The United States National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, through an informal partnership with industry, labor, and the United States Mine Safety and Health Administration, has developed and tested a new instrument known as the Personal Dust Monitor (PDM). The new dust monitor is an integral part of the cap lamp that coal miners normally carry to work and provides continuous information about the concentration of respirable coal mine dust within the breathing zone of that individual. Previous laboratory testing demonstrated that there is a 95% confidence that greater than 95% of individual PDM measurements fall within +/-25% of reference measurements. The work presented in this paper focuses on the relationship between the PDM and respirable dust concentrations currently measured by a coal mine dust personal sampler unit utilizing a 10 mm Dorr-Oliver nylon cyclone. The United Kingdom Mining Research Establishment instrument, used as the basis for coal mine respirable dust standards, had been designed specifically to match the United Kingdom British Medical Research Council (BMRC) criterion. The personal sampler is used with a 1.38 multiplier to convert readings to the BMRC criterion. A stratified random sampling design incorporating a proportionate allocation strategy was used to select a sample of mechanized mining units representative of all US underground coal mines. A sample of 180 mechanized mining units was chosen, representing approximately 20% of the mechanized mining units in production at the time the sample was selected. A total of 129 valid PDM/personal sampler dust sample sets were obtained. A weighted linear regression analysis of this data base shows that, in comparison with the personal sampler, the PDM requires a mass equivalency conversion multiplier of 1.05 [95% C.I.=(1.03, 1.08)] when the small intercept term is removed from the analysis. Removal of the intercept term results in a personal sampler-equivalent concentration increase of 2.9% at a PDM measurement of 2.0 mg m(-3).

Since 1982 standard calibration materials recommended for respirable crystalline silica analysis by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) P7 Infrared Method and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) X-ray Diffraction (XRD) Analytical Method 7500 have undergone minor changes in size distribution. However, a critical assumption has been made that the crystalline silica in ambient mine atmosphere respirable dust samples has also remained essentially unchanged in particle size distribution. Therefore, this work compared recent particle size distributions of underground coal mine dust and the silica component of these dusts with estimated aerodynamic particle size distributions of calibration standard materials MIN-U-SIL 5, Berkeley 5, and SRM 1878 used by two crystalline silica analysis techniques. Dust impactor sampling data for various locations in 13 underground coal mines were analyzed for the respirable mass median aerodynamic diameters. The data suggest that the MSHA P7 method will underestimate the silica content of the sample by at most 7.4% in the median size range 0.9 to 3.6 microm, and that it is unlikely one would obtain any significant error in the MSHA P7 method analysis when the method uses Berkeley 5, MIN-U-SIL 5, or SRM 1878 as a calibration standard material. The results suggest that the NIOSH Analytical Method 7500 would be more appropriate for a dust sample that is representative of the total (no cyclone classifier) rather than the respirable airborne dust, particularly because the mass fraction in the size range below 4 microm is usually a small percentage of the total airborne dust mass. However, NIOSH Analytical Method 7500 is likely to underestimate the silica content of an airborne respirable dust sample by only 5 to 10%. The results of this study also suggest that any changes that may have occurred in the median respirable size of airborne coal mine dust are not significant enough to cause any appreciable error in the current methods used for respirable crystalline silica analysis.

No abstract

No abstract