U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 1055 

Coal Resources Available for 

Development-A Methodology 

and Pi lot Study 
AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAPS OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the 

current-year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological 

Survey publications released prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List." Publications 

that are listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price 

and Availability List" are no longer available. 

Prices of reports released to the open files are given in the listing "U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports," updated 

monthly, which is for sale in microfiche from the U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports Section, Federal Center, 

Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225. Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical 

Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. 

Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below. 

BY MAIL 

Books 

Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications of 

general interest (such as leaflets, pamphlets, booklets), single copies of 

Earthquakes & Volcanoes, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters, 

and some miscellaneous reports, including some of the foregoing series 

that have gone out of print at the Superintendent of Documents, are 

obtainable by mail from 

U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports 

Federal Center, Box 25425 

Denver, CO 80225 

Subscriptions to periodicals (Earthquakes & Volcanoes and 

Preliminary Determination of Epicenters) can be obtained ONLY from 

the 

Superintendent of Documents 

Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 

(Check or money order must be payable to Superintendent of 

Documents.) 

Maps 

For maps, address mail orders to 

U.S. Geological Survey, Map Distribution 

Federal Center, Box 25286 

Denver, CO 80225 

Residents of Alaska may order maps from 

Alaska Distribution Section, U.S. Geological Survey 

New Federal Building - Box 12 

101 Twelfth Ave., Fairbanks, AK 99701 

OVER THE COUNTER 

Books 

Books of the U.S. Geological Survey are available over the 

counter at the following U.S. Geological Survey Public Inquiries 

Offices, all of which are authorized agents of the Superintendent of 

Documents: 

• WASHINGTON, D.C.-Main Interior Bldg., 2600 corridor, 

18th and C Sts., NW. 

• DENVER, Colorado-Federal Bldg., Rm. 169, 1961 Stout St. 

• LOS ANGELES, California-Federal Bldg., Rm. 7638,300 N. 

Los Angeles St. 

• MENLO PARK, California-Bldg. 3 (Stop 533), Rm. 3128,345 

Middlefield Rd. 

• RESTON, Virginia-503 National Center, Rm. 1C402, 12201 

Sunrise Valley Dr. 

• SALT LAKE CITY, Utah-Federal Bldg., Rm. 8105, 125 South 

State St. 

• SAN FRANCISCO, California-Customhouse, Rm. 504, 555 

Battery St. 

• SPOKANE, Washington-U.S. Courthouse, Rm. 678, West 920 

Riverside Ave. 

• ANCHORAGE, Alaska-Rm. 101, 4230 UniversityDr. 

• ANCHORAGE, Alaska-Federal Bldg, Rm. E-146, 701 C St. 

Maps 

f 

Maps may be purchased over the counter at the U.S. Geological 

Survey offices where books are sold (all addresses in above list) and at 

the following U.S. Geological Survey offices: 

• ROLLA, Missouri-1400 Independence Rd. 

• DENVER, Colorado-Map Distribution, Bldg. 810, Federal 

Center 

• FAIRBANKS, Alaska-New Federal Bldg., 101 Twelfth Ave. 
Coal Resources Available for 

Development-A Methodology 

and Pilot Study 

By JANE R. EGGLESTON, M. DEVEREUX CARTER, and 

JAMES C. COBB 

A methodology for assessing available coal resources was 

developed and tested in a pilot study conducted on the 

Matewan 7.5-minute quadrangle, Kentucky 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 1055 
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Dallas L. Peck, Director 

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 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1990 

Free on application to the 

Books and Open-File Reports Section 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Federal Center 1 Box 25425 

Denver 1 CO 80225 

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data 

Eggleston, Jane R. 

Coal resources available for development: A methodology and pilot study I by 

Jane R. Eggleston, M. Devereux Carter, and james C. Cobb. p. cm.-(U.S. 

Geological Survey circular ; 1055) 

Includes bibliographical references. 

Supt. of Docs. no. : I 19.4/2 : 1055 

1. Prospecting. 2. Coal. I. Carter, M. Devereux. II. Cobb, James C. Ill. 

Title. IV. Series. 

TN271.C58E34 1990 553.2'4'0973-dc20 8~00390 
CONTENTS 

Abstract 1 

Introduction 1 

Acknowledgments 3 

General Approach 3 

Area Selection 3 

Data Collection and Assimilation 4 

Resource Estimation 6 

Introduction 6 

Computer Resource Calculations 7 

Matewan Quadrangle Pilot Study 8 

Data Sources 8 

Methodology 10 

Results 11 

Other Limiting Factors 14 

Summary 15 

References Cited 15 

FIGURES 

1. Graph showing the U.S. energy supply forecast to the year 2000 2 

2. Chart showing domestic energy supply in the year 2000 2 

3. Chart showing the resource classification system 3 

4. Location map showing the pilot study area, Matewan quadrangle, central 

Appalachian region 8 

5. Stratigraphic column for the Matewan quadrangle pilot study 9 

6-10. Map overlays depicting areas of restrictions for the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal 

bed, Matewan quadrangle study area: 

6. Original coal 12 

7. Mined areas 12 

8. Land-use restrictions 12 

9. Technological restrictions 12 

10. A, Available surface-minable resources; B, Available undergroundminable resources 13 

11. Chart showing the resource summary of the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal bed, 

Matewan quadrangle study area 13 

12. Pie diagram showing the results of the pilot study of the coal resources in the 

Matewan quadrangle 14 

TABLES 

1. Sources of data for assessing coal availability 5 

2. Coal resource study summary, Matewan quadrangle 14 

3. Land-use restrictions to surface mining, Matewan quadrangle 14 

4. Technological restrictions to underground mining, Matewan quadrangle 14 

Contents Ill 

Coal Resources Available for DevelopmentA Methodology and Pilot Study 

By Jane R. Eggleston,1 M. Devereux Carter,1 and James C. Cobb2 

Abstract 

Coal accounts for a major portion of our Nation's 

energy supply in projections for the future. A demonstrated reserve base of more than 475 billion short tons, as 

the Department of Energy currently estimates, indicates 

that, on the basis of today's rate of consumption, the 

United States has enough coal to meet projected energy 

needs for almost 200 years. However, the traditional 

procedures used for estimating the demonstrated reserve 

base do not account for many environmental and technological restrictions placed on coal mining. A new methodology has been developed to determine the quantity of 

coal that might actually be available for mining under 

current and foreseeable conditions. This methodology is 

unique in its approach, because it applies restrictions to 

the coal resource before it is mined. Previous methodologies incorporated restrictions into the recovery factor (a 

percentage), which was then globally applied to the 

reserve (minable coal) tonnage to derive a recoverable 

coal tonnage. None of the previous methodologies define 

the restrictions and their area and amount of impact 

specifically. Because these restrictions and their impacts 

are defined in this new methodology, it is possible to 

achieve more accurate and specific assessments of available resources. 

This methodology has been tested in a cooperative 

project between the U.S. Geological Survey and the 

Kentucky Geological Survey on the Matewan 7.5-minute 

quadrangle in eastern Kentucky. Pertinent geologic, mining, land-use, and technological data were collected, 

assimilated, and plotted. The National Coal Resources 

Data System was used as the repository for data, and its 

geographic information system software was applied to 

these data to eliminate restricted coal and quantify that 

which is available for mining. This methodology does not 

consider recovery factors or the economic factors that 

would be considered by a company before mining. 

Results of the pilot study indicate that, of the estimated original986.5 million short tons of coal resources in 

Kentucky's Matewan quadrangle, 13 percent has been 

Manuscript approved for publication November 2, 1989. 1

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA 22092. 2

Kentucky Geological Survey, Lexington, Ky. 

mined, 2 percent is restricted by land-use considerations, 

and 23 percent is restricted by technological considerations. This leaves an estimated 62 percent of the original 

resource, or approximately 612 million short tons available 

for mining. However, only 44 percent of this available coal 

(266 million short tons) will meet current Environmental 

Protection Agency new-source performance standards for 

sulfur emissions from electric generating plants in the 

United States. In addition, coal tonnage lost during mining and cleaning would further reduce the amount of coal 

actually arriving at the market. 

INTRODUCTION 

In the spring of 1986, a research project (pilot study) 

was undertaken by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in 

cooperation with the Kentucky Geological Survey (KGS), 

to develop and test a methodology for determining the 

quantity of coal resources actually available for mining 

under current conditions. Impetus for the study came from 

the numerous energy forecasts projecting an increasing 

domestic dependency on coal in future years and from the 

lack of specificity in the current literature regarding the 

availability of coal for development. Conoco, in its 1986 

"World Energy Outlook," predicted that about 25 percent of 

the U.S. energy supply will come from coal by the year 

2000 (fig. 1). The Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration (EIA, 1988a) forecast that coal 

consumption would increase from 26.9 percent today to 37 

percent of our domestic energy supply by the year 2000 

(fig. 2). Without an adequate reserve base, these forecasts 

for coal consumption cannot be substantiated (fig. 3). 

The reserve base, indicated by the shaded area on 

figure 3, is defined as that portion of demonstrated coal 

resources that can be mined economically at the time of 

determination. Assessing the reserve base is currently an 

activity of the EIA. Using coal resource data from the State 

geological surveys and the USGS, the EIA applies minable 

depth and thickness limits to determine the demonstrated 

Introduction 
f-Z50r-------------------------------------, llJ 

--' 

;; 

5 40 0 

llJ 

--' 

0 

~ 30 t----------- 0 

cr: 

llJ 

CL 

(/) 20 

llJ --' L------ cr: 

cr: 

;;3 10 

z 

0 

::::; 

COAL 

NATURAL GAS 

OIL 

--' 0 ~ 19=73::-------:-19::':7-:-9---------,-1-='" 98:-::5-----,-9L90 ____________ _j20Q0 

YEAR 

Figure 1. U.S. energy supply forecast to the year 2000 

(Conoco, Inc., 1986). 

Natural gas 

30% 

Figure 2. Domestic energy supply in the year 2000 (modified from EIA, 1988a). 

reserve base (ORB), which is currently estimated to be 

about 475 billion short tons (EIA, 1988b). This is the figure 

upon which many energy forecasts have been based. Even 

if coal production increases markedly from its current level 

of a little over 900 million short tons per year, we should 

still have several hundred years of coal supply according to 

this current ORB figure . But how much of this coal really 

is available? 

To detennine the actual availability of coal for 

development, the USGS and KGS developed and tested a 

methodology that would provide greatly increased specificity to coal resource assessments. In addition to depth and 

thickness limitations to coal mining, other restrictions that 

effectively limit mining of coal were applied. In this study, 

we defined available coal as follows: 

ORIGINAL COAL RESOURCES 

minus 

COAL MINED AND COAL LOST IN MINING 

equals 

REMAINING COAL RESOURCES 

minus 

COAL RESTRICTED BY LAND-USE CONSIDERATIONS 

minus 

COAL RESTRICTED BY TECHNOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 

Original coal resources are defined as the amount of 

coal, containing 33 percent or less ash, in the ground prior 

to production and under less than 6,000 ft of overburden. 

The coal beds are either 14 in or thicker for anthracite and 

bituminous coal or 30 in or thicker for subbituminous coal 

and lignite, in such form and amount that extraction is 

currently or potentially feasible (Wood and others, 1983). 

Coal mined and coal lost in mining is the quantity of coal 

that has been removed or "sterilized" by surface or underground mining. Remaining coal resources are defined as 

original resources less coal mined and coal lost in mining. 

Land-use restricted coal most likely will not be mined 

because surface features or structures would be disrupted by 

mining, and the integrity of the natural environment would 

be threatened, or the rights of the individual or community 

would be impacted. Technologically restricted coal most 

likely will not be mined because geologic or mining-related 

factors would negatively impact the economics or safety of 

a mine. 

Land-use and technological restrictions vary regionally because of types of mining, regulatory variations, 

land-use differences, and geologic conditions. In addition, 

available coal can be designated as compliance or noncompliance coal, depending on whether or not it meets the 

Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) new-source performance standards for sulfur emissions. According to 

EPA's requirements (CFR, 1987), compliance coal must 

release no more than 1.2 lb of sulfur dioxide per 1 million 

Btu when burned in powerplants. 

In the development of the methodology, an optimal 

size for a study area was determined. This study area had to 

be small enough to allow for detailed delineation of coal 

geology, mined areas, and a variety of restrictions in a 

timely fashion but had to be large enough to be representative of a wider area. If the methodology proved successful, the USGS, in cooperation with Geological Surveys in 

other coal-bearing States, would propose to apply the 

methodology to additional study areas. 

2 Coal Resources Available for Development-A Methodology and Pilot Study 
TOTAL RESOURCES 

IDENTIFIED 

DEMONSTRATED 

MEASURED l INFERRED 

INDICATED 

u 

~ 

0 

z RESERVE BASE 

0 

u 

UJ 

I 

I 

Sd 

~ 

0 

z RESOURCES 0 

u 

UJ 

c:J 

:J l l (/) 

UNDISCOVERED 

HYPOTHETICAL SPECULATIVE 

- f-- - t--

I 

I 

~ :::i 

co 

u; 

<( 

UJ 

L.L. 

u 

~ 

0 

z 

0 

u 

UJ 

(!) 

z 

u; 

<( 

UJ 

a: 

u 

z 

-E-- -------INCREASING GEOLOGIC ASSURANCE ----- --------

Figure 3. Resource classification system (modified from Averitt, 1975). 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The authors wish to thank the Kentucky Department 

of Mines and Minerals, the U.S. Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement (Lexington, Ky., office), 

and the Kentucky Department of Natural Resources for help 

in defining and gathering the geologic, regulatory, and 

mining information used in this study. O.B. Davidson, 

N.K. Gardner, R.E. Sergeant, and S.J. Tewalt were valuable members of the project team in conducting the pilot 

study. We wish to thank K.J. Englund, N.K. Gardner, H.J. 

Gluskoter, S.P. Schweinfurth, and R.E. Sergeant for their 

thorough reviews of this manuscript. 

GENERAL APPROACH 

In developing a methodology for determining available coal resources, several steps were defined. These are 

(1) study area selection, (2) data collection and assimilation, and (3) resource estimation. The following sections 

detail the methodology that was developed for testing in a 

pilot study. 

Area Selection 

It might be preferable to study an entire region in the 

detailed fashion developed in this methodology. However, 

since we arbitrarily define a region in this study as containing multiple counties and usually several States or parts of 

States, the time, manpower, and costs required to conduct 

such a comprehensive study make this approach impractical. It is therefore crucial that the study areas selected be 

representative of larger areas, so that results can be extrapolated. If a region is divided into segments based on 

similarity of characteristics such as geology, mining practices, mining history, production patterns, and previous 

coal resource assessments, areas having similar characteristics can be defined for subsequent purposes of extrapolation. 

Geologic conditions may vary throughout a region, 

and these conditions can be categorized. The stratigraphic 

position of coal beds in the area is significant, because coals 

represent a variety of depositional environments through 

geologic time. These different environments dictate the 

coal's physical and chemical characteristics, including lateral continuity, thickness, quality, and roof and floor rock 

types. Regions also vary with respect to the degree of 

folding and faulting . It is therefore necessary to categorize 

a region by its stratigraphic and structural features so that no 

significant geologic characteristics will be ignored in the 

course of the regional study. At least one study area should 

be located in each major geologic type area. 

Mining practices also may vary within a region, often 

because of geologic characteristics. Because these variations will influence the restrictions required, mining practices should be categorized. For example, in areas that have 

General Approach 3 
gentle topography, strip mining is more prevalent, whereas 

in areas that have steep topography, contour mining and 

mountaintop removal are common. In some areas, longwall 

underground mining is common, whereas in others roomand-pillar is the norm. At least one study area should be 

located in each different mining area. In many instances, 

the mining areas and geologic type areas could be the same. 

The extent of past and present mining within a region 

varies and should be categorized in a general manner. 

Likewise, the reserve base and production of the region 

should be categorized. Areas that have a larger reserve base 

and production must be given greater emphasis, although 

areas that have lesser reserves and production should be 

represented by study, too. The reserve base has been 

developed in a number of previous studies, and these 

published data will provide a relative idea of resource 

distribution throughout the region. Production figures are 

published also, usually annually. 

Several possible methods of extrapolating the study 

results from smaller to larger areas that have similar 

characteristics exist. But it is probably most logical to take 

advantage of previous resource studies to accomplish this. 

Once the study is completed for one area, the results can be 

evaluated and compared to previous resource estimates to 

obtain percentages higher or lower than previous estimates. 

These percentages can then be applied to previous resource 

estimates for the surrounding area to develop an estimate for 

current available coal for the larger area. In this methodology, however, it is assumed that the previous resource 

estimates for both the study area and the larger area were 

conducted in the same fashion, with the same assumptions, 

level of detail, and geologic knowledge. In addition, of 

course, the previously discussed geologic and restrictive 

features must be similar in both the study area and the larger 

surrounding area. Geological features include lateral continuity of the coal beds, structure (folding, faulting, and dip), 

and mine-roof stability. Restrictive features include the 

land-use and technological parameters (as described in the 

"Introduction") that most impact coal availability. While 

this extrapolation process is less thorough than performing 

an intensive study throughout the entire region, it is a 

workable method that will provide valuable results in a 

reasonable period of time for a large area. 

The size of the study area selected should be a 

workable size but should have enough variability and 

information to represent, together with other study areas in 

the region, a realistic cross section of the region. For the 

purposes of this study, a 7 .5-minute quadrangle was 

deemed the optimum size for a study area, because it would 

allow us to apply the necessary detail to accomplish the task 

in a reasonable period of time. In addition, much of the 

geologic mapping in the Eastern United States has been 

done at this scale. 

Data Collection and Assimilation 

After a study area is selected, data needs must be 

defined, and the necessary data must be gathered and 

assimilated. Data needs are categorized in the following 

way: geologic considerations, past and present mining, 

land-use restrictions, and technological restrictions. Possible sources of data are shown in table 1. A good data base 

is the key to development of an assessment of available 

coal. Time spent talking with local specialists familiar with 

the area and reviewing appropriate literature is well spent. 

Supplementary data can be collected in the field when other 

sources are deemed to be inadequate. 

Geologic considerations include coal-related information such as coal thicknesses and intervals, lateral extent of 

coal, outcrops and structure (folding, faulting, and dip), and 

coal quality. Because this information is the foundation 

upon which all subsequent restrictions are applied in this 

methodology, adequate time and effort are required to 

develop this comprehensive geologic data base. 

For each coal bed in the study area, accurate locations 

of past and present underground and surface mines must be 

identified and plotted. In some cases, locations already have 

been plotted by State mining agencies or geological surveys. Even then, however, updating is often necessary. The 

U.S. Bureau of Mines maintains a microfilm library consisting of maps of abandoned undergound mines. In addition, State mining regulatory agencies have maps of recent 

surface and underground mines, because such maps are 

required for the mine permitting process. Topographic maps 

and air photographs also can be used to determine the 

location and extent of surface mines. Adits of underground 

mines often are shown on topographic maps, but in localities that have multiple closely spaced coal beds, mines 

cannot be assigned to a specific coal bed unless additional 

information is obtained. Also, the lateral extent of the 

underground mine cannot be determined from locations 

alone. 

Land-use restrictions primarily impact surface mining, although a few may restrict underground mining also. 

The Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 

of 1977 (Public Law 95-87) defined certain land uses that 

are protected from surface mining and (or) deep mining. 

These Federal requirements have now been incorporated 

into State regulations. State regulations vary but generally 

maintain the Federal requirements as a minimum. However, 

variances are given to many of the regulations. It is 

therefore vital to consider local practices when determining 

the impact of various land uses on mining in the study area. 

The following land-use factors can restrict the mining 

of coal: 

1. Cemeteries. -Surface rmnmg cannot be conducted 

through a cemetery; the U.S. Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) requests mine 

4 Coal Resources Available for Development-A Methodology and Pilot Study 
Table 1. Sources of data for assessing coal availability 

>- u 

c::: 

Q) 

>- 00 

~ >- "' c: ~ c c: ::::l 0 

Types of data rJ'l ::::l 

rJ'l ~ -;; ::::l u -;; 00 ·so u ~ 0 ·so 

0 0 ~ 0 c::: ~ 

C) ~ .E 

C) 

~ v) ~ 

~ ~ v; :::> v:; 

Geology 

Coal bed thicknesses and intervals ....... X X X 

Coal outcrops ........................... X X 

Coal quality ............................ X X X 

Structural features ....................... X X 

Past and present mining 

Surface ................................. X X 

Underground ............................ X X 

Land-use restrictions 

Oil and gas wells ....................... X X X 

Cemeteries ............................. X 

Streams ................................ X X 

Residential public buildings .............. X 

Historic sites, public lands ............... X 

Highways and railroads .................. X 

Powerlines and pipelines ................. 

Federal lands ........................... X 

Endangered species habitats .............. X 

Technological restrictions 

Surface mining: 

coal depth and thickness .............. X X 

Underground mining: 

coal depth and thickness .............. X X 

Proximity to mines ..................... X 

Barrier pillars .......................... X 

Roof of floor problems ................. X 

Structural problems ..................... X X 

operators to leave a 100-ft buffer around cemeteries. 

The locations of most cemeteries are shown on topographic maps. 

2. Streams, Lakes, and Reservoirs.-Surface mining 

through small streams can be accomplished by rechanneling the streams. Streams that have a mean average 

flow of more than 5 fe Is are under the control of the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, however, and should 

be considered a restriction on mining. Variances to 

mine across these streams are difficult to obtain. 

Streamflow records for streams in the study area can be 

obtained from the local USGS Water Resources Division offices or by direct measurements of the streams. 

Although more commonly impacting surface mining, 

streams and other water bodies restrict shallow underground mining because of the potential for subsidence 

'E <ll ~ 

00 Q) E <ll 

c::: ~ ~ ~ 

·c: c::: 00 u 

·so "' -~ 

~ c::: c::: "' ~ ~ 

~ rJ'l ~ 0 <ll u ~ ~ "0 tl ~ c::: <ll u til <ll ~ 

~ c::: <ll c::: c::: ::::l c.. ~ 0 ~ "' "' 0 rJ'l <ll "' ·c: ·~ -~ <ll ....I u.. 

- .t:. E "' - <ll - ~ 

0 c.. c.. 0 ·o ·o ·~ 0 

~ 5 u E ::::l 0 0 c::: ::::l Q) 00 :c "' <ll <ll c::: "' u trJ 0 c.. 0 ~ <ll -;; 0 ~ 

~ u "' u "0 0 ~ 00 ::::l 00 u ~ ~ c::: .t:. 00 c::: co c::: 'i: co "' vi c.. 0 ·c: v) ·c: s "0 vi ... c.. <ll Q) vi ::> < 0 

1- ~ ::5 ~ J: u::: ::> :::> 

X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X X X 

X X X X X X X 

X X X X X X 

X X X X X X 

X X X X X X X 

X X X X X 

X X X X X X 

X X X X X X 

X X X X X X 

X X X X X X X 

X X X X X 

X X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X 

X X X X 

hazards, which can cause flooding of the mine. 

3. Residences, Towns, and Public Buildings. -Federal 

law prohibits surface mining within 300 ft of a private 

residence or public building. But individual homeowners may sign a waiver allowing the mining company to 

mine up to, or through, their house. Often a house is 

moved to a new location. Groups of houses and public 

buildings such as schools, town halls, and hospitals do, 

however, pose a restriction to surface mining. Only 

shallow underground mining would be restricted by the 

presence of towns and buildings, and this restriction is 

because of the possibility of subsidence. 

4. Historic Sites and Non-Federal Public Parks. -Coal in 

public parks and historic sites cannot be mined, except 

in the extremely rare case in which all agencies 

responsible for managing these parks and sites 

General Approach 5 
approve. Locations of parks and historical sites are 

usually shown on topographic maps, or they can be 

obtained from local public agencies. 

5. Highways and Railroads.-Roads and railroads can be 

moved during surface mining, provided such action is 

cost effective and approved by the responsible agencies 

or companies. The one exception is federally funded 

highways, which cannot be mined through or moved 

for mining. A barrier of 100 ft must be left between the 

mine and highway. 

6. Powerlines and Pipelines. -No specific laws prohibit 

mining through these features. Sometimes a 100-ft 

buffer is left, especially for major line networks, but 

other times operators move the lines or mine under 

powerlines and leave islands of coal at the posts. 

Therefore, some coal may be restricted, depending on 

local mining procedures and economics. 

7. Federal Lands.-Surface mining is prohibited on lands 

within the boundaries of the National Park System, the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, the National System 

of Trails, the National Wilderness Preservation System, the Wild and Scenic Rivers System (including 

study rivers), National Recreation Areas, and areas 

designated as endangered species habitats. Mining is 

allowed on National Forest land but only if the mining 

will not interfere with the original purpose for which 

the land was set aside. 

8. Oil and Gas Wells. -Oil and gas wells restrict both 

surface and underground mining. In this study, we 

consider the wells as land-use restrictions when they 

restrict surface mining and as technological restrictions 

when they restrict underground mining. A 200-ft buffer 

is commonly left around the wells, but this buffer zone 

is sometimes less if the exact location of the well is 

known. Oil and gas well locations are usually available 

from State geological surveys. 

As herein defined, technological restrictions primarily impact underground mining. However, depth and 

thickness of a coal bed may be considered as technological 

restrictions to surface as well as underground mining. 

Technological restrictions are based on the limitations of 

mining safety, costs, and equipment. The following are 

some technological factors that can restrict mining. 

1. Coal-Bed Depth and Thickness.- Technological factors can limit the minimum surface-minable coal-bed 

thickness because certain equipment does not have the 

flexibility to separate thin (generally 14 in or less) coal 

beds from the surrounding rock. Surface-mining depth 

is limited because certain equipment or combinations 

of equipment are not designed for deep pits. Most 

underground mining is limited to coal beds greater than 

28 in thick because of equipment and manpower 

requirements; mines are generally within 1 ,000 ft of the 

surface because production costs increase with an 

increase in depth. 

2. Coal Beds too Close to Another Bed or Mine. -Beds 

that are close (usually 40 ft or less vertically) to an 

abandoned underground mine or another coal bed that 

is more likely to be mined are restricted from mining 

(sterilized) because of safety concerns. In mining close 

to an abandoned or active mine in the same coal bed, a 

barrier of at least 100 ft is generally required for safety 

purposes. 

3. Geologic Conditions that Impact Mining.-Unstable 

roof or floor rock can be a restriction if safety and cost 

factors adversely impact mining. If a coal bed is known 

to split, pinch out, or be faulted, it could be considered 

a restriction on mining, depending on local practices. 

Steep dip of the coal bed sometimes limits mining 

because the equipment is designed for relatively flatlying beds. An exception is in areas such as the 

Anthracite region, where the mining technique is especially designed for steeply dipping beds. 

In summary, technological factors can limit the minability of coal in a variety of ways. Because local mining 

practices and geologic conditions vary regionally, regional 

differences must be taken into account in quantifying 

available coal. Mining engineers working for local companies and regulatory inspectors, who regularly visit the mines 

and are familiar with local conditions, are a good source of 

additional information. 

Coal quality can influence the marketability of coal 

and therefore the likelihood of mining particular coal beds. 

Because of EPA's sulfur emission standards for coalburning powerplants, high-sulfur coal is not as marketable 

as low-sulfur coal. Other coal-quality factors, such as ash, 

moisture, and sodium and chlorine content, also have 

important effects on coal marketability. In southern West 

Virginia a few coal beds have high levels of inertinite 

macerals, which inhibit complete and rapid burning of the 

coal in power generation boilers. This coal-quality parameter restricts the coal as a competitive fuel source. Mine 

operators and coal marketing representatives usually have 

the best information on problems associated with coal 

quality, unique to the area, that impact marketability. State 

geological surveys have files of coal-quality data, and, if 

data are limited, they can be supplemented by collection 

and analysis of channel samples of coal beds in the study 

area. 

Resource Estimation 

Introduction 

The three basic elements essential to coal resource 

calculations are (1) coal-bed thickness, (2) specific gravity 

6 Coal Resources Available for Development-A Methodology and Pilot Study 
of the coal, and (3) the size of the area to be included in the 

tonnage estimate. Thickness is determined by measurements from coal-bed exposures at the surface (outcrops), 

from boreholes, and in coal mines. The number and spacing 

of the thickness measurements are major determinants of 

the degree of reliability of the estimate. Specific gravity is 

a measure of the weight factor of a coal and may be 

determined from individual coal analyses in the area 

involved. This measurement is employed mainly for mine 

development studies. However, a table of the average 

specific gravity for each coal rank in the United States has 

been established and is generally used for large-area coal 

resource estimation in this country. For bituminous coal, 

the average specific gravity is 1. 3 2, or 1 , 800 tons per 

acre-foot; this figure is used for coal availability studies in 

the central Appalachian region. Areal measurements in this 

study were accomplished by computer calculation of the 

digitized areas. 

The methodology for coal resource calculations 

developed in this study follows the Coal Resource Classification System of USGS Circular 891 (Wood and others, 

1983). The basic criteria set forth by Circular 891 were 

modified slightly for timeliness in this study and are as 

follows. 

1. Only coal in beds greater than or equal to 14 in thick is 

included as a resource. Coal in a bed less than 14 in 

thick is excluded. 

2. Coal resource tonnages are reported in thickness increments of either 14 to 28 in or greater than 28 in. 

3. Three overburden categories are reported: 0 ft to 

surface-minable limit, surface-minable limit to 1 ,000 

ft, and greater than 1,000 ft. Surface-minable limits 

may be 0 to 100, 0 to 200, or 0 to 300 ft, whichever 

would most closely follow local practice. The remainder are considered potential underground-minable 

coals. 

4. Coal resource estimates are reported in the following 

categories of assurance or reliability: measured (including coal 0 to 0. 25 mi from point of thickness measurement), indicated (0.25 to 0.75 mi), inferred (0.75 to 3 

mi), and hypothetical (greater than 3 mi). 

Computer Resource Calculations 

The initial steps required in calculating resources for 

this study include collection of data points for coal thickness, elevation, and quality parameters (where available); 

correlation of beds; determination of the approximate specific gravity; selection and delineation of the land-use and 

technological restrictions; and preparation of outcrop maps. 

Once these initial steps are completed, data entry begins. 

Data entry is by far the most time-consuming aspect of the 

study, but it is essential that data be entered correctly and 

stored in clearly documented fields. All subsequent work by 

a variety of users derives from this basic data base. 

The point source data, including coal-bed thickness, 

elevation, location, lithology, and chemistry, are digitally 

recorded and stored in their appropriate stratigraphic and 

geochemical data bases. The coal-bed outcrop, the mined 

areas, and most of the land-use and technological restrictions are drawn on base maps, and each is digitized, labeled, 

and stored in its individual data base. Once the data have 

been entered, checked for errors made during entry, and 

corrected, the user may begin to generate derivative maps. 

Data-point maps are plotted to display the number of points 

and spread of the basic information. Gridded files of coal 

thickness, structure, and quality are generated, and the 

isopachs, structure contours, and isopleths of chemical 

values are plotted. The computer-drawn lines may then be 

modified, if necessary, to follow the user's interpretation of 

the thickness, elevation, and chemical character of the coal. 

The depth of coal from the surface may be generated 

from a file of digital surface elevations. The National 

Mapping Division of the USGS has produced Digital 

Elevation Models (DEM's) covering about one-third of the 

United States. Fortunately, DEM's are available for most of 

the Appalachian basin. When the DEM is used, computer 

grid-to-grid subtraction of the elevation at the top of the bed 

from the surface elevation creates a grid of the overburden, 

which can be contoured to derive the depth-of-burial (overburden) lines. 

Once coal thickness and overburden maps have been 

generated, individual lines (14- and 28-in coal-bed thickness, 200- and 1 ,000-ft overburden) can be selected and 

stored for future use. 

As previously stated, the areas covered by land-use 

restrictions and some of the technological restrictions may 

be plotted on base maps and digitized. Most of the areas 

affected by technological restrictions, however, are readily 

generated by the computer. Barrier pillars of coal, left for 

safety purposes around active or abandoned coal mines, 

may be created as buffers at the required distances from the 

digitized boundaries of the mine. For underground mining, 

the interburden between beds is determined through gridto-grid subtraction of the top of the lower bed from the base 

of the upper bed. Where the two beds occur within less than 

the restrictive distance, a determination is made as to which 

of the two coals would most likely be mined, largely based 

on coal thickness. These restriction lines are saved and 

stored with the other computer-derived restrictions for 

coal-bed depth and thickness. 

At this point, the user has all of the line files 

necessary for coal resource calculation: outcrop, coal-bed 

thickness, overburden thickness, surface and deep mines, 

land-use and technological restrictions, and parameters for 

quality. Given the weight factor, the computer will then 

calculate the amount of original, mined and lost in mining, 

restricted, and available coal resources for each coal bed in 

the prescribed thickness and overburden categories. 

General Approach 7 
First, the original coal resource is calculated by 

thickness and overburden categories to quantify all of the 

coal in the ground prior to mining and prior to application of 

restrictions. Next, the resources are calculated for the 

surface and deep mines and subtracted from the original 

resource to determine the amount of coal left in the ground 

after mining-the remaining resource. Each of the land-use 

and technological restrictions is then combined individually 

with the remaining coal resource to ascertain the amount of 

coal that will be restricted from future mining by each type 

of constraint. 

Many of the restrictions overlap one another, as is the 

case with towns/streams, thin interburden, and previous 

mining above or below a coal bed. Therefore, to avoid 

duplication of restrictions before the available resource is 

calculated, all of the land-use restrictions must be combined 

into one land-use restrictions file, and, likewise, all of the 

technological restrictions must be combined into one technological restrictions file for each coal bed. Care must be 

taken also not to overlap or duplicate land-use and technological restrictions, especially in the surface-minable area. 

The resultant restriction files are finally excluded from the 

remaining coal resource to derive the amount of coal 

resource available for development in each of the prescribed 

thickness and overburden categories. 

While noncompliance with respect to sulfur dioxide 

potential is not considered a restriction to mining for the 

coal availability studies, an estimate of compliance coal was 

included in this study because it is a factor in determining 

marketability for most of the power-generating coals in the 

central Appalachian region. 

When the original, remaining, available, and available compliance coal tonnages have been determined for the 

study area, these results can be related to previous estimates 

and extrapolated to the larger, similar area defined earlier in 

the study when the study area was selected. 

MATEWAN QUADRANGLE PILOT STUDY 

Once a methodology had been developed for assessing available coal resources, a pilot study was conducted to 

apply and test this methodology. The study was a cooperative effort between the USGS and the KGS. The central 

Appalachian region, which includes eastern Kentucky, was 

chosen as a focal point because coal production has been 

historically high for this region and industry has a great deal 

of interest in this area. The 7.5-minute quadrangle was 

determined to be the optimum size for study, and the 

Matewan quadrangle (fig. 4) was selected for several 

reasons. Located on the eastern edge of Pike County, Ky., 

this quadrangle is fairly representative of its surrounding 

area, having low population density, many coal beds, and 

intensive mining. The quadrangle was selected also because 

KENTUCKY 

Central 

Appalachian 

region 

OHIO 

\ 

1.. 

Matewan quad~ pilot study /" 

_,.J!.~-- VIRGINIA 

_____ 1 ____ _ 

/ 

.,.J r..._r-' 

TENNESSEE ~-' 

NORTH 

CAROUNA 

/ 

I ( -----'l 

--GEORGIA---- SOUTH CAROUNA '-\ 

50 100 150 MILES 

0 100 200 KILOMETERS 

Figure 4. location map of the pilot study area, Matewan 

quadrangle, central Appalachian region. 

most of its surface and underground mine maps already had 

been compiled. 

Data Sources 

The geology of the Matewan quadrangle has been 

studied by a number of researchers. Key reports used in 

developing the coal geology for this pilot study included the 

1:24,000-scale geologic quadrangle map by Trent (1965), 

KGS's Energy Resources Series (Brant and others, 1983), 

and coal thickness (Kentucky Geological Survey, 1986) and 

coal quality (Currens, 1986; Currens and others, 1987) 

reports. KGS geologists identified 21 coal beds as being 

potentially minable. Of the 21 beds, some had more data 

available than others. The amount of data available is 

usually related to the degree to which coals have been 

economically important. Eight of the coal beds have been 

mined underground to some extent, and eight have been 

surface mined. All of the coal beds considered in this study 

are from the Pennsylvanian Breathitt Formation (fig. 5). 

The topography of the area is rugged and steep, typical of 

the central Appalachian region. Consequently, most of the 

coal beds are exposed at the surface and thus are accessible 

for surface and underground mining. 

8 Coal Resources Available for Development-A Methodology and Pilot Study 
z 

<( 

z 

<( 

> ....J 

> (fJ 

z 

z 

w 

a.. 

w 

....J 

Cl 

Cl 

~ 

z 

<( 

z 

....J 

~ 

> (fJ 

z 

z 

w 

a.. 

0::: 

w 

~ 

0 

....J 

c:: 

0 

·.;:::; 

co 

E 

0 

LL 

-~ 

-:5 

co 

Q) 

m 

c:: 

0 

·.;:::; 

co 

E 

0 

LL 

Q) 

Q) 

....J 

MEMBERS, ZONES, AND BEDS 

~.r- Erosional surface 

.... 

. . 

. . 

I--

:.... 

.. f.!- •• 

~· 

~ 

~· 

k-:""" 

c::::::-~ 

: .. . · .. . 1-'- ""> ... ·. f.-· ~ .. 

c 

Broas coal zone 

}Peach Orchard coal zone (2 beds) 

Hazard coal zone 

MAGOFFIN MEMBER 

Taylor coal zone 

}Hamlin coal zone 

Fire clay rider coal zone Fire clay coal 

}whitesburg coal zone 

KENDRICK SHALE MEMBER 

Williamson coal zone 

}

Upper Elkhorn No.3 1/2 coal 

Upper Elkhorn No.3 coal zone 

Upper Elkhorn No.3 coal 

Upper Elkhorn No.2 coal 

Upper Elkhorn No. 1 coal 

Lower Elkhorn rider 

Lower Elkhorn coal 

Powellton coal 

BETSIE SHALE MEMBER 

~: .. · .-;--:.., Matewan coal 

---

.. . .. I 

r 

v "'-.) ( 1::>- .o(?"o."a 

p 0 .• c::::, . 

~0: .. ~··.~~ 

~~·~ ~0· o ... 

.·.·~:o·.a 

{"~~ o· ·~. 

1::>- • o ;;;i_g_." a ( 

Eagle coal 

}Giamorgan coal zone 

EXPLANATION 

D Dominantly shale 

Osandstone 

~ Quartzose and 

~ quartz-pebble sandstone 

Stratigraphic section included 

in the pilot study 

r- 0 FEET 

f---100 

f- 200 

f---300 

f---400 

f- 500 

~-~ ~-soo 

~ •• '-<::::5" ·.: a - - - - - - - .J._ __ L..<. _....=<. ••• o.. ~. . ~~-J------------------------------------------------------~ 

Figure 5. Stratigraphic column for the Matewan quadrangle pilot study (modified from D.R. 

Chesnut, Jr., Kentucky Geological Survey, written commun., 1987). 

Matewan Quadrangle Pilot Study 9 
Abandoned and active underground mines were 

located and plotted in a cooperative effort between the 

Kentucky Department of Mines and Minerals (KDMM) and 

the KGS. Mined areas were located and plotted on the 

Matewan quadrangle, with mined coal beds being noted. In 

some cases, the mining companies had given coal beds 

names that were different from the accepted KGS bed 

nomenclature; therefore, an effort was made to properly 

correlate the mined beds with the KGS nomenclature. The 

mines were located with the help of records from the 

KDMM and the Kentucky Division of Surface Mining, 

aerial photography, and verbal communications with mine 

operators and regulatory officials. These mines were also 

identified as to the coal bed mined. 

KGS and USGS geologists met with many local 

regulators, mining engineers, and consultants to determine 

the restrictive parameters that should be applied to the 

Matewan quadrangle. Some of the land-use restrictions 

were outlined under the Kentucky Natural Resources and 

Environmental Protection Cabinet Document 405 KAR 

24:040, entitled "Permit Application Review," and the 

Kentucky Revised Statutes 350.465 and 350.610, which 

define Kentucky's surface mining regulatory program. 

Also, the Lexington regional office of the OSM was helpful 

in describing potential variances to regulations and their 

likelihood of being granted. If the granting of a particular 

variance is commonplace, the restriction was not considered 

in this study. In addition, information pertaining to potential 

nonregulatory restrictions (for example, powerlines or pipelines) and depth and thickness limits of a coal bed was 

obtained from State agencies including the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, the 

Kentucky Department for Surface Mining Reclamation and 

Enforcement, and the KDMM. 

Methodology 

Computer methods were used to enter, store, generate, and manipulate the information concerning thousands 

of minute locations and to perform the repetitive combinations and calculations involved in the project. The USGS 

has developed the National Coal Resources Data System 

(NCRDS) as the master data base for coal resource information. NCRDS maintains a data base manager (PACER) 

(Cargill and others, 1976) and graphics programs (GARNET) (Olson, 1977) to access and manipulate the data for 

coal resources assessment. GARNET programs calculate 

and tabulate coal resources according to the specifications 

of USGS Circular 891. Therefore, the NCRDS formats and 

software were selected for the coal availability studies. 

Data for the Matewan quadrangle were compiled 

during a recent coal resource assessment study (Brant and 

others, 1983) and were transferred to the NCRDS format 

and data base with ease. KGS geologists digitized coal 

outcrops of the 21 beds identified for study and digitized the 

mine map data acquired from the KDMM. 

Four of the land-use restrictions (powerlines, pipelines, streams, and towns) were plotted on scale-stable base 

maps and digitized by the KGS. Cemeteries and oil and gas 

wells were digitized as points, and GARNET created the 

buffers around them. All of the boundary lines for technological restrictions were generated by GARNET. The 

restrictions applied to the Matewan quadrangle are as 

follows: 

Restrictions 

Land-use 

Surface mining: 

Powerlines . . . . . . . . . 100-ft buffer. 

Pipelines . . . . . . . . . . . 100-ft buffer. 

Criteria 

Cemeteries . . . . . . . . . 100-ft buffer (a GARNET -generated 

300-ft by 300-ft square around center of 

cemetery was used). 

Oil and gas wells ... a 200-ft by 200-ft square around well 

site was used. 

Major streams . . . . . . 100-ft buffer if flow greater than 5 ft3

/s. 

Towns ............. 300-ft buffer. 

Underground mining: 

None 

Technological 

Surface mining: 

Too thin . . . . . . . . . . . less than 14 in is resource cutoff. 

Too deep . . . . . . . . . . greater than 200 ft. 

Underground mining: 

Too thin . . . . . . . . . . . less than 28 in. 

Too deep . . . . . . . . . . greater than 1 ,000 ft. 

Deep mine barrier pillars (between mines, 

for safety .......... 50-ft buffer zone around active or 

Deep mining too 

close above or 

abandoned mines. 

below ............. less than 40ft of separation. 

Thicker beds too 

close above or 

below ............. less than 40ft of separation. 

Oil and gas wells ... 200-ft by 200-ft square around well 

site. 

A conflict appeared in reporting potential overlapping 

land-use and technological restrictions in the 0- to 200-ft 

overburden category. For this study, the decision was made 

that future mining at less than 200 ft of overburden was 

most likely to be surface mining, so that only those 

restrictions applicable to surface mining were applied to the 

0- to 200-ft category. 

10 Coal Resources Available for Development-A Methodology and Pilot Study 
After all of the Matewan data were transmitted to the 

USGS and entered into NCRDS, all computer searches, 

manipulations, combinations, resource calculations, and 

tabulations were performed by the USGS in close communication with the KGS. USGS personnel ran computer 

programs to test and develop the methodology and applicability of NCRDS software to parameters for a coal availability study. In fact, methodologies were modified and 

GARNET and other NCRDS programs were enhanced 

frequently as the project progressed. 

PACER searches of the stratigraphic data base 

extracted only the coal within each coal bed, excluding 

partings and other non coal lithologies. Coal thickness and 

elevation files were created for each of the 21 coal beds. 

The data points were displayed and gridded, and isopach 

and structure contour lines were plotted. Where necessary, 

interpretive points were added and incomplete coal thickness data deleted to derive reasonable coal thickness and 

structure depictions. The 14- and 28-in isopach lines were 

stored as boundary lines for coal thickness. The bed 

elevation grids were stored for subsequent combination with 

a grid file of the surface topography to derive overburden 

and for grid-to-grid operations to calculate interburden 

intervals between the coal beds. 

The DEM for the Matewan 7.5-minute quadrangle 

was acquired from the National Mapping Division of the 

USGS. This model provided a grid with 60-m spacing of the 

surface elevations that, when combined with the top-of-coal 

elevation grid for each coal bed, supplied the overburden 

categories (200 and 1 ,000 ft) required as overburden criteria 

for each coal bed. 

A grid interval of 0.03728 mi (approximately 43,000 

grid nodes in the Matewan quadrangle) was selected for use 

in resource calculation and is recommended for future coal 

availability studies. This interval corresponds to the 60-m 

(approximately 200-ft) grids of the DEM's as utilized in 

GARNET. The GARNET resource program subdivides 

each grid cell into 16 segments. A 200-ft grid interval is 

thereby subdivided into 50-ft squares to ensure that the 

smallest boundaries (the 50-ft barrier pillars) would not be 

excluded from the resource computations. 

GARNET programs generated the combinations of 

coal thickness lines (isopachs), overburden and interburden 

lines, outcrops, surface and underground mines, and each 

of the land-use and technological restrictions. Several 

thousand different combined areas were created, and more 

than 1,000 were used in coal resource calculations. 

Original coal resources, coal mined and lost in 

mining, remaining coal resources, individual restrictions, 

and available coal resources were all calculated as a check 

on the methodology. However, only two of the first three 

and one of the last two must be calculated, so we recommend that coal mined and lost in mining, coal remaining, 

and individual restrictions should be calculated. The original resource may be derived from the sum of the two 

categories "coal mined and lost in mining" and "remaining 

coal resources." Available coal resources is the result when 

the restricted coal is subtracted from the remaining coal 

resources. 

Enough chemical data were available in the KGS 

computer files to generate sulfur isopleth lines for most of 

the 21 beds. The amount of available coal meeting current 

compliance standards was then calculated for the Matewan 

quadrangle. 

Results 

The methodology was repeated for each of the 21 coal 

beds. Figures 6--10 are a series of maps depicting the areas 

affected by restrictions on one bed, the Upper Elkhorn No. 

2. Figure 6 shows the original, posterosional extent 

(shaded) of the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal bed in the 

Matewan quadrangle, Ky. The white area indicates an 

absence of this coal bed. As additional restrictions were 

applied to the Upper Elkhorn No. 2, more and more of the 

coal bed was eliminated from consideration. On figure 7, 

portions of the coal bed that have been removed by 

underground and surface mining are shown. Land-use 

restrictions have been added on figure 8. These include 

powerlines, pipelines, gas and oil wells, cemeteries, towns, 

and large streams, all with buffer zones around them. All of 

these land-use restrictions, except for oil and gas wells, 

apply only to surface mining. Technological restrictions 

affect a large portion of the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal, as 

shown on figure 9. These restrictions apply only to 

underground-minable coal and include (1) portions of the 

coal bed that lie less than 40 ft above or below an 

abandoned mine or a coal that we judged would be more 

desirable to mine, (2) deep-mine barrier pillars, (3) buffer 

zones around oil and gas wells, ( 4) areas where the coal lies 

more than 1 ,000 ft below the surface, and (5) areas where 

the coal is too thin (less than 28 in thick). Figures lOA and 

lOB illustrate the results, after all mined and restricted coal 

was eliminated. Coal available for surface mining was 

limited to that which is less than 200 ft deep and 14 in or 

more thick; this available coal is shown as the shaded area 

in figure lOA. Coal available for underground mining is 

shown as the shaded area in figure 1 OB. Figure 11 summarizes the results of the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 resource 

analysis. Of the 92 million short tons of coal remaining 

today in the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal bed, 28 million short 

tons (30 percent) are estimated to be available for mining, 

most of which is considered to be surface minable. 

A similar methodology was applied to the other 20 

coal beds included in the Matewan quadrangle pilot study. 

Results for all 21 coal beds in the quadrangle are presented 

in table 2. Figure 12 summarizes the results in pie-chart 

format, showing resource results by percentage of the 

original986.5 million short tons of coal. Most of the mined 

coal was removed by underground mining (92 percent). 

Matewan Quadrangle Pilot Study 11 
Figure 6. Original occurrence of the Upper Elkhorn No.2 

coal bed (shaded) in the Matewan quadrangle study area. 

Figure 8. Land-use restrictions (shaded) to mining the 

Upper Elkhorn No.2 coal bed, Matewan quadrangle study 

area. 

Figure 7. Mined areas (shaded) of the Upper Elkhorn No. 

2 coal bed, Matewan quadrangle study area. 

Figure 9. Technological restrictions (shaded) to mining 

the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal bed, Matewan quadrangle 

study area. 
Figure lOA. Available surface-minable resources 

(shaded) of the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal bed, Matewan 

quadrangle study area. 

REMAINING 

~ RESOURCES 

(92 mst) 

ORIGINAL 

RESOURCES 

(106 mst) 

'--0 

I 

I "--,. \ 

~ I W 

'-....~//(~ \ 

\ 

Figure 108. Available underground-minable resources 

(shaded) of the Upper Elkhorn No. 2 coal bed, Matewan 

quadrangle study area. 

RESTRICTED 

RESOURCES 

(64 mst) 

""' Jill"' AVAILABLE 

RESOURCES 

(28 mst) 

UNDERGROUND-MINABLE 

SOURCES 

(5 mst) ""' RE Jill"' 

"""' ~ 

~COAL MINED AND SURFACE-MINABLE--

LOST IN MINING RESOURCES 

(14 mst) (23 mst) 

Figure 11. Resource summary of the Upper Elkhorn No.2 coal bed, Matewan quadrangle study area. mst, millions of 

short tons. 

Matewan Quadrangle Pilot Study 13 
Table 2. Coal resource study summary, Matewan quadrangle 

[Million short tons] 

ORIGINAL COAL ................................... 986.5 

Coal mined and lost in mining: 

Mined underground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117.6 

Surface mined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 

Total mined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128.3 

REMAINING COAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858.2 

Coal restricted by land use: 

Streams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.6 

Powerlines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 

Pipelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 5 

Towns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 

Oil and gas wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Cemeteries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 

Total restricted by land use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.1 * 

Coal restricted by technology: 

Bed is less than 28 in thick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123.4 

More minable coal bed is within 40ft above or below . . . . 86.2 

Active or abandoned mine is within 40ft above or below . 21.8 

Barrier pillars adjacent to previous mines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 9 

Bed is deeper than 1,000 ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 

Oil and gas wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

Total restricted by technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228.0* 

AVAILABLE COAL ................................. 613.0 

AVAILABLE COMPLIANCE COAL ................... 267.0 

*Not necessarily a sum. Calculated separately to avoid 

double counting of overlapping restrictions. 

Table 3. land-use restrictions to surface mining, 

Matewan quadrangle 

[Expressed as percentages of total] 

Streams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 

Powerlines ............................................ . 

Pipelines .............................................. . 

Towns ............................................... . 

Oil and gas wells ....................................... . 

Cemeteries ............................................ . 

Total: 17.1 million short tons (2% of original coal) 

25 

19 

11 

4 

3 

Land-use restrictions play a very minor role in limiting 

surface mining, restricting only 2 percent of original coal. 

Of the land-use restrictions considered, major streams (flow 

greater than 5 refs) restrict the most coal (38 percent) (table 

3). Of the 23 percent of original coal restricted by technological parameters, coal beds that are too thin (less than 28 

in) contribute the most to restricting coal from being mined 

underground (table 4). Finally, 613 short tons of coal (62 

ORIGINAL COAL= 986.5 MILLION SHORT TONS 

Coal restricted 

by technology 

23% 

Coal restricted 

by land use 

2% 

Figure 12. Results of the pilot study of the coal resources 

in the Matewan quadrangle. Restricted, mined, and available coal are shown as a percentage of the original coal 

resources 

Table 4. Technological restrictions to underground mining, Matewan quadrangle 

[Expressed as percentages of total] 

Bed is less than 28 in thick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51. 9 

More minable coal bed is within 40ft above or below . . . . . . . . . 36.3 

Active or abandoned mine is within 40ft above or below....... 9.2 

Deep mine barrier pillars adjacent to previous mines . . . . . . . . . . 1.6 

Beds deeper than 1,000 ft................................. .8 

Oil and gas wells........................................ .2 

Total: 228 million short tons (23% of original coal) 

percent of original coal) in the Matewan study area are 

available for mining, 53 percent of which is available for 

underground mining and 47 percent for surface mining. If 

coal quality factors are considered, only 27 percent of the 

original coal is available for mining and meets EPA 

compliance standards. 

Other Limiting Factors 

Other factors may limit the availability of coal even 

further. For example, in many situations mining could be 

inhibited or totally restricted by localized geologic problems 

such as coal-bed discontinuities or mine roof problems. 

Economic factors may further limit coal availability. Many 

mine costing models incorporate financial factors to determine the amount of coal that could be mined at various 

costs. Agencies such as the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI, 1981) and the U.S. Department of Energy 

14 Coal Resources Available for Development-A Methodology and Pilot Study 
(EIA, 1982) have developed mine costing models, as have 

many mining companies. These models could be applied to 

the results of this study to determine the impact of the 

economics of mining coal on the quantity of available coal 

that might actually be currently minable or minable at a 

given price. 

In this study, available coal is still coal "in the 

ground," not the quantity of coal that actually reaches the 

market. Prior to shipment, coal is lost in mining and in 

cleaning. In general, approximately 50 percent of available 

coal may be lost during underground mining (depending on 

the mining method used), 10 percent during surface mining, 

and 10 percent or more during coal cleaning (when 

required). When these recovery factors are applied to the 

estimated 613 million short tons of available coal in the 

Matewan quadrangle, it becomes evident that a significantly 

smaller amount of coal will actually arrive at the market. 

SUMMARY 

The methodology developed to determine available 

coal resources was applied to the Matewan 7 .5-minute 

quadrangle, Pike County, Ky. During the pilot study, some 

plans and expectations were revised after mining engineers 

and regulatory officials were consulted. After a number of 

difficulties were worked out in the computer programs and 

in the project in general, some "streamlining" of the original 

methodology was accomplished, and the methodology is 

now available for additional studies. While results from the 

Matewan quadrangle are useful, it is estimated that the 

methodology must be applied to approximately 15 to 20 

additional 7.5-minute quadrangles in the central Appalachian region before meaningful results for the entire region 

(fig. 4) can be obtained. However, on the basis of these 

initial studies, it appears that the quantity of coal available 

for mining is considerably less than the total remaining 

resource. For the Matewan quadrangle, technological 

restrictions appear to be the most critical limiting factor on 

coal availability. 

To quantify the Nation's available coal resourcesparticularly the amount of available low-sulfur ( compliance) coal resources-investigations must be conducted in 

coal regions throughout the United States. Results of this 

continuing research could have far-reaching implications 

for U.S. coal policy and energy planning. 

REFERENCES CITED 

Averitt, P., 1975, Coal resources of the United States, January 1, 

1974: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1412, 131 p. 

Brant, R.A., Chesnut, D.R., Frankie, W.T., and Portig, E.R., 

1983, Coal resources of the Big Sandy District, Kentucky: 

University of Kentucky Institute for Mining and Minerals 

Research, Energy Resource Series, 47 p. 

Cargill, S.M., Olson, A.C., Medlin, A.L., and Carter, M.D., 

1976, PACER; data entry, retrieval, and update for the 

National Coal Resources Data System (Phase I): U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 978, 107 p. 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 1987, Parts 53-60: Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, v. 40, p. 

255-257. 

Conoco, Inc., 1986, World energy outlook through 2000: Wilmington, Del., Coordinating and Planning Department, 11 p. 

Currens, J.C. , 1986, Coal-quality data for the Eastern Kentucky 

Coal Field: Kentucky Geological Survey, Open-File Report, 

104 p. 

Currens, J.C., Bragg, L.J., and Hower, J.C., 1987, Analysis of 

coal samples from the Big Sandy District, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, Ser. 11, Information Circular 20, 

421 p. 

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), 1981 , Coal mining cost 

model: Palo Alto, Calif., EPRI EA-1273, 4 v. 

Energy Information Administration (EIA), 1982, Documentation 

of the Resource Allocation and Mine Costing (RAMC) 

model: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Energy, 

Energy Information Administration Report DOEINBB-0020, 

160 p. 

--1988a, Annual energy outlook 1987 with projections to 

2000: Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Energy, 

Energy Information Administration Report DOE/ 

EIA--0383(87), 66 p. 

--1988b, Coal production-1987: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration 

Report DOE/EIA--0118(87), 176 p. 

Kentucky Geologic Survey, 1986, Coal-thickness data for the Big 

Sandy District, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, 

Open-File Report, 212 p. 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, 1988, 

Public Law 95-87 (includes all revisions through June 1, 

1988): 175 p. 

Olson, A.C., 1977, Graphic analysis of resources by numerical 

evaluation techniques (GARNET): Computers & Geosciences, v. 1, p. 539-545. 

Trent, V.A., 1965, Geology of the Matewan quadrangle in 

Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle 

Map GQ-373, 1:24,000 scale. 

Wood, G.H., Jr., Kehn, T.M., Carter, M.D., and Culbertson, 

W. C. , 1983, Coal resource classification system of the U.S. 

Geological Survey: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 891, 

65 p. 

References Cited 1 S 

SELECTED SERIES OF U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PUBLICATIONS 

Periodicals 

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (issued bimonthly). 

Preliminary Determination of Epicenters (issued monthly). 

Technical Books and Reports 

Professional Papers are mainly comprehensive scientific reports 

of wide and lasting interest and importance to professional scientists 

and engineers. Included are reports on the results of resource studies 

and of topographic, hydrologic, and geologic investigations. They also 

include collections of related papers addressing different aspects of a 

single scientific topic. 

Bulletins contain significant data and interpretations that are of 

lasting scientific interest but are generally more limited in scope or 

geographic coverage than Professional Papers. They include the results 

of resource studies and of geologic and topographic investigations, as 

well as collections of short papers related to a specific topic. 

Water-Supply Papers are comprehensive reports that present 

significant interpretive results of hydrologic investigations of wide 

interest to professional geologists, hydrologists, and engineers. The 

series covers investigations in all phases of hydrology, including 

hydrogeology, availability of water, quality of water, and use of water. 

Circulars present administrative information or important scientific information of wide popular interest in a format designed for 

distribution at no cost to the public. Information is usually of short-term 

interest. 

Water-Resources Investigations Reports are papers of an 

interpretive nature made available to the public outside the formal 

USGS publications series. Copies are reproduced on request unlike 

formal USGS publications, and they are als_o available for public 

inspection at depositories indicated in USGS catalogs. 

Open-File Reports include unpublished manuscript reports, 

maps, and other material that are made available for public consultation 

at depositories. They are a nonpermanent form of publication that may 

be cited in other publications as sources of information. 

Maps 

Geologic Quadrangle Maps are multicolor geologic maps on 

topographic bases in 7.5- or 15-minute quadrangle formats (scales 

mainly 1:24,000 or 1:62,500) showing bedrock, surficial, or engineering geology. Maps generally include brief texts; some maps include 

structure and columnar sections only. 

Geophysical Investigations Maps are on topographic or planimetric bases at various scales; they show results of surveys using 

geophysical techniques, such as gravity, magnetic, seismic, or radioactivity, which reflect subsurface structures that are of economic or 

geologic significance. Many maps include correlations with the geology. 

Miscellaneous Investigations Series Maps are on planimetric or 

topographic bases of regular and irregular areas at various scales; they 

present a wide variety of format and subject matter. The series also 

includes 7 .5-minute quadrangle photogeologic maps on planimetric 

bases that show geology as interpreted from aerial photographs. Series 

also includes maps of Mars and the Moon. 

Coal Investigations Maps are geologic maps on topographic or 

planimetric bases at various scales showing bedrock or surficial 

geology, stratigraphy, and structural relations in certain coal-resource 

areas. 

Oil and Gas Investigations Charts show stratigraphic information for certain oil and gas fields and other areas having petroleum 

potential. 

Miscellaneous Field Studies Maps are multicolor or blackand-white maps on topographic or planimetric bases on quadrangle or 

irregular areas at various scales. Pre-1971 maps show bedrock geology 

in relation to specific mining or mineral-deposit problems; post-1971 

maps are primarily black-and-white maps on various subjects such as 

environmental studies or wilderness mineral investigations. 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlases are multicolored or blackand-white maps on topographic or planimetric bases presenting a wide 

range of geohydrologic data of both regular and irregular areas; 

principal scale is 1:24,000, and regional studies are at 1:250,000 scale 

or smaller. 

Catalogs 

Permanent catalogs, as well as some others, giving comprehensive listings of U.S. Geological Survey publications are available under 

the conditions indicated below from the U.S. Geological Survey, 

Books and Open-File Reports Section, Federal Center, Box 25425, 

Denver, CO 80225. (See latest Price and Availability List.) 

"Publications of the Geological Survey, 1879-1961" may be 

purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form and as 

a set of microfiche. 

''Publications of the Geological Survey, 1962-1970" may be 

purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form and as 

a set of microfiche. 

"Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1971-1981" may 

be purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form (two 

volumes, publications listing and index) and as a set of microfiche. 

Supplements for 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and for subsequent years since the last permanent catalog may be purchased by 

mail and over the counter in paperback book form. 

State catalogs, ''List of U.S. Geological Survey Geologic and 

Water-Supply Reports and Maps For (State)," may be purchased by 

mail and over the counter in paperback booklet form only. 

"Price and Availability List of U.S. Geological Survey Publications," issued annually, is available free of charge in paperback 

booklet form only. 

Selected copies of a monthly catalog "New Publications of the 

U.S. Geological Survey" are available free of charge by mail or may 

be obtained over the counter in paperback booklet form only. Those 

wishing a free subscription to the monthly catalog "New Publications of 

the U.S. Geological Survey" should write to the U.S. Geological 

Survey, 582 National Center, Reston, VA 22092. 

Note.-Prices of Government publications listed in older catalogs, announcements, and publications may be incorrect. Therefore, 

the prices charged may differ from the prices in catalogs, announcements, and publications.