United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

Radiation
             Office of
             Radiation Programs
             Washington DC 20460
Technical Note
ORP/TAD-79-10
September 1979
Sediment Characteristics
of the 2800 Meter Atlantic
Nuclear Waste Disposal
Site:  Radionuclide
Retention Potential
            Biogenous Materials
                v  v  v  Y
Terrigenous
Materials
    Clay
   Minerals

-------

-------
                               TECHNICAL NOTE
                               ORP/TAD-79-10
          SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS
                   OF THE            ,
2800 METER ATLANTIC NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL  SITE:
        RADIONUCLIDE RETENTION POTENTIAL
                    by
             James Neiheisel
         Technology Assessment Division
         Office of Radiation Programs
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
            Washington, D.C. 20460
              September 1979
This report was prepared with the technical support of

the United States Army, Corps of Engineers under Inter-

agency Agreement EPA-78-H0152
              Project Officer
              Robert S. Dyer

      Radiation Source Analysis Branch
      Technology Assessment Division
      Office of Radiation Programs
      U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
           Washington, D.C. 20460

-------
                               EPA REVIEW NOTICE

     This report has been reviewed by the Office of Radiation Programs,  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and approved for publication.   Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect 'che views and policies
of the EPA.  Neither the United States nor the EPA makes any warranty,
expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility of any
information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents  that its
use would not infringe privately owned rights.

-------
                            EPA TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
      Publications of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)  Office of
 Radiation Programs (ORP) are available in paper copy,  as long as  the EPA/ORP
 supply is available,  or from the National Technical Information Service
 (NTIS),  Springfield,  VA 22161.

      The following reports  are  part  of the EPA/ORP 1976  Ocean Disposal Report
 Series:

 ORP/TAD-79-1  Materials for Containment of Low-Level Nuclear Waste  in the  Deep
              Ocean

 ORP/TAD-79-2  On  Board  Corrosion Analysis of  a  Recovered;Drum from  the
              Atlantic  2800 Meter Radioactive Waste Disposal Site

 ORP/TAD-79-3  Analysis  and  Evaluation  of a Radioactive Waste Package Retrieved
              from the  Atlantic  2800 Meter Disposal Site
                                                         I
 ORP/TAD-79-'4  Reports of Infaunal Analyses Conducted on  Biota Collected at the
              Atlantic  2800  Meter Radioactive Waste Disposal Site

 ORP/TAD-79-5  Geologic  Observations of the Atlantic 2800iMeter Radioactive
              Waste Dumpsite

 ORP/TAD-79-6  Sediment  Geochemistry of the 280.0 Meter Atlantic  Radioactive
              Waste Disposal Site

 ORP/TAD-79-7  Ocean Current Measurements at the Atlantic 2800 Meter
              Radioactive Waste Disposal Site

ORP/TAD-79-8  Survey Coordination and  Operations Reoort -i EPA Atlantic 2800
              Meter Radioactive Waste Disposal Site  Survey

ORP/TAD-79-9  1976 Site Specific Survey of the Atlantic 2800 Meter Deepwater
              Radioactive Waste Dumpsite:  Radiochemistry

ORP/TAD-79-10 Sediment Characteristics of  the 2800 Meter Atlantic  Nuclear
              Waste Disposal Site

-------

-------
                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                  Page

 List of Tables and Figures	..	                         1v
 Abstract	,!.......................,:. ,\\\\'	
 Introduction. ......................*.*.**.*.*.*.'**.'.*.'**.""**	*" * " "T
 Geological Setting. ....,...........'.".'.'.'.".*'.'.] **.[""	* * <,
 Sample Locations..'...,.,.-.... i ....".*.'.*.".*."'."***.*	• • • • •	• 1
 Analytical Methods.	'.'' *..' */. I'.'.'.*.''.*'.	'''%
 Sediment Texture	....*.*.*.*.*.*.".*.".*.".*.".*.*."*	 o
 Sedimentary Parameters.....;	*.....!!•!!	'	''' *r * t
 Physical Properties. ....'.":....'.'...*.".".".*.' *."." * * * ..'."*.','**"'""
 Sediment Composition. ............*..*.'.*.*'.*.'.*.*.'."*"'	* * *
 Biogenous Materials.....,	'*!.*.*.* I.' .*.' J.".' J,? '.I'.'.'. .*','"'	'    in
 Terrigenous Materials.	*.*.".!*.*.*.".*.*.*.'.".'.". 1	*" ' * " 16
 Clay Minerals.	......... t	...*.".'..'.".*.*.'.... ''< '	''''16
 Characteristics of Clay Minerals..'.".". *. *.'.'.".".'.'.'.'. *.'.". *} * *	-*•'*'• ^
 Cation  Exchange Capacity	..*.'.'.'.*"  	" *21
 Distribution Coefficient, (Kd), Considerations'.'.'.'.'."" 	21
 Sediment Source Considerations.............	.	..,',*.' .*.'.'.'"' "23
 Sedimentation Processes Affecting  Radipnuclide "    "      '";"••.
  Distribution in Sediment..'..'............;......                25
Summary and Conclusions..........,.,.........'.'..'..'..''.."'"'" 26
Acknowledgements..........\ ....... ^	*';'* *"	* "27
Reference  Cited	;•'..		*".'.".I!!".'.11*.*.".!*.'	21
.8
10
                                      iii

-------
                           LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

                                                                   Page
TABLES
1.   Texture Physical Properties and Sedimentary
     Parameters of Sediment from the 2800 Meter
     Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site and Vicinity	6

2.   Mineral Suite of Sand-Silt-Clay Size Fractions and Average
     Sediment Composition from the 2800 Meter Atlantic Nuclear
     Waste Disposal Site and Vicinity	9

3.   Heavy Mineral Analysis of Sand-Size Sediment from the
     2800 Meter Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site and Vicinity...17

4.   Clay Minerals of Clay-Size Fraction of Sediments from the
     2800 Meter Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site and Vicinity...18

5.   Cation Exchange Capacity of Sediment from 2800 Meter
     Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site	20

FIGURES

1.   Sediment Sample Locations of 2800 Meter Atlantic Nuclear
     Waste Site and Vicinity taken  in 1975 and 1976	2

2.   Triangular Textural Diagram of Sediment from  the 2800 Meter
     Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site	•	7
 3.    Photomicrograph of Sand-Size Fraction of Sediment from 2800
      Meter  Atlantic  Nuclear Waste Disposal Site ............... •> ..... 11

 4.    Scanning Electron Micrograph of  Silt-Size Material from 2800
      Meter  Atlantic  Nuclear Waste Disposal Site ............... . ..... 12

 5.    Scanning Electron Micrograph of  Silt-Size Material from 2800
      Meter  Atlantic  Nuclear Waste Disposal Site ............... <• ..... 13

 6.    Scanning Electron Micrograph of  Clay-Size Material from 2800
      Meter  Atlantic  Nuclear Waste Disposal Site ..................... 1^
 7.    Scanning Electron Micrograph of Clay-Size  Material  from 2800
      Meter Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site ..................... 15

 8.    Direction of Longshore Currents Near Shore,  Turbidity Flow
      Down the Submarine Canyons,  and Predominant  Bottom  Flow in
      Vicinity of 2800 Meter Atlantic Waste Site ..................... 24
                                        iv

-------
                                     ABSTRACT
                    Sediment Characteristics of the 2800 Meter
                    _  Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site:
                         Radionuclide Retention Potential

                                        by
                                 James Neiheisel                     ^

      The sediments of the abandoned 2800 meter Atlantic nuclear waste dumpsite
 have been analyzed for texture, mineral composition, physical properties,
 cation exchange capacity and factors effecting sediment deposition,- as part of
 an extensive program by the Environmental Protection Agency to evaluate ocean
 Si!?" i  aSHSr\, aljer?ative nuclear> waste disposal method.   The sediments
 physical and chemical properties are evaluated in the light of the geologic
      The sediments are relatively uniform silty clays and clayey silts
 comprised of approximately one-third biogenous carbonate materials,  one-third
 terrigenous materials and one-third clay minerals.   The biogenious materials  in
 the sand and upper silt-size fraction are predominantly foraminifera with
 minor amounts of diatoms while coccoliths dominate the finer silt and  clay
 size fractions.   The terrigenous materials in the course sediment fractions
 are predominantly quartz and feldspar with minor amounts of mica,  glauconite,
 and heavy minerals.   Clay minerals,  of the clay-size fraction,  in order of
 abundance,  include illite,  kaolinite,  chlorite and montmorillonite.

      Relatively  high cation exchange capacity in the sediment  (15.2-25 l»
 meq/lOOg)  is attributed  to the clay  minerals  comprising approximately
 one-third of the sediment.   Correspondingly high Kd values  might  also be
 expected as a result of  sorption of  radionuclides onto clay minerals with  most
 favorable conditions related to PH,  Eh, and other environmental factors.   The
 biogenous fraction might also be expected to  retain some strontium-90 by
 isomorphous substitution of this radionuclide for calcium.

      Diagnostic  heavy minerals in the  sand-size  fraction reflect  the source
 areas as predominantly the  adjacent  continental  shelf, and  provide important
 clues concerning the mechanisms effecting transport and  deposition of the
 sediment.   Longshore currents  along  the coast  funnel sediment into the Hudson
 Canyon and  turbidity currents  transport sediment  down  the submarine canyon;
 some  of  this  sediment is advected in a southwesterly direction from the
 submarine canyon by  contour currents for  deposition along the continental
 rise.  The  net deposition at the  waste site thus consists of the "rain" of
 biogenous microorganisms, the  transport of  sediment from the coastal and
 continental shelf area by turbidity  currents via submarine canyons, and
 transport of  sediment along the  continental rise by prevailing contour
currents.

     The effectiveness of the sediment barrier relates to timely burial of the
waste drum prior to leachate release from ruptured or corroded drums as well
as freedom from  "short circuiting" effects such as bioturbation or other
mechanisms capable of providing migration pathways for the radionuclides.
                                       v

-------

-------
                                   Introduction


      The Ocean Disposal Program of the Environmental Protection Agency is
 currently involved in investigating abandoned nuclear waste disposal sites in
 the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans.  The condition of the 55 gallon steel waste
 drums deposited at these sites between 1950 and 1962 and their impact on the
 ocean environment is under extensive investigation.  Information gained by
 field and laboratory investigations of the factors effecting the stability of
 the waste site will enable evaluation of ocean disposal as a potential
 alternative method to present land burial disposal methods.  An evaluation of
 the ability of the sediment to act as a barrier to the migration of
 radionuclides leached from the waste form and the geological stability of the
 site will provide important data for considerations governing; future ocean
 disposal.

      At present,  little is known about deep ocean sediment as regards its
 physical properties,  mineral composition, or ability to effect sorption and
 retention of radionuclides.   This laboratory investigation of sediment samples
 from the 2800 meter site reports on the geologic setting,  sediment  texture,
 physical properties,  mineral composition, and chemical parameters of one of
 the major abandoned waste sites.   Consideration is given to the potential
 ability of this sediment to act as a geochemical barrier in the sorption of
 radionuclides and preventing their migration from the disposal site.   Site
 stability is evaluated in light of the sedimentological findings, including
 use of diagnostic heavy minerals to delineate source areas,  as well as field
 observations of the hydrodynamic factors.

                                 Geologic Setting

      The 2800 meter Atlantic site,  situated approximately 190 kilometers off
 the New Jersey coast,  comprises an area of 256 km2 centered at 38°  39«N
 and 720 00'  w>   The bottom topography at this site is a smooth,  gently
 sloping surface typical of the upper continental rise (Figure 1).

      The Hudson Canyon,  approximately 70  km northeast of the 2800 meter site,
 is  the largest  submarine canyon of the Atlantic  continental  shelf.  Submarine
 canyons are  believed  to act  as sediment traps that funnel  terrigenous
 sediments  down  the slope as  turbidity currents.   Deltas  on the abyssal  plain
 at  the foot  of  the Hudson Canyon have been described  by  Pratt  (1) and other
 investigators as material  transported via the thalweg of the canyon to  this
 deposition site.   Some  of the  sediment  undoubtedly overflows  the canyon or is
 resuspended  from the  submarine canyons by hydrodynamic agents and other
 mechanisms including  biological activity.   This  sediment source as well as
 sediment transported by  bottom contour currents and the  biogenous materials of
 the marine environment  constitute  the materials available  for deposition at
 the waste  site.

     Observations  of  the 2800  meter nuclear waste  by  the SRV Alvin during 1975
 and 1976 by  Rawson and Ryan  (2) reveal that the site  is carpeted by fine
 grained  muds.  Photographs of  the steel drums  reveal  sediment plumes extending
 in  a southwesterly direction;  this reflects prevailing or strongest  current
 flow from  the northeast  predominantly parallel to bottom topography.  Current
measurements from meters deployed during field operations in August  and
November 1976 indicate diurnally varying oscillatory currents up to  0.5 knots
with strongest velocity flow in a southwesterly direction.

-------

-------
                                 Sample Locations

      The sample locations and type recovery of the sediment  samples  are
 depicted in Figure 1.   In addition to the  core samples  (to 40  cm depth)  in  the
 2800 meter site area,  several Smith-Mclntire grab samples were obtained  at  the
 waste site,  and other  locations  in the adjacent shelf edge,  slope, and
 submarine canyons,  for contrast  analyses.   A Smith-Mclntire  grab sample  (SH2)
.was collected from 100 meter  depth in the  ancestoral Hudson  River Valley which
 existed in this location during  the Pleistocene Epoch.  Another sample,
 (SH16),  was obtained in the Hudson Canyon  at the  2000 meter  depth at the foot
 of the continental  slope (Figure 1).   Other grab  samples were  obtained at the
 2000 meter contour,  approximately 110  kilometers  northwest of  the Hudson
 Canyon between Block Canyon and  Atlantis Canyon (SH15), and  another  sample
 approximately 40 kilometers upslope from the nuclear waste disposal site
 (SH4A).   The comparison of the texture and mineral  compositon  of these samples
 with those from the  waste dumpsite provide important clues regarding the
 possible source area and transport pathways of the  sediment  to the deposition
 site in the  study area.

                               Analytical  Methods
                               ^~™~~~     	-^™—™^^—^«        • |

      The texture of  the sediment was determined by  standard  sieving and
 hydrometer techniques  and a grain size distribution curve constructed from
 this data.   The sand,  silt, and  clay size  fractions were retained for mineral
 identification of each size fraction.   The mineral  identification of the
 sand-size fraction was determined by standard petrographic techniques while
 x-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy,  and chemical  techniques were
 used in  the  identification of the finer silt and  clay-size fractions.  X-ray
 diffraction  analysis of the clay minerals  in the  clay-size fraction was  in
 accordance with Biscaye,  1965  (3).  The special techniques necessary to
 distinguish  kaolinite  from chlorite, utilized the slow scan  techniques
 proposed by  Bicaye,  1964  (4);  the areas of the 3.54 A peak were measured for
 chlorite and the areas of the  3.58  A peak  for kaolinite.  Carbonate
evaluations were made  on  each  of the size  fractions by acid leach techniques
using 1:4HC1.   The fractional  components determined on each size  fraction was
weighted by  the grain  size distribution curve and the sum recorded as the
average  for  the sample.

     The cation exchange  capacity determinations were made using a method
similar  to that of Zaytseva,  as  briefly described by Sayles  and Mangelsdorf
 (5).   The  samples were  squeezed  into a stainless steel device and the pore
water  collected and analyzed for Na+, K+,  Mg++, and Ca++;  the remaining
squeeze  cake was split  into two  parts.  One part was used for determination of
the  residual water content (110oc drying)  and the other was  leached of
residual sea water and  exchange cations, using a succession  of washes (80%
methanol, IN NH4C1 adjusted to pH 8 with NH4 OH).   The exchange cations were
calculated by subtracting the seawater contribution from the total leach
solution.  The purpose  of this_ involved procedure was to circumvent the
exchange cation-seawater reequiTibrium  (Donnan effect)  that  occurs during the
washing 'step which' proceeds the .exchange dn the, more ..traditional .approach.
The pH adjustment and the use:;of methanol [were used to:minimize ;solutiqnpfjl
      during leaching.

-------
     Sedimentary parameters were computed from the grain size curve by
standard procedures.  Physical parameters, including bulk specific gravity,
moisture, porosity, and Atterberg limits were performed in accordance with
U S  Army Corps of Engineers standard soil testing procedures (b).  ihese
parameters are used in correlating uniformity of conditions within the
sediment and in computations for radionuclide retention.

     Any water loss as a result of storing samples for three years before
analysis is considered to be inconsequential for most of the parameters
tested.  The physical parameters and cation exchange capacity, most
susceptible to water loss, were performed on samples well contained and
observed to be in a highly plastic state so as not to detract from the
significant information presented.

                                Sediment Texture

     The sediment  texture of the upper  continental rise has been described on
a regional basis by several investigators using various classifications.
Emery  (7) and  others, stressing grain size, depict the general region as
comprised of silt  and clay; others stressing the relatively high biogenous
content, have  described  the sediment as globigerina  ooze.  The texture
classification used in this report is in accordance  with  Shepards (8)
classification and particle sizes comply with  EM1110-2-1906,  (6);  sand-size
consists of particles between  5.00 and  0.074mm size,  silt-size consists  of
particles between 0.074  and 0.002mm  size, and  clay-size material consists of
particles  less than 0.002mm size.  A ternary plot  of the  sand-silt-clay  values
and sediment  description is depicted in Figure 2  and listed in Table 1.

      The predominant sediment type at  the 2800 meter site is clayey silt with
 subordinate amounts of silty-clay and  silt  (Figure 2).   Sand is  abundant only
 in- the Pleistocene Hudson River sample (SH2)  taken at the edge of the
 continental shelf and the sample from 2000  meter depth between Block and
 Atlantis Canyons (SH15).  Within the 2800 meter study area,  the  sand content
 averages 6.3 percent and ranges between 2 and 14 percent; the silt content
 averages 55.0 percent, ranging between 42 and 76 percent; the clay content
 averages 38.7 percent ranging between 20 and 50 percent (Table  1).  The
 sediment samples within the 2800 meter nuclear waste disposal site are
 generally uniform in texture from the surface to 40 cm depth and throughout
 the area; samples outside the area are less uniform.

      Stanley and Wear (9) in a survey of surface sediments on the outer shelf,
 shelf break, and upper slope between Norfolk and Wilmington canyons have
  disclosed a transition textural facies which generally parallels the upper
 continental slope between 250 and 300 meter depth, except at canyon heads.
 This "mud-line" (> 0.062mm size) , identifies the long-term separation of
 erosional versus depositional regimes and thus serves as a major energy-level
 boundary on the upper continental slope.  In this investigation, all the
  sample  locations  except SH15 have a texture in general compliance with the
  "mud-line" concept.  Sample location SH15 at 2000 meter  depth contains  sand,
  silt, and  clay in generally similar amounts and this coarser texture may be
  related to slumping or  canyon controlled sedimentation.

-------
                              Sedimentary Parameters
                                                           !
      The sedimentary parameters are statistical measurements derived from the
 textural grain-size distribution curve and are commonly used in most
 sedimentological investigations.  These parameters have most application in
 the higher energy zone at shallower depths (10) but are included in this
 investigation to reflect on the deposit ional environment, provenance,  and for
 correlation purposes.  The sedimentary parameters considered are in accordance
 with standard procedures and include the median diameter, standard deviation,
 skewness, and kurtosis.  The values for the various station locations  are
 listed in Table 1.

      The median diameter is the 50 percentile of the grain size distribution
 curve.   The median  diameter for the samples from the 2800 meter site is
      The standard deviation is a statistical  measurement of the amount of
 sorting and is one of the more useful parameters for correlation purposes.
 The standard deviation of samples outside the waste site ranges from 0.48,  for
 the sandy Pleistocene river sample on the shelf,  to 1.39 for the sample at  the
 foot of the continental slope at 2000 meter depth at location SH 15  (Figure
 1).  More uniform conditions prevail at the waste site.   The standard
 deviation for dive 538 samples at 4 cm intervals from surface to 20  cm depth
 are respectively:  3.78,  3.20,  4.57,  3.60,  and 3.47.   Standard deviation for
 two samples from dive 584 are 2.8l and 3.13 while for dive  58'j values are
 3.10,  2.96,  2.87,  and 2.39 (Table 1).   Thus,  it  is apparent that generally
 uniform conditions prevail with no apparent trend with depth at the  waste site.

      In accordance with Friedman's classification (11) for  sorting,  the
 samples range from well sorted (Class 1)  to extremely poorly sorted  (Class  6)
 with progressively poorer sorting in the  seaward  direction.   The Pleistocene
 River  sample,  (SH2),  is  well sorted (Class 1), while  samples SH15 and SH16, at
 the base of  the  continental  shelf, are moderately well sorted  (Class  3)   All
 samples from the 2800 meter  waste site and sample SH14 (immediately upslope of
 the waste site)  are extremely  poorly sorted (Class 6).  The  sorting in general
 becomes poorer as  the clay content increases and this parameter  correlates
 well with the "mud-line"  concept  cited previously.         ;

     The  skewness  is a measure of the direction and degree of overall
 deviation from symmetry.   It is a dimensionless number which expresses tht
 predominance of  coarse or  fine admixtures  and may be positive or negative.
 Positive  values  demonstrate that the curve is skewed toward the finer grain
 sizes and may indicate a stronger depositional environment.   Negative values,
 in  turn,  show a  tail toward the coarser grain sizes and may, therefore,
 reflect some removal of fines.  The skewness values at the waste site range
 from -1.35 to +2.80 with the highest value at greatest depth from core samples
 of Dive 585.  Near surface samples to 7cm depth at all locations have negative
values which indicates a different sedimentation rate than the intermediate
depth positive values (Table 1).  No trend is apparent from the middle to  the
bottom of core depth (Table 1).                            i

-------
   o
   43
   i.
   3
            n
            n
          a 
•H   0)
•o   o
             (0 /

            •H
            •o
   *•
            2
          L  n
          0)  4->
          X)  -H J
          «-  s a.
          4)  *H
          43  J
 ^*
 CD 0)
 43 4> p^l
 rt C S-
             O
^2
             cn



             43
             £
   43


    g-o
    O C


    0) C/
              0) O
  =r cn 
                                                          CMCM
                                                          cvjo
o in o ooo
«noo CM CM o» i

CM CM CO J» CM
                                                                                   !«!
                                                                                     CM
                                 mcnmrnro

                                 §§§§§
                                      f*if>
                                      Si
§88§8§
                                                                                     CM
8
                      ooooooo    ooooo
                                                          oo
                                                                 oooooo
                       i -.  .  i   .1   .
                         o o    o    o
                    n :  12  :   i  :   :
                                 ^.ssss   si     :  !  :  ;  ;  i    i  i
§3 !  i  t  i   i  i   lofocnmjy-imon'io


   i  iini   i  i   i CM t—«— m o f»"> CM ^- i CM  i
pa i  i  oo  i   l  l   l — oocr>oc*>-'CT!l^-'

es                  rn *~ *~   "~    a-      in
o                  oo              oo      oo
•v.                  in              in      in
                                                                   1  IB
                                                                       o
                                                                          i   i
                                        W
                                                        W
                                                               Ct]
                                                                                 01
                                                                                 S
                                                                                 td
                            «-«-ooo   ooooo   oo    o o «- o «- o   oo
                               in CM o o   in in tn  10   inin   o c\j eo o eo in   inin
                                  -a-   sr sr (f>   in   roa-   3-a-a-iTmCM   com
                          
-------
                                                         CLAY
SAND
                                                                                   j       EXPLANATION



                                                                                   |O 2800 METER DEPTH




                                                                                   & 2000 METER DEPTH
                                                                                   I



                                                                                   D  100 METER DEPTH



                                                                                   SH MclNTYRE GRAB SAMPLES
                                                                                                         SILT
                         Figure 2.  Triangular diagram depicting sediment samples from North Atlantic

                                  radioactive waste disposal site.  Nomenclature is in accordance with

                                  oneparcf (1954) °

-------
                                       8

     The kurtosis is a measure of the peakedness of the curve.   It  shows the
relationship of the sorting within the main body of the curve to that of the
tails.  A kurtosis of 1 is normal whereas a kurtosis of 2 is leptokurtic,
meaning that it is excessively peaked by a factor of 2; a leptokurtic sample
is better sorted in the main body than in the tails.  All the samples at the
waste site are leptokurtic with values ranging between 2.48 and 4.20 (Table
1).  No trend is apparent over the area of the waste site or with depth, but,
it is significant that all samples are better sorted in the main body than in
the tails.               <

     While sedimentary parameters tell little of the adjustment of  the
sediments td their present environment or of provenance, these parameters  can
reflect homogeneous conditions within an area.  These parameters enable a
relatively inexpensive means of establishing if uniformity of physical
conditions prevails within the area investigated.

                              Physical Properties

     Physical properties bf the sediments provide basic data necessary for
prediction of radionuclide migration in sediment.  Some of these physical
parameters are listed in Table 1.

     The water content (percent dry weight) varies from 209 percent to 62
percent in the 2800 meters, study site.  Within the 2800 meter site the lowest
water content is associated with samples containing the higher sand content.
The lowest water content occurs in the sandy samples (SH 2 and SH 15) outside
the study area.

     The.bulk density values of the samples from the 2800 meter site varies
between 0.49 gcm-3 and 1.11| gcm"3 with;values depending on the amount of
interstitial water.  Sample number 22 from dive 585 is a surface sample and
has the lowest measured  bulk density of 0.36 gcm-3 and. the highest water
content of 240 percent (dry weight) while sample number 2,  (5 to 12.5 cm
depth) from  dive 585 has the highest measured bulk  density value of  1.14
gcm-3 and a  correspondingly low water  content of 46 percent  (Table 1).

      The  porosity  of the sediment within the nuclear waste dump site ranges
between 0.75 and 0.86 with higher values generally  correlating with  higher
water content  (Table  1).  Both the bulk specific gravity
and porosity values are  used  in  computing  the radionuclide  retention
capability  of the  sediment.

     .Atterberg  Limits are  useful in  describing  quantitatively  the  effect  of
varying water content on the  consistency of  fine grained sediments.  The
boundaries  are  defined by  trie  water  content  which produces  a specified
consistency. The  liquid limit (LL)  defines  the water  content at which the
sediment  closes with  standard mechanical manupliation,  while the plastic  limit
 (PL)  is the water  content  at  which the sediment begins to  crumble  or break
 apart.   The shrinkage limit (SL)  is  the water content at which the soil
 reaches its theoretical  minimum volume after drying from a saturated
 condition.   Atterberg Limits  for 6 samples within  the 2800 meter waste site,
 and one sample (SH15) outside the area, are listed in Table 1.  All  the
 samples at the nuclear waste  site display  marked similarity and uniformity

-------
    B
    o
 •o >

 to -o
 CO  O
 t4  4O
 CD  -ri

 >  W
 S O
   O.
 0) CO
 40  CD
 O 40
 CO  01
CD t.
N a
553

y
3 g
°? 4J
 s t,
CO 0)

CM 0)
 O S

 OJ o

£S

£N
1
 . §
CM -H

0) -H

•rl 2


II

   cS
         n tn
         §
         o n
        2
        W U
          CO
        •H m


          t
       5*
         0
       -U
       i, CO
CO U
§

!«
tS
.1
rH 4J
O, CO
B 0
CO O
W J
               gggggg{   g   g  g   g   g

               CM CM in oo co ro en   CM   co  ro   CM   en

               t-rHrHCMfggg   g   g  g   g ;g



               !  !  !  !  !  !  !     !    !    !     !    >
               ggggggg   g   g
                                g   g
j a- co in o CM oo
I CM rH CM CO i-H CM


I in CM CM O rH O
i vo co f~ t— vo e?-
                                 o
                                 m
               t  I
               I  t
                      ;  :  i
                      ::;
                                     CM
                                     co
                                          CM



                                          CO
                                               in
                                               CO
                                             CM

                                             &
              in CM 1-1 en as as ce
              ggggggg

              in in o in in o o
              rH rH CM rH rH rH I-H
                                 g   g   g
                                                         CM   CO   00   CM   C\» .-: ^  • 
                                                                    CM
                                                                         vo
                                                                         CO
                                                                                   CO
                                                                                   a-
                                                                                   ;CO;,
                                               'o,
                                               CO
                                                                              vo
                                                                              CM
                  a  B B
                  o o o
                  o o o
                    O OO
                    C\J CM
                 O
                 CM
                         m a
                         o o
                         o o
                         00 00
                         CVJ CM
                  in vo o
                 -rHrHCM
                             CO
                         m tn in
                         in \o ' •
                in
                 i co
                o co
                •-in
                CM
               i   ta
                x t»
                O M
                CO O
 o
CO
 I CO
mco
                                         S
                                         o
                                         CM
                                         rH
                                         I .  .
                                         CO OO
                                    O H
                                    ma
                                        O M
                                        ma
                                             i-H CO
                                             •» in
                                             CM
                                              - ta
                                             x t>
                                             o H
                                             ffl O
                                                 a
                                            o
                                           o
                                           rH
                                            I
                                           O JT
                                            — CO
                                           CM in

                                           ta ca
                                           m >
                                                                     o   o
                                                                     vo   cy>
                                                                     CM   co
                                                                                       cn
                                                                                       O»
                                                           §
                                                                    CM
                                         B    T   T   7
                                         ,S IS ° Iff ° >n t- in
                                         in co -co '-co, -co
                                          » in a~ in t*- in c^- in

                                           tacatawiatata
                                         «s>m>m>m>
                                         o M S M-p M 5 M
                                         mciE-inHQE-iQ
rH


?.iS;
t- in
ta ta
S-B-
EH O
'£".'
 H in
 •—oo
 t- in
 ta ia

 §5
 t^ o
B   5
o-   /o
in   rH
 I    I
O CTi'O

cn.in'cM"

ta ta ia
                                                                                            g
                                                            '.-;•-:    t.
                                                              I?*
                                                              2 « ?
                                                              d) rH

                                                             '•o  «5
                                                              "I"
                                                              §£i?
                                                              J-L-8-
                                                                                                  -on

                                                                                               ,  § 5 g
                                                                                   .a.  g.  g
  a

*** ci
in CM
eg ta
                                                                                                 „'«?§
                                                                                                  1 CM CO.

-------
                                       10

with depth, whereas the sample outside the area has markedly different
values.  In themselves, the Atterberg Limits mean little, but they are very
useful as indices to significant properties of sediments.  For example, the
difference between the plastic and liquid limits, termed the plasticity index
(PI), represents the range in water contents through which the sediment is in
a plastic state and is inversely proportional to the ease with which water
passes through the sediment.  Thus, the low PI value of 18 for the sample
outside the study site (SH15) reflects a more permeable sediment as compared
to the range of PI values of 59 to 76 for the less permeable samples within
the 2800 meter nuclear waste site.  The Atterberg limits are also useful in
identifying and classifying sediments and for correlation purposes.

                              Sediment Composition

     The mineral composition of the sediment varies considerably within the
sand,  silt, and clay fractions.  Since both mineral composition and grain size
are important  factors  in assessing the radionuclide retention capability, the
sediment  in this investigation is treated in as  quantitative manner as
possible  in order to obtain realistic values.  The fractional components are
reported  for  each size fraction and the  average  composition of"the sediment is
the  sum of these  fractional components reduced to their representation in the
total  sample  as shown  on  the  grain size  distribution  curve.

     The  average mineral  composition  for 60 samples from the Atlantic upper
continenatal  rise of  the  mid-Atlantic States by  Hathaway (12)  is  as  follows:
quartz,  17 percent;  feldspar,  12  percent, carbonate,  18 percent;  clay
minerals,  53  percent,  hornblende,  trace.  As compared with the 2800  meter  site
the carbonate content  is  greater  (37  percent)  and  the clay content less (30
 percent).

      The carbonate  is probably greater at the  2800 meter site because of its
 location farther  seaward on the upper continental  slope.  This increase of
 carbonate in a seaward direction off the North Atlantic continental shelf has
 also been demonstrated by Turekian (13).

      The sediment composition is important in any assessment of the
 radionuclide retention capabilities of the sediment.   In order to group
 materials of similar chemical behavior as regards their barrier potential to
 migration of radionuclides from nuclear waste leachate, the sediment is
 classified into a biogenous group, terrigenous  sand and silt group, and'a clay
 mineral group.

                               Biogenous Materials

      Biogenous materials, originating from the  ocean environment, comprise
 more than a third of  the sediment.  Reported as carbonate and miscellaneous
 diatoms  in Table 2, these materials are shown to be most abundant in the sand
 fraction  but  they are also abundant in all sieve sizes (Table 2).  The
 calcareous foraminifera comprise the bulk of the sand  (Figure 3) and are
 predominantly the planktonic genus Globigerina.

-------
                              11
Figure 3. Photomicrograph (26X) of sand-size fraction of sediment core 7
5-12 cm depth, from Dive 585 in the 2800 meter Atlantic nuclear waste disposal
site.  Foraminifera comprises the predominant portion of the sand.

-------
                          12
Figure 4. Scanning Electron Microgram (4800X) of rill:fract.
from 2800 meter depth at. dive location 584 (0 -5 cm depth)
in Atlantic Nuclear Waste Dumpsite. The diatom and t
fragment (upper right) constitute the larger biogenous
while Coccoliths (lower right) constitute the smaller
i>io(jf:ngus materials.

-------
                          13
Figure 5. Scanning Electron Micrgraph (2900X) of Silt Fraction
from dive 585 (0-5 cm depth) in 2800 meter Atlantic Nuclear
Waste Dumpsite. Broken, spherical, calarcous, Globeirigerina
horamimfera (upper right) and Coccoliths comprise the
predominate biogenous silt fraction.

-------
                            4*ff»iS!fi|wH
                            »y ^'r ,jML,^.,,^^iSJ^;i^-«^f F|V;^F,t ^..,! S^|£'./^
-------
                                  15
i&frc;- %  /•** r
1 «» * _ v^ *t    4,1  «•«.,
                Figure 7. Scanning Electron Micrograph (14,000X1. of calareous
               Coccolith tests from dive'585 location (15 cm depth) in
                2800 Meter Atlantic Nuclear Waste Dumpsite.

-------
                                       16

     Calcareous planktonic coccolith tests (less than 30 microns in diameter)
constitutes the biogenous material of the lower silt and cla-y-size fraction
(Figures U, 5, 6, and 7).  Minor calcareous corallttes and siliceous diatoms
also occur in the upper silt-size fractions but these microorganisms seldom
comprise more than a few percent of the biogenous fraction.

     Certain radionuclides, such as strontium-90 could possibly exchange for
some of the calcium cation of the carbonate fraction and thus the biogenous
material has some potential for radionuclide retention by the sediment.

                             Terrigenous Materials

     Terrigenous materials include all the non-biogenous materials except the
clay minerals and the predominant amount occurs in the silt-size fraction.
The terrigenous materials are predominantly quartz and feldspar but also
includes minor amounts of mica (biotite, muscovite, and chlorite) and very
minor amounts of detrital heavy minerals and glauconite (Table 2).  The
glauconite generally comprises less than one percent of the sediment and while
marine in origin this material  is largely derived as detrital material from
erosion of Cretaceous formations of the adjacent continent.

     Special detail to the varieties of feldspar and detrital heavy minerals
lend support to the source of the sediment but most of these materials do not
contribute significantly to radionuclide retention.  Heavy minerals from the
2800 meter site comprise less than one percent of the terrigenous material;
fraction representation  is listed in Table 3.  The ratio of heavy mineral
species reflect sources  from, the mineral provinces delineated on the adjacent
continental shelf and boundries between these provinces are essentially
perpendicular to the shelf break.  The ratios of these minerals will be used
in a later section to reflect on the source area and the hydrodynamic agencies
involved in effecting sediment deposition at the 2800 meter site.

     Pebble size chert and quartzite rock particles are unique  to the
Pleistocene Hudson River sample  (SH2) while diagnostic gabbro rock particles
of upper sand size  (JJ-Smm) occur  in sample SH15  from the bottom of the
continental slope between Atlantis and Block Canyons.  The presence of these
rock particles  in either pebble  or upper sand size is of correlative value to
distinguish the New England coast sediments from those originating in the
region  of  the New York Bight.

                                  Clay Minerals

     The clay minerals comprise  approximately a  third of the sediment at the
2800 meter site and constitute the bulk  of the clay-size fraction.  Their
unique  dimensions (less  than 2 microns diameter),  large surface area, high
cation  exchange capacity, and high sorption potential for  radionuclides makes
the clay minerals the most significant as regards  the potential of the
sediment to act as  a barrier to  the migration of radioactive waste.

     Illite  is the  principal mineral of  the clay-mineral suite  with a range
between 50 and 60 percent.  Kaolinite and chlorite occur in generally similar
proportions  in the  clay-mineral  suite with ranges  between  12 and 30 percent
 (Table  U).  Because of the difficulty  in obtaining a clear resolution of

-------
17







0)
X! >>
-P -P
s 'c
O -H
L 0

^
4J
§T3
c
B CO
•iH
CO 43
CO -H
CO
N rH
•H (0
CO CO
•o a
co b
> t.
rH rt
fl)  t
EC  CM









S
vo O
CM 0 Cf
EC OO r-
CO CM

in o
CM O CM
£C OO rH
CO CM

in
oo S
in o
> CM
•H



in
oo S
in o
o =r
>w
•H
Q


in o
O CM
co oo
> CM
•H
Q


—
co B
in o
o in
CO 00 rH
> CM
•H
Q


OO
co S
in o
O  CM
•H
Q


s
in o
rH O O
K 0 rH
CO CM


CM 0
*Tf* f^ CO



c
o •
-H O
*O 4-3 SS
> t— in co a\ in
> rH CM CM
 £-,
s 6 g.^1 £ J
H S ^ C3 CO






- ^J- J3- 00 rH rH aj> CM
1


i

1

!


CM in CM rH CM CM: CM
1



'

CM OO CM rH rH CM CM



'
in OO CM rH CM .=1- CM


rH ON CM rH mrHiCM

o. n
O CO O
SH 4J 0) CO
O -H C C
0) OJ 0> rH rH
O O iH -H rH S CO
S £ M § 5 3 ro
W IS! CO « K E-i S
in


. *-




VO






in


o
•H
CO
K
^^
•H
cH
g
3
to
CO
4J
c

c5



0>




CM


oo






CO
^^
o
0)
c
o
t.
0
c
"s

^)
CH
•o
c
n)

co"
4^
•H
+5
fl)
o.
(0
^

•H
L.
CO
^

rH
0)
t.
0)
•H
S
ra
o
0)
c '«
co w
rH fO
0) t.
O CO
n c
S "^
.
1-1
•
eo
CO
4J


-------
                               18
      Table 4.  Clay Minerals of Clay-Size Fraction of Sediments from
      the 2800 meter Atlantic Nucelar Waste Disposal Site and Vicinity

                                          %_  Clay  Mineral   Suite
Location Lab No.
SH4A (2000m)
SH15 (2000m)
SH16 (2000m)
SH20 (2800m)
SH25B (2800m)
SH26B (2800m)
DIVE 583
BOX 2,- 0-5 cm
DIVE 583
BOX 2, 5-8cm
DIVE 583
BOX 2, 8-12cm
DIVE 583
BOX 2, 12-l4cm
DIVE 583
BOX 2, l4-l8cm
DIVE 583
TUBE 1, 22.5-30
DIVE 584
TUBE 2, 0-1 Ocm
DIVE 584
BOX 1, 0-5cm
DIVE 585
TUBE 4, 0-7 cm
DIVE 595
TUBE 7, 0-7 cm
DIVE 585
TUBE 7, 7-1 2cm
DIVE 585
TUBE 7, 12-1 7cm
DIVE 585
TUBE 7, 17-22cm
DIVE 585
TUBE 3, 0-5 cm
DIVE 589
TUBE 2, 0-10cm
DIVE 589
TUBE 2, 10-15cm
9
10
11
14
12
13

16

17

18

19

20

21

15

6

22

1

2

3

4

5

23

7
Illite. Kaolinite
47
60
60
52
51
52

54 ,

56

58 .

58

54

55

50

58

58

52

54

52

54

55

57

50
30
19
.20
20
20
20

21

18

,,16
,
18

18

23

• 21

17

17

18

23

20

19

18

20

30
Chlorite Montmorillonite
16
18
15
18
18
20

15

18

16

16

18

12

21

17

17

18

15

20

19

17

17

12
7
5
5
10
9
8

10

8

10

8

10

10

8

8

8

12

8

8

8

10

• 6

8
Note:  1.  Chlorite fraction includes trace amounts of vermiculite.
       2.  Montmorillonite includes mixed-layer clay (chlorite-
           montmorillonite)
       3.  Carbonate comprises between 15 and 39 percent of the clay
           fraction.

-------
                                        19                  :

 chlorite and kaolinite on x-ray diffractograms both the slow scan speed and
 the regular scan x-ray diffraction techniques were employed for more positive
 identification of these two minerals.  The values of the clay minerals at the
 nuclear waste site are in general agreement with the values obtained by
 Hathaway for the upper continental rise sediments in this region (12)   Dayal
 et al. (14), found chlorite to be slightly in excess of kaolinite at the
 nuclear waste disposal site, however, the sum of both kaolinite and chlorite
 are in general agreement in all the' investigations cited.  Montmorillonite and
 mixed-layer montmorillionite clay occur in subordinate amounts at all site
 locations with values generally less than 10 percent of the clay-mineral
 suite.  The clay mineralogy is fairly consistent throughout the 2800 meter
 Atlantic nuclear waste disposal site.

                         Characteristics of Clay Minerals

      In order to make use of clay minerals in investigations concerning
 nuclear waste disposal,  it is necessary to have a general concept of the
 chemical and structural  make up of the common clay minerals.   The following
 treatment is presented for those readers having little familiarity with the
 common clay minerals at  the Atlantic  sites.

      The common  clay minerals are hydrated silicates  comprised of thin sheets
 held  together by predominantly ionic  bond;  each sheet consists of planes of
 cations (silica,  aluminum,  magnesium,  or iron)  in which the individual cation
 is  surrounded by either  four (top sheet)  or six (lower sheet)  oxygen and
 hydroxyl ions.   The  main subdivisions of the clays are based on how these
 sheets are  stacked as follows:

     a.   Kaolinite of 1:1  clays  contain one  silicia sheet (silicon-oxygen
          tetrahedron)  and  one sheet of either aluminum, magnesium,  or  iron
          (aluminum-oxygen-hydroxol octahedron).
                                                            I
     b.   Illites  and  montmorillonites  of  2:1 clays  contain  two  silica sheets
          which are on either  side of  an aluminum,  magnesium, or iron sheet.
          In addition,  the montmorillonites contain one or two water sheets.

     c.   Chlorite of  2:2 clays contain two silica  sheets which  alternate with
          two magnesium or iron sheets;  the latter have bonds of unequal
          strength.
                                                            I
     Typical clay structures have a thickness of 7 Angstroms as in the case of
kaolinite, 10 Angstroms for illite, 14 Angstroms for chlorite and 12 to 14
Angstroms for montmorillonite.  Water  between montmorillonite tetrahedral
layers increases the  thickness 2.5 to 4 Angstroms depending on presence of one
of two water layers fixed respectively by Ca++ and Mg++ or Na+.  The
K+ fixed  to illite, does not add much  thickness to the clay structure
because it fits into  the hexagonal hole in the silica tetrahedrom sheets.
Chlorite  contains no  interlayer water  but is similar to montmorillonite in
size due to a brucite  layer.  Isomorphous substitution may take place in the
clay mineral structure with the amount depending on charge, ionic radius,
coordination number or solubility of the participating ions.  Common
substitution in clay minerals might involve an Fe+++ and A1+++ substitute
for Si++++ in the tetrahedral layer while Mg++ and Fe++ substitute for

-------
                            20
            Table 5.  Cation Exchange Capacity of Sediment from 2800
                  Meter Atlantic Nuclear Waste Disposal Site.
                          Exchangeable Cations (meq/lOOg)
Field No.
SH26
SH20
Dive 584
Dive 583
Dive 585
Dive 589
Lab No.
13
14
15
16
21
23
Na+
7.0
8.0
11.3
9.4
6.9
7.3
K+
0.8
1.6
2.6
2.1
1.4
1.7
Mg++ Ca"1"1" Stations
4.1
4.3
6.3
5.3
3.4
4.2
3.3
3.5
5.2
4.0
3.3
3.6
15.2
17.4
25.4
20.8
15.0
16.8
Notes:  1.  Method in accordance with Zaytseva non-rinse technique.  Tested by
K. Beck.

-------
                                       21

A1+++ in the octahedral layer.  The result of a lesser valence cation
substitution for a higher valence cation is a negative (-) charge.  Most of
the charge on kaolinite is usually along the edge but for raontmorillonite is
along the surface.  Cations, such as Ca++, Na+, H+, Mg++, and K+,
are adsorbed on these positions to neutralize the charge when the clay
particle encounters a cation-rich environment or receives radionuclides from
waste drums.  Radioactive waste contains considerable strointium and cesium
which could substitute for calcium or sodium under proper environmental
conditions.

                            Cation Exchange Capacity

     The measurement of cation exchange capacity is correlative with the
ability of a sediment to adsorb radionuclides from a radioactive waste
source.  This measurement is expressed in terms of milliequivalents per 100
grams and varies for the different clay minerals.  The general range in cation
exchange capacity of the common clay minerals, in milliequivalents, is 3-50
for kaolinite, 10-40 for chlorite, 10-40 for illite, and 80-150 for
montmorillonite.  Thus, sediment rich in montmorillonite would have a higher
cation exchange capacity than a kaolinite-rich sediment.

     The cation exchange capacity ranges between 15.0 and 25.4 meq/lOOg at the
2800 meter site (Table 5).  Dayal, et al., (14), reporting on the cation
exchange capacity with depth for cores taken by the SRV Alvin, found a range
between 35 to 55 meq/lOOg.  No significant trend in the total cation exchange
capacity with depth of burial was observed and it was concluded that fixation
of exchangeable cations does not occur during early diagenesis.

     The presence of organic matter in the sediment could also influence the
cation exchange capacity of a sediment.  Experiments in recent soils reveal
cation exchange capacity values of 150-500 meq/lOOg for organic matter.  The
organic matter at the waste site, however, is probably negligible since values
of total organic carbon reported for this section of the 'ocean floor are on
the order of 0.05 percent of the sediment (Emery and Uchupi (10).

                  Distribution Coefficient (Kd) Considerations

     The complex physicochemical reactions that occurs between radionuclides
in solution and the ocean sediment is termed sorption.  Sorption includes such
phenomena as adsorption,  ion exchange,  colloid filtration, reversible
precipitation, and irreversible mineralization.  Sorption is expressed in
terms of the distribution coefficient (Kd) which is the ratio of the sorbed
and dissolved fraction of the radiosotope in the sediment.  Knowledge of the
Kd of a given radionuclide in sediment, together with information concerning
the bulk density and porosity of the in situ state, may be used to estimate
the retardation factor, Rd, for groundwater transport of that radionuclide
using the equation Rd = 1 + KdP/E, where p is the bulk density of the medium
and E is the porosity.  The bulk density used in the equation must be reported
in units of g/cm3 to obtain a dimensionless Rd.

-------
                                       22

     The bulk density of the samples from the 2800 meter nuclear waste
disposal site range between 0.49 to 1.14 g/cm3 with a general average of
0.68 g/cm3.  The porosity has a relatively narrow range between 0.75 and
0.81.
     Considerable Kd values for continental geologic formations or soils have
been reported in the literature, however, such data is not directly applicable
to the ocean sediment environment.  Also much of this data is subject to
inadequate characterization of the solid medium or to inappropriate
experimental design of the testing method.  Some laboratory Kd values for
strontium-90 and cesium-137 using clay minerals have been reported by Ames and
Rai (15).  Such data may possible compare to those expected in ocean sediment;
this data is listed below for clay minerals.
     Clay Minerals
                                           Kds
                                  Sr-90
                Cs-137
     Montmorillite
     Kaolinite
     Illite
104
 15
100
 45
400
      Heath(l6),  reporting on  preliminary results of distribution coefficient
 experiments  on montmorillonite-rich  Pacific Ocean deep sea sediment indicated
 Kd  values for cesium 137  varies  from 3000  to 20,000 and  for strontium 90
 values  range from 100 to  6000.   As contrasted to continental deposits, the
 marine  clays appear to be superior in retaining radionuclides.  Much needs to
 be  done,  however,  to get  reliable data on  the interactions between dissolved
 waste components and deep-sea sediments.   Kd measurements in the laboratory
 have been conducted in an oxidizing  environment, whereas in reality, ocean
 sediment  is  largely a  reducing  environment.  Bondietti  and Francis (17) have
 demonstrated the role of  the  oxidation state in controlling the solubility of
 technetium and neptunium  from a  nuclear waste source;  in a reducing
 environment  both radionuclides have  high Kd values yet in oxidizing conditions
 both elements are highly  mobile  and  not readily retained by the geologic
 media.   The  pH and Eh are also important factors governing solubility.  Both
 pH  and  Eh (oxidation-reduction)  measurements should be made as soon as the
 sediment  sample is received on board the vessel.  Measurements for Kd's in the
 laboratory should match these measured field parameters.

      In addition to the need  for laboratory controlled environmental
 conditions to match the in situ  conditions at a disposal site for accurate Kd
 assessment,  Seitz, et al., (18), in  recent column infiltration studies of
 cesium  and other radionuclides on shales and other  rock  types, has warned of
 other factors that also influence radionuclide retention.  Some of these
 factors which may have application to ocean  sediment  considerations include

-------
                                        23
                                                           [
 (a) flow rates and dispersive characteristics,  (b)  nuclide-bearing colloids
 that react slowly with lithic material, (c) migrating clay particles with
 adhered radionuelides,  (d)  chelating of soluble organic compounds,  and  (e)
 effects of coexisting species of radionuclides.

                          Sediment Source Considerations   ,

      The sediment deposition is a function of both  source area and transport
 agencies.   Each of these factors are important  considerations  in  any analysis
 of the pathway migration of radionuclides from  waste drums at  the 2800  meter
 site as well as in any  potential future disposal sites.   Examination of the
 sediments  at the 2800 meter site reflect both their source and processes  of
 deposition.

      Submarine canyons  have been cited  by several investigators as  sediment
 traps that funnel terrigenous sand to ocean depths  (10,  19,, 20).  Stan-ley, et
 al.,  (21)  concludes that turbidity currents moving  down the canyons release a
 considerable portion of their load on the upper and lower continental rise.
 Observations and investigations also cited by Emery and Dohupi  (10)  would
 suggest that the terrigenous sand in the sediment at the 2800 meter nuclear
 waste site eminates from a  source largely from  the  Hudson Canyon  and lesser
 amounts by contour currents from the northeast.

      That  the"terrigenous sand-size  sediment at the 2800 meter  nuclear waste
 site  has its origin from nearshore continental  shelf sand funneled  down the
 Hudson Submarine Canyon can be assessed by diagnostic heavy minerals in the
 sand  fraction.   Several heavy mineral provinces and subprovine.es on  the
 continental  shelf of the mid-Atlantic and New England states have been
 delineated by several investigators  (10,  19,  22-29).  The Hudson Canyon
 receives the terrigenous sands from  the central New Jersey  Coast on  the south
 .(30)  and the Long Island coastal  region on the  north as  a result of  longshore
 currents directed to the New York Bight (Figure 8).    This provides a
 SSTh^1^^ heaY7-mineral  suite that  is  similar  to the adjacent continental
 f?  M    3  differs  from  the heavy-mineral  suite  delivered by canyons  draining
 the New England coast.   This is apparent  in the comparison of the
 heavy-mineral  suite  of  samples SH15 and SH2  (Table 3).  Sample SH15, located
 at the  base  of the continental slope between Atlantis and Block Canyons,
 °2n^n» a Sarnet-staurolite ratio that correlates with the characterization
 of the New England shelf heavy mineral province reported by Ross  (23)
whereas sample SH2 has a higher garnet-straurolite ratio which is correlative
with the heavy mineral province centering about  the  New York Bight and the
Hudson Canyon  (23).  Thus the garnet-staurolite ratios of the 2800 meter
nuclear waste site range between 5 and 9  (Table  3) and these values are
typical of the mid-Atlantic province centering about the New York Bight.  Such
data correlates with hydrodynamic considerations previously cited and it
suggests the source of the inorganic portion of  the  sand fraction may be from
the adjacent continental shelf with relatively short transport  distance from
the Hudson Canyon to the deposition site.

-------
24

-------
                                       25

      That the sediment funneled down Wilmington Canyon on  the southwest side
 of the 2800 meter study area is not transported northeasterly is  suggested by
 heavy mineral studies by McMaster (26) and Neiheisel  (24),'. The sediment source
 of terruginous sands transported by turbidity  currents in  Wilmington Canyon
 appears to be from the areas controlled by longshore  currents operating along
 the mid-New Jersey Coast toward Cape May  (30)  and  from longshore  currents
 directed north along the Delaware Coast toward Cape Henlopen (31),
 (Figure 8).   Twitchell,  et  al.,  (32) cite  evidence that Wilmington Canyon
 extended to Delaware Bay and thus the heavy-mineral suite Iwould probably
 reflect a mixed New Jersey  suite delineated by McMaster (26) and  the Delaware
 coast suite delineated by Neiheisel (24) in investigations near shore.
 Alexander (25)  and Kelling,  et  al (28) in  investigations on the outer shelf
 also indicate a change in sillimanite and  pyroxenes in prpximity  to the
 Wilmington Canyon.   The influence of the Wilmington Canyon terrigenous
 sediment is  also not apparent at the 2800  meter nuclear waste site for the
 heavy mineral assemblage postulated.  However,  more definitive sampling must
 be conducted to better define this southwestern boundary of that  portion of
 the upper continental rise  containing the  2800  meter  nuclear waste site.

      Investigators in the deep-sea submersible  ALVIN  have recently provided
 further evidence supporting transport of sediment  in  a southwesterly direction
 along the upper continental rise at the 2800 meter nuclear waste  site.
 Photographs  by Rawson and Ryan  (2),  reveal (a)  nuclear waste drums with rust
 and sediment on the  lee  side of  drums extending in a  southwesterly direction
 and (b)  40 cm high Umbella  bending in a southwesterly direction in compliance
 with bottom  currents.  Current meters also recorded a westerly direction and
 velocities up to lOcm/sec.
                 Sedimentation Processes Affecting Radionuclide
                            Distribution in Sediment

     The sediment can only be an effective barrier if the nucilear waste drums
are surrounded by the sediment.  Leakage from an exposed area, of the drum
would "short circuit" the sediment trap by moving radionuclides directly into
the water column.  Thus any consideration of the capability of the sediment at
the site to retain radionuclides must also consider the capability of waste
drum confinement by burial prior to the release of leachate after rupture or
corrosion of the drums.  Even if buried, the bioturbation effected by
burrowing organisms may "short circuit" the sediments potential to entrap the
radionuclides by the sorption process.

     The 2800 meter site contains nuclear waste drums were deposited on the
ocean floor a few decades ago and early indications are that relatively few of
the drums have ruptured or corroded excessively.  The sedimentation rate at
the site according to Rawson and Ryan (2), is 6.8 cm per 1000 years for the
recent Epoch, i.e., for the last 11,000 years.  Thus the amount of sediment
accumulation around the drums is a result of the drum sinking into the soft
sediment, the vertical "blanketing" by sediment from above and the deposition
effected in "craig and tail" like deposits on the leeward side of the drum as
a result of prevailing bottom contour currents.   Any meaningful radiological
survey of the fate of radionuclides leached from ruptured waste drums at the
2800 meter site must consider the retention of radionuclides 'by sorption as

-------
                                       26

well as the potential dispersal by "short circuit" mechanisms such as
bioturbation hydrodinamic mechanisms or direct contact with the water column.
Preliminary surveys by Dayal, et al. (14) from radiometric measurements of
cores taken in 1975 in proximity to waste drums suggest that concentrations of
both eesium-137 and cesium-134 reflect release from nearby waste drums.  A
model developed to'describe the observed radioactive cesium distribution,
indicates a faster mixing rate through the vertical than is considered
possible by migration of the radionuclide via molecular diffusion, through
pore waters; an eddy diffusion process is suggested that may relate to
bioturbation, hydrodynamic mechansms, or other short circuit mechanisms.

                            Summary and Conclusions

     The sediment from the 2800 meter Atlantic nuclear waste disposal site and
vicinity has been analyzed for texture, mineral composition, physical
parameters, and geochemical parameters to gain basic information as relates to
the ability of the sediment to act as a barrier to the migration of
radionuclides from the nuclear waste drums.

     The texture of the sediment is uniform throughout the waste site to 30 cm
depth and is predominantly a clayey-silt with minor amounts of silty-clay.
The sand-size fraction comprises from 2 to 14 percent of the sediment and
consists predominantly of biogenous calcareous foraminifera tests and minor
amounts of quartz, feldspar, mica, glauconite, diatoms, and detrital heavy
minerals.  The predominant silt fraction (42 to 76 percent) consists of
biogenous carbonate (foraminifera, coccoliths and minor other) and detrital
terrigenous quartz, feldspar, mica, and minor other.  The clay size fraction
consists of a clay mineral-suite and biogenous carbonate (largely
coccoliths).  The  clay mineral-suite, comprising 65 to 78 percent of the
clay-size fraction, is comprised of illite (50-57 percent), kaolinite  (16-30
percent), chlorite (12-21 percent), and montmorillonite (5-12 percent).

     The total cation exchange capacity of the sediment ranges between 15.2
and 25.2 percent with no apparent variation with depth.  The exchangeable
cations in order of abundance are Na+, Mg ++, Ca++, and K*.  The
relatively high cation exchange capacity of the sediment predicts relatively
high coefficient distribution,  (Kd), values to be expected  in the sediment.
Bulk specific gravity and porosity values determined for the sediment  samples
can be used  to compute the radionuclide retention,  (Rd), of the sediment if
the distribution coefficient is known.  Comparisons of marine sediment Kd's
and terrigenous samples suggest that highest radionuclide retention occurs in
the marine sediments.

     The deposition at the waste site  is controlled by the  vertical "rain" of
micro fossils, contour current movement of sediment in a southerly direction,
and some movement  of sediment down  the slope'by the effects of downslope
movement or  other  mechanisms.  That the terrigenous sand and silt fraction is
largely controlled by sediment  funneled down the  submarine  canyons with
"plumes" of  this sediment made available for directional transport by
prevailing bottom  currents is evident  in the heavy-mineral  suite  at the  site.
The heavy-mineral  suit is typical of the provinance of the  New York Bight at
the head of  Hudson Canyon and the areas controlled by longshore currents
operating along the coast.

-------
                                       27

     The ability of the nuclear waste drums to be covered by sediment is
essential if the sediment is to act as a "trap" for the radionuclideg.
Exposed waste drums effect dispersal of the radioactive leaphate to the water
column.  Short circuiting of the sediment "trap" may also be effected by
bioturbation or other disturbances of the sediment and migration will be
effected by the pH, Eh, and other environmental factors.
                                                           i          -
                                                           i
                                Acknowledgements           J

     This work was sponsored by the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Radiation Programs, pursuant to the Marine Protection Research Sanctuaries Act
of 1972, as amended (Public Law 92-532) with R.S.  Dyer project officer.
Laboratory equipment to perform sediment analysis was provided the writer by
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,  South Atlantic Division Laboratory,
Marietta, Georgia under an interagency agreement.   Supporting tests, including
grain size distribution curves, porosity, bulk specific gravity, and Atterberg
Limits, were performed by the Corps of Engineers and scanning electron
micrographs were obtained by sub contractual agreement with the Georgia Tech
Engineering Experiment Station. 'Cation exchange capacity analysis were made
by Dr. Kevin Beck of the School of Geophysical Sciences at Georgia Tech.
Special thanks is extended to Dr.  Eric Force,  U.S.  Geological Survey, Reston,
Va, for use of laboratory facilities and petrographic microscope for the
examination of heavy mineral, and to Dr. Robert Carney of the Smithsonian
Institute, for verification of microfauna on scanning electron micrographs.  I
also wish to thank Dr. Charles Weaverj of Georgia Tech, Dr. Kenneth Czyscinski
of Brookhaven National Laboratory,  and Dr.  Alexander Williams of the
Environmental Protection Agency for their careful review and helpful
suggestions in the preparation of this'report.

                               .REFERENCES CITED
                                   i •...•• U . i in in • i  i ,           I
                                                           I
(1)  PRATT,  R.M.,  Atlantic continental'shelf and slope of the United States -
     physiography and sediments of the deep-sea basin,  Geol:  Survey Prof.
     Paper 529-B,  4Up. (1968).         :   ."'

(2)  RAWSON,  M.D. ,  and RYAN,  W.B.F,',  Geological observation of deepwater
     radioactive waste dumpsite -  106,  EPA  Report 520/9-78-001,  in press

(3)  BISCAYE,  P.E., Mineralogy and sedimentation of recent deep-sea clay in
     the Atlantic Ocean and adjacent seas and oceans,  Geol. Soe.  Amer.  Bull..
     v. 76,  p.  803-832,  (1965)
                                                           I
(1)  BISCAYE,  P.E., Distinction between kaolinite and chlorite in recent
     sediments by x-ray diffraction,  Amer. Mineralogist,  v. 49,  p.  1281-1289.
     (196U).

(5)  SAYLES,  F.L.,  and MANGELSDORF, D.C., The equilibrium of clay minerals
     with seawater: exchange reactions,  Geochem., Cosmochim,,  Acta,  v.4l, p.
     951-960,  (1977).                     "  :
                                                           !
(6)  U.S.  ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,  Laboratory  soils testing,!  EM-110-2-1906,
     Appendix  II,  Washington,  D.C.,  (1970).

-------
                                       28

(7)  EMERY,  K.O.,  Atlantic continental shelf and slope of the United States,
     Geol.,  Survey Prof., Paper 529 A: 23 p., (1966).                r

(8)  SHEPARD, P.P., Nomenclature based on sand-silt-clay ratios,  Jour,  of Sed.
     Petrology, v. 24, p. 151-158, (1954).

(9)  STANLEY, J.S., and WEAR, C.M., The "mud line": an erosion-deposition
     boundary on the upper continental slope, Marine Geology, v.28,  M-19-M-29,
     (1978).

(10) EMERY,  K.O.,  and UCHUPI, E., Western North Atlantic Ocean:  topography,
     rock, structure, water, life and sediments, Amer. Assoc. Petroleum
     Geologists Memoir. 17, 532 p., (1972).

(11) FRIEDMAN, G.M., On sorting, sorting coefficients, and the log normality
     of the grain-size distribution of sandstones, Jour. Geology, v.70, p.
     737-752, (1962).

(12) HATHAWAY, J.C., Regional clay mineral facies in the estuaries and
     continental margin of the United States east coast; in Nelson editor,
     Environmental framework of Coastal Plain estuaries, Geol. Soc.  of
     America, Memoir 133, p. 331-358, (1972).

(13) TUREKIAN, K.K., Oceans, Prentice Hall Inc., 120 p., (1971).

(14) DAYAL,  R.S.,  OAKLEY, S., and DUEDALL, I.W., Sediment geochemical studies
     of the Atlantic 2800 meter nuclear waste disposal site, personal
     communication, in press.

(15) AMES, L.L., and Rai, D., Radionuclide Interractions with soil and Rock
     Media,  Volume 1, EPA, 520/6-78-007, p. 174-186, (1978).

(16) HEATH,  R.C.,  Barriers to radioactive waste migration, Oceanus,  v.  20, p.
     26-30,   (1977).

(17) BONDIETTI, E.A., and FRANCIS, C.W., Chemistry of Technetium and Neptunium
     in contact with unweathered  igneous rock;  science underlying radioactive
     waste management.  Materials Research Science Meeting, Boston,  Mass. 28
     Nov-1 Dec, p. 57, (1978).

(18) SEITZ, M.G., et al., Migratory properties  of some nuclear waste elements
     in geologic media, Nuclear Technology, v.  44, July  (1979).

(19) HUBERT,  J.F., and NEAL, W.F., Mineral composition and disposal patterns
     of deep-sea sands in the Western North Atlantic Province, Bull. Geol.,
     Soc., Am., v. 78, p. 749-772, (1967).

(20) KELLER,  G., and SHEPARD P.P., Currents and sedimentation processes in
     submarine  canyons off the  northeast United States,  in: D.J. Stanley and
     G. Kelling (Editors), Sedimentation  in  submarine canyons, fans, and
     trenches.  Dowden, Hutchinson and  Ross, Stroudsburg, Pa, pp. 15-32,
     (1978).

-------
                                         29

  (21) STANLEY, D.J.,  SHENG,  H., and PEDRAZA,  C.P.,  Lower  continental rise  east
      of the Middle Atlantic States:  predominant  sediment dispersal
      perpendicular to isobaths.,  Geol.  Soc.  Americal Bull,  v1-. 82  D
      1831-18110,  (1971).

  (22) McMASTER, R.L., and GARRISON, L.E., Mineralogy and  origin of southern New
      England shelf sediments, Jour.  Sed., Petrology, v.  36. n. 4, p
      1131-1142,  (1966).                                         '

  (23) ROSS, D.A., Atlantic shelf and  slope of the U.S.  jheavy minerals of  the
      continental margin from southern Nova Scotia  to northern New Jersey, USGS
      Prof. Paper 529-G, 40  p., (1970).

  (24) NEIHEISEL, J.,  1973, Source  of  detrital heavy minerals in Atlantic
      Coastal Plain estuaries:  Georgia  Institute of Technology. Ph.D.
      dissert., l8l p., (1973).
     i                                                        i
  (25) ALEXANDER, A.E., A petrographic study of some continental shelf
^    sediments: Jour Sed. Petrology, v. 4, p. 12-22, (1934).
                                                .
  (26) McMASTER, R.L.,  Petrography  and genesis of the New Jersey beach sands,
      New Jersey Dept. of Conservation and Economic Development, Geological
      Survey Bull., 63, 239 p., (1954).                      ,

  (27) McCARTHEY, G.R., Coastal sands of  the eastern United States,  Amer. Jour.
     j>f Science,  v.  22,  p.  35-50,  (1931).

  (28) KELLING,  G., SHENG,  H., and STANLEY, D.J., Mineralogic composition of
      sand-sized sediment on the outer margin off the Mid-Atlantic States:
      assessment of the influence of the ancestral Hudson and other fluvial
      systems,  Geol.  Soc.  of America Bull.,  v. 86, p.  853-862,  (1975).

  (29) SHEPARD,  P.P.,  and COHEE,  G.V.,  Continental shelf sediment off the
      Mid-Atlantic States,  Geol.  Soc.  Americal Bull.,  v.47, p,,  441-458,  (1936).

 (30) U.S.  ARMY CORPS  OF  ENGINEERS, Shore of New Jersey-Barnegat Inlet  to Cape
      May Canal, beach erosion control study,  House Document 208, 86th
      Congress,  1st session,  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  107p.,  (1959),;

 (3D U.S.  ARMY CORPS  OF ENGINEERS, Delaware coast,  beach  eroaion control and
      hurricane protection, Senate  Doc.  90,  90th Congress, 2nd  Session,
      Philadelphia, Pa, llOp.,  (1968).
                                                             i
 (32) TWICHELL,  D.C.,  KNEBEL, H.J., and FOLGER,  D.W., Delaware  River, Evidence
      for  its former extension  to Wilmington Submarine  Canyon:  Science,  v.  195.
      p  483-485, (1977).
                                                       -281-147/141!

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------
TJO
§3
0) O
3 9L
:*OJ
o c
   w
75'
<-8
0! w
(D
C
          <>mc
             <
3;
Q.
6

-------