effects of coal pile runoff on stream quality and macroinvertebrate communities

VOL. 21, NO. 3 WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN

AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION JUNE 1985

EFFECTS OF COAL PILE RUNOFF ON STREAM QUALITY AND MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITIES

Michael C. Swift'

ABSTRACT: Samples of coal pile runoff, Georges Creek water, and macrobenthos above and below two coal storage areas along Georges Creek, AUegany County, Maryland, were collected in July, August, and September 1982, and February and July 1983. Coal pile runoff was collected under high- and low-flow conditions. Water samples were analyzed for Hg, Zn, As, Fe, Mn, Al, SOT2, pH, filterable and nonfilterable residue, conductivity and acidity. Leachate from coal piles along Georges Creek contained high concentrations of heavy metals, particularly manganese, aluminum and zinc. Iron and sulfate were very high and the pH ranged from 1.4 to 3.1. Georges Creek water had much lower concentrations of metals, iron and sulfate and a pH of about 7.0. The distribution of macrobenthos in Georges Creek showed the effects of both runoff from coal storage piles and periodic drought. Brillouin's diversity index values were low even in areas which did not dry. Densities of tubificid worms and chironomid larvae were very high above the coal storage areas where organic inputs were high. At all the rest of the sampling stations, macroinvertebrate densities were very low. Where coal pile runoff enters Georges Creek, it compounds the effects of periodic drought and further stresses the aquatic community. (KEY TERMS: coal pile leachate composition; macrobenthos diversity; heavy metals; acidity; water quality.)

INTRODUCTION

Projected increases in coal utilization in the United States pose a variety of environmental problems, including land disturbance, air pollution, and waste disposal. Increasing use of coal by power plants will require additional storing and handling of coal, both at power plants and at areas near mines. One potential environmental pollutant from stored coal is runoff which can enter water bodies adjacent to storage areas. Most power plants are designed with permanent containment systems for holding coal pile runoff until it can be treated. Coal storage sites at or near the mine site often do not have adequate containment and treatment systems. Thus, the potential for water pollution from coal pile runoff is much greater from coal stored near the mine site than from coal stored at power plants. Even though coal piles near mine sites are small and individual piles are stored in these areas for a relatively short time, coal is almost always present. The potential for environmental damage from runoff from these piles

is particularly serious because most toxic materials which leach from coal do so within the first few times the coal is ex- posed to water.

The chemical nature of leachate from stored coal is not well known. Carlson, et al. (1979), showed that elutes from Great Plains coal were relatively nontoxic to a variety of test organisms. However, Cox, et al. (1979), showed that coal leachate was highly acidic and contaminated with high concentrations of SOz2, Fe, Mn, Al, Zn, Hg, As, and Se. An important finding of their study was that elutes from shaker-type laboratory studies do not reflect the composition of coal-pile leachate . Previous studies of coal pile leachate were either done in the laboratory (Carlson, et al., 1979) or on coal piles stored on site at power plants (Nichols, 1974; Anderson and Youngstrom, 1976; Matsugu, 1976; Cox, et aZ., 1979; Brook- man, et aZ., 1981). Because utilities maintain roughly a 90day supply of coal, the turnover of these large coal piles is relatively slow. Leachate from utility coal storage piles may not be representative of leachate from recently mined coal.

Effects of coal-pile runoff on aquatic macroinvertebrates have not been measured directly. Many studies have measured the effect of acid mine drainage on aquatic communities (e.g., Roback and Richardson, 1969; Simmons, 1973; Dills and Rogers, 1974; Orciari and Hummon, 1975). These studies showed that under acidic conditions most orders of aquatic insects, mollusks, and worms are eliminated or reduced in density. To the extent that coal-pile runoff is similar to acid mine drainage, these studies suggest that coal runoff should ad- versely affect aquatic macroinvertebrates.

This study was designed to describe the chemical composition of coal-pile runoff, monitor the effect of this runoff on the water quality of Georges Creek and measure the effect of coal-pile runoff on the macroinvertebrate community in Georges Creek.

'Paper No. 84059 of the Wuter Resources Bulletin. Discussions are open until February 1, 1986. (Contribution number 1616-AEL from UMCEES,

2University of Maryland, Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, Appalachian Environmental Laboratory, Frostburg State College Campus, Appalachian Environmental Laboratory.)

Gunter Hall, Frostburg, Maryland 21532.

449 WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN

swift

METHODS

Study Area Georges Creek lies in western Maryland in the valley be-

tween Big Savage Mountain and Dans Mountain. It drains to the south into the North Branch of the Potomac River at Westernport, Maryland. Two study sites were chosen at the upper end of Georges Creek where it is in close proximity to coal storage piles. Water samples were collected above and below each site.

Site I was located adjacent to a coal washing plant and large coal storage area. The upstream sampling station (IA) was located about 400 m above the coal piles and 100 m above the coal washing plant. The creek at this site is 2-5 m wide, and flows over a mixed mud, gravel and cobble substrate that is essentially continuous riffle. There is no coal storage or mining above this point but there is organic waste input to the creek. Water depth varies from as much as 1 m at high water to a few cm at low flow. This site was not dry at any time during this study. The downstream sampling station (IB) was located about 50 m downstream from the coal storage area. The creek bed at this site is loose shale and sand. The creek was completely dry at this site during late summer, 1982.

Coal-pile runoff from the coal storage piles at Site I is collected by a ditch and carried to a holding pond beside Georges Creek. Consequently, no runoff from these coal piles directly enters Georges Creek. Coal-pile runoff at this site was collected where water was running through cuts in the coal piles into the ditch.

Site I1 was located about 3 km downstream from site I and was adjacent to coal storage piles. The upstream sampling

station (IIA) was located about 100 m above the coal piles and just below a rock dam about 0.3 m high. The creek a t this site is about 5 m wide. Water depth ranges from about 0.75 m at high flow to sleepage < 1 cm at low flow. Even while parts of Georges Creek were dry during 1982, there was seepage from the small pool behind the rock dam at this station. The creek bottom is composed of small gravel and sand including some grass. The downstream sampling station (IIB) was located about 20 m below the storage piles. The creek runs between high banks at this station and is about 5 m wide. Water depth ranged from 0.75 m at high flow to dry in late summer, 1982. The creek bottom at this site is composed of shale and coal that has slumped down from coal piles on the creek bank. In late summer, 1982, bulldozers removed about 0.5 m of coal and shale from the dry creek bed.

Coal-pile runoff from coal piles at this site runs into a small collecting pond or into Georges Creek. Samples were collected for this study at the southern end of the coal storage area just above the creek and at the center of the storage area above the small collecting pond.

In this paper the terms runoff and leachate are used inter- changeably and refer to water collected as it left the coal storage area.

Water Chemisifry Water samples were collected and analyzed using EPA-

approved methods (Table 1). Samples were collected in plastic or glass bottles and held at 4OC until analyzed, Samples were analyzed for pH, conductivity, temperature, filterable residue, nonfilterable residue, acidity, sulfate, iron, manganese, aluminum, ziric, mercury, and arsenic. Samples were analyzed

TABLE 1. Analytical Methods for Water Analysis.

Analysis Site Method Reference

PH Field Electrometric (EPA Method 150.1) EPA (1979) Conductivity Field Specific conductance (EPA Method 120.1, YSI Model EPA (1979)

Temperature Field Thermometer EPA (1979) Filterable Residue AEL Gravimetric (EPA Method 160.1) EPA (1979) Nonfilterable Residue AEL Gravimetric (EPA Method 160.2) EPA (1979) Acidity AEL Titrimetric (EPA Method 305.1) EPA (1979) sulfate CBL Turbidimetric (EPA Method 375.4) EPA (1979) Iron (Fe) CBL AA, Direct Aspiration (EPA Method 236.1) EPA (1979) Manganese (Mn) CBL AA, Direct Aspiration (EPA Method 243.1) EPA (1979) Aluminum (Al) CBL AA, Furnace (EPA Method 202.2) EPA (1979) Zinc (Zn) CBL AA, Furnace (EPA Method 289.2) EPA (1979) Mercury (Hg) CBL Coleman Hg Analyzer MAS-50, using stannous

chloride as a reducing agent Arsenic (As) CBL AA, Hg hydride generator using sodium borohydride Perkin Elmer Manual

33, SC-T Meter)

NOTE: AEL = Appalachian Environmental Laboratory. CBL = Chesapeake Biological Laboratory. AA = Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry.


Effects of Coal Pile Runoff on Stream Quality and Macroinvertebrate Communities

at either the Appalachian Environmental Laboratory or at Chesapeake Biological Laboratory.

Leachate samples were collected after short and long dry periods to assess the effect of rainfall volume and incubation time on leachate quality.

Macroinvertebrate Corn munity Analysis Stream invertebrates were sampled using a T-sampler

(Mackie and Bailey, 1981) made of 10.8 cm diameter plastic pipe and 0.5 mm mesh which sampled an area of 91.6 cm2 to a depth of about 3 cm. Three replicate samples were collected above (IA, IIA) and below (IB, IIB) each coal storage site on 3 August and 27 August 1982, and 1 February and 14 July 1983. Samples were preserved in formalin in the field, sorted in the laboratory and preserved in 70 percent alcohol. Indivi- dual organisms were identified to the lowest practicable taxon using the keys in Pennak (1978) and Edmondson (1959).

Statistical Analyses The number of individuals per taxon on each date was used

for upstream/downstream and between site comparisons. Brillouin's diversity index (€3) was calcdated from the counts in each T-sample following the method of Stauffer, et al. (1 980). Because only one species was present in some samples and no macroinvertebrates were found in others, it was not possible to make statistical comparisons among stations and dates.

RESULTS

Water Chemistry Water chemistry in Georges Creek varied with station and

flow rate (Tables 2 and 3) but there were few clear trends.

Throughout the sampling period, the creek pH was circum- neutral, there was no measurable acidity, conductivity was low and the temperature was reasonable for the season. Non- filterable residue was very low (< 0.05 mgl-l) and, while generally higher and more variable, filterable residue was low as well.

Iron and zinc were the most concentrated metals on each date sampled (Tables 2 and 3); sulfate concentration was high also. Most metals were present in higher concentrations below the coal storage piles (21 of 30 metal and sulphate samples). This was especially true for aluminum. Concentrations were generally higher at Site I1 than at Site I. Neither arsenic nor mercury was detectable at the limits of the analytical tech- niques used.

On 29 July, the flow rate in Georges Creek was low at all stations and by 14 September only a few small pools of water remained at Sites IB, IIA, and IIB. Drought conditions continued until late September. At station IA, water flowed continuously, even during the drought period. The 27 Sep- tember sample was collected within 24 hours of the first significant rainfall in 30 days. The creek was flowing well at all sampling sites at this time. These changes in flow are reflected in the temperature data, but the other water quality parameters measured in this study show no trends with stream flow.

Chemistry of Coal Pile Runoff The chemistry of coal-pile runoff is significantly different

than that of Georges Creek and poses a significant pollution potential. The chemistry of coal runoff differed among the three sampling dates and between sites.

Within site differences in chemical characteristics of coal leachate were considerable (Tables 4 and 5). Flow rates were low on all three sampling dates and the runoff was the color

TABLE 2. Georges Creek Water Chemistry at Site I During Late Summer 1982. The flow rate was low on 29 July and average on 27 September; the creek was mostly dry on 14 September so samples below the coal piles were collected from small pools.

Parameter

Above Coal Piles Below Coal Piles

29 July 14 September 27 September 29 July 14 September 27 September

Fe (mg/liter) Mn (mg/liter) Al (mgfliter) As (mglliter) Hg (mg/liter) Zn (mg/liter)

Acidity (mglliter as CaC03) Filterable Residue (mglliter) Nonfilterable Residue (mg/liter) Conductivity (II mho/cm)

PH Temperature (OC)

(mg/liter)

5.08 0.1 1 0.130

<0.001 < O . l O

0.92

0 0.294 0.004

48

430 1.4

17

3.62 0.34 0.090

<0.001 < O . l O

0.04 6.20 0 0.116 0.016

250

19 7.1

2.22 0.14 0.097

<O.OOl < O . l O

0.59 45.9

0 0.235 0.011

7.7 14.5

355

1.71 1.08 0.810

<O.OOl < O . l O

2.55 1225

0 0.304 0.009

7.0 390

18

5.15 2.01 0.705

<0.001 < O . l O

0.68 22.9 0 0.289 0.056

650 7.4

23

4.25 0.29 0.792

<0.001 < O . l O

0.03 66.6

0 0.212 0.022

7.0 13.5

315


Swift

TABLE 3. Georges Creek Water Chemistry at Site I1 During Late Summer 1982. The flow rate was low on 29 July and average on 27 September; on 14 September water samples above and below the coal pile were collected from small pools.

~~

Parameter

~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ - ~~

Above Coal Piles Below Coal Piles

29 July 14 September 27 September 29 July 14 September 27 September

Fe (mglliter) Mn (mg/liter) A1 (mglliter) As (mg/liter) Hg (mg/liter) Zn (mg/liter)

Acidity (mg/liter as CaC03) Filterable Residue (mg/liter) Nonfilterable Residue (mglliter) Conductivity (p mho/cm) PH Temperature (OC)

(mglliter)

1.84 0.25 0.566

<O.OOl < O . l O

2.83 110

0 0.285 0.018

7.2 330

19

4.06 1.32 0.905

< 0.001 < O . l O

0.43 317

0 0.604 0.042

7.9 680

19

1.65 0.27 0.479

<O.OOl < O . l O

0.70 84.0 0 0.169 0.002

6.7 300

13

2.03 0.32 0.749

< 0.001 <O. lO

150 0 0.319 0.017

6.8

2.55

370

20

1.20 3.39 0.531

<0.001 < O . l O

0.49 317

0 1.048 0.004

6.4 1480

21

1.20 0.30 0.218

<O.OOl < O . l O

0.22 95.0 0 0.183 0.023

6.7 255

13

of gasoline. Variations in flow rate did occur; flow rate was greatest on 13 October and least on 9 June. However, differences in chemical characteristics did not always correlate with flow rate. In general, metals and sulfate concentrations and conductivity were inversely proportional to flow rate, and pH and filterable and nonfilterable residue concentrations were proportional to flow rate (Tables 4 and 5).

Coal storage pile runoff was highly contaminated with metals. The highest concentrations of Mn, Al, As, Hg and Zn were found in the very low flow sample collected at Site I on 9 June (Table 4). These concentrations were 5-10 times higher than those in samples collected on 29 July and 13 October.

The concentrations of metals and sulfate were higher at Site I than Site I1 (10 of 12 data pairs) on both 29 July and 13 October (Tables 4 and 5). Of particular concern were the high concentrations of Hg, As, Al and Zn. Coal pile runoff from Site I had a lower pH and higher filterable residue, conductivity and acidity as well (Tables 4 and 5). These differences between sites may have been due to the size of the coal piles. At Site I the coal piles were about 10 m high and covered about 1 ha while at Site I1 the coal piles were only about 3-5 m high and covered about 0.1 ha.

TABLE 4. Chemical Analysis of Coal Pile Runoff a t Site I.

Parameter 9 June 29 July, 13 October

Fe (mg/liter) Mn (mg/liter) A1 (mg/liter) As (mglliter) Hg (mg/liter) Zn (mg/liter)

Acidity (mglliter as CaCO,) Filterable Residue (mglliter) Nonfilterable Residue (mg/liter) Conductivity (I.( mho/cm) PH Temperature (OC) Flow Rate Inches of Rain in Previous 10 Days

(rnglliter)

84.66

16.24 1,872

0.025 194.35

20,000

32 Very Low

2.69

1.4

4,253 22.84

215.1 3.02

<O. lO 13.54 13.625

99 1 17.0 0.005

68,800 1.9

25 Low

0.43

83,536 3.34

220.3 2.68

<O.lO 3.82

7,802 7,104

11.21 0.250

2.5 4,100

11 Low

0.1 1

452

~~~

WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN


TABLE 5. Chemical Analysis of Cod Pile Runoff at Site 11. Station IIA never completely dried because of percolation through the short dam just above the sampling site. However, most of the creek bed did dry and where water continued to

29 July 13 October Parameter ~~

Fe (mglliter) Mn (mglliter) Al (mglliter) As (mglliter) Hg (mglliter) Zn (mglliter)

Acidity (mglliter as CaC03) Filterable Residue (mg/liter) Nonfilterable Residue (mglliter) Conductivity (p mholcm)

Temperature (OC) Flow Rate Inches of Rain in Previous 10 Days

(mg/liter)

PH

954 16.86

238.2 <O.OOl <O.lO

11.69 5,150

351 6.47 0.0023

2.1 22.5 Low 0.11

5,000

10,671 3.06

19.85 <0.001 < O . l O

4.62 796 583

1.33 6.49

1,050

12 Low

3.1

0.43

Macroinvertebrates The macrobenthos community of Georges Creek is char-

acterized by low diversity and, except for three species at one station, low density. The mean diversity of all replicates and dates on which more than one species was collected was H = 0.62 (n = 39). The fauna tended to be specific to each sampling station and primarily reflected the effects of periodic drying of the creek bed during fall 1982.

At station IA, Georges Creek flowed continuously, received a high organic load and received no coal storage or mining wastes. The macroinvertebrate fauna at this station was primarily tubificid worms and chironomid larvae; simuliid larvae were present in July 1983 (Table 6). The dominance of tubificid worms or chironomid larvae in the T-samples depended on whether the bottom was more muddy or sandy, respectively. Because of the numerical dominance of two taxa, species diversity at this station was relatively low on all four sampling dates (Table 7).

Georges Creek dried completely at least twice between 3 August and 1 February. It was barely flowing on 26 August, dry on 14 September, flowing well on 27 September, dry on 13 October, and flowing well on 1 February. Shortly before 25 August, during a low flow period, there was a large spill at the coal washing plant above station IB which introduced a large amount of very fine particulate coal into the creek. The effects of these unpredictable and harsh habitat changes can be seen in the macrobenthic invertebrate community. The macrobenthos at station IB consisted of 4-5 taxa, but they were present in very low numbers (Table 6) . Because no species was numerically dominant in the T-samples the species diversity was somewhat higher than at station IA (Table 7). By July 1983, macroinvertebrate diversity was still low but water quality improvement was indicated by the presence of four species of fish: white sucker, golden shiner, blacknose dace and pumpkinseed.

flow it was only as a thin sheet (< 1 cm) over the substrate. The macrobenthic community was characterized by a greater number of species than at other stations but with very low densities (Tables 6 and 7). In most T-samples, seven to ten taxa were represented, including the only mayflies and dragon- flies collected in this study.

Station IIB dried on the same schedule as station IB. In addition, a large amount of coal slumped into the creek between 3 August and 25 August. During one of the following dry periods, a bulldozer was used to remove about 0.5-1 m of stream bottom, which was largely coal. The remaining substrate was largely coal fmes and small pieces of shale. These habitat disturbances are evident in the macroinvertebrate community. When first sampled, species diversity and density were very low (Tables 6 and 7). The second sample contained even fewer macroinvertebrates and the third sample contained only coal and shale. There was considerable recolonization at this station by July 1983.

DISCUSSION

Coal Runoff This study presents unique data on the chemical composi-

tion of coal runoff from coal piles stored near the mine site prior to shipping and on runoff from western Maryland coal. The chemical composition of coal runoff is a function of rainfall parameters (frequency, intensity, duration, pH, evapora- tion) and coal pile parameters (sulfur content, age of pile, particle size, pile configuration, temperature, microorganisms) (Davis and Boegly, 1981). There have been only a few studies of coal-pile runoff and these have all been on power plant coal piles. Davis and Boegly (1981) summarized much of these data and they are presented here for comparison with this study (Table 8).

It is immediately apparent that coal runoff in this study contained substantially higher concentrations of iron, man- genese, aluminum, arsenic, zinc and sulfate and significantly lower filterable and nonfilterable residue (Table 8). The low concentrations of particulate and dissolved material in runoff from Sites I and I1 is due to the slow runoff flow rates when these samples were collected. Even shortly after a rainfall, runoff was pale yellow in color and contained little particulate material. One explanation for the low filterable and nonfilterable residue values in this study is that newly mined coal may contain fewer fine particulates than coal on site at power plants, which is more pulverized from repeated handling. The high metal and sulfate concentrations are more difficult to explain. Western Maryland coal is found in 13 different seams. The coal stored at Site I and Site 11 includes coaf from these seams and is relatively low in sulfur (2.7-4.1 percent) Toenges, et al., 1949). Coal composition may explain why western Maryland coal runoff contains higher concentrations of some


swift

TABLE 6. Mean Number of Individuals of Each Taxon Per T-Sample in Georges Creek.

3 August 1982 26 August 1982 1 February 1983 14 July 1983 - Taxon L4 IB IIA IIB IA IB IIA IIB IA IB IIA IIB IA IB IIA IIB

< 1 < I

2 < l

326 27 1 231 1

< 1

Nema toda <1 <1 Annelida

Oligocheaeta Haplotaxida

Tubificidae 208 5 Arthropoda

Crustacea Isopoda

Asellidae Amphipoda

Gammaridae Gammarus

Decapoda Cambaridae

Cambarus Insecta

Ephemerop tera Baetidae

Odonata Gophidae

Hemiptera Gerridae Veliidae

Megalop tera Sialidae

Sialis Coleoptera

Dy tiscidae Hydaticus

Diptera Tipulidae

Tipula Chironomidae

sp. A sp. B pupae

Heleidae Tabanidae

Simuliidae Empididae Muscidae

Tabanus

Mollusca Gastropoda

Basommatophora Physidae

Planorbidae 1 Physa 2 < 1 3 <1 3

Bivalvia Heterodonta

Sphaeridae Sphaerium <1 1

213 65 6 1

< 1

< 1

<1

1

23

<1

1

<1 1

< 1 1

113 11 2 1 472 2 4 1 14 1 < 1 140 239 13 6 < 1 1 5 1 1 0 3 8 1 1 < 1 15 4 9 < 1 1

< 1 1 < 1

1 < 1 1 <: 1

1 1

<1 55 < 1

< 1 < 1

3 1 <1

<1

metals and sulfate than runoff in studies cited by Davis and Boegley (1981) but it doesn’t explain the runoff differences between sites. These differences are probably due to differences in the configuration of the coal piles at these sites. At Site I, the piles were larger in height and area than at Site

11. As a result, percolation was probably slower and concentration of pollutants may have been greater. The duration of runoff from :any rainfall was much shorter at Site I1 than at Site I, which suggests that rainfall was in contact with coal for a much shorter time at Site I1 than at Site I.



TABLE 7. Brillouin's Diversity Indices for Replicate T-Samples at Each Station and Mean Diversity Index and Standard Deviation at Each Station.

Replicate -

Date Station 1 2 3 X S

3 August 1982 IA IB IIA IIB

0.56 0.78 1.01

1 Species

0.75 0.50 1.04

No Fauna

0.68 0.99 1.02 0.62

0.67 0.59 0.93 0.48

0.64 0.07 0.79 0.20 1.00 0.02 0.55 0.10

26 August 1982 IA IB IIA IIB

0.77 0.58 1.32

1 Species

0.70 0.27 0.48

1 Species

0.74 0.04 0.45 0.16 0.94 0.43

1 February 1983 IA IB IIA IIB

0.67 0.35

No Fauna No Fauna

0.53 0.27 0.44 0.32

. 0.11 0.37

No Fauna No Fauna

0.13 0.37 0.37

No Fauna

0.31 0.32 0.36 0.01

14 July 1983 IA IB IIA IIB

0.87 0.17 0.65 0.61

0.77 0.72 1.06 0.72

0.72 0.17 0.38 0.30 0.72 0.31 0.55 0.21

TABLE 8. Chemical Composition of Coal Pile Leachate From Several Studies (upper values are ranges, lower values are means).

"A4

Parameter Site I' Site III E P A ~ G X I I ~ U ~ Plant J Plant E Plant E Storm Ontario Hydro5

Fe (mg/liter)

Mn (mglliter)

4,253-83,536 95483,671 0.06-93,000 104,250 240-1,800 280480 62-380 150-1,000 10,800 1,140 940 380 150 420

3.34-84.66 3.06-16.86 4.5-72.0 8.545 2.4-10.0 0.88-5.4 3.4-12 17.1 28.7 4.13 2.3 7

Al (mdliter)

As (mg/liter)

215.1-1,872 19.85-238.2

2.68-16.24 0.001

66440 2260 26 0 43.3

0.005-0.6 0.006-0.46 0.17 0.02

48-75 62

0.02-0.1

Hg (mglliter) 0.10 0.10 0.0002-0.0025 0.003-0.007 0.0004 0.004

5.89 5.9 6.68 2.18 3.82-194.35 4.62-11.69 0.006-23 2.4-26 2.3-16 1.1-3.7 Zn (mg/liter)

- 0.2-0.3

7,802-13,625 796-5,150 133-21,920 6,880

1,800-9,600 1,9004,000 870-5,500 1,1006,900 5,160 2,780 2,300 4,100

Acidity (mglliter as CaC03) 991-7,104 351-583 375-8,250 300-7,100 860-2,100 300-1,400 300-2,850

Filterable Residue (mglliter) 11.21-17.0 1.336.47 24744,050 9,300-14,900 2,500-16,000 2,900-5,000 1,200-7,500 4,600-11,600

2,560 3,400 1,360 710 1,500

11,700 7,900 3,600 2,700 6,500

Nonfilterable Residue (mg/liter) 0.005-0.250 0.0026.49 69-2,500 8.0-2,300 3 8-270 470 190 650

Conductivity (cc mho/cm) 4,100-20,000 1,050-5,000

PH 1.4-2.5 2.1-3.1 2.1-7.8 2.2-5.8 2.3-3.1 2.5-3.1 2.5-2.7 2.4-2.9 2.79 2.67 2.63 2.7

Temperature (OC) 11-25 12-22.5

'This study; 'Nichols, 1974; 3Anderson and Youngstrom, 1976; 4C0x, etal. , 1977; 'Featherby and Dodd, 1977.


Swift

Macroinvertebrate Communities The macroinvertebrate fauna in the upper end of Georges

Creek where this study was conducted was depauperate. Identifying the reason(s) for the general low macroinvertebrate density and diversity is complicated by the interacting effects of drought and pollution from coal pile runoff..

When a creek dries, most of the macroinvertebrate fauna present dies. Recolonization is dependent on refugia which can provide a source of organisms once water is again flowing in the creek. Refugia include resting stages in the life cycle, stages absent from the aquatic habitat during the life cycle and areas which remain wet. In Georges Creek wet refugia oc- curred at station IA where the creek flowed continuously and at station IIA where a small rock dam created a small pool. Despite these refugia, sampling in February 1983 indicated little recolonization downstream after flow began in Novem- ber.

It is clear from the samples collected in July 1983, following a six-month wet period, that recolonization occurs both from the wet refugium above station IA and from other nearby stations. This is particularly clear at stations IIA and IIB, where an almost complete lack of fauna was replaced by communities with diversities little different from those at stations IA and IB. Tubificid worms, snails and clams probably dispersed from station IA and the pool above station IIA, while insect larvae could have come from upstream sites or nearby creeks.

Substrate type also affects macroinvertebrate distribution. The stream bed at station IA was the most representative of a normal stream and contained cobbles, gravel, sand and mud. The stream bed at station IB and IIB was primarily loose shift- ing shale or banks of coal fines mud. Station IIA was slightly better habitat than IB or IIB, but the sand and gravel there

was very shallow and dry much of the year. Coal fines and coal spoil in the form of shale are an important pollutant in Georges Creek. Superimposed on the effects of drought and coal particulates on the macroinvertebrate community in Georges Creek is the dissolved pollutant load in coal-pile runoff. When stream flow is moderate to high this pollutant load is diluted and water quality in the creek supports both invertebrates and fish. In fact, the organic loading above station IA probably enhances production of tubidicid worms and chironomid larvae. At lower flow rates coal pile runoff can be expected to have the same effects on macroinvertebrates as does acid mine drainage. One important difference is that acid mine drainage is usually continuous, whereas coal pile runoff is usually intermittent.

The results of this study are comparable to earlier surveys of macroinvertebrate distribution in Georges Creek. Stauffer, et aL (1981), studied the entire length of Georges Creek and found an average macroinvertebrate diversity of 0.97. Their values are somewhat higher than those recorded in this study, but they include nine stations spread over 20 km, none of which dries.

456

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study (.4-062-MD) was funded by USDI, OWRT as part of the 1981-1982 Annual Cooperative Program of the Maryland Water R e sources Research Center. Computer time for this project was supported in full by the Computer Science Center of the University of Maryland. Bruce Taliaferro, Tim Welch, Donna Gates and Diana Striegel assisted in the field and with analyses. The coal companies whose coal storage piles were included in this study generously provided access for sampling.

LITERATURE CITED

Anderson, W. C. and P. M. Youngstrom, 1976. Coal Pile Leachate - Quantity and Quality Characteristics. J. Sanit. Eng. Div., Am. SOC. Civ. Eng. 10:2(EE6) : 123 9-1 253.

Brookman, G. 'I:., J. A. Ripp, P. B. Katz, B. C. Middlesworth, and D. K. Martin, 1981. Planning Study to Model and Monitor Coal PiIe Runoff. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/S7-81- 016, Washington, D.C.

Carlson, R. M., A. R. Oyler, E. H. Gerhart, R. Caple, K. J. Welch, H. L. Kopperman, D. Bodenner, and D. Swanson, 1979. Implications to the Aquatic Environment for Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Liberated from Northern Great Plains Coal. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/3-79-093, Washington, D.C.

Cox, D. B., T. Y. J. Chu, and R. J. Ruane, 1977. Quality and Treat- ment of Coal Pile Runoff. In: Proc. 3rd Symp. on Coal Prepara- tion NCAlBCR Coal Conf. and Expo. IV, Washington, D.C., 18-20 October 1977. National Coal Assoc., Inc., Washington, D.C., pp.

Cox, D. B., T. 'f. J. Chu, and R. J. Ruane, 1979. Characterization of Coal Pile Drainage. TVA-EP-79/13, EPA/600-7-79/051,98 pp.

Davis, E. C. and W. J. Boegly, Jr., 1981. A Review of Water Quality Issues Associated with Coal Storage. J. Environ. Qual. 10:127-132.

Dills, G. and 'l'. Rogers, Jr., 1974. Macroinvertebrate Community Structure as an Indicator of Acid Mine Pollution. Environ. Pollut. 6:239-261.

Edmondson, W. T., 1959. Freshwater Biology, 2nd Edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, 1248 pp.

Environmental Protection Agency, 1979. Methods for Chemical Analy- sis of Water .and Wastes. EPA-600/4-79-020, Washington, D.C.

Featherby, S. €7. and D. J. R. Dodd, 1977. Control of Air and Water Contaminates from Coal Piles. Presented at ASCE Spring Conf., Dallas, Texas.

Mackie, G. L. and R. C. Bailey, 1981. An Inexpensive Stream Bottom Sampler. J. Freshwat. Ecol. 1:6169.

Matsugu, R. S., 1976. Ontario Hydro Research Division Report. Toronto, On,tario, 32 pp.

Nichols, C. R., 1974. Development Document for Effluent Limita- tions Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category. U.S. En- vironmental Protection Agency, EPA440/1-74-029-A, Washington, D.C.

Orciari, R. D. and W. D. Hummon, 1975. A Comparison of Benthic Oligocheate Populations in Acid and Neutral Lentic Environments in Southeastern Ohio. Ohio J. Sci. 75:4449.

Pennak, R. W., 1978. Freshwater Invertebrates of the United States, 2nd Edition. Wiley-Interscience, New York, New York, 803 pp.

Roback, S. S. and J. W. Richardson, 1969. The Effects of Acid Mine Drainage on Aquatic Insects. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia

Simmons, G. ML, 1973. A Preliminary Report on the Use of the Se- quential Comparison Index to Evaluate Acid Mine Drainage on the Macrobenthos in a Pre-Impoundment Basin. Trans. Amer. Fish SOC.

252-277.

121~81-107.

4 :701-713.

WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN


Stauffer, J. R., Jr., C. H. Hocutt, and M. L. Hendricks, 1981. A Survey of the Fish and Macroinvertebrates of the North Branch Potomac River. Final report to Anthony Abar, Mining Administrator, May- land Department of Natural Resources, Energy and Coastal Zone Administration, Tawes State Office Bldg., Annapolis, Maryland.

Stauffer, J. R., Jr., R. L. Reish, and W. F. Calhoun, 1980. FORTRAN Program for Calculating Brillouin’s Species Diversity Index. Prog. FishCult. 42: 185-187.

Toenges, A. L., L. A. Turnbull, L. Williams, H. L. Smith, H. J. O’Don- nell, H. M. Cooper, R. F. Abernethy, and K. Waage, 1949. Investi- gations of Lower Coal Beds in Georges Creek and North Part of Upper Potomac Basins, Allegany and Garrett Counties, Maryland. U.S.D.I., Bur. Mines, Tech. Pap. No. 725, 141 pp.


effects of coal pile runoff on stream quality and macroinvertebrate communities

Documents