## Coal Availability Study—Standing Rock Area, San Juan Basin Northwest New Mexico BY
Gretchen K. Hoffman and Glen E. Jones
Study funded through US Geological Survey Cooperative Agreement No. 98HQAG2017 - Availability of Coal Resour ces Menefee Formation, San

Juan Basin, northwest New Mexico April 1, 1998-September 30, 1999 New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources Division of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology Socorro, NM 87801 

# Open-file Report 5 4 0 July, 2011Introduction
Coal is an important part of New Mexico’s economy and contribute s substantially to the state’s educational funds through royalties and taxes. New Mexico produced 28.24 million st of coal in 1998, ranking 13 th in the nation. Of this total, 11.71 million st (> 41%) is produced from the Lee Ranch and McKinley mines, both extr acting coal from the Menefee Formation. Twothirds of the state’s t onnage is delivered to three electrica l generating stations in New Mexico. All but a small portion of the remaining production is shipped by rail to generating stations in Arizona. The Lee Ranch and McKinley mines are the only mines in New Mexico with the rail spurs to the main Burlington Northern-Santa Fe lin e, allowing them to ship coal to Arizona. Lee Ranch delivers coal to nearby Escalante Generati ng Station at Prewitt, NM. McKinley sends coal to Salt River Project’s Coronado generating stat ion and Tucson Electric’s Springerville power plant near Springerville, AZ, and to Arizona Pub lic Service Cholla plan t, near St. Johns, AZ.* With the above economic and geologic factors considered, four quadrangles on the southeast edge of the Standing Rock field were chosen for this study (Fig. 1). The four 7.5 minute quadrangles chosen for this study are the Seven Lakes, Kin Nahzin Ruins, Laguna Castillo, and Orphan Annie Rock. This 350-sq mi area along the Menefee outcrop has economic potential because of it proximity to the existing rail road spur and for the quality of the coals. The northern extent of the Lee Ranch coal mine is approximately 10 miles southeast of the study area and the South Hospah lease area (Texas Utilities-Chaco Energy) is within the study area. There is no previous coal prod uction from this area.

*Update 2011: This study was completed in 1999 before McKinley mine closed and Ed Segundo mine, northwest of Lee Ranch opened. El Segundo lease was previously South Hospah mentioned in text and shown on Fig. 1Geologic Setting Menefee exposures within the St anding Rock field trend, more or less parallel to the Late Cretaceous shoreline (N55oW). The Standing Rock fi eld is within the Chaco slope and therefore the units dip gently N–NW into the San Juan Basin (S JB). This area is dominated by gently northdipping beds. Some high-angle faulting was delinea ted in the southernmost part of the study area during exploration drilling in the South Hospah mine lease as sh own on Figure 1. The southern edge of the Sta nding Rock field is the contact of the Point Lookout Sandstone and the Cleary Coal Member of th e Menefee Formation. This field extends along this contact over portions of T.'s 16-19 N., and R. 's 9-17 W for a distance of approximately 70 miles (Fig. 1). Standing Rock’s eastern boundary with the San Mateo fi eld is arbitrarily se t at the north-south boundary between R8W and R9W. The northern boun dary is the northern most outcrop of the Cleary Coal Member of the Mene fee Formation. The Cleary Coal Member is defined as a coalbearing sequence and the overlying Allison Member is barren of coal. The western boundary of the Standing Rock field is defined by the pinchout of the Point Lookout Sandstone. This is the southwestern extent of the Point Lookout Sandsto ne and beyond this northwest-southeast trending line, the Menefee Cleary Coal Member and the Crevasse Cany on Gibson Coal Member are undivided. Coal Geology The coals in the Standing Ro ck field are typically within a shale-dominated sequence, but several are overlain or underlain by siltstone or sandstone. These coals are within the Cleary Member of the Menefee Formation, near the base of this unit. One coal zone, the Green, is directly above or within a few feet of th e Point Lookout Sandstone contact. Most of the coals are within 200 ft of the Point Lookout Sandstone (Fig. 2). Six coal zones are recogn ized in the Cleary coal-bearingsequence i n the South Hospah mine area (Chaco Energy, 1981). The zone s from the base of the Cleary Coal Member upward are the Green, Blue, Red, Tan, Bronz e, and Creme zone s. The author added a seventh zone, Gold, reco gnized in this study area. Many of these coal beds an d zones are thin and only the three lowermost zones have any continuity throughout the area. Only these three coal zones are used fo r resource calculations in this study. The three coal zones are very similar in average coal seam thickness, total coal within a zone, and zone thickne ss (Fig. 3). There is great variability of seam thickness within a zone over the entire study area. . Total coal isopachs for the Green, Blue and Red zones (Figs. 4, 5, 6) illustrate the variability of thickness in the two most cons istent coal zones within the study area. Average zone thickness varies from over 5 ft to 9 ft thick, including interburden. Each zone averages one seam, but the Green zone can have a maximum of five seams, the Blue three seams, and the Red zone a maximum of four seams. Average total th ickness of the Cleary Coal Member is 125 ft. There is great variability in this thickness because of the lenticul arity of the coals an d the coal zones. This lenticularity is illustrated in the cross sec tions located on Figure 7 along strike (Figs. 8, C-C’; 9, D-D’) and downdip (Figs. 10, A-A’ ; 11, F-F’). Correlation of seams on these cross sections and for resource calculation is by zone ra ther than by coal bed. Any co al on the cross section does not necessarily represent the same bed on an adjacent section; rath er the coals are correlated as being within the same zone.0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00

Zones (number of point)Thickness in Feet

Seam avg 3.33 4.58 3.27 Seam max 14.00 17.00 18.10 Total coal avg 4.38 5.87 3.91 Total coal max 17.50 17.00 18.10 Interburden avg 4.16 5.95 7.33 Zone Average 6.28 9.02 5.43 Zone Max 26.5 34.5 31.6 Red (176) Blue (191) Green (197)

Figure 3. Coal zone thickness and interburden characteristics by zone. Numbers in p arenthesis are number of data p oints. Coal quality The apparent rank of Cl eary Coal Member coals in the Standing Rock field is subbituminous A (Hoffman, 1996a). Weighted–avera ge analyses on an as –received basis follows: Standing Rock Average Std Dev. No. of Sa mples Average for Zones (Hoffman, 1996a) (This study) Red (13) Blue (37) Green (14) Moisture (%) 17.03 1. 42 27 16.06 16.44 16.74 Ash (%) 13.32 3.35 27 11.37 13.30 13.09 Volatile matter (%) 33.83 1.41 27 34.86 34.55 34.69 Fixed carbon (%) 35.81 2. 79 27 37.60 35.74 35.40 Sulfur (%) 1.06 0.38 27 0.79 1.23 1.27 Calorific value (Btu/lb) 9429 552 27 9822 9612 9755 Lbs. of Sulfur/MMBtu 1.09 0.41 30 1.09 1.57 1.31Weighted averages by zone are shown a bove and on Figure 12. The sulfur values of the Blue and Green zones are high fo r the SJB and greater than the weighted average for the entire Standing Rock field. These Menefee coals would not meet the New Source Performance Standards of the Clean Air Act of 1.2 lbs of SO 2 per million Btu (Energy Information Administration, 1993). Both the Green and Blue zones pyritic sulfur content is high, 0.38% of total sulfur for the Green and 0.61% of total sulfur for the Blue zone. Blending is necessary to lower the sulfur content and perhaps washing would help to remove some of the pyritic sulfur, lowering the total sulfur content. Lee Ranch mine blends their product in part because of the variability of the sulfur content. The Standing Rock st udy area coals are medium-ash, no nagglomerating, subbituminous coals with weighted zo ne averages from 11,218 to 11,403 moist, mineral matter-free Btu/lb (MMFBtu/lb). These rank values ar e higher than Fruitland coals th at are mined el sewhere in the SJB and the ash content of these co als is lower than the Fruitland Formation coals. An average of the few oxide analyses available reveal the major constituent of the ash is SiO 2 (52%), followed by AlO 2 (21%), Fe 2 O 3 (9%), CaO (5%), and MgO (1.3%). Th e remaining oxides are individually less than 1%.0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18Percent

Ash 11.37 13.30 13.09 13.32 Moisture 16.06 16.44 16.74 17.03 Sulfur 0.79 1.23 1.27 1.06

Zones Lbs sulfur/MMBtu 1.09 1.57 1.31 1.09 Red (13) Blue (37) Green (14) Standing Rock field (27)

um bers Figure 12. Weighted averages of quality analyses by zone. N in parenthesis are number of data points.

Available data The database for the Standing Rock study is a subset of the data co llected and entered by the New Mexico Bureau of Mines (NMBMMR) in to the National Coal R esource Data System (NCRDS). The NMBMMR has had cooperative grants with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to enter data into NCRDS for the past 20 year s. Exploration projects in the study area have resulted in a clustered data set (Fig. 7). Drill holes are concentrated in the surface-minable area and less data is available for the deep coal area except where oil and gas logs are available. Other sources of drill hole data are the South Hosp ah and Lee Ranch mine plans, Coal Resource Occurrence and Coal Development Potential maps (CROCDP), and NMBMMR drilling. After the project began, additional data were entered into the database, in partic ular oil and gas logs from NMBMMR subsurface library, to help fill in gaps.A total of 140 data points were evaluated for the f our-quadrangle study area (Seven Lakes, Kin Nahzin Ruins, Orphan Annie Roc k, and Laguna Castillo). Additionally, 142 data points from the quadrangles surrounding this area were used to calculate resources.

Coal availability studies in New Mexico Detailed methodology Cleary Coal Member Menefee coals in th e Standing Rock area are subbituminous; therefore, resource calculations are based on a minimum thickness of 2.5 ft and 1770 tons/acre ft. The following parameters, which conform to USGS Circular 891 (Wood et al., 1983), were used to calculate resources for each zone. Total coal (  2.5 ft) within a zone instead of individual
seams is the basis of resource calc ulations because of the lenticular ity of the coals. Coals thinner than 2.5 ft and above or below coals meeting the thickness criteria and separated by a parting less than the thickness of the thinne r coal are included in the ca lculation. The following are the resource criteria used in this study: Thickness (ft): Depth (ft): Reliability 2.5–5 10:1 stripping ratio Measured (1/4 mi) 5–10 0–250 Indicated (1/4–3/4 mi) 10–20 250–500 Inferred (3/4–3 mi) >20 500–1000 >1000 Reliability categories are limited to measured, i ndicated and inferred. No hypothetical reliability category was used in this study because of the lenticularity of these coal beds. Line data for the Point Lookout-Menefee c ontact was digitized fr om Beaumont (1998). These line data form a boundary mask between areas of coal and no coal. Data files with elevations for tops of coal zones were gridded in Arc Info® and overlain with a grid from the 1:100,000 Chaco Mesa Digital Elevation Model (D EM). From this combined layer, theoverburden maps for each zone were generated. This overburden layer supplied the zero depth line, or crop line, for each zone. The resulti ng overburden maps for the Green, Blue, and Red zones are illustrated in Figures 13-15. The upper depth limits for the categories are highlighted on these maps. From the original database created for the study, subset files were produced for each zone with latitude, longitude, total thickness, and point identification. These files included data from quadrangles surrounding the fou r-quadrangle study area. By using data from surrounding quadrangles, reliability categories that overlap in to the study area were in cluded in the resource calculations. The data files were used to pr oduce coal thickness grids and polygon files for the reliability categories. The reliability polygons were gridded and each cell assigned a thickness from the thickness grid. By overlaying the overbur den layer onto the reliability layers, the total area (calculated in m 2 and converted to acres) for each thickness, depth, and reliability category were determined for the four- quadrangle area. Volumes (acre-ft ) were calculated using the thickness attribute of the cells, and finally multip lied by 1770 tons/acre-ft to result in original resource tonnage for each zone. Land-use restrictions were digitized from the 1:100,000 Chaco Mesa topographic quadrangle. No mining has taken place in this ar ea therefore; there was no mined out layer to subtract from the original resource. Technical re striction filters were ap plied to the remaining resource layers for each zone. Appropriate buffe rs, as discussed in the following section, were assigned to the digitized land-us e restrictions. These restrictio n layers were consecutively overlain on the combined overburden, reliability, and thickness layers with the mined-out areas and technical restrictions to calculate the resource tonnage removed by each restriction.Overview of restrictions The following is a list of restrictions that were considered for this area. The buffers applied to these restrictions adhere to th e New Mexico Coal Surface Mining Regulations 19 NMAC 8.2, which follow the Federal regulations: Restrictions Buffer County roads 100 ft on either side NM State Highway 57 and Tribal Hi ghway 9 100 ft on either side Pipelines, powerlines 50 ft on either side Buildings, public or private 300 ft Chaco National Monument outlier (1 /4 section) (entire area) Ponds 100 ft Railroad spur 100 ft on either side Figure 16 illustrates these restric tions along with the Menefee outcrop.

Technological restrictions Technical parameters that influenc e the resources of this study are: Coal too close to the surface . Coal with less than 20 ft of ove rburden is subtracted from the remaining resource estimate. Coal with less than 20 ft of overburden is removed because SJB coal within this interval is generally weathe red or sometimes burned and can not be used for energy production. Most operating mines in the SJ B use the greater-than- 20-ft depth guideline for calculating mine reserves Coal too thin at depth . Coal beds 2.5 ft to 5 ft thick are not considered minable at depths greater than 250 ft. The original resour ces are calculated for this dept h category but these results are removed under the tech nical restrictions.Land-use restrictions Restrictions to m ining in the project area are few, but some are significant. A secondary state road (NM State Highway 57, Tribal Highway 9) , pipelines, and powerlin es transect the area (Figs. 1, 16). These restrictions were digi tized from the 1:100,000 Chaco Mesa topographic quadrangle. The buildings were digitized from th e 7.5-min quadrangles and the oil and gas fields were drawn on the Chaco Mesa 1:100,000 quadrangle from oil and gas pool maps available at the NMBM&MR. A railroad spur, built to connect the South Hospah mine to the main line, was plotted on the 1:100,000 Chaco Mesa quadrangle and digitized. The Chaco National Monument outlier was digitized from the 1: 100,000 quadrangle. Although ar cheological sites are in the study area, they would likely be m itigated, and were not considered.

Standing Rock study area resources The original resources for the Standing Rock study area are 3.82 billion st (Table 1, 2). There is no m ining production in this area to remove from the original resource. The technological restrictions, removing near surface coal (0–20 ft) and thin coal (  2.5–5 ft) at depths greater than 250 ft removed 1.24 billion st fr om the total resource, th e largest depletion of remaining resources. This restri ction withdraws 32.6 % from the remaining available resource, only a minor amount, 8 million st, is from th e 10:1 stripping ratio category. Most of the technological restriction a pplies to thin coals at depths greater than 250 ft. Restrictions related to pipelines, powerlines, and major roads in the study area remove 21 million st from the remaining available resource. It is unlikely that NM State Highway 57 or Navajo Tribal Highway 9 would be mitigated although some of the county roads might be considered. Figure17a-c illustrates the proportion of coal removed by these restrictions and therem aining available resource for each of the zone s. Figure 18, Tables 1 and 2 demonstrate how the restrictions influence the available coal re sources in each zone. Overall, the original resources in the Green zone are depleted the most by these restrictions. The Seven Lakes and Hospah oil and gas pools have little effect on surface minable coal, but would impact underground mining, removing 56 millio n st from the resource. The railroad spur removes 2 million st from the original resource and none of this restricted resource is within the 10:1 stripping ratio category.

Restrictions with potential for mitigation The restrictions applied to the remaining resource with potential for mitigation are buildings, and ponds. Buildings remove 5 million st from the remaining resource. If mining were to take place these buildings, which are mos tly Native American hogans, would be moved and the owners compensated. The small ponds cal led Laguna Castillo and Orphan Annie Tank remove 6 million st of coal resource. There are minor washes in the study that are not Alluvial Valley Floors and lack flow except during rai ny seasons, consequently mining would not be restricted in the wash areas.Red Zone (milions of st)

Available 63.9% (702) Ponds 0.2% (2) Buildings 0.1% (1)

Land-use: Chaco National Monument 0.4% (3) Land-use: pipelines, powerlines, roads 0.5% (5) Technological Restrictions 34.7% (392)

Oil And Gas: Seven Lakes and Hospah pools 0.2% (3) Railroad: South Hospah and Lee

Ranch spurs

0.1% (1)

Blue Zone (millions of st)

Railroad: South Hospah and Lee

Ranch spurs

0.1% (2) Oil And Gas: Seven Lakes and Hospah pools 2.2% (37) Technological Restrictions 22.9% (380)
Land-use: pipelines, powerlines, roads 0.7% (11) Land-use: Chaco National Monument 0.1% (1) Ponds 0.3% (3) Buildings 0.1% (2)

Available 73.5% (1,119)

Green Zone (millions of st)

Available 57.8% (667) Ponds 0.2% (2) Buildings 0.2% (2)

Land-use: Chaco National Monument 0.0% (0) Land-use: pipelines, powerlines, roads 0.4% (5) Oil And Gas: Seven Lakes and Hospah pools 1.4% (17) Railroad: South Hospah and Lee

Ranch spurs

0.0% (1) Technological Restrictions 40% (469)

Figure 17a-c. Original zone res ources removed by land-use and technical restrictions and remaining available resources.0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000Millions of st Original resource
Original minus T

echnical
Remaining-landuse restrictions =Available

Red Blue Green Overall Coal Zones
Figure 18. Standing Rock area coal resources by zone. Comparison with ot her resource st udies The DOE Demonstrated Reserve Base study (Hoffman, 1996b) estimate of 0.84 billion st for the entire Standing Rock fiel d is difficult to compare to the 2.5 billion st available resource for the four-quadrangle study area. The DRB did not include calculations for inferred reliability and for depths greater than 1000 ft. The inferre d category increases the available resource by 1.70 billion st and 0.31 billion st of coal are added for depths greater than 1000 ft for the study area. Removing these two categorie s leaves 0.49 billion st of av ailable resources, about 58% of the DRB estimate for the entire Standing Rock fi eld, although the study area is about 1⁄4 the total area of this field. New point source data wa s added during this study, which increased the accuracy of the resource estimate and filled in areas of no data The DOE Demonstrated Reserve Base study (Hoffman, 1996b) estimate of 0.84 billion st for the entire Standing Rock fiel d is difficult to compare to the 2.5 billion st available resource for the four-quadrangle study area. The DRB did not include calculations for inferred reliability and for depths greater than 1000 ft. The inferre d category increases the available resource by 1.70 billion st and 0.31 billion st of coal are added for depths greater than 1000 ft for the study area. Removing these two categorie s leaves 0.49 billion st of av ailable resources, about 58% of the DRB estimate for the entire Standing Rock fi eld, although the study area is about 1⁄4 the total area of this field. New point source data wa s added during this study, which increased the accuracy of the resource estimate and filled in areas of no dataSummary The Cleary Coal Mem ber of the Menefee Formation in the Standing Rock study area contains moderate-ash, moderate-sulfur, Subbitu minous A-rank coals. This resource does not meet compliance coal standards of less than 0.6 lbs sulfur/MMBtu, but with blending or washing these coals potentially could meet this guideline . Within the Cleary Coal Member, three of the seven coal zones recognized were evaluated fo r original and available resources in the study area. These zones, Green, Red, and Blue contain relatively thin, vari able coal seams with average seam thickness of 3-4 ft. Using Arc Info® facilitates calculating resources for areas with many restrictions and allows for faster recalculation of resources with new data. Origin al resources for this study area are 3.8 billion st and are greater than previous studies becaus e the inferred category and depths greater than 1000 ft are included. Another factor influencing the resource total is the acquisition of data during the study. Technica l restrictions removed about 1.2 billion st from the original resource, which is the largest restriction on the re source. The available resource is 2.5 billion st for the Standing Rock study area. A percentage br eakdown by zone of this total is 27% in the Green, 45% in the Blue, and 28% in the Red. Of this available res ource, 0.15 billion st is within the 10:1 stripping ratio category (Table 1). The Blue zone contai ns 75% (0.11 billion st) of the strippable (10:1) resource.References Anderson, O. J., Jones, G. E., Green, G. N., 1997, Geologic Map of New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-file report 97-052, scale 1:50,000. Beaumont, E. C., 1998, Distribution of near-surface coal deposits in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Resource Map 19, scale 1:250,000. Chaco Energy Company, 1981, South Hospah mini ng plan: Geology: Perm it Application filed with the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, vol. 2, 16 p., 9 plates. Energy Information Administration, 1993, U.S. Co al reserves: An update by heat and sulfur content: Energy Information Admi nistration DOE/EIA–0529(92), p. viii. Hoffman, G. K., 1996a, Coal resources of New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Resource Map 20 , 22 p. text, 1 sheet, scale 1:1,000,000. Hoffman, G. K. 1996a, Demonstrated reserve base for coal in New Mexic o, modified from final report for cooperative agreement DE-FC0193EI23974: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Open-file report 428, 89 p. Wood, G. H., Kehn, T. M., Carter, M. D., a nd Culbertson, W. C., 1983, Coal resource classification system of the U.S. Geologica l Survey: U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 891, 65 p.