What follows are the letters and photographs we forwarded to ADEM bringing the coal slurry discharge problem to their attention.  Our good friends at the Alabama Environmental Council put us in touch with a deer hunter who had been exploring in the Cahaba Wildlife Management Area and noticed the discharge.  The hunter actually took me out to the site where we explored the tributary together.  It was at that point we realized that this was a very significant problem.  Please see the account described in AEC's Winter Newsletter at:
 
http://www.aeconline.ws/uploads/files/AECNews_winter06_REV.pdf
 
We and AEC will continue to tracking how the clean-up is to be handled.
 
Randy Haddock,
Field Director
Cahaba River Society
 
 

Ms Snyder-Conn, Mr Miller, and Mr Garland,

 
A deer hunter friend recently notified us of a potential problem in the Gurnee area.  He observed a large amount of a black material that had been dumped on the ground and had run off into a tributary.  Since then we have found a location where the material, which I believe is coal slurry from a shaft-mine operation, has been deliberately piped and discharged to at least one tributary to Piney Woods Creek, itself a tributary to the Cahaba River.  Piney Woods Creek enters the Cahaba about 18.5 miles upstream from the CRNWR.
 
ADEM is currently investigating. Two inspectors accompanied me on Dec 6th.  It was at that time we discovered a pipe similar to the one with discharge on the ground below it (9150) was apparently flowing with something.  We followed that to a shaft mine operation, whereupon they did an inspection.  They returned the following day to do a "full inspection".  I've gotten little word back from them since then.  We have written a letter to Steve Jenkins, Chief of Field Operations Division encouraging him to fine the company and require them to clean up what I'll show you below:
 
When we followed the trail of black material down from the pipe (9150) we found a flat section of the tributary where the material had accumulated to a depth of three feet (9129 through 9133).  Following the tributary, we eventually came to Piney Woods Creek just below its confluence with Murray Creek.  A "bar" of the slurry material was obvious there (9142).
 
Last Sunday I hiked into the river and paddle a short way to the confluence of Piney Woods Creek with the Cahaba.  There was a black coating on the Piney Woods Cr streambank about three feet high (9225).  If you scraped off that material, you found the natural streambank alluvium beneath it (9214).
 
We told ADEM we thought these images suggest that a very large volume of the coal slurry has been discharged.  We asked them to fine the responsible party and make them clean-up the slurry remaining in the unnamed ephemeral trib to Piney Woods Creek.
 
Thought you folks might want to know why you get those coal fines washing up on the sandy beaches of the refuge.  If you have any questions, please let me know.
 
Randy Haddock

December 12, 2006

 

 

via email

Mr. Steve Jenkins, Chief
Field Operations Division
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
P.O. Box 301463
Montgomery, AL  36130-1463

 Regarding: A coal slurry discharge to Piney Woods Creek in the Cahaba River basin

Mr. Jenkins,

On December 5, 2006, I notified ADEM about a serious mining problem near Pea Ridge, Alabama.  We now believe this is an illicit coal slurry discharge.  Following an email and a phone conversation with me, Mr. Clay James indicated he would ask two inspectors to investigate the situation the following day.  We are very grateful for that prompt response.  On December 6, 2006, I met Ms. Darby Clark and Ms. Shalain Berquest who accompanied me to the area of the discharge. 

I wanted to compliment the manner in which Ms. Clark and Ms. Berquest handled their response to our concerns.  They were very professional in their management of that outing.   Also, we necessarily negotiated some very steep terrain.  If the area we hiked was not steep, then it was often rich in nasty Horse-briars.  They were undaunted by the considerable physical challenges of evaluating the seriousness of this problem and determining the source of the problem.  We appreciate their dedication. 

The attached images, some of which I have only today emailed to Mr. James and Ms. Clark, document the serious nature of this problem.  In the initial stages of this episode, I did not know if we should be concerned about whether the discharge might be toxic or if this was primarily a sedimentation issue.  While the assessment of the potential toxicity of the discharge is in your hands, it is clear to us that the discharged material is a serious problem with respect to sedimentation and the habitat impacts is has caused to Piney Woods Creek and to the Cahaba River.  Clearly, hundreds of cubic yards of discharged material remains in the ephemeral tributary to Piney Woods Creek.  Untold amounts have moved on through the ephemeral tributary and been released into Piney Woods Creek and will eventually be in the Cahaba River mainstem.

On the first day of their inspection, December 6th, Piney Woods Creek below its confluence with Murray Creek was very much more turbid than it was upstream of Murray Creek (see the last photo in Attachment A).  The grayish color of Piney Woods Creek downstream of Murray Creek was very similar to the turbidity I noted from the unnamed tributary, suggesting that Murray Creek may be receiving other similar discharges upstream from the currently identified site on Piney Woods Creek.  Will ADEM be conducting a survey of other nearby tributaries to determine if there are other locations where this slurry dumping has occurred?  A more thorough inspection of Murray Creek seems prudent.

We view this situation as being very serious.  The Cahaba River mainstem downstream from its confluence with Piney Woods Creek (as well other mainstem segments) is currently on the State’s 303 (d) list for habitat destruction due to excessive sedimentation. 

The response to this situation should reflect the serious nature of impacts to the Cahaba River.  We urge the Department to take both of the following steps to quickly abate this problem and serve as an effective deterrent to further illegal discharges of this kind:

§       Levy a significant fine and

§       Require the responsible party to remove the remaining material before more of it is carried downstream. 

Removal of the material remaining in the streambed of the unnamed ephemeral tributary to Piney Woods Creek should be feasible, particularly for the flat portion of the tributary where the slurry has accumulated to depths of three (3) feet or more.  An access road to that location would allow the excavated material to be transported to a location where it could be properly disposed.  However, we would not recommend using machinery to remove material in the remainder of the ephemeral tributary as such an operation would probably create more of a sedimentation problem than it would relieve.  That work should be done by hand, taking care not to damage the ephemeral streambed.  It is unlikely that materials that have escaped into Piney Woods Creek could be removed without causing more damage than it would relieve, but an assessment of the feasibility of sediment removal from Piney Woods Creek should be made.

Thank you for your consideration of these comments.  We look forward to an outcome that will address the impacts from this illicit discharge, repair some of the damage it has caused, and which will hopefully discourage future negligent behavior.

Sincerely,

Randall C. Haddock

 Field Director
Cahaba River Society
205 322-5326 ext 412

CC:

Clay James, ADEM Field Operations Division
Darby Clark, ADEM Field Operations Division
Shalain Berquest, ADEM Field Operations Division

Attachment A

There are two locations we know of where the slurry material has been dumped on the ground.  The first site is across the road from three storage tanks on the east side of the access road:

 

While not a large amount of material is here, this appears to be the source of where a very large amount of material was released.

The second location is from a 6” pvc pipe:

 

Relatively small amounts have accumulated in the steeper portions of the ephemeral tributary channel below these two points, but photos suggest that significant amounts of material have traveled down this tributary.  That is, slurry material is found 10” to 12” high on stream-side boulders:

 

  However, where the streambed levels-out, more slurry material accumulates.  One area has a 40’ to 100’ wide “floodplain”.  There, the slurry material has accumulated to a depth of at least 3’, as shown in the series below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The slurry material was carried all the way down the unnamed ephemeral tributary and was discharged into Piney Woods Creek near 33° 12’ 21”, -87° 56’ 41”. 

    

The first of these two photos hints at how turbid Piney Woods Creek was.  I believe there may be additional discharge points upstream from this location causing this turbidity.  Just five minutes upstream from this location is the confluence of Murray Creek with Piney Woods Creek.  (While Murray Creek is apparently much larger than Piney Woods Creek at the confluence, the stream below the confluence has been called Piney Woods Creek.)  At the confluence, Piney Woods is very clear and Murray Creek is extremely turbid: 

   This photo is a close-up of the point where Piney Woods Creek and Murray Creek meet.  The stream in the foreground is Murray Creek and the upper and clearer stream is Piney Woods Creek.  When this photo was made on December 6th, there had been no rain for several weeks.  We suspect the turbidity observed in Murray Creek results from yet another discharge source upstream on Murray Creek that we have yet to locate.