EPA-600/2-76-110
June 1976
Environmental Protection Technology Series
U.S. Environmental
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Of1 ice of Research and Development, U S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into five series. These five broad
categories were established to facilitate further development and application of
environmental technology Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The five series are:
1 Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
TECHNOLOGY series This series describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent
environmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution This
work provides the new or improved technology required for the control and
treatment of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is £ v/ailable to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-76-110
June 1976
FEASIBILITY STUDY
DEER PARK DAYLIGHTING PROJECT
A. R. Richardson and M. T. Dougherty
Ackenheil & Associates, Incorporated
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15216
Grant Number S-801353
Project Officer
Elmore C. Grim
Resource Extraction and Handling Division
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio ^5268
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
CINCINNATI, OHIO H5268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
approved for publication. Approval does not signify that the
contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
i i
-------
FOREWORD
When energy and material resources are extracted, processed, and
used, these operations usually pollute our environment. The resultant
air, land, solid waste and other pollutants may adversely impact our
aesthetic and physical well-being. Protection of our environment requires
that we recognize and understand the complex environmental impacts of
these operations and that corrective approaches be applied.
The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory - Cincinnati
assesses the environmental, social and economic impacts of industrial
and energy-related activities and identifies, evaluates, develops and
demonstrates alternatives for the protection of the environment.
In this report the technical and economic feasibility of "daylighting",
the removing and replacing of the overburden above a coal seam, was
evaluated as a means of abating acid mine drainage (AMD) pollution.
AMD, which is formed by the oxidation of pyritic material, is one of the
major sources of stream pollution in the eastern United States. The
conclusion of the report is that "daylighting" can be used to eliminate
AMD from certain abandoned mine workings, and that "daylighting" also
enhances the use potential of the land, and minimizes the risk of future
erosion and stream siltation.
Results of this work will be especially interesting to State and
Federal agencies concerned with reclamation of abandoned mines and to
mining firms searching for additional coal reserves.
David G. Stephan, Director
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati
i i i
-------
ABSTRACT
The study was performed to determine the technical and economic feasi-
bility of daylighting abandoned deep coal mines as a method to abate
acid mine drainage by employing common surface mining and backfilling
techniques. Data on the present water quality of Lost Run, Garrett County,
Maryland was obtained and used for the evaluation of using daylighting
as a method to improve water quality. Other criteria were thickness,
quality and amount of coal in-place. A mining and reclamation plan was
developed for the daylighting. This plan was devised based on the acid-
ity of overburden material, the estimated coal in-place, and erosion
control methods to reduce siltation.
The feasibility study results indicate this demonstration project would
be technically and economically feasible and that reclamation would
effectively produce usable land and improve water quality. The
estimated cost of the demonstration project is about $500,000 for a
70 acre (28 hectare) site. The major obstacle in implementing the
project is aquiring rights, easements and methods of awarding contracts.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Environmental Protection
Agency Project S-801353, by Ackenheil £ Associates Baltimore, Md. , Inc.,
under the partial sponsorship of the Environmental Protection Agency
and the State of Maryland, Department of Natural Resources. Work was
completed as of March 3, 1973.
i v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
FOREWORD i i i
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF FIGURES vii
LIST OF TABLES viii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ix
SECTION
I CONCLUSIONS
Technical Feasibility
Impact on Water Quality
Economic Feasibility
Property Purchase and Contractual Arrangements
II RECOMMENDATION
Proceed with the Project
I I INTRODUCTION
General
Purpose and Scope
Jurisdictiona1 Framework
IV DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA 10
Location
Project Area
Topography
Geology
Watershed
Mining in Western Maryland
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
V DATA OBTAINED DURING PHASE I ............ 21
Description of the Project Site
Topographic Site Plan
Water Qual i ty Study
Interceptor Ditches and Sediment Basins
Property Ownership
Geologic Section at the Site
History of Mining at the Site
Overburden Analysis and Revegetation Potential
VI PROPOSED PLANS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ..... 39
Mining Plan
Site Reclamation
Continuing Water Quality Monitoring
Property Acquisition and Contractual Considerations
Time Schedule
VII COST ESTIMATE
Summary of Estimated Cost to Complete Project
Mining and Reclamation
Gauging Stations
Water Quality Stations at Sediment Basins
Water Analysis
Additional Cost to the State of Maryland
Recovery from Sale of Coal
Adjustment for Presently Unreclaimed Strip Mines
VIII APPENDIX ...................... 59
Tables 1 through 16
v i
-------
FIGURES
NO. PAGE
1 Garrett County, Maryland 11
2 Location Map 12
3 Photograph of Site ]k
*» Garrett County Geology 15
5 Generalized Geologic Section 16
6 Watershed Map - Sampling Stations 18
7 Topographic Plan of Existing Site 22
8 Schematic Showing Estimated Pollution Sources 2k
9 Schematic Showing Estimated Loadings on Average Day 25
10 Property Ownership Map 30
11 Geologic Column at Site 32
12 Site History of Mining 3^
13 Coal Base Contours and Overburden Isopachs *tO
\k Proposed Mining Scheme k\
15 Proposed Final Plan *»5
16 Miscellaneous Details 4 7
17 Proposed Construction Schedule 53
v i i
-------
TABLES
NO. PAGE
1 Results of Water Quality Data Station 1 60
2 Results of Water Quality Data Station 2 61
3 Results of Water Quality Data Station 3 62
4 Results of Water Quality Data Station 4 63
5 Results of Water Quality Data Station 5 64
6 Results of Water Quality Data Station 6 65
7 Results of Water Quality Data Station 7 66
8 Results of Water Quality Data Station 8 67
9 Results of Water Quality Data Station 9 68
10 Results of Water Quality Data Station 10 69
11 Results of Water Quality Data Station 11 70
12 Results of Water Quality Data Station 12 71
13 Results of Water Quality Data Station 13 72
14 Results of Water Quality Data Station 14 73
15 Summary of Water Quality Data 74
16 Water Well Analyses 75
VIM"
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Mr. John Mat is, Department of Natural Resources, State of Maryland,
served as Project Director during this feasibility study. Mr. Matis1
technical and administrative assistance during this project is
gratefully acknowledged.
The study was performed in collaboration with Potomac Engineering and
Surveying, Oakland, Maryland. Potomac Engineering and Surveying provided
field crews for surveying, water sample collection and provided technical
advise for the project. Mr. Henry Moomau served as Project Engineer for
Potomac Engineering and Surveying.
Water testing was performed by the Maryland Water Resources Administration
Laboratory in Cumberland, Maryland.
IX
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions are the opinion of the consultant based on the
data obtained and the study leading to the project implementation plans
presented in Section VI
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
Project Is Technically Feasible: It is the consultant's opinion that,
if conducted in accordance with the plans of Section VI, daylighting
and reclamation can be accomplished within current Maryland Mining Law
by using the equipment and methods of operating commonly employed in
strip mining in the area.
Reclamation Will Be Effective: It is the consultant's opinion that
grading, treating and planting according to the plan presented in
Section VI will produce about 70 acres (28 hectares) of land with
vegetative cover, suitable for a variety of uses.
Minimum Risk Of Erosion: It is the opinion of the consultant that, if
the erosion control measures specified in Section VI are followed, the
risk of future erosion will be minimized.
Minimum Future AMD: Daylighting according to the plan set forth in
Section VI should result in reduction to a minimum^or elimination of
AMD from the abandoned deep mine workings.
IMPACT ON WATER QUALITY
Based on the data previously presented, it is estimated that the day-
lighting project will result in a significant reduction in the pollution
load discharged by Lostland Run into the North Branch of the Potomac
River.
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY
Budget For Project Completion: It is estimated that the project can be
accomplished at less than the costs budgeted in the grant application
and within the proposed budget presented in Section VII and summarized
as follows:
-------
Construction Costs Estimated At: $281,260.00
Engineering Costs Estimated At: $191,225.00
Water Testing Arid Soil Testing
Costs Estimated At: $ 10,250.00
Total Estimated Budget To Complete: $482,735.00
Estimated Maryland salaries and expenses for Phase II and III are not
included in the above. It must be again emphasized that the estimated
credit from the sale of the coal, which has been deducted to estimate
the net construction costs above, is subject to significant variation
if the price of coal varies or if the amount of coal in place is other
than the percent estimated.
PROPERTY PURCHASE AND CONTRACTUAL ARRANGEMENTS
Major Obstacle: It is the opinion of the consultant that the major
obstacles to implementation of the project will be:
Acquiring title to the surface and mined rights or
securing of easements which satisfy the State of
Maryland and the Environmental Protection Agency's
legal requirements.
Arriving at a method for awarding the contract and
a type of contract acceptable to the State of
Maryland and the Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the conclusions of the preceeding section, it is recommended
that the demonstration phase of the project be ititiated. It is technically
feasible and can be performed within the budget of the EPA Grant. It is
anticipated that the project will have a significant impact on the water
quality of Lostland Run.
-------
SECTION I I I
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL
Demonstration Project Feasibility Report: This report discusses the
feasibility of performing a "Daylighting" demonstrati on project in
Garrett County, Maryland.
Work on the feasibility portion of the project has been in progress
since September 5, 1972. Initiation of work followed a grant offer
from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the State of Maryland
on June 15, 1972 and subsequent acceptance of that offer by the State
of Maryland. The grant for the Demonstration Project is covered under
Section 107 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and is assigned
Project No. S-801353.
The total project, originally scheduled over a four-year period, is
broken into three distinct work phases. Phase I involves a feasibility
study, Phase II includes design and construction operations, and
Phase III permits post-construction evaluation. This report transmits
results of Phase I which has been completed.
Acid Mine Drainage Pollution Abatement: Pollution of streams by oxida-
tion reaction products of impurities in the coal and associated coal
measure rocks exposed during mining is one of the major deteriorating
effects on the environment. Pollution from acid mine drainage can
originate from either surface or deep mining operations.
Current mining and water quality laws in most, if not all, of the states
in the bituminous coal region require discharge permits and plans of
mining operations directed toward minimizing the effects of siltation
and acid mine drainage pollution during active mining. Reclamation of
strip-mined land can be accomplished in such a manner that future
discharge of acid mine drainage will be minimal. Most states require
elimination or treatment of polluted discharges from deep mine work-
ings to be provided on a long-term basis by a mining company wishing
to stop operations.
-------
Particularly troublesome sources of AMD in streams of coal-producing
regions are abandoned deep mines. Determining ownership, fixing
responsibility and formulating legislation requiring abatement are
difficult or impossible. Usually such pollution sources are truly
"orphans". In addition, at the source methods of abatement of AMD from
abandoned deep mines are expensive and of limited effectiveness. Treat-
ment methods are also costly and require a continuous expenditure of
money.
Daylight ing As A Method Of Acid Mine Drainage Pollution Abatement:
Various techniques have been developed and demonstrated for the abate-
ment of acid mine drainage from abandoned deep mine workings. These
techniques have included sealing mines, diversion of water on the
surface to prevent its entering mine workings, grouting of overlying
water-bearing strata, grouting the mine workings, collapsing the mine
workings, flooding the mine workings, or otherwise attempting to
exclude air from the workings and providing treatment of the discharge.
One technique which has often been suggested is "daylighting" and requires
only knowledge of ordinary current common technology. Daylighting would
be accomplished by removal of the overburden over abandoned mine workings,
removal of the coal and other acid-producing or potentially acid-
producing materials and replacement of the overburden to reclaim the
site. Potentially acid-producing material which was not salable would
be buried at such depths and locations as would minimize future
possibilities for acid production.
Requirements For Daylighting: The technique of daylighting, as a method
of acid mine drainage abatement, is potentially applicable to many
abandoned mine workings in the bituminous coal fields of eastern
United States. In regions of severely dissected topography where the
attitude of the underlying rocks is horizontal or gently dipping, it
is common to find isolated hills or knolls with a coal seam outcropping
circumferential ly around the hill. Very often these seams of coal have
been deep mined and contain abandoned workings. Typically, the outcrop
has been or is being removed by the contour strip mining method. If the
abandoned mine workings in a coal seam outcropping circumferentially are
sources of acid mine drainage pollution, daylighting would be an effec-
tive technique for abating this pollution.
The choice between daylighting and other applicable techniques would be
based on the relative costs of the various techniques. The feasibility
of daylighting would depend on the thickness and character of the over-
burden which would have to be removed. The cost of daylighting would
also depend on the thickness and character of the overburden material,
but in addition, would be closely controlled by the quantity and quality
of salable coal remining in the abandoned mine workings.
-------
In some instances the cost could be reduced by incorporating day-
lighting with an active or planned strip mining operation.
In addition to elimination of a source of AMD pollution, reclamation
of abandoned strip mine workings and enhancement of the land use poten-
tial of the property above the abandoned mine workings would frequently
be added benefits from a daylighting operation.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
Purpose: The purpose of the Deer Park Daylighting Project is as follows
To demonstrate the technical feasibility of daylighting at a
site chosen as typical of sites where such a method of abating
acid mine drainage would be applicable. The techniques to be
employed are those commonly used in surface mining in the region
and no special excavation, backfilling or grading will be
employed. The entire operation will be in conformity with the
current State of Maryland mining law.
To establish the costs of a typical daylighting operation.
To demonstrate the effectiveness of daylighting as an acid
mine abatement technique by water quality monitoring before,
during and following the daylighting.
Scope Of Work To Date; A pre-feasibi1ity study conducted jointly by
the State of Maryland and the Consultant involved:
A study of mining and geology in Western Maryland.
A review of available data relevant to acid mine drainage
pollution in Western Maryland.
Location on the USGS 7-1/2 minute topographic Quadrangle Maps
of sites in Western Maryland which would seem suitable for a
demonstration project.
Conferences with the Maryland Bureau of Mines and the Maryland
Land Reclamation Committee and selection of the sites estimated
to be most suitable for a demonstration project.
Visits to the sites and discussions with property and mineral
right owners and mine operators.
Selection of a site for a demonstration project.
Based on the information obtained, an application was submitted to the
Environmental Protection Agency for a Demonstration Project Grant.
-------
Following the award to the State of Maryland of a grant for a Demonstra-
tion Project, Phase I of the project was undertaken. The purpose of
Phase I was to determine the feasibility of performing the project within
the budget indicated in the grant, to obtain data on which to base
detailed plans and specifications, and to establish a program of water
quality monitoring. The scope of Phase I is as follows:
Set up a program for water quality monitoring.
Gather water quality data on which to base an opinion on the
effect of the project on the water quality of Lostland Run.
Perform a topographic survey.
Study the field geology.
Prepare a Preliminary Site Plan showing proposed final
topography.
Recommend a plan for mining and reclamation.
Estimate quantities and costs.
Prepare a property ownership map.
Prepare a report presenting the preceding information and an
opinion on the feasibility of the project.
JURISDICTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Cognizant Authority: This project is being undertaken by the Water
Resources Administration, an agency of the Department of Natural
Resources of the State of Maryland.
Legislation: The legislation authorizing the expenditure of funds for
the project is the Abandoned Mine Drainage Control Act of 1970, Article
66C, Section 67^1, A through H, of the Maryland Code as found in the
1970 Replacement Volume as amended.
Contracting Agency: The contracting agency for this project is the
Water Resources Administration, an agency of the Department of Natural
Resources of the State of Maryland.
Administrative Agency: The work under contracts on this project will
be administered by the Water Resources Administration of the State of
Maryland.
-------
Water Quality Standards: Water quality standards which regulate dis-
charge into any of Maryland's waters have been established by the
Department of Water Resources (now the Water Resources Administration).
Water quality in the streams of Maryland is regulated by the Water
Resources Law of Maryland, Article 96-a of the Annotated Code of
Maryland, 1967 and 1972 Cumulative Supplement. Under this law, water
quality must conform to Water Resources Regulation k.8, "General and
Specific Water Quality Criteria and Water Quality Standards for All
Maryland Waters." A permit for discharge into any Maryland water
is required and discharge must conform to State of Maryland Water Resour-
ces Regulation A.7, "Requirements for Discharge Permit."
Higher Public Use of Waters: No legislation relative to the higher
public use of water is known to have bearing on the daylighting project.
Since no dams or impoundments other than the siltation basins are
involved, no permits would be required. No diminishing of the quantity
of water in Lostland Run will occur and thence no riparian water rights
are involved.
Land Use Standards: No particular land use standards are known to exist
for the general area in which the site is situated. It is proposed to
return the site to the same land use category which existed prior to
mining, i.e., agriculture, forest and wildlife.
Mining Laws and Reclamation Committee^: The Daylighting Project will
fall under the "Strip Mining Laws of the State of Maryland, 1971," a
copy of which is included in the Appendix to this report. In order to
proceed with the daylighting, a permit must be obtained and renewed
annually as indicated in the mining law.
The Mining Law creates a "Land Reclamation Committee" whose duties
include approval of all procedures for reclamation, conservation and
revegetation of areas affected by open-pit mining within the State of
Maryland. The plans for the daylighting project must meet the approval
of this Reclamation Committee.
Site Acquisition: According to the*Director of the State of Maryland,
Water Resources Administration, lands involved in projects found under
this authority must be purchased in Fee Simple by the State of Maryland
or easements obtained which satisfy the requirements established in the
Abandoned Mine Drainage Control Act of 1970. Consequently, a Negotiator
with the Department of Natural Resources is now negotiating for acquisi-
tion of surface and mineral rights to the project area. Acquisition
by the State of Maryland of all property included in the project by
Fee Simple or by suitable easements will effectively control any future
mining of the site.
-------
Funding Authority: The Funding Authority for this project is the Water
Resources Administration of the State of Maryland, as indicated previous-
ly in the description of the affecting legislation.
Water and Mineral Rights; No water rights will be affected by the Project
Discharge from the project site enters Lostland Run within the boundaries
of the Potomac State and Forest and Lostland Run remains within the State
Land to its discharge into the North Branch of the Potomac River.
State Ownership of Lanch The Ownership of the Project Land by the State
of Maryland or the possession by the State of Maryland of satisfactory
construction easements will give control of any future pollution from
the project site to the State of Maryland.
Existing Mining Laws and Water Quality Standards: The existing mining
laws and water quality standards of the State of Maryland (See Appendix)
regulate discharge from future mining and this will effectively control
possible future pollution of Lostland Run from any new mining operation.
Mining on State Owned Lands; Any strip mining now in progress on state-
owned land must be completed within six months. After that time, no
mining will be permitted on state-owned land. Thus, following the
completion of the current Buffalo Coal Company stripping operation along
South Prong, Lostland Run no future stripping along South Prong, Lostland
Run is anticipated.
-------
SECTION IV
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA
LOCATION
The Demonstration Project Site is located in Western Maryland about
four miles southeast of Deer Park. As shown on Figures 1 and 2, the
project site is in the southeastern part of Garrett County. Lands of
the Potomac State Forest surround the majority of the site at distances
ranging from about one-half to one mile (one to two kilometers). Western
Maryland is a beautiful, mountainous region, situated in the Appalachian
Mountains and well-known internationally for its scenery.
Garrett County, Maryland is an important recreational region reasonably
convenient to Baltimore, Maryland, Washington, D. C. and environs and the
Pittsburgh metropolitan area,. The importance of this region as a recrea-
tional area will increase greatly with the completion of the "National
Freeway" which will bring the county within a three-hour drive of
Metropolitan District of Columbia.
The Deep Creek Lake recreational area is well-known and popular. It
lies about 7 miles (11 kilometers) north of the project site.
Oakland, the county seat of Garrett County, is about 7 miles (11 kilometers)
east of the site. The area surrounding Oakland is increasing in light
industrial importance especially since a project funded by the Appalachian
Regional Commission has created an industrial park. Bosh and Lomb, among
other light industries, have constructed a plant in this industrial park.
Deer Park is an abandoned summer resort famous in the late 19th century
for its mountain scenery and water. Convenient to Washington, D. C. by
railroad, Deer Park Hotel boasted one of the first indoor swimming pools
in the United States. Many well-known government officials and D. C.
celebrities vacationed regularly in Deer Park. President Grover Cleveland
honeymooned at Deer Park and the cottage in which he and his bride cele-
brated their marriage is still standing. Deer Park water is still
bottled and marketed commercially.
10
-------
P E N N S Y L V A N I A
MARYLA NO
6 A R R £ T T
C 0
<0
a
D««p Creek
Sfote Park
'Ooklo nd
^
-^v.
Figure I - GARRETT COUNTY MARYLAND
-------
39°22'30"
79°15'
Figure 2 - LOCATION MAP
SCALE l" = 2000'
12
-------
PROJECT AREA
The Demonstration Project Site comprises a total area of about 70 acres
(28 hectares). Deep mine discharge from the site was recorded in the
"Western Maryland Mine Drainage Survey," 1962-1965. At the time of
project start-up, about 30 acres (12 hectares) were affected by:
(I) a small, in-progress stripping operation (Uphole); (2) a stripping
operation in which coal removal is complete but the reclamation of
which is to be incorporated into this project; (3) abandoned strip
pits and old spoil banks; (k) small orphan gob piles from deep mining
operations. The remainder of the site consists of about 25 acres
(10 hectares) within the strip mine highwalls consisting of a central
knoll which is underlain with deep mine workings (See Figure 3 for a
photograph of the area).
TOPOGRAPHY
The topography of the area is rugged. Located in the ridge and valley
topographic province, the Upper Potomac Basin locally has elevations
ranging from about 1000 feet (300 meters) about M.S.L. in the vicinity
of the North Branch of the Potomac River to about 3000 feet (900 meters)
on Backbone Mountain, just north of the site. The valley walls of the
tributaries leading to the North Branch are steep, with slopes of 25% not
uncommon.
GEOLOGY
The project area is situated on the flank of Backbone Mountain in what is
known geologically as the Upper Potomac Basin. Within this basin, the
rock strata are of Pennsylvania Age and include the Conemaugh, Allegheny,
and PottsvNle Formations.
As indicated on Figure k, the prominent feature which influences the
geology of the area is the Deer Park Anticline. The axis of this
structure is located approximately k-]/2 miles (7-2 kilometers) northwest
of the project area and trends northeast-southwest. The rock strata dip
southeasterly from the axis of the anticline, steeply in the area north-
west of the project area but more gently in the vicinity of the North
Branch of the Potomac River.
The individual rock strata which are present in the Upper Potomac Basin
are shown in typical cross-section in Figure 5« Bedrock members of the
Conemaugh formation are predominantly gray to brown claystones, shales,
siltstones, sandstones, and coals. In the lower portion of the Conemaugh
Formation, these strata are commonly interspersed with beds of red clay-
stone, calcareous claystone and fossi1iferous marine shales. The
Allegheny Formation, for the most part, is composed of interbedded sand-
stones, siltstones, claystones, shales and coals. The Pottsville Forma-
tion, particularly the lower section, is characterized by an abundance of
medium to coarse grained sandstones. The upper portion of the Pottsville
is similar in stratigraphy to the Allegheny Formation.
13
-------
o_
<
QC
12
o
I-
o
:r
Q.
I
(V\
0)
1_
3
O)
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
z
o
I-
o
Ul
in
Figure 4- GARRETT COUNTY GEOLOGY
-------
CD
z
_l
>-
z
z
u
Q.
MISSISSIPPIAN
Monongohela I
Formotion 1
Conemough Formotion
Upper
Member
Lower
Member
Al legheny
Formotion
Pottsville
Formotion
Mouch Chunk
Formotion
^VVXVNA*.
-=- ~
^~^^
PITTSBURGH COAL
Clorksburg R«d B«d
BARTON COAL
Birmingham Rtd Bad
AMES MARINE SHALE
HARLEM COAL
Pittsburgh R«d Bed
UPPER BAKERSTOWN COAL
LOWER BAKERSTOWN COAL
MEYERSOALE RED BEDS
Brush Cr»«K Monn* Sholt
BRUSH CREEK COAL
Corinth Sondstona
M-jhomng Red Shale
UPPER FREEPORT COAL
UPPER KITTANNING COAL
MIDDLE and LOWER
KITTANNING COAL GROUPS
MOUNT SAVAGE CLAY
BROOKVILLE COAL
Figures- GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC SECTION
-------
The coal horizons which are important to the area include the Barton,
Harlem, Upper Bakerstown, Lower Bakerstown, Brush Creek, Upper Freeport,
Lower Freeport, Upper Kittanning and Middle and Lower Kittanning.
Locally, much confusion exists as to the naming of these coal seams.
For example, the Lower Bakerstown Coal which is the seam of interest in
this project is often referred to as the Upper Freeport; in the adjacent
Georges Creek Basin, this seam is commonly known as the Lower Freeport.
Locally, it is known as the Thomas Coal. Actually, the Lower Bakers -
town Coal does not correlate with either the Upper or Lower Freeport
Coai in adjacent Pennsylvania.
WATERSHED
On North Branch Potomac River: The project site is located in the drainage
basin of the North Branch of the Potomac River, which forms the boundary
between Maryland and West Virginia just south of the site. The North
and South Branches of the Potomac River join southeast of Cumberland to
form the Potomac River which flows through our Nation's Capitol.
Lost land Run; The site for this demonstration project is situated near
the center of Lostland Run Watershed. This watershed drains an area of
almost 6,300 acres (2,670 hectares) (approximately 9.8 square miles or
25.k square kilometers).
As indicated on Figure 6» the Lostland Run Watershed is generally tri-
angular shaped with all major streams flowing in a southerly or south-
easterly direction. At the apex of the triangle, is the mouth of
Lostland Run which empties into the North Branch of the Potomac River.
The upper elevation of the watershed is comprised of the southeast
flank of Backbone Mountain, a prominent topographic feature in the
Garrett County area.
Lostland Run has been reported to have been a locally well-known stream
for trout fishing prior to its pollution by acid mine drainage. Trout
are still reported to inhabit the upper reaches of the stream. Lostland
Run flows through and in close proximity to the Potomac State Forest for
most of its length. This fact, coupled with the natural beauty of
Lostland Run and the region through which it flows, would serve to
make Lostland Run once again a trout stream of no minor consequence in
the recreational schemes of the State of Maryland should the quality of
the water be sufficiently improved.
North Prong And South Prong: The major streams which unite to form the
main course of Lostland Run are the North Prong and South Prong Lostland
Run. These two tributaries drain approximately 90% of the total water-
shed area.
17
-------
CO
o
CO
o
z
n
a.
a.
-------
Drainage from the project site occurs principally into an unnamed south-
flowing tributary of South Prong Lostland Run. This stream enters South
Prong Lostland Run at a distance of approximately 2-1/2 miles (k kilometers)
from where Lostland Run eventually enters the North Branch of the Potomac
River. Little, if any, drainage is estimated to occur from the demon-
stration site directly or indirectly into the North Prong of Lostland Run.
Bloomlngton Dam: The Bloomington Dam on the North Branch of the Potomac
River is now under construction by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Flood control and low flow augmentation are the prime objectives of the
impoundment of water.
One of the prime constraints on future use of the body of water for
recreational and water supply purposes is the severe pollution of the
North Branch of the Potomac River by acid mine drainage. While the
impact of the daylighting project on the water quality of the North
Branch of the Potomac River is not expected to be very great, neither
will it be negligible. Lostland Run is a significant source of acid
mine drainage pollution to the North Branch of the Potomac River. The
completion of the project will eliminate an estimated 300 to 500 pounds
(130 to 230 kilograms) per day of acid load to the North Branch of the
Potomac River.
MINING IN WESTERN MARYLAND
Coal Basins: Bituminous coal has been extensively mined in Western
Maryland. The coal occurs principally in five identifable and discrete
basins, the Upper Youghiogheny Basin, the Lower Youghiogheny Basin, the
Castleman Basin, the Georges Creek Basin and the Upper Potomac Basin.
These basins are situated in Allegany and Garrett County, and generally
have boundaries coinciding with boundaries of synclinal basins, separa-
ted by mountainous terrain. The approximate boundaries of these basins
are indicated on Figure 4.
The most extensively mined of these basins and the one of greatest
current activity is the Georges Creek Basin, located partly in Allegany
County and partly in Garrett County. The other four coal basins extend
into adjacent states of West Virginia and Pennsylvania, but the Maryland
portions of these basins lie exclusively in Garrett County.
Upper Potomac Basin: The project site is situated in the Upper Potomac
Coal Basin. This basin extends from the headwaters of the North Branch
of the Potomac River to Piedmont, West Virginia. It is divided into two
parts by the North Branch of the Potomac River, the northwestern portion
being situated in Maryland. The Upper Potomac Basin is the second most
extensively mined out area in the State of Maryland and is also the
location of considerable current mining. Only limited mining is underway
in the other three basins.
19
-------
Coa1 Seam; The most important coals of the Upper Potomac Basin are
found in the lower portion of the Conemaugh Formation and the upper
portion of the Allegheny Formation. The Pittsburgh Seam which Is at
the base of the Monongahela Formation above the Conemaugh is reported
over 20 feet (7 meters) thick near Elk Garden, West Virginia, but
has been eroded for most of the Maryland portion of the basin.
With few exceptions, the various coal seams are poorly correlated In
the five basins, with local and confusing names assigned to the coal
seams. The Pittsburgh Coal ("Big Vein") has been extensively mined
in the Georges Creek Basin where It attains a maximum thickness of
14 feet (5 meters).
The Barton Coal, the Lower Bakerstown Coal (or Thomas Coal) and the
Davis Coal (Upper Freeport) are mined throughout the Upper Potomac
Basin.
20
-------
SECTION V
DATA OBTAINED DURING PHASE I
The following sections present the data obtained during Phase I and indi-
cate the methods of obtaining these data. A physical description of the
site and a plan showing existing topography are included. Data from the
water quality monitoring, the test boring, the property ownership study,
the study of mining at the site and the preliminary overburden nutrient
analysis are presented.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT SITE
Figure 3 is an aerial photograph of the project site taken in November of
1972 from the Buffalo Coal Company Helicopter. The veiw is looking south-
west with South Prong Lostland Run running parallel to the upper border
of the photograph. Between the western boundary of the disturbed area
and the border of the photograph, the mine being reclaimed along the
west of the site is the Upole operation which should be completed before
Phase II begins. The strip operation commencing at the sediment basin in
the left foreground and proceeding clockwise around the left of the site
is the current Buffalo Creek Coal Company operation. The Lower Bakerstown
Coal is seen exposed at the base of the highwall left of the sediment
basin.
TOPOGRAPHIC SITE PLAN
A detailed field survey was performed during Phase I. This field survey
involved obtaining data from which to plot a plan of the project area.
Cross-sections were obtained on 50 foot (15.2 meters) spacings across
the project and plotted.
Figure 7 is a plan of the project area prepared from the detailed field
survey. The existing spoil banks, strip pits, highwalls and deep mine
entries located during the survey are shown on Figure 7-
Also, the location of the probable maximum original grade before stripping
and the estimated original grade at other locations along the south of
the project are indicated on Figure 7.
21
-------
to
(O
X
Ul
u.
o
O
I
Q.
<
OC
O
O
0.
O
o>
i_
3
O>
22
-------
WATER QUALITY STUDY
Watershed Reconnaissance: A preliminary watershed reconnaissance was
undertaken on September 13 and September 14, 1972. Starting at the mouth
of Lostland Run at its junction with the North Branch Potomac River, the
stream was walked to the point at which the North Prong and the South
Prong of Lostland Run meet. Both the North and the South Prong were
walked from their confluence to their sources. Field pH was measured and
water samples were taken at points where drainage entered the streams and
at other key locations. The data obtained as a result of this survey are
presented in the Appendix to this report. The following conclusions
regarding the acid mine drainage pollution were based on the September 13>
and 14, 1972 study:
Lostland Run discharges AMD into the North Branch of the Potomac
River.
The principal source of this pollution is an abandoned deep mine
just north of the bridge crossing the South Prong of Lostland Run.
This mine is known locally as the Gilman Mine.
The Gilman Mine contributes most of thy pollution load to South
Prong Lostland Run upstream of the entrance of discharge from
the project site.
The pollution load of South Prong Lostland Run increases signi-
ficantly below the entrance of discharge from the project site
as shown on Figure 8 and Figure 9. The discharges from the
site as measured at Station 7 indicate an average increase of 8%
to a high increase of 16% during high flows.
The majority of the-pollution load discharged by Lostland Run
into the North Branch of the Potomac River originates on the
South Prong of Lostland Run.
Phase I Monitoring; The monitoring stations at which routine samples
were obtained weekly are shown on Figure 9. These sampling stations
were established following the September 14 and September 15, 1972
survey and were based on the results of that survey.
Description of Sampling Stations:
Station 9, 10 and 1*4; Stations 9, 10 and 14 were established at
definable locations with discharges from mining at the project
site. Discharges at all three stations were estimated to origi-
nate from deep mines intersected by the strip mine highwall.
While some water from the strip pits is present in the discharge,
the majority of the flow is estimated to be deep mine drainage.
90°V notch weirs were constructed at these stations to enable
an estimate of flow quantities to be made. No difficulty was
encountered with maintenance of these weirs.
23
-------
Uphole
Mine
Buffalo Buffalo
West East
Gilman
Mine
\
I
/
4% 5% 2%
other 5%
2'
-il 100%
ola:
NOTE
PERCENTAGES BASED ON SUM OF
HOT ACID, TOTAL IRON 8 SULFATE
LOADS
Figure 8-SCHEMATIC SHOWING ESTIMATED POLLUTION SOURCES
-------
Uphole
Mine
Buffalo
West
Buffalo
East
Oilman
Mine
V
\!
1
Ftow= 0 5 CFS
PH - 2 8
Ac i d = 2840 Ib
Iron - 506 Ib
Sulfote = 3820 Ib
Flow = 0 II CFS
pH = 3 6
Acid = 180 Ib
I run = 3 Ib
Sul fate = 325 Ib
Flow = 3 5 CFS
pH = 62
Acid = 250 Ib
Iron - 4 Ib
ulfate = 96O Ib
:tov- 8 5 CFS
PH = 3 7
Acid - 2070 Ib
Iron - 440 Ib
Sulfote = 39OO Ib
1
T
Flow = 24CFS(estimoted>
pH =50
A ci d = 2340 Ib
Iron - 142 Ib
Sulfote = 8200 Ib
-Flow = I 0 CFS
M =51
Acid = 232 Ib
Iron = 5 Ib
Sulfote = llSOlb
, Flow = 14 c FS
p H =43
Acid = 22OOI6
Iron = 270 I b
Sulfote = 7700 ib
I Flow =12 CFS (estimated)
pH =54
Acid = 775 Ib
iron -- 20lt>
Sulfote = 3240 Ib
0 24CFS
3 5
250 Ib
19 Ib
420 Ib
Flow = I 2 CFS
pH =48
Acid = 495 Ib
Iron = 12 Ib
'lulfote = 1770 ib
0 I CFS
3 4
120 Ib
10 ib
200 Ib
SCHEMATIC SHOWING ESTIMATED LOADINGS
Figure 9- QN AVERAGE DAY
-------
Station 8: Station 8 was established at the discharge location from
the Gilman Mine. A 90°V notch weir was constructed to enable an
estimate of flow quantities to be made.
Stations 1,2,3 and 4; Stations 1, 3 and k were located on the
South Prong of Lost land Run. Station 2 is on the unnamed tribu-
tary entering South Prong of Lostland Run from the west just
downstream of Station I.
Horizontal weirs were established at these stations following the
September 13 and 14, 1972 reconnaissance However, high water
following heavy rains late in September and early in October
resulted in weirs at Stations 1, 2 and 4 being washed out.
These three weirs were re-established by pouring concrete abut-
ments on both sides of the stream. A 2 inch (5 centimeter) wide
groove from top to bottom of each abutment was formed to accept
2 inches by 12 inches (5 centimeters by 30 centimeters) planks
which formed a weir across the stream. Sand bags were placed both
downstream of the planks to provide support and upstream of the
planks to inhibit underseepage.
Weirs, 1, 2, 3 and k washed out following a heavy rain the last
week of November. Weirs 1, 2 and 4 were easily re-established by
retrieving the intact planks and replacing broken planks. Weir 3
was abandoned at this time, since it was judged that the expense
of re-establishment of this weir was not justified. It was felt
that sufficient data could be obtained at the remaining stations.
Stat ions 7 and 11; Stations 7 and 11 are located at 18 inch dia-
meter culverts leading beneath roadways. Flow quantities at these
stations were estimated by recording the depths of flows in these
pipes.
Stations 12 and 13; Sampling Stations 12 and 13 were established
on the North Prong and the South Prong of Lostland Run at their
junction. Flow quantities at these sections were estimated on
the basis of surface velocity and assumed cross-sections.
Stations 5 and 6: Stations 5 and 6 were established at locations
of identifiable discharges into South Prong of Lostland Run from
the unnamed east tributary which is assumed to drain the site.
The flows at these locations were only trickles.
Analyses: Samples were taken weekly at each sample station commencing
on October k, 1972. However, no good estimates of quantities were
obtained on the west tributary or on the South Prong until November 21,
1972 due to construction and subsequent washing out of weirs. The
information prior to November 21, 1972 is considered preliminary.
26
-------
Water samples were obtained in glass bottles, rinsed in the source water
before filling. These samples were promptly delivered to the State of
Maryland Water Resources Administration Laboratory in Cumberland.
The following analyses were performed in the Cumberland laboratory:
Lab pH - Each Sample
Specific Conductance - Each Sample
Suspended Solids - Alternate Weeks
Dissolved Solids - Alternate Weeks
Turbidity - Alternate Weeks
Total Hot Acidity - Each Sample
Mineral Acidity - Each Sample
Total Iron - Each Sample
Ferrous Iron - Alternate Weeks
Aluminum - Alternate Weeks
Manganese - Alterante Weeks
Sulfate - Alternate Weeks
Total Alkalinity - Alternate Weeks
Total Hardness - Alternate Weeks
Settleable Solids - Selected Samples
Magnesium - Selected Samples
Calcium - Selected Samples
Results of Phase I Monitoring; The results of all water quality data
are presented in the Appendix to this report. Table 16 presents the
results of the September 13 and 14 watershed reconnaissance while
Tables 1 through 14 are summaries of all the data obtained for each
station during the regular monitoring program from October 4, 1972 to
February 13, 1973-
27
-------
Results of samples taken from November 21, 1972 to January 16, 1973
were used to prepare Table 15. These data represent estimated typical
stream performance and pollution concentrations. The average pollution
loads were based on the average concentrations of pollutants and the
average flow observed during the November 21 to January 16 period. The
use of weirs as a basis of quantity estimation was not available prior to
November 21. Data obtained subsequent to January 16, 1973 were not available
for inclusion in Table 15 at the time of its preparation.
Summary of Pollution Load Data; It is the opinion of the consultant that
one of the best indications of the relative pollution at any source or
at any sampling station would be the loadings of the principal pollutants,
i.e., hot acidity, total iron and sulfates. Assuming that the summaries
presented in Table 15 are reasonable, the averages of concentrations of
hot acidity, total iron and sulfate were used with the average recorded
or estimated flows to arrive at typical pollution loadings. These
typical and average flows are presented on Figure 9-
Figure 8 is based on the sum of the hot acidity, total iron and total
sulfate daily loadings as presented on Figure 8. The percentages shown
are the percentages of the sum of the above pollution loadings with the
pollution loading of Lostland Run just downstream of the confluence of
the North and South Prongs taken as 100%.
In our opinion, the relative pollution loadings shown on Figure 9 reason-
ably represent the relative significance of the various sources.
With the total daily pollution load (as defined above) in Lostland Run
below the confluence of the North Prong and the South Prong taken as 100%
the following summary represents our opinion of the relative significance
of each source:
Estimated Loading On
Source Contribution An Average Day (Pounds)*
North Prong 28% k,000
Project Site 16% 2,280
Gilman Mine 48% 6,850
West Tributary 8% 1,1^0
*Based On Sum Of Hot Acid, Total Iron and Sulfate.
Note: To convert pounds to kilograms, multiply by 0.^536.
28
-------
INTERCEPTOR DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS
In the water quality monitoring plan to be used during the daylighting
project, ditches surrounding the site on the east, south and west sides
are planned to intercept the estimated complete drainage from the site
and conduct this drainage to two sediment basins or siltation ponds.
These ditches and ponds were designed early in Phase I with the coopera-
tion and approval of the Oakland, Maryland office of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service.
This system is planned to collect the discharge from the site before
during and after mining and the continuous monitoring of discharge from
the siltation ponds will provide data on which to base conclusions
regarding the effectiveness in reduction of acid mine drainage from the
site, the effectiveness of sediment control measures during construction
and the effectiveness of post-construction erosion control measures.
The ditches were laid out and construction of the ditches and basins was
begun the third week in October. Shortly after construction commenced,
the weather became inclement with almost constant rain. It became
impossible to work on the grading required to complete the basins and
ditches and further construction during this phase was abandoned.
At this time the southern-most siltation basin, Pond #1, is rough graded
and the ditches have been rough graded. No work has been accomplished
on Pond #2. It is estimated that this phase of the work is 60% complete
and will be completed with the approval of the State of Maryland early
in Phase II to allow a short discharge base line to be established prior
to beginning construction.
Consequently, the water quality study above is based on sampling of
identifiable sources discharging from the site. Additional discharge
from the site probably exists but is not being monitored until the
discharge from the site passes into the east tributary. This tributary
is monitored at Station 11. (See Figure 6).
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
Surface Rights; Figure 10 shows the boundaries of the site superimposed
on the property ownership map. The bearings and distances of the bounds
of the plot of ground required to contain the entire project are also
shown. The surface rights to the land within the project are currently
owned by six individuals. Daniel A. Holland, Clifton E. Holland,
Reese Tasker and Harold H. Upole are the principal surface right owners
involved while two small portions of land, belonging to Penzil Flowers
and Alta J. Upole, also fall within the project boundaries.
-------
x
00
fr
LJ
or
UJ
a.
o
a:
a_
i
o
a>
i_
3
O»
30
-------
Mineral Rights: Two mineral right ownerships would be involved within the
area to be daylighted. The mineral rights below the Holland properties
and the Tasker property are owned by A. D. Naylor Heirs. Harold A. Upole
owns the rights to the Lower Bakerstown Coal and overlying minerals. It
has not yet been determined who owns the rights to the minerals below
the Lower Bakerstown Coal beneath the Harold A. Upole property.
GEOLOGIC SECTION AT THE SITE
Test Boring: One test boring was drilled at the location shown on
Figure 9. This boring was drilled using diamond coring through rock
with an NX core, by Tinney Drilling Company, Inc., of Bridgeville,
Pennsylvania. The driller's log of this boring is included in the
Appendix to this report.
Geologic Section: Figure 11 is a geologic section constructed from the
results of this test boring. As shown on this section about 30 feet
(9 meters) of soil overlies bedrock at the project site. Bedrock beneath
the soil consists of about 20 feet (6 meters) of medium hard to hard gray
shale, probably the Friendsville Shale, overlying the Lower Bakerstown
or Thomas Coal. The Lower Bakerstown Coal was approximately 60 inches
(1.5 meters) thick in the bore hole. About 3 feet (1 meter) of a brown
underclay probably exists beneath the coal but this was not recovered.
The brownish color was noted in the drill water during this 3 feet
(1 meter) run. A massive gray shale was recovered to a depth of 82 feet
(25 meters). From 82 feet (25 meters) to 104.5 feet (32 meters) a
reddish shale, possibly the Meyersdale Red Shale, was encountered.
Massive gray shales were recovered to a depth of 152 feet (46 meters)
where a 30 inch (76 centimeters) seam of coal was cored. This fs esti-
mated to be the Brush Creek Coal.
Hard dark gray shale was cored from a depth of 153-5 feet (46.8 meters)
to a depth of 170 feet (52 meters). Thirty feet (9 meters) of a massive
hard gray sandstone, estimated to be the Corinth Sandstone was
encountered at a depth of 170 feet (52 meters).
The remainder of the boring was through gray shales until a hard black
shale and coal was encountered at about a depth of 270 feet (82 meters).
This formation is estimated to be the Piedmont Coal. The total thickness
of hard black shale and coal encountered was about 4 feet (1.2 meters).
The material from a depth of 274 feet (83-5 meters) to 290 feet
(88.A meters) was soft to hard gray shale. At a depth of 290 feet
(88.4 meters) a 4.5 foot (1.4 meters) thick stratum of a hard gray
sandy shale with claystone streaks was encountered, followed by a 3 foot
(1 meter) seam of coal, probably the Upper Freeport or Split Six Coal.
31
-------
Figure II- GEOLOGIC COLUMN AT SITE
32
-------
HISTORY OF MINING AT THE SITE
Source: No maps of any of the deep mine operations at the site were avail-
able for examination during this study. Previous owners and operators
were contacted and the State of Maryland, Bureau of Mines files were
searched without finding any maps of deep mining operations.
Local mine officials, persons formerly employed in the mining operations
at the site, persons having a personal knowledge of the site history and
local residents were interviewed. The approximate time and extent of
mine operations described in subsequent sections are the results from
these interviews.
Remaining Coal Reserves Lower Bakerstown Coal: Remaining coal reserves
underlying the unstripped areas of the site are estimated to be 30 to 35
percent. These estimates are approximate, however, because the extent of
deep mine operations is not known.
Deep Mining: The historical data on mining of the site chosen for the
EPA Daylighting Project began in the 1930's. At that time two individuals,
a Mr. Briggs and a Mr. Martin, first names unknown, drove a drift entry
on the property of Mr. Reese Tasker. The main entry ran approximately
northwest with side rooms running northeast and southwest. The most
extensive mining was done in a southwestern direction. It is reported
that mining operations in the southwest were halted when a fairly large
clay seam was intercepted. Mining along the direction of the main entry
was believed to have been halted at the property line between Reese Tasker
and Clifton Holland. It is believed that the Briggs and Martin mine was
the only extensive deep mine on the Reese Tasker property.
From the mid-1950's to the mid-1960's several small deep mine operations
were undertaken by various individuals. Three small prospect entries
were driven on the property of Reese Tasker near the property line with
William Upperman and Clifton Holland. The person or persons prospecting
are unknown, but the mining is not believed to have been extensive.
Mr. George Tasker operated a small deep mine on the Reese Tasker property
immediately west of the existing Tasker home. In approximately I960,
a Mr. McCrosky, first name unknown, also drove two small entries west
of the Tasker home, Figure 12.
In addition, Mr. Julian Moon (R. Shank) drove three entries on the
property of Harold Upole. This mine is believed to have extended north-
east toward the workings of Briggs and Martin to retrieve coal below the
clay seam encountered by Briggs and Martin. During this same period,
Mr. Wallace Kimmel drove a small entry from the coal face exposed by the
surface mining done by Clay Stickell. This mine is also not believed to
have been extensive with tunnels paralleling the Stickell highwaU.
33
-------
DEEP MINING
(a) Bnggs and Martin
( b) Me C ro S ky
(c ) G. Tos K e r
( d ) Prospect Entries
( e ) W. K i m m e I
( f ) Sines and Colhs
(g) J Moon
SURFACE MINING
I C Stickell
2 D Houck
3 Up hole Coal Co.
4 Buffalo Coal Co
C HOLLAND
Figure 12 - SITE HISTORY OF MINING
-------
Perhaps the most extensive deep mining during this period was done by
Mr. Denzel Sines and Mr. Gordon Call is. Their entry was located on
the property of Daniel A. Holland, adjacent to the property of Mr. Harold
Upole and Mr. Reese Tasker, and ran approximately northeast. Rooms
were driven northwest toward the surface mine pit of Daniel Hauck.
Completion of mining by Mr. Sines and Mr. Call is concluded deep mining
operations in the area. The approximate locations of these mines are
shown on Figure 12.
Surface Mining; The approximate limits of the surface mining operations
at the site are indicated on Figure 12. In the early 19^0's, Mr. Clay
Stlckell began the first surface mining operations in the area. The mine
was located on the property of Clifton Holland near the common inter-
section of that property with the properties of Reese Tasker and Penzil
Flowers. The mining by Mr. SttckeJl was not extensive. The remainder
of the surface mining of the properties of Clifton and Daniel A. Holland
was done by Mr. Daniel Hauck. These surface mining operations were
active in the latter 1950's with approximately 7,000 tons (6,350 metric
tons) of coal being mined.
The most recent surface mine operations were undertaken by Upole Coal
Company and Buffalo Coal Company. The operations of Upole Coal Company
are located on the property of Harold Upole and affect a small area.
This mine is operational to date. The operations of Buffalo Coal Company
were located on the property of Mr. Reese Tasker. The Buffalo Coal
Company operation is conducted under Permit #L1^-67~195 This mining
operation was temporarily halted in early 1972 by mutual agreement between
the State of Maryland and Buffalo Coal Company when this site was con-
sidered for a daylighting project.
State of Maryland, Bureau of Mines Listing; The Maryland Bureau of
Mines had the following list of operator's names and years of operation.
However, they admit that the operator listed may be different from the
actual people that operated the mines and also that the years of
operation are only estimates. All of this mining was done prior to
Maryland mining laws, except for current operators, Upole Coal Company
and Buffalo Coal Company.
Briggs and Martin 1935
Clay Stickell 19^2 -
Kimmel 1950 - 56
R. Shank 1952 - 56
Jordan and Foster 1956 - 59
Call is and Tasker 1958 - 62
Hauck 1959
35
-------
McCrosky I960 - 66
Tasker and Tasker 1962 - 63
Buffalo Coal Company 1971 - 72
Upole Coal Company 1971 - 73
Future Mining: No coal which would be stippable within the project
boundaries or within reasonable proximity thereto exists below the
Lower Bakerstown Seam.
A boring drilled near the high point of the site to a depth of 300 feet
(91 meters) encountered two seams of coal. A seam approximately 18 inches
(45 centimeters) in thickness, estimated to be the Brush Creek Coal, was
encountered at a depth of 152 feet (46 meters) and a 36 inch (90 centi-
meter) thick seam estimated to be the Upper Freeport Coal, was encountered
at a depth of 294 feet (90 meters).
It is estimated that recovery of either of these two coals by deep
mining is not economically feasible at the present time.
Buffalo Coal Company is currently stripping two seams of coal, probably
the above two seams, in the valley of South Prong Lostland Run, about
3000 feet (900 meters) west of the site. Upperman is stripping what is
estimated to be the Brush Creek Coal in an operation substantially
complete and has reclaimed about 1500 feet (450 meters) southwest of
the project boundaries.
OVERBURDEN ANALYSES AND REVEGETATION POTENTIAL
Samples: Auger samples of soils encountered in the test boring were
delivered along with the section of the rock cores to Dr. Richard M. Smith
Professor of Agronomy at West Virginia Univeristy, Morgantown, West
Virginia for analyses.
Summary Report On Overburden Potential; The summary of the overburden
analyses and revegetation potential contained in Professor Smith's
report is presented as follows:
We have visited the site of this project, have observed the
soil and rock section of the coal, have collected miscellaneous
selected samples, have studied the test core provided by Ackenheil
and Associates (labelled TB-1, or in W. Va. files Md.A) and have
reached the conclusion that sufficient favorable material is
available to form productive, non-toxic soil for a variety
of possible uses and prevention of near-surface pollution by
water or sediment.
The overburden material is sufficiently variable with depth that
placement for desired soil and water quality will require care.
36
-------
Assuming that resistant coarse fragments (gravel, cobble and
boulder sizes) will be undesirable at the land surface, it
will be necessary to bury the topmost layer.
necessary to bury the topmost layer.
Two zones are potentially toxic from reduced sulphur compounds
not over-compensated by basic constituents. These are associated
with the Lower Bakerstown Coal and bone coal at 47 to 51 feet
(14 to 16 meters) below the land surface at the point represented
by the test bore; and by a recognizably dark colored zone (Munsel 1
Color Value of 5 or lower) at the 12 to 14 foot (3 to 4 meter) depth
below the land surface at the same location. Presumably, this
horizon (35 feet (10.7 meters) above the Lower Bakerstown)
corresponds to the Upper Bakerstown horizon of the region. The
acid potential here is relatively minor and could be neutralized
with potentially alkaline mudstones present elsewhere in the
section .
Maximum carbonates (primarily calcite) occur in the gray shale
(or mudstone) at 41 feet (12.5 meters) from the surface.
Between 21 feet (6.4 meters) (6 feet (1.8 meters) below the
Upper Bakerstown Horizon) and 45 feet (13.7 meters) (2 feet
(0.6 meters) above the Lower Bakerstown) sulphur contents
range downward from 0.3 percent, which could cause toxicity
except that sufficient neutralizing potential is present to
assure net alkalinity throughout.
Decisions regarding detailed placement of materials for desired
soil and water quality should be based on detailed information
about available plant nutrients and textures of weathering mud-
stones represented as well as on the net acid-base accounts.
Field clues could be developed to guide machinery operators in
the choice of materials for planned placement.
Materials present in the overburden could accommodate a wide
variety of plants and land uses. Ideal placement and treatment
would be influenced by decisions about anticipated land use.
For instance, surface cobbles and stones would be incompatible
with efficient use of farm machinery as required on meadowland.
On the other hand, they might be considered desirable in some
woodland intended for recreation whereas high percentages of
clay would be undesirable. But fertile calcareous mudstones
would make productive meadowlands even through clay contents
were relatively high.
Choices of plants would depend on land use and soil placements.
However, a well -adapted forage mixture of general usefulness would
be: birdsfoot trefoil 15 pounds (6.8 kilograms); white clover 5 pounds
(2.3 kilograms); tall fescuegrass 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) and
redtop 5 pounds (2.3 kilograms).
37
-------
Material between 21 and *»5 feet (6.k and 13.7 meters) below the
surface is chemically favorable for plant growth without liming.
Forage establishment and early growth would be favored by
500 pounds (560.2 kilograms/hectare) per acre of 15-15-0 fertilizer
or equivalent. Other plant nutrients appear to be satisfactory.
38
-------
SECTION VI
PROPOSED PLANS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
MINING PLAN
Overburden Thickness: Figure 13 presents contours on the base of the coal.
These contours are based on coal elevations obtained during surveying and
on test boring information. In addition, Figure 12 shows Isopachs of
thickness from the base of the coal to the present ground surface.
Clearing and Grubbing: Approximately 30 acres (12 hectares) are covered
by third growth timber and old spoil in which pine and fir trees
(Christmas Trees) are growing. This area should be cleared, the marketable
timber and pulp wood sold and the remaining brush slashed and buried or
burned. Burning is recommended if permitted by Air Pollution Control Laws.
If air pollution regulations prohibit burning, the slashed material should be
buried as stripping progresses.
Stripping Topsoil : The upper 2 feet
should be stripped from the 25 acres
within the existing highwalls. This
areas,
(6.1 decimeters) of topsoil material
(10 hectares) more or less included
material should be stockpiled in two
Overburden Excavation and Coal Removal and Sale; The mining plan is indi
cated on Figure 14. It is anticipated that this operation will proceed
in the following sequence:
Open Existing Keyway: The first step should be to open the exist-
ing keyway above Sediment Basin No. I as shown on Figure 14. This
operation should be followed by a general grading of the existing
pits left by the Buffalo Coal Company stripping. This general
grading should be done to provide good drainage in the existing
Buffalo Coal Company pits.
Cut Sequence: The mining should
Figure 14. The first cur should
highwall as indicated by Cut 1.
to the southwest of the existing
after Cut 1 has been made. This
B, and C as indicated.
proceed in the sequence shown on
be around the west of the existing
The small block of coal remaining
pit can be removed at any stage
should be accomplished by Cuts, A,
39
-------
;\- HJ.LI
;: i i ;bnt-*=i^.
CO
x
Q.
O
LU
O
(C
13
CD
(£
UJ
>
O
TJ
C
O
CO
cr
^
o
H
Z
O
o
UJ
(/>
<
CD
O
O
to
0>
i_
3
O»
-------
.
(^=j^-^^~- -~. - u-" i
\s ~ ^"\--^
'., ^==-' -<" '^v/ \
i... X >/
UJ
2
UJ
X
o
o
z
z
o
UJ
(O
o
0.
o
a:
a.
a>
i_
a
o>
u.
-------
Either Cut 2 or Cut 12 could be taken next. If two sets of equipment
are available, mining of the east of the site (Cuts 13 through 17)
and the west of the site (Cuts 2 through 11) could proceed simul-
taneously. If only one set of equipment is available, the mining
should progress in the exact numerical sequence indicated on
Figure 1A.
It is recommended that no equipment operate on top of the coal
while removing the overburden. This is because of the danger of
a shovel or other piece of equipment falling into the old mine
entries and rooms. In addition, deterioration and contamination
of the coal could occur if equipment worked on top of the coal.
Either a high front shovel or a dragline could be used. However,
not being able to operate on the coal and the necessity of being
selective with the overburden material suggest that a dragline
would probably be the more efficient piece of equipment.
Material Selection: During overburden removal, the material
removed should be cast in such a manner that the upper 10 feet
(3 meters) of the soil material existing above the gray shale
bedrock is cast on top of the spoil. This requirement should
present no difficulty to the operator since the materials are
readily discernable on the basis of color and ease of excavation.
The brownish soil material being removed can easily be placed
on top of the gray shale material previously removed.
Toxic Material: The upper portion of the coal materials being
removed represents the significant acid producing layer at the
site. This material is potentially toxic to plant growth. As
much of this material as possible should be mixed with the coal
and sold. Any remaining material should be buried at the base
of the spoil pile on the low wall side of the cut being made.
Coal: Analyses of the coal at the project site are presented on
the table on the following page. As indicated from these analy-
ses, the full 50 inches (1.3 meters) section of the coal is some-
what high in sulfur and ash and may or may not be marketable de-
pending upon the market conditions at the time of mining.
Removal of the upper one foot of roof coal or bone coal will
probably produce a product estimated to be similar to the Truck
Top Sample reported in the following table. However, the bottom
30 inches (7-6 decimeters) of coal tested on March 31, 1972 was
an exceptionally good grade of coal, low in sulfur and ash, and
should yield a very good price.
At the time of mining, a marketing study should be made to
determine whether sale of the entire 50 inches (1.3 meters)
section of coal, sale of the section with the bone coal removed
of the sale of the bottom 30 inches (7.6 decimeters) will produce
the greatest return.
-------
COAL ANALYSIS
Lower Bakerstown Coal
Buffalo Coal Company Strip Mine
Tasker Site
May 10, 1972 - Truck Top Sample
Moisture 2.03%
Ash 18.00%
Sulfur 1.37?
BID 12409
#9 Coke Button
March 13^ 1972 - Channel Sample
Moi sture
Ash
Sulfur
BTU
Full 50 In.
0.27 cm)
2.662
25.193
3.65*
#8 Coke Button
Bottom 30
(76.2 cm)
3-70%
6.82%
.67%
#9 Coke
In.
Button
The Lower Bakerstown Coal is reported to be irregular in thickness
and to contain at least one and sometimes several shale partings.
As noted in the section discussing previous mining, the Briggs
and Martin mine was reported to have been abandoned when a large
clay seam was encountered.
Consequently, the quantity in place and the scheme for marketing
the coal which will produce the greatest return can only be
determined as daylighting progresses.
-------
SITE RECLAMATION
Existing and "First Cut" Spoil;
Spoil on North: The existing spoil from the abandoned stripping
around the north and northwest of the site should be pshed back
into the adjacent abandoned strip pits. Thisoperation probably
can best be accomplished as the successive strip cuts indicated on
Figure ]k reach their northern limits. At that time the existing
spoil can be pushed into the abandoned strip pit and the dragline
can deposit soil material being excavated over this spoil.
Spoil on East and South: Any "orphan" gob or bone piles on the
north and northeast periphery of the project site should be
panned into the central void left at the completion of cuts II
and 17 as shown on Figure H.
The abandoned spoil to the east of Buffalo Coal Company's operation
and the spoil from the Buffalo Coal operation and from Cuts 1 and
12 should be removed by pan or scraper and also deposited in the
central void left at the completion of daylighting. Panning this
material into the central void should result in the potentially
toxic material in this spoil being buried and the original upper
soil material ending up once again on top.
Final Site Plan; A recommended final site plan is presented in Figure 15.
Th is si te plan endeavors to restore the original topography. The suggested
site plan also is compatible with the previously recommended scheme for
daylighting and disposing of existing spoil.
Maximum Slopes: The maximum original slope occurred at approxi-
mately the section indicated on Figure 15 and is estimated to
have been about 23% (13°) The recommended final plan has
final slopes along the south of the project site about 20%
(11-1/2°).
Land Useage: The recommended final plan is compatible with a
range of future land use. It is particularly favorable to
agricultural useage since considerable, reasonably level land
is provided. As topsoil development and enrichment occur,
conversion to forest land would be possible.
Grading Plan: Following completion of the mining or daylighting
operation and the removal and burial in the central void of
existing spoil, the following sequence of grading operations is
suggested:
Regrading of reclaimed Upole Mine with excess material
graded to the approximate location of the Buffalo Coal
Company strip pits.
-------
Ul
CO
O
a.
o
a:
a.
3
O>
-------
Grading of the northwest, north and northeast peripheral
areas, grading any excess material toward the approximate
previous locations of the Stickell and Hauck strip pits (See
Figure 12) to contours shown on Figure 15.
Grading of area daylighted to contours shown on Figure 15.
This grading should be performed in such a manner that the
soil material is spread over the top surface.
Distribution of stockpiled topsoil on all areas outside of
the original highwall locations and grading of these areas
to contours shown on Figure 15.
Eros ion Control; Particular control measures are necessary to reduce
erosion on the southern slopes of the reclaimed area. The following are
recommended:
A diversion ditch at the top of slope as shown on Figure 15 is
recommended. This ditch should be 20 feet (6.1 meters) wide and
have a parabolic cross-section as shown in Figure 16.
A riprap section at the location indicated on Figure 15 and having
the section shown on Figure 16 should be constructed to carry the
discharge from the parabolic diversion ditch to the ditch leading
to the sedimentation basin.
Fine grading the slope to produce ridges of earth at approximate
10 feet (3 meters) spacings following the contours is recommended.
A section of this slope is shown on Figure 16. All equipment
working on this slope should follow the contours. Formation of
the earth ridges and final grading should be accomplished by
back-blading to remove depressions by the grousers on the dozer
treads perpendicular to the contour formed.
Soil Amendments: The surface shall be prepared, lime (if required) and
fertilizer spread and the surface disced following the contour exactly.
The amounts of lime and the Fertilizer specification will be recommended
following more detailed studies made by Professor Smith at the Univeristy
of West Virginia as the mining progresses. For preliminary estimating
purposes, Dr. Smith's tentative recommendation of 500 pounds per acre
(560.2 kilograms per hectare) of 15-15-0 fertilizer with no liming
required was used
Seeding and Mulching: One of the seeding mixtures included on Page 3-903
of the proposed "Standards and Specifications for Seeding Strip Mine
Areas in Western Maryland" included in the Appendix to this report should
be selected. This selection will be dependent upon the planting season.
The planting should be accomplished according to the Specifications.
Mulching and mulch anchoring should follow the proposed Specifications.
Hay mulch is recommended if obtainable and if free of noxious weeds such
as Canada Thistle, Johnsongrass and Quackgrass.
-------
6 FREEBOARD
PARABOLIC DITCH No Scol«
FORMED ON CONTOUR BY
BACKBLADING"with DOZER or GRADER
S E C T I 0 N "C" No Scole
SECTION "B"
RIPRAP SLOPE PROTECTION
No Scale
F'igure 16 - MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS
-------
CONTINUING WATER QUALITY MONITORING
Stations on Lostland Run: It is recommended that the present sampling
stations on Lostland Run be relocated and improved by establishing
permanent stream flow gaging stations at the following locations:
On South Prong Lostland Run, just downstream of the mouth of
the unnamed west tributary.
On South Prong Lostland Run, just upstream of the mouth of North
Prong Lostland Run.
On Lostland Run just upstream of the North Branch of the Potomac
River.
These gauging stations should be designed and calibrated to give continuous
recordings of stream flow quantities at these locations.
Water Quality Sampling on Lostland Run; As soon as the above three stream
gauging stations are established, the program of weekly sampling should be
reinstituted.
Purpose of Lostland Run Sampling: The purpose of the three stations on
Lostland Run is to determine the project impact. The stations above and
below the source will indicate changes in pollution load during and
following project implementation.
The station at the mouth of Lostland Run will indicate the effect of the
project in reducing the pollution load discharged by Lostland Run into
the North Branch of the Potomac River.
Monitoring of Site Discharge::
Continuous Monitoring: It is recommended that a continuous,
automatic recording water quality and flow quantity monitoring
station be established on the discharge of Sediment Basin No. 1
and that an automatic recording flow quantity monitoring gauge
be established on the discharge of Sediment Basin No. 2. It is
felt that, with the mining and grading plan recommended, only a
minor quantity of water will enter Sediment Basin No. 2 and the
detailed grading plans will provide for the extension of the
drainage collection ditch across the haul road to connect with
the ditch which extends east of Sediment Basin No. 1. This will
result in the ultimate abandonment of Sediment Basin No. 2.
Weekly Samples: It is recommended that, in addition, weekly
water quality samples be obtained at the discharges of the two
sediment basins. These should be taken concurrently with the
samples on Lostland Run.
-------
Analysis of Weekly Water Quality Samples: The five weekly grab samples
from the three stations on Lostland Run and the sediment basin discharges
should be analyzed for the following physical and chemical properties:
Physical Properties: Temperature, Turbidity, Total Solids,
Filterable Sol ids
Chemical Properties: pH, Total Acidity, Mineral Acidity, Alkalinity,
Total Iron, Ferrous Iron, Sulfate, Aluminum,
Calcium, Manganese, Magnesium
Automatic Monitor - Sediment Basin:
Stage Recorder: The discharge from the standpipes of both sediment
basins should discharge into a poured concrete basin filled with a
V-notch weir. The water levels in these basins should be monitored
with continuously recording stage gauging instrumentation.
pH and Conductivity: The discharge from Sediment Basin No. 1
should be automatically monitored for pH and conductivity with
continuously recording instruments.
PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND CONTRACTUAL CONSIDERATIONS
Acquisition of Surface and Mineral Rights; The policy of the "Abandoned
Mine Drainage Program" of the State of Maryland is to acquire ownership
of both surface and mineral rights to any property involved in a project
or obtain easements as previously described. Hence, the first step in
implementation of the Daylighting Project will be to acquire property
ownership and/or obtain easements. No negotiation, contract or work can
commence before ownership or easements are required. Currently, a
negotiator for the State of Maryland is in the field investigating
this factor.
Contract^: One of the more difficult factors in implementation of this
project wil1 be arriving at a contract that meets the approval of both
the State of Maryland and the Environmental Protection Agency that
yields a reasonable, but not excessive, profit to the contractor selected
to do the work.
Most of the earthmoving, grading and revegetation quantities can be
estimated within reasonable limits prior to construction. Thus, the
costs for most items can be reasonably estimated at the time of
contracting. The major unknown factors which quite significantly
influence the net cost of the project are the quantity and selling
price of the coal. Arranging for a contract which will consider these
factors, which will assure the State of Maryland that the construction
budget will not be exceeded and which will not result in either loss or
excessive profit to the contractor will be very difficult. The following
possibilities for reaching a contract arrangement for the Daylighting
Project are suggested:
-------
Bid on Lump Sum Basis: In this type of arrangement, the construc-
tion contract would be let on the basis of a lump sum cost for the
entire job. The contractors bidding on the job would arrive at
their own estimate of the coal remaining in place and would estimate
the average selling price for coal over the life of the mining
phase of the project. On the basis of these estimates, contractors
would bid one lump sum figure for the complete job and the contract
would be awarded to the lowest bid of a qualified contractor.
Under this arrangement, the contractor would lose or gain if the
quantity of coal still in place varied from the estimate or if the
selling price of coal fluctuated.
Advantages: The advantages of such an arrangement are that
the contract is let following competitive bidding, the State
of Maryland is assured of the cost of the project and careful
and continuing monitoring of material quantities is not
needed for payment.
Disadvantages: The major disadvantages of such an arrange-
ment is that costs for various work items would be difficult
to account for and separate. Since the study of costs is
one of the objectives of the proposed project, this is a
major disadvantage. In addition, the contractor could end
up with an inordinately high profit which could lead to
public criticism of the project.
Bid on Lump Sum Basis for Construction Only: In such an arrange-
ment, contractors would submit a lump sum bid price for all work
items. The qualified contractor with the lowest lump sum bid
price for the sum of all construction I terns would be awarded the
contract. The State of Maryland would arrange separately for the
sale of the coal. The monies acquired for the sale of the coal
would be applied to payment of the contractor.
Advantages: The State of Maryland would benefit from any
recovery of coal in excess of the quantity estimated and
from any increase in the sale price of coal over the life
of the project. There would be no opportunity for public
criticism on the basis of the contractor making an inordinately
high profit.
Disadvantages: The principal disadvantages of this arrange-
ment are that no unit costs would be directly obtainable and
that the total net cost of the project could vary and would be
difficult to predict. The obtaining of unit costs is one of
the principal objectives of the project. In addition, the
State of Maryland would have to make all arrangements for sale
of coal, and accept the possibility of the net cost of the
project exceeding the budgeted amount.
50
-------
Bid on Unit Price Basis: In this type of arrangement, contractors
bidding on the job would submit unit prices for the various items
of work. The contract would be awarded to the qualified contractor
whose unit prices bid yielded the lowest estimated cost for the
construction based on estimated quantities furnished by the Engineer,
The State of Maryland would arrange for and benefit from the sale of
the coal. Such monies would be placed in a separate account and
applied to the payment of the contractor's charges for the project.
Advantages: This could result in the lowest cost of the
project to the State of Maryland based on the possibility of
recoverable coal in excess of estimated quantities and a con-
tinuing increase in the selling price of coal. It would pre-
clude the realization of an excessive profit by the contractor.
An arrangement of this type would satisfy one of the prime
objectives of the project by furnishing relatively accurate
cost data.
Disadvantages: The basic disadvantage of such a contract
would be the inability to predict the final cost of the project
before the project was completed. The total project cost
could be considerably above estimates, should the selling
price of coal drop drastically or should some unforseen factor
reduce the quantity of recoverable coal significantly below
the estimate.
Bid on Cost Plus a Fixed Fee Basis: This arrangement would be a
variation from the above in that unit costs for the various construc-
tion items would be submitted in lieu of unit prices. An addi-
tional bid Item would be the contractor's fixed fee for performing
the work. The contractor would arrange for the fee for performing
the work. The contractor would arrange for the sale of the coal
but the money recovered from this sale would be held in an account
and applied to payment of the contractor's cost and fee.
Advantages: An arrangement of this type would have the advantages
of the unit price arrangement. In addition, the State of Maryland
would be relieved of involvement in the sale of the coal. There is
a possibility that lower unit costs might be bid because the con-
tractor's fee would not be tied to the quantities involved. The
job might be completed in less time since the contractor's percent-
age profit would increase with decrease of costs resulting from
reduction in construction time. Any decrease in total construction
time would result in a decrease in costs for engineering field
representation.
51
-------
Negotiation: A construction contract could be awarded following
negotiation with a single contractor on any of the preceding bases.
In addition to the advantages and disadvantages noted previously,
the following points should be noted:
Advantages: Possibly lower unit prices or unit costs could
be obtained. Buffalo Coal Company, who submitted a letter
of intent with the-, original project application, has an
existing contract with Virginia Electric Power Company for
coal. Therefore, new arrangements would not be necessary for
coal sale, should the Buffalo Coal Company complete successful
negotiations with the State of Maryland. Buffalo Coal Company
has a stripping operation in close proximity to the project
site and has a more favorable position since moving and mobili-
zation costs would be less. The possibility of some "good
will" contribution by Buffalo Coal Company exists. Buffalo
Coal Company has cooperated fully during Phase I and indicated
a willingness to contribute significantly to the project
during the application stage.
Disadvantages: The two principal disadvantages to negotiating
would be that comparative unit prices or unit costs would not
be available. Unless a complete audit of Buffalo Coal Company
were undertaken, the actual cost might be hard to determine.
Obtaining relative cost data is one of the prime objectives
of the project. Secondly, the contracting regulations of
both the Department of General Services of the State of
Maryland and the Grants Administration Division of the
Environmental Protection Agency may make a negotiated
contract on such a sizeable project impossible.
TIME SCHEDULE
Proposed Time Schedule: A preliminary time schedule is presented in
Figure 17. This time schedule is based on mining progressing one cut at
a time. It provides for final planting within a planting season. This
schedule could be revised by construction using two sets of equipment
and making simultaneous cuts. The time schedule is tight and indicates
the necessity to proceed promptly with contract negotiation, land
acquisition and construction.
52
-------
ly f a
1975
1974
Seot 1
*JC|SI 1
Aug. 1 -
July 1
June 1 -
Moy 1
Apr. 1 -
Mor. 1 -
Jon. 1 -
Dec 1 -
Nov 1 -
Oct. 1 -
Sept.l -
Aug 1 -
July i -
June I -
MOV 1
Apr 1 _
Mar 1 -
Jon 1 ~
Dec 1 -
Nov 1 -
Ort 1 -
Sept I -
Aug 1 ~
PLANT
o
z
0
or
0
v
A
/ \
Ui
K
UJ
a.
2
O
O
o
z
z
2
z
o
5 °
cc 5
£ f
l&J ^
en
or
w iZ
S
»<*§
zoo:
< UJ 1-
_IQ. z
Q-OT 8
NA^V^V
u>
z
._
a:
o
r~
Z
O
z
>/\A
Figure 17 - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
-------
SECTION VII
COST ESTIMATE
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS TO COMPLETE PROJECT
Mm Ing and Rec 1 amat Ion:
Estimated Cost: $476,760.00
Minus Credit For Coal Sale -191,000.00
Minus Credit For Required Reclamation - 4,500.00
Estimated Net Cost 281,260.00
Water Analyses 6,450.00
Additional Soil Nutrient Analyses
Phase II and Phase III 3,800.00
Engineering Plus Fees (Including Stream Gauging
Stations ($2,300.00) and Sediment Monitor-
ing Stations ($4,460.00) 191,225.00
TOTAL OF ABOVE ITEMS: $482,735-00
Phase II and Phase III State of Maryland Salaries and Expenses are not
included in the above total.
There will be a carry-over to Phase II of the $10,000 budgeted in Phase I
for construction of the sediment ponds and interceptor ditches.
MINING AND RECLAMATION
The following table contains the estimated quantities and approximate unit
costs for the various items necessary in daylighting and reclamation. The
unit costs used are based on bids received on Quick Start Projects in
Pennsylvania and discussions with persons familiar with mining and recla-
mation in western Maryland.
-------
ESTIMATE OF QUANTITIES AND COSTS
I tern
Clearing and Grubbing
Strip and Stockpile Topsoil
Overburden Removal
Distribute Old Spoil
Grading
Spread Topsoi1
Parabolic Ditch
Additional Grading On Slopes
(Ridge Formation)
Riprap Section
Fertilize, Disc, Seed & Mulch
Estimated
_Q.uant i ty
Estimated
Unit Price
$75.00
30 Acres
88,000 Yds.3 $ 0.50
1,460,000 Yds.3 $ 0.23
234,000 Yds.3 $ 0.20
70 Acres $100.00
88,000 Yds.3 $ 0.25
1,820 Ft. $ 0.50
35 Acres
380 Ft.
70 Acres
$100.00
$10.00
$150.00
Total Estimated Cost Of Mining And Reclamation:
Estimated
Price
$ 2,250.00
44,000.00
336,000.00
46,800.00
7,000.00
22,000.00
910.00
3,500.00
3,800.00
10,500.00
$476,760.00
NOTE: To convert acres to hectares, multiply by 0.4047.
NOTE: To convert feet to meters, multiply by 0.3048.
NOTE: To convert cubic yards to cubic meters, multiply by 0.7646.
It is estimated that construction of interceptor ditches and sedimentation
basins can be completed within the amount budgeted in Phase I ($10,000).
GAUGING STATIONS
The costs for the three gauging stations is estimated to be $2,300 using
the following estimated costs for materials and labor.
55
-------
:OST PER STATION
Descrt.ptIon Estimated Cost
l» Ft.-36 In. (1.2 Meters - 3\.k Centimeters)
Corrugated Steel Pipe At $24.00/Ft.
(30.5 Centimeters) $ 96.00
Automatic Stage Recorder $300.00
Station Enclosure $100.00
Riprap $ 30.00
Labor $2^0.00
TOTAL COST PER STATION: $766.00
Thus, the estimated cost of 3 stations is: 3 x $766.00 = $2,300.00
WATER QUALITY STATIONS AT SEDIMENT BASINS
Sediment Basin No. 1: It is recommended that a stilling basin be con-
structed at the outfall of the discharge of Sediment Basin No. I and that
an automatic continuously recording station measuring stage, pH and
conductivity be installed. The estimated cost of this installation is
as follows:
Stilling Basin and Station Enclosure Construction $ 880.00
pH Probe and Instrumentation $ 600.00
Conductivity Probe and Instrumentation $1,500.00
Automatic Stage Recorder $ 300.00
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $3,280.00*
^Assumes the enclosure for the instruments will be furnished by EPA.
-------
Sediment Basin No. 2: Since it is estimated that only a small portion
of drainage from the site will enter Sediment Basin No. 2 and since early
abandonment of this Basin is anticipated, it is not recommended that pH
and conductivity instruments be installed. Hence, the total estimated
cost is $1,180.
WATER ANALYSIS
Phase II; Assuming that the daylighting project proceeds according to the
schedule presented in Figure 19, sampling and analyses will be required for
a total of 27 months or 120 weeks. Thus, a total of 600 analyses will be
required during this phase of the project.
Phase III: The Phase I I I or Post-Daylighting monitoring will be con-
tinued for a 12 month or 52 week period. Thus, 260 analyses will be
required during this phase.
Estimated Costs: Recent studies in the Cumberland Lab of the Maryland
Water Resources Administration have resulted in a cost estimate of
$7.50 per analysis. Thus, the total estimated cost for the water analyses
required during Phase II and Phase III is:
850 Analyses x $7-50 = $6,450.00
ADDITIONAL COSTS TO THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Additional costs will be incurred by the State of Maryland. These costs
will include but not be limited to the following items:
Salary of the Project Director.
Salary of the Administrator of the Cumberland Lab.
Secretarial Salaries.
Overhead on These Salaries
Expenses
Transporter ion
Telephone
Lodging
Meals
Mailing and Reproduction
Report Presentation
These expenses must be evaluated in determining the project costs. How-
ever, this determination is beyond the scope of this study.
RECOVERY FROM SALE OF COAL
An estimated 45,000 tons (40,800 metric tons) of coal remain in place.
If the sale price for the coal in the pit is estimated at $4.25, the
recovery from the sale of the coal would be an estimated $191,000.
57
-------
The preceding estimate is based on:
25 acres (10.1 hectares) to be stripped.
36 inches (91 centimeters) of salable coal.
33% representing the probably minimum coal in place considering
the dates and records of deep mining.
ADJUSTMENT FOR PRESENTLY UNRECLAIMED STRIP MINE
About 15 acres (6.1 hectares) of unreclaimed Buffalo Coal Company strip
mine area remain. Buffalo Coal Company must reclaim this disturbed area
under their existing permit. Since an estimated cost of reclaiming this
land at $300 per acre (.40A7 hectares) would be $^,500, a credit of this
amount should be considered in the project costs.
This credit will appear either as a deduction from construction costs
should Buffalo Coal Company be awarded the contract for the work or an
assessment against Buffalo Coal Company should others do the work.
-------
SECTION VIII
APPENDIX A
TABLES 1-16
59
-------
(B3 i/6iu)
wnmv3
(6W i/ftu)
WniSBNOVW
(J3JJ 1/61U)
sanos 3iav3i.Li.3s
(£03B3 l/6i")
Aimnvxiv ivioi
(''OS l/6u>)
aivjins
("W l/&««)
3S3NV9NVW
(IV 1/&U)
wnHiwmv
NOVII snoaasj
('J 1/6UJ)
Noai ivioi
(£03B3 1/6"1)
All Q 13V 1VU3NIW
(£03B3 t/6w)
All Q 13V 10H IViOl
(nor)
Aiiaiauni
( Jai!l/5Mi )
sanos asAiossia
( J3J!t/6w ) 1
sonos a3QN3dsns
OoS.Z § un/soqiun)
33NV13naN03 3ldl33dS
Hd
(J.)
aynivu3dW3i
(s*3)
ttOU
31VQ
:
i
i
c
c
cc
i
i
t
i
k
o
0
NO
1
O
0*1
in
NO
!
!
Is
v^>
o-\
I
1
-3-
0
2
i
i
t
i
a
o
NO
1
1
1
1
O
O
in
o
i
i
tn
:
VD
cr\
%
i
i
CM
1
1
O
CO
O
CO
1
m
O
NO
1
1
[
0
I-.
0
r~-
o
o
CM
c
CO
LTV
m
LTV
-3-
o
o
trv
!>
CM
CO
1
CO
r-»
-a-
-3-
ra
0
CTl
O
r--
0
^^
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
u\
1
1
1
0
m
o
m
ZI
1
o
VO
O
CO
1
1
o
CM
i
in
m
in
-3-
O
CM
\
CM
NO
in
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
CM
0
CM
1
co
CM
1
1
1
1^
ff\
1
0
cr\
CM
-3*
no
'CO
o~>
\
CM
1
1
1
t
1
O
r»>
l
1
1
l
1
O
CM
-3-
1
1
O
ra
m
O
co
^j-
i
-3-
1
CM
r^i
O
in
CO
CO
NO
CM
\
CM
eo
*
i*
f«.
-a-
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
0
l-~
o
r-^
o
NO
NO
o
NO
CM
1
1
1
1
f~-
er\
i
i
o
(T.
CM
l~-
p^
in
CM
o
in
CM
0
^
NO
in
o
in
o
IT
O
o
fl
0
NO
O
CO
o
-3"
O
in
c
c
aa
-
CM
CM
CM
-3-
-3-
NO
1
CM
-T
n-i
c^
NO
O
S
1
l
l
1
l
O
co
CM
1
1
1
1
O
co
i
CO
in
o
NO
-3-
CM
rr\
0
CO
CM
r^
m
0
0
CO
ro
\
CM
O
z
i-
V)
O
-------
(3 |/6iu)
wnmv3
HHIS3N9VW
(jaj!l/6tu)
sanos 3iav3ij.i3s
( 03e3 I/**")
UINIIVXIV IVIOJL
(*/OS I /6"1)
(UN |/6uj)
3S3NVDNVW
(IV l/6w)
wnNiwmv
HNI snomj
NOVII 1V101
UIOI3V WVJ3NIW
XilQ 13V IOH 1VJ.01
((130
xnaiaani
sanos asAiossia
( J3} j |/6ui )
sanos 03QN3dsns
(3.SZ § uo/soquin)
33W13naH03 3UI33dS
-
(do)
3vmivy3d'»J3i
M01J
3,
-3"
o
o
c
oc
1
1
1
1
1
o
i
i
o
-3-
O
oo
CM
1
LA
LA
0
SO
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
CSI
O
LA
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
O
(TV
CSI
1
0
PA
LA
SO
_
so
1
LA
OO
O
1
1
1
1
1
C
c>
U
1
1
1
1
1
c
1
o
CO
o
1C
LA
1
1
1
1
1
r-.
so
i
i
i
i
-3-
CM
0
1
1
1
1
1
-a-
a
c
c
i
i
o
I
0
-a-
rv
i
i
o
i
i
0
^
o
"^
1 1
o
\4
e
i
i
i
CS
O
-3
O
^_
C
CO
e
c
o
o
a
SO
r-
i
i
o
oo
LA
0
SO
0
-3-
1 .
o
i
i
i
i
o
LA
1
1
1
1
O
LA
1
1
O
so
-X
1
o
i
i
_
SO
o
"-
oo
pa
2
0
I
1
1
O
0
o
fv
o
o
o
LA
O
O
so
O
CSI
co
0
o
^
LA
»/\
pa
S
CM
<
O
SO
$
1
1
1
f
1
0
1
o
CM
^
1
-r
i
i
01
so
O
CM
so
CO
CM
C
1
c
ff
c
a
i
o
i
i
i
i
-s-
1
1 .
LA
CM
0-,
LA
O
LA
LA
CM
LA
O
CM
1
1
1
1
C
-»
LT
U"
1
1
1
O
1
1
o
SO
O
1
1
J
so
LA
LA
PA
pa
(N
CM
U
a
|
i
i
c
a
o
i
o
i
t
i
i
en
CO
i
LA
LA
LA
so
O
-
LA
CM
CM
1
1
1
1
1
O
-»
O
ir
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
i
i
CM
SO
in
i
i
oo
1
LA
LA
LA
-3"
O
J-
SO
CM
CM
to
OO
i
i
i
i
i
o
o
LA
CSI
O
o
pa
O
1
1
1
r-.
I
LA
pa
CO
so
0
-
o
CM
CM
0
V
a
u
r-
c
u*
C
p*"
If
o
IT*
C
O
0
o
o
CM
oo
CO
-3-
LA
LA
^
so
O
LA
CO
O",
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
CSI
0
o
o
1
1
0
1
1
o
CM
CM
1
1
1
O
-3-
__
f-
o
CM
LA
OC
SO
CN
1
1
,
1
1
O
o
o
CN
-------
wnmv3
WniS3NOVW
SOIIOS 319V31113S
AllNIIVXItf 1VJ.OJ.
(''OS I /.&">)
3ivdins
(UK i/6ui)
3S3NV9NVW
(IV l/6w)
wnNiwmv
NO*. sn<««d
MINI 1V4.01
(£03«3 1/6*1)
AII QI 3v 1WJ3NJW
(^03B3 I/61*1)
All Q 13V 10H 1V10I
AiioiSS
( J9JI 1/6UI )
SQI10S Q3A10SSIO
( J3) 1 |/6UI )
sanos asaNSdsns
33NV13ntlH03 3IJI33dS
*
(Jo)
3HIUVyJdW31
MOId
aiva
1
1
1
1
1
1
e
c
o
CM
1
I
1
1
1 .
CO
1
1
0
CA
CA
1
1
1
1
o
\0
LA
o
1
1
1
o
o
0
1
1
1
1
1
o
LA
o
1
1
1
1
o
c
1
o
p^
1
CM
o
2
1
t
1
1
CO
o
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
vO
1
1
1
1
II
II
o
c->
1
1
o
C'
co
o
LA
1
1
1
CA
1
1
1
-T
CM
o
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
o
1
o
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
0
CO
1
1
o
or
IT
1
1
1
0
-3-
vO
o
-3-.
o
CM
CM
LA
CO
f--
-3-
.*>
in
VO
CM
1
1
LA
CM
cA
o
CO
o
0
1
1
I
i
o
o
CM
1
1
1
1
1
0
CM
en
i
i
CM
CA
in
CM
CA
1
1
CO
-3-
1
1
LA
O
1^
O
o
r-.
-3-
-3-
LA
1
1
1
O
O
in
o
CM
O
LA
CO
CA
-3-
O
VO
VO
CM
CM
-3-
CM
LA
0
-3"
O
a-
o
CO
CM
1
1
1
1
1
O
If
ir
i
i
i
i
[
o
in
i
o
CM
-3-
CA
1
1
CO
1
1
CA
-3-
O
CA
LA
CM
CO
CM
LA
O
CM
CM
CM
cr\
~
CM
vo
CM
CM
CM
O
cn
0
£
C""\
CN
c
rA
IT
J-
PI
LA
O
in
o
CO
LA
o
LA
O
C"
C3
LT
O
CO
O
CO
o
CO
vO
CM
O
CA
CM
vD
CA
CA
1
1
vO
O
CM
1
j
j
|
O
IT
1
1
1
1
1
O
J-
1
1
0
-3-
LTl
0
LA
LA
.3.
LA
-a-
CM
r~-
CA
i
i
i
CA
CM
10
o
z
CO
3
O
K
Itl
u.
O
v>
U
a
ro
Ul
62
-------
(3 i/6iu)
wnmv3
(6H i/6u)
W&IS3N3VW
(jaj|l/6ui)
SOI10S 31SV310J.3S
(£03*3 l/Siu)
AJ.HJI1V>nV 1V101
(I/OS l/6iu)
sivdins
(UW |/6ui)
3S3NV3NVW
(IV l/Bu)
wnNiwmv
NOUI snouviaj
(»d t/6u)
NOUI IViOi
(f03
i
i
i
o
o
vO
O
c«">
1
1
-3-
O
^
O
--»
o
1
1
1
1
d
LT
CXI
1
I
1
1
O
LTI
CO
1
1
VO
VO
o
r^
i
i
CM
0
VO
**"}
-3-
f"»
1
1
ao
\
o
i
i
i
i
i
o
Wl
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
tn
CO
1
1
o
r^
f^
VD
-3-
r-
i
i
1
CO
fl
1
1
-3"
fM
^^
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
\o
2
o
SO
O
1
1
o
O
ITi
1
O
,
C"l
f^l
o
o
CO
ra
~^
O
CTl
r^
i
.
o
CO
0
vO
o
Y*"\
O
01
O
r-~
m
o
VO
. o
rg
O
O
VO
ro
O
^f
vO
Cvl
-3-
CM
-»
-3-
CO
m
n
0
-3-
_
CM
»-»
1
1
1
a
o
o
i
i
i
i
o
ef
a-
l
VD
tn
r»"
i
0
i
u\
if\
oa
i^
in
^r\
co
CM
\
vO
C
.
1
1
1
1
1
O
-3-
O
CM
O
IA
1
O
1
1
VO
CM
1
Ln
CM
f
tr\
if\
ir\
fr\
in
0
CM
1
1
1
1
1
1
rn
1
1
1
i
.1
l
0
f\
1
o
a-
i
o
LTl
1
^
VD
-
-3-
VO
rr .
VD
O
^
1
1
1
1
LA
VO
1
^
1
1
O
CO
CM
1
CM
O>
CO
£
O
Cf\
LA
CM
CM
-3"
O
O
fM
en
x»
o
Z
Z
O
<
o
>-
K-
_J
oc
Ul
-------
(e0 i/Biu)
HnmvD
(BH i/6u)
HniS3N9VW
(J35II/61U)
sanos 3i8V3iii3s
(^0083 l/6ui)
AllNIIVXIV 1V101
(»/OS l/6ui)
3iv j ins
(UH (/BUI)
3S3NVDNVW
(IV l/6»")
wnNiwmv
NOMI sno>j>i3d
(3J I/BUJ)
No>ji ivioi
(E03B3 l/6lu)
A1IQI3V 1V»3NIW
(£o3«?3 t/5iu)
A1IO 13V 10H 1V101
(nor)
Aiiaiaani
( J3J!|/DU1 )
sanos 03A10SSIQ
( J3JJ |/6lU )
sanos asaNSdsns
(O.SZ 3 uio/soquin)
3DNV10naHOO Oldl03dS
Hd
(J.)
3aniVa!3dW3i
(**3)
rtOIJ
31VO
-a-
o
~x
o
v.
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
LA
CM
1
1
1
1
O
(M
1
1
1
O
CO
o
ff\
1
-3-
o
00
en
j-
i
i
i
i
CO
>*
o
1
1
1
c
vi
c
1
1
1
c
cs
1
1
1
v£
C
LT
O
LT
1
1
1
iN
If
1
1
_T
(1
O
,
1
1
1
1 O
cs
00
1 CM
O
o
0
CM
1
1
1
O
\o
r^
l
1
O
1
^_
LT\
1
r^\
^
0
vO
LT
1
t
1
O
\c
(~~
CM
C
v<
C
o
o
o
" «f
o
vO
oo
ro
,
oo
O~l
r~-
LT\
TV.
O
-3-
\
IT
1
1
0
CsJ
IT>
CM
C
o
o
CM
o
o
0
o
\o
\o
-3-
O
oo
r-s,
m
in
o
U1
in
§
CM
v
1
1
1
1
O
J)
VD
CM
1
O
1
1
o
ffi
o
r^
,
o
p
CM
U"»
O
^~
r^
i
00
CM
^,
r^>
LT\
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
O
^
1
O
o
1
1
IA
-a-
i
LTV
r^s
CM
U"l
o
-3-
m
\c
o
ir\
o
«M
<
C
L
C
1
C
1
1
c
c
t-
1
o
1
1
CM
un
o
-»
o->
o
o
CM
II
^v
CM
ro
j-
l
i
i
l i
i
0
o
_
1
'
o
o
I
1
o
a:
ui
<
CO
t-
V)
UJ
tc.
m
<
-------
C*3 l/6«0
wnmvo
(6M l/5u)
Wf)IS3N3VW
(J91JI/6UI)
SanOS 319V31113S
(£03eo t/6uj)
Aiinnvxiv "ivioj.
(fOS 1/6U)
aivjins
(uw |/6w)
3S3NV9NVH
(JV l/6«u)
wnHiwmv
NOVII SnOV>13d
(aj i/6ui)
NOVII 1V101
(£03e3 l/6ui)
All G 13V 1VU3NIW
(£03
LA
1
1
1
-3-
CM
^
O
1
1
1
1
1
o
c*
oo
-3-
O
O
1
o
CM
1
O
CM
CM
CM
1
O
CM
1
1
_
r-
o
a~>
i
i
re
~^
0
ir
i
i
i
i
o
\O
O
f"l
o
o
cv
o
§
o
_o
0
1^.
tr>
-3-
O
CM
0
^__
IS\
o
(Ti
LTt
O
f^
o
-^
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
-3"
-3-
CM
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
\o
t
1
-3"
rn
O
vO
i
c~\
-3"
1
1
OO
LA
LO
r-~
o
en
m
-3"
^-.
oc
1
1
1
o
Cs
O
CM
O
O
o
o
-3-
O
o
vO
O
vO
0
i
I
I
i
i
I
C
1
1
C
ca
r-
i
0
i
i
CM
LA
O
LA
-3-
oo
o
vO
CM
^,
CM
a
u
i
c
c
oc
c
c
1"
o
1
1
J
-T
rr
f
1
LA
1
O
|-~
O
-3"
CM
-T
O
CM
O
\
-3-
-3-
> CM
J-
O
LA.
0
vO
CM
O
r*^.
O
o
o
9
o
CSl
m
CM
LA
O
LA
f-^
-3-
vO
O
m
vO
-------
wnmvo
(6W [/5u)
IU1IS3NOVW
SOnOS 318V31113S
(^03^3 l/6ui)
xiinnvxiv IV.LOI
C/os i /BUI)
3S3NVONVW
(IV l/6ui)
wnNiwmv
NOHI snoa^sd
NOUI 1V101
All a 13V 1VU3NIW
(^03*3 l/5ui)
Alia 13V 10H 1V101
(nor)
Aiiaiauni
( J31| 1/&U1 )
sanos 03/nossia
sanos a3aN3dsns
(30Sc d uo/soquin)
;j3i!VI3naN03 OIJI3JdS
Hd
(Jo)
3aiuvJ3d,iJi
flOU
3iVd 1,
1
o
0
o
i
i
i
i
o
CS.
esi
Csl
i
i
i
i
i
O
1
i
Csl
ro
1
1
C
LA
LA
vO
LA
1
1
1
DO
O
1
1
1
1
O
\o
o
Cs,
Csl
1
1
1
1
1
O
1
1
cc
0
Csl
oc
CO
1
1
1
CO,
VO
1
1
1
T
0
1
1
CS
C
C
CS
oc
c-
c
1
c
1
o
a-
CSI
-3-
1
1
C
1
1
«r.
VC
O
CO
t
ro
O
CS
1
1
1
C
O
.
Csl
O
-J-
in
if
o
o
o
Csl
r-
CA
CSI
1
Csl
-a-
LA
O
m
0
Csl
O
c
c
Lf
1
1
1
1
1
1
C
a-
cc
1
o
CSI
O
o
SO
1
1
OO
oc
1
1
-3-
VO
O
CO
0
-a-
SO
1
1
0
o
Csl
O
o
CSI
§
0
O
-3"
LA
Csl
Csl
SO
CO
o
cc
Csl
3-
_
LA
LA
CO
so
CSI
Csl
1
1
j
1
1
O
-a-
O
1
,
1
1
o
1
1
c
ro
00
1
1
O
SC
t
1
CO
LA
O
CO
O
CM
00
Csl
CSI
-a-
i
i
i
i
o
CSI
O
O
r-.
i
1
o
i
i
i
i
Csl
1
1
ro
OO
-a-
o
so
O
o
LA
O
Csl
1
1
1
1
O
c
-a-
Csl
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
CO
1
O
-a-
CSI
1
1
O
1
1
SO
-3-
LA
Csl
2
c*
C1
o
1
1
1
1
1
J
o
o
o
i
o
1
1
1
SO
ro
I
LA
Csl
-a-
CO
LA
0
Csl
O
LA
r-.
CSI
1
1
1
1
1
c
c
c
ex
1
1
1
1
1
o
1
1
CN
oc
o
-a-
i
0
1
1
-3-
-=
LT\
-a-
LP>
CSI
so
CSI
CSI
US
_
1
1
1
1
1.
c
0
cc
Cs!
O
c>
o
1
1
1
1
Csl
o
ro,
I
O
^
LA
O
o
CO
CO,
Csl
O
-s.
oc
CO
J
0
LT.
C
0
c .
c-
r-i
o
c
c-
0
c
cc
c
ro
Csl
CO
Csl
L-\
CSI
CM
LA
O
CO
-
cr.
0
i
i
t
i
-
LT.
0
C
1
1
c
1
1
0
-
.
1
1
LA
-3-
cr>
VO
0
-a-
-
VO
i
i
i
i
i
c'
(
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
c
or
O
C
Csl
c-,
CS,
VO
Csl
CO
S
|
1
r^
^C
1
r^i
f"«
CN
i
i
i
i
O
CM
O
1
t
1
1
,
O
1
1
o
CX'
0
o
CsJ
O
£
^
LA
1
CT1
0
ro
LA
CSI
o;
o
LA
O
C
c-
o
0
o
VC
Csl
O
-3
Csl
Csl
Csl
O
O
Cs.
LA
*-
CO,
1
1
VO
O
Csl
=
|SJ
0
If
-
LL>
1-
V^
1
V,
r
K
a
£
_i
3
O
in
-------
(BO i/6ui)
wnmvo .
(6w i/6ui)
WnlS3NOVH
(J9JH/6UI)
SOMOS 318V31113S
(^03^3 l/6ui)
AllNIHmv 1VJL01
(/OS l/Biu)
3ivjins
(uw i/6ui)
3S3NV9NVW
(IV 1/6*")
wnNiwmv
NOoM snoy«3d
(3J 1/6UJ)
Noai ivioi
(£O?*D i/6u»)
Alia 13V 1VU3NIH
(£03»D 1/6*)
AliaiDV 10H IViOJL
(nor)
Aiiaiayni
( j«ji/6ui )
sanos asAiossia
( J31H/6U) )
sanos asaNSdsns
OoSZ § uio/soqiun)
33NVi3nON03 DIJIWdS
Hd
(J.)
3ynivy3dW3i
(S:P)
M01J
aiva
i
v
-T
O
^
O
-v.
O
1
1
1
1
1
O
O
CN
\t>
CM
1
1
1
1
CM
0
o"»
1
O
oo
oo
in
i
o
O
£
CM
LTV
CM
1
,
00
^x
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
o
CN
t-.
i
i
i
i
o
i
i
i
i
o
o
1^
CO
CM
O
CM
r-
co
vo
o
o
-T
m
o
o
j-
\c
o
r^
c^
Co
m
.
o
o
er>
CM
oo
CM
o
o
VO
r~
o
1 .
i
i
i
i
i
o
o
r-
LTV
in
in
i
i
\o
i
in
CN
o
o
\O
-T
~^
O
^
1
1
1
1
0
0
CM
-a-
o
CM
vO
CM
-f
0
SC
OO
o
-3-
r^
O
oo
r-~
o
-*
CM
0
V*
oo
0
in
CM
o
o
o
in
CM
r^
CM
O
o
-a-
in
o
^
CM
I
1
1
1
1
1
O
in
CM
1
1
1
1
f
in
-3-
1
O
o
in
0
\o
[
o
i
i^
CM
O
0
CM
-3-
CM
^»
CM
in
r^
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
CM
-3-
rr\
«VI
o
n^,
l
l
O
oo
i
i
i
t
-3-
l~-
cr\
1
o
o
in
CM
oo
CM
O
o
0
O
vo
-3-
O
JC.
~
i
o
o
o
CM
CM
CM
f\
0
CM
VO
J-_
CTv
O
>^
1
rf
1
1
1
0
0
o
vO
O
oo
-3-
O
c*^.
f*N
1
OO
VO
1
|
**
j
i
i
O
o
s
vO
m
O
vO
**"
vO
^
1
1
1
1
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
vO
CM
O
TO
in
O
on
^_
vO
O~!
CM
O
1
A
m
i
i
co
J
«>
CM
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
O
r~-
VO
i
i
i
i
,
00
in
j
0
CM
t+
1*\
CM
1
1
in
*
o
c^
1
o
-3*
r-
in
in
V
o
o
r~-
fV
0
i~
-3
C
Lf
f
C
C
u
-3
C
CN
C
u
v£
C
^
C
a
o
c*
c
C>
C
o
(T
O
CN
J-
CM
1
vO
O
CM
|
1
1
1
1
O
o
o
cr.
i
i
i
i
i
r^i
vO
l
1
O
in
oo
o
vO
o
00
o
CM
o
o
CM
CM
f~
CM
^IJ
O
rr\
^^
-
l-
4
O
ac
ui
en
00
o
<
Y-
67
-------
(BO l/Biu)
(6W i/6u)
WOIS3N3VW
SanOS 318V31JJ.3S
AllNllV>nv 1V101
(t/QS l/6ui)
3S3NV9NVW
(IV l/6ui)
unNiwmv
NOcJI SnO«cJ3d
NOcll 1V101
Alia i3v 1VU3NIW
Alia 13V 10H 1V101
(nsr)
Aiioiaani
( 4311 l/DUl )
sanos a3Aiossia
sanos asaNSdsns
(30Sc § luo/soqiun)
33NV13naN03 3IJI33dS
Hd
(Jo)
3HIUVsljdxJ31
(S:P)
M01J
3iva
l
1
l
l
O
O
1
1
1
1
1
(SI
1
1
,o
o
_
1
1
1
1
0
cs»
r.
CM
1
t
1
1
O
0
1
1
1
1
o
CO
1
1
1
1
1
-3-
-3-
1
1
C
,
!
!
o
rA
ft
rA
1
l
t
1
0
1
l
1
1
1
O
0
0
cn
C-,
r*-
Lfs
SO
LA
-3-
-3-
r-.
-3-
co
CO
o
CN
0
0
co
CN
1
CO
0
1
1
1
1
e
c
CN
1
1
1
1
1
O
CO
1
1
o
LA
O
-3-
CN
[
1
1
en
CN
1
t
I
-3-
CSI
O
I
I
I
i
I
I
O
0
03
r-
o
C
vO
0
-3-
CM
1
1
CM
-3-
0
(S|
CM
1
1
I
en
CN
1
rA
O
f-
c
1
1
1
1
0
o
CO
c
CN
CO
CO
c
CO
CO
o
CN
o
CN
CN
0
O
O
CN
CN
rA
~^.
'1
1
1
1
1
0
o
a
1
1
1
1
1
CN
1
CO
o
LA
]
O
LA
1
1
0
rA
0
^
LA
O
-T
r-.
i
i
i
i
o
o
o
-3-
O
CN
O
C
0
CN
LA
SO
CTi
CN
SC
CN
LA
SO
CO
O
SO
O
LA
CN
rA
O
-3"
CN
CN
-31
U
I
1
,
1
1
1
1
O
o
c-
o
c-
LA
O
0
1
1
o
0
en
i
i
i
CN
1
1
O
0
rA
o
CO
o
o
LA
C
CN
1
1
1
1
C
C
S£
r*
1
1
l
1
l
C
CC
1
t
-3-
SO
CN
J
0
1
1
CN
rA
O
rA
CN
O
CN
CN
C
c
-3
1
1
1
l
l
l
C
c
c~
0
o
o
o
CN
1
1
0
CN
cn
i
i
rA
CO
1
O
cn
cn
CO
rA
O
-3-
o
o^
CN
1
1
1
1
1
1
c
o
cr
1
1
1
1
o
LT
1
O
CTi
O
Lf>
O
-T
SO
O
cc
o
0
-3-
O
J-
_l
a
UJ
bu
O
12
ta
ui
ac
o>
UJ
_i
CD
68
-------
(3 I/Bui)
HnmvD
(6w l/6w)
tmiSlNQVH
(J«)t(/6u)
SailOS 318V31113S
(£03«3 1/6UJ)
Aiiunvxiv iviOi
(/OS l/6ui)
3iVdinS
(uW i/6ui)
3S3NV3NVW
(IV i/bu)
wnHiwmv
NOUI SfKNtGd
(*d I/&U)
NOHI 1VJ.01
(£03e3 l/6iu)
Ail Q 13V 1VH3NIW
(£0:>*3 l/6w)
A1IQ 13V iOH IViOi
(nor)
Aiiaiaani
( J3}l [/BUI )
sanos asAiossiQ
( jaan/eui )
sanos a3QN3dsns
(3.SZ S w3/soi|iun)
33NVlDnON03 3131 D3dS
Hd
(Jo)
3aniva3d'J3i
(S:P)
MH3
31VQ
i
i
i
i
o
o
o
r^>
CM
)
1
1
1
1
O
1
1
c
NO
en
t
l
t
l
O
LA
o
Pn
r-
CM
i
i
-3-
O
\
O
,
1
0
o
i
i
i
i
NC
LA
[
O
CA
CO
O
PA
1
1
1
1
O
LA
CO
CM
v»
O
1
1
o
o
-f
l~-
o
CM
p^
o
c^
a-
o
-3-
CM
O
CM
a-
r^
j-
o
LA
O
-3"
CM
O
-a-
0
CM
-3-
^
o
o
JT
^
CN
ff
-3-
0
in
fv-
0
o
CO
er>
r^
0
1
o
'
-------
(e3 I/BUJ)
wnmvs
(6W i/6u.)
WniS3N3VW
(Jajj,/6ui)
SGI10S 318V31113S
(^03*3 l/6uJ)
Aiinn\onv moi
C?OS l/6ui)
aivjins
(uw [/6w)
3S3NV9NVW
(IV 1/Sui)
wnNiwmv
Noyi snoHciSJ
(aj !/5uJ)
NOYII "1V101
(£03*3 l/6w)
Ail Q 1 3V 1VM3NIW
(£03*3 l/5w)
A1IO 13V iOH 1V101
(nor)
AiiaiaaTU
( jaJH/Bui )
sonos asAiossia
( J3}]|/BUJ )
sanos a3QN3dsns
(3.SZ § uio/soqujn)
33W13naN03 3IJI3JdS
Hd
(J.)
iyfuvu3dU3i
(S:P)
rtOU
3iva
-3-
0
\
o
\
0
1
1
1
1
1
o
c
ec
<»
i
i
i
i
c
u
1
\£
oa
\0
f
I
O
fV
LT
CJ^.
CM
1
1
1
1
O
LA
CM
1
1
O
CO
o
**>,
1
1
o
1
1
-3
LA
CM
O
CO
r-^
CM
CM
o
VO
-a-
i
i
i
i
i
i
t
o
cr
LA
O
r^
C
!
c
1
1
1
CM
LA
-3"
1
1
0
-3-
LA
LA
O
o
CM
1 .
cr.
\
CM
1
1
1
O
r^-
LA
CM
1
1
1
1
1
C
1
1
VO
LA
f\
1
1
O
1
CM
-3-
LA
<*~
CM
0
VO
CM
\
CM
0
ec
-3-
LA
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
VA
CVI
O
CO
f~
O
o
cv
C
v£
C
C
c
K
C
u
u
c
fv
C
u-
If
r~
-3
CC
a-
m
i
VO
0
«v
1
1
1
1
O
CM
LA
LA
(
t
1
t
1
C
VO
1
1
co
cf\
0
LA
LA
CM
-3"
CM
CM
0
O
LA
.
LA
-
o
(T
u.
o
CO
UJ
sr
CD
-------
(eD t/Siu)
Wni31V3
(6W i/6w)
WniS3N9VW
(J35I 1/6U1)
sonos 3iav3iii3s
(£0363 l/6iu)
Aiinnv>nv ivicu
(I/OS l/Bui)
3j.vdins
(UK i/6ui)
3S3NV3NVW
(IV l/6ui)
wnNiHmv
MOM! sno«H3j
(aj i/oui)
Noa i ivioi
(^03*3 |/6iu)
A1IOI3V 1Vc)3NIW
(^03^3 I/DUJ)
A1IQ 13V 10H "1V10J.
(nor)
Aiiaiaani
( J3}I[/6U1 )
SailOS Q3ATOSSIQ
( jaji i/6ui )
sanos asaNSdsns
O.SZ et ui3/soquin)
33Wi3naf!03 31JI33dS
Md
(J.)
3anivy3dwii
(SJ3)
MOU
3iva
-a-
o
o
-^
o
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
CN
LA
SC
1
f
1
1
1
O
1
o
00
o
CO
1
o
LA
-3"
SO
PA
U\
1
1
1
00
v^
o
i
t
i
i
i
o
-=r
LA
fv
1
1
f
1
(
1
O
r~.
1
1
o
CD
o
LA
vO
O
1
1
1
CO
LA
1
1
1
-a-
CM
~x
O
1
1
1
1
1
o
-3-
CN
VO
0
O
1
1
O
1
1
o
oo
c
NO
1
1
o
1
1
_
rv
o
CO
1
PA
-v
O
LT
O
1
1
CM
cs
LA
O
r--
o
o
o
o
o
«M
1^
r^
r^
i
LA
CM
LA
IA
O
1«»
o
GO
r-.
O
^
1
1
1
o
\0
o
CM
>
1
1
1
1
1
O
CM
1
1
1
1
1
O
CM
OO
-3-
1
1
1
1
1
O
1
-3-
CA
J-
1
1
(M
f
tn
^r
o
ro
O
-a-
cs
"v.
CM
CM
(TV
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
-3-
o
CM
O
1
O
..
1
r^~
0>1
i
i
LA
-3-
vO
LA
O
(M
CN
r*\
CTi
^1
CM
1
1
1
1
1
O
LA
-3"
1
I
1
1
1
1
O
1
00
CM
LA
f^l
1
1
1
O
LA
O
LA
-a-
Lri
VD
CM
>^.
CM
cr,
oc
r-s
SO
,
1
I
I
0
o
-3-
o
o
o
1
1
1
f^.
so
1
1
o
-3-
sO
SO
LA
-
f^
CM
O
^
O
C
LA
SO
0
LA
O
SO
f-l
LA
O
h-
0
O
o
o
0
-a-
0
o^
LA
00
0
OC
0
»
^Bp_
so
a
^
LA
CM
ro
1
i
sO
O
^
l
1
1
O
-T
f«-.
1
f
1
1
t
o
1
1
CM
(--.
CA
-T
CO
J-
LA
CN
-3-
sp
*O
0
LA
PA
PA
^
CJ
o
o
t-
K
in
a
>
o
ce
u.
o
tf)
Ul
C
00
71
-------
(e3 t/Siu)
wnmv3
(6W l/&u)
WDIS3N3VW
(Jal!t/6lU)
SOI10S 319V31113S
(^03^3 I/Bui)
Aiitmvxiv ivioj.
(*7QS I/Bui)
3iwins
(UK i/6u)
3S3NV3NVW
(IV l/6ui)
wnNiwmv
NO»I snoa»3J
(aj i/6ui)
Noai ivioi
(£03eo I /6m)
AH a nv ivyamw
(£03eo 1/&U)
AJ.IQ 13V 10H IV 101
(nor)
AH ai guru
( J3}l 1/BlU )
sanos asAiossia
( J3}I(/6UJ )
sanos asaNadsns
(3«Sc § uo/soqiun)
33MV13naH03 3IJI33dS
Hd
(Jo)
3ynivH3dW3i
(S:P)
W)lJ
3iva
-3-
o
\
o
^
o
!
1
1
1
,1
e
LA
c\
1
t
1
1
1
o
LA
1
1
o
rr\
\o
rn
1
o
-3-
o
in
CM
CM
-a-
1
1
1
CO
^
o
1
1
1
t
1
o
o
CTi
1
i
1
1
1
o
a-
i
i
vO
OA
1
c^
oo
v£
-3-
O
r-^
o
LA
pg
t^
o
^s
t
1
1
1
1
1
0
CM
in
CM
1
1
1
1
1
O
m
oo
i
i
o
r~
0
in
CO
i
i
CM
(^
o
1
1
0
VO
in
r-»
O
in
r^
-3-
^L
(*>
0~\
t
1
1
1
o
CM
O
CO
in
o
in
o
0
o
V3
O
-3-
0
CM
fv
CO
CO
VO
in
-3-
»
i
i
i
i
0
cc.
0
o
o
o
0
1
1
o
cc
CM
1
1
CM
r*"v
CTv
CM
1
1
1
1
LA
OO
CM
O
LA
O
r*~*
P--
CM
VO
^
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
vo
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
0
CM
pr.
O
0
CM
cn
CM
-3-
C^
0
CM
1
1
O
r^
i
en
CM
P^
CM
\
1
1
1
1
O
r^
i
i
i
i
i
o
CO
-
[
0
CM
cn
CM
-3-
o~\
o
o
r*.
fi
^r
i
LA
O
c«^
^.
ro
cn
0
cc
o
in
o
LA
r^
o
VO
o
o
0
m
CM
O
J-
o
CN
LA
CM
-a-
o
o
r-»
in
cn
f
r^
m
i
i
vO
O
^
1
1
1
1
1
o
in
vC
i
i
i
i
i
i
o
CM
CM
1
1
CM
m
CO
f~\
vn
CO
o
in
-3-
CM
cn
rn
L)
O
-3-
J-
CM
m
~v
IO
6
-------
(B3 i/biu)
wnmvo
(6H i/6u)
wms3N3vw
(jaill/6iu)
sanos 3iav3iii3s
(£0363 l/6iu)
A1INI1VX1V IViOi
CTQS i/6«0
Sivjins
(uw l/6ui)
3S3NV9NVH
(IV !/&")
HfiHiwmv
Noai snob-asj
(aj t/6ui)
NOUI ivioi
(^03*3 i/6ui)
AilQIDV 1W3NIW
(£03B3 l/6u»)
AliaiDV iOH 1V10JL
(nor)
xiiaiaani
( J3JI l/DUl )
sanos a3Aiossia
( J3JI 1/5UJ )
sanos a30N3dsns
(3«SZ § luo/soquin)
33!lV13naN03 3IJI33dS
Hd
(J.)
Sa'niVa'Sdusi
(s^)
MOU
3iva
-3"
o
\
o
^
o
!
f
:
a
a
r>
NO
oo
f
u
c
p"
tf
o
VI
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
NO
o-\
00
o
oo
\J\
o
UA
IA
1
1
0
LA
1
O
m
0
1
1
r*i
O
IA
vO
1
1
1
O
0
«M
O
LA
OO
j-
o
o
LA
CM
cr>
S
-3-
O
r~
LA
cr>
o
-v
1
1
1
1
1
-3-
CM
O
LA
r~-
0
O-v
or\
o
CM
r^
i
o
PA
1
OO
o
o
1
1
1
o
o
.
o-
o
-3-
i
-3-
1
I
1^
PA
CM
V.
1
1
1
1
1
1
O
o
o
r^
i
i
ii
i
j
o
LA
PA
1
1
OO
o
CM
PA
CM
OO
LA
O
O
LA
O
CM
PA
PA
1
1
CM
O
PA
-X
OO
f-
-3-
r^
o
LA
O
O
NO
o
CO
o
o
CM
o
oo
o
LA
-3-
PA
CO
cn
CM
CM
CM
CM
O
O
O
rA
PA
PA
1
1
NO
O
CM
LU
ISI
3
U_
u
(/)
ro
**>.
cs
z
o
I-
<
in
<
o
<
3
o
cc
U)
I-
b.
O
CO
tf)
Ul
IE
LU
J
CD
-------
g
O 0 0
I-. o to
«O 00 O
tO »0 rH
I IM O
I rH iS
i m
rH oo r-
o to
o
CM
IM
8SS
i/)
in i
fM
CM
IO
l O» I
I rH I
I I
i in
in r- rH
IO «M IN
Ol O> 00
IM «
O O
f- rH rH
IM rH
S
o <*
IM
» IM
rH O rH
* IM
O
ss
o
< o
p-
o
000
CM rH o
f- « rH
r-( OC\O
K> V
Ol t>- I/
O O
^ rH
r4 (M
tO fM VO
rH O OO
oo in
to
o m
in «r
o m o
oo to
W tO CM
o to o
in IM rH
^ K) fM
o m o
l~- rH vn
^ o r^
rH rH
^f O> O>
tO rH
Ul «M i-l
«M OC r-
rH O> rH
o o o
l-H C
to
in CM
R
oo
IMrH
00 IM ^
IM rH
o o o
o> o m
IM «M rH
IM O IM
^ C7t (71
IM rH
0
IM
*.
rH O O
o moo
toes
CM K)
o * \o
«o too
CM rH O
in to to
CM rH
« * «
I IM t
I rH I
IM rH rH
O C O
O O 0
*!8
o
"ISS
O
O O
1-
£3
>
O
IM
oo a
DO ** O
rH in rH
O >0 CM
IS) lA ^f
>o m
* to to
* to 10
K^q
&
&
6
fe
as*
sa 1 a
feC
6
H«
H
to
110
^2
£2
a
u
u
Z!
2
K
es
OH
2
I
in
UJ
m
-------
(T/2uO
NMDTVD
(l/3ui)
WniSHNDVH
(T/Sui)
sunos aiavaijjHs
(^ODBD I/3ui)
AIINITVTIV TVJXXL
(T/Suil
aivdins
(T/8ui)
3S3WDNVN
(I /3m)
MnNiwmv
aj i/3ui)
NOHI sncwaaa
f;M i/Sui)
NCWI TVJJ01
(£OD*D T/3ui)
JU.IQIDV TVtfHNIN
(£OD8D T/3"0
AIIQIDV JOI TVJAL
(n3f)
T T T fT T £T\in T
AuLJi VJ X u ul Mf
(l/3ui)
sanos coAiossia
(l/Sta)
sanos aaoNHdsns
(uo/soqmn)
3DNVJDnONOD DldlDSdS
ud
(*JJ)
iudaa
d
o
en
00
oo
o
in
o
o
"*"
o
'
o
o
0
r-i
o
o
o
I-t
I-l
o
rH
O
iH
0
O
O
rH
|l
in
to
Ol
o
o
o
o
»
1
fM
O
i 1
O
0
*
o
*-"
o
in
in
o
r-l
O
0
s
to
T}"
c*
c
J
Tf
to
o
iH
O
in
o
rg
t--
o
'
o
1 I
i-H
CM
.0
*
O
0
8
0
rH
*
vD
00
vO
O
3O
ll
OO
to
00
o
in
o
oo
to
c
*
o
I-l
o
c
"
o
o
to
CM
rH
0
in
oc
d
,
in
CSl
in
fe
V
t~.
CV1
CTl
^
O
in
C
^
o
to
"
o
1 (
o
o
CM
0
0
*
in
in
o
g
,
in
in
in
t-t
K CO
P
o
£
m
o
o
rj
a:
m
Ui
u.
z
UJ
a.
Z
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT
(Please read Instructions on the reverse
DATA
before completing)
1 REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-76-110
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AMD SUBTITLE
FEASIBILITY STUDY
DEER PARK DAYLIGHTING PROJECT
5. REPORT DATE
June 1976 (issuing Date)
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
A. R. Richardson
M. T. Dougherty
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Ackenheil & Associates, Incorporated
1000 Banksville Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15216
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHE 263
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO
S-801353
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Feasibility 9/3/72 - 3/3/73
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA-ORD
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The study was performed to determine the technical and economic feasibility of
daylighting abandoned deep coal mines as a method to abate acid mine drainage by
employing common surface mining and backfilling techniques. Data on the present
water quality of Lost Run, Garrett County, Maryland was obtained and used for the
evaluation of using daylighting as a method to improve water quality. Other
criteria were thickness, quality and amount of coal in-place. A mining and recla-
mation plan was developed for the daylighting. This plan was devised based on
the acidity of overburden material, the estimated coal in-place, and erosion control
methods to reduce siltation.
The feasibility study results indicate this demonstration project would be technic-
ally and economically feasible and that reclamation would effectively produce
usable land and improve water quality. The estimated cost of the demonstration
project is about $500,000 for a 70 acre (28 hectare) site. The major obstacle in
implementing the project is aquiring rights, easements and methods of awarding
contracts.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
*CoaI. Mines, *Strip Mining, Underground
Mining, ^Overburden, Chemical Properties,
*Water Pollution, Reclamation, Cost
Analysis, Acidity, ph Control, Drainage,
Erosion Control
Contour Mining, Strip
Mine Wastes, Underground
Mine Waste, Acid Mine
Drainage, Environmental
Protection, Mine Waters
8G
81
13B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
86
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
76
«USGPO: 1976 657-695/5451 Region 5-11
------- |