United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600 7 79-208
October 1979
Research and Development
Fugitive Dust at
the Paraho Oil
Shale
Demonstration
Retort and Mine
nteragency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program
Report
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports o1 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 INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare trom adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-79-208
October 1979
FUGITIVE DUST AT THE PARAHO OIL
SHALE DEMONSTRATION RETORT AND MINE
J. E. Cotter and D. J. Powell
TRW Environmental Engineering Division
Redondo Beach, California 90278
and
C. Habenicht
Denver Research Institute
Denver, Colorado 80210
Contract No. 68-03-2560
Project Officer
Edward R. Bates
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, Cincinnati, Ohio
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 recommendations for use.
-------
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 con-
trol methods be used. The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory-
Cincinnati (lERL-Ci) assists in developing and demonstrating new and improved
methodologies that will meet these needs both efficiently and economically.
New synthetic fuel processes under development need to be characterized
prior to commercialization, so that pollution control needs can be identified
and control methods can be integrated with process designs. This sampling
and analysis program for fugitive dust, conducted at the Paraho oil shale
demonstration plant, represents a significant advance in oil shale extraction
and handling characterization. The work reported in this document will serve
as a guide for the determination of fugitive dust sampling and analysis pri-
orities in future oil shale programs. For further information contact the
Resource Extraction and Handling Division.
David G. Stephan
Director
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati
-------
ABSTRACT
A fugitive dust sampling program was conducted at the Anvil Points, Colo-
rado site of the Paraho mining and oil-shale retorting operation. High-volume
samplers were used extensively for fugitive dust collection, and 175 calcula-
tions for total suspended particulate were reported for measurements made at
the mine adits, haul road, raw shale crushing area, and spent shale transfer
area. Supporting meteorological data are also given, as well as background
dust measurements. Particulate size distribution calculations were derived
from 36 cascade impactor samples at the above locations.
Elemental chemical analysis results were reported for 19 elements from
each of 20 selected high-volume sample collections. In addition, 26 samples
were extracted for organic content. The extractions were then fractionated
by the EPA/IERL Level 1 method, and eight organic classification fractions were
quantitatively given. The significance of these findings is summarized, and
recommendations for work are stated.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-02-2560 by
TRW Environmental Engineering Division under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. Chemical analyses of particulate samples
were subcontracted to Denver Research Institute and CDM/Acculabs. The report
covers the period of August 17, 1977 to January 31, 1978, and work was com-
pleted as of September 1, 1978.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vii
Acknowledgments viii
1. Introduction 1
Program objectives and utility background 1
Description of the Paraho process and site 2
2. Conclusions and Recommendations 5
Particulate physical measurements 5
Particulate chemical analysis 5
Future work 6
3. Sampling and Analysis Procedures 7
Test plan and execution 7
Laboratory analysis methods 13
4. Summary Of Measurement Results . . . 18
Total suspended particulates 18
Particulate size distributions 20
Inorganic analyses 23
Organic analyses 26
Appendices
A. Particulate Collection Equipment and Performance 31
B. Inorganic Analyses 58
C. Organic Analyses 66
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Schematic of Anvil Points mining and material handling
operations 3
2 General locations of fugitive dust sampling 8
3 High-volume samplers at retorted shale disposal area ... 10
4 High-volume samplers and meteorological station near
haul road ''
5 Extraction of samples for organic analyses 15
6 TSP values for retorted shale transfer area 19
7 TSP values for mine adits 1 and 2 21
8 TSP values for haul road (South Point) location 22
9 Equivalent aerodynamic diameter of retorted shale dusts . • 25
VI
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Test Matrix 9
i
2 Elemental Analysis Group 13
3 Sequence and Quantities of Solvents Used for Liquid
Chromatographic Elutions 16
4 Classes of Organic Compounds Reportedly Eluted in Each
Liquid Chromatograph Fraction. . „ 17
5 Particulate Size Distributions from Cascade Impactor
Average Data 24
6 Average Elemental Compositions of Fugitive Dusts
(Units in PPM) 27
7 Average Organic Compositions of Dust Samples 28
Vll
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The close cooperation and assistance of the Development Engineering, Inc.
in the conduct of the fugitive dust sampling program is gratefully acknow-
ledged. Recognition is also due to Laramie Energy Technology Center (Depart-
ment of Energy), The Paraho site administrator, for their continuing support
of interagency environmental study programs.
viii
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND UTILITY BACKGROUND
An environmental assessment of oil shale extraction processes was recently
completed by TRW for the USEPA. As part of the work plan for the assessment,
TRW conducted a sampling and analysis program at the Paraho oil shale demon-
stration plant in Anvil Points, Colorado, in 1976J A strong recommendation
resulting from this prior work was that a comprehensive fugitive dust survey
should be conducted at the Anvil Points site, in anticipation of future stu-
dies for dust control related to mining, crushing, and material handling oper-
ations.
Aims of the Test Program
The program objectives included: 1) determining the sources of fugitive
dust and the contributions of these sources over and above natural background
dust concentrations; 2) noting related meteorological characteristics; 3) quan-
titatively evaluating the total suspended particulates (TSP) at various dis-
tances from the dust sources; and 4) determining particulate size distribution
at the TSP measurement locations.
In addition to the mass measurements, chemical composition of particu-
late matter was also defined as a program measurement objective. Both in-
organic elemental analysis and organic classifications were sought. These
constituent analyses helped to characterize particulate matter which fell into
the breathable dust category, and they also provided useful clues concerning
the particulate-generating sources.
Program Management
The fugitive dust sampling program was done in close cooperation with
Developing Engineering, Inc. (DEI), the operator of the Paraho site. A sub-
contract was let to DEI for program support, transportation on site, facilities
Sampling and Analysis Research Program at the Paraho Oil Shale Demonstration
Plant, EPA 600/7-78-065; also, Executive Briefing; Environmental Sampling
of the Paraho Oil Shale Retort Process at Anvil Points, USEPA Technology
Transfer, EPA-625/9-77-002.
-------
usage and data review. A major subcontract was also released to Denver Research
Institute for laboratory analysis of organic extractions from selected partic-
ulate samples. A purchase order was placed with CDM/Acculabs for inorganic
elemental analysis. The efforts of these participants were coordinated with
TRW sampling and analysis work to assure the USEPA of a rapid completion of
the project with a minimum of delays. Program information requirements and
various samples were scheduled for release to the various participants.
Laramie Energy Technology Center (Department of Energy), the lease administra-
tor for the Anvil Points site, was also advised of the program activities.
Limitations and Uses of the Test Results
The data obtained from the crushing and retorting operations are unique
to the Paraho Oil Shale Demonstration Plant. Because much of the equipment
and many of the operating procedures used at Anvil Points would probably
not be employed in a commercial venture, data pertaining to particulate
and dust quantities in the site vicinity cannot be compared to those from a
full-scale Paraho-type operation. The mining operations are possibly the
closest model of a commercial facility. A detailed discussion of the Anvil
Points equipment and operating procedures is developed more fully in this
section.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PARAHO PROCESS AND SITE
Underground Mining and Crushing
The mine at Anvil Points is a room and pillar operation mining the
Mahogany Ledge of the Green River Formation, at an altitude of approximately
2440 meters (8000 ft). Mined shale is trucked 8.8 kilometers (5.5 mi) by road
down to the processing area (Figure 1).
At the plant site the mined shale is processed through the primary and
secondary circuits of the crushing and screening plant, to produce a feed of
approximately minus 7.6 centimeters (3 in) to plus 6 millimeters (1/4 in) in
size, which is sent to storage bins. The jaw-type crushing equipment is
government-furnished Navy surplus, and is unenclosed. The 10-15% fines from
the screening plant are stock-piled.
The screening operations are enclosed in existing buildings. Fugitive
dust in the interior air is collected in baghouse filters. After the filter-
ing fines are removed and stockpiled.
Semi-Works Retort
The minus 7.6 centimeters (3 in) to plus 6 millimeters (1/4 in) product
from the crushing and screening plant is lifted and transferred by an inclined
belt to the top of the retort. The inclined and lateral transfer belts are not
tightly enclosed.
-------
HAULING
RETORTED SHALE
TRANSFER
CRUSHING
Figure 1. Schematic of Anvil Points mining and material handling operations.
-------
Probably the most representative piece of equipment at the Anvil Points
plant site is the Paraho semi-works retort itself, which is specifically de-
signed to use the same configuration of solid and gas handling systems as a
full-scale plant. This retort is capable of operating, in either a direct or
indirect heating mode, at mass feed rates of up to 3423 kilograms/hour/square
meter (700 Ibs/hr/sq. ft.). During the period of the test program it was
operated in the direct mode only. Typical feed rates were about 10 metric
tons/hour.
Spent retorted shale was removed from the bottom of the kiln at about 150°C
230°C and transferred by a belt conveyor to trucks for conveyance to an off-
site vegetation study location. Normally, the conveyor dump point would be
at the retorted shale disposal area.
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
PARTICULATE PHYSICAL MEASUREMENTS
Total suspended particulate (TSP) measurements of fugitive dust can be
effectively carried out with high-volume samplers in the vicinity of oil shale
mining and handling operations. Measurements conducted at the Anvil Points
mine adits appeared to be the most definable, since fugitive dusts from min-
ing, blasting, and vehicular exhausts were confined. Measurements in open
areas (haul road, retorted shale transfer, crushing) will vary considerably
from one high-volume sampler to the next, implying that a single sample source
cannot supply data which is typical for the area. A number of samplers must
be used, to allow for random variations in dust concentrations under varying
wind and terrain conditions. The sampler configuration used in this study
(two - downwind, one - upwind) is probably a minimum choice to provide useable
TSP statistics.
TSP data included in this report appeared to be credible with sample vol-
umes as low as 30 cubic meters, while sample volumes of 15 cubic meters tend-
ed to give results that were out of line with larger sample volumes. Although
the data are useful measures of ambient dust concentrations at ground level,
they are too scattered or biased to be used for very accurate dispersion or
source emission estimates.
Particle size separations were done with cascade impactors mounted at the
intake of selected high-volume samplers. The method was not difficult to im-
plement, but the interpretation of the raw data left some key questions unan-
swered. The assumption that the high-volume filters can be treated as a final
impactor stage is very questionable, and it is strongly recommended that com-
parative studies be initiated with uniform dust sources. Evaluating cascade
impactor performance versus optical sizing techniques indicated that particle
bounce errors were significant.
PARTICULATE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Elemental analyses of the particulate samples from various areas appear
to be similar to the elemental concentrations of oil shale, even though raw
shale dust, retorted shale dust, and haul road dust were collected. The
methods used for the analysis of each constituent were selected for accuracy
and were time-consuming. For any future work involving large numbers of fugi-
tive dust samples, spark-source mass spectrometry is recommended as a much
faster analysis method, even though analysis accuracy would be limited to a
factor of two to three. Millipore high-volume filters would be better than
paper filters for these samples, since paper is difficult to stabilize for
weighing.
-------
Separation of the organic extracts was effective for providing prelimi-
nary sample characterization, using the Level 1 liquid chromatography method.
It is strongly recommended that future analyses of fugitive dust samples in-
clude complete infrared spectroscopy of each of the separated chromatographic
fractions. In order to do this without interference from contaminants, the
high-volume filters should be solvent-extracted before use in the field. Al-
though the Level 1 fractionation is a screening technique rather than a detail-
ed analysis procedure, it was able to provide some strong evidence that equip-
ment and explosives used in mining activities generate particulates, as well
as raw shale dust.
FUTURE WORK
Fugitive dust measurements should be continued at other oil shale extrac-
tion sites as opportunities occur. The coverage of sampling locations should
be extensive, since considerable statistical variations of sample results are
expected. If the dust measurements are to be used for source emission esti-
mates, then the placement of high-volume samplers must be selected to relate
to the particular diffusion model used for these estimates. Cascade impactors
for particulate size distribution measurements should be preceded by an inlet
cyclone to collect particles above 5 micron size, and some optical size
scanning should be done in parallel. Finally, samples taken for organic
analyzes should be as large as many of the samples used in this survey (1 gram
or larger) to minimize weighing errors, and high-volume fiberglass filters
should be solvent-extracted prior to use to remove silicon oils.
-------
SECTION 3
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
Site Survey and Preparation
The TRW Task Manager visited the Anvil Points site with the Technical
Project Monitor (TPM) and other EPA personnel. A survey was made of the min-
ing and oil shale handling operations, to determine sources of fugitive dust,
and candidate locations for collection devices. Visual observations of dust-
generating operations and local wind behavior were especially useful in prepar-
ing the equipment plan and choice of methodology. Support services and faci-
lities were arranged with the site operator, Development Engineering Inc. (DEI),
Services included access to line power wherever feasible, and transportation
for test team personnel.
Test Plan and Equipment Selection
The principal dust collection devices were high-volume samplers (General
Metal Works Models 2000 and 2310). These were supplemented, as required by
the test plan, by cascade impaction samplers (Sierra Instruments, Model 235)
determining particle size distribution. The sampling locations and area de-
signations are given in the local contour map (Figure 2) and the test matrix
(Table 1) respectively. The testing locations and periods of operation were
reviewed with representatives from DEI to assure that mining and extraction
operations would not be affected in any way by the sampling activity. As in-
dicated'in Table 1. dusc collection took place in the vicinity of mining,
hauling, crushing ana discharging operations. The Anvil Points mine ventila-
tion system consists of fresh air forced through one adit, circulation to the
back of the mine, and exhaust from two remaining adits. High-volume samplers
were used at the mine mouth for the fugitive dusts carried out in the exhaust
air through the two adits. Except for the mine, meteorological instrumenta-
tion was also provided at each collection location to continuously record wind
direction and velocity. The instrumentation is described in the equipment
list in Table A-8. At the remote haul road locations, portable generators
were used to power the high-volume units.
The sampling schedule was arranged for a continuous four-week effort, in
an attempt to include some statistical variation of sample characteristics
during the course of the program. As indicated by the test matrix (Table 1),
measurements in the vicinity of the crusher were not emphasized, because the
equipment was obsolete, and was being used only as an expedient during the
limited duration research and development program conducted by DEI.
-------
Mine Adit
No. 1 &
Figure 2. General locations of fugitive dust sampling.
8
-------
TABLE 1. TEST MATRIX
Sources
Mine adits
Haul road
Crushing area
Spent shale
transfer
No. sampling
locations
2
3
3
3
Total No.
samples for
TSP
40
90
15
30
Total No.
size
distribution
8
12
6
12
Total No.
inorganic and
organic analy-
ses
(Each category)
4
6
3
6
The mining and hauling operations were given considerable attention, since
these activities are similar to that expected of full-scale operations.
Sampling Program Execution
Upon notification of a starting date by the TPM, the field sampling team
was placed on site within a week. At the same time, final support arrange-
ments were made with DEI personnel.
The required complement of high-volume samplers, portable generators, and
meteorological instruments were deployed at the Anvil Points site according to
the approved final test plan. High-volume samplers were positioned at the re-
torted shale transfer area (Figure 3) and adjacent to the haul road (Figure
4). The collectors located near each source consisted of a one upwind-two
downwind configuration, with the exception of the mine mouth. As in most
mountain valley terrains, there was a strong upslope wind during midday, and
a downslope wind in the evening and early morning hours. However, since local
wind patterns were variable, close surveillance was required to determine
when a collector was in an upwind or downwind position, and manual switch-
overs were done as required. An automatic switch-over controller actuated by
a wind direction detector failed to operate at the site.
Close operational supervision was required, to ensure that sample collec-
tions were coordinated with dust-generating activity. Very close coordi-
nation with DEI personnel was required to achieve this objective. The period
-------
*»j£~*
. ^^^^^^^^P
Figure 3. High-vol samplers at retorted shale disposal area,
10
-------
Figure 4. High-vol samplers and meteorological station near haul road.
II
-------
of sampling varied, depending on the amount of sample desired and proximity
to a source. Although a nominal one-hour sampling period was usually suffi-
cient, rough filter weighings in the field were used to assure that sample
catches were sufficiently large to provide accurate weings and analyses. The
three-sampler sites had one unit upwind (approximately 20 meters) and two units
downwind (approximately 10 and 50 meters, depending on the site and sample
catch). The two downwind samplers were approximately on the downwind axis.
Records of mine and plant activity were kept by the field crew for each
sampling site. In particular, mining activities, blasting, haul truck opera-
tions, and crushing operations were logged, since all of these activities were
intermittent or variable. This information was recorded on the same data
sheets as the high-volume unit records.
Data Reduction and Quality Assurance
Filters were removed from the high-volume samplers and cascade impactors
after each test and sealed in polyethylene bags. The bags were placed in an
envelope, with the location and field data recorded on the envelope. The basic
record number for each sample was the filter sequence number, which was print-
ed on each filter. Therefore, the results associated with each sample were
directly traceable back to the filters, which were put into storage unless
they were consumed in a subsequent analysis step.
As already noted, the key to assuring continued operation of both high-
volume samplers and meteorological instrumentation was close surveillance by
the field crew. The air flow rate through the high-volume units was recorded
from rotometers at the beginning and end of each sample collection. Local
temperatures and pressures were recorded to correct the average actual flow
rates to standard conditions. The rotometers were calibrated against a cali-
brated orifice meter at the start of the field testing program.
Total suspended particulate (TSP) values for each sample collected were
determined from stabilized filter weights, sample time, and corrected sampler
air flow rate. Before-and-after weights were taken under controlled tempera-
ture and humidity conditions. The cascade impactor filters were weighed under
controlled conditions as well, and particulate size breakdown determined from
impactor calibration curves, down to about the 0.5y (and less) cutoff. A five-
stage impactor was used. Fiberglas filters were used for TSP determinations
and (in some cases) subsequent organic analysis. Fiberglas filters have ex-
cellent weight stability, since water absorption is negligible. Since Fiber-
glas filters cannot be decontaminated well enough for good elemental analysis,
Whatman paper filters were used for inorganic determinations. There is a
trade-off involved in this choice, since paper filters are difficult to stabi-
lize and the resulting net sample weights are probably less accurate than sam-
ples collected on Fiberglas.
12
-------
Organic analyses require large (1 to 10 g) samples to be quantitative,
especially for spent shale (which is lower in organic content then raw shale).
Therefore, the sampling time for organic analysis samples was considerably
longer than other samples. In some cases, the high-volume units were run
overnight to collect a sufficient sample mass. Locating a sampler within a
few meters of the dust source was another technique used to increase sample
size. Samples weighing 10 to 20 grams were not intended for TSP calculations,
since high-volume air flow characteristics are unreliable with the resistance
presented by a heavy sample layer on a filter.
Meteorological data were recorded on strip charts, and average conditions
were manually interpreted for each hour of operation. Wind direction and air
temperature were directly recorded, while wind speed was averaged from the
"wind run" trace (which is an integrated wind speed).
The final quality assurance step was data validation by comparison with
similar samples. The size of the data base obtained from the test program is
large enough to allow these comparisons to be useful. In some cases, for ex-
ample, the appearance of insufficient sample size was confirmed by gross vari-
ances in analytical results. Accuracy estimates for analysis methods were
used to determine the statistical validity of analysis results.
LABORATORY ANALYSIS METHODS
Inorganic Analysis
Nineteen elemental determinations were done (Table 2) for the number of
samples indicated in the test matrix of Table 1, with the exception of two
haul-road upwind sampler locations which collected no measureable dust during
their period of operation. Three additional determinations were done, of
samples taken in the vicinity of the screening room baghouse for comparison to
other raw shale source samples.
TABLE 2. ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS GROUP
Element
Element
Element
Arsenic
Al umi num
Calcium
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Sodium
Nickel
Lead
Selenium
Vanadium
Zinc
Silicon
Sulfur
13
-------
All analytical methods were based upon standard procedures, as described
in Appendix B. Although typical IERL/RTP Level 1 methods for elemental analy-
sis employ spark source mass spectrometry, a decision was make to use standard
'analysis techniques in the interest of higher accuracy.
Flame-mode atomic absorption was used to determine Al, Ca, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe,
Mg, Na, Ni, Pb, and Zn. Flameless atomic absorption-graphite furnace atomiza-
tion was used to determine As, Se, and V. Mercury was determined by cold vapor
generation-atomic absorption. Si was determined by a colorimetric technique
and F was determined by specific ion electrode. Sulfur was determined by a
gravimetric method after conversion to a sulfate. Generally speaking the lim-
its of precision were +10%. For sample sizes less than 0.05 grams the pre-
cision was + 100%, and for samples less than 0.2 grams the precision was
± 50%.
Organic Analyses
Selected particulate samples were extracted for 48 hours in methylene
chloride, using soxhlet extractors (Figure 5). After extraction, the extracts
were reduced in volume on a rotary evaporator and then weighed to within +_
0-00003 grams. The samples were then fractionated into eight fractions, using
EPA Level 1 liquid chromatography procedures.2
A silica gel column was prepared (as described in detail in Appendix C),
and a sample was washed into the top of the column at the start of each sepa-
ration. Elution was carried out using the solvents given in Table 3. The
classes of organic compounds expected in each fraction eluting in the bottom
are given in Table 4. The eluted fractions were allowed to go to constant
weight, and final weighings were recorded to + 30 micrograms. Silicon oils
apparently left on the Fiberglass filters from the manufacturing process con-
taminated the samples and no doubt influenced the organic analysis results.
2
Technical Manual for Analysis of Organic Materials in Process Streams,
EPA 600/2-76-072, March 1976.
14
-------
Figure 5. Extraction of samples for organic analyses,
-------
TABLE 3. SEQUENCE AND QUANTITIES OF SOLVENTS USED FOR
LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHIC ELUTIONS
Fraction
Number Solvent
1 25 ml n-hexane
2 25 ml 20% methylene chloride in n-hexane
3 25 ml 50% methylene chloride in n-hexane
4 25 ml methylene chloride
5 25 ml 5% methanol in methylene chloride
6 25 ml 20% methanol in methylene chloride
7 25 ml 50% methanol in methylene chloride
8 25 ml methanol
16
-------
TABLE 4. CLASSES OF ORGANIC COMPOUNDS REPORTEDLY2
ELUTED IN EACH LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPH FRACTION
Fraction
number
1 Aliphatic hydrocarbons
2 Aromatic hydrocarbons
Polynuclear organic materials
Polychlorinated biphenols
Hal ides
3 Esters
Ethers
Nitro compounds
Epoxides
4 Phenols
Esters
Ketones
Aldehydes
Phthalates
5 Phenols
Alcohols
Phthalates
Ami nes
6 Ami des
Sulfonates
Aliphatic acids
Carboxylic acid salts
7 Sulfonates
Sulfoxides
Sulfonic acids
8 Sulfonic acids
2
Technical Manual for Analysis Organic Materials in Process Streams.
EPA 600/2-76-072, March 1976.
17
-------
SECTION 4
SUMMARY OF MEASUREMENT RESULTS
TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES
Total suspended particulate matter (TSP) measurements are summarized in
this section, and the detailed calculations are presented in Appendix A, as
are the meteorological and vehicle movement records.
Retorted Shale Transfer Area
Particulate matter concentrations are plotted in Figure 6 as milligrams
per cubic meter (mg/m^) @ 20° C, as measured near the point where retorted shale
was transferred from a discharge conveyor to haul trucks. The downwind sam-
plers were always north of the transfer point, as indicated by the average
wind conditions indicated on the figure. The upwind sampler for background
measurements was placed in the corresponding south orientation.
The high-volume samplers were located at 15-20 meters north (15-20 MN),
35 meters north (35 MN), 100 meters south (100 MS), and (for heavy sample col-
lection only) 5 meters north (5 MN). An unexpected result was that consis-
tently higher concentrations were measured at 35 meters downwind than at 15
and 20 meters downwind of the source. The only other apparent contributor of
dust in the vicinity was the crushing and screening operations which were
always downwind of the samplers during the testing periods. A possible expla-
nation of this result is that a sampler at 15-20 meters, having been placed at
a lower elevation than the source, was missing a portion of the centerline
dust concentrations. The sampler at 35 meters was at about the same elevation
as the source, since the terrain was rising at this point.
TSP values ranged from 2 to 36 milligrams/cubic meters at the downwind
locations, while background values were about 0.5 milligrams/cubic meters. The
samples were collected for about one hour at downwind locations and two hours
at upwind locations, with sample catches ranging from 100 to 1000 milligrams.
Heavier samples were always found downwind. Occasional runs were made for much
longer periods (20 hr) to obtain heavy samples, but TSP values obtained from
these tests are not comparable to shorter sampling periods. In general, a 24-
hour collection will yield a lower TSP value than that obtained from a 1-hour
test, because periods of inactivity will be included in the longer test time.
18
-------
160°/225°
2-10
MPH
30
DC
LU
LLJ
5
O
00
o
cc
01
a.
CO
cc
O
WIND DATA (AVERAGE, AM/PM)
120°/180° 120°/150° 120°/180°
5-7 2-5 4-7
MPH MPH MPH
10
7 8
DATE (SEPT)
Figure 6. TSP values for retorted shale transfer area.
19
-------
Mine Adits
TSP values measured at Anvil Points mine adits No. 1 and 2 are plotted in
Figure 7 for five separate days in September. Concentrations varied widely
from 1 to 35 milligrams/cubic meters. Sampling times varied from 0.5 to 2 hours
but there did not appear to be any correlations of the measured TSP values with *
sampling time. Activities during these five days included mining, dump truck
movement, and (on 9/27) blasting. The peak dust concentrations at the adits
were found, predictably, during the post-blast period at midday.
Haul Road
Four days of operations on the mine haul road were recorded, as can be
seen from the TSP values plotted in Figure 8. These high-volume measurements,
collected at 200 meters above the plant site at the southern-most switchback,
were run for 0.5 to 1.5 hours under varying gusty and calm conditions. Vehicle-
induced dust is clearly evident in Figure 8, although occasional measurements
were lower than background trends. While the general wind direction during the
day was upslope (north), the prevailing direction at the southpoint location
was westerly. Downwind samplers were spotted from 10 to 18 meters east of the
road edge (10 ME, 12 ME, etc.). The scatter of the TSP data values suggest
that local gusts and calms can strongly affect the range of TSP values, and
a single high-volume unit would not be likely to yield a realistic "average"
characterization. The midrange seemed to be around 2 milligrams/cubic meters.
No dust control was being used during this time, although heavy rain in early
September had reduced the dust potential. The spread of observed TSP measure-
ments for similar vehicle traffic is around 1.5 milligrams/cubic meter, and
this spread appears to mask the TSP differences expected with varying traffic.
Crushing Area
Measurements in the crushing area were not emphasized since the crusher
was not representative of equipment that would be used by industry, so that
TSP values were not plotted. Background levels were the same as the retorted
shale transfer area. Some apparent "dust concentrations" have been calculated
for the crusher area and other areas and are reported in Appendix A, as deter-
mined from particle sizing collections.
PARTICULATE SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS
Particulate size distributions were calculated from the mass collections
on five cascade impactor plates, plus the mass on the filter (stage 6) of the
high-volume unit supporting the cascade impactor. The actual mass values,
varying from total amounts of 1.3 grams to 0.03 grams are listed in Appendix A.
The Sierra Instruments impactor used in this study has been designed for nomi-
nal size separations listed as follows?
20
-------
ro
DATE (SEPT)
Figure 7. TSP values for mine adits 1 and 2
-------
ro
ro
WIND DATA (AVERAGE, AM/PM)
270°/270°
2-11 MPH
255°/280°
4 - 15MPH
240°/280°
3 12 MPH
255°/270°
2 16 MPH
c
LU
5- •
KEY-
DOWNWIND VALUES •
UPWIND PATTERNS —
19
20 21
DATE (SEPT)
22
Figure 8. TSP values for haul road CSoutb Point) location,
-------
Stage 123 456 (filter)
Range 8y+ 8-3y 3-1.5y 1.5-ly 1-0.5y 0.5y
The size ranges adjusted for flowrate calibration, together with weight
percentages found in each of six stages, are surtmarized in Table 5. The
inclusion of the high-volume filter as a sixth stage is a key assumption, and
presumes that the manufacturer is correct in claiming that the particulate sizes
reaching the high-volume filter are in the 0.5 micron (and less) class. This
assumption also is implicit in the calculated equivalent mass median aerodyna-
mic diameter, Dp = 1.4 microns.
TRW does not feel that high confidence can be assigned to this particle
size data. The apparent indication of strong bimodel distributions concentra-
ted in the 8 micron and 0.5 micron ranges is a suspect result, and could have
been the consequence of inefficient particle collection at each stage. A de-
tailed description of the Sierra Instruments cascade impactor is given in Ap-
pendix A, together with experimental collection characteristics of these types
of particle sizing devices and optical scanning results of random filters from
mine/haul road/crushing/retort locations. Other researchers found that high-
volume collectors tend to discriminate against larger (>.10 micron) size
particles, and that particle bounce-off at each impactor stage will result
in underweight results in larger size ranges, and overweight results in smaller
size ranges. Bounce-off errors are further substantiated by optical scan
results reported in Appendix A. A measure of the uncertainty in interpreting
these particulate sizing data is shown in Figure 9, where the mass median
diameter of retorted shale dust is calculated to be 1.4 microns when the
filter is assumed to contain only particles under 0.5 microns. The other
extreme possibility shown is where the mass of particles collected on the
filter is assumed to be evenly distributed among the size ranges identified
with the five preceding stages and the resulting mass median diameter is
calculated to be 6.5 microns. The most likely median size of all dust parti-
cles in the retorted shale handling area is probably closer to the larger esti-
mate of 6.5 microns, since particles greater than 10 microns are not well col-
lected. Future sampling should use an inlet cyclone ahead of the cascade
impactor, to collect particles above 5 microns.
INORGANIC ANALYSES
Average elemental analyses, done for selected samples from each plant and
mine area, are given in Table 6 with backup data listed in Table B-3, Appendix
B. For the most part, the elemental values had good internal consistency, even
though sample sizes were as small as 20 milligrams in some cases. It was found
that a 2 milligram sample gave completely variant results.
Most of the elemental concentrations range within + 50% of published ele-
mental analyses for raw oil shale. It was expected that retorted shale dust
would show a depletion of the volatile elements mercury and arsenic, as well
as sulfur, but there is insufficient evidence presented here to make such a
claim.
23
-------
TABLE 5. PARTICULAR SIZE DISTRIBUTIONS FROM CASCADE IMPACTOR
AVERAGE DATA*
Location
Haul road
(average of •<
13 samples)
Mine ^
(average of
8 samples)
/
Crusher area** /
(average of
6 samples)
I
(
Retorted shale 1
transfer area ^
(average of
9 samples)
\J t \J ™ "TW • W
Size range
(microns)***
rs.3 +
' 8.3 - 3.5
3.5 - 1.7
1.7 - 1.1
1.1 - 0.6
,0.6 -
'"9.5 +
9.5 - 3.9
3.9 - 2
2 - 1 .2
1.2 - 0.7
0.7 -
i
'8.8 +
8.8 - 3.7
3.7 - 1.9
1.9 - 1.2
1.2 - 0.6
0.6 -
8.3 +
8.3 - 3.5
3.5 - 1.8
1.8 - 1.1
1.1 - 0.6
0.6 -
5 Stages + filter
32
9
3
2
2
50
29
21
7
4
3
33
.1 wt %
.3
.6
.4
.4
.3
.5
.5
.6
8
* •**
.7
.0
20.2
4.0
3.8
5.
4.
62.
37.
7.
3.
3.
2.
46.
0
3
7
1
3
0
5
8
3
5 Stages only
65 wt. %
19
7
5
4
-
44
32
11
7
6
-
54
11
in
i U
13
12
-
69
13
6
7
5
—
"Optical sizing of participates Indicates that cascade Impactors have a
significant bounce error - see Appendix A, Table A-6
**Crusher 1s not typical of equipment that likely would be used by Industry
***S1ze ranges determined by flowrate calibration curves supplied by manufacturer
24
-------
104-
CL
O
QC
LJ
Ul
<
Q
O
O
O
oc
LU
LLI
54-
24-
i.o 4-
0.5
5 PLATES ONLY:
MASS MEDIAN
DIAMETER = 6.5
PLATES PLUS HI-VOL
FILTER:MASS MEDIAN
DIAMETER = 1.4 n
0.1
H 1 1-
1.0 10 50
PERCENTAGE BY WEIGHT LESS THAN Dp
90
Figure 9. Equivalent aerodynamic diameter of retorted shale dusts.
25
-------
ORGANIC ANALYSES
Selected samples were extracted for organics, and the extracts separated
by liquid chromatograph (L.C.). The analysis rationale and generic classifi-
cation of each of the L.C. fractions was described in Section 3. The quantita-
tive results of these fractionations are given in Table 7.
It appears that the predominant fractions are numbers 1, 5, and 6, al-
though it should be understood that there is considerable overlap of consti-
tuents in adjacent fractions. The mine-related dust samples are particularly
heavy in the aliphatic hydrocarbon-containing fraction (No. 1). This may have
been affected by the use of ANFO explosives and diesel powered equipment in
the mine, both sources of hydrocarbon-laden emissions. It was also noted that
all mine samples were black, rather than the light tan color which is charac-
teristic of shale dust. Organic extractables from raw shale dusts were in the
range of 1.5-4 weight percent, indicating the well-known fact that shale fines
are lower in organic content than bulk oil shale. Retorted shale dust organic
extractables were predictably low (0.3 to 0.5 weight percent); much of the or-
ganic constituent removal appears to have occurred in L.C. fraction No. 1.
Elemental sulfur will show up in fraction No. 1 also, since it is solvent
extractable. This effect would be most noticeable in retorted shale dust,
since the retorting process converts much of the organic sulfur in raw shale
to elemental or free sulfur. There is no correlation between total sulfur
analyses and the amount of free sulfur found in shale samples. Other tenta-
tive characterizations of these fractions are in Appendix C based on some
very limited infrared absorbence data. The infrared scans showed up some
contamination of the filters from silicon oils, so that specific character-
ization of the L.C. fractions could not be done. In the future, it is re-
commended that high-volume sampler filters be decontaminated prior to use by
solvent extraction.
26
-------
TABLE 6. AVERAGE ELEMENTAL COMPOSITIONS OF FUGITIVE DUSTS (UNITS IN PPM)
>^Cd
^Ca
•/Cr
/Cu
/F.
'Mg
" Ma
"XNi
7Pb
/ V
/ Zn
Mn
•/Al
As
i/Se
Ai
S
F
/H9
Crusher area
ND
28,655
15
40
19,150
20,450
13,040
12
17
24
161
135
11,188
3,8
11
119,145
243
745
11.5
Retorted shale
transfer area
5
105,617
31
71
17,783
28,735
22,968
30
55
131
179
295
15,634
14,9
11.7
41,112
5,271
1,291
0,2
Mine adit
2
75,025
13
145
13,325
27,725
32,155
19
68
43
150
315
12,761
7 8
4.4
83,000
13,450
1,925
0.1
Haul road
2
82,300
29
133
22,933
50,567
20,333
43
96
57
200
503
27,073
16-3
34.8
299,000
2,950
10,800
0.9
Raw shale
screening room
baghouse area
6
62,533
54
53
22,767
39,167
28,767
39
64
228
165
...
41,700
16,6
35.3
50,367
6,400
975
0.3
Upwind areas
2
102,650
n
231
20,270
34,170
15,550
321
195
38
420
272
30,528
4.5
14.8
104,850
4,525
6,923
*
*samples too small
27
-------
TABLE 7. AVERAGE ORGANIC COMPOSITIONS OF DUST SAMPLES
Wt %
Organic
Solubles 123456789
Wt % per fraction
Average of Mine Related
oo Sampl es
3.88
59.5 3.9 5.1 2.3 18.9 4.7 1.2 1.5 2.8
Average of Raw Shale Crushing
and Handling Areas
1.19
36.5 7.4 5.8 2.1 25.1 17.3 1.8 2.5 3.0
Average of Retorted Shale
Handling Areas
0.52
38.7 4.9 5.1 3.6 27.1 12.4 2.4 2.9 ?.3
-------
CONTENTS OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
PARTICULATE COLLECTION EQUIPMENT AND PERFORMANCE 31
TSP DATA COLLECTION AND REDUCTION 31
PARTICULATE SIZE ANALYSIS 33
Equipment 33
Performance Analysis 33
FIGURES
Figure A-l. Placement of Particulate Matter Collection
Equipment 32
Figure A-2. Cascade Impactor Plates 34
TABLES
Table A-l. Total Suspended Particulate Values 36
Table A-2. Apparent Dust Concentrations from Particulate
Sizing Tests . 42
Table A-3. Mass Distribution on Cascade Impactor Plates 43
Table A-4. Percentage of Particulate by Weight on Each Stage ... 45
Table A-5. Lower Size Limit Particle Sizing Cutoffs (microns). . . 46
Table A-6. Optical Sizing of Selected Filters from Particulate
Separation Tests 47
Table A-7. Traffic Records for Haul Road and Mine 48
Table A-8. Equipment List 57
APPENDIX B
INORGANIC ANALYSES 58
SAMPLE PREPARATION 58
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 58
QUALITY CONTROL AND ASSURANCE 60
ANALYSIS PRECISION ESTIMATES 60
REFERENCES 65
TABLES
Table B-l. Analysis Methods 59
Table B-2. Inorganic Analysis Test Limits 62
Table B-3. Paraho Fugitive Dust Elemental Analysis
(Units in PPM) 63
29
-------
APPENDIX C
ORGANIC ANALYSES 66
EXTRACTIONS 66
FRACTIONATION 67
INFRARED ANALYSIS 68
FIGURES
Figure C-l. Infrared spectra of L.C. fraction 1 70
Figure C-2. Infrared spectra of L.C. fraction 2 71
Figure C-3. Infrared spectra of L.C. fraction 5 72
TABLES
Table C-l. Summary of Organic Extraction and Separation
Data from Particulate Emissions: Mine
Related Samples 73
Table C-2. Summary of Organic Extraction and Separation
Data from Particulate Emissions: Samples from
Raw Shale Crushing and Handling Areas 74
Table C-3. Summary of Organic Extraction and Separation
Data from Particulate Emissions: Samples from
Retorted Shale Handling Areas 76
30
-------
APPENDIX A
PARTICULATE COLLECTION EQUIPMENT AND PERFORMANCE
TSP DATA COLLECTION AND REDUCTION
The high-volume collectors (specified in Table A-7) were placed at down-
wind locations for the various fugitive dust sources and also at upwind loca-
tions for background measurements. Samplers at the mine were actually located
about 10 meters inside the two mine adits, so wind was not a factor with these
positions. Equipment locations and prevailing wind directions are generally
indicated in Figure A-l.
High-volume sampling at the haul road was initiated just prior to the
approach of a vehicle, and continued for 0.5-1 hours. In this time, two to
eight more vehicles would pass the sampling area, including pickup trucks as
well as dump trucks. There was no attempt made to Collect a sample during
the approximate passage time of a single truck, since the measurement would
have been below the detection limit. The sampling location was beside a short
(about 30 to 40 meters) section of haul road between two switchbacks. The
road traversed the prevailing wind direction. The two downwind samplers were
separated about 15 meters along the road; a haul vehicle moving at an esti-
mated 9 meters/sec (20 miles/hour) would have taken 1.5 seconds to pass.
The chronological listing of all samples collected for total suspended
particulate (TSP) determinations is presented in Table A-l. In addition,
apparent TSP calculations derived from particulate sizing tests are shown in
Table A-2 to backup the observation that small sampling volumes (15-30 cubic
meters) may yield quite different TSP values, and they should not be taken as
an adequate characterization of dust concentrations. The raw data of average
air flow rate through the collector was converted to cubic meters (0 1 atmos-
phere and 20° C) by using the indicated sampling time, pressure corrections
and temperature corrections. The location code for the high-volume samplers
is as follows:
RDM - retorted shale transfer, downwind
RUW - retorted shale transfer, upwind
CDW - crushing area, downwind
CUW - crushing area, upwind
HRDW - haul road, downwind
HRUW - haul road, upwind
MA 1 - mine adit No. 1
MA 2 - mine adit No. 2
31
-------
ADIT1 ADIT 2
PREVAILING
WIND
CRUSHER
PREVAILING
WIND
*
I
— —
'/,'*
XJ
"^ X |
— TRANSFER
® ( INDICATES HIGH - VOLUME SAMPLER)
Figure A-l. Placement of participate matter collection equipment.
32
-------
PARTICIPATE SIZE ANALYSIS
Equipment
Size fractionation of suspended particulates was accomplished with a high-
volume cascade impactor (Sierra Instruments Model 235), which mounted directly
on top of the high-volume samplers used for total particulate collection. The
impactor (Figure A-2) design consists of a series of five slotted plates with
decreasing slot widths from the first impaction stage to the last stage.
Particles collect on a lightweight fiberglass substrate at each stage, and
the remaining particles that do not impact on any of the five stages are
collected by the back-up filter in the high-volume sampler.
At 40 cubic feet/minute nominal flowrate, the expected particle size cut-
off diameters at 50 percent collection efficiency for spherical particles with
unity mass density is specified as follows:
Stage 12345
50% cut-off (microns) 7.2 3.0 1.5 0.95 0.49
Performance Analysis
The mass distribution on each stage of the cascade impactor is recorded
for each particulate sizing test in Table A-3; Stage 6 is the backup filter.
These values were converted to weight percent distribution in Table A-4, and
the expected lower limit particle size cutoffs were determined (Table A-5)
from the manufacturer's flowrate calibrations. The efficiency of particle
collection by high-volume samplers is known to be sharply reduced for particles
greater than 10 micron diameter, and also that sampler orientation to wind
direction is critical.2 The heavier particles in fugitive dusts at the various
locations were probably not included in the reported sample catch. Once in
side the high-volume sampler, particle bounce errors can lead to further dis-
tortion of the size distribution observations.3 Around 20-25 percent of 1-2
micron particles can get through to a backup filter.4 If the collection
efficiency at each impactor stage were known as a function of particle size,
numerical evaluation and correction of errors could be accomplished.5
An examination of the data averages for particle size distributions (Table
5) shows an apparent bimodal distribution, with 30 to 50 percent of the total
sample catch appearing on the backup filter. If the mass of particulate on the
backup filter is treated as though it really is less than 0.6 microns in di-
ameter, calculated mass median diameters (e.g., Figure 9} will be less than
typical urban suspended particulates.6 This conclusion is clearly invalid,
and an optical scanning analysis of randomly selected backup filters was con-
ducted to provide a limited estimate of the extent of particle sizing in-
efficiencies. These results are given in Table A-6, together with an esti-
mate of tbe corrections in observed mass distributions when the particles
counted on the filters are assumed to be spherical and unity density.
33
-------
Figure A-2. Cascade impactor plates
34
-------
TRW believes that the trend of particle size distributions on the select-
ted high-volume filters summarized in Table A-6 provides convincing evidence
that the cascade impactor separation was subject to a great deal of particle
bounce error. Particles in the 3-to-8 microns range dominate the weight per-
centage on these filters, and the range that the filters are intended to
catch (0-1 microns) represent a negligible weight percentage.
REFERENCES
1. 40 CFR, Part 50.11, July 1, 1975.
2. J.B. Wedding, A.R. KcFarland, and J.E. Cermak, "Large Particle Collection
Characteristics of Ambient Aerosol Samplers", Environmental Science and
Technology, 11:4 (1977).
3. T.G. Dzubay, I.E. Mines, and R.K. Stevens, "Particle Bounce Errors in
Cascade Impactors", Atmospheric Environment, 10:229 (1976).
4. R.M. Burtor,, et. al., "Field Evaluation of the High Volume Particle Fraction-
ating Cascade Impactor, J. APCA, 23:4 (1973).
5. D.F.S. Natusch and O.R. Wallace, "Determination of Airborne Particle Size
Distributions", Atmospheric Environment 10:315 (1976).
6. M.G. Wadley, et.al., "Size Distribution Measurements of Particulate Matter
in Los Angeles and Anaheim using High-Volume Anderson Samplers", J. APCA,
28;4 (1978).
35
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE VALUES
OJ
Date Location
9/03/77 ROW
9/04/77 ROW
9/04/77 RUW
9/04/77 ROW
9/04/77 ROW
9/04/77 CDW
9/05/77 ROW
9/5-9/6/77 ROW
9/05/77 RUW
9/05/77 ROW
9/05/77 ROW
9/05/77 ROW
9/05/77 RUW
9/06/77 RUW
9/06/77 ROW
9/06/77 ROW
9/06/77 RUW
9/06/77 ROW
9/06/77 ROW
9/06/77 ROW
9/06/77 ROW
9/06/77 RUW
9/07/77 MAI
9/07/77 MA2
9/07/77 MA2
9/07/77 MAI
9/07/77 M.A2
9/07/77 MAI
9/7-9/77 ROW
9/08/77 ROW
9/08/77 RUW
9/08/77 ROW
9/08/77 ROW
9/08/77 RUW
9/08/77 ROW
9/08/77 CUU
Hi-vol
no.
11
11
8
7
11
11
7A
8
7
11
7
8
8
7
11
8
11
7
7A
7
8
4A
5
5
4A
5
4A
7A
11
8
7
7
8
11
9
Filter no.
1122755
1122798
1122753
1122799
1122752
1122754
1122794
1125597
1 ' 22796
1122795
1122789
1122790
1122797
1122782
1122778
1122774
1122781
1122783
1122780
1122784
1122779
1122787
1122762
1122761
1122750
1122760
1122748
1122749
1122751
1122764
1122763
1122765
1122783
1122744
1122737
1122771
Average
T
°r
72
70
70
70
70
70
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
74
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
Average
barometric
pressure
IHG)
24.09
24.12
24.12
24.12
24.12
23.92
24.11
24.11
24.11
24.11
24.11
24.11
24.11
24.10
24.10
24.10
24.10
24.10
24.10
24.10
24.10
24.10
21.58
21.58
21.58
21.58
21.60
21.60
24.13
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
Average
flownte,
ACFK
43.5
36
60
55
53.5
51
53
45
60
35
52.5
37.5
70
67.5
37
55
70
59.5
29
45
39
70
47
30
40
50
40
49
45
60
70
30
45
70
58
70
Tine.
minutes
199
1140
172
61
61
391
60
1230
192
60
60
60
150
135
90
90
'20
125
60
300
60
105
60
60
60
60
60
60
1367
90
115
90
80
110
60
134
PA/ PS
pressure
correction
.8051
.8061
.8061
.8061
.8061
.7995
.8058
.8058
.8058
.8058
.8058
.8058
.8058
.8055
.8055
.8055
.8055
.8055
.8055
.8055
.8055
.8055
.7213
.7213
.7213
.7213
.7219
.7219
.8065
.8041
.8041
.6041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
TS/TA
temperature
correction
.9962
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
.9944
.9944
.9944
.9944
.9944
.9944
.9944
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9925
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
Standard
cubic
feet
6943
33082
8319
2704
2631
15943
2548
44351
9231
1683
2524
1803
8414
7285
2662
3957
6715
5946
1391
10793
1871
5876
2015
1286
1715
2144
1716
2103
49150
4302
6413
:i5i
6134
2772
7472
X
Milligrams
staple Ual
4519.
10126.
167.1
289.4
634.4
1847.6
523.9
11901.4
331.5
484.3
260.8
116.5
213.4
644.2
1359.2
132.9
423.4
242.4
17481.2
369.6
151.2
240.2
261.3
258.3
112.2
325.5
168.9
190.7
317.9
110.6
575.9
207.0
Cubic
•eters l»9
e 2o*c
194.4
926.3
232.9
75.7
73.7
446.4
71.3
1241.8
258.5
47.1
70.7
50.5
235.6
204.0
74.5
110.8
188.0
166.5
38.9
302.2
52.4
164.5
56.4
36.0
48.0
60.0
48.0
58.9
1376.2
120.5
179.6
60.2
171.8
77.6
209.2
»9/»3
23.2
10.93
0.717
3.82
8.61
4.14
7.35
9.58
7.04
6.85
5.16
0.494
1.05
8.65
12.27
0.706
2.54
6.23
7.05
0.919
4.26
5.44
4.31
2.34
2.70
.940
2.17
.644
7.42
.989
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE VALUES (continued)
Date
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/08/77
9/09/77
9/09/77
9/09/77
9/09/77
9/08/77
9/10/77
9/09/77
9/09/77
9/10/77
9/10/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
Location
CDW
CDW
RUW
ROW
ROW
RUW
RDW
ROW
RDW
CDW
CDW
CUW
CUW
RDW
CUW
CDW
CDW
CDW
CDW
HA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
Hi-vol
no.
10
6
8
7
11
8
11
7
7A
10
6
9
9
7
9
10
6
6
10
5
4A
5
4A
5
4A
5
4A
5
4A
4A
8
4A
8
Filter no.
1122779
1122772
1122740
1122743
1122741
1122739
1122735
1122738
1122742
1122769
1122770
1122768
1122766
1122736
1122732
1122734
1122767
1122730
1122731
1122790
1122793
1125501
1125532
1122776
1125531
1125594
1125595
1122786
1122185
1122748
1122758
1125573
1122791
Average
OF
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
75
71
71
71
71
75
71
71
71
73
6
62
62
67
62
62
62
62
62
62
(-•>
59
59
59
59
Average
barometric
pressure
(MG)
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.06
24.03
23.83
23.83
23.83
24.06
23.83
23.83
23.83
24.06
6
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
?1.C2
21.52
21.52
21.52
21.52
Average
flowrate,
ACFH
65
50
74
32
57.5
70
58
45
75
70
50
72.5
70
36.5
75
70
55
50
70
30
40
37.5
42.5
42.5
45
45
45
45
4f
50.5
45
43
425
Time.
• minutes
56
56
120
90
90
105
90
90
1455
87
35
135
35
90
155
20
20
60
60
29
37
57
57
60
59
61
59
61
CD
63
59
58
60
PA/PS
pressure
correction
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8041
.8031
.7965
.7965
.7965
.8041
.7965
.7965
.7965
.8041
.8041
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7i;3
.7193
.7193
.7193
.7193
TS/TA
tenperature
correction
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9907
.9981
.9981
.9981
.9981
.9907
.9981
.9981
.9981
.9944
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
l.C',5
1.021
1.021
1.021
1.021
Standard
cubic
feet
2900
2231
7074
2294
4122
5855
4158
3226
86929
4882
1391
7781
1948
2617
9242
1113
874
2399
3358
635
1081
1561
1769
1862
1938
2004
1938
2004
1971
2333
1947
1829
1870
Milligrams
sanple («g)
241.2
418.0
160.0
361.0
749.6
157.4
690.6
12289.4
173.3
256.3
222.9
143.2
381.0
182.3
248.4
137.1
354.0
327.0
189.9
313.4
263.3
f891.5
91.3
277.6
95.5
457.9
163.5
628.0
145.1
201.5
163.3
180.8
Cubic
meters (mg)
0 20*C
81.2
62.5
198.1
64.2
115.4
163.9
116.4
90.3
2434.0
136.7
38.9
217.9
54.5
73.3
258.8
31.2
24.5
67.1
94.0
17.8
30.3
43.7
49.5
52.1
54.3
56.1
54.3
56.1
55.2
65.3
54.5
51.2
452.4
. *3
2.97
6.66
.808
5.62
6.50
.960
5.93
5.05
1.27
6.59
1.02
2.63
5.20
7.96
5.60
5.28
3.48
10.67
10.34
6.03
18.01
1.75
5.11
1.70
8.43
2.91
11.38
2.22
3.70
3.19
3.45
(continued}
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE VALUES (continued)
Date
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
<*> 9/16/77
9/16/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/19/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
location
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
MAI
MA2
HRUU
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDVI
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
m-voi
no.
4A
8
4A
8
4A
8
8
4A
8
4A
8
4A
8
4A
8
4A
1
9
10
6
1
10
9
9
10
6
9
11
1
5
5
7
11
1
MUer no.
1125589
1125590
1122728
1125591
1125592
1125600
1125585
1125586
1125587
1125508
1125509
1125510
1125511
1125512
1125514
1125513
1125518
1125515
1125516
1125521
1125519
1125583
1125522
1125544
125527
125528
125526
15
14
16
13
12
9
n
Average
T
°T
59
59
59
59
59
59
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
Average
barometric
pressure
IMG)
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
Average
flow-ate.
ACFH
52
47.5
50
42.5
50
40
42.5
50
42.5
47.5
42.5
47.5
42.5
47.5
42.5
47.5
55
70
72.5
46.5
52.5
65
62.5
50
'5
40
42.5
48
48
37.5
41
41
51
45
Time,
minutes
31
29
63
66
54
44
62
58
59
57
60
59
47
55
60
56
76
74
74
72
91
87
87
53
61
61
61
67
73
60
99
94
102
101
PA/ PS
pressure
correction
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
;7757
.7757
.7757
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
TS/TA
temperature
correction
1.021
1.021
1.021
1.021
1.021
1.021
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.015
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
Standard
cubic
feet
1177
1006
2300
2048
1972
1285
1913
2105
1820
1965
1851
2034
1450
1896
1851
1931
3291
4078
4224
2636
3761
4452
4281
2086
2148
1910
2029
2517
2742
1761
3177
3016
4071
3557
Milligrams
sample (ing)
39.3
81.9
103.4
275.0
238.5
386.1
333.2
68.3
389.5
100.3
333.4
104.5
287.4
102.4
314.3
116.5
58.4
176.0
135.9
72.9
67.8
125.0
215.4
106.9
124.3
110.1
51.3
162.3
98.3
88.3
Cubic
meters (mg)
t 20*C
33.0
28.2
64.4
57.3
55.2
36.0
53.6
58.9
51.0
55.0
51.8
57.0
40.6
53.1
51.8
54.1
92.1
114.2
118.3
73.8
105.3
124.7
119.9
58.4
60.1
53.5
56.8
70.5
76.8
49.3
89.0
84.4
114.0
99.6
roj/a
1.191
2.90
1.606
4.80
4.32
10.73
6.22
1.160
7.64
1.82
6.44
1.83
7.08
1.93
6.07
2.15
0.634
15.6
1.15
0.988
0.644
1.00
1.80
1.83
2.07
2.06
0.903
3.29
1.104
1.05
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE VALUES (continued)
<*)
Date
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
Location
HRDU
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDU
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDU
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
Hl-vol
no.
9
e
10
6
9
10
7
11
1
5
5
1
9
10
5
11
7
1
7
5
11
9
6
10
6
9
10
1
11
5
7
11
1
6
10
9
6
Filter no.
1125508
1 1 25507
1125505
34
36
35
33
29
30
10
31
1125554
26
32
1125555
25
1125556
1125567
112553
1125580
1125504
1125578
1125503
1125579
1125549
1125581
1125550
1125543
1125552
1125548
1125547
1125537
1125538
1125551
1125541
1125542
1125535
Average
T
°F
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
6c
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
Average
barometric
pressure
(MG)
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.16
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
23.21
Average
fl curate,
ACFK
45
40
45
42.5
40
40
46
50
48
41
42.5
50
45
47.5
49
50
57.5
52
60
50
52
50
47.5
50
30
50
50
50
52
47.5
52.5
50
45
45
47.5
50
42.5
Time,
minutes
89
87
89
99
99
99
111
85
77
42
63
93
65
65
61
40
59
54
104
99
148
68
68
68
94
94
94
114
114
114
114
E8
68
70
70
70
44
PA/ PS
pressure
correction
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7741
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
,7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
.7757
TS/TA
temperature
correction
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.011
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1 .017
Standard
cubic
feet
3134
2723
3134
3293
3099
3099
3996
3326
2892
1348
2095
3668
1515
2436
2358
1578
2676
2215
4923
3905
6071
2682
2548
2682
2225
3708
3708
4497
4677
4277
4722
2682
2414
2485
2623
2761
1475
Milligrams
sample (mg)
113.0
79.6
135.9
20.3
91.3
47.0
135.3
71.0
56.0
12.6
21.2
2.4
159.2
215.1
28.1
127.0
135.3
16.1
104.2
110.8
77.9
83.6
93.1
34.3
27.1
232.1
189.4
16.9
49.2
151.8
136.8
126.3
46.5
Cubic
meters (ng)
9 20°C
87.8
76.2
87.8
92.2
86.8
86.8
111.9
93.1
81.0
37.7
58.7
102.7
64.6
68.2
66.0
44.2
74.9
62.0
137.8
109.3
170.0
75.1
71.3
75.1
62.3
103.8
103.8
125.9
131.0
119.6
132.2
75.1
67.6
69.6
73.4
77.3
41.3
. »3
1.29
1.04
1.55
0.220
1.05
0.541
1.21
1.88
0.954
0.123
0.328
0.035
2.41
2.87
0.453
0.922
1.24
0.095
1.39
1.55
1.04
1.34
0.897
0.272
0.207
1.94
1.43
0.225
0.728
2.18
1.86
1.63
1.13
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE VALUES (continued)
Date
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
4* 9/22/77
° 9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/2° .'77
9/22/77
Location
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
HRDW
HRDU
HRDH
HRDW
HRDW
Hi-vol
no.
10
9
5
7
11
1
5
7
10
9
5
10
6
9
1
7
5
11
9
'1
11
7
5
6
10
a
9
Filter no.
1125534
1125536
1125539
1125540
1125560
1125561
1125563
1125562
49
48
40
101
22
100
1122713
1122714
1122715
1122711
1125568
1122717
1122716
1122718
1125560
96
98
97
1125565
Average
T
°F
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
-------
TABLE A-l. TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATE VALUES (continued)
Date.
9/24-9/27
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
T23-?4/77
9/23-24/77
9/23-24/77
9/24/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/24-27/77
9/24-27/77
9/26/77
3 '26/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
4/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/24/77
Location
HA2
HRDW
HRDW
HRUW
HRUW
HRUW
HRUW
HRUW
HRDW
MAI
KA2
PA2
CUU
ROW
ROW
MAI
MAI
ROW
ROW
RDW
ROW
RUW
RUW
RUW
ROW
RUW
RDW
ROW
RDU
RDW
MM
MA2
MAI
MA:
MAI
MAI
MAI
MA2
MA2
Hl-vol
no.
4A
10
5
1
11
10
1
11
7
8
12
4A
1
7
5
8
12
7
7
5
9
9
9
9
5
9
5
7
6
5
8
4A
14
1C
8
14
8
4A
4A
Filter no.
1122725
1125533
1122721
1125558
1122719
1125530
37
38
39
90
42
43
92
82
81
1122720
112557
94
80
79
84
85
05
04
73
91
77
78
70
69
41
17
71
19
18
23
20
67
1122725
Average
T
°F
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
55
55
55
57
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
61
51
61
61
61
61
61
Average
baroMtrfc
pressure
(MG)
21.38
23.12
23.12
23.12
23.12
23.12
23.12
23.12
23.12
21.38
21.38
21.38
23.87
23.92
23.92
21.40
21.40
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
23.92
21.4d
23.92
21.40
2V«0
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
21.40
Average
floxrate
ACFM
23.5
45
44.5
50
52
50
48
52
40.5
23
20
29
55
38
17
26
20
37.5
30
'.2 ?
28
27
29
30
46
26.5
42.5
36.5
16
13
25
25.5
17.5
37.5
41
25.5
39
31
23.5
. Tim.
•Inutes
4725
46
50
41
41
38
63
63
75
1368
1367
1370
80
32
32
4715
4715
39
51
45
55
80
87
121
13
36
46
54
34
38
152
165
100
16
29
29
50
58
300
PA/PS
pressure
correction
.7146
.7727
.7727
.7727
.7727
.7727
.7727
.7727
.7727
.7146
.7146
.7146
.7978
.7995
.7995
.7152
.7152
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7995
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
.7152
TS/TA
temperature
correction
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.029
1.029
1.029
1.025
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
1.017
Standard
cubic
feet
80696
1627
1748
1611
1675
1493
2376
2574
2387
23135
20103
29213
3598
989
1223
89167
68590
1189
1244
1555
1252
1756
2051
2952
486
776
1590
1603
1272
1329
2946
3061
1273
436
865
538
1560
1308
5128
Milligrams
sample (mg)
1908.4
67.5
147.1
76.4
38.1
76.1
152.4
135.1
170.9
281.6
85.0
1018.7
620.7
3573.9
3589.9
542.5
94.7
548.2
58.9
98.4
43.9
351.9
132.4
520.9
1316.4
659.6
412.4
125.4
142.3
78.4
173.7
245.2
35.8
639.0
1324.6
1908.4
Cubic
•eters (*g)
* 20'C
2259.5
45.6
48.9
45.1
46.9
41.8
66.5
72.1
66.8
647.8
562.9
818.0
72.7
27.7
34.2
2496.7
1920.5
33.3
34.8
43.5
35.1
49.2
57.4
79.9
13.6
21.7
44.5
44.9
35.6
37.2
82.5
85.7
35.6
12.2
24.2
15.1
43.7
36.6
143.6
.,/.'
1.48
2.51
3.01
1.69
0.812
1.82
2.28
0.209
0.304
0.344
1.17
36.8
18.15
1.43
1.87
16.3
2.72
12.60
1.68
2.0
0.549
25.88
6.10
11.71
29.32
18.53
11.09
1.52
1.66
2.20
14.24
10. 1 J
2.37
14.62
36.9
13.3
-------
TABLE A-2. APPARENT DUST CONCENTRATIONS FROM PARTICIPATE
SIZING TESTS
Date
9/19
9/20
9/21
9/21
9/22
9/22
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/19
9/22
9/26
9/24
9/26
9/25
9/25
9/25
9/25
9/16
9/16
9/27
9/15
9/15
9/15
9/16
9/27
9/J4
9/14
9/14
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/26
Time
10:24
10:38
8:42
11:27
9:18
12:06
12:16
10:31
1:54
1:05
1:59
2:26
11:10
9:33
7:54
8:09
8:54
10:17
10:54
10:33
12:02
3:04
1:35
12:21
10:56
3:00
5:47
11:31
2:16
1:12
11:49
9:23
10:37
11:11
10:02
4:22
Actual
Location f|OW
(ft3/min)
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
46.5
36.5
30
30
30
30
42
43
40
40
40
30
37.5
32.5
33
36
33
32.5
32.5
32.5
32.5
17.5
32.5
33.5
31.5
35
25.5
43.5
40
40
32
37.5
38.5
35
38.5
37.5
Corrected Total Concentra-
flow volume tion
(SCFM) (m3 I? 20"C) (mg/m3)
36.6
28.6
23.7
23.7
23.6
23.6
34.2
35.0
32.5
32.5
31.5
36.1
30.5
26.6
26.8
29.5
27.0
26.6
26.6
23.6
23.6
12.7
23.7
24.6
23.1
25.4
18.6
35.4
32.6
32.6
26
30.5
31.3
28,5
26.9
30.5
73.8
52.8
42.4
62.3
54.6
25.1
31.6
26.4
66.6
29.]
66.1
30.4
34.2
64.0
28.6
28.1
19.7
20.1
16.4
39.6
41.6
35.6
39.9
26.8
38.8
21.3
15.1
59.5
12.8
24.6
14.6
13.7
17.5
16.7
13.2
33.3
2.65
2.00
1.99
1.41
I.b9
0.34
2.84
1.83
3.04
25.9
4.98
0.84
3.88
3.49
9.97
6.69
17.59
13.45
24.52
6.88
4.87
4.24
6.26
2.66
4.27
11.03
8.19
17.08
29.13
23.16
72.13
43.60
48.06
37.93
70.89
39.81
42
-------
TABLE A-3. MASS DISTRIBUTION ON CASCADE IMPACTOR PLATES
Date
9/19
9/20
9/21
9/21
9/22
9/22
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/19
9/22
9/26
9/14
9/14
9/14
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/26
Time
10:24
10:38
8:42
11:27
9:18
12:06
12:16
10:31
1:54
1:05
1:59
2:26
11:10
11:31
2:16
1:12
11:49
9:23
10:37
11:11
10:02
4:22
Location
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Haul road
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Retort discharge
Stage
11
(gn.)
0.0775
0.0164
0.0320
0.0015
0.0185
0.0055
0.0189
0.0267
0.0337
0.6789
0.0936
0.0028
0.0171
0.3817
0.1041
0.0148
0.6869
0.2256
0.3519
0.2370
0.3828
0.5615
Stage
#2
(gm)
0.0194
.0008
0.0122
0.0026
0.0064
0.0025
0.0082
.0090
0.0160
.0032
0.0296
0.0011
0.0092
0.0666
0.0166
0.0785
0.0821
0.0398
0.0524
0.0297
0.0678
0.1116
Stage
13
(gm)
0.0063
0.0056
0.0008
-
0.0007
0.0006
0.0053
0.0049
0.0089
.0032
0.0134
-
0.0056
0.0248
0.0089
0.0195
0.0420
0.0193
0.0267
0.0165
0.0218
0.0431
Stage
#4
(gm)
0.007
0.001
0.0011
-
-
-
.0038
0.0050
0.0110
0.0039
0.0079
-
0.0026
0.0284
0.0146
0.0250
0.0498
0.0191
0.0311
0.0191
0.0280
0.0394
Stage
#5
(gm)
0.005
0.006
0.0001
-
-
-
0.0028
.0028
0.0068
0.0002
0.0109
0.0011
0.0033
0.0247
0.0129
0.0175
0.0350
O.OM4
0.0202
0.0139
0.0319
0.0277
Stage
16
(gm)
0.0729
0.0760
0.0383
0.0836
0.0610
-
0.0506
Neg. Wt.
0.1262
0.0644
0.1738
0.0205
0.0948
0.4903
0.2158
0.4145
0.1573
0.2791
0.3588
0.3173
0.4034
0.5425
(continued)
Total
weight
(gm)
0.1881
0.1058
0.0845
0.0877
0.0866
0.0086
0.0896
0.0484
0.2026
0.7538
0.3292
0.0255
0.1326
1.0165
0.3729
0.5698
1.0531
0.5973
0.8411
0.6335
0.9357
1.3258
-------
TABLE A-3. MASS DISTRIBUTION ON CASCADE IMPACTOR PLATES (continued)
Date
9/24
9/26
9/25
9/25
9/25
9/25
.9/16
9/16
9/27
9/15
9/15
9/15
9/16
9/27
Time
9:33
7:54
8:09
8:54
10:17
10:54
10:33
12:02
3:04
1:35
12:21
10:56
3:00
5:47
Location
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Crusher
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Stage
#1
(gin)
0.0356
0.0352
0.0384
.0904
0.0592
0.0986
0.0946
0.0669
0.0227
0.0888
0.0123
0.0382
0.1000
0.0429
Stage
#2
(gm)
_
0.0106
0.0110
0.0046
0.0171
0.0271
0.0614
0.0428
0.0271
0.0584
0.0141
0.0412
0,0630
0.0190
Stage
13
(gin)
0.0079
0.0109
0.0049
.0143
0.0125
0.0178
0.0238
0.0152
0.0110
0.0175
0.0044
0.0138
0.0183
0.0096
Stage
#4
(gm)
0.0114
0.0095
0.0038
0.0306
0.0155
0.0201
0.0118
0.0084
0.0086
0.0108
0.0025
0.0087
0.0090
0.0091
Stage
#5
(gm)
0.0104
0.0100
0.0043
.0198
0.0149
0.0167
0.0018
0.0071
0.0030
0.0104
0.0038
0.0075
0.0030
0.0073
Stage
#6
(gm)
0.1582
0.2088
0.1256
0.1869
0.1512
0.2219
0.0791
0.0621
0.0784
0.0640
0.0342
0.0563
0.0367
0.0358
Total
weight
(gm)
0.2235
0.285
0.1880
0.3466
0.2704
0.4022
0.2725
0.2025
0.1508
0.2499
0.0713
0.1658
0.235
0.1237
-------
TABLE A-4. PERCENTAGE OF PARTICULATE BY WEIGHT ON EACH STAGE
Haul road
Mine
Retort
discharge
Crusher
.
Date
9/19
9/20
9/21
9/21
9/22
9/22
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/19
9/22
9/26
9/16
9/16
9/27
9/15
9/15
9/15
9/16
9/27
9/14
9/14
9/14
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/26
9/25
9/25
9/24
9/26
9/25
9/25
Time
10:24
10:38
8:42
11:27
9:18
12:06
12:16
10:31
1:54
1:05
1:59
2:26
11:10
10:33
12:02
3:04
1:35
12:21
10:56
3:00
5:47
11:31
2:16
1:12
11:49
9:23
10:37
11:11
10:02
4:22
10:17
10:54
9:33
7:54
8:09
8:54
% In
stage
1
41.2
15.5
37.9
1.7
21.4
63.9
21.1
55.2
16.6
90.1
28.4
11.0
12.9
34.7
33.0
15.1
35.5
17.3
23.0
42.6
34.7
37.6
27.9
2.6
65.2
37.8
41.8
37.4
40.9
42.4
21.9
24.5
15.9
12.4
20.4
26.1
% In
stage
2
10.3
0.8
14.4
3.0
7.4
29.1
9.2
18.6
7.9
0.4
9.0
4.3
6.9
22.5
21.1
13.0
23.4
19.8
24.8
26.8
15.4
6.6
4.5
13.8
7.8
6.7
6.2
4.7
7.2
8.4
6.3
6.7
-
3.7
5.9
1.3
% In
stage
3
3.3
5.3
0.9
-
0.8
7.0
5.9
10.1
4.4
0.4
4.1
-
4.2
8.7
7.5
7.3
7.0
6.2
8.3
7.8
7.8
2.4
2.4
3.4
4.0
3.2
3.2
2.6
2.3
3.3
4.6
4.4
3.5
3.8
2.6
4.1
% In
stage
4
3.7
0.9
1.3
-
-
-
4.2
10.3
5.4
0.5
2.4
-
2.0
4.3
4.1
5.7
4.3
3.5
5.2
3.8
7.4
2.8
3.9
4.4
4.7
3.2
3.7
3.0
3.0
3.0
5.7
5.0
5.1
3.3
2.0
8.8
% In
stage
5
2.7
5.7
0.1
-
-
-
3.1
5.8
3.4
0.02
3.3
4.3
2.5
0.6
3.5
2.0
4.2
5.3
4.5
3.4
5.9
2.4
3.5
3.1
3.3
2.4
2.4
2.2
3.4
2.1
5.5
4.2
4.7
3.5
2.3
5.7
% In
stage
6
38.8
71.8
45.3
95.3
70.4
-
56.5
-
62.3
8.5
52.8
80.4
71.5
29.0
30.7
52.0
25.6
48.0
34.0
15.6
28.9
48.?
57.8
72.7
14.9
46. /
42. /
50.1
43.1
40. '.I
55.9
55..:
70.8
73.3
66.9
53.0
45
-------
TABLE A-5. LOWER SIZE LIMIT PARTICLE SIZING CUTOFFS (microns)
Date
Haul Road 9/19
9/20
9/21
9/21
9/22
9/22
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/26
9/19
9/22
9/26
Retort 9/14
9/14
9/14
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/27
9/26
Crusher 9/24
9/26
9/25
9/25
9/25
9/25
Mine 9/16
9/16
9/27
9/15
9/15
9/15
9/16
9/27
Time
10:24
10:38
8:42
11:27
9:18
12:06
12:16
10:31
1:54
1:05
1:59
2:26
11:10
11:31
2:16
1:12
11:49
9:23
10:37
11:11
10:02
4:22
9:33
7:54
8:09
8:54
10:17
10:54
10:33
12:02
3:04
1:35
12:21
10:56
3:00
5:47
Stage
1
7.56
8.64
8.78
8.78
8.78
8.78
7.92
7.92
8.28
8.28
8.14
7.56
8.28
7.63
8.28
8.28
9.0
8.28
8.14
8.64
8.86
8.28
8.86
8,86
8.50
8.86
8.86
8.86
8.78
8.78
12.96
8.78
9.0
9.07
9.0
10.66
Stage
2
3.15
3.6
3.66
3.66
3.66
3.66
3.3
3.3
3.45
3.45
3.39
3.15
3.45
3.18
3.45
3.45
3.75
3.45
3.39
3.60
3.69
3.45
3.69
3.69
3.54
3.69
3.69
3.69
3.66
3.66
5.46
3.66
3.75
3.78
3.75
4.44
Stage
3
1.58
1.8
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.83
1.65
1.65
1.73
1.73
1.70
1.58
1.73
1.59
1.73
1.73
1.88
1.73
1.70
1.8
1.86
1.73
1,86
1.86
1.79
1.86
1.86
1.86
1.83
1.83
2.76
1.83
1.88
1.89
1.88
2.24
Stage
4
1.0
1.14
1.16
1.16
1.16
1.16
1.05
1.05
1.09
1.09
1.07
1.00
1.09
1.01
1.09
1.09
1.20
1.09
1.07
1.14
1.18
1.09
1.18
1.18
1.13
1.18
1.18
1.18
1.16
1.16
1.77
1.16
1.19
1.21
1.19
1.43
Stage
5
0.51
0.59
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0,54
0.54
0.56
0.56
0.55
0.51
O.Sfi
0.52
0.56
0.56
0.62
0.56
0.55
0.59
0.61
0.56
0.61
0.61
0.59
0.61
0.61
0.61
0.60
0.60
0.92
0.60
0.61
0.62
0.61
0.74
46
-------
TABLE A-6. OPTICAL SIZING OF SELECTED FILTERS FROW PARTICIPATE SEPARATION TESTS
Sample location
Retorted shale transfer
Haul road
Crusher area
Mine adit no. 1
No. %
Wt. %
No. %
Wt. %
No. %
Wt. %
No. %
Wt. %
0-1. Op
21.78
0.02
16.21
0.01
19.25
0.01
72.85
0.12
1.0-2. Op
18.05
0.35
19.88
0.29
17.08
0.27
8.61
0.38
2. 0-3. Op
14.61
1.32
13.46
0.89
10.56
C.76
2.65
0.54
3. 0-8. Op
36.10
34.83
35.47
25.08
40.37
30.98
10.93
23.77
over 8. Op
9.46
63.47
14.98
73.73
12.73
67.98
4.97
75.19
Polarized light microscopy performed by Walter C. WcCrone Associates
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL ROAD AND MINE
Date
9/19/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/20/77
Location
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Filter No.
1125571
1125546
16
10
9
34
1125508
1125527
33
Traffic
Up
2:01
2:21
2:25
2:35
10:30
10:51
11:32
11:35
1:35
2:29
2:31
10:50
10:51
11:31
11:34
1:35
2:29
2:31
12:08
12:36
12:38
1:08
10:50
10:51
11:31
11:34
1:33
1:36
2:30
2:32
Down
2:06
2:11
2:53
10:42
11:09
11:12
2:10
2:14
3:06
3:10
10:42
11:09
11:12
2:10
2:14
3:06
3:10
11:57
12:10
12:12
12:35
1:14
1:17
10:42
11:09
11:12
2:11
2:14
3:07
3:10
(continued)
48
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/20/77
9/20/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
9/21/77
Location
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Filter No.
1125505
1125507
1125539
1125534
112536
1125535
1125503
1125578
Traffic
Up
12:08
12:36
12:38
1:08
12:36
12:38
1:08
2:08
2:12
2:19
10:26
10:29
10:26
10:29
Down
11:57
12:10
12:12
12:35
1:14
1:17
12:10
12:12
12:35
1:14
1:17
2:20
2:42
3:03
3:08
2:40
3:01
3:07
2:40
3:01
3:07
2:40
3:01
3:07
10:14
10:50
11:02
11:02
11:07
10:14
10:50
11:02
11:02
11:07
49
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
Location
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Filter No.
112560
1125560
39
40
1122717
1125558
1122713
1122721
1122715
1122719
1122716
1125561
1125562
1125530
1125568
1122720
Traffic
UP
10:43
10:47
11:26
11:41
11:43
11:49
12:35
12:40
12:42
12:35
12:40
12:42
2:27
2:30
Down
11:15
11:25
11:32
12:18
12:25
12:27
12:18
12:25
12:27
3:02
3:11
50
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/22/77
9/26/77
Location
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Road
Filter No.
1122718
101
98
100
1125563
1122714
87
Traffic
Up Down
1:32
1:38
1:41
10:44
11:26
11:38
11:39
11:41
1:30
1:35
1:37
2:07
10:44
11:26
11:38
11:39
11:41
9:39
9:44
9:55
12:38
12:43
12:44
1:27
1:31
1:35
1:12
1:20
1:22
1:46
2:06
2:16
2:18
10:45
11:12
11:23
11:30
1:09
1:18
1:20
1:45
2:03
2:14
2:16
10:45
11:12
11:23
11:30
9:19
9:24
9:30
10:20
10:25
10:27
12:20
12:27
12:29
1:10
1:13
1:18
1:19
51
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/26/77
9/02/77
9/07/77
9/07/77
9/07/77
9/07/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
Location
Road
Road
Road
Road
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Filter No.
36
88
47
89
1122757
1122760
1122762
1122750
1122746
1122785
1125531
Traffic
Up
2:02
2:19
2:22
2:28
12:34
12:36
12:43
10:48
10:51
10:57
11:42
11:43
11:50
In
3:19
3:41
3:42
3:44
1:18
1:27
Down
2:02
2:06
2:11
2:56
3:00
3:09
12:17
12:21
12:26
10:32
10:36
10:40
10:58
11:25
11:28
11:38
Out
3:56
4:00
4:07
1:40
1:48
52
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/14/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
Location
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Filter No.
1122793
1122776
1122786
1122792
1125501
1125594
1125595
1125532
1125573
1125591
1122791
1125600
Traffic
In
1:32
4:05
2:31
2:41
12:04
12:11
12:19
12:31
11:45
1:52
1:56
2:00
11:36
11:47
11:59
11:59
12:03
2:32
2:47
2:53
Out
10:20
11:40
1:23
1:28
3:52
12:17
2:45
2:55
2:58
12:26
11:48
11:49
12:05
12:09
12:15
12:16
1:32
11:45
53
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/15/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
Location
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Filter No
1122758
1125574
1122728
1122748
1125592
1125589
1125590
1125582
1125572
1125569
1125510
Traffic
In
10:45
10:47
11:02
11:12
11:05
11:15
11:39
11:51
1:14
11:00
2:38
1:55
2:00
2:05
Out
10:50
11:17
1:18
1:35
2:00
2:04
10:21
10:34
10:08
11:13
11:13
11:22
3:05
11:57
12:02
12:04
12:06
(continued)
54
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/16/77
Location
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Filter No.
1125508
1125512
1125509
1125586
1125587
1125585
1125513
1125514
1125511
\
Traffic
In
10:49
12:40
11:21
11:51
11:52
10:45
10:45
10:49
11:08
9:54
9:54
9:58
1:34
1:36
1:38
2:10
12:40
12:41
12:45
1:01
Out
10:40
10:51
10:58
10:57
11:19
12:48
12:51
12:55
9:57
10:00
10:02
10:08
1:42
1:46
1:51
1:53
1:12
55
(continued)
-------
TABLE A-7. TRAFFIC RECORDS FOR HAUL AND ROAD MINE (continued)
Date
9/16/77
9/16/77
9/23/77
9/23/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
9/27/77
Location
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Mine
Filter No.
1125584
1125517
42
2
41
17
71
23
18
Traffic
In
12:40
12:41
12:45
1 :01
10:45
10:45
10:49
11:08
3:22
3:22
Out
3:21
3:16
3:21
56
-------
TABLE A-8. EQUIPMENT LIST
Meteorological Equipment
2 - MRI model 1071 mechanical weather stations monitors and record
wind run, direction, and temperature
1 - Sling psychrometer
1 - Barometer
Other Equipment
8 - General Metal Works high volume samplers model 2000 (40 CFM)
5 - General Metal Works Accu-Vol high volume samplers model 2310 (40 CFM)
1 - Onan 3 KW generator
1 - Sierra Instruments 5 stage high volume cascade impactor,
model 235 (40 CFM)
1 - Velometer
2000 feet of 12/3 extension cord
200 Gelman spectrograde glass fiber filters - 8" x 10"
200 Whatman 41 cellulose filters - 8" x 10"
1 - Mettler P-5 balance
1 - Dessicator
57
-------
APPENDIX B
INORGANIC ANALYSES
SAMPLE PREPARATION
The polyethylene bags containing dust samples from Whatman filters were
hand-carried to the inorganic analysis laboratory where they were logged in
along with stabilized filter tare weights. The filters were stabilized under
identical temperature and humidity conditions and weighed to + 0.1 milligrams.
Where sample weights were over 10 grams, a portion of the particulate was
weighed for analysis. On all other filters, one-half of the area was digested
for trace and major metals analysis, one-eighth of the area was digested for
mercury analysis, one eighth of the area was digested for sulfur analysis, and
one eighth of the area was fused for silicon and fluoride analyses. The net
sample weights varied from 21 milligrams to 13.2 grams, so that analysis accu-
racy varied considerably as a function of available sample.
All samples to be analyzed for As, Al, Ca, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mg, Na, Ni, Pb,
Se, V, and Zn were digested to completion at 95°C in a 1:1 mixture of nitric
acid, hydrochloric acid, and perchloric acid. Samples for mercury analysis
were digested in a 1:3 aqua regia mixture of nitric and hydrochloric acid for
two minutes at 95°C followed by permanganate-persulfate oxidation. A sodium
hydroxide-magnesium oxide fusion was used to decompose samples for analysis of
Si and F. Sulfur was determined by a gravimetric method after dissolution and
oxidation by bromine to sulfate and precipitation as barium sulfate. The di-
gested samples were all brought to a 50 mililiter volume for analysis.
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The methodology used for each inorganic constituent is given in Table B-l,
together with references for each standard method and the detection limit in
milligram/liter. All related data were recorded in the analyst's laboratory
notebook, including:
1. Analysis being performed (procedure document number and title)
2. Pertinent information about procedure, reagents, etc.
3. Sample identification (project number and filter number)
4. Dilutions of sample, if any
5. Data resulting from analysis (absorbance readings, milligrams of
precipitate, etc.)
6. Data for quality control blanks, standards and calibration
7. Sample calculations including background corrections
8. Results
58
-------
TABLE B-l. ANALYSIS METHODS
Parameter
Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmi um
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Fluoride
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silica
Sodium
Sulfate
(from sulfate)
Vanadium
Zinc
Description of method
flame atomic absorption
flame! ess atomic absorption with
NiNOg using standard additions
flame atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
specific ion electrode
flame atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
cold vapor atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
flameless atomic absorption with
NiNOg using standard additions
colorimetric, ammonium molybdate
flame emission
BaS04 precipitate
flameless atomic absorption
flame atomic absorption
References
1,2,7
3,4,5,6
2,7
2,7
2,7
2,7
2
2,8
2,8.
2,7
2,7
2,5
2,7
3,4,5,6
1,2
7
1,2
5,6
2,7
Detection
limit mg/1
0.1
0.002
0.002
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.1
0.01
0.01
0.05
0.005
0.00002
0.01
0.005
1
0.1
10
0.005
0.005
59
-------
9. Information such as wave length, cell size, zero reference solution,
sample size.
A "Standard Additions" technique was used in the case of suspected inter-
ferences (example: As and Se determinations by flameless atomic absorbtion).
In the standard addition method, equal volumes of sample are added to a deion-
ized distilled water blank and to three standards containing different known
amounts of the test element. The absorbance of each solution is determined
and then plotted on the vertical axis of a graph, with the concentrations of
the known standards plotted on the horizontal axis. When the resulting line
is extrapolated back to zero absorbance, the point of interception of the
abscissa is the concentration of the unknown.
The quantity of each constituent (in milligrams) was determined from the
measured concentrations and known liquid sample volumes. These values were
then converted to particulate ppm concentrations by using the sample weight
determined prior to sample preparation steps.
QUALITY CONTROL AND ASSURANCE
A new clean Whatman filter blank (for high-volume applications) was pro-
cessed through the identical analysis sequence. Whenever blank values were
significant, they were subtracted from the raw analytical measurements.
To provide further evaluations of analytical accuracy and precision, 10%
of all analyses were repeated and another 10% were spiked. This was consis-
tent with routine procedures conducted by the inorganic chemical laboratory.
The computed values of elemental compositions of the dust samples were
compared for internal consistency. One small sample of only 2 milligrams was
analyzed, but the results were a factor of ten higher than comparable samples,
so the data were not reported. It would have been difficult to make a judge-
ment on inadequate sample size without such a sizable data base*
ANALYSIS PRECISON ESTIMATES
Quality control limits were based upon actual performance at CDM/Acculabs,
Typically more than 50 data points were used to generate the limits of 2o as a
"warning limit" and 3o as a "control limit". For the purpose of determining
precison, the quantity "% deviation" is calculated as follows:
% Deviation = (X, - X2) • 100 where x -s yg/ml
(X1 + X2) * 1/2
60
-------
Run 1 Run 2
Example: X-, = 2.9 X2 = 3.2
% Deviation = (3.2 - 2.9) x (100) = g Q0/ f
•3 n I n g 7.O/0 I Ul LWU
^ — — repeated analyses
For the purpose of determining accuracy, the quantity "% recovery" is
calculated as follows:
% recovery = Concentration found x 1QQ = mass found 1QQ
h recovery concentration expected * IOU mass expected x mu
Example: Ca = 5.9 yg/ml (100 ml solution
spike with 1,000 ml of 500 yg/ml soln.
Calcium in original solution = 5.3 yg/ml x 100 ml
« 530 yg Ca
Calcium added 500 yg/ml x 1.000 ml = 500 yg
• determine 10.0 yg/ml in 101 ml = 1010 yg
• find 1010 yg Ca
t expect to find 500 + 530 = 1030 yg Ca
% recovery = - x 100 = 98%
The data control limits indicated in Table B-2, below, have been accumu
lated on samples in the range from the detection limit to 100 times the de-
tection limit.
61
-------
TABLE B-2. INORGANIC ANALYSIS TEST LIMITS
Component
As
Al
Ca
Cd
Cr
Cu
Fe
Mg
Na
Ni
Pb
Se
V
Zn
Si
S
F
Hg
Mn
% Mean Recovery
113%
103
102
106
75
96
103
102
102
106
103
113
97
108
93
103
112
101
104
% Deviation
20 3o
32%
38
9
30
48
29
48
12
17
43
46
17
12
48
12
22
33
80
11
47%
57
14
46
72
44
72
18
25
65
69
27
18
73
18
34
50
120
16
Table B-2 indicates that repeated arsenic (As) analyses, for example,
will statistically lie outside the 2a control limit of 32% deviation only 1
in 20 times. The control limit band is then +_ 16% around the mean value. At
the 3a level, only 1 in 500 arsenic analyses are expected to fall outside the
47% deviation band.
The following arsenic values were obtained from five separate samples
taken downwind of the retorted shale transfer point:
5.5, 45.9, 5.4, 5.1, and 12.9 ppm.
The high value of 45.9 ppm is not within a 3o analysis precison of 47%
of the apparent midrange (5 - 15 ppm) of the other sample analyses so 1t can
be argued that the high value indicates a real variation in the arsenic con-
tent of the retorted shale dust at the time the second sample was taken. Sim-
ilar comparisons can be made for other elemental analyses of the various dust
samples.
Table B-3 summarizes all inorganic analyses that were performed for nine-
teen constituents. The location codes are consistent with Table A-l.
62
-------
TABLE B-3. PARAHO FUGITIVE DUST ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS (UNITS IN PPM)
01
co
Net Wt. (g)
0.2389
4.4011
0.0580
1.0187
13.2218
4.3699
0.0596
0.5482
0.0589
0.0439
0.6390
0.1351
0.1737
1.3246
0.0883
0.0913
0.0212
4.5232
4.6322
4.5582
Filter
No. /Date
93-9/24
21-9/21
92-9/24
82-9/26
8-9/1 5
1-9/9
70-9/27
79-9/26
84-9/26
4-9/26
20-9/27
90-9/27
19-9/27
67-9/27
12-9/20
36-9/20
26-9/21
2-9/9
3-9/13
6-9/14
Location
COW
COW
CUW
ROW
ROW
ROW
RDM
RDM
ROW
RUW
MA 1
MA 1
MA 2
MA 2
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
SRBH
SRBH
SRBH
Cd
ND
NO
1
2
21
4.5
1
2
ND
2
1
11
5
2
3
2.9
ND
6.7
5.9
6.1
Ca
56,100
1,210
35,300
281,000
91 ,500
45,300
97,200
98,000
20,700
170,000
73,200
500,000
73,700
80,000
96,700
91,700
58,500
67,300
59,000
61 ,300
Cr
29
1.2
72
12
21
52
13
11
75
ND
12
64
20
9
69
ND
19
47
60
56
Cu
76
3.9
72
75
60
47
68
64
110
390
146
14,700
210
78
147
175
76
64
48
48
Fe
11,300
27,000
6,640
21,100
21,700
21 ,900
17,900
17,800
6,300
33,900
11,100
79,200
17,700
13,400
31,700
24,200
12,900
23,700
22,300
22,300
Mg
1,900
39,000
6,640
36,700
24,300
33,800
36,200
34,700
6,710
61,700
28,500
172,000
23,100
30,800
34,100
29,400
88,200
47,400
36,200
33,900
Na
8,080
18,000
4,200
6,880
6,850
28,400
6,500
5,980
83,200
26,900
17,060
112,000
74,300
20,200
11,100
29,400
20,500
25,300
31 ,800
29,200
Ni
23
0.6
3.3
30
30
36
24
26
32
638
13.1
141
33
16
44
55
31
36
36
45
Pb
33
NO
94
44
47
63
36
40
102
296
56
750
92
66
102
55
130
65
64
62
(continued)
-------
TABLE B-3. PARAHO FUGITIVE DUST ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS (UNITS IN PPM) (continued)
Net Wt. (g)
0.2389
4.4011
0.0580
1.0187
13.2218
4,3699
0.0596
0.5482
0.0589
0.0439
0.6390
0.1351
0.1737
1.3246
0.0883
0.0913
0.0212
4.5232
4.6322
4.5582
Filter
No. /Date
93-9/24
21-9/21
92-9/24
82-9/26
8-9/15
1-9/9
70-9/27
79-9/26
84-9/26
4-9/26
20-9/27
90-9/27
19-9/27
67-9/27
12-9/20
36-9/20
26-9/21
2-9/9
3-9/13
6-9/14
Location
CDW
CDW
CUW
ROW
ROW
ROW
RDM
ROW
RUW
RUW
MA 1
MA 1
MA 2
MA 2
HRDW
HRDW
HRDW
SRBH
SRBH
SRBH
V
44
4.5
16
140
130
243
34
110
13
108
28
440
49
68
74
63
35
308
243
132
Zn
319
3
198
157
134
140
282
182
830
455
110
1,303
260
118
154
386
61
140
130
225
Mn
263
6.7
152
396
359
-
364
354
120
665
266
2,320
402
325
539
616
355
-
-
-
Al
5,876
16,500
48,000
8,181
10,210
42,700
10,080
7,000
4,650
21,460
11,500
69,670
15,000
13,043
36,590
29,240
15,390
41 ,900
42,200
41 ,000
As
7.5
0.11
2.4
5.5
45.9
12.9
5.4
5.1
1.7
11.4
11.6
60.7
6.9
0.9
11.3
16.5
21
20.0
16.1
13.5
Se
20.9
1.1
22.4
3.3
14.7
30
5.4
5.1
5.1
6.8
1.7
22.2
9.8
4.4
18.1
51.5
-
30
33
43
Si
56,900
181,300
37,700
45,560
45,300
34,700
65,400
14,600
54,000
290,000
81,200
435,000
110,000
59,600
227,000
Major
670,000
43,700
14,400
93,000
S
460
25
5,000
1,730
5,600
26
8,800
10,200
5,600
2,500
10,800
65,100
23,600
8,600
1,250
2,400
5,200
7,800
5,300
6,100
F
1,440
50
9,000
360
1,130
574
1,620
2,770
3,510
6,180
2,190
4,590
1,750
1,570
3,180
20,700
8,520
1,787
517
622
Kg
23
0.01
-
0.04
0.31
0.34
0.06
0.08
-
0.9
0.06
0.3
0.23
0.03
0.5
0.4
1.9
0.48
0.25
0.28
Filter 90 data were not included in averages reported in Table 6 because the calcium, magnesium and silica
values add to >100* (sample accuracy is £5031).
-------
REFERENCES
1. "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater", 14th
edition, 1975.
2. "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes" USEPA, 1974 (EPA-
625-16-74-003).
3. "Determining Selenium in Water, Wastewater, Sediment, and Sludge by
Flameless Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy", Martin & Kopp, AA Newsletter
v.14, no. 5, 1975.
4. "Atomic Absorption Analysis with the Graphite Furnace using Matrix
Modification", Ediger, AA Newsletter v.14, no. 5, 1975.
5. Federal Register, Part II, EPA Water Programs, "Guidelines Establishing
Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants", December 1, 1976.
6. "Analytical Methods for Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry using the
HGA Graphite Furnace", 1972.
7. "Analytical Methods for Flame Spectroscopy", Varian.
8. Technicon Autoanalyzer, Industrial Method No. 100-70 W "Nitrate and
Nitrite in Wastewater".
65
-------
APPENDIX C
ORGANIC ANALYSES
EXTRACTIONS
At the laboratory, the sample bags were opened 24 hours prior to extrac-
tion and the samples were again desiccated. The samples were not reweighed
prior to extraction. Samples awaiting extraction were stored in a cool dark
sample storage room specifically set aside as a solvent and vapor-free area.
Past experience has shown retorted shale samples to absorb large amounts of
volatile compounds when present even in trace amounts in the ambient storage
atmosphere.
Burdick and Jackson^"Distilled in Glass" methylene chloride was used
for all of the extractions. All solvent batches were tested for residues by
evaporation of twice the amount of solvent that would be used at any point in
the extraction or elution process. Evaporation was done in a rotary evapora-
tor at a low temperature and reduced pressure. Cumulative solvent residues
did not exceed 5% of the minimum amount of extracted material in any case
and were in most cases well below 0.1% of the extract by weight.
Soxhlet extraction apparatus and cellulose Soxhlet thimbles were all
thoroughly cleaned with a 24-hour extraction cycle in methylene chloride prior
to usage. The extractors used for these samples were large-size, 300 mil 111 Her
capacity units. The size of these extractors, although large in comparison to
the size of many of the samples, was necessary in order to adequately hold the
larger samples. The small samples, some weighing only 182 milligrams were com-
pletely held within the matrix of their Fiberglass filters. The filter itself
when folded up occupied between 1/3 to 1/2 of the Soxhlet thimble volume. Sam-
ples were loaded into the prewashed Soxhlet thimbles directly from their plas-
tic shipping bags. Since the bags had not been previously cleaned with solvent,
no attempt was made to wash residual sample from the bag. In some cases this
would produce a small error in the sample weights used in calculating the per-
cent solvent extractable.
The solvent reservoirs used with these extractors were 2 liter flasks and
were filled with approximately 800 mill illters of solvent. Condensers for the
Soxhlet systems were cooled with recirculating water-ethylene glycol solution
which is held at 0°C. This low temperature assured that volatile components
could not be lost during extraction. All ground glass standard taper joints
were fitted together in a dry state and no lubricants were used. All Soxhlet
extractions were carried out in total darkness and all subsequent extract han-
dling was done under subdued indirect incandescent lighting.
66
-------
After extraction, the extracts were reduced in volume on a specially de-
signed rotary evaporator at a low temperature and reduced pressure. The con-
denser was operated at 0°C and the receiving flask was kept below -5°C. The
extract itself was held at a constant 15°C in a temperature controlled water
bath. The rotating joint in this system was composed of two glass ball joints
and a Teflon interface joint. No lubrication was needed or used on this joint.
The extracts were each reduced to a volume^ f about 10 mililHers and then fil-
tered through 0.5 micrometers. FluoroporeB'Teflon filters were then washed in-
to preweighed glass test tubes where they were taken to constant weight "dry-
ness" under a stream of purified dry nitrogen. Temperature was maintained at
20°C. Successive weighings over a one to two week period assured constant
weight had been reached on all samples. All weighings were made to within +_
0.00003 grams with triplicate final weights being recorded.
FRACTIONATION
Standard 25 centimeter x 1 centimeter ID glass chromatography columns
fitted with Teflon fittings and Teflon stopcocks were used. A glass frit sits
on the bottom of the column to retain the absorbent. No lubricants were used
for column fittings or stopcocks. The absorbent material used was 60-200 mesh
silica gel that had been heated to 200°C for 24 hours prior to column packing.
The silica gel was then cooled in a desiccator. 13.5 +0.2 grams of this
material was slurried with approximately 40 mill 11 Hers of methylene chloride
that had been deaerated by bringing to a near boil for several minutes. This
slurry was then poured into the glass column and the system was vibrated while
the excess solvent was slowly allowed to drain out of the column. At no time
was the solvent allowed to drop below about 0.5 centimeters above the top of
the absorbent bed.
The use of deaerated solvents greatly reduced the problem of air bubble
formation in the column packing procedures. Column height after final settl-
ing of the absorbent material was 22.5 +0.5 centimeters. After packing, the
columns were prepared by eluting them with the following solvents.
1. 100 mi 11Iliters methanol
2. 25 mm 11 Hers methlyene chloride
3. 25 ml 1111 Hers n-hexane
In most cases less than 500 milligrams of sample extract was available for
fractionation. For extracts weighing more than 500 milligrams, an aliquot of
slightly less than 500 milligrams was removed using a micro spatula. To each
of these extracts 0.5 mil111 Hers of methylene chloride was added and allowed
to sit with the extract for 15 to 20 minutes in order to solubilize the entire
"dried" mass. To this solution, 0.5 grams of the activated silica gel was
added and thoroughly mixed. This combination was then washed onto the top of
the column in n-hexane. Elution was carried out using the solvents shown in
Section 3. Each eluted fraction was collected in a numbered, solvent-washed,
and pre-weighed aluminum micro weighing pan. The eluted fractions were then
allowed to go to constant weight dryness at 20°C. Final weights were recorded
67
-------
to within +_ 30 micrograms. The range of extract weights was from between 180
micrograms and 0.47 grams. A ninth fraction represented materials that were
not recovered from the column. This was determined by taking the differences
between the amount of material placed on the column and the summation of all
fraction weights removed from the column. For the most part, this fraction
consisted of materials bound to the column packing and not eluted by the metha-
nol. All data are listed in Tables C-l, C-2 and C-3.
In addition to the collected particulate samples, three other samples were
extracted and fractioned in an identical manner for comparison. Two samples
were in bulk form, having been dumped from the surface of several high-volume
filters collected in highly dust laden areas. One sample consisted of raw
shale dust from the screening room. The other sample had been collected next
to the pilot plant retort diverter belt just prior to the chute running to the
screw conveyor system. Both of these samples were collected in March of 1976.
The complete analysis of a blank high-volume filter was made for the pur-
pose of quality control. Extraction, extract handling, weighing, and fraction-
ation was performed on this sample in a manner identical to the rest of the
filters. Of the 8.3 milligrams of material extracted from the filter, most of
this material was eluted in the first fraction of the fractionation scheme.
Infrared analysis of this fraction revealed it to be composed almost entirely
of silicon oils.
INFRARED ANALYSIS
As previously mentioned, the Level 1 sample fractionation scheme is a
fairly low resolution process with overlap between fractions. It was felt
that perhaps a better insight into the composition of these samples, as well
as the fractionation scheme itself, could be realized by the inclusion of a
few rapid infrared absorption analysis on some of the samples.
Infrared analysis was performed on a Beckman IRS spectrophotometer, Data
collection for the spectra printed in this report was performed by a HP9825
calculator system. In order to provide sufficient material for rapid IR ana-
lysis, same-numbered fractions from similar sample types were combined. Three
categories of similar sample types were used; namely: mine related samples,
raw shale samples, and retorted shale samples. The newly combined fractions
were spotted on salt plates in a carbon tetrachloride solution and allowed to
dry thoroughly before analysis. The infrared spectra of fraction numbers 1,
2, and 5 are shown in Figures C-l to C-3.
Silicon oils, frequently used as lubricants in the manufacture of glass
filament products such as the high-volume filters, as well as stopcock greases,
have a very characteristic set of infrared absorptions. These are at 795,
1020, 1080, 1260 and 2960 centimeters'1, being due to the various Si-0, Si-C,
C-0 and C-H bonds present in these compounds. Unfortunately, the spectra of
all of the separated fractions exhibited these bands to some degree, including
the spectra of the procedural blank high-volume filter, where they are the
only bands present. In view of this and the fact that solvent residues did
not contain these materials and no silicon lubricants were used anywhere in
68
-------
the analytical procedure, the most likely source of thes compounds would be
the high-volume filters themselves. This contamination hindered the interpre-
tation of all but the strong features in the infrared spectrum of these samples.
It is evident that in progressing through the series of L.C. fractions
that the aliphatic hydrocarbon-dominated first fractions gradually gives way
to more and more polar organic compounds in the latter fractions. This is
shown by the increase in the 3500-2500 centimeter"! region (alcohols, phenols,
carboxylic acids, and others) and in the 1750-1550 centimeter"! region (esters,
ketones, acids, olefins, and nitrogen-containing compounds).
Interpretation of the dominant features of the infrared absorbance spec-
tra of L.C. fractions 1, 2 and 5 from each of the three sample categories are
listed below, but the characterizations should not be treated as conclusive.
Mine L.C. fraction 1 —
Long chain aliphatic hydrocarbons with a slight amount of
hydroxyl and aromatic compounds.
Raw shale L.C. fraction 1 --
Long chain aliphatic hydrocarbons constitute possibly 90% of
this sample. The remainder may be a combination of hydroxyl
(3150 cm ), carboxylic acid (1705 cm ), and olefinic
(1600 cm ), compounds. A small amount of aromatic character
seems to be evident in this group. This is a very complex mixture.
Retorted shale L.C. fraction 1 --
Essentially the same remarks apply to this fraction as for Fraction
1 of the raw shale sample. The mixture, however, is less complex
due to the absence of a number of bands and the presence of no new
bands.
Mine, raw shale, and retorted shale L.C. fractions 2 --
This group of fractions shows little difference between each other.
They are essentially identical to Fraction 1 of the raw shale sample
above.
Mine, raw shale, and retorted shale L.C. fractions 5 -- ,
Very broad bands in the 3500-2500 and 1750-1550 centimeter
regions are an indication of a complex misture of many oxygen-
containing organic species, particularly alcohols, phenols, carboxy-
lic acids, ketones, and esters, all dominated by large amounts of
aliphatic hydrocarbon structures, with relatively small amounts of
aromatic structures.
69
-------
Wavolongth (in microns)
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 1416
Retorted Sha
LC 1
00 3500 3000 2500 2003 1500 1B0Q
Wavenumbor (in cm""*)
Figure C-l. Infrared spectra of L.C. fraction 1,
c
o
•i-l
0
CO
•»-4
E
0)
c
0
L
600
70
-------
2.5
Wavolength (in microne)
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 1416
Raw Shale LC 2
Retorted Shale LC 2
4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
Wavonumber (in cm"1)
Figure C-2. Infrared spectra of L.C. fraction 2.
71
c
0
•H
0
0
E
0
c
D
L
600
-------
2.5
Wavelength (in microns)
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 141$
I
I
I 1 1 I I I I 1 I
Raw Shale LC 5
Retorted shale
LC 5
Mill I I Illl'll II II III I I I I I I I I I I I I I
4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
Wavenumber (in cm"1)
Figure C-3. Infrared spectra of L.C. fraction 5.
n
o
••H
CO
E
CO
C
0
L
600
72
-------
TABLE C-l. SUMMARY OF ORGANIC EXTRACTION AND SEPARATION DATA FROM
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS: MINE RELATED SAMPLES
Filter no., sampling
location, date, starting Sample wt.
time, and sampling duration (g)
Wt. %
organic —
solubles 1
Wt. % per fraction
8
#502 13 m. into adit 2 run
during blast. 9-15,16-77,
1516 hr, 17.7 hr
#557 13 m. into adit 1,
9-24-77, 0815 hr,
78.6 hr
#588 13 m. into adit 1,
run during blast. 9-15,16-77
1514 hr, 17.7 hr
#720 13 m. into adit 1
9-24- to 9-27-77, 0815 hr,
78.6 hr
#725 13 m. into adit 2
9-27-77, 0811 hr,
78.8 hr
#749 10 m. into adit 1
9-7.77, 1430 hr, 1.0 hr
#761 13 m. into adit 2
9-7-77, 1200 hr, 1 hr
1.08
3.59
0.89
3.57
1.91
1.17
0.50
3.78 63.2 4.4 5.0 1.7 17.8 3.1 0.4 0.9 3.4
4.95 65.8 3.2 5.2 1.8 14.8 3.7 0.9 0.6 4.0
3.25 42.5 5.2 6.8 3.0 23.2 9.4 2.7 3.9 3.3
4.01 64.6 3.2 5.7 2.0 16.1 3.5 0.9 0.7 3.3
3.42 63.5 4.2 3.8 1.9 17.1 4.1 1.4 1.7 2.2
3.88 59.0 3.7 4.9 2.1 21.7 6.2 0.7 0.3 1.3
58.0 3.4 4.2 3.3 21.6 2.9 1.7 2.4 2.4
-------
TABLE C-2. SUMMARY OF ORGANIC EXTRACTION AND SEPARATION DATA FROM
PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS: SAMPLES FROM RAW SHALE CRUSHING
AND HANDLING AREAS
Filter no., sampling
location, date, starting
time, and sampling duration
Sample wt.
Cg)
lit. %
organic
solubles 1 2 3
Wt. % per fraction
J754 10m. N of crusher
at loader. 9-4-77, 0910 br. 1.85
6.5 br
J745 5m. N of screening
room baghouse discharge.
9-7,8-77, 1630 hr,
23.0 hr
43.99
1733 screening room
baghouse discharge, 9-8,9-77 21.76
1630 hr, 17.2 hr
J777 screening room
baghouse discharge 9-9,10-77 24.32
0930 hr, 19.2 hr
1564 near electrical shed
9-24-77, 1121 hr
18.3 hr
21.32
1.74 33.5 4.4 4.7 1.7 25.0 20.6 3.8 5.7 0.6
1.40 43.9 10.2 2.7 0.7 32.4 5.6 0.4 0.4 3.7
0.08 35.4 6.9 14.5 3.9 22.2 9.2 1.7 3.1 3.1
0.07 36.8 8.9 7.7 4.0 14.3 16.7 2.8 4.7 4.0
1.41 39.1 9.4 3.6 0.8 25.4 20.7 0.7 0.4 1.3
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-2» SUMMARY OF ORGANIC EXTRACTION AND SEPARATION DATA FROM
PARTICIPATE EMISSIONS: SAMPLES FROM RAW SHALE CRUSHING
AND HANDLING AREAS (continued)
Filter no., sampling Wt. %
location, date, starting Sample wt. organic
time, and sampling duration (g) solubles 1
Wt. % per fraction
8
"vj
en
**
Filter 35m. n of screening
room baghouse discharge
9-13, 14-77, 0825 hr, 3.79"
26.3 hr
Filter 65m. N of screening
room baghouse discharge
9-14, 15-77, 1300 hr, 2.31
27.0 hr
DRI AP VI screening room dust 200.00
samples collected 3-15,16,17^76
during previous sampling program
**
1.66 29.8 6.1 5.2 1.7 28.4 30.8 1.7 1.6 4.7
1.61 29.6 7.0 4.9 2.4 32.5 14.9 2.1 2.6 4.0
1.54 44.0 6.5 3.2 1.2 20.2 19.8 1.2 1.2 2.7
**0nly a small part of total sample was available for extraction.
-------
TABLE C-3. SUMMARY OF ORGANIC EXTRACTION AND SEPARATION DATA FROM
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS: SAMPLES FROM RETORTED SHALE
HANDLING AREAS
Filter no., sampling tot. %
location, date, starting Sample wt. organic
time, and sampling duration Cgl solubles
Wt. % per fraction
J597 5m. Ne of retorted
shale baghouse discharge.
9-5,6-77, 1300 hr, 20.3
hr
J598 5m. Sw of retorted
shale baghouse discharge
9-9,10-77, 0940 hr
21.5 hr.
#751 5m. N of retorted
shale baghouse discharge.
9-7,8-77, 1023 hr.
19.6 hr
J784 5m. N of retorted
shale baghouse discharge
9-6-77, 0930 hr, 5.0 hr
1742 5m. Nw of retorted
shale baghouse dispenser.
9-8,9-77, 0920 hr,
24.3 hr
11.90
6.19
10.81
17.48
12.29
0.45 33.2 2.6 6.6 6.2 32.5 12.2 1.7 1.3 2.6
0.43 25.1 3.4 5.4 6.4 27.8 17.8 3.8 5.7 4.6
0.48 43.1 6.0 4.0 1.6 23.7 11.3 3.5 3.4 3.5
0.52 37.8 4.4 6.1 6.1 22.3 14.4 3.2 4.4 1.4
0.47 28.1 6.1 5.1 3.1 34.5 13.7 3.5 2.5 3.5
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-3. SUMMARY OF ORGANIC EXTRACTION AND SEPARATION DATA FROM
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS: SAMPLES FROM RETORTED SHALE
HANDLING AREAS (continued)
Filter no., dampling Wt. %
location, date, starting Sample wt. organic
time, and sampling duration (g) solubles
Wt. % per fraction
^724 next to 1st lower
transfer of retorted shale 23.93
conveyor. 9-26, 27-77,
1810 hr, 14.5 hr.
i723 next to 1st lower
transfer of retorted shale 22.42
conveyor. 9-26, 27-77,
1812 hr, 14.5 hr
DRI AP V 2 m. SE of the
screw conveyor chute Cupper 100.00
level Jpilot plant retorted
Shale belt 3-9,10-76, during
previous sampling program,
0.27 48.4 5.3 5.9 2.2 24.4 10.6 1.2 1.6 0.5
0.22 50.6 4.7 3.0 1.8 25.5 7.5 1.0 2.7 3.0
1.33
., 9 , n . ,. lt-
43'2 7'° 4'5 K5
1 .
"5 1 "5 ]'5 3'°
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-79-208
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Fugitive Dust at the Paraho Oil Shale Demonstration
Retort and Mine
5 REPORT DATE
October 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Cotter, J.E.,
Powell, D.J. and Habenicht, C
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
TRW, Environmental Engineering Division
TRW, Inc.
One Space Park
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
INE 623
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2560
Work Directive T-5002
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 REP
D COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/12
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
The final report for this project, under the same title, is to be published as an
ORD Series 7 report.
16. ABSTRACT ~~ ' ~~
A fugitive dust sampling program was conducted at Anvil Points, Colorado, site
of the Paraho mining and oil shale retorting operations. High-volume samplers were
used extensively for fugitive dust collection, and 175 total suspended particulate
calculations are reported for measurements made at the mine adits, the haul road,
raw shale crushing area, and the spent shale transfer area. Supporting meteorological
data is also given as well as background dust measurements. Particulate size
distribution calculations were derived from 36 cascade impactor samples at the above
locations.
Elemental chemical analysis results are reported "for eighteen elements from each
of twenty selected high-volume sampler collections. In addition, twenty-six samples
were extracted for organic content. The extractions were then fractionated by the
EPA/IERL Level 1 method, and eight organic classification fractions are quantitatively
given.
The significance of these findings is summarized, and recommendations for work
are stated.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Dust Control
Oil Shale
fining
Retorts
Air Pollution
Pollution Control
Colorado
Western United States
Dust
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport/
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
86
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
78
U.S. GOVERNMENT FWSTING OFFICE: 1979 -6 57 .146/5478
------- |