OCR error (C:\Conversion\JobRoot\000007P6\tiff\2000SUEM.tif): Unspecified error ------- ------- ELKINS MINE DRAINAGE POLLUTION CONTROL DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Ronald D. Hill Chief, Mine Drainage Pollution Control Activities, Robert A. Taft Water Research Center, Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, U.S. Department of the Interior, Cincinnati, Ohio. SUMMARY In 1964, a mine drainage pollution control demonstration project was under- taken near Elkins, West Virginia. The area contained a large drift mine (3,000 acres) which had been extensively surface mined along the outcrop. The objective of the project was to determine the effect on the water quality of "air" sealing and divert- ing water away from the underground mine and reclaiming the surface mines. Some 450 subsidence holes were filled, over 12.5 miles of surface mines were reclaimed and 101 seals constructed. Approximately 640 acres of land were disturbed during reclamation which were revegetated in the spring of 1968. This paper reports the effectiveness of the reclamation work for the first two years following construc- tion. The reclamation and revegetation of the surface mines and refuse piles have shown some benefits, however, an equilibrium condition has not been established and the long term effects have yet to be determined. While some areas have shown trends of continued improvement, others showed an improvement the first year, followed by some deterioration the second year. Air sealing, under the conditions at Elkins was unsuccessful, except for one site, the oxygen concentration behind the seal has not decreased and the pollution loads have not decreased. For the combined watershed of Roaring Creek and Grassy Run there has been over a 1,500 ton decrease in the acidity load for the base year 1966. However, none of the streams in either watershed has returned to its unpolluted state. INTRODUCTION An authoritative report on acid mine drainage was issued by the Committee of Public Works of the U.S. House of Representatives.^1) Recognizing the extent of the problem, the report pointed out that elimination of this form of pollution would restore vast quantities of water for municipal and industrial use, propagation of fish, aquatic life, and wildlife, recreational purposes, and other uses. After pointing out that most of the various methods developed to abate acid mine drainage had been abandoned because of high costs and technical failure in field applications, the Committee concluded that mine sealing was the most promising method. The report recommended: (l) a sealing program directed at sealing abandoned mine shafts and other drainage openings, (2) a stepped-up research program by fed- eral, state, and interstate organizations to develop other abatement measures, and (3) a stream and acid flow regulation program employed where sealing or other methods are unable to sufficiently reduce the acid content of the stream to meet water qual- ity requirements for all legitimate purposes. The report also called for a demonstration program to evaluate mine sealing procedures and results, suggesting that the work be done in "three appropriate water- sheds containing between 50 and 100 abandoned coal mines each from which acid water ------- 285. is draining." Funds for the demonstration grant, $5 million, were authorized by Congress in 1964* The work was to be under the direction of the Water Supply and Pollution Con- trol Program of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the forerunner of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA) which later was transferred to the U.S. Department of the Interior. Other participating agencies were the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM), U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (USSFW), and West Virginia (W. Va.) agencies in charge of mining, water pollution, and reclamation. In March 1964, the first demonstration project site was selected in the Roaring Creek-Grassy Run watershed near Elkins, West Virginia. The area contained a large drift mine (3,000 acres) and a number of smaller underground mines (Figure 1). The outcrop had been extensively surface mined and contained over 1,000 acres of disturbed land. The surface mines had intercepted the underground mine workings of the large mine and were diverting water into it. Since the coal dipped from the Roaring Creek watershed toward the Grassy Run watershed, water was diverted from one watershed to the other through the underground mine. Upon passing through the underground mine the water flushed out pollutants. Roaring Creek and Grassy Run were discharging over 12 tons per day of acidity to the Tygart River. Chemical characteristics of the two streams are presented in Table I. TABLE I Water Quality Characteristicsa pHD Acidity, (Hot), Ca«>3 Iron, Total Iron, Ferrous Sulfate Hardness, CaC03 Calcium, CaC03 Aluminum Specific Conductance0 Flowd Grassy mg/1 2.55 656 110 4 992 446 293 38 1,723 6 Run Tons/day 10.6 1.8 0.06 16.0 7.2 4.7 0.6 ___ ___ Roaring Creek mg/1 3.3 no 5 1 168 99 76 12 530 40 Tons/day 1.8 0.08 0.01 2.7 1.6 1.2 0.2 -_. a. Average values for period March 1964 to June 1966 b. Unit not mg/1, median value c. Units - micromhos per cm d. Units - cubic feet per second The demonstration project was carried out in three phases: (1) site selec- tion, preconstruction evaluation, and reclamation planning, (2) construction of mine seals and regrading and revegetation of surface mines, and (3) project evaluation. Phase 1, begun in March 1964, and completed in July 1966, was devoted to water quality surveillance (FWPCA); stream gaging (USGS); surface mapping, investigation of mine conditions, and designing control measures and reclamation planning (USBM); securing land permits (W. Va.) and awarding the construction contract (FWPCA, USBM). Sealing of the mines and concurrent reclamation measures (Phase 2) were begun in July 1966 and terminated in September 1967. Disturbed areas were revegetated in the spring of 1968. Phase 3, evaluation of the effectiveness of mine sealing and reclamation meas- ures is continuing. ------- 286. S820-.' Demonstration Project No. I Randolph County, West Virginia FIGURE 1 LEGEND « SUBWATCRSHED C ' Core drilling site yM Permanent streamgage ft quality monitor /\ Temporary streamgage ( j Stream quality sampling point : ':'' Stripmine disturbance A Mine entrance ------- 287. CONTROL MEASURES The following control measures were carried out: 1. Air sealing of the underground mine: Since oxygen is necessary for the oxidation of pyrite and the production of iron and acidity, preventing oxygen from reaching the pyrite should reduce or eliminate acid pollution. Air sealing was to be accomplished by filling all bore holes, subsidence holes, and other air passages into the mine. "Wet" mine seals, which allow water to leave the mine, but prevent air from entering, were to be constructed at all openings discharging water. 2. Water diversion: Since water is the transport media for carrying acid and iron from the mining environment, reducing the amount of water passing through a surface or underground mine will reduce the amount of pollution. To prevent water from entering underground mines, subsidence holes were to be filled, streams were to be rechanneled away from mines, and "dry" seals, a solid seal through which water could not pass, were to be constructed in mine portals. 3. Burying of acid-producing spoils and refuse: Since these materials were major contributors to pollution they were to be buried in surface mine pits. 4. Surface mine reclamation: Although surface mines were to be regraded primarily to prevent water from entering the underground mine, regrading also reduces the time that water is in contact with acid-producing mate- rial in the surface mine itself. During regrading burying the highly acid material was planned. 5. Revegetation: All disturbed areas were to be revegetated to prevent erosion and stabilize the backfills. The design of the seals and various types of backfills used on the project has been reported previously.(4) The project was not completed. Those mines on the south half of the Roaring Creek Watershed, upstream of Coalton (see Figure 1) were reclaimed as planned. How- ever, no reclamation took place north of Coalton in the Roaring Creek Watershed and none took place in the Grassy Run Watershed. Thus, any improvement in water quality would occur in the southern subwatersheds of Roaring Creek. It was also possible that some improvement might occur in Grassy Run since the reclamation in Roaring Creek should have diverted water from the underground mine which drained to Grassy Run. A summary of the work performed is presented in Table II. TABLE II Reclamation Work Performed Reclamation Surface Mines Reclaimed Backfill, Total Subsidence Holes Filled Mine Seals Grass Planted Only Grass Hydroseeded Only Trees Planted Only Hydroseed Grasa and Trees Planted Grass and Trees Planted 12.5 Miles 3.6 Million Cubic Yards 450 101 322 16 57 195 120 Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres ------- 288. RESULTS The climatic conditions play an important role in the evaluation of pollution control techniques. Not only are there the seasonal variations in flow volumes and concentration (see Figures 2-5) but, variations between years. For example, during 1964 and 1965, the two years before reclamation, the acidity concentration of Roaring Creek at its mouth was 88 mg/1 and 141 mg/1, respectively, and the acid load (March - December period) was 1,289 tons and 1,311 tons respectively. The difference between these years was that the precipitation in 1964 was 41.58 inches as compared to 34-06 inches in 1965 (Table III). Thus, the choice of a base year becomes critical in making evaluations. This important point should be kept in mind during the following discussion. Due to the complexity of the situation in the reclaimed area, it was divided into five subwatersheds for evaluation. The location of each monitoring point for a subwatershed is shown in Figure 1. In general, the monitoring point was at the mouth of a small stream system. Each subwatershed is described below. Subwatershed RT8F-1 - A sampling point at the mouth of this 202-acre subwater- shed was used to measure the effect of reclamation on 49 acres of surface mines. One underground mine discharge is located in the area and it has not been sealed. During wet periods the underground discharge contributed only a small per- centage of the pollution load (from 1 to 25 percent) while during dry periods (summer and late fall) it often contributed 100 percent of the pollution load. Because of the variable contribution from the underground mine, determining the effectiveness of the surface mine reclamation is difficult. In our analysis, we have assumed that the con- tribution from the underground mine was the same for both the before and after periods and thus, a constant factor (in actuality the underground discharge has had a slightly lower acidity and sulfate concentration following reclamation). The data collected at this sampling point are summarized in Figure 2 and Table IV. During 1968, there was a marked improvement in the acidity and sulfate concen- trations. However, during 1969, the concentration levels have increased over those of 1968, but have not reached those of the pre-reclamation period. This increase may partially be due to the reduced affect of the Time that was applied in 1968 during revegetation. If the present trend continues, the water quality may approach that of pre-reclamation periods. The acid and sulfate load during 1968 was significantly reduced below that of 1966, but during 1969, the iron and sulfate load had returned to levels near or above the 1966 level and only acidity still showed a significant reduction. Subwatershed RT 9-2 - This 692 acre watershed contained 160 acres of surface mines (23 percent of land area) all of which were reclaimed. One underground dis- charge is located in the watershed, however, its acid load contribution is minor (less than one percent). In Table V and Figure 3, the data collected at the mouth of the watershed are summarized. The data show that during 1968 and 1969, the concentration of acidity and sul- fate was less than the pre-reclamation period of 1964 - 1966. During 1969, there has been a small increase in acidity over 1968 and a small decrease in sulfate. These latter changes are well within a range that can be expected, due to yearly variations. The importance in the choice of a base year is apparent from the load data presented in Table V. If the dry year 1965 is chosen, the acidity load decreased much less in 1968 and 1969 than if 1966 is chosen, which had similar precipitation to 1968 and 1969. The sulfate load was higher during 1968 than during the pre-reclamation years, however, in 1969 the load was less. These data may indicate that a large portion of the sulfates was leached from the freshly disturbed soil in 1968 and that a continued decrease in sulfate can be expected. ------- 289. M > g -rl M 5 -> O, O *rt u n I. HH CO O O 8 «0 71 o "Eg o *< O O o *: n o> II ------- 290. TABLE IV Summary Data Subwatershed RT8F-1 Mean Concentration Mg/1 (S.D.a) Before Reclamation 1965 - 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 Load, tons Before Reclamation 1965 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 a. Standard Deviation b. Incomplete Data Summary Mean Concentration Mg/1 (S.D.a) Before Reclamation 1964 - 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 Load, tons Before Reclamation 1965 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 Acidity 199 (78) 74 (3D 123 (33) b 39 12.5 23.7 TABLE V Data Subwatershed RT Acidity 178 (63) 86 (28) 96 (26) IB? 243 153 331 Iron 19 (12) 10 (5) 16 (8) b 4.7 1.6 4-5 9-2 Iron 5 (2) 4 (1.4) 5 (1.8) 6.4 7.5 7.2 8.0 Sulfate 290 (86) 159 (37) 211 (70) b 52.1 26.0 64.5 Sulfate 313 (105) 225 (64) 208 (90) 338 436 450 268 a. Standard Deviation ------- 291. . E 400 300 200 100 0 40 30 20 10 0 400 300 200 100 0 I ACIDITY. CaC03 TOTAL IRON SULFATE AFTER RECLAMATION I 1965 1966 1967 FIGURE 2 1968 1969 RUNOFF CHARACTERISTICS WATERSHED RT8F 1 ------- 292. 350 300 ^ 250 E £ 200 C3 CJ * 150 100 50 0 M E . 10 o ae 0 500 ~ 400 a* B - 300 ACIDITY. CaC03 100 BEFORE RECLAMATION TOTAL IRON AFTER RECLAMATION j_ 1965 1966 1967 1968 FIGURE 3 RUNOFF CHARACTERISTICS WATERSHED RT9 2 1969 ------- 293- Subwater»hed RT 9-23 - This 3,749 acre watershed contained 256 acres of suf- face mines (7 percent of land area) which were reclaimed. One insignificant under- ground mine discharge was present in the area. A summary of the water quality is presented in Table VI and Figure 4' The concentration data as illustrated in Figure 4 are difficult to interpret. Each year there is a sharp increase in concentration during the summer when the flow rate is low, with the exception of 196? which had somewhat higher rainfall. Overall, as seen in Table VI, there has been a decrease in concentration from the prereclama- tion period of 1964 - 1966 and a longtem trend of a smaller concentration of acidity and sulfate. The load data show that the 1969 loads are less than for either 1965 or 1966. TABLE VI Summary Data Subwatershed RT 9-23 Mean Concentration Mg/1 (S.D.a) Acidity Iron Sulfate Before Reclamation 1964 - 1966 100 (62) 50) 163 (97) After Reclamation 1968 65 (48) 5 (4) 140 (128) 1969 56 (30) 4 (2) 84 (40) Loadj Tons Before Reclamation 1965 446 33 792 1966 653 46 979 After Reclamation 1968 429 29 844 1969 316 23 525 a. Standard Deviation Subwatershed RT 6-20 - This 211 acre watershed contained 45 acres of surface mines (21 percent of land area) and two underground mine discharges. As shown in Figure 5 and Table VII, there has been no improvement in the water quality, in fact, the water has degraded in quality and the long term trend indicates it will get even worse. An analysis was made to determine the source of the pollutants (Table VIII). Before reclamation approximately 54 percent of the pollution load came from the under- ground mines and the remainder from the surface mines. Following reclamation in 1968, there was a 91 percent decrease in the acid, 89 percent in iron and 33 percent in sulfate attributable to surface mines. At the same time there has been over 100 per- cent increase in these pollutants from the underground mines. In 1969, the acid load from surface mines increased over 1968, but was still 55 percent less than 1966. The iron load also raised slightly while the sulfate load decreased slightly. Both the underground mines have had their portals sealed with "wet11 seals. However, the mines are not sealed to air movement, as the oxygen content of the atmosphere within the mine is the same as without. Air probably moves into the mine through subsidence holes, cracks, etc., in the overburden. Since over 75 percent of the pollution came from one of the mines, RT 6-12, a further analysis of that ------- 500 _ 400 300 200 100 06 E 1965 966 1967 1968 FIGURE 4 RUNOFF CHARACTERISTICS WATERSHED RT9 23 1969 ------- 295. 1969 FIGURE 5 RUNOFF CHARACTERISTICS WATERSHED RT 6 20 ------- 296. TABLE VII Summary Data Subwatershed RT 6-20 Mean Concentration Mg/1 (S.D.a) Before Reclamation 1964 - 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 Load ^ tons/day Before Reclamation 1965 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 Acidity 486 (183) 613 (173) 783 (227) 113 149 183 183 Iron Sulfate 91 (40) 616 (225) 148 (43) 686 (177) 232 (101) 881 (236) 21 152 33 168 48 211 55 216 a. Standard Deviation TABLE VIII Pollution Acidity, Total Underground Mines Surface Mines* Iron, Total Underground Mines Surface Mines* Sulfate, Total Underground Mines Surface Mines* Loads and their Source - Subwatershed RT 6-20 Before Reclamation Percent Tons of Total 148.7 80.5 54 68.2 46 33.2 18.3 55 14.9 45 168.0 ££7 53 n A Q i n yo.j 47 After Reclamation 1963 1959 Percent Percent Tons of Total Tons of Total 183.8 - 182.9 167.5 91 152.1 83 6.3 9 30.8 1? 48.0 - 54.5 46.3 96 50.6 92 1.7 4 3.9 8 211.3 - 215.9 169.7 80 168.2 77 51.6 20 47.7 23 * Considered to be the difference between underground mine load and total load. ------- 297. discharge was made (Table IX). A slight increase in the concentration of pollutants and flow volume has occurred with the exception of aluminum. No explanation for this increase has been obtained. The water quality from the second "sealed" mine has shown no improvement either. In summary, the surface mine reclamation appears to have reduced the pollutants from that source, while on the other hand the underground mine seals are ineffective and for some unknown reason the pollution load is even greater than in the past. TABLE IX Water Quality Underground Mine Drainage RT 6-12 Before Sealing ^ Mean S.D.* Flow, cfs PH Acidity, CaC03, Mg/1 Iron, Mg/1 Sulfate Hardness, CaC(>3, Mg/1 Aluminum, Mg/1 0.12? 2.6 977 238 1,002 231 64 0.169 _ 533 157 536 165 29 After Sealing^2) Mean S.D.* 0.16 2.8 1,031 291 1,055 327 50 0.14 _ 440 135 386 106 22 * Standard Deviation (1) 23 Samples, March 64 - June 66 (2) 44 Samples, September 6? - July 69 Subwatershed RT 6-21 - The control site is located at the mouth of Kittle Run, one of the worst areas in the project. The streambed had been completely destroyed during mining when the overburden was deposited in the creek. Surface runoff and underground mine drainage in the headwaters were partly directed into underground mines. Thus, the sample site at the mouth of the creek was not indicative of the total pollution contribution. During reclamation 140 acres of surface mines were regraded and planted, several refuse piles and garbage dumps were buried, six clay seals were installed in deep mine openings and two wet seals were constructed. The streambed also was reestab- lished, thus directing all of the runoff past the control point. In Table X, the data collected at the control site are reported. It should be remembered that the before reclamation data do not show the total pollution load of the watershed since part of the water was directed into the underground mine upstream from the control point. Thus, the load values would have been greater than those reported. In Table XI, the source of pollution following reclamation is reported. It is interesting to note that even though the area contributing to the discharge from the watershed was greater after reclamation, the acid and sulfate load was less. The volume of water discharged increased from 18.35 million cubic feet in 1966, to 22.55 million cubic feet in 1968, but decreased to 16.08 in 1969. At the same time the pollution load from the underground mines remained the same or increased. It can be concluded from these data that the reclamation of the surface mines and the burial of the refuse piles resulted in a reduction in pollution. The increase in surface mine contribution from 1968 to 1969 may be due to normal yearly variations or show a decreased benefit of the lime applied to the soil during revegetation. The discharge from underground mine RT 6-9 has increased in volume (see Table XII) and decreased in acid, iron, and sulfate. Although the concentration has decreased, the increase in flow has resulted in an increase in the pollution load (Table XI and XII). ------- 298. TABLE X Summary Data Subwatershed RT 6-21 Mean Concentration Mg/1 (S.D.a) Before Reclamation13 1965 - 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 Acidity 1,555 (400) 1,12? (241) 1,060 (227) Iron 328 (85) 309 (64) 330 (108) Sulfate 1,768 (432) 1,179 (240) 1,243 (309) Load, Tons Before Reclamation^ 1965 1966 After Reclamation 1968 1969 a. Standard Deviation. b. The before and after 684 868 683 575 reclamation data are not dir 148 175 192 183 ectly comparable, 829 944 737 652 because some o the pollution load developed in the watershed prior to reclamation was diverted to the underground mine and thus, did not pass the control point. TABLE XI Pollution Loads And Their Sources Subwatershed RT 6-21 Acidity, Total Mine RT 6-9 Mine RT 6-23 Total Underground Surface Mines Iron, Total Mine RT 6-9 Mine RT 6-23 Total Underground Surface Mines Sulfate, Total Mine RT 6-9 Mine RT 6-23 Total Underground Surface Mines 1966 Tons 868 59 242 301 ** 175 14 54 68 *# 944 79 268 347 «* 1968 Tons 683 266 246 512 171* 192 72 64 136 56* 737 248 274 522 215* * Assumed to be difference between total Percent of Total 38 36 74 26 37 33 70 30 - 33 37 70 30 1969 Tons 575 221 163 384 191* 183 62 51 113 70* 652 220 194 414 238* and underground. Percent of Total _ 38 28 66 34 - 33 27 61 39 33 29 63 27 *# Cannot be determined because not all water in watershed drained past control point during pre-reclamation. ------- 299. The cause of the increased flow has not been determined. Samples of the air behind the "wet" seal contained the same concentration of oxygen as the air outside the mine, thus, air must have access to the mine. Mine RT 6-23 also had no reduction in the oxygen content inside the "wet" seal. An increase in flow was recorded at this mine (Table XII). The acid, iron, and sul- fate concentrations have been reduced. Thus, an increase in flow and a decrease in concentration results in the pollution load from the mine being approximately the same for both the before and after period (Table XI and XII). Mine Seals - Eleven "wet" seals were constructed in the large 2,000 acre under- ground mine complex and one in a small isolated mine. The sealing of the large mine was not completed. All of the portals on the south half of the mine were sealed, but several were left open on the north half. The subsidance over large parts of the mine was not corrected. Thus, it is not surprising that air samples collected from behind the "wet" seals contained the same oxygen concentration as the air outside the mine. The quality and quantity of water discharging from nine mine openings have been mon- itored and the results reported in Table XII. The first eight openings, reported in Table XII, were in the large 2,000 acre mine. The data have an overall trend that indicates the concentration of acidity and sulfate has reduced slightly and the flow increased, resulting in an overall increase or no change in the pollution load. The concentration figures shown are averages and the actual data varied to such a degree that it is questionable if there are any actual changes due to mine sealing. The increase in flow noted at several sites probably is due to better measurements of flow after reclamation. Before reclamation, there were often seeps at the base of highwalls and toes of spoils that could not be measured. As a result of reclamation this water was forced out the main portal. Mine RT 9-11 was a small isolated mine (only a few acres) and all its known openings had been sealed. Unlike the large mine, it was felt that a better than aver- age effort had been extended to seal off all air entrances to the mine. As seen in Table XIII, the oxygen content within the mine had been reduced, but not eliminated. During the latter months of 1969, a marked increase in the oxygen content occurred. No explanation has been found for this happening. A marked reduction in acid and sulfate concentration occurred shortly after the mine was sealed, even before the oxygen concentration was reduced. This reduction is felt to be due to a change in the hydraulics of the mine, since two feet of water were ponded in it as a result of the seal, and not a reduction in acid formation. The quality of the water has been fairly constant since the initial decrease and has appeared to reach an equilibrium. CONCLUSION The Elkins Mine Drainage Demonstration Project has produced both encouraging and discouraging results. The reclamation and revegetation of surface mines and refuse piles have resulted in a decrease in the pollution load from that source. Not all the changes occur overnight and several years may be required before all of the residual pollutants are leached from the reclaimed spoil. Soil samples col- lected from the spoil indicated that a reserve of 2,000 pounds per acre of sulfate remains to be leached in the upper six inches. In some areas the pollution load the second year after reclamation was higher than the first. This change may be due to normal yearly variations or to the decreased effect of the lime applied during re- vegetation. The air sealing of underground mines to eliminate all oxygen cannot be accom- plished under the conditions encountered at Elkins. Even under the best conditions the oxygen was reduced to only seven percent. With each change in barometric pressure, air moves in or out of the mine. In a large complex mine with a tendency for subsidance, no reduction can be expected. Air sealing as practiced at Elkins was not successful. ------- 300. TABLE XII Characteristics of the Discharge Prom Underground Mines Before (1966) and After Air Sealing Mine Seal Number RT 6-9 RT 6-23 RT 6-12 RT 6A-1 RT 6-3 RT 6-6b RT 6-5 RT 5-2 RT 9-Hc RT 6-9 RT 6-23 RT 6-12 RT 6A-1 RT 6-3^ RT 6-6° RT 6-5 RT 5-2 RT 9-llc a. Bulkhead Acidity Sulfate 1966 1968 1969 . 1966 1968 Concentration, Mg/1 1,958 1,615 1,615 2,740 1,494 1,942 1,455 1,312 2,114 1,56? 977 1,031 955 1,002 1,055 712 437 474 586 509 21? 195 181 427 412 264 2,193 2,422 408 2,022 307 21? 225 486 425 837 664 - 1,147 799 591 331 348 1,035 685 Load Tons/Year 59 266 221 79 248 242 246 163 268 274 65 129 135 68 136 17 11 6 10 13 20 22 23 38 45 25 39 18 22 34 240 171 172 399 350 118 119 & 81 159 18 16 16 26 33 seal constructed September 1969. b. The concentration mas lower and volume higher du. 1969 1,608 1,560 1,098 520 358 2,380 412 a 674 220 194 152 6 51 17 315 a 30 Discharge 1966 1968 1969 Million Cubic Ft. Per Year 1 5.5 4.5 4-3 5.7 4.1 4.1 4.5 4.8 0.6 0.8 0.4 3.4 3.9 4.7 2.3 0.8 0.2 27.9 27.7 24.7 4.5 6.6 a 0.9 1.5 1.4 ring 1966 because sirface runoff was measured along with the mine discharge. All mine seals, but RT 9-11 are into the 2,000 acre mine, RT 9-11 is into a small isolated mine. ------- 301. TABLE nil Effectiveness of Mine Seal RT 9-11 Before Sealingb (Mean) Minimum After Sealing Oct. 67 Nov. 67 Dec. 6? Jan. 63 Feb. 63 March 68 April 68 May 68 June 68 July 68 Aug. 68 Sept. 68 Oct. 68 Nov. 68 Dec. 68 Jan. 69 Feb. 69 March 69 April 69 May 69 June 69 July 6.9 Aug. 69 Sept. 69 Oct. 69 Nov. 69 Dec. 69 Oxygen Within Mine, Percent -j.-.r _ 9.1* -.. 7.8* -._ _ 8.8* -.,. 10.8* -.-,-!- 7.0* . ___ 7.2* 7.6* ..... ..,,..- .-... ~ - __ 7.0 .. 14.0 15-5 Acidity (Hot) auc/1 591 (65)c 438 388 365 325 315 328 332 277 344 382 354 318 360 279 247 269 373 320 357 319 332 367 339 357 432 309 340 333 PH 2.8d 3.1« 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.2 3-2 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.0 2.6 3.4 2.8 3.2 Iron, n«/l 93 (25)c 48 86 83 87 75 69 77 60 64 81 73 70 74 74 78 66 62 58 70 118 93 63 67 60 60 86 71 56 Sulfate, ntt/1 1,035 (155)C 710 835 770 785 655 700 703 625 620 660 780 665 680 630 660 590 700 585 650 602 597 770 605 685 860 700 735 600 a. Data collected by U. b. March 1964 - August S. Bureau of 196?. c. Number in parenthesis is standard d. Median value. *». Ma-vHimini valua. Mines. deviation. ------- 302. The final analysis of the effectiveness of the remedial measures is the pol- lution load of Roaring Creek and Grassy Run. In Table XIV, these loads are pre- sented. The Roaring Creek discharge shows a reduction of the acid load of 754 tons in 1968 and 781 tons in 1969, if 1966 is considered the base year. If 1965 is considered the base year, then there has been an increase in the acid load. It is suggested that 1966 is a better base year since it has a precipitation level similar to 1968 and 1969 while 1965 has approximately five inches less. Although no remedial work was performed in the Grassy Run watershed, the work performed in Roaring Creek was to have diverted water from the underground mines that drain to Graasy Run, thus, reducing the pollution load. As shown in Table XIV, there has been a reduction. Oddly, there have been no significant trends in the dis- charge from this watershed, the discharges for 1965, 1966, 1968, and 1969 being 195, 190, 248, and 166 million cubic feet per year, respectively. If 1966 was considered the base year, then there was a decrease in the acid load for the Roaring Creek - Grassy Run area of 1,50? tons in 1968 and 2,990 tons in 1969. However, even with these decreases, it is quite evident that these creeks are still highly polluted and far from being recovered. They can only return to that condition when an effective method of controlling underground discharges can be developed. TABLE XIV Pollution Load Roaring Creek and Grassy Run, 1964 - 1969 Acidity. Tons/year Sulfate. Tons/year Year Roaring Creek Grassy Run Roaring Creek Grassy Run Before Reclamation 1964 1965 1966 1,500* 2,397 3,576 l,823b 3,303 3,467 2,119a 4,131 5,416 2,775b 5,320 4,683 During Construction 1967 4,908 4,737C 7,603 6,144e After Reclamation 1968 1969 2,822 2,795 2,915 2,393 4,663 3,207 4,141 3,480 a. Only 10 months, March - December b. Only 9 months, April - December c. Only 9 months, January - September ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was a cooperative effort between the Federal Water Pollution Con- trol Administration, the State of West Virginia, and the following Federal agencies: U. S. Bureau of Mines, U.S. Geological Survey and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Soil Conservation Service, U. S. Forest Service, and Tygarts Valley Soil Conser- vation Districts, provided assistance in the revegetation aspects of the project. Mr. Lowell A. Van Den Berg, FWPCA, was responsible for the development of the field activities for this project and the coordination of the activities of the various agencies. Mr. Robert Scott was project engineer. ------- 303. REFERENCES (1) Committee of Public Works, U. S. House of Representatives, 1962, "Acid Mine Drainage," House Committee Print No. 18, 87th Congress, Second Session, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (2) Porges, R., Van Den Berg, L. A., and Ballinger, D. G., Re-Assessing an Old Pro- blem - Acid Mine Drainage. Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division, Proc. of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 92, No. SA 1, February 1966. (3) Bullard, W. E., Acid Mine Drainage Pollution Control Demonstration Program Uses of Experimental Watersheds. International Association of Scientific Hydrology, Symposium of Budapest, Extract of Publication No. 66, Budapest, Hungary, 1965. (4) Hill, Ronald D., Reclamation and Revegetation of 640 Acres of Surface Mines - Elkins. West Virginia. Proceeding International Symposium on Ecology and Revegetation of Drastically Disturbed Areas, Pennsylvania State University, August 1969 (to be released 1970). Copies available from Federal Water Pollution Control Administration. ------- , ,« -»8 X1JU- ------- |