Adverse Effects of
Coal Mines      Out of sight, out of mind. Most visitors to West Virginia will not see the adverse effects of coal mining. They are hidden by the isolation of coal mines in sparsely populated areas of the state. People who hike, fish, hunt, camp, and otherwise venture beyond main thoroughfares may encounter troubled waters.

     AMD. Visitors and locals, who have had the pleasure of navigating the Cheat River or playing in the Buckhannon River or in a host of other streams or rivers, have been mortified by the ugly, orange-yellow residue on river banks and rocks left by acid mine drainage. The scene looks as if a misguided artist has turned natural beauty into a cosmic joke. Progress has been made in treating affected streams but there is a long way to go to correct the situation.

     Acid mine drainage (AMD) affects the North Branch of the Potomac River, known for its white water rafting. The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River (ICPRB) is concerned that AMD hinders deters inflow of people who want to fish and recreate. West Virginia University's National Mine Land Reclamation Center is assisting in developing technologies to clean up AMD.

     Too much, too little water. Mines of all sorts, which disturb the earth, are prone to destabilize the soil and cause water run-off and siltation of streams.  Longwall coal mining, in particular, can lead to loss of well water where mining is underneath the wells.

     Mountaintop removal mining may hurt stream habitat according to a study by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The study was done in 1999-2000. MTR can reduce the size of particle in streams and reduce daily changes and seasonal variations in stream temperature. Stream flow could be increased dramatically during low flow periods aat sites with valley fills.

     CHIAs: Study before permitting. Cumulative Hydrologic Impact Assessment (CHIA) is required by SMCRA, which is the federal statute governing strip mining. CHIA is a holistic concept recognizing that surface coal mine discharges can affect watersheds and not just the mine site, itself.

     CHIAs are meant to protect the hydrologic balance, which is the relationship between the quality and quantity of water into and out of the studied area. That subject is the province of hydrogeologists. At and adjacent to the proposed surface mine, the mine's hydrologic impact is to be minimized. Off site the surface mine must be "designed to prevent material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area." [30 USC sec 1260(b)(3), WV Code sec 22-3-18(b)(3)].

     Cumulative impacts are the focus of concern. When cumulative impacts within the cumulative impact area - which includes all anticipated mining - exceed predetermined threshold limits or ranges, they constitute material damage. A threshold limit could be a specific concentration of a metal such as iron, for example. The goal is to prevent or to mitigate damage to the hydrologic balance.

     As readily can be seen, regulatory definitions are important to enforcement of the law. WVDEP in 2001 proposed deleting the definition of "cumulative impact" and adding a limited definition of "material damage to the hydrologic balance." The definition game, as played in West Virginia, favors coal companies.

     The CHIA process is complex and relies upon mountains of data and required studies, frequent water sampling, selection of scientific criteria, informed inspection, and vigorous enforcement by WVDEP.

     CHIA litigation. Since early 1999 OVEC has sought to remedy WVDEP's pattern and practice of poorly administering and enforcing the statutory CHIA requirement. The agency resisted settling the dispute. A lawsuit was started in Huntington before federal district court judge Robert C. "Chuck" Chambers. In various written opinions Judge Chambers has interpreted the statute and regulations, a first for a federal district court in this state. Injunction hearings were held concerning permits along Island Creek in Logan County, and Hominy Creek which is a native trout reproducing stream in Nicholas County.

     In a March 2001 hearing important testimony highlighted the inadequacy of data underlying CHIA findings. Water sampling data are infrequent and do not paint an accurate picture of a baseline from which to measure water violations, both for quantity and quality. OVEC's experts testified that inexpensive monitors could continuously measure flow of water. That data could be used to determine a mine's contribution to flooding. Needless to say, coal companies prefer little data so their potential liability for flood-caused damages is reduced.

     Coal mines, valley fills, and flooding. Denuded surface coal mines invite floods. Stripped of trees, shrubs, and soil, chopped- off mountains lack normal capacity to absorb and use rain water. That fits with common sense.

     Valley fills at mountaintop removal mines increase storm runoff. [Valley fills are discussed in"Valley fills" in this web site]. Computer modeled predictions of storm runoff by OSM and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers say so. The study was done as part of the settlement of the Bragg case.

     Flood studies as part of the CHIA permitting process were not required by WVDEP until 2000. Surface Water Runoff Analysis (SWORA) was an issue in the March 2001 hearing menitoned above. Unfortunately, that one mine site near Island Creek was the only mine in the state to have undergone design by computer analysis. The weakness of that water runoff plan was that it was not calibrated with real, experiential data.

     Horrendous July 2001 floods in southern West Virginia again brought tragedy and massive destruction to thousands of people. Many blamed mountaintop removal and valley fill. Coal companies were cited by WVDEP for violations contributing to flooding, but WVDEP felt its data were weak. If the agency had not resisted OVEC's science-backed position for continuous monitoring of water..... At least one lawsuit followed.

Last updated on Tuesday, September 4, 2001