Abstract Objectives Dust is generally sampled on a filter using air pumps, but passive sampling could be a cost-effective alternative. One promising passive sampler is the University of North Carolina passive aerosol sampler (UNC sampler). The aim of this study is to characterize and compare the UNC sampler’s performance with PM10 and PM2.5 impactors in a working environment. Methods Area sampling was carried out at different mining locations using UNC samplers in parallel with PM2.5 and PM10 impactors. Two different collection surfaces, polycarbonate (PC) and carbon tabs (CT), were employed for the UNC sampling. Sampling was carried out for 4–25 hours. Results The UNC samplers underestimated the concentrations compared to PM10 and PM2.5 impactor data. At the location with the highest aerosol concentration, the time-averaged mean of PC showed 24% and CT 35% of the impactor result for PM2.5. For PM10, it was 39% with PC and 58% with CT. Sample blank values differed between PC and CT. For PM2.5, PC blank values were ~7 times higher than those of CT, but only 1.8 times higher for PM10. The blank variations were larger for PC than for CT. Conclusions Particle mass concentrations appear to be underestimated by the UNC sampler compared to impactors, more so for PM2.5 than for PM10. CT may be preferred as a collection surface because the blank values were lower and less variable than for PC. Future validations in the working environment should include respirable dust sampling.