I . 338

MINING AND RECLAMATION IN NORTH CAROLINA

Charles H. Gardner, Chief and

James D. Simons, Mining Specialist

Land Quality Section Division of Land Resources

P.O. Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611

N.C. Department of Natural Resources & Community Development

ABSTRACT

The mining industry in North Carolina has steadily grown during the period of 1971-1982 and has made major economic contributions. The Mining Act of 1971 was enacted and amended to permit mining in an environmentally sound manner and to require reclamation of disturbed lands after mining. An annual increase in the lands disturbed by mining has accompanied the growth of the industry. Reclamation is restoring many mined lands to other productive uses. There is a significant and widening gap between the Statewide area disturbed by mining and the area reclaimed during the past ten years. Most of this gap is attributed to the mining industry's growth rate and the reclamation time lag for such areas as active mine pits, stock piles, and waste settling areas.

Research is needed to develop economically feasible methods of accelerating reclamation of clay waste settling areas, to refine buffer zone requirements between mine sites and mountain streams, and to investigate wet reclamation alternatives for peat mining areas.

INTRODUCTION

The preamble of the North Carolina Mining Act of 1971 recognizes the importance of mining Itto the economic well being of North Carolina and the Nation" and spells out the General Assembly's intent to allow mining and to provide for the protection of the State's environment. This includes providing for the "subsequent beneficial use of the mined and reclaimed lands. 'I

- 1 -

I 337

8. Kuenzler, E. J., E). J. Mufholland, L. A . Ruley and R. P. Sniffen. "Water Qu lity in N.C. Coastal Plain Streams and Effects of Ch $ nnelization", Water Resources Research Institute, Repork No. 127, Raleigh, N.C., 1977.

I

9. North Carolina Crop and Ljvestock Reporting Service. "North Carolina Agricultu a1 Statistics", Raleigh, N.C. 1971-1981.

Biological aqd Agriculturdl Engineering Department, NCSU. "Nitrogen and',Phosphorus danagement Goals for the N.C.

4 10.

Portion of the,Chowan Riv r", Presented before the Cho- wan-Albemarle Legislative Study Commission, Edenton, N.C. November, q982.

I \ 1

:I i

13

t '

The Mining Act of 1971 established a permitting program for all mining operators disturbing more than one acre. Each permit contains two types of conditions: (a) operating conditions, to provide environmental protection during mining, and (b) reclamation conditions. These conditions are spelled out in detail in each individual permit so that they are site-specific. Reclamation is normally required within two years after completion of disturbing any specific area, though exceptions must be made for continuously active areas such as quarries and clay waste settling ponds.

Many people are not aware of the magnitude of mining in North Carolina, the variety and value of its mineral resources, and the effort the State and mining operators have invested in the mining regulatory and reclamation program.

This paper briefly summarizes the economic importance of mining in North Carolina, discusses the requirements of the Mining Act of 1971 and amendments in 1977 and 1981 along with enforcement record, and reviews the reclamation accomplishments. It also points out the most important research needs for improving mined land reclamation in North Carolina.

ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF MINING IN NORTH CAROLINA

The mining industry in North Carolina makes an important economic contribution to the State and the Nation. Although the land disturbed by mining represents less than 0.1percent of the surface area in North Carolina, the annual value of mineral production in the State is over 300 million dollars in raw product value according to the U.S. Bureau of Mines. This raw product value probably translates to a contribution of over 1.5 billion dollars per year. Further, practically every other industry in the State is dependent on the materials and chemicals produced by mining. The leading commodities in terms of value have been crushed stone, phosphate rock, cement, lithium minerals, and sand and gravel. North Carolina leads the world in lithium production and has led the Nation in production of feldspar, olivine, pyrophyllite, scrap mica, and brick clays. The annual mineral product value by commodity is shown on Table 1. Although the mineral value is subject to fluctuations in market conditions as reflected by a severe slump in 1981 and 1982, the trend has been an increase in mineral values. Construction aggregate (sand, gravel and crushed stone) has shown the largest growth, followed by industrial minerals. A steady increase has occurred in the number of mines permitted under the Mining Act (Table 2). Approximately 5,500 people are employed directly in mining.

- 2 -

340

Table 1

Year

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982

Year

1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982

Mining Product Value (X $1000) (U.S.B.M. Data)

Sand & Gravel

Crushed Stone

19 , 327 20 , 844 15 , 610 18 , 287 21 , 269 28 , 080 29,733 28 , 735 28 , 700 25 300

76 , 062 72 , 342 69 , 327 75 , 462 87 , 254 108,867 125,319 125 , 019 119 , 800 116 , 700

Industrial Minerals

42 , 441 55,185 63 , 799 97 , 839

145 , 464 174,867 213,728 185 , 214 123 , 657

114,882

Clay & Shale

5057 4648 4094 4677 4990 9067 8385 7308 5650 6554

Dimension Gem- Stone stone Tota l

3203 40 $146,930 2800 50 $155,869 -- 50 $152,880 7000 75 $203,340 3041 75 $231,511

3932 50 $342,286 4536 40 $379,366 4512 40 $343,916 2814 60 $275,085

3050 50 $294,578

Table 2

Number of Permitted Mines by Year by Commodity

Sand & Gravel

140 188 231 255 257 268 271 280 288 311

Crushed Stone

79 93 100 102 102 101 107 110 111 112

Industrial Minerals

41 38 38 41 45 47 46 48 53 54

Clay & Shale

40 43 44 45 47 50 47 48 47 47

Dimension Gem- Stone stone

17 16 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 22 19 22 19 20 19 14 19 17

Total

333 401 452 482 490 507 512 525 532 560

- 3 -

341

REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINING ACT OF 1971

The stated purposes of the Mining Act of 1971 are:

"(1) That the usefulness, productivity, and scenic values of all lands and waters involved in mining within the State will receive the greatest practical degree of protection and restoration.

(2) That from June 11, 1971, no mining shall be carried on in the State unless plans for such mining include reasonable provisions for protection of the surrounding environment and for reclamation of the area of land affected by mining. (1971, c. 545, s.3.)"

This mandated protection of the environment during mining, and reclamation after mining, gives the Mining Commission and the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development broad powers to regulate the variety of mining activities across the State, ranging from peat mining to rock quarries to sand pits. The Act was amended in 1977 and 1981. The 1981 amendments were in response to recommendations of the Governmental Evaluation Commission.

A mining permit is required for any activity where the "affected land" disturbed is one acre or more. "Affected land" is defined to include mine excavation, processing areas, stock piles, waste piles, and settling ponds. To apply for a mining permit, the applicant must: (1) submit an application describing how the environment will be protected and the site reclaimed; (2) submit mine location and mine layout plans; (3) notify adjoining property owners and local government of the proposed operation and of their right to a hearing.

One of the 1981 amendments provides that the Department may hold a public hearing if sufficient public interest exists. As of April 1983, two formal public hearings have been held. Prior to this amendment, the Department held several public meetings when local citizens expressed concern about a proposed operation. The statute requires the Department to circulate the application to other appropriate government agencies and allows 60 days to grant or deny the permit. In the event of a public hearing, the Department has 30 days following the hearing to grant or deny the permit.

The Act requires that a mining permit be granted unless: (1) any requirement of the Act or regulations will be violated; (2) the operation will have unduly adverse affect on wildlife or fresh water, estuarine, or marine fisheries,

- 4 -

1342

( 3 ) the operation will violate State standards for air quality, surface water quality or ground water quality; (4) the operation will constitute a substantial physical hazard to the public; (5) the operation will have a significant adverse effect on the purposes of a publicly owned park, forest, or recreation area; (6) previous experience with similar operations indicates a substantial possiblity that the operation will result in significant deposits of sediment in streams or lakes, landslides or acid water pollution; or (7) the operator has not corrected all previous violations.

An operator may appeal any decision of the Department to the N.C. Mining Commission. The Mining Commission is composed of nine members appointed by the Governor. Three representatives are from the mining industry, three from nongovernmental environmental interests, two from the Environmental Management Commission and the Chairman of the NCSU Minerals Research Laboratory Advisory Committee.

If an application is approved, a reclamation surety must be filed before the permit is issued. A 1981 amendment gives the Mining Commission authority to set the surety amounts. The current requirement is: 1-5 acres: $2,500; 5-10 acres: $5,000; 10-25 acres: $12,500; 25 or more acres: $25,000. This schedule is currently being reviewed and may soon be revised.

The permit contains an environmental control section and a reclamation section. Each section contains site specific conditions. The operator is required to submit an annual report outlining reclamation performed during the previous year.

The permit is granted for a maximum of ten years and is renewable. The permit may also be transferred or modified at the operator's request. The Department has the authority to modify an existing permit if the conditions of the mining do not accomplish the purposes of the Act.

ENFORCEMENT OF THE MINING ACT

Background

The policies and procedures for enforcing The Mining Act of 1971 have evolved considerably since the date of enactment from very generalized to detailed procedures. Initially, few enforcement options were possible. Later amendments added multiple options including civil penalties, injunctive relief and permit suspension with bond forfeiture. Amendments to

- 5 -

343

the Act and experience in the program have been responsible for improvements in enforcement.

The enforcement of the Act is twofold: to ensure compliance with permit conditions which provide for environmental control during mining and reclamation after mining; and to prevent mining without a permit.

Under the original Act, the only recourse for failure to correct deficiencies was to hold a hearing to suspend or revoke the permit. Legal time requirements for notice of hearings and possible appeal to the Mining Commission and Superior Court could have delayed actual compliance for several months. Permit suspension or revocation was considered a last resort and many minor violations lingered while voluntary compliance was sought. Nine hearings to suspend or revoke the permit have been scheduled to date, eight of which were scheduled before the 1981 amendments gave civil penalty authority to the Act. Only two hearings were actually held and no permit suspension or revocations were necessary. Both hearings resulted in the operator signing a consent agreement to comply and on-site compliance was obtained shortly thereafter. Six other scheduled hearings were cancelled when the operator complied before the hearing date. One hearing to suspend or revoke the permit is scheduled for June, 1983.

The only enforcement procedures available for mining without a permit before 1977 was to seek Superior Court action by either criminal penalties or injunctive relief. Both of these actions were considered only after exhausting efforts to seek voluntary compliance. One criminal penalty has been sought by the Department. Injunctive relief to prevent further mining without permit and/or to reclaim any mining disturbance made without a permit has been sought and secured for four sites.

Two enforcement tools were added administratively in the period of 1975-76 to improve the effectiveness of the Act. First, the format of the mining permit itself was changed from a certificate to a document which detailed site specific operating and reclamation provisions. With detailed permit conditions, enforcement procedures could then be based on a failure to comply with the specific terms of permits rather than a failure to comply with the generalized purposes of the Act.

The other enforcement tool put into effect in the period of 1975-76 was an agreement with the Department of Transportation (DOT) whereas the DOT could stop purchasing aggregate from an operator upon notification that the

- 6 -

344

operator was in violation of the Mining Act. This agreement was implemented by adding a condition to the "Request for Bids on Fine or Coarse Aggregate," and by the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development notifying DOT in writing of such a violation. The DOT has been very cooperative in the few instances of requests for this enforcement. Although infrequently invoked, the threat of contract cancellation from DOT (a major purchaser of aggregate) has proven very useful in gaining compliance from operators selling aggregate. This agreement was particularly useful before amendments to the Act enabled the Department to assess civil penalties for violations.

Civil Penalties

In 1977, the Mining Act was amended to allow the Department to assess a civil penalty for mining without a permit for up to $5,000 per day of violation. This amendment was a major improvement in the enforcement since it enabled the Department to take action directly when an operator was mining without a permit rather than relying on Superior Court for injunctive relief or criminal penalty. The amendment is written such that a civil penalty for mining without a permit can be assessed for violations committed before a notice of violation is sent. Consequently, possible penalty is an incentive for an operator to obtain a permit before mining rather than waiting to be discovered before applying. As of April 1983, eight operators have been assessed civil penalties for this violation resulting in a collection of $10,825.00. ~ A gradual drop in the number of incidents of mining without a permit has continued as awareness of the Act and penalty become more widespread.

The 1981 amendments to the Act gave the Department the additional authority to assess civil penalties of up to $100 per day for violation of the conditions of a mining permit. This authority gave the Department more latitude in dealing with minor violations while strengthening possible actions on violations which warrant a hearing to suspend or revoke the permit. The civil penalty authority also shortened the time required to take action on a violation.

Under current regulations a Notice of Violation must be sent which gives a reasonable period to comply and warns of a penalty. A daily penalty, beginning on the date of the Notice of Violation, is assessed if compliance is not gained within the prescribed period.

During the period of July 1981through April 1983, three civil penalties have been assessed resulting in a collection of $ 3 , 2 0 0 . 0 0 with additional settlement underway.

- 7 -

345

The number of violation notices is expected to increase initially as this provision is fully implemented. It is hoped that the number will decrease as operators experience timely enforcement without the previous delays needed to schedule a hearing to suspend or revoke the permit.

Only three surety forfeitures have been made as a result of operators abandoning the site without performing reclamation; this is a good record, considering that there are well over 500 mines. The forfeitures included a $2,500 savings assignment for a sand and gravel pit, a $2,321 mortgage of real property for a clay mine and a $2,500 bond for a crushed stone operation.

Summary

Seeking voluntary compliance has been the primary means of gaining compliance with The Mining Act of 1971. The large majority of mine operators have complied with the mining permits and provisions of the Act with only occasional reminders. Almost all operators will cooperate fully when reminded of the enforcement provisions. However, the Mining Act of 1971 as amended in 1981 provides several enforcement options with dealing with habitual, continuing, or severe violations. Operators mining without a permit and violations of permit conditions are normally assessed a civil penalty. More urgent violations endangering public safety or environmental quality may be enforced more expediently by court injunction if the operator fails to voluntarily comply immediately. A civil penalty would usually follow such action. In the case of repeated, willful violation, criminal charges may be sought. Permit revocation and bond forfeiture are reserved for cases of continuous or habitual violations or abandonment of sites.

RECLAMATION IN NORTH CAROLINA

The Mining Act of 1971 requires that reclamation begin as soon as practical after completion or termination of mining. Although the Act provides that reclamation be completed within two years, the Department is authorized to grant longer periods to reclaim the site when two years is not adequate. This extension is commonly granted for Quarry type excavations where areas of the excavation are active, and clay settling pond areas where the clay may take years to consolidate.

Prior to the enactment of the Mining Act, reclamation was not required by law in North Carolina. Consequently, what little reclamation was done was often accomplished

- 8 -

346

haphazardly and often did not actually restore the mined area to any useful purpose.

A preliminary report based on information supplied by the operators initially permitted in 1972 showed that approximately 1100 acres had been reclaimed prior to the Mining Act. One early estimate by the Soil Conservation Service found that over 36,000 acres had been mined in the state prior to 1965.

Mined land statistics were not kept until 1973 when the operators were required to submit the annual reclamation reports outlining mine disturbance and reclamation during the previous year. These reports show that approximately 5896 acres have been reclaimed during the period 1971-1982. During this same period, approximately 13,092 acres have been mined. This reclaimed land represents about 45% of the mined land since the Mining Act was passed. The 55% not yet reclaimed consists of long term mine use such as quarry excavations, processing plants, stock piles, active waste piles, and settling ponds.

Table 3 illustrates the amount of land mined and reclaimed by permitted operations each year from 1973-1982. As previously mentioned, these statistics are based on annual reports submitted by the operators. Although an effort is made to field-check the reports during mine inspections, these statistics should be considered approximate.

The total amount of mining land disturbed and reclaimed has increased steadily since 1973 as is shown in Table 3.

The mined land acreage is expected to increase dramatically when another major phosphate mine opens and if proposed large scale peat mining operations develop. Consequently, mine reclamation will become even more important to ensure that the state’s land is wisely utilized.

- 9 -

Table 3

Number of Acres Disturbed by Mining and Reclaimed(1)

Industrial Year Sand & Gravel Crushed Stone Minerals

Dist. Recl.(2) Dist. Red. Dist. Recl.

1971-73 476 50 129 43 130 19

1974 504 189 172 62 32 109

1975 521 288 155 83 108 49

1976 459 379 203 83 204 367

1977 450 457 190 108 180 74

I 1978 437 251 186 98 492 175

Z; 1979 359 285 240 134 503 143

1980 524 274 242 153 2245 154

1981(3) 600 536 225 150 1096 150

I

1982 483 303 217 146 110 122

TOTAL 4813 3012 1959 1060 5100 1362

Dimension Clay & Shale Stone Gemstone Total Dist. Recl. Dist. Recl. Dist. Recl. Dist. Recl.

64 0

168 93

74 44

86 33

66 21

134 18

176 52

150 44

100 25

38 7

1056 337

2 0 5 0 806 112

1 4 7 15 884 472

6 1 15 0 879 465

2 0 11 19 965 881

12 0 5 13 903 673

11 7 8 4 1268 553

12 10 11 8 1301 632

8 4 11 10 3180 639

rj

10 5 5 7 2036 873

17 1 1 870 596 21

85 48 79 77 13092 5896

(1)Mine land disturbance and reclamation statistics are based on information submitted by permitted

(2)Dist. - Acres Disturbed during year; Recl. - Acres Reclaimed during year operators and should be considered approximate

(3)Individual Commodity statistics for 1981 are estimated; Total is based on annual reports

348

RESEARCH NEEDS FOR IMPROVED RECLAMATION

While there are many areas of reclamation research that could lead to more productive mine reclamation at lower cost, there are three important categories of mine reclamation problems that deserve special priority in North Carolina. These are: waste clay impoundment reclamation, particularly in the phosphate and gravel mining industries; buffer zone criteria for alluvial gravel mines along mountain streams; and reclamation alternatives in peat mining areas. Brief discussion of these follows:

Waste Clay Impoundments

Many mining operations utilize a washing process to separate silt and clay sized materials from the ore, and these fine grained waste materials are deposited as a slurry in mined-out pits and/or retained in artificial impoundments formed by earth dams. The clay waste deposits are typically colloidal, thixotropic masses tens of feet thick, and are very slow to consolidate. Normally the waste impoundments will not support significant loads (such as sand-capping or agricultural equipment) for many years or even decades. Unreclaimed waste clay impoundments account for a significant portion of the difference between "acres disturbed" and "acres reclaimed" in the North Carolina mining statistics.

In terms of total volume and unreclaimed surface areas, this problem is most severe in the phosphate and gravel industries. For example, the phosphate industry in North Carolina has dedicated almost 3 , 0 0 0 acres to clay waste impoundments having an ultimate storage capacity of almost 100,000 acre feet. None of these areas has been reclaimed to date.

In Florida, considerable research has been done on developing economically feasible methods of accelerating consolidation of phosphatic clay wastes, and some progress has been made. That research and experience needs to be extrapolated to North Carolina's conditions. Texasgulf, Inc. is currently experimenting with a new system of mixing sand, clay, and gypsum wastes; optimization of that system for improved reclamation could be aided by further research.

Improvement of consolidated rates and reclamation of clay wastes could be of significant economic benefit to the mining industry by reducing the number of waste storage impoundments constructed and by increasing the value of these 1 ands . Reduction in the number and size of these impoundments also would lessen the risk of damage by dam failures.

- 11 -

349

Gravel Minina Alona Mountain Streams

There is a significant amount of alluvial gravel mining in the floodplains of mountain streams in North Carolina. Many of these streams support trout fisheries; all are relatively high velocity waterways and flood frequently. The mines are obviously in environmentally sensitive areas. Mining permits in these areas require that undisturbed buffer zones be maintained between the mining excavation and the streams. However, the buffer zones are often destroyed by natural migration of the streams.

Research is needed to establish criteria for buffer zone width requirements and to determine the best vegetation types for buffer zones and reclamation areas.

Peat Minina Wet Reclamation Alternatives

Currently peat mining permits specify that the mined areas will be reclaimed to agricultural use or forests. Practically all of the currently permitted areas will have mined pit bottom elevations sufficiently high to allow gravity drainage after mining. However, there are thousands of acres of potentially minable peat deposits that are too low-lying to be gravity drained after mining is completed. Reclamation of these low-lying areas to agriculture or forestry would require "perpetual pumping". There would be no assurance that pumping would be maintained and the areas could become permanently flooded. It is unknown whether such flooded mined-out peat lands would be productive for wildlife or fisheries.

Research is needed to establish acceptable reclamation alternatives for these low-lying deposits. The research should include investigation of the desirability of diking to prevent salt water flooding during major storms, natural and introduced vegetation in flooded areas, and prediction of the types of wildlife and fisheries habitat that would develop naturally or could be developed by properly designed wetlands.

- 12 -

350

i 1

r e a t i n g Brackish-water Marshes f o r P o s s i b l e M i t i g a t i o n of Wetland D i s t u r b a n c e s x

E. D. Seneca and W. W. Nor th C a r o l i n a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y

ABS TRACT

Techniques were developed f o r es t p b l i s h i n g new b r a c k i s h - w a t e r a r s h e s by g r a d i n g and t r a w s p l a n t i n g s i t e s n e a r t h e Pamlic -a e s t u a r y . The pu rpose of c r e a t i n g new marshes was t o $‘evelop a method f o r o f f s e t t i n g l o s s e s of n a t u r a l marshes f b a t may occur due t o phospha te mining a c t i v i t i es . T h e , most c r i t i c a l step w a s d e t e r m i n i n g e l e v a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e marsh p l a n t spec ies i n r e l a t i o n t o l o c a l t t d e l e v e l s and g r a d i n g t o t h e c o r r e c t e l e v a t i o n s . P l a n t S p a r t i n a and Juncus

f e r t i l i z e r s t o t h e growth of t h e S p a r t i n a s p e c i e s . / S t a n d i n g c r o p of t h e t r a n s p l a n t e d S p a r t i n a w a s e q u a l t o y a t u r a l s t a n d by t h e end o f two growing s e a s o n s , b u t - J. roemer i anus w a s s l o w e r t o deve lop . I

/

w a s

I

The e f f e c t of a t r a n s p l a n t e d marsh on w a t e r chemis t ry w a s a s s e s s e d d u r i n g c o n t r o l l e d I t i d a l exchanges. Water samples were ana lyzed f o r okganic carbon and 13 m i n e r a l n u t r i e n t s . R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d tWt t h e marsh c o n t r i b u t e d Mn, Zn, Fe and NHq-N t o t h e e s t u a r i e water and a c t e d as a s i n k f o r PO4-P. h.

INTRODUCT’JON / I

T i d a l marshes a re v a l u a b l e r e s o u r c e s which a re a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of p r o d u c t i v e e s t a r i n e sys tems. They are i m p o r t a n t n u r s e r y grounds and\ s o u r c e s of ene rgy and n u t r i e n t s f o r a q u a t i c organisms ( ). Marshes a l s o p r o v i d e f o o d and h a b i t a t f o r w l l d l i f e , and w a t e r f o w l , r e d u c e s h o r e l i n e e r o s i o n , s e r v e ab b u f f e r g a g a i n s t s to rm t i d e s and ass imi la te e x c e s s n u t r i e n F s from p \ o l l u t a n t s such as sewage and a g r i c u l t u r a l d r a i n a g e / \ \

Marshes a re p r o t e c q e d from d i i t u r b a n c e by s t a t e and I \

f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n s of t h e i r B c o l o g i c a l and economic value. In s p i t e of Q z t u r b a n c e s may occur i l l e g a l l y , cases may b e j u s t i f i e d

1