A Chemical and Biological Evaluation

                        of Three.

             Mine Drainage Treatment Plants


                  Work Document No. 1*7
This document has been prepared to record a specific
water pollution control activity carried out, to date,
in the furtherance of the vater pollution control pro-
gram being developed in the subject basin.  The infor-
mation contained herein will serve as a ready reference
to aid in the planning and development of the program
in the basin, for appropriate in-service training of
participating personnel, and facilitating program
activities with other cooperating groups.
Questions and comments relative to this material
should be directed to:

                    Field Operations
                  Wheeling Field Office
           Surveillance and Analysis Division
                     Region III, EPA
             Wheeling, West Virginia 26003

                  Prepared by:

          Scott C. McPhilliamy and James Green

          U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
                       Region III
           Surveillance and Analysis Division
                  Wheeling Field Office
                 Wheeling, West Virginia

                        June 1973

-------
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES                                                      III
LIST OF FIGURES                                                      TV
SUMMARY                                                                :;
CONCLUSIONS                                                            5
INTRODUCTION.                                                         11
SURVEY DESCRIPTION                                                   12
     FIELD PROCEDURES  -  CHEMICAL SAMPLING                           13
     FIELD PROCEDURES  -  BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING                         Ik
     STATE REQUIREMENTS                                              IS
     DESCRIPTION OF  SITES                                            13
IffiRCTK.^JEATIvuBM'T PLANT                                              19
     CHEMICAL EVALUATION                                            !'')
     BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION                                           L',5
     CHEMICAL EVALUATION                                             33
     BIOLOGICAL EVALUATJOI'I                                           37
THOMPSON TREATMENT PLANT.                                             ^k
     CHEMICAL EVALUATION                                             U5
     BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION                                           50
CONTROL ._S1'AD 'IOJl_-_ LY>[C rT BOEHOLE.                                    56
     CHEMICAL EVALUATION                                             JT
     BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION                                           63

-------
                        TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)




                                                                  Page






DISCUSSION                                                          69




     BERCIK TREATMENT PLANT                                         70




     KEFOVER TREATMENT PLANT                                        71




     THOMPSON TREATMENT PLANT                                       72




     CONTROL STATION - LYNCH BOREHOLE                               73




BIBLIOGRAPHY                                                        76
                                     II

-------
                                LIST OF TABLES




Table No.




    1         'Water Quality Data,  Bercik Treatment  Plant                 22




    2          Benthos Sampling Stations, Bercik Treatment Plant          26




    3          Benthos Data Summary, Bercik Treatment  Plant               27




    k          Benthos Data, Bercik Treatment  Plant                       28




    5          Water Quality Data,  Kefover Treatment Plant                35




    6          Benthos Sampling Stations, Kefover Treatment  Plant         38




    7          Benthos Data Summary, Kefover Treatment Plant             39




    8          Benthos Data, Kefover Treatment Plant                     Uo




    9          Water Quality Data,  Thompson Treatment  Plant               1+7




   10          Benthos Sampling Stations, Thompson Treatment Plant        51




   11          Benthos Data Summary, Thompson  Treatment Plant             52




   12          Benthos Data, Thompson Treatment  Plant                     53




   13          Water Quality Data,  Lynch Borehole Discharge               59




   lU          Water Quality Data,  Control Site                           60




   15          Benthos Sampling Stations, Control Site                   6k




   16          Benthos Data Summary, Control Site                        65




   17          Benthos Data, Control Site                                66
                                     III

-------
                             LIST OF FIGURES


Figure Ho.                                                           Page

    1             Bercik Treatment Plant                              21

    2             Kefover Treatment Plant                             3^

    3             Thompson Treatment Plant                            ^6

    k             Control Station, Lynch Borehole                     58

    5             Class Composition for Surber Samples                7^

    6             Density and Diversity Index Values for the          75
                  Surber Samples

-------
                                  SUMMARY






       Chemical and biological sampling was conducted at three mine




drainage treatment plants operating in Washington County, Pennsylvania.




These treatment plants were operated by the Jones and Laughlin Steel




Corporation at their Vesta No. k and Vesta No.  5 Mines.   Although




J & L operates other mine drainage treatment plants, those selected




for this evaluation were the Bercik, Kefover and Thompson facilities.




Each receiving tributary was unaffected by mine drainage above the




location of the treatment plant.




      A fourth site was selected as a control station.  This site




represented an untreated effluent from an active mine which discharged




to a tributary unaffected by mine drainage above the selected point of




discharge.  This site was located on Little Indian Creek north of




Rivesville, West Virginia.




      Chemical samples were collected from four areas at each of the




treatment plants.  These points included the receiving stream both




above and below the treatment plant and the untreated mine discharge




as it was pumped from the borehole as well as the treated effluent



prior to discharge to the receiving stream.  Biological sampling of




the receiving stream was conducted above the treatment plant, immedi-




ately below the final effluent, and below the plant.  Similar sampling




was also conducted at the control site.  Sampling was conducted once a




month at each of the four sites during the months of May, June, July




and August 1972.

-------
      In addition to the parameters  generally associated with mine




drainage, ten additional parameters  were included  for  analysis during




three of the four sampling rounds.   These were all metals and included




manganese, aluminum, calcium,  magnesium, cadmium,  chromium,  copper,




lead, nickel and zinc.  These  metals were included in  a general attempt




to observe the efficiency of a conventional mine drainage treatment




plant for the removal or reduction of metals  not commonly associated




with mine drainage but often present in measurable quantities.




      The effectiveness of the treatment plants in removing  or reducing




common mine drainage parameters was  generally adequate.  However, on oc-




casion, two of these plants were responsible  for the discharge of a final




effluent which exhibited excessive concentrations  of acidity, suspended




iron and total iron.




      The benthos in the receiving streams below each  of the three




plants were affected by the treated  mine effluent. However, the adverse



affects were much more noticeable.below the two plants mentioned above




where both acidity and iron concentrations were occasionally excessive.




      In general, the chemical and biological data rank the  three plants




in the same order of effectiveness when the data is  evaluated from either




standpoint.  This order of ranking is as follows:




                        Kefover Treatment Plant




                        Thompson Treatment Plant




                        Bercik Treatment Plant

-------
                              CONCLUSIONS






1.  The Kefover Treatment  Plant  was the most  efficient of the three




    plants studied.   The retention time in the  sedimentation pond




    and the dilution capacity of the receiving  stream were the




    principal features of  this facility.   The flow in the receiving




    stream was larger than the final Kefover  effluent and diluted




    the residual chemical  constituents to  a more tolerable level.




    The benthos in the receiving stream were  only slightly affected




    by the treated discharge.  In addition to the conventional mine




    drainage parameters, copper  and zinc were significantly reduced




    at this site. A raw water aluminum concentration was completely




    removed by the treatment  procedure on  both  occasions when ini-




    tially present.






2.  From a chemical  standpoint and under normal operating conditions,




    the Thompson Plant was probably as effective as the Kefover Plant




    in removing or reducing common mine drainage parameters.  However,




    acid slugs can be discharged from this plant during some mainten-



    ance operations.   As a result, tfc-i overall  treatment capability




    was reduced.   This was particularly evident with respect to the




    downstream benthos.  An initial raw water aluminum concentration




    was completely removed on each occasion it  was present.  Signifi-




    cant reductions were noted in the concentrations of nickel and




    zinc and to a lesser degree  for several other trace metals.

-------
3.  The Bercik Plant  was the least  efficient of the three facilities




    studied.   The benthic  community was severely depressed immediately




    below the discharge point  and only slightly improved well below




    the discharge point.   The  limited dilution capacity of the receiv-




    ing stream below  the plant was  a significant factor impairing the




    effectiveness of  this  operation.  A suspended iron concentration,




    ranging from 2 mg/1 to 6 mg/1 in the  final effluent, was primarily




    responsible for the poor aesthetic appearance of the receiving




    stream below the  facility.




k.  The inclusion of  trace metals in the  analyses of the various




    mine waters were  not intended as part of the overall evaluation




    of the treatment  plants under consideration.  They were included




    only as an additional  point  of  interest to determine what effects




    conventional lime neutralization would have on initial concentra-




    tions of various  trace metals in raw  mine water.  In reviewing




    the limited amount of  data collected  during this survey, it is




    apparent that the concentrations of these metals can vary signi-




    ficantly from discharge to discharge  or with varying time periods




    at the same discharge  point. Perhaps if a particular trace metal




    was consistently  present  in  significant quantities, the treatment




    plant operation could  be  adjusted to  eliminate or reduce the metal




    in question.  Under normal operating  procedures, trace metal re-




    moval appears to  he a.  function  of the chemical make-up of the mine




    water and the type of  treatment supplied.

-------
5.   When sludge removal  is  necessary, it should be done frequently




    enough so  that the retention time is consistently long enough




    to permit  the sedimentation of nearly all suspended solids.

-------
                             RECOMMENDATIONS






1.  Any similar study should be conducted with an increased number




    of both biological and chemical samples.   The sampling period




    should represent at least three seasons of the year.   If arti-




    ficial substrates are used, they should be exposed for eight




    weeks instead of four.  The benthos, where practical,  should




    be identified to genus.  Chemical sampling should be conducted




    on a weekly basis rather than monthly.






2.  In addition to other treatment plant construction considerations,




    it is recommended that consideration be given to the size of  the




    available receiving stream.  This stream should be large enough




    to dilute the treated effluent to a level which can be tolerated




    by the benthos, plankton and fish.






3.  Treatment plants should be designed so that acid slugs are not




    released to the receiving stream when maintenance operations  or




    equipment failures occur at the facilities.  When the  rav water




    or treated water ponds require sludge removal, a second pond




    should be available for temporary use during the maintenance




    operation.






k.  The water quality of streams below new treatment plants should




    be comparable, to or better than, the water quality conditions




    exhibited in the receiving streams below the Kefover and Thompson




    Treatment Plants.

-------
5.  This study vas not performed in a detailed manner  and can only




    serve to grossly evaluate the three treatment  plants.  The




    chemical and "biological data and related observations sade




    during this survey can serve as an aid in planning other  such




    studies and in designing future treatment plants.
                                    10

-------
                              INTRODUCTION






     In September of 1971> a work activity was formulated  at the




Wheeling iield Office, Surveillance and Analysis  Division, Region




III, Environmental Protection Agency, vhich involved a program for




updating the number of active underground coal mining operations




in the Monongahela Biver basin.   An earlier study had been conducted




prior to 1965 which involved all types of mining  operations both




active and abandoned.  Between 1965 and 1971>  significant  changes




had occurred, particularly with respect to the number of underground




mines still in operation.  A resurvey of the active underground mines




in the Monongahela River basin was initiated in November 1971  and was




completed in December  1972.  The results of this survey are published




in Work Document No. k6, "The Status of Active Deep Mines  in the




Monongahela River Basin."




     During the inventory, it was found that many of the mines, par-




ticularly in Pennsylvania, were supplying some type of treatment  to




their mine drainage effluent prior to discharge.   Single samples  col-



lected at these treatment plants generally indicated that  common  mine




drainage parameters were removed, or seduced with  a high degree of ef-




ficiency.  For this reason, it was decided to  conduct additional  samp-




ling at several mine drainage treatment plants in order to more accu-




rately assess the operational efficiency of these facilities.
                                   11

-------
     At the outset of the study, it was decided not to limit the




survey to the collection of samples only for chemical vater quality




analyses.  Benthic organisms are frequently used in vater pollution




surveys us water quality indicators because they are relatively sta-




tionary organisms.  A survey of benthic organisms provides a gross




analysis of water quality in a given area of stream.  For this reason,




samples for both water quality and biological analyses were collected




at selected points at each of the treatment plant sites.   This will




provide a separate chemical and biological evaluation at  each of the




treatment plant sites.






                           SURVEY DESCRIPTION






     Selection of the mine drainage treatment plants was  based on




several factors including location, quantity and quality  of mine




effluent, and travel time between sites.  In the final selection,




three sites, operated by the Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation,




were chosen for the study.  A letter of request was submitted to the




appropriate Jones and Laughlin official and permission was obtained




to visit the sites as required.  No time period was allotted for our




sampling run and personnel from the Wheeling Field Office were able




to visit the treatment plant sites at any time during the course of




study.  The three selected sites were the Bercik, Kefover and Thompson




v.'.'ie drainage treatment plants.
                                     12

-------
     A fourth site was also selected as a control station.  This




site represented, an untreated effluent from an active mine which




discharge to a tributary unaffected, "by mine drainage above the




selected point of discharge.  This site Fas located on Little




Indian Creek north of Rivesville, West Virginia.






                  FIELD PROCEDURES - CHEMICAL SAMPLING




     With respect to relative location, identical sampling points




were selected at each treatment plant site.  A background sampling




point was selected at each site above the treatment plant.  Since




each receiving tributary was unaffected by either active or aba.n-




doned mine drainage, the sampling point was indicative of the natural




unaltered stream vater quality.  Additional sampling points included




the raw mine water before treatment and r.lso the final effluent repre-




senting the quality of water discharged to the receiving stream.  A




fourth sample was collected from the receiving stream a. short distance




below the point where the final effluent entered that particular re-




ceiving stream.




     A total of four samples were collected at each site.  This repre-




sented one complete round at each site during the months of May, June,




July and August of 1972.   Durirs the May sampling round, the collected




samples were analyzed for conventional, mine drainage parameters.  These




pai-aoieters included acidity, alkalinity, sulfates, dissolved iron and




suspended iron.  The total iron concentration was obtained by combining




the dissolved, and suspended iron components.

-------
     During the subsequent samplings, ten additional parameters




were determined for each site.  These parameters included manganese,




aluminum, calcium, magnesium, cadmium, chroraium, copper, lead, nickel




and zinc.  Analyses for these metal;- were considered in a general




attempt to further evaluate the efficiency of a conventional mine




drainage treatment plant for the removal or reduction of metals




not commonly associated with mine drainage hut often present in




measurable quantities.






               FIELD PROCEDURES - BIOLOGICAL SAMPLING




     Changes in vater quality produce different responses from




different aquatic organisms.  There are some aquatic organisms which




can survive and flourish in heavily polluted waters and there are



other organisms which cannot survive in waters even slightly polluted.




This is true of benthos, plankton and fish.  Benthic organisms are




used frequently in water pollution surveys as water quality indicators



because they are relatively stationary organisms.  Fish and plankton




can be less effective in demonstrating pollution conditions than the



benthos because fish may avoid polluted water by swimming away and the




plankton effects may not be readily measured because of stream drifting.




     A survey of the benthi^ organisms provides a gross analysis of




weter quality in a given area of stream.  By using biological data and




descriptions, one can delineate sections of a stream into unpolluted




zones capable of supporting a varied population of aquatic organisms




and polluted zones which support altered aquatic communities.

-------
     Three  sampling ^tationr- were pet up at each 01' the  four  sites.




The first station at  erch site wa/; located upstream of the discharge.




This station is  a reference or bseEsro'Uixl station.  The  second  sta-




tion at  each cite w._;:: loj t*^ >,;l in the 13th edition  of




Standard Methods (.".,).   The s&.;:pier evposen apivroxirnately one  square




foot of  surface  aa'ea  for the attachment of orgariisras.




     Two nulti-plate  si^;plers were suspended in the water column at




ea^h of  the tvelvo Gi.a,t.idiS,  'Pha '''^cosure period for the samplers




was approximately one month and -.,>irec exposure periods vere used at




each station.  These  samplers vere juspenrled both vertically  and

-------
horizontally in the water columnv




     At the end of the exposure period, the sur.plers were carefully




removed from the water, detached fret! their holding devices> and




placed in one gallon bucket:; filled uith a five percent solution of




formalin.  The samplers vre taXeu to tl.e laboratory, disassembled,




brushed with a stiff "bi'istle "brush, and the organisms were concen-




trated in a U. S. Standard Wo. 30 sieve.




     Each sample was sorted, counted and identified.  The identifi-




cation of the insects, clams and ci'iisfcaceans vas carried, to the family




taxanonde level.  All the other groups were identified to the class or




order taxGnomic level except the Phylum Heinatoda.  The family Hydridae




was counted as a taxcnooiic group bxtt the number of these collected at




any given station >;as not counted, in the ~cotal number of organisms




collected at that station.




     The taxa collected were divided into three cla; sas based on




their tolerance to mine drainage.  The three classes are as follows:



Class 1, organisms intolerant of nrlnc drainage; Class II, organisms




which are tolerant to scr.ie conctituriii^R of nine draina^1? to some de-




gree; Class III, organisms which &i c to.lerant to mine drainage.  The




classification of tlia toxanomic groiips, as described in this report,




is preliminary and cny reference r.ads to this classification system




should identify it as such,  '"his system will be revised and updated




as more information is gained and a-ore data is collected.  The classi-




fication system used in this report is based on observed tolerances
                                    16

-------
of the various groups as reported .in the literature,  i.  e. ,  Griffith

(2), Reppert (3)5 Dinsmore (U)5 etc., and upon personal  observations

of various benthic associations encountered in both affected and  un-

affected water.  Published and unpublished data developed by the

Wheeling Field Office v&s also used in establishing the  system.

     A diversity index was applied to samples collected  as  a matter

of interest to see hov such an index would relate to  the observed

results.  The following index, taken from Wilhm (5) was  used;

                        d = s^
                            LnK

Where d is the diversity index„ s is the number of taxa  and  LnN is

the natural logarithm of the number of individuals per sample.  The

larger the diversity index, the "better the water quality, because

the diversity index represents the wealth of taxa as  related to total

number of organisms per sample.  Maximum diversity exists if each in-

dividual is in a different taxa and minimum diversity exists If all

individuals belong to the same taxa.
                                   IT

-------
                           STATE REQUIREMENTS






     The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources reqiiires




active mine discharges to meet -effluent guidelines imposed by the




Commonwealth.  In general, these requirements limit the pH value to




between 6.0 and 9-0 standard units, require a total 5ron concentra-




tion of 7 rag/1 or lessj and require a final effluent exhibiting net




alkalinity.




     Although these are the 'effluent criteria imposed by the Common-




wealth on active underground mine discharges under the .1965 amended




Clean Streams Law, the water quality standards of the receiving stream




are also of prime importance in determining the compliance status of e




particular mine drainage discharge.  A 1.5 &g/l total iron concentra-




tion has "been adopted by the Commonwealth for streams in the Pennsyl-




vania portion of the Mcnongahala River 'basin.




     A permit is required from the DEK for each point of mine drainage




discharge from an active sine.  The effluent r eclair osnents for each dis-




charge are specified in the permit.  As conditions require, the discharge




may exceed the guidelines listed above or conversely it may require more




restrictive limitations.  The DKR stay also require limitations on other




mine drainage parameters such as aluminum, manganese, sulfates, etc.5




as deemed necessary.






                         DESCRIPTION OF SITES




     The three Jones and Laughlin  treatmnt plants were located in
                                   IS

-------
Washington County, Pennsylvania.   The  Sercik  plant was located on an




unnamed tributary to Pike  Run which.,  in turn, is a tributary to the




Monongahela River near  t*r-_- eoianunity  of Co«l  Center.   The Kef over




plant was located on L c.le.i... R1; .  anr  th;  ^honpson plant ^aa located




on Plum Run.  Both Daniei'-; Run and Plura Run are tributaries to Ten-




mile Creek, which --enterf;  the Monongahela River at Mi i^sboro, Penn-




sylvania.




     The control site representing an active  untrte.ted discharge




was located on Little Indicn Creek, a tributary to Indian Creek




which joins the Mononsahela River at  Everettville, West Virginia.




     The tributaries on wi.ieh these four  cites are located are




unaffected by any active or abandonees,  mine discharges  along the




entire length of strefra under co^ i.Weratio.L.









                         BITRCIK TREATMENT PLAJ:T
     Tliis facility provided lime neutralization followed by aeration




and sedimentation.  Acidity vas not  p. raajor  pro'clc a in the raw mim:




water effluent; howover, the ini'oirJ. iron  ^(jnceritration va-T excessive.




At an earlier visit to this site (12/7.0)  only sedimentation and mech-




anical aeration were supplied.  Howler, at  the tiae of the first




sampling for this stud;/, the facility had  been upgraded by the instal-




lai.. .^n of the lire addition apparatus and  aa electrical aerator.

-------
     After alkalinization and aeration, the effluent was gravity fed




to a series of three sedimentation pond?,   The final eifluent from




the third pond is discharged to an unnamed tributary of Pike Run




(Figure l).




     During the period of sampling, this raine effluent was charac-




terized by a comparatively Large discharge which averaged 1,928 gpm.




The alkalinity concentration of the raw effluent generally exceeded




the acidity concentration and the total iron concentrction was 50 iag/1




or less.




     The chemical and "biologica.1 sampling points associated with the




Bercik mine drainage treatment plant are shown in Figure 1.  Table 1




lists the chemical data collected during the four sampling periods.






                           CHEMICAL EVALUATION




     The raw water pumped to the surface at the Bercik "borehole was




alkaline on three of the four sampling occasions.  However, the total




iron concentration ranged from 20 to 50 mg/1.  This initial total




iron concentration was reduced by treatment to a range of 3 to 6 rag/1




in the final effluent.  It DP noteworthy that the dissolved iron por-




tion of this total iron concentration averaged only 0.5 ag/1 wnile




the suspended iron fraction accounted for the major portion of the




iron which was measured»  There was no suspended iron present in the




untreated raw water discharge., and the final effluent exhibited a




suspended iron concentration ranging from 2 t/o 6 nag/I.

-------
RICHEYViLLE
    B= 8ENTHIC SAMPLING POINT
    C£ CHEMICAL  SAMPLING POINT

-------
ro
                                                              Table 1

                                                       Water Quality Data

                                                      Berelk Treatment Plant
                   Background  (C-201)

                  5/72 	6/72 7/72  8/72
Downstream (C—203)
Untreated Discharge         Treated Discharge
    (C-200)                    (C-202)
5/72  6/72  7/72  8/7.2    5/72  6/72.  '.7/7.2  8/72    5/72  6/72  7/72  8/72
pH
Specific
Conductance
Flow-gpn
Net
Alkalinity
mg/1
Dissolved
l^on-mg/1
Suspended
Jron-mg/1
Total Iron
mg/1
Bulfate
mg/1
Manganese
mg/1
Aluminum
Kg/1
6.9 7.3 7-7 7.5 6.6 6.9
570 600 520 650 2300 2500

______

-6l* 175 191* - -177 81

0 001 50 50

0.5 1 0 0 00

3.5 l 01 50 50

l»5 65 55 120 1530 825

0.1 k 0 5

-000- 0

7.1 7-0
3000 2700

-

39 203

20 ^5

0 0

20 1*5

900 750

5 k

0 1

6,k f.k
2800 2800

22kO 1885

1*7 82

1 1

k 2

5 3

1365 850

«* S

0

7.3
2700

1508

130

0

2

2

930

k

Q

7.1 7-5
2600 2500

2080

2kk 112

0 0.5

6 3.5

6 k

775 1360

It

0

7.7
2500

2806

75

0.5

2.5

3.0

775

5

0

7-5
2700

3018

120

0

3

3

960

h

0

7.*
2600

-

222

0

6

6

750

5

0

       *Negative value denotes acidi jy.

-------
                                                                                      , contInued)
                                      Water Quality Data

                                    Bereik IPreatBient Plant
  Background (C-2Q1)

5/72 ...6/72  7/12  8/72
Untreated Discharge
    (C-200)
5/?2  6/727/728/72
  Treated Discharge
     (C-202)
5/72  6/72 .7/78  8/72
  Downstream (C-203)

5/72  6/72  7/72	6/72
Calcium
rag/1
Magnesium
mg/1
^^,.w
ug/1
Chromium
ug/1
ro
^Copper
- 3/1
Lead
ug/1
Nickel
ug/1
Zinc
ug/1
55 50 60

17 j.; 2C

0 u 0

o c n

0 50 8

0 0 20

20 1*0 5

-10 0 0

200

fO

10

20

0

20

70

20

200 300

50 65

20 °\

0 1*1

0 j.0

o 60

80 60

20 22

200

60

10

10

0

20

50

20

200 320

60 60

20 16

20 25

0 0

0 20

1*0 U2

20 13

200

50 •

10

0

0

Jio

50

10

200

50

20

0

50

0

0

20

300

65

19

36

10

20

55

20


-------
     The three large sedimentation ponds at Bercik have been in opera-




tion for 7 or 8 years.  During this time, sludge removal has been



somewhat minimal due to the large area available for sedimentation.




However, the long-term, accumulation of sediment (iron floe)  was be-




coming a problem at the Bercik site.  In the treatment process, the




dissolved iron is converted to the insoluble state .for precipitation.




However, due at least in part to the chemical composition of the mine




water before and after treatment and the reduced capacity of the avail-




able sedimentation area, a significant portion of the iron concentration



was discharged to the receiving stream in the suspended state.




     As would be expected from the above discussion, the total  iron




concentration carried by the receiving stream (C-203) below the Bercik




discharge, represented a significant increase in comparison with the




total iron concentration exhibited by the background sampling point




(C-201) above the Bercik discharge.  The background total iron  concen-




trations ranged from 0 mg/1 to 1 mg/1 and the downstream values ranged




from 3 to 6 mg/1.  This iron was generally present in the form  of ferric




hydroxide and/or ferric sulfate which were responsible for staining  and



coating the banks and bottom of a downstream length of the receiving




tributary.



     The alkalinity concentration of the receiving stream was reduced




by the Bercik discharge on two of the four sampling occasions.   However,




on one occasion the alkalinity was increased.   There were no significant

-------
changes in the pH values of the receiving stream below the Bercik




outfall.  As expected, the sulfate concentrations ir,  the receiving




stream were greatly increased.   At the upstream point, the sulfate




values ranged from ^-5 to 120 mg/1 while the downstream point  values




ranged from 750 mg/1 to 1,3&0 mg/1.






                          BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION




     Descriptions of the three  "biological sampling stations associ-




ated with the Bercik treatment  plant are given below.  Tables 2, 3




and k represent the biological  data collected at these points.




     The number of organisms and taxa collected at the two downstream




stations was well below the numbers collected at the  upstream station.




The following is a more detailed description of the results obtained




at each station.






Station B-l (Upstream of Discharge)




     The substrate at this station was composed of a  mixture  of rock,




rubble, gravel and sand (Table  2).  Stream bottom conditions  appeared



to be very stable.  The numbta-  of taxa collected at this station,  21,



(Table 3) "was the most collected at any of the stations during the




study and also yielded the highest diversity index of 3-50.  The or-




ganisms were well distributed among several taxonomic groups.  Eleven




Class I taxa and nine Class II  taxa were collected; however,  there was




a. total of 1^7 Class II organisms (Figure 5) and 106  Class I  organisms.
                                   25

-------
                                                         Table 2
                                                Benthos Sampling Stations
                                                 Bercik Treatment Plant
 Station
 Number

  B-l
 B-J
ro
 B-3
Sampling Dates

     5/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/1.6 to 7/2U
     to 8/21
     5/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to 7/2U
7/2l» to 8/21
     5/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to 7/2it
7/2li to 8/21
Stjation Location ,
                                       X-Trib. to Pike Run
                                       approximately 275
                                       yards above the
                                       discharge.
X-Trib. to Pike Run
approximately 30 yards
below the discharge.
X-rArib. to Pike Run
approximately 30Q
yards below the
discharge.
Substrate Description
Riffle Areas*
  10*1 Rock
  2Q% Rubble
  20$ C.Gravel
  20$ F.Oravel
  20% C.Sand
  IG% F.Sand
Pool Areas
  Consisted mainly of
  bedrock

Riffle Area
      Rock
      Rubble
      C.Gravel
  1555 P.Gravel
  10% C.Sand
  105? F.Sand
Pool Areas
  Mostly bedrock with
  some gravel.

Riffle Areas
  5^ Rock
  5% Rubble
  50% C.Gravel
  30^ F,Gravel
  10$ C.Sand
  105? F.Sand
Pool Areas
  Bottoms consisted
  mainly of clay and
  gravel,
          Comments
                                                       The dendys collected on
                                                       1/2k were knocked over
                                                       and laying on their side
One dendy collected o;.
7/2<*/ had been knockee
ever and vas laying or
its side.
      *Bottom compositions  are  estimates based on  field  observations.

-------
                                                  Benthos Data Summary
                                                 Bercik Treatment Plant
Station
Number
B-l






B-2





(
t
B~3






Sampling Nc
. of
Dates Samples
5/16
5/16 to 6/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to l/2k
6/16 to l/2k
7 /2k to 8/21
l/2k to 8/21
5/16
5/16" to 6/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to 11 '2k
6/16 to 7M
J/2k to 8/21
7/2k to 8/21
5/16
5/: 6 to 6/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to 7 /2k
6/16 to if 2k
7 /2k to 8/?i
If 2k to 8/21
1
1
1
1
1
T
J_
]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Type of
Sastgle
S *
D **
D
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
D
D
Total No. of
Organisms
301
76
28
66
93
9
28
16
225
59
1
55
0
1
^5
6
U
7
11
j.1
0
No, of Taxa
collected
21
lv
1
5
8
1
5
3
3
6
l
1*
0
1
9
3
1
5
7
1
0
Diversity
Index
3-50
0.70
0
0.95
1.5**
0
1.20
0.72
0.62
1.23
0
0.75
0
0
2.10
0,56
0
2.09
2.50
0
0
% of
Class I
35
0
0
6
U
0
11
6
12
7
0
2
0
0
11
17
0
y^i
U
27
0
0
% of
Class II
49
3
0
6
k
0
k6
kk
12
66
100
9k
0
0
31
17
0
71
6k
"0
0
% of
Class III
16
97
100
88
92
100
k3
50
76
27
0
k
0
100
58
66
.100
29
9
100
0
 * Surber Samples
** Artificial Substrate Samples

-------
Class I

eaddisfli.es.
  Hydroptilidae
  Philopotamidae
  Psychomyiidae

Stoneflies_
  Perlidae
  Perlodidae
  Heptagenlidae

Crustaceaas
  Astacidae
  Isopoda

Flatworigs_
  Ihirbellarla
                                                * " '  "t •!•  * 1 ,                                          '      *
                                                 xaole •;
                                             Benthos  Data
                                        Bercik  Treatment  Plant

            B-l- B-lb B-lb B-lc B-lc B-ld B-ld   B-2e  B-2b B-2b B-2o B-2c B-2d B~2d B-3a B-3"b B-3b B-3c B-3c

             11                                                                       3
              1
              1
              1
             33
  Keciatoda
ll Clarns
  Sphaer i i d s e

Crane_Fli_e_s
  Tipulidae

Leeeheg_
  Hirudinea

Class II

Caddisflies
  Hydropsychidae      ^7
                             31
                                                    13
                                                              32   1   15

-------
                                                         Bsntiios Data
                                                    Bercik Treatment  Plant
  Class  II (cont'd)
                       B-Oa B-l"b  B-lb B-le B-lc B-ld B-ld  B-2a B~2b B-2b B-2c B-2c B~2d B~2d B-3a B-3b B-3b B-3c B-3<
  St-oneflies
                                                                                                   1
Nemouridae
Mayflies
Baetidae
Beetle Larvae
Elmidae
2k
30
6
1
    I^tlscidae                           3
    Hydrophilidae

  Cru s t ac e_an s
    Amphipod'a           31*                     I                         6        37

  Snails_
    Pulmonata                                  1          1
ro
     mpididae
    Simuliidae

  tlpr.se ........ fj-j-gg,
    Tatanidae
    Coenagrionidae                                        1

  Aguat i c jforms
    Oligochaeta          211                11          31                         11         2   1

-------
 Class III
 Megalojjtera
   Slalldae
                     B-?_a B-Jb B-lb  B-lc B~lc  B-M B-ld  B-2a B~2b B-2b B-2c 8-2e B-2d B-2d B-3a 3~3b  B-3b  B-3c  B-:
 Midge Flies
   Chironorndae
>B    72     28    58    85    9
8   19   16
l    26
I*   2
u>

-------
The benthic community at this station is what one woula expect to




collect in a. smal] stream vith good water quality.
     About 65 percent of the substrate at this station was gravel




(Table 2) with the remainder being a combination of rock, rubble




and sand.  Red stains were present on the substrate and suspended




iron particles produced a reddish tint in the vrater.  Only 16 or-




ganisms and 3 taxa (Table 3) were collected at this station.  Class




I organisms were reduced in number from 106 at Station B-l to one




at Station B-^'2 and from 11 taxa at Station B-l to one taxon at




Station B-2.  Class II organisms were similarly reduced in number




and taxa.  At Station B~la there were 1^7 Class II organisms in 10




taxa and at Station B~2 there were 7 organisms in one taxa.  The




number of Chironomidae were reduced from 48 at Station B-l to 8 at




Station B-2.  The total numbers and variety of the benthic community



at this station vas severely depressed.  The substrate may be partly




attributable for the poor macroinvertebrate community, however ., the




major problem is the degradation of t" _e stream water quality by the




discharge, indicating a toxic effect.






Station^B^S






     The substrate at this station wes not favorable for aouatic life




as it was composed of about So percent gravel with "very little rock




and rubble,  suspended iron particles were also visible in the water
                                    31

-------
at this Station and the substrate was ctained red.  The benthic com-




munity was slightly improved over che one at Station B-?; however,, it




still d*^ not begin to compare with th
-------
     The chemical and "biological  sampling points associated with the




Kefover site are shown in Figure  2.   Table 5 lists the chemical data




collected during the toi^r sampling periods.






                            CHEW CAL ^VALUATI01!






     The acidity concentration  of the raw water discharge at the




Kefovar site ranged from 100  mg/1 to flO mg/1 for three samples.




On the fourth sa'mplinf,, the discharge exhibited a net alkalinity




of 95 J^g/1*  Kie octal ircn concentration of the untreated effluent




ranged, from 15 mL/l to 60 mg/1.   Suspended iron was present in three




of the foil'-' f3B.iL.-les.




     The treated Kefov^r discharge exhibited an average net alka-




linity of 111 ias/1 a;rlng the campling period.  The corresponding




pH values ranged from 6.8 bo  7.1.  An average discharge rate of




168 gpm v-as measvred ut this  plant.




     Iron removal at blie Kef ever  site wa^ quite adequate.  On one




occasion, the treateu effluent  s;-:hl"bited a total iron concentration




of 3 Eg/1; ho"ev;».r. cla.'ing  the  other nnmpling periods, the iron con-




cen~':,.at? on c.v-er,^'',^! oaly G.^4  :af/l.  As a rer.ti.l~c, of the neutralisation




process- the sulfate concentration averaged 1,875 mg/1 in the treated




discharge.  Oa two of the three samples, where the presence of aluiui-




n-u3T> teas det. ote5, iuitiai rav -,;ater concentrations of 1*5 mg/1 and 2h




mg/1 wo:re both reduced to zero  by the treatment process.  Initial




concciitra'.ionr. oi* such trace  metals as cadmiums copper and r.ine were
                                     33

-------
                                                     N
                                                    SEDIMENTATION
                                                    POND
              EAST MARIANNA
9s 8ENTHIC SAMPUNO POINT

Cs CHEMICAL  SAMPUN6 POINT
FIGURE 2
X^>
KEFOVER TREATMENT PLANT
                                               MONQNGAhftLA
                                               RIVER

-------
  Specific
  Conductance

  Flow-gpm

  let Alka-
  li nity~mg /I

  Dissolved
  Iron-mg/1

w Suspended
VJJ Iron-mg/1

  Total Iron
   mg/1

  Sulfate
   mg/1

  Manganese
   mg/1
 Background  (C-205)

5/72  6/72  ..7/7.2 _6/7.2.

6.8   7.3   7.8   7.8

550   650   5^0   650
168
            19k
0.5   0,3    0     0
 0000
0.5   0.3    0     0
 65    60    65   70
        0     3    0
                          0     0    0
                                         Table 5
                                  Water  Quality Data
                                Kefover  Treatment Plant

                          Untreated Discharge (C-20k)  Treated Discharge (C-206)

                             5/72  6/12  1/12	6/7.2     g/72  6/72  7/72,  8/72

                             U.6   fc.5   6,7   5.5      6.8   6.9   7.0   7-1

                             7000  8000  8000  8000     8000  8000  71*00  8000
                                                        Downstream C-207)

                                                       5/72  6/7.2  7/7.2  8/72

                                                       7.7   7.5   8.0   7.5

                                                             1200  1000  2100
-610*  -590    95  -100
                               25    15    15
                               35    11     0    18
                               60    25    15    58
      17 H   180   150     2it06  1132  2120   -

135    30    90   188       78   106   182   209
                             0.3   0'.5    0    0.2
                             0.2    0
                           0.3     10     0
                            000
                             0.5   0.5    3    0.2     0.3     1     0     0
                             3375  2100  1700  2300     2800  2100  1200  ifcOO     255   310   200   56c
                                      7     0
                                            0    2*1
                                     6    0
                                                                 0    0
                                  1
                                                               00
   Kg/1
  *Negative value denotes acidity.

-------
        Table 5
  Water Quality Data
Kefover freataent Plant
(continued).

Calcium
mg/1
k'c*nesium
mg/1
Cadmium
ug/1
Chromium
ug/1
Copper
ug/1
Lead
ug/1
Nickel
ug/1
Zinc
Background
5/72 6/72
50

10

— "5

0

5
0

10

10
(C-205) Untreated Discharge
7/72 8/72
50 120

10 12

0 70

0 0

0 0
0

0 5

20 7
5/72 6/72
200

25

20

30

- 100
50

500

700
7/72
210

75

20

20

100
0

100

300
(C-20lt)
8/72
390

100

560

18

65
30

1*50

580
Treated Discharge
5/72 .6/72
200

115

5

0

5
20

koo

200
7/72
300

75

0

20

0
0

100

70
(C-206)
8/72
80

85

^2

80

20
20

300

1*0
Downstream
5/7.2 6/72
75

15

0

0

0
0

50

Uo
C-207
JE/12
70

15

0

0

0
0

n

20
)
8/7-
150

30

20

20

25
20

36

15

-------
reduced to a lower level of concentration by the treatment process.




     At the upstream sampling point (C-205), the pH value ranged.




from 6.8 to J.B and exhibited an average net alkalinity of 168 mg/1.




At the stream sampling point below the Kefover discharge (C-207)*




the pH value ranged from 7«5 to 8.0 and exhibited an average net




alkalinity of iM mg/1.  During the period of sampling, there was




no significant increase in ths total iron concentration carried  by




the receiving stream.  Above the discharge point, the tributary  car-




ried an average iron concentration of 0.2 mg/1 and below the dis-




charge, the average was 0.3 ffig/1.  Sulfate values averaged 65 mg/1




at the background station and 3^1 mg/1 at the downstream sampling



point.






                          BIOLOGICAL EVALUATIOI






     Descriptions of the three biological ..ampling stations associ-




ated with the Kefover plant are given below.  Tables 6, 7 and 8



present the biological data collected at these points.



     The total number of organisms collected at the three stations




(Figure 6) declined in downstream order; however, the diversity




indices for the three stations remained relatively constant.  The




principle group collected at the stations was the dipteran family,




Cbzronomidae*  The following is a more detailed description of the




results obtained at each station.
                                     37

-------
                                                        Table 6
                                               Benthos-Sampling Stations
                                                 Kefover Treatment Plant
  Station No.
Sampling Dates

     5/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to 7M
7/2U to 8/21
Station Location

Daniels Run
approximately 200
yards upstream of
the discharge.
    B-5
     5/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to 7/2U
I/2k to 8/21
Daniels Run
approximately 50
yards below the
discharge.
u>
CO
    B-6
     5/16
5/16 to 6/16
6/16 to if 2k
T/2k to 8/21
Daniels Run
approximately
yards below the
discharge.
Substrate Description

Riffle Areas*
  10$ rock
  30J5 rubble
  30% C.Gravel
  10% F.Gravel
  10$ C.Sand
  10$ F.Sand
Pool Areas
  Bottoms consisted
  mainly of "bedrock"

Riffle Areas
  10% rock
  50$ rubble
  20% C.Gravel
      F.Gravel
      C.Sand
Pool Areas
  Bottoms consisted
  mainly of "bedrock"

Riffle Areas
  10$ rock
  30$ rubble
  10$ C.Gravel
  10$ F.Gravel
  20$ C.Sand
  20$ F.Sand
Pool Areas
  Bottoms consisted
  mainly of "bedrock"
           Cpmments

The dendy, the last
collected 7/2^4, had
been mov.id about 25 feet
downstream by the
current.
       *Bottom compositions  are  estimates based on field observations.

-------
U)
                                                             Table  7
                                                      Benthos Data  Summary
                                                     Kefover  Treatment Plant
Station
Number
B-l*



B-5





B-6

1
1

Sampling Ho. of
Dates Samples
5/16
5/16 to
6/16 to
7/24 to
5/16
5/16 to
5/16 to
6/16 to
7/24 to
7/24 to
5/16
5/16 to
5/16 to
6/16 to
7/24 to

6/16
7/24
8/21

6/16
6/16
7/2*1
8/21
8/21

6/16
6/16
7/24
8/21
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Type of
Sample
S*
D**
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
Total No. No. of taxa Diversity % of
of Organisms collected Index Class I
1*1*0
93
30
52
338
108
182
10*
28
59
246
78
88
^7
32
18
3
3
3
15
1*
6
3
1
2
15
1*
1
1
l
2.
0.
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.
2.
0.
0
0
0
79
HU
58
50
fco
61*
96
1*3

25
51*
69
i


1*1
0
3
0
58
0
1
0
0
0
10
1
0
0
0
% of % of
Class II Class III
15
2
7
1*
17
1*
7
13
0
2
25
3
0
0
0
kk
98
90
96
25
96
92
87
100
98
65
96
100
100
100
          *Surber Samples

        **Artificial  Substrate Samples

-------
Class I
  Hydroptilidae
  Phllopotamidae
  Psychomyiidae
  Heliopsychidae

Stoneflies
  Perlidae

Mayflies
  Heptftgeniidae

Crustaceans
  Isopoda

Flat-worms
  T'irbellaria
  Nematoda

Fingernail Clams
  Sphaeriidae

Crane Flies
  Tipuliidae

Coelenterat
-------
                                                           Table 0                                     Continued
                                                         Benthos Data
                                                    Kefover Treatment Plant
  Class II {cont'd)
                      B-lm   B-4b   B-^c   B-Ud    B-5a  3-5b  B-5b  B-5e  B-5d  B-5d     B-6a  B-6b   B-6b   B-6c  B-6d
  Stoneflies
    Nemouridae           11                                        2

  Mayflies
    Baetidae            17            2      1        **      1                                 22

  Megaloptera
    Corydalidae                                       1                                        1

  Biting Midge
    Ceratopogonidae      1

  Beatle Larvae
    Blmidae             15                          17                                       19
    Psephenidae                                                                               2

  Crustaceans
    AmiDhipoda            1                            2
-£"
  Snails_
    Pulmonata                                                     1                           1

  Black Flies
    Simuliidae            96                                        7
  Danee Flies.
    Empididae                                         51                      2

  Damselfly
    Agrionidae                                                                      1

  Aquatic Worms
    Oligochaeta          17   2                       3      3    11                           12

-------
                                                                                                       Continued
                                                         Beuthoi".  Dutu
                                                    Kefovor Treatment 3Ma.nl
 Class III
                      B-i*a   B-lfb   B-lic   B-^d    B-5a  B-5b   B-5b  B-5ft  B-5d  B-5d     B-6a  B~6b  B-6b   B-6c  B-6a
 Megalogtera
   Sialidae                    1

 Midge Flies
   Chironomidae        192    90       2?      50      81*   loU    167    93     28   58       159    75   88    kj     32
ro

-------
Station B-^ (upstream of discharge)




     The substrate at this station was stable and consisted primarily




of rubble and gravel (Table 6).   There was  no evidence of any siltation




problems.  The principle land use above this station was agricultural




with its associated housing.  The stream was organically enriched as




indicated by an abundant growth of algae attached to the surface of




the substrate.  This growth provided a habitat for the large numbers




of Hydroptilidae and Chironomidae larvae collected at this station.




There was a total of nine taxa at this station in Class I and eight




taxa in Class II with one group in Class III.






Station B-5 (50 yards below discharge)




     The physical characteristics of this station were almost identi-




cal to Station k.  The substrate material at this station was also




coated with a thick growth of algae.  The total number of organisms




and the number of taxa collected at this station were less than those




found at Station E-k.  Although the percentage of Class I organisms



increased at Station B~5> the number of taxa in Class I was reduced




from 9 at Station B-lj to four at Station B-5-  The increase in Class  I




organisms is due totally to the numbers of Hydroptilidae.  The dis-




charge affects all the Class 1 organisms except the Hydroptilidae arid




Perlidae.  The organisms in Class II were reduced in number by only 8




and gained one taxon; they were not greatly affected by this discharge.




The large reduction in the number of midge is the major difference  in




total numbers of organisms between Station 3-U and Station B-5.  The

-------
bar graphs representing numbers shown on Figure 5 do not accurately




express the impact of the discharge on the stream due to the large




number of Hydroptilidae.






Station B-6 (^50 yards below discharge)




    The substrate at this station consisted mostly of various sands




and rubble.  There was not a dense algal growth on the substrate as




there was at Stations B~^ and B-5-  The total number of organisms




at this station was reduced further while the number of taxa remains




the same as Station B-5 and only three less than Station B-H.  The




percentage composition by Class differs greatly with those at Sta-




tions B-l* and B-5-  The substrate at this station affects the benthic




fauna as much as the discharge itself.  The great reduction in the




Hydroptilidae population is the significant difference in Class I




organisms at this station as opposed to the upstream stations, and




this can be attributed to the loss of habitat rather than any changes




in water quality.  No significant differences are present between




this station and Stations B-lf and B-5 in relation to the Class II



organisms.






                       .THOMPSON. TREATMENT, PLANT






    This lime neutralization facility is located on an unnamed




tributary to Plum Run which, in turn, joins Tenmile Creek near the




community of Fairfield, Pennsylvania.  The raw mine water is pumped




to a holding pond above the treatment plant.   From this point, the

-------
mine water is piped through the plant.   Additional mixing and some




aeration of the alkalinized effluent is supplied by a V-notched




baffling device prior to discharge to a single sedimentation pond.




A portion of the treated effluent is diverted (when necessary)  to




a small fish pond adjacent to the sedimentation pond.




    The chemical and biological sampling points associated with the




Thompson site are shown in Figure 3.  Table 9 lists the chemical




data collected during the four sampling periods.






                          CHEMICAL EVALUATION






    Cleaning operations were; underway at the raw water holding  pond




at the Thompson site during the first sampling round.  Since only




one holding pond was available at this site, a temporary makeshift




treatment procedure, not indicative or normal plant procedure,  was




in operation at the time of visit.  The portion of the raw water




discharge which exceeded the capacity of the treatment plant was



pumped directly (without treatment) to the sedimentation pond.   This




raw water was then combined in this pond with the treated effluent



discharged by the plant.  The end result of this activity was a final




discharge which exhibited an acidity concentration of 115 mg/1  and




carried a total iron concentration of 50 mg/1.  During the sample




period, the background alkalinity of ITT mg/1 in the receiving  stream




was totally depleted with a. resultant acidity concentration of  63  mg/1.

-------
                  B-8
                    C-2IO.B-9
 /SEDIMENTATION
  POND
                                                   THOMPSON SHAFT
             WEST  ZOLLARSWLLE
                                 FAiRFlLLD
                                                   WASHINGTON CO
B= 8ENTHIC SAMPUN6 POINT
Cs CHEMICAL  SAMPLING POINT
  FIGURE 3
|  THOMPSON  TREATMENT

1  PLANT
                                  GREEN CO
                                             MCKONGAHELA
                                             Rl VL R

-------
pfl

Specific
Conductance
let Alka-
linity-mg/1

Dis solved
Iron-mg/1

G  pended
1 on-sig/1

Total Iron
 nig/1
  .If ate
 tig/,]

Manganese
 rag/I
Alusilnuiii
 mg/1
                 Background (C-209)
                                                            'x&Dj S ';'

                                                      Water Quality Data

                                                   Thompson Treatment Plant

                                        Untreated Discharge (C-208)  Treated Discharge (C-2U )
                                                                                 Downstream (C-210)
                 7.8   7.2   7-6   7.8     3.2   3.i*   3-1   3.1      8.0   7-2   7-3   7-6

                      1000  1000  1100    8000  5500  6000  5000     6000  5550  6000  i*500
750
 -----       ..„_        _    nl,   129   100

177   110   186   136   1300*  -oifO* -760* -5S>*    -115*    7    35    ^3
  0   0,5     0     0    100    100   160   100

0.7   0.5     0   0,2     50      0     0    10


0.7   1.0     0   0.2    150    100   160   110
      280
                                                      50   0.3   0.5   0.5
                                                       0   0.7     0   1.5
                                                             1   0.5   2.0
                                                           1.5    0
                                                             0    0
                                                                                                 6.9   7-5   T-5   T.«

                                                                                                1100  1700  1900  280


                                                                                                1531   833   858

                                                                                                 -63*  103   Io3   lU
                                                                                                   i   o,:
                                                                                                   1   0,5
                                         "000   2i»50  2150  2350     3^50  2200  1700  I8k$      180   U80   510
                                                                                                       0.5     2
                                                                                                               0   0. '-j

-------
Zinc
                                                            Table 9




                                                      Water Quality Data




                                                   Thompson Treatment Plant




                 Background. (C-209)     Untreated Discharge (C-208)  Treated Discharge (C-21l)    Downstream  (C-210)




                5/72. 6/72  7/72  8/72    £/J2  6/J2  J/72  8/J2     5/72..,67.2. ..J.Zlg—8/7.2
20    20    17
700   900   620
20    20    33
Calcium
ffig/1
Magnesium
jag/1
Cadmium
ag/1
Chromium
ug/1
Copper
CO Ug/1
jead
ug/1
Nickel
ug/1
75
25
0
0
0
o
20
•^U*4-B»i«™~f>~'*»
75
25
0
20
0
0
0
_™— i—,1^™.
120
35
18
0
0
20
20
rtT ' JL_I _ _- 	 r ru '- •-• — -
300
135
20
ko
100
20
500
«kw«fc»&».«i»— •—— «
200
75
20
1*0
5000
0
200
1*80
80
650
57
170
20
600
.11 HIM n ,ri.. ill. I.I 1. II. I . nl. i.ill.t. i 	 n
1*00
50
10
0
0
20
60
„». i li ^. — tm-**u~i=f*H ,n. '..^^,~.—
600 781
50 6l
20 33
30 10
0 50
0 ilO
80 200
50
50
10
0
0
5
20
170 2-
-------
The following comments relate to the three subsequent  sampling rounds



at the Thompson plant when it was operating under  normal  conditions.



     'ue Thompson raw water discharge carried average  acid  and iron



concentrations of 762 mg/1 and 123 ag/1,  respectively.  The aluminum



concentration averaged 50 ing/l.  The presence of trace metals, in-



cluding cadmium., chromium, coppers nickel and zinc were detected on



each of the thre-e occasions which analyses for these metals were



performed.  Lead was present on two of the three occasions.  After



treatment, the high initial acidity was converted  to a net  alkalin-



ity averaging 28 mg/1.  The initial average total  iron concentration



(123 mg/l) was reduced to an average concentration of  only  1.2 mg/1.



The aluminum present in the raw water was completely removed by  the



treatment process.  Zinc was the only trace metal  which was signi-



ficantly reduced by the treatment process.  An initial average con-



centration of 7^0 miercgrams per liter was reduced to  2k  ndcrograms



per liter in the treated discharge.



    Above the Thompson plant, the pH values of the receiving stream



ranged from 7-2 to 7-8.  Below the Thompson outfall, the  stream  ex-



hibited pH values ranging from J.k to 7-5-  At the upstream point,



the stream exhibited an average net alkalinity of  l6l  mg/1.  Below



the point of discharge^ the stream carried an average  net alkalinity



of 137 Jng/1.  There was nc significant change in the average total



iron concentrations measur
-------
An average discharge rate of 11k gprn was measured at this site


during the survey.


    With the exception of the one instance described above,  the


Thompson plant provided excellent treatment with respect to  the


upgrading of the water quality exhibited by the final discharge


from the facility.




                         BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION




     Descriptions of the three biological sampling stations, associ-


ated with the Thompson plant are given below.   Tables 10, 11 arid 12


present the biological data collected at these stations.


    The diversity indices at the three stations at this  site were


gradually reduced from Station B-7 to Station B-9 while  the  total
                                                              A  '

number of organisms was greatly reduced between Station  B-7  and   •


Station B-8, and increased between Station B~8 and Station B-9.,


The principle taxonomic group collected at the three stations was


the dipteran family, Chironomidae.  The following is a more  detailed


description of the results obtained at each station.




Station B-7 (upstream of discharge)
                                                          i

    The substrate at this station consisted primarily of rubble  which


(Table 10) provides a favorable habitat for benthic organisms.   A


total of 18 taxa and 302 organisms were collected at this station.


Fifty-six percent of the organisms collected were in Class I; 19
                                  50

-------
                                                          T'oble 10
                                                 Benthos Sampling Stations
                                                  Thompson Treatment Plant
Station Ho.
  B-7
                    Station
                  5/17 to 6/16
                  6/16 to l/2k
                       to
                    Plum !wn approximately
                    25 feet above the
                    discharge .
                      5/17
                       to 6/16
5/17
6/16 to 7M
7/2fc to 8/21
Plum Run approximately
hO feet below the
discharge.
  B-9
    5/17
5/17 to 6/16
6/16 to if 2k
T/2k to 8/21
                    Plum Rim approximately
                    200 yards "below the
                    discharge.
Substrate Description

liffle Areas*
  5% rock
 1*5* rubble
 10* C.Gravel
 10* F.Gravel
 10* F.Sand
 20* clay
Pool Areas
 A mixture of bedrock,
 fine silt and some clay.

Riffle Areas
 10$ rock
 10* C.Gravel
 10* F.Gravel
 30* C.Sand
 1*0* F.Sand
Pool Areas
 A mixture of bedrock,
 fine silt and some clay.

Riffle Areas
 20* rubble
 10*C.Gravel
 10* F.Gravel
 30* C.Sand
 20* F.Sand
Beol Areas
 Mostly bedrock
 with some silt.
                                                                                      Comments

                                                                           One dendy collected
                                                                           on 7/2fc was partially
                                                                           silted in.
                                                                           One dendy collected
                                                                           on 7/24 was partially
                                                                           out of.the water
                                                                           because of low flow.
       *Bottom compositions are estimates based on field observations.

-------
                                                          Table 11
                                                    Benthbs Data Summary
                                                  Thompson. Treatment Plant
VI
!\
Station Sampling £.», of
Kumber Dates Samples
B-T 5/1T
5/17 to 6/16
5/17 to 6/16
6/16 to 7/24
6/16 to 7/24
7/24 to 8/21
" 7/24 to 8/21
-j ° 5/17
5/17 to 6/16
5/17 to 6/16
6/16 to 7/21*
7/24 to 8/21
. B-9 5/17
5/17 to 6/16
5/17 to 6/16
6/16 to 7/S4
6/16 to 7/21*
7/24 to 8/21
7/&4 to 8/21
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Type of
Samples
s*
D**
D
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
D
D
Total No.
of Organisms
302
1*7
38
33
38
18
32
95
99
37
11
8
210
41
38
28
32
13
81
No. of Taxa Diversity
Collected Index
18
4
2
1*
k
1
3
12
6
3
1
3
12
5
5
1
1
1
5
2.98
0.78
0.27
0.86
0.82
0
0.58
2.42
1.08
0.55
0
0197
2.06
1.08
1.20
0
0
0
0.91
Jfof
Class I
56
2
0
3
3
0
3
14
6
3
0
0
28
2
7
0
0
0
1
% of
Class II
19
2
3
9
50
0
3
34
k
0
0
25
24
10
4
0
0
0
5
* of
Class III
25
96
97
88
47
100
94
52
90
97
100
?5
48
88
89
100
100
100
94
         * Surber Samples
        ** Artificial Substrate Samples

-------
                                                           Table 12
                                                       Benthos  Data
                                                   Thompson Treatment Plant


  Class  I           B-7a B-7b B-7b B-7c B~7c  B~7d  B-7d   B-8a B-8b B-8b B-8c B~8d    B-9a B~£b B-9b B-9c B-9c B-9d B~9c

  Caddisflies

   Hydroptilidae    65                                  1                           53
   Philopotamidae   26                                                                1

  Stoneflies
   Perlidae          27    1                                                           5
   Perlodidae         3

  Crustaceans
   AsTicidae                                               211                     11
   a-SOpOda          "ie:                                    2

  Flatyprms
   Turbellaria       3                              1     1*     5
vn
   ingerna.il Clams
   Sphaeriidae       113

  Crane  Flies
   Tipuliidae         1                                                                1

  Coelent er ata
   Hydrida^                 -*                                   -

  Leeches
   Hirudinea                        11                                     11

  Class  II

  Caddisflies
   Hydropsy chi dae    91                          8                         19    2                        1

  Stoneflies
                      2

      *The nicnber of  these  organisas  were not  counted.

-------
                                     Table 12
                                 Benthos  Data
                             Thompson Treatment Plant
                                                                                                          continued
Class II (eont'd)  B-?a B-7b B-7b B-?c B~7c B-?d B~?d   B-8a B-8b B~8b B-8c B-8d    B~§a B~0b 3-9T3 B~9c B~9e B-9d B-9S
Mayflies
  Baetidae
      _
  Ceratopogonidae
  SIMdae

  Bystiseidae

 Crustaceans,
  AmpMpoda

 Snails^
, Pulmonata
'Bl«ck Plies
Djmce_ _Fligs
  Empididae
Shore Flies
  Sphydridae
  Aeshnidae
  Agrionidae
  Oligochaeta

Class III

Midge Fliea_rii
  Chironomidae
                    IT
6 •

l

2

1
18
76
                1
         37  29
                     15
                                    12
                                                           10  3
                                                                                      23
                                                                                      1
                                          18  1%    30     50 89   36   '11   6     100  36    25   28   32  13

-------
 percent in Class II 'aM 25 percent in Class III (Table 11).   The



 majority of the organisms were ia seven taxonoade  groups  and, of



 these sssven groups 9 four -were in Class I,   She composition of the



 beathie community at this station was considered representatire



 of unpolluted vater.





 Station .B-8 (&0 feet below discharge)



      Sand was the principle constituent of  the 'substrate  at this



 station (fable  10).   fhere was  Tery little  rock and no rubble  for



 the attachment  of macroinvertebrates,  This poor substrate may "be



 partially responsible for the results  obtained  at this station .



 fhe substrate ia this particular  stretch of Plum Bun had Yery  light



 red stains on it  from iron precipitates.  3!he composition of the



 benthic coaaaunity was primarily midge larvae which made up 52 percent



 of the total  OPfiible.ll).  Ill classes of organisms were reduced in



 numbers (Figure  5) and the most drastic reduction was within Class I



•where the number dropped  from 168 organisms at Station B-7 to 13



organisms at this station,  fhe diversity index was loirer at this



 station (Figure 6) than the index at B-7 and the number of taxa was



also less,  fhe benthic community at this station was represented by



organisms capable of tolerating both pollution and a poor substrate.





            (200 yards below the discharge)
     fhe substrate at this station vas somewhat improved oTer that



encountered at Station B-8.  Approximately 30 percent of the bottom

-------
 consisted of rubble -(Table B~10}*   Although rubble creates a de-



 sirable habitat  for the development of a diverse benthic community 5



 the overall results do not reflect this.   The total number of or-



 ganisms collected at this  station  «as  210 (Figure 6) as compared.



 to the  95 organisms collected at Station B~8.   This increase of



 llg" organisms is due to the increase in the number of the family



 Hydroptilidae and the family Chironomidae.   The number of Hydro-



 psyehidae .and Elmidae also increased but  not.in numbers approaching



 those of the Bydroptilidae and Chironomidae«   The total number  of



 taxa collected at  this  station was  the  same as collected at  Station



 B-8; however5  there -w&s a  decrease  in the number of Class 1  taxa



 and an  increase  in the  number  Class  II.   The diversity index (2..06}



 was lover than the diversity index  at Station  B-8 (2.1*2).  The  in-



 crease  in. total  number  at  Station B~9 -was the  cause of this  reduced



 diversity index.





                  ' 'COWtCRQI.f"Smg?IQl._-. MICH  BQBEHOLg   ••••••••'





     This station was located on Little Indian Creek,  a tributary



to  Indian Creek which joins the Monongahela River  at Everettville,



West Virginia.  The source of mine water discharge at  this site was



the lyach Borehole from the Arkwright lo. 1 Mine operated by Consol-



 idation Coal Co.  Theeeffluent .from this borehole  was  representative



 of  a grossly polluted mine drainage discharge.  The mine  effluent was



pumped to a small equilization pond and then flowed directly to Little



Indian Creek mthout any treatment.

-------
      Samples for chemical and. biological analyses were collected.



 from a point above the discharge (C-212, background)s  150 yards



 "below the discharges and 0«9 mile below the discharge.   There was



 no actual Sampling of the Lynch Borehole during the survey period.



 However.,  samples of the Lynch Borehole  were collected  as part of*



 the overall inventory of all active underground mines  in the  Mon-



 ongahela  River "basin mentioned earlier  in this, document.   These



 samples -were collected during March, September  and October of 1972.



 This information is presented in Table  13.



      Little Indian Greek is  unaffected  "by any type of mine drainage



 discharge above the Lynch Borehole.  There  is one  abandoned mine a



 short distance above (upstream)  the furthest dornistream sampling



 point (C-214).   Shere was no visible discharge  from this mine during



 the  period' of surveys however, samples vere collected, from the mi-



 named receiving stream  on which  the mine  is located in order to



 document the  lack of any  significant mine drainage  contribution



 from this  site.   Chemical data for the control  site are presented in



 Tattle 1U.






                           CHEMICAL MALUATIQI





      Little Indian Creek,  above the Lynch Borehole, exhibited pB



values ranging  from 6.T to 7.6 and carried an average alkalinity



 concentration of 11? tog/1,  fhe average total iron concentration



 at this point was  1.6 mg/1 and the average sulfate concentration



was less than 50 mg/1.  frace metals were detected in minute



quantities.






                                   5T

-------
BOREHOLE


-------
                             fable 13

                        Water Quality Data

                     lynch Borehole Discharge
Date
pi

let Acidity
Ib/dagr

Eotal Iron
  ng/1	
Ib/day

Sulfates
Flow (gpm)
                     2.6
                  (1,550)
                    1600
                   (403)
11,500
(2898)

    21
  3.0
 5T25
(68?)
 2300'
 (2T6)
                                3.1*
                               2TOO
                              (1650)
                                 (660)

                                    10
                  51

-------
pH
Indian Creek (C-212)
                                                         Tattle Ik
                                                    Water  Quality Data
                                                        Control Site

                                            Little Indian Creek  (C213J Unnamed Tributary (O-216)
                                            150 yds. 1>elow  discharge   to Little Indian Creek
6.?    ?.2   ?-3   7.6    2,6   3.2   2.7   2.8
6,6   6,7   7.3   7-5
Specific
Conductance
let Acidity
mg/1
Dissolved
Iron-fflg/1
Suspended
Iron-mg/1.
K
?
,.otal Iron
mg/1
Sulfate mg/1
Malagasies e-mg/1
Aluminum-ing/l
Calcium-iug/1
Magnes iura-mg/1
kko too
~71@ -90*
0.3 0.5
2,7 0
3.0 0.5
60 kO
0. 2
0
20
8
Uoo
-152®
0
0
0
feo
3
0
liO
- 15
520
-155*
0.5
2.5
3
U5
0
0
50
11
3000 3500
930 1320
100 100
20 100
120 200
1505 1250
— 3
- _ 70
100
50
3200
1180
75
0
75
1530
U
60
100
50
5500
^
660
60
720
1900
6
130
180
100
3'40 300
1^0 1
_
„
2 k
50 50
0.2
0
17
_ c
280
-25s
_.
-
5
650
„
_
-
-
                                                                                            90
Little Indian Creek (C21
0.9 Mi» "below diseliarge


 •?.fc   3.5   3.0   2.Q

2500  2^00  2200  3500


 315'   -    202

 600   715   515  1055



 100   100"   20   300

    0     0      0     20


 100   100    20   320
                                                                                  930  IQkQ   TOO

                                                                                          3     U

                                                                                         ^5    kO

                                                                                         50    70

                                                                                         35    25
 ^negative value denotes alkalinity

-------
                                       Table lit
                                  Vater Quality Data
                                     Control Site

Indian Creek (C-212)     tittle Indian Creek (0213)  Unnamed friTbutsry (C-216)
  Background             150 yds, "belcw discharge    to Little Indian Creek
              ^,
     (continued)
Little Indian Creek (C2l
0.9 Mi. below discharge
.
ug/1
Chromium
ug/1
Copper
•ug/1
Lead
Tig/1 .
\
t
Nickel
Zinc
ug/1
0 0 20


0 20 0
0 0 20

0 0 10

0 80 10
20 0 25

5


TO
300

20

600
r- 1200

0


50
10,000

0

250
1600

3800


85
600

30

1500
2500

— 0 ». _


10
— o — —

— 0 "- —

30
ko

_ 5


60
200

20

500
- 700

                                                                                                0  1?00
                                                                                                     35
                                                                                                     20
                                                                                       500   100    860

-------
      The pH values of the Lynch discharge ranged from 2.6 to 3
-------
                          BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION






      Descriptions- of the three biological sampling stations  ass6-




 ciated with the control site are given "below.   Tables  15s  16 and




 1? present the biological data collected at these  stations.




      The samples collected.' at this  site demonstrates the chronic




 toxieity of untreated mine drainage to most organisms.  The'  rela-




 tively healthy upstream benthic community was  totally  absent at




 both downstream stations.






              ( upstream  of discharge)
     Little Indian  Creek  in this reach is very small.  The mouth.



of the benthie sampler  spanned the entire width of the riffle.



The substrate was composed of gravel and sand (Table Ik) ,  The



bottom fauna collected  at this station was predominantly sensitive



organisms  (Figure 5)«



     Thirty-nine percent of the organisms ware in Class II and



only three percent of the organisms were in Class III.  The fifty-



eight Heptageniidae  (fable 15) accounted for greater than 50 percent



of all organisms collected at this station.  .Although the organisms



were not evenly distributed among the taxonomic groups > the stream



supported an aquatic fauna indicative of good water quality.






         .-ll. (150 yards below discharge)
     She water quality and the substrate w&Te seriously degraded



at this station.  The stream bottom was completely encrusted with
                                 63

-------
B-10
      5/25
5/25 to 6/22
6/22 to ?/25
7/25 to 8/22
B-ll
      5/25
5/25 to 6/22
6/22 to 7/25
7/25 to 8/22
B-12
      5/25
5/25 to 6/22
6/22 to 7/25
T/25 to 8/22
                                                 fable 15
                                         Benthos Sampling Stations
                                               Control Site
Little Indian Creek
approximately 50 yards
above the discharge.
Little Indian Creek
approximately 150 yards
"below the discharge.
Little Indian Creek
0.9 miles "below the
discharge.
SjibstraAeJDescrigtion

Riffle Areas®
  20# Bulible
  10% 0.Gravel
      T. Gravel
      C.Sand
      F.Saad
  10JJ Silt
Pool Areas
  Bottoms consisted
  mostly of mud and silt

Riffle Areas
  20% C.Gravel
  10$ F.Gravel
      C»Sand
      F.Sand
  30| "Yellow Boy'1
Pool Areas
  Gravel and "Yellow Boy"

Riffle Areas
  10* Bock
  20| C.Gravel
  20% F.Gravel
      C.Sand
      F.Sand
      "Yellow Boy"
Pool Areas
  Bedrock and "Yellow  Boy"
                                                                                                   Comments
The "bottom in this
area-'i-ras encrusted iritn
iron precipitates.
There was also a lot. -of
iron precipitates in
suspension
Iron precipitates were
in suspension.
      *Bottom compositions  are  estjjsates based  on field  observations.

-------
                                                  Table 16
                                            Benthos Data Summary
                                                 Control Site
Station   Sampling
B-lOa
B-10b
B-lOb
B-lOc
B-lOo
B-lOd
B-lOd

B-lla
B-llb
B-llb
B-llc
B-llc
B-lld
B-lld

B-12a
B-lSb
3-12b
B-12e
B~12c
B-12d
B"12d
             5/25
          5/25 to 6/22
          5/25 to 6/22
          6/22 to 7/25
          6/2.2 to 7/25
          7/25 to 8/22
          7/25 to 8/22

             5/25
          5/25 to 6/22
          5/25 to 6/22
          6/22 to 7/25
          6/22 to 7/25
          7/2
t
8/22
           f/25 to 8/22

             5/25
           5/25 to 6/S2
           5/25 to 6/22
           6/22 to 7/25
           6/22 to 7/25
           7/25 to 8/22
           7/25 to 8/22
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
JL
'"1
-j.
1
•j
~!
1
1
1
s*
c*
D
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
D
D
S
D
D
D
D
D
TJ
                                111
                                118
                                 8U
                                 6k
                                 82
                                 76
 1
 l
 2
 0
 1
 0
 0

 1
 3
23
 5
 8
 2
11
12
 !l
 3
 1*
 2
 6
 1

 i
 l
 l
 0
 1
 0
 0

 1
 1
 1
 1
 1
2.31*
0.63
O.ij?
0,72
0.23
1,15
A
t*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
58
1
6
ll*
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
' 0
0
39
12
39
59
k
22
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
u
3
87
55
27
96
75
100
: 100
0
100
0
100
0
0
100
100
100
100
100
100
300
       '"Barter  Samples
      **Artificial  Substrate Samples

-------
o\
ON
Class I

Caddisflies
  Hydroptilidae

Stonefli.es.
  Perlodidae

Mayflies
  Heptageniidae

Crustaceans
  Astaeidae

Flatworms
  Turtellaria

Fingernail Clams
  Sphaeriidae

Coelenterata
  Hydridae

Leeches
  Hirudinea

Class II

Caddisflies
  Hydropsychidae

Stcmeflies
  lemoui-idae
                      B-   B~  B-   B-   B-  B-  B-
                      lOa  1013 lOb  lOc  lOc  lOd lOd
     •• -Table-17
     Benthos Data
     Control Site

B-  B-  B-  B-  B-  B- 'B-
lla lib lib lie lie lid lid
B-  B-  B-  B-  B-  B-  B-
12a 12b 12b 12c 12c 12d 12d
                       1
                      58
                       1
                       1
                       7


                      16
         *The ntMbers  of these organisms were not counted.

-------
                                                         'i'u'ble 17                                      Uunll.mi..M.I
                                                       BoathOB Data
                                                       Control Bite

                  B_  E-  B-  B-  B-  B-   B-      B-  B-  B-  B~  B-  B-  B-       B-  B-  13-  B-  B- • B-  B-.
Clajis II (cont'd) 10a lOb lOb lOc lOc 10d  lOd    lla lib lib lie lie lid lid      12a 12b 12b 12c 12c 12d l?d
Mayflies
Baetidae
Beetle Larvae
Elmidae
Dytiscidae
Snails
Pulmonata
Aquatic Worms
Oligochaeta
13
2
1
3
2 13
2
1 6
33 37 3 9
Class III


Midge Flies
  Chironomidae     3 103   ^6 17   79   57    7      1       '2       1               1   3  23    5    8   2   11

-------
 iron precipitates  creating an almost unlnhibitable substrate.   The



 pools  in this area were filled with flocculent  iron precipitates



 except for a channel large enough for the water to pass through.



 A single Chironomidae was  collected in the sample  at this station.



 An aquatic -worm  (fable 16")  collected on an artificial  substrate "was



 the  only tajosnomie group collected except the midge.   A few midge



 were also collected  on the  artificial substrates.



 Station B-12 (0.9 miles below discharge)



     Chemical analyses indicated the water quality at  this sta-



 tion was slightly improved  over the -water quality  found at Station



 B-ll,  The substrate was also somewhat improved.   Hie  stream bottom



 was  not encrusted as severely as at Station B-ll,  and the basic bot-



tom  constituents were more  coarse creating a more  inhabitable sub-



 strate.  However9 the aquatic  fauna at this station was represented



only by Cfhironcanidae.
                                 68

-------
                               BISCUBSIOT






      The amount of data obtained from the artificial substrates




 was insufficient to provide a "basis  for valid conclusions.   I'his




 ineffectiveness of the multi-plate artificial substrates can "be




 attributed to the exposure period.   The artificial substrates




 were placed in deep riffles, pools,  on the bottom, suspended, wel.I ,




 above the bottom, both horizontally  and vertically oriented.  The




 four week exposure periods used  for  this study were not  long enough




 for the  colonization of the macroinvertebrat.es,   It feat;  been shown




 (Pullner (6)} that macroinvertebrates  t-ii.ll colonize an artificial




 substrate,  similar to the  one used in  this study,  sufficiently in




 8-10 weeks  to obtain reliable results.   Fullner's  study  was  con-




 ducted on a large river compared to  the small  streams sampled



 during this  study but this should not  significantly affeet the



 colonization of the artificial substrates.           ' '"




      The single bottom sample collected at each of the twelve




 stations was  used almost exclusively for  evaluating the  four sites.




 Statistically5  a  single bottom sample  is  not totally reliable for




malting a biological  evaluation of a given stream reach:,  nowever,




 these data are  much more reliable than the artificial substrate-




 data,




     The level  of tazonomie identification affects  the classifi-




 cation of organisms into their respective  tolerance groups.   Taxa.
                                 69

-------
 were placed in Class  I  if the literature aad data indicated that



 most members of that  group were sensitive' to mine drainage.  Tasa



 were placed in Class  II if most members of that group demonstrated



 some tolerance to mine  drainage.  The family level of identifica-



 tion for the crustaceans and insects becomes critical for,, the



 Class II organisms because a family is placed in Class II if only



 one  genus or species  of that family is facultative.  The families



 Sialictae. and ChronoKidae have repeatedly demonstrated that they



 are  predominantly tolerant to mine drainage -  and, therefore are



 placed in Class< III.












     This treatment plant was the most ineffective of the three



 facilities studied4  The Taeathie community was severely depressed



 immediately below the discharge and only slightly improved veil



below the discharge.  There were several factors impairing the



 effectiveness of this treatment plant.  The size of the receiving



 stream was of prime importance and for low flow periods represents



nearly the entire flow of the receiving stream,   In other words,



there is no significant dilution of this discharge by the receiving



stream.  This discharge would not affect the  biota of a large stream



nearly as much as it affected this unnamed tributary of Pike  Run*
                                 70

-------
      As mentioned earlier» the BerciK. facility ted been upgraded



 "by the addition of a, liiaer     • as electrical aerator shortly Be-



 fore this plant,     selected for study*  However» due to the



 accxmuf atlon of sludge smierial ia the ponds and the reduced



 retention time, -it appears doubtful that any significant improve-



 ment occurred in the water quality of the final effluent.  In



 March 1973» Joses     L'aughlin Steel Corporation reported, that a



 sludge removal         would be initiated at the Bercik facility.



 Hie end result of .this operations ia eonaeetion with the upgraded



 treatment procedures should result itt the production of a final



 effluent exhibit    iaproved crater quality.   This is of particular



• importance with-respect to  the iacreased efficiency in the removal



 of suspended iroa.   Shis suspended iron represented the major por-



 tion of the total Iroa coaoentration and     primarily responsible



 for the poor aesthetic appearance of a downstream portion of  the



 receiving stream..











      flie Kefover Treatment  Plant is the most  efficient  treatment



 plant of the three studied.  As  the results demonstrates  the 'ben-



 thos a&.this site were-somewhat  adversely affected but  not  to  the



 extent that  they were  at the two otter  treatment plants.  The  re-



 tention time in the  settling pond and the dilution factor of the
                                 '71

-------
 receiving stream are the principal  fe&tures  of  this treatment



 plant.   Hie plant is relative^ new    lias  not had time to build



 up large quantities  of sludge  in the settling pond, thus giving



 the treated water an adequate  settling period.  The receiving



 stream  Is large? than the discharge and dilutes the remaining



 chemical constituents of the discharge to a tolerable level.



     Copper and  sine were significantly reduced by the Kefover



 treatment     .   These metals were reduced from . an average ini-



 tial concentration .of 88 ug/1 and 527 ug/1 to an average of 8 ug/1



 and 103 tig/1 s respectively.  In initial aluminum concentration was



 completely  removed by the treatment -procedure on "both occasions



 when initially present.





                                          PM1T






     From the.chemical standpoint     under -Boraal operation con-



 ditions, this plant is as effective as the Kef over freatment Plant.



 However, slugs of acid water are apparently released., on occasion,



 from this plant and reduce its overall treatment capability.  These



 slugs occur when sludge is being pitnrped from the raw water holding



pond.   When the raw water pond is being cleaned, the raw water is



pumped to the treated water settling pond and mixed with mter that



has "been treated,  fhis mirtwe of treated and untreated water then



 discharges to the receiving stream.   She plant was operating under

-------
 these  conditions  during  the  first sample  collection.




     If  there were no slugs  released from this plant, its effec-




 tiveness would probably  be equal to that  of the Kefover Treatment




 Plant,




     An  average initial  aluminum concentration of 50 sig/1 was




 completely removed by the treatment procedure.  Similar signifi-




 cant reductions were  apparent for nickel  and zinc and., to a lesser




 degree^ for several other trace metals,






                    CONTROL STATION - LYKCH BOREHOLE






     As previously mentioneds the discharge from this borehole




 severely degrades the water quality of Little Indian Creek and




 nearly eliminates all macroinvertebrates.  The" data collected




 from the study area at this site demonstrates the affects of an




 untreated discharge upon the stream, water quality and the benthos




of the receiving stream.

-------
    JL&L
106
     
-------
B1RCIK           PLAIT
  STATION B-l
 STATIC)! B-2
                                                                        •2,10
 STATION B-3
KSPOWR           PLANT
      kko
           m
   STATION B-4
                                        338
                                            2.1*0
STATIC! B-5
STATIC! B~6
 THOMPSOI           PLANT
       321  2,98
            i!
    STATI01 B-7
      2.42
                                         as.
 STATION B-8
  211 .2,06
STATION B-9
 LYNCH BOREHOtS
          2.3k
      111
     STATIOI B-10
   ui-L-i-i

  STATION B-ll
                                                                            .1.1
  STATION B-12
                                     500-
                         OP
                  INDIVIDUALS
                  PEE SQ.  FT.
                 DIYERSITI INDEX

-------
                             BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste-water*
             Thirteenth Edition.  Aiaerican Public Health Association,,
             Inc. 1971.

2.  Griffith, R.s 1972, A eomparative Study of Benthie Macrofauaal
             Production by Standing Crop in a Stream Affected "by
             Acid Mine Drainage,  A Thesis Submitted to Michigan
             State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Re-
             quirements of the Degree of Master of Science, De~
             partsient of Fisheries and Wildlife,

3.  Reppert, H. T., unknown,-Aquatic Life and the Acid Reaction,
             Hattural Besources Institute» University of Maryland.

k.  Mnsittores B. H., 19689  The Aquatic Ecology of Tom*s Bun,
             Clarion County, Pennsylvania- Preceding Watershed
             Reclamations A leport to the Pennsylvania Department
             of Mines and Mineral Industries, Bureau of Coal Be-
             search aafi the Pennsylvania Department of Health,
             Bureau of Sanitary Engineering, Division of Water
             Quality.  Publication 21.

5.  Wilhm, J«  L., 196?* Comparison of Some Diversity Indices
             Applied to Populations of Benthic Macroinverte'brates
             in a Stream Receiving Organic Wastes, Jour.  Water
             Poll. Cent.  Fed.;  39 (10):   1673 - 1683.

6.  Pullner, R. W. 1969?  A Comparison of Benthic Macroinvertebrates
             Collected "by Rock-Filled and Modified Multi-Plate
             Samplers,   P.W.P.C.A.  Ohio  Basin P.8gion5  Upper Ohio
             Basin Office, Wheeling,  W,  Ya1? At tl^e 17th Annual
             Meeting of the Midwest Benthological Society,
             Kentucky Dam Village.

-------