Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage 

on Streamflow and Water Quality in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin, 

Schuylkill, Columbia, and Northumberland 

Counties, Pennsylvania, 2001

by Charles A. Cravotta III

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

In cooperation with the Schuylkill Conservation District and 

the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 

Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5291
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Cravotta, C.A., III, 2005, Effects of abandoned coal-mine drainage on streamflow and water quality in the Mahanoy 

Creek Basin, Schuylkill, Columbia, and Northumberland Counties, Pennsylvania, 2001: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Report 2004-5291, 60 pages plus appendixes.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
 iii

Contents

Abstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Physiography and Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Geology and Mining History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Water-Quality Protection and Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Methods of Water-Quality Site Selection, Sampling, and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Flow and Quality of Streams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Streamflow Variability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Contaminant Concentrations and Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Aquatic Ecology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Streambed Chemistry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Characteristics of Abandoned Mine Drainage Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Remedial Priorities and Alternatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Data Usage and Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

References Cited. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Appendixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
iv 

Figures

1. Maps of Mahanoy Creek Basin showing locations of municipalities, Western Middle 

Anthracite Field, named streams, and corresponding streamwater and mine-drainage

monitoring locations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

2. Flow chart for selection of passive-treatment alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

3. Graphs showing comparison of flow rates, pH, and dissolved constituent concentrations at 

abandoned-mine drainage and streamwater sample sites in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 

for high base-flow and low base-flow conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4. Graphs showing comparison of total and dissolved concentrations of iron, manganese, 

aluminum, zinc, cobalt, nickel, copper, cadmium, lead, and arsenic in low base-flow 

and high base-flow abandoned-mine drainage and streamwater samples collected in 

Mahanoy Creek Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

5. Maps of Mahanoy Creek Basin showing streamflow, net alkalinity, dissolved iron, 

dissolved manganese, dissolved aluminum, sulfate, nitrate, and Hilsenhoff’s 

biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity at streamwater sampling sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

6. Graph showing streamflow and water quality at sites along the main stem of Mahanoy Creek . . . . 23

7. Bar charts showing contributing area, streamflow yields, metals loading, and 

percentage of abandoned mine drainage metals loading at streamwater monitoring 

sites in the Mahanoy Creek Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

8. Bar charts showing Hilsenhoff’s family-level biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate

diversity at sites sampled for water chemistry in the Mahanoy Creek Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

9. Bar charts showing geometric mean of the ratios of observed and probable effect 

concentrations or probable effect levels for metals in streambed sediments in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

10. Maps of Mahanoy Creek Basin showing abandoned mine discharge locations 

and corresponding flow rates, net alkalinity concentration, and loading of iron, 

manganese, and aluminum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

11. Graphs showing relation between priority ranking based on dissolved metals loading in 

March 2001 for top 25 abandoned mine drainage sites and flow rate, acidity, 

pH, iron, manganese, and aluminum concentrations, Mahanoy Creek Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

12. Bar charts showing comparison of priority ranks for top 15 abandoned mine drainage 

sites, Mahanoy Creek Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
 v

Tables

1. Description of abandoned mine drainage sites in the Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, 

surveyed in 2001. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

2. Description of stream sites in the Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, surveyed in 2001 . . . . . . . . . .10

3. Values of selected constituents for streamwater and abandoned mine-drainage samples 

collected for the Mahanoy Creek, Pennslyvania, watershed assessment during 

March 26-28 and August 20-22, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4. Fish species identified and number of individuals counted during ecological survey of 

Mahanoy Creek and selected tributary streams, Pennsylvania, October 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

5. Aquatic macroinvertebrate abundances and corresponding Hilsenhoff family-level biotic index

at stream water-quality monitoring sites in the Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pa., 2000-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

6. Metals concentrations for whole white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) collected in 

October 2001 from Mahanoy Creek near Gowen City, Pa., and October 1999 from 

Shamokin Creek near Shamokin, Pa., and Swatara Creek at Ravine, Pa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

7. Color, mineralogy, and chemistry of fine sediment and corresponding “sediment-quality 

guidelines” for streamwater and mine-drainage sample sites, Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pa., 

August 20-22, 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

8. Priority rankings and possible remedial alternatives for abandoned mine drainage in Mahanoy 

Creek Basin, Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Appendixes

A. Hydrological data for abandoned mine drainage and associated stream monitoring sties in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin, March, August, and October 2001 (CD rom, only). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

B. Geographic information system (GIS) project with linked water-quality data base, 

Mahanoy Creek Basin, March, August, and October 2001 (CD rom, only). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

C. Digital reproductions of out-of-print reports (CD rom, only) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975, Operation Scarlift project no. SL-197, Mahanoy Creek mine 

drainage pollution abatement project: Harrisburg, Pa., Sanders & Thomas, Inc. Engineers, 

125p., 1 appendix, 2plates. 

Growitz, D.J., Reed, L.A., and Beard, M.M., 1985, Reconnaissance of mine drainage in the 

coal fields of eastern Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 83-4274, 54p. 

Reed, L.A., Beard, M.M., and Growitz, D.J., 1987, Quality of water in mines in the western 

middle coal field, anthracite region, east-central Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4038, 51 p.

Wood, C.R., 1996, Water quality of large discharges in the anthracite region of eastern 

Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4243, 68p.

D. “AMD Treat” computation worksheets for Centralia Mine Tunnel Discharge (M19),

Mahanoy Creek Basin, March and August 2001 (CD rom, only). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
vi 

Conversion Factors and Datum

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F = (1.8 x °C) + 32

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C = (°F - 32) / 1.8

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). 

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or 

micrograms per liter (μg/L). Concentrations of constituents in sediment are given as micrograms 

per gram (μg/g) or weight percent (wt%). 

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at 

25°C).

Symbols are used to indicate less than (<), less than or equal to (<), greater than (>), greater than 

or equal to (>), equal to (=), and approximately equal to (~). 

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 25,400 micrometer (μm)

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)

Flow rate or volume

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 1,699 liter per minute (L/min)

gallon per minute (gal/min) 3.785 liter per minute (L/min)

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L)

Mass

ton, short (2,000 lb) 0.9072 megagram (Mg)

ounce 0.035 gram (g)

Application or loading rate

pounds per year (lb/yr) 0.4536 kilograms per year (kg/yr)

pounds per acre per day [(lb/acre)/d] 0.1121 grams per square meter per day [(g/m2

)/d]

pounds per acre per day [(lb/acre)/d] 1.121 kilograms per hectare per day [(kg/ha)/d]
Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on 

Streamflow and Water Quality in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin, 

Schuylkill, Columbia, and Northumberland Counties, 

Pennsylvania, 2001

by Charles A. Cravotta III

Abstract

This report assesses the contaminant loading, effects to 

receiving streams, and possible remedial alternatives for abandoned mine drainage (AMD) within the Mahanoy Creek Basin 

in east-central Pennsylvania. The Mahanoy Creek Basin 

encompasses an area of 157 square miles (407 square kilometers) including approximately 42 square miles (109 square kilometers) underlain by the Western Middle Anthracite Field. As a 

result of more than 150 years of anthracite mining in the basin, 

ground water, surface water, and streambed sediments have 

been adversely affected. Leakage from streams to underground 

mines and elevated concentrations (above background levels) 

of acidity, metals, and sulfate in the AMD from flooded underground mines and (or) unreclaimed culm (waste rock) degrade 

the aquatic ecosystem and impair uses of the main stem of 

Mahanoy Creek from its headwaters to its mouth on the Susquehanna River. Various tributaries also are affected, including 

North Mahanoy Creek, Waste House Run, Shenandoah Creek, 

Zerbe Run, and two unnamed tributaries locally called Big 

Mine Run and Big Run. The Little Mahanoy Creek and Schwaben Creek are the only major tributaries not affected by mining. 

To assess the current hydrological and chemical characteristics 

of the AMD and its effect on receiving streams, and to identify 

possible remedial alternatives, the U.S. Geological Survey 

began a study in 2001, in cooperation with the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protection and the Schuylkill 

Conservation District. 

Aquatic ecological surveys were conducted by the U.S. 

Geological Survey at five stream sites during low base-flow 

conditions in October 2001. Twenty species of fish were identified in Schwaben Creek near Red Cross, which drains an 

unmined area of 22.7 square miles (58.8 square kilometers) in 

the lower part of the Mahanoy Creek Basin. In contrast, 14 species of fish were identified in Mahanoy Creek near its mouth at 

Kneass, below Schwaben Creek. The diversity and abundance 

of fish species in Mahanoy Creek decreased progressively 

upstream from 13 species at Gowen City to only 2 species each 

at Ashland and Girardville. White sucker (Catostomus commersoni), a pollution-tolerant species, was present at each of the 

surveyed reaches. The presence of fish at Girardville was unexpected because of the poor water quality and iron-encrusted 

streambed at this location. Generally, macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance at these sites were diminished compared to 

Schwaben Creek and other tributaries draining unmined basins, 

consistent with the observed quality of streamwater and streambed sediment.

Data on the flow rate and chemistry for 35 AMD sources 

and 31stream sites throughout the Mahanoy Creek Basin were 

collected by the USGS during high base-flow conditions in 

March 2001 and low base-flow conditions in August 2001. A 

majority of the base-flow streamwater samples met water-quality standards for pH (6.0 to 9.0); however, few samples downstream from AMD sources met criteria for acidity less than 

alkalinity (net alkalinity = 20 milligrams per liter as CaCO3) 

and concentrations of dissolved iron (0.3 milligram per liter) 

and total manganese (1.0 milligram per liter). Iron, aluminum, 

and various trace elements including cobalt, copper, lead, 

nickel, and zinc, were present in many streamwater samples at 

concentrations at which continuous exposure can not be tolerated by aquatic organisms without an unacceptable effect. Furthermore, concentrations of sulfate, iron, manganese, aluminum, and (or) beryllium in some samples exceeded drinkingwater standards. Other trace elements, including antimony, 
2 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, selenium, silver, and 

thallium, did not exceed water-quality criteria for protection of 

aquatic organisms or human health. Nevertheless, when considered together, concentrations of iron, manganese, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc in a majority of 

the streambed sediment samples from Mahanoy Creek and 

AMD-affected tributaries exceeded the probable effect level for 

toxicity because of multiple contaminants. 

The water-quality data for the AMD sources were used to 

determine priority ranks of the sources on the basis of loadings 

of dissolved metals (iron, manganese, and aluminum), net alkalinity, and sulfate and to identify possible remedial alternatives, 

including passive-treatment options. The ranking sequence for 

the top AMD sources based on the high base-flow data generally matched that based on the low base-flow data. Although 

concentrations increased with decreased flow, the pollutant 

loadings generally increased with flow; six previously identified intermittent AMD sources were not discharging during the 

low base-flow sampling period. The top 4 AMD sources, 

Locust Gap Tunnel (M29), Packer #5 Breach (M13), Packer #5 

Borehole (M12), and Girard Mine seepage (M11), on the basis 

of dissolved metals loading in March 2001, accounted for more 

than 50 percent of the metals loading to Mahanoy Creek, 

whereas the top 15 AMD sources accounted for more than 

99 percent of the metals loading. When sampled in March 2001, 

the top 15 AMD sources had flow rates ranging from 0.4 to 

17.2 cubic feet per second (680 to 29,200 liters per minute) and 

pH from 3.9 to 6.7. Dissolved iron was the principal source of 

acidity and metals loading; concentrations of iron ranged from 

2.1 to 18 milligrams per liter. Dissolved manganese ranged 

from 0.95 to 6.4 milligrams per liter. Dissolved aluminum 

exceeded 1.0 milligram per liter at 4 of the top 15 AMD sources 

but was less than 0.4 milligram per liter at the others. Nine of 

the top 15 AMD sources, including the top 4, were net alkaline 

(alkalinity greater than acidity); the others were net acidic and 

will require additional alkalinity to facilitate metals removal 

and maintain near-neutral pH. 

Alkalinity can be acquired by the dissolution of limestone 

and (or) bacterial sulfate reduction within various passive-treatment systems including anoxic or oxic limestone drains, limestone-lined channels, or compost wetlands. Subsequently, the 

gradual oxidation and consequent precipitation of iron and 

manganese can be accommodated within settling ponds or aerobic wetlands. Assuming an iron removal rate of 180 pounds 

per acre per day (20 grams per square meter per day), constructed treatment wetlands at the top 15 AMD sites would 

require a minimum area ranging from 0.3 to 5.8 acres (1,210 to 

23,500 square meters). Land area below the Packer #5 Breach 

(M13, ranked 2nd of all AMD sources in the watershed), the 

Packer #5 Borehole (M12, ranked 3rd), and the Centralia Tunnel (M19, ranked 6) may be sufficient for installation of passive 

treatment. However, because of the proximity of the Locust 

Gap Tunnel and many other discharges to streams, roads, or 

railroads, and the limited availability or access to land at the discharge location, passive treatment would not be suitable at 

many AMD sites. The reduction of infiltration and removal of 

culm waste and (or) the relocation of the discharge to nearby 

areas could decrease the AMD quantities and facilitate treatment at some of the priority AMD sites. 

Introduction

Mahanoy Creek is a tributary of the Susquehanna River 

that drains an area of 157 mi2

 (407 km2) in east-central Pennsylvania (fig. 1). The Mahanoy Creek Basin is a narrow watershed bounded by a series of parallel, westward-trending ridges. 

Mahanoy Creek flows 53.7 mi (86.4 km) from its headwaters 

near the village of Buck Mountain in Schuylkill County to its 

mouth near Herndon in Northumberland County. From the village of Buck Mountain, Mahanoy Creek flows westward 

through Mahanoy City, Girardville, and Ashland. From Ashland, Mahanoy Creek flows southwestward approximately 2 mi 

(3.2 km) to Gordon and then another 35 mi (56 km) westward 

to its mouth on the Susquehanna River.

The upper part of Mahanoy Creek, with a total drainage 

area of 46 mi2

 (119 km2) at Ashland, drains an area of 37 mi2

(96 km2

) underlain by the Western Middle Anthracite Field 

(fig. 1), where anthracite was extensively mined from about 

1840 through 1950 (Reed and others, 1987). This area includes 

all or most of the drainage areas for the upper Mahanoy Creek, 

North Mahanoy Creek, and Shenandoah Creek plus drainage 

from the vicinity of Centralia locally named “Big Mine Run” 

(Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975). Smaller areas than described 

above also have been extensively mined including approximately 2 mi2

 (5.2 km2) for an unnamed tributary, locally named 

“Big Run” (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975) that drains from 

Mahanoy Mountain southward to Mahanoy Creek at Locustdale 

and 3 mi2 (7.8 km2

) for the upper part of Zerbe Run in the western part of the basin south of Trevorton (fig. 1). Additionally, an 

intermediate reach of Mahanoy Creek, near Helfenstein, 

receives discharges from the Locust Gap (M29) and Doutyville 

(M31) Tunnels that drain a mined area of 7 mi2

 (18.1 km2) to 

the north within the adjoining Shamokin Creek Basin (Reed and 

others, 1987; Cravotta and Kirby, 2004a). 

Leakage from streams to underground mines and elevated 

concentrations (above background levels) of acidity, metals, 

and sulfate in the abandoned mine drainage (AMD) from 

flooded underground mines and (or) unreclaimed culm (waste 

rock) piles degrade the aquatic ecosystem and impair uses of the 

main stem of Mahanoy Creek from its headwaters to its mouth 

on the Susquehanna River (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975; 

Reed and others, 1987; Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001, 2002, 2004). Degradation also is evident within various tributaries, including North Mahanoy 

Creek, Waste House Run, Shenandoah Creek, Big Mine Run, 

Big Run, and Zerbe Run. The Little Mahanoy Creek and 

Schwaben Creek are the only major tributaries not affected by 

mining. Consequently, Mahanoy Creek is designated a “high 

priority watershed” on the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP) degraded watershed list 
Figure 1. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing locations of (A) municipalities and Western Middle Anthracite Field, (B) named streams and corresponding 

streamwater and mine-drainage monitoring locations. Mine-drainage sites that discharge directly from ground designated ground-water AMD, and those that were downflow within channel or ditch designated streamwater AMD. Western Middle Anthracite Field corresponds with mapped area of Llewellyn Formation after Berg and others (1980). Hydrography from U.S. Geological Survey 1:100,000 topographic map base. 

Pennsylvania

Study Area

1A1B

Mahanoy Creek Little Mahanoy Creek

Nor ht Mahanoy Creek

oL

C

t s

er

ke

Wa

et s

o H

su

R

e

nu

Mahanoy Creek ShenandoahCreek

Rattling Run

h Ke

R

yl

nu

r C

ba

u R n

“Big 

Run”

Schwaben Creek

Zerbe Run

Mouse Creek

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

h

eu

qsuS

R

a

n

n

a

r

e iv

“Big 

Mine 

Run”

76o07’30’’ 76o15’00’’ 76o22’30’’ 76o30’00’’ 76o37’30’’ 76o45’00’’

40o47’30’’

40o45’00’’40o42’30’’40o50’00’’

40o47’30’’

40o45’00’’40o42’30’’40o50’00’’

Introduction 3
4 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

(Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 1998, 

2004). To assess the current effects of AMD and to identify possible remedial alternatives, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

began a study in 2001, in cooperation with the PaDEP and the 

Schuylkill Conservation District (SCD). The study was initiated 

in response to a request for assistance by the Mahanoy Creek 

Watershed Association (MCWA).

Purpose and Scope

This report assesses the contaminant loading, effects to 

receiving streams, and possible remedial alternatives for AMD 

within the Mahanoy Creek Basin on the basis of water-quality 

data collected by the USGS during 2001 and supplemental ecological data collected by the USGS and PaDEP during 2000-

2002. Data on the flow rate and chemistry of water were collected by USGS at the known AMD sites and at selected stream 

sites within the Mahanoy Creek Basin during high base-flow 

conditions in March 2001 and then repeated during low baseflow conditions in August 2001. During the low base-flow survey in August 2001, streambed sediments were collected for 

chemical analysis, and during October 2001, data on the diversity and biomass of fish species were collected by USGS at five 

of the sampled stream sites. Additionally, during 2000-2002, 

aquatic macroinvertebrate samples were collected by PaDEP 

throughout the Mahanoy Creek Basin. The basin-wide synoptic 

monitoring of flow and water quality during stable base-flow 

conditions was performed to (1) identify site-specific characteristics including temporal variability associated with seasonal 

changes in base flow, (2) indicate spatial variability and relative 

effects of the AMD throughout the basin, and (3) avoid complications in data collection and interpretation associated with 

rainfall or other short-term weather events. The supplemental 

surveys of streamflow and aquatic ecology documented the 

effects of the AMD on streamwater resources. The study data 

were compiled into a digital database and a geographic information system (GIS). The data were used to compute contaminant 

loading rates, to determine the potential effects of the AMD on 

aquatic ecology, and to identify possible remedial priorities and 

alternatives for watershed rehabilitation. The PaDEP, SCD, and 

MCWA will use study results for selecting AMD priorities and 

remediation alternatives. 

Physiography and Land Use

The Mahanoy Creek Basin lies in the Appalachian Mountains section of the Ridge and Valley Physiographic Province 

(Way, 1999). This area is characterized by complexly deformed 

strata and elongate, northeast-southwest trending ridges that 

bound narrow valleys. Because of their steep slopes and thin 

rocky soils, the ridges tend to be forested and sparsely developed. Urban, industrial, and agricultural land uses predominate 

in the valleys. The western two-thirds, or lower part, of the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin is in the Northern Shale Valleys and 

Slopes Ecoregion where forested and agricultural land uses predominate (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001). The eastern third, or upper part, of the basin is in the 

Anthracite Coal Ecoregion (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001). 

Land use in the Mahanoy Creek Basin has been classified 

as 66 percent forested, 21 percent agricultural, 9 percent “barren, mined,” and 4 percent urban (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2000; Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 

2002). Nevertheless, this land-use classification may be misleading because, in the upper basin, abandoned underground 

mines extend beneath much of the surface, and “natural” reforestation conceals large tracts of unreclaimed spoil. Considering 

the extent of “spoil” and other land-use patterns depicted by 

USGS topographic maps, land use in the upper Mahanoy Creek 

Basin at Ashland could be classified as 50 percent forested, 

44 percent “mine spoils,” 5 percent urban, and less than 

1 percent agricultural. Hence, although the anthracite industry 

largely is inactive, mining could be considered a major land use 

within the valley of the upper basin. 

Geology and Mining History

The Western Middle Anthracite Field underlies parts of 

the Mahanoy Creek Basin and the neighboring Shamokin Creek 

Basin (Reed and others, 1987; Cravotta and Kirby, 2004a). The 

coalfield is a synclinal basin, or “canoe-shaped” structure, that 

has been subdivided by parallel faults. Sandstone, siltstone, and 

conglomerate are the dominant lithologies surrounding the 

coalbeds; limestone has not been mapped within the coalfield 

(Wood and others, 1986; Berg and others, 1989; Eggleston and 

others, 1999). In the Mahanoy Creek Basin, a total of 24 coalbeds of the Llewellyn and Pottsville Formations of Pennsylvanian Age, with average thicknesses from 0.6 to 8.3 ft (0.2 to 

2.5 m), have been identified and mined to depths exceeding 

2,500 ft (762 m) below land surface (Reed and others, 1987). 

Most anthracite mines were developed as large underground 

complexes or “collieries” in the valleys, where shafts and tunnels connected mine drifts and slopes within multiple coalbeds. 

Generally, mining was conducted by the room-and-pillar 

method, with barrier pillars left intact between adjacent collieries (Reed and others, 1987). 

Anthracite production in Pennsylvania peaked in 1917 at 

more than 100 million short tons, including 12 million tons 

from the Mahanoy Creek Basin (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975; 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001; 

Pennsylvania Coal Association, 2001). During the peak of production, 95 percent of the anthracite was obtained from underground mines. In 2000, less than 6 million short tons of anthracite were produced in Pennsylvania; only 5.5 percent was from 

underground mines (Pennsylvania Coal Association, 2001). 

Only a few surface and deep mines presently are active in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin; the majority of these operations involve 

reprocessing of coal waste piles (Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, 2002). 
Introduction 5

Substantial quantities of coal were placed with other rock 

on waste piles near the historically active mining and processing facilities because of the vast amounts of coal available and 

a limited market for fine-grained material. The waste material 

generally can be characterized as rock (1-5 percent coal), culm 

(20-80 percent coal), or silt (20-80 percent coal), with culm 

being coarser than silt (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975). Culm 

and rock banks are concentrated near the abandoned deep mines 

and collieries, and much of the silt has eroded from piles and 

accumulated in the streambeds. According to Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975), some of the larger culm and rock banks are 

near the eastern limits of Girardville, between Gilberton and St. 

Nicholas, and east of Centralia. Some of the larger silt piles in 

the watershed are along North Mahanoy Creek, along the southern side of Mahanoy Creek between Mahanoy City and Gilberton, on the north side of Mahanoy Creek in the vicinity of St. 

Nicholas, near the eastern limits of Centralia, and along Zerbe 

Run west of Trevorton. The heaviest silt deposits are concentrated along Mahanoy Creek from below Ashland, downstream 

past Gordon, and along Zerbe Run southwest of Trevorton. 

Most underground mines were closed before 1960 and, 

when ground-water pumping ceased, the mines flooded producing underground “mine pools.” When the underground mines 

were active, some stream channels were lined artificially or 

diverted to reduce leakage and to reduce the costs of pumping 

ground water from the mines. Upon closure of the mines, leakage resumed from sections of these channels, and some streams 

coursed into open mine pits or other openings. For example, 

during dry periods, upper Mahanoy Creek, North Mahanoy 

Creek, Waste House Run, and Lost Creek can lose all or most 

of their flow to underground mines (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 

1975; Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 

2004). 

Numerous areas within the Mahanoy Creek valley and 

along the valley slopes have not been reclaimed or revegetated. 

Barren, steep banks of rock spoil, culm, and silt are sources of 

sediment (suspended solids), acidity, metals, and sulfate in 

water that infiltrates or runs off the surface. In parts of the basin, 

surface flow is diverted through subsidence pits, fractures, and 

mine openings to the underground mines. In downstream 

reaches, the water resurges as AMD adding contaminants to 

Mahanoy Creek and its tributaries, while contributing substantially to streamflow. The AMD constitutes a substantial portion 

of base flow in mined watersheds of the region, especially during low-flow or drought conditions (Becher, 1991). 

Discharges typically emanate from tunnels, slopes, air 

shafts, and other passages, including fractures in stream channels, and other topographically low points overlying the mine 

complexes. Many of the same streams that lose water to underground mines in the upper reaches gain water from mine discharges in their lower reaches. In some cases, the mine complexes extended beyond surface-water divides, enabling the 

transfer of surface and ground water between adjacent stream 

basins. For example, water originating in the Shamokin Creek 

Basin discharges to the Mahanoy Creek Basin from the 

Doutyville, Helfenstein, Locust Gap, and Centralia Mine discharges, whereas water is conveyed from the Mahanoy Creek 

Basin through interconnected mine complexes to become part 

of the overflow from the Henry Clay Stirling discharge in the 

Shamokin Creek Basin (Reed and others, 1987; Cravotta and 

Kirby, 2004a). Because the underground mine complexes were 

extensive, their discharge volumes tend to be substantially 

greater and more continuous than those from less extensive surface mines or spoil piles. 

Water Quality

Generally, AMD can have low pH and elevated concentrations (above background) of dissolved sulfate (SO 2-

4 ), iron 

(Fe2+, Fe3+), manganese (Mn2+), aluminum (Al3+), and other 

metals that result from the oxidation of pyrite (FeS2) and the 

dissolution of carbonate, oxide, and aluminosilicate minerals by 

acidic water (Cravotta, 1991; Rose and Cravotta, 1998). Pyrite 

oxidation takes place where oxygen (O2) and moisture (H2O) 

are available as described in the reactions below.

FeS2 + 3.5 O 2+ 2- + 2 + H2O → Fe + 2 SO4 + 2 H (1)

(3)

Fe2+ + 0.25 O2 + H+ → Fe3+ + 0.5 H2O (

Fe3+ + 3 H O → Fe(OH) + 3 H+ 2 3

Initially, pyritic sulfur is oxidized to SO 2-

4 (reaction 1). Under 

non-recharge conditions, various secondary sulfate minerals 

and concentrated, acidic fluids can accumulate near the pyrite. 

Subsequently, infiltrating water or surface runoff can dissolve 

and transport the acidic oxidation products. In contrast with 

SO 2-

4 , which is transported primarily as a dissolved ion, Fe can 

be transported as ferrous (Fe2+) and ferric (Fe3+) ions and as 

suspended Fe(III) solids. In the presence of O2, highly soluble 

Fe2+ tends to oxidize to relatively insoluble Fe3+ (reaction 2). 

At pH greater than 3, concentrations of Fe3+ tend to be limited 

by the formation of Fe(III) oxyhydroxides and related solids 

(reaction 3). The complete, stoichiometric oxidation of pyrite is 

indicated by combining reactions 1, 2, and 3. Half the protons 

(H+), or acid, produced by the complete oxidation of pyrite 

results from the oxidation of pyritic sulfur to SO 2-

4 (reaction 1) 

and the other half results from the oxidation of Fe2+ to Fe3+ and 

its hydrolysis and precipitation as Fe(OH)3 (reactions 2 and 3). 

The acid produced by pyrite oxidation or by hydrolysis of 

iron and other dissolved metals can be neutralized by reaction 

with calcite (CaCO3), dolomite [CaMg(CO3)2], and other calcareous minerals as described below. 

CaCO + 2+ - 3 + H = Ca + HCO3 (4)

CaMg(CO ) + 2 H (5) + 2+

3 2 = Ca + Mg2+ + 2 HCO -3

These calcareous minerals are the dominant components of 

limestone and can occur in nodules, cementing agents, or fractures in sandstone, siltstone, shale, and associated strata of coal2)
6 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

bearing rocks. Alkalinity, represented by bicarbonate (HCO -

3 ), 

and base cations, including calcium (Ca2+) and magnesium 

(Mg2+), are common products of neutralization by these calcareous minerals. Alkalinity also can be produced by bacterial 

reduction of sulfate in environments where organic matter is 

available and oxygen is deficient (Hedin and others, 1994; 

Langmuir, 1997). Where absent or deficient at a mine site, the 

addition of limestone or other alkalinity-producing materials to 

mine spoil or mine drainage can be effective for prevention or 

neutralization of AMD and the attenuation of dissolved metals. 

As the pH increases to near-neutral values (pH 6 to 7), concentrations of Fe3+, Al3+, and various other metals in AMD generally will decline; however, concentrations of SO 2-

4 , Fe2+, and 

Mn2+ generally will not be affected unless conditions become 

extremely reducing (Blowes and Ptacek, 1994; Langmuir, 1997; 

Cravotta and Trahan, 1999; Cravotta and others, 1999).

The pH of AMD can be unstable because of a general tendency for the exsolution of dissolved carbon dioxide (CO2) and 

hydrogen sulfide (H2S), the dissolution of O2, and the consequent oxidation and hydrolysis of dissolved iron and manganese (Rose and Cravotta, 1998; Cravotta and others, 1999; Cravotta and Kirby, 2004b). AMD that initially has near-neutral pH 

and contains alkalinity ultimately could have acidic pH (less 

than 4.5) after its complete oxidation. This acidity results 

because of the oxidation and (or) hydrolysis of dissolved iron 

(reactions 2 and 3), manganese, aluminum, and other cations 

(Cravotta and Kirby, 2004b). Net-alkaline samples (alkalinity 

greater than acidity) tend to remain near neutral; however, netacidic samples (acidity greater than alkalinity) tend to have 

acidic pH after complete oxidation. Hence, the characterization 

of AMD as acidic or neutral and the evaluation of appropriate 

remediation should consider the pH, acidity, alkalinity, and 

concentrations of dissolved metals. 

Although sewage-treatment facilities serve the larger 

municipalities in the study area, such as Frackville, Ashland, 

Girardville, and Shenandoah, direct discharges of raw sewage 

and leaky on-lot sewage disposal systems degrade local stream 

sections throughout the basin (Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, 2001, 2002). Agricultural practices 

affect the quality of streamwater in parts of the western subbasin, particularly Schwaben Creek (Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, 2004). However, AMD from abandoned anthracite mines is the overwhelming source of contaminants to Mahanoy Creek, Little Mahanoy Creek, North Mahanoy Creek, Shenandoah Creek, Zerbe Run, and various smaller 

unnamed tributaries (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001, 2002, 2004). 

Water-Quality Protection and Restoration

Pennsylvania has adopted water-quality criteria intended 

to protect the anticipated uses of streams for (1) the maintenance and propagation of cold-water and warm-water fish; (2) 

water supply for domestic, industrial, livestock, wildlife, and 

irrigation purposes; (3) boating, fishing, and water-contact 

sports; (4) power; and (5) treated waste assimilation (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2002). The main stem Mahanoy Creek 

is designated a warm-water fishery (WWF) and its tributaries 

are designated cold-water fisheries (CWF) (Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania, 2002). To meet the WWF and CWF designations, the following criteria must be met (Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania, 2001a, 2002):

• temperature during July and August not to exceed 66°F 

(18.9°C) or 87°F (30.6°C) for CWF and WWF, respectively;

• dissolved oxygen concentration greater than 5.0 mg/L for 

CWF and 4.0 mg/L for WWF;

• alkalinity not less than 20 mg/L as CaCO3, except where 

natural conditions are less;

• pH not less than 6.0 or greater than 9.0;

• total iron concentration not to exceed 1.5 mg/L as a 30-day 

average;

• dissolved iron concentration not to exceed 0.3 mg/L;

• total manganese concentration not to exceed 1.0 mg/L; and 

• total aluminum concentration not to exceed 0.75 mg/L.

The above criteria for chemical constituents have been 

incorporated in recently developed “total maximum daily 

loads” (TMDLs) for Mahanoy Creek and its tributaries (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2002; 

Dempsey and others, 2002). The intent of the TMDLs is to identify the amount of a contaminant that a stream can assimilate 

without exceeding its water-quality standards. TMDLs have 

been calculated for each of the above contaminants documented 

as causing impairment. However, the criteria for TMDLs are 

limited to only some of the constituents that may have adverse 

effects to aquatic organisms or humans. Trace metals such as 

arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), lead 

(Pb), nickel (Ni), and zinc (Zn) commonly are found in AMD at 

levels that are above background concentrations and may be 

toxic (Elder, 1988; Hyman and Watzlaf, 1997; Rose and Cravotta, 1998; Cravotta and others, 2001). Guidelines for the protection of freshwater aquatic organisms and human health from 

these trace metals and other contaminants have been established 

by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1997, 2002a, 

2002b) and adopted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

(2001b). 

The restoration of water quality in mining-affected areas 

generally involves a combination of remining, land reclamation, and AMD treatment. Remining includes reprocessing of 

culm and silt to separate previously uneconomic coal from 

waste rock and surface mining or “daylighting” of old underground mine complexes. Such remining currently is done under 

stricter environmental regulations than in the past and can result 

in reduced infiltration to underground mines and (or) improved 

water quality. Land reclamation can involve the filling of open 

pits or shafts, the removal and (or) revegetation of coal spoil or 

culm banks, and the restoration of stream channels and streamflow. 

Treatment of AMD may be necessary to neutralize acidity 

and remove dissolved and suspended metals from the hydrologic system where reclamation of a mine or mining-related sur-
Methods of Water-Quality Site Selection, Sampling, and Analysis 7

face effects is not possible. The conventional treatment for 

metal-laden effluent that has excess acidity involves aeration 

and the addition of strong alkaline chemicals (Skousen and others, 1998). Although effective, this “active” treatment approach 

can be expensive because of the high cost of chemical reagents, 

operation, and maintenance. Alternative treatment methods for 

AMD include wetlands and limestone-based systems (Hedin 

and others, 1994; Skousen and others, 1998; Watzlaf and others, 

2000). Generally, for net-acidic AMD, limestone-based treatments such as an open limestone channel (OLC), anoxic limestone drain (ALD), oxic limestone drain (OLD), or vertical flow 

compost wetland (VFCW) also known as “successive alkalinity 

producing systems” (SAPS) could be appropriate to add alkalinity (fig. 2). For net-alkaline AMD or after treatment with 

alkalinity producing systems, oxidation ponds or aerobic wetlands are useful to remove metals as solids. These “passive” 

treatment systems generally require little maintenance over 

their design life (typically 20 years) but are limited by slower 

rates of neutralization and contaminant removal and, consequently, may require larger land area than for conventional 

“active” treatments. Nevertheless, passive systems can be cost 

effective where water chemistry meets suggested criteria and 

land and component materials are available locally (Skousen 

and others, 1998). 

Operation Scarlift project SL-197 (Sanders & Thomas, 

Inc., 1975) identified 31 mine discharges and presented 3 abatement plans that included mine sealing, backfilling of strip pits, 

regrading and revegetating steep banks, relocation and lining of 

streams, and active chemical treatment to remediate AMD and 

erosion problems in the upper Mahanoy Creek Basin. The estimated cost in 1975 dollars for these plans ranged from $6.4 to 

$31.3 million (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975). However, 

because these proposals were too costly or impractical, little has 

been done to mitigate the AMD. 

Major changes could have occurred in the flow and quality 

of the mine discharges and in the quality of Mahanoy Creek in 

the decades since the Operation Scarlift report was completed 

in 1975 (Reed and others, 1987; Wood, 1996). Furthermore, 

passive-treatment systems that recently have been developed 

could be lower cost alternatives to remediate AMD compared to 

active treatment methods considered previously. This study was 

undertaken to provide an updated assessment of the hydrological and chemical characteristics of the AMD and hydrological, 

chemical, and biological characteristics of the receiving streams 

in the basin and to determine the ecological effects, priorities, 

and alternatives for AMD remediation. 

Methods of Water-Quality Site Selection, 

Sampling, and Analysis

Before the basin-wide synoptic monitoring was initiated, 

published data on the locations of AMD and stream monitoring 

sites as reported by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975), Reed and 

others (1987), and Wood (1996) were reviewed, compiled, and 

mapped. The mapped locations were then compared with electronic images of mine maps and original hand-marked copies of 

topographic maps provided by L.A. Reed of USGS to resolve 

discrepancies in site names or locations. 

A total of 35 AMD sites were identified from various documents; 30 of these sites were sampled (tables 1 and 2). Each of 

the AMD sites is identified by local identification numbers from 

1 to 35, in approximate downstream order, with the prefix M in 

column 1 of table 1 (fig. 1). Four of the Scarlift sample sites 

(M06, M10, M16, and M35) and two of the previous USGS 

sample sites (M09 and M15) could not be located or were not 

accessible for this study. The Packer #5 Borehole and Breach 

(M14) previously sampled by Reed and others (1987) is along 

an open ditch more than 0.25 mi (0.40 km) downstream from 

the Packer #5 Borehole (M12) and Breach (M13). Because 

mine water sources are sampled at this site, it was assigned the 

local identification number M14. However, because of its physical setting, site M14 was listed with stream sites and was 

assigned a downstream-order station number in table 2. Additionally, 31 stream sites were surveyed, identified by local identification numbers from 1 to 31 with the prefix S in column 1 of 

table 2 (fig. 1). A formal USGS station identification number 

was assigned to each of the sampled AMD and stream sites for 

their incorporation in the USGS National Water Information 

System (NWIS) database (tables 1 and 2). Generally, previously published latitude and longitude of Reed and others 

(1987) were used to assign the corresponding station numbers 

for AMD sites (table 1). In some cases, these station numbers 

differ from the reported coordinates because of typographical 

errors in the previously published coordinates and (or) inconsisDETERMINE FLOW RATE

ANALYZE WATER CHEMISTRY

CALCULATE LOADINGS

SETTLING

POND

VFCW

DO <1 mg/L,

Fe3+ <1 mg/L,

Al3+ <2 mg/L

DO >1 mg/L,

Fe3+ >5 mg/L,

Al3+ >3 mg/L

Alkalinity

< Acidity

AERATION

& 

SETTLING

POND

Alkalinity

> Acidity

Alkalinity

< Acidity

MEETS EFFLUENT STANDARDS?

AEROBIC 

WETLAND 

OR 

SETTLING 

POND

DISCHARGE

OR OR

DO >1 mg/L,

Fe3+ <5 mg/L,

Al3+ <3 mg/L

Alkalinity

> Acidity

ANAEROBIC

WETLAND OPEN

LIMESTONE

CHANNEL

SETTLING

POND

ANOXIC

LIMESTONE

DRAIN

OXIC

LIMESTONE

DRAIN

OR

Figure 2. Flow chart for selection of passive-treatment alternatives 

modified from Hedin and others (1994), Skousen and others (1998), 

and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (1999). 

Vertical flow compost wetland (VFCW) also known as SAPS or 

RAPS. Less than (<), greater than (>), milligrams per liter (mg/L). 
8 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

tency between the current global positioning system (GPS) 

measurement and previously mapped locations. Stream or other 

surface-water sites were assigned USGS station numbers based 

on the relative downstream order within a given watershed 

(table 2). 

Water-quality and flow data for the synoptic surveys were 

collected at the AMD and stream sites during high base-flow 

conditions, March 26-28, 2001, and low base-flow conditions, 

August 20-22, 2001 (tables 1 and 2). Two teams of two persons 

each were deployed to assigned sites with GPS units and identical sets of water-quality sampling and monitoring equipment. 

When samples were collected, the flow rate was measured using 

a wading rod and pygmy meter or volumetrically (Rantz and 

others, 1982a, 1982b), and the temperature, specific conductance (SC), pH, redox potential (Eh), and dissolved oxygen 

(DO) concentration were measured using a field-calibrated YSI 

multiparameter water-quality sonde using methods described 

by Wood (1976) and U.S. Geological Survey (1997 to present). 

Water samples were collected as 1-L grab samples as close as 

possible to the discharge location or where streamflow was well 

mixed, avoiding bottom sediments and other debris. The grab 

samples were split into subsamples for field filtration and preservation as appropriate. Filtered (0.45-μm pore-size filter), 

unpreserved samples for analysis of major anions and unfiltered 

samples without head space for analysis of alkalinity and acidity were stored in sample-rinsed polyethylene bottles at 4°C. 

Samples for dissolved (0.45-μm pore-size filter) and total 

recoverable (whole-water; in-bottle nitric and hydrochloric acid 

digestion) metal analysis were acidified with nitric acid (HNO3) 

and stored in acid-rinsed polyethylene bottles. 

Within 48 hours of sampling, alkalinity was titrated in the 

laboratory with sulfuric acid to a fixed endpoint pH of 4.5. Concentrations of major anions, major cations, and trace elements 

were determined using ion chromatography (IC) and inductively coupled plasma emission mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) 

and inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry 

(ICP-AES) (Fishman and Friedman, 1989; Fishman, 1993; 

Crock and others, 1999). The cation and trace-element analyses 

were completed by the USGS Mineral Resources Research 

Laboratory in Denver, Colo., and the anion analyses including 

sulfate, chloride, nitrate, and phosphate were completed at the 

Actlabs Laboratory in Toronto, Ontario. Data for most constituents were available for filtered and unfiltered samples and by 

different methods (ICP-MS, ICP-AES, and (or) IC). For example, sulfur (presumably sulfate) and phosphorus (presumably 

phosphate) were reported analytes by IC and ICP-MS. Generally, filtered samples had constituent concentrations less than or 

equal to the unfiltered samples (as discussed in more detail later 

in this report), and the results by different methods were comparable. However, the values for sulfate by IC typically were 

less than those by ICP-MS. Charge imbalances were calculated 

as the difference between cation and anion equivalents relative 

to the mean of cation and anion equivalents and routinely were 

less than 10 percent considering data for sulfate by IC. Hence, 

sulfate by IC is used hereinafter.

Bottom sediments were collected during low base-flow 

water-quality sampling in August 2001. At each stream and 

AMD site, a composite sample was collected using a polyethylene scoop for subsampling to a depth of approximately 1 in. 

(2.5 cm) at four to six points across the stream or discharge 

location, emphasizing depositional zones behind obstructions. 

Where present, ochreous coatings were scraped from rocks and 

other substrate materials. Sediments were sealed with associated “native” water in plastic bags and stored at 4°C until laboratory processing could be completed. In the laboratory, the 

composite sample for each site was wet-sieved with deionized 

water through a 100-mesh (0.182-mm) stainless-steel screen. 

The material smaller than 100 mesh was centrifuged for 1 hour 

at 10,000 revolutions per minute and then oven dried at 32°C. 

Dried sediments were disaggregated by crushing gently with a 

ceramic mortar and pestle and then analyzed for chemical and 

mineralogical composition. The dried powder was sieved to less 

than 37 μm and mounted in the 2.5-cm diameter well of a stainless-steel holder for mineralogical analysis by X-ray diffraction 

(XRD). The XRD patterns were collected on a Scintag thetatheta diffractometer using Cu radiation over the range 5° to 80° 

at a 1° per minute continuous scan rate. Major, minor, and trace 

elements in a 1-gram subsample of the dried sediment were 

determined by ICP-MS and ICP-AES after decomposition with 

a mixture of hydrochloric, nitric, perchloric, and hydrofluoric 

acids at low temperature (Fishman and Friedman, 1989; Fishman, 1993; Crock and others, 1999; Taggart, 2002). 

Fish were collected by electrofishing over a 500-ft 

(150-m) reach consisting of mixed riffle, run, and pool habitats 

at selected stream sites, held for measurement and identification, checked for anomalies, and then released in accordance 

with methods described by Meador and others (1993a, 1993b), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1993), and Bilger and 

others (1999). Four of the sites (S10, S16, S23, and S30) on 

Mahanoy Creek were downstream of AMD sources; one site 

(S28) on Schwaben Creek was within an unmined area. 

Selected large specimens (greater than 25-cm length) of white 

sucker (Catostomus commersoni) from Mahanoy Creek near 

Gowen City (S23) were sacrificed for analysis of trace metals in 

whole fish. Six specimens were frozen for transport to the laboratory in accordance with preparation protocols (Hoffman, 

1996). The whole-fish samples were homogenized to form a 

single composite, and a subsample was dried and acid-extracted 

for analysis of trace metals by ICP-AES, ICP-MS, or cold 

vapor-atomic absorption spectrophotometry (Hoffman, 1996). 

Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys were conducted at 

most water-quality monitoring stations and additional sites during base-flow conditions in 2000-2002 by Martin A. Friday of 

PaDEP using rapid bioassessment protocols (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993; Barbour and others, 1999). Some 

of the benthic surveys were conducted in coordination with 

USGS water-quality sampling surveys in August 2001 and fish 

surveys in October 2001. A rectangular frame kicknet with 

0.6-mm screen size was used to capture debris and organisms 

dislodged from the streambed. An area of approximately 0.5-m2

was “kicked” upstream of the net for a total of 30 seconds for
Preston Mine Preston #3 water level drift (M15) n.a. 72 404744076163001 404744.0 761630.0 MMC No No

Preston Mine #2 overflow (M16) 31 n.a. n.a. 404745.0 761708.0 MMC No No

Preston Mine #3 Tunnel overflow (M17) 32 73 404725076173401 404724.6 761732.8 MMC Yes Yes

Bast Mine Tunnel (M18) 34 74 404729076180801 404730.9 761804.6 MMC Yes Yes

Centralia Mine Tunnel (M19) 36 75 404727076192601 404735.3 761925.7 MMC Yes Yes

Bast Mine overflow (M20) n.a. 76 404711076190901 404711.1 761907.5 MMC Yes Dry

Bast Mine Oakland Tunnel (M21) 38 77 404706076195401 404706.0 761952.5 MMC Yes Yes

Tunnel Mine seepage to ditch from spoil bank/pond (M22) n.a. n.a. 404655076195301 404655.0 761953.2 MMC No Yes

Tunnel Mine discharge from spoil bank/pond (M23) n.a. n.a. 404650076200201 404649.6 762001.9 MMC No Yes

Tunnel Mine drain pool area and storage (M24) 40-41 78 404645076201201 404644.8 762011.5 MMC Yes Yes

Tunnel Mine Orchard Drift overflow near Ashland sewage (M25) 42 n.a. 404648076202301 404648.0 762023.4 MMC No Yes

Potts Mine West Breach (M26) 48 79 404634076221901 404633.3 762216.8 MMC Yes Yes

Potts Mine East Breach (M27) 49 80 404624076221501 404628.7 762215.8 MMC Yes Yes

Lavelle Mine Lavelle slope (M28) 53 91 404558076240501 404558.0 762405.0 MC Yes Yes

Locust Gap Mine Locust Gap Tunnel (M29) 54 92 404504076261201 404504.0 762612.0 MC Yes Yes

Locust Gap Mine Helfenstein Tunnel (M30) n.a. n.a. 404515076265201 404515.1 762652.1 MC Yes Yes

Locust Gap Mine Doutyville Tunnel (M31) 56 94 404435076283801 404435.0 762838.0 MC Yes Yes

N. Franklin Mine drift and Borehole (M32) 62 111 404617076404401 404616.5 764042.1 ZR Yes Yes

N. Franklin Mine seepage (M33) 63 112 404636076405801 404640.7 764058.6 ZR Yes Yes

N. Franklin Mine bank seepage (M34) n.a. n.a. 404617076405201 404617.4 764051.7 ZR Yes No

N. Franklin Mine Sunshine Mine overflow (M35) 65 n.a. n.a. 404552.0 764351.0 ZR No No

1. Local site identification numbers, in parentheses, used to indicate site location in figure 1. 

2. Streams are shown in figure 1. UMC=Upper Mahanoy Creek; MMC=Middle Mahanoy Creek; MC=Mahanoy Creek; NMC=North Mahanoy Creek; SC=Shenandoah Creek; 

ZR=Zerbe Run.

3. Water-quality and flow data collected for high base-flow conditions on March 26-28, 2001, and (or) low base-flow conditions on August 20-22, 2001. Streambed chemistry samples 

also collected at surface-water and ground-water stations during the low base-flow survey. 

4. Scarlift site number of Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975). 

5. Informal USGS site number of Reed and others (1987).

6. Formal USGS station identification number was assigned only if the site was sampled by USGS for this study or Reed and others (1987). Latitude and longitude for sites that 

were not sampled by USGS were estimated from maps in Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975). 

ection, Sampling, and Analysis 9
Unn. Trib. to Mahanoy Cr "Big Mine Run" nr Girardville (S15) M19 n.a. 0155521346 404714.4 761904.5 Yes Yes No No

M12-M13 n.a. 0155521341 404739.9 761643.3 Yes Yes No No Packer #5 Mine Breach and Borehole at Mahanoy Cr (M14)b

Mahanoy Cr nr Ashland (S16) (S10,S14)M14-M25 43 0155521356 404635.1 762021.7 Yes Yes Yes Yes

Mahanoy Cr nr Gordon (S17) (S16) n.a. 0155521369 404524.3 762024.9 Yes Yes No No

Rattling Run at Gordon (S18) n.a. 45 0155521486 404457.5 762016.7 Yes Yes No No

Little Mahanoy Cr at Gordon (S19) (S18) 46 0155521488 404514.6 762032.8 Yes Yes No Yes

Unn. Trib. to Mahanoy Cr "Big Run" nr Lavelle (S20) M26,M27 51 01555228 404512.9 762221.2 Yes Yes No Yes

Crab Run nr Taylorville (S21) n.a. n.a. 01555232 404446.4 762329.4 No Yes No Yes

Mahanoy Cr nr Lavelle (S22) (S17,S19,S20,S21) 52 01555234 404509.0 762350.0 Yes Yes No No

Mahanoy Cr nr Gowen City (S23) (S22)M28-M31 58 01555240 404425.4 763255.1 Yes Yes Yes Yes

Zerbe Run at Trevorton (S24) n.a. 61 0155524529 404652.8 764058.1 Yes Yes No Yes

Unn. Trib. to Zerbe Run at Trevorton (S25) M32-M34 n.a. 0155524558 404646.4 764101.3 Yes Yes No Yes

Zerbe Run nr Dornsife (S26) (S24,S25)M35 66 01555246 404521.0 764517.0 Yes Yes No Yes

Mahanoy Cr nr Dornsife (S27) (S23,S26) 67 0155525004 404354.0 764738.7 Yes Yes No No

Schwaben Cr nr Red Cross (S28) n.a. 68 0155525061 404257.7 764645.9 Yes Yes Yes Yes

Mouse Cr bl Urban (S29) n.a. 70 0155525069 404122.0 764617.1 Yes Yes No Yes

Mahanoy Cr at Kneass (S30) (S27,S28,S29) 71 01555251 404328.8 764855.4 Yes Yes Yes Yes

Mahanoy Cr nr Herndon (S31) (S31) n.a. 01555252 404334.0 765016.0 No Yes No No

1. Local site identification numbers, in parentheses, used to indicate site location in figure 1. 

2. The Packer #5 borehole and breach (M14) was assigned a surface-water station number (0155521341) and is treated as surface water in subsequent figures and tables. However, this site consists 

entirely of mine drainage from the Packer #5 borehole (M12) and breach (M13) and, hence, was given a local number with prefix “M”.

3. AMD sources identified by local site numbers in table 1. If the site is downstream from another stream monitoring site(s), the AMD associated with the upstream site, in parentheses, also applies. 

4. Scarlift site numbers based on report of Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975).

5. Water-quality and flow data collected for high base-flow conditions on March 26-28, 2001, and (or) low base-flow conditions on August 20-22, 2001. Streambed chemistry samples collected at 

all surface-water and ground-water stations during August 2001. Fish were collected during low base-flow conditions on October 10-11, 2001. Macroinvertebrates, or “bugs,” collected and identified by 

Martin A. Friday of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection during July 2000 to May 2002 at sites indicated plus additional sites in the watershed. 

10 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 11

each sample. Samples were collected from three habitats consisting of shallow riffle with exposed cobbles, deeper riffle, and 

run habitats. The samples were composited in the field and identified to family level. Counts of organisms for various taxa were 

recorded as rare (1-2), present (3-9), common (10-24), abundant 

(25-100), and very abundant (greater than 100). By assuming 

the average value for the abundance range indicated for each 

taxa and a value of 125 for very abundant taxa, the semi-quantitative taxa abundance data were used to calculate the familylevel biotic index (Hilsenhoff, 1988; Barbour and others, 1999). 

The data assembled for the assessment were incorporated 

into digital databases, including the USGS NWIS, spreadsheets, 

and a GIS. These data are summarized by site in appendix A. 

The water-quality data also are accessible on the World Wide 

Web for selected stations (tables 1 and 2) and dates on the 

USGS NWIS (http://wwwpah2o.er.usgs.gov/).

Priority ranks of AMD sites were determined and compared on the basis of ranks of contaminant loads during low and 

high base-flow conditions. Because acidity of AMD is largely a 

function of the pH and dissolved metal concentrations, prioritization methods evaluated metals loading for ranking the AMD 

sources using an approach similar to that of Cravotta and Kirby 

(2004a). The metals loading was computed as the product of 

flow rate and the sum of concentrations of the dissolved metals 

as

Metal load = f.

Q.(CFe + CMn + CAl), (6)

where Q is the instantaneous flow rate in cubic feet per second 

and C with a subscript Fe, Mn, or Al indicates dissolved iron, 

manganese, or aluminum concentration, respectively, in milligrams per liter. For these units of measure, the conversion factor, f = 0.893, yields annual loading in megagrams (Mg/yr), 

whereas f = 0.984 yields annual loading in short tons (ton/yr). 

Acidity for all the samples was computed from pH and dissolved metals concentrations in milligrams per liter as

Aciditycomputed (mg/L CaCO ) = 50.

(10(3-pH) + 2. 3 CFe/55.85 + 

2.

CMn/54.94 + 3.CAl/26.98). (7)

The computed acidity avoids issues of different analytical methods, the lack of reporting negative values for the “hot” acidity, 

or an assumed value of zero for near-neutral pH samples; however, the computed acidity also involves assumptions regarding 

valence or speciation of the dissolved metals (Kirby and Cravotta, 2004; Cravotta and Kirby, 2004b). The net alkalinity was 

computed by subtracting the computed acidity from measured 

alkalinity as

Net alkalinity (mg/L CaCO3) = Alkalinity - Aciditycomputed.(8)

The net alkalinity on the basis of computed acidity (equations 7 

and 8) is comparable to the measured “hot” acidity where acid 

added at the start of the titration is subtracted from the total base 

consumed and negative values of the acidity for high-pH samples are reported (Cravotta and Kirby, 2004b). 

The physical setting (area available for treatment, slope, 

access), maximum measured flow, and specific water-quality 

data for each AMD source including minimum net alkalinity 

(equation 8) and maximum concentrations of dissolved oxygen 

and metals for the low and high base-flow samples were used to 

determine feasibility of remediation. Guidelines similar to those 

introduced by Hedin and others (1994) and modified by 

Skousen and others (1998) were used for the identification of 

appropriate remedial alternatives (fig. 2). Consideration was 

given to remining or removal of culm banks, various passivetreatment technologies, active treatment, and the “no-action” 

alternative. Computed wetland size, based on the 180 lb/acre/d 

(20 g/m2/d) iron-loading rate of Hedin and others (1994), was 

compared with available land area (not considering ownership) 

to indicate feasibility for implementation of passive treatment at 

each site. 

Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin

Data for flow rate, pH, acidity, net alkalinity, and metals 

concentrations in samples from each AMD and stream site surveyed for the Mahanoy Creek watershed assessment during 

high base-flow conditions in March 2001 and low base-flow 

conditions in August 2001 are summarized in table 3 and 

figure 3. These high and low base-flow data were collected with 

the intent to bracket average conditions and indicate some of the 

variability in flow and chemistry at each AMD and stream monitoring site. All data on the flow rates, pH, concentrations of 

major ions, trace elements, nutrients, and other constituents are 

documented in appendix A. 

Instantaneous streamflow ranged from 0 to 320 ft3/s (0 to 

544,000 L/min) (table 3); the medians for the low and high 

base-flow surveys were 2.0 and 9.3 ft3

/s (3,380 to 15,600 

L/min), respectively. Flow rates of AMD ranged from 0 to 

17.2 ft3

/s (0 to 29,200 L/min); the medians for the low and high 

base-flow surveys were 0.09 and 0.53 ft3

/s (153 to 900 L/min), 

respectively. With few exceptions, the flow rate at each stream 

and AMD site during March 2001 exceeded that during August 

2001 (fig. 3). Generally, concentrations of sulfate, acidity, and 

dissolved iron and manganese at a particular site were greater at 

low base-flow conditions than high base-flow conditions; however, the pH and dissolved aluminum concentrations at a given 

site were comparable for low base-flow and high base-flow 

conditions (table 3, fig. 3). 

Most AMD and streamwater samples collected during the 

high base-flow and low base-flow surveys had near neutral pH 

(table 3); the median pH for AMD was 6.0 and for streamwater 

was 6.8. The AMD and streamwater samples that had pH less 

than 5 were net acidic and those that had pH greater than 6 were 

net alkaline (table 3). The low-pH samples had elevated concentrations of acidity, metals (Fe, Mn, Al), and sulfate. Many of 

the high-pH samples had elevated concentrations of alkalinity, 

sulfate, calcium, and magnesium (table 3, appendix A), 
S15

S16

S17

S18

S19

S20

S21

S22

S23

S24

S25

S26

S27

S28

S29

S30

S31

3.86 2.43

87.7 50.2

112 46.2

9.61 1.99

30.1 6.80

6.08 1.33

n.d. .61

107 51.4

239 65.5

7.99 .62

6.68 2.79

30.2 4.36

277 71.2

28.4 1.66

4.28 .52

320 76.6

n.d. 76.3

6,560 4,130

149,000 85,300

190,000 78,500

16,300 3,380

51,100 11,600

10,300 2,260

n.d. 1,040

182,000 87,300

406,000 111,000

13,600 1,050

11,300 4,740

51,300 7,410

471,000 121,000

48,300 2,820

7,270 883

544,000 130,000

n.d. 130,000

9.6 9.7

9.4 9.0

9.7 8.3

12.3 8.3

13.1 8.3

10.6 9.6

n.d. 7.2

10.4 8.4

11.0 8.9

11.6 9.5

10.2 10.5

11.5 8.8

11.7 8.4

12.6 8.4

11.9 9.4

12.2 8.8

n.d. 8.7

3.7 3.6

7.0 7.0

7.0 6.9

5.7 6.5

7.0 7.0

8.2 8.0

n.d. 7.1

7.0 7.6

7.3 7.6

7.0 7.2

6.3 6.3

6.0 4.3

6.7 6.9

7.3 7.5

8.4 7.7

7.1 7.2

n.d. 7.3

60 79

35 42

32 51

3 n.d.

11 20

108 178

n.d. 32

23 47

21 58

11 49

-6 -6

-3 -20

17 38

14 54

52 120

24 21

n.d. 43

5.8 3.1

4.8 5.7

4.2 2.1

.01 .01

.10 .08

.12 .22

n.d. .15

1.6 .12

.76 .11

.14 .21

8.1 11

1.5 .15

.28 .08

.03 .06

.05 .06

.11 .08

n.d. .08

5.6 8.9

.02 .02

.02 .04

.14 .01

.11 .01

.03 .01

n.d. .01

<.01 .04

.01 .02

.04 .02

.05 .04

.10 2.3

.02 .04

.01 .02

.02 .01

.01 .03

n.d. .02

4.8 6.0

3.4 6.5

3.3 6.0

.09 .01

.05 .02

.90 .75

n.d. .05

2.3 4.6

1.8 3.3

.06 .02

2 2.4

.93 2.7

1.3 .90

.01 .02

.01 .01

1.2 .54

n.d. .23

482 524

321 491

295 480

7 6

10 11

286 508

n.d. 9

227 427

190 409

10 8

253 304

99 264

152 382

12 11

16 17

132 363

n.d. 361

.50 <.10

.16 .30

.30 .45

.10 .18

.55 .52

.80 .50

n.d. 3.3

.70 .76

1.0 .73

.51 .72

.07 <.01

.50 .60

.66 .80

6.0 1.9

2.8 2.8

1.8 .77

n.d. .71

<.01 <.01

.03 .04

.04 .04

.03 <.01

.03 .07

<.01 <.01

n.d. .08

.03 .04

.03 <.01

.01 .01

<.01 <.01

.04 .02

.02 <.01

.01 .03

.01 .02

.01 <.01

n.d. <.01

55.9 39.1

644 548

753 336

2.1 <.1

7 .7

5.7 1.2

n.d. .1

373 219

549 201

1.7 .1

60.6 33.5

68.2 20.1

396 65.1

1.4 .1

.3 <.1

378 44.7

n.d. 22.2

Abandoned Mine Drainage (GW, GW-AMD)

M01

M02

M03

M04

M05

M07

M08

M11

M12

M13

M17

M18

M19

M20

M21

M22

M23

M24

M25

M26

M27

M28

M29

M30

M31

M32

M33

M34

0 0

8.79 0

5.28 2.64

0 0

.01 0

.38 .03

.27 0

4.10 2.73

5.27 3.62

5.00 5.80

2.23 .67

.67 .40

3.86 2.43

2.23 0

4.00 2.30

n.d. .03

n.d. .03

.09 .13

n.d. .04

1.44 .36

.22 .29

.23 .01

17.2 7.29

.09 <.01

3.52 .99

6.45 2.56

.03 0

.02 <.01

0 0

14,900 0

8,970 4,490

0 0

17 0

646 51

459 0

6,970 4,640

8,950 6,150

8,500 9,850

3,790 1,140

1,140 680

6,560 4,130

3,790 0

6,800 3,910

n.a. 51

n.a. 51

153 221

n.a. 68

2,450 612

374 493

391 17

29,200 12,400

153 2

5,980 1,680

11,000 4,350

51 0

34 <2

n.d. n.d.

0.2 n.d.

.1 .2

n.d. n.d.

9.7 n.d.

.3 .4

.5 n.d.

2.2 .3

.2 .3

.1 .4

.4 .2

8.3 8.8

7.4 8.4

3.1 n.d.

3.8 5.2

n.d. 5.5

n.d. .1

8.9 .9

n.d. 1.5

.2 1.7

.6 2.5

.5 1.0

8.8 9.1

3.7 2.8

9.3 9.6

4.6 4.4

4.8 n.d.

.9 .6

n.d. n.d.

4.7 n.d.

4.9 4.8

n.d. n.d.

6.4 n.d.

6.1 6.1

6.6 n.d.

6.1 6.0

6.3 6.3

6.3 6.2

6.3 6.2

5.8 5.7

3.9 3.6

6.5 n.d.

6.3 6.4

n.d. 4.1

n.d. 5.9

7.4 6.1

n.d. 5.6

6.6 6.4

6.7 6.5

3.9 4.3

6.7 6.5

5.5 6.1

5.0 6.1

5.9 5.2

3.1 n.d.

2.9 2.9

n.d. n.d.

-21 n.d.

-18 -18

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

57 11

164 n.d.

51 15

108 96

95 94

59 72

-2 -24

-59 -80

80 n.d.

74 79

n.d. -109

n.d. 55

218 54

n.d. 21

245 216

190 202

-20 -32

34 29

8 13

-17 9

5 3

-110 n.d.

-184 -220

n.d. n.d.

3.4 n.d.

3.6 6.3

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

14 33

5.2 n.d.

18 24

12 21

13 22

4.8 4.7

7.7 19

7.6 4.6

8.4 n.d.

7.3 14

n.d. 2.3

n.d. .03

.24 14

n.d. .04

16 30

8.9 13

2.2 10

6.7 11

.01 1.9

2.1 3.4

11 13

5.1 n.d.

21 31

n.d. n.d.

2.1 n.d.

1.6 1.1

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

<.01 <.01

<.01 n.d.

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

.01 .01

.04 <.01

.35 .47

5.5 8.7

.04 n.d.

.05 .08

n.d. 15

n.d. <.01

<.01 .05

n.d. .17

<.01 .24

<.01 .01

1.3 1.5

.05 .05

<.01 .01

1.8 .34

.32 .51

9.8 n.d.

14 17

n.d. n.d.

1.2 n.d.

1.2 1.2

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

6.4 8.9

3.5 n.d.

3.8 4.4

5.9 9.0

6.3 9.2

.95 .99

2.5 4.2

4.9 5.9

2.7 n.d.

2.6 3.1

n.d. 9.7

n.d. 2.7

.82 2.7

n.d. .82

3.6 5.1

2.1 2.3

1.6 1.8

2.3 3.8

<.01 .93

1.3 1.5

1.9 2.3

3.8 n.d.

3.0 3.9

n.d. n.d.

104 n.d.

105 111

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

582 561

450 n.d.

218 228

600 596

600 595

62 74

434 578

483 520

372 n.d.

360 351

n.d. 696

n.d. 203

181 221

n.d. 106

787 785

329 347

77 94

424 506

18 20

181 239

297 307

419 n.d.

454 506

n.d. n.d.

0.01 n.d.

.01 <0.01

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

.40 <.05

.40 n.d.

<.10 <.01

.40 <.05

<.10 <.10

.01 <.01

.40 <.05

.40 <.05

<.10 n.d.

<.10 <.01

n.d. <.05

n.d. <.01

<.10 <.01

n.d. <.01

<.10 <.05

<.10 <.05

.05 <.01

<.10 <.10

.06 <.01

<.10 <.01

<.10 <.01

.10 n.d.

<.10 <.10

n.d. n.d.

<0.01 n.d.

<.01 <.01

n.d. n.d.

n.d. n.d.

<.01 <.01

<.01 n.d.

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 n.d.

<.01 <.01

n.d. <.01

n.d. <.01

<.01 <.01

n.d. <.01

.01 <.02

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 .01

<.01 <.01

<.01 <.01

<.01 n.d.

<.01 <.01

0 0

52.6 0

30.2 20.3

0 0

n.d. 0

6.9 1.2

2.1 0

79.9 69.3

84.3 97.1

86.3 162

11.5 3.4

6.3 8.5

62.1 41.7

22.2 0

35.6 35.3

n.d. .8

n.d. .1

.1 2

n.d. <.1

25.2 11.4

2.2 4.0

1.0 .1

139 96.7

<.1 <.1

16.4 4.6

76.2 36.2

.5 0

.7 .1

1. Site descriptions given in tables 1 and 2. Site locations given in figure 1. Complete data for sampled sites given in appendix A.

2. For convenience, flow rate is given in English and standard international units; 1 ft3

/s = 1,699 L/min.

3. Net alkalinity = measured alkalinity - computed acidity per equations 7 and 8. 

4. Concentration and loading data are for “dissolved” metals and other constituents in filtered (0.45-μm pore size) samples. 

12 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin
Figure 3. Comparison of flow rates, pH, and dissolved 

constituent concentrations at each ground-water AMD (GW

AMD)

streamwater AMD (SW

AMD)

and 

0

200400600800

1,000

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

Sulfate (Mar. 2001), mg/L

Sulfate (Aug. 2001), mg/L GW-AM D SW-AM D SW

3D

0

5,000

10,00015,000

20,00025,00030,00035,000

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000

Iron (Mar. 2001), ug/L

Iron (Aug. 2001), ug/L GW-AM D SW-AM D

SW

3E

0

2,0004,0006,0008,000

10,000

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000

Manganese (Mar. 2001), ug/L

Manganese (Aug. 2001), ug/L GW-AM D SW-AM D SW

3F

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1000

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000

Flow Rate (Mar. 2001), ft3/s

Flow Rate (Aug. 2001), ft 3/s GW-AM D SW-AM D SW Line of equality

3A

2.03.04.05.06.07.08.0

2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0

pH (Mar. 2001)

pH (Aug. 2001)

GW-AM DSW-AM DSW

Line of equality bounded by +/- 0.5 pH

3B

0

255075

100125150175

200225

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225

Acidity (Mar. 2001), mg/L CaCO3

Acidity (Aug. 2001), mg/L CaCO3 GW-AM D SW-AM D SW

3C

10,000

100,000

1), ug/L 

3G

Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 13
14 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

indicating their origin as acidic AMD that had been neutralized. 

Few AMD or streamwater samples for this survey had pH less 

than 4. The minimum pH value of 2.9 for AMD was observed 

at the North Franklin Mine (M34) during low and high baseflow conditions. The maximum pH value for AMD samples was 

7.4 for high base-flow and 6.5 for low base-flow conditions. The 

minimum and maximum pH values for streamwater samples 

were 3.6 and 8.4, respectively. Notably, one stream site, Zerbe 

Run near Dornsife (S26), had acidic pH during low base-flow 

conditions but near-neutral pH during high base-flow conditions. The low pH and increased acidity (decreased net alkalinity) at this site for low base-flow conditions (table 3, fig. 3) can 

be attributed to various possible factors, including less dilution 

with alkaline water sources, increased rate of pyrite oxidation 

associated with increased air flow to the subsurface as the water 

table declined during summer drought, increased rate of Fe2+

oxidation associated with warmer temperature, and more complete oxidation and hydrolysis associated with longer transport 

or detention times at slower flow rates. 

Although criteria for water-quality protection apply to the 

total concentration of regulated constituents (Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania, 1998a, 1998b, 2001a, 2002), the dissolved 

concentrations generally are considered to be bioavailable 

(Elder, 1988; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a). 

Thus, the “dissolved concentration” data for the filtered 

(0.45-μm pore size) samples can be evaluated directly with 

respect to aquatic-toxicity criteria. Furthermore, the dissolved 

metals loading is required for the selection and sizing of AMD 

treatment systems (fig. 2) and, as indicated by equations 7 and 

8, the dissolved metals concentrations are included in the measurement and evaluation of acidity and net alkalinity. Thus, 

hereinafter, dissolved metals concentrations and corresponding 

computed values for metals loading, acidity, and net alkalinity 

will be emphasized. A subset of the metals analyzed for this 

study that have established criteria for protection of aquatic life 

or human health are described below. 

Computed acidity (equation 7) of AMD samples ranged 

from 0 to 220 mg/L; corresponding net alkalinities (equation 8) 

of AMD ranged from 245 to -220 mg/L. Generally, because of 

dilution, the maximum values of acidity and net alkalinity were 

smaller for streamwater compared to the AMD sources. 

Although acidity at many AMD and streamwater sites was 

greater during low base-flow than high base-flow conditions 

(table 3, fig. 3), most AMD and streamwater sources consistently were net acidic (alkalinity less than acidity) or net alkaline (alkalinity greater than acidity) (table 3). The net acidic 

samples had elevated concentrations of dissolved iron as Fe2+, 

manganese as Mn2+, and sulfate. 

Sulfate concentrations in the low and high base-flow AMD 

samples ranged from 18 to 787 mg/L (table 3, fig. 3). Sulfate 

concentrations in streamwater samples did not exceed 

600 mg/L. The maximum concentrations of sulfate in AMD or 

streamwater samples were comparable for low base-flow and 

high base-flow conditions. Generally, streamwater samples had 

lower concentrations of sulfate than AMD sources with equivalent flow. Although the sulfate concentrations for a particular 

AMD source generally were comparable during high base-flow 

and low base-flow conditions, sulfate concentrations for 

streamwater sites generally were smaller during high base-flow 

than low base-flow conditions (fig. 3). Approximately half the 

AMD and streamwater samples exceeded the secondary drinking-water standard for sulfate (250 mg/L; U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2002b). 

Iron concentrations in the low and high base-flow AMD 

samples ranged from 0.01 to 33 mg/L, and in streamwater samples ranged from less than 0.01 to 21 mg/L (fig. 3, table 3). 

With few exceptions, iron concentrations for a particular site 

were similar or greater during low base-flow than high baseflow conditions. Generally, surface water had lower concentrations of iron and other metals than AMD with equivalent flow. 

For samples containing more than 6.0 mg/L (6,000 μg/L) iron, 

the concentrations of dissolved and total iron were equivalent 

(fig. 4); that is, dissolved iron was predominant over suspended 

iron-containing particles. Approximately half the AMD samples exceeded the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1998a, 

1998b) criteria for instantaneous maximum concentration of 

iron in effluent from an active mine (7.0 mg/L) (fig. 4). More 

than one-third of streamwater samples exceeded the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (2002) instream criteria for total recoverable iron (1.5 mg/L) and dissolved iron (0.3 mg/L) (fig. 4). 

Most AMD and half the streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life from dissolved iron (1.0 mg/L) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2002a). All but one AMD and most streamwater samples 

exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002b) 

secondary drinking-water standard for iron (0.3 mg/L). 

Manganese concentrations in the low and high base-flow 

AMD samples ranged from less than 0.01 to 9.7 mg/L, and in 

streamwater samples ranged from 0.01 to 9.2 mg/L (fig. 3, 

table 3). With few exceptions, dissolved manganese concentrations at a particular site were greater during low base-flow than 

high base-flow conditions (fig. 3). Generally, manganese was 

predominant as a dissolved constituent in the AMD and streamwater samples (dissolved = total) (fig. 4). About one-fifth of the 

AMD samples exceeded the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

(1998a, 1998b) criteria for instantaneous maximum concentration of manganese in effluent from an active mine (5.0 mg/L), 

and more than one-third of the streamwater samples exceeded 

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (2002) instream criteria for 

total recoverable manganese (1.0 mg/L) (fig. 4). All AMD and 

most stream samples exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2002b) secondary drinking-water standard for 

manganese (0.05 mg/L).

Aluminum concentrations in the low and high base-flow 

AMD samples ranged from less than 0.01 to 17 mg/L, and in 

streamwater samples ranged from less than 0.01 to 8.9 mg/L 

(fig. 3, table 3). Dissolved aluminum concentration was 

inversely correlated with pH; AMD and streamwater samples 

that had pH greater than 5 had aluminum concentrations less 

than 0.75 mg/L. With few exceptions, dissolved aluminum concentrations at a particular AMD site were similar during low 

and high base-flow conditions; however, at most streamwater
4A: Iron 

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

PACODE

TMDL

CCCF

4C: Aluminum

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1 10 100 

Dissolved Co

Total Concentration, ug/L

4B: Manganese

10

100

1,000

10,000

10 100 1,000 10,000

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

PACODE

TMDL

Figure 4. Comparison of total (whole-water) and dissolved (0.45-μm pore-size filter) concentrations, in micrograms per liter (μg/L), for low b

flow abandoned-mine drainage (HI-GW; LO-GW) and streamwater (HI-SW; LO-SW) samples collected in Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylva

August 2001, respectively: (A) iron, (B) manganese, (C) aluminum, (D) arsenic, (E) barium, (F) beryllium, (G) cadmium, (H) cobalt, (I) copper, 

zinc. PACODE indicates effluent limitation for active surface or underground coal mine in Pennsylvania (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1

total maximum daily load stream-quality criteria (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2001a); and CCCF indicates continuous contaminant con

tolerated by freshwater aquatic organisms without unacceptable effect (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a).

4D: Arsenic

1.0

0.1

10.0

0.1 1.0 10.0

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

4F: Beryllium

1.00

0.10

0.01

10.00

100.00

0.01 0.10 1

Dissolved Co

Total Concentration, ug/L

4E: Barium

10

100

10 100

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

50

50
4G: Cadmium

1.00

0.10

0.01

10.00

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

CCCF

4J: Lead

1.00

0.10

0.01

10.00

0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

CCCF

Figure 4. Comparison of total (whole-water) and dissolved (0.45-μm pore-size filter) concentrations, in micrograms per liter (μg/L), for low b

flow abandoned-mine drainage (HI-GW; LO-GW) and streamwater (HI-SW; LO-SW) samples collected in Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylva

August 2001, respectively: (A) iron, (B) manganese, (C) aluminum, (D) arsenic, (E) barium, (F) beryllium, (G) cadmium, (H) cobalt, (I) copper, 

zinc. PACODE indicates effluent limitation for active surface or underground coal mine in Pennsylvania (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1

total maximum daily load stream-quality criteria (Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2001a); and CCCF indicates continuous contaminant con

tolerated by freshwater aquatic organisms without unacceptable effect (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a).—Continued

4L: Zinc

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

1 10 1

Dissolved Co

Total Concentration, ug/L

CCCF

4H: Cobalt

1.0

0.1

10.0

100.0

1,000.0

0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0 1,000.0

Dissolved Concentration,ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

CCCF

4K: Nickel

1

10

100

1,000

1 10 100 1,000

Dissolved Concentration, ug/L

Total Concentration, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

HI-SW

LO-SW

CCCF

4I: Copper

1.0

0.1

10.0

100.0

1,000.0

0.1 1.0 1

Dissolved Con

Total Concentration, ug/L
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 17

sites, concentrations of aluminum differed between low and 

high base-flow conditions (fig. 3). For the AMD and streamwater samples containing more than 1.0 mg/L (1,000 μg/L) aluminum, dissolved aluminum was predominant (dissolved = total) 

(fig. 4). More than one-fourth of the AMD and one-tenth of the 

streamwater samples exceeded the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1998a, 1998b) criteria for instantaneous maximum concentration of aluminum in effluent from an active mine 

(0.75 mg/L) and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (2002) 

instream criteria for total recoverable aluminum (0.75 mg/L). 

Most AMD and approximately half the streamwater samples 

also exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of 

aquatic life from dissolved aluminum (0.087 mg/L) and the secondary drinking-water standard for aluminum (0.2 mg/L) (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Arsenic was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 0.2 μg/L in more than two-thirds of the AMD and 

streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 

7.0 μg/L (appendix A). Despite potential for its mobilization 

from coal and shale, dissolved arsenic was present at only low 

concentrations likely because of the adsorption of arsenate and 

arsenite ions by iron oxides (Cravotta and others, 2001). The 

total concentration of arsenic was as much as 2.5 times that of 

the dissolved concentration (fig. 4). None of the AMD or 

streamwater samples exceeded the 150 μg/L continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2002a) or the 10 μg/L primary drinkingwater standard for arsenic (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002b). 

Barium was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 10 μg/L in all of the AMD and streamwater samples; 

the maximum concentration was 75 μg/L (appendix A). Generally, the barium was present as a dissolved constituent (fig. 4), 

but at only low concentrations because of solubility control by 

barite (BaSO4) in solutions containing sulfate (Nordstrom and 

Alpers, 1999). None of the AMD or streamwater samples 

exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic 

life (4,100 μg/L) or the primary drinking-water standard 

(2,000 μg/L) for barium (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Beryllium was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 0.05 μg/L in two-thirds of the AMD and streamwater 

samples; the maximum concentration was 16 μg/L 

(appendix A). The beryllium was predominantly dissolved at 

concentrations greater than or equal to 1 μg/L (fig. 4). Although 

criteria for beryllium have not been established for protection of 

aquatic life, some AMD or streamwater samples exceeded primary drinking-water standards (4 μg/L) for beryllium (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b).

Cadmium was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 0.02 μg/L in four-fifths of the AMD and streamwater 

samples; the maximum concentration was 4.0 μg/L 

(appendix A). The cadmium was predominantly dissolved at 

concentrations greater than or equal to 0.3 μg/L (fig. 4). Some 

AMD samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (2 μg/L); however, none of the AMD or 

streamwater samples exceeded the primary drinking-water 

standard (5 μg/L) for cadmium (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Chromium (not shown in fig. 4) was detected at concentrations greater than or equal to 1.0 μg/L in less than one-third of 

the AMD and streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 9 μg/L (appendix A). None of the AMD or streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (19 μg/L) or the primary drinking-water 

standard (100 μg/L) for chromium (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Cobalt was detected at concentrations greater than or equal 

to 0.02 μg/L in all of the AMD and all but one of the streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 530 μg/L 

(appendix A). The cobalt was predominantly dissolved at concentrations greater than or equal to 1 μg/L (fig. 4). Most of the 

AMD and associated streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (19 μg/L); 

drinking-water standards have not been established for cobalt 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Copper was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 0.5 μg/L in seven-eighths of the AMD and streamwater 

samples; the maximum concentration was 150 μg/L 

(appendix A). The copper was predominantly dissolved at concentrations greater than or equal to 10 μg/L (fig. 4). Some AMD 

and associated streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (9 μg/L); none 

exceeded the primary drinking-water standard (1,300 μg/L) for 

copper (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Lead was detected at concentrations greater than or equal 

to 0.05 μg/L in more than half the AMD and streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 6.4 μg/L (appendix A). 

The lead was predominantly dissolved at concentrations greater 

than or equal to 2.5 μg/L (fig. 4). Some AMD and one streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (2.5 μg/L); none exceeded the primary 

drinking-water standard (15 μg/L) for lead (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Nickel was detected at concentrations greater than or equal 

to 0.3 μg/L in all the AMD and streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 890 μg/L (appendix A). The nickel 

was predominantly dissolved (fig. 4). Many of the AMD and 

some streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (52 μg/L); drinking-water standards have not been established for nickel (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Selenium (not shown in fig. 4) was detected at concentrations greater than 0.2 μg/L in less than one-tenth of the AMD 

and streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 

0.4 μg/L (appendix A). None of the AMD or streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of 

aquatic life (5.0 μg/L) or the primary drinking-water standard 

(50 μg/L) for selenium (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Silver was detected at concentrations greater than or equal 

to 0.01 μg/L in less than one-eighth of the AMD and stream-
18 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

water samples; the maximum concentration was 0.9 μg/L 

(appendix A). None of the AMD or streamwater samples 

exceeded the secondary drinking-water standard (200 μg/L); 

criteria for protection of aquatic life have not been established 

for silver (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, 

2002b). 

Thallium was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 0.05 μg/L in less than one-twentieth of the AMD and 

streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 

0.2 μg/L (appendix A). None of the AMD or streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of 

aquatic life (13 μg/L) or the primary drinking-water standard 

(2 μg/L) for thallium (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2002a, 2002b). 

Vanadium was detected at concentrations greater than or 

equal to 0.2 μg/L in less than one-fourth of the AMD and 

streamwater samples; the maximum concentration was 

1.0 μg/L (appendix A). None of the AMD or streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of 

aquatic life (100 μg/L); drinking-water standards have not been 

established for vanadium(U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002a, 2002b). 

Zinc was detected at concentrations greater than or equal 

to 1.0 μg/L in all but one each of the AMD and streamwater 

samples; the maximum concentration was 3,200 μg/L 

(appendix A). The zinc was predominantly dissolved (fig. 4). 

Many AMD and some streamwater samples exceeded continuous exposure criteria for protection of aquatic life (120 μg/L); 

however, none exceeded the secondary drinking-water standard 

(5,000 μg/L) for zinc (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2002a, 2002b). 

In summary, a majority of the base-flow streamwater samples during the study met Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

(2001b, 2002) water-quality standards for pH (6.0 to 9.0); however, few met criteria for acidity less than alkalinity (net alkalinity greater than or equal to 20 mg/L as CaCO3) and concentrations of dissolved iron (0.3 mg/L) and total manganese 

(1.0 mg/L) (figs. 3 and 4). Iron, aluminum, and various trace 

elements, including cobalt, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc, were 

present in various AMD and associated streamwater samples at 

concentrations at which continuous exposure can not be tolerated by aquatic organisms without an unacceptable effect. Furthermore, in some samples, concentrations of sulfate, iron, 

manganese, aluminum, and (or) beryllium exceeded drinkingwater standards. Other trace elements, including antimony, 

arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, selenium, silver, and 

thallium, did not exceed concentration criteria for protection of 

aquatic organisms or human health. The characteristics at individual streamwater sites and specific source(s) of contaminants 

are summarized in the next section. 

Flow and Quality of Streams

The flow and quality of low and high base-flow samples 

for each of the primary stream monitoring locations are 

described below, in approximate downstream order, by the 

local site identification number. The dominant upstream AMD 

sources and selected water-quality data are described in 

tables 1, 2, and 3 and shown in figures 5 and 6. The flow and 

quality of all the high base-flow streamwater samples are shown 

in figure 5. The flow and quality of those samples along the 

main stem of Mahanoy Creek are shown in figure 6. The predominant trends along the length of Mahanoy Creek from its 

headwaters to Ashland (S16) are increasing flow rates coupled 

with increasing pH and concentrations of iron, manganese, and 

sulfate associated with “net alkaline” AMD loading in the vicinity of Ashland. Downstream from Ashland to its mouth near 

Kneass (S30), continued increases in flow rates are coupled 

with near-neutral pH. Within the stream, the AMD contaminant 

concentrations are attenuated by dilution, precipitation, and 

adsorption processes. These downstream trends are similar to 

those reported by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975, fig. 17), 

except that concentrations of acidity and sulfate have decreased 

compared to the 1975 report; the downstream segments of 

Mahanoy Creek presently (2001) have excess alkalinity. 

Site S03 is near the headwaters of Mahanoy Creek below 

the village of Buck Mountain, 1.2 mi (1.9 km) downstream 

from the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Mine Morris Tunnel (M01) 

and upstream from other AMD sources. In March 2001, streamwater within the relatively undisturbed, unstained channel of 

the sampled reach was flowing at 0.67 ft3/s (1,140 L/min). The 

streamwater had pH of 4.0, net alkalinity of -11 mg/L, sulfate 

concentration of 34 mg/L, and relatively low concentrations 

(less than 1.0 mg/L) and cumulative loading of dissolved iron, 

aluminum, and manganese (0.8 Mg/yr) (table 3; fig. 5). The 

concentration of dissolved nitrate in Mahanoy Creek at S03 was 

0.4 mg/L (table 3). In August 2001, the sampled reach was dry. 

These data indicate that the area sampled by S03 is affected by 

losses of flow because of streambed leakage to underground 

mines and, when flowing, has water quality that is marginally 

affected by intermittent AMD. 

Site S04 is on Mahanoy Creek at the eastern limit of 

Mahanoy City, 0.1 mi (0.16 km) downstream from S03, and is 

dominated by discharge from the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Mine 

seepage (M02). In March 2001, streamwater within the ochrestained channel of the sampled reach for S04 was flowing at 

8.9 ft3/s (15,100 L/min) with pH of 4.8, net alkalinity of 

-20 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 105 mg/L, 

iron of 3.2 mg/L, aluminum of 2.0 mg/L, manganese of 

1.1 mg/L, and nitrate of 0.4 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). In 

August 2001, the sampled reach at S04 was dry; the upstream 

AMD sources at M01 and M02 were not flowing (table 3, 

fig. 5). The data for Mahanoy Creek at S04 indicate that the area 

is affected by losses of flow and by loading of acidity and metals from intermittent AMD sources. 

Site S06 is the mouth of North Mahanoy Creek at the 

northern limit of Mahanoy City and is 2.5 mi (4.0 km) downstream from S05 near its headwaters. Water flowing from S05 

to S06 travels through an extensive mine-scarred area, but no 

large mine discharges are present in the subbasin. In March 

2001, streamflow at S06 was 8.7 ft3/s (14,800 L/min) with pH 
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 19

5A5B

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

Figure 5. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing: (A) streamflow; concentrations of (B) net alkalinity, (C) dissolved iron, (D) dissolved manganese, (E) dissolved aluminum, (F) sulfate, and (G) nitrate; and (H) Hilsenhoff (1988) biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity at streamwater sampling sites. Streamflow and chemical concentration data for March 2001; macroinvertebrate data for various dates, May to October, 2000-2002, at more numerous sites than sampled for water chemistry. Streamflow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); 

and dissolved metals, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L). 
20 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek BasinFigure 5. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing: (A) streamflow; concentrations of (B) net alkalinity, (C) dissolved iron, (D) dissolved manganese, (E) 

dissolved aluminum, (F) sulfate, and (G) nitrate; and (H) Hilsenhoff (1988) biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity at streamwater sampling sites. Streamflow and chemical concentration data for March 2001; macroinvertebrate data for various dates, May to October, 2000-2002, at more numerous sites than sampled for water chemistry. Streamflow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); 

and dissolved metals, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).—Continued

5C5D

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 21 Figure 5. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing: (A) streamflow; concentrations of (B) net alkalinity, (C) dissolved iron, (D) dissolved manganese, (E) dissolved aluminum, (F) sulfate, and (G) nitrate; and (H) Hilsenhoff (1988) biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity at streamwater sampling sites. Streamflow and chemical concentration data for March 2001; macroinvertebrate data for various dates, May to October, 2000-2002, at more numerous sites than sampled for water chemistry. Streamflow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); and dissolved metals, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).—Continued

5E5F

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5
22 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek BasinFigure 5. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing: (A) streamflow; concentrations of (B) net alkalinity, (C) dissolved iron, (D) dissolved manganese, (E) 

dissolved aluminum, (F) sulfate, and (G) nitrate; and (H) Hilsenhoff (1988) biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity at streamwater sampling sites. Streamflow and chemical concentration data for March 2001; macroinvertebrate data for various dates, May to October, 2000-2002, at more numerous sites than sampled for water chemistry. Streamflow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); 

and dissolved metals, sulfate, and nitrate concentrations in milligrams per liter (mg/L).—Continued

5G5H

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5
0

50

100150200250300350400

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

Streamflow, ft

3/s; Sulfate, mg/L

-30-20-1001020304050

Net Alkalinity, mg/L CaCO3

AMD Addition

Streamflow

Sulfate

Net Alkalinity

6A

S30

S27

S23

S22

S17

S16

S10

S04

S03

Local Site Number

4.55.05.56.06.57.07.5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

pH

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,000

Dissolved Fe, Al, Mn, ug/LpHIron Aluminum Manganese

6B

0

100200300400500600700800

ssolved Fe+Mn+Al load, megagrams/yr

AMD Addition

AMD Metals Load

Stream Metals Load

6C

Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 23
24 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

of 5.6, net alkalinity 1 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved 

iron of 0.01 mg/L, aluminum of 0.06 mg/L, manganese of 

0.02 mg/L, and nitrogen of 0.05 mg/L (table 3). In August 

2001, despite measurable streamflow at site S05, the sampled 

reach at S06 was dry. These data indicate that the reach between 

sites S05 and S06 on North Mahanoy Creek is affected by losses 

of flow, but the water quality is not affected by AMD. 

Site S08 is the mouth of Waste House Run at St. Nicholas 

and is 2.5 mi (4.0 km) downstream from S07. Streamwater at 

S07 originates in a forested “water-supply” area and then continues to S08 through a mine-scarred area, but no large mine 

discharges are present in the subbasin. In both March 2001 and 

August 2001, the reach at S08 was dry (table 3). Nevertheless, 

at S07, streamflows of 1.33 and 0.11 ft3

/s (2,260 and 

187 L/min) in March 2001 and August 2001, respectively, were 

measured with near-neutral pH and low metals concentrations 

(table 3). These data indicate that the reach between S07 and 

S08 on Waste House Run is severely affected by losses of flow. 

The entire stream is captured by an open mine void characterized as a crop fall by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975) approximately 0.3 mi (0.5 km) downstream of S07. 

Site S09 is Mahanoy Creek at Gilberton, 4.5 mi (7.2 km) 

downstream from site S04, and includes flow from the VulcanBuck Mountain Boreholes discharge (M03) but is above the 

Gilberton Mine Pump (M04). Streamwater at S09 was sampled 

only in August 2001; streamflow was 2.8 ft3/s (4,760 L/min), 

with pH of 5.0, net alkalinity of -6 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 256 mg/L, iron of 0.41 mg/L, aluminum of 

0.21 mg/L, manganese of 1.8 mg/L, nitrate of 2.0 mg/L, and 

phosphorus of 0.06 mg/L (table 3). These data indicate streamwater quality of Mahanoy Creek at S09 is affected by AMD and 

nutrient loading from Mahanoy City and vicinity. 

Site S10 is Mahanoy Creek above Girardville, 3.5 mi 

(5.6 km) downstream from site S09, and includes intermittent 

flow from the Gilberton Mine Pump (M04) and continuous flow 

from the Girard Mine seepage (M11). In March and August 

2001, flows at S10 were 32.1 and 7.84 ft3/s (54,500 and 

13,300 L/min), respectively (table 3). The quality of the high 

and low base-flow samples was variable with pH of 5.9 and 6.3, 

net alkalinity of -3 and 9 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of 

sulfate of 138 and 203 mg/L, iron of 2.9 and 6.8 mg/L, aluminum of 0.18 and 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 1.7 and 2.6 mg/L, 

nitrate of 0.11 and 0.66 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.01 and less 

than 0.01 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). During both sampling 

events, the Gilberton Mine Pump was not operating and M04 

was dry. The AMD discharged from the Girard Mine seepage at 

M11 accounted for one-eighth and one-third of the streamflow 

volume at S10 during March and August, respectively. 

Site S13 is Shenandoah Creek at Lost Creek, downstream 

of streamwater sites on Kehly Run (S11) and Lost Creek (S12) 

and the borough of Shenandoah (fig. 1) plus nearby smaller 

municipalities (not shown on figure 1) including Shenandoah 

Heights, East William Penn, West William Penn, and Lost 

Creek. In March and August 2001, flows at S13 were 3.0 and 

0.2 ft3/s (5,098 and 340 L/min), respectively (table 3). The high 

and low base-flow samples had pH of 7.4 and 7.0, net alkalinity 

of 13 and 26 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 74 

and 166 mg/L, iron of 0.41 and 0.09 mg/L, aluminum of 0.05 

and 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 0.87 and 1.8 mg/L, nitrate of 2.0 

and 3.3 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.30 and 0.33 mg/L (table 3, 

fig. 5). These data indicate streamwater quality of Shenandoah 

Creek at S13 is affected by AMD and nutrient loading. The 

nutrient enrichment is associated with treated sewage discharges from the city of Shenandoah and untreated sewage from 

the boroughs of East William Penn, West William Penn, and 

Lost Creek (M. A. Friday, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, written commun., 2003). 

Site S14 is the mouth of Shenandoah Creek at Girardville, 

1.8 mi (2.9 km) downstream from site S13 on Shenandoah 

Creek, and includes AMD discharges from the Weston Mine 

(M05, M06, M07) and the Hammond Mine (M08, M09, M10). 

The streamwater from S13 and Hammond Mine AMD discharges (M08-M10) flow into a large constructed wetland 

(exceeding 10 acres or 40,470 m2

) immediately upstream of 

S14. In March and August 2001, flows at S14 were 12.1 and 

5.5 ft3

/s (20,600 and 9,340 L/min), respectively (table 3). The 

high and low base-flow samples had pH of 6.7 and 6.9, net alkalinity of 43 and 68 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 421 and 553 mg/L, iron of 3.1 and 0.76 mg/L, aluminum 

of 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 4.0 and 6.9 mg/L, nitrate of 0.60 

and 0.27 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.03 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). 

Larger streamflow, higher concentrations of acidity, sulfate, 

and metals, and lower concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus at S14 than at S13 (table 3, fig. 5) indicate streamwater quality of Shenandoah Creek at S14 is affected by large discharges 

of AMD downstream from S13. The nutrient enrichment at S13 

is largely attenuated by mixing with AMD and biological 

uptake and other processes within the wetland upstream of S14. 

Site S15 is at the mouth of the unnamed tributary locally 

called Big Mine Run, 0.5 mi (0.8 km) downstream from the 

Centralia Mine Tunnel discharge (M19). Big Mine Run is 

formed almost entirely of AMD discharged from the Centralia 

Mine Tunnel; the flow rate was assumed the same for M19 and 

S15 and was measured at an intermediate location. In March 

and August 2001, flows at S15 were 3.86 and 2.43 ft3/s (6,560 

and 4,130 L/min), respectively (table 3). The high and low 

base-flow samples at S15 had pH of 3.7 and 3.6, net alkalinity 

of -60 and -79 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 

482 and 524 mg/L, iron of 5.8 and 3.1 mg/L, aluminum of 5.6 

and 8.9 mg/L, manganese of 4.8 and 6.0 mg/L, nitrate of 0.50 

and less than 0.10 mg/L, and phosphorus of less than 

0.01 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). Site S15 had the most severely 

affected streamwater quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin on 

the basis of net alkalinity (acidity) and dissolved metals concentrations, particularly aluminum. 

Site S16 is Mahanoy Creek downstream from Ashland and 

Girardville, 4.3 mi (6.9 km) downstream from site S10, and 

includes Shenandoah Creek and various large AMD discharges 

(M12-M25). Site S16 is near the downstream limit of the Western Middle Anthracite Field that underlies the upper Mahanoy 

Creek Basin (fig. 5). The AMD sources include the Packer #5 

Borehole and Breach (M12, M13, M14), the Preston Mine #2 
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 25

and #3 discharges (M15, M16, M17), the Bast Mine Tunnel 

(M18), the Centralia Mine Tunnel (M19), the Bast Mine overflow and Oakland Tunnel (M20, M21), the Tunnel Mine drain 

pool area (M22, M23, M24), and the Tunnel Mine Orchard 

Drift (M25). In March and August 2001, flows at S16 were 87.7 

and 50.2 ft3

/s (149,000 and 85,300 L/min), respectively 

(table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at S16 had pH of 

7.0, net alkalinity of 35 and 42 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 321 and 491 mg/L, iron of 4.8 and 5.7 mg/L, 

aluminum of 0.02 mg/L, manganese of 3.4 and 6.5 mg/L, 

nitrate of 0.16 and 0.30 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.03 and 

0.04 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). The metals loading of 

548 Mg/yr (604 ton/yr) at S15 during August 2001 was larger 

than that at any other site (table 3), whereas the metals loading 

of 644 Mg/yr (710 ton/yr) during March 2001 was exceeded (or 

equalled) only by that at the next site downstream (S17). 

Site S17 is Mahanoy Creek at Gordon, 1.7 mi (2.7 km) 

downstream from site S16. Although seepage from coal silt and 

wetlands along the floodplain indicate potential for AMD loading, no large AMD sources and only one unnamed tributary 

from the unmined area of Fountain Springs are present between 

S17 and S16. In March and August 2001, flows at S17 were 

~112 (error?) and 46.2 ft3

/s (190,000 and 78,500 L/min), 

respectively (table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at 

S17 had pH of 7.0 and 6.9, net alkalinity of 32 and 51 mg/L, and 

dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 295 and 480 mg/L, iron of 

4.2 and 2.1 mg/L, aluminum of 0.02 and 0.04 mg/L, manganese 

of 3.3 and 6.0 mg/L, nitrate of 0.30 and 0.45 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.04 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). Generally, the metals concentrations and loading were expected to be lower at S17 

than S16 because of negligible additional AMD sources and 

attenuation of dissolved constituents by dilution and mineral 

precipitation within the streambed. In March 2001, concentrations of sulfate, iron, and manganese declined by 8, 13, and 

3 percent, respectively, at S17 compared to S16. However, the 

loading and flow rate at S17 were 17 and 28 percent larger, 

respectively, than those at S16 in March 2001, and also were 

larger than those for a downstream site, S22, indicating a possible positive error in the flow and associated loadings values for 

S17. If the flow at S17 in March 2001 was 95.3 ft3/s 

(161,900 L/min), consistent with the volume increase to dilute 

sulfate from the observed concentration at S16 to that at S17, 

the metals loading at S17 would be 641 Mg/yr (707 ton/yr) and 

comparable to that at S16. 

Site S19 is the mouth of Little Mahanoy Creek at Gordon, 

downstream of Rattling Run (S18). No mining has taken place 

in the Little Mahanoy Creek subbasin (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 

1975). The borough of Frackville is at the headwaters of Little 

Mahanoy Creek. In March and August 2001, flows at S19 were 

30.1 and 6.8 ft3/s (51,100 and 11,600 L/min), respectively 

(table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at S19 had pH of 

7.0, net alkalinity of 11 and 20 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 10 and 11 mg/L, iron of 0.10 and 0.08 mg/L, 

aluminum of 0.11 and 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 0.05 and 

0.02 mg/L, nitrate of 0.55 and 0.52 mg/L, and phosphorus of 

0.03 and 0.07 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). Similar water-quality 

results, but with slightly lower pH and nutrient levels, were 

obtained for site S18 near the mouth of Rattling Run (table 3, 

fig. 5). These data are consistent with the expectation that mining has not affected the quality of Little Mahanoy Creek; however, nutrient loading affects its water quality. 

Site S20 is at the mouth of the unnamed tributary locally 

called Big Run, approximately 1.9 mi (3.1 km) downstream 

from the Potts Mine discharges (M26 and M27) near Locustdale. In March and August 2001, flows at S20 were 6.08 and 

1.33 ft3

/s (10,300 and 2,260 L/min), respectively (table 3). The 

high and low base-flow samples at S20 had pH of 8.2 and 8.0, 

net alkalinity of 108 and 178 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 286 and 508 mg/L, iron of 0.12 and 

0.22 mg/L, aluminum of 0.03 and 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 

0.90 and 0.75 mg/L, nitrate of 0.80 and 0.50 mg/L, and phosphorus of less than 0.01 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). Although the 

flow and quality of Big Run are dominated by iron-laden, net 

alkaline AMD discharged from the Potts Mine (M26 and M27), 

the large excess net alkalinity and turbulent flow path facilitated 

the oxidation and attenuation of iron and associated metals 

within the streambed between the AMD sources and the mouth 

of Big Run. 

Site S21 is near the mouth of Crab Run. Streamwater at 

S21 was sampled only in August 2001; streamflow was 

0.61 ft3/s (1,040 L/min), with pH of 7.1, net alkalinity of 

32 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 9 mg/L, 

iron of 0.15 mg/L, aluminum of 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 

0.05 mg/L, nitrate of 3.3 mg/L, and phosphorus 0.08 mg/L 

(table 3). Although Crab Run was initially listed by PaDEP as 

degraded because of AMD (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 1998), no mining has taken place in the 

Crab Run subbasin, and AMD constituents are not elevated. 

Fine silt covered the cobble-dominated streambed. Agricultural 

activities in the subbasin are possible sources of nutrients and 

other water-quality stresses. 

Site S22 is Mahanoy Creek near Lavelle, 5.1 mi (8.2 km) 

downstream from S17, and includes Little Mahanoy Creek, Big 

Run, and Crab Run. In March and August 2001, flows at S22 

were 107 and 51.4 ft3/s (182,000 and 87,300 L/min), respectively (table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at S22 had 

pH of 7.0 and 7.6, net alkalinity of 23 and 47 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 227 and 427 mg/L, iron of 

1.6 and 0.12 mg/L, aluminum of less than 0.01 and 0.04 mg/L, 

manganese of 2.3 and 4.6 mg/L, nitrate of 0.70 and 0.76 mg/L, 

and phosphorus of 0.03 and 0.04 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). 

The metals loadings at S22 of 373 Mg/yr (411 ton/yr) and 

219 Mg/yr (241 ton/yr) during March 2001 and August 2001, 

respectively, were about half that at Mahanoy Creek at Ashland 

(S16) or Gordon (S17) for the same time period. These data 

indicate that dissolved iron and aluminum concentrations from 

AMD sources (M1-M27) largely have been attenuated by mineral precipitation within the streambed upstream from S22 

because of the near-neutral pH and excess alkalinity of Mahanoy Creek. 

Site S23 is Mahanoy Creek near Gowen City, 9.0 mi 

(14.5 km) downstream from S22, and includes large AMD dis-
26 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

charges from the Locust Gap Tunnel (M29; called the Helfenstein Tunnel by Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975) and the 

Doutyville Tunnel (M31) that divert water from underground 

mines in the Locust Gap area of the Shamokin Creek Basin to 

the north. In March and August 2001, flows at S23 were 239 

and 65.5 ft3

/s (406,000 and 111,000 L/min), respectively 

(table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at S23 had pH of 

7.3 and 7.6, net alkalinity of 21 and 58 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 190 and 409 mg/L, iron of 0.76 and 

0.11 mg/L, aluminum of 0.01 and 0.02 mg/L, manganese of 1.8 

and 3.3 mg/L, nitrate of 1.0 and 0.73 mg/L, and phosphorus of 

0.03 and less than 0.01 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). The metals 

loadings at S23 of 549 Mg/yr (604 ton/yr) and 201 Mg/yr 

(221 ton/yr) during March 2001 and August 2001, respectively, 

were greater during March but comparable during August to 

that at Mahanoy Creek near Lavelle (S22). 

Site S24 is on Zerbe Run below Trevorton and is not 

affected by mining (table 3, fig. 5). In March and August 2001, 

flows at S24 were 7.99 and 0.62 ft3

/s (13,600 and 1,050 L/min), 

respectively (table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at 

S24 had pH of 7.0 and 7.2, net alkalinity of 11 and 49 mg/L, and 

dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 10 and 8 mg/L, iron of 

0.14 and 0.21 mg/L, aluminum of 0.04 and 0.02 mg/L, manganese of 0.06 and 0.02 mg/L, nitrate of 0.51 and 0.72 mg/L, and 

phosphorus of 0.01 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). 

Site S25 is near the mouth of an unnamed tributary to 

Zerbe Run at Trevorton, 0.7 mi (1.1 km) downstream from the 

North Franklin Mine AMD discharges (M32, M33). In March 

and August 2001, flows at S25 were 6.68 and 2.79 ft3/s (11,300 

and 4,740 L/min), respectively (table 3). The North Franklin 

Mine Drift and Borehole (M32) accounted for most of this 

streamflow (table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at 

S25 had pH of 6.3, net alkalinity of -6 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 253 and 304 mg/L, iron of 8.1 and 

11 mg/L, aluminum of 0.05 and 0.04 mg/L, manganese of 2.0 

and 2.4 mg/L, nitrate of 0.07 and less than 0.01 mg/L, and phosphorus of less than 0.01 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). 

Site S26 is at the mouth of Zerbe Run, 4.6 mi (7.4 km) 

downstream from the junction of Zerbe Run at Trevorton (S24) 

and the unnamed tributary draining the North Franklin Mine 

(S25), and downstream from additional seepage from the North 

Franklin Mine. In March and August 2001, flows at S26 were 

30.2 and 4.36 ft3/s (51,300 and 7,400 L/min), respectively 

(table 3). During low base flow, the unnamed tributary draining 

the North Franklin Mine (S25) accounted for almost two-thirds 

of this streamflow; however, during high base flow, contributions from S24 and S25 were similar and, combined, accounted 

for only half the total streamflow at S26 (table 3). The quality 

of the high and low base-flow samples at S26 was variable with 

pH of 6.0 and 4.3, net alkalinity of -3 and -20 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 99 and 264 mg/L, iron of 1.5 

and 0.15 mg/L, aluminum of 0.10 and 2.3 mg/L, manganese of 

0.93 and 2.7 mg/L, nitrate of 0.50 and 0.60 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.04 and 0.02 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). Relatively poor 

water quality during low base-flow conditions reflects the predominance of AMD contributions; however, improved water 

quality during high base flow indicates substantial dilution by 

various unidentified sources of net-alkaline water quality.

Site S27 is Mahanoy Creek at Dornsife, 3.6 mi (5.8 km) 

downstream from S26 and 15.5 mi (24.9 km) downstream from 

S23. Downstream from its confluence with Zerbe Run at S26, 

no additional AMD sources contribute flow to Mahanoy Creek. 

In March and August 2001, flows at S27 were 277 and 

71.2 ft3

/s (471,000 and 121,000 L/min), respectively (table 3). 

The high and low base-flow samples at S27 had pH of 6.7 and 

6.9, net alkalinity of 17 and 38 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 152 and 382 mg/L, iron of 0.28 and

0.08 mg/L, aluminum of 0.02 and 0.04 mg/L, manganese of 1.3 

and 0.90 mg/L, nitrate of 0.66 and 0.80 mg/L, and phosphorus 

of 0.02 and less than 0.01 mg/L (table 3; figs. 5 and 6). The metals loadings at S27 were 396 Mg/yr (437 ton/yr) and 

65.1 Mg/yr (71.7 ton/yr) during March 2001 and August 2001, 

respectively. 

Site S28 is near the mouth of Schwaben Creek near Red 

Cross. Agriculture is the predominant land use in this 22.7 mi2

(58.8 km2

) subbasin; coal-bearing rocks and associated discharges are absent in the subbasin. In March and August 2001, 

flows at S28 were 28.4 and 1.66 ft3

/s (48,300 and 2,820 L/min), 

respectively (table 3). The high and low base-flow samples at 

S28 had pH of 7.3 and 7.5, net alkalinity of 14 and 54 mg/L, and 

dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 12 and 11 mg/L, iron of 

0.03 and 0.06 mg/L, aluminum of 0.01 and 0.02 mg/L, manganese of 0.01 and 0.02 mg/L, nitrate of 6.0 and 1.9 mg/L, and 

phosphorus of 0.01 and 0.03 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). These data 

indicate constituents associated with AMD are not elevated; 

however, nitrogen enrichment is consistent with base-flow data 

collected in June 1993 by USGS (Durlin and Schaffstall, 1994, 

p. 273) indicating water-quality impairment from agricultural 

sources in the subbasin. 

Site S29 is near the headwaters of Mouse Creek below 

Urban. Mouse Creek ultimately flows to Schwaben Creek; the 

mouth of Mouse Creek is 2.6 mi (4.2 km) downstream from 

S29 and 0.5 mi (0.8 km) downstream from S28. Approximately 

half the 2.8 mi2 (7.3 km2) subbasin above S29 is covered by 

agricultural fields and half is forested. In March and August 

2001, flows at S29 were 4.28 and 0.52 ft3/s (7,270 and 

883 L/min), respectively (table 3). The high and low base-flow 

samples at S29 had pH of 8.4 and 7.7, net alkalinity of 52 and 

120 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 16 and 

17 mg/L, iron of 0.05 and 0.06 mg/L, aluminum of 0.02 and 

0.01 mg/L, manganese of 0.01 mg/L, nitrate of 2.8 mg/L, and 

phosphorus of 0.01 and 0.02 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). Agricultural 

sources contribute nitrogen at site S29, which otherwise has 

exceptionally good water quality, consistent with base-flow 

data collected in June 1993 by USGS (Durlin and Schaffstall, 

1994). 

Site S30 is Mahanoy Creek at Kneass, 3.0 mi (4.8 km) 

downstream from S27 and 1.9 mi (3.0 km) downstream from 

the mouth of Schwaben Creek. In March and August 2001, 

flows at S30 were 320 and 76.6 ft3/s (544,000 and 

130,000 L/min), respectively (table 3). The high and low baseflow samples at S30 had pH of 7.1 and 7.2, net alkalinity of 24 
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 27

and 21 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 132 and 

363 mg/L, iron of 0.11 and 0.08 mg/L, aluminum of 0.01 and 

0.03 mg/L, manganese of 1.2 and 0.54 mg/L, nitrate of 1.8 and 

0.77 mg/L, and phosphorus of 0.01 and less than 0.01 mg/L 

(table 3, fig. 5). The metals loadings at S30 were 378 Mg/yr 

(417 ton/yr) and 44.7 Mg/yr (49.3 ton/yr) during March 2001 

and August 2001, respectively. 

Site S31 is Mahanoy Creek near Herndon, 3.9 mi (6.3 km) 

downstream from S30. Streamwater at S31 was sampled only in 

August 2001; streamflow was 76.3 ft3

/s (130,000 L/min), with 

pH of 7.3, net alkalinity of 43 mg/L, and dissolved concentrations of sulfate of 361 mg/L, iron of 0.08 mg/L, aluminum of 

0.02 mg/L, manganese of 0.23 mg/L, nitrate of 0.71 mg/L, and 

phosphorus of less than 0.01 mg/L (table 3). During August 

2001, the metals loading at S31 was 22.2 Mg/yr (24.4 ton/yr), 

which was half that at S30. The decreased concentration of dissolved manganese from S30 to S31 accounted for the corresponding reduction in metals loading. The data for dissolved 

and total metals concentrations at S31 are consistent with baseflow data collected in September 1994 by USGS (Breen and 

Gavin, 1995) indicating transport of iron and aluminum is 

largely as suspended colloids, whereas manganese is largely 

dissolved (particle size less than 0.45 μm). 

Streamflow Variability

Continuous data are not available to indicate the ranges in 

streamflow or water quality of Mahanoy Creek. However, longterm (1940-1992), continuous records are available for streamflow of Shamokin Creek near Shamokin (USGS station 

01554500). Although continuous streamflow gaging was discontinued by USGS at this site in 1992, measurements were 

resumed during a recent study (Cravotta and Kirby, 2004a). The 

average daily streamflow at the Shamokin station during March 

26-28, 2001, was 137 ft3/s (232,800 L/min) and during August 

21-23, 2001, was 30 ft3/s (50,970 L/min), bracketing the longterm average streamflow of 85.1 ft3/s (144,600 L/min) during 

1940-1992. Hence, considering these data as a surrogate for 

conditions on Mahanoy Creek, the hydrological data collected 

for the high and low base-flow surveys of the Mahanoy Creek 

Basin likely bracket the long-term average conditions. 

Wide ranges in flow rates at water-quality sampling sites 

were recorded during March and August 2001 (fig. 3) reflecting 

expected seasonal variability in recharge and ground-water discharge (base flow) in the Mahanoy Creek Basin. These interactions were amplified by drought conditions during the study 

period. During August 2001, 7 of the 29 surveyed AMD sources 

were “dry,” including the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Mine seepage (M02) and the Bast Mine overflow (M20) that were the seventh and eleventh largest AMD sources sampled during March 

2001, respectively (tables 1 and 3). Six stream survey sites, on 

Mahanoy Creek near its headwaters (S01, S02, S03, S04) above 

Mahanoy City, North Mahanoy Creek at its mouth (S06) at 

Mahanoy City, and Waste House Run at St. Nicholas (S08), 

were dry in August 2001 (tables 2 and 3). In contrast, during the 

high base-flow survey in March 2001, only 1 of the 31 stream 

survey sites, Waste House Run at St. Nicholas (S08), and only 

2 of the 29 sampled AMD sources, the Vulcan-Buck Mtn. Mine 

Morris Tunnel (M01) and Gilberton Mine Pump (M04) discharges, were not flowing (table 3). Of the 31 AMD sites 

reported from the Scarlift investigation, only 1 had been identified previously as intermittently flowing (Sanders & Thomas, 

Inc., 1975).

To determine the magnitude and effects of interbasin 

ground-water or surface-water diversions, streamflow at points 

along Mahanoy Creek and its tributaries was compared to the 

drainage area defined by upstream topography. Streamflow values were normalized as the yield, or discharge divided by the 

contributing area (figs. 7A and 7B). Streamflow yields for Mahanoy Creek at Kneass (S30) were larger during the high baseflow survey and smaller during the low base-flow survey than 

those for Mahanoy Creek near Ashland (S16). This result indicates AMD is a substantial, sustained source of base flow in the 

upper basin and is consistent with interpretations by Becher 

(1991) for the adjacent Shamokin Creek Basin. Becher noted 

that streamflow in the upper Shamokin Creek Basin is sustained 

by discharges from water stored in the mines and, consequently, 

is less variable than that for nearby unmined basins with equivalent watershed areas but greater proportions of runoff contributing to the streamflow. A more detailed analysis of the annual 

water budget for the Mahanoy Creek Basin and various subbasins is given by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975). 

Compared with Little Mahanoy Creek at Gordon (S19; 

unmined subbasin), Mahanoy Creek at Ashland (S16) and Gordon (S17) had high streamflow yields for low base-flow conditions (fig. 7B). This difference also is apparent, but is less pronounced, during low base flow for Mahanoy Creek at Gowen 

City (S23) below large discharges from the Locust Gap Mine 

(M29, M31) that divert flow from the adjoining Shamokin 

Creek Basin. As explained by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975), 

compared to unmined areas, greater yields from mined, unreclaimed, poorly vegetated areas result from a smaller proportion 

of the annual rainfall leaving the subbasin as evapotranspiration 

and a greater proportion recharged to ground water. In parts of 

the basin, surface flow is captured by subsidence pits, fractures, 

and other openings to the underground mines that ultimately 

discharge AMD at downflow locations. The diversion of water 

from the Shamokin Creek Basin or other subbasins magnifies 

this effect. Yield generally declined downstream from Gowen 

City indicating smaller recharge rates and potentially smaller 

effects from AMD. In contrast, some other tributaries had substantially smaller yields than Little Mahanoy Creek at Gordon, 

including upper Mahanoy Creek sites (S01, S02, S03), North 

Mahanoy Creek (S06), Waste House Run at St. Nicholas (S08), 

and Shenandoah Creek (S13, S14). These tributaries were 

affected by leakage to underground mines that resulted in complete loss of streamflow during low base-flow conditions at 

sites S01, S02, S03, S06, and S08. Sanders & Thomas, Inc. 

(1975) identified specific losing stream reaches and surfacewater capture zones upstream from these sites. No attempt has 

been made with this assessment to update this information. 
S

s

3

id (C) d

nns

7

2S

S1

nd 2. 

, Pe

 1 a

61

 100 perce

s

S

22

able

2

), an

S

i

0 S1

3

/s/m

4

y Creek Basin

0S

1S

1

re m

03

 Ma

lues greater than

 1 and t

7

ile (ft

re

hano

u

001

 in fig

 200

S

 2.

 the

ted; va

ted

g.

r

a

u

a

1

6

A

M

S0

1S

 per squa

nca

er

9

tru

s indic

1

b

cond

s 

S

g sites in

cer

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

0

um

4.

3.

3.

2.

2.

1.

1.

0.

0.

S1

N 

orin

er se

eit

onit

et p

7B

2i/m/s3tf d,eliow YlfeamrtS

l S

) axis wa

a

4

bic fe

er m

0

Loc

d AMD sou

S

0

mwat

S3

1%

 in cu

rea

e ordinate (Y

mple

s

 sa

85

st

7

 th

2

%

4S1

S

 at 

n

040

e o

32

3

low yield

ing from

S

ading

6

2

S2

S2

 streamf

tals lo

 scal

ls load

)B

71

), (

S

MD) me

 1. In 7C, the

a met

5

2

2S

A

re

6 S1

uare miles (mi

 sum of

ge (

u

01

n in fig

S

S2

ne draina

 the

0

4

ter than

0

i

S

5

ed m

bers show

3S0

1S

g area in sq

ndon

tin

1

 aba

ter was grea

S0

urib

4M1

t Figure 7. (A) Con

) of

cal site num

9

o

mwa

1

0

0

0

0

S

e (%

rea

80

60

40

20

0

16

14

12

10

20%

00%

80%

60%

40%

20%

00%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

tag

2im ea,re AnagiaDr

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

ing in st

7A

7CadD LoM Af ontecr pe asamertSin al etM

percen

August 2001. L

load
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 29

Contaminant Concentrations and Loads

To evaluate the potential for transport and attenuation of 

metals contributed by various AMD sources upstream of stream 

survey sites, the dissolved metals loads from all known AMD 

sources were summed and compared with the measured load at 

the stream site (fig. 7C). Except for Shenandoah Creek near 

Girardville (S14) and Mahanoy Creek at Ashland (S16) and 

Gordon (S17), the measured dissolved loads of metals in stream 

samples downstream from known AMD sources were less than 

the sum of metals loads from these AMD sources. Lower measured loadings of metals at the stream sites compared to the 

cumulative load from upstream AMD sources generally results 

from the precipitation and adsorption of metals downflow from 

the AMD source(s). 

Higher measured loadings of metals at some stream sites 

(S14, S16, S17) compared to the sum of metals loading from 

upstream AMD sources (fig. 7C) could indicate that one or 

more large sources of metals were not sampled upstream from 

that stream site. For example, access was restricted in the lower 

part of the Shenandoah Creek subbasin. Thus, some previously 

reported discharges including the Hammond Mine Connerton 

Village Boreholes (M09) and Hammond Mine Connerton #1 

and #2 discharges (M10) that likely contributed to metals concentrations and streamflow of Shenandoah Creek near Girardville (S14) were not sampled. In contrast, all known large AMD 

sources were sampled along Mahanoy Creek between Girardville (S10) and Ashland (S16). However, increased metals loading between these two sites was apparent for low and high baseflow conditions indicating the presence of additional large 

AMD discharges within this reach. The elevation of the stream 

bottom typically is below the reported ground-water elevations 

of the underlying mine pools and known discharges (Sanders & 

Thomas, Inc., 1975). Thus, an upward flow gradient would be 

expected and the additional unreported AMD sources may discharge within the stream channel. Subsequent to the 2001 surveys, some “new” discharges were identified on the south side 

of Mahanoy Creek near Ashland (Stephen Ulceski, Ashland 

Borough, written commun., 2003). Further investigation is 

needed to determine the locations and characteristics of these 

unsampled and (or) unidentified discharges. 

The attenuation of metals loading as a percentage of the 

total known AMD loading generally was greater during low 

base-flow than high base-flow conditions (fig. 7C). The attenuation of dissolved metals within the stream channel during low 

base-flow conditions can reduce the total metal loading at 

downstream points. However, resuspension and transport of 

metals as particles can take place during high base-flow or 

stormflow conditions. Greater instream loadings at high baseflow conditions indicate that contaminant concentrations were 

not simply diluted with increased flow, but greater quantities of 

metals had entered the stream from various sources. Some of 

the AMD sources could be intermittent (runoff or discontinuous 

seepage), contributing metals only during high-flow conditions, 

such as discharges from the Vulcan-Buck Mountain seepage 

(M02), the Gilberton Mine Pump (M04), and the Bast Mine 

overflow (M20). 

Although the potential toxicity of dissolved aluminum and 

other metals, such as nickel and zinc, to fish and other aquatic 

organisms can be reduced by their removal from the water column, the iron, aluminum, and associated metals in AMD can 

accumulate on or within the streambed forming ochreous (ironrich) encrustations (Winland and others, 1991; Webster and 

others, 1998). The accumulation of metals in the streambed will 

degrade the aquatic habitat and may only temporarily reduce the 

downstream metal loading. The scour and resuspension of the 

precipitated metals during high-flow events can result in the 

non-attainment of water-quality criteria in downstream reaches. 

This condition has been documented on the basis of stormflow 

sampling on Swatara Creek (Cravotta and Bilger, 2001) and is 

indicated to a lesser extent by the high base-flow data of this 

investigation. Generally, the non-conservative transport of metals from the AMD sources to downstream monitoring sites 

invalidates simple computations of load reductions required for 

attainment of TMDLs. Because the metals are not transported 

conservatively from the AMD source to downstream locations, 

correction factors would be needed to relate the load reduced at 

an AMD source to the corresponding load reduction at a downstream location. 

Aquatic Ecology

Aquatic ecological surveys that included fish samples 

were conducted at five stream sites during low base-flow conditions in October 2001 (table 4). The streamwater at these sites 

had pH greater than 6 during the surveys. All the fish species 

identified had been previously reported for Pennsylvania 

streams with pH from 4.6 to 6.5 (table 4). Twenty species of 

fish were identified in Schwaben Creek near Red Cross, which 

drains an unmined area of 22.7 mi2 (58.8 km2) in the lower part 

of the Mahanoy Creek Basin. In contrast, 14 species of fish 

were identified in Mahanoy Creek near its mouth at Kneass, 

below Schwaben Creek. The diversity and abundance of fish 

species in Mahanoy Creek decreased progressively upstream 

from 13 species at Gowen City to only 2 species at Ashland and 

Girardville. Some of the species in Schwaben Creek and Mahanoy Creek at Kneass or Gowen City are considered intolerant 

of pollution and acidity, including swallowtail shiner (Notropis 

procne), rosyface shiner (Notropis rubellus), river chub (Nocomis micropogon), banded darter (Etheostoma zonale), and 

shield darter (Percina peltata) (table 4). Cold-water species, 

including juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta), longnose dace 

(Rhinichthys cataractae), and blacknose dace (Rhinichthys 

atratulus), were captured from Mahanoy Creek at Gowen City 

(table 4). White sucker (Catostomus commersoni), a pollutiontolerant species that feeds on organic matter and organisms 

within sediments in cold- and warm-water environments, was 

present at each of the surveyed reaches. The presence of any 

fish in Mahanoy Creek at Girardville was unexpected because 

of the poor water quality and iron-encrusted streambed at this
Table 4. Fish species identified and number of individuals counted during ecological survey of Mahanoy Creek and 

selected tributary streams, Pennsylvania, October 20011

Taxa

Minimum pH 

2 in Pa.

Pollution 

toler3 ance

Mahanoy Creek Schwaben Cr 

nr Red 

Cross 

(S28)

ORDER

Family

Genus species

Common name

Girardville 

(S10)

Ashland 

(S16)

Gowen 

City 

(S23)

Kneass 

(S30)

CYPRINIFORMES

Cyprinidae

Campostoma anomalum Stoneroller 6.0 M 0 0 0 4 36

Cyprinella analostana Spotfin shiner 6.4 M 0 0 1 9 308

Exoglossum maxillingua Cutlips minnow 6.1 I 0 0 0 0 12

Luxilus cornutus Common shiner 6.0 M 0 0 0 0 4

Nocomis micropogon River chub 6.0 I 0 0 1 0 0

Notropis hudsonius Spottail shiner 6.4 M 0 0 2 232 350

Notropis procne Swallowtail shiner 6.5 I 0 0 0 4 0

Notropis rubellus Rosyface shiner 6.0 I 0 0 0 8 21

Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow 5.6 T 0 0 0 13 40

Pimephales promelas Fathead minnow 6.5 T 1 0 0 0 0

Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace 5.6 T 0 0 39 0 1

Rhinichthys cataractae Longnose dace 5.9 I 0 0 3 0 15

Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub 5.2 T 0 4 11 0 15

Semolitus corporalis Fallfish 6.1 M 0 0 2 0 24

Catostomidae

Catostomus commersoni White sucker 4.6 T 19 18 51 40 23

Hypentelium nigricans Northern hog sucker 6.0 I 0 0 0 0 1

SILURIFORMES

Ictaluridae

Noturus insignis Margined madtom 5.9 M 0 0 0 0 5

SALMONIFORMES

Salmonidae

Salmo trutta Brown trout 5.9 M 0 0 2 0 0

PERCIFORMES

Centrarchidae

Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass 6.0 M 0 0 0 4 6

Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish 6.4 T 0 0 1 3 0

Micropterus dolomieu Smallmouth bass 6.0 M 0 0 9 163 60

Percidae

Etheostoma olmstedi Tessellated darter 5.9 M 0 0 9 19 16

Etheostoma blennioides Greenside darter 6.0 M 0 0 3 24 34

Etheostoma zonale Banded darter 6.0 I 0 0 0 21 31

Percina peltata Shield darter 6.5 I 0 0 0 1 1

Total number of individuals collected: 20 22 134 545 1,003

Total number of species identified: 2 2 13 14 20

1. Fish collected by electrofishing, identified, and released by U.S. Geological Survey on October 10-11, 2001. Counts are 

indicated below site heading. 

2. Minimum pH of occurrence in freshwater in Pennsylvania as reported by Butler and others (1973).

3. Pollution tolerance: I (intolerant), M (moderate), T (tolerant), adapted from Barbour and others (1999). 

30 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin
Effects of Abandoned Mine Drainage in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 31

location. Despite excellent physical habitat offered by deep 

plunge pools and boulders bordered downstream by riffles, fish 

were not present at the top of the surveyed reach at Girardville. 

Near the top of the reach, in the vicinity of the Girard Mine 

seepage (M11), a strong odor of hydrogen sulfide in the air was 

detectable because of mixing and aeration of various AMD 

inflows. 

Although poor water quality and iron-rich coatings on the 

streambed degraded the aquatic habitat in the mining affected 

reaches of Mahanoy Creek and its tributaries, one or more 

aquatic macroinvertebrate species (insects, crustaceans, worms) 

were observed at each of the 17 sites that was surveyed for 

water chemistry and macroinvertebrate diversity (table 5). Generally, macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance at the mining-affected sites on Mahanoy Creek and tributaries were 

diminished compared to Little Mahanoy Creek, Mouse Creek, 

Schwaben Creek, and other unmined tributaries (table 5, 

figs. 5H and 8). Nevertheless, even if mined, subbasins that 

were predominantly forested had a greater diversity and a 

higher water-quality indication on the basis of the Hilsenhoff 

(1988) family-level biotic index than those with extensive unreclaimed or revegetated mined areas or with extensive agricultural development (fig. 8). For example, the Hilsenhoff biotic 

index indicated excellent or very good water quality in Mahanoy Creek near Mahanoy City (S03) and at Gowen City (S23) 

and in Kehly Run near Shenandoah (S11) where second-growth 

forests surround the immediate area (table 5, figs. 5H and 8). 

Also, Mouse Creek (S29), where the drainage area is dominated 

by agricultural land use but also includes substantial forested 

cover, had very good water quality compared to fair quality of 

Schwaben Creek (S28) on the basis of the Hilsenhoff biotic 

index (table 5, fig. 5H and 8). In Mahanoy Creek at Gowen 

City, 16 benthic macroinvertebrate taxa (family level), including 3 genera each of Ephemeroptera (mayflies), Plecoptera 

(stoneflies), and Trichoptera (caddisflies) were identified 

(table 5). However, elsewhere, the most common specimens 

identified in degraded reaches were Hydropsyche and Chironomidae that are known to tolerate acidic or organic-enriched conditions. For example, within the discharge zone of the VulcanBuck Mountain Boreholes (M03) and other AMD affected 

reaches on Mahanoy Creek (S09, S10, S16), chironomids and 

other diptera species considered tolerant of pollution were predominant (table 5). 

Metals that have accumulated in the sediments of miningaffected streams could become elevated in the tissue of inhabitant fish and other aquatic organisms (Winterbourn and others, 

2000; Cravotta and Bilger, 2001). Concentrations of metals in 

the whole-fish sample of white sucker from Mahanoy Creek 

near Gowen City were similar to those for equivalent samples 

collected October 1999 from Shamokin Creek near Shamokin 

and Swatara Creek at Ravine, Pa. (table 6). Iron, manganese, 

aluminum, strontium, copper, nickel, and zinc concentrations 

were elevated compared to other metals in the whole-fish samples from these mined watersheds (table 6). In general, because 

of metals in gut contents and in organs such as the liver, concentrations of most metals in whole fish will be greater than those 

in fish prepared for consumption (Campbell and others, 1988; 

Cravotta and Bilger, 2001). Nevertheless, none of the metals in 

the whole white sucker samples exceeded U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (1997) screening values for human consumption (table 6). The concentrations of zinc exceeded the 

national average for whole-fish samples reported by Lowe and 

others (1985). Copper and selenium were similar to the national 

averages, and mercury and lead were lower than the national 

averages (Lowe and others, 1985). The following elements 

were not detected in the fish samples: antimony (Sb), boron (B), 

cadmium (Cd), molybdenum (Mo), silver (Ag), and uranium 

(U) (table 6). 

Streambed Chemistry

Ochreous precipitates at the AMD sites in the Mahanoy 

Creek Basin were composed predominantly of iron and aluminum compounds in the form of goethite (FeOOH), ferrihydrite 

(Fe(OH)3), schwertmannite (Fe8O8(OH)6SO4), and (or) poorly 

crystalline or amorphous aluminum-hydroxysulfate minerals 

(table 7). The iron minerals imparted rusty brownish colors to 

the sediments. Quartz (SiO2), muscovite (KAl3Si3O10(OH)2), 

kaolinite (Al2Si2O5(OH)4), and gypsum (CaSO .

4 2H2O) were 

locally present at the AMD sites. Downstream from the AMD 

sources, streambed sediment samples were composed of quartz, 

muscovite, kaolinite, chlorite (Mg5Al2Si3O10(OH)8), and (or) 

calcite (CaCO3) along with the iron-bearing minerals (table 7). 

These streambed sediments were enriched in iron, aluminum, 

and (or) manganese plus trace metals (table 7). Median concentrations of aluminum, manganese, cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc in the fine fraction of streambed sediments (less than 0.180 mm) from Mahanoy Creek and its 

tributaries exceeded those for the AMD sediments. Only the 

median concentrations of iron and arsenic in the AMD sediments were greater than those for the streambed samples. 

Compared to median concentrations in streambed sediments across the conterminous United States (Rice, 1999), the 

streambed sediments from Mahanoy Creek and its tributaries 

had two to three times greater median concentrations of iron, 

arsenic, cadmium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc and smaller 

median concentrations of aluminum and chromium (table 7). 

Concentrations of iron, manganese, copper, nickel, lead, and 

(or) zinc in the streambed sediments from Mahanoy Creek commonly exceeded sediment-quality guidelines (SQGs) for protection of sediment-dwelling organisms in freshwater ecosystems (Persaud and others, 1993; MacDonald and others, 2000) 

(table 7, fig. 9). The SQGs indicate metal concentration levels 

above which harmful effects to benthic organisms are likely. 

The “probable effect level” (PEL) guideline applies for iron and 

manganese (Persaud and others, 1993); the “probable effect 

concentration” (PEC) guideline applies for arsenic, cadmium, 

chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc (MacDonald and others, 2000). MacDonald and others (2000) concluded that a geometric mean PEC quotient (concentration/PEC) greater than 0.5 

indicated sediment toxicity because of multiple contaminants.
- - - -------- R - ----- - - -

- - - -P---------- C- - C A R

- - - -------- P - - P --- C C -

--- --------------- P - R

--- -RPP - - - - - R P R C- - R P -

- - - - PR- - -RP - - - R - -R R R -

- - - -------- R - - R --- - P -

- - - CPRA - - P - AAAA A-R A A A

- - P R- - -R- - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - P------- C - - A A- - P A -

- - P R- - - - - - - C - ----- - - -

- - - P-------------- P P P

- - - - - - - - -R- - - - - - - - - - -

P - - - PR- - - -R ---- P-- - - -

- - C RC - - - - - - A P VA P P-- P C R

- - C - - -C- - - - - - A - R- - P - -

- - - --------------- R - -

- R - P - - RR - RR R - P R R-R - P R

R - - - RRR - - - - - R ----- - - -

- - - C - - RR - - - R R P P P-- - P -

- - - ---------- - P --- - - -

- - - --------------- - A -

- - R - - - -R-RP P-P- -R- C R -

- - - - - - - - VA - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - --------------- A - -

- - - -------- - R ----- R - -

4 Hilsenhoff’s family-level biotic index: 9.2 0.09 5.24 4.21 6.03 4.38 4.14 6 10 5.75 7.8 4.62 5.14 5.61 3.76 3.75 10 4.75 5.65 3.76 4.68

1. Monitoring sites described in tables 1 and 2. Shaded columns for unmined subbasins. Bold site numbers where fish surveys were completed in October 2001 (table 4).

2. Macroinvertebrates collected and identified by Martin A. Friday of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection using rapid bioassessment protocols (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency 1993; Barbour and others, 1999) during July 2000 to May 2002. Additional macroinvertebrate data were collected for other sites that did not have water-quality data; 

these data are reported in appendix A and illustrated in figure 5H as the Hilsenhoff (1988) biotic index. 

3. Pollution tolerance index values from 0 (intolerant) to 10 (tolerant) and number of organisms for each taxa used to compute the family-level biotic index (Hilsenhoff, 1988): 

0.00-3.75 (excellent), 3.76-4.25 (very good), 4.26-5.00 (good), 5.01-5.75 (fair), 5.76-6.50 (fairly poor), 6.51-7.25 (poor), and 7.26-10.00 (very poor). Tolerance values are based on 

tolerance to organic pollution and are not necessarily indicative of tolerance to acid or metals pollution or sedimentation. 

4. Hilsenhoff index computed by assuming the number of organisms was equal to the average for the abundance classification range: - = 0; R = 1.5; P = 6; C = 17; A = 62.5; and 

VA = 125. 

0

5

4

4

2

6

0

5

4

3

1

2

6

10

6

6

6

4

6

6

8

4

10

10

9

9

Pteronarcyidae

COLEOPTERA (aquatic beetles)

Elmidae

Psephenidae

MEGALOPTERA (dobsonflies, alderflies)

Crydalidae

Corydalus

Nigronia

Sialidae

TRICHOPTERA (caddisflies)

Glossosomatidae

Hydropsychidae

Limnephilidae

Philopotamidae

Rhyacophilidae

DIPTERA (true flies)

Athericidae

Ceratopogonidae

Chironomidae (red)

Chironomidae (other)

Simuliidae

Tabanidae

Tipulidae

Other Diptera

NON-INSECT TAXA

DECAPODA (crayfish)

Cambaridae

MOLLUSCA (clams, snails)

Physidae

AMPHIPODA (scuds)

Crangonyctidae

OLIGOCHAETA (aquatic earthworms)

Oligochaeta

Tubificidae

PLATYHELMINTHES (flatworms)

Turbellaria

Other Worms

32 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin
9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

10

Vu cal

n-Buck Mountain Mine Boreholes (M03)

Mahanoy Cr nr Mahanoy City S03) (

N. Mahanoy Cr at Mahanoy City S06) (

Waste House Run at Yatesville (S07)

Mahanoy Cr at Gilberton (S09)

Mahanoy Cr at Gi ar

dr vil el

(S10)

Kehly Run nr Shenandoah (S11)

Lost Cr nr Lost C eek r

(S12)

Shenandoah Cr at Lost Creek (S13)

Shenandoah Cr nr Gira dr vil el (S14)

Mahanoy Cr nr Ashland (S16)

Litt el

Mahanoy Cr at Go dr on (S19)

Unn. Tr bi . to Mahanoy Cr "B gi

Run" nr Lavel e ( l

S20)

Crab Run nr Taylorvil e ( l

S21)

Mahanoy Cr nr Gowen City (S23)

Zerbe Run at Trevorton (S24)

Unn. Trib. to Zerbe Run at Trevorton (S25)

Zerbe Run nr Dornsi e 

f

Schwaben Cr nr Red 

Mo

M

Local Site Name (Site Number)

x Hilsenhoff Biotic Inde

Figure 8. Hilsenhoff (1988) biotic index of aquatic macroinvertebrate diversity, 2000-2002, at sites sampled for water chemistry in the Mah

Pennsylvania. Diagonal-patterned bars indicate unmined subbasins. Local site numbers shown in figure 1. Macroinvertebrates collected 

Friday (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, written commun., 2003).

VERY POOR

POOR

FAIRLY POOR

FAIR

GOOD

VERY GOOD

EXCELLENT
34 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

Table 6. Metals concentrations for whole white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) collected in October 2001 from 

Mahanoy Creek near Gowen City, Pa., and October 1999 from Shamokin Creek near Shamokin, Pa., and Swatara Creek 

at Ravine, Pa. 

[Concentrations reported as micrograms per gram (μg/g) dry and wet weight for six-fish composite sample; water and 

solids content in weight percent (%); <, less than; n.a., not applicable]

Constituent

Mahanoy Creek near 

Gowen City1

Shamokin Creek 

near Shamokina

Swatara Creek at 

Ravinea Consumption 

2 advisory,

dry weight

National Monitoring 

Program geometric 

3 mean concentration,

White sucker, whole White sucker, whole White sucker, whole wet weight

Dry Wet Dry Wet Dry Wet 1978-79 1980-81

Aluminum Al 420 131 44.7 13.9 46.9 11.1 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Antimony 

Arsenic 

Sb

As

<.10

.40

<.03

.12

<.15

<.15

<.05

<.05

<.20

<.20

<.05

<.05

n.a.

3.0

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Barium Ba 3.40 1.06 1.73 .54 4.20 .99 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Beryllium 

Boron 

Be

B 

.10

<3.00

.03

<.93

<.15

.37

<.05

.12

<.20

.40

<.05

.09

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Cadmium Cd <.10 <.03 <.15 <.05 <.20 <.05 10.0 n.a. n.a.

Chromium Cr <2.00 <.62 .97 .30 1.90 .45 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Cobalt Co 3.50 1.09 .23 .07 .80 .19 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Copper 

Iron 

Lead 

Cu

Fe

Pb

4.20

2,500.

.60

1.31

778.

.19

2.45

187.

.37

.76

58.2

.12

3.60

103.

.20

.85

24.3

.05

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

0.86

n.a.

.19

0.68

n.a.

.17

Manganese

Mercury 

Molybdenum 

Nickel 

Mn

Hg

Mo

Ni

230.

.036

.10

3.80

71.6

.011

.03

1.18

15.8

.068

<.15

.44

4.91

.021

<.05

.14

70.6

.100

<.20

1.20

16.7

.024

<.05

.28

n.a.

.6

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

.11

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

.11

n.a.

n.a.

Selenium Se 2.80 .87 1.56 .49 2.30 .54 50. .46 .47

Silver 

Strontium 

Ag

Sr

<.10

65.0

<.03

20.2

<.15

37.9

<.05

11.8

<.20

62.8

<.05

14.8

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

n.a.

Uranium U <.10 <.03 <.15 <.05 <.20 <.05 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Vanadium V .70 .22 <.15 <.05 <.20 <.05 n.a. n.a. n.a.

Zinc Zn 67.0 20.9 39.9 12.4 70.0 16.5 n.a. .26 .24

Water/Solids 77.0% 23.0% 68.9% 31.1% 76.4% 23.6% n.a. n.a. n.a.

1. Mahanoy Creek near Gowen City, Pa. (S23); site described in table 2. Shamokin Creek near Shamokin, Pa. (USGS station 

01554500) described by Cravotta and Kirby (2004a). Swatara Creek at Ravine, Pa. (USGS station 01571820) described by Cravotta 

and Bilger (2001).

2. Human consumption advisory screening levels from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1997). Concentrations are on a 

dry weight basis. 

3. National Monitoring Program data for 1978-81 from Lowe and others (1985). Concentrations are on a wet weight basis.
q,,

S24 dark brown 7.5 YR 3/4 q,m,ch,c 4.1 7.0 2,200 15 1.2 85 75 57 290 440 .73 .85

S25 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 q,m,k 5.8 6.5 1,800 21 .9 75 82 120 84 380 .66 .80

S26 strong brown 7.5 YR 4/6 q,m,k 5.8 4.6 180 13 .1 48 56 28 42 120 .25 .29

S27 yellowish brown 10 YR 5/6 q,m 11 5.0 12,000 18 1.7 49 95 300 55 960 .84 1.27

S28 light yelllowish brown 2.5 Y 6/3 q,m 2.6 4.7 700 9.3 .2 41 20 26 24 88 .20 .25

S29 dark gray 5 Y 4/1 q,m 1.9 3.1 540 6.4 .3 36 10 22 23 90 .17 .21

S30 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 q,m 13 5.1 9,400 19 1.9 45 100 220 51 980 .81 1.23

S31 light olive brown 2.5 Y 5/4 q,m 7.7 4.4 5,000 14 1.1 42 63 200 39 590 .59 .84

Abandoned Mine Drainage (GW, GW-AMD)

M03 dark yellowish brown 10 YR 4/4 g,q,m 32 3.1 110 26 0.2 45 88 12 120 95 0.32 0.40

M07 dark yellowish brown 10 YR 3/6 g,q 55 .35 720 300 .2 4 4 44 7.9 310 .20 .37

M11 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 g,f,q 45 .34 430 20 .2 4 20 54 21 390 .21 .35

M11 yellowish red 5 YR 5/6 f 49 <.01 810 180 <.1 <1 <3 19 7.1 120 .10 .22

M11 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 f 51 <.01 2,300 180 <.1 <1 <3 19 7.2 130 .10 .25

M11 light gray 2.5 Y 7/2 f 50 <.01 6,300 4 .2 <1 3 47 1.6 420 .07 .21

M11 yellowish brown 10 YR 5/8 g,s 52 <.01 440 120 <.1 <1 5 38 7.3 140 .12 .23

M12 yellowish brown 10YR 5/8 g,q 49 .46 17,000 120 .2 7 9 110 9.4 160 .23 .57

M13 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 g 53 .18 2,500 180 <.1 2 5 72 2.3 10 .09 .22

M14 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 g,q 52 .77 1,500 110 <.1 9 20 68 15 30 .19 .37

M17 dark reddish brown 5 YR 3/4 g 42 1.50 170 45 2.2 2 39 18 5.4 480 .24 .35

M17 yellowish brown 10 YR 5/6 q,f 41 .78 180 21 .8 2 20 9.5 1.9 220 .12 .20

M18 yellowish brown 10 YR 5/6 g,q 45 2.8 370 96 <.1 20 140 9.7 20 170 .27 .42

M19 strong brown 7.5 YR 4/6 g,q,m 35 1.4 83 12 <.1 18 71 7.3 39 63 .17 .24

M20 grayish brown 2.5 YR 5/2 f 46 2.4 470 65 1.0 4 30 50 6.6 420 .28 .45

M21 yellowish red 5 YR 5/6 f,g 49 2.7 9,500 86 .8 2 56 130 10 590 .36 .76

M22 dark olive brown 2.5 Y 5/4 g 46 3.0 390 64 <.1 1 41 18 20 120 .15 .26

M24 “white slime” n.d. q,g,a 4.1 >20. 120 6.8 .1 18 98 27 21 40 .17 .19

M24 dark olive brown 2.5 Y 3/3 g,q 55 .46 1,500 50 .1 8 6 36 4.7 160 .14 .29

M25 light olive brown 2.5 YR 5/3 g,f 36 7.1 95 31 .2 7 120 9.1 39 70 .21 .29

M26 light olive brown 2.5 Y 5/3 g,f 36 7.2 110 30 .2 7 120 8.6 39 68 .20 .29

M26 dark yellowish brown 10 YR 4/4 q,m,k,g 13 4.8 620 77 .2 48 49 44 29 82 .34 .46

M27 dark olive brown 2.5 Y 3/3 g,f 56 .03 3,800 33 <.1 <1 <3 82 <.2 31 .05 .15

M28 reddish yellow 7.5 YR 6/8 g,s 47 .17 23 2 <.1 5 20 1.8 71 47 .08 .12

M29 yellowish brown 10 YR 5/8 f,q 47 3.0 13,000 7 1.5 5 92 360 10 1,300 .43 .90

M30 brownish yellow 10 YR 6/8 q,s 30 2.6 4,100 11 .6 18 190 71 330 210 .55 .90

M31 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 g 54 1.1 390 28 <.1 12 140 7.7 37 330 .25 .40

M32 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 f,g 44 2.8 1,500 38 <.1 6 53 17 50 170 .22 .41

M34 strong brown 7.5 YR 5/8 g,q 46 .27 17 19 <.1 16 400 2.7 6.4 83 .16 .19

SEL, PEC: 4 n.d. 1,100 33.0 5.0 111 149 48.6 128 459 n.d. n.d.

3.5 6.4 n.d. 6.3 .4 64 27 27 27 110 n.d. n.d. NAWQA:6

1. Metal concentrations on dry weight basis in percent or parts per million (1% = 10,000 ppm) for <100 mesh (<0.182-mm) size fraction. 

2. The probable effect concentration (PEC) or severe effect level (SEL) is a sediment-quality guideline above which harmful effects to benthic organisms are likely to be observed 

(Persaud and others, 1993; MacDonald and others, 2000). SEL for iron and manganese (Persaud and others, 1993); PEC for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and 

zinc (MacDonald and others, 2000). 

3. Site descriptions in tables 1 and 2. Shaded rows indicate sites in unmined subbasins. Site locations shown in figure 1. Complete data for sampled sites in appendix A.

4. Mineralogy identified by XRD: g=goethite, f=ferrihydrite, s=schwertmannite, a=amorphous aluminum hydroxysulfate, q=quartz, m=muscovite, k=kaolinite, ch=chlorite, c=calcite, 

gy=gypsum. Low peak-to-background ratios for many of the XRD patterns indicate amorphous material was present in addition to the minerals identified (J. M. Hammarstrom, U.S. 

Geological Survey, written commun., 2004). Small quantities of a mineral (less than 5 percent) or poorly crystalline or amorphous materials may not be detected by XRD. 

5. Geometric mean of the ratios of the observed concentration and the corresponding PEC or SEL for metals in streambed sediments (after MacDonald and others, 2000). 

6. Median concentration for streambed sediment across the conterminous United States from the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program (Rice, 1999). 

e in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 35
1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

Unn. Tr b. i

o t

N. Mahanoy Cr nr Shoemakers S( 05)

Waste House Run at Yatesvil e l

S( 07)

Mahanoy Cr at Gi be l

r on t

S( 09)

Mahanoy Cr at Gi ar r

dvil e l

S( 10)

Kehly Run nr Shenandoah S( 11)

Lost Cr nr Lost C eek r

S( 12)

Shenandoah Cr at Lost C eek r

S( 13)

Shenandoah Cr nr Gi ar

dr vil e l

S( 14)

Unn. Tr b i

o t

Mahanoy Cr at Gi ar r

dvil el

B" g i

M ne i

Run" S( 15)

Mahanoy Cr nr Ashland S( 16)

Mahanoy Cr nr Gordon S( 17)

Litt e l

Mahanoy Cr at Gordon S( 19)

Unn. Tr b. i

o t

Mahanoy Cr B" g i

Run" nr Lavel e l

S( 20)

C ab r

Run nr Tay or l

vil e l

S( 21)

Mahanoy Cr nr Lavel e l

S( 22)

Mahanoy Cr nr Gowen Ci yt

S( 23)

Zerbe Run at T er vor on t

S( 24)

Unn. Tr b. i

o t Ze be r

Run at Trevor on t

S( 25)

Zerbe Run nr Dornsi e f

S( 26)

Mahanoy Cr nr Dornsi ef

S( 27

Schwaben Cr nr Red C oss r

Mouse Cr b

Mahanoy 

Mah

Local Site Name (Site Number)

Geometric Mean Probable Effect Quotient

PEC Quotient

PEC+SEL Quotient

Figure 9. Geometric mean of the ratios of observed and probable effect concentrations (PECs) or PECs plus severe effect levels (SELs) fo

sediments in the Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, August 2001. Local site numbers shown in figure 1. Diagonal-patterned bars indica

SEL is the guideline for iron and manganese (Persaud and others, 1993) and the PEC is guideline for arsenic, cadmium, chromium, coppe

(MacDonald and others, 2000). A geometric mean probable effect quotient greater than 0.5 indicates harmful effects to benthic organism
Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage 37

Streambed sediments sampled in August 2001 at about 

half the mining-affected sites (S13, S14, S17, S20, S22, S23, 

S25, S27, S30, and S31) and half the nonmining sites (S07, S19, 

and S24) had geometric mean PEC quotients greater than 0.5 

reflecting elevated concentrations of copper, nickel, lead, and 

(or) zinc (fig. 9). In contrast, only 1 of 29 AMD sediment samples (3 percent) had a geometric mean PEC quotient greater 

than 0.5 (table 7). 

The most degraded streambed sediments were from 

Shenandoah Creek at Lost Creek (S13) and near Girardville 

(S14). At S13 and S14, metals concentrations in the fine fraction exceeded SQGs for iron (4 wt%), manganese (1,100 mg/g), 

copper (149 mg/g), nickel (48.6 mg/g), lead (128 mg/g), and 

zinc (459 mg/g) (table 7). Concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, 

and chromium were below the PEC or PEL. The geometric 

mean PEC quotients considering arsenic, cadmium, chromium, 

copper, lead, nickel, and zinc were 1.18 and 0.84 at S13 and 

S14, respectively, and comparable PEC+PEL quotients, which 

included Fe and Mn, were 1.11 and 1.19. Generally, the 

PEC+PEL quotients were greater than the PEC quotient 

(table 7) because of elevated concentrations of iron and manganese in the sediments at most streamwater and AMD sites. 

Concentrations of iron and aluminum in the AMD and 

streambed sediments were inversely correlated, and manganese 

was not correlated with iron or aluminum, indicating one of 

these metals was predominant in the precipitate at each site. 

Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients were significant 

between iron and arsenic; among aluminum, cadmium, chromium, copper, and lead; and among manganese, cadmium, 

cobalt, nickel, strontium, and zinc. Dissolved trace metals have 

been reported to adsorb to hydrous iron, aluminum, and manganese oxides, and manganese oxides generally are more effective 

sorbents than iron or aluminum oxides at near-neutral and lower 

pH (McKenzie, 1980; Coston and others, 1995; Webster and 

others, 1998; Tonkin and others, 2004). Compared to other trace 

metals, chromium, copper, and lead tend to adsorb to aluminosilicates (clay) and iron oxides at relatively low pH (4 to 6) 

(McKenzie, 1980; Webster and others, 1998). In contrast, nearneutral pH values favor adsorption of manganese, cobalt, 

nickel, and zinc on iron oxides (McKenzie, 1980). Ultimately, 

the adsorbed manganese can oxidize forming manganese oxides 

(Cravotta and Trahan, 1999). The general correlation among 

manganese, cobalt, nickel, and zinc in mine-drainage sediments 

was previously reported by Cravotta and Trahan (1999) for precipitate that formed within an “oxic limestone drain” and by 

Cravotta and Bilger (2001) for streambed samples from Swatara Creek in the Southern Anthracite Field of Pennsylvania. 

Correlations between iron and arsenic in AMD precipitate were 

previously noted by Cravotta and others (2001). 

In summary, despite AMD loading along most of its 

length, the quality of water in Mahanoy Creek improved downstream of Ashland because of attenuation processes including 

dilution, precipitation of hydrous iron, aluminum, and manganese oxides, and adsorption of trace metals. The accumulated 

metals in the streambed of Mahanoy Creek and its miningaffected tributaries degrade the aquatic habitat and serve as a 

long-term source of metals that can be resuspended during 

storms and associated high-flow conditions and possibly redissolved if subjected to acidic or anoxic conditions. The lack of 

taxa richness and trophic imbalance in mining-degraded 

reaches within the Mahanoy Creek Basin are consistent with the 

identified toxic effect levels for iron, manganese, nickel, copper, lead, and zinc in streambed sediments and imply that contaminant loadings from AMD sources are stressful to aquatic 

macroinvertebrates and, consequently, can be limiting to insectivorous (insect-eating) and piscivorous (fish-eating) species of 

fish and other higher trophic level animals. Elevated concentrations of iron, manganese, aluminum, strontium, copper, nickel, 

and zinc in whole white sucker sampled from Mahanoy Creek 

near Gowen City indicate potential for sediment-derived metals 

to accumulate in aquatic organisms. 

Characterization and Remediation of 

Abandoned Mine Drainage

Numerous AMD sources have been identified as sources 

of acidity, metals, and other contaminants in Mahanoy Creek 

and its tributaries. However, the effects on streamwater quality 

can vary depending on the characteristics of the AMD sources 

and the receiving stream. Hence, the primary goals of this study 

were to assess and rank the effects of individual AMD sources 

and to identify possible remedial alternatives, including passive-treatment options, that could be applied in the basin.

Characteristics of Abandoned Mine Drainage Sources

The water-quality data for high base-flow samples collected in March 2001 and low base-flow samples collected in 

August 2001 are summarized below for the largest AMD 

sources on the basis of flow volume, in approximate east-towest (or downstream) order. The large discharges are identified 

by local site number indicated in table 1 and distinguished by 

larger symbols in figure 10 on the basis of their flow rate, acidity (net alkalinity), and metal loadings. Most of the large AMD 

sources are along the valley bottom near perennial streams. 

Many AMD sources contribute substantially to base flow of the 

receiving stream. The tributary subbasin that receives the AMD 

is identified in table 2. On the basis of previous reports by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975) and Reed and others (1987), the 

approximate recharge area for each of the AMD sources has 

been delineated along with other mine features as part of the 

GIS developed for the project. Possible treatment alternatives 

on the basis of the AMD water quality (fig. 2) and the proximity 

of the AMD source to nearby streams, roads, and other land-use 

features have been noted below for consideration by resource 

managers and land owners that may be involved in decisions to 

implement remediation. No attempt has been made in this study 

to evaluate the feasibility for remediation or treatment of the 

AMD sources. 
38 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 10A 10B

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

Figure 10. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing abandoned mine drainage locations and corresponding (A) flow rate, (B) net alkalinity concentration, and loading of dissolved metals: (C) iron, (D) manganese, (E) aluminum, and (F) iron+manganese+aluminum, March 2001. Flow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net 

alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); loading in megagrams per year (Mg/yr). 
Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage 39

10C10D

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

Figure 10. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing abandoned mine drainage locations and corresponding (A) flow rate, (B) net alkalinity concentration, and loading of dissolved metals: (C) iron, (D) manganese, (E) aluminum, and (F) iron+manganese+aluminum, March 2001. Flow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net 

alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); loading in megagrams per year (Mg/yr).—Continued
40 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin 10E 10F

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

00 5

10 MILES

10 KILOMETERS

5

Figure 10. Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, showing abandoned mine drainage locations and corresponding (A) flow rate, (B) net alkalinity concentration, and loading of dissolved metals: (C) iron, (D) manganese, (E) aluminum, and (F) iron+manganese+aluminum, March 2001. Flow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3/s); net 

alkalinity concentration in milligrams per liter as calcium carbonate (mg/L CaCO3); loading in megagrams per year (Mg/yr).—Continued
Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage 41

The Vulcan-Buck Mountain Morris Tunnel (M01), the 

Vulcan-Buck Mountain seepage (M02), and the Vulcan-Buck 

Mountain Boreholes (M03) all discharge AMD from the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Mine to the headwaters of Mahanoy Creek 

east of Mahanoy City (fig. 10). Flow is intermittent at M01 and 

M02 but continuous at M03. During March and August 2001, 

no water was flowing from site M01, reflecting drought conditions during the study. Water-quality data at M01 previously 

were reported by Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975, site 1) and 

Reed and others (1987, site 61) indicating it had pH of 3.3, low 

concentrations of iron and manganese (less than 2 mg/L), and a 

high concentration of aluminum (greater than or equal to 

20 mg/L). In March 2001, discharge at M02 was 8.79 ft3/s 

(14,900 L/min) with pH of 4.7, net alkalinity of -21 mg/L, and 

concentrations of dissolved iron of 3.4 mg/L, aluminum of 

2.1 mg/L, manganese of 1.2 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.2 mg/L 

(table 3, fig. 10). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M02 was 52.6 Mg/yr in March 2001; 

however, this site was dry in August 2001. In March and August 

2001, discharge from the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Boreholes at 

M03 was 5.28 and 2.64 ft3

/s (8,970 and 4,490 L/min), respectively (table 3). The quality of the AMD was relatively constant 

with pH of 4.9 and 4.8, net alkalinity of -18 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 3.6 and 6.3 mg/L, aluminum of 1.6 

and 1.1 mg/L, manganese of 1.2 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.1 and 

0.2 mg/L. In March and August 2001, the combined load of 

dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese was 30.2 and 

20.3 Mg/yr, respectively (table 3, fig. 10). These data indicate 

that water discharged from the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Mine is 

net acidic and contributes substantial quantities of metals to 

Mahanoy Creek. However, treatment would be difficult 

because the flow varies substantially and area is limited for construction of a treatment system(s). The AMD abatement plan of 

Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975) proposes stream restoration and 

backfilling of abandoned pits to minimize recharge to the mine. 

The Gilberton Mine Pump (M04), which discharges AMD 

intermittently from the deepest mine in the upper Mahanoy 

Creek Basin, was not operating during March and August 2001. 

Reed and others (1987) reported that the Gilberton Mine Pump 

“operates 40 percent of the time to control water levels and prevent flooding of basements in Gilberton.” According to Edward 

Wytovich (Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned 

Mine Reclamation, oral commun., 2002), this AMD source was 

not flowing during any month in 2001, reflecting drought conditions during the study. When the Gilberton Pump is in operation, the discharge drastically affects the streamflow and water 

quality of Mahanoy Creek from Gilberton downstream to its 

confluence with Shenandoah Creek. Previously published data 

indicate the discharge at M04 can be large (23 ft3/s or 

39,100 L/min) and acidic (net alkalinity less than -100 mg/L) 

because of high concentrations of iron (greater than or equal to 

50 mg/L) (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975; Reed and others, 

1987). Because the flow rate is extremely variable and the quality is poor, passive treatment of the Gilberton Pump discharge 

is not a suitable alternative. According to Gary Greenfield 

(Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, oral 

commun., 2002), the PaDEP has developed preliminary plans to 

install a new borehole to the Gilberton Mine at a lower surface 

elevation than the pump discharge that ideally would maintain 

the required mine pool elevation and allow AMD to flow continuously by gravity through a constructed wetland. 

Downstream from the Gilberton Mine Pump, the Girard 

Mine seepage (M11) overflows to Mahanoy Creek from the 

Girard Mine pool near the eastern limits of Girardville (fig. 1). 

The seepage is predominantly from a collapsed mine opening at 

M11 along the southern bank of Mahanoy Creek, but various 

smaller seeps also discharge in the vicinity (Sanders & Thomas, 

Inc., 1975). In March and August 2001, discharge at M11 was 

4.10 and 2.73 ft3/s (6,970 and 4,640 L/min) with pH of 6.1 and 

6.0, net alkalinity of 51 and 15 mg/L, and concentrations of 

dissolved iron of 18 and 24 mg/L, aluminum of less than 

0.01 mg/L, manganese of 3.8 and 4.4 mg/L, and oxygen of 2.2 

and 0.3 mg/L, respectively (table 3, fig. 10). In March and 

August 2001, the combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, 

and manganese from M11 was 79.9 and 69.3 Mg/yr, respectively. Although the net-alkaline quality of the Girard Mine 

seepage is suitable for treatment with aerobic wetlands (fig. 2), 

passive treatment of the large flow at M11 would not be suitable 

because of its proximity to Mahanoy Creek and State Route 54 

and the large size required for a passive system. Active-treatment options, such as heterogeneous catalysis of iron oxidation 

by ferric hydroxide, have been proposed (Dietz and Dempsey, 

2002).

The Weston Mine surfaces area seepage (M05), Weston 

Mine Lost Creek-Buck Mountain discharge (M06), and the 

Weston Mine Lost Creek Borehole (M07) discharge AMD from 

the upper part of the 11.3-mi2 (29.3-km2

) Shenandoah complex 

between Mahanoy City and Girardville (Reed and others, 

1987). Variable flow rates have been measured in the Weston 

Mine discharges; flow is intermittent at M05 and M06 but continuous at M07. During March 2001, AMD from M05 was 

flowing at only 0.01 ft3/s (17 L/min) with pH of 6.4 and dissolved oxygen of 9.7 mg/L; the site was dry during August 2001 

(table 3). Nevertheless, previous data for M05 indicate a substantial flow rate of 3.7 ft3/s (6,290 L/min) with pH of 6.1 and 

iron concentration of 20 mg/L (Reed and others, 1987). The 

Weston Mine Lost Creek-Buck Mountain discharge at M06 

could not be found and was not sampled during the current 

study; this discharge probably was dry. Previous data indicate 

that this discharge had a pH of 4 but relatively low concentrations of dissolved metals (less than 2 mg/L) (Sanders and Thomas, Inc., 1975). In March and August 2001, discharge at M07 

was 0.38 and 0.03 ft3/s (646 and 51 L/min), respectively, with 

pH of 6.1, net alkalinity of 57 and 11 mg/L, and concentrations 

of dissolved iron of 14 and 33 mg/L, aluminum of less than 

0.01 mg/L, manganese of 6.4 and 8.9 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.3 

and 0.4 mg/L (table 3, fig. 10). In March and August 2001, the 

combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese 

from the Weston Mine discharges was 6.9 and 1.2 Mg/yr, 

respectively (table 3). 
42 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

The Hammond Mine seepage (M08), Hammond Mine 

Connerton Village Boreholes (M09), and the Hammond Mine 

Connerton #1 and #2 discharges (M10) discharge AMD from 

the middle part of the Shenandoah complex between Mahanoy 

City and Girardville (Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975; Reed and 

others, 1987). The Hammond Mine discharges have variable 

flow rates; flow is intermittent at M08 but probably continuous 

at M09 and M10, which are at lower elevations than M08 along 

Shenandoah Creek. Discharge from the Hammond Mine enters 

a large wetland and accounts for tripling of the flow rate of 

Shenandoah Creek between sites S13 and S14 (fig. 1, table 3). 

In March 2001, discharge at the Hammond Mine seepage (M08) 

was 0.27 ft3/s (459 L/min) with pH of 6.6, net alkalinity of 

164 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 5.2 mg/L, 

aluminum of less than 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 3.5 mg/L, and 

oxygen of 0.5 mg/L (table 3, fig. 10). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M08 was 2.1 Mg/yr. 

Because access was restricted along Shenandoah Creek in the 

area of the wetland, AMD sources at M09 and M10 could not 

be verified or sampled for this study; these may be one and the 

same AMD source, but the mapped locations and site descriptions in Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975) and Reed and others 

(1987) are not identical. Although current data on the flow rates 

and quality of the Connerton discharges are lacking, passive 

treatment of these and the Hammond Mine seepage is taking 

place in the wetland. The AMD abatement plan of Sanders & 

Thomas, Inc. (1975) that proposes stream restoration and backfilling of abandoned pits to minimize recharge to the Shenandoah complex could reduce flow rates from the Hammond Mine 

and, consequently, increase detention time and treatment effectiveness within the wetland.

The Packer #5 Mine discharges are the largest sources of 

AMD from the 11.3-mi2

 (29.3 km2) Shenandoah complex 

between Mahanoy City and Girardville (Reed and others, 

1987). The Packer #5 Mine discharge sampling sites (M12, 

M13, and M14) are within the municipal boundaries of Girardville (fig. 1). The discharges from the Packer #5 Mine Borehole 

(M12) and Breach (M13), which are approximately 0.1 mi 

(0.16 km) downstream from M12, are collected into a 0.50 mi 

(0.80 km) long ditch that is diverted through a culvert under 

Mahanoy Creek. The combined flow from the Packer #5 Mine 

Borehole and Breach within the ditch (M14) enters Mahanoy 

Creek approximately 0.25 mi (0.40 km) below the confluence 

of Mahanoy Creek and Shenandoah Creek. Although the flow 

at M14 consists entirely of drainage from M12 and M13, data 

for M14 were shown with streamwater samples in tables 2 and 

3 and figure 3 because of the physical setting of this site. The 

chemistry of samples from M12, M13, and M14 is similar 

(table 3). In March and August 2001, discharge at M14 was 

10.27 and 9.42 ft3/s (17,400 and 16,000 L/min) with pH of 6.4, 

net alkalinity of 95 and 76 mg/L, and concentrations of 

dissolved iron of 13 and 21 mg/L, aluminum of 0.02 and 

0.01 mg/L, manganese of 6.2 and 9.2 mg/L, and oxygen of 3.3 

and 2.0 mg/L, respectively (table 3, fig. 10). The combined load 

of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M14 was 176 

and 254 Mg/yr in March and August 2001, respectively. 

The metal loading rate from the combined Packer #5 Mine 

discharges (M14 or M12 plus M13) is greater than that from any 

other AMD source in the Mahanoy Creek Basin (table 3). The 

net-alkaline quality of the AMD from the Packer #5 Mine is 

consistent with data reported by Sanders and Thomas, Inc. 

(1975) and Reed and others (1987) and indicates aeration and 

settling basins may be appropriate for treatment (fig. 2). However, larger flow rates ranging from 38 to 49 ft3

/s (64,600 and 

83,300 L/min) were documented by Reed and others (1987). 

Because of the large flow and metals loading rates, the construction of aerobic wetlands will require a large area (more 

than 7 acres). Reed and others (1987) indicated that infiltration 

to the Shenandoah complex is 25 percent higher than other 

areas in the Mahanoy Creek Basin. According to Sanders & 

Thomas, Inc. (1975), the streamflow from Waste House Run, 

Lost Creek, and other unnamed tributaries enters open pits and 

(or) infiltrates, accounting for approximately 12 percent of the 

AMD discharged from the Shenandoah complex. The AMD 

abatement plan of Sanders & Thomas, Inc. (1975) proposes 

stream restoration and backfilling of abandoned pits to minimize recharge to the Shenandoah complex and, consequently, 

to reduce flow rates from the Packer #5 Mine. 

The Preston Mine discharges from three locations (M15, 

M16, and M17) to Mahanoy Creek within the municipal boundaries of Girardville (fig. 1). Neither the Preston Mine #3 water 

level drift (M15) nor the Preston Mine #2 overflow (M16) was 

sampled during this study. Site M16 is within the wetland on 

Shenandoah Creek and could not be accessed. Although the 

published locations for M15 and M16 differed between Sanders 

& Thomas, Inc. (1975) and Reed and others (1987), these AMD 

sources may be one and the same based on their descriptions 

and water quality. The published coordinates for M17 in Reed 

and others (1987) are erroneous; however, the correct location 

of the Preston Mine #3 Tunnel overflow (M17) was shown on 

hand-marked maps provided by L.A. Reed (U.S. Geological 

Survey, written commun., 2001), and these coordinates are 

shown in table 1. In March and August 2001, discharge at M17 

was 2.23 and 0.67 ft3/s (3,790 and 1,140 L/min) with relatively 

constant pH of 6.3 and 6.2, net alkalinity of 59 and 72 mg/L, 

and concentrations of dissolved iron of 4.8 and 4.7 mg/L, aluminum of 0.04 and less than 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 0.95 and 

0.99 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.4 and 0.2 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3, fig. 10). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M17 was 11.5 and 3.4 Mg/yr, respectively. The net-alkaline quality of the AMD from the Preston 

Mine Tunnel indicates aeration alone may be appropriate for its 

treatment (fig. 2). Land area within Girardville (vacant, abandoned building lots) before the discharge enters Mahanoy 

Creek could be investigated for a passive aerobic wetland. 

The Centralia Mine Tunnel (M19) drains an area of 4 mi2

(10.4 km2) near Centralia. Recharge over about half this area 

originates in the Shamokin Creek Basin. Big Mine Run at S15 

is formed almost entirely of AMD discharged at M19. In March 

and August 2001, discharge at M19 was 3.86 and 2.43 ft3/s 

(6,560 and 4,130 L/min) with pH of 3.9 and 3.6, net alkalinity 

of -59 and -80 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 7.6 
Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage 43

and 4.6 mg/L, aluminum of 5.5 and 8.7 mg/L, manganese of 4.9 

and 5.9 mg/L, and oxygen of 7.4 and 8.4 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3, fig. 10). In March and August 2001, the combined load 

of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M19 was 62.1 

and 41.7 Mg/yr, respectively. Less than 10 percent of these 

metals loads were attenuated prior to the discharge of Big Mine 

Run (S15) to Mahanoy Creek (table 3, fig. 7). Although other 

AMD sources in the area discharge larger quantities of metals, 

the acidity loading from the Centralia Mine Tunnel is larger 

than that from other AMD sources in the Mahanoy Creek Basin. 

Passive treatment to add alkalinity and remove iron, aluminum, 

and other metals may be possible considering the 0.50 mi 

(0.80 km) distance and relatively large, undeveloped area 

between the discharge and Mahanoy Creek. 

The Bast Mine (M18, M20, and M21) discharges from various mine openings along Mahanoy Creek between Girardville 

and Ashland. In March and August 2001, discharge from the 

Bast Mine Tunnel (M18) was 0.67 and 0.40 ft3

/s (1,140 and 

680 L/min) with pH of 5.8 and 5.7, net alkalinity of -2 and -

24 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 7.7 and 19 mg/

L, aluminum of 0.35 and 0.47 mg/L, manganese of 2.5 and 

4.2 mg/L, and oxygen of 8.3 and 8.8 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3, fig. 10). In March and August 2001, the combined load 

of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese from M18 was 6.3 

and 8.5 Mg/yr, respectively. These data indicate a moderate 

acidity loading from M18 to Mahanoy Creek but with lower 

quantities of metals than the net-alkaline AMD at sites M20 and 

M21. In March 2001, discharge at the Bast Mine overflow 

(M20) was 2.23 ft3

/s (3,790 L/min) with pH of 6.5, net 

alkalinity of 80 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 

8.4 mg/L, aluminum of 0.04 mg/L, manganese of 2.7 mg/L, and 

oxygen of 3.1 mg/L (table 3, fig. 10). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese from M20 was 

22.2 Mg/yr in March 2001; however, in August 2001, AMD 

was not flowing at M20. In March and August 2001, discharge 

at the Bast Mine Oakland Tunnel (M21) was 4.0 and 2.3 ft3/s 

(6,800 and 3,910 L/min) with pH of 6.3 and 6.4, net alkalinity 

of 74 and 79 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 7.3 

and 14 mg/L, aluminum of 0.05 and 0.08 mg/L, manganese of 

2.6 and 3.1 mg/L, and oxygen of 3.8 and 5.2 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3, fig. 10). During March and August 2001, the combined 

load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese from M21 

was 35.6 and 35.3 Mg/yr, which was among the largest in the 

Mahanoy Creek Basin. Passive-treatment systems at M18, 

M20, and M21 would not be suitable because of the proximity 

of these sites to Mahanoy Creek and roads. Although the discharge from M18 flows through a backwater wetland within the 

flood plain of Mahanoy Creek, metals removal is not likely to 

be large given the slightly acidic pH of the discharge. 

Four sources of AMD from the Tunnel Mine (M22, M23, 

M24, and M25) originate from surface drainage and underground mines on the south side of Ashland. Two small seeps at 

M22 and M23 and two larger discharges from mine openings at 

M24 and M25 were sampled during this study. In August 2001, 

seepage from a spoil bank was sampled at M22 with a flow rate 

of 0.03 ft3/s (51 L/min), pH of 4.1, net alkalinity of -109 mg/L, 

and concentrations of dissolved iron of 2.3 mg/L, aluminum of 

15 mg/L, manganese of 9.7 mg/L, and oxygen of 5.5 mg/L 

(table 3). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and 

manganese at M22 was 0.8 Mg/yr, mostly because of the high 

aluminum concentration. In contrast, the Tunnel Mine discharge at M23 in August 2001 had a flow rate of 0.03 ft3

/s (and 

51 L/min) with pH of 5.9, net alkalinity of 55 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 0.03 mg/L, aluminum of less 

than 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 2.7 mg/L, and oxygen of 

0.1 mg/L (table 3). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M23 was 0.1 Mg/yr. The Tunnel Mine 

drain pool area and storage (M24) was sampled in March and 

August 2001 and previously was reported by Sanders and Thomas, Inc. (1975) and Reed and others (1987). In March and 

August 2001, discharge at M24 was 0.09 and 0.13 ft3

/s (153 and 

221 L/min) with pH of 7.4 and 6.1, net alkalinity of 218 and 

54 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 0.24 and 

14 mg/L, aluminum of less than 0.01 and 0.05 mg/L, manganese of 0.82 and 2.7 mg/L, and oxygen of 8.9 and 0.9 mg/L, 

respectively (table 3). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M24 was 0.1 and 2.0 Mg/yr, respectively. Different results between the sampling dates reflect different flow paths as well as other factors, such as aeration. In 

March 2001, the AMD was sampled after discharging from the 

last of three ponds in series, whereas in August 2001, the AMD 

at that location was not flowing and the sample was collected 

within the first pond near its outlet. The Tunnel Mine Orchard 

Drift overflow (M25) was not sampled in March 2001. In 

August 2001, discharge at M25 was 0.04 ft3

/s (68 L/min) with 

pH of 5.6, net alkalinity of 21 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 0.04 mg/L, aluminum of 0.17 mg/L, manganese 

of 0.82 mg/L, and oxygen of 1.5 mg/L (table3). The combined 

load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M25 was 

less than 0.1 Mg/yr. Generally, the seepage with high concentrations of aluminum can be abated by removal of the acidforming culm bank where it originates, whereas the net-alkaline 

discharge can be treated by aerobic wetlands. 

Two discharges originate from the Potts Mine (M26 and 

M27) near Locustdale that form the principal source of streamflow to Big Run. In March and August 2001, discharge at the 

Potts Mine West Breach (M26) was 1.44 and 0.36 ft3/s (2,450 

and 612 L/min) with pH of 6.6 and 6.4, net alkalinity of 245 and 

216 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 16 and 

30 mg/L, aluminum of less than 0.01 and 0.24 mg/L, manganese of 3.6 and 5.1 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.2 and 1.7 mg/L, 

respectively (table 3). In March and August 2001, the combined 

load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese was 25.2 and 

11.4 Mg/yr, respectively. In March and August 2001, discharge 

at the Potts Mine East Breach (M27) was 0.22 and 0.29 ft3/s 

(374 and 493 L/min) with pH of 6.7 and 6.5, net alkalinity of 

190 and 202 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 8.9 

and 13 mg/L, aluminum of less than 0.01 and 0.01 mg/L, manganese of 2.1 and 2.3 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.6 and 2.5 mg/L, 

respectively (table 3). In March and August 2001, the combined 

load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese was 2.2 and 

4.0 Mg/yr, respectively. The net-alkaline character of these dis-
44 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

charges is remarkable and coupled with a long, turbulent flow 

path results in more than 80-percent reductions in the iron loading from the AMD sources at M26 and M27 to the mouth of Big 

Run at S20 (fig. 7). Constructed wetlands could be installed to 

prevent the iron from accumulating in Big Run where the solids 

are scoured and transported during high-flow conditions. 

The Lavelle Mine slope (M28), Locust Gap Tunnel (M29), 

Helfenstein Tunnel (M30), and the Doutyville Tunnel (M31) 

discharge AMD from the Locust Gap Mine and, possibly, the 

Germantown Mine that drain an area of 7 mi2 (18.1 km2

) 

entirely within the Shamokin Creek Basin (Reed and others, 

1987). In particular, the Locust Gap Tunnel and Doutyville 

Tunnel discharges contribute substantial quantities of AMD to 

Mahanoy Creek where the stream traverses an extensively forested area that is not scarred by mining or underlain by anthracite-bearing rocks. In March and August 2001, discharge at the 

Lavelle Mine slope (M28) near Mowry was 0.23 and 0.01 ft3/s 

(391 and 17 L/min) with pH of 3.9 and 4.3, net alkalinity of -20 

and -32 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 2.2 and 

10 mg/L, aluminum of 1.3 and 1.5 mg/L, manganese of 1.6 and 

1.8 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.5 and 1.0 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and 

manganese was 1.0 and 0.1 Mg/yr, respectively. Passive treatment of this net acidic but relatively small AMD source could 

be possible with an anoxic limestone drain and aerobic wetlands 

given the large undeveloped area between the discharge source 

and Mahanoy Creek. However, this AMD source with a relatively small metals loading may not warrant priority consideration. 

The Locust Gap Tunnel (M29) and Helfenstein Tunnel 

(M30), both near the village of Helfenstein but 0.6 mi (0.9 km) 

apart (fig. 1), mistakenly have been described with the same 

name. However, the drainage from the Locust Gap Tunnel 

(M29) at the bank of Mahanoy Creek is a large flow compared 

to the small seep from the hillside at the original Helfenstein 

Tunnel (M30). In March and August 2001, discharge at the 

Locust Gap Tunnel (M29) was 17.2 and 7.29 ft3/s (29,200 and 

12,400 L/min) with pH of 6.7 and 6.5, net alkalinity of 34 and 

29 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 6.7 and 

11 mg/L, aluminum of 0.05 mg/L, manganese of 2.3 and 

3.8 mg/L, and oxygen of 8.8 and 9.1 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3, fig. 5). The combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M29 was 139 and 96.7 Mg/yr, distinguishing the Locust Gap Tunnel as the second largest, continuously flowing AMD source in the Mahanoy Creek Basin after 

the Packer #5 Mine discharges (M12 and M13). In March and 

August 2001, the Helfenstein Tunnel (M30) discharged 0.09 

and less than 0.01 ft3/s (153 and 2 L/min) with a combined load 

of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese of less than 

0.1 Mg/yr (table 3, fig. 5). Because of its small size and remote 

location, the discharge at M30 may not warrant treatment, even 

though land may be available for a treatment system. In contrast, passive treatment of the discharge from the Locust Gap 

Tunnel (M29) would not be suitable because of its large size 

and proximity to Mahanoy Creek. Although the metals discharged are substantial from the Locust Gap Tunnel (M29), this 

AMD source may be considered low priority for cleanup on the 

basis of its marginally net alkaline character (table 3). Furthermore, the aquatic ecosystem downstream of M29 on Mahanoy 

Creek near Gowen City (S23) is relatively high quality compared to upstream segments (tables 4 and 5). 

The Doutyville Tunnel (M31) flows into Mahanoy Creek 

2.6 mi (4.2 km) downstream from the Locust Gap Tunnel 

(M29) and 4.4 mi (7.1 km) upstream from site S23 on Mahanoy 

Creek (fig. 1). In March and August 2001, discharge at M31 

was 3.52 and 0.99 ft3

/s (5,980 and 1,680 L/min) with pH of 5.0 

and 6.1, net alkalinity of -17 and 9 mg/L, and concentrations of 

dissolved iron of 2.1 and 3.4 mg/L, aluminum of 1.8 and 

0.34 mg/L, manganese of 1.3 and 1.5 mg/L, and oxygen of 9.3 

and 9.6 mg/L, respectively (table 3, fig. 5). In March and 

August 2001, the combined load of dissolved iron, aluminum, 

and manganese at M31 was 16.4 and 4.6 Mg/yr, respectively. 

Passive treatment of the discharge from the Doutyville Tunnel 

(M31) may not be suitable because of its large size, remote location, proximity to Mahanoy Creek, and its variable flow and 

water quality (table 3). This AMD source also may be considered low priority for cleanup because of the relatively highquality aquatic ecosystem downstream on Mahanoy Creek near 

Gowen City (S23) (tables 4 and 5). 

The North Franklin Mine, which underlies a mined area of 

3 mi2

 (4.8 km2) in the upper part of Zerbe Run near Trevorton, 

discharges AMD from at least four continuous and intermittent 

sources (M32, M33, M34, and M35) (fig. 1). The largest AMD 

source in the Zerbe Run subbasin is the North Franklin Mine 

Drift and Borehole (M32) that accounts for most of the flow and 

metals loading to the unnamed tributary to Zerbe Run at S25 

(figs. 1, 9, and 10). In March and August 2001, discharge at 

M32 was 6.45 and 2.56 ft3/s (11,000 and 4,350 L/min) with relatively constant pH of 5.9 and 5.2, net alkalinity of 5 and 

3 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 11 and 

13 mg/L, aluminum of 0.32 and 0.51 mg/L, manganese of 1.9 

and 2.3 mg/L, and oxygen of 4.6 and 4.4 mg/L, respectively 

(table 3, fig. 5). In March and August 2001, the combined load 

of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M32 was 76.2 

and 36.2 Mg/yr, respectively, ranking it among the top five 

sources of AMD in the Mahanoy Creek Basin. Discharge at the 

North Franklin Mine seepage (M33) in March 2001 was 

0.03 ft3/s (51 L/min) with pH of 3.1, net alkalinity of 

-110 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 5.1 mg/L, 

aluminum of 9.8 mg/L, manganese of 3.8 mg/L, and oxygen of 

4.8 mg/L (table 3, fig. 5). The load of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese at M33 was 0.5 Mg/yr in March 2001; 

however, in August 2001, site M33 was dry. In March and 

August 2001, seepage from a culm bank at M34 had a flow rate 

of 0.02 and less than 0.01 ft3/s (34 and less than 2 L/min) with 

pH of 2.9, net alkalinity of -184 and -220 mg/L, and concentrations of dissolved iron of 21 and 31 mg/L, aluminum of 14 and 

17 mg/L, manganese of 3 and 3.9 mg/L, and oxygen of 0.9 and 

0.6 mg/L, respectively (table 3, fig. 5). The pH was lower and 

concentrations of dissolved aluminum were greater than those 

for any other AMD source sampled during the study. Despite 

the small flow rate, the combined load of dissolved iron, alumi-
Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage 45

num, and manganese at M34 was 0.7 and 0.1 Mg/yr in March 

and August 2001, respectively. The Sunshine Mine overflow 

(M35) discharge at M35 was not sampled because a locked gate 

blocked access to the AMD source; discharge was not observed 

flowing from the site. Passive-treatment wetlands may be suitable for treatment of the North Franklin Drift and Borehole at 

M32 because it contributes the greatest loading of metals to 

Zerbe Run and it has marginally net alkaline water quality. Nevertheless, other smaller AMD sources could cause acidification 

of Zerbe Run that was apparent at S26 during low base-flow 

conditions (table 3). Ideally, alkalinity may be added to the 

unnamed tributary of Zerbe Run in a sufficient quantity to 

buffer downstream loading of AMD. 

Remedial Priorities and Alternatives

Flow and concentration data for the high base-flow samples collected in March 2001 were used to determine priority 

ranks of the AMD sources on the basis of loads of dissolved 

iron, manganese, and aluminum and to indicate the minimum 

size of wetlands for iron removal. The AMD source with the 

highest loading was assigned a rank of 1, with successively 

higher ranks assigned to AMD sources in descending order of 

dissolved metal loading (table 8). To provide context for comparing the AMD sources, the dissolved metals loading at each 

AMD source was expressed as a percentage of the sum of dissolved metals loading for all sampled AMD sources in the 

watershed (table 8). Generally, the AMD sources with the largest flow rates and iron concentrations were ranked among the 

top 15 AMD sources; however, the AMD ranking generally did 

not correlate with the acidity, pH, or aluminum concentration 

(fig. 11). Although concentrations increased with decreased 

flow (fig. 3), the contaminant loadings generally increased with 

flow. 

The top 4 AMD sources, Locust Gap Tunnel (M29), 

Packer #5 Breach (M13), Packer #5 Borehole (M12), and 

Girard Mine seepage (M11), on the basis of dissolved metals 

loading in March 2001 accounted for more than 50 percent of 

the metals loading to Mahanoy Creek, whereas the top 15 AMD 

sources accounted for more than 99 percent of the metals loading (table 8). When sampled in March 2001, the top 15 AMD 

sources had flow rates ranging from 0.4 to 17.2 ft3/s (680 to 

29,200 L/min) and pH from 3.9 to 6.7. Nine of the top 15 AMD 

sources, including the top 4, were net alkaline (alkalinity greater 

than acidity); the others were net acidic and will require additional alkalinity to facilitate metals removal and maintain nearneutral pH. 

The March 2001 high base-flow data for flow rate and dissolved metal concentrations were considered useful in the evaluation of AMD priorities because (1) flow rates in March 2001 

were near normal based on long-term streamflow record for 

Shamokin Creek (Cravotta and Kirby, 2004a), (2) six previously identified intermittent AMD sources were not discharging 

during the August 2001 low base-flow survey, and (3) acidity is 

determined largely by dissolved metals concentrations (Cravotta and Kirby, 2004b). Ideally, loadings and associated AMD 

priorities should be determined on the basis of long-term averages, but these data were not available. Data for pH were not 

used for the ranking computations because pH tends to be an 

unstable parameter that does not indicate the ultimate potential 

for acidic conditions (Cravotta and Kirby, 2004b). Furthermore, 

when pH or hydrogen ion loadings were included in the ranking 

computations, results were not changed appreciably. Estimates 

of the metals loads and corresponding rankings of AMD priorities also were similar on the basis of the metals in whole-water 

(total) and 0.45-μm filtered (dissolved) subsamples. 

The ranking sequence for the top AMD sources based on 

the high base-flow data generally matched that based on the low 

base-flow data (fig. 12). However, 2 of the top 15 AMD 

sources, the Vulcan-Buck Mountain seepage (M02) and the 

Bast Mine overflow (M20), ranked 7 and 11, respectively, were 

not flowing in August 2001 (table 3, fig. 12). With the exception of AMD sources with elevated concentrations of aluminum, such as the Vulcan-Buck Mountain Mine (M02 and M03), 

Centralia Mine (M19), and Doutyville Tunnel (M31), the concentration of dissolved iron greatly exceeded the other metals, 

indicating iron was the predominant source of acidity (fig. 12). 

Manganese typically was greater than or equal to the aluminum 

concentration. 

The AMD priority ranking could have been developed 

using various other constituents or computational methods. 

Because the proportions of dissolved iron, aluminum, and manganese in the AMD varied from site to site, different rankings 

could result by weighting the metals with different factors such 

as dividing the concentration by regulatory standards. Cherry 

and others (2001) and Herlihy and others (1990) used a combination of biological and chemical metrics to assess AMD 

effects on a watershed scale. Williams and others (1996, 1999) 

used flow and chemical constituents including acidity, metals, 

and sulfate to develop a ranking scheme based primarily on contaminant loading; pH was used as a “tie-breaker.” For the current study, rankings on the basis of sulfate were similar to those 

computed on the basis of dissolved metals (table 8). When netalkalinity loading was considered, the ranks for various AMD 

sources with substantial alkalinity and metals loading shifted to 

lower ranks (table 8). For example, the top five AMD sources 

on the basis of metals loading, Locust Gap Tunnel (M29), 

Packer #5 Mine Breach (M13) and Borehole (M12), Girard 

Mine seepage (M11), and North Franklin Mine Drift and Borehole (M32), had net-alkalinity rankings of 25, 20, 24, 21, and 

15, respectively (table 8). These rankings indicate that acidity 

loading from these sources is less than that from other topranked AMD sources; however, because of site specific limitations, their treatment is not necessarily more feasible than other 

large AMD sources. Ultimately, the feasibility of remediation 

of a particular discharge must consider the AMD quality and 

loading rates, if the site is accessible for treatment, and if funding, construction permits, and other resources can be obtained 

for implementation. Although such details have not been considered for this assessment, possible remedial alternatives and 

comments on site-specific issues for consideration by resource
1.0

1.3

0.6

0.4

0.3

0.4

0.4

0.1

<.1

0.1

<.1

<.1

<.1

0.1

<.1

<.1

<.1

-

-

-

1. Site descriptions given in tables 1 and 3.

2. Rankings based on instantaneous loadings computed as product of flow rate and concentration of relevant constituents. Metals loading based on concentrations of dissolved iron, 

aluminum, and manganese. Net-alkalinity concentration computed as measured alkalinity minus computed acidity per equations 7 and 8. Rank of 1 for greatest loading; rank value 

increases with decreased loading.

3. Principal characteristics based on maxima and minima for flow rate and concentrations of alkalinity, dissolved metals, and oxygen (in mg/L) for samples collected in March and 

August 2001 (table 3). Flow (ft3/s): ‘very large’ if minimum > 2.0; ‘large’ if maximum > 1.0 and < 2.0; ‘moderate’ if maximum > 0.1 and < 1.0; ‘small’ if maximum < 0.1; ‘intermittent’ if 

maximum or minimum = 0. Iron and manganese (mg/L): ‘very high’ if minimum Fe > 12 and minimum Mn > 4; ‘high’ if minimum Fe < 12 and minimum Mn < 4; ‘moderate’ if minimum Fe 

< 6 and minimum Mn < 2; ‘low’ if maximum Fe < 3 and maximum Mn < 1. Aluminum (mg/L): ‘very high’ if maximum > 4; ‘high’ if maximum > 2; ‘moderate’ if maximum < 2; ‘low’ if maximum 

< 0.2. Net alkalinity (alkalinity - computed acidity; mg/L as CaCO3): ‘net acidic?’ if maximum < 5; ‘net acidic’ if maximum < 0; ‘net alkaline?’ if minimum > 0 or if missing and minimum pH 

> 6.4; ‘net alkaline’ if minimum > 5. Dissolved oxygen (mg/L): ‘anoxic’ if maximum < 1; ‘suboxic’ if maximum < 2; ‘oxic’ if minimum > 2. 

4. Remedial alternatives initially identified on the basis of maxima and minima for flow rate and water quality (in mg/L): ‘Remove culm bank’ if maximum pH < 4.0; ‘Aerobic pond’ if 

minimum net alkalinity > 5; ‘VFCW and aerobic pond’ if minimum net alkalinity < 5, maximum dissolved oxygen > 1, maximum Al > 2, and maximum flow < 6.5; ‘ALD and aerobic pond’ 

if minimum net alkalinity < 5, maximum dissolved oxygen < 1, maximum Al < 2, and maximum flow < 6.5; ‘OLD and aerobic pond’ if minimum net alkalinity < 5, maximum dissolved oxygen 

> 1, maximum Al < 3, and maximum flow < 6.5; ‘OLC’ if minimum net alkalinity < 5, maximum Fe < 10, maximum Al < 5, and maximum flow < 10; ‘Active Treatment’ if minimum flow > 2 

or maximum net alkalinity < -300. 

5. Minimum wetland size computed by dividing the product of maximum flow rate and maximum iron concentration, in grams per day, by 20 g/m2/d (180 lb/acre/d) per Hedin and 

others (1994). If smaller loading rate used, increase area by constant factor: for loading rate of 10 or 5 g/m2/d, multiply wetland area estimate by 2 or 4, respectively.

Area inadequate for passive 

treatment.

Area adequate for wetland 

(?). 

Area adequate for wetland 

(?). 

Area inadequate for passive 

treatment (?).

Area inadequate for passive 

treatment (?).

Discharge drains to existing 

wetland.

Area available for passive 

treatment.

Area adequate for wetland 

(?). 

Discharge drains to existing 

wetland.

Area available for passive 

treatment.

Source removal best; area 

available for treatment.

Source removal best; area 

available for treatment.

Source removal best; area 

available for treatment.

Possibly enhance existing 

ponds for treatment.

Area available for passive 

treatment.

Area available for passive 

treatment.

Discharge drains to existing 

wetland.

Insufficient data. 

Insufficient data.

Insufficient data.

X

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

?

+

X

X

+

X

X

+

X

X

+

+

-

+

X

X

X

X

-

-

-

X

-

-

X

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

X

-

-

X

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

X

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

X

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

X

-

X

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

X

X

X

-

-

-

-

?

?

-

Very large flow; moderate Fe, Mn; 

moderate Al; net acidic; anoxic

Large flow; high Fe, Mn; moderate Al; 

net alkaline; suboxic

Intermittent flow; high Fe, Mn; low Al; 

net alkaline; oxic

Large flow; moderate Fe, Mn; 

moderate Al; net acidic?; oxic

Large flow; moderate Fe, Mn; low Al; 

net alkaline; anoxic

Moderate flow; very high Fe, Mn; low 

Al; net alkaline; anoxic

Moderate flow; high Fe, Mn; moderate 

Al; net acidic; oxic

Moderate flow; high Fe, Mn; low Al; 

net alkaline; oxic

Intermittent flow; moderate Fe, Mn; 

low Al; net alkaline; anoxic

Moderate flow; moderate Fe, Mn; 

moderate Al; net acidic; anoxic

Small flow; moderate Fe, Mn; very 

high Al; net acidic; oxic

Small flow; high Fe, Mn; very high Al; 

net acidic; anoxic

Intermittent flow; moderate Fe, Mn; 

very high Al; net acidic; oxic

Moderate flow; moderate Fe, Mn; low 

Al; net alkaline; oxic

Small flow; moderate Fe, Mn; low Al; 

net alkaline; anoxic

Small flow; low Fe, Mn; low Al; net 

alkaline; suboxic

Small flow; low Fe, Mn; low Al; net 

alkaline; oxic

Intermittent flow; moderate Fe, Mn; 

moderate Al; net alkaline?; oxic

Intermittent flow; not sampled.

Intermittent very large flow; not 

sampled.

12

7

10

11

15

14

13

17

16

19

18

22

21

20

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

23

19

4

18

14

9

16

17

5

7

6

8

13

12

11

10

28

26

27

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4.1

3.4

3.0

2.2

1.6

0.9

0.9

0.3

0.3

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

Vulcan-Buck Mtn. Mine Boreholes (M03)

Potts Mine West Breach (M26)

Bast Mine Overflow (M20)

Locust Gap Mine Doutyville Tunnel (M31)

Preston Mine #3 Tunnel overflow (M17)

Weston Mine Lost Cr Borehole (M07)

Bast Mine Tunnel (M18)

Potts Mine East Breach (M27)

Hammond Mine Seepage (M08)

Lavelle Mine Lavelle slope (M28)

Tunnel Mine seepage to ditch (M22)

N. Franklin Mine bank seepage (M34)

N. Franklin Mine seepage (M33)

Tunnel Mine drain pool area (M24)

Tunnel Mine discharge from spoil bank (M23)

Tunnel Mine Orchard Drift overflow (M25)

Locust Gap Mine Helfenstein Tunnel (M30)

Weston Mine surface areas seepage (M05)

Vulcan-Buck Mtn. Mine Morris Tunnel (M01)

Gilberton Mine Pump (M04)

46 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin
Figure 11. Relation between priority ranking based on dissolved metals loading in March 2001 for top 25 abandoned mine drainage (AMD) 

acidity, (C) pH, (D) iron, (E) manganese, and (F) aluminum concentrations for high base-flow (HI-GW) and low base-flow (LO-GW) AMD s

Basin, Pennsylvania. Flow rate in cubic feet per second (ft3

/s); concentrations in millgrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per liter (μg/L)

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Flow Rate, ft3/s

HI-GW

LO-GW

11A

0

50

250

200

150

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 

Acidity, mg/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

11B

0

5,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 

Iron, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

11D

y = -68.746x + 3917.4

R2 = 0.0519

0

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

12,000

10,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

AMD Rank

Manganese, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

11E

0

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

18,000

16,000

14,000

12,000

10,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 

AMD Rank

Aluminum, ug/L

HI-GW

LO-GW

11F

y = -0.0405x + 6.09

R2 = 0.0619

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

pH

HI-GW

LO-GW

11C
Figure 12. Comparison of priority ranks for top 15 abandoned mine drainage (AMD) sites, Mahanoy Creek Basin, Pennsylvania, (A) on the 

iron, aluminum, and manganese in filtered samples collected during high base-flow conditions (HI-GW) in March 2001 and low base-flow 

August 2001, and (B) considering relative contributions of dissolved iron, manganese, and aluminum to the dissolved metals loading duri

5%

0%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

M29M13M12M11M32M19M02M21M03M26M20M31M1

Percentage of Cumulative Metals

(Fe+Al+Mn) Load

Dissolved Me

Dissolved Me

12A

0

80

60

40

20

140

120

100

Locust Gap Mine Locust Gap Tunnel (M29)

Packer #5 Mine B each r

(M13)

Packer #5 M ne i

Borehole (M12)

Girard Mine seepage (M11)

N. Frankl n i

Mine Dr fi t and Borehole (M32)

Centralia Mine Tunnel (M19)

Vulcan-Buck Mountain M ne seepage ( i

M02)

Bast M ne i

 Oakland Tunnel (M21)

Vu can- l

Buck Mountain Mine Bo eh r

oles 

M03 (

)

Pot s t

Mine West B each r

(M26)

Bast Mine Overflow

M(

20)

Locust Gap Mine Doutyville Tunnel (M31)

P est r

on M ne i

#3 Tunnel overflow

M(

Weston Mine Lost C

Local Site Name (Site Number) in order of AMD Rank (based on dissolved Fe+Mn+Al l

Dissolved Load, 

in megagrams per year

12B
Characterization and Remediation of Abandoned Mine Drainage 49

managers and land owners that may be involved in decisions to 

implement remediation are summarized in table 8.

Generally, to meet water-quality criteria for 0.3 mg/L dissolved iron, nearly all the AMD sources would require construction of some sort of settling basin or wetland to facilitate 

iron oxidation, hydrolysis, and deposition. Hence, to provide a 

basis for evaluating alternatives for passive treatment, the minimum wetland size for each AMD source was computed using 

the data for maximum flow rate and maximum iron concentration for the March 2001 and August 2001 data and considering 

criteria of Hedin and others (1994) for an iron-removal rate of 

180 lb/acre/d (20 g/m2

/d) (table 8). The computed wetland 

sizes ranged from 5.8 acres for the Locust Gap Tunnel discharge (M29) to less than 0.1 acre for seven small AMD discharges. Small wetland acreages were computed for sites with 

low flow rates and low concentrations of dissolved iron; however, many of these AMD sources, such as seepage from the 

North Franklin Mine (M33 and M34) or the Tunnel Mine 

(M22), could have high concentrations of dissolved aluminum 

(table 8). Consequently, a larger treatment area than that computed based on iron alone may be needed. 

If the AMD is net acidic and (or) has elevated concentrations of aluminum, treatment steps or components that add alkalinity to the AMD could be appropriate in addition to a wetland 

(fig. 2). Because many of the AMD sources in the Mahanoy 

Creek Basin have large flow and metal loading rates (table 8), 

innovative designs that accelerate iron oxidation (Dietz and 

Dempsey, 2002) and (or) incorporate automatic flushing for 

solids removal (Vinci and Schmidt, 2001; Weaver and others, 

2004; Schueck and others, 2004) may be advantageous. Furthermore, bench-scale testing of the possible treatment alternatives, such as that by Cravotta (2002, 2003), Cravotta and others 

(2004), and Dietz and Dempsey (2002), could be helpful for the 

selection and design of treatment alternatives. 

Various restoration activities could be considered to mitigate the AMD contamination in the Mahanoy Creek Basin. 

Because many of the AMD sources are large or have insufficient land area for construction of active or passive-treatment 

systems, the prevention of infiltration through mine spoil or into 

the underground mines is warranted. If surface reclamation or 

streamflow restoration is planned or completed, the design of 

any AMD treatment system should consider additional monitoring to document potential changes in flow and loading rates. 

The following restoration strategies that were identified to meet 

TMDLs in the Shamokin Creek Basin (Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001; Cravotta and Kirby, 

2004a) generally could be applicable in the Mahanoy Creek 

Basin and other watersheds affected by abandoned mines. 

• Reclamation of abandoned surface mines, including 

removal of abandoned highwalls and spoil banks and filling abandoned surface-mine pits would eliminate surfacewater accumulations that become contaminated with mine 

drainage because of contact with exposed acid-producing 

strata and reduce the amount of surface runoff directed into 

the mine-pool systems. The regrading of disturbed areas, if 

returned to original contour before mining, would provide 

a more natural flow pattern for runoff and prevent surface 

water from percolating through abandoned refuse and 

entering underground mine pools. 

• Removal, regrading, and (or) replanting of abandoned 

coal-refuse piles would reduce the amount of sediments, 

silt, and coal-waste runoff into surface streams and eliminate a source of AMD. 

• Restoration of surface channels and flow of streams that 

now disappear into spoil banks and enter deep-mine pools 

could lessen the volume of water discharged by AMD 

sources. 

• Site-specific assessments to determine whether passive 

treatment is practical and which treatment systems are best 

suited for specific discharges should include discharge 

water quality and flow, topographical setting, construction 

costs, and long-term operation and maintenance costs. 

Suitable technology may not be available to passively treat 

many of these high-volume discharges. 

Data Usage and Limitations

The evaluation of contaminant loading rates and the use of 

these data for the development of TMDLs or design of treatment systems require sufficient samples to characterize the 

average values and extremes in flow rates and quality at each of 

the AMD sources. However, average or extreme conditions 

generally are not known for individual AMD or stream monitoring sites in the Mahanoy Creek Basin because continuous 

records for flow or chemistry are not available. Detailed treatment design at any AMD site would require additional data on 

the range of flow rates and corresponding variations in water 

quality. 

In the Mahanoy Creek Basin, the primary water-quality 

effects from AMD are locally low pH, high concentrations of 

aluminum and possibly other toxic metals, and extensive ironhydroxide coatings on streambeds. Low pH coupled with high 

concentrations of dissolved aluminum and other metals, such as 

nickel and zinc, can be toxic to many aquatic organisms (Burrows, 1977; Burton and Allan, 1986; Hyman and Watzlaf, 1997; 

Earle and Callaghan, 1998; U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002a). Although dissolved iron is not acutely toxic 

at the concentrations documented in this basin (less than 

50 mg/L), thick accumulations of iron hydroxide effectively 

can eliminate the habitat of aquatic macroinvertebrates that 

serve as food sources for organisms at higher trophic levels. 

Manganese loading was incorporated in the AMD prioritization 

because manganese concentrations in streamwater and in effluent from active mines are regulated by Federal and State law 

(Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1998a, 1998b, 2001a). 

Kleinmann and Watzlaf (1986) and Hyman and Watzlaf (1997) 

explained that the manganese regulation is in force not because 

of its toxicity, but rather because manganese concentration 

serves as a proxy for toxic trace metals. The streambed sediments collected for this study indicated correlations between 

manganese and cadmium, cobalt, nickel, strontium, and zinc. 
50 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

An inherent assumption in the three-metal assessment used 

for this study is that, if the instream loadings of iron, manganese, and aluminum are decreased to acceptable levels by 

appropriate treatment or natural processes, other chemical, 

physical, and biological parameters will be within a range that 

should support normal aquatic populations. For pH, acidity, and 

alkalinity, this assumption should be valid because the AMD 

treatments appropriate for removal of iron, manganese, and aluminum also will increase the pH and alkalinity while decreasing 

acidity in receiving streams. Because trace-metal concentrations in streamwater and sediments tend to be controlled by 

their adsorption to precipitated Fe(III) and Mn(IV) hydroxides, 

trace-metal toxicity also can be reduced by treatments that 

effectively remove acidity and promote the formation of the 

metal hydroxides. Dissolved oxygen concentrations in flowing 

streams should be adequate to support warm-water and (or) 

cold-water fish populations once the chemical-oxygen demand 

associated with Fe(II) and Mn(II) loadings is reduced. Although 

sulfate concentrations will be slightly affected by AMD treatment, the sulfate concentrations in this basin are not expected to 

negatively affect biological recovery. 

Once streamwater chemistry improves, some obstacles 

may still remain in the restoration of aquatic ecosystems. One 

remaining obstacle could be lack of adequate aquatic habitat or 

stream substrate. Most stream substrates in the Mahanoy Creek 

Basin are coated by relatively loosely bound iron-hydroxide 

precipitate or they are “armored” by tightly bound iron-hydroxide cements. The loosely bound precipitate can be scoured and 

suspended by fast-flowing water during stormflow conditions 

producing turbid, rust-colored streamwater. These conditions 

are evident during stormflow conditions on Mahanoy Creek, 

Shamokin Creek (Cravotta and Kirby, 2004a), and Swatara 

Creek (Cravotta and Bilger, 2001). At least two major remaining substrate or habitat problems will not be addressed by AMD 

treatment alone. First, during high-flow events, the erosion of 

coal and waste-rock particles from numerous mine roads and 

waste-rock piles into streams periodically will disturb stream 

habitats. Second, some stream reaches (especially the headwaters of Mahanoy Creek and the lower reaches of North Mahanoy 

Creek, Waste House Run, and Lost Creek) are ephemeral 

(always dry except during high base-flow or stormflow events) 

because water is lost to underlying deep mine complexes. The 

three-metal dissolved load ranking for base-flow conditions 

does not address these problems.

Although cost estimates were not determined for the remedial alternatives, the flow and water-quality data collected for 

this study can be used to estimate and compare the relative sizes 

and costs (capital and annual maintenance) for different activetreatment and passive-treatment alternatives. The flow, acidity, 

alkalinity, and metals concentration data are critical data for 

such computations because they determine the quantities of 

neutralizing agents, the overall size of the treatment system, and 

the quantities of sludge that may require disposal. Given the 

estimated size and cost for a treatment system, its feasibility can 

be evaluated based on analysis with a computer program such 

as AMDTreat (U.S. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 

Enforcement, 2002). The comparison of alternatives becomes 

complicated, however, considering different assumptions about 

capital and long-term maintenance costs, replacement frequency, inflation rates, and interest growth. For example, as 

shown in appendix D, maximum values for flow, acidity, and 

metals concentration data collected in March and August 2001 

for the Centralia Tunnel discharge (M19) were used with 

AMDTreat version 3.1 and default settings for unit costs (U.S. 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 2002). 

Active treatment of M19 with pebble lime was estimated to 

have a capital cost of approximately $96,000 and an annual 

maintenance cost including chemicals of approximately 

$69,400. Alternatively, a passive system, such as a vertical flow 

compost wetland (VFCW), is estimated to have a capital cost of 

approximately $353,000 and annual maintenance costs of 

approximately $20,400. For a design life of 20 years, annual 

inflation rate of 3 percent, and annual interest growth rate of 

2.5 percent, analysis with AMDTreat indicates that the net 

present cost for treatment of the Centralia Mine discharge 

would be approximately $1,014,000 for the active system compared to $668,000 for the passive system. If inflation remained 

at 3 percent and the interest growth rate were 9.4 percent or 

more, the net present costs for the active treatments would be 

less than that for passive treatment. This example illustrates 

“high capital, but low maintenance cost” for passive treatment 

compared to active treatment of large discharges and how these 

costs are considered in future planning. Nevertheless, land for 

construction of a passive system may not be available or accessible, and the best treatment alternative may not have been considered. Any treatment design would require such site-specific 

information. 

Summary

Mahanoy Creek is a tributary of the Susquehanna River in 

east-central Pennsylvania. The Mahanoy Creek Basin encompasses an area of 157 mi2 (407 km2

) including approximately 

42 mi2 (109 km2

) underlain by the Western Middle Anthracite 

Field. Contaminated runoff and discharges from abandoned 

anthracite mines degrade the aquatic ecosystem and water quality of the main stem of Mahanoy Creek from its headwaters to 

its mouth on the Susquehanna River plus various tributaries, 

including North Mahanoy Creek, Waste House Run, Shenandoah Creek, Zerbe Run, and two unnamed tributaries locally 

called Big Mine Run and Big Run. The Little Mahanoy Creek 

and Schwaben Creek are the only major tributaries not affected 

by mining. To assess the effects of AMD sources and to identify 

possible remedial alternatives, the USGS, in cooperation with 

the PaDEP, SCD, and MCWA began a study in 2001. Data on 

the flow rate and quality of water were collected at all known 

AMD sites and at selected stream sites within the Mahanoy 

Creek Basin during high base-flow conditions in March 2001 

and then repeated during low base-flow conditions in August 

2001. The basin-wide synoptic monitoring of flow and water 
Summary 51

quality during stable base-flow conditions was performed to (1) 

identify site-specific characteristics including temporal variability associated with seasonal changes in base flow, (2) indicate spatial variability and relative effects of the AMD throughout the basin, and (3) avoid complications in data collection and 

interpretation associated with rainfall or other short-duration 

weather events. Streambed sediments were collected during the 

August 2001 low base-flow survey. Additionally, during October 2001, data on the diversity and biomass of fish species were 

collected at a subset of the sampled stream sites, and during 

2000-2002, data on the diversity of aquatic macroinvertebrates 

were collected throughout the basin. 

The quantity and quality of water in Mahanoy Creek and 

tributaries in the upper Mahanoy Creek Basin above the borough of Ashland are affected by leakage to abandoned underground mines and by metal-contaminated discharges from tunnels, slopes, shafts, and unreclaimed spoil associated with 

abandoned mines. Additional mine discharges affect the quality 

of water below Ashland, including large discharges from the 

Locust Gap and Doutyville Tunnels near Helfenstein. High 

base-flow samples collected in March 2001 and low base-flow 

samples collected in August 2001 provided information on the 

current water-quality characteristics and the relative differences 

among AMD sources and stream-sampling sites. Because as 

much as one-sixth of the known AMD sources were not flowing 

during August 2001, the data for March 2001 were used as the 

primary basis for characterizing aquatic quality at each site and 

distinguishing AMD priorities. Generally, concentrations of 

sulfate, iron, and manganese for a particular AMD site were 

similar or greater during low base-flow than high base-flow 

conditions. 

The pH of most of the AMD sources was near neutral (pH 

6 to 7). However, some of the AMD sources with near-neutral 

and lower pH values had negative net alkalinity, indicating that 

pH ultimately could decline to values less than 4.5 after complete oxidation and hydrolysis of dissolved metals. The predominant source of acidity in most streamwater samples was 

dissolved iron. Some streamwater and AMD samples, mainly in 

the headwaters of Mahanoy Creek, the Big Mine Run drainage 

from the Centralia Tunnel, and seepage from culm banks of the 

Tunnel Mine along Mahanoy Creek and the North Franklin 

Mine, had low pH and elevated concentrations of aluminum 

(greater than 1 mg/L). 

Twenty species of fish were identified in Schwaben Creek 

near Red Cross, which drains an unmined area of 22.7 mi2

(58.8 km2) in the lower part of the Mahanoy Creek Basin. In 

contrast, 14 species of fish were identified in Mahanoy Creek 

near its mouth at Kneass, below Schwaben Creek. The diversity 

and abundance of fish species in Mahanoy Creek decreased progressively upstream from 13 species at Gowen City to only 2 

species each at Ashland and Girardville. White sucker (Catostomus commersoni), a pollution-tolerant species, was present at 

each of the surveyed reaches. The presence of fish at Girardville 

was unexpected because of the poor water quality and ironencrusted streambed at this location. Generally, macroinvertebrate diversity and abundance at these sites were diminished 

compared to Schwaben Creek and other unmined tributaries, 

consistent with the observed quality of streamwater.

A majority of the base-flow streamwater samples met 

water-quality standards for pH (6 to 9); however, few samples 

downstream from AMD sources met criteria for acidity less 

than alkalinity (net alkalinity = 20 mg/L as CaCO3) and concentrations of dissolved iron (0.3 mg/L) and total manganese 

(1.0 mg/L). Iron, aluminum, and various trace elements including cobalt, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc, were present in many 

streamwater samples at concentrations at which continuous 

exposure can not be tolerated by aquatic organisms without an 

unacceptable effect. Furthermore, concentrations of sulfate, 

iron, manganese, aluminum, and (or) beryllium in some samples exceeded drinking-water standards. Other trace elements, 

including antimony, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, 

selenium, silver, and thallium did not exceed water-quality criteria for protection of aquatic organisms or human health. Nevertheless, when considered together, concentrations of iron, 

manganese, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, 

and zinc in a majority of the streambed sediment samples from 

Mahanoy Creek and AMD-affected tributaries exceeded the 

probable effect level for toxicity because of multiple contaminants. 

The concentrations of dissolved metals provided a consistent basis for evaluation of acidity and contaminant loading and 

were similar to concentrations of total metals in AMD water 

samples. With two exceptions, the computed sum of metals 

loading from AMD sources upstream of stream-monitoring 

sites generally exceeded the measured load at the stream site. 

Metals loading measured on Mahanoy Creek at Ashland (S16) 

and at the mouth of Shenandoah Creek (S14) were greater than 

the sum of metals from AMD sources. This result indicates that 

one or more AMD sources was not sampled in that reach. Additional investigation in the reaches between S13 and S16 is warranted to identify and characterize these sources. Elsewhere, 

smaller measured loads compared to the computed sum of metals loading from AMD sources upstream indicates that metals 

accumulate in upstream segments during base-flow conditions. 

This accumulation of metals in the stream degrades the aquatic 

habitat and indicates that a greater quantity of metal would need 

to be removed at the AMD source to achieve similar load reduction at a downstream location. 

The water-quality data for the sampled AMD sources were 

used to determine priority ranks of the sources on the basis of 

loadings of iron, manganese, and aluminum and to identify possible remedial alternatives, including passive-treatment options. 

The ranking sequence for the top AMD sources based on the 

high base-flow data generally matched that based on the low 

base-flow data. Although concentrations increased with 

decreased flow, the contaminant loadings generally increased 

with flow; six previously identified intermittent AMD sources 

were not discharging during the low base-flow sampling period. 

The top 4 AMD sources, Locust Gap Tunnel (M29), Packer #5 

Breach (M13), Packer #5 Borehole (M12), and Girard Mine 

seepage (M11), on the basis of dissolved metals loading in 

March 2001 accounted for more than 50 percent of the metals 
52 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

loading to Mahanoy Creek, whereas the top 15 AMD sources 

accounted for more than 99 percent of the metals loading. When 

sampled in March 2001, the top 15 AMD sources had flow rates 

ranging from 0.4 to 17.2 ft3

/s (680 to 29,200 L/min) and pH 

from 3.9 to 6.7. Dissolved iron was the principal source of acidity and metals loading; concentrations of iron ranged from 

2.1 to 18 mg/L. Dissolved manganese ranged from 0.95 to 

6.4 mg/L. Dissolved aluminum exceeded 1.0 mg/L at 4 of the 

top 15 AMD sources but was less than 0.4 mg/L at the others. 

Nine of the top 15 AMD sources, including the top 4, were net 

alkaline (alkalinity greater than acidity); the others were net 

acidic and will require additional alkalinity to facilitate metals 

removal and maintain near-neutral pH. 

Alkalinity can be acquired by the dissolution of limestone 

and (or) bacterial sulfate reduction within various passive-treatment systems including anoxic or oxic limestone drains, limestone-lined channels, or compost wetlands. Subsequently, the 

gradual oxidation and consequent precipitation of iron and 

manganese can be accommodated within settling ponds or aerobic wetlands. Assuming an iron removal rate of 180 lb/acre/d 

(20 g/m2

/d), constructed treatment wetlands at the top 15 AMD 

sites would require a minimum area ranging from 0.3 to 5.8 

acres (1,210 to 23,500 m2). Land area below the Packer #5 

Breach (M13; ranked 2nd), the Packer #5 Borehole (M12; 

ranked 3rd), and the Centralia Tunnel (M19; ranked 6) may be 

sufficient for installation of passive treatment. However, 

because of the proximity of the Locust Gap Tunnel and many 

other discharges to streams, roads, or railroads, and the limited 

availability or access to land at the discharge location, passive 

treatment would not be suitable at many AMD sites. The reduction of infiltration and removal of culm waste and (or) the relocation of the discharge to nearby areas could decrease the AMD 

quantities and facilitate treatment at some of the priority AMD 

sites. 

Acknowledgments

Suzanne J. Ward, Jeffrey J. Chaplin, K. Samuel Fishel, and 

Mark A. Roland of the USGS, Martin A. Friday of PaDEP, 

Ryan J. Koch of Schuylkill Conservation District, and Stephen 

E. Ulceski of Ashland Borough assisted with data collection for 

the assessment. Robert Seal, Jane M. Hammarstrom, and 

Nadine Piatak provided chemical and mineralogical analyses of 

the water samples and streambed sediments. Michael D. Bilger 

and Robin A. Brightbill of the USGS and Martin A. Friday of 

PaDEP conducted the aquatic ecological surveys. Kevin J. 

Breen, Ralph J. Haefner, Jane M. Hammarstrom, Kim L. Otto, 

and J. Kent Crawford, of USGS provided helpful reviews of 

early drafts of this report.

References Cited

Barbour, M.T., Gerritsen, J., Snyder, B.D., and Stribling, J.B., 

1999, Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and 

wadeable rivers--periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and 

fish (2d ed.): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 

841-B-99-002, 11 chapters, 4 appendixes. 

Becher, A.E., 1991, Groundwater resources in and near the 

anthracite basins of Schuylkill and adjacent counties, 

Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th Series, 

Water Resources Report 64, 59 p., 1 plate.

Berg, T.M., Barnes, J.H., Seven, W.D., Skema, V.K., 

Wilshusen, J.P., and Yannicci, D.S., 1989, Physiographic 

provinces of Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 

4th Series, Map 13, scale 1:2,000,000. 

Berg, T.M., and others, 1980, Geologic map of Pennsylvania: 

Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th Series, Map 1, scale 

1:2,500,000, 3 sheets. 

Bilger, M.D., Brightbill, R.A., and Campbell, H.L., 1999, 

Occurrence of organochlorine compounds in whole fish 

tissue from streams of the Lower Susquehanna River Basin, 

Pennsylvania and Maryland, 1992: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4065, 17 p.

Blowes, D.W., and Ptacek, C.J., 1994, Acid-neutralization 

mechanisms in inactive mine tailings, in Jambor, J.L, and 

Blowes, D.W., eds., Environmental geochemistry of sulfide 

mine-wastes: Mineralogical Association of Canada, Short 

Course Handbook, v. 22, p. 271-292. 

Breen, K.J., and Gavin, A.J., 1995, Reconnaissance of tracemetal loadings in Mahanoy Creek - - a tributary to the Lower 

Susquehanna River, Pennsylvania, affected by acidic mine 

drainage (abs.): EOS, Transactions of the American 

Geophysical Union, v. 76, no. 17, p. S133 (http://

wwwpah2o.er.usgs.gov/projects/lsus/abs.mahanoy.html).

Burrows, W.D., 1977, Aquatic aluminum--chemistry, 

toxicology, and environmental prevalence: CRC Critical 

Reviews in Environmental Controls, v. 7, p. 167-216.

Burton, T.M., and Allan, J.W., 1986, Influence of pH, 

aluminum, and organic matter on stream invertebrates: 

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, v. 43, 

p. 1285-1289. 

Butler, R.L., Cooper, E.L., Crawford, J.K., Hales, D.C., 

Kimmel, W.G., and Wagner, C.C., 1973, Fish and food 

organisms in acid mine waters of Pennsylvania: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency EPA-R3-73-032, 158 p.

Campbell, P.G.C., Lewis, A.G., Chapman, P.M., Crowder, 

A.A., Fletcher, W.K., Imber, B., Luoma, S.N., Stokes, P.M., 

and Winfrey, M.,1988, Biologically available metals in 

sediments: National Research Council Canada Publication 

No. NRCC 27694, 298 p.

Cherry, D.S., Currie, R.J., Soucek, D.J., Latimer, H.A., and 

Trent, G.C., 2001, An integrative assessment of a watershed 

impacted by abandoned mined land discharges: 

Environmental Pollution, v. 111, p. 377-388.
References Cited 53

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1998a, Chapter 87. Surface 

mining of coal. Pennsylvania Code, Title 25. Environmental 

Protection: Harrisburg, Pa., Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania, p. 87.1-87.122. 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1998b, Chapter 89. 

Underground mining of coal and coal preparation facilities. 

Pennsylvania Code, Title 25. Environmental Protection: 

Harrisburg, Pa., Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, p. 89.1-

89.96. 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2001a, Chapter 96. Water 

quality standards implementation. Pennsylvania Code, Title 

25. Environmental Protection: Harrisburg, Pa., 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, p. 96.1-96.8. 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2001b, Chapter 16. Water 

Quality Toxics Management Strategy--Statement of policy. 

Pennsylvania Code, Title 25. Environmental Protection: 

Harrisburg, Pa., Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, p. 16.1-

16.46.

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2002, Chapter 93. Water 

Quality Standards. Pennsylvania Code, Title 25. 

Environmental Protection: Harrisburg, Pa., Commonwealth 

of Pennsylvania, p. 93.1-93.226. 

Coston, J.A., Fuller, C.C., and Davis, J.A., 1995, Pb2+ and Zn2+

adsorption by a natural aluminum- and iron-bearing surface 

coating on an aquifer sand: Geochimica et Cosmochimica 

Acta, v. 59, p. 3535-3547. 

Cravotta, C.A. III, 1991, Geochemical evolution of acidic 

ground water at a reclaimed surface coal mine in western 

Pennsylvania, in Proceedings of the 1991 National Meeting 

of the American Society of Surface Mining and Reclamation, 

May 14-17, 1991, Durango, Colorado: American Society of 

Mining and Reclamation, p. 43-68.

Cravotta, C.A. III, 2002, New method to estimate longevity of 

anoxic limestone drains (poster), in Proceedings of the 19th 

Annual Meeting of American Society of Mining and 

Reclamation, Lexington, Kentucky, June 9-13, 2002: 

American Society of Mining and Reclamation, p. 1062- 

1064.

Cravotta, C.A. III, 2003, Size and performance of anoxic 

limestone drains to neutralize acidic mine drainage: Journal 

of Environmental Quality, v. 32, p. 1277-1289. 

Cravotta, C.A. III, and Bilger, M.D., 2001, Water-quality trends 

for a stream draining the Southern Anthracite Field, 

Pennsylvania: Geochemistry-Exploration, Environment, 

Analysis, v. 1, p. 33-50.

Cravotta, C.A. III, Brady, K.B.C., Rose, A.W., and Douds, J.B., 

1999, Frequency distribution of the pH of coal-mine drainage 

in Pennsylvania, in Morganwalp, D.W., and Buxton, H., eds., 

U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology 

Program--Proceedings of the technical meeting: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

99-4018A, p. 313-324.

Cravotta, C.A. III, Breen, K.J., and Seal, R., 2001, Arsenic is 

ubiquitous but not elevated in abandoned coal-mine 

discharges in Pennsylvania (abs.), in U.S. Geological Survey 

Appalachian Region Integrated Science Workshop 

Proceedings, Gatlinburg, Tennessee, October 22-26, 2001: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-406, p. 105.

Cravotta, C.A. III, and Kirby, C.S., 2004a, Effects of abandoned 

coal-mine drainage on streamflow and water quality in the 

Schuylkill Creek Basin, Northumberland and Columbia 

Counties, Pennsylvania, 1999-2001: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4311, 53 p.

Cravotta, C.A. III, and Kirby, C.S., 2004b, Acidity and 

alkalinity in mine drainage--practical considerations, in 2004 

National Meeting of the American Society of Mining and 

Reclamation and the 25th West Virginia Surface Mine 

Drainage Task Force, April 18-24, 2004: American Society 

of Mining and Reclamation, p. 334-365.

Cravotta, C.A. III, and Trahan, M.K., 1999, Limestone drains to 

increase pH and remove dissolved metals from acidic mine 

drainage: Applied Geochemistry, v. 14, no. 5, p. 581-606.

Cravotta, C.A. III, Ward, S.J., Koury, D.J., and Koch, R.D., 

2004, Optimization of limestone drains for long-term 

treatment of acidic mine drainage, Swatara Creek Basin, 

Schuylkill County, PA in 2004 National Meeting of the 

American Society of Mining and Reclamation and the 25th 

West Virginia Surface Mine Drainage Task Force, April 18-

24, 2004: American Society of Mining and Reclamation, p. 

366-411.

Crock, J.G., Arbogast, B.F., and Lamothe, P.J., 1999, 

Laboratory methods for the analysis of environmental 

samples, in Plumlee G.S., and Logsdon, M.J., eds., The 

Environmental Geochemistry of Mineral Deposits--Part A. 

Processes, techniques, and health issues: Society of 

Economic Geologists, Reviews in Economic Geology, v. 6A, 

p. 265-287. 

Dempsey, B.A., Paksuchon, B., Suhataikul, R., and Dietz, J.M., 

2002, Sampling strategies for TMDL of AMD-affected 

streams, in Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of 

American Society of Mining & Reclamation, Lexington, 

Kentucky, June 9-13, 2002: American Society of Mining & 

Reclamation, p. 10-26. 

Dietz, J.M., and Dempsey, B.A., 2002, Innovative treatment of 

alkaline mine drainage using recirculated iron oxides in a 

complete mix reactor, in Proceedings of the 19th Annual 

Meeting of American Society of Mining & Reclamation, 

Lexington, Kentucky, June 9-13, 2002: American Society of 

Mining & Reclamation, p. 496-516. 

Durlin, R.R., and Schaffstall, W.P., 1994, Water resources data, 

Pennsylvania, water year 1993, volume 2. Susquehanna and 

Potomac River Basins: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data 

Report PA-93-2, p. 271-273. 
54 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

Earle, J., and Callaghan, T., 1998. Effects of mine drainage on 

aquatic life, water uses, and man- made structures, in Brady, 

K.B.C., Smith, M.W., and Schueck, J.H., eds., Coal Mine 

Drainage Prediction and Pollution Prevention in 

Pennsylvania: Harrisburg, Pa., Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, 5600-BK-DEP2256, p. 4.1-4.10. 

Eggleston, J.R., Kehn, T.M., and Wood, G.H., Jr., 1999, 

Anthracite, in Schultz, C.H., ed., The geology of 

Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th series, 

Special Publication 1, p. 458-469. 

Elder, J.F., 1988, Metal biogeochemistry in surface-water 

systems--a review of principles and concepts: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1013, 43 p.

Fishman, M.J., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory--

Determination of inorganic and organic constituents in water 

and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 93-125, 217 p.

Fishman, M.J., and Friedman, L.C., eds., 1989, Methods for 

determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial 

sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chap. A1, 545 p.

Hedin, R.S., Nairn, R.W., and Kleinmann, R.L.P., 1994, 

Passive treatment of coal mine drainage: U.S. Bureau of 

Mines Information Circular 9389, 35 p.

Herlihy, A.T., Kaufmann, P.R., Mitch, M.E., and Brown, D.D., 

1990, Regional estimates of acid mine drainage impact on 

streams in the mid-Atlantic and southeastern United States: 

Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, v. 50, p. 91-107.

Hilsenhoff, W.L., 1988, Rapid field assessment of organic 

pollution with family-level biotic index: Journal of North 

American Benthological Society, v. 7, p. 65-68. 

Hoffman, G.L., 1996, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory--

Preparation procedure for aquatic biological material 

determined for trace metals: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 96-362, 42 p.

Hyman, D.M., and Watzlaf, G.R., 1997, Metals and other 

components of coal mine drainage as related to aquatic life 

standards, in Proceedings of the 1997 National Meeting of 

the American Society for Surface Mining and Reclamation, 

May 10-15, 1997, Austin, Texas: Princeton, W.Va., 

American Society for Surface Mining and Reclamation, 

p. 531-545. 

Kirby, C.S., and Cravotta, C.A., III, 2004, Acidity and 

alkalinity in mine drainage--theoretical considerations, in

2004 National Meeting of the American Society of Mining 

and Reclamation and the 25th West Virginia Surface Mine 

Drainage Task Force, April 18-24, 2004: American Society 

of Mining and Reclamation, p. 1076-1093.

Kleinmann, R.L.P., and Watzlaf, G.R., 1986, Should the 

discharge standards for manganese be reexamined?, in

Proceedings 1986 Symposium on Mining, Hydrology, 

Sedimentology, and Reclamation: Lexington, Ky., 

University of Kentucky Office of Engineering Services, 

p. 173-179.

Langmuir, Donald, 1997, Aqueous environmental 

geochemistry: New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, 600 p. 

Lowe, T.P., May, T.W., Brumbaugh, W.G., and Kane, D.A., 

1985, National Contaminant Biomonitoring Program--

concentration of seven elements in freshwater fish, 1978-

1981: Archives of Environmental Contamination and 

Toxicology, v. 14, p. 363-388. 

MacDonald, D.D., Ingersoll, C.G., and Berger, T.A., 2000, 

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment 

quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems: Archives of 

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, v. 39, p. 20-

31. 

McKenzie, R.M. 1980, The adsorption of lead and other heavy 

metals on oxides of manganese and iron: Australian Journal 

of Soil Research, v. 18, p. 61-73. 

Meador, M.R., Hupp, C.R., Cuffney, T.F., and Gurtz, M.E., 

1993a, Methods for characterizing stream habitat as part of 

the National Water-Quality Assessment Program: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-408, 48 p.

Meador, M.R., Cuffney, T.F., and Gurtz, M.E., 1993b, Methods 

for sampling fish communities as part of the National WaterQuality Assessment Program: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 93-104, 40 p.

Nordstrom, D.K., and Alpers, C.N., 1999, Geochemistry of acid 

mine waters, in Plumlee, G. S., and Logsdon, M. J., eds., The 

Environmental Geochemistry of Mineral Deposits--Part A. 

Processes, methods, and health issues: Reviews in Economic 

Geology, v. 6A, p. 133-160. 

Pennsylvania Coal Association, 2001, Pennsylvania coal data 

2000: Harrisburg, Pa., Pennsylvania Coal Association, 36 p.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 1998, 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 1998 Water Quality 

Assessment: Division of Assessment and Standards: 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 

Bureau of Water Quality Management, April 1998, accessed 

December 15, 2002, on the World Wide Web at http://

www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/watermgt/WC/Subjects/

WQStandards/305_wq98_narr.htm#PART3.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 1999, 

Pennsylvania’s nonpoint source management program, 1999 

Update: Harrisburg, Pa., Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, 394-2000-002, p. 42-51. 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2001, 

Watershed Restoration Action Strategy (WRAS) Subbasin 

06B Mahanoy Creek and Shamokin Creek Watersheds 

(Susquehanna River) Northumberland and Schuylkill 

Counties, PA: Harrisburg, Pa., Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, 19 p.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2002, 

Mahanoy Creek Watershed TMDL Columbia, 

Northumberland and Schuylkill Counties: Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of 

Watershed Management, October 1, 2002, accessed May 25, 

2004, on the World Wide Web at http://www.dep.state.pa.us/

dep/deputate/watermgt/wqp/wqstandards/tmdl/

MahanoyCr_TMDL.pdf.
References Cited 55

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 2004, 

Proposed Section 303(d) list: Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, Bureau of Water Quality 

Management, accessed February 15, 2004, on the World 

Wide Web at http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/

watermgt/wqp/wqstandards/303d-Report.htm.

Persaud, D., Jaagumagi, R., and Hayton, A., 1993, Guidelines 

for the protection and management of aquatic sediment 

quality in Ontario: Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 

Water Resources Branch, 24 p.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982a, Measurement and computation 

of streamflow--1. Measurement of stage and discharge: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, 284 p.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982b, Measurement and computation 

of streamflow--2. Computation of discharge: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, 631 p.

Reed, L.A., Beard, M.M., Growitz, D.J., 1987, Quality of water 

in mines in the western middle coal field, anthracite region, 

east-central Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 85-4038, 51 p.

Rice, K.C., 1999, Trace-element concentrations in streambed 

sediment across the conterminous United States: 

Environmental Science & Technology, v. 33, p. 2499-2504.

Rose, A.W., and Cravotta, C.A., III, 1998, Geochemistry of 

coal-mine drainage, in Brady, K.B.C., Smith, M.W., and 

Schueck., J., eds., Coal Mine Drainage Prediction and 

Pollution Prevention in Pennsylvania: Harrisburg, Pa., 

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 

5600-BK-DEP2256, p. 1.1-1.22. 

Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975, Operation Scarlift project no. 

SL-197, Mahanoy Creek mine drainage pollution abatement 

project: Harrisburg, Pa., Sanders & Thomas, Inc. Engineers, 

125 p., 1 appendix, 2 plates. 

Schueck, J.H., Helfrich, D.R., and Fromell, D.J., 2004, 

Limestone upflow pond with siphon discharge design 

considerations--a simple solution to high volume, high 

metals AMD discharges, in Proceedings of the 6th Annual 

Statewide Conference on Abandoned Mine Reclamation, 

June 9-12, 2004, Indiana PA: Bedford, Pa., Western 

Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation, 

23 p.

Skousen, J.G., Rose, A.W., Geidel, G., Foreman, J., Evans, R., 

Hellier, W., and others, 1998, Handbook of technologies for 

avoidance and remediation of acid mine drainage: 

Morgantown, W.Va., National Mine Land Reclamation 

Center, 131 p.

Taggart, J.E., Jr., 2002, Analytical methos for chemical analysis 

of geologic and other materials, U.S. Geological Survey: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-0223 (http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/2002/ofr-02-0223/). 

Tonkin, J.W., Balistrieri, L.S., and Murray, J.W., 2004, 

Modeling sorption of divalent metal cations on hydrous 

manganese oxide using the diffuse double layer model: 

Applied Geochemistry, v. 19, p. 29-53. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993, Fish field and 

laboratory methods for evaluating the biological integrity of 

surface waters: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 

600/R-92/111, 348 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997, Guidance for 

assessing chemical contaminant data for use in fish 

advisories--Volume 2, Risk assessment and fish consumption 

limits (2d ed.): Philadelphia, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency EPA 823-B-97-009, accessed December 15, 2002, 

on the World Wide Web at http://www.epa.gov/OST/fish/

volume2.htm. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, National 

recommended water quality criteria--2002: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency EPA 822-R-02-047, 33 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002b, National 

primary drinking water standards: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency EPA 816-F-02-013, July 2002, 7 p., 

accessed December 15, 2002, on the World Wide Web at 

http://www.epa.gov/safewater. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1997 to present, National field manual 

for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 

9, chaps. A1-A9, 2 vols., variously paged, accessed 

December 15, 2002, on the World Wide Web at http://

pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2000, Land cover: U.S. Geological 

Survey Map 66, scale 1:500,000, accessed December 15, 

2002, on the World Wide Web at http://edcwww.cr.usgs.gov/

programs/lccp/nationallandcover.html. 

U.S. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 

2002, AMDTreat 3.1: Washington, D.C., U.S. Office of 

Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, accessed 

June 15, 2003, on the World Wide Web at http://

amd.osmre.gov. 

Vinci, B.J., and Schmidt, T.W., 2001, Passive, periodic flushing 

technology for mine drainage treatment systems, in

Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of American 

Society for Surface Mining and Reclamation, Albuquerque, 

New Mexico, June 3-7, 2001: American Society for Surface 

Mining and Reclamation, p. 611-625.

Watzlaf, G.R., Schroeder, K.T., and Kairies, C., 2000, Longterm performance of alkalinity- producing passive systems 

for the treatment of mine drainage, in Proceedings of the 

2000 National Meeting of the American Society for Surface 

Mining and Reclamation: Princeton, W.Va., American 

Society for Surface Mining and Reclamation, p. 262-274.

Way, J.H., 1999, Appalachian Mountain section of the Ridge 

and Valley province, in Schultz, C.H., ed., The geology of 

Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th series, 

Special Publication 1, p. 352-361.

Weaver, K.R., Lagnese, K.M., and Hedin, R.S., 2004, 

Technology and design advances in passive treatment system 

flushing, in 2004 National Meeting of the American Society 

of Mining and Reclamation and the 25th West Virginia 

Surface Mine Drainage Task Force, April 18-24, 2004: 

American Society of Mining and Reclamation, p. 1974-1989. 
56 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

Webster, J.G., Swedlund, P.J., and Webster, K.S., 1998, Trace 

metal adsorption onto an acid mine drainage iron(III) oxy 

hydroxy sulfate: Environmental Science & Technology, v. 

32, no. 10, p. 1361-1368.

Williams, D.R., Sams, J.I., III, and Mulkerrin, M.E., 1996, 

Effects of coal-mine discharges on the quality of Stonycreek 

River and its tributaries, Somerset and Cambria Counties, 

Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 96-4133, 95 p.

Williams, D.R., Clark, M.E., and Brown, J.B., 1999, stream 

water quality in coal-mined areas of the Lower Cheat River 

Basin, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, during low-flow 

conditions, July 1997: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 98-4258, 8 p.

Winland, R.L., Traina, S.J., and Bigham, J.M., 1991, Chemical 

composition of ochreous precipitates from Ohio coal mine 

drainage: Journal of Environmental Quality, v. 20, p. 452-

460. 

Winterbourn, J.J., McDiffett, W.R., and Eppley, S.J., 2000, 

Aluminium and iron burdens of aquatic biota in New Zealand 

streams contaminated by acid mine drainage--effects of 

trophic level: The Science of the Total Environment, v. 254, 

p. 45-54. 

Wood, C.R., 1996, Water quality of large discharges in the 

anthracite region of eastern Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4243, 

68 p.

Wood, G.H., Jr., Kehn, T.M., and Eggleston, J.R., 1986, 

Deposition and structural history of the Pennsylvania 

Anthracite region, in Lyons P.C. and Rice C.L., eds., 

Paleoenvironmental and tectonic controls in coal-forming 

basins of the United States: Geological Society of America 

Special Paper 210, p. 31-47. 

Wood, W.W., 1976, Guidelines for the collection and field 

analysis of ground-water samples for selected unstable 

constituents: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 1, chap. D2, 24 p.
Appendixes 57

Appendixes 

Appendix A.

Hydrological data for abandoned mine drainage and associated stream monitoring sites in 

the Mahanoy Creek Basin, March, August, and October 2001 (CD-ROM, only)
58 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

Appendix B.

Geographic Information System (GIS) project with linked water-quality data base, 

Mahanoy Creek Basin, March, August, and October 2001 (CD-ROM, only)
Appendixes 59

Appendix C.

Digital reproductions of out-of-print reports (CD-ROM, only)

Sanders & Thomas, Inc., 1975, Operation Scarlift project no. SL-197, Mahanoy Creek mine drainage pollution abatement project: 

Harrisburg, Pa., Sanders & Thomas, Inc. Engineers, 125 p., 1 appendix, 2 plates (compiled from digital documents available at 

http://www/amrclearinghouse.org/Sub/SCARLIFTReports/Mahanoy). 

Growitz, D.J., Reed, L.A., and Beard, M.M., 1985, Reconnaissance of mine drainage in the coal fields of eastern Pennsylvania: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resource Investigations Report 83-4274, 54 p.

Reed, L.A., Beard, M.M., Growitz, D.J., 1987, Quality of water in mines in the western middle coal field, anthracite region, eastcentral Pennsylvania: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 85-4038, 51 p.

Wood, C.R., 1996, Water quality of large discharges in the anthracite region of eastern Pennsylvania, U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4243, 68 p.
60 Effects of Abandoned Coal-Mine Drainage on Streamflow and Water Quality in the Mahanoy Creek Basin

Appendix D.

“AMD Treat” computation worksheets for Centralia Mine Tunnel Discharge (M19), 

Mahanoy Creek Basin, March and August 2001 (CD-ROM, only)