QUALI'H  IN AN AK!;A 01- ABAMlONhli MiNhS

             Robert S.  Davis                         I). R. Maneval, Ph.X
                Biologist                               Science AdvuM,'

   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency         Appalachian Regional C^r
                Region III                             Washington, D. ',.
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
      Mine drainage abatement has been the subject of research on the part of many
state and federal agencies for years.   Cooperation on such projects, also, is not
nev,   The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Appalachian Regional
Commission (ARC), for example, have cooperated on several projects in the past.
However, a project specifically to evaluate interagency cooperation is new.  In
addition, this project is ultimately aimed at more than an evaluation of cooperation,
environmental improvements accrued are the ultimate benefits.

      Most of EPA's efforts in mine drainage abatement have been in the area of
research and development and demonstration, in keeping with the laws under v,-.ich
EPA exists.  Of course, the main constraint in EPA's efforts and its predecessor
organizations has been the level of funding available to carry out abatement work
using available technology.  Technology development, however, has progressed to
the point where many alternatives are presently available.  While EPA and its
predecessor organizations have been involved with technology development and
demonstration, many other organizations, including federal, state and local  govern-
ments as well as private corporations, have contributed enormously and impressively.

      The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) was created in 1965 by the U. S.
Congress to provide planning, program and financial aid to Appalachia.  The ARC
is a unique blend of federal and state cooperation.

      Recommendations for a regional program contained in the 1963 report of the
President's Appalachian Pegional Commission (PARC) were significantly weighted
toward resource projects.  This weighting reflects several important characteristics
of the President's Commission effort.   Recommendations from the Commission for a
regional program were to be such that they would receive generally favorable
support from Congress.  At that time (summer 1963), it was easier to identify
generally acceptable program and project opportunities in the resources field,
either in terms of development or in investigation, than in other fields sucn as
health and welfare.  Organizationally, therefore, there were a larger number of
individuals and subteams directing efforts towards resource questions during the
PARC effort.  Each of the team- - water resources, forest resources, agricultural,
recreation, coal and other mineral resources, and power - was able to draw upon
a wide range of specific program and project opportunities that were available to
them.  Most of these represented specific and sometimes favored projects which
had previously been proposed -- deferred for one reason or another -- or were an
acceleration of existing activities.

      Section 205

      At present, Section 205 of the Appalachian Act authorizes programs for:
(1) the sealing and filling of voids in abandoned coal mines to prevent surface
subsidences;  (2) the extinguishment of underground and outcrop mine fires;  (.3) the
sealing of abandoned oil and gas wells; (4) the abatement of mine drainage;  (5) the
reclamation of surface mine areas and mining waste banks on public lands;  (6) the
necessary planning and engineering required for the identification, selection, and
implementation of these reclamation projects.
                             Piea.etypcto  bor de'lir. ..•


                              Do no:  typo in  this art'o


      These project^ are concentrated in or surround! tie those .irons uith TV - -nt k:L
future growth.  A major priority of this program is to reclaim  land f'.r int-'siv^.
uses such as industrial and commercial development, school site--', or -;ther -^nlic
use purposes.  Tliere is a great need throughout the Appalachian Ke>. ion for -.-><.•
creation of hazard-free lands suitable for development.  Most land in minir.r area?
is too steep for uses requiring construction and much of the  land of appro:.-: ate
slope is in river valleys and subject to flooding-   Hie scarcity of this rc-ource
has been aggravated by past mining practices which have left, in some cases, other-
wise useable land unreclaimed, covered with mountains of waste materials,  cr subj:-.t
to subsidence from underground mines.

      A wide array of work can be approved by ARC under Section 205 on prr ite
property so long as the mine problem stemmed from an abandoned deep mine.  ",nly  if
strip mined land is owned by a non-profit, private organization, etc., or  is
publically owned, can the ARC make grants for surface mine reclamation.  Or ly a
fraction of the thousands of acres of stripped unreclaimed lands in Appalac.-.ia
qualify as noted above.  Thus, the ARC efforts to date have involved mainly deep
mine reclamation work - extinguishing mine fires, mine subsidence control, refuse
pile covering, etc.

      Strip Mine Restoration

      Four basic types of surface mine reclamation projects have been supported b/
ARC to date: (1) recreation areas; (2) school sites; (3) industrial parks; and
(4) airport runway extensions.  Recreation  areas have been aided, fcr ex^-ple,  at
Moraine State Park, Pennsylvania; Jellico, Tennessee; Friendship Park, Ohi; : and
Flemington, West Virginia.  School sites have been created at Norton, Virginia;
Martinsburg, West Virginia; and Luzerne County (Votech School), Pennsylvania.
Industrial parks have been aided through ARC funds at Delano, Pennsylvania;
Coshocton, Ohio; and Dickson City, Pennsylvania.   The airport at Pittsburgh has
benefitted from an abandoned strip mine restoration project which allowed  =n
important extension on a runway.

      With this in mind, EPA decided to undertake a special project based  voon this
available technology.  This project was designed to enlist the cooperation of as
many agencies as possible, at the local, state and federal levels, and to  define
the direction for the 208 and 303(e) sections of the law in areas where mi-ing is
a part of the continuing land use.  The EPA regions are at the interface of
technology and implementing pollution control.  Sections 208 and 303 (e) describe
mechanisms regarding the planning process towards carrying this out.  Anot%er
reason, and perhaps the most important one, is the cost of abatement at abandoned
sites.  This project was designed to be an initial step towards establish.!? ; a
way for interagency cooperation using a combination of as many funding sources as
possible to hopefully further the cause of pollution abatement.

                              HISTORY OF THE PROJECT

      At the outset, EPA contacted ARC, since a closely related contract v^s being
administered at that time under an interagency agreement with EPA's Office of
Research and Development.  That contract was aimed at assessing the envirornentai
problems of the Monongahela River Basin.  Due to this, and ARC'S close tie~ with
state and local agencies in the area, EPA felt that ARC would have the greatest
amount of knowledge on the Basin.  An interagency agreement was then prepared
specifically for this project.

      For several reasons the interagency agreement is a good mechanism for a
project of this kind.  It places the project on firm footing by acting as  .A formal
contract between governmental agencies .  Cost savings are realized through the
absorption of overhead costs as part of daily operating procedures.  In addition,
specific expertise is more readily available than is usually the case when formal
contracting procedures with non-government organizations are used.
                             Please type to borti'MMn.


                              Do not  ty pe in  t In-; 'U c o

     As with any project ol' this kind, a great deal  of effort was initially
expended in locating an appropriate site.   Ln consultation witli one or t.-.o st ".cs,
several potential sites were discussed,  all  in the Ohio River Ba :n, with all :ut
OIK- located in the Monongahela River Basin.   This Basin, it was '.'It, clc-;ervc_ the
greatest amount of attention since I; PA luid supported a comprehensive study on -,he
Basin that was carried out by the Appalachian Regional Commission.   The presc"
site at Settler's Cabin Park in Pennsylvania (Figure 1) was chosen  and has pr: en
to be the best as time has passed.  For example, an important aspect of the pr:ject
is its relation to 208 and 303(c), as stated previously.  Shortly after the ir.ter-
agency agreement between EPA and ARC was signed, a 208 agency was designated ;/
EPA for the Pittsburgh area.  This project in Settler's Cabin Park  then assured a
larger image and has now been granted additional funding for the expansion of the
EPA-sponsored portions of the project, amounting to more than twice as nuch as
originally granted by EPA.

     Several sites were investigated and one by one were discarded for various
reasons until one was left.  The site chosen lies in an undeveloped portion of a
county regional park in an area of incompletely restored strip mines, deep,
as well as active and abandoned oil and gas wells.  The review process required
contact with county and state officials and part of this contact represents initi-
ating cooperation among local, state and federal agencies.  The site chosen will
act as a test case for this cooperative effort within the bounds of legislati:r.
and regulation and part of the project will result in a critique of this inter-
agency cooperation.

     Over a million people live within the immediate vicinity of the Settler';
Cabin Regional Park.  The Allegheny County Commissioners, many years ago, as rart
of a recreation development master plan, located in various sections surrounding
metropolitan Pittsburgh a number of regional parks.   The site of this propose;
project has remained in a somewhat undeveloped state due to the adverse environ-
mental effects of previous mineral exploitation.  With the growth of the greater
Pittsburgh area and especially the growing concentration of housing areas to the
west and southwest of Pittsburgh in the corridor between downtown Pittsburgh and
the Greater Pittsburgh Airport, the importance of making the Settler's Cabin
Regional Park available for public use is  even more important than  in the past.

     The Settler's Cabin Mine Reclamation  Project is located in Allegheny County,
Pennsylvania, southwest of the City of Pittsburgh.  Settler's Cabin Park is naned
for the ancient log cabin being restored at the park.  Future programs at the
Cabin will accent regional history and the life style of the early settlers,  ".he
park area includes some land which was formerly used for farming.  The remnants of
these various commercial uses will provide rich and varied subject  matter for
future nature interpretive programs, in addition to the extensive history of energy
related extraction activities.

     Nearing 1,000 acres, this park site offers a variety of attractive picnic areas
and playground equipment, and when the requested mine reclamation work is done, the
park will be nearly ready for full utilization.  The Park layout is shown in
Figure 2.  A unique trail system is under  development for this park.  It will
encompass the natural resources of the area as well as the remnants of previous
commercial land uses.

     Site Justification and Benefits

     Pinkerton Run is located in the center of a county park within the Pittsburgh
metropolitan area, and reclamation will result in reduction of acid load in the
stream.  Water based recreation is a major part of the county park  plan.  The
County has twice postponed the development of recreational facilities along
Pinkerton Run because of the acid mine drainage problem.  Matching  State funds are
available for park development if the mine drainage pollution problem can be
                             H i e a i> e f y } ; u I o ; > a < :: .. r -  ' i

                                        a n ci

                              Do not  type in this area

.- ' V.'         5
   (  X^^.i.:-.
O f
P 5

l-' u.
             PI oast; typr- t.

                          on d

              Do ri o t  t v p o i n  ^ ii i s area

i'iceess! -,:: !y reduced.   Relited projects .  rsidc the P i nl.ert.on Run area      •  . ro
now in the design or exociii ion phase, will, '..lien coupled with t ho nro;n       -r-  : -.
the SettKr's Cabin Regional Park, have an impact on The overall iniprov    .:
water qu,-ility in Pinkcrton Run.  The entire area of the park is public!/ 
                            IMTAi i,N^_Sj_M.Ji|2:ri^ !-^[(!N_

     The description of the study ;irea included in  this  chapter  cncoinpusso*  r.ot  '".'
Settler's Cabin Park, hut also priwitely-owned property  around the  periphe: ;• ^z  ~  .
park.  This slightly expanded study area was developed because of the  difficulty ".:
analysis of mining, related surface features, an-j mine drainage  di--.chd.rge  • , ir.t~
within a confined area.  Actually, most of the d c-p mines that contribute  to T"int
drainage within the park extend beyond the park boundary.

     The study area is contained within the Robinson  Run Watershed.  Plnkerion's
Run originates outside Settler's Cabin Park in North  Fayctte Township  and  flovs
through the park before discharging into Robinson Run, then into Chartier?   reek,
and ultimately into the Ohio River.  The location is  shown on Figure 1, along wit-.
the major drainage basins of the area.


     The Pinkerton's Run study area is part of the Allegheny Plateau geomorphic
province.  The rock strata encountered are essentially horizontal.  The landscape
is an erosional one where valleys have been carved by streams downcutting  tnrcugr.
layers of sedimentary rock.  Land areas between valleys  remain as topographic hi-"1
but have a moderately rounded appearance due to weathering and erosional f:rce-s.
The valley wall slopes generally range from about 2$% to about 40?0  while t•;
rounded valley divides have more gentle slopes ranging from about 4% to 10
The maximum relief of the study area is roughly 400 feet.  The Pittsburgh  coal si--.-;
outcrops along valley walls within the project area.  The coal had  great economc
value and has been extensively deep and strip mined resulting in altered land for-s.


     The sedimentary rock strata outcropping in the Pinkerton's  Run study  area ar;
of Pennsylvanian age.   The rock types generally encountered are  interbedded  sand-
stone, shale, limestone and coal.  The rock strata are members of the Monongahela
and Conemaugh Groups.   The contact between these two  groups marks the position of
the economically valuable Pittsburgh coal seam.  A generalized columnar section
showing the rock units exposed in the study area appears in Figure  3.

     The strata exposed in the study area dips slightly  toward the  south.   Struc-
ture contours on the base of the Pittsburgh coal seam reflect the gentle southward


     Soil associations are groups of soils which ordinarily occur together  in the
landscape.   Each soil  has its characteristic location depending  on  the land  slope
and material from which it was derived.  The soil associations are  named ir. order
of their importance within the association.  For instance, the Westmoreland-
Guernsey soil association is composed primarily of Westmoreland  soils with  secor.c-
ary amounts of Guernsey soils, as well as other minor soils.  The Pinkertor.  Run
study area generally exhibits two soil associations.  These soil associations an;
a brief general physical description of each are listed  on the following table:

Soil Association	     Description
Westmoreland-Guernsey-Clarksburg     Soils have developed in material deri\ed fr;
                                     weathered shales, sandstones and
                                     Slopes range from gentle to steep, but are
                                     mostly moderate.

Westmoreland-Guernsey                Soils have developed in material derived frc
                                     weathered shales, sandstones and limestones,
                                     Slopes are steep.

                             Do n ot  t y pe i n  t \\\ s .-: i v a

                          i  GEOLOGIC
                          2  SECT ION
              G I e n sh ow
                                    tTTSBURGH COfll
                                     * E S LIMESTONE
        P!ea',o  I >•;-,•;  ro  in ' r,< , i;r ,..

                       a n d

          Uo not ty|:-r>!n  >',;'", •• i   'i

      ,:'.ii  -oil :;'.rio^'OS inlo ,u _ount -u-\ci   •1hyMCai t i a i 1 >' dettTPii :iin^ their potential urocl I hi i .  .  1'lic potential '-' .   -r  . i p i 1 ~.
t'or fnv location can be estimated hy conihi ni ne the soil charac tt-r. st ic -
with the slopes on which they are  t-'ound.   Potential soil  croji i) i 1 i',_  a[Mii_,n to
areas distrubed hy the activities of man,  such as strip mininjj.  In  qener:.:, the
potential erodibility of the existing soil associations within Settlor's  VMI: /i.k
is estimated as high, except in flat or moderate slope areas where  the pc'.ntial
erodibility is estimated as medium.


          Water Quality

          The water quality of the Settler's Cabin Park area is  affected  -rimaril/
by acid mine drainage.  In an underground  mine, water percolates through  tie over-
burden and contacts pyrite in the strata lying above the  coal  (usually car?onace:us
shales and sandstone].  The water then flows along the floor of  the  nine  ^rid even-
tually discharges at an outcrop or exposed entry or, in some cases,  rises  to the
surface under artesian pressure.  All but  two of the 25 documented  .cid nne drain-
age discharges routinely collected during  the sampling period were  gravit.'  drained
deep mine discharges.  The remaining two acid discharges  resulted from ar-  .nre-
clair.ed strip mine in which runoff becomes entrapped in depressions  and c intact;
acid forming strip mine spoil material.

          Acid mine drainage most seriously affects Pinkerton's  Run  and its cajir
tributaries which are continuously polluted.  The streams monitored  by SF-3 and
SR-4 are also continuously polluted by acid mine drainage.  The  least affected
stream is monitored by station SR-6, its eastern tributary monitored by S7-16  i=
relatively clean, while the western branch monitored by SR-S is  intermittently
affected by acid mine drainage.  The effect of acid mine  drainage polluti:?. on fe
aquatic life of the project area is significant.  A comparison of the cherical
water quality during the study and the concentrations required to sustain  /iable
fish populations provide little or no likelihood that fish live  within the  park.
A possible exception would be upstream of  Station SR-16 where the chemical  water
quality during the sampling period remained acceptable.

          A field investigation was performed to locate and sample  nine drainage
discharges.  Twelve deep and strip mine discharges were known from  the Ch=rtier?
Creek Mine Drainage Pollution Abatement Survey, which was published  in 1?~D.  A
total of 80 mine drainage discharge points and stream monitoring station;  ,\ere
located by the field crews.  However, most of the mine drainage  discharge;  were
located during the period of high ground water and subsequent high  mine flows.
Consequently, for the purpose of routine sample collection and monitoring  for  13
weeks, the sampling program was reduced to include 49 samples.   Of  the 
          • 'ruand Water

          The major water bearing Iv.-ds which are potent i:ii  sources of water supply
 in the Pinkerton's Run study area arc the Pittsburgh Sandstone, Connellsville Sand-
 stone and Morgantown Sandstone.  The reliability of the Pittsburgh Sandstone, which
 overlies the Pittsburgh coal,  is questionable as a water source in the study area.
 This is because the Pittsburgh coal has been extensively mined and subsequent sub-
 sidence of the overlying strata has probably drained the aquifer.  The Morgantown
 Sandstone, which lies roughly  ISO to 220 feet below the Pittsburgh coal, is the
 best and most persistent aquifer in the area for domestic uses, and is permeable
 enough to sustain some public  water supplies.  The Connellsville Sandstone  is not
 as reliable an aquifer in the  study area as the Morgantown  Sandstone.  This is
 because the Connellsville Sandstone, which lies 30 to 60 feet below the Pittsburgh
 coal, is more shaley and thus  less permeable.  However, areas which are not shaley
 are generally permeable enough to sustain domestic needs.

          Unconsolidated deposits of alluvium on the flood  plain of Pinkerton's Run
 could prove to be a. source of water.  The water bearing potential of the unconsoli-
 dated flood plain material is dependent on its thickness and lithology and warrants
 further study.

     Mining History

     Deep mining activities in the general  area of the Pinkerton's Run Watershed
roughly covered the years  1908 through 1937.   Mining operations were conducted
using the room and pillar method where drift entries were driven to provide access
to the coal.   The coal was then mined from  room-size areas leaving pillars  of coal
in place to provide roof support.   This phase of the mining operation occurred
roughly from 1913 to 1932.

     The final phase of mining involved the recovery of the coal pillars as deep
mining operations concluded.   Most of the mining was done under shallow cover
causing localized subsidence  and subsequent disruption of surface and subsurface
patterns.   The numerous mine  openings in the area were usually left unsealed,
allowing water and air to  enter the mine complex which contributed to the acid mine
drainage problem.

     Strip mining operations  were primarily conducted in the 1940's.   The coal left
in place by previous deep  mining was entirely stripped from the coal outcrop follow-
ing the contours of the land  surface.   Many of these strip mines were improperly
reclaimed and now provide  a means for surface water to enter the deep mine  where
it can discharge as acid mine drainage.   No strip or deep mines are currently in
operation within the watershed.

                                ANALYSIS OF DATA

     All available mine maps  were obtained.   An overlay was prepared in an  effort
to ascertain where underground workings were near the surface or had been inter-
cepted by surface mining.

     Following the collection of water quantity and quality data,  mine maps, and
other available sources of information,  an  analysis was made of alternative pollu-
tion abatement plans which would maximize acid load reduction,  be least cost in
effectuating,  and blend in best with the long-term park department plans.

     From the process of screening abatement plan alternatives, a recommended
abatement plan was developed.  This section summarizes that plan and includes  a
preliminary scope of work  with cost estimates.
                             Do •..-, ;  f , -i... u.  !!.«-.

     A comnrchens i ve mine drainage ab.itemetr: ,-lan was devised for Settler's Cabin
Park which includes five step1- ->r ph.ises ftv i \vi K'ltienlat ion.   The first phase, or
Phase I, should, by itself, he sufficient tu fulfill the teemical criteria of
achieving an inflow of 50 nm/I of net alkalinity <.oni_ent rat i on at each stream
monitoring station in the P i nkert on' .-• Run Watershed during the once in ten year,
seven day consecutive low flow.  !'he plans are numbered Phase I  through Phase V,
with each phase being successively more complex.

     Certain individual abatement methods are common to all five phases.  These
common methods were judged to be the minimum requirements necessary to achieve the
project objectives in all five phases.

     The first and most important abatement method common to the five phases is the
reclamation of the strip mine formally designated OAK 30 in the Chartiers Creek
report and designated here as Work Area No. 1.   Work Area No. 1 was recommended in
the Chartiers Creek report as a method of decreasing the flow at mine discharge
4688.  The design of the project was  authorized by OCR as Project SL 102-7-20.
Plans, drawings, and a cost estimated were completed for this site, although the
design was never finalized by DI'.R.   Reclamation of strip mine OAK 30 was halted
when the property owner, Patrick J. Fleck, doing business as Deep Valley Coal
Company, obtained a mine drainage permit, 3474SM15, for an area covering OAK 30.
As of this writing, a strip mine permit has been applied for but has not been
granted for OAK 30.

     Two mine drainage discharges were attributed to Work Area No. 1,  Since the
two discharges result only during or after a storm when water-filled depressions
overflow, these two sources have the capacity to degrade Pinkerton's Run with a
slug of acidic water.

     The second abatement method found in all five alternatives is an interceptor
system designed to collect localized deep mine discharges and bypass the streams
and eventually discharge the collected AMD into Robinson Run, either treated or
untreated, depending upon the selected plan.

                                ABATEMENT SUMMARY

     The location of all recommended work areas is shown by phases on the abatement
plan, and an impact summary of all phases is shown on Table 1.  A "no-action"
alternative is also summarized for baseline establishment.

                                  COST SUMMARY

     Provided on Table 2 is a summary of the total estimates costs to implement
each phase.  Part of the capital costs include estimated engineering and design
services, exclusive of surveying, aerial photography and map preparation.  All
costs are derived from 1976 unit prices for construction labor and materials or
adjusted to 1976 based on the "Engineering News Record" 20 cities construction cost
index.  Finally, capital costs were amortized at 7% interest for 20 years and added
to estimated operation and maintenance costs to yield an equivalent annual cost for
each phase.  All estimated costs have been rounded to the nearest $1,000.
                             D o n o t  I y p






- §
W E-

*f **



i ft . ^

T1 rt ^
<-* O O
"1 O/l t3
Gj -M
X j> 
.£ ! -n ?; S


D 4-J *^
C -H 4J
T3 -H  -H
CD ca P
i/l P « cS
^H 3 CD
CD l-H rM !~(
cO o -H CD


r. ,~ -f.
t -• T, ""
^J ^J ^
'-J ^J
O CD -r4
»•"* 'f3 _^
r "
— rj fj
*-* 2 C &0
"-J cO C^
C O TJ •'" '
!— i £_ J_, f^
~* .^ Q r^
•*-> O 7i
O O O r— «

f <1> O
e > -H
• H -H 4-J
4-i 4-» ns
O — * O CJ

C "-i f^ i — i
•H 4-1 ^J
•^ ^ ^ 2
V 03 CJ +3
•-"» O rC
^-* !>, fJ U-t
-^ < c

rt rX > '-/".
-C f-r O C/J
D O r^ O
Oi 32 C^ C

X w
O ^ -H
r— t — JH
O C Cfl

ni -H

cr o
rt ^ •!-»
o rt

JS W "
4-» C 00
o -H -d
O -H nJ
!H T3
Q^ j^ p^
i-i O OS

I T3
i-H t/) CD
ca - (H
3 e o

f-i m s 'c
p ^ c E
3 'H 3 X
C- fH
CD TJ cs \o
> 4-1 C P I
O O c3 3 oi
f-i X3 LO
eu x c -H
e -P 3 j-i x
t—+ -H oi 4-> ,-Q

H- 1
*-» 1
•/) c>
4J H
^ o
,j q.)
73 (-. '/)
'O > 03

'/i 4~)
C 'J *— <
'-i " TJ
n3 T3 '"'
« ^-

• H

•Jl !H
CD ca
0) '-4-.
•yi o
(H 3
O i — i
C cS
^-4 >


T3 C
e -H
ca x:
O -H
•H ^
cd p
3 cs
cr P
ca •[-(
« CS
CD x:
O 1~(
?"l CS ,X
p  XP E
O wD i~l
JH -H p ,
e P e CD

5 '5
6 o ^
"C -b c
• — i O ^
T~< ^H, r— *
"S P-

O ^3
~; o

(rt CD -M
c VH ^
5-t O -1J
-J V-J J^
+-J '-J
2- s


CD l5
CS cs
01 '~
m o

o ^
c ca

, — i
C3 V)

to p
fn —i
f-l -H
cu O
P cS
CP bo
d) C

P C 'c
cd C
in co

O.1 Q J^
E ca cs

i — i

P 0
cS 3
""" "O
" CD C

CD T-t
> X P
O ^ cti
fi __ P

i — i
i— i
u *-'
C 'j '/)
'p "3 C
-n O CO
T3 fH r-H
-a &,

"^ O tS
5 o

I/) CD P
C '-. CS
(-, 0 0)

CD "~l" cu


cS cfl
•J) ^
1} UM
'y, 0
^ 3
O — <
c ca
i— i >

i — i
• H

P -
W P C8
CD 0) CD

fn -H CO


CD "" C

P -H -H C
tn cs E
CD 3 to ex
O CS ^H 2
^ ,O CD
rv -rt CS ^
i— I Cfl CD 13



t/i r^
CD r-l

O c£
p co
Cd. cS



O :"-
• — t i>
•S 'r"
O^ t/1

M 4-i
S-l -H
00 4-

t/1 M
•_.; .^
O i
— 1 .-4
—1 P
i — 1
• H

O -H
4-1 to C
0 CD 3
C Cfl
•rH -H O
P P- (/;
O T-* C
3 CJ -n

CJ e~t O
Cd p ry^


0 XI
p to
cS E
3 a

CD in f-i

P P t3
cS C
"l 3
CD X 0

O O *H
E 0 cs
>-( CD CX

^ 1



t/1 71

> P .->

&, CO O
e 3 -H







C 3
o o

Do nut  ty p e i n

                                  COST SHMVW''

                  Kstimated Fi'~st             Hstimuted Operation     f:quiv
" i),   11 ;   i  ,r_i'.> L'ariirr. .} .  r'i^cK.  The  a ix a  is  i-'irrc-ntlv jnik r
,j ,!nnc ils t,: .i"- ;>'-;:n.t.   \i tho .ir-.i : •% to In-  'Triii inm-d, o Ui^r  • .>oiv r.u i on  '..ith
 ',<• Bureau "!   iurf-ioo Mine kec i ain.r  ion i-> ncoilfd  to insure- adequate  ivr Iaw;it ion ot
-lurk Areu ! ,

          Scope of Work

          kegrade 26 acres of W«rk  Area 1 to provide positive  drainage,  drain and
treat existing water-filled depressions, close  two mine openings.  Construct  2,200
lin.  ft. of diversion ditch at the  top of the  existing highwull,  and install  290 lin.
ft. of bituminous flume across the  required bench to minimize  infiltration into the

          Install 23,000  lin. ft. of plastic pipe from 10 AMD  discharges.   Install
concrete catch basins at  9 discharges and excavate a trench  through  the  toe of the
reclaimed strip mine upstream of SR-23 to place  a perforated pipe to collect  AMD
seepage.  Install a total of 78 manholes, one  at  every pipe  confluence  and at every
300 lin. ft.  along each intercept ,r.  The pipe  is to be installed at a  minimum of
4 ft. below the ground surface and  should parallel the streams along the floodplain.
The impact of this Phase  I work is  shown in Table 3.

     Phase II
     Phase II adds the restoration of five portions of unreclaimed strip mines.   All
five areas currently contain depressions which  restrict natural  surface drainage
and allow infiltration from water-filled depressions  into  adjacent abandoned deep
mines.  The work areas are designated 2, 5,  7,  8,  and 10.

          Scope of Work

          Regrade a total of 18 acres in five unreclaimed  strip  mine  areas to pro-
vide positive drainage and revegetation.  Samples  of  the upper spoil  layer should
be tested for nutrients and fertilizer requirements to insure  adequate soil treat-

     Phase III
     Phase III consists of revegetating four strip mines with  appropriate grasses,
legumes, trees and shrubs.  The revegetation will enhance  the  aesthetics  of the
park, facilitate development of proposed revegetation facilities,  provide a buffer
zone between existing and proposed high density picnic areas and unsightly strip
mines, and minimize erosion.

          Scope of Work

          Revegetate a total of 77 acres in Work Areas 3,  4, 6, and  11.   Appropri-
ate grasses,  legumes, trees and shrubs for reforestation areas and game refuge
areas, and their locations, are shown on the abatement plan map.

     Phase IV

     Work Areas 9 and 12 are approximately 30 to 50 ft. above  an abandoned deep
mine.  Roof collapse in the deep mines and subsequent fracturing of  the rock units
above the coal have caused extensive surface subsidence in each of these  areas.
This subsidence causes severe limitations upon land development within the park,
especially Area 12 which is intended to become a picnic area.   Moreover,  Area 9 is
promoting rapid infiltration of storm runoff through subsidence areas.  This infil-
tration probably discharges as part of AMD source 4676 located at  the  headwaters
of the stream monitored by station SR-3.  Also, the interpretation of  subsurface
structure and mine drainage patterns indicates that the mine complex of Work Area
12 is responsible for the 380 Ibs. per day of acid monitored at station SR-17.
                       	  P ! ,"' o 5 O  i / 11 .  >,,


                             D o n oi ty p e i i!  t '11r c; r c a






1 — 1

— )










_. %
'ed C rH
4-» -H \
o e oa



P-| -^^
d> rH 06
p^ 03 E
T^ ^— ^

03 C -*




o e oo
H 3 ^


/ 	 4
rH rH
03 C \
4-> O OO
o f-i e
H i— i -— '


'C ^H

O rH &7
2^ oi S


0 PH
rH 00


r-l O
O -H

•H ed
C t ^
_o w

ino^oooom ^
rnoinooo^ ii

i i tn

\o ^o rH ^f r^ vO in oS
to t^ to Tt ^ "=t ^f
i-H in i— 1 .— ( »-H r-H O P«
^TMtO^rUltO'-* E
(NJ i— 1 CM «— 1 O*J ^f CM Co
CM i— ( l/l
»—i to ^f in en
CMr^OOrHrHrHrH 03
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CQ
DS pi OS Qi OS, OS. &.
oooooototoonto *

          I'a^'li"!!! or i:yeav.'V<- the deep  -line ue.rk'.n'"< "t"  3  :icrv<  n;  '',•:!>  \ro'i  p  ••
.>] ;jcres of V.'ork Area 12.  Remove remnant ; of  the main  Pitt^bur. i  t.n,i!  plii<  rooi
.inil bony coals .uul the P i t t:>':"ir'.',h ruler  .oal.  Apnrox imately  d.OOO r;-vi  f-2,0i'0  to-
of marketable coal for Work Areas 9 ami  12, respectively, could  be recovered  to   ::-
sot the construct ion cost.-;.

          In Work Area ;), place approximately  2,7()0  cu. yds.  ol"  rock filter  mater-
ial along the working Pace ho fore backfilling.  If additional  deep  mine  drainage  .
encountered.  Kogradc to approximate original  contour.  l:or U'ork  \rca 12,  place  i.
clay blanket and select  relatively impervious  spoil  material  along the  northern
work limits prior to backfilling.  Backfill and  grade to  finished  contours  for t'r :•
proposed picnic area development.

     Phase V

     The final phase of the recommended  abatement program includes a lime  neutral-
ization treatment facility to chemically neutralize  the AMD coin-eyed by the  Phase  '-
interceptor system and for the construction of additional interceptors  from  AMD  c.--
charges 4673 through 4688 located to the west  and southwest of the project  area.

     This phase is intended as a long range goal and should be considered  as  a
possible component of a more  comprehensive appraisal of mine  drainage and  water
resources problems throughout the Robinson Run and Chartiers  Creek drainage  basir.;.

          Scope of Work

          Install approximately 31,000 lin. ft.  of plastic  pipe  to intercept  at
least 11 AMD discharges designated 4673  through  4688 in the west  and southwest
portions of the project area.  The AMD sources should be  conveyed  by gravity to  a
lime neutralization treatment facility located in the flood plain  of Robinson  Run
near the confluence with Pinkerton's Run.  The treatment  facility  will  chemically
neutralize and oxidize the mine drainage such  that the  discharged  effluent  will
comply with Title 2S, Chapter 95, Water Quality  Criteria  for  pH  and iron.

          The design flow for the treatment facility was  estimated at 2,500  gal. rer
minute with a weighted average acidity concentration of 275 mg/1.   All  design  para-
meters for the unnamed tributary to the North  Branch of Robinson  Run, monitored  by
station SR-12, were estimated due to AMD discharges  beyond  the scope of the  curre-".:
survey.  Additional flow and water quality characteristics  should  be obtained  ale:-.;;
this stream reach for design purposes.


     The authors especially appreciate the help  of Mr.  Ralph  Rhodes, whose  exper-
ience and perspectives in Research and Development projects,  as  well as in  govern-
ment relations, served well in the initial struggle  to  launch this project.   We  .:re
also indebted to the support of Mr. Daniel J.  Snyder, III,  and Dr.  Alvin R.  Morris,
the Regional Administrator and Deputy Regional Administrator, respectively,  of Er\,
Region III.

     The authors also acknowledge the patience and encouragement  of Mr. Clifford
McConnel and members of his staff, namely Mr.  Andrew "Bud"  Frederick and Mr.  David
Hogeman.  Their initial help with regard to technical information  was invaluable.

     At the local level, the Allegheny County  Commissioners were  eager  to  pursue
this project.  Their positive attitude was of  immeasurable  help,  especially  with
regard to the availability of the site as well as manpower  and materials.  Mr.
Donald Herman, County Director of Public Works,  acting  as their  representative,  has
been the man behind the nuts-and-bolts help in construction needs  and access  to
adjoining properties during the engineering phase.
                            P! «> n •; <_• I y ;.• .% t o '-, > • . ,. < \, ;•< •


                              Do not tvpi-  in tins  •]?>••<,

     • ,i is.'   •!'(', ' In-  people f.-'-pijii^ i hi.,- {-"or cooperat. j j>p, <'n-o  Sr.  llonaul >',".  '\1iitchoa_
...-•.;-o lit'' it. .t  in UUP ; n ^-rel-ited i>roji-c!s is Vt-ry broad,  and Mr.  0.  l.orch  (.no Ion;.;-;
>v i i li the Coi'iiiuss ion 1 .

     Within i:.PA, Mr.  IMuar Pash ("now with the U. S.  Fish  and Wildlife Service),  anc
hjs successors  in tlie Washington Headquarters, Mr. Charles Vcnderlyn and Nh~. Deely,
have both sliown  sufficient interest so that further  funding  lias  rec  -utly been made
avali able,

                                SELECTEO RI- FERENC_L:S

1,   A.  C. Ackenheil Geosystcms, Inc., Pollution Abatement Survey of Chartiers Cree;
    Drainage Basin, Pa.  Contract No.  SL-102.  1969.

2.   A.  C. Ackenheil Geosystems, Inc., Settler's Cabin Park Mine  Drainage Pollution
    Abatement Survey: Allegheny County, Pa. (Available from  Appalachian Regional
    Commission.)  1976.

3,   Appalachian  Regional Development Act of 1965, as amended; PL 89-4.

4.   Criteria for Developing Pollution Abatement Programs  for Inactive and  Abandone:
    Mine Sites.  EPA  440/9-7S-008.   1975.

5.   Environmental Protection in Surface Mining of Coal.   EPA 670/2-74-093.  1974.

6.   Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments.  PL 92-500.   1972.

7.   Inactive and Abandoned Underground Mines: Water  Pollution Prevention and
    Control.  EPA 440/9-75-007.  1975.