Dust Suppression on

Wyoming’s Coal Mine

Haul Roads

Literature Review

Recommended Practices
and Best Available
Control Measures – BACM

Dust Suppressant
Selection Guides

A Manual

prepared for:
Industries of the Future
Converse Area
New Development

October, 2004

by:

Temple Stevenson
Cover photos: courtesy of Triton Coal – Tony Trouchon (photographer)
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction iii

I. Literature Review: Fugitive Dust and Its Control 1

II. Recommended Practices and Best Available

Control Measures 21

Table 2.1 Dust Control Operations Recommendations 25

Figure 2.1 Sample Air Event Outline 26
Table 2.2 Best Available Control Measures
BACM (Recommendations) For Controlling
Fugitive Dust on Mine Haul Roads 28

III. Dust Suppression Selection Guides 31

Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products 33

Table 3.2 Dust Suppression Applications Guide 41
Table 3.3 Dust Suppression on Mine Haul Roads
Cost Worksheet (available in excel) 57

Appendices 61

Appendix A: Dust Suppression Survey and Results 63

Appendix B: Dust Control Plan and
Self Inspection Checklists 67
Appendix C: Palliative Selection Matrix
(Thompson) 73
Appendix D: Palliative Selection Matrix
(Bolander and Yamada) 77
Appendix E: Fugitive Dust Bibliography 81

i
ii
 Introduction

Fugitive dust emissions are increasingly becoming a problem for Wyoming’s surface coal
mines located in a windy semi-arid environment where the average wind speed is 13.4
miles per hour and the average rainfall is a mere 14 inches with some of the highest
evaporation rates in the nation. Fugitive dust emissions are a nuisance in coal mines; dust
impairs visibility, affects the health of employees, increases wear and tear of equipment,
and increases road maintenance and costs. Current drought conditions, elevated wind
speeds, compliance with air quality and clarity standards impacted by particulate
emissions, a predicted increase in coal production, and increased Coal Bed Methane
operations has heightened the concern.

Dust from surface coal mine operations also has the potential to negatively impact
Federal Class I Air Quality Areas in the region, such as Badlands and Wind Cave
National Parks and the Northern Cheyenne American Indian Area. While no visibility
impairment in these Class I areas is currently attributable to any Wyoming source, it is
anticipated that strategies to maintain a status of minimal impact will be of notable value
to the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) and the State of Wyoming in the
development of its Regional Haze SIP(State Implementation Plan), due by Dec 31, 2008
(Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for Visibility Protection: Review Report, 2003).

It is the intent of this report to contribute to a better understanding of fugitive dust and its
mitigation, so that efficient and effective management strategies for suppressing it can be
implemented. The report includes four segments: I. Literature Review; II. Recommended
Practices and Best Available Control Measures -BACM; III. Dust Control Suppressant
Selection Guides; and an Appendices containing a fugitive dust bibliography and
document examples.

iii
iv
 I. Literature Review: Fugitive Dust and its Control

Sources and Impact of Dust Generated by Surface Coal Mines

Haul roads, over-burden piles, drilling and blasting, coal transfers 93% of the total dust
and loading, and topsoil handling are all contributing factors of emissions from a coal
dust generation in a coal mine. A South African study conducted strip mine could be
in an arid climate similar to Wyoming’s by Thompson and Visser contributed to coal
transport or haul roads
(2002) titled “Benchmarking and Management of Fugitive Dust
Emissions From Surface Mine Haul Roads,” determined that 93% of the total dust
emissions from a coal strip mine could be contributed to coal transport or haul roads.
Figure 1. illustrates their findings of the contributions of specific sources of fugitive dust
as a percentage of the total fugitive dust generated by a surface coal mine.

Fig. 1 Percentage contribution to total dust emissions (Thompson & Visser 2002)

Assessing the source and impact of dust to determine the need to increase watering,
decrease speed, use dust suppressing chemicals (also known as palliatives), or re-
graveling is constricted by a lack of problem solving methodology that takes into account
the complexity of various interactions. The interactions include traffic volume, weight,
climate, and more according to Thompson & Visser (2002). They add, “most surface
mine operators agree that dust-free roads are desirable, but find it difficult to translate this
into cost-effective management and mitigation.” This same study found that regular
watering and the application of chemical suppressants in conjunction with optimal
aggregate surfaces is the only effective option for controlling fugitive dust emissions on
haul roads.

The most harmful types of fugitive dust to the respiratory system are those that are under
10 microns in diameter, known as PM10’s. Because they are most harmful, they are the

1
most monitored. Another common measurement involves total suspended particulates’ or
TSP’s. Total suspended particulates refer to the total amount of solid particulates and
liquid droplets suspended in the air, regardless of particle size (Ferguson et al., 1999).
Wyoming has been monitoring PM10 emissions to meet Federal standards since 1989,
before that TSP’s were the only monitored emission.

According to EPA officials, exceedences of the 24 hour standard for particulate

matter in southern Campbell County escalated substantially over the last 15
years; from 0 incidents during 1990-2000 to 19 incidents from 2001-03.

Dust Suppression Planning

When a coal mine is in the process of implementing a dust suppression plan, cost analysis
plays a large role in product selection. When looking at a product, an overall cost analysis
should be taken into account. According to Bolander and Yamada (1999) in a report for
the US Forest Service entitled “Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide,” a
successful dust control program should not only reduce total dust emissions, but it should
also reduce maintenance costs. Some dust control products have proven that they can
significantly reduce overall road maintenance costs and thus achieve an overall savings.
At the same time additional preparation and a change in maintenance practices must be
accounted for. A booklet published by Environment Australia, a branch of Australia’s
Department of the Environment and Heritage, Dust Control Best Practice Environment
Management in Mining (1998), explains the benefit of a dust control plan as “a long-term
view of dust control has proven consistently cost effective. Mine planning has a
particularly important role to play in dust control. Applying controls after the problems
arise is often difficult, impractical or costly.”

Haul Roads/Unpaved Roads

Fugitive dust is derived from a variety of sources; nonpoint sources such as un-vegetated
soils, and specific sources such as haul roads (Environment Australia 1998). Dust
generation can be defined as the process by which particulate matter becomes airborne.
The amount of dust that becomes airborne is a function of various factors; including the
susceptibility of the surface material to wind and water erosion, and the erosive actions
of haul trucks (Thompson & Visser 2002). If this latter human activity coincides with
unfavorable weather conditions, the result can be greatly increased dust emissions
(Ferguson et al., 1999).

Haul roads generate significant amounts of dust emissions (EPA Fugitive Dust,
1992; Thompson and Visser, 2002).

There have been several studies completed to estimate the emission rates of PM10 on
unpaved roads. According to Bolander and Yamada (1999) in the US
Forest Sevice Report, Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide, the following
dust generation factors should be considered when designing a dust control plan:

2
 Dust Generation Factors:

• Vehicle Speed
• Number of Wheels Per Vehicle
• Traffic Volume
• Particle Size Distribution of the Aggregate
• Compaction of the Surface Material
• Surface Moisture
• Climate

Researchers from the Desert Research Institute at the University of Nevada determined
that a vehicle traveling on a untreated unpaved road at a speed of approximately 25 mph
generates between 0.59 to 2.00 lbs of PM10 emissions per vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
(Gillies et al. 1999). When that vehicle’s speed was increased to 35 mph the emission
rates increased to 1.85 to 3.04 lbs. PM10 VMT with an uncertainty of 0.23 lbs. PM10
VMT. Other studies have found similar emission results. Flocchini et al.(1994) suggest
that reducing vehicle travel speeds on unpaved roads from 40km/hr to 24 km/hr reduced
PM10 emissions by 42 + 35%.

The Environmental Protection Agency, reporting in Compilation of Air Pollutants

Emission Factors Volume 1 Ch 13, AP-42 (1998), found that emission of fugitive dust on
haul roads is highly correlated with vehicle weight and silt content of the surface
material. The study reported that a silt content mean of 8.4% of fines on a haul road while
a mean of 24% was found on a freshly graded haul road. This indicates a significant
increase in fines after a road has been graded.

In addition to these factors the EPA also suggests that other traffic characteristics should
be considered; such as the cornering of trucks, the road’s bearing strength, and grade
(EPA, 1998, AP-42). They also suggest a complete examination into climate conditions
like freeze/thaw cycles and monthly average wind speeds.

Effective dust control on haul roads in the Powder River Basin is complicated by the fact
that stretches of road, constructed of less than optimal aggregates, are subject to high
traffic volume by heavy haul trucks, which requires continuous grading and the frequent
addition of new surface material. Wearing of surface material is related to a number of
factors including wind speed at the road surface, traffic volume and tonnage, type of road
aggregate, compaction of the road, amount of spillage, and climate (Thompson & Visser
2002).

In addition to haul roads and related travel areas such as truck parking lots,
stockpile/reclaim areas also contribute to total dust emissions, but are usually much more
difficult to control. (EPA Fugitive Dust, 1992). The EPA has devised numerous
equations to estimate emissions both from unpaved roads and from storage piles. These
equations can be found in “Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical
Information Document for Best Available Control Measures,” published by the EPA in
September of 1992.

3
In a report by the U.S Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories Gebhart et
al.(1999) noted that chemical suppressants should be considered as a secondary solution
in controlling dust. “A properly maintained road with adequate drainage to create a hard
road surface should be the first step and must be implemented to the greatest extent
possible. The best way to avoid a dust problem is to properly maintain the surface, and
that is achieved by grading and shaping for cross sectional crowning which prevents dust
generation caused by excessive road surface wear.” It should be noted that this study had
to contend with heavy vehicles with tracks, such as tanks, which reduced the efficiency
and cost effectiveness of any dust suppressant.

Effectiveness of Dust Suppressant Measures on Unpaved Roads

When analyzing dust control effectiveness it is hard to

determine a product’s direct impact due to the large number Chemical dust suppressants
generally provide a PM10
of compounding variables (traffic volume, truck weight and control efficiency of about
speed, road type, etc.). This is further compounded by the 80% when applied at regular
fact that there is not a uniform standard for determining dust intervals of two weeks to one
suppressant effectiveness (North Carolina Department of month (EPA, AP-42, 1998).
The effectiveness of dust
Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality
suppressants however,
(2003). Most assessments available are based on qualitative depends on the dilution rate,
data not quantitative data (Sanders & Addo, 1993). “Without the application rate, the time
any quantitative dust measurement, it is difficult if not between applications, the
impossible to assess the economics and lasting value of dust amount, weight and speed of
traffic, meteorological
palliation methods,” (Sanders & Addo, p.11, 1993). There
conditions, and road
are generally two areas of study concerning measuring or characteristics.
analyzing dust. The first is atmospheric modeling and
prediction, and the second is field measurements and quantifications (Sanders & Addo,
1993). Field studies are generally more helpful in determining actual effectiveness;
however there are numerous factors that need to be considered. Because of the diversity
of site characteristics, it is difficult to recommend a suppressant that will work well in all
situations.

In many instances the only gauge of the effectiveness of a product is either the results
from manufacturer’s testing or testimonials from previous users (Engle, 2004). Even then
it is hard to determine if the product is going to work in a particular area with possibly a
different aggregate type.

4
The following is a summary of some of the significant studies that have been conducted
regarding the relative effectiveness of dust control measures.

Thomas Sanders, et al.(1997) conducted a study at Colorado State University on unpaved

road sections in Larimer County, Colorado to try to determine the relative effectiveness
of the three commercially available dust suppressants. These researchers evaluated the
effectiveness of lignosulfonate (lignin’), calcium chloride (CaCl2), and magnesium
chloride (MgCl2) against a section left untreated. They based their evaluation on three
fundamental measurements; traffic volume, fugitive dust emissions, and total aggregate
loss and used these measurements to calculate a cost analysis.

After taking 15 dust samples over a test period of 4.5 months they found that all three of
the treated sections outperformed the untreated section. Total aggregate loss was
significantly higher for the untreated section, in fact it was 3 times more than the MgCl2,
2.7 times the lignin’, and 2 times the CaCl2. Relative fugitive dust emissions were also
highest on the untreated section. Based on cost to replace aggregate lost, traffic volume,
cost of maintenance, and cost of suppressants they concluded that lignin’ and MgCl2 had
an identical cost per mile per year of $21 vehicle, while CaCl2 was at $26 and the
untreated was up to $36. They produced the following chart to highlight the cost analysis.
(ADT is the average daily traffic).

(Sanders, et al. p. 396, 1997)

Based on these results, the group concluded that under high temperature and low relative
humidity lignosulfonate appears to lessen the amount of dust produced. They also found
that lignosulfonate and MgCl2 had the least total aggregate loss at 1.0 t/mi/yr/vehicle. The
study found a 28-42% reduction in annual maintenance cost for the treated sections
compared to the untreated sections.

However, during a personal interview with this author on March 30, 2004, Dr.
Sanders stated that he felt the MgCl2 was the superior product based on cost and
long term effectiveness (Sanders, 2004).

5
In a laboratory study, Epps and Ehsan (2002) compared aggregates from Wyoming,
Texas, and Arizona to determine the effectiveness of water, CaCl2 and MgCl2 at
controlling dust. They used a crushed gravel stone from Wyoming in one segment of the
study. This gravel contained approximately 9.9% fines, less than both the Texas and
Arizona samples. They prepped the aggregates by allowing them to cure for 2 days at
32C and 35% relative humidity. They then sprayed the samples with water at a rate of
1.8 L/m2 to reduce the surface tension and increase the rate of penetration, and next
applied magnesium chloride to one sample, calcium chloride to another, and water only
to another sample. They found that applying chemical palliatives (MgCl2 and CaCl2) to
the Wyoming aggregate had a statistically significantly effect on reducing erosion caused
by wind. This, they determined was related to the fact that the chemicals kept the surface
wet even in windy conditions. The authors found no real difference between the MgCl2
and CaCl2, but noted that both lose their effectiveness over time.

Next they evaluated the effectiveness of the chemicals in a simulated traffic experiment.
They found that a 38% solution of CaCl2 and a 30% solution of MgCl2 applied to the
Wyoming aggregate significantly reduced erosion caused by traffic compared to an
aggregate sample that was only treated with water. They concluded that the application
of CaCl2 or MgCl2 greatly enhanced dust control on unpaved roads in comparison to
water or no treatment and that there is not a significant difference between the two
chemicals.

Gillies et al. (1999) from the Desert Research Institute at the University of Nevada and
the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District evaluated the effectiveness
of four dust suppressants over a 14 month study. The suppressants that were tested
included a biocatalyst stabilizer (EMC2), a polymer emulsion (Soil Sement), a petroleum
emulsion with polymer (Choerex PM), and a nonhazardous crude-oil-containing material.
The study identified an equation to calculate suppressant control efficiency, which they
define as “the percent reduction in emissions between the treated and untreated sections:”

Efficiency= 1-(treated emission factor/untreated emission factor)

This study determined that estimating suppressant efficiency can be done using some
simple methods in place of expensive monitoring. The authors determined that a
measurement of the bulk silt loading and the surface strength can provide an effective and
inexpensive assessment of a suppressants effectiveness to reduce PM10 emissions. A
suppressant treated surface that can achieve bulk silt content less that 20 g/m2 is
considered to be 90% effective at suppressing PM10 emissions. Further, if that surface can
maintain flexibility (measured by a penetrometer) and can resist brittle failure then the
suppressant is predicted to maintain effectiveness longer (Gillies, et al. 1999).

Effectiveness results The bio-catalyst (EMC2) was only 39% effective one week
after the initial application and 0% effective after 11 months. The acrylic co-
polymer was 95% effective after one week and approximately 85% after 11
months. The bitumen product was 95% effective after one week, 75% after 3
months, and 53% after 11 months.

6
The EPA has created an equation to determine the PM10 emission factor for unpaved
roads. This accuracy of this equation, however, is still under some question, particularly
related to vehicle speed (Muleski/MRI 2002). Also this equation is designed around
average traffic weight, and does not account for heavier trucks (e.g. haul trucks).

E=2.6 (Silt/12)^0.8 (Weight/3)^0.4 / (Moisture/0.2)^0.3)

E= PM10 unpaved road dust emission factor for all vehicle classes
Silt = silt content, material less than 75 µm in the surface material
Weight = average weight of the vehicle fleet (tons)
Moisture = surface moisture content (%) (EPA, AP-42, 1998)

The addition of moisture into the equation is fairly recent (Countess, 2001). It was added
based on the recognition that climate and moisture play a large part in overall emissions
from unpaved roads. An older version of this equation included variables for the number
of wheels and speed, but re-analysis proved the variable not to be statistically significant
(Countess, 2001). However, when using this model in an industrial setting it may be
important to account for total wheels, traffic volume, and speed as variables. In addition,
some feel that the type of aggregate should be included as it can often account for the
long term amount of fines in the road surface.

Dust Suppressants

Road dust suppressants have evolved notably. Second and third generation products are
now solving not only the dust problem but also cost efficiency, environmental, and labor
issues (Engle, 2004). Positive results are now coming from even the toughest desert and
drought environments where past products have failed (Engle, 2004). While EPA (AP-
42, 1998) testing has shown that chemical dust suppressants can be effective (80% PM10
reduction when applied at regular intervals) there is not a single, cure-all solution. Some
products work better in certain climates, various road surfaces, and under different traffic
volumes, and each product comes with various advantages and limitations.

Dust suppressants are effective based on the fact that they agglomerate the fine particles
in a road surface, binding the surface particles together, and increasing the density of the
haul road surface material (Bolander & Yamada, 1999). If fines are lost as dust on an
unpaved road it leads to the coarse material coming loose and can then be thrown or
washed away. This can result in a road full of corrugations and potholes that require
expensive maintenance (Sanders & Addo, 1993). “The main goal of a dust control is to
stabilize the road surface; reducing the rate of aggregate loss and money spent annually in
replacement,” (Sanders & Addo, 1993).

Dust control additives are beneficial not only at reducing dust emissions, but they also
improve the compaction and stability of the road. According to Epps and Ehsan (2002)
there are numerous factors related to the effectiveness of a dust palliative including
application rate, method of application, moisture content of the surface material during
application, palliative concentrations fines content, mineralogy of the aggregate, and
environmental conditions.

7
Surface treatments to control dust emissions fall under two categories, wet suppression
and chemical stabilization (EPA, AP-42, 1998). Wet suppression includes watering and
the application of surfactants that keep the road surface wet. Chemical stabilization
involves an attempt to change the physical characteristic of the road. Unlike watering,
chemical suppressants require less reapplication and many act to form a hardened road
surface (EPA, AP-42, 1998).

The addition of a wetting agent or larger sized particles reduces erodibility only at the
interface of the surface and the impact vehicles (Thompson & Visser 2002). Dust control
measures lose effectiveness on a scale ranging from immediately to weeks. The
palliative effects of water decays from 100% to 0% in a matter of hours while chemicals
applied to control dust may decay over several days or weeks so it is important to
understand the expected effectiveness of the product that you are working with
(Thompson & Visser 2002).

A report issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the South Dakota Local
Transportation Assistance Program states that in areas of high traffic volume, the cost of
dust control can more than pay for itself. This is based on the fact that a good dust control
agent can not only reduce material lost from the road, but also reduce the need for blade
maintenance (Skoreth & Selim 2000). The same study determined that when a dust
suppressant is not working well aggregate fines are lost, leaving only gravel size particles
on the road, which leads to the formation of a washboard surface, reduced skid resistance,
and potholes. The addition of agents (water or chemical) to reduce erodibility is based on
the principle of increasing binding of the fines and gravel. (Thompson & Visser 2002).

According to “Surface Mine Dust Control” by John Organiscak, et al. (2003), the best
dust control plan should be dependent on the type of aggregate you have on your haul
road. Selecting a dust suppressant, according to Sanders (1993) should depend not only
on its performance characteristics, but also on the type of traffic and volume, roadway
conditions, and the costs involved to achieve the desired level of control.

In the following selection and application guide, Bolander and Yamada (1999) suggest
that selecting suppressants involves determining not only cost but cost effectiveness.
They have devised the following list of benefiting factors that should be considered when
selecting a dust palliative.

Palliative Factors

• Coherence of the Dust Particles (to themselves or larger particles)

• Resistance to Traffic Wear
• Aggregate Retention
• Long-term Effectiveness
(Bolander & Yamada, 1999)

8
Water

Water assists in maintaining the compaction and strength of the road aggregate
and reduces the potential loss of road material (Thompson & Visser 2002). Water
is attractive because it is seen as a cost effective alternative, however the cost
soon escalates with the addition of expensive equipment and operating costs.

Data from the EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors Volume 1,
Ch 13, AP-42 (1998) shown here in Figure 1.1 suggests that small increases in
moisture content (1 to 2 moisture level) initially results in large increases in
control efficiency (from 0% to 75%) but beyond which additional efficiency
grows slowly with increased watering (requires 2.5x more water to increase
effectiveness to 95%) significantly reducing cost effectiveness at the upper levels.

Figure 1.1 Dust Control Efficiency of Water

Similarly, a study by Rosbury and Zimmer (1983) found that watering once per
hour has an efficiency of 40% in controlling dust, but when that rate is doubled
the efficiency increases only by 15% to 55%.

Re-application is required at frequent intervals dependent on environmental

conditions. Water retention in the Powder River Basin is generally poor due to
high temperatures and wind speeds as well as low relative humidity. Increasing

9
water scarcity and cost adds to the scenario making water a temporary and
typically un-economical solution.

Thompson and Visser (2002), based on the context of the arid South African coal
mines, determined the degree of dust control achieved by watering is a function of
the amount of water applied, time between applications, traffic volumes, weather
conditions, wearing-course material, and the extent of water penetration into the
wearing course. They determined that on an average degree of dustiness, a 50%
reapplication is required at three hour intervals in the winter and every hour and a
half in the summer. These intervals decrease with the addition of weight per
vehicle, number of wheels, traffic volume, and climate conditions.

Thompson and Visser (2002) also found that traffic volume negatively correlated
with total dustiness; which they explained based on observation, that higher traffic
volumes led to more compaction of the wearing course and the removal of most
loose material on the sides of the road as well as spillage from the vehicle. They
also determined that vehicles lower to the ground with many wheels tend to cause
an increase in dust based on the increase in wind shear.

Precipitation can greatly reduce dust emissions. Normally a rainfall resulting in at

least 0.1 inch is assumed to suppress all emissions. However during a hot, dry
summer’s day a rain of that same amount may only reduce emissions for hours as
opposed to days (Countess, 2001).

Chlorides

Chlorides are salts that act as water attracters and absorbers; as hygroscopic
compounds, they draw moisture out of the air to keep the road surface damp,
although there is no physical binding (Skoreth & Selim 2000).

Chlorides are the most commonly used products for haul road dust control. A study by
Rosbury and Zimmer (1983) showed that the highest control efficiency measured for a
chemical dust suppressant (at that time), 82%, was for CaCl2 two weeks after application,
then decreased over time. The average during the initial two weeks was approximately
50%. After five weeks, the control efficiency declined to less than 20%.

The most common salts used to control dust are calcium chloride (CaCl2) and
magnesium chloride (MgCl2). When determining which is most effective, it’s
ability to produce a brine under adverse conditions such as high wind speeds, low
humidity, or high traffic volumes is the best indicator (Sanders, 1993).

CaCl2

Calcium Chloride (CaCl2) has been used as a dust control and road
stabilizing agent for the last century (Epps & Ehsan, 2002). CaCl2 has
deliquescent and hygroscopic properties causing the chemical to have a

10
 high affinity to water; increasing the tension of water molecules between
soil particles. When applied the chemical increases the adhesive bond
between particles resulting in retention of particles. According to Epps et
al.(2002) CaCl2 has a wider range of effectiveness in regards to
temperature than magnesium chloride and loses its hygroscopic property
at a temperature of 25C if the relative humidity drops below 32%.

Calcium Chloride comes in three forms; flake at 77-80% purity, pellet 94-
97% purity, and a clear liquid at 35-38% purity (Bolander & Yamada,
1999). Calcium Chloride is favored over Magnesium Chloride in areas or
seasons of higher humidity, but it is not as effective in long dry spells
(Bolander & Yamada, 1999). This chemical can significantly lower the
freezing point of a water solution. In fact at 30% solution can have a
freezing point of -60F (Larkin Laboratory, 1986). Because of this
property several coal mines choose to use CaCl2 during the winter.

MgCl2

Magnesium chloride is a by-product of potash production and is only

available in the liquid form (Ferguson et al., 1999). When determining if
CaCl2 or MgCl2 is more effective there are contradictory findings and
statements. It seems the more recent studies are coming to the conclusion
the MgCl2 is outperforming CaCl2,. According to Epps and Eshan (2002)
MgCl2 is more effective than CaCl2 in increasing the surface tension of
water molecules. Bolander and Yamada (1999) found that MgCl2 is
considered to be the best water absorbing product for drier climates
because the chemical starts to absorb water from the air at 32% relative
humidity regardless of the temperature. The product also increases the
aggregate surface tension, creating a very hard road when the surface is
dry, more so than CaCl2.

Both CaCl2 and MgCl2 are known to be corrosive to metals, because they attract
moisture to the surface and thus prolong the period of erosion (Bolander &
Yamada, 1999). A positive attribute of both of these chemicals is that each
allows a maintenance crew to re-grade and re-compact with little concern for
surface moisture loss.

Gebhart et al.(1999) state that these salts provide the most satisfactory blend of
application ease, cost, and dust control for semi-arid, semi-humid climates.

Organic/Non-Bituminous Chemicals

Compounds under this category include lignosulfonate, sulphite liquors, tall oil
pitch, pine tar, and vegetable oils. These products generally perform well in arid
environments but are not very effective when applied to aggregate surface
material with few fines (Gebhart, et al., 1999). These dust control agents can be

11
very sticky and may harbor an unappealing odor. They often fail after heavy rains
due to their water soluble, organic nature (Gebhart, et al., 1999). These products
currently appear expensive, but the cost benefit equation continually changes. As
a rule, they tend to be environmentally friendly. One compound with some
supporting literature is lignosulfonate (lignin’).

Lignin’

Lignin’ or lignosulfonate is a by-product of the paper making process and

is regarded to be generally safe environmentally because of the fact that it
is an organic product. This product performs very well under arid
conditions. It binds particles together to increase the strength of the road
and remains effective during long dry spells with low humidity (Bolander
& Yamada, 1999). One of lignin’s weaknesses is that it is highly soluble
in water, and its surface binding properties can be destroyed by heavy rain.
It also has a tendency to stick to passing vehicles and is difficult to remove
from painted surfaces (Frazer, 2003). Lignin is most effective and shows
the greatest longevity when the road has been scarified and the product has
been mixed into the aggregate (Sanders & Addo, 1997). However, it is
this same scarification process that reduces the current use of lignin’ on
some haul roads, as the perceived costs of the down-time due to
scarification and curing appears prohibitive.

A study using lignin’ on Pikes Peak’s unpaved roads conducted by

Sanders and Addo (1998) revealed that the lignin was 2.7 more effective
at suppressing dust than water. After spring snowmelt, 8 months after
application, there were indications that the Lignin’ was still functioning in
a good proportion of the test sections.

Petroleum Products

Petroleum products include asphalt emulsions (modified and not), dust oils/dust
fluids, and petroleum resin emulsions. These products may be effective in a
variety of climates; however, because they are by-products of petroleum and
waste oils, they may contain toxic materials with significant environmental
effects, and are not considered safe unless they have been processed to remove
toxins (Gebhart, et al., 1999). These products are usually very expensive and like
the organic products, are very sticky and have a foul smell.

Petroleum products are film forming and dust binding. They coat the dust
particles and form a cohesive membrane that attaches each to adjacent particles.
This results in a chained bond of large agglomerates that are too heavy to be
dislodged by wind (James Informational Media, Inc., 2000).

12
 Emulsified Asphalts

Emulsified Asphalts work to control dust, but their use is very limited and
the product must be applied with specialized equipment (Skorseth and
Selim 2000). The soil type and density of the road surface can greatly
affect the rate at which a petroleum product penetrates the road. Roads
that have been scarified to loosen the aggregate achieve the greatest
amount of soil penetration. If the road has not been scarified the use of
products with low viscosities will be ineffective (Bolander, Yamada
1999).

Polymers

Polymers such as polyvinyl acrylics and acetates work by binding the surface
particles together to form a semi-rigid film on the surface. Polymers are
considered suitable for use under a wide range of climate and soil conditions and
are most effective in environments that receive 8 to 40 inches of precipitation a
year. Generally, a light compaction of the road after application of a polymer is
recommended unless the product is mixed into the road surface (Bolander,
Yamada 1999). Polymers are considered to be most effective on lightly trafficked
areas. These types of palliatives are usually non-toxic and environmentally
friendly (Gebhart, et al., 1999).

Electro-Chemical Stabilizers

Electro-Chemical stabilizers include sulphonated petroleum, ionic stabilizers

and bentonite. They are not likely to leach out and are stated to be very effective
at reducing dust emissions in clay or sandy aggregate types. These products work
well under a variety of climate conditions; however, many of these products have
not been tested using standard laboratory tests under field conditions. Small scale
trials should be performed to determine site specific efficiency prior to larger
scale usage (Gebhart, et al., 1999).

Surfactants

Essentially surfactants are additives that make water wetter, reduce surface tension and
allow better penetration of the palliative. At least one product (Haul Road Dust Control)
claims a cumulative effect, whereby each new application boosts the effectiveness of the
previous levels.

Several manufacturers of surfactants recommend prewetting of the roadbed, for their

products to perform optimally. Similarly, Epps and Ehsan (2002) used prewetting in
their laboratory study of aggregates and erosion.

There is a slight trend within mine operations in the Powder River Basin to use highly
diluted applications of MgCl2 and CaCl2 in all water applications, instead of a surfactant.

13
There are environmental concerns associated with the use of certain surfactants. (refer to
page 17 of this document for a discussion of these impacts)

Other Commercial Products

A list of commercial products is posted by The New Mexico Environment/ Department

of Air Quality Bureau, which can be accessed on the web at
http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/dust_control.html and in Table 3.1 of this report.
There are some products listed here that are not included in this literature review.
Classification of every product is not possible in part due to lack of a literature history
and to the proprietary nature of the commercial formulas.

Mechanical Stabilization

Mechanical or road stabilization is the mixing of two or more substrate materials to create
a road surface that has the correct fine gradient and plasticity. This method does not
involve the application of chemicals although they can be used in addition to the
stabilization. One of the most effective substrate mixtures involves the addition of clays
to a gravel and sand aggregate. The clay binds to the fine particles, and improves the
roads stability and longevity. “When a gravel road resists lateral displacement during
traffic, it is said to be mechanically stable, notes Gebhart, et al. (1999). This resistance is
provided by the natural forces of cohesion and internal friction that exist in the soil.”

Importance of Appropriate Dust Suppressant Application

Appropriate application of a selected product is key to the overall effectiveness of a dust

control plan. “It can translate either into success or costly wastefulness, failure, and more
difficult maintenance down the line,” according to David Engle (2004), author of “Road
Maintenance Techniques and Products Have Made Great Strides.” Engle also
emphasizes timing as a critical component to successful application. He suggests an
initial application during the narrow window between the spring rains and the start of the
summer drought; “Keeping an eye on the weather forecast is critical; many expensive
applications have been ruined by rainfall.”

Not only is the timing of the application crucial, but the manner in which the product is
applied is just as important - if not more so. Sanders and Addo (1993) describe two ways
in which suppressants are most typically applied; mixed-in-place and spray methods.
The mixed in place method involves mixing the suppressants with the road aggregate.
When this application procedure is used it not only suppresses dust but it also provides
for an improved road surface resulting in reduced maintenance costs. Spraying involves
the high pressure application of the material to the road surface. Topical spraying is
effective for short periods of time, though, resulting in the need for reapplications
throughout the season (Sanders & Addo, 1997). It is usually wise to try a test section to
determine how well the product is going to work on a specific gravel, and what type of
application works best (Skorseth & Selim, 2000).

Almost all suppressants have a greater longevity and effectiveness when applied to a road
that has been properly prepared, scarified, and the suppressant is mixed in with the
aggregate and then compacted to a 6-inch thick wearing course (Sanders & Addo, 1997).
14
Another key application principle was identified by Bolander and Yamada (1999). They
suggest that adequate penetration of the dust suppressant into the surface material is
imperative. This penetration should be 3/8 to 3/4 of an inch in depth. Proper penetration
will reduce the loss of palliative from surface wear and allow the surface to resist
leaching. The process imparts cohesion, and resists aging.

Bolander and Yamada (1999) in the USFS Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide,
provide the following suggestions for applying dust suppressants:

Application Tips

• Repair unstable surface, grade (to a adequate depth) immediately prior

to application
• Apply suppressants (especially salts) immediately after the wet season
• Apply after a rain, or spray the road before application, to ensure
materials are more moist and thus more workable
• Adhere to manufactures recommendations on minimum application
rate, compaction and curing time
• Use a pressure distributor to evenly distribute the suppressant
• Water frequently and lightly, not infrequently and heavily

Scarifying

Sanders et al. (1997) include scarification of the road surface in their list of
important techniques to be considered when applying dust suppressants and
particularly specify the technique when using lignin. Organiscak et al. (2003)
suggest that when using chlorides it is beneficial to loosen 1-2 inches of the road
aggregate uniformly to allow the chemical to penetrate evenly. And like Bolander
and Yamada (1999), the group stresses proper road preparation as a key to the
effectiveness of a dust palliative, especially creating a good crown and drainage
when using a chloride. They also state that when using a chloride the roadway
should not be compacted before applying the chemicals and the road should be
kept at optimum moisture before application, this allows the product to be
absorbed quickly and evenly.

For some suppressants it is recommended to keep traffic off the road surface for two to
three hours after application to allow the product to absorb and cure (Skorseth & Selim,
2000). This characteristic is expected to be considered a limitation by mine engineers,
who would have difficulty justifying the necessary down time involved on mine haul
roads (see survey results, Appendix A). Grading after application also partially destroys
the effect of many dust suppressants (Ferguson et al., 1999). Because of this, grading
should be postponed after heavy application of suppressant for as long as possible.

The EPA has recommended that a diluted reapplication be applied periodically (2 weeks
to a month) to control loose surface material. They also state that weather related

15
application schedules should be considered prior to implementing a dust control program
(EPA Fugitive Dust, 1992).

The type of road aggregate is one factor that determines the type of dust control that is
most effective. Organiscak et al. (2003) recommend effective applications for various
road types in their article “Surface Mine Dust Control.” In road surfaces with poor size
gradation, water is the only effective solution because chemical suppressants (most of
which are water soluble) cannot compact the surface or form a new surface because they
will leach. In sand they recommend bitumens because of the fact that they are not water
soluble. On a road with good gradation all chemical suppressants can be used, and on a
road with too much silt the road should just be rebuilt, as no dust control will be effective
(Organiscak, et al., 2003). If a haul road is left untreated by a dust suppressant aggregate
replacement will become necessary over shorter periods of time and maintenance will be
required more frequently (Epps & Ehsan, 2002).

Education and Training

In addition to using prescribed application procedures, John Watson and Judith

Chow (2000) from the Desert Research Institute suggest that the success of a dust
control problem depends on outreach and education programs for contractors and
public works agencies. In a coal mine, education should be extended to
maintenance personnel.

Environmental Impacts

The major environmental concern when using dust suppressants is contamination of

ground and surface water. Thomas Piechota, an assistant engineering professor at
University of Nevada Las Vegas was quoted in Lance Frazer’s “Down with Road Dust
(Innovations)” as saying it doesn’t matter what suppressant is used, there will always be
some level of water quality impact (Frazer, 2003). Peichota noted that petroleum
compounds were more harmful than suppressants such as magnesium chloride. Another
area of impact he mentioned is the fact that the suppressants are creating a somewhat
impenetrable road surface, which will increase runoff, which has its own hydrologic
impacts.

There is some potential for off-site plant damage during periods of heavy rainfall
(Ferguson et al., 1999). All necessary precautions should be followed to unsure that these
chemicals are kept away from water sources.

16
The following photo taken in June of 2004 in Larimer County, Colorado between Lyons
and Estes Park strongly suggests runoff from a highway treated with a 30% solution of
Sodium Chloride (rock salt) and sand may be impacting ponderosa and other pines
(Anon’ CoDOT, 2004).

While no Wyoming coal mines use Sodium Chloride to treat dust on haul roads that we
know of, the expected negative publicity from this environmental impact (near Boulder)
may carryover into other road salts such as MgCl2 and CaCl2 which are heavily used.
There is no scientific evidence yet of the actual cause of the tree damage, but the die-off
appears to be confined to an area within 50’of the roadway for 20 plus miles, strongly
suggesting road runoff and/or exhaust fumes as contributing factors. Conversely, few
Wyoming coal mine haul roads traverse timbered acreage, limiting this specific impact.

Surfactants, on the other hand, may pose some environmental concerns. M. Warhurst
(1995) in a report to Friends of the Earth, England, outlines toxicity concerns with
alkylphenol ethoxylate (APEO) surfactants, and calls for a more widespread ban on their
use (The surfactant is currently banned in several European countries). He recommends
the replacement of APEOs with linear alcohol ethoxylate surfactants, which are readily
biodegradable according to Consultants in Environmental Sciences Ltd (CES, 1993).

17
 Works Cited

Anonymous Colorado Department of Transportation Official. Personal Interview with

Author. June, 2004. Boulder, CO.

Bolander, P., Yamada, A. (November 1999). “Dust Palliative Selection and Application
Guide.” United Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Technology and Development
Program. San Dimas Technology and Development Center, San Dimas, California.

Countess, R. et al. 2001. Methodology for Estimating Fugitive Windblown and

Mechanically Resuspended Road Dust Emissions Applicable for Regional Air Quality
Modeling. Paper in International Emission Inventory Conference, "One Atmosphere, One
Inventory, Many Challenges." Denver, CO, April 30. (Power point presentation slides)

Engle, D. (2004). “Bidding Farwell to Dusty Roads, Road Maintenance Techniques and
Products Have Made Great Strides,” Forester Communications, Erosion Control
January/February 2004. www.forester.net

Environment Australia, Department of the Environment and Heritage (1998). “Dust

Control Best Practice Environment Management in Mining.” Sustainable
Industry/Sustainable Minerals.

Environmental Protection Agency 450/2-92-005 (1992). “Fugitive Dust Background

Document and Technical Information Document for Best Available Control Measures.”
Office of Air Quality, Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.

Environmental Protection Agency (1998). “Compilation of Air Pollution Emission

Factors, AP-42. ” Volume 1, Ch 13, Unpaved Roads. Office of Air Quality, Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.

Epps, Amy, Ehsan, M. (2002). “Laboratory Study of Dust Palliative Effectiveness.”

Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. September/October 2002 p.427-435.

Frazer, Lance (2003). “Down with Road Dust (Innovations),” National Institute of
Environmental Health Sciences. Env Health Perspectives Dec. 2003 V111 i16 pA892(A).

Ferguson, J.H. et al. (1999). “Fugitive Dust: Nonpoint Sources.” Agricultural MU Guide.
University of Missouri-Columbia. Agricultural Publication G1885.

Gebhart, D.L., Denight, M.L., Grau, R.H., (1999). “Dust Control and Technology
Selection Key.” U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Land
Management Laboratory, Resource Mitigation and Protection Division; and the U.S.
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Pavements Division.

James Informational Media, Inc (2000).“Better Roads, a Look at Dust Control and Road
Stabilizers.” Better Roads Magazine www.betterroads.com/articles/prod500.htm

18
Larkin Laboratory (1986). “Calcium Chloride and Magnesium Chloride for Dust
Control.” 1691 N. Swede Rd. Midland Michigan 48640

N. Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality

(2003). “Economic Analysis of Particulates from Fugitive Dust Emissions Sources.”

Organiscak, J.A., et al. (2003). “Chapter 5. Surface Mine Dust Control.” In Handbook for
Dust Control in Mining, Center for Disease Control, IC # 9465.

Rosbury, K.D., Zimmer, R.A. (1983). “Cost-Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on

Unpaved Haul Roads, Volume 1: Results, Analysis, and Conclusions.” PEDCo
Environmental, Inc. U.S. Bureau of Mines.

Sanders, T. (2004). Personal Interview conducted by Temple Stevenson on the campus of

Colorado State University, March 30, 2004.

Sanders, T.G., Addo, J.Q. (2000). “Experimental Road Dust Measurement Device.”
Journal of Transportation Engineering, November/December 2000.

Sanders, T.G., Addo, J.Q. (1998). Pikes Peak Road Dust Project. Colorado State
University.

Sanders, T., Addo, J.Q., Ariniello, A., Heiden, W.F. (1997). “Relative Effectiveness of
Road Dust Suppressants.” Journal of Transportation Engineering September/October
1997. p 393-397.

Sanders, T.G., Addo, J.Q. (1997). “Effectiveness and Environmental Impact of Road
Dust Suppressants.” MC Report NO. 94-28, Mountain Plains Consortium.

Skorseth, K., Selim, A.A (2000). Gravel Road Maintenance and Design Manual. South
Dakota Local Transportation Assistance Program. U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration.

Thompson R.J., Visser, A.T. (2002). “Benchmarking Management of Fugitive Dust

Emissions From Surface-Mine Haul Roads.” Transaction of the Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, 111/April, pp A28-A35.

Watson, J.G., Chow, J.C. (2000). “Reconciling Urban Fugitive Dust Emissions Inventory
and Ambient Source Contribution Estimates: Summary of Current Knowledge and
Needed Research.” Desert Research Institute, Energy and Environmental Engineering
Center. DRI Document No. 6110.4F

Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for Visibility Protection- Review Report. 2003.
Prepared by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division

19
20
 II. Recommended Practices and Best Available Control Measures

Best practices for dust control in a Wyoming surface coal mine simply means utilizing
the most practical and effective methodology that is currently available. In many cases
best practices can be achieved by appropriate planning and or the identification and
control of dust sources as they are identified.

According to “Dust Control Best Practices Environmental Management in Mining”

prepared by Australia’s Department of the Environment and Heritage, best practices for
dust control in a surface mine operation should include:

Planning

The identification of potential sources of dust

A prediction of dust levels likely to occur
An evaluation of the effect of the dust
The incorporation of the dust predictions and control measures into mine planning
and design

Observation

Observations of point sources which can be readily identified

Dust emission rates based on qualitative estimates and models

Controlling

An aware workforce
Integration of dust control into operations planning (construction, topsoil
stripping, blasting)
Intergrading dust control provisions into work practices (use of chemical
palliatives)
Monitoring and feedback dust emissions
Efforts based on observational and qualitative assessments
Awareness of current methods and technology used for dust control
(Environment Australia, 1998, p.8-9)

The most effective, consistent and cost effective dust suppression strategy is a long term
plan that looks to control dust before the problem arises. Applying dust controls after the
problem arises is impractical and costly. Because of this, mine planning has a very
significant role to play in dust control (Environment Australia, 1998).

21
Dust Control Strategies

When developing a dust suppression plan there should be a set of standardized

procedures for application and maintenance. Standardized application this will minimize
confusion on how the product is applied and maximize the product’s effectiveness. A
sound set of road application and maintenance procedures will result in safer working
conditions, a decrease in actual maintenance work, in addition to a decrease in overall
road dust emissions.

The following quote prepared for the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research
Laboratories, highlights the fact that controlling road dust emissions should be seen as a
process, not just the application of chemical palliatives.

“The best way to avoid dust problems is to ensure that roads are properly
maintained by surface grading and shaping for cross-sectional crowning to
prevent excessive road surface wearing and consequent dust generation.
Chemical dust suppressants are considered a secondary solution, to be used
only when maintenance practices have been implemented to the greatest extent
possible,” (Gebhart, et al. 1999, p. 10)

Gebhart, et al. (1999) recognize three major types of dust control methods including: (1)
Construction and Maintenance; (2) Mechanical Stabilization; and (3) Chemical
Palliatives.

Construction and Maintenance

Good construction and maintenance practices are fundamental to providing durable and
erosion resistant trafficked surfaces in dust-prone areas. Due to environmental and traffic
deterioration of the aggregate surface haul roads require frequent maintenance. Gebhart,
et al. (1999) suggest that the following construction and maintenance steps be performed
to prevent dust emissions on unpaved roads:

Use of a well graded aggregates consisting of an adequate amount of fines that

can be used as cohesive binders.
Retention of a crown on the road surface to provide adequate drainage.
Drainage for the wearing surface, shoulder, and verge.
Proper compaction of the wearing surface after the addition of aggregate and
grading.
Reduced maintenance grading during dry weather conditions.

Creating adequate surface drainage should be provided in order to minimize damage

caused by moisture. Standing water in the roadway will lead to surface softening and
failure (Skorseth, Selim 2000).

22
 Compaction of the road after adding aggregate and grading will increase the
density and strength of the wearing surface as well as retention of larger
aggregates (Gebhart, Denight, Grau, 1999).

Mechanical stabilization

A road is considered stable when it resists lateral displacement caused by traffic.

Mechanical stabilization is achieved by mixing soils of two or more gradations. This
type of resistance is attributed to the natural forces of cohesion and the internal friction
that are present in the soil (Gebhart, et al. 1999). Dust control products often have an
added benefit of increasing soil stabilization. According to Skorseth and Selim (2000) in
“Gravel Road Maintenance and Design Manual,” soil stabilization will control the loss
of fines from the road surface that typically result in distresses such as wash-boarding and
reduced skid resistance. This type of unstable road becomes hard to maintain and hauling
in new road aggregate with a higher percentage of fines becomes expensive. Aggregate
loss can be as much as one ton of aggregate per mile per year on a typical unpaved
county road for each vehicle that passes over a road daily (Sanders, Addo, 1998) and
losses would be substantially higher on haul roads. A reduction in blade maintenance is
another benefit of using a dust control product. When the road remains tightly bound and
stable it will require less maintenance (Skorseth, Selim 2000). Manufactures recommend
a delay in blading for as long as possible once a product has been applied because blading
can reduce or remove the dust control product from the road.

Chemical Palliatives

The use of chemical palliatives should be used in conjunction with the two other
methods, especially if mechanical stabilization is cost-prohibitive and high dust
emissions persist. When chemical dust palliatives are maintained over a long-term basis
there can be a 50-75% or more reduction in dust generation. Gebhart, et al. (1999) feel
that the dust control methods should be applied in the order discussed here: (1)
construction and maintenance, (2) mechanical stabilization, and (3) chemical palliatives
in order to reduce dust emissions successfully.

Applying Chemical Palliatives

Before applying any dust suppressant, at minimum basic road maintenance needs
to be performed. Preparing a road before the application of chemical palliatives
should include the construction of a good crown on the driving surface, good
shoulder drainage, and a fresh blading of the road surface to remove any potholes
or other imperfections (Skorseth, Selim 2000). In addition scarifying the road in
order to loosen the soil a minimum of one to two inches can be done. This will
leave a uniform depth of loose aggregate across the road will allow even and fast
penetration of the dust control product into the road surface. Several authors and
product distributors have cited the need for scarification because of the added
depth of saturation it can provide. This deeper saturation is directly related to
increased dust control effectiveness. Although there may be some added costs and

23
time associated with scarification, in the long run it is generally believed the
extended life and increased effectiveness of the product outweighs the initial
application preparation costs. The following list is a compilation of
recommendations by Bolander and Yamada (1999) for applying dust control
products from numerous authors and product distributors.

Suppressant Application Tips

• Repair unstable surface, grade (to a adequate depth) immediately prior

to application
• Scarify the road to loosen the surface material to allow for even
penetration of the product into the soil
• Apply suppressants (especially salts) immediately after the wet season
(apply directly after a rain or pre-wet the surface prior to application)
• Adhere to manufacturer’s recommendations on minimum application
rate, compaction and curing time
• Use a pressure distributor and realign the water nozzles on the
application truck to ensure a even distribution of the suppressant
• Water frequently and lightly, not infrequently and heavily

Water as a Palliative and its application

Applying water on problem areas provides immediate but short term

results. This inexpensive method of dust control is recommended as a
short-term solution to dust emission problems (Gebhart, et al.,1999).
Water is effective at controlling dust emissions because the water
surrounds and adheres to the dust particle making it difficult for the dust
particles to move. However, under continual wetting conditions a pumping
of the fine to the roads wearing surface may occur (Gebhart, et al.,1999).
Excessive moisture on unpaved roads can lead to negative effects
including a reduction in the strength of the road bed, road deformation
under vehicle loading, and an increased potential for brittle failure which
produces smaller particles that can then be crushed by vehicle tires
(Rosbury and Zimmer, 1983). In the EPA’s Compilation of Air Pollution
Emission Factors Volume 1, Ch 13, AP-42 (1998) it is noted that small
increases in moisture content result in large increases in control efficiency,
but only up to a point, beyond which additional efficiency grows slowly
with increased watering.

Water droplet size has been shown to be an important factor in dust

suppression effectiveness (Gambatese, James 2001). If water droplets are
too large, smaller dust particles generally just slipstream around the
droplets without actually making contact. If the droplets are too small they
just mix and circulate with the dust particles without actually wetting
them. Small droplets may be negatively affected by wind and surface
tension. An optimal water droplet size for surface impaction of fine

24
 particulate agglomeration is approximately 500 um. To create an effective
water spray system hollow cone nozzles which produce the greatest
control of dust while minimizing clogging should be used. Angling the
nozzles on the truck body in a horizontal angle or lower will protect the
droplets from wind.

Application practices issues

There can be other problems that inhibit the effectiveness of using a dust control
palliative. These include a lack of communication between water truck operators,
applying a product where not needed (such as shoulders and berms), and confusion as to
the desired outcome of using the product. The information in the following chart is taken
from a presentation prepared by Rose Haroian, Environmental Manager for the Powder
River Coal Company; and is helpful in addressing some of the operational problems that
are encountered when using a dust palliative and or water to suppress dust.

Table 2.1 Dust Control Operations Recommendations

Problem Solution
Water trucks aren’t synchronized Communicate between water trucks to determine
where watering has and hasn’t taken place

Operators are seeking dust elimination rather than Maintain an understanding of what the desired goal
dust control of watering is, and have indicators that determine
when the roads need watered. Sometimes the visual
indicators are not accurate.

Roads treated with dust control products are being
watered too much
Coal Dust caused by spillage
Over watering creates more dust
Spraying water in high wind
Soft Spots
Sprayers are not properly positioned
Watering inappropriate areas such as berms
Newly treated roads only need water when they
become visibly dusty.
Do not attempt to apply water to coal spills, clean up
the spillage instead
Communication needs to occur between the blade
and water truck operators, don’t water where it is not
needed
Adjust speed and location on the road to account for
wind.
Don’t over water, spot watering in the same location
will cause road problems
Modify sprayer locations to ensure the angles are
optimizing the desired spray area
Watch where you are watering. Relocate if needed.
If this does not work turn off the outside sprayer.

Blades blade off watered areas Blades should only blade where it is necessary

Blades blade rock and chemicals into ditches Carry windrows across the road. Do not leave
chemicals and scoria in the ditch

25
Real Time Data - Monitoring

Visual indicators to perceive dust emissions problems are a useful technique,

however it is hard to keep an eye on dust emissions 24 hours a day. The collection
of real-time dust emission data from air quality monitors is important. A reliable
PM10 emission inventory is required for the state’s SIP and is logical so that
source specific dust control measures can be taken. The dust may be coming from
an overburden pile or a county or coal bed methane (CBM) road, so automatic
watering of the haul road would be inappropriate. The use of real-time data
incorporated with the notification of personnel and a record of where the dust is
coming from as well as weather conditions can create can create a higher
understanding and accountability of dust emission exceedences.

The monitoring network for particulate emissions in the Powder River Basin is
extensive; operating since 1989, according to Wyoming’s Long Term Strategy for
Visibility Protection: 2003 Review Report (Wyo DEQ, 2003). Additional
monitoring, including that of meteorological data is conducted at IMPROVE
(Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments) locations.

Figure 2.1 illustrates a sample protocol used by one mine to be followed based on
various types of exceedences and events (aided by real-time data).
Figure 2.1 Sample Air Event Outline:
Air Event Logging and Action Levels (_____________Mine, WY)

If ug/m level = 300 (over 1 hr)

(1) notify production supervisor
Supervisor’s actions include:
ensure adequate water trucks operating
record water usage for this shift
ensure problem areas are addressed
notify____________________
If ug/m level = 80 (24 hr rolling average)
(1) notify production supervisor
Supervisor’s actions include:
Same as above, plus:
Estimate wind speed and direction
Consider modifying plant operations contributing to dust
Inspect dust generating segments of operation to ensure proper dust control
Document conditions including offsite impacts, meteorological conditions
Document actions taken
Take photographs to document primary sources of dust (on or off site)
Notify Senior Environmental Engineer if cause of dust event cannot be identified
If ug/m level = 100 (24 hr)
(1) Notify Operations Manager(OM), who will notify Sr. environmental
engineer (SEE)and production coordinator(PC).
(2) Notify General Manager (GM) if curtailment of operations is expected

If ug/m level=150 (excursion event)

(1) Notify the ____ Environmental Manager as well as OM, SEE, and PC, and GM.
(2) Contact the Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality by phone
Actions to consider
Curtail production operations
Contact neighbors contributing to dust impact (county roads, landowners
Water/suppress dust on any identified problem areas
Document actions taken
If ug/m level=120 (24 hr)
(1) Notify same as above (150 level)
Contact ____ Environmental Manager
Contact ____ President
Contact the Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality by phone

26
Properly applying and maintaining a dust control product can be more important than
selecting the perfect one because the manner in which a product is used directly relates to
how effective the product will be. Cost-effective dust control depends not only on
application but also on proper maintenance and regular reapplication. Properly using a
dust control product can reduce the amount of grading that is required, decrease the
amount of road aggregate that is lost, and reduce vehicle wear and tear. Ultimately all of
these benefits result in a savings of time and money, which is illustrated in Table 3.2 of
this manual.

A BACM recommendation from Dona An~a County, New Mexico (2000) can be
summarized as Smart Timing and involves the timing of either operations or palliative
application so as to prevent the most likely exceedences due to meteorological
conditions.

The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ, 2001) notes that

technological and economic feasibility is a valid criteria for determining BACM and adds
that BACM will change as new products and approaches are proven technologically and
economically feasible.

Gaffney and Shimp (1997), in a report for the California Air Resources Board, call for
improved GIS technology to calculate and spatially analyze emissions.

In compiling BACM recommendations, the author visited with mine engineers. To

ascertain the opinions of surface coal mine engineers in the Powder River Basin relative
to dust suppression on haul roads a survey was developed and distributed. Five responses
were recorded and are summarized in Appendix A. of this report.

27
Best Available Control Measures (BACM) Recommendations

The following control measure recommendations have surfaced from a thorough review
of the literature and analysis of the fugitive dust situation facing Wyoming surface coal
mines. Mine representatives, agents from the Wyoming Dept of Environmental Quality,
and Region 8 of the EPA, and other appropriate parties should review and discuss the
strategies for technological and economic feasibility and expected effectiveness before a
final BACM list is completed.

Table 2.2 Best Available Control Measures - BACM (Recommendations)

For Controlling Fugitive Dust on Mine Haul Roads

Keywords Recommended Practice

Monitoring Develop a protocol (similar to example given in Figure 2.1) for notification of appropriate plant
Reporting personnel and environmental agencies (e.g. Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality) in
reaction to various dust events.
Monitoring Develop a report template for documenting and reporting dust events
Reporting
Controlling Be prepared to supplement current water truck fleet with rental/vendor trucks to ensure no
exceedences occur
Inventory Use real time g/h TEOM samplers to make adjustments in mine operations as necessary
Monitoring
Controlling, Develop a chemical suppressant regimen that effectively and consistently controls dust. Be
Documenting prepared to justify this regimen by monitored and documented use to determine effectiveness at
varying climatic conditions. Become aware of emerging technologies.

Documenting Closely document water usage along with climatic conditions (current effectiveness of water is
controlling hard to determine due to lack of reliable data)

Communication Share successes and failures with other mine engineers, as dust is a regional issue, not a site issue.
training, Periodically conduct personnel appropriate training in dust monitoring and suppression. Ensure
communication communication across all levels of operation.
Monitoring Maintain at least one person on site who is certified in opacity monitoring or contract with a
vendor certified in opacity monitoring

Modeling Seek to prevent dust rather than react to it. Include weather forecasting into dust event predictions
Incorporate GIS modeling into dust control planning.
Controlling Maintain equipment in optimal condition (e.g. spray nozzles)
Controlling Follow proven or recommended palliative application procedures (e.g. surface prep, application
rates and times, curing, compaction and grading)
Controlling Take action to reduce spillage from haul trucks, as coal and overburden spillage destabilizes the
road and significantly reduces the effect of palliatives. Maintain optimal roadbed conditions.

28
 Works Cited

Bolander, P., Yamada, A. (November 1999). “Dust Palliative Selection and Application
Guide.” United Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Technology and Development
Program. San Dimas Technology and Development Center, San Dimas, California.

Dona Ana County, New Mexico. (2000) “Suggested Best Available Control Measures
(BACM) for Reducing Windblown Dust from Manmade Sources in Dona Ana County.”
Report.

Environment Australia (1998). “Dust Control Best Practices Environmental Management

in Mining.” Australia Government, Department of the Environment and Heritage.
www.deh.gov.au/industry/industry-performance/minerals/booklets/dust/dust1.html

Gaffney, P., Shimp D. (1997). “Improving PM10 Emission Inventories.” Report to

California Air Resources Board, Technical Support Division.

Gambatese, John A., James, David E. (2001). “Water Suppression Using Truck-Mounted
Water Stray Systems.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management V. 137 n1.

Gebhart, D.L., Denight, M.L., Grau, R.H., (1999). “Dust Control and Technology
Selection Key.” U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Land
Management Laboratory, Resource Mitigation and Protection Division; and the U.S.
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Pavements Division.

Haroian, Rose, and Best Practices Team (2003). “Haul Road Dust Suppression, Key
Issues and Solution.” Powder River Coal Company.

Rosbury, K.D., Zimmer, R.A. (1983). “Cost-Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on

Unpaved Haul Roads, Volume 1: Results, Analysis, and Conclusions.” PEDCo
Environmental, Inc. U.S. Bureau of Mines.

Sanders, T., Addo, J.Q., Ariniello, A., Heiden, W.F. (1997). “Relative Effectiveness of
Road Dust Suppressants.” Journal of Transportation Engineering September/October
1997. p 393-397.

Skorseth, K., Selim, A.A (2000). Gravel Road Maintenance and Design Manual. South
Dakota Local Transportation Assistance Program. U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration.

Thompson R.J., Visser, A.T. (2002). “Benchmarking Management of Fugitive Dust

Emissions From Surface-Mine Haul Roads.” Transaction of the Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, 111/April, pp A28-A35.

29
30
 III. Dust Suppression - Selection Guides

The information supplied throughout this section is intended to provide a convenient

resource for the reader, so as to serve as a starting point for a discussion of various
features and applications of dust suppressants. The data are not necessarily
comprehensive or complete. It is the user’s responsibility to thoroughly research
and compare products and vendors to determine which can provide high quality
results and services. Vendors are not equally reliable, or comparable, relative to
timeliness, price or their adherence to recommended application procedures.

It is also the user’s responsibility to determine the extent of environmental impacts

associated with a given product or application procedure. A vendor’s claim of non-
toxicity should not be considered rigorous proof. As a rule, there is a lack of
detailed studies on dust suppressant effectiveness and their impact on the
environment and human health (Frazer, 2003).

It is not the intent of this document to endorse any product or vendor and any that
have been referenced were cited only because of their willingness to provide
published information.

TABLE 3.1 DUST SUPPRESSION PRODUCTS, is a compilation of known products,

categories and types, as well as contacts where more information on the product can be
located.

Selection of a dust control product should include a consideration of the manufacturer’s

recommended application procedure. Many times a product is not selected if it requires
extensive application procedures that under the normal operations of a coal mine cannot
be performed. Examples of such procedures include extensive road preparation causing a
cessation of operations and/or a prolonged curing time.

Additional selection criteria for dust palliatives should include how the product will
perform under high traffic volume and weight, site specific weather conditions, length of
time the product will be effective, how it works on different types of aggregates,
effectiveness on steep slopes, and in extreme temperatures, and other criteria depending
on individual needs.

31
32
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number

Bentonite Bio Cat 300-1 Central Oregon Bentonite 541-477-3351

800-426-5564
Bentonite Pelbon American Colloid Co.
847-392-4600
Clay Additives

Bentonite Volclay American Colloid Co. 708-392-4600

Montmorillonite Stabilite Soil Stabilization Produces 800-523-9992

Soil Stabilization Products Co.,

Enzymes Bio Cat 300-1 800-523-9992
Inc
Soil Stabilization Products Co., Gillies et al. 1999, Watson
Enzymes EMCSQUARED 800-523-9992
Inc et al. 1996
Perma-Zyme
Enzymes The Charbon Group. Inc. 714-593-1034
11X
Enzymes Plus, Div of Anderson
Enzymes UBIX No. 0010 800-444-7741
Affiliates
Electro-
Ionic Terrastone Morrhead Group 831-684-1148
chemical

Sulfonated Oils CBR Plus CBR Plus, Inc. (Canada) 604-684-8072

Sulfonated Oils Condor SS Earth Sciences Products Corp. 503-678-1216

Sulfonated Oils SA-44 System Dallas Roadway Products, Inc. 800-317-1968

Sulfonated Oils Settler Mantex 800-527-9919

Frazer, Lance 2003 Ntl.

Organic modified
Dust Stop Cypher USA 615-365-4480 www.cypherltd.com Institute of Env Health
colloids polysaccaride
Sciences

33
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number
Lignosulfonate generic Sanders, et al 1997

Lignosulfonate CalBinder California-Fresno Oil Co. 209-486-0220

Lignosulfonate DC-22 Dallas Roadway Products, Inc. 800-317-1968

605-642-3147
Lignosulfonate DC-9112 GE Water Technologies GE Betz Inc. www,gewater.com
866-439-8272

Lignosulfonate Dustac Georgia Pacific West, Inc. 360-733-4410

Lignosulfonate Dustac-100 Georgia Pacific West, Inc. 360-733-4410

Lignosulfonate Polybinder Jim Good Marketing 805-746-3783

Lignosulfonate RB Ultra Plus Roadbind America Inc. 888-488-4273

Organic Non-
Molasses/Sugar
Petroleum Dust Down Amalgamated Sugar Co. 208-733-4104
Beet

Pacific Chemicals, Inc/ Lyman 604-828-0218

Tall Oil Emulsion Dust Control E
Dust Control 800-952-6457

Pacific Chemicals, Inc/ Lyman 604-828-0218

Tall Oil Emulsion Dustrol Ex
Dust Control 800-952-6457

ArrMaz Custom Chemicals, Inc. Schommer & Sons

Tall Oil Emulsion Road Oyl 863-293-7884 www.roadproductscorp.com
Winter Haven FL Portland, Oregon
Dust Control
Vegetable Oils Greeenland Corp. 888-682-6040
Agent SS

Kansas Soybean Association 800-328-7390

Vegetable Oils Soapstock
Indiana Soybean Association 800-735-0195

34
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number

Asphalt Emulsion CSS-1 Any major asphalt supplier

Cutback MC-70 Any major asphalt supplier

Dust Oil/Dust
Duo Prime Oil Lyondell Petrochemical 800-423-8434
Fluids
Dust Oil/Dust
EnviroKleen Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. 800-321-0699 www.midwestind.com
Fluids
Dust Oil/Dust
Fuel Oil Pacific Northern Industrial Fuels 206-284-4421
Fluids
Modified Asphalt
Asphotac Actin Inc. East Chicago, Ind 219-397-5020
Emulsion
Modified Asphalt Gillies et al. 1999 Watson
Coherex Witco Corp. Chandler AZ 800-494-8287
Emulsion et al. 1996
Organic Modified Asphalt
DOPE-30 Morgan Emultech, Inc. 530-241-1364
Petroleum Emulsion
Penetrating
Modified Asphalt
Emulsion Kock Asphalt Co 909-829-0505
Emulsion
Primer (PEP)

Midwwest Research
Modified Asphalt Pennz EnVirotech Services 814-368-1200
American Refining Group www.pennzsuppress.com Instititute for the EPA,
Emulsion Suppress-D Inc Greeley, CO 307-369-3878
1998

Modified Asphalt
Petro Tac Sytech Products Toledo OH 800-537-0288
Emulsion
Modified Asphalt
Road Pro Midwest Industrial Supply 800-321-0699
Emulsion
Modified Asphalt
Sandstill Energy Systems Associates 703-503-7873
Emulsion

35
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number
aklyphenol BASF Chemical Division, Mt.
wetting additive 800-543-1740 www.basf.com Warhurst,Michael 1995
ethoxylates Olive, NJ
Haul Road Dust Fairmont Supply Co
wetting additive Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. 307-875-2492 www.midwestind.com
Control Green River, WY

TerraBond TerraBond Industries-Fluid D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC

wetting additive 888-356-7847 www.terrabond.net
Water Wetter Sciences, LLC Tech Report, 1996

wetting additive
Golden West
with both ionic Golden West Industries Heber
Chem-Loc 101 Industries, Wright, 800-321-dust
and anionic City, UT
Wyoming
properties
Surfactant
wetting additive
Golden West
with both ionic Golden West Industries Heber
Chem-Loc 102 Industries, Wright, 800-321-dust
and anionic City, UT
Wyoming
properties
wetting additive
Golden West
with both ionic Golden West Industries Heber
Chem-Loc 411 Industries, Wright, 800-321-dust
and anionic City, UT
Wyoming
properties
wetting additive,
DusTreat
latex based GE Betz, GE Water Technology www.gewater.com
DC9136
sealant

36
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number
Acrylic co- Dust Buster - Fairmont Supply Co
Midwest Industrial Supply 307-875-2492 www.midwestind.com
polymer HR51 Green River WY
Acrylic co- Environmental Products and
Envirotac II 888-674-9174 www.envirotac.com
polymer Applications, Inc.
Combination of
Top Shield Base Seal Internationa, Inc. 800-729-6985
Polymers

copolymer DustShield Soil-LOC, Inc, Scottsdale, AZ 888-828-7300 www.soil-shield.com

polymer emulsion DirtGlue DirtGlue Enterprises 888-606-6108 www.dirtglue.com

polymer emulsion Soiltac Soilworks, LLC Gilbert AZ 800-545-5420 www.soiltac.com

TerraBond Dust TerraBond Industries-Fluid

polymer emulsion 888-356-7847 www.terrabond.net
Cap Sciences, LLC

Polyvinyl Acetate Aerospray 70A Cytec Industries 800-835-9844

Environmental Soil Systems,

Polyvinyl Acetate Soil Master WR 800-368-4115
Inc.

Vinyl Acrylic Earthbound L Earth Chem Inc. 970-223-4998

Vinyl Acrylic ECO-110 Chem-crete 972-234-8565

Synthetic
Liquid Dust
Polymer Vinyl Acrylic Enviroseal Corp. 561-969-0400
Control
Emulsions
Vinyl Acrylic Marloc Reclamare Corp.

Vinyl Acrylic PolyPavement PolyPavement Company 323-954-2240

Vinyl Acrylic Soil Seal Soil Stabilization 800-523-9992

37
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number
Gillies et al 1999, D.
Gebhart, et al. USAEC
Vinyl Acrylic Soil Sement Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc. 800-321-0699
Tech Report, 96
Watson et al. 1996

800-815-7668
Vinyl Acrylic Soiloc-D Hercules Environmental
770-303-0878

TerraBond TerraBond Industries-Fluid

Vinyl Acrylic 888-356-7847 www.terrabond.net
PolySeal Sciences, LLC

D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC

Vinyl Acrylic Top Seal Soils Control International 817-526-5550
Tech Report, 1996

polyacrylamides
970-330-0281 Vernon Prevatt, D. Hart
combined with Tri-PAM US Marine Corps
908-464-1500 (USMC brief)
super absorbents

38
 Table 3.1 Dust Suppression Products
Suppressant Suppressant Manufacturer or Primary Phone
Product NAME Regional Distributor Web site Citation/author
Type Category Distributor number
blend of calcium
chloride and D. Gebhart, et al. USAEC
Dust Fyghter Midwest Industrial Supply 800-321-0699
magnesium Tech Report, 1996
chloride
Calcium
calcium chloride General Chemical 800-668-0433 www.gogenchem.com Sanders, et al 1997
Chloride liquid
calcium chloride generic Sanders, et al 1997
Oxford, Inc.
calcium chloride Dowflake Dow Chemical 208-267-2297 www.dow.com
Moyie Springs, ID

calcium chloride Liquidow Dow Chemical 800-447-4369

magnesium
Chlor-tex Soil-Tec 702-873-2023
chloride
magnesium Dust Busters, Evanston
DustGard North American Salt Company 307-789-3878 www.nasalt.com Sanders, et al 1998
chloride , WY
magnesium
Water Dust-Off Cargill Salt 800-553-7879
chloride
absorbing
magnesium magnesium Dust Busters, Evanston
307-789-3878
chloride chloride , WY
Magnesium
chloride (90%)
and 10% Brody Chemical-Casper
Dust Eliminator Brody Chemical 800-488-2436 www.brodychemical.com
surfactant WY
(ethoxylated nonly
phenol)
Magnesium EnVirotech Services
chloride and Caliber Inc Greeley, CO Engle, David 2004. in
Glacial Technologies 800-369-6878 www.envirotechservices.com
proprietery corn DCA2000 (multiple dust control Erosion Control
based additive products)

sodium chloride IMC Salt IMC Salt 800-323-1641

sodium chloride Morton Salt Morton International 312-807-2000

39
TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSION APPLICATIONS GUIDE, is a product selection
tool, compiled from published sources. This particular guide assembles products in
general categories with the addition of application guidelines, environmental issues,
application notes, limitations and attributes where known. The reader again should be
cautioned that the table cannot be considered complete or comprehensive. It is probable
that there are more substantial differences within a product category than is implied
within the table.

Since new products are continually being developed, the information compiled in Table
3.2 is incomplete from that perspective as well. Users are encouraged to work with
vendors in testing new products….and just as importantly, in sharing the results.
Detailed case studies with less proprietary data are needed.

40
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

agglomerates
generally fine dust
unknown (but
unknown but no may become particles.
quality road
reported 1 to 3% of road 1 treatment every 5 slippery when Generally
Clay Additives Bentonite construction is
vegetation or material by dry weight years wet if high fines increases the
considered crucial
freshwater occur. dry strength of
to dust control)
impacts material under
dry conditions

changes
clay fines
characteristics of
needed for best
clay size
some products performance.
particles.
low; 39% after one are highly acidic in Requires long
highly diluted at 1:600 Generally
Enzymes or week and 0% after their undiluted Needs time to curing time.
Electro-chemical in some cases but no ? effective
Sulfonated Oils 11 months (Gillies form. Needs set up/cure limited life span
application rate known regardless of
et al.) product specific Test on-site
climate
analysis prior to large
conditions.
scale
Least likely to
applications
leach out.
modified
Organic colloids biodegradable
polysaccharide

41
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

claimed non
hazardous but
with all petroleum
MRI test cured down time for
Dust Oil/Dust based products
85% initial .46 gal/sq yd for 45 hrs with curing was
Fluids there is the
no traffic extensive
potential for
hydrocarbon
contamination.

42
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

not good in high

pH soils in dry
conditions may binds or
not retain agglomerates
resilience. Can surface particles
be become because of
Organic crusty and asphalt adhesive
Petroleum fragment under properties.
traffic and wet Some are film
condition weather. forming
can range from .1 to 1
95% after one week blade mixing for specific Some products Waterproofs the
Modified Asphalt gal per sq yd for initial
and 53% after 11 stabilized roads 2 rolling required are difficult to road. Non
Emulsion app and less for
months (Gillies et and rolling mechanically maintain Can toxic, non
reapps
al.) sprayed be mixed with corrosive
fresh or salt Effective in a
water. Waste multitude of
oils contain environments
toxic materials Considered
and must be relatively
processed to expensive
remove these (Gephart).
toxins.
Odorous. Sticky

43
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

Product may
stick to
vehicles. On Binds road
site mixing is surface
costly. particles. Under
Effectiveness dry conditions it
No cure time reduced by increases the
No strong water
suggested by heavy rains. dry strength of
quality issues
at least one Becomes material. Retains
although BOD .09 gal/sq yd initial scarify to a
vendor. When slippery when effectiveness
(Biochemical followed by 3 depth of 4", 3 maintenance doses
Lignosulfonate 80% range prewetting the wet and brittle under long dry
Oxygen Demand) maintenance doses of prewet, mix at a rate of .01 gal/ft2
road the use when dry. periods.
may be high upon .045gal/sq yd annual insitu, compact
of surfactant Difficult to Performs best in
leaching into a
may be maintain a hard arid and semi-
small stream
beneficial. surface. Less arid conditions.
effective on Can be
igneous, reshaped in soils
crushed gravel with high
and medium to amounts of clay.
low fines.
Odorous.

44
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

Organic Non-
petroleum cost of heated
application
trailers may be
several products
the warmer the prohibitive,
shown to have low 135 degree F agglomerates
.25 to .5 gal per sq yd product the limited
Vegetable Oils impact on heated 1 the surface
initial faster the geographic
freshwater aquatic application particles
penetration availability
environments
oxidizes rapidly
and then
becomes brittle.

Adheres surface
several days of
particles
cure time
together.
claimed to be suggested by at
Greatly
suitable for laid down like least one
increases dry
environmentally .3 to 1 gal per sq yd at asphalt, mixed vendor. Difficult
Tall Oil Emulsion 1 strength of
sensitive areas 1:4 dilution rate with crushed to maintain a
material under
but mostly stone hard surface.
dry conditions.
unknown Effective in a
Limited number
wide range of
of treatments
aggregates
needed.

45
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

akylphenol
ethoxylates have
issues related to
biodegradability
Diluted at
and human
rates of
wetting additive impacts (9-10
site prep is more 1:1000 or less
(some have ionic mole nonyl phenol
dependant on and then
and anioinc ethoxylates have site specific and
primary applied either
Surfactant properties) Also been banned in dependant on
suppression with primary
includes some Europe due to conditions
agent and not suppressant or
latex based impacts on human
surfactant with water only
sealants endocrine system)
makes water
also used to
wetter
extinguish coal
fires generally
claimed non-
hazardous

46
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

scarifying and
grading and do not store or
80% after 12 mo
mixed insitu and apply below
and 95% after 8 for
compacted at least 30% freezing do
vinyl acrylic (one
followed by solids, addition not apply during
Acrylic co- result) 95% claimed non
site specific topical of surfactant or when rain is
polymer after one week and hazardous
application may enhance expected in 24
85% after 11
for extreme penetration hrs test
months (Gillies et
protection the bed cured for 7
al.)
product needs to days
be mixed insitu

product is
applied with a
fertilizer
spreader then
polyacrylamidce reduced dust by 80- application
raked and not
s combination 90% at helicopter varies
none listed 1 lb for every 150 ft. saturated with commercially
with super landing sites in the depending on
water at a rate of available
absorbents desert soil pH
1 gallon per 5
sq/ft. Then
topped with an
emulsion

47
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

environmentally
Synthetic safe and May require can apply
Polymer biodegradable no specialized either sprayed binds surface
Emulsions difficult to
polymer known water 1 gal undiluted per 50 equipment for topically or particles
maintain a hard
emulsion quality or plant sq ft mixing in with mixed in because of glue
surface
impacts but needs soil if not applied place, followed like properties
product specific topically by compaction
analysis

48
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

Scarification varies: one

recommended vendor
as the product suggests road
runs easily use can be
binds soil
grade, scarify, resumed soon curing/drying
particles
apply 1st coat, after time is typically
together may
roll, apply 2nd application, recommended
include a dye so
.5 gal/sq yd most application and other vendors do not apply
applicators can
80% on average typical one product roll again grade suggest below 36-40
environmentally better ascertain
Vinyl Acrylic after 12 months suggests .75 gal/ sq top 3-6 inches of product needs deg F.
safe coverage
95% after 8 months yd (1st coat) followed soil. Best when to cure for 8- Not
Generally
by 1:15 at .5gal/sq yd applied to a 12 hrs at 72 recommended
considered non-
moist surface deg F. Two for highly
toxic. Best on
and optimal soil step trafficed
lightly trafficed
moisture at application surfaces
surfaces
least one followed by
product does not compaction
recommend pre- suggested for
wetting all soil types

49
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

At 77o F, It starts
to absorb water
at 29% RH. At
100o F, it starts
to absorb water
corrosive to at 20% RH.
metal (corrosive Lower freezing
inhibitors can point than
long term may be added) It MgCl2. Treated
use result in water requires a roads can be
quality minimum RH regraded and
degradation in level to absorb recompacted
runoff conditions moisture from with less impact
Freshwater can be topically the air. Does on product
works better in
aquatics species sprayed or not perform as capability
winter than Performs better
calcium chloride less than MgCl2 may develop .4 gal/sq yd or mixed in place 4-Feb well as MgCl2
some other
chloride (requires over long, dry than MgCl2 in
products high humidity.
concentrations; scarifying) spells.
negligible if proper Rainwater tends Moderately
buffer zones exist. to leach out priced. Lowers
Similar impacts on soluble the freezing
trees as Mag chlorides. point of the road
Chloride. Slippery when moisture and
wet if a high helps prevent
amount of fines frost heaving,
are present. thus reducing
road
maintenance.
Provides greater
density with less
50 compaction
effort
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

All chlorides pose works well on

More
a potential hazard steep slopes
Water absorbing calcium chloride deliquescence than to offsite plants 1.5% by weight of tightly blade and no 2nd
MgCl2,
(flake) after a heavy aggregate pre-wet application
up to 98% for 1-5
rainfall. same as needed
days
liquid CaCl2. grading only

51
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

Absorbs water
from the air at
32% RH
independent of
corrosive to
temperature.
metal may
Harder surface
corrosive, water have limited
than CaCl2.
shed quality effectiveness on
Treated roads
issues can be coal fines
can be regraded
minimized with varying Requires
and
adequate buffer .5 gal/sq yd initial combinations addition of recompacted
zone. Affects maintenance is .3 used (e.g. water,
with less impact
pine, hemlock, gal/sq yd (some different especially if
on product
poplar, ash, mines using very surfactants or below 32% capability
spruce and diluted ratios (1%) additives; relative
Effective in drier
maple. Potential instead of surfactants humidity.
magnesium 2-3 full treatments per including climates.
generally high concerns with with normal watering similar ratios Rainwater and Reasonable
chloride season
spills. recommended of CaCl2 and over-watering cost. Less
(surfactant application rates vary tend to leach
MgCl2. maintenance
additive by road type with out soluble
Several mines needed
(particularly nonyl gravel the lowest per chlorides
switch to (Sanders).
phenol ethoxlates) sq yd and clay the necessitating
CaCl2 in Generally
and/or other highest reapplication. If
Winter provides the
proprietary roads contain a
best
additives may high fine
combination of
also have content, they
application ease,
impacts) may become
durability, cost
slippery when
and dust control
wet.
for semi-arid,
semi-humid and
humid climates
52
(Gephart et al.)
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

Low (40%) at
typical rate. When evaporation
rate of use is necessitates
doubled, numerous agglomerates
effectiveness may reapplications the surface
increase to 90% for controls dust for particles and is
short durations, a limited time, normally readily
sometimes as low blading and (as low as 12 available. Can
light watering
as 12 minutes increases siltation repeated minutes in high have positive
preferred and
Water water EPA, AP-42 (1998) requires large reapplications as temp and wind immediate
numerous
notes that moisture quantities needed site conditions). results and is
applications
ratio of 2 equates to specific labor intensive. generally
75% efficiency. Expensive over considered
Significant long term use inexpensive as
increases in when all costs a short term
moisture ratio are are considered. dust control
needed to increase Can pump fines
efficiency to 95% to the surface
(e.g. 2.5 times)

53
 TABLE 3.2 DUST SUPPRESSANT APPLICATIONS GUIDE

PM 10
effectiveness
Recommended
The author cannot # of applications per
application rate
verify that all Site year (general vendor
(general vendor
levels listed are preparation recommendations -
Suppressant Suppressant Environmental recommendations - Site specific
time averaged; and or documentation of Limitations Attributes
Type Category Impact documentation of notes
the method maintenance effectiveness on
effectiveness on
preferred by MRI needed haul roads is often
haul roads is often
for its ability to inadequate)
inadequate)
show true
effectiveness.

The above list and all other materials supplied throughout this document are intended to provide a convenient source of information for the reader, so as to serve as a
starting point for a discussion of various features and applications.....but the data is not necessarily fully comprehensive or complete. It is the user's responsibility to
thoroughly research and compare products and vendors to determine which can provide high quality results and services. Vendors are not necessarily equally reliable, or
comparable relative to timeliness, price and their adherence to recommended application procedures. It is not the intent of this document to endorse any product or vendor
and any that have been referenced were cited because of their willingness to provide information only.

The reader is referred to the following sources for additional selection guides:
Ferguson, John, W. Downs, D. Pfost. 1999. Fugitive Dust: NonPoint Sources, Agriculture MU Guide, U of MO
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand is a measure of the amount of biodegradeable organic material present in a sample of water. 5mg/L or less is desireable.
Bolander, Peter, and A. Yamada. 1999. Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide. USFS
Sanders, Thomas, and J. Addo. 1993. Effectiveness and Environmental Impact of Road Dust Suppressants, Mountain Plains Consortium

Thompson, R.J. and A. T. Visser 2002. Benchmarking and management of fugitive dust emissions from surface mine haul roads. Table 1 Palliative Selection Matrix

Gebhart, Dick, M. Denight, and R. Grau. 1999. Dust Control Guidance and Technology Selection Key, US Army Construction Engineering Research Lab.

Specific test results (effectiveness) for dust suppressants can also be found in the following sources:
EPA. 1998. Compilation Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, Volume I, Fifth Edl, Section 13.2.2, Unpaved Roads. Research Triangle Park, NC
Cowherd.C. Jr. et al., 1988. Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources, EPA-450/3-88-008, US.EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
Muleski, G. E., et al., 1984. Extended Eval' of Unpaved Road Dust Suppressants in the Iron and Steel Industry, EPA-600/2-84-027, EPA, OH
Cowherd.C. Jr. and J. S. Kinnsey. 1986. Indentification, Assessment and Control of Fugitive Dust Particulate Emissions, EPA-600/8-86-023, EPA, OH
Muleski, G.E. and C. Cowherd, Jr., 1986. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Chemical Dust Suppressants on Unpaved Roads, EPA-600/2-87-102, EPA, OH
Gillies, et al. 1999. Long Term Efficiencies of Dust Suppression to Reduce PM 10 Emissions From Unpaved Roads , JAWMA, 49, 3-16

54
TABLE 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST
WORKSHEET, is a price and product comparison worksheet. Users can explore
various costing scenarios with the excel spreadsheet, but should be cautioned that all data
included involves estimates. Reliable pricing data are very difficult to obtain. First of
all, there are a multitude of variables affecting price, and as many affecting the selection
of a given product and application. Secondly, we were not able to ascertain the price of
all dust suppressants that are currently being used in Wyoming coal mines. When the
price of a product has been provided by a vendor or end user and is felt to be reasonably
accurate it was included. However, costs of product and application measures vary
significantly by location and situation.

Down time for example is a substantial cost that undoubtedly prohibits the use of
certain suppressants but is difficult to measure. Actual costs per mine need to be
calculated and used instead. Down time estimates for delays on a main railway
line for coal trains was $1 million per hour (UP: Oct 2, 1998, Perkins, Wyoming).

The cost and amount of road maintenance needed, such as grading, and compacting are
also estimates, ascertained from the 2004 USFS Cost Estimating Guide for Road
Construction. The USFS estimates were doubled for use on wider haul roads. The
frequency of the maintenance required for various suppressant types is generally
unknown, and is always situationally dependant. The figures provided are adjustments
made to data supplied by Sanders, 1997. The suppressant tested with the lowest
aggregate loss was lignosulfonate. The difference in aggregate loss compared to
lignosulfonate was calculated as a percentage and this adjustment ratio used to estimate
the need for road maintenance. CaCl2 for example was estimated to need 148% more
blading and related road maintenance than lignosulfonate based on Sanders’ findings of
148% more aggregate loss.

The worksheet is intended to help the user recognize some of the costs beyond initial
application. Other costs that may have been overlooked for a given site or product and
can be added by users. Users are referred to the USFS publication, Bolander et al.(1999)
Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide (pp.13-14) for additional costing
worksheets.

It is apparent that more detailed records are needed in order to better ascertain the cost
effectiveness of a given product or application method. Application rates for example
are an important factor in product effectiveness, as is the frequency of repeat
applications, yet most of the information supplied by vendors is in ranges so wide as to
be unusable. Similarly, more detailed reporting of water usage would assist in the
determination of water’s effectiveness and cost.

55
56
 A B C D E F G H I
1 Table 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET
synthetic electro
Suppressant Type water water absorbing organic petroleum
2 polymer chemical
Enzymes
Ligno- Modified Acrylic co
Ionics
Suppressant category water CaCl2 flake CaCl2 MgCl2 sulfonate Asphalt polymers
Sulfonated
(Lignin) Emulsion vinyl acrylics
3 oils

Product Examples many DustGard

examples have proprietary ingredients and varying application DustFyghter Soil Sement
PennzSuppre Terrastone
recommendations that may enhance peformance beyond general DustOff Dust Shield
Water ss Road BioCat
category product Brody Chem Dirt Glue
Oyl, Coherex EMC2
(mi = mile, Lignin'=Lignosulfonate, agg' = aggregate, $0=intential Caliber DCA DB- HR51
illustration of no data) 2000, etc
4
.02/gal 0.30/gal $ 284/ton .30/gal .90-1.30/gal
Cost per undiluted unit (gal, ton,etc.)
(in place) USFS (Sanders) (vendor) (Sanders) avg (vendor)
5
6 Dilution rate na 1:2 na 1:2 1:1 1:4

.085gal/sq yd x
10000 gal/mile .4gal/sq yd 1.9lb/sq yd
application rate of diluted mixture .5gal/sq yd 2 apps reapps .5gal/sq yd
(Vendor) (USFS) (USFS)
at .045 sq yd
7
8 amount of undiluted product/mile (gal, or lbs) 9293 133760 11616 11968 7040
9 Product cost per sq yd $0.0396 $0.2700 $0.0495 $0.3000
10 Water portion of mixture in gal/mi 10000 18867 0 23,584 $11,968 28160
11 initial app Product cost per mile $2,788 $19,008 $3,485 $21,120
12 initial app pre wetting/mi (USFS 2004, vendor) 10,000 gal/mi $200 $200 $200 $200
13 initial app water portion of mixture (gal x .02/gal) USFS $200 $377 $0 $472 $239 $563 $0 $0
14 surfactant (wetting additive) $85/10000gal $85 $160 $0 $200 $102 $239 $0 $0
15 initial app scarification/mi (USFS,2004) 1730/mi $1,700
16 initial app blading/mi (USFS,2004) 680/mi $680 $680 $680 $680
17 initial appl mix in place (USFS,2004)(blade rate x 2) 1760/mi $1,760
18 initial app rolling/compacting (if separate event) 860/mi $860
19 initial app miscellaneous costs (detours)

initial app curing (down time cost per mile) acrylics and polymers
expected to be significantly higher due to projected curing time
recommended by vendors, but actual value is uknown.
20
21 INITIAL APPLICATION SUBTOTAL (sum of rows 11-20) $1,165 $4,206 $19,688 $5,037 $25,981 $803 $0 $0

57
 A B C D E F G H I
1 Table 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET
synthetic electro
Suppressant Type water water absorbing organic petroleum
2 polymer chemical
Enzymes
Ligno- Modified Acrylic co
Ionics
Suppressant category water CaCl2 flake CaCl2 MgCl2 sulfonate Asphalt polymers
Sulfonated
(Lignin) Emulsion vinyl acrylics
3 oils
1st reapplication (50% initial product rate but full cost of app) USDA and
$2,812 $10,184 $3,295 $15,421 $803 $0 $0
22 product vendors
23 2nd reapplication (repeat of 1st reapplication) $2,812 $3,295 $15,421 $803 $0 $0
24 3rd reapplication (see North Carolina Div of Air Q) $2,812
25 4th reapplication
26 5th reapplication
27 6th reapplication
Annual Maintenance blading (USFS,2004) $680/mi x 52 weeks/yr
(cost shown is once/wk/mi for Lignin rated lowest in agg' loss by $70,720 $52,374 $35,360 $36,359 $35,360
28 Sanders, 1997 (Others adjusted by maintenance ratio:row 32)

Water estimate based on one mine's use of 81.76 mil gallons per
year(haul road length of 5 miles, 75% of water use on roads)
Maintenance water (@ .5 gal/sq yd/day)would equal 12848000 gal
Water for Lignin' rate of .13gal/sq yd/day is based on vendor
recommendation. Water only double rate based on NC Div of Air 24528000 12264000 12264000 12264000 3188640
Quality. Thompson and Visser 2002 and Rosbury and Zimmer 83 , and
USDA FS suggest watering intervals of 30 min during peak season
which is 8 months per year. Winter interval: every 3 hrs. (.082 per pass
x 6 average passes)
29
Maintenance water cost/mile annually (USFS) Uses Row
$490,560 $245,280 $245,280 $245,280 $63,773
30 29 estimated water use levels x $200/10000gal

Maintenance aggregate replacement (Sanders 1997. Modified for haul

$1,831,610 $1,356,458 $915,805 $941,680 $915,805
31 trucks, 120' haul road and aggregate cost in place of $11.57/ton)

Adjustments (Sanders, 1997) used difference in aggregate loss to

justify additional maintenance (water only adjustment based on NC Div
200.00% 148.12% 100.00% 102.83% 100.00%
of Air Q, Thompson and Visser and Rosbury and Zimmer). Flake CaCl2
based on mine engineer performance evaluation
32
33 Intangibles $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
34 surfactant $85/10000gal of water (if used) $208,488 $104,244 $27,103 $0 $0 $0
35 suppressant at 1% solution 100gal/10000gal tanker ($30) $36,792 $36,792

36 TOTAL annual cost per mile application and maintenance $2,602,543 $1,703,544 $1,330,561 $1,271,737 $1,098,865 $2,408 $0 $0

58
 A B C D E F G H I
1 Table 3.3 DUST SUPPRESSION ON MINE HAUL ROADS - COST WORKSHEET
synthetic electro
Suppressant Type water water absorbing organic petroleum
2 polymer chemical
Enzymes
Ligno- Modified Acrylic co
Ionics
Suppressant category water CaCl2 flake CaCl2 MgCl2 sulfonate Asphalt polymers
Sulfonated
(Lignin) Emulsion vinyl acrylics
3 oils
37
38 Sources:
39 USFS Cost Estimating Guide for Road Construction 2004
40 USDA FS Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide
41 Sanders, Thomas et al. 1997. Relative Effectiveness of Road Dust Suppressants
Average haul truck = 550,000lbs(equal to 100 vehicles) 216 haul
trucks per day (9x24) X 3.6 to adjust for 120' road. Aggregate
replacement $11.57/ton for crushed rock in place (adjust for scoria as
42 known)
43 Thompson, R.J and A.T.Visser. 2002. Benchmarking and management of fugitive dust emissions from surface mine haul roads.
44 Rosbury, K.D., and R. A. Zimmer. 1983. Cost Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on Unpaved Haul Roads, PEDCO Environmental, Inc., US Bureau of Mines
45 North Carolina Dept of Env and Nat Resources Div of Air Quality. 2003. Economic Analysis of Particulates from Fugitive Dust Emissions Sources
46 vendors (product vendors and specific mine information (anon')

59
60
APPENDICES

61
62
 Appendix A:

Dust Suppression Survey and Results

63
64
 Dust Suppression Survey (Results)

The following inquiry will assist the researcher in compiling a recommendation of

“best practices” for dust abatement on mine haul roads. Although the results will be
tabulated, your name or company will not be associated with your response.

1. Please indicate your primary chemical dust suppressant

MgCl2 (3), CaCl2 (1), PennzSuppress (1)
2. Please use the following criteria to explain why you use the Primary product you
selected in Q1. Check all that apply and add any other reasons that are not listed.

_5__ can be applied with no down time for haul trucks

_4 _ is readily available locally
_2__ is one of a limited list of available products offered by our area vendors
_4__ appears to be more cost effective than other options
_4__ appears to be environmentally safe
_4__ can be applied with standard equipment (water trucks) by our employees
_3__ in addition to suppressing dust, the product seems to improve or maintain
the road surface drivability and/or slows breakdown and need for grading
_2__ requires minimal staff training to adequately apply
_1__ (your criteria)_Vender maintains automated system_________________
___ (your criteria)_______________________________________________
___ (your criteria)_______________________________________________

4. Do you currently use a surfactant to improve the efficiency of the water and/or
your primary suppressant? _1__yes __4_no
If yes _ChemLoc 102 (1)____ (product)

5. A few mines no longer use a surfactant but use a very diluted application of their
primary suppressant instead. Please comment on your mine’s use of either a
surfactant or a very diluted product with general watering:
-1000gal. of MgCl2/45,000gal. water, 3 loads every 2 or 3 days
-Surfactant used in each truck load
-We use diluted product on haul roads that we grade a lot
-Stronger on outlying roads
-Intend to use diluted MgCl2 with general watering in the future
6. Would you recommend your primary product (by cost and performance) to be
used by other mines for haul road dust suppression? Explain:
-MgCl2- Yes, low cost
-MgCl2- Yes, when properly applied, and minimal blading afterwards
product provides effective low cost suppression compared to alternatives
-CaCl2- Cost effective with good results
-PennzSuppress- Depends on the mine, cost is prohibitive. However, the
dealer support and maintenance is critical to our operation.
-MgCl2- Cheapest available product that meets the DEQ/AQD
requirements.

65
 7. What, in your opinion is the biggest problem or limitation in using your primary
product for haul road dust suppression now and in the future?
-No problem with MgCl2. Issue is maintenance and upkeep of haul
roads.
- Product (CaCl2) is brought in by railroad into Gillette. Railroad does
not put a priority on locating RR cars so vendor can off-load product.
Sometimes, the RR cars w/product sit in the yard for a week before the
vendor can access them.
- MgCl2- Educating the workforce that unnecessary grading of the road
rapidly reduces the effectiveness of the treatments. Secondary concern is
availability of the product as more industries move to use it in the face of
continuing drought.
- Spillage from haul trucks covers the chemical and makes it inefficient
-PennzSuppress- Cost
8. Have you tried other road dust suppression products that you were unsatisfied
with? Which ones and why?
- Tried emulsified tree resin, stuck to vehicle parts causing paint to chip.
- EMC2 did not work at all
-Unichem
9. If you have discontinued the use of a product which performed well please
explain here:
- MgCl2, expensive to have shipped to the mine. Not simple or
automated for us to use. Contractors don’t want to use their tanks
because of fear of corrosive behavior.
10. Please rank the following in the order that presents the biggest challenges to dust
suppression at your coal mine. (1 being the highest, 5 being the lowest (rank only 5 of
6)). To determine rank, average scores were calculated. Items ranked #1 = 5
points, #2 = 4 points, #3 = 3 points, #4 = 2 points, #5 = 1 point, unranked = 0
points.

Rank
__3.8____ (1) Cost of suppressants
__2.8__ (2) Monitoring Data (to show effectiveness of suppressant and when
reapplication is necessary)
__2.4____ (3) Employee training
__2____ (4) Proper Application
_ 2____ (4) Other (describe) Rail delivery issues; Spillage
1.8___ (5) Need for a better product

Summary:

Five surveys were returned. The majority of respondents reported using MgCl2. In the
ranking of challenges Other issues were selected twice, and in both instances the issue
was ranked of highest importance for that mine. Overall the Other category ranked tied
for fourth.

66
 Appendix B:

Dust Control Plan and Self Inspection Checklists

67
68
 Air Quality of Idaho:
Supplemental Fugitive Dust Control Information
________________________________________________________________________

Developing a Dust Prevention and Control Plan

Keeping potential fugitive dust problems under control is an everyday job. Plan ahead by
developing a dust prevention and control plan as follows:

1. Identify all potential fugitive dust emission sources.

• Start with a facility site plan map.

Record all paved haul roads, unpaved haul roads, stockpiles, material
transfer points, material conveyances, parking lots, staging areas, and
other open areas subject to wind erosion.
Indicate prevailing wind direction on your map.

• Study daily traffic volumes

Determine whether roads and open areas are used frequently or
occasionally. Consider daily routine modifications that will reduce traffic
in some areas or eliminate it altogether

2. Assign dust control methods.

Determine the appropriate dust control method for each sources identified
from your facility. If desired, color –code your map to indicate which dust
control method to apply where.

3. Determine frequency pf application.

For each source and each control method identified, determine how
frequently dust control treatments should be applied. Develop a Self-
Inspection Checklist to record the scheduled applications. (See below).

4. Record all dust control activities.

It is a good practice to record your dust control activities on your

checklist, along with the daily weather information, such as average wind
speed and direction, temperature, rainfall, etc. Recording the information
will enable you to monitor and evaluate the success of your efforts.

5. Monitor your dust control efforts.

You will need to monitor your dust control activities on a regular basis to
ensure that the measures taken are adequately controlling fugitive dust.

69
Self-Inspection Checklist

Use a self-inspection checklist to help incorporate the routine tasks of fugitive dust
control into your daily schedule. The checklist serves as a job reminder on a daily basis
and as a record of your efforts to keep dust problems to a minimum. You can identify
problem areas before they get out of hand, and anticipate adjustments for seasonal
changes or unforeseen circumstances.

The sample checklists on the following pages can be used to document dust control
methods as well as weather conditions. It is recommended that you use a checklist for
each source of fugitive dust emissions.

Example Dust Control Plan

Fugitive Dust Sources: Unpaved Haul Roads

Control Method: Chemical Dust Suppressant

Frequency of Application:
Record - Keeping:
Monitoring of Control Efforts
Special Considerations:
Every three months or as needed
Date suppressant applied and area covered
Roads monitored daily
• Traffic limited on haul roads by
placing product near the entrance
of facility
• Speed limit of 10 miles per hour
on facility grounds

70
Example Self-Inspection Checklist: Fugitive Dust Control Method Log

Fugitive Dust Source: Unpaved Haul Roads

Date Time Control Method Comments
4-1-02 7 am Magnesium Chloride All haul roads on
applied facility grounds
6-1-02 7 am Magnesium Chloride Entrance of
applied facility/stock pile area
only
8-1-02 7 am Magnesium Chloride All haul roads on
applied facility grounds
10-1-02 - See weather log
12-1-02 - See weather log

Self-Inspection Checklist: Weather Log

Date Temperature Wind Speed/ Amt. of Rainfall Comments
Direction
10-2-02 55 F (high) 5 mph 0.10 inch Wet, cloudy,
cold
10-8-02 50 F (high) 8 mph 0.0 inch Wet, cloudy,
cold
10-15-02 56 F (high) 8 mph 0.05 inch Wet, cloudy,
cold
10-22-02 52 F (high) 7 mph 0.0 inch Wet, cloudy,
cold

Best Management Practices: Fugitive Dust Control Methods

To control fugitive dust emissions, the Idaho Department of Environment Quality (DEQ)
and representatives of the rock crushing industry have developed Best Management
Practices (BMPs) for the following fugitive dust generating sources:

Paved public roads

Unpaved haul roads
Conveyor transfer points and screening operations
Crushers and grinding mills
Stockpiles

Although directed at the rock crushing industry in particular, many of these practices are
applicable to mining and mineral processing facilities, sand and gravel operations, and
concrete asphalts batch plants as well. The recommendations specific to haul roads
follow:

71
Unpaved Haul Roads

Fugitive dust control methods for unpaved haul roads include:

• Limit vehicle traffic on unpaved haul roads;
• Limit vehicle speeds on unpaved haul roads. If a speed limit is imposed, post
signs along the haul road route, clearly indicating the speed limit. Place signs so
they are visible to vehicles entering and leaving the sites of operations.
• Apply water to the surface of the unpaved road. Control runoff so it odes not
saturate the surface of the unpaved haul road and cause trackout. If runoff is not
or cannot be controlled, try applying gravel to the surface of the unpaved haul
road over an area sufficient to control trackout
• Improve aggregate on the surface of the unpaved haul road; and
• Apply an environmentally safe chemical dust suppressant to the surface of the
unpaved haul road.

72
 Appendix C:

Dust Palliative Selection Matrix

(Thompson and Visser)

73
74
The following chart by Thompson and Visser (2002) provides additional comparisons on
the perceived performance of several dust palliatives relative to plasticity, slope, traffic
volumes and applications. (“Benchmarking of Fugitive Dust Emissions from Surface-
Mine Haul Roads” p. A29.)

75
76
 Appendix D:

Dust Palliative Selection Matrix

(Bolander and Yamada, USFS)

77
78
The Product Selection Chart prepared by Peter Bolander and Alan Yamada for U.S.
Forest Service’s Technology and Development Program is published in “Dust Palliative
Selection and Application Guide” and can be found online at http://www.wsdot.
wa.gov/TA/T2Center/DustGuide.pdf. This table offers information for dust suppression
selection based on use/traffic volumes, surface material, and climatic conditions.

Notes:
(1) May require higher or more frequent application rates, especially with high truck volumes
(2) Greater than 20 days with less than 40% relative humidity
(3) May become slippery in wet weather
(4) May leach out in heavy rain
(5) SS-1 or CSS-1 with only clean, open-graded aggregate
(6) Road mix for best results

(Bolander, Yamada p.12 1999)

79
80
 Appendix E:

Dust Suppression Bibliography

(T. Stevenson, 2004)

81
82
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Arizona Dept of Arizona Department of Environmental Quality

Environmental Air quality exceptional and natural events 2001
Quality policy PM10 best available control measures

Associated Press Associated Press State and

EPA Watching Dust From Mines, Roads 2003 Associated Press
International Local Wire

Australia Government;
Australia Dept of www.deh.gov.au/industry/industry-
Dust Control, Best Practices Environmental Sustainable Industry; Department of the
the Environment 98 performance/minerals/booklets/d
Management in Mining, Australia Sustainable Minerals Environment and
and Heritage ust/dust1.html
Heritage

Axetell, Ken, Jr. Survey of Fugitive Dust from Coal Mines 78 EPA 68014489 EPA
Development of Emission Factors for
Stensland, G.J; Unpaved Roads: Implications of the New Air Pollution Control
Banard, W.R. 88
Gatz, D.F. PM10 regulations. Transactions, PM10 Association
Implementation of Standards

Transactions, Standards and Air and Waste

Improved fugitive dust PM10 emissions
Barnard, W. 92 Non-Traditional Particulate Management
estimates for trends
Source Controls Association

Development of emission factors for unpaved Transactions, PM10 Air Pollution Control
Barnard, W.R. 88
roads Implementation Standards Association
http://www.forester.net/ecm_0203
Baxter, Roberta Arrest that Fugitive Dust! 2003 Erosion Control Forester.net
_arrest.html
Quantifying the Environmental Impact of
unpublished Master's thesis
Becker, D.C. Particulate Deposition from Dry Unpaved
Iowa State University
Roadways
User's Guide: Fugitive Dust Control
Beggs, T. W. 85 EPA EPA
Demonstration Studies
Gravel Loss characterization and Innovative
Transportation Research National Research
Berthelot, C. Carpentier, A. Preservation Treatments of Gravel Roads: 2003
Record Council
Saskatchewan, Canada

Assessment of Road Carpet for Control of

Blackwood, T. R. 79 EPA EPA
Fugitive Emissions from Unpaved Roads

Proceedings - ARTBA-NACE
Blanc, T.R. Lingosulfonate Stabilization Conference Local
Transportation

83
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Lessons learned from the failure of a

Chitwood, L.; Transportation Research National Research
Bolander, P. bituminous surface treatment in central
Steele, H.M.; Record Council
Oregon
San Dimas Technology
Bolander, P., Dust Palliative Selection and Application Forest Service Technology
99 and Development
Yamada, A. Guide and Development Program
Center
A Guideline to Liquid Spray Applications for
Bolander, Peter Erosion Contol, Dust Abatement, and 96 U.S. Forest Service
Tackifiers

Chemical Additives for Dust Control - What USDA Forest Service,

Bolander, Peter 96
We've Used and What We've Learned Portland Oregan

Third Symposium on the

The control of fugitive emissions using Transfer and Utilization of
Carnes, D. H. 82 USEPA
windscreens Particulate Control
Technology, Vol IV.
Cut costs by controlling dust; heavy haul-
Carter, R. road dust can stir up haulage and 96 Coal Age, vol 104, n 12
maintenance problems

University of Wyoming,
Champlin, Robert Control of Fugitive Dust from mining haul
78 EPA Institute of Energy and
L. roads
Environment

Center for dirt

Natural Systems Approach to preventing Transportation Research National Research
Colbert, W. and gravel road 2003
environmental harm from unpaved roads Record, v 1, n 1819 Council
studies
Overview of Regional Transportation
Council of Fresno Planning Agency Process to Identify and
http://www.fresnocog.org/aq-
County Implement Best Available Control Measures 2002
modeling/bacm/bacm.htm
Government in Support of the PM10 Plan for the San
Joaquin Valley

Methodology for Estimating Fugitive

Western Governor's
Countess, Windblown and Mechanically Resuspended Western Governor's
2001 Association Contract 30203-
Richard Road Dust Emissions Applicable for Regional Association
9
Scale Air Quality Monitoring

Cowherd, C Cost Effectiveness of road dust controls 82 EPA Report EPA

84
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Identification, Assessment and Control of

Cowherd, C Kinsey, J.S. 86 EPA Report EPA
fugitive dust particulate emissions
Development of Emissions Factors for
Cowherd, C. et al. 74 EPA
Fugitive Dust Sources
Development of Methodology and emission
EPA Office of Air Quality
Cowherd, C. Guenther, C.M. inventory for fugitive dust for the regional air 76
Planning and Standards
pollution study.
Air & Waste
Fine Particle Components of PM10 From
Cowherd, C. Kuyhendal, W.B. 97 Management Assoc. 1997
Fugitive Dust Sources
Proceeding
Cowherd, C. Fugitive Dust Emissions 96 MRI
Profiling Data for open fugitive dust sources
Prepared for US EPA, Emission Factors and
Cowherd, C. 99 EPA, MRI
Inventory Group, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Colorado Transportation Dept. of Civil
CTIC Road Dust Suppressants 89 Information Center, Bulletin Engineering, Colorado
#3 State Universtiy
Fugitive Dust from Vehicles Traveling on
Cuscino, Thomas 76 EPA EPA
unpaved roads
New Mexico Dept of
Fugitive Dust Control Techniques and www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/dus
Dubyk, S. 2004 website Environmental Air
Businesses t_control.html
Quality Bureau
Particulate control measure feasibility Maricopa Association of
Dulla, R.G. Withycombe, E 97 Sierra Research
STUDY Governments Report
Fugitive Dust Background Document and
Dunkins, R. Technical Information Document for Best 92 EPA
Available Control Measures
Fugitive Dust Emissions From Trucks on Environ. Sci. Technol. 10,
Dyck, R.I Strukel, J.J. 76
Unpaved Roads 1046-1048
Gerard, S; Gate,
Eaton, R.A; Rating Unsurfaced Roads 88 Army Corps of Engr.
D.W.
Road Maintenance Techniques and Products Forester Communications
Engle, David 2004 Forester.net
Have Made Great Strides January/Feburary
Open fugitive dust PM10 control strategies Midwest Research
Englehart, P.J. Muleski, G.E. 80 Study
study Institute

Control Techniques for Particulate Emissions

EPA EC/R Inc. NC EPA 450381005a EPA
from Stationary Sources, Vol 1

85
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Control Techniques for Particulate Emissions

EPA EC/R Inc. NC EPA 450381005b EPA
from Stationary Sources, Vol 2

40 CFR Part 52: SIPs for Lead

EPA Nonattainment - IIB: Reasonable Available 92 EPA EPA
Control Measures (draft)
Western
40 CFR Part 5: Regional Haze Regulations
EPA Regional Air 1999 Federal Register EPA www.wrapair.org/309/index.html
Vol. 64, No. 126, July
Partnership
Midwest Compilation of Air Pollution Emissions
Emission Factor and http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42
EPA Research Factors Volume 1, AP-42, Chapter 13 EPA
Inventory Group /ch13
Institute Unpaved Roads
Midwest
Emission Factor Domumentation for AP-42
EPA Research 1998 EPA final report
Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads
Institute
USEPA Region 8 - State Implementation https://yosemite.epa.gov/R
Wyoming Dept of
EPA Wyo Dept of EQ Plan - Wyoming - Section 14 - Control of 98
Environmental Quality
8/R8Sips.nsf/Wyoming?O
Particulate Emissions penView
Emission Control Technologies and emission
EPA 87 EPA EPA (The Center)
factors for unpaved road fugitive emissions

Midwest
Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42
EPA Research 1998 EPA final report EPA
Section 13.2.2 Unpaved Roads
Institute
EPA's Interpretation of the HSWA prohibition
EPA on the use of hazardous waste as a dust 85 EPA EPA
suppressant
National Air pollutant emission trends,
EPA 2000 EPA EPA
procedures
Review of Surface Coal Mining Emission http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42
EPA EPA
Factors /ch11/final/c11s09.pdf
Laboratory Study of Dust Palliative Journal of Materials in Civil
Epps, A. Eshan, M. 2002
Effectiveness Engineering
Ferguson, John Univeristy of Missouri
Fugitive Dust:Nonpoint Sources MU Ag Guide
H. Extension
Air and Waste
Moon, K. C, and Evaluation of fugitive dust control methods in Proceedings Air and Waste
Fitz, D. R. 93 Management
Zeldin, M. the Coachella Valley Management Association
Association

86
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Evaluation of Watering to control dust in high

Fitz, D. R. 2000 JAWMA
winds
Field Study to Determine limits of best
Fitz, D. R. available control methods for fugitive dust 96 CE-CERT Document University of California
under high wind conditions.
Evaluation of Watering to Control Dust in
Fitz, D.R Bumiller, K 2000 JAWMA 50, 570-577
High Winds
National Institute on
Down with Road Dust (innovations) Dust Environmental Health
Frazer, Lance 2003 Environmental Health
Stop Perspectives
Sciences
Freeston, Frank Runoff of oils from rural roads treated to
72 EPA EPA
J. suppress dust
Analysis on Emission Factor of Fugitive Dust J. Environmental Science 9,
Fu, L. Leung, D.Y.C. 97
from Road Traffic 501
Journal of Construction
Dust Suppression using a truck-mounted American Society of
Gambatese, J. James, D 2001 Engineering and
water spray system Civil Engineers
Management, V 137, n1

Recommendations for Improving Western

Western Governor's Grand Canyon Visibility
GCVTC Vistas: Report of the Grand Canyon Visibility 96 Reports to the EPA
Association Transport Commission
Transport Commission to the US EPA

US Army Construction
Denight, M., Dust Control Guidance and Technology Engineering Research
Gebhart, Dick L. 99
Grau, R.H. Selection Key Labratories, Land
Management Laboratory

US Army Construction
Thomas Hale
Dust Control Material Performance on Engineering Research http://aec.army.mil/usaec/technol
Gebhart, Dick L. and Kim 96 USAEC Technical Report
Unsurfaced Roadways and Tank Trails Labratories, Land ogy/dustcontrol.pdf
Michaels-Busch
Management Laboratory

87
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Watson, J.G.;
Rogers, C.F.; JAWMA Paper: Long-Term
Long-Term Efficiencies of Dust Suppression Journal of the Air and Waste Air and Waste
DuBois D.W.; Efficiencies of Dust Suppressants
Gillies, J.A. to Reduce PM10 Emissions From Unpaved 99 Management Association 49, Management
Chow, J.C.; to Reduce PM10 Emissions from
Roads 3-16 Association
Langston, R.; unpaved roads
Sweet, J.
Wind Barriers Offer Short-Term Solution to
Grantz, D.A 98 California Agric., 53, 14
Fugitive Dust

Proceedings, International
Mostafa, N.;
Hagen, L.J. PM10 Generation by Wind Erosion. 96 Confrence on Air Pollution
Hawkins, A.
from Agricultural Operations

Evaluation of PM10 Emissions Factors for

Harding Lawson Regional Air Quality Council, Harding Lawson
Paved Roads Prepared for Regional Air 91
Associates Denver Colorado Associates
Quality Council, Denver, CO

http://www.pirnie.com/docs/resou
Hewitt-Daly, Mary Overview of Fugitive Dust Emissions 2000 Malcolm Pirnie
rces_pubs_air_may00_6.html

Successful Farming, v 87, n

Holmberg, M. Soy Oil Ready to Eat Your Dust 89
11
Bergerson, K.L;
Mission Oriented Dust Control and Surface
Fox, D.E; Denny, Iowa Hwy. Res. Board Proj.
Hoover, J.M. Improvement Processes for Unpaved Roads. 81
C.K.; Handy, HR-151
Final Report
R.L.
Assessment of the current status of the
PEDCO-Environmental
Hubbard, S. J. environmental aspects of fugitive dust 76 EPA
Specialists
sources associated with mining

Jackson, Transportation Research National Research

Jackson, D. Washington State Chip and Seal Study 90
N.;Mahoney, J.; Record Council

James
www.aggman.com/0703_pages/0
Informational Taming the Haul Road Dust Demon 2003 AGGMAN Mercur Media, Inc
703marketing.html
Media

Precipitation Scavenging and

Hemisphere Publishing
Gillette, D.A.; Fate of Dust Particles from Unpaved Roads Atmosphere-Surface
Johnson, T. 92 Co., Washington, 933-
Schwiesow, R. Under Various Atmoshperic Conditions. Exchange. Edited by S.
948
Schwartz and W.G. N. Slinn

88
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Investigation of Fugitive dust, Volume I -

Jutze, G. A. Axetell, K. 74 EPA EPA
Sources, emissions and control.

Investigation of Fugitive dust, Volume II -

Jutze, G. A. Axetell, K. 74 EPA EPA
Control Strategy and regulatory approach.

Investigation of Fugitive Dust Sources

Jutze, G.A. et al. 74 EPA
Emission and Control
Rule 402: Fugitive Dust, Kearn County Air www.arb.ca.gov/DRDB/KER/CUR
KCAPCD 93 website
Pollution Control District HTML/R402.HTM
Kern County Air Chemical Dust Suppressants: a list of
Kern County Air http://www.kernair.org/complianc
Pollution Control products and suppliers, Kern County Air 2003 website
Pollution Control District e_assistance.htm
District Pollution Control District
Kinsey, J.S. Control Technology for sources of Pm10 85 EPA EPA
Kirchner, Henry Public Works, Vol. 119, No.
Road Dust Suppressants Compared 88
W, P.E. 13

Baxter, T.E.;
Use of Laboratory Methods to Quantify Dust Trans., Soc. Of Min. Engr. Of
Lane, D.D. Cuscino, T.; 84
Suppressants Effectiveness AIME, 274-2001
Cowand, C, Jr.;

Larkin Laboratory 1691 N.

Calcium Chloride and Magnesium Chloride
Larkin Laboratory 86 Swede Rd. Midland Michigan
for Dust Control
48640
Evaluation of Dust Controls used on upaved
McCoy, J.F. 83 Report U.S. Bureau of Mines
haul roads

Midwest Arizona Dept of

Unpaved Road Emission Impact 91 Report
Research Institute Environmental Quality

http://www.mriresearch.org/Rese
Midwest
Fugitive Dust Source Characterization 99 archServices/Environment/Measu
Research Institute
rement/FugitiveDust.asp

Fugitive Dust Control Surface Treatments at

Minnesota Air Quality General N 1, Minnesota Pollution
Industrial Facilities: Water treatment 2002
Pollution Control March Control Age
considerations
EPA, Emissions Factors and
Estimation of PM10 dust fluxes from Research Triangle Park,
Inventor Group, Office of Air
MND Associates emissions factors for different fugitive dust 99 NC; MND Associates,
Quality Planning and
sources. Toronto
Standards

89
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Nieutwstadt,
Model Experiments of the Resuspension Aerosol Sci. Technol 19, 330-
Mollinger, A.M F.T.M.; Scarlett, 93
Caused By Road Traffic 338
B.
USDA Forest Stabilizing unpaved roads with calcium Transportation Research National Research
Monlux, S. 2003
Service chloride Record Council
Niemeirer,
A Stochastic Framework for Estimating University of California
Morey, Jennifer Debbie,
Unpaved Road VMT for PM10 Mobile 2001 Davis Dept. of Civil and
E. Limanond,
Emissions Inventories Env. Engineering
Thirayoot
PM10 Emissions From Public Unpaved Roads
in Rural Arizona. Transactions, PM 10 Air and Waste Management
Muleski, G.E Stevens, K.M. 92
Standards and Nontraditional Particulate Association
Source Controls
Definition of the Long-Term Control
Muleski, G.E. Efficiency of Chemical Dust Suppressants 85 EPA EPA
applied to unpaved roads

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Chemical

Muleski, G.E. 87 EPA EPA
Dust Suppressants on Unpaved Roads

Extended Evaluation of Unpaved Road Dust

Muleski, G.E. 84 EPA EPA
Suppressants in the Iron and Steel Industry

New Mexico Implementation and Determination of Best New Mexico

Environment Available Control Measures for Reducing Environment www.nmenv.state.nm.us/aqb/dus
2000
Department - Air Windblown Dust from Manmade Sources in Department - Air Quality t_control.html
Quality Bureau Dona Ana County, California Bureau

Branson, J.R.;
The Effects of Vechicle Activity on Particle J. Aerosol Sci. 20, 1425-
Nicholoson, K.W. Giess, P.; 89
Resuspension 1428
Cannell, M.
North Carolina Division
North Carolina Cost Analysis Chart Agenda Item 18 of Air Quality
http://daq.state.nc.us/search.sht
Division of Air Economic Analysis of Particulates From 2003 Department of
ml
Quality Fugitive Dust Emission Sources Environmental and
Natural Resources
Reasonable Available Control Measures for
Ohio EPA 80 Report EPA
Fugitive Dust Sources

90
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Page, S.J.;
Surface Mine Dust Control Chapter 5
Organiscak, J.A. Cecala, A.B.; Surface Mine Dust Control
(includes Haul road dust control)
Kissell, F.N.
Orlemann, J. A. Fugitive Dust Control Technology 83 EPA EPA
Strength and Density Modification of University of Wyoming,
Thomas, V.;
Palmer, James T Unpaved Road Soils Due to Chemical 95 Department of Civil and
Boresi, Arthur P.
Additives, MPC Report No. 95-39 Architectural Engineering

Van Ed, J; J. Potential Environmental Impacts of Dust

http://www.epa.gov/nerles
Piechota, T. (ed) Batista, K. Stave, Suppressants: "Avoiding Another Times 2002` UNLV, EPA (600/R-04/031) UNLV, EPA
D. James Beach" Expert Panel Summary, EPA d1/cmb/pdf/dust.pdf

No More Brownouts:Dust Abatement in Marine Corps

Prevatt, C.V. Hart, D. E. 2003 Marine Corps Gazette
Support of Tactical Helicopter Operations Association

Guidelies for Development of Control

Richard, George Safriet, D. W. Strategies in Areas with Fugitive Dust 77 EPA EPA
Problems
Mangold, H. A; Cost and benefits of road dust control in
Roberts, J.W. 75 JAPCA
Rossano, A. T. Seattle's Industrial valley
Cost and Benefits of Road Dust Control in Journal of the Air Pollution
Roberts, J.W.
Seattle's Industrial Industrial Valley Association, Vol 25 #9
Cost-effectiveness of dust controls used on
Rosbury, K. D Zimmer, R. A. 83 Report U.S. Bureau of Mines
unpaved haul roads. Vol I.

Cost-effectiveness of dust controls used on

Rosbury, K. D 83 Report (contract J0218021) U.S. Bureau of Mines
unpaved haul roads. Vol II (data).

Effectiveness and Environmental Impact of

Road Dust Suppressants. MPC-94-28. Mountain Plains Consortium http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members
Sanders, T. G. 93
Fargo, ND. Mountain Plains Consortium, Proceedings /2003/111-16/innovations.html
USDOT.
Ado, J.Q.;
Relative Effectiveness of Road Dust Journal of Transportation
Sanders, T. G. Ariniello, A.; 97
Suppressants Engineering, Sept/Oct
Heiden, W.F.
South Dakota Dept of
NEAP Controls (BACM determination for http://www.state.sd.us/denr/DES/
Environment and
Schultz, Brad Industrial Fugitive Dust Sources-Unpaved 2004 AirQuality/NEAP/neapcontrols.ht
Natural Resources Air
Road Control) m
Quality
Seton, Johnson Portland Road Dust Demonstration Project. Report - Dept of Public
83 City of Portland
and Odell, Inc Appendix. Works

91
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Singer, Rexford
Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources 88 EPA
D.
Singer, Rexford Environmental Evaluation of Dust Bureau of Mines,
82 EPA
D. Suppressants USDInterior
Hydrologic Impacts of Disturbed Lands Journal of Hydrologic
Singh, Vivek
Treated with Dusts Suppressants Engineering

Gravel Roads- Maintenance and Design South Dakota Local

http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/gra
Skorseth, K. Selim, A. Manual Section IV. Dust Control and 2000 Transportation Assistance
velroads/sec4.pdf
Stabilization Program (SD LTAP)

Solving the Next Impediment to Coal Bed

Steward, M.,
States, J. Methane Development in the Powder River 2004
Brown, T.
Basin (Abstract)
Journal of Transportation
Thomas, S., Experimental Road Dust Measurement
2000 Engineering,
Addo, J. Device
November/December

Transactions of the Institution

Benchmarking and Management of Fugitive
of Mining and Metallurgy,
Thompson, R.J. Visser, A.T. Dust Emissions from Surface-Mine Haul 2002
Section A: Mininng Industry,
Roads
111 28-34

Coal-the future, 12th

International Confrence on
Evaluation and Modeling of Haul Road Dust
Thompson, R.J. Visser, A.T. 2000 Coal Research (Sandt on:
Palliatives
S.A.I.M.M., 2000) 53-60.
Symp. Series S26
Transportation Research
Mangement of Unpaved Road Networks on
Thompson, R.J. Visser, A.T. 99 Record (TRR) 1652, 1999,
Opencast mines
217-24
Mine Haul Road Fugitive Dust Emission and J. Mine Vent.Soc.S.Afr.,
Thompson, R.J. Visser, A.T. 2001
Exposure Characterisation 54(1), 18-30

The Reduction of the Safety and Health Pretoria: Safety in Mines Collieries Sub-
Thompson, R.J. Visser, A.T. Risks Associated with the Generation of Dust 2000 Research Advisory Committee Final Report
on Strip Coal Mine Haul Roads Committee, 2000 for Project COL 467

Inspector's Guide for fugitive dust emission

Torrez, Lucien sources: causes and control techniques, 84 EPA EPA
recommendations and examples

92
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Dust Suppression with Less Water: Pollution US Dept of Energy

U. S. Dept of
Prevention Case Study (using Soil-Sement) US Dept Energy Fact Sheet Office of Environmental
Engergy
Los Alamos Ntl. Laboratory Mgmt

U.S. Bureau of Cost-Effectiveness of Dust Controls Used on Report for U.S.B.M. by

83
Mines Unpaved Mine Haul Roads Pedco Environmental Inc.
UMA Engineers, Roads and Transportation
Guidelines for Cost Effective Use and
Planners and 87 Association of Canada
Application of Dust Palliatives
Surveyors (RTAC)
Case Study: Coal Mine Road Dust is
Undlin, David Controlled in 12-mile Trial with DusTreat 2003 GE Betz
Program
GE Betz Western Energy Company Study,
Undlin, David 2003 GE Betz
Haul Road Dust Control Status
Jacobs Ranch, GE Betz Study on Dust,
Undlin, David 2003 GE Betz
Graphs
Chapter 8 Transportation Conformity
US Dept of US Dept of http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environm
Reference Guide - PM10 Nonattainment and 2003 Federal Highway Adm
Transportation Transportation ent/conformity/ref_guid/partii.htm
Maintenance Areas

Pardyjak, E.R.; Vehichle-Generated Fugitive Dust Transport: Atmos.Environ., 37(16), 2295-

Veranth, J.M 2003
Seshadri, G. Analytic Models and Field Study 2303

Friends of the Earth

An environmental assessment of alkylphenol www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/e
Warhurst, Michael 1995 Report (England, Wales and
ethoxylates and alkylphenols thoxylates_alkylphenols.pdf
Northern Ireland)
Chow, J.C.;
Effectiveness Demonstration of Fugitive Dust
Gillies, J.; Air and Waste Management
Watson, J.G. Control Methods for Public Unpaved Roads 96
Rodgers, C.F.; Assoc. 1996 Proceeding
and Shoulders
Langston, R.
Air Pollution Engineering Van Nostrand Reinhold,
Watson, J.G. Fugitive Dust Emissions 2000
Manual NY

Reconciling Urban Fugitive Dust Emissions

Inventory and Ambient Source Contributions Desert Research Institute Desert Research
Watson, J.G. Chow, Judith 2000
Estimates: Summary of Current Knowledge Document 6110.4F Institute
and Needed Research

93
 Name of Journal or
Primary Author Authors Title Year Name of Publisher URL
Publication

Establishment of Acceptable Dusting Criteria USDA Forest Service

Wellman, E.A. Barraclough, S. 72 Winema National Forest
for Aggregate Surface Roads Administration Study 7110

The Contribution of Road Sanding and

Wittorff, D.N. Salting Material on Amibient PM 10 94 A&WMA and US EPA
Concentrations
Wrage, R Shouse, S. Dust Control on Rural Roads Report Iowa State Extension
McDonald, J;
Hayes, T; Chow,
Northern Front Range Air Quality Study: Desert Research
Zielinska, B J.C.; Fujita, E.M. 98 DRI Report
Volume B Source Measurement Institute
and Watson, J.
G.

A look at dust control and road stabilizers A look at dust control and road
2000 Better Roads
(buyer's guide - several summarizing articles) stabilizers

University of Kansas
Rural Transp. Fact Sheet No.
Controlling Dust on Unpaved Roads 89 Transp. Ctr. Lawrence
84-02. T2 Program
Kansas
Controlling Dust: Which Materials should you
98 Better Roads, v68, n 6
use?
Dust Contol, Road Maintenance Costs Cut
90 Public Works, Vol. 121. No.6
With Calcium Chloride
Dust control fights erosion 92 Better Roads, v 62, n 10
Guidelines for use and application of dust
90 Public Works, Vol 21, n 1
palliatives
How to control dust on an unpaved, unstable
Better Roads, v68, n 6
road
Review of recent developments in surface Highways and transportation,
92
dressing vol 39, n 9

94