International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research

IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

Pre-mining Prediction of Quality of Water and its Application

in Environmental Management Plan

H. L. Yadav1, A. Jamal2, and A. K. Ranjan3

1
Research Scholar, Department of Mining Engineering, IIT (BHU) Varanasi, India.
2
Professor, Department of Mining Engineering, IIT (BHU) Varanasi, India.
3
Assistant Mining Engineer, Directorate of Geology and Mining, Uttar Pradesh.

Abstract:
The quality of water in the sump is ultimate product of rock water- interaction. Geochemistry of rocks decides the quality
of water in mine sump. The role of water quality management in the mining industry has been gaining attention due to
social awareness and legal requirement. Proper management and utilization of water in mine are not becoming
practical due to lack of advance information about quality and quantity of water to be produced during mining. Advance
information (pre- mining) about coal overburden and quality of lea-chate to be released from mine spoil will not only be
helpful in reclamation and re-vegetation of mine spoil but also make water treatment and utilization plan more practical,
economically feasible and eco-friendly.
In this paper, geoenvironmental properties of coal and associated rocks have been used to predict the quality of water in
a proposed mine. The prediction has been conducted by leaching column method. To predict and minimize the probable
hydrologic consequences of surface mining, slake durability test of overburden rocks to be disturbed during mining have
been conducted. The analysis of leached water and leached rocks were carried out by advance and conventional
techniques.
The result reveals bench wise water quality on the advancement of mining; within the mine (in sump) and outside the
mine (overburden dumpsite).
The laboratory results are encouraging and may be applied for,
i) Selection of plant communities for reclamation and re-vegetation of mine spoil,
ii) Management of acid water in mine and
iii) Creation of water based employment in the area during and after mining (fishery, swimming / boating, Ponds and
water supply set up for irrigation).
Keywords: acid mine drainage, waste materials, leachate test, leaching column, coal bench

Introduction
Good water scarcity is rapidly increasing and becoming a major environmental problem for many developed
and developing countries of the world. Water is also essential for mining operations at one place and is
interference in mining operations at another place. Different Mining activities are sources of water pollution
and often create qualitative and quantitative pollution in and around the mine. Among the various causes of
water pollution is an interaction of rocks, minerals with water, depending upon their solubility and reactivity.
As a result of rock-water interaction during mining, there is the occurrence of acid mine drainage (acid rock
drainage) primarily results from the oxidation of Pyrite and pyrrhotite. In the absence of Pyrite, the water may
be neutral or alkaline. The nature of water regarding pH value may be predicted during prospecting or
exploration stage with borehole samples. In this paper, various geo environmental properties of the coal seam
and associated rocks have been used to predict the natural water quality in a proposed coal mine. Coal mining
in India is a major activity and producing over 612.44 million metric tons in 2014-15, a growth of 8.25% over
the previous year (Energy Statistics, 2016) the generation of waste rock over 1000 million cubic meters.These
mines are providing a suitable place for interaction of water with coal and rocks, and causes of various

188 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

pollutants. In this paper, the water quality prediction has been made by column leaching and pollutant to be
released, and corresponding pH value of water has been predicted in advance, before the start of the mine at the
exploration stage.
The pre-mining prediction of drainage quality is governed by several climatic, geological, geotechnical and
geochemical factors. The following components describe the rocks and reaction environment of iron pyrite
and other sulphide occurring in coal and associated rocks:
• The amount of acid producing sulphide minerals occurring in coal and associated rocks.
• The amount of acid neutralizing acid carbonate and alkali based minerals present in associated rocks as
overburden and inner burden.
• The type and concentration of the contaminants present in rocks and coal.
The availability of above criteria not only fulfills the requirements of occurrence of AMD. It is controlled by
several factors such as:
•Types of pyrites minerals present and their mode of occurrence.
• Type of carbonates and alkali based hydroxide minerals.
• Surface area available for reaction means particle size of coal.
• Other parameters such as availability of water, oxygen, bacteria, etc.
Keeping in mind the above aspects of acid generation, predictive tests were developed for mine drainage
prediction. These methods may broadly be divide into the static and kinetic method. The static methods
determine both the total acid generating and total acid neutralizing potential of coal and associated rocks. The
potential of different litho-types to generate acid drainage is calculated as either the difference of the values or
as the ratio of values. The static test intends to predict the acid/ alkalinity generation potential. Whereas
kinetic tests are intended to simulate the process found at mining sites, usually at an accelerated rate. Data
from these tests are used to identify acid producing and acid neutralizing potential of different lithod-units in
the given sedimentary formation.

Global Status of Acid Mine Drainage

Presently in many parts of the world, the water quality status declining due to, a breakdown to devote
sufficiently in water Services. These water services incorporate the treating, recycle and reusing of water
efficiently. This types of problem happened due to mis- management of policy-makers and economic
planners, which not fully appreciate the significance of water. This is currently raising the water crises issue in
many parts of the world. When the worldwide demand of water will be more than the supply (Creamer, 2015).
The world’s population is increasing very fast and may be tripled in the last of the twentieth century, while
world population also increased 40-50 %, in the next 50 years with six times demand of renewable resources.
Due to this natural water resources in many parts of the world will be under high pressure (Creamer,
2015).These concerns will continue to increase due to the growing population and the impacts on water
systems. Therefore, pressure on natural water resources is not unique to India, but it is a universal problem,
with many develop and developing countries experiencing the same impacts. The main purpose of this study
is to look at AMD from a global perspective and to understand; its impacts that AMD-related issues are not
unique to India but are being experienced in several parts of the world. Among developed countries, coal
mines of USA are major sources of water pollution and affect the surface and sub surface water quality to a
large extent. Acid mine drainage generated from coal mines and coal refuse spoils is one of the most continual
industrial pollution problems in the USA. In 1936, it was estimated that more than 9 million tonnes of
sulphuric acid were yearly release from coal mines into the natural streams situated in Pennsylvania
(Krickovic1965). Now, although state and federal regulations specify water quality standards for coal mine
discharges. In 1967 most comprehensive survey was conducted by the federal water pollution control
administration in the drainage basins all over the Appalachian region in Pennsylvania, West Virginia,
Kentucky, Ohio, Marland, Virginia, Tennessee, Georgea, and Alabama. Waters samples were collected for
analysis of various water quality parameters including acidity, to determine the level of water pollution
189 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan
 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

caused by coal mine drainage, at that time,10500,miles of stream were considerably degraded by coal mine
drainage and further analysis of the data showed that approximately half or 5740 miles of stream were
affected by AMD (Olem 1981).In the USA approximately 180,000 acres of lakes and reservoirs have also
been infected by acid mine drainage (Kleinmann, 1989).
In Pennsylvania more than 2400 miles of streams severely contaminated by coal mining (Mallo, 2011) which
annually produced approximately 82 million tonnes of coal, there are 2,795 miles of major streams that fail to
meet current water quality standards drainage from abandoned mines contributes to at least 70% of the total.
Although projected figures for 1993 indicates a slight decrease in stream miles that will not meet water quality
standards, no decrease in the drainage pollution related to mining is expected. In Ohio, where annual coal
production was nearly 42 million tonnes, a 1979 study conducted by the Ohio environmental protection
agencies indicates that AMD affects 1075 miles of streams, according to division of water quality control of
the Tennessee, where annual coal production is nearly 11.5 million tonnes,AMD was estimated to effects 994
miles of stream, according to the division of water quality control of the Tennessee department of public
health in Kentucky, the department for natural resources and environmental protection, division of abandoned
lands, has compiled data for 1978-80 which shows the more than 2100 miles of stream are affected by coal
mine discharge within the eastern coalfields. Only 77 miles after acidic (Beston1986) the low protection of
acid in a stream in this area of Kentucky is approximately related to the abundance of limestone in the coal-
bearing rocks (Heuisch 1987). Although rigorous comparison cannot be made, the more recent data show that
the amount and magnitude of AMD pollution are same as that measured in the 1977 study. Government
regulation has done much work to improve the water quality of discharges from active mining operations, but
AMD released from inactive mines, which are not properly regulated (Nicholson et al., 1988).In spite of
increased efforts to control it, AMD continues to be a major severe environmental problem. Many literature
surveys show that in few coal mines of United Kingdom having AMD problems. This has low pH as 3.2.
Whereas the range of concentration of total dissolved solids varies from 1727 to 2022 mg/L the sulfate and
iron concentrations are also much higher, and in few cases, it has been reported as 1506 mg/L and 2305mg/L
respectively (Best et al. 1983; Rae, 1978). Today Canadian coal/ metals mining industries are also facing
AMD problems in many major mining sites in various provinces. There are more than 10,000 abandoned
(Report Government of Canada, 1991) mines in Canada as per records of the Canadian government,
Canadian mineral industry generates 650 million tones of mine waste (waste rock and tailings) per year.(
Report Government of Canada 1991). This is 20 times the amount of municipal solid waste. Many coal
mines are suffering from AMD the dimension of the problem is relatively more between 1984 to1987; two
projects were taken to define the extent of acid generating mine and mine waste(Fillion et al.,1990). British
Columbia Ontario, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Quebec, Sasktchewan, Yukon, and Northwest
Territories were all identified as having operating and abandoned acid generating sites with a total area of
15000 hectares the two provinces with the longest history of mining Ontario and Quebec, have completed
survey of their active and inactive mines sites in Ontario, 100 active/ inactive mine site were identified and
out of these 20 mines sites pose solemn problem of acid mine drainage. In Quebec, out of 107 inactive mine
sites, twenty-one mine sites due to acidic drainage have been identified as hazardous waste sites (Fillion et al.
1990).
Many hydrological studies carried out in an anambka state coal mining area in Nigeria by numerous
researchers. The preliminary observation shows that the mine area is harshly suffering from the AMD
problem. The analysis results show high TDS, iron and sulphate content with low pH value in water resources.
This is due to sub-bituminous grade coal, which has been mined since 1916. Which create a major problem
for portable water supply to Enugu state. Many Ground water samples were collected from the surrounding
area and analyzed between the periods of 1987 to 1988.which shows wide variation in Water quality. The pH
value of mines was found as 2.8, 2.3, 6.1 and 6.3 respectively (Erickson et al., 1982).Korean coal mines also
effected by acid mine drainage, which discharges more than 141000 m3 mine influence water every day (Chon
and Hwang, 2000).

190 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

Pakistan has enormous coal reserves (amounting to about 186 Bt) and its utilization is increasing every day
(Shoaib, 2013). The major coal fields (Lakhra coal mine) in Pakistan has been identified as primary sources of
acid mine drainage generation in Pakistan, degrading water quality ( Asif et al., 2002)
Mine water started to decant from inactive underground mine workings on the West Rand in Gauteng
Province
In South Africa, AMD is occurring on the West Rand in Gauteng Province. Acid mine water started to decant
from defunct (closed) flooded underground mine workings on the West Rand in August 2002. “Decant has
subsequently been manifested at various mine shafts and diffuse surface seeps in the area. Up until year 2005.
The close of storage and pumping services to contain and manage on average of 15 Mega-Litres per day
(ML/d) of decant, the AMD found its way disturbed the natural water course and flowed towards northward
the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site (Oelofse et al., 2007).
China is an also major coal production country, annually discharged Over 6.1 billion m3 of CMD in
surrounding mine area, results based on the study of water quality of 269 coal mines in 11 large coal-
producing regions in China. Out of these Six broad types of CMD were identified which was slightly
contaminated, acidic, high salinity, high sulfate, high fluoride, with an elevated range of iron and manganese.
Which pose a serious environmental pollution problem in China (Feng, et al., 2015).
In the Lead and Zinc Ore Mining, Sardina, Italy significant increases concentration level of salinity, Na and
Cl, and Hg, due to the ending of dewatering activities in the overlying aquifers due to mixing in the shallow
groundwater system (Cidu et al. 2001). Australia is a mineral-rich country, which plays important role in
Australian economy. In Australian coal was discovered near Newcastle in New South Wales in the 1700s and
later in the south and west of the settlement (Australian government sources, 2007).Due to different coal
mining operation, AMD is common problems in Australia, and a serious attempt is being made to control and
manages the AMD problems in Australia, and there is a general awareness of the potential problems
associated with the presence of reactive sulfide in the mine and mine waste. Regulation authorities are
responsible for providing details of the nature and occurrence of acid mine forming materials within the
deposits and to provide a management plan for the disposal of AMD and reclamation of acid generating
waste. Rules and regulations covering the management of mine waste within many South East Asian countries
are very inadequate. However, only general pollution control and environmental rules and regulation are used
for the management of the environmental problems in many mining industries (Deul et.al1.,1967;
Ivanovetal1989).
Mine water is not only related to surface and sub-surface degradation of water quality, but it is also liable for
the humiliation of essential soil quality, water habitats and also responsible for allowing heavy metals to seep
into the natural environment (Adler and Rascher, 2007). Due to an exacerbating nature of AMD is its
persistence, it is very complex to remedy. In many cases, the AMD-affected area may never be completely
restored (EEB, 2000).
The problem of AMD, no doubt is mostly confined to localized zone at the sources but may extend to large
distances if the acid mine water is allowed to get discharged into the water stream as is the case in many coal/
metals mines.
Mines and its impact on natural waters resources in various regions around the world have been reported by
(Bell et al.,2001; Black and Craw,2001;Cravotta et al.,2010;Equeenuddin et al.,2010; Lattuada et
al.,2009;Nganje et al.,2010 and Sahoo et al.,2012, Yadav and Jamal, 2015a; 2016a).

Acid Mine Drainage Problem In Indian Coal Mines

In the process of development, Indian coal mining industries play important role in economy and energy
sector. In Indian coal mining both, opencast and underground mines directly or indirectly affects the
surrounding environment, among them in few mines; generation of AMD continues to be one of the most
severe environmental problems. Due to AMD problems in some coal mines, the ecological disturbance is
major persistent problems, mainly in lower Gondwana coal of barakar formation and tertiary coal of north-

191 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

east region. The high percentage of sulphide minerals in coal of barakar series of lower Gondwana system in
central India and the tertiary systems in the north-east region including Jammu & Kashmir is responsible for
the severe AMD problem (Dhar et al., 1986; Jamal, 1989). Indian coals normally contain total sulfur, 2%-8 %,
where 75%-90 % is in the form of organic sulfur, while 25%-10% in the form of in inorganic viz pyritic sulfur
and sulfate (Baruah and Khare 2007).In Makum coalfield (Ledo and Baragolai) Assam, India generally
contains 71.7% and 78.5% of organic sulfur, and 28.2% and 21.5 % of inorganic respectively (Baruah et al.
2006). The proximate and ultimate analysis result of coal obtained from Makum Coalfield, Assam showed
3.31%, 2.95% and 2.16% of ash content, total sulfur, and organic sulfur, Respectively (Saikia et al. 2014). The
vitrinite content and volatile matter of the Make Coalfield, Assam was 42.3% and around 93%, respectively
(Saikia et al. 2014). Total sulfur content found in Namchik coalfield, Arunachal Pradesh ranged 1.23%-
4.84%. Which containing organic sulfur 41%-74%, of total sulfur and 8%-46.6% of volatile matter (Chandra
et al., 1984). Similar characteristics also found in Bapung coals of Jaintia Hills, Meghalaya, organic sulfur was
more abundant among the different sulfur species constituting an average 62% of organic sulfur of the total
sulfur content of 4.59 % in it (Ahmed and Rahim 1996). Some time these total values of sulfur content found
more than 7.0 wt %, out of which, 25% and 75 % in form of inorganic and organic sulfur content. The Tiru
Valley coals of Nagaland, India, classified in sub-bituminous to bituminous-D in rank, which having 4%-7%
moisture with reasonably high content of volatile matter (22% and 42%), sulfur (5%-11%) content (Singh et
al. 2012a, b). The volatile matter, total sulfur and Ash content of Northern Mongchen and Moulong Kimong
coalfields, Nagaland, India ranged 34.9 %-44.8 %, 3.23 %-5.21%, 2.01%-19.5%, respectively (Das et al.,
2015). The average sulfur content in Indian coals is approximately 1% (exceptions are coal of in Assam and
Jammu & Kashmir). In Andhra Pradesh, Bengal, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Orissa, coal fields,
sulfur contents range from 0.2 to 3% (Singh1986; Badrinath et al., 1987) the total sulfur contents found in
Assam coal is as high as 8%(average 3-6%).Which major portion is made up of organic compounds of sulfur,
in Indian, fortunately, the majorities of the coal mining area are safe and only in few localized areas having
AMD problem. AMD is the most persistent pollution problems in coal mines of North Eastern Coalfields. The
Tertiary coals of north eastern coal fields have been found to contain as high 8% sulphur with varying
percentage of pyrites, sulphate and organic and free sulphur the overburden dumps around these mines are
highly acidic having pH of even 2.65 since rainfall in this area are large, acid drainage is of serious
environmental concern (Rawat, 1982; Rawat, 1983).In the Gobi OCP of Northern Coalfields Ltd, Singrauli,
severe problem of AMD has been reported. The pH value reported here is as lower as (1.9-2.63) (Jamal1989,
Prasad, and Kumar, 2015; Yadav and Jamal. 2016).Beside this in another part of the country, a few coal mines
have also been reported to suffer from AMD (Dhar1990; Jamal1989; Jamal et al 1991; Prasad and Kumar
2015).
Mine water is characterized by low pH,(Yadav and Jamal, 2015; Jamal et al, 2015) high salinity, acidity,
aluminum, iron, and, sulphate, raised levels of heavy metals such as cadmium, cobalt, copper, molybdenum
and zinc, and probably even radionuclide’s. The acidic water dissolves several salts and also mobilizes metals
from mine workings and overburden. Released dark, reddish-brown colour water with low pH values as 2.5
continue at the mine site (Akcil and Koldas, 2006).
Field Study and Sample Collection
Bore hole samples (core samples) were collected from different exploration sites of Chhattisgarh coalfield,
India. The representative overburden samples were collected during drilling operation by diamond core drills.
This method of drilling provided a continuous record of the rock at that particular point along with structure
and textures in the vertical profile. Three drilling sites were selected to collect rock samples from exploration
sites. Two holes represent 20 ha where as three holes represent 60 ha of the proposed mine sites. Overburden
sample mostly is sandstone followed by shale, clay, fired clay and conglomerate with coal collected,
separately from the different litho-types during the drilling operation. The average thicknesses of coal Seam in
exploration bore holes are given in table 1., the vertical sampling interval was 1 meter within sandstone,(Noll
et al.,1988). The obtained sample from core drills, crushed in the laboratory of size to 8 meshes (ASTM) and
put into the leaching column for rock- water interaction study. A wide variety of kinetic or leaching tests has
been used in research studies (Bradham and Caruccio, 1991; Lapakko,1973). The leachate resulting from the

192 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

various kinetic tests are collected in clean and dry plastic container and evaluated for certain parameters such
as pH, Temp. TDS and EC by MultiParameter, pH meter, and obtained result are shown in Table 2and 3.Coal
and non-coal samples have also been used for column leaching experiments to predict the quality of water
existing at various benches with respect to time during the rainy season in a year in the projected mine. The
life of the coal mines varies from 20 to 40 years. During this duration, coal deposit passes through different
stages such as planning, development, exploitation and abandoned stages. During mining, many non- coal and
coal benches are being developed with time. With these stages, the sump water quality in proposed mine site
will also continually be changed. Hence, accordingly, the simulation for an experiment in leaching- column-
set- up has been made and tested for different geoenvironmental parameters

Geoenvironmental Properties
The following geoenvironmental properties of coal and associated rocks were determined
• R-pH value
• Acid production potential
• Acid neutralization potential
• slake durability index
The above properties were determined, and results are summarized in table 1to5
Rock-pH (R-pH)
Rock-pH is a modified form of abrasion pH. It may be defined as the pH of the decant water obtained after 24
hours of the interaction of the finally ground rock powder obtained of 200 mesh with the water of 7.0 pH
value at 25°c in a solid, liquid ratio of 1:10 by volume (Jamal ,1989). The Rock-pH value of rocks is a
function of Constituent ion of the minerals, ease with which these ions pass into aqueous solution, and nature
of binding materials. The Rock-pH of different rocks types and coal were done by standard available
technique. The results are shown in Table 4.
Acid Production Potential
The standard technique was used to determine inorganic sulfur in coal and associated rocks.
Acid production potential (APP) it is defined as the amount of acid that would be produced if all pyrites in
the sample reacted according to the following stoichiometry
FeS2+15/4O2+7/2 H2O= Fe (OH)3+2SO4-- +4H+
APP is determined in kg of CaCO3 equivalent per ton of associated rock expressed as determine in kg of
CaCO3/ton)
To predict drainage quality in the proposed coal mine, and to know the actual acidity, the most suitable
method for determining acid producing the potential of the associated rock were used the results are given in
table 6.
Acid Neutralization Potential (ANP)
It is defined as the ability of the stratum to neutralize a strong acid. Acid neutralization potential is
determined in kg of CaCO3/ton of associated rocks (Noll et al.,1988; Skousen et al.,1997).The neutralization
potential was determined by reacting 2 gram of rock samples with a known amount and strength of HCL. The
solution was then back -titrated with a base (NaOH) of known strength to pH 7.0 to determine the neutralizing
content of the sample. This standard procedure was adopted for determination of acid neutralization potential,
and the values were calculated as follows:
1. C = mL acid in blank/mL base in blank.
2. mL acid consumed = mL acid added -mL base added x C
3. Tons CaCO3 equivalents/ 1000 tons of material = (mL of acid consumed) x (25.0) x (N of acid).The results
of acid neutralization potential value are given in Table 5.

193 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

Results and Discussion

The leachate from sandstone sample shows the alkaline value of water. Table 2 shows that the pH value of
water leachate from overburden is ranging from 6.13 to 9.30.the pH value also depends on the types of rock
and rock characteristic .It may also be observed that the Total dissolved solids range from 426.6-544.4 mg/L.
During the initial stage of mining, the ground water would also interact with rocks in the rainy season and
increase the alkalinity of sump water. During overburden removal stage, TDS concentration is also high in the
sump water. The exposure of coal benches would produce acid water during drainage. The pH of coal seepage
will be in acidic range, and pH value will be higher than the values show in Table 3. It may be observed from
this Table that the leachate from coal is very acid in nature in laboratory condition. However, in proposed mine
site water would less acidic than the laboratory condition due to water chemistry. The R-pH of different types
of sandstone (overburden) is shown in table 4. It may be observed from this table that there is significant
variation in R-pH value among sandstone also. It ranges from 7.72 to 9.28. The acid neutralization potential
(ANP) of different types of sandstone is given in Table 5. It may be observed that there is marginal variation in
ANP of fine grained sandstone in the area. The acid production potential (APP) of coal and shale is given in
Table 6. It may be observed that there is variation in coal and shale in the area. However it has ample capacity
to neutralize acidic water in the proposed mine when it would be commissioned
Table 1. Average thickness of coal seam in exploration bore holes in two sites
S.No Name of coal seam Bore hole thickness (m) Bore hole thickness in meter

1 Upper Kusmunda seam 33.04 m (including bands) 36.60m(Including bands)

25.28m(Excluding bands of
1m&above)
2 Lower Kusmunda seam 27m (including bands) 35.19m(Including bands)
(composite) 49.83m(The mean thickness) 58.74(Excluding bands of
1m&above)
3 Lower Kusmunda seam 23.0m(Excluding bands of 4.22m (Including bands)
(top splite) 1m&above) 39.05m(Excluding bands of
1m&above)
4 Lower Kusmunda seam 3.57m (Including bands of 31.65m(Including bands)
(Bottom splite) 1m&above
3.57(Excluding bands of 14.99m(Excluding bands of
1m&above 1m&above)

Table 2. Kinetic (leaching column) test for pre-mining prediction of drainage

Sl. Types of rock Temp. ºC pH range TDS ( mg/l) EC (µS/cm)
No.
1 White sandstone 29.2 8.90-9.30 426.6-544.4 640-817
2 Brown sandstone 28.4 8.83-9.19 484.9-514.6 727-772
3 Yellow sandstone 29.3 8.84-9.22 535.2 – 542.5 803-814
4 Clay 28.8 7.99-8.13 121.3-137.4 182-206
5 Shale 28.7 6.13 – 7.10 382.4-475.4 573-713
6 Fire clay 28.9 7.74 -7.85 129.2-151.5 194-227

194 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

Table 3. Kinetic (leaching column) coal for pre-mining prediction of drainage

Sl. Types of rock Temp ºC pH range TDS ( mg/l) EC (µS/cm)
No
1 Immediate shale 22.4 6.93-7.15 212.4-316.1 318.6-474.2
2 Immediate shale 22.4 6.83-7.05 209.0-305.1 314-458
3 Immediate coal 22.4 4.84 -4.24 516.9 -528.0 775-792
4 Immediate coal 22.9 4.63 -4.34 412.2 -426.6 618-639
5 Immediate coal 22.9 4.65-4.81 621.3 -684.2 932-1026
6 Immediate coal 22.9 4.67 -4.81 505.1 – 565.4 757-848
7 Immediate coal 22.9 4.91 -5.67 580.0-583.3 870-875
8 Immediate coal 24.1 4.78-4.92 533.6 -591.2 800-887
9 Immediate coal 24.1 4.17 -4.39 582.2 -593.0 873-889
10 Immediate coal 24.1 4.41 – 4.89 478.1 – 532.6 717-798

Table 4. R-pH value of different litho-units

Sample No. Litho-units R-pH value Nature Avg.
1 Fine grained sandstone 7.72 Alkaline 7.72
2 Fine grained sandstone 8.78 very Alkaline
3 Fine grained sandstone 8.88 very Alkaline 8.66
4 Fine grained sandstone 8.92 very Alkaline
5 Medium grained sandstone 8.62 Alkaline
6 Medium grained andstone 8.88 very Alkaline 8.83
7 Medium grained sandstone 9.01 very Alkaline
8 Course grained sandstone 9.28 very Alkaline
9 Course grained sandstone 9.11 very Alkaline 9.20
10 Course grained sandstone 9.21 very Alkaline

Table 5. Acid neutralization potential (ANP)

Sample Litho-logic description ANP ( kg ofCaCO3/ton)

interval(m) Avg. Max. Min.
0-4 Top Soil 6.32 6.32 6.32 6.32
4-10 unconsolidated sand 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88
55.5-56 Fine grained sandstone 60.70
63.32-66 Fine grained sandstone 61.65
126.5-128.5 Fine grained sandstone 57.66 57.83 61.65 53.86
224.5-228.4 Fine grained sandstone 56.38

195 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

Table 6. Acid production potential (APP)

Sample Litho-logic APP ( kg ofCaCO3/ton)
interval(m) description Avg. Max. Min.
23-26 Shale 10 16.37 28.75 8.44
119-128 Shale 16.56
131-135 Shale 20.94
136-140 Shale 14.69
142-143 Shale 19.38
181-182 Shale 8.44
207-213 Shale 12.19
275-281 Shale 28.75
71-104 Coal 41.88 41.57 41.88 41.25
128-131 Coal 41.25
135-136 Coal 45.94 37.66 45.94 29.38
154-181 Coal 29.38
257-270 Coal 50.63 44.69 50.63 38.75
272-275 Coal 38.75
71-72 Shaly coal 28.75 25.78 28.75 22.81
270-272 Shaly coal 22.81

Conclusion
The study result shows pH value in an alkaline range varying from 8.90-9.30 and, TDS concentration is also
ranging from 426.6-544.4 mg/L. The yellow and brown sandstone also showed the similar behaviour like
sandstone. Clay and fire clay are almost neutral and having TDS below160 mg/L. The pH value, TDS
concentration and electrical conductivity of leachate from shale varying from 6.13-7.10, 382.4-475.4 mg\L
and 573-713 µS/cm respectively. The obtained information can be used in the design and cost remediation
plans for the fulfilment of water quality standards in a more practical, economical and an efficient approach. It
is also useful for making practical and suitable decisions at the investigative stage of mining projects.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank, Department of Mining Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, and
Banaras Hindu University for offering the supports for this work.

References
1. Adler, R. and Rascher, J. (2007). A Strategy for the Management of Acid Mine Drainage from Gold Mines in
Gauteng. Report. No. CSIR/NRE/PW/ER/2007/0053/C. CSIR, Pretoria. 8
2. Ahmed M, Rahim, A. (1996). Abundance of sulfur in Eocene coal beds from Bapung, Northeast India. Int J Coal
Geolgy 30:315-318
3. Akcil, A. and Koldas, S. (2006). Acid Mine Drainage (AMD): causes, treatment and case studies. Journal of Cleaner
Production 14, 1139- 1145.
4. Badrinath,S.D., Kaul, S.N.,Gadkari, S.K., and Deshpande, V.P.,(1987).Acid mine drainage cost effective treatment
methods.IAWPC Tech. Annual (14) : 91-97.
5. Baruah BP, Khare, P., (2007a). Pyrolysis of high sulfur Indian coals. Energy Fuels 21:3346-3352
6. Baruah, B.P., Saikia, B.K, Kotoky, P., Rao, P.G. (2006). Aqueous leaching of high sulfur sub-bituminous coals in
Assam, India. Energy Fuels 20:1550-155.

196 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

7. Bell, F.G., (2001). Bullock, S.E.T., Hälbich, T.F.J., Lindsay P. Environmental impacts associated with an abandoned
mine in the Witbank Coalfield, South Africa. International Journal of Coal Geology; 45:195-216.
8. Best, G.A., Aikman, D.T., (1983). The treatment of ferruginous groundwater from an abondanded colliery. Jl. Water
pollution control Fed. 82:557-556.
9. Beston, R.P., (1986). coal and coal mine drainage. Jl. Water pollution control Fed. 53(6) :566-569.
10. Black, A. Craw, D., ( 2001). Arsenic, copper and zinc occurrence at the Wangaloa coal mine, southeast Otago, New
Zealand. International Journal of Coal Geology; 45:181-93.
11. Bradham, W.S. and Caruccio, F.T., (1991). A comparative study of tailings analysis using acid-base
accounting,cells, columns and soxhlets. In: Proc., 2nd International Conf. on the Abatement of Acidic Drainage,
Montreal, Canada, 157-174.
12. Chandra, D., Ghose, S., Chaudhuri, S.G., (1984). Abnormalities in the chemical properties of tertiary coals of Upper
Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. Fuel 63:1318-1323
13. Chon, H., Hwang, J., (2000).Geochemical Characteristics of the Acid Mine Drainage in the Water System in the
Vicinity of the Dogye Coal Mine in Korea. Environ Geochem Health,22:155-72.
14. Cidu, Rosa, Biagini, C., Fanfani, L. and Marras, I. (2001).Mine closure at Monteponi (Italy): Effect of the cessation
of dewatering on the quality of shallow groundwater. Applied Geochemistry 16(5):489-502
15. Cravotta III C, Brightbill R, Langland M.( 2010). Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Swatara Creek Basin, Southern
Anthracite Coalfield, Pennsylvania, USA: 1. Stream Water Quality Trends Coinciding with the Return of Fish. Mine
Water and the Environment, 29:176-99.
16. Creamer, M., (2015). Water: Decide now on Lesotho 2, Acid Mine Drainage projects. Mining Weekly. Available
from http:// m.mining weekly. com/ article/ water-decide-now-on-lesotho-2-acid-mine-drainage-projects-prof-
2015-12-03. Accessed April 5, 2016.
17. Das, T., Saikia, B.K., Baruah, B.P., Das, D., (2015). Characterizations of Humic acid isolated from coals of two
Nagaland coalfields of India in relation to their origin. J Geol Soc India 86:468-474
18. Dhar, B. B., Ratan, S., and Jamal, A., (1986).Impact of opencast coal mining on water environment - A case study, J.
34 (12):596-601.
19. EEB. (2000).The environmental performance of the mining industry and the action necessary to strengthen European
legislation in the wake of the Tisza-Danube pollution. European Environmental Bureau. Document No. 2000/016:
32.
20. EnergyStatistics (PDF). http:// mospi. nic. in. dated 18 November 2016.
21. Equeenuddin, S.M., Tripathy S., Sahoo, P.K., Panigrahi, M.K., (2010). Hydrogeochemical characteristics of acid
mine drainage and water pollution. J Geochem Explor 105:75-82
22. Erickson , P.M.,(1984). Eastern coal operation- acid mine drainage from inactive mines. Env. Geochemistry &
health,7:16
23. Feng, Qiyan., Li Ting., Qian, Bin., Zhou. Lai., Gao, Bo.,Yuan. Tao., (2016).Chemical Characteristics and Utilization
of Coal MineDrainage in China. Mine Water Environ (2014) 33:276–286 DOI 10.1007/s10230-014-0271-y
24. Filion, M.P., Sirois, L.L., Ferguson, K., (1990). Acid mine drainage research in Canada. CIM Bull 83:33-40
25. Government of Canada.(1991).The State of Canada’s Environment, Ottawa: Minister of Supply and
Services,:11-19.
26. Henuish, G.W.(1987).Lime sustitute for the treatment of acid mine drainage. Jl. Mining Engineering. 39(4):33-36.
27. Jamal A. Environmental impact of opencast coal mining on air and water quality and its management, PhD Thesis
(Unpublished) Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India, 1989.
28. Jamal, A., Dhar, B.B., and Ratan.S., (1991).Mine drainage control in an opencast coal mine, mine water and the
environments, 10:1-16.
29. Jamal, A., Yadav, H.L., and Pandey, S.S., (2015). Heavy Metals from Acid Mine Drainage in Coal Mines-A Case
Study. European Journal of Advances in Engineering and Technology, 2(8): 16-20
30. Kleinmann, R., (1989).Acid mine Drainage in the United States: Controlling the Impact on Streams and Rivers:1-10.
31. Lapakko, K., (1993) Evaluation of Tests for Predicting Mine Waste Drainage pH. Report to the Western Governors
Association, MN Dept. of Natural Resources, St. Paul, MN:76.
32. Lattuada, R.M., Menezes, C.T.B., Pavei, P.T., Peralba, M.C.R., Dos, Santos J.H.Z., (2009). Determination of 17
metals by total reflection X-ray fluorescence and evaluation of toxicity of a river impacted by coal mining in the
south of Brazil. J Hazard Mater :163:531-7
33. Mallo, S.J., (2011). The menace of acid mine drainage: an impending challenge in the mining of Lafia-Obi coal,
Nigeria. Cont. J. Eng. Sci. 6, 46-54.
34. Nganje, T., Adamu, C., Ntekim, E., Ugbaja, A., Neji, P., Nfor E(2010). Influence of mine drainage on water quality
along River Nyaba in Enugu South-Eastern Nigeria. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology:4.

197 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan

 International Journal of Engineering Technology Science and Research
IJETSR
www.ijetsr.com
ISSN 2394 – 3386
Volume 4, Issue 6
June 2017

35. Nicholsan, R.V., Gillham, R.W. and Reardon.( 1988) . pyrite oxidation in carbonate buffered solution .
Geochemica Cosmochim. Acta. 53(5):1077-1085.
36. Noll, D.A., Bergstresser, T.W.,& Woodcock, J.,(1988).Overburden sampling and testing Mannual. Small Operators
Assistance Program. PADER, Bureau of Mining and Reclamation: 78.
37. Oelofse, S.H.H., Hobbs, P.J., Rascher, J., & Cobbing, J.E., (2007). The pollution and destruction threat of gold
mining waste on the Witwatersrand - A West Rand case study. Symposium on Environmental Issues and Waste
Management in Energy and Mineral Production (SWEMP 2007):11-13 December 2007. Bangkok.
38. Olem, H., (1981). Coal and Coal Mine Drainage. Jl. Water pollution control Fed. 53(6):814-824
39. Prasad bably and Kumar Hement, (2015). Treatment of acid mine drainage using a fly ash zeolite column. Mine
water environ.doi10.1007/s10230-015-0373-1
40. Qureshi, A., Maurice, C., Ohlander, B., (2016). J. Geochem Explor, 160:44-54. doi: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2015.10.014
41. Rae, G.(1978). Mine drainage from coalfields in England and Wales, a summary of its distribution and relation sip to
water resources. Central water planning unit, technical note. Note no.24, national coal board, London.
42. Rawat, N.S. (1982). Sulphur occurrence in coal and its relationship to acid formation. Metals and minerals,Sept.
XXI,(10) :19-26
43. Sahoo, P.K., Tripathy, S., Equeenuddin, S.M, Panigrahi, M.K., (2012). Geochemical characteristics of coal mine
discharge vis-à-vis behavior of rare earth elements at Jaintia Hills coalfield, northeastern India. J Geochem Explor
112:235-43.
44. Saikia, B.K., Ward, C.R., Oliveira, M.L.S., Hower, J.C., Baruah, B.P., Braga, M., Silva, L.F., (2014). Geochemistry
and nano-mineralogy of two medium-sulfur Northeast Indian coals. Intern J Coal Geol 121:26–34
45. Shoaib, M., (2013). Ch. 14. Energy. In: Wasti SE (ed) Pakistan Economic Survey 2012-13. Ministry of Finance,
Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, Pakistan: 187-202
46. Singh,G.(1986). Impact of coal mining on water quality.Proc. National Seminar on Environmental Pollution
Control& Monitoring, CSIO, Chandigarh, oct:457-463
47. Skousen J.G,Renton, J. Evans P. Leavitt B.Brady,K.B.C. Ziemkiewicz P.F. (1997).Neutralization potential of
overburden samples containing siderite. J. environ. Qual. 26:673-681.
48. Skousen, J.G., Hedin, R., and Faulkner,B.,(1997).Water quality changes and costs or remining in Pennsylvania and
westvirginia. In. fourteenth American society for surface mining and reclamation conference, 10-15 may: 64-73.
49. Yadav, H .L., and Jamal, A. (2015).Impact of Mining on Water Resources in India, International Journal of
Advanced Research Volume 3(10):1009 -1015.
50. Yadav, H.L., and Jamal, A., (2015a).Removal of Heavy Metals from Acid Mine Drainage: A Review. International
Journal of New Technologies in Science and Engineering, 2(3):77-84,
51. Yadav, H.L., and Jamal, A., (2016).Wastewater in mines and status of utilization". International Journal of Advance.
Research.4 (6):310-315,
52. Yadav, H.L., and Jamal, A.,(2016a).Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage: A General Review. International Advanced
Research Journal in Science, Engineering and Technology, 3(11):116-122.

198 H. L. Yadav, A. Jamal, and A. K. Ranjan