PB86-173606
THE LUBBOCK LAND TREATMENT SYSTEM RESEARCH AND
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: VOLUME II. PERCOLATE
INVESTIGATION IN THE ROOT ZONE
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX
Feb 86
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Information Service
-------
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory
Ada OK 74820
EPA/600/2-86/027b
February 1986
Research and Development
The Lubbock Land
Treatment System
Research and
Demonstration
Project:
Volume II.
Percolate
Investigation in the
Root Zone
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions, on the reverse before completing)
i. REPORT NO.
EPA/600/2-86/027b
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
PBS 6 17.3bOf,
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
THE LUBBOCK LAND TREATMENT SYSTEM RESEARCH AND
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT: Volume II. Percolate
Investigation in the Root Zone
5. REPORT DATE
February 1986
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
R.H. Ramsey and R.M. Sweazy
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX 79409
In cooperation with: Lubbock Christian College
Institute of Water Research, Lubbock, TX 79407
CAZB1B
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
CS-806204
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory.
P.O. Box 1198
Ada, OK 74820
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final (11/27/78 - 12/31/85)
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA-600/15
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officers:
Curtis C. Harlin
Lowell E. Leach, Jack Witherow, H. George Keeler, and
16. ABSTRACT
The Lubbock Land Treatment System Research and Demonstration Project, funded by
Congress in 1978 (H.R. 9375), was designed to address the various issues concerning
the use of slow rate land application of municipal wastewater. The project involved
the 1) physical expansion of an overloaded 40-year old Lubbock slow rate land treat-
ment system; 2) characterization of the chemical, biological and physical conditions
of the ground water, soils and crops prior to and during irrigation with secondary
treated municipal wastewater; 3) evaluation of the health effects associated with
-f)ie slow rate land application of secondary effluent and 4) assessment of the
'cvfects of hydraulic, nutrient and salt mass loadings on crops, soil and percolate.
Percolate investigations, described in this volume, evaluated the fate of
infiltrating nutrients from applied wastewaters in the root zone at test plots
located on both study farms.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report I
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
162
20. SECURITY CLASS (Tillspage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
EPA/600/2-86/027b
February 1986
THE LUBBOCK LAND TREATMENT SYSTEM
RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
VOLUME II
Percolate Investigation in the Root Zone
by
R. H. Ramsey and R. M. Sweazy
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, Texas 79409
EPA COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT CS806204
Project Officers
Lowell E. Leach
Jack L. Witherow
H. George Keeler
Curtis C. Harlin
Wastewater Management Branch
R. S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
This study was conducted in cooperation with:
LCC Institute of Water Research
Lubbock, Texas 79407
Dennis B. George, Project Director
ROBERT S. KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820
-------
DISCLAIMER
The information in this document has been funded in part
by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under
assistance agreement No. CS806204 to Lubbock Christian College
Institute of Water Research who contracted with Texas Tech
University for this research. It has been subjected to the
Agency's peer and administrative review and has been approved
for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
n
-------
FOREWORD
The U.S. Evironmental Protection Agency was established to coordinate
the administration of major Federal programs designed to protect the qual-
ity of our environment.
An important part of the Agency's effort involves the search for
information about environmental problems, management techniques, and new
technologies through which optimum use of the Nation's land and water
•resources- can be assured and the threat pollution poses to the welfare of
the American people can be-minimized.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and
Development conducts this search through a nationwide network of research
facilities. As one of these facilities, the Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory is responsible for the management of programs including
the development and demonstration of soil and other natural systems for the
treatment and management of municipal wastewaters.
The slow rate land treatment process of municipal wastewaters uses the
unsaturated soil profile and agricultural crops managed as the treatment
media. The Lubbock Land Treatment System Research and Demonstration Pro-
gram, funded by Congress in 1978 (H.R. 9375) was designed to address the
various issues limiting the use of slow rate land application of municipal
wastewater. The project involved expansion of the Lubbock Land Treatment
System to 2,967 hectares; characterization of the chemical, biological and
physical condition of the ground water, soils and crops prior to and during
irrigation with secondary treated municipal wastewater; and evaluation of
the U.S. Environmental Protection- Agency's design criteria for slow rate
land application. Results demonstrate that, where such systems are cor-
rectly designed and operated, they can be cost effective alternatives for
municipal sewage treatment at sites where conditions are favorable for low
hydraulic loading combined with cropping practices.
This report contributes to the knowledge which is essential for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to meet requirements of environmental
laws and enforce pollution control standards which are reasonable, cost
effective and provide adequate protection for the American public.
Clinton W. Hall, Director
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory
111
-------
ABSTRACT
An investigation of the amounts and quality of percolate generated by
the land application of secondary effluent from the Southeast-Water
Reclamation Plant at Lubbock, Texas was conducted at two sites. One site was
located on the Frank Gray farm (Friona Soil Series) which had served as a
land treatment site for four decades. The other site located on the Gene
Hancock farm (Amarillo Soil Series) near Wilson, Texas, was receiving its
initial applications of treated wastewater. Three test plots were
constructed at each site and equipped with 3 replicates of 3 extraction tray
lysimeters placed-under layers of undisturbed soil at 61, 122 and 183 cm
depths. Two pairs of 76 cm diameter tube lysimeters, 122 cm and 183 cm in
length, containing cores of undisturbed soils, were also emplaced on the plot
with their, top surface 30 cm below the surface. One plot at each site was
planted to bermuda grass, one to grain sorghum, and one to cotton. The
amounts of treated effluent applied to the plots during the project period
were less than the design amount. This greatly decreased the amount and
frequency of daily percolate collected from the lysimeters during the project
period and reduced the effectiveness of the study results. Periodic quality
analysis was made of percolate samples. The nutrient parameters in percolate
samples, with the exception of nitrate and potassium, were generally reduced
by a factor of 10 or more from those of the applied water where more than one
water quality test for the constituent was performed. The mass of cations
and anions contained in the amounts of percolate with pH levels in a range of
7.4 to 8.8 measured in the root zone would adversely impact the quality of
the ground water underlying the Hancock site.
This report, covering the period from January 1, 1980 to completion on
September 30, 1984, is submitted in fulfillment of EPA Grant CS806204 to
Lubbock Christian College Institute of Water Research.
iv
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures vi
Tables vii
Acknowledgement ix
1. Introduction 1
2. Conclusions . 3
3. Recommendations 5
• 4. Research Approach 6
Site Characteristics 6
System Design and Monitoring Procedures 10
5. System Operations 41
Lysimeters 41
Irrigation 44
6. Results and Discussion 48
Percolate Collection Activities 52
Soil Analysis 70
Field Use of Extraction Lysimeters 85
References 88
Appendices
A. Profiles of Test Soils 91
B. Hydraulic Loading Rates . . 94
C. Nitrogen Loadings 101
D. Percolate Quality Parameters at the Test Plots .... 105
E. Equivalent Ratios for Water Charateristics ...... 137
F. Mass Inputs in Applied Wastewater and Mass Outputs in
Percolate and Crops Harvested 144
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Location of the Hancock Farm Test Site 7
2 Location of the Gray Farm Test Site 8
3 Plan of Test Facility 11
4 Arrangement of Percolate Collection Units in Tube Lysimeter .... 13
5 Extraction Tray Design . 16
6 Wick Assembly 18
7 Lysimeter Control Panel Design 20
8 Irrigation Coverage of Test Plots at the Gray Site 28
9 Irrigation Coverage of Test Plots at the Hancock Site . 29
Vf
-------
TABLES
Number - Page
1 Seasonal Water and Nutrient Use by Crop Types Utilized
in Study . 9
2 Precipitation Values for 5-Year Return Period : ... 21
3 Monthly ET and ET Values for Conditions at Lubbock, Texas. . . 23
p crop
4 Weekly Irrigation Schedule 27
5 Measurement Frequency of Weather Parameters 32
6 Water Analysis .34
.7 Sampling Schedule for Percolate 35
8 Sampling Schedule for May 1983 to August 1983 36
9 Soil Analyses 38
10 Crop Analyses 39
11 Hydrologic Factors at the Gray Site for 1982 53
12 Hydrologic Factors at the Hancock Site for 1982 54
13 Hydrologic Factors at the Gray Site for
January 1 to September 30, 1983 55
14 Hydrologic Factors at the Hancock Site for
January 1 to September 30, 1983 56
15 Monthly Percolate Data in mm for the Bermuda Grass Plot
at the Gray Site from October 1982 to September 1983 60
16 Depth of Percolate Intercepted by Lysimeter Units Over
Study Period at the Hancock Site 62
17 Depth of Percolate Intercepted by Lysimeter Units Over
Study Period at the Gray Site 63
18 Percolate and Water Quality Samping Events from
May 1, 1982 to September 30, 1983 64
19 Crop Yields and Geometric Means of Selected Parameters
for Test Crops Grown in 1982 66
20 Crop Yields and Geometric Means of Selected Parameters
for Test Crops Grown in 1983 67
vii
-------
21 Geometric Means of Concentrations for Quality Parameters in
Irrigation Waters Applied to the Test Areas over the
Project Period . , 68
r\
22 Changes in 10~£Mg/g of Soil with Depth for Selected Cations
and Anions Between Sampling Periods in
March 1981 and November 1983 72
23 - Results of Soil Analysis for TKN-N on Test Plots
for 3 Sampling Periods in 10~1 mg/g of Soil ..... 73
24 Results of Soil Analysis for N03 -N on Test Plots
for 3 Sampling Periods in 10~^ mg/g of Soil 74
25 Results of Soil Analysis for NH3 -N on Test Plots
for 3 Sampling Periods in 10"^ mg/g of Soil ..... 75
26 Results of Soil Analysis for Total Phosphorus-P on Test Plots
for 3 Sampling Periods in 10"! mg/g of Soil 76
27 Results of Soil Analysis for Orthophosphate-P on Test Plots
for 3 Sampling Periods in 10" 3 mg/g of Soil 78
28 Maximum Concentration in PPB and Location of Organics
in the Soil Profile at the Test Sites in November 1983 . ... . .79
29 Application of Metals in Wastewaters and Fate of Metals
in Plot Root Zone over Project Period—Gray Site 81
30 Application of Metals in Wastewaters and Fate of Metals
in'.Plot Root Zone over Project Period—Hancock Site ...... 82
31 Bromide Tracer Location in Plot Soils in March 1983
After Application in May 1982 83
32 Bromide Tracer Location in Plot Soils in November 1983
After Application in May 1983 . . 84
ym
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This report was prepared-under a contract with the Lubbock Christian
College Institute of Water Research with funds provided by EPA Grant CS806204.
The authors would like to acknowledge the help and cooperation of the Institute
staff in the performance of the project activities.
IX
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
Since 1939, the Frank Gray farm, located east of Lubbock, Texas, had
served as a land application site for the city's treated wastewater. During
the seventies, this facility experienced difficulties in handling the
additional wastewater that had been generated by the growth of the city. The
hydraulic loading rates used on the farm were in excess of the rates
recommended for slow rate systems by both the EPA and the State of Texas. A
new land application site north of Wilson, Texas, was developed to reduce the
loadings being experienced at the Frank Gray farm.
In conjunction with the construction of the new site, a research effort
was initiated to evaluate the effects of the soil-crop matrix"on the quality
and quantity of the applied wastewaters percolating through the soil normally
penetrated by the roots of field crops. These upper soil layers, known
collectively as the soil root zone, possess physical, chemical, and
biological characteristics that affect the agricultural productivity of the
site.
Successful implementation of land application systems for municipal
wastewater treatment is predicated on the effective removal and stabilization
of wastewater constituents in the soil profile. Monitoring of the ground
water under and adjacent to the site is necessary to insure that the land
application system is functioning as intended. Evaluating the percolate
quantity and quality as it leaves the root zone should provide information on
potential detrimental conditions that would enable changes to be made in the
operational procedures of the land application system to lessen pollutional
impacts on the underlying ground water. A current problem associated with
the monitoring of ground water under and adjacent to land application sites
is that by the time poor quality conditions are noted in ground water,
corrections in the system's operation will have little short-term effect
because of the mass of pollutants already in transit through the soil
profile. The uncertainties associated with ground water movement under the
test sites, a depth to ground water ranging from 3.0 to 27.4 m, and
variations in the physical properties of the soil profile could cause
problems in monitoring .short-term effects of the land application systems on
the ground water under the two sites used by the City of Lubbock.
The study devised for the investigation of impacts resulting from
physical, chemical, and biological activities in the soil root zone on
percolate flow and quality had two objectives. As stated in the original
proposal, these were:
-------
(1) To obtain information on the amount and rate of water movement in
the unsaturated zone under different cropping management systems;
and
(2) To obtain data on the quality of water applied to the soil and that
drawn from different soil depths in the unsaturated zone.
To accomplish these objectives, test facilities were constructed at the
Gray and Hancock sites. The test facility on the Gray site was located in
an area adjusting to a lower hydraulic loading while the test area at the-
Hancock site was constructed in an area just being subjected to irrigation
with treated wastewater.
Measurements were made of the precipitation and of irrigation waters
applied to three .cropping systems that were of economic importance to the
region and which exhibited a range of water and nutrient requirements during
growth. The crops grown on each test facility site were cotton, grain
sorghum, and bermuda grass.
Considerable biological and chemical activity occurs in the near-surface
zone .among the life forms inhabiting the soil and the various and complex
soil, soil-water, and soil-atmosphere interfaces present. To monitor
percolate flow and possible quality changes with soil depth, lysimeter
systems were installed so that percolate could be obtained at three different
levels in the root zone under each test plot.
-------
SECTION II
CONCLUSIONS
1. The extraction lysimeters utilized in the study are not suitable for use
as monitoring devices in operational land treatment systems primarily because
of the high costs associated with their installation and operation when
compared to conventional ground water monitoring.
2. Hydraulic loading rates utilized during this study were insufficient to
produce percolate for quantity and quality analysis for use in evaluating
current design criteria for test crop conditions using slow-rate land
application procedures.
3. The inability to apply design hydraulic loadings to the test plots, to
intercept percolate in the soil profile, and to accurately measure
evapotranspiration on the test plots caused unexplained losses of such
magnitude that accurate and meaningful water or solute balance determinations
for the substances measured during the project can not be developed.
4. The lysimeter techniques utilized in the project cannot reproduce the
conditions of soils in their natural state nor detect the subtleties inherent
in the hydraulic responses of undisturbed soils at a specific locale.
5. The mass of cations and anions contained in the small amounts of
percolate at pH levels in a range from 7.4 to 8.8 measured in the root zone
of the test plots irrigated with wastewater effluent may adversely impact the
quality of the ground water underlying the Hancock site if irrigation with
wastewater effluent is continued at design rates over a period of years.
6. Except for nitrates and potassium, the nutrient parameters, in percolate
collected from lysimeters where more than one water quality test for the
parameter was performed, were generally reduced by a factor of 10 or more
from the applied water.
7. Test facilities utilized on the project were subjected to flood damage
and operational delays as a result of piping actions caused by fissures in
the soil profile.
8. Experiences in this study indicated that better techniques must be
developed to measure and adjust vacuum levels employed in extraction
lysimeters.
9. From an operational basis, slow-rate land application systems utilizing
forage crops offer less conflicting interactions among weather factors, crop
-------
cultural needs, farm machinery use, and wastewater irrigation schedules than
other crops.
-------
SECTION III
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. A long-term study would be essential to determine the influence of crop
production and biological activities in the root zo'ne on the flow patterns
and quality of percolate generated by the land application of municipal
wastewater.
2. The area! occurrence, frequency of flow events, and magnitude of the
mass of water-borne solutes and pathogens transported through macropores in
the soil matrix should be investigated at land application sites. When
ponding of wastewaters on the surface occurred, macropores flowed under
hydrostatic pressure.
3. Appropriate tracer materials should be added to irrigation water in
order that the rates of water and solute movement can be determined under
different rates of hydraulic loading.
-------
SECTION IV
RESEARCH APPROACH
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The selection of the test areas on the Hancock and Gray farms was
originally predicated on the soil characteristics of the facilities, past
management practices., and surface drainage.
Hancock Site
Because of the locations preempted for center pivot irrigation units,
the test sites available for selection on the Hancock farm were restricted to
corner areas. The site chosen is indicated in Figure 1.
In previous years, when ground water had been available for furrow
irrigation, the row orientation was from north to south. The test plots
occupied the head row area that had existed during the early irrigation era.
This could imply that greater amounts of irrigation water had percolated down
through the soil profile of the test area than in those areas located further
down slope.
Site location had impacts on both the availability and quality of water
used during project activities. The distribution system installed on the
site could not be designed for maximum flexibility of operations. The
location of the test area on the farm prescribed that the water supply line
be connected to an 0.38 m diameter pipeline on the eastern boundary of the
site. This pipeline was the primary transmission line for conveying treated
wastewater from Lubbock to a 1.48 x 106 m3 storage lagoon. The irrigation
water applied at the test site was generally water that had been pumped from
Lubbock rather than water from the storage lagoon.
Gray Site
The test facility at the Gray site was selected from among the field
areas which had the longest histories of treated effluent irrigation. The
location of the facility is shown in Figure 2. The ditches adjacent to these
roads prevented highway runoff from entering the plot area. The land slope
of the test area was from east to west at less than 1 percent. The field
plots were supplied with irrigation water from a wastewater effluent storage
lagoon located approximately 1.5 km northwest of the site.
-------
Figure 1. Location of the Hancock Farm Test Site
-------
Figure 2. Location of the Gray Farm Test Site
8
-------
Plot Layout
The crop systems selected for both test areas were cotton, grain sorghum
and bermuda grass. These crops were of economic importance in the region and
also exhibit varied ranges of water and nutrient requirements during growth
(Table 1). Only one plot for each crop was planned at each test area.
Three adjoining 0.84 ha plots (91.5 m per side) were laid out and
enclosed by a cyclone fence. The percolate collection facility was located
at the center of each plot. The 45-m distance from the plot boundary to the
test facility was assumed to be sufficient to eliminate boundary effects
caused by other land uses on areas adjacent to the test plots (15).
Soil Characterization
The test areas at the Gray and Hancock farms were located on the soil
types that the county soil survey publications for Lubbock and Lynn counties
(3, 12) showed to comprise the largest acreage on the farm. The Gray test
area was located on a soil of the Friona series and the Hancock area was
located on one of the Amarillo series. Both are loamy soils located on
uplands and formed in calcareous, loamy eolian deposits. Typical profile
descriptions of the soil are provided in Appendix A.
TABLE 1
SEASONAL WATER AND NUTRIENT USE BY
CROP TYPES UTILIZED IN STUDY
Crop
Bermuda grass0
Cotton
Grain Sorghum
Total
consumptive
use of
water3
(cm)
102d
76
46
Nitrogen
(kg/ha)
400-675
75-110
135
Nutrients ,
phosphorous
(kg/ha)
35-45
15
15
Potash
(kg/ha)
225
40
70
?Hansen et al. (18).
process Design Manual Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater (18),
.Nutrient figures are for coastal bermuda grass.
Water use figures are for pastures.
-------
SYSTEM DESIGN AND MONITORING PROCEDURES
Lysimeter Systems Design
Two types of nonweighing lysimeters using undisturbed soil profiles were
installed on the test plots. The first type, hereafter referred to as tube
lysimeters, consists of a form made of appropriate siding material to be
pushed down through the soil profile at the sampling site (4). After
reaching the appropriate depth, the form with its encased soil core is
removed. After equipping the unit with a percolate collection system, the
enclosed soil core is used as the test material. The test unit can be
installed in the laboratory or at a field site. The other type involved
employs trays filled with a disturbed soil to capture soil percolate; these
are placed under, and in contact with, the overlying, undisturbed soil profile
by means of horizontal excavations (7). The tray technique is site specific.
Vacuum devices were used to obtain percolate from the lysimeters. The
vacuum level was adjusted to the level measured by a tensiometer located in
adjacent undisturbed soil. If soil characteristics were uniform, this
practice would insure that the area of influence on moisture transport in the
profile above the tray or tube is no greater or less than a comparable area
in .the undisturbed profile.
Replicates of the two lysimeter techniques for collecting soil percolate
were utilized on each test plot. Three trays, located in cavities 108
degrees apart, were placed at depths of 61, 122, and 183 cm. Pairs of tube
lysimeters were emplaced with the upper surfaces 30 cm underground so that
normal tillage operations could be conducted. Percolate was collected from
one pair of tube lysimeters at a depth of 122 cm and from the other pair at
183 cm. One plot on each farm area had an additional pair of tube lysimeters
which collected percolate at the 244 cm depth.
An underground chamber containing the necessary support equipment for
the installed vacuum extractors was installed at the center of each test
plot. The lysimeters were placed in the soil radially around the chamber and
at distances far enough from it so as not to be influenced by the chamber's
interference with soil percolate flow. The use of a circular chamber allowed
the units to be placed within a small area, thus minimizing both differences
in soil characteristics and in plot size. A plan view of a test facility is
shown in Figure 3. A detailed description of the units, their installation,
the supporting facilities, and operational characteristics follows.
Tube Lysimeters—
The tube lysimeters were constructed from used 76.2 cm 00 steel pipe
with a wall thickness of 0.95 cm. The soil area within pipe sections was
0.434 ma. The number and length of the tube lysimeters installed on the
project were: 14 with a length of 107 cm, 14 with a length of 168 cm, and 4
with a length of 229 cm.
Three angle iron ears were welded at points 120 degrees apart on the
pipe surface at about 30 cm from the top of the pipe. These served as
attachment points for chains used for either lifting or positioning the pipe
10
-------
Vacuum Pump
Manhole
Sample Collection
Units
Tensiometers
Extraction Tray
1.52m x .15m
(3 Trays will be emplaced at
each of the 3 specified depths)
Tube Lysimeters
2 - 1.07m-Length
2 - 1.68m Length
Buried 0.3m below surface
Figure 3. Plan of Test Facility
-------
sections. The pipe sections were taken to the test area and placed at points
that had been randomly selected on the plot map around the proposed locations
of the percolate extraction facilities. Each point on the surface at the
site was assumed to overlie material of the same soil type and to exhibit
uniform profile conditions. The processed units from each farm area were
later indiscriminately assigned to one of the three test facilities at each
site.
At the designated location, the top 30 cm of soil was scraped off and
the pipe section was placed vertically on this surface then driven into the
soil under, existing site conditions. Water was not applied to wet the soil
material. Only in very few instances did the p'ipe advance exceed 2.5 cm per
blow. Generally, the penetration was 1/20 to 1/5 of this value. Excavation
of the soil around the outside of the pipe after driving the pipe into the
ground a few centimeters was found to increase the depth per blow. After the
pipe sections had been driven to their final depth, the units were lifted and
loaded for transport to a processing area.
In the processing area, each pipe section was inverted, exposing the
bottom of the soil profile for further processing (Figure 4). The lower 15
cm of soil in the original profile was removed and two percolate extraction
units were installed so that, if failure in one unit occurred, percolate
collection from the lysimeter continued through the remaining unit. Each
unit utilized three porous ceramic, round-bottomed, straight-wall cups, rated
at 1 bar under high flow conditions; these were 4 cm in diameter by 19 cm in
length. . The cups were connected tpgether with tygon vacuum tubing having 6
mm I.D. and 4.8 mm wall thickness. The cup connection to the vacuum tubing
consisted of a short length of glass tubing which passed through a rubber
stopper cemented in the end of the cup, and was inserted into the vacuum
tubing. The vacuum tubes for each unit passed through a hole constructed in
the side of the lysimeter. Rubber grommets were fitted around the tubing and
coated with silicone sealer to provide an effective water barrier.
At this time, a control ten-siometer, consisting of a porous ceramic cup
with a suction value of 1 bar, cemented and sealed with cold-setting silicone
rubber to tygon tubing was installed. The tubing (11 mm I.D. and 1.6 mm wall
thickness) for this unit also passed through a grommetted hole (19 mm
diameter) in the side of the lysimeter. After inspection, the soil taken
from the bottom of the lysimeter was replaced and packed by hand around the
extraction units. The remaining void was then filled with soil that had
originally been taken from the unit. A bottom plate was placed on this
surface and tack-welded to the pipe. The pipe section was then inverted and
the bottom plate was welded to the pipe section. The welded joint, after
cleaning and inspection, was sealed with a coating of silicone.
The prepared tubes were transported to the test facilities where a crane
was used to place each lysimeter on earth footings that had been leveled to
the proper depth in the excavation. Tygon vacuum tubing was laid in a
prepared trench from the test facility to each lysimeter and connected by a
polyethylene male-female connection to the short piece of tubing that had
been provided on each extraction unit. The connections were cemented
together and sealed with a cold setting silicone rubber. Tygon tubing from
12
-------
4cm Dia Ceramic Cup
for Percolate Collection
Tensiometer
Unit
15 cm
Tygon4*.
Tubing
for
Percolate
Collection
Collection Plane
,76m Diameter
x
1.07m Height
Figure 4. Arrangement of Percolate Collection
Units in Tube Lysimeter
13
-------
the test manhole was connected to the control tensiometer at this time also.
After inspection of all connections, the tube lysimeters were buried with
material excavated from the lysimeter trench. Stored topsoil was then spread
over the tops of the tube lysimeters to a depth of 30 cm.
Soil compaction did occur during the process of driving the pipe
sections into the soil profile. Excavation of the bottom 15 cm of soil from
the unit was difficult in all cases, indicating that the density of the soil
in the lysimeter may have been greater than that observed and experienced at
adjacent depths outside of the driven pipe sections. Two permeability tests
using a falling head permeameter with no pressure were conducted on soil
samples taken from the bottom of two units. Results gave rates of
permeability below 1 x 10"8 cm/sec. These results and the packing of the
soil that .was evident in the removal of the lower 15 cm of soil from the test
units caused concern about the validity of comparisons between percolate
flows in field soils and those found within the tube lysimeters.
Tray Lysimeters—
The design and installation of the tray lysimeters utilized in the
project were based upon the extraction devices developed by Duke and Raise
(6). The 56 trays used on the project were 15 cm wide, 20 cm deep, and 150
cm long. The top area of each tray was 0.232 m2. Four trays utilized for
extracting percolate samples for priority organic analysis were constructed
of stainless steel (fittings and tubing were constructed from teflon
material) whereas the others were constructed of 18-gauge galvanized sheet
metal.
The tray lysimeters were installed in horizontal cavities dug radially
outward from the plot's underground equipment shelter. A plan view is shown
in Figure 3. The underground equipment shelter (manhole) was constructed in
an excavation that had been obtained by boring a 3.35 m diameter hole at the
center of the test plot to a depth of 3.35 to 3.65 m. The placement of the
boring rig and, subsequently, the travel of other vehicles on the test plot,
were restricted to the sector where a later excavation was to be made to
place the tube lysimeters. The side walls of the manhole were formed into a
10-sided polygon, 3.2 m in diameter and 2.8 m high. Treated tongue-and-
groove'lumber, 5 cm thick, was bolted to three angle-iron "hoops." The
exterior corner joints on each side were covered with a strip of 20.3 cm-wide
galvanized flashing material. The completed, painted wall units were'lowered
into the prepared excavation.
After leveling the wall sections, rectangular openings, 25 x 30 cm, were
cut into the wooden walls at each tray lysimeter location so that the
rectangular cavity could be drilled for installing the tray. Once the holes
were cut, metal flashing was placed around the rectangular openings to hold
back pea gravel poured to fill the void space between the soil and the wooden
wall. The gravel provided a rapid drainage pathway for the percolate
intercepted by the manhole roof. It was found that a grouting operation was
necessary to stabilize the pea gravel around the rectangular cavities.
The hydraulic soil coring and sampling machine that had been modified
and used by Dukes at Colorado State was employed to dig the horizontal
14
-------
cavity. The horizontal cavities for the trays were dug in two steps. A
10 cm diameter pilot hole was drilled with a flight auger to a distance of
2.5 to 3 m horizontally into the earthen wall. Loss of control in vertical
alignment of the pilot hole caused a dome to form in the final cavity roof in
the first four holes drilled. These holes were modified by redrilling and
increasing the cavity length until a flat section was available for the
1.52 m tray. Stabilization of the boring unit so that horizontal and
vertical alignment was maintained during construction of the cavity was
essential.
After completion of the pilot hole, a rectangular coring device with a
sharp front edge that sheared the soil to produce the final rectangular-
shaped cavity was pushed into the soil by hydraulic pressure. The sheared
soil was stored in the interior of the coring device. A portion of soil
removed during the coring phase was placed in plastic garbage bags and used
to fill the tray installed in that particular cavity. The three holes at
each depth were drilled 108 degrees apart to provide as large a sampling area
as possible.
Holes were punched in the end of the tray nearest to the manhole. The
hole location and dimensions are shown in Figure 5. An inflatable air bag
was constructed for each tray. The inflated air bag was to keep the tray in
contact with the roof of the cavity in a manner similar .to that used in the
Colorado State study. Lay-flat butyl tubing, 10 cm in diameter, was cut into
1.5m segments to form the air bag. A valve stem from a truck tire was
attached by vulcanization to each segment. The ends of each bag were folded
and sealed by vulcanization. An air bag was then glued to the bottom of each
tray. An airhose assembly, that had been previously checked for leaks by
submersion in a water bath while attached to an inflated bag, was then
connected to the valve stem and the air bag was inflated. Air pressure was
maintained for at least a week for leak detection. The air bag assembly was
then deflated and remained in the deflated state until after the tray had
been inserted into the cavity.
The extraction units consisted of five ceramic tubes fastened together.
These tubes were made by sawing off the closed ends of flat-bottom straight-
wall porous ceramic cups 30 cm in length; they had a one bar bubbling
pressure. The modified cups were joined by cementing a tygon tubing sleeve
to two adjacent units. One end of each complete unit was connected to a
plastic fitting that passed through the end of the tray during installation
and was joined to a length of tygon vacuum tubing during the installation
process. The vacuum tubing from the two extraction units in the tray would
be joined to a Y-connection located in the manhole which provided two
separate percolation collection systems. If one extraction unit failed it
could be sealed off and the other used.
The other end of the extraction unit was fitted to a length of 3 mm-I.D.
tygon tubing. During installation this piece of tygon tubing was folded back
and buried in the fill soil of the tray. The remainder of the tubing was
passed through a separate hole in the end of the tray closest to the manhole
and was terminated in the manhole. The ends of the tubing were tightly
crimped to prevent air entry. This small tube could be used to flush out the
15
-------
Sheet Metal Ties
38cm O.C.
Riveted or Spot
Welded to Sldewalla.
Fabricated from 18 ga
Galvanized Steel
20.3 cm
16 ga Ties Recessed approx
'1.2 cm below top of Trough
m
•m
m
m
m
-
1 1
1 .--l^ cm
i T
_L^-6 ™M_
-
-------
ceramic tubes if a slime buildup were to occur. The wick assembly is shown
in Figure 6.
The installation of each tray lysimeter began with the placement of
sifted soil (wire mesh with 1 cm between strands) in the bottom of the tray
to a depth of 2 to 2.5 cm. Two wick units were placed on the soil bed in the
bottom of the tray. The tygon tubing and plastic fittings were inserted
through the proper holes then sealed with grommets in the end of the tray. A
coating of silicone sealer was placed over each grommet both on the inside
and outside of the tray. Soil was then gently placed around and over the
ceramic candle. The remaining space in the tray was filled by placing thin
layers of sifted soil in the tray and firming these layers by hand. A
tensiometer unit consisting of a porous ceramic cup glued to a length of
tygon tubing sufficient to reach the manhole cavity was installed just below
the soil surface in the tray.
After filling and leveling the soil in the tray, a thin layer of soil
was sifted over the tray. The tray was then moved from the assembly point to
the entrance of its respective cavity and pushed into the cavity beneath the
undisturbed soil zone. After the lengths of vacuum tubing were glued to the
plastic fittings and coated with silicone sealer, the tray was pushed to its
permanent position.
When all the trays had been installed, the air bags were inflated to
raise the trays to positions where they were in contact with the roofs of the
cavities. About half the bags deflated within 24 hours. The 75 to 80 kg
weight of some 0.045 m3 of soil in the tray imposed greater stress on the
inflated bags than had been experienced in the pre-i nstal lation leak test
under no-load conditions. Rather than repair the air bags, a decision was
made to place wooden wedges under each tray. Three pairs of wedges were
forced into position between the sides of the cavity and the inflatable bag.
After installation of the tray lysimeters, the manhole structures were
completed. Each unit was floored and a sump pump was installed' in a
reservoir under the floor. The outfall of the sump pump was a gravel bed
buried at a depth of 60 cm below the soil surface and located 6 m from the
edge of the manhole. An earth-covered roof was constructed over each unit.
Access to the unit was by means of a manhole 1 m in diameter. An air vent
system was installed to produce" an air circulation pattern that reduced
humidity levels in the manhole facility.
Vacuum System—
The lysimeters in each battery were in close proximity and the number of
units in each battery ranged from 13 to 17. A vacuum system similar to the
system employed by Dr. Harold Dukes of Colorado State University (7), was
used in this study. The volume of space in the wick system and the
connecting vacuum tubing lines was estimated for the respective lysimeter
batteries to determine the volume evacuated. One vacuum unit with a 38 liter
reservoir serviced the lysimeters in each battery.
The lysimeters were attached individually to the vacuum unit through a
loop system. Each lysimeter unit had an individual control panel. This
17
-------
Tygon Tubing
11 nun ID
14mm OD
3cm Length
Bonded with CPVC Cement
Ceramic Candle
10mm ID
13mm OO
300mm Length
Tygon Tubing
7.9mm ID
18 mm OD
/
00
Polyethelyne
To
Access Well
Plastic Pipe
10mm ID
13mm OD-_
ne /
nnector1 /
1
-1 U
f
!
i
i
1
n L
.u
1
i —
3.2mm|{l/8"
1
Tygon Tubing
llmm ID
14mm OD
3cm Length
Tygon Tubing
3.2mm ID
6.4mm OD
Flush Line-
- 27 NPT)
Ceramic Candle
10mm ID
13mm OD
300mm Length
Tygon Tubing
11 mm ID
14mm OD
3cm Length
NPT x 1/4'
Imperial
Figure 6. Wick Assembly
-------
system adequately handled the wide range of vacuum requirements experienced
among the lysimeters in each battery.
The design for the control panel utilized for each tray or tube
lysimeter has been outlined in previous studies (6, 7). . A schematic diagram
of the vacuum system control panel used'on each lysimeter is shown in Figure
7.
In the original design, the control of the vacuum in each lysimeter was
regulated by using the readings taken on two tensiometers. One of these was
a reference tensiometer located in the undisturbed soil and the other was a
tensiometer installed in the lysimeter. The.tensiometers were installed
horizontally from the manhole so that less equipment would be present on the
soil surface.
A reference tensiometer, consisting of a porous ceramic cup glued to a
section of thin-wall tygon tubing was placed in the undisturbed soil
approximately 30 to 60 cm to the side of the tube or tray lysimeter. The
water reservoir for the tensiometer was also connected to a manometer in
which air was the fluid between the mercury in the manometer and the water in
the reservoir.
The tensiometer in the lysimeter was implanted in the top of the tray
lysimeter when the tray was being filled with soil and the tubing was
extended through the end of the tray. In the case of the tube lysimeters,
the tensiometer unit was installed in the bottom of the tube at the same time
the percolate collection units were installed. The tubing from the tray
and/or tubes was also connected to water reservoirs consisting of plastic
pipe. These units were hooked to mercury manometers in the same manner as
the reference tensiometers.
Originally, the first step in the lysimeter operational procedure was to
adjust the needle valve on the control panel to regulate the vacuum level in
the candle so that eventually the tray tensiometer manometer reading would
equal that of the reference unit in the undisturbed soil. A series of needle
valve adjustments over time would be necessary to bring about agreement
between the reference tensiometer and the tensiometer in the tray or tube.
Under the planned schedule of irrigation, divergence in the tensiometer
readings was not expected since the moisture content of the soil was
anticipated to remain at or near field capacity during the projected period.
Irrigation System Design
Treated municipal wastewaters were to be applied to the test plots by
sprinkler irrigation. The hydraulic loading rates for the project cropping
system were developed in accordance with the recommended EPA design
procedures (18).
Hydraulic Loading Rates—
The design rates for a land application system may be dependent on one
or a combination of soil characteristics at the site, concentration of
materials in the wastewater, and/or climatic conditions.
19
-------
Pressure
Switch
ro
O
Tygon
Vacuum
-Tubing
Solenoid
1/8" F, l/4m
Bushing
V
Tee 6462-20
\
-Needle
Valve
Male
Pipe
Adapter
To
Extractor
^-Needle V-i /a» no<]
1/8
Pipe Nipple
1/8"
NPT Tee
Figure 7. Lysimeter Control Panel Design
-------
Climatic factors — the following discussion presents the development of
precipitation and evapotranspiration conditions required for calculations.
Precipitation — Forty years of monthly precipitation data obtained at
Lubbock were used to determine monthly design values for use in the EPA
procedure. The National Weather Service recording station at the Lubbock
International Airport was approximately 12 km NW of the test plot at the Gray
site and 33.8 km NNW of the Hancock site in Lynn County. Frequency analysis
was employed to determine the monthly precipitation- that will occur at least
once in a five-year period. The recurrence interval (R.I.) was calculated by
the formula:
R.I.
where l\! = number of monthly values, and
M = rank of individual value.
The monthly values obtained using the analysis outlined in the EPA
manual are shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2
PRECIPITATION VALUES FOR 5-YEAR RETURN PERIOD
Month
January
February
March
Apri 1
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
cm
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76 '
10.11
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60
78.08
Evapotranspiration rates—The calculation of specific evapotranspira-
tion rates consisted of two tasks. The first task was to calculate the
potential evapotranspiration rate. This value is representative of a well-
watered crop of alfalfa which is under no moisture stress (9). The second
task was to determine the water needs of the crops, consisting of bermuda
grass and annual crops of cotton, grain sorghum and winter wheat, to be used
21
-------
on the test plots during their growth and development.
Potential evapotranspiration rates used in determining the hydraulic
rates for the test plots were estimated by means of the Jensen-Haise
procedure (9). This procedure, classified as a "radiation method," utilizes
local temperature and percentage of sunshine.
The basic equation for calculating the potential daily
evapotranspiration (ET ) in langleys/day as defined for a well-watered
alfalfa crop is: P
ETp = CT (T - Tx) Rs ' (2)
where T = average monthly temperature in °C.
The other factors in equation (2) are variables developed from the following
equations. Cj is a temperature coefficient defined as:
T = f 4- r r ' ^ '
I L1 + 02LH
where GI = 20 - [(2°C)(elevation in m above MSL)/305],
Cp = 7.6°C, and
CM = 50
The values ez and el are the saturation vapor pressure in millibars (mb) at
the mean maximum and mean minimum temperatures for the warmest month at the
site.
T is a constant defined as:
A
TX = -2.5 - 0.14 (e2-e.,)0C/mb-(elevation
in m above MSL)/550 (4)
R , the incoming solar radiation, is defined to be:
RS = (0.35 + 0.61S)R$o (5)
where S = ratio of actual to possible sunshine, and
R = average cloudless-day solar radiation for the month
in question and the latitude position of the site.
The average monthly temperature, percentage of possible sunshine, and
temperature values for determining e: and e2 were obtained from a
climatological summary for Lubbock published by the National Weather Service.
The latitude and elevation of the Lubbock International Airport weather
station were used rather than those at the individual sites since the maximum
22
-------
difference in latitude between the station and the sites was approximately 18
minutes and the elevation difference was less than 65 m. The conversion of
langleys/day to mm/d of water was based upon the change of enthalpy at the
average monthly temperature. The monthly values of ET are given in Table 3.
To adjust the potential evapotranspiration requirements which were
calculated for alfalfa to evaporation requirements for crops grown on the
site, crop coefficient (kc) values were developed. The procedure utilized
for determining the kc values is that outlined in Guidelines for Predicting
Crop Hater Requirements, published by the Food and Agricultural Organization
(FAO) of the United Nations (5). The monthly ETp values were multiplied by
the appropriate kc values to determine the monthly values for each particular
crop. Evapotranspiration values for each cropping season were developed
including both periods when bare soil and/or crops were present. The results
obtained for cotton, grain sorghum, and bermuda grass systems are given, in
Table 3. For months when bare soils and crops were present, a proportion of
the ET for each condition was computed and summed to obtain the kc value.
TABLE 3
MONTHLY ET AND ET VALUES FOR
p crop
CONDITIONS AT LUBBOCK, TEXAS
ET
crop
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Total
ETP
(cm)
3.91
6.01
10.01
15.84
20.80
26.31
25.98
24.15
16.77
11.78
6.18
4.12
171.00
Cotton
(cm)
2.97*
3.97*
5.21*
6.50*
13.10**
11.57
24.03
29.00
19.96
11.07
3.46**
2.39*
133.23
Bermuda
(cm)
1.40***
2.16***
6.00
15.84
20.80
26.31
25.98
24.15
16.77
11.78
3.59***
1.50***
156.28
Grain
Sorghum
(cm)
2.97**
3.97**
5.21**
6.50**
10.92
17.10
28.32
25.12
10.90
6.83**
2.97**
2.39**
123.20
*bare soil
**partially bare soil and part cover
***dormant vegetation
23
-------
Hydraulic Loading Calculations—
The hydraulic loading rate for each test plot was determined using both
water and nitrogen balances as design criteria (18). These two calculations
and the crop coefficients used to adjust evapotranspiration values are
described in the following sections. .
Mater balance criteria—Initially, permeability data published in the
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey for Lubbock County, Texas (3)
were utilized as the basis for des-ign. These data had been obtained from
representative profiles of the soil series and served as an estimate of soil
water flow conditions at the site. The results obtained with these data gave
conservative values in that the capacity of the soil profile to transmit
water (LWp in cm per month) was used as the basis for the hydraulic loading
rates. In light of these conservative figures a series of infiltration tests
was made at each site in July 1982 and used as the basis for-determining
percolation rates. The split-ring infiltrometer tests yielded the following
steady state infiltration rates:
Friona Ap series - 46 mm/hr,
Friona B22t - 179 mm/hr,
Amarillo At - 62 mm/hr, and
Amarillo B22t - 84 mm/hr.
Using the lower values of these data as the limiting condition for percolate
determination, new hydraulic loading rates were computed.
The monthly hydraulic loading rate (LWp) in cm of water, assuming that
the surface runoff of precipitation is zero, can be defined as:
LW = ET - P + P (6)
p c r w v '
where ET = monthly rate of evapotranspiration of crop in cm,
P = monthly precipitation (5-yr return period) in cm, and
P = monthly probable soil percolation rate in cm (18).
W
The loading rates obtained for the three cropping systems are presented in
Appendix B. The monthly values of Pw are based on the number of operating
days at each site each week (2.5 days) imposed by the irrigation priorities
adopted for the project.
Nitrogen balance criteria—The nitrogen balances were based on a total
Kjeldahl nitrogen content of 27 mg/1 N measured in the wastewater collected
at the Gray site and on 24 mg/1 N wastewater produced at the Lubbock
wastewater treatment plant in July 1982. The configuration of treatment
processes used at the Lubbock treatment plant produced different effluent
streams which caused the variations in nitrogen content.
The seasonal nitrogen needs of the crop were taken from the EPA design
manual (18). The monthly nitrogen use values were calculated by multiplying
the seasonal nitrogen need by the ratio obtained when each monthly value of
24
-------
evapotranspi ration for the crop was subtracted from the precipitation (Pr-ET)
value for the crop and the result was divided by the (Pr-ET) value for the
growing season.
The monthly hydraulic load LW/..N in cm of water was computed by use of'
the following equation:
. _ C0 (*-*W + U 00)
where C = nitrogen content in mg/1 in percolating water
p (10 mg/1 under EPA guidelines),
Pr-ET = net evapotranspi ration in cm,
crop •
U = nitrogen uptake by crop in kg/ha during the month,
f = fraction of applied nitrogen removed by denitrification
and volatilization (0.2 used for determinations), and
C., = nitrogen concentration in mg/1 in applied wastewater.
The values obtained for LW(^) at both sites are given in Appendix B.
The hydraulic loading rates computed for each crop at both sites are
presented in column 5 of these tables. The design loading rate (LWg) in cm
of water applied per month presented in column 6 of Tables C-l to C-3 for
each crop will be limited by the nitrogen content of the wastewater rather
than by soil permeability.
Irrigation System
During the planning phase it was assumed that a permanent-set spr'inkler
irrigation system would be employed on each plot. Economic constraints did
not allow utilization of this system.
A traveling gun system* was subsequently selected which utilized
pressurized treated wastewater from a permanent pump station on each site.
Buried pipe was laid from the pump station to risers. The unit was equipped
with a sprinkler nozzle which sprayed in a circular segment over the area
where the gun had previously traveled. The device was capable of delivering
800 liters (210 gallons) per minute at 552 kN/ma (80 psi) over a half circle
with a diameter of 97.5 m under no-wind conditions. The travel rate of the
unit could be altered through a three-speed gear box and by changing sizes of
an internal vane device which affected the initial travel speed controlled by
the gear box.
The amounts of water applied in each pass could also be varied through
*Green Field Traveler, model LD6330. Manufactured by Boss Irrigation Equip-
ment Company, Lubbock, Texas.
25
-------
gear box adjustments. The speed of movement desired was from 0.15" to 0.45 m
(0.5 to 1.5 ft) per minute, which was sufficient to give an application
volume in each irrigation event of from 4.0 to 6.4 cm over the test areas at
a flow rate of 800 liters/minute through the gun. The rate of water
application over a half circle with a diameter of 97.5 m was .0.213
mm/m"/minute. The rates of infiltration for the two soils in the study were
high (1.5 to 5.1 cm/hr for the Friona soil, and 5.1 to 15.2 cm/hr for the
Amarillo soil) (3) and thus no problem from surface runoff was anticipated
prior to the operational phase.
Irrigation Schedule—
The weekly irrigation sequence for each plot is given in Table 4. The
irrigation unit would be at each site for a 2.5-day period each week. The
bermuda grass plots were irrigated at both sites on Wednesdays. In this
manner, it was possible to irrigate the bermuda .plots at each site three
times and the other two plots twice during the 2.5-day irrigation interval.
Also presented are the approximate number of hours that were projected
for irrigating the plots at the time the irrigation system was designed end
ordered. The variations in time were caused by differences in travel path
lengths and the speed of the gun. The hydraulic loading rates used for the
irrigation system design were based on the rates of soil percolate movement
in the profile. The maximum amount of wastewater to be applied under the
original design was 32 cm/month. The alterations in project loading rates
brought about by field infiltration tests resulted in an undersized unit for
project needs.
Measurement of Irrigation Water—
Because of the variable area coverage of the irrigation water applied
over the plot due to wind, a "catch-can" measurement system was developed.
Four plastic cylinders, 10 cm in diameter and 15 cm in height, with weighted
bases, were placed in a diamond pattern in which two cans were in line with
the manhole cover and parallel to the line of travel of the gun. The
distance between adjacent cans was from 10 to 15 meters. The volumes of
water caught in these four cans were measured with a graduated cylinder as
soon as the irrigation gun plume had moved past the test area adjacent to the
manhole.
Irrigation Gun Pathways—
The location of the test sites with respect to state highways, county
roads, and activities on adjacent parcels restricted the number of paths
across each plot to one. Spray drift caused by wind was the primary
constraint. The paths of the gun at each site are given in Figures 8 and 9.
At the Hancock site, the bermuda grass plot contained the four control-tube
lysimeter units in addition to the two pairs of 122 cm and 183 cm units. The
group of eight tube lysimeters at this location was placed in an excavation
that had been dug in the quadrant southwest from the manhole; the traveling
gun crossed over this installation on a path which had been selected so that
it was normally just upwind of the lysimeter battery installation in the
direction of the prevailing SW winds. Though this was to have insured that
the plot area overlying the test units got a uniform coverage of water in a
majority of irrigation events, it actually influenced the amount of percolate
26
-------
TABLE 4
WEEKLY IRRIGATION SCHEDULE
Irrigation sequence and approximate time in hours
Day
Monday
rv> Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Site
Hancock
Hancock
Hancock-Gray
Gray
Gray
First
Bermuda (3.7h)a
Bermuda (3.7h)
Bermuda (3.7h)
Bermuda (2.5h)
Bermuda (2.5h)
Second
Cotton (2.2h)b
Cotton (2.2h)
Bermuda (2.5h)
Grain Sorghum (2.5h)
Grain Sorghum (2.5h)
Third
Grain Sorghum (1.4h)
Grain Sorghum (1.4h)
Cotton (2.3h)
Cotton (2.3h)
.Speed of 0.3 m/minute
Speed of 0.45 m/minute
-------
Direction | ;
of Travel
Spray Boundary
Site Perimeter (Fence)
Figure 8. Irrigation Coverage of Test Plot at
the Gray Site
28
-------
Qweather Station _^— Pump
©
Travelling
\ Gun Track
~T
0 15m 30m
Direction
of Travel
Hydrant
• Direction
: of Travel
I©
Test
Area
....4
•Site Perimeter'
(Pence)
•Spray Boundary
Figure 9. Irrigation Coverage of Test Plot at
the Hancock Site
29
-------
captured by some of the tube lysimeters on this plot. Moreover, the reduced
water coverage on a plot probably increased the oasis effect experienced by
•the vegetation grown over the lysimeters during the hot, dry and windy
weather that prevailed over the region during much of the two growing
seasons.
Control Lysimeters—
Two pairs of tube lysimeters collecting soil percolate at the 1.2 and
1.8m depths on the bermuda plot at the Hancock site served as the control
system for the project. A metal structure with a removable roof was
installed over these lysimeters. The sides of the structure were forced into
the ground to prevent surface runoff from entering the enclosed area. The
roof was placed on the structure during wastewater irrigation periods but was
removed during the interim periods to expose the bermuda grass in the
structure to sunlight and precipitation.
Initially, each irrigation event on the control units consisted of
flooding the surface of the enclosed area with 15 cm of Lubbock's tap water.
In the 1983 crop season, a configuration of plastic pi'pe was used to sprinkle
the water uniformly over the surface area.
The water amounts applied to the control plots were to be the same as
the design amounts.of treated wastewater applied by irrigation.
Approximately 15 cm of water was applied "weekly to the plots from June 1982
through the second week of November 1982. Eighteen irrigations were applied
to the control plots in the interval from March 26, 1983 to August 18, 1983.
Crops and Cultural Practices
The agricultural crops utilized in the test plots were bermuda grass,
cotton, grain sorghum, and wheat. The same crops were grown each season.
The grass plots were sown with the NK37 strain of bermuda grass. The winter
wheat used was TAM105. In 1982, Richardson Y-303A® was the grain sorghum
variety used, while GSA 1310A was sown in 1983. The cotton varieties planted
were Paymaster 303® and Delta Pine Rio 875®. The latter variety was a short-
season type used during the 1982 crop season for replanting after hail
damage.
Project Cultural Activities—
Upon completion of the manhole facility, the plot areas were filled and
graded in September and October 1981. Areas encompassing the manhole and in
the vicinity of the aluminum access tubes for the neutron probe measurements
were tilled with a garden-type self-propelled rptotiller and by hand tools.
Wheat was sown on all test plots. Calibration of all the percolate
collection systems under the same crop and water management was anticipated.
With no irrigation water available at the site and the low rainfall that
occurred during the fall of 1981 (3.2 cm at the Hancock site from 20 October
through 31 December, 1981, and 3.5 cm at the Gray site for the same period),
a poor stand of wheat resulted. No attempt was made to harvest the wheat
prior to plot preparation in March and April 1982. The plots were cross-
disked and harrowed prior to planting.
30
-------
A flat field surface was provided for planting. No herbicides were
applied on either the cotton or grain sorghum plots since the use of
herbicides might affect the organic content of the percolate.
Wet conditions caused delays in planting and seedling emergence during
the last two weeks of May. Establishment of the crops was hampered by cold
wet soil conditions and hail damage. The final planting of cotton took place
during the first week of July, 1982.
The grain sorghum plots were disked and wheat was sown in mid-November.
The unseasonable cold weather which began the last week of November 1982 and
persisted through February 1983 reduced the stand and growth. The wheat was
disked during land preparation in March 1983.
Deep chiseling of the four crop plots was performed in March 1983.'
Because of the weed control problems experienced during the 1982 season,
herbicide use was planned for the 1983 season. Treflan® was applied and
incorporated into the soil on the cotton plots at each site. The plots were
then disked and listed on the contour in May, 1983. Milogard®was
incorporated in the grain sorghum plots in mid-May.
Planting of the grain sorghum and cotton plots was completed May 1 at
the Hancock site and May 24 at the Gray site. A post-emergence herbicide, 2-
4D, was used on the grain sorghum plots in June. The interrow areas were
plowed twice after seedling emergence.
Weather Monitoring Activities
Measurements of precipitation and meteorological data at each site were
needed to interpret the results of percolate collection activities. The
location of the instrumentation group in the weather station constructed at
each test site is shown in Figures 1 and 2. The parameters measured at each
site, type instruments used, and frequency of the measurements are listed in
Table 5.
Water, Soils and Crop Analysis
Water Analysis—
The amounts and quality of the water applied to the soil surface and the
amounts and quality of the water collected as percolate by the vacuum
extraction lysimeters were the prime interests of the data collection effort.
Quantity determinations—The input water to the plot areas consisted of
precipitation and irrigation with treated wastewater. The precipitation
amounts for each test site were measured with both recording and non-
recording rain gages located in the weather station at each site.
Precipitation was assumed to have been applied uniformly over the 2.5 ha
site. The amount of treated wastewater applied during the irrigation event
was determined by the catch-can procedure described previously.
During the operational phase of the project, daily inspections were made
of the lysimeters attached to the manhole vacuum systems. The percolate
31
-------
TABLE 5
MEASUREMENT FREQUENCY OF WEATHER PARAMETERS
Parameters
Type Equipment
Measurement Frequency
ro
Barometric pressure
Pan evaporation
Pan maximum water temperature
Pan minimum water temperature
Precipitation
Radiation - global
Radiation - net
Relative humidity
Temperature
Temperature - wet bulb
Temperature - maximum
Temperature - minimum
Wind speed at 2 meters
Wind speed at 0.6 meters
Microbarograph
Standard evaporation pan
Maximum thermometer
Minimum thermometer
Standard weighing/recording
rain gages
Pyranograph
Net-radiometer
Hygrothermograph
Hygrothermpgraph
Sling psychrometer
Maximum thermometer
Minimum thermometer
Totalizing anemometer
with event recorder
Totalizing anemometer
Continuous chart
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily and continuous chart
Continuous chart
Continuous chart
Continuous chart
Continuous chart
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
Daily
-------
collected in the 20-liter glass bottle which functioned as the specific
percolate storage unit for the lysimeter was measured in a graduated
cylinder.
Sample collection—Grab samples were taken using all or a portion of the
daily volume collected from a lysimeter. These were collected when a
lysimeter first began percolate production, resumed percolate collection
after several days with no percolate collection, and during designated sample
collection events.
Weekly composite samples were prepared by taking a portion of each daily
collection volume from the lysimeter. Composite samples were.also taken with
and without an acid preservative. The composited samples were stored in 4°C-
refrigerators at each site until the end. of the sampling interval.
Samples of irrigation water were obtained from the plastic containers
used for determining applied water volumes. The collected water from the
four containers" used in the volume determination was composited as an
irrigation water sample for each event on the plot. The sample was collected.
as soon as the plume from the traveling gun had cleared the container layout
on the plot.
Quality determination—Percolate and irrigation water samples were
analyzed for the parameters presented in Table 6. The procedures used are
presented in Volume I of Lubbock Land Treatment System Research _and
Demonstration Project. The original sampling schedule is listed in Table 7.
The parameters that were analyzed in group classification A in Table 7, were
accorded a priority listing based primarily on the limited sample volume
collected. In April, 1983 a sampling schedule was developed to obtain more
quality data from the collected percolate. The collection schedule given in
Table 8 consisted of weekly periods in which' composite or grab samples were
taken from the lysimeter percolate. The weekly composite samples from units
at both sites were taken on an as-collected basis or acid-fixed. Based upon
the amount of sample present, the analyses to be run on each type of
composite sample were prioritized as follows. For the samples not acid-
fixed, the analyses were: 1) pH; 2) chemical oxygen demand (COD); 3) total
dissolved solids (TDS); 4) sulfate (S04); and 5) alkalinity (alk). For the
acid-fixed samples they were: 1) nitrite plus nitrate (N02+ N03); 2) ammonia
(MHO; 3) total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKI\i); 4) COD; 5) Minerals [i.e., sodium
(Ma), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), and magnesium (Mg)]: 6) chloride (Cl); and
7) total organic carbon (TOC).
Grab samples were taken once a week from each lysimeter that had
collected percolate over the previous 24-hour period during the designated
periods shown in Table 8. The sample analysis priorities to be followed
under the grab sample collection schedule were: 1) conductivity; 2) N03; 3)
orthophosphate; 4) bromide; 5) total phosphorous; and 6) organic phosphorous.
In an effort to determine whether solute changes were occurring on a
daily basis, two periods in which daily grab samples were taken from each
contributing lysimeter unit from Monday to Friday were scheduled.
Applications of 2 kilograms of sodium bromide were made over the soil surface
33
-------
TABLE 6
WATER ANALYSES
CO
Alkalinity (Alk) mg/1 of CaCO
Total Organic Carbon (TOG) mg/1
Conductivity mhos
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/1
PH
Chloride (Cl) mg/Cl/1
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg N/l
Nitrite plus Nitrate (NO +NO ) mg N/l
Ammonia (NH ) mg N/l
Total Phospnorus (Total P) mg P/l
Orthophosphate (Qrtho P) mg P/l
Organic Phosphate (Org. P) mg P/l
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) mg/1
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) mg/1
Sulfate (SO ) mg SO /I
Total coliform/100 ml
Fecal Coliform/100 ml
Fecal Strep/100 ml
Salmonella/300 ml
Aluminum (Al) mg/1*
Arsenic (As) mg/1*
Barium (Ba) mg/1*
Boron (B) mg/1*
Calcium (Ca) mg/1*
Cadmium (Cd) mg/1*
Cobalt (Co) mg/1*
Chromium (Cr) mg/1*
Copper (Cu) mg/1*
Iron (Fe) mg/1*
Lead (Pb) mg/1*
Magnesium (Mg) mg/1*
Manganese (Mn) mg/1*
Mercury (Hg) mg/1*
Molybdenum (Mo) mg/1*
Nickle (Ni) mg/1*
Potassium (K) mg/1*
Selenium (Se) mg/1*
Silver (Ag) mg/1*
Sodium (Na) mg/1*
Thallium (Tl) mg/1*
Zinc (Zn) mg/1*
Anthracene/phenathrene PPB
Atrazine PPB
Benzene PPB
Benzeneacetic Acid PPB
4-t-butylphenol PPB
Carbontetrachloride PPB
4-chloroaniline PPB
Chlorobenzene PPB
Chloroform PPB
2-chlorophenol PPB
1-chlorotetradecane PPB
Dibutylphathalate PPB
2,3-dichloroaniline PPB
3,4-dichloroaniline PPB**
Dichlorobenzene PPB M,P,O
DichloroHiethane PPB
2,4-dichlorophenol PPB
Diethylphthalate PPB
Diisooctylplithalate PPB
Dioctylphthalate PPB
Dodecanoic acid PPB
Etliyl benzene PPB
Heptadecane PPB
Hexadecane PPB
Hexadecanoic acid PPB
Methylheptadecanoate PPB
Methylhexadecanoate PPB
1-methylnaphthalene PPB
2-methylphenol PPB
4-methylnaphtlialene PPB
Naphthalene PPB
4-nonylphenol PPB
Octadecane PPB
Phenol PPB
Propazine PPB
Ot-terpineol PPB
Tetrachloroethylene PPB
Toluene PPB
Trichloroethane PPB
Trichloroethylne PPB
*Total and Available
**PPB = Parts Per Billion
-------
TABLE 7
SAMPLING SCHEDULE FOR PERCOLATE
Parameter
Alkalinity
COD
TDS
Conductivity
.pH
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
NH3
N02+N03
Total Phosphorus
Organic P
Orthophosphate
TOC
Ca
ci.
K
Mg
Na
S04
Heavy Metals
Ag, As, Ba, DC, Cr, Cu,
Pb, Se, Zn, Co, Al, Mn,
Organics
Fecal Col i form
Group Classification*
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
A
B
A
B
C
Fe, Hg, Ni
Ti, Mo, B
D
C
*Key: A - weekly; B - Monthly; C - Quarterly; D - Yearly
35
-------
co
cr>
TABLE 8
SAMPLING SCHEDULE FOR MAY 1983 TO AUGUST 1983
Percolate
Five Day Daily
Composite Samples Grab Samples Discrete Samples
Month Hancock Gray Hancock Gray Hancock Gray
May Week 1 Meek 1
Week 2 Meek 2
Week 3* Week 3*
Week 4 Week 4
June Week 1 Week 1
Week 2 Week 2 Week 2
Week 3 Week 3
Week 4* Week 4*
July Week 1 Week 1
Week 2 Week 2
Week 3
Week 5 Week 5
August Week 1 Week 1
Week 2* Week 2*
Week 3 Week 3
Week 4 Week 4
Water Quality
Five Day Daily
Discrete Samples
Hancock Gray
Week 4 Week 4
Week 4 Week 4
Week 1 Week 1
*Acid fixed
-------
overlying the lysimeters the week prior to the first 5-day sampling period at
each test area in hopes of tracing the movement of percolate water through
the profile.
Also, irrigation waters applied to the test plots were to be analyzed
for 1) nutrients (TKN, NO,, NH3, Total P, PO^ Organic P); 2) minerals (i.e.,
Na, K, Ca, Mg); 3) COD; and 4) IDS. The five-day periods in which this test
was scheduled- are listed in the right hand column of Table 8.
Soil Analysis—
Core analysis—Soil cores were taken within 6.0 m of the ends of the
lysimeter trays at various time intervals over the life of the project. Each
core was divided into 30-cm sections, then those from the same depth at each
test plot were composited to make a sample.- Soil samples obtained with the
auger were not subdivided.
A part of each sample was put into a glass screw-cap jar immediately
after segmentation for priority organic analysis. The rest of the sample was
put into a sterile polyethylene bag and sealed. The samples were then put
into an ice chest and taken to Lubbock Christian College Institute of Water
Research (LCCIWR) for analysis. The physical, chemical, and bacterial
analyses that were performed on the soil samples are shown in Table 9. The
procedures used are presented in Volume I of Lubbock Land Treatment System
Research and Demonstration Project. A complete analysis was run during the
first (March 1981) and last (November 1983) sampling periods. Partial
analyses were run on samples taken in January 1982 and March 1983 from a few
plots.
Bromide analysis—Movement of bromide through the soil profile can
simulate movement of nitrate (18). An application of sodium bromide was made
over different 6 m by 6 m test areas on each crop plot each spring during the
test phase. Soil cores taken to depths of 1.8 m at each test area in
subsequent seasons were analyzed for bromide so that the rate of movement of
the bromide front could be determined.
Soil moisture determinations—Weekly monitoring of soil moisture data
began in the spring of 1982 with a neutron probe, and continued through
August 1983 except for a few periods during wet field or frozen soil
conditions. Three access tubes were emplaced on each plot from 5 to 6 m from
the center of the manhole. The average of the three readings at each depth
on the plot was assumed to represent the soil moisture conditions in the
vicinity of the test system. The readings were made at 15.2 cm intervals
from the surface to depths of 1.5 to 2.1 meters.
Crop Analysis—
Yield data on each plot were calculated from crop samples taken from
three subplot areas that had been laid out parallel with the path of the
traveling-gun irrigation unit and in line with the lysimeter battery. On the
bermuda plots, the grass was cut from a grid block with an area of 1 m2 that
had been selected by a random number generation process for each subplot.
The harvested material was put into plastic bags and taken to LCCIWR for
weight, moisture content, and the constituent determinations (Table 10).
37
-------
TABLE 9
SOIL ANALYSES
Alk mg/g CaC03**
TOC mg/g**
Conductivity mhos**
IDS mg/g**
pH**
Cl~ mg/Cl~ Total**
TKN mg/g N Total**
N02/N03 mg/g N**
NH3 mg/g N**
Total P mg/g P**
Ortho P mg/g P**
S0^~ mg/g S**
Organic P**
Organic Matter**
Sulfur mg/g
Specific Gravity
Texture**
Bulk Density**
Color**
Total Coliform/g**
Fecal Coliform/g**
Fecal Strep/g**
Acti nomycetes/g**
Fungi/g**
Al mg/g*
As mg/g*
Ba mg/g*
B mg/g*
Ca mg/g*
Cd mg/g*
Co mg/g*
Cr mg/g*
Cu mg/g*
Fe mg/g*
Pb mg/g*
Mg mg/g*
Mn mg/g*
Hg mg/g*
Mo mg/g*
Ni mg/g*
K mg/g*
Se mg/g*
Ag mg/g*
Na mg/g*
Tl mg/g*
Zn mg/g*
Acenaphthylene PPB***
Anthracene/
phenanthrene PPB
Atrazine PPB
Benzene PPB
Benzeneactic acid PPB
4-t-butylphenol PPB
Carbontetrachloride PPB
4-chloroaniline PPB
Chlorobenzene PPB
Chloroform PPB
2-chlorophenol PPB
1-chlorotetradecane PPB
Dibutylphthalate PPB
2,3-dichlorotetradecane PPB
3,4-dichloroaniline PPB
Dichlorobenzene PPB
Dichloromethane PPB
2,4-dichlorophenol PPB
Diethylphthalate PPB
Diisooctylphthalate PPB
Dioctylphthalate PPB
Dodecanoic acid PPB
Ethylbenzene PPB
Heptadecane PPB
Hexadecane PPB
Hexadecanoic acid PPB
Methylheptadecanoate PPB
Methyhexadecanoate PPB
1-methylnapthalene PPB
2-methylphenol PPB
4-methylphenol PPB
Napthalene PPB
4-nonylphenol PPB
Octadecane PPB
Phenol PPB
Propazine PPB
a-terpineol PPB
Tetrachloroethylene PPB
Toluene PPB
Trihloroethane PPB
Trichloroethylene PPB
*Total and Available
**Parameters sampled during partial analysis.
***PPB = Parts Per Billion
38
-------
TABLE 10
CROPS ANALYSES
pH
TKN mg/g N
NH3 mg/g N
Total P mg/g P
Oil mg/g
Protein mg/g
KCN mg/g
Fatty Acid mg/g
Sulfur mg/g S
Starch mg/g
Niacin mg/g
Fiber mg/g
Biotin mg/g
Total Coliform/g
Fecal Coliform/g
Fecal Strep/g
Al mg/g Total
As mg/g Total
Ba mg/g Total
B mg/g Total
Ca mg/g Total
Cd mg/g Total
Co mg/g Total
Cr mg/g Total
Cu mg/g Total
Fe mg/g Total
Pb mg/g Total
Mg mg/g Total
Mn mg/g Total
Hg mg/g Total
Mo mg/g Total
Ni mg/g Total
Se mg/g Total
Se mg/g Total
Ag mg/g Total
Na mg/g Total
Tl mg/g Total
Zn mg/g Total
39
-------
Yields of cotton and grain sorghum were determined by harvesting the
grain head and lint over three one-meter lengths of row from a position on
each sub-plot selected by random number generation. Weight, moisture
content, and the constituents, shown in Table 10, of the bagged samples were
analyzed by LCCIWR.
40
-------
SECTION V
SYSTEM OPERATIONS
LYSIMETERS
A number of problems developed in the lysimeter facilities during the
project. In the sections that follow the problem areas and the resultant
corrective actions will be discussed.
Flooding of Manholes
Inundation of the manholes with resultant damage to the percolate
collection system elicited the most concern. The flooding events were the
result of piping conditions which developed when the soil surface around the
test facility was flooded from excessive precipitation. The tube lysimeters
were minimally affected.
Piping of water into the cavity of some of the tray lysimeters at the
60 cm level occurred on project sites as a result of ponding of applied
irrigation water from both sprinkler and flood irrigation events, and also of
ponding of surface water from excessive precipitation. Piping failure in
fill material occurred at one manhole causing water to enter the manhole via
the vacuum tube trench leading from the tube lysimeter battery. In a few
instances, piping developed in an area between the pea-gravel layer and the
soil surrounding the manhole assembly. In these cases, water e-ntered the
manhole through tray cavities at the 1.2 and 1.8 meter depths.
Flooding from piping events occurred at least once in each of the
manholes during the project period. Damage to the systems in the west
manhole at the Hancock site and the north manhole at the Gray site was not
appreciable since the water depth never rose to the level where the percolate
collection system was located. Flood damage at other manholes was extensive
and required the rebuilding of the percolate collection system. In the
aftermath of these flood events, the vacuum pump unit had to be removed and
repaired. Corrosion of the components on the control panels in the aftermath
of flooding was responsible for at least two vacuum pump unit failures during
the 1983 crop season. Each flood event usually deposited enough sediment to
cover the bottom of the manhole to a depth of 30 to 60 cm. The south manhole
at the Hancock site required rebuilding three times during the active project
phase and each of the other three units that suffered major flood damage
required two renovations.
Sump pumps with capacities of 19 to 30 liters per minute were not
effective when piping occurred because of the large amount of sediment that
41
-------
entered the manhole. Usually the volume of water entering the manhole was so
great that the sump pump could not have handled the inflow without damage
occurring to the percolate collection system.
Problems associated with flooding were not limited to damage of the
system components. There was also concern that the flows in some instances
were sufficient to erode soil from the zone of contact between the soil in
the top of the tray and the roof of the cavity at the 60 cm level. The slope
of the manhole roof was such that only a 10 or 12 cm opening remained for
the cavity entrance at the 0.6 meter level; this prevented inspection of
these units. Water from flood events entering the cavities at the 1.2 and
1.8 meter levels caused collapse of the wall sections in some instances.
This could have led to a poor interface connection between the roof and the
top of the tray.
In the aftermath of a flood event, the channels which had developed from
piping action were located. After the soil had dried, the channels were dug
out and the excavated area was backfilled. In the larger cavities, plastic
bags were filled with soil and tamped into place.
Vacuum System
Problems developed with the original tensiometer design and in the
associated operational procedures when the data collection phase was
initiated. Some of these problems had been masked by the dry soil conditions
wh-ich prevailed in the soil profile during the months of July through
September, 1982. The moisture levels had been generally at soil matrix
potentials greater than one bar and thus out of the operational range of the
tensiometers. The vacuum levels in the lysimeters could not be adjusted or
evaluated while the tensiometers were inoperable. The three primary problem
areas were:
(1) The use of deaerated water in the tensiom&ters, not having
prevented gas bubbles from forming in the horizontal tubing, led to
inconsistent manometer readings.
(2) The use of the flexible thin-wall tubing in the assembly of the
tensiometers caused a varying tubing geometry which led to poor
reliability in manometer readings.
(3) The use of air, a compressible fluid, as the connecting fluid
between the mercury in the manometers and the water in the
tensiometer unit caused a lag in readings.
The delay in manometer response was solved by replacing the air with
water. The inability to solve the first two problems listed above led to a
decision to eliminate the original system in August 1982. In September 1982,
commercial tensiometers were installed as reference units to provide soil
matrix potential data so that the vacuum levels in the tube and tray
lysimeters could be adjusted. One unit each was installed at the 60 cm and
120 cm depths for controlling the three tray lysimeters on the bermuda and
cotton plots. A reference tensiometer was placed adjacent to the 120 cm tube
42
-------
lysimeters on these plots. Tensiometers 180 cm in length were not installed
that fall because of the low matrix potential readings that were obtained
from the 120 cm tensiometers. The vacuum levels in the lysimeters at the 180
cm level during the fall and winter season were set to correspond to the
readings obtained by the reference tensiometers located at the 120 cm level.
No tensiometers were installed on the grain sorghum plots since winter wheat
was to be planted. The vacuum in the lysimeters on the grain sorghum plots
was set to correspond to the readings obtained in the bermuda grass.
Shelters, filled with insulating material, had been constructed around
the tensiometers. Despite this, several units froze during a cold period
that occurred in the last week of November 1982. Vacuum levels in the other
lysimeters were thereafter set by using the readings obtained from the
workable reference units at the same level. This approach created a problem
in that some of the reference tensiometers had stabilized and portrayed high
matrix potential readings because of the increased soil water content from
late fall irrigation events and precipitation. Units that were later found
to be inoperable continued to record these high readings after soil moisture
content in the profile had decreased.
The installation pattern used for the commercial-type tensiometers was
not sufficient for project control. Only one tensiometer was installed at
each depth in the manhole to control the vacuum in the three trays at that
level and one tensiometer was installed at the reference depth in undisturbed
soil adjacent to each pair of tube lysimeters. Because of the soil
variability that existed around each manhole, this was probably an inaccurate
way to control the vacuum in individual trays.
The vacuum level in the lysimeters after installation of the commercial
tensiometers was controlled through a system in which a mercury manometer was
connected to the vacuum line downstream from the control panel. The needle
valve at the control panel was adjusted to give the desired reading on the
manometer. The set point was based on the values obtained from the reference
tensiometer for that depth.
Vacuum System Air Leakage
The number of connections between the wick assembly in the tray or tube
lysimeter and the remaining units in the percolate collection system were
minimized to reduce sites from which leaks could occur. Each connection was
coated with silicon sealer to ensure an airtight joint. The connections made
between the wick assembly in the tube lysimeter and the vacuum tube leading
to the manhole were such that the two pieces to be joined were taped together
and then sealed with silicon to ensure that the joint was firmly connected
and would remain sealed after burial. In addition, a slack length of vacuum
tubing was provided near each joint so that the soil stresses on the buried
lines would not pull the connection apart. The vacuum lines from the tube
lysimeter to the manhole area were covered with soil by hand before the
remaining soil was placed in the excavation by mechanical means.
The primary area where air leakage occurred was in the wick assemblies
of both the tray and tube lysimeters. In the first season of operation the
43
-------
reference tensiometers initially installed could not be used as control
mechanisms for the vacuum system. The vacuum level in each lysimeter unit
was set approximately at the same point through adjustment of the needle
valve on the control panel. Air leakage into the system in some manholes was
high and the number of hours of operation of the vacuum pumps was excessive.
Adjustment of the vacuum levels in the individual manholes was performed to
satisfy the criterion that the number of hours of operation generally did not
exceed five to six hours during a 24-hour period. In the unit adjustment
phase it was noted, by the frequency of switch operations, that some
lysimeters leaked more than others. These were taken off line.
The tube lysimeters in the north manhole at the Gray site exhibited
excessive air leakage when initially put on line. In the aftermath of a
series of precipitation events in the spring of 1982, air leakage decreased
even though no percolate was collected.
The wetting of the soil profile during the fall and winter of 1982 led
to decreased air leakage in all the manholes. Many tray and tube lysimeters
began to collect percolate and continued to perform through the spring and
early summer of 1983. As the soil dried out due to the deficiency in amounts
of irrigation water applied, the vacuum level in each lysimeter unit was
increased in response to the readings on the reference tensiometers. This
caused increased vacuum pump operation during the 24-hour period. Those
units with noticeable air leakage were again taken off line. As vacuum
requirements increased, the cycle of tray-lysimeter shutdowns followed in
1982 was again implemented. The unit with the highest frequency of percolate
collection was left on line and the other two trays at that depth were
disconnected from the vacuum system. Even so, several electric motors burned
out as a result of excessive operation caused by the vacuum requirement in
the manhole or by a malfunctioning solenoid valve on a control panel.
IRRIGATION
Problems experienced with the irrigation system were the result of the
operational characteristics of the traveling gun system and the proposed
irrigation schedule.
Operational Problems
The planned schedule of irrigation operations at the two sites was
quickly found to be too inflexible with the single irrigation unit allowed by
budget constraints. Being able to apply the planned amounts of water during
the growing season depended upon the irrigation unit operating 40 hours per
week. Any problems resulting from irrigation unit maintenance needs, stages
of crop growth, weather, water availability at the site, field conditions,
labor, or other project activities would disrupt the irrigation schedule.
The amounts of water applied to the plot areas were much reduced during the
two growing seasons, thereby aggravating problems associated with percolate
collection from the lysimeters. Insufficient water application from
irrigation led to reduced amounts of water that could drain freely under the
influence of gravity.
44
-------
Field Percolation Rates—
Movement of the applied water through the soil profile was not as rapid
as had originally been expected. Hence the soil surface was much wetter than
anticipated at the end of the 24-hour drying period between irrigation runs.
The use of the 2.5-day weekly irrigation schedule at each site caused the
irrigation gun to retrace its path across the plots for two or three
consecutive days after drying intervals of only 15 to 24 hours. The
consequence of this was that the soil structure was destroyed as a result of
the kneading of the soil by traffic over the path area and deep ruts
developed. This treatment of the soil decreased infiltration rates and
promoted muddy conditions. Accordingly, the time for setup of the system
prior to operation rapidly increased after irrigation was started each season
due to the depth and expanse of mud that had to be traversed. Due to the
operational sequence followed in the project, greater stresses were imposed
by the mud on both the vehicle used to transport and position the irrigation
gun at the plot and on the irrigation gun itself during the test phase than
would have occurred in normal field operations with a similar system.
Surface Sealing—
A factor which proved influential throughout the project was the impact
of the water plume from the irrigation gun on the soils at the test plots.
The height of the rise of the plume (7 to 10 m above the. ground surface) and
the subsequent return of large drops or contiguous volumes of water to ground
caused severe erosion. The erosion effects caused by impact of the plume led
to the destruction of soil aggregates. -This, in turn, resulted in a
reduction of infiltration during the irrigation events. The surface crust
formed by the disaggregated particles, with possible assistance from the
salts contained in the irrigation water during the drying cycle, was
sufficient to prevent crop seeds from sprouting and to reduce the
infiltration rates in subsequent precipitation or irrigation events.
Crop Damage—
The impact of irrigation, water on emerging seedlings caused a reduction
in the plant numbers either through the washout of the seedlings or from
breaking the stalks of young plants. Plant damage was also noted at later
stages of crop development in the form of broken branches, stripped leaves,
removal of seed or cotton bolls and broken, bent, or matted stalks and leaves
in forage crops.
Surface Runoff—
The wash or scour caused by the irrigation water impact and flow was
sufficient to destroy beds or furrows formed in tillage operations after two
to three irrigation events. In the initial year of the project operation, a
flat field surface was provided so that the travel of the gun over the plots
would be less restricted. The project soils were assumed to be capable of
infiltrating water at high rates, thus decreasing the need for planting on
the bed and letting the excess water fill the adjacent furrows. The high
infiltration rates of the test plot soils were substantiated by tests made
with a split ring infiltrometer.
As the 1982 crop season progressed, the need for a change in the form of
45
-------
the field surface became apparent. Large amounts of the applied water became
surface run-off and collected in the ruts of the irrigation unit path or
flowed to low points on or outside the test area. The amounts of water that
were collected in the catch-cans were not representative of the water
infiltrating into the soils over the test units in view of the runoff
observed during the irrigation events. The flat field surface and the scour
action of the water upon impact, which sealed the soil surface, aided in the
generation of surface runoff.
Field Activities—
The accumulations of runoff in the low areas increased the difficulty of
performing cultivation and of setting up the irrigation gun system prior to
an irrigation event. In some instances, because of the persistent expanse of
mud along the irrigation unit path, turn rows were constructed during
cultivation along the boundary of the muddy'areas, thus destroying additional
test plot vegetation.
Corrective Measures
The problem areas previously outlined were addressed during the
operational phase of the project as discussed below. Remedial actions taken
to minimize or eliminate operational problems experienced in 1982 are
presented in the following discussion.
Plume Impact—
A plume dispersion device was installed on the irrigation gun late in
the 1982 crop season. This aided in the dispersion of the water jet and
helped modify the rates of erosion from soil splash and surface scour.
Crop Damage—
Irrigation events were delayed on the crop plots during the 1983 growing
season until cotton and grain sorghum seedlings had emerged and were in the
early phases of the crop development stage (crop ground cover >10%). This
increased the stand of plants on the crop plots but eliminated the amounts of
wastewater that were scheduled for application during that time interval.
Surface Runoff—
A major concern during early months of the 1982 growing season was that
the amount of applied water could not be correlated with the"amounts of water
infiltrating into the soil over the test lysimeters because of the observed
runoff during irrigation. Water was held on the site by constructing dikes
in September 1982 around the test area containing the lysimeters. The plan
was to dike three plots of similar size parallel to the path of the traveling
gun. The center plot area had 15 m sides. This length was somewhat greater
than the diameter of the lysimeter battery (9 m). The plots adjacent to the
center plot were to be used for crop yield measurement.
Crop and weed residue on the cotton and grain sorghum plots produced a
mixture of organic and inorganic material in the dike. The resistance of
this mixture to the scour of the plume was lower than that which would have
occurred with soil alone. The dikes on the crop plots became ineffective
after only 2 or 3 sequential irrigations in the fall of 1982.
46
-------
Construction of the dikes in the bermuda grass plots was hindered by wet
soil conditions and the thick grass sod. The addition of irrigation water,
however, caused the sod in the dike material to begin new growth. This
regrowth provided much more stability to the dikes in the bermuda grass areas
than was experienced on the crop plots. The applied water was effectively
retained in the diked plots during the fall and winter months.
In March 1983, the dikes around the bermuda grass plots were
reconstructed prior to new vegetal .growth. Because of the observed failure
of the dikes on the crop plots during the previous fall, contour furrows on
the crop plots were constructed with a lister after running guide rows with a
level. The contour furrows were eroded by plume scour but were maintained
over the crop season by cultivation. Problems still resulted with the
excessive mud in the vicinity of the path of the traveling gun since in all
plots the path of the gun was generally perpendicular to the contour rows.
These wet areas caused problems in cultivation. Nonetheless, surface runoff
from the plots was reduced by employment of the contour rows.
The expanse of mud created by the movement of the gun in a path
perpendicular to the contour rows and the roughness of the traveling gun path
in the aftermath of furrow construction or reconstruction by cultivation
increased the time required to set up the system prior to an irrigation event
above that experienced in the previous crop season. Field roughness,
resulting from the crossing of each furrow and bed, also added to the
stresses imposed on the irrigation and transport units, causing an increase
in down time of both the traveling gun and the transport system during the
1983 crop season.
47
-------
SECTION VI
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Results of this study ideally would be presented in tabular form so the
changes in mass flux of the quality parameters resulting from input, output,
and storage in the root zones of the test plots for specific time periods
could readily be seen. Since movements of organic and inorganic constituents
of concern in municipal wastewater land application systems are dependent on
the water flux in the soil profile, the occurrence, composition, state, and
rates of water flow in the profile must be known to determine the transport
and fate of wastewater constituents. Failure to apply the design rates of
treated wastewater on the test plots caused soil moisture levels in the
profile that were insufficient to generate percolate continuously during the
project. The inability to intercept the percolate that was generated with
the installed collection devices, and to measure evapotranspi ration
accurately over the project period on the test plots has made it impossible
to calculate accurate and meaningful water balances and have, thereby,
diminished the utility of the project results.
The inability to account for the water flux also limits the interpre-
tations that can be made about the fate of the various constituents of
concern in municipal wastewater land application systems since the transport
of these materials is dependent on the water flux. In addition, good and
complete data regarding solute concentration, mass, and location in the
profile were unavailable, as was a definite knowledge of the interactions
(i.e., sorption, precipitation, dissolution, etc.) occurring between the soil
matrix and the soil water. Quantification of all this information would be
essential in order to determine the fate of pollutants in the soil matrix,
ground water, or crops, and in order to obtain a complete understanding of
the many chemical, physical, and biological processes which comprise the
system.
The hydrologic portion of the study was planned to obtain information
that could be used to evaluate the masses involved in the following equation:
(Precipitation + Wastewater Applied in Irrigation) =
(Evapotranspiration + Percolate Flow from the Root Zone
+ Change in Root Zone Water Storage) (8)
Information on the solutes that posed possible quality impacts to the
soil, crops, or the underlying ground water was sought to help evaluate the
terms (in kg/ha) of the following equation:
48
-------
(Mass applied in Irrigation Water) = (Mass removed in Harvested
Crops + Change of Mass in the Internal Storage Elements in the Root
Zone Profile + Mass Transported out of the Root Zone in Percolate +
Mass Transported out of the Root Zone as Gas) (9)
As an example of what was expected in the study, the design hydraulic loading
rates from Table C-l and the climatological data recorded at the site from
May 1, 1982, to November 17, 1982, were used to develop a scenario of what
should have happened on the bermuda grass plot at the Hancock site for water,
total nitrogen, and total phosphorous. The following data and assumptions
were used to estimate the results:
(a) The bermuda grass that was planted in May, 1982, was irrigated with
the design requirement for May as shown in Table" C-l (55 cm).
(b) The irrigation water applied to the plot exhibited a total nitrogen
content of 37.7 mg/1 and total phosphorous of 9.06 mg/1 throughout the
irrigation season. (These values represent the geometric mean of five
analyses of each constituent obtained from five samples of irrigation water
collected in catch cans on the Hancock site in the summer of 1983.)
(c) The amounts of bermuda grass produced and the protein content of
the harvested grass are proportional to the amount of nitrogen applied in the
irrigation water (16). [Estimates of the hay produced and the protein
content were developed by extension of log — log diagrams constructed from
yield data presented in a Texas Agricultural Extension Service publication.
(22)]'
(d) The nitrogen content of the dried bermuda grass was 16 percent of
the protein content (13).
(e) Since applied nitrogen governs crop production to a large extent,
the amount of phosphorous removed by the crop was dependent on the amount of
nitrogen applied to the grass. [Removal rates were from 35 to 45 kg-P/ha
over the range of nitrogen applications from 400 to 675 kg-N/ha (18).]
(f) Denitrification and volatilization caused a 25 percent loss in the
amount of applied nitrogen (18).
(g) The nitrogen not utilized in the growth of the bermuda grass or
volatilized remained in the soil water.
(h) The phosphorous in the applied water was removed in the root zone
by specific adsorption and precipitation (10), while no nitrogen was stored
in the root zone.
(i) Evapotranspi ration losses from the bermuda grass were similar to
those calculated by the following equation (5):
ET - KK (10)
crop
49
-------
where ET = monthly crop evapotranspiration in cm
K = pan coefficient
K = crop coefficient
c
ET = monthly Class A pan evaporation in cm
pan
The values obtained for the hydro!ogic factors during the May to November
time interval were as follows:
[60.5 cm (precipitation) + 305 cm (applied wastewater)] =
[86.18 cm (evapotranspiration) + X cm (percolate flow from the root
zone)].
The depth of percolate flowing to the ground water was calculated from this
analysis to be 279.32 cm. The. volume of percolate per hectare flowing from
the root zone would thus have been 28,000 m3.
Using the total nitrogen and total phosphorous concentration of the
wastewater and the design irrigation rates, the amounts of the two nutrients
were computed employing the assumptions previously made. These values were
inserted into the equation for solutes as follows:
Calculations for total nitrogen,
[780 kg N/ha (applied in irrigation water)] = [(0.25 x 780) kg N/ha
(volatile losses) + 0 kg N/ha (storage in the root zone) + (0.122 x
0.16 x 21,000) kg N/ha (removed in the harvested crop) + Y kg N/ha
(transported out of the root zone in the percolate)].
The value obtained for Y was 173 kg N/ha. Using the values calculated for
nitrogen and the percolate, the concentrations of nitrogen in the percolate
flowing from the root zone would have been 6.18 mg N/l. This value meets the
design criterion for percolate flowing into underlying ground waters (18).
Calculations for total phosphorous,
[276 kg P/ha (applied in irrigation water)] = [Z kg P/ha (storage
in the root zone) + 48 kg P/ha (removed in the harvested crop) +
0 kg P/ha (transported out of the root zone in the percolate)].
The value of Z was 228 kg P/ha. This amount should have been accumulated in
the soil during the 1982 growing season.
In contrast to what should have happened, data that were obtained from
the project were used to compute corresponding values in equations (8) and
(9). The rainfall and the evapotranspiration values used were the same as in
the previous evaluation. The actual irrigation amount, 99.17 cm (Table 12),
that was applied was only 32.5 percent of the design amount. The average
depth of percolate intercepted by the surface area of the five tray
lysimeters operative during the period was 0.4 cm. Utilizing the measured
hydrologic data, the following results were obtained:
50
-------
[60.5 cm (precipitation) + 99.17 cm (applied wastewater)] =
86.18 cm (evapotranspiration) + 0.4 cm (percolate flow from the
root zone) + Y cm (unexplained losses)].
The unexplained losses in the 183 cm depth of soil that was monitored on this
plot during the 1982 crop season amounted to a depth of approximately 73 cm
of water. The data collection techniques used were incapable of detecting
this loss.
The total nitrogen and total phosphorous values used in the solute
equation were developed from crop, soil, and percolate samples. The nitrogen
and phosphorous associated with crop production were developed from grass
production figures on the test plot (Table 19) multiplied by the average
total, nitrogen (30.4 mg N/g) and the average total phosphorous (3.04 mg P/g)
obtained from analysis of grass samples harvested from the plot during the
1982 season. Values of organic nitrogen-N, NH3-N, N02+ N03-N, and total
phosphorous-P obtained from soil samples taken on the plot (March 1981 and
February 1983 for NH3 and N02+N03, and March 1981 and November 1983 for
organic nitrogen and -total phosphorous) were used to determine the change in
the mass of nitrogen and phosphorous in the 183-cm profile depth. The
estimated mass of soil (25,560 metric tons) was derived from soil bulk
density values obtained from samples taken on the plot. Average percolate
concentrations for total kjeldahl nitrogen, NO,+ N03-N, and total phosphorous
for the tray lysimeters on the plot (Table D-1) were used to determine the
amounts of the two nutrients transported in the percolate. Use of these
values in the solute equation gave the following results:
Calculations for nitrogen,
[780 kg N/ha (applied in irrigation water)] = [3,440 kg N/ha
(decrease in storage) + 72.4 kg N/ha (removed in the harvested
crop) - 4.0 kg N/ha (transported out of the root zone in the
percolate) + Y kg N/ha (unexplained losses)].
Calculations for phosphorous,
[276 kg P/ha (applied in irrigation water)] = [424 kg P/ha
(increase in storage) +7.1 kg P/ha (removed in the harvested crop)
+ 0.002
kg P/ha (transported out of the root zone in the percolate) +
Z kg P/ha (unexplained gains)].
The value of the unexplained losses in nitrogen, Y, was calculated to be
2,584 kg N/ha, whereas the unexplained gains, Z, in phosphorous were
approximately 141 kg P/ha. Even if 100 percent of the applied nitrogen was
assumed to be converted to gas through volatilization of ammonia and
denitrification, an unexplained loss of 1800 kg N/ha occurred that was not
accounted for in the percolate or in crop removal. The solution obtained for
nitrogen was in contradiction with the expected result. The result obtained
for phosphorous, a material easily removed in the soil matrix, was
satisfactory and would have been even better had the geometric mean of the
wastewater total phosphorous content been used. However, there are some
51
-------
questions associated with the data obtained for total phosphorous in the soil
profiles during the March 1983 and the November 1983 sampling events (Table
26). Average profile values for March 1983 showed an increase since the
initial sampling period in March 1981 in 5 of the 6 plots. The results
obtained in November 1983 showed that, in 4 of the 6 plots, the average
values of total phosphorous in the profile had decreased below the values
obtained in March 1981. Results obtained with mass balance calculations were
changed from unexplained losses to unexplained gains when using the different
sets of data as the basis for calculations.
Conducted in a manner similar to that used for N and P, a mass balance
for chloride, calculated for the same time period, showed that 3,300 kg Cl/ha
was applied and that the soil content of chloride in the 183 cm depth
increased by 1,330 kg Cl/ha. Crop use and percolate flow accounted for
losses of 1.5 kg Cl/ha and 32.3 kg Cl/ha, respectively. . Unexplained losses
of chloride in the soil profile on this plot amounted to 1,928 kg Cl/ha.
The magnitude of the unexplained losses in the soluble components
transported out of the profile during the 1982 crop season on this one plot
illustrates the difficulty associated with attempting to utilize mass balance
determinations to explain the phenomena occurring on and below the test plots
in this study.
Moreover, irrigation loadings during the primary seasonal growth periods
on the other plots were smaller percentages of the design load (Tables C-l,
C-2, C-3, 11, 12, 13, and 14). Crop yields on the test plots were lower than
those attained on similar area sites irrigated with ground water. The
erratic yield and infrequent occurrence of percolate events led to even
greater infrequencies in percolate quality sampling events and analyses
(Table D-l). Also, the study procedures used were incapable of monitoring
the water and solute flux in the internal storage elements of the soil matrix
in an adequate and timely manner. These irregularities in the project
operation, coupled with inadequate data collection, would require unjustified
manipulation of the available information in order to obtain mass balance
determinations. Therefore, the use of material balances in the explanation
of the project results was not attempted. In the following sections, the
results that were obtained during the project period are presented and
discussed in the context of the observed events.
PERCOLATE COLLECTION ACTIVITIES
Hydraulic Loadings
Lysimeter operations began at both sites in May 1982 and continued
through September 1983. The precipitation and irrigation records at the two
sites for the two growing seasons are shown in Tables 11 and 12 for the 1982
season and Tables 13 and 14 for the 1983 season. Annual estimated
evapotranspiration amounts, shown as ET0 in the tables, were calculated using
actual pan evaporation data obtained at the site and a pan coefficient
multiplier, Kp, that was selected using monthly geometric means of wind speed
and relative humidity as criteria (5). Also shown are estimates of ETcr0p
52
-------
TABLE 11
HYDROLOGIC FACTORS AT THE GRAY SITE FOR 1982
Month Precipitation
(cm)
January
February
March
April
cn May
Co
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
0.41
0.48
1.42
4.04
19.30
15.52
4.75
1.80
4.42
1.50
3.53
3.30
60.47
Input
Applied Uastewater
Bermuda Cotton Grain Sorghum ET a
(cm) (cm) (wheat)(cm) (cm)
3.06C
8.04C
14.21
15.77
10.88
12.26
21.35 5.35 14.16 18.11
20.29 10.05 11.80 14.38
18.93 14.34 14.57 13.33
31.55 7.78 11.26
4.44 6.43
3.55 4.15C
92.12 37.52 48.52 131.88
Bermuda
(cm)
8.70
11.03
16.30
12.94
12.00
10.13
3.21
74.31
Output
ET b
crop
Cotton Grain Sorghum
(cm) (cm)
5.44 5.44
7.23 9.26
17.93 19.74
17.26 14.60
15.86 7.83
10.75
4.63
79.10 56.87
aSummation of daily data measured during month that was multiplied by pan coefficient K ( 5 ). In each
month there were some daily data missing because of ice, rain, or the water level in tRe pan being too
.low for accurate measurements.
crop = ^C^Q) wnere KC is a crop coefficient ( 5 ).
clce in the pan for several days.
-------
TABLE 12
HYDROLOGIC FACTORS AT THE HANCOCK SITE FOR 1982
Month Precipitation
(cm)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL
0.78
0.58
3.20
2.16
18.64
19.74
11.28
2.72
4.42
0.83
2.95
3.14
70.14
Input
Applied Wastewater
Bermuda Cotton Grain Sorghum ET
3 o
(cm) (cm) (wheat)(cm) (cm)
4.58C
6.33C
•12.46
18.99
14.90
13.31 8.85 1.73 12.62
14.22 12.33 13.11 20.33
14.05 13.00 8.77 19.10
18.84 16.81 13.03 13.20
22.00 6.45 1.50 13.54
16.75 6.68
4.26C
99.17 57.44 38.14 146.99
Bermuda
(era)
11.92
11.36
18.30
17.19
11.88
12.19
3.34
86.18
Output
ET
Cotton
(cm)
7.45
7.45
20.13
22.92
15.71
12.93
4.81
91.40
b
crop
Grain Sorghum
(cm)
7.45
9.53
22.16
19.39
7.76
66.29
Summation of daily data measured during month that was multiplied by pan coefficient K ( 5 ). In each
month there were some daily data missing because of ice, rain, or the water level In trie pan being too
,low for accurate measurements.
*^crop = "c^^o^ wliere * is a cr°P coefficient ( 5 ).
Ice in the pan for several days.
-------
Wl
tn
TABLE 13
HYDROLOGIC FACTORS AT THE GRAY SITE FOR JANUARY 1 TO SEPTEMBER 30. 1983
Input
Applied Uastewater
Month Precipitation
(cm)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
TOTAL
5.00
0.78
0.45
1.58
11.08
5.54
3.38
0.00
0.60
28.41
Bermuda
(cm)
6.39
4.81
5.56
16.74
4.86
4.74
5.99
49.09
Cotton
(era)
4.78
4.87
8.84
2.41
20.90
Grain Sorghum
(wheat)(cm)
3.10
6.57
3.67
5.92
19.26
(cm)
1.48C
5.24
9.46
14.58
18.45
16.07
20.68
9.29d
95.25e
Bermuda
(cm)
7.57
13.12
16.61
14.46
18.61
70.376
Output
ET b
crop
Cotton Grain Sorghum
(cm) (cm)
9.23 9.23
9.48 12.13
20.47 22.60
39.186 43.96e
3Summation of daily data measured during month that was multiplied by pan coefficient K (5). In each
month there were some daily data missing because of ice, rain, or the water level in tne pan being too
.low for accurate measurements.
DETcro = Kc(ETQ).where KC Is a crop coefficient ( 5).
clce In the pan for several days.
Pan water level too low for accurate measurements.
eTotals do not represent data from entire growing season.
-------
CT>
TABLE 14
HYOROLOGIC FACTORS AT THE HANCOCK SITE FOR JANUARY 1 TO SEPTEMBER 30. 1983
Input
Applied Wastewater
Month Precipitation Bermuda
(cm) (cm)
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
TOTAL
3.20
0.41
0.76
2.59
6.89
3.20
3.12
0.60
20.77
12.22
9.02
16.29
24.98
19.92
8.44
59.70
150.57
Cotton Grain Sorghum ET a
(cm) (wheatHcm) (cm)
6.63 4.60
4.87
14.65
16.02 14.04
40.60 5.92
82.77 18.64
3.13C
3.84C
• 10.12
12.94
13.65
20.63
23.20
17.40
111.46d
Output
ET b
crop
Bermuda Cotton
(cm) (cm)
8.10
11.65
12.29 6.83
18.57 12.17
20.88 22.97
15.66 20.88
87.15d 62.85d
Grain Sorghum
(cm)
6.83
15.58
25.36
17.66
65.43d
aSummat1on of daily data measured during month that was multiplied by pan coefficient K ( 5 ). In each
month there were some daily data missing because of 1ce, rain, or the water level in tRe pan being too
. low for accurate measurements.
ETcrop " Kc*EV where Kc 1s a crop Coeffic1ent ( 5 ).
jlce In the pan for several days.
Totals do not represent data from entire growing season.
-------
which were calculated using the estimated ET0 and a crop coefficient
multiplier, Kp, selected by using wind speed, relative humidity, and stage of
crop growth as criteria (5).
The hydraulic loadings applied to the control plot at the Hancock site
are not shown in Table 11 or Table 13. The bermuda grass on this plot was
irrigated with potable water from the Lubbock system over both growing
seasons in the test period. The hydraulic loading rates (approximately 240
cm in 1982 and 270 cm in 1983) and the water quality differences between the
control plot and the test plots were so different that no meaningful
relationships could be developed using the control plot data.
The percentages of the design irrigation application rates (Tables C-1
to C-3) that were actually applied in 1982 to the bermuda grass, cotton, and
grain sorghum plots were 27%, 83.5%, and 60.7% at the Gray site. The
calculated values for ETcrop for the three test crops in Tables 11 and 12
were lower than those which were used to estimate the design hydraulic loads
(Table 3). Monthly totals of applied irrigation water and precipitation
exceeded the calculated values for ETcr0p over the 1982 growing season on.the
bermuda grass plot at the Gray site and for all months of the growing season
except August at the Hancock site. The calculated ETcr0p for cotton exceeded
the water inputs in July, August, October, and November at the Gray site, and
in August, October, and November at the Hancock site. Hydrologic loadings
exceeded the calculated ETcrop for the grain sorghum except for the months of
July and August at the Gray site, and for the month of August at the Hancock
site.
The monthly amounts of irrigation water applied to the plots during the
1983 growing season, shown in Tables 13 and 14, were below design loads. The
percentages of the design application rates applied to the plots for the
bermuda grass, cotton, and the grain sorghum at the Hancock site were 44.8%,
17.5%, and 18.4%, respectively. At the Gray site, the respective rates were
15.8%, 46.6%, and 24.4% of the design loadings for bermuda grass, cotton, and
grain sorghum. The calculated values of ETcr0p for bermuda grass were
greater than the applied hydraulic loadings except for the months of April
and August at the Hancock site and for the month of June at the Gray site.
On the cotton and grain sorghum plots at both sites, the hydraulic loadings
were greater than the calculated values of ETcr0p only in the month of May
during the period March through August, 1983, after which pan evaporation
data collection was discontinued at both sites.
Soil moisture conditions during the growing seasons were much drier than
the ETcr0p values that were predicted using pan evaporation data. Soil
moisture values calculated using recorded percolate events from the
lysimeters gave evidence of dry soil conditions. The inability to apply
irrigation water at the design rates during the two growing seasons was the
cause of the low number of percolate collection events recorded during those
periods critical to the study. Problems experienced during the two growing
seasons accounting for the decreased irrigation amounts are presented in the
following subsections.
57
-------
1982 Season-
Precipitation recorded at the sites in the six months prior to May 1982
were 73.5 percent of the long term average at the Gray site and 69.5 at the
Hancock site. Irrigation water became available for use at the Hancock site
in April and at the Gray site in May. No pre-plant irrigations were applied
at either site because of the timing of the availability of irrigation water
at the sites and the existing time constraints imposed by equipment and labor
availability for land preparation and planting operations of the three crops
at the two sites.
Storm conditions in May and early June caused delays in planting,
problems with seedling emergence, and hail damage to seedlings.
Additionally, the vacuum units had to be repaired and the percolate
collection systems rebuilt after the manholes on the cotton and grain sorghum
plots at both sites were flooded in the aftermath of high intensity
precipitation events during this time period. The grain sorghum plots were
replanted in late May and the final replanting of the cotton plots with a
short season variety occurred in early July.
After the delays caused by the replanting operations and the repairs of
the flooded manholes, irrigation applications were started in June at the
Hancock site. Startup problems occurred with the pump station. Construction
debris in the pipe laid to the test site clogged the pump impellers several
times during the initial pumping period, causing multi-day delays. When
irrigation operations were started at the Gray site in July, the clogging of
the pump impellers in the booster pump at the site caused further delays in
the irrigation schedule at both sites. Additional problems experienced
during the growing season, which collectively aided in reducing the amounts
of irrigation water applied to the plots, were: (a) postponing irrigation to
prevent seedling damage (cotton plot at the Gray site), (b) delaying
irrigation so that the crop plot soils would dry enough to cultivate for
weeds, (c) maintenance problems with the traveling gun system, (d)
maintenance problems with the vehicles used to position the traveling gun
system, and (e) the inability to obtain water at the Hancock site prior to
midmorning.
1983 Season-
One prewatering event was applied to each crop plot in April 1983. No
irrigation water was applied to the crop plots in May because of land
preparation and planting operations. To prevent damage to seedlings from the
irrigation gun plume, irrigation was delayed on the crop plots until
sufficient growth had been attained.
When the cotton was irrigated on June 21 at the Hancock site plant
damage occurred. Irrigation was then delayed further on the crop plots at
both sites. This delay in initiating irrigation caused decreases in soil
moisture by the end of June.
Problems with the traveling gun system developed during June.
Thereafter maintenance operations associated with the muddy field conditions
and the unit braking system, cable, and cable guidance system during July and
August caused multi-day losses of irrigation application events. A traffic
58
-------
accident on August 3 disabled, for the remainder of the project, the vehicle
used for positioning the traveling gun in the field and injured one of the
two full-time employees on the project. The irrigation gun was subsequently
operated only eight more days in August.
In an effort to raise soil moisture levels to a point where percolate
could be generated in the soil profile for capture by the extraction
lysimeters, wastewater effluent was applied in flood irrigation events on the
cotton and bermuda grass plots at the Hancock site in September. Irrigation
efforts continued during September at the Gray site using the traveling gun
unit.
Percolate Quantity
Only 25 of the 41 lysimeters on the Gray site contributed percolate
during .the five months of the 1982 growing season. At the Hancock site, 26
of the 46 units had contributed percolate by the end of September. The
increased amounts of irrigation in August and September and decreased rates
of evapotranspiration in the latter part of the growth period led to an
improvement in soil moisture conditions and an increase in the number of
percolate collection events during September and October 1982.
The buildup of moisture in the soil profiles of all the plots as a
result of fall irrigation, fall precipitation, and decreased evaporation
subsequently led to percolate generation in many lysimeter units that had not
contributed previously. By December 31> 1982, 35 of the 41 units on the Gray
site had contributed percolate, and at the Hancock, 30 of the 46 units had
contributed. Percolate collection events continued on a'frequent basis
through February for many of the contributing lysimeters, but by March
decreases were noted. Percolate events and the amount of percolate collected
per event decreased through May in most lysimeter units. A low number of
percolate collection events occurred during the crop growing season on all
plots as a result of low soil moisture levels in the soil profiles.
Percolate collection events were noted in two more units on the Gray site
during 1983 so that flows from 37 of the 41 units at the Gray site occurred.
As an example of the percolate amounts and occurrence experienced during
the study period, Table 15 presents the depths of percolate in mm intercepted
by the surface area of the various lysimeters on the bermuda grass plot at
the Gray site. The low amounts of precipitation received during the three
months prior to May 1, 1983, (41 percent of average rainfall) and the 1.29 cm
of rain occurring in May before a storm event of May 30 which produced 9.78
cm of precipitation had caused a decrease in the volumes of percolate
produced in the lysimeters on this plot. The monthly percolate interception
in all but the 183 cm and 244 cm depth tube lysimeters had decreased to below
1 mm depth by the end of May. Even though irrigation on this plot had
started in March, the amounts produced by the four longer tube lysimeters
continued to decrease over the next three months and had ceased by September.
Percolate was collected from tray units at all depths in October 1983
following flood irrigation of the bermuda grass plot in September.
Additionally, two tray units located at the 60 cm level on the bermuda grass
59
-------
TABLE 15
MONTHLY PERCOLATE DATA IN mn FOR THE BERMUDA GRASS PLOT
AT THE GRAY SITE FROM OCTOBER 1982 TO SEPTEMBER 1983
Tray Lysimeter Units
61 cm 122 cm
Month 101 102 103 104 105 106
Oct. 1982
Nov.
Dec. 12.4 6.8 0.5
CTl
0 Jan. 1983 21.7 8.1
Feb. 20.2 2.3 2.1 5.6
Mar. 5.6 0.3 0.3
Apr. 0.4 0.6
May 0.7 0.2
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Tube Lysimeter Units
183 cm 122 cm
107 108 109 111 112
61.9
• 100.2
9.4 6.5 2.6 52.2 40.8
5.6 10.2 3.7 35.1 19.6
5.8 15.4 4.7 46.4 32.1
7.3 6.3 2.0 9.9 10.7
1.9 2.9 0.4 4.0 3.9
0.7 0.8 <0.1 0.4
0.1 0.4 <0.1
<0.1 <0.1
0.3
<0.1
183
113
13.6
22.4
29.1
7.0
5.7
12.2
5.5
3.6
1.4
cm
114
51.9
22.6
39.6
7.9
2.7
10.0
3.8
1.3
0.2
244
115
109.2
43.9
65.4
32.6
16.6
12.2
3.8
4.9
0.1
cm '
116
86.3
22.1
68.7
29.7
11.6
4.2
4.0
1.8
1.1
TOTALS 60.2 2.6 18.0 6.9 30.3 41.3 14.6 310.2 114.1 100.5 140.0 288.6 229.5
-------
plot at the Gray site that had never contributed percolate during the study
were excavated and brought back to the laboratory for analysis. Leachate was.
collected by the extraction system following water application to the
lysimeter surfaces. If the proper amounts of irrigation water had been
available for application it is probable that more lysimeter units would have
contributed percolate during the study.
The depth of percolate intercepted by the surfaces of the lysimeter
units at the test sites for the two year study period are shown in Tables 16
and 17. The amounts of water that were applied through precipitation and
wastewater irrigation to the test plots were insufficient to generate a pore
volume of percolate in the volume of soil over the extraction assemblies in
the lysimeters. during the study period. The average porosities calculated
from soil measurements on the Hancock and Gray sites were 0.458 and 0.451,
respectively. Using the average of these two values, a pore would contain an
average of 27.7, 55.4, and 83.2 cm depths of percolate for the tray
lysimeters at 61, 122, and 183 cm depths. The four control units and the
122 cm tube 113, located next to a semi-permanent water puddle along the path
of the traveling gun path on the bermu'da grass plot on the Hancock site, were
the only units that intercepted more than a pore volume during the test
interval.
The amounts of percolate intercepted by'all lysimeter units with the
exception of the tube lysimeter on the control plot are small. The values of
depth of percolate that were recorded for both years are not indicative of
those that would be measured on a properly operated land application system.
Much of the percolate was captured during the winter and spring when no
irrigation water was applied nor vegetative growth occurring. Percolate
volumes and dates of percolate occurrence at the different profile leve.ls
obtained in the study can not be used to determine the operational
.characteristics or the suitability of current design criteria for slow rate
land application systems because of the inadequate hydraulic loadings that
were realized.
It is apparent from the data in the tables that a wide variation exists
in the number of collection events and the amounts of percolate collected
between sites, among plots on the same site, and between units on the same
plot and at the same level. Variations in hydraulic loading rates between
plots, in irrigation water applications on the plot, in soil properties above
the lysimeter units, in plot vegetation and cultural practices, operational
characteristics of the individual lysimeter units, and operational procedures
followed in operating individual lysimeters were factors that caused the
differences noted among units in Tables 16 and 17.
Percolate Quality
The number of percolate collection and water quality sampling events for
each lysimeter unit over the project period are presented in Table 18. Many
of the water quality samples were of such small volume that only a few
parameters could be measured. Also, the timing of the majority of the
percolate collection events was during the winter and spring months when
vegetative growth was minimal on the test plots and few irrigation events
61
-------
crv
TABLE 16
DEPTH OF PERCOLATE INTERCEPTED BY LYSIMETER UNITS
OVER STUDY PERIOD AT THE HANCOCK SITE
Location
Tray
0.61 m
1.22 m
1.83 m
Tube
1.22 m
1.83 m
2.44 m
Controls
1.22 m
1.83 m
Bermuda
Units
101*
102
103 .
Avg.b
104
105
106
Avg.
107
108
109
Avg.
. HI
• 112
Avg.
113
114
Avg.
121
122
Avg.
123
124
Avy.
Depth
(en.)
5.1
12.2
4.4
7.2
0.9
1.2
Neg
1.1
0.3
4.1
—
2.2
—
0.1
0.1
108.1
43.1
75.6
171.3
155.3
163.3
113.3
114.9
114.1
Grain Sorghum
Units
201
202
203
Avg.
204
205
206
Avg.
207
208
209
Avg.
211
212
Avg.
213
214
Avg/
215
216
Avg.
Depth
(cm)
0.8
1.7
— — .
1.25
0.8
—
—
0.8
0.3
Neg
Neg
0.3
0.5
0.5
Neg
1.4
1.4
Cotton
Units
301
302
303
Avg.
304
305
306
Avg.
307
308
309
Avg.
311
312
Avg.
313
314
Avg.
Depth
(cm)
Neg
3.9
3.9
3.5
3.5
3.2
0.9
1.6
0.7
2.9
0.8
1.5
10.8
1.2
6.0
2.0
0.3
1.2
a(Jnit code In which the first digit identifies the plot and the next two identify lysimeter type and
depth.
Average of producing units.
-------
00
TABLE 17
DEPTH OF PERCOLATE INTERCEPTED BY LYSIMETER UNITS
OVER STUDY PERIOD AT THE GRAY SITE
Location
Tray
0.61 m
1.22 m
1.83 m
Tube
1.22 m
1.83 m
2.44 ra
Bermuda
Units
101a
102
103 .
Avg.b
104
105
106
Avg.
107
108
109
Avg.
Ill
112
Avg.
113
114
Avg,
115
116
Avg.
Depth
(cm)
Neg
6.1
6.1
0.3
1.8
0.6
0.9
3.3
4.1
1.5
3.0
31.1
10.8
21.0
10.1
14.1
12.1
28.9
25.1
27.0
Cotton
Units
201
202
203
Avg.
204
205
206
Avg.
207
208
209
Avg.
211
212
Avg.
213
214
Avg.
Depth
(cm)
12.3
3.6
6.6
7.5
5.2
0.6
4.3
3.4
2.9
0.2
2.0
1.7
5.8
6.7
6.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
Grain Sorghum
Units
301
302
303
Avg.
304
305
306
Avg.
307
308
309
Avg.
311
312
Avg.
313
314
Avg.
Depth
(cm)
17.2
33.2
15.5
22.0
1.7
7.2
—
4.5
1.3
1.0
4.3
2.2
5.0
18.8
11.9
17.0
33.1
25.1
aUn1t code In which the first digit Identifies the plot and the next two Identify lyslmeter type and
depth.
Average of producing units.
-------
TABLE 18
PERCOLATE AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLING EVENTS FROM
MAY 1, 1982 TO SEPTEMBER 30, 1983
Unit
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
111
112
113
114
115
116
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
111
112
113
114
121
122
123
124
Perc.
___
2
94
9
47
14
87
97
78
189
127
218
195
215
202
34
78
44
9
19 .
1
2
54
1
__
1
305
218
415
346
405
417
Qua!.
__
—
17
1
12
1
19
18
16
39
23
45
36
44
38
12
20
11
1
3
—
—
13
1
_
—
65
39
77
63
79
77
Unit
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
211
212
213
214
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
211
212
213
214
215
216
Perc.
Gray Site
94
59
119
55
8
16
74
9
14
ISO
93
17
5
Hancock Site
25
1
—
18
—
—
1
1
1
___
—
1
10
__
—
Qual.
15
5
19
4
—
1
2
1
—
29
13
2
—
5
—
—
2
—
—
__
_
—
__
—
_
2
_
—
Unit
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
311
312
313
314
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
311
312
313
314
Perc.
126
220
107
46
43
—
11
16
34
40
145
114
193
1
11
25
14
20
. 12
3
15
9
73
56
53
19
Qual.
21
42
17
• 8
5
—
3
2
4
7
26
21
41
__
3
12
3
3
• 1
2
1
4
17
11
13
3
64
-------
with wastewater effluent were occurring.
The poor stands of cotton and grain sorghum and the resulting low yields
obtained on the plots (Tables 19 and 20) during both growing seasons
generally did not represent conditions that would occur under normal
conditions in a municipal wastewater land application system. Average yields
for irrigated cotton and grain sorghum in Lubbock county for 1982 and 1983
were 252 and 396 kg/cotton/ha and 3720 and 3390 kg/grain sorghum/ha,
respectively (23). Grain sorghum yields at the Hancock site were higher than
the county average during both seasons. The yields of bermuda grass were not
reported on a county basis. Fertilization with nitrogen and irrigation were
the primary determinants of yield with this crop (16). Therefore, solute
levels that were measured in the percolate samples collected from the crop
plots during the two growing seasons covered in the study were not
representative of conditions where higher plant densities per unit area are
encountered.
There is some benefit in comparing the composition of the percolate that
was collected, even though the collection periods and the less-than-normal
plant populations that existed on the plots were distorted, with the
composition of the irrigation waters applied to the plot. The solute
concentrations, of the percolate that was intercepted had been impacted by
previous wastewater irrigation events on the various plots. The geometric
mean (G), standard deviation (SD), number of sampling .events (E), coefficient
of variation (CV), percentage of composite samples (%C), and the mass in
kg/ha for chemical constituents analyzed in the quality samples obtained from
the lysimeters over the project period are shown in Appendix D. The mass in
kg/ha was calculated using the geometric mean and the depth of water
intercepted by the surface area of the lysimeter unit (Tables 16 and 17).
The geometric means of selected water quality parameters in the
irrigation waters applied to the test areas are shown in Table 21. The
wastewater"quality applied at each site varied because of the different
treatment paths at the wastewater treatment plant, sources of wastewater
treated in each treatment sequence, and storage practices. The water quality
characteristics of the water applied to the control plot were obtained from
water sample analyses made at the municipal water treatment plant.
Comparison of the geometric means of the constituent concentrations
shown in Appendix D with those shown in Table 21 generally reveals a decrease
in nutrient levels in the percolate samples. Levels of total Kjeldahl
nitrogen (TKN), ammonia nitrogen (NH3-I\I), total phosphorous (TP),
orthophosphate phosphorous (Ortho P), and organic phosphorous (Org. P)
decreased by a factor of 10 or greater. The levels of the combined total of
nitrogen reported as nitrite/nitrate-nitrogen (N02+N03-N) increased in the
percolate. The increase in these forms resulted from the oxidation of the
other nitrogen compounds present in the applied wastewater as well as from
the mobilization by the percolate of nitrates stored in the profile.
The cation and anion concentrations as depicted by values of the
geometric means of the collected percolate varied among similar lysimeter
units at the same depth level on the test plots and between the depth levels
65
-------
TABLE 19
CROP YIELDS AND GEOMETRIC MEANS OF SELECTED
PARAMETERS FOR TEST CROPS GROWN IN 1982
Site Plot Average Yield Total Total Protein Sulfur Chloride
. Nitrogen Phosphorus
(kg/ha)a(%MC)b (mg-N/g) (mg-P/g) (%) (mg-S/g) (mg-Cl/g)
Gray
Berm. Grass 1.900 (68.3) 45.90
Cotton0 0
Gr. SorghumdfS 1.850 (33.5) 15.72
Hancock
Berm. Grass 2,350 (74.6) 30.43
Cotton0 6
Gr. Sorghumd>e 9,760 (41.0)
3.14
3.02
3.04
28.22
9.66
18.75
8.16
2,88
5.37
84.64
1.30
0.65
.Dry weight basis.
Percent moisture at the time of harvest.
°.Stand too poor to harvest for reliable results.
Unthreshed grain with approximately 10 percent stalk.
Damage to grain from birds and/or insects.
-------
TABLE 20
CROP YIELD AND GEOMETRIC MEANS OF SELECTED
PARAMETERS FOR TEST CROPS GROWN IN 1983
Site Plot Average Yield Total
, Nitrogen
(kg/ha)a(%MC)b (mg-N/g)
Gray
Berm. Grass
ft
Cotton
d e
Gr. Sorghum '
Hancock
Berm. Grass
Cotton0
Gr. Sorghum
3,812 (68.2) 22.58
816 (43.1) 9.37
0 — 15.72
7.976 (67.7) 18.29
1,349 — 9.15
4.123 (14.1)
Total Protein Sulfur Chloride
Phosphorus
(mg-P/g) (%) (mg-S/g) (mg-Cl/g)
3.48 13.89 7.48 8.36
1.45 5.76 9.41 0.32
3.02 9.66 2.88 1.30
3.10 11.23 9.57 8.61
1.26 5.63 8.16 0.42
— —
• Dry weight basis.
Percent moisture at the time of harvest.
.Stand too poor to harvest for reliable results.
Unthreshed grain with approximately 10 percent stalk.
-------
. TABLE 21
GEOMETRIC MEANS OF CONCENTRATIONS FOR QUALITY PARAMETERS,
IN IRRIGATION WATERS APPLIED TO THE TEST AREAS
OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD . .
PARAMETER
ALK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-N
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG P.
COD
Cl"
S04
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC
APPLIED
WASTEWATER
GRAY SITE
(mg/1)
295
1190
11:2
3.47
2.75
4.00
2.30
0.172
116.6
302
215
81.5
44.1
19.4
256
38.8
APPLIED
WASTEWATER
HANCOCK SITE
(mg/1)
347
1180
37.6
0.114
20.9
14.4
8.27
0.267
245
332
203
58.0
24.3
18.2
315
54.6
IRRIGATION
WATER
CONTROL PLOTS3
(mg/1)
200
924
-
' 0.109
247
181
47.1
23.3
223
Data compiled from records of Water Sample Analysis at the Lubbock
Municipal Water Treatment Plant.
68
-------
on the same plot. Differences were also apparent among the values for'the
same constituent at the same level between plots. The reasons for the
variation were probably the same factors listed previously for the variations
in the amounts of percolate collected.
Sets of equivalent ratios between the meq/1 values for cations and
anions and indices calculated from groupings of meq/1 values for these
parameters were developed where data was available using the geometric means
of the percolate, applied irrigation waters, and underlying ground water at
each site. Insufficient data at the Hancock site limited the number of
values obtained. The ratios for the various plots are shown in Tables E-1 to
E-6. The values used for the ground water at the Hancock site were geometric
means developed from data taken during the baseline period (June 1980 to
February 1982) before wastewater was applied.
The majority of the. values developed from the percolate data are less
than 1. Normally, in soils containing high levels of carbonate, the
equivalence ratios are higher than unity (11). The values exhibited at all
sites are an indication of the impacts from relatively higher levels of Ma,
Cl, and HC03 in the irrigation water.
The adjusted SAR values (1) exhibited for the applied waters on all test
areas were sufficient to cause impacts on the soil in the form of
deflocculation of clays, reductions in infiltration rates and decreases in
the availability of K. Additionally, the high SAR values found in these
waters were sufficient to cause phototoxicity of the- test crop plant leaf
surfaces and to pose difficulties in root absorption of the soil waters
resulting from irrigation using these waters. The high value (20.1) of the
adjusted SAR of the wastewater effluent applied at the Hancock site can be
expected to cause the rapid development of soil and crop problems at that
site. The adjusted SAR values for the ground water at the Gray site are much
higher as a result of the long history of wastewater irrigation, than those
determined for the ground water at the Hancock site.
The adjusted SAR ratios for the percolate at the Gray site were greater
than the values for the irrigation water and the ground water. All values of
the adjusted SAR at the Gray site indicate root adsorption problems.
Adjusted SAR values for the percolate at the Hancock site (Tables E-4 through
E-6) are lower than those obtained for either the applied water or the ground
water. These lower values indicate that adsorption and retention of Na was
occurring in the profile. The values for the two control units were slightly
higher than those calculated for the other units irrigated with wastewater.
Base exchange indices (IBA) given by Schoeller (14) in Mathess (11) were
calculated for the applied water, percolate, and ground water. A positive
index is an indication of favorable conditions for an exchange of alkalis (Na
and K) in the water for alkaline earth ions (Ca and Mg) in the soil (11). A
negative value of the index indicates favorable conditions for the exchange
of alkaline earths in the water for alkalis in the soil. The positive value
of the IBA values for the percolate intercepted by the majority of the
lysimeters indicated that alkalis in the soil water were being exchanged for
Ca and Mg in the root zone.
69
-------
The (C1~ - Na+)/Cl~ index also establishes the value of the sign for the
IgA. The high sodium content of the applied waters is seen by the negative
values obtained for this number. This indicator is also negative for the
ground water at both sites. Negative values of (Cl~ - Na+)/Cl~ and Ig/\ are
seen for percolate at four locations (3 tubes and 1 tray unit) at the Gray
site. Percolate at 11 locations exhibited positive values.
Mass Transport Results for Percolate Flows
Tables F-l to F-7 show the masses of the parameters that were measured
in the quality studies of the applied irrigation water and of the percolate
intercepted by the lysimeters during the project period. The average
geometric mean of the parameter at the profile depth and the average depth of
water calculated from the contributing lysimeters on the plot at that level
were used to calculate the values shown. The seven tables also present the
masses of various constituents that were contained in crops produced on each
plot; these were calculated from sample analysis and crop production figures
for the two crop seasons. The crop production figures for the two sites are
given in Tables 19 and 20.
The mass values calculated for the control, plot show close agreement
between applied amounts and mass transported by the percolate. This was to
have been expected with the loading applied on the control units. On the
other plots, the parameters that may fall within a factor of 10 of the
applied rates were alkalinity, TDS, Cl, and the cations. Tables F-l to F-7
indicate that even with the deficits experienced .in hydraulic loading on the
test plots the translocation of large amounts of material (Na, Ca, Cl, SOM
and alkalinity) occurred at different depths in the profile. Movements of
the magnitudes shown in these tables may impact the quality of ground water
under these sites if irrigation is continued at design rates on the sites in
the future.
SOIL ANALYSIS
The soils at both sites generally followed the typical profile
description presented in Appendix A. The layers of calcium carbonate,
regionally referred to as caliche, varied in thickness, cementation, and
hardness within the plots, between the plots, and between sites. A layer of
indurated caliche was generally found at each site between 45 and 183 cm.
This condition was more pronounced in the Friona soils at the Gray site.
In addition to the variability of those soils formed from eolian
sediments, it was noted during excavation made for the percolate extraction
facilities that the Hancock test area had previously been the site of a
prairie dog colony. The burrows had subsequently filled with surface soil
over a time interval. The walls of each of the three excavations showed
evidence of the old burrows through color differentials exhibited by the
darker surface soils occupying the old burrows in the lighter colors of the
undisturbed materials in the lower horizon. The burrows noted were within
240 cm of the soil surface.
An examination of constituent changes in the soil between sampling
70
-------
intervals is presented in this section. Accumulations and depletions at
different depth levels were noted in the same profile for many materials.
Table 22 shows the variability that existed for selected cations and anions.
Sodium and chloride increases are noted on all plots at the Hancock site,
whereas depletions of both materials are noted in the majority of the depth
intervals at the Gray site. The levels of N02+N03-N decreased in all levels
on the plots at the Hancock sjte. The effects of the low hydraulic loadings
on this constituent can be seen on the cotton and grain sorghum plots at the
Gray site. . _
Nutrients
An examination of the variations of nitrogen compounds at both sites at
30-cm increments was made down to the 90 cm depth for the sampling events in
the springs of 1981 and 1983, and in the fall of 1983. The caliche layers at
the Gray site required that the soil from 90 to 180 cm depth be composited.
The average values for the depth intervals at each sampling period show
a decrease in TKN (Table 23) with depth. Based upon the levels of NH^-N
shown in Table 25 for the depth intervals in these soils, the TKN for the
sites was judged to be primarily organic nitrogen. Although there was little
difference in the TKN measured at the two sites, the average values in the
profile at the Hancock site were higher (4.6 mg N/g compared to 4.1 mg N/g).
This would amount to a difference of 0.5 kg N per metric ton of soil between
the two sites or 1400 kg N/ha in the top meter of soil, with an average bulk
density of 1.4 g/cm3. With the exception of the cotton plot, examination of
the average values in the profile for the plots at the Hancock site to the 90
cm depth showed a general decrease in TKN during the study period. At the
Gray site, the average TKN of the three plots at the 90 cm depth for each
sampling period showed little change. Three of the plots (the bermuda grass
and the grain sorghum plots at the Hancock site, and the cotton plot at the
Gray site) exhibited their lowest values of TKN during the March 1983
sampling period.
The N03 -N content in the soil profiles at the Hancock site were
generally higher both at the start and end of the project than were the
levels measured at the Gray site (Table 24). The average profile N03-N
content for the three sampling periods in the top 90 cm showed a general
decrease over time. High concentrations of nitrates were found in the
initial percolate volumes intercepted by many lysimeter units.
Concentrations generally decreased as the volume of flow recorded increased.
Again, the NH3-N data in Table 25 show that larger initial values were
present in the soils at the Hancock site. Generally, decreases of NH3-N in
the profile occurred over the project interval. Also noticeable over the
three project periods was the decrease of NH3-N with depth. The grain
sorghum plot on the Gray site exhibited the highest value in the 90 cm
profile during the spring of 1983.
Table 26 shows the total phosphorous present in the upper 91 cm of the
soil profile in the three sampling periods during the study. The profile
averages for the last sampling event show that decreases in total phosphorous
71
-------
TABLE 22
CHANGES IN 10~2 mg/g OF SOIL WITH DEPTH FOR SELECTED CATIONS AND ANIONS
BETWEEN SAMPLING PERIODS IN MARCH 1981 AND NOVEMBER 1983.
Plot
Bermuda
Cotton
Grain
Sorghum .
Bermuda
Cotton
Grain
Sorghum
Depth
.Interval
(cm)
0-30
30-60
60-90
90-180
0-30
30-60
60-90
90-180
0-30
30-60
60-90
90-180
0-30
30-60
60-90
90-120
120-150
150-180
0-30
30-60
60-90
90-120
120-150
150-180
0-30
30-60
60-90
90-120
120-150
150-180
Na
-8.2
-8.0
-52.3
-8.5
-8.4
-1.1
10.7
-.5
-11.8
-13.7
-11.7
9.4
4.4
9.5
3.6
-0.1
0.3
-8.3
27.4
53
83
-4.6
-6.4
-9.9
17.6
16.7
2.0
410
12.0
-7.8
Ca
Gray Site
15,780
.3,460
14,200
7,750
-6.0
-79.0
-384
10,900
223
-116
-47.0
4,010
Hancock Site
1,800
606
-490
14,100
6,940
15,200
-10.9
-12,100
-833
6,570
9,200
6,790
11
-346
-40
-3,480
10,300
12,500
Cl
-2.0
-8.4
1.1
-4.2
-2.8
9.8
3.8
-0.3
-2.5
-6.1
-4.7
-0.8
1.8
4.2
4.7
7.4
13.0
13.4
15.2
-3.3
-1.0
0.5
3.6
-1.4
0.7
7.6
8.7
1.2
-0.2
-3.8
so4
-8.4
-1.5
15.0
-194.2
-4.1
-205
-204
-161
-231
-204
-204
-194
-1,7
4.1
8.4
-7.7
-6.6
-2.2
-3.5
3.8
10.3
9.3
6.7
6.5
-5.9
-1.9
-0.7
-3.2
-4.6
-4.2
N02«03-»
-1.45
-1.00
-0.33
-0.35
-1.00
0.18
0.94
0.94
-0.29
0.34
-0.09
0.82
-0.29
-0.60
-0.94
-3.75
-0.76
-1.22
-0.43
-0.89
-0.93
-0.78
-0.72
-0.76
-0.04
-0.34
-0.43
-0.68
-0.05
-0.03
72
-------
co
TABLE 23
RESULTS OF SOIL ANALYSIS FOR TKN-N ON TEST PLOTS
FOR 3 SAMPLING PERIODS IN 10'1 mq/q OF SOIL
Site Depth
(">)
Hancock 0 - .30
.30-. 61
.61-. 91
Avy. In
profile
Gray 0 - .30
.30-. 61
.61-. 91
• Avg. in
profile
3-4/81
6.1
5.8
7.8
6.6
5.2
2.8
2.2
3.4
Bermuda
Plot
2/83
5.6
4.6
3.2
4.5
5.0
3.8
2.2
3.7
Grain Sorghum
Plot
11/83
6.6
4.9
2.6
4.7
5.4
3.7
1.1
3.4
3-4/81
5.5
5.0
2.6
4.4
6.3
4.1
2.5
4.3
2/83
. 4.0
3.9
2.4-
3.4
5.0
5.2
4.8
5.0
11/83
5.3
4.9
2.7
4.3
4.8
3.6
2.7
3.7
3-4/81
4.4
4.4
3.3
4.0
6.4
3.9
2.8
4.4
Cotton
Plot
2/83
6.0
5.5
3.2
4.9
4.8
2.6
2.8
3.4
Avg. in Depth
Interval
11/83
5.2
5.4
2.7
4.4
6-7
5.0
3.6
5.1
3-4/81
• 5.3
5.1
4.6
5.0
. 6.0
3.6
2.5
4.0
2/83
5.2
4.7
2.9
4.3
4.9
4.0
3.3
4.1
11/83
5.7
5.1
2.7
4.5
5.6
4.1
2.5
4.1
-------
•-J
4=.
TABLE 24
RESULTS OF SOIL ANALYSIS FOR NO-j -N ON TEST PLOTS
FOR 3 SAMPLING PERIODS IN 10'3 mg/g OF SOIL
Site Depth
(m)
Hancock 0 - .30
.30-. 61
.61-. 91
Avg. In
profile
Gray 0 - .30
.30-. 61
.61-. 91
Av9. (n
profile
3-4/81
3.35
6.32
9.80
6.48
14.71
11.72
5.04
10.47
Bermuda
Plot
2/83
2.21
1.64
0.44
1.42
1.42
.14
1.11
0.84
Grain Sorghum
Plot
11/83
0.44
0.36
0.40
0.40
2.28
1.72
1.72
1. 90
3-4/81
7.85
7.93
6.24
7.34
15.38
0.32
0.34
5.34
i/83
4.01
3.52
3.26
3.59
1.72
7.74
6.60
5.35
11/83
7.47
4.54
1.90
4.63
2.15
1.28
1.26
1.56
3-4/81
6.37
10.57
12.12
9.68
6.49
1.19
4.99
4.22
Cotton
Plot
2/83
2.64
3.19
2.04
2.62
2.76
2.13
6.97
3. 5
Avg In Depth
Interval
11/83
2.04
1.67
2.83
2.17
1.53
0.58
0.56
0.89
3-4/81
5.85
8.26
9.38
7.82
12.18
4.41
3.46
6.67
2/83
2.94
2.78
1.91
2.54
1.96
3.33
4.89
3.39
11/83
3.31
2.19
1.71
2.40
1.98
1.19
1.18
1.45
-------
TABLE 25
RESULTS OF SOIL ANALYSIS FOR N»3-N ON TEST PLOTS
FOR 3 SAMPLING PERIODS IN IP'3 mg/g OF SOIL
cn
Site Depth
•(•)
Hancock 0 - .30
.30-. 61
.61-. 91
Avg. in
profile
Gray 0 - .30
.30-. 61
.61-. 91
Avg. In
profile
3-4/81
1.22
1.72
3.11
2.01
2.61
0.44
1.17
1.40
Bermuda
Plot
2/83
3.46
1.36
0.87
1.89
1.85
0.86
0.56
1.09
Grain Sorghum
Plot
11/83
0.25
0.60
1.06
0.63
1.57
0.82
0.57
0.99
3-4/81
3.31
2.42
1.66
2.46
2.46
1.16
0.73
1.45
2/83
1.38
2.44
1.36
1.72
1.40
1.44
2.73
1.85
11/83
1.18
1.17
0.63
0.99
2.15
1.28
1.26
1.56
3-4/81
2.47
1.85
1.35
1.89
2.89
0.76
4.38
2.67
Cotton
Plot
2/83
1.10
0.80
0.71
0.87
1.89
2.13
3.87
2:62
Avg In Depth
Interval
11/83
1.17
0.69
0.94
0.93
1.53
0.58
0.56
0.89
3-4/81
2.33
1.99
2.04
2.12
2.65
0.88
2.09
1.87
2/83
1.98
1.53
0.98
1.50
1.71
1.48
2.38
1.85
11/83
0.86
0.82
0.87
0.85
1.75
0.89
0.80
1.15
-------
(ft
TABLE 26
RESULTS OF SOIL ANALYSIS FOR TOTAL PHOSPHORUS-P ON TEST PLOTS
FOR 3 SAMPLING PERIODS IN 10-1 tng/g OF SOIL
--------- - - - . - _ _ III __
Site
Hancock
Gray
Depth
(.11)
0 - .31
.31-.61
.61-.91
Avg. In
Profile
0 - .31
.31-.61
.61-.91
Avg. in
Profile
Bermuda
Plot
3/81
1.2
2.2
1.9
1.77
2.3
2.1
4.0
2.80
2/83
1.9
2.0
1.8
1.9
4.0
2.4
1.3
2.56
11/83
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.57
1.7
4.2
3.6
3.16
Grain Sorghum
Plot
3/81
1.3
1.3
1.6
1.40
5.9
2.1
1.8
3.26
2/83
1.4
1.9
2.1
1.8
4.6
2.9
3.0
3.5
11/83
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.37
4.2
2.5
2.8
3.16
3/81
1.0
1.6
1.7
1.43
4.9
2.7
2.3
3.30
Cotton
Plot
2/83
1.3
1.6
1.6
1.5
4.8
2.7
3.2
3.57
11/83
1.5
1.5
1.3
1.43
4.7
2.6
2.4
3.23
Avg. In Depth
Interval
3/81
1.17
1.70
1.73
1.53
4.37
2.3
2.7
3.12
2/83
1.53
1.83
1.83
1.73
4.47
2.67
2.5
3.21
11/83
1.47
1.5
1.4
1.46
3.53
3.1
2.93
3.19
-------
occurred in four of the plots. An increase in total phosphorous was observed
at the profile at the bermuda grass plot on the Gray site. No change in
average profile content was observed between the first and last reading made
on the cotton plot at the Hancock site. A rise in the average profile total
phosphorous content was noted for all plots except the bermuda grass plot at
the Gray site. The average values observed for the profile at the Hancock
site at the end of the project were approximately 50 percent of these at the
Gray site.
Table 27 shows the orthophosphate phosphorous in the three 30 cm
increments of the upper soil profile of the plots. At the end of the project
period, the available soil phosphorous was two orders of magnitude less on
the bermuda grass and the grain sorghum plots at the Hancock site than the
values obtained on the companion plots at the Gray site. Orthophosphate
phosphorous in the cotton plot at the Hancock site, however, was one order of
magnitude less than what was recorded at the Gray site. Examination of the
average values in the profile show that orthophosphate phosphorous levels
decreased over the project period in the upper 90 cm depth at both sites.
Priority Organics
The composition of the project soils at the beginning and. end of the
project period showed reductions in most of the priority organics measured at
both sites. The location of the 20 materials identified in the project soils
in November 1983 and the maximum levels of each compound, in ppb, are shown
in Table 28. Thirty-six organic compounds were identified in project soils
in analyses performed in the spring of 1981. Reduction in concentration of
11 of the organics found in November 1983 had occurred over the project
period. Increases had occurred in the concentration of nine compounds:
carbon .tetrachloride, dibutylphthalate, hexadecane, methyl heptadecanoate,
methyl hexa-decanoate, octadecane, phenol, propazine, and tetrachlorethylene.
The greatest increase in the soil profile occurred in the levels of carbon
tetrachloride, hexadecane, and dibutylphthalate. The two former compounds
are solvents. The mass loadings in kg/ha applied to the irrigation
wastewater over the project period for these three materials were calculated
for the bermuda plots at both sites because of the higher hydraulic loadings.
The mean concentrations and mass loadings of those substances in the
wastewaters going to the Hancock site during .the project period were 5.8 yg/1
for carbon tetrachloride (0.145 kg/ha); 2.0 yg/1 for hexadecane (0.05 kg/ha);
and 104 yg/1 for dibutylphthalate (2.6 kg/ha). In water going to the Gray
site the values were 4.7 yg/1 for carbon tetrachloride (0.066 kg/ha) and 140
yg/1 for dibutylphthalate (1.98 kg/ha). Hexadecane levels were not
determined for the treated effluent transported to the lagoon on the Gray
site.
Trace Metals
A mass balance of the metals in the soils of each plot was developed
using the soil analysis data that were taken at the beginning and end of the
project for each 30 cm depth of soil down to 183 cm. The mass of each 30 cm
layer was determined from measured bulk density values that had been made.
The net change in the metal content in mg/kg was then used to determine the
77
-------
00
TABLE 27
RESULTS OF SOIL ANALYSIS FOR ORTHOPHOSPHATE-P OH TEST PLOTS
FOR 3 SAMPLING PERIODS IN 10~3 mg/g OF SOIL
___ -- -1- - _ ._.
Site
Hancock
Gray
Depth
(n.)
0 - .31
.31-.61
.61-.91
Avg.ln
Profile
0 - .31
.31-.61
.61-.91
Avg. in
Profile
Bermuda
Plot
3/81
1.97
1.01
0.64
1.210
17.36
15.76
4.25
12.46
2/83
0.02
0.08
0.02
0.04
7.20
6.64
0.02
4.62
11/83
0.04
0.01
0.06
0.037
6.84
4.68
.02
3.85
Grain Sorghum
Plot
3/81
2.47
1.05
1.05
1.523
16.78
24.35
19.69
20.27
2/83
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1.88
19.44
13.76
11.69
11/83
0.08
0.05
0.05
0.060
5.99
9.44
13.47
9.63
Cotton
Plot
3/81
1.69
1.55
1.05
1.430
33.27
34.14
30.90
32.77
2/83
0.38
0.13
0.13
0.213
1.69
1.97
1.25
1.64
11/83
1.35
0.02
0.02
0.463
6.88
5.90
1.19
4.65
Avg. in Depth
Interval
3/81
2.04
1.20
0.91
1.38
22.47
24.75
18.24
21.82
2/83
0.14
0.08
0.06
0.09
3.59
11.56
5.01
6.72
11/83
0.49
0.03
0.04
0.19
6.57
6.67
4.89
6.04
-------
ID
TABLE 28
MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION IN PPB AND LOCATION OF ORGANICS
IN THE SOIL PROFILE AT TEST SITES IN NOVEMBER 1983
Hancock Site
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Atrazlne
Benzene
Carbon tetrachlorlde
Chloroform
1-chlorotetradecane
Dibutylphthalate
Olchlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Heptadecane
Hexadecane
Methyl heptadecanoate
Methyl hexadecanoate
2-methylphenol ,
4-methyl phenol
Octadecane
Phenol
Propazi.ie
Tetrachloroethylene
Trichloroethylene
0-0.3
(rn)
1.6
89
6.0
4.2 •
1.8
50
1110
350
36.8
141
4.5
1.4
0.3-0.6 0.6-0.9
(m) (m)
5.4
3.7 1.6
3.1 2.1
1.1
82 6.2
890 140
16 -
1.4
81 170
460 1150
224
34 102
2.9 2.0
0.9-1.2 1.2-1.5
(m) (m)
41
74
1.0 1.0
2.5 2.5
71
150 •
115
340 260
280
70
2.6 1.5
Gray Site
1.5-1.8 0-0.3 0.3-0.6 0.6-0.9 0.9-1.8
(m) (rn) (m) (m) (m)
1.0 1.4 1.6 1.1 1.2
3.7 3.2 2.8 2.9 2.8
40 40
39
300 200 200 280 210
14 22
13
1.9
2.0 36 2.5 3.1 2.8
-------
mass change in each layer and these values were summed over the 183 cm depth.
The results of this are shown in Tables 29 and 30.
The input of metals to each plot was determined from the amounts of
wastewater applied on each plot and the geometric mean of the quality
characteristics of the applied water. The changes in the soil profile were
greater than had been anticipated from the application rates of the
inorganics. In some instances, such as with sodium, the response was within
the same order of magnitude. For most of the heavy metals, however, a much
larger accumulation is shown in the soil data than would be warranted by the
application rates utilized. Provided the data were correct, the.
accumulations or depletions such as those shown in Tables 29 and 30 are of
definite concern. Variability in soil properties from site to site on the
test plots, even when composite samples were analyzed, introduced errors that
could not be eliminated unless a much larger number of samples, randomly
collected from the plot, were to have been analyzed. Extrapolation of these
results, using the bulk densities to determine soil mass, also contributes
errors in the results.
Bromide
Soil cores to be analyzed for bromide were taken on each test area in
March and November 1983. The results of the analysis are shown in Tables 31
and 32. '
1982 Crop Season—
The two plots at the Hancock sites which received the greatest hydraulic
loading contained little residual bromide in the 183 cm deep profile. The
grain sorghum site received a hydraulic loading 66.4 percent as great as that
applied on the cotton site and 38.5 percent as great as that on the bermuda
grass (Table 12). It appeared from the profile data shown in Table 31 that
the bromide moved about 1.5 cm down through the profile for each centimeter
of water applied at this site.
Variability in movement was much greater at the Gray site. The bermuda
plot, with a much larger hydraulic loading (Table 11), showed a bromide ion
accumulation in the 60 to 90 cm level. This corresponded to the depth of the
indurated caliche layer that was encountered in placing the tray lysimeters.
Moreover, this level occurred in the region of maximum moisture content that
had been identified in the soil profile with the neutron probe. The movement
of bromide on the other two plots was approximately 1.95 cm per centimeter of
applied water.
1983 Crop Season—
The general movement rates exhibited during the 1983 crop season are
presented in Table 32. The hydraulic loading during the interval was less
than that shown in Table 31 because of the time period difference between
analyses. The cotton and grain sorghum plots still had bromide present in
the surface layer. Some translocations were evident in the bermuda plots
because of the heavier hydraulic loading on these plots (Tables 13 and 14).
At the Gray site, the effect of the caliche layer on the bromide was
evidenced by build-up of bromide in the 45 to 60 cm layer on the bermuda
80
-------
GO
TABLE 29
APPLICATION OF METALS IN WASTEWATERS AND FATE OF METALS
IN PLOT ROOT ZONE OVER PROJECT PERIOD—GRAY SITE
Bermuda
Metal
Al
As
Ag
Ba
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
N1
Pb
Zn
Applied
in
irrigation
kg/ha
1.550
0.098
0.078
5.460
0.031
0.095
0.973
1.590
7.500
530.000
442.000
0.528
3730.000
0.189
0.111
1.570
Awt in
profile
1000
kg/ha
141.000
-0.056
4.000
2.470
0.016
0.212
0.089
-0.345
-66.600
-47.000
-15.100
-1.620
0.323
-0.170
-0.016
-0.272
Cotton
Applied
in
irrigation
kg/ha
0.573
0.036
0.029
2.020
0.012
0.035
0.360
0.587
2.770
196.100
164.000
0.195
1380.000
0.700
0.041
0.582
A wt in
profi le
1000
kg/ha
105.000
0.128
0.003
-1.730
0.005
0.126
-Q.301
-0.047
-0.180
-28.100
8.640
-1.400
0.031
-0.089
0.008
-0.088
Grain Sorghum
Applied
in
irrigation
kg/ha
0.665
0.042
0.034
2.340
0.014
0.041
0.418'
0.681
3.220
227.000
190.000
0.227
1600.000
0.810
0.047
6.780
Awt in
profile
1000
kg/ha
-22.500
0.062
0.007
-0.595
0.009
0.098
0.414
-0.005
47.800
-12.700
1 1 . 300
-2.640
-0.614
-0.420
-0.008
-0.463
-------
00
TABLE 30.
APPLICATION OF METALS IN WASTEWATERS AND FATE OF METALS
IN PLOT ROOT ZONE OVER PROJECT PERIOD—HANCOCK SITE
Bermuda
Metal
Al
As
Ag
Ba
Cd
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
K
Mg
Mn
Na
Ni
Pb
Zn
Applied
in
irrigation
kg/ha
1.910
0.157
0.125
5.170
0.300
0.125
1.580
0.894
18.800
820.000
741.000
0.580
5990.000
0.462
3.250
3.910
Awt in
profile
1000
kg/ha
43.200
0.349
0.219
0.419
0.008
0.117
0.497
0.054
64.400
-13.400
12.800
-0.892
2.110
-0.201
-0.201
-0.806
Cotton
Applied
in
irrigation
kg/ha
1.070
0.088
0.070
2.900
0.168
0.070
0.884
0.502
10.540
460.000
416.000
0.326
3360.000
0.259
1.820
2.190
Awt in
profi le
1000
kg/ha
-67.200
0.435
0.099
0.726
0.007
O'.OSO
0.470
0. 934
29.100
-18.400
7.000
-1.640
0.848
-0.031
-0.069
-0.628
Grain Sorghum
Applied
in
irrigation
kg/ha
0.443
0.036
0.028
1.170
0.068
0.028
0.358
0.203
4.270
187.000
168.000
0.132
1360.000
0.105
0.738
0.889
Awt in
profile
1000
kg/ha
28.600
0.750
0.020
0.777
0.030
0'.125
0.710
0.627
51.900
-5.070
13.000
-1 . 300
1.930
-0.016
-0.016
-0.545
-------
00
CO
TABLE 31
BROMIDE TRACER LOCATION IN PLOT SOILS IN MARCH 1983
AFTER APPLICATION IN MAY 1982
Concentration in mg/q at depths below surface
Sample
No.
XI 98
X202
X203
XI 99
X200
X201
Plot
Hancock 2 Grain Sorg.
Hancock 1 Bermuda
Hancock 3 Cotton
Gray 3 Grain Sorghum
Gray 1 Bermuda
Gray 2 Cotton
0-15 cm
<0.0002
<0.0002
<0.0001
<0.0002
<0.0002
<0.0001
91-102 cm
0.324
<0.0001
<0.0001
<0.0001
2.288
<0.0001
122-132 cm
4.322
<0.0002
<0.0002
<0.0002
<0.0002
1.132
168-183 cm
1.619
<0.0001
0.487
2.255
<0.0001
1.809
Detection Limits = 0.1 mg/1 in extract
or
<0.0001 mg in 100 g of soil
<0.0002 mg in 50 g of soil
-------
TABLE 32
BROMIDE TRACER LOCATION IN PLOT SOILS IN NOVEMBER 1983
AFTER APPLICATION IN MAY 1983
Sample
No.
X198
X202
00
** X203
XI 99
X200
X201
Plot
Hancock 2
Grain Sorg.
Hancock 1
Bermuda
Hancock 3
Cotton
Gray 3
Grain Sorg.
Gray 1
Bermuda
Gray 2
Cotton
0-15 cm
.0094
.0050
.0100
.0051
.0054
.0051
Concentration in mg/g at
30-45 cm 45-60 cm 60-75 cm
<.0002 <.0002
.0029 .0254
.0059
<.0002 .0036
.0067 .0107
.0108 .0036
depths below surface
75-91 cm 91-107 cm 168-183 cm
.0037
<.0002 . .0057
.0044
.0029 .0032
.0181 .0049
.0032
-------
plots similar to that shown in Table 31 for 1982. The cotton plot, with a
greater hydraulic loading than the grain sorghum plot, showed an increased
bromide content in the 30 to 35 cm layer.
FIELD USE OF EXTRACTION LYSIMETERS
Employment of lysimeters in the soil root zone to monitor percolate
generated in the land treatment of municipal wastewater is an attractive
concept for improving system management. .Detection of undesirable pollutant
concentrations in percolate would signal a need to initiate operational
changes to reduce the application of the problem pollutant or pollutants.
With present monitoring techniques, pollutants are not detected until ground
water samples from monitoring wells reflect compositional changes. By the
time pollutants are detected in ground waters, large amounts of the
contaminating substance may be in transit both in the unsaturated zone and- in
the saturated zone. Early warning by detection of potential pollution
problems in the root zone would reduce environmental impacts on area ground
waters.
The extraction lysimeter systems utilized in this study to sample
conditions -in the vadose zone are not, however, suitable for use as
monitoring devices in land treatment of municipal wastewaters. The primary
probTem is the high cost associated with the collection of useful data from
extraction lysimeter systems.
Specialized equipment is required to prepare and emplace lysimeter
systems. Support facilities for controlling lysimeter conditions and
percolate collection must be installed. Because soil property differences,
either in the undisturbed core of the tube lysimeters or in the undisturbed
soil layers overlying the tray lysimeters, affect the rates of percolate
movement, percolate volumes and the composition of percolate, the lysimeters
must be operated continuously. If information useful in the operation of the
land treatment system is to be obtained, frequent data collection and sample
analysis will be required. Useful information can be obtained about the
impacts of biological activities on soil water flow using either the
extraction or weighing type of lysimeter. In the author's opinion, however,
there is a question now, after completion of this study, as to whether any
lysimeter system can reproduce the conditions of soils in their natural state
or can detect the subtleties inherent in the hydraulic response of soils in
the natural state at a specific location.
Study results indicated that percolate moves through the profile in
erratic and unpredictable sequences. Even on the control plots, where
application of water occurred at a frequent and sufficient rate to maintain
soil moisture conditions at levels at which percolate flow was continuous,
the arrival of the peak rates of flow at the collection unit varied over a
range of 1-to-3 days after an irrigation event. Additionally, the
variability of soil properties over the site and vertically in the profile
affects percolate volumes and characteristics. This situation was noticeable
in study results and dictates that replication of lysimeter units must be
provided at the site in future studies if reliable information is to be
obtained. All of these factors add to the costs associated with the use of
85
-------
extraction lysimeters.
The attention and expense required to operate lysimeters in the root
zone limit their applicability to research activities rather than operational
management of land treatment systems. Lysimeters can be useful in helping to
define what occurs in the root zone. The two types of units used on the
project would require modifications in system component construction and in
the test environment if they are to be employed in another research
application. Problem areas with ihe lysimeters utilized in the study that
require consideration before employment in future research efforts are
presented in the following lists.
Tray Lysimeters
1. The auger used to drill the pilot hole for the cavity would drift.
This produced a dome-like roof area for a portion of the cavity in a few
locations where vertical drift occurred.
2. The small cavity opening made it difficult to determine the shape
of the roof area at greater distances from the manhole. The inability to
examine roof shape thoroughly can result in conditions where no contact is
made between the soils in the tray and those in the roof surface.
3. Puddling of the soil in the cavity walls occurred during the
forming, of the final rectangular shape of the tray cavity. The back-and-
forth movement of the cutting head along the soil surface compressed and
smoothed the surface zone. Packing of this surface could decrease the
hydraulic conductivity of the soils in the roof area in contact with the soil
surface of the tray and thus produce a soil condition less conducive to
percolate flow.
4. Techniques to better position the tray surface against the cavity
roof need to be developed. The positioning of the trays to obtain suitable
contact with the roof surface was finally accomplished by means of wooden
wedges. The additional movement and vibration of the trays during the
interim could have caused both spalling of the roof soil and spillage of the
tray material, thus resulting in less contact between the two surfaces.
5. Improvement is needed both in the materials used in wick assembly
and in the techniques of their construction. Aging of the materials used in
forming the connective joints between the ceramic candles in a moist
environment may have caused the further deterioration in the vacuum seal of
the wick assemblies noticed during the second season of the project.
6. Methods to prevent piping episodes in which macropores and
micropores conduct ponded surface water from either precipitation or
irrigation into the tray cavity area and support facilities must be
perfected. Solutions will be dependent primarily on limiting the amount of
ponding that occurs over the test plot. Placement of tray lysimeters at
greater soil depths would decrease the probability of piping from macropores
since the number and frequency of flow events in these structures are thought
to decrease with depth (2). From calamities experienced during the study
86
-------
period, it has been determined that it is more cost effective to prevent
piping events than to respond to piping episodes by providing sufficient sump
pump capacity and capabilities to handle highly variable inflows of mud and
water.
Tube Lysimeters
1. The hammering action used to drive the pipe section into the soil
could have altered conditions in- the structure and in the position of the
encapsulated soils. Any compression of the soil material in the cores would
be expected to have an adverse effect on the movement of soil water through
them. The tight soil conditions noted in the bottom of the lysimeters were
not comparable to those observed in the bottom of the excavation from which
the encapsulated cores were removed.
2. The greater densities of the soil observed in the tube lysimeters
could also affect the amount of water caught. It is probable that, when
water infiltrated the surface soils above the tube lysimeters, the tight soil
surface on the lysimeters created a perched water table in which the free
water would have flowed horizontally to the more permeable zones that existed
in the backfill areas surrounding the units.
3. Concentrated efforts must be made to adequately compact backfill
soil around tube lysimeter installations. In two instances settlement of
fill material around tube lysimeters, caused by ponded conditions at the
surface, -led to piping conditions that flooded the support facility via the
path of the buried percolate collection lines.
The variability in natural soils also affected study results. The
differences in soil properties between test areas and within test plots in
addition to management of activities on the plots affected the percolate
flows that .were measured. The field data recorded in each lysimeter resulted
from the integrated influence of all local soil properties on flow
conditions. The variations in soils, textures, densities, stratigraphy,
chemical properties, biological artifacts, and structure introduced
unexplainable differences in response to hydraulic loadings. Additionally,
difference in soil management above the lysimeters during the project can
affect soil properties which will influence study results. Since
tensiometers are the easiest means presently available for measuring the
matric potential in soils, their utilization to control the operation of
individual extraction lysimeters will require their emplacement in the soils
overlying the lysimeters. Tensiometers, access ports to lysimeter support
facilities, and additional instrumentation devices located near the lysimeter
may clutter the soil surface and interfere with normal surface agricultural
operations as they are practiced elsewhere on the site. This factor,
combined with the packing of the soil caused by operators servicing the
equipment in all types of weather, can easily create an artificial soil
environment not representative of field conditions.
87
-------
REFERENCES
1. Ayers, R. S. Quality of Water for Irrigation. In: Proceedings
Irrigation Drainage Division, Specialty Conference. ASCE. August 13-
15, Logan, Utah. 1975. p. 24-56.
2. Sevan, K, and Peter Germann. Macropores and Water Flow in Soils. Water
Resources Research. Vol. 18, No. 2: 1311-1325. October, 1982.
3. Blackstock, D. A. Soil Survey of Lubbock County, Texas. Soil
Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1979. 105 pp.
4. Brown, K. W., C. J. Gerard, B. W. Hipp, and J. T. Ritchie. A Procedure
for Placing Large Undisturbed Monoliths in Lysimeters. Soil Science
Society of America Proceedings. Vol. 38: 981-983. 1974.
5. Doorenbos, J., and W. 0. Pruitt. Guidelines for Predicting Crop Water
Requirements. Food and Agricultural Organization Irrigation and
Drainage Paper 24. Rome. 1977.
6. Duke, H. R., and H. R. Haise. Vacuum Extractors to Assess Deep
Percolation Losses and Chemical Constituents of Soil Water: Soil
Science Society of America Proceedings. Vol. 37: 963-965. 1973.
7. .Duke, H. R., E. G.-Kruse, and G. L. Hutchinson. An Automatic Vacuum
Lysimeter for Monitoring Percolation Rates. ARS 41-165 Agricultural
Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Beltsville, MD.
September, 1970.
8. Hansen, V. E., 0. W. Israelson, and G. E. Stringham. Irrigation
Principles and Practices. 4th Edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York,
1980. pg. 142.
9. Jensen, M. E. (ed.). Consumptive Use of Water and Irrigation Water
Requirements. American Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE Committee on
Irrigation Water Requirements. 1973.
10. Loehr, R. C., W. J. Jewel, J. D. Novak, W. W. Clarkson, and G. S.
Friedman. Land Application of Wastes, Vol. 2. Van Nostrand Reinhold
Environmental Engineering Series. 1979. pg. 28.
11. Matthess, G. The Properties of Groundwater. John Wiley and Sons. New
York. 1982.
12. Mowery, I. C., and G. S. McKee. Soil Survey of Lynn County, Texas.
Soil Conservation Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1959. 37
pp.
13. Olson, R. A., and L. T. Kurtz. Crop Nitrogen Requirements, Utilization,
and Fertilization. In: Nitrogen in Agricultural Lands. F. J.
Stevenson, ed. American Society of Agronomy Series on Agronomy, No. 22.
1982. pg. 568.
-------
14. Schoeller, H. (1956): Geochimie des eaux souterraines. Application aux
eaux de gisements de petrole. Rev. Inst. Petrol. Ann. Combust. Liq.,
10, Paris, pp. 181-213, 219-246, 507-552, 671-719, 823-874. 1955.
15. Tanner, C. B. Measurement of Evapotranspiration. In: Irrigation of
Agricultural Lands, R. M. Hagan, H. R. Haise, and T. W. Edminston, eds.
American Society of Agronomy Series on Agronomy, No. 11, 1967. pg. 534-
' 574.
16. Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Partners for Profit Coastal
Sermudagrass, Fertilizer and Management. B- 1223. 1979.
17. Texas Department of Agriculture. 1983 Texas County Statistics, pg.
171.
18. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Process Design Manual Land
Treatment of Municipal .Wastewater. Center for Environmental Research
Information. EPA 625/1-81-013. October, 1981.
19. Wendt, C. W., A. B. Onken, and 0. C. Wilke. Effects of Irrigation
Methods on Groundwater Pollutants by Nitrate and Other Solutes. EPA
600/2-76-291. December, 1976. pg. 6.
89
-------
APPENDICES
90
-------
APPENDIX A
PROFILES OF TEST SOILS
91
-------
APPENDIX A
PROFILES OF TEST SOILS (3, 12)
. Amarlllo Series
Ap - 0 to 0.36 meters; reddish brown (SYR 5/4) fine sandy loam, dark reddish
brown (5YR 3/4) moist; weak fine granular structure; hard, friable; -few
fine roots; mildly alkaline; abrupt smooth boundary.
B2H - 0.36 to 0.61 meters; reddish brown (SYR 4/4) sandy clay loam, dark
reddish brown (SYR 3/4) moist weak coarse prismatic structure parting to
weak medium subangular blocky; very hard, friable; common .roots; many
pores; thin discontinuous clay films on prism faces and patchy clay
films on ped faces; noncalcareous; mildly alkaline; gradual wavy
boundary.
B22t - 0.61 to 0.84 meters; reddish brown (SYR 5/4) sandy clay loam, reddi'sh
brown (SYR 4/4) moist; weak coarse prismatic structure parting to weak
medium subangular blocky; hard, friable; few roots; common pores; nearly
continuous clay films on prism faces and patchy clay films on ped faces;
noncalcareous; moderately alkaline; gradu-al wavy boundary..
B23t - 0.84 to 1.17 meters; reddish brown (5YR 5/4) sandy clay loam, reddish
brown (SYR 4/4) moist; weak coarse prismatic structure parting to weak
fine to medium subangular blocky; hard, friable; common pores; few
patchy clay films on ped faces; few films and threads of calcium
carbonate; calcareous; moderately alkaline; gradual wavy boundary.
B24tca - 1.17 to 1.52 meters; pink (5YR 7/4) sandy clay loam, reddish yellow
(SYR 6/6) moist; weak coarse prismatic structure parting to weak fine
subangular blocky; hard, friable; many soft masses and weakly cemented
concretions of calcium carbonate, about 30 percent by volume;
calcareous; moderately alkaline; diffuse wavy boundary.
B25tca - 1.52 to 2.03 meters; pink (SYR 7/4) sandy clay loam, light reddish
brown (SYR 6/4) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; hard,
friable; few patchy clay films; many sand grains bridged with clay
films;, many soft masses and weakly cemented concretions of calcium
carbonate; calcareous; moderately alkaline.
Friona Series
Ap - 0 to 0.20 meters; reddish brown (SYR 4/3) sandy clay loam, dark reddish
brown (SYR 3/3) moist; weak fine granular structure; slightly hard, vary
friable; many fine roots; mildly alkaline; abrupt smooth boundary.
B21t - 0.20 to 0.38 meters; reddish brown (SYR 4/3) clay loam, dark reddish
brown (5YR 3/3) moist; moderate coarse prismatic structure parting to
moderate medium subangular blocky; very hard, friable; many pores; many
92
-------
worm casts; thin patchy clay films, mostly on prism faces; few films and
threads of calcium carbonate in lower part; calcareous; moderately
alkaline, clear smooth boundary.
B22t - 0.38 to 0.66 meters; reddish brown (SYR 4/4) clay loam, dark reddish
brown (SYR 3/4) moist; weak coarse prismatic structure parting to weak
fine subangular blocky; hard, friable; many fine pores, common worm
casts; thin patchy clay films, mostly on ped surfaces; few films,
threads, and masses of calcium carbonate; calcareous; moderately
alkaline; abrupt smooth, boundary.
B23cam - 0.66 to 0.81 meters; pinkish white (SYR 8/2) caliche; indurated in
the upper part and strongly cemented in the lower part; the upper
surface is laminar and smooth; the lower part has pendants of calcium
carbonate as much as 1 centimeter long; gradual wavy boundary.
B24ca - 0.81 to 1.52 meters; pink (7. SYR 8/4) sandy clay loam, pink (7.SYR
7/4) moist; weak medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard,
friable; about 50 percent calcium carbonate in soft powdery forms;
calcareous; moderately alkaline.
-------
APPENDIX B
HYDRAULIC LOADING RATES
94
-------
en
TABLE B-1
HYDRAULIC LOADING JO BERMUDA GRASS AT THE GRAY SITE WITH
SOIL PERMEABILITY AT 4.39 CM/DAY (4% OF LOWEST RATE)
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
(crop)
(cm)
1.40*
2.16*
6.00
15.84
20.80
26.31
25.98
24.15
16.77
11.78
3.59*
1 . 50*
156.28
(3)
Pr
(cm)
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76
10.11
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60 '
78.08
(4)
Net ET
(2) - (3)
(cm)
-0.56
-0.79
1.89
11.08
10.69
15.46
16.45
14.88
6.33
3.02
0.85
-1.10
78.20
(5)
Percolation
(cm)
35.12
52.68
' 52.68
52.68
52.68
52.68
52.68
52.68
26.34
430.22
(6)
LW(P)
(4) + (5)
(cm)
37.01
63.76
63.37
68.14
69.13
67.56
59.01
55.70
27.19
510.87
*Dormant vegetation
-------
vo
TABLE B-2
HYDRAULIC LOADING TO BERMUDA GRASS SYSTEM AT THE HANCOCK SITE
WITH SOIL PERMEABILITY AT 5.95 CM/DAY (4% OF LOWEST RATE)
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
ET(crop)
(cm)
1.40*
2.16*
6.00
15.84
20.80
26.31
25.98
24.15
16.77
11.78
3.59*
1.50*
156.28
(3)
Pr .
(cm)
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76
10.11
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60
78.08
(4)
Net ET
(2) - (3)
(cm)
-0.56
-0.79
1.89
11.08
10.69
15.46
16.45
14.88
6.33
3.02
0.85
-1.10
78.20
' (5)
Percolation
(cm)
47.6
' 71.4
71.4
71.4
71.4
71.4
71.4
71.4
35.7
583. 1
(6)
LW(p)
(4) + (5)
(cm)
49.49
82.49
82.09
86.86
87.85
86.28
77.73
74.42
36.55
663.76
*Dormant vegetation
-------
10
TABLE B-3
HYDRAULIC LOADING TO COTTON AT THE GRAY SITE WITH SOIL
PERMEABILITY AT 4.39 CM/DAY (4% OF LOWEST RATE)
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
ET(crop)
(cm)
2.97*
3.97*
5.21*
6.50*
13.10**
11.57
24.03
29.00
19.96
11.07
3.46**
2.39*
133.23
(3)
Pr
(cm)
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76
10. U
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60
78.08
(4)
Net ET
(2) - (3)
(cm)
1.01
1.02
1.10
1.74
2.99
0.72
14.>50
19.73
9.52
2.31
0.72
-0.21
55.15
(5)
Percolation
(cm)
13.17
35.12
35.12
35.12
17.56
136.09
(6)
LW(P)
(4) + (5)
(cm)
14.91
35.84
49.62
54.85
27.08
•
182.3
*Bare soil
**Cover and bare soil in period
-------
TABLE B-4
HYDRAULIC LOADING TO COTTON AT THE HANCOCK SITE WITH SOIL
PERMEABILITY AT 5.95 CM/DAY (4% OF LOWEST RATE)
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
ET(crop)
(cm)
2.97*
3.97*
5.21*
6.50*
13.10**
11.57
24.03
29.00
19.96
11.07
3.46**
2.39*
133.23
(3)
Pr
(cm)
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76
10.11
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60
78.08
(4)
Net ET
(2) - (3)
(cm)
1.01
1.02
1.10
1.74
2.^99
0.72
14.50
19.73
9.52
2.31
0.72
-0.21
55.15
(5)
Percolation
(cm)
17.85
47.6
47.6
47.6
23.8
-
184.45
(6)
LW(p)
(4) + (5)
(cm)
19.59
48. 32
62.10
67.33
33.32
.
230.66
*Bare soil
**Cover and bare soil in period
-------
<£>
<0
TABLE B-5
HYDRAULIC LOADING TO GRAIN SORGHUM AT THE GRAY SITE WITH
SOIL PERMEABILITY AT 4.39 CM/DAY (4% OF LOWEST RATE)
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
ET(crop)
(cm)
2.97*
3.97*
5.21*
6.50*
10.92**
17.10
28.32
25.12
10.90**
6.83*
2.97*
2.39*
123.20
(3)
Pr
(cm)
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76
10.11
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60
78.08
(4)
Net ET
(2) - (3)
(cm)
1.01
1.02
1.10
1.74
0.81
6.25
18.79
15.85
0.46
-1.93
0.23
-0.21
; 45.12
(5)
Percolation
(cm)
13.17
17.56
35.12
35.12
35.12
136.63
(6)
LW(p)
(4) + (5)
(cm)
15.45
18.37
41.37
53.91
50.97
180.07
*Bare soil
**Cover and bare soil in period
-------
o
o
TABLE B-6
HYDRAULIC LOADING TO GRAIN SORGHUM AT THE HANCOCK SITE WITH
SOIL PERMEABILITY AT 4.39 CM/DAY (4% OF LOWEST RATE)
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
ET(crop)
(cm)
2.97*
3.97*
5.21*
6.50*
10.92**
17.10
28.32
25.12
10.90**
6.83*
2.97*
2.39*
123.20
(3)
Pr
(cm)
1.96
2.95
4.11
4.76
10.11
10.85
9.53
9.27
10.44
8.76
2.74
2.60
78.08
(4)
Net ET
(2) - (3)
(cm)
1.01
1.02
1.10
1.74
0.81
6.25
18.79
15.85
0.46
-1.93
0.23
-0,21
45.12
(5)
Percolation
(cm)
17.85
23.8
47.6
47.6
47.6
184.45
(6)
LW(p)
(4) + (5)
(cm)
19.59
24.61
53.85
53.85
66.39
227.89
*Bare soil
**Cover and bare soil in period
-------
APPENDIX C
NITROGEN LOADINGS
10.1
-------
o
ro
TABLE C-1
NITROGEN LOADINGS WITH 27 MG/L N WASTEWATER FOR THE GRAY SITE AND
24 MG/L N WASTEWATER AT THE HANCOCK SITE AND DESIGN LOADING FOR
TEST PLOTS USING EPA DESIGN CRITERIA FOR BERMUDA GRASS
(1)
Month
January
February
March
Apri 1
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
Pl-ET(crop)
(cm)
+ .56
+ .79
- 1.89
-11.08
-10.69
-15.46
-16.45
-14.88
- 6.33
- 3.02
- .85
+ 1.10
-78.2
(3)
U
(kg N/ha)
16.
52.
69.
87.
86.
80.
56.
39.
10.
500.
6
9
5
9
8
7
0
3
3
0
Gray
12.7
36.0
50.7
62.5
60.7
56.7
42.8
31.3
8.2
361.6
(4)
LW(N)
(cm)
Hancock
16.
45.
63.
78.
76.
71.
54.
39.
10.
455.
0
5
0
7
5
5
0
4
3
8
Gray
37.01
63.76
63.37
68.14
69.13
67.56
59.01
55.70
27.19
510.87
(5)*
LV)
(cm)
Hancock
49.
82.
82.
86.
87.
86.
77.
• 74.
36.
663.
49
49
09
86
85
28
73
42
55
76
Gray
13
36
55
55
55
55
43
32
8
352
(6)**
LV>
(cm)
Hancock
16
46
55
55
55
55
54
21
10
367
*Column 5 is based upon three operational days per week. These are project operational restrictions
rather than what could be applied with the proper irrigation system.
**Column 6 is what can be applied in three days per week from May to August.
-------
o
to
TABLE C-2
NITROGEN LOADINGS WITH 27 MG/L N WASTEWATER FOR THE GRAY SITE AND
24 MG/L N WASTEWATER AT THE HANCOCK SITE AND DESIGN LOADING
FOR TEST PLOTS USING EPA DESIGN CRITERIA FOR COTTON
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
Pr~ET(crop)
(cm)
- 1.01
- 1.02
- 1.10
- 1.74
- 2.99
- .72
-14.50
-19.73
- 9.52
- 2.31
- .72
- .21
-55.15
(3)
U
(kg N/ha)
12.
24.
29.
20.
11.
1.
97.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gray
10.0
9.7
8.2
8.0
9.0
44.9
(4)
LW(N)
(cm)
Hancock
6.
12.
10.
10.
11.
50.
0
3
3
1
4
1
Gray
14.91
35.84
49.62
54.85
27.08
182.3
(5)*
LW(p)
(cm)
Hancock
19.
48.
62.
67.
33.
230.
59
32
10
33
32
66
L
Gray
10.0
9.7
8.2
8.0
9.0
44.9
(6)**
LI
(D)
(cm)
Hancock
6.0
12.3
10.3
10.1
11.4
50.1
*These loadings are based on two operational days per week at the cotton plots.
-------
TABLE C-3
NITROGEN LOADINGS WITH 27 MG/L N WASTEWATER FOR THE GRAY SITE AND
24 MG/L N WASTEWATER AT THE HANCOCK SITE AND DESIGN LOADING
FOR TEST PLOTS USING EPA DESIGN CRITERIA FOR GRAIN SORGHUM
(1)
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Totals
(2)
Pr-ET(crop)
(cm)
- 1.01
- 1.02
- 1.10
- 1.74
- .81
- 6.25
-18.79
-15.85
- .46
1.93
- .23
.21
-45.12
(3)
U
(kg N/ha)
7.
28.
47.
41.
10.
135.
3
4
0
7
6
0
Gray
8.0
5.6
19.1
24.3
22.3
79.3
(4)
LW(N)
(cm)
Hancock
11.
7.
24.
30.
28.
101.
0
1
1
7
1
0
Gray
15.45
18.37
41.37
53.91
50.97
180.07
(5)*
LW(p)
(cm)
Hancock
19.
24.
53.
66.
63.
227.
59
61
85
39
45
89
L1
Gray
8
11
19
24
22
79
(6)**
W(D)
(cm)
Hancock
11
7
31
28
101
*These loadings are based on two operational days per week at the grain sorghum plots.
-------
APPENDIX D
PERCOLATE QUALITY PARAMETERS"AT THE TEST PLOTS
105
-------
TABLE 0-1
PERCOLATE QUALITY PARAMETERS AT TEST PLOTS'
o
en
SOURCE
CRAY
TRAY 103
6a
so"
CVC
tc"
Ee
ky/haf
TRAY 104
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
TRAY 105
G
SO
CV
XC
E
ky/ha
aG • geometric
bSD - standard
ALK CONO
i CaCO}/l) (
221. 8070.
47.4
21.2
50 100
2 1
135. 4923.
398.
too
1
71.6
mean
deviation
ITS pll TWI
«9/l) (ma N/l)
4652. 8.08 1.41
487. .184 .240
10.4 2.28 16.8
100
6 2 3
2838. 4.93 .862
3982.
770.
19.1
100
17-
CCV - coefficient of variation
NOg/NOj Nllj TOIAL P ODTIIO P ORG.P COO Cl 50^
(ng N/l) (og N/l) (ug P/l) (mg P/l) (ng/P) (pg/l) (iug/1) (wg/l)
1.56 .051 .29
.999 ' .097
50.5 91.9
7 7 1
.949 .031 .177
4.36 .026
4.31 .014
79.6 47.1
80 25
5 4
.784 .005
1C - percentage
*E • niaiber of
.025
.112
176.
6
.015
.017
.023
99.1
3
.003
of compos lie 'lafflple
quality determination
1665.
523.
29.8
88.9
9
1016.
50 1591.
245.
15.3
too
1 4
9 286.
80S-
88. 3
10.9
100
8
491.
530.
.'5.9
612.
40.2
6.56
too
5
110.
Ca
(ug/l)
280.
76.2
26.5
66.7
3
171.
560.
16.8
345.
60.8
17.5
100
2
62.2
£/!>
167.
39.6
23.2
66.7
3
102.
197.
100
5.9.
173.
6.36
3.67
100
2 .
31.2
K Ha TOC
35.9 1207.
2.65 }8.9
7.35 3.22
100 50
3 2
21.9 736.4
19
1
.57
24.'4 807.
3.54
14.4
100 100
2 1
4.39 145.
In total sampling effort
made for the
parameter
kg/ha- mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE 0 - I
CONT.
SOURCE
GRAY
TRAY 106
Ga
su"
cvc
Le
kg/lu/
ALK
CaC03/l)
COND TDS pll TKN
(«g/l) (°x» N/l)
N02/N03
(«9 N/l)
40.2
,
2.41
Nil., TOTAL P
(09 N/l) (nig P/l)
2.29
1
.137
ORTIIO P ORG.P COD
(«9 P/D («9/P) (pg/D
.01
1
.001
Cl
(«9/D
S0<
("9/0
Ca
(oiy/l)
Mg
K
(og/l)
Na T(
(ng/l) («s
TRAY 104-106 DEPTH AVERAGE
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
TRAY 107
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
*G ' " geometric
bSD - standard
398
too
1
71.6
316.
12.0
3.80
too
2
104.
aic an
deviation
3982.
770.
19.1
100
3
717-
4426 3058. 7.48 .26
439.
14.3
too
1511
1461. 1009. 2.47 .086
6.31
14.7
131.
16.7
6
.568
,
37.5
11.3
28.6
7
12.4
"xc
.064
1.01
210.
20
5
.006
.0)6
.0)0
65.5
6
.012
• percentage of
.015 50.
.030 .
181.
4 1
.001 9
.015
.013
72.6
6
.005
1591.
245.
15.3
100
4
286.
108).
197.
18.0
too
to
357.
597.
49.3
8.63
83.3
6
53.7
488.
151.
30.2
100
II
161.
406.
130.
28.6
66.7
3
66.1
350.
139.
38.3
too
2
115-
181.
14.3
7.88
100
3
16.3
III.
59-4
49.9
100
2
36.7
22.4
4.40
19.4
66.7
3
2.02
10.3
2.40
23.3
50
2
3.40
807.
100
1
145.
424.
too
1
140.
conno* Ite *»«*>• In total sampling effort
e£ • number of quality determination Bade
for the
parameter
CCV • coefficient of variation
kg/ha- nass In kg/lia for natertat Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE D - I
o
oo
SOURCE ALK COND TDS pll TKN
(U9 CaCO}/l) («9/l) (ng N/l)
GRAY
TRAY 108
Ga
S0b
CVC
1C
Ea
kg/haf
TRAY 109
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
213.
1.41
.664
100
2
87.3
418.
too
1
62.7
TRAY 107-109 DEPTH
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
» geauetrl
286.
66.1
29.1
too
5
85.7
c mean
5467.
116.
2.12
2
2245.
AVERAGE
5162.
607.
11.9
3
1549.
3540. 7.85 .32
73.6 .028
2.08 .361
100
3 21
1451. 3-27 .131
2298.
187.
8.14
100
2
345.
3018. 7.73 .288
544. .214 .042
17.8 2.77 14.6
100
10 3 2
90S. 2.82 .087
CONT.
N02/N03 NII3 TOTAL P
(ug N/l) (ng N/l) (ng P/l)
57.6
37.1
57.7
7
23.6
10.8
4.49
39-0
16.7
5
1.63
30.0
30.9
77.7
95
19
9.01
"xc
.035
.374
184.
a
.014
.015
2.19
233.
14.3
7
.002
.057
1.28
318.
4.76
21
.017
• percentage of
ORTIIO P ORG.P
(og P/l) (ng/P)
.012
.Oil
77.2
.125
8
.005
.020
.017
69.7
too
5
.003
.015
.004
23.2
5.3
19
.004
conpotlu tanple
COD Cl
(pg/D («g/D
33. 1428.
438.
29.9
100 88.8
1 8
13.5 586.
549.
169.
29.7
too
3
82.5
33 1105.
4)0.
36.5
100 95.4
1 21
13.5 3)2.
S04 Ca
402. 3)4.
78.2 5.66
19.1 1.69
100 50
8 2
402. 137.
307. 38
43.9
14.1
100 100
6 i
46.1 5.7
402. 220.
13). 157.
31.8 54.5
too So
27 5
121. 66.1
Hg
(«g/D
iso.
13.4
8.92
SO
2
61.6
64.2
too
1
9.63
112.
46.6
38.6
80
5
33.7
if
(••u/U
14.
1.41
10. 1
50
2
5.74
16.
1
2.4
12.9
2.89
22.3
4o
5
3.88
Na TOC
(my/I) (ug/Q
616.
SI. 6
8.36
50
2
25).
544.
118.
21.3
66.7
3
163.
In total sampling effort
SO « standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
eE • number of quality determination made for the parameter
kg/ha* mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
.
o
vo
SOURCE
(t
GRAY
TUBE IM
G*
so"
CVC
xcd
I*
kg/haf
TUBE 112
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
ALK
ig Catty
689.
59-4
8.53
100
2
2,42.
507.
23-5
4.64
80
5
548.
COW) TOS
1) («9/D
3616.
321.
8.84
5
11244
4287.
749.
17-2
18
4630.
2269.
194.
8.54
100
a
7058.
2667.
365.
13.6
78.6
14
7058.
pll TKH
(ug N/l)
8.43 1.29
.148 1.62
1.75 92.7
4 5
26.2 3.89
7.62 .607
.264 .321
3.47 45.9
5.6
18 18
8.23 .656
N02/N03
(ng N/l)
4.06
5.62
74.2
20
12.6
196.
3.68
196.
10
212.
T
ta.3
(«g N/l)
.013
.017
102.9
19
.041
.053
,086
92.2
10
.057
ABLE 0-1
COHT.
TOTAL P OHTIIO P OAG.P
(ng P/l) («y P/l) (ng/P)
.019
.018
76.6
17
.058
3.36
1.25
35. 5
5
3/63
2.46
.90S
34.8
II. 1
9
7.66
.012
.008
61.2
IB
.013
.02
1
.062
.012
.012
88.4
II
.013
COD
26.9
7.64
27.9
SO
2
83.5
32.1
31.4
82.1
II
34.7
Cl
841.
165.
19.2
100
II
2617.
808.
240.
28.7
66.7
IB
872.
so4
157.
76.4
43.7
100
10
489.
525.
52.4
9.94
7.7
13
567.
Ca
119.
22.6
18.9
100
2
370.
230.
105.
36.6
too
9
249.
ha
72.1
8.98
12.4
100
2
224.
76.9
14.8
18.9
100
9
83.1
K
(wg/1)
•
27.9
7.78
27-3
100
2
B7.0
11.4
5.21
40.9
100
9
12.3
Ha
(«H»/D
947.
720.
63.9
100
8
2945.
528.
100
1
570.
TOC
dug/0
8.44
5.67
45.5
7
26.2
TUBE 111-112 DEPTH AVERAGE
G 553. 4131. 2515.
SD 94.3 738. 369.
CV 16.9 17.6 14.5
1C • 85.7 86.4
E 7 23 22
kg/ha
1162.
G » geometric mean
bSD • standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
7.76 .710
.400 .865
5.15 93.4
4.5
22 23
16.3 1.49
1.72
5.69
too.
30
3.61
.021
.063
145.
29
.045
.060
1.59
195.
22
.127
.072
1.34
153-
3.7
27
.152
.012
.012
82.2
12
.025
31.3
29.0
79.4
7.7
13
65.6
820.
212.
25.1
79-3
29
1723.
327.
189.
50.6
47.8
23
687.
204.
113.
46.0
100
II
429.
76.0
13.8
17.8
100
II
160.
13.4
8.27
53.0
100
II
19.9
887.
703.
66.2
100
9
542.
8.4*
5.67
45.5
7
26.2
XC • percentage ofcomposite sample In total sampling effort
eE • number of quality determination uade for the parameter
kg/ha- uass In kg/ha for Material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE 0-1
COHT.
SOURCE AI.K
(ng CaCOj/l)
CRAY
TUBE' "3
G*
SLf-
CVC
xcd
te
kg/ha f
TUBE 1)4
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
395.
91.0
22.6
100
4
399.
291.
108.
35.1
100
4
411.
COND HIS
(n9/0
2676. 159).
521. 188.
19.0 11.7
IS 100
20 10
2702. 1609.
3867. 2789.
715. 130.
18.1 4.66
7.1 100
14 II
5452. 3932.
pll TKN
' (ay N/l)
7.91 .443
.140 .271
1.77 52.3
33.3 28.6
6 7
7.99 .447
7.85 .588
.165 .305
2.10 46.6
28.6 28.6
7 7
11.1 .787
NtyNOj Nil, TOTAL P
(«9 N/l) (ng N/l) (uy P/l)
1.47
.989
56.8
10.7
28
1.49
.724
2.39
108.
9-52
21
1.02
.015 .033
.774 .079
264. 1)).
18.2
II 9
.015 .0)4
.026° .039
.06) .041
131. 81.9
16.7
12 6
.037 .054
OR] 110 P ORG.P COO Cl SOj Ca
(«9 P/l) (»g/P) (pg/l) («g/D (ay/I) («y/l)
.015 .01
.029
127.
8.3
12 1
.015 .010
.012 .07
.009
66.6
8.3
12 1
.017 .099
77.1 466.
12). 181.
100. 36.2
80 100
5 1)
77.8 471.
40.9 10)5.
3.0.2 50.5
64.6 4.88
75 100
4 I)
57.7 1459.
209. 90.3
42.2 41.8
19.9 42.8
100 100
1) 3
211. 91.2
45). 229.
52.6 92.6
11.5 38.)
100 100
12 )
6)9. )24.
Hg
33.6
.51)
15)
100
3
)).9
64.
9.76
IS.I
100
)
90.2
K
(»-J/D
D.I
6.25
44.6
100
3
13. i
20.5
15.6
100
)
28.9
Na TOC
(u'J/l) (uig/|)
)24. 11.9
2).) 29.7
7.08 77.2
100 100
2 2
)27. )2.2
609. 16.8
20.5 10.0
3.37 55.2
100 100
2 2
859- 2). 6
TUBE II3-H4 DEPTH AVERAGE
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
*G " geometric
bSD - standard
339.
106.
29.7
100
8
411.
mean
deviation
3M4. 2136.
857. 627.
26.5 28.2
11.8 100
34 21
3767. 2585.
7.88 .491
.150 .286
1.91 48.8
30.8 28.6
13 14
9.53 .595
CCV - coefficient of variation
1.09
1.73
88.9
10.2
49
1.31
"xc
e£
fkg/lia
.036 .0)6
.5)8 .058
325. 107.
4
23 II
.044 .044
• percentage of
.01) .026
.022
120.
8.)
24 2
.016 .0)2
composite lample
- number of quality determination
- mass In kg/ha
58.2 695.
97.7 30).
110. 39.4
77.8 100
9 26
70.4 841.
303. 144.
1)2. 102.
40.2 59-9
100 100
25 6
687. 1/4.
146.
20.6
36.8
100
6
56.1
16.4
5.75
33.2
100
6
19.9
448. 21.5
16). 21.5
)4.6 76.1
100 100
4 4
542. 26.0
In total saaipllng effort
wade for the
parameter
for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE D -
SOURCE" ALK CONO TDS
(mg CaC03/l) (my/I)
GRAY
TUBE US
0
sub
cvc
1C
Ee
kg/ha f
296.
75.1
24.8
75
4
856.
3479- 2224.
489. 377.
13.9 16.7
8 85.7
25 14
10054 6427.
pit TKN
(ng N/l)
7.69 .641
.219 .411
2.85 58.9
20 28.6
10 7
22.2 1.85
N02/N03
(«0 N/l)
2.89
1.74
53.6
11.1
27
8.35
CONT.
NII3 TOTAL P ORTIIO P OR6.P COO
(ng N/l) (ng P/l) (nig P/l) (rng/P) (pg/l)
.049
.285
170.-
18.2
II
.144
.016
.025
no.
10
.046
.012
.014
96.4
12
.036
.01 26.7
43.4
107.
25 60
4 5
.029 77.1
Cl
(•19/1)
725.
64.5
8.88
78.6
14
2095.
S0«
(19/0
484.
61.8
12.5
83.3
12
1413.
Ca
(«3/0
232.
4.95
2.13
50
2
672.
Mil
(og/D
61.9
4.24
6.84
50
2
179.
K
(IKJ/D
15.5
.707
4.56
50
2
44.8
Na
(«9/D
563.
1.41
25.1
50
2
1627.
IOC
(«g/0
17.5
14.6
71-8
too
2
$0.6
TU
•
BE
cv
*c
£
kg/na
238. 3772. 2776. 7.72 .374
3.54 596. 2771. .326 .374
1.50 15.6 99.4 4.2276.9
100 5.6 90 18.2 3) 3
2 18 10 II
3) 3
9
10.5
6.09
53.9
15
20
26.3
.043
.142
152.2
25
12
.108
.01
16.7
6
.025
.014
.034
148.
9.1
II
.036
.01 33.6
68.6
109.
50
1 6
.025 84.4
924.
83.45
9.00
92.3
13
2318.
596.
48.8
8.16
91.7
12
1496.
299.
14.8
4.96
SO
2
751.
42.5
2.12
4.99
SO
2
107.
9.17
1.13
12.3
100
2
23.0
660.
63.6
9.61
50
2
1658.
15.5
.141
.912
100
2
38.9
BE I I5-H6 DEPTH AVERAGE
c
CV
1C
kg/ha
275.
67.2
23.9
83.3
3599. 2439. 7-70 .474
551. 421. 27.3 .398
15.1 16.9 21.666.9
6.9 87.4 18.2 31.2
li a tit 11 •£
43 24 21 16
4.99
5.77
86.4
12.76
1.1
47
.046
.220
170.
21.7
23
.013
.021
114
6.25
.£
16
.013
.025
131.
4.3
23
.01
20
5
30.3
56.9
108.
55
II
81.8
814.
125.
16.2
85.2
27
540.
76.5
14.0
87-5
MI.
2«*
263.
39-3
14.9
50
712.
51.3
11.6
22.2
50
138.
11.9
3.72
30.1
75
32.2
610.
67.9
II. 1
50
1646.
16.5
8.86
49.5
100
44.5
SO
getmetrlc wean
standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
dtC • percentage of compos life sample In total sampling effort
6E • nunber of quality determination made for the parameter
fkg/lia* nass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
ro
TABLE 0-1
COHT.
SOURCE AI.K
(ug CaC03/l)
GRAY
TRAY 201 .
Ga 228
sub
CVC
xcd too
Ee 1
kg/haf 280.
TRAY 202
G
SO
CV
xc
E
kg/ha
TRAY 203
G 154
SO
CV
JC 100
E 1
kg/ha 102.
aG <• geometric mean
bSO * standard deviation
CONO
(
4390
741.
16.7
12.5
8
5400.
5302.
247.
4.67
50
2
1909.
1358.
256.
18.6
33.3
3
897.
TDS
«9/D
3295.
165.
5.01
100
4
4052.
.344
100
1
1240.
1162.
100
1
767.
pll TKN
8.16 1.57
.205 .798
2.51 47.4
25 33.3
4 3
10.0 1.93
7.81 2
.233
2.99
50 100
2 1
2.81 .72
7.47 4.04
.431 1.12
5.78 27.3
3 2
4.93 2.67
N02/N03
(mg N/1)
22.3
29.9
57.0
9.0
11
27.5
13.1
17.1
67.6
25
4
4.71
3.99
17.3
95.5
8.3
12
2.63
"xc
eE
NH3 TOTAL P
(mg N/l) (og P/l)
.036 401
.102 .304
120. 66.8
16.7
6 2
.045 .493
.140 .01
.391
102.
33.3
3 1
.051 .004
.079
.181
98.8
9.1
11
.052
• percentage of
ORTIIO P
(«g P/l)
.062
.400
137.
8
.077
.057
.192
136.
3
.020
.212
.437
IIS.
7-7
13
.139
compos 1 to
ORG.P COO
(wg/P) (pg/D
41.1
8.04
19.3
66.7
3
50.5
50.
100
1
18.
50.
66.7
3
33.
Cl
(mg/l)
1063.
93.7
8.79
100
3
1307-
393.
33.1
8.39
too
3
260.
S04
(«g/»
633.
64.7
10.!
too
3
779.
524.
100
1
189.
171.
49.3
27.9
100
4
113.
Ca M0 K
(ng/l) («g/D (mg/l)
278. 113. 230.
100 100 100
1 1 1
342. 139. 283.
62. 25.2 24
too too too
1 1 1
40.9 16.6 15.8
Ha TOC
(ng/l) (rng/Q
17.5
too
1
21.5
18.8
100
1
6.77
23.4
too
1
15.4
sample In total sampling effort
- number of quality determination made
for the
parameter
CCV ' coefficient of variation
f,
kg/ha* mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
SOURCE AlK COND TDS pll TKN
(119 CaC03/l) (ng/l) (ng N/l)
CRAY
TRAY 201-203 DEPTH AVERAGE
c* 187. 2027. 2790. 7.85 2.24
SD 52.3 1567. 895. .414 1.41
"^ 27.4 40.5 30.2 5.27 55.5
*c 100 23 100 22.2 100
E" f 2 13 6 9 6
Wh* 141. 1520. 2093. 5.89 1.68
TRAY 204
G
SD
CV
SC
E
kg/ha
\J1AY 206
SD
CV
SC
E
kg/ha
aG " geometric nean
bSD * standard deviation
TABLE
COHT.
N02/N0} NII3 TOTAL t
(ing M/l) («g M/l) (ng P/l)
9.59 .068 .117
27.9 .213 .335.
84.1 116. 109.
II. 1 19
27 20 3
7.20 .050 .088
.032
.052
94.5
^
.016
.01
1
.009
SC • percentage of
0 - 1
ORTIIO P ORG.P COD Cl 50^ Ca Hg
(u>9 P/l) (ug/P) (pg/l) (ug/l) (ug/1) (mg/l) (ug/l)
.119 45.9 647. 322. 131. 53.4
.397 6.47 373. 237.9 152.7 62.1
124. 13.9 51.1 60.7 W-9 89-9
4.2 71.4 100 100 100 100
24 76822
.089 34.5 485. 241. 98.5 40.0
.842
.107
12.6
2
.438
.05 1.02
100
1 1
.022 .439
composite sample In total sampling effort
K Na IOC
(uiij/.l) (nig/1) (1119/0
127. 19.7
146. 3-1
US. 15.6
100 100
2 3
95.3 14.8
e£ • number of quality determination made for the parameter
CCV • coefficient of variation
fkg/ha- mass In kg/lia for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
T A B I E
CONT.
D - I
SOURCE ALk COND TOS pll TICK
(og CaCOj/l) (iug/1) (nig N/l)
GRAY
TRAY 20d-206 DEPTH AVERAGE
a4
sob
cvc
£e
kg/haf
TRAY 207
G 8.11
so
CV
tc
E |
TRAY 208
G
SO
CV
tc
e
kg/ha
N02/N0j .Nil,
(«H) N/l) (ug N/l)
.025
.052
112.
5
.009
.226 .01
1.59
Idt.
2 1
.065 .003
.01 .39
.0002 .008
TOTAL P ORTIIO P ORG.P COD Cl SO^ Ca Hg K
(ng P/l) (my P/l) (utg/P) (pg/l) (»!l/l) (rag/1) (wg/ll (uig/l) (mg/
.106 1.02
80.2
100
3 1
.036 .d39
.Od9
.Old
2
.Old
.98
1
.020
*6 * geometric iiean
bSD - standard deviation
CCV * coefficient of variation
tC • percentage of cooiposlta sample In total sampling effort
eE • number of quality deteiwlnatlon Bade for the parameter
kg/haa mass In kg/ha for Material Intercepted by the unit
-------
SOURCE
AI.K
1 CaC03/l)
COHD 70S
(«J/D
GRAY
TRAY 207-208 DEPTH AVERAGE
G*
so"
cvc
Ee
kg/haf
TUBE 211
G
su
CV
tc
E
kg/ha
TUBE 212
C
SO
CV
SC
E
kg/ha
aG » geometric
bSO • standard
169.
14.8
8.76
100
2
98.1
195.
25.2
12.9
75
130
mean
deviation
6161.
719.
11.6
8.3
12
3573.
4170.
389.
9.29
15.4
13
2794.
5098.
460.
8.98
too
8
2957.
2936.
41.3
1.41
100
3
1967.
T A B L E 0 - 1
COHT.
pll TKN
(ng N/l)
8.11
1
2.35
7.93 1.33
.106 1.02
1.34 66.4
50 33.3
2 3
4.60 .769
*
7.98 .305
.49 .587
6.13 114.
66.7 100
3 2
5.35 .204
N02/N0}
(•9 N/l)
.080
2.93
172.
3
.014
16.5
25.8
46.0
5.3
19
5.32
80.8
38.9
39.8
14.3
14
.040
Nl!3
(«9 N/l)
.063
.269
•34.
2
. .Oil
.\
.070
.068
70.7
12.5
8
.041
.060
.108
112.
66.7
3
.040
TOTAL P ORTIIO P OflG.P COO
(»g P/l) (mg P/l) to/P) (pg/1)
.014
.007
47.3
50
2
.008
1C • percentage
eE
» number of
.014
.537
149.
3
.002
.022
.050
129.
8.3
12
.013
.016
.053
167.
33.3
6
.010
of composite sample
quality determination
48.6
2.31
4.74
66.7
3
28.2
79-9
178.
126.
3
53.5
Cl S04 Ca Mg K Na TOC
(•9/1) (^/l) (»9/l) (n9/U (uxj/l) (mg/1) (ng/Q
2142. 522. 564. 92.6 13.0
230.6 263.
10.7 40.4
100 100 100 100 100
6 a i i i
1242. 303. 327. 53.7 7.54
806. 416.
59.8
14.2
100 66.7
3
540. 279.
31.6
too
1
19.5
8.88
2.48
27-3
100
2
5.95
In total sampling effort
.Bade
for the parameter
CCV * coefficient of variation
kg/ha- nass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
SOURCE
CRAY
AI.K
(109 caoyi)
COND
TDS pll
(09/1) («
TKH
•9 N/l)
N02/N03
("9 N/l)
TABLE
com.
HI,
<«J N/l)
TOTAL P
<«9 P/l)
0 - 1
ORTIIO P OAG.P COO
(ng P/l) («g/P) (pg/l)
Cl
<«9/l)
S°<
Ca
(«a/i)
M9
(ug/U
K Na TOC
(»9/l) («g/D («9/0
TUBE 2 11-2 12 DEPTH AVERAGE
G*
sub
CVC
xc
Ee
kg/haf
185.
24.7
13.2
83.3
6
117.
5029.
1166.
22.6
12
25
3169.
4396. 7.96
1088. .352
24.1 4.42
100 60
II 5
2763. 5.01
.737
.959
85.0
60
5
.464
32.3
37.8
51.3
9.1
33
5.32
.067
.075
27.3
77.4
II
.044
.014
.007
47.3
50
2
.008
.019
.049
136.
16.7
IB
.012
62.3
123.
130.
83.3
6
39.3
1863.
551.
28.1
100
7
1173.
491.
246.
42.0
90.9
II
309.
564.
100
1
327.
92.6
100
1
53.7
13.0 13.8
14.3
82.9
100 100
1 3
7.54 8.72
TUBE 2 13
G
SO
CV
tc
E
kg/ha
TRAY 301
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
196
100
1
7.84
208.
7-78
3.73
too
2
358.
5338.
212.
3.97
50
2
214.
2780.
142.
5.10
25
8
4781.
2376. 7.84
100 100
1 1
2957- 4.60
1796. 7.46
188. .456
10.4 6.11
100 40
7 5
4052. 12.8
.462
.248
48.3
3
.795
15
1
5.32
5.73
6.70
58.9
8.3
12
9.85
.044
1.36
270.
II. 1
9
.076
.049
.049
56.9
3
.085
.01
1
.0004
.014
.064
196.
8
.025
.10 37.1
15.8
40.8
50
1 2
.172 63.9
677.
102.
14.9
100
8
1164.
255.
96.7
35.6
100
9
438.
132.
16.3
12.3
too
2
227.
52.9
4.31
8.15
too
2
90.9
18.9 268. 26.1
1.41
7.44
100 100 100
2 1 1
32.6 461. 45.8
*G * geometric mean
bSD - standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
• percentage of composite sample In total sampling effort
• number of quality determination Bade for the parameter
mass In kg/ha for Mterlal Intercepted by the unit
-------
SOUHCt
CRAY
TRAY 302
Lb
cvc
tc
kg/l.af
ALK
(•ig CaCiyi)
208.
84.2
38.6
75
691.
CUNO
2254.
1336.
52.8
71
14
7484.
TDS pll TKN
(aig/l) («9 N/l)
1628. 7.60 .798
1336. .366 1.21
52.8 4.81 96.6
64.3 II. 1 It.l
14 9 9
5404. 25.2 2.65
N02/M03
(«>9 N/l)
4.71
8.49
64.8
3.7
27
15.6
T A
NH3
(«9 N/l)
.090
.772
239.
5.3
19
.299
B L E
COMT.
TOTAL P
(«9 P/D
.071
.077
70.0
4
.237
D - 1
ORTHO P
(ma P/l)
.051
.718
223.
4.8
21
.169
ORG.P COO Cl
(«9/P) (P9/D (uig/l)
•01 35.0
9.67
26.9
40
2 5
.033 116.
769.
93.7
12.1
100
10
2554.
so4
<«>9/l)
264.
80.0
28.8
90.1
II
878.
Ca
<*>!)/ 1)
232.
62.4
26.1
100
3
773-
Hg
(nig/l)
93.8
21.8
22.8
100
3
311.
K
35.9
5.64
15.6
100
3
119.
Na
(ug/l)
497.
266.
50.2
too
2
1650.
TOC
(eig/0
20.5
5-78
27.7
50
2
68.0
TRAY 303
G
SO
CV
SC
E
kg/ha
965. 707. 8.52 .257
410. 233. .050 .396
40.4 31.7 58.1 104.
25 100 50
4422
1496. 1095. 13.2 .398
2.57
4.11
99.9
12.5
8
3.99
.028
.058
107.
14.3
7
.043
1.6
1
2.48
.417
.627
95.2
7
.646
.01
1 .
.016
21.2
13.7
58.9
50
2
32.8
130.
52.9
37.4
100
6
202.
69.8
43.4
53.4
too
7
108.
39.
100
1
60.5
19.6
100
1
30.4
20.
100
1
31.
15.9
100
1
24.6
G
CV
1C
208.
65.5
30.5
83.3
2110. 1464. 7-67 .603
1147. 1169. .497 1.04
48.3 57.3 6.48 107.
15.4 80 25 7.1
26 25 16 14
4685. 3250. 17.0 1.34
4.47
8.06
72.4
6.4
47
9.92
.059
.895
284.
8.6
35
.132
.106
.534
186.
8
.236
.058
.636
197.
2.8
36
.129
.018
.045
139.
4
.039
31.7
11.8
34.8
44.4
9
70.4
473.
279.
47.6
100
24
1050.
185.
115.
512.
96.3
27
410.
143.
91.9
54.0
100
6
318.
59.7
34.8
50.6
100
6
132.
26.3
9.95
35.8
100
6
58.5
434.
242.
54.6
too
3
965.
20.5
5.51
26.1
75
45.6
G • geometric mean
bSl) - standard deviation
CCV • coefficient of variation
'kg/ha-
percentage of composite sample In total sampling effort
number of quality determination uade for the parameter
mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted ty the unit
-------
00
SOURCE AI.K
(tig CaC03/l)
GRAY
TRAY 304
6a
sob
CVC
xcd
Ee
kg/haf
TRAY 305
G
SD
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
COND TDS pll TKN
(ng/U (ug N/l)
4090. 2082. 8.21
20.5
.984
too
1 2 1
695. 35*. 1.40 '
15*5.
49.5
3.2
50
2
1121.
N02/M03
(ng N/l)
3.80
.361
9.48
2
.645
.491
2.06
68.8
3
.353
TABLE
CONT.
Nllj TOTAL P
(ng N/l) (tig P/l)
.043
.107
125.
It
.007
.091
.150
110.
3
.066
D - 1
TTRTliO P
i«3 P/D
.127
35.5
4
.022
.01
3
.007
ORG.P COO
(og/P) (pg/l)
50.8
100
1
8.64
49.7 17.9
1 |
35.8 12.9
Cl
(«9/l)
779-
93.8
11.9
100
3
1.36.
629.
32.5
5.17
50
2
453.
so4
H/D
359.
48. 1
13.3
75
*
61.0
149.
55.2
J5.8
50
2
107.
Ca
(my/I)
107.
too
i
18.2
120.
1
86.4
Hg K Na TOC
(mg/l) («y/l) («g/l) (uy/Q
26.
100
1
4.42
22.
1
15.8
TRAY 304-305 DEPTH AVERAGE
G •
SD
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
* geometric iiean
* standard deviation
4090. 1793. 8.21
312.
17.2
75
1 4 1
695. 807. 1.40
l.ll
1.68
57.6
5
.500
"xc
e£
.059
.118
110.
7
.027
• percentage of
.043
.075
92.5
7
.019
50.2 17.9
.778
1.55
50
2 1
22.6 12.9
715.
107.
14.8
BO
5
352.
266.
116.
39.7
66.7
6
120.
113.
9.19
6.10
50
2
50.9
23.9
2.83
11.8
50
2
10.8
conpoilt* sample In total sampling effort
• number of quality determination made
for the
paraueter
"SO
CCV • coefficient of variation
ky/ha* mass In kg/lia for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE 0 -
CONT.
SOURCE ALK
(ng CaCOj/l)
GRAY
TRAY 307
C 212
sob
cvc
tt"
E6 I
kg/haf 27.6
TRAY 308
G 270
SO
CV
1C
E 1
k9/l« 27.
TRAY 309
SO
CV
SC
E
kg/ha
COND IDS pll TKH
(ng/1) (ug N/l)
IOJ8. 8.17 1.18
84.9
8.01
2 1 1
138. 1.06 .153
540 8.71
100 100
1 1
54. .871
1522. 8.08 1.08
86).
52.7
2 1 1
654. 3.47 .46*
h02/N03 NII3 TOTAL P OKTIIO f ORG.P
(09 N/l) (ng N/l) (ng P/l) (109 P/l) (ng/P)
.983 .20 .03 .01 .01
4.16
134.
2 till
.128 .026 .004 .001 .001
.17
i
1
.017
.394 .028 .10
1.26 .050
100. 110.
3 2 1
.169 .012 .043
COO C1 S04 Cs Mg K Na TOC
(pg/1) (»g/l) (og/l) («g/l) («g/l) (ng/l) (09/1) (og/i
5.4.9 132. 14).
11.3
7.91
50
112
7.14 17.2 18.6
135.
100
1
13.5
169. 64. 18. 4.0 IS.
1 1 1 1 1
72.7 27.5 7-74 1.72 6.45
aG - geometric nean dSC • percentage of compos Itesoivle
-------
TABLE
- I
COHT.
ro
O
SOURCE ALK COND
(»j CaC03/l) (
GRAY
TRAY 307-309 DEPTH
G«
SDb
CVC
1C
I*
kg/haf
rE 311
SO
CV
xc
E
kg/ha
TUBE 312
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
239.
*I.O
17.0
SO
2
52.6
153.
62.9
39.0
66.7
3
76.6
**8.
8*.9
18.8
100
2
8*2.-:
AVERAGE
1070.
635.
53.5
20
5
235.
3246.
1718.
49.1
33.3
3
1623.
3029.
871.
27.6
9
569*.
TOS
m/1)
3*10.
3*2.
9.99
33.3
3
1705.
2188.
118.
5.39
100
9
*M3.
pll TKN
(ng N/l)
8.32 1.13
.3*0 .071
*.09 6.26
33.3
3 2
1.83 .2*8
8.09 .*63
.021 .83*
.262 III.
SO SO
2 2
4.04 .232
7.92 .*9*
.3** .297
4.34 51.6
7 8
14.9 .928
R0.,/N03
(ng N/l)
.465
2.3*
.465
6
.102
12.3
20.5
9.7-9
25
*
6.13
7-38
22.*
108.
IS
13.9
NII3
(ng N/l)
.05*
.096
99.5
3
.012
.077
.263
131.
33.3
3
.038
.035
.1**
IS).
IS
.065
TOTAL P ORTIIO P ORG.P
(ng P/l) (mg P/l) d>g/P)
.03
1
.00*
.02*
.032
96.*
66.7
3
.012
.017
.012
57.7
7
.033
.252
.086
1**.
3
.OSS
.018
.05
1*3.
25
*
.009
.018
.072
IBS.
13
.033
.01
1
.001
.032
.021
60.6
50
2
.016
.01
'
1
.019
COD
(P9/D
96.3
80.7
72.1
2
21.2
26.1
16.3
57.1
so
2
13.0
12.*
33.2
125.
2
23.*
ci so4
(ng/l) (ng/l)
132.
1
17.2
13720.
2.83
.206
2
6860.
671.
96.*
14.2
too
to
1261.
IIS.
38.9
32.1
75
4
25.3
696.
100
1
3*8.
369.
56.*
15.1
100
9
69*.
Ca Hg K Na TOC
(•(I/O (wg/D (ng/D («g/l) dm/I)
18. *. is.
i i i
7.7* 1.72 6.*5
5*3. 12.2
33.3
6.11
100 100
2 1
271. 6.1
1*1. 56.8 20.9
55.7 *.78 2
37-6 8.3* 9-5
100 100 100
3 3 3
265. 107. 39.*
C - geometric mean
bSO > standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
1C • percentage of conpoilte sample In total sampling effort
8£ • number of quality determination made for the parameter
'kg/ha- nass In kg/ha for Material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE D - I
COHT.
SOURCE ALK
(«g CaC03/l)
GRAY
CONU TOS
pll TKN
(ng N/l)
N02/N0j NII3 TOTAL P OHTHO P ORG.P COD Cl SO^
(ag N/l) (ng N/l) (og P/l) (wg f/l) (og/P) (pg/l) (ng/l) (ny/l)
Ca
Mg
(«g/D
K
Na
(«g/D
TOC
TUBE 311-312 DEPTH AVERAGE
C
sub
cvc
xcd
Ee
f
kg/ha'
JJJBE 313
SD
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
TJJBE3I4
SD
CV
XC
E
ky/ha
BU " geometric
bSO * standard
235.
171.
6158.
80
5
280.
279.
61.7
21.8
66.7
3
474.
286.
32.0
ll.l
too
6
948.
mean
deviation
3082. 2445.
1113. 584.
34.4 23.4
8.3 9.2
12 12
3667. 2909.
3869. 2780.
679. 741.
17.3 25.9
18.8 100
16 4
6578. 4726.
4041. 3104.
1170. 694.
27.9 21.9
15 100
20 II
11374.10276
7.96 .488
.306 .389
3.85 63.7
ll.l 10
9 10
9.47 .580
7.97 .452
.272 .467
3.42 83.4
66.7 100
3 2
13-5 .769
7.65 .464
.353 .498
4.61 76.5
20 26.6
10 7
.25.3 1.54
CCV « coefficient of variation
8.21
21.4
104.
5.3
19
9.77
.156
74.7
239.
IB.B
16
2.65
10.0
21.6
109.
4.5
22
33.2
d*c
e£
fkg/h*
.940 .019
.163 .019
145. 79-1
5.5 10
IB 10
.047 .023
.179 .017
.203 .014
85.6 70.7
50
4 2
.304 .029
.029 .014
.069 .034
121. 149.
7.7
13 7
.096 .046
.018 .022 18.0 756. 393.
.066 .016 21.4 2.84 114.
176. 60.5 77.6 .036 28.1
5.9 33.3 25 83.3 100
17 3 4 12 10
.021 .026 21.4 899. 468.
.016 .017 49.5 819. 417.
.076 .0)4 49.5 163- 359.
202. 70.7 99-7 19.7 69.2
II. I 100 100 100
9 2324
.027 -029 84.2 1392. 708.
.106 .01 41.9 955. 657.
.114 45.4 387. 176.
244. 86.0 38.3 26.2
6.7 20 100 100
15 4 5 12 12
.055 .033 137. 3)62. 2175.
141.
55.7
37;6
100
3
265.
459.
222.
43.9
100
5
1519.
S6.8
4.75
8.34
100
3
107.
80.9
22.6
26.9
100
5
268.
20.9
2.
9.5
100
3
39.4
7.92
3.65
41.6
100
5
26.2
543.
33.23
6.11
100 .
2
271.
511.
256.
44.3
100
4
1690.
12.2
100
1
6.1
13.2
9.40
63. B
100
2
22.4
6.3
100
1
20.9
• percentage ofcompotlte sample In total sampling effort •
- number of
quality deteiulnatlon made fur the parameter
* nass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE
D - I
f\>
ro
SOURCE ALK CONO TDS pit TKN N02/N0j
(ng CaCOj/l) (ng/D (»9 N/l) (ng N/l) {
GRAY
TUBE 313-314 DEPTH AVERAGES
6* 284. 3964. 3014. 7.72 .462 4. SB
SUb 40.0 978. 695. .352 .438 49.8
CVC 13.9 24.0 22.5 4.55 73-5 190.
XCd B8.9 16.7 100 30.8 44.4 10.5
Ee 9 36 IS 13 9 38
' kg/haf 713- 9949. 7566. 19.4 1.16 II. $
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
aG - geometric wean XC
bSD • standard deviation eE
com.
WI3 TOTAL P ORTIIO P ORG.P COD Cl S04 Ca Mg K Ha TOC
[ug N/l) (mg P/l) (ng P/l) («g/P) (pg/l) (ng/l) (ug/l) (ay/I) («g/l) (ug/l) (my/1) (uig/0
.044 .015 .016 .012 39.0 935. 586. 459. 80.9 7.92 511. 10.3
.132 .030 .099 .028 43-4 165. 233. 222. 22.6 3.65 256. 8.25
133. 135. 230. 210. 84.0 16.8 36.4 43.9 27.0 41.6 44.3 69.1
17.6 8.3 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
17 9 24 5 6 14 16 5 5 5 4 3
.III .037 .041 .030 97.9 2346. 1472. 1519. 268. 26.2 1690. 25.8
- percentage ofcompo,|te sample In total sampling effort
* number of quality deteralnatlon nade for the parameter
CCV • coefficient of variation
kg/ha* nass In kg/ha for uatertal Intercepted by the unit
-------
ro
CO
SOURCE AI.K
(nj CaCOj/l)
HANCOCK.
TRAY 101
G1
so"
cvc
it" -
te
kg/haf
TRAY 102
G 238.
SI)
CV
tC too
E |
kg/ha 390.
TRAY 103
G 100.
SO
CV
1C
E 1
kg/ha %7 5
aG - geooietrtc mean
bSO = standard deviation
CONO
1
4)50.
813.
19.6
2
2117.
3570.
1089.
29.3
71.4
7
4355.
5470.
70.
1.28
too
2
2407.
TDS
[»3/l )
2429.
510.
20.7
100
3
1239.
2831.
428.
15.0
75
4
3454.
3436.
100
1
1512.
pll TKH
to H/l)
7.79 .15
.141 .099
1.81 66.
2 2
3.97 .077
7.28 .490
.427 .287
5.87 48.4
3 6
8.88 .598
.692
.131
18.7
3
5.39 .314
CCV • coefficient of variation
T A 6 I E
CONT.
N02/N03 Kllj TOTAL P
to N/l) (my N/l) (eg P/1)
18.3
16.4
72.6
4
9.35
1.52
9.85
162.
10
1.85
.84
5.02
177.
8
.369
d*C
«£
fkg/ha
.066 .03
.067
79:6
5 I
.034 .015
.053 .021
i 136 .024
137. 85.8
II 4
.065 .025
.02
1
.009
• percentage of
0 - 1
ORTIIO P OKG.P COO
(ug P/1) (mg/P) (pg/1)
.031
.173
157.
3
.016
.014
.025
123.
6
.017
.01
k
.00k
conipo* Ite sample
• number of quality determination
- nass In kg/ha
102.
124.
85.4
^
51.8
61.8
35.7
49.8
4
75.4
36.9
15.2
38.9
3
16.2
Cl SOj Ca Hy K Ha
(119/1) (og/1) (oig/l) («g/l) (oig/1) (ng/l)
917.
152.
16.3
100
4
468.
1121.
268.
23.3
75
8
1368.
1555.
435.
27.2
33.3
3
684.
179.
77.3
1,0.8
100
6
91.2
181.
59.6
31.4
100
7
222.
227.
21.7
9.55
33.3
3
99.8
539. 378. 26.
2.10
100 100 100
1 1 1
275. 193. »3.3
375. 91.4 16.4 22.
90. 9.
23.5 2.30 50.
66.7 66.7 66.7 100
3331
457. III. 19.9 26.8
TOC
(uig/Q
14.9
t.88
32.
2
8.45
9.28
2.12
22.6
2
4.08
In total sampling effort '
made
for the
parameter
for naterlal Intercepted by the unit
-------
r\>
•£»
SOURCE ALK CONO TDS pit TKN
(ng CaCOj/1) (ng/l) (ng N/l)
HANCOCK
T«AY 101-103 DEPTH AVERAGE
c 160. 3959. 2738. 7.d8 .d37
50 91.9 1120. $08. .dl8 .287
CVd 53.1 27.2 18.3 5.58 52.6
*£ 50 dS.S 75
E f 2 II 8 5 II
k9/li» 115. 2850. 1971. 5.39 .)ld
TRAY lOd
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
TRAY 105
G J7dd.
SO
CV
1C 100
E 1
kg/ha 2d7.
aC o geometric Bean
LSO • standard deviation
TABLE
CONT
D - 1
NtyHOj Wlj TOTAL P ORTIIO P ORG.P COO Cl SO^
("9 N/l) («g N/l) (ng P/l) (wj P/l) (og/P) (pg/l) (ug/1) (u.g/1)
1.92
ld.3
181.
22
1.38
68. d
100
1
6.15
123.
1
Id. 8
d»C
«E
.057 .022
.116 .019
122. 69.0
16 6
.Odl .0)6
.15
too
1
.Old
.Id
1
.017
- percentage
• number of
.015 '6d.d 1135.
.08d . 85.3 352.
221. 95. d 29.8
73.3
13 H IS
.Oil d6.3 817.
SO
too
1
d.5
.01 502.3
20.5
d.oB
100
1 2
.001 60.3
188.
£0.9
31.0
87.5
16
135.
333.
d3.6
13.1
too
2
39.9
Ca
dio.
107.
25.2
75
d
295.
2Sd.
1
30.5
Hg K Na IOC
130. 18. d 22. 11.7
I.d3 35.7 d.S7
.879 179. 37.0
75 75 100
d d 1 d
93.8 13.2 26.8 8.1.5
177. 26.
100 100
1 1
21.2 3.12
of composite' *M>pl« In total sampling effort
quality doternlnatlon made for tlia
parameter
CCV • coefficient of variation
kg/ha* nass In kg/ha for naterlal Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE
D - I
CONT.
IVJ
cn
SOURCE ALK
(mg CaCOj/1)
HANCOCK
CONO TDS pit TKN
(n>9/l) (mg N/l)
N02/N03
(«9 N/l)
HII, TOTAL P onTHo P ORG.P
(mg N/l) (mg P/l) (ug P/l) (mg/P) (
COO
P9/I)
Ct
S04 Ca Hj K Na
[i"J/D («"J/0 (ni'j/1) (my/I) (my/I)
TOC
<»g/1
TRAY 104-105 DEPTH AVERAGE
G4
sob
CVC
V*
Ee
kg/haf
TRAY 108
& 128.
SO
cv
1C
E l
kg/ha 52.5
TRAY 109
G
SO
CV
«C
E
kg/ha
*G « geometric mean
bSO • standard deviation
2744.
100
1
247.
6866. 5193. 7.91 .759
806. 748. .014 1.57
11.7 14.3 .178 102.
75
2424
2815. 2129. 3.24 .3H
1.29
1
91.8
38.9
40.6
50
2
10. 1
184.
229.
60.2
a
75.5
446.
1
d»C
eE
.145 .01
.007
4.90
50
2 1
.016 .001
.085 .028 .01
.131 .049
87.9 109.
72 5
.035 .Oil .004
.10 .23
1 1
- percentage of compos 1 to sample
• number of quality determination
50.
too
I
4.5
103.
99.3
75.1
4
42.1
1)4.
1
502.
20.5
4.08
100
2
60.3
679.
341.
45.5
20
5
278.
1420.
1
333. 254. 177. .26
43.8
13.1
100 100 100
2111
39.9 30.5 21.24 3.12
232. 627. 266. 30.
30.0
12.8
. 100 100 100
5 II 1
95.2 257. 109. 12.3
47.
1
19.
17-
1
In total sampling effort
made
for the
parameter
CCV - coefficient of variation
kg/h«" mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by tliu unit
-------
ro
SOURCE ALK
(ng CaC03/l)
HANCOCK
CUNO
TDS pii TKN
(»»J/l) (ng N/l)
N02/H03
(ng N/l) 1
TABLE
CONT.
NII3 TOTAL P
[ng N/l) (og P/l)
D - 1
ORTIIO P
(ng P/l)
££i
COO Cl
i (pg/D («g/D
SO^ Ca
(wg/1) (iug/1)
Kg
(my/I)
K
(119/1)
Na TOC
(>*j/l) (ug/Q
TRAY 108-109 DEPTH AVERAGE
G* 128.
sub
CVC
JC
E* 1
kg/ha 52 5
TUBE 113
351
?!J 89- »
cy 2d.e
« 62.5
t /h 8
kg/ha Jm.
TUBE lid
6 299.
SD 20.9
" 6.99
JC ,00
E i,
kg/ha ,288.
*G » geometric mean
SD * standard deviation
6866.
806.
11.7
2
28)5.
20 7d.
270.3
12.9
7.7
39
5193. 7-91 -8dd
7d8. .Old 1.37
Id.) .178 91. d
75
d 2 5
2129. 3.2d .187
Id6l. 7-51 .277
76.9 .395 .d55
5.26 5.26 108.
82.) 15
17 22 20
22dl6 15790 81.2 .232
2135.
d29.
19.7
8.7
9201.
I5d3. 7.d3 .285
216. .336 2.13
13.9 d.5l 2dl.
90.1 8.3 15. d
Ml 9 It
1* * 3
66d9. 32.0 1.23
203.
215.
55.5
9
dd.7
12.2
26.)
13d.
9-5
d2
132.
10.3
15.9
III.
d.2
dd.5
d*c
e£
.087 .057
.122 .162
85.8 151.
8 3
.019 .013
.03d .019
.112 .023
137. 106.
12 7.d
25 27
.369 .203
.OdS .015
•Sd9 .0)6
273. 8d.B
Id. 3
Ui »
i j
.I9d .063
• percentage of
.01
5
.OOd
.Oil
.OOd
36.1
31
.115
.Oil
.Od6
205.8
5.9
.01.8
.Old
.Old
82.9
17
.Id7
.015
.Oil
62.3
10
1 A
III
.063
105. 768.
86. d d09.
67.2 1.7.5
66.7
5 6
23.1 169.
19.7 d03.
30.6 65.5
d.3 16.0
11.8 83.)
17 IB
213. d35d.
13.0 503.
10. 1 9d.3
66.1 18. d
22.2 8d.6
Si j
13
55.9 2I6B.
232. 627.
29.9
12.8
100
5 1
95.2 257.
237. 196.
37.8 29.7
15.7 15.0
9d.l 90
17 10
2561. 2120.
123. 225.
13.3 7d.d
10.7 31.5
100 100
530. 971.
266.
100
1
109.
lie.
7.6d
6.dd
90
10
I26o.
75.6
18.2
23.6
100
326.
30.
100
1
12.3
13.0
5.10
36.6
90
10
Idl.
15.2
9.d2
55.3
100
65.6
28.7
20.9
6d.B
2
6.32
126. 7.27
53.6 3.28
39.9 d2.0
68.9
9 H
1361. 78.6
79.2 d.63
8.71 1.78
10.9 35. d
100 33.3
3dl. 20.0
composite sample In total sampling effort
• number of quality determination made for the
parameter
CCV - coefficient of variation
kg/ha* mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
rv
-j
TABLE 0-1
CONT.
SUURCE ALK
(09 CaCOj/l)
HANCOCK
COND TOS pll TKN
(u9/l) (ng N/l)
fclfl /MA
n\tn 1 (11*1
(«9 N/l)
NII3 TOTAL P
(ogN/l) (»g P/l)
ORTIIO P ORG.P
(•19 P/D <«>9/P)
COO Cl
(P9/D ("9/1 )
SO. Ca
(ug/l) (HCJ/I)
WO
K
Na
TOC
(«9/D
TUBE 113-114 DEPTH AVERAGE
G* 333.
S0b 77.9
CVC 22.9
ICd 75
Ee 12
kg/haf 25i4.
TUBE 121
G 392.
SO 52.4
CV 13.3
1C 50
E 12
kg/ha 6708.
TUBE 122
G 30J.
SO 1,9.8
CV li.3
« 27.3
E II
kg/ha 1,699.
aG - geometric mean
bSD - standard deviation
2096. 1492. 7.48 .279
337. 152. .372 1.37
15.9 4.2 4.97 227.
8.1 85.7 2.9 15.2
62 28 34 33
15846 11283 56.5 2.12
1816. 1056. 7.49 .133
278. 211. .231 .292
15.2 19.4 3.09 III.
4.3 59.3 7.1 13.8
46 27 26 29
31114 18095 128. 2.27
1691. 1014. 7.61 .186
246. 164. .262 .316
14.4 16.0 3.43 104.
4.9 57.1 9.5 14.3
41 21 24 21
26257 15746 118. 2.89
11.5
23.0
130.
7.6
66
86.9
.387
26.5
391.
6.2
49
6.63
.236
8.63
291.
7.5
4o
3.67
d«C
eE
.038
.342
244.
12.8
39
.284
.017
.048
143.
II. 8
34
.301
.016
.052
169.
11.5
26
.253
.017
.021
101.
5
40
.131
.016
.043
163.
2.9
35
.274
.015
.021
101.
28
.233
• percentage of
.Oil .014
.028 .012
184. 74.5
2.1 3-7
48 27
.082 .106
.Oil .013
.004 .016
39.6 95.3
2.4
40 24
.199 .233
.013 -013
.165 .018
389. 108.
6.25
29 16
.200 .203
conpotl'tc sample
17.0 442.
25.8 93.2
112. 20.6
15.4 83.9
26 31
129. 334).
19.4 267
19.0 68.4
64.2 24.8
21.1 66.7
19 27
332. 4574.
18.0 257.
44.5 160.
147. 54.7
12.5 58.3
16 24
280. 3396.
183. 207.
65.0 52.7
33-5 24.8
96.4 93.8
28 16
1385. 1562.
189. 187.
23.3 47.1
12.3 24.0
95 90
20 10
3232. 3206.
216. 157.
51.9 30.7
23.6 19.1
71.4 67.5
14 8
3362. 2444.
too.
23.9
22.6
93.8
16
757.
78.2
7-96
10. 1
90
10
1340.
65.6
7.54
11.4
87.5
8
1019.
13.8
6.89
45.7
93.8
16
104.
21.5
6.05
27.3
90
10
368.
16.1.
5.42
31.6
67.5
8
255.
107.
50.3
43.8
92.9
14
807.
106.
10.4
9.76
86.9
9
1817.
107.
13.5
12.5
65.7
7
1657.
6.20
3.09
45.4
it. a
17
46.9
6.94
10.5
107.
26.7
15
119.
4.04
2.28
50.6
23.1
13
62.7
In total sampling effort
• number of quality determination made for the
parameter
£CV - coefficient of variation
kg/lia- mass In kg/lia for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE 0-1
COHT.
ro
00
SOURCE ALK CONO IDS pll TKN
(»j CaC03/l) (og/l) (»g N/l)
HANCOCK
N02/H03 Nil-, TOTAL P OKI 110 t ORG.P COD Cl SO^
("9 N/l) (») N/l) («ig P/l) (mg P/l) (mg/P) (pg/l) (ug/t) (my/I)
Ca
(«9/U
HO
K
Na
TOC
TUBE 121-122 DEPTH AVERAGE
G1
sob
CVC
K
E8
kg/haf
TUBE 123
u
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
TE -24
SI)
CV
»c
E
kg/ha
aG •• geometric
bSU • standard
346.
67.3
19.1
39
23
565.
272.
74.9
26.6
*2.9
14
3082.
237.
29.9
12.6
50
10
24)5.
wean
1756. 1038. 7.5* .153
270. 192. .252 .300
15.2 18.2 3.3* 107.
4.59 58.3 7.69 1*
87 48 52 50
28676 169*3 123. 2.50
1627. 99*. 7.68 .197
53*. «*7. .37* .502
31.7 14.6 4.86 116.
3.9 68.2 6.4 20.7
SI 22 31 29
18431 11260 87.0 2.23
1419. 90S. 7.55 .195
277. 73.4 .319 .788
18.9 8.13 4.23 193.
4.2 65.2 10.3 20
48 23 29 30
16306 10398 86.8 2.24
.310
20.5
405.
7.9
89
5.06
2.52
97.1
239.
11.8
SI
28.6
.521
41.6
265.
13.7
51
5.99
dic
deviation E
CCV • coefficient of
variation
fkg/ha
.017 .016
.0*2 .035
152. 1*7.
11.6 1.6
60 63
.278 .261
.028 .016
.091 .016
1*5. 83.
16.7 2.8
36 36
.317 .177
.022 .016
.19* .028
293. 122.
17.1 6.25
35 32
.253 .180
- percentage
• number of
.Oil
.107
443.
1.4
69
.181
.Oil
.006
5*.B
2.6
38
.127
.012
.021
128.
5.3
38
.140
.013 18.7 262. 199.
.016 32.9 119. 40.2
94.1 126. 42.1 19.8
2.5 17-1 62.7 85.3
40 35 51 34
.219 306. 4285. 3260.
.014 32.3 246. 147.
.012 46.3 51.7 23.5
74. a 94.0 20.5 15.8
S.5 42.1 68. 80
18 19 25 15
.157 366. 2789. 1671.
.014 34.5 241. 134.
.021 173. 50.8 25.2
113. 194. 20.6 18.6
5.0 31.6 64 60
20 19 25 15
.162 396. 2769. 1534.
173.
43.5
24.1
BB.8
18
2830.
120.
18.7
15.4
80
10
1358.
117.
24.5
20.6
75
8
1349.
72.3
9.92
13.6
8.B8
18
1181.
82.0
6.33
7.69
20
10
929.
56.9
6.94
12.1
25
8
655.
19.1
5-17
30.9
88.8
18
312.
25.3
4.75
18.5
80
10
287.
14.5
3.42
23.1
75
8
166.
106.
11.4
10.7
87.5
14
1736.
99.2
29.1
28.3
77.8
9
1124.
106.
29.5
27-2
75
8
1209.
5.39
8.14
III.
25
28
88.1
7.92
5.58
60.0
38.5
13
89.7
8.07
14.17
118.
30.8
13
92.7
of compotlte sample In total sampling effort
quality determination wade for the parameter
• mass In kg/ha for iialcrU) Intercepted by the unit
-------
ro
10
SOURCE AlK
(iq CaCOj/1)
HANCOCK
COND TDS pll TKN
(ug/l) (OK, N/l)
9.7 102. 7.99
20.8 14.2 6.92 28.5 10.6
17.3 20.0 33.2 27.1 100.
77.8 77.8 77-8 76.5 34.6
18 18 IB 17 26
1355. 793. 225. 1164. 91.2
23.4
100
1.87
aG - geometric iioan
bSD - standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
kg/ha
percentage of compos It* sample In total sampling effort
number of quality determination made for tlie parameter
mass In kg/ha for uaterlal Intercepted by the unit
-------
T A B I E 0-1
CONT.
SOURCE AU COND TOS pll fitfi
(09 CaCOj/l) (ag/l) (ig M/l) («HJ N/l) (09 N/1) (ing P/l) (ing P/l)
NOyNOj ffilj TOTAL P ORTliO P OnS.P COO Cl
SO
Ca
^ Hg
(P9/U ("9/D ("9/0 ("il/0 ("9/D
K Na TOC
(•wj/0 ("9/0
HANCOCK
TUBE 211
a
c
so"
cvc
3570.
9.17
.01
kg/h«
.000$
OJ
o
TUBE 2U
o
SO
cv
sc
E
kg/ha
8.08 5.25 27.0
1.13 .735
I
3.78
.025
.007
28.3
. 2
.003
.022
.028
9
-------
TABLE D - I
CUNT.
SOURCE ALK
(ng C.CO.,/1)
HANCOCK
TRAY 302
6»
sub
CVC
xcd
Ee
kg/haf
TRAY 303
G 2 1.6.
SO
CV
1C
E 1
kg/ha 95.9
CONU 70S pH TKN HOj/NOj NHj TOTAL P
(tng/l) (mg N/l) (ng N/l) (ing N/l) (mg P/l)
1234.
Sili.
1.2.6
6
370.
7.00
1
2.1
1402. 7.80
1 1
5*7. 3.04
.527
1.90
132.
50
2
.158
.692
.600
61.9
40
5
.269
11.2
76.3
159.
33.3
3
3.40
9.19
9.75
81.2
30
10
3.58
.107 .01
.332
140.
33.3
3 1
.032 .003
.061 .01
.086
79.3
50
6 1
.024 .004
ORTKO P ORG.P COD
(«g P/l)
-------
TABLE
D - I
CONT.
00
ro
SOURCE AU COND TOS pi! TKN
(•9 CaC03/l) («g/1) (mg N/l)
HANCOCK
TUBE 314
G* 600. .79
so"
c»c
xcd too
Ee | |
kg/ha ,8 02^
TUBE 313-314 DEPTH AVERAGE
<• 2046. .199
SO 646. .398
CV 29.4 121.
XC 66.7
E II 3
kg/ha 246. .024
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
*G • geometric mean
SO • standard deviation
£CV - coefficient of variation
N02/N03 WI3 TOTAL P
<«g N/1) («ig N/l) (ng P/l)
3.22 .170
3.52 .085
86.7 47.1
33.3 100
3 2
.097 .005
78.5 .088 .01
72.6 .091
51.5 79.2
20 75
15 4 4
9.42 .Oil .002
1C • percentage of
ORTHO t ORG.P COO Cl SOj Ca Mg 1C Ha TOC
(ng P/l) («g/P) (pg/l) (>ig/l) (uig/l) (mg/1) (»g/l) (mg/l) (wy/l) (my /I
45.8 28.
28.J
56.6
100 100
2 1
1.38 .18
.012 .01 51.2 63.3 243. 15.9
.008 21.6 81.3
55.1 39.5 95.1
100 100 100
74321 1
.003 .002 6.15 7.59 48.6 ).|8
coraposl trample In total sampling effort
eE • number of quality determination nade for the parameter
kg/ha- mass In kg/ha
for naterlal Intercepted by the unit
-------
co
SOURCE ALK COND TOS pi! TKN
(rag CaC03/l) (mg/1) (09 N/l)
HANCOCK
TRAY 304
G* 1160. 1039.
SDb
CVC
xcd
te II
k9/ha . 81.2 7.27
TRAY 305
G 214. 1177. 7-08 .10
SO 101.
CV 8.60
XC
E l 3 II
k9'ha 68.5 377. 2.27 .0)2
TRAY 306
G
SO
CV
XC
E
kg/ha
N02/N03
(ng N/l)
1.22
.849
62.4
2
.086
2.11
9.46
152.
33.)
.676
.27
1
.024
TABLE D - 1
CONT.
NH3 TOTAL P ORTIIO P ORG.P COO Cl SO^ Ca Hg K Na TOC
(«g N/l) (ng P/l) (Big P/l) (ng/P) (pg/l) (og/l) («g/l) (ng/l) (ng/l) .(uig/l) (ng/l) (.ig/0
.305 .024 1.26
.332 .035
86.3 101.
SO 100
2 2*1
.021 .002 .088
.01 .018 .03 H7.
Ill 1
.003 .058 .001 37.4
.08 .07
1 1
.007 .006
°so
geometric mean
standard deviation
CCV • coefficient of variation
XC * percentage of compot I te tamp!* 'n tout sampling effort
e£ * number of quality determination Mde for the parameter
fkg/ha- mass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
TABLE 0-1
COHT.
CA)
SOURCE AU COND TDS pll TKN
(ng CaC03/1) (og/1) (ng H/l)
HANCOCK
TRAY 304-306 DEPTH AVERAGE
G" 214. 117). 10)9. 7.08 .10
Sl)b . 83.5
CVC 7. 1
tt"
Ee 1 4111
kg/ha je.S IBS. 166. 2.27 .032
TRAY 307
G 2.83
SO
CV
E 1
kg/ha .198
TRAV 308
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
NOyMOj NHj TOTAL P ORTHO P ORG.P COD Cl S04 Ca Hg K Ma TOC
(ng N/l) (ng N/l) >g P/l) (ng P/l) (og/P) (pg/l) (ng/l) («g/l) (ng/l) (.ug/1) (ng/l) (ng/l) (ng/
1.25 .092 .18 .034 * 1.26 117. . ' •
6.65 .276 .028
IBS. 129. 64.8
16.7 25 100
6 4 1 4 II
.199 .015 .058 .005 .088 37.4
16.6 .)) 1)1. 67. 35.7 10. 79.
II 1 1 1 1 1
1.16 .023 9.17 4.69 2.49 .7 5.53
.27 .6) .01
1 1 1
.078 .18) .00) '
G • geometric nean
SO - standard deviation
CCV - coefficient of variation
d« • percentage of C0mpo»lto sample In total sampling effort
e£ • nunber of quality detemlnatlon Bade for the parameter
fkg/ha- mass In kg/ha for tuterlal Intercepted by the unit
-------
co
en
T A B L
CONT,
SOURCE ALK
(mg CaC03/l)
HANCOCK
TRAY 309
6«
so"
CVC
«c<
Ee
kg/haf
261.
1
20.9
COHO
1005.
81.4
8.09
3
80.4
IDS
("9/1 )
905
1
72.4
pH TKN NOj/NOj Nllj
(ng N/l) (mg N/l) (og N/l
7.38 .279
.225 .481
3.05 109.
3 2
.591 .022
.915
.687
63.8
3
.073
.02
.017
69.3
4
.002
E 0 -
I
TOTAL P ORTHO P ORG.P
) (n>9 P/l) (ng P/1) («9/P)
.01
2
.0008
.020
.019
76.6
4
.002
.01
I
.0008
COD Cl S04 Ca Mg K Na TOC
(pg/D («g/D («9/D («g/D («g/U («g/U («9/D («g/<
24.
i
1.92
TRAY 307-309 DEPTH AVERAGE
G
SD
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
TUBE 311
G
SO
CV
1C
E
kg/ha
8G • geometric
bSD • standard
26).
1
20.9
121.
11.3
9.35
100
2
130.4
mean
deviation
1005.
81.4
8.09
3
80.4
2397.
271.
11.3
14.3
14
2589.
905
1
72.4
1615.
553.
33.0
too
3
1743.
7.38 .604
.225 1.42
3.05 115.
3 3
.591 .091
7.75 .808
.120 .198
I.S5 24.1
100 100
2 2
8.37 .873
1.28
7.04
175.
5
.192
41.2
4.67
11.2
14.3
14
44.5
.057
.253
.143.
6
.009
.153
.035
22.8
100
2
.165
.01
2
.0008
.013
.020
112.
100
6
.015
XC * percentage
«£
- number of
• 017
.018
81.3
5
.003
.01
7
.Oil
.01
1
.0008
.013
.012
81.6
. 100
6
.014
Of composite sample
quality
56.1 67 35.7 10..
75.7
97.6
2 III
8.41 4.69 2.50 .7
2.12 421. 63.5
31.7 122. 17-1
141. 28.2 26.3
100 100 100
2 3 3
2.29 454. 68.6
In total sampling effort
79.
1
5.53
5.35
.212
3.96
100
2
5.78
dateralnatlon made for the parameter
CCV - coefficient of variation
'kg/ha- nass In kg/ha for material Intercepted by the unit
-------
CO
Cft
SOURCE ALK
(ng CaC03/l)
HANCOCK
TUBE 312
G*
SDb
CVC
Kd
Ee
kg/haf
COND TDS
("9/0
1527.
336.
21.3
9
183.
pH TKN
("9 N/l)
1.7*
100
I
.209
N02/N03
(*g N/l)
77.0
10.0
12.9
10
10
9.24
TABLE
CONT,
Nllj TOTAL P
(ng N/l) (ng P/l)
.08 .26
100 100
1 1
.009 .031
D
- I
ORTHO P ORG.P COD Cl
(og P/l) («9/P) (pg/l) (ng/l
.01
3
.001
112 1.50
100 100
1 1
13.* .18
S04 Ca Hg
184
100
i
22.1
K Na IOC
27.1
100
1
3.25
TUBE 311-312 DEPTH AVERAGE
G 121.
SD 11.3
CV 9.35
xc 100
E 2
kg/ha 130.
TUBE 313
G
SD
CV
SC
E
kg/ha
*G • geometric man
bSD • standard davlatlon
2009. 1615.
509. 553.
24.4 33.0
8.7 100
23 3
1206. 1744.
2313.
391.
16.6
10
463.
7.75 1.03
.120 .5*9
1.55 48.B
100 100
2 3
8.37 .617
.01
50
2
.002
CCV • coefficient of variation
53.5
19.6
34.6
12.5
2*
32.1
17*.
17-8
10.2
8.3
12
34-9
d«C
•E
.123 .021
.05 .093
38.5 176.
too too
3 7
.07* .012
.0*6 .01
.028
56.6
50
2 *
.009 .012
- percentage of
.01
10
.006
.013
.008
55.1
7
.003
.013 7.96 325.
.012 56.3 173.
81.6 108. 47.7
100 100 100
6 3 4
.014 4.78 195.
.01 64. 143.
•
100 100
4 1 1
.002 12.8 28.6
82.9
61.1
64.5
too
4
49.7
243.
i
1
48.6
9.19
12.6
99-7
100
3
5.51
15.9
100
1
3.18
compo* 1 tt sanple In total sampling effort
• nunber of quality
kg/ha* nass In kg/ha
for
deternlnatlon nade for the parameter
naterlal Intercepted by
the unit
-------
APPENDIX E
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR WATER CHARACTERISTICS
137
-------
TABLE E-l
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR WATER CHARACTERISTICS
ON THE BERMUDA PLOT AT THE GRAY SITE
Ratio
:o42"/cr
HCO,"/C1~
ca2+/cr
HC03"/Na*
K+/Na+
Ca2W
Mg2W*
SARa
Cl" - Na*
Cl"
BASE .
EXCHANGE0
Irrigation
.528
.692
.481
.531
.045
.369
.878
13.64
-.303
-'BA
Tray
61
.357
.094
.298
.129
.027
.411
.984
Depth
122
.374
.177
.312
.227
.016
.577
.735
23.08 23.23
.275
+ IBA
.218
+IBA
(cm)
183
.268
.183
.353
.241
.013
.464
.841
20.05
.241
+IBA
122
.294
.478
.441
.287
.009
.264
.613
38.50
-.668
-'BA
Tube Depth
183
.321
• .346
.367-
.348
.022
.369
.530
21.40
.006
•',.
(cm)
224
.489
.240
.573
.208
.011
.496
.320
28.13
-.154
-<=,
Ground
Water
.502
.596
.423
.563
.038
.400
1.45
12.38
-.058
-'BA
aSAR = NaV((Ca2+'+ Mg2+)/2)'[9.4-p(K2'-K1' )-p(Ca+Mg)-p(A1k)]
b-IBA meq/1 Cl" < meq/1 Na* or meq/1 (HC03" + S042") > meq/1 (Mg2+ + Ca2*)
+IBA meq/1 Cl" > meq/1 Na+ or meq/1 (HC03" + S042") < meq/1 (Mg2* + Ca2+)
138
-------
TABLE £-2
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR WATER CHARACTERISTICS
ON THE COTTON PLOT AT THE GRAY SITE
Ratio Irrigation
jO^'/Cl" ..528
liCO-j'/Tl" .692
Ca2*/Cl~ .481
HC03"/Na*
Ca2W
Tray Depth (cm)
61 122 183
.366
.205
• .359
Tube Depth (cm) Ground
122 183 224 Water
.194 .602
.070 .596
.054 .423
.878
.670
.271
1.45
SAR
Cl
BASE h ,
EXCHANGE0 ~'BA
BA
+I
BA
aSAR
Mg2+)/2)i[9.4-p(K2'-K11)-p(Ca+Mg)-p(Alk)]
-IBA raeq/1 Cl" < meq/1 Na+ or meq/1 (HC03" + S042") > raeq/1 (Mg2+ + Ca2+)
HBA meq/1 Cl" > meq/1 Na+ or meq/1 (HCOj" .+ S042") < meq/1 (Mg2* + Ca2+)
139
-------
TABLE E-3
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR WATER CHARACTERISTICS
ON THE GRAIN SORGHUM PLOT AT THE GRAY SITE
Ratio
V-'/cr
HC03"/CT
Ca2*/Cl'
HC03*/Na+
Kf/Na*
Ca2W
M92+/Ca2*
SAR3
Cl" - Na*
Cl"
BASE .
EXCHANGE0
'SAR . Ma
b ,
Irrigation
.528
.692
.481
.531
.045
.369
.878
13.64
-.303
-'BA
,V((Ca2+ , ^2
Tray
61
.289
.312 .
.535
.220
.036
.378
.688
18.48
-.417
- roeq/1 Na* or meq/1 (HC03" * S042") < meq/1 (Mg2+ + Ca2*)
140
-------
TABLE E-4
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR MATER CHARACTERISTICS
ON THE BERMUDA PLOT AT THE HANCOCK SITE
Ratio
•V'/cr
nco3"/ci"
ca2+/cr
HC03~/Naf
K*/Na+
Ca2W
Mg2t/Ca2+
SARa
Cl" - Na*
Cl"
BASE h
EXCHANGE0
aSAR = Na
Irrigation
.457
.738
.309
.507
.034
.212
.690
20.08
-.457
-'BA
+/((Ca2+ + Mg2*)/:
-IBA meq/1 Cl" < meq/1 Na
Tray Depth (era) Tube
51 122 183 122
.122 .223
.100 .118
.639 1.445
1
.
2.
.523 .703
4
'
+IBA +IBA . <
2)i[9.4-p(K21-K11)-p(Ca-t^g)-p(Alk)]
Depth (cm)
183 224
305
533
827
.43
076
217 •
799
.32
627
"„
Ground
Water
.903
2.54
1.03
1.39
.065
.565
1.71
5.49
-.827
-'BA
+ or meq/1 (HC03~ + S042*) > meq/1 (Mg2* + Ca2+)
+IBA meq/1 Cl" > meq/1 Na+ or raeq/1 (HC03" * S042") < meq/1 (Mg2+ + Ca2+)
141
-------
TABLE E-5
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR WATER CHARACTERISTICS
ON THE COTTON PLOT AT THE HANCOCK SITE
Ratio Irrigation
Tray Depth (cm)
61 122 183
Tube Depth (cm) Ground
122 183 224 Water
iicn3"/.ci
.457
.738
.483
.396 1.30
.188
.263
.284
.903
2.54
1.52
.075
1.39
.065
Ca2+/Na + .212 .972
Mg /Ca . .590 .88
SARa 20.08 4.55
Cl' - Na +
BASE h
EXCHANGE
.565
1.71
5.49
aSAR = Na*/((Ca2* + Mg2'l')/2)^9.4-p(<21-<1 ' )-p(Ca+Mg)-o(A1k)]
b-IBA meq/1 Cl" < raeq/1 Na* or meq/1 (HC03" + S042") > meq/1 (Mg2+ * Ca2+)
meq/1 C1" > meq/1 Na* or meq/1 (HC03" + S042") < meq/1 '(Mg
2+
Ca
2*
142
-------
TABLE E-6
EQUIVALENT RATIOS FOR WATER CHARACTERISTICS
ON THE CONTROL PLOT AT THE HANCOCK SITE
Tray Depth (cm) Tube Depth (cm) Ground
Ratio Irrigation 61 122 183 122 133 224 Water
V'«-
nco3'/cr
Ca2+/Cl~
HC03"/Na+
ItW
Ca2W
Mg2+/Ca2+
SARa
C1" - Na+
cr
BASE h
EXCHANGE0
.543
.571
.343
.412
.247
.792
12.89
-.386
-'BA
.568
.935
1.162
1.50
.109
1.87
.698
4.65
.378
+IBA
.420
.742
.870
1.16
.114
1.36
.833
4.69
.362
+ IBA
.903
2.54
1.03
1.39
.065
.565
1.71
5.49
-.827
-'BA
"SAR - Naf/((Ca2+ + Mg2*)/2)*[9.4-p(K2'-K1l)-p(Ca+Hg)-p(Alk)]
b-IBA meq/1 Cl~ < meq/1 Na* or meq/1 (HC03" + S04Z") > weq/1 (Mg2+ + Ca2*)
+IBA meq/1 C1~ > raeq/1 Na* or meq/1 (HC03* + S042") < meq/1 (Mg2* » Ca2+)
143
-------
APPENDIX F
MASS INPUTS IN APPLIED WASTEWATER AND
MASS OUTPUTS IN PERCOLATE AND
CROPS HARVESTED
144
-------
TABLE F-l
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE BERMUDA
PLOT AT THE GRAY SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Tray Death
Parameter
A.LK
TOS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-N
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COD
Cl
SO,
•»
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC
Applied
Wastewater
4170
18980 •
159
49.0
38.8
56.5
32.5
2.43
1650
2080
3040
1150
623
274
3610
548
61 cm
135
2840
.862
.949
.031
.177
.015
1020
491
171
102
21.9
736
122 cm
71.6
717
.568
.006
.001
9.0
286
53.7
36.5
16.3
2.02
145
183 cm
85.7
905
.087
9.01
.017
.004
13.5
. 332.
121
66.1
33.7
3.88
163
Tube Depth
122 cm
1160
5280
1.49
3.61
.045
.127
.152
.025
65.6
1720
6S7
429
160
28.2
1860
26.2
183 cm
411
2580
.595
1.31
.044
.044
.016
.032
70.4
841
366
174
56.1
19.9
542
26.0
244 cm
744
2440
1.28
13.49
.1.25
.036
.036
.027
81.7
2200
1460 •
712
138
32.2
1650
44.4
Crop
147
19.5
73.7
130
31.6
13.3
86.5
6.06
145
-------
TABLE F-2
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE COTTON
PLOT AT THE GRAY SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Parameter
ALK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-N
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COO
Cl
SO,
t
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC
Applied
Wastewater
1730
' 7850
65.7
20.3
16.1 '
23.4
13.4
1.0
681
861
1260
476
258
113
1490
227
Tray Depth
61 cm 122 cm 183 cm
141
2090
1.68
7.20 .014
.050 .009 .011
.088
.089 .036 .002
.439
34.5
485 '
241
98.5
40.0
95.2
14.8
Tube Depth
122 cm 183 cm 244 cm
117 7.84
2760 95.0
.464
5.32 0.60
.044
.008 _
.012 .001
39.3
1170
309
327
53.7
7.54
8.72
Crop
16.8
2.44
.26
38.0
4.92
2.99
9.95
.317
146
-------
TABLE F-3
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE GRAIN SORGHUM
PLOT AT THE GRAY SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Tray Depth
Parameter
ALK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH,-N
W
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COD
Cl
SO,
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC
Applied
Wastewater
2000
9110
76.2
23.5
18.6
27.1
15.6
1.17
790
980
1460
552
299
131
1730
263
61 cm
462
3250
1.34
9.92
.132
.236
.129
.039
70.4
1050
410
318
132
58.5
964
45.6
122 cm
807
.500
.027
.019
22.6
12.9
352
120
51.0
10.8
183 cm
52.6
.248
.102
.012
.004
.055
.001
21.2
17.2
25.3
7.74
1.72
6.45
Tube Depth
122 cm
280
2910
.58
9.77
.047
.023
.021
.026
21.4
899
468
265
107
39.2
39.4
6.1
183 cm 244 cm
712
7570
1.16
11.5
.111
.037
.041
.030
97.9
2350
1470
1520
268
26.2
1690
25.8
Crop
29.5
5.82
2.90
19.9'
4.90
4.21
9.27
0.59
147
-------
TABLE F-4
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE BERMUDA PLOT
AT THE HANCOCK SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Tray Depth
Parameter
ALK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-N
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COD
Cl
so4
Ca
Hg
K
Na
TOC
Applied
Wastewater
8680
29620
940
2.85
52.1
359
207
6.67
6120
8300
5070
1450
607
455
7870
1365
61 cm 122 cm
116
1971
.314
1.38
.041
.016
.011
46.3
817
135
295
93.8
13.2
26.8
8.45
247
10.1
.016
.001
4.5
60.3
39.9
30.5
21.2
3.12
Tube Depth
183 cm 122 cm 183 cm 244
52.5
2130 •
.187
44.7
.019
.013
.004
23.1
169
95.2
257
109
12.3
6.32
2510
11282
2.11
86.9
.284
.131
.082
.106
128.8
3340
1380
562
757
104
807
46.9
cm Crop
229
31.6
. 39
238
41.2
18.6
116
10.8
148
-------
TABLE F-5
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE COTTON
PLOT AT THE HANCOCK SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Tray Depth
Parameter
A.LK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-M
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COD
CV
SO,
•t
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC •
Applied
Wastewater
4870
16630
527
1.60
293
201
116
3.74
3440
4660
2850
813
341
255
4420
766
61 cm 122 cm
95.9 68.5
547
.224 .032
3.38 .199
.026 .015
.004 .058
.006 .005
17.1 .088
154 37.4
112
6.19
183 cm
20.9
72.0
.192
.009
.008
.003
.008
8.41
4.69
2.50
.700
5.53
Tube Depth
122 cm
130
1740
.617
32.1
.074
.012
.006
.014
4.78
195
49.7
5.51
183 cm 244 cm
.024
9.42
.011
.002
.003
.002
6.15
7.59
48.6
3.18
- Crop
12.3
1.70
.569
32.9
3.53
2.47
10.6
.190
149
-------
TABLE p-6
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE GRAIN SORGHUM
PLOT AT THE HANCOCK SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Parameter
ALK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-N
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COD
Cl
so4
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC
Applied
Wastewater
1970
6730
214
.647
118
81.5
47.0
1.52
1390
1890
1150
329
138
103
1790
310
Tray Depth Tube Depth
61 cm 122 cm 183 cm 122 cm 183 cm 244 cm Crop
.171 .735 141
.40 .165 1.62 3.78
.011 .003
.002 .001 .001 .003 26
4
35.1
71.0 377
27
27.4
94.6
2.78
1.87
150
-------
TABLE F-7.
MASS INPUTS AND OUTPUTS IN KG/HA ON THE CONTROL PLOT
AT THE HANCOCK SITE OVER THE PROJECT PERIOD
Parameter
ALK
TDS
TKN
N02+N03-N
NH3-N
TOTAL P
ORTHO P
ORG. P
COD
Cl
so4
Ca
Mg
K
Na
TOC
Applied
Water
3270
15100
1.78
4030
2960
770
381
3640
Tube
122 cm
5650
16900
2.49
5.06
.278
.261
.181
.219
306
4300
3260
2830
1180
312
• 1736
,88.1
Depth
183 cm
2930
10800
• 2.24
13.1
.285
.178_
.133
.159
381
2780
1600
1350
793
225
1163
91.2
Crop
123
1.70
.569
32.9
3.53
2.47
10.6
.190
151
------- |