Coal Diver
Everything you wanted to know about coal, but were afraid to ask.
This is a text-only version of the document
"OSM Leaked Proposed Stream Rule Changes - Ch 3.9-10 - 2011".
To see the original version of the document
click
here.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
CHAPTER 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT......................................................................... 3-1 3.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Mineral Resources and Mining ............................................................................ 3-1 3.2 Geology and Seismicity ....................................................................................... 3-1 3.3 Soils...................................................................................................................... 3-1 Geomorphology AND Fluvial Processes ............................................................. 3-1 3.4 3.5 Topography .......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.6 Surface Water Hydrology .................................................................................... 3-1 Groundwater Hydrology ...................................................................................... 3-1 3.7 3.8 Water Resources .................................................................................................. 3-1 3.9 Radionuclide and Chemical Contaminant Transport ........................................... 3-2 3.9.1Background Information .............................................................................. 3-2 3.9.1.1 Formation of Coal Mine Drainage ..................................... 3-2 Surface Water Parameters Typically Affected by 3.9.1.2 Coal Mine Drainage ........................................................... 3-4 3.9.1.3 Summary of Recent Research on Coal Mining and Surface Water Quality ........................................................ 3-7 3.9.1.4 Relevant Regulations and Criteria.................................... 3-10 Radionuclides in Coal ...................................................... 3-13 3.9.1.5 3.9.2Appalachian Basin Water Quality Baseline ............................................... 3-14 3.9.3Colorado Plateau Water Quality Baseline ................................................. 3-17 3.9.4Gulf Region Water Quality Baseline ......................................................... 3-18 3.9.5Illinois Basin Water Quality Baseline........................................................ 3-19 3.9.6Northern Rocky Mountains & Great Plains Water Quality Baseline ........ 3-21 3.9.7Northwest Water Quality Baseline ............................................................ 3-24 3.9.8Other Western Interior Water Quality Baseline......................................... 3-25 3.10 Air Quality, Meteorology, and Noise ................................................................ 3-27 3.10.0Background .............................................................................................. 3-27 3.10.1Appalachian Basin ................................................................................... 3-29 3.10.1.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-29 3.10.1.2 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-34 3.10.1.3 Noise................................................................................. 3-34 3.10.2Colorado Plateau ...................................................................................... 3-34 3.10.2.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-34 3.10.2.2 Sources of Air Emissions ................................................. 3-37 3.10.2.3 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-37
For Official Use Only – Deliberative Process Materials FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES i
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only – Deliberative Process Materials FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
3.10.2.4 Noise................................................................................. 3-37 3.10.3Gulf Region .............................................................................................. 3-38 3.10.3.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-38 3.10.3.2 Sources of Air Emissions ................................................. 3-40 3.10.3.3 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-40 3.10.3.4 Noise................................................................................. 3-40 3.10.4Illinois Basin ............................................................................................ 3-40 3.10.4.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-40 3.10.4.2 Sources of Air Emissions ................................................. 3-44 3.10.4.3 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-44 3.10.4.4 Noise................................................................................. 3-44 3.10.5Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains .......................................... 3-44 3.10.5.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-44 3.10.5.2 Sources of Air Emissions ................................................. 3-49 3.10.5.3 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-49 3.10.5.4 Noise................................................................................. 3-50 3.10.6Northwest Region .................................................................................... 3-50 3.10.6.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-50 3.10.6.2 Sources of Air Emissions ................................................. 3-51 3.10.6.3 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-52 3.10.6.4 Noise................................................................................. 3-52 3.10.7Other Western Interior ............................................................................. 3-52 3.10.7.1 Regional Air Quality ........................................................ 3-52 3.10.7.2 Sources of Air Emissions ................................................. 3-54 3.10.7.3 Regional Meteorology ...................................................... 3-54 3.10.7.4 Noise................................................................................. 3-54
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 3.9-1 National (USEPA 2009) Water Quality Criteria for Parameters Often Affected by Surface Coal Mining Based on Literature ................................................................................. 3-10 Table 3.9-2 Stream Miles Impaired Due to Mining .............................................................. 3-16
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 3.9-1 Mechanism of Pyrite Oxidation (after Snoeyink and Jenkins 1980).................... 3-3 Figure 3.9-2 Appalachian Basin Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ............................... 3-15 Figure 3.9-3 Colorado Plateau Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ................................ 3-18 Figure 3.9-4 Gulf Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ...................................................... 3-19
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
ii
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only – Deliberative Process Materials FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Figure 3.9-5 Illinois Basin Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ........................................ 3-20 Figure 3.9-6 Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ............................................................................................................................ 3-23 Figure 3.9-7 Northwest Region (Excluding Alaska) 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ............. 3-25 Figure 3.9-8 Other Western Interior Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies ........................ 3-26 Figure 3.10-1 Figure 3.10-2 Figure 3.10-3 Figure 3.10-4 Figure 3.10-5 Figure 3.10-6 Figure 3.10-7 Region Figure 3.10-8 Region Figure 3.10-9 Figure 3.10-10 Nonattainment Areas in the Appalachian Basin Coal Region ............... 3-30 Federal Class I Areas in the Appalachian Basin Coal Region .............. 3-33 Federal Class I Areas in the Colorado Plateau Coal Region ............... 3-36 Federal Class I Areas in the Gulf Region Coal Region ......................... 3-39 Nonattainment Areas in the Illinois Basin Coal Region ........................ 3-41 Federal Class I Areas in the Illinois Basin Coal Region ....................... 3-43 Nonattainment Areas in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains ................................................................................................................ 3-45 Federal Class I Areas in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains ................................................................................................................ 3-48 Federal Class I Areas in the Northwest Coal Region ............................ 3-51 Federal Class I Areas in the Other Western Interior Coal Region ....... 3-53
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
iii
1 2
Chapter 3 Affected Environment
3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 INTRODUCTION MINERAL RESOURCES AND MINING GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY SOILS GEOMORPHOLOGY AND FLUVIAL PROCESSES TOPOGRAPHY SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY WATER RESOURCES
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES 3-1
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
3.9
RADIONUCLIDE AND CHEMICAL CONTAMINANT TRANSPORT
This section presents background information on chemical and radionuclide transport at coal mining sites (Section 3.9.1) and current water quality impairments within the seven coal-resource regions in the United States (Sections 3.9.2 to 3.9.8). The Background Information section describes key physical and chemical transport processes, and the results of those processes, that are pertinent to all coal-producing regions. Because there is no shortage of information regarding this subject, the Background Information section may seem lengthy. The information presented is vital to planning future development of coal resources while minimizing off-site impacts, particularly to aquatic resources. Sections 3.9.2 to 3.9.8 show the occurrence of 303(d) listed impaired water bodies within the seven coal-resource regions and describe recent studies regarding the influence of coal mining on water quality for those regions for which such studies have been conducted.
3.9.1
Background Information
Coal mine drainage (CMD) is the mineral rich water that is produced from increased weathering or breaking-down of minerals in disturbed earth at a surface coal mine. This section provides an overview of the physical and chemical processes that can cause CMD; describes the surface water quality parameters that are commonly affected by CMD; provides a summary of recent CDM research; presents relevant water quality criteria; and discuses important radionuclides in coal. The information below is based on summaries of these topics presented in USEPA (2003, 2005), OSM (2008), and peer-reviewed literature. 3.9.1.1 Formation of Coal Mine Drainage
In undisturbed geologic strata, groundwater typically flows along faults, fractures, and bedding planes. Minerals associated with bedrock in groundwater flow areas have been extensively weathered over many thousands of years. During surface coal mining, however, the bedrock that is located over the coal seams is broken up into smaller rock fragments and particles. The overlying bedrock is called overburden. When the overburden is broken up into smaller rocks and particles, the minerals have more contact of to air and water. As a result, the minerals become more weathered and break down into chemical particles faster. Sulfide minerals, such as pyrite (FeS2), often are found with coal and overburden. The sulfide minerals are the primary minerals involved in the development of CMD. Oxidation of pyrite leads to the production of a hydrogen ion (H+) and release of sulfate (SO42-) and ferrous iron (Fe2+). The classic chemical reactions involved in the creation of CMD are (Snoeyink and Jenkins 1980): 4FeS2(s) + 14O2 + 4H2O = 4Fe2+ + 8H+ + 8SO424Fe2+ + 8H+ + O2 = 4Fe3+ + 2H2O (2) (1)
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-2
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
4Fe3+ + 12H20 = 4Fe(OH)3(s) + 12H+ (3)
These reactions result in pyrite being oxidized to form ferric hydroxide (FeOH3), which causes a yellow-brown discoloration of the water. The hydrogen ion reacts with calcareous (calcium rich) and silicate minerals in soil to give rise to waters that have high concentrations of major cations (e.g., calcium, magnesium, and potassium), selected metals (e.g., aluminum, manganese, selenium), hardness, and total dissolved solids (TDS). Another reaction of importance in formation of CMD is the oxidation of pyrite by ferric iron (Fe3+): FeS2(s) + 14Fe3+ + 8H20 = 15Fe2+ = 2SO42- + 16H+ (4)
Hence, once formed, ferric iron may either precipitate as Fe(OH)3(s) or oxidize more FeS2(s) to Fe2+ by reaction (4). The cyclical nature of the pyrite oxidation process is shown in Figure 3.9-1. Figure 3.9-1 Mechanism of Pyrite Oxidation (after Snoeyink and Jenkins 1980)
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 It should be noted that iron oxidation is highly pH dependent (Stumm and Morgan 1981); specifically, the oxidation rate decreases with decreasing pH. Consequently, it might be expected that the rate-limiting step in the cyclical oxidation of pyrite would be the slow oxidation of Fe2+ to Fe3+ at low pH. However, it has been shown that several microbes (e.g., Thiobacillus thiooxidans, Thiobacillus ferrooxidans, and Ferrobacillus ferrooxidans) will encourage the oxidation of Fe2+. The oxidation rate is 106 times greater in unsterilized water from acid mine drainage sites than in the same water that has been sterilized (Snoeyink and Jenkins 1980). According to Snoeyink and Jenkins (1980), once the pyrite oxidation cycle has started—that is, once a small amount of pyrite has been oxidized by oxygen (O2)—more oxygen is needed only for the microbially assisted oxidation of Fe2+ to Fe3+. Further pyrite is oxidized by Fe3+according to Equation 4.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-3
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
CDM varies widely in composition. The composition depends on the characteristics of the overburden and the reclamation practices. In general, there are two categories of CMD: acidic mine drainage (AMD) and neutral/alkaline mine drainage (NAMD) (USEPA 2003). Both types result, to some degree, from oxidation of sulfide minerals and release of acidity, iron, and sulfate. In AMD, there are far more dissolved acidic particles than alkaline particles. In many cases there are no alkaline minerals. The pH of AMD varies from 2 to 6 and acidity ranges from 0 to 1000s of mg/L (expressed in terms of CaCO3 equivalency or amount of calcium carbonate per unit volume needed to neutralize the acidity) (USEPA 2003). The high acidity is a result of elevated concentrations of hydrogen ions (H+) and dissolved iron, aluminum and manganese. These metals can hydrolyze (donate a proton [H+] from a coordinated water molecule) and release additional acidity. AMD also contains elevated levels of a variety of anions (primarily sulfate) and cations (primarily calcium and magnesium) that are the result of pyrite oxidation and subsequent neutralization and ion-exchange reactions in the overburden. In NAMD, alkalinity is equal to or exceeds mineral acidity. Since pH is circumneutral (about pH 7), mineral acidity is associated with dissolved ferrous iron and manganese only. Aluminum solubility is very low, usually less than 0.5 mg/L, at circumneutral pH. Concentrations of calcium, magnesium, sulfate, and trace metals vary considerably in NAMD, depending on whether sulfide mineral oxidation occurs prior to or after groundwater has contact with an alkaline material (USEPA 2003), but typically are elevated over background levels (Pond et al. 2008, Hartman et al. 2005, Bryant et al. 2002). Certain coal mining activities will routinely produce AMD, if CMD is produced. However, when CMD is produced from surface mining in the steep terrain of the Central Appalachian coalfields of Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia, it generally results in NAMD (Pond et al. 2008). Calcareous strata and lower concentrations of sulfur in the coal help to explain the alkaline mine drainage typical of this region. 3.9.1.2 Surface Water Parameters Typically Affected by Coal Mine Drainage
Surface water parameters typically affected by CMD include total dissolved solids (TDS), pH, alkalinity, acidity, sulfate, iron, manganese, aluminum, and total suspended solids. A discussion of these parameters as they relate to surface coal mining is presented in USEPA (2003). A summary of the information is presented here. Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) -- As indicated above, mining activities increase weathering of rocks and, as a result, increase the amount of dissolved minerals in downstream surface waters where mining occurs. Other land uses, including agriculture, silviculture, and urbanization, also are known to increase dissolved minerals in surface waters. Two parameters, specific conductance and TDS, are used to estimate the amount of dissolved (i.e., ionized) minerals in water. The specific conductance of a solution is a measure of the ability of the solution to conduct a current. It is an indication of the amount of dissolved ions in the water. Electrical current is transported through water by the movement of ions, and specific conductance increases as the amount of ions in the water increases. Specific conductance and TDS are related. There is no accepted natural range for either parameter in undisturbed waters due to their dependence on local geology and land use. However, natural or unpolluted freshwaters generally have specific
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-4
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
conductance between 20 and 500 micromhos per centimeter (μmhos/cm) and TDS between 10 and 250 milligrams per liter (mg/L) (USEPA 2003). CMD has been reported to have specific conductance in excess of 5,000 μmhos/cm (TDS of 3,000 mg/L) in some situations (Rose and Cravotta 1998) with typical values of 1000 to 3000 μmhos/cm (Pond et al. 2008, Hartman et al. 2005). pH -- A common parameter used to assess water quality and evaluate impacts of mine drainage is pH (the measure of the hydrogen ion activity {H+}in water). The pH scale is 0 to 14, but the pH of natural or unpolluted waters generally falls between 5 and 10. Typical convention is to consider a surface water sample with a pH of 7 as neutral, values less than 7 as acidic, and values greater than 7 as alkaline. This convention may lead to confusion in evaluating impacts of mining, since waters with pH in the 5 to 7 range may occur naturally. It may be more appropriate to consider pH as an indicator of aquatic health, with the optimal pH for aquatic life falling between 6 and 9 (USEPA 2003). Values of pH less than this range are suggestive of coal mine discharge-related impacts if the other indicator parameters discussed in this section also are present. Reduced pH by itself may have other causes. For example, acid precipitation may depress the pH of surface waters (Lynch et al. 2000) and pH in ice-covered lakes may become depressed as a result of carbon dioxide buildup (Kratz et al. 1987). Alkalinity – Alkalinity, usually reported as milligrams per liter (mg/L) of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) and is a collective measure of the acid neutralizing capacity of water (Stumm and Morgan 1981). Because the alkalinity of most surface waters is primarily a function of the carbonate (CO32-), bicarbonate (HCO3-), and hydroxide (OH-) content, alkalinity usually is taken as an indication of the concentration of these constituents. In some cases, measured values for alkalinity may include concentrations of borates, phosphates, silicates, and other bases, if they are present (APHA 1985). In combination with acidity, the two parameters assess the ability of water to resist pH change, which is commonly referred to as “buffering capacity.” Natural or unpolluted waters will range from near zero buffering capacity, for smaller headwater streams and poorly buffered waters, to more than several hundred mg/L buffering capacity, for larger waters and waters in predominately limestone regions (USEPA 2003). CMD can cause alkalinity to increase or decrease in the receiving stream, depending on overburden characteristics and mining and reclamation practices. Receiving water alkalinity at mining sites where AMD is present typically is very low or zero, while alkalinity at sites where NAMD occurs typically is highly elevated (Rose and Cravotta 1998). Acidity -- Acidity in natural or undisturbed waters is another property of water that reflects its ability to neutralize alkaline inputs. In most surface water bodies, acidity is a measure of the presence of carbonic acid (H2CO3), bicarbonate ion (HCO3-), and hydrogen ion (H+). This measurement is usually reported as mg/L of CaCO3. In conjunction with alkalinity, these two parameters represent the buffering capacity, as mentioned above. Acidity in CMD can be difficult to evaluate because of the potential presence of reduced iron and manganese (USEPA 2003). When evaluating mine related acidity, it is frequently necessary to measure a different type of acidity, known as hot mineral acidity, which includes the contribution of reduced forms of metals on acidity. Hot mineral acidity is also a measure of the potential of a water to depress pH from release of hydrogen ions during the hydrolysis and precipitation of soluble metals. Difficulty arises in interpreting hot mineral acidity results due to reporting differences among
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-5
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
studies (frequently reported as acidity, total acidity, mineral acidity, and total mineral acidity) and as negative or zero values where alkalinity exceeds hot mineral acidity (USEPA 2003). Hot mineral acidity reported from a number of abandoned and permitted coal mined sites ranged from zero to several thousand milligrams per liter (Rose and Cravotta, 1998). Receiving water acidity at mining sites where AMD is present typically is very high, while acidity at sites where NAMD occurs typically is very low or zero, just the opposite of alkalinity (Rose and Cravotta 1998). Sulfate -- Sulfate is a good indicator of influence by CMD, because its presence in coal mining areas generally indicates sulfide mineral oxidation (USEPA 2003). Natural freshwater can have elevated sulfate levels in the five to twenty mg/L range, depending on the influence of acidic deposition and water trapped in the pores of rock during its formation (also referred to as connate water). In addition, surface water sulfate concentrations can be increased due to a variety of sources besides coal mining. These include treated and untreated wastewater, urban and residential runoff, and agriculture (USEPA 2003). Elevated levels of sulfate in CMD can exceed several thousand mg/L and, as a result, can elevate levels in receiving waters in watersheds affected by coal mining activity (Pond et al. 2008, Rose and Cravotta 1998). Iron -- The metal most often used to evaluate impacts of coal mining on surface waters is soluble or total iron. Iron occurs in CMD largely as a result of sulfide mineral oxidation (USEPA 2003). In most natural surface waters, soluble iron is either near or less than measurable amounts because it is sparingly dissolves in water with a pH of 7. However, if anoxic conditions persist, elevated levels of soluble iron can be found in surface waters, such as in the bottom waters (hypolimnion) of a lake (Wetzel 1983) or in groundwater. The impact of soluble iron on water quality is generally related to drinking water aesthetics, taste, and odor (USEPA 2003). However, at high concentrations, exceeding 1 mg/L, iron oxidization and precipitation can result in the blanketing of a stream or lake bottom with a yellow-colored precipitate. The discoloration and iron coating on the substrate degrades habitat for aquatic insects and spawning fishes (Earle and Callaghan 1998). Iron concentrations in CMD can range from less than one to values greater than several hundred milligrams per liter (Rose and Cravotta 1998). Manganese -- In addition to iron, manganese is frequently used as an indicator of CMD impacts on surface and groundwater. Its presence results from secondary weathering of carbonate minerals (USEPA 2003). In most natural surface waters, soluble manganese is present at very low levels due to its limited solubility under oxidizing, circumneutral conditions, similar to iron. If present, manganese may persist in surface waters longer than iron, due to its slower oxidation rate. The effects of manganese are generally related to drinking water aesthetics, taste and odor (USEPA 2003). Manganese precipitation in surface waters may cause impacts to sediments similar to those caused by iron precipitation (see above). In addition, elevated concentrations of manganese (greater than 120 µg/L) may be toxic to aquatic biota (Suter and Tsao 1996). Aluminum -- Aluminum is another metal frequently found at elevated levels in AMD, but usually not in NAMD (USEPA 2003). Its presence is a direct result of secondary weathering of silicate minerals (e.g., clays). The aluminum concentration in surface water is a result of its pHdependent solubility, with solubility increasing from less than 1 mg/L at circumneutral pH to
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-6
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
greater than 100 mg/L at pH less than 3 (Stumm and Morgan 1981). In soluble form, aluminum is hydrolysable (able to donate a proton [H+] from a coordinated water molecule). In this form, it can be one of the major total “hot” acidity components in AMD, but is of little importance in NAMD, or in AMD with pH greater than approximately 5. Aluminum, when present in soluble form, may be toxic to freshwater aquatic life at concentrations as low as 87 ug/L (USEPA 2009), but its pH-dependent solubility limits the toxic conditions to water of pH less than 5.5 or greater than 9 (USEPA 2003). As an indicator of CMD, aluminum is only of value in low pH waters where other parameters are present at levels to provide sufficient evidence of mine drainage influence. In addition, because aluminum is the third most abundant element in the earth’s crust (Horne 1978), its presence in surface water, when measured as total aluminum, may be related to suspended solids from various sources, such as eroded soil and sediment carried in high flow runoff events, and bottom sediment inadvertently entrained during sample collection (USEPA 2003). Total Suspended Solids -- Total suspended solids (TSS), the measure of particulate material suspended in surface water, is frequently included in parameters used to assess CMD-related impacts. TSS can be a useful parameter to evaluate entrainment of sediment into a sample and erroneously high total iron, manganese, or aluminum results. In addition, TSS in waters is an indicator of upstream erosion, which may be the result of earth disturbances such as surface mining. However, TSS may also be increased in surface waters from anthropogenic activities associated with agriculture, silviculture, and urbanization. The effects of surface coal mining on TSS concentrations in surface waters are difficult to identify and assess because elevated TSS typically occurs only during storm runoff events, and is dependent on rainfall intensity, duration, and surface conditions at the mine preceding the rain event (USEPA 2003). 3.9.1.3 Summary of Recent Research on Coal Mining and Surface Water Quality
Recent research of the influence of coal mining on surface water quality and chemical transport have been largely focused on the primary region of mountaintop/valley fill coal mining. This type of mining is most commonly used in West Virginia and eastern Kentucky. Noteworthy studies include those by Paybins et al. (2000), Howard et al. (2001), Stauffer and Ferreri (2002), Bryant et al. (2002), Hartman et al. (2005), and Pond et al. (2008). Key findings from these studies related to surface water quality and chemical transport are discussed below. Paybins et al. (2000) – This study by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) examined water quality in the Kanawha/New River Basin in West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina in the late 1990s and made comparisons with historic data. In 1998, water samples from 57 wadeable streams were analyzed once. The samples were collected from streams in the region of the Appalachian Plateaus where coal has been mined. At least three analyses were available for 51 of the sites for 1979 to 1981, before the SMCRA affected regional water quality. Each 1998 analysis was compared to the one earlier analysis with the closest corresponding streamflow. In 33 basins that had been mined both before and after SMCRA, median concentrations of total iron and total manganese were lower in 1998 compared with 1979 to 1981 (as might be expected due to increased regulation of these substances), but sulfate and specific conductance were higher. In 1998, median total manganese, specific conductance, sulfate, and pH were higher in 37 basins mined since 1980 compared with 20 basins unmined since then; median total iron was lower in
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-7
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
the mined basins, possibly reflecting treatment of permitted discharges. Also for this USGS study, 40 samples of streambed sediment from 36 sites in the Kanawha–New River Basin were analyzed for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) during 1996 to 1998. The highest sediment PAH concentrations were measured in the Appalachian Plateaus, at some of the most heavily mined sites in the basin. Coal samples in West Virginia typically contain between 20 to 85% PAHs by mass. Coal particles are common in streams draining coal fields; however, PAHs in coal particles may not be bioavailable. Howard et al. (2001) – The study was implemented to determine if streams in mined watersheds in Kentucky were being impacted by mountaintop mining and valley fills. Eight mining-related sites were selected for this study in Breathitt, Perry, Knot, and Bell Counties; these sites were downstream of active mining, inactive mining, and/or reclaimed mining sites. Four reference sites were located in the Robinson Forest and Redbird Wildlife Management Areas located in Breathitt, Knott, Clay, and Leslie Counties, areas within which mining has not occurred. Various measures of water quality, habitat quality, and macroinvertebrate community structure were found to be related to mining activities. In particular, conductivity was considerably higher at all mined sites compared with reference sites. Conductivity showed the strongest correlation to indicators of macroinvertebrate community health. This result lead the authors to suggest that conductivity may be responsible for the impairment observed in mined areas, or that conductivity is a surrogate for other factors that were not measured. Stauffer and Ferreri (2002) – The primary objectives of this work were to characterize fish communities in the primary region of mountaintop/valley fill coal mining in West Virginia and Kentucky and evaluate the effects of these mining operations on fish populations in downstream areas, but some water chemistry analyses also were done. During 1999 and 2000, fish communities were sampled at 58 sites in West Virginia and 15 sites in Kentucky. In 2001, 16 sites were sampled in the Guyandotte River Basin in West Virginia: eight in the Mud River, five in the Big Ugly, and three in Buffalo Creek. At these 16 sites, surface water samples were collected and analyzed for aluminum, iron, arsenic, copper, selenium, and hardness. Five Mud River sites sampled in 2001 had detectable levels of selenium (9.5 to 31.5 μg/L). Notably, sites that were associated with valley fills and had detectable levels of selenium supported fewer fish species than sites solely associated with valley fills, suggesting that selenium may be impacting fish community health. Also, the total number of fish species was dramatically lower in sites classified as filled that had selenium present and sites classified as filled that did not have selenium present compared with unmined sites, suggesting that parameters other than selenium also may be impacting fish community composition downstream from valley fills. Bryant et al. (2002) -- These authors investigated stream chemistry associated with sites classified as mined, unmined, filled, and filled/residence in five watersheds in West Virginia (Clear Fork, Island Creek, Spruce Fork, Twentymile Creek, and Upper Mud River). Unmined sites were not located downstream from mines or valley fills. Mined sites were located downstream of older mines with no valley fills; filled sites were located downstream from mined sites with valley fills; and filled/residence sites were located downstream from mined, filled sites with residences in the watershed. The data from this report indicate that mountaintop/valley fill mining increases concentrations of several chemical parameters in streams. Sites in the filled category had increase concentrations of sulfate, TDS, total selenium, total calcium, total
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-8
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
magnesium, hardness, total and dissolved manganese, specific conductance, alkalinity, total potassium, acidity, and nitrate/nitrite. Comparisons to federal ambient water quality criteria (AWQC) were performed with a subset of the data. Selenium concentrations from the filled category sites were found to exceed the selenium criterion (5 µg/L) at most sites in this category. No other site categories had violations of the selenium criterion. Green et al. (2000) provide benthic community data for the sites studied by Bryant et al. (2002) and examine relationships between water quality and benthic community impairment. Fulk et al. (2003) provide additional evaluation of biological impairment, including effects on fish, at the sites studied by Bryant et al. (2002). Hartman et al. (2005) -- In southern West Virginia, these authors studied four pairs of streams, each consisting of a fill and a reference stream, in watersheds representative of those experiencing mountaintop/valley fill mining. Streams pairs were selected for similar environmental conditions, with one stream having a valley fill in its headwaters. Surface water in valley fill streams was found to have significantly greater specific conductance, sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, copper, nickel, manganese, and iron relative to reference streams. Additionally, valley fill streams contained lower densities of Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Coleoptera (beetles), Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies), non-insects, scrapers, and shredders than reference streams. The authors concluded that at a minimum, valley fills increase specific conductance and metals in streams and this or some other unquantified factors structure the macroinvertebrate community downstream of the valley fill. Pond et al. (2008) – Macroinvertebrate community composition and surface water parameters were reported for 37 small West Virginia streams—10 unmined and 27 mined sites with valley fills. A wide range of water quality parameters were found to be significantly elevated at mined sites compared with unmined sites, including pH, specific conductance, calcium, chloride, hardness, magnesium, nitrate, potassium, selenium, sodium, and sulfate. The authors examined their data to identify relationships between water chemistry and macroinvertebrate community parameters and concluded that mining activity has had subtle to severe impacts on benthic macroinvertebrate communities and that the biological condition most strongly correlates with a gradient of ionic strength. Finally, a Selenium Workshop Summary included as an appendix to USEPA (2005) describes ongoing research regarding the speciation and toxicity of selenium in streams in the coal mining region of Appalachia. Selenium and sulfur are closely related both chemically and biologically. The two elements have similar, for example, bond energies, ionization potentials, and electron affinities. Because of their geochemical similarity, selenium commonly occurs in sulfide minerals. Selenium is perhaps the most enriched element found in coal because it easily substitutes for sulfur in both organic and inorganic complexes. Because of the substitutions of selenium in organic complexes and sulfide minerals, the selenium content of coal and organic shale may be many times crustal abundance. The pH and oxidation-reduction conditions of the weathering environment greatly influence selenium speciation, and therefore, its potential solubility, environmental mobility, and biological uptake.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-9
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
3.9.1.4
Relevant Regulations and Criteria
Water Quality Criteria -- As described in the preceding sections, coal mining activities have the potential to alter water chemistry in downstream areas. It is possible to relate water chemistry to impairment of beneficial uses of water by aquatic life and humans where water quality criteria exist. Table 3.9-1 provides federal water quality criteria for parameters often affected by coal mining operations. States may have more restrictive standards, including numerical and narrative standards (see Appendix 3.9A). Table 3.9-1 National (USEPA 2009) Water Quality Criteria for Parameters Often Affected by Surface Coal Mining Based on Literature Freshwater Aquatic Life Acute Acidity Alkalinity Aluminum Copper (dissolved) Iron Manganese Nickel (dissolved) pH Selenium Sulfate TDS mg/L as CaCO3 mg/L as CaCO3 µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L pH units µg/L mg/L mg/L n/a n/a 750 13.4 n/a n/a 470 n/a n/a n/a n/a Chronic n/a 20,000 87 9 1,000 n/a 52 6.5 to 9 5 n/a n/a n/a Human Health for Consumption of Water + Organism n/a n/a n/a 1,300 300 50 610 5 to 9 170 n/a n/a n/a Organism Only n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 100 4,600 n/a 4,200 n/a n/a n/a Aquatic life criterion for total recoverable selenium Aquatic life criteria for hardness of 100 mg/L as CaCO3 For pH 6.5 to 9 Aquatic life criteria for hardness of 100 mg/L as CaCO3
Parameter
Units
Comment
TSS mg/L n/a Key : CaCO3 = calcium carbonate mg/L = milligrams per liter
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-10
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
Parameter
Units
Freshwater Aquatic Life Acute Chronic
Human Health for Consumption of Water + Organism Organism Only
Comment
n/a = not available TDS = total dissolved solids TSS = total suspended solids µg/L = migrograms per liter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 SMCRA-Clean Water Act Relationships – OSM (2008) provided a summary of the relationship between SMCRA and the Clean Water Act (CWA); that summary is included in this section for reference. SMCRA was enacted by Congress in 1977 to provide a comprehensive program to regulate surface coal mining and reclamation operations. A variety of programs under the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) may also apply to surface coal mining and reclamation operations, particularly if these operations impact the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. Section 404 of the CWA regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. Section 402 regulates all other point source discharges of pollutants into waters of the U.S. Technology-based effluent limits for the NPDES program are established by the USEPA to restrict the concentration of particular pollutants associated with a particular industry (e.g., iron for coal mining discharges). Section 401 provides states with the authority to review and either deny or grant certification for any activities requiring a Federal permit or license, to ensure that they will not violate applicable state water quality standards. Specific provisions within SMCRA address the relationship between SMCRA and the CWA: SMCRA Section 501(a)(B) requires that the Secretary of Interior obtain the written concurrence of the Administrator of the USEPA prior to promulgating and publishing permanent program regulations which relate to water quality standards promulgated under the CWA. SMCRA Section 702(a)(3) states that nothing in SMCRA shall be construed as superseding, amending, modifying, or repealing the CWA or any rule or regulation promulgated there under. The courts have addressed the provisions of Section 702 of SMCRA, 30 U.S.C 1292, and the relationships between SMCRA and CWA programs:
We hold that EPA variances and exemptions . . . are substantive elements of regulation under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act . . . and that the Secretary, pursuant to section 702(a)(3) may not alter these variances and exemptions by promulgating more stringent provisions insofar as the variances and exemptions apply to surface coal mining operations. In re Permanent Surface Mining Regulation Litigation, 627 F.2d 1346, 1369 (D.C. Cir. 1980))
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-11
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
SMCRA Section 713(a) requires the President, to the extent appropriate, and in keeping with the particular enforcement requirements of each Act, to insure the coordination of regulatory and inspection activities between the agencies responsible for SMCRA and CWA. To further this coordination, on February 8, 2005, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCOE), USEPA, OSM and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the purpose of providing concurrent and coordinated review and processing of surface coal mining applications proposing the placement of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States. This is a national umbrella document for surface coal mining designed to improve decision-making using the SMCRA regulatory authority as the suggested focal point for the initial data collection and conducting joint pre-application meetings, public meetings, public notices and site visits. Each agency retains its statutory authorities and independent decision making responsibilities. A State or Federal SMCRA authority proposing to take this lead role as the focal point for processing will develop specific procedures and sign a local agreement with the appropriate USEPA regional offices, USFWS field or regional offices and USCOE districts.
The SMCRA-CWA relationship was examined in detail in MTM/VF DPEIS (USEPA 2003). Additional information on this subject is provided in Sections I.F.3.a; II.B.1.a-b; II.C.1.a.1-2 and b; II.C.2-8 and 10; and II.D.2 of that document, which is available at http://www.epa.gov/region03/mtntop/eis2003.htm. Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. Sections 1531 et seq. -- This act requires federal agencies to ensure that any action authorized, funded or carried out does not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, both aquatic and terrestrial (OSM 2008). Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934, 16 U.S.C. Sections 661 et seq -- This act authorizes the Secretaries of Agriculture and Commerce to provide assistance to and cooperate with Federal and State agencies to protect, rear, stock, and increase the supply of game and furbearing animals, as well as to study the effects of domestic sewage, trade wastes, and other polluting substances on wildlife. The Reorganization Plan Number II of 1939 transferred the Bureau of Fisheries, and responsibility for protection of furbearing animals, as well as certain functions related to conservation of wildlife, game, and migratory birds, to the Department of the Interior. Amendments enacted in 1946 require consultation with the USFWS and the fish and wildlife agencies of States where the "waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed or authorized, permitted or licensed to be impounded, diverted . . . or otherwise controlled or modified" by any agency under a Federal permit or license. Consultation is to be undertaken for the purpose of "preventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources" (OSM 2008). Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, 16 U.S.C. Sections 1271 et seq.-- This act establishes a system of areas distinct from the traditional park concept to ensure the protection of each river’s unique environment. It also provides for preservation of certain rivers that possess outstanding scenic, recreational, geological, cultural, or historic values; and maintenance of their freeflowing condition (OSM 2008).
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-12
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
3.9.1.5
Radionuclides in Coal
Radioactive elements of concern in coal include uranium-235, uranium-238, thorium-232, and their daughter products (Van Hook 1979). Concentrations of radionuclides in coal are generally less variable than those of trace elements, values of 1 ppm for uranium and 2 ppm for thorium being reasonable national averages (Van Hook 1979). Compared with the parameters discussed above in Section 3.9.1.2, there appears to be little available information on radionuclides in CMD and/or streams affected by CMD. The literature regarding radionuclides in coal is largely focused on enrichment of radionuclides in fly ash and other by-products of coal combustion (e.g., Coles et al. 1978). However, according to the USGS (1997), radioactive elements in coal and fly ash should not be sources of alarm. The vast majority of coal and the majority of fly ash are not significantly enriched in radioactive elements, or in associated radioactivity, compared to common soils or rocks. This observation provides a useful geologic perspective for addressing societal concerns regarding possible radiation exposure from coal mining and combustion. A noteworthy decay product of both uranium and thorium is radon (http://www.radon.com/radon/ra-don_facts.html; accessed 9-15-10). Radon is released from soils in all areas of the United States, including coal mining areas, as a result of the natural decay of uranium and thorium. Radon is a gas and can result in lung cancer in people as a result of inhalation. However, radon poses this risk only in confined spaces such as underground mines and homes (basements in particular) where its concentration may build up. Most radon in confined spaces results from release from soil. Radon can also occur in groundwater and pose an ingestion risk if the groundwater is used as a drinking water source. However, research has shown that the risk of lung cancer from breathing radon in air is much greater than the risk of stomach cancer from ingesting water containing radon (USEPA 2010). Indeed, most of the risk from radon in groundwater comes from radon released into the air when the water is used for showering and other household purposes (USEPA 2010). Radon levels vary markedly in different regions of the country, based on geologic factors. In general, high levels of radon are associated with granite and igneous rocks, shale and greywacke sandstone (a mixture of quartz, feldspar, mica, rock fragments, and more), phosphate deposits, and some beach sands that may contain high levels of radon progenitors (i.e., uranium or thorium) (http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/radon.htm; accessed 9-15-10). Rock types in the United States that are high in radon sources include: Uranium-bearing metamorphic rocks and granites: Sheared faults in these formations cause some of the highest indoor levels in the US, particularly in the Rocky and Appalachian ranges, and the Sierra Nevada. Marine black shales: Sources of high radon throughout the United States and especially the central region from Ohio to Colorado. Glacial deposits derived from uranium-bearing rock and sediment. Major components of glacial deposits in the northern Midwest. They have high radon emanation due to large surface area, and high permeability due to cracking when dry.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-13
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Soils derived from carbonate, especially karstic terrain that is high in uranium and radium. Uranium-bearing fluvial, deltaic, marine, and lacustrine deposits, which provide most of the US uranium, and are located in the Western US.
3.9.2
Appalachian Basin Water Quality Baseline
A number of studies have been conducted over the past approximately 10 years to document water quality conditions in the primary region of mountaintop mining and valley fills. The most noteworthy studies (Paybins et al. 2000, Howard et al. 2001, Stauffer and Ferreri 2002, Bryant et al. 2002, Hartman et al. 2005, and Pond et al. 2008) are described in Section 3.9.1.3. In summary, these studies indicate that mountaintop mining and valley filling activities are associated with downstream changes in surface water chemistry. These changes include increased surface water concentrations of a number of parameters that are known to be associated with surface mining, including sulfate, TDS, calcium, magnesium, hardness, manganese, specific conductance, alkalinity, and total potassium. The majority of these constituents also may be elevated in streams affected by other types of large-scale, earth-moving activities. In addition, selenium was found to exceed the USEPA water quality criterion for selenium (5 µg/L) in stream water downstream from valley fills, but not in reference streams. The existence of selenium at concentrations in excess of the criterion indicates a potential for impacts to the aquatic environment and possibly to wildlife that feed on aquatic organisms. Figure 3.9-2 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Appalachian coal resource region.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-14
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.9-2
Appalachian Basin Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
2
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-15
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5
In some areas, particularly in eastern Ohio, the density of impaired water bodies is particularly high. However, based on an analysis done by OSM (2008), only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities (see Table 3.9-2). Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region. Table 3.9-2 State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas Colorado Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana New Mexico North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Percentage of Evaluated Stream Miles Impaired Due to Mining Stream Miles Impaired Underground Mining 17 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 102 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.02% Abandoned Mines 275 33 n/a n/a n/a 25 24 83 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a 710 16 n/a 496 8 3118 319 n/a 31 28 n/a 4142 n/a 1.35% Surface Mining 114 354 180 n/a n/a 515 159 n/a 0 17 n/a n/a 250 8 96 0 1354 22 39 27 n/a 0 91 n/a 46 7 0.47%
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-16
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
State Streams Impaired
Source: OSM 2008 Key: n/a = not available
Stream Miles Impaired Underground Mining Abandoned Mines Surface Mining
1 2 3 4 5 6
3.9.3
Colorado Plateau Water Quality Baseline
Figure 3.9-3 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Colorado Plateau coal resource region. However, based on an analysis done by OSM (2008), only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities (see Table 3.9-2). Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-17
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.9-3
Colorado Plateau Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
3.9.4
Gulf Region Water Quality Baseline
Figure 3.9-4 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Gulf Region coal resource area. However, based on an analysis done by OSM (2008), only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities (see Table 3.9-2). Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-18
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.9-4
Gulf Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
2 3 4 5 6
3.9.5
Illinois Basin Water Quality Baseline
Figure 3.9-5 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Illinois Basin coal resource region. However, based on an analysis done by OSM (2008), only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities (see Table 3.9-2).
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-19
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3
Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region. Figure 3.9-5 Illinois Basin Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
4
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-20
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
3.9.6
Northern Rocky Mountains & Great Plains Water Quality Baseline
WWC (2001) discussed potential surface water contamination and transport issues associated with surface coal mining at the North Jacobs Ranch Lease-by-Application (LBA) Tract, Campbell County, WY, approximately 40 miles south of Gillette, WY, within the Powder River Basin. The area surrounding the North Jacobs Ranch LBA Tract consists of gently rolling topography. The ephemeral streams within this area are typical for the region, and their flow events are closely reflective of precipitation patterns. Flow events frequently result from snowmelt during the late winter and early spring. Surface water quality typically varies with streamflow rate; the higher the flow rate, the lower the TDS concentration, but the higher the TSS concentration. Most local surface waters in the area are a sodium or calcium sulfate-type that exceeds Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) domestic use standards for arsenic, manganese, and TDS. Surface water quality usually is unsuitable for domestic use, marginal for irrigation, and suitable for stock and wildlife. WWC (2001) suggested that impacts on surface water quality from the proposed project would be negligible. Changes in runoff characteristics and sediment discharges would occur during mining as a result of alteration of drainage channels, but hydrologic controls would be in place to allow runoff from mined areas to accrue in the mine pit, where it would be treated and discharged according to WDEQ standards. After mining and reclamation were complete, surface water flow, quality, and discharge from the North Jacobs Ranch LBA Tract would approximate pre-mining conditions according to WWC (2001). WWC (2003a) discussed potential surface water contamination and transport issues associated with surface coal mining at the proposed Ash Creek Mine, Sheridan County, WY. The EIS for this proposed mine concluded that changes in runoff characteristics and sediment discharges would occur during mining, and that erosion rates could reach high values on disturbed areas because of vegetation removal. However, because state and federal regulations require that surface runoff from mined lands be treated to meet effluent standards, mine runoff and sediment loads would be deposited in ponds or other sediment-control devices. During mining, disruptions to streamflow in the nearby Little Youngs and Youngs Creeks would not be expected to be substantial. Lastly, WWC (2003) concluded that after mining and reclamation were completed, that surface water flow, quality, and sediment discharge would approximate premining conditions. In general, the finding of the EIS for the Ash Creek Mine regarding potential surface water contamination and transport issues were similar to those for the North Jacobs Ranch LBA Tract discussed above (WWC 2001). Similar to WWC (2001, 2003a), WWC (2003b) discussed potential surface water contamination and transport issues associated with surface coal mining at five proposed mines in the South Powder River Basin, WY. The conclusions regarding potential impacts to surface water quality and sediment transport were identical to those for other proposed surface coal mines in this region (WWC 2001, 2003a). In general, surface coal mining in this region of the country is not expected to result in significant surface water contamination and transport to downstream areas due to the ephemeral nature of streams in this area and the practice of capturing and treating storm water runoff to acceptable standards.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-21
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5
Figure 3.9-6 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Northern Rocky Mountain & Great Plains coal resource region. However, based on an analysis done by OSM (2008), only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities (see Table 3.9-2). Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-22
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2
Figure 3.9-6
Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
3
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-23
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3.9.7
Northwest Water Quality Baseline
Figure 3.9-7 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Northwest coal resource region. Alaska is not shown because no digital 303(d) data are available for Alaska. Impaired waters are present in western Washington, Oregon, and California (see Figure 3.9-7). However, as in other regions, it is expected that only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities. Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-24
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.9-7
Northwest Region (Excluding Alaska) 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
2 3 4 5 6
3.9.8
Other Western Interior Water Quality Baseline
Figure 3.9-8 shows 303(d) listed impaired water bodies that lie within the Other Western Interior coal resource region. However, based on an analysis done by OSM (2008), only a fraction of these water bodies are impaired due to coal mining and/or other mining activities (see Table 3.9For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-25
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3
2). Nonetheless, the existence of these impaired water bodies represents the baseline condition for this region. Figure 3.9-8 Other Western Interior Region 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies
4
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-26
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
3.10 AIR QUALITY, METEOROLOGY, AND NOISE
This section describes the existing air quality, meteorology, and noise conditions in the counties within the seven coal regions.
3.10.0 Background
Portions of regional air quality are non-attainment for the following air pollutants: fine particulate (PM2.5), particulate (PM10), ozone, and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Locating mines within or next to these non-attainment areas would tend to cause further degradation of the air quality. Therefore, in promulgating this stream protection rule, consideration needs to be given to whether the rule would tend to drive coal mining to regions where non-attainment areas are prevalent. For this reason, all of the non-attainment areas that are in the area of study were identified. Fine particulate (PM2.5) standards were first promulgated in 1997, when the Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) established annual and 24-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5. USEPA revised the 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.5 in 2006 and is expected to revise the annual standard in 2010 or 2011. Currently, the annual standard is 15 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3), and the 24-hour standard is 35 μg/m3. Standards for coarse particulates (PM10) were first promulgated in 1987, replacing an earlier standard to total suspended particles (TSP). At the time, both an annual and 24-hour standard were set at 50 μg/m3 and 150 μg/m3, respectively. In 1997, the form of the 24-hour standard was changed, but was later vacated by a court decision. In 2006, the annual PM10 standard was revoked, leaving only the 150 μg/m3 24-hour standard. In 1997, USEPA set an 8-hour average ozone standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). At that time, the 1-hour ozone standard was 0.12 ppm; however, that was subsequently deleted in favor of the 8-hour standard. In 2008, USEPA determined the ozone standard should be lowered to 0.075 ppm, but early in 2010 a lower concentration (0.6 to 0.07 ppm) was considered. Current attainment status is based on the 0.08-ppm standard. In1971, a 24-hour and an annual sulfur dioxide air standard were established at 140 parts per billion (ppb) and 30 ppb, respectively. The sulfur dioxide air quality standard was revised on June 3, 2010, to a single 1-hour standard of 75 ppb. States have not yet been able to assess what areas are in attainment of the new 1-hr standard. Fuel burning from mining operation leads to emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx, a precursor to ozone), sulfur dioxide, particulate and VOC. Other sources of emissions include particulates emitted from material handling and crushing operations and fugitive dust from road traffic. The pollutants that cause ozone formation are nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). These two pollutants photochemically react in the atmosphere to form ozone.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-27
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
Fine particulate formation is caused by several atmospheric chemical reactions, not all of which are well understood. It is thought to be the result of sulfates that are created when sulfur dioxide is oxidized in the atmosphere, which then combines with organic aerosols to form the particulate. The same is true to a lesser extent with nitrogen oxides forming nitrates that react or organic aerosol to form the fine particulate. Therefore, the major pollutant of concern to prevent further fine particulate emissions is sulfur dioxide. Sulfur dioxide is formed in combustion of materials that contain sulfur. Additional sources of air emissions include road hauling, coal storage, and material handling at transfer points (mechanical conveyors), topsoil and overburden removal, loading and unloading operations, wind erosion, underground mine exhausts, railroad pit burners, crushing and screening, coal washing, thermal drying, and refuse handling. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are a pollutant of growing concern. An analysis (see Appendix 3.11-A) shows that both underground mining and surface mining release large quantities of methane gas, but underground mining emits as much as five times more methane per ton of coal mined. To minimize GHG emissions from underground mines, room and pillar mining should be practiced versus longwall and shortwall mining. In addition to methane, mines also produce GHGs from on-site fuel burning, from diesel fuel used in trucks to dryers used in coal preparation plants, though this contributes only a few percent to the overall GHG emissions from a typical mine. Based on 2009 coal production data and emission factor estimates taken from USEPA studies (see Appendix 3.11), an estimated 100 million metric tons of GHG are emitted from coal mines in the United States annually. To evaluate emission changes due to the different alternatives under study in Section 4, the emission factors developed in Appendix 3.11-A will be used to calculate the emission change in each region based on the projected change in the amount of coal to be mined for surface and underground coal mines for that region. Air emissions from mining operations are governed by a variety of federal regulations promulgated under the authority of the Clean Air Act. Depending on the size of a given operation and the processes employed, a coal mine can be subject to none, some, or all of the following regulations: New Source Performance Standards for Coal Preparation and Processing Plants 40 CFR 60, Subpart Y and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 40 CFR 52.21. One requirement of PSD regulation is that any facility subject to PSD must install the best BACT on sources that emit the pollutant or pollutants that are above major source thresholds. To determine BACT, a case-by-case analysis must be performed, considering factors such as energy, environmental, and economic impacts. In the case of coal mining, the only pollutant likely to exceed major source thresholds is PM. Under the recently promulgated “tailoring rule,” USEPA will begin to regulate emissions of GHGs under the PSD regulations. Unlike other regulated pollutants, the applicability threshold for PSD regulation of GHGs ranges from 50,000 tons per year to 100,000 tons per year of direct CO2-equivalent emissions. Impacts on Class I areas are evaluated as part of the PSD permitting process. If a mine has significant emissions, it is required to evaluate its impact on any Class I area within a 300 km radius of the mine. Therefore, all Class I areas in each of the regions that could be impacted have been identified.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-28
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
In 2009, USEPA promulgated the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. This rule requires that any of several listed source types, and several other types of sources that emit more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) per year report their total emissions to USEPA annually. The rule proscribes specific methods for calculating GHG emissions, and requirements for monitoring and recordkeeping to help ensure the data for those calculations is available. Methods for calculating emissions from these sources, specifically the methane emissions from vent wells, vent shafts, or degasification systems where methane is emitted or used, can be found in Subpart FF of the rule. Otherwise, only mines and operations that emit more than 25,000 MT CO2e per year from stationary combustion sources are subject to this rule, with the calculation methodology and requirements found in Subpart C of the rule. General Conformity Rule requirements were considered for the non-attainment areas, however since 40CFR93.153 (c)(iii) states that “rulemaking and policy development and issuance” are exempt from the rule, it was not taken under further consideration. There are many sources of noise at a coal mine operation, as at any industrial operation. Noise is typically associated with heavy machinery, but an additional concern is the noise from blasting operations. Surface mining generally creates more noise than underground mining. The coal processing areas for the two types of mining are generally the same.
3.10.1 Appalachian Basin
3.10.1.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.1.1.1 Nonattainment Areas Three pollutants currently exist in concentrations in the ambient air in the Appalachian Basin that exceed ambient air quality standards: PM2.5, ozone, and sulfur dioxide (USEPA, 2010). Figure 3.10-1 depicts the locations of these non-attainment areas.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-29
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.10-1
Nonattainment Areas in the Appalachian Basin Coal Region
2
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-30
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
3.10.1.1.1.1
PM2.5
The air quality exceeds the 24-hour standard in cities in Alabama, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. Air quality exceeds the annual standard in parts of every state of the Appalachian Basin (USEPA, 2010). 3.10.1.1.1.2 Ozone
Areas in Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Virginia are not in attainment of the current 8-hour standard (USEPA, 2010). The northeast region of the United States experiences high levels of ozone due to high altitude transport of pollutants from other mid-west and eastern power plants and other large industrial sources. Because of this circumstance, state rules in these affected states (which includes Pennsylvania) regulate new emission sources of VOC and NOx under non-attainment rules. 3.10.1.1.1.3 Sulfur Dioxide
One area within the Appalachian Basin, the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley in Pennsylvania, was designated nonattainment based on the old standard (USEPA, 2010). The following nonattainment areas are within the Appalachian Basin: (USEPA, 2010) Alabama: PM2.5: Jackson, Jefferson, Shelby, and Walker Counties Kentucky: PM2.5: Lawrence County Maryland: None Ohio: PM2.5: Belmont, Shocton, Jefferson, Lawrence, and Stark Counties Pennsylvania: Ozone: Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties; PM2.5: Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Cambria, Dauphin, Greene, Indiana, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties; SO2: Armstrong County Tennessee: Ozone: Anderson County; PM2.5: Anderson County Virginia: None West Virginia: PM2.5: Brooke, Kanawha, Marshall, Mason, and Wayne Counties
3.10.1.1.2 Pollutants of Concern Throughout the Appalachian Basin, ample forestland and trees are a source of biogenic VOC, such that in this region only NOx is the limiting factor for ozone formation. NOx is formed as a result of combustion, so any fuel combustion at a mine can potentially contribute to ozone formation. Appalachian coal generally contains a significant amount of sulfur. When burned, this sulfur is oxidized to sulfur dioxide that contributes to fine particulate formation (PM2.5) in the atmosphere. It also would be a primary contributor in an area that is not in attainment with the air quality standards. Therefore, when burning of coal at the mines, emission controls should be considered, especially in the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, which is classified as non-attainment for sulfur dioxide in Pennsylvania.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-31
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an estimated 42% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States is from Appalachia. 3.10.1.1.3 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Each state in the Appalachian Basin has a USEPA-approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) that grants permitting authority over their air management districts. In addition to state permitting authorities, Alabama, Kentucky, and Tennessee have some local permitting authorities able to issue air permits within their jurisdiction. Ohio and Pennsylvania also have local regions within the state that handle the permitting directly, while permitting in other states is completed centrally in the state’s main environmental offices (USEPA, 2010) 3.10.1.1.4 Federal Class I Areas Federal Class I areas are designated Federal lands that are parks and wilderness areas within which air quality is especially protected. In the Appalachian Basin, there are numerous Class I areas around the Smokey Mountain Area and other portions of the Appalachian Mountain chain. A mine subject to PSD regulation must review its impact on all Class I areas within 300 kilometers (km). The following Class I areas (DOI, 2007) are within 300 km of the Appalachian Basin: Acadia National Park Brigantine Wilderness Cape Romain Wilderness Cohutta Wilderness Dolly Sods Wilderness Great Gulf Wilderness Great Smoky Mountains National Park James River Face Wilderness Joyce Kilmer Slickrock Wilderness Linville Gorge Wilderness Lye Brook Wilderness Mammoth Cave National Park Otter Creek Wilderness Presidential Range-Dry River Wilderness Shenandoah National Park Shining Rock Wilderness Sipsey Wilderness Swanquarter Wilderness
Figure 3.10-2 depicts the locations of these Class I areas.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-32
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.10-2
Federal Class I Areas in the Appalachian Basin Coal Region
2 Key 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Swanquarter Wilderness Cape Romain Wilderness Brigantine Wilderness Shenandoah National Park Arcadia National Park Great Smoky Mountain National Park Mammoth Cave National Park Sipsey Wilderness 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Presidential Range-Dry River Wilderness Otter Creek Wilderness Lye Brook Wilderness Linville Gorge Wilderness Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness James River Face Wilderness Great Gulf Wilderness Dolly Sods Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-33
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Shining Rock Wilderness
18
Cohutta Wilderness
3.10.1.2 Regional Meteorology Prevailing wind patterns in the Appalachian Basin generally follow the topography and flow from the southwest to the northeast. Local terrain impacts wind direction greatly. Average low temperatures in the winter months range from 18 to 30 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), with the average highs during summer ranging from 79 to 85°F. Precipitation within the basin varies from 40 inches per year on the southern portion of the basin to 36 inches per year on the Northern portion (Ruffner and Bair, 1979). 3.10.1.3 Noise 3.10.1.3.1 Local Ordinances Most noise ordinances are for large urban areas and cities, where there is no coal mining. The only noise ordinance that could be applicable is for Tuscaloosa, Alabama, since there are coal mines within the jurisdiction of this ordinance. A listing of ordinances can be found in NPC, 2010.
3.10.2 Colorado Plateau
3.10.2.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.2.1.1 Nonattainment Areas There are no nonattainment areas for NAAQS in the Colorado Plateau in the coal mining counties. 3.10.2.1.2 Pollutants of Concern When coal is burned at the mines, emission controls should be considered especially in Arizona, which has neighboring counties classified as non-attainment for sulfur dioxide. Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an estimated 10% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States is from the Colorado Plateau Region. 3.10.2.1.3 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Each state in the Colorado Plateau has a USEPA-approved SIP that grants permitting authority over their air management districts. In addition to state permitting authorities, the counties of Maricopa, Pima, and Pinal in Arizona have local permitting authorities able to issue air permits within their jurisdiction (USEPA, 2010b). 3.10.2.1.4 Federal Class I Areas In the Colorado Plateau, there are numerous Class I areas around the Rocky Mountains and in the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico. A mine subject to PSD regulation must review its
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-34
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
impact on all Class I areas within 300 km. The following Class I areas are within 300 km of the Colorado Plateau (DOI, 2007): Arches National Park Bandelier Wilderness Black Canyon of the Gunnison Wilderness Bosque del Apache Bridger Wilderness Bryce Canyon National Park Canyonlands National Park Capitol Reef National Park Carlsbad Caverns National Park Chiricahua National Monument Wilderness Chiricahua Wilderness Eagles Nest Wilderness Fitzpatrick Wilderness Flat Tops Wilderness Galiuro Wilderness Gila Wilderness Grand Canyon National Park Great Sand Dunes Wilderness Guadalupe Mountains National Park La Garita Wilderness Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness Mazatzal Wilderness Mesa Verde National Park Mount Baldy Wilderness Mount Zirkel Wilderness Pecos Wilderness Petrified Forest National Park Pine Mountain Wilderness Rawah Wilderness Rocky Mountain National Park Saguaro Wilderness Salt Creek Wilderness San Pedro Parks Wilderness Sierra Ancha Wilderness Superstition Wilderness Sycamore Canyon Wilderness Weminuche Wilderness West Elk Wilderness Wheeler Peak Wilderness White Mountain Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-35
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4
Yavapai-Apache Nation Zion National Park
Figure 3.10-3 depicts the locations of these Class I areas. Figure 3.10-3 Federal Class I Areas in the Colorado Plateau Coal Region
5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Salt Creek Wilderness Bosque del Apache (Little San Pascual Unit) Bosque del Apache (Indian Well Unit) Bosque del Apache (Chupadera Unit) Yavapai-Apache Nation Chiricahua NM Wilderness – Not Studied Chiricahua NM Wilderness – Key 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Wheeler Park Wilderness West Elk Wilderness Weminuche Wilderness Sycamore Canyon Wilderness Superstition Wilderness Sierra Ancha Wilderness San Pedro Parks Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-36
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Designated Wilderness Zion National Park Rocky Mountain National Park Guadalupe Mountain National Park Grand Canyon National Park Capitol Reef National Park Canyonlands National Park Bryce Canyon National Park Arches National Park Black Canyon of the Gunnison Wilderness Bandelier Wilderness Saguaro Wilderness Carlsbad Caverns National Park Great Sand Dunes Wildernessnps Petrified Forest National Park Mesa Verde National Park White Mountain Wilderness
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
Rawah Wilderness Pine Mountain Wilderness Pecos Wilderness Mount Zirkel Wilderness Mount Baldy Wilderness Mazatzal Wilderness Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness La Garita Wilderness Gila Wilderness Galiuro Wilderness Flat Tops Wilderness Fitzpatrick Wilderness Eagles Nest Wilderness Chiricahua Wilderness Bridger Wilderness
3.10.2.2 Sources of Air Emissions The coal from this region has low ash content and low sulfur content (EIA, 1989). The low ash content would produce lower particulate emissions. The low sulfur content would reduce the amount of coal cleaning necessary. 3.10.2.3 Regional Meteorology Prevailing wind patterns in the Colorado Plateau generally flow from the East Southeast in the southern portion of the plateau (Arizona and New Mexico) and from the northwest at the northern section (Utah). Local wind currents follow the local terrain impacts, which are significant in the northern region. Average low temperatures in the winter months range from 14 to 18°F with the average highs during the summer months 90 to 100°F. Precipitation within the Plateau region is low and varies from 7 to 12 inches per year (Ruffner and Bair, 1979). 3.10.2.4 Noise Noise associated with predominantly surface mining activities prevails only in the immediate vicinity of an active surface mine in the Colorado Plateau Region. These noises may include large truck hauling noise, episodic blasting, and similar industrial noise, in accordance with specific permit conditions and local ordinances, if any.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-37
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
3.10.3 Gulf Region
3.10.3.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.3.1.1 Nonattainment Areas There are no nonattainment areas for NAAQS in the Gulf Region. 3.10.3.1.2 Pollutants of Concern Throughout the Gulf Region, ample crops, forestland, and trees are a source of biogenic VOC, such that in this region only NOx is the limiting factor for ozone formation. NOx is formed as a result of combustion, so any fuel combustion at a mine can potentially contribute to ozone formation. Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an estimated 7% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States comes from the Gulf Region. 3.10.3.1.3 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Each state in the Gulf Region has a USEPA -approved SIP that grants permitting authority over their air management districts (USEPA, 2010b). No local air quality regulations are in place in the Gulf Region coal producing counties. 3.10.3.1.4 Federal Class I Areas Federal Class I areas are designated Federal lands which are parks and wilderness areas within which air quality is especially protected. In and around the Gulf Region, there are numerous Class I areas. A mine subject to PSD regulation will need to review its impact on all Class I areas within 300 km. The following Class I areas are Class I areas within 300 km of the Gulf Region (DOI, 2007): Big Bend National Park Bradwell Bay Wilderness Breton Wilderness Caney Creek Wilderness Chassahowitzka Wilderness Cohutta Wilderness Hercules-Glades Wilderness Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness Mammoth Cave National Park Mingo Wilderness Okefenokee Wilderness Saint Marks Wilderness Sipsey Wilderness Upper Buffalo Wilderness Wolf Island Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-38
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3
Figure 3.10-4 depicts the locations of these Class I areas.
Figure 3.10-4
Federal Class I Areas in the Gulf Region Coal Region
4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 5 Wolf Island Wilderness Saint Marks Wilderness Okefenokee Wilderness Mingo Wilderness Chassahowitzka Wilderness Breton Wilderness Big Bend National Park Mammoth Cave National Park Key 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Upper Buffalo Wilderness Sipsey Wilderness Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness Hercules-Glades Wilderness Cohutta Wilderness Caney Creek Wilderness Bradwell Bay Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-39
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
3.10.3.2 Sources of Air Emissions The Gulf Region consists of surface mining and coal preparation plants only (EIA, 2009). The coal from this region has very high ash content and median sulfur content (EIA, 1989). The high ash content would produce higher particulate emissions during handling, storage, drying, etc; increasing the need for higher control at these sources. 3.10.3.3 Regional Meteorology Prevailing wind patterns in the Gulf Region generally flow from the south to the north, veering to the northeast in the Arkansas and Tennessee areas. Local wind currents follow the terrain impacts which generally mean they follow the river patterns. Average low temperatures in the winter months range is near freezing ranging from 31 to 42°F with average highs during the summer months of 92 to 94°F. Precipitation within the Gulf Region is significant, varies from 36 to 48 inches per year, and is affected greatly by tropical storms (Ruffner and Bair, 1979). 3.10.3.4 Noise Noise associated with predominantly surface mining activities prevails only in the immediate vicinity of an active surface mine in the Gulf Region. These noises may include large truck hauling noise, episodic blasting, and similar industrial noise, in accordance with specific permit conditions and local ordinances, if any.
3.10.4 Illinois Basin
3.10.4.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.4.1.1 Nonattainment Areas Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is the only pollutant that currently exists in concentrations in the ambient air in the Illinois Basin that exceed ambient air quality standards (USEPA, 2010a). The following nonattainment areas are within the Illinois Basin: Illinois: PM2.5: Randolph Co Indiana: PM2.5: Dubois Co, Gibson Co, Pike Co, Warrick Co Kentucky: None
Figure 3.10-5 depicts the locations of these non-attainment areas.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-40
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.10-5
Nonattainment Areas in the Illinois Basin Coal Region
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3.10.4.1.2 Pollutants of Concern Coal mined in the Illinois Basin generally contains a significant amount of sulfur. When burned, this sulfur is oxidized to sulfur dioxide, which contributes to fine particulate formation (PM2.5) in the atmosphere. Therefore, when coal is burned at the mines, emission controls should be considered or other alternative fuels. Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-41
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
estimated 13% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States is from the Illinois Basin. 3.10.4.1.3 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Each state has a USEPA -approved SIP that grants permitting authority over their air management districts. In addition to state permitting authorities, Jefferson County in Kentucky has a local permitting authority able to issue air permits within its jurisdiction (USEPA, 2010b). 3.10.4.1.4 Federal Class I Areas Federal Class I areas are designated Federal lands which are parks and wilderness areas within which air quality is especially protected. In the Illinois Basin, there are numerous Class I areas. A mine subject to PSD regulation will need to review its impact on all Class I areas within 300 km. The following Class I areas are within 300 km of the Illinois Basin (DOI, 2007): Cohutta Wilderness Great Smoky Mountains National Park Hercules-Glades Wilderness Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness Mammoth Cave National Park Mingo Wilderness Seney Wilderness Sipsey Wilderness
Figure 3.10-6 depicts the locations of these Class I areas.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-42
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.10-6
Federal Class I Areas in the Illinois Basin Coal Region
2 1 2 3 4 3 Seney Wilderness Mingo Wilderness Great Smoky Mountains National Park Mammoth Cave National Park Key 5 6 7 8 Sipsey Wilderness Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness Hercules-Glades Wilderness Cohutta Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-43
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
3.10.4.2 Sources of Air Emissions The Illinois Basin region only has surface mining and coal preparation plants (EIA, 2009). The coal from this region has median ash content and very high sulfur content (EIA, 1989). The low sulfur content would increase the amount of coal cleaning necessary. If the coal preparation plant is using a dry cleaning process, the particulate emissions from this unit would be greater, or would require better control. 3.10.4.3 Regional Meteorology Prevailing wind patterns in the Illinois Basin generally flow from the south to the north veering to the northeast in the Michigan. There are few terrain features in the basin that could impact wind patterns. Average low temperatures in the winter months range is below freezing ranging from 20 to 23°F with the average highs during the summer months ranging from 84 to 89°F. Precipitation within the Illinois Basin is significant and varies from 32 to 48 inches per year (Ruffner and Bair, 1979). 3.10.4.4 Noise Noise associated with predominantly surface mining activities prevails only in the immediate vicinity of an active surface mine in the Illinois Basin. These noises may include large truck hauling noise, episodic blasting, and similar industrial noise, in accordance with specific permit conditions and local ordinances, if any.
3.10.5 Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains
3.10.5.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.5.1.1 Nonattainment Areas Coarse particulates (PM10) and ozone in the Northern Rocky Mountain and Great Plains region currently exceed ambient air quality standards (USEPA, 2010a). Figure 3.10-7 depicts an aerial plot of non-attainment areas within the Northern Rocky Mountain and Great Plains region.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-44
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2
Figure 3.10-7
Nonattainment Areas in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region
3
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-45
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
3.10.5.1.2 PM10 Nonattainment areas for the PM10 standard are located in Montana and Wyoming (USEPA, 2010a). 3.10.5.1.3 Ozone The only areas not in attainment of the current 8-hour standard in the region are the greater Denver area (USEPA, 2010a). The following nonattainment areas (USEPA, 2010a) are within the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region: Colorado: Ozone: Adams Co Montana: PM10: Rosebud Co North Dakota: None Wyoming: None
Considering that most of the mining in this area is surface mining and the fact that PM10 nonattainment areas exist, dust emissions from mining activities caused by haul roads and conveyors are a concern. Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an estimated 19% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States comes from the Northern Rocky Mountain and Great Plains. 3.10.5.1.4 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Each state has a USEPA-approved SIP that grants permitting authority over their air management districts. Therefore, any air permits for a mining operation will need to be granted by the state (USEPA, 2010b). 3.10.5.1.5 Federal Class I Areas Federal Class I areas are designated Federal lands which are parks and wilderness areas within which air quality is especially protected. In the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains region, there are numerous Class I areas around the Rocky Mountains and in the hills and mountains of the region. A mine subject to PSD regulation will need to review its impact on all Class I areas within 300 km. The following Class I areas are within 300 km of the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains region (DOI, 2007):
UL Bend Wilderness Red Rock Lakes Wilderness Medicine Lake Wilderness Lostwood Wilderness Fort Peck Spokane Flathead
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-46
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES Northern Cheyenne Yellowstone National Park Rocky Mountain National Park Grand Teton National Park Glacier National Park Capitol Reef National Park Canyonlands National Park Arches National Park Craters of the Moon Wilderness Black Canyon of the Gunnison Wilderness Bandelier Wilderness Badlands/Sage Creek Wilderness Wind Cave National Park Theodore Roosevelt National Park Great Sand Dunes Wilderness Mesa Verde National Park Wheeler Peak Wilderness West Elk Wilderness Weminuche Wilderness Washakie Wilderness Teton Wilderness Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Scapegoat Wilderness Sawtooth Wilderness San Pedro Parks Wilderness Rawah Wilderness Pecos Wilderness North Absaroka Wilderness Mount Zirkel Wilderness Mission Mountains Wilderness Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness La Garita Wilderness Hells Canyon Wilderness Gates of the Mountains Wilderness Flat Tops Wilderness Fitzpatrick Wilderness Eagles Nest Wilderness Eagle Cap Wilderness Cabinet Mountains Wilderness Bridger Wilderness Bob Marshall Wilderness Anaconda Pintler Wilderness
Figure 3.10-8 depicts the locations of these Class I areas.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-47
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 Figure 3.10-8 Federal Class I Areas in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region
4 1 2 3 4 5 UL Bend Wilderness Red Rock Lakes Wilderness Medicine Lake Wilderness Lostwood Wilderness Fort Peck Key 26 27 28 29 30 West Elk Wilderness Weminuche Wilderness Washakie Wilderness Teton Wilderness Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-48
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Spokane Flathead Northern Cheyenne Yellowstone National Park Rocky Mountain National Park Grand Teton National Park Glacier National Park Capitol Reef National Park Canyonlands National Park Arches National Park Craters of the Moon Wilderness Black Canyon of the Gunnison Wilderness Bandelier Wilderness Badlands/Sage Creek Wilderness 1 Badlands/Sage Creek Wilderness 2 Wind Cave National Park Theodore Roosevelt National Park Great Sand Dunes Wildernessnps Mesa Verde NP Wheeler Peak Wilderness
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
Scapegoat Wilderness Sawtooth Wilderness San Pedro Parks Wilderness Rawah Wilderness Pecos Wilderness North Absaroka Wilderness Mount Zirkel Wilderness Mission Mountains Wilderness Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness La Garita Wilderness Hells Canyon Wilderness Gates of the Mountains Wilderness Flat Tops Wilderness Fitzpatrick Wilderness Eagles Nest Wilderness Eagle Cap Wilderness Cabinet Mountains Wilderness Bridger Wilderness Bob Marshall Wilderness Anaconda Pintler Wilderness
3.10.5.2 Sources of Air Emissions The coal from this region has very high ash content and median sulfur content (EIA, 1989). The high ash content would produce higher particulate emissions during handling, storage, drying, etc; increasing the need for higher control at these sources. The low ash content would produce lower particulate emissions. 3.10.5.3 Regional Meteorology Prevailing wind patterns in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains generally flow from the southwest to the northeast then veering to the southeast on the eastern portion of the region. Terrain features play a significant role in both wind direction and speed in this region.. Average low temperatures in the winter months range is below freezing ranging from 3 to 10°F with the average highs during the summer months ranging from 79 to 90°F. Precipitation within the Rocky Mountains and Great Plains area is significant and varies from 12 to 18 inches per year (Ruffner and Bair, 1979).
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-49
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
3.10.5.4 Noise Noise associated with predominantly surface mining activities prevails only in the immediate vicinity of an active surface mine in the Northern Rocky Mountains and Great Plains Region. These noises may include large truck hauling noise, episodic blasting, and similar industrial noise, in accordance with specific permit conditions and local ordinances, if any.
3.10.6 Northwest Region
3.10.6.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.6.1.1 Nonattainment Areas There are no nonattainment areas for National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the Alaska within the Northwest Region. 3.10.6.1.2 Pollutants of Concern Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an estimated 0.1% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States is from the Northwest Region. 3.10.6.1.3 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Alaska has a USEPA -approved SIP that grants permitting authority over its air management districts. Therefore, any air permits for a mining operation will need to be granted by the state (USEPA, 2010b). There are no local air quality authorities. 3.10.6.1.4 Federal Class I Areas Federal Class I areas are designated Federal lands which are parks and wilderness areas within which air quality is especially protected. In Alaska, there are four Class I areas. A mine subject to PSD regulation will need to review its impact on all Class I areas within 300 km. Denali National Park and Denali National Park and Wilderness are the only Class I areas within 300 km of the Northwest region (DOI, 2007). Figure 3.10-9 depicts the locations of these Class I areas.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-50
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1
Figure 3.10-9
Federal Class I Areas in the Northwest Coal Region
2 3 4 5 6 7 3.10.6.2 Sources of Air Emissions There are currently underground mining, surface mining, and coal preparation operations in the Northwest Region (EIA, 2009). The coal from this region has low ash content and low sulfur content (EIA, 1989). The low ash content would produce lower particulate emissions. The low sulfur content would reduce the amount of coal cleaning necessary.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-51
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
3.10.6.3 Regional Meteorology The predominant Northwest Region is in central Alaska. Prevailing wind patterns in this region generally flow from the north to the south. There are significant terrain features in this region with a Mountain Chain in the south and eastern portion of the state. Average low temperatures in the winter months range is below freezing ranging from -21 to -3°F with the average highs during the summer months ranging from 55 to 72°F. Precipitation within this region is low and varies from 12 to 15 inches per year (Ruffner and Bair, 1979). 3.10.6.4 Noise Noise associated with predominantly surface mining activities prevails only in the immediate vicinity of an active surface mine in Alaska. These noises may include large truck hauling noise, episodic blasting, and similar industrial noise, in accordance with specific permit conditions and local ordinances, if any.
3.10.7 Other Western Interior
3.10.7.1 Regional Air Quality 3.10.7.1.1 Nonattainment Areas There are no nonattainment areas for NAAQS in the Other Western Interior region. 3.10.7.1.2 Pollutants of Concern Because most of the mining in this region is surface mining and regional winds can carry dust emissions from mining activities to PM2.5 non-attainment areas, particulate emissions caused by haul roads and conveyors are a concern. Based on 2009 mining statistics concerning total coal produced and the percentage of coal coming from surface mines and underground mining, an 8% of the GHG produced from the coal mining industry in the United States is from the Other Western Interior Region. 3.10.7.1.3 State and Local Air Quality Authorities Each state has a USEPA -approved SIP that grants permitting authority over their air management districts. Therefore, any air permits for a mining operation will need to be granted by the state (USEPA, 2010b). 3.10.7.1.4 Federal Class I Areas Federal Class I areas are designated Federal lands which are parks and wilderness areas within which air quality is especially protected. In and around the Other Western Interior region, there are numerous Class I areas. A mine subject to PSD regulation will need to review its impact on all Class I areas within 300 km. The following Class I areas are within 300 km (DOI, 2007) of the Other Western Interior region: Big Bend National Park Caney Creek Wilderness
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-52
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Carlsbad Caverns National Park Guadalupe Mountains National Park Hercules-Glades Wilderness Mingo Wilderness Salt Creek Wilderness Upper Buffalo Wilderness White Mountain Wilderness Wichita Mountains
Figure 3.10.-10 depicts the locations of these Class I areas. Figure 3.10-10 Federal Class I Areas in the Other Western Interior Coal Region
11 1 Key Wichita Mountains (North Mountain 7 Unit) Carlsbad Caverns NP
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-53
Chapter 3 – Affected Environment For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Wichita Mountains (Charons Garden Unit) Salt Creek Wilderness Mingo Wilderness Guadalupe Mountains NP Big Bend NP
8 9 10 11
White Mountain Wilderness Upper Buffalo Wilderness Hercules-Glades Wilderness Caney Creek Wilderness
3.10.7.2 Sources of Air Emissions There are currently underground mining, surface mining, and coal preparation operations in the Other Western Interior region (EIA, 2009). The coal from this region has low ash content and low sulfur content (EIA, 1989). The low ash content would produce lower particulate emissions. The low sulfur content would reduce the amount of coal cleaning necessary. 3.10.7.3 Regional Meteorology Prevailing wind patterns in the Western Interior region is from the south to the north. There are few terrain features in this area that affect wind patterns and for the most part the entire area can be considered flat. Average low temperatures in the winter months range from 13 to 31°F with the average highs during the summer months ranging from 85 to 94°F. Precipitation within this region Western Interior region is consistent throughout the region and averages 30 to 32 inches per year (Ruffner and Bair, 1979). 3.10.7.4 Noise Noise associated with predominantly surface mining activities prevails only in the immediate vicinity of an active surface mine in the Other Western Interior Region. These noises may include large truck hauling noise, episodic blasting, and similar industrial noise, in accordance with specific permit conditions and local ordinances, if any.
For Official Use Only - Deliberative Process Material
FIRST WORKING DRAFT – 10/22/10 DO NOT DISTRIBUTE OUTSIDE DOI ANDCOOPERATING/COORDINATING AGENCIES/ENTITIES
3-54