The document provides guidance on assessing the impacts of mineral dust from quarrying operations using a qualitative source-pathway-receptor approach. It recommends including in assessments: predictions of particulate matter and dust deposition impacts at sensitive receptors considering emission sources, meteorology, dispersion, and receptor sensitivity; residual impacts and effects; and any required mitigation. The guidance advises using a matrix to determine the risk of dust impacts based on source emissions, pathway effectiveness, and receptor sensitivity/magnitude of effects. An example is provided to illustrate how the approach can be applied to specific receptors near a quarry.

1. Guidance on the Assessment of Mineral
Dust Impacts for Planning
Assessment of Disamenity Dust Impacts
using S-P-R Qualitative Approach
Jon Pullen
RPS Planning & Development

2. 1. Introduction
2
Potential Effect Causative Impacts
Effects on people Health Exposure by inhalation to
dust suspended in the air
(PM10 fraction)
Disamenity Deposition of dust out of the
air and accumulation on
surfaces, leading to soling /
staining
Effects on ecologically-sensitive habitats Deposition of dust out of the
air and accumulation on
flora, etc
• The guidance covers three potential effects from quarry dust:

3. Terminology
• Amenity: “A positive element or elements that contribute to the overall
character or enjoyment of an area. For example, open land, trees, historic
buildings and the inter-relationship between them, or less tangible factors
such as tranquillity.”
(www.planningportal.co.uk/directory_record/101/amenity)
• Disamenity: The government Planning Portal does not define disamenity,
but its literal meaning would be “impaired amenity” and from its definition of
amenity could be considered to be a negative element or elements that
detract from the overall character or enjoyment of an area.
• Impacts & Effects - The terms ‘impacts’ and ‘effects’ are often used
interchangeably in Environmental Statements and Dust Assessments. In
this document the term ‘impact’ has been used to describe a change in
suspended particulate matter (PM) concentration or dust deposition and
‘effect’ to describe the consequences of any impacts such as to human
health or disamenity
3
1. Introduction (continued)

4. 150m 200m100m50m >1 km
PM10-30
PM10
PM>30
• Transport of dust from source to receptor:
o Source – release of dust at quarry.
o Pathway – travels through the air in a particular direction and for a given
distance to…
o Receptor
• If all three elements are present in an unbroken chain then dust exposure/impact
(deposition and accumulation on surfaces) can occur
• May result in an adverse effect (disamenity)
Dust suspended in air
1. Introduction (continued)
Dust deposited
on surfaces

5. I will cover…..
2. Recommended content of the
assessment
3. The qualitative S-P-R approach
4. The Steps in the assessment
5. Example
5
1. Introduction (continued)

6. 2. Recommended Content of the Assessment
6
v. A prediction, using appropriate assessment tools, of the likely PM10 and dust
deposition impacts and resulting effects (on health, amenity, and/or ecology) at
relevant sensitive receptors, and taking into account the following:
a) The likely magnitude of dust emissions (after control by measures incorporated into the
scheme);
b) the likely meteorological characteristics at the site;
c) the dispersion and dilution afforded by the pathway to the receptors, taking into
account distance, orientation, local terrain and features, and other relevant factors;
d) the sensitivity of the receptors to disamenity, health and/or ecology effects; and
e) any likely cumulative interactions.
vi. The residual PM10 and dust deposition impacts and their disamenity, health
and/or ecology effects;
vii. A conclusion on the significance of the overall residual air quality effect, i.e.
whether “significant” or “not significant”;
viii. Where the effects are assessed as significant, appropriate further mitigation
(including modification of site design) and control measures that could allow the
proposal to proceed without causing significant adverse effects; and....

7. 3. The Qualitative S-P-R Approach
• Why?
– The collective view of the IAQM Working Group is
that it is currently inappropriate to use a
quantitative modelling approach to predict the
impact in most cases.
– This is primarily due to a lack of UK derived
emission factors for minerals sites that could be
used for modelling.
• How?
– The guidance recommends the dust impact at
relevant receptors should be predicted using a
qualitative assessment based clearly on the S-P-R
concept.
7
For the appropriate assessment tool, the guidance recommends a qualitative
risk-based approach as usually being sufficient for assessing disamenity (and
also the ecological) effects of deposited dust

8. 4. The Steps in the Assessment
Risk of Dust Impact
Receptor Sensitivity
Low Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity High Sensitivity
High Risk of Dust Impact Slight Adverse Effect Moderate Adverse Effect Substantial Adverse Effect
Medium Risk of Dust
Impact
Negligible Effect Slight Adverse Effect Moderate Adverse Effect
Low Risk of Dust Impact Negligible Effect Negligible Effect Slight Adverse Effect
Negligible Risk of Dust
Impact
Negligible Effect Negligible Effect Negligible Effect
• The fundamental matrix of exposure v effect similar to those in other S-P-R
based guidance.
• Describes magnitude of disamenity effects for receptors of different
sensitivities receiving different deposition impacts.

9. 4. The Steps in the Assessment (cont)
9
• Receptor sensitivities are categorised (Low, Medium or High) using same criteria as
IAQM construction dust guidance.
• Categorising the dust deposition impact on each receptor is more challenging. This
needs to be obtained by considering, together, the Residual Source Emissions term
and the Pathway Effectiveness.
Residual Source Emissions
Small Medium Large
Pathway Effectiveness
Highly effective pathway Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk
Moderately effective pathway Negligible Risk Low Risk Medium Risk
Ineffective pathway Negligible Risk Negligible Risk Low Risk
• It is this matrix, which delivers the dust impact, that requires “calibration” for
quarries.

10. 10
• The calibration of this matrix for quarries is where the IAQM document really
makes a contribution .
• Gives guidance on how these two terms should be categorised, drawing on the
collective experience of the Working Group. Factors covered:
4. The Steps in the Assessment (cont)
a) Magnitude of Residual Source Emissions term
i. The activities being undertaken (blasting, crushing, screening, etc.);
ii. The types and properties of the materials involved;
iii. The size of the site / area of land worked (hence the quantities of materials involved and
the number of vehicles and plant etc.);
iv. The durations and frequencies of the activities;
v. The likely effectiveness of the dust control measures incorporated into the design of the
submitted development scheme;
vi. Other mitigation measures applied to reduce or eliminate dust; and
vii. the meteorological conditions that can promote or inhibit the raising of dust at the source
(high winds and rainfall, respectively).
b) Pathway Effectiveness term
i. The distance between dust sources and receptors
ii. Orientation of receptors relative to the prevailing wind direction
iii. Terrain and physical features.

11. 4. The Steps in the Assessment (cont)
11
• Various schemes have been used by IAQM members to determine the
Source term and the Pathway term. Appendix 3 has an illustrative example.
• The example given for determining the Pathway Effectiveness term…
a) first categorises the frequency of potentially dusty winds as follows:
Frequency Category Criteria
Infrequent Frequency of winds (>5 m /s) from the direction of the dust source on all days in the year are less than 5%
Moderately frequent The frequency of winds (>5 m/s) from the direction of the dust source on all days in the year are between 5% and 12%
Frequent The frequency of winds (>5 m/s) from the direction of the dust source on all days in the year are between 12% and 20%
Very frequent The frequency of winds (>5 m/s) from the direction of the dust source on all days in the year are greater than 20%

12. 4. The Steps in the Assessment (cont)
12
b) each receptor’s distance from the dust source is then categorised
based on the criteria in the table below:
Category Criteria
Distant Receptor is between 200 and 400m from the dust source
Intermediate Receptor is between 100 and 200m from the dust source
Close Receptor is less than 100 m from the dust source

13. 4. The Steps in the Assessment (cont)
13
• The Pathway Effectiveness term then is classified using the Frequency of Potentially
Dusty Winds and the Receptor Distance from Source, as follows:
Frequency of potentially dusty winds
Infrequent
Moderately
frequent
Frequent Very frequent
1.1 Receptor
Distance
Category
Close Ineffective
1.2 Moderately
Effective
Highly Effective Highly Effective
Intermediate Ineffective
1.3 Moderately
Effective
1.4 Moderately
Effective
Highly Effective
Distant Ineffective 1.5 Ineffective
1.6 Moderately
Effective
1.7 Moderately
Effective

14. Risk of Dust Impact
Receptor Sensitivity
Low Sensitivity Medium Sensitivity High Sensitivity
High Risk of Dust Impact Slight Adverse Effect Moderate Adverse Effect Substantial Adverse Effect
Medium Risk of Dust
Impact
Negligible Effect Slight Adverse Effect Moderate Adverse Effect
Low Risk of Dust Impact Negligible Effect Negligible Effect Slight Adverse Effect
Negligible Risk of Dust
Impact
Negligible Effect Negligible Effect Negligible Effect
4. The Steps in the Assessment (cont)

15. 5. Example
15
Example of Summary of Dust Disamenity Effects at Specific Receptors
Ref Receptor details
and location
Location
relative to
nearest dust
source
Residual
Source
Emissions
Pathway
Effectiveness
Dust Impact
Risk
Receptor
Sensitivity
Magnitude of
Dust Effect
R1
Rock House
Green Lane
(Residential)
220m
“downwind”
of mineral
extraction
Medium
Moderately
Effective
Low Risk High
Slight
Adverse
Effect
R2 Wood Cottage
Kings Road
(Residential)
300m
“upwind” of
haul road
Large Ineffective Low Risk High
Slight
Adverse
Effect
R4 Village Store and
Post Office
(Commercial /
Retail)
170m
“downwind”
of mineral
processing
Large
Moderately
Effective
Medium Risk Medium
Slight
Adverse
Effect
R5
The Rec
(Playing Fields)
150m
“upwind” of
stockpiles
Medium
Moderately
Effective
Low Risk Low
Negligible
Effect
R6
Public footpath
50m
“downwind”
of mineral
processing
Large Highly Effective High Risk Low
Slight
Adverse
Effect

16. Significance of Effects
• Where the overall effect is greater than “slight adverse”, the
effect is likely to be considered significant.
• This is a binary judgement: either it is “significant” or it is “not
significant”.
• Concluding that an effect is significant should not mean, of
itself, that a development proposal is unacceptable and the
planning application should be refused; rather, it should mean
that careful consideration needs to be given to:
– the consequences;
– the scope for securing further mitigation; and
– the balance with any wider environmental, social and economic
benefits that the proposal would bring.
16

17. Questions?
17