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

-------