The recovery of an AMD- impacted stream treated by steel slag leach - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The recovery of an AMD- impacted stream treated by steel slag leach beds: a case study in the East Branch of Raccoon Creek NAAMLP Conference, Columbus, OH September 21-24, 2014 Caleb Hawkins Master of Science in Environmental Studies Candidate The Voinovich School of Leadership and Public Affairs, Ohio University Athens, OH Dr. Natalie Kruse, The Voinovich School, Environmental Studies; Dr. Kelly Johnson, College of Arts and Sciences, Biological Sciences; Dr. Dina Lopez, College of Arts and Sciences, Geological Sciences

East Branch, Raccoon Creek Watershed • Drainage Area 19.95 mi 2 (12768 acres) • Approximately 8 miles long, average fall per mile =19.5ft • 5% of land affected by underground mines (approx. 576 acres) • 15% land affected by surface mines (approx. 1983 acres) • Pre-reclamation: largest contributor of acidity to Raccoon Creek

Reclamation and Restoration • Over $2,000,000 in reclamation projects • Reclaimed gob piles • Three Phases of Steel Slag Bed Construction (11 SSLBs) • Limestone channels • Phase I completed December 2007 (Sanner Road) • Reduced acid load from 1175 lbs/day to 1 lb/day • Reduced metal load 186 lbs/day to 46 lbs/day • Phase II and III (completed in Dec 2010 and Spring 2011) • Reduced acid load from 251 lbs/day to 36 lbs/day • Laurel Run • Reclamation goal: reduce acid loads at the mouth of East Branch, restore pH to circumneutral

Mouth of Laurel Run pH, Acidity, and Alkalinity 80 12 70 10 60 Concentration mg/L 8 50 pH 40 6 30 4 20 2 10 0 0 1/14/04 5/28/05 10/10/06 2/22/08 7/6/09 11/18/10 4/1/12 8/14/13 12/27/14 Date acidity_lab_mgl alkalinity_lab_mgl PH_lab

Sanner Run pH, Alkalinity, and Acidity 10 100 9 90 8 80 7 70 Concentration mg/l 6 60 pH 5 50 4 40 3 30 2 20 1 10 0 0 1/14/04 5/28/05 10/10/06 2/22/08 7/6/09 11/18/10 4/1/12 8/14/13 12/27/14 Date acidity_lab_mgl alkalinity_lab_mgl PH_lab

Primary Research Questions • Relationship between MAIS values (rapid bioassesments), sediment chemistry, and aqueous chemistry? • Are there definable zones of recovery below steel slag leach beds? • Does gradient influence the deposition of metals in pools ? • How does the stream alkalinity change from the treatments in the headwaters to the mouth of East Branch?

Methods • Rapidbioassesments (MAIS) • WQ samples • Measure stream slope (areas of deposition) • Discharge • Sediment samples (ICP-OES analysis)

Past Research • MAIS at 5 sites in July 2013 and 2014 • Low flow WQ samples and alkalinity budget in August 2013 • High flow WQ samples and acidity/alkalinity budgets in June 2014 • QHEI at MAIS sites in October 2013 • Gradient measured at 14 sites in January and February 2014 (3 more sites to be measured)

MAIS values in East Branch and at confluence Year Confluence Mouth Tick Ridge (MSBC010. (EB010) (EB047) RM (approx. 0.5 mi RM0.1 2.2 downstream of mouth) 2001 * * 5 2002 * * 3 2003 * * 0 2005 8 * * 2006 9 8 * 2007 12 12 * 2008 9 6 * 2009 10 12 11 2010 12 11 13 2011 13 9 8 Confluence has improved status. R 2 =0.66 P=0.007 (9 years 2012 12 13 12 of data) *= no data available Mouth does not have improved 2013 13 10 15 status. R 2 = 0.11 P = 0.41

Results Drainage Site River MAIS QHEI Area mi 2 Mile Score Mouth 0.1 19.9 10 63 Good Poor Tick 2.2 15.4 15 73 Excellent Ridge Good 76.5 Dexter 3.2 13.9 13 Excellent Good 67 Good South 4.9 8.43 5 Very Bridge Poor 70 North 5.5 6.49 8 Poor Excellent Bridge 2013 scores = no correlation between habitat and macroinvertebrate scores

MAIS score by year at three sites 18 16 14 12 MAIS Score • Tick Ridge R 2 = 0.18 and is not 10 significant P=0.47 (5 years of 8 data) 6 4 2 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Year Confluence Mouth Tick Ridge Linear (Tick Ridge)

Number of Individuals (2013) Taxa richness (2013) 500 35 450 30 400 25 350 No. of Individuals No. of Individuals 300 20 250 15 200 150 10 100 5 50 0 0 0.1 2.2 3.2 4.8 5.7 0.1 2.2 3.2 4.8 5.7 River Mile River Mile

Aqueous Chemistry Sampling Dates • Aug 4-5, 2013 • Aug 15-16, 2013 • May 22-23, 2014 (alkalinity Budgets) • June 4-5, 2014 • Aug 4-5, 2014 • Sep 2014 (alkalinity budgets) • Mar 2015 (chemical and alkalinity budgets)

Acid Load Sanner Road - May and June 2014 Cabin Poling Starr Stallion 400 20 18 350 16 300 14 Acid Load kg/day 250 Discharge CFS 12 200 10 8 150 6 100 4 50 2 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 River Mile Discharge May CFS Discharge June CFS June Acid Load May Acid Load

Laurel Run Acid Loads - May, June, and August 2014 600 20 18 500 16 14 Acid load kg/day 400 12 CFS 300 10 8 200 6 4 100 2 0 0 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 River Mile Aug Acid Load kg/day June Acid Load May Acid Loag kg/day Aug Discharge June Discharge CFS May Discharge CFS

Mouth to Sanner Run Starr Poling Yost Cabin Stallion 9 8 7 6 Concentration mg/l 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 River Mile Al Fe Mn

Mouth to Laurel Run 5 Forest SSLB Winnifred SSLB 4.5 4 3.5 Concentration (mg/L) Starr SSLB 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 Northwoods SSLB 0.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 River Mile Fe Al Mn

Al loadings Laurel Run 16 14 12 10 Loading (kg/day) 8 6 Starr SSLB 4 Winnifred SSLB 2 Northwoods SSLB Forest SSLB 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -2 River Mile Al loading kg/day Δ Al loadings kg/day

Mouth to Laurel Run Tributary – June 2014 Winnifred SSLB 1800 9 1600 8 Forest SSLB 1400 7 Northwoods SSLB Starr SSLB Conductivity (µS/cm2) 1200 6 Sulfate (mg/L) 1000 5 pH_Lab 800 4 600 3 400 2 200 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 River Mile conductivity_lab_uScm sulfate_mgl PH_lab

1400 7 Starr Stallion Poling Yost Cabin 1200 6 1000 5 Conductivity (µs/cm3) sulfate (mg/l) 800 4 pH 600 3 400 2 200 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 River Mile conductivity_lab_uScm sulfate_mgl PH_lab

Preliminary conclusions • Gradient does not affect the concentration of suspended metals (Fe, Al) • Need more data points • Treatment systems buffer the acid effectively near headwaters sites • Dilution buffers later downstream • Sediment samples may tell different story • Water quality improvements are not immediate • Varying zones of chemical recovery exist in East Branch

Future Research • Sediment sampling July 2014 • Sediment analysis fall 2014 • WQ Sampling/ Alk Budget fall 2014 • Finish gradient sampling fall 2014 • QHEI October 2014 • Continued lit review, data analysis, and writing in the fall 2014 and spring 2015 • Historical data in context and weather influences

Qu Ques estion ons? Contact: Caleb Hawkins Grad Assistant AEP Watershed Restoration Program ch029413@ohio.edu (937) 404-1016

References Cited • MacCausland, A. and McTammany, M.E., 2006. The impact of episodic coal mine drainage pollution on benthic macroinvertebrates in streams in the Anthracite region of Pennsylvania. Environmental Poluution 149, 216-226. • Jennings, S.R., Neuman, D.R. and Blicker, P.S., 2008. Acid Mine Drainage and Effects on Fish Health and Ecology: A Review. Reclamation Research Group Publication, Bozeman, MT. • Yoder, C.O. and Rankin, E.T., 1996. Assessing the condition and status of aquatic life designated uses in urban and suburban watersheds, pp. 201-227. in Roesner, L.A. (ed.). Effects of Watershed Development and Management on Aquatic Ecosystems, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY. • Cravotta III, C.A., Bilger M.D., 2001. Water – quality trends for a stream draining the Southern Anthracite Field, Pennsylvania. Geochem. Explor. Environ. Anal. 1, 33-50.

• Hogsden, K.L., Harding, J.S., 2012. Consequences of acid mine drainage for the structure and function of benthic stream communities: a review. Freshwater Science, 31(1), 108-120. • McClurg, S., Petty, J.T., Mazik, P., and Clayton, J., 2007. Stream ecosystem response to limestone treatment in acid impacted watersheds of the Allegheny plateau. Ecological Applications, 17, 4, 1087-1104. • Kruse, N.A., DeRose, L., Korenowsky, R., Bowman, J.R., Lopez D.,, Johnson, K., Rankin, E., 2013. The role of remediation, natural alkalinity sources and physical stream parameters in stream recovery. The Journal of Environmental Management, 128, 1000-1011. Doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.06.040