bureau of Mines RI-7765, U.S.
     Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., 1973.  10 pp.

29.   TLVs® Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and
     Physical Agents in the Workroom Environment with Intended
     Changes for 1973.  American Conference of Governmental In-
     dustrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1973.  94 pp.

30.   Irani, M. C., et al.  Methane Emission from U.S. Coal Mines
     in 1973, A Survey.   Supplement to Bureau of Mines IC-8558,
     U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., December
     1974.  52 pp.

31.   Blackwood, T. R., and R. A. Wachter.  Source Assessment:
     Coal Storage Piles.  Contract 68-02-1874, U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency,  Cincinnati, Ohio.  July 1977-  84 pp.
                                50

-------
32.   Blackwood, T. R., T. F. Boyle, T. L. Peltier, J. V.
     Pustinger, and D. L. Zanders.  Fugitive Dust from Mining
     Operations - Appendix.  Contract 68-02-1320, Task 10, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
     North Carolina.  (Final report submitted to the EPA by
     Monsanto Research Corporation, September 1975.)   65 pp.

33.   Paone, J. , J. L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.  Land Utiliza-
     tion and Reclamation in the Mining Industry, 1930-1971.
     Bureau of Mines IC-9642, U.S. Department of the Interior,
     Washington, D.C., 1971.  148 pp.

34.   Strippable Reserves of Bituminous Coal and Lignite in the
     United States.  Bureau of Mines IC-8531, U.S. Department of
     the Interior, Washington, D.C., 1971.  148 pp.

35.   Coal Analyses of Model Mines for Strip Mining of Coal in the
     United States.  Bureau of Mines IC-8535, U.S. Department of
     the Interior, Washington, D.C., 1972.  115 pp.

36.   Blackwood, T. R.  Final Report Outline of the Source Assess-
     ment Document.  Contract 68-02-1874, U.S. Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
     (Report submitted by Monsanto Research Corporation,
     May 1975.)  16 pp.

37.   Turner, D. B.  Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates.
     Public Health Service Publication No. 999-AP-26, U.S.
     Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Cincinnati,
     Ohio, 1969.  52 pp.

38.   Maneval, R. 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.

39-   No More Coal-Dust Problem for Georgia Power.  Power, 105(7):
     184-185, 1961.

40.   Minnick, L. J.  Control of Particulate Emissions from Zinc
     Plants - A Survey.   Journal of the Air Pollution Control
     Association, 21 (4):195-200, 1971.

41.   Herde, R. S.  Dust Control on Mine Roads.  Mining Congress
     Journal, 51:90-92,  July 1965.

42.   Dials, G. E., and E. C. Moore.  The Cost of Coal.  Environ-
     ment, 16(7):18-24,  1974.

43.   Marion Power Shovel Introductory Brochure.  Marion Power
     Shovel Company, Marion, Ohio, 1968.
                               51

-------
44.   Tractors and Scrapers Versus Shovels and Trucks.  Mining
     Congress Journal.  52:42-45, January 1966.

45.   Carson, B. A.  General Excavation Methods.  F. W. Dodge Cor-
     poration, New York, New York, 1961.  pp. 96-122.

46.   Big Muskie:  King of the Giants.  Coal Age, 74(12):50-61,
     1969.

47.   Young, G. I.  Elements of Mining.  McGraw-Hill Book Company,
     New York, New York, 1946.  414 pp.

48.   Wetson, J. A.  Guide to the Selection of Mine Scrapers.
     Engineering and Mining Journal, 168:173-175, January 1967.

49.   Warren, P. J.  Tractor Dozers Blaze the Trail.  Rock Pro-
     ducts, 66:84-86, 94-96, March 1963.

50.   Adler, Y., and H. E. Naumann.  Analyzing Excavation and
     Materials Handling Equipment.  Research Division Bulletin
     No. 53, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg,
     Virginia, February 1970.  230 pp.

51.   Rubber-Tired Dozer Was a Busy Rig.  Roads and Streets,
     102:165, November 1959.

52.   Rodonsky, J.  Track and Wheels in the Open-Pit - Where Do
     They Perform Best?  Engineering and Mining Journal, 158:
     87-89, April 1957.

53.   Guides for Successful Stripping.  Coal Age, 67:186-205,
     July 1962.

54.   Harwood, C. F., and T. P. Blaszak.  Characterization and
     Control of Asbestos Emissions from Open Sources.  EPA-650/2-
     74-090, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Tri-
     angle Park, North Carolina, December 1974.  195 pp.

55.   Li, T. M.  Rotary Drilling with Automated Controls - New
     Force in Open-Pit Blast Hole Production.  Coal Age, 79(8):
     82-89, 1974.

56.   Murray, J. R., and J. W. Francis.  Consol Tries Pneumatic
     Bulk Loading of Horizontal Drill Holes.  Coal Age, 79(1):
     64-65, 1974.

57.   U.S. Energy Outlook - Coal Availability.  A Report by the
     Coal Task Group of the Other Energy Resources Subcommittee
     of the National Petroleum Council's Committee on U.S. Energy
     Outlook, Washington, D.C., 1973.  p. 287.
                                52

-------
58.   Stefanko, R.,  R. J. Ramani, and M. R. Ferko.  An Analysis of
     Strip Mining Methods and Equipment Selection.  Office of
     Coal Research R&D Report No. 61, Interim Report No. 7, U.S.
     Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C., 29 May 1973.
     131 pp.

59.   1972 National Emissions Report.  EPA-450/2-74-012, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
     North Carolina, June 1974.  422 pp.
                                 53

-------
                           APPENDIX A

      STRIP AND AUGER MINING TECHNIQUES FROM THE  STANDPOINT
                     OF REGIONAL VARIABILITY


Strip  (opencast) mining and auger mining are the  two methods most
widely used for removing surface coal.

Strip mining consists of removing the overburden, extracting the
coal, and then replacing the overburden.  When the overlying
material consists of earth or clay, it can be removed directly by
scrapers or excavators, but where rock is encountered it is
necessary to resort to blasting to prepare the material for
handling by the excavators.  The usual method of  working is to
extract the coal in a series of regular slices called cuts.  The
length of each cut is governed by the limits of the area to be
worked.  The width of the cut depends on the type of excavating
equipment available; for example, in the case of  dragline exca-
vators the casting distance will be a determining factor.  The
first operation is to make an initial cut, called the box cut,
into solid ground.  Overburden from this cut has  to be loaded
into vehicles and transported to a suitable dumping ground.  The
exposed coal can then be excavated.  Next, the overburden of the
second cut is deposited into the void of the preceding cut,
thereby exposing a fresh area of coal for excavation.  This
system is repeated across the area to be worked,  and the box cut
overburden is used to fill the void of the final  cut (2).

Auger mining is a method often used by strip mine operators when
the overburden gets too thick to be removed economically.  Large-
diameter, evenly spaced holes are drilled up to 61 m into the
coalbed by an auger.  Like a bit used for boring  holes in wood,
this consists of a cutting head with screwlike extensions.  As
the auger turns, the head breaks the coal, and the screwlike
extensions raise it and dump it on an elevating conveyor; this,
in'turn, carries the coal to an overhead bin or loads it directly
into a truck.   Auger mining is relatively inexpensive, and it is
reported to recover approximately 60% to 65% of the coal  (2).

There are two broad strip coal mining techniques  practiced in the
United States, contour mining and area mining.  Both types can be
used only if the overburden thickness is less than approximately
61 m (the limit of current equipment).  Contour mining finds
application in hilly terrain where the topography governs pit
design.  The objective of contour mining is to extract coal by


                               54

-------
excavating narrow strips which follow the  circumference  of  the
hill.  Coalbeds generally lie flat in the  ground;  thus it is
impractical to completely extract coal lying in a  hillside.  The
overburden becomes increasingly deeper, resulting  in uneconomical
extraction.  This fact can be readily seen in Figure A-l  (58).

The term maximum stripping ratio is used to determine where min-
ing becomes uneconomical.  Stripping ratio is usually defined as
the ratio of the depth of overburden removed to depth of coal
produced (meters of overburden/meter coal).  Thus, large amounts
of overburden are commonly removed if the  coal seam is thick, as
shown in Figure A-l.  The maximum stripping ratio  varies from
region to region, but 20:1 is a typical figure.  At one Illinois
mine as much as 24 m of overburden is stripped to  recover 71 cm
of coal (16).

Area mining, the second general method of  strip mining, involves
the development of large flat open pits in a series of long nar-
row strips, usually 30 m wide by 1 km or more in length.   The
objective of area mining, which also applies to contour mining,
is to expose, recover, and haul away the coal as economically as
possible.   This usually means that the overburden  should be moved
only once.   The above definition of stripping ratio holds iden-
tically for area mining.  A generalized schematic  representative
of open pit or area mining at an Illinois mine is  shown in Fig-
ure A-2.  This schematic depicts a dragline working a multiple
coal seam operation.  The view of a Wyoming mine in Figure A-3
shows two seams being worked from an upper and a lower bench.
Regional variations exist in strip mining  (58), and the three
divisions of East and Mideast, Central, and Midwest and West can
be used to classify these variations as described  below.

East and Mideast

The East is characterized by steep, hilly  topography with the
coal outcropping on both sides of the hills.  Strip mining is
generally confined to small tracts of land, and because of the
nature of the terrain, contour mining with small equipment is
more common than area mining (58).

The Mideast is also noted for hilly terrain, although the slopes
are not as steep as those encountered in Pennsylvania.  Contour
mining is generally the rule, especially in Ohio,  and variations
from mine to mine concern the amount of land affected as one
(58) Stefanko, R., R. J. Ramani, and M. R. Ferko.  An Analysis
     of Strip Mining Methods and Equipment Selection.  Office of
     Coal Research R&D Report No. 61, Interim Report No. 7, U.S.
     Department of the Interior, Washington, B.C., 29 May 1973.
     131 pp.
                               55

-------
                      HILLSIDE BEFORE MINING
          DEPICTING STRIPPING RATIO, meters overburden/meter coal removed
                    ECONOMICAL
                           UNECONOMICAL
                       HILLSIDE AFTER MINING
Figure A-l.
Hillside before  and after mining  showing
typical stripping ratio variability  (58).
                               56

-------
                                      DRAGLINE
                                      ROAD ON
                                      LEVELED
                                      SPOIL
                EXPOSED ILLINOIS
                  NO. 6 SEAM
                       PLAN VIEW
       1.8 m:NO. 6 SEAM     SECTIONAL VIEW
Figure A-2.   Dragline positioned on  leveled  spoil
               removing parting for multiple seam
               operation in  Illinois  (58) .
                           57

-------
                                          HAULAGE ROAD
                     v   v   v
                       v   SURFACE
  Figure A-3.  Plan view of a Wyoming open pit  coal mine  (58).

tract and the equipment size used.   In this  area  equipment  with
capacities up to 164 m3 is used to mine coal from seams at  depths
up to 56 m  (58).

Central

As the topography of the land becomes more flat in the Central
region of the country, the mining methods become  more tradition-
al.  The pits are nearly straight for their  entire length.   Dif-
ferent kinds of equipment such as bucket wheel  excavators find
rather widespread use in this area because of the unconsolidated
nature of the upper strata.  In other areas  of  the Central  region
where the upper strata are consolidated, large  draglines are
utilized to mine coal (58).

Midwest and West

The Midwest region of the United States is the  western portion  of
the Great Plain, specifically the states of  North and South
Dakota.  The topography of this area is nearly  flat, and although
no surface mining is currently under way in  South Dakota, ample
lignite reserves are present for future development  (58).
                               58

-------
The topography of the West is characterized by gently rolling
hills which gradually steepen toward the Rocky Mountains.  The
coal seams are generally subbituminous and lignite.  Small capa-
city equipment is utilized to mine these coals.  The most strik-
ing characteristic of the coal seams in this region is their
thickness, which approaches 31 m in some areas (58).
                                59

-------
                           APPENDIX B

           RESPIRABLE DUST EMISSION FACTOR DERIVATION
                       AND SUPPORTIVE DATA
UNIT OPERATIONS

The emission factors for open coal mining were arrived at by
field sampling two mines.  Information on overburden dusts re-
sulting from drilling, overburden removal (stripping), and blast-
ing was obtained from mine A, a bituminous coal mine located in
Illinois.  Mine B, a subbituminous coal mine located in Wyoming,
was sampled for information on coal dusts resulting from blasting,
transport/unloading, and loading.

The field measurements were made on a portable respirable dust
monitor manufactured by GCA Corporation, Model RDM 101-4.  When
employed in the respirable "mode" the instrument measures mass
concentrations of particles having mean diameters (assumed
spherical) less than 7 ym.  The instrument is capable of measur-
ing dust concentrations ranging from 20 yg/m3 to 10 x 103 yg/m3.
The accuracy of the instrument is defined in its specifications
as "...within ±25% of the measurements obtained from a companion
simultaneous gravimetric respirable mass sample for 95% of the
samples."

The general procedure for determining the respirable dust emis-
sion factors consisted of sampling the equipment actively engaged
in mining for mass concentrations, computing an emission rate via
one of Turner's (37) Gaussian plume models  (point source, line
source, dose), and finally relating the emission rate to perti-
nent weighting parameters.  The weighting parameters were used to
convert the mass emission rate to mass emissions (g) per metric
ton of coal mined in the case of the unit operations.  The spe-
cific weighting parameters used are discussed in this section.

The three-diminsional coordinate system describing  the location
of the GCA sampler with respect to the emission source is de-
picted in Figure B-l for point sources.  The GCA sampler was
elevated downwind approximately 2 m above ground in all  instances
to minimize ground effect.  Care was taken  to ensure that the
plume was not missed when sampling at x distances less than 100 m
by choosing elevated sites.  A rule of thumb generally used to
set the minimum sampling distance was that  the sampler be set a
distance x that is greater than 18 times z, the effective height

                               60

-------
of the emission  source  (from the sampler datum).   The mass con-
centration contribution  of  the source was estimated as the dif-
ference between  the  downwind reading and the background reading.
Background readings  were obtained by sampling with the GCA
monitor at the mine  boundaries furthest upwind.
                        WIND
              GCA SAMPLER
              SITE(x,y,z)
               - n
     Figure B-l.
Three-dimensional rectangular coordinate
systems (point sources).
The raw concentration data from mines A and B are presented in
Table B-l.  The results indicate that draglines and overburden
blasting operations do not emit significant quantities of res-
pirable dust, although much visible dust was witnessed.  Over-
burden stripping is performed by several types of equipment
throughout the industry, but the functions of each type are simi-
lar and thus the emission factor for overburden stripping was
assigned a zero value.  The overburden blasting did not emit res-
pirable particulates; the coal blasting operation at mine B did.
This suggests a greater friability of coal versus overburden.
Drilling operations generated the highest concentrations of dust.
Of all unit operations, drilling comminutes the particles of
greatest amount, especially in tough overburden  (rock).  Coal
drilling operations were not sampled because they are not as
widely used throughout the industry as overburden drilling.

The unit operations of reclamation and coal augering were also
not sampled.  The reclamation operation is similar in nature to
overburden stripping and perhaps less severe.  Thus, an emission
factor of zero was assigned to it.  Coal augering generates res-
pirable dust that is expected to be similar in magnitude to that
                                 61

-------
                         TABLE  B-l.   RAW  DATA  - UNIT OPERATIONS
Wind
Atmospheric speed,
Unit operation Date stability m/s


Overburden stripping 4/16/75 C 3.0

Drilling 4/17/75 D 9.0
Distance,
X
117.9
101.2
70.7
87.5
87.5
152.4
33.5
33.5
33.5
33.5
Blasting 4/18/75 D 9.8 260.0


76.2
Blasting 5/15/75 B 4.47

457.2
76.2




Loading 5/15/75 B 5.4

76.2
76.2
76.2
Transport 5/15/75 B 2.2 22.9


Transport 5/15/75 B 3.6 1 **•*

76.2

Unloading 5/15/75 B 4.47



76.2


y
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0


0
30.5
9.1



0
0
0
0


0
4.6

0


0


m
z
15.2
15.2
15.2
15.2
15.2
0
0
0
0
0
0


-12.2
30.5
-12.2



0
0
0
0


0
0

0


0


Dust type
Overburden.
a
Overburden
Overburden
Overburden
Overburden
Overburden
a
Overburden
Overburden
Overburden
Overburden
Overburden


Coalc
Coal
CoalC



Coal
Coal
Coal
Coal


Coal
Coal

Coal


Coal


Downwind
cone . ,
b
<50b
<50b
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
901.2
2,001.2
1,091.2
2,101.2
0.0


480.0
140.0
70.0



273.0
378.0
194.0
460.0


1,280.0
320.0

430.0


60.0


Comments


Bucyrus-Erie 1450-W
60-yd3 dragline.

Bucyrus-Erie 61-R
15-in-dian>. drill
(no control) .
9,107 kg ANFO detonated
(twelve-55-ft holes)
(4-min sample).
196 kg ANFO (4-min sample)
536 kg ANFO (4-min sample)
Approx. 27 metric tons
coal loaded into truck
by 750-metric ton per
hour front-end loader.
91 metric tons loaded
into truck in 5 min.
!91 metric tons loaded
into truck in 6 min.
12.9 km/hr transport
(0.524 rad angle,
unwatered road) .
Onpaved road, 1 truck
36.6 m of transport,
1 truck.
One 91-metric ton truck
unloading on unwatered
road.
One 91-metric ton truck
unloading on watered
road .
 Mine A.
 Below detectable limits.
CMine B.
 Background is for one truck on a watered road, no unloading.

-------
measured for drilling.  The emission factor for coal augering is
obtained from the emission factor  from drilling,  with an appro-
priate correction factor  applied.

Point Source

To arrive at the emission factors  the emission rates must first
be obtained from the  raw  data.   Turner's  Gaussian diffusion point
source model  (37) given below  in general  form was utilized in the
case of the unit operations of loading, drilling, and unloading:


                               1 /x_\2  1 /z_V
                 Q =  4x110- a ue2^  e °z'                     (B-l)

where   Q = emission  rate, g/s
        X = concentration contribution of a unit
            operation, g/m3
       a  = lateral dispersion coefficient
        ^   a  = Ax0'90^1 where A  is a stability constant
       a  = vertical  dispersion coefficeint
            a  = AXB  + C  where A,  B, and  C are stability
                 constants
        u = wind speed, m/s

Line Source

The unit operation of transport was estimated by assuming that
the emissions from the vehicles resemble  a continuously emitting
infinite line source  with the  angle between the wind direction
and line source being .  The  model is Gaussian and is expressed
as  (37):
                    q  =  -|sinc|>/2? c^uxe                       (B-2)


where  q =  source  strength per unit distance,  g/s-m

Total Dosage  from  a Finite Release

The blasting  unit  operation mass emission was  estimated as a
total release integrated  over the time of passage of the blast.
This release  of mass  is expressed as follows (37):
                   QT  =  DTira  azue2V'eV                    (B-3)
                                 63

-------
where  Q_ = total release, g
       D  = total dosage, g-s/ra3
       D_ = xt  where t  is the total  sampling  time,  s
        J.     S        S

The calculated values of Q, q, and QT  are presented  in  Table B-2.


                   TABLE B-2.  MASS EMISSIONS3

Unit
operation Date
Drilling 4/17/75



Blasting 5/15/75

Loading 5/15/75



Transport 5/15/75

Unloading 5/15/75

X x 106 D^ x 106
Q Q
Model g/m g-s/m
Point 901.2
2,001.2
1,091.2
2,101.2
Dose 480.0 115,200
140.0 33,600
Point 70.0
273.0
378.0
194.0
Line 460.0
1,280.0
320.0
Dose 430.0 103,200
60.0 14,400
Qi 9/3
0.16
0.35
0.19
0.36


0.483
0.537
0.744
0.382




q, g/s-ra QT' g




531.0
1,841.0




0.00307
0.01108
0.00905
169.2
23.6

   Blanks indicate data not applicable.

Since the equipment sampled was  typical of  the  industry,  the mass
emissions per equipment type were converted to  emission factors
for use in describing the industry contribution.   The  following
describes the conversion of the  mass emissions  per unit operation
to workable emission factors using appropriate  weighting factors.

Drilling Overburden

                          Q =  0.35 g/s

At mine A, it takes 45 min to  drill  16.8  m  or 6.2  x 10~3 m/s.

Thus,
             0.35 g
1 s
           _ =  56.4 g dust
6.2 x 10~3 m   meter of hole
                                 64

-------
To estimate the g/metric ton of coal mined, we must estimate the
amount of ANFO per metric ton of coal mined and the ANFO packing
per hole.  From annual Illinois state statistics on surface coal
production and ANFO usage, we obtain  (1, 17):


           52.7 x 10 6 kg ANFO      = 1,716.6 g ANFO

       30.7 x 10 6 metric tons coal   metric ton coal

Mine A uses 46,039.1 g ANFO/m; thus,


56.4 g dust x _ 1 m _    1,716.6 g ANFO _  2.10 g dust
     m        46,039.1g ANFO   metric ton coal   metric ton coal

Similarly, for the other three data points, the emission factors
are:

      For #2:  1.14 g dust/metric ton coal
      For #3:  0.962 g dust/metric ton coal
      For #4:  2.16 g dust/metric ton coal

The average drilling emission factor is 1.59 g/metric ton of coal
with a standard deviation of 0.628.

Transport of Coal (Unwatered Road)

1.  0.00307 g/m-s - one 91-metric ton truck at 3.58 m/s , 4-min
    sample

    or 0.738 g/v-m

2.  0.01108 g/m-s - one 91-metric ton truck at 2.23 m/s and one
    pickup truck at 4.47 m/s, 4-min sample

    or 1.33 g/v-m

3.  0.00905 g/m-s - one 91-metric ton truck at 3.58 m/s, 4-min
    sample

    or 2.17 g/v-m

avg. :  1.41 ±0.720 g/v-m

Since the representative mine has an area of 1.97 km2,  the dis-
tance for transport is a maximum of 700 m.  Thus,
     1.41 g/v-m  (700 m)(91 Jgriftons ) =  10'85 ?/metric ton
                                 65

-------
In a representative mine the road is watered to reduce this dust.
The sampling results show that over a 50% reduction is achieved
through watering  (200 yg/m3 on watered road vs. 430 yg/m3 on un-
watered road; same distance, wind speed, etc.).  Thus, the emis-
sion factor for a watered road would be


          10.85 g/metric ton (0.465) = 5.04 g/metric ton

Blasting Coal

Floor  (1.81 kg ANFO/metric ton):  4.06 g/metric ton
Wall   (1.23 kg ANFO/metric ton):  4.24 g/metric ton
avg.:  4.15 ±0.127 g/metric ton

Loading Coal  (Including 30-m Transport and Payloader)

115.9 g - 29.9 metric tons  (1/3 truck) =3.87 g/metric tons
225.6 g T 91 metric tons (5 min)       = 2.487 g/metric tons
312.4 i 91 metric tons  (6 min)          = 3.444 g/metric ton
160-3 T 91 metric tons  (6 min)          = 1.767 g/metric ton
avg.:  2.89 ± 0.947 g/metric ton

Loading Coal  (Corrected to Exclude Transport)

2.89 - (1.41 g/v-m x 3.0 m/91 metric ton) = 1.96 g/metric ton
±1.42

Unloading Coal  (Including 40-m Transport)
(unwatered road)

169.2 g T 91 metric tons = 1.865 g/metric ton

Unloading Only

1.  1.865 - 1.24 = 0.625 g/metric ton

2.  23.6 g 4 91 metric tons = 0.260 g/metric ton

avg.:  0.442 + 0.257 g/metric ton

The emission factors are summarized in Table B-3.  Coal augering
is similar to drilling.  The weighting parameter used to derive
the representative factor was the ratio of annual  auger produc-
tion to annual strip coal production  for 1972.  This is not a
statistically derived value and as such no error estimate can  be
made for it.  All factors are expressed in grams of respirable
dust emitted per metric ton of raw coal produced.
                                66

-------
                  TABLE B-3.  EMISSION FACTORS
        (grams of respirable dust/metric ton of raw coal)

Operation
Drilling ,
Transport
(dry load)
Blasting
Loading coal
(inc. trans.)
(exc. trans.)
Unloading coal
(inc. trans. ) ,
(exc. trans.)
Coal augering


2.
0.

4.

3.


1.
0.


#1
10 r
738C

06

87

A
865d
623



1
1

4

2



0

Sample
#2 #3
.14 0.962
.33C 2.17C

.24

.49 3.44



.260


#4
2.16 1
(1
5
4

1.77 (2
1


0.

Average
± standard
deviation
.59
.41
.04
.15

.89
.96


442

+
+
±
+

±
±


±
0.
0-
0.
2.
0.

0.
1.


0.
084
628r
72)c
57
127
H
947)d
42


257

   Blanks indicate data not applicable.
   Added together to arrive at a factor for transport/unloading.

  °Units are grams of respirable dust/vehicle-meter, used to
   derive factor in grams/metric ton of coal.

   Only used to derive the exc. trans, factor.

WIND EROSION - WORST CASE

The Woodruff-Siddoway  (W-S) equation was solved by nomograph to
arrive at the emission factors for wind eroded land  (19).  The
factors were calculated for each coal  state.  The W-S equation
describes the amount of total dust emitted.  This includes res-
pirable dust and dust via  saltation, which is large particle
dust  (greater than 7 ym).  As a result, the  emission factor es-
timates for wind erosion are higher than those for respirable
dust alone.  The emission  factors are  thus a worst case  esti-
mate.  The assumptions used when calculating the wind erosion
emission factors are listed below:

        • Assume no ridges (K = 1)
        • Assume no vegetation (V = 0)
        • Deviation of percent soil cloddiness based on:
           1.   descriptions of soil types found in
               various states; i.e., loam, sandy loam,
               clay,  etc.
           2.   typical particle-size distributions of
               various types of soil.
           3.   based on these two situations, the average
               for a particular state was derived.  For
               example, a very general estimate was made

                                67

-------
               that North Dakota is 1/6 sandy loam, 1/2
               silt loam, 1/6 sand, and 1/6 clay.

               Percent soil fractions larger than 0.84 mm
               in North Dakota = 1/6  (particles >0.84 mm
               in sandy loam) + 1/2 (particles >0.84 mm in
               silt loam) + 1/6 (particles >0.84 mm in sand)
               + 1/6  (particles >0.84 mm in clay).

The above information was then used to solve the W-S equation.
                                68

-------
                           APPENDIX C

        INPUT DATA, DERIVATIONS, AND SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
              PERTAINING TO MASS EMISSION RATES AND
                REPRESENTATIVE SOURCE DEFINITION
MASS EMISSIONS

The work sheet for Equation 4 is presented in Table C-l.  The
parameters and units of each are given below:

     A. = state areas of land disturbed annually, km2

     e. = state emission factor for wind erosion, g/s-km2

     P. = state coal production for 1972, metric tons/yr

    ZE. = sum of the appropriate emission factors per
      1   state;
          EE. = 13.3 for all six unit operations, g/metric ton

          EE. = 13.2 for states not having coal augering
            1   operations, g/metric ton

    Q.  = total respirable dust mass emissions per state
     -1    from open coal mining, g/s

    Q.  = respirable coal dust mass emissions per state, g/s

    Q.  = respirable overburden dust mass emissions per
     •*    state, g/s

Percent ratios are obtained by dividing Q.^, Qjj2/ and Q.3 by
total particulates per state (dimensionless).

The composition of dust emitted from the industry was estimated
to contain 93% coal and 7% overburden dusts.  This was estimated
by considering the dust composition from the unit operations and
wind erosion.  Overburden stripping and reclamation are not in-
cluded as their respirable dust hazard is negligible  (see Appen-
dix B).  The breakdown is shown in Table C-2.
                                69

-------
 TABLE  C-l.   INPUT  DATA  AND  COMPUTATIONS  FOR DETERMINING STATEWIDE  MASS  EMISSIONS3
                                                                     6

                           Qjk =  AjejXk +  3-171 X 10"8  Pjxk

j State
1 Alabama
2 Arizona
3 Illinois
4 Indiana
5 Kentucky
6 Missouri
7 Montana
8 New Mexico
9 North Dakota
10 Ohio
11 Pennsylvania
12 Tennessee
13 Texas
14 Virginia

A.
11.675
0.991
27.988
16.017
49.716
7.644
2.723
2.210
3.683
35.208
43.455
7.624
1.942
10.680
15 West Virginia 40.877
16 Wyoming
Total
Other states
National
3Blanks indicate
Total respirable
Respirable coal
2.760


data not
dust K =
dust K =

e. x 103
7.47
56.2
11.7
6.05
7.47
11.7
185.4
56.2
51.2
7.47
7.47
11.7
89.0
7.47
7.47
56.2


applicable
i, K! = i
2, X2 = 0.

A.e.
3 3
0.087
0.056
0.327
0.097
0.371
0.089
0.505
0.124
0.188
0.263
0.324
0.089
0.172
0.079
0.305
0.155



P. x 10~3
11,988
2,680
30,665
22,229
58,688
4,129
7,442
6,563
6,016
31,477
24,318
4,893
3,670
9,104
20,031
9,514
253,415
10,197
263,612

3.
EE.
13.27
13.18
13.18
13.18
13.27
13.18
13.18
13.18
13.18
13.27
13.27
13.27
13.18
13.27
13.27
13.18



,171 x 10'
XP.EE.
5.04
1.12
12.82
9.29
24.70
1.73
3.11
2.74
2.51
13.25
10.23
2.06
1.53
3.83
8.43
3.98
106.6
4.26
110.86


5.13
1.18
13.15
9.39
25.07
1.82
3.61
2.86
2.70
15.88
10.55
2.15
1.70
3.91
8.73
4.13
109.8
4.26
114.06
	 a 	
Respirable overburden dust
.00.
927.


STotal

national

particulate


Total

particulate
C d (all sources), Ratio. Ratio
Sj2 QJ3 g/s (59) total coal
4.78 0.35
1.09 0.09
12.29 0.86
8.84 0.55
23.39 1.68
1.68 0.14
3.19 0.42
2.66 0.20
2.47 0.23
12.58 3.3
9.78 0.77
1.98 0.17
1.54 0.16
3.64 0.27
8.07 0.66
3.84 0.29
101.8 8.00
4.0 0.26
105.8 8.26
, K = 3, Xs = 0.
emissions (all

37,370
2,304
36,241
23,729
17,318
6,418
8,646
3,259
2,504
55,994
57,406
12,990
17,419
15,139
6,776
2,391

566,7206
073.
sources ) , g/s .

0.013 0.012
0.051 0.047
0.036 0.034
0.040 0.037
0.145 0.135
0.028 0.026
0.042 0.037
0.088 0.082
0.108 0.099
0.028 0.022
0.018 0.017
0.017 0.015
0.009 0.008
0.026 0.024
0.129 0.119
0.173 0.161

0.019 0.018




Ratio
over- ,
burden
0.001
0.004
0.002
0.003
0.010
0.002
0.005
0.006
0.009
0.006
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.010
0.012

0.001



(59)  1972 National Emissions Report.  EPA-450/2-74-012, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
    June 1974.  422 pp.

-------
    TABLE C-2.  DISTRIBUTION OF COAL AND OVERBURDEN EMISSIONS

Unit
operation/
source
Drilling
Coal loading
Transport/
unloading
Blasting
Auger ing
Wind erosion
Total
National
emissions,
g/s
13
16

45
34
0
3
114
.28
.37

.79
.67
.7
.2
.1
Estimate
of dust,
% coal
50
100

100
100
100
50

Coal
emissions,
g/s %
6.
16.

45.
34.
0.
1.
105.
64
37

79
67
7
61
8
Estimate
of dust,
i overburden
50
0

0
0
0
50

Overburden
emissions,
g/s
6.
0

0
0
0
1.
8.
64





61
2

Thus the weight percent of coal in the dust is 105.8/114.1 x 100
= 93%.  This is a crude approximation, but it is indicative of
the fact that coal dust is the major pollutant.

REPRESENTATIVE - MINE SIZE AND DISTANCE

Representative Size

Mine A disturbs 6.197 x 105 m2/yr of land, per personal communi-
cation with mining personnel.  This mine produces 835,531 metric
tons per year at a 13.6  (m/m) stripping ratio.  The land distur-
bance of any mine should be proportional to stripping ratio and
tonnage; thus, for one year:
                    AD = 5.45 x 10"
P x S
     R
(C-l)
where  An = annual land disturbance, km2
        D
        P = annual tonnage, metric tons

       S  = stripping ratio, m/m
        R
The average life expectancy of any strip mine is approximately
20 years  (35).  The average mining property size, A^, is 20 times
Equation C-l; thus,
             V
                    Ap = 1.09 x 10~6 P x S
     R
                       (C-2)
The representative mine size is computed knowing P and SR.  The
weighted average SR for the United States is 16.82 as calculated
from Reference 34 and the state coal production for 1972.
                                71

-------
The average mine size is 108 x 103 metric tons per year computed
by dividing the total 1972 U.S. surface production by the number
of strip mines  (2,225).  Thus, using Equation C-2, A  = 2.0 km2.

Representative Distance

The mine area is assumed circular such that the radius is the
representative distance.  Thus,


                  r = V_E. = 0.792 km = 792 m
                       ¥ ir
                                 72

-------
                            GLOSSARY


amorphous:  Without stratification or other division; uncrystal-
     lized.

ANFO:  Ammonium nitrate and fuel oil mixture used as an explo-
     sive.

anthracite:  Hard compact natural coal containing only a small
     amount of volatile matter.

auger:  Similar to a bit used for boring holes in wood the auger
     consists of a cutting head with screwlike extensions; the
     head breaks the coal and the extensions raise and dump it
     onto conveyors.

auger mining:  Method of removing surface coal by boring holes
     into the coal bed using an auger.

azimuth:  Horizontal direction expressed as the angular distance
     between the direction of a fixed point (as the observer's
     heading) and the direction of the object.

bituminous:  Soft coal containing considerable volatile matter.

confidence interval:  Range over which the true mean of a popu-
     lation is expected to lie at a specific level of confidence.

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

fibrosis:  Growth of fibrous connective tissue in an organ in
     excess of that naturally present.

free silica:  Crystalline silica defined as silicon dioxide
     (SiO2) arranged in a fixed pattern (as opposed to an
     amorphous arrangement).

growth factor:  Ratio of 1978 emissions of respirable dust to
     1972 emissions of respirable dust.

hazard factor:  Primary ambient air quality standard  (for cri-
     teria pollutants) or a reduced threshold limit value (for
     noncriteria pollutants).


                               73

-------
lignite:  Variety of coal intermediate between peat and bitumi-
     nous containing much volatile matter; also called brown coal
     or wood coal.

noncriteria pollutant:  Pollutant for which ambient air quality
     standards have not been established.

overburden:  Loose soil, gravel, sand, or similar material over-
     lying a deposit of useful geological materials (such as a
     coal seam).

pneumoconiosis:  Disease of the lungs caused by habitual inhala-
     tions of irritant mineral or metallic particles.

precipitation-evaporation index:  Reference used to compare the
     precipitation and temperature levels of various P-E regions
     of the U.S.

respirable particulates:  Particulates with a geometric mean
     diameter less than or equal to 7 ym.

severity:  Hazard potential of a representative source defined
     as the ratio of time-averaged maximum concentration to the
     hazard factor.

silicosis:  Diffuse fibrosis of the lungs caused by the chronic
     inhalation of silica dust less than or equal to 10 ym in
     diameter.

stripping ratio:  Ratio of the depth of overburden removed to
     depth of coal produced.

strip mining:  Coal mining method by which overburden is removed
     coal is extracted in a series of regular slices,  and the
     overburden is replaced.

subbituminous:  Coal that is lower rank than bituminous but
     higher than lignite.

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

tipple:  Apparatus by which loaded cars are emptied by tipping
     sometimes including an elevated runway or framework upon
     which the cars are run for tipping.
                              74

-------
                               TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                         (Please read/nstmctions OH the revtne btfort completing}
 REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-78-004x
                               3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

SOURCE ASSESSMENT;
OPEN MINING OF COAL
State  of the Art
6. REPORT DATE
 September 1978  issuing date
                                                    6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 AUTMOR(S)             ~~~ "      '
S. J.  Rusek, S. R.  Archer, R. A.  Wachter, and
T. R.  Blackwood  ,
                               8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.


                                MRC-DA-709
 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Monsanto Research  Corporation
1515  Nicholas Road
Dayton,  Ohio  45407
                               10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                1BB610
                               II.CONTRACf/'GrtANTNO.

                                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, 9/74  -  9/77
                               14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                   EPA/600/12
 IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

 IERL-CI project  leader for this report is John F.  Martin,  513-684-4417
 ie. ABSTRACT
               report describes  a study of  atmospheric emissions from the
 open mining of  coal.  The potential environmental effect of  this emission
 source was evaluated using source severity,  defined as the ratio of the
 maximum ground-level concentration of a pollutant at a representative plant
 boundary to a hazard factor.  The hazard factor is the ambient air quality
 standard for criteria pollutants and an adjusted threshold limit value for
 other pollutants.   Respirable dusts are generated from five  unit operations
 and from wind erosion; contributions from  these sources to the total dust
 loading are:  coal transport and unloading,  40%; blasting, 30%; coal load-
 ing, 14%; drilling,  12%; coal augering, 1%;  and wind erosion,  3%.  Emissior
 factors for the unit operations indicate that 13 g of respirable dust are
 emitted per metric ton of coal  mined.  Total dust severity is  0.036, and
 overburden dust severity is 0.014.

 Control technology in open coal mining has been implemented  for drill rigs,
 haul roads, and coal refuse piles.  The industry is experiencing a high
 growth rate  (3.5%  per year), and the growth  factor for the industry  (1978
 emissions/1972  emissions) is 1.23.
17.
                            KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
 Air  Pollution
 Coal Mining
 Dust
 Silicon Dioxide
                                         b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                    Air Pollution  Control
                    Stationary Sources
                    Source Severity
                    Open Mining
                    Particulate
                                             COSATI Field/Group
                   48A
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

   RELEASE TO PUBLIC
                   19. SECURITY CLASS (This Ptport)
                      Unclassified
             21. NO. OF PAGES
                  87
                                         20 SECURITY CLASS (Thtjpagel
                                           Unclassified
                                                                 22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-t |t-73)
                                       75
                                   U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978 — 657-060/1494

-------