HYDROLOGY OF AREA 22, EASTERN COAL PROVINCE, NEW YORK

MULBERRY FORK LOCUST FORK

SIPSEY FORK PENNSYLVANIA BEAR CREEK

NORTH CAROLINA

(SOUTH CAROLINA \

ALABAMA UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS OPEN-FILE REPORT 81-135

HYDROLOGY OF AREA 22, EASTERN COAL PROVINCE, ALABAMA

BY JOE R. HARK1NS AND OTHERS

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS 81-135

TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA MARCH 1981 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

JAMES G. WATT, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Doyle G. Frederick, Acting Director

For additional information write to:

U. S. Geological Survey P. O. Box V University, Alabama 35486 CONTENTS Page Abstract ...... 1

1.0 Introduction ...... 2

1.1 Objective ...... 2 F. A. Kilpatrick and J. R. Rollo 1.2 Project area...... 4 Joe R. Harkins 1.3 Hydrologic problems related to surface mining...... 6 Celso Puente 2.0 General features...... 8 2.1 Geology ...... 8 A. K. Sparkes 2.2 Land forms ...... 10 A. K. Sparkes 2.3 Surface drainage...... 12 Joe R. Harkins 2.4 Land use...... 14 G. J. Allord 2.5 Soils ...... 16 Mark E. Green

2.6 Precipitation ...... 18 Joe R. Harkins 3.0 Water use ...... 20 3.1 Water use in 1975...... 20 Mark E. Green 3.2 Use classification of streams ...... 22 Mark E. Green

4.0 Hydrologic networks...... 24

4.1 Surface water ...... 24 Joe R. Harkins 4.2 Ground water ...... 26 A. K. Sparkes 5.0 Surface water ...... 28 5.1 Streamflow characteristics ...... 28 Joe R. Harkins 5.2 Low flow ...... 30 Joe R. Harkins 5.3 Flood flow ...... 32 Joe R. Harkins 5.4 Duration of flow ...... '...... 34 Joe R. Harkins

III 6.0 Quality of surface water ...... 36 6.1 Specific conductance and dissolved solids ...... 36 Celso Puente 6.2 pH...... 38 Celso Puente

6.3 Sediment ...... 40 Celso Puente 6.4 Iron...... 42 Elizabeth A. Flanary 6.5 Manganese ...... 44 Elizabeth A. Flanary 6.6 Sulfate...... 46 Celso Puente

6.7 Trace elements...... 48 Celso Puente

7.0 Ground water ...... 50

7.1 Source, recharge and movement ...... 50 A. K. Sparkes

7.2 Water levels...... 52 A. K. Sparkes

7.3 Water availability ...... 54 A. K. Sparkes

8.0 Quality of ground water ...... 56 Elizabeth A. Flanary

9.0 Water-data sources ...... 58

9.1 Introduction ...... 58

9.2 National water-data exchange-NAWDEX ...... 60 9.3 WATST0RE ...... 62 9.4 Index to Water-data activities in coal provinces ...... 64

10.0 List of references ...... 66

Appendixes ...... 68

1. Stream classification Alabama intrastate waters...... 68

2. Surface-water stations ...... 70 j 3. Ground-water stations ...... 72

IV FACTORS FOR CONVERTING INCH-POUND UNITS TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF UNITS (SI)

For the convenience of readers who may want to use International System of Units (SI), the data may be converted by using the following factors:

Multiply the inch-pound units By To obtain the SI units inches (in) 25.4 millimeters (mm) inches per hour (in/h) 25.4 millimeters per hour (mm/h) 2.54 centimeters per hour (cm/h) feet (ft) 0.3048 meters (m) feet per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meters per kilometer (m/km) miles (mi) 1.609 kilometers (km) square miles (mi2) 2.590 square kilometers (km2) acre 0.4047 square hectometers (hm2) acre feet 1233 cubic meters (m3) gallons per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liters per second (L/s) million gallons per day (mgal/d) 0.04381 cubic meters per second (m3/s) 3785 cubic meters per day (m3/d) cubic feet per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meters per second (m3/s) cubic feet per second per cubic meters per second per square mile [(ft3/s)/mi2] 0.01093 square kilometer [(m3/s)/km2] tons per square mile per metric tons per square kilometer year [(ton/mi2)/yrj 0.03753 per year [(t/km2)/yr]

HYDROLOGY OF AREA 22, EASTERN COAL PROVINCE, ALABAMA

BY JOE R. HARKINS AND OTHERS

ABSTRACT

The Eastern Coal Province is divided into 24 hydro- Use of water is primarily from surface-water sources logic reporting areas. Area 22 is located near the south­ as ground-water supplies generally are not sufficient for ern end of the Eastern Coal Province, in the Mobile and public supplies. The largest uses of water are for hydro­ Tennessee River basins. It includes part of the Plateau electric power generation, and industrial and municipal and the northern edge of the Warrior coal fields in supplies for use outside the Area (Birmingham). Alabama, and covers an area of 2,495 square miles. The U.S. Geological Survey operates a network of This report is designed to be useful to mine owners hydrologic data collection stations to monitor the and operators and consulting engineers by presenting streamflow and ground-water conditions. This network information about existing hydrologic conditions and includes 74 surface-water stations, 13 observation wells, identifying sources of hydrologic information. General and 4 springs. These data include rate of flow, water hydrologic information is presented in a brief text with levels, and water-quality parameters. These data are illustrations on a single water-resources related topic. available from computer storage through the National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX) as well as in published The area is underlain by the Cretaceous Tuscaloosa reports. Group (Gordo and Coker Formations), Pennsylvanian Pottsville Formation, and pre-Pennsylyanian rocks. The Hydrologic problems relating to surface mining are Pottsville Formation, containing the coal beds, underlies (1) erosion and sedimentation, (2) decline in ground- about 85 percent of the Area, including all of the central water levels, and (3) degradation of water quality. part. Pre-Pennsylvanian rocks are exposed in two valleys Average annual sediment yields can increase by four along the eastern side of the Area and the Tuscaloosa magnitudes in surface mined areas from 20 tons per Group overlies the Pottsville Formation and the pre- square mile per year from areas not affected by mining Pennsylvanian rocks along the western side. to 300,000 tons per square mile per year from mined areas. Sediment yields increase drastically when vegeta­ The Area lies in four stream basins, the Mulberry tion is removed from the highly erosive soils and from and Locust Forks of the and Bear unregulated surface mining operations. Decline in Creek, which is a tributary to the Tennessee River. ground-water levels can occur in and near surface mining Sipsey Fork, the largest basin, is a tributary to Mulberry areas when excavation extends below the water level in Fork. Mulberry Fork basin is underlain almost entirely the aquifer. This can cause nearby wells and springs to by the coal-bearing rocks of the Pottsville Formation. go dry. Acid mine drainage is a problem only adjacent Sipsey Fork, principal tributary to Mulberry Fork, and to the mined area. The acid water is neutralized quickly most of it's tributaries flow into Lewis by the buffering action of calcareous minerals and (or) Smith Lake. The outflow of the lake is regulated by alkaline water, but does increase trace-element concen­ hydropower generating turbines. Locust Fork drains the trations including aluminum, copper, lead, iron, man­ eastern side of the Area. It's basin contains part of two ganese, and zinc. Dissolved-iron concentrations which valleys of pre-Pennsylvanian rocks. Bear Creek and it's are high in and near surface mining areas rapidly de­ tributaries drain the western edge of the Area where the crease due to aeration and dilution as the water moves Tuscaloosa Group overlies the Pottsville Formation or downstream and in short distances downstream are the pre-Pennsylvanian rocks. comparable with water from unmined areas. Sulfate is usually the major dissolved constituent in water from The Area has a moist temperate climate with an mined areas and tends to stay dissolved although its annual rainfall that ranges from 56 inches in the south­ concentrations are reduced by dilution. Sulfate concen­ ern part to 52 inches along the western edge. The trations, like most water-quality parameters, are higher majority of the Area is covered by forest and the soils at times of low flow of streams. have a high erosion potential when vegetative cover is removed. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 7. / OBJECTIVE

Area 22 Report Submitted in Support of Public Law 95-87

Existing hydrologic conditions and identification of sources of hydrologic information are presented.

This report provides broad hydrologic information, In recognizing the potentially adverse impact that using a brief text on an accompanying map, chart, graph, coal mining may have on water resources, Public Law or other illustrations for each of a series of water- 95-87 requires (1) that each mining-permit applicant resources related topics. The summation of the topical make an analysis of the potential effects of the pro­ discussions provides a description of the hydrology of posed mine on the hydrology of the mine site and the area. The information contained herein should be adjacent area, (2) that "an appropriate Federal or State useful to surface mine owners and operators, and con­ agency" provide to each mining-permit " and (3) that sulting engineers in the preparation of permits and measures be taken by mining permittees to control regulatory authorities in appraising the adequacy of adverse effects of mining on the "hydrologic balance" permit applications. and reclamation of the land.

A need for hydrologic information and analysis on a This report broadly characterizes the hydrology of scale never before required nationally was initiated when Area 22 in Alabama as delineated in figure 1.1-1. The the "Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of hydrologic information presented or available through 1977" was signed into law as Public Law 95-87, August sources identified in this report, may be used in des­ 3, 1977. The Act established a new Federal agency, cribing the hydrology of the "general area" of any Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement proposed mine. Furthermore, it is expected that this (OSM), within the U.S. Department of the Interior, hydrologic information will be supplemented by the whose function is to set guidelines for controlling the lease applicant's specific site data as well as data from adverse effects of coal mining on the environment. The other sources to provide a more detailed picture of the Act provided for establishment of State-level regulatory hydrology of the area in the vicinity of the mine and the authorities to administer and enforce State laws meeting anticipated hydrologic consequences of the mining the Federal guidelines. Further provided in the Act is operation. the backup provision that if no satisfactory State pro­ gram is developed the Federal regulations will be en­ forced by OSM. 50 MILES

50 KILOMETERS

Mobile Pomt Figure 1.1-1 Location Map

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 OBJECTIVE 1.0 INTRODUCTION (Continued) 1.2 PROJECT AREA

Area 22 is Located in Southern Part of Eastern Coal Province

Area 22 includes 2495 square miles of which 2194 square miles are in the Black Warrior River basin and 301 square miles are in the Bear Creek basin.

The Eastern Coal province is divided into 24 hydro- the largest single basin in Area 22 and contains Lewis logic reporting areas. The division is based on hydro- Smith Lake with a surface area of 33.1 mi^ (21,200 logic factors, location, size, and mining activity. Hydro- acres). The mouth of the Sipsey Fork is also in Area 22. logic units (drainage basins) or parts of units are com­ The headwater area of Bear Creek basin is drained by bined to form each area (see front cover for areas in the Bear Creek and two tributaries, Cedar and Little Bear Eastern Coal province). The drainage basins in Area 22 Creeks. are shown in figure 1.2-1. Area 22 covers most of the southern end of the Area 22 is near the southern end of the Eastern Coal Plateau Coal Field and a small part of the Warrior Coal province in Alabama. The area, which includes parts of Field along the southern edge of the Area (fig. 1.2-2). Etowah, Blount, Marshall, Cullman, Walker, Winston, The Area also includes the southern end of the Sequat- Lawrence, Franklin, and Marion Counties, lies within the chie Valley and almost all of Murphrees Valley. These Mobile River basin except for the area in Franklin valleys extend across the Area in a northeast-southwest County, a small area in the western edges of Lawrence direction across the eastern side and are not a part of the and Winston Counties, and the northern edge of Marion coal fields. County which drain to the Tennessee River by way of Bear Creek. The Cumberland Plateau section of the Appalachian Plateaus province comprises most of Area 22 (fig. 1.2-3). Area 22 includes 2495 mi^ and encompasses the The eastern half of Franklin County lies in three physio­ upper part of the Black Warrior River basin and the graphic regions; the Highland Rim section of the Interior headwater area for Bear Creek. It includes the basins of Low Plateaus province, the Cumberland Plateau section Locust and Mulberry Forks of the Black Warrior River of the Appalachian Plateaus province, and East Gulf from Trafford to the headwaters of Locust Fork and Coastal Plain of the Coastal Plain province. from Empire to the headwaters of Mulberry Fork. The basin of Sipsey Fork, a tributary to Mulberry Fork, is SCALE 1:1,000,000

10 20 30 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

FRANKLIN Basin boundary Cedar C basin Subbasin boundary Bear( Creek b r CREEK EXPLANATION BASIN

M ARiON Physiographic Divisions -71 JM / JcOEFEt |f*LE Highland Rim section MW^&tj (Interior Low Plateaus province) l/^ETOW A H Cumberland Plateau section 34\J^bi_JN'sinv_j '"j> -4J.-; (Appalachian Plateaus province) East Gulf Coastal Plain section (Coastal Plain province) Location of Area 22 in Alabama

Figure 1.2-1 Drainage basins.

MARSHALL MAR ION

EXPLANATION

Coal Fields

Plateau Field ETOWAH

WALKE R

'M ARSH ALL M ARI ON- From Sapp and Emplaincoun (1975)

Figure 1.2-3 Physiographic divisions.

ETOWAH

WALKER

Figure 1.2-2 Coal fields.

BASE FROM U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1.0 INTRODUCTION (Continued) STATE BASE MAP, 1966 1.2 PROJECT AREA 1.0 INTRODUCTION (Continued) 1.3 HYDROLOGIC PROBLEMS RELATED TO SURFACE MINING

Hydrologic Environment can be Adversely Altered by Surface Coal Mining

Erosion, sedimentation, decline in water levels, diversion of drainage, and degradation of water quality are typical problems associated with surface coal mining.

Surface mining drastically alters the environment of surface-mining areas when excavation extends below the previously undisturbed lands and if the areas are unre­ base water level of the basin. This can cause wells and claimed there can be long-term detrimental environ­ springs to go dry. A hypothetical diagram illustrating mental consequences. Mining activities such as the water-level declines resulting from surface mining is removal of vegetation, excavation, and creation of large shown in figure 1.3-3. The water level declines could be volumes of unconsolidated spoil materials increases the temporary or permanent depending on depth of excava­ potential for erosion and sedimentation (fig. 1.3-1). tion and subsequent reclamation. Average annual sediment yields for streams draining relatively undisturbed basins in Area 22 generally range The alteration of natural topography by surface from 20 to 800 (tons/mi^)/yr. In contrast, annual mining commonly diverts drainage. Such diversion alters sediment yields for streams draining heavily mined but the streamfiow characteristics (Knight and Newton, unreclaimed areas can be as high as 300,000 1977). Diversion of drainage is illustrated by the hypo­ (tons/mi2)/yr (Hubbard, 1976). thetical diagrams shown in fig. 1.3-4.

Adverse effects generally associated with increased One of the most common and troublesome water- erosion include excessive sediment deposition in streams quality problems is acid-mine drainage. During mining, and reservoirs which in turn increases the cost of main­ accelerated weathering of iron-bearing minerals (pyrite taining navigation channels and treating industrial and and marcasite) exposed in spoil materials and coal beds domestic water. Examples of extreme erosion and produces sulfuric acid and large quantities of soluble sediment deposition that have occurred in adjacent Area mineral salts. Water draining such a mined area generally 23 are shown in figure 1.3-1. Sediment deposition in has low pH values (2.5-5.0 units), high sulfate, and high Locust Fork of the Black Warrior River near Sayre has dissolved-solids concentrations. The acidic water reacts resulted in an alteration of the aquatic habitat, increased with other minerals and commonly increases trace- flooding due to filling of the stream channel by sedi- element concentrations including aluminum, copper, . ment, and reduction of aesthetic value in recreation lead, iron, manganese, and zinc. Adverse effects associ­ areas (fig. 1.3-1). Sediment deposition at Lake Harris, a ated with acidic and highly mineralized mine drainage municipal water-supply source for the city of Tusca- include: (1) reduction of stream aquatic life, (2) in­ loosa, has reduced reservoir storage capacity (fig. 1.3-2). creased corrosiveness, (3) limited use of water for most domestic and industrial purposes, and (4) reduction of Decline of ground-water levels can occur in and near aesthetic value and recreational use. Normal inflow to stream from aquifer AQUIFER

A. UNDISTURBED CONDITION

Figure 1.3-1 Spoil banks along Locust Fork of Black Warrior Figure 1.3-2 Sediment deposited in Harris Lake, Tuscaloosa River near Sayre, Jefferson County. County.

poorly permeable

Normal stream inflow interrupted; now stream loses water to aquifer.

B. DISTURBED AQUIFER (Reclaimed overburden is poorly permeable impeding ground water)

Previously mined and reclaimed Water available for PRIOR TO MINING private well: quality may be impaired. O

C. DISTURBED AQUIFER (Permeable fill improving infiltration)

Figure 1.3-3 Possible impacts of mining aquifers

AFTER MINING 1.0 INTRODUCTION (Continued) Figure 1.3-4 Possible disruption of drainage patterns resulting from mining operations. 1.3 HYDROLOGIC PROBLEMS RELATED TO SURFACE MINI 2.0 GENERAL FEATURES 2.1 GEOLOGY

Three Geologic Units Underlie the Area

Area 22 is underlain by three principal geologic units: the Pottsville Formation, which contains the coal beds; the undifferentiated pre-Pennsylvanian rocks; and the Tuscaloosa Group.

The Pottsville Formation of Pennsylvanian age eastern geologic structure section, fig. 2.1-1). In northern underlies about 85 percent of Area 22, including all of Walker County on the southern boundary of the Area, the central part of the Area. Undifferentiated pre- the Pottsville is 1,100 feet thick (McGlamery, 1955). The Pennsylvanian rocks occupy two valleys in the eastern thickest and most productive coal beds are found in the part of the Area and also crop out in the west. The upper part of the Pottsville above the base of the Black Coker and Gordo Formations of the Tuscaloosa Group Creek coal bed (Adams, 1926). The outcrop of the Black of Late Cretaceous age cap the hills in the western part Creek coal bed generally is considered the boundary (fig. 2.1.1). The outcrop area of the Pottsville Formation between the Plateau Coal Field to the north and the includes parts of two coal fields, the Plateau and the Warrior Coal Field to the south (Mining Information Warrior. Series, 1978). Lithology is difficult to correlate regional­ ly. Generalized vertical sections showing coal beds are The geologic structure in Area 22 is most complex shown in figure 2.1-2. in the east, where the strata are folded and faulted to form northeast-southwest trending anticlines and syn- The undifferentiated pre-Pennsylvanian rocks are clines. The anticlines have eroded to form the topo­ about 4,900 feet thick and consist primarily of lime­ graphic lows of Sequatchie Valley and Murphrees Valley. stone, dolomite, chert, sandstone, shale, and some beds The synclinal troughs form Sand Mountain and Blount of hematite. These strata crop out in Sequatchie Valley Mountain capped by the erosion-resistant sandstones of and Murphrees Valley in the eastern part of the area and the Pottsville Formation. Elsewhere in the Area the in smaller stream valleys in the western part. strata dip south westward 30 to 200 ft/mi. The Coker and Gordo Formations of the Tuscaloosa The Pottsville Formation consists chiefly of alterna­ Group unconformably overlie the pre-Pennsylvanian ting beds of gray sandstone, conglomerate, siltstone, and rocks and the Pottsville Formation in the western part of shale with beds of coal and underclay. The formation the Area. The Coker is the older of the two., forma­ generally becomes thicker to the south because (1) the tions and usually is present below the Gordo. However, regional dip to the southwest is greater than the south­ in most of the Tuscaloosa Group outcrop in Area 22, the ward slope of the land surface preserving younger beds Gordo overlaps the Coker and rests on the Pottsville to the southwest, and (2) the beds of the formation Formation. The base of the Coker dips toward the thicken and increase in number to the south and south­ southwest about 30 ft/mi; the base of the Gordo dips east. Thickness of the Pottsville Formation within Area southwestward about 25 ft/mi (Causey, 1972). Both 22 ranges from 210 feet at the northern boundary (Faust formations consist of unconsolidated sand, gravel, and and Jefferson, 1980) to 1,400 feet on Blount Mountain in clay with the major gravel beds near the base of each the southeast (Culbertson, 1964). Blount Mountain is formation. Thickness of the Tuscaloosa Group in Area located on the downthrown side of a thrust fault which 22 varies from zero feet at the Pottsville contact to contributes in part to the greater thickness there (see about 50 feet at the western boundary of the area. MULBERRY FORK

SEQUATCHIE VALLEY

SAND MOUNTAIN

EXPLANATION MURPHREES VALLEY Tuscaloosa Group HOUSTON BLOUNT Sand, gravel, and clay MOUNTAIN

Pottsville Formation Sandstone, conglomerate, shale, and RN GEOLOGIC siltstone with some coal beds and underclay STRUCTURE SECTION Pre-Pennsylvanian rocks WESTERN GEOLOGIC Limestone, dolomite, sandstone, STRUCTURE SECTION chert, and shale

"COLUMNAR SECTIONS" ONLY ETOWAH Coal beds

Sandstone Figure 2.1-1 Geologic map with structure sections. Conglomerate WALKER Geology from Adams and others (1926)

Northeastern part of Marion County Cullman County Warrior coal field

Winston C(junty "" ... Mary Lee coal group _^^^«*-. Lick Creek Sandstone Member Bloil Jefferson coal bed nt Mountain Black Creek p coal bed Black Creek coal bed Black Creek coal group Jeflerson Payne (Bynum) coal bed Bear Creek Polecat ;-'-:;v^ Fourth conglomerate coal bed Polecat coal bed Woodward coal bed ^^ Lee Dodd Mine Carnes (Altoona) coal bed

Polecat vV--^i; Third conglomerate coal bed Brock Mine Washington coal bed Bear Creek coal bed /' ~ coal bed /Unnamed coal bed Boyles / Sandstone Member / Lowe's (Swansea) coal bed Franklin Cciunty /" Unnamed coal bed Lawrence County / Unnamed coal beds Second conglomerate / °:-'v >"/.-; / I Caskie coal bed Lower Conglomerate 'bear Creek Coal bed >?'; .-;': .'».' Howard coal bed Lower Conglomerate ^.' < ;.-'.=: McCarty Mine Reid Gap coal bed A.M. Lollar '^"iV^: ''?£?> David Motes

Hovater - - - mm &'-, -j'.'f',' Q'\.:?JZi'-.n Genera //zed from outcrops within county or area noted at top of columns Not to scale but proportional to thickness of average sections From Sapp and Emplaincourt (1975) Generalized from outcrops within county or area noted. Figure 2.1-2 Generalized columnar sections showing possible relationships of coal beds. 2.0 GENERAL FEATURES 2.1 GEOLOGY 2.0 GENERAL FEATURES (Continued) 2.2 LAND FORMS

Area 22 Within Three Physiographic Provinces

Area 22 lies within three physiographic provin