United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory
Ada OK 74820
EPA-600-2-79-072
March 1979
Research and Development
Long-Term
Effects of Land
Application of
Domestic
Wastewater
Vineland, New Jersey,
Rapid Infiltration Site
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6 Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution-sources to meet environmental quality standards.
:>s document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
or> Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161
-------
EPA-600/2-79-072
March 1979
LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF LAND APPLICATION OF DOMESTIC WASTEWATER:
Vineland, New Jersey, Rapid Infiltration Site
Ernest L. Koerner
Benham-Blair & Affiliates, Inc.
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73120
and
D. Alan Haws
Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
Norman, Oklahoma 73069
Contract No. 68-03-2363
Project Officer
Richard E. Thomas
Office of Water Program Operations
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
ROBERT S. KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Robert S. Kerr Environmental
Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was established to coordinate
the administration of major Federal programs designed to protect the
quality 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.
EPA'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 munici-
pal wastewaters.
Although land application of municipal wastewaters has been practiced
for years, there has been a growing and widespread interest in this
practice in recent years. The use of land application received major
impetus with the passage of the 1972 amendments to the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. The 1977 amendments to the Act gave further
encouragement to the use of land application and provided certain incen-
tives for the funding of these systems through the construction grants
program. With the widespread implementation of land application systems,
there is an urgent need for answers to several major questions. One of
these questions regards the long-term effects of land application on the
soil, crops, groundwater, and other environmental components. This
report is one in a series of ten which documents the effects of long-term
wastewater application at selected irrigation and rapid infiltration
study sites. These case studies should provide new insight into the
long-term effects of land application of municipal wastewaters.
This report contributes to the knowledge which is essential for the
EPA to meet the requirements of environmental laws and enforce pollution
control standards which are reasonable, cost effective, and provide
adequate protection for the American public.
*>iw 0
mw**1^ \^, •
William C. Galegar
Director
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
i 1 i
-------
ABSTRACT
This report presents the findings of a study on the long-term effects of
applying treated domestic wastewater to an infiltration site at Vineland, New
Jersey. Primary treated domestic wastewater has been applied to three sepa-
rate infiltration basins for approximately 50, 29, and 3 years, respectively,
using a high rate, rapid infiltration method. The effluent applied to
Basin I serves the Borough of Vineland, while the effluent applied to Basins
II and III serves the Landis Sewerage Authority. Water and soil samples from
this site were compared with similar samples from an upstream control area
not receiving wastewater application.
Data on a number of parameters were evaluated against information about
the natural features of the Vineland physiographic region. Methods used in
the field and laboratory analyses are described in sufficient detail to pro-
vide a basis for comparison of these results to other studies.
An essential aspect of evaluating water analyses is understanding the
hydrogeology of the area. Knowledge of depth and movement of groundwater and
location and thickness of aquifers was essential in interpreting data from
wells strategically placed on both test and control sites.
Mean concentrations of 18 of the 48 parameters analyzed statistically
were found to be significantly greater in the effluent applied to Basin I
than in the control groundwater. Sixteen of the eighteen parameters were
found to be significantly greater in the test site groundwater below Basin I
than in the control groundwater.
Similarly, differences in 20 mean concentrations out of 48 parameters
analyzed were found to be significantly greater in the Landis effluent
applied to Basins II and III than in the control groundwater. For test
groundwater below Basin II and Basin III, mean concentrations for 17 and 13
parameters, respectively, were found to be significantly greater than concen-
trations in the control groundwater.
Surface water samples taken downgradient from the infiltration basins in
the Pan/in Branch tributary of the Maurice River indicated that migration of
constituents from the groundwater to the surface water was occurring. Simi-
lar surface water samples from the Maurice River did not reveal this mi-
gration and likely reflected the dilution effect of the greater flow in the
Maurice River than in the Parvin Branch.
Analyses of soil samples taken at three different depths from beneath
the infiltration basins and the upgradient control sites indicated signifi-
cant accumulations of nitrogen, phosphorus, and zinc to be occurring below
iv
-------
the infiltration basins down to the deepest depth sampled.
This report was submitted in partial fulfillment of Contract No.
68-03-2363 by Benham-Blair & Affiliates, Inc., as the principal contractor;
Engineering Enterprises, Inc. as subcontractor; with three cooperating
companies: Sheaffer and Roland, Inc.; D. E. Matschke Company; and W. J.
Bauer Consulting Engineers, Inc.; under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. This report covers the period from
January, 1976, to November, 1977; work was completed as of September, 1978.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword iii
Abstract iv
Figures viii
Tables x
List of Abbreviations and Symbols xii
Acknowledgments xiv
1. Introduction 1
2. Conclusions 3
3. Site-Selection Process 5
General Criteria 5
Mid-Atlantic States Sites 7
4. Description of Site 9
General 9
Test Site 9
Control Site 9
Groundwater Hydrology and Geology 9
Surface Water 15
Soils 18
Climate 19
Land Use 22
5. Plant Operation and Costs 23
Borough of Vineland Treatment Plant 23
Landis Sewerage Authority Treatment Plant 23
Wastewater Characteristics 24
Infiltration of Wastewater 24
Operating Costs 25
6. Research Methods 26
Well Construction and Locations 26
Chemical and Biological Analyses 34
Data Evaluation Plan 46
7. Results and Discussion 51
Water 51
Soils 105
Projected Useful Life of Site for Wastewater Infiltration . 113
References 116
Appendices
A. Well Logs for Control and Test Sites 119
B. Data Tables for All Water and Soil Samples 135
Glossary 164
vii
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Rapid infiltration 2
2 Location map 10
3 Groundwater level contours, Cumberland Co., New Jersey 12
4 Water elevation contours, August, 1976, and cross
section locations 13
5 Water level contours, December, 1976 14
6 Vineland, N.J. stream flow measuring and sampling stations .... 16
7 Typical aboveground construction 27
8 Test holes and sample wells, Vineland, N.J 31
9 Well location at sewage disposal plant 32
10 Cross section A-A1 Vineland, N.J 47
11 Cross section B-B1 Vineland, N.J 48
12 Cross section C-C1 Vineland, N.J 49
13 Sample well location map Vineland, N.J 58
14 Groundwater constituents - ammonium nitrogen 69
15 Groundwater constituents - soluble organic nitrogen 72
16 Groundwater constituents - nitrate nitrogen 73
17 Groundwater constituents - COD 75
18 Groundwater constituents - chloride 77
19 Groundwater constituents - dissolved solids 78
20 Groundwater constituents - boron 79
-------
Number Page
21 Groundwater constituents - potassium 82
22 Groundwater constituents - calcium 83
23 Groundwater constituents - soluble phosphorus 85
24 Groundwater constituents - iron 88
25 Groundwater constituents - zinc 89
26 Groundwater constituents - lindane 92
27 Groundwater constituents - total coliform 94
28 Groundwater constituents - fecal coliform 95
29 Groundwater constituents - infectious virus units 99
30 Total inorganic and organic nitrogen mean concentrations
in control and test site soils 108
31 Total and available phosphorus mean concentrations in control
and test site soils 109
32 Total zinc and copper mean concentrations in control
and test site soils 110
33 Total potassium and magnesium mean concentrations in control
and test site soils Ill
34 Total iron and manganese mean concentrations in control
and test site soils 112
IX
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Comparison of Sites Located in Mid-Atlantic States 8
2 Summary of Flow Measurements on Maurice River, Parvin and
Tarkiln Branches 17
3 Temperature and Precipitation Data 20
4 Recent Climatological Data 21
5 Wastewater Characteristics 24
6 Well Summary Table 28
7 Summary of Field Methods 35
8 Summary of Constituent Concentrations in Vineland and Landis
Treatment Plant Effluents and Vineland Municipal Water Supply . . 52
9 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Control Site Groundwater
and the Applied Vineland and Landis Effluents 55
10 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Control Site
Groundwater and Test Groundwater Below Basin I 60
11 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Control Site
Groundwater and Test Groundwater Below Basin II 61
12 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Control Site
Groundwater and Test Groundwater Below Basin III 62
13 Summary of Parameter Mean Concentration Comparisons Between
the Test Groundwater of the Three Basins 64
14 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in the Groundwaters
Beneath the Landfill and Basin III 65
15 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in the Groundwaters
Beneath Basin I, Downgradient and Intermediate Wells 66
16 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in the Groundwaters
Beneath Basin II and Downgradient Wells 68
-------
Number Page
17 Comparison of Chloride, IDS, and Boron Applied To and
Passing Each Infiltration Basin 80
18 Comparison of Potassium, Calcium, Sodium, and Magnesium
Applied to and Passing Each Infiltration Basin 84
19 Comparison of Soluble Phosphorus and Soluble Orthophosphate
Applied To and Passing Each Infiltration Basin 86
20 Comparison of Iron, Manganese, and Zinc Applied To and
Passing Each Infiltration Basin 87
21 Virus Isolation 96
22 Virus Isolation by the Bentonite Method 100
23 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Maurice River Water
Upstream (Control) and Downstream (Test) of the Treatment Plant . 102
24 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Pan/in Branch Water
Upstream (Control) and Downstream (Test) of the Treatment Plant . 103
25 Calculation and Comparison of Incremental Flow Concentrations
of Statistically Significant Parameters 104
26 Mean Concentrations of Parameters in Control and Test Site Soils . 106
27 Phosphorus, Copper and Zinc Balances 114
XI
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS
acre-ft
BOD
BOD5
cm
cm/hr
COD
DO
exch
extr
fecal coli
9
gal
GL
gpd
gpd/ft
gpm
ha
hr
in
in/hr
kg
kg/ha
kg/ha/yr
km
L
L/s
L/d/m
Ib
Ib/acre
Ib/acre/hr
MCL
mg/g
mg/L
Mgal/d
Mgal/d/ft
mi
mL
mm
acre-foot
biochemical oxygen demand
5-day biochemical oxygen demand
centimeters
centimeters per hour
chemical oxygen demand
dissolved oxygen
exchangeable
extractable
fecal coliform
grams
gallons
ground level
gallons per day
gallons per day per foot
gallons per minute
hectares
hours
inches
inches per hour
kilograms
kilograms per hectare
kilograms per hectare per year
kilometers
liters
liters per
liters per
pounds
pounds per acre
pounds per acre per hour
meters
cubic meters
maximum contaminant level
milligrams per gram
milligrams per liter
million gallons per day
million gallons per day per foot
miles
milliliters
millimeters
second
day per meter
-------
mo
ng/g
ng/L
nm
sq ft
SR
SS
SWL
IDS
TOC
total coli
yr
yg/g
yg/L
ymhos/cm
#/100 ml
SYMBOLS
Al
As
B
Ca
Cd
Cl
Co
Cr
Cu
Fe
Hg
H-2S04
IT 4
Mg
Mn
N
month
nanograms per gram
nanograms per liter
nanometer
square feet
slow rate irrigation
suspended solids
static water level
total dissolved solids
top of casing
total coliform
year
micrograms per gram
micrograms per liter
micromhos per centimeter
number of coliform per 100
aluminum
arsenic
boron
calcium
cadmium
chlorine
cobalt
chromium
copper
iron
mercury
sulfuric acid
potassium
magnesium
manganese
nitrogen
millilHers of sample
Na
NH,
NHJ
Ni
NO?
P J
Pb
S
Se
so4
>
<
y
sodium
ammonia
ammonium
nickel
nitrite
nitrate
phosphorus
lead
sulfur
selenium
sulfate
zinc
greater than
less than
micron
xm
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The large number of participants in this team project precludes mention
of all those who have made substantial contributions. Continual interest and
encouragement have been provided by Richard E. Thomas, Project Officer for
the EPA. His experience in land treatment projects, technical/scientific
expertise in soils, and administrative guidance was essential for the suc-
cessful completion of the study.
Each of the participating companies had a primary leader or coordinator
who took major responsibility for bringing the project to completion. Ernest
L. Koerner, Benham-Blair & Affiliates, Inc., was responsible for the overall
supervision, chemical analyses, and editing and production of the final re-
port. D. Alan Haws, Engineering Enterprises, Inc., was a senior author and
project manager for field construction and sample collection. Donald E.
Matschke, D. E. Matschke Company, and Herbert M. Schornick, Engineering
Enterprises, Inc., developed the results and discussion and the statistical
comparisons. Messrs. William J. Bauer, Keith E. Bennett, William H. Bellis,
John S. Fryberger, Harold E. Namminga, W. Russell Street, Dennis G. Lund,
Paul K. Law, Lelan K. Martin, R. LeRoy Carpenter, and John R. Sheaffer also
made substantial contributions to the project.
In addition, the cooperation and assistance of personnel from the City
of Vineland, New Jersey, and the Landis Sewerage Authority were appreciated.
xiv
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
Land application of domestic wastewater is not a new concept, although
it has only been in recent years that land treatment has received renewed
attention. The multiple advantages of land treatment have been documented
by many studies, but almost without exception there has been a lack of data
on long-term effects.
Primary effluent from the Vineland and Landis treatment systems is
infiltrated into the ground using a high-rate infiltration method as
illustrated in Figure 1. Located on one site, the land application systems
utilize three basins. The Vineland infiltration basin (I) serves the Borough
of Vineland and has been operating for approximately 50 years. The Landis
Sewerage Authority has two infiltration basins, the older of which (II) has
been operating for approximately 30 years and the newer (III) since 1974. In
high-rate infiltration land treatment, the applied wastewater percolates
through the soil and eventually reaches the groundwater. Removal of waste-
water constituents such as suspended solids, BOD, and coliform is ac-
complished by the filtering and straining action of the soil. Nitrogen re-
movals are generally poor unless specific operating procedures are establish-
ed to maximize denitrification.
Well-drained soil, which is essential for infiltration-percolation,
includes sand, sandy loams, loamy sands, and gravel. Very coarse sand and
gravel are not ideal because wastewater passes too rapidly through the
first few feet of soil, where the major biological action takes place.
These soils are also characterized by low ion exchange capacities, which
limits the chemical retention of pollutants.
The infiltration basins are located in highly permeable sand and gravel.
Basins I and II were operated essentially on a continuous basis until 1974,
when Basin III was constructed, and since then all basins have been alter-
nately flooded and dried.
In this research study conducted over a one-year period, test and con-
trol plots were selected for comparison of certain parameters. Samples were
collected of the sewage effluent, groundwater, and soils. Field laboratory
analyses of some samples at the site and later, complete chemical laboratory
analyses provided the data presented in this report.
The objective of the study was to investigate the long-term effects of
applying wastewater effluent to the land. Possible health hazards of heavy
metal accumulation in soils; potential contamination of groundwater supplies
with bacteria, viruses, or excessive nitrates; and undesirable changes in
1
-------
APPLIED
WASTEWATER
Evaporation
PERCOLATION
(Unsaturated Zone)
Figure I. Rapid infiltration.
the chemistry of the soil were key issues addressed. The study was designed
to delineate the zone of groundwater influence, identify the flow path from
the site, and compare on-site groundwater quality to upgradient control
groundwater quality.
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
An analysis of the waters and soils at the Vineland and Landis treatment
site has produced findings related to the use of wastewater for groundwater
infiltration with primary effluent applied on an essentially continuous basis
for up to 50 years. Major conclusions are as follows:
1. Total and fecal coliform consistently occurred in the effluent and
at depths to 6 m (20 ft) in the shallow wells beneath the basins.
Total coliform occasionally occurred at the deeper depths and down-
gradient. Fecal coliform did not occur at depths greater than 9 m
(30 ft) and occurred only one time in a shallow well 50 m (165 ft)
downgradient.
Viruses occurred in the same pattern as coliform but appeared to
move deeper and further downgradient. Viruses were detected in the
effluent on each sampling round and in several wells to depths of
17 m (55 ft) immediately beneath the basins on at least two rounds.
They were detected once in a well 50 m (164 ft) downgradient and
once in a well 250 m (820 ft) downgradient.
2. Metals such as zinc, that were measured in small concentrations in
the treatment plant effluents, were removed and continue to be
sufficiently immobilized by the infiltration soils after 30 to 50
years of infiltration. An apparent extraneous source of high zinc
concentration was evident at Basin I but these concentrations were
contained within the soils monitored for this study.
3. Iron and manganese appear to have been rendered more mobile as a
result of infiltration flows. The iron concentrations in particu-
lar are extraordinarily high and must be considered at a problem
level.
4. More toxic metals such as cadmium, lead and mercury were demon-
strably absent in the infiltrated effluent and the underlying
groundwater.
5. Lindane was found in greater than background concentrations but
within the proposed national limitations for primary drinking
water concentrations in both the effluent and the infiltrated
groundwater.
6. Concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus, and chemical oxygen demand
-------
in the groundwater beneath and downgradient from the basins varied
with basin service life and loading rates and were highest beneath
and downgradient from Basin II. Approximately 58 percent of the
applied total nitrogen concentration, 4.3 percent of the applied
soluble phosphorus concentration, and 14 percent of the applied
chemical oxygen demand were present in the groundwater downgradient
from Basin II.
The phosphorus removal capability of the monitored treatment site
soils near the older basin have been substantially reduced by 50
years of continuous flooding. Removal of phosphorus concentrations
below 0.1 mg/L is taking place on soils beyond the area monitored
for this study. Basin III continues to have phosphorus adsorption
capability on immediately adjoining soils due to the comparatively
young, three-year life of this basin.
Flow measurements and chemical anaylses of the Parvin Branch indi-
cate that most of the infiltrated effluent moves away from the
basins as groundwater but eventually enters Parvin Branch as sur-
face water prior to its confluence with the Maurice River. A large
percentage of the salient parameters in the applied effluent and
downgradient groundwater could be accounted for in the surface
water in Parvin Branch but were not measurable after dilution by
the Maurice River.
Although the three basins with their different service lives and
loading rates complicated the evaluation, they also offered an
excellent opportunity for cross comparison and duplication of con-
clusions. Anomolies were found and are discussed in the text,
however, the performance of the separate basins was generally
quite consistent with loading rates, service life and hydro-
geology.
-------
SECTION 3
SITE-SELECTION PROCESS
GENERAL CRITERIA
Earlier Approaches
An earlier report (Bauer, 1976) defined a number of working approaches
for the site-selection process. These were used initially to provide direc-
tion in the data-gathering phases. The earlier approaches included the
following:
Soil Chemistry--
The chemical reaction of the soil with the chemicals in the applied
wastewater takes place first in the upper layers of the soil. After these
upper or plow layers have become saturated, reactions take place at progres-
sively lower elevations. The distribution of accumulated chemicals resulting
from the application of wastewater is studied from the point of view of this
simple model of the process.
Hydrological--
Water moves through the earth in two major forms: (1) as soil water
through the unsaturated zone, where the two fluid properties of fluid weight
and surface tension dominate the movements, and (2) as groundwater through
the saturated zone, where the two fluid properties of fluid weight and vis-
cosity dominate the movements. Both of these movements are subject to the
laws of fluid mechanics, permitting mathematical models to be set up for a
particular site.
Such models are useful in guiding the exploratory and sampling program
and in interpreting the results of such programs. The models enable one to
define a "plume" of water that originates in the wastewater application site.
This plume is then the only part of the soil and groundwater that is affected
by the application of the wastewater. All other water outside this plume re-
mains unaffected. This is an extremely important concept in guiding the pro-
gram of sampling and in interpreting the results.
Application to Sites
The foregoing approaches aid in defining parameters that help to distin-
guish one site from another. Several of these parameters are as follows:
-------
Uniform Permeability of Soils--
Each test site and control site should have the same type of soil with
the same general, reasonably uniform permeability. The soil should not con-
tain any well-defined channels through which the applied water could escape
without contact with the chemicals in the soil mass.
Same Site—
The same site should have been used for a long time. If wastewater had
been applied to first one and then another site over the period of operation,
the concept of the long-term effect would not be applicable.
Depth to Groundwater--
The depth to the groundwater should be sufficient to permit some move-
ment through the unsaturated zone, yet shallow enough to allow economical
sampling of the water. The thickness of the aquifer should be adequate to
permit a large body of soil to react with the applied wastewater.
Accounting for Chemical Elements—
Sufficient data should be available to estimate the total mass of chemi-
cal elements applied with the wastewater, the amount percolated through the
soil, and the amount that has remained in the soil.
Constant Quality--
No substantial change should have occurred in the chemical quality of
the applied wastewater over the period being studied.
Extraneous Sources--
If chemicals other than those in the wastewater have been applied on the
study sites, such an application can introduce uncertainties into the opera-
tion that would make the analyses difficult. Other factors being equal,
sites a-t which other sources of chemicals have been applied should be
avoided.
General Criteria Supplied by EPA
The EPA also specified certain other general criteria for the selection
of sites. These criteria are as follows:
1. Flow rates should be at least 4.38 L/s (0.1 Mgal/d).
2. Historical records should be available for at least 10 years.
3. The applied wastewater should be effluent from either primary or
secondary treatment.
4. A good control site should be available within a reasonable dis-
tance and have the same general type of soil and hydrogeological
conditions.
-------
MID-ATLANTIC STATES SITES
Preliminary Evaluations
The geographical area involved comprised the states of Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and
South Carolina. STORET data supplied by the EPA were examined for infor-
mation about potential sites in each of these states. A survey was conducted
to obtain further information about these sites and any others that might
be candidates for study. The survey showed only the sites at Vineland, New
Jersey, to meet the criteria that had been established for the study. _0nly
two states, New Jersey and Maryland, had any examples of high-rate infil-
tration systems using municipal effluent. One at St. Charles City, Maryland,
was too new to be considered for the study. Other potential sites were elim-
inated for the reasons listed in Table 1.
Vineland, New Jersey Sites
Two sites are operated at Vineland in close proximity. One was estab-
lished by the City of Vineland Water and Sewer Utility Authority in the late
1920s. The other was established by the Landis Sewerage Authority in the
late 1940s. Both use essentially the same approach in applying the effluent
to the land and allowing it to percolate through the extensive sand deposit.
The method of application at the Landis Sewerage Authority and the Old
Borough of Vineland site was altered in April, 1973. The procedure for infil-
tration was changed from continuous flooding to intermittent flooding. Be-
tween periods of flooding, the basin used is drained, the bottom scarified,
and the soils allowed to dry before the next period of flooding.
-------
TABLE 1. COMPARISON OF SITES LOCATED IN MID-ATLANTIC STATESa
Uniform Same Groundwater Aquifer Mass Wastewater Extraneous
Location Permeability Site Depth Thickness Balance Quality Sources Total
Vineland, N.J.b +1* 00 +1+1+10 4
* +1 = Parameter Favorable; -1 = Parameter Unfavorable; 0 = Neutral
Notes:
a. There were surveys made of potential sites in all of the states comprising the Mid-Atlantic
Region as follows:
oo
1. No municipal infiltration treatment systems: Pennsylvania; Delaware; West Virginia; Virginia;
North Carolina; South Carolina.
2. Too new: St. Charles City, Maryland.
3. Other New Jersey sites: many used for sludge drying; many abandoned.
b. The sites at Vineland are presently managed by two agencies: (1) City of Vineland Water and Sewer
Utility Authority and (2) Landis Sewerage Authority. Both are contemplating a joint management of
the two facilities, which are immediately adjacent to each other. For the purposes of this
comparison summary, the sites managed by these two agencies are regarded as one site.
-------
SECTION 4
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
GENERAL
The City of Vine!and is located in Cumberland County in southern New
Jersey. This portion of south New Jersey is in the Coastal Plain physio-
graphic province and borders the northeastern shore of Delaware Bay
(Figure 2). The topography is that of a broad sand and gravel plain dissect-
ed by stream drainage into low rolling hills. This plain slopes gently
toward Delaware Bay. In the vicinity of Vineland, the land surface is as
much as 40 m (130 ft) above sea level; however, along the bay, tidal marshes
may extend inland for five miles.
The test and control sites are in the drainage basin of the Maurice
River, with the Parvin and Tarkiln Branches providing drainage from these
sites to the Maurice River.
TEST SITE
The test site is represented by two treatment facilities, which are
contiguous and serve the City of Vineland as well as the surrounding area.
These two facilities are considered as one test site; however, historical
length of operation and treatment of effluent are different.
The infiltration basins are at an elevation of approximately 15 m
(50 ft) above sea level and are in the southwestern sector of Vineland.
CONTROL SITE
The control sites are located above the test site relative to the ground-
water gradient. One control site is directly north of infiltration Basin I.
Because the solid waste landfill is near, the other control site is between
Basin III and the landfill. The control site areas are about 18 m (60 ft)
above sea level.
GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY AND GEOLOGY
The Vineland area, in fact practically all of south New Jersey, is
immediately underlain by unconsolidated sands and gravels. These sediments
represent primarily the Cohansey Sand of Miocene-Pliocene Age (Johnson,
1950). The Cohansey is generally a medium to coarse grained quartz sand
with some clay, silt, and gravel scattered throughout the formation (Rooney,
1971). Massive ironstone beds are common in the upper portion of the
-------
Figure 2. Location mop.
10
-------
Cohansey, and the iron colors the formation causing yellow to red shades
for a normally gray to buff brown color. Some carbonaceous, micaceous,
silty clays are also present in the Cohansey.
On the higher ridges the Cohansey Sand is overlain by the Bridgeton
Formation, which is composed of coarse gravel and sand, generally uncon-
solidated, of Pleistocene Age. According to the geologic map of Johnson
(1950), the Bridgeton Formation does not occur in the control or test site
area.
Beneath the Cohansey is the Kirkwood Formation, which crops out only
in southwestern Cumberland County and probably cannot be distinguished
from the sands and gravels of the Cohansey.
When the Cohansey and Kirkwood sediments are saturated with water,
they combine to form the shallowest and most important source of ground-
water in Cumberland County (Rooney, 1971). Even at the higher elevations
in the control site area, the water table is only about 5 m (15 ft) below
the ground surface, and it decreases to about 1 m (3 ft) near the Maurice
River.
The water-level map for Cumberland County (Figure 3) shows the Vineland
area on the southeastern side of a groundwater divide, with the regional
horizontal flow direction west and southwest toward the Maurice River.
This regional gradient in the Vineland vicinity has a slope of about 0.0038.
Detailed water-level contours for August and December, 1976, are shown
on Figures 4 and 5, respectively. These two maps show essentially the same
overall trends; however, there was a mound beneath Landis Basin III in
August, 1976 (Figure 4) that was not evident in December, 1976 (Figure 5).
These changes were due to the wastewater loading schedule for the infiltration
basins and rainfall. The groundwater movement from Basin I is to the west-
southwest into the Maurice River. From Basin II the groundwater moves to the
south into the Parvin Branch or to the southwest into the Maurice River.
Groundwater movement from Basin III is to the south into the Tarkiln and
Parvin Branches.
The water-level contours suggest that the groundwater quality of all
three basins could be affected-by the solid waste landfill. The groundwater
gradient slope from these two maps is about20.0Q34. Permeabilities reported
for the Cohansey sand range from 5.66 x 10~ cm ,per3sec per cm (12QO
gpd per ft-MRosenau et al., 1969) to 1.27 x 10 cm per sec per cm (2,700
gpd per ft ) (Rooney, 1971). Using the above slope and range for coefficient
of permeability, and assuming an effective porosity of 15 percent, the rate
of horizontal groundwater movement ranges from 1 to 2.5 m (3 to 8 ft) per day.
This means that infiltration wastewater at Basin I probably requires from
17 to 36 months to reach the Maurice River.
The sample descriptions for the Cohansey Formation (Appendix A) do
not indicate much clay; however, the results of the pump tests suggested the
existence of clay lenses. For instance, the pump test well was screened
at 60 cm (2 ft) intervals from 9 to 12 m (30 to 40 ft). An observation
11
-------
r\>
0 4
Scale-Miles
EXPLANATION
Altitude of groundwater levels
Figure 3. Groundwater level contours, Cumberland Co., New Jersey. From Rooney,
1971
-------
COUNTY
SOLID WASTE
LANDFILL
54
^220
O- SAMPLE WELL
WATER ELEVATION CONTOUR
== = DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER
MOVEMENT
Figure 4. Water elevation contours, August, 1976, and cross section locations.
13
-------
I Comity
Sfrlid Waste
Ldndfill
Water level contours, December, 1976
14
-------
well located 3.6 m (12 ft) away was screened from 3.4 to 4.3 m (11 to 14 ft)
(Figure 4). During a pump test the observation well showed no drawdown, but
well 42290, screened 14 to 15 m (46 to 50 ft) and located 9 m (30 ft) from
the pump well, did show drawdown. This suggests that one or more clay
lenses retarded vertical communication in the aquifer.
SURFACE WATER
The major surface stream in the Vine!and study area is the Maurice
River, The Parvin and Tarkiln Branches provide minor drainage and enter the
Maurice River southwest of the study site (Figure 6). The flow was measured
in the Maurice River above Landis Avenue and below Sherman Avenue in August,
1976. The flow increased from about 1,950 to 3,200 L/s (69 to 113 ftYs) be-
tween the two stations (Table 2). Very little of this increased flow was a
result of the confluence with the Parvin Branch, but 425 to 570 (15 to 20
ft /s) may have resulted from the Muddy Run Branch. The major flow increase
was probably due to groundwater inflow. Flow measurements were made during
a relatively low flow period, because the average discharge at the USGS
gaging: station at Norma is 4,650 L/s (164 ft /s) for the years 1932 to 1970.
The Tarkiln and Parvin Branches showed increased flow rates downstream
that cannot be totally accounted for by tributary inflow. This increased
flow was predominantly due to groundwater inflow. The groundwater inflow into
the Tarkiln Branch is primarily from the direction of the test site infiltra-
tion basins and from the landfill.
Field observation of the Tarkiln Branch suggested that inflow into
the stream was influenced by the infiltration basins. Along the west side of
Tarkiln Branch opposite Basin III, red-orange iron bacteria flourish, but
this phenomenon does not occur on the east bank. Measurements at station
42460 showed a higher conductivity on the west bank. The iron bacteria
continue to be very prominent downstream into lower Parvin Branch. From
station 42470 to station 42520, iron bacteria cover nearly all the vegetation
and projections in the stream, and the water conductivity measurements are
high.
The upper Parvin Branch, stations 42450 and 42480, is a clear stream
with observed fish, healthy vegetation, and no iron bacteria. The conduc-
tivity measurements are low, and there seems to be no evidence of infil-
tration basin or landfill pollution. Water analyses and visual observation
at station 42440 on the Tarkiln Branch did not show evidence of pollution.
The measured flow is low; hence groundwater inflow is low in comparison with
downstream flow, which is affected by the artificial mounding of the ground-
water table beneath Basin III. Between stations 42440 and 42490, the stream
flow increased by 52 L/s (1.82 ft /s) or 1.18 Mgal/d. In contrast, the flow
in the Parvin Branch, which does not appear to be affected by Basin III,
decreases 0.12 Mgal/d along a similar reach between stations 42450 and 42480.
The increase in flow between stations 42490 and 42470 minus the tributary
flow at station 42480 is 0.14 Mgal/d; the increase between stations 42470 and
42520, located just below Basin II, is 0.61 Mgal/d.
15
-------
City of Vln«l
-------
TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF FLOW MEASUREMENTS ON MAURICE RIVER, PARVJN AND TAKKILN BRANCHES
Flow
Station Width Depth Flow
Number Date (Feet) (Feet) (cfs)
MAURICE RIVER
42500 8-26-76 37.5 1.82 68.82
4?510 8-26-76 51 4.0 113
TARKILN BRANCH
42440 8-24-76 3.2 0.25 0.27
42460 8-25-76 8.4 0.26 1.21
12490 8-25-76 7.4 0.58 2.09
PARVIN BRANCH
42450 8-25-76 7.0 1.05 1.51
42480 8-25-76 6.9 0.75 1.32
42470 8-25-76 14.5 0.89 3.6?
42520 8-31-76 9.2 1.23 4.56
Temperature
22
24
23
20
_
18
18
20
19
21
Conductivity
(ijmhos/cm)
75
90
185
290
350
129
135
305
370
Color Remarks
Clear Landis Avenue
Clear Sherman Avenue
Clear Elm Road
East of Landis Basin III
East side of stream
West side of stream;
red-orange iron bacteria;
floating chunks of iron
bacteria.
Above confluence with Par-
vin Branch; floating iron
bacteria prevalent.
Clear Orchard Road
Clear Above confluence with
Tarkiln Branch; vegetation,
fish.
Below confluence with
Tarkiln Branch; boggy
bottom, no fish, iron
bacteria cover everything.
Damage tint Highway 55; chunks of
floating iron bacteria.
-------
Although there was no groundwater inflow upstream at this time, there
would likely be some natural groundwater inflow along the lower reaches
investigated. Even so, it is obvious that much of the 1.8 Mgal/d increase in
flow in the Pan/in Branch above station 42520 is the result of wastewater
infiltration at Basins II and III.
The flow of the Pan/in and Tarkiln Branches is quickly diluted by the
large flow in the Maurice River. At station 42510 there is no evidence
of iron bacteria, and the conductivity is low.
SOILS
The soils at the Vineland study site have been formed from materials of
glacial origin and are characteristically deep, sandy, and well drained. The
surface is nearly level to gently sloping terrain. Around the wastewater
site, soils belonging to the Eavesboro, Lakewood, and Lakehurst Series are
dominant. These series have rapid permeability, ranging from 5 to >20 cm/hr
(2 to >6 in/hr), and low available soil water capacity; they are well drained,
loose, and low in fertility and organics. The upper soils appear bleached
gray in color with a profile depth greater than 18 cm (7 in) thick. The sub-
soils and substratum are yellowish brown and composed of sands and gravel
materials. At the test site, the continual leaching in the infiltration beds
has long since removed any diagnostic soil horizons. The water table is
generally less than 3 m (10 ft) below the surface.
The test site basins are not vegetated and are scarified following each
inundation with wastewater. The control site is vegetated with mixed pine
and oak with an understory of shrubs and bushes. In reality, this soil is
not a soil system as typically defined, but a quartz sand filter for the
groundwater.
A typical profile of the soil representative of the control site and of
the test site in its virgin state follows:
Al-0-8 cm (0-3 in)'; very dark grayish brown consisting of a mixture of
dark organic matter and clean white sand grains; sand is single grained,
loose; few small and medium roots present; strongly acidic; clear wavy
boundary.
Cl-8-25 cm (3-10 in); yellowish brown single grains of sand, loose when
moist, no'nsticky when wet; small and medium roots present; strongly
acidic; gradual wavy boundary.
C2-25-110 cm (10-43 in); yellowish brown single grained, clear sand
grains; loose consistency with commonly medium pores and root channels
present; structureless; few small roots present; strongly acidic; gradu-
al wavy boundary.
C3-110-160 cm (43-63 in); yellowish brown with a few splotches of very
pale brown color; sands are loose, clear single grains; few large pores;
strongly acidic; gradual wavy boundary.
18
-------
C4-160-200 cm (63-79 in); very pale brown with a few common distinct
yellowish red mottles; single grained, loose when moist; clear; strongly
acidic.
Infiltration Rate Test
During the third sampling round in March, 1977, an infiltration rate
test of the test and control site soils was conducted. Cylinder-type infil-
trometers were employed, using a method similar to that described by Haise
et al (1956).
A set of three cylinders was used for the tests. The cylinders were
filled to a predetermined point, and measurements were made at the end of 1,
3, 5, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, and 180 minutes. The infiltrometers were
refilled as required to bring the water level back to the original mark.
The test site measurements were made in Basin II, adjacent to wells 42030,
42040, and 42170 through 42210. The control site measurements were made
adjacent to wells 41010 through 41030. The steady state conditions at the
end of two hours of testing on the control and test sites soils indicated an
infiltration rate of about 130 cm/hr (51 in/hr) and 15.8 cm/hr (6.2 in/hr),
respectively.
CLIMATE
Cumberland County has a humid temperate climate moderated by the
Delaware Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. The average annual temperature and
precipitation data are given in Table 3.
Summer temperatures do not exceed 38 C (100 F) for long periods but
are frequently in the range from 33 to 37 C (91 to 98 F). Winter tempera-
ture generally are not below -15 C (5 F) for long periods. The ground is
normally not frozen throughout the winter.
The average annual precipitation is 102 to 112 cm (40 to 44 in), and
the monthly averages in Table 3 indicate that precipitation is well distri-
buted. In nearly every year there are periods when there is not enough rain-
fall for high-value crops. Rainfall is heaviest in June and July with much
of the rainfall occurring in summer as thunderstorms. The largest amount of
rainfall recorded in a 24-hour period is 25.4 cm (9.99 in.). In winter, the
rainfall frequently warms the soils enough to thaw any frozen ground.
The wind is mainly from the northwest, with its duration and velocity
greatest during the month of March.
The length of the growing season in the county is about 193 days. The
average date of the last killing frost in spring is about April 15, and that
of the first in fall is October 25.
Recent climatological data for the period of field sampling are shown
in Table 4.
19
-------
TABLE 3. TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION DATAC
ro
o
Temperature
Average
daily
Month maximum
(6F)
January 46
February 44
March 51
April 62
May 73
June 82
July 87
August 85
September 77
October 69
November 56
December 46
Year 65
All data based
Average annual
Average annual
Average
daily
minimum
(6F)
27
25
31
40
51
60
66
64
56
47
35
27
44
on records at Millvi
highest temperature.
lowest temperature.
Two years in 10 will have
at least 4 days with--
Maximum
temperature
equal to
or higher
than--
(BF)
55
59
68
82
88
92
96
91
88
81
68
59,
97b
lie FAA Approach,
Minimum
Precipitation
One year in 10
will have —
temperature
equal to
or lower
than--
(8F)
6
9
20
30
39
50
58
53
45
32
24
13r
2c
Millville,
Average
total
(Inches)
2.9
2.8
3.8
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.9
4.4
3.1
2.7
3.5
3.6
40.1
New Jersey.
Less
than--
( Inches)
0.7
1.6
2.0
1.3
0.9
0.7
0.9
1.4
0.6
0.6
1.3
1.4
32.8
More
than--
(Inches)
4.8
4.2
5.7
5.7
5.9
5.3
7.7
9.3
6.8
5.0
5.9
6.2
56.5
-------
TABLE 4. RECENT CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA
Month
January, 1976
February, 1976
March, 1976
April, 1976
May, 1976
June, 1976
July, 1976
August, 1976
September, 1976
October, 1976
November, 1976
December, 1976
Total, 1976
January, 1977
February, 1977
March, 1977
April, 1977
May, 1977
June, 1977
Total , Jan-
June 1977
T Ave£a?8,,
Temp. ( F)
29.3
41.3
45.5
54.3
60.8
73.2
74.2
73.3
66.7
51.8
39.8
31.1
53.4
21.9
34.2
48.0
54.9
64.1
68.9
48.7
Precipitation9 Evaporation
(inches) (inches)
n 10
i an
i , yu
i 70
i./u —
i r\n
J. . UH
2.69 6.19C
1.89 7.45C
2.29 8.12C
3.10 6.91C
3.01 4.58C
n on
n c;n
9 fiR
29.85 33.25C
2 20
i n?
•5 nn
7 ^4
0.80 7.23
2.36 7.41C
11.97 14.64
a Measured at Mill
Measured at New
ville FAA Approach at
Brunswick, New Jersey
Millville, New Jersey.
21
-------
LAND USE
Farm acreage in Cumberland County, which includes Vineland, decreased
from a high of 40 percent in 1940 to about 30 percent by 1969. Although the
number of farms has decreased, sizes of individual farms have increased. In
1969, the average size of a farm was 53 ha (130 acres); about 27,000 ha
(67,000 acres) was in crops, and of this more than 8,100 ha (20,000 acres)
was irrigated.
The main crop is vegetables grown for freezing; they include snap beans,
onions, and cabbage, among others.
In 1967, hardwood and pine forests comprised about 45 percent of the land
area of the county. Most of the extensive woodland is not considered a
part of farms.
22
-------
SECTION 5
PLANT OPERATION AND COSTS
For this project the two treatment systems in operation serving the
Vineland area were studied as one site. The Vineland system serves the origi-
nal development in the borough. The Landis Sewerage Authority serves the re-
mainder of the developed portions of Vineland and nearby communities.
BOROUGH OF VINELAND TREATMENT PLANT
The treatment facility owned and operated by the Borough of Vineland
presently serves a total estimated population of 5,850 persons. The average
daily flow to the Vineland plant for the first eight months of 1974 was 35
L/s (0.80 Mgal/d). The capacity of the plant is 66 L/s (1.5 Mgal/d). The
plant provides primary treatment of the wastewater before it is discharged
o.nto infiltration beds. The area of the beds is about 9.7 ha (24 acres).
Primary treatment includes coarse screening of the influent and primary
settling tanks. Sludge drawn off from the sedimentation compartment of the
settling tanks is discharged to sludge drying beds twice a year, and the
dried sludge is then plowed under.
There are no major industrial contributors to the City of Vineland plant,
but at various times the wastewater contains oil from spills from the power
plant and large concentrations of syrup wastes from the Limpert Company,
a soda syrup manufacturer.
LANDIS SEWERAGE AUTHORITY TREATMENT PLANT
The Landis Sewerage Authority's existing treatment plant served a total
estimated population of approximately 19,000 persons in 1974, with an average
daily flow of 180 L/s (4.1 Mgal/d). The treatment facility has an average
daily design flow capacity of 310 L/s (7.0 Mgal/d), providing primary treat-
ment through an influent pumping station, pre-aeration chamber, and primary
settling tank. The final effluent is discharged onto infiltration beds.
Sludge from the primary settling tanks is pumped to a sludge-holding tank
and processed by chemical oxidation and stabilization before being pumped to
open drying beds; dried sludge is disposed of by stock-piling on the existing
plant property. Infiltration Basins II and III, presently being utilized for
the plant effluent, comprise a total area of 26.3 ha (65 acres). Basin II
has been used since 1948, while Basin III has been used since 1974.
Almost 50 percent of the total flow contributed to the Landis Sewerage
Authority System is from industrial sources. The three major industrial
23
-------
contributors and their daily average flows are:
1. Progresso - 26 to 53 L/s (0.59 to 1.21 Mgal/d).
2. Venice Maid - 26 to 44 L/s (0.59 to 1.00 Mgal/d).
3. Manischewitz Food Products - 7 to 11 L/s (0.16 to 0.25 Mgal/d).
Maximum industrial flows occur during the canning season, which lasts
for about four months of the year. Other wastes received at the plant on
occasion have a pH above 8 due to caustic spills, high chloride concentra-
tions, and excessive quantities of oil and grease.
WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Wastewater characteristics measured in 1974 were as indicated in
Table 5.
TABLE 5. WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS
Parameter (mg/L) Vine!and Landis
BOD5
COD
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Orthophosphate
Suspended Solids
306
510
37.9
11.3
273
638
799
34.1
10.0
209
INFILTRATION OF WASTEWATER
The Borough of Vineland infiltration site, Basin I, has been in opera-
tion since 1928. The Landis Sewerage Authority Basin II has been in opera-
tion since 1948 and Basjn III since 1974. Basins I and II were operated by
the continous flooding technique from their initial use until April, 1973,
when the operation was changed to intermittent flooding. Basin III has been
operated by the intermittent flooding technique since its initial use.
N
The present operation is to flood the beds by either pumping or gravity
flow, depending upon location. The flow to each bed is controlled by shear
gates, and the flow is distributed at the higher end of each bed until the
level in the bed reaches about 45 cm (18 in). As this level in each bed is
attained, flow is diverted to the next bed. The length of time that each bed
is flooded varies, depending on volume of flow and the soil percolation rate.
After the wastewater has percolated through the soil, the entire bed
is normally scarified in order to loosen the soil and enhance the permeabil-
ity of the top layer. Every six months, each bed is plowed to a depth of
30 cm (12 in), mixing the soil and organic matter that has been filtered
during the percolation of the wastewater.
24
-------
OPERATING COSTS
The Landis Sewerage Authority Report of Audit for 1976 reported the
following for operation of its sewage collection and treatment system:
Operating Revenues
Minus Operating Expenses
Net Revenues
Minus Debt Service
Net Income for Year 1976
$1,348,771
331,468
$1,017,303
196.391
$ 820,912
The 1976 Annual Report for the City of Vine!and reported sewer revenues
of $160,703, expenses of $40,362 and net income of $120,341.
25
-------
SECTION 6
RESEARCH METHODS
WELL CONSTRUCTION AND LOCATIONS
Well Construction
Test-hole and sample-well construction was done by one or a combination
of the following drilling methods: (1) eight-inch hollow-stem auger, (2)
powered, three-inch hand auger, (3) jet with city water. The hollow-stem
auger was used for the deeper holes, with the casing and screen placement
through the hollow stem of the auger. While the auger method provides
marginal information about the sediments because of the mixing that occurs as
the sample travels up the auger flights, major lithological changes, such as
clay layers or gravel beds, could frequently be noted by a change in the
penetration rate and the rotation rate of the auger. Drive core samples were
generally taken every 3 m (10 ft) and at suspected formation changes.
Although the auger does not provide the most useable lithological data,
it does allow the placement of well screens with minimal contamination. The
auger flights were withdrawn after placement of the well casing, allowing the
hole to cave around the screen and casing. However, there was generally 10
or more feet of open hole after withdrawal of the auger flights, and half a
sack of bentonite (25 pounds) was poured around the casing. The rest of the
hole was backfilled with augered material and the top of the hole sealed with
the remainder of the sack of bentonite.
Shallow holes were constructed with a powered, three-inch hand auger.
The hole was augered to the desired depth or slightly deeper, the auger with-
drawn, and casing with screen pushed to the selected depth. This technique
worked well for the very shallow holes; however, it was sometimes necessary
to jet the casing with screen to the selected depth. In such cases,
Vineland city water was used as the jetting water. Completion of the hole
was similar to that for the hollow-stem auger holes.
During construction, chlorinated water was added to the drill hole after
the water table had been reached or to the jetting water when wells were
jetted in. After construction, the wells were again chlorinated and pumped
for several hours to ensure that any contamination or water introduced during
construction was pumped out.
The aboveground construction included a six-inch diameter steel casing
and lockable lid, pushed about two feet into the ground to protect the casing
(Figure 7). This procedure was not used on any of the wells constructed
26
-------
Steel protective cosing
Locking hasp
Threaded PVC cap
Ground line
Bentonite plug
Figure 7 Typical aboveground construction
within the infiltration basins, as protection within the basin was considered
unnecessary and steel casing would be a source of metal contamination in the
water-saturated environment of the basin.
For this study, seven test holes, six control site wells, 36 test site
wells, and two pump test observation wells were constructed. These wells
ranged in depth from 0.6 to 21 m (2 to 69 ft) (Table 6). A description of
the sediments encountered and the particulars of well construction are given
in Appendix A.
Figure 8 shows the locations of the six control site wells, three test
holes, one upstream test site well, and seven downstream test site wells.
The remainder of the test site wells, test holes, and existing Landis Sewer-
age Authority wells are shown on Figure 9.
Groundwater Samples
Prior to sampling, the wells were carefully bailed to remove the volume
of water in the casing and then a dissolved oxygen sample was collected and
fixed in the field. Wells were chlorinated with a calcium hypochlorite
solution, which was circulated through the well and sampling pump, then
27
-------
TABLE 6. WELL SUMMARY TABLE
41010
41020
41030
41040
41050
41060
42020
42030
42040
42050
42060
42070
42080
42090
42100
42110
42120
42130
42140
42150
42160
42170
42180
42190
50
35
30
21.5
60
40
9.5
30
8
30
60
4
7
16
22
45
4
7
11
17
70
4
6
12
45-49
30-34
26-30
19-21
56-60
36-40
7-9
26-30
6-8
25-29
58-60
2-4
5-7
14-16
20-22
41-45
2-4
5-7
9-11
15-17
65-67
2-4
4-6
10-12
1
20
3
10
50
50
—
25
2
12
16
--
2
9
16
2
--
--
--
10
12
3
2
11
1.02
1.02
1.01
0.85
0.94
1.06
1.05
1.01
3.08
0.92
0.73
1.95
1.88
1,76
1.95
0.8
2.0
2.09
1.99
2.0
0.88
2.43
2.88
3.1
63.42
63.81
63.56
67.16
67.15
67.26
55,53
54.77
51.94
64.76
57.64
58.81
58.67
58.51
58.59
57,90
61.91
62.04
61.98
62.03
64.90
51.41
51.94
51.92
50.29
50.23
50.18
53.55
53.26
53,57
49.46
46.5
46.67
50.43
50.64
52.88
52.29
52.27
52.26
51.68
---
54.67
54.27
50,35
46,68
46.67
46.64
13.13
13.58
13.38
13.61
—
6.07
8.27
5.27
14.33
7.0
5.93
6,38
6.24
6.33
6.22
DRY
DRY
7.31
7,76
14.55
4,73
5.27
5.28
12.8
12.8
13.0
14.25
—
5.26
8.78
5.85
15,49
6.98
5.94
6.32
6.16
6.22
5.86
DRY
DRY
DRY
14,06
15,62
5.3
5.85
5.87
12.77
13.01
12.9
—
13.89
13.67
—
8.79
5.81
15.0
6.81
5.79
5.66
5.51
5.6
5.4
DRY
DRY
DRY
13.4
15.29
5,18
5.84
5.87
12.77
13.21
13.02
14.07
14.16
14.02
6.08
10.35
5.83
15,4
7.19
5.96
6.91
6.75
6.83
6.87
DRY
DRY
DRY
13.96
15.63
5.88
6.52
6.53
(Continued)
28
-------
TABLE 6. (Continued)
42200
42210
42220
42230
42240
42250
42260
42270
42280
42290
42300
42310
42350
42350
42370
42380
42390
42400
OBS1*
OBS2*
L-9
16
55
9
28
15
25
8
8
30
50
5
12
45
34.5
9
16.5
35
55
40
15
ISA
14-16
51-55
7-9
26-28
13-15
23-25
6-8
6-8
26-30
46-50
3-5
10-12
40-45
30-34
7-9
14-16
30-35
50-54
«
38-40
11-15
Test We
11
25
5
10
3
6
5.5
1.8
50
15
2
16
30
7
6
3
14
10
80-100
80-100
1
2.87
1.01
0.98
0.91
1.03
0.92
1.02
0.96
1.12
1.16
0.92
1.0
0.66
1.15
1.04
0.99
1.0
1.05
0.75
0.64
0.55
51.99
54.49
57.42
67.83
67.17
67.02
55.50
50.78
50.37
50.67
41.13
41.16
43.39
47.28
48.12
45.48
45.96
46.05
50.37
50.27
67.39
46.66
44.71
52.11
54.18
53.95
53.81
49.46
44.14
43.95
44.19
37.38
37.42
34.55
38.39
43.92
40.59
41.53
40.82
44.64
44.57
54.12
5.33
9.78
5.31
13.65
13.22
13.21
6.04
6.64
6.42
6.48
3.75
3.74
8.84
8.89
4.2
4.89
4.43
5.23
---
---
5.9
10.48
5.84
15.0
13.71
13.64
5.23
5.56
5.38
5.6
4.2
2.94
2.89
8.68
4.3
4.37
4.81
3.88
._.
---
---
5.92
9.6
15.13
5.71
---
5.07
5.73
5.51
5.68
4.4
3.1
3.11
8.73
4.64
-._
...
—
5.73
5.70
13.27
6.55
10.09
6.75
15.94
14.13
13.7
6.04
6.42
6.19
6.3
DRY
3.68
3.68
8.97
5.56
5.19
4.75
5.36
6.16
5.76
DRY
(Continued)
*Pump Test Wells
29
-------
TABLE 6. (Continued)
TH1
TH2
TH3
TH4
TH5
TH7
TH8
R-l*
R-2*
R-3*
R-4*
25
19.5
13.5
14
11.5
25
25
25
80
23-25
17-19
11.5-
13.5
12-14
9.5-
11.5
20-25
20-25
20-25
75-80
8
7
15
16
15
7
0.8
1.27
0.98
1.0
0.84
1.15
0.97
57.00
58.14
66.68
67.35
51.35
55.26
50.80
64.00
52.76
51.86
49.79
52.36
50.56
53.68
52.81
48.68
51.21
44.12
53.3
45.46
44.04
44.19
4.64
7.58
13.0
14.54
2.67
4.05
6.68
10.7
7.3
7.82
5.6
4.33
13.08
13.87
14.94
1.44
4.23
5.64
—
—
—
5.22
4.93
13.35
13.03
14.79
2.05
3.33
5.77
—
_—
._.
—
3.54
7.48
13.46
14.46
2.29
5.17
6.46
—
_-_
___
6.11
Also well 41070
Also well 4234Q
*Water level recorder wells installed by Landis Sewerage Authority.
30
-------
3?
O
TH-I
TH-5
VINEL
V////A Sludge Drying Beds
Sludge Disposal Areas
WELL NO.
CTSAMPLE WELL
4Z230
Vineland
Treatment Plant
TH-4
—_~_ ~=^~~_ r7~_ "71
For DeHail and Well liocations This Area See Figure 9
LANDI!
BASIN
e Figur
I
m
e9
/
Londis
Treatment Plant
A
Meters
Figure 8. Test holes and sample wells, Vineland, N. J.
31
-------
co
IN)
42240 42250
, I I I I . II I I I I I U
42160 / \_42050
I I Infiltration Pit Number
Sludge Drying Beds
Sludge Disposal Areas
O Sample well
Water level recorder
A Test hole
Landis sample well
500
Scale in Meters
Figures. Well location at sewage disposal plant.
-------
pumped and rinsed until the water showed no residual chlorine by the ortho-
tolidine test. Samples were collected through a centrifugal pump.
The same personnel performed all sampling on the four rounds. At each
sampling point, a field sheet recording form was completed that noted the
time of collection, method of sampling, length of time the well was pumped,
and any pertinent field conditions.
The typical procedure was for the sampling team personnel to collect
about six water samples per day in prepared kits. Each kit consisted of
several sample bottles and polyethylene containers to which preservatives had
already been added. After the sampling team had collected several samples,
the filled kits were returned to the field laboratory for analyses. Normal-
ly the time between collection of the sample and delivery to the field
laboratory did not exceed two hours.
Effluent Samples
A 24-hour composite sample consisting of four grab samples was collected
at each treatment plant outfall on each sampling round.
Soil Samples
Composite soil samples were collected twice from the control sites and
from each infiltration basin of the test site. Composite test site samples
were obtained by combining a number of individual core samples collected from
the same depth from the infiltration basins. Composite control samples were
collected using the same procedure from areas located upgradient from the
test site basins. The sample cores were taken for three depth increments:
0 to 31 cm (0 to 12 in), 95 to 105 cm (37 to 41 in), and 295 to 305 cm (116
to 120 in).
During the warm season (August, 1976), composite soil samples were col-
lected from each of the infiltration basins and a control site adjacent to
and upgradient from each basin to represent the same soil type and profile.
Also, soil drive core samples were taken from 3 to 3.7 m (10 to 12 ft) in
wells 42260 and 42280 and from 7.6 to 8.2 m (25 to 27 ft) in well 42290.
During the cool season (March, 1977), composite soil samples were collected
from each of the infiltration basins and from a control sub-area site located
adjacent to control wells 41010 through 41030.
Virus Samples
Water was collected from the sample wells and the effluent discharge of
the treatment plant in polyethylene-lined 208 L (55 gal) drums and trans-
ported to the field laboratory by truck. The wells, pump, hoses, and drums
were sterilized with calcium hypochlorite solution and then rinsed until no
residual chlorine was detected by the ortho-tolidine test prior to taking
samples.
At the field laboratory, viruses were concentrated by using a virus con-
centrator as illustrated in the 14th edition of Standard Methods,
33
-------
Section 913 A (American Public Health Association, 1976). The concentrator
utilizes the general principle of acidification of the sample, adsorption of
the viruses onto a filter, and subsequent readjustment of the pH, allowing
elution of the viruses into the concentrated sample.
During round 2 (December, 1976), samples were also concentrated using
the bentonite technique developed by the U.S. Army Bioengineering Research
and Development Laboratory, Ft. Detrich, MD (Schaub, 1977).
The final concentrate was air shipped to the assay laboratory on dry
ice.
Virus Assaying Procedures
In the laboratories the water samples were assayed for viruses, and
neutralization tests were performed on selected isolates to identify the
viruses by using buffalo green monkey kidney (BGMK) cell monolayers, human
embryonic lung (HEL) cells, or primary baboon (PB) cells for cytopathic
effect (Lenette, 1969).
Samples exhibiting cytotoxicity were retested, after centrifugation at
3,000 rpm for 10 minutes, by filtration through a 0.45 ym filter and two
hours of adsorption at 37 C (99 F) during continual rotation.
If plaques became visible, they were counted, plucked, and grown for
identification in either BGMK, PB, or HEL cells, depending on the cell line
in which they were first isolated.
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL ANALYSES
Samples collected in the field at the control and test sites were either
analyzed at the field laboratory or returned to the laboratory in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma, for analyses. The time-critical parameters were analyzed in
the field as soon as the samples were collected. For those samples desig-
nated for later laboratory analyses the standard methods for preservation
relevant to the parameter to be analyzed were employed. In the following
sections the methods used in the analyses of water and soil samples are pre-
sented in sequence. Field methods are discussed prior to laboratory methods.
A summary is given in Table 7 of the field method changes that were made dur-
ing the sampling program to overcome equipment and methodology problems.
Methods for Analyses of Water
Field Analyses--
Alkalinity (total)--Water samples were titrated with a 0.02 N sulfuric
acid solution to an end point of pH 4.5. An exactly prepared 0.02 N solution
of sodium carbonate was used to standardize the sulfuric acid and was used in
spiking water samples (APHA, 1976).
Ammonia—Ammonia analyses were performed with the use of an ammonia
electrode. A standard curve was constructed from 1000, 100, 10, 1, and 0.1
34
-------
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF FIELD METHODS
CO
on
Sampling Trip
Analysis
Alkalinity
(Total)
Ammonia
BOD
Chloride
Col iform
(Total)
Col iform
(Fecal)
Conductance
D.O.
Nitrate
Nitrogen
(Kjeldahl)
Orthophosphate
(Soluble)
PH
Phosphorus
(Soluble)
Phosphorus
(Total)
Sulfide
Sulfate
Vine! and I
Potentiometric
Titration
Probe
Probe
Probe
Membrane Filter
Membrane Filter
Meter
Winkler
Probe
Digestion &
Probe
Single Reagent
pH Electrode
Filtration, Diges-
tion, & Single
Reagent
Digestion &
Single Reagent
Probe, No
Preservative
Probe
Vineland II
Potentiometric
Titration
Probe
Probe
Tritration
Membrane Filter
Membrane Filter
Meter
Winkler
Cadmium Reduction
Digestion &
Probe
Single Reagent
pH Electrode
Filtration, Diges-
tion, & Single
Reagent
Digestion &
Single Reagent
Probe, No
Preservative
Turbidimetric
Vineland III
Potentiometric
Titration
Probe
Probe
Titration
Membrane Filter
Membrane Filter
Meter
Winkler
Cadmium Reduction
Digestion &
Probe
Single Reagent
pH Electrode
Filtration, Diges-
tion, & Single
Reagent
Digestion &
Single Reagent
Probe With
Preservative
Turbidimetric
Vineland IV
Potentiometric
Titration
Probe
Probe
Titration
Membrane Filter
Membrane Filter
Meter
Winkler
Cadmium Reduction
Digestion &
Probe (Modified)
Single Reagent
pH Electrode
Filtration, Diges-
tion, & Single
Reagent
Digestion &
Single Reagent
Probe With
Preservative
Turbidimetric
-------
mg/L solutions of stock ammonium chloride. The samples and standards were
treated identically. The electrode was immersed into the sample, and 10 N
sodium hydroxide was added to raise the pH. The millivolt reading was re-
corded, and the ammonia concentration was determined directly from the cali-
bration curve (Orion INI, 1975a, and Bremner, 1972).
Biochemical oxygen demand—Dissolved oxygen (DO) in water samples was
determined with a DO meter prior to setting up biochemical oxygen-demands
(BODr). The meter was air-calibrated with an aneroid barometer according to
manufacturer's instructions. Air calibrations were periodically checked
against the Winkler method. The samples were diluted with aerated dilution
water according to the results obtained from initial experimentation. In
some samples no dilutions were required. The initial DO was measured direct-
ly in the BOD bottle. The bottles were then carefully glass-stoppered and
plastic caps placed over the mouths of the bottles to prevent loss of water
from the water seal. The samples were prepared in duplicate and incubated at
20 C in the dark for five days. The final DO was also measured with the
probe. Samples containing chlorine were treated with sodium thiosulfate to
eliminate the chlorine and then seeded with 24-hour-old domestic wastewater.
Glucose-glutamic acid checks were performed to observe the efficiency of the
BOD procedures (APHA, 1976).
Coliform (total)—Field samples were collected in sterile glass bottles.
Samples were thoroughly mixed, and 1 ml was taken with a sterile pipette and
passed through a 0.45 ym Gelman filter. Beginning with sampling rounds three
and four, one 50 mL sample was also run. All equipment was sterilized by
immersion in boiling water. The filter was aseptically placed on a filter
pad containing 2 ml Endo Broth in a 50 x 12 mm plastic petri dish. The
dishes were placed into a whirlpac plastic bag, inverted, and incubated at
35 C for 24 hours in a bacteriological incubator. The typical coliform
colonies counted had a pink to dark red color with metallic surface sheen
(APHA, 1976).
Coliform (fecal)--The procedure was identical to that for total coli-
forms with the exception of medium. The medium used was mFC, and plates were
not inverted. Plates were incubated at 44.5 C for 24 hours. Typical coli-
form colonies were small and blue (APHA, 1976).
Conductivity--Determination of specific conductance was performed using
a conductivity meter. Using a potassium chloride solution of known conduc-
tance, the meter was calibrated prior to running analyses. Specific conduc-
tance values were corrected to 25 C by using multiplication factors (APHA,
1971).
Dissolved oxygen--At the well site, immediately after pumping the well,
dissolved oxygen was measured by the azide modification of the Winkler
method. One Hach powder pillow each of manganous sulfate, alkaline-iodide-
azide, and sulfamic acid was added to the water sample. The sample was then
brought to the field laboratory and titrated with phenylarsine oxide (PAO)
using a starch indicator (APHA, 1976).
Nitrate nitrogen—Samples from round one were analyzed for nitrate
36
-------
with the use of the nitrate electrode. The probe was immersed in the sample
and the final millivolt reading was recorded. Nitrate concentrations
were determined from a standard curve prepared from standards serially dilut-
ed, from a potassium nitrate stock solution.
Due to the inability to recover spikes and uncontrolled drift in mil-
livolt readings in certain samples, the nitrate probe was replaced with the
cadmium reduction column method for sampling rounds two, three, and four.
The samples were flocculated and/or filtered through a 0.45 ym Gelman filter
prior to analyses. An aliquot of sample was passed through a column con-
taining granulated copper-cadmium to reduce nitrate to nitrite. Columns were
reactivated between field trips and at other times when efficiency dropped.
The nitrite (that originally present plus reduced nitrate) was reacted with
the color reagent to form a highly colored azo dye, which was measured spec-
trophotometrically at 420 nanometers (nm). The nitrite was then determined
in the sample and subtracted from the initial value to obtain nitrate (USEPA,
1974; Orion IM, 1975b; and Orion IM, 1976c).
Nitrogen (total and soluble organic)--A micro-Kjeldahl digester and an
ammonia electrode were used for analyses. Procedural changes were made
throughout the field trips in an attempt to correct the problem of not ob-
taining total nitrogen recovery. A 50 ml aliquot of sample (filtered for
soluble, not filtered for total) was boiled in the presence of concentrated
sulfuric acid, potassium sulfate, and mercuric sulfate, and evaporated one-
half hour past the disappearance of sulfurous acid fumes. Rounds one, two,
and three samples were analyzed by adding 10 N sodium hydroxide to the sample
and recording the millivolt reading from the ammonia probe. For the first
three rounds, the mercury interference in the digestion reagent was not
identified before testing for ammonia. This resulted in an ammonia-mercury
complex formation and low nitrogen results. Experiments in the laboratory
showed that addition of 2 N sodium iodide with the 10 N sodium hydroxide did
not effectively eliminate the mercury interference. Beginning with round
four, two major changes were made: 1) Hengar crystals, which are selenium
coated, replaced mercury as the catalyst and 2) samples were partially
neutralized with sodium hydroxide and allowed to cool in an ice bath prior to
ammonia analyses to compensate for heat gained from addition of the sodium
hydroxide to acid. Excellent results were obtained, using the final revised
procedures (Orion IM, 1975a, and Bremner, 1972).
Orthophosphate (soluble)--Orthophosphate phosphorus was determined by
the single reagent method. Samples were filtered through a 0.45 ym Gelman
filter. The pH of the sample was adjusted to 7.0 +_ 0.2 with sodium hydrox-
ide. Ammonium molybdate, antimony potassium tartrate, and ascorbic acid
color reagent were added to the sample and read in the manner described for
total phosphorus (USEPA, 1974).
£H--Hydrogen ion concentration (pH) was determined by use of a glass
combination pH electrode. The meter was calibrated for pH determinations by
using buffers of pH 4, 7, and 10 (APHA, 1976).
Phosphorus (total)--Phosphorus was determined by the single reagent
37
-------
method. Sulfuric acid (11 N) and ammonium persulfate were added to the
samples. Samples were boiled gently followed by pH adjustment to pH 7.0 +_
0.2 with sodium hydroxide. Ammonium molybdate, antimony potassium tartrate,
and ascorbic acid color reagent were added to the samples. The blue color
formed was read at 640 nm using a spectrophotometer. The phosphorus concen-
tration was determined from a standard curve that was prepared from serial
dilutions made from a stock phosphorus solution (USEPA, 1974).
Sulfide sulfur—Analyses for sulfide were made with a sulfide electrode.
Procedural changes involving sulfide anti-oxidant buffer (.SAQB) and standards
were a result of additional research by Orion (Orion IM, 1976a).
Samples for rounds one and two were brought to the field laboratory,
where an aliquot of sample was added to an equal volume of 50 percent SAOB.
The SAOB contained sodium hydroxide, sodium salicylate, and ascorbic acid.
The calibration curve was prepared from a standard consisting of sodium sul-
fide, sodium hydroxide, sodium salicylate, and ascorbic acid. The standard
was titrated against a 0.1 M lead perchlorate solution to obtain the exact
normality. Standards and samples were treated identically except standards
were prepared by diluting in 25 percent SAOB. The electrodes were immersed
in the sample, and the millivolt reading was recorded after it stabilized.
The exact concentration of sulfide was determined from the standard curve
(Orion IM, 1975c).
Samples for rounds three and four were added directly to plastic bottles
half filled with 50 percent SAOB in the field. The SAOB contained sodium
hydroxide, disodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), and ascorbic acid.
The calibration curve was prepared from a standard consisting of sodium sul-
fide and SAOB. The standard was titrated against 0.1 M lead perchlorate to
find the exact normality of the standard. This solution was then serially
diluted .to prepare a standard curve. The samples and standards were treated
identically. The electrodes were immersed in the sample, and millivolt
readings were recorded. The exact concentration of sulfide was determined
from the standard curve (Orion IM, 1976a).
Laboratory Analyses--
Boron—Boron was analyzed by the curcumin method. Samples were added to
evaporating dishes made of boron-free glass. Curcumin reagent was added, and
the dishes were placed in a water bath set at 55 +_ 2 C and evaporated to
dryness. The contents of each dish were redissolved in 95 percent ethyl
alcohol, filtered through Whatman 30 filter paper, and read at 540 nm on a
spectrophotometer. The boron concentration was determined from a standard
curve, which was prepared from standards serially diluted from a 100 mg/L
boron stock solution (APHA, 1976).
Chemical oxygen demand--Samples were collected in plastic bottles con-
taining sulfuric acid as a preservative and kept on ice until the analyses
were completed. The dichromate reflux method was used for chemical oxygen
demand (COD) determinations. The alternate procedure for dilute samples in
which the potassium dichromate and ferrous ammonium sulfate are more dilute,
was used for low level COD samples (USEPA, 1974).
38
-------
Chloride—Analyses for chlorides for the first round were performed
with a chloride electrode. Due to problems with this electrode, sample
analyses of rounds two, three, and four were completed by the mercuric ni-
trate titration method. Hach powder pillows (prepared indicator-acidifier
reagent) were used as the indicator for rounds two and three, but the
indicator-acidifier reagent was used for round four (APHA, 1971).
Prior to running analyses with a chloride electrode, standard curves
were prepared from serially diluted standards of a 100 mg/L sodium chloride
stock solution. Standards and samples were treated identically. The elec-
trodes were immersed in samples with ionic strength adjuster (ISA) added.
Samples were mixed at a constant rate on a magnetic stirrer until stable
millivolt readings were observed. Using millivolt readings, unknown concen-
trations were determined from the calibration curve (Orion IM, 19765).
Samples for titration were adjusted to a pH of 2.5 with nitric acid, and
indicator-acidifier reagent was added to the sample, which was then titrated
with 0.0141 N mercuric nitrate. If high chlorides were present, 0.141 N
mercuric nitrate was used as the titrant. The samples were titrated to a
light purple end point. Iron, which acts as an interference, was removed
from the sample through flocculation with zinc sulfate solution and sodium
hydroxide. The floe was allowed to settle and was filtered through a 0.45
micron filter. Analyses were performed on the filtrate (APHA, 1976).
Herbicides—Field samples were collected in hexane-rinsed, glass-stop-
pered bottles. Chlorinated phenoxy acid herbicides were extracted from the
acidified water sample with diethyl ether. The ether layer was filtered
through anhydrous sodium sulfate into hexane-rinsed bottles, 37 percent
potassium hydroxide was added, and the sample was returned to the laboratory
for analyses. Water was added to the sample and the ether removed by evapo-
ration. Extraneous organic matter was removed by extracting the basic
aqueous phase with diethyl ether. The aqueous phase was acidified to hydro-
lyze the esters to acids and the acids extracted with diethyl ether.
Benzene was added and the solution evaporated to 0.5 ml in Kuderna-Danish
evaporators.
The acids were esterified to methyl esters with 0.5 ml boron trifluoride
in methanol. The benzene layer was shaken with neutral 5 percent sodium
sulfate solution. The benzene extracts were further purified by passing
through Florisil columns. Identification and quantification of the esters
were made by gas-liquid chromatography and were corroborated through the use
of two or more unlike columns (USEPA, 1971).
Metals (total)--Metal analyses were performed by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry. Field samples were collected in plastic bottles and
preserved with nitric acid to a pH 2. Two bottles were preserved for each
sample. Round four samples were filtered at the well site through a 1 ym
filter. All metals except for arsenic, selenium, and mercury were prepared
by cautiously digesting with nitric acid and evaporating to dryness. Samples
were refluxed with nitric acid and brought back to volume, then subjected to
the standard conditions and instrumental parameters for the corresponding
metals (USEPA, 1974; Martin, 1975; and Atomic Absorption Methods Manual,
39
-------
1975).
Mercury was analyzed by the cold vapor technique. Concentrated sulfuric
acid, concentrated nitric acid, 5 percent potassium permanganate, and potas-
sium persulfate were added, and samples were heated 2 hours at 95 C in a
water bath. Sodium chloride and hydroxylamine hydrochloride were added to
samples. The mercury was vaporized by adding stannous sulfate (USEPA, 1974).
Arsenic and selenium were determined by atomic absorpiton, using a
heated graphite atomizer and electrodeless discharge lamps. The samples were
digested with nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide. Nickle nitrate was added to
the digested samples prior to analysis (Martin, 1975).
Organic carbon (total and soluble)--Solub1e organic carbon samples were
filtered through a 0.45 micron Gelman filter and kept iced until prepared for
analyses. Total organic carbon samples were not filtered. Purging and
sealing of the ampules were done in the field. Ten ml glass ampules were
prepared by adding 0.2 g potassium persulfate to 5 mL of sample and 0.5 mL of
3 percent phosphoric acid. Samples were then purged with oxygen. Phosphoric
acid was prepared daily and added to the ampules just prior to sealing.
Samples were prepared in triplicate. Carbon dioxide-free water was used for
the blanks. Tests were performed in the laboratory to determine optimum
length of time for purging and combusting the samples. The organic matter in
the ampules was oxidized in a pressure vessel that was placed in an oven
heated to 175° C for 16 hours.
After oxidation, the samples were analyzed with a carbon analyzer
(USEPA, 1974, and Oceanography International IM, 1971).
Pesticides—Field samples were collected in hexane-rinsed, glass-stop-
pered bottles. Organochlorine pesticides were extracted from the water with
an 85:15, hexane: methylene chloride solvent mixture in the field. The
organic layer was filtered through anhydrous sodium sulfate into hexane-
rinsed bottles and returned to the laboratory for analysis. The organo-
chlorine pesticides analyzed were endrin, lindane, methoxychlor, and tox-
aphene. Extracted samples were concentrated in Kuderna-Danish evaporators in
a hot water bath. The concentrated samples were purified, if necessary, by
passing through Florisil columns. Identification and quantification of
pesticides were made by gas-liquid chromatography and were corroborated
through the use of two or more unlike columns (USEPA, 1971).
Solids' (dissolved)--Samples were brought to room temperature, and well-
mixed aliquots were passed through Reeve Angel, type 934 AH filters with
gentle suction. One hundred mL was transferred quantitativelyQto pre-weighed
evaporating dishes. Samples were evaporated to dryness at 100 C in a water
bath and placed in an oven at 180 C for \h to 2 hours. Evaporating dishes
were weighed again after cooling in a desiccator (USEPA, 1974).
Solids (suspended)--Samples were brought to room temperature and mixed
thoroughly. Using gentle suction, 50 mL of sample was filtered through Reeve
Angel, type 934 AH filters in 25 mL tared Gooch crucibles. The filtered
40
-------
samples were dried in an oven at 104° C for one to two hours. Crucibles and
filters were desiccated until cool and reweighed (USEPA, 1974).
Solids (total)--Data for total solids were obtained by summing the
dissolved and suspended solids values.
Solids (volatile suspended)--The solids retained on the filter from the
suspended solids analysis were ignited at 550 C in a muffle furnace to
determine volatile suspended solids (USEPA, 1974).
Sulfate sulfur--Round one was analyzed for sulfate with a lead specific
ion electrode. Samples were diluted 1:1 with methanol. These were titrated
with lead perchlorate until the millivolt readings fell within a range estab-
lished by a blank curve. The exact sulfate concentration was extrapolated
from a standard curve plotted on Grans plotting paper (Orion IM, 1975d).
Due to the inability to duplicate sulfate results using other methods,
the remaining rounds of sulfates were analyzed turbidimetrically by the
barium sulfate method. While the solution was being stirred, conditioning
reagent and barium chloride crystals were added. After exactly one minute,
the barium sulfate turbidity was read at 420 nm on a spectrophotometer, and
the sulfate concentration was calculated from a standard curve prepared from
serially diluted standards of a 1,000 mg/L sodium sulfate stock solution
(APHA, 1976).
Methods for Analyses of Soils
Laboratory Analyses--
Cation exchange capacity--Air-dried soil samples (<2 mm particle size)
and 1 N ammonium acetate were shaken for several minutes and allowed to stand
overnight. Sample extracts were filtered through perforated Coors crucibles
containing Reeve Angel glass fiber filters using gentle suction. Soil leach-
ing was done with 1 N ammonium acetate, adding small amounts at a time so
that leaching took no less than one hour. This was followed by leaching with
95 percent ethanol in small amounts until the leachate gave a negative test
for ammonia with Nessler's reagent. The soil was air-dried and weighed.
Water was added, and ammonia was measured with an ammonia electrode by
immersing into the sample and adding 10 N sodium hydroxide to raise the pH.
Ammonia concentration was determined from a standard curve prepared from
serially diluted standards of 1,000 mg/L ammonium chloride stock solution.
No modifications were made for calcareous soils (Orion IM, 1975a; Busenberg,
1973; and Black, 1965).
Boron_--Air-dried soil samples were refluxed with distilled water for 30
minutes'! the soil-water suspension was separated by adding 1 N calcium chlo-
ride and centrifuging at 2,000 rpm for 10 minutes. The boron concentration
of the supernatant was determined by the curcumin method (APHA, 1976, and
Black, 1965).
Herbicides--Air-dried soil samples were mixed with water, sul-
fur ic~acTd7Tnd" diethyl ether. After shaking for four hours, the extracts
were filtered through anhydrous sodium sulfate. An aliquot of the ether
41
-------
extract was transferred to a separatory funnel and shaken with sodium hydrox-
ide. The aqueous phase was transferred to another separatory funnel, the pH
adjusted to 3, and extracted with ether. Mineral oil in hexane was added to
the extract and evaporated carefully to 5 mU employing a 50 C water bath
and a Snyder column. The extract was further evaporated to 0.1 mL. The
phenoxy acids were esterified using boron trifluoride in methanol, as de-
scribed for herbicides in water (Woodham, 1971).
Metals (exchangeable and extractable)--Air-dried soil was pulverized by
mortar and pestle to pass a 2 mm screen.
Aluminum was extracted with 1 N potassium chloride. The suspension was
filtered immediately, and the solids were washed with 1 N potassium chloride
(Ellis, 1975). Aluminum was analyzed by atomic absorption.
The ions K, Mg, and Na were exchanged with 1 N ammonium acetate by
shaking for five minutes. Extracts were filtered through Whatman No. 40
filter paper and analyzed by atomic absorption (Ellis, 1975).
The metals Fe, Zn, Mn, Cu, Ni, Pb, Cr, and Co were extracted from soils
by shaking for two hours with triethanolamine, calcium chloride, and carboxy-
methylimino bis-ethylenenitrilo-tetraacetic acid (DTPA) (10 ml per 4 g soil),
followed by filtering through Whatman No. 42 filter paper (Ellis, 1975). The
metals were analyzed by atomic absorption.
Metals (total)--Samp1es were prepared by digesting soil in teflon
beakers with hydrofluoric acid and evaporating the liquid to dryness. This
was followed by digesting with a 3:1 hydrochloric: nitric acid mixture (aqua
regia) for five minutes and then redissolving any residue in 1:1 hydrochloric
acid. Samples were filtered and analyzed by atomic absorption spectrophotom-
etryi
Total mercury analyses were prepared by digesting soils with aqua regia
for two minutes in a 95 C water bath, followed by a 5 percent potassium
permanganate digestion for 30 minutes. Sodium chloride, hydroxylamine hydro-
chloride, and distilled water were mixed with the sample and stannous sulfate
was added to vaporize the mercury through the absorption cell (USEPA, 1974).
Total arsenic and selenium analyses were prepared by refluxing the soil
samples two times with nitric acid, followed by digestion with hydrogen
peroxide and nitric acid. Nickel nitrate was added to the digested samples
prior to analyses by atomic absorption, using the heated graphite atomizer
and electrodeless discharge lamps.
Nitrogen (inorganic)--Because ammonia, nitrate, and nitrite nitrogen
readily change form in soil, these parameters were summed to obtain inorganic
nitrogen values. Ammonia, nitrate, and nitrite nitrogen were determined by
the following methods.
Ammonia nitrogen was determined after extracting air-dried soil with 2 N
potassium chloride by shaking on a rotary shaker for two hours. Samples were
allowed to sit for 30 minutes before being analyzed for ammonia with an
42
-------
ammonia electrode. The probe was immersed in the sample, followed by the
addition of sodium hydroxide to raise the pH. Ammonia concentration was
determined from a standard curve prepared from serially diluted standards of
a 1,000 mg/L ammonium chloride stock solution (Orion, IM, 1975a, and Black,
1 _?DO ) .
M\ the m'trate and nitrite nitrogen determination, potassium chloride
(2 N) was used to extract the ammonia, nitrate, and nitrite from the air-
dried soil by shaking together for one hour. The suspension was filtered
through Whatman No. 4 filter paper. The pH was adjusted between 11 and 14
with 10 N sodium hydroxide. At least half the volume of the filtrate was
evaporated by boiling, to drive off all ammonia nitrogen. After cooling and
adjusting the filtrate to the original volume, concentrated sulfuric acid and
Devarda's alloy were added. Samples were placed in a 70 C water bath for
two hours for reduction of nitrate and nitrite to ammonia. Ammonia concen-
trations of the solutions were measured with an ammonia electrode after
addition of sodium hydroxide. Ammonia concentration was determined from a
standard curve prepared from serially diluted standards of a 1,000 mg/L
ammonium chloride stock solution (Orion IM, 1975b; Orion IM, 1976c; and
Black, 1965).
Nitrogen (organic)--Air-dried soil was digested with concentrated sul-
furic acid, potassium sulfate, cupric sulfate, and selenium. The solutions
were evaporated for 30 minutes past the disappearance of sulfurous acid
fumes. Samples were diluted, neutralized with sodium hydroxide, and analyzed
with an ammonia electrode. Ammonia concentration was determined from a
standard curve prepared from serially diluted standards of a 1,000 mg/L
ammonium chloride stock solution (Orion IM, 1975a; Bremner, 1972; and
Black, 1965).
Pesticides—Soil samples were air-dried, mixed with Celite, and
Soxhlet extracted for 12 hours with hexane: acetone (41:59 v/v). The ex-
tracts were then shaken in a separatory funnel with a saturated sodium
chloride solution and extracted with hexane. The extracts were washed twice
with a saturated sodium chloride solution. The hexane phase was dried with
anhydrous sodium sulfate. Unless further purification was necessary, the
samples were ready for gas chromatographic analyses (Williams, 1968).
£H--The soil was air-dried and pulverized by mortar and pestle before
samples were analyzed. Twenty-five mL of distilled water per gram of soil
was added and the mixture stirred. The pH was measured while the sample
was mixing (Black, 1965).
Phosphorus (available)--Samples of air-dried soil were extracted with
0.03 N ammonium fluoride and 0.025 N hydrochloric acid by shaking for one
minute. The extract was filtered through Whatman No. 42 filter paper and the
pH adjusted to 7.0 +_ 0.2 with sodium hydroxide. Color reagent (mixture of
antimony potassium tartrate, ammonium molybdate, and ascorbic acid) was
added, and the absorbance was read at 640 nm with a spectrophotometer (APHA,
1976, and Black, 1965).
Phosphorus (total )--Air-dried soil samples were digested with 6 percent
43
-------
perchloric acid in a flask. Samples were boiled until the dark color due to
organic matter disappeared. An aliquot was adjusted to pH 7.0 +_ 0.2 with
sodium hydroxide, followed by the addition of color reagent. After color
development, absorbance was measured on a spectrophotometer at 640 nm (APHA,
1976, and Black, 1965).
Sulfur (total)--Su1fate sulfur and organic sulfur were combined to obtain
total sulfur values.
For the determination of sulfate sulfur, monobasic calcium phosphate was
added to air-dried soil samples and shaken for 12 hours, followed by filter-
ing through a Gooch crucible fitted with a glass fiber filter. An aliquot of
filtrate, gum acacia solution, and hydrochloric acid was mixed with barium
chloride crystals. Absorbance was measured at 420 nm on a spectrophotometer.
The concentration of sulfur in the samples was determined from a standard
curve prepared from serially diluted standards of a stock sulfate solution
(Black, 1965).
The residue in the Gooch crucible from the sulfate sulfur determination
was used for organic sulfur analyses. After drying at 103 C, sodium bicar-
bonate was mixed with the soil and added uniformly as a surface layer. After
ignition at 500 C for three hours the sample was extracted and analyzed as
described for sulfate sulfur (Black, 1965).
Methodology Problems and Modifications
As indicated previously, certain difficulties in analyses were experi-
enced in using the standard methods. The following sections discuss the
problems encountered in the water and soil analyses and indicate the
modifications that were employed in an attempt to obtain measurements of the
parameters -involved in the study. Table 7 summarized the modifications for
field methods for each of the sampling rounds during the study.
The problems and modifications are mentioned for two reasons. First,
for time-critical parameters, it may be the explanation for missing data for
certain samples. If the method was known to be faulty, the data were deleted
from the data tabulation shown in Appendix B. Second, certain analytical
procedures were modified to obtain accurate results for the types of samples
encountered in this study. These modifications are reported for the benefit
of future investigators for similar type studies. Also, it was deemed valu-
able to report those cases when certain new analytical tools did not conform
to the manufacturer's claims.
Water Analyses—
Calciurn—Initial review of calcium data indicated low values were being
generated. Spiked samples indicated low recoveries. Therefore, all samples
were repeated and were run by the method of standard addition. Excellent
recoveries were obtained; therefore, all calcium data are valid.
Chemical oxygen demand—Results from some of the early field samples
stimulated questions concerning the procedure being used. Extensive spiking
and duplication of samples showed no methodology problems and no reason for
44
-------
the anomalous data.
Ch1oride--The initial problem was a faulty electrode. Later problems
involved matrix interferences. The probe method was replaced by mercuric
nitrate titrations as listed in the EPA methods manual (USEPA, 1974).
Metals--Data from several metals appeared anomalous at some time during
the analyses. A malfunctioning atomic absorption (AA) was initially a prob-
lem. Failures included several faulty hollow cathode lamps, a faulty printed
circuit board in the photomultiplier, an out-of-tolerance nebulizer, and
numerous graphite rods (cuvettes) that had been manufactured without meeting
specifications. Analyses in question were repeated, using an operational
instrument. All metal analyses reported are considered valid data.
Nitrate nitrogen--The nitrate probe was used according to the manufac-
turer's directions with success for some samples, but problems were encoun-
tered with other samples. Discussions with the manufacturer resulted in new
filling solutions for the probe and different ionic strength adjuster solu-
tions to aid in reducing interferences. Some faulty probes were also discov-
ered during the analyses. Although the probe method was abandoned during
round two sampling, nitrate values obtained by the probe were comparable to
Cd reduction method values, and data were thus considered valid.
Organic nitrogen—The EPA method was modified initially by using the
ammonia probe instead of distilling the ammonia and titrating. It was dis-
covered later that the temperature of the solutions measured with the elec-
trode varied markedly, depending on the amount of acid in the solutions.
This temperature variation affected the probe adversely; thus, it was found
necessary to partially neutralize samples to about pH 5, cool to room tem-
perature, then add the remainder of the base and measure the ammonia with the
probe. Several items concealed this problem initially. Three electrode
failures were experienced, and thus questionable data were attributed to
this. It was also discovered that mercuric ions in the digesting reagent
were not releasing the ammonium during analyses.
Sulfate su1fur--The sulfate (lead) probe was used according to the manu-
facturer's directions with little success at the sampling sites, although
initial tests proved the method satisfactory. Discussions with the manufac-
turer resulted in numerous changes in the solutions used during analyses.
The probe was later found to be faulty as well. All first round sulfate
analyses were discarded from the data base. The probe was abandoned, and
only turbidimetric measurements were used for the remaining samples for the
final three rounds.
Soil Analyses —
Inorganic nitrogen—Nitrate plus nitrite nitrogen was determined ini-
tially according to the ASOA method, with the exception that steam distil-
lation <6f ammonia was replaced by the use of the ammonia probe. Spiked
samples indicated that reduction of nitrate and nitrite was limited and that
the method was underestimating the concentrations of nitrate and nitrite
nitrogen. After much experimentation, it was discovered that the Devarda
alloy would not reduce N03 and N02 to NH4 without the addition of a proton
45
-------
donor. Satisfactory results were obtained by adding small amounts (<1 ml)
of concentrated H^SO..
Organic nitrogen (total)--The method as described by Bremner and Tabata-
bai (1972) was followed initially. The temperature interference described
for the organic nitrogen procedure for water samples was initially a problem
for soil samples. Partial neutralization followed by cooling solved the
difficulty of obtaining accurate results.
DATA EVALUATION PLAN
General background data about the site including geology, hydrogeology,
soils, climate, and other relevant information have previously been pre-
sented.
Data collected at the field site from wells, effluent samples, and
soils were transmitted to the laboratory for collation and computer tabu-
lation. Additional analytical procedures at the laboratory provided data on
many parameters, which were integrated with field data. Appendix B pro-
vides complete data tables for all parameters that had reliable, internally
consistent results. In some instances columns of data were combined, such as
ammonium and nitrate-nitrite nitrogen, if analytical procedures indicated
that individual parameters might overlap.
In the Results and Discussion section the critical resource values of
water and soils are compared for the test and control sites.
The evaluation of the results of water analyses is presented in three
parts: effluent, groundwater, and surface water. In each part the results
are discussed in relation to such site characteristics as hydrology, renova-
tion performance of the soil, or quality of the groundwater. In addition,
some projections are attempted for long-term loadings of critical parameters
contained in the wastewater.
In analyzing the groundwater data, constituent concentrations are traced
along the paths coinciding with groundwater movement beneath and downgradient
from the three basins. Figures 10, 11, and 12 depict the sample wells and
cross sections traced in analyzing the groundwater for Basins I, II, and III,
respectively.
Wells 42060, 42080, 42090, 42100, and 42110 are used to analyze the
groundwater beneath Basin I (Figure 10). In a statistical analysis the mean
parameter concentrations for the groundwater beneath Basin I are compared to
downgradient wells 42300, 42310, and 42350. Also in a statistical analysis,
mean parameter concentrations for a group of downgradient wells 42270, 42280,
and 42290, which are close to Basin I, are compared to wells 42300, 42310,
and 42350, which are further downgradient. In addition, in a more detailed
analysis the constituent concentrations in the groundwater beneath Basin I
are compared to downgradient wells 42280, 42290, 42310, and 42350.
Wells 42030, 42040, 42170, 42180, 42190, 42200, and 42210 are used to
analyze the constituent concentrations in the groundwater beneath Basin II
46
-------
-f?,
-
VINELAND AREA I PITS
§e8*§
Figure 10. Cross section A-A Vlneland, N. J.
-------
CO
60
50
40
30
20
J
CO
Lul
log
"CD
H
o
-10
-20
-351—1 Figure II. Cross section B-B' Vineland, N. J.
-------
-LANDIS AREA IH PITS-, § ?
" * 8 9
0
o
o
Gravel
Sandstone
Screen location
Figure 12. Cross section C-C' Vineland, N. J.
49
-------
(Figure 11). Mean parameter concentrations for groundwater beneath Basin II
are also compared to downgradient wells 42380, 42390, and 42400.
Wells 42050, 42150, and 42160 are used to analyze the constituent concen-
trations in the groundwater beneath Basin III (Figure 12). Mean parameter
concentrations for groundwater beneath Basin III are compared to the ground-
water of wells 41040, 41050, and 41060, which is representative of underflow
from the landfill.
For soils the results that merited discussion include nitrogen, phos-
phorus, zinc, copper, iron, manganese, potassium, and magnesium. Other
parameters found to be significantly greater in the test site soils at the
depth 0-30 cm are listed. Although values were obtained for many other param-
eters the differences .between control and test sites were generally within
the range of variability expected for any one soil site.
Finally, the movement and survival of viruses and fecal and total coli-
form bacteria were investigated. . Discussion of the methods used and the
results obtained for these parameters follows in the sections on water and
soils.
50
-------
SECTION 7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Samples collected in the field were identified by a code number that was
used on all data tables and graphs as well as in the narrative sections where
individual sample results are discussed. The wells at the Vineland site were
coded according to a five-digit number. The first digit (4) referred to the
Vineland site; the second digit indicated whether the sample was from a con-
trol (1) or test (2) site; the third and fourth digits indicated the sample
well number (01 to 40); the fifth digit was always 0.
The well water samples were numbered using a six-digit code. The first
four digits indicated the well and location, while the last two digits indi-
cated the sampling round—first digit: 4 - Vineland; second digit: 1 - con-
trol site wells, 2 - test site wells; third and fourth digits: 01 to 40 -
well numbers, 44 to 52 - surface water, 55 - Landls treatment plant effluent,
56 - Vineland treatment plant effluent, 60 - municipal water; fifth and
sixth digits: 01 - sample collected first round (August, 1976), 02 - sample
collected second round (December, 1976), 03 - sample collected third round
(March, 1977), 04 - sample collected fourth round (May, 1977).
Drive core soil samples were numbered using a five-digit code—first
digit: 4 - Vineland; second digit: 1 - control site, 2 - test site; third
digit: 1 - Vineland Basin I, 2 Landis Basin II, 3 - Landis Basin III;
fourth digit: 1 - first sampling round (August, 1976), 3 - third sampling
round (March, 1977); fifth digit: 1 - sample depth (0-31 cm), 5 - sample
depth (95-105 cm), 6 - sample depth (295-305 cm).
WATER
Effluent Constituents
The Vineland and Landis treatment plants produce effluents for infiltra-
tion that are typical of primary treatment. Laboratory analyses of the ef-
fluents were run in August and December, 1976, and in March and May, 1977,
for the purpose of examining seasonal effects. The results are summarized
in Table 8 for Vineland effluent sample numbers 425601 through 425604
and for Landis effluent sample numbers 425501 through 425504.
Also presented in Table 8 is a summary of component data for the Vine-
land municipal water supply. Samples were taken for analysis in December,
1976, and March, 1977, and are designated sample numbers 416002 and 416003.
51
-------
TABLE 8. SUMMARY OF CONSTITUENT CONCENTRATIONS IN VINELAMO AND LANPIS TREATMENT PLANT EFFLUENTS AND VINELfND MUNICIPAL HATER SUPPLY
cn
ro
Treatment Plant Effluents
Parameter
(nig/L unless noted)
FJissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (pmhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Suspended Solids
Total Solids
Volatile Suspended Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100mL)
Fecal Coliform (#/100rnL)
Total Organic C
Dissolved Organic C
Total Organic N
Soluble Organic N
Aramonium-N
Hitrate-N
Total Phosphorus
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sul fate
Aluminum
Arsenic (pg/L)
Boron (pg/L)
Cadmium (pg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (pg/L)
Chromium (pg/L)
Copper (pg/L)
Iron
Lead (pg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (pg/L)
N.ckel (pg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (pg/L)
Selenium (pg/L)
F.ndrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxyclor (ng/L)
Tuxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D lnu/l)
2,4,5 tP'Silvex (ng/L)
c Concentrations below detection 1
At least on sample analyzed too
Vineland
Range
0.4-2.6
5.6-7.0
432-848
92-136
163-268
19-56
182-326
9-45
90-215
237-472
19-135
<0. 1
400-TNTCC
0-TNTC
56-153
57-124
4.2-35.8
3.0-27.6
5.0-25.1
<0.1-0.2
5.8-15.5
4.5-6.9
3.7-6.2
g-26
0.3P-0.8
5b-20B
34-460
20B-50K
in.. 13
soP-ioo"
20-26
47-72
1.0-2.4.
100D-200D
3-6
0.05^-0.09
0.5b-<1.0
50b-100B
9.8-26.3
38-1.17
111-J45
10 b
0.03b
120-10,300
°-01b
O.lb
0.5-54°
6.3-126
imit indicated.
numerous to count.
Mean
1.5
6.5
548
115
214
43
258
27
154
372
57
<0. 1
TNTC
TNTC
108
35
23.1
16.8
17.2
0.1
9.3
5.7
4.8
14
0.6
<5
311
<:20
12
c50
<20
58
1.5
<100
4
<0.05
<1 .0
<100
14.5
60
127
«10
<0.03
2,830
<0.01
<0.1
9.5
72.0
Range
<0.1-3.3
5.5-7.5
425-100]
88-149
186-514
34-54
240-553
11-44
136-173
272-315
19-179
<0. 1
TNTC
0-TNFC
56-116
42.9-55.6
0.66-34.8
15.9-25.4
13.8-23.7
<0.1-3.7
6.5-12.5
5.4-7.2
3.5-5.9
11-32
0.3-0.9
5-206
350-642
20B-50b
iT13 b
50r-10Q
20-50°
54-96
0.6-2.9,
100D-200D
3-5
0.03-0. 10
°-V1-°h
50b-100b
9.3-11.3
30-145
72-2g7
10 b
0.03b
0.5-4,510
0.01
V f
2.0b-54b
35.0-131.0
Landis
Mean
1.8
6.8
602
130
301
41
342
29
149
287
77
<0. 1
TNTC
TNTC
82
48
18.5
21.1
19.0
1.3
9.0
6.3
4.8
24
0.6
<5
534
<20
11
<50
<20
77
1.2
<100
4
0.06
<1.0
<100
10.4
75
121
flO
<0.03
1,227
<0.01
<0. 1
10.5
72
Vineland Municipal
Water Supply
Range
6.2-7.5
7.3-8.9
66
24-28
37-63
3
66
2
3
1-4
<1
<0.5
0.9
<0.1-0.4
0.3
1.1-2.5
--
0.2-0.4
0.04-0.07
4-5
0.4-0.8
10B-20B
31-248
20D-5CB
4-6
50°-10gD
20b-50B
On'-) CO
O.lb-0.2^
100-200°
1-2,
0.05D ,
o. sP-i .op
50b-100b
1.6
3-4
20-29
10 b
0.03b
-------
Effluent five-day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) concentrations were
comparable for the two effluents and were typically in the range of 90 to
215 mg/L with an average of 154 mg/L for the Vineland plant and between
136 and 173 mg/L with an average of 149 mg/L for the Landis plant. Suspended
solids (SS) concentrations ranged from 19 to 56 mg/L with an average of 43
mg/L at Vineland and from 34 to 54 mg/L at Landis with an average of 41 mg/L.
The Landis plant is reported to have an approximate fifty percent con-
tribution from food processing industries that apparently does not sig-
nificantly affect BODj- or SS concentrations.
The chemical oxygen demand (COD) concentrations were in the ranges of
237 to 472 and 272 to 315 mg/L with averages of 372 and 287 mg/L for Vine-
land and Landis, respectively.
Ammonium nitrogen concentrations for the two effluents were also compar-
able with averages of 17.2 and 19 mg/L for Vineland and Landis, respectively.
Organic nitrogen average concentrations were 23.1 mg/L for Vineland and 18.5
mg/L for Landis. The average nitrate nitrogen concentration was 0.1 mg/L for
Vineland and 1.3 mg/L for Landis. Average total nitrogen concentration at
Landis was 38.8 mg/L as contrasted with 40.4 mg/L at Vineland. This range
of total nitrogen concentration is customary for primary plants.
Average total phosphorus concentrations were 9.3 and 9.0 mg/L for the
Vineland and Landis plants, respectively. Average soluble phosphorus con-
centrations were 5.7 and 6.3 mg/L, and the average soluble orthophosphate
concentration was 4.8 mg/L for both effluents for the Vineland and Landis
plants, respectively.
Sodium, boron, potassium, sulfate, chloride, and dissolved solids showed
the marked increase in concentration anticipated by a cycle of municipal
water use. For example, the Vineland municipal supply had a measured chlo-
ride concentration in the range of 1 to 4 mg/L while the effluents had
average chloride concentrations of 57 to 77 mg/L. This was normal for a
municipal primary effluent, as was the increase in dissolved solids from an
average 50 mg/L in the municipal supply to average concentrations of 214 to
301 mg/L in the treatment plant effluents.
Among the indicator pesticides and herbicides, lindane was the only
parameter showing significantly higher concentrations in the effluent as
contrasted with the municipal supply. Lindane concentrations ranged from
120 to 10,300 and from 0.5 to 4,510 ng/L and averaged 2,860 and 1,227 ng/L
for Vineland and Landis effluents, respectively. This compares favorably
with the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations maximum con-
taminant level for lindane of 4,000 ng/L.
Overall observations that could be made concerning the Vineland and
Landis treatment plant effluents were: (1) All parameters were typical of
primary effluent with increased concentrations, when compared with the
Vineland municipal supply water, of BODr, SS, COD, nitrogen, phosphorus,
sodium, boron, potassium, sulfate, chloride, and dissolved solids; and (2)
lindane was identified at above-background levels and with average concen-
trations of 1,227 to 2,860 ng/L for Landis and Vineland effluents,
53
-------
respectively.
A statistical comparison was made of mean concentrations of various
parameters for the Vineland effluent applied to Basin I versus the control
groundwater wells 41010, 41020, and 41030 using the method of pooled vari-
ances at the 0.05 level of significance. For purposes of the evaluation,
analytical data determined below the limit of detection were arbitrarily
input at one-half the detection limit value to obtain a mean value. For this
reason, mean values for some parameters were reported lower than the limit of
detection values. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 9. The
analysis showed significant differences in mean concentrations for 20 para-
meters of 48 parameters analyzed. Only 42 parameters are shown in the
following tables. The six parameters, suspended solids, total solids, vola-
tile suspended solids, total organic carbon, total organic nitrogen, and
total phosphorus, were not included because the comparisons were explained
by the data from dissolved solids, dissolved organic carbon, soluble organic
nitrogen, soluble phosphorus, and soluble orthophosphate. For those para-
meters with significant differences, 19 had mean concentrations that were
significantly greater in the treatment plant effluent than in the control
groundwater. These parameters are pH, conductivity, total alkalinity,
dissolved solids, BOD,-, COD, chloride, dissolved organic carbon, soluble
organic nitrogen, ammonia, soluble phosphorus, soluble orthophosphate, boron,
calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, zinc, and lindane. Mean dissolved
oxygen concentration was significantly greater in the control groundwater
than in the treatment plant effluent. As shown in Table 9, concentrations
for many of the metals were consistently below detection limits for both the
treatment plant effluent and the control groundwater. In addition, for both
total and fecal coliform, at least one sample of the treatment plant effluent
yielded results too numerous to count (TNTC) and prevented comparing the
means for the two parameters statistically to the control groundwater. For
the remaining parameters, no significant differences were found.
In another statistical comparison, the mean parameter concentrations of
the Landis effluent applied to Basins II and III were compared to the con-
trol groundwater wells 41010, 41020, and 41030. Significant differences
were found to exist for 20 parameters (Table 9). As in the previous com-
parison, dissolved oxygen was the only parameter with a mean concentration
greater in the control groundwater than in the treatment plant effluent.
Except for sulfate replacing lindane, the remaining same 18 parameters had
means which were significantly greater in the treatment plant effluent than
in the control groundwater. Mean concentrations for most metals were below
detection limits. Also, at least one sample of the Landis effluent yielded
total and fecal coliform counts that were too numerous to count. There were
no differences for the remaining parameters at the 0.05 level of significance.
Municipal Supply Constituents
The Vineland municipal water supply is from a deep aquifer underlying
the Vineland area, which is separated from the sand layers used for the Vine-
land and Landis infiltration ponds. Knowledge of water supply constituents
was necessary to provide background concentrations that could be compared
with concentrations in the treatment plant effluents. The individual
54
-------
TABLE 9. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN CONTROL SITE
GROUNDWATER AND THE APPLIED VINELAND AND LANDIS EFFLUENTS
Means (mg/L unless noted)
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Col i form (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammo ni urn- N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
? Test and control sites are significantly
Average concentrations below detection 1
TNTC - At least one sample too numerous
Control
8.8
5.2
64
7
40
1.1
7
4 ,
O.lb
51
0
0.8
1.8
0.1
1.0
0.08
0.03
9
1.8
6
113,
20b
3,
50
20b
20b
Iu6
ioob
1
obn
1
100b
1.2
2
43b
10 b
0.03°
21.3 ,
0.01
o.r
10.4
185
different
Vineland
1 5a
6.5a
548a
115a
214a
154a
372a
57 h
O.lb
TNTCC
TNTC
85a a
16. 8a
17. 2a
0.1
5.67a
4.78a
14
0.5
6,
311a
20b
12?
50b
20b
58
L5
100°
4 b
°b05
lb
100b
14.5a
60
127a
10 b
0,03D
2830a ,
o.ojr
o.r
9.5
72
at the 0.05
Land is
1.8a
648a
602a
130a
sor
149a
2871
77a ,
O.lb
TNTC
TNTC
48a
21. la
19. Oa
1.3 a
6.32a
4,78a
24 b
0.5b
8a
534a
20b
11
50b
20b
77
1*2
ioob
4a
0 06
1
100b
10,4a
75
121a
10 b
0.03°
1227
0.01
o.r
10.5
72
level .
imit indicated.
to count.
55
-------
constituent ranges and average concentrations tabulated in Table 8 have been
discussed when relevant in the foregoing sections relating to treatment
plant effluents.
Groundwater
Primary effluent from the Vine!and and Landis treatment systems is
transmitted to the groundwater via a system of infiltration basins. The
soils in the Vineland area consist largely of sand and other permeable sub-
soil particulates. The primary effluent derives treatment in the process of
percolation and contact with these permeable strata.
Infiltration Basin I, which serves the Borough of Vineland, has been
functioning for approximately 50 years, largely on a basis of continuous
infiltration with little or no rest periods. The Landis Sewerage Authority
has two infiltration basins, the older of which (II) had been operating for
approximately 30 years in a continuous mode until 1974. Since 1974 the old-
er Landis infiltration basin has been alternately flooded and dried, thus
permitting reestablishment of aerobic soil conditions. The newer Landis
infiltration basin (III) was put into operation in 1974 and has been in an
intermittent flooding and drying mode since inception. The relative loca-
tions of the three infiltration basins are depicted in Figure 4 (page 13).
The purpose of this report is to examine the degree of treatment provided by
the three infiltration basins, including any effect due to the age of the
infiltration system.
A complicating factor in the analysis of groundwater quality as related
to the infiltrating flows from the three infiltration basins is the presence
of a landfill site directly north of Basin III.
As previously discussed, the predominant direction of groundwater flow
in the vicinity of the infiltration basins is southwesterly as indicated on
Figure 4. Thus, contributions to groundwater from the landfill site can be
expected to contribute to the two Landis basins (II and III) and possibly
to the Vineland basin (I) as well.
The Vineland basin is 9.7 hectares (24 acres) in area and, as of 1974,
received approximately 35 L/s (0.8 Mgal/d) for an average infiltration rate
of 11 m/yr (36 ft/yr). The Landis basins comprise 26.3 hectares (65 acres)
in area and, as of 1974, received approximately 180 L/s (4.1 Mgal/d) for an
average infiltration rate of 21 m/yr (70 ft/yr). The projected rate of flow
of the underlying groundwater is 1 to 2.5 m/day (3.5 to 8 ft/day).
The saturated zone beneath the bottom of the infiltration basins was
nominally 1.4 m (4.5 ft) at Basin I, 0.8 m (2.7 ft) at Basin II, and 3.7 m
(12 ft) at Basin III.
The control site groundwater monitoring area was established to the
north of Basin I in soils that were similar to those at the treatment sites.
Groundwater contributions to the control site are believed to be the result
of infiltration by direct precipitation. The saturated zone in the soils
underlying the control monitoring area is 3.7 m (12 ft) below ground level
56
-------
(Table 6).
Reference to Figure 4 indicated that the groundwater under the infiltra-
tion site is mounded and that the mounding decreases with distance along the
direction of groundwater travel. Perceptible mounding continues, however,
to the southwest edge of the area monitored for this study. The groundwater
flow net is complicated at the eastern edge of the monitored area by the
close proximity of the Tarkiln and Parvin branches, streams tributary
to the Maurice River. The groundwater contours indicate that the ground-
water is discharging to the surface water at these streams. This is corrobo-
rated by analysis of the constituents within the river water and is dis-
cussed in a subsequent section of this report.
As a result of the mounding and the river influences, the groundwater
contours indicate that there are flow components locally induced by the
infiltration basins that travel in both westerly and easterly directions.
With the foregoing as a review of factors affecting groundwater quantity
and quality, it is now appropriate to begin the discussion of groundwater
quality parameters.
Monitoring wells were installed at the treatment and control areas
(Figure 13). Test site wells are designated 42010 through 42400. Upgradient
(control) wells are designated 41010, 41020, and 41030. Wells 41040, 41050,
41060, and 41070 are downgradient from the landfill and intended to monitor
the effect of the landfill on the groundwater tributary to the infiltration
basins.
Groundwater samples were taken from these wells at four times over a
year, August and December of 1976, and March and May of 1977. Samples were
analyzed for a number of water quality parameters, many of which are dis-
cussed in this section of the report.
Statistical Comparisons of Groundwater Data
Using the sample data, various comparisons of parameter mean concentra-
tions in the test groundwater and control groundwater were made with sta-
tistical techniques. In general, a comparison consisted of defining the
regions of interest, computing sample parameter means for the regions of
interest, and then testing for the existence of significant differences in
the means at the 0.05 level using the method of pooled variances. As
mentioned earlier, analytical data determined below the limit of detection
was arbitrarily input at one-half the detection limit to obtain a mean value.
In the previously discussed comparisons (Table 9) mean concentrations
for 19 parameters for the Vineland and Landis effluents out of 48 parameters
analyzed were found to be significantly greater than the corresponding
parameter means for the control groundwater. In the following discussion,
references to these parameters are frequently made in order to trace the
relative changes that occur as the Vineland and Landis treatment plant
effluents percolate to the groundwater.
57
-------
Figure 13. Sample well location map Vine land, N. J.
58
-------
The first analysis compared mean parameter concentrations for the test
groundwater below the Vineland Basin I to those for the control groundwater.
Specifically, the test groundwater well numbers are 42060, 42080, 42090,
42100, and 42110. The control site wells were 41010, 41020, and 41030. The
results are shown in Table 10. Mean concentrations for 17 parameters--
pH, conductivity, total alkalinity, dissolved solids, BOD,-, chloride, dis-
solved organic carbon, soluble organic nitrogen, ammonia, soluble phosphorus,
soluble orthosphosphate, boron, calcium, iron, magnesium, potassium, and
sodium--were found to be significantly greater in the test groundwater than
in the control groundwater. With the exception of iron, the remaining 16
parameters were significantly greater in the Vineland effluent compared to
the control wells, suggesting possible leaching for these constituents. Only
dissolved oxygen was found to be significantly greater in the control wells
than in the test groundwater. The average concentrations for many of the
metals were below the detection limits in the test groundwater. At least one
sample of the test groundwater had total and fecal coliform results TNTC
which prevented statistical comparison to the control groundwater. For the
remaining parameters, no significant difference at the 0.05 level was found
between the test and the control groundwaters.
In the next analysis, means for the test groundwater below Landis Basin
II were compared to those for the control groundwater. Test groundwater for
Landis Basin II is identified from well numbers 42030, 42040, 42170, 42180,
42190, 42200, and 42210. The results in Table 11 show significantly greater
means for 19 parameters in the test groundwater of Basin II compared to the
control groundwater. Means for 17 of these parameters were significantly
greater in the Landis effluent than in the control groundwater, suggesting
possible leaching for these constituents. Specifically, these 17 parameters
are pH, conductivity, total alkalinity, dissolved solids, BODr, COD, chlo-
ride, dissolved organic carbon, soluble organic nitrogen, ammonia, soluble
phosphorus, soluble orthophosphorus, boron, calcium, magnesium, potassium,
and sodium. In addition, mean concentrations for lindane and iron were
also significantly greater in the test groundwater. Dissolved oxygen and
nitrate concentrations were significantly greater in the control groundwater
than in the test groundwater. For many of the metals, average concentrations
were below detection limits for the test and control groundwaters. Also,
at least one sample of the test groundwater analyzed had total and fecal
coliforms too numerous to count. For the remaining parameters, no signifi-
cant differences between the test and control groundwaters were found.
Parameter means for test groundwater below Landis Basin III were com-
pared to those for the control groundwater. Test groundwater wells were
numbers 42050, 42150, and 42160. Means for 16 parameters were significantly
greater for the Landis Basin III groundwater than for the control groundwater
(Table 12). Thirteen of the parameters--pH, conductivity, total alkalinity,
dissolved solids, COD, chloride, dissolved organic carbon, soluble organic
nitrogen, ammonia, boron, magnesium, potassium, and sodium--were previously
found to have mean concentrations significantly greater for the Landis ef-
fluent than for the control wells, thus suggesting possible leaching for
these constituents. Arsenic, iron, and manganese were the other three para-
meters with mean concentrations greater in the test groundwater than in the
control groundwater. Only dissolved oxygen was observed to have a mean
59
-------
TABLE 10. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN CONTROL SITE
GROUNDWATER AND TEST GROUNDWATER BELOW BASIN I
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Coliform (#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammo ni urn -N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Means (mg/L
Control
8.8
5.2
64
7
40
1.1
7
4 b
o.r
51
0
0.8
1.8
0.1
1.0
0.08
0.03
9
1.8
6
113.
20b
3u
50b
2°h
20b
1R6
100B
1
0K11
!h
100b
1.2
2
43.
10 h
0.03b
21.3 ,
0.01b
O.I6
10.4
185
unless noted)
Test (Basin I)
0.4*
6 6a
468a
119a
226a a
6.5a
75a
27a
5.7 «
TNTCC
TNTC
21.9?
10. 6a
11. 6a
l'.49a
1.69a
1.54a
22 ,
0.5b
10a
332a
20b
14a
50b
20b
23 »
12.6a
100b
5a
0.13
lb
100b
10- 6a
383
525.
10b ,
0.03°
453 .
0.01°
O.lft
16.4
26.8
b Test and control sites are significantly different at the 0.05 level.
c Average concentrations below detection limit indicated.
TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
60
-------
TABLE 11. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN CONTROL SITE
GROUNDWATER AND TEST GROUNDWATER BELOW BASIN II
Means (mg/L unless noted)
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Coliform (#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (#/100 mL)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Control
8.8
5.2
64
7
40
1.1
7
4 b
o.r
51
0
0.8
1.8
0.1
1.0
0.08
0.03
9
1.8
6
113,
20b
3b
50b
20b
20b
1B6
100°
1
obii
lb
100D
1.2
2
43b
10 b
0.03D
21.3 ,
°y
o.r
10.4
185
Test (Basin II)
0.2?
6.9a
688?
187a
381a
12a
99a
79a
16.5
TNTCC
TNTC
28a a
11. Oa
17. 5a
0.06a
4.51a
3.80a
19 b
0.5°
8.
593a
20a
9b
50b
20b
20 a
9 b°
100D
4a
0 09
!b
100° a
13,3a
102a
43b
10 b
003b
1173 b
°-°l
o.r
13.0
120
? Test and control sites are significantly different at the 0.05 level
Average concentrations below detection limit indicated.
c TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
61
-------
TABLE 12. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN CONTROL SITE
GROUNDWATER AND TEST GROUNDWATER BELOW BASIN III
Means (mg/L unless noted)
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Col i form (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
b Test and control sites are significantly
Average concentrations below detection 1
^ "7" M TT^ Aj_T j_ n
Control
8.8
5.2
64
7
40
1.1
7
4 b
0.1D
51
0
0.8
1.8
0.1
1.0
0.08
0.03
9
1.8
6
113.
20b
3.
50b
?n
20b
Ih6
ioob
1
0.11
1
100b
1.2
2
43h
10 h
0.03°
21.3 .
0.01b
O.I6
10.4
185
different at the
imit indicated.
Test (Basin III)
0.3a
6a6
653a
161*
326a
12.1
80a
70a
2.9
TNTCC
52 a
21. 7a
6<1a
10. 6a
0.34
0.09
0.07
39
145
1 1
609?
20b
10k
50h
20b
20b
29.3a
100b
3a
0K53
lb
100b
12.3a
86a
43.
10 h
0.03D
227 .
0.01b
O.I6
13.2
27.5
0.05 level.
one sample too numerous to count.
62
-------
centration significantly greater in the control groundwater. As in the pre-
vious analysis, average concentrations for many of the metals were below the
detection limits in the test groundwater. At least one sample of the test
groundwater analyzed total coliforms too numerous to count. For the remain-
ing parameters, no significant differences in the means were found.
The next two analyses compared the test groundwaters of the three
basins. Analysis A (Table 13) compared the test groundwater below Basin I
with the test groundwater below Basin II. Table 13 shows significant differ-
ences for 14 parameter mean concentrations in analysis A. Twelve parameter
means were significantly greater for the test groundwater below Basin II,
whereas two parameters were greater for the test groundwater below Basin I.
This probably reflects the heavier loadings on Basin II than on Basin I.
Analysis B compared the test groundwater below Basin II with the test ground-
water below Basin III. Analysis B showed significant differences for five
parameters, with three means being greater for the test groundwater below
Basin II and two means being greater for the test groundwater below Basin
III. An overall observation from the two analyses is that loading quantities
had greater effects on groundwater constituent concentrations than the rela-
tive length of time the systems have been operating.
An analysis was made to study the influence of leachate from the near-
by landfill on test groundwater quality compared to the influence from the
infiltration basins. The analysis consisted of comparing the mean concentra-
tions of parameters for the test groundwater below the landfill to the test
groundwater below Landis Basin III. Test groundwater wells for Basin III
have been identified previously. The landfill groundwater wells are
numbers 41040, 41050, and 41060. The results are shown in Table 14. The
analysis showed mean concentrations for 16 parameters were significantly
greater for the groundwater below Basin III than for the groundwater below
the landfill. Also, 12 of the 16 parameter means were previously found to
be significantly greater in the Landis effluent than in the control ground-
water. The other four parameters not previously found to be significantly
greater were arsenic, iron, manganese, and lindane. Only dissolved oxygen
had a mean concentration greater in the landfill groundwater than in the test
groundwater below Basin III. These results indicate the influence of the
leachate from the landfill on groundwater quality to be significantly less
than the influence from the infiltration basins.
The next group of analyses evaluated changes that occurred as the test
groundwater moved downgradient from the basins. The first analysis compared
the test groundwater below the Vineland Basin I with a group of downgradient
wells. Test groundwater well numbers for Basin I have been identified
previously. The downstream wells were numbers 42300, 42310, and 42350. The
results in Table 15 show mean parameter concentrations for soluble ortho-
phosphate and calcium were greater in the test groundwater below Basin I than
in the groundwater of the downgradient wells. Mean concentrations for iron
and manganese were significantly greater for the downgradient groundwater.
Also shown in Table 15 is a comparison of the mean parameter concentrations
for intermediate downgradient wells 42270, 42280, and 42290 with the down-
gradient wells 42300, 42310, and 42350. No significant differences were
found for any of the parameters for this comparison.
63
-------
TABLE 13. SUMMARY OF PARAMETER MEAN CONCENTRATION COMPARISONS
BETWEEN THE TEST GROUNDHATER OF THE THREE BASINS
Analysis A"
Parameter Basin Vineland I Landis II Landis II Landis III
Dissolved Oxygen a
pH (units) a
Conductivity (ymhos/cm) a
Total Alkalinity a
Dissolved Solids a
Biochemical Oxygen Demand a
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride a
Sulfide-S
Total Coliform (#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N a a
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus a a
Soluble Orthophosphate a a
Sulfate
Al umi num
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L) a
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron a
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese a a
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium a
Sodium a
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2.4.5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Mean concentrations are significantly different at the 0.05 level for the
basin test groundwater.
64
-------
TABLE 14. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN THE
GROUNDWATER BENEATH THE LANDFILL AND BASIN III
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg"/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Means (mg/L
Landfill
3.7
4.8
242
4
168
2
10
51 b
o.r
33
10
5.8
0.8
1.4
0.31
0.05
0.03
6
0.5
4
68b
20D
3b
50b
20b
23
°62
100°
3
0.21
3b
100°
1.4
40
46b
10 b
0.03°
00b
0.1
4.8
21.8
unless noted)
Basin III
0.3a
6.6
653?
161a
326a
12.1
80a
70
2.9
TNTCC
52 a
21. 7a
r id
io!6a
0.34
0.09
0.07
39a
1,5
Ua
609a
20b
10b
50b
20b
20b
29 3a
100°
3 a
Jb53
n
100°
12 3a
86a
43b
10 b
0.03°
a
227 b
0.01
o.r
13.2
27.5
? Landfill and Basin III sites are significantly different at the 0.05 level
Average concentrations below detection limit indicated.
c TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
65
-------
TABLE 15. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN THE GROUNDWATERS
BENEATH BASIN I, DOWNGRADIENT AND INTERMEDIATE WELLS
Means (mg/L unless noted)
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Col i form (#/100 mL)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Basin I Downgradient Wells
0.4
6,6
468
119
226
6.5
75
27
5.7
TNTC
TNTC
21.9
10.6
11.6
1.49
1.69
1.54
22 ,
0.5b
10
332,
20b
14,
50b
20b
23
12,. 6
1005
5
0,13
1?
100°
10.6
38
525,
10 b
0.03°
453 ,
0.01b
O.I6
16.4
26.8
0.1
6.6
395
169
174
4.0
53
26 b
0.1°
TNTC
0
14.2
8.5
9.8
0.05
0.42a
0.02a
20
2.4
6
302.
20b
6?
50b
20b
20b
38,.5a
ioob
4 a
Oh45a
*h
100b
8.2
37
44,
10 h
0.03b
64 h
0.01b
O.I6
13.3
40.9
Intermediate Wells
0.4
6.8
486
189
211
4.3
34
34 b
o.r
28
0
19.6
5.6
10.1
0.12
0.30
0.18
14 h
0.5b
7
395,
20b
17,
50b
20b
20b
37.7
ioob
5
0.33
IK
100b
9.6
47
46.
10 h
0.03°
78 ,
°-°D
o.r
15.1
33.9
b Basin I and downgradient sites are significantly different at the 0.05 level
Average concentrations below detection limit indicated.
TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
66
-------
A similar analysis was made for wells downgradient from Landis
Basin II (42380, 42390, and 42400). The mean parameter concentrations for
the downgradient groundwater were compared to those of Basin II test ground-
water. The results in Table 16 show mean concentrations for BOD, COD,
soluble phosphorus, soluble orthophosphate, boron, calcium, and lindane
were significantly greater in the test groundwater below Basin II than in
the groundwater of the downgradient wells. Mean concentrations for iron
and manganese were greater for the downgradient wells. These results in-
dicate the change in groundwater quality is greater from the groundwater
below Basin II to downgradient wells than from the groundwater below Basin I
to downgradient wells and probably reflects the greater loading rates on the
Landis basins.
Groundwater Quality
The salient groundwater quality parameters that differentiated the test
and control sites are discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.
In all cases, these parameters were present in the infiltration waters
at concentrations greater than occurred in incident precipitation. The
complete list and data for groundwater quality parameters are tabulated in
Appendix B.
Nitrogen--
Ammonium nitrogen concentrations in the Vine!and effluent ranged from
5'to 25.1 mg/L. Ammonium nitrogen concentrations in the groundwater beneath
Vineland Basin I varied from 0.5 to 26.7 mg/L (Figure 14). The lowest con-
centrations, in a range up to 9 mg/L, were encountered in the August sampling
at a time when nitrification activity could be expected to be at a maximum.
The ammonium nitrogen concentration in the effluent in August, 1976 was
5 mg/L. The highest concentrations, in a range between 12 and 26.7 mg/L were
encountered in the December sampling at a time when nitrification activity
could be expected to be at a minimum because of low temperatures. At
intermediate observation periods, ammonia nitrogen concentrations were also
at intermediate levels. This variation was particularly evident at moni-
toring well locations located immediately downgradient from the infiltration
basin. At monitoring locations further downgradient, ammonia nitrogen con-
centrations continued to vary with time of year and did not show major de-
creases in concentration with distance from the basin source within the area
monitored in this study. At a given well location, concentrations generally
were relatively constant down to depths of 8 to 9 m (26 to 30 ft) but de-
creased at a depth of 17 to 18 m (56 to 59 ft) which is probably near the
bottom of the wastewater plume at this location. Lower concentrations in the
shallowest downgradient wells 42270 and 42300 indicate dilution from re-
charge and that the main plume of infiltrated wastewater is beginning to move
below these depths.
Ammonium nitrogen concentrations in groundwater beneath Landis Basin II
varied from 1.4 to 29.8 mg/L with no correlation observed with time of year.
Groundwater below Basin II could be affected by Basins I and III as well as
the upstream landfill. Thus, it is possible that ammonium nitrogen compo-
nents of flow emanting from these other sources might mask seasonal vari-
ations from Basin II. Observations concerning concentration gradients along
67
-------
TABLE 16. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN THE GROUNDWATERS
BENEATH BASIN II AND DOWNGRADIENT WELLS
Means (mg/L unless noted)
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Basin II
0.2
6.9
688
187
381
12
99
79
16.5
TNTCL
TNTC
28
11.0
17.5
0.06
4.51
3.80
19 u
0.5b
8
593,
20b
9,
50b
20b
20b
9,0
ioob
4
0K09
!h
100°
13.3
102
43,
10 h
0.03°
1173 ,
o.or
O.I6
13.0
120
Downgradient Wells
0.5
6.9
729
211
345 a
44a
40d
78
0.7
4
0
13.9
8.0
17.4
0.05,
0.273
O.ll3
4
0.5
ioa
486h
20b
5a
50b
20b
20b
33,.6a
1005
4 .
0,32a
*h
100b
14.6
100
20,
10 h
0,03°
70 h
<>V
O.lft
10.7
35.4
Basin II and downgradient sites are significantly different at the 0.05
, level.
c Average eoncefltratlans• bj?1o\y detection limit indicated.
TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
68
-------
AUG. 1976
31-
35
DEC. 1976
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
Mgon vqlue of pqfometer.mq /L
Screen depth(in feet)
MA-NO
Figure 14. Groundwater constituents.- Ammonium Nitrogen
69
-------
the path of groundwater travel and with depth were the same as for Basin I.
Ammonium nitrogen concentrations in groundwater beneath Landis Basin III
varied from 4.4 to 19.1 mg/L and varied with time of year in a manner con-
sistent with Basin I. Typical August concentrations were generally highest
with intermediate time periods also intermediate in concentration. Ob-
servations concerning concentration gradients along the path of groundwater
travel and with depth were the same as for Basin I.
Ammonium nitrogen concentrations in groundwater downgradient from the
landfill varied from <0.1 to 6.4 mg/L. Other observed concentrations
were 0.1, 0.1, 0.13, 0.4, and 2.7 mg/L. The lowest and highest concentrations
were both observed at the deepest monitoring point at 17 to 18 m (56 to 59
ft) below ground level. The highest concentration was observed in March
and the lowest in May. There was also a possibility that these monitoring
wells, which were located over a saddle on the saturated zone surface, could
at times receive ammonium nitogen contributions direct from Basin III.
Control groundwater concentrations of ammonium nitrogen varied from
<0.1 to 0.4 mg/L and averaged <0.15 mg/L. Thus background concentrations
were essentially at minimum detectable concentrations.
The overall observation was that ammonium nitrogen was exiting the
groundwater area monitored in this study in large amounts. Immediately be-
neath Basin I the groundwater contained 68 percent of the amount of applied
ammonium nitrogen; beneath Basin II, the groundwater contained 92 percent and
groundwater beneath Basin III contained only 56 percent of the applied
ammonium nitrogen. An analysis of Basin I, using wells 42280, 42290, 42310,
and 42350 with an average concentration of 12 mg/L, is representative of the
overall groundwater leaving Area I. This analysis indicated that 70 percent
of the ammonium nitrogen is exiting via the groundwater. Well 42300 was ex-
cluded from the averages because other parameters such as chloride, conduc-
tivity, and alkalinity indicated that it is above the wastewater plume at
that location. Although less obvious, the same parameters indicate that con-
centrations in shallow well 42270 could be diluted by recharge from onsite
precipitation.
If wells 42380, 42390, and 42400 are regarded as overall discharge moni-
toring wells for Area II, the average measured discharge concentration is
17.3 mg/L. The weighted average applied ammonium nitrogen concentration was
19 mg/L and therefore an estimated 91 percent of the applied ammonium nitrogen
could be leaving Area II via the groundwater. Well 42360 across Parvin Branch
which probably receives some dilution from the southwest and/or flow from
Basin III was not included as a downgradient well for Basin II.
Some of this exiting ammonium nitrogen would likely originate from the
organic nitrogen component of the primary effluent as a result of biodegrada-
tion in the infiltrated soils. The evidence suggested that the program of
alternate flooding and drying, as practiced at Vineland and Landis, was con-
trolling ammonium nitrogen discharge to the groundwater to a limited extent
at Vineland Basin I and Landis Basin III. The limited control at Vineland
Basin I was probably related to the lower loading rates whereas the better
70
-------
performance of Basin III was probably affected by length of service but
due primarily to the greater thickness of the unsaturated zone. The un-
saturated zone beneath Basin III was 3.7 m (12 ft) as contrasted to 0.8 m
(2.7 ft) beneath Basin II which is loaded at an equivalent rate. Overall,
the control of ammonia nitrogen at the combined site was not effective and
the ammonia nitrogen concentrations exceed safe standards for healthy aquatic
1 i f e.
Nitrogen (organic)--The soluble organic nitrogen concentrations applied
to the infiltration basins ranged between 3.0 and 27.6 mg/L with an average
of 16.8 mg/L at Vineland Basin I and ranged between 15.9 and 25.4 mg/L
with an average of 21.1 mg/L at Landis Basins II and III. The soluble
organic nitrogen concentrations in groundwater beneath and downgradient
from Basin I, II, and III varied from 0.1 to 41.6 mg/L (Figure 15) and were
variable in seasonal characteristics in gradients along direction of ground-
water travel and with depth. Using wells beneath each basin as monitoring
points, Basin I has an average concentration of discharge of 10.6 mg/L,
Basin II had 11.0 mg/L and Basin III had 6.1 mg/L. This corresponds to
passage of organic nitrogen concentration of 63 percent for Basin I, 52 per-
cent for Basin II and 29 percent for Basin III. Of the individual basins,
Landis Basin III appears to be most effectively converting organic nitrogen
to other forms of nitrogen. The average concentration of wells 42028, 42029,
42031, and 42035 downgradient from Vineland Basin I was 7.7 mg/L and indicat-
ed that 46 percent of the applied soluble organic nitrogen was exiting
Area I. Average concentration of wells 42380, 42390, and 42400 downgradient
from Landis Basin II was 8.0 mg/L and indicated 44 percent passage.
The organic nitrogen concentrations leaving the Vineland and Landis
treatment sites although decreasing slightly downgradient are excessive and
are potentially a problem because of their likely natural conversion to other
nitrogen forms such as ammonia and nitrate.
Groundwater downgradient from the landfill wells 41040, 41050, and
41060 was contributing soluble organic nitrogen concentrations in the range
of <0.1 to 1.5 mg/L with an average of 0.8 mg/L. Control groundwater con-
tained concentrations that ranged from 0.2 to 9.5 mg/L and averaged 1.8 mg/L.
The 9.5 mg/L appears to be an anomolous value which if excluded would leave
a range of 0.2 to 1.0 mg/L. Thus, little if any orgainc nitrogen entered the
treatment site groundwater as a result of the landfill or the upstream con-
trol water.
Nitrogen (nitrate)--The nitrate nitrogen concentrations applied via the
primary effluents ranged <0.1 to 3.7 mg/L. Nitrate nitrogen was essentially
absent in the treatment monitoring wells at a detectable limit of <0.1 mg/L
(Figure 16). A few sporadic readings occasionally occurred in the shallow-
est monitoring wells indicating that some nitrification may be occurring near
the top of the water table.
Nitrate nitrogen concentrations in groundwater downgradient from the
landfill ranged from <0.1 to 0.6 mg/L with an average of 0.3 mg/L. Control
groundwater had a nitrate nitrogen concentration range of <0.1 to 2.6 mg/L
and an average of 1.0 mg/L. Thus very little nitrate nitrogen was contributed
71
-------
5.3
6-8
2.0
27-30
NA
4€-50
XNA
3-5
NA
IO-I2
AUG. 1976
DEC. 1976
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
1/4
ZOO 4OO
Meon volue of porometer.mg /L
Screen depth(in feet)
NA-No data avallahl*
Figure 15 . Groundwater constituents.- Soluble Organic Nitrogen
72
-------
3-8
KMZ
18-17
NOTE-NO SAMPLES
THIS DATE 31-38
81-88
AUG. 1976
91-09
DEC. 1976
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
M«on vqlua of parameter, rog /L
Screen depth(in f«et)
NA-M *f«»
-------
to the treatment site groundwater from the upgradient landfill and background
concentrations in control groundwater probably only contributed to the
northernmost well 42230.
The weighted average applied effluent nitrate nitrogen concentration
was 1.1 mg/L and this concentration was completely removed to a detectable
concentration of <0.1 mg/L at the treatment site.
Nitrogen (total)--The total nitrogen concentration including total
organic, ammonia and nitrate nitrogen applied to the Vineland Basin I on a
weighted average basis was 40.4 mg/L. The total nitrogen leaving Area I via
the groundwater as measured at wells 42280, 42290, 42310, and 42350 was 19.7
mg/L. Therefore, by approximate methods, 49 percent of the applied nitrogen
was leaving Vineland Area I via the groundwater. A similar analysis of
Landis Basin II, where an average of 47.7 mg/L total nitrogen was applied as
compared to an average of 27.5 mg/L in wells 42380, 42390, and 42400, indi-
cates that 58 percent of the applied nitrogen was leaving Area II via the
groundwater.
Although there was no suitable location for monitoring wells down-
gradient from Landis Basin III, it could be assumed that organic nitrogen
would decrease downgradient and that the total nitrogen leaving Area III
would be slightly less than the average concentration beneath the basin.
Wells 42050, 42150, and 42160 have an average concentration of 14.6 mg/L
ammonia nitrogen and 6.1 mg/L soluble organic nitrogen. The average total
nitrogen applied was 47.7 mg/L and the average total nitrogen leaving
Area III would probably be less than 43 percent of the applied amount.
Chemical Oxygen Demand--
The COD concentration of the applied effluents ranged from 237 to 472
mg/L. The COD concentration range of the groundwater beneath and down-
gradient from the infiltration basins was 12 to 273 mg/L (Figure 17). Con-
centrations varied irregularly with season but generally demonstrated a
gradient with distance along path of groundwater travel and with depth.
Residual concentrations were lowest and in the range of 20 to 32 mg/L for the
deepest and farthest downgradient monitoring wells. This is consistent with
results observed in other land treatment systems, where given sufficient dis-
tance of travel, the concentration of applied COD dropped to natural back-
ground concentrations.
The average COD concentration of the effluent applied to Basin I was
372 mg/L. The average concentration beneath the basin was 75 mg/L and the
average downgradient concentration was 42 mg/L indicating that 11 percent of
the applied concentration was passing the downgradient wells. Beneath the
basin there were generally a decrease in concentration with depth and down-
gradient although these gradients are not as consistent as in Area II. As
discussed elsewhere, this may be related to the lower loading rates and
occasional clay layers within this area.
The average COD concentration of the effluent applied to Basin II was
287 mg/L. The average concentration beneath the basin was 99 mg/L and the
average downgradient concentration was 40 mg/L which indicates 14 percent of
74
-------
AUG. 1976
ZT-30
16
46-50
/NA 40-48
3-5
138
10-12
DEC. 1976
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
1/4
IMtaa
2OO 4OO
BOO
A
Meon value of parameter,mg /L
Screen depthdn feet)
NA-No data oveilatil«
Ftqurc 17 . Groundwaier constitu«r»t«.- COD
75
-------
the applied concentration was passing. There was an obvious decrease in con-
centration with depth and downgradient. It is interesting to compare the
concentration of wells beneath the basin with downgradient wells of approxi-
mately the same depth. The average concentration of one 7.9 m (26 to 30 ft)
deep well beneath the basin was 108 mg/L as compared to 51 mg/L for a 9.1 m
(31 to 35 ft) downgradient well. Similarly the 15.5 m (51 to 55 ft) wells
have concentrations beneath the basin of 37 mg/L and 27 mg/L downgradient.
With the same effluent and infiltration rates the average concentration
beneath Basin III was 80 mg/L indicating that slightly better performance
might be expected.
Groundwater flow from the landfill ranged in COD concentration from 3 to
16 mg/L with an average of 10 mg/L. Control groundwater concentrations
ranged from 3 to 12 mg/L with an average of 7 mg/L. Thus only minor COD com-
ponents were measured as contributing to the treatment site groundwater.
Additional distance of travel of the treatment site tributary groundwater be-
yond the monitored study area can reasonably be expected to reduce the
residual concentration to a final COD concentration approaching the back-
ground level of 7 mg/L.
Chloride, Dissolved Solids, and Boron--
The concentrations of chloride and dissolved solids in the applied ef-
fluents ranged from 19 to 179 and 163 to 514 mg/L, respectively. The
applied effluents boron concentration ranged from 34 to 642 yg/L (Table 8).
The treatment site groundwater had a range of concentrations of 3 to 198 mg/L
for chloride .(Figure 18), 57 to 564 mg/L for dissolved solids (Figure 19),
and 49 to 933 yg/L for boron (Figure 20). The concentrations for each of
these parameters varied irregularly with period of sampling, distance along
path of groundwater travel and with depth.
The major contributor to this variability was the concentration of the
parameters in the applied effluent which were extremely variable at different
sampling periods. For example, Vineland effluent chloride concentrations
ranged from 19 to 42 mg/L for all sampling periods except the August, 1976,
sampling at which time effluent chloride was 135 mg/L. Boron concentrations
ranged from 347 to 460 yg/L except for the December, 1976, value of 34 yg/L.
Likewise, all Landis effluent chloride samplings ranged from 19 to 77 mg/L
in concentration except for the May, 1977, sampling which tested at 179 mg/L
concentration. Dissolved solids also exhibited wide variability for single
samplings.
The variability of parameter concentration is not unexpected and the
average obtained from four samples must be viewed in that context. For
example, it is unlikely that 25 percent of the time the concentration of
boron in the Vineland effluent is only 34 yg/L.
Utilizing the previously designated representative wells, the average
parameter concentrations beneath and downgradient from each basin is summar-
ized in Table 17. The precent leaving the area as determined by the average
downgradient concentration compared to the average effluent concentration is
also shown in Table 17.
76
-------
ZOO 4OO
BOO
Meon volue of poromet«r. mq /L
Screen depthdn faet)
HA-No data
Figure 18. Groundvrater constituent*.- Chloride
77
-------
NOTE-NO DATA
AVAILABLE
EXCEPT WHERE
NOTED.
Meon volue of poromettr.mg
Screen depthdn feet)
NA- No data avallaai*
Nota: No data available unless not
Figure 19. Groundwater constituents.- Dissolved Solids
ed
78
-------
Screen dep»h(in feet)
HA-Mo date c«aiieB»l«
Not«: No dala available unless noted
Figure 20. Groundwater constituents.- Boron
79
-------
TABLE 17. COMPARISON OF CHLORIDE, IDS, AND BORON
APPLIED TO AND PASSING EACH INFILTRATION BASIN
Infiltrated
Effluent
Immediately
Beneath
Downgradient
Average Parameter Concentration in mg/L
Basin I
Basin II
Basin III
Cl TDS Boron Cl TDS Boron C1 TDS Boron
57 214 0.311 77 301 0.534 77 301 0.534
27 226 0.332 78 381 0.593 70 325 0.609
34 194 0.381 78 344 0.486 -- --- ---
Percent Passing, % 61
91
123 101 115
91
Although it is probably not justified to attempt to explain the
difference between Areas I and II some observations can be made. Some
additional idea of the average concentrations infiltrated can be obtained
from Table 17. Examination of the average concentrations immediately beneath
Basin I would indicate that the average effluent concentrations were probably
less than 57 mg/L of chloride and greater than 311 yg/L of boron. If the
one low value of 34 yg/L were excluded, the average boron concentration
would be 403 yg/L and the boron leaving Area I would be 95 percent compared
to the 123 percent indicated in Table 17. The deepest well (42060) included
in the average concentrations beneath Basin I is constructed beneath a clay
layer of undetermined continuity. This is probably reflected in the lower
parameter concentrations for this well which were 22 mg/L chlorides, 101 mg/L
dissolved solids, and 191 yg/L boron. Some clay layers were also encountered
during construction and subsequent pump testing of Area I downgradient wells.
These clay layers may segregate the wastewater plume and complicate the
evaluation.
The results downgradient from Basin II are more consistent with what
one would expect. Again, the higher concentration of dissolved solids
immediately beneath the basin accounts for the higher percentage occurring
downgradient.
Soils with organic and clay content generally have small adsorption
capacities for boron. For practical purposes, however, chloride, dissolved
solids, and boron can be regarded as parameters that are refractory to soil
interactions in this environment and thus pass through the infiltration
system and subsequent saturated zone relatively unchanged.
The possible landfill contributions of chloride, dissolved solids, and
boron concentrations ranged from 1 to 111 mg/L and averaged 51 mg/L, 37 to
80
-------
292 mg/L and averaged 168 mg/L, and 40 to 106 yg/L and averaged 68 yg/L,
respectively. Control groundwater concentrations for chloride, dissolved
solids, and boron ranged from 1 to 8 mg/L and averaged 4 mg/L, 23 to 76 mg/L
and averaged 40 mg/L, and 4 to 280 yg/L and averaged 113 yg/L, respectively.
Thus, only the landfill contribution of chloride and dissolved solids could
have detectable influence on the treatment site groundwater. Higher than
average chloride concentrations occur in the two deepest landfill monitoring
wells, in the deepest well beneath Basin III and in deep well 42400 down-
gradient from Basin II. The respective average concentrations are 88, 100,
and 94 mg/L. The water level contours for December, 1976 (Figure 5, page 14)
indicate groundwater flow along this path.
Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium, and Sodium--
The potassium and calcium concentrations of the applied effluent ranged
from 9 to 26 mg/L and 9 to 13 mg/L, respectively. Treatment site groundwater
concentrations ranged from 3.5 to 18 mg/L for potassium and from 1 to 80 mg/L
for calcium (Figures 21 and 22). These cations along with others such as
magnesium and sodium are held in the soil by cation exchange properties of
the soil which are properties of the organic and clay content of the soil.
Most soils have limited capacity for the univalent potassium and sodium
cations and greater capacity for the divalent calcium and magnesium cations.
The potassium and calcium concentrations of the treatment site ground-
water are indicators of the ability of the soils to absorb such cations. The
resulting concentrations were irregularly variable with period of sampling,
distance along path of groundwater travel and with depth.
The average concentrations of potassium, calcium, sodium, and magnesium
for the infiltrated effluent, the groundwater beneath the basins and the
downgradient groundwater are summarized in Table 18. Examination of the
average concentrations of these parameters applied to, immediately beneath,
and downgradient indicates that the Vineland and Landis soil infiltration
systems have little remaining adsorptive capacity for the monovalent cations,
potassium and sodium, but apparently still has downgradient adsorptive
capacity for the divalent cations, calcium and magnesium. The capacity for
calcium and magnesium appears to have been depleted immediately beneath
Basins I and II, but is still available beneath the newer Basin III. Differ-
ent conclusions could be drawn if the two values of calcium were not deleted
from the averages in Table 18.
Groundwater downgradient from the landfill ranged from 0.2 to 2.4 mg/L
and averaged 1.4 mg/L for potassium, and from 1.2 to 7.9 mg/L and averaged
3.5 mg/L for calcium. Control groundwater concentrations ranged from <0.5
to 2.9 mg/L and averaged 1.2 mg/L for potassium, and from 0.7 to 4.8 mg/L and
averaged 2.7 mg/L for calcium. Magnesium and sodium averaged 2.9 and 40 mg/L,
respectively, downgradient from the landfill and 1.0 and 1.8 mg/L, respec-
tively, in the control groundwater. Thus, landfill or control groundwater
were not contributing to treatment site groundwater concentrations of potassi-
um, calcium, or magnesium. However, the landfill could be contributing to
the sodium concentration.
81
-------
1/4
2OO
40O
^~<
80O
Meon value of porometer. mo /U
Screen depth (in feet)
NA-Ne deto «y«llafcU
Note^No data available unlass noted
Figum 21. Groundwater constituents.- Potassium
82
-------
Meon value of parameter,.n>q /L
Screen depfri(in fsef)
NA-No «krta eseilabte
Note: No data available unless noted
Figure 22. Groundwater constituents.- Calcium
83
-------
TABLE 18. COMPARISON OF POTASSIUM, CALCIUM, SODIUM, AND
MAGNESIUM APPLIED TO AND PASSING EACH INFILTRATION BASIN
Average Parameter Concentration in mg/L
Basin I Basin II Basin III
K Ca Na Mg K Ca Na Mg K Ca Na Mg
Infiltrated
Effluent 14.5 11.8 60 4.1 10.4 10.8 75 4.1 10.4 10.8 75 4.1
Immediately ,
Beneath 10.6 13.6 38 5.1 13.3 8.9 101 4.1 12.0 4.5 86 3.0
Downgradient 9.9 6.9a 49 4.5 14.6 4.9 100 3.7
Percent
Passing, % 68 58 82 110 140 45 133 90
a Includes 13 values between 1.9 and 12, but excludes 1 value of 80.
Includes 10 values between 1 and 10, but excludes 1 value of 66.
Phosphorus--
The soluble phosphorus concentration of the applied effluent ranged from
4.5 to 7.2 mg/L. The soluble orthophosphate comprised the majority of
soluble phosphorus and ranged in concentration from 3.5 to 6.2 mg/L.
Phosphorus and particularly the soluble orthophosphate are adsorbed on
active sites associated with the iron and aluminum content of the acid soils
encountered at the Vineland and Landis treatment site. The other soluble
phosphorus constituent, soluble organic phosphorus, can be adsorbed on
other active sites associated with the clay content of the soil.
The behavior of soluble phosphorus was examined in the treatment site
groundwater. The range of concentrations encountered was <0.01 to 7.6 mg/L
(Figure 23). The average concentrations immediately beneath and downgradient
as determined from the previously selected wells are shown in Table 19.
Groundwater concentrations of soluble phosphorus immediately beneath
Basin I varied irregularly with respect to sampling period and with depth
to 14 m (46 ft). However, there was a marked decrease in average concen-
trations in the deepest well which as previously discussed was constructed
beneath a clay layer. If well 42060 is omitted from the average concen-
trations beneath Basin I, the average concentrations of soluble phosphorus
and soluble orthophosphate become 2.19 and 1.96 mg/L, respectively, as com-
pared to the lower values shown in Table 19. The adsorption capacity of the
soils immediately beneath Basin I have been reduced. Downgradtent soils are
not yet exhausted and the residual phosphorus concentrations drop rapidly to
84
-------
MAR. 1977
6-6
0,04
2?-36
0.03
46-50
f 0 03 \
/ 40-45
3-5
IO-I2
MAY 1977
Meon volue of porometer.mq /L
Screen depth (in fact)
HA-No data available
Note: No data available unless noted.
Figur* 23. Groundwater constituent*.- Soluble Phosphorus
85
-------
TABLE 19. COMPARISON OF SOLUBLE PHOSPHORUS AND SOLUBLE
QRTHQPHOSPHATE APPLIED TO AND PASSING EACH INFILTRATION BASIN
Average Parameter Concentration In mg/L
Basin I Basin II Basin III
Infiltrated
Effluent
Immediately
Beneath
Downgradient
Percent Passing, %
P
5.7
1.69
0.18
3.2
P04
4.8
1.54
<0.03
0.6
P
6.3
4.51
0.27
4.3
P04
4.8
3.80
0.11
2.3
P P04
6.3 4.8
0.09 0.07
the 0.1 mg/L range with distance along the path of groundwater travel.
The soils beneath Basin II appear to be almost exhausted for further
phosphorus adsorption under present operating conditions. By contrast, the
relatively new Landis Basin III site produced consistent concentrations
immediately beneath in the range of 0.1 mg/L. The Basin III, groundwater also
exhibited a regular soluble phosphorus gradient with depth which would be ex-
pected for an active site.
The average soluble phosphorus concentration downgradient from Basin II
was 0.27 mg/L. The weighted average soluble phosphorus concentration of the
applied effluent was 6.3 mg/L and therefore, the estimated passage of
soluble phosphorus was 4.3 percent. Approximately 2.3 percent of the applied
soluble orthophosphate was passing the downgradient wells. This residual
concentration would be further reduced by contact with soils downgradient
from the area monitored for this study until residual phosphorus was in
equilibrium with the area soils at background concentrations.
Soluble phosphorus contributions to the treatment site groundwater from
the landfill ranged from 0.02 to 0.10 mg/L and averaged 0.03 mg/L, Soluble
phosphorus concentrations contributed by control groundwater ranged from
fc'0.01 to 0.41 mg/L and averaged 0.08 mg/L. Thus, no significant phosphorus
contribution to the treatment groundwater was observed to originate at the
landfill and background concentrations of soluble phosphorus did not markedly
affect treatment site groundwater quality.
Metals—
Groundwater was examined for the presence of the following metals:
86
-------
arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, copper, iron, lead, maganese, mercury,
nickel, selenium, and zinc. The concentrations of cadmium, cobalt, chromium,
lead, mercury, nickel, copper, selenium, and arsenic were generally at or be-
low minimum detectable levels.
Iron, manganese, and zinc had perceptible concentrations in the ground-
water tributary to the treatment site. Figures 24 and 25 depict the moni-
toring results for iron and zinc, respectively. The behavior of manganese in
the treatment site groundwater was similar to that of iron.
The average concentrations of iron, manganese, and zinc in the effluent,
immediately beneath, and downgradient from the infiltration basins are
summarized in Table 20.
TABLE 20. COMPARISON OF IRON, MANGANESE, AND ZINC
APPLIED TO AND PASSING EACH INFILTRATION BASIN
Average Parameter Concentration in mg/L
Infiltrated
Effluent
Immediately
Beneath
Downgradient
1
12
42
Fe
.5
.6
.7
Basin
Mn
0.06
0.13
0.40
I
0.
0.
0.
Basin I
Zna
127
024b
039
Fe
1.
9.
33.
2
0
6
Mn
0.07
0.09
0.32
I
0.
0.
0.
Zna Fe
121 1.2
043 29.3
029
Basin III
Mn Zna
0.07 0.121
0.53 0.043
a Includes several values less than the detectable limit of 0.02 mg/L.
Excludes well 42080 with an average concentration of 2.18 mg/L. If
included, average would be 0.525 mg/L.
Iron and manganese concentrations in the treatment site groundwater
generally increase in concentration with depth and markedly increase down-
gradient. The statistical comparison found that these were the only two
parameters which increased downgradient. The possible sources for the
extraordinarily high iron concentrations are groundwater contributions from
the upgradient landfill and/or the iron content of the treatment site soil.
Iron and manganese concentrations averaged <1.6 mg/L and <0.15 mg/L,
respectively, at the control wells and 0.26 mg/L and 0.21 mg/L, respectively,
at the wells downgradient from the landfill. There is apparently no signi-
cant iron or manganese contribution from the control groundwater or the
landfill.
87
-------
AUG. 1976
DEC. 1976
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
200 4OO
800
Meon value of parameter, mo /L
Screen depthdn feet)
NA-No data available
Note: No data available unless noted
Figure 24. Groundwater constituents.- Iron
-------
TOO 4OO
800
Mean value of porometer^g/L
Screen depth(m feet)
NA-No data ovallaH*
Note: No data available unless noted
Figure 25. Groundwater constituents.- Zinc
89
-------
An examination of Figure 34 (page 112) under the discussion of soils
shows that iron has apparently been leached from the soils under Basins I and
II when compared to nearby control soils. Conversely, leaching is not evident
at Basin III which has only been in operation since 1974. The average iron
concentration (Table 20) of the groundwater beneath the respective basins
would also indicate that the soils beneath Basins I and II have been suffi-
ciently depleted so that less iron is now being leached as compared to the
higher concentration immediately beneath Basin III where very little deple-
tion has occurred to date. The extremely high downgradient concentrations
indicate that iron is still being leached as the water moves through the
downgradient soils. Manganese concentrations follow the same pattern as
iron. The mechanism for this is likely the reduction in an anaerobic environ-
ment of the oxidized hydroxides to the soluble ferrous and manganous forms
and/or chelation by the organic constituents remaining in the water. The
average iron discharge concentration from the monitored study site is 43 mg/L
downgradient from Basin I and 34 mg/L downgradient from Basin II. Iron con-
centrations greater than 0.3 mg/L can be expected to cause nuisance problems
in water supply use (USEPA, 1976).
An approximate iron balance attempted under the soils discussion adds
additional validity to the conclusion that iron and manganese are leaching
from the soils.
The zinc concentration in the control groundwater ranged from <20 to
99 yg/L and averaged 46 yg/L. The zinc concentrations downgradient from the
landfill ranged from <20 to 72 yg/L and averaged 46 yg/L, which indicated
no contribution from the landfill to the background concentration found in
the control wells.
The data in Table 20 and Figure 25 show that in passing through the
infiltration basins, the zinc concentration quickly reach background levels
even in the shallowest wells. Figure 32 (page 110) in the soils discussion
verifies a significant accumulation of zinc in the soils beneath each basin
and particularly within the first 0 to 30 cm (0 to 1 ft).
Extremely high values of zinc ranging from 948 to 3428 and averaging
2176 yg/L were found in well 42080. This is a shallow well 1.5 to 2 m (5 to
7 ft) deep constructed just at the top of the water table beneath Basin I. It
is probably significant that the average concentration of nickel in this well
was 173 yg/L as compared to values consistently less than detectable limits
of 100 yg/L for all other wells. A similar pattern was evident with copper.
Higher concentrations might be expected in nearby wells; however, the high
zinc values did not occur in adjacent well 42090 which is only 2.8 m (9 ft)
deeper than well 42080 or in the nearest downgradient well 42260 which is
1.8 to 2.4 m ( 6 to 8 ft) deep. For the potential groundwater flow rate of
1 to 2.5 m (3.5 to 8 ft) per day and the sampling time frame, groundwater
should move from Basin I to downgradient well 42260 but might not reach
further downgradient wells 42280 and 42290. The groundwater contours for
December, 1976, (Figure 5, page 14) show that flow from well 42080 could move
around well 42260. It is also possible that the high zinc concentration
would be removed by the soils before the groundwater reached any of the down-
gradient wells.
90
-------
One possibility is that a slug of wastewater containing high concen-
trations of metals was infiltrated into the same or an adjacent pit where
well 42080 is located. The zinc concentrations of 964, 3428, 3365, and
948 yg/L for the four sampling rounds suggest the passage of a slug of
contaminated water. However, the duration is not consistent with a small
slug unless some adsorption and leaching or flushing are also occurring at
the fluctuating interface of the saturated zone. Another possibility is
that sludge or even some metal object has been disposed near well 42080 in
the past.
Pesticides and Herbicides--
Test site groundwaters were examined for the presence of endrin, lindane,
methoxychlor, toxaphene, 2,4-D and 2,4,5 TP Silvex. Endrin, methoxychlor, and
toxaphene were not found above the respective detectable limits of <0.03,
<0.01 , and <0.1 ng/L.
The herbicides 2,4-D and 2,4,5 TP Silvex were found at concentrations in
the same range as encountered in the control groundwater and at concen-
trations well below problem levels.
The lindane concentration in the applied effluent ranged from 0.5 to
10,300 ng/L with the higher values occurring in August, 1976. The lindane
concentration observed in the treatment site groundwater ranged from <0.2
to 6,480 ng/L and decreased with distance of travel along the direction of
groundwater flow (Figure 26). There was no discerning gradient with depth
except that high values did not occur in the deepest wells beneath the basins.
At Basin I the average concentration of the applied effluent was 2830
ng/L and the average concentration beneath the basin was 484 ng/L. This
includes the average concentration of the deepest well which was only 18.6
ng/L or near background levels. The previously selected downgradient wells
averaged 62.8 ng/L.
Effluent concentrations at Basins II and III averaged 1227 ng/L as
compared to average concentrations beneath the basins of 1172 ng/L and
227 ng/L, respectively. Again, the deepest wells were considerably lower,
averaging 119 ng/L beneath Basin II and 31 ng/L or near background levels
beneath Basin III.
The higher loading rates and higher water table at Basin II are
apparently resulting in higher concentrations getting to the shallow and
intermediate wells immediately beneath the basin as compared to the other
two basins. However, the average downgradient concentration of 69.5 ng/L
is about the same as Basin I downgradient wells and indicates continued
reduction with travel.
The lindane concentration in the landfill groundwater ranged from <0.2
to 6.2 ng/L and averaged 3 ng/L. The control groundwater ranged from 0.4 to
70.4 ng/L and averaged 21 ng/L and could have contributed to the test site
groundwater concentrations. Lindane concentration of the test site ground-
water decreased with depth and movement downgradient. The National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations standard maximum contaminant level for
91
-------
AUG. 1976
120
51-35
DEC. 1976
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
200 4OO
800
Meon vqlua of porometar, no/L
Screen depthdn feet)
NA-Mo data a*«llabl«
Note: No data available unless noted
Rgur« 26. Groundwater constituents.- Undone
92
-------
lindane is 4,000 ng/L (USEPA, 1976). The minor concentrations leaving the
areas are not of significant concern.
Coliform Bacteria—
Total and fecal coliform results are shown on Figures 27 and 28,
respectively. These evaluations used the data from all wells rather than
those designated in the previous analyses. Despite taking all precautions,
some contamination during the field sampling may be responsible for the
scattered positive total coliform counts in some of the wells not located
beneath or adjacent to the basins. This should be considered when evaluating
the data.
Positive counts for total coliform occurred in two of eight control well
samples and two of seven landfill well samples.
Positive total coliform counts were consistently found directly beneath
all three basins. Often the results were too numerous to count. Beneath the
basins, positive total coliform counts were found at all monitoring depths.
For wells downgradient from Basin II the total coliform counts were signifi-
cantly less than directly below Basin II with only two samples yielding
positive results. With the exception of the August, 1976, sampling, the same
trend occurred for wells downgradient from Basin I. During the August, 1976,
sampling round, however, two samples from wells downgradient from Basin I
yielded results for total coliform too numerous to count. High values
occurring only on the first round suggested contamination from construction.
In contrast, positive fecal coliform counts which are more a reliable
indicator of fecal contamination were restricted to the shallower well
depths directly beneath the basins. Only three samples exhibited positive
fecal coliform counts of 183, 300 and 4/100 mL for depths greater than
6 m (20 ft) beneath the basins. No fecal coliforms were found at depths below
9 m (30 ft).
For wells downgradient from Basins I and II, no positive fecal coliform
counts occurred. One positive fecal coliform count (69/100 ml) was monitored
during March, 1977, for intermediate well number 42370 which is approximately
50 m (165 ft) from Basin II and 2.1 to 2.7 m (7 to 9 ft) deep.
The obviously decreasing magnitude of total coliform with depth and with
movement away from the basins and the absence of positive fecal coliform
counts in any well deeper than 12 m (40 ft) or further than 50 m (165 ft)
downgradient illustrates the capability of the sands to limit significant
movement of the infiltrated coliform.
Viruses--
The control site wells tested negative for infectious viruses on all
four sampling rounds. The primary treatment plant effluent tested positive
for virus particles on all four sampling rounds ranging from 120 to 4659
infectious virus units per 100 L of wastewater (Table 21).
On the first sampling round, August, 1976, viruses were found in 9 of 10
test wells beneath Basins I and II at depths varying from 0.6 to 16.8 m
93
-------
NA
46-50
/NA 40-45
3-5
0
10-12
MAR. 1977
MAY 1977
M
rlx
Mta
2OO 4OO
I 1
80O
Meon value of parameter.^/100 ml_
Screen depthdn feet)
MA- No «ara mailabl*
TNTC - Too numerous to count
Rgur« 27. Groundwoier constitu«nt«.- Total coliform.
94
-------
0 200 400 «OO /N
Figure 28. GrounAwoter constituents.- Fecal coliform.
Meon value of porometef. #/IOO mL
Screen depth(in faet)
HA-Ho data avallakl*
TNTC- Too numerous to count
95
-------
TABLE 21. VIRUS ISOLATION
Source
Sample No.
Control Site Wells
410301
410302
410303
410304
FTP Effluent
425501
425502
425503
425504
Test Site Wells
Area I
"420501
420803
120901
420902
420903
420904
421001
421002
421003
421004
Area II
421701
421702
421703
421704
421801
421802
421803
421804
420401
420402
420403
420404
Depth
Screened Date
(m) Sampled
7.9-9.1 8-29-76
12-13-76
3-12-77
5-26-77
NA 8-30-76
12-16-76
3-07-77
5-30-77
1.5-2.1 8-29-76
3-07-77
4.3-4.9 8-30-76
12-14-76
3-12-77
5-31-77
6.1-6-7 8-29-76
12-14-76
3-12-77
5-31-77
0.6-1.2 8-27-76
12-16-76
3-09-77
5-31-77
t.2-1.8 8-27-76
12-15-76
3-09-77
5-30-77
1.8-2.4 8-28-76
12-25-76
3-11-77
5-30-77
Original
Volume of
Sample (L)
273
151
132
151
68
57
30
68
167
108
151
79
76
87
151
114
76
132
265
64
106
87
174
83
121
68
250
102
76
102
x Volume
of Concentrate3
(mL)
50
33
33
29
66
33
66
74
182
83
110
99
99
55
83
66
94
66
61
88
107
94
44
55
44
64
66
44
66
58
per lOO.mL of
BGM
0
0
0
0
4800
333
100
110
1267
0
50
0
0
0
35
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
15
25
0
0
24
0
0
0
Infectious
Concentrate
PB
—
0
--
—
200
--
„_
0
__
0
—
__
0
--
__
0
0
„
__
0
Virus Units
per 100 L
BGM
0
0
0
0
4659
193
220
120
1381
0
36
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
4
17
0
0
6
0
0
0
of Sample
PB
—
0
--
—
440
—
__
0
„
__
0
0
__
0
o
0
(Continued)
-------
Table 21. Continued
Depth
Source Screened
Sample No. (m)
421901 2.9-3.5
421902
421903
421904
422001 4.3-4.9
422002
422003
422004
420301 7.9-9.1
420302
420303
420304
422101 15.5-16.8
422102
422103
422104
Downgradlent from Area II
423701 2.1-2.7
423702
423703
423704
423901 9.3-10.5
423902
423903
423904
424002 15.4-16.6
424004
Date
Sampled
8-28-76
12-15-76
3-08-77
5-29-77
8-25-76
12-14-76
3-11-77
5-29-77
8-30-76
12-12-76
3-10-77
5-27-77
8-29-76
12-11-76
3-11-77
5-27-77
8-26-76
12-15-76
3-08-77
6-01-77
8-26-76
12-13-76
3-06077
6-01-77
12-16-76
6-01-77
Original
Volume of
Sample (L)
125
79
76
98
265
95
76
83
235
76
106
61
182
114
76
57
227
61
76
114
212
76
170
132
151
121
Volume
of Concentrate
(ml)
77
44
66
108
193
110
72
72
121
50
44
99
110
330
66
53
88
83
44
44
77
99
94
55
22
39
per 100hmL
BGMD
0
0
90
0
8
0
0
0
13
0
40
0
4
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Infectious
of Concentrate
PBC
—
0
--
--
0
--
__
--
0
--
--
0
--
„
—
0
--
..
--
0
—
__
--
Virus Units
per 100 L
BGM
0
0
78
0
6
0
0
0
7
0
17
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
of Sample
PB
—
0
—
„
—
0
—
__
—
0
—
__
—
0
--
„
—
0
--
._
—
0
--
--
Volume of concentrate includes 10% fetal calf serum.
b Buffalo Green Monkey
c Primary Baboon
-------
(2 to 55 ft). In December, 1976, viruses were found in 7 of the 10 test wells
beneath Basins I and II. However, in March, 1977, viruses were found in only
2 of the 10 wells and, in May, 1977, no viruses were detected in any of the
10 test wells (Figure 29).
Downgradient from the infiltration basins viruses occurred one time
in shallow well 42370 which is 50 m (165 ft) from Basin II, and one time in
the intermediate depth well 42390 which is 250 m (820 ft) from Basin II.
However, no viruses were detected in deep well 42400 which is located next
to well 42390.
It is significant that fecal coliforms occurred in well 43370 but were
never found in wells 42390 or 42400. This and the supporting coliform data
from Basins I and III reasonably define the limit of coliform movement in
these sands. Considering viral particle size and electrical charge, it
would be expected that viruses would travel further through permeable sands
than coliforms.
Although the selected sampling wells did not fully define the extent
of virus movement downgradient, the decreasing number in well 42390 and
the negative results in well 42400 indicate that viruses probably do not move
much further downgradient.
During round 2 (December, 1976), virus samples were also concentrated
using the bentonite technique developed by the U.S. Army Bioengineering
Research and Development Laboratory, Ft. Detrick, MD (Shaub, 1977). The
results obtained by the Ft. Detrick Laboratory are shown in Table 22.
All samples from the control sites were negative for viruses. The
treated effluent was positive for viruses on all four testing rounds. The
test wells in Basin I and Basin II produced virus isolates in 18 out of 38
samples. However, only 2 of 10 samples from wells downgradient from Basin II
showed positive for virus.
Selected positive virus samples were identified using neutralization
tests. Of the 17 identifications, there were 5 polio viruses, 3 coxachie B4,
and 9 echo viruses.
No attempts were made to differentiate the polio viruses into vaccine
or wild strains. However, the National Center for Disease Control in Atlanta
reported no cases of polio in the state of New Jersey for the study period.
It is extremely difficult to correlate the isolation of echo viruses and
coxachie viruses in wastewater or in water wells adjacent to wastewater
irrigation sites. It must be assumed that human cases existed in the popu-
lation served by the treatment plants; however, contact with New Jersey State
Health Department Epidemiology Section failed to uncover any reported out-
breaks of aseptic meningitis or exanthens during the study period.
Surface Water
Surface waters from the Maurice River and the Tarkiln and the Parvin
Branch tributaries were sampled in August, 19765 and March, 1977, at lo-
cations indicated in Figure 6 (page 22). Analyses of the surface water
-------
ISOLATE, BOM
EFFLUENT'4699
AUG. 1976
ISOLATE,
3GM, HEL
EFFLUENT=
DEC. 1976
ISOLATE
BQM, PB
EFFLUENT'220,440
MAR. 1977
ISOLATE, 8GM
EFFLUENT-120
MAY 1977
A
Units p«r 100 Ut»n (BGM,P9,HEL)
Screen depth(m feet)
NA-N8 aato ovo.labU
Figure 29. Groundwater constituents.- Infectious virus units.
99
-------
TABLE 22. VIRUS ISOLATION BV THE BENTONITE METHOD
O
O
Source
Sample No.
Control Site Well
410302
FTP Effluent
425502
"lest Site Wells
Area I
~470902
421002
Area II
421702
421802
420402
421902
422002
420302
422102
Downgradient from
423702
42390?
424002
Depth
Screened
(m)
7.9-9.1
NA
4.3-4.9
6.1-6.7
0.6-1.2
1.2-1.8
1.8-2.4
2.9-3.5
4.3-4.9
7.9-9.1
15.5-16.8
Area II
2.1-2.7
9.3-10.5
15.4-16.6
Date
Sampled
12-13-76
12-16-76
12-14-76
12-14-76
12-16-76
12-15-76
12-15-76
12-15-76
12-14-76
12-12-76
12-11-76
12-15-76
12-13-76
12-16-76
Original
Volume of
Sample (L)
60
10
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
37
30
40
42
40
Volume
of Concentrate
(ml)
76
91
100
101
111
107
110
108
109
91
150
109
91
126
per 100 nil of
BGMd
0
476
0
59
.-
20
—
—
56
--
0
Infectious
Concentrate
HELD
0
238
0
41
10
0
71
0
20
102
164
0
10
0
Virus Units
per 100 L of Sample
BGM HEL
0 0
4330 2170
0 0
150 103
28
0
56 196
0
55
250
280 820
0
22
0 0
Buffalo Green Monkey
Human Embryo Lung
-------
samples were compared to determine if there was evidence that the treatment or
landfill sites affected groundwater discharges to the streams.
Statistical comparisons were made of the surface water for both the
Maurice River and Parvin Branch using the same methods as in the groundwater
analysis. The first analysis compares control surface water upstream of the
treatment plant on the Maurice River with test surface water on the Maurice
River downgradient from the treatment plant in the direction of groundwater
flow. The control surface water is identified by stations 42500 and 42540.
The test surface water is identified by stations 42510 and 42530. The results
of the analysis in Table 23 show that no significant differences were identi-
fied for any of the parameters analyzed. The greater flow of the Maurice
River has a significant effect on diluting the impact of infiltrating flow
from the treatment plant.
The surface water for the Parvin Branch was analyzed in the same manner
as the above analysis. The upstream control surface water for the Parvin
Branch is identified as stations 42440, 42450, and 42480. The test surface
water for the Parvin Branch located downgradient from the treatment plant in
the direction of groundwater flow is identified as stations 42460, 42470,
42490, and 42520. The results of the analysis in Table 24 indicate mean
concentrations for conductivity, total alkalinity, dissolved solids, chlo-
ride, dissolved organic carbon, boron, iron and sodium were significantly
greater at the 0.05 level in the test surface water than in the control
surface water. Except for iron, the same parameters occur in the Landis
effluent in significantly greater concentrations than in the control ground-
water. These results show the influence of the treatment system on the water
quality in the Parvin Branch. Dissolved oxygen, calcium, and magnesium were
found to have mean concentrations greater in the control surface water.
These concentrations indicate that approximately 75 percent of the 1.8
Mgal/d increase in stream flow below Basins II and III is infiltrated waste-
water moving into the stream. Apparently 34 percent of the average daily
infiltrated wastewater in Basins II and III had reached Parvin Branch above
Station 42520. The groundwater contours (Figure 4, page 18) show that most
of the remaining loading on Basins II and III will reach Parvin Branch prior
to its confluence with the Maurice River.
Ammonium nitrogen did not show as significantly different at the 0.05
level; however, the total nitrogen when evaluated in terms of the stream
flows did increase substantially. The control stream water with a flow of
1.15 Mgal/d had a total nitrogen concentration of 8.3 mg/L (0.6 total organ-
ic-N + 1.5 ammonia-N +6.2 nitrate-N) as compared to the test stream water
with a flow of 2.95 Mgal/d and a total nitrogen concentration of 12.0 mg/L
(5.5 total organic-N + 3.8 ammonia-N + 2.7 nitrate-N) (Table 24).
Using the material balance equations shown in Table 25, the calculated
concentration of the increased flow of 1.80 Mgal/d is 14.4 mg/L. A second
material balance calculation utilizing the control groundwater concentration
is necessary if it is accepted that 75 percent of this additonal flow is
infiltrated wastewater. This gives a flow of 1.35 Mgal/d at a concentration
of 17.9 mg/L, which compares to an average total nitrogen concentration in
101
-------
TABLE 23. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN MAURICE RIVER WATER
UPSTREAM (CONTROL) AND DOWNSTREAM (TEST) OF THE TREATMENT PLANT
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Means (mg/L
Control
9.6
6.4
99
10
71 ,
1.0b
22.3
7 .
O.lb
TNTCC
1
5.7
0.5
1.0
1.7
0.08
0.04
16 u
0.5b
193
199,
20b
3L
50b
22U
20b
0»6
100B
3
0 05b
IK(T
h
100
1.8
4
20b
t_ v/i
10b L
L
0.03
17 8
L
0.01°
o r
V_f * 4.
13 6
66l5
unless noted)
Test
9.1
6.5
96
8
73 ,
1.0b
20.3
12 .
O.lb
TNTC
9
5.2
0.1
0.7
1.7
0.07
0.03
16 K
0.5b
202
149,
h
20°
3
50b
20b
Us.
20b
1, 0
•*• U. "^
ioob
3
0 05b
W • \J *S
uod
J. h \J
ioob
2.1
5
20b
t-^L
10b
J. V L
0 03b
\J » \J ^J
48 6
* K
o.or
o r
VJ • J.
14 1
J. " • J.
65.3
b Test and control sites are significantly different at the 0.05 level
c Average concentrations below detection limit indicated.
TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
102
-------
TABLE 24. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN PARVIN BRANCH WATER
UPSTREAM (CONTROL) AND DOWNSTREAM (TEST) OF THE TREATMENT PLANT
Means (mg/L unless noted)
Parameter
Dissolved Oxygen
pH (units)
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Chloride
Sulfide-S
Total Col i form (#/100 ml)
Fecal Col i form (#/100 ml)
Dissolved Organic C
Soluble Organic N
Ammonium-N
Nitrate-N
Soluble Phosphorus
Soluble Orthophosphate
Sulfate
Aluminum
Arsenic (yg/L)
Boron (yg/L)
Cadmium (yg/L)
Calcium
Cobalt (yg/L)
Chromium (yg/L)
Copper (yg/L)
Iron
Lead (yg/L)
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury (yg/L)
Nickel (yg/L)
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc (yg/L)
Selenium (yg/L)
Endrin (ng/L)
Lindane (ng/L)
Methoxychlor (ng/L)
Toxaphene (ng/L)
2,4-D (ng/L)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/L)
Control
8.9
6.7
136
18
106
1.6
16.0
11 b
O.lb
TNTCC
400
2'2b
0.1D
1.5
6.2
0.04
0.04
7 b
0.5D
21
83
20b
9b
50b
20b
20b
0.4
100D
6
o.og
^o
100°
4.7
4
30
10 b
0.03°
66.6 b
°-°l
0.1°
16.3
72.3
Test
5.3a
68
ssr
63a
197a
2.6
23.0
40 b
O.lb
TNTC
13 a
4'7b
o.r
3.8
2.7
0.04
0.06
12 b
0.5°
10a
245b
20,
4b
50b
20b
20 a
6b9a
100°
4a
0.12
V
100
6a2
47b
20b
10 b
0.03°
48.4 b
0.01
0.1
15.2
44.4
? Test and control sites are significantly different at the 0.05 level
Average concentrations below detection limit indicated.
c TNTC - At least one sample too numerous to count.
103
-------
TABLE 25. CALCULATION AND COMPARISON OF INCREMENTAL FLOW CONCENTRATIONS
OF STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT PARAMETERS
Parameter Means
Parameter
Conductivity (ymhos/cm)
Total Alkalinity
Dissolved Solids
Total Solids0
Chloride
Total Organic Carbon0
Dissolved Organic Carbon
Boron (yg/L)
Iron
Sodium
A
Control Surface
Water
(Table 24)
136
18
106
115
11
3.0
2.2
83
0.4
4
B
Test Surface
Water
(Table 24)
381
63
197
208
40
7.5
4.7
245
6.9
47
D
Computed
Material
Balance
538
92
255
267
59
10.4
6.3
348
11.1
74
(mg/L unless noted)
Test Groundwater
Beneath Basin III
(Table 12)
653
161
326
—
70
33.6
21.7
609
29.3
86
Downgradient
From Basin II
(Table 16)
729
211
345
—
78
9.0
13.9
486
33.6
100
Parameters with mean concentrations significantly greater for the test surface water than control
surface water (Table 24).
Computed concentrations of constituents in groundwater as it enters Parvin Branch using the following
material balance: C.Q. + CDQD = CnQn
C,, = cone, in column A
Qfl = Total flow in Parvin & Tarkiln Branches above basins
H = 1.51 + 0.27 = 1.78 cfs (Table 2)
CB = cone, in column B QB = Total flow in Parvin Branch below basins = 4.56 cfs (Table 2)
CD = cone, computed for column D QQ = QB - QA (apparent contribution from groundwater) = 2.78 cfs
Data from Appendix B, Table B-l.
-------
the Landis effluent of 47.7 mg/L and in the groundwater beneath and down-
gradient from the basins of 21.2 mg/L.
All the salient parameters increase markedly as the Tarkiln Branch
flows from station 42440 to station 42490 and at downstream stations 42470
and 42520 on the Parvin Branch. These increases are more obvious if the con-
centrations of incremental flow attributed to groundwater inflow below the
basins is calculated as shown in Table 25.
The groundwater contribution is shown as 0.079 m3/sec (2.78 cfs) or 1.8
Mgal/d and differs from the 1.92 Mgal/d increase in flows discussed under
surface water because of the loss between stations 42450 and 42480. The
high groundwater contribution along this reach of the stream is a result
of some natural groundwater inflow of very low parameter concentrations
plus the infiltrated effluent of high concentration.
The average concentration of the groundwater or infiltrated effluent
before it enters the stream is determined from the average concentration of
wells beneath Basin III and downgradient from Basin II. Those parameters
which move through the soils relatively unchanged include conductivity,
dissolved solids, chloride, boron, and sodium and the respective percentages
of those parameter concentrations occurring in the increased stream flow as
compared to the test groundwater are 78, 76, 79, 64, and 80.
SOILS
Soil samples from the bottom of infiltration Basins I, II and III were
taken at depths of 0 to 31, 95 to 105, and 295 to 305 cm in August, 1976,
and March, 1977. Control samples were collected near each basin in areas
unaffected by wastewater infiltration.
Statistical Comparisons of the Soils
Statistical comparisons of the mean parameter concentrations for the
soils of the test and control sites were performed using the method of
pooled variances at the 0.05 level of significance. The analyses consist
of three comparisons for the three depths sampled between the test and
control sites. The results in Table 26 show significantly greater differ-
ences at the 0 to 31 cm depth to exist for pH, total organic nitrogen, total
phosphorus, total sulfur, exchangeable calcium, extractable copper, lindane,
2,4,5 TP silvex, total aluminum, total calcium, total sodium, and total zinc
for the test site soils than for the control site soils. For many of the
metals, average concentrations were below the detection limit for both the
test and control sites. Further, it is noted from Table 26 that, although
a statistical comparison is not possible for extractable zinc and total
copper because the average concentrations are below the detection limits for
the control site, it does appear that the means for these two parameters are
somewhat greater in the test site soils. For the remaining parameters at the
0-31 cm depth, no significant differences were found.
For the 95 to 105 cm depth, significantly greater mean concentrations
were found for pH, total organic nitrogen, total phosphorus, available
phosphorus, and total calcium in the test site soil than in the control site
105
-------
TABLE 26. MEAN CONCENTRATIONS OF PARAMETERS IN CONTROL AND TEST SITE SOILS
O
Ol
Means (pq/L unless noted)
Depth
Parameter
pH (units)
Inorganic Nitrogen
Total Organic Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus
Available Phosphorus
Total Sulfur
Cation Exchange Capacity (meq/lOOg)
Extractable Aluminum
Extractable Boron
Extractable Cadmium
Exchangeable Calcium
Extractable Cobalt
Extractable Chromium
Extractable Copper
Extractable Iron
Extractable Lead
Exchangeable Magnesium (mg/g)
Extractable Maganese
Extractable Nickel
Exchangeable Potassium (mg/g)
Exchangeable Sodium (mg/g)
Extractable Zinc
Endrin (ng/g)
Lindane (ng/g)
Methoxychlor (ng/g)
Toxaphene (ng/g)
2,4-D (ng/g)
2,4,5 TP Silvex (ng/g)
Total Aluminum (mg/g)
Total Cadmium
Total Calcium (mg/g)
Total Cobalt
Total Chromium
Total Copper
Total Iron (mg/g)
Total Lead
Total Magnesium (mg/g)
Total Manganese
Total Mercury
Total Nickel
Total Potassium (mg/g)
Total Sodium (mg/g)
Total Zinc
Total Arsenic
Total Selenium
Control
4.0
19.4
158
25
2
116
0.9
45.7
0.51,
0.05b
o.oib
0.12°
0.05b
0.2
52
0.8 ,
0.01b
1.8b
0.1 b
0.01b
°'°i
2.5°
0.6b
1.0 .
0.01b
°'5 b
0.13b
1.3
068
2D
0505
2h
5b
2b
V
10° ,
0.01b
43 h
V
20°
0.2b
0.06
2
1.3
0.6
0-31 cm
Test
5.2a
22,8
499a
240a
86,
253a
0.8
41.8
0.27,
0.05b
0.08a
0.12°
0.05b
9.93
36
5-1 k
0.01b
0.6,
0.1 b.
0.01b
0.01b
8.3°
0.6b
33. 9a
°-°l
0.66.
0.13b
3'3a
W
2
V5
2°
5b
13a
1.9
16
0.10
39 h
V
20B
0.3 ,
0,16a
22a
1.0
0.8
Control
4.4
22.9
17
31
3
91
0.5
61.3
0.07.
0.05b
0.02b
0.12°
0.05b
0.3
33 ,
0.5b,
0.01b
3.2b
O.lb
0.01b
°'°D
2.5D
167
2D
0 04
2h
5b
2b
2B9
10B
0.02
57 h
1 Ob
20°
0.4
0.10
6
1.5
0.5
95-105 cm
Test
5.3a
23 7
43a
126a
67a
67
0.3
86.5
0.19,
0.05b
0.03b
0.12°
0.05°
5.8
24 h
0.5b
0.01b
0.3,
O.lb
0.01b
0.01b
3.7
V
2°
0 07a
2°
5b
4
2h2
10B
0.05
51 h
1 Ob
20°
0.4
0.15
13
1.5
0.6
295-305 cm
Control
5.2
8.8
2
17
5
103
0.4
44.3
0.18,
0.05b
0.02.
0.12°
0.05b
0.3
29 ,
0.5b,
0.01b
l.lu
0.1 K
0.01b
°-°l
2.5°
UO
2b
0 08
2°
5b
2b
1.7
10 h
0.01b
41 ,
!/
20B
0.4
0.13
3
1.3
0.5
Test
5.6
12 4
26a
99a
43a
64
0.4
38.7
0.31,
0.05b
0.03.
0.12°
0.05b
5.0
39 ,
0.5b
0.5,
O.lb
0.01b
0.01b
4.3
1.5
2B
0 07
2°
5b
3
2.0
10B
0.05
36 .
I/
20B
0.4
0,19
12a
1.5
0.6
? Test and control sites significantly different at the 0.05 level.
Average concentration below detection limit indicated.
-------
soil. Except for available phosphorus, these parameter means were also
significantly greater at the 0 to 31 cm depth. The remaining eight parameters
were not found to be significantly greater indicating retainage is occurring
only at the shallower depths for these parameters. Finally, at the 295 to
305 cm depth, means for total organic nitrogen, total phosphorus, available
phosphorus, and total zinc were significantly greater for the test site soils
than the control site soils.
Detailed Discussion
Selected parameters are plotted in Figures 30 through 34 as a function of
depth below the basin surface and below the surface of the control soil area.
For the test site parameters, concentrations generally decrease with depth
below the basin surface. For the control site parameters, only organic
nitrogen decreases regularly with depth. Total phosphorus and total zinc in
the control site soils appear to be random with depth.
Nitrogen--
The total organic nitrogen concentrations (Figure 30) in the deeper
test site soils tend to converge with the control site deep nitrogen concen-
trations. The differences between the organic nitrogen accumulated in Basin
I soils and Basin III soils do not reflect the difference between 50 and 3
years of operation, respectively. But there is a stable level of organic
nitrogen for a soil, which once reached, merely results in a higher annual
liberation of ammonia. As already observed, the majority of the nitrogen is
leaving the infiltration site via the groundwater.
Phosphorus--
While the total phosphorus concentrations of the deeper test site soils
must converge with the respective concentrations in the deeper control site
soils, Figure 31 indicated considerable accumulation throughout the depths
sampled. The water quality data indicates that the phosphorus adsorption
capacity of the soils immediately beneath Basins I and II has been severely
reduced or exhausted, but that the soils beneath Basin III are apparently
still active.
The average phosphorus concentration of the effluent is 9.0 mg/L and
if a loading rate of 21.4 m (70 ft) for 3 years is assumed, then 5,740 kg/ha
(5,114 Ib/acre) has been applied to Basin III. Approximately 57 kg/ha
(51 Ib/acre) has percolated to the groundwater and 4,772 kg/ha (4,252 Ib/acre)
has accumulated in the first 300 cm (9.8 ft) of soil (Table 26). The excess
phosphorus has likely accumulated below 300 cm (9.8 ft).
Copper and Zinc--
Similar balances were attemped for the three basins for cooper and zinc.
Loading rates for Basin I were assumed to average 11.3 m (37 ft) for 50 years.
Loading rates for Basin II were assumed to average 21.4 m (70 ft) for a
period of 29 years, but actual rates would have been less during the early
years and greater prior to the completion of Basin III. An examination of
Figure 32 shows that both parameters have accumulated in the soils and that
the accumulation decreases with depth as would be expected. The water
quality data indicates that both parameters are still being effectively re-
moved from the wastewater.
107
-------
30-
en
c
o
(I)
w
0
o
20-
10 -
0
Depth cm
v/ /A Control
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin I
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin II
30 ' 100 ' -300
Basin III
Total Inorganic Nitrogen
500 -
1 400 -
c
o
S 30° ~
i-
S 200 -
o
100 -
g
Depth cm
!_
-,
«n _ n
30 i 100 i 300
Basin I
7
^
/
'
-
^n .n
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin II
_
/
/
^
/
-i
ra PI - n
30 ' 100 i 300
Basin III
Total Organic Nitrogen
Figure 30. Total inorganic and organic nitrogen mean concentrations
in control and test site soifs
108
-------
300-
Ol
CD
* 200 -
o
(0
-M
O)
0
J 100-
0
Depth cm
VS/A Control
^_^
0
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin I
0
0
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin II
^
1 J
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin III
Total Phosphorus
J.HU —
120 -
o» 100 -
en
n.
° 80-
-i-j
S-
S 60 -
u
0
o
40 -
20 -
0
Depth cm
30
nri
r-|
100 ' 300
Basin I
R/5
30 100 300
Basin II
-
-i
"71 UAm
30 100 300
Basin III
Available Phosphorus
Figure 31. Totol and available phosphorus mean concentrations in
control and test site soils
109
-------
CD
O
•r—
-I-J
ro
OJ
o
30-
20-
10-
Depth cm
Control
Test
30
100 300
Basin I
30 100 300
Basin II
Total Zinc
30 100 300
Basin III
15-
en
5 10-
o
•4->
OJ
(i r~
C. 3~
O
0
Depth cm
7-
/
'
i
30
ft
/(
^
1
100
Basin
I
7
^
s
-
300
T\
M
I/I
-i
r
(/
1 1
30 100 300
Basin II
pj
\A
-
n
rd M
M (/I
i i
30 100 300
Basin III
Total Copper
Figure 32. Total zinc and copper mean concentrations in control
and test site soils
110
-------
8CO-I |
Ll
600-
o, 500-
CD
§ 400-
•r—
| 300-
O)
o
° 200-
100-
0
Depth cm
-^yy^i Control
: 1 Test
T
^
/
30
.,
/
/
/
/
/
/
^
^
/
^100 '
Basin I
'.
/
',
',
-
300
^
/
-j
30 '
/
/
^
'',
0
r-.
?
^
/
^
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
100 ' 300
Basin II
yi
^
^
y
',
/
^
^
/
'
^
^
/
XI
/
/
;
/
x
;
/
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin III
150-,
Total Potassium
en
100-
-------
3000-
en
? 2000-
o
rd
S_
•£
O)
£ 1000-
o
0-
Depth cm
7
/
^
^
r-
7
/
/
^
'
'
;
\
V//A Control
7
\
-,
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin I
y-
/
\
-
T
',
/
/
/
/
\
-
7
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
30 100 300
Basin II
/
X
/
/
/
/
l-l
<-r
/
;
/
/
\
/
/
/
/
X
— 1
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin III
Total Iron
80-
en
1 60-
o
'^ 40-
ro
i.
c
S 20-
c
o
0-
7
,
/
/
/
/
/
/
. .
?•
/
^
/
/
/
^
f
-
Depth cm 30 ' 100 '
Basin I
t
/
£
300
_
.
y
X
/
/
^
—
/
/
/
/
y
/
/
/
^
/
~"
7
'
/
/
/
/
'
/
'
^
^
X
^^
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin II
-]
71
,
/
/
'
'
/
'/
__
/
^
^
X
/
/
/
x
X
/
X
/
x
/
X
^
/
30 ' 100 ' 300
Basin III
Total Manganese
Figure 34. Total iron and manganese mean concentrations
in control and test site soils
112
-------
Potassium, Calcium, Magnesium, and Sodium--
The water quality discussion of these parameters concluded that there
was some uptake of calcium and magnesium by the soils while sodium and
potassium were passing on through. However, in some cases, the water quality
data appeared to conflict with these conclusions.
There was insufficient data to statistically compare the soils of the
individual basins; however, the overall statistical comparison showed signi-
ficantly more sodium and calcium at the 0 to 31 cm depth. At the 95-105 cm
depth, only calcium was present in significantly greater amounts.
The graphical comparisons of the individual basins (Figure 33) show an
apparent accumulation of magnesium but no apparent accumulation of potassium
within the first 300 cm of the soils. Hence, the soils data generally
substantiate the water quality conclusions regarding these parameters.
The parameter balances summarized in Table 27 are as variable as the
data, but are still within the same range of magnitude and do show some re-
lationship to loading rates and years of operation. An exception is noted
for zinc accumulation in Basin III which is 8 times the amount applied.
Iron and Manganese--
The groundwater quality discussion concluded that iron and manganese
were leaching from the soil. Figure 34 illustrates that leaching of iron has
occurred beneath Basin I and that both iron and manganese have leached from
the soil beneath Basin II.
An approximate materials balance indicates that 34,040 kg/ha
(30,400 Ib/acre) of iron has been leached from the first 300 cm of soil
beneath Basin II. The average iron concentration in the groundwater beneath
Basin II is 9 mg/L and the applied effluent averages 1.2 mg/L. The difference
of 8 mg/L is equivalent to 668 kg (1,474 Ib) per year and the first 300 cm
of soil could have supplied this difference for 21 years. The iron concen-
tration of the groundwater beneath Basin III is 29 mg/L which indicates that
initially more than 7.8 mg/L would have been leached from Basin II and that
much of the present concentration is coining from soil below 300 cm.
It is interesting to note that the average concentration of those wells
beneath Basin II which are less than 100 cm deep is 5.3 mg/L, which reflects
an increase in iron concentration of only 4.1 mg/L.
PROJECTED USEFUL LIFE OF SITE FOR WASTEWATER INFILTRATION
The original intent of this study was to provide answers to a number
of questions related to the long-term viability of land treatment systems.
Two such questions discussed in the following paragraphs are:
1. For how long a period can a land treatment system be expected to
provide satisfactory treatment for water?
2. What effect does continuing long-term application of organic,
nitrogenous, and heavy metal constituents have on the soil system?
113
-------
TABLE 27. PHOSPHORUS, COPPER AND ZINC BALANCES
Ib/acre
Parameter
Phosphorus
Basin III
Copper
Basin I
Zinc
Basin I
Copper
Basin II
Zinc
Basin II
Copper
Basin III
Zinc
Basin III
Applied
5114
235
634
421
663
44
69
Percolate to
Groundwater
51
0
0
0
0
0
0
Accumulated
in Soil
4252
119
297
231
655
108
551
Not Accounted
For
811
116
337
190
8
-64
-482
The Vineland-Landis infiltration basin system has been discharging
nitrogen constituents to the groundwater underlying the test site. While
all three basins contribute to this discharge, Basin II contributes the
largest concentrations, Basin I is next and Basin III was observed to con-
tribute the least, but still sizeable, concentrations. Ammonium nitrogen
is the form of nitrogen present in the highest concentration in all of the
di scharges.
Total nitrogen concentrations of the groundwater downgradient or
beneath Basins I, II, and III varied with loading rates, unsaturated depth
and service life and was 49, 58, and 43 percent, respectively, of the applied
concentrations. The COD concentration downgradient from Basins I and II was
11 and 14 percent of the applied concentration. Immediately beneath Basins
I and II the soluble phosphorus concentration was 30 and 76 percent of the
applied concentration, respectively, but decreased to 3.2 and 4.3 percent
downgradient. The concentration immediately beneath Basin III was only 1.4
percent of that applied.
Phosphorus is no longer accumulating in the soils immediately beneath
infiltration Basins I and II. Phosphorus is still accumulating in the
soils beneath Basin III which had only been in operation three years.
Phosphorus is leaving the area monitored for this study at concentrations
114
-------
in the range of 0.1 mg/L which indicates that continuing phosphorus removal
will depend upon downgradient soils that are not on the test site premises.
Metal constituents and particularly zinc, which have been observed to
accumulate in the test soils, continue to be effectively removed to minimum
detectable concentrations at monitoring wells immediately adjoining the infil
tration basins. Based upon this performance after 50 and 29 year periods
of operation, it is likely that the immediate test site can continue to pro-
vide another 50 years of satisfactory metals removal.
115
-------
REFERENCES
American Public Health Association. 1971. Standard Methods for the Exami-
nation of Water and Wastewater. 13th ed. New York, N.Y. 874 pp.
American Public Health Association. 1976. Standard Methods for the Exami-
nation of Water and Wastewater. 14th ed. New York, N.Y. 1,119 pp.
Bauer, William J. 1976. Long Term Effects of Applying Wastewater to Land;
Site Selection Report (unpublished). Submitted to U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
Bear, Farman D. 1964. Chemistry of the Soil. ACS Monograph 160.
Black, C. A. (ed.). 1965. Methods of Soil Analysis, Parts 1 and 2. Ameri-
can Society of Agronomy Series No. 9. 1,572 pp.
Bremner, J. M., and M.A. Tabatabai. 1972. Use of an Ammonia Electrode for
the Determination of Ammonium in Kjeldahl. Comm. Soil Science and
Plant Analysis. 3(2):159-165.
Busenberg, E., and C. V. Clemency. 1973. Determination of the Cation Ex-
change Capacity of Clays and Soils Using an Ammonia Electrode. Clays
and Clay Minerals. 21:213-217.
Crites, Ronald. 1977. Process Design Manual for Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
252 pp.
Ellis, Roscoe, Jr., John J. Hanway, George Holmgrem, Dennis R. Kennedy, and
0. W. Bidwell. 1975. Sampling and Analysis of Soils, Plants, Waste-
waters and Sludge. Agricultural Experiment Station Research Publica-
tion 170 and North Central Regional Publication 230, Kansas State
University, Manhattan, Kansas. 20 pp.
Instrumentation Laboratory Inc. 1975. Atomic Absorption Methods Manual.
Wilmington, Mass. 48 pp.
Johnson, Meredith E. 1950. Geologic map of New Jersey. State of New Jersey
Department of Conservation and Ecomomic Development, Atlas Sheet No. 40.
Lennette, Edwin H. (ed.). 1969. Diagnostic Procedures for Viral and
Rickettsial Infections. 4th ed. American Public Health Association.
New York, N.Y. 602 pp.
116
-------
Martin, Theodore D., J. F. Kopp, and Richard D. Ediger. 1975. Determining
Selenium in Water, Wastewater, Sediment, and Sludge by Flameless Atomic
Absorption Spectroscopy. Atomic Absorption Newsletter. 14(5).
Mills, P.A., J.H. Onley, and R. A. Gaither. 1963. Gas Chromatographic
Analysis of Pesticides. Varian Instruction Manual. Abstracted from
Journal of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 46:186.
New Mexico Resource Conservation and Development Council. 1975. Sureste
Resource Conservation and Development Project—Program of Action. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 118 pp.
Oceanography Internationl Inc. 1971. Instruction Manual. College Station,
Texas, pp. 1-1 to 12-5.
Orion Reserach Inc. 1975a. Ammonia Instruction Manual, Electrode Model
95-10. Cambridge, Mass. 27 pp.
Orion Research Inc. 1975b. Nitrate Instruction Manual, Electrode Model
93-07. Cambridge, Mass. 24 pp.
Orion Research Inc. 1975c. Sulfide Instruction Manual, Electrode Model
94-16A. Cambridge, Mass. 34 pp.
Orion Research Inc. 1975d. Lead Instruction Manual, Electrode Model
94-82. Cambridge, Mass 22 pp.
Orion Reserach Inc. 1976a. Sulfide Instruction Manual, Electrode Model
94-16A. Cambridge, Mass. 34 pp.
Orion Research Inc. 1976b. Chloride Instruction Manual, Electrode Model
94-17A. Cambridge, Mass. 28 pp.
Rooney, James G. 1971. Ground-water Sources, Cumberland County, New Jersey
State of New Jersey Division of Water Resources, Special Report No. 34.
65 pp.
Rosenau, Jack C., Solomon M. Lang, George S. Hilton, and James G. Rooney.
1969. Geology and Ground-water Resources of Salem County, New Jersey.
State of New Jersey Division of Water Policy and Supply, Special
Report No. 33. 142 pp.
Schaub, Stephen A., and Charles A. Sober. 1977. Virus and bacteria removal
from wastewater by rapid infiltration through soil. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology. 5:609-619.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1971. Methods for Organic Pesticides
in Water and Wastewater. National Environmental Research Center,
Cincinnati, Ohio. 58 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Methods for Chemcial Analysis
of Water and Wastes. EPA 625-16-74-003. Washington, D.C. 298 pp.
117
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Quality Criteria for Water.
EPA 440-9-76-023. Washington, D.C. 501 pp.
Walsh, Leo M. 1973. Soil Science of America, Soil Testing and Plant
Analysis.
Williams, I. H. 1968. Gas Chromatographic Analysis of Pesticides. Varian
Instruction Manual. Abstracted from Journal of the Association of
Official Analytical Chemists. 51:715.
Woodham, D. W., W. G. Mitchell, C. D. Loffis, and C. W. Collier. 1971.
Gas Chromatographic Analysis of Pesticides. Varian Instruction
Manual. Abstracted from Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry.
19:186.
Yip, G. 1964. Gas Chromatographic Analysis of Pesticides. Varian
Instruction Manual. Abstracted from Journal of the Association
of Offical Agricultural Chemists. 47:343.
118
-------
APPENDIX A
WELL LOGS FOR CONTROL AND TEST SITES
VINELAND, NEW JERSEY
Drill Hole Logs
Control Site
Hole 4101 0
Date: 8-21-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 45.5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 45.5 to 49.5 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-2 Loam, sandy, organic, roots
2-20 Sand, fine to medium, brown
20-30 Sand, medium to coarse, with some gravel
30-38 Sand, fine to coarse
38-45 Gravel and sand
45-48 Sand, fine to medium
48-50 Clay
Hole 41020
Date: 8-22-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 30 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 30 to 34 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
See Hole 41010
Hole 41030
Date: 8-22-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 26 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 26 to 30 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
119
-------
See Hole 41010
Hole 41040
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-1
1-25
Hole 4105Q
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-17
17-50
50-60
Hole 41060
8-22-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
2-in. plastic to 19.5 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 19.5 to 21.5 ft.
Hole augered to 25 ft., casing and screens jetted into place
with city water.
Depth in feet
Soil, fine, sandy and silty
Sand, fine to coarse with scattered gravel, buff to brown
3-5-77 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
2-in. plastic to 56 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.010 in.) plastic 56 to 60 ft.
Casing and screens set through hollow-stem auger; split-spoon
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, yellow
Sand, fine to medium, with fine gravel, yellow, sand
coarser at base
Sand, fine to coarse, silty, trace of clay, fine gravel
Date: 3-5-77 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 36 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.010 in.) plastic 36 to 40 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen pit through hollow-stem auger; aplit-spoon
sample 38-38.5 ft.
Log: Depth in feet
0-0.7 Soil, fine sandy, gray
.7-18 Sand, fine to medium, brown to orange, some gravel
18-35 Sand, fine to coarse, orange to brown, with fine to coarse
gravel
35-40 Sand, coarse, and gravel, medium
(Continued)
120
-------
Study Site
Hole T.H.
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-2
2-12.5
12.5-17.5
17.5-25
25-30
-1
8-2-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
2-in. plastic to 5.5 ft.
2-in. slotted (.010 in.) plastic 5.5 to 9.5 ft.
Split-spoon sample 5-7.5 ft.
Depth in feet
Sand, loose, damp, fine to medium, gray-brown, trace small
gravel
Sand, moist, blue-brown, fine to medium, trace small gravel
and silt.
Sand, dense, wet, fine to medium, brown, trace fine to coarse
gravel
Sand, dense, fine to coarse, brown, some fine to coarse gravel
Sand, dense, wet, fine to coarse, brown, gravel, trace of silt
Hole T.H.-2
Date: 8-2-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 7 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.010 in.) plastic 7 to 11 ft.
Remarks: Split-spoon sample 7.5-10 ft.
Log: Depth in feet
0-5 Sand, medium dense, damp, fine to medium, brown, trace
fine to medium gravel
5-7.5 Sand, medium dense, fine to medium, yellow-brown, trace
fine to medium gravel
7.5-10 Sand, medium dense, fine to medium, brown, trace fine to
coarse gravel
10-30 Sand, very dense, fine to coarse, brown, trace fine to
coarse gravel
Hole T.H.-3
Date: 8-13-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 23 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.030 in.) plastic 23 to 25 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered to 21 ft., and jetted with city water to 25 ft.
(Continued)
121
-------
Log:
Depth in feet
0-15 Sand, fine to medium, moist, brown
15-18 Sand, fine to medium, brown, wood/fragments
18-25 Sand, fine to coarse, brown, gravel at 25 ft.
Hole T.H.-4
Date: 8-14-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 17 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 17 to 19 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered to 15 ft., jetted with city water to 19 ft.
Log: Depth in feet
0-5 Sand, fine to medium, gray
5-19 Sand, fine to medium, brown
Hole T.H.-5
Date: 8-14-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 11 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 11 to 13 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered to 15 ft., caved back to 3 ft., jetted screen
to 13 ft. with city water
Log: Depth in feet
0-0.5 Soil, dark, organic
0.5-15 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole T.H.-7
Date: 8-14-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 12 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 12 to 14 ft.
Remarks: Augered to 6 ft., jetted to 14 ft. with city water
Log: Depth in feet
0-14 Sand, fine to medium gray-brown
Hole T.H.-8
Date: 8-14-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 9.5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 9.5 to 11.5
(Continued)
122
-------
Remarks: Augered to 6 ft., jetted with city water to 11.5 ft.
Log: Depth in feet
0-8 Sand, fine to medium, brown
8-11.5 Sand, fine to coarse, some small gravel and gravel at base
Hole 42020
Date: 8-22-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 7.5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. continuous slot (.020 in.) plastic 7.5 to 9.5 ft.
Remarks: Augered to 12 ft., split-spoon sample 10-12 ft.
Log: Depth in feet
0-1 Sand, fine, gray-white
1-3.5 Sand, fine to medium, brown
3.5-12 Sand, medium to coarse, gray, organic odor
Hole 4203 0
Date: 8-20-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 26 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 26 to 30 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-15 Sand, fine to coarse, gray
15-22 Sand, medium-coarse, small gravel
22-30 Sand, coarse, gray
Hole 42040
Date: 8-18-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 6 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 6 to 8 ft.
Remarks: Bottom of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-8 Sand, fine to medium, dark gray
Hole 42050
Date: 8-20-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 25.5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 25.5 to 29.5 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
(Continued)
123
-------
Log:
Depth in feet
0-6 Fill for dike
6-17 Sand, fine to medium, gray to brown
17-21 Sand, medium to coarse, gray
21-30 Sand, coarse, gray, and small to medium gravel
Hole 42060
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-44
44-59
59-51
51-55
55-60
8-21-76 Type Rig:
2-in. plastic to 58 ft.
Hollow-Stem Auger
2-in. wire-wound, continuous slot (.020 in.) plastic 58 to
60 ft.
Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray-brown
Clay, brownish-white
Sand, fine
Clay, with sand streaks
Sand, coarse, with gravel
Hole 42070
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 2 ft.
Screen: 2-in slotted (.020 in.) plastic 2 to 4 ft.
Remarks: Augured to 4 ft., floor of infiltration pit considered
ground level
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray
Log:
0-4
Hole 42080
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 5 to 7 ft.
Remarks: Floor of infiltration pit considered ground level
jetted into place with City water
Log: Depth in feet
0-7 Sand, fine to medium, gray
screen
(Continued)
124
-------
Hole 42090
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 14 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 14 to 16 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen jetted into place with city water, floor
of infiltration pit considered ground level.
Log: Depth in feet
0-16 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole 42100
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 20 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 20-22 ft.
Remarks: Augured to 12 ft., jetted to 22 ft. with city water; floor
of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-22 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole 42110
Date: 8-20-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 41 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 41 to 45 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-28 Sand, fine to medium, gray
28-38 Sand, coarse, gray, small gravel
38-43 Sand, fine to medium
43-44 Sand, medium to coarse, with gravel
44-45 Clay, sandy, pinkish red
Hole 42120
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 2 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 2 to 4 ft.
Remarks: Augered hole, floor of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-4 Sand, fine to medium, gray
(Continued)
125
-------
Hole 42130
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 5 to 7 ft.
Remarks: Augered hole, floor of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-7 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole 42140
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 9 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 9 to 11 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen jetted into position with city water, floor
of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-11 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole 42160
Date: 8-15-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 15 ft.
Screen: 2--in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 15 to 17 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen jetted into position, floor of infiltration
pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-17 Sand, fine to median, gray
Hole 42160
Date: 8-20-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 65 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.02C in.) plastic 65 to 70 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-6 Fill, dike
6-16 Sand, fine to medium, gray
16-41 Sand, fine to coarse, gray, small to medium gravel
41-45 Sand, fine, silty, occasional gravel
45-51 Sand, fine to medium, brownish
51-65 Sand, very fine to fine, silty, clay streaks, brown
65-70 Sand, medium to coarse, small gravel
(Continued)
126
-------
Hole 42170
Date: 8-18-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 2 ft.
Screen: 2-in. wire-wound continuous slot (.020 in.) plastic
2 to 4 ft.
Remarks: Augered hole, floor of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-4 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole 4218 Q-
Date: 8-18-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 4 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 4 to 6 ft.
Remarks: Augered hole, floor of infiltration pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-6 Sand, fine to medium, gray
Hole 4219 0
Date: 8-18-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 9.5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 9.6 to 11.6 ft.
Remarks: Jetted to 11.6 ft. with city water, floor of infiltration
pit considered ground level
Log: Depth in feet
0-11.6 Sand, fine to medium, coarse sand or gravel at base
Hole 42200
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks
Log:
0-14
14-16
8-18-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
2-in. plastic to 14 ft.
2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 14 to 16 ft.
Screen jetted into position with city water, floor of
infiltration pit considered ground level
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray
Sand, coarse, gray, small gravel
(Continued)
127
-------
Hole 42210
Date: 8-20-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 51 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (.020 in.) plastic 51 to 55 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
fine to medium, gray
coarse, gravel
fine to medium
very coarse, gravel
fine to medium, brown
medium to coarse
0-18
18-20
20-32
32-34
34-47
47-55
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Hole 4222 0
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-9
Hole 42230
8-17-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
2-in. plastic to 7 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 7 to 9 ft.
Screen jetted into position with city water
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks
Log:
0-28
Hole 42240
8-16-76 Type Rig: Water Jet
2-in. plastic to 26 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 26 to 28 ft.
Screen jetted into position with city water
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray, with coarse sand and gravel at base
Date: 8-17-76 Type Rig: Water Jet and Power Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 13 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 13 to 15 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered and screens jetted into position with city water
Log: Depth in feet
0-15 Sand, fine to medium, gray, with coarse sand and gravel at
base.
(Continued)
128
-------
Hole 4225 0
Date: 8-17-76 Type Rig: Water jet and Power Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 23 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 23 to 25 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered and screens jetted into position
Log: Depth in feet
0-19 Sand, fine to medium, gray
19-21 Gravel, coarse, sand, coarse
21-25 Sand, medium to coarse, gray
Hole 42260
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-3
3-6
6-12
Hole 42270
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-6
6-9
Hole 42280
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
8-20-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
2-in. plastic to 6 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 6 to 8 ft.
Hole augered to 12 ft.
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray
Sand, fine to medium, reddish
Sand, fine to medium, white
8-20-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
2-in. plastic to 6 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 6-8 ft.
Hole augered to 9 ft.
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, reddish
Sand, fine to medium, white
Log:
0-22
22-30
8-22-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
2-in. plastic to 26.5 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 26.5 to 30 ft.
Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger; split spoon
sample 10-12 ft.
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, gray
Sand, coarse, and scattered fine gravel
(Continued)
129
-------
Hole 42290
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-3
3-18
18-23
23-50
Hole 4230 0
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks;
Log:
0-2.5
2.5-6
Hole 4231 0
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-2
2-6
6-10
10-11
11-13
13-15
8-22-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
2-in. plastic to 46 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 46-50 ft.
Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger; split-spoon
sample 25-27 ft.
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium organic
Sand, fine to medium, becoming coarser with depth, tan color
Sand, medium to coarse
Sand and gravel, with heavy gravel at 30 ft.
8-21-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
2-in. plastic to 3 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 3 to 5 ft.
Augered to 6 ft. pushed screen and casing to 5 ft.
Depth in feet
Sand, medium to coarse, with coarse gravel, poorly salted,
gray to white
Sand, medium, with gravel, brown, very organic odor
8-21-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
2-in. plastic to 10 ft.
2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 10 to 12 ft.
Augered to 15 ft., jetted screen into position with City water
Depth in feet
Sand,
Sand,
organic odor
Sand, medium
Sand, coarse
Sand, medium
Gravel, with
medium, poorly sorted, with gravel, gray to white
fine to medium, poorly sorted, with gravel, brown,
, with gravel, yellow-brown color
, yellow with large gravel
, some gravel, yellow-brown
medium to coarse sand
(Continued)
130
-------
Hole 42350
Date: 8-23-76 Type Rig; Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in, plastic to 39,5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. continuous slot (0,020 in.) plastic 39.5 to 45 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow^stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-45 Sand and gravel with coarse sand and gravel between 25 and; 30 ft,
Hole 42360,-j
Date: 8-23-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 30.5 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.02 in.) plastic 30.5 to 34.5 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-5 Sand, fine, gray
5-20 Sand, fine to medium, with granules
20-25 Sand, fine to medium, some gravel
25-31 Sand, medium to coarse, scattered gravel
31-35 Sand, coarse, gray, with gravel
Hole 4237 0
Date: 8-20-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 7 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 7 to 9 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered and screen pushed into position
Log: Depth in feet
0-2 Sand, medium, white
2-7 Sand, medium, red
7-9 Sand, medium, white
Hole 42380
Date: , 8-14-76 Type Rig: Powered Hand Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 14 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 14-16 ft.
Remarks: Hole augered to 6 ft., screen and casing jetted into position
with City water
Log: Depth in feet
0-12 Sand, fine to medium, gray
12-16 Sand, coarse, and small gravel
(Continued)
131
-------
Hole 42390
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks
Log:
8-23-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
2-in. plastic to 30.4 ft.
2-in slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 30.4 to 34.4 ft,
Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Depth in feet
0-35 Sand, fine to coarse, with scattered gravel
Hole 42400
Date: 8-23-76 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 50.6 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 50.6 to 54.6 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger
Log: Depth in feet
0-5 Sand, fine, white
5-20 Sand, fine to medium, white
20-23 Sand, coarse, with gravel
23-31 Sand, coarse
31-39 Sand, coarse, brown, heavy, with gravel
39-45 Sand, medium
45-50 Sand and clay interbedded
50-65 Sand, medium to coarse
65-75 Sand, with clay lenses
75-80 Sand, medium
Hole Pump-Test Hell
Date: 3-5-77 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 30 ft.
Screen: 2-in. continuous slot (0.020 in.) plastic 20 to 32 ft;
34 to 36 ft.; and 38 to 40 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screens set through hollow-stem auger; hole is
adjacent to 42280
Log: Depth in feet
0-20 Sand, fine to medium, gray
20-40 Sand, medium to coarse, with gravel, gray to brown
Hole Observation Hell
Date: 3-5-77 Type Rig: Hollow-Stem Auger
Casing: 2-in. plastic to 11 ft.
Screen: 2-in. slotted (0.020 in.) plastic 11 to 15 ft.
Remarks: Casing and screen set through hollow-stem auger; hole is
between pump test well and 4229 0
(Continued)
132
-------
Log:
0-15
Hole R-l
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-3.5
3.5-12.5
12.5-25
Hole R-2
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-2
2-11
11-25
Hole R-3
Date:
Casing:
Screen:
Remarks:
Log:
0-2
2-7
7-12
12-25
Hole R-4
Date:
Screen:
Remarks:
Depth in feet
Sand, fine to medium, becoming coarse at base, with fine
to coarse gravel, brown to gray
level recorder well
3-31-71
6-in. plastic to 20 ft.
6-in. plastic 20 to 25 ft.
Landis Sewerage Authority water
Depth in feet
Loam, sandy, fine, buff color
Sand, medium, red-buff color
Sand, medium to coarse, buff
4-1-71
6-in. plastic to 20 ft.
6-in. plastic 20 to 25 ft.
Landis Sewerage Authority water level recorder well
Depth in feet
Loam, sandy, gray to white
Sand, medium, gray to white
Sand, granules and pebbles, gray to white
4-2-71
6-in. plastic to 20 ft.
6-in. plastic 20 to 25 ft.
Landis Sewerage Authority water level recorder well
Depth in feet
Loam, sandy, gray
Sand, fine to medium, buff
Sand, medium, gray to white
Sand, granules, and pebbles, gray to white
4-71
Stainless steel 0.008 in. slot 75 to 80 ft.
Landis Sewerage Authority water level recorder well
(Continued)
133
-------
Log: Depth in feet
0-2 Loam, sandy, gray to white
2-7 Sand, fine, buff
7-13.5 Sand, medium, gray to white
13.5-27.5 Granules, sandy, gray to white
27.5-38 Sand, gravel, with stones, white
38-40.5 Jersey stone (cemented conglomerate)
40.5-45 Clay, buff
45-62 Sand, buff
62-68 Jersey stone (cemented conglomerate)
68-74 Clay, gray, with streaks of gray sand
74-80 Sand, gray to buff
134
-------
APPENDIX B
DATA TABLES FOR ALL WATER AND SOIL SAMPLES
LEGEND
Sample code numbers are explained in Section 7, "Results
and Discussion."
99.9 means too numerous to count.
Negative sign (-) means less than.
-4
Values in yg/g x 10 = percentage.
135
-------
TABLE B-l. HATER QUALITY DATA
5AMPLF
NUMBER
416OO2
4160O3
4103O1
41O3O?
4 1 03O3
41O3O4
4102O1
4101O1
4101O3
410104
4256O1
•— ' 1256O?
CO
CTl 4356O3
4256O4
4223O1
422303
4223O4
42OBO1
42O8O2
420B03
420O04
42O9O1
42090?
420903
420904
COLLECTION
PATI-
12/13/76
3/ 7/77
8/24/76
12/13/76
3/ 3/77
5/26/77
8/P4/76
8/24/76
3/ 4/77
5/26/77
8/26/76
12/13/76
3/ 7/77
5/27/77
8/25/76
3/ 3/77
5/31/77
8/24/76
12/12/76
3/ 3/77
5/31/77
6/24/76
12/12/76
3/ 5/77
5/31/77
DEPTH TEMP
M DEG C
7 9
7. 9
7. 9
7. 7
9. 1
13. 7
13. 7
13. 7
7. 7
7. 9
7. 9
1. 5
1. 5
1. 5
1. 5
4 3
4. 3
4. 3
4 3
1
1.
1.
1.
1.
1
1
2.
O.
1.
1.
O.
2.
1.
2.
77.
1.
6
5
2
3
3
7
6
O
8
7
7
8
6
3
1
7
6
DISSOLVED CONDUC-
OXYGEN TIVITY
MG/L PH UMHOS/CM
6
7.
9.
B.
8.
9.
8.
8
7.
9.
0.
?.
2.
O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
0.
1.
1.
1.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
2
5
4
8
6
O
8
9
3
2
9
6
1
4
1
1
1
3
p
3
3
1
1
1
1
8. 9
7. 3
4. 4
4. 5
4. 5
4. 7
5 4
5 9
5. 6
6 6
5'. 6
6. 9
7. 0
6. 3
6. 7
6. 9
6 8
6. 7
6. 4
6. 3
6. 2
6 8
6. 4
7 1
6. 4
66.
66
49
52.
79
45.
64.
49.
72.
1O3.
848.
433.
477.
432.
625
472.
601.
415.
820.
774.
278.
649.
472.
330.
TOTAL-
ALKALINITY
MG/L CACO3
28.
24.
-2.
-2.
-2.
4.
8.
12.
8.
24.
116.
136.
116.
92.
220.
1BO.
231.
84.
68.
60.
79.
142.
168.
168.
100.
VOLATILE
DISSOLVED SUSPENDED TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS SOLIDS nOLIDS SOLIDS BOD
MG/L r-:G/l_ MG/L MG/L MG/L
37.
63. 3 66.
23.
23.
37.
76.
163. 19. 182.
268. 54. 326.
211. S6. 267.
2O3.
259.
369.
472.
208.
2O2.
219.
195.
2.
2.
-1.
1.
-1.
2.
2.
-1.
-1.
143.
9. 90.
169.
45. 215.
16
11.
12.
14.
1.
4.
14.
10.
3
7.
14.
COD
MG/L
3.
4
7.
10.
3.
12.
237.
472.
4OB.
61.
SO.
181.
235.
273.
15.
215.
66.
35.
96
CL
MG/L
4.
1.
1.
2.
6.
^
2.
1
H.
6.
135.
31.
19.
42
25.
35.
48.
2O.
24.
22
35.
23.
34.
41.
37.
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
CJ
SULFIDE-
SAflPLC SULFUR
NUMBEK NO/L-S
416002
416003 0. 1
41O301
4103O2
41O3O3 -0. 1
410304 -0. 1
410201
410101
410103 -0. 1
410104 -0. 1
425601
425602
425603
425604 -0. 1
422301
4223O3 5 7
422304 -O. 1
420B01
420802
420803 -0. 1
420804 -0 1
420901
420902
420903 31 6
420904 -0 1
Td 1 AL
COL I FORM
tt/lOOML
0.
0.
O.
40O.
O.
O.
O.
0.
9
O.
99,9
400.
99,9
99,9
99.9
10,
2300.
99.9
4830.
54
99,9
99,9
400.
99.9-
99,9
1 Ol AL
H-CAL ORGANIC
CCILIFQRM CAKUGN
M/1OOML MvJ/l C
0 -1. 0
0
0.
0. 2. 0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
99,9 56. 3
O. 89. 4
0 316
99,9 53 2
0
O.
0.
99,9
0. 16. 3
0.
0
2600.
0. 20. 4
0.
54.
DISSOLVED
ORGANIC
CARBON
MG/L.-C
-0.
-1.
-O.
-0.
-1
-1.
-O.
3.
57.
60.
24.
98.
13.
23.
61.
34.
11.
58
23.
43.
5
0
5
5
0
0
5
0
1
6
0
5
6
6
5
6
0
1
2
8
TOTAL SOLUBLE
ORGANIC ORGANIC
NITROGEN NITROGEN
MG/L-N MG/L-N
O. 9 0.
-0.
0.
9.
O.
0.
0.
0.
1.
3.
29. 2 19
4. 2
35. 8 27.
10.
18.
27.
4.
1.
13.
20.
4.
13.
17.
4
1
2
5
5
3
8
3
O
O
8
6
4
4
6
2
7
7
O
4
7
O
NH4
MG/L-N
O.
0.
-0.
O.
O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
3.
22.
16.
25.
8.
1.
40.
5.
17.
6.
9.
9.
18
18.
18.
3
3
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
O
8
O
1
6
1
4
8
6
2
6
0
0
1
6
TOTAL SOLUBLE
N03 PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHORUS
MG/L-N MG/L-P MG/L-P
1.
2.
-O.
-0.
-O.
2.
2.
0.
O.
-O.
0.
0.
17.
0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
1
5
1
1
1
6
1
15. 5
1 6. OO
2 9. 86
1 5. BO
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
O. 39
O. 2O
0. 07
0. O2
0. 08
0. 02
-O 01
O. 41
0. O4
O. O2
6. 2O
4. 5O
6. 90
5. 10
3. 00
0. 14
4. 4O
1. 30
1. 80
0. 32
0. 84
1. 50
5. 00
0. O6
4. 50
SOLUBLE
ORTHO-
PHOSPHATI
MG/L-P
0. 07
0. 04
0. 02
-O. 01
0. O4
0. 02
-0. Ol
0. 15
-O. Ol
0. 02
6. 2O
4. OO
5. 20
3. 70
2. 6O
O. 1O
1. 3O
1. 50
1. SO
0. 25
O. 64
2. 20
5. OO
O. 04
3. 50
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE-
NUMBER
416OO2
4 1 6003
41O3O1
4103O2
410303
410304
4102O1
410101
410103
41O1O4
42S6O1
OJ -425602
CO
425603
425604
432301
4223O3
4223O4
4i'03Ol
42OS02
42OS03
42OB04
42090 1
420V02
4209O3
42O9O4
S04
MG/L--SO4
5.
4.
12.
12
13.
3
4
26
13.
4.
4.
4.
64.
26.
7.
4.
7.
26.
iM.
MG/L -AL
O. U
O 4
A 6
1. 0
2. 0
1. B
1. 2
0. 0
-O. 3
-0 5
O. 8
O. 7
-0 3
-0. 5
•0. 5
-0. 3
-0. 5
0. 6
O. 9
O. 6
-0. 5
-0. 5
--0. 3
-0. 3
-0. 5
AS
U3/L-A5
-ao
-10.
10.
-20
-10
-5.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-5.
-10
-20.
-10.
-5
21.
29.
8
23
-2O.
17.
31.
-1O.
-20.
-10.
-5.
K
UO/L-B
31.
248.
1 2O.
4
258.
8O
60.
40.
280
62.
46O.
34.
347.
4O4.
40O.
92.
464.
44O.
378
187.
362.
47O.
424.
494.
362.
CD
I'G/L-CD
-50.
-2O.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-2O.
-20
23.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
CA
MG/L-CA
6.
4.
3
1.
4.
3.
™>
4.
12.
10.
12.
13.
23.
12.
12.
28.
28.
4.
7.
35
15.
11.
19.
CO
UG/L-CO
-100.
-50.
-50.
-1OO.
-50.
-50.
-SO.
-5O.
-5O.
-100.
-50.
-50.
-5O.
-50.
-100.
-50.
-50.
-100.
-50.
CH
UG/L-CR
-50.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-2O
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-5O.
26.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20
-2O.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20
-2O.
CD
UG/L-CU
-2O.
-50.
-2O.
-2O.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
47.
72.
58.
56.
-2O.
-50.
-20.
30.
2O.
-5O.
143.
-2O.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
FE
MG/L-FE
-O 2
-0. 1
1O. 2
O. 2
-O 1
-O. 2
1. 1
0. 7
0. 3
-0. 2
2. 4
1. O
1. 3
1. 1
19. 9
27. O
25. 1
7. 7
2. 3
1. 2
5. 6
7. 2
6. 8
7. 3
7. 5
PB
OG/L-PB
-100.
-20O.
-1OO.
10O.
-2OO.
-10O.
-100.
-20O.
-1OO.
-1OO.
-20O.
-100.
-200.
-1OO.
-100.
-200.
-100.
-100.
-200.
MG
MG/L-MG
1. 1
1. 7
0. 5
0. 3
-1. O
O. 4
1. 7
1. 4
1. 5
1. B
4. 0
2. 7
5. 5
4. 2
4. 1
6. 4
2. 1
5. 1
11. 0
16. 0
6. 6
3. B
4. 2
3. 5
MN
MG/L-MN
-0. OS
-O. 05
O. 34
0. O2
0. 22
0. 22
-O. O5
-0. O5
-O. 05
0. 04
-O. OS
0. 09
-O. O5
0. 04
0. OB
O. 14
0. 12
O. 13
0. 24
0. 24
0. 14
O. 16
0. 15
0. 14
0. 13
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMBER
416002
416003
410301
41O3O2
41O3O3
41O304
410201
410101
410103
410104
425601
4236O2
425603
423604
422301
420802
422303
422304
420801
42O8O3
420804
42O9O1
42O9O2
420903
4209O4
HG
UG/L-HG
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-O.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-O.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-0.
0
5
0
0
5
0
O
3
0
0
5
0
O
3
0
3
0
O
5
NI
UG/L-NI
-5O.
-10O.
-50.
-50.
133.
-30.
-50.
-3O.
-100.
-30.
-5O.
-50.
-100.
-50.
-30.
91.
-100.
-SO.
119.
322.
159.
-50.
-50.
-1OO.
-50.
K
MG/L-K
1.
1.
0.
0.
-0.
-1.
2.
1.
2.
1.
26.
1O.
11.
9.
14.
16.
6.
13.
12.
11.
6.
16.
12.
9.
9.
6
6
5
4
5
0
9
3
1
7
3
4
6
8
3
1
7
0
8
8
6
3
6
4
3
NA
MG/L-NA
3.
2.
1.
1.
1
-1.
2.
2.
2.
2
117.
45.
39.
38.
50.
35.
39.
48.
27.
36.
43.
35.
51.
45.
24.
9
9
4
4
1
O
3
7
3
3
ZN
UG/L-ZN
29.
-20.
99.
32.
34.
62.
-20.
-20.
-20.
84.
113.
146.
111.
136.
73.
3428.
34.
-20.
964.
3363.
948.
-20.
32.
-20.
48.
SE
UG/L-SE
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-1O.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
ENDRIN
NG/L
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
03
03
O3
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
LINDANE
NO/L
-1.
4.
2.
4.
0.
26.
8.
70.
0.
37.
10300.
260.
120.
642.
312.
93.
96.
229.
13.
-0.
3SO.
4250.
326.
320.
1
2
2
1
4
8
8
4
6
8
3
0
7
2
METHdXY-
CHLOR
NG/L
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
TQXA-
PHENE
NG/L
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2, 4-D
NG/L
-2.
-0.
-54.
-2.
-0.
-0.
-54.
-54.
-0.
-0.
-34.
-2.
0.
-54.
-3.
0.
8.
-34.
11.
8.
-54
-2.
-0.
10.
1
1
1
1
6
1
6
1
3
3
1
6
3
1
1
2
2. 4, 3 TP
SILVEX
NG/L
60. 0
49. 0
21. 0
20. 5
133.
17.2
16. 3
25. 5
22. 9
23. 0
126.
109.
6. 8
44.8
62. 0
27. 0
42. 5
6. 2
10. 3
63. 2
22. 6
7. 0
27. 2
22. 3
42. 6
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
-pi
o
SAMPLE
NUMBER
421001
42100?
421O0.3
4210O4
4211O1
42O6O1
4SO602
420603
4L'O604
4226O1
4226O?
4226O3
422701
4227O:3
422QOJ
42PB03
4228O4
4227O1
42270?
422903
422704
423501
423502
4235O3
423504
COLLECTION
DATE
B/P1/76
12/ 12/76
3/ 3/77
0/31/77
B, '24/76
8/24/76
12/12/76
3/ 3/77
5/31/77
8/25/76
12/1O/76
3/ 7/77
8/24/76
3.' 3/77
8/24/76
3/ 1/77
5/P6/77
0/24/76
12/1O/76
3/ 3/77
5/?9/77
B/24/76
12/12/76
3/ 4/77
5/27/77
DEPTH
M
6.
6
6.
6
12.
17.
17
17.
17.
1.
1.
1
I.
1.
7.
7.
7.
14.
14.
14.
14.
12.
12,
1C.
12.
1
1
1
1
5
7
7
7
7
O
B
0
B
8
7
7
7
0
0
0
O
2
2
'•>
2
TEMP
DEG C
1.
1
1
I.
1
1
1.
1
1.
1.
1
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
7
2
4
5
4
6
4
9
1
9
4
3
4
1
3
6
2
2
5
2
DISSOLVED CONDUC-
OXYGEN TIV1IY
MG/L FH UMHOS/CM
O.
-0.
0.
0
0.
0.
-0.
O.
-0.
0.
-0.
-0.
0.
0.
2.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-o.
-0.
-0
-0.
-o
3
1
3
5
2
1
1
4
1
4
1
1
3
3
5
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
6
6
6
6
6.
6
6.
6
6.
6.
6.
6.
6
6.
6.
6
7.
6.
6.
6.
7.
6.
6
6.
6.
7
7
7
6
6
7
9
9
6
7
6
B
7
4
B
9
O
7
9
9
O
4
e
a
B
347.
528.
659.
5O4.
470.
151.
246.
ISO.
271.
397
516.
4B9.
156.
283.
539.
63O.
590.
470.
586.
6OO.
522.
568.
6O2.
615.
545.
TOTAL
ALKALINITY
MG/L CACO3
196.
192.
192.
141.
158.
46.
76.
70.
9O.
116.
152.
124.
50.
64.
192.
284.
271.
150.
220.
240.
231.
214.
268.
276.
243.
DISSOLVI
SOLIDS
MS/L
200
26O.
2B2.
89.
100.
116.
214.
20O.
282.
196.
209.
202.
177.
158.
255.
I9B.
VOLATILE
SUSPENDED TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS
MG/L MG/L MG/L
BOD
MG/L
9.
2.
4.
12.
4.
3.
-1.
1.
B.
3.
12.
12.
3.
2.
7.
3.
11.
1.
1.
1.
10.
2.
4.
11.
COD
MG/L
1?..
2O.
21.
44
31.
16.
16.
25.
32.
16.
27.
72
4O.
29.
38.
28.
16.
21.
24
28.
63.
31.
27.
CL
MG/L
16.
34.
35.
?6.
17.
3.
18.
14.
57.
17.
28.
10.
6.
20.
24.
19.
41
21.
39.
79
54.
27.
44.
37.
.38.
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SUl FIDE-
SAMPLE SULPUR
NUMBER MG/L--5
TOTAL DISSOLVED TOTAL SOLUBLE
FECAL ORGANIC ORGANIC ORGANIC ORGANIC
TOTAL _
COLIFORM COLIFORM CARHON
»/lOOML &/1OOML MG/L-C
SOLUBLE
TOTAL SOLUBLE ORTHO-
4210O1
42100?
421 003 13.8
421O04 -0. 1
421101
42O6O1
42060?
4206O3 -O. 1
42O6O1 -O. 1
4226O1
42260?
4226O3 25. B
4227O1
4327O3 -O. 1
422801
422BO3 -O. 1
4??BO4 -0. 1
422701
42P902
422903 -0. 1
4229O4 • -O. 1
4235O1
4235O2
423503 -O. 1
423504 -0. 1
.
100.
f).
('.
O
O.
:).
O.
(}
• i_
l1.
O.
0.
100
O.
ISO.
'!
f>.
O.
200.
0.
O.
O.
27.
O.
O.
O.
0.
0.
O.
0.
100.
O.
0.
O.
O.
O.
O.
0.
0.
O.
O.
O.
O.
0.
11. O
9. 1
ARBON NITROGEN NITROGEN
IG/L-C MG/L-N MG/L-N
9.
JB.
21.
7.
2.
1 1.
10.
17.
IB.
?0.
7.
5O.
18.
4.
IB.
6.
1O
17.
O
3
6
9
4
2
8
1
6
0
6
2
2
5
1
9
5
2
1.
5.
0.
IB.
41.
14.
B.
O.
5.
26.
5.
O.
2.
11.
O.
13.
5.
9.
15.
B
1
1
1
6
3
3
1
2
4
3
6
O
O
9
7
8
5
6
NH4
MG/L-N
B.
26.
10.
IB.
B.
O.
12.
3.
6.
8.
21.
13.
-O.
O.
0.
15.
18.
1.
20.
12.
2O.
4.
19.
11.
17.
2
7
2
3
4
5
1
7
9
6
8
2
1
3
8
b
2
7
3
9
6
2
O
7
O
NO3 PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHAT
MG/L-N MG/L-P MG/L-P MG/L-P
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3.
3.
2.
2.
O.
O.
O.
0.
O.
2.
3.
4.
1.
O.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-0.
O.
O.
3O
9O
6O
6O
76
O9
O3
09
O4
5O
9O
40
70
46
O6
O4
02
02
10
O3
O7
01
05
03
1.
3.
2.
2.
0.
0.
-O.
O.
0.
2.
3.
3.
1.
O.
-0.
O.
-0.
-0.
0.
0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
O.
BO
7O
40
20
76
O6
01
60
O2
2O
90
3O
10
19
Ol
02
01
01
10
02
Ol
Ol
Ol
02
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE S04
NUI10ER HG/L-SO4
421001
421002
421OO3
421004
421 1O1
420601
420602
42O6O3
420604
422601
4226O2
422603
4P27O1
422703
4228O1
422803
422004
4229O1
422902
422903
422904
423501
423502
423503
423504
13.
14
82
1 1.
3
1 1.
59.
67.
40.
4.
4
12.
11.
11.
22.
22.
31.
AI-
MS /L AL
-O. 5
-O. 3
-0. 3
-O. 5
0. 7
-O. D
-O. 3
-0. 3
-O. 5
O. 9
-0. 3
-0. 3
2. 1
-0. 3
-0. b
0. 3
-0. 5
-0. 5
0. 5
-0. 3
-O. 5
-O. 5
0. 7
-0. 3
-O. b
AS
UG/L-AS
-10.
-20.
-10.
-5.
-10.
-20.
-1O.
6.
10.
-2O.
-10.
1O.
-10.
-1O.
14.
a.
-10.
-20.
-10.
-5.
-10.
-20.
-10.
-5.
G
UG/L-B
40O.
5O1
2B6.
305.,
280.
160.
304.
6B.
230.
250.
411.
286.
160.
321.
35O.
462.
336.
390.
506.
559.
474.
330.
283.
376.
306.
CD
UG/L-CD
-20.
-5O.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-5O.
-2O.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
CA CO
MG/L-CA UG/L-CH
16.
B.
11.
20.
6.
3.
2.
4.
9.
12.
14.
14
19.
80.
6.
8.
12.
4.
3.
5.
12.
7.
6.
9.
-50.
-1OO.
-50.
-5O.
-50.
-100.
-5O.
-50.
-100.
-50.
-SO.
-50.
-5O.
-5O.
-50.
-1OO.
-5O.
-5O.
-100.
-50.
CR
UG/'L-CR
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20
-2O.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
21.
-20.
-2O.
-50.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
CD
UG/L--CU
-20.
-20.
-5O.
-2O.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-SO.
-2O.
-2O.
-2O.
-5O.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-50.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-50.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
FE
MG/L-FE
11.4
9. 1
9. 5
12 6
19. O
15. 6
21. O
27. O
43. 4
B. 1
8. 4
9. O
1O. 1
10. 2
36. 0
49. 0
56. O
47. O
27. 0
53. 0
50. B
55. 0
28. O
SB. O
59. 9
PB
UG/L-PB
-10O.
-10O.
-20O.
-100.
-10O.
-100.
-200.
-too.
-1OO.
-200.
-1OO.
-200.
-1OO.
-200.
-10O.
-1OO.
-200.
-10O.
-1OO.
-2OO.
MO
MG/L-MG
5. 2
3. 4
5. 1
6. 1
3. 7
0. 9
1. 2
2. 1
3. O
3. 5
7. 1
12. 0
2. 9
9. 9
4. B
7. 9
2. 2
3. 5
3. 4
4. 9
3. 3
6. 3
5. 9
7. 3
5. 7
MN
MG/L-MN
0. O9
-0. 05
O. OB
O. 13
O. 15
O. 08
O. 12
O. OB
O. 19
O. OB
O. 16
0. 13
O. 3O
0. 49
0. 31
0. 40
0. 09
0. 31
O. 36
0. 36
0. 35
O. 54
0. 68
O. 59
O. 55
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
CO
SAMPLE
NUMBER
421001
421002
421O03
421004
421101
420601
420602
42O6O3
42O604
4226O1
422602
422603
4227O1
422703
422801
422803
422804
4229O1
422902
422903
422904
423301
423502
423303
4233O4
HG
UQ/L-HQ
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-o.
0
0
3
0
0
O
5
0
0
3
O
3
O
3
O
0
3
0
0
3
NI
UG/L-NI
-30.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-100.
-3O.
-10O.
-5O.
-100.
-30.
-30.
-50.
-100.
-30.
-50.
-30.
-100.
-30.
K
MG/L-K
11.
13.
13.
13.
7.
3.
3.
7.
6.
8.
12.
9.
3.
3.
12.
11.
11.
11.
10.
9.
9.
11.
9.
9.
9.
6
2
0
0
9
0
7
9
6
7
3
0
4
1
2
0
7
3
4
8
8
4
3
8
3
NA
MG/L-NA
47.
33.
63.
30.
48.
4. 4
15.
6. 2
24.
29.
36.
28.
10.
14.
69.
30.
89.
42.
34.
46.
52.
62.
33.
48.
ZN
UG/L-ZN
-20.
28.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
23.
22.
-20.
-20.
30.
92.
103.
-2O.
-2O.
116.
-20.
34.
-20.
100.
32.
-2O.
-20.
SE
UG/L-SE
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
ENDRIN
NG/L
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-o.
-o.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-o.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
03
O3
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
O3
O3
O3
O3
O3
03
03
03
03
LINDANE
NG/L
480.
158
101.
20.
18.
20.
1.
33.
122.
80.
1340.
28.
18.
8.
310.
69.
1.
6.
32.
29.
8.
18.
8.
30.
4
2
5
8
2
2
6
8
7
1
6
O
O
METHOXY- TOXA-
CHLOR PHENE
NG/L NG/L
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-o.
-0.
-0.
-0.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2, 4-D
NG/L
-34.
-2.
0.
70.
-54.
-34.
-2.
14.
23.
-34.
-2.
-0.
-34.
0.
-34.
-0.
5.
-34.
-2.
-0.
47.
-54.
-2.
-0.
23.
1
6
1
1
3
9
1
1
2
1
3
1
9
1
1
3
2, 4. 3 TP
SILVEX
NG/L
21. 0
28. 7
8. 3
101.
9. 0
-5. 4
8. 4
36. 6
17. 3
31. 6
63. 8
30. 7
57. 2
15. 4
42. 2
62. 3
9. 8
54. 0
38. 4
20. 3
5. 9
60. 0
31. 9
21. 3
8. 8
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
VOLATILE
SAMPLE
NUMDEK
423101
4231O?
4231O3
423001
425501
13550?
425503
425SO4
422201
422203
4222O4
421701
421703
421801
42180?
421003
4218O4
4PO4O1
4219O1
421902
421903
4219O4
422001
42O301
42O3O2
COLLECT ION
DATE
0/21/76
12/12/76
3/ 1/77
8/24/76
fl/26/76
12/12/76
3/ 7/77
5/27/77
8/21/76
3/ 7/77
5/29/77
8/23/76
3/ B/77
8/23/76
12/1 1/76
3/ 8/77
5/30/77
0/23/76
0/23/76
I?/) 1/76
3/ 0/77
5/29/77
8/23/76
8/P3/76
12/1 a/76
DEPTH
M
3. O
3 O
3. 0
0.9
2. 1
2. 1
2 1
0. 6
O 6
1. 2
1. 2
1. 2.
1 2
1. 8
2. 7
2. 7
2. 7
2 7
4. 11
7. 9
7. 7
TEMP
t>FG C
1 6
1. 0
2. 1
0. B
2 2
1 4
I. 3
2 7
1 O
2. 6
0. 9
2. 6
2. 6
O. 6
2. 7
2 6
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
MG/t PH
0. 4
-0 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
1. 7
2. ?
3. 3
-0. 1
2. 7
1. 2
0. 3
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
0. 1
1. 9
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
0. ?
O. 3
0. 3
6 4
6 B
6. 9
5 9
5. 5
7. O
7 5
7 ?
6. 9
6. 8
6 4
7 2
6 B
7. 0
6 6
6 8
6. 4
7. 7
7. 1
6 6
6 8
6 5
7. 4
6. 7
6. 8
CONDUC-
TIVITY
UMHOS/CM
196.
27O
310.
56.
425
516
464
1OO1
686.
856.
528.
576.
966.
588.
429.
1136
972.
539.
413.
258.
1050.
762.
49O.
519.
7O8.
TOTAL
ALKALINITY
MG/L CAC03
80.
1 IS.
14O.
10
88.
136.
146
149.
192.
264.
175.
176
236.
164.
152.
242.
162.
178.
144.
168
228.
149.
164.
164.
216.
DISSOLVED SUSPENDED TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS BOD
MG/L MG/L. MG/L MG/L MG/U
57.
203
1B6. 54 240.
222. 34. 256.
281. 38. 319.
514 39. 533.
245.
314
53O.
180.
615.
421.
231.
564.
415.
271.
2.
2.
4.
3.
11. 142.
44. 145.
136.
32. 173.
h.
3.
12.
11.
15.
26.
B.
22
12.
24.
11.
7.
15.
11.
8.
1O.
15.
COD
MG/L
5O.
138.
48.
36
272.
273.
315.
69.
33.
70.
157
1O4.
132.
248.
54.
66.
246.
61.
69.
53.
181.
CL
MG/L
12.
22.
36.
3.
19.
34.
77
179.
21.
43.
33.
17.
156.
35.
36.
198
164.
16.
16.
52.
16O.
122.
IB.
16.
74
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SUL F I DE -
SAMPLE SULFUR
NUMBER MC/L.-S
423101
423102
423103 -0. 1
4^3OO1
425501
425502
425503 0. 1
425504 -O. 1
422201
422203 7 O
1^ 422204 -0 1
01 421701
421703 31 6
4:.' 1801
421802
421803 45 2
421B04 -0. 1
42O4O1
42 1 9O 1
4219O2
421903 49. 7
421904 O. 4
422001
420301
420302
1LJ1AL.
COL I FORM
#/10OML
99,9
O
0.
9°, 9
99,9
99.9
99,9
99,9
C)
3.
150.
90,9
99,9
99,9
7000
99.9
6150.
O.
24OO.
99,9
99. 9
0.
31OO
0
99 . 9
101 AL
FhCAL ORGANIC
COL1FORM CAR 11 DM
tt/IOOML MR /I -C
O
0 26 2
0.
O
9 '''•'' 56 4
99 ,9 79. 2
O 76. 0
99. 9 15. 6
0.
0.
O.
1OOO
O
9", 9
45O.
16.
0
0.
2OO.
1096. 23. 9
234
O
0.
0.
30O. 29 2
DISSOLVED
ORGANIC
CARBON
MG/L.--C
2O.
18.
1 1.
4O
55.
42.
53.
21.
23
27.
21.
43.
76.
15.
-1.
11.
84.
17.
1O
17.
3
2
8
5
6
9
0
0
4
O
9
2
6
5
0
3
O
6
9
2
TOTAL SOLUBLE
ORGANIC ORGANIC
NITROGEN NITROGEN NH4
MG/L.-N MG/L-N MG/L-N
16.
3. 1 6.
3,
-O.
22_ 0 20.
19. 9 159 18.
0 7 13.
34. B 25. 4 23.
7.
24.
19.0 22.
21.
20.
19.
0. 4 14.
0. 8 27.
12. 1 15.
17.
14.
17.
24.
16.3 19.
15.
15.
19. 1 16.
O
9
5
1
0
3
B
7
0
B
3
0
5
0
2
3
6
0
O
4
4
4
O
0
1
TOTAL
NO3 PHOSPHORUS
MG/L-N MG/L-P
-O.
-0.
3
-O
-O.
-0.
O.
-o.
0.
-o.
-o.
o.
-0
-0.
-o.
1
1
12. 5
7 6. 50
1 B. 60
1 8. 50
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
SOLUBLE
PHOSPHORUS
MG/L-P
1.
O.
O.
1.
7.
5.
6.
6.
2.
0.
0.
3.
6.
3.
5.
5.
2.
2
2.
4.
5.
4.
4.
4.
5.
1O
02
57
SO
20
40
30
4O
OO
69
27
BO
70
OO
70
50
90
40
OO
70
80
00
70
20
60
SOLUBLE
ORTHO-
PHOSPHATE
MG/L-P
-0. 01
-O. Ol
O. 02
0. 08
4. 00
3 50
5. 70
5. 9O
0. 31
0. 53
0. 23
2. 2O
5. SO
2. 10
5. 5O
5. 5O
2. BO
2. 4O
1. BO
3. 4O
5. 50
3. 80
2. OO
2. 20
5. 00
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMUER
4231O1
423102
4231O3
123OO1
425501
42&S02
425S03
425504
422201
422203
>— ' 422204
-Pa
CD 421/O1
4217O3
421001
4218O2
4218O3
421B04
4204O1
421901
421902
421YO3
421904
422001
42O301
4203O2
SOI
MG/L -EO4
1
32.
23.
IV
7.
BO.
10.
12.
12.
8.
31.
a.
us.
5
rtl.
HC/L. -AL
1 P
1. 1
O. 3
i:> 3
-O. 5
0 9
-O. 3
-O. 5
-0. 5
-O 3
-0. 5
1. 4
-0. 3
1. 5
-0. 3
-O. 3
-0. t>
1. 2
-O. b
-O. 3
-0. 3
-0. 5
-O. 5
1. 6
-O. 3
AS
UG/L-AS
-10
-ro.
-10.
-10
-20.
10.
5
-10.
-10.
-5.
-10.
-10.
-1O
-SO.
-10.
5.
-10
-10.
-20.
-10.
-5.
13.
-2O.
B
UC./L--D
?60
469.
234
160.
35O.
610.
642.
534.
5OO.
5O9.
416.
6OO.
639.
480.
759.
359.
654.
470.
530.
933.
446.
505.
65O.
6OO.
727.
CD
UC/L-CD
-20
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-20
-20
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
-5O.
CA
MG/L-CA
7.
2.
1.
2.
13.
11.
8.
11.
1O.
6.
28.
8.
11.
10.
2.
5.
22.
8.
B.
5.
6.
22.
B.
10.
11.
CO
UG/L-CQ
-SO.
-1OO
-50.
-50.
-50.
-1OO.
-50.
-50.
-5O
-5O.
-5O.
-5O.
-1OO.
-50.
-50.
-50.
-100.
-50.
-5O.
-5O.
-10O.
CR
UG/L-CR
-20.
-50.
-20.
5O.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
-2O.
-50.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-5O.
-2O.
-20
-2O.
-2O.
-50.
cu
UG/L-CU
-2O.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
54.
96.
92.
65.
-2O.
-5O.
-2O.
-2O.
-5O.
-20.
T-2O.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
63.
-5O.
-20.
^20.
-20.
20.
FE
MG/L-FE
28. 0
24. 0
39. O
16. 4
2. 9
0. 7
O. 7
O. 6
2O. 0
24. 0
21. 3
4. 7
9. 1
3. 3
O. 6
4. 7
10. 7
3. 0
3. 0
1. 1
5. 7
15. O
3. 8
10. 3
12. 0
PB
UG/L-PB
-10O.
-100.
-20O.
-10O.
-1OO.
-1OO.
-20O.
-1OO.
-20O.
-10O.
-20O.
-100.
-10O.
-200.
-100.
-100.
-100.
-200.
-10O.
-10O.
-100.
MG
MG/L-MG
1. 7
2. 6
3. B
O. 5
4. O
3. O
5. 3
3. 9
3. 6
6. 2
7. 2
3. O
3. 7
3. 9
O. 4
6. 2
11. 0
3. 1
2. 3
1. 3
8. 6
1O. 0
3. 0
2. •?
3. 5
MN
MG/L-MN
O. 30
O. 38
0. 36
0. IB
-O. 05
0. 09
O. 10
0. O3
0. 11
0. 13
0. 37
O. O6
O. 06
-O. 05
-O. OS
0. 11
0. 16
-0. 05
-0. 05
0. 11
0. O6
0. 12
-0. 05
0. 05
O. 12
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMBER
423101
4231 O2
423103
423O01
425501
425302
425503
425504
422201
422203
422204
421701
421703
421801
421802
421803
421804
420401
421901
421902
421903
421904
422001
420301
42O3O2
HO
UG/L-HG
-1. 0
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-1. 0
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 5
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. O
-1. O
-1. O
-0. 3
-1. 0
-1. 0
-1. 0
NI
UG/L-NI
-50.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-50.
-50.
-100.
-50.
-50.
-100.
-SO.
-30.
-100.
-50.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-50.
-50.
-30.
-100.
-50.
-50.
-30.
-30.
K
MG/L-K
7. 2
7. 3
7. 7
3. 3
9. 3
11.0
9. 8
11. 3
13. 3
9. 0
11. 0
13. 6
13. 4
13. 2
4. 8
14. 6
17 2
13. 0
9. 3
13. 6
13. 0
18. 0
12. 5
14. 8
14. 2
NA
MG/L-NA
21.
27.
28.
3. 8
34.
68.
31.
143.
43.
34.
35.
49.
146.
44.
33.
167.
188
36.
33.
74.
154.
169.
48.
47.
92.
ZN
UG/L-ZN
B3.
-20.
-30.
83.
207.
113.
72.
92.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
92.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
5O.
56.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
25.
-20.
309.
-20.
SE
UG/L-SE
-10.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
ENDRIN
NG/L
-0. 03
-O. O3
-0. O3
-0. 03
-0. 03
-0. 03
-0. O3
-0. 03
-0. 03
-0. 03
-0. O3
-O. 03
-0. 03
-0. 03
-0. 03
-0. O3
-0. O3
-0. 03
-0. 03
-O. O3
-0. O3
-0. 03
-0. 03
-O. O3
-0. 03
LINDANE
NG/L
112.
26.
18.
290.
451O.
8. 8
0. 3
388.
80.
5. 7
1340.
1700.
648.
625.
2960.
1100.
184O.
880.
1900.
648O.
234.
12.
1030.
19OO.
METHOXY-
CHLQR
NG/L
-0. 01
-O. Ol
-0. Ol
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-O. 01
-O. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-O. Ol
-0. Ol
-0. 01
-0. Ol
-0. 01
-O, 01
-0. 01
-0. 01
-O. Ol
TOXA-
PHENE
NG/L
-O. 1
-O. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
2, 4-D
NG/L
-34.
-2.1
-O. 1
-54.
-54.
-a.*
3. 3
-54.
-0. 1
10. 0
-54.
-0. 1
-34.
-2.1
-0. 1
35. 8
-34.
-34.
-0. 1
-0. 6
-34.
-34.
-2.1
2. 4, 3 TP
SILVEX
NG/L
42. 9
4. 4
93. 3
64.3
131.
52. 8
72. 3
33.
-5. 4
26. 6
6. 2
29.0
29.0
66.0
19. 6
144.
14. d
16. 0
180.
17. 2
43. 3
700.
84O.
6. 3
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
I—1
-fi
oo
SAMPL !-'
NUMBER
42O3O3
42O3O4
422101
4221O?
422103
4221O4
4237O1
423702
423703
423H01
423003
4237O1
423903
423904
424O01
424002
424O03
424OO4
423601
4236O3
4236O1
41O4OI
410103
41O4O4
410D03
COLLEC I ION
UAltT
3/ 8/77
5/27/77
8/23/76
12/1 1 /76
3,' 7/77
5/27/77
8/24/76
12/10/76
3/ 7/77
8/23/76
3/ 5/77
8/23/76
3/ 5/77
5/27/77
8/23/76
12/1O/76
3/ 5/77
JV27/77
8/24/76
3/ 7/77
5/30/77
8/26/76
3/ 5/77
5/26/77
3/ 7/77
DEPTH
M
7.
7.
15.
15.
15.
15.
2.
2.
2
4
4.
9
9.
9.
15.
15.
15.
15.
9.
9.
9.
5.
5.
5.
17
7
?
5
0
5
5
1
1
1
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
p
P
1
1
1
8
B
8
1
DISSOLVED
TEMP OXYGFN
DEC C MG/L PH
O.
1.
1
1
1.
1
1.
1.
1.
\.
I.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
7
4
8
4
4
9
4
6
5
5
6
6
S
7
5
5
8
4
4
4
1
3
-0.
-0
O
O.
-0.
-O
O.
-O.
0.
-O
1.
-O
-O.
-O.
-O.
0
-O
-0.
-O
-O
12.
3.
4.
1
1
1
3
P
1
1
4
1
7
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
0
O
9
O
6
6
6
6.
6
6
6.
6.
6
6
6
6
7
6.
6.
6.
7.
6.
6
6
6
4.
4
4
4.
9
7
5
7
9
9
4
4
9
9
9
B
O
8
7
9
O
?
7
8
8
6
9
5
9
VOLATILE
CONDUC- TOTAL DISSOLVED SUSPENDED TOTAL SUSPtNDED
T1VITY ALKALINITY SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS BOD
UMH05/CM MG/L CAC03 MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L
1 1 1O.
517.
770.
500.
756.
614.
58B.
516.
453.
673.
615.
673.
72O.
725.
77O.
061.
826.
694.
6B6.
696.
591.
49.
94.
77.
348.
236.
20O.
156.
172.
192.
211.
152.
132.
1O8.
174.
192
194.
2O4.
196.
192.
24O.
272.
231.
204.
184.
2OB.
1.
4.
-2.
4.
550.
254.
270
324.
32O.
243.
19O.
34O.
368
399.
311.
318.
331
7707.
37
75.
213
2O.
10.
5.
4.
4.
12
S.
5.
4.
9.
3.
3.
2.
11.
3.
1.
2.
6.
3.
2.
11.
-1.
-t
1.
-1.
COD
MG/L
155
41.
32.
32.
48.
37.
36.
33.
44.
52
38.
64.
2O.
29.
32.
25.
132.
3.
6.
8.
CL
MG/L
187.
42.
53.
59.
97.
56.
37.
62.
2O.
5B
93.
47.
46.
85.
61.
105.
1O6.
1O4.
47.
94.
1O7.
1.
10.
19
53.
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
to
SUl.F I DE-
SAMPLE SULFUR
NUMBER MG/l.-S
420303
42O304
4221OI
4221 OS'
422103
4221O4
423701
43370^
4237O3
423801
423803
4239OJ
423903
423904
424001
424OOJ'
424OO3
4240OT
423601
4236O3
4236O4
41O4O1
410403
41O404
41O5O3
2O. 3
O. 2
-O. 1
-O. 1
O. 1
3. 3
-O 1
-O. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
O. 1
-O 1
-0 1
-0 1
-0. 1
TOTAL
TOTAL FECAL ORGANIC
COL1FORM COLIFORM CARIION
#/lOOML tt/lOOML MG/L-C
99,?
2P.
O.
0.
09 , qf
H.
O.
O.
186.
0.
O.
O.
O.
0
O.
33.
O.
0
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
186.
O.
4.
O.
O. IB. 1
O.
O.
O.
O. 21 8
69.
O.
O.
0.
O.
O.
O.
O. 90
O
O.
0.
O.
O.
O.
0.
O.
67.
DISSOLVED TOTAL SOLUBLE
ORGANIC ORGANIC ORGANIC
CARBON NITROGEN NITROGEN NH4
MG/L-C MG/L-N MG/L-N MG/L-N
45.
2B.
1O.
18.
23.
11.
1?
14.
17.
13.
3O.
12
7.
7.
7.
8.
8.
24.
18
1
2.
3.
9
5
O
O
5
5
8
6
6
3
6
5
O
9
3
4
5
5
9
1
5
2
a.
19.
7.
15.
1.
3.
5.
3.
12.
2.
14.
9.
B.
1.
O.
1.
6
6
4
O
3
3
3
6
5
1
2
6
8
3
5
3
22. 4
29. 8
3. 6
1. 4
11.9
25 4
-O. 1
12. 1
3 1
14. 5
14 5
12. 5
17. 1
21. 4
7. 8
21 3
22. 6
24. 7
7. 4
14. 4
19. 2
3. 7
O. 2
O. 1
6. 4
SOLUBLE
TOTAL SOLUBLE ORTHO-
NO3 PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHATI
MO/L-N MG/L-P MG/L-P MG/L-P
-O.
-O.
O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
1.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0
-O.
-O.
0.
O.
O.
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
6
2
7.
7.
3.
6.
3,
2.
1.
2.
0.
O
O.
O.
O.
0.
O.
-O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
10
6O
oo
oo
3O
20
80
OO
69
62
12
41
25
26
76
01
03
02
19
O3
02
1O
O4
O2
06
6. 70
7. 3O
1. 9O
5. OO
3. 2O
2. OO
1. 4O
1. OO
O. 69
O. O8
0. 09
0. 35
0. 23
0. 23
-0. 01
-O. Ol
-0. 01
0. 02
O. OS
O. O3
O. O2
O. O2
O. O3
O. O2
O. O4
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPL.t
NUMBER
420303
420304
422101
422102
422 1O3
422104
4237O1
423702
423VO3
423B01
423BO3
423901
4239O3
423904
424001
424OO2
424003
424004
4236O1
423603
4236O4
4104O1
410403
41O4O4
41O5O3
SOI
MG/L-SO4
5
9
6.
3.
15
44.
6.
4.
3.
4.
3
3.
3
4.
9.
13.
3.
Ai-
nu/I -AL
-0. 3
0. di
0 6
-0 3
--O. 3
-0 5
O 6
-0 3
-0. 3
-0. 5
0. D
2. 3
O. 7
-O. 5
-0. 5
-0. 3
-0. 3
--0. 5
£3. 9
O. 5
1 4
1. 2
O. 4
O. 6
0. 4
AS
UG/L-AS
-10
8.
12.
-20
15
7
-10.
-2O.
-10.
14.
25.
1O.
-10.
12.
-1O.
-2O.
-1O.
-5.
37.
-1O.
7.
-10.
-1O.
-5.
-1O.
u
HG/L-H
777
51 /
OOO.
664
b59.
489.
46O.
443.
664.
500.
411.
480.
5O5.
460.
49O.
458.
444.
625.
38O
650.
343.
40.
52.
65.
CD
UG/L-CD
-2O.
-2O.
-5O.
-20
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-2O.
-2O.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
-00.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
26.
-20.
CA
MG/L-CA
10
3.
7.
5.
7.
9.
13.
11.
27.
5.
3.
6.
3.
5.
7.
5.
4.
6.
12.
8.
11.
7.
2.
3.
4.
CO
UG/L-CQ
-50.
-50.
-1OO.
-5O.
-50.
-100.
-5O.
-5O.
-SO.
-5O.
-50.
-50.
-1OO.
-5O.
-50.
-50.
-50.
-50.
-5O.
CR
UG/L-CR
-20.
-20
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
44.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
C(J
UG/L-CU
-5O.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-5O.
-2O.
-5O.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-5O.
-20.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-5O.
FE
MG/L-FE
16. 0
9. 7
24. 0
13. 4
18. O
12. 6
7. 9
7. 1
7. 2
10. 7
14. O
33. 4
31. O
27. 1
51.
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
cn
SAMPLE
NUMBER
420303
4203O4
422101
4221 O2
422103
422104
423701
423702
423703
423801
4238O3
423901
423903
423904
4240O1
424002
424003
424004
423601
423603
423604
410401
41O4O3
41O404
410303
HO
UG/L-HG
-0.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-I.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-0.
3.
-0.
-1.
-1.
O.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-0.
-O.
s
O
0
3
0
0
3
0
3
O
3
0
0
7
0
3
O
3
5
NI
UQ/L-NI
-100.
-30.
-30.
-3O.
-1OO.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-10O.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-30.
-100.
-50.
-10O.
K
MG/L-K
13.
16.
16.
3.
10.
14.
7.
6.
6.
14.
12.
13.
12.
13.
16.
17.
14.
16.
17.
13.
17.
0.
0.
I.
1.
8
6
1
7
0
0
4
a
7
6
0
0
6
2
4
4
2
1
6
4
4
2
6
3
7
NA
MG/L-NA
146.
144.
139.
92.
91.
1O3.
32.
76.
49.
82.
87.
134.
89.
101.
116.
93.
9O.
1O4.
71.
82.
89.
2. 7
4. 0
8. 3
53.
ZN
UQ/L-ZN
-2O.
-20.
99,
-20.
-2O.
99.
99.
-20.
-20.
40.
-20.
3O.
-20.
40.
-20.
-20,
33.
116.
23.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
70.
72.
SE
UG/L-SE
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
ENDRIN
NG/L
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
O3
03
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
03
O3
03
O3
03
03
03
03
LINDANE
NG/L
32.
440.
120.
88.
23.
246.
3.
960.
-0.
430.
108.
24.
6.
23.
3.
4.
13.
9.
12.
14.
14.
4.
-0.
6.
-O.
6
3
2
4
2
3
4
3
0
6
1
C
0
0
8
2
2
2
METHOXY- TOXA-
CHLOR PHENE
NG/L NG/L
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
-0. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
2, 4-D
NG/L
-0. 1
7. 6
-34.
-2.1
-0. 1
10.3
-34.
-2.1
-0. 1
-54.
-0. 1
-54.
-0. 1
11. 2
-34.
-2.1
0. 3
3. 0
-34.
-0. 1
13. 3
-54.
-0. 1
-0. 6
5. 5
2, 4. 5 TP
SILVEX
NG/L
51. 6
24. 8
13. 0
49. 7
32. 4
9. 5
70. 0
20. 2
18. 5
54. 0
25. 1
45. 0
17. B
11. 3
102.
39. 9
11. 6
11. 5
17. 0
11. 2
4.6
21. 0
35. 0
9. 8
46. 6
(.Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
ro
SAMPLE-
NUMSEK
4105O4
41O603
4106O4
41O7O4
4224O1
42P5O1
4325O3
422503
432504
43 1 50 1
431SO3
421503
4215O4
42O5O1
420502
43O5O4
4316O1
4216O?
421603
421 6O4
42340?
433403
4234O4
434401
4244O3
COLLECTION
DATF
5/P6/77
3/ 7/77
5/P6/77
5/31/77
B/35/76
8/25/76
12/13/76
3/ 5/77
5/?9/77
B/35/76
12/11/76
3/ 4/77
5/?9/77
8/35/76
13/11/76
5/30/77
0/35/76
13/1 1/76
3/ 4/77
5/P9/77
13/13/76
3/ 7/77
5/3O/77
8/34/76
3/1O/77
DEPTH
M
17.
11
11.
7.
4
7.
7.
7.
7.
4
4
4
4.
7
7.
7.
19.
19
19.
19
1
O
O
O
o
0
o
o
0
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Q
Q
B
8
TEMP
DFG C
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
O.
1
1.
1.
1.
1.
2.
1.
. 3
3
3
4
9
7
7
1
9
2
3
7
9
8
6
2
6
6
3
4
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
MG/L PH
O.
1
3.
O.
3.
2.
-O.
-O.
-O
-O.
-O.
-O.
2.
O.
-O
-0
-0
-O.
-O.
-o.
-o.
-o.
-0.
8.
7.
7
O
3
9
1
P
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
7
4.
5.
4
6
6.
5.
6
6.
6.
6
6
6
6.
6.
6.
6.
6
6.
6.
7.
5.
6.
6
6.
6.
9
O
9
5
4
7
O
9
9
4
4
7
3
3
7
9
7
8
B
O
8
O
O
6
9
CONDUC- TOTAL
TIV1TY ALKALINITY
UMHOS/CM MG/L CACO3
338.
338.
452.
832.
754.
443.
638.
7O8.
843.
566.
369.
496.
316.
849.
560.
9OO.
773.
1O15.
6OO.
738.
493.
372.
363.
1O7
110.
8.
4.
B.
2O4.
56.
28.
92.
135.
257.
98
10O.
216
83.
no.
144.
177.
172.
2O4.
216.
257.
64.
48.
84.
12.
20.
D I SSOLVED
SOLIDS
MG/L
1B9.
204.
292.
393.
233.
32B.
4O5.
185.
369.
227.
357.
52O.
388.
289.
37O.
192.
209.
SO.
88.
VOLATILE
SUSPENDED TOTAL SUSPENDED
SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS BOD
MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L
7.
-1.
4.
12.
3.
2.
-1.
2.
11.
3.
13.
71.
10.
4.
10.
3.
-1.
4.
2.
8.
— 1
1
9.
9. 89. 3. 2.
9. 97. 1.
COD
MG/L
16.
13.
16.
17.
B
2O.
6O.
56.
2O4.
63
157.
56.
37.
80.
39.
25.
16.
33.
97.
8.
CL
MG/L
75.
85.
111.
1O5.
B2
5O.
123.
116.
141.
44.
34.
34.
34.
95.
46
BB.
57.
178.
69.
93.
63.
54.
44.
3
12.
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
oo
SUL FII'F. -
SAMPLf SUL T UK
NUMBER MP/L-S
410504 -0. 1
1106O3 -0. 1
41O6O4 -0. 1
410704 -O. 1
422401
422501
4225O2
42P503 -O. 1
4225O4 -0 1
421501
421502
421 50n 14 5
421501 -0. I
420501
42050?
420504 --0. 1
421601
42160^
42)603 -0. 1
421 6O4 -O 1
4234O2
423403 0 1
423404 -0 1
4244O1
424403 0 1
TOTAL
COL 1 FORM
»/10OML
O.
46.
O.
3.
99.9
O.
16O.
O
0
99, 9
1767.
'
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
tn
SAMPLE.
NUMBER
410504
4106O3
41O6O4
4107O4
4224O1
4225O1
422502
422503
4225O4
421501
4,21502
421503
421504
420501
420502
420504
421601
4216O2
421603
421604
4234O2
423403
423404
424401
4244O3
SOI
MG/t -SO4
6.
3.
4.
?3.
17.
1O.
10.
31.
14.
74.
62.
105.
5.
11.
11.
54.
SB.
9O.
4.
AL
MG/L - AL
~O. 5
O A
-O. 5
-0. 5
0. 9
-0. 5
-0. 3
-0. 3
-O. 5
-0. 5
4. 7
b 5
3. 6
-0. 5
1. 1
-O. 5
-O. 5
-0 3
-0. 3
-0. 5
-O. 3
-0. 3
-O. 5
-0 5
1. 0
AS
UG/L-AS
-5
-10.
-5
-5.
-10.
-10.
-20.
-10.
5 .
11.
-20.
25.
15.
-10.
-20.
16.
-1O.
-20.
-1O.
8.
-20.
-10.
B.
31.
65.
13
UG/L-U
106.
78
64.
514.
52O
4OO.
49.
383.
364.
360.
9O9.
576
736.
3BO.
822.
716.
46O.
617.
715.
407.
292.
345.
7O.
16O.
CD
UG/L-CD
-20.
-2O.
-20
-50.
-2O.
37.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-5O.
-2O.
-5O.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
CA
MG/L-CA
1.
1
4.
3.
3.
4.
1.
4.
1O.
1.
1.
5.
66.
5.
5.
3.
6.
2.
4.
2.
2.
6.
6.
CO
UG/L-CQ
-50.
-5O.
-5O.
-1OO.
-50.
-50.
-100.
-5O.
-5O.
-1OO.
-50.
-100.
-5O.
-1OO.
-50.
-50.
-SO.
CR
UG/L-CR
-2O.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-30.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-5O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-20.
29.
-20.
CU
UG/L-CU
56.
-50.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-2O.
-5O.
-2O.
-20.
47.
-50.
20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-50.
-20.
20.
-5O.
-20.
-20.
-50.
FE
MG/L-FE
O. 4
-O. 1
-O. 2
23. 0
3. 6
11.3
26. O
49. 4
35. O
23. 0
13. O
11.4
47. O
23. 3
21. 6
27. 0
26. O
36. O
38. B
2O. O
13. O
23. 3
0. 6
O. 8
PB
UG/L-PB
-200.
-10O.
-1OO.
-100.
-2OO.
-1OO.
-100.
-20O.
-1OO.
-1OO.
-100.
-10O.
-2OO.
-100.
-200.
-100.
-2OO.
MG
MG/L-MG
2. 5
3. 4
5. 3
1. 4
1. 6
1. 3
O. 6
2. 6
3. 1
4. 7
O. 5
2. 1
2. 2
3. 2
2. 5
2. 5
4. 6
3. 6
3. O
5. 2
O. 5
1. 2
0. 6
4. 2
6. 1
MN
MG/L-MN
0. 28
0. 24
O. 07
3. 56
O. 66
0. O9
O. 15
O. 22
O. 33
O. 84
0. 41
O. 15
0. 32
O. 46
0. 25
0. OB
O. 69
1. 27
0. 72
0. 68
0. 16
-0. O5
0. O6
0. 07
0. 13
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMBER
41OS04
41O6O3
41O604
410704
422401
4225O1
4223O2
422903
4223O4
4213O1
I— > 4215O2
cn
en 421S03
421304
420301
420302
420304
421601
4216O2
421603
421604
423402
423403
423404
424401
424403
HO
UG/L-HO
-O.
-I.
-1.
-1.
-O.
-I.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-O,
-1
-0.
3
0
0
0
3
O
0
3
O
O
0
0
3
O
3
. 0
3
NI
UC/L-NI
-30.
-100.
-50.
-50.
-SO.
-30.
-30.
-10O.
-30.
-30.
-3O.
-1OO.
-SO.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-30.
-3O.
-100.
-50.
-50.
-1OO.
-30.
-SO.
-1OO.
K
MG/L-K
1.
1.
2.
16.
12.
3.
6.
8.
9.
13.
6.
16.
11.
12.
11.
13.
14.
13.
9.
1O.
5.
4.
4.
3.
2.
5
6
4
9
7
1
1
4
S
0
0
5
0
8
7
4
3
2
4
0
7
7
4
9
2
NA
MG/L-NA
64.
53.
93.
13O.
111.
67.
96.
103.
127.
48.
31.
70.
60.
133.
74;
66.
83.
133.
75.
130
73.
39.
61.
3. 4
3. O
ZN
UQ/L-ZN
48.
33.
38.
40.
31.
67.
139.
34.
23.
-2O.
38.
-20.
23.
298.
-20.
-20.
46.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
147.
92.
40.
30.
111.
SE
UQ/L-SE
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-to.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
ENDR IN
NO/L
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
O3
O3
03
O3
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
03
O3
03
O3
03
03
O3
L I NDANE
NG/L
3.
-0.
3.
17.
34.
10.
18.
O.
1O8.
4OO.
280.
64.
13.
8OO.
320.
1040.
101.
4.
2.
18.
73.
172.
13OO.
1.
6.
6
2
9
7
7
1
2
9
6
0
0
0
O
7
O
4
METHQXY- TOXA-
CHLOR PHENE
NG/L NG/L
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-O. 1
2, 4-D
NO/L
-0. 6
-0. 1
-0. 6
-0. 6
-34.
-34.
-2. 1
O. 6
-O. 6
-34.
-2. 1
-0. 1
-0. 6
-34.
-2. 1
15. 4
-34.
-2. 1
-0. 1
43. 6
-2. 1
-O. 1
44. 1
-34.
0. 3
2, 4, 3 TP
SILVEX
NG/L
14. 2
23. 0
2. 9
2. 6
34. 6
671.
43. 7
41.2
9. 4
-3. 4
45. 4
9. 3
8. 8
10. O
37. 8
12. 9
45. 0
33. 4
22. 5
71. 9
93. O
7. 3
12. 3
138.
11. 1
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE COLLECTION DEPTH TEMP
NUMBER I3AU- M DEC C
4P460!
4246O3
4249O1
424903
424501
424503
424801
424BO3
(-» 424701
cn
O-, 4247O3
425201
1252O3
425001
425003
4254O1
4254O3
4253O1
425303
425101
425103
0/P4/76
3/ 7/77
B/P5/76
3/ 1O/77
B/P4/76
3/10/77
8/P5/76
3/ 1O/77
8/25/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/ 1O/77
8/?6/76
3/ 9/77
0/26/76
3/ 9/77
8/P6/76
3/ 9/77
8/26/76
3/10/77
2.
1.
1
1.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
1.
2.
1.
2.
1.
2
1.
2.
1.
2
1.
O
6
8
7
O
6
O
4
9
5
1
6
2
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
VOLA1 ILE
DISSOLVED CONDUC- TOTAL DISSOLVED SUSPENDED TOTAL SUSPENDED
OXYGFN 1LVITY ALKALINITY SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS SOLIDS BOD
MG/L PH UMHQS/CM MG/L CACO3 MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L MG/L
4
5.
3.
4.
6.
12
7.
1O.
4.
7.
4.
7
8.
11.
8.
10.
7.
11
8.
9.
9.
?
8
5
7
7
6
3
9
5
6
6
3
O
1
8
5
1
O
9
6.
7
6
6
6
6
6.
6.
6
6.
6
7
6
6.
6.
6.
6
6
6
6.
(-.
O
6
9
4
3
9
7
5
7
7
0
2
3
4
6
4
4
4
8
356
324.
456.
46O.
1 70.
102.
170.
157.
35B.
313.
41O.
372
91.
9O.
127
88.
9O
86.
1O7.
1OO.
44. 159. 27. 186.
6O. 176. 9. 181.
74. 226. 5 231.
84. 217. 4. 221.
24
8. 129. 21. 150.
30.
16. 127. -1. 125.
54.
48.
74.
68. 206. 15. 221.
20. O.
4. 73. -1. 72.
8.
B. 69. 4 73.
8.
4. 67. 4. 71.
8.
12. 79. 5 84.
6 3.
4.
3 3.
2.
3.
-1.
2.
1.
4.
1.
3.
-1.
-1
1.
-1.
1.
-1.
1.
-I.
1.
COD
MG/L
12.
4.
26
9.
32.
13.
64.
18.
24.
13.
28.
25.
14.
36.
17.
20.
a.
CL
MG/L
34.
51 .
36
34.
6.
15
7
24.
29.
45.
29
65.
4.
9.
4.
9.
4.
26.
6
12.
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
cn
SUI.FIPE-
SAMI'Lt: SULFUR
NUMUfrR MG/L- S
424601
424/.03 -0 1
4247O1
4247O3 -0 1
424501
4245O3 -O 1
424801
424Q03 -0 1
4247O1
424703 -O 1
425201
425^03 -0 1
425O01
425OO3 -O 1
425101
4254O3 -O 1
4253O1
425303 -O 1
425101
425103 -0. 1
TOTAL
COL I FORM
tt.'lOOML
'79. 9
99.9
4700.
9
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
CD
SAHPLt
NUHUER
4246O1
424603
424901
4249O3
4245O1
424 5O3
424801
4240O3
4247O1
421703
425201
425203
4250O1
425OO3
425401
425403
425301
425303
4251O1
4251O3
SOI
HG/l --SO4
10.
14.
B.
S.
8.
14.
16.
16.
15.
16.
Al
MG/L--AL
-0 Ei
-O. 3
-0. 5
-O. 3
-0 5
O 3
-0. 5
0. 5
-O. 3
-0. 3
-0. 5
-0. 3
-O. 5
-O. 3
-0. 5
-0. 3
-O. 5
-0 3
-O. 5
0. 5
AS
UG/L--AS
-10.
30.
-10.
20.
-10.
-10.
-10.
14.
-10.
-10.
-10
-1O.
83.
142.
402.
145.
360.
126.
219.
104.
B
UG/L--B
POO
204
?80
371.
90.
37
60.
160.
256.
240.
249
120.
121.
110.
446.
90.
271.
10O.
136.
CD
UG/L-CD
-2.0.
-2O.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
-20
-20.
-2O.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
CA
MG/L-CA
2
4.
5.
4.
10.
1O.
11
11.
3.
7.
4.
5.
3.
2.
4.
3.
3.
4.
3.
3.
CO
UG/L-CO
-50.
-5O.
-50
-50.
-50.
-50.
-5O.
-5O.
-50.
-5O.
-5O.
-50.
-50.
-50.
-50.
-5O.
-5O.
-50.
-50.
-bO.
CR
UG/L-CR
63
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-30.
-20.
38.
-20.
-2O.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
57.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-2O.
CD
UG/L-CU
-20.
-5O.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-50.
-2O.
-50.
-2O.
-50.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-50.
-20.
-50.
-2O.
-50.
-2O.
-50.
FE
MG/L-FE
B. 5
7. 4
7. 7
6. 6
0. 3
0. 1
O. 4
-O. 1
5. 3
4. 3
6. 9
8. 6
0. 8
0. 2
0. 9
0. 3
0. •?
1. 3
1. 0
0. 6
PB
UG/L-PB
-100.
-20O.
-10O.
-20O.
-100.
-2OO.
-too.
-2OO.
-1OO.
-2OO.
--1OO.
-2OO.
-10O.
-20O.
-100.
-20O.
-100.
-2OO.
-10O.
-2OO.
MG
MG/L-MG
3. 2
4. 1
3. 1
3. 8
4. 9
6. 6
4. 6
6. B
3. 3
5. 3
3. 6
5. 8
2. 1
3. 6
2. 1
3. 2
2. 2
3. 0
2. 4
3. 4
MN
MG/L-MN
O. 15
O. 15
0. 11
O. 15
-O. O5
-0. O5
-O. 05
O. 15
O. OB
O. OB
O. 11
0. 13
-O. O5
-O. O5
-0. 05
0. 06
-0. 05
0. O6
-0. O5
O. O6
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-l. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMBER
424601
424603
424901
424703
424501
424303
424801
^ f
<_n 424803
IT)
424701
4247O3
4232O1
423203
423O01
4230O3
425401
425403
425301
425303
423101
423103
HO
UG/L-HO
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. O
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 5
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 5
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 3
-1. 0
-0. 3
NI
UG/L-NI
-30.
-1OO.
-3O.
-1OO.
-30.
-100.
-3O.
-1OO.
-30.
-1OO.
-30.
-100.
-30.
-1OO.
-30.
-100.
37.
-1OO.
-SO.
-100.
K
MO/L-K
3. 7
4. 3
7. 6
3. 9
7. 3
3. 6
7. 6
3. 3
7. 0
4. 3
8. 4
6. 0
2. O
1. 6
2. 0
1. 3
2. 2
1. 6
2. 7
1. 9
NA
MO/L-NA
41. O
43. O
39. 0
38. O
3. O
6. 2
3. 0
3. 8
38. 0
36. 0
49. 0
31. 0
2. 3
3. O
2. 1
3. 1
3. 3
3. O
4. 4
6. 2
ZN
UO/L-ZN
-20.
-20.
^20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
34.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
-20.
23.
-20.
-20.
SE
UO/L-SE
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10
-10.
-10.
ENDRIN
NO/L
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
O3
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
03
LINDANE
NC/L
3.
2.
83
22.
68.
316.
8.
-0.
31.
3.
241.
0.
28.
-0.
42.
-0.
138.
-0.
36.
-0.
30
30
60
20
OO
00
OO
20
20
10
OO
90
40
2O
3O
2O
00
2O
OO
20
METHOXY- TOXA-
CHLOR PHENE
NO/L NO/L
-0.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-0. 1
2, 4-D
NO/L
-34.
O.
-34.
-0.
-34.
-54.
-0.
-34.
0.
-34.
12.
-34.
O.
-34.
-O.
-34.
1.
-34.
0.
30
1O
10
4O
90
40
10
60
80
2. 4, 3 TP
SILVEX
NS/L
66. 1
22. 3
70. 1
6. 2
89. 2
117.
6. 4
79. 4
9. 9
37. 4
43. 4
142.
24. 3
94. 3
3. 0
93. 7
33. 7
74. 9
38. 9
-------
TABLE B-2. SOIL DATA
SAMPLE
NUMBER
41111
41131
41115
41135
41116
41136
41211
41215
41216
41311
41315
41316
42111
42131
42115
42135
42116
42136
42211
42231
42215
42235
42216
42236
42311
42331
42315
42335
42316
42336
42426
42428
42429
COLLECTION
DATE
8/26/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/1O/77
B/26/76
B/26/76
B/26/76
8/26/76
B/26/76
8/26/76
8/26/76
3/ 1O/77
8/26/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/10/77
8/26/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/10/77
B/26/76
3/10/77
8/26/76
3/10/77
8/26/76
3/10/77
8/22/76
8/22/76
8/22/76
DEPTH
M
0. 00
O. OO
1. 00
1. OO
3. OO
3. OO
0. OO
1. OO
3. 00
0. 00
1. 00
3. OO
0. OO
O. OO
1. OO
1. OO
3. 00
3. 00
0. OO
0. 00
1. 00
1. 00
3. 00
3. 00
0. 00
O. OO
1. 00
1. OO
3. OO
3. 00
3. 35
3. 35
7. 92
INORGANIC
NITROGEN
PH UG/GM-N
3.
3.
4.
3.
3.
4.
4.
4.
6.
4.
4.
5.
4.
5.
5.
4.
6.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
4.
5.
5.
5.
5.
4.
5.
6.
6.
9
5
4
9
1
1
2
5
1
4
7
5
4
7
1
4
6
9
0
8
3
8
6
7
7
8
2
7
8
8
4
2
1
19
11.
38.
7.
9.
6.
31.
31.
13.
15.
14
6.
24.
19.
18.
14.
8.
14.
41.
14.
55.
12.
10.
7.
19.
17.
10.
32.
21.
12.
10.
12.
3
2
3
1
1
4
1
5
0
9
7
B
4
6
1
6
4
6
4
8
1
5
2
7
2
5
0
1
0
1
2
2
TOTAL
ORGANIC
NITROGEN
UG/GM-N
31.
130.
6.
36.
-1.
6.
210.
18.
-1.
262
9.
1.
428.
579.
50.
45.
16.
27.
576.
425.
39.
65.
27.
41.
534.
452.
21.
39.
19.
2.
1.
TOTAL AVAILABLE
PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHORUS
UG/GM-P UG/GM-P
16.
16.
26.
39.
14.
IB.
24.
2B.
18.
44.
30.
19.
92.
17B.
78.
135.
13O.
107.
326.
313.
144.
187.
119.
99.
341.
191.
115.
97.
96.
41.
42.
39.
46.
1.
1.
3.
2.
3.
4.
1.
3.
3.
4.
2.
1O.
37.
17.
57
55.
85.
29.
209.
46.
142.
58.
71.
29.
157.
47.
56.
34.
30.
14.
23.
17.
6.
0
2
O
4
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
0
O
O
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
O
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
SULFUR
UG/GM-5
114.
33.
133.
37.
144.
no.
110.
no.
94.
208.
84.
64.
150.
4O8.
78.
43.
100.
55.
224.
232.
62.
77.
77.
77.
213.
289.
B5.
58.
53.
20.
66.
64.
82
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-2. Continued
CTi
SAMPLE
NUMBER
41111
41131
41113
41133
41116
41136
41211
42131
41215
42135
41216
42136
41311
41313
41316
42111
42115
42116
42211
42231
42215
42235
42216
42236
42311
42331
42315
42335
42316
42336
42426
42428
42429
CATION
EX-CAP
MEQ/1OOG
0.
O.
0
0.
O.
0.
O.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
O
0.
0.
1.
0.
O.
O.
0.
O.
1.
O
O
O.
O.
0.
0.
0.
O.
37
71
40
23
64
10
82
37
46
18
50
17
57
84
21
82
24
64
11
56
41
38
73
15
14
52
37
16
61
10
43
57
5O
EXTR.
AL
UG/GM
78.
23.
64.
41.
4O.
36.
52.
64.
86.
54.
27.
56.
42.
26.
3B.
63.
63.
51.
34.
74.
13.
32.
23.
36.
53.
234.
65.
32.
19.
6O.
EXTR.
B
UG/GM
O. 82
1. Ol
O. O3
O. 13
O. 16
0. 39
O. O9
O. 1O
O. Ol
0. 19
O. 12
0. 57
0. 13
0. 12
O. O7
O. 13
0. 22
0. 24
0. 29
O. 62
O. 09
0. 43
0. 13
0. 19
0. 43
0. 06
O. 17
O. Ol
O. 13
O. 60
O. 2O
0. 12
EXTR.
CD
UG/GM
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0
-O.
-O.
-0
-O.
-O.
O.
-0
-0.
-O.
O
03
O5
O3
O3
O5
03
O3
O5
O5
O3
03
O5
O5
03
O5
09
05
O3
O3
O5
O3
O5
05
O3
03
O5
O5
O3
05
OS
O5
OS
16
EXCH.
CA
MG/GM
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O.
0
0.
O.
O.
O.
O.
O
O
O.
O
O.
0
O.
O
0.
O.
O
O2B
O07
O19
O07
O31
OO3
O01
O99
O2 1
Oil
O36
O19
O22
O36
O18
034
035
O33
092
O33
O23
038
O18
O70
083
06O
027
032
O16
034
O47
037
EXTR.
CO
UG/GM
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
EXTR.
CR
UG/GM
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-0.
-0.
-0.
0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
0.
-0
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
O.
0.
O5
12
O3
12
O3
12
05
12
03
12
05
12
O3
OS
03
03
03
03
O3
12
O3
12
O3
12
03
12
O3
12
03
12
05
O6
03
EXTR
CU
UG/GM
-O. O3
O. 9O
O. 14
O. SO
0. SI
O. SO
-O. O3
17. 00
-0. 03
11. 00
-0. 05
11. 00
-0. 05
0. 16
-O. OS
7. 10
0. 67
O. 7O
12. 00
14. 00
2. 20
16. OO
O. 87
16. OO
3. 80
3. 40
0. 26
4. 5O
-0 03
1. 40
-0. O5
-0 05
-O. O3
EXTR.
FE
UG/GM
6O.
23.
20.
12.
83.
64.
51.
7.
23.
3.
7O.
60.
72.
16.
45.
10.
10.
25.
29.
3.
25.
8
22.
39.
27.
45.
40.
100
25.
15.
27.
107.
EXTR.
PB
UG/GM
-0. S
-O. 3
O. 6
1. 9
-0. 3
-0. 5
-0. 3
-0. 5
-0. 3
8. 1
0. 5
0. 8
4. 3
-O. 3
-0. 3
3. O
-O 5
-0. 5
-0. S
-O. 3
-0. 3
EXCH
MG
MG/GM
-0. Ol
-0. 01
-O. Ol
-O. Ol
-O. Ol
-O. 01
-O. 01
-O. Ol
-O. Ol
-O. 01
O. Ol
-0. 01
-O. Ol
0. Ol
-0. 01
-0. Ol
-O. 01
-0. 01
0. 01
0. Ol
O. Ol
-O. Ol
-0. 01
-0. 01
O. 01
0 01
O. 01
-O 01
-O. Ol
-O. 01
0. Ol
-0. 01
-O. Ol
EXTR.
MN
UG/GM
2. 23
0. 50
O. 36
9. 4O
O. 71
2 2O
O. 94
0. 45
2. 43
0. 15
1. 07
0. 24
3. 58
O. 59
0. 31
O. 71
O. 42
O. 62
0. 59
0. 63
-0. 12
0. 28
0. 22
0. 26
0. 63
O. 74
0 71
O. 41
1. OS
-
O. 48
1. 38
2 26
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-2. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMBER
41111
41131
41 115
41135
41116
41136
41211
41215
41216
41311
41315
41316
42111
43131
43115
CTl 42135
ro
42116
42136
42211
42231
42215
42235
42216
42236
42311
42331
42315
42335
42316
42336
42426
42428
42427
EXTR.
NI
UQ/GM
-O. 2
-O. 1
-O. 2
-0. 1
-0. 2
-O. 1
-0. 2
-0. 2
-0. 2
-0. 2
-0. 2
-0. 2
-O. 2
0. 4
-0. 2
-0. 1
-O. 2
0. 3
-0. 2
O. 1
-0.2^
0. 1
-0.2
O. 1
-0. 2
-0. 1
-O. 2
0. 2
-O. 2
-0. 1
-0. 2
-0. 2
-0. 2
EXCH.
K
MC/GM
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
O.
-O.
-0.
O.
-0.
-O.
O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
0.
-0.
0.
-0.
O.
0.
O.
-O.
0.
-0.
O.
O.
-O.
-0.
O.
-0.
-O.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
03
01
01
01
01
02
02
01
01
01
01
01
EXCH.
NA
MG/GM
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-O.
-0.
O.
-0.
-0.
0.
O.
-0.
-O.
0.
-O.
0.
-0.
O.
0.
O.
O.
0.
0.
O.
O.
0.
0.
O.
O.
O.
0.
O.
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
02
01
02
02
02
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
EXTR.
ZN ENDRIN LINDANE METHOXYCHLOR
UG/GM NG/GM NG/GM NG/GM
1.
-3.
-0.
-2.
-O.
-2.
-O.
-0.
-O.
-O.
3.
-0.
12.
8.
2.
-2.
2.
9.
2.
8.
3.
9.
11.
-2.
B.
9.
-0.
5.
-O.
-2.
1.
-0.
4.
5 -0. 60 O. 54 -O. Ol
5 -O. 11 -0. 11 -O. 53
5
5
5
5
5 -O. 6O 2. 11 -O. Ol
5
5
5 -O. 6O 1.47 -O. Ol
0
5
0 -0. 6O 24. 19 -O. Ol
5 -0. 11 1. 55 -0. 53
5
5
7
4
6 -O. 60 26. 59 -O. Ol
9 -O. 1 1 37. 52 -O. 53
O
3
0
5
4 -0. 6O 75. 79 -O. Ol
1 -O. 1 1 37. 68 -O. 53
5
7
5
5
5
5 -0. 60 70. 03 -0. 01
0
TOTAL
TDXAPHENE 2, 4-D SILVEX AL
NG/GM NG/GM NG/GM MO/GM
-O. 6O -O. 13 O 84 O.
-O. 53 -O. O2 1. 34 0.
1.
2.
O.
1.
-O. 6O -O. 13 1. 27 O.
1.
1.
-O. 6O -O. 13 1. 57 1.
1.
O
-0. 60 -0. 13 4. 12 0.
-O. 53 -O. O2 5. 18 1.
1.
1.
O.
1.
-O. 6O -O. 13 1. 61 1.
-0.53 -O. 02 1.89 2.
1.
1.
O.
1.
-O. 6O -0. 13 2. 83 2.
-O. 53 -O. O2 4. 24 2.
1.
2.
1.
2.
O.
-0. 60 -0. 13 2. 74 0.
O.
9
6
6
2
7
3
5
6
4
2
2
6
9
4
3
7
8
6
8
O
1
6
9
6
2
5
8
3
8
O
8
7
7
TDTAL
CD
UG/GM
-2.
-2.
-2.
— y
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
TOTAL
CA
MG/GM
O. 07
O. O5
O. 02
O. 06
0. 04
O. O4
0. 05
O. O4
0. 21
O. O3
O. O3
0. O2
O. 11
O. 13
0. O7
0. OS
0. 07
0 06
0. 2O
O. 14
O. 06
O. O9
O. OS
O. O4
0. 13
O. 19
0. OB
0. 06
0. 13
0. O6
O. O7
O. O4
O. OS
(Continued)
-------
TABLE B-2. Continued
SAMPLE
NUMBER
41111
41131
41115
41135
41116
41136
41211
41213
41216
41311
41315
41316
42111
42131
42115
CTi 42135
OJ
42116
42136
42211
42231
42215
42235
42216
42236
42311
42331
42315
42335
42316
42336
42426
42428
42429
TOTAL
CO
UG/CM
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
T
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
-2.
TOTAL
CR
UG/GM
-5.
-2.
-3.
-2.
-5.
-2.
-3.
-3.
6.
-5.
-5.
-3.
6.
4.
-3.
-2.
-3.
-2.
9.
-2.
5.
-2.
-5.
-2.
3.
4.
5.
-2.
6.
-2.
-3.
-3.
10.
TOTAL
CU
UG/GM
2.
-3.
2.
-3.
2.
-3.
-2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
16.
1O.
4.
-5.
3.
-3.
21.
10.
7.
5.
4.
«
10.
1O.
3.
-5.
3.
-3.
2.
2.
3.
TOTAL
FE
MG/GM
2. 1
1. 3
2. 8
3. 3
1. 0
1. 3
1. 7
2. 6
2. 7
2. 6
2. 6
1 6
1. 7
1. 3
2. 4
1 9
1. 4
1. 7
2. 2
1. 7
2. 2
1. 2
2. 2
1. 4
2. 3
2. 3
2 7
2 8
3 2
1 9
1 7
1. 7
3. O
TOTAL
PB
UG/GM
-10.
-1O
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
28.
-10.
-1O.
16
-1O.
-1O.
-10.
-1O.
-1O.
-1O.
-10.
-1O.
TOTAL
MG
MG/GM
-O. Ol
O. O2
-O. Ol
O. O7
O. Ol
O. O3
0. O2
-O. 01
O. Ol
O. Ol
-O. Ol
-O. Ol
O. O8
O. 21
O. OS
O. O6
O. 03
O. O6
0 08
O. O9
O. O4
O. O3
0. 03
O. O7
O. O6
0 07
O. O7
0 03
O. O3
O. O6
O. O4
0. 03
0 02
TOTAL
MN
UG/GM
46.
39.
33.
39.
12.
26.
41.
63.
82.
46.
31.
43.
38.
26.
67.
43.
26.
37.
42.
47.
3O.
26.
30.
22.
43.
37.
73.
48.
44.
27.
22.
92.
TOTAL
HO
UG/OM
«
-O.
-1.
-O.
-1.
-O.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-O.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-O.
-1.
-0.
-1
-0.
-1.
-0.
-1.
-0
-1.
-1.
-1.
0
2
0
2
O
2
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
O
2
0
2
O
2
0
2
0
2
O
0
O
TOTAL
NI
UG/GM
-10.
-2O.
-10.
-20.
-10.
-20.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-10.
-1O.
-20.
-1O.
-2O.
-10
-20.
-10.
-20.
-10.
-2O.
-1O.
-20.
-10.
-20
-10.
-2O.
-1O.
-20
-10
-1O.
-10.
TOTAL
K
MG/GM
-O. 2
O. 2
O. 6
O. 4
-O. 2
O. 3
-O. 2
O. 2
0 8
0. 3
0 4
0. 4
-0. 2
0. 3
0. 3
0 4
-0. 2
0 4
0. 2
0. 3
0 2
0. 3
O. 3
0. 4
0 2
O. 4
0 4
0. 6
0. 4
0 6
O. 2
-0. 2
-O. 2
TOTAL
NA
MG/GM
-0. O5
0 12
O. O8
0. 13
-0. 03
0. 11
-0. 03
0. 06
0. 23
0. 09
0. 10
0. 13
0. 1O
0. 16
0. 11
O. 16
O. O6
0 14
0 24
O. 16
0 08
0. 17
0. 11
0. 18
0. 12
0. 18
0. 12
0. 28
0 31
0. 34
O 1O
-O. 03
-0. 03
TOTAL
ZN
UG/GM
3.
1.
3.
12.
-2.
3.
-2.
4.
4.
4.
4.
-2.
22.
21.
9.
8
6.
13.
19.
24.
9.
17.
20.
8.
29.
18.
18.
14
13.
8
3.
3.
11.
TOTAL
AS
UG/GM
-2.
-1.
2.
-1.
-3.
2.
-2.
-2.
3.
2.
-2.
1.
-a.
-1.
2.
1.
-3.
1.
2.
-1.
-2.
2.
1.
3.
2.
2.
1.
-2.
2.
~y
TOTAL
SE
UG/GM
-1.
1.
-1
-1.
_,
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
1.
-1.
-1.
-1.
-------
GLOSSARY
Adsorption: A process in which soluble substances are attracted to and held
at the surface of soil particles.
Advanced wastewater treatment: Additional treatment designed to reduce
concentrations of selected constituents present in wastewater after
secondary treatment.
Alkali soil: A soil with a high degree of alkalinity (pH of 8.5 or higher)
or with a high exchangeable sodium content (15 percent or more of the
exchange capacity) or both.
Aquiclude: A geologic formation which is porous and capable of absorbing
water but will not transmit it rapidly enough to supply a well or spring.
Aquifer: A geologic formation or strata that contains water and transmits it
from one point to another in quantities sufficient to permit economic
development.
Consumptive use: Synonymous with evapotranspiration.
Conventional wastewater treatment: Reduction of pollutant concentrations in
wastewater by physical, chemical, or biological means.
Drainability: Ability of the soil system to accept and transmit water by
infiltration and percolation.
Effective precipitation: Precipitation that enters the soil and is useful
for plant growth.
Evapotranspiration: The unit amount of water lost from a given area by
transpiration, building of plant tissue, and evaporation from the soil
surface, snow, or intercepted precipitation in a specified period of
time.
Fixation: A combination of physical and chemical mechanisms in the soil that
act to retain wastewater constituents within the soil, including adsorp-
tion, chemical precipitation, and ion exchange.
Groundwater: The body of water that is retained in the saturated zone that
tends to move by hydraulic gradient to lower levels.
Groundwater table: The free surface elevation of the groundwater; this level
will rise and fall with additions or withdrawals.
164
-------
Infiltration: The entrance of applied water into the soil through the soil-
water interface.
Infiltration-percolation: An approach to land application in which large vol-
umes of wastewater are applied to the land, infiltrate the surface, and
percolate through the soil pores.
Irrigation: Application of water to the land to meet the growth needs of
plants.
Land application: The discharge of wastewater onto the soil for treatment
or reuse.
Loading rates: The average amount of liquid or solids applied to the land
over a fixed time period, taking into account periodic resting.
Lysimeter: A device for measuring percolation and leaching losses from a
column of soil; also a device for collecting-soil water in the field.
Micronutrient: A chemical element necessary for plant growth in amounts be-
low 1 mg/L.
Mineralization: The conversion of an element from an organic form to an in-
organic form as a result of microbial decomposition.
Overland flow: Wastewater treatment by spray-runoff (also known as "grass
filtration") in which wastewater is sprayed onto gently sloping, rela-
tively impermeable soil that has been planted to vegetation. Biologi-
cal oxidation occurs as the wastewater flows over the ground and con-
tacts the biota in the vegetative litter.
Pathogenic organisms: Microorganisms that can transmit diseases.
Percolation: The movement of water through the soil pores once it has passed
the soil-water interface.
Phytotoxic: Toxic to plants.
Primary effluent: Wastewater that has been treated by screening and sedi-
mentation.
Refractory organics: Organic materials not removed in secondary treatment.
Ridge-and-furrow method: The surface application of water to the land through
formed furrows; wastewater flows down the furrows, and plants may be
grown on the ridge.
Saline soil: A nonalkali soil containing sufficient soluble salts to impair
its productivity.
Secondary treatment: Treatment of wastewater by physical, chemical, or bio-
logical means such as trickling filters, activated sludge, or chemical
165
-------
precipitation and filtration.
Sewage farming: Originally involved the transporting of sewage to rural
areas for land disposal. Later practice includes reusing the water for
irrigation and fertilization of crops.
Soil texture: The relative proportions of the various soil separates—sand,
silt, and clay.
Soil water: That water present in the soil pores in an unsaturated zone
above the groundwater table.
Spraying: Application of water to the land by means of stationary or moving
sprinklers.
Spray-runoff: See overland flow.
Tilth: The physical condition of a soil as related to its ease of culti-
vation.
Transpiration: The net quantity of water absorbed through plant roots and
transpired plus that used directly in building plant tissue.
Viruses: Submicroscopic biological structures containing all the genetic
information necessary for their own reproduction but dependent for
reproduction upon living cells.
166
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing}
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-79-Q72
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF LAND APPLICATION OF DOMESTIC
WASTEWATER: Vine!and, New Jersey, Rapid Infiltration
Site
5. REPORT DATE
March 1979 issuing date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7.AUTHORIS)
Ernest L. Koerner, Benham-Blair & Affiliates, Inc.
D. Alan Haws, Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Benham-Blair & Affiliates, Inc., Oklahoma City, OK 7312(
and
Engineering Enterprises, Inc., Norman, OK 73069
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BC822
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2363
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Lab-Ada, OK
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final - 1/76 - 11/77
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/15
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report presents the findings of a study on the long-term effects of applying
treated domestic wastewater to an infiltration site at Vineland, New Jersey. Primary
treated domestic wastewater has been applied to three separate infiltration basins
for approximately 50, 29, and 3 years, respectively, using a high rate, rapid
infiltration method. The effluent applied to Basin I serves the Borough of Vineland,
while the effluent applied to Basins II and III serves the Landis Sewerage Authority.
Water and soil samples from this site were compared with similar samples from an
upstream control area not receiving wastewater application.
Sample analyses included metals, nutrients, organics, bacteria, and viruses.
There was considerable variation in basin performance; however, the performance
of the separate basins was generally quite consistent with loading rates, service
life, and hydrogeology.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATl Field/Group
groundwater recharge
soil properties
trace elements
water chemistry
rapid infiltration system
primary pre-treatment
(wastewater)
land application
municipal wastes
wastewater treatment
43F
91A
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report!
UNCLASSIFIED '
21. NO. OF PAGES
181
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
167
U S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1979 -657-060/1650
------- |