Prepublicai'ion issue for EPA libraries
->,^^._ . ^ and State Solid Waste Management Agencies
SW-156c
MUNICIPAL SLUDGE AGRICULTURAL UTILIZATION PRACTICES
An Environmental Assessment
Volume II
This final report (SW-156c) describes work performed
for the Federal solid waste management program
under contract no. 68-01-3265
and is reproduced as received from the contractor
Volume I which presents: an explanation of the purposes and
methodology fop site selection; a detailed explanation of
the sampling and analytical program; an analysis of the
data; and a summary, conclusions, and recommendations section
will he available from Solid Waste Information,, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency., Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
NOTE: Volume 1
see: SW-700
U.S. Environmental Protection Agtw»
Region 5, library
77 West Jacf'son Boulevard, 12th HOW
Chicago.ll 60604-3590
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1978
-------
This report was p-epared by SCS Engineers, Inc., Long Beach, California,
under Contract No 68-01-3265.
Publication does not signify that tie contents lecessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of commercial produets-'constitute endorsement by the
U.S. Government.
An environmental protection publication (SW-156;) in the solid waste
management series.
-------
or CONTENTS
i. i r; t of 1 a bl <»,
' i s t o f F i g u r o c;
_ i ',t of Phot.oqrapnr
CIIAPTF. R I - MACHfi, GEORGIA
S i te Descr i |>t, i on
C 1 i ITI ate
S c i I 0 e s c r i p • i o n
Source and Description of Sludge
Public Attitudes toward Landspread i ng of Sludge
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading
Economics
Sampling and Analysis
P a g e
v
xi
CHAPTER I!
LAS VIRGENES, CALIFORNIA
Site Description
Cl imatc
S o i i D e c c r i p t" i o n
Source and Description of Sludge
r'uMir Attitudes toward Landspread i ng of Sludge
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading
E c o n o m i c s
S a m p 1 i n j ,1 n d A n a 1 y s i s
CHAPTER
III
•
WILMINGTON, OHIO
C ' ins ate
SIM 1 Tr.
CHAPTER IV -- SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI
S i t e D e s c r i p t i o n
12
19
23
23
24
48
48
56
57
61
68
71
71
72
93
-: pt-ir-- 93
98
r i p t i r r, 99
S o u r- c e o n d Description of Sludge 106
Public Attitudes toward L and spread i ng of Sludge 112
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading 112
Economics 117
S a ;;i p 1 i • i q a n d A n a i y s i s 118
142
142
147
148
153
S o i 1 0 e c> r r i p t i o n
•"ourrf Mid Description of Sludae
:';;{''• ''fcui!"1 toward Lai :•- |if..fMi ..•. (.i ',,,!,,.>- }{>;.
S M t p i n d [ n r n 1 Regulation? on Sludae Spreading 166
Economics 1 67
S a m p 1 ' P " ^ n H A r- n ' v s i s 168
i i
-------
01 CONTENTS (Continued)
CHAPTER V - CH1PPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN 192
Si te Descri ption 192
Climate 198
So i 1 Descri pti on 199
Source and Description of Sludge 204
Public Attitudes toward Landspread i ng of Sludge 213
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading 216
Economics 219
Sampling and Analysis 219
CHAPTER VI - HOPKINSVILLE, KENTUCKY 243
Site Description 243
Climate 248
Soil Descri ption 250
Source and Description of Sludge 252
Public Attitudes toward Land spreading of Sludge 263
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading 264
Economics 264
Sampling and Analysis 265
CHAPTER VII - FRANKFORT, INDIANA 287
Site Description 287
Climate 291
Soil Descri ption 292
Source and Description of Sludge 296
Public Attitudes toward Landspreadi ng of Sludge 303
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading 306
Economics 307
SamplingandAnalysis 308
CHAPTER VIII KENDALLVILLE, INDIANA 331
Site Description 331
Climate 337
Soil Description 338
Source and Description of Sludge 342
Public Attitudes toward Landspreadi ng of Sludge 350
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading 354
Economics 354
Sampling and Analysis 355
CHAPTER IX - COLUMBUS, INDIANA 377
SiteDescription 377
Climate 382
Soi 1 Descri ption 383
Source and Description of Sludge 388
Public Attitudes toward Landspread i ng of Sludge 397
State and Local Regulations on Sludge Spreading 400
Economics 400
SamplingandAnalysis 400
i '
-------
! Al'.l i '•
'• . Mac.on, Georgia Operation and Maintenance Costs
Tor Sludge Spreading ?S
/ . C o s t f o r U i s p o s a 1 o f S 1 ij d g e ? 6
P,. Chemical Characterization of Stabilized Sludges 29
9, Concentrations of Total and DTPA Extractable
Metals in Composite Surface and Subsurface Soils 30
i;) , Total Metal Concentrations in Individual Sub-
'5 u r f a c c S o i 1 S a r,i p I e s 31
M, Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils and
;' 1 a n t'- 3 ?
I".. ->elenfu,!i in Composite P i an ts and So i 1 s 33
13. Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations in
Sludge, Soils, and Plants 44
14. Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants 45
: '; . Concentrations of Microbes in Sludges, Soils
and Plants " 46
.b. ! apia W.Mor Reclamation Plant 1975 Chemical
Analysis Summary Secondary Effluent 54
I/. Las Virqenes, California Sludge Disposal 55
i(! . las Virqenes, California Meteorological Data 58
! ° C!-,," .11 i f r, 1 and Physical Proper tier, ^f Soil1 ,
i ••i '>•"; rgpnes , C* l i forn i a 6?
'-'0. Las Virqenes, California Stabilized Liquid
,"> I LI d g e A n a 1 y s i s 65
•i. Las Virgenes, California Dewatered Sludge
Ce n e r a t i o n 66
?''. Las Virgenes, California Digestion, Dewatering,
a n d ';i n r e a d i n g C o s t s 73
'-3. Cost for Disposal oc D-watered Sludge - 1975 74
24. Chemical Characterisation of Stabilized Sludges 77
25. Concentrations of Total and DTPA Extractable
Metals in Composite Surface and Subsurface
5 oils 78
<'f-'. i.">tai Metal Concentraf i ons in Individual Sub-
^urface Soi1 Samples 79
;',', Metal Concentration, in Surface Soils and Plants 80
2 <°-. C h 1 o r i n a t e d Hydrocarbon Concentra t i o n s i n
Sluriqr, Soils', ind ^1 ants 89
/9. Pa^asite1- in Sludges, Soil';, and Plants °0
-------
TABLES (Continued)
N u m b e r and T i t_l o P a
-------
60
6?
6.';
64
66
6'
70 .
84
85
86
87
Mo i y-bdonuiii in Composite Plai.fi and Soils
Metai Concentrations in Surface Soils arid
Chlorinated Hyd roc art; on Concentrations
Sludge, Soils, and P i a n r, s
Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants
C o n c e n t r a t i o n >
and 1" i •• ,-)t s
Ch i ppewa r a 1 Is
Chippewa Fal1s
n
f M i c r o b es in Sludges, S o i
S1u d g e Application Rates
Wisconsin Meteorological
Data
Chemical and Physical Properties of Soils,
Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin
Chippewu Tails Secondary Effluent Treatment
H" f i c i e n c i e s
C h i p p e w a Falls
C h i p p o w a Falls
Analyse^
C h i p p e w a
C h i ppewa
C h i p p e w a
Cost tor
I ndul-1 r i a 1 Fl ows
Stab Sized Liquid Sludge
r d I ! 13
Falls
1. i q u , u Sludge Distribution
Sludge to Drying Beds
Falls Capi .al Expenditures
Disposal o' Liquid Sludge
Chemical Characterisation of Stabilized
Sludges from Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin
Concentrations of Total and DTPA Extractable
Metals in Composite Surface and Subsurface
Soils
Total Metal Concentrations in Individual
Subsurface Soil Samples
Metal Concentration" in Surface Soils and
Plants
Metal Co rice n t rn t i on . in Soy Bean Samples
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations in
Sludges, Soils, and Plants
ra ra.> i : PC i r, :, Judges, Soil',, ana r"icnts
Concentration of M i : r o h e s in Sludges. Soils,
and Plants
Kentu:ky C 1 i nia to! og i r a 1 Summary
Hopk i nsvi 1 1 e
C he mi c a 1 an d
Hopki us v i1 Ie
i -i n <, I i > i c ^ i "I 1 p
o
Soil
Phvsicil Properties
Kentucky
Treatment F a c i1i t i e ;
Hopkin- vi11e , Kentu:ky Industrial Flows
Stabilized Liquid S'udge Analysis
Hopkinsvi11e , Kentu.ky Sludge Generation
Cost for Disposal o' Liquid Sludge
Chemical Character! :at i on of Stabilized
Sludges from Hopkin , vi11e , Kentucky
! 7 6
177
IP. 3
139
196
200
205
207
208
210
211
2 \ 2
220
221
224
225
2.26
227
228
239
240
256
258
260
266
269
-------
Nuiiit c- v «> r.d T i i. 1 e Pai{
88. Concentration'; of lota I and i'li'A Ex tractable
Metals in Composite Surface and Subsurface
Soils 270
80. Total Mora! Conronfrations in Individual
Subsurface Soil Sample1; 271
'JO. Metal Concentr.it ions in Su^fjce Soils and
T1 an is 272
91. Clilor nated ii vd r ot a rbo n Concen t ra ! •; or:s in
s udge, Soils, and Plants 283
9J. Purasrtes in Sludges, Soils, and Plants 284
93. Concentration of Microbes in Sludges, Soils,
and Plants ?85
94. Frankfort, Indiana Climatological Data 293
95. Chemical and Physical Properties of Soils,
Frankfort,Indiana 297
96. Frankfort, Indiana SIP Wastewater Operating
Summaries 298
97. Frankfort, Indiana Stabilized Liquid Sludge
Analyse--: 300
90. Frar.kfort, Indiana Industrial Flows 301
99. Cost for Disposal of Liquid Sludge 309
100. Chemical Cha car t, ei i za t i on of Stabilized Sludges
From Frank f o r t , I nd i ,t na 312
101. Concentrations of Total and DTPA Extractable
Metals in Composite. Surface and Subsurface
Soils 313
102. lotol Metal Concentrations in Individual
Surface Soi1 Samp]es 314
103. Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils and
Plants 315
104. Metal Concentrations in Wheat Grain Samples 316
105. Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations in
Sludge, Soils, a rid Plants 327
I Of. Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants 328
107. Concentration of Microbes in Sludges, Soils,
and Plants 329
108. Kendal1vi11e, Indiana Sludge Application Rates 336
10f.'. Kendal 1 vi 11 e , Indiana meteorological Data 339
110. Chemical and Physical Properties of Soils 343
111. Kendal1vi11e , Indiana Secondary Effluent
Treatment Efficiencies 345
112. Kendal ivi11e , Indiana Stabilized Sludge
Anal ysi'S
113. K e n d a 11v i1 Ie, Indiana Sludge Generation 349
114. Chemical Characterization of Stabilized Sludges
from Kendal1vi1 Ie, Indiana 358
115. Concentrations of Total and DTPA Extractable
Metals in Composite Surface and Subsurface Soils 359
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number and Title Page
116. Total Metal Concentrations in Individual
Subsurface Soil Samples 360
117. Selenium in Composite Plants and Soils 361
118. Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils and
Plants 362
119. Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations in
Sludge, Soils, and Plants 373
120. Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants 374
121. Concentration of Microbes in Sludges, Soils,
and Plants 375
122. Columbus, Indiana Meteorological Data 384
123. Chemical and Physical Properties of Soils,
Columbus, Indiana 389
124. Columbus, Indiana Secondary Effluent
Treatment Efficiencies 390
125. Industrial Discharge Parameters 391
126. Columbus, Indiana Liquid Stabilized Sludge
Analyses 393
127. Columbus, Indiana Sludge Generation 395
128. Columbus, Indiana Sludge Application Rates 396
129. Columbus, Indiana Capital Expenditures 401
130. Columbus, Indiana Liquid Sludge Spreading
Costs 402
131. Cost for Disposal of Liquid Sludge 403
132. Chemical Characterization of Stabilized Sludges 407
133. Concentrations of Total and DTPA Extractable
Metals in Composite Surface and Subsurface
Soils 408
134. Total Metal Concentrations in Individual Sub-
surface Soil Samples 409
135. Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils and
Plants 410
136. Metal Concentrations in Corn Grain Samples 411
137. Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations in
Sludge, Soils, and Plants 422
138. Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants 423
139. Concentration of Microbes in Sludges, Soils,
and Plants 424
IX
-------
FIGURES
Number and Title
3
15
26
38
50
62
74
86
98-
1 .
2.
-12.
13.
14.
-22.
23.
24.
25.
-35.
36.
37.
-47.
48.
49.
-59.
60.
61 .
-71 .
72.
73.
-83.
84.
85.
-95.
96.
97.
107.
Macon, Georgia Treated Plot
Macon, Georgia Control Plot
Particle Size Analyses
Las Virgenes, California Treated Plot
Las Virgenes, California Control Plot
Las Virgenes, California Particle Size
Analyses
Wilmington, Ohio
Wilmington Treated Plot
Wilmington Control Plot
Wilmington, Ohio Particle Size Analyses
Springfield, Missouri Treated Plot
Springfield, Missouri Control Plot
Springfield, Missouri Particle Size
Analyses
Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin Treated Area
Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin Control Area
Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin Particle Size
Analys es
Hopkinsvi 1 1 e , Kentucky Treated Plot
Hopki nsvil 1 e, Kentucky Control Plot
Hopkinsvil le , Kentucky Particle Size
Analyses
Frankfort, Indiana Treated Plot
Frankfort, Indiana Control Plot
Frankfort, Indiana Particle Size Analyses
Kendal 1 vi 1 1 e, Indiana Treated Field
Kendal 1 vi 1 1 e , Indiana Control Field
Kendal 1 vi 1 le , Indiana Particle Size Analyses
Columbus, Indiana Treated Field
Columbus, Indiana Control Field
Columbus, Indiana Particle Size Analyses
81-88
94
95
96
128-137
143
144
178-187
193
194
229-238
244
246
273-282
288
289
317-325
332
334
363-372
378
380
412-421
-------
PHOTOGRAPHS
Number and Title Page
1 . Treated Site 20
2. Treated Site Plants 20
3. Control Site 21
4. Control Site Plants 21
5. S.T.P. Drying Beds 22
6. S.T.P. Tank Truck 22
7. Treated Plot 69
8. Control Plot 69
9. DCG Dewatering Unit 70
10. Dumpster 70
11 . Treated Field 113
12. Control Field 113
13. Drying Beds 114
14. Sludge Spreading Tank 114
15. Close-up, Baffle Arrangement 115
16. Treated Field 163
17. Fescue, Treated Field 163
18. Backhoe Trench, Treated Field 164
19. Control Field 164
20. Treated Field 214
21. Trifoliate 214
22. Bed Dried Sludge 215
23. Tank Truck 215
24. Treated Plot 261
25. Control Field 261
26. Drying Beds 262
27. Sludge Tank Truck 262
28. Treated Field 304
29. Control Field 304
30. Sludge Tank Truck 305
31. Drying Beds 305
32. Sludge on Treated Field 351
33. Treated Plot 351
34. Control Plot 352
35. SludgeSpreadingTruck 352
36. Alfalfa Treated Plot 353
37. Treated Field 398
38. Tank Truck Depositing Sludge 398
39. Sludge Saturated Ground 399
-------
-------
I MAI1 1 I R I
MA TON , (,l ORC, I A
i oc aj, i on
"i h : ; slii-'v site is located on the east si (it of Ma con,
r,c>(, r.'i i a, i pp i •> •< i ma t r> : \ r> km v^ Pii) from the downtown area.
I \.Ill If'i ' I •;•!'((' t fate.i plot and the lower Poplar Sin-et
'-owact 1 ."j i i'Vt ( Plant (SIP) a r'> situated on city-owned nrop('f/
to !,,i I i eg 'ip.'. fin (\f'l> acres). The western boundary of the
i)'':tporty i •; formed by the Ocnulgee River levee. Sludge gerier-
iiei 1%, M^P S r :J has >i"neral!y been spread on all available land
a; i Me ;Mf ' Ke tr'^U-pd plot selected for sampling was located
i r: a \'-'.'• I)- S.U) a err-,) field approximately 150 m (500 ft) to the
west of the digesters (see Hgure I).
P h y S i ' a i Co rid i t; i o ns
! (•<•> s i i c is r (Ha lively level and covered with native
q r.r,c. "<; . ,;; i , a c e n t i a M d is a mixture of swamps and hardwood
fo >••;>-, ! ••. . r'n> western edcje of the treated plot slopes gently
i • a smiM ' fia (5 a-.:r-e) lake. 1 he aroundwater table at the
sits- is approximately 1.! m ('"> ft) below ground surface.
''." (••r.Med plo! has be on and continues to be in natural
V'.MJ^ i a >-. i nn . In the . prirj lime, cheat grass (Brom_u_s tecUirum)
a bounds. Growth is a idee by relatively uniform precipitation.
i he c ht-a tn ra s s . after spring harvest, begins to die off. Local
be M!,i>ii-: j i .. - j the.i i.-sumes a vigoiOi.:, gr'j'.vth patten M^t^] th-.
o n s e I" o f w inter.
-------
Mar:.;: STP on
Low.~'r Poplar St.
ryi ng
Beds
M-i- '- i, Gc-.v-qi a Trea t c;ci nl ot
-------
The controi pi of was adjacent to the SFP (see finure 2)
and loco led near the north end of a 10.1 ha (25 acre) Meld.
U waf pianied in oats (Avena vp. ), and its topography and ioil
v hara; f-ori s I i < ^ were virtually identical to that cf the treated
;iioc. Oats were1 considered to be sufficiently similar to the
c hea tq r,;; s s Lo je^ve as a control crop. The oats had not started
: o bu (' and we r f o t the same height - 46 to 61 cm (18 to 24 in) -
'i s t h< c, hea t g r,j ~ •;.
r,t rm i nc; Pr ac t i Lf-"
i iquid sl;i(i<]e has been spread on the treated plot and
i'Ui ') i)' the surrounding SIP property continuously since 1965.
Sluuq*' opneratinn records, however, have been maintained only
,-ince 197? and are not field specific. The STP superintendent
e s t i in.! ted that the treated plot has had four uniform and con-
sisLfi'" applications of sludge annually since 1965. The
v-s t iin.i i od average annual application rate has been 28 dry m
t o n s / h a (12.5 ci r y t o n s / a c r e ) assuming that the sludge solids
on Let!'" is M.4 percent (averaged analytical data), and that.
i.ne l.-id covers "36 sg m (9,000 sg ft).
/'•f. the time of sampling (April 5, 1976), the cheat grass
w; s i' vigoroir- growth. The approximate 0.8 ha (2 acre)
'reare^ plot had a uniform stand ranging from 46 to 61 cm
(•^ te 'M in i. The depth of the root zone was approximately
1. to 1°. cm (5 i.o 7 in).
The treated field is leased to a local farmer for produc-
tion (^ hay. He pays the STP $0.25 per harvested bale. Normal
harvest patterns result in three cuttings annually. The Mrst,
-------
0
,,,.-A E
(' \ to
, \ v- -
cu
o
c
fO
c
o
o
cx
h-
4-)
c
o
CJ
en
i-
o
cu
05
c:
o
ro
s:
v ^ )
\ '
'11
o
o
n 'U
CxJ
cu
\V
-------
in la to May, is for She i: h'M t, qra s s . "I wo additional cult inns
are made of bennuda qrass. In 1975, the total yield for both
crops was approximately 3,000 bales.
The baled hay is used for beef cattle feeding. The present
leusee reported no adverse effects to the cattle (one and one-
half years f e o d i n q experience).
The treated field has never been tilled. The STP super-
intendent indicated that no pesticides, herbicides, or ferti-
lizers have ever been used on this field.
The control plot: had been planted to corn continuously
from 1900 through 1970. In 1971, an oats-soybean rotation was
initiated and presently continues. Typically, the field is
harrowed in October, chisel-pi owed, reharrowed and planted to
oats. hi February, a mixed grade of fertilizer (5-10-15) is
applied at the rate of 670 kg/ha (600 Ibs/acre). In early
June, the oats are harvested. Yields were not available for
any of the years. The farmer of the control field indicated
that pesticides or herbicides had never been used.
CLIMATE
Located near the geographical center of Georgia, 322 km
(200 miles) from the Atlantic Ocean, Macon is well situated to
escape rigorous climatic extremes. Severe storms are infre-
quent. Tornadoes occur infrequently. Thunderstorms occur
approximately two days out of five from June through August.
Tho overage growing season is 246 days, and radical
departures are uncommon. inow occurs during most winters,
but amounts are usually qu te small as evidenced by only six
-------
days with ?. .*> cm (1 in) or more of snowfall in the 25-year
icriod 1049 to 1973. Rased on records dating from 1935, the
average annual precipitation was 114 cm (44.7 in) with a high of
148 cm (58.2 in) in 1953, and a low of 66 cm (26.1 in) in 1954.
Additional meteorological data are presented in Table 1.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Re gj o_nj_l__A_re_3
The soils of the Ocmulgee River flood plain, including the
treated plot, are mapped by the Soil Conservation Service as
the Chewacla-Wehadkee-Congaree Association. The soils range
from well- to poorly-drained. In the past, the better drained
areas have been farmed.
Overall, tPe soils of the Chewacla series make up about
40 percent of the soil association, soils of the Wehadkee series
about 30 percent, and soils of the Congaree series 20 percent.
Minor series comprise the balance. The somewhat poorly-drained
Chewacla series has a dark brown silt loam surface layer, about
15 (.m (6 in; thick, over pale brown to light yellowish-brown
silty clay loam. Gray or light gray mottling occur within 51
cm (20 in) of the surface.
Soils of the Wehadkee series are poorly drained, have a
aark brown surface o»er mottled dark gray, gray, strong brown,
and reddish-brown silty clay loam. Soils of the Congaree
series are well drai led and have a dark brown silt loam surface
layer, about 15 cm (o in) thick, over dark reddish-brown silty
loam to silty clay loam. The thickness of the sub-soil is
approximate"y 160 cm (60 in).
-------
CS
o:
0
UJ
_l «
§ §
•- £
*B3£
t •. 2E
I « s
<_
CO «
2 !
~ r
C I
0) z!
•_ I
* r s
OJ
OOOOOO OOOOOO O
3QOO OOOOOO O
3 o a a oooooo o
-------
Q)
E
a>
i..
+-*
X
UJ
T3
C
c
03
en
"ra
E
-------
The Chowacln-Wehadkee association is strongly acid. It
is low in natural fertility and medium in organic matter con-
tent. Permeability is moderate, while the water holding
(opacity ic> moderate (o hiqh. Tilth is generally good. The
i wo 'oil', otuiir on the flood plain in such intricate patterns
that, it has not been practical to map them separately. Typi-
cally, the profile for this association shows the A horizon
ranging from silt, loam, loam to sandy loam or fine sandy loam
in texture, and from pale brown and brown to drirk brown and
reddish brown in color. The C horizons, range from loam, silt
loam to silt.y clay or loamy sand in texture. Color ranges from
dark reddish brown and dark brown to brown and to dark yellow-
ish brown. In many places, gray mottling is present in the C
hori/on below a depth of 76 crn (30 in).
• he fnngaiei1 sn,l cuumonly fucurs with the Chewacla soil.
••owever, ihe Chewacla so 1 has poorer drainage than the
Conqaree soil. The Chew'da series also occupies a lower
position on the landsrapf and is subject to more frequent
flooding.
in t ho immediate1 ana of the treated and control plots,
the soil association is c.ominated by soils of the Congaree
s e r i e s~ .
T rea ted PJ o l:
1he soil profile of the treated plot basically followed
t.fie jb.'V" '•",• • ipi in"s. Thf1 surface soil ranq^d in deoth from
8 to 15 cm (3 to 6 in) aid was a dark brown silty loam.
-------
'! !, <> , f\ } ,'ciifii and oxlori'linq to approximately
' y"r of •, i 1 '; y ! o,;;n "M^qinq f^oni brown to
I! 1',-w'd ,1 1 de| i'.! f '''.MI; M6 r in (34 in) to
: {'1' -, ri \ . ;iol;>w I, Ne ..a^ci wac. a "layer of
', n :; •• • .' i1 1 P *'!:t ': n >' M t,' "• p r )••, .
• juii.-' > n vi o y <\ ov>}.^ I" lie ^aiiiplr-
-iT :K<~' s o i ! layf-rs varied as
d'~ ,• • iof'" .1!" i'0 1 oc "'t •"*!•••(' c'iMfeni o* t ru- <: 1 .TV "layer v^rioJ
w i ' ' • ] ' ) r c > : i o i . v h . ' i ' 1 1'( i : ! > ; ' i ( s ' ( n '•» ^ '•_• r - l i d i ' v s n t u r a t, o d ) a L the.1
oic- o • ;: ~<:i!.i»;f ,>]i;! cr! j .t '. ^n : to the lake.
) (Finis ^ i'i-j / • i H.K M n i! t's " ond 3 (!-'iq:(re i)
we ; t':*-1 <'••'"•.• rw- !'-t'i- ii' /.nich the bottom layer o f clay was
i (.f (, ! i or. '-. were uniformly sandy to
i '!(' i ; o I !' i ' '
i ;, ' > . ' .n, ' i i ' 7 ' ,KI in , i; r f ,''.,' oil 'H" L iii. L ^ n I '(> i
;);;/< y.ir'"! ' .i \ •, i 1 f y sane), which prrsuma hi y was a
•it. i • :ii i • i n i •" ' '. hf ui'dc r ] y i ;i q I,, /ei of s 1 wit, h the
•Mi'i.icr :. i i ,• loa!:, dj'-eq CM ! ! ivaticn Below the sand (extend
-••)" ID ri ,ie; ! M o r a p pro ;> i nia 1 e 1 y v/i en (,ir) in)) was a thin rlay
i., >.i'i(, i-:) i f i :ickii,-,'~. t'firi 0 t; l:> r 1:1 (0 to r, in). Follow
i >;,; v/r, .-' l.ivi-r '.' ;,alroso' Juirio;' tops oil ) of undetermined
•jf1 ;; f M ; ', i , o i i ;• t • . i ! o v;>' • > e. i H ! i ve i / u P i f o ri.i throughout
h'Xhiic, ,'H and i.rher related soil data are
s n')wri ;n i a : ,.?
-------
Ill
N. :-
o c>
LU O
s: o
CYI J. 1
I-
~J| U
n
m
- u
in
nr
00
o r-
'M
.jo "o a
O -O AJ
jn ./>
*—' O
xf ro - oo ro
T> o> ro o
vo r- if} ro ro
•-" O O O —<
ro
°>
in •-! vo st co
.n jpi
•a .n
o -4
-VI ' *V!
">
—+ if- o> rv-
^ I
•n
.r
O 3
<\i
CM ro
-i CVl
co oo us in co
CM •->
-------
.,,,1^ i AN!
S.-W.MJC. !_
- to!/ on oercent of the population of Bibb CourK
A |) I I i" II A 1 '•' il I *- ' .' ' ^ r '
•i4'-000 - 1975) was located within the Kacon city limits. This
Copulation was served by two wastewater treatment facilities -
lhe Lower Poplar Street Plant (the plant under study), and the
Kocky Creek Plant. The former, constructed in 1959, serves
approximately three-quarters of the population. As originally
constructed, the plant provided grit re-noval and primary
settling with discharge of primary effl Jent to the Ocmulgee
P1ver. Sludge from the primaries was stabilized in one of three
anaerobic digesters, providing a combined three-month detention
Hir, From the digesters, the sludge w.as discharged to drying
L I 1 1 i v_ •
bPd, Until 1965, the dried sludge was removed from the beds
by STP personnel and hauled free of charge to local farmers.
In 1963, the STP was upgraded to sacondary treatment with
n,e construction of two high-rate trickling filters, a secondary
clarifipr, and two additional anaerobic sludge digesters. The
ruckling filters, in parallel, are 51.8 m (170 ft) in diameter
,nd capable of handling up to 56,800 cu m/day (15 mgd) each.
In 1965, the STP commenced spreading of liquid digested
,ludqe on 50.6 ha MZ5 acres) of adjacent city-owned property.
Essentially the entire area has at one time or another been
treated with sludge. The sludge is typically spread four times
annually between the months of April and November.
Sludge is usually not spread during the wiiter months
sine, plant growth is at a minimum and the soil moisture i: at
12
-------
or near saturation. Spreading, however, has varied over the
years depending on wo.it.her conditions. Combined caiujoii.y of
the two secondary sludge digesters affords sufficient stora go
volume during the non-spreading months.
The STP was designed for an average loading of 45,400 cu m/
day (12 m g d ) . It currently serves an estimated If) 7,000
residents with a population equivalent of 125,000. The STP
superintendent stated that a significant but undetermined
percentage of infiltration occurs. Additionally, storm water
is routed through the STP. A record peak daily flow reading of
93,500 cu m/day (24.7 rngd) was recorded in May, 1975. Influent,
effluent, and treatment efficiencies are shown in Table 3.
An estimated 30 percent of the influent to the STP is
industrially derived. The principal contributors are:
C_omjDany Type of Manufacturing
Proctor and Gamble Edible oils
Lagle'', Poultry processors
0. Burns Company Fertilizer from tannery wastes
Tex-Print Texti1e dyeing
Y.K.K. Zipper Zipper manufacturing, dyeing
Individual industry effluents have not been monitored. Of
the industries listed, only the poultry processor discharges a
waste thought to have a .ignificantly higher BOD than normal
domestic sewage. Procto1' and Gamble provides pretreatment of
their wasu*water prior to discharge. The was tewaters from Tex-
Print and Y.K.K. Zipper, although of relatively high volume,
contain only small amounts of dyes and are thought not to contribute
13
-------
CQ
' — i C
LJ CD
U_ ! r^
Ui <4-
UJ
1 —
JT*
UJ
^>_
h- 1
LU ! i
re:
h~ l':
UJ i
— i
u_
LL- ',
jj
>- ' !
a;
cr +->
o c
2L i O)
O =5
uj i L!"
'/O : C
• — .
-
JT
^
o
LO ( . --3 CO 1 1 ; OO LO
• ••••*•!
i^-- co cr. i — co **• O
i-- ro oo ro co v)- LO
O O VD Ln LD en oo ro
LO O CO 1 r^- CTl r-- LO
r^. cc r-- r-- LO LO '£> LD
L.-) o r-- i — r •- cr. . — LSD
r--oOr».r-^uDLDvOLO
LO r^. ro r^ O"1 LD > — LD
oo *-j ^t~ *^t LD Ln oi co
i — o~> r- r-~ CTJ Ln LJO
en CM CM i — o CM Ln i
r— - i — r— i — r™ r —
^ LO CM Ln oo LD uo Ln
«d- o") cn LO . — • co oo Ln
. — CM i — i — e-j ( — cvi c\i
O O O C' O O O O
CM ^r i — — LO r- co en
CM O LO . — r-- Ln oo CM
o r-. CTi oo '.o co co en
LD Ln "=i- -vt- co c~^ oo oo
ID Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln uo
r-- r^. r^ r^- r--~ r^ r^-- r^.
s->,c:cr>Q--i->>u
O-rO3 rJCUOOCL)
ecsro^ooozra
f~- LI") LD CO
O en r-*~ r~-~
LO r^ LD ^
a** co Ln i —
r~~ un -vf r^
Ln LSO tn LO
Ln
r-* Ln LD
LD
•
on CM . — o
LD CM r~ 1 —
r~~ r~~
CM
LD oo LD co
<^J- LD LD *^f"
i— CM t— r—
cn
•
«^1" LD >^f cn
LD r--- -=3- O
. — CM CM CM
o o o o
CM Ln r-. cn
LO LD LD co
t^ cn oo CM
•^ oo Ln "=3"
LD LO LO
r~^. r^**. r^».
c jn s- cn
ro OJ ro >
•-0 Li. SI "=C
-------
<, ubs t a n t i a 1 HOD loading, seasonal fluctuations are not signs-
i i c <) rt t..
A i present, the i ndu s t, r i e s pay a water use charge; no
( hdt'fjes based on was tew a lor discharge have been initiated.
Sludge S ta b i ij z,7'10 cu in ( 1 ./T. ing) capacity primary digesters. Detention
time is approximately 30 days each. First step sludge is then
pumped to one of three 3,180 cu m (6.84 nig) capacity secondary
digesters. Combined detention time for the secondaries is
approximately three months. Supernatant is returned to the
primary < 1 ai iff e r i n f1u ent. No c h e mi c a 1s a re added at t n e SIP.
Sludge from the secondary and primary digesters is removed
for either 1andspreading or bed drying. Distribution was
estimated by STP personml to be approximately 90 percent land-
spread in
-------
Co tn", on Ira t i or:
Ni
Zn
Fb
M o ! s I u r e
1 1 .90
47
1050
^83
.".9. X
lll,t. 1 s1,.hih/p(l slu.iqo sauinio, Odohor '), 1^74
e.! on an ov-n dry woiqht basis
If;
-------
(,!( i nix1 r '), I (i M No oilier < henri < a 1 data on sludge e x i s I s .
ii i ',))()'.; data, it i s e<, i i m
-------
WACOM,
FABLF b
- : iOHlD SI Uiir.r IIAUI Tflf,
Month 197.'' i9/'<
Jan. f^.r'f, "
f o b (;
Mar. A, i) 10 '?!••>'!
;\ 0 r , '•/ !) 0 i)
May >^ i i c) '
• UMI- 0 m
J.ily ^52 ''
Aucj. i ,-fl.O? 0
So ni . i:-o (i
Oct. !l (1
^r;v . • ,;M';, o
noc. f)/- 1 n
Tot.il l'1,')f)f) fi6''
Y e -i r'
1 9 7 "r
/•\
(;
0
364
1 '• ' ' '
nnb
(35
^,442
60
426
1 , 0 0 3
0
436
T', ,796
1 '-) 7 5
4 0 5
0
0
625
6 3 2
226
0
n
63
182
3,233
271
f> , fi /I 2
-------
Interviews with the STP personnel and neighbors adjacent.
Lo the STP indicated no apparent aesthetic, odor or other
environmental problems associated with the disposal operatiens.
The sludge spreading has contributed to a lush grass cover on
the 50.6 ha (125 acre) site.
Photographs 1 through 6 show, respectively, a view of
the treated field, soil and grass on treated plot, the control
field, plants grown on the control plot, drying beds at the
STP, and the tank truck used for spreading.
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
The Director of Public Works, the Health Department, and
the local newspaper were contacted to determine public attitudes
toward 1andspreading of rludge. A Bibb County Health Department
representative stated th
-------
LO
4->
c
a. +j
ro T-
S_ 00
O "S
0)
ro
0 ro
•M 01
O i-
JC 1—
Q_
20
-------
c
(O
O!
4->
(T3 •r-
" O
•*-> S_
O •*->
o- C
re
-s
O ^3
•<-> c
O O
-------
o
-
<=»- c
"3 ro
S- h-
Cn
LD OJ
CO
-£= en
Q. c
^Q
O
O Q-
1/1
22
-------
Interviews with local Soil Conservation Service and US DA
personnel indicated their awareness and acceptance of the
'Judge spreading practices,
STATf AND LOCAL REGULATIONS ON SLUDGE SPREADING
In May, 1975, the Solid Waste Management Section, Environ-
mental Protection Division of the Georgia Department of Natural
Resources issued "Guidelines for the Sanitary Landfill or
Landfill Disposal of Liquid, Semi-Solid and Industrial Sludge
W. isles." Hie iju i do 1 i nos govern (.ho disposal of municipal and
industrial sludges at approved locations within public or
privately operated disposal sites, or at disposal sites
designed and operated solely for the disposal of these wastes.
Limitations for sludge spreading on farm land are not included.
Currently, there are neither guidelines nor legislation govern-
ing the sludge spreading program in Mac on.
All STP employees receive influenza, tetanus, and typhoid
i nnocul a t i ons on a voluntary basis free of charge.
[ f I u i p m o n t I) o s c : r i jj t i _o n o nc Cost
Total capital investment for the sludge spreading system
iv as approximately $5,000. In March, 1966, the plant purchased
a 3 . <• cu in (5 ci yd) dump truck for $4,765. The sludge tank
was obtained at no cost from a water treatment plant and
mo u ni fd on tdt truck. Approximately $80 was spent to install
two salvaged plug-valves on the tank.
To facilitate loading, approximately $200 was spent to
install a re mot:1 control electrical switch to operate the
23
-------
, hxi'h' |<«H!|)<, ,it !(•" .1 i qi'S Ic r>, . 1 he sludge lank is I i ] I ed from
.1 ji I |Mi | j n i • (i 'l,j .1 (. e hi i o i he 'I I'y i n <| !>(• (I s .
l\'< men 1.1 oned j. revi ous I y , ai! o I the sludge is not spread
on the S7P site. Therefore, other costs are incurred. For
example, fl has, k hoe is used to periodically remove sludge from
the drying !;pds. A backhoe was originally purchased in I960
for $.(J,6i}() and irjdoci in l'J/4 on the purchase of a new $25,000
,-!) son h,.(HiOp. P crodii for $5,600 was allowed for the old
t-ackhoe. The backhoe is used an estimated 75 percent of the
* iine for handling 'he bed-dried sludge.
notdik-d costs for oper-ation and maintenance (O&M) of the
< It/dye Sj) read ing ecjuipment for the four-year period beginning
October, 197'!, are shown In Fable 6.
Table 1 provides a cost analysis for the spreading
oper
-------
TABI E"
Y o a r *
] Q 7 1 - 7 ?
1972-71
107?.- M
19/4- 7 '>
iolal
WON, r.FOWilA - OPt RATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS
FOR sumnr SPREADING
fuel ($)
.j
G a s o1i n e [ Oil
15f 7
141: 7
? 3 ? 6
2 f. / 4
Repairs (S)
i Larts I Labor [ Jj_res_[ Misc. ( $ )
79
8?
3 3 1
3 I 1
46
103
20 r
c> j
? 1 8
91
0
0
7 0 3
0
4
0
5
Average Annual Cost.
Total($)
379
344
'•', •> 4
1 _,/,()_ 8
$3, DBS
$ 771
:0ct.oher 1 through September 30.
25
-------
TABLE 7
COST FOR DISPOSAL OF SLUDGE - 1975
Annual Capita? Cost
Vehicle Depreciation^
1966 Dump Truck $4,765
1974 Backhoe $19,4002
Total Annual Capital Cost $2,118
Annual Operating Cost
Personnel
1 Operator -
Liquid
1 Operator -
Beds
Fringe Benefits (25
Vehicle Operation a
Total Annual Operating
Total Annual Capital a
0
Contingency FactorJ
Total Cost
Total Annual Cost
Total Sludge Hauled An
Hourly Rate % Time Worked
$2.40 19
2.40 10.2
percent)
nd Maintenance
Cost
nd Operating Cost
$5,124 _ $7.98/dry
nually 708 dry tons ($7.24/dry
Cost
$ 924
$ 491
$1,415
$ 354
$ 771
$2,540
$4,658
$ 466
$5,124
m ton
ton)
Vehicles were fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8 per-
cent interest equivalent to $169.68 per $1,000 annually.
9
The JD 500 Backhoe was fully depreciated over 10 years at 8
percent interest, equivalent to $145.56 per $1,000 annually.
A 10 percent contingency factor is added to cover such items
as administrative overhead.
26
-------
/\., shown iii • i I < > I, •, w<11 c 9! cm (24 to 36 in) - Horizon C; and 91 to
12? cm (36 to 4, in) - Horizon D.
Both surface and subsurface soil samples at the control
plot were obtained in exactly the same manner as those at the
treated plot, -.ince the surface soil layer at the control plot
was approximately 20.3 to 30.5 cm (8 to 12 in) "deep, approxi-
mately 2 S sijrfarp r. o i 1 cores were obtained from each section
Plants
Grass samples were obtained by shearing the plants
approximately 7 6 to 12.7 cm (3 to 5 in) from the ground. Each
set in pie confainel approximately 50 to 100 individual blades
i-anqinq in loncth from 15.2 to 45.7 cm (6 to 18 in). Approxi-
mately 20 s'uh samples were obtained from each section, Plant
samples from both plots were taken in the same manner.
-------
r'f- son I the f ol lowing:
D (> s_c r i_p t IJD n
rht?micdl ri'dfdc. terization of Stabilized
Concentration of Total and DTPA Extrac-
table Metals in Composite Surface
arid Siibsu r f ?.ce Soils
Total Mt'ta! Concentrations in Indivi-
a'nn : Subsurface Soil Samples
Me t<\ 1 Concentrations i ri Surface Soils
i ,> Sclcrnuii! in Coinpos i t.o Plants and Soils
Ij Ch 1 or ( na toti Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
I /; Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants
] i; Concentration of Microbes in Sludges,
S o i 1 s , a n rl Plants
Mgun's 1 to K- present particle size analyses of the
j .1 r i o us s o " 1 c o in p o ^ i t e " .
-------
TABLE 8
(HLMHAL UlAKAtitKlZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
MACON. GEORGIA
VoUt-ile Solids (%)
N03 - N
NH. - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
Ag
As
B
Cci
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mil
Mo
N i
Pb
Se
Zn
H?0 (%)
nH
(4/5/76)
33.75
14 .6
5305
23872
7203
1619
149?
14915
10500
267
593
1 .02
2. BO
37.0
10
1 148
24 .6
660
24873
9.41
452
,8.73
10]
3173 /
4 .07
1 2 2 '\
8 .} . 2
7.4
(10/20/76)
39 .96
0 .07
16600
45196
17393
2786
6268
40732
13679
429
1464
2.14
I .61
107
13 .8
1113
17.9
1 250
22250
23 .4
750
20.2
171
91 1
23 .4
2304
87 .7
7.8
Average
36 .9
7 .8
10952
34534
12298
2203
3880
27823
12090
348
1029
1 .58
c' . 2 1
72
11 .9
1131
21 .3
955
23562
16.4
601
14.5
137
16324
13.7
1766
88
All Units inng/q (unless otherwise noted)
All data expressed or, ovet drv weight basis,
-------
h --i
v I
"-. ii :- ->
*_ !;•-
< ~> ',
~~ ^ :>
^ /-. i1. ->
^- "• i
-J ^ i:
JL.
-J
V
H
;'1
ft
V 'V
0
»r, n
« » •
CT P^ I
'V,
V "vi -
J~ t)
in 1/1 a" i -
X
^A jj
oi -
r —•
X -A.
J ~3
_»
•1
-k.i
X
c\J
S S S U i
u u u
^ I I I I ,
i O VO •-«'-«:' . ~
CM j ^, O,
-------
f, ,ls—~ -' ' X ,f»—i"V>
U VI - i i —, _ vj 4"
.tv>
i * «r
• ^- ,r>
i n '"y n 7*
. \j _•_ VI
r ^i--'•*) —•'W> o
-t~U -i X
yi
-r- 'n 3
> .-vi =>:
TTK-* :
-\l rn
_J
j- x> x "- T- —^ "> X' x: 7
-- x> -vj > •a ^ xc n jn ^ -
:v -v r
-T ~> i-
T
-2
N !
?•/J
o n \j
— X
'^0 ^D
X
JL.
"i
—I
_i
' O1 P- 'VC^ Ct
: —• <\jrv—'X
t • * •• « <
uuu
oj
: u
00 U
CM
^O —I .-i CM
:s s u
oo u
<\l -Z CM
CM ^2" ^O»~'^^CM ^vO^^^^CM
*—* *~* -sf v£) cT» i-* *^"* -JOiO«-i'-< CJOvO^t'-' OovO "irt f-> OvO "> '-
jJCMNfvOC?' UJcM UJcM^sOC* -^J CM />
-------
1' -.0
-n -Xi
•\j
-i
-o •«; .* i|
0 /v,> j|
' • * ! i
^ , "^ "^ i I
M
i/)
u.
r- '1
-J
on
yi
z
J")
A.'
-> > -1-
CM
"^ -C
!\i . r Jj
.-n^jn
i/> .n *
x; en
r o
f) f\! 'XJ (X
3* '\i V i'!
>
*
-f>
.~t
o r> -u
'A!
,-X 4
"Xi ' "u
rvj -^
-------
TABLE 12
StLKNTUM IN COMPOSITE PLANTS AND SOILS
MACON, GEORGIA
!> 1 (in t, ( The a t<)r
-------
Aq
O
o s
2 5!
UJ C
O
-a
o
TD
O)
O)
3
OO
CO
l/)
ai
OJ
O
U
fO
51
f'j
OJ
cr.
-------
gl'
LU !°2
/,\ Xg i -LI
o
^
O
u_
CO
CO
o
o
1-
_J
a
z
CO
,0
z
o
a.
a:
0
CO
UJ
Q
UJ
-J
a- 6
S z:
s-
D-
-------
w £„
cd >^
H-j £ Ji
UJ «
CD
S_
1—
£
O
1 — 1
1
<~o
its
c
••C
QJ
N
QJ
a.
o
o
ra
5:
U')
-------
o
z z
{/> ;,,
tC .- '
liJ ,',,.,
i-'J •••::,
ui {]
o S'
CI ""
' o
H
cv
LT
OJ
-------
7.1
CC >
UJ
ULJ
n S
CD 'J;-
2 f.- £
{-- O
O
O
13
e
o
CNJ
C\J
'U
t-J
C/)
OJ
o
ro
a_
O
<_J
CT3
-------
cr. > --
UJ ,',,„
LU <""
Zp
OQl
zsr,
01 ?,£
wgs
05-
1
J,
o
t-
o
u.
C/5
O
-J
l-
to
g2
n
u)
o
h-
CL
cc.
o
l/l
a
UJ
S z
yl
i
._
re
O
ro
oo
r^
co
CM
s
^
O
(J
(T!
: j
CO
«=*•
o
<^
4^
E
O
0
OJ
o
ro
H-
C^
I
1
39
-------
UJ
>
c
o
o
o
^o
«^-
1
0
CM
C/l
I/)
(1)
M
OJ
O
s_
ro
C
O
CJ
CTi
OJ
CT
Lu
•1C
-------
—
""
—
- .
.
-_
-
-
--
--
._
-
—
....
.1:-
o
O
00
o Ji
0
o
U-
CJ)
_i
o
u
^S
0^
t-
Q
Z
o
o-
z
o
H
fl.
CC
^•t
LJ
O
Hi
_1
S Z
to
^U
C
n3
C/0
E
rti
C
vo
tn
co
f
o
o
^s
CM
T— H
LO
, —
O
_l_)
C
o
o
r~H
i
^?
i
co
>>
rO
OJ
N
(.n
O)
o
S-
"3
Q_
-------
*»•"* **• I , " T
z '-" :•: ••
su p, -- j s
f>?-i -'i
O • ,-; ;.'
to f^°
i?:
q
^
o
L
C/5
CD
O
03
ex.
•a:
crs
o
o
03
Ol
-------
1C
tu
LU
On «
_ ;?£
•C. I" (3
01 []-'
i/i ^ |ua3 J.
0
o
LL
co
CO
O
o
=!
Q
Z
I/)
V?
O
l-
Q.
-------
I ABl i I '•
CM! nk I fvA I ! I) IIY;)R()( AKRON (.tiNCI N I i
-------
I
!
1
1
h'
^'t
— J '
C'
r.
* "
c~r"
<-_'']' «r
>---< (- i^,
'.1 C-: 0 |
<-/-• c -,
Lll
'' C ' '!
l"< LH
CO C'' „-' ;
'••£ f~ ^ ("' >
J- -^ o
~_.i c-r
- /^ *. - i
*- • i
i — i
(/•)
cr
_, ,
i
i
i
i-
Cl
ro
^
CJ
£ 1
o
~
CD
*r—
O
CJ
(
E
00
s_
ro
O
oo
t^£
''• (J OJ •>
-, j : • > oo
'".i "-J; ^ =
""> t n cr, o
~^-
•r1' i — "^f
| CJ '
' '-•r' ' ~O
: o QJ
!*'
i uj •< —
, r - 1> -O
C1 j£ _> fX3
j r-" O rb to 4-J
' - 13 o: 01 oo
n3 ,_
[ C/) 00
rti
V,
O)
~ft3
^>
o
rj.
J")
' \
,
1
1. >
•;3
*r~
^
• 1 —
CL
Cl>
r~~
o
c
QJ OJ QJ CU CD
Er > > > >
^^ *i *i— *r~ "i^
n? to to to
c> en en en
, — CD CD CD
tr!
uo
CD
r-. oo
••~- o
o c^
cxi E
^"^-~ O
O 0
1 —
O)
4->
"T" fO
0.1 CL'
M ^_
•f- -O r— (— CD
i — cu c u
•r- -(-> S_ 1 fO
o oo to 4-^ c^—
to •+-> CD C. oo s-
-M C S_ O r— 3
en ro 1 — O •!— (jO
t— O
CL. (/)
I,
tO
*».-
en
ro
^>
O
O
..n
V
1
1
oo!
CD
.~o
*( —
o
U QJ CU
^ , r_ ^_ , ,
^_ *r^ T^ *r^
E^ to to to
35 CT) CD CD
i — CD CD OJ
7*. zr z:
00
•1 —
!^
tO
O
OO
oo
CD
00
O
CL
e
o
o
'o
E i-
e E e o +->
CJ 0 U C
oo o
UD i — , — CV1 O
<^j- t^ (T^ i
i 1 "i 1 1
CO ^O i — f~~
^X) «^j~ l^D O'' OO
•r-
c
oo
1
j
1
i
1
ll
1
1
QJ QJ > > > >
^O fO rO fO fT3
CT> CT) CTi CT) CT;
CD (U OJ (U
-------
03
rr-- -
ii -i;
i| :> •
'i i;
o >
j :;
i ••
! !
iO i £ '
rc? i u'<
~ il
' |
'on 5
G ii
^ !
a- ;i
L 1
"x i
I
c
tj
( )
1 —
<./ 1 I «
"• 1
:/:
i
(..
(
t-L
" '!
. I
'
-^i
° i_;
lj «
oo gi
_, UJ<
-"'I
en "'
Lil ^
CO J->
gs
V '
1- -*
*-
U
r > ,
<^_J j
K ^
-'•
U
D-
i-
,
'••
(
-51- i
LlJ
O
O
C, 1
)
i
|
i
i
i1
ii
I*
If
!' i
ii
r
;i
1
!
,pe.j"i.-'11(in 4 -t- -*- + -t +
Y^p3vll.* 1 JAiUj j .L J. .4. -t ^
_,,yr)A L (.ihl'.'l^OJd
- - - -
-t- -f •-•- + + 4.
•+ 4 -*• +• + +
«3 OO UT r^~ OT C\j
c-> o o o o o
XX
, Oonfl ! S b i xx x ,^
-f _i i..- to 0
•via DJ() |rqo[ ^ Ln_ <"> o> co o
_| -- .— to tn t-o (xj
• ( i
| ..vp^V"' L'J'J'O'J
1 i "T i t L 'j*
^^p,-l')Jl }I10'.} |
i
•+- + + •*• III
^ + + + .1
- -i
.vaAlllllUdSCUH + + + + + -f
*T -If- .' * '
L.
; *on;>!iis b • o u^ o o
1 r L J
j .'Ofi 6,^0 L1>'-)°1
;^ i-o o o
xi un r-, o O Q
^r+- r- — — w ~^»
^J ' *^._ *£™
CO
j
j __ __.
|
| ,*.!>, );0[(iuicr) .tit , ,
L
1
;; ^^P3UIJIJIHV)
U -
'-T)
r;
i
1
_.
«3
r -
,
C '
r^
|
! -S
t-/"l
_Y^.aA L (dUiilSO-l,
,- ,-
i ; i i it
•+ + + + + +
-
~ Q Q
xDupll | <0 D
inri (\H-iiniciiS ° Q " ^
^rHl IUIJ [I'-pJI . r. -z. -^ -z. -z. a:
I
1
,^p810!(iiiio;) ! .111 , ,
1
- \
* *pd!lU L J-llO") , , i , , ,
j
1
^lAnduinsajji 4 + + -t- + +
i
J Cl Q O Q Q O
--}("•!•> me- (ii ^t^ZtZ ~Z- -^.
* l 1S S o o
'''•' (-i "^ tP'ioi i r-. en cO i — ai . —
— '-^ .—, O O
Ll2! "1U ^""11 ° - - -
. j i i i r i — F—
•)bpn|_s b JdU x x x x xx
DI-;] oiquaoy |_c^
X X X ^
l^. O CO OO 00 O1
)j_ co CD cxi «* •* r~-
C\J c^ r"— r~~ r~ ^ f*^
^
^J-
oo O
• f— 1 •
CO
fT3 *^
-Q .
CD
-M
JT -r-
01^-—
•r —
(1) O
>>'+-
s~ o t.
-o o
t-
03 01 4-
!S
cz O to
O O. rtj
TD n3 -O
OJ CD
CO tO 4~>
to ra S- "O
CD 0 OJ
s- -a cx-t-1
CL CD CU ^
X to S-- OJ
01 to •£
ai to QJ
— 1 to i. c: "a
V_) <-_>
" ' -M CX- O
^_ x -,- QJ
C (XI ^NI
° LO ^v. LO -\
n/r' ^-o-^o -a •—
a; -M ^t- ,_ ^j- ,_ QJO
- - ° +J s-
O.-t- n) _Q j^ oo fO 4->
I; S- Cn3SfOn3 -POJC:
ro(Jx>(tiai-t->4-> cs_o
c/ioo rs ct: or. '-•
', to fa 2
i ai to > c
c nj c
S cu ii
. — . — to
i— fS J3 <^>
o ---
r— * X
-$c
-------
<.
f >
o
-1 •
CU
1 ->
i/ >
r)
O
-)J(]
v vihpn i <; 1)
. ', < ' d ! j t n [!'-]<>
*,PM.>l.luo3
.. ._
.Vv[ M'ULjUOj
V,;;A.U^CUL
,. onpn j ';, 6
j/'d buy IP^OI
,,(>.>», |,ta«D
));
•V ; i ~ . T J
, ^A L+riuinsoj.,
t tj[3pn [ ^ 13
Jirxi f5j(i | P4o
,f ^poi;) | diuco
^pauULjUO')
~j. . lf'l||llC~l j
* '• •-*•'• <
U'tl |j.(Q |!2.).Uj_
•nn | C 1) .i.id y
3L(jOJO\/ [L'^01
c
i • O
Q T-
rO O
OO (/> co *3 Lr>
j a) r— 1.0 ';•> - fTi at i — — i — CD r-- l
• — •!- r-^. cx> c\j o i — -r- oo ^t UD oo i —
^ — * oo i — > i — i — oo i — i —
0 _ jQ
Q. Q.
E E
0 E 0 E
CJOJEEEu OOJESEO
O
QJ C2
I
-o
ra
o
-a
O)
oo
O!
Q_
X
a>
CJ S-
o
S-
gj +
3>
O oo
Q. 03
ra T3
CD
OO •(->
03 S-
o
CU
s-
O
>
aj
03 -Q id
>• C3 •=-
* *
47
-------
I I,AIM I U II
, AS \'!HulN. :,, CAI IICUNIA
SITL OtSCRIPlION
Location
This study site, known , s Ciaretville Farms, is located
approximately 56 kn (^ -nO -^ °f downt°wn Los AngeleS*
' Crtlitornia. The site is about 6 km (3.5 mi) from the Pacific
Ocean. Major resident^! communities in the vicinity of the
sr,,dy site are located approximately 16 km P 0 mi) northeast
in the San Fernando Val ley.
'.ludqe i-> received from the Taoia Water Reclamation Plant
(STP) located approximately 3 km ( 2 mi) south of the site.
The study site itself is comprised of 85.5 ha (211 acres)
of se,ni-mountainous terrain. This property, originally a
,.Jtholir ^nnnary, is currently used as a campus of a small
..ollege. though portions of the property are used for agricul-
tural ;.urposes. The n.-npertv is to be sold and converted to a
cemetery. Both the sludge treated and control plots are loca-
ted on ,he property.
Physical C o run t ion
"rh"p Las Virgenes Valley is characteristic of the many
va^levs within the Santa Monica Mountain range. The site is
surrounded by mountains to an elevation of 861 m (2,824ft).
Both rhe treated and control fields are on rolling terrain typi
f-ed bv slopes ranging from an estimated two to four percent.
-------
I r! , • i I ( .1 I I (i .)(,.! i !) II I I'd \ 11 i I) f, '. (',:'(' illjm'e'. I > ,Hl '! I ^ )
.11 <• -, fp,'. r,f i ,"l !>v ih<- ni.i i ii <,>Mip!'s driveway. The treated pi,,l is
!(!•. ,i ! ed in ! h.' west of the road; the control to the east. Of
th" total .-irroace on the property, only 13 ha (32 acres) are
used for r s; n<"f> t;n( -» cheated with sludge, halt of which have
had nea^y app i i r a u oris. The treated plot is located within the
( a 11 e > naif.
L (i s >/ i r'!>.'lies Creek runs in a north-south direction and
v»?f, through thr> on tiro Las Virgenes Valley. The stream bed is
I o< a f ecMpnr<"/-;',,a f rl y 1 b 1 ni (1,500 ft) to the west of the
rrcat;1,-1 plot A small or seasonal tributary runs in a north-
r-ior< r growth of rye grass.
: .-: , /in \;ii;,-[] the coni»"! pint 1C Ice-'red is approxi-
nati.'ly 5.7 ha (14 acres) anti had been planted in oats in Decem-
ber, 1475. However, in order to facilitate this current study,
the plot was harrowed; and on January 26, 1976, rye grass (same
-------
Culvert
-o
(O
o
I C£
- IX
01 !
Telephone Pole
75 M
,4 Mast JL
iTeljephone
! P o 1 le
79
21
1
N
No Scale
Entrance
Gate
©
--30 M
Control Plot
Figure 13
Las Virgenes, California Treated Plot
50
-------
!~ri t r<) nr •"•
i S a t, t- s ,
V
ro
'• 3
fid S Mn i H
Irrigation Outlet
CM ;' 'i
! Rye Grass
; PI ft i ted on 1/26/76
s:
o
3rd Eucalyptus
from Gate
y
r
ii
jMth Tree
j from Gate
•(Dark Trunk
37
1 ft in Diameter'
N
No Seale
I Frea ted PIot
Figure 14 Las Virgenes, California Control Plot
-------
lot ni s i -• ed . ()', in ! r (• ~ (ontro'i plot is triangularly
shaped, 39.6 x 305 x 36.6 m (130 x 100 x 120 ft).
Groundwator in two wells on the property is at an esti-
inat.cn drjit.fi of ,'']') 111 (/('D fl } DC-low the ground surface. The
! 11 ! - i o r n i a Slate lie;"'1 r ( me n t n f Public lie a I Mi , ho we? ve r , o rue r ed
thai, the u^o of i. he so wo II s bo discontinued prior to use of
secondary effluent from the T a p i a S T P <\ s an irrigation source.
f o rmi n^g P ract 1 ces
File treated field had bo en continuously planted in Sudan
grass - en annual crop used for cattle feed - from 1952 to
1975. In the fail of 1975, however, the 7.3 ha (18 acre) field
was planted to perennial rye grass (j-ojlu_m pj; r re n e, variety -
Linn). At the time uf sampling, April 15, 1976, the rye grass
on the treated plot ranged in height from 15 to 40 cm (6 to 16
in). fir root zone throughout the entire plot was observed to
extend ^o a depth of 15 to ?0 cm (6 to 8 in). Growth in the
swales •Jd s lower and thinner than in other sections.
1 h > STP does not have a permit to discharge secondary
of Hum1 to a receiving st.rf'.-m. Consequently, a water recla-
1'iatJOi) program was established in which various ranchers
throughout the Las Virgenes Valley utilize treated sewage
.'-•ffluint as an irrigation source. Rainfall is generally sparse,
and irrigation provides moisture to support crop growth. Both
the treated and control fields have been irrigated with secon-
dary effluent since 1970.
-------
!,!ii!f ! .'. Miovv-. tht- !9/5 '.uiMiiici t y of se<.OMld ry efi luent
< ft PHI ; t. H ! rinaiy-.ps lor t lie- S i" P . I he quantity of effluent
-p|'l";ed to the study site is not. knowr. .
The control fit-Id has had a history of alfalfa prior to
!c*7/i. r.-.q i nr, i ng that year and continuing through the present,
the . i c- i (i has !~ecn ;n oats. At the time of first sampling in
;'U r' ' ' 1976. L"c cirowth of grass on the control plot was about
fi c iii ( ^ . f> i M ) in height. The grass was sampled again in Sep-
lioth the ir ('-riled and control fields were prepared for
;) I un I i'in, IM -i . i • i i 1 i: r manner. A chisel plow was used to break
;h- • !•'•••iiini l.o .\ lopth of 4S to 50 cm (18 to 20 in), followed by
d ! S k i i) (| ,
:•. '!jdq<', tie watered at the SIP and air dried at the farm
,itc for at lo,. s t 60 days, was distributed to the field using a
.lump 'ruck witli he tailgate partially opened. The dried
.-jdge was then further spread as evenly as possible with a
i.rai;" (~o 1 ! owt."l ''V discing. A manure spreader had been tried,
i-.;.t the si Lid-jo pv-oved too fine for distribution without exces-
• ! »;= dust .
i\ot,ords on tht- amount of sludge spread since 1969 have not
• 't-n i,.,i i n 1 a j iu5d iy the farm manager but were provided by the
:'" . " r -'-1^ 1 7 A . Assuming ^>"?;. a pj-^cv i 'i-a t el y 75 percent
. t tf1". dried sludge was apniied to 3.6 ha (9 acres) of the
ttea ted field, the average application rate over the past three
years has been approximately 51 dry m tons/ha/year (23 dry tons/
-------
• ' \
, 1 1
'' 4-'!
ji H
li -5
i -i
l'l ^
\ 1 C£
, I
!|
'• i
i
1
i
1
!
(
1 ;
-> - . i
* i
h- (i- ; ;
; "" <"."'" 1 1
.. r •- ! !
-J 5: ! 1 s-
,:i ID ] 1 cu
C/l j! 4->
^ ^ M 01
O 01 "i ! E
>--,-< ^ ' rO
h--',-^'1 S.
,-r >- — ' ' fO
- ;^t!i °-
"" --lisr^,'
- J o: i
LU UJ 'C. \ :
_j or 1°^ !
' UI~. J - ,
CO ;± i '
I — 1,1, — i •=- -° * r--
-[ LU0 i -
.- TLlJ i I/I
" vJ^' | r7> rr> '-T>- ' . "- -- r:r> CT)^>, C)
cn r ff. E- E. E '"D c;> cn '^ r- £ 01 F:
c fi r.- F: F- f£
cxi • — • — c\j '• - '-O r -
j-^l f~j C"1 O '~~ CO r - ',D ' r- - 10 O ID C'
cr o o o o o *"!• vo o i — o o o o
o o •
• O O O O CD O O o O ("0 O O
O 0 v
•D
(U
,f_l
ro
*- -
V
o
,/) r"
E: 0) ^ E -C
O •>> o> :? "^ ••- — E <->
-r- '.. J_ T3 -r- i~ 1— r~ i- 3
C -5 CU •- E^ CU '>- '-"- ° E CU •<• r—
cu o ^> E cu -^ -i o c- u -a o a. E ro
oos^., — rr;i — u o i- a> c: fa S-Q-"D4j
i_ a> "- >, OJ T- > — o .c -r— cu -c o «3 o
«t s: t.o c_i oo ir LL ai a. M - J o t J cj H-
^^^,^,,^^ ^ -^--^-^--^^--^-^^^.-^
CJ) rn CT> C' r— u cn rji CD cn CT> cn cn cn cr
i" E f: r- ' o >-£ '<: e E i: E: E E E
r-- •
,-j rvi f-) c^> r-- r^ u~> CO c 5 ri- cn no CNJ
«. «- . (-, , . i - • - t- - 0 - O
•-O ("1 / r- • M l£> • r i O1 1^-- i~
< . I-- I-- C3 CVI
a>
E
r—
O
O
0
V
JT
d"
O
_a
s_
ti
o
o
i-
o
>)
-c:
-^
en
E
r-^
<~t~
^J3
(XI •
r-..
!
'
! s-
cu
: ^
\ %
ai
s-
ro
CX
XI C
V
4-1 (-> — :~>
r- 4J ^ 4-> O O
ai c. a) c: f) i_
~3 O) =! OJ GJ 4-J
i — 3i — ZS CU i- ••—
'4-- 1 H- r— r— -3 2:
c (+_ M- <+. _Q 4.J
•"— C. CU ^ 'O G E
o ai cu E
•> co i — '-t
'.: t:
;> a;
t^> cn cr
o o a>
^- i- cn >>
4-> CJ) CD +J
•r- -r- S-
^T ^T 4-J CLJ >• >-)
•r— 4~) CU -i— 4->
O CU ^ ro T3 CU 4-> "r-
4-J 4~v -C -I- +J CJ "O
•r- ro i — Cl. S-- rO 3 -i—
S- S- (O O l+- "O JD
+-) 4-> 4-> <^X CD O
•<--i— o ca 08 _c
s: sr i— 2: o Q_
r— r-
x: _c :
CLO 0
— t/) c Q S-
3 Q O O 3
O 1 — O -O | —
54
-------
1ABLE 17
!/"; mr-i r;r',, I,AI nokniA ".uioni DISPOSAI (dry metric tons)
1 i c. po s ii i A r r ,i
1 ,! re !. v i i ' "
,\ rnis ( -, U"1 v s if •• )
a ill p o P a n ( h
,1 !• i,; ^ ! .in r
i (• -, Anq e I e s ! n 'j n ty
"1< nf <; "n do
• 6 o - n 7 ?
; a k n o w n
1973
>'90
30.]
40
•')/
10
3
1974
503
1975
35
1 ,160
33
.olid',.
55
-------
( ,,
rtin,,y.,nf). rotal slud,, ,ppli'-l s^ 1969 on tins field was
. . , w tn,,\ Additional quantities of sludge
713 dry 'i; tons I /i.u dry i^"-> - •
, 0_ t,e clUrrounding areas of the field, but not
nrtve been spread on tit. ,urr
on the sample^1 plol:.
n,ic stl|rtv site, therefore, serves a threefold function.
7t one time, one o' — 1 fields in the Las Virgenes
OP,o which the SIP can release secondary effluent. At
H,l sine time, th, rye nrnss servo, as pasture for cattle.
- ,c „„,, ol '.ever,.! locations for receipt of
Thirdly, it snrve-, a'. ""'
dowatered sludge from !.!.<• STFV
I>rt1l1z.r, h.,ve never teen used on either the treated or
,,,ptroi plots. Tho fa" ».n.3er recalled that the herbicide
p,,-.tiMdes have been usi;(1.
,ne -..ttlo ..»•<- use,l for boef production only. The farm
„„„,„;, uated fbat Vhe
of averse effects fro, the ,ewage sludge application.
Cl I MAI <-
The 5'ju
ine o'juthern Californid coastal climate is normally pleasant
and mild throughout the year. Tho Pacific Ocean is the primary
moderating influence, while coastal mountain ranges buffer
aqainst extremes ot summer heat and winter cold from interior
regions. A variable balance between mild sea breezes and
either hot or cold winds from the interior provides some vari-
ety in weather conditions.
-------
Relit hiM'i and low temperatures be<. nine more extreme and the
• iverdne relative humidity becomes lower ac, one travels inland
md up foothill slopes. At the coast and on the lower coastal
plain, average d a i 1 y temperatures fluctuate about 15'C in sum-
incjr rtriH ?l) ( in 4,he winter, but in foothill and inland valley
O
i o'liniun i '. i es thus1 ranges increase to about JO^C in summer and
.' '. C i n wi n ' er .
Most rainfall occurs during the winter with nearly 85 per-
cent o! t,he Mint a 1 total occuring from November through March.
..ummer', are ••"-, si. n t i a 1 1 y without precipitation. Based on rec-
"rds dtHinq fv-om 1936, the average annual precipitation has
>een J 5. 7 ci!' (i^.05 in) with a high of 79.5 cm (31.28 in) in
'.-)41, and a low of 10.4 cm (4.08 in) in 1953. The average
annual frost-fre2 season is approximately 3?0 days. Snow and
• i! ur ler s t orrhs are very infrequent. Meteorological data are
,umni."! c', zed i n Table 1 " .
•> o i L n f s c R i p r i o N
:veij i o/ui } _Af eu
Both the sludge treated and control fields are character-
:."ed by t-he s i 1 ty clay loam of the Salinas series. This very
•eep, we ! 1 - "v .H-ipri •; o i 1 developed on gentle to moderately
•--'oping fans an< v.Hley floors in recent alluvium from sedi-
Tt-ntciry nia t e r i P 1 3 . Soil of this series is characterized by a
lark ijiay. moderately fine textured, granular, neutral surface
soil. Subsoil is generally dark yellowish brown, of moderately
!ine textures, massive, and mildly alkaline. Yellowish brown,
-------
oi
O
oo t;
r— _J
<
O
CD OO
<: uj
C3
n
c
0)
O
0)
JC
03
to
O
"ro
o
'bfl
^
o
J_
o
o o o o
30000 OOOC
3 O O O
c o
-------
O)
C
O
00
UJ
I
CO
E
0)
c
0!
0>
(0
E
i_
o
Z
"ih
i r
-------
a underlie the
Salin.
.v-, series -,nil orofiio as mapped by the
S o i 1 Co n s o r v a t i o n S e r v i c e follows :
• 0 to 38.1 nn (0 to l:. MI; - dark r.ray s 11 t.y .lay loam;
•n:>(1h!!n granular s t ru>- t arc , hard, sliahtly sticky and
plastic; :IPM * IT; 1 .
• ^ : '° 7K"'' '•"' '>i5 to 31 in) - dark grayish-brown clay
loan; ,iied i uiri •; u!;.i n-i'i 1 d i b'ocky s f rue 1:u re ; hard,
1. 1. : L k y a nd p i a •; i. i < "PII f r ,, ]
. /:i.7 to I0f> rm ( ;i I to ^ in) - dark yellowish-brown
('1(>> 'oanr. pMd ;.'. !-.••,!••' j( o <,v)i]s -.»'" ?he frenffd plot qen-
i-saliy tfjIloA- the abevi sjro^ile
-------
the surface, gradually changing by the 1.2 m (4 ft) level to
dark grayi sh-brov/n clay loam. The surface soil was taken to a
depth of 30 cm (2 in). A coarser, slightly yellowish-brown
clay loam was en :ountered at areas marked "X" on Figure 13-1.
This discontinuity was not observed at any other sampling holes
on either the treated or control plots. Both surface and sub-
surface soils wichin the swale region were observed to be drier
and less plastic than othor parts of the field.
Control Plot
The surface and subsurface soils of the control area
appeared to be similar to those of the treated plot.
Texture anc pH data for soils obtained from the treated
and control plot, are shown in Table 19.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
Sewage Treatment Plant
The STP currently serves an approximate copulation of
40,000 and a population equivalent of 75,500. Average daily
flow is approxi lately 17,033 cu m/day (4.5 mgd).
The plant, constructed in 1965, was originally designed
for a flow of 1893 cu m/day (0.5 mgd). Expansion over the last
eleven years has increased its capacity to 30,280 cu m/day
(8 mgd).
The plant utilizes an activated sludge process. Primary
treatment consists of comminut'on followed by sedimentation.
Primary effluen then enters the rectangular activated sludge
aeration tanks. The operition is step fed with a 3.5 hour
*, 61
-------
0
ro o o
p I (NJ l\l PI
c > r- o o
ro <\ -d ro
Sj
•O
ih
ii -*
i -v
j
w
5 i
._ ._,
_^',
^
(-• r
'.i: a
^
•^
— '
^
'-J
_ _ j
i
i
.-_
\ i
i
^v i i- -
" j jj
' '"" >-J
ii «• J
^*.i _~jf **"l
J "* ./I
= Id I-1
>- '£>
-^- ^.
i -«
>
5 y>
_j
|
sj
o
JO
_
'1
•
x -~ o '
•> x; ^ ^1 o -s- rv -•
4< * * * * -^ i o •— '"3- •*- ~ •
•v in *- 'jo xi in •*• o ir
o n j'( 0^ "*i — i — • rvj
~»
rvj _n "i vi "^ -s
i, .O •>- '-T.' •£• JO "~- 4^
J .3 Ct ~' \| O O O
. . . . ....
""* o ..--•'• -« _• > .-j
yi
jj
~
jH
'— *
*
il
•d <£) (NN ro in O CO S
r<) ro fi m ro st ro p~
f_
T?
~i
to o
...J S
'•\
•*•
<
~0
'-?§
•< CD
.!> ar
1 0 ^
Ip--
!l a
-a ^
' l —
ul.52
*-• p
u_ -^
- -
1 H . ^£
3 a.
i ^ '9 ', .
rOfTlvO vo N
CMCMCMCM CMCMCMCM
corocNro OVO^OON
inrncOCO >3-ONN-t
'. .-HrtOO r-l'OOO
o m o • •••'•
cjN'iciNONO vomin.in
;
1 1 *- ' 1 •! 2.
, , 5: > u j r s u
,^ ^, u u . ^ u u
f-J 01 ^ ro \o ON
:x o
— • -. j i
v
•>
•>
.
^I
"*
b
^
H
^^
V'
•*•
-£
M 2
1 -J »
L> n
r-* 1~J
c3 z
^.
•7
-« t
0 13
* 7C
0 0
•^-* rvi
" ,."
-------
detention t i :no. t itia'l eftlur-nt is tr rated in a chlorine con-
tact chamber and released to a 11,400 cu m (3 MG) slow equaliz-
ing reservoir.
The reclaimed water is pumped to two unlined storage res-
ervoirs. The first reservoir located at the STP holds 11,400
cu m (3 MG) and serves as regulatory storage for waste spray
disposal on non-productive agricultural land. During periods
of inclement weather surplus effluent is disposed by stream
discharge from the reservoirs. The STP has no permit for
stream discharge, except during these periods of inclement
weather. A second reservoir holds 49,200 cu m (13 MG) of re-
claimed water for crop and permanent pasture irrigation and
off-site waste c p r a y fields. All fields are properly managed
and irrigated throughout the year. Gravity feed from the res-
ervoirs supplies sufficient head for irrigation.
As summarized in Table 16, the final effluent from the
STP approaches drinking water quality. BOD, SS, heavy metal
concentrations, and Coliform MPN values are very low. The low
metals concentr. tions are due to stringent industrial discharge
regulations.
Approximately 10 percent of the influent is contributed by
industry. The major industrial contributors are Bunker Ramo,
the Burroughs Corporation, Raypak, and Fotomat.
Industry monitoring has not been comprehensive in the
past. TDS and pH are checked for each industrial contributor
on a monthly schedule.
63
-------
Mudyc S ! ,i hi 1 i / a i i mi -'in! SiorafjO
Siud'.e rrom !hc S M' >s , t <\ b i ! i / ed in (jorobi< digestion
tanks iiavinq a combined ^apacity of 'UK.'Q tu in U'>00,OQO gal).
Sludge is generate'! from a cnnn/i n.i ti on or settled waste acti-
vated \liid i I'M I i1 i v ',' d d . 1 cu m (7.b cu yd) dumps ters (see Photograph
i 0 , , f or \ ran s po rt to the various disposal sites.
lie MP provides n(.> sto>v\t]o capacity for sludge other than
the In.iitcd f 1 e x \ b i 1 i ! y of vligester detention time. The mod-
;•!-,,; r i -as",;! wcathei |u>rir!ts sludqe distribution on essen-
tially d n uninterrupted, year round basis. During periods of
i nc ! emo'if. weather, the sl;;dge is brought to the county landfill
Lu"-.m . of the muddy field conditions.
On SeptcMiher ] 2, 1975, a simple of the dewatered sludge
was obtained, an analysis of which is presented in Table 20.
This tabulation r ep r e s en t s the only historical data on these
sludge solids. All reported metal concentrations were less
than 1/00 ''
-------
TAIJLF 20
.AS VllM.nrS, f/u [FORNH - STACIli/TD LIHUID SLUDC.F. ANAIYS1S1
P a ra me t e r Concentration
9 -
Cci 5.3
Cu 906
Mi ???.
7 n 1,670
Pb v 233
N! o i s t u i e { ' } B 6 . 6
ase I stabilized sludge sample, September I'l, 1975.
3at.a '•xpressed on an oven dry weiqht basis.
65
-------
r-H !_O U) (
r^~ o CM ^
o CT-I cr •—
o r-- i— i
cr- en en
CXI O) fsl O
oo «••• <•£> CM
"=3- oo •=*• c\j
o
o
CM
Ul
J
(11
'-'t
I-
. [_
>--i
O
u.
i~.
i
O
-
1 1.1
,*•
Ll ]
1 --'
t'
*" "*
"*
• r
i
r-M
i i
f/-i
°i !
•4 f-~. >-O ) C-l -~t- ^ i- I l-J 143 <: I at CM
O ex) ai r-. ttT '4- o-i (v. •* C-T m i£) r--
U1 >.O CM "^1 ^ l-O CM UJ ,,-!-> . . v
-— cn O- -(-> > O
Q.
CD
-------
shi'tqe ii-r the ye,!)-. ! (> /.', iu I1)/1, nulusivn. In I')/1), 11,/IMi
•:u MI (14,6'jO c.u y's used to transport wet sludge to the land
sites. The- slucge is dumped at designated locationsfor dis-
tribution hy th> farmers.
Dtili/MUJ ? small bulldozer, the study site farm manager
spreads the piles of dewatered sludge over a sufficient area to
allow i lie sludge to air dry for a minimum of 6 months. The dried
sludge is then 'and-loaded into a dur.ip truck and spread on the
field (see Farm ng Practices for additional details).
67
-------
Photographs / through 10 ,how, respectively, the
treated plot, control plot, D C G d e w a t e r i n g u n i T: , and d u m p s t e r
container.
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
In an effort to assess public attitudes toward landspread-
ing of sludge, the California State Public Healtn Department
ind several local newspapers were contacted. The Health
Hep-artiiieri t representative stated that he recognized sludge
spreading as a viable alternative for sludge disposal but
expressed concern about the potential build-up of toxic mater-
ials.
A telephone interview with the editor of the Malibu Surf-
side Mews indicated that, there had never been articles in the
paper concerning sludge disposal. However, there is intense
public concern with expansion of sewer systems in the general
area. The editor s t-Hcd (hd! opposition to expansion is par-
tially a result of the constant, foul odors which permeate the
las V i >" genes Valley and the aesthetic problems associated with
the disposal of "anything1 from a sewage treatment plant.
These pressures are partly responsible for the STP currently
having no discharge permit for their treated effluent,
STP personnel stated that they have tried to explain to
the various objectors the nature and degree of treatment of the
secondary effluent - that in most cases, it is of better quali-
ty than the water normally flowing in Malibu Creek - all to no
avai 1 .
-------
Photograph 7
Treated Plot
Photograph 8
Control Plot
69
-------
Photograph 9
DCG Dewatering Unit
Photograph 10
Dumpster
70
-------
In cat!/ IJ/6, a rot yet been resolved, and with the potential
sale of the study site, sludge spreading at the site has been
h a 1 f e d .
STAU AND : OCAL RLGULATIONS ON SLUDGE SPRfADING
There are no slate, county or city regulations governing
the llp;)]i, dtion of municipal sewage sludge solids at the las
'/il'""""'- -'•'" T'<" r,lifornia SfatP and the ! os Angeles
-oun;.' ;--.:•'•. :.. ,,Kl, ,lepa r huen^ s nrt awdrc of the STp,s sludge
utilisation nr^e-tjrp, The California StatP Public Health
:-r-»t>-r srts quiaslines to th- e^fe-l thai sludoe M-reedio,,
1 .j
A'ni !l!;t be ' sf'"''-'1 of contamination to water resources,
..reate u public. ,ealth menace, or present an aesthetic nuisance,
')ut does not .-eqjire site preparation, monitoring, or specific
'j i spos a "i prac t i ces .
The employees of the STP receive mandatory inoculations
igaiim f typiio id, tetanus, and polio.
'fONUMiL^
F.ie G!,,,!ne spreading program was initiated in 1967 with
the purchase .) f one DCG gravity sludge dewatering unit for
520,000. The d watered sludge was hauled to various local
dumping spots. This practice was continued until 1971 at
-------
whi;h time I: wo mot o i)CG units were purchased at $20,000 each.
Addition.!! purchases were a 1971 Chevrolet truck for $21,000 and
two Dempster containers at $1,800 each.
The SIT maintains a separate, detailed accounting record
for all cost centers associated with the sludge spreading oper-
ation as shown in Table ?2. All data are expressed in terms
of S/MG-STP influent. A cost analysis for calendar 1975 is
presented in Table (?3. The STP personnel are aware of the
high costs and have drafted a plan to alter their disposal
program accordingly. The proposed alternative encompasses the
purchase of nearby land and the piping of liquid sludge solids
to the disposal site. ""his would eliminate the high chemical
and hauling costs.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
Sludge
On April 1 b and August 4, 1976, five one-1i ter grab sam-
(iles each of raw and stabilized sludge were obtained from both
the primary clarifiers and the aerobic digesters.
S oj 1
On April 15 and April ?3, 1976, surface soil samples were
fafson i -oin both the treated and control plots. These plots
were .1 i -iciod into five and tnree sections, respectively (refer
to Figure 1J and M. The control plot was divided into
only three sections because of its smaller size.
Thirty (30) random surface soil samples from 0 to 25 cm
(0 to 10 in)were taken in each section using a 2.5 cm (1 in)
-------
A i; I
\ AS ViRH! N| S, r.Al.irOPN!A
jiw,, AND '-PRLAIUNG COSTS - 1975
i.o s t I f>n tc r Rate
SH idbf-r 16
f n ;-. r .-< y 45
MI M ;.|f- • S;l., i.abfr 11
4 ?? Lqu ipment
H KM niri-i Fc-^s F
''. n } < • [ o r. h n!, f -i n ri P d r t s 7
-'0 ' in M-'ni' ot S/IKI SIP influent.
-------
COS I TOR DISPOSAL (M DFWAFERED SLUDGL - 1075
An n_u aj C ap i taj Co_sj.
Vehi cle Uepre c;a ti on
1971 Chevrolet Truck: $?l,nOO $ 3,563
o
Lfjui pnieii i Dcpre.' i at, ion
'/ - OCC Un i t-~, : ^60,000 8,734
2 - D P in p s t e r ? u in p s f e r s : $ 3 . 6 0 0 5_2 4
Total Annual Capita! fo<-t $12,821
Annual 0[n-ratinn Cost
Po rsonnel
Plant i ahor V26,640
Mauling Labor JJIi§64
Fot-il labor "$"3773"04
Fringe Benefits (30 percent) $11,191
Vehifl^ 81 Fquipnion4. Maintenance ^ Operation 19,306
D-j'upiru] Fees 13,320
Cheniic,>is 34,965
Uti liti PS 99S
T< t;il Ar.nual Operating Cost $117,084
Ictil Annual Cdpital R Operating Cost $129,905
!'• Vrcent Cont; ncjonc y Factor3 $ 13,000
';• to ' Annual Cos r $142 ,905
FoUi Annual Cost . $142,905 _ $128.07/dry m ton
Fotal SI udye Haule(i'"/\nnMa I l.y 1", 2 30 dry "tons ( $1 1 6 . 1 H/dr y ton)
Vohiclf- was fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8 percent
interest equivalent, to $ 1 G9 . 6!V $ 1 , 000 annually.
'"F qui nnient was fully depreciated over 10 years at 8 percent
interest, ivpnvalent to S 1 1 S . f>6/ $1 , OOP annually.
'A 10 pen rut contingency fa: tor is added as admi n i s t rat.-'ve
o verhf-ad .
7 (
-------
i! i aii'M e f • tainle-.s ;teel split, tube sampler. As the sampler
was withdrawn, any mi seel 1 an en LIT. non related debris was dis-
carded prior to pi -icing the soil into a sampling bag,
bubs .!<• i acf samples were obtained with a 7.6 cm (3 in)
diameter steel bucket auger and split tube sampler. The sub-
sjrfac. e r, ar'u'l'-s were so moist and plastic that the bucket auger
would f.ene*~rate only a few centimeters at. a time. To make
rn a 1 1 e r 2 worse, once the soil was in the bucket auger, the sam-
ple LOU Id be removed only with great difficulty. At the start,
therefore, of e a c h subsurface layer, the bucket auger was used
tc remove soil to the beginning layer depth. The split tube
sampler, fitted >vi th 30 cm (1 ft) extensions, was then inserted
at. thrre of the rye
grass above a height of 15 to 17 cm '6 to 7 in). Each sampling
from a section produced about 0.9 kg (2 Ib) of sample.
-------
Id!'. I ("» :j/l llirijii'ih •',() picsi-nl I he Ic/Mowiruj:
i <\ h I e Dcsc_i-ijvti on
/'•I Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
Sludges
?l~> Concentr11I ons of Total arid DTP A
l-.x Irac t.ao i o fletdls in Composite Surface
•i p,d Subsu r ra ce Soils
2b Fota! Metal Concentrations in In-
(livinual Suosurface Soil Samples
21 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and Plants
Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in S i u d a e , Soils and Plants
Pardsit.es in Sludges, Soils, and
Plants
30 Concentrations of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and Plants
fii|i-1 res, 15 ro 22 present particle size analyses
of the various soil composites by depth.
-------
TAB 1.1 :'1
CIIARAi: II RI .(ATI ON 0! \, I AH [I I/I I)
I AS V IRGFNTS , GAL! I-OKN I A
I ROM
Volatile Solids ('/.)
N03 - N
MM. - N
0 r g a n i r. N
f
K
?Ja
Ca
Mq
so4
Cl
Ag
As
B
Crl
Cr
Co
f>i
F e
H<]
Mn
No
fli
Pb
So
/n
H,,0 ('/,)
pii
Al ) un i t, s i n ; q/ -
A,l djf ,' ox IK-PS? i '
4/15/
77 .
! Ml)
4«;>b9
':' If. 7
KUi6
13/9
? 'i 9 5 5
r« 1 1 6
67 .
1040
5.
1 .
70,
> ' .
U',r>
3 .
- i 9
(.768
90.
5-12
6.
64 .
36.
5 .
1379
88.
6.
( : Ml 1 e S S
-' on ove
/6 8/4/
3 a 72
15 .0
-1665
41539
16067
20
2629
27000
4674
3 96
1910
55 1
62 6
,: 73
f) 1 0
1 22
7 '1 8
7067
4 7
420
67 13
6 46
9 42
0 > 8
1326
3 91
9 6
o t h e r w i s e
P dry we : a h
76
.06
.67
.45
.0
.35
.63
.0
.6
.99
.53
o
.1
.7
.99
.1
.3
noted)
t b a s i
Average Field D r i e d
74.7
.41
3153
45199
17117
1566
2004
26478
4895
81 .7
1475
3.45
4.13'
71 .6
11 .1
154
6.39
95?
6918
49.0
481
10 .2
55.4
39.8
7 .02
1353
85.6
s.
63.95
4.19
2224
47065
17814
1344
2063
23217
5206
1 1 59
1067
.78
8.2
73.0
1 1 .9
2! 1
10.3
953
9813
2.0
550
12.5
101
73.7
13.0
1456
3.7
-------
-J
X
j ,r
J":
•s,
3 ;:
_ _)
Ti o
rvj n
v.1 x. "y
-I 0. C
t~ 1 '1
X '• .3
.l! w'l -i-
<* .u
, _J 'i
^— t.
0 .'T
5 1.
AS
oO
_»
y. cr
•T'
•v
JT1 V
r*. -\j
2 5: U
O U
CVJ
rt ^-i Cvl
vO CT^ *H
^ *" n vo o>
CJl
••i t
-------
•J V •» :t Vvl O -* ^
# * « »*» • * *
X- \J ~VJ M "HIV."
•S I
r: •*: — •-- ii T» .•>
-t .fi iri -t r '.r, <* "-!
X
-t 'JL
^, 5: s: L > ,aj :£ 5: L •
',J u
-------
) i '•
r,
3
* *
- „,, »•
..r. >
-T X!
X'
CM
X
o
•XI
rv
v rv
n n m
t
r,
"VI -1
(X,
_1
f
Cf
j.1
Tr
./!/;/>
-------
o o o o o o
to «- ro
(l(Din
o
H
6
Lu
C.O
o
o
.0
0~
t-
_J
O1
a
~f
a
0-
C
o
UJ
o
UJ
o-d
T
E
fO
0
ro
CO
CO
^
00
CVJ
0)
O)
C7
S-
^.^
to
— 1
O-l
0-3
"O
0)
lj
fO
O!
S-
1—
O)
o
frt
H-
S-
oo
OJ
M
OO
C/)
a)
c
o
c
s_
O)
81
-------
55
DC
Ul
,V\ Xq
z
g
v-
<
o
ii-
cn
CO
-
<
o
6?
i-
_i
i/i
#
D
z
<
1»
l#
z
o
P
a.
£
u
to
ul
o
UJ
_l
°- c
22
<
CO
E
CO
O
>
rtS
o
ȣ>
CO
CO
«i-
CVJ
1/1
uJ
c
OJ
D
S-
•r~
>
ro
5-
82
-------
"I
I ',.,]'.
-r-t
•
-.
----
i
I
j
i
j
i
f
.-
.
-
„
"
—
- __
~
. . . . ;
i t
I.. 1 _l
• -*- ; - -
; j
1
j
, i
i !
L 1 i
-4- -
r~H-H
.
1--
-
--
-
-
__.
r~7
k"
__
.._
u-
._-
~
'
~::
..._
u
.„_
_
— .
--
__
L
1 -
I
- -
[ —
v
1
—
[- —
:„„
;_;
— -
—
[_
*
-
—
r
f
^
u
•-
_
H
--
1—
._.
—
—
j_
--
r-
—
^
—
i-1
:-:
—
O
o
O
00
O
o
o
o
ro
O
CM
O
c>
,/ fq
ff- LU
5o ?
UJ
95§
>- " 2
r: •"
s~
O
O
cn
re
QJ
d)
u
CPi
vo
-------
>
(/>
n3
— 1
UD
OO
-a
QJ
[ ^
-------
o
41,61;",', Xq j,"jui-j jua
CM
I/)
.-&
"3
q-
3
00
1/1
ro
C
•-a:
01
01
1/1
OJ
o>
C1
O)
s.
C-;
85
-------
o
1 '
o
o
u.
i
J
0
o
o-
H
in
,^o
z
o
H-
n.
a:
o
V)
UJ
o
SAMPLE
NO.
Sb i.i
UJ r *
~ O "> X
W ^S -. o
Z° ul •* "•
__ < ? ™ '<
On<3 7 •-'
•* ,Vi * 3
z?o r. g
lil 5U' ^ S
rn =2-j o
V/ i: yj -J
"P I
b
i- -m O
|i |yyyM* >^ o
%
£
tn
C
a
r—
tj
C
CT
(/
a
c
OJ
0
S-
•r™
on
Jj
CO
MHHi dMBHb ^
T^^ ^^^^ ••)
•1 iln -
• I ill ^
flf 1 1 1 1 1 7~-
£JIU1 -
~~JK*J i
,_
o
4J
C
o
o
"
E
o
to
1
^
to
to
O)
rsi
QJ
u
•r—•
-(->
S-
cx
0)
c
QJ
o
CM
-------
If)
O
SSs
UJ 5 co
HI
fO
o
CO
n
ro
CX)
C/l
QJ
c
a
S-
>•
tn
fO
_J
n
oo
§ —
o
-p
£^
O
0
E
O
CTi
d
-------
• , O ' < O C> O O O
cvj to v?- m to r- w
>-
o
111
1MBI8M Aq jauij
O
1—
o
U.
CO
CO
«*
o
>-
<
_1
CO
TO
— 1
CM
or
10
r—
0
s-
1 \
c
0
C_)
E
o
CM
CNJ
i
i —
cn
O)
tsl
O)
o
+->
4-
Q_
cu
c
O)
C1
S-.
(XI
CVI
01
i-
CD
•i—
U.
88
-------
TAMI i ,";;
Cii! OHINAi I D HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUUGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
LAS VIRGF'NFS , CAL T FORMA
Soi !
Surface Composites
roa toil
Plot
0.03
0.?
0.09
0 . 0 1
/«g/kg
('- o n t r o 1
Plot
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
0.15 DDT
,0.03!DIELDRIN
0.01 PCB 1221
0.28 PCB 1248
Plant
Composites
Stabi "M zed Sludge
0 . 2 «
0.8
•0.01
< 0 . 01
(4/15/76) (8/4/76)
-'0.?5 <0.06
<0.3 -0.02
<0. 1 <0. 1
4302 .6
-0.01 DDT
<0.01 DIELDRIN
-0.4 PCB 1221
<0.5 PCB 1248
Field Dried
^0.07 DDT
2.70 DIELDRIN
< ,07 PCB 1221
1626 PCB 1248
Detetrion limits v. ry due to sample size, plant matter
interference, ,uid ristrument sensitivity.
89
-------
1
1
I
\
i
i
UO
D_
Q ---C
^C !P
A :
,' [?l
1 »~— <
^ -i 1
CVJ '7) <.„->
*M
LiJ i/) (•")
_J UJ UJ
=1 Q UJ
i— n> c^
i Q;
CO i-*
U i
f-- !
h- ^ i
- 1
^r ;
^
i
!
i
i
i
i
|
|
i '
! :
°! ' fa.> ci ,i) a.
"* ' 7"1 I-" ^ ^'
_^ * J 4- ' t-J 4-i
,/ . " rO ^ 'Xi .'ci
! , , ! C7) ni ."T. O>
fj
h± T5 a) ro 4-> 4J C
E 3 Q: rji i/> oo ra
tO | ^- r-
OO j 00 D-
1
(
I
d< OJ QJ (lJ d) OJ CL> tU CD
1"* ""'•"->>!> > ^> ^> °^»
(-J 4-> 4~> 4-' 4-J -(_) 4_) 4J 4J 4.^ 1
^^3 rdfT3rt5fn n3(OfOfO
C'l CT> 01 CD O1 CT> CD CTl CT) CD
QJ OJ OJ CU Q.) CD Qj
CD QJ
+ ' 4-'
•r-
D 0
n. Q.
c- E
o o
t ) O
111 1 —
c> o
4-> E i- E
ra E =. u 4J E E u 1,
a,1 o •_• c o o
'_ C\J O Cvl
1:1 i — i — a) i — i — c\j <__> a; i — i — cvi
(DO O >X5 CT> i — U tD CT> i —
-i-1 <>_ 1 A3 1 1 1 1 03 1 1 1
(T34-J <+-Oi — i — f-Oi — i —
CD C (/) S~ CO VO CT^ LO i_ C^O tO CTl
S- O i — 13 r-~* 13
1 — C_> T- OO -r- CO
0 O
DO C/)
-------
CD r
o
CO
UJ
1
en
^<
°2
0
i — 1
h-
a:
i—
^Zi
LU
Z
O
"r—
o
0
o
OP
-1 J
oo
t —
nj
O
OJ
U_
B
O
[ .
O
CJ
t .
fl3
yj
CD
1 1
(ti
r—
•—
CJ
en
-C
CO
fO
'
'CU
C
o
E
rd
to
^p0^.9[dUJ03
^^.psiuj IJ.U03
_. — . . ,
r^Aiiflmn^^iJ i
^f.^f.O/\ L.|.V4U.IIIjC/^Q
— — . -_.__,_„
r) fi ! )H 1 C f)
jad 6jQ L»^0i
n^i ^ i rfiiino
•¥"¥-r "T L v/
x^P9lU^ LJ.U03
— - __ ,- . -,
."^A iiriiiincn ij
jiji^* L^_ULUMjOwiQ
„ p 1 /;
x, oUpf 1 [^ ^ D
jad 6jg Le'-)°l
i /
^^po-i^ [uiuoj
•¥"¥-r ^ ^ J' ^ ^ J
jf^aA LQ uinnsajtj
_„. .
^.aBpnis 6
uad 6^0 16^.01
**P;J}9 [duiOQ
_ _ . „ _^ .. ._
+¥pauu L^uo3
.. „_ . ___ — „
^^.aA i^dujnsauci
^aSpnis 6
uad 5jQ LG:)-0i
aBpnLS 6 «iad
1 3 p r
o L Q O^A a\/ ( i? j. o i
*• ' v i. i -i-
c:
o
*i
C) -*-->
i — D.
Q. "' — •
£ s..
(T3 O
CO CO
OJ
o
+ 4- 4- -t 4-
+ + 4- 4-4-
4-4- 4- 4-4-
•* co co PJ r^
oo o o o
i — r— i — i — r—
X X X XX
O i— r^~ CO LT)
OO 00 CM UD r—
4- 1 4* II
4-1 4- II
4-4- 4- 4-1
CM VD
0 0
f — r-"
x Q x Q a
oo 2T r-» Z. z.
en CM
i I 1 it
i i i II
4-4- 4- 4-4-
Q Q Q Q Q
z. z. z zr z:
4-" 1 II
4-1 1 II
+ 4- 4- 14-
a o Q a
'—.Z. Z. Z. Z.
A O)
O r- O
UD r— Q_ r— CO
O O £= CD O
X X oo X XI
CTl LO OO OO 1
i — O OO CTl 1
i — • ~^_ • •
r— CM OO CO
O 3
Q.M-
O <+-
O O
P^. c~
O -M
S- S
4-> O
C i-
O C7)
0 i-
O)
4-* ?>
c o
CU 00
.C 00
4-> CU
o c
4-> -r- •
ro oo
QJ 4-> ai
-XJ _f*j J_)
ro O rO
s~ c
3 -(J -r-
0 0 E
O C rd
fO 4J
00 C
C ro 0
«C 5 0
i
CM
.
. — .
oo O
to
-Q .
CU
-C: •<—
O) O
•^ (
i
S- O i-
"O O
£^
ro CO 4-
•s-
^«
C O OO
o ex re
xi ra TD
ai cu
00 00 4->
OO rO S— ~*~)
fi i f~, Qi
ti> i_j ^j-'
S- X> o 4-J
a. co a> <->
X 00 S-
— — — w . . • • • ' • \/J >- ^_ ^"
LT> ID 4-> D_ O
i — «vf r— <^- CM
>v-^ **-*. '^^ ^^^ "O i"~-
•* CO •* OO 4J CS-O
3Q^QCCOCO rOf—O
r— f^
CO Q.
r- X -r- c
S- OJ i-
3 a> "
i — i — oo _
r- re J3 Q
«C >• 0 ^
•— -K *
^
91
-------
- ""*
~o
Q_)
73
>—
_£
c:
o
t j
O
00
LiJ
1
. — J
CQ
-
CJ
C)
O
Cl
s.
4->
tO
IT)
o
(X>
LI
n
o
<4-
-1 —
CJ
o
r
(15
O
CU
IX.
r -
(7)
d
A .
(O
a;
r- '
I1.1
C
f "»
j_
I ) M ! C i 1
f- ( i i
. j/j 1 > i / ~i ' ) ^ '* O 1
" l ^ ^ ( J (. - 1 J,
^Pa}oLdLuo3
¥^fJ9UU 1 J-LiOQ
.. . . .
.-, YOA i.'idi[ins.)j(j
_ -
f l l ' I ' 1 0 '
Jl)d b"° [L>-0;
^^.pa^o | duio;.
^ ,, panu LJ uo;;
. _ _
., . '1A 1 IdlllfV.i) .I,'
,,,o6pn[s 6
jad 6j() (.ep-ox
a . ,||KJ
¥YI
^^paiiLI 1 JUO'J
. .
f ^ OA L IlililMSOJJ
(
\" ' '
i ii fllM I'^lt^l
- U ] ' J
, 1 . - 1
)[ ! | ^ U vt iM i
i , . > • .
|
0
(D -4->
i — n.
O..T -
03 o
0)
CJ
4 -i 4 4 4-4
-i 4 1 4- 44-
4- •+ 4- 4- 44-
tn
— -^ «=1 CM
cn on cv cxi o
CZ) ...
i — «^ ir> UT cTi
-— U^ LO
4 i I I 44-
4 : 1 ( 44-
4444 44-
C51 LO
r- - CL C) U1 OO CO
i ' i I II
4111 II
44-4+ 4-4-
O Q Q C3 Q Q
1 I 1 i II
4111 II
4- 4- 4 f 4-4
tij i "i o cj en o
. ~*i - "-"" • *'-" Iri f^"i. ~^~
C/l (/I
cu cn co r - cu
co +j co co r--. ci 4-> r-- i —
1 '' -r— .... .| — . .
. .0 u3 co r-- c ^) , •. <~
O vo O ry r\i
6 E O
<_> a> E E u cj o E
U CJ O O O
1 "O fO CM 1 i — fO
OJM-i — i — CM O4-i —
i/)+->s_uDcr>i — ioi-i- vo
i — *
to CTi
0 r—
• •
r~^- * o
E 0
a
CM
i— CM
CT) r-H
1 1
ID O1
.
^-—
to O
_Q .
CU
J^~. ••—
u~>- — -
oj c
%; , — ,
" i
'^ 0 S--
TJ O
S_
T3 O) 4-
c 6 1^0
O Q- (O
XI fO 'U
OJ UJ
OO CO -< J
(/) ro i- TJ
UJ C^ *-^
^ X) O- ^ 5
Cl CD OJ O
V in ^ OJ
( ' i w i "" J
O) L: a'
c/> ^— c_ *-^
, — . ^x ., QJ
.-5 CU 4-5 c
OJ > ^
S- CU S-
3 QJ »
i — i — OO
•=C >• O 2-
4<
92
-------
CHAPTER 1TI
WILMINGTON, OHIO
SITE DESCRIPTION
Locati on
This study site is located east of Wilmington, Ohio,
approximately 72 km (45 mi) northeast of Cincinnati. Sludge
generated by the Wilmington Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP) is
spread on 22.7 ha (45 acre) of a 26.3 ha (65 acre) farm located
10 km (6 mi) southwest of the STP. Both the treated and control
plots are located on this farm.
Physical Conditions
The study site is characterized by very gently rolling
terrain (typically less than 4 percent grade) and is covered
with pasture grasses, alfalfa, and red clover. Adjacent
properties are in similar use.
Lake Cowan, abounding with a variety of species of game
fish, is located approximately 0.5 km (0.3 mi) south of the
test and control plots (see Figure 23), both of which slope
in the direction of the lake. The slope of the treated plot
is estimated to be approximately 2 percent, whereas the control
plot, on slightly steeper terrain, has a slope of 2 to 4
percent.
As shown in Figure III-l, the two fields are adjacent.
Both are 3.6 ha (9 acre) in size and the plots within are both
approximately 69 x 46 m (225 x 150 ft) (see Figures 24 and
25). The field designated as control has been excluded
93
-------
co
o
c:
o
-------
/ /
\ ('on t rol \ F i ol
L_
Corn
N
No Scale
Fiuure 24 Wilmington Treated Plot
-------
X
69 M
Dirt Road
— X <~~--7-- X
1
2
A >
M
I 3M
- I .-V
7
Gate
Fence-
No Scale
N
Fiqure 25
Wilmington Control Plot
-------
from s ludqc a pp I i <:
-------
sludge distribution, however, were not maintained prior to
1968. In addition, records were not available on a field-by-
field distribution basis. Estimates were, therefore, made by
the farmer to determine the sludge application rates. Assuming
that the treated field in which the sampled plot was located
received one uniform coating of sludge per year and that sludge
solids have averaged 5 percent (STP data), the annual applica-
tion rate has been 6.8 dry m tons/ha (3 dry tons/acre). The
farmer estimated that this application rate has been reasonably
consistent since 1959.
Normal harvest patterns result in two cuttings annually,
the first in June and the second in September. The June and
September, 1976, cuttings yielded a total of approximately 650
hales from tho treated field and 690 hales from the control
field. These grass crops are used for beef production. The
farmer reported no adverse health effects to his cattle.
Fertilizer, Agrico 12-12-12, was applied to the treated
area during June, 1974 at 336 kg/ha (300 Ibs/acre). No ferti-
lizers have been used in the control field since 1971. Atrazine
has been used in the past on both fields when they were in corn.
Neither field has received lime for the last 10 years.
CLIMATE
The climate of the Wilmington area is continental with a
rather wide range of temperatures f^om winter to summer. Maxi-
mum precipitation occurs during winter and spring, with a
minimum during late summer and fall. The heaviest snowfalls
98
-------
usually occur during January, although the heaviest recorded
24-hour amounts have occurred during late November and February.
Summers are warm and humid. The temperature reaches 32°C
(90°F) or higher about 26 days each year. Winters are moderately
cold with frequent periods of overcast.
The freeze-free period averages 187 days annually, from
mid-April to the latter part of October. Additional meteorolog-
ical data are presented in Table 31.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
^£H^£§ L A211 _Ly_n§
Clinton County lies entirely in the glaciated region of
Ohio. The northeastern three-fourths is covered by medium-
textured drift of Wisconsin age which is more naturally fertile
than other parts of the county. The remainder is covered by
the much older, deeply loached drift of Illinoian age. The
I 1 1 i n o i a n til! plane is !n o w n locally as the P i n e- 0 a k Flats.
The treated and control plots have two basic soil series,
Fincastle and Xenia. The Xenia series is predominant and
common to both sites. Runoff from the Xenia soil is slow to
rapid. Vhe risk of erosion is moderate to high, depending on
steepness, lerui'- of -;lo)es, and the type of vegetation. Most
Nenid ".oil is ( liqhtly o' moderately eroded, with a deep root
.'>>!!•', a medium mo i stu re-supply i nci capacity, and a surface soil
inediu''! in orqanc matter. In the severely eroded soil, these
properties are less favorable for agriculture.
Iho Xenia series consists of light-colored, moderately
well drained, »ea'~ly levol to sloping soils on uplands. The
99
-------
Ill o o ry n o '•> r> O c
o
I—t
a:
o
O
t—
LU CO
I z;
< s:
03 j,
CD
C !
OJ ,
O
03 ;
CO
o
"co
y *
W) ?
o ,
o
0)
*->
O)
100
-------
U)
E
0)
X
LU
in
C
TO
O)
S
O
Z
101
-------
soils have developed in 46 l.o ]()'/ < m (IH to 40 in) of loess
overlying medium-textured, calcareous till of the Wisconsin
age. Carbonates occur at a depth of 76 to 122 cm (30 to 48 in).
The native vegetation consists of ash, elm, maple, and other
deciduous trees.
A representative profile of Xenia silt loam as mapped in
the Clinton County Survey, September, 1962, is described as
fol1ows:
0 to 20.3 cm (0 to 8 in) - dark grayish brown, friable
silt loam; moderate, medium and fine, granular structure;
medium acidity.
20.3 to 27.9 cm (8 to 11 in) - dark yellowish brown,
friable silty clay loam; weak, fine, subangular blocky
structure; strongly acidic.
27.9 to 48.3 cm (11 to 19 in) - dark brown to yellowish-
brown, firm silty clay loam; moderate, fine to medium,
subangular blocky structure, strongly acidic.
48.3 to 61 cm (19 to 24 in) - yellowish-brown, firm
silty clay loam; many medium to fine distinct mottles
of brown to grayish-brown; moderate, medium to coarse,
subangular blocky structure; medium acidity.
61 to 86.4 cm (24 to 34 in) - yellowish-brown, friable
clay loam; many fine, faint mottles of brown and dark
yellowish-brown; weak, medium, subangular blocky
structure to massive; medium acidity in upper part,
gradually changing to neutral or alkaline in lower part.
102
-------
86.4 to 12? cm (34 to 48 in) - mottled yellowish-
brown to grayish-brown loam till; massive (structure-
less); calcareous.
The Fincastle soils are associated with the very poorly
drained Brooks tone, the moderately well drained Xenia, and the
well drained Russell soils.
The texture of underlying till ranges from loam to silt
loam. It is seldom leached of carbonates where the overlying
loess is 91.4 cm (36 in) or more in thickness. In contrast,
carbonates may be leached to a depth of 122 cm (48 in) where
the overlying loess is less than 91.4 cm (36 in) thick. On
trie terminal moraine, carbonates may be as deep as 183 cm (72
in) from the surface. This extreme variation can occur in
short horizontal distances.
Runoff from Fincastle soils is slow to medium in nearly
level areas and medium on gentle slopes. These soils have
moderately deep root zones, a medium moisture supplying capacity,
-nd a surface soil that is medium in organic matter.
A representative profile of Fincastle silt loam as mapped
in the September, 1962, Clinton County Soil Survey is described
as follows:
0 to ?0.3 cm (0 to 8 in) - dark grayish brown, friable
silt loam; moderate, fine, granular structure; medium
to slightly acidic,
20.3 to 35.6 cm (8 to 14 in) - yellowish brown, firm
silt loam; many medium to fine distinct mottles of
103
-------
brown and grayish brown; medium, subangular, blocky
structure; medium acidity.
35.0 to 91.4 cm (14 to 36 in) - brown and dark yellowish
brown, firm silty clay loam; medium, distinct yellow
brown mottles; moderate, medium subangular blocky
structure; medium to slightly acidic in upper part,
grading to neutral in lower part; small weathered
pebbles of glacial till in lower part.
91.4 to 122 cm (36 to 48 in) - many light brownish
gray and dark yellowish brown mottles, friable loam
till; massive in place; calcareous.
Treated Plot
The treated plot is characterized by soils of both series -
Xenia (XeBl) and Fincastle (FnAl). However, sections 4 and 5
as shown in Figure 24 were the only two sections to contain
the FnAl soil. The observed sampling to 122 cm (48 in)
followed the profiles of each soil series as described above.
Cp_n_t_r o j Njrt
The control field contains soil of the Xenia series -
XeCl and XeC2. The two types differ only in slope, the XeC2
being characteristic of the more severely sloped terrain. The
sampled plot was staked out to avoid the XeC2 soil type.
Samplings tn 1?? cm (48 in) were observed to follow the Xenia
profile as -described above.
Textura, pH, and other soil data of the treated and
control plots are shown in Table 32.
104
-------
Si
"""
^
i., _j
\. —«
n
-
»
^
jj
1
.^
^
»
f.
-
1
~i
'fc
o
0
.^. 5
,.0 _l
_,
'a 1^
J n
i a)
ij
— •
~^
x a
LJ Z
n51
•i a
<* ID
J3 cr
§^
i
, t"
-o
^s
-- --••'
O Q
-^J UJ
X 0
U)
a o
i) O
-
'
X.
^
t
*
^
OOOOUD OOOCDO
roroooro oooorooooo
,n u -i > 4: •*- ^ •-• - °
' * [I " * * ^ ]
_ (- 0 ^ \3 CO X/ ^ — —
^.-xjo-o :z '-> z ^ -^ ^ ~-s
r-> f^ y- ./;• o ^ -^ - 0 g
^>^JOO _?j?^C-c'
crij^-ojocvj ^Loor^-in
r-«ojrororo r-«c\iroo4CM
1*0 xt t^ oo N \D CM *-< ro to
r^- \o u"> to >^ f^vo^ovoin
rojNOOsi»-i oroo^oo
r-* rH CM •-» *-t •-* OvJ
O xf <± >± CO •-* CTi P") N C\j
^£>i^) \o if) ro c\j
-H O O O O •-* 0 O O O
o^\Dco i i ii
. ^ oo o rt i-i -, rl m o r-i <-<
^^'i-trovocTi ~ *-* ro voc^
:x O
tJ
105
-------
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
The STP currently (1976) serves an actual population of
10,000 and a population equivalent of 19,000, When the plant
was constructed in 1936, treatment consisted of grit removal
and primary settling with discharge to Lydall Creek. In 1953,
the STP was upgraded to secondary treatment with construction
of secondary aeration tanks, a secondary clarifier, and an
anaerobic sludge drgester. In 1953, the plant was further
improved by increasing the capacity from 3,800 cu m/day (1 mgd)
to a present capacity of 7,600 cu m/day (2 mgd). The superin-
tendent (also the farmer of both the treated and control sites)
estimates that there is a sizable but unknown flow resulting
from infiltration.
The STP utilizes a conventional activated sludge process.
Influent to the plant is comminuted, passed through a grit
removal system, preaerated for about 20 minutes, and settled
in three primary settling tanks. Primary effluent then enters
sludge aeration tanks with an average detention time of approxi-
mately six hours. The mixed liquor is settled in secondary
clarifiers for about two hours. Secondary effluent is given
ccntact chl orinati on prior to discharge to Lydall Creek. No
chemicals or additives other than chlorine are used. Table
33 presents treatment efficiencies for calendar 1975.
An estimated 25 percent of the flow to the STP originates
from industrial sources. The major contributors are:
106
-------
CO
CO
UJ
_J
CO
vo r^* LO CD o
«=J-VOLOl — LOOLOCMLOUPLOLO
CO CO CO CT) CTi CT) CD CT) CT) CD CD CD
LocooLOi — r--uDcoi — COLOCO
COUDLOCMLOi — LO^J-^)-CO'^-> —
OOCOCOCTiCTtCTlCDCDCDCDCDCD
CMU3COCOUDCOLT>! — IJDCDOOO
«^- >, . 4-> . . .
EJDS-S->,Cr— C7>CL-M>O
n3O)fCQ.f0333CUOOCU
rau-szeCZioocCc/ioza
co
CD
CM
CD
00
00
CO
LO
CD
CD
CD
nj
i-
co
107
-------
I ndu f> t ry P r qdjj c_t_
Randall Company Metal products
Cincinnati M i 1 1 a c r o n Milling tools
Erwinq Auger Bit Machined tools
International Paper Paper products
Lee Decks Electrical switches
Comptrol Hydraulic valves
Individual flow, waste strength, or heavy metal contribu-
tions by the various industries is unknown. However, the
Randall Company, a subcontractor to Ford Motors, supplies tail
pipes and door trim utilizing a zinc dipping process. This
company is required to pretreat their effluent, but the effec-
tiveness of pretreatment is unknown.
S 1 u d g e S t a b i 1 i z a t i o n and S t o rag e
The STP utilizes two-stage anaerobic digestion. Sludge
from the secondary clarifiers is returned to both the primary
clarifiers and the aeration tanks. Combined sludge is pumped
from the primary clarifiers into a 379 cu m (0.1 MG) primary
digester having a retention time of approximately 10 days.
Supernatant is returned to the primary clarifiers. The partially
stabilized sludge is pumped to a 834 cu m (8.22 MG) secondary
digester which provides an additional 20 days retention time.
Sludc/e, as needed, is withdrawn from the secondary digester for
landspreading purposes.
Approximately 95 percent of the digested sludge is land-
spread without dewatering. The remaining five percent is
bed-dried in one of 8 drying beds. Each bed is 12 x 24 x 0.5 m
i n •
i U .
-------
(40 x 80 x 1.5 ft). The dried sludge is offered to the community
as a soil conditioner on a first-come, first-served basis. In
addition, the beds offer extra storage capacity to the STP
during inclement weather.
On September 26, 1975, a Phase I grab sample of stabilized
sludge from the secondary digester was obtained, the chemical
analysis results of which are presented in Table 34. The
Pb and Zn concentrations appeared to be very high. No other
sludge analytical data exists.
Disposal of Sewage Sludge
Table 35 presents monthly sludge distribution records
from 1968 to the present.
The STP (based on 1968 to 1975 data) generates 1,627 cu m
(0.43 MG) of sludge annually. Assuming an average solids
content of five percent, the STP generates an annual average
of 81 dry m tons (90 dry tons).
Sludge spreading is accomplished via a 3.8 cu m (1,000 gal)
tank truck. The tank has been modified by the addition of a
61 cm (24 in) length of 10 cm (4 in) diameter pipe fitted to
the valve on the tank,' the other end is welded to a rectangular
baffle plate (refer to Photo 15). The valve on the rear of
the tank truck controls the rate of sludge discharging onto the
baffle plate. The baffle design spreads sludge over an area
approximately 1.2 m (4 ft) wide as the truck is driven across
the field. Each load is normally emptied over a path covering
approximately 230 m (750 linear ft).
109
-------
TABLE 34
WILMINGTON, OHIO - STABILIZED LIQUID SLUDGE ANALYSIS1
Parameter Concentrations2
Cd 15
Cu 394
Ni 35
Zn 49,700
Pb 8,670
Moisture (/;-} 94.6
Phase I stabilized sludge sample, September 26, 1975.
2
Data expressed on an oven dry weight basis.
110
-------
E
3
u
i — i
— i
nr
LU
CD
tn S
oo 3
00
LU Q
—1 t-.
CO ID
CM
CM
OO
^
i — '
CM
r^.
CM
1
f^
CM
•~
O
p^
CM
cr\
to
CM
00
UD
CM
-P
C
O
s:
i — r — i — CM CO CO i —
CMi — CMi — i — i — i — i —
LOr— •xJ-UDLOC^r- OOOOO
CT> C7t r*— CM CM LO OO CM
1— r— r- r— CM r-
?^co°SSocoS^[^M
1— i— •— CM CO r— r— r—
OIX>CMCMOr-lOCMlQUDV£>r—
, . +J
CJ3S-S- >, C i— CDCL+J>O
0^^<^^=<^C^^^
tn
^D
•V
CO
r™
r^.
O
**
r—
^
uo
»<
^
r>«
O
CM
«^-
1 —
LD
ro
CM
CM
t/1
'm
+J
°
111
-------
Ihe majority of sludge hauling is typically accomplished
during lalo ',|>rin
-------
Photograph 11
Treated Field
Photograph 12
Control Field
113
-------
Photograph 13
Drying Beds
Photograph 14
Sludge Spreading Tank
114
-------
Photograph 15
Close-up, Baffle Arrangement
115
-------
The Cooperative Extension Service of Ohio State University,
however, in conjunction with the Ohio Agricultural Research and
Development Center has issued Bulletin #598 entitled Ohio Guide
for Land Application of Sewage Sludge. On Page 12 of this
bulletin, under the heading of RELATIONSHIP AMONG AGENCIES, the
bulletin describes the authority of th<; Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency to regulate land application of sewage sludge
...from both state and federal laws:
"Sections 6111.44 and 6111.46 of the Ohio Revised Code
require that plans for all sewage treatment systems be
submitted to OEPA for approval. , pproval will be
based on whether or not the propo ed system will
pollute the state's waters, preset t a hazard to the
public's health, or cause a public nuisance. The
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of the U.S.
Congress also requires that an en' ironmental assess-
ment be prepared for any proposal which would recieve
federal funds. In practice, this means that plans
and, if appropriate, an environmental assessment should
be submitted to the OEPA. The OEPA engineers and
planners would then verify that the proposal is based
on sound engineering judgment and that it would not
cause significant water pollution or present a threat
to the public's health. If fede ~al funds are involved,
OEPA would also verify the cost effectiveness of the
proposal and consider t, n. overall environmental impact
of the proposal.
116
-------
"It. is important for landowners to understand that an
approved plan for sludge application does not remove
their responsibility for water pollution or health
hazards that result from the application of this
sludge on their land. Plan approval means that in
the judgment of the OEPA, the proposed system should
function satisfactorily. However, it is possible
that unforeseen problems might arise. In such situa-
tions that OEPA would give the landowner a reasonable
period of time to rectify the problem. Of course,
the landowner should also reserve the option to discon-
tirue sludge application on farmland in the event of
sucr unforeseen problems.
" 7 ru local health department would become involved
onl\ if a nuisance or health hazard situation were to
exi't. It is recommended that landowners contact the
local health department for guidance and support prior
to ? p p1> i n g sludge to their land."
I CONOMK'S
l\\'n pjnont Dcscription and_ Cp_s_t
In 1959, a 1953 1-ton Ford truck body was purchased and
fitted with a 3.8 cu m (1,000 gal) tank modified with the
pre\iously mentioned pipe-baffle plate arr?ngement. Costs
incurred for the original equipment modifications were never
reccrded. Funds for this work were taken rom the general
opetating budget.
117
-------
The original spreading equipment was replaced during June,
1975, with a new 1975 Ford 1-ton truck body purchased for
approximately $5,000. A tank, purchased in 1971 for $200,
was installed. Refitting costs were estimated at $75 for the
transfer of the tank to the new truck body.
Records of O&M, labor, and other costs directly related
to sludge spreading were never kept separately from other STP
expenses. The STP superintendent, was, therefore, asked to
estimate expenses for the years of re:ord. These figures are
shown in Table 36, but include only fuel and labor. Other
costs, such as repair parts for the truck, tires, etc. were not
estimated.
Table 37 presents a cost analysis or the sludge
spreading ope rat ion.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
SJjjd_g_e
On July 2 and August 25, 1976, f: ve or,2-liter grab samples
each of raw and stabilized sludge were obt lined from both the
primary clarifiers and the secondary :ludg>' digester.
Soil
On time 2 and 3, 1976, surface and subsurface samples
wore obtained from both the reated and control plots. As
show;; in figures 24 and 15, the treated and control plots
were divided into five sections. Approximately 30 random
cores from 0 to 18 cm (0 to ' in) were obtained from each
section with a 2.5 cm (1 in) diameter stail less steel split
tube sampler. Before each cere was taken, the ground was
118
-------
r-,
r-
cvj
en
cvi
in
oo
ro
O
00
01
L/
I-
o
CJ
X
o
O
o
O
CVI
cr>
o
CO
to
CTi
r-^
r— C
00 if)
CFi (X) ^d~ O '— LO CJ^
CO LO CVI LO CVI CO i—
i— cvi cvi i— cvi ro ro
-]
s_
O)
S-
T3
Q'
CTi
c
o
o
JD
-------
TABLE 37
COST FOR DISPOSAL OF LIQUID SLUDGE - 1975
Anrmal Cap_i_ta_l Cost
Vehicle Depreciation
197') Ford 1-Ton Truck cost: $5,000 $ 848
Stationary Equipment Depreciation 0_
Total Annual Capital Cost $ 848
Annual Operating Cost
Personnel • Ho
1
F r i n g
Vehic
Total
Total
10 Pe
Total
Tot
0 terator
urly Rate % Time Worked
$3.25
e Benefits (25 percent)
1" Maintenance and
\nnual Operating
Annual Capital an
r^ent Contingency
Annual Cost
a 1 Annual Cost
Operation
Cost
d Operating Cost
Factor^
$2,198
10 $ 650
163
337
$1 ,150
$1 ,998
200
$2,198
$26.92/dry m ton
STu ige Hauled Annually 90 dry tons ($24.42/dry ton)
Vehicle vas fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8 percent
interest, equivalent to $169.f8 per $1,000 annually.
r>
A 10 percent contingency factor is added to cover such items
as administrative overhead.
120
-------
< iearod of miscellaneous non-sludge debris. The sampler was
(hen inserted into the cleared area. Any miscellaneous non-soil
debris was discarded from the sampler prior to placing the cores
into sampling containers.
Subsurface soil samples were obtained with a 8 cm (3 in)
stainless steel bucket auger. At both the treated and control
plols, the top 18 c'i (7 in) cf soil were discarded from the
augcr. Samples obt ined from depths between 18 and 30 cm (7
and 12 in) were lab'led A-horizon; B-horizon samples were taken
between 30 and 61 c>' (12 and 24 in); C-horizon samples were at
61 to 91 cm (24 to !6 in); and D-horizon samples were at 91
to 122 cm (31; to 48 in).
Both surface aid subsurface soil samples at the control
plot were obtained in exactly the same manner as the treated
P1 o".
i'l ants
Samples of a I < >'fa were obtained by shearing the top 20 to
30 i m (8 to 12 in). Anproxinately 1 kg (2 Ibs) of sample
representing 20 different cuttings was obtained from each
sec,ion. Plant samples frorr the treated and control plots were
obt lined in an identical manner.
121
-------
Tables 38 through 44 present the following:
T a b 1 e
38 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
SIudges
39 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite
Surface and Subsurface Soils
40 Total Metal Concentrations in Individual
Subsurface Soil Samples
41 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and Plants
4? Molybdenum in Composite Plants and Soils
43 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
44 larasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants
45 Concentration of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and Plants
Figures 26 to 35 present particle size analyses of the
various soi! composites by depth.
122
-------
TABLE 38
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
WILMINGTON, OHIO
Vo'l Sol ids (';',)
N03 - N
NH4 - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
As
R
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Mo
Ni
Pb
>e
ii
)I20 U)
PH
Ml u its in ug/g (unless otherwise noted),
P11_ d ta expressed on oven dry weight basis.
123
7/2/76
54.07
26.3
13906
39688
51625
2738
2875
43000
10515
181
3594
4.06
1 .88
51 .6
14.8
3216
9.69
525
20938
2.5
316
49.4
40
1463
5.0
58063
96.8
7.4
8/25/76
50
1
6836
16404
19442
1481
1115
19731
3808
28
1904
23
7
1256
4
302
6346
1
185
41
12
750
3
• 33519
94
8
.78
.15
.8
.77
.38
.3
.69
.23
.35
.5
.7
.46
.8
.1
Average
52
13
10146
. 28046
35534
2110
1995
31366
7162
105
2749
2
1
37
11
2236
6
414
13642
1
250
45
26
T107
4
45791
95
.4
.7
.42
.13
.5
.2
.96
.93
.5
.4
.23
.8
-------
y>
DI/J
CO
-J
D
• :i Z ! i fu
•Si
! i
0
JLJ
LJ
5
If—
r
xo.
oo
_l
X
-T!
r j1
x /• ;? •-•
-- (T< rvi -:•
X> 0
O ~) X
QS •*}
n -\i
O- (V '\i r-, :?.
At 01 rc -"vi ,v
JT^ f> C.1 Cvi f*Ti
0s !^- Ifl >d —•
cT1 <$• n ^v* ij"*
>^ i •—* J\2 >O
-------
-JO
X
—> > o .
r \j v
JTs .7- *-
n > •*
r « •
, 03*
*-• X' ~
o -3- <*
••\JfV\l
-C- •O "- X? v r>
«x> \j X; —. -
• -« 7> *> •* \?
'U
•£< i
•5
X
uJ
A)
X.
X
•£• •»• n
« «' *
or-a
» • e
X» J* <*' *
zr
ir> o
« «. «
o .
^iX -G (V
r^-c- j> -r1
• • • *
S> if I u"! <»•
o o — •
-55
a°~
^ ro vo
o000
^ ^< m
-J
u
I I
•u uu
• 'uuu
N _, CM
CM ^- o f-i I-ICM
1 1
O^H
rovo
I ^J I I I i
•-* , 00 O «-H r-4
/>
-U
7)
-in
^ U UU
_, CM
i-O 'Hi-i CM
'-'PO vOd »-i
^ I I I I
• 000-H rt
,*-:•-< rovo o*
r>sszu
'n U U U
,. cvj
.•r o rt « cvj
U
r
i
_ i i i i
. , 00 OT-» rt
125
-------
.1
-71
• "5
x
o
<;
5
a
•4
2
-0
r\
•
-
w *>
•"> "M *- :c — • ~ >j •- -"-i ^ 3 t »> 1 «i •*> y .*-, "I
.-J O X" *> "O ~> 1 7* -i -~ ?< r> 7. -~ \J ''H
_. ;? -. ^ - ^ ^o 0 i ,0 =, - wti V-
o oj r: -3 ^ cr a* ;> - tr» z> ^> ^ ~> r -•
'J> — « I? ~ C> O O O —^ O *-^ C" O —*'"">
* *
•rf1 I \J
•-. ^ j c- J r^ 'j-i -• ...- c. a c V.JT,
"^ ^ s^ ^^ -^ 0^ f**^ J* f"*^ *0 *-"* iV O v!T *vJ
'V "vi v v 'v \J cvj A.* rx* 'M ru 'v x v
O C: .O — O ^> /*3 O O "£• ^i C1 i— oct*-rt— -r-^**^ ^ f^-cr^j^^^-i^nco''*)
C' * in ^ .c ^ .in- vi rxi rv ^ o- s, *t -<
X1 •»• , (V .t: :c T* :?• — « TO X1 C cri 3* ro a> o
••^ -•s -• -• o o .: o a o o o cs o =• c
y o o ^ o -> 2 -> si 3 .-> o a o -j
— i. o * — .T O L J ~LJ uJ aJ uJ ~fcj r~
x o
CO
in
i
o
M
UJ
a
o
*
z >
UJ _J
> z
o o
Z UJ
O f-
O CO
UJ 0
co a
CO 2
UJ O
a u
a.
X Z
UJ O
-------
TABLE 42
MOLYBDENUM IN COMPOSITE PLANTS
AND SOILS
Wilmington, Ohio
Treated Plot Control Plot
Plant
(alfalfa)
Soil (depth in cm)
0-18 2.00 1.97
18-30 2.63 2.60
30-61 2.98 1.80
61-91 2.53 1.80
91-122 3.25 3.10
127
-------
UJ
~
"
op ?
UJ 8
X o
o
Xq J9UI-J
Z
o
I—
o
U-
IS>
V)
z
0
a.
f£
O
LtJ
a
Ul
ad
S z
u
13
Q_
O
c:
!=
CM
CU
128
-------
Aq JSSJDOO
o
o
CM
o
10
O
10
o
to
o
o
CO
o
CD
o
o
s 8-
0
V)
LU ££
IH
Z ZO
U 85
COi's
£s§
Wfc°
§ 3
J o
o
o
o
CO
o
to
o
in
o
ro
O
CJ
z
o
H
O
U.
"""
C/J
c
o
•p
O5
c
'i
•r—
3
00
LO
O
r"H
•a
HI
fO
cu
s-
l-
E
o
o
CO
1
00
l/>
•r-
to
ai
N
oo
S-
ra
Q-
o
•r—
^r
o
c
o
C
•r-
e
CsJ
ai
3
cn
129
-------
Xq JSSJDOQ
X ™~
C3
s
5 •"
I
e 2
Xq
H
O
l-
0
L-
CO
<
o
«t
0
5
5s
0
z
6s
z
0
H-
CL
a:
o
Ul
o
Ul
"-d
sz
CT>
C
O
4^
Dl
c:
E
i —
5
UD
0
t-H
-o
OJ
to
O)
I—
E
0
UD
1
O
I/)
C/5
O)
ISI
OO
o>
u
t.
(X3
O.
CO
CM
O)
s_
130
-------
Xq
o
•c.
1 1 1
UJ
35
^ a
o ^
O —
-1".
o
Xq Jauij
o
1-
o
Z
O
a
K.
o
V)
UJ
a
UJ
SZ
(O
E
re
o
_i
>
o
oo
no
uo
CXJ
i— i
c.
o
c
•r-
E
•r-
3
CD
r--.
o
r— 1
"8
| *
fO
S-
tr
u.
131
-------
...j .. j . .
1 1
-i !
!
" " 1
" ; i
i i
_7ii:rr;
i
a. .
-
i _
i
i
i
-
--
-_„
--
_ —
--
~~
—
- .
. ..j
o
o
O
<7>
O
•»
O
tD
O
in
O
O
ro
o
OJ
o
o
i
O
1
o
u
co
o>
"l,
o
i ;
;
«
l
O'
t
3
0
> i "
i :
! .
•
(
* :
!
: ;
i '
i i
i
i
ni -]
»
s
i
1
QJ
S-
3
rn
32
-------
o
W 5M-
UJ "S -
•c-
Ul
J8UI.J
z
g
t~
o
ii.
CO
to
_i
o
o
v£
t-
to
a
6?
z
o
l-
Q.
K
O
V)
LJ
O
UJ
£L o
sz
OT
e
o
•r—
to
T— 1
UD
O
r-H
c
O
1 %
•f"'
a
c
E
•1 —
3
C\J
CNJ
O
i— 1
r_
O
c
0
o
cu
o
03
4-
^_
3
oo
(/I
co
cu
isl
O)
O
•i —
4->
S_
(«
OL.
JC
o
CD
C
CO
s-
3
CTI
133
-------
o
o
g
i—
o
ii
CO
_J
o
o
t-
5«
o
z
<
u>
;£
z
o
P
a.
2
Q
to
Ul
o
LU
_J
X 21
in
e
re
0
— 1
-M
OO
LO
CM
CM
10
CO
t— 1
c:
0
a
c
•r-"
p^
r—
5
CO
CM
O
1—4
1
0
S-
4-1
c
0
E
o
o
ro
i
CO
<— 1
O)
M
a>
u
13
Q_
O
c:
o
CXI
ro
134
-------
Xq
o
o
cc
W
UJ
06
n
ui 8?
o
i o
• o
g
i—
o
o
UJ
_l
°-6
s r
-------
o
o
o
i;
Z
UJ
gM
w?8
2:
g
h-
O
IL.
CO
CO
o
^
CJ
5
o
t/7
Z
O
a.
CK
w
Ul
o
UJ
0-0
sz
w
E
fO
O
1
4->
(/)
E
fO
0
_J
>,
03
r—
i —
•; —
CXI
ro
O
r-\
c
0
CD
•^
J
•i —
^
O
o
, —
o
c
o
o
o
(
a<
i
i— i
UD
CO
•I—
1/1
IT!
C
a>
KI
CO
ai
tJ
Q..
O
O
CD
c:
-------
Xq
O
Sh
in
g
t-
0
U-
_j
0
<
0
H
s?
0
z
u>
s?
O
O.
£C
0
to
UJ
Q
UJ
o-ci
5Z
CO
£
(O
O
l/>
LO
CM
LT>
LO
O
CM
c
O
4J
en
c:
>t —
E
r~~
5
S
O
i-H
'o
1-
o
o
e
u
CM
CM
t— I
i— 1
C*
H"
to
•I—
t/1
01
N
OO
OJ
O
O
O
+J
en
e
LD
CO
-------
IAUI.I 4 \
CliL OKI NATE-D HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
1$ SLUDGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
WILMINGTON, OHIO
Surface Composites
P ] a ri t
C o in p o s i t e s
I a b i1i2 e d Sludge
{ Treated
! Plot
Cont
Plo
rol ~"
t
t ' •-
. . . /*q / k q . . . .
1_ . . . .... __
<0.01 1
0.84
<0.5
99
.0.0?
,0.04
<1
si
7/2/76
<0.31
,0.63
* .1
1 566
< 0
0
<0
<0
-0
<0
<1
<0
.01
.01
.5
.4
.02
.04
.11
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
DDT
D1ELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
8/25/76
0
1
<
4731
.19
.35
.1
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Detection limits vary due to sample size, plant matter
interference, and instrument sensitivity.
138
-------
CO
I—
•z.
— 1
o_
Q
•z.
oo" 2
— I :r
* o °
5 °° *
LU co P
— 1 LU 5
< Q S
h- => g
00 jd
2: 3
)— H
OO
LU
h-
i — t
co
-M
^
to
O)
ce
sr
o
•1 —
4_J
Q.
•i — •
&~
O
to
0)
Q
O)
Q.
6
f^j
oo
O) O) CU CD
> > > >
ro fO fO T3
C7i cr> o> cr>
Ol CU CU OJ
,-— to" -— to
iO [^^ l^Q [^
i^-. ^-^ r^^ ^^.
-^. un ^ in
CNl OO C\J C\J
r^ oo t^- co
*^— ^ *-^^ ^^rf- V ^
CD CD
N N
•i — 'r—
r— t~—
•r~ *r-
CD f^ O (/)
CD 2 S (O fO 4J
"O "3 rtf +->•»-> C
r— ^~
CO Q.
CUd) CU CU CU CU CL) CU O> CU CU CU
>> >>>>> >>>>>
1 i i \ i ^ i \ i \ i \ i ^ i ^ i ^ I \ -i ^ i ^
O) CD CD O> CD CD CD CD -M C7V CD CD
CUCU CU oou c ooo
S- i— 1 O CvJ
-Ol— 1— O> O r— r— i— 1 O O)Or— r— CM
CUO UCOVOCTii — UCO^DCPli —
•MS-lraillllroilll
ro 4-> M-COOi— i— 4-COOr-r—
cu c in i-i — coiocn to s-i — covDcn
S- O r- 3 1—3
1 — O T- CO •!- CO
o o
co oo
139
-------
CQ
to
CT>
'
1
00
c.
CD
s_
•t-J
OO
rd
U
Ol
u_
s^.
o
•i —
o
CJ
na
OJ
U-
rtf
C"1
•i —
.c:
oo
«3
r-
io3
03111 J 1 1 1 J O*"A
^.^.\ OUMLJ.UUJ
-iA iirimriCr4 \ *\
***• «-4uuiiis ^cl
~ "TTn"~"B~
. *, ,.
Jr3(1 DUQ [t?3Qj_
^pa^Ld.uoD
^^pauuL-^uo3
^aAt^dainsaad
^96pn[$ 6
jad 6^0 L^^0!
D9i o i djiini
•¥"¥-K T" L *J
,} A i nHiuncT j i
r ~
^a/3pn[s 6
. ~,A t: jn , o« n ,
^^pa^.a[dui03
— . . — . . _ , —
^pauuy.1100
¥^aAL;dumsaj U"> O «d- O
i — CM (XI i —
CM i —
1 1 1 1 1
4141 4
4444 4
Q 0 Q Q Q
z: z iz zr :zr
i i i i i
4141 4
4444 4
Q a Q a Q
•zr- -z. 2: •z. z.
00 O
r^~ i — o.i i — i —
o o o o o
X X X X X
CTI oo r^ cc
CM OO O i — CM
, ,_ , , ,
CM CM CM CM
r~ co r~~ oo OJ
4->
CD JD _Q oo (O
en 3 3 its (Q 4-> ai
-0 fO (0 4-J 4-> C S_
3 Qi Ct: CO i/} ro 1 —
oo a.
4
4
4
o
X
CM
, —
4
4
4
oo
1
4
+
a
1
4
4
Q
^
o
'"o
X
uo
oo
Control
•"p"
oo 0
£ r
4-1 •
-^5^S
. J
OJ C
1
i- 0 i-
"O O
s_
5
c: o oo
O O- ra
"O T3 ~O
ai cu
00 03 t- "O
d> o Q-1
s- "a Q. •*-*
o. cu a> u
X to S_ 01
QJ 00 •*->
CU 00 ^
•*-» CL O
v . CL)
^ 5 -M c:
oo n3 O
CD to > C
s_ a> i-
3 OJ "
1 — i — OO
i~ ra JO Q
cC >• 0 ^
f— * *
If
140
-------
TD
CU
O
o
CQ
(J
o
4->
Q.
OO
i —
O
ID
Lu
O
O
(j
cu
u_
fT3
CD
oo
03
'oj
o
E
fO
oo
a
n opg
4-Jca
*p^id"K>3
**pauu LJ.U03
j^aA LQ-diunsa^d
*a6pnis 6
v/iad 6ug te4oi
j^pa^a [dwo3
jfjf.pauu LJ.U03
^aA L^diunsajfj
*a6pn[s 6
uad 6uQ [e^oi
**pa}a Ldui03
^pauu .141103
^aA L^diunsa^rj
^.a6pn[s 6
jiad BUQ LE4°1
^pa^ a [diuo3
**pauu LJ.U03
**^^
¥a6pnLS 6
uad 6aQ LB4°1
6pn[S 6 uad r
'
c.
o
•r—
CU 4-1
r— Q-
CL-r-
E i-
ro O
OO 00
Ol
Q
+ + + 4- 4-
+ + + + + +
O O O O O O
O O CO O O O
«^- cr> i — 10 co o
i — CM i — i — CO
14-4-11 i
I 4- 4- I I 4-
4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4-
Q r— r~- Q Q Q
z. i— CM z. z. z.
114-4-1 1
4-4-4-4-4- 4-
Q Q Q Q Q Q
•z. z. z. z. -z. z.
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 4- 4- 1 1
4-4-4-4-4- 4-
i * t * t * t ^ i ^ /~-»
'Z. Z. -Z. Z. Z. -Z.
s-^ oo oo
•^ CU CM CZD ^O CJ"> r > rjj 1,0
O+->cor-^"d-r^r-~ •(->;£)
^— 00 i — CMOOO OOi —
o o
Q. JL
0 E O
OCUEEEU OCU
O O O U (J
1 ~O 1C CM 1 i — rO
OJM-Oi— !— CM OM-
00+->S_COU3CTli — OOS-S-
i — ro 3 1 1 1 1 i — +-> 3
•r-QJoO CO CD i— r— -i-CGO
Oi- i — COVDCT>OO
oo i— oo o
4-
4-
4-
O
O
CO
CM
4-
4-
4-
IH
1
'
-
Q
'
'
4-
Q
O
•-
E
O
o
CO
1
CO
4-
-
4-
O
O
00
CM
'
'
4-
Q
Z.
\
•
4-
0
Z.
•
'
-
Q
CO
•-
E
O
o
CO
4-
4-
4-
oo
CO
4-
4-
+
2
1
1
4-
i
i
•
4-
Q
VO
O
0
CTi
10
4-
4-
+
O
O
CT>
n
CM
1
'
4-
Q
Z.
1
'
4-
Q
Z.
'
1
4-
Q
Z.
f^
-
O
CM
CM
on a dry weight basis.
power of 10 (i.e., 10^
as + or -.
results expressed
es expressed as a
'Al
*Va
-o
CU
t-o'
o <"
Q.-*-*
<" ^
^
s-s
•° cu
4-> c
5§
O II
^g
O ^
*
*
141
-------
CHAPTLR IV
SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI
SITE DESCRIPTION
L oc_a_t jo n
This study site is located southwest of Springfield, Mis-
souri, approximately 10 km (6 mi) from the downtown area. The
treated field is located to the west and immediately adjacent
to the Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP). The control
field if. located approximately 2.5 km (1.5 mi) west of the
Springf'eld city limits and 6 km (4 mi) northwest of the STP.
i' C°d i t i Q n s
The treated 12.6 ha (31 acres) is gently sloping (about 2
percent and decreases in elevation from west to east. As shown
in Figure 36, a draw runs through the pasture which carries
runoff to a small 15 m (50 ft) diameter pond in the corner of
the property
The location of the control plot is shown in Figure 37
The southern end of the control plot is located in the middle
of an 8.1 ha (20 acre) field. The topography of the plot is
approximately the same as that of the treated plot.
At the time of sampling, May 17, 1976, the treated field
was in tall fescue ( F_e_s_t_u c a e 1 a t i o r arundi nacea ). The control
field vegetation was a mixture of tall fescue and clover.
The water table lies an estimated 41 m (135 ft) below the
surface.
142
-------
(Control Site
- 6 KM
Trees
N
No Seale
Power Plant
Stack
Farm
House
Area
Phase I
Sampling Plot
Backhoe
rS a m p1 ing
Power
Poles
(TYP)
npaved Construction Rd.
85 Paces
i-
OJ
a.
o
c
rO
O>
Ol
CD
fd
2
O)
c/o
Figure 36 Treated Plot
143
-------
o lid r,o ! t i IK- RU .
• ?.5 kin
Gra
ncf St~.
! "I
ii!,! rn
' 1
,--- x- - -x -- x — -, -r ' —
Fa rm
n
vx~ 1 x"
), +f
(Gat'es
) 4
4_t_J
House
-
i
X
r 37 Control Plot:
-------
Farming Practices
Since sludge was first applied to the treated field in
about 1961, a variety of grasses and crops have been grown.
Various certified seed crops including barley, wheat, and milo
(grain sorghum) were grown from 1960 to 1964; and from 1964 to
1970, the field was in orchard grass. In 1970 the field was
plowed and corn planted. The following year soybeans were
planted, but the crop was lost due to wet weather.
In 1972 a mixture of wheat and tall fescue was grown.
From late 1973 through early 1976, the field was in fescue and
used exclusively for grazing cattle. Later in 1976, however,
the fescue was used as a seed crop which was harvested in June,
The field will be pastured again in the fall of 1976 following
an application of sludge and normal regrowth.
STP personnel have maintained sludge distribution records
since 1963. Assuming an average 3 percent sludge solids (STP
data), the annual application rate over the last 12 years has
been 15.8 dry m tons/ha (7.0 dry tons/acre). Table 46 pre-
sents the average annual application rates.
Historically, the control field has been in permanent pas-
ture. In 1971 it was seeded with a mixture of rye and tall
fescue. The rye was allowed to grow to a height of approxi-
mately 1.5 m (5 ft) and then cut and baled. In March, 1975,
clover was sown.
At the time of sampling in mid-May, 1976, the field was a
mixture of clover and fescue. During late May and early June,
145
-------
f Alii I /I I,
M'klNOH! U), MISSOUH1 - Ai'l'L I CAT ION RATtb
Year
1963
196S
1 9 6 f>
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1 9/4
197?
Total
Average
Dry Metric tons/hal
21 .
14.
8.
18.
1 1 .
21 .
13.
20.
20.
16.
12.
9.
189.
15.
5
4
2
4
8
6
2
8
2
9
9
0
0
8
•
Based on 3 percent sludge solids (STP data).
146
-------
1976, the clover took over and grew to a height of approximately
61 cm (24 in). In mid-June approximately 1270 bales of clover
were harvested.
In early 1975 a phosphorus-potash fertilizer was applied
to the field. Information on the exact type of fertilizer and
the application rate was not available. The height of the fes-
cue at the time of sampling was approximately 25 to 26 cm (10
to 14 in).
CLIMATE
This tableland area is practically at the top of the crest
of the Missouri-Ozark mountain plateau. The average elevation
of the city proper is slightly over 396 m (1300 ft) above mean
sea 1evel.
Normal precipitation is well distributed, the three winter
months normally being the driest. The distribution is consid-
ered to be excellent from an agricultural standpoint, and the
climate permits green pasturing the year round. Since 1935
the annual precipitation has exceeded 127 cm (50 in) only on
three occasions and dropped below 51 cm (20 in) only six times.
The average annual precipitation is 100.8 cm (39.7 in) based on
records from the period 1941 to 1970. Snow normally falls in
small amounts during all winter months from November through
March.
The average growing season is 199 days, from April 9 to
October 25. The mean average temperature is 13.4°C (56.1°F),
with a mean daily maximum of 19.5°C (67.2°F) and daily minimum
147
-------
of 7.2 C (45.0 T). Additional meterological data are presented
in Table 47 .
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Regional A_r e a
The soil from the treated and control plots and most of
the surrounding land is mapped as Britwater silt loam. This soil
is typically found on gently sloping (2 to 5 percent) ridge
tops of upland divides and stream terraces. Parcels of Brit-
water silt loam often include 5 to 10 percent Goss soil, 5 to
15 percent Viraton soil, and 5 to 10 percent Unnamed and Ponder
silt loam:.. The Goss soil is normally found on side slopes at
low elevations and the Viraton soil on smooth broad ridge tops.
The Unnamed and Ponder silt loams are on valley foot slopes.
The total of all these inclusions rarely exceeds 30 percent.
The soil of the Britwater series is typically deep, well-
drained, and moderately permeable, having loamy surface and
subsoil layers. It was formed in limestone residuum or thin,
old si1ty alluvium, or loess over limestone residuum under
deciduous f i rests.
A ref resentative profile of Brftwater silt loam (2 to 5
,'Pfront slope) "is characterised by the Government Conservation
Srrv i c c a c- f o 1 1 ows :
i5.? to ?2.9 cm (0 to 9 in) - dark brown silt loam;
moderate, very fine, and fine, granular structure; very
friable; few chert; few iron and manganese concretions;
medium acidity.
48
-------
1 — 1
o;
:D
O
oo
oo
H-t
£ s
«j
LU "
1 C1
CO —I
«=C LU
|— l-l
LU
03
•z.
Q.
09
Ml
*•-
a*-
S
>-
_
«
•0
"
?
s
s
„ ^
iri
1_
TO 3
O 1
•v. g
^" -i
c
t z
Z3 "
O-
0) f
.C j
1—
0
u.
xj
(S dfeBJOfty
nil (O 1U93J9(J
, _
_JT?.
i _
^^^ds afiej.iA^/
IJCIU
"~ uo,,-»J,a
.
>H -|
"° U
3H °_,
H °
,,0
inoi
91BQ
I— [
leioi
Bui, ooo
6UUB3H
IS^OT
8180
wan6,H
AN,uoW
™'Za
A,,0
|
•°.».~™~°: ~~".-.-.*. -
i _
J oooooo oooooo o
M~~ -~ 2
-
_ -.-. *
"*
'o-^o-o-oooo^-.-
f
^.^^^^t -< ^. ,-t ^. rf.
--- - °
o>n o «« o
r.
r M~^~._^-r~~^ir.
Z 10 ./) Z 2 U>
«r-r-o-~ ^r-^r-^i^ ' ^
""""" *
""'""'" •"0 •»«<•<«•<'
^ o -»• trt tn in' -^ o •«•
|--'~t-"" •-«•"'•'• «
o « a
-~i ,A~
J-»-« OO OOOO^-CO O>
o-* 00 00000^ -
,-. 00 00000* £
~« 0 O Z 0
s"""""1- "s""" ^
-•"•-•"-r -~i-*- j
^ ~=S SSS" S
ESPS" =S?S |
U-
^OJ^^^rg ^ _ ^ 3
_ . .
S5SSS£ SS?^S5 S
z: 03 oc of j- z _joo.i~>o *
149
-------
"O
o>
o
cj
i
U I
0)
E
0)
k.
•«-<
X
UJ
m
o>
E
i_
o
150
-------
DC
ZD
O
oo
OO
I—I
5 s
111 •>
—1 Q
CO _l
<: LU
*- z
-------
cu
3
c
8 i
en
•a
a>
E
a?
C.
m
0)
(0
E
i_
o
Z
150
-------
22.9 to 58.4 cm (9 to 23 in) - yellowish-red silty
clay; common fine, faint dark brown and reddish-brown
mottles; moderate, very fine, and fine, subangular
blocky structure; friable; thin, patchy, clay films;
few chert; few iron and manganese concretions; medium
aci dity.
58 to 84 cm (23 to 33 in) - yellowish-red and red silty
clay loam; strong fine and very fine, angular and sub-
angular blocky structure; firm; thin, nearly continuous
clay films; few chert; few iron and manganese concre-
tions; medium acidity.
84 to 114 cm (33 to 45 in) - red and dark red silty
clay loam, common, medium and large, distinct brown and
pale brown mottles; moderate, fine, angular blocky
structure; firm; thick, nearly continuous clay films;
few chert; few iron and manganese concretions; medium
acidity.
114 to 183 cm (45 to 72 in) - dark red cherty clay;
common, fine, and medium, distinct light brownish-gray
faint yellowish-red and pale brown mottles; moderate
fine, angular blocky structure; very firm; thick con-
tinuous clay films; 35 to 60 percent chert; common iron
and manganese concretions; strongly acidic.
Treated Plot
The soil sampled from the treated plot followed somewhat
the profile of Britwater silt loam. The presence of chert,
151
-------
however, ,i I .ill depth1, below I he I ir-.t 20 cm (ft in) in fide samp-
ling extremely difficult: - to Ue point, where, sufficient sample
((Ucintit IPS from the two lowest desired depths, 61 to 91 cm (24
to 36 in) and f) 1 to 122 cm (36 to 48 in), could not be obtained.
A trench measuring approximately 1.2 x 3.0 x 1.5 m (4 x 10
x 5 ft) deep was dug with a backhoe at the eastern end of the
plot adjacent to Section 3 (see Figure IV-1). The following
profile was observed:
0 to 20 cm (0 to 8 in) - dark gra> silt loam; many
grass roots; soft and friable; no rocks in ground.
. 20 to 41 cm (8 to 16 in) - dark gray silt loam grading
into reddish silt clay loam at the lower depth; esti-
mated 50 percent chert ranging from marble to golf ball
s i 7. e .
41 to 61 cm (16 to 24 in) - estimated 85 percent chert
ranging from 2,5 to 30 cm (1 to 12 in) in size; yellow
silty clay throughout surrounding pieces of chert.
61 to 81 cm (24 to 32 in) - estimated 75 percent chert
ranging from 2.5 to 30 cm (1 to 12 in) in size; red
c1ayey'materia 1 surrounding chert.
81 to 122 cm (32 to 48 in) - ebtimated 75 percent large
pieces of chert; yellow clay to silty clay surrounding
k, f; e r t .
i,ojijLr o 1 PJ ot
An examination of the samples taken from the control plot
indicatfd that the soil is of a similar type to that of the
15?
-------
treated plot. All of the soil horizons described above for the
treated plot are present in the control plot, although signifi-
cant quantities of chert exist closer to the surface of the con-
trol plot. At the south end of the plot the presence of chert
in the subsoil occasionally prevented sampling of the mid-
subsoil 61 to 81 cm (24 to 32 in) and consistently prevented
sampling of the lower subsoil. In the remainder of the control
plot, chert was present in quantities sufficient to interfere
with sampling only at the lower subsoil horizon.
Texture, pH, and other soil related data are shown in
Table 48.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
The Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP), opened
in 1958, serves an equivalent population of 164,000 (1976).
A second wastewater treatment plant operating in the city of
Springfield serves an equivalent population of 19,000 (1976).
As constructed, the STP consists of bar screens followed
by an aerated grit removal chamber, preaeration, primary
settling, aeration, and final settling. The secondary treat-
ment process utilizes the aeration tanks for nitrification
employing the Kraus modification to standard activated sludge.
Final discharge of treated effluent is to Wilson Creek.
In 1968, a lagoon was constructed to add tertiary treat-
ment to the system during periods of normal flow and to provide
rudimentary treatment of wastewater during periods of peak flow
153
-------
0)
£
11 f>
o
co i— oo i— o
i— CM r— PO i—
O
a -y> JTI
•3t" >.iJ '"'*
o
OCOUTC-O
oo CM -a- ON
—i O O O O
O»-'\DOO
jj j_ fVJ <-««-< CVJ
X fM
154
-------
^^
^
*r,
c
^-r ,"> f\j
_n
HI
U
8?
i/t r*> ~ in
-*•*£•£
-------
111 exi,os'. of plant r.opacity. By IT/3, I. JIM plant was consis-
t.r-ntly operating witti flows above design capacity. As a result,
(he priiu ipal function of the lagoon became one of primary
treatment of sewage flows in excess of design capacity before
discharge to Wilson Creek. To facilitate rudimentary treatment
in the lagoon, six 14.9 kw (20 hp) floating aerators were
added in 1973.
In the spring of 1975 ground was broken for an expansion
and modification of t n e S T P. Scheduled completion is for the
fall of 1977. When completed, secondary treatment will be
accompl •; shed using pure oxygen activated sludge. The system will also
include nitrification, gravity sand filtration, and disinfec-
tion of the final effluent by ozonation. Vacuum filters will
!•> e used to do water digested sludge prior to application to agri-
cultural land.
The design average daily flow for the S T P is 45,400 cu m/
day (12 mgd ) with a design capacity of 113,600 cu m/
day (30 nigf!'. Presently, however, the average daily flow is
approximately /5 ,700 cu m/day (20 mgd ), resulting in only
18,900 cu in''day (5 mgd) receiving rudimentary treatment via the
lagoon mentioned above.
The influent f.o the treatment plant is characteristic ot
domestic sewage, with an average BOD of 240 mg/1 and suspended
scl'ds (SS) concentration of 170 mg/1. Current discharge limi-
tations for the plant are 50 mg/1 BOD and 70 mg/1 SS. The 1975
average effluent BOD and SS concentrations, excluding that por-
156
-------
tion which receives only rudimentary treatment, are 40 mg/1 and
50 mg/1, respectively*
An estimated 15 percent of the average daily flow to the
STP comes from industrial sources, as shown in Table 49. The
principal industrial contributors are food processors and insti-
tutions such as hospitals and universities. None of the indus-
trial contributors have average daily flows which vary signifi-
cantly throughout the year.
Sludge Stabilization and Storage
Sludge from the secondary clarifiers is returned to the
primary clarifiers. Sludge drawn from the primaries is par-
tially stabilized in two primary anaerobic digesters, each with
4,160 cu m (1.1 MG) capacity. No chemicals are used throughout
the digestion process. The hydraulic design of the sludge
digestion system is based on the following retention periods:
Average (12 mgd) - 20 days
Maximum (16 mgd) - 16 days
Peak (20 mgd) - 24 days
Six drying beds, each measuring 30 x 15 x 0.6 m (100 x 50
x 2 ft) provide additional storage capacity. These beds, how-
ever, are used infrequently due to the high manual labor costs
for handling dried sludge.
On September 19, 1975, a Phase I grab sample of stabilized
sludge was obtained from the truck loading port of the secondary
digester. This sample was analyzed by conventional atomic
absorption techniques. This data and three other analyses per-
157
-------
TABLE 49
SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI - INDUSTRIAL FLOWS
Source
American Laundry Co.
Cox, Lester E., Medical Center
Drury College
Empi re Foods , Inc .
Evange I Co"! lege
Foremost Foods Co., Dairy Div.
French, R. T. , Co.
Kraft roods Co.
Kraft Foods Consolidated Ind.
Lily, ) i v. of Owens-Tllinois
M. F . A. , Packing Division
Mid-America Dairymen, Inc.
St. Join's Hospi tal
Southwest Missouri State Univ.
Syntex Agribusiness, Inc.
Hi land Dairy, Inc,
Total
Average flow (cu m/day)
210
880
420
180
420
660
300
670
1270
450
350
1070
690
390
1320
350
700
10,330
1 5 8
-------
formed at the STP laboratory are presented in Table 50.
Lead shows the greatest fluctuation, with a range from 707 to
Disposal of Sewage Sludge
Records of total quantities of sludge generated by the STP
from 1958 to 1962 are not available. However, records have
been maintained since 1963. The rate of application has been
fairly constant on the study site.
Spreading and hauling were relatively uniform throughout
1975 as shown on Table 51. Assuming 3 percent solids (STP
analytical data) an annual total of 1,815 dry m tons (2,000 dry
tons) is generated.
Essentially, all of the sludge generated by the treatment
plant is spread on agricultural land. A small percentage is
spread on drying beds and subsequently used by local residents
and the local golf course as a fertilizer and soil conditioner.
Two trucks are used continuously to haul sludge from the sew-
age treatment plant. Each is fitted with an 11.4 cu m (3,000
gal) capacity tank and a spreading bar for distribution of
sludge by gravity. At the farm the truck drives across the
field with the sludge discharging through the spreader pipe.
Each tank covers an area approximately 550 m (1,800 ft) long
and 2.5 m (8 ft) wide.
When the plant first opened in 1958, the operators experi-
enced difficulty locating farmers who were willing to have
sludge applied to their land. Several farmers were eventually
159
-------
TARN 50
I), MISSniJIM - V!/\BII I/M) LIOUIU SlUDGt ANA1YSIS1
Concentration
Parameter lest h Test B^ Test C2 Test D3
ug/g
Cd
Cu
Ni
Pb
Zn
Cr
Mo is tu ,'e ('.» )
ug/g
J2
816
1923
4710
1170
M g/g
43
532
125J
376(
1310
58 54
606 232
672
707 1940
3990 440
2020
98. 5
HNOo-HClC* digestions; Data e>pressed on an oven dry'weight
basis
Springfield STP Lab, dates unknown
Phase I stabilized sludcio sample, Sept. 19, 1975
16'
-------
TABLE 51
SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI - LIQUID SLUDGE HAULING QUANTITIES (cu m)
Month
Jan .
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov .
Dec.
Total
1975
2270
11400
7950
2650
5300
2650
6800
3800
3400
4540
4920
4920
60600
161
-------
//ersuaded, however, f,o use sludge, on d trial basis, as a
leriflizer supplement. After several years the farmers were
; on*' i need th-.it those «i pp i i ca t i ons were beneficial. Local
demand for 'he sludge has increased ever since. At the present
time demand exceeds supply. The result is that sludge is lim-
ited to farms within a radius of 6.7 km (4 mi) frorr the STP.
The sewage treatment plant maintains a list of farmers to
receive the sludge. Each farmer is alloted an equal amount of
sludge to cover 32.4 ha (80 acres). Assuming the farmer will
accept the alloted amount, the sludge is spreac . If the farmer
declines, the next name on the list is contacted and sludge
delivery begins at that farm. When the last name on the list
is reached, the rotation begins again with the first farm.
During no-.-haul periods slucge is stored in the digesters.
At the time of sampling, interviews with the farmer of the
treated plot and personnel at the STP indicated no known aes-
thetic or environmental problems associated with the sludge
spreading program. One potential problem, however, was dis-
rjssed which dealt with the pond near the treated field (See
f injure 36). The natural drainage pattern of the treated
i'; e1d is toward the pond which supplies drinking water for live-
•-tcck. Although water from the pond has nsver been analyzed,
' is conceivable that runoff from heavy rahis r^ul : .. ,n.' •'
Jisfoived constituents from prior sludge applications.
Photographs 16 through 19 show respectively the treated
plot, fescue on the treated plot, the backhoe exposure on the
treated plot, and the control plot.
-------
O
D-
t-~.
,_ T3
OJ
-C 4->
Q. fO
fO OJ
S- S-
Oil—
O
O O)
Q. U
Ol
Q.
fO -O
i- O)
O H3
4->
-------
01
-o
OJ
-C LL-
Q-
03 r—
S_ O
cr> s-
O -t->
•*-> C
O O
TD
I—
0)
-o
OJ
"-' Q)
S-
-C I—
Q.
(O »
S- J=
O1 O
O C
4_> O)
O S-
J= (—
D-
CU
O
-------
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
The Department of Public Works, the County Health Depart-
ment, the Missouri State Department of Natural Resources, the
local newspaper, and the STP superintendent were contacted to
determine public attitudes toward the use of sewage sludge as
a soil amendment.
When questioned concerning the public reaction to the
land spreading of sludge, the Public Works Department stated
they had never been questioned or challenged on this method of
sludge disposal. A representative of the Health Department
stated that the department believes sludge spreading to be a
desirable and acceptable method of sludge disposal. A tele-
phone interview with a representative of the Department of
Natural Resources indicated that they were aware of the sludge
spreading practice and were in the process of preparing guide-
lines for all such sludge applications in the state. Contact
with the editor of the local newspaper indicated that no
articles relative to sludge disposal had ever been written.
Despite this lack of publicity, local citizens other than
farmers are interested in obtaining sludge. The STP personnel
report that they receive several calls daily from individuals
who wish to obtain sludge from the drying beds for use on their
lawns or gardens. Before construction of the sewage treatment
expansion began, local citizens were usually allowed entrance
to remove sludge from the drying beds. Because of the con-
struction activities, however, this is no longer possible; and
165
-------
it is necessary for a plant employee to clean the beds and pile
the dried sludge in a location more easily accessible to the
public. As a result of greater labor costs required by this
procedure compared to spreading sludge on surrounding farms,
the availability of sludge for local citizens is currently
1 i ni i ted.
Some odor complaints from neighboring farms have been
received. However, these complaints are thought to result for
the most part from jealousy on the part of farmers who have not
been able to receive sludge from the treatment plant.
Interviews with local Soil Conservation Service personnel
indicated their awareness and acceptance of the sludge spread-
ing practices. However, it was noted that the limestone bed-
rock formations in southwestern Missouri are highly fractured.
As a result, contaminants may reach groundwater in some loca-
tions. Additional study and monitoring were recommended.
STATF AND LOCAL REGULATIONS
Representatives of the Solid Waste and Water Resources
Divisions of the Missouri Department of Natural Resources indi-
cated that there are no regulations or requirements pertaining
to the use of sewaqe sludge on agricultural lands. A disposal
permit is required if wnstewater sludge is to he placed in a
landfill but. not if it is spread on agricultural land. The
Solid Waste Divi.ioo is currently planning to develop guide-
lines for the application of sludge to agricultural land.
166
-------
In a separate interview,, a representative of the Health
Department also indicated that there were no regulations govern-
ing disposal of sludge to agricultural lands, and that the
department was aware of the current sludge spreading practice.
ECONOMICS
Equipment Description and Cost
A cost of approximately $10,000 was incurred in 1958 for
the installation of sludge spreading equipment. At that time
pipes were installed from the digesters to a location conveni-
ent for truck loading. Associated with these costs were labor
and materials for electrical controls to operate the sludge
pumps.
Two 11.4 cu m (3,000 gal) tank trucks are used to spread
the sludge. One is a 1969 Chevrolet purchased new for $12,000;
the other is a 1971 Chevrolet purchased new for $18,000. The
tanks, manufactured by Aero Tank in Springfield, Missouri, were
purchased for $2,800 each to coincide with delivery of the
trucks.
Operation and maintenance costs for the trucks are esti-
mated by plant personnel to be $0.25 per mile. Total combined
annual mileage for both vehicles is approximately 25,000.
Two plant employees are assigned essentially full time to
haul liquid sludge. The basic salary for these employees is
$8,000 per year, plus 25 percent fringe benefits. Additional
labor is needed for handling the bed dried sludge. An "average"
year was estimated to require approximately 60 man-days of
167
-------
manual labor f shove 1 i rig, raking, etc.). Table 52 provides
an analysis of the cost of spreading liquid sludge.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
S I u d y e
On May 17 and September 7, 1976, five one-liter grab sam-
ples each of raw and stabilized sludge were obtained from both
the primary clarifiers and the secondary sludge digester.
SpJJ
On May 17 and 18, 1976, surface and subsurface soil samples
were obtained from both the treated and control plots. As
shown in Figures 36 and 37 the treated and control plots
wore divided into five sections. Twenty core samples from the
surface 0 to ?0 cm (0 to 8 in) were collected with a 2.5 cm
(] in) diameter stainless steel split tube sampler. Dead
plant debris on the top portion of each core was discarded
prior to placing the soil core in a sample bag.
Subsurface soil samples were obtained with an 8 cm (3 in)
diameter bucket auger. At the treated plot the top 20 cm (8 in)
of soil wert discarded from the bucket auger. Samples obtained
from the de;ths between 20 and 41 cm (8 and 16 in) were labeled
horizon A; 41 to 61 cm (16 to 24 in) horizon B; 61 to 81 cm (24
to 32 in) horizon C; and 81 to 122 cm (32 to 48 in) horizon D.
Chert in the subsoil prevented the sampling of a D-horizon
sample from Section 3.
As indicated in I"i (jure 36 a trench approximately 18 m
(20 yd) from the south end of Section 3 and approximately 1.2
-------
TABLE 52
COST FOR DISPOSAL OF LIQUID SLUDGE - 1975
An n u a ]_ _C_ajpJijta_] Co s t
Vehicle Depreciation
1969 Chevrolet Truck: $12,000 $ 2,036
1971 Chevrolet Truck: $18,000 3,054
2 3,000-gal Tanks: $5,600 950
Stationary Equipment Depreciation^ ______
Total Annual Capital Cost $ 6,040
An
nua
1 Op
erat
i no
Personnel
Cost
Hourly Rate % Time Worked
2 Operators $4 1
Fringe Benefits (25 percent)
Vehicle Maintenance and Operation
To
To
10
To
tal
tal
Pe
tal
Tota
Annual
Ann
rcen
Ann
1 An
ua 1
t Co
ual
nua 1
Ope
Cap
nti
Cos
Co
rating Cost
ital and Operating Cost
ngency Factor^
t (Average)
st (Avg. ) $35,519
00 $16,000
4,000
6,250
$26,250
32,290
3,229
$35,519
$19.58/dry m to
Total Sludge Hauled Annually 2000 dry tons ($17.76/dry ton)
Vehicles were fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8 percent
interest, equivalent to $169.68 per $1.000 annually.
2
Stationary equipment was fully depreciated over 8 years
assuming 8 percent interest, equivalent to $145.56 per $1,000
annually.
3
A 10 percent contingency factor is added to cover such items
as administrative overhead.
169
-------
> {-0 x I.1, in (4 x if) x !- fl) deep w,i', durj wil.h «i b.u.khof (-,ee
f'lio I oqraph 17) to visually examine the various soil horizons
cind obtain ,ul
-------
Tables 53 through 61 present the following:
Table Description
53 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
Sludges
54 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite
Surface and Subsurface Soils
55 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite
Surface and Subsurface Soils - Treated
Plot Profile Samples from Back-Hoe
Trench
56 Total Metal Concentrations in Indivi-
dual Subsurface Samples
57 Molybdenum in Composite Plants and Soils
58 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
59 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
60 Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and
Plants
61 Concentration of Microbes in Sludges,
Soi1s , and Plants
Figures 38 to 47 present particle size analyses of the
various soil composites by depth.
171
-------
TABLE 53
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI
Vol atile Solids (%)
N03 - N
MH4 - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
Ag
As
B
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
t 0
He,
Nn
Mo
N i
Pb
Se
Zn
H20 (%)
pH
All units in p g / g ( u n 1
All data expressed on
5/17/76
60.37
100
58923
53154
8808
7154
10692
66308
7269
<154
669
1 .00
9.23
6C.O
55.4
2231
15.4
786
13462
7 .69
388
37 .7
336
6.92
8.15
3246
98.7
8.2
ess otherv\n's
oven dry w c i
9/7/76
58.04
<2.73
24691
32818
26000
3545
5272
52000
5409
68.2
9227
0.91
3.15
20.9
56.8
2627
2.73
859
13545
13.5
509
49.1
268
295
8.18
3364
97.8
8.5
e noted)
g h t basis
Average
59.2
51 .4
41807
• 42986
17404
5350
7982
59154
6339
in
4948
0.95
6.21
40.5
56 .1
2429
9 .07
823
13504
10.6
449
43.4
302
151
8.17
3305
98.3
172
-------
LO
£
«H
j^
f-
oJ
_J
-to
— uj
00
r JL. i
o
3
ti
•*»
rvi
"s
cn"^
_j
•c
UJ
s tp &
_j'~ ^
•or
»- S
1
=»
-
»•
I
, —
xa.
r— Ju,
oa
J
0.
"0 o o o
i ~. c- ^ o
., -, V -V, -H
• -v ^ — -
*-« ^C TV Ti — *
**) -H ^-H — * ~-€
•- Zi •*• — 'V
^. Xt <}• Si — i
;c -« - - ^>
C** -~*t O O^ "J5
o o o o a
0 i 0 30
:v ^s :2 ^ r-*
C — •» if! JC jTl
•» ;X f\j "\j t\i
os j: > o
os -^ ^ rG r^
O •? w* £* ft
-1
y- fy ^ ^ ;r
cc as s- cr in
rvj "vj -* rn ro
in - f- = —
o -*> in r> o
i— t — « r-» ?V r-<
i«~ t^ r\j n r-
—i v. & -s r-
r-» o o cj a
• • • 2
• UJ S S S U
U O O rH rH rH
X CM •* c -<
^ X - ^ -H
T- — r- JT "^
* _ 4 .Jx TS J-
- -. ^ ^ 0
,.0 T^- ^Vl C& -^7
•n x. rj 7- n
^— . i ^ / — , __^
r«— -. VJ. ^^- _J ^~^
-» 3* - 0 0
—« o ^ o o
300^2
2 O O 3 O
~ — S r-t £. r-w
-^ - -a x <*
a- rvi -* .— s*
•— « rv rv *\£ "*i
* n o ^vi o
co
-------
'V J
y>
r" to
IT _2
yj
•a u. >—<
U U.
_• -3 O
< L. r
fv
•s<
i/i
Z X
5 \
a.
>i- *vi x —•
•—« *™« o
O -> —
ru
r,
-------
D ^
Uw>
U
O
,/T
3
l/J
y>
LO »-<
< 2 •-*
1/7
<
*V
fc—
OJl
f—
o
: r
•a
JO
O DO
o
o
_!
v
r
uuu
ouo
uuo
: so
u o u
_4-3"vOCO'-< »_4-' »_,-< _4<)'vOCO»-< —«-d"VOOO--<
t-l III t-llll _llll ,-1111 ^_llll
^jO '-I r-l'-l j_jO--H«-l«-l ^OfHi-li-1 ,^_jO>-<«-ll-l 5_)O'-l«-liH
^jOJ-^^OOO t-jCM^vOOO .iCM'^'^OCO ujOJ^d'iO.CO aJ^*-
y> y> -ft 'j\ ~f>
175
-------
TABLE 57
MOLYBDENUM IN COMPOSITE LAND AND SOILS
Springfield, Missouri
Treated Plot
Control Plot
Plant
(fescue)
Soil (depth in cm)
0-20
20-41
41 -61
61-81
81-122
pg/g
0 .84
0.67
1 .90
2.58
1 .79
2.65
2.93
2.00
2.17
1 .90
2.99
3.26
176
-------
i
r
(XI
X> T> ";
•n x "•,
v x1 v
z
AJ —
\i -n ,0 v
ro
_>
'V
-T! :> xC X
ru
xi o —, _n -j
xi x c xj \i
.n
!/)
LO
O
J) ^
Si CM
AJ
ro 0s >?• ^
' ' \i / —
X J>
•* n
V X
o or;
— Si
z.
-r iT.
~ ~ ^ 'X -j- co i
z o
a en
•*- X' Xi
CM
•r- o.
AJ ro
TV
•X-
— O X1 CC
— -X —• — ;
X' AJ V X
Si
.XI
ri _*
^- X A
S^ X Xi'
X'
rv A. rv
j- x
TJ
i
i.
— x>
,0
s>
jj J .0 vO
a:
^ Si
77 £ /J ' — ~~
-t X
177
-------
V)
/q
Z
o
o
u!
w
CO
o
%CLAY
5
o^
Q
z
v>
z
o
p
o.
OESCRI:
tut
O. Q
£
re
C
O
cv
c:
cv.
T3
Ol
•1™"
drinaf
tf
un
I^J
Treate
o>
o
3»
tjft
in
in
r—-
ro
IS4
O>
u
•r-
•M
i_
Ou
O)
<*-
D1
i.
O.
c/i
CO
ro
s-
3
-------
Xq
o
CO
to So
CC 5*
92 y
rH
^-1
1
0
H
E
u
1— 1
1
o
CM
01
•r—
(/)
>
fO
c
-------
JSSJDOQ
o
o
f.q
o
J-
o
0
t-
s?
o
Z
DESCRIPTION
U)
-i
•4
£ oo «
DC 32 •;
Bsa s
Sil ! i
o§i ? •;•
_— a "" 5 u
^5.^0 " 3
W 8s a s
m ?"^ §
W^ '- C(j -•
f 1 < z o
h; So «r
f/) i- O 5
w-' w c:
s
E
a)
C
£
un
c^
LTJ
m
r—
OJ
•r-
<+-
C
c
•f-
i-
q
(/
t--
r—
fc-_^.
mil
Treated i
1 III °
•Mil
PT
f
if
1 1
!1
X
;j
•<
Cl
•J
r
D
£
o
r— *
1
r— f
o
^r
1/5
(/)
-------
Xq
CO
Xq jsui-)
o
h-
o
u.
C/)
,
fO
o
CO
ro
a
C-l
-o
'oi
•I —
M-
Dl
S_
Q.
CO
CN1
0) E
IT 5
tu j
LU '
z =
C3 £-
z -.
UJ J
tO •;
o
wl
II J
CWI1
j-, i
Q o:
?1
3>5
< 2
, UJ
5 2;
O — '
tl
-0
/)
F
Hvi
C3
o
i — t
CO
1
I— 1
to
£
?•
r>
*^
.j
s
Ol
N
on
a
181
-------
Xq
o
1—
o
u.
CO
W?
c^
o
_J
o
h-
z
U)
z
0
ESCRIPl
Q
U
-1
Iz
2
8?* S
w 5«i i
w »a - o
— ^ O 2 J u.
~~ ' Q ^ ~ 5
C3 < z ^t i
.^" Z o " ^
"J 85 3 I
CO -J x
8ii o-
8sss i •
13
U^
|UJ o
AMM
H^
III
III
III
III
^wr
X
u
V
o
-.3
;r
O
"
E
(O
o
^
fO
r"—
-M
•i—
oo
g
r-t
"O
"cu
•r—
M-
O>
C
Q.
CO
^J
I
CP
fH
H
E
O
CM
CM
r-f
CO
10
CO
"3
cu
N
• r—
oo
U
o
s:
T3
O)
cn
c
•r—
t.
Q.
CO
CU
i-
LL.
182
-------
(q6ia/v\ Aq J86JDOO
"i 06
CC sS
LU 5.;
UJ.no:
O
CM
S
CO
-a
"QJ
4-
C71
C
• 1 —
s-
QJ
CO
LO
l£>
, —
O
-M
o
t_>
O!
o
n3
i^
S-
3
l/j
I/)
co
(O
C
o
s-
(O
Q-
-o
i—
O)
C.
CO
CO
O)
S-
en
183
-------
o
o
If)
-9
o
z
(O
S?
z
o
a.
K
O
u>
ta
a
1U
Sz
£«6 H
CC a?
mi. ?-
UJ 88 §
*"* ^x UJ "» O
2 is 2 5
,,„ < 5: ? <
7Z Q« s ".
^S5 » 5
Z =; o « 3
ujss a •
80
*S S o c
ws° ^
r>
^^^^^^^^^ o
^^^^•^^^^^^ CJ
^H ^^
^^n P^"
(•I III
III III
III III
I • 1 III
[•jm
LrlM
E
rt
C
4.
r—
"i
re
C
%
O
•r-
CXJ
in
<~o
CO
-o
'cu
4-
C
C
• r~
a
to
s
r_
O
i-
1 *
C
0
o
o
1— 1
*^t"
1
o
OJ
r
CJ
<
m
3
£
O
-J
•^ §
in
to
r—•
ra
•a;
a;
ai
r—
•i—
s-
Q-
O
s:
-o
cu
cr
c
o.
oo
OJ
S-
CT.
U_
184
-------
o
o
CO
o
,\ fq
g
h-
o
Lu
CO
CO
o
f
CJ
55
O
z
o
s°
z
o
i-
n.
r;
o
1*1
o
UJ
X 2:
UJ w£ - S
— , n JJJ 2 u:
i£~ '•*' ^ «» -'
D« V ".
< •f- ~. T
-— tt UJ J! o
at.. '•**- o °« ^
i • | O ^ ;j o
\\J( O ^ ***
coi'i " 1
0
- - 0
RM
i
CM0
li
i
-------
CO
LU
CO
O
CO
'•f. a
35
Xq
o
I—
o
[1
CO
f/1
^
_J
o
o
l-j
o
en
z
O
p
a
5
ul
a
UJ
ZZ
tn
E
rd
O
_J
>^
cd
i —
•r—
OO
UJ
ro
CNJ
i — 1
"O
•r—
O)
C
si
a.
65
ts*
f^
o
c
o
g
t-H
CO
1—4
to
•r"
I/I
ro
cu
•i—
oo
CD
rO
CL.
TD
-------
o
o
CO
Xq J9ui-j
IM «
s~
187
-------
TABLE 59
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUDGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI
Treated
Plot
Control
Plot
/tq/kq
Soil
Surface Composites 0.08
<0.02 ]
<0.02
73
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
0.12 DDT
<0.02 DIELDRIN
<1 PCB 1221
1 PCB 1248
Plant
Composites
Stabilized Sludge
<0.01
<0.02
0.16
0.11
(5/17/76)
1 .54
114
.01
2846
<0.02
<0.02
(9/7/76)
<0.26
<0.09
<.01
5Q87
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Detection limits vary due to sample size, plant matter
interference, and instrument sensitivity.
188
-------
00
h-
2!
1 —
^
(/)
CD
CC
£Z
O
•r—
4->
Q.
•r—
S-
0
CO
CD
!
CD
!
cx
E
T3
00
E
03
S-
CD
fO
0
o
V
i
co
•i —
c
rO
O
n3
03
E E 0
it! rO O
S_ S- X
CD CD O
fO *
> > -o
O O C
fO
0 0
LO LO CO
CD
v v -6
1 1 O
CD O -r- > >
C C 4-> -Q 4-> -P
Tj O3 fC3 E O3 O3
O O CD 3 CD CD
CD r— CD CD
n3 n3 2: 2: 2:
S~ S- CyO
03 fO -i—
O O S-
O O rt5
XX O
O O CO
1— h- S- 1
CD r^ f^ f^j 4_>
CD2Sn303-l->aJCcO
"On3 (T34->4-> CS-Oi —
rsdiDiOOOO (d 1— O -r-
i— r— O
OO Q. OO
CD CD CD CD CD
> > > > >
4-> -l-> -4-> 4-> 4->
03 fd 03 03 fC
CD CD CD CD O)
CD CD CD CD CD
2: 2: 2: 2: 2!
CO
CD
+->
CO
O
a.
E
O
<~-3
•^
E S-
E E E 0 +J
ooo c
CM O
CD i— r— i— r\J O
O ^i~ CO CO i~~
fO 1 1 1 1 1
q- o f— f— i—
S- CM -vj- CO 00 CO
oo ••-
0
00
j
(U CD CD CD ^
> > > > > '
+J 4~> +J -)_> 4_> ;
fO 03 rt5 n3 "rj
CD CD CD CD (,T
OJ CJ CD CD JL.
2: 2: Z 2: 2:
'
;
1
1
|
j
j
i
|
E
E E E o
o o o
CM
CD i— i— i— CM
O ^3" CO CO r—
(T3 1 1 1 1
Cj C — ^ , ^— /«—
S- CM •vf CO CO
Z5
oo
189
-------
LU
_J
CQ
CONCENTRATION OF MICROBES IN SLUDGES, SOILS, AND PLANTS1 - 1976
SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI
Fecal Streptocci.
E
O
«*-
•r—
f —
o
u
cu
u_
"cu
CD
•t —
00
Salmonella
^p9^9[d(U03
**pauu J4U03
«aM,dmS3Jd
¥a6pn[s 6
jad 6^0 L^0!
wpa,5ld«3
Hp~W«03
..a,.L»d,nS8Jd
Ji;a6pn[5 6
uad 6uQ I6^°i
«pSWl*o3
^^,patuuLj.uo3
^Htasa.d
jad BJQ lB4oi
..pa^tdu.oo
«pe«uUuo3
tf.if.dh L^diunsaUrj
¥a6pn[s 6
jad 6uQ Le4°I
a6pn[s 6 uad
:peg Diqouav IE:J.O_L
c
o
•r-
r— Q.
O.T-
E S-
m u
OO »•"-«. LO en cu o
ur> CH +j s.
cu JD .a co ra 4->
cnXXfOra -UCUC
•OrarO+J+J Ci-O
30:0:0000 roi— c_>
oo ol
-=1-
V5 CD
1/1
ro
_Q
-M
-E •
Cn~
O)
O) O
O S-
o
O) +
OW
CX fC
"O 03 "O
CU CU
to to 4~> '
to ro S~ ^->
CU O OJ
S- T3 Q-40
o. cu cu 'J
x to 5- QJ
a> to -*r
cu to _g
•*-> Q. O
.- i^* CU
r— ^s »r~ T;
to re °
CU to > c
"•Si «
^«^o
<£. >• O ^
r— * *
*
90
-------
o
u
C)
4-1
fj.
o
it-
0
ro
OJ
LL.
ro
CU
0)
<"!o
ra
' —
cu
1 *•
o
--
m
t/)
qoeg
,|)C)],»L(1UI(V)1
'1^1 i ( 1 1 M ( V"\
•v ^-i j J
— — _ _
^eAiiduinsajd
. , ,
^v)f;pii[5 5
jar! IUQ I'qoj
,,|Kr,otd,uoo
t 1 ~il II 1 1 t 1 I r\f"\
^.sf |Jc»UU LJ.UUJ
J^BA Lqdumsajfj
JBQ i)jQ .Epoi
^ i-ps^o | diuo'j
^^petuj JUOQ
_ _
.v.oALI.lPinS.U.i
r n .' 1
i i '! ' 1 >
,^ cH ! i )J( 1 ) i ( * i ( ) \
V / , i 1,
i v paqa l fiiuon
' '
.__ —
^ . [JoilU LJU03
-
.* ^t1''1 1 1 Oli!nS9-lr|
^ obpnjs b
..Ofi fUf) j l?10|
jpri[s' ^ jad l
DLrcuay Le4oj
c~
o
OJ +->
r— i^
il. T-
[-. i-
ro C_)
C/) ^1
CJ
i i l -1 i 4 -t 1 i i
1 1 + + ! -t + 4 1 1
+ + + + + + + ++ +
f2^gLng o^S^i?
ro
i i i i i + i i i i
i i i i i + i i i i
+ + + + f + + + + +
QQQQQ -QQQCD
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
+ -+ + + + + + + + +
<~i i_j o n a o Q ca a o
- " - ' --'*" *^" ^^ *-^" *2T ^^* ;^ ^^
" " ''"""'"""'" '
i : i l l ! 1 l i i
i l 1 l l l 1 l i i
+ 4 + I- + + + + + +
cj n a o a a a a a a
'- ^2-2:z2:
^ " j1,' ro "5 -rj- CT, CXI ^ VO OJ CO CO O
O •<— ••.,_•••• i
0 r— O r—
c^ O
t E
o E 0 fc
i J Cl) t: £r E: CJ C_> CU £: £f &: O
U O O (_) O O O O
i "o ra cxi i i — ra cv
C> M- i — i — r— CXI O M— ' — i — i— CXI
r — ro rs 1 1 1 1 i — -4-> 3 1 1 1 I
•r-- d) C/) O 1 1— 1 T— C U~l O 1 1 1
o s~ cxi *vf to co o o cxt <_" vo co
OO h - C/) t_>
.
CO CD
•r— r- -
CO
ra
_Q
cu
C~ •!—
D1 — •
cu c
1
S- 0 S-
"O O
s_
ra O) +
C O 00
O Q- 03
~O ra "O
cu cu
CO CO 4->
CO ra i-
S_ -O Q.
O <1> (1>
X CO S_
CU co
O) co
4-i n o
1 X T-
rs ai 4->
CO ra
CU CO >
i- CU S-
3 0)
i — ra -Q
«=C >> C5
r— * -X
191
-------
CHAPTER V
CHIPPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN
SITE DESCRIPTION
Location
This study site is located approximately 8.0 km (5 mi)
southwest of downtown Chippewa Falls, a small, rural town in
northwest Wisconsin. Chippewa Falls is about 19 km (12 mi)
northwest of Eau Claire and about 515 km (320 mi) northwest of
Mi 1waukee.
The treated (sludged) and control plots are located on a
single 72.9 ha (180 acre) farm and are separated by a distance
of approximately 1 km (0.5 mi). The Chippewa Falls Wastewater
Treatment Plant (STP) is approximately 8.0 km (5 mi) north of
the study site.
Ph^si cal Condi tj_on
The fields in which the treated and control plots are
located are, planted in soybeans (Glycine soja) and are located
on level terrain. Figures 48 and 49 show the locations of
the treated and control plots within their respective fields.
Adjacent farm properties were observed to be in corn, hay and
oats.
The treated plot is located within a 2.0 ha (5 acre) field
and measures approximately 31 x 38 m (100 x 125 ft). This area
was selected for sampling because, in the farmer's estimate,
it represents an area which has consistently received the
heaviest applications of sludge. The size of the sampled plot
192
-------
Pine Trees
(Full Length
This Side) 6
N -— .. -^
No Scale
2 M
Soy Bean Field
2 Hectares
House
cm
Butane Tanks
- —A/
1-5 KM
Dividing Line for'
"•• Soils
30 M -H \
" "" r —r
CO
ro
b
! 3rd Telephone
i1 Pole-> I
Thomson Rd.
t
®
1
R/W Post
s
o
co
Ol
F i g u r e 4 8 .
Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin
Treated Area
193
-------
House
Pine Trees
N
No Scale
16 M
Approx. Dividing Line,
for Soils Per Soil
2 Hectares,
69 M
Telephone Pole (TYP)
z;
ro
*H
CM
Thomson Rd.
183 ^4-
Stop Ahead Sig
Figure 49. Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin
Control Area
194
-------
was restricted to avoid sampling soils of two different
series.
The (.ontrol plot is 1 oca tod on an estimated ?, ha (4. f>
aero) field, approximately 1 km (0.5 mi) south of the treated
field. It measures approximately 70 x 31 m (230 x 100 ft), and
also was restricted in size due to the presence of two different
soil series.
Throughout the area, groundwater levels range from approxi-
mately !8 to 27 m (60 to 90 ft) below ground surface.
Farmi ng_Practices
The owner of both treated and control plots farms the
treated field but rents the control field to a tenant farmer.
The treated field has been consistently planted in soybeans and
has a history of sludge application dating back to 1971. Sludge
has been applied on a rotating basis to as many as 57 ha (140
acres) of the farmer's fields. Based on records from the STP
(see Source and Description of Sludge), and assuming an even
distribution of sludge to the fields, sludge application rates
,>ave been as shown in Table 62. The farmer, however, estimated
that the s a:!'pled plot had received an annual average of 16 dry m
tons/ha (7 dry tons/ a ere) c, ssuming an average spreading of five
1 avers o f ! i q u i d s 1 u d g e / y.: a r .
Soybean yields in the Chippewa Falls area have been poor
for the last 5 to 6 years, averaging only approximately 10 bu/
acre. The yields at the study site have been similar, with a
disastorous 0.5 bu/acre in 1976. The 1976 crop was not
harvested, with the exception of the five test sections. The
195
-------
TABLE 62
CHIPPEWA FALLS - SLUDGE APPLICATION RATES
Year
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
Dry Metric Tons /ha
1 .2
3.1
4.7
3.9
3. 1
Based on 3 percent sludge solids (STP data).
196
-------
0.5 bu/acre was estimated from the yield of these sections.
The farmer related that yields from other fields of similar soil
types to which no sludge has been applied have been just as poor
as the treated field.
As a result of the continuing poor yields, the field on
which the sample plot is located and adjacent land totaling
16.2 ha (40 acres) was recently (summer 1976) sold to the city
of Chippewa Falls for a future community park.
The control plot is farmed by a tenant farmer in a similar
manner to that used by the owner. This field has a crop rota-
tion history of corn, oats, clover, and soybeans; but the rota-
tion has riot been practiced since the 1974 soybean crop. The
1976 yield was 5 bu/acre.
The treated and control plots have the following in common:
Soil preparation - Ground is plowed to a depth of 25 cm
(10 in) in the springtime, disced, and harrowed. The
fields are planted in soybeans in late May or early
June.
Herbicide applications - Lorox at 1.1 kg/ha (1 Ib/acre)
and l.asso at 2.8 1/ha (1 qt/acre) are applied.
Lime application - 3.7 m tons/ha (3 tons/aere) are
a d ii o u o a c h 0 c I o b e r .
Fertilizer application - None have been applied to
e i th e r field.
At the time of sampling, both plots had a uniform stand of
soybeans ranging in height from 25 to 46 cm (10 to 18 in).
197
-------
The yield difference between the treated and control plots
is attributed to soil conditions. As described in Soil Descrip-
tion, ihe soil of the control plot (Burkhardt sandy loam) is
more naturally fertile than the soil of the treated plot
(Nymorf loamy sand), and the water holding capacity of the
Burkhardt is greater than the Nymore. At the time of sampling,
the soil of the control plot (Burkhardt) was much less droughty
than that of the treated plot (Nymore).
CLIMATE
The climate of Chippewa Falls is continental, resulting in
wide ard frequent variations in temperature. Storms moving
eastward or northeastward into the area bring warmer weather
and supply most moisture. These are usually followed by cooler
air from Canada. The winters are cold and damp. The summers
are generally warm with moderate humidity. Periods of hot and
humid weather occur occasionally, lasting from a few days to a
week at a t^'me. The average last day for freezing temperatures
in spring is April 25, and the average date for the recurrence
of freezing temperature in autumn is October 16. This provides
a favorable growing season for the staple crops typically planted
in this area.
Approximately 60 percent of the annual precipitation falls
during the months of May through September. This is the main
growing season. Most of the summer rainfall comes during
erratically spaced thunderstorms. Some damage from heavy rains,
high winds, and hail occurs each year, but tornadoes are infre-
quent and cover very small areas. Snow is froquent in winter
198
-------
and is the predominant form of precipitation in that season.
Additional meteorological data are presented in Table 63.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Treated Plot
Nymore loamy sand is the soil type in the treated plot.
It was formed on nearly level to gently sloping stream terraces
and outwash plains. Due to its coarse texture, Nymore loamy
sand is excessively drained. It is naturally low in fertility,
organic matter content, and water holding capacity. The surface
layer is easily tilled through a wide range of moisture condi-
tions. It is subject to wind and water erosion; surface runoff
is not severe, however.
Nymore loamy sand (0 to 3 percent slope), as mapped by the
Soil Conservation Service, has a typical profile as delineated
be!ow:
0 to 20.? cm (0 to 8 in) - very dark grayish brown
loamy sand; weak fine granular structure; very friable;
strongly acidic.
?0.3 to 45.7 cm (8 to 18 in) - dark brown loamy sand;
we,1', medium subangular structure; very friable; clay
bridges sand grains; gravel 2 to 15 mm in diameter, 5
to 10 percent by volume; moderately acidic.-
45.7 to 61.0 cm (18 to 24 in) - dark brown light loamy
sand; single grained; loose, clay bridges sand grains;
gravel 2 to 15 mm in diameter, 5 to 10 percent by volume;
moderately acidic.
-------
0
00
CD eC
•4-1
C
Q
•NPWOd jo iu*oj*4
H d'tu j •* » -
ra
Q
"Jo
O
'So
o
Meteo
if
on in
r o *»«-*•*• *
*»» •» * » 4 •»
I—
cu I ^
1/1 *!
to , s
o I 1
i- i 6
<_> ! •=
-z -Joo.»->« 5
<*-«a^3 OUwyoii tw
->u.c^r-i ->4u>i52o v
200
-------
0)
E
o
v.
•*->
X
UJ
TJ
C
*J *»( MOUS
j j£) kjJui t 0 ** an r- o O **
uOiiPlidf3»j^ j
L— 'Ll
|- _"£"? -"
V I
'" 1
O
CQ
cf
H-
-------
. 6T.O to 91.4 cm (24 to 38 in) - brown sand; single
grained; loose; gravel 2 to 15 mm in diameter, 5 to 10
percent by volume; moderately acidic.
91.4 to 152 cm (36 to 60 in) - yellowish brown sand;
single grained; gravel 2 to 20 mm in diameter, 5 to 15
percent by volume; slightly acidic
The soil sampled for this study closely followed the above
profile.
Nymore loamy sand is principally used for farming. It is
suited to growing row crops, small grains, grasses, and legumes
for hay and pasture with proper management. Diring dry periods,
the soil is vulnerable to severe drought. With irrigation and
other soil and water conservation practices, this problem can be
relieved or overcome.
Ir gently sloping areas, Nymore loamy sand is subject to
moderate water erosion due to surface runoff and to severe wind
erosion. Minimum tillage, winter cover crops, shelter belts,
grassed waterways, and contour farming help prevent soil loss.
Keeping the soil under pasture also controls water and wind
erosion. Proper stocking rates, pasture rotation, and timely
deferment of grazing are essential in maintaining the soil
fertility and good pasture.
Control Plot
The control plot is characterized by Burkhardt sandy loam.
Burkhardt sandy loam was formed on broad, smooth, nearly level
to gently sloping stream terraces and outwash plains. The soil
is naturally low in fertility, organic matter, and water holding
202
-------
capacity. II is somewhat excessively drained with high permea-
bility. The surface layer is easily tilled under a wide range
of moisture conditions. The surface is subject to slow to
medium runoff.
Burkhnrdl sandy loam (0 to 3 percent slopes), as mapped,
h (i l.ypiral profile
-------
cultivated crops, there is a severe hazard of drought, because
of the low available water capacity. This can be overcome with
irrigation and other water conserving practices. Gently sloping
areas have a moderate erosion hazard due to surface runoff.
Minimum tillage, winter cover crops, diversions and grassed
waterways, and farming on the contour help prevent soil loss.
The sampled soil was observed to follow the above profile.
Moisture, pH, and other analytical data for soils in the
treated and control plots are presented in Table 64.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
Sewage Treatment Plant
All domestic and industrial wastewater from the town of
12,500 people is given secondary treatment at the municipal STP.
In 1968, the existing facility was expanded to include secondary
treatment, to accommodate heavier flows, and to meet regulatory
requirements. The plant is currently serving a population
equivalent of 51,000.
The STP is operated as a conventional act"vated sludge
facility. l!aw influent is passed through .1 mechanical bar
screen, a g-it removal chamber, and into primary clarifiers.
The prinary effluent flows by gravity to oie of four aeration
tanks which can be operated either in parallel or in series to
permit the rse of the current process, high rate activated sludge,
contact stabilization, or step aeration.
After settling, aeration tank effluent flows through a
contact chlcrination tank before discharge to the Chippewa
River. Table 65 presents treatment efficiencies covering the
204
-------
yi
o
(f>
JL-
— < z
i— 'O
r -j
Oj- i/3
V£> i
a.
v/)
JL.' _J _!
X L? -
<
^
-«
^
JL
uJ
SI
LJ
( ^
-^
i
'JC
O
Q
,f:
LJw
N
a
X
N
C
y
«
.
^
_j
u
1-
hH
en
Q
^
to
z
o
CO
fV
LL.
O
li)
5
H
|
X
\-
a.
UJ
Q
U)
0
3 0
J O
s
"^
^
5
•i
a.
oo^o^io*^" u^^^r^r^-ro
f. -. -, V ~> tn iO i/> ^0 />
/» co -*; m => ^ c> "V.'
tnoo
o oo oaoo-c
4> CQ in -i « — • a* —• o :c
oc?^cr^»sO -* r*> r^> »— to-
-^^->^^ OAl^Oi,--
rv ^ — i o o r*> :vs -HI *-• ;\J
o o o o o o o c o -o
00^0= • o ^ j a o
-d"Ooooor^- rom-jro-*
•-1
r-NrocMO OCMOO-*O
CVJ rt
rooioro r^rooorovo
oo oo oo o^ o^ ^* oo oo 0^ c^
-j-iooofvjvo moor^-N
i^^n^irtO o-*rooo
ooooo >-«oc>oo
2 S
!-tJs:s:so u 2 z z x
u> o o u u u o o
Q "i vM _i «< W
,,7'vo<-i'-|w ^rT-vo-H^oo
ri.tr-tfvooi'-i ^ r: sr vo ov «H
v-jr.,11 zrriiii
*5 -D O \O «H tH *— O O vO *^ «-*
UJ C/7 CM -^ nO O\ ""* t/5 . .
^
j^.
3
• .'
—
t
5
>.
!i
—
_,.
i
5
— "«.
Cn
•ft
i.
i
iJ
-7
T
•a-
T.
1.
^
rv.: o
U "O
5 ?
E *
_t T
0 -3
• X
S O
^^. ~«.
— r^
205
-------
LO
LO
UJ
1
CO
eC
1 —
1
OO
UJ
o
UJ
0
t— 1
u_
U-
LU
I—
UJ
s:
i —
•a;
LU
ca
t—
I—
UJ
— :
i '
u_
UJ
>-
C£
•a:
r~\
•z*
O
O
t 1 I
00
1
oo
1
_l
•a:
u.
3
UJ
o_
Q-
i — i
^
O
c:
O
CJ '
-o
O)
o:
TT-'2
4-*
C
QJ
4-
4-
UJ
i —
4-)
C
QJ
=5
4-
c:
H-H
O
f|~
>,
^2
10
o
cn
^
00
oo
C2
O
CO
r-
cn
E
•^-^
oo
00
^
cn
E
—
O
O
CO
^
CD
E
— -
oo
oo
_-_
,_
•-v.
cn
E
^ — *
Q
O
CO
>>
to
•o
•^
E
u
_c
. ^
c
o
s:
CMOCOVOCOOO»3-LOOO
cnr^cocococncnooco
O LO UD *d~ ^~ ^ vo i — cn
cnr^-cocooocncncnco
i — l-^Cnr^LOCMLOLOOO
CMI — cn^±«^-cOLooo
f— r— r— CM i— CM r—
COOOCOCMLOLO1=3"r^LD
OOLO-=±COCTlCMOOLOLO
COO(OLnCMLOOOi — CM
COCnlOi — OCMi — OOOO
LnootOoocMLO«^-oo
r- i— CM i— CM r—
LOChOOOOLO)Ci — CDQ.-t-' > O
ctrorsrsricuooaj
cC *y *~D ""D i" o cn
r— CM LO cn
cn i— r-. o
•— •—
OOOO
oo ^d- oo t—
cn •— LO r—
O LO OO CM
LO
| —
-
J= r—
t J *r-~
C -Q S- S-
10 OJ ro CL
O U_ S *t
OO LO
cn cn
OO LO
cn cn
LO LO
«* CO
oo oo
~
CO <—
LO CM
•—
O O
CO LO
t~*t r^
CM ^
cu
>> =
to 3
s: o
o
cn
r_
CM
LO
r—
^~
CM
LO
CO
0
•^>
r—
LO
r —
LO
o
oo
r--.
-
CLJ
cn
fO
^
cu
>
«C
,
CO
i_
cu
co
CU
cn
•c—
TU
E
O
i-
ti
*T"~
C
ITS
(
V-
CD
o
t— *-
CO
CO
O)
•a
3
r—
^_)
C
HH
"~
206
-------
limo span April, 197!) to Juno, 1976. Incoming BOD and suspended
solids (SS) loadings for this period show high averages of 676
and 1,408 mg/I, respectively. This strong waste is the result
of a large industrial component that comprises up to 65 percent
of the total flow to the plant. In addition, digester superna-
tant is returned to the head of the system where it is mixed
with influent prior to monitoring. In periods when sludge is
riot removed from the digesters, this has an effect of raising
r.he ROD and SS levels.
The treatment plant typically achieves 90 percent removal
of BOD and SS. However, due to the high strength of the
influent, the final discharge averages roughly 50 mg/1 BOD and
"1:5 rnq/1 SS. Present plans call for enforcement of stricter
industrial pro - Irea!ment regulations to reduce influent waste
•.triMuj:. h to aii! the treatment facility in achieving required
t*Tlucr,t- ijuali:> of 30 mg/1 of BOD and SS.
kith tfis " :?6u expansion, rated average dry weather flow is
13,200 tu in/day (3.3 mgd). Capacity for combined sewage flows
I'jrinn storms i <> 53,000 ci. in/day (14 mgd). STP personnel
reported thai o-irt of the sewage system remains combined with
the storm drains, b.jt thaf the conversion to totally separate
systems is in progress. infiltration was also reported to be a
s i i] n i i i can i , but unknown, percentage of the influent.
f a h 1 o G 6 shows the various industrial contributors to
'he STr>. Flow levels have been estimated.. BOD levels from the
'••vwery (STi> d n--, 1 y t i c a i data) average approximately 1,050 mg/1.
207
-------
TABLE 66
CHIPPEWA FALLS - INDUSTRIAL FLOWS
Company
Packer! and
Leinenkugel
Brewing
Johnson Plastic
Mc'ichi nery
Better-Bri te
Plating
Consoli dated
Thermoplas ti cs
Amoco Chemical
Product
Estimated
Average
Daily Flow
(cu m/day)
Slaughtering,
Rendering
Beer
PI as ti c machine
parts
Chrome and other
metal plating for
Plastic Machinery
Plasti cs
2300
100
N.A.*
N.A.
N.A.
3800
Comment
Primary
treatment
High BOD-
Average
1050 mg/1
Mostly
cooling
water
*Not avai Table
208
-------
Wastewater from Packer!and receives primary treatment before
discharge to the STP. Flow from industry is estimated at 65
percent. No chemicals are added throughout the treatment plant.
SJ_!i£L9JL_§?abi 1jjLa_tj_ojL and _S_torage
Waste activated sludge from the secondary clarifiers is
returned to the primary settling tanks. Sludge from these
tanks is pumped to the primary anaerobic digester having a
capacity of 3,249 cu m (858,442 gal) and an equivalent detention
time of roughly 150 days. Anaerobic digestion is completed in
one of two secondary digesters having a combined capacity of
2,164 cu m (571,622 gal) with an equivalent detention time of
about 100 days. Additional storage is provided by eight drying
beds, e a c h' ha v i n g 446 s q m (4,800 s q ft) of surface area and
capable of holding approximately 208 cu m (55,000 gal) of liquid
sludge.
Historical analytical data on sludge is shown in Table 67.
Disposal o f S e wage Sludge
The city of Chippewa Falls has been disposing of liquid
and dry sludge to agricultural fields for 7 years. Table 6H,
presents the distribution of liquid sludge to the study site '
covering the five-year period 1971 to 1975. Virtually all of
the liquid sludge generated by the STP during this time span had
been spread on this farm. Alternately, some sludge was sent
to the drying beds (see Table 69 ). An estimated 50 percent of
the dried sludge has been spread at the study site. The remain-
ing bed-dried sludge was either trucked to neighboring farms,
made available for public use, or disposed at a sanitary "iendfill.
209
-------
TABLE 67
CHIPPEWA FALLS - STABILIZED LIOUID SLUDGE ANALYSES1
Parameter
Cd
Cu
Ni
Pb
Zn
Moisture (%)
Concentration Oug/
A
2
480 43
10 3
37
400 71
9
9)2
B
6.5
1
2.1
3
0
7.0
Data were from: A) Soil Sci. Dept. University of Wisconsin,
Madison, Wisconsin, 1976, and B) Phase I stabilized sludge sample,
September, 1975.
>
"Data expressed on an oven-dry weight basis.
210
-------
co
**o
1 . 1
l~Lj
CO
et
r-
£
Z3
O
z.
O
1 — 1
1 —
CO
i — i
o:
i—
I/O
i — i
Q
UJ
0
Q
1
^-J
Q
i— i
— >
O*
i — i
_J
_J
— I
U-
eC
UJ '
o-l
O-
i — i
in
o
i
i
i
5-
03
CU
>-
i
1 O
U /
cr>
i—
*j-
P-N
CD
1
CO
r^
CT>
r—
CM
cr>
i —
i — -
r^.
CTl
r—
C~
+J
C
O
^~
LO CO CD LO CM ** r—
uarJ-OCMOCMVOCsl
00^1-COOOOO^J-'*CM
CM co r— r-^ p^ CO
CO CM LO CO r— CD
CM •••••• CD
*— COCM>— OCO«d-O
CvJO>— COCMOOCD'—
^0 ^ CO r, 1-, Pv r-
LO tO CD CM VO VO
LO • • • • LO
•"d-CDCM'3-COCOr— CD
O*JDOr— COCOCMi—
LOLQi — OOCO<£>^Ti —
CD' — OCDCO^-i — i —
OOOCOiX>P--CMi — LO
IQ«3-LOCOCOCMLOO
LO LO CM r— «y •sj- CM
UD r— ps»
O O O • O O
CM l^~ O
r-s. pv «d~
r— r— CM
_C r—
U T- CU >5
c-QS-s->,c:f— cr>
03CU.T3Q-rc5r3Z5r5
— ) . u. s:,- CO ^" CM
O CO ^J" U3 CO
CM CM CM O r—
LO CM CD VO CD
LO
sf r*. en • — ^1"
• • • • •
CD O *!• O CM
CM r- i— CM CO
P-. CO CO LO CO
IO CO CO
CM O •
O CO ID CM CO
CO O CM CM CO
i— i— 00 LO CO
00
VD *3~ CD CM
P^ P--. CD O
LO P^ "* LO
«* CM r- LO
CO
CO CT> CM LO CO '
.... .
CO LO CM OO
i — «.^ CD ' CM *3-
^i- LO co co og
CM
10
C7>
0
_J O
•4-> O J~ r—
CU u' O CD O- •
(/•> O 'Z. Q (—
211
-------
CTl
CQ
u
a
UJ
oa
i — r
C<
Q
O
UJ
a
' i
_- _J
|
CO
c/")
— 1
u_
3
UJ
Q.
£;
o
i
i
s-
(Q
cu
^
i
in
^*.
en
r—
^f"
en"
*~
CO
r-.
en
r—
CM
r-^.
en
r-.
r—
-C
-M
C
O
s:
r^ 03 oa
• • •
r-- en i r-.
r*- CTl 1 «*
VC I— l£>
<£ en t— CM
. • • •
ic to co oo
C\i OO VO . i co i i oo
(JD 1 CM 1 VQ 1 I IO
CO OO OO CO
cu >> • 4-^
>,c:i — CT)Q_-*->>o
"3 3r3r3CUOO
-------
I ho S i I1 po rsonno I omph.i s i/od , however, ( ha I ro< srds of dry
sludge 1n the study site were estimated and would n« t be reliable
fur use in tlv calculation of application rates. Therefore,
,i |i|»l i t a 1, i on rites previously shown under Farming Practices were
i (i i r u I at od wi!h the assumption t h -i t no bed-dried sludge had
lie en a pp 1 i ed .
liquid sludge is spread using a tank truck with a capacity
.)i ;../ 'ov"i (in a re a approximately '^00 x 2 m (1,000 x 6 ft). Dried
sludge is transported via dump truck to the edge of the fields
v/fie re if is stockpiled and later transferred to a manure
•rtvador for distribution on the fields.
Interviews wilh S T i' personnel and the farmer indicate no
Apparent d<'•-,! heln or environmental problems associated with the
sludge 'preading operation. No odor problems were reported with
;.so of "lie liquid •, in.;gn, but were evident when dry sludge was
left in 1 a r q e piles for several days at the edges of fields.
^h.i tog r a pits 20 through 23 show, respectively, the
" <~ '-• 'i i e <-' f i e i ! . the sampled trifoliate, f i e 1 d - d r i e d sludge, and
; h > i .1 n k t ru c k .
riip.i !', .M'TToPF^ TOWARD L,-f« '.PPEADING OF SLUDGE
- hf ^hiimewa County Cui-'ic Health Department, the Wisconsin
n- i>" 'a r t i;;on i o i" Natur.i": Resources, and the local newspaper
wo>-o i.oniacted t •> a^.sess public attitudes and awareness of sludge
'Pt •'.; d > rig p-,;;•' i i'es . The tirst two agencies were aware of the
-------
Photograph 20
Treated Field
Photograph 21
T r i f o 1 i a t e
214
-------
* L \ ?? rf* T 2^
-^->^ / f, ';
* ", " A i ." .• *
Photograph 22
Bed Dried Sludge
Photograph 23
Tank Truck
215
-------
practice and could not recall any public opposition to sludge
spreadi ng.
An interview with the Outdoor Editor of the Herald Telegram
indicated that several articles relative to sludge spreading had
been published, but he was not able to locate copies of the
texts. He related the following:
In the early 1970's, several articles relevant to sludge
spreading were printed. These were very general in
nature and were obtained from Copley News Service.
Several years ago (exact time unknown), an article
describing the purchase of sludge spreading vehicles
was printed. This was general in nature and only
describedthetrucks.
Fron time to time, the Herald Tel eg ram has covered
events at the local town meeting. The editor recalls
that one of these articles made note of sludge as a
ferti1i zer source.
No articles adverse to sludge spreading have ever appeared in
the local newspaper.
Interv ews with local Soil Conservation Service personnel
indicated tieir awareness and acceptance of sludge spreading
practices. It was also their opinion that there was little
public awareness of sludge utilization practices.
STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS ON SLUDGE SPREADING
The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources in 1975 issued
Technical Bulletin No. 88, entitled Guidelines for the Application
216
-------
of Wastewater Sludge to Agri tu 1 Lural Larul_ ijl^Jlis.Cj)nsjji.
preface to this publication reads as follows:
"This publication gives guidelines for applying
processed (i.e., not raw) sewage sludge to agricultural
and forest lands. It has been nrepared to assist
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources personnel
in the granting of discharge permits (Chapter 147,
1973 Assembly Bill 128). Section 147.02, Water
Pollutant Discharge Elimination; Permits, Terms and
Conditions, states that "the disposal of sludge from
a treatment work by any person shall be unlawful
unless such disposal is done under a permit issued
by the department." Section 147.26, Design of Publicly
Owned Treatment Facilities, states that "the department
shall (Mirouraqo the dosiqn of publicly owned treatment
works which provide for: (a) The recycling of sewage
pollutants by using them in agriculture, silviculture
or aquaculture; (b) The ultimate disposal of sludge in
a manner not resulting in environmental hazards.
"Sludge application on land must be considered as
an alternative disposal method. This guideline can
be used for screening the land application alterna-
tive, evaluating environmental effects, assessing of
other important non-monetary effects, and for
developing a land
217
-------
application program in consultation with qualified
specialists if this alternative is selected. The
guideline addresses the properties of sludge and alter-
native handling methods, factors that determine
environmentally-acceptable loading rates, current
application technology and site selection, management
and monitoring. It does not consider specifics of
all possible site properties, handling options and
management variables. It was prepared by the University
of Wisconsin Soil Science Department and the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources.
"These guidelines are based on current knowledge and
should be revised as new information becomes available.
Factors affecting the limitations to sludge application
rates from heavy metals are not well understood, and
new technology for sludge application should become
available in the near future."
The "guidelines" have not yet been implemented into a
comprehensive administrative policy by the Department of Natural
Resources. The Health Officer of Chfppewa Falls reviewed a city
regulation prohibiting the surface disposal of sludge within the
city limits of Chippewa Falls. This ordinance does not affect
the case study site since the farm is located outside the city
limits.
The sewage treatment plant has a mandatory innoculation
program for all employees which provides protection against
typhoid, tetanus, and polio.
218
-------
ECONOMICS
The Chippewa Falls STP has maintained a detailed account of
capital purchases since the beginning of the sludge spreading
program (see Table 70 ). In addition to these prices of
equipment shown, several surplus military vehicles and a 5.1 cu
in (1,350 gal) tank were obtained at no cost. This smaller tank
was used for spreading prior to purchase of the 5-ton truck and
0.7 cu in (2,300 gal) tank. The Marlow piston pump was purchased
to be used exclusively for pumping sludge from the digester to
the tank truck.
Records of daily expenditures have not been separately
maintained from general plant expenses. The STP superintendent,
therefore, was asked to estimate labor and operation and mainten
ance (O&M) costs. These costs, and a cost analysis of the
sludge spreading operation, are presented in Table 71. The
O&M costs include a $2,000 engine overhaul to the 5-ton Jeep
truck. The other factor which accounts for the high O&M cost
is the distance to the study site, approximately 8 km (5 mi).
The cost analysis includes both the liquid and bed-dried
sludge. From Tables 68 and 69 it can be seen that of the
total 8,486 cu ni {?.? ing) of liquid sludge generated, aporoxi-
•nately 30 percent, or 2,573 cu in (.7 mg) went to the drying beds
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
S l_u_d_g_e
On August 3 and November 16, 1976, five one-liter grab
samples each of raw and stabilized sludge were obtained from
both the primary clarifier and the secondary digester.
219
-------
TABI.F /O
CHIPPEWA FALLS - CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
Year
Description Purchased Cost ($)
1968 Chevy Dump Truck - 1970 2,880
1 Ton
1967 Jeep Military 5-Ton 1974 1,250
Truck
2,300 gal (8.7 cu m) Tank 1974 2,000
for Jeep Truck
2 - Sludge Piping 1969 400
Faci1i ti es
Marlow Piston Pump 1975 10,000
220
-------
TABLE 71
COST FOR DISPOSAL OF LIQUID SLUDGE - 1975
ADnual Capi tal Cost
Vehicle Depreciation
5T Army Truck cost: $2,000 $ 339
1968 Chevy Dump Truck cost: $2,880 475
Stationary Equipment Depreciation^
1969 Piping Facilities: $400 58
1975 Marlow Pump: $10,000 1,456
1974 300-gal Tank (8.7 cu m) cost: $2,000 291
Total Annual Capital Cost $ 2,619
Annual Operating Cost
Personnel Hourly Rate % Time Worked
1 Operator $5.0032.4 $ 3,365
Fringe Benefits (25 percent) 841
Vehicle Maintenance and Operation 11,436
Total Annual Operating Cost $15,642
Total Annual Capital and Operating Cost 18,261
10 Percent Contingency Factor3 1,826
Total Annual Cost $20,087
Total Annual Cost = $20,087 _ $79.08/dry m ton
Total Sludge Hauled Annually 280 dry tons "($71.74/dry ton)
Vehicles were fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8
percent interest, equivalent to $169.68 per $1,000 annually.
2
Equipment was fully depreciated over 10 years at 8 percent
interest, equivalent to $145.56 per $1,000 annually.
A 10 percent contingency factor is added on administrative
overhead.
221
-------
son
On August 3 and 4, 1976, surface and subsurface samples
were obtained from both the treated and control olots. As shown
in Figure 43 and 49 both the treated and control plots were
divided into five sections. Approximately 30 individual core
samples fron the surface 0 to 20 cm (0 to 8 in) were obtained
per section with a 2.5 cm (1 in) diameter stainless steel split
tube sampler.
Subsurface soil samples were obtained from the treated and
control plots with an 8 cm (3 in) diameter stainless steel bucket
auger. The surface top 20 cm (8 in) was discarded from the auger.
Samples were then taken between 20 and 46 cm (8 to 18 in) and
labeled Horizon A; 46 and 61 cm (18 to 24 in) Horizon B; 61 and
91 cm (:'4 and 36 in) Horizon C; and 91 and 122 cm (36 and 48 in)
Horizon D.
Plants
On August 3 and 4, 1976, plant tissue samples were obtained
from both the treated and control plots. Only the top mature
trifoliate was sampled. Approximately 100 such trifoliates were
picked from separate plants from each section resulting in an
estimated 1 '
-------
dirt. The +4 fraction was hand-picked clean of rocks, stems and
other non-related debris pr^or to compositing and analyses.
Tables?2 through 79 present the following:
Talbje
72 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
Sludges
73 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite
Surface and Subsurface Soils
74 Total Metal Concentrations in Individual
Subsurface Soil Samples
75 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and Plants
76 Metal Concentrations in Soy Bean Samples
77 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
78 Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants
79 Concentrations of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and Plants
Figures 50 to 59 present particle size analyses of
the various soil composites by depth.
223
-------
TABLE 72
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
CHIPPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN
Volatile Solids (%)
N03 - N
NH4 - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
Ag
As
B
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
Zn
H20 (%)
PH
8/3/76
57.1
1 .9
19070
22548
11903
2419
4903
14161
4967
n.d.
8613
9.68
1 .29
45.8
7.10
1039
6.45
1168
1 1903
4.77
197
5.16
20.6
152
6.13
1058
96.9
7.8
11/6/76
55.7
24.1
23233
26606
14828
2018
8458
13651
5514
<133
13169
2.14
3.75
39.1
6.96
1494
5.89
1568
14722
43.4
236
8.03
21 .4
53.8
9.10
1322
98.1
7.6
Average
56
13
21152
24577
13366
2218
6681
13906
5241
<66
10891
5
2
42
7
1267
6
1368
13313
24
217
6
21
103
7
1190
97
.4
.0
.92
.52
.5
.03
.17
.1
.60
.6
.5
All unit; in ug/g (unless otherwise noted).
All data expressed on oven dry weiqht basis
-------
•7
•/>
_ J ^^
«*-«
— — •
^/i
•oJ^
T. I/)
•-oJ i
<3 '"% 1/J
£ X -'-!
*— y ~>
r^ *j_ «*• /
'. i 1 I/) ^y}
< 5 -r
f 1 1/>
r-- t- «
3 c. y>
-L? LZ /
_j -p< _i
<
-J*t
«i
4
*— <
JLj
J" •-* O
"* ^y
-J <5
O
t—
O
^^
r
vo.
•— ^iJ
0^
1.
jp — < o » "*• * or a- ru a*
M «c :> x> -« n •*) -^ — x.
^ o — * o "~^ -^oci-*o
;u --O ^ " ^ ^C '*v**><-4rr>*-*
-«J>=3->3 i 3 -S '? 0
•*•/>*>•!»•-« V."rJKi>'*V
•^^^•O'O * M -« *> .\J
•O3000 33030.
^ *^ rvi j\j ^? •£? ^*TI ^ ^* ^i
OO-OOO OOO'OO
OOOOO ' 3OOOO
I
0 1? -3 0 ^> =>d030
r^ •* o ^ N- /i ^- «£" o •"•
7s -^ -^ f\j rvs x> t/^ \TI M f) *\f -»'
•v -^ ^ o 41 (vjn.'n^-n
•^•jO^O^''^' vfi^COO^sC,
o o
>* tn f> o ui jo.oc\j^tii
^» C3 *-4 f*) CC "** • **^ 'Vl tO f*T
^^^^^
•» m in tn .» 4-n-*f^n
ooocro oooc*o'
i ;
' i • i ! •
i • ., Z , ' ,..,,. X1
oJ z; Z Z U ( ti IX Z Z 0!
LJ O U U ' y U U] O
04 CM ' _, < CJ
jJXVO^«-ifM .3u,*°*H'— i
LO
JO
*^-
o
— «
uJ
"•C"
>-
5
U
">.
0
i: •
-j t-
1/3 75
f/¥ ' i j i
V' - J.*
3T i »™t
x ' a
jj 4
D
< i -J
h-! 0
<' X
:* i
_»' O
-I; Z
< r
-•; W
1
225
-------
_J
J.
vJ
oJ
I rr- o ^ c
t v xi v •—
•v1 ^ Ji -* ,f "*) fi 3 "vixj n f1 —«>*:*> ,r.
• * » • ««•« •**« * • o « •
. «k
> * * « * * *
^•i>"*J .C-O'*)-
o o o r> o o o o- o o o o o :> o o
10 • V
c—-^ ?•
X' 'X —•
jj
u
z r
^•a
•-.a
O 3
-> v£- -a ju
* * » •
.—41 r ^ f^I
:D MX. O
« * * *
OOO
uu u
CVJ
MM
O^O »-*«-*
Al 2 Z S. U
uuu
2 CM
T vO i-i t-i CM
• s;
" uuu
5 "O --i CM CM
• • • s:
jn s: 23L u
uuu u uu
CM 7- ^ «-ICM _3 *O «H»H CM
H- I I I I
0OvO-.~
.1 CM_ I I I I
. j O VO CM rt
1 1 I 1
f- I I I I
'".CJ
/>
-J
T
r
-------
z
I
o
or
a
o
•* xj
— » — * o
i o r
s ./• co •
r •-» «*•
ru v -,r •?«
'- o --•
'v
Xi
o o o
J VI
x- .r« -c
CM •'
oj
o
•v
-S3
-*-* ulj uJ •"—
_i
D
X
/)
r>
•_> J J
•y> /i ..o
227
-------
rt
UJ
D.
< ~-
(fl <£'
Z '*-'
UJ i/i
OQ t*
^ O
00 */>
UJ _-»
J"x" J
^_ —J
CD •-» <
^
CL
^
U
0
;»i
iL
*~,
-j^
"^
' •*»
c
i > i: co «O ro ro "X (\J •£ »-^ to ^
^^ s0 *JH 'T' iVJ C^ >& ^*" -^" *" * ^XI C^ r^- 1^- rri 'Vl
CT< 'JCOT^T'T1^ f^ "-^-•O-i'^Ou-)
^-*
• — t 0v uCi —* r*^ ^ ^) C3 CO O iT^ n cC1 ^ <\^»— *
O O •—* ^ J) O O CO *-^ (XJ (\l O OD '^^ CD ^"~
•^ rV>if>-*'*)^^ * UJ -rv,n*in
— ^ 2 z a z uj -« 2:^zcz uJ
(/I DOOOO O_ll/) OOOOG C>
u.'Q- t-»-*-*-t-z:«a:CL ^- »-*-»- K- ^i •
^-i ^ju«_>oc->«ic>-j: ouooo*/)«/>U>2I U1 X JJ
3C 0
»
^
<
X
z
~
t
>.
,£
-"
2 >'
> Z
0 0
Z UJ
d t-
t— 1
ji en
jJ O
s// Q.
UJ O
3L U
CL
X Z
Jj 0
w
228
-------
IU,BI.IM ^q j uij
o
U.
CO
cf
O
f
o
^o
6-
h-
Cf)
ra
-i
q
n.
tr.
o
Ul
°
UJ
o-o
£ Z
Ir :'" ''-
w <•;.. ^
LU "g , o
-X 5 S 7. "
^Ua rf -^ ** ^
5 s? ^ "
±i 2 «" 5 o
Z z o - 3
1 1 1 ° Z -J °
UJ (j — ^ 0
w i'a " §
O5g - .
rn i- o ?
"•• w q
-j
n
»-
ii • I r "*"
l.~
\l
1
0
L]
•J
?•
-
-o
(0
00
^J
CTi
CO
re
(U
Q.
Q.I
•r- i
j:
0 I
in
evj
«
0
L.
•o
0)
(O
O)
-------
o
o
t\j
o
fO
Xq
o
o
IT)
O
u>
o
r-
o
CO
o
o
o
o
8
o
o
o
o
•a >
J
tfi
at
K
•» O
C3
50
UJ 85 2
I 8
8
o
O
O
o>
o
to
o
o
(O
;suij
z
a
IL.
V)
-------
o
o
CM
o
10
*q
o
o
IO
o
ID
o
f-
o
CO
o
o
o
o
o
o
(3
0}
O
to
O
J3LJI-J
o
o
to
o
CM
o
o
u.
«
CO
J
o
o
S?
1-
«/>
s?
a
z
to
•5
z
o
a.
—
u
u
o
III
o-d
T3
(0
oo
"O
c
(O
oo
E
O
_J
co
CO
CTi
CO
<0
^
a;
Q.
CL
•r-
0
co
CvJ
10
—
(O
"-
•a
a>
4J
ID
0)
s_
1—
E
O
1^
UD
1
(JO
**
S-
ra
Q_
3
-------
c
*
o
o
o
r^-
cj
8
CM
O
8
O
f--
S
*• S
o
1 ?
« 8
5 —
o
in
Z a>
JC V.
o rl
o
~ ^>
** to
ex
0 _
O pj
a —
•a
er ^,
o ™
In
V>
rl *"
<
<
JI|C'3/,\ Xq jacjDOQ |Ue3J9^
3O OOOoOO OOO
— (VI tO ^J"ioWf~ O3OTO
?>
—
-
-
"^
~ t
f
/
/
^
f
s
c*
*~
^^
^
^
^*
-*»
^
_,-—
^x-
*^*
S
/
,
i
I
/
i
- V
j
;
DO OOOOOOOOc
OOCOr^COiOil-IOCM —
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
m
€3
e
c
u
10 .^
0 «*>
_c
D
i_
U
0
O
o
IT)
o
o
>
o
w
SjftNO
COAISE|MEDIUM| FINE IV.FINE
V.COARSE ]
GRAVEL
Sly .
iii i . 2
m2£ I
Z gS ? ?
~
(0
CD
S-
1—
E
O
,—
01
1
10
>>
«
c
«C
O)
N
*r—
-------
D
M
,**
*
'
1™ -
1
T
c
t<
c
c
3
>
,-••
j
|
i
1
i
>
<.
_rf-H
^~
\
1
C
3
\ A'q
C
u
X'
— 1
I
C
IX
JJU
1
*
^
)
)
!J
C
(J
.--
r
X
^
3
T
C
c
X
C
o
>
o
A
/
3
J
C
C
j
j
J
c
D
n
i
/
r
>
c
c
c
o
o
o'
o
0
o
o
in
o
o
—
0
meters
5
c
« S
6 OT
o
o
IT.
)
>
<
t
^
Cl
Q
<
0)
G
<
Q
t
t
J
)
\
0
u
z
u.
Ul
z
u.
z
3
lil
a:
<
Ul
i/>
K
J
J
>
I
C
D
ICATIOf\
u.
CO
^3
(C
(1
lM
0 CC
c ?
^ °
^
?
io
- o
T.
ll
i
T3
ai
4J
cu
s.
1— .
*?
^
u
^
r
c
r
u
VI
M
,
T)
.7
O
.1
r
a:
3
0
X
t>
it
m
O
y
3
5
LD
_i
O
T
=J
40HLONGB
(A
I/)
>>
i —
T3
j—
O)
N
r~
CD
O
+->
!-
03
Q-
ft
(/)
•r—
•N
CO
•—
ti-
ro
2
Q.
Q.
-C
CJ
CD
-3
u_
-------
Aq
z
o
o
li.
U)
V)
_J
o
_J
(J
1-
to
0
Z
Ifl
5?
z
0
»-
0.
tc.
o
UJ
0
HI
.J
xz
CO
•c
C
E
rt
C
CO
o
c\
rv
rx
03
^
0)
Q
Q
•r™
_C
CJ
r^
CJ
0«i
"~~
)
(/)
r—
r^-
(O
U_
r—
O
S-
-1 \
c
o
o
QJ
O
ffj
ti
s-
3
c/>
CT
•r~
OT
ro
c:
•a:
Ol
IS!
0)
r—
O
+->
t.
Q.
(O
S
Q..
d.
JZ
O
LO
in
O)
cn
•r—
U_
-------
/q JJKJDO;)
CO
Xq
2:
0
i-
o
u.
CO
co
«^
_J
o
u
o
z
Ul
Q
111
"•6
"O
c
£
E
03
0
_J
uo
CM
CO
CO
ro
5
O
Q.
Q.
•i—
-C
O
^
CM
CM
to
to
u_
1 —
o
s.
^_>
o
o
E
o
to
^3-
1
o
CM
01
01
N
OO
QJ
O
IT3
0.
O.
LO
01
235
-------
ji)6iSM
z
o
t_
o
u.
V)
<
0
_i
o
t-
_I
CO
.5
°
O
z
*
00
CO
CO
•~
ra
J-
r—
o
s_
4_>
C.
0
c^
E
o
l«—
vo
i
^j-
(SI
ai
o
•r-
S-
(O
CL
.,
-------
o
!' , I I
- • f- f—!- -4—•
, ; . t 1 ..1---I—
. . _: _i. L_
Li_;Liiz.-Er.
f i
<7>
z
g
i-
0
u.
V)
V)
<
— 1
0
5
_J
o
1-
U)
s?
o
z
" "
cc iy 5
Bis , i
2° UJ 3 "•
< Z ? <
TT Q5 S «J
§SS S 5
^^M Z £•! N ^
UJ 8s a s
so i
72 So 5
V) s° > oo
R M
1 • 1 1 111 2 n3
Illlllt ^ ^*
^*J IfJU °
'"' DBB" s CD
WMMI^K^ S N
-a
c
(O
c/^
CO
*
CO
cr>
(O
^
0)
CL
Q.
5
a>
co
CM
U-
o
S-
4J
^~
O
CJ
E
c
I—
cr
i
i —
<&
v~>
a)
o
•i —
[ ^
IT3
a_
f\
1/5
•r—
— tZ
«
tn
1 —
(O
1 1
03
3
(TJ
0.
a.
jr
C_)
00
LT>
ai
i.
rs
en
•r—
U_
-------
tv«
o
rO
O
^r
o
in
s
O
r-
§
s 8
I
z
I S
OJ
EC
UJ
UJ
s
C3
tfw*«
01
03
O
50
JT-TW
fe
52
Kg
O yj "J
« ^ *»
ft O r»
52 5
X o «*
gx .j
Z5>
u O
t- o
W»" •"—%,
t;
-
o
ij
5
i
o
^
0
n
x
o
d
cc
UJ
O
O
O
O
o
o
03
2
O
to
o
W
o
to
O
CM
"Z.
o
1-
o
u.
to
to
o
_l
o
5?
-1
tn
^
o
Q.
O.
*i™*
-C
<->
«*•
cvf
r—
W>'
w
*"' -1
o
S-
•(->
c
0
<_>
E
o
CM
CM
1
r—
o>
i/1
I/T"
its
c
(U
N
•r—
OO
-------
TABLE 77
ORINATED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUDGE, SOILS AMD P.ANTS
CHIPPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN
Treated
Plot
" S6T1"
Surface Composites <0.001
<0.001
10.5
-0.001
Plant
CompDsites
1
-0. 01
<0.01
-0. 75
-0.5
Control
Plot
/•g/kg
<0.001
<0.001
<0.06
<0. 06
<0.01
<0.0l
<0.75
<0.5
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Corns os i tes
Stai.il i zed SI udge
<0.001
-0.003
0. 4
0.4
(3/3/71.)
<-0.06
<-0.03
<0.01
<1 . 9
<0.001
<0.003
<0.06
<0.06
(11/6/76)
<0.05 DDT
0.4
<0.01
335
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Detection limits vary rue to sample size, plant matter
interference, and instriment sensitivity.
?39
-------
00
f—
— t
IE
O
CO
-t-J
1
— ^
CO
CD
o:
o
4->
ex
*—
o
to
Q
CD
Q.
e
f0
oo
OJ CD CD QJ QJ CD CU
> > > > > > >
-4-) +J 4-> 4-> -P 4J 4->
fO tfO CO (X3 fO n3 CO
CD o1) CT) CT> cn CD CD
(1) X3 — v O
r~. 10 r^ to Q.
co "v. oo ^v, o
-^ r- \ r— O
00 r— 00 r-
~~^ ^ "^ Ol
"O "O t3
0> O) OJ
M rsi s-
•i- -r- -O r— (— O)
r— r— -(->C4- Oi — 3
SQIQrtyOOO (O(— O-r-OO
r— i— O
OO Q- 00
QJ O)
> > > >
^_> +J +J ^-)
(X3 rt3 fO (O
CI) C7i CD CD
CD QJ QJ QJ
z. z. z. z.
CO
QJ
CO
O
CL
O
O
i —
O
E i-
E E E 0 -M
u o o c
CM O
IO i — l — CM O
^J- vO O^l r~*
1 1 1 1 1
O r— i—
CXI «a- ID CTl CO
•1 —
o
00
i
i
j '
it
i
QJ > > > >
4_) 4_) +^ 4J 4^
f^U fQ fQ f^3 fD
CD CD CD CD CD
CD QJ QJ QJ QJ
z z: z z: z
E
E e E o
o o o
CM
CD UD i — i — C\J
C_) ^~ i£i O"V r—
fO 1 1 1 1
C+— c^> ^J f— p—
S- CM «^- U3 CTl
00
240
-------
l{"1
r*--
cri
i —
t/7
i
i —
i
Q.
Q
<
CO
1 — t
V~H
„
cn EJ.-H
UJ co"
-— J -~~ i
""•^ 5"
i— co [7-
U-i
CO .-
*r^r ^H
0 ^
s^
fe5
o
> — 1
1 —
•=c
C£
1 —
UJ
o
o
•r~-
O
O
O
O>
-1 J
(
(1)
U
(U
u.
E
0
"r~*
O
r—
CD
Li-
ra
, —
PSWJ 1 J UOQ
r)Aiidumsojf]
*^
) \ ) D M 1 C f)
V r L j
uriil CJQ it^oi
^^.pa^a Ldui03
¥¥.pauuLj.uo3
^^Aiidumsajd
^s6pn[g 6
jad 6uQ [6^.01
.,Pa;aLdui03
„
^^.pauui.juo3
_ — . , . ~ .- . . — _
^BA L^dinnsajj
^af5pri[5 6
uad 6^0 le^oi
^^patj.a [diuo3
^^.paiiiu LJ.U03
^^.aA L^dmnsauci
-,
,fa6pn[5 b
jad 6^0 IB^OI
a6pnts 6 uad
o^iDn 3i.c]0via\/ ipioi
T u .n uLTj,
C
O
•i —
CU 4->
i O
Q--.-
E i~
fO O
CO to
O)
a
+ + + + + +
"*"
+ + + + + +
-z. z. -z.
en O CTi O CT> CT)
O i— O r— O O
r— X r- X i— r-
x o x n x x
LO uo o LO m LO
r-» • to • o r—
00 • O .
co co CM cr>
r— r— II
CO --^ CO ^^
CO r— CO r^ ^4-'o4-
•M tO i. H)
<1J_4 C_J
X3
CU ^ 0 CU
i- -a cx-H
ex cu QJ y
X to i-. "J
cu to -P
cu P
$- CU U „
a cw »
r— • ^3 Jp C-5
•a: > o -c
j/
-------
HI
o
o
en
OQ
O Q O
§ S 3
CM <£> in
i i
uad
1369
pnis 6
^0 Lei°l
9}a[dlU03
3UUL4U03
idiunsajd
nis 6
0 leioj.
uad
i
1^401
c
o
•r-
O> 4->
•— n.
CL-r-
E S-
rO O
CO 00
CL>
Q
00
^^
' T3
i— ra
•r- (U
O S-
co }—
+
a
;z:
i
i
+
a
2:
LO
CTI
CO
ro co o
«d- o *d-
^
e s o
o o
CM 1
r— f— CO
IO O% r— OO
(£> i— r- -^
•>T W3 CTi O
CO
00
Ol
•f—
^
-s
^
o
O
"o
i_
4->
C
O
w
+
C3
^
1
,
+
Q
Z
•tf-
O
00
Surface
+
Q
z:
i
+
Q
7"
r^-
oo
e
o
ID
«d-
1
0
CM
+
d
•z.
1
+
Q
Z
oo
IJ3
CM
U
UD
1
ir>
«^-
+
Q
•z.
1
+
Q
•z.
O
CO
1.0
E
u
oi
1
«r>
+
Q
Z
1
-f
Q
CO
V£>
CNJ
o
CM
CM
1
r—
cn
••=±
4->
-C -r-
o>—
a> o
S r— .
tti
"°^0
(/) rd S-
cu o
s- -a
Q- O)
X oo
OJ to
O) to
co S- c
4-> Q_ O
•— X -r-
rs o> -M
to rtj
O) to >
S- O) i-
o
-X
*
O)
QJ
"O
0)
c
O
242
-------
CHAPTER VI
HOPKINSVILLE, KENTUCKY
SITE DESCRIPTION
Location
This study site is located approximately 5 km (3 mi)
northwest of downtown Hopkinsvi11e , Kentucky. Hopkinsvi11e ,
the Christian County Seat, is approximately 24 km (15 mi) north
of the Tennessee border and about 97 km (60 mi) northwest of
Nashville, Tennessee.
The treated plot is located approximately 270 m (300 yd)
from the Hopkinsville Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP). The
control plot is located approximately 1.5 km (1 mi) to the
northeast of the treated plot and 5 km (3 mi) north-northwest
of downtown Hopkinsville.
Physical Condition
Farming is the predominant occupation in the area, the
principal crops being corn, small grains, hay, tobacco, some
truck crops, fruit, and pasture. The farm in which the treated
plot is located consists of several fields totaling 21 ha
(52 acres). As shown in Figure 60, the sampled plot, fenced
on all four sides, measures approximately 91 x 107 m (300 x
350 ft) and is characterized by a slight depression of about! m
(3 ft) running from southeast to northwest. It is in a gently
?43
-------
Fence (4 sides TYP)-. Control Field *1.5 km
x
cr\
><•
N
No Scale
107 M
f- /s - /\ /\ -~/\ /\ A
G
1
o
3
*
5
^ <
» tp-^**
>
>
>
>
>
Gate -,
._ v . . ..y — v y ... Y -V , „ ...v. • /•
Sewage Treatment Plant
Figure 60 Hopkinsville, Kentucky Treated Plot
244
-------
rolling slope of less than 2 percent.
The field in which the control plot is located is approx-
imately 12 ha (30 acres) in size. The sampled plot (see
Figure 61) measures approximately 91 m (300 ft) square and
has topography similar to the treated plot. Plant and soil
samples were not taken from the draw shown in the southwest
corner of Section 5.
Limestone bedrock and some sandstone exist below both the
control and sludge treated plots at a depth of approximately
3 m (9 ft). Depth to groundwater varies with location and
season, and no wells exist in the immediate vicinity of either
the treated or control plots. The nearest surface water is the
North Fork of Little River, located approximately 180 m
(200 yds) south of the STP.
Farming Practi c ejs
The treated fields are worked by tenant farmers. Sludge
has been applied to all 21 ha (52 ac) since 1967, but applica-
tion rates and uniformity of spreading have not been consistent
from field to field.
The approximate 1 ha (2.5 ac) pasture plot selected for
sampling first received sludge about 5 years ago when it was
applied once every spring for a period of 3 consecutive years.
The estimated application rate each time was approximately
22 dry m tons/ha (10 dry tons per ac). Sludge was again applied
to this plot on May 12 and 13, 1976 (one week before sampling).
An estimated 110 cu m (30,000 gal) of sludge at 10 percent
245
-------
Sludge Area
{=: 1.5 KM
X
X
50 M
X
X
No Scale
N
Barn
— 91 M
X-1
Glass Avenue
\
X
Draw
^
X
X
18
30 M
Figure 61 ' Hopkinsvllle, Kentucky Control Plot
246
-------
solids equivalent to 11 dry m tons/ha (5 dry tons/ac) was
spread. Virtually all the sludge applied in 1976 was spread
on test Sections 3, 4, and 5 as shown on Figure 60.
At the time of sampling, May 20 and 21, 1976, the treated
plot had an abudant crop of common fescue (Festuca e1 atior
arund i nacea). Other plants such as timothy and orchard
grasses, red-top, and clover were also in evidence. Height of
fescue was estimated to be about 61 cm (24 in). The farmer
indicated that this hay was normally harvested twice each year,
once in June and again in late September. The field has occa-
sionally been pastured throughout the years.
The farmer of the treated plot indicated that the plot
had been cultivated and planted with crops in one or two years
since 1967. However, he could not recall in which years the
field had been cultivated and what crops had been grown.
Similarly, he indicated that fertilizer had probably been
applied to the field at least once since 1967, but could remem-
ber neither the year nor the application rate. Lime, at
3.4 m tons/ha (1.5 tons per ac) has been applied once every
3 or 4 years.
For the past 10 to 12 years, the control plot has been
used almost exclusively to pasture cattle. Occasionally, the
grass in the field has been allowed to grow for a hay crop.
As far as the owner could remember, no fertilizer has been
applied to the field in the last 10 years. In addition, no
herbicides or pesticides have ever been applied.
247
-------
At the time of sampling (May 20 and 21, 1976), the field
was covered with a freshly cut mixture of grasses dominated
by tall fescue - the same as on the treated plot.
CLIMATE'
Tlr e climate of Hopkinsville is temperate with warm, humid
summers and moderately cold winters. Passing weather fronts
and the associated high and low pressure centers are respon-
sible for the marked weather variations. These fronts are
least prevalent in late spring and summer, increase somewhat
by late fall, and become most frequent in winter and early
spring. The growing season averages 197 days.
Precipitation is fairly well distributed throughout the
year, although September and October usually have the least
rainfall. Thunderstorms occur approximately 50 days each year.
These are most frequent in the spring and summer months. The
maximum daily precipitation reflects this short duration, high
intensity type of rainfall associated with thunderstorm acti-
vity. The mean annual precipitation averages approximately
12 cm (48 in) .
Snowfall is quite variable from year to year, with some
winters having little or none. The annual average for the
period 1896 to 1971 was 27.2 cm (10.7 in). Additional meteoro-
logical data are presented in Table 80.
248
-------
^^
O
t—
UJ
O
CO
IJJ
UJ — 1
_J _J
03 <—•
1 — oo
*"~
v:
Q-
0
1C
!
1
!
1
Ul
^ C »i
/ I.J ^
V 2 f/j
o S r
;i- v: 6
^ >•
n V.
f ^
1 ll U
1
f~! i-t
f-^. r-^
1 c^ en
t i
1 £ ^
mT n
% "
r' *-i' £
O r.i Ej
nj (,}
§ B
u ,?
(U
r» v
7; K
;, S •:
O
o f^ n
^ '° f.
M f J '*
Ih?
j .i >i
r?
"d
.n
ri
il
9
(D
S
"j
n
o
O.
"t;
'V
s .d
3 s
ti
a
"""
c* ^i M t* X f. '- *>0 '». M > U
d * -1 n. 1 -J ? 3 v u b y
*t in 3. -*r 3. *"> »-) •< n o ^ t-*
0 r-t-HliOOO OOOO**
SSS2"*0 ooor<2P:
0 ^«-.00 000*^
O OOO-ttr«4r^ rs.iiQvO'^OO
r^l i~t r~* r-*
s
n
*
rH r-< O r*< *O n
O D O Ch O
^ . t • E-< O O O O O O « *
--( fX fX (N ^f CO
eo r4 o o «n vo ^,
^t ,_• r^ ^ ^1 ^ ^,
** • • • • o o o o o * • •
r^ (N *-i
-------
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Regional Area
Most of the land in Hopkinsvi11e, including the treated
and control plots, is mapped as the Pembroke series. This
soil is typically found on nearly level or sloping (3 to 15
percent) upland areas. Some areas have karst topography.
Soil of the Pembroke series is typically 230 to 300 cm
(90 to 120 in) deep, well drained, and moderately permeable
with medium runoff characteristics. Silt loam surface layers
and silty clay loam subsoils typify the series. These soils
were formed, in part, in loess and in part in the underlying
limestone residuum or old alluvium under deciduous forests.
The original forest was mixed hardwood: chiefly oaks, hickory,
maple, ash, elm, hackberry, and poplar. Nearly all the forest
has now been cleared; the area is used primarily for crop pro-
duct i o n .
A typical profile for Pembroke silt loam as mapped by the
Soil Conservation Service is described as follows:
0 to 22.9 cm (0 to 9 in) - dark brown silt loam; weak
to moderate fine granular structure; very
friable; many roots; neutral.
22.5 to 40.6 cm (9 to 16 in) - reddish-brown to
yellowish-red silty clay loam; weak fine
subangular blocky structure; friable;
many roots; few clay films; common very
250
-------
small black concretions; slight acidic.
40.6 to 83.8 cm (16 to 33 in) - red silty clay loam;
moderate medium subangular blocky struc-
ture; friable; common roots; common clay
films; common very small black concre-
tions; medium acidity.
83.8 to 114 cm (33 to 45 in) - dark red, heavy silty
clay loam; moderate, medium, subangular
blocky structure; friable; few roots;
common clay films; common black stains
in peds; common black concretions; fine,
small chert fragments; strongly acidic.
114 to 191cm (45 to 75 in) - dark red silty clay;
moderate, medium, blocky structure; firm;
common clay films; common black stains on
peds; common black concretions; fine,
small chert fragments; strongly acidic.
...below 274 cm (108 in) - limestone.
Treated Plot
The soil of the treated plot, as sampled, resembled the
Pembroke profile as outlined above. Boundaries between the
various horizons, however, were wavy, resulting in sampled
depths overlapping somewhat the depths presented as the
"typi cal" profi1e.
__fJ o_t
Surface and subsurface soil cores sampled from the control
251
-------
plot closely resembled the treated plot soil profile,
although the control plot surface horizon was 2.5 to 5 cm
(1 to 2 in) thicker than that of the treated plot.
Texture, pH and other related soil data are presented in
Table 81.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
Sewage Treatment Plant
The Hopkinsville Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP) serves
a population of 21,250 (1970) and an equivalent population of
28,710 (1976). The original plant, constructed in 1938, con-
sisted of bar screens, a grit removal basin, primary clarifier,
a 37 m (120 ft) dia trickling filter, secondary clarifier,
primary anaerobic sludge digester, and sludge drying beds.
Sludge from both clarifiers was anaerobically digested, spread
in drying beds, and subsequently made available for use by
hone gardners and a local country club.
In 1958, the treatment plant was expanded by the addition
of a second 30 m (100 ft) d ia. trickl i ng filter, a sludge
thickening tank, and a 890 cu m (235,500 gal) secondary
anaerobic sludge digester. No additional changes have been
made to the plant since that time.
The present process is as follows: Metered raw sewage is
pumped through a bar screen and grit removal chamber before
entering the 81 cu m (216,000 gal) capacity primary clarifiers.
Detention time is approximately two hours. Secondary treat-
252
-------
./>
— *
en
O-
m
~u >-
— * ^
tr D
JLl —
i-5*
<
i— .X «r
03 ?c
••
J-i _' ii.i
'. 0 ~J
•*?± *~~4 i— *
>— c
2! O
t*
«^
O
uJ
D
N
V-' C
JLJ L
v-*
»— I
CM
1
^
-T
1
m
r
t
-y-
-i.
^
"~* <
^ j
>- u
«-f
^•*
^
"T^ I-H
u ^
- Q
'-> Z
jj -*i
- ^
._,""
<1
o a:
X *i
3 0
LU
a
^ H
3j c/)
-• Q
, _™_J
\
»~ r
Hi ^ —
r1 LLI
^- Q
^ o
3 0
J 0
" «-H
c
^
5
.,.>
'^
al
i — v£5 O
CO CM CO
vj "v. .?
vO O J.1
0
--T 0 VJi
sC o rvs
•u o o
(V »'\J Cf*-
•n ^ =
- >0 ")
r^i o o
ro in o
CTi Ox O
*"~* •— 4 (M
jj
' i 51 S!
n < ° u
JLl A O «-t
— JC ro vo
«f 3 1 1
xi tn m o
-x - M
*"~
co r~- *i- O O i — cri
i— CM r— CO OO CO CM
•^ a1 vj N£; "- ~- Xi
,Ti ifl *• -^
0 0 -' C
*n •* o — • -»> r« -•
O — « -* — • T*) X) "*1
m i\s o o -^ -o
oo ~« -=> ^ :=> o
co CM N CM ro vo Is-
CM ro CM ro -i- ro •*
ro vo N CM in vo in
vo in vo vo ^~ in *d"
Ox st1 vO vO CM CO CO
r-l t-H
h- cj\ ro CM co ro
CM «-« -* -* -
X
n.
J~(
•>
:>
.-"
;,
.U
'r,
j
X
a.
•^
T
-^
M ::
t i
L> n
u .?
X •-
_^
•"•* 1
• 2:
O O
*^ *-^.
-. -vj
253
-------
ment is provided by two rock media trickling filters and
591 cu m (156,000 gal) capacity secondary clarifiers, with a
detention time of approximately 1.5 hours. Discharge of
treated secondary effluent is to the North Fork of the Little
River. No chemicals are added throughout the treatment pro-
cess .
The present average daily flow is approximately 8,300
cu m/day (2.2 mgd). Design capacity is 11,4000 cu m/day
(3 mgd). Table 82 presents treatment efficiencies for a
one-year period beginning July, 1975.
An estimated 15 percent of the average daily flow to the
STP is derived from industrial sources. The principal indus-
trial contributors are mostly light industries involved in
fabrication; their average daily discharges do not vary sig-
nificantly with the seasons. Table 83 shows, each company,
product produced, and average flow.
Data on the industrial contribution of BOD, suspended
solids, and oil and grease are not available. The STP super-
intendent reported that no particular problems have been ex-
perienced as a result of the industrial discharges and that
the pollutant concentrations are not thought to be signifi-
cantly higher than for domestic sewage.
Sludge Stabilization and Storage
Sludge stabilization is achieved by two-stage anaerobic
digestion. Sludge from the secondary clarifiers is returned
to the primaries from which the combined settled sludge is
254
-------
CM
CO
1
CO
•=£
1—
CO
LU
0
I--LJ
t 1
CJ
1 .
LL_
LU
1—
"Z.
1 1 1
^
LU
ce
i—
LU
ID
i
u_
LJ_
LU
>-
Q
it!T
0
C_J)
LU
CO
1
^_
N'
t :•
ZD
1—
LU
LU
1
- 1
--^
CO
~ '
i — i
Q_
O
re
1
i i
c:
O>
4-
LJLJ
4->
C
OJ
,E
i — i
I
I
1
CO
CO
c
o
T3
OJ
C£
Q
./• o
CO
,
, —
cn
JE-
CO
CO
CP
E
Q
O
CO
i —
^•^
cr
^
— -•
cy)
(O
, — .
CT
E
0
r^
1
r— fO
•r- -0
Q ~E
OJ rs
cn o
"3 __
cu c
> 1 —
c
c~
.(_>
C
o
s;
O "vh CTl CO *£) i — Ol i — CT* "^ 1 i —
cocor-~r^r^oooocricocococri
cMr^-ocMi — cocoOi — o^io
oor^cocooor-i^-oococococo
OCMUD^i — •=±tOl£)OOO«3'O
•^-COLOUOLOOOi — r — CMOOCMOO
UD CM oo o 10 o i — LO r-.. co oo r-»
^t r*^ 10 LO <^ LO ^ ^ «cf «^* «^J~ oo
•jj-. —
CM OO OO CM CM CM i — CMCMCMCMCM
000>=3-^-OOOOOO<-
roi — i — COOO^OUDi — lOi — i — CO
co r^ P^ CD CD "^ "^t" ^- ^J~ ^^- r^ co
OOOOOOCTiCnCTiCTiOOCTiOOOOCTi
iD tD
^
.
r— CDCL-M>OC:u2S-S_>,C
rsnoiooiDroairoCLns^
'^
255
-------
TABLE 83
HOPKINSVILLE, KENTUCKY - INDUSTRIAL FLOWS
I -idustry
Eboni te
Paul tless Hardware
P. F. Malborn2
Mi d-Conti nen t
Phi 1 ips -Dodge
U.S. Machine
TOTAL
;
Product
B ow 1 i n g balls
Plated hardware
Tungsten steel powder
Springs
Magnetic wi re
Pop rivets
Werage flow
cu m/day
197
151
643
11
170
144
1,316
^Estimated based upon water consumption figures.
r>
Company recently sold; will be making graphite in the
future.
256
-------
pumped to a sludge thickening tank. From the thickener, the
sludge is pumped into the 632 cu m (167,000 gal) capacity
primary anaerobic digester. Retention time for the superna-
tant is normally on the order of a few days, after which it is
returned to the primary clarifiers. Retention time of the
heavier fraction in the primary digesters is typically on the
order of several weeks, after which it is pumped to the
secondary sludge digester.
Total retention time in the secondary digester varies
widely depending upon seasons. During the spring and summer,
when sludge is spread to the maximum extent possible, reten-
tion time is approximately one to two weeks. During the win-
ter, however, the retention time may reach three months.
Accordingly, sludge solids reportedly fluctuate from a low of
two percent (during summer) to a high of 14 percent (prior to
spreading in early spring). Additional sludge storage capacity
is provided by 11 drying beds, each measuring approximately
30 x 7.5 x 0.5 m (100 x 25 x 1.5 ft).
Chemical analysis of sludge solids has not been per-
formed on a routine basis. The results of two analyses,
however, are presented in Table 84.
Disposal of Sewage Sludge
Based on 1971-1975 data, the STP generates approximately
1,780 cu m (470,000 gal) of sludge annually. Assuming an STP
reported average solids content of 10 percent, total sludge
generated annually is 178 dry m tons (196 dry tons).
257
-------
TABLE 84
STABILIZED LIQUID SLUDGE ANALYSIS1
- ~ _ - _ „ _, — „_ . . „
-— - - -— •
Concentration
Parameter
*
Zn
Cu
Ni
Pb
Cd
Cr
Volatile Acids
Total A kal i ni ty
Moisture ("O •
pH
Test A^
- PPm -
2884
2156
235
918
17
336
2805
2903
93.5
5. 5
Test B3
- u q/g -
3861
62.6
271
1617
17.7
-
-
_
97.7
-
1 Data expressed on an oven dry weight.basis.
2
Kentucky Water Pollution Control Commission, 1971.
3
Phase I stabilized sludge sample, September 18, 1975.
258
-------
Approximately 70 to 75 percent of the digested sludge is
landspread without dewatering. The remaining sludge is pumped
to the drying beds. The bed-dried sludge is used principally
by the country club but is also available for local domestic
purposes .
Historical records on sludge spreading date back to 1967
when the program was initiated. Table 85 presents available
sludge distribution data. In recent years, the amount of
sludge spread on the study site has decreased due to more
demand by other farmers.
Liquid sludge is spread using a 3.8 cu m (1,000 gal)
tank mounted on a 1 ^ ton truck chassis fitted with a 15 cm
(6 in) dia gravity discharge pipe. When applying sludge to a
field, the driver brings the truck to a steady speed and opens
the sluice gate value at the rear of the tank with a rope in
the cab. In this manner, a load of sludge is spread over an
ai ea estimated 10 be yO m (100 yJs) in length and 2 in (6 ft)
in width. Assuming approximately 10 percent solids, this is
equivalent to a spreading rate of 22 dry m tons/ha (10 dry
tons per ac) per application.
Interviews with STP personnel and a tenant farmer indi-
cated no apparent aesthetic or environmental problems asso-
ciated with this method of sludge disposal. Odors were
minimal at the time of field sampling, despite the fact that
sludge had been spread only seven days prior to sampling.
Photographs 24 through 27 show, respectively, the
259
-------
_
o
k— 1
i—
s
u_
u_
e
e
z:
00
' r
>-
^!
LO 0 *—
03 ^ >,
Z ^
UJ LU £
3 J 3
t- ^ —
i — i
>
f— t
CL
O
3:
4J 01 T3
c cn 0)
4->
3 3 «
err—' s_
00 O)
id M- o>
+j o en
o
\—
i —
o-a
4-> 0)
OQ
Ol
cr cn
T3 SZ
3 'SL
00 5-
O
O) o
CD (!>
"O ^ *
oo
1—
1 1
CO c"j^
o o
O Ol
•r-
0) 00
cn
-o >,
rs -o
r— 3
00 4-J
00
S-
rO
0)
C5 f^ C\J C3 VX5 v£5 CT\ Cft CO
00 ^5 OO C^ C^J ^™~ ^^ CO C?5
^•oocooor^voco«3i—
CO
• vo r*^ oo i i i i co
o fi en r^- i i i i to
CTt »~~ OO C\J 1 1 1 1 r—
r—
CT> i£) Ln CO i i i i O
CO CxJ oo ^J- | i | I LO
co oo CD LO i i i i cr>
Lovocnvoooocftcvjcn
vjDOOCTioooor^cor^
CDr— r^OOCvJOOOOOOO
r— i— r— i—
r~-cOCTio^~c\ifO'^"LO
to vo to ^* i^^ ^^ i*^^ r^« r*v
CT^ tji O^ CT^ ti") C^ O^ C7^ CT^
S-
o
(J
>r_
•o
(O
+J
c
0
o
01
(B
(/)
•o
J__
o
u
0)
s-
Q-
(—
Ol
4J
13
0)
T3
•r—
OJ
s-
03
-------
Photograph 24
Treated Plot
Photograph 25
Control Field
261
-------
Photograph 26
Drying Beds
. -i
Photograph 27
Sludge Tank Truck
262
-------
treated pilot, the control plot, the drying beds, and the
sludge tank truck.
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
The Department of Public Works, the State Department of
Health Services, and the local newspaper were contacted to
determine public attitudes toward land spreading of sludge.
A representative of the State Department of Health Ser-
vices stated that they were aware of the sludge spreading
practice and that they believed it to be a desirable and
acceptable sludge disposal procedure.
A representative of the Public Works Department indicated
that they had never encountered opposition to this method of
disposal. They also indicated their desire to continue this
disposal practice.
When questioned concerning public awareness and attitude
towards the land spreading of sludge, the editor of the local
newspaper, The Kentucky New Era, indicated that there had
never been any articles concerned with sludge disposal methods
as far as he could remember. In addition, he could not recall
any citizen complaints or objections to the current disposal
practice .
Interviews with the local Soil Conservation Service
personnel indicated their awareness and acceptance of the
sludge spreading practice.
263
-------
STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS ON SLUDGE SPREADING
Representatives of the State Departments of Public Works
and Health Services indicated that there were no city, county,
or state regulations which affect the current sludge spreading
operation at the Hopkinsville site. In addition, there are no
requirements for site preparation, monitoring, or specific
disposal practices. The STP employees do not receive innocu-
lations as a consequence of their job specialty.
ECONOMICS
Equipment Description and Cost
Total capital investment for the sludge spreading system
was approximately $5,000. In 1966, the plant purchased a
used 1^2 ton Chevrolet truck for $750. A 3.8 cu m (1,000 gal)
tank was purchased for $1,000 and mounted on the truck. In
1969, the original truck was replaced with a new 1% ton
Chevrolet truck chassis for approximately $3,000. The sludge
tank was transferred from the old truck to the new truck at a
nominal cost. The only additional expense for the sludge
spreading operation was $50 in materials to facilitate load-
ing of the sludge spreading truck from the existing sludge
piping system to the drying beds.
Separate O&M records for sludge spreading are not re-
corded by the STP. Maintenance costs for the truck, in-
cluding fuel and repairs, are estimated at $0.20 per mile.
Since a majority of the liquid sludge which is trucked from
264
-------
the plant is spread on agricultural land within 1.5 km (1 mi)
of the plant, the truck only logs approximately 3,200 km
(2,000 mi ) a year.
One plant employee is assigned part-time to hauling
sludge. The STP superintendent estimates that on the average,
it takes one hour to load, haul, and spread a tank load of
sludge. Based upon an hourly wage of $3.50 per hour, plus
fringe benefits of 25 percent, the labor costs for spreading
250 loads in 1975 were $1,120.
Table 86 provides an analysis of the 1975 (calendar)
cost of sludge spreading.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
S 1_ u d_gj>
On May 20 and August 25, 1976, five one-liter grab
samples each of raw and stabilized sludge were obtained from
both the primary clarifiers and the secondary digester.
On May 20 and 21, 1976, surface and subsurface soil samples
were obtained from both the treated and control plots, each of
which was divided into five sections. Approximately 20 sur-
face samples were randomly taken throughout each section from
the surface 0 to 15 cm (0 to 6 in) with a 2.5 cm (1 in) dia-
meter stainless split tube sampler. Before each core was
removed, dead plant material and/or accumulated dried sludge
was di scarded .
265
-------
TABLE 86
COST FOR DISPOSAL OF LIQUID SLUDGE - 1975
Annual Capital Cost
Vehicle Depreciation
1969 Chevrolet Truck: $3,000 $ 509
Total Annual Capital Cost 509
Annual Operating Cost
Personnel Hourly Rate % Time Worked
1 Operator $3.5012.6 $ 816
Fringe Benefits (25 percent) 204
Vehicle Maintenance and Operation 400
Total Annual Operating Cost $1,420
Total Annual Capital and Operating Cost $1,929
2
10 Percent Contingency Factor 193
Total Annual Cost $2,122
Total Annual Cost _ $2,122 _ $22. 28/dry m ton
Total Sludge Hauled Annually 105 dry tons ($20.21/dry ton)
Vehicle was fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8 percent
interest, equivalent to $169.68 per $1,000 annually.
2
A 10 percent contingency factor is added to cover such items
as administrative overhead.
266
-------
Subsoil samples were obtained with a 7.6 cm (3 in)
stainless bucket auger. Samples obtained from the depths
between 15 to 30 cm (6 to 12 in) were labeled horizon A;
30 to 61 cm (12 to 24 in), horizon B; 61 to 91 cm (24 to 36 in),
horizon C; and 91 to 122 cm (36 to 48 in), horizon D.
Both surface and subsurface soil samples at the control
plot were obtained in exactly the same manner as those at the
treated plot.
PI ants
On May 20, 1976 grass samples from the treated plot were
obtained by cutting with a pair of shears. The plants were
trimmed about 7.6 cm (3 in) from the ground with each sample
containing an estimated 100 to 200 individual blades ranging
in length from 30 to 61 cm (12 to 24 in). Approximately 20
such samples were obtained from each section.
The grasses on the control plot had been cut on May 19,
1976 in preparation for baling. Since the cut grasses still
lay fresh in the field, samples were collected by simply
picking up handfulls of the fescue from 20 different loca-
tions in each of the five sections. The size of the samples
and the length of the grass collected were approximately the
same as those obtained from the treated plot.
267
-------
Tables 87 through 93 present the following:
Tab! e Desc ri pti on
87 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
SIudges
88 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite
Surface and Subsurface Soils
89 Total Metal Concentrations in
Individual Subsurface Soil Samples
90 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and PI ants
91 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
92 Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and
Plants
93 Concentrations of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and Plants
Figures 62 to 71 present particle size analyses
of the various soil composites by depth
268
-------
TABLE 37
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILTZFD SLUDGES FROM
HOPKINSVILLE, KENTUCKY
Volatile Solids (%)
N03 - N
NH4 - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
SO,
Cl
Ag
As
B
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
7n
H20 (%)
pH
5/20/76
45.31
20
7708
21531
7187
1583
1427
53563
3614
-21
250
1.10
1 .0
33.5
8.85
483
10.3
381
4708
6.04
189
8.54
6823
50.2
4.06
1647
90.4
7 .5
8/25/76
36.8
<.41
3087
15020
24014
1041
2473
71351
3568
n .d .
249
1 .22
1 .28
30.7
6.35
277
9.05
714
10209
13.6
214
13.7
57.1
120
8.65
1290
85.0
7 .6
Average
41
10
5398
- 18276
15600
1312
1950
62457
3591
<10
250
1
1
32
7
380
9
548
7459
9
202
11
3440
' 85
6
1469
87
.1
.2
.16
.14
.1
.6
.68
.82
.1
.1
.36
.8
All units in ng/g (unless otherwise noted)
All data expressed on oven dry weight basis
-------
r
— •
v/l
_l-~
<-
*~<
uj
£ /I
_J
Oj— '
-JO
TU1
•5
— Itt
-JL>
<;< >-
^ 'A. *.
t— rv
< 5 :?
JtJt UT. *"""-
00 rx5j £
CO ^ *
do •••
!*J Z jJ
-* ^i<£ _l
<• -auJ •— <
— u ->
_i< t/j
<5 a. Z
~ :t — i.
-^ -J X.
— 1/> i
u_iu r
O i —
»— <
•/i v>
::0
OQ.
*^Z
— o
-V-
LL
w—
2;
jj
CJ
^
O
'/) V
J
— t
rt
—
O *-4
c ^
"r o
< .D
jj V-
\
«i O
0. LJ
CJ
O
L>'
"1
•~^-
rvj
U5
^:
^
E- ?
-J 0
- ^
-
->
u
o
u
J
\-
1
. '^ " - •" t -v .-- >,
". \ \ t '* ^ ^ •" ^ *
- J -^ : ~ • . . . .
_ - " J rj .-j ^, -,
^ o "N C 0 -i ~
•^H • ^^
-J —"—•-« ^H _
- 5 n Z ^ > » r> -, ^
7 ^ ^ ^ - - t .. J, ?
a; — i o ~ o ~ -T _ .* •
! ! = 5 S 5 2 5 £ 5
3°°-0 0000^
^ •; ^ ° :vi ^- o ^ ^ .^
C^'nr,^ ****•
*I**-}'^ ">'*"! ->-1^-«-*
^> -* ;\i ^ ^ i ^ ^ n
^* •~< •— * rn ^-t -TIJ
°. °. t T ~ « o o o
^ o ^ * * ^ Sf 5 r i -
S. °. ^ '1 ^ * * .-v IB <,
- - - « S S? JC Pi fi 4
'•*t **^. « * -»_ *~^
^ " ~ t t ~ *• * •* *
£ - » ^ tn o. n ^ ^ ^
*"•* —* »-^* -^*
S P? * 5 2 ^ ^ * M co
.,*:Xl<0 : =o-o-oso
^ ° ° =* ° ; , o o o 4 o 1
1 '
i
*j * " S ' * • . • y '
-555"! .555":
3 S 7 ? ? ? i ^ £ S 5 g S:
J- 1 I j or •>- i i i i .
< 5 « o - - £ 5 J) i A J,,
^ T» - n « » sr^^nvoo^
2 0
, °
|
*
•S)
— I
ir>
<
3C
o
*
3
£_
-U
^*
3
2T «
O 2
O
O «-*
i.f 1 !„
iA
C/) jj
jj 'O
X — «
2L Cj
*<
A3
-------
A.
JO
X,
s>
_e
01
00
x> /i o -- fi
—4
-. *^ ^ f\ -~r .r, s "- \J *^ XV *% vi O ,U ^r uO *£> •—*^ **•
J^ "«3 ^^ ^ : \J O *.O >>Q
—H -^ —« --^ >-H» —^ —< *—4
i 'O o o o o o o o o o o r>
Jiri ^ J* ^ O Z> ^ JL "^ ^ -> O
— —« -^ "vi X ^ "O O 3" *\J j^ TI \r* sD j~t '4_"( T*>
^~ v •? -j^ c.h c 'J* ry '-^r^v .T1 ^*- -x o ID • c ^ *-HP ^ i~c
*~ i
,' 'T^^joXi '£—*"*-'*> ^-^^--^O *V'V3:
-T. ' , ( «••• »*•.«. » » * • ***» «
I __ ^ ^ ^ __ _ ^ _
t ^- X X- O >£J ^X' CC> <\i O ^> O r*- 'J* C^ JT* -^ CC
! c- ^ r-
o
-J
H
o
5:0
u
^ O ^* ^^CM
-• I I I I
^~ in o ~.-i
O
ss: 2 o
ou o
CM
O*-i •-< CM
rovo CT. rt
i i i i
mo »H rt
ft
su ^2:2:20 ^ 2:22: u
u -*uoo •" uoo
CM CM __ CM
•-•CVJ ^O'-H'-'CM Zo^'—'CM
Ox «—i --5 po vD Ox ^~* ^ PO vD Ox «—<
'III! -• I I I I "" I I I I
'IOO«-I^H '— in o *->*-< *~ in o'-<'-<
irt uj'" oJ'
-------
<-
«— t
J
«
•rt
-*
o >-
CJ
aJ .3
(-? * —
*s nr
J. 0."
0 JC *
en -1
J Z- J
•JJ r-»
Z 00
•O iT
•— *:
Z X
3 <
i
?
_
^
—
U
^-
CM
^
-C
a
-y
_J
r>
(/i
<9
UZ ID
< ^
a:
01 .
U
— '
°
01
•-*
s:
<
•j)
\o
^f
•
*^
,c
o-
J":
r> 4. • •«- **: *- x ^ -o
_ ^ o /! = — "^ -t
"*i v '>j n ^ •*> ^ i — *
O- /J ^ :JJ i_T> >"*7 CO X'
-i £i » m xo a 'vj-t
3\ n f*> o C« O O**»-
n ^c 3? ^- 'j^ 3? rv co
* •**•---->•
17^ O XT O1* »C i\i N- JO
f) r*1 — < rO 'VA CV Cvs O
o o o o o o o o
nj
•
S
>-<
CF" O >• r>- (U f»- r— r)ninj>ino
(\i f\i ^vi "vj rvi rvj rvi
(V,
(•») {>«-*<*)»-« S t*- O
i^D 00303 0
-a o jj uj uJ jj oj LUi—
.'jJO 1/1 U> 5/J (/> !/l Z J/>
a:
m i
CM
.
1-4
V
!
— • <*••»- J --> "V J~i V
o -. -. - -j i o r\j
'V rV! .\j — « — i W V
o rv -4 ,TJ > c- - >
^ ^ & > ^- -* ~~ -
ir.rii'.
•C ^i T> «o — i j>- **^ .r<
4 * ^ * ^^
m ji ;> c -•« ~ t.---
V "U — f 0 — ,V, — ^
o o o o o o o ,3
i
i
J"1.
*
x<
,vi j\ -f •£. ^ r^j \j'\i
o r»- o o cr .\j >>rv
tr- •» en •>}• ^ ^ ^-^
•-* ru r\ji 7^ 3» .T; o •— •
rv f\J ^y -H — * •— * CM
d" CD C^> '"^ *VI '*^t
2J ^_ rr> r>^ .-\j r^ ._n J.
O o o 03 o* -;c ;> '^
— « •— <
^ t- >0 <* 0 ."> -ff-
3? f**- 3d f*- r^ CO- fs*- o
B f _^
C_> tj C21 CJ C_^ •._? — i '--J
Uf i-« rvs n -*- if> «
*-* Z. Z.> Zi Z Z uJ
_jy> oooao 01
fY -X fc.-_ ^_ 1^- j.^. fcrir >* «
UL. _giji__ fM- ^— J— - M— , |W- ^ •
H-s: o -j o o u < o
2IO UJjuUJiiJjJaJr—
o o (/> i/> i/) -v) y> x in
L>
1 i
i
CO
CO
<
^
or
Q
•z. >
o o
"Z. UJ
° L
Q CO
CO DL
co 5:
lil O
Q.
X Z
UJ O
< CO
h- >-<
< to
<
_| 2
< <
^>. *-*
iH CVJ
^. ^.
-------
CO
cr>
UJ
Hr
CJ
z:
UJ
to
o
o
o
O
O
Xq
0
o
u.
CO
_j
o
5
0s
H
"
o"'
z
^0
z
o
SCRIPT
UJ
o
at
j
"•0
s z
t
O
CO
CM
CM
CM
vo
Ip
r-(
CU
r~*
"i—
c
OL
O
"T"
O
o
CO
t3
CU
s-
1—
GJ
O
03
^
CO
-------
UJ
UJ 85 2
m
Xq
o
o
u.
C)
_J
o
o
ss
t-
VJ
o
z
u>
z
o
SCRIPT
UJ
UJ
0-0
^
tn
E
q
>,
rO
CJ
r— ~
oo
f — 1
CO
s
IT)
OJ
•r~
c
•r—
Q.
O
O
00
a
-------
Xq
z:
o
<
O
CO
<
_l
o
_J
0
1-
co
s«
0
4
z
o
1-
o.
a:
o
V)
UJ
0
UJ
a. o
sz
CO
ft
r™
c_
4-
r—
•r-
(/"
O
O"
LT
LT
LT
T—
a,
r-
I —
•*-
(J
C.
-^
c
c
li
c\
r—
cc
EC '
s
2
0
^nf^
o
u_,
""'*
>
-a
OJ
rO
. OJ
S-
1—
N
5-
"* UJ
•^ -y
^ *
^9
< 2
X
^ o
0 2
£P
u O
MM
r
I
&
o
r~H
o
ro
S
5
^7
^*
j
UJ
j:
o
0
"
00
I,
1—
fO
-------
|i(0i3/v\ Xq JSEJDOQ
o
o
°
O
-5» ^
2. zu
mO 2
O p
t/) -1
O3
,q6i8A\ Xq jauij
o
1—
0
U-
CO
to
.J
o
_J
o
H
o
S^
z
o
l~
0.
ct:
«
UJ
o
tu
_1
si
V)
E
(T3
C
>
rO
4-3
en
CO
CM
ro
CTl
OJ
i— •
>
(/I
C
-V
C
C
z
oc
a
T3
ai
n3
2
i H-
E
O
j |
CT>
1
r— 1
to
1
C
«=c
CO
CD
O
•i—
4-J
i-
Q-
c:
ai
a.
o
LO.
O7
-------
o
o
JSUIj
p
J—
o
U-
CO
CO
o
>
J
o
CO
^0
o
z
z
o
a.
DESCR
Ul
°-6
I Z
to
CO ^ a
ct: ?" :;
^J O 10 '
uj «s - s
Z fS s ^
w ii 1 5
^^ 3^ O ** "*
f I | O jz J o
Ol Op uf 0
COlS 3
r \ 5 z o en
WS8 | ' -
r> ^*>
E
fC
C
re
c_
1 —
•r-
cr
CM
c«-
u:
LT
^
a
•r"
>
I/"
C
•r-
J^
O
C
rc
c\
cc
- 0
-o
cH
•J
7
o a'
E
o
CM
CM
r— i
i
.—i
CT>
» i>i
0 .f-
_ t/>
ai
S-
ro
D-
*s
3
O)
^
r>
-------
|i|'MUM
O
Xq
2
o
I—
0
u.
CO
CO
**
o
5
s?
1-
_J
o
z
0?
z
o
1—
IX
V
0
tAj
O
LU
o-o
X z
tf) »- '-
CC 5% •;
Uj|| , I
5 I| I ?
•« H "• C! o
.C. r t) ™ 5
•<. a ?
w !-;^ ?
t/7
e
c
.^
4-:
or
E
ft
J
•4-
• i—
r-
o.
u:
-
a
JZ
•r
^
C
^
C
c
rz
c
f~*
h-
w
1
i
M
-) | -.r-
<•••
^^
rr
[1
f— '
O
s.
c
c
c .
cu
(_
4^
i.
~«
i/-
3 . ~»^
o --^
•<
JJ
? C
0 ej
7.
v^r
Nl
OO
CD
O
4->
fC
IX
*v
u
1
-------
Xq
CO
O
JSUIj JUDOJOJ
d
ij
o
u.
CO
_J
0
^
o
£~
l-
cn
0^
o
z
«I
V)
z
o
H
Q.
ESCRI
a
Ul
sz
<<
Ul
-^
o
, ^
VMV
E
(T3
0
J
re
o
5
oo
CNJ
ro
CM
U3
O)
•p—
>
to
C
•r—
a
o
J-
s
r-
r—
O
i.
•M
0
0
n»
h
El
II
^4
5 rt
2 c
O ci
'.3
§ a-
* t
E
u
0
CO
i
LO
,—1
a
o
4-J
s_
Q.
>
O
-(->
ai
r
cu
•—
1/1
•i —
CL
o
31
CO
a>
S-
^5
rr>
U_
279
-------
O
c\i
C)
f
o
o
O O O O O
z:
o
i~
o
U-
co
OT
O
>
<
_J
o
^o
H
«
'^?
0
.z
(i*-
a:
o
i-
o.
(C
"
W Sof >
1 1 ! W (T tf
-> ° S 2 £
<
I/)
C
•1 —
^^
OL.
0
CO
r-
r—
0
s*.
-(-5
C
o
I
F
E
o
i-H
UD
j
o
16 2
i
I OJ
= .N
i
1
CD
U
s_
Q-
"
•^
-^
O
^
•rJ
C
'U
-^
*s
-------
Q
to
if)
at
UJ
LU
UJ
fi (C
9 a
£S
<-> ^
o
i o
' u
!H6ia/,\ /q J3UI-)
g
j~
o
u.
01
0}
_t
O
V
_j
S?
i-
U)
z
o
H
0.
[C
o
v>
UJ
Q
UJ
S Z
£
rO
0
*~^
>
"3
C_>
CO
UD
ro
LO
CO
O)
., —
>
I/)
C
^
Q
o
—
00
CO
1 —
o
^s
C
o
0
E
o
J — 1
en
i
i— i
vO
-------
JSSJDOQ
o
o
.
*•" O «
it I <« e
*-* _ UJ
"
O 5 3 2
CO |3
') < z
'O
Xq jsui j
o
o
u.
V)
o
•i
o
(5°
^-
r-j
OJ
i —
O
282
-------
TABLE 91
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUDGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
HOPKINSVILLE, KENTUCKY
So-1
Sur'ace Composi tes
Pic nt
Compos lies
Stabi 1 i 2 ;d Sludge
Treated
Plot
MQ
-0.0071
0.47
<0 . 7 5
<0.5
<0.01
20 2
<1 .17
<0. 11
(5/20/76)
9.38 1
14.9
260
1469
Control
Plot
/kg ....
<0
0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
•
.007
.007
.75
.5
.01
.02
.83
.22
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
(8/25/76)
eo-p,?1 ; o.
<0
<
5837
4-p
.08
.08
TrryT
TTT/ 1
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Dete-tion limits vary due to sample size, plant matter
inte-ference, arid instrument sensitivity.
Plan. -Batter interference.
283
-------
(/O
-^
*~
^L
— -J
O-
Q
^? ^~
^ ^
~E)
• h—
£ ° ^
LU OO 1
m « d
2 § |
t— H
1-1 O
oo -1-
i—
00
! -r- y>
11 _Q c:
3 E 03
CO 3 O
CU " —
£X i - x s * — *•
O
(/)
cu
a
0)
,_. O)
2- T3 03 03
03 r~
oo oo
E
03
S-
CD
•^^,
03
0
O
LO
•v
1
CU CU CU
> to > >
'•!-> 'c '-T> +J
03 03 03 03
CD O CD CD
CU QJ CU
03
U
O
X
0
h-
CO
Ol
, s S ^ (/>
vo ^o o
r^** r**** (^L
^. -^ E
O LO O
CM CM O
LO OO TJ
v — . — . CU
"O "O 03
CU CU CU
N N i-
•l- -r- -O r- h-
r— i— (DO
•i— •»— 4-> L_ |
-Q JD tO
4-> •(-> C S- O i—
OO CO 03 1 — <_>•!-
r— O
D_ CO
CU CU CU CU CU
> > > > >
+J 4_) ^-J 4_J 4J
03 03 03 O3 03
CD CD CD CD CD
CU CD CU CD CU
to
CU
4-)
i/)
O
Q.
E
0
°
r-_
O
E i-
E E E 0 4->
O O O C
CM O
O) O r— r— CM O
(J CO VO CTl r~~
03 1 1 1 1 1
M- LO O r— r—
3 r-
CO -r-
O
00
1
i
1
CU CU CU CU CU
> > > > >
4J +J ^ +j 4-j
03 03 o3 03 O3
CD CD CD CD CD
CU CU CU CU CU
E
E E E 0
U O O
CM
CU O i— •— • CM
O CO *Q C3^ r-"
ro 1 1 1 1
i*- LO o •— i—
J- r- CO VO
-------
ro
ai
UJ
i
CO
d(^
1
1
vo
CT>
1
co
I—
^
— 1
£X
o
5
n
CO
1 — 1
o
CO
CO ^
i t i CJ
CJ3 =3
Q 1—
^ LU
CO **^
»— i LU
LU >~ '
03 >
CD co
fy* *_L
0 t-«
S Q-
(.7
u_ n:
O
o
t — t
J—
si
t—
LU
O
o
T '
O
o
o
-4-1
O
i-
4-J
CO
r —
ro
O
O)
U_
E
O
M-
r—
O
o
"res
CU
U-
rd
i —
CU
en
•i —
-d
CO
r^
cu
0
E
ro
CO
^jo^.^duioo
.- ... -. _
D auji>i Lj-Uon
^"
—
^^aA Lq.duinsaj(j
^,a6pn[5 6
jad OJQ [L^OI
^pajaiduioo
_
¥¥pauu LJ-U03
^^.aAL^dumsajd
3 n n n i c fi
^ad SJQ LB4°1
n~\T -^ i Hijir)*^
Jf-V-K 4 L J
auutiuon
^^
, .
^f.^,O/\ L 4 oo».4(J
"iirSr^n i r* f\
voUL/III^ L/
uad 6^0 LB40i
^.^pa^a [duioQ
^^pauiu LJ.UO3
^.^aA LQ.duinsajcj
--
^a6pn[$ 6
jad 6*10 IP^O!
a6pn[$ 6 uad
^oeg oiqouay [eq.oi
c~
r
CU 4-^
r- D.
CL-r-
e i-
co to
CU
Q
4- + 4- 4-
4-4-4-4-
4-4-4-4-
UD oo «* r^
o o o o
X X X X
o to o oo
*± r— CO CO
4- + 4- +
4-4-4-4-
4-4-4-4-
0 O O 0
X X X X
CO O UD CO
ro oo i — ro
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
4- 4- 4- 4-
Q Q Q Q
•ZL ~ZL -Z. -ZL
4-111
4-14-1
4-4-4-4-
ro
CO O Q Q
O ~~
i— 0
OO i — to i —
o o o o
X X X X
00 53- CO
r— r— tO rO
j^j , CS~t I
o LO o LO
-t-3
rs a: ct: co co
CO
4- 4-
4- 4-
4- +
•* ^.
0 O
X X
O CO
r— «3-'
4- 4-
4- 4-
4- 4-
^^" r~~*
O CTi
1 1
4- 4-
4- 4-
Q Q
r i
4- 4-
+ +
f~~> f~*t
z Z
CTv CT>
O O
x 'x
LD
CM CTi
ro to
"O i—
CU O
co ro 4->
4-> O) C
C S- 0
fO 1 — O
CX
O)
4-> •
_C T-
CD -- -
•i~
CU C2
S- O S-
•° s. °
n3 O) 4-
3:
C O CO
O Q- ra
cu a>
l/l to -4->
(/) 03 S-
O) O
CL CU CU U
x to s_ QJ
r~> o
i— x •.- S-
CO rO °
CD 10 > c
S_ CU i-
=3 CU "
< > O
r- * 4=
*
285
-------
TD
OJ
00
CTv
UJ
—I
QQ
•I —
0
o
4_>
CL
i— o.
O.-r-
£ S~
rO O
OO CO
OJ
O T- vo LO
0
E
O
0 cv E E
O O O
i -a ia
CD 4- O i —
to +J s- co co
r— tS 3 1 1
••- a> co in CD
OS- r— CO
00 |—
4
4
4
O
O
if)
«N
4
4
4
CO
^t-'
1
4
4
Q
'
4
4
Q
Z
O
,_!
E
U
r—
cn
4
4
4
0
O
cn
*•£
s-s
° a
•^ 5
5i
01 'I
is
*
*
286
-------
CHAPTER VII
FRANKFORT, INDIANA
SITE DESCRIPTION
Location
This site is located approximately 5 km (3 mi) north of
Frankfort, Indiana, and approximately 1.5 km (1 mi) northwest
of the Frankfort Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP). The control
field is approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mi) north of the treated
field.
Physical Condition
Corn, soybeans, and other feed grains compose the princi-
pal crops in this area. Native vegetation on this generally
flat to gently rolling (slopes less than 4 percent) terrain is
typified by dense stands of hardwoods, especially in and
around natural drainage courses.
The 2.5 ha (6 acre) treated field (Figure 72) is loca-
ted on gently rolling terrain at a slightly higher elevation
than the level control field. The sampled plot of the treated
field is approximately 90 m (300 ft) square, and has a slight
depression of approximately 1 m (3 ft) in the northeastern cor-
ner of Section 1. Additionally, there is a rise of approxi-
mately 1.5 m (5 ft) in Section 5. The field tapers gradually
to Wildcat Creek, the principal tributary in the area. This
creek forms the southern boundary of the farm. Directly south
of Wildcat Creek and across from the treated plot are several
large industrial stabilization lagoons which cover a total of
287
-------
Bridge
-.rr
Ind Hwy 75 To Frankfort* 5 km
1rees
Shop
: : ; ;Barn;
•Farmhouse L - j
10
Control
Field
No Scale
Frankfort, Indiitna Fr^atec Plot
288
-------
19 ha (47 acres). These were established by the city to handle
the large seasonal effluent from a food cannery.
The sampled control plot, also approximately 90 m (300 ft)
square, is located in the southeast corner of an 8.5 ha (25
acre) field north of the treated field (see Figure 73).
Two wells supply all the water to the treated farm.
Groundwater is at an estimated depth of 21 m (70 ft).
Farming Practices
The treated field is in a current rotation of two years
corn and three years wheat. At the time of sampling (May 25,
1976), the field was in spring wheat (Triticum spp.). The
field will be planted to corn in 1977.
This particular field has had a history of continuous
sludge spreading dating back to about 1964. Neither the
farmer nor STP personnel could recall exactly when and where
sludge spreading began, since records were not kept prior to
1974. The farmer estimated that three sludge applications had
been made to the total field in 1974 and about one and a half
applications in 1975. Estimated application rates, assuming
sludge solids of 6.5 percent (STP analytical data), totaled 40
dry m tons/ha (17.7 dry tons/acre) in 1974, and 20 dry m tons/
ha (8.9 dry tons/acre) in 1975. The farmer felt that these
two years were "typical" in terms of historical sludge applica-
tion rates. This same farmer also farms another field of
approximately 16 ha (40 acres) to which sludge has been applied
for the last ten years, but spreading on this field has not
-------
-------
_ y- y y
Trees
-------
been ,is consistent as on the smaller fitld Hnrnpled for this
study.
Field preparation for wheat usually begins toward the end
of September with several applications of sludge. The field
stubble is chisel plowed to a depth of 20 to 25 cm (8 to 10 in)
and disced, followed by seeding with a grain drill for the next
year's crop. Chisel plowing is restricted to shallow depths in
order to avoid drain tiles. Lime at 6.7 m tons/ha (3 tons/
acre) is incorporated during the field preparation approximately
once every three years.
During the wheat cycle, the field is annually supplemented
with potash at 220 kg/ha (200 Ib/acre). In the spring, 67.2 kg
N (ammonium nitrate)/ha (200 Ib/acre) is also applied. No
other chemicals are used.
Wheat yields were 50, 80 and 64 bu/acre, respectively, for
1974, 1975, and 1976. The farmer has historically sold the
wheat crop to a local flour mill.
When the field is prepared for corn (late fall), dry
potash at 336 kg/ha (300 Ib/acre) is applied, and" the field
chisel plowed to a depth of 25 cm (10 in). Fertilizer (6-24-24)
is then applied at 220 kg/ha (200 Ib/acre) in mid-May. Anhy-
drous ammonia is applied at 110 kg N/ha (100 Ib N/acre) to fur-
ther stimulate crop growth. Atrazine at 4.5 kg/ha (4 Ib/acre)
is used for weed control after planting.
The control field follows a crop rotation pattern of one
year each of wheat, alfalfa/clover, corn, and soy beans. At
290
-------
the time of sampling, this field was planted to the same vari-
ety of wheat as the treated field.
Around the first of November, preparation for wheat begins
by spreading fertilizer (7-26-26), at 220 kg/ha (200 Ib/acre)
and discing to a depth of 15 to 20 cm (6 to 8 in). At time of
planting (typically, mid-May), the same fertilizer is applied
again at 220 kg/ha (200 Ib/acre). Additionally, 110 kg/ha (100
Ib/acre) of ammonium nitrate is applied in the spring. Lime
has been added to the field at 6.7 kg/ha (3 tons/acre), but
infrequently - approximately once every four or five years.
For corn, potash at 220 kg/ha (200 Ib/acre) and phosphate
at 110 kg/ha (100 Ib/acre) are added at the time of plowing.
When the field is seeded, fertilizer (6-24-24), at 220 kg/ha
(200 Ib/acre) and anhydrous ammonia at 170 kg/ha (150 Ib/acre)
are applied. The herbicide, Aatram, is "banded" onto the field
at a rate of 9 kg/ha (8 Ib/acre).
Wheat yields have historically been between 60 and 70 bu/
acre. During the time of sampling (May 24 and 25, 1976), how-
ever, the central Indiana area was experiencing a severe drought
condition. The wheat, which had formed kernels and was in the
milking stage, was yellow to greenish-yellow in color - much
more so than the treated field, although neither had been irri-
gated. The 1976 yield from the control field was 25 bu/acre.
CLIMATE
Precipitation is evenly distributed throughout the year.
The month of May usually has more than other months while winter
291
-------
months have the least. Spring and summer rains are usually
sufficient for most crops.
Temperatures have ranged in the past 30 years from -30.6
to 24.6°C (-23 to 102°F). July is the warmest month of the
year, averaging eight days with temperatures exceeding 32.2°C
90° F). January is the coldest month. Temperatures below zero
occur an average of eight days during the winter season.
Snow has occurred as early as October and as late as May,
but most falls in February. The greatest snowfall in any one
24-hour period over the last 30 years was 20 cm (8 in) recorded
February 25, 1960.
The average freeze-free period extends from April 23 to
October 22. However, freezing has occurred as late as May 27
and as early as September 27. Additional meteorological data
are presented in Table 94.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
The entire treated plot and the northeast section of the
control plot are mapped by the Soil Conservation Service as
Russell silt loam. The remainder of the control plot is mapped
as Camden silt loam.
Soil of the Russell series is described as gently sloping,
deep, and well drained on upland till plains. This soil was
formed in 50 to 102 cm (20 to 40 in) of silty loess and under-
lying glacial till. The dominant slope is about 4 percent.
The soil has high available water capacity and moderate per-
meability. The organic matter content in the surface layer is
moderate. Surface water runoff is slow (low spots within
292
-------
Q
CQ
•- O
O O O O
T .•" -T -I a)
) o oO
Q 3
es,
Midni
on earli
than one
vation t
s.
measure
thly me
188 A
JBOMOI
plOD»U
i«,A
r °'-)<*H
A,i|,uoW
uiuumirui
*i'?a
uimuixvm
A]IPQ
,(,uoN
,J ^i * — *
t- •*•
£%&%$£ ^aat^^^
O f^O-O(j» r^ W ^ >xianooO-- u, 2: < X S -iozo
*c
. 0
« £
•"»
n
cv
i«
-1 —
0
r-.
s
O
3
.»
*
J
JH
V
>s
T3*"
0
t>
*u
O
£
g
*
W
«
In
«l
>
^x
^^
^' ,
- ^
Sf
»
r« «
h *
3 £
293
-------
fields have been extensively tiled to facilitate drainage).
This soil has a friable surface layer that is easily tilled
through a wide moisture content range.
The Russell series, as mapped by the Soil Conservation
Service, has a typical profile as shown below:
0 to 20.3 cm (0 to 8 in) - brown silt loam; friable;
moderate, medium, granular structure; neutral.
20.3 to 38.1 cm (8 to 15 in) - ye 11owish-brown silt
loam; moderate, fine, subangular blocky structure;
fric.ble; patchy brown clay films on faces of some peds;
medium acidity.
38.1 to 66.0 cm (15 to 26 in) - dark yellowish-brown
silty clay loam; moderate, medium subangular blocky
structure; firm; continuous dark brown clay films on
faces of peds; strongly acidic.
66 to 101.6 err, (26 to 40 in) - yellowish-brown clay
loam; moderate, medium, subangular blocky structure;
firm; continuous dark brown clay films on faces of
peds; strongly acidic.
101.6 to 121.9 cm (40 to 48 in) - yellowish-brown light
clay loam; weak, coarse, subangular blocky structure;
friable; discontinuous dark brown clay films on faces
of peds; strongly acidic (upper) to neutral (lower).
121.9 to 182.9 cm (48 to 72 in) - loam till, massive;
very firm; moderately alkaline (calcareous).
294
-------
Soil of the Camden series, deep and well drained, occurs
on upland till plains. This soil was formed in 71 to 140 cm
(28 to 55 in) of loess and the underlying outwash. In some
areas, the lower part of the profile was formed in the under-
lying glacial till.
The Camden series has a typical profile as shown below:
0 to 22.9 cm (0 to 9 in) - dark brown silt loam; weak,
medium structure; friable; neutral.
22.9 to 30.5 cm (9 to 12 in) - yellowish-brown silt
loam; moderate, medium, platy structure; friable;
slightly acidic.
30.5 to 40.6 cm (12 to 16 in) - dark brown heavy silt
loam; moderate, fine and medium, subangular blocky
structure; friable; discontinuous, thin, dark,
yellowish-brown coatings on faces of peds; neutral.
40.6 to 81.3 cm (16 to 32 in) - yellowish-brown silty
clay loam; fine, prismatic structure that parts to
moderate, medium, angular and subangular blocky; firm;
continuous dark brown clay films; neutral.
31.3 to 1^7.2 cm (32 to 54 in) - dark yellowish-brown
silty clay loam; moderate, coarse, subangular blocky
structure; firm; continuous dark brown clay films on
faces of peds; neutral.
The sampled surface and subsurface soil closely followed
the profile through 122 cm (48 in) as described above for the
Russel 1 silt 1 oam.
295
-------
Control Plot
Similarly, the sampled surface and subsurface soil fol-
lowed the profile as described for Camden and Russell silt
loams. With reference to information supplied by the local
Soil Conservation Service, parts of Sections 1 and 2 nearest
the fence line (see Figure 73) are mapped as Russell silt
loam. Both the Russell and Camden series descriptions are
similar; however, differences between soil types were not
observed throughout the sampling.
Moisture, pH, and other analytical data for soils of the
treated and control plots are presented in Table 95.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
Sewage Treatment Plant
The Frankfort Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP) currently
serves a population of 15,000 and a population equivalent of
12,900. The latter figure is based on an average (1975) flow
of 11,700 cu m/day (3.1 MGD) and a BOD of 85 mg/1.
The STP process, with a design capacity of 13,200 cu m/day
(3.5 MGD), has essentially remained unchanged since 1930.
Influent to the plant passes through a grit chamber into the
primary clarifiers. Detention time in the primaries is approxi-
mately two hours. Primary effluent is pumped to a 91 x 30 x
2.4 m (300 x 100 x 8 ft) rock-media trickling filter. Secondary
settling tanks, with a detention time of approximately two
hours, followed by contact chlorination, constitute final
treatment prior to effluent discharge to Prairie Creek. Table
96 presents the STP operating summaries for 1974 and 1975.
296
-------
X
JLj
1_
—>
ir> C
o
X .
o a o
S £
u !
u
•—4
O» -i a>
roro
i
in
vO
O
I i
C\JC>-OOCO
-------
TABLE 96
FRANKFORT, INDIANA
STP WASTEWATER OPERATING SUMMARIES
Parameter
Averag
(cu
pH
BOD -
BOD -
BOD -
BOD -
e daily flow
m/day)
Raw (mg/1)
Primary (mg/1)
Final (mg/1)
Total reduction (%)
SS - Raw (mg/1)
SS - P
SS - F
SS - %
vss*-
rimary (mg/1)
inal (mg/1)
Total reduction
Raw (%)
1975
11700
7.2
85
76
13
84.7
38
33
13
65.8
77
1974
11700
7.3
105
86
16
84.8
82
69
23
72.0
67
,
*VSS - Volatile Suspended Solids
298
-------
An industrial wastewater surcharge system has been
developed and implemented but is presently not enforced,
Additional efforts at enforcement are planned in the
near future according to STP personnel. Industrial con-
tribution is about 30 percent of total flow.
Only chlorine is added during the treatment
process.
SIudge Stabi1ization and Storage
Raw sludge from the secondary clarifiers and
trickling filter is returned to the primaries. Sludge
from the primary clarifiers is stabilized in a 2,280
cu in (0.6 MG) anaerobic digester. Supernatant from the
digester is returned to the primaries. Maximum deten-
tion time in the digester is approximately 45 days.
An additional 13 days storage capacity is provided by
the two drying beds, each capable of holding approxi-
mately 98 cu m (25,000 gal) of sludge.
The STP provided historical sludge analytical
data as shown in Table 97. All three stabilized sludge
analyses indicate extremely high heavy metal concen-
trations. On a dry weight basis, cadmium ranged from
1,062 to 2,215 ppm. Similarly, lead varied from 385
to 1 ,461 ppm.
Industrial contributors to the STP are tabulated
in Table 98.
299
-------
TABU: 07
FRANKFORT, INDIANA - STABILIZED LIQUID SLUDGE ANALYSES1
Parameter
Test A2
Wet
Dry
Cprice
Test Bj
Wet
ntration .
Test (T
Wet
Dry
Test D5
Wet j Dry
Cu
Ni
Cr
Cd
Zn
Pb
P
Sb
As
Co
Fe
N'T
Mo
Hy
Se
Moisture6 (%)
52
24
63
69
no
25
650
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
93.5
800
369
969
1,062
1,692
385
10,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
392
3.2
16.5
33
85
5
0
0.2
0.02
0.75
125
30
7.6
0
0
-
2,984
52
140
144
260
35.6
0
1.3
0.02
8.6
190
20
7.9
0
0
93.5
45,000
800
2,154
2,215
4,000
548
0
20
-
133
2,923
308
122
0
0
-
97.6
28.3
-
44.1
157.5
40.9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
97.2
3,486
1,010
-
1,575
5,625
1,461
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
All results in ppm.
2Indiana State Board of Health (4/21-4/27/75); stabilized sludge.
3Clyde Williams and Associates (2/18/76) - raw sludqe.
4Clyde Williams and Associates (2/18/76) - stabilized sludge.
Sphase I stabilized sludge sample, bept. 26, 1975.
Moisture levels estimated from STP analytical data.
300
-------
TABLE 98
FRANKFORT, INDIANA - INDUSTRIAL FLOWS
Company
Del Monte
Peter Paul
General Battery
Glover Ice Cream
Indiana Brass
Ri chardson
Mallory Control
Formi ca
National Seal
Swift
Product
Canned Vegetables
Candy
Auto Batteries
Ice Cream
Foundry
Porcelain ,
Enamel ing
Electroni cs
Formica
Gasket, Seal
Edible Oils
Avg. Daily
Flow (cu m/day)
No Flow1
814
75.7
18.9
378.5
341
473
189
227
1741
Pre-
Treat-
ment
-
no
yes
no
no3
no3
no
no
no
no
80 days of tomato processing per year. All flow into
special lagoons. Operation to terminate in 1977.
Pretreatment consists of neutralization by lime
addition.
Pretreatment facilities currently being installed.
301
-------
Di sposa1 of Sewage SIud ge
Prior to 1964, sludge was vacuum filtered and land-
filled. Starting in 1964, however, liquid sludge has been
hauled on a continuous and almost exclusive basis to the
study site. Accurate records on total amounts disposed
have not been maintained. The only recorded totals avail-
able were 4,920 cu m (1.3 MG) for 1974, and 4,425 cu m
(1.17 MG) for 1975. An additional 665 cu m (175,700 gal)
and 292 cu m (77,240 gal) of sludge were distributed in
1975 and 1974, respectively, to the drying beds.
Sludge quantities could not be identified as having
been spread on a particular area within the treated
fields. As indicated previously, sludge application rates
on the sampled plot were estimated to have been 39.6 m
tons/ha (17.7 dry tons/acre) in 1974 and 19.9 m tons/ha
(8.9 dry tons/acre) in 1975.
Recently, small but unknown amounts of liquid sludge
have been spread on the grounds of a large nearby retire-
ment center. The STP personnel also mentioned that when-
ever the study site could not accept liquid sludge (in-
clement weather, interference with crops, etc.), the
trucks were diverted to ground surrounding the industrial
1agoons .
Sludge spreading is accomplished with two trucks. One
is equipped with a 6.6 cu m (1,750 gal) tank, the other with a 5.7
302
-------
cu m (1,500 gal) tank. Sludge is discharged by gravity from a
valve attached to the rear of the tank; no special baffle
attachments are used. Typically, one tank load covers an
approximate 150 x 2 m (500 x 6 ft) area.
Photographs 28 through 31 show, respectively, the
treated field, the control field, the tank truck, and the dry-
i ng beds.
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
The Clinton County Health Department, the Frankfort Times ,
and the mayor of Frankfort were interviewed to assess public
attitudes and awareness of the local sludge spreading operation
The county sanitarian related his awareness of the practice.
He stated that Indiana had no special requirements or permits
necessary for the disposal of sludge solids onto farmland. He
also stated that he was unaware of any public health problems
regarding the handling of sewage sludge.
A member of the Frankfort Times staff could recall only
one previous story relative to sludge utilization practices.
This was an article printed on September 20, 1975, describing,
in general terms, the initial visit of SCS Engineers to obtain
Phase I soil, plant, and sludge samples. Following the Phase
II samplings of May 24 and ?5, 1976, another article appeared
relating again, in general terms, the nature of the project.
No adverse publicity concerning the sludge spreading program
has ever been reported in the newspaper.
303
-------
Photograph 28
Treated Field
Photograph 29
Control Field
304
-------
Photograph 30
SIudge Tank Truck
Photograph 31
Drying Beds
305
-------
The inaycr o franklort similarly resetted that she was
aware of the practice, but could not recall any adverse pub-
lic i ty.
The Frankfort bTP superintendent stated that, in his opin-
ion, most people were not aware of the sludge spreading program
or of the potential benefits that could be realized from util-
izing sludgs' as a soil amendment. Only one complaint has ever
been registered over the use of sludge solids. A neighbor of
one of the Created fields objected to the odor when, on one
occasion, s udgc was spread too close to his farmhouse,
STATE AND LJCAL REGULATIONS ON SLUOGE SPREADING
Thr ST ' is not currently governed by any state, county, or
city regulations concerning the application of municipal sewage
solids to farmland. The county sanitarian mentioned that sep-
tic wastes i-uji t be plowed into the soil, but that this regula-
tion was not applicable to sludge solids from the STP. STP
personnel, when questioned, stated that special permits were
not required for disposing of sludge.
The County Health Department is aware of and has given its
acceptance to the current sludge handling practices. The STP
employees do not receive inoculations, but there have been no
reported health problems associated with sludge handling.
The State of Indiana is currently working on the adoption of
Gu.delines for Sludge Disposal on Land. In May, 1976, Draft
#3 - "Interim Guidelines for Municipal Sludge Disposal on Land"
was issueci. These guidelines are quite similar to those •
306
-------
issued by Wisconsin and Oh id and de.il with:
Site selection,
Allowable total load of sludge on land,
Allowable sludge application rate,
Allowable life of disposal site,
Management of spreading operation, and
Monitoring and reporting.
ECONOMICS
Record keeping at the STP in terms of sludge generation
and cost accounting has been piece-meal. The only recorded
investment was a $400 expenditure in 1971 for the purchase of
two World War II Army trucks, each subsequently equipped with
salvaged tanks for sludge spreading. The trucks, however,,
remain the property of the U.S. Government, each $200 original
"purchase" actually being a life-time lease. One truck is
equipped with a 5.6 cu m (1,500 gal) tank, while the second is
equipped with a 6.6 cu m (1,750 gal) converted gasoline storage
tank.
For estimating costs, the STP superintendent stated that
sludge disposal required the services of one operator, 6 hours/
day, 3 days/week, 52 weeks/year. The average hauling rate was
estimated to be 4 to 5 loads/day at 6.6 cu m (1,750 gal)/load.
For bed-dried sludge, it was estimated that five man-days were
required to completely remove the sludge from one bed. Through
out calendar 1975, approximately six full beds were removed
and made available for local domestic use.
307
-------
No separate records have been kept relative to 0 & M costs;
consequently, estimates by the STP personnel were made for
calendar 1975. These and other related cost data are shown in
the cost analysis presented in Table 99. Note that labor
for handling bed-dried sludge is included in the analysis.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
SIudge
On May 24 and August 24, 1976, five one-liter grab sam-
ples each of raw and staoilized sludge were obtained respec-
tively from both the primary clarifiers and the anaerobic
sludge digester.
Soil
On May 24 and 25, 1976, surface and subsurface soil sam-
ples were obtained from both the treated and control plots.
Each of the plots was divided into five sections. Approxi-
mately 30 individual core samples from the surface 0 to 15 cm
(0 to 6 in) were obtained from each section with a 2.5 cm
(1 in) diameter stainless steel split tube sampler.
Subsurface soil samples were obtained from the treated
and control plots with an 8 cm (3 in) diameter stainless steel
bucket auger. The surface 15 cm (6 in) of soil was discarded
from the auger. Samples were then taken between 15 and 41 cm
(6 and 16 in) and labeled Horizon A ; 41 to 61 cm (16 to 24
in) Horizon B ; 61 to 91 cm (24 to 36 in) Horizon C ; and
91 to 122 cm (36 to 48 in) Horizon D.
308
-------
I AH I I <)<)
COS] I OK IHSi'OSAI 01 I iqilll) SIUDC.E - l()/!>
VehicleDepreciation 0
Stationary Equipment Depreciation 0
Total Annual Capital Cost 0
Annual Operating Cost
Personnel (estimated) Hourly Rate % Time Worked
1 Operator - Liquid $3.26 45 $3,064
1 Operator - Dry 3.26 12 782
Fringe Benefits (25 percent) 962
Vehicle Maintenance and Operation (estimated) 720
Total Annual Operating Cost $5,528
Total Annual Capital and Operating Cost 5,528
10 Percent Contingency factor, 553
Total Annual Cost (estimated) $6,081
__ _[pta_l AmiuaJ_ C_o_s_t _____ $6,081 _ $19. 04/dry m ton/
TofaVsTudgV Hauled Annually 352 dry tons" " ($17.28/dry ton) (
A 10 percent contingency factor is added to cover such items
as administrative overhead.
309
-------
The extreme eastern edge of Section 1 and the extreme
western edge of Section 5 (see Figure 72) of the treated
plot were not sampled because of uneven topography.
Plants
Plant samples from the treated and control plots were
taken in two steps and in identical manners. At the time of
the first sampling, May 24, 1976, wheat in both plots was in
the milk to dough stages of the ripening phase. Samples were
collected by shearing and retaining the top 20 to 25 cm (8 to
10 in). Approximately ten samplings were made within each
section resulting in approximately 1.5 kg (3 Ib) of sample per
section. The stalks with attached head portions were sent to
the laboratory for analyses.
On June 23, 1976, the mature wheat grains were sampled
from both plots. Utility shears were used to remove the
grains ftrom the plant with approximately 2.5 cm (1 in) of
stalk attached. Approximately 1.5 kg (3 Ib) of grains were
collected from each section. Upon receipt the grain samples
were air dried for two weeks, manually threshed and winnowed.
The dried wheat grains were submitted to the laboratory for
analyses.
Tables 100 through 107 present the following:
310
-------
Table D e s_c ri p t i o ji
100 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
SI udges
101 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite
Surface and Subsurface Soils
102 Total Metal Concentrations in In-
dividual Subsurface Soil Samples
103 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and Plants
104 Metal Concentrations in Wheat Grain
Samples
105 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
106 Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants
107 Concentration of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and Plants
Figures 74-83 present particle size analyses
of the various soil composites by depth.
311
-------
TABLE 100
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
FRANKFORT, INDIANA
Volatile Solids (%)
N03 - N
NH4 - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
Ag
As
B
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
Zn
H20 (%)
pH
All units in yg/g (unl
All data expressed on
5/24/76
48.53
20.4
9580
25220
5492
2760
9560
52200
3260
<20
174
1 .2
2.6
65.2
1550
4074
16
1745
13280
8.0
247
8.4
499
103
5.4
2306
95.0
7.5
ess otherwis
oven dry wei
8.24/76
48.05
6.49
5203
20865
25919
1715
2797
43000
7662
n .d .
2216
2.7
3.51
22.0
1459
3905
16.4
12527
29595
.81
385
5.13
500
390
5.95
• 2000
92.6
7.1
e noted).
ght basis.
Average
48
13
7392
23043
15705
2238
6179
47600
5461
<20
1195
1
3
43
1505
3990
16
7136
21438
4
316
6
500
247
5
2153
93
.3
.4
.95
.06
.6
.2
.41
.77
.68
.8
312
-------
S!
* ,,_
AM-
O '•
r\ j)
rt
<«•
O
•-1*
Ir
XQ.
•-.Li
a.3
JTV
JJ — X*
XI ^
i :c
O
0 CS
o
o o
."O V
!-• C
cv —.
C\J
.A
if -*
rvt 'Vi
ci r- ifi
o n r
C* ^O X' O A
-t *
C^ %/
«* ro
^—'' »i"l O*- '»?* f\i
r^J —* i«* •-« (v
fVi :\3 —> O
^C JT5 CJ* O
O u"> O l\'
—• —• rvj rv
fVI
•'Vi
rv in — o •*
o N- OD f- cr»
O =5 O O O
Ul 2: 2 £ O
LJ U U U •
O <
-------
* • • «
c JT- -r xi /) > 3 O 'JVC Al .r
« • * » «< «•«•
t-^i ^ya a <»-
•/> ri -i ^^
',««•«
I—* ' V TV , *
^> •»> ^n •?
r,
_i
50
—•\j\j-v -.
F 4i *
. -IM
/}
'Si
ai
-i V-*^ •»>-. O :
UQ E>'
* *
o o— • o
CNJ
O
CQ
UJ
LJ
oc
o
DC
U_
-lrtC\t rjO'-l'-ICM
" UUU
Z CM
O
.1111 t- I I I I
,inp'-i'-i (Jin o«-i t-i
CO
I I I I
mOr-Irt
«H*VO O
UUU
r (
^O *H w-H <
CM
,S2SU
uuu
CM
O <-H --i CM
O «H •-!
.III
,mo-H
•v/)
I
D
314
-------
M V
-- co
CTl-
,\1 CM
V V
t n
OT
CD
- i' J
•^ '' *—t
ih O
X
J"'
.r.
x
-\r
45
X D
•*. x?
XI
-X!
~) <\l X1 " CT "-^
o <_?
IT,
(/)
CD
r
o
>-*
LU
o:
Q
Z
LU
>
O
Z LU
O H
Q 10
a
Q.
UJ
(/)
uj o
at o
o.
X Z
UJ O
< to
Q >-
_J
_J Z
315
-------
^
~
CO
LU
D.
5
en
z
I-H
a <•
o 2:
•* < c
0 LU Z.
i— X —
5:
LU •
_l 2: »-
CD ~+ CC
< O
f- yj u.
0 Z
k— CC
•c: u.
or
UJ
6
o
<:
t—
UJ
5:
CM
Z
1
o:
o
rf-N
CM
"to
a.
Ni
*2 '^
_j ^
a
1^
^
UJ
~
s:
ro o
ro N
^ w
^0 1*-
c. o
CD -^ f*- ^ -^ If* r— O O
-* o ji ^- <* m LO-* f—
\D CO O*
* JH-
•-» Z ^ 2 2 2 aJ — f
\/? ^z^ *— * ^-^ *— ' »-—^ ^-* —* **>
srt/)o .0
CD tf"« ^^ CL1 '"^ C£j f\i
u cc tn •—* -^ ^ ^
* * "-vim * -^
•O O Ch O (O !*-•—»
vD o cy< t> nj — ro
* j> ,n >n .0 voo
(\# tr o o •— * o rv^
"^ — i — < nj ru 'vj o
0 O 0 O 0 O O
•— * (\i F*} -Ct" '.f^ *
">
1 z. z i: z 2: uj
o c o o c-
" *~*
O tj O C1 CJ < -^
uj LU uj !j_' ua ;j.'<—
4/> t/) 1/J t/5 t/l T C/J
,
«
t/5
<
33
t—
T
o
— ^
LJL-
f.
~3i
—
^ — I
0 0
^ LU
— f-
^— i
° to
lU Q
^ 1
•JJ O
^ <->
a
^ z
jJ O
< to
»~ 1-H
< to
_J
— '
-------
|I|(>I-I/A /![ J-KJOOj
,<> -,1 „•, .|) ( (J) 0> < .>
O
m6ia/,\ Xq
2!
O
O
CO
CO
0
o
i
o
z
CO
6
>-
Q.
1C
o
w
Ul
a
tu
°- 6
5 2
3
«> ;>,, ;
Cf. ., - :-
tu ,',,„ ;
LU «;:, .j :',
2! ^T ^s « '-'•
m °i? i: "-
l_> < ^ ^ T.
^__ l£ *-*
Ul If I I
CO ^ 3 '-^
f \ 5 v? o
W ^8 |
TJ
. °
^
M
|5l
^^i
-------
o
)L|6is/,\ ^q jsuij
o
o
u.
to
_l
o
CJ
H-
o
to
Z
0
H
n_
o:
o
to
LU
o
llj
-J
•r
E
re
o
00
2
CO
CO
4J
_
(D
t-
C
03
S-
o
en
CO
T3
0)
re
01
S-
i—
E
u
O
1
03
C
CD
N
tr,
01
U
CL
S-
o
c
rD
S-
U-
'313
-------
H-|f>ia/,\
z
o
\-
o
lu
Cf)
If)
_J
o
o
1-
u>
o
"
PTION
DESCR
SAMPLE
NO.
to :>v i
LM ^iil , ;;,
^""^ rt Ul I » ( )
2 :i';' J ;;
8|i
tb
E
ITS
O
1—
00
CM
to
CO
i.
0
c
i.
u_
'^O
o^
CO
?- i
g--— .
»ll •'••
T3
CD
fO
OJ
i-
ff8*
u .
I
E
O
1
o
11
0
b
tj
i "j
1 5
! r-
^? s
(/)
•r—
cn
ro
c
QJ
N
•r—
00
OJ
u
C
fO
(U
s-
3
O
•1—
u_
-------
to
,
CC j
HI A
IJJ «;
UJ
mn j .
o
1-
u
u.
CO
o
_j
u
t-
5?
o
z
5s
z
o
a.
u
to
u)
0
w
^6
3 z
10
E
fO
O
_J
o
E
03
O
1
— «J
0
-t-J
oo
CO
CM
CM
LD
0
CM
-
0
•*-
E
05
<-.
U-
CM
O
CTi
•a
CD
(O
cu
s_
l—
E
O
en
i
fO
c
aj
N
•i—
00
CU
u
rd
s_
OJ
rs
320
-------
,V\ Xq i,T
2
O
t-
0
U.
en
CO
o
0
"•5
H
tn
O
z
CO
(J*
o
1—
0-
5
o
CO
Ul
o
Sz
if) " • «
CC "•''- •
WSri ^
UJ "S - o
2| 2 ^ « 3
05i S r-
t*^m CC ^ n O
•& r o S 3
ui 85 =i -
CO
o
w
.
w^
I
n
Ml
•Hf
2^ 3
c «
< Z Q
u O c
t- o i
w £i
U
i
U
„ ^
i tj
h <
CO
Z
O
*
_i C>
E
n3
O
1
-M
i —
•r—
C/)
CM
CM
"vl-
CM
4J
S~
0
l+-
J>£
c
(O
s_
u_
0
D
n
-o
<1)
4->
ro
•*«
E
O
M
\l
|
<-2r
71
(O
c:
O)
a;
o
i.
o
c.
ra
CO
r-^
aj
s_
3
CD
321
-------
jijf)i3/v\ Aq
2
0
O
u.
in
CO
_j
o
<
_j
o
i
o
MM** *< ,' "<
On '1 y "
< £ Z, I
j, IU p 0
p£. z 0 « i
1 1 1 O z _» m
IU o- u, 0
to -" 2
03 S3 S
^ 3 o S
W U" S
„ <">
ig
sT
Ka
w
£
anw
11
If
11
i
*
1 J
<
CD
a
0
-J
*
i
o
— i
r—
CO
tn
p—
o
LD
-M
j_
0
c
rc>
s-
u_
CO
co
—
o
£
c.
o
OJ
(0
1-
s^
^
to
•I —
to
01
-------
Q
4i|6is/,\ Xq
o
V-
o
CO
_j
o
(J
>°
H
J
vy
5?
o
to
5"-
z
o
0.
—
o
;>,; i:
cr: -> < •':
UJ o,/>
w -if. 5 »
*<— - -^ y "• *
5i^ v ';
zsr H s
• , t o i- li c.
tli o - *-* o
wi's " §
0
, .... °
r^<
F
B^
ti
n*rf
jj- ^^
MH5*K> X i /^
li
if
M
"*j 'r—
1 " (/I
V ^>-j
0 ,
r. it)
E
fO
o
_J
-M
r—
•I—
CM
tr>
(JO
^-
$-
o
tf-
-±z
c
(T3
S-
u_
o
00
^~
o
s-
4->
c:
o
0
E
O
o
*3-
1
IT)
•—
M
•i —
O)
4-1
fO
^
t— t
+->
S-
o
c
03
S-
u_
C3
co
cu
^_
^
en
Lu
323
-------
T:
o
i-
o
U-
— -
CO
CO
0
o
t-
J
o
v>
2:
O
f;
o.
a:
0
Ul
e>
Ul
0-0
3= z
~"
.
cr
f5
o
i
(ti
o
•1 —
CM
00
o
00
^
i-
o
t—
.^
c
(O
s-
u_
UD
00
CO
or
U.1
LU
"ZL
0
z:
LU
CO
0
&*«,
i,'
r'
k
butt'
r—
O
S-
4->
c
0
0
fj O
1
<'-:'
2 -'
•' o
o ,•-
> ,.
s. ~^
rr' '^
JWM
Y7
ii
f!
|i
E
u
—
to
1
o
*
-.
•
-'
„
1
'"
""""A
">
]
I
i
*
;,
,'.
*
0
4
T
o
•4
tJ
s
o
o
Ii
Li
3
^
C)
r
O
o
J
CO
l/l
01
INI
OJ
( --
o
-i —
t >
o
tf-
c:
ro
S-
co
OJ
<*.
3
en
324
-------
O
q
H
O
UJ "2 , 5
-» °S ;', ^
S
c
o
0
E
o
1 —
en
i
10
cu
o
*I~
-M
ro
Q-
~ZZ.
\ — i
n
-M
i.
O
t-
c
rO
S-
u_
CM
co
cu
en
•r—
Ll_
325
-------
u: «'
L'J j'jii!
<3 5"
2: 5 a '•
uj 8* J
o
o
u.
to
01
.J
o
o
H
CO
o
to
55
o
a
cc
o
CO
u
UJ
°^d
5
E
03
0
ai
C\J
en
oo
s-
o
<4—
-^
c
rO
S_
Ll—
CO
00
0
s-
^J
G
O
e>
E
0
OJ
(XI
r—
I
i™
O~l
OJ
ISl
V
o
oo
co
326
-------
TABLE 105
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUDGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
FRANKFORT, INDIANA
Soil
Surface Composites
Plant
Compos ites
-
Treated
Plot
Control
Plot
juq / k a
0.5
0.004
*•' 0 . 7 5
-'0.5
<0.007]
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
DDT
'0.007 DIELDRIN
<0.75 PCB 1221
<0.5 PCB 1248
0. 125
32
0.17
0. 11
<0.25
<0. 1 7
<0. 1 1
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Composites
Stabilized Sludge
0. 01
0. 02
(5/24/76)
6. 6
1382
•1.0
<0.01
<0.02
<1.35
<13. 5
-1.0
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
(3/24/76)
<0.2 DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
1 Detection limits vary due to sample "size",
plant matter interference, and instrument sensitivity.
^Plant matter interference.
327
-------
1
OO
1—
2:
c^£
[
d.
_r^
ca~
c£
CO
£.
Q_
i
1
i
I
j
[
I
\
\
| f
|
i
£_-
(O
CT
O)
b
t 0
; in
1
i :
i , CO
OJ
: .,_
O
O
i-
-Q
E
Z3
•—
' co
•i —
i-
n3
o
! °°
L/l i <£
^
— < ro
— ^ >»
OJ °
n; S
o
^
^^
0
0
"n
*
,
i
i
i -—--
{£>
r^--
U
CO i
OJ
O
o
r--{ 01
o cn 2
;:- "o ro
r- , rs Q:
ra , —
Ut CO
E
rt!
cn
-v^
ro
>
O
O
in
i
y
ZL
(O
O
ro
rU
(J
0
X
0
1 —
,, ^
vo
f\
^~^
•^J-
00
CO
^
ro
o:
r
r6
S-
cn
rO
;>
O
O
in
i
CO
QJ
-o
• i —
O
0 Ol
•r- >
( t
_Q -M
E ro
3 cn
i— Ol
co
., —
S-
ro
U
CO
«=r
, — * -— • ^
L£) V£5
( — ' r^-
— ^. •'-^
^" ^t~
CSJ OO
un oo
^. ^- —
~O "O
GJ O)
N rsl
! — i —
•r- •.- T3
JD -O OJ
fO ^0 *t— ^
+->-!-> c:
CO CO fO
, —
Q_
QJ OJ OJ QJ OJ QJ QJ
> > > > > > >
ro "Ja "ro Ic "ra "ro "Jc
CD cn cn cn cn cr> cn
CD QJ OJ QJ QJ QJ QJ
^ ^r. z: 2: z: z: 2:
(/) CO
ai CD
-«-' +->
CO CO
o o
a. o.
E E
0 0
-^ J^ (J O
ro ro ~o i —
>-> +J QJ O
oo oo -M e s-
ro E E E o •)->
i i ai o o o c:
S- CM O
-Oi — 1 — QJOi — i — CMO
QJ O O ^" ^O CTl r-~
4j i- i ro i i 111
rO 40 C>_ Lf) (^5 , — ,
(11 C coS-i — ^•IDCTicO
S- 0 r— Z3 •—
1— O -,- CO -r-
O O
OO OO
i
i
j
1
j
!
1
QJ QJ QJ > > > >
t3 fO rc3 T3 fO <
c^i o^ ^T> CT) cn I
cu cu cu cu QJ i
i
I
i
i
i
E
E E E 0
O U O
OvJ
a> o i — i — CM
O "^ ir^"i Q~J ^~
ro i t i i
4— LO O i — i —
S- n— "^ VO CTl
13
OO
_J
328
-------
o
M>
r~--
<7\
1
CO
1—
^21
•=t
_l
ex
o
^T7
CO
| ! j e;^-
CD 2:
Q i — i
_J Q
, ,--v — »•
iy i *£-.
i — i
r r
i — t •>
t—
oo ce
LlJ O
CU LJ_
0 ^
r£ i?r
0 — i Qi
2: l-1-
u_
0
~?"
O
1 — I
h-
i
I
\
o
( )
o
1 )
li-
eu
1-
+->
(/^
n5
O
cu
U-
^
S^-
o
q-
•r—
r — -
O
o
, —
03
U
CD
u_
CO
, —
, —
CD
C1
-C.
>HI.( 1 lUO'J
- -
"~1A I'lfillinC*^! 1
^.^.dA i j viuinbo^d
-
v obi>M I ^ b
Y i L ->
jad IUQ [iv40i
vvDi91BldlUOn
-T--T-I T |_" "-^
^ xpanu LILIOQ
^^aA L^duinsajfj
— ,
^a6pn[s 6
jed GJQ [e^oi
v vDaia i diiJO'i
^t ^ p *-* 4 ^ L •-'
pOUU I LUO"1
- - -
m.B/\ i qduinsojj
^5Lpn[S 6
uad 6jQ !p1°i
¥^p34a[dwoo
**peuuLj.uo3
— — - —
j,c-^5A 1 1 duinsajfj
. - - - .
¥a5pn[S t)
a ad i)jQ [eq.oi
Bpn[s 6 J9d
•Jiqoaoy [B^OI
c
o
CU 4-^>
i — C-
Q.-i-
.t; i-
rO 0
C/1 00
GJ
r;j
1 1 f
4-4-4-
4-4-4-
LO CO IO
0 0 O
XXX
tn co cri
r-^ ^ r-^
4- 1 +
+ 1 4-
4-4-4-
o Q tn
,— 1Z. 0
f~— r~~
X
01
i i i
4- 1 4-
4-4-4-
Q Q Q
2: rz z:
i i i
4- I 4-
4-4-4-
Q Q Q
"Z. 'Z. "Z.
r-, CTi CO
000
XXX
«3-
^3- •* CNJ
cvi i — tn^
^
*3- «* OJ
CM CM ^-x
^^ -~~. ir>
IT) CO
CD -Q
en 3 S fO
X5 (T3 rO 4->
=3 o: o; co
i —
CO
1 t 1
4- 4- 4-
4- 4-4-
CO CO CO
O O O
X XX
co r-^ LT>
cr> r^ r~-
4- 4- I
4- 4- 1
+ + +
CD CO Q
UD ,— z:
i i i
I 4- 4-
4- 4-4-
Q Q Q
•ZL -ZL 'Z.
\ 1 1
I 4- 4-
4- 4-4-
Q Q Q
z: z zr
o
r— O1 CO
0 O 0
X XX
CM «3- 01
<* CO
fO +J CU C
4-> C S- O
CO rO 1— C_>
S
.
^ ^
•^d-
co O
CO
fO "
JO •
CD
4-> .
S^ •<-
CT)- —
•r—
n i f~~^
\U \ — }
5 r- -
>,<+-
C o s~
-o o
to rO S-
n i (^
\u »-/
s- -a Q.
Q- CU CU
X CO S-
a> to
CU CO
CO S— C
•(-> Q- O
^11 resul
*Va1ues ex
^^Observati
•o
CD
4->
O
CD
4->
CD
"O
CD
C
O
c
ii
Q
•z.
329
-------
o
o
CD
CQ
( ' 1
iL>
U.
O
4--
O
O
O
U_
QJ
L/")
n3
O
E
tO
4oeg
^pauu i juo;)
uad 1)JQ 1^401
} * pa3 a [duo')
A jf.pauui.juo3
*9opn|s f)
jac 6uQ L^4°i
J.J|cpa4a[duJ03
,.^P<-)UU 1. |U03
* jf/'A i/4diutisajcj
^.a6pn[g 6
uad OJQ 1^4°!
~^LJU03
jad BJQ Ip4°l
6pn[s 6 uad v
c
o
a; 4->
r— Q.
fi" s^
ra CJ
CO 10
OJ
Q
I 1 1 1 1 1 f f •< 4-
4 4- )• •) f 44-4-44-
t t 1 4- 1 + 4- 4- 4 4-
ro u > *^' ^j^ co r~-~ co co
- — - CXI 1 CXI r — CM CO i i ID CXI
Or- CXI
144-14- 1 I 1 1 1
I 4- I i + I i 1 I i
ar-oaiD ooaoo
z: t— -z^ -ZL z:z:z:zrz:
i i i i i i i i i i
4- 4- -1- 4- + 4-4-4-4-4-
4- 4- 4- 4- 4- 4-4-4-4-4-
QOCDQO aaoaa
zrzzzrzrz: z:z:z:z:z:
i i i i i i i i i i
QQOQQ O Q Q Q Q
C/l CO
•^^ CD a>
D -M O CTt LO CTl r— +J i — r— CO CO CXI
O *r- LO co co o ^3" T— cy^ ' — r~^ co LD
- — ' OI^-.IDCXIC\JCO OOOLOCXICOi —
ri ,.,. , o , ,„..,
§ E § E
OCUEEEo OCDEEEo
ouoo oooo
1 ~O fO CXI 1 i — <& CXJ
O) C(- O •— •— CXI O M- O >— r— CXJ
CO+JS-^f-LOCTii — COi-S-'vJ-LOCrii —
i — to^i i i ii — -»->r3i i i i
•r-CUCOLOO — i — -r-CCOLOOi — i —
OS- ' — ^ocnoo i — ^CQOI
CO t— CO C_3
co CD
•r- r —
(/I
ra
-O
O)
OJ CD
I
S-
TJ
O
OJ
co
to
O)
5-
CL
X
O)
co
4->
O S-
o
S-
O) 4-
O co
D- to
i ~a
a>
CO
d)
S-
C) ^^
CD O) <~>
co ^ cy
co -t-1
O) co O)
o o
x .,_ O)
CLI 4-» c
CO > !—
01 i-
rs a) ii
i— CO
5Si
330
-------
J.IIAI'I II! VIM
U NDAI I V II I ! , INDIANA
Mil 1)1 r,CK II1! ION
Lp Cjrtjk) n
The study site is located on a 68.9 ha (170 acre) farm
about 3 kin (2 mi) northwest of Kendal 1 vi 11 e in northeastern
Indiana, approximately 190 km (120 mi) north of Indianapolis
and 160 km (100 mi) east of Chicago, Illinois. The Kendallville
sewage treatment plant (STP) is located approximately 3 km (?
mi) southeast of the study site. The control plot is located
on a 32.4 ha (80 acre) farm about 5 km (3 mi) east of the
1; r e a t o d plot.
!' h y_ s i c d_l_ C_o n dj tjjoji s
Kendallville and the neighboring towns are basically small
farming and dairy communities. Crops typically grown in the
area are corn, soybeans, oats, and various other feed crops.
The surrounding area is characterized by rolling terrain with
slopes ranging from 2 to 9 percent. Both the treated and con-
trol plots are located on similar terrain.
The treated field (see Figure 84) on which the sampled
••'lot is located is ^. ;j iia (?2 acres) in size. It is one of
several cine1" fields totaling approximately 41 ha (100 acres)
that, have received sludge from the Kendallville STP since about
1963. The sampled plot, in the northwest corner of the field,
is in the shape of a parallelogram measuring approximately
300 ft (91 m) on each side. The plot slopes gently from
331
-------
, Taller Power Po!os
~~15 M—
LU
O
Silo
Shorte
Poles
Farm Bldgs
N
No Scale
1 .5 KM
State Route 6
To Kendallville ~ 1.5 KM
Figure 34
tiual 1 vil 1 e, Indiana • Treat^H Field
332
-------
northeast to southwest. This area was estimated by the farmer
to have had the most consistent applications of sludge through-
out the yectrb.
At the time of sampling (May 27, 1976), the treated field
was planted in a mixture of alfalfa (Medicago sati va) , orchard
grass, and clover, of which alfalfa, the dominant plant, was
sampled. Some areas of the field had stands of alfalfa ranging
in height from 31 to 41 cm (12 to 16 in) while other areas were visibly
less productive; some were even barren. The latter condition
was caused by large dried crusts of sludge up to 2.5 cm (1 in)
thick. Noticeable alfalfa weevil damage was observed through-
out the field.
Groundwater is estimated to be at a depth of 31 m (100
ft) in the vicinity of the treated plot.
The farm on which the control plot is located is on
steeper sloped ground that the treated farm, but the plot
sampled is on a very gently sloped plateau measuring about 91 m
(300 ft) square (see Figure85). Alfalfa and other grasses
on the control plot were the same mixture as on the treated
plot. Alfalfa was estimated to comprise about 70 percent of
the crop with an average height between 46 and 61 cm (18 and
24 in). Alfalfa weevil damage was also apparent in this field.
Farm i n g _P_r a c t. i c e_s_
The field on which the treated plot is located is in a
current rotation of one year corn, one year soybeans, one year
oats, and two years alfalfa (one year pasture and one year hay).
333
-------
Fence Line 37 M
N
No Scale
Figure 85
Kendal'ville, Indiana - Control Field
-------
Ihe 1f)76 crop was to bo cut for hay shortly after samples were
obtained for this study. Yields were not available for any of
the crops for any year.
The field is typically cultivated to a depth of 20 to 25
cm (8 to 10 in) with a mold board plow, and 8-16-16 fertilizer
applied at 40 to 50 kg/ha (300 to 400 Ibs/acre). No pesticides
or herbicides are used during the two-year alfalfa cycle. When
the field is planted to corn, however, Atrazine and Lasso at
2.2 kq/ha (2 Ibs/acre) are applied. The treated plot has never
been limed. The crops grown on the treated plot are used for
non-dairy cattle feed. No adverse effects to livestock have
been reported by the resident farmer.
Since 1963, all sludge from the Kendallville STP has gone
to the study site. Spreading, however, has been inconsistent,
especially during periods of inclement weather when the truck
drivers have historically dumped sludge in the most easily
accessible areas. This has resulted in visible ponding and
sludge accumulations ranging from several inches to several
r e e t. This was evident in lower areas of other adjacent sludge
treated fields. Based on STP records and assuming that 41 ha
(100 acres) have been used for spreading, application rates
over the years have O^L-D estimated and are shown in Table
108 .
Approximately half of the control site farm property is
permanent pasture with the remaining area on a rotation of four
to five years alfalfa, one year corn, one year soy, and one
/ear oats. At the time of sampling, the control plot was
335
-------
TABLE 108
KENDALLVILLE, INDIANA - SLUDGE APPLICATION RATES 1
Year
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
Dry Metric Tons/ha
2.5
2.9
2.9
4.7
4.9
8.1
15.9
19.3
19.7
1 Based on 4.0 percent sludge spllds (average analytical deta) ; averages
were estimated from available hauling logs.
336
-------
pl.mleil to I ho same variety o I a I t
-------
Precipitation, normally averaging about 91 cm (36 in) a
year, is well distributed, with monthly amounts ranging from
near 5 cm (2 in) in February to near 10 cm (4 in) in May, June,
and July. Damaging hailstorms occur about twice a year. Snow
usually covers the ground for about 30 days during the winter
months, but heavy snowstorms are infrequent. Only twice since
1911 has a single 24-hour fall exceeded 30 cm (1 ft) in depth.
Additional meteorological data are presented in Table 109.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Regional Area
The treated and control plots are characterized by soils
of the Rawson-Morley-Miami complex. In the opinion of the
resident Soil Conservation Service scientist, the treated plot
consists mainly of the Morley series (estimated at 90 percent),
while the control plot is exclusively of the Morley series.
The Miami series was not observed at either plot.
Morley soils are on till plains of Wisconsin age. Slopes
are commonly between 3 and 12 percent, but may range from 1 to
25 percent. These soils are formed in calcareous clay loam to
silty clay loam glacial till that, in some places, has a mantle
of less than 46 cm (18 in) of loess or glacial drift. Morley
soils typically have light-colored silty Ap and A2 horizons;
brown, fine-textured B horizons, free of mottling in the upper
part; and C horizons of calcareous loamy glacial till.
A typical profile of Morley silt loam as mapped by the
Soil Conservation Service follows:
338
-------
> O O O O C
C
O)
O
03
(TJ
o
O
0)
•+->
0)
j ."OH -
I* I" .'OH "21
If ",n;H~'s|
\j-.o-OOO 0000*
i — —
"3
C
sr
O-*Or-*^^-^ O'^^OO'-*
OOOr-jJJOr-t>-^c
s_
o
u_
339
-------
•o
cu
c
o
o
01
o
CO
<£.
w
0>
E
UJ
•o
c
<
c
(0
o
ro
E
hi-
Hi6
•5
' 1
I "
" *
1= I;
uj - E
(«" £
V'JCS.
pU?3
_ .AOq.
•""wumu
ajouj jo ijpui o i
•JOUJ JO IJ3UI IQ
Ji
c
s
a
J
Apnoo
Apno|3
A|U«d
je«o
-M0Ml-JMMA.i4u.nn
euiijtunj »tq!Wod )0 iaj
f
Relative
humidity pet
Precipitation m inchei
£
C
u.
">A
UOflMJlQ
<£S
_»!»
jnoH *
jrtOH 2 E
jnoH £ g
*WH £ ~
ST.OW. Ice pellett
1
i
Hormtl
Degree dayf
B*e65"F
Temperatures "F
E
Z
"•A
till K u!
-A
AIMIUOUJ
ug »j ui
-A
Amiuouj
ujnuJixcvN
(»ujJO|g
e.,003
SUUNH
1
A|M»UO«
-T:o
*,,a
muon
(*l
^
sssss; ssssss s
0 0000 0
i s^^s ° °°*i"_s s
* eooo<* "* °°° i
IN* IM
*
O
l>
•>
O>
(M
(M
*** • ° 0 000* »M 0
---—*- S ^- m
-^ -*-«-• o
-
^WV-« --n.VV «
-•""«'- --o»,« «
O> r- • IN O w * tr o » r- «* * •«
«r- = « o ooo-r-- n
in UIO*
«
r-i«r- c ooo^^m m
"22H ° 000-iS £
S£223£ 2KS^22 ^2
o>
»
C4
:::;;: :::::: :
,"^^^ mm 0=
d
*s as- ?
~2-*~ °"S;I- 3
in
2
— on on r-o« i~» — m~o~o o~~
lit it
3S, = ,, Sg«» 0
SKS3SS PP225S 5
t^*^*** tCom^r^^ 0
,
SSSSPS 2SE25S S
— >
340
-------
0 In 10.;' < in (() lo /I in) Very tlntl <)r
-------
faint, yellowish-brown mottles; weak medium prismatic
structure breaking to moderate medium blocky structure;
firm; few pebbles; calcareous; clear smooth boundary.
. 107 to 122 cm (42 to 48 in) - Brown silty clay loam;
many, medium, distinct, gray mottles; structureless,
massive; firm; calcareous glacial till.
Treated and Control Plots
The sampled surface and subsurface soils were found to be
similar to the above profile descriptions through the first
122 cm (48 in). The presence of pebbles between the 30 cm (1
ft) and 61 cm (2 ft) levels on both plots prevented the use of
a hand bucket auger. Subsurface samples were obtained with a
pneumatic 5 cm (2 in) diameter core drill mounted on the back
of a pick-up truck (see Sampling and Analysis for more detailed
description).
Moisture, pH, and other analytical data for soils of the
treated and control plots are presented in Table 110.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
Sewage Treatment Plant
The Kendallville Wastewater Treatment Plant (STP), pro-
viding secondary treatment of all wastewater, serves an actual
population of 9,200 and an equivalent (12-month average)
population of 22,700. The plant was constructed in 1958 and
expanded in 1972 to serve the growing population. Expansion
consisted of the addition of four primary settling tanks, two
trickling filters, and one final clarifier.
342
-------
CSJCMCMCMi —
k,J
! I
•> 'O — » "U
-x
o o r o
-------
The STP treats an average flow of 5,700 to 6,400 cu m/day
(1.5 to 1.7 mgd) with three trickling filters having a design
capacity of 10,100 cu m/day (2.68 mgd). The treatment process
consists of grit removal, primary settling, trickling filter
secondary treatment, and secondary clarification, followed by
contact chlorination and discharge to Henderson Lake. Based on
an average flow, primary settling detention time is approximately
4.3 hours; residence time in the secondary clarifiers averages
2.6 hours. Trickling filter surface area totals 0.150 ha (0.371
acres,) of exposed rock media. Secondary treatment efficiencies
are shown in Table 111.
Phosphorous is precipitated by the daily addition of
about 450 1 (120 gal) of 42 percent ferric chloride. The
solution is added to the secondary clarifier influent.
Dubois Floculite 550 at a dilution of 1.7 kg/kl (7 lbs/500
gal) enhances coagulation in the secondary clarifiers. Actual
consumption averages about 3 kg/day (7 Ibs/day).
An estimated 20 to 25 percent of the total flow is from
industrial sources. Industries that contribute significant
amounts of influent to the STP are listed below:
Industry Product Manufactured
Flint & Walling Pumps
Kraft Foods
Essex Wire Wires of all types
Newnan Foundry Metal products of all types
Kendallville Foundry Metal products of all types
344
-------
LL!
—I
CQ
CJ>
z:
UJ
U-
UJ
UJ
s:
h-
•=t
UJ
DC
UJ
rD
i
Cf-
c
QJ
s-
UJ
cu
^
1 — 1
LO
oo
O
CD
—
CT
CI
oo
OO
— —
^
cr
C
Q
O
03
,—
C7>
co
O1
E
-— ~
Q
O
CQ
O
ro
-"""> ~O
f — ^^
<- G
Q 3
O
CD
=C
:
C\j * — \ O~i O"i O^ LO CD CTi> OO CT^ CO ^-3"
^»o ^i~ LO ^o LO r***- r*~» ^O *™H LO r**^ ^.t*
cj-icncriCriCTiCTicTiCTiCrioococTi
0.^-CT,CT,CMCOOCOCX3^COCT,
**O C\J CO "^d~ *s3" CM ^Jh r-H i — 1 CO CO ^3
r^. oo
r^. r-H r-. O oo O LO r-- r^- CO CM CNJ
i — 1 1 — ( t — ( r — t » — < CO ^t" CM
r-l«X) COLOOOCMU30UDCOOO
i — I CVI CVJ i — ( t — I CM CM CM CO CO CM CM
r-t UD CM CO 'X) ^T O T— * CO O r-l rH
CD CO r*^. i — i * — i CTi r*-* LI".) CD r~% co O^
CMr-Hr-HOOOOOOCMCMCMCMOOOO
r^ CM ^ LO r — o CTi UD CD VD CTI ^*
LT) «^r CTi LO LO O LO i — I LO CD «3- LO
COOOCOOOCMOOOOOOCOOOCMCM
CC LO «3- CM ^J- «S" r— iCTlt— ^: r—
« CJ >, . +J . . . . .o.,_
j^c^-cncL+J >OCJ3 s_s_
fO3Z.'3CUOOCU(OCUn3Q-
2!'~3rOCCOOOz:Q'-OI-L.s:et
CM
«^
CTi
LO
CM'
CTi
4 1
LO
• — '
CO
CM
UD
r-.
CM
CM
CVJ
OO
CO
CO
uo
cu
ro
i-
(U
>
345
-------
BOD and suspended solids (SS) analyses are routinely
performed in-house by Kraft and average approximately 730 and
190 mg/1, respectively. The STP does not experience seasonal
fluctuations from any of the processors.
Sludge Stabilization and Storage
Sludge is returned by gravity from the secondary to the
primary clarifiers where it is pumped either to an Imhoff
holding tank or to an anaerobic digestion tank, the capacities
of which are 878 and 428 cu m (231,880 and 112,948 gal),
respectively. The anaerobic digester has a maximum retention
capacity of 14 days. Excess sludge can be stored in the Imhoff
for an additional 30 days. Due to the limited capacity of the
anaerobic digester, sludge is sometimes pumped directly to the
Imhoff, bypassing the digester. This accurs quite often during
periods of inclement weather. Since the sludge trucks are
loaded from the Imhoff tank, both stabilized and partially-
stabilized sludges are at times mixed and landspread together.
Two drying beds, each having an area of 37.2 sq m (4,000
sq ft) are available for additional sludge storage but have
not been used in several years.
A grab sample of stabilized sludge was obtained from the
STP in September, 1975. The results of that analysis, com-
prising the only known sludge data, are shown in Table 112.
The lead (Pb) level is extremely high. Since none of the
industrial effluents have ever been monitored, the origin of
the Pb is unknown.
346
-------
TABLE 112
KENDALLVTLLE, INDIANA - STABILIZED LIQUID SLUDGE ANALYSES1
Parameter
Cd
Cu
Ni
Pb
Zn
Moisture ( % )
o
Concentration (^g/g)
28.3
446
75.9
8176
4882
93.2
phase I stabilized sludqe sample, September, 1975.
expressed on an oven dry weight basis.
347
-------
Disposal of Sewage Sludge
From records provided by the STP from 1967 through 1975,
the quantities of sludge generated can be seen to be increasing
(see Table 113). Specifically, the amount of sludge spread
in 1973 was approximately double that of 1972. The STP super-
intendent, however, attributed this difference to the 1972
plant expansion which was completed at the beginning of 1973.
Assuming an average sludge solids content of 4.0 percent,
average sludge generated annually (1973-75) is 739 dry m tons
( 815 dry tons). All liquid sludge generated at the STP has
been spread on the 40.5 ha (100 acres) of which the treated
plot is a part.
The Kendallville STP contracts with an outside trucking
company for sludge hauling. The truck is equipped with a 9.5
cu m (2,500 gal) tank, fitted with a 15 cm (6 in) diameter
discharge pipe. Typically, the truck is driven across the
field with the valve open, allowing the sludge to pour onto
the ground. One tank full covers an area approximately 1 to
1.5 m (3 to 5 ft) in width and 300 m (1,000 ft) in length.
As mentioned in Farming Practices, however, some areas of
the various fields have served as dumping grounds for sludge,
especially during periods of wet weather.
Prior to 1967, sludge was hauled with STP equipment.
Frequent and costly mechanical breakdowns, however, compelled
the city to contract with a private hauler. The city presently
pays the contractor $10 per load for hauling the sludge to the
348
-------
TARI.I I 13
KENOALLVILLE, INDIANA - SLUDGE GENERATION
Year
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
Dry Metric Tons
108
130
129
215
223
358
713
857
875
Solids at 4.0 pi.r-cent (averaged analytical data).
349
-------
farmer's fields. The contractor in turn pays the farmer $1 per
load to dump on farm property.
Interviews with the farmer and STP personnel indicate that
the only problem associated with sludge disposal has been a
complaint in early 1976 from a neighbor regarding the odor
emanating from newly spread, sludge. The problem was not severe,
however, and has not affected continued disposal at the study
site.
Photographs 32 through 36 show, respectively,
sludge swath on the treated plot, the treated plot, the control
plot, the sludge spreading truck, and a view of the alfalfa
sampled from the treated plot.
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
Personnel from the Kendallville News Sun, the Noble
County Board of Health, and the Kendallville City Health
Department were interviewed to assess their awareness of the
sludge spreading practices. The Managing Editor of the News
Sun stated that in the five previous years, no articles had
appeared relative to sludge spreading.
The Noble County Sanitarian related that in early 1976,
a neighbor living adjacent to the treated field lodged a
complaint regarding possible effects of sludge "run-off" con-
taminating a creek or river. Upon examination, however, the
Sanitarian determined that the complaint had no public health
significance. When asked how he viewed the sludge spreading
program, he answered that for all practical purposes, he saw
350
-------
Photograph 32
Sludge on Treated Field
Photograph 33
Treated Plot
351
-------
Photograph 34
Control Plot
Photograph 35
Sludge Spreading Truck
352
-------
Photograph 36
Alfalfa Treated Plot
353
-------
no appreciable difference between the use of sewage solids or
animal wastes as a fertilizer source.
The Kendallville Health Officer was interviewed regarding
any potential health problems associated with sludge spreading.
He was not aware of the local sludge utilization program.
STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS ON SLUDGE SPREADING
There are currently no Indiana state regulations governing
application of sludge to agricultural land. The STP superin-
tendent stated that no permits are required for either disoosal
or transportation of sludge. The Noble County Sanitarian has
knowledge of the sludge spreading practice (see Public Attitudes)
and approves of this disposal method.
There have been no reported adverse health effects
affecting any person involved in the sludge disposal program.
Inoculations are not given to the STP employees.
ECONOMICS
Under current agreement, the sludge hauling contractor
receives $10 for each load hauled from the STP. The sludge is
to be disposed only at the study site. For each load dumped,
the contractor pays the farmer $1.
Records dating back to 1967 indicate that the contractor
has hauled approximately 80 percent of the sludge for $9/load
through 1975. (A second hauler employed at $10/load during
segments of 1973 and 1974 accounted for the remaining 20
percent.) The rate was increased to $10/load on January 1,
1976.
354
-------
l)u<> l.o l.hc n.il.uro o I the at) n'cmon t., I ho <<)•. I. of d j-, |>o-,,i I
is (ItrtM.tly dependent upon the hauling fee and the sludge
solids. The current disposal cost is $26.47/dry m ton ($24.Ol/
dry ton) based on 9.6 cu m (2,500 gal)/load and 4.0 percent
siudge solids.
Chemical expenses for both ferric chloride and Floculite
550 were not included in the cost analysis of sludge disposal
since they are used principally for precipitating phosphorus
and achieving required suspended solids removal efficiencies.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
SIudge
On May 27 and August 26, 1976, five one-liter grab
samples each of raw and stabilized sludge were obtained from
both the primary clarifiers and the anaerobic sludge digester.
S oj 1
On May 27 and 28, 1976, surface and subsurface soil
samples were obtained from both the treated and control plots,
each being divided into five sections. Approximately 30
individual core samples from the surface 0 to 20 cm (0 to 8 in)
were obtained per section with a 2.5 cm (1 in) diameter stain-
less steel split tube sampler.
An initial attempt wac, made to obtain subsurface samples
using a 7.6 cm (3 in) diameter stainless steel bucket auger.
However, all attempts were unsuccessful because of pebbles
between the 30 and 61 cm (12 and 24 in) level. A truck-mounted
5 cm (2 in) diameter pneumatic core drill operated by the
155
-------
resident soil conservationist was finally used to obtain the
required samples. The surface 20 cm (8 in) was discarded from
each core. Samples were then taken between 20 and 30 cm (8 and
12 in) and labeled Horizon A; 30 to 61 cm (12 to 24 in) Horizon
B; 61 to 91 cm (24 to 36 in) Horizon C; and 91 to 122 cm (36 to
48 in) Horizon D. Four 122 cm (48 in) cores evenly spaced
throughout were obtained from each section. As the cores were
removed from the sample tube, each was carefully placed on a
clean plastic tarp, measured and cut, and placed in premarked
plastic sample bags. Subsurface soil samples were obtained
from both treated and control plots in an identical manner.
Plants
On May 27, 1976, alfalfa samples were obtained from both
plots by cutting and retaining the top 20 to 25 cm (8 to 10 in)
of plants with a pair of cutting shears. The alfalfa grew in
clusters in both fields so that each cutting contained an
estimated 10 plant samples. Any other trimmed tissue such as
clover or orchard grass was removed prior to placing the
alfalfa in a sample bag. Approximately 15 such cuttings were
taken from each section, resulting in an estimated 2 kg (4 Ib)
sample from each section.
Tables 114 through 121 present the following:
356
-------
Tablj? Description
114 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
SIudges
115 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite Surface
and Subsurface Soils
116 Total Metal Concentrations in Indivi-
dual Surface Soil Samples
117 Selenium in Composite Plants and Soils
118 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and Plants
119 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
120 Parasites in Sludges, Plants, and Soils
121 Concentrations of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and PI ants
Figures 86 to 9b present particle size analyses of the
various soil composites by depth.
357
-------
TABLE 114
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
KENDALLVILLE, INDIANA
Volatile Solids (%)
NO- - N
NH4 - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
Ag
As
B
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
Hg
Mn
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
Zn
H20 (%)
pH
5/27/76
33.08
<1 .88
3031
18765
19375
7925
9250
39625
17992
n .d .
7734
15.2
7.19
61 .6
76.1
3023
35.2
1038
71766
3.13
14969
10.6
108
12609
22.0
11006
93.6
7.5
8/26/76
39.13
6.21
2483
10836
8741
2584
3776
11922
6522
<17.2
5690
5.26
3.02
25.9
23.8
998
14.6
431
24440
3.02
4767
4.48
46.7
2348
12.3
3371
88.4
7.6
Average
36.1
4.05
2757
. 14801
14058
5255
6513
25774
12257
<8.6
6712
10.2
5.11
43 .8
50.0
2011
24.9
734
48103
3 .08
9868
7.54
77 .3
7479
17.2
7188
91 .0
All units in vg/g (unless otherwise noted).
All data expressed on oven dry weight basis. •
358
-------
UT)
-I
J-
-JO
X' *Jl
T IX •£
— J. «'
*C -3 •— «
Jl /
,1 _j
*"~ i —i
yi />
rr
^ —
jj
X '
^.1 ^
!
*•"•.
—
O J
XTL
— jj.
1.
-" "v.; -C :xj — * -o .0 > >
•vi r ^ - > x i- ^ n _r.
•»- ^* -t — 0 M — i -* -^ 0
•V
^T'CD^1^ -VU ,p i — "VJ
<\| -4 1 —1—4 — « r-t — 4 .— ^ — •
'XJ O O O JT> tJ *£> — ' J"i >
X) -g — . o o —• -f -• -i r-
= = " ° =0 = 0,
"vj 'X' m r-. ^* ^-> — i "\< rv ru
T" *"~5 **— . '"*S "^l f^ l'^* "^* if*1
^ J~i o -C; • — *^ 'v-
ir. "^ •> *r --t c iv — •:: >-
sC >- -^- -
'V "*1 -^* "t -4 -Xl 'V *"*) *t **>
rXJ --D O "*1 ^ 'f\ '£) 0s -sf jR
'VJDlPxCO Ch(\iCCkfl»-*
'J i -— * fV *^ »iJ l\jt fVJ rVI ifi (/>
oa-ooo ooooo
• *
• 3E • 2:
5:2:5:0 5:2:2:0
UlOOO UJOOO
Ui CM LJ CM
^
X 0
-1.'
1
Cr »— *
uJ H-
Jbi .-
T »-,
X
— CJ
< r
o i
_f O
_r 2
— t 'VJ
359
-------
o.
s;
o
s/>
iii
u.
X
•in
UD
2
O
2
UJ
O
z
o
o
<
»—
UJ
o
X
Q.
«£
.>
_l
Q
z
UJ
C5
UJ
X
— Jjl
o
to
N,
O
o
X
z r
aJ
o
«c
r- CO
•j> rs > n
~+ \r_+_t
-O \i J^.
r\j \J-^.
oooo
ooo
co
jj
*'\j'vj'-« vx^vi—«
JVlOSJO*
0000 00-00
oooo
-J
T
y>
-U
OUU
»t PO\O CJ> IH
I- I I I I
(jOO^-ii-i
jjIMCOvOO*
cn
ouy
CM
i-irt CM
ou u
CM
u
uou
CM
rt CM
UUO
io.
I I I I
Oi-t 1-1
I I I I
O i-* i-*
ro \OCTI
— I I I i r- i i i i
(jOOrtrt c_>OOi-(^«
» jj CM rovocji
s/)
360
-------
TABLE 117
SELENIUM IN COMPOSITE PLANTS AND SOILS
KENDALLVILLE, INDIANA
Treated Plot Control Plot
yg/g
Plant
(alfalfa) <0.02 <0.02
Soil (depth in cm)
0-20
20-30
30-61
61-91
91-122
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
361
-------
1
1
J j
C" t
fz
1 _i
' Q-
f -^
l/^ i
, -J
»— t '
O *2
1 S/» Z"
' uJ — <
1 i-^ «J
»|t
*~ ui uj
oJ _l
-J j Z _l
< >
*— , V) -U
: Z -J
I ^) «
4 ^
< oJ
X *:
•*•
1
i i.
i _J
, f—
i oj
; f
~r-
. \
1
CM '' '
7 ,
0
CM
CL i
Ni '
Z. V
_i ! ><
X x
Z
1
•o
CM
3
a-
i ;
i
_j
o
02: ! a
t fcH'ru o x ^vLO^_4
r*- ^O^'iAfwt'sr*io^l ^ ro.r^-^-^^ocO1
^ ( 1 ! , 1 , ,
45 ^p co ! rfs <\ji tr^ ?** • '^O i -^ cc - ro 0s1 c:» x>
^ -sO f*- rxj *"* i -^3 o •* ^ i cy^ ' x* !*•*- O1 r\j **- xi
|-*S]-*xi w i ! ' i ^ •*, »«••** -x*
J \O ^O ^- ^~ *G | •& f**- ^3 J"J ' ^^> ' vO O* -O "*O sC -^
1 i i i ] i ' :
i i ! . i i ,
, cO ' ^* ^^ GD ^0 i CO *^ ' J^ f^l ' *Nta~ **£• •'\f ^0 CC ^) i^*
1 ^ ' **•• *^- OF1* fVI i XI T*> (7*- CO"1 ^-1^f^-i^VJO ;3* ^ j JO DJ'JO J*O X-; ^ X > ^0 JO X'O-
1 ! i ' s i ; i ! ;
t QV > -^ ^* ' tXi oo «^ ^ 3"* ^ "^ ' f^ !^* o ^- ^O 'O *O ^O -^O '-£' d>
! i o joooojooo o o.oo'oooo
! ; ; . i : : '
> : : ! ro ' i
* • • ' . • ; «, ! ;
~ 1 ; ; Sir , , '
! ' 23 - t\i C3 kf^ ^P "** O C^ Lf"( CJ1*
i r*> ! 43 (\i ' in !*-if*-cT>cc>cxfv
! i
r> ^
tO ' CF^ Of i h/^ ^*- ' f) f^, Ou1 i *& ' *~^ i Cl! rO C^* LO "1 'O
*O j ^- QO 1 "O ^ i *~** oo "^* i o i "^i •"* -^J ' *^* *"^ ^ "^
f^ i nj fV! i 'XI ry ' T*l csj ! ' **i i t\& '\J "Xi fV3 ?\l i t^J
i ' ! ! ! i ! i ! ' ;
i 1
dn , h x
fv* ' ft fL* ' rt rv* *i rv ^ ; [ • "^
i ^fj | l^» f\| ^VJ *•"* i r*^ f*^ f\f ' f\j Xi *™ * r"0 *™^ *~^ ^Xj "^
,0 ^ _ ^ 0 O 0 ^ , w/ . 0 — -.
/** ""^ "> "~ j ~i ' ""* ""*• ( ' /I "^ *^3 *~> ""* ' "~i ^
1> f -^ >^J -~^ ~~* -—* — »™t k/ ? -^ -- * —V *— * •— t — J
*— ^ tj (J <^ »J ^J ij ^| T— ' • £. '*-} »-? ^ "J1 ^^ *^I "^
<3T O jiJ -A-t u^ yj.t jj ii ^*- 2 ^ ^JL^ jj . tj x.' U-f -iJ *~
i_y_t (^j) ^yi i/j ',/} i^ ,o 51 •y^ C5 C-J v/? yj yv '-/J s/i »„ >yj
*
•T
j._j
r
<*-*
j ,1 L, J
t> O
-^ r
OJ O
'V ^
^j "5
— ^
.
-• A»
362
-------
4q5<8/,\/q
in v -
o
(—
o
Lu
co
CO
y
£
fO
o
>
fC
C_J
CX)
CM
ro
CO
CT>
ro
r—
1 —
r—
fO
•o
c
a>
C\J
01
CO 5
a: \
01 ,
zi
r «
—y '
Z.
01
CO '
8
ifT"j
Z ;
tw
r^
o
-to*
e
o
ip
c .
j to
.O (X
!-
* z
n
•^ o
•3 :r
_> p
iltAH.Ni
CONSUL
F I
M
ft""' '
o
NJ
~_
~
-
;t
<-»
^~
!* V
g
^
°
•
to
(/i
ra
^
a>
NJ
•i —
i f\
\j t
01
u
•r-
1 ^
fO
a.
r<
2:
ri
0)
1
!^I
>
_
fa
c
CD
^
00
-------
J8SJDOO
•» o
S 3
C3
si I
. 0
III 85
CO* — *
z
o
l-
o
u.
CO
CO
-J
o
>-
J
o
3?
t-
_l
CO
s?
0
z
CO
oS
2
o
CL
O
ta
la
Ul
o-o
* z
CO
E
(O
O
_J
ro
0
cn
CM
o
"*"
00
O)
r~
>
I—
r~
(O
•o
c:
cu
X
c»
ID
0^
r^j
(D
•l-l
nj
1^
cu
o
NJ
OO
CU
r—
O
•I—
-M
-------
_J
to
Q
O
2:
o
»~
o
Lu
co
_t
o
_J
o
o*~
—
£«
o
^
i/}
o^
O
n.
cr:
o
«>
Ul
o
Ul
_J
0;d
5
"
.
1 v
e
tQ
o
>,
res
o
CM
co
o
00
CO
1 —
•1 —
<—
(0
-O
c
O)
^.
CT)
f f\ 1
nr: .
in ,
Si
"~« i
CJ5 -
•— 7. ;
UJ J
cos
CO'
'
§^
1 t
f '.
> ">
ft "
is
^ °
< ^
^ UJ
-J -J-
J.,i
/? nf
< -*
!§
- o
->
9p3*s
r J
b f
fi 1
-tfc
e
o
o
co
o
It,
~?
f~l
.J
LL*
ll1
1
\
1 0
i II
i
- [
fl
•
r
0
T
»J
j
O
6
o
5
D
r
<
n
•3
V
u
V
S
(/I
>
, —
03
^~
<£
O)
IS1
•r—
OO
O)
(O
Q_
•z.
h— 4
•s
^
•r—
>
,
-D
(D
00
oo
0)
^
en
u_
365
-------
o o
cvl ro
O o O O
^ 10 *& ^~"
§
O
o
7
o
o
o
o
o
CO
o
CO
o
10
o
10
o
C\J
fq jsuij
o
1-
o
u.
CO
ff)
_J
0
_l
o
s^
5
5
°
o
z
w
3s
Z
o
OESCRIPT
j
r
CO So s
DC 5S -
tu x - ?
LU ££ , g
• ^ O yj -« 14.
K™» 5 *^ *? •"*
o" S o
^ ^ X
j_. CC w ^» O
Ui °5 2 °
^^ . *— »- ^
CO Sg 2
O
3 CO
fll IUJ!L>1 °
1
tFl
fi
fj
, >
«•«>
f*5 5 °°
1 1 I ^ r-
S I } 3 m
( ( « o C
^j j -* ^^-
^ ^iLi 5
cu
E
ro
O
_j
03
ro
CO
«3-
CM
(1)
•i— •
rt
-8
• ^
E
O
VO
1
O
CO
-
IN
Ol
o
•4->
Q-
z:
«\
r^
r-*
>
^
TO
C
CU
CTl
CO
01
s.
CD
1 1
366
-------
cc: ?•?.
LU /,„;
w «•::.
13
2:
o
t-
o
ti-
er)
CO
<
_l
O
>-
<
_l
o
ss
5
«o
^
a
z
<
u>
B?
z
o
fr—
a.
K
o
UJ
Q
UJ
J
°-0
Ss
<
«>
E
re
0
>
re
c_>
un
CO
01
CO
to
•—
(O
•o
c
O)
^i
<£>
oo
C3-I
TJ
1
vo
OJ
rO
Q.
T3
£Z
cu
o
CTl
QJ
en
367
-------
g £=•
.out
z
o
1-
o
u.
CO
CO
_J
o
o
i~
•a
c?
O
«
5?
0
0.
o
V)
Ul
o
UI
o-d
5 K
w
«*/S 1— o
rr -y i
m §a i
rr oa ^ 2
•^ 5* ? ^
o^? ^ ^
<^ s x
, — , CC ^ O
21 za " 2
LU 8| g |
CO i^ 3
O<2 0
ui O «c
^ «° | (/,
t
Ji4
l-<
n
H
****"
2 ^
tf^W^ X >s
Efi" ^
R 1 1 ? c
fijj 2 "^
£^) J 5 CU
E
03
O
_J
>
n3
CJ
^
,
**
00
CM
(L)
•r-
>
(C
•o
C
cu
i^C
CM
Oi
Ch
13
(D
- cd
• ^*f
H
E
U
M
M
I
—
Dl
C/)
CL)
O
•r—
s-
Q_
*
•y
h-H
JT>
d^
|Z
>
r—
, —
tQ
c
cu
(
QJ
S-
cn
LJ_
368
-------
4qf)i8/,\ Xq ^^u
_,
0
\-
o
tl
en
_J
o
j
o
^0
0
H
«
s?
a
X
CO
^0
0
1C
o
n.
oc
o
CO
U)
Q
£* .
5
f
p
p
6
*
1
E
(O
0
en
r-
"*
O
fit
1 —
•1—
1 —
(O
•o
O)
^
CO
CO
CO '
Ct! ;
OJ ;
LU -
__, <
^^- *
• — •
CO
^-•^ '
^7" -
r« i
m i
">;
o
Crt !
ff^l
f * I
C * 1
r • I
*£jj
fe**£
O
s-
4-J
C
O
o
5 f >
*
> LO
jli!
- -r
t S
. i'i
3 s.
J.»-
o ^
< 3
r "
So
- o
/)
TT
r y
t B
0 i
_!/
:x^
OJ
u
H3
tf—
S-
CO
^,
\
»
,
f
}
f-
> H
n
K
M
g
* J
^
i
r
",
— *
>
Y
<
"3
7
^
i
q
o
tj
3"
-<
O
-
V
u
4
t/)
*!
,
f2
~
^~
^
o:
^ j
C/ J
o
s_
ftS
D_
—?*
•£— -
I — i
r—
>
i —
(O
"c
O!
CVI
CTi
OJ
s_
O)
LU
369
-------
Xq JSSJDOQ
o o o o
— tvl
H
3
z
vt
•o
O
jsuij
.g.
O
(—
O
ti_
CO
to
_J
O
_I
0
t£
_i
«
^
o
Z
Z
o
1-
0.
o
C1
Ul
0
hi
_1
5
#20 1
CC si ~
LU «S , g
•^ * Z « J
r^ 0 p s o
\~J •< ^ *J x
Z z o c; <
"- 5 " °
CO ^ 3 3
O < z- g
01 C to
b •!—
.. - - •->
^
J?.4*
T}*'
|i
tv
t<
few)
(W-VO " x >^
VV
i!
1
i
? S ,-
8 o ro
63 c
» ?: *-
go eC
^ i?1'.' Jb o QJ
E
0
_J
CM
CM
"*
oo
'>
1—
03
"^3
c:
o^
\x
Ol
r—
O
S-
•)»>
C
0
0
E
O
o
co
i
o
CM
1/1
QJ
(J
S-
fO
Q-
f\
^21
h-H
n
O)
j
>
-a
c
0)
CO
en
OJ
s-
13
CD
l_l_
370
-------
t "~*
O
CO
o
O
ss
Ul 8^
M>
3 o
O
2
O
t-
o
w
0
V
_J
^
1-
55
O
<
(/J
s?
2
0
D.
o
tf)
U
a
Ul
o-ci
22
v>
e
(O
0
_J
o
CO
<£>
oo
,_,.
CO
O)
E
>
I
to
"O
c:
^
0
IT)
CTl
C
S.
^
C
c
0
£
o
1 —
10
1
o
ro
03
Q.
ra
TD
c:
CD
en
a>
371
-------
o
evl
fq
O
•<*•
O
to
o
CO
o
o
7
o
CO
o
in
o
o
ro
o
CM
/q
z
o
I—
o
Lu
CO
to
_I
O
i
0
1-
CO
o
z
z
o
£
A.
ec
o
Ul
a
u
_j
3Z
Sly 1
1 1 1 x - 3
t" o w z
HI «> a: •=
•— * -.. jj ; o
ZfS ? 5
C35g ? "-
^- - Q- U «TI JJ
-21 2:0 « 5
ui 85 g s
W PS 3
t> <§ g
OJ So |
3
fj'
Wd
.
B« 4 -^
1 1 I § ;;i
K f I o 3
BJJ | D
j i^--,* -ff o
E
-c
1C
c\
if.
01
S
-j
n-
tO
•a
c
OJ
i^
to
IT)
r-
O
S-
4^
o
o
0
,__
-------
TABLE 119
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUDGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
KENDALLVILLE, INDIANA
Treated
Plot
Soil
Surface Composites
0.29
0.08
00
Control
Plot
/"g/kg
o.oi1
0.02
Chiorinated
Hydrocarbon
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB 1221
PCB 1248
Plant
Composi tes
Stabilized Sludge
.-0.02
,0.04
<•!
< 0 . 1 1
(5/27/76)
-1 .56
5.78
<1 .0
3672
<0.02
<0.04
<1
-------
co
I—
z.
CL.
Z. ff
<: z
« i i
CO Q
0-5
OJ ^^
- " ul
** 1
LU CO _j
, | LU ZZ
CO C£> ;>
£ § d
—1 5
CO Q
^^
- . ^1.
ZZ LU
1— 1 yx
CO
LU
I—
i — i
co
|
Q.
CO
CO
d>
a:
o
-r-
-P
O.
.
^~
O
CO
a>
Q
O)
^«
o.
6
re
CO
O) d) d> d>
_l_. i i i ji j ^
rt3 fO fO fO
CD O"l C71 O^
10 <£> ID
c^ c^ c^ c^
i — 10 r~~ vo
CM CM CM CM
^^ "^ — . *^^
un co Ln co
•*~f* V»-^ *-_ <• ^_^
^3 ^3
a> ai
N N
•i— *r—
•n~ *r~
CD n O
CD 3 3 re re
3 o: D; co i/)
CO
o D ai cu CD cu cu
re re re re re re re
CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
<1> OJ CD CU CD CL) CD
z. z. -z z. z. z. -z
CO CO
CD CD
1 ^ i ^
•r- «r—
CO CO
O 0
a. Q.
E E
0 0
o t_>
T3 r—
ai o
•i-> E S_
re e e E o -n
O) O O O C
i- CM O
"Or — I — OJOi — i — CMCJ
ai o o ro vo en •— i
•<-> s- i re i i i i i
CO re -t-5 M— O O r— r—
-t->O)c:cos_cMroio(Tico
C S- O i— 3 i—
re i— cj> -i- co -r-
r- O 0
Q- CO CO
CD CD CU QJ CD
fO 'O fO fO (O
CD CD CD CD CD
OJ d) (D Q) d)
Z. "Z Z. Z. Z.
E
E E E o
o o o
CM
CD O i— i— CM
O CO VT> CT> r—
re i i i i
<+- 0 O i— i—
Sw CM CO VO CT>
3
CO
374
-------
!
CM
UJ
1
CO
I—
^
2
1
i —
00
1 —
1
_J
D_
G
<£
C/")
_^ j
o
oo
"
i
oo "— '
m >
CO — J
0 — 1
cr <;
c_) Q
£ Q
Lo_
O
O
i — i
Oi
1 —
UJ
<->
O
o
0
o
C?
1 >
C )
IIJ
00
'rtj
o
CU
LJL-
p^
o
.^
o
CJ
05
' CD
U.
O> -Q
tn S 2 ro
"C1 ro n3 -t->
r c£ a: oo
O"
4- 4-
+ 4.
4- 4-
ir> <=r
0 0
x x
•=3- tn
^t- CM
1 4-
1 4-
1 4-
~o
) —
Q X
'jt/^_ ^j~
•—
1 1
1 4-
4- 4-
Q Q
1 1
1 +
4- 4-
O Q
~z. -z.
en cn
o o
X X
<-o OD
m o
UP r—
CM
CO CD
_Q co ro
ro •(-> CU
->-> C S-
OO ro h—
D-
4-
4-
4-
^.
O
X
cr>
r—
4-
4-
+
1
O
r—
X
cn
•—
i
4-
4-
Q
1
4-
4-
Q
"Z.
0
""o
'x
CM
i —
O
c
o
.
-—^
CO CD
CO
CU
cu o
1
s~ o s_
"O O
ra CO 4-
^
c: o co
o ex ra
"a ra "o
cu cu
co co -t-J
co ra i- "O
CU O ^
i- -a o.-*-3
o. cu cu u
O) co +->
01 CO ^
CO i- C "°
4-> Q_ O „
r- X -r- CU
3 0) +-> £=
CO ra O
CU CO > c
S~ CU S-
3 0) »
5 > o -^
r— -X -K
i
375
-------
-o
cu
3
C
C
o
o
CM
ca
1/1 j|t*.aA L^dmnsajd
u
cu «abpn[s 6
utad BJQ LS^OJ.
^.^,p9^.9[dui03
o
Y^aAL^duinsaud
(O
cu
^ ^abpntS 6
uad SJQ lcl°i
«pwi*«a
,2 ^pauu .141103
r—
oo
uad SUQ le^oj.
»»pa,aLdu,OD
1 ^ **pauu LJ.U03
cu
o
^ ^^.aA Lq.duinsaj(j
VOUO -l-)i — CO
i— tOlOlOCMCOCO Ulrv-LO
0 0
Q. Q.
1 E §
OCUEEEO c_>CUE
o o o o o u
1 "O (O CM 1 r— eo
CU 4- O r— •— CM OM-O
io4->s_covocrii — ios-S-co
r- fO 3 1 1 1 1 ,— 4-> 3 1
•i— O) CO O O i — i — T-CCO O
OS- CMCOVOO1OO CM
+ + +
^d" uo cr*
1 1 1
1 1 1
Q o a
z. z. z.
\ 1 1
+ + +
Q Q Q
z, z. z.
1 1 1
+ + +
+ + +
Q Q a
Z. "Z Z.
CTi |-~- CM
tn o co
CM CO i—
E E O
0 O
CM
r- i— CM
1 1 1
0 i— i—
co to en
ai
ca
01
cu
s-
ca
to
(O
•o
0)
to
to
s-
Q-
X •
ai
-S
to >
cu i-
13 CU
r—
r—
03
O
*
*
376
-------
CHAPTER IX
COLUMBUS, INDIANA
SITE DESCRIPTION
Location
This study site is approximately 1.6 km (1 mi) south of
Columbus, Indiana. The sludge-treated field is located adja-
cent to the Columbus Treatment Plant (STP) located at 327 Water
Street. The primary control field is approximately 0.8 km
(0.5 mi) south of the treated field. A second control field
from which only corn grain samples were taken is located
directly south of the primary control field.
PJi^sical Cqndijn_ons
Columbus is typical of the many farming communities in
sou th-eeM t r.-; i Indiana: terrain is flat to gently rolling, and
principal crops are corn, soybeans, and other feed grains.
The treated n>c,t, measuring approximately 300 x 20 m
(1,000 x 100 ft) is situated on a 14.2 ha (35 acre) field adja-
cent to tho STP (Figure 96) and slopes downward from south
to nor; ;. The long and narrow rectangular shape of this plot
was dictated by the presence of several different soil series
within the field. Establishment of this rectangular configura-
tion allowed all sampling to be performed within one soil
series. The outer boundary line of treated plot coincides with
the edge of the field. Haw Creek, which forms a natural bound-
ary for the 14.2 ha (35 acre) field, is south and below the
p lot.
377
-------
ttaw Creek
Control
Field
N
No Scale
Power
Railroad
tracks
Corn
30 M
o
p
ro
Lafayette\ . Rower Poles (TYP)
STP
Figure 96
-Columbus, Indiana Treated Field
378
-------
I'.nlh run! ml fi<»l
-------
Haw Creek
Railroad Tracks
Original Control Plot
Figure 97
Columbus, Indiana Control Field
380
-------
form a sufficiently firm base thai would support a stand of
corn .
Field preparation typically begins in the fall with chisel
plowing to a depth of 30 cm (12 in) followed by applications of
phosphate at B6 kg/ha (50 Ib/acre) and potash at 134 kg/ha
(120 Ib/acre). In the spring the field is disked twice to a
depth of 20 cm (8 in), and then seeded. The corn is allowed to
grow to a height of almost 30 cm (12 in), and anhydrous ammonia
is applied at 224 kg/ha (200 Ib/acre). 1975 provided an excep-
tion to this cultivation schedule, however, because fertilizers
were not used.
If necessary, the field is spot-sprayed with Banvel for
weed control. In 1975, the insecticide Heptachlor at 5.6 kg/ha
(5 Ib/acre) was applied. In 1976, 20 percent Aldrin at 5.6 kg/
ha (!) Ib/acro) was used. The soil on the treated field has had
a history of lime applications to maintain a pH level of
between 6.5 and f .8. Lime, however, has not been applied with-
in the last five years.
Though the normal yield for corn in the Columbus area is
approximately 125 bu/acre, the first corn crop from the treated
field in 1975 yielded only 35 bu/acre. The farmer of the field
believes there were three principal reasons for the low yield:
1. Excess sludge in the lower spots of the field
prevented seed germination even though the
surface soil and sludge deposits had been
worked , oqether.
381
-------
2. The heavy loadings of sludge throughout the
field prevented the surface soil from drying,
consequently delaying planting of the crop by
an estimated 3 to 4 weeks; and
3. No fertilizer was added to the crop to stimu-
late growth.
The 1976 yield was an estimated 90 bu/acre. The farmer
again cited late planting due to the slow drying time of the
field as the principal reason for the lower yield. Comparable
1976 yields in the area averaged 30 bu/acre.
The control plots are owned by two separate farmers. Soil
preparation and farming techniques utilized are similar to
those of the treated field, but anhydrous ammonia is added at a
reduced rate: 112 kg/ha (100 Ib/acre). In addition, the herb-
icide Aatrex 4L is usually applied at 0.8 1/ha (0.5 gal/acre).
Lime has not been used within the last five years.
Yields were not available for either control plot. All
three plots were observed at the time of sampling to have abun-
dant growths of corn that had passed the tasseling stage with
young ears averaging 5 to 8 cm (2 to 3 in) in length. The crop
at the treated plot was, however, slightly less mature than at
the control plot, probably due to a difference in planting
dates.
CLIMATE
The climate near Columbus is continental, with rather warm
summers, moderately cold winters, and occasional wide variations
382
-------
in temperature, particularly during the fall and winter.
Periods of humi
-------
CM
UJ
_l
03
et
to
o
o
5 I 'W '«"" *1> *ta«t r^«V
384
-------
IS)
X
UJ
•o
c
u
c
re
0)
S
to
> O O CT-
~o
-------
A representative profile of Ross silty clay loam as mapped
by the Soil Conservation Service is described as follows:
0 to 17.8 cm (0 to 7 in) - Dark brown, silty clay
loam; moderate, medium granular structure; firm;
neutral.
17.8 to 33 cm (7 to 13 in) - Dark brown, silty
clay loam; moderate, medium subangular blocky
structure; firm; continuous, very dark grayish-
brown and very dark brown organic coatings on
faces of peds; neutral.
. 33 to 76.2 cm (13to 30 in) - Dark brown silty clay
loam; moderate, fine and medium, subangular blocky
structure; firm; continuous very dark grayish-
brown organic coatings on faces of peds; neutral.
76.2 to 94 cm (30 to 37 in) - Dark yellowish-brown
loam; weak, medium and coarse, subangular blocky
structure; friable; discontinuous, very dark
grayish-brown organic coatings mainly on vertical
faces of peds; neutral.
94 to 114 cm (37 to 45 in) - Dark yellowish-brown
loam; massive; friable; neutral.
. 114 to 183 cm (45 to 72 in) - Dark yellowish-
brown stratified sand and sandy loam; massive;
loose; neutral in upper part and moderately alkaline
(calcareous) below a deptr, of 165 cm (68 in).
386
-------
I rrated Plot
The treated plot is mapped as Ross silt loam but while the
soil has a profile similar to that described above, the surface
layer is a friable silt loam. Included with this soil are some
areas that have a surface layer of loam and other smaller areas
that have a surface layer of silty clay loam. In a few places,
there are small areas that have loose gravel at a depth of less
than 100 cm (39 in).
Observations to the 122 cm (48 in) level during sampling
indicated that the treated plot soil closely followed the above
description. Identification of the surface 0 to 20 cm (0 to 8
in) was difficult, however, due to the large quantities of
field-dried sludqe intermixed with the original topsoil.
Control Plot
The parallelogram-shaped control plot from which soil and
leaf samples wen. taken is also mapped as Ross silt loam.
Observations at the time of sampling indicated a close simi-
larity to the previously-described profile, with the exception
of a sand layer encountered all along the 69 m (225 ft) Section
I Li ne at the 61 en: (? ft) 1 evel .
The soil at. the plot from which the mature grain samples
were obtained is mapped as Ross silty clay loam. It is des-
cribed in the Bartholomew County, Indiana, Soil Survey (May,
1976), and has a profile described as representative of the
series.
387
-------
Moisture, pH, and other relate; data for the treated 'and
control plots are presented in Tar^e 123.
SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF SLUDGE
Sewage Treatment Plant.
The Columbus Treatment and Disposal Plant (STP) provides
secondary treatment to wastewaters from a population of 26,500
(1970) and a population equivalent of 50,000 (1976). The plant
employs a modified contact stabilization process aided by the
use of alum and anionic polymer (Nalco 677) for phosphorus
removal. The plant treats an average flow of 24,400 cu m/day
(6.45 mgd) with a rated design capacity of 32,400 cu m/day
(8.6 mgd). Primary treatment consists of grit removal, pre-
aeration, and primary settling. Secondary treatment consists
of contact stabilization sludge reaeration and secondary clari-
fication. Sludge is returned from the secondary clarifiers to
oxidation, reaeration tanks that operate at 11,000 ppm mixed
liquor suspended solids (i-.LSS) concentration. Return activated
sludge from this operation is piped to the contact stabiliza-
tion mixed liquor tanks operated at a concentration of 2500 to
3000 ppm MLSS.
Effluent from the ce.ondary clarifiers is contact chlorin-
ated prior to discharge to thj East Fork of the White River.
Secondary treatment efficiencies for the twelve-month period,
August, 1975, to July, 1976, are shown in Table 124.
Personnel at the STP estimate that industrial flow consti-
tutes two-thirds of the total plant influent. Table 125 pre-
388
-------
»
— J
:/•
j_
'~'
j-.
-•
—
u.. 5
f
A —
t ^.
/> £
^^— "~^i
r ^
"" !J
3
"
-J
:5
?
u
(
N
-•' (
L. y
5 ^
L
p^
CVI
t
,1"
-
£
'r-
I
L
J
,/,
« — i ^
--T '"
-'
H
*-T *~1
-J ^
— .
—
^ r
' "X Q
^ z
I (/)
i_ -L —
r. z
•-J O
-, DO
;- o;
- <
0 U
UJ
, cr
- D
( i
-—* 1
jj m
„-§_
X
r— ^j~
D 1-
i Q.
1 ,UJ
X Q
21
\ CJ
5 0
J 0
_._
Vs
^
,
T
^
t
oJ
--
CO CO C\J i — i —
„.- 'VJ i. -* JO
i; ••- - •v-
J>
1 0 -1 .C' -;?
"*1 ZI* C- '"^3 *s*-
1 — 1
>•* o — ^ x
r — » ,T "u v
_, "V — 4 —t _,
•xj ro -^ o -<
A. *~^ V '
»***>*
i -j D 3 :j
-i N r- >0 ON
LO *~* *~* vO CO
ro ro cvi *™* '~|
LO LO vD vO r^-
iCT' vO VO *JD CO
vo c\j vo r^~ ro
• - • • •
in *-< o o o
o> ro i/) oj
-------
CO
LU
I—(
O
UJ
I—I
o
UJ
CM
CQ a:
*f. «I
I- Q
CO
I
OO
ZD
oa
o
o
1 f\
\J 1
if)
c
0
o
-o
0)
OC. Q
O
^^ CO
"p
s
oo
-M oo
ni
3 ' — -
4^ ---Z.
<4- cr,
LU £
Q
o
CQ
t— 1
cr
^
CO
CO
1— 1
o>
^ T-l
E --^
i— i cr
a
o
. ca
3
O
1 [
>> to
r° ~£
• O
ai
C
O
en t~^ «^- LO CM CM r^
LO t^- r-~ LO LO LO LO
cys en en en en en en
CM o vo <*o r^ en i —
r*^ co r-^ ^D LO <^j- to
en en en en en en en
o LO vo co rn o en
•=3" oo ^J" <£> r~-- oo i —
i— i h- O r~^ en o o
^- r— ( OO P"- CM r— > i-H
CM CM CM i-( CM CM CM
LO en «3- rv. «— i t~~. i— i
co oo to en o i — r^
to o co «a- T— i CM CM
to co o LO co LO LO
r^ CO ^J" LO r~i ^* ^J~
CM CM CM CM CM CM CM
LO tD
en en
i— < i— i
Cn O. 4-> > O E -Q
3 cu o o a> « cu
=i oo o 'z. Q rr> u.
i^ r-n r-n <* o r--
co "d~ to r-» LO LO
en en en en en en
i^ en co CM r~ co
o ^* to i^ «3~ LO
en en en en en en
LO
to co co us CM en
i—H r~H t"H
CO
o en to ^J" co to
r-H
to en r^ r-i CM rH
LO ^1 O r-H «* CM
CM CM CM CM CM CM
o co cj co T— i en
to r-~ to '•*• LO LO
en CM LO LO CM o
<=3" O "* tD LO CM
LO CO **• LO CM <•
LO rH CM ^*- r~- «3-
CM CM CM CM CM CM
CU >i
S- S- >> C r— CT
(O Q. tO 3 3 3
2: >=c s; --o o
-------
1
j
I
U i
QL
UJ CD
I— r>.
< "~
Qi UJ
•
Q ro
o "o
cn
'. "">
i
IT:
o.
;
i
. —
i >>
i 5 *S
! O \
r — ^
Lj_
H3
0
" ""
'
;
i
4_>
O
33
~t75
! o
5—
CL
: s-
O
en
—
t ^.
j L 1.
a*
i i
CVI
i/>
(!) i—
r-~. 0)
i i "-
r •) CU
_ j
c
i-f~> *3~ re
CTi LO CJ
1 • T-
r— O H-
•i —
c^
cn
•r-
IT) O tO
r^ ro c
i . i — i
r — i
CVI
CVJ «^t" CTi
i O cvj ro
LH *3"
un
r^ o "-t
i ro r — cvi
l^Q ,
T;[-
1 • II
f- 1
1 .
CO 1C CO LO
O CO O1 CO
cvi i — r~~-
oo
CT.
C
•1 —
~O -V
^ o
"*^ rc3 ro
i- S- O CX
CL' T3 .0
4_J C7 "U 4-*
ro rs S- 03
. — ro ro CU
Q- _J CJ S:
i CVi
ro 4— S-. cn
C S_ CU C
o o t: o i — T-
(_' T— CJ "O ~T2 -^
oo 4-; r: ' — (tio
O ro •<- ro 4-> ro
e> 2: _i rs OT Q.
1
1
,—
CO oo
• i —
r— CU
>
CU
— 1
CVJ 4->
i — c:
ro
O 0
., —
4-
•'-
cn
O oo
o c
co M
CO
co co
co •*
O CO
<^f-
1 :
CD CO
to r^
ro co
LJT)
00
cn
CD c
C T-
•r- 4-J
^»i tO
fO ro
CQ ( )
^>.
c: s-
cu -o
to "o c:
CL r— 3
ro O O
CO O U_
1
1
1
1
o
CVI
CVI
Ol
ej-
i —
CO
oo
r^
LO
cvj
cn
c:
UJ
i —
cu
00
cu
• 1 —
Q
D_
1
f )
to
cz
•i —
E
E
13
O
1
to
i —
QJ
1 >
CU
1
C
OO ro
CD O
• •! —
r— 4-
•i —
C
cn
in
c
i i — i
r^
LO 1
Ln
cn
r~-*i i
ro
O
i
co
o cn
Cr* i —
Cn LO
.
cn
c: CU
UJ S_
33
i — 4->
CU T-
OO C"
CU S-
•r- 7^
CU Ll_
ro
O T3
S- c:
oo o i — i
C -Q
•r- CO C
E 01 -r-
E r- >
13 03 S-
<-J> 3:
CU
— i
c
ro
O
•i —
t| —
•i —
c:
cn
to
C
i — (
i
I
i
!
01
co
^D
O
•i —
£_
4-J
0
QJ
r—
UJ
CU
CJ
c
ro
., —
i —
CU
C£
•
CL.
t—
CO
4—
O
4-'
C
CU
E
4->
rO
CU
S-
4—1
j >,
ro
T5
C
O
O
CU
O
+j
c
O)
^3
i —
4—
4-
CU
• TD
ro CU
4-> 4-*
ro ro
TD CU
S-
o 4~>
t— 1
CO CO
CL)
to cn
ZJ S_
JD ro
E -c
13 CJ
i — 00
O T-
O Q
i — cvi
00
CU
23
r-—
ro
>
4-*
SZ
CU
Z5
i —
4-
4-
CU
i
to
4_>
03
CU
i.
4_)
CU
^_
Q-
ro
391
-------
sents a 3-month summary of analytical and flow data for the
major industrial contributors.
It is interesting to note that pretreated effluent from
the Stadler Packing Plant is piped directly to the aeration
tanks, conserving primary clarifier capacity in the plant.
Pretreatment at the Stadler plant is provided by three lagoons;
the first two are anaerobic, add the third is a facultative
stabilization and holding pond. Anaerobiosis is assured in the
first two lagoons by a layer of tallow intentionally spread
over the surfaces to provide an air seal. Detention time of
the ponds is approximately 5 to 7 days.
Sludge Stabilization and Storage
Sludge stabilization is accomplished in one of two paral-
lel, connected 2260 cu m (0.6 mg) anaerobic digesters. Com-
bined detention time is approximately 30 days. Sludge from the
primary clarifiers is pumped directly to the digesters. With-
drawal for land spreading is directly from one of the digestion
tanks.
Ten drying beds were available for additional storage
capacity prior to 1976, but these have been removed as a part
of a major STP expansion program.
The sludge is routinely analyzed by the STP with standard
atomic absorption (AA) techniques. An additional sample was
taken during Phase I of this study (Sept. 19, 1975) and was
analyzed with similar AA techniques. Table 126 presents
these analytical data. Metal concentrations .appear to be uni-
formly low and do not exhibit significant fluctuation over time
392
-------
TABLE 126
COLUMBUS, INDIANA - LIQUID STABILIZED SLUDGE ANALYSES
Date1
1/6/76
1/22/76
1/30/76
2/12/76
1/13/76
3/3/76
3/11/76
3/25/76
4/6/76
4/13/76
4/20/76
4/27/76
5/6/76
5/26/76
6/3/76
6 / 1 C / 7 f,
Date 2
9/19/75
Concen trat
pH Cd
6.8 0
1
6.9
7.1 1
2
0
5.8 1
0
5.9 0
6.3 0
(> . 9 (1
6.8 0
0
7.2 5
7.1 0
7 .(', 0
0
(12
.52
.12
.16
.4
.0
.21
.0
.56
.58
.67
.8
.74
.68
.0
.56
r
.42
.4)
2
ion (/
14.8
17
14.4
18.4
68
13.4
1 a c
26.7
(785)
Wet Wei
Zn
65
88
97.5
67.5
-
44
84
37
42.5
69.7
53.6
54.8
52
52.4
60.8
61 .6
54.0
(1590)
ght
Basis
Pb
3
3
1
7
5
4
28.5
3
1.4
23.2
27.2
19.2
2
2
2
2
2
3.6
7
2
20
1
1
e
1
5
7.2
1 .6
8.9
Cr
20
44
22
28
39
44
41
22
29
34
38
36
L. L~
21
38
36
.8
.6
.8
.6
.6
.4
.6
.6
.8
. -r
.2
.8
-
(555)
Columbus, Indiana STP analysis
p
Phase I stabilized sludge sample, September 19, 1975. Concentrations in
parentheses are expressed on an oven weight basis.
393
-------
Disposal of Sewage Sludge
The STP has been 1andspreading sludge since 1965. Sludge
generated during the 12-month period from July, 1975, to June,
1976, totaled 43,546 cu m (11.5 MG). Table 127 shows the
monthly distribution and amounts of dry sludge generated.
These figures are based on an average solids content of 5 per-
cent as reported from STP analyses.
The treated field received heavy applications of sludge
from 1971 to 1975, as shown in Table 128 This land was
leased by the city to serve as a "disposal" ground for a large
percentage of its sludge. Though the study site will probably
no longer be used for this purpose, the STP has and continues
to land spread sludge at several other local sites totaling
about 81 ha (200 acres). The city does not pay for the use of
this other acreage.
Until 1976, sludge at the treated field was distributed by
either flooding through a 10.2 cm (4 in) irrigation pipe (88
percent of the total sludge applied) or by tank truck (12 per-
cent). Truck spreading between 1965 and 1975 was accomplished
with a 1965 Dodge truck fitted with a 9.1 cu m (2400 gal) tank.
In 1975, a new Marman truck with a 9.8 cu m (2600 gal) tank was
purchased. In the summer of 1976, a third vehicle - a Simpson
Big Wheels - with a 4.5 cu m (1200 gal) tank was purchased.
Sludge is generally spread on a year-round basis and has
been accomplished since 1975 exclusively with tank trucks.
Once loaded, the trucks drive to the field and,travel ing at a
394
-------
Month
Jul . 19/5
Aug.
Sept.
Oct .
Nov.
Dec .
Jan. 1976
i7eb .
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun •
TOTAL
„ , ._
TABLE 127
r.oi iiMi'.n'', , INDIANA - su'oor
1 i q u i d Sludge
Generated (cu en)
3727
3615
3683
3940
3225
3345
3793
297]
3940
3787
3701
3824
43551
W NF RAT I ON
Dry Sludge
Generated (m tons }
186
181
184
197
161
167
190
148
197
189
185
191
2174
Sludge & 5 percent solids (STP data).
395
-------
TABLE 128
COLUMBUS, INDIANA - SLUDGE APPLICATION- RATES
Year
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
Total Dry SI
(metri
1,
1,
udge Appl i ed
c tons)
523
625
285
945
227
Appl i cat i on
(metric ton
37
115
91
67
16
Rate
s/ha)
Based on 5 percent sludge solids (STP data).
396
-------
steady speed, distribute their loads by gravity through a fan
spreader. Each load is spread over an area approximately 300 m
(1000 ft) long and 2 m (6 ft) wide. Photographs 37 through
39, respectively, show the treated field, tank truck depos-
iting sludge, and the sludge saturated ground.
Interviews with various STP personnel and the farmer of the
treated field indicate no apparent environmental problems.
When questioned regarding the use of his property as a disposal
site, the farmer stated that he probably would accept additional
sludge only if applied in a manner to assure him that
no possible deleterious effects on his crops would occur.
PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD LANDSPREADING OF SLUDGE
Interviews were conducted with personnel from the local
newspaper, The Repubjic, and with the head of the Bartholomew
Department of County Health. Employees at The Republic indi-
cated that they had never printed any article pertaining to any
aspect of sewage sludge disposal. The head of the Bartholomew
County Department of Health was aware of the sludge spreading
;.\i r c', i <.-,1 rT>d thought i-1 to be an acceptable disposal alternative
He has had no involvement with the program and stated that he
was not aware of any health problems associated with sludge
ha n d1 ing.
The residen • soil conservationist from the Soil Conserva-
tion Service was aware of the sludge spreading practice. He
also was not cogrizant of any problems associated with land
spreading of s1u< ge.
397
-------
Photoqraph 37 "*
Treated Field
Photooraph 38
Tank Truck Depositing Sludge
398
-------
i'li'iiouraph 39
. MnJi,.j .aturated Ground
-------
STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS ON SLUDGE SPREADING
Interviews with various personnel from the STP indicate
that permits have not been required for any aspect of the
sludge-spreading program. Inoculations for polio, typhoid, and
tetanus are given to all the STP employees. The Columbus
Health Department regulates and records the inoculations for
each employee.
ECONOMICS *
, i
The STP has maintained monthly records of their sludge-
spreading costs since the inception of the program in 1965.
Capital equipment purchased for the period 1965 to June, 1976,
are shown in Table 129.
During the four years when the STP used the study site for
sludge disposal, the 14.2 ha (35 acre) field was rented at
$4,000/year. The annual rental fee was increased to $5,000
starting in 1975.
Detailed cost records supplied by the STP covering the
period from July, 1975 to June, 1976, are presented in Table
130. Table 131 presents a cost analysis of the sludge-
spreading operation.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS
SIudge
On July 13 and November 29, 1976, five one-liter grab
samples each of raw and stabilized sludge were obtained from
both the primary clarifiers and the anaerobic digester.
400
-------
TABLE 129
COUJMBIJS, INDIANA - CAP HAL EXPENDITURES
Year-
Purchased Description Cost
1965 1965 Dodge Truck $ 8,000
1965 9.1 cu m (2400 gal) Tank 600
1971 Irrigation Pipe 1,700
1971 Irrigation Pump 1,116
197b 1975 Marmon Truck 30,000
1975 9.8 cu m (2600 gal) Tank 1,440
401
-------
TABLE130
COLUMBUS, INDIANA - LIQUID SLUDGE SPREADING COSTS
Month
July 1975
Aug
':> e p t
Get
Nov
Dec
Jan 1976
Feb
Mar
'Apr
• May
June
Total
Total Wages
$1420
1204
1125
1227
1222
1276
1369
1245
1533
1567
1519
1574
$16281
Maintenance
$254
270
455
890
950
59
330
517
278
314
214
447
$4978
Fuel
$327
177
321
326
212
374
386
263
387
333
330
376
$3812
402
-------
TABLE 131
COS i i OR DISPOSAL OF LIQUID SIUDGE
JULY, 197'j - JUNF, I97f.
Cgj-f
,, . ' - - <"• pv" e c i a t i o n
"- • '••"-, rmsr Truck cost: $3,000
' \' ::..8 cu ,n Tank cost: $1,440 $5,335
" • '• ;.-i"y rquipment Depreci ati on^
> ' •; ' i ." v • c a 1: i o n Pipe cost: $1,70 0
>(:" - rr:qatior! Pump cost: $1,116 4_1_0_
i.. , "' 'Viiuai Capital Cost $5,745
An,,i;.' • '". ^^!n9_Co^jt
I-G.'^ .... -. e- Taoie IX-9) $16,281
fTi..'u ., \.: ;>r; (25 percent) 4,070
Ve"iic"!^ Hr - lit e;iance and Operation 4,978
Mi,-' ;.,; , _LL§12
71,1.-,! -.-. '.-a Operating (Cost $29,141
i.'. : "•",-Ktol Camldl and Operating Cost $34,886
10 r)erc."'Vu r.oiv;ingency Factor3 3,489
Total A • '.-j. , i. ,st $38,375
T()1LrlJ ^OJiyiJ Cos_t_ _____ = $38,375 _ $ I 7. 65/dry m ton
Ti/fa~l~SY'V:fi~HauleT Annually 2396 dry tons4 ($V6.02/dry~ ton)
Vehic;;,. were fully depreciated over 8 years assuming 8 percent
intereslj equivalent to $169.68 per $1,000 annually.
•->
^Stationary eq''indent was fully depreciated over 10 years
assuming 8 percent interest, equivalent to $145.56 per $1,000
annual 1y.
'•4
'A 10 pert enL contingency factor is added to cover such items
as administrative overhead.
/!
B a i, e d on 5 p e r c e n r, solids ( S T P analytical data).
403
-------
Soil
On July 13 and 14, 1976, surface soil samples were taken
from both the treated and the original control plots. Both
plots were divided into five sections. A 2.5 cm (1 in) diam-
eter stainless steel split tube sampler was used for all sam-
plings. Approximately 30 individual cores were obtained from
the surface 0 to 30 cm (0 to 12 in) of soil. Sample corings
from the control field were taken "on line" - i.e., corings
were obtained every 5 m (15 ft) along one row of corn. The
technicians then crossed to the third parallel row and removed
additional individual cores every 5 m (15 ft), while returning
to the starting point of that section. Any miscellaneous, non-
soil debris was removed from the sample device prior to depos-
iting of all individual cores into their respective sample bags.
Subsurface samples were obtained with an 8 cm (3 in) diam-
eter stainless bucket auger. Sampling at the treated plot was
accomplished by obtaining cores to 122 cm (48 in) from four
approximately equally spaced areas within each section. Sam-
ples from the control plot were obtained by four corings to 122
cm (48 in) along one row of corn for each section. Samples
from both plots taken from the 30 to 46 cm (12 to 18 in) layer
were labeled horizon A; those from 46 to 61 cm (18 to 24 in)
level as horizon B; 61 to 91 cm (24 to 36 in) horizon C; and 92
to 122 cm (36 to 48 in) horizon D.
As noted in Soil Description, sand at the 61 m (2 ft) level
was encountered in the control plot along the Section 1 line.
404
-------
Sdinplinq .it. t. ho L) hori/on on I. ho control plot was difficult due
to a combination of pebbles and large sand.
On July 13 and 14, 1976, corn leaf samples were obtained
from both the treated and original control plots. The upper-
most mature leaf on the plant was selected for sampling. Corn
on both plots was in vigorous growth with small ears from 5 to
8 cm (2 to 3 in) appearing on most stalks. Sampling techniques
were similar to those for soils. Leaves from tbe treated plot
were obtained within the area of each section; and leaves from
the control plot were obtained by walking the section line,
gathering one leaf every 5 m (15 ft) on the return to the
starting point (head of the field). Thirty (30) leaves were
taken to represent, each section from each plot.
On October -'5, 1976, mature and field-dried ears of corn
were sampled from both the treated plot and "second" control
plot. Thirty ears of corn representing the area within each
section of the treated plot were obtained, resulting in a 150-
ear sample for the entire plot. One hundred (100) random ears
were selected as a field composite to represent the control
plot.
Upon arrival in Long Beach, California, each ear was
broken in half, and approximately five rows of kernels around
the diameter at the break removed to represent the ear. Those
kernels were placed in new plastic bags marked to represent the
individual sections. Master field composites were made neces-
sary prior to the transfer of all samples to the laboratory.
405
-------
Tables 132 through 139 present the following:
Table Description
132 Chemical Characterization of Stabilized
Sludges
133 Concentrations of Total and DTPA
Extractable Metals in Composite Surface
and Subsurface Soils
134 Total Metal Concentrations in In-
dividual Subsurface Soil Samples
135 Metal Concentrations in Surface Soils
and Plants
136 Metal Concentrations in Corn Grain
Samples
137 Chlorinated Hydrocarbon Concentrations
in Sludge, Soils, and Plants
138 Parasites in Sludges, Soils, and Plants
139 Concentrations of Microbes in Sludges,
Soils, and Plants
Figures 98 to 107 present particle size analyses
of the various soil composites by depth.
406
-------
TABLE 132
CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF STABILIZED SLUDGES FROM
COLUMBUS, INDIANA
Volatile Solids (%)
NO., - N
NH - N
Organic N
P
K
Na
Ca
Mg
so4
Cl
An
As
B
Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
Fe
"g
Mn
Mo
Ni
Pb
Se
7n
ii 2o (r.)
pH
7/13/76
55.18
n.d .
9487
11106
11936
1745
421 3
17532
3362
47.9
2872
1 .28
1 .06
27.4
4.47
355
25.5
31 5
8553
3 .09
394
34 .7
138
179
0.28
574
95.3
8.2
11/29/76
54.84
12.0
15933
34970
14699
4608
801?
27680
8343
188
3524
1 .81
3.31
50.0
6.93
473
22.6
470
11747
2.11
551
7.53
184
?z 1
13.0
898
96.7
7 .8
Average
55.0
6
12710
23038
13317
3177
6113
22606
5853
118
3198
1 .23
2.19
38.7
5.7
414
24.1
393
10150
2.6
473
21 .1
161
10"
6.64
736
96.0
All units in tig/g (unless otherwise noted).
All data expressed on oven dry weight basis
407
-------
z
L
fl?
ili
p
ot>
•-a:
<
— us:
_i*r 3
"-x a
w? ",".-* CJ
— i/J
U.UJ
Oi—
1— t
i/JS/J
zo
OIL
*~ 6
—
O
Cn
3_
rvi
~ 2
^^
_j
— « 3-0-37-Ai
-40/)~--( ? X! Ty + ^
3^\1— »— <\f — 'O^-3tJ
^ .- X- -Vi •«] .r. -3 -^ TV
-* xi n o "^ -^ ^vtrjAjo
C^ ^V .M
OOOO"O OOOO^i
a ^* .C -• -« -• ^ if) cr "
"V *- wO /* /i *Ols--£i'*>"lJ
^
*— * c^ ^" o c. t^i -^ vO ^~^
f— • ^-« i-< 33 rvj o «*• -n m -i
Si *~*
fwOf^-* m-co^^C'T'
tn ^ f^ ^ t> 3 a? in o» jv
OJ^-^TJ.-" -V -« ^-<
»-*
t^- iyv •p-* »D lO 00 '.T1 0s f^ o
n r*/ -^ ^ **- t —
o
Z. «
o .z
o
d "— •
it! *-
\fi y)
J-> -^
JL *•"*
i 0
jj' -f
< _a
— o
-------
r
u
"1
i r
j
!
i "V
I
— "z
< x
-J £•
*~Cj
i
1
X
-- X
• J o
-^ , - - -, . r - -T^ -.
> * C — ' *— > r— ./"i T Tl "M ""~i r* T -t5 — i
.0 r\ xi vi •- ji •*! xt ~- -0 "^ o — r. TV
— . — \i 3 v c -• ^~ D o £ -• -~- -O',n •*>
nv. i r-,-vo-> -o-rxi") -i-iT"-)
—. — 4 ^_™ _,^< 'VI — «
— i r rj r -~ ^. -f t' -- ^ '-' ^ f> > ~>j
.r>-*>~ £ •cnri~- j"! -u £> i y
r.r>r,-3 -£»-* -r.r, •»> fi ^3 r*> r i
o>-*s" S^,^:
« • *S~ • • • ^** * * • H£L * * * «L
"""uuu vuuu ^uuu *uuu
-, CM-. CM— CM, CVI
~ VO »-< --^OJ ^TVO*-<'^CM "ZTVO'-H'-tCVJ --^^0 t-l*-* CM
^ i i 1 1 r? i i i i z! i i i i ~i i 1 1 i
O vO •-<'-< . . O >O '-•'-< ^OvO^i'-' rj'-' *£'•"' "^
. ro n v
•*•,
i' ^ .G ^ r.
^'JS
. . .5:
-0 uu u
-T CM
il! i i i i
, - OvO v-i •-*
409
-------
ro
V
4
*
t—
1
I;
•^
'"" <
< — «
X Z
o >-«
J1
^ i/J
•-> 3>
X
z: 3
c _i
»— * O
cr
V—
z
oJ
vj
^
a
o
_i
<
oJ
X
1
(M
Z
1
or
o
00
a.
j ^
2 X
<£ iU
s! *
*
— t
._^
^
d
C\J
•jj
a.
,B.
(Si
_J
> — a
0
in
to
•""I
:_j
D
ie 1
X:
«s
t/J
ro \o
*7 °)
fO (\j
3> "1
> 'J-
-VJ -VI
-JD ^ ^ ^ M * o •••> ^
"0 -<•*>— «*roo-,x c
JTi -C >£I vC -^" -O LO "O
n* o f\i »~< c^1 f*** f^i "^ ^^*
-^ JO *^l ^C **^~ ™* ->\i "VJ -O
c^ -I? Of^ 3* (*~ •*/ c^ •— * ,n
'JO • — •
-.. --.M^M-OCMO T>
»
^ o ^VJ t*) *O ^\l iT ^D %/
.,._,,=
o^
•
O •-*
O -XJ
"~*
J~>
' rn J3
in ^;r-.ou>!>tD^ 0
rvi cs ?*i •* 30 •-* to >f> x
0 XI J1 0 iA J1 LO
•\l C5
*\j "'*<#• Ufl f\J •*> ^ o ' o rvt oj •* o
QC -XJ Jl ^"
^h rvi *o ^? ^ r*) ' ''n o* cu>
i
t— ; ! > *—
•-» Z Z Z 2T ~Z' JL£ •— •
'^J O, D O O O O-I-O
H- z: '^? o o L> ^> < o •— si
^ O gkJjJUJjJaJ.iU*— 2O
* U '^ ^ ^ '^ ^i ^ 3 ^
^
_^
^
_,
XJ
:\j
-^
-T*
!»-
CTi
*
"*
0
.»v
_c
>x>
0
-
2
a
~~*
{3
uJ
J-, ^ t »~- ~ 4,
* ~""1 ""7 "*> <*
JO -t &• X X .^ i
f^O *"
-* 0 D > O ^
O *"*"> '\f \X -•* -^
—. .
0 x ,_« Cyl O O — r
w
— * xO •*) J> r>— •
o i> r> "- ^-i
rv r-i rvj ^- — H.
iT}1 i/l -O ^* O- 'C
*C* tC ^"O -^? >• cr>
O*— K --S •— ^ — -—
^J —^ -kw? ^^ ._.
aj m * ji _. .
T' ~* ~" tZ .jii
a 5 5 D D
»-••< *— < ^^ * •<
L» L> C-> CJ < .~3
tiJ ii/ jj uJ aJ I —
CO
CO
m
m
h-
I
„
UJ
•>
>-
Q
•
Z >
UJ _l
o o
Z LU
0 1-
HH
Q CO
UJ O
(/) D.
to 5:
HI O
cr u
Q.
X Z
UJ O
< CO
1 .__,
r^ ^*
Q >-
_J
_l <
1 "7
1 £-
<*f
*4.
E5
410
-------
z
I
e>
Cf.
o
S
S
rv
tr-
M M
VD
ro
1
U)
CD
<
H
lil ;
a
£ i; !
< !
°.
z -
Ct '-
O -1
t 1 1
v--
t ft
.1;
1 r» '
^
i i
1
1
]
1
!
i
1 i
! j
I
i
i ^ 1
«- cj-
^ ru tn
aJ u.'
_1
o
cr
'./)
o
a.
o o o o
r—( >—t •-•*-•
K- »— f— >—
o o u •_>
li, jj UJ >xl
V, Z
O O
:: ID
<_> i-
i—i
c a)
^ a
.•i Q.
•y> 2
ix.' O
i O
x Z
,jj O
o >-
411
-------
z
o
h-
o
u.
CO
co
_l
0
<
o
^2
1-
lil
Q
Ul
£* .
si
SN ^
UJ 5«- s
UJ "5 - S
*-— o rn *• ^
2 5s ? 5
0 Si 2 r-
Z ?o H <
I»J 0 Z J Q
^^ ^ £? °
O) ^3 o
0 S3 o
r^ So 5
03 S° |
,**• °
1^^
DMv
E
O
1
-o
(O
t/>
<— <
tn
CO
in
in
^3
3
O
o
LT>
<£>
^H
^H
T5
CD
CU
S-
1—
Mv*- ^
TI
Ei
ii
j
cs
0 I"
0
J 0 "^
— h*- — *~~ — i ,rt
QJ
(J
S-
3
oo
C
CD
oo
o
^J
S-
-------
Xq
O
O
tq6ia/s\
o
1-
13
IL
CO
CO
_J
O
0
~o
t-
^
vy
o£
0
Z
v>
^
0
a.
c
o
V)
u
Ul
Zz
«0 ko
CC 7" :j
UJ 5,«-
11 1 a: ^
^ oSi 5 2
?5 S
«M*S
•BMD
7i
l{
B 1
II
H \
*&
^
i
<
C)
., CO
6 -r~
-1 i/)
S '•>
^
-i
|
c/
i
f
(
p*.
r—
^—
0"
^
LT
X
£
i —
C
c_
r-
,
OJ
n3
S-
ro
Q_
•z.
•— '
,
I/I
'^
_c
E
1 —
c
Cl
cr
d
s.
-
c
u
-------
o
CVI
o
ro
O
in
o
09
O
cr>
O
O
o
o
o
o
8-
8-
CO
ct:
UJ
LU
z
C3
o
X .
-------
o
UJ 5
UJ «tt
UJ
g
<
I
^52
" I 1
i i
V Aq
z
o
1—
0
LL
V)
CO
O
o
I-
o
z
^
z
o
a.
t£
o
Ul
0
U)
J
o-o
•S.X
4
E
0
— 1
-a
(*O
(_/^
UD
r— i
r— 1
CO
CO
3
e
o
o
CO
CO
t— 1
-a
n3
QJ
S-
t—
E
o
1—1
CTl
1
IQ
in
(/i
(T)
c:
r—
U
S-
rc
Q_
O
o
O
O)
3
CD
415
-------
o
CM
o
to
o
in
o
CO
O
en
o
o
I-
o -
r- -
o
«>"
8-
o -
•5 -^
o
o
O
tn
o
CO
o
o
to
o
10
o
o
ro
O
c\l
Z
O
1 —
«3
O
lu
V)
CO
<
J
o
>-
<
_1
o
ss
5
to
52
o
z
^
£
z
0
J-
o.
a
o
v>
Ul
a
Ul
_j
°-c>
S Z
*f
to
1
i
•o
c
(O
00
CO
r-H
CO
f^
to
3
JD
E
3
O
0
CTl
CO
.— )
t— 1
toj
CC. -.
UJ =
S!
a :
zi
in <
LU t
tn '
<#J J
Ul
„«. '
W •
? ?
0E Si.
M
^
j
-*
•?
IM
._^^
Mw
X!
O)
-t->
n3
CU
S-
1—
id
iS
c .
J W
Q CC
-> "•
I'
?s
JuJ
§s
J^:
H
Is
,0
- o
*•»
jMHiM
I
S^P"
r ^A
EE
O
OJ
C>J
r-H
1
^-1
cr>
•^«
v»
CM
S
r>
<»
J
La
t
J
>
31
<
£
-
V)
(/)
^
ts
c
01
3
.a
E
^
o
C_J
CM
CZ)
0)
S-
Z3
CD
LJ_
416
-------
Aq
o
O
(ft
cc >->
Ox J
O — u
z:
o
(--
<
o
Lu
CO
CO
<
_J
o
>-
<
_l
u
32
H
-1
re
O
^J-
co
•^~
«d-
oo
CNJ
CO
••
J3
E
,_
O
o
in
cr
^^
o
i.
j J
c
o
o
0)
u
ro
ti
T—
i.
^
CO
-
re
E
<=C
(U
tsl
•r-
OO
cu
o
s-
(O
D.
O
O
ro
o
OJ
S-
cr>
417
-------
O
CM
O
to
J96JDOO
O
m
O
o
o
o -
i
o
CO
o
01
o
o
FF1
!
1
i
•
(
•
1
i
(
(
rJ> I
-£. •
"4 «:
M <
Z<
13 !
Z I
JJ 5
10 |
D '
CO {
&. '
=>
i<
•MK?
iy
c .
J t/>
» o:
18 5
< :? 5
? Ul r
'a S
^ E
/T r?
^ -^
«S
0
/I
•M«O
fi
y
. ^TL
0
.
0
l/>
•I—
I/)
ns
O
O
O
en
o
oo
o
o
<£>
o
to
o
to
o
OJ
o
2
O
1-
O
LL
CO
CO
_J
o
<
i-
o2
o
z
Ul
o
1—
a.
0
V]
Ul
a
SAMPLE
NO.
E
n
C
^
n
cl
a
-------
o
o
CO
Mir.
»*• 0 w
UJ
0s
a
z
*t
CO
0?
z
o
0.
E
o
3
E
f—
o
1"^**
r-l
O
S-
c
o
o
E
o
1— 1
1
O
U
3
O
uo
o
419
-------
o o
i—r
o
o
00
o
1^-
o
ID
O
in
Jsuij
o
ro
O
CM
Z
0
t-
H
OT
_J
O
g3 3
U<§ g
WS" g
I ^M • I I 1 • ^
I fil I I I I 1 t?
^™J "ll 3
^ ..••!* §
n3
O
_J
-a
c
GO
ID
i— 1
r- 1
0
IS)
^3
-Q
E
3
O
o
CO
LO
]
t-H
i —
o
s_
c:
o
o
E
o
r-t
1
r— t
«.o
O)
Nl
O)
U
ns
CL-
o
o
UD
O
OJ
420
-------
o
LU
<5 5
?o «
z
o
1—
o
li
CO
co
_J
o
o
5s
t-
w
#
o
z
o>
5«
z
o
DESCRIP1
ui
°^ 6
52
cn
-o
c
rd
cn
LT>
LO
O
cn
i/i
•3
e
3
'o
0
cn
i — i
i— i
ontrol
O
e
o
CM
CM
,— 1
1
r-H
CTl
-------
TABLE 137
CHLORINATED HYDROCARBON CONCENTRATIONS
IN SLUDGE, SOILS AND PLANTS
COLUMBUS, INDIANA
Treated Control
Plot Plot
/*q/kci
Soil
Surface Composites 0.13 <0.011
<0.01 <0.01
<0.5 <0.5
216 <0.4
Plant
Composites <0.-02 <0.02
<0.01 <0.01
<0.25 <0.75
<0.75 <0.5
Grain
Composites <0-001 <0.004
<0.001 <0.0024
<0.1 <0.1
<0.1 <0.1
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon
DDT
DIELDRIN
PCB
PCB
DDT
1221
1248
DIELDRIN
PCB
PCB
DDT
1221
1248
DIELDRIN
PCB
PCB
1221
1248
(7/13/76) (11/29/76)
Stabilized Sludge <0.4 0.9 - DDT
<0.04 <0.18
<0.4 <0.1
<15 <27
DIE
PCB
PCB
LDRIN
1221
1248
Detection limits vary due to sample size, plant matter
interference, and instrument sensitivity.
422
-------
OO
H-
z:
_i
Q_
Q
<-
- •=£
^J
CO CO ID
>>> > •> >>>>>
i i i ^ i i i $ i j i ^ i _j i_i j. ^ t_) i^
fOfOn3
2r^T2r.ir: ^r^: 2:^:2:2:^:
to
QJ
x — ^ lX> - — U3 (/)
UD r^ *-o r^-. O
•\ cr> ~^- en E
oo cvi ro CM o
i — ^^ i — ~\ O
"^^^ r— ^^_ i M — *H —
r^- i — r^- i — 03 ro ~o
- — - ^— ' OJ QJ QJ
r— r— 4-> E
-o -a fa E E E o
QJ QJ I 1 CD O (J O
N N S_ CM
•r- -r- 'O i — 1 — QJ ID i — i — CM
r— i — (DO O^^DCTli —
•r- •!- +-> S- I <1J 1 1 1 I
QJ JD-Q(/)(C4-> M— OvOi — i —
Cn S^rOftJ-MQJCl/lS- CO «J" UD CTl
~O t3 cO 4-3 4-3 C i- O i — 13
rsoiaioooo
d
o
o
1
CO
p—
• p—
o
OO
i
QJ CD QJ QJ QJ
>>>>>!
4.) 4.) 4_) 4_> 4J
CD cn en en en
QJ QJ QJ QJ QJ
2T Z -Z. Z Z
i
E E E u
O U O
CM
QJ VO i — i — CM
n3 1 1 1 1
M- O VO r— r—
S- CO «=J- IO CTi
3
00
il
. 423
-------
CT)
CO
LrJ
_J
CO
H-
UD
1
*~oo
z:
Q.
Q
oo
i — i
O
oo
oo
CONCENTRATION OF MICROBES IN SLUDGE
COLUMBUS, INDIANA
Fecal Streptocci.
o
•i—
'o
o
(O
0
cu
u_
'oi
O1
•r-
00
Salmonella
^aiehuoo
^pauuuuoo
«9A WdB,nsaid
¥a6pn[$ 6
jad 6uQ LE^°1
¥¥pa^.a[diuo3
^pa^^uoo
^axHd.say
^a6pn[$ 6
uad 6^0 Lel°l
^paq.a[duioo
j^pauu LJ.U03
«»»H*»^
^a6pn[S 6
-tad SJQ IP^OI
«W»l*^)
^.^paoiwi LJ.U03
3f.it.dh LQ.diiinsaud
^a6pn[s 6
aad SUQ LB^OI
a6pn[s 6 uad
}Deg oj.qoua\/ [65.01
c
o
•i—
CJ •<-*
i— CL
Cu-i-
e s-
fO O
OO 00
cu
Q
CO
i^« o t-^ un
O i— O O
i— X r— r—
x o x x
O to CM CO
00 •— r- r—
O O O O
X X X X
f^ CM LO
r~^ co r— co
O O i— O
1 1 1 1
Q Q Q Q
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 4- 1 +
Q
O O O
•z. o -z. z
O O OI
O1 i— r— O
0 X O i—
•— 00 i— X
X O X Oi
r— O CO
CJ^ i — • O •
o
LO «3-
CO CM CO CM
O) JO JD 00
CP S S (0 (0 -(J
-O re fO -4-> 4-> C
3 o£ o: oo oo n3
oo o.
0 0
O 0
r-x un
CM |-~
+ 1
+ 1
CD f ^
co -z.
CO
1 1
1 1
1 1
Q o
z: z:
r i
i i
i i
Q Q
0 O
O O
s "*
O xj-
o r-«
i— CM
i i
CO M- "o <4-
-l-> (O S- (O
(CO) -P CO
CO _1 C _J
S- O
\~- 0
fO *N
.a .
01
CT)
(U O
I
O t-
-a o
+
£= O 01
O O- fO
~D fO ~O
O) O)
to to •»->
cu o co
i- T3 Q.+J
CL CO CL) ^
X to S- CU
CO 00 -*f
co to QJ
S- ci "^
to .
+-> CL
i— X
3 CO
in
CO to
S- CO
CU "
;J5°
. o 2=
424
-------
j" .^ *pa,aidu,o3
'.O | * }A f "1 (Jljin r^ r) ' i — - "*<- -- -1- -i- +
, yj,.. - .... ., -Ci
;<>| - |
jod (Lm |i>'jO!1^ •--•: «••; r- ,— co
- ";5 f-- "
' f
=|_._**-.__'_. .!".._.
o
^' ¥*p3UULJ.UO;j j -iiii i
o ;
re 1
oJS : ;
^.^pe^a [daio'j i '• ' ! ' ' '
ro j I) ,(i| j | i IjQ'i i > 1 1 1 I 1
! ^u**-1."" 'J
1 .D1[ - H -1 4- 4- 4- 4- 4-
j ^^bpnj_5 t) O Q Q Q Q O
1 f i
( .. i
5 j i "
j ^pa.oi 0.03
rot '
^pduuyuojj
1 ^ r" "" 1
^i __ i
' — I Y-^^P^IS 6 ' Q Q Q Q Q O
3 ' . . i _ , ii/i to
c j 101^0 DLqOJOy [P1.0iv°0 '^ o 0 cr> co CM "^ 0
,9 Jr— O °° r~ O r~
<-) , l^-r- O ' 0
^ S 1 1 F 1
9? ." ; o QJ e E E 6 o oj
00 0) .,..> i u u o o o
, . o ; ! "^ ro CM i i — to
£-j -rX ' cr> i — co i- S-
•-H ^.j f. i r— IB -V ! 1 i 1 I— -)-> 3
r^ /A l7 . ••- d> 0-) O l£> i — i — -r- C (/)
S ''j'oi-co^iocnoo
pb f ^ j oo H~ oo o
4-4-44-
4-4-4-4-
+ 4-4-4-
«* O LO
CM CO O CM
LO
1111
IIII
+ 4 + +
O Q O Q
lill
+ + + +
Q Q O Q
•z. z: z: z:
iiii
i i i i
+ + 4 +
Q Q O Q
cr> o
un co oo CM
r^. co co LT>
E E E o
u o o
CM
CO i— r— CM
^J- CO CTt i —
1 I 1 1
O CO i — i —
CO *d" CD CT>
i 5
•f 5
*7R nr*
l£|
l.-a-g
0 _J to.
._ . — > •
c: _ t/5
2~^.
___ ??•
• * r- j
CO CD
IO
-M •
J^ •!-
'i—
5-01-
O O
(O OJ +
C 0 CO
O O- ro
•0 rtf -0
QJ QJ
CO co J-> •
(/) (tf i- ^^
CL QJ QJ U
X co S- OJ
QJ CO 4-1
QJ tO ^
4J Q. O
rs QJ 4-> g
QJ tO > C
5- O) i-
3 QJ II
i — i — CO
<£. > O 2:
r- * -^
1628S,
425
-------
------- |