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-
------- |