600283096
AN EVALUATION OF SUESURFACE CONDITIONS AT REFINERY
LAND TREATMENT SITES
by
K. W.. Brown and L. E „ Deuel, Jr
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas 77843
Submitted to the
American Petroleum Institute
Grant No. CR 807868
Project Officer
Carlton C. Wiles
Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U_S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal
Environmental Protection Agency and approved for
publication. Approval does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade
names or commercial products constitute endorsement or
recommendations for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was created
because of increasing public and government concern about
the dangers of pollution to the health and welfare of the
American people. Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled land
are tragic testimonies to the deterioration of our natural
environment. The complexity of that environment and the
interplay of its components require a concentrated and
integrated attack on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step
in the problem solution, and it involves defining the
problem, measuring its impact, and searching for solutions.
The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory develops new
and improved technology and systems to prevent, treat, and
manage wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant
discharges from municipal and community sources, to preserve
and treat public drinking water supplies, and to minimize
the adverse economic, social, health, and aesthetic effects
of pollution. This publication is one of the products of
that research and is a most vital communications link
between the researcher and the user community.
Land treatment of wastes has the potential of being an
economically safe means of disposal of certain industrial
waste streams. It is, however, still in its infancy and
although some land treatment is being done, only limited
information exists on the degradation and movement of waste
constituents in soils. This study was conducted to
partially fill this void.
Francis T. Mayo
Director
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
Soil cores were collected from five land treatment
facilities being used for the disposal of various solid
wastes from oil refineries. Cores from similar but untreated
soils adjacent to each facility were collected for comparison.
The samples were analyzed for chemical constituents to deter-
mine whether there was any evidence of the movement of waste
constituents in the soil.
The sites selected represented diverse climatic regions,
and the soils ranged in texture from clay to sand. The facili-
ties had been in operation from 1 to 7 years before sampling and
had received a wide range of waste applications.
Data from this study indicate that metals from the waste
applied typically remain in the treatment zone and concentrations
generally are within ranges considered normal for soils. Only at
one site which had acidic soil did chromium move to depths below
the zone of incorporation. The potential exists for possible
downward migration of land treated hydrocarbons. At most sites,
only very low concentrations of hydrocarbons were found at limited
depths below the zone of incorporation. Since these materials remain
in the aerobic zone, they will likely degrade with time. At one
site with sandy soils, hydrocarbons were detected to 224cm (88.2 in.)
in depth at which degradation would be expected to occur only very
slowly, but this occurance was determined to be the result of pre-
vious industrial contamination.* The potential for downward
migration is typically greatest in coarse-textured, sandy soils,
and less in fine-textured soils. Textural discontinuities appear
to help slow the downward movement of hydrocarbons. The results
indicate that with proper site selection and application rates,
the potential for groundwater contamination from land treatment
of refinery waste is minimal.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Cooperative
Agreement No. CR 807868-01 by Texas A&M Research Foundation under
the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
the American Petroleum Institute. This report covers the period
The site reported that core samples taken before applying waste
to the landtreatment area showed oil levels similar to those found
in this s tudy.
iv
-------
November 5, 1980 to November 4, 1981 and work was completed
as of April 1, 1982.
v
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Disclaimer. ii
Forward iii
Abstract iv
Figures . vi
Tables xiii
Acknowledgements. xv
1. Introduction 1
2» Experimental Design 3
Sampling 5
Site History... 5
Analyses 5
Soil properties 5
Metals 5
Organics 5
High Performance Liquid Chromatography
(HPLC) . . . . 8
3. Results and Discussion 9
Particle Size Distribution. 9
Cationic Distribution..... 9
Soil Reaction* . . „ 15
Soluble Constituents............. 26
Heavy Metal Distribution. . 45
Organic Distribution...... 52
Gas Liquid Chromatographic Characteriza-
tion..... ...... 53
Detector response .................... 53
Chromatographic frac t ionat ion 58
Molecular weight and carbon number... 60
Hydrocarbon Distribution by Gas Liquid
Chromatographic Analyses 64
Site A GLC profiles...... 64
Site B GLC profiles..... 64
Site C GLC profiles.... 70
Site D GLC profiles. 77
Site E GLC profiles.................. 77
High performance Liquid Chromatography
(HPLC) .... 86
-------
References.................... '. 92
Append ices:
A. Glima to logica 1 Data for the Sites Sampled... 94
B * Site Description.......... *..„*... 97
vii
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Schematic diagram of the analytical system.. 6
2 pH profile at Site A 21
3 pH profile at Site B. 22
4 pH profile at Site C 23
5 pH profile at Site D.. 24
6 pH profile at Site E. . ....... 25
7 EC profile at Site A * 32
8 EC profile at Site B. 33
9 EC profile at Site C.... 34
10 EC profile at Site D 35
11 EC profile at Site E...... 36
12 Correlation of observed and calculated EC
values for Site D . , 43
13 Chromatographs of standard compounds. Peak
numbers refer to compounds listed in
Table 35... 61
14 Relationship between retention time and
molecular weight of known compounds 62
15 Relationship between retention time and
carbon number of known compounds 63
viii
-------
16 Chromatographs of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at untreated Site A. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil 65
17 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at treated Site A. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
quivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil..... 66
13 Chromatograms of the total extracts of
soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site A. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to 10 n
moles C per gram oven dry soil........ 67
19 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at untreated Site B. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil.... 68
20 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at treated Site B. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil . 69
21a Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site B. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil...... 71
21b Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site B. Rectangles in each legend
-------
represent Che area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil 72
22 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at untreated Site C. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil... 73
23 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at treated Site C. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil. 74
24a Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site C. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil 75
24b Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site C. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil,,.. 76
25 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at untreated Site D. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil...... 78
26 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at treated Site D. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil..... 79
27a Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
-------
Site DC Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil. 30
27b Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site D. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil... . . 81
28 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at untreated Site E. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil........................ 82
29 Chromatograms of fractionated soil
extracts for the three surface depths
at treated Site E. Rectangles in
each legend represent the area
equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram
oven dry soil........................ 83
30 a Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site E. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil................................. 84
30b Chromatograms of the total extracts
of soil below the top three sample
locations at untreated and treated
Site E. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry
soil........................ 85
31 HPLC scan of standard samples 87
32 HPLC scan of the 0-15 cm of the extract
from the treated site at location A.„ 88
33 HPLC scan of the 0-30 cm of the extract
from the treated site at location E... 89
-------
34 HPLC scan of the 76-91 cm of the extract
from the treated site at location B.... 90
B-l Land treatment sample area for Site A 99
B-2 Land treatment sample area for Site B..... 103
B-3 Land treatment sample area for Site C....... 105
B-4 Land treatment sample area for Site D...... 108
B-5 Land treatment sample area for Site £...„.., 112
xii
-------
Tables
Number
1 History of Waste Application at Sampling
Sites ........... 4
2 USDA Texture and Particle Size Distribu-
tion of the Untreated and Treated Soils
at Site A.. 10
3 OSDA Texture and Particle Size Distribu-
tion of the Untreated and Treated Soils
at Site B.. „ 11
4 USDA Texture and Particle Size Distribu-
tion of the Untreated and Treated Soils
at Site C.. 12
5 USDA Texture and Particle Size Distribu-
tion of the Untreated and Treated Soils
at Site D........... 13
6 USDA Texture and Particle Size Distribu-
tion of the Untreated and Treated Soils
at Site E. 14
7 Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cations
and Percent Sodium Saturation in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site A.. 16
8 Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cations
and Percent Sodium Satration in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site B.. 17
xiii
-------
9 Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cations
and Percent Sodium Saturation in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at. Site C.. 18
10 Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cations
and Percent Sodium Saturation in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site 0.. 19
11 Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cations
and Percent Sodium Saturation in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site E.. 20
12 Electrical Conductivity, pH, Soluble Cations,
and Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) in the
Untreated and. Treated Soils at Site A... 27
13 Electrical Conductivity, pH, Soluble Cations,
and Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site B.C. 28
14 Electrical Conductivity, pH, Soluble Cations,
and Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site C... 29
15 Electrical Conductivity, pH, Soluble Cations,
and Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site 0... 30
16 Electrical Conductivity, pH, Soluble Cations,
and Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) in the
Untreated and Treated Soils at Site E... 31
17 Soluble Anions in the Untreated and Treated
Soils at Site A 37
13 Soluble Anions in the Untreated and Treated
Soils at Site B..... 38
19 Soluble Anions in the Untreated and Treated
Soils at Site C... 39
20 Soluble Acions in the Untreated and Treated
Soils at Site D „ 40
21 Soluble Anions in the Untreated and Treated
Soils at Site E 41
22 Regression Coefficients and Corresponding
Coefficient of Determination 42
xiv
-------
23 Mean Cl , SO* and NO - Values Averaged
Over Depth for Boch Treated and Untreated
soils 44
24 Total Metal Contents with Depth for Untreated
and Treated Soil at Site A in ppm 46
25 Total Metal Contents with Depth for Untreated
and Treated Soil at Site B in ppm 47
26 Total Metal Contents with Depth for Untreated
and Treated Soil at Site C in ppm 48
27 Total Metal Contents with Depth for Untreated
and Treated Soil at Site D in ppm........ 49
28 Total Metal Contents with Depth for Untreated
and Treated Soil at Site E in ppm..,, 50
29 Trace Element Content of Soils 51
30 Total Organic Carbon and Extracta-ble Oil
and Grease for Soils From Site A
Given in Percentage ...................... 53
31 Total Organic Carbon and Extractable Oil
and Grease for Soils From Site B
Given in Percentage 54
32 Total Organic Carbon and Extractable Oil
and Grease for Soils From Site C
Given in Percentage 55
33 Total Organic Carbon and Extractable Oil
and Grease for Soils From Site D
Given in Percentage . 56
34 Total Organic Carbon and Extractable Oil
and Grease for Soils From Site E
Given in Percentage 57
35 Flame lonization Detection Response to
Hydrocarbons Reported as Integration
Units Per Mole of C 59
la Average Precipitation in Inches by Month
for all Locations ........ 94
-------
Ib Average Temperature by Month for all
Locations , 95
Ic Average Evaporation by Month for all
Locations 96
xvi
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The input and suggestions from the Solid and Hazardous
Waste Research Division of EPA's Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio, and from the
API Task Force responsible for monitoring of this effort
are gratefully acknowledged.
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Land treatment has been demonstrated to be an effective
method of disposing of waste streams that contain
biodegradable organic materials. The various constituents
of the land-treated waste that do not degrade accumulate in
the soil; however, some of these constituents could migrate
down through the profile if the retention capacity is
exceeded .
Raymond et al. (1975) showed that oil applied to soils
at the rate of 100 barrels (bbl)/acre resulted in no oil
lostj either in runoff or leachates generated. They
reported significant ether-extractable materials in
leachates, which suggests an incomplete degradation and
mobility of some components of the oil.
Water quality could be adversely affected by the low
redox potentials associated with saturated soil conditions
or by overloading with high BOD materials if contaminant
solubilities are significantly enhanced. Fuller (1977)
reported enchanced mobilities for As, Cr, Fe , and Zn under
reducing environments (unoxygenated) . Movement of metals
through soluble metal-organic complexes were also reported
as a potential means of enhanced mobility.
Applications of organics to soil tend to increase soil
acidity (Britten et al., 1976). Most metals have increased
solubilities under acidic soil conditions (Chaney, 1973;
MacLeon and Dekker, 1976). The potential for enhanced
mobility largely depends on the initial soil reaction and
the buffer capacity of the soil if it is not amended with
liming agents. Specific information concerning the fate of various
organic constituents in land treatment operations also is limited.
Anions present special problems with respect to their
rate of movement through soils relative to water (Thomas and
-------
Swoboda, 1970). The phenomenon apparently depends on the
cation exchange capacity so that negatively charged surfaces
repel anions , effectively reducing the volume of water
needed to leach a given anion.
The primary objective of this study was to determine
the potential for downward migration of constituents
following the long-term use of specific sites for land
treatment of refinery waste sludges.
-------
SECTION 2
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
A sampling program was initiated to evaluate the
presence of waste constituents in the surface and subsurface
soil. Samples were collected both from soils that had been
treated with refinery wastes and from adjacent soils that
had not been used for waste disposal (referred to as
untreated soil). Samples were collected fr.om similar depths
at both locations, and the results of the analyses were
compared to determine whether waste constituents had moved.
Groundwater and soil pore water analyses were not conducted.
With the assistance of the API task force, five sites
were selected that had been used for land treatment of oily
wastes for several years. Sites were selected principally
on the basis of geographical and climatological diversity.
Detailed climatological data for each site (Appendix A) were
calculated based on the 30-year mean for the nearest weather
station. In view of the broad range of characteristics of
the five sites (i.e. wastes handled, application rates, soil
types, application method), it is believed that this effort
adequately reflects current refinery operations (Table 1).
Sampling
The sampling scheme was modified as necessary to meet
field conditions. Each treatment site was surveyed and 4 to
5 locations were selected as representative areas. Cores
were taken from each spot and composited with depth. About
12 depth intervals were selected at each site depending on
the soil profile. Descriptions of the treatment sites and
the positions from which samples were taken are given in
Appendix B. At each land treatment site, one soil core was
taken from an untreated soil adjacent to the treated area.
Detailed descriptions of the soils native to each land
treatment facility is given in Appendix B. Samples were
placed in glass containers and transported to Che
laboratory, where they were maintained in cold storage until
analyzed .
-------
Table 1. History of Waste Application at Sanpling Sites.
Description
Type of Waste Applied:
API Separator Sludge
OAT Sludge
Tank Bottom Sediment
FU|er Clays
ETP Sludge
Slop Oil Emulsion
Treatment Fend Sludge
Leaded Sludge
Rate of Application
Method of Application
Date That Landtreataent
1-4Z oil
277 bbl acre/yr
3020 bbl/.ere/
aonth
680 bbl/A/
oonch
Applied to Applied co sur- Subsurface in- Applied Co
surface and face and disced, jeetlon and surface and
disced tilled repeated- tilled twice.
several rimes: ly°
tilled twice.
80 ydJ/A/yr
Applied Co sur-
face and tilled.
Begun
Last Application Dace
Before Sampling
Date of Sailing
Tt»e Since Last Application
May 1973
July 1979
Stov.2*. 1980
13 months
Ute 1974
August 1980
July 1-2, 1981
11 months
October 1979
Oecemoer 3. 1980
Dec. 8-11, 1980
1 week
June 1976
Wr '•
January 7 ,
1981
3 months
March 1979
Prior co Nov. 19,
1980
March 16-20, 1981
Over 4 months
* Effluent tre
t plant.
-------
Site History
Since the history of past applications will have a
large bearing on interpretation of analytical data, a
concerted effort was made Co obtain a consistent and
detailed history of each site. This information included
beginning dates, applicatio.n rates and methods, types of
wastes applied, and the date of the last application before
sampling. A summary of this information is presented in
Table 1.
Analyses
A schematic diagram of the analyses performed on each
soil sample is given in Figure 1. Details of the analytical
procedures are presented below.
Soil Properties; Appropriate soil analyses were made
to verify field descriptions and provide a data base for
correlative interpretation of the results. Parameters
included pH (Peech,, 1965), specific conductance (Bower and
Wilcox, 1965), texture (Day, 1965), cation exchange capacity
(Chapman, 1965a), and soluble and exchangeable cationic
distribution (Chapman, 1965b). In addition to the above
soil properties, soils were analyzed for NO.-N (Bremner,
1965) and chloride and sulfate by specific anion electrode
technique.
Metals: Subsamp lea of each composite were digested
with nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide. The latter was
added to facilitate the destruction of organics and
oxidation of the various metallic species. Following
digestion, metals were analyzed according to EPA protocol
(EPA, 1979, Methods 206.3, 213.1, 218.1, 245.1, 239.1,
270.2, 249.1, and 236.1). Atomic absorption spectroscopic
technique was used for specific metal analyses, except for
arsenic, which was analyzed by colorimetric technique
following conversion to its hydride and complexing with
silver die thyIdithiocarbamate in a pyridine base. An
aliquot of the metal digest was evaporated to a very low
volume in the presence of a, sulfuric, hydrochloric acid
matrix to purge traces of nitric from the sample before
arsine generation.
Analytical procedures have been statistically evaluated
for the metals of interest using NBS reference soils.
Organics: In addition to the above inorganic soil
properties and/or constituents, each segmented core was
analyzed specifically for total organic carbon (Allison,
-------
Soil Sample
taken in field
Sox
extr
"i
dlchlor
Silic
coin
fractto
1
Saturates Arena.
transport to
laboratory
1
i 1 1
Ulet TOC 1IN03 Physical and
action and digest Chemical Properties
th Oil and Grease 1 )
onethane 1 | )
1 pll EC
•*" fpf un
analysia CEC N0
for Cl SO
netala _ „
Texture Ex
a gel
nut | "1
latioii As Cd
Cr llg
Pb Ki
" ~1
itlca Pulynuclear Aromatlca
Exchangeable Cations
GLC
GLC
GLC
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the analytical system.
-------
1965) and extractable oil and grease by a modified procedure
of Dibble and Bartha (1979).
Organics were Soxhlet extracted from all soil samples
maintained at field moisture content. Between 10 to 20 g of
soil on a dry weight basis was weighed in an extraction
thimble and Soxhlet extracted with 75 to 250 ml of
CH-CL- for four hours. Greater amounts of solvent were
used tor the samples which visually appeared to have greater
amounts of oily residue. The extract was dried by passing
it through a bed of 15 g anhydrous Na-SO, . The extract
was then flash evaporated to less than 50 ml and brought up
to 50 ml volume by addition of CH^Cl,,. One 5 ml aliquot
was evaporated and gravimetrically analyzed for residue. A
5 ml aliquot of the extract from soil samples from the upper
3 depth intervals from each location was fractionated before
GLC analys is.
Fractionation into saturates, aromatics and higher
condensed polynuclear aromatics was achieved by the method
suggested by Warner (1976). A five ml aliquot was evaporated
with a gentle steam of dry nitrogen and reso1ibilized in
hexane for loading onto 10 g activated silica gel in a
column. The sample vial was rinsed with approximately 2 ml
petroleum ether which was also transferred to the column.
Saturates were eluted with 25 ml petroleum ether. The
sample vial was then rinsed with 2 ml 20Z methylene chloride
in petroleum ether which was transferred to load the column.
Aromatics were then eluted with 50 ml- of 20% methylene
chloride in petroleum ether. A final rinse of the sample
vial was made with 5 ml methylene chloride which was
transferred to the column, and followed by elution of
carbazoles and some higher condensed polynuclear aromatics
with 20 ml of methylene chloride. The silica gel was
finally rinsed with 50 ml methanol to elute some of the
higher molecular weight materials. This extract was
analyzed by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) as
described below.
Soil samples from all lower depths were similarly
extracted with CH-Cl. and small aliquots went directly
to GLC analysis without frac tionation. Each of the three
extracts were analyzed by GLC using a temperature programmed
Tracer Model 560 GC , equipped with a flame ionization
detector. The GLC was fitted with a 0.64 cm i.d. by 1.8 m
long glass column packed with 37. OV-1 on 30/100 mesh
chromosorb w. Injector temperature was maintained at
235 C. The column oven was programmed between 100 and
240 C at a rate of 3°C/min with an initial 10 min hold
and a. final 40 min hold.
-------
High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)
An aliquot of the methanol extract (Fraction 5) from
surface horizon and an aliquot of the total extract from
samples collected deeper in the profile were systematically
analyzed by HPLC for phenol and phenolic derivatives
according to the procedure detailed in L. C. Varian Report
No. 96. A Beckman Model 421 liquid chromatographic unit
equipped with a Beckman ultrasphere ODS reverse phase column
in conjunction with a variable UV detector system was used
to separate and analyze for phenols. The mobile phase was
water/acetonitrile/1Z acetic acid. A gradient of 30Z to
802 acetonitrile/lZ acetic acid in 20 min at a flow rate of
1.0 ml/min was used, followed by a 6-min isocratic run at
80Z acetonitrile/IZ acetic acid. The regeneration step
entailed a 10-min gradient from 80Z to 30Z acetonitrile/IZ
acetic acid and followed by a 20-min equilibration with 30Z
acetonitrile/IZ acetic acid at 1 ml/min.
Phenols were routinely monitored at 280 am. Samples
showing suspect peaks by comparison with standard retention
times were reinjected and monitored at 254 am. The ratio of
the suspect peak intensity of 230 am to the intensity at 254
am was compared with the ratio for the appropriate standard
compound* If the 280/254 ratio for a suspect peak varied
significantly from the known ratio, it was rejected as a
possible phenol peako
-------
SECTION 3
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Particle Size Distribution
Physical properties of a soil are defined as those
characteristics, processes, or reactions of a soil which are
caused by physical forces but, for all practical purposes,
are integrally related to particle size. The particle size
distribution determined for treated soils and untreated
soils with respect to depth are shown in Tables 2 through 6,
along with the corresponding USDA textural classification.
Site A. reflects a medium textured (loam) surface over a
clay. Treated and untreated soils at Site B ranged from
medium to coarse texture throughout the profiles. A coarse
texture (sand) dominated the profile developed at Site C.
Site D was typically medium textured, becoming coarser with
depth. The soils at Site E are clay throughout the profile.
The mobility of most constituents would be favored by
open coarse textured soils such as found at Site C. Anionic
mobilities may be enhanced in deep clay profiles. Textural
discontinuities, such as those which occur at Site A, B, and
D (Tables 2, 3, and 5) would tend to impede water
transmission and downward movement of soluble constituents
within the profile. The greater macroporosity of coarse
textured soils tend to favor natural aeration necessary for
the microbial oxidation of organics. Textural
discontinuities in high rainfall areas may prove detrimental
to degradation rates of organics through lowered gaseous
exchange rates.
Cationic Distribution
The cation exchange capacity (CSC) is the total
amount of exchangeable cations that a soil can adsorb.
Among the cations normally held by the CEC are NA, Ca, Mg,
and Kc Soils having high clay content and organic matter
(OM) content usually have a high CEC. A moderate to high CEC
-------
Tabla 2.
USDA Taxtura and Parcicla Six* Distribution oi cha !facr«Ae«d
•id Traacad Soils ac Sic* A.
Siea
A- Uncreated
Soil
^•Treated
Soil
Depth
(cm)
0-15
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
0-15
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-U2
Depth
(in)
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
USD*
Taxcura *
SO.
L-CL
C
C
C
set
c
a
S1L
c
c
c
c-a.
e
c
e
?arzlcla Size (?)
Sand
48
44
31
24
30
46
22
36
30
44.
42
43
38
40
43
41
Silt
23
29
27
27
23
27
25
29
51
9
4
13
22
17
15
3
Clay
29
27
42
49
47
27
53
35
19
47
54
44
40
43
42
51
SCL - sandy day lo
I. - loa»
CX. - clay loan
C - clay
511. - ailc loan
SL - sandy loan
S - sand
LS - loamy sand
10
-------
Ta&l* 3.
USD* Taxtur* and Partial* Six* Di*trlbution of ch* Qncr**c*d
and Tr*ac*d Soila aC Sic* B.
Sit*
8-(Incraat*d
Soil
a-Tr«ated
Soil,
Dapch
(at)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-2*4
244-305
305-366
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61=7*
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244=305
305-366
Dapch
(In)
0-6
5-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
asoA „
Taxtur* '
t,
SL
SL
S
3
S
LS
L
L
SL
SI.
SL
SL
SL
L
L
LS-SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
St-SCL
SO.
SCL
Parcici* Siza (Z)
Sand
42
72
76
93
91
94
32
41
48
66
54
55
53
34
46
43
76
75
65
65
70
62
47
48
Silt
35
17
14
3
2
2
10
37
31
21
44
43
30
30
36
41
18
19
19
17
16
18
27
26
Clay
23
11
10
4
7
4
8
22
21
13
2
2
17
16
18
16
6
6
16
18
14
20
26
26
11
-------
Table 4.
USD* T«xcur« and Partial* Size Distribution at th* Untr**c*d
and Truc*d Sell* »t Sit* C.
sit*
C- Untraatad
Soil
C-Tra«ead
Soil
Depth
(cm)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-132
152-183
183-244
244-305
30S-366
Depth
(in)
0-6
6-12
12- 1.8
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
US DA
Taxtura
SL
LS
S-LS
LS
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
LS
S
SL
LS
SL
LS
S
LS
LS
LS-SL
LS
LS
LS
S
Partial.
Siz* (
Sand Silc
31
36
38
38
80
74
31
33
33
30
as
93
73
34
77
87
92
85
87
32
35
35
35
90
6
8
6
3
6
11
4
2
2
2
2
5
17
5
9
4
3
3
4
6
5
4
5
I
'V
Clay
13
6
6
9
14
15
15
15
13
18
13
t
10
11
14
9
5
12
9
12
10
11
10
9
12
-------
T«bl« 5.
USD*. Taxtura and Particl* Sizm Distribution of th* Untrutad
and Traatad Soil* at Situ D.
Sit* Dapth
(on)
D-(titraatad 0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-132
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
>-Tr*aead 0-10
Soil 10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
Dapth
(in)
0-4
i-3
3-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-4
4-8
8-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
US DA
Taxtur*
SL
SL
SCL-SC
SC
sc
sc
so.
sc
so.
so,
SCL
SCL
S
SCL
SCL
SCL
SCL
SO,
SO.
SCL
SCL
SCL
SCL
SL
LS
S
Partial*
Siza (')
Sand Silt
75
77
56
47
48
54
53
51
65
68
63
67
91
64
60
58
60
53
57
53
51
S2
54
70
36
90
15
12
9
6
12
10
15
12
9
10
12
12
1
13
U
9
a
15
12
13
19
17
18
11
5
4
CUy
10
11
35
47
40
36
32
37
26
22
23
21
8
23
29
33
32
32
31
29
30
31
28
19
9
&
13
-------
Table 6.
OSOA Texcur* and Particle Slza Otstrlbucion of che Uncreated and
Treated Soil* ac Sic* E.
Sice
E-Uncraated
Soil
E-TraaCad
Soil
Depth
(cm)
0-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-122
152-183
133-244
244-303
305-366
0-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
133-244
244-305
305-366
Dap eh
(in)
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-12
12-18
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
OSDA
Texture
C
c
C
-
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
Particle Slza
Sand
25
20
28
-
17
21
14
11
11
16
16
25
16
16
IS
18
16
18
13
15
13
16
sue
29
32
22
-
23
21
11
7
22
18
11
25
31
29
24
21
21
18
25
24
29
26
m
Clay
46
43
50
-
,60
58
75
32
67
66
73
50
53
55
61
61
63
64
62
61
58
58
14
-------
would be advantageous to a land treatment site as the CEC
would help prevent migration of added waste constituents.
Profiles reflecting the CSC and cationic distribution
are shown in Tables 7 through 11. Some of the calcium and
magnesium reported as exchangeable cations exceed CEC values
due to sparingly soluble sulfate and/or carbonate salts.
Cation exchange capacities generally reflect corresponding
clay contents and are within the normal ranges for soils.
Some of the treated sites are considerably higher in CEC possibly
due to the organics applied. The high sodium saturations occur in
both the treated and untreated soil profiles at Sites A and C. The
data suggest that after the utilization of these sites in the land
treatment of refinery waste there has only been a slight alteration
of the cationic distribution towards sodium, except at Site A where
the sodium levels were greater for the untreated soil.
Soil Reaction
Comparative soil reaction are presented in pH profiles
for both untreated and treated soils at each site (Figures 2
through 6). Site A demonstrates the typical acidifying
reaction normal to the degradation of organics in soil.
For the most part the influence of land treatment on
soil reactions were attenuated within the upper 91 to 183 cm
(3 to 6 ft) of the profiles sampled, attenuation being
reflected by convergence of measured values.
The divergence of profiles shown for Sites B and C are
attributed to the coarse texture and associated low buffer
capacity, although it should be noted that values
differ generally by less than one pH unit.
Soil reactions for both treated Sites D and E exceed
values for the untreated sites to a depth of 1.5 m.
Although initial waste properties are unknown, the pH
profile suggests the increased alkalinity stems from the
waste applications.
It is desirable to have a pH ranging between 6 and 3 in
a land treatment facility since this is the most favorable
range for soil microorganisms, concomitant to a functional
facility. This pH range favors the solubility of essential
nutrients and sorption of heavy metals.
15
-------
Tabla 7. Cacion Exchange Capacity, Bxchangaabia Cations and P«rc«ne Sodium Saturation
In ch« UhtnaMd and Tr«at«d Soils ac Sic* A.
Exchangeable Cations
Site
&-Untreated
Soil
A-Treated
Soil
Depth
(ca )
0-15
13-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-132
0-15
13-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
Depth UEC
(in > (aeq/lOOg)
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
7.1
7.2
10.1
13.1
12.7
9.2
9.6
9.6
11.3
12.9
13.3
14.5
15.3
17.4
15.3
12.1
Ha
1.3
5.2
7.2
8.9
10.4
10.4
7.3
7.1
0.5
2.5
5.1
4.8
6.2
7.3
5.8
6.1
K
-<»eq/]
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0..1
0.3
0.3
0.3
1.6
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.3
Ca
18.1
4S.O
314.6
39.3
4S.S
35.3
36.1
54.9
20.0
33.3
61.5
46.7
47.4
5UO
32.8
55.4
MB
4.7
12.2
16.3
9.2
10.6
3.0
12.9
5.9
5.2
7.7
9.9
9.6
9.1
7.9
3.2
14.3
Ha
Saturation
(Z)
25.4
72.2
71.3
S3.9
81.9
53.1
37.2
36.2
4.4
19.3
38.3
33.1
40.5
42.0
37.9
50.4
16
-------
Table 3.
Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cation* and Percent Sodium Saturation
In the Uncreated and Treated Soils at Site S.
Exchangeable Cations
tia
Site
B-Uatreatad
Soil
3-Treaeed
Soil
Depth
(cm )
0-13
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-132
132-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
Depth CEC
(la ) (neq/lOOg)
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24- 30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
4.1
2.4
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.7
1.4
5.4
7.5
4.4
5.5
4.0
3.5
4.5
4.8
3.7
1.7
2.3
2.4
4.5
5.2
4.6
6.6
6.0
Na
K Ca
/ 1 i svn \
Mg
Saturation
(Z)
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Ocl
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.5
1.5
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.6
1.6
6.4
6.2
3.6
13.3
23.0
25.0
3.8
4.0
3.6
5.3
2.3
2.7
5.2
5.0
4.3
6.4
6.5
i.a
0.1
U.I
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.6
3.7
3.5
1.7
2.5
2.3
0.8
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.2
0.7
1.6
3.5
3.9
3.0
4.8
4.5
2.4
4.2
10.0
10.2
10.5-
15.4
0.5
1.9
1.3
2.3
1.8
2.5
11.4
2.2
2.1
2.7
5.9
4.3
4.2
2.2
1.9
2.2
1.5
1.7
11
-------
Tabla 9.
Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Caclona and Percent Sodium Sacuracion in cha
Uncreated and Traacad Soila at Slca C.
Zxchanceiible Caclona
Slta
Dapch
(cm )
Dapch
(in )
CEC
(latq/lOOg)
Na
K Ca
Na
Mg Saturation
C-Untreaead
Soil
C-Treatad
Soil
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-13
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-45
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
1.7
2.6
2.1
2.2
2.6
2.0
2.5
3.6
4.0
4.3
3.0
1.5
5.5
3.2
3.0
2.5
2.0
2.3
2.6
2.9
2.3
2.8
4.4
2.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
1.2
0.9
0.9
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.04
1.2
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
oa
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
42.7
5.9
12.5
2.9
22.4
1.9
1.8
2.3
2.9
2.6
1.7
o.a
27.9
15.1
9.4
2.0
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.4
1.6
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.9
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.3
1.9
2.3
3.2
3.3
2.4
1.0
4.6
1.5
1.7
1.6
2.0
1.3
1.9
2.0
1.7
1.7
1.3
1.4
17.6
7.7
14.3
13.6
46.2
45.0
36.0
11.1
7.5
6.3
6.7
2-. 7
21.3
12,5
6.7
12.0
10.0
8.7
23.1
13.8
13.0
14.3
4.5
0.0
18
-------
Table 1.0, Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Cacioaa and Percent Sodiua Saturation in the
Untreated and Treated Soil* at Site 0.
Exchangeable Cationa
Slta
D- Untreated
Soil
D-Tr«atad
Soil
Depth
(at )
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-132
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
Depth
(in )
0-4
4-8
3-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-4
4-8
8-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
46-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
CEC
(i»eq/100g)
3.3
3.1
9.2
12. 8
1.0
9.1
3.4
9.6
7.0
5.7
6.5
5.5
2.1
8.7
9.9
7.9
6.8
6.3
5.8
7.5
6.6
6.5
7.0
4.4
2.3
1.6
Ma
0.0
0.1
1.2
3.3
4.3
3.8
3.9
3.5
2.3
2.1
1.4
1.2
0.4
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.9
1.2
2.2
1.5
1.5
2.8
2.5
1.3
0.7
0.4
K
— (men /100s
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Ca
\
6.1
4.3
9.3
10.3
9.3
18.4
36.3
31.5
17.1
28.2
30.1
34.0
23.5
19.0
18. n
9.3
32.6
30.3
30.6
36.0
30.0
32.8
26.9
30.4
28.9
28.5
Mg
0.6
0.6
4.7
6.3
5.4
4.7
5.9
3.9
3.9
3.3
2.9
2.8
0.8
3.2
3.0
3.1
3.3
4.0
3.0
3.0
2.6
3.0
2.5
3.2
1.7
1.2
Na
Saturation
(Z)
0.0
3.2
13.0
29.7
43.0
42.0
46.4
36.5
40.0
36.3
21.5
21.8
19.0
12.6
12.1
15.2
27.9
19.0
37.9
20.0
22.7
43.0
35.7
29.5
30.4
25.0
19
-------
Table 1.1. Cation Exchange Capacity, Exchangeable Caciona and Percent Sodium Saturation in cba
Untreated and treated Soils ac Site E.
Exchangeable
Site
Deptb
(cm )
Depth
(in )
CEC
(ntq/lOOg)
He
Cations
K Ca
MS
Ha
Saturation
(Z)
V S^^f A.WWRS
E- Uncreated
Soil
E-Traated
Soil
0-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
133-244
246-305
305-366
0-10
30-40
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
16.1
13.4
15.9
17.4
18.0
18.4
14.4
15.8
13.4
12.0
10.7
11.4
17.6
23.2
23.8
18.1
20.5
22.1
12.9
11.9
10.6
9.6
0.1
0.4
o.s
0.9
1.0
1.3
1.0
0.7
1.9
2.5
2.0
0.3
1.1
0.3
0.6
1.4
1.3
1.6
2.3
2.4
2.3
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
21.0
16.7
17.1
17.4
17.9
19.3
17.2
24.9
12.3
31.4
13.4
33.3
17.2
18.5
26.5
32.6
38.3
20.4
28.0
37.2
37.2
37.4
5.7
6.9
9.7
10.2
11.3
12.3
12.6
13.6
11.1
14.7
10.5
7.4
9.6
10.3
10.7
12.1
12.5
12.4
13.3
12.7
11.7
9.5
0.6
3.0
5.0
5.2
5.6
7.0
6.9
4.4
14.2
20.3
18.7
7.0
6.3
1.2
2.5
7.7
6.3
7.2
17.8
20.2
21.7
17.7
20
-------
2H
i>
6
PH
7
TREATED SOH
8
\UNTREATED
\
O
SOIL
\
\
o
1.5
h-
o.
Ul
2.5
Figure 2. pH profile at Site A.
21
-------
tu
z
0.
8
0
1 •
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
II-
12-
PH
4567
°VfT* UNTREATED
TREATED -4 -^— SOIL
SOIL * A
^*Q
\?
N— . ^s.
\^.
•\ 7 •
? °i
\
(^
\ \
\ 1 -
!
1 i .
• 0
.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
i
Figure 3. pH profile at Site Bo
22
-------
_
£
X
K
0.
s
0
1-
2
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
-
9-
10-
1 I-
I2J
PH
&5 70 75 8.0
• ^0
i ^^
*^~ * A
\ V- UNTREATED-
TREATED — -» O SOIL
SOIL i ^
t~~~
!\
*
^J w
;x
, \
-------
£
X
0.
8
0
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6
7-
8-
9-
10
I I
12
PH
6789
i i » i
Q •
GL %^-TREATED SOIL
GL *v
UNTREATED *X _ »^
^No •
xo /
/ /
0 /*
(/
\
i©
/
\
\\
\ \ -
Figure 5. pH profile at Site Do
24
.5
- I
- 1.5
2 ~
-12.5
3.5
£
-------
PH
6
8
o
1
z
3-
4-
5-
£ 6-
<••»
z
£ 7-
8
8-
9-
10-
ii.
12-
X I*
/ y TREATED SOIL
? V~
Gi •
^^°s *
UNTREATED^ x \
SOIL ^'
\l
\
\
\\
1
1
u
\\
u
\\
\ \
o •
.5
1
1.3
0.
Ul
2.3 °
3
3.3
4
Figure 6, pH profile at Site
25
-------
Soluble Constituents
Little can be discerned from comparing the cationic
distribution of the soluble matrics, due to the complicated
anionic interactions involving precipitory mechanisms of
less soluble species (Tables 12 through 16). The addition of
soluble sodium salts within treatment facilities tended to
decrease solution levels of background calcium and magnesium
salts .
Profiles developed for the electrical conductivities
are presented in Figures 7 through 11. Values generally
reflected salt accumulation near the surface in sludge
treated soils and downward migration in all but the more
acid Site A. The extreme salinity noted between 30 to. 91 cm
(1 to 3 ft) o.f the control soil at Site D was indicative of
a subsurface saline seep (a natural phenomenon).
Chloride, sulfate and nitrate anions were measured for
each depth interval sampled (Tables 17 through 21) and
correlated to the corresponding EC values, using the
following multiple linear regression model.
EC « bQ * bl (Cl~) + b2 (S04») + b3 (SO^)
To test how well the variability in EC corresponds to the
three anions measured, computed values were linearly
correlated to the observed values.
Regression .coefficients and the coefficient of
determination (r ) comparing calculated and measured EC
values are given in Table 22. The data shows that the
variability of EC values can be described by a three
component anion model, and EC is then adjusted to a
saturated paste value. Saturated paste values better
approximate salt levels at field moisture levels. Treated
Site E did not conform well to a linear model (r * 0.33).
The variability in EC measured for a 1:1 soil:water ratio
was somewhat attenuated when converted to a saturated paste
moisture level, such that a linear model could not resolve
subtle differences below the surface 46 cm (18 in).
The correlation of measured and calculated EC values
for Created Site D is shown in Figure 12. While somewhat
scattered about the idealized regression line, Che data
demonstrates a strong positive correlation, supportive of
the fact that variability in EC with depth can be discerned
by the changes in the respective anion concentrations.
A comparison of anion concentrations averaged over depth
is given in Table 23. Treated Site A shows essentially no
change in either the distribution or total
26
-------
Tabla 12
Electrical Conductivity, pll. Soluble Cations, and Sodlua Adsorption Ratio (SAR) in
ch« Uncreated and Treated Soils at Sice A.
Site
Depth
(cm )
Depth
(in )
EC
(aohoe/om)
pH
Ma
««i.^l. <
!a1 r «
K ia Hg
SAS
^-Untreated
Soil
A-Treated
Soil
0-15
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
0-15
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
3.5
10.0
19.2
25.4
35.7
47.6
21.6
40.6
13.8
3.9
14.3
16.1
39.2
31.7
42.3
37.3
7.9
8.3
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.2
3.2
3.3
6.6
7.4
7.3
3.1
8.1
8.1
fl.2
8.3
56.0
229.0
306.0
340.0
414.0
481.0
363.0
515.0
92.0
145.0
180.0
222.0
337.0
472.0
425.0
437.0
30.0
7.1
1.0
1.-8
1.8
4.3
3.3
4.2
19.4
3.6
1.6
1.9
2.0
3.3
5.3
1.9
214.0
747.0
13,354.0
1,763.0
33U.O
90.0
70.0
lUh.O
119.0
33.0
13.0
244.0
73.0
315.0
288.0
2,788.0
126.0
35.7
381.0
44. d
28.6
50.0
33.0
48. 0
50.0
14.0
9.3
14.3
25.5
102.0
83.0
202.0
4.3
11.6
3,7
11.3
30.9
57.5
50.6
58.7
10.0
20.3
53.3
19.5
43.0
32.7
31.2
U.3
27
-------
Tatol. 13
Elactrical Conductivity, pIC, Soluble Cations, and Sodium Adaorption Ratio (SAR) in
tlM Untr«*t«d and Truud Soils ae Slea fl.
Soluble Sales
Sic*
Dcpch
(em )
Dapelt
(in )
EC
pH
S« K Ca Mg
SAR
B-Uncreaced
Soil
B-Tr««t«d
Soil
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
133-244
244-305
305-366
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-6
6-12
12-13
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
50-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-13
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-43
40-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
2.3
2.1
1.3
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.9
1.5
1.3
6.9
5.9
6.4
2.9
4.4
4.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.5
0.9
0.9
4.5
4.3
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.6
6.2
6.1
6.3
7.1
7.1
5.1
4.7
4.8
5.7
5.4
5.1
5.2
5.4
5.3
5.6
6.0
6.2
5.1
3.2
3.3
3.8
3.6
3.8
3.4
2.6
2.6
3.1
4.2
4.2
5.7
5.9
5.3
5.9
7.4
7.4
5.9
5.6
5.6
5.4
4.9
4.9
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
'0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
5.7
2.9
o.a
2.9
<0.5
<0.5
4.0
59.0
22.0
22.0
12.0
14.0
15.0
8.1
12.0
12.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< i.o
< 1.0
10.3
13.2
5.3
3.1
8.3
3.3
31.0
26.0
22.0
26.0
15.0
19.0
12.0
17.0
17.0
11.0
19.5
19.5
3.2
1.3
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.8
1.1
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.1
0.9
1.0
4.3
0.9
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.7
1.2
1.2
28
-------
Table
Electrical Conductivity„ pll» Soluble Cations, and Sodium Adsorption Hallo (SAR) In
the Untreated and Treated Soils at Site C.
Soluble Salts
Site
Depth
(cm )
Depth
(in )
EC
(•nhoa/ca)
pll
Ha
K Ca
/ ,„ ^1 4 bn^
MB
SAR
V !*!«:«{/« A I.W
C-Untreated
Soil
C-Trcated
Soil
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
iaa-244
224-305
305-166
0-15
15-30
30-4b
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-1U3
103-244
244-305
_3L'5.73.<'-12
)2-13
ia-24
24-30
30-36
3(>-4 8
4H-60
60-72
72-96
96-I20
120-144
9.4
8.1
3.7
4.1
4.8
5.6
7.1
6.3
5.0
1.6
0.9
0.4
33.3
7.4
3.6
3.8
3.7
4.2
3.4
3.2
4.7
1.9
2.0
1.7
7.8
7.6
7.5
7.5
7.4
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.6
6.8
7.2
7.5
7.0
7.0
6.6
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.8
7.1
7.3
7.5
7.3
7.1
47.0
33.0
26.0
52.0
4H.O
68.0
94.0
53.0
38.2
16.3
6.2
4.2
267.0
58.0
33.0
34.0
37.0
35.0
38.0
39.0
43.0
23.0
20.0
kJ
6.3
7.4
3.7
3.4
3.0
2.9
2.9
1.5
1.5
2.0
3.1
4.2
10.0
3.2
3.0
1.7
1.9
1.6
3.3
1.6
«».5
3.2
3.3
<0.5
250.0
1,407.0
8.359.0
18,555.0
148.0
18.0
26.0
2,197.0
38.2
8.2
6.2
< 1.0
187.0
19.3
6.1
3.4
3.7
3.2
3.3
3.2
3.3
9.7
10. 0
L4_
19.0
15.0
11.0
21.0
12.0
.8.8
8.8
11.8
14.7
14.3
21.9
4.2
123.0
12.9
3.0
3.4
3.7
3.2
3.3
3.2
10.0
16.0
20.0
6.9
4.1
1.2
0.4
0.5
5.5
18.6
22.5
1.6
5.3
4.9
1.7
2.9
21.4
14.5
15.5
18.4
19.2
19.5
21.0
21.8
16.7
6.4
5.2
3.0
-------
Table 15
Electrical Conductivity, pi!. Soluble Cation*, and Sodiua Ad»orpcion Racio (5AR) in
th* Untrcaud and TrMMd Soils ac Site Q.
Sollibl. Salr«
Site
Depth
Depth
(in )
EC
(aahoa/ca)
pH
Ma K Ca
Mg
SAB
D-Uatraated
Soil
D-Traatad
Soil
J-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
133-244
244- 305
305-366
0-4
4-8
3-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-4
4-8
3-12
12-13
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
4.1-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
2.3
1.3
2.9
7.7
14.7
14.6
U.I
10.2
9.3
10.0
6.1
7.4
5.2
3.2
3.4
4.3
4.9
4.9
3.8
2.3
7.5
3.4
8.8
3.3
9.0
5.2
6.9
6.0
6.2
6.6
6.8
7.4
7.3
3.0
7.9
3.0
3.3
3.2
3.3
7.5
7.4
7.5
7.7
3.0
3.2
3.9
8.5
8.3
3.1
3.2
8.2
3.4
3.3
3.2
31.0
68.0
127.0
127.0
153.0
102.0
105.0
92.0
38.0
61.0
48.0
54.0
47.0
39.0
51.0
24.0
40.0
42.0
55.0
67.0
34.0
69.0
17.0
59.0
6.6
3.2
2.1
1.3
0.0
0.0
2.2
0.0
2.4
2.6
2.4
2.6
0.0
2.6
2.3
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.3
2.7
0.0
0.0
23.0
18.0
42.0
34.0
12.0
4.1
6.7
4.1
24.0
37.0
34.0
34.0
6.9
21.0
23.0
33.0
36.0
36.0
67,0
44,0
23.0
44.0
33.0
23.0
10.3
7.4
3.3
32. n
21.0
25.0
10.0
4.1
6.7
2.0
20.0
24.0
17.0
24.0
3.4
13.0
19.0
22.. 0
24.0
27.0
37.0
44.0
25.0
42.0
30.0
22.0
3.4
3.7
0.9
0.6
5.5
12.6
38.5
63.5
5». 3
60.0
22.3
16.7
17.5
11.3
20.9
3.2
9.3
7.5
9.3
4.3
5.5
6.4
11.2
10.1
15.0
13.8
6.5
25.6
30
-------
Table 16.
Electrical Conductivity, pit. Soluble Cations,
the Uncrcaced and Treated Soil* at Site li.
and Sodluai Adaorption Ratio (SAB) in
Sice
Depth
(cm )
Depth
(in )
EC
(••ooa/cB)
pH
He
Cnltfhl* <
airs
K Ca
Hg
SAR
E-Un created
Soil
C-'freacad
Soil
0-30
30-40
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
133-244
244-305
305-366
d-30
30-46
46-ol
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
132-133
1U3-244
244-305
305-366
0-12
12-13
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-43
43-60
60-72
72-96
96-12U
120-144
0-12
12-13
1U-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
43-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.7
(i.T
U.5
0.6
0.6
2.3
2.5
2.9
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.9
6.1
5.7
5.7
0.1
6.2
9.6
7.1
7.3
7.7
7.9
7.9
6.5
6.4
o.a
6.9
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.7
7.3
7.9
3.2
1.3
1.8
12.3
13.3
15.3
18. U
7.1
22.5
24.3
27.5
30.1
31.0
20.0
32.2
30.3
7.6
9.0
32.4
31.3
33.3
34.4
32.3
<0.5
-------
ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (mmhos/cm)
5 10 IS 20
3
a.
UJ
o
4
TREAT
SOIL
UNTREATED
.5
1.5
2 *
2.5
t
UJ
o
3.5
Figure 7. EC profile at Site A.
-------
0
I H
2
3-
4-
5
ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (mmhos/cm)
1234
£
8
9-
10
ir-
P
6
UNTREATED
TREATED SOIL
.5
1.5
2-3
3.5
Figure 8. EC profile at Site B.
-------
0
I-
2-
3-
4
5
~ 6^
£ 7
a.
ui
o 3
9-
10.
II
12
ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (mmhos/cm)
1234
EC 10
TREATED SOIL
UNTREATED SOIL
.5
1.5
2 C
£
1U
2.5 °
3.5
Figure 9. EC profile at Site C.
34
-------
0
I
21
3
4
5H
^ 6
ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (mmhot/cm)
1234
8
7-\
8
9-
10-
II-
12-
I.S
2 ~.
3
—
3.5
Figure 10., EC profile ar. Site D.
35
-------
ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY (mmhos/cm)
0.5 1.0 I.S 2.0
&
y
1 •
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
*
10-
II-
12-1
if'** J
\ S
s X^
\ f TREATED SOIL
O •
UNTHEATED -A
SOIL T
i ^x
i x
/f
/ i
/
1 /
i ]
1
1
1 1
f *
-
.5
i
i
1.5
2 5
^
H
2.5 g
3
13
4
Figure 11. CC profile at Site E.
36
-------
Table 17. Soluble talons in Che Uncreated and Treated Soils at Siea A.
Sica
A-Untreaced
Soil
A-Treated
Depth
(cm)
0-13
15-23
23-30
30-33
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
0-15
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-132
Depth
(in)
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40"
40-50
50-60
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
Anlon Coacencracion( meq/ liter )T
ci-
1.3
3.3
2.0
1.7
2.0
2.0
L.3
1.7
5.4
3.3
3.1
3.4
3.3
2.9
3.0
2.6
SV
191
106
147
212
284
564
292
380
234
122
143
198
335
356
326
344
"3
2.2
1.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
1.1
1.5
0.5
0.3
0.9
0.3
0.6
0.5
0.7
1.1
0.7
t Value* relative ea a aacuraeed paa«extract.
37
-------
Table 18.
Soluble Anton* in eh* Untreated and Treated Soils at Sice B.
Slee
B-Untreaced
Soil
B-Treaced
Soil
Depth
(cm)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
X83-244
244-303
305- 364
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
133-24*
244-30J
305-366
Depth
(in)
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-2*
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
40-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Anion
a-
0.9
0.5
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.3
2.3
2.3
3.4
3.7
3.0
3.3
1.9
2.0
2.2
2.2
1.9
1.9
Concentratlon(neq/ liter)
sv
13.6
10.4
10.0
3.6
10.4
11.6
10.6
6.6
6.7
7.8
7.8
10.4
76.6
45.4
41.6
66.2
36.4
38.0
16.8
22.9
11.3
13.8
11.2
9.2
"OS
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.6
1.0
0.9
1.5
1.1
1.6
3.6
0.9
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.5
Value* relative to a saturated paste extract.
38
-------
Table 19. Soluble Aniona In Che Untreated and Treated Soils at Sice C.
Site
C- Uncreated
Soil
C- treated
Soil
Depth
(cm)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-41
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
Depth
(in)
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
40-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-13
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Anion
ci-
39.8
29.8
25.7
34.3
32.5
54.0
85.9-
S6.2
54.4
23.5
10.2
3.5
199.0
39.3
25.6
38.0
38.0
23.6
20.2
19.5
30.4
14.5
17.2
14.1
Concentration( neq/ liter) f
so4-
40.8
20.5
7.6
12.2
4.3
6.3
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.2
0.9
370.0
37.2
13.4
14.7
16.2
4.5
9.8
6.9
10.5
7.0
2.3
2.4
M5
3.0
11.1
0.9
1.1
o.a
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.7
O.i
0.4
0.5
3.3
1.8
1.1
1.7
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
0.7
0.3
0.6
Value* relative Co * saturated paate extract.
39
-------
Table 20. Soluble dnioiu in Che Untreated and Treated Soils at Sice 0.
Sice
D- Untreated
Soil
D-Truced
ff*i i
dOlJ>
Depth
(ca)
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
75-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-30S
305-366
Depth
(in)
0-4
4-6
8-12
12-18
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-43
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-4
4-8
3-12
12-13
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
43-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Anion
ci-
3.3
3.9
13.2
48.4
102,0
126.0
139.0
111.0
101. a
96.3
57.5
72.3
30.5
15.3
14.4
12.5
11.5
12.1
13.3
24.6
34.1
35.8
62.1
61.4
51.1
29.8
Cone entrmciorKraeq/ liter)
so4-
5.9
3.4
2.3
16.3
41.2
32.6
14.2
13.4
9.6
10.1
10.4
12.6
4.6
28.5
26.9
6.2
9.6
9.1
9.1
13.0
15.2
12.1
9.4
11.2
6.3
9.4
f
"°3
5.7
2.2
11.0
4.1
2.1
8.1
10.0
9.0
11.1
13.2
11.2
12.4
17.0
3.1
18.7
13.7
19.6
19.9
3S.4
28.2
8.3
9.6
9.2
15.4
21.4
12.6
t Value* relative eo a saturated peace extract.
40
-------
Table 21*
Soluble Anions ia Che Uncreated and Treaced Soils at Sice E.
Site
E-Uncreaced
Soil
E-Treated
C*«4 1
aoix
Depch
(en)
U-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
133-244
244-305
305-366
0-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
133-244
244-305
305-366
Oepch
(in)
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-43
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-43
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Anion
ci-
1.6
1.4
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.3
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.1
9.9
11.0
5.2
4.6
6.6
3.4
2.2
4.5
5.2
6.7
6.7
Concentracion
-------
Tabla 22.
Sagr«Mloa Co«ffici«nc« and Corr**pondlag Co«fficl«nc
of Daterainacion.
Sic*
Conscanc
Anion Co«ffiei«nt
so.
A-Uncr««c«d 9.0
^-Treated -0.3
1.4
-3.9
0.10
0.12
-9.2
+9.4
0.98
1.91
B-Tr«»t«t«d
0.21
0.48
0.08
0.04
0.10
0.03
0.32
1.57
0.96
0.99
0-Trcaccd
0.4
5.07
0.03
0.03
0.29
0.14
0.22
-0.10
0.37
0.75
£-Uncr*ac»d
E-Tr««E«d
0.40
1.18
0.67
0.08
-0.06
0.03
-1.04
-0.35
0.35
0.33
42
-------
10
SI
u
a>
CD
u 5
1
o
a
o
M
4J
U
Idealized Regression r » 1.0
Data r2 - 0.75
5 10
Electrical Conductivity (Calculated)
Figure 12. Correlation of observed and calculated EC values
for treated site D.
43
-------
Tabl«23. Hun d", 50^ , and t»3 Value* Av*rag*d Omr Depth Cor
Sech Treated and Untreated Soils.
Anton
Site Cl S04"
-•• aeq/licer
A-Untr««t«d 1.91 272 0.95
A-Truc«d 3.38 2S8 0.76
3-UnerMC«d 0.67 9.54 0.54
B-TruCad 2.51 31.6 1.08
C-Qncraacad 40.3 8.58 2.24
Otrutad 40.4 41.2 1.71
&-Uncr«ac«d 60.3 13.7 9.01
D-Tr««c«d 29.5 12.8 16.3
E-OncrMC«d 1.48 4.25 0.25
E-Tr««t«d 6.00 6.68 0.31
44
-------
T»bl« 24. Toc«l M«tai Conccnci with Dapch for Uncr«ac*d and TtMCCd Soil at Sica A in pp».
SIC*
A-ltacra*ci
Soil
A-Tr.««d
Soil
Dapch
(on)
id 0-15
13-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
0-lb
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-1S2
D«pch
(in )
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-40
A*
1.2
9.2
3.3
1.6
0.9
3.7
4.6
1.2
1.7
1.2
3.7
3.8
0.2
1.1
6.3
6.9
Cd
1.8
2.4
1.9
2.2
2.2
1.3
1.3
1.7
2.1
2.1
1.3
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.3
2.0
Cr
29.4
32.3
27.8
25.0
28.1
29.4
26.5
25.0
182.4
44.1
26.5
26.5
28.1
42.1
41.9
31.9
"'
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.2
1.2
0.6
1.2
1.2
0.6
1.8
0.6
1.1
1.1
1.2
Pb
23.5
29.4
27.8
27.8
31.3
29.4
29.4
22.2
50.0
29.4
29.4
29.4
31.3
31.6
28.3
28.9
Hi
17.6
23.5
22.2
19.4
21. "9
23.5
20.6
19.4
11.3
17.6
17.6
17.6
15.6
15.3
23.6
17.3
V
67.6
37.6
03.9
77.3
71.9
53.3
52.9
55.6
44.1
58.3
58.3
67.6
62.5
65.3
78.5
57.8
46
-------
Tabl. 25. Total jfccai Cont.nts wich Depth for Uncre.c.d and Truc.d Soil ac Sice 3 in ppm.
SIC*
8-ttatr««c*d
Soil
B-Truc«d
Soil
Dapch
(ca)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
183-244
244-305
305-366
Dcpch
(in )
0-6
6-12
12-18
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
A*
1.6
< 0.2
0.9
< 0.2
< 0.2
1.7 .
< 0.2
3.7
2.6
1.5
1.5
1.1
4.3
2.7
4.8
1.9
2.0
2.6
1.4
3.4
2.3
0.7
' 0.2
3.0
Cd
2.1
1.3
0.9
1.2
0.9
2.1
1.2
1.5
1.3
1.5
1.0
1.3
2.1
2.2
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.5
2.0
1.5
1.5
l.S
2.6
1.8
Cr
35.5
19.1
20.7
20.4
23.1
18.1
12.2
25.4
33.0
32.8
22.7
27.3
191.0
186.3
78.9
44.9
44.9
73.9
37.4
40.7
25.8
27.9
33.2
30.6
Hg
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< U.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
10.6
11.2
3.3
1.9
1.1
0.9
0.6
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
< 0.5
Pb
17.7
12.7
6.0
5.8
5.3
6.0
6.1
10.:
10.2
12.0
10.1
10.1
67.6
71. i
36.2
16.0
14.0
14.3
11.5
11.6
12.9
12.7
20.4
17.9
:n
23.4
22.3
20.9
23.4
23.1
24.1
21.3
35.5
35.5
30.3
30.3
32.3
41.1
40.4
32.3
28.3
28.1
35.5
25.9
26.2
30.9
35.5
33.3
40.8
V
106.4
95.5
119.7
117.0
86.7
120.5
91.5
15 2'. 3
101.5
126.3
75.3
75.8
117.6
124.2
131.6
128.2
34.3
88.8
86.2
87.2
103.1
101.5
127.6
102.0
47
-------
Table 26. Toc«i itecal Gancenca with Oepch (or Uncreated and Treated Soil at Sice C in ppm.
Sice
C-Uncraaced
Soil
G-Treaced
Soil
Depch
(ca)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
366-427
Depch
(in )
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
144-168
Aa
7. a
4.1
3.5
3.1
3.5
3.5
3.1
3.5
2.3
4.0
3.6
3.4
16.3
8.4
3.7
2.8
2.8
2.4
2.0
2.0
4.0
3.2
2.4
3.6
Cd
2.4
1.4
0.5
i.a
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.6
1.3
1.9
1.1
1.0
2.6
0.3
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.1
0,3
0.9
1.4
1.4
1.1
Cr
21.0
19.2
18.4
15.0
13.1
10.6
13.2
16.0
13.4
16.3
16.0
7.7
109.4
16.9
10.9
13.4
16.1
13.6
16.3
13.8
11.9
13.6
16.2
5.3
Ug
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.1
1.6
1.1
1.1
2.1
1.6
3.2
1.6
1.6
1.1
0.5
1.1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
1.1
0.5
Ph
34.:
32.3
13.2
18.0
LJ.1
5.3
< 5.0
5.3
5.3
S.i
10.9
5. I
57. i
l-.l
1!.7
10.7
5.4
5.4
10.9
11.0
5.9
10.9
10. 8
10. n
Ml
13.1
10.9
2.6
o.O
5.3
10.6
7.9
3.0
3.0
13.6
3.0
5.1
Jt.3
11.2
8.2
3.1
3.1
8.1
5.4
5.5
5.9
3.1
3.1
5.3
V
34.2
27.4
26.3
24.0
21.0
79.4
52.9
53.2
53.5
54.3
53.2
25.6
78.1
56.2
27.3
53.8
53.8
54.3
54.3
55.2
29.8
54.3
54.1
26.6
48
-------
Table 27. local tfecal Conceacs with Dapch far Uncraacad and Traacad Soil ac Sice D In ppra.
Stea
D-Uncraatad
Soil
D-Traatad
Soil
Dapch
Ccm)
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-o i
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-1U3
183-244
244-305
305-366
Dapch
(in )
0-4
4-a
a- 12
12-18
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-4
4-a
3-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Afl
< 0.2
0.6
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
1,1
< 0.2
3.0
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0 = 2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
< 0.2
Cd
1.3
1.0
1.4
1.9
1.9
1.9
0.3
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.9
1.3
1.3
1.6
1.6
1.6
0.3
1.6
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.8
1.6 -
0.3
0.5
1,6
Cr
12.9
7.7
17.1
19.5
19.3
16.2
16.7
16.0
13.4
16.0
10.3
10.7
7.9
31.6
18.4
13.2
15.3
13.8
15.8
10.5
15.8
15.8
10.5
16.7
10.5
7.9
Hg
0.5
0.5
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
3.7
3.2
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
2.1
1.1
1.1
2.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
Pb
18.1
18.0
20.0
26.0
27.6
27.0
14.0
13.4
13.4
13.4
18.9
13.4
21. Z
63.:
34.2
21.1
21.1
26.3
34.2
26.3
26.3
26.3
15.3
16.7
15. 3
21.1
Ml
2.6
5.2
3.6
13.0
13.3
13.5
11.2
10.7
8.0
8.0
L0.3
3.1
2.6
13.2
13.2
10.5
15.3
10.5
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.9
1.4
1.3
1.3
V
25.9
25.3
57.1
65.1
55.2
54.0
36.3
53,4
34.7
34.7
34.7
34,7
13.2
34.2
26.3
26.3
26.3
26.3
21.1
21.1
34.2
34.2
34.2
27.3
13.1
7.9
49
-------
lafcl* It,
local Metal Concanu with Depth for Uncraaccd and Ir«aC«d Soil at Sice C if. ppn.
E-Untr.."d 0-30
Soil
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
183-244
244-305
305-366
E-Tr«ac«d 0-30
Soil 30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-132
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
(In 1
0-12
12-13
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
60-72
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
0-12
12-13
13-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
44-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
AM
4.8
5.7
3.3
3.4
6.3
2.9
4.8
0.3
<0.2
4.8
7.1
6.3
4.7
5.6
5.6
5.2
4.7
5.3
<0.2
6.8
5.3
4.7
Cd
2.7
2.4
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
3,0
3.6
3.9
2.3
2.1
2.7
2.7
2.5
3.2
2.1
2.2
3.1
3.0
3.3
Cr
41.0
29.9
41.2
33.5
41.9
47.0
27.6
44.4 •
33.7
35.5
24.9
113.9
37.4
37. a
32.2
43.7
3?.. 2
37.8
33.5
39.3
35,7
29,9
ag
1.1
1.1
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.1
0.6
0.5
1.6
0.5
0.5
<0.5
0.5
<0.5
<0.5
1.1
1.6
Pb
95.6
35.3
38.5
38.5
47.5
47.0
27.6
44.4
38.7
33.3
38.7
19.4
37. i
37.3
37.6
43.7
43.0
29.7
35.7
3*. 5
30.2
35.3
Hi-
30.0
21.7
30.2
30.2
36.3
35.9
22.1
30.6
11.1
:7.3
3J.1
30.6
24.1
29.7
Z9.6
35.5
32.0
29.7
27.5
30.9
32.9
29.9
V
109.3
108.7
137.4
137.4
139.7
193.4
110.5
194.4
133.1
164.9
138.1
111.1
133.7
135.1
134.4
136.6
80.6
108.1
137.4
140.4
109.9
108.7
50
-------
Table 29. Trace Element Content of Soils
Element
Total
(mg/kg)
As
Cd
Cr
Hg
N±
Pb
V
6 (0.1-40)
0.5 (0.1-0.7)
100 (5-3000)
0.03 (0.01-0.8)
40 (5-5000)
10 (2-2000)
100 (20-500)
t Klrkham (1979)
51
-------
Organic Distribution
Comparative analyses of both total organic carbon and
extractable oil and grease are given in Tables 30 through
34. An analysis of variance (ANOVA), using total organic
carbon and oil and grease as duplicate measures of the same
parameter, was employed to evaluate hydrocarbon levels
between treated and untreated soil and hydrocarbon levels
between depth intervals within sites. Hydrocarbon levels at
Site A were significantly higher in the treated soil. An F
test indicated the difference to be significant at better
than a 1Z level. The least significant difference (LSD)
computed for Site A was used to compare oil and grease
levels with depth in the treated site. This test suggested
that oil and grease is retained within the surface 23 cm (9
in) of sol1.
The ANOVA for Site B indicated that the greater
hydrocarbon levels in the treated soil was significant at a
1Z level. Variance with depth was significant down to 46 cm
(2 ft) of soil. It should be noted that no attempt was made
to split out the variability due to technique of measuring
hydrocarbons from the error mean square, which reduces the
sensitivity of testing differences between depths due to
treatment.
Data evaluated for Site C do not reflect a statistical
difference between untreated and treated soil hydrocarbon
levels, although values decreased significantly with depth.
Simple comparisons to the untreated soil are not possible
due to contamination of the untreated soil selected to
appreciable depths. However, in this coarse textured soil,
the data suggest an attenuation of hydrocarbons within
1.8-2.4 m (6 to 8 ft) of the surface.
Hydrocarbons at Site D (Table 33) reflect the general
trends found at Sites A and B, in that the treated soil had
significantly higher hydrocarbons than the untreated soil,
and the organics were attenuated within the surface 30 cm (1
ft) of soil.
Site E (Table 34) reflected no statistical differences
due to treatment and correspondingly no differences with
respect to depth. These data suggest that hydrocarbons
loaded onto the soil have degraded without an appreciable
migration of degradation products within the profile.
In three of the 5 cases studied, treated soils had
significantly higher oil and grease contents to depths of 23
to 61 cm (9 to 24 in). In the case of Site C, a deep sand
with a contaminated control for comparison, no significant
increase in hydrocarbons was found by gravimetric analysis.
52
-------
Table 30.
Carbon and E«r.ctabl. OU and Gr.ee. for Soils from Slca A Given in
Untreated S
Depth
0-15
15-23
23-30
30-53
53-76
76-102
102-127
127-152
Depth
(in )
0-6
6-9
9-12
12-21
21-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
Total Organic
Carbon
0
.65
0.35
0
0
0
0
0
0
.28
.27
.17
.18
.15
.08
ioll
Oil
Gr
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Treated Soil *
and
eaee
.05
.01
.06
.12
.02
.02
.04
.01
Total Organic
Carbon
4.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
6
0
31
17
ia
15
47
07
Oil and
Greece
5.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
55
66
07
05
02
17
20
08
a
b
c
c
c
c
c
c
Treated soil hydrocarbon l«v*l diff«rs significantly from untreated soil
LSD at O.OS " 0.28 Oil end greeee value* with different letter subecripts are significantly
different at the 0.05 level.
53
-------
T«bl« 31. Total Organic Carbon and Extraccabla Oil and iJreaaa far Soils from Site 3 Given In
Percentage.
Depth
(as)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-309
305-366
Depth
(in )
0-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Untreated
Total Organic
Carbon
4.1
1.5
0.58
0.37
0.37
0.27
0.37
0.25
0.19
< 0.01
0.47
0.20
Soil
Oil and
Greaae
0.24
0.05
0.16
0.06
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.01
Treated Soil
Total Organic
Carbon
6.0
6.3
6.5
< 0.01
1.10
1.6
0.35
0.60
0.12
0.24
< 0.01
0.46
*
Oil and
Greaae
5.49 .
3.98 b
1.63 c
0.71 d
0.38 d
0.62 d
0.08 d
0.18 d
0.13 d
0.07 d
0.06 d
0.06 d
Treated soil hydrocarbon level differs significantly from untreated soil.
LSD at O.OS • 0.86 Oil and grease value* with different letter subecripta are significantly
different at the O.OS level.
54
-------
Tabl« 32. Total Organic Carbon and Retractable Oil and Grease for Soils from Site C Glv«n in
Percentage.
Otpch
(cm)
0-15
15-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-305
305-366
Depth
(in )
U-6
6-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Untreated
Total Organic
Carbon
4.0
Z.3
1.9
2.2
1.6
0.5
< 0.01
< 0.01
0.08
< 0.01
< 0.01
0.66
Soil
Oil and
Grease
2,71
0.16
0.96
1.49
2.12
0.42
0.04
0.11
0.10
0.01
0.01
0.01
treated Soil*
local Organic
Carbon
5.3
L.3
0.75
1.2
0.79
0.61
0.58
0.53
0.33
0.06
< 0.01
< 0.01
Oil and
Grease
7. 86 a
2.60b
O.S9C
0.79C
0.49cd
0.44 cd
0.06d
0,49cd
0.33cd
0.02 d
0.08 d
0.05 d
'treated soil hydrocarbon level did not differ significantly froa untreated soil level.
LSD at 0.05 • 0.49 Oil and grease values with different letter subscripts are significantly
different at the 0.05 level.
55
-------
Table 33. Total Organic Carbon and Extraceable Oil and Grease for Soils from Sice 0 Given In
Percentage.
Untreated Soil
tap eh
(en)
0-10
10-ZO
20-30
30-46
46-61
61-75
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-133
183-244
244-305
305-366
Depth
(In )
0-4
4- a
8-12
12-18
18-24
24-3U
30-36
36-48
48-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
1 -144
Total Organic
Carbon
1.4
0.58
0.67
0.59
0.47
0.13
' o.oi
0.06
< 0.01
0.07
< 0.01
0.05
< 0.01
Oil and
Grease
0.19
0.31
0.04
0.04
o.or
0.06
0.31
0.08
0.08
0.01
0.02
0.12
0.28
Treated Soil
Total Organic
Carbon
6.0
2.0
0.20
0.21
< 0.01
0.10
< 0.01
0.10
< 0.01
•r 0.01
< 0.01
< 0.01
0.19
*
Oil and
Grease
3.43 a
1.05 b
0.14 c
0.06C
O.OSc
0.07 c
0.06c
Q.OTc
O.lOc
0.06c
0.07c
0.04c
0.07c
Treated soil hydrocarbon level differs significantly fro* untreated soil.
LSD at 0.05 • 0.36 Oil and grease value* with different letter subscripts are significantly
different at eh* O.OS level.
56
-------
T«bU 34. Tocal^organic Carbon and Ettraccabla Otl and Craaaa for Soil, from Site E Given In
Ubcraacad Soil
Dapch
(em)
-0-30
30-46
46-61
61-76
76-91
91-122
122-152
152-183
183-244
244-303
303-366
Dapch
(in )
0-12
12-18
18-24
24-30
30-36
36-43
43-60
60-72
72-96
96-120
120-144
Total Organic
Carbon
4.0
2.4
1.9
1.3
2.0
1.5
0.5
1.0
0.21
0.10
0.10
Oil and
Graaaa
0.10
0.33
0.43
0.42
0.11
0.11
0.07
0.11
0.38
0.04
0.31
Traaeed Soil
Tocal Organic
Carbon
3.3
1.0
0.36
1.0
0.51
0.36
0.20
0.20
0.07
< 0.01
0.14
Oil and
Graaaa
0.46a
0.44a
0.12a
0.06a
0.40a
0.12a
0.03a
0.13a
0.06a
0.02a
Q.04a
Traacad aoil hydrocarbon laval diffara lignificantly from uncraacad soil
LSD ac 0.05 - 0.28 Oil and graaaa value* with different letter subscripts ara significantly
different ac the 0.05 laval.
57
-------
Only one site had no increase in oil and grease due to
treatment and no change with depth.
Gas Liquid Chromatographic Characterization
Detector Response: Gas liquid chromatographic (GLC)
analyses in conjunction with column fractionation on silica
gel was used to develop characteristic chromatograms in
untreated and treated soil with respect to depth interval
sampled.
A complex mixture of standards was injected to evaluate
GC column conditions and detector response over a daily,
weekly, and monthly time interval. Detector response,
reported in integration units per mole carbon for the
various hydrocarbons injected, averaged over time is
presented in Table 35. Response in integration units per
mole of carbon averaged over compounds and the standard
deviation about the mean is also given. The column in line
with detector 2 did not resolve n-docosane and phenyl
carbazole into separate peaks. Thus, the value reported was
computed relative to the total carbon between the two.
These data suggested that the hydrocarbon response is
relatively constant for a given instrument setting, when
normalized to carbon injected setting. The standard
deviation reflects variability over a 4 month time interval
and innate differences between compounds, particularly
xanthene. A detector response of 10,000 integration units
require 100 ng C j 18 ng C for detector 1, and 80 ng C + 10
ng C for detector 2. Excluding xanthene does not
numerically affect the standard deviation, such that 10,000
integration units correspond to 100 ng C i 8.5 ng for
detector 1 and 80 ng C + 4.5 ng C for detector 2.
This discussion is not intended to imply the
applicability of long term averages for quantification
purposes - certainly daily standard injections are paramount
for quality assurance - but is presented to describe the
utility of the technique employed when dealing with complex
unknowns. Standard addition entails multiple injections
which are inordinant ly time consuming for a long running
temperature program required of most complex mixtures.
Internal standards added to unknown mixtures may not
necessarily reflect the class of compounds chromatographed ,
which parallel the inherent errors discussed previously
and/or may co-elute with unknowns.
Column Chromatographic Fractionation: The standard
(Table 35) fractionated on silica gel reflects the utility
of this procedure for potentially reducing the complexity of
58
-------
T*bla 33. FIiM Ioniz«Cioa Dceaccion RBSpoai* to Hydrocarbon* 3«port«d
u Integration Units Per Hoi* of C.
0«c«ccor g««pon»«
P««k Ho. Compound 0»e«ceor Ho. 1 D«tector So. 2
I l,2-iiiph«nyUchan« 1.26 x 1012 1.59 x 1012
2 :Canch«n« 0.39 x 1012 0.92 x 10i2
3 Dib«nzothioph*n« 1.25 x 1012 1.54 x 1012
4 Anchnac«n« 1.16 x J.012 1.37 x 1012
3 a-Eehyl Carb«zol« 1.33 x 1012 1.70 x 10U
S p-T«rph«iyl 1.24 x lO*2 1.50 x 1012
7 FluoraiclMSM 1.32 x 1012 1.62 x lO^2
8 a-tioco««n« 1.16 x 1012 1.60 x 1012
9 a-Ph«nyl Corfaoxol* 1.37 x 10U
10 H«x«co«n< 1.15 x 1012 1.61 x 10i2
11 Choluen* 0.99 x 1012 1.53 x 1012
Avg. 1.19 x 1012 1.50 x 1012
Std. d«» (« i) 0-18 x 1012 0.18 x 1012
Ho otaazneioiu 5SO 500
59
-------
chromatograms for evaluating the fate of the various classes
of compounds comprised in the waste added to soils (Figure
13). Saturates were cleanly separated in the standard
mixture. Fraction 2 and Fraction 3 were combined due to an
inconsistent separation of di- and tri- aromatic compounds
from poly nuclear aromatic materials, as reported in the
procedural paper (Warner, 1976). Fraction 4 contained the
two carbozoles added in the standard mixture, although
significant quantities of both were eluted in combined
Fractions 2 and 3 .
Soxhlet extracts of samples collected at the first
three depth intervals were column fractionated on silica
gel. Fractions 2 and 3 were combined in a similar manner as
the standard prior to GLC analyses. Methanol was employed
as a final rinse in an attempt to extract higher condensed
polynuclear aromatics (e.g. asphaltenes) not eluted with the
other solvents. No attempt was made to column fractionate
Soxhlet extracts of samples collected at the lower depth due
to the relatively low hydrocarbon levels and the potential
for lowered concentrations for hydrocarbons recovered in
multiple fractions. Thus, to improve the sensitivity level
to hydrocarbons extracted from samples collected at the
lower depths, chromatograms were developed for total extract
following the removal of an aliquot for gravimetric
analyses .
Molecular Weight and Carbon Number: A linear
regression model was used to describe the relationship
between retention time and molecular weight (MW) (Figure
14). Retention time (RT) corresponding to peak sensitivity
for compounds used in the standard mixture and others
including napthalene, biphenyl, methyl heptadecanoate, 1, 3,
5-triphenyl benzene, triphenylethylene , tetraphenylethylene ,
and 9,9 -bifluorene were found to increase linearly with
increased molecular weight. Values (RT) averaged for
multiple injections of known compounds of varying molecular
weight gave a regression coefficient (r ) of 0.84. These
data suggest that hydrocarbons with less than 76 g/mole
would be eluted with the solvent front at the same column
and instrument conditions employed for the standards. A
20-min increase in retention time roughly corresponds to 5
carbons added in a chain configuration for saturates, or a
benzene ring added for aromatics.
Similar results are reflected in the linear regression
retention and carbon number (Figure 15). Again the fit of
the modeJ. is reflected in the high regression coefficient
value (r - 0.83).
60
-------
STANDARDS
,10
NOT
FRACTIONATED
FRACTION 1
FRACTIONS 2&3
FRACTION 4
yv.
Figure 13. Giromatographs of standard compounds. Peak numbers
refer to compounds listed in Table 35.
61
-------
BOO
S 5200
o
.*?
o
5
100
76.1 + 3.9 (RT)
0.84
10
20
70
80
90
30 40 50 60
Retention Time (minutes)
Figure 14. Relationship between retention time and molecular weight of known compounds
-------
ON
24
18
g 12
.o
o
o
If - 6. J + 0.27 (RT)
r2 -0.81
10 20 30 40 50 60
Retention Time (minutes)
70
80 90
Figure 15. Relationship between retention time and carbon number of known compounds.
-------
Hydrocarbon Distribution by Gas Liquid
Chromatographic Analysis
Site A GLC Profiles: GLC comparative profiles for
the various fractions over the first three depth intervals
are gi.ven in Figures 16 and 17 for untreated and treated
soil at Sits A. A complex mixture of saturates eluted in
Fraction 1, and polynuclear aromatics eluted in Fractions 2
and 3, dominate the hydrocarbons extracted from treated Site
A. The decrease in hydrocarbons chromatographed with depth
corresponds with the decreases observed for both total
organic carbon and extracted oil and grease (Table 30).
Untreated soil was very low in extractable hydrocarbons
with little detected by GLC in the upper profile.
Chromatograms of extracted hydrocarbons of the lower levels
in the profile whic'h were not fractioned (Figure 18), begin
to show some hydrocarbons at the 53 to 76 cm (21 to 30 in)
depth interval in the untreated soil, with an even greater
amount detected in the 76 to 102 cm (30 to 40 in) sample.
Their occurrence is attributed to degradation products of
natural soil humus. While the concentration of any one
compound is relatively low, there is a noticeable
accumulation of material at the 76 to 102 cm (30 to 40 in)
depth interval suggesting a mechanism of illuviation and
deposition in a base enriched zone. This is a natural
phenomenon recently addressed in a paper by Holzhey et al.
(1975). A similar trend was noted for the treated site, but
with comparatively higher quantities chromatographed in the
76 to 102 cm (30 to 40 in) and 102 to 127 cm (40 to 50 in)
depth intervals.
Fifteen months have elapsed since hydrocarbons were last
applied at this site. The considerable quantity of material
extracted and recovered in Fraction 1, and Fractions 2 and 3
may indicate a relatively slow degradation rate. This could
be attributed to climatic factors. The area averages less
than 38 cm (15 in) rainfall annually and only 159 frost free
days. A slope of 4 to 7 at the site would tend to reduce
the effective rainfall. Certain hydrocarbons applied to Site
remained in the upper 23 cm (9 in) for 15 months after
application. Moisture deficiency may have retarded
degradation and minimized the potential for mobility.
Site B GLC Profiles: The untreated soil
chromatograms show few hydrocarbons resolved as peaks
(Figure 19). Chromatograms of fractionated materials for
treated Site B show a complex mixture dominated by saturates
and aromatics (Figure 20).
Profiles developed for total extracts of samples taken
64
-------
•ITE A
0 * It CM
FRACTION 1
•IT I A
o - it CM
FRACTION! * t i
• ITf A
0 - II CM
FRACTION 4
• ITE A
0 - 1C CM
FRACTION •
V
•ITE A
It - S3 CM
Fit ACTION 1
•ITE A
It - 21 CM
FRACTIONS 2 t >
CITC A
1t - 23 CM
FRACTION 4
SITE A
It - 31 CM
FRACTION 9
Ln
•ITE A
I) - 10 CM
FRACTION 1
•ITE A
11 - 10 CM
FRACTION! 2 t 1
BITE A
23 - SO CM
FRACTION 4
• ITE A
21 - 10 CM
FRACTION •
V
Figure 16. Chromatographs of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at untreated Site A. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
•UK A
II - I) Cll
MAC110K «
•111 A
la -10 CM
MAClUk t
fit A
• II
•If! A
fcftK.
\
•111 A
'
,A
STf A
> • la cu
FRACTION 4
II - U Cll
MActnM« a >
•in A
l» - *• CM
MACTKMI 4
Figure 17. Chromatograros of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at treated Site A. Rectangles In each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
TMATIO
SUB A
30 - $3 CM
UNTREATED
sm A
30-S3 CM
SITS A
S3 - 76 CM
sm A
S3-7VCM
sm *
7« - ioa CM
sm A
ioa - nr CM
srre A
ioa - tar CM
sm A
1J7- 152 CM
sm A
127 - I
Figure 18. Chroraatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site A.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil.
67
-------
00
nuciuw i
I
S"
I
nuciMM i
•iri •
II-MCM
IHACTIOMXII
mil
• -UCM
nuerioii4
• -MCH
FUCI KM!
•IT! •
•
to-4* CM
'•AC TUN •
...I
Figure 19. Chromatograras of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at untreated Site B. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
VO
una
O-IICM
I I.I FRACTIONS » * •
TRCATfD
M
L»
1
f
I1
JT
I,
v"
\
*'\
1
/I
V
i«*aocH
FHACTIOMSa *3
•
•rre§
10 -4« CM
FKACTIONI2 tl
1
'"---~
•ITE I
0-1>CI>
FRACTKW4
•ITE*
1 ft - 10 CH
FRACTION 4
•ITE •
10 - 4« CM
FRACTION 4
•ITE •
0 - If CH
FRACTION 1
•ITE I
IB - JO en
FRACTION!
•ITE I
10 - 41 CM
FRACTION •
Figure 20. Chromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at treated Site B. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
to 366 cm (12 ft) clearly show -some migration of
hydrocarbons out of the zone of incorporation, but also
demonstrates retention of applied materials within the
surface 91 cm (3 ft) of soil.
This site is a good example of how a textural
discontinuity serves in the retention of hydrocarbons. The
soil is a loam to sandy loam to approximately 61 cm (2 ft),
underlain by 30 cm (1 ft) of coarser material. The coarser
material for the treated site at 61 to 76 cm (24 to 30 in)
(Table 2) retained fewer hydrocarbons as shown in both
extracted values assayed gravimetrica1ly (Table 30) and by
GLC (Figures 21 a & b). Increased hydrocarbons in the next
layer 76 to 91 cm (30 to 36 in) reflect an increased
concentration of hydrocarbon backed up by slowed penetration
into the zone below 91 to 122 cm (36 to 48 in) containing a
much higher clay content.
Considerable hydrocarbons remained in the zone of
incorporation although a year had passed since the last
loading (Table 1). The data indicates the retention
capacity of the soil for this waste stream, and a relatively
low migration potential to deeper strata, afforded
principally by a textural discontinuity.
Site C GLC Profiles; Characteristic profiles
developed for the various fractions are compared for the first 3
sampling depths for untreated and treated soil at Site C (Figure 22
and 23, respectively). Profiles reflect the complexity of the waste
materials applied just one month prior to sampling (Table 1), with
the bulk of the organics being eluted in the first two fractions
collected. The large cone shaped pattern is indicative of a complex
matrix eluting from the GLC column unresolved into peaks. Although
the materials chromatographed contain some saturates, the bulk is
characteristically aromatic in nature, with molecular weights less
than 300.
GLC analyses of samples taken to 366 cm (12 ft) show
migration portions of the waste materials to a depth of 244
cm (8 ft) (Figure 24 a & b). Although the untreated soil
shows similar materials to a depth of 91 cm (3 ft), the
hydrocarbons are attributed to possible previous industrial
use of the soil thought to be an untreated area.
Chromatograms of materials fractionated for the upper 45 cm
(18 in) of the supposedly untreated area are relatively
clean with respect to differentiated peaks, but reflect a
characteristic cone shape indicative of previous
contamination.
The depth of penetration of near surface applied
materials at this site is attributed to its very coarse
70
-------
TREATED
UNTREATED
SITE B
46 - 61 CM
SITE B
4« - 61 CM
SITE B
• 1 ' 79 CM
SITE B
81 - 76 CM
SITE B
76-91 CM
SITE B
79 - 91 CM
SITE B
91 - 122 CM
sift a
91 - 122 CM
Pigure 2la. Chromatograns of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site B.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil.
71
-------
TREATED
SITE B
122 - 152 CU
J-<^
UNTREATED
SITE B
122 - 162 CM
SITE B
1S2 - 183 CM
SITE B
152 - 183 CM
SITE B
183 - 244 CM
SITE B
244 - 308 CM
SITE B
183 - 244 CM
SITE a
244 - 305 CM
SITE B
305 - 368 CM
Table 21b. Chromatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site B.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil.
72
-------
GJ
Kttc.
nuctwNi
•411 C
nucnoM 11
Figure 22. Qiromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at untreated Site C. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
•411 C
10 - 44 CM
rHACtlON 1
wr«c
4t-(ICM
r*ACtWH I
•Ill C
• - 30 CM
TOACTIOM 4
•Iff C
• • a* cu
nucMM •
V _,'
•ni c
to - 4« CM
MACTIOMI it*
5i"-J. CM
MACtlON 4
•me
10 - 41 CM
MUCTKMI I
•ITC C
4« - tl CM
MACTION 4
\
•IT! C
«• - • I CM
FIIACTION I
l~ ''
Figure 23. Chromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at treated Site C. Rectangles in each legend
represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per gram oven
dry soil.
-------
UNTREATED
SITE C
48 - 61 CM
TREATED
srrsc
• 1 - 79 CM
srrec
76 - 91 CM
w
/
\
MTEC
•1 - 121 CM
SITE C
81 - 7S CM
srrec
71 - »1 CM
«TEC
• 1 - US CM
Figxire 24a. Giromatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site C.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil.
75
-------
KTIC
tit - 1U C
I
l« \
Figure 24b. Chromatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site C.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil.
76
-------
texture. Degradation rates are expected to be much lower
once materials penetrate the profile below the active
surface solum.
Site D GLC Profiles: The GLC scan developed for the
various fractions for the three surface layers of the
untreated and treated soils at Site D are given in Figures
25 and 26. The area under the chromatograms correlates well
with gravimetrically assayed oil and grease values (Table
33), and demonstrates that the waste applied to this site
is retained within the zone of incorporation.
Chromatograms developed for total extracts of soil
samples collected deeper in the profile reflect only the
downward migration of materials normal to weathered products
of soil humus (Figure 27a & b).
This site has been utilized since June 1976, and
application was made in October, 1980, just 3 months prior
to sampling (Table 1). The broad distribution of residual
organics indicate that a wide spectrum of the organics
applied remain in the zone of incorporation. Changes in
this distribution would be expected as degradation proceeds,
particularly in the winter months.
Site E GLC Profiles: GLC profiles developed for the
various fractions for the first 3 sampling depths for
untreated and treated soil at Site E are given in Figures 28
and 29. The extractable organics are dominated by saturates
and light end (low molecular weight) aromatics. While
appreciable hydrocarbons were extracted from untreated soil
and assayed gravimetrically, most were not amenable to GLC
analysis, making it impossible to compare characteristic
profiles between sites and depths within sites.
The surface profile (Figure 29) of the treated site
demonstrates degradation within 4 months following the last
application (Table 1). Profiles also suggest migration to
successive depths but with considerable attenuation within
the top 61 cm (2 ft) of soil. While low in concentration,
hydrocarbons extracted from treated soil at lower depths
reflect the characteristic profiles of the upper zones
(Figure 30 a & b), and suggest some penetration to the 91 to
122 cm (36 to 48 in) depth interval.
There are two plausible explanations for material
movement at this site; one based on waste material loading,
the other on the type clay to which it was applied. It is
possible that the waste material applied has a low affinity
for the clay surface and moves through the cracks in this
soil to greater depths. While a heavy clay would no doubt
77
-------
-J
oo
SITE D
0 - 10 CM
FRACTION t
SITE D
10 - 20 CM
FRACTION 1
SITE D
20 • 10 CU
FRACTION 1
SITE D
0 - 10 CM
FRACTIONS a * a
SITE D
10 - 20 CM
FRACTIONS 2 ft 1
SITE O
20 - to CM
FRACTIONS 2 A £•
SITE 0
0 - to CM
FRACTION 4
SITE D
10 - 20 CH
FRACTION 4
SITE 0
20 - SO CU
FRACTION <
SITE D
0 - 10 CM
FRACTION 6
SITE D
1O - 20 CM
FRACTION S
SITED
20- 90 CM
FRACTIONS
Figure 25. Chromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at untreated Site D. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
SITE Q
0 - 10 CM
FHACTIONI > > 9
K
*.
, , -
/ \ FRACTIONt * ft
ftlTED
10 - >O CM
F91 ACTIONS IAS
0 - 10 CM
FRACTION 4
•ITf D
10 - *0 CM
FRACTION «
»rri D
*0 - JO CM
FRACTION 4
Figure 26. Chromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at treated Site D. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
TMATED
SITIO
JO - 4« CM
UNTMATCD
SITCO
30 - 4« CM
smo
«4-«1 CM
smo
4»-«1 CM
smo
•1 - 7« CM
Figure 27a. Chromatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site 0.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil*
80
-------
TTOATCD
smo
132 - US CM
UWTMATCD
trrto
122 - 1M CM
smo
1S2 - 1M CM
MTCO
1M - 244 CM
srno
1(3 - 244 CM
SJT«0
344-JOf CM
smo
244 - IDS CM
smo
MS - 3»« CM
Figxire 27b. Chromatograms of the Cotal extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site D.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent
to 10 n aoles C per gram oven dry soil.
81
-------
•ITC C
0- 1ICM
FRACTION 1
SITE I
0 - II CM
FRACTION! 9 1 1
n
•ITE I
O - It CM
FRACTION 4
*ITE E
0 - IB CM
FRACTION •
•ITS I
It - SO CM
FRACTION 1
00
1ITI t
0 - JO CM
FRACTIONS t ft 3
SOII
»o - 4* en
FRACTION 1
»ITt t
JO - 44 CM
FRACTIONS S A »
SITE E
11 - 30 CM
FRACTION 4
•ITS E
It - 30 CM
FRACTION •
•ITl E
10 - 41 CM
FRACTION 4
«ITf I
JO - 4« CM
FRACTION •
Figure 28. Chromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three
surface depths at untreated Site E. Rectangles in each
legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
oo
u>
{ITE I
0 - 4t CM
FRACTIONS > A 9
SITE*
4« - !l CM
FRACTIONS ft |
SITE E
0 - 30 CM
FRACTION 4
•ITCf
10 - 4* CM
FRACTION 4
SITE E
4« - «1 CM
FRACTION 4
•III i
«• - •» CM
m*CTKM •
Figure 29. Chromatograms of fractionated soil extracts for the three surface depths at treated
site E. Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to 10 n moles C per
gram oven dry soil.
-------
TREATED
SITE e
«1 - 76 CM
UNTREATED
SITE 6
•1 - 78 CM
srree
76 - 91 CM
SITEE
78 - 91 CM
- 122 CM
SJTEE
91 - 122 CM
122 - 192 CM
smee
122 -152 CM
Figure 30a. Chromatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample locations at untreated and treated Site E.
Rectangles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n, moles C per gram oven dry soil.
84
-------
n
TMATD
ami
1M-183CM
UNTOATB
smi
1S2- 1MCM
snri
1*3-244 CM
sme
183-244 CM
OTII
2 44-30* CM
ant
244-308 CM
smi
3M-3MCM
Figure 30b. Oiromatograms of the total extracts of soil below the top
three sample location at untreated and treated Site E.
Sectangeles in each legend represent the area equivalent to
10 n moles C per gram oven dry soil.
85
-------
induce a more tortuous path (chromatographic effect),
movement out of the active surface so'lum, especially at too
high an application rate, could exceed the potential
degradation rate. The other mechanism is one induced by the
fact that receiving soil is a. vertisol characterized by its
shrink-swell properties that result in cracks and fissures
developed during a dry cycle. This results in a churning of
the soil whereby surface materials fall into cracks,
distributing the surface applied materials throughout the
profile. This mechanism is reflected in the carbon profiles
shown in Table 34. Ironically the rapid degradation rate at
this site and relatively high rainfall which usually
enhances mobility could serve to reduce potential mobility
of this waste stream.
High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)
Surface horizons for all treated sites, and subsurface
samples showing significant hydrocarbons (by GLC-flame
ionization detection) were analyzed by HPLC. A
characteristic profile developed for the standard mixture is
given in Figure 31. To aid in the detection of phenolic
derivatives, analyses were made by injection of a methanolic
extract of the sample. Extracts were generated by high
speed blending of sufficient sample to provide a detection
limit to 1 ppm phenol based on the integrated area of the
standard.
Comparative retention time and area ratio analyses show
only two surface samples and one subsurface sample to
possibly contain phenolic materials. These being the
immediate surface samples collected at treated Site A
(Figure 32) and treated Site E (Figure 33), and the 76 to 91
cm (30 to 36 in) depth interval sampled at treated Site B
(Figure 34). While several phenolic derivatives fit the
retention time criteria, only pentachlorophenol passed the
area ratio test for the surface samples at treated Site A
and E. Although, no attempt was made to positively identify
the material as pentachlorophleno1, sample extracts were
screened far halogenated hydrocarbons using an electron
capture Ni detector fitted to Tracor Model 550 gas
chromatograph equipped with a 31 OV-1 packed column. Based
on the detector's response to lindane, aldrin, dieldrin,
heptachlor, and arochlor 1254, no halogenated hydrocarbons
were detected in quantities exceeding 1 ppm, which strongly
suggests that material detected in the phenolic screening as
potentially pentachloropheno1 was something other than a
chlorinated hydrocarbon.
36
-------
r
I-PHENOL
32-NITROPHENOL
•3-CHLQROPHENOL
14-NITROPHENOL
i5-OIMETHYLPHENOL
'6-CHLDRO -M-CRESOL
7-OICHLDROPHENOL
8-OINITRO-O- CRESOL
9-TRICHLJOROPHENOL
10-PENTA CHLOROPHENOL
Figure 31. HPLC scan of standard samples.
87
-------
Figure 32. HPLC scan of the 0-15 cm of the extract from the
treated site at Location A.
-------
Figure 33. HPLC scan of the 0-30 cm of the extract from the treated
site at Location E.
89
-------
Figure 34. HPLC scan of the 76-91 cm of the extract from the treated
site at Location B.
90
-------
Phenol was the only material to pass a ratio test for
the subsurface sample collected at treated Site B. Since
the concentration is low ( ^ 1 ppm phenol), and no phenol was
detected in the surface horizons, this result was considered
to be of little significance, and no attempt at positive
identification was made.
91
-------
REFERENCES
Allison, L. E. 1965. Organic Carbon. In Methods of Soil
Analysis Part 2. Chemical and Microbiol. Properties.
Chap. 90. C. A. Black (ed . ) American Society of
Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Bower, C. A. and L. V. Wilcox. 1965. Soluble Salts. In
Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2. Chemical and
Microbiol. Properties. Chap. 62. C. A. Black (ed.).
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Bremner, J. M. 1965. Inorganic Forms of Nitrogen. In
Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2. Chemical and
Microbiol. Properties. Chap. 84. C. A. Black (ed.).
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Britton, W. A., J. A. Lawson and D* 0. Bridgham. 1976.
Land applications of food processing wastewater.
Agron. Abstr. 21 pp.
Chaney , R. L. 1973. Crop and food chain effects of toxic
elements in sludges and effluents. In Proc. of Joint
Conf. on Recycling Municipal Sludges and Effluents on
Land. Champaign, 111. U.S. EPA, U.S.D.A. and Nat.
Assoc. of State Univ. and Land Grant Coll., Washington,
D.C. pp. 129-141.
Chapman, H. D. 1965a. Cation Exchange Capacity. _In
Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2. Chemical and
Microbiol. Properties. Chap. 57. C. A. Black (ed.).
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Chapman, H. D. 1965b. Total Exchangeable Bases. In
Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2. Chemical and
Microbiol. Properties. Chap. 58. C. A. Black (ed . ) .
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Day, P. R. 1965, Particle Fractionation and Particle Size
Analysis. In Methods of Soil Analysis Part 1.
Physical and Mineralogical Properties, Including
92
-------
Statistics of Measurement and Sampling. Chap. 43. C. A.
Black (ed.). American Society of Agronomy, Madison,
Wisconsin.
Dibble, J. X. and R. Bartha. 1979. Leaching aspects of oil
sludge biodegration in soil. Soil Sci., 127: 365-370.
Fuller, W. H. 1977. Movement of selected metals, asbestos,
and cyanide in soil: applications to waste disposal
problems. U.S. EPA. EPA-600/2-77-020.
Holzhey, C.S., R. B. Daniels, and E. E. Gamble. 1975.
Thick Bh horizons in the North Carolina Coastal Plain:
II. Physical and chemical properties and rates of
organic additions from surface sources. Soil Soc. of
Am. Proc. 39(6): 1182-1187.
Kirkham, M. B. 1979. Trace Elements. Jji The Encyclopedia
of Soil Science. R. W. Fairbridge and C* W. Finkl, Jr.
(eds.). p. 571-575. Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, Inc.,
Stroudsberg, Pennsylvania.
Mac Leon, A. J. and A. J. Dekker* 1976. Lime requirement
and availability of nutrients and toxic metals to
plants grown in acid mine tailings. Can. J. of Soil
Sci. 56:27-36.
Peech, M. 1965. Hydrogen-Ion Activity. In Methods of
Soil Analysis Part 2. Chemical and Microbiol.
Properties. Chap. 60. C. A. Black (ed.). American
Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin.
Raymond, R. L. , J. 0. Hudson and V. W. Jamison. 1975.
Assimilation of oil by soil bacteria. In Proc. 40th
Annual Midyear Meeting API Refining.
Thomas, G. W. and A. R. Swoboda. 1970. Anion exclusion
effects on chloride movement in soils. Soil Sci.
110:163-166.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1979. Methods for
Chemical Analysis of Water and Waste, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Van Loon, J. C. 1974. Mercury contamination of vegetation
due to the application of sewage sludge as a
fertilizer. Environ. Letters 6: 211-218.
Warner, J. S. 1976. Determination of aliphatic and
aromatic hydrocarbons in marine organisms. Analytical
Chemistry, 48: 578.
93
-------
APPENDIX A
Cllmatologlcal Data for the Sites Sampled
10
Appendix
Precipitation 4fi Indies by ibnth for all Locations.
Site
A
1
C
0
E
Time
Period
1940-1979
1955-1979
1940-1979
1940-1979
1940-1979
Hontlia
Jan
0.79
4.73
3.09
1.51
3.75
Feb
0.64
3.46
3.07
1.52
3.U7
Mar
1.02
3.03
2.58
1.36
2.63
Apr
1.62
2.65
1.06
1.91
3.58
M«y
2.14
2.10
0.32
3.13
4.68
June
2.46
1.70
0.06
2.88
4.43
July
0.92
1.31
0.01
1.93
4.19
Aug
0.93
1.55
0.05
2.34
4.16
Sept
1.34
2.27
0.23
4.82
4.81
Oct
1.12
3.63
U.50
2.59
3.69
Nov
0.77
4.46
1.35
1.81
4.01
Dec
0.72
5.15
2.60
1.68
4.18
Annual
14.47
36.04
14.92
27.48
47.18
-------
Ib 0 Average Temperature by Month for all Locations.
Site
A
B
C
D
E
time
Carlo*
1940-1979
1955-1979
1940-1979
1940-1979
1940-1979
Hoiitlis
Jan
21.8
37.2
55.9
56.)
49.7
Feb
27.1
41.2
57.0
59.1
53.3
Hat
33. fl
43.4
58.5
65.0
61.5
Apr
45.2
47.8
60.8
71.5
67.8
Hay
Si. 2
54. t
63.4
76.8
73.9
June
63.5
59.0
67.2
81.0
79.8
July
72.6
62.5
71.5
83.3
82.4
Aug
70.7
61.9
72.3
83.4
81.7
Sept
59.9
57.3
70.8
80.6
77.6
Oct
49.6
50.2
66.6
7J.9
69.2
Nov
35.3
42.8
62.2
64.9
59.2
Dec
27.8
40.2
57.6
58.4
54.2
Annual
46.9
49.8
63.6
71.2
67.6
-------
Appendix Ic •« Average Evaporation by Honclt for all Locations.
a\
Site
A
R
C
0
E
TW*
Period
1955-1980
1955-1979
1959-1979
1955-1979
1955-1979
limit lie
Jan
-
0.02
2.89
3.19
2.95
Fob
-
0.06
4.79
4.22
3.37
Mar
-
0.4)
4.86
5.04
4.83
Apr
4.03
1.46
6.11
5.83
5.64
May
6.39
4.15
7.16
6.84
7.12
June
7.63
5.20
7.59
7.80
7.72
July
9.16
6.45
8.53
7.91
7.74
Ang
8.20
5.30
8.26
7.54
7.12
Sept
5.05
3.25
6.74
5.84
5.89
Oct
-
0.69
5.35
5.06
5.28
Nov
-
0.14
3.60
3.91
3.86
Dec
-
0.02
2.75
3.17
2.72
Annual
- Total
40.46
27.17
68.63
66.35
64.24
-------
APPENDIX B
Site Description
Sampling Sice: A. Sampling Date: November 24, 1980.
I. Topography
A. General Description: This site is composed of two
experimental plots approximately one acre each
within a larger enclosure. The terrain is a
rolling hills type, and the elevation in this area
ranges from 823 to 1,189 m (2,700 to 3,900 ft).
The native vegetation of area consists mainly of
western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii) , green
needlegrass (Stipa viridula) , and sagebrush
( Artemis ia f i lif olia) . There was no
vegetation on site.
B. Slope: The area consists of a 4 to 7 percent
slope.
I. Soil
A. General Description (name): The soil is a Kyle
series. This series consists of a silty clay,
well-drained, nearly level, gently sloping and
fine textured soil. The 4 to 71 slope Kyle silty
clay occurs on fans, foot slopes, and uplands.
The soil is mainly used for dry farming and for
range.
B. Depth and Acidity: Kyle silty clay is a
moderately to strongly alkaline soil which occurs
to a depth of 152 cm (60 in). The shale parent
material occurring at a depth greater than 152 cm
(60 in) is a clay.
C. Profile (color, structure):
97
-------
Ap - 0 to 23 cm (0 — 9 in), grayish-brown (2.5Y
5/2) silty clay, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y
4/2) when moist; moderate, fine granular
structure in upper part to moderate, fine and
very fine blocky in lower part; extremely
hard when dry, firm when moist, and sticky
and plastic when wet (surface 8 cm (3 in) was
frozen but dry at the time of the sampling);
calcareous; pH 7.7; abrupt boundary.
C. - 23 to 61 cm (9 to 24 in), grayish-brown
(2.5Y 5/2) clay, dark grayish-brown (2.5Y
4/2} when moist; moderate, fine and very
fine, blocky in upper part; few medium-sized
pressure surfaces in lower part; extremely
hard when dry, very firm when moist, sticky
and very plastic when wet, calcareous; pH
7.8; gradual boundary.
C- - 61 to 152 cm (24 to 60 in), light
brownish-gray (2.5Y 6/2) clay, dark
grayish-brown (2.5Y 4/2) when moist; massive;
a few lenses of silty clay loam 8 cm ( 3 in)
thick; extremely hard when dry, very firm
when moist, very sticky and plastic when wet;
calcareous; pH 8.2.
The Kyle silty clay (4-7Z slope) differs from
the typic in that it has less clay in all
horizons.
III. Climate:
A. Rainfall: The annual precipitation is 33 cm (13
in) .
B. Pan Evaporation: The average warm season
evaporation is 107.1 cm (42.18 in).
C. Seasonal Temperature: The mean annual temperature
is 46°F.
98
-------
SLOPE
HI N *-
Qy oy
®
6T) (?)
NATIVE SOIL
SAMPLE
-* M *-
® SAMPLING SITE
» * 6' CYCLONE FENCE
Figure 3-1. Land treatanent sanple area for Site A.
99
-------
Sampling Site: B. Sampling Data: July 1-2, 1981.
I. Topography
A. General Description: The facility is roughly 6 acres in
size, is located ca 1.2 km (three quarters of a mile) from the
coast, and the elevation of the area is 152 meters
(500 ft) above sea level. The terrain is composed
of upland and terrace depressions, and the
intrazonal soils have developed mainly under
conditions of excessive moisture. The typical
legumes, grasses and trees of the area are as
follows: alsike clover (Trifolium hybridum
L. ) , white clover (Trifolium repens L. ) ,
Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.),
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratens is L. ) , Douglas
fir (-Pseudo tsug a menziesii) and cedar
(Juniperus virginiana Linn.). There was no
vegetation on site.
B. Slope: The sample site consists of a 1 to 2
percent slope.
II. Soil
A. General Description (name): The four land
treatment samples were found to be a Norma silty
clay loam - Cagey silt loam, undulating complex.
The Norma and Cagey soils are blended in a
transitional zone at the land treatment site. The
control sample was taken at a location typical of
the Norma silty clay loam series.
The Norma soils are formed from thin mantles
of gravel or sand which overlie heavy clay and are
probably modified by loesslike materials. The
Cagey soils have developed from loesslike mantled
gravelly drift over a clay till.
Both Norma and Cagey soils have a layer of
gravelly sand occurring at approximately 46 to 51
cm (18 to 20 in) in depth. Penetration of this
layer in the soils at the land treatment sampling
site proved to be extremely difficult, and the
method of sampling was modified in order to
circumvent the problem. A tube was used to sample
the first 46 cm (18 in), and then an auger was
used to penetrate the tight gravelly layer. On
one core sample, the auger was used exclusively
after repeated efforts to penetrate with the
tube failed.
100
-------
Probably two-thirds of the Norma silty clay
loam and Cagey silt loam, undulating have been
cleared for crops and pasture. The high moisture
content and slow drainage of the soils are more
favorable for hay, pasture, and small grains.
B. Depth and Acidity: The Norma silty clay loam soil
occurs to a depth of 147 to 198 cm (58 to 78 in)
and varies in acidity from slightly acid to a
depth of 144 cm (58 in) and neutral or slightly
alkaline from 147 to 198 cm (58 to 78 in).
The Cagey silt loam, undulating soil occurs
to a depth of 122+ cm (48+ in) and is medium acid
to a depth of 122 cm (48 in) and neutral or mildly
alkaline from 12"2 + cm (48+ in).
C. Profile (color, structure):
Norma silty clay loam
0 to 13 cm (0 to 5 in), dark brownish-gray
granular silty acid silty clay loam having a
high content of organic matter; nearly black
when wet; 10 to 15 cm (4 to 6 in) thick.
13 to 46 cm (5 to 18 in), light brownish-gray clay
loam having a 1.27 cm (1/2 in) blocky
structure; dark brown when wet; 25 to 38 cm
(10 to 15 in) thick.
46 to 147 cm (18 to 58 in) light yellowish-brown
slightly acid somewhat compact but open and
porous iron-stained gravelly sand; 91 to 122
cm (36 to 48 in) thick.
147 to 198 cm (58 to 78 in), light olive-gray
dense clay till; shows angular fractures and
is embedded with gravel, stones and boulders;
varies considerably in thickness; neutral or
slightly alkaline; in some areas along the
coast contains marine shells.
Cagey silt loam, undulating
0 to 36 cm (0 to 14 in), moderately dark brown or
rich-brown floury mellow very fine granular
silt loam; contains fine shot pellets; layer
is 10 to 36 cm (4 to 14 in) thick; medium
ac id .
101
-------
36
51
to 51 cm (14 to 20
subsurface layer
contains mo re shot
layer above; 10 to
in), lighter medium-brown
of floury, silt loam;
and is more compact than
25 cm (4 to 10 in) thick;
medium
layer.
acid; abruptly underlain by next
122 +
to 122 cm (20 to 48 in), grayish-brown or
grayish-yellow highly iron-stained porous
gravelly sands; medium acid; material
slightly coated with clay; 51 to 76 cm (20 to
30 in) thick.
cm (48+ in), steel-gray or bluish-gray rusty
or iron-stained dense clay till fractured
into massive blocks; fracture planes darkened
by brown colloidal matter; neutral or mildly
aIkaline.
III. Climate:
A. Rainfall:
(46.2 in).
The annual precipitation is 117
cm
B. Pan Evaporation: The average
evaporation is 65.5 cm (25.8 in).
warm
season
C. Seasonal Temperature: The mean annual temperature
is 49.2°F.
102
-------
LAND TREATMENT SAMPLE AREA
•-CONTROL
X-LANO TREATMENT
SAMPLES
NORTH
FIELD
SOUTH
FIELD
Figure B-2. Land treatment sample area for Site B.
103
-------
Sampling Site: C. Sampling Date: December 8-11, 1980.
I. Topography
A» General Description: The land treatment covers
approximately 2.4 hectares (6 acres), and the
site is surrounded by approximately a 7.62 m (25
ft) concrete wall. The site is located in a
lagoon area with an elevation of approximately
24.4 m (80 ft). The vegetation is typical of
species occurring only on extremely disturbed
areas .
Bo Slope: The area consists of a 0.5Z slope.
II. Soil
A. General Description - : The soil was
originally classified as Oakley fine sand;
however, this series was discontinued around 1962.
The area of the refinery has not been reclassified
in the interim. The Area Soil Scientist visited
the treatment site, and a copy of the results of
his analysis indicated that he would call the soil
a Typic Xeropsamment mixed thermic. The treatment
area is approximately 1.4 mtles from the coast.
III. Climate:
Ao Rainfall: The average annual rainfall is 37.9 cm
(14.92 in) for 1940-1979.
B. Pan Evaporation: The average annual evaporation
is 170 cm (66.97 in) for 20 years.
G. Temperature: The average annual temperature is
63.6 degrees for 1940-1979.
104
-------
o
\J>
SAMPLE B
SAMPLE
•AMPLE 4
SAMPLE
Figure B-3. Land treatment sample area for Site C.
-------
Sampling Site: D. Sampling Date: January 7, 1981
I. Topography
A. General Description: This site lies on a nearly
level coastal terrace. A narrow land of moderately
sloping and strongly sloping, loamy soils extends
along the northern edge of the nearly level area.
The surface has an almost uniform grade that slopes
southeastward to the coast. The land treatment site
is located on the top of a hill. The vegetation
consists of native and sprigged coastal bermuda
(Cynodon datyIon). The land treatment facility
was ca 165 by 55 m (180 by 60 yds) and divided into
71 strips ca 2.1 m (7 ft) wide. There is a control
strip at each end and alternating grass strips and
treated strips.
B. Slope: The area consists of a 0 to 1% slope.
II. Soil
General Description: The soil of the site is Miguel
fine sandy loam (0 to 1 percent slopes). This
series consists of deep, loamy and sandy soils that
contain a mottled claypan. Internal drainage is
very slow in Miguel soils. Surface drainage is
medium to rapid in gently or moderately sloping
areas. Therefore, much water is lost in runoff, and
the intake of water is very slow. The runoff could
account for the loss of 2.54 cm (1 in) of soil from
the typic Ap horizon which was 0-10 cm (0-4 in)
instead of 0-13 cm (0-5 in) at the time of sampling.
Depth and Acidity (color, structure): The Miguel
fine sandy loan occurs to a depth of 76 to 138 cm
(30 to 55 in), and the pH ranges from 6.0 in the
upper layer to 7.0 in the deeper layers. The parent
material which contains hard and soft lumps of lime
is pale brown and less clayey than the subsoil.
Profile (color, structure):
Ap - 0 to 10 cm (0 to 4 in), dark grayish brown (10
YR 4/2) fine sandy loam, very dark (10 YR 3/2) when
moist; weak, granular structure; slightly hard when
dry, very friable when moist, noncalcareous; pH 6.0;
clear boundary.
106
-------
A - 10 to 25 cm (4 to 10 in), dark-gray (10 YR 4/1) fine
sandy loam, very dark gray (10 YR 3/1) when moist; weak
granular structure; slightly hard when dry; friable
when moist; noncalcareous, pH 6.0; abrupt boundary.
B21 t - 25 to 56 cm (10 to 22 in), dark grayish-brown (10 YR
4/2) sandy clay, very dark (10 YR 3/2) when moist; few
fine, distinct mottles of red (2.5 YR 4/6) and many,
medium faint mottles of yellowish brown (10 YR 5/6);
moderate, medium, blocky structure; very hard when dry,
firm when moist, plastic when wet; noncalcareous; pH
6.5; gradual boundary.
B22t - 56 to 76 cm (22 to 30 in), gray (10 YR 5/1) sandy
clay, dark gray (10 YR 4/1) when moist; common, medium
faint mottles of pale brown (10 YR 6/3); weak, blocky
structure; very hard when dry, firm when moist, plastic
when wet; noncalcareous; pH 7.0; gradual boundary.
Cca - 76 to 138 cm (30 to 55 in), very pale brown (10 YR
7/4) sandy clay loam, light yellowish brown (10 YR 6/4)
when moist; strong, coarse blocky structure; very hard
when dry, very firm when moist; many soft lumps and
fragments of calcium carbonate; strongly calcareous;
gradual boundary.
III. Climate
A. Rainfall: The average annual rainfall is 69.8 cm
(27.48 in) for Che 40 years from 1940 to 1979.
Bo Pan Evaporation: Annual evaporation is 175.2 cm
(68.98 in).
C. Seasonal Temperature: The average temperature for
the year 1940 to 1979 is 71.3°F.
107
-------
o
oo
•
X LAND TREATMENT SAMPLES
• CONTROL
Fi^uie C-4. Laad treatment uunple area for Site D.
-------
Sampling Site: E. Sampling Data: March 16-20, 1981
I. Topography
A., General Description: The active site cores were
sampled in a diked area surrounding a tank on the
refinery site. The control core was sampled outside
the diked area. The vegetation in the land farm area
consists of 60 percent St. Augustinegrass
(Stenotaphrum secundatum) and 40 percent
bermudagrass (Cynodon dactyIon). There was some
St. Augustinegrass (S tenotaphrum seeundatum)
grown on the site.
B. Slope: The area typically has slopes which range
from 0 to 3 percent; however, the land treatment
site had a 5 percent slope in places.
II. Soil
A. General Description: The soil is the Lake
Charles-Urban Land complex. The Lake Charles series
consists of deep clayey soils on upland prairies.
The Lake Char les-Urban Land soil makes up 10 to 75
percent of the Lake Charles series. The Urban Land
includes some remnants of Lake Charles soils that
have been altered by cutting, filling, and grading.
The soil history of the area sampled does include
the removal of the topsoil from the area. The soil
is somewhat poorly drained with the surface runoff
typically classified as very slow or medium.
Permeability and internal drainage are very slow.
The soils in this series are clayey throughout the
profile and are formed in alkaline marine clay.
Undisturbed areas of these soils have gilgai
microrelief, in which the microknolls are 15 to 30
cm (6 to 12 in) higher than microdepress ions . The
surface 30 cm (12 in) is not typical of topsoil,
indicating the importation of materials. Below 30
cm (12 in), the soil shows typical profile
characteristics .
Depth and Acidity: The Lake Char les-Urb an Land soil
ranges from slightly acid through mildly alkaline,
and this soil occurs to a depth of 188 cm (74 in).
Profile
Ap - 0 to 56 cm (0 to 22 in); black (10 YR 2/1)
clay, very dark gray (10 YR, 3/1) dry; moderate fine
109
-------
blocky structure; very hard, very firm, very sticky
and plastic; many fine roots; few roots; few fine
iron-manganese concretions; shiny pressure faces;
neutral; diffuse wavy boundary.
A12 - 55 to 91 cm (22 to 36 in); very dark gray (10 YR
3/1) clay, dark gray (10 YR 4/1) dry; moderate fine
blocky and subangular blocky structure in upper 30
cm (12 in) and breaking to moderate fine and medium
blocky in the lower part; the lower part contains
common large wedge-shaped peds having long axes
tilted 10 to 60 degees from the horizontal and
bordered by intersecting slickensides ; extremely
hard, very firm, very sticky and plastic; aggregates
have shiny pressure faces; few fine iron-manganese
and calcium carbonate concretions; mildly alkaline;
diffuse wavy boundary.
AClg - 91 to 132 cm (36 to 52 in); dark gray (10 YR 4/1)
clay, gray (10 YR 5/1) dry; common fine and medium
distinct mottles of olive (5Y 4/3) and few fine
distinct mottles of yellowish brown (10 YR 5/4);
common large wedge-shaped peds having long axes
tilted 10 to 60 degrees from the horizontal and
bordered by intersecting slickensides , peds break to
moderate medium and coarse blocky structure;
extremely hard, very firm, very sticky and plastic;
few fine roots; aggregates have shiny pressure
faces; few fine iron-manganese concretions; few
calcium carbonate concretions as much as 1
centimeter (0.39 in) in diameter; mildly alkaline;
diffuse wavy boundary.
AC2g - 132 to 188 cm (52 to 74 in); gray (5Y 5/1) clay,
gray (5Y 6/1) dry; common fine and medium distinct
mottles of light olive brown (2.5Y 5/4) and few fine
distinct mottles of yellowish brown (10 YR 5/6);
weak fine angular blocky structure; extremely hard,
very firm, very sticky and plastic; few fine
iron-manganese concretions; few intersecting
slickensides ; few irregularly shaped pitted calcium
carbonate concretions generally less than 3 cm (1.
in) in size; mildly alkaline.
III. Climate
A. Rainfall: The average annual precipitation is 117
cm (46 in).
B. Pan Evaporation: The Thornthwaite P-E index is 183
em (72 in)„
110
-------
C. Temperature: The mean annual temperature is 69°F,
111
-------
XLAMO TREATMENT SAMPLES
• CONTROL
Figure B-5. Land treatment sample area for Site E.
112
------- |