|
|
Meek, F. A., Jr., Skousen, J. G., & Ziemkiewicz, P. F. (1996). Evaluation of acid prevention techniques used in surface mining. In Acid mine drainage control and treatment. Morgantown: West Virginia University and the National Mine Land Reclamation Center.
|
|
|
|
Lushnikova, O. Y. (1996). Kompleksirovaniye metodov tamponazha i biolokatsii dlya zashchity podzemnykh vod ot zagryazneniya i istoshcheniya. Combined methods of grouting and biolocation for protection of ground water from pollution and depletion. Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedeniy. Gornyy Zhurnal, 1996(12), 49–52.
|
|
|
|
Ketellapper, V. L., Williams, L. O., Bell, R. S., & Cramer, M. H. (1996). The control of acid mine drainage at the Summitville Mine Superfund Site. In Proceedings of the Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Environmental and Engineering Problems (SAGEEP), vol.1996 (pp. 303–311).
Abstract: The Summitville Mine Superfund Site is located about 25 miles south of Del Norte, Colorado, in Rio Grande County. Occurring at an average elevation of 11,500 feet in the San Juan Mountain Range, the mine site is located two miles east of the Continental Divide. Mining at Summitville has occurred since 1870. The mine was most recently operated by Summitville Consolidated Mining Company, Inc. (SCMCI) as an open pit gold mine with extraction by means of a cyanide leaching process. In December of 1992, SCMCI declared bankruptcy and vacated the mine site. At that time, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) took over operations of the water treatment facilities to prevent a catastrophic release of cyanide and metal-laden water from the mine site. Due to high operational costs of water treatment (approximately $50,000 per day), EPA established a goal to minimize active water treatment by reducing or eliminating acid mine drainage (AMD). All of the sources of AMD generation on the mine site were evaluated and prioritized. Of the twelve areas identified as sources of AMD, the Cropsy Waste Pile, the Summitville Dam Impoundment, the Beaver Mud Dump, the Reynolds and Chandler adits, and the Mine Pits were consider to be the most significant contributors to the generation of metal-laden acidic (low pH) water. A two part plan was developed to control AMD from the most significant sources. The first part was initiated immediately to control AMD being released from the Site. This part focused on improving the efficiency of the water treatment facilities and controlling the AMD discharges from the mine drainage adits. The discharges from the adits was accomplished by plugging the Reynolds and Chandler adits. The second part of the plan was aimed at reducing the AMD generated in groundwater and surface water runoff from the mine wastes. A lined and capped repository located in the mine pits for acid generating mining waste and water treatment plant sludge was found to be the most feasible alternative. Beginning in 1993, mining wastes which were the most significant sources of AMD were being excavated and placed in the Mine Pits. In November 1995, all of the waste from these sources had been excavated and placed in the the Mine Pits. This paper discusses EPA's overall approach to stabilize on-site sources sufficiently such that aquatic, agricultural, and drinking water uses in the Alamosa watershed are restored and/or maintained with minimal water treatment.
|
|
|
|
Cram, J. C. (1996). Diversion well treatment of acid water, Lick Creek, Tioga County, PA. Ph.D. thesis, Pennsylvania State University at University Park,, University Park.
Abstract: Diversion wells implement a fluidized bed of limestone for the treatment of acid water resulting from acid mine drainage or acid precipitation. This study was undertaken to better understand the operation of diversion wells and to define the physical and chemical factors having the greatest impact on the neutralization performance of the system. The study site was located near Lick Creek, a tributary stream of Babb Creek, near the Village of Arnot in Tioga County, Pennsylvania. Investigative methods included collection and analysis of site water quality and limestone data and field study of this as well as other diversion well sites. Analysis of data led to these general conclusions: The site received surface water influenced by three primary sources 1) precipitation, 2) mine drainage baseflow, and 3) melted snow. Water mostly influenced by precipitation events and mine drainage baseflow was more acidic than water influenced by melting snow conditions. The diversion wells were generally able to treat only half or less of the total stream flow of Lick Creek and under extremely high flow conditions the treatment provided was minimal. A range of flow conditions were identified which produced the best performance for the two diversion wells. Treatment produced by the system decreased through the loading cycle and increases to a maximum value after each weekly refilling of limestone. Fine grained sediment in the stream was found to be limestone of the same general composition as the material placed within the wells. Neutralization of acid water was largely due to microscopic particles rather than the limestone sediment discharged to the stream. Additional downstream buffering due to the limestone sediment physically discharged from the vessels was not apparent. Diversion well systems are inexpensive and simple to construct. In addition, the systems were found to be highly reliable and able to effectively treat acid water resulting from mine drainage and acid precipitation. Diversion wells provide better treatment when the treatment site is located at the source of the acidity (such as a mine discharge), rather than at the receiving stream. Systems should be designed with 15 to 20 feet of hydraulic head and the site must have year-round access. Diversion well systems require weekly addition of limestone gravel to the vessels to facilitate continual treatment. A great deal of commitment is necessary to maintain a diversion well system for long periods of time. These systems are more economical and require less attention that conventional chemical treatment of acid water. However, these systems require more attention that traditional passive treatment methods for treatment of acid, including mine drainage.
|
|
|
|
Burnett, M., Skousen, J. G., Skousen, J. G., & Ziemkiewicz, P. F. (1996). Injection of limestone into underground mines for AMD control. In Acid mine drainage control and treatment. Morgantown: West Virginia University and the National Mine Land Reclamation Center.
|
|
