Alternatives Analysis For Coal Slurry Impoundments

INTRODUCTION Disposal of coal refuse is a costly and challenging problem facing the coal industry today. After the Martin County Coal Company slurry spill and the subsequent regulatory changes state and federal agencies are now beginning to require companies to justify new slurry impoundments. The authors have performed an analysis of different means of disposing of coal refuse for a major coal producing company located in the eastern Kentucky coalfields (the name of which will be withheld for the purpose of this paper). The company’s existing slurry impoundment is nearing its maximum permitted elevation and also an elevation where it may come in contact with abandoned underground workings. Due to the increased concern with underground mine works near slurry impoundments, additional consideration was given to raising the existing impoundment. Several other alternatives were evaluated, including but not limited to raising the existing impoundment, constructing a new slurry impoundment, constructing slurry cells, belt presses and others. This alternatives analysis was performed as part of a Section 404 permit for a valley fill and is currently being reviewed by the U. S. Army Corp of Engineers. All of the known possible alternatives were discussed in detail in the analysis. Due to the findings of the alternatives analysis, the company considers the engineered construction of the proposed impoundment to be the most favorable option of all the other alternatives evaluated, from both an economic and environmental standpoint. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION FOR COALREFUSE/SLURRY DISPOSAL Background The company currently operates several deep mines and employ over 300 people and produces over 3.9 clean Mt/a (4 million stpy) of high quality, low sulfur coal. Currently, coarse refuse is belted to a valley fill, while, fine refuse is pumped to the existing impoundment. Coarse refuse is trucked to the existing impoundment as needed for construction purposes. The average recovery is approximately 50%; therefore, over 3.9 Mt/a (4 million stpy) of coal refuse must also be separated and placed.