United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
ffice of
Environmental Review
Washington DC 20460
December 1979
&EPA
Environmental Impact
Assessment Guidelines
For New Source
Surface Coal Mines
-------
This document is available to the public through the National
Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-130/6-79-005
December 1979
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
GUIDELINES FOR NEW SOURCE
SURFACE COAL MINES
EPA Task Officer: Frank Rusincovitch
US Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Environmental Review
Washington, DC 20460
-------
Preface
This document is one of a series of industry specific Environmental
Impact Assessment Guidelines being developed by the Office of Environ-
mental Review for use in EPA's Environmental Impact Statement preparation
program on New Source NPDES permits. It is intended to be used in
conjunction with Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for Selected
New Source Industries, on OER publication that includes a description of
impacts common to most industrial new sources.
The requirement for federal agencies to assess the environmental
impacts of their proposed actions is included in Section 102 of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended. The
stipulation that EPA's issuance of a New Source NPDES permit is an action
subject to NEPA is in Section 511(c)(l) of the Clean Water Act of 1977.
EPA's regulations for preparation of Environmental Impact Statements =»re
in Part 6 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, NEPA procedures
for the jtiew Source NPDES Program are described in Subpart F of Part 6.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
List of Figures iv
List of Tables v
INTRODUCTION 1
I. OVERVIEW OF THE INDUSTRY 3
I.A. BACKGROUND 3
I.A.I. US Environmental Protection Agency
NPDES Program Procedures 3
I.A.2. US Department of Interior Office
of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement 4
I.A.3. Relationship Between Permits Granted
Under NPDES and SMCRA 5
I.E. SUBCATEGORIZATION OF THE INDUSTRY 5
I.C. COAL FORMATION AND GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION 7
I.C.I. Types of Coal 7
I.C.I.a. Coal Reserves 9
I.C.l.b. Composition of Coals 9
I.C.2. Coal Provinces 13
I.C.2.a. Pacific Coast Coal Province .... 13
I.C.2.b. Rocky Mountain Coal Province .... 15
I.C.2.C. Northern Great Plains Coal Province 19
I.C.2.d. Interior Coal Province 21
I.C.2.e. Gulf Coal Province 21
I.C.2.f. Eastern Coal Province 21
I.D. TRENDS 25
I.D.I. Locational Changes 25
I.D.2. Raw Materials 26
I.D.3. Surface Mining Systems 27
I.D.3.a. Area Mining 30
I.D.3.b. Contour Mining 36
I.D.3.C. Open Pit Mining 41
I.D.4. Pollution Control 44
-------
Page
I.E. MARKETS AND DEMANDS 48
I.F. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS 51
I.F.I. The Natural Environment 51
I.F.I.a. Earth Resources 51
I.F.l.b. Vegetation and Wildlife 52
I.F.I.e. Air Quality 53
I.F.l.d. Surface and Groundwater Resources .... 53
I.F.2. The Human Environment 53
I.F.2.a. Aesthetics 54
I.F.2.b. Land Use 54
I.F.2.C. Sound and Vibration 54
I.F.Z.d. Transportation 54
I.G. REGULATIONS 54
I.G.I. Air Pollution Performance Standards 55
I.G.2. Water Pollution Performance Standards 59
I.G.3. Other Federal Regulations 64
I.G.4. State Regulations 64
II. IMPACT IDENTIFICATION 67
II.A. MINING WASTES (EFFLUENTS) 70
II.A.I. Wastewater From Coal Transportation 76
II.B. MINING WASTES (EMISSIONS) 76
II.C. MINING WASTES (SOLID WASTES) 78
II.D. TOXICITY AND POTENTIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE
FROM SELECTED POLLUTANTS 79
II.D.I. Human Health Impacts 79
II.D.I.a. Fugitive Dust 79
II.D.l.b. Sulfates 79
II.D.I.e. Iron 79
II.D.l.d. Manganese 80
II.D.I.e. Zinc 80
II.D.l.f. Trace Elements 80
II.D.2. Biological Impacts 80
II.D.Z.a. Sediment 80
II.D.2.b. Acid 82
II.D.2.C. Iron 82
II.D.Z.d. Manganese 82
II.D.2.e. Zinc 82
ii
-------
Page
II.E. OTHER IMPACTS 82
II.E.I. Coal Transportation 82
II.E.I.a. Railroads 83
II.E.l.b. Barges 83
II.E.I.e. Trucks 83
II.E.l.d. Pipelines 83
II.E.2. Coal Preparation 87
II.E.3. Post Mining Impacts 87
III. POLLUTION CONTROL METHODOLOGIES 90
III.A. ACTIVE MINING CONTROLS 91
III.B. POST MINING CONTROLS 95
IV. OTHER CONTROLLABLE IMPACTS 97
IV.A. AESTHETICS 97
IV.B. NOISE 97
IV.C. SOCIOECONOMIC 99
IV.D. ENERGY REQUIREMENTS 100
V. EVALUATION OF AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES 103
V.A. ALTERNATIVE MINE LOCATION AND SITE LAYOUT 103
V.B. ALTERNATIVE MINING METHODS AND TECHNIQUES 104
V.C. OTHER ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERATIONS 105
V.D. NO-PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 105
VI. REGULATIONS OTHER THAN POLLUTION CONTROL 106
iii
-------
List of Figures
Number Page
1 Coal provinces of the US 10
2 Pacific Coast coal province 14
3 Rocky Mountain coal province 17
4 Northern Great Plains coal province 20
5 Interior coal province 22
6 Gulf coal province 23
7 Eastern coal province 24
8 Area mining with stripping shovel 31
9 Area mining with tandem draglines 32
10 Area mining with B.W.E. and dragline 33
11 Area mining with B.W.E. and shovel 34
12 Area mining with tandem B.¥.E.'s 35
13 Mountain top removal: First and second cuts 37
14 Mountain top removal: Successive cuts 38
15 Mountain top removal: Reclaimed area 38
16 Box cut mining sequence- of operations 39
17 Box cut mining operation 40
18 Block cut mining sequence of operations 42
19 Block cut mining operation 43
20 Open pit mining with dragline 45
21 Open pit mining with loader and shovel 46
22 Multiple bench open pit mining , 47
/ /'
23 Production of bituminous and lignitic coal 49
24 Mine wastewater treatment system 94
iv
-------
List of Tables
Number Page
1 Classification of coal by rank 8
2 Demonstrated coal reserve base 11
3 Distribution of surface minable coal 12
4 Relationships of physiographic provinces 16
5 Phases and unit operations 28
6 Regional forecast of coal production 50
7 New source performance standards: Air quality 56
8 Applicable air quality standards 57
9 Non deterioration increments 60
10 New source effluent limitations 62
11 Existing source effluent limitations 63
12 State and local controls and permits 65
13 Potential constituents of wastewater 72
14 Chemical characteristics of acid mine drainage 74
15 Chemical characteristics of alkaline mine drainage 75
16 Pick-up velocities of dry dusts 77
17 Health problems associated with trace metals 81
18 Environmental impacts of transportation 85
19 Chemical characteristics of process wastewaters 88
20 Energy efficiencies of mining methods 101
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Clean Water Act requires that EPA establish standards of performance
for categories of new source industrial wastewater dischargers. Before
the discharge of any pollutant to the navigable waters of the United
States from a new source in an industrial category for which performance
standards have been proposed, a new source National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit must be obtained from either EPA or the
State (whichever is the administering authority for the State in which
the discharge is proposed). The Clean Water Act also requires that the
issuance of a permit by EPA for a new source discharge be subject to the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which may require preparation
of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the new source. The pro-
cedure established by EPA regulations (40 CFR 6 Subpart F) for applying
NEPA to the issuance of new source NPDES permits may require preparation
of an Environmental Information Document (EID) by the permit applicant.
Each EID is submitted to EPA and reviewed to determine if there are
potentially significant effects on the quality of the human environment
resulting from construction and operation of the new source. If there
are, EPA publishes an EIS on the action of issuing the permit.
The purpose of these guidelines is to provide industry specific guidance
to EPA personnel responsible for determining the scope and content of EID's
and for reviewing them after submission to EPA. It is to serve as supple-
mentary information to EPA's previously published document, Environmental
Impact Assessment Guidelines for Selected New Source Industries, which
includes the general format for an EID and those impact assessment con-
siderations common to all or most industries. Both that document and
these guidelines should be used for development of an EID for a new
source surface coal mine.
These guidelines provide the reader with an indication of the nature of
the potential impacts on the environment and the surrounding region from
construction and operation of a surface coal mine. In this
capacity, the volume is intended to assist EPA personnel in the identifi-
cation of those impact areas that should be addressed in an EID. In
addition, the guidelines present (in Chapter I) a description of the
industry, principal mining areas and methods, environmental problems,
and recent trends in location, raw materials, mining methods, pollution
control, and demand for industry output. This "Overview of the Industry"
is included to familiarize EPA staff with existing conditions in the
industry.
Although this document may be transmitted to an applicant for informational
purposes, it should not be construed as representing the procedural
requirements for obtaining an NPDES permit, for complying with Office of
Surface Mining (DOI) regulations, or as representing the applicant's
total responsibilities relating to the new source EIS program. In addi-
tion, the content of an EID for a specific new source application is
determined by EPA in accordance with Section 6.604(b) Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations and this document does not supersede any
directive received by the applicant from EPA's official responsible for
implementing that regulation.
-------
The appendix is divided into six sections. Chapter I is the "Overview
of the Industry," described above. Chapter II, "Impact Identification,"
discusses mining related wastes and the impacts that may occur during
construction and operation of the mine. Chapter III, "Pollution Control,"
describes the technology for controlling environmental impacts. Chapter IV
discusses other impacts that can be mitigated through design considerations
and proper site and mine planning. Chapter V, "Evaluation of Alternatives,"
discusses the consideration and impact assessment of possible alternatives
to the proposed action. Chapter VI describes regulations other than
pollution control that apply to the coal mining industry.
-------
I. OVERVIEW OF THE INDUSTRY
I.A. BACKGROUND
I.A.I. US Environmental Protection Agency NPDES Program Procedures
The Clean Water Act (33 USC et seq.) establishes a National goal to
eliminate pollution of the surface waters of the United States. Section
402 of the Clean Water Act authorizes US-EPA either to directly administer
NPDES permits to various industries that discharge to waters of the United
States, or to delegate the permitting authority to State or interstate
agencies that have the authority adequate to implement and enforce their
own wastewater permit programs. As of 1 October 1978, 13 States which
contain minable coal reserves had either not elected or not been quali-
fied by US-EPA to issue NPDES permits. In the States listed below NPDES
permits are processed by the appropriate regional offices of US-EPA.
STATE
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Idaho
Kentucky
Louisiana
US-EPA
REGION
IV
X
IX
VI
X
IV
VI
STATE
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Texas
Utah
West Virginia
S. Dakota
US-EPA
REGION
VI
VI
VI
VIII
III
VIII
Sections 301 and 304 of the Clean Water Act require that US-EPA develop
effluent standards for specific industries, which include surface coal
mines, and that effluent standards be established both for existing
sources (operating surface coal mines) and new sources (surface coal
mines either not yet in operation on the date final regulations are
issued, or that meet specific EPA criteria qualifying them as new
sources). New source regulations were published on 12 January 1979
(40 CFR Part 434; 44 FR 2589. Operations of mines that began operation
after January 12, 1979 will have to acquire a new source NPDES permit
prior to initial mine development and start-up operations.
In accordance with Section 511(c) of the Clean Water Act, Federal permits
for new sources are subject to the provisions of the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321'et. seq.; 83 Stat. 852
et seq.; PL 91-190). NEPA requires identification of and environmental
impact statements on "major Federal actions significantly affecting
the quality of the human environment." (Section 102(2)(c)). (State-
administered NPDES permits are not subject to NEPA.)
-------
Regulations governing the application of NEPA to new source permits
in general were promulgated in 40 CFR Part 6, Subpart F. These regulations
provide for environmental review by EPA of all new source NPDES permit
applications. After the proposed facility (in this case a surface coal
mining operation) is designated a "new source", EPA usually reviews an
environmental information document (EID) submitted by the permit applicant.
Upon completion of this review, EPA may issue either a finding of no
significant impact or require the preparation of an environmental impact
statement (EIS) as a basis for more extensive review.
I.A.2. US Department of Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
The US Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement (OSM) was established under Title II of the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA; 30 USC 1201 ^t seq.). The
responsibilities of OSM broadly include:
• The promulgation of performance standards for surface
mine operations and surface operations of underground
mines
• Approving and monitoring State-administered programs
to regulate the surface coal mining industry
• Administering various programs to repair the legacy
of previous mining, and advancing the technology
of surface mining and reclamation
Sections 506, 510, 515, and 516 of SMCRA require that OSM regulate
all aspects of surface coal mining that may affect water quality l
and quantity, including those aspects not regulated by EPA under
the Clean Water Act, such as:
• Nonpoint source discharges
• Discharges to groundwater
• Discharges to surface waters not regulated by EPA
• Impacts of mining on water quantity
• Discharges to surface waters during reclamation
Final regulations for OSM's permanent regulatory program were published
on 13 March 1979 (44 FR 50:15311-15463). These regulations
focus primarily on the prevention or mitigation of potentially
adverse effects of surface coal mining on the hydrologic balance.
-------
Environmentally sensitive hydrologic resources are protected through the
use of in-process and end-of-process controls to reduce or eliminate the
discharge of pollutant loads to the hydrologic regime. Other parts of
the regulations contain performance standards for special surface mining
techniques (i.e., mountaintop removal) and for mining in certain areas
(i.e., steep slopes, prime farmland, and the State of Wyoming). Also
included are criteria for determining the appropriate post mining land
use to which a surface-mined area must be reclaimed.
Of the twelve subchapters promulgated, two bear directly on the scope and
extent of information to be furnished in an applicant's EID:
0 Subchapter G: Permits for surface coal mining and reclamation
operations
0 Subchapter K: Permanent program performance standards
I.A.3. Relationship Between Permits Granted Under MPDES and SMCRA
OSM's responsibilities for regulating the surface mining industry are
partly coincident with EPA's mandate to regulate water and air pollution
under the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seg) .
Both agencies have the power either to grant permits directly or to oversee
the granting of permits to operators of surface coal mines. Both agencies
are constrained to avoid duplicative effort—EPA under Section 101.(f)
of the Clean Water Act, and OSM under Section 201,(c)(12) of SMCRA.
To insure that duplicative regulatory activity is minimized, interagency
task groups have been convened to draft a memoranda of understanding
between EPA and OSM. In final form, these memoranda will provide for a
joint application process, joint permiting, and joint inspection activity.
OSM's mandate to control mining pollution under SMCRA extends beyond
EPA's mandate to regulate the active mining phase covered under NPDES,
A major part of this combined permitting process, therefore, will fall
outside the purview of EPA's responsibility to regulate surface coal mining.
I.E. SUBCATEGORIZATION OF THE INDUSTRY
For the purpose of studying waste treatment and effluent limitations,
the coal mine point source\category initially was subcategorized
by the established Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) groups
applicable to the coal mining industry. These SIC groups then
were further subdivided by: (1) geographic location of the mine,
(2) type of mine (surface or underground), and (3) size of mine
(annual tonnage); all based on anticipated variations in raw
wastewater. After evaluation of statistical analyses of the data
obtained during the study, it was determined that based on waste
treatment the coal mining point source category should be divided
into four discrete subcategories based on the origin of the waste-
water, i.e., wastewater from the mining activities and wastewater
from the coal preparation activities, or mining services activities.
-------
Wastewater from the mining activities was further subdivided
by the characteristics of the raw mine drainage. Mining services
activities (coal preparation) were subdivided on the basis of character-
istics of wastewaters from preparation plantsk coal storage areas,
refuse storage areas, and the ancillary areas associated with coal
preparation plants.
Thus, the coal mining point source category has been subdivided
for the purpose of EPA's effluent guidelines and standards
(40 CFR 434) as follows:
Subpart A - Coal Preparation Plant. The provisions of this
subpart are applicable to discharges resulting from the cleaning
or beneficiation of coal of any rank including but not limited
to lignite, bituminous, and anthracite.
Subpart B - Coal Storage, Refuse Storage, and the Coal
Preparation Plant Ancillary Area. The provisions of this
subpart are applicable to discharges which are pumped,
siphoned, or drained from coal storage, refuse storage, and
coal preparation plant ancillary areas related to the cleaning
or beneficiation of coal of any rank including but not limited
to bituminous, lignite, and anthracite.
Subpart C - Acid or Ferruginous Mine Drainage. The provisions
of this subpart are applicable to acid or ferruginous mine
drainage resulting from the mining of coal of any rank,
including but not limited to bituminous, lignite, and
anthracite.
Subpart D - Alkaline Mine Drainage. The provisions of this
subpart are applicable to alkaline mine drainage resulting
from the mining of coal of any rank including but not limited
to bituminous, lignite, and anthracite.
In order to maximize the utility of this environmental impact
assessment guidance material, this particular document focuses
on surface coal mining operations and associated environmental
impacts and pollution control methods. Specifically, the document
considers rank of coal, geographic location of coal, and mining
and reclamation methods as the primary determinants of environmental
impact. This approach was taken to isolate those areas of concern
that are unique to surface coal mining activities and to establish
a workable methodology to assess the magnitude and significance
of potential impacts in the EID- Although a distinction has been
made between surface coal mining activities and other coal mining
operations (e.g., underground mining, coal preparation facilities,
coal storage facilities, etc.), it should be noted that these other
coal mining methods and related activities will be the subjects
of separate guideline documents to be prepared by EPA.
-------
I.C. COAL FORMATION AND GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION
I.C.I. Types of Coal
Coal is formed by the accumulation and compaction of organic
material, which when buried by sediments is altered from complex
organic compounds to carbon. The organic material that forms
today's coal was derived from the accumulation and partial decay of
plants and animals in ancient marine and freshwater marshes. Paleo-
environmental analyses suggest that these remains accumulated in
lowland areas associated with floodplains, in estuarine marshes
associated with ancient barrier islands, and in marshes associated
with the non-marine and marine parts of ancient deltas.
Coals that occur in the United States were deposited mostly during
the Pennsylvanian (345-280 million years before present) and Cretaceous
Periods (136-65 million years before present). The type of coal
that formed during and since these periods of deposition is dependent
on its degree of compaction, not on its age. Coals that were subject
to greater burial or mountain building stresses were changed more
or have a higher "rank" than those that were subjected to less
stress. Coal normally is ranked on the basis of its percentages
of fixed carbon, natural moisture, and volatile matter (Table 1).
Lignite, subbituminous coal, bituminous coal, and anthracite comprise
the major classes of coal, within which there are groups. As rank
increases (lignite to anthracite) the percentage of fixed carbon
increases, the percentage of volatile matter decreases, and heating
value increases. Based solely on heating value, the market value
of coal can be expected to increase with rank. Because sulfur
content and other end-use specifications and requirements can
influence significantly the demand for coal, the heating value is
only one of several criteria that determine the actual market value
of coal deposits.
The initial compaction of coal-forming material results in the
formation of peat. Compaction of peat results in formation of
lignite, the lowest-ranked coal type. Lignite is characterized by
contents of about 30% fixed carbon, about 25% volatile materials,
45% moisture, and an average thermal content of about 6,590 BTU's
per pound. Compaction of lignite results in the formation of
subbituminous coal, characterized by average contents of about
42% fixed carbon, about 34% volatile materials, 23% moisture, and
about 9,700 BTU's. Subbituminous coal is subcategorized on the
basis of heat content into 3 groups (Table 1).
Bituminous coal results from compaction of organic material under
pressures higher than those associated with lignite or subbituminous
coal. Five groups of bituminous coal are recognized (Table 1), and
the average characteristics of these coals include contents of 47 to
86% fixed carbon, more than 14% volatile matter, 3 to 12% moisture,
and 11,000 to 15,000 BTU's.
-------
Table 1. Classification of coal by rank.
CLASS
Anthracite
Bituminous
Subbituminous
Lignite
GROUP
Metaanthracite
Anthracite
Semianthracite
Low volatile
Bituminous
Medium volatile
Bituminous
High volatile A
Bituminous
High volatile B
Bituminous
High volatile
Bituminous
Subbituminous
A coal
Subbituminous
B coal
Subbituminous
C coal
Lignite
LIMITS1
FC 98 - 100%
FC 92 - 98%
VM 2 - 8%
FC 96 - 92%
VM 8 - 14%
FC 78 - 86%
VM 14 - 22%
FC 69 - 78%
VM 22 - 31%
FC < 69%
VM > 31%
BTU 13,000 - 14,000
FC < 69%
VM > 31%
BTU 11,000 - 13,000
FC < 68%
BTU 11,000 - 13,000
FC < 69%
VM < 31%
BTU 11,000 - 13,000
FC < 69%
VM < 31%
BTU 9,500 - 11,000
FC <
VM < 31%
BTU 8,300 - 9,500
FC < 69%
VM < 31%
BTU < 8,300
1 FC - percent by dry weight of fixed carbon
VM - percent by volume of volatile matter
BTU - British thermal units per pound of naturally moist coal
Source: American Society for Testing and Materials. 1978. Specification
for class of coal by rank. D388. Philadelphia PA.
-------
Anthracite coal is ranked highest, and its formation requires extra-
ordinary pressures and temperatures generally not associated with
simple burial and compaction. Distribution of anthracite is limited,
therefore, to local or regional areas which have undergone intense
folding or are near to igneous intrusions. Average characteristics
of anthracite coals include contents of greater than 86% fixed carbons,
less than 3% moisture, less than 14% volatile matter, and 12,000 to
15,000 BTU's. Three groups of anthracite coals are distinguished
on the basis of fixed carbon content (Table 1).
I.C.I.a. Coal Reserves. The reserves in the 31 States believed to
have significant amounts of coal were determined to be 438,332 million
tons as of January 1976 (USBM 1977). About 32% (141,361 million
tons) are considered to be surface minable and are distributed among
6 coal provinces (Figure 1). The reserves include those coal deposits
which occur in relatively thick beds at depths which do not prohibit
extraction by conventional surface recovery methods. Anthracite
and bituminous coal deposits in the reserve base are at least 28
inches thick and are within 1,000 feet of the surface. Subbituminous
and lignite reserves base are within 1,000 feet and 200 feet of the
surface, respectively, and are at least 60 inches thick. Additional
coal deposits, which do not meet these criteria, were included in
the reserve base if such deposits are mined currently, or if, in the
opinion of the US Bureau of Mines, such deposits are commercially
minable at the present time. Table 2 is a summary of the distribution
of surface minable coal.
Generally, about 50% of the reserves are recoverable, based on current
mining techniques and environmental restrictions (USBM 1977). Approxi-
mately 28.7% of the surface minable reserve tonnage is located east
of the Mississippi River. The remaining 71.3% is located in Alaska
and in the conterminous States west of the Mississippi River. Most
of this coal is located within the lignite and subbituminous coal
fields of Montana, Wyoming, and North Dakota. Table 3 summarizes
coal distribution by rank east and west of the Mississippi River.
I.C.l.b. Composition of Coals. Sulfur is the most abundant trace
element in coal, and it reduces the value of those coals in which it
is found. Sulfur occurs both as an inorganic constituent mineral
(mostly pyrite) in coal itself and as part of organic complexes
associated with coal. Sulfur contributes to air pollution, reduces
coking quality, and (when 'exposed to oxygen and water) forms acid
mine drainage.
The sulfur content of United States coa±s ranges from 0.2 to about
7.0% by weight. The percentage of sulfur in coal generally is
greatest in the bituminous coals of the Interior and Eastern coal
fields. The sulfur content of coal generally is less than 1% in the
Northern Great Plains and Rocky Mountain Provinces for subbituminous
coal and lignite. Thus, nore than 90,000 million tons (64%) of the
total surface-minable reserves are low-sulfur (<1% sulfur) and occur
in the western United States.
-------
-------
Table 2. Demonstrated coal reserve base of surface rainable coal . Values are expressed in millions of short tons.
COAL RANK COAL PROVINCE
STATE
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
Colorado
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Michigan
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
jjj New Mexico
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming
Anthracite Bituminous
284.4
80.5
325.5
7.8 107.0
676.2
0.4
14,841.2
1,774.5
465.4
998.2
8,418.0
134-. 5
1.6
3,596.0
601.1
0.4
6,139.8
425.2
142.7 1,391.8
337.9
b
267.9
888.5
5,149.1
Subbituminous Lignite
1,083.0
640.7 14.0
25.7
149.2 2,965.7
b
33,843.2 15,766.8
1,846.8
10,145.3
2.9
426.1
481.5 8.1
23,724.7
Pacific Rocky Mountain Great Plains Interior Gulf Eastern
1,367.4
735.2
325.5
140.5
3,791.0a
0.4
14,841.2
1,774.5
465.4
998.2
3,950.4 4,467.6
t
134.5
1<6 b
3,596.0
49.610.13
2,447.9
0.4
10,145.3
6,139.8
425.2
2.9
1,534.4
426.1
337. 9a
fc 3,181.9
267.9
888.5
489.5
5,149.1
23,724.7a
TOTAL
1,367.4
735.2
325.5
140.5
3,791.0
0.4
14,841.2
1,774.5
465.4
998.2
8,418.0
b
134.5
V
3,596.0
49,610.1
2,447.9
0.4
10,145.3
6,139.8
425.2
2.9
1,534.4
426.1
337.9
3,181.9
267.9
888.5
489.5
5,149.1
23,724.7
Totals 150.5 46,905.0 60,688.9 33,616.6 1,227.6 39,708.7 49,134.3 28,088.5 4,718.218,483.6 141,361
a Combined reserve base of surface minable coal in two provinces.
No reliable data on the reserve base of surface minable coal.
Source: US Bureau of Mines. August 1977. Demonstrated coal reserve base of the United States
on January 1, 1976.
-------
Table 3. Distribution of surface minable coal, by rank, east and
west of the Mississippi River.
Million Short Tons
Anthracite Bituminous Subbituminous Lignite Total
East of the
Mississippi River 142.7 39,362.1 — 1,083.0 40,587.8
West of the
Mississippi River 7.8 7,542.9 60,688.9 32.533.6 100,773.2
Total 150.5 46,905.0 60,588.9 33,616.6 141,361.0
Source: US Bureau of Mines. August 1977. Demonstrated coal reserve
base of the United States on January 1, 1976.
12
-------
Coal contains traces of virtually all elements, but insufficient
data on their occurrence and concentration is known to classify
coals according to trace element content. When coal is burned,
most of these elements are concentrated in the coal ash, but a few
are volatilized and can be emitted to the atmosphere. Trace ele-
ments are of interest because generally they are more concentrated
in coal than in the earth's crust. They also are potential
pollutants. Arsenic, barium, beryllium, bismuth, boron, cobalt,
copper, fluorine, gallium, germanium, lanthanum, lead, lithium,
mercury, molybdenum, nickel, scandium, selenium, silver, strontium,
tin, vanadium, uranium, yttrium, zinc, and zirconium occur in some
coals in concentrations that are greater than their average abundance
in the crust of the earth. The occurrence of an element at concen-
trations above average for ordinary crustal rocks, however, does
not mean that its concentration necessarily is at a level toxic
to humans or other biota, nor that it is in a form that readily
permits its release to the environment. The possible elevated
concentration of some trace elements in selected coal beds probably
will receive greater attention in the future.
I.C.2. Coal Provinces
The six coal province boundaries (Figure 1) generally coincide with
boundaries of major physiographic provinces, although more than one
physiographic province may be contained within a single coal pro-
vince, and parts of some physiographic provinces may lie within
more than one coal province. Basic characteristics of the geology
and hydrology of these provinces are described below. The facts
of this discussion were derived from the Federal coal leasing program
Final EIS of 1975 (US-DOI n.d.).
I.C.2.a. Pacific Coast Coal Province. This coal province essen-
tially is mountainous. It thus has wide variations in relief. The
mountains of Washington and Oregon trend north to south and are
dotted with isolated volcanic cones. These mountains may still be
undergoing the mountain-building process of uplift. The Pacific
province generally has large supplies of surface and groundwater,
but locally, water supply varies greatly. Numerous water management
structures control runoff and other surface waters. Most groundwater
is obtained from river-deposited sediments (alluvium) and generally
has a high iron content. Groundwater in the mountainous permafrost
areas generally is of poor quality.
Coal measures of the Pacific Coast province are found in scattered
fields in California and Oregon, and in one large field and scattered
small fields in Washington (Figure 2). Of these States, only
California does not have sufficient coal deposits to justify its
inclusion in the demonstrated reserve base (USBM 1977). California
coals are mostly of Ecocene to Miocene age, and range in rank from
lignite to high volatile bituminous B. These deposits are scattered
over 43 counties, and fewer than a dozen locations have undergone
mining or intensive prospecting.
13
-------
Figure 2. The Pacific Coast Coal Province.
Source: US Department of the Interior, n.d. Final environmental impact statement:
proposed Federal coal leasing program. Variously paged.
-------
Ranks of Oregon coals range from subbituminous C to bituminous.
The Ecocene age coals of Washington range from subbituminous to
anthracite, but most are subbituminous to bituminous; some also
are of coking quality. Coals in Alaska range from lignite to high
volatile bituminous grades. Coals are found in large fields along
the Arctic Coastal Plain, and in smaller fields located both inland
and along or near southern shorelines. Less is known of the coal
fields in Alaska than in any other State, but it is expected that
new coal fields will be discovered as exploration of the Alaskan
interior proceeds, and as boundaries of partially explored coal
fields and data on the quantity and quality of coals are developed.
I.C.2.b. Rocky Mountain Coal Province. This coal province includes
all the physiographic provinces of the Rocky Mountains, parts of the
Colorado Plateau Physiographic Province, and the Basin and Range
Physiographic Province (Table 4). The Rocky Mountain Coal Province
is bordered on the east by the Great Plains, and on the west by a
series of high plateaus. These borders are marked by distinct
changes in geologic structure and vegetation.
Water supplies in this coal province are limited and thereby can
be a severely limiting factor in the exploitation of the vast coal
reserves. Much of the province is vulnerable to droughts which can
persist for years. The quality of surface waters varies widely
over the province, and generally is poorer in basin areas. Ground-
water derived from alluvium locally is of good supply and quality,
although some alluvium may produce highly mineralized water. Yields
from wells drilled into bedrock are low to moderate. Water from
these wells may be of good quality, if the water is derived from
highly permeable strata. Water drawn from strata of low permeability
generally is highly mineralized. Many coal fields are located in
areas where there are no perennial streams, and groundwater supplies
are either limited or of poor quality.
Coal fields of the Rocky Mountain Coal Province are grouped into
coal regions. The boundaries of a coal region generally coincide
with major physiographic features, and one physiographic province
may contain more than one coal region (Table 4). The Basin and Range
Physiographic Province does not contain a coal region, but does
include scattered small fields in central and southern New Mexico.
The coal fields of the Rocky Mountain Coal Province are described
below within the framework of the physiographic province categori-
zation (Figure 3). Coal measures range in age from Cretaceous to
Miocene and range in rank from lignite to anthracite.
• Northern Rocky Mountain Physiographic Province - This
physiographic province contains the Yellowstone Coal Region,
where coals of the high volatile bituminous A, B, and C ranks
are found in rocks of Upper Cretaceous age. Coal beds are
thin, impure, and usually greatly disturbed by folding and
faulting.
15
-------
Table 4. Relationships of physiographic provinces and coal regions
in the Rocky Mountain Coal Province.
Physiographic Province
Northern Rocky Mountains
Middle Rocky Mountains
Wyoming Basin
Colorado Plateau
Basin and Range
Coal Region
Yellowstone
Big Horn Basin
Hams Fork
Green River
Wind River
Uinta
Southwestern Utah
San Juan River
Location
West Montana
Northwestern Wyoming
Western Wyoming
Wyoming, Colorado
Wyoming
Utah, Colorado
Utah
Colorado, New Mexico
Small fields in central
and southern New
Mexico
Source: US Bureau of Mines. August 1977. Demonstrated coal reserve
base of the United States on January 1, 1976.
16
-------
HAMS FORK
REGION
SOUTHWESTERN
UTAH REGION
YELLOWSTONE REGION
A
t 'UINTA
| BASIN
Colorado R.
SAN JUAN
RIVER REGION
NEW MEX.
Rio Grande R.
A
BIGHORN
REGION
WIND RIVER
REGION
Ptatte R.
GREEN
RIVER REGION
Source: University of Oklahoma. 1975. Energy Alternatives: A
comparative analysis. Prepared for CEQ, ERDA, FEA, FPC, DOI, and
NSF. USGPO.
Figure 3. Rocky Mountain Coal Province
041-011-00025-4.
17
-------
• Middle Bocky Mountain Physiographic Province - This
physiographic province contains the Big Horn Basin and Hams
Fork Coal Regions. The late Cretaceous and Paleocene age coals
of the Big Horn Basin region range in rank from lignite through
high volatile C subbituminous, and occur in lenticular beds
which rarely persist at minable thickness for more than 5 miles
at outcrop. Dips of locally folded strata can reach 50°, re-
sulting in an irregular distribution of coal outcrops. The
Paleocene age coals of the Hams Fork region range in rank
from subbituminous B to high volatile A bituminous. Beds of
higher grade coals may be as thick as 20 feet; thicknesses
of lower grade coal range to 100 feet. These coal beds are
situated in a highly complex zone of thrust faults and folded
rocks, resulting in steeply dipping strata and thereby making
mining difficult in most parts of the region.
• Wyoming Basin Physiographic Province - This semi-arid
region contains the Wind River and Green River Coal Regions.
The Wind River Coal Region of central Wyoming is a basin bor-
dered by narrow ridges formed by steeply dipping sedimentary
rocks. Coals of this region are Late Cretaceous to Paleocene
in age, and are mostly subbituminous. Although coal beds may
approach thicknesses to 17 feet, surface mining is made difficult
by the steep dips of the strata. The Green River Coal Region
consists of Late Cretaceous to Paleocene age coal in beds up
to 42 feet thick. Coals range in rank from subbituminous C to
high volatile bituminous C, and higher rank coals locally may
occur in areas of igneous intrusion and intense structural
deformation.
• Southern Rocky Mountain Physiographic Province - Coals of
this province are found in the North Park coal area of the
Colorado Mountains. Coals of the North Park area are of
subbituminous B rank and occur in several major beds up to
77 feet thick.
• Colorado Plateau Physiographic Province - This province
covers 130,000 square miles of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado,
and Utah, and contains the Uinta, Southwestern Utah, and San
Juan River Coal Regions. Rocks of the province generally are
of sedimentary origin and occur in horizontal strata. Erosion
of these strata has resulted in formation of canyons, mesas,
and buttes. The landscape comprises wide plateaus, uplifts,
and broad basin areas. The Late Cretaceous age coal beds of
the Uinta Coal Region range in rank from subbituminous C to
coking quality, high volatile A bituminous; some semianthracite
and anthracite deposits occur in the Crested Butte Field of
the Uinta Region. Coal bed thicknesses generally range from
5 feet to 15 feet, but locally may approach 40 feet. The Late
Cretaceous age coals of the Southwestern Utah Coal Region
range in rank from subbituminous A to high volatile C bituminous,
with local occurrences of semianthracite. These coals are
18
-------
found in flat-lying to gently dipping beds from 2 feet to 30
feet thick. The Late Cretaceous and Eocene age coals of the
San Juan River Coal Region occur as lenticular, discontinuous
deposits up to 5 feet thick in areas of complex geologic structure.
Thicker, more continuous coal beds up to 38 feet thick with
numerous shaly partings are found in structurally less complex
parts of this region. San Juan River region coals are generally
of subbituminous rank, but high volatile bituminous A, B, and C
rank coals also are found.
• Basin and Range Physiographic Province - This province
comprises isolated, roughly parallel mountain ranges separated
by nearly level, sediment-filled desert basins. The province
contains several separate coal fields of Late Cretaceous age.
Coal occurs in beds up to 7 feet thick and generally is of
bituminous rank, some of which is of coking quality. Limited
anthracite deposits occur locally.
I.C.2.C. Northern Great Plains Coal Province. This coal province
includes coal regions that occur in the Great Plains east of and
adjacent to the Rocky Mountains. The area is characterized by
little surface relief, gently rolling plains, some areas of bad-
lands and dissected plateaus, and isolated mountains. Rocks of
this province occur in nearly horizontal sedimentary strata which
curl up sharply along the flanks of the Rocky Mountains. Five Coal
Regions are recognized within the Northern Great Plains Coal
Province (Figure 4).
• North-Central Coal Region - This region includes the Judith
River Basin and Assiniboine Regions shown in Figure 4. The
Late Jurassic age coals of the Judith River Basin Region generally
are of the high volatile bituminous B and C ranks and contain
1.7 to 4.0 percent sulfur. Late Cretaceous age coals of the
Assiniboine Region range in rank from subbituminous A and B to
high volatile bituminous B and C. These coal beds generally
are discontinuous and too thin to be of commercial importance,
other than as sources of local fuel.
• Fort Union Coal Region - This coal region contains an
estimated 438 billion tons of lignite, the largest single coal
resource in the United States. Coals are Late Cretaceous to
Paleocene in age, and increase in rank westward from lignite
in North Dakota to subbituminous in Montana.
• Powder River Coal Region - This coal region is a southern
extension of the Fort Union Coal Region, covering southern
Montana and northeastern Wyoming. Coals are Upper Cretaceous
to Eocene in age, and range in rank from subbituminous to high
volatile C bituminous.
19
-------
ASSINIBOINE REGION
FORT UNION REGION
JUDITH
BASIN
REGION
N.DAK.
Missouri R.
\PlatteR.
NEB.
SP/afteft.
DENVER REGION
POWDER
RIVER REGION
RATON MESA REGION
Source- University of Oklahoma. 1975. Energy Alternatives: A /
comparative analysis. Prepared for CEQ, ERDA, FEA, FPC, DOI, and NSF.
^ USGPO. 041-011-00036-4,
Figure 4. Northern Great Plains Coal Province.
20
-------
• Denver Coal Region - This region comprises 8,000 square
miles of gently rolling plains underlain by Late Cretaceous
and Paleocene age coal bearing rocks. Coals generally are of
subbituminous B and C ranks and occur in lenticular, discontinuous
beds up to 17 feet thick. Extensive deposits of lignite also
are found in this region.
• Raton Mesa Coal Region - This coal region is located in
southern Colorado, where Late Cretaceous and Paleocene age
coals range in rank from coking high volatile bituminous A
and B to non-coking high volatile bituminous C.
I.C.2.d. Interior Coal Province. This coal province is an extensive
area of low relief underlain by flat-lying Paleozoic age sandstones,
limestones, conglomerates, and shales which lie between the Appalachian
Plateaus and the Rocky Mountains. Coal beds of this province are of
Pennsylvanian age, and generally comprise high volatile bituminous
grades which improve in quality in the western part of the coal region.
In Oklahoma and Arkansas, some coal deposits have been devolatilized
to coking low volatile bituminous and semianthracite ranks. The
subbituminous coal fields of north-central Texas (Figures 1 and 5)
are not included in the demonstrated reserve base because of incom-
plete information on occurrences and thicknesses of local coal
deposits.
The Interior Coal Province Province generally has abundant water
supplies, although most surface waters and some groundwater must be
treated for industrial and municipal use.
I.C.2.e. Gulf Coal Province. This province comprises extensive
lowlands and coastal areas. The subsurface generally is composed
of unconsolidated beds in detrital sediments and limestones which
dip gently seaward. Outcrops of rock become successively older
inland. The province has a good supply of surface water and ground-
water, and droughts are uncommon except in southwest Texas. Coal
deposits consist of Upper Cretaceous age bituminous beds near the
Mexican border, and areally extensive deposits of lignite which
extend from southern Texas to Alabama (Figure 6).
I.C.2.f. Eastern Coal Province. This coal province extends 800
miles from northern Pennsylvania to northwestern Alabama (Figure 7)
and essentially is mountainous for its entire length. The province
has abundant surface and groundwater supplies, but extensive mining
activity has resulted in serious local water pollution problems.
Coals of this province were deposited in the Pennsylvanian age
Appalachian Basin, which consists of a series of sandstones, shales,
limestones, conglomerates, and coals. Structural features such as
faults and fold axes trend northeast-southwest, parallel to the
basin margins. The eastern part of the basin is extensively folded
and faulted, and contains the higher grade coals of the region.
These coals range in rank from medium volatile bituminous coals of
the major eastern Appalachian coal fields to the high quality
21
-------
NORTHERN REGIOI
WESTERN REGION>
ILLINOIS
EASTERN REGION
SOUTHWESTERN REGION
Figure 5. Interior Coal Province.
Source: University of Oklahoma. 1975. Energy Alternatives: A
con^arative analysis. Prepared for CEQ, ERDA, FEA, FPC, DOI
and NSF. USGPO. 041-011-00025-4. '
22
-------
Figure 6. Gulf Coal Province.
Source: US Department of the Interior, n.d. Final environmental
impact statement: Proposed Federal coal leasing program.
Variously paged.
23
-------
PENN. ANTHRACITE REGION
APPALACHIAN REGION
ATLANTIC
COAST REGION
Figure 7. Eastern Coal Province .
Source: University of Oklahoma. 1975. Energy Alternatives: A comparative
analysis. Prepared for CEQ, EKDA, FEA, FPC, D01, and NSF. USGPO.
041-011-00025-4.
24
-------
anthracite of northeastern Pennsylvania. The western part of the
Appalachian basin is marked by strata in broad, open folds which
dip gently westward. Coals of the western part of the basin
generally are of the high volatile bituminous grade. The ranks
of coals in the Eastern Coal Province generally decrease from east
to west in bands which trend northeast-southwest, parallel to major
structural features.
I.D. TRENDS
Trends in surface mining of coal reflect (1) trends in the regula-
tion of coal mining, (2) trends in the development of surface mining
technology, and (3) trends in the use of coal as a fuel. These
trends are manifest in (1) the emergence of large, western surface
mines as major suppliers of coal, (2) the current interest in
recovery of low sulfur coals and desulfurization of high sulfur coals
for use as boiler fuels, and (3) the continuing dialogue between
regulatory authorities and the coal mining industry on surface
mining techniques that will adequately protect the environment,
maximize recovery of the mined resource, and provide mine operators
with an adequate economic return.
I.D.I. Locational Changes
Locational trends in the surface coal mining industry include
(1) shifts of mining activity to coal regions which contain large
reserves of economically recoverable and usable coal and (2) shifts
of mining activity within regions to situations which previously
were avoided because adverse topography, overburden thickness, or
other factors precluded an economic return on investment in mining
operations.
Several factors have contributed to the dramatic expansion of the
western surface coal mining industry. Large tracts of relatively
flat land underlain by thick, horizontal seams of low sulfur (less
than 1%) coal are amenable to high production surface mining
operations. The pit, spoil piles, haul roads, and ancillary
facilities can be designed to minimize the cycle times of unit
mining operations, thus maximizing productivity per manshift. Such
surface mines attract investment capital because high-rate producers
can commit to long-term delivery agreements, whereas low-rate producers,
generally located in the east, are subject to the exigencies of the
open market, and generally cannot guaranty an equitable return on
investment capital.
Operators of eastern surface mines use such methods as mountaintop
removal and head-of-hollow fill to offset the disadvantages of
surface mining in steeply sloping terrain. Although the extent
and magnitude of their environmental impacts are controversial,
mountaintop removal and head-of-hollow fill will be used by an
increasing number of eastern surface mine operators as mining
opportunities diminish on gentler slopes (Murray 1978).
25
-------
I.D.2. Raw Materials
Because it is an extractive process, surface mining does not entail
the consumption of large amounts of raw materials normally asso-
ciated with manufacturing processes. The major raw materials consumed
in surface mining operations include:
• Energy
• Chemicals for treatment or neutralization of wastes
and discharges
• Chemicals for blasting
Energy is consumed in all phases of the mining operation. Trends
in energy consumption include: (1) the use of electricity as a
power source for draglines, stripping shovels, overburden drills,
and overburden conveyors; and (2) the use of computer simulation
techniques to determine the proper sizes and horsepower ratings
of mining equipment. In the past, equipment sizing for a given
mine primarily was based on desired production rate and operator
experience. Mismatches in equipment hauling and load capacities
sometimes resulted in the waste of horsepower and cycle time. The
current approach to integrated mine planning through computer
simulation seeks to maximize productivity and minimize energy
consumption and cycle time.
Lime is the chemical most widely used in the treatment of acid and
ferruginous mine drainage. Recent trends in the research and develop-
ment of waste treatment systems include the use of reverse osmosis
processes and biochemical agents to treat raw mine drainage.
Chemicals such as sodium hydroxide and anhydrous ammonia also have
been used to treat mine drainage, with varying degrees of success.
Future research efforts in treatment processes will seek to minimize
sludge production and costs of treatment chemicals while maximizing
pollutant-removal efficiencies.
The chemical most commonly used for blasting in surface mining
operations is a mixture of ammonia nitrate and fuel oil (ANFO).
Trends in the development of explosives and blasting agents include
development of blasting components that deliver maximum energy with
minimum costs. These costs accrue not only from the direct purchase
of blasting materials, but also from handling and storage require-
ments for explosive materials, drill-hole pattern designs, and the
occasional necessity to reshoot drill holes which did not fire
during the main blast.
26
-------
I.D.3. Surface Mining Systems
A modern surface coal mine is the culmination of years of analysis,
planning, and negotiation. To open and operate a surface coal mine
successfully, the mine operator must secure startup and operating
capital, markets, permits, insurance, bonds, equipment, and a work
force without undue expenditures of venture capital. These prere-
quisites for mining bear sufficient costs so that mine operators
generally are compelled to save money wherever feasible during
each phase of mining.
Computer simulation techniques increasingly are utilized to stream-
line and integrate the unit operations which comprise phases in the
life of a mine-site (Table 5). Unit operations consist of sequences
of operating cycles, each of which has a characteristic time lapse
between initiation and completion. These cycle-times are minimized
to the extent practicable to achieve efficient operation of the
mining system.
For example, hauling is a round trip activity. The hauling cycle
begins with the arrival of the hauler at the loading point. Subse-
quent activities can include:
• Waiting for positioning
• Positioning for loading
• Loading
« Traveling to dumping point
• Waiting to dump
• Dumping
• Traveling to loading point
Hauling cycle-time can be reduced by minimizing waiting, traveling,
dumping, and loading times with an optimum combination of equipment
selection and site design factors, including:
• Haul road gradients
• Haul road distances
• Relative capacities of loaders and haulers
• Hauler running speeds
• Hauler dumping modes
27
-------
Table 5 • Phases and unit operations in the surface mining of coal.
Phase
Exploration
Development
Production
Rehabilitation
Unit Operation
Exploration
Dewatering
Diversion
Drilling
Blasting
Stripping
Hauling
Storage of topsoil or other
soil horizons
Hauling
Maintenance
Beneficiation
Source: US Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. User's manual
for premining planning of eastern surface coal mining: volume I,
executive summary. EPA-600 7-78-180, 81 p.
28
-------
The optimum choice of each factor may be constrained by limitations
in the other cycles with which hauling must interface. For instance,
haulers can off-load in one of three modes from the rear, side, or
bottom of the hauling bin. The choice of dumping mode is limited
by dumping point factors. The rear-dump mode may be necessary
if the dump point is a restricted space, such as a loading hopper
which feeds a conveyor. Choice of the bottom-dump mode may be
dictated by the necessity to achieve specified lift thicknesses
in backfill operations without the use of graders and bulldozers.
Surface mining systems are sequences of unit operations which have
been designed to accommodate the a. priori limitations on mining
imposed by geology, topography, and regulatory authorities. Three
kinds of mining systems have evolved which entail the removal of
overburden to extract coal. These systems have been modified to
reflect regional limitations on mining. The three major systems and
their variants include:
• Area mining
Conventional
Mountain top removal
• Contour mining
Box cut
Block cut
• Open pit mining
Two other surface coal mining systems, daylighting and longwall
stripping, currently are the subjects of Federally funded demon-
stration projects. Neither system currently is used in commercially
operated surface mines, and each system, therefore, will receive
only a summary description. More detailed descriptions of the three
major surface mining systems follow.
Daylighting includes removal of overburden and recovery of coal
pillars from abandoned underground mine workings. After the coal
is recovered, the mine-site is backfilled and regraded with the
stockpiled overburden, and then is rehabilitated to an appropriate
land use.
In longwall stripping, the coal outcrop is contour surface-mined
to leave an open bench and a highwall. Automated equipment,
including self-advancing roof supports, coal conveyors, and a con-
tinuous miner, is inserted into entries driven through the coal
seam perpendicular to the bench and highwall. Mining advances
parallel to the bench, which is backfilled and reclaimed after the
undermined highwall has collapsed.
29
-------
I.D.S.a. Area Mining. Area mining is employed in the gently rolling
terrain of the western US and in selected terrains of the Interior
and Eastern coal provinces. Conventional area mining is restricted
to regions of flat terrain where horizontal or nearly horizontal
coal seams can be recovered from shallow depths of overburden, which
then can be regraded to approximate original contour. Mountain top
removal is used in rugged terrain of the Appalachian Mountains,
where regrading to approximate original contour may not be feasible
or desirable. Both methods essentially result in total recovery
of the mined resource. A typical conventional surface mining opera-
tion proceeds in the following manner. A trench (box-cut) is exca-
vated through the overburden to the coal seam. This trench usually
is extended linearly either to the perimeter of the permitted area
or to the edge of the coal deposit. The mined overburden (spoil)
is stockpiled parallel to the trench on unmined ground, and coal
is recovered from the exposed seam. Successive cuts are made parallel
to the initial trench, and spoil from each succeeding cut is stock-
piled in the trench of the previous cut. Spoil from the initial
cut is placed in the trench of the final cut, and the disturbed
area is progressively regraded to the approximate original contour,
thus eliminating all high walls and other man-made escarpments and
depressions not needed to facilitate revegetation and reclamation
of the disturbed area.
The operational details of an area surface mine primarily depend
upon the excavating, loading, and hauling equipment employed at
the mine-site. Ignoring the capitalization constraints described
in I.D.I, equipment selection generally is based on the depth and
kind of overburden to be removed, the number of coal seams to be
mined from a single pit, the thickness of partings between the
coal seams, the rippability of the coal seams, and the planned
geometry of the pit.
Stripping shovels can be used if the overburden that is to be regraded
in the mined-out trench or pit can be homogenized during stripping
without adversely affecting the reclamation process (Figure 8).
Tandem draglines can be used in the pull-back mode if it is desirable
to invert the sequence of overburden strata, thus burying potentially
unreclaimable overburden beneath more desirable material found closer
to the coal seam (Figure 9).
If segregation or selective placement of overburden horizons is
necessary to achieve rehabilitation of the site to a particular
post mining land use, a combination of excavators, including scraper-
loaders, draglines, bucket wheelexcavators, and stripping shovels
can be employed (Figures 10 and 11). Pit geometry may be engineered
so that excavators can pass one another during bidirectional mining.
It also may be necessary to place two or more excavators on separate
benches to achieve proper location of spoil (Figure 12).
30
-------
ORIGINAL
• SURFACE
Source: US Bureau of Mines. 1975. Economic engineering analysis of
US surface coal mines and effective land reclamation. US Department
of Commerce, NTIS PB-245-315/AS.
Figure 8. Typical area mining with stripping shovel.
31
-------
-,—^. .., M ._ _.-.r-r^-s
•—•—- *\?;> LAMD «JS?:&^
— — *^^8^*W
]*imi'&ffif®$?^V§
Source: US Bureau of Mines. 1975. Economic engineering analysis of
US surface coal mines and effective land reclamation. US Department
of Commerce, NT1S PB-245-315/AS.
Figure 9. Typical area mining with tandem draglines.
32
-------
A/MS5?"-'
/£&&s*
SPOIL FROM MINED OUT PIT
SECTION VIEW
Source: US Bureau of Mines. 1975. Economic engineering analysis of
US surface coal mines and effective land reclamation. US Department
of Commerce, NTIS PB-245-315/AS.
Table 10. Area mining by utilizing a bucket-wheel excavator and a
dragline in tandem.
33
-------
Source: US Bureau of Mines. 1975. Economic engineering analysis of
US surface coal mines and effective land reclamation. US Department
of Commerce, NTIS PB-245-315-AS.
Figure 11. Typical area mining with bucket-wheel excavator and shovel.
34
-------
^VU'-'O r^>^- »
c^^fefe
ss@^s
».~~:i.-T-«>v-'Vv:
..SURFACE' ,- r
^.!^?^?
-M&^.'^rTgIl>^lc
- EXPOSED COAL
SPOIL FROM ACTIVE CUTS
PLAN VIEW
> SPOIL FROM
ACTIVE CUTS
SURFACE
SPOIL PILES
(PRfVIOUS CUTS)'
SECTION VIEW
Source: US Bureau of Mines. 1975. Economic engineering analysis of
US surface coal mines and effective land reclamation. US Department
of Commerce, NTIS PB-245-315/AS.
Figure 12. Area mining with tandem bucket-wheel excavators.
35
-------
The mountain top removal method proceeds in the following manner.
After placement of runoff diversions, sedimentation ponds, and any
requisite water treatment facilities, a box-cut is made through the
overburden along a line more or less parallel to the coal outcrop
(Figure 13). This cut is made in a manner such that at least a
15 foot wide barrier of coal seam at the outcrop remains undisturbed.
This "bloom" or "blossom" of undisturbed coal acts as a buttress to
help stabilize spoil slopes during mining operations and subsequent
reclamation. Spoil from the initial cut is transported to approved
storage areas and stockpiled in a stable manner. Successive cuts
are made parallel to the initial cut, and spoil from each successive
cut is stockpiled in the trench of the previous cut (Figure 14).
Final stabilization and revegetation of the mined area result in
flat to gently rolling terrain suitable for various uses (Figure 15).
Coal is transported from the mine-site to cleaning plants, transfer
points, and consumption points via trucks and conveyors. Trucks
used for coal hauling range in capacity from 25 to 150 short tons,
and may off-load in a rear-dump, bottom-dump, or side-dump mode,
depending on the design of the receiving station. Trucks in the lower
load ranges can be operated on-road and off-road, subject to State
and local restrictions. Mobile conveyor belts are used in some
larger mines to decrease the truck haulage cycle time. Permanent
conveyors can be employed to transport coal from truck dump points
to cleaning plants, railheads, barge points, and consumption points.
I.D.3.b. Contour Mining. Contour mining methods generally are employed
in the mountainous terrain of the Eastern coal province. Contour
mining historically consisted of "shoot and shove" operations in
which overburden, blasted loose by explosives, was cast downslope
from the coal outcrop. Coal was loaded out by shovels, bucket loaders,
and dump trucks, and the mining operation proceeded thus around the
mountain, more or less on the same contour. The mine-site usually
was abandoned with little or no post mining reclamation.
Modern conventional contour mining generally employes the box-cut
method, which proceeds in the following manner (Figures 16 and 17);
The site is laid out according to the approved mining plans; signs
are posted to mark the appropriate components of the mine. Runoff
and siltation control structures are installed, and the initial
mined area is scalped of topsoil, which is stockpiled separately
from other overburden and wastes. The initial cut is made and spoil
is piled on the outslope to form a drill bench. The drill bench
is then loosened by blasting, and the spoil is hauled to an approved
stockpile area. Toxic and acid forming spoils are segregated
to prevent contamination of ground and surface waters and facilitate
deep burial during the regrading phase. A barrier of undisturbed
overburden at least 15 feet wide is left at the coal outcrop.
36
-------
MOUNTAIN TOP
FIRST CUT
BARRIER
BLOSSOM
MOUNTAIN TOP
OtlCINAl
GROUND
SLOP
BARRIER
BLOSSOM
Source: Grim, E. C., and R. D. Hill. 1974. Environmental protection
in surface mining of coal. Office of Research and Development,
11. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati OH, 277 p.,
EPA-670/2-74-093.
Figure 13. Mountain top removal: first and second cuts.
37
-------
MOUNTAIN TOP
BRUSH DAM
BARRIER
Source: Grim, E. C., and R. D. Hill. 1974. Environmental protection
in surface mining of coal. Office of Research and Development,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati OH, 277 P., EPA-670/2-74-093.
Figure 14. Mountain top removal: successive cuts.
BRUSH DA
BARRIER
Source: Grim, E. C., and R. D. Hill. 1974. Environmental protection
in surface mining of coal. Office of ke«" ~ch and Development,
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cinuxunati OH, 277 p., EPA-670/2-74-093.
Figure 15. Mountain top removal: reclaimed area.
38
-------
INITIAL BOX CUT
Remove topsoil
Prepare
overburden
Remove and store
overburden
Prepare
site
Fragment, remove and
load coal
Source: Chironis, Nicholas P. (ed.)- 1978. Coal age operating
handbook of coal surface mining and reclamation. McGraw-Hill,
Inc., New York, NY, 442 pp.
Figure 16. Sequence of operations for box cut contour surface mining.
-------
Source: Adapted from Chironis, Nicholas P. (ed). 1978. Coal age operating handbook of coal
surface mining and reclamation. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York NY, 442 p.
FIGURE 17. TYPICAL BOX CUT CONTOUR MINING OPERATION
-------
A haul road and parallel drainage ditch are constructed along the
coal outcrop and the exposed coal is removed. The unrecovered coal
seam is mined with augers, and the auger holes generally are sealed
with clay or some other nondeleterious, impervious material. The
cut then is backfilled with previously stockpiled overburden so
that (1) the backfilled slope is stable, (2) all highwalls are
eliminated, and (3) toxic and acid-forming wastes and unmined
coal seams will not contaminate ground and surface waters with
deleterious siltation or leachate. Backfill is regraded to the
approximate original contour, where possible. The regraded site
is then replanted with appropriate species of plants and moni-
tored for a specified length of time to insure success of the reve-
getation effort. Haul roads are either abandoned in an acceptable
manner or are stabilized for use during and after replanting
(US-EPA 1977; Grim and Hill 1974).
The development of a block cut contour mine is similar to box cut
mining, with major differences in spoil handling techniques and the
sequence of mining sections (Figure 18). Whereas the box cut method
generally proceeds around the mountain in one direction, block cut
mining progresses in both directions along the coal outcrop
(Figure 19). An initial block of overburden is excavated near the
center of the permit area, and spoil temporarily is placed down-
slope of the coal outcrop, or in a head-of-hollow fill. After the
coal has been loaded out, spoil from the second cut is placed in the
trench of the first cut. Because the second cut is only one-third
to one-half the length of the first cut, spoil from the third cut
also can be placed in the first cut. The third cut is stripped
as coal is loaded out of the second cut. Each successive cut is
smaller than the previous cut, so that the amount of spoil to be
hauled to final cuts is minimized.
Transport of coal from contour surface mining operations generally
is accomplished by dump trucks with capacities that range from 25
to 50 tons. These relatively small capacity trucks generally operate
both on mine haul roads and public highways and, thus, must conform
to the weight limitations specified by state motor vehicle agencies
and local highway authorities. ; Mobile conveyors which feed permanent
conveyors also may be used to transport coal to preparation plants.
I.D.S.c. Open Pit Mining. Open pit operations include a combination
of area mining and contour mining techniques to recover coal from
steeply dipping seams in the mountainous terrain of the Rocky
Mountain coal provinces. Such operations in Wyoming are classified
as Special Bituminous Coal Mines by OSM, and are subject to special
performance standards which closely parallel existing Wyoming law.
41
-------
INITIAL BLOCK CUT
PREPRODUCTION
Remove and store
topsoil
Prepare overburden
Remove and store
first cut
Prepare
site
to
Source: Chironis, Nicholas F. (ed.)> 1978. Coal age operating handbook
of coal surface mining and reclamation. McGraw-Hill, Inc.,
New York, NY, 442 pp.
Figure 18.* Sequence of operations for block cut contour mining.
-------
LO
.-/*»"'** '~*-**">•"•'rrfVi-VVii :''••><-«'••V-fO;^'^
\ ••& Tnocnii erne Ace1 ^>!.Aln9^yi
FIRST CUT SPOIL
TEMPORARILY
DIVERSION DITCH
x. jr.!' "••.,».., ji. ••"
Source: Adapted from Chirojiis, Nicholas P.(ed.). 1978. Coal age operating handbook of coal
surface mining and reclamation. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York NY, 442 p.
FIGURE 19. TYPICAL BLOCK CUT CONTOUR MINING OPERATION
-------
Equipment selection, spoil placement, and the depth to which coal
will be mined are dependent on the ratio of overburden thickness
to coal seam thickness (overburden ratio) and the number of seams
to be mined. Mining usually is initiated in the oldest (lowest)
coal seam in the permit area. A dragline or stripping shovel can
be used to cast overburden on both sides of the pit, forming spoil
piles on the previously mined highwall and adjacent to the outcrop
of the next coal seam to be mined (Figure 20). Coal is loaded out
with shovels or bucket loaders, and bulldozers reclaim the mined
area to a configuration approved by regulatory authorities. Com-
binations of scraper loaders and stripping shovels also can be
used for overburden removal (Figure 21).
Coal seams thicker than 70 feet with overburden ratios of 1:1 or
less are mined by multiple bench open pit methods (Figure 22).
Emphasis in the development of this mining method is placed more
on proper sequencing of coal loading, hauling, and storage tech-
niques than on overburden handling. Overburden is removed from
the initial cut by scraper loaders or a combination of shovels and
haulers, and is stockpiled adjacent to the pit. Subsequent over-
burden cuts are backfilled into the pit as stripping shovels load
coal into haulers for transport to conveyors or unit trains (see
page 47 ). Both of these transport systems can feed preparation
facilities or generating plants.
I.D.4. Pollution Control
Significant advances have been made in pollution control techniques
used in the surface coal mining industry. Evolving or improved
technologies include:
• Alternate mining methods, emphasizing controlled spoil
placement and reclamation concurrent with extraction
• Wastewater treatment systems, emphasizing innovative
techniques to replace limestone treatment systems and
rapid-filling sediment ponds, both of which suffer from
reduced treatment cost ratios as a result of recent
regulations (see section I.G.)
• Revegetation systems, emphasizing the replanting of re-
claimed areas with plant species which have been
specially bred for replanting of local minespoils
• Soil stabilization systems, emphasizing (1) the use of
soil mechanics in slope design, and (2) soil covering
agents such as quick-growing vetches and grasses,
artificial soil amendments and chemical binders, and
mulches to prevent wind and water erosion of recently
backfilled or temporarily stockpiled soils
44
-------
Source: US Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement. 1978. Draft environmental statement: Permanent
regulatory program implementing section 501(b) of the surface mining
control and reclamation act of 1977. Washington, DC. Variously
paged.
Figure 20. Open pit mining with dragline.
45
-------
Source: US Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement. 1978. Draft environmental statement: Permanent
regulatory program implementing section 501(b) of the surface mining
control and reclamation act of 1977. Washington, DC. Variously
paged.
Figure 21. Open pit mining with scraper loader and stripping shovel.
46
-------
> J-it*J'ft*'^'* Mi^iiTfl 'l I I 111*111 fi1 -T^*t«^j
Source: US Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement. 1978. Draft environmental statement: Permanent
regulatory program implementing section 501(b) of the surface mining
control and reclamation act of 1977. Washington, DC. Variously
paged.
Figure 22. Open pit operation with multiple coal benches.
47
-------
I.E. MARKETS AND DEMANDS
Approximately 95 percent of the total coal produced in the US is
committed to sales contracts or other delivery agreements in
advance of production. This figure includes the production from
mines wholly owned by steel producers, utilities, and other high
volume coal consumers. The remaining 5 percent is sold on the open
market, known in the industry as the spot market. Most of the coal
sold on the spot market is mined in the East and generally is pro-
duced by relatively small mining operations which do not produce the
high volume of coal necessary to win long-term sales agreements.
Based on projections developed by the US Department of Energy
(US-DOE 1978) a substantial increase in coal production and utili-
zation is expected through 1990 (Figure 23). The extent of the
production increase will depend primarily on production rates
achieved in surface mining operations in the Powder River Basin
and, to a more limited extent, other western coal provinces. The
US-DOE forecasts are based on three scenarios for production rates
of western coal mines (Table 6 ). The low production scenario
is a conservative estimate based solely on production for which
sales contracts existed as of 1 January 1978. The high production
scenario represents the probable upper limit of expected production
without some.type of Federal administrative action. The medium
production estimate accounts for coal production reasonably expected
during the target years 1985 and 1990, including 120 million tons
of currently planned production not under contract for delivery
as of 1 January 1978.
The expected increase in coal utilization reflects the current
Federal energy policy which, in part, is targeted at reducing
dependence on imported energy commodities. Production during 1976
was about 665 million short tons of which 67% (444 million tons)
was utilized to generate electricity. A production shortfall of
31.4 to 196.3 million short tons is forecast for the 1985 medium
and high scenarios; shortfall under the low scenario could reach
57.4 million short tons. The predicted 1990 production shortfall
could range from 6.4 to 679.2 million short tons, again depending
upon which scenario is considered (US-DOE 1978).
Surface-mined coal varies from high value coking coals to low value,
low BTU, high ash fuel coals. To satisfy air pollution standards
for the generation of electricity, coals with naturally low sulfur
contents and coals that are susceptible to significant reduction
of sulfur content by cleaning will be in higher demand than'coals
of comparatively lower quality. The demand for metallurgical grade
coals generally has decreased since 1973, reflecting the general
decrease in US steel production (US Bureau of Mines 1978).
-------
2000 r-
1800
1600
1400
§
o 1200
t/>
Z
O
_J
z 1000
eoo
600
.'00
200
Projected range of
production possibilities
1900 1910
1990 2000
Source: US Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement. 1978. Draft environmental statement:
Permanent regulatory program implementing section 501(b) of the
surface mining control and reclamation act of 1977. Washington,
DC. Variously paged.
Figure 23. Production of bituminous and lignitic coal by method of
mining, from 1900 to 1990.
49
-------
Table 6. Regional forecasts of coal production by method of mining.
Region
East:
Surface — *
Midwest:
West:
Total:1
LOW
297.7
129.1
123.6
125.7
27.9
286.2
449.2
541.0
990.2
1985
Medium
308.3
132. £
145.7
127.0
28.6
375.3
482.7
634.6
1,117.3
High
319.1
135.2
154.9
127.0
28.6
423.0
502.7
685.5
1,188.2
Low
299.9
96.4
225.6
110.5
28.4
353.8
554.0
560.4
1,114.4
1990
Medium
341). 4.
99.9
274.1
128.3
37.0
636.5
656.5
864.6
1,521.0
High
377.8
101.0
287.6
153.2
36.1
300.5
701.8
1,154.6
1,856.4
•'•Total may not add due to independent rounding.
Source: US Department of the Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.
1978. Draft environmental statement: Permanent regulatory program implementing section
501(b) of the surface mining control and reclamation art of 1977, Washington, DC.
Variously paged.
-------
Desulfurization of coal by physical or chemical cleaning currently
is not practiced at commercial scale, although demonstration plants
and pilot facilities currently are in use. Projected demand for
steam grade coal, therefore, will concentrate initially on coals
with comparatively lower sulfur contents. As the feasibility of
coal desulfurization is enhanced by implementation of improved,
demonstrated technology, coal consumers may elect to use local,
cleanable, high sulfur coals instead of more distant low sulfur
coals. The factors which constrain such choices include the costs
of transportation, beneficiation, and environmental regulation,
all of which may vary significantly at the regional level.
I.F. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
Indiscriminate, unregulated surface mining of coal historically
has resulted in the degradation of surface-mined lands and adjacent
areas. The environmental impacts popularly associated with surface
coal mining are related to the disruption of the surface and sub-
surface of the mine-site. Impacts on transportation, energy, and
other community and regional assets generally are at least as
significant as site-related impacts, although such infrastructure
impacts are more subtle than site-related impacts. The type of
impacts associated with surface coal mining are similar industry-
wide (i.e., sedimentation, discharge of mine drainage, preemptive
land use). The significance and intensity of these impacts, however,
will vary with such local and regional factors as topography, surface
and subsurface hydrology, geology, climate, and land use planning.
The following description of the environmental effects of surface
coal mining is intended solely as a nontechnical introduction to
the elements of the subject. A more complete analysis is presented
in Chapter II of this Appendix.
I.F.I. The Natural Environment
Natural features of the environment which are affected significantly
by surface mining include earth resources, vegetation and wildlife,
air quality, and surface and groundwater resources.
I.F.I.a. Earth Resources. Surface mining includes such activities
as blasting; overburden removal; coal extraction; construction of
haul roads, dewatering and diversion structures; spoil disposal;
and rehabilitation which can alter topography and geology permanently.
Surface mining not onlv removes or alters the coal bed as a geologic
unit, but also destroys the geologic units overlying the mined coal.
Regardless of the reclamation techniques employed, the postmining
land surface will bear only approximate resemblance to the natural,
premining topography. In addition, spoil placement precludes
many types of land uses for years after mining ceases.
51
-------
Erosion is the most potentially significant adverse effect of surface
mining activities on earth resources. Mine development includes
the clearing and grubbing of the mine-site, topsoil removal, and
haul road construction, all of which contribute to the erodibility
of the mine-site; spoil piles, exposed overburden, and bare embank-
ments also are erodible surfaces. Disturbed, exposed soil is easily
eroded by wind and precipitation. In addition to the potential
for degradation of air quality and water quality, as will be dis-
cussed in subsequent sections, erosion adversely affects soil
stability and productivity. Because soil is the growing medium
for vegetation which provides the Nation's food, fiber, wood, and
wildlife habitat, the adverse effects of surface coal mining on soil
productivity are a significant environmental concern. It is
estimated that 26% of the Nation's total strippable coal reserves
underlie prime farmland in the States east of the Mississippi
River (US-DOI 1978). Only 3% of the coal-minable acreage in
States west of the 100th meridian are located on alluvial valley
floors (Hardaway and others 1977 within US-DOI 1978). Alluvial
valley floors are important areas of agricultural production in the
arid and semi-arid western part of the Nation. At present, the
degree of success of reclamation of these areas disturbed by surface
mining cannot be assured (US-DOI 1978).
I.F.l.b. Vegetation and Wildlife. Surface mining eliminates
vegetation from the area of active mining for the duration of the
mining operation. The major types of vegetation destroyed by
mining include forage plants, trees and shrubs, and cultivated
crops (US-DOI 1978). In addition to the initial clearing and
grubbing, surface coal mining reduces soil productivity by (1)
destroying topsoil, (2) depositing toxic materials on or near
the soil surface, (3) polluting the soil from mine water sources,
(4) soil erosion, and (5) landslides on unstable reclaimed" land
(US Department of Agriculture 1977 within US-DOI 1978).
Destruction of vegetation eliminates wildlife habitat. Animals
dependent upon vegetation for shelter and food also are eliminated
from the mine-site. Although displaced wildlife initially may
move to adjacent, undisturbed areas, the resulting competition
and behavioral interaction between immigrant and resident wildlife
contributes to increased stress and mortality among the general wild-
life population. Ground-dwelling animals, common in grasslands
and scrublands in western States, may be killed directly by mining
activities.
Wildlife in areas adjacent to mining operations may be disturbed
by blasting, equipment and transportation noise,1 and fugitive dust.
52
-------
I-F.l.c. Air Quality. The major air quality impact from surface
mining is an increase in total suspended participates (primarily
fugitive dust). The aspects of mining which contribute fugitive
dust to the local environment include blasting of overburden and
coal, coal and spoil transportation over unpaved haul roads, and
stockpiling of topsoil and overburden which are susceptible to wind
erosion. Fugitive dust emissions are highest in the arid, windy
regions typical of the western States (US-EPA 1978 within US-DOI
1978). Such emissions can be a specially significant problem
in air quality regions where ambient air quality already exceeds
standards or where air quality degradation by new sources is not
permissible.
Other atmospheric emissions from mining activities include NOX
from blasting, and vehicular exhaust emissions.
I.F.l.d. Surface and Groundwater Resources. Surface coal mining
operations may affect hydrology significantly in the mined area
and surrounding areas. The erosion of exposed soil, waste piles,
and coal storage piles can transport sediment and toxic substances
to nearby streams. Increased sediment loads, acid mine drainage,
and mine water which may contain toxic trace elements and high
dissolved solids contribute to the: (1) deterioration of stream
quality, (2) degradation or elimination of aquatic life, (3) diminution
of water supplies and water-use opportunities, and (4) increase in
downstream flood potential by reducing the water carrying capacity
of downstream channels and floodpaths.
Surface mining also may affect groundwater supply and quality.
Mining activities can cause: (1) the fracturing of aquifers and
confining strata, with subsequent drainage of usable water,
(2) lowering of water tables in adjacent areas, and (3) contamination
of aquifers with acid mine drainage, toxic trace elements, and high
dissolved solids from mine water and leaching of spoil piles.
The potential for significant groundwater problems is particularly
high in alluvial valley floors, located west of the 100th meridian.
Alluvial sediments in these areas transmit and store much of the
water available to vegetation during the growing season. Restora-
tion of the hydrological characteristics of these areas following
surface mining is, at present, unassured.
I.F.2. The Human Environment
Socioeconomic factors which may be affected significantly by surface
mining include aesthetics, land use, local sound and vibration
levels, and transportation resources. These direct impacts pri-
marily are a result of the size of the operation and site specific
conditions. The extent and significance of secondary or indirect
impacts such as induced growth, infrastructure changes, and demo-
graphic changes largely depend on the local economy, existing
infrastructure, availability of workers, and other related factors.
53
-------
Long-term secondary impacts are seldom significant unless the mining
operation leads to the development of significant supporting facili-
ties (commercial, industrial, and residential). A discussion of
secondary impact analysis is contained in the EPA document,
Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for Selected New Source
Industries.
I.F.2.a. Aesthetics. Surface coal mining impairs virtually all
of the aesthetic qualities of a mine-site. The land is denuded
of vegetation, scarred by excavations, and lined with piles of
overburden and spoil. Alterations of the land surface disrupt
the continuity of the adjacent topography. Noise and dust gen-
erated by blasting and equipment further accentuate the presence
of the mining operation.
I.F.2.b. Land Use. Surface mining can destroy the potential
of the land to sustain uses that were possible prior to mining.
Prime agricultural land or areas of unique and valuable scenic,
archaeological, historic, or biologically noteworthy features
can be irretrievably lost through surface mining.
I.F.2.C. Sound and Vibration. The noise of blasting, heavy equip-
ment, and coal transportation may affect neighboring residents
and communities adversely. Similarly, vibrations generated by
these .activities may cause structural damage to surrounding
facilities.
l.F.2.d. Transportation. The transportation of coal by trucks
can generate fugitive dust (from haul roads and coal), noise, and
traffic congestion. Coal truck traffic also can hasten the deteri-
oration of local roads. Extractive activity immediately adjacent
to public roads may weaken roadbeds through removal of adjacent,
supporting material. Changes in local drainage patterns and sedi-
mentation of downstream surface waters can contribute to flooding
of local public roads.
I.G. REGULATIONS
Currently there are no national air pollution performance standards
which directly apply to atmospheric emissions from new source
surface coal mines. In the absence of Federal emission standards
for the surface coal mining industry, air quality impacts will be
assessed on the basis of receiving air quality standards, and
applicable State and local standards.
Federal water pollution performance standards are covered primarily
by the Standards of Performance for the coal mining point source
category, and are contained in Section 40 CFR 434. Control is
through the issuance of the NPDES permit. Administration and
enforcement rest either with EPA or with those States with
approved NPDES permit programs.
54
-------
Other pollution control regulations (or amendments) which may
apply include the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977, Clean Air Act of 1977, and Clean Water Act Amendments of
1977. Solid waste regulations include the Federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 and any State regulations
which govern the management and disposal of solid wastes.
I.G.I. Air Pollution Performance Standards
Federal air pollution regulations normally specify both the maximum
amounts of specific pollutants that can be emitted from a source
and standards for controlling pollution of ambient air. Although
no new source performance standards (NSPS) have been proposed for
surface coal mines, NSPS have been proposed for coal preparation,
which is the activity associated with the mining of coal that is most
likely to affect air quality. Other air quality regulations that
also apply include National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements.
The following paragraphs discuss these Federal regulations.
The regulatory program designed to achieve the objectives of the
Clean Air Act is a combined Federal/State function. The rule of
each State is to adopt and submit to EPA a State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for maintaining and enforcing primary and secondary
air quality standards in Air Quality Control Regions. EPA either
approves the State's SIP or proposes and implements its own plan.
The SIP's contain emission limits which may vary within a State
due to local factors such as concentrations of industry and
population. New source regulations require the Administrator to
develop standards of performance for new stationary sources of
air pollution. These standards must reflect levels of control
which can be achieved by applying the Best Available Control
Technology (BACT), taking cost into account. New source perform-
ance standards for coal preparation plants are presented in
Table 7 .
Ambient air quality standards
-------
Table 7 . Summary of new source performance standards for bituminous
coal preparation plants and handling facilities capable of processing
more than 181 metric tons (200 short tons) of coal per day.
Equipment
Participate
Opacity Limitation Concentration Standard
% g/dscm gr/dscf
Thermal Dryers
20
0.070
0.031
Pneumatic Coal
Cleaning Equipment
10
0.040
0.018
Coal Handling and
Storage Equipment
20
Source: 40 CFR 250.
56
-------
Table 8. Summary of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (from 40 CFR 50)
Standard
Emission
Sulfur dioxide
Particulate matter
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen dioxide
Ozone
Carbon monoxide
Lead
Primary
80 micrograms/m3 annual
arithmetic mean
365 micrograms/m3 maximum
24-hour concentration*
75 micrograms/m3 annual
geometric mean
/\
260 micrograms/m maximum
24-hour concentration*
160 micrograms/m3 (0.24 ppm)
maximum 3-hour concentration *
100 micrograms/m3 annual
arithmetic mean
235 micrograms/m3 (0.12 ppm)
maximum 1-hour concentration*
10 mg/m3 (9 ppm)
maximum 8-hour concentration*
40 mg/m? (35 ppm)
maximum 1-hour concentration*
1.5 micrograms/m3
maximum calendar quarterly
average
Secondary
1,300 micrograms/m3 maximum
3-hour concentration*
150 micrograms/m3 maximum
24-hour concentration*
60 micrograms/m3 annual geometric
mean
(as guide in assessing
implementation plans)
160 micrograms/m3 (0.24 ppm)
maximum 3-hour concentration*
100 micrograms/m3 annual
arithmetic mean
235 micrograms/m3 (0.12 ppm)
maximum 1-hour concentration*
10 mg/m3 (9 ppm)
maximum 8-hour concentration*
40 mg/m3 (35 ppm)
maximum 1-hour concentration*
1.5 micrograms/m3
maximum calendar quarterly
average
*The maximum allowable concentration may be exceeded for the
prescribed period once each year without violating the standard.
-------
The plan permitted specified numerical "increments" of air pollu-
tion increases from major stationary sources for each class, up
to a level considered to be "significant" for that area. Class I
provided extraordinary protection from air quality deterioration
and permitted only minor increases in air pollution levels. Under
this concept, virtually any increase in air pollution in the above
pristine areas would be considered significant. Class II incre-
ments permitted increases in air pollution levels such as would
usually accompany well-controlled growth. Class III increments
permitted increases in air pollution levels up to the NAAQS.
Sections 160-169 were added to the Act by the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1977. These amendments adopted the basic concept
of the above administratively developed procedure of allowing
incremental increases in air pollutants by class. Through these
amendments, Congress also provided a mechanism to apply a prac-
tical adverse impact test which did not exist in the EPA regulations.
The PSD requirements of 1974 applied only to two pollutants: total
suspended particulates (TSP) and sulfur dioxide (802). However,
Section 166 requires EPA to promulgate PSD regulations by 7 August
1980 addressing nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,
and photochemical oxidants by use of increments or other effective
control strategies. For these additional pollutants, States may
adopt non-increment control strategies which, if taken as a whole,
accomplish the purposes of PSD policy set forth in Section 160.
Whereas the earlier EPA regulatory process had not resulted in the
Class I designation of any Federal lands,- the 1977 Amendments
designated certain Federal lands Class I. All international parks,
national memorial parks, and national wilderness areas which exceed
5,000 acres, and national parks which exceed 6,000 acres, are
designated Class I. These 158 areas may not be redesignated to
another class through State or administrative action. The remaining
areas of the country are initially designated Class II. Within
this Class II category, certain national primitive areas, national
wild and scenic rivers, national wildlife refuges, national sea-
shores and lakeshores, and new national park and wilderness areas
which are established after 7 August 1977, if over 10,000 acres
in size are Class II "floor areas" and are ineligible for
redesignation to Class III.
Although the earlier EPA regulatory process allowed redesignation
by the Federal land manager, the 1977 amendments place the general
redesignation responsibility with the States. The Federal land
manager only has an advisory role in the redesignation process,
and may recommend redesignation to the appropriate State or
to Congress.
58
-------
In order for Congress to redesignate areas, proposed legislation
would be introduced. Once proposed, this probably would follow
the normal legislative process of committee hearings, floor
debate, and action. In order for a State to redesignate areas,
the detailed process outlined in Section 164(b) would be followed.
This would include an analysis of the health, environmental,
economic, social, and energy effects of the proposed redesignation
to be followed by a public hearing.
Class 1 status provides protection to areas by requiring any new
major emitting facility (generally a large point source of air
pollution—see Section 169[1] for definition) in the vicinity to
be built in such a way and place as to insure no adverse impact
on the Class I air quality related values.
The permit may be issued if the Class I increment will not be
exceeded, unless the Federal land manager demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the State that the facility will have an adverse
impact on the Class I air quality related values.
The permit must be denied if the Class I increment will be
exceeded, unless the applicant receives certification from the
Federal land manager that the facility will not adversely affect
Class I air quality related values. Then the permit may be
issued even though the Class I increment will be exceeded.
(Up to the Class I1 increment—see Table 9 .)
I.G.2. Water Pollution Standards of Performance
Under the authority of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, as amended (Public Law 92-500), EPA has issued standards
of performance which specify maximum allowable concentrations of
impurities in the various wastewater streams from coal mining
activities. These regulations on the coal mining point source
category (40 CFR 434,10-434.42; 44 FR 2589, 12 January 1979) form
the basis for this discussion. All coal mines that begin operations
after January 12, 1979, the date when EPA New Source Standards of
Performance for the mining industry went into effect require National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. They must
meet at a minimum the National new source effluent guidelines and
standards for the industry, if they propose to discharge wastewaters
into the surface waters of the Nation (Table 10). New Source NPDES
permits for the coal mining industry.
59
-------
Table 9 . Nondeterioration increments: maximum allowable increase
by class.
Pollutant* Class I Class II Class III Class I1 exception
(yg/m3) (yg/m3) (yg/m3) (yg/m3)
Particulate matter:
Annual geometric mean 5 19 37 19
24-hour maximum 10 37 75 37
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean 2 20 40 20
24-hour maximum 5** 91 182 91
3-hour maximum 25** 512 700 325
*0ther pollutants for which PSD regulations will be promulgated
are to include hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, photochemical
oxidants, and nitrogen oxides.
**A variance may be allowed to exceed each of these increments
on 18 days per year, subject to limiting 24-hour increments of
36 yg/m3 for low terrain and 62 yg/m3 for high terrain and
3-hour increments of 130 yg/m3 for low terrain and 221 yg/m3
for high terrain. To obtain such a variance both State and
Federal approval is required.
Source: Public Law 95-95. 1977. Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1977, Part C, Subpart 1, Section 163-
60
-------
will differ significantly from the existing source NPDES permits
which EPA began to administer several years ago (final existing
source regulations are in 40 CFR 434; 42 FR 80:21379-21390,
26 April 1977). First, the proposed Nationwide new source limi-
tations (Table 10) are more restrictive than the existing source
limitations for total iron (Table 11). Second, each new source
permit must be approved prior to the construction of the proposed
new source. Third, new source NPDES permit actions may be
subject to comprehensive environmental review by EPA in accordance
with NEPA, as well as other applicable environmentally protective
laws and regulations. Hence the new source program offers
significantly enhanced opportunity, as compared with the existing
source program, for (1) public and interagency input to the Federal
NPDES permit review process, (2) effective environmental review
and consideration of alternatives, and (3) implementation of
environmentally protective permit conditions on mine planning,
operation, and decommissioning.
New source coal mining industries will be defined to include three
basic categories of operations, according to the proposed regula-
tions. First, new coal preparation plants independent of mines
will be considered new sources as of the effective date of the
regulations. Second, surface and underground mines that are
assigned identifying numbers by the Mining Enforcement Safety
Administration subsequent to the effective date of the regulations
automatically will be considered new sources. Third, other mines
may be regarded by EPA as "substantially new" operations if they
(i) begin to mine a new coal seam, (ii) discharge effluent to a
new drainage basin, (iii) cause extensive new surface disruption,
(iv) begin construction of a new shaft, slope, or drift, (v) make
significant additional capital investment, or (vi) otherwise have
characteristics deemed appropriate by the Regional Administrator
to place them in the new source category. The determination of
whether or not a mine is a new source will be conducted case by
case, based largely on the information supplied by each applicant.
EPA's new source effluent limitations have been proposed to apply
only to wastewater discharged from active mining areas. They do not
apply to runoff from land that has been regraded in accordance with
a mining plan. Areas undergoing reclamation, that have been regraded
but not yet released from revegetation bonds by other agencies, are
to be considered a separate subcategory from active mines and coal
preparation plants. No limitations for the new subcategory have been
proposed. EPA discharge regulations do not address directly the long-
term effluents from surface mining operations following the completion
of revegetation.
61
-------
Table 10. Nationwide performance standards for wastewater discharged after application of the best available
demonstrated control technology by new sources in the coal mining point source category. The limitations are
not applicable to excess water discharged as a result of precipitation or snow melt in excess of the 10-year,
24-hour precipitation event (40 CFR 434; 44 FR 2590, 12 January 1979). Units are milligrams per
liter (mg/1) except as otherwise indicated.
Coal Preparation Plants'
Bituminous. Lignite, and Anthracite Mining
Acid or Ferruginous
Mine Drainage3
Alkaline Mine
Drainage-
Parameter
Total suspended
Total iron
Total manganese
pH (pH units)
1-day
Maximum
solids 70.0
6.0
4.0
range^ 6.0 to
Average of
30 consecutive
daily values
35.0
3.0
2.0
9.0
1-day
Maximum
70.04
6.0
4.0
range2 6.0-9
Average
30 consecutive
daily values
35. 0A
3.0
2.0
.0
1-day
Maximum
70. 04
6.0
range 6.0-9
Average of
30 consecutive
daily values
35. 0*
3.0
.0
Maganese discharge limitations are applicable only to discharges which are acidic prior to treatment.
2 Slightly higher pH may be allowed if necessary to achieve the maganese limitation.-
3 Drainage which is not from an active mining area (for example, a regraded area).is not required to meet
the stated limitations unless it is mixed with untreated mine drainage that is subject to the limitations.
4 Total suspended solids limitations do not apply to discharges from coal mines located in Colorado, Montana,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.
-------
Table 11 . Nationwide performance standards for wastewater discharged after application of the best available
demonstrated control technology by existing sources in the coal mining point source category. The limitations
are not applicable to excess water discharged as a result of precipitation or snow melt in excess of the 10-year,
24-hour precipitation event (40 CTR 434; 42 FR 80:21379-21390, 26 April 1977). Units are milligrams per liter
(mg/1) except as otherwise indicated.
1 Bituminous, Lignite, and Anthracite Mining
Coal Preparation Plants
Acid or Ferruginous Alkaline Mine
Mine Drainage^ Drainage^
Parameter
Total suspended solids
Total iron .
oj Total manganese
pH (pH units) ran;
1-day
Maximum
70.0
7.0
4.0
;e2 6.0 to
Average of
30 consecutive
daily values .
35.0
3.5
2.0
9.0
1-day
Maximum
70. 04
7.0
4.0
range^ 6.0-9.
Average
30 consecutive
daily values
35. 04
3.5
2.0
0
1-day
Maximum,
70. 04
7.0
range 6.0-9
Average of
30 consecutive
daily values .
35. 04
3.5
.0
Magahese discharge limitations are applicable only to discharges which are acidic prior to treatment.
^Slightly higher pH may be allowed if necessary to achieve the maganese limitation.
3 Drainage which is not from an active mining area (for example, a regraded area) is not required to meet
the stated limitations unless it is mixed with untreated mine drainage that is subject to the limitations.
Total suspended solids limitations do not apply to discharges from coal mines located in Colorado, Montana,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.
-------
I.G.3. Other Federal Regulations
The regulations for OSM's permanent program (44 FR 50:
15311-15463; 13 March 1979) apply EPA's existing source effluent
limitations (Table 11) to all surface mine discharges except those
which originate in the undisturbed parts of the mine-site. Drainage
from undisturbed areas will be treated if mixed with raw mine
drainage prior to discharge. Drainage from areas undergoing re-
clamation also shall meet the limitations in Table 11 prior to
discharge.
1.6.4. State Regulations
As of December 1975 all States that contain surface minable coal
reserves had passed laws and promulgated regulations to control
the surface mining of coal (Imhoff and others 1976). State regu-
lations typically apply to mining methods, reclamation procedures,
and post mining land uses. Only the regulations promulgated in Montana,
Maryland, North Dakota, Ohio, and Texas provided State authority
to designate lands unsuitable for mining. The information required
by an applicant to satisfy permit requirements varies between
States and the effectiveness of enforcement of regulations also
has varied.2 Minimum standards of performances now are prescribed
by OSM. Under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, State
surface mining regulations may be more stringent, but not less
stringent, than the minimum Federal standards. As of November 1978,
State mining regulations were being revised to meet the requirements
of the new Federal law. The permit applicant is advised to consult
early with the appropriate State authorities relative to State
regulations and procedures applicable to surface coal mine operations.
Table 12 presents a hypothetical list as an indication of the range
of State and local controls and permits that may apply 'to a
surface mine.
64
-------
Table 12. Hypothetical example of State and Local controls and permits required for a surface mine
In
Time Period/Activity
Pre-mining (years 0-4):
Existing land use
Prospecting the area
Mineral and economic evaluations
Acquisition of rights
Surveying and design of mine
Natural Resources studies
Reclamation planning
End land-use planning
Costs analyses
t\
Obtaining mine permit
Constructing roads and buildings2
Zoning and
Related Local
Land Use
Controls
Water, Air,
State and Noise
Reclamation Pollution
Controls Controls
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Other Controls, As Named
State water rights.
State and local environmental
controls.
Waste discharge permits
State location of development
(e.g., as in Maine).
Obtaining utilities
Drainage and erosion control2
Fencing and screening
Environmental monitoring2
Joint mining and reclamation (years 4 to
Removal and segregation of soils2
Disposal of debris2
Drilling and blasting2
Extracting and hauling minerals
Filling and grading
Reducing pitwalls or highwalls2
Burying toxic materials2
Revegetatlon2
Post-mining (4 to 36) :
Vegetation survival studies2
Pest and weed control2
Land capability studies
Divesting ownership or rights
Water quality performance
Decommissioning mine (dismantling,
demolishing, etc.)
Established end use
Recovery of bonds
iDoes not Include controls pertaining
2A process that tends to be maintained
X
—
X
—
30):
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X-.
X
to mine safety.
or repeated, as
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
X
—
X
necessary,
—
X
—
X
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
X
—
throughout much
State utilities regulation.
State water board
State fish and game.
—
Local soil and water conver,1
Sanitary land fills.
State permit.
State severance taxes.
—
—
—
—
State agriculture.
State agriculture.
State agriculture.
Official acceptance of lakei
and roads.
State agriculture.
State mine abandonment laws
—
—
of the life of the mine.
-------
Table 12. Hypothetical example of State and Local controls and permits required
for a surface mine (concluded).
Source: Imhoff, E.A., et al. 1976. A guide to State programs for reclamation of
surface mined areas. US Geological Survey Circular 731. Resource and Land
Investigations (RALI) Program. Arlington VA.
66
-------
II. IMPACT IDENTIFICATION
Surface coal mining is an extractive process rather than a manufac-
turing process, and therefore generates environmental impacts which
are of the same general types Nationwide, but which vary in intensity
and significance locally. Key mine-site characteristics which
influence the magnitude and significance of environmental impacts
include topography, geology (depth of overburden to coal seam,
thickness and position of the coal seam), soil composition, land
use, the presence of unique or sensitive natural features, hydrology,
and climate. Therefore, it is important that the permit applicant
thoroughly describe the environmental setting of the proposed
permit area and appropriate adjacent areas. Adjacent area means
those natural and human resources contiguous to or near the proposed
permit area that may be affected by surface coal mining and recla-
mation operations conducted within the proposed permit area. The
applicant should consult with EPA to delineate the adjacent area
proximate to the proposed permit area. The following information
should be included in the EID:1
• Earth Resources
A map which shows clearly the topography of the proposed permit
area and adjacent lands, accompanied by additional maps, illus-
trations, and text as needed to delineate or describe slopes
greater than 25%, unstable slopes, existing spoil piles,
existing mine workings, and other special or extraordinary
topographic features.
Maps which delineate the flood prone areas associated with
precipitation events of 100-year recurrence interval or other
recurrence intervals as appropriate, included in or proximate
to the proposed permit area and adjacent area.
Maps, cross sections, and text which delineate and describe
the soils and geology of the proposed permit area and adjacent
areas. The composition and thickness of all strata, including
those which directly underlie the lowest stratum to be dis-
turbed, should be described in sufficient detail to support
the applicant's proposed plans for spoil handling, waste
treatment or burial, and post-mining rehabilitation. Coal
and overburden material should be analyzed to determine
chemical parameters such as acid producing potential, concen-
trations of trace elements, sulfur content, and coal rank.
Soils should be analyzed chemically to determine the kinds
and amounts of soil amendments necessary to rehabilitate the
disturbed site.
The US Department of Interior Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and
Enforcement (OSM) requires applicants for OSM or State-administered
permits to furnish similar information with the permit application
(30 CFR Chapter VII; 44 FR 50:15311-15463, 12 March 1979).
67
-------
Climate
Text and illustrations which describe the maximum, minimum,
and annual and monthly average for rainfall, snow, temperature,
inversions, velocity and direction of winds, and probable
occurrence of severe weather events at the proposed mine-site
and adjacent areas.
Air Quality
Baseline data and explanatory text which describe the atmos-
pheric concentration of participates at the mine-site and
adjacent areas. Baseline data for concentrations of other
parameters, including NOx, may be required by the Regional
Administrator on a case by case basis.
Groundwater
Maps, text, and illustrations (including cross sections) which
delineate and describe the depth, areal extent, hydrogeology,
and water quality of all aquifers and confining strata to be
disturbed during exploration, mining; or reclamation.
Maps and text which delineate and describe all water wells
located within the proposed permit area and adjacent areas.
The text should describe water withdrawal rates, groundwater
uses, water well ownership, local or regional plans for
groundwater development, and projections for increases or
decreases in local groundwater demand through an appropriate
planning year, to be designated by the Regional Administrator.
Surface Waters
Maps, text, and illustrations which describe all proposed
receiving waters. Receiving waters include seeps, springs,
streams, impoundments, wetlands, and navigable waters which
would receive discharge from, or otherwise are proximate to
the proposed permit area and adjacent areas. The text should
include descriptions (supported by appropriate illustrations
and maps) of all drainage basins located wholly or partially
within the permit area and adjacent areas. The hydrology of
receiving waters should be described on the basis of data
presented in the EID, including statistics on low flow, normal
flow, and flood flow. Existing flow control installations
should be identified, and existing or proposed flood control
plans should be described.
68
-------
Maps and text that describe the chemical quality of proposed
receiving waters and delineate stream segments that are classi-
fied as water quality limited and effluent quality limited by
an appropriate State or Federal agency. Stream segments
classified by other systems also should be described. Chemical
quality of receiving waters should be characterized on a seasonal
basis by the following parameters:
—temperature
—pH
—acidity
—alkalinity
—hardness
—dissolved oxygen
—total suspended solids
—total dissolved solids
—sulfate
—ammonia
total dissolved concentrations of iron, manganese, zinc,
aluminum, and nickel
Aquatic Biota
Text which describes a seasonal, quantitative baseline of data
on the biota of receiving waters. Appropriate biota include,
but are not limited to:
—phytoplankton
—macrophytes
—invertebrates
—fish
Text (and maps, where appropriate) which describes the occurrence
or potential for occurrence of rare or endangered species of
aquatic life in proposed receiving waters.
69
-------
• Terrestrial Biota
Maps and text which delineate and describe existing vegetation
in the permit area and adjacent areas.. The text should
characterize vegetation by factors such as:
—species composition
—importance as wildlife habitat
—local and regional uniqueness
—noteworthy specimens or associations
—rare or endangered species
—species of economic importance
Text (and maps, where appropriate) which describes the wild-
life that inhabit or otherwise use the permit area or adjacent
areas, including an inventory of species of amphibians, rep-
tiles, birds, and mammals, and the occurrence or potential
for occurrence of rare or endangered species.
The wastes generated by surface coal mining include effluents, air
emissions, and solid wastes. Many wastes consist of locally occurring
natural materials which, if left undisturbed, would have minimal
potential to degrade the environment. Other wastes consist of sub-
stances transported to the mine-site during the course of normal
operations.
The EID should identify and describe all sources of waste associated
with both the proposed mining method and the proposed permit area
and adjacent area. Effluents, air emissions, and solid wastes should
be discussed separately. The remainder of this chapter describes
the minimum information requirements and supporting rationale for a
general characterization of the environmental impact of wastes gen-
erated by surface coal mines. Regional Administrators may identify
additional information requirements for specific EID's.
II.A. MINING WASTES (EFFLUENTS)
To characterize proposed effluents adequately, the EID should pro-
vide, at a minimum, maps, text, and illustrations which describe:
• Wastewater sources, including:
groundwater
runoff
interdicted receiving waters
70
-------
• Wastewater quantities, including the volume and duration
of flows from each source
• Wastewater quality, including the parameters listed in
Table 13
• Environmental impacts of the proposed discharge. The
environmental resources to be considered include those
identified in the description of the existing environment
included in the BID
Wastewater associated with surface coal mining generally occurs as
nuisance water which must be managed effectively to avoid disruption
of or damage to the mining and reclamation operation. Groundwater
normally is encountered during excavation for mine development or
coal recovery. Groundwater is held in fractures, joints, solution
channels, and interstitial voids that commonly occur in natural
geologic materials. Coal seams locally may be significant sources
of groundwater. These coal seams generally have well-developed
fracture systems, and overlie relatively impermeable shales, clays,
or claystones.
Runoff occurs as the result of precipitation, and includes water
which does not infiltrate the surface to recharge groundwater.
Runoff patterns at a given location can change with alterations
in ground cover, topography, and baseflow. Wastewater attributable
to runoff should be quantified for drainage areas of the proposed
permit area and adjacent area using an accepted method (Chow 1964;
USDA-SCS 1972). Quantities should be calculated for each configu-
ration of drainage areas that will result from the progress of the
mining operation. Wastewater quantities thus calculated can be
compared to runoff from the pre-mining drainage pattern to assess
the impact of proposed mining operations on streamflow.
The proposed permit area or adjacent area may include receiving
waters that require impoundment, channelization, or other inter-
diction for mining to progress. Contamination of interdicted
receiving waters with pollutant-bearing mine drainage generates
a waste stream which must be treated adequately. The volume of
the waste stream can be predicted and minimized during the design
process.
Four basic types of effluents may be discharged from mining operations:
• Discharge effluent
• Sediment-bearing effluent
• Acid mine drainage
• Treated mine drainage
71
-------
Table 13. Potential chemical constituents of coal industry wastewater.
Major Constituents - Total
Acidity
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Boron
Calcium
Chlorides
Dissolved Solids
Fluorides
Hardness
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Strontium
Sulfates
Suspended Solids
Zinc
Major Constituents - Dissolved
Aluminum
Boron
Calcium
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Silicon
Strontium
Zinc
Minor Constituents - Total
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Selenium
Minor Constituents - Dissolved
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Selenium
Additional Analyses
Acidity, net
Acidity, pH8
Ammonia
Color
Ferrous Iron
Oils*
PH
Specific Conductance
Turbidity
* Preparation Plants Only
Source: US-EPA. 1976a. Development document for interim final
effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance
standards for the coal mining point source category.
Washington, DC, 288 p. EPA 440/1-76/057-a.
72
-------
Discharge effluent is untreated mine drainage that is of acceptable
quality for discharge without sedimentation or neutralization
treatment. This type of discharge may result from collection of
runoff from undisturbed areas or from effective management of
interdicted receiving waters.
Sediment-bearing effluent is mine drainage which has passed through
settling basins for removal of excessive amounts of sediment.
Sediment-laden water generated by the erosion of exposed land is
a common, but significant, problem encountered in surface mining.
Erosion and resulting sedimentation contribute to the exposure of
toxic substances, onsite and offsite water pollution, and the loss
of soil nutrients leading to reduced soil productivity. Estimates
of erosion from unreclaimed mined land vary from a few tons per
acre to greater than 300 tons per acre (US-DOI 1978). Active and
abandoned coal mines are estimated to generate 17,850 tons of sedi-
ment per square kilometer of exposed soil per year (US-EPA 1973
within US-DOI 1978). The susceptibility of surface-mined land to
erosion is dependant on site conditions. To assess adequately the
extent of potential erosion, the permit applicant should consider
and document in the BID the following factors (Grim and Hill 1974):
• Degree of slope
• Length of slope
• Climate
• Amount and rate of rainfall
• Type and percent vegetation cover
Acid mine drainage (AMD) is untreated mine drainage characterized
as acid with high iron content. The removal of overburden often
exposes pyritic materials which, when oxidized, eventually produce
ferric hydroxide and sulfuric acid. This wastewater is characterized
by low pH and high concentrations of heavy metals such as iron,
manganese, copper, and zinc (Table 14). The amount and rate of
acid formation and the quality of discharge are a function of the
amount and type of pyrite in the overburden and coal, other geo-
logical and chemical characteristics of the overburden, and the
amount of water and air available for chemical reaction.
Raw mine drainage also may be alkaline in areas where the overburden
contains alkaline material such as limestone or where no acid-producing
material is associated with the coal seam. The general chemical
characteristics of raw alkaline mine drainage are listed in Table 15.
These discharges usually are high in sulfates and generally are
less detrimental to the environment than acid mine discharges.
73
-------
Table 14 . General chemical characteristics of raw acid mine drainage
from surface coal mines.
Parameter Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Dev.
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
pH 2.6 7.7 3.6
Alkalinity 0 184 5 32
Total Iron 0.08 440 52.01 101
Dissolved Iron 0.01 440 50.1 102.4
Manganese 0.29 127 45.11 42.28
Aluminum 0.10 271 71.2 79.34
Zinc 0.06 7.7 1.71 1.71
Nickel 0.01 5 0.71 1.05
TDS 120 8,870 4,060 3,060
TSS 4 15,878 549 2,713
Hardness 24 5,400 1,944 1,380
Sulfate 22 3,860 1,842 1,290
Ammonia 0.53 22 6.48 4.70
Source: US-EPA. 1976a. Development document for interim final
effluent limitation guidelines and new source performance
standards for the coal mining point source category.
Washington, DC, 288 p. EPA 440/l-76/057a.
74
-------
Table 15 . General chemical characteristics of raw alkaline mine
drainage from surface coal mines.
Parameter Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Dev.
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
pH 6.2 8.2 7.7
•Alkalinity 30 860 313 183
Total Iron 0.02 6.70 0.78 1.87
Dissolved Iron 0.01 2.7 0.15 0.52
Manganese 0.01 6.8 0.61 1.40
Aluminum 0.10 0.85 0.20 0.22
Zinc 0.01 0.59 0.14 0.16
Nickel 0.01 0.18 0.02 0.04
TDS 152 8,358 2,867 2,057
TSS 1 684 96 215
Hardness 76 2,900 1,290 857
Sulfate 42 3,700 1,297 1,136
Ammonia 0.04 36 4.19 6.88
Source: US-EPA. 1976a. Development document for interim final
effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance
standards for the coal mining point source category.
Washington, DC, 288 p. EPA 440/1-76/057-a.
-------
Acid mine drainage, untreated by neutralization and sedimentation,
has destroyed productivity in approximately 11,000 miles of US streams
(H. R. Rep. No. 95-218, 95th Cong., 1st Sess. at 58, 1977 within
US-DOI 1978). For the Appalachian Region, it is estimated that a
residual acid load in excess of 300,000 tons per year is not neu-
tralized until it reaches the larger streams (US-SCS 1978 within
US-DOI 1978). Approximately 97 percent of the acid pollution in
streams and 63 percent in impoundments is generated by coal mining
operations (US-DOI 1978).
Treated mine drainage is effluent which has been treated by neutrali-
zation and sedimentation and generally is of acceptable quality for
discharge. The water quality of discharge effluent and sediment-
bearing effluent, however, generally is superior to the quality of
treated mine drainage (US-EPA 1976a).
II.A.I. Wastewater From Coal Transportation
Water is utilized in coal transportation as a dust suppressant applied
to haul roads, coal loads on trucks and conveyors, and coal storage
piles. Water also is utilized as the transporting medium in slurry
pipelines to carry coal to coal preparation facilities. The waste
characteristics of water utilized for coal transportation are similar
to sediment-bearing effluents and raw mine drainage at the mine-site.
II.B. MINING WASTES (EMISSIONS)
Air emissions result from all phases of surface coal mining and can
affect air quality for considerable distances from the mine-site.
The principal impact on air quality is an increase in total suspended
particles, primarily fugitive dust generated from haul roads, topsoil
and overburden handling, dragline operations and spreading activities
associated with rehabilitation.
To assess the environmental impacts of air emissions adequately, the
EID should contain, at a minimum, the following information:
• Sources of emissions
• Quantities of emissions
• Physical and chemical composition of emissions
The impact of dust on air quality depends on particle size and
composition, and air flows of sufficient velocity to carry the dust
from the point of origin. The pick-up velocities for various dusts
are listed in Table 16 (Djamgouz and Ghonein within Down and Stocks
1978). In mining operations, however, machinery and transportation
increase the distribution -of dust by imparting a velocity to the dust
particle which effectively lowers the wind speed required to raise
the dust. On asphalt roads, as much as 1% of newly deposited dust may
76
-------
Table 16. The pick-up velocities of dry dusts*.
Mr Velocity, m/s (ft./s)
Particle Size (urn)
75-105
35-75
10-35
* Add Im/s (3 ft./s) for wet dusts.
Granite
7 (23)
6 (20)
4 (13)
Silica
6 (20)
5 (16)
3 (10)
Coal
5 (16)
4 (13)
3 (10)
Source: Down, C. G. and J. Stocks. 1978. Environmental impact of
mining. Applied Science Publishers, Ltd. London, England.
371 p.
77
-------
be resuspended by each vehicle passage (Down and Stocks 1978). Other
factors affecting dust transport are season, time of day, soil moisture,
temperature, humidity, and wind direction (Downs and Stocks 1978).
Fugitive dust emissions can be transported up to 20 km from mining
operations (Dvorak and others 1977 within US-DOI 1978). Generally
this environmental problem is greater in the western States where
arid conditions and high winds are common. To demonstrate the mag-
nitude of the problem, uncontrolled fugitive dust emissions from a
western mine operation which produced one million tons of coal per
year was estimated at 1,750 tons per year, of which 265 tons per
year were of respirable size (US-EPA 1978 within US-DOI 1978).
The problem is less severe in the eastern States where rainfall
and humidity are greater and wind velocity and intensity are less
(Hittman Associates, Inc. 1975).
Other atmospheric emissions include equipment and vehicular exhausts
which- generate participates, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, hydro-
carbons, oxides of nitrogen (also a product of blasting), and minor
amounts of aldehydes and organic acids (Hittman Associates, Inc.
1975).
II.C. MINING WASTES (SOLID WASTE)
Solid wastes generated by surface coal mining include:
• Natural wastes
• Treatment wastes
Natural wastes include overburden materials, organic debris, rock
partings in coal seams, or other materials occurring naturally at
the mine-site, which have a high potential to contaminate the
environment. Acid-bearing or toxic-forming overburdens are poten-
tially detrimental to the success of reclamation, and, if improperly
handled, can release pollutants to the environment long after mining
ceases.
Treatment wastes are products of the pollution control systems employed
at mine-sites. Treatment wastes include sludges from sediment ponds,
treatment ponds, clarifiers, centrifuges, and runoff control structures.
To adequately assess the impact of solid wastes on the environment,
the BID should furnish, at a minimum, the following information:
• Sources of solid waste
• Quantity of solid waste
• Quality of solid waste
78
-------
Solid wastes contaminate the environment through release of pollu-
tants. Solid waste pollutants may be transported to surface waters
in sediment-laden runoff. Groundwater quality may be affected
adversely by leachate from improperly designed waste piles or
wastes which are buried improperly. Potential contaminants in solid
wastes include the parameters in Table 13 .
II.D. TOXICITY AND POTENTIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE FROM
SELECTED POLLUTANTS
The most common pollutants associated with the surface mining indus-
try are: (1) sediment, (2) acid, (3) iron, and (4) manganese. Other
heavy metals commonly found in mine drainage include nickel, aluminum,
zinc, and sulfates. These pollutants can affect the environment
adversely and may be toxic to both humans and wildlife.
II.D.I. Human Health Impacts
Principal pollutants found in coal which may have effects adverse
to human health are:
• Fugitive dust
• Sulfates
• Iron
• Manganese
• Zinc
• Other trace elements
II.D.I.a. Fugitive Dust. Fugitive dust, if uncontrolled, can result
in ground level ambient air quality which is hazardous to those
working at or living downwind of the mine-site. Twenty-four hour
and annual average ambient air quality standards may be exceeded
not only at the mine-site but also for miles downwind (Murray 1978
within US-DOI 1978).
II.D.l.b. Sulfates. Sulfates can cause both a bad taste and a
laxative effect in drinking water. EPA (1976b) recommends
an upper limit of 250 mg/1 to provide reasonable protection to huuians
from these adverse effects.
II.D.I.e. Iron. Based upon aesthetic and taste considerations a
limit of 0.30 mg/1 iron has been established for domestic water
supplies (US-EPA 1976b).
79
-------
II.D.l.d. Manganese. The upper limit for manganese in domestic
water supplies is 0.5 mg/1 (US-EPA 1976b). Although this limit was
established primarily for aesthetic and taste considerations, there
have been reported cases of manganese poisoning from contaminated
drinking water (US-EPA 1976a).
II.D.I.e. Zinc. Concentrations of zinc in excess of 5 mg/1 can
cause an undesirable taste in public water supplies. In addition,
zinc can have an adverse effect on humans at high concentrations
(US-EPA 1976a).
II.D.l.f. Trace Elements. Various trace elements which may be
found in coal can have effects adverse to human health. Table 17
presents a summary of trace metals, their associated health problems,
and pertinent references for more detailed documentation.
II.D.2. Biological Impacts
Aquatic and terrestrial biota may be affected adversely by pollu-
tants commonly found in wastes from surface mining operations.
II.D.2.a. Sediment. Sediment transported by water during erosion
and by air as fugitive dust is the most abundant pollutant from
surface coal mining. If uncontrolled, sediment transported by runoff
may degrade receiving waters by causing increases in turbidity,
oxygen demanding materials, nutrients, and potentially toxic sub-
stances. Increased sediment loads to receiving water also hasten
the aging of ponds and lakes through filling and nutrient enrichment.
Excess sediment reduces the holding capacity of waterways, increases
flooding, degrades water for consumptive uses, increases water treat-
ment costs, and decreases the useful life of reservoirs and navigation
channels.
Aquatic life also is affected adversely by excess sediment. Increased
suspended sediment loads reduce primary productivity (photosynthesis)
in surface waters by limiting the penetration of light. Sedimen-
tation buries and suffocates the organisms of the periphyton and
macroinvertebrates which have limited mobility, and reduces or
eliminates fish spawning success. Physical abrasion from suspended
sediments also destroys aquatic organisms. As sediment load increases
in streams, the interstices between the gravel and rocks which compose
the bottoms of riffle areas gradually will be filled. This process
effectively eliminates many habitats otherwise occupied by a variety
of aquatic organisms. Aquatic macroinvertebrates and fish respond
to high concentrations of suspended solids by exhibiting increased
rates of downstream movement (drift), decreases in population, and
changes in community composition (Gammon 1970). Sediment, as a
major constituent of fugitive dust, also may damage the plants on
which it settles.
80
-------
Table 17 . Possible health problems associated with trace metals
found in coal.
Metal or metal compound Health problems
Nickel carbonyl Suspected carcinogenesis
Antimony, arsenic,
cadmium, cobalt,
copper, iron, lead,
magnesium, manganese,
tin, and zinc oxides
Reference
(Sunderman and
Donnelly 1965)
(Cavanaugh 1975)
Nickel
Cadmium
Chromium and compounds
Berylium and compounds
Arsenic
Cobalt
Lead and compounds
Mercury and compounds
Vanadium
Fume fever
Nasal cancers
Prostate cancer
Carcinogenesis
Carcinogenesis
Poisoning
Cancer of the skin
Poisoning
Carcino genes is
Nasal cancers
Kidney damage
Mutagenic and
teratongenic effects
Inhibition of lipid
formation
(Waldbott 1973)
(Oilman and
Ruckerbauer 1963)
(Pott 1965);
(Kipling and Waterhouse
1967)
(Hueper 1961)
(Reeves et al. 1967);
(Wager et al. 1969)
(Nishimuta 1966)
(Wickstrom 1972)
(Lee and Fraumeni
1969)
(Oilman and
Ruckerbauer 1963)
(Zawirsica and Medras
1968)
(Zollinger 1953)
(D'ltri 1972)
(Stokinger 1963)
81
-------
II.D.2.b. Acid. Acid water discharges can affect aquatic life
adversely by acting as a toxicant, causing osmotic imbalances,
physiological harm to fish, and affecting aquatic plants, algae,
and benthic macroinvertebrates (US-DOI 1978) .
II.D.2.C. Iron. Iron discharged with mine wastewater can be very
toxic to aquatic life. It kills fish by coating gills with iron
hydroxide precipitates ("yellow boy") and by coating stream
bottoms, thus burying macroinvertebrates and other food organisms
(US-EPA 1976a and US-DOI 1978). Although tolerance to iron varies
greatly among aquatic species, EPA (1976b) recommends an upper limit
of 1 mg/1 for the protection of freshwater aquatic life.
II.D.2.d. Manganese. Similar to iron, manganese discharges from
surface mines act both as toxicants to aquatic biota and as preci-
pitates, burying bottom-dwelling organisms (US-EPA 1977 within
US-DOI 1978).
There are no specific criteria for the concentration of manganese
allowed in freshwater. It appears that levels up to 1 mg/1 would
be safe for aquatic animal life (US-EPA 1976b). Much lower levels,
however, may pose a hazard to aquatic plants. Levels down to 0.005
mg/1 soluble Mn were found to be toxic to algae (McKee and Wolf
1963).
II.D.2.e. Zinc. In soft water, concentrations of zinc ranging from
0.1 to 1.0 mg/1 can be lethal to fish by affecting the gills or
acting as an internal poison (US-EPA 1976a). The sensitivity of
fish to zinc varies with species, age, condition, and chemical and
physical characteristics of the water. Freshwater plants may be
affected adversely by concentrations of 10 mg/1 (US-EPA 1976a).
II.E. OTHER IMPACTS
Other impacts of surface coal mining include the potential effects of:
• Transportation of coal
• Preparation of coal
• Post mining activities
II.E.I. Coal Transportation
This section discusses in some detail the emissions from
various modes of coal transportation.
82
-------
II.E.I.a. Railroads. Railroads, diesel and electrical powered,
transport nearly 70% of all bituminous coal mined in the US.2
Three types of trains are used in transporting raw coal:
• Conventional
• Unit
• Dedicated
When conventional trains are used, cars carrying coal are treated
like any other car. Unit trains are made up entirely of cars carrying
coal. When coal is transported by conventional trains, the Interstate
Commerce Commission's (ICC) general rates apply. In contrast, a
special rate of almost one third less applies to special unit trains.
Unit trains offer several other advantages including better use of
equipment, elimination of standard railroad tie-ups such as classifi-
cation yards and layover points, and promotion of better coordination
between mine production and consumers, particularly consumers dependent
on coal supplied by a single mine (National Academy of Engineering,
1974).
The dedicated railroad, the third rail option, is used exclusively
for transporting coal. A dedicated railroad generally is used only
when an existing railroad is not available and when the railroad will
link a mine to a single-source user.
II.E.l.b. Barges. Barges only move about 11% of the raw coal shipped
in the U.S. (based on the fact that bituminous accounts for over 90%
of all coal produced in the U.S.). In such areas as the Ohio River
Valley, barges can be loaded directly from the mine. When mines are
not located adjacent to a navigable river, the coal has to be trans-
ported to the barge loading facility by either truck or train (usually
by train).
II.E.I.e. Trucks. Moving as much coal as barges do, trucks offer the
major advantage of flexibility; their major disadvantage is a failure
to be cost effective for moving large quantities long distances.
II.E.l.d. Pipelines. Slurry pipelines can be used to transport
pulverized coal suspended in water. In this system, coal has to be
processed to obtain the proper particle size. Pumping stations,
dewatering facilities, and in some cases, storage facilities also
are required. The major advantage of slurry pipelines for trans-
porting coal long distances is low operating cost (Mutschler and
others, 1973). High capital costs and water requirements are major
disadvantages.
2A1though data for all coals are not available, bituminous coal represents
all but a small fraction of coal mined.
83
-------
In terms of potential environmental impacts, four impact categories
should be addressed in the EID (see Table 18 for an estimate of
environmental residuals for six transportation technologies by
region):
• Water
• Air
• Solids
• Land
—Water - Barges may contribute dissolved solids to the
river water. Drying the coal, after transporting via
a slurry pipeline, produces a water effluent with
negligible amounts of coal in it. Other modes of
coal transportation do not involve water.
—Air - Participates, ranging from 1 to 46 tons per
1012 BTU's transported (Table 18 ), represent those
associated with wind losses along the route and at
the end points. A 2% wind loss is assumed for con-
ventional trains as opposed to 1% for unit trains,
river barges, and trucks. Based on these assumptions,
transportation methods emit more particulates than
any of the technologies in the coal development system.
Other air emissions from transportation methods are
due to diesel fuel combustion; thus, haul distances
govern the magnitude of the total amounts emitted.
In any case, the nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide
emissions are low, ranging from 0.5 to 4.3 tons and
0.1 to 4.4 tons, respectively, for each 1012 BTU's
transported. Comparisons between transportation
modes are meaningful because equal haul distances
have not been assumed.
Solids - Solids arise from water and air emissions.
Land - The National Academy of Engineering (NAE) has
pointed out that most new overland transportation
systems will need additional rights-of-way and new
facilities. Railroad land use requirements for coal
transport are based on the percentage of coal to
total rail freight and on the percentage of coal
originating in the area. Because haul distances are
not equal among the 6 transportation modes, values
given in Table 6 are not directly comparable. Land
used for coal transported ranges from 1 to 70 acres
per 1012 BTU's transported. Of additional interest
are the assumptions that rail rights-of-way average
6 acres per mile (approximately 55 feet wide)f a conveybr
requires 30 feet of right-of-way along its length (3.64-
acres per mile), and trucks average 1.67 x 10 acres ;.;
per ton-mile (allow 50% error in the data) (University
of Oklahoma, 1975).
84
-------
"Fable 18 . Environmental and health Impacts of coal transportation: By coal region and
transportation mode.
Air pollutants (tons/1012 Btu's)
Occupational health
F/ia 1012 Btu's
op
WJ
System
Unit train
Northwest .coal
Central coal
I
Northern :
•Appalachian coal
Central
Appalachian coal
Southwest coal
Mixed pr conven-
tional train
Northwest coal
Centrtal coal
Northern
Appalachian coal
Central Appalachian
coal
Particulates
23.6
20.3
18.4
18.1
20.9
46.3
38.9
35.
33.8
1
2.67
4.17
4.28
5.06
1.59
2.12
3.42
3.4
2.89
0*
c/>
2.32
3.7
3.71
4.39
1.38
1.83
2.96
2.94
2.51
Hydrocarbons
1.78
2.85
2.85
3.38
1.06
1.41
2.28
2.27
1.93
8
2.5
3.99
4.
4.73
1.49
1.97
3.18
3.17
2.7
Aldehydes
.392
.626
.627
.743
.234
.31
.502
.499
.424
Solids
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
CO
§5
!>>«
*0 CD ^
a >-> ^
cd o o
>4 cd H
75.1/0
75.1
30.4/0
30.4
27.670
27.6
26.6/0
26.6
67.2/0
67.2
75.1/0
75.1
30.4/0
30.4
27.6/0
27-6
26.6/0
26.6
Deaths
.075
.066
.065
.062
.067
.075
.066
.065
.062
Inj uries
.599
.876
.856
.767
.0534
.599
.876
.856
.767
4J
CO
CO
Tl
&
55.6
81.3
79.6
71.4
49.6
55. 1
81.3
79.6
71.4
(Continued next page)
-------
Table 18. Environmental and health impacts (Concluded).
00
Mr pollutants (tons/1012 Btu's)
F/Ta
Occupational health
1012 Btu's
System
Slurry pipeline
river barge
Central coal
Northern
Appalachian coal
Central
Appalachian coal
Trucking
Northwest coal
Central coal
.
Northern
Appalachian coal
Central
Appalachian coal
Conveyor
Central coal
Northern
Appalachian coal
Central
. Appalachian coal
3 : I
NA = Not aool:
iculates
4J
B
tn
20.
19.7
17.4
22.9
19.
17.
16.4
0
0
0
Lcable
X
i
.794
1.9
.689
1.69
1.4
1.28
1.29
NA
NA
NA
aFixed
X
o
W3
.85
2.04
.739
.124
.104
.093
.09
NA
NA
NA
land ret
o carbons
LI
1
.566
1.22
.443
.169
.14
.128
.124
NA
NA
NA
8
.67
1.63
.591
1.03
.866
.776
1.754
NA
NA
NA
to
.«
•d aif-t
a K-A
3 o o
i-i at H
NA
NA
NA
0
1.84/0
1.84
1.67/0
1.67
1.6/0
1.6
.42/0
.42
.386/0
.386
.376/0
.376
ntal land
3
4J
-------
II.E.2. Coal Preparation3
Coal preparation includes the crushing and/or cleaning of coal.
Preparation of coal which is low in impurities, as from many Western
mines, only requires crushing and sizing. When impurities in coal
occur in quantity, however, cleaning also is required. Impurities
include clays, shale and other rock, and pyrite. Coal cleaning
processes vary in complexity and may produce several types of
wastes. The types and quantities of waste products produced by
coal preparation facilities depend upon the size of the facility,
the chemical properties of the coal, and the extent and method of
coal cleaning. Depending on the amount of impurities in the raw
coal, refuse quantities will range from 0 to 25 percent of the
total coal processed (US-DOI 1978).
The simplest coal preparation plant utilizes crushing and screening
to remove large refuse material. Because this usually is a dry
process, wastes consist of coal dust, solid waste refuse, and surface
runoff from ancillary areas, including coal storage piles and refuse
disposal areas. Other preparations plants are more complex and
perform additional cleaning processes. These processes may utilize
water, thermal dryers, and various separation procedures. These
preparation facilities produce wastewater, process sludges, and
additional air emissions (from thermal dryers). The characteristics
of wastewater from coal storage, refuse storage, and coal preparation
plant ancillary areas generally are similar to the characteristics
of raw mine drainage at the mine supplying the preparation plant.
The general chemical characteristics of process wastewater are
listed in Table 19 (US-EPA 1976a). The principal pollutant in coal
preparation wastewater is suspended solids (coal fines and clays)
which may be reduced through clarification processes.
II.E.3. Post Mining Impacts
Post mining environmental effects potentially are similar to those
which occurred during active mining. Improper or incomplete post
mining reclamation may result in the continuation of all or some
of the adverse impacts of surface coal mining. Denuded land, such
as spoil banks and haul roads, can continue to erode from surface
runoff and wind, resulting in additional sedimentation, fugitive
dust, and exposure of toxic material. Similarly, if unchecked,
mine water contaminated with acid and other toxic substances may
continue to degrade receiving waters long after active mining has
ceased. Therefore, poorly planned and incomplete mining reclamation
may result in further degradation of aquatic and terrestrial resources
and impair alternative land uses.
%fore guidance for assessing impacts associated with coal preparation
facilities will be contained in a separate guideline report,
Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for New Source Underground
Coal Mines and Coal Preparation Plants.
87
-------
Table 19. General chemical characteristics of process wastewaters
from coal preparation plant process water.
Parameters Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Dev.
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
pH 7.3 8.1 7.7
Alkalinity 62 402 160 96.07
Total Iron 0.03 187 47.8 59.39
Dissolved Iron 0 6.4 0.92 2.09
Manganese 0.3 4.21 1.67 1.14
Aluminum 0.1 29 10.62 11.17
Zinc 0.01 2.6 0.56 0.89
Nickel 0.01 0.54 0.15 0.19
TDS 636 2,240 1,433 543.9
TSS 2,698 156,400 62,448 8,372
Hardness 1,280 1,800 1,540 260
Sulfates 979 1,029 1,004 25
Ammonia 0 4 2.01 1.53
Source: US-EPA. 1976a. Development document for interim final
effluent limitations guidelines and new source performance
standards for the coal mining point source category.
Washington, DC, 288 p. EPA 440/1-76/057-a.
88
-------
Early planning and proper reclamation immediately following mining
can eliminate many of the potential adverse impacts which may con-
tinue after mining has ceased. However, erosion, sedimentation,
and dust may increase temporarily during reclamation activities
such as backfilling, topsoil handling, regrading, and road removal.
In addition, post mining reclamation will eliminate some minor
benefits to water-associated wildlife and aquatic life that have
colonized water held in deep cuts. Restoration of the terrain to
approximate original contour will eliminate such habitats created
during mining. These adverse effects, however, will be minor and
of short duration.
89
-------
III. POLLUTION CONTROL METHODOLOGIES
The adverse effects of surface coal mining wastes can be avoided
or minimized through the use of appropriate pollution control
technologies during mine development, extraction, and reclamation.
Pollution control technologies are classified as in-process or
end-of-process controls, depending on where they are applied in
the waste stream.
In-process controls:
• Reduce wastewater volume
• Reduce solid waste volume
• Reduce fugitive dust concentration
by application of measures such as:
• Selective routing of runoff
• Control of groundwater and leachate migration
• Selective handling of toxic and acid-forming wastes,
usable spoil, and topsoil
• Phased grubbing and clearing of mine sections prior
to extraction
• Appropriate stabilization of exposed soils
End-of-process controls prevent or minimize the contamination of
groundwater and receiving water by:
• Sediment-bearing effluent
• Acid mine drainage
• Noxious leachate
End-of-process controls include:
• Adequate treatment of effluent wastes
• Proper disposal of solid wastes
Both in-process and end-of-process controls are applied to active
mining and post mining operations. The balance of this chapter
describes the kinds of process controls used or available for use
during mining and reclamation. The applicant should consult the
90
-------
appropriate sections of OSM's permanent program regulations for speci-
fications applicable to th'e design of structures and systems.
Additional guidance is available from references listed in the
bibliography under DESIGN.
The BID will include, at a minimum, the following information:
• Description of proposed mining method in sufficient
detail to facilitate an assessment of proposed control
strategies for adequacy
• Description of proposed wastewater management systems
• Description of proposed treatment methods for each waste
stream expected during mining
• Description of proposed disposal methods for sludges
and other solid wastes expected during mining
• Description of proposed control methods for fugitive
dust
Each description should be accompanied by maps, plans, illustra-
tions, cross-sections, and specifications that clearly indicate
the final design of disposal sites, slopes, structures, systems,
and processes.
III.A. ACTIVE MINING CONTROLS
Active mining controls reduce the amounts of effluent, solid waste,
and air emissions requiring treatment, containment, or disposal
at the mine-site and adjacent areas. Many active mining controls
are multipurpose and simultaneously abate air, water, and solid
waste pollution problems. Some active mining controls are inte-
gral parts of the reclamation process, and thus may also qualify
as post mining controls. Active mining controls frequently used
in the surface coal raining industry include:
• Runoff control systems
• Infiltration and groundwater migration abatement systems
• Spoil handling systems
• Effluent treatment systems
• Stabilization of bare soils
91
-------
Precipitation produces runoff which becomes contaminated with sediment
and other pollutants if permitted to drain freely over the mine-site.
Appropriate controls include:
• Diversion ditches to prevent inundation of disturbed areas
with runoff from undisturbed areas above the highwall.
These diversions may feed into collectors or outfalls
which bypass other wastewater collection and treatment
systems employed at the mine-site
• Grassy filter strips between exposed soil surfaces and
receiving waters
• Collection ditches to handle runoff from haul roads, pit
areas, maintenance yards, load-out yards, spoil piles,
and other areas where runoff potentially is contaminated
by sediment or pollutant-bearing wastes. These collectors
feed into appropriate treatment systems for removal or
neutralization of pollutants
Infiltration of polluted runoff into the groundwater regime can
result in contamination of local surface and groundwater supplies.
Controls used to minimize the potential for groundwater degradation
include:
• Burial and neutralization, as appropriate, of toxic, acid-
forming, and other objectionable spoils, wastes, and exposed
coal seams under at least 4 feet of acceptable material
during backfill of the mined area. The minimum require-
ments for such burial are contained in OSM's regulations
promulgated on 13 March 1979 previously cited
• Grout curtains, plugs, seals, and subsurface drainage
systems to reduce the influx of groundwater to the active
mining area and other areas where groundwater may either
contribute significantly to wastewater volume or become
contaminated by pollutant-bearing infiltration
Spoil handling systems prevent or minimize the contamination of
usable backfill and topsoil with objectionable solid wastes and
runoff. Spoil handling systems should achieve the following:
• Separation of topsoil from other overburdens and preser-
vation of topsoil through proper construction and seeding
of topsoil storage piles
92
-------
• Separation of objectionable spoils from usable spoils.
Objectionable spoils will be backfilled into the mined
area first and then covered with a requisite thickness
of usable material; therefore, properly designed spoil
handling systems should minimize cycle times required
to achieve the proper sequence of backfill
• Stabilization of bare soils
Effluent treatment systems remove or neutralize the objectionable
constituents of raw mine drainage and sediment-bearing effluent.
Treatment systems generally consist of one or more ponds which
conform to OSM's specifications for construction of sediment ponds-
A typical large-volume treatment system is illustrated schema-
tically in Figure 24. Raw water is mixed with lime slurry
in batches in the flash mix tank. Treated water
is aerated as it flows to one of three settling ponds. As one
settling pond fills with sludge, treated water is routed to other
settling ponds, and sludge from the full pond is pumped to sludge
drying ponds, for dewatering, removal, and eventual burial. Typical
treatment systems employed at surface coal mines include:
• Lime neutralization
• Sodium hydroxide neutralization
• Hydrous ammonium neutralization
• Reverse osmosis
• Ion exchange processes
• Iron oxidation by
aeration
electrochemical oxidation
ozone oxidation
Lime neutralization is the most common method used to treat acidic
and ferruginous mine effluents. Specific guidance on acceptability,
design, and costs of individual treatment systems is available
from references listed in the bibliography under TREATMENT.
Sediment-bearing effluents may be treated effectively without the
use of neutralization processes. Sediment ponds should be con-
structed to provide minimum detention times of 10 hours or 24 hours,
depending on the kinds of coagulants used for sediment removal.
93
-------
Figure 24. Flow diagram for a typical coal mine wastewater treatment system.
VO
1
p
RAW WATER
HOLDING POND
1
«-
r , •
FLASH MIX
TANK
LIME
SLURRY
*.
I*
•i
«•
K-
SETTLING
POND
SETTLING
POND
SETTLING
\
i
•
p EFFLUENT TO CREEK ^
i
1
SLUDGE
POND
i
~1 "
4 .
SLUDGE
POND
,4
-i
I
SLUDGE
POND
i
EFFLUENT TO CREEK
Source: US Environmental Protection Agency. :1976a. Development document for interim final effluent
limitations guidelines and new source performance standards for the coal mining point source
category. T3PA-440/9-75-008. Washington, DC. 467 pp.
-------
Stabilization of bare soils prevents contributions of excessive
sediments to wastewater handling and treatment systems and reduces
the potential for air pollution by fugitive dust. Soil stabili-
zation should be considered for all:
• Haul roads
• Spoil banks
• Backfilled areas
• Denuded areas
Soil stabilization activities include the use of:
• Water
• Mulch
• Synthetic soil amendments
• Quick growing species of suitable plants
• Pavement
• Canvas and plastic blankets
to protect exposed soil surfaces from erosion by wind and water.
The particular activity appropriate for protection of exposed soils
will depend on the planned use of the exposed soil. Normal mining
operations result in many exposed soil surfaces which ultimately
will be protected by backfill and post-mining reclamation. With
the exception of pavement, the soil stabilizing agents listed above
are appropriate for temporary protection of temporarily exposed
soils. Pavement is appropriate for soil protection in high-use
areas, including ancillary cleaning, loading, and maintenance areas,
parking lots, and haul roads projected for long-term use. Specific
guidance for temporary stabilization of exposed soils is contained
in the references listed in the bibliography under SOIL PROTECTION.
III.B. POST MINING CONTROLS
Post mining controls prevent or minimize the long-term release
of pollutants to the environment after active mining has ceased.
These measures also can mitigate the.unavoidable impacts associated
with surface coal mining by rehabilitating affected areas to an
appropriate land use consistent with the provisions of OSM regu-
lations previously cited. Post mining controls are multipurpose
and simultaneously prevent or minimize air, water, and solid waste
pollution problems. Post mining controls include:
• Reclamation
• Monitoring
95
-------
Reclamation occurs simultaneously with extraction in the ideal
case. Spoil excavated from one part of the operation is trans-
ported and backfilled into mined-out areas, which are then regraded
and replanted in accordance with an approved reclamation plan.
In practice, however, the sequence of mine operations may require
that spoils, topsoil, and other excavated material be stockpiled
until needed for restoration of disturbed areas. In such instances,
appropriate Active Mining Controls should be applied to reduce the
potential for environmental degradation during reclamation. Runoff
control, soil stabilization, and treatment are included among such
controls.
Failure of reclamation efforts generally results from:
• Death of replanted species
• Failure of backfilled slopes
Monitoring of the reclaimed area insures that these problems are
identified and corrected before they result in significant
environmental degradation.
96
-------
IV. OTHER CONTROLLABLE IMPACTS
IV.A. AESTHETICS
New source surface coal mines may be large and complex operations
occupying an area of hundreds of acres. Highwalls, coal storage
and handling areas, haul roads, spoil and refuse piles, exposed
soils, dust, erosion, sediment-laden streams, etc., are aesthetically
displeasing to many. Particularly in rural and suburban areas,
surface mining can represent a noticeable intrusion on the landscape.
Measures to minimize the impact on the environment must be developed
during site selection, mine planning design, and reclamation. The
applicant should consider the following factors where feasible to
reduce potential aesthetic impacts:
• Existing Nature of the Area: The topography and major
land uses in the area of the candidate sites are impor-
tant. Topographic conditions, such as hills, can be used
to screen the mining from view. A lack of topographic
relief will require other means of minimizing impact,
such as regrading or vegetation buffers.
• Proximity of Mining Sites to Parks and Other Areas Where
People Congregate for Recreation and Other Activities:
The location of public use areas should be mapped and
presented in the EID Representative views of the mining
site from observation points should be described. The
visual effects on these recreational areas should be
described in the EID in order to develop the appropriate
mitigation measures.
• Transportation System: The visual impact of new access
roads, rail lines, haul roads, refuse piles, etc. on
the landscape should be considered. Locations, con-
struction methods and materials, and maintenance should
be specified.
• Creation of Aesthetically Pleasing Areas: If planned
carefully, the development of a surface coal mine can create
aesthetically pleasing areas. Through effective reclama-
tion, the creation of usable recreational and open space
lands may be an important improvement to an area. Such
positive impacts should be presented in the EID.
IV.B. NOISE
The major sources of noise associated with a surface coal mine
operation are:
• Coal transportation system (railroads, haul roads)
• Coal preparation facilities.(crushers and screens)
• Blasting operations
97
-------
• Coal extraction equipment
• Land reclamation/grading equipment
Such surface mining activities can create significant ambient noise
levels. These levels can be expected to decrease with distance and,
the more vegetation and natural barriers which exist, the greater
the rate of noise decrease. It has been documented that at distances
of 1500 to 2000 feet from the coal mining equipment, noise levels
may decrease by 20dBA; however, even at such distances, the increases
in noise levels due to coal mining activities still may be quite
noticeable. Noise receptors within one-half mile are the most
affected and should be documented in the EID.
Noise also can create serious health hazards for exposed workers;
therefore, the necessary source and operational control methods
should be employed. Such measures include:
• Mufflers
• Lined ducts
• Partial barriers
• Vibration insulation
• Imposed speed limits on vehicles
• Scheduled equipment operations and maintenance
A suitable methodology to evaluate noise generated from a proposed
new source surface coal mine would require the applicant to:
• Identify all noise-sensitive lands uses1 and activities
adjoining the proposed mine-site
• Measure the existing ambient noise levels of the areas
adjoining the site
• Identify existing noise sources, such as traffic, aircraft
flyover, and other industry, in the general area.
• Determine whether there are any State or local noise
regulations that apply to the site
• Calculate the noise level of the mining operation and
compare with the existing area noise levels and the
applicable noise regulations
1 US-EPA has recommended a 75-dBA, 8-hour exposure level to protect
from loss of hearing, and a 55-dBA background exposure level to
protect from annoyance of outdoor activity.
98
-------
• Assess the noise impact of the mine's operational noise
and, if required, determine noise abatement measures
to minimize the impact (quieter equipment, noise barriers,
improved maintenance schedules, etc.)
IV.C. SOCIOECONOMIC
The introduction of a large new coal mine operation into a community
may cause economic and social changes. Therefore, it is necessary
for an applicant to understand the types of impacts or changes that
may occur so that they can be evaluated adequately. The importance
of these changes usually depends on the nature of the area where the
mine is located (e.g., composition and size of existing community).
Normally, however, the significance of the changes caused by a mine
of a given size will be greater near a small, rural community than
.near a large, urban area. This is primarily because a small, rural
community is likely to have a nonmanufacturing economic base and a
lower per capita income, fewer social groups, a more limited socio-
economic infrastructure, and fewer leisure pursuits than a large,
urban area. There are situations, however, in which the changes
in a small community may not be significant and, conversely, in
which they may be considerable in an urban area. For example, a
small community may have had a manufacturing (or natural resource)
economic base that has declined. As a result, such a community
may have a high incidence of unemployment in a skilled labor force
and a surplus of housing. Conversely, a rapidly growing urban area
may be severely strained if a large surface mine operation is
located nearby. The rate at which the changes occur (regardless
of the circumstances) also is an important determinant of the sig-
nificance of the changes.
During the mine operation, the impact will be greater if the project
requires large numbers of workers to be brought in from outside
the community than if local, unemployed workers are available. The
impacts are well known and include:
• Creation of social tension
• Demand for increased housing, police and fire protection,
public utilities, medical facilities, recreational
facilities, and other public services
• Strained economic budget in the community where existing
infrastructure becomes inadequate
Various methods of reducing the strain on the budget of the local
community during operation should be explored. For example, the
company itself may build the housing and recreation facilities and
provide the utility services and medical facilities for its imported
work force; or the company may prepay taxes and the community may
agree to a corresponding reduction in the property taxes paid later.
Alternatively, the community may float a bond issue, taking advantage
of its tax-exempt status, and the company may agree to reimburse
the community as payments of principal and interest become due.
99
-------
The permit applicant should document fully in the BID the range of
potential impacts that are expected and demonstrate how possible
harmful changes will be handled. For example, an increased tax base
generally is regarded as a positive impact. The revenue from it
usually is adequate to support the additional infrastructure required
as the mining employees and their families move into the community.
The spending and respending of the earnings of these employees have
a multiplier effect on the local economy, as do the interindustry
links created by the new plant. Socially, the community may benefit
as the increased tax base permits the provision of more diverse and
higher quality services and the variety of its interests increases
with growth in population. Contrastingly, the transformation of a
small, quiet community into a larger, busier community may be
regarded as an adverse change by some of the residents who chose
to live in the community, as well as by those who grew up there
and stayed because of its amenities. The applicant also should
consider the economic repercussions if, for example, the quality
of the air and water declines as a result of various waste streams
from the coal mine operation and its ancillary facilities (e.g., coal
preparation plant, etc.).
In brief, the applicant's framework for analyzing the socioeconomic
impacts of developing and operating a surface coal mine should be
comprehensive. Most of the changes described should be quantified
to the extent possible to assess fully the potential costs and
benefits. The applicant should distinguish clearly between expected
short-term and long-term changes.
The applicant should develop and maintain close coordination with
State, regional, and local planning and zoning authorities to
ensure full understanding with all existing and/or proposed land
use plans and other related regulations.
IV.D. ENERGY REQUIEEMENTS
The impact of surface coal mining on local energy supplies will
depend largely on the type of mine operation proposed and the
extent of ancillary facilities. Two criteria commonly are used
to assess the efficiency of various mining methods:
• Percentage of in-place coal recovered
• Amount of ancillary energy required (ancillary energy
requirements are the diesel fuel and electricity required
to operate all mining equipment, including drills, drag-
lines, tractors, trucks, and, under controlled conditions,
to reclaim the land) (University of Oklahoma 1975)
Table 20 presents expected recovery efficiencies and ancillary
energy requirements per 10-^ BTU's for three major types of surface
mine operations. Recovery efficiencies range from a low of 46 percent
for Central Appalachian auger mining to a high of 98 percent for
Northwest strip mining. Area strip mining in other regions is about
100
-------
Table 20. Energy efficiencies (in percent) and energy requirements
of various surface mining methods in different geographical regions
of the US.
Method of Mining Geographical Region
Northern Central
Northwest Central Appalachia Appalachia Southwest
Area mining NA
Recovery efficiency
(percentage) 98 81 81 81
Ancillary energy
(109 BTU's per 1012 BTU's)
Uncontrolled 1.92 6.48 5.82 5.09
Controlled 1.93 6.62 5.94 5.11
Contour mining NA NA NA
Recovery efficiency
(percentage 80 80
Ancillary energy
(109 BTU's per 1012 BTU's)
Uncontrolled 10.9 10.6
Controlled (modified
block cut) U 10.7
Auger NA NA NA NA
Recovery efficiency
(percentage) 46
Ancillary energy
(109 BTU's per 1012 BTU's)
Uncontrolled 0.86
Controlled 0.93
NA = Not applicable; U - Unknown
Source: Hittman Associates, Inc. 1974. Environmental impacts,
efficiency, and cost of energy supply and end use. Final
report: Volume 1, Columbia MD
101
-------
80 percent efficient. No variation occurs between the uncontrolled
and controlled case2, and the data are established for all of the
recovery efficiencies to within 10 percent.
Ancillary energy con sumpt ions are not well documented and data are
valid only to within an order of magnitude. Of the total ancillary
energy requirement, approximately 85 percent is electrical and
15 percent is diesel. An exception is the Northwest Region, where
diesel fuel accounts for 50 percent of the total ancillary energy
required. 3
Ancillary energy needs for area mining are low, averaging 5 x
(five billion) BTU's for every lO*2 (trillion) BTU's mined indicating
that only 0.5 percent of the energy mined is used in mining. The
ancillary energy requirements for contour mining are higher than
for either of the other mining methods, averaging about 1.4 percent.
The ancillary energy needed under controlled conditions increases
slightly for all types of mines.
Because these energy requirement data are very generalized, the
permit applicant should evaluate the energy efficiencies and demands
of all methods considered during project planning in the context
of an alternative analysis. Also, feasible design modifications
should be considered in order to reduce energy needs.
At a minimum, the applicant should provide the following information
in the EIA:
• Total external energy demand for operation of the mine
• Total energy generated on site
• Energy requirements by type
• Source of energy off-site
• Proposed measures to conserve or reduce energy demand
and to increase efficiency of mine operation
2 Controlled conditions include land reclamation and water treatment
as part of the mining operation; under uncontrolled conditions,
they are not.
3 The electric energy was calculated as three times the BTU equivalent
of a kilowatt hour (kwh) to obtain the petroleum equivalent.
102
-------
V. EVALUATION OF AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES
The alternatives section of the EID is important and should address
each reasonable alternative equitably. The purpose of this analysis
is to identify and evaluate alternate plans and actions that may
accomplish the desired goals of the project. The types of alter-
natives can include modifications to the proposed method of mining,
relocation of the proposed mining operation, or the alternative
that always must be considered—no project.
For the alternatives to a proposed project to be designated and
assessed properly, the impact assessment process should commence
early in the planning phase. In this manner, social, economic,
and environmental factors, against which each alternative is to be
judged, can be established. Alternatives should not be limited
to a cost/benefit analysis in deciding their attributes. Environ-
mental and social benefits also must be weighed with each alternative.
As a guide, the complexity of the alternative analyses should be a
function of the magnitude and significance of the expected impacts
of the proposed mining operation. For instance, a mining operation
that is shown to have minimal impact on a region generally would
require fewer alternatives presented in the EIA.
The proposed surface mine operation and its alternatives, as
influenced by p.ublic opinion, also should be evaluated carefully.
In this way key factors such as aesthetics, social settings, and
land use can be assessed properly.
V.A. ALTERNATIVE MINE LOCATION AND SITE LAYOUT
Because it is not possible to move the coal resource, the site
alternative analysis ordinarily should include a detailed description
of the proposed mine location, site layout, and alternative con-
figurations of mining activities (haul roads, diversion ditches,
sedimentation ponds, .preparation plants), within the site boundaries.
In the EID the applicant should display the proposed mining site
(and alternative locations) on map(s) that show existing environ-
mental conditions and other relevant site information. Important
information would include:
• Proposed and alternative mining areas (if any) established
by the applicant
• Placement of integral components of the surface mining
operation
• Major centers of population density (urban, high, medium,
low density or similar scale)
• Water bodies suitable for water use
103
-------
• Railways, highways (existing and planned), and waterways
suitable for the transportation of raw materials and wastes
• Important topographic features (e.g., mountains, wetlands,
floodplains)
• Dedicated land-use areas (parks, historic sites, wilderness
areas, wildlife refuge lands, testing grounds, airports, etc.)
• Other sensitive environmental areas (prime agricultural
lands, historic sites, critical habitats of imperiled species)
• Soil characteristics
Using these graphic materials, the applicant should provide a condensed
description of the major considerations that led to the selection
of the proposed site, including quality of the coal resource, adequacy
of transportation systems, economic factors, environmental considera-
tions, license or permit conditions, compatibility with any existing
land use planning programs, and current attitudes of interested
citizens.
Quantification, although desirable, may not be possible for all
factors because of lack of adequate data. Under such circumstances,
qualitative and general comparative statements, supported by documen-
tation, may be used. Where possible, experience derived from operation
of other mines in the same area, or at an environmentally similar
site, may be helpful in appraising the nature of expected environmental
impacts.
Through such analyses, if the proposed site location or site layout
proves undesirable, then alternative sites and layouts from among
others originally considered could be reevaluated or new sites
could be identified and evaluated. Therefore, it is important
that a permit applicant systematically identify and assess all
feasible alternative site locations and site layouts as early in
the planning process as possible, so that a complete explanation
of the steps, factors, and criteria used to select the proposed
location can be presented in the EID.
V.B. ALTERNATIVE MINING METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
All feasible methods and techniques for extraction of the coal
resource should be examined carefully on the basis of reliability,
economy, and environmental considerations. Section I.D.3. of this
report presents a description of the major alternative mining methods
that are in commercial use. Those alternatives that appear practical
and best suited to the situation should be screened further on the
basis of factors such as:
• Land, raw materials, waste generation, waste treatment,
and storage requirements
104
-------
• Release to air of dust, total suspended particulates,
Indirect source emissions, and other potential pollutants
subject to Federal, State, or local limitations
• Releases to water of sediment, acids, trace metals, and
other constituents subject to Federal, State, and local
regulations
• Water consumption rate
• Fuel consumption and the generation of solid wastes with
associated waste disposal requirements
• Capability, reliability, and energy efficiency
• Economics
• Aesthetic considerations for each alternative process
• Noise generation
A tabular or matrix form of display often is helpful in comparing
feasible mining alternatives. Alternative mining methods which are
not feasible should be dismissed with an objective explanation of
the reasons for rejection.
V.C. OTHER ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERATIONS
In addition to identifying and evaluating alternative mining loca-
tions, site layout configurations, and mining methods, the permit
applicant should also consider the following:
• Phased or staged mining of coal to avoid an area that
could be seasonally sensitive
• Alternative access to and from mining site
• Alternative production rates
• Alternative reclamation techniques (e.g., selective
replacement of overburden materials, etc.)
One or a combination of these considerations could avoid or minimize
potentially adverse impacts associated with the mining operation.
V.D. NO-PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
In all proposals for facilities development, the applicant must
consider and evaluate the impact of not constructing the proposed
new source. Because this analysis is not unique to the development
of a surface coal mine, no specific guidance is provided as part of
this appendix. The permit applicant, therefore, is referred to
Chapter IV (Alternatives to the Proposed New Source) in the EPA
document, Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines for Selected
New Source Industries, which was published in October 1975.
105
-------
VI. REGULATIONS OTHER THAN POLLUTION CONTROL
The applicant should be aware that there may be a number of regu-
lations other than pollution control regulations that may apply to
the construction and operation of new surface coal mine operations.
The applicant should consult with the appropriate EPA Regional
Administrator regarding applicability of such regulations to the
proposed new source mine. Federal regulations that may be pertinent
to a proposed surface mine operation include, but are not limited
to, the following:
• Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 USC 1451 et seq.)
• The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1974 (16 USC 661-666)
• USDA Agriculture Conservation Service Watershed Memorandum
108 (1971)
• Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1969 (16 USC 1274 et seq.)
• The Flood Control Act of 1944
• Federal-Air Highway Act, as amended (1970)
• The Wilderness Act of 1964
• Endangered Species Preservation Act, as amended (1973)
(16 USC 1531 et seq.)
• The National Historical Preservation Act of 1966
(16 USC 1531 et seq.)
• Executive Order 11593 (Protection and Enhancement of
Cultural Environment, 16 USC 470) (Sup. 13 May 1971)
• Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974
(16 USC 469 et seq.)
• Procedures of the Council on Historic Preservation (1973)
(39 FR 3367)
• Executive Order 11988 (replaced E0#11296, 10 August 1966)
• The Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969
(88 Stat. 742)
• Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (Section 102)
• Energy Conservation and Production Act of 1976 (Section 164)
106
-------
Because surface mine operations characteristically disrupt many
surface acres, the applicant should place particular emphasis on
obtaining the services of a recognized archaeologist to determine
the potential for disturbance of an archaeological site, such as
an early Indian settlement or a prehistoric site. The National
Register of Historic Places should also be consulted for historic
sites such as battlefields.
The applicant also should consult the appropriate wildlife agency
(State and Federal) to ascertain that the natural habitat of a
threatened or endangered species will not be adversely affected.
From a health and safety standpoint, most industrial operations
involve a variety of potential hazards and to the extent that these
hazards could affect the health of mine workers, they may be
characterized as potential environmental impacts. These hazards
exist in the coal mining industry because of the very nature of
the mine operation (e.g., heavy equipment movement, raw material
handling and transport, blasting, etc.). All mine operators should
emphasize that no phase of operation or administration is of greater
importance than safety and accident prevention. Company policy
should provide and maintain safe and healthful conditions for its
employees and establish operating practices that will result in
safe working conditions and efficient operation. All proposed
plans to maximize health and safety should be described by the
permit applicant in the EID.
The mine must be designed and operated in compliance with the
standards of the US Department of Labor, the Coal Mine Health
and Safety Act, and the appropriate State statutes relative to
mine safety.
107
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
This bibliography has been separated into two parts:
• Full citations listed alphabetically by author
• Author-date citations listed alphabetically by topic
108
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, L. M., J. P. Capp, and E. Eisentrout. 1971. Reclamation of
acidic coal-mine spoil with fly ash. US Dept. of the Interior,
Bureau of Mines Rep. Invest. 7504, 29p.
Adams, L. M., J. P. Capp, and D. W. Gillmore. 1972. Coal mine spoil
and refuse bank reclamation with powerplant fly ash. Compost
Science 13 (6): 20-26.
Aguar, Charles E. 1971. Mining and reclamation as related to state,
regional, and national land use plans, goals, and requirements.
Rehabilitating Drastically Disturbed Surface Mined Lands Symposium
Proceedings. Georgia Surface Mined Lane Use Board, Macon GA,
p. 11-14.
Aha-rah, Ernest C., and R. T. Hartman. 1973. Survival and growth of
red pine on coal spoil and undisturbed soil in western Pennsylvania.
In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach
Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:429-444.
Ahmad, Moid(ed.). 1971. Acid mine drainage workshop. Proceedings of
a workshop, 2-6 August 1971. Ohio University, Athens OH, 167p.
Akamatsu, M. C. L. 1977. Research needs related to acid mine water.
Proceedings of a workshop, 10-12 November 1976, sponsored by the
Northeast Water Institute Directors. Center for Extension and
Continuing Education, Water Research Institute, West Virginia
University, Morgantown WV, 118p.
Aleem, M. I. H. 1974. Metabolic capabilities of sulfur oxidizing
bacteria and their role in water pollution. Kentucky Water
Resources Institute, Lexington KY, prepared for the Office
of Water Research and Technology, Washington DC. 137 p.
Allen, Natie, Jr. 1973. Experimental multiple seam mining and recla-
mation on steep mountain slopes. In Res. and Appl. Tech. Symp.
on Mined-Land Reclam. Proc., Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville
PA, p.98-104.
Allen R. H., Jr., and W. R. Curtis. 1975. A photographic technique
for monitoring erosion on strip mined lands. Photographic Appli-
cations in Science, Technology, and Medicine 10 (4): 29-31.
Allen, Rufus H., Jr., and D. A. Marquis. 1970. Effect of thinning
on height and diameter growth of oak and yellow-poplar saplings.
USDA Forest Serv. Res. Paper NE-173. NE. Forest Exp. Sta.,
Upper Darby PA, lip.
Allen, R. H., Jr., and W. T. Plass. n.d. Influence of fertilizer on
survival of shrub lespedeza planted on acid spoils. Tree Planter's
Notes 26(4): 12-13.
109
-------
American Public Works Association. 1973. Rail transport of solid
wastes. Chicago IL, 153 p.
American Society for Testing and Materials. 1978. Specifications
for class of coal by rank. D388. Philadelphia PA.
Anderson, Henry W., Marvin D. Hoover, and Kenneth G. Reinhart. 1976.
Forests and water: effects of forest management on floods, sedi-
mentation, and water supply. US Department of Agriculture Forest
Service.General Technical Report, PSW-18/1976, Berkeley CA, 115 p.
Andreuzzi, Frank C. 1976. Reclaiming strip-mined land for recreational
use in Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania. A demonstration project.
Division of Environment Field Office, US Bureau of Mines,
Wilkes-Barre PA, 27 p.
Appalachian Regional Commission. 1969. Acid mine drainage in Appalachia.
Washington DC, 126p.
Appalachian Regional Commission. 1970. Final environmental impact
statement [on] research and demonstration of improved surface
mining techniques, Commonwealth of Kentucky, Washington DC, lOp.
Applied Science Laboratories, Inc. 1971. Purification of mine water
by freezing. USGPO, Washington DC. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Water Pollution Control Research Series, 14018 DRZ02/71,
64p.
Argonne National Laboratory. 1976. Balanced program plan: Analysis
for biomedical and environmental research. Volume 3. Coal extrac-
tion, processing, and combustion. Energy Research and Development
Administration, Argonne IL, 74p.
Augustine, Marshall T. 1966. Using vegetation to establish critical
areas in building sites. Soil Conservation 32 (4): 78-80.
A. W. Martin Associates, Inc. 1975. Development of a comprehensive
program of insurance protection against mining subsidence and
associated hazardous location risks. By the author, King of
Prussia PA.
Baker, Robert A., and A. G. Wilshire. 1968. Acid mine drainage—pilot
plant. Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh PA.
Baker, R. A., and A. G. Wilshire. 1973. Microbiological factor in
acid mine drainage formation. II. Further observations from a
pilot plant study. In: The science of the total environment.
Elsevier Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1:411-426.
Ballou, S. W. 1976. Socio-economic aspects of surface mining: Effects
of strip-mine reclamation procedures upon assessed land values.
In National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research Inc., Fourth
Symposium on Surface Mining and Reclamation, p. 242-263.
110
-------
Barnhisel, R. I., and A. L. Rotromel. 1974. Weathering of clay
minerals by simulated acid coal spoil-bank solutions. Soil
Science 118 (1): 22-27.
Barnhisel, R. I. 1977. Reclamation of surface mined coal spoils.
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Office Research
and Development, US-EPA, Cincinnati OH, EPA-600/7-77-093, 56p.
Theodore Barry and Associates. 1975. Operations study of selected
surface coal mining systems in the United States. Prepared for
the US Bureau of Mines, Washington DC. Los Angeles CA, 236p.
Bartee, L. D. 1964. Evaluation of mulch materials for establishing
vegetation on small dams. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
19 (3): 117-118.
Bay, R. R. 1976. Rehabilitation potentials and limitations of surface-
mined lands. Transactions of the North America Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference. 41:345-355.
Beattie, James M. 1957. Foliar analysis shows value of spoils bank
for fruit plantings. Ohio Farm and Home Res. 42:65-67.
Bengtson, G. W., S. E. Allen, D. A. Mays, and T. G. Zarber. 1973.
Use of fertilizers to speed pine establishment on reclaimed coal-
mine spoil in northeastern Alabama: I. Greenhouse experiments.
In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach
Sci. Publ., New York NY, 2:199-225.
Bengtson, G. W., D. A. Mays, and J. C. Allen. 1973. Revegetation of
coal spoil in northeastern Alabama: effects of timing of seeding
and fertilization on establishment of pine-grass mixtures. In
Res. and Appl. Tech. Symp. on Minded-Land Reclam. Proc. Bitum.
Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 208-214.
Bengston, G. W., D. A. Mays, and T. G. Zarger. 1971. Techniques useful
in establishing vegetative cover on reclaimed surface-mined lands.
In Proceedings of the Symposium on Rehabilitation of Drastically
Disturbed Surface Mined Lands. Georgia Surface Mined Land Use
Board, Macon GA, p. 79-86.
Berg, William A. 1961. Determining pH of strip-mine spoils. USDA
For. Serv. Res. Note NE-98. Northeast For. Exp. Stn., Upper
Darby PA, 7p.
Berg, W. A. 1965. Plant-toxic chemicals in acid-spoils. In Pennsylvania
State University Coal Mine Spoil Reclam. Symp. Proc. University
Park PA, p. 91-94. /
Berg, William A. 1969. Determining pH of strip-mine spoils. Research
Note N598, US Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Upper
Darby PA.
Ill
-------
Berg, William A. 1973. Evaluation of P and K soil fertility tests on
coal-mine spoils. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land.
Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, '1:93-104.
Berg, W. A., and E. M. Barrau. 1972. Composition and production of
seedings on strip-mine spoils in Northwestern Colorado. In Res.
and Appl. Tech. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Proc. Bitum. Coal
Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 215-224.
Berg, W. A., and R. F. May. 1969. Acidity and plant-available phos-
phorus in strata overlying coal seams. Mining Congress Journal
55 (3): 31-34.
Berg, W. A., and W. G. Vogel. 1968. Manganese toxicity of legumes
seeded in Kentucky strip-mine spoils. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap.
NE-119, Upper Darby PA, p.12.
Berg, William. A., and W. G. Vogel. 1973. Toxicity of acid coal-mine
spoils to plants. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land.
Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:57-68.
Beyer, L. E., and R. J. Hutnik. 1969. Acid and aluminum toxicity as
related to strip-mine spoil banks in western Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania State University Special Research Report SR-72, 79p.
Bitler, J. R., and J. D. Martin. 1977. Computer graphics demonstra-
tion—area coal availability studies. US Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Mines, Information Circular 8736, 16p.
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1964-1973. Mine drainage abstracts—a
bibliography. Annual Supplement. Pennsylvania Dept. of Environ-
mental Resources, Harrisburg PA.
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1968. Sulfide treatment of acid mine
drainage. Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., Monroeville PA, variously
paged, 87p.
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1970. Studies on limestone treatment
of acid mine drainage. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration, Water Pollution Control
Research Series DAST-33 14010.EIZ 01/70. USGPO, Washington DC, 96p.
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1971. Studies on densification of coal
mine drainage sludge. US Environmental Protection Agency, Water
Pollution Control Research Series 14010 EJT 09/71. USGPO, Washington
DC, 113p.
Blevins, R. L., H. H. Bailey, and G. E. Ballard. 1970. The effect of
acid mine water on floodplain soils in the western Kentucky coal-
fields. Soil Science 110: 191-196.
112
-------
Boccardy, Joseph A., and W. M. Spaulding, Jr. 1968. Effects of
surface mining on fish and wildlife in Appalachia. US Dept. of
the Interior, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Resource
Publ. 65, 20p.
Boesch, Mark J. 1974. Reclaiming the strip mines at Palzo. Compost
Science 15 (1): 24-25.
Bohm, R. A., J. Lord, J. P. Moore, P. K. Scheidt-Bleek, and G. A. Vaughn.
1973. The economics of the private and social costs of Appalachian
coal production. Prepared for the National Science Foundation
by the Appalachian Resources Project, Tennessee University,
Knoxville TN, 39p.
Bondurant, Donald M. (ed.). 1971. Proceedings of the revegetation
and economic use of surface-mined land and mine refuse [conference].
Sponsored by School of Mines, College of Agriculture and Forestry,
Appalachian Center, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
Bowden, Kenneth L. 1961. A bibliography of strip-mine reclamation,
1953-1960. Dept. of Conservation, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor MI, WR 101, 13p.
Brackenrich, J. D. 1974. Design criteria of sediment-control structures
in Appalachia. Paper presented at the 67th Annual Meeting, ASAE.
St. Joseph MI, 81p.
Branson, Branley A., and D. L. Batch. 1972. Effects of strip-mining
on small stream fishes in east central Kentucky. Biol. Soc.
Wash. Proc. 84(59): 507-517.
Branson, B. A., and D. L. Batch. 1974. Additional observations on
the effects of strip mining on small-stream fishes in east-central
Kentucky. Transactions of the Kentucky Academy of Science
35(3-4): 81-83.
Brant, Russell A. 1964. Geological description and effects of strip
mining on coal overburden material. Ohio Journal of Science
64 (2): 68-75.
Brant, Russell A., and R. M. DeLong. 1960. Coal resources of Ohio.
Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources, Div. of Geology, Survey Bulletin
58, 245P.
Brant, Russell A., and E. Q. Moulton. 1960. Acid mine drainage manual.
Ohio State University, Engineering Experiment Station Bulletin
179, 40p.
Breeding, C. H. J. 1961. Crown vetch as aid to strip mine reclamation.
Mining Congress Journal 47(4): 70-71.
113
-------
Brenner, Fred J., R. H. Crowley, M. J. Musaus, and J. M. Goth III.
1975. Evaluation and recommendations of strip mine reclamation
procedures for maximum sediment-erosion control and wildlife
potential. In Surface Mining and Reclamation: Proceedings of
the National Coal Association, Louisville KY, 2:2-23.
Brodine, Virginia. 1973. Air pollution. Harcourt, Brace
Jovanovich, Inc., New York NY, 205p.
Brown, C. D., E. H. Dettman, R. A. Hinchman, J. D. Jastrow, and F. C.
Kornegay. 1977. The environmental effects of using coal for
generating electricity. Argonne National Laboratory, Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, and Energy Research and Development
Administration, Washington DC, 227p. NTIS No. PB-267 237/6 ST.
Brown, James H. 1973. Site factors and seeding methods affecting
germination and survival of tree species direct-seeded on surface-
mined areas. West Virginia University, Agricultural Experiment
Station Bulletin 620, Morgantown WV, 25p.
Burt, William H., and Richard Grassenheider. 1976. A field guide
to the mammals. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston MA, 290p.
Galdwell, N. B. 1974. An annotated bibliography of the surface-mined
area restoration project. US Dept. of Agriculture, Northeastern
Forest Experiment Station, Berea KY, 21p.
Capp, John P., and D. W. Gillmore. 1973. Soil-making potential of
powerplant fly ash in mined-land reclamation. In Proceedings of
the Resource and Applied Technology Symposium on Mined-Land
Reclamation. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc. Monroeville PA, 178-J.86.
Capp, J. P., D. W. Gillmore, and D. G. Simpson. 1975. Coal waste
stabilization by enhanced vegetation. US Bureau of Mines and
Energy Research and Development Administration, Morgantown Energy
Research Center, Morgantown WV, 12p. NTIS No." CONF-7505105-1.
Caruccio, Frank T. 1973. Characterization of strip-mine drainage by
pyrite grain size and chemical quality of existing groundwater.
In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach
Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:193-226.
Caruccio, F. T., J. C. Ferm, J. Home, G. Geidel, and B. Baganz. 1977.
Paleoenvironment of coal and its relation to drainage quality.
US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Develop-
ment, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati OH,
EPA-600/7-77-067, 107p.
Gary, Herbert C. 1971. Management plans. In Proceedings of the Reha-
bilitating Drastically Disturbed Surface Mined Lands Symposium.
Georgia Surface Mined Land Use Board, Macon GA, p. 28-32.
114
-------
Cavanaugh, G. D., et al. 1975. Potentially hazardous emissions for
the extraction and processing of coal and oil. EPA-650/2-75-038.
USEPA, Research Triangle Park NC.
Cederstrom, D. J. 1971. Hydrologic effects of strip mining west of
Appalachia. Mining Congress Journal 57(3): 46-50.
Chironis, Nicholas P. (ed.). 1978. Coal age operating handbook of
coal surface mining and reclamation. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York
NY, 442p.
Coal Task Group, National Petroleum Council. 1973. US energy outlook:
Coal availability. Committee on US Energy Outlook, Other Energy
Resources Subcommittee, US Dept. of the Interior, 287p.
Coates, William E. 1973. Landscape architectural approach to surface
mining reclamation. In Proceedings of the Res. and Appl. Tech.
Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville
PA, p. 26-41.
Cole, Norman F., M. Ferraro, R. Mallary, J. F. Palmer, E. H. Zube.
1976. Visual design resources for surface mine reclamation. In-
stitute for Man and Environment and ARTSTECNICA Center for Art
and Technology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA,
Publication R-76-15, 131p.
Conant, Roger. 1975. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians.
Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston MA, 429p.
Continental Oil Company. 1971. Microbiological treatment of acid
mine drainage waters. US Environmental Protection Agency, Water
Pollution Control Research Series, 14010 ENW 09/71. USGPO,
Washington DC.
Cook, Frank, and W. Kelly. 1976. Evaluation of current surface coal
mining overburden handling techniques and reclamation practices.
Prepared for the US Bureau of Mines, Washington DC, by Mathtech
Inc., Princeton NJ, 320p. NTIS No. PB-264111/6ST.
Cook, Harold A. 1969. Influence of acid mine water on the micro-
flora of sewage. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, West Virginia
University, Morgantown WV, 82p.
Cooper, A. 1965. The effect of transported stream sediments on the
survival of sockeye and pink salmon eggs and alevina. Int. Pac.
Salmon Fish. Comm., Bulletin 18, 71p.
Corbitt, Robert A. 1971. Design and operation of wastewater handling
facilities. In Proceedings of the Rehabil. Drastically Disturbed
Surf. Mined Land Symp. Georgia Surface Mined Land Use Board,
Macon GA, p. 70-73.
115
-------
Council on Environmental Quality. 1973. Coal surface mining and
reclamation: an environmental and economic assessment of alternatives
prepared at the request of Henry M. Jackson, Chairman, Committee
on Interior and Insular Affairs, US Senate, pursuant to S. Res. 45,
a national fuels and energy policy study. Committee print serial
No. 93-9 (92-43). USGPO, Washington DC, 143p.
Curtis, Willie R. 1973a. Effects of strip-mining on the hydrology
of small mountain watersheds in Appalachia. In Ecology and
Reclamation of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ.,
New York NY, 1:145-157.
Curtis, Willir R. 1973b. Moisture and density relations on graded
strip-mine spoils. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land.
Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:135-144.'
Curtis, W. R. 1974. Sediment yield from strip-mined watersheds in
eastern Kentucky. In Proceedings of the Second Res. & Applied Tech.
Symp. on Mined-Land Reclamation, p. 88-100.
Czapowskyj, Miroslaw M. 1973a. Establishing forest on surface-mined
land as related to fertility and fertilization. USDA For. Serv.
Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-3. Northeast. For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby
PA, p. 132-139.
Czapowskyj, Miroslaw M. 1973b. Performance of red pine and Japanese
larch planted on anthracite coalbreaker refuse. In Ecology and
Reclamation of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ.,
New York NY, 2:237-245.
Czapowskyj, Miroslaw M. 1976. Annotated bibliography on the ecology
and reclamation of drastically disturbed areas. USDA Forest Serv.
Gen. Techn. Rep. NE-21. NE. Forest Exp. Sta., Upper Darby PA, 98p.
Czapowskyj, Miroslaw M., and Edward A. Sowa. 1976. Lime helps estab-
lish crownvetch on coalbreaker refuse. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap.
NE-348. Northeast. For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby PA, 6p.
Dames and Moore. 1976. Development of pre-mining and reclamation
plan rationale for surface coal mines. Prepared for US Bureau
of Mines, Washington DC, Denver CO, 3 vols.
Darden, Sam. 1971. The preparation and use of maps in reclamation
work. In Proceedings of the Rehabilitating Drastically Surface
Mined Lands Symposium. Georgia Surface Mined Land Use Board,
Macon GA, p. 33-36.
Davidson, Walter H. 1977. Performance of ponderosa pine on bituminous
mine spoils in Pennsylvania. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. NE-358.
Northeast For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby PA, 6 p.
Deely, Dan. 1977. Water quality management guidance for mine-related
pollution sources (new, current, and abandoned). US Environmental
Protection Agency Office of Water Planning and Standards, EPA-440
13-77-027, variously paged.
116
-------
Deely, Daniel J., and F. Y. Borden. 1973. High surface temperatures
on strip-mine spoils. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated
Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:69-79.
Dickerson, John A., and W. E. Sopper. 1973. The effect of irrigation
with municipal sewage effluent and sludge on selected trees, grasses
and legumes planted in bituminous strip mine spoil. Pennsylvania
State University Sch. For. Res., Res. Briefs 7(1): 1-4.
D'ltri, F. M. 1972. The environmental mercury problem. CRC Press,
Cleveland OH.
Division of Fuels Data and Division of Coal. 1977. Coal—bituminous
and lignite in 1975. US Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Mines,
Mineral Industry Surveys, Washington DC, 67 p.
Division of Plant Sciences, College of Agriculture and Forestry, West
Virginia University. 1971. Mine spoil potentials for water
quality and controlled erosion. US-EPA, Water Pollution Control
Research Series 14010 EJE 12/71, 206p.
Dougherty, M. T., and H. H. Holzen. 1976. Evaluation of surface mine
reclamation techniques, Campbell's Run watershed, Pennsylvania.
US-EPA, Office of Research and Development, Industrial Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati OH, Environmental Protection
Technology Series EPA-600/2-76-111, 50p.
Dougherty, Murray T., and A. H. Holzen. 1976. Feasibility study,
fly ash reclamation of surface mines, Hillman State Park [PA].
Prepared for Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Resources,
Harrisburg PA, by Achenheil and Associates Geo Systems, Inc.,
Pittsburgh PA, 83p.
Doyle, William S. 1976. Strip mining of coal: environmental solutions.
Noyes Data Corporation, Park Ridge NJ, 352p.
Doyle, Frank J., H. G. Bhatt, and J. R. Rapp. 1974. Analysis of
pollution control costs. Prepared for the Appalachian Regional
Commission, Washington DC, by Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., Beaver
PA, 421p.
Down, C. B., and J. Stocks. 1978. Environmental impact of mining.
Applied Science Publishers, Ltd., London, England, 371p.
Drnevich, V. P., R. J. Ebelhar, and G. P. Williams. 1976. Geotechnical
properties of some eastern Kentucky surface mine spoils. Proceedings
of the Ohio River Valley Soils Seminar on Shales and Mine Wastes:
Geotechnical Properties, Design and Construction. Lexington KY,
p. 1-1 to 1-13.
Dvorak, A. J., C. D. Brown, E. H. Dettman, R. A. Hinchman, J. D. Jastrow,
and F. C. Kornegay. 1977. 'The environmental effects of using
coal for generating electricity, Argonne National Lab., Argo^nne
IL, 227p.
117
-------
Dyer, Kenneth L., and Willie R. Curtis. 1977. Effect of strip mining
on water quality in small streams in eastern Kentucky, 1967-1975.
USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. NE-372. NE. For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby
PA, 13p.
Economic Development Council of Northeastern Pennsylvania. 1977.
Recreational use of anthracite waste land in northeastern
Pennsylvania. Suggestions for an evaluation and planning
process. Avoca PA.
Edgerton, Barry R., and W. E. Sopper. 1974. The effects of municipal
sewage effluent and liquid digested sludge on the establishment
of grasses and legumes on bituminous coal strip-mine spoils.
Pennsylvania State University College of Agriculture Exp. Stn.,
Res. Briefs 8(1): 6-9.
Emrich, Grover H., and G. L. Merritt. 1969. Effects of mine drainage
on groundwater. Ground Water 7(3): 27-32.
E. S. Preston and Assoc., Ltd. 1967. Procedure manual, land capa-
bility study. Central Appalachian study region. Prepared for the
Appalachian Regional Commission, Washington DC.
Evans, Robert J., and J. R. Bitler. 1976. Coal surface mining recla-
mation costs—Appalachian and midwestern coal supply districts.
US Bureau of Mines Information Circular IC-8695. Eastern Field
Operation Center, Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh PA, 57p.
Everett, Herbert W., C. A. Foster, and B. J. Hines. 1974. Meeting
the challenge of reclamation. US Dept. of Agriculture, Soil
Conserv. Serv., Lexington KY, 105p.
Fay, G., and D. C. Glenn-Lewin. 1976. Legislative regulation of
the environmental impact of strip-mining. Prepared for the Energy
Research and Development Administration by the Energy and Mineral
Resources Research Inst., Iowa State Univ. of Science and Technology,
Ames IA, 14p.
Feiss, Julian W. 1965. Coal mine spoil reclamation. In Coal Mine
Spoil Reclamation; Scientific Planning for Regional Beauty and
Prosperity; Proceedings of the School of Forest Resources Symposium.
College of Agriculture, Pennsylvania State University, University
Park PA, p. 12-23.
Fenton, M. Robert. 1973. Landscape design principles for strip-mine
restoration. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land.
Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 2:485-495.
Federal Energy Administration. 1975. Energy Supply and Environmental
Coordination Act of 1974, Section 2, coal conversion program,
final environmental statement. Energy Resource and Development
Administration, Office of Fuel Utilization, Washington DC,
FES 75-1, 174p. and appendices.
118
-------
Ferguson, Fred E., Jr., K. Evans, and P. C. Jenckes. 1974. Severed
surface and mineral estates right to use, damage or destroy
the surface to recover minerals. In Proceedings of the
Nineteenth Rocky Mt. Mine Law Inst., Mathew Bender and Co.,
New York NY, p. 411-437.
Fisser, Herbert G., and R. E. Ries. 1975. Pre-disturbance ecological
studies improve and define potential for surface mine reclama-
tion. In Proceedings of the Third Surface Mining and Reclamation
Symposium. National Coal Association, Washington DC, 1:128-134.
Foreman, John W., and D. C. McLean. 1973. Evaluation of pollution
abatement procedures, Moraine State Park [PA]. Gwin, Dobson and
Foreman, Inc., Altoona PA, 77p.
Foreman, W. E. 1975. Impact of higher ecological costs of surface
mining. Prepared for the US Bureau of Mines, Washington DC by
Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ., Div. of Minerals
Engineering, Blacksburg VA, 172p.
Powells, H. A. 1965. Silvics of forest trees of the United States
Agriculture Handbook No. 271., USDA Forest Service, Washington
DC, 761p.
Fowler, Dale K., and C. H. Peery, III. 1973. Three years' development
of a public use wildlife area on a mountain coal surface mine in
southwest Virginia. In Proceedings of the Res. and Appl. Tech.
Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville
PA, p. 319-333.
Frawley, Margaret L. 1971. Surface mined areas [bibliography]: Control
and reclamation of environmental damage. US Dept. of the
Interior, Washington DC, 74p.
Funk, David T. 1962. A revised bibliography of strip-mine reclamation.
USDA For. Serv., Cent. States For. Exp. Stn. Misc. Release 35.
Columbus OH, 20p.
Funk, David T. 1973. Growth and development of alder plantings on
Ohio strip-mine banks. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated
Land, Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:483-491.
Gammon, J. R. 1970. The effect of inorganic sediment on stream biota.
Water Quality Office, US Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington DC, 141p.
Gang, M. W., and D. Langmuir. 1974. Controls on heavy metals in
surface and groundwaters affected by coal mine drainage; Clarion
River-Redbank Creek Watershed, Pennsylvania. In Proceedings of
the Fifth Symposium on Coal Mine Drainage Research, Louisville KY.
Gasper, D. C. 1976. Harmful impacts of current surface mine reclama-
tion on infertile streams and their future. Paper presented to
the 1976 Northeast Fish and Wildlife Conference, Hershey PA.
119
-------
Gilman, J. P. W., and G. M. Ruckerbauer. 1963. Metal carcinogenesis.
I: Observations of the carcinogenicity of a refinery dust, cobalt
oxide and colloidal thorium dioxide. Cancer Research 22(2):
152-157.
Gleason, Virginia E., and H. H. Russell. 1976. Mine drainage bibli-
ography, 1910-1976. (Coal and the Environment Abstract Series).
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc., for the US-EPA and Pennsylvania
Dept. of Environmental Resources, Monroeville PA, 288p.
Glenn-Lewin, D. C., G. Fay, and S. D. Cecil. 1976. Bibliography of
strip mine ecology. Prepared for the Energy, Research and
Development Administration, Ames IA, 49p.
Glover, F. W., Jr. 1976. Use of surface-mined lands. In National
Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research Inc., Fourth Symposium
on Surface Mining and Reclamation, p. 236-241.
Gluskoter, H. J., R. R. Rich, W. G. Miller, R. A. Cahill, G. B. Dreher,
and J. K. Kuhn. 1977. Trace elements in coal: occurrence and
distribution. Illinois State Geological Survey Circular 499,
Urbana IL, 154p.
Goldberg, Everett F., and G. Power. 1972. Legal problems of coal
mine reclamation: a study in Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania and
West Virginia. Maryland Univ. School of Law, Baltimore MD, 245p.
Good, D. M., V. T. Ricca, and K. S. Shumate. 1970. The relation of
refuse pile hydrology to acid production. In Proceedings of the
Coal Mine Drain. Res. Symp. 3. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc.,
Monroeville PA, p. 145-151.
Goodwin, Richard H., and W. A. Niering. 1975. Inland wetlands of
the United States evaluated as potential Registered Natural
Landmarks. National Park Service Natural History Theme Studies
2, 550p.
Gordon, Richard L. 1976. Economic analysis of coal supply: An
assessment of existing studies. Prepared for the Electric Power
Research Inst., Palo Alto CA. Pennsylvania State Univ.,
University Park PA, 152p.
Goodman, Gordon T., and S. A. Bray. 1975. Ecological aspects of the
reclamation of derelict and disturbed land: An annotated biblio-
graphy. Geo Abstracts Ltd., University of East Anglia, Norwich,
England, 351p.
Grandt, Alten F. 1974. Reclamation problems in surface mining.
Mining Congress Journal 60(8):28-33.
Greenbaum, Margaret E., and C. E. Harvey. 1974. Surface mining, land
reclamation, and acceptable standards. Kentucky Univ., Inst. for
Mining and Minerals Research, Lexington KY, 47p.
120
-------
Greene, Benjamin C., and W. B. Raney. 1974. West Virginia's controlled
placement. In Proceedings of the Second Res. and Appl. Technol.
Symp. on Mind-Land Reclam. Natl. Coal Assoc., Washington DC,
p. 5-17.
Grier, William F., C. F. Miller, and J. D. Woraach. 1976. Demonstration
of coal mine haul road sediment control techniques. Prepared for
Kentucky Dept. for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection.
Mayes, Sudderth and Etheredge, Inc., Lexington KY, and Environmental
Systems Corp., Knoxville TN, 84p.
Griffith, Franklin E., M. 0. Magnuson, and R. L. Kimball. 1966.
Demonstration and evaluation of five methods of secondary back-
filling of strip-mine areas. US Bureau of Mines Report of Inves-
tigations 6772, Washington DC, 17p.
Grim, E. C. 1975. Modern ways of strip mining in mountainous areas.
US-EPA news of environmental research in Cincinnati, industrial
waste treatment research, Cincinnati OH, unpaged.
Grim, E. C., and R. D. Hill. 1974. Environmental protection in surface
mining of coal. Office of Research and Development, US Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati OH, 277p., EPA-670/2-74-093.
Grube, Walter E., Jr., R. M. Smith, R. N. Singh, and A. A. Sobek.
1973. Characterization of coal overburden materials and mine soils
in advance of surface mining. In Proceedings of the Res. and Appl.
Tech. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc.,
Monroeville PA, p. 134-152.
Grube, Walter E., Jr., R. M. Smith, J. C. Sencindiver, and A. A. Sobek.
1974. Overburden properties and young soils in mined lands.
In Proceedings of the Second Res. and Appl. Technol. Symp. on
Mined-Land Reclam. National Coal Assoc., Washington DC, p. 145-149.
Grube, Walter E., Jr., and R. C. Wilmoth. 1976. Disposal of sludge
from acid mine drainage neutralization. US-EPA, Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory, Crown Mine Drainage Control
Field Site, Rivesville WV, 20p.
Gulf Environmental Systems Company. 1971. Acid mine waste treatment
using reverse osmosis. Environmental Protection Agency, Water
Pollution Control Research Series 14010 DYG 08/71. USGPO,
Washington DC, 85p.
Gunnett, John W. 1975. Regional aspects of mine planning to increase
production and enhance reclamation. In Proceedings of the Third
Symp. on Surface Mining and Reclam. National Coal Assoc.,
Washington DC, 1:95-127.
Habeck, W. J. 1975. Surface coal mining machinery and equipment.
Prepared for US Bureau of Mines, Washington DC, by Ford, Bacon and
Davis, Inc., New York NY, 32 3p.
121
-------
Haigh, Martin J. 1976. Environmental problems associated with reclama-
tion of old strip-mined land. Oklahoma Geology Notes 36(5):
200-202.
Haley, W. A. 1974. Changing methods and equipment use in Appalachian
surface coal mining. In Proceedings of the Second Res. and Appl.
Technol. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. National Coal Assoc.
Washington DC, p. 193-203.
Hamilton, Lawson W., Jr. 1974. Reclamation in steep slope surface
mining. Mining Congress Journal 60(9):111-114.
Hanna, George P., Jr. 1964. The relation of water to strip-mine
operation. Ohio Journal of Science 64(2):120-124.
Heine, Walter N., and W. E. Guckert. 1973. A new method of surface
coal mining in steep terrain. In Proceedings of the Res. and
Appl. Techn. Symp. on Minded-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc.,
Monroeville PA, p. 105-116.
Herricks, Edwin E., and J. Cairns, Jr. 1974. Rehabilitation of
streams receiving acid mine drainage. Prepared for Office of
Water Research and Technology. Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State
Univ., Water Resources Research Center, 281p.
Herricks, E. E., et al. 1975. Hydraulic and water quality modeling
of surface water discharges from mining operations. Research
Division Report 159, Dept. of Agricultural Engineering, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg VA.
Higgins, Tom. 1973. The planning and economics of mined-land use for
agricultural purposes. In Proceedings of the Res. and Appl.
Tech. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc.,
Monroeville PA, p. 287-293.
Hill, Lawrence W. 1960. How precipitation affects strip-mine pond
water levels in Southeast Ohio. USDA For. Ser., Cent. States
For. Exp. Stn., Columbus OH.
Hill, Ronald D. 1970. Elkins mine drainage pollution control demon-
stration project. In Proceedings of the Third Coal Mine Drain.
Res. Symp. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 284-303.
Hill, R. D. 1971. Restoration of a terrestrial environment—the
surface mine. ASB Bulletin 18(3):107-116.
Hill, R. D. 1973. Water pollution from coal mines. Paper presented
at the 45th annual conference, Water Pollution Control Assoc.
of Pennsylvania, University Park PA. US-EPA, National Environemental
Research Center, Cincinnati OH, lip.
122
-------
Hill, R. D. 1974. Overview of use of carbonate rocks for controlling
acid mine drainage. Paper presented at the Tenth Forum on
Geology of Industrial Minerals, Ohio State Univ., Columbus OH.
USEPA, National Environmental Research Center, Industrial Waste
Treatment Research Laboratory, Mining Pollution Control Branch,
Cincinnati OH, 9p.
Hill, R. D. 1976. Methods for controlling pollutants. Paper presented
at Reclamation of Drastically Disturbed. Lands Symposium, Wooster
OH. US-EPA, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Resource
Extraction and Handling Division, Cincinnati OH, 39p.
Hill, R. D., and A. Montague. 1976. The potential for using sewage
sludges and compost in mine reclamation. US-EPA, Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory, Resource Extraction and Handling
Division, Cincinnati OH, and US-EPA Region III, Philadelphia PA, lip.
Hill, R. D., and R. C. Wilmoth. 1971. Limestone treatment of acid mine
drainage. Society of Mining Engineers, AIME, Transactions 250:
162-166.
Hill, R. D., R. C. Wilmoth, and R. B. Scott. 1971. Neutrolosis
treatment of acid mine drainage. US-EPA, Water Quality Office,
Cincinnati OH, 14010 05/71, 13p.
Hittman Associates, Inc. 1975a. Assessment of environmental impact
of steep slope mining, baseline data survey, quarterly report 1.
Prepared for West Virginia Surface Mining and Reclamation
Association, Columbia MD, 47p.
Hittman Associates, Inc. 1975b. Assessment of environmental impact
of steep slope mining, final baseline survey report. Prepared
for West Virginia Surface Mining and Reclamation Associates,
Columbia MD, variously paged, 191p.
Hittman Associates, Inc. 1975c. Environmental effects, impacts, and
issues related to large scale coal refining complexes. Energy
Research and Development Administration, Washington DC, 178p.
Hittman Associates, Inc., 1976. Assessment of environmental impact
of steep slope mining, quarterly report 3, baseline data survey.
Prepared for West Virginia Surface Mining and Reclamation Asso-
ciation. Columbia MD, variously paged, lOp.
Hoffman, Glenn J., G. 0. Schwab, and R. B. Curry. 1964. Slpe sta-
bility of coal strip mine spoil banks. Ohio Agric. Exp. Stn.
Ser. 8. Wooster OH, 24p.
Hoffman, I., F. J. Lysy, J. P. Morris, and K. E. Yeager. 1972.
Survey of coal availabilities by sulfur content. Mitre Corp.,
McLean VA, 171p.
123
-------
Holland, Frank R. 1973. Wildlife benefits from strip-mine reclamation.
In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land, Gordon and Breach
Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:377-388.
Horizons Incorporated. 1970. Treatment of acid mine drainage.
Federal Water Quality Administration, Dept. of the Interior,
Water Pollution Control Research Series 14010 DEE 12/70. USGPO,
Washington DC.
Hounslow, Arthur, Joan Fitzpatrick, Lawrence Cerrillo, and Michael
Freeland. 1978. Overburden minerology as related to grbundwater
chemical changes in coal strip mining. US Environmental Pro-
tection Agency Office of Research and Development, Ada OK,
EPA-600/7-78-156, 299p.
Hueper, W. D. 1961. Environmental carcinogenesis and cancers. Cancer
Research 21:842.
Hunt, Clifford F., and W. E. Sopper. 1973. Renovation of treated
municipal sewage effluent and digested liquid sludge through
irrigation of bituminous coal strip mine spoil. Pa. State Univ.
Sch. For. Res. Briefs 7(1):11-14.
Hutnik, Russell J., and G. Davis (ed.). 1973. Ecology and reclama-
tion of devastated land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ. Inc., New
York NY, 1041p.
Hyslop, James. 1964. Some present day reclamation problems: an
industrialist's viewpoint. Ohio Journal of Science 64(2):157-165.
Imhoff, E. A., T. 0. Friz, and J. R. La Fevers. 1976. A guide to
state programs for the reclamation of surface mined areas. US
Geological Survey Circular 731, Reston VA, 32p.
Jacoby, Pete W. 1969. Revegetation treatments for stand establishment
on coal spoil banks. Journal of Range Management 22(2):94-97.
Jarrett, Arthur E., 1968. Resources, reclamation, recreation: the
Ohio Power Company and the three R's. American Forests 74(11):
28-29, 47-49.
Johnson, Philip L. 1977. Environmental effects of energy, abstracts
of selected projects supported by EPA funds. Oak Ridge Assoc.
Universities, Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection
Agency, and Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry, Washington
DC, 186p.
Jones, J. N., W. H. Armiger, and 0. L. Bennett. 1975. Forage grasses
aid the transition from spoil to soil. In Proceedings of the
Third Surf. Min. and Reclam. Symp, Natl. Coal Assoc., Washington
DC, 2:185-194.
124
-------
Jones, J. N., Jr., W. H. Arminger, and G. C. Hungate. 1973. Seed
ledges improve stabilization of outer slopes on mine spoil. In
Proceedings of the Res. and Appl. Tech. Symp. on Mined-Land
Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 250-258.
Kathuria, Vir D., M. A. Nawrocki, and B. C. Becker. 1976. Effec-
tiveness of surface mine sedimentation ponds. Hittman Associates,
Inc., Columbia MD, and Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati OH, 109p. NTIS No. PB-258 917/4ST.
Kentucky Department for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection
and Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 1975a. Research
and demonstration of improved surface mining techniques in eastern
Kentucky: revegetation. Prepared for the Appalachian Regional
Commission, Washington DC. Frankfort KY, 338p.
Kentucky Department for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection
and Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. 1975b. Research and
demonstration of improved surface mining techniques in eastern
Kentucky: revegetation manual. Prepared for the Appalachian
Regional Commission, Washington DC. Frankfort KY, 104p.
Kentucky Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection,
Watkins and Associates, Inc., and C. T. Haan. 1977. Onsite
control of sedimentation utilizing the modified block-cut method
of surface mining. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Research and Development, Cincinnati OH, EPA-600/7-77-Q68, 91p.
Keller, E. C., Jr., and J. A. Silvester. 1974. A diversity indices
computer program for use in aquatic systems evaluation. Appala-
chian Center, Water Research Institute, West Virginia University.
Information Report 3: 309-324.
Kennedy, J. L. 1973. Sodium hydroxide treatment of acid mine drainage.
US-EPA, National Environmental Research Center, Office of Research
and Monitoring, Cincinnati OH, 6p.
Kennedy, J. L., and R. C. Wilmoth. n.d. Water samples: proper col-
lection procedures. US-EPA, Office of Research and Development,
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati OH, unpaged.
Kieffer, F. V. 1972. A bibliography of surface coal mining in the
United States. Forum Associates, Columbus OH, 71p.
Kimball, L. Robert. 1974a. Water quality: Surface mine water
quality control in the eastern Kentucky coal fields. Prepared
for the Appalachian Regional Commission, Washington DC, by Kentucky
Dept. for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Frankfort
KY, 44p. NTIS No. PB-262 578/8ST.
Kimball, L. Robert. 1974b. Surface mine water quality control in the
eastern Kentucky coal fields. Prepared for the Appalachian
Regional Commission, Washington DC, by the Kentucky Dept. for
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Frankfort KY,
216p.
125
-------
Kimball, L. Robert. 1975. Slope stability research study in the
eastern Kentucky coal fields. Prepared for the Appalachian
Regional Commission, Washington DC, by the Kentucky Dept. for
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, Frankfort KY,
447p.
Kimball, L. Robert. 1976. Debris basins for control of surface
mine sedimentation. Prepared for the Industrial Environmental
Research Lab., Extraction Technology Branch, Cincinnati OH, by
the Kentucky Dept. for Natural Resources and Environmental
Protection, Frankfort KY, 58p.
King, Thomas F. 1975. Recommended procedures for archaeological
impact evaluation. Los Angeles CA, 17p.
Kinney, Edward C. 1964. Extent of acid mine pollution in the United
States affecting fish and wildlife. US Bureau of Sport Fisheries
and Wildlife Circular 191. Washington DC, 27p.
Kipling, M. D,, and J. A. H. Waterhouse. 1967. Cadmium and prostatic
carcinoma. Lancet 1:730.
Kirchgessner, David A. 1977. Environmental regulations pertaining
to coal utilization, Fourth Symposium on Coal Utilization,
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc.,
Louisville KY, p. 30-40.
Krause, Rodney R. 1973. Predicting mined-land soil. In Ecology and
Reclamation of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ.,
New York NY, 1:121-131.
Kuchler, A. W. n.d. Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous
United States. American Geographical Society, Spcial publication
No. 36, Washington DC, 116p. and 1 map.
Lee, A. M., and J. F. Fraumeni. 1969. Arsenic and respiratory cancer
in man: An occupational study. Journal of the National Cancer
Institute 43(b):1045-1052.
Leet, L. Don. 1971. Effects produced by blasting rock. Hercules
Incorporated, Wilmington DE, 24p.
Lohman, S. W. 1972. Groundwater hydraulics. US Geological Survey
Professional Paper 708, 70p.
Lovell, H. L. 1973. An appraisal of neutralization processes to
treat coal mine drainage. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Demonstration, Washington DC.
Environmental Protection Technology Series EPA-670/2-73-093, 347p.
Mallary, Robert, and C. A. Carlozzi. 1976. The aesthetics of surface
mine reclamation: An on-site survey in Appalachia, 1975-1976.
Institute for Hand and Environment ARTSTECNICA Center for Art and
Technology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA,
Publication R-76-5, 54p.
126
-------
Martin, J. F. 1974. Coal refuse disposal in the eastern United
States. US-EPA, News of Environmental Research in Cincinnati,
Industrial Waste Treatment Research, unpaged.
Martin, J. F. 1976. Research and development programs for acid
mine water. US-EPA, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Resource Extraction and Handling Division, Extraction Technology
Branch, Cincinnati OH, lip.
Martin, J. F., and E. F. Harris. 1977. Research and development
programs for pollution control in mining and transport of solid
fuels. US-EPA, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Extraction Technology Branch, Cincinnati OH, ,4p.
Martin, J. F., R. B. Scott, and R. C. Wilmoth. n.d. Water quality
aspects of coal refuse utilization. US-EPA, Industrial Environ-
mental Research Laboratory, Extraction Technology Branch,
Cincinnati OH, unpaged.
Maryland Dept. of Health and Mental Hygiene, Div. of Solid Waste
Control. 1971. Use of abandoned strip mines for disposal of solid
waste in Maryland. Prepared for US-EPA, Office of Solid Waste
Management Programs, Washington DC. Baltimore MD, 206p.
McGuire, J. R. 1977. There's more to reclamation than planting
trees. American Forests (July).
McKee, Jude E., and H. W. Wolf. 1963. Water quality criteria, second
edition, the Resources Agency of California, Sacramento CA, 539p.
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. 1973. Analysis of pollution control costs.
Appalachian Regional Commission, Washington DC, 436p.
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. 1974. Architectural measures to minimize
subsidence damage (Subsidence Control Study Series). Prepared
for the Appalachian Regional Commission, Washington DC.
Minear, R. A., B. A. Tschantz, J. H. Rule, G. L. Vaughan, and D. E.
Overton. 1976. Environmental aspects of coal production in the
Appalachian region, progress report, June 1, 1975 - May 31, 1976.
University of Tennessee, Appalachian Resources Project,
Khoxville TN, 96p.
Minear, R. A., B. A. Tschantz, J. H. Rule, G. L. Vaughan, D. E.
Overton, and G. Briggs. 1977. Environmental aspects of coal
production in the Appalachian region, progress report June 1,
1976 - May 31, 1977. Prepared for the US Energy Research and
Development Administration under Contract No. E-(40)-4946.
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN, 91p.
127
-------
Mineral Resources Research Center. 1971. Flocculation and clarifi-
cation of mineral suspensions. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Water Quality Office, Water Pollution Control Series 14010 DRB
05/71. USGPO, Washington DC.
Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration. 1975. Final environ-
mental statement, regulations governing the disposal of coal
mine waste (30 CFR Part 77, Sections 77.215.h through 77.217).
United States Department of the Interior, Washington DC.
Variously paged, 230p.
Mining Informational Services. 1977. 1977 Keystone coal industry
manual. McGraw-Hill, New York NY, 782p.
Moomau, Henry F., F. R. Zachar, and J. W. Leonard. 1974. Feasibility
study of a new surface mining method 'longwall stripping1.
Prepared for US-EPA by Potomac Engineering and Surveying
Company, Petersburg WV, 74p.
Moore, John R., R. A. Bohm, J. H. Lord, F. K. Schmidt-Bleek, and
G. A. Vaughn. 1977. Economics of the private and social costs
of Appalachian coal production* Prepared for the National
Science Foundation, Washington DC, by the Appalachian Resources
Project, University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN, 77p.
Mumford, R. E., and W. C. Bramble. 1973. Small mammals on surface-
mined land in southwestern Indiana. In Ecology and Reclamation
of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY,
1:369-376.
Munn, Robert F. 1973. Strip mining; an annotated bibliography.
West Virginia University Library, Morgantown WV', llOp.
Murray, Francis X. (ed.). 1978. Where we agree: Report of the
national coal policy project. Volume 2, Westview Press,
Boulder CO, 477p.
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1973. Pro-
ceedings of the first research and applied technology symposium
on mined-land reclamation. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc. Monroeville
PA, 355p.
National Coal Association. 1974. Proceedings of the second research
and applied technology symposium on mined-land reclamation.
Washington DC, 252p.
National Coal Association. 1975. Proceedings of the Third surface
mining and reclamation symposium. Washington DC, 482p.
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976a.
Third symposium on coal utilization. Louisville KY, 233p.
128
-------
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976b.
Fourth symposium on surface mining and reclamation. Washington
DC, 276p.
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976c.
Sixth symposium on coal mine drainage. Washington DC, 291p.
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1977.
Proceedings on the seventh symposium on coal mine drainage re-
search. Washington DC, 257p.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1974. Climates
of the states. Water Information Center, Port Washington NY,
Vol. I, 486p.
NPS (National Park Service). 1973. Preparation of environmental
statements: Guidelines for discussion of cultural (historic,
archaeological, architectural) resources. Prepared in coopera-
tion with the Office of Environmental Project Review,
Washington DC. Variously paged, 34p.
NPS (National Park Service). 1975. Index of the National Park System
and affiliated areas as of January 1, 1975. USGPO, Washington
DC, 136p.
National Technical Information Service. 1976a. Strip mining. Cita-
tions from the NTIS data base. Search period 1964 - September
1976. US Department of Commerce, Springfield VA,
NTIS/PS-76/0810, 206p.
National Technical Information Service. 1976b. Surface mining part
I. Strip mining. Citations from the engineering index data
base. Search period 1970 - September 1976. US Department of
Commerce, Springfield VA, NTIS/PS-76/0811, 91p.
Nature Conservancy, The. n.d. The Nature Conservancy preserve
directory. Arlington VA, 154p.
Neckers, J. W., and C. R. Walker. 1951. Field test for active sulfides
in soil. Soil Science 74: 467-470.
Nicholls, Harry R., Charles F. Johnson, and Wilbur I. Duvall. 1971.
Blasting vibrations and .their effects on structures. US Bureau
of Mines Bulletin 656, Washington DC.
Norman, R. L. 1975. Using wildlife values in benefit-cost analysis
and mitigation of wildlife losses. Proc. Int. Assoc. Game Fish
and Conservation Comm. 65: 119-130.
NUS Corporation, Cyrus W. Rice Division. 1971. The effecrs of various
gas atmospheres on the oxidation of coal mine pyrites. US Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control Research Series
14010 ECC 08/71. USGPO, Washington DC, 144p.
129
-------
Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry. 1976. Proceedings of a
national conference on health, environmental effects, and control
technology of energy use. 9-11 February 1976, Sheraton Park
Hotel, Washington DC. US-EPA, Office of Research and Development,
Report 600/7-76-002, 340p.
Office of Water Resources Research, Water Resources Scientific Infor-
mation Center, Office of Water Research and Technology. 1975.
Acid mine water, a bibliography. Washington DC, 569p.
Ohio State University Research Foundation. 1968. Potential of strip-
mined areas for fish and wildlife reclamation. Columbus OH, 84p.
Otte, J. A., and M. Boehlje. 1975. Model to analyze the cost of
strip mining and reclamation. Iowa State University, Energy
and Mineral Resources Research Inst., Ames IA, 19p.
Paone, James, J. L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti. 1974. Land utilization
and reclamation in the mining industry, 1930-71. US Bureau of
Mines, Washington DC, 68p.
PD-NCB Consultants Ltd., and Dames and Moore. 1976. Research study
of retreat surface area mining systems. Prepared for the US
Bureau of Mines, Washington DC, 216p.
Pegg, William J. 1968. Toxicity of acid mine water to two species
of sunfish. Unpublished MS thesis, West Virginia University,
Morgantown WV, 107p.
Pegg, W. J., and C. R. Jenkins. 1976. Physiological effects of
sublethal levels of acid water on fish. West Virginia University,
Center for Extension and Continuing Education, Water Research
Institute, Bulletin 6, 47p.
Pennington, D. 1975. Relationship of groundwater movement and strip-
mine reclamation. In National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal
Research Inc. In Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Surface
Mining and Reclamation 1: 170-176.
Pennsylvania State University, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences.
1973. An analysis of strip mining methods and equipment selec-
tion. University Park PA, 148p.
Peterson, Howard B., and R. Monk. 1967. Vegetation and metal toxi-
city in relation to mine and mill wastes. Utah State Univ.
Agri. Exp. Stn. Circ. 148. Logan UT, 75p.
Peterson, J. R., and J. Gschwind. 1973. Amelioration of coal mine
spoils with digested sewage sludge. Proceedings of the Res. and
Appl. Tech. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc.,
Monroeville PA, 187-196.
130
-------
Pettyjohn, W. A. 1975. Pickling liquors, strip mines, and groundwater
pollution. Ground Water 13 (1): 4-10.
Pittsburgh Mining and Safety Research Center. 1976. Mining research
review: An annual review of selected mining research activities
of the Bureau of Mines. Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh PA, 66p.
NTIS No. PB-258 438/1ST.
Plass, W. T. 1975. An evaluation of trees and shrubs for planting
surface-mine spoils. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,
Research Paper NE-317, Northeast. For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby PA.
Plass, William T. 1977. Growth and survival of hardwoods and pine
interplanted with European alder. US Department of Agriculture.
For Serv. Res. Paper NE-376. Northeast. For. Exp. Stn., Upper
Darby PA, lOp.
Plass, William T., and J. D. Burton. 1967. Pulpwood production
potential on strip-mined land in the South. J. Soil and water
Conserv. 22(6): 235-238.
Plass, William T., and J. P. Capp. 1974. Physical and chemical
characteristics of surface mine spoil treated with fly ash. J.
Soil and Water Conserv. 29(3): 119-121.
Potts, C. L. 1965. Cadmium proteinuria: The health of battery
workers exposed to cadmium oxide dust. Annals of Occupational
Hygiene 8:55.
Ramani, R. V., R. Stefanko, and M. R. Ferko. 1974. Surface mining
technology in the United States. In Proceedings of the Second
Res. and Appl. Technol. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. National
Coal Assoc., Washington DC, p. 204-216.
Ramani, R. V., and M. L. Clar. 1978. User's manual for premining
planning of eastern surface coal mining, volume I: Executive
summary. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research
and Development, Cincinnati OH, EPAr600/7-78-180, 71p.
Ramsey, John P. 1970. Control of acid pollution from coal refuse
piles and slurry lagoons. In Proceedings of the Third Coal Mine
Drain. Res. Symp. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA,
p. 138-144.
Redente, E. F., R. W. Payser, and J. L. Balzer. 1976. Developing
a reclamation plan for western surface coal mines. In Proceedings
of the Fourth Symposium on surface mining and reclamation.
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc.,
Monroeville PA, p. 39-43.
Reeves, A. L., D. Deitch, and A. J. Vorwald. 1967. Beryllium
carcinogenesis. I: Inhalation exposure of rats to beryllium
sulfate aerosols. Cancer Research 27:46.
131
-------
Rehder, John B. 1972. Geographic applications of ERTS-1 imagery
to rural landscape change. Dept. of Geography, University of
Tennessee, 34p.
Rehder, John B. 1973. Geographic applications of ERTS-1 imagery
to landscape change. Prepared for NASA Earth Resources Survey
Program, Washington DC, by Department of Geography, University
of Tennessee, Knoxville TN, 112p.
Rex Chainbelt, Inc. 1970. Treatment of acid mine drainage by re-
verse osmosis. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Federal Water
Quality Administration, US Department of the Interior. Water
Pollution Control Research Series 14010 DYK 03/70. USGPO,
Washington DC, 35p.
Rex Chainbelt, Inc. 1972. Reverse osmosis demineralization of acid
mine drainage. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Monitoring. Water
Pollution Control Research Series 14010 FOR 03/72. USGPO,
Washington DC, lllp.
Richardson, A. R., and M. T. Dougherty. 1976. Feasibility study,
Deer Park daylighting project. US-EPA, Office of Research and
Development, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati OH, Environmental Protection Technology Series
EPA-600/2-76-110, 75p.
Riley, Charles V. 1972. Design criteria of mined land reclamation.
Soc. Mech. Eng. Proc. (Oct.) 19p.
Riley, Charles V. 1973. Chemical alterations of strip-mine spoil
by furrow grading—revegetation success. In Ecology and Reclama-
tion of Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York
NY, 2: 315-331.
Ringe, Axel C. 1973. Land reclamation in mining areas. A biblio-
graphy with abstracts (1964-May 1973). National Technical Infor-
mation Service, Springfield VA, 30p.
Samuel, David E., Joy R. Stouffer, Charles H. Hocutt, and William T.
Mason. 1978. Surface mining and fish/wildlife needs in the
eastern United States: proceedings of a symposium, 3-6 December
1978. West Virginia University and US Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS 78/81, US Government Printing
Office, Washington DC, 386p.
Sanderson, Glen C. (ed.). 1977. Management of migratory shore and
upland game birds in North America. International Association
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Washington DC, 358p.
Saperstein, L. W. 1971. Potential for reclamation or redevelopment
of open-pit mines. In Proceedings of the AIME Environ. Qual.
Conf. Washington DC, p. 257-64.
132
-------
Saperstein, Lee W., and E. S. Secor. 1973. Improved reclamation
potential with the block method of contour stripping. In
Proceedings of the Res. and Appl. Tech. Syrap. on Mined-Land
Reclara. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 1-14.
Schlesinger, Benjamin, and D. Daetz. 1975. Development of a pro-
cedure for forecasting long-range environmental impacts.
Prepared for the Resource and Land Investigations (RALI)
Program, US Geologic Survey, Reston VA by Stanford Univ.,
Dept. of Industrial Engineering, Palo Alto CA, 152p.
Scott, James J. 1976. Research and development priorities: Surface
mining reclamation. Prepared for the US Bureau of Mines by the
University of Missouri, Dept. of Mining, Petroleum, and Geological
Engineering, Rolla MO, 158p.
Skelly & Loy, 1975. Economic engineering analysis of US surface coal
mines and effective land reclamation. Prepared for US Bureau
of Mines, Harrisburg PA, 611p.
Smith, E. J., M. A. Shapiro, and M. Synak. 1972, Effect of lime
neutralized iron hydroxide suspensions on juvenile brook trout
(Salvelinus fontinalis, Mitchill). Water Res. 6:935-950.
Smith, E. J., J. L. Sykora, and M. A. Shapiro. 1973. Effect of lime
neutraized iron hydroxide suspensions to survival, growth, and
reproduction of the fathead minnow (Pimephales promulas). J.
Fish. Ass. Board Can. 30:1147-1153.
Smith, E. J., and J. L. Sykora. 1976. "Early developmental effects
of lime neutralized iron hydroxide suspensions on brook trout
and cobo salmon. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., Vol. 2, p. 308-312.
Smith, Michael J. 1972. A study of runoff from small rural water-
sheds in response to completed and proposed land use changes.
Prepared for Office of Water Research and Technology, Washington
DC, by Ohio State University, Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Columbus OH. NTIS No. PB-264 900/25T.
Smith, Ronald W., and D. G. Frey. 1971. Acid mine pollution effects
on lake biology. Prepared for US-EPA by Indiana Univ. Water
Resources Research Center. Water pollution control research
series, 133p.
Smith, Richard M., W. E. Grube, Jr., T. Arkle, Jr., and A. A. Sobek.
1974. Mine spoil potentials for soil and water quality. Prepared
for US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati OH, by West
Virginia Univ. Div. of Plant Sciences, Morgantown WV, 320p.
Smith, Richard M., A. A. Sobek, T. Arkle, Jr. ,%J. C. Sencindiver,
and J. R. Freeman. 1976. Extensive overburden potentials for
soil and water quality. Prepared for US-EPA Industrial Environmental
Research Lab., Cincinnati OH, by'West Virginia Univ., Div. of
Plant Sciences, and West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey,
Morgantown WV, 329p.
133
-------
Society for American Archaeology. [No date.] Archaeology and
archaeological resources: A guide for' those planning to use,
affect, or alter the land's surface. Washington DC, 24p.
Sopper, William E., L. T. Kardos, and L. E. DiLissio. 1975. Recla-
mation of anthracite coal refuse using treated municipal waste-
water and sludge. Prepared for US Office of Water Research and
Technology, Washington DC, by Pennsylvania State University
Inst. for Research on Land and Water Resources, University
Park PA, 183p.
Sopper, William E., L. T. Kardos, and B. P. Edgerton. 1974. Using
sewage effluent and liquid digested sludge to establish grasses
and legumes on bituminous strip-mine spoils. Pennsylvania State
University Inst. for Research on Land and Water Resources,
University Park PA, 165p.
Spaulding, Willard M., and R. D. Ogden. 1968. Effects of surface
mining on the fish and wildlife resources of the United States.
US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and
Wildlife, Resource Publication 68, Washington DC, 51p.
Spore, R. L. 1972a. Opportunity costs of land use: The case of
coal surface mining. Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge TN, 17p.
Spore, R. L. 1972b. Opportunity costs of landscape modification by
coal surface mining. Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge TN, 16p.
Spore, R. L., E. A. Nephew, W. W. Lin. 1975. Costs of coal surface
mining and reclamation: A process analysis approach. Oak Ridge
National Lab., Oak Ridge TN, 15p.
Stefanko, Robert, R. V. Ramani, and M. R. Ferko. 1973. An analysis
of strip mining methods and equipment selection. Pennsylvania
State Univ., Dept. of Mineral Engineering, University Park PA,
148P.
Stokinger, H. E. 1963. In; F.A. Patty (ed.). Industrial hygiene
and toxicology. Interscience Publishers, New York,
Striffler, W. D. 1973. Surface mining disturbance and water quality
in eastern Kentucky. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated
Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 1:175-191.
Strohl, J. H., and J. L. Hern. 1976. Removal of undesirable cations
from acid mine water by a new cation-exchange material. West
Virginia University, Center for Ext. and Cont. Education, Water
Research Inst. 9, 14p.
Sunderman, F. W., and A. J. Donnelly. 1965. Studies of nickel car-
cinogenesis in metastasizing pulmonary tumors in rats induced by
the inhalation of nickel carbonyl. American Journal of
Clinical Pathology 46:1027.
134
-------
Sutton, Paul. 1973 a. Reclamation of toxic stripmine spoilbanks. Ohio
Agric. Res. and Dev. Cent., Wooster OH. Ohio Rep. 58(1):18-20.
Sutton, Paul. 1971. Establishment of vegetation on toxic coal mine
spoils. In Proceedings of the Res. and Appl. Tech. Symp. Bitum.
Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 153-158.
Sykora, J. L., E. J. Smith, M. A. Shapiro, and M. Synak. 1972.
Chronic effect of ferric hydroxide on certain species of aquatic
animals. In Fourth symposium on coal mine drainage research,
proceedings. Mellon Institute, Pittsburgh PA, p. 347-369.
Sykora, J. L., E. J. Smith, M. Synak, and M. A. Shapiro. 1975. Some
observations on spawning of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalia,
Mitchill) in lime neutralized iron hydroxide suspensions. Water
Res. 9:451-458.
Tennyson, Gerald R. 1962. Equipment development for strip mining
and reclamation. In Conservation - A Key to Work Progress.
Proceedings of the Soil Conserv. Soc. Amer., Des Moines IA,
p. 99-105.
Thompson, F. C., and H. A. Wilson. 1975. Tolerance and synthetic
ability of sewage microorganisms in acid mine water. West
Virginia University, Center for Extension and Continuing Education,
Water Research Institute, Bulletin 5, 60p.
Thompson, Robert D., and H. F. York. 1975. The reserve base of US
coals by sulfur content I: The eastern states. US Bureau of
Mines Information Circular 8680, Eastern Field Operation Center,
Pittsburgh PA, 543p.
Tschantz, Bruce A. 1975. A hydrologic impact study of strip mining
on selected east Tennessee watersheds. In Final Report on a
Systems approach to Energy Supply: Environmental and Economic
Aspects of Coal Production. National Science Foundation,
Washington DC.
Tschantz, Bruce A., and R. A. Minear. 1975. Impact of coal stripmining
on water quality and hydrology in east Tennessee. Prepared for
US Office of Water Research and Technology, Washington DC, by
Water Resources Research Center and Dept. of Civil Engineering,
Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville TN, 5p.
Tyco Laboratories, Inc. 1971. Silicate treatment for acid mine
drainage prevention. Tyco Laboratories, Inc., Waltham MA. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Water Pollution Control Series
14010 DLI 02/71. USGPO, Washington DC, 96p.
Ungar, E. E., W. N. Patterson, C. L. Dym, and C. L. Galaitsis. 1975.
Noise control in surface mining facilities: Chutes and screens.
Prepared for US Bureau of Mines, Washington DC, by Bolt Beranek
and Newman, Inc., Cambridge'MA, 152p.
135
-------
University of Oklahoma, Science and Public Policy Program. 1975.
Energy alternatives: A comparative analysis. GPO 041-011-
00025-4, Washington DC.
US Bureau of Mines. 1967. Surface mining and our environment. US
Department of the Interior, USGPO, Washington DC, 127p.
US Bureau of Mines. 1973. Methods and costs of coal refuse disposal
and reclamation. Bureau of Mines Inf. Circ. 8576, Washington DC,
36p.
US Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh Mining and Safety Research Center.
1975. Noise control; proceedings of Bureau of Mines Technology
Transfer Seminar, Pittsburgh PA. Bureau of Mines Information
Circular 8686, Pittsburgh PA, 113p.
US Bureau of Mines, Pittsburgh Mining and Safety Research Center.
1976. Mining research review, an annual review of selected
mining research activities of the Bureau of Mines. Bureau of
Mines Special Publication 5-76. Pittsburgh PA, 66p.
US Bureau of Mines. 1978. Mineral commodity summaries. US Dept.
of the Interior, Washington DC, p. 40-41.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
1971a. The issues related to surface mining, 92nd Congress,
1st Session. Committee print serial 92-10. USGPO, Washington
DC, 255p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
1971b. Legislative proposals concerning surface mining of coal,
92nd Congress, 1st Session. Committee print. USGPO, Washington
DC, 25p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
1972a. Hearings, 92nd Congress, 1st Session, S. 1498, S. 2455,
and S. 2777, pending surface mining legislation, Parts 1 and 2.
USGPO, Washington DC, 882p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
1972b. Hearings (24 February 1972) 92nd Congress, 1st Session,
pursuant to S. Res. 45, a National fuels and energy policy study,
on S. 2777 and S. 3000, Part 3. USGPO, Washington DC, p. 883-1173.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
1973a. Regulation of surface mining operations, hearings (13-16
March 1973), 93rd Congress, 1st Session, on S. 425 (and) S. 923,
Parts 1 and 2. USGPO, Washington DC, l,410p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Sub-
committee on Minerals, Materials, and Fuels. 1973b. Coal surface
mining and reclamation, hearings (30 April 1973). USGPO,
Washington DC, 85p.
136
-------
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. 1973c.
Coal surface mining and reclamation, 93rd Congress, 1st Session.
ommittee print serial 93-8 (92-43). USGPO, Washington DC, 143p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. 1973d.
Factors affecting the use of coal in present and future energy
markets, 93rd Congress, 1st Session. Committee print serial 93-9
(93-44) USGPO, Washington DC, 43p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. 1973e.
Surface Mining Reclamation Act of 1972, report to accompany S. 425,
93rd Congress, 1st Session. Senate report 93-402. USGPO,
Washington DC, 94p.
US Congress, Senate, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. 1974.
Energy policy papers. Senate Committee print serial 93-43 (92-78).
Printed at the request of Henry M. Jackson, Chairman, pursuant to
S. Res. 45, The National Fuels and Energy Policy Study. USGPO,
Washington DC, 353p.
US Congress, House, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Sub-
committee on Mines and Mining. 1971. Interior Department mines
and mining orientation briefing (19 May 1971), 92nd Congress,
1st Session. USGPO, Washington DC, 132p.
US Congress, House, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Sub-
committee on Mines and Mining. 1972. Regulation of strip mining,
hearings (20 September - 30 November 1971), 92nd Congress, 1st
Session, on H. R. 60 and related bills. USGPO, Washington DC, 890p.
US Department of Agriculture. 1968. Restoring surface-mined land.
USDA Misc. Publ. 1082. Washington DC, 18p.
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1972. National
engineering handbook, section 4, hydrology. US Government Printing
Office, Washington DC, variously paged.
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Stan-
dards and specifications for soil erosion and sediment control
in developing areas. College Park MD, variously paged.
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, Morgantown
Districti 1974. Erosion and sediment control handbook for urban
areas. Morgantown WV, 154p. with appendices A-D.
US Department of Energy Leasing Policy Development Office. 1978.
Federal coal leasing and 1985 and 1990 coal production forecasts.
139p.
US Department of the Interior. 1970. Hydrologic influences of strip
mining. US Geological Survey Professional Paper 427, Reston VA.
137
-------
US Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement. 1978a. Permanent regulatory program imple-
menting section 501(b) of the surface mining control and
reclamation act of 1977: Draft environmental statement.
Washington DC, 296p.
US Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement. 1978b. Permanent regulatory program of the
surface mining control and reclamation act of 1977: Draft
regulatory analysis. US Government Printing Office, Washington
DC, 137p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1971. Mine spoil potentials
for water quality and controlled erosion. Water Pollution
Control Research Series Project 14010 EJE 12/71, 207p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1973. Processes, procedures,
and methods to control pollution from mining activities.
EPA-430/9-73-011. USGPO, Washington DC, 390p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Polluted groundwater:
Estimating the effects of man's activities. EPA-680/4-74-002.
Washington DC, 99p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1975a. Environmental impact
assessment guidelines for selected new source industries.
Office of Federal Activities, Washington DC, variously paged.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1975b. Review of mining and
mining-related environmental impact statements (surface coal
mining section draft). Office of Federal Activities,
Washington DC, typescript, 153p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1975c. Criteria for developing
pollution abatement programs for inactive and abandoned mine
sites. EPA-440/9-75-008. Washington DC,.467p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976a. Development document
for interim fdnal effluent limitations guidelines and new
source performance standards for the coal mining point source
category. Washington DC, 288p. EPA-440/1-76/057-a.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976b. Quality criteria for
water. Washington DC, 256p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976c. Environmental assessment
of surface mining methods: head-of-hollow fill and mountaintop
removal. Monthly Progress Report, 31 July 1976. Region III,
Philadelphia PA, 17p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1976d. Erosion and sediment
control, surface mining in the eastern United States, planning
and design. EPA-625/3-76-006. USGPO Region 5-11, 238p.
138
-------
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1977a. Annotated bibliography
for water quality mgmt. Fourth edition. Water Planning Division,
Washington DC, 59p.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1977b. Nonpoint source control
guidance, hydrologic modifications. Office of Water Planning
and Standards. Washington DC, variously paged.
US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1977. 1975 National survey of hunting,
fishing, and wildlife-associated recreation. Washington DC, 99p.
US Geological Survey and the Bureau of Land Management. 1976. Surface
management of Federal coal resources (43 CFR 3041) and coal mining
operating regulations (30 CFR 211), final environmental statement.
US Department of the Interior, Washington DC, variously paged,
676p.
US Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry. 1976. Proceedings of
a national conference on health, environmental effects, and
control technology of energy use. US Environmental Protectio'n
Agency, Office of Research and Development. Report 600/7-76-002,
Washington DC, 340p.
van der Leeden, F. 1973. Groundwater pollution features of Federal
and state statutes and regulations. US-EPA, Office of Research
and Development, Washington DC, EPA-600/4-73-001a, 88p.
Van Lear, David H. 1971. Effects of spoil texture on growth of
K-31 tall fescue. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note NE-141, Northeast.
For. Exp. Stn., Upper Darby PA, 7p.
Vimmerstedt, J. P., and P. H. Struthers. 1968. Influence of time
and precipitation on chemical composition of spoil drainage.
jn Second Symposium on Coal Mine Drainage Research, Ohio River
Valley Sanitation Commission, Cincinnati OH, p. 152-163.
Vimmerstedt, John P., and J. H. Finney. 1973. Impact of earthworm
introduction on litter burial and nutrient distribution in Ohio
strip-mine spoil banks. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 37(3): 388-391.
Vimmerstadt, J. P., J. H. Finney, and P. Sutton. 1973. Effect of
strip mining on water quality. Ohio State University Water
Resources Center, Columbus OH, 64p.
Vir Kathuria, D., M. A. Nawrocki, and B. C. Becker. 1976. Effec-
tiveness of surface mine sedimentation ponds. US-EPA, Office
of Research and Development, Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati OH, EPA-600/2-76-117, lOOp.
Vogel, Willis G. 1970. Weeping lovegrass for vegetating strip-mine
spoils in Appalachia. In Proceedings of the First Weeping Lovegrass
Symp. Samuel Roberts Noble Found., Ardmore OK, P. 152-162.
139
-------
Vogel, Willis G. 1971. Needs in revegetation research on surface-
mined lands. In Proceedings of the W. Va. Univ. Symp. Revegetation
and Economic Use of Surface-Mine Refuse, Morgantown WV, p. 14-18.
Vogel, Willis G. 1973. The effect of herbaceous vegetation on survival
and growth of trees planted on coal-mine spoils. In Proceedings
of the Res. and Appl. Tech. Symp. on Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal
Res., Inc., Monroeville PA, p. 197-207.
Vogel, W. G. 1974. All season seeding of herbaceous vegetation for
cover on Appalachian strip-mine spoils. In Proceedings of the
Second Research & Applied Technology Symposium on Mined-Land
Reclamation. National Coal Assoc., Washington DC, p. 175-188.
Vogel, W. G. 1975. Requirements and use of fertilizer, lime, and
mulch for vegetating acid mine spoils. In Proceedings of the
Third Surface Mining and Reclamation Symposium, National Coal
Association, Washington DC, 2: 152-170.
Vogel, W. G., and W. A. Berg. 1968. Grasses and legumes for cover
on acid strip-mine spoils. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation .
23(3): 89-91.
Vogel, Willis G., and W. A. Berg. 1973. Fertilizer and herbaceous
cover influence establishment of direct-seeded black locust on
coal-mine spoils. In Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land.
Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY, 2: 189-198.
Vohs, Paul, Jr., and D. E. Birkenholz. 1962. Response of bobwhite
quail to management on some Illinois strip-mined lands. Trans.
111. State Acad. Sci. 55(1): 13-19.
Vories, Kimery C. 1976. Reclamation of western surface-mined lands:
Workshop proceedings March 1-3, 1976. Ecology Consultants,
Inc., 152p.
Wager, W. D., et al. 1969. Comparative chronic inhalation toxicity
of beryllium ores, bertrandite, and beryl, with production of
pulmonary tumors by beryllium. Toxicology and Applied
Pharmacology 15:10.
Waldbott, G. L. 1973. Health effects of environmental pollutants.
C. V. Mosby Company.
Warner, Don L. 1974. Rationale and methodology for monitoring
groundwater polluted by mining activities. Prepared for US
Environmental Protection Agency by General Electric Co., Santa
Barbara CA. EPA-680/4-74-003, 68 01 0759, 85p.
Warner, Richard W. 1973. Acid coal mine drainage effects on aquatic i
life (in Roaring Creek WV). In Ecology and Reclamation of
Devastated Land. Gordon and Breach Sci. Publ., New York NY,
1:227-237.
140
-------
Weaver, Ralph H. 1968. Ecological study of the effects of strip
mining on the microbiology of streams. Prepared for US Office
of Water Resources Research, Washington DC, by Kentucky Water
Resources Inst., Lexington KY, 41p.
Weigle, Weldon K. 1965. Designing coal-haul roads for good drainage.
USDA For. Serv., Cent. States For. Exp. Stn. Columbus OH, 23p.
Weigle, Weldon K. 1966. Erosion from abandoned coal-haul roads.
Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 21(3): 42.
Weigle, Weldon K., and G. P. Williams. 1968. Match additive to soil
types for best stabilization. Rural and Urban Roads, June 1968,
p. 24-25.
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources. 1975. Drainage hand-
book for surface mining. Division of Planning and Development,
and Division of Reclamation in cooperation with Soil Conservation
Service, USDA, Charleston WV, variously paged, 136p.
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources. 1976. Annual inter-
agency evaluation of surface mine reclamation in West Virginia.
Division of Reclamation, Charleston WV, 73p.
Wickstrom, G. 1972. Arsenic in the ecosystem of man. Work-
Environment Health 9(1):2-8.
Williams, George P., Jr. 1973. Changed spoil dump shape increases
stability on contour strip mines. In Proceedings of the Res. and
Appl. Tech. Symp. on Mined Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc.,
Monroeville PA, p. 243-249.
Wilmoth, R. C. 1973. Applications of reverse osmosis to acid mine
drainage treatment. US Environmental Protection Agency, Office
of Research and Development, National Environmental Research Center,
Cincinnati OH, Environmental Protection Technology Series
EPA-670/2-73-100, 157p.
Wilmoth, R. C. 1977. Limestone and lime neutralization of ferrous
iron acid mine drainage. US-EPA, Office of Research and Develop-
ment, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati OH,
Environmental Protection Technology Series EPA-600/2-77-101, 94p.
Wilmoth, Roger C., and R. D. Hill. 1970. Neutralization of high
ferric iron acid mine drainage. US Department of the Interior,
Federal Water Quality Administration, Robert A Taft Research
Center. Water Pollution Control Research Series 14010 ETV 08/70.
USGPO, Washington DC, 42p.
Wilmoth, R. D., and J. L. Kennedy. 1976. Combination limestone-
lime treatment of acid mine drainage. US-EPA, Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory, Crown Mine Drainage Control
Field Site, Rivesville WV, 37p.
141
-------
Wilmoth, R. C., and J. L. Kennedy, [n.d.]. Treatment options for
acid mine drainage control. US-EPA, Office of Research and
Development, Industrila Environmental Research Laboratory,
Cincinnati OH, unpaged.
Wilmoth, R. C., D. G. Mason, and H. Gupta. 1972. Treatment of
ferrous iron acid mine drainage by reverse osmosis. US-EPA,
Norton Mine Drainage Field Site, Norton WV, and Rex Chainbelt,
Inc., Milwaukee WI, unpaged.
Wilmoth, R. C., and R. B. Scott. 1974. Use of coal mine refuse and
fly ash as a road base material. US-EPA, National Environmental
Research Center, Industrial Waste Treatment Research Laboratory,
Mining Pollution Control Branch, Crown Field Site, Rivesville WV,
1BB040 10/74B, unpaged.
Wilmoth, R. C., and R. B. Scott, [n.d.]. Water recovery from acid
mine drainage. US-EPA, Cincinnati OH, 5p.
Wilmoth, R. C., R. B. Scott, and E. F. Harris. 1977. Application of
ion exchange to acid mine drainage treatment. US-EPA, Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati OH, unpaged.
Wilmoth, R. C., R. B. Scott, and J. L. Kennedy. 1977. Investigation
of ion exchange treatment of acid mine drainage. US-EPA, Indus-
trial Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati OH, 22p.
Woodley, R. A., and S. L. Moore. 1967. Pollution control in mining
and processing of Indiana coal. Water Pollution Control
Federation Journal 39(1): 41-49.
Young, G. K., R. S. Taylor, and J. S. Selekof. 1973. Simulation and
optimization of acid mine drainage abatement alternatives. Pre-
pared for the US Army Corps of Engineers by Water Resources
Engineers, Inc., Springfield VA.
Zande, Richard D. 1973. Friendship park—one use of reclaimed strip-
mine land. In Proceedings of the Res. and Appl. Tech. Symp. on
Mined-Land Reclam. Bitum. Coal Res., Inc., Monroeville PA,
p. 294-303.
Zaval, Frank J., and J. D. Robins. 1972. Revegetation augmentation by
use of treated active surface mine drainage. A feasibility study.
Prepared for Kentucky Dept. for Natural Resources and US-EPA by
NUS Corp., Cyrus W. Rice Divn., Pittsburgh PA, 155p.
Zawirsica, B., and K. Medras. 1968. Tumors and disorders in the
porphyrin metabolism In rats with chronic experimental lead
poisoning. I: Morphological studies. ZBL ablg. Path. Anat. 3:1.
Zollinger, H. U. 1953. Druch Chronische BsLeiveriguflung Erzeugte
Nierenadenome und Carcinonebei ralten und ihre Bezieghungen Zu
den Entspreshenden Neubilkungen des Menschen. Virchaus. Arch.
Path Anat. 323:694.
142
-------
TOPICS
Bibliographies
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1964-1973
Bowden 1961
Caldwell 1974
Czapowskyj 1976
Frawley 1971
Funk 1962
Gleason and Russell 1976
Glenn-Lewin and others 1976
Johnson 1977
Kieffer 1972
Munn 1973
National Technical Information Service 1976a and b
Office of Water Resources Research 1975
Ringe 1973
US Environmental Protection Agency 1977a
Coal
American Society for Testing and Materials 1978
Bitler and Martin 1977
Brant and DeLong 1960
Gluskoter and others 1977
Hoffman and others 1972
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976a
Thompson and York 1975
US Bureau of Mines 1978
Coal Industry
Coal Task Group, National Petroleum Council 1973
Dames and Moore 1976
Division of Fuels Data and Division of Coal 1977
Evans and Bitler 1976
Fay and Glenn-Lewin 1976
Federal Industry Administration 1975
Feguson and others 1974
Foreman 1975
Gordon 1976
Jarrett 1968
Kirchgessner 1977
Mining Information Services 1977
Murray 1978
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research 1976a
Paone and others 1974
Ramani and others 1974
Spore and others 1975
University of Oklahoma 1975
US Bureau of Mines 1978
143
-------
Coal Industry (cont'd)
US Department of Energy 1978
US Department of the Interior 1978a and b
US Geological Survey and the Bureau of Land Management 1976
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1976
General Guidance
Deely 1977
Itnhoff and others 1976
Kennedy and Wilmoth n.d.
King 1975
Kirchgessner 1977
National Park Service 1973
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service 1972
US Environmental Protection Agency 1975a, 1975b, 1976a, and 1977b
Impacts
Anderson and others 1977
Bay 1976
Blevins and others 1977
Boccardy and Spaulding 1968
Bransen and Batch 1972 and 1974
Brant 1964
Brown and others 1977
Cavanaugh and others 1975
Cederstrom 1971
Cook 1969
Cooper 1965
Curtis 1973a and 1974
Czapowskyj 1976
Dickerson and Sopper 1973
D'ltri 1972
Doyle 1976
Down and Stocks 1978
Dvorak and others 1977
Dyer and Curtis 1977
Emrich and Merritt 1969
Fay and Glenn-Lewin 1976
Fisser and Ries 1975
Foreman 1975
Fowler and Peery 1973
Gammon 1970
Gasper 1976
Oilman and Ruckerbauer 1963
Glover 1976
Good and others 1970
Goodman and Bray 1975
Grim and Hill 1974
Haigh 1976
Hanna 1964
144
-------
Impacts (Cont'd)
Herricks and Cairns 1974
Herricks and others 1975
Hill 1960 and 1976
Hittman Associates, Inc. 1975a, b, c, and 1976
Holland 1973
Hueper 1961
Hutnik and Davis 1973
Keller and Silvester 1974
Kimball 1975
King 1975
Kinney 1964
Kipling and Waterhouse 1967
Lee and Fraumeni 1969
Leet 1971
Lohman 1972
Mallary and Carlozzi 1976
Minear and others 1976 and 1977
Moore and others 1977
Murray 1978
Nicholls and others 1971
Norman 1975
Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry 1976
Ohio State University Research Foundation 1968
Pegg 1968
Pegg and Jenkins 1976
Pennington 1975
Peterson and Monk 1967
Potts 1965
Reeves and others 1967
Rehder 1972 and 1973
Schesinger and Daetz 1975
Skelly and Loy 1975
Smith and others 1972, 1973, and 1976
Smith 1972
Smith and Frey 1971
Society for American Archaeology n.d.
Spaulding and Ogden 1968
Stokinger 1963
Striffler 1973
Sunderman and Donnelly 1965
Sykora and others 1972 and 1975
Tschantz 1975
Tschantz and Minear 1975
US Bureau of Mines 1967
US Environmental Protection Agency 1973, 1974, 1975a, and 1976c
Vohs and Birkenholz 1962
Wager 1969
Waldbott 1973
Warner 1973
Weaver 1968
145
-------
Impacts (Cont'd)
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1976
Wicks trom 1972
Zawirsica and Medras 1968
Zollinger 1953
Mining Systems
Allen 1973
Appalachian Regional Commission 1970
Gary 1971
Chironis 1978
Cook and Kelly 1976
Council on Environmental Quality 1973
Dames and Moore 1976
Doyle 1976
Greene and Raney 1974
Grim 1975
Grim and Hill 1974
Gunnett 1975
Habeck 1975
Haley 1974
Heine and Guckert 1973
Hittman Associates 1975a, 1975b, and 1976a
Kentucky Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection 1977
Martin and Harris 1977
Moomau and others 1974
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1973, 1974,
1975, and 1976b
Otte and Boehlje 1975
PD-NCB Consultants Ltd. and Dames and Moore 1976
Pennsylvania State University 1973
Ramani and others 1974
Ramani and Clar 1978
Richardson and Dougherty 1976
Saperstein 1971
Saperstein and1 Secor 1973
Skelly and Loy 1975
Stefanko and others 1973
Tennyson 1962
Theodore Barry and Associates 1975
Ungar and others 1975
US Bureau of Mines 1975
US Environmental Protection Agency 1976c
Miscellaneous
Argonne National Laboratory 1976
Brodine 1973
Chironis 1978
Council on Environmental Quality 1973
Dames and Moore 1976
146
-------
Miscellaneous (Cont'd)
Deely 1977
Doyle 1976
Doyle and others 1974
Fay and Glenn-Lewin 1976
Foreman and McLean 1973
Greenbaum and Harvey 1974
Grim and Hill 1974
Higgins 1973
Lohman 1972
Martin and Harris 1977
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. 1974
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1974
Nature Conservancy n.d.
Pittsburgh Mining and Safety Research Center 1976
Ramani and Clar 1978
Rehder 1972 and 1973
Richardson and Dougherty 1976
Samuel and others 1978
Society for American Archaeology n.d.
Spore 1972a and b
Spore and others 1975
University of Oklahoma 1975
US Bureau of Mines 1967 and 1976
US Congress, Senate, 1971a, b; 1972a, b; 1973a, b, c, d, e; 1974
US Congress, House 1971 and 1972
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service 1972
US Department of the Interior 1978a and b
US Environmental Protection Agency 1973 and 1975c
US Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry 1976
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1975
Woodley and Moore 1967
Overburden Quality
Caruccio 1973
Caruccio and others 1977
Davidson 1977
Deely and Borden 1973
Division of Plant Sciences 1971
Drnevich 1976
Grube and others 1973 and 1974
Hounslow 1978
Krause 1973
Neckers and Walker 1951
Smith and others 1974 and 1976
US Environmental Protection Agency 1971
Van Lear 1971
147
-------
Reclamation
Adams and others 1971 and 1972
Aguar 1971
Aha-rah and Hartman 1973
Allen and Marquis 1970
Allen and Plass n.d.
Andreuzzi 1976
Augustine 1966
Ballou 1976
Barnhisel 1977
Bay 1976
Beattie 1957
Bengtson, Allen, Hays, and Zarber 1973
Bengtson, Mays, and Allen 1973
Bengtson, Mays, and Zarber 1971
Beng 1961, 1965, 1969, and 1973
Berg and Barrau 1972
Berg and May 1969
Berg and Vogel 1968 and 1973
Beyer and Hutnik 1969
Boesch 1974
Bondurant 1971
Breeding 1961
Brenner and others 1975
Brown 1973
Capp and Gilmore 1973
Gary 1971
Coates 1973
Cole and others 1976
Curtis 1973b
Czapowskyj 1973a, 1973b, and 1976
Czapowskyj and Sowa 1976
Darden 1971
Davidson 1977
Deely and Borden 1973
Dickerson and Sopper 1973
Dougherty and Holzen 1976a and b
Economic Development Council of Northeastern Pennsylvania 1977
Edgerton and Sopper 1974
Evans and Bitler 1976
Everett and others 1974
Feiss 1965
Fenton 1973
Fisser and Ries 1975
Fowler and Peery 1973
Funk 1973
Glover 1976
Goldberg and Power 1972
Goodman and Bray 1975
Grandt 1974
Greenbaum and Harvey 1974
Greene and Roney 1974
Griffith and others 1966
148,
-------
Reclamation (Cont'd)
Grim and Hill 1974
Hamilton 1974
Higgins 1973
Hill 1971 and 1976
Holland 1973
Hunt and Sopper 1973
Hutnik and Davis 1973
Hyslop 1964
Irahoff and others 1976
Jacoby 1969
Jarrett 1968
Jones and others 1973 and 1975
Kentucky Department for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection
and others 1975a and 1975b
Kimball 1975
Mallary and Carlozzi 1976
McGuire 1977
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1973, 1974,
1975, and 1976b
Ohio State University Research Foundation 1968
Otte and Boehlje 1975
Peterson and Gschwind 1973
Plass 1975 and 1977
Plass and Burton 1967
Plass and Capp 1974
Redente and others 1976
Riley 1972 and 1973
Saperstein 1971
Saperstein and Secor 1973
Scott 1976
Skelly and Loy
Sopper and others 1974 and 1975
Sutton 1973a and b
Tennyson 1962
US Bureau of Mines 1973
US Department of Agriculture 1968
Van Lear 1971
Vimmerstedt and Struthers 1968
Vimmerstedt and Finney 1973
Vogel 1970, 1971, 1973, 1974, and 1975
Vogel and Berg 1968 and 1973
Vories 1976
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1975
Zande 1973
Zaval and Robins 1972
Socioeconomic Infrastructure
A. W. Martin Associates, Inc. 1975
Ballou 1976
Bohm and others 1973
Economic Development Council of Northeastern Pennsylvania 1977
149'
-------
Socioeconomic Infrastructure (Cont'd)
E. S. Preston And Associates, Ltd. 1967
Fowler and Peery 1973
Higglns 1973
Jarrett 1968
Moore and others 1977
Zonde 1973
Spil Protection
Allen and Curtis 1975
Augustine 1966
Bamhisel and Rotrotnel 1974
Barnhisel 1977
Bartee 1964
Beyer and Hutnik 1969
Brenner and others 1975
Brown 1973
Capp and others 1975
Curtis 1973b and 1974
Czapowskyj 1973a
Davidson 1977
Grier and others 1976
Hill 1976
Hoffman and others 1964
Kimball 1975
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service 1975
US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service
US Environmental Protection Agency 1973 and 1976d
Vogel 1970, 1974 and 1975
Vogel and Berg 1968 and 1973
Weigle 1966
Weigle and Williams 1968
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1975
Williams 1973
Terrestrial Biota
Conant 1975
Fowells 1965
Goodwin and Niering 1975
Kuchler n.d.
Mumford and Bramble 1973
National Park Service 1975
Nature Conservancy n.d.
Samuel and others 1978
Sanderson 1977
US Fish and Wildlife Service 1977
Vohs and Birkenholz 1962
150
-------
Transport
American Public Works Association 1973
Grier and others 1976
Martin and Harris 1977
Weigle 1965 and 1966
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1975
Treatment
Applied Science Laboratories, Inc. 1971
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1968, 1970, and 1971
Continental Oil Company 1971
Corbitt 1971
Doyle and others 1974
Grube and Wilmoth 1976
Gulf Environmental Systems Company 197
Herricks and Cairns 1974
Herricks and others 1975
Hill 1974 and 1976
Hill and Wilmoth 1971
Hill and others 1971
Horizons Incorporated 1970
Kathuria and others 1976
Kennedy 1973
Kimball 1974a, 1974b, and 1976
Lovell 1973
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. 19/3 ' '
Mineral Resources Research Center 1971
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976c and 1977
Rex Chainbelt, Inc. 1970 and 1972
Strohl and Hern 1976
Tyco Laboratories, Inc. 1971
US Environmental Protection Agency 1973 and 1975c
Vir Kathuria and others 1976
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources 1975
Wilmoth 1973 and 1977
Wilmoth and Hill 1970
Wilmoth and Kennedy 1976 and n.d.
Wilmoth and others 1972
Wilmoth and Scott n.d.
Wilmoth, Scott, and Harris 1977
Wilmoth, Scott, and Kennedy 1977
Woodley and Moore 1967
Young and others 1973
Waste Disposal
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1971
Capp and Gilmore 1973
Capp and others 1975
Czapowskyj 1973b
151
-------
Waste Disposal (Cont'd)
Czapowskyj and Sowa 1976
Dickerson and Sopper 1973
Dougherty and Holzen 1976
Edgerton and Sopper 1974
Grube and Wilmoth 1976
Hill and Montague 1976
Hunt and Sopper 1973
Martin 1974
Martin and others n.d.
Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene 1971
Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration 1975.
Peterson and Monk 1967
Peterson and Gschwind 1973
Plass and Capp 1974
Sopper and others 1975
Sopper and others 1974
US Bureau of Mines 1973
Wilmoth and Scott 1974
Wastewater Control
Brackenrich 1974
Corbitt 1971
Gong and Longmuir 1974
Grier and others 1976
Herricks and others 1975
Kathuria and others 1976
Kimball 1974a, 1974b, and 1976
Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. 1973
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976c and 1977
Ramsey 1970
US Environmental Protection Agency 1973
Woodley and Moore 1967
Young and others 1973
Water Quality
Ahmad 1971
Akamatsu 1977
Aleem 1974
Appalachian Regional Commission 1969
Baker and Wilshire 1968 and 1973
Berg and May 1969
Beyer and Hutnik 1969
Bituminous Coal Research
Blevins and others 1970
Boccardy and Spaulding 1968
Brant and Moulton 1960
Cook 1969
Cooper 1975
Curtis 1974
Emrich and Merritt 1969
Foreman and McLean 1973
152
-------
Water Quality (Cont'd)
^Gammon 1970
Gang and Langmuir 1974
Gasper 1976
Good and others 1970
Grimm and Hill 1974
Herricks and Cairns 1974
Herricks and others 1975
Hill 1960, 1970, 1973, and 1976
Horizons Incorporated 1970
Hounslow and others 1978
Keller and Silvester 1974
Kimball 1974a and b
Kinney 1964
Martin 1976
Martin and others n.d.
McKee and Wolf 1963
National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. 1976c and 1977
NUS Corporation 1971
Pegg 1968
Pegg and Jenkins 1976
Pennington 1975
Pettyjohn 1975
Ramsey 1970
Smith and others 1972 and 1973
Smith and Sykora 1976
Striffler 1973
Thompson and Wilson 1975
US Environmental Protection Agency 1973 and 1976b
van der Leeden 1973
Vimmerstedt and others 1973
Warner 1974
Woodley and Moore 1967
Young and others 1973
Zaval and Robins 1972
153
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-13016-79-005
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines
for New Source Surface Coal Mines
S. REPORT DATE
December 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Alfred M. Hirgch; David H. Dike; William C. Ressler;
D. Keith Whitenight
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
WAPORA Inc.
6900 Wisconsin Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20015
1O. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-4157, Task 003d
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Environmental Review
401 MStreet, S. W.
Washington, D. C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/100/02
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
EPA Task Officer - Frank Rusincovitch - (202) 755-9368
16. ABSTRACT
The report provides guidance for evaluating the environmental impacts of a proposed
surface coal mine requiring a new source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to discharge
wastewater to the navigable waters of the U.S. The guidelines are intended to
assist in the identification of potential impacts, and the information requirements
for evaluating such impacts, in an Environmental Information Document (EID). An
EID is a document prepared for EPA by a new source permit applicant; it is issued
by the Agency to determine if the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) is warranted for the proposed facility.
The report includes guidance on (1) identification of potential wastewater
effluents, air emissions, and solid wastes from pulp and paper mills, (2) assessment
of the impacts of new facilities on the quality of the environment, (3) state-of-the-
art technology for in-process and end-of-process control of waste streams, (4)
evaluation of alternatives, and (5) environmental regulations that apply to the
industry. In addition, the guidelines include an "overview" chapter that
gives a general description of the surface coal mining industry, significant
^°^1ai:ed "i^u1** and/fcent trends in location, raw materials, processes,
control, and the demand for industry output.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Coal Mining
Water Pollution
Environmental Impact
Assessment
081
13 B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
161
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage/
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
*U.& GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1980 311-132/13 1-3
------- |