DOA
EPA
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Science and Education Administration
Federal Research
University Park PA 16802
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Energy, Minerals, and
Industry
Washington DC 20460
EPA-600-7-78-1 62
August 1978
Research and Development
Comparison of
Some Properties of
Minesoils and
Contiguous
Natural Soils
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program
Report
-------
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 INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/7-78-162
August 1978
COMPARISON OF SOME PROPERTIES OF MINESOILS
AND CONTIGUOUS NATURAL SOILS
by
Tom A. Pedersen, Andrew S. Rogowski, and Roger Pennock, Jr.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Science and Education
Administration, Federal Research
Northeast Watershed Research Center
University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
EPA-IAG-D5-E763
Project Officer
Clinton W. Hall
Office of Energy, Minerals and Industry
Washington, D. C. 20250
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20250
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Energy, Minesoils and Industry,
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.
ii
-------
FOREWORD
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, in part, stress the
control of nonpoint source pollution. Sections 102 (C-l), 208 (b-2,F) and 304(e)
authorize basin scale development of water quality control plans and provide for
area-wide waste treatment management. The act and the amendments include, when
warranted, waters from agriculturally and silviculturally related nonpoint sources,
and requires the issuance of guidelines for both identifying and evaluating the
nature and extent of nonpoint source pollutants and the methods to control these
sources. Research program at the Northeast Watershed Research Center contributes to
the aforementioned goals. The major objectives of the Center are to:
. study the major hydrologic and water-quality associated problems of the
Northeastern U.S. and
. develop hydrologic and water quality simulation capability useful for
land-use planning. Initial emphasis is on the hydrologically most
severe land uses of the Northeast.
Within the context of the Center's objectives, stripmining for coal ranks as a
major and hydrologically severe land use. In addition, once the site is reclaimed
and the conditions of the mining permit are met, stripmined areas revert legally
from point to nonpoint sources. As a result, the hydrologic, physical, and
chemical behavior of the reclaimed land needs to be understood directly and in
terms of control practices before the goals of Sections 102, 208 and 304 can be
fully met.
iii
-------
The following report considers an important component of the reclaimed strip-
mined area—the minesoil. The chemical, physical, and morphological properties of
minesoil control oxygen and water movement to the underlying spoil, the amount of
available water retained for supporting a protective or productive vegetative
cover, and the erosivity of the material. The pertinent minesoil properties need
to be identified and compared with the properties of the original undisturbed soil
before the hydrologic and chemical impact of stripmining and reclamation practices
can be predicted adequately. The following report takes a major step in this
direction by comparing minesoils with contiguous natural soils to establish the
effects of mining and reclamation procedures.
Signed:
Harry B. Pionke
Director
Northeast Watershed
Research Center
iv
-------
ABSTRACT
Investigations were conducted to evaluate soil changes due to surface coal mining
and reclamation operations in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania. Objectives included
comparison of minesoils with contiguous natural soils to establish what effect mining
and reclamation procedures have on the properties of minesoils.
Four minesoil pits located within the disturbed area and four natural soil pits
located in adjacent undisturbed areas were described and sampled. Three of the
natural soils were classified as Typic Dystrochrepts and one was an Aquic Fragiudult.
The minesoils were classified as Udorthents.
Bulk densities were determined at 10 randomly located sites. Microlysimeters
were subsequently installed at these sites and used to determine saturated hydraulic
conductivities and evapotranspiration.
Pedogenetic development in the minesoils was minimal and the most prominent
feature of the minesoils was their high degree of coarseness and their high rock
fragment content. Roots tended to concentrate along soil-coarse fragment
interfaces. Few roots penetrated the massive minesoil material in the C horizons.
In general, the chemical constituents of the minesoils resembled the natural
soils. However, the weathering of the natural soils has leached bases from them
and significantly more extractable aluminum was found in these soils than in
minesoils. Organic carbon and nitrogen determination was affected by the high
content of carboniferous shale and coal fragments in the minesoils. The clay
minerals present in the minesoils had not been weathered as much as those in the
natural soils. The mineralogy suggests that these minesoils and the natural
soils were derived from the same materials.
-------
Results showed that minesoils contained 75% coarse fragments (by weight) as com-
pared with 50% for contiguous natural soils. Minesoils also contained significantly
less sand and clay than natural soils. The minesoils studied had lower specific
surface than natural soils due to their lower organic matter and vermiculite contents.
3 3
Average bulk density of the minesoil surface was 1.70 g/cm vs 1.26 g/cm for
adjacent soils.
The natural soils retained an average of 14.3% (by weight), whereas the minesoils
retained an average of 10.3% available water. The range of water retained between
-0.3 and -15 bar matric potential of the minesoil ranged from 5.5 to 16.7% as compared
with 7.1 to 39.2% in the natural soils. "In situ" determinations of field-capacity
yielded values between 6 and 12% (by weight), whereas microlysimeters retained from
12 to 19% after 2 days of drainage.
Microlysimeter data indicated that evapotranspiration of minesoils could be
approximated by A-pan results.
Single ring infiltrometer studies indicated that infiltration rate of the mine-
soil ranged from 0.5 to 34.3 cm/hr.
Extreme variation existed in saturated hydraulic conductivity values obtained
using microlysimeters. Use of a small plot to determine unsaturated hydraulic
conductivity of the minesoil indicated that infiltrating water followed voids
present in the minesoil.
This report was submitted in partial fulfillment of EPA-IAG-D5-E763 by the
Northeast Watershed Research Center, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Science and
Education Administration, Federal Research, under the sponsorship of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. This report covers a period from September 1,
1975 to August 31, 1977, and work was completed as of November 30, 1977.
vi
-------
CONCLUSIONS
Soil changes due to surface coal mining and reclamation operations in Clearfield
County, Pennsylvania were evaluated. Morphological, chemical, physical and hydraulic
properties of minesoils were compared to those of contiguous natural soils.
Studies showed that pedogenetic development in the minesoils was minimal and the
most prominent feature was their high degree of coarseness and their high rock-
fragment content. Clay mineralogy data suggested that these minesoils and natural
soils were derived from the same materials.
Minesoils contained more rock fragments (by weight) and less sand and clay than
did adjacent natural soils. The natural soils had higher specific surface than the
minesoils studied due to their higher organic matter and vermiculite contents. The
minesoils were denser than the natural soils due to their higher coarse fragment
content and lack of structural development.
Results showed that natural soils retained more water at equal matric potentials
than did minesoils. Infiltration rate of minesoils was highly variable as was
saturated hydraulic conductivity determined using microlysimeters. Use of a small
plot to determine unsaturated hydraulic conductivity indicated that water flow
followed voids present in the minesoil.
VII
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword ±±±
Abstract v
Conclusions vii
Figures x
Tables xi
Acknowledgments xiv
1. Introduction and Experimental Site 1
Introduction 1
Experimental site 1
2. Morphological and Chemical Characteristics 5
Introduction 5
Materials and methods 7
Profile descriptions and field sampling 7
Laboratory characterization 7
Statistical analysis. ... 9
Results and discussion 10
Soil and minesoil morphology 10
Field morphology 10
Soil classification 12
Root distribution 15
Laboratory analyses 17
Chemical characterization data 17
Spectrometric and spectrographic analyses 24
Clay mineralogy 28
Organic carbon and organic nitrogen 29
Summary 33
3. Physical Characteristics 34
Introduction 34
Materials and methods 36
Laboratory analyses 36
Field studies 37
Statistical analyses 39
Results and discussion 41
Physical properties 41
Particle size 41
Specific surface 54
Bulk density and porosity 54
Soil water 61
Moisture characteristics 61
Water retention 63
Field soil water 69
Evapotranspiration 69
viii
-------
Soil-water movement 71
Infiltration 71
Saturated hydraulic conductivity 76
Unsaturated hydraulic conductivity 76
Summary 81
References 82
Appendices
A. Profile descriptions for soils and minesoils 88
B. Laboratory characterization data for pedons described in
Appendix A 99
C. Organic carbon (Walkley-Black) values for selected
horizons 116
D. Size distribution data for pedons described in Appendix A 118
E. Moisture characteristics for pedons described in Appendix A .... 127
F. Meteorological data 136
IX
-------
FIGURES
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Location of experimental site
Schematic diagram of study area and location of experimental sites.
P-l through P-8 are soil pits, L-l through L-13 are lysimeter sites,
1-1 through 1-9 are infiltration sites, and K is the unsaturated
hydraulic conductivity plot . .
Cation exchange capacity, base saturation, pH and total acidity for
the natural soils
Cation exchange capacity, base saturation, pH and total acidity
for the minesoils
Schematic representation of unsaturated hydraulic conductivity
plot
Particle size summation curves for composite samples
Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution with depth
for Pit 1
Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution with depth
for Pit 2
Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution with depth
for Pit 3
Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution with depth
for Pit 4
Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution with depth
for Pit 5
Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution with depth
for Pit 7
Clay (<2 pm) distribution with depth for Pits 1 through 8
Coarse fragment (>2 mm) distribution with depth for Pits 1
through 8
Dry bulk densities of minesoil determined by various methods. . . .
Moisture characteristics for A2 horizon, Pit 1, and Ap
horizon, Pit 6
Moisture characteristics for B22 horizon, Pit 2, and C2 horizon,
Pit 8
Cumulative evapotranspiration (ET) from lysimeters, and
evaporation from A-pan during study
Infiltration on minesoil using single ring inf iltrometer (I) , and
infiltration on the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity plot
(K-Plot)
Volumetric water content within the unsaturated hydraulic
conductivity plot
Page
2
4
18
19
40
43
44
45
46
47
48
50
51
52
57
62
64
73
74
79
X
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Total sulfur, sulfate sulfur, pyritic sulfur and organic sulfur
of selected horizons
Quantitative spectrometric analysis of selected horizons
Semiquantitative spectrographic analysis of selected horizons. . . .
Carbon/nitrogen ratios for natural soils
Carbon /nitrogen ratios for minesoils
Composite sample-size distribution
Calculated values of specific surface area for Pits 1 through 4. . .
Calculated values of specific surface area for Pits 5 through 8. . .
Bulk density standard deviation, and coefficient of variation of
minesoils determined by various methods
Bulk densities of natural soils
Bulk densities of minesoils determined by the clod method
Gravimetric water content at -15 bar matric potential for
natural soils
Gravimetric water content at -15 bar matric potential for
minesoils
Water retained between -0.3 and -15 bar matric potential for
Pits 1 through 4
Water retained between -0.3 and -15 bar matric potential for
Pits 5 through 8 *
Gravimetric (G) and volumetric (V) water contents of lysimeters
at saturation and "field capacity"
Gravimetric (G) and volumetric (V) water content at
"field capacity"
Particle size distribution of lysimeters by weight
Evapotranspirational loss estimated by various methods
23
25
27
31
32
42
55
56
58
59
59
65
66
67
68
70
70
71
72
xi
-------
TABLES (continued)
Number Page
20 Infiltration rates on minesoils and natural soils 75
21 Saturated hydraulic conductivities (K), sampling variability (S),
and relative measure of variability (S/K), before (I) and after
(II) 4 months of exposure 77
22 Tensiometer readings on minesoil during unsaturated hydraulic
conductivity study 77
23 Gamma and neutron depth probe standardization of K-Plot. Bulk
density (BD) and volumetric water content (V) 80
B-l Physical characterization data for Pit 1 100
B-2 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 1 101
B-3 Physical characterization data for Pit 2 102
B-4 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 2 103
B-5 Physical characterization data for Pit 3 104
B-6 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 3 105
B-7 Physical characterization data for Pit 4 106
B-8 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 4 107
B-9 Physical characterization data for Pit 5 108
B-10 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 5 109
B-ll Physical characterization data for Pit 6 110
B-12 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 6 Ill
B-13 Physical characterization data for Pit 7 112
B-14 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 7 113
B-15 Physical characterization data for Pit 8 114
B-16 Chemical and mineralogical characterization data for Pit 8 115
C-l Organic carbon of selected horizons determined by the
Walkley-Black method 117
D-l Particle size distribution for Pit 1 119
D-2 Particle size distribution for Pit 2 120
D-3 Particle size distribution for Pit 3 121
D-4 Particle size distribution for Pit 4 122
xii
-------
TABLES (continued)
Number Page
D-5 Particle size distribution for Pit 5 123
D-6 Particle size distribution for Pit 6 124
D-7 Particle size distribution for Pit 7 125
D-8 Particle size distribution for Pit 8 126
E-l Moisture characteristics for Pit 1 128
E-2 Moisture characteristics for Pit 2 129
E-3 Moisture characteristics for Pit 3 130
E-4 Moisture characteristics for Pit 4 131
E-5 Moisture characteristics for Pit 5 132
E-6 Moisture characteristics for Pit 6 . 133
E-7 Moisture characteristics for Pit 7 134
E-8 Moisture characteristics for Pit 8 135
F-l Meteorological data 137
xiii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Appreciation is extended to Drs. Daniel D. Fritton and Marvin L. Risius for
their beneficial suggestions and review of this manuscript.
Special thanks also go to Dr. Edward J. Ciolkosz, Joseph Hallowich, and
Alex Topolanchik for their assistance in describing the soils; to Dr. Robert L.
Cunningham and members of the Soil Characterization Staff for laboratory
characterization of the soils.
xiv
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION AND EXPERIMENTAL SITE
INTRODUCTION
Increased occurrence of surface coal mining to provide for energy needs has
spurred renewed concern about its environmental effects. Employment of modern
reclamation techniques (Grim and Hill, 1974) may minimize pollution potentials
of reclaimed areas. However, acid mine drainage, erosion, and increased sediment
loads are among the problems that will most likely continue to be associated with
stripmined land (Van Voast, 1974) in the future.
Stabilization of spoil banks through rapid vegetation is very important.
Properties of minesoils determine, to a large extent, if rapid revegetation is
possible. This study was initiated to establish what effect surface mining and
reclamation operations have on the properties of minesoils. Our objective was to
determine the morphological, chemical, and physical characteristics of minesoils
as compared with contiguous natural soils, both in situ and in the laboratory.
EXPERIMENTAL SITE
The experimental site consists of a recently reclaimed 4~ha bituminous coal
stripmine adjacent to undisturbed land. The site is located about 1.2 km
northeast of Kylertown in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania (Figure 1). The site
lies within the Pittsburgh Plateau section of the Appalachian Plateau Province.
The geologic system is Pennsylvanian, characterized by cyclic sequences of
sandstone, shale, coal, and clay. The area is underlain by flat-lying to gently
folded sedimentary rocks (Glass, 1972) consisting of reddish, yellowish and
brownish clay shale and yellowish brown sandstone, shale and siltstone. The coal
-------
Figure 1. Location of experimental site.
-------
PENNSYLVANIA
EXPERIMENTAL
SITE
SCALE = I: 2,000,000
-------
seams include the middle and lower Kittanning seams (C & B) of the Allegheny group.
Silt shale, thin bedded sandstone, siltstone and clay shale underlie the middle
Kittanning C-seam under which the lower Kittanning B-seam is found. The general
topography of the area is broad with slightly rounded divides, which are separated
by narrow V-shaped valleys (Glass, 1972). Mean elevation of the site is about
450 m with a northern to northeastern aspect.
Before stripmining, the vegetation of the area was hardwood forest in which oak
and hemlock predominated. Grasses and legumes have become established on the site
after reclamation.
Continuous meterological data was obtained from instruments located at the
site (Figure 2) from May 24, 1976 through May 24, 1977 (Appendix F). Precipita-
tion was measured by a universal recording raingauge. A U.S. Weather Bureau Class
A evaporation pan was used to monitor evaporation. Maximum-minimum thermometers
and a hygrothermograph were also located at the site. A pyreheliometer was used
to record solar radiation.
The climate of the study site is humid. The average annual precipitation is
107 cm with an average 150 days without frost.
-------
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of study area and location of experimental
sites. P-l through P-8 are soil pits, L-l through L-13 are
lysimeter sites, 1-1 through 1-9 are infiltration sites, and
K is the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity plot.
-------
WEATHER
STATION
-------
SECTION 2
MORPHOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
INTRODUCTION
Surface mining for coal inevitably disturbs the soil and rock strata, which
overlie the coal. The soils present before stripmining in many cases were
moderately well to well-developed and reflected properties associated with the
components of the soil-forming factors. Many areas that have been stripmined were
previously forested, like our site. The soils associated with these areas are
generally not suited for agricultural production. These forest soils usually have
some characteristic that limits their agricultural use. In some cases, slopes or
stoniness are excessive and in others the depth to a limiting layer, like bedrock
or a fragipan, is shallow, making agricultural use impractical.
Soil reconstruction aims to duplicate soils that existed before mining
(McCormack, 1974) and when possible to eliminate any limiting factor.
Rapid establishment of vegetation on these disturbed areas is essential to
initiate soil development has to control erosion and to stabilize minesoil.
Jones et al. (1975) stated that the amount of organic matter added during the
initial stages of soil development has the greatest affect on profile
differentiation.
Sobek et al. (1976) showed that minesoils are young pedogenically and reflect
the properties of their parent material more closely than mature undisturbed soils.
Grube et al. (1974) showed that the unweathered sedimentary rocks exposed from
mining contain a wealth of primary minerals. Values of extractable P, K, Ca, and
Mg in incremental depth samples of overburden showed that concentrations of these
-------
cations are likely to be higher in pulverized unweathered rock than in old soils and
veathered rocks. However, Barnhisel and Massey (1969) reported that levels of Ca,
X, and P were low in Kentucky spoil materials. They also reported that Mg levels
vere sufficient for plant growth, but an imbalance in the Ca/Mg ratio was evident.
Sobek et al. (1976) stated that the primary properties of overburden materials
are pH and relative proportions of acids and bases. Massey and Barnhisel (1972)
reported that the most difficult chemical problem in minesoils is their acid
condition. These acid conditions arise if iron sulfide (pyrite), present in the
material are oxidized, yielding sulfuric acid and metal sulfates (Massey and
Barnhisel, 1972). Most of this acidity is attributed to H resulting from oxidation
+3
of sulfide minerals and not from Al (Barnhisel and Massey, 1969).
In Pennsylvania, soils that have formed from sandstones tend to be coarse-
textured, highly pervious, and lower in base status and plant nutrients than soils
derived from shale (Sobek et al., 1976). Sobek et al. (1976) also showed that
sandstone overburden contained moderate amounts of pyrite, whereas shales generally
were finer in texture and contained higher amounts of carbonates.
Upon oxidation of the metal sulfides present in the material, some Cu, Zn, and
Ni could be solubilized and remain in solution if pH remained sufficiently low
(Massey and Barnhisel, 1972). These elements could be present in minesoil at levels
that are toxic to plants. Barnhisel and Massey (1969) found high levels of Fe, Mn,
Cu, Ni, Mg, Al, and SO. in acid-forming spoils in Kentucky.
Due to free salts in minesoils, no clear relationship exists between the
amount of cations extracted and CEC. No clear relationship exists among
mineralogy and amount of cations extracted or CEC either (Barnhisel and Massey,
1969) . Barnhisel and Massey (1969) also reported that high amounts of mica
could supply part of the K, and that clay minerals serve as a "buffer" by re-
acting with acids produced by oxidation of sulfides.
-------
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Profile Descriptions and Field Sampling
Eight pits, labeled P1-P8 in Figure 2, were located in and around this recently
stripmined and reclaimed area. Four pits about 2 m deep, 3 m long, and 1.5 m wide
were excavated around the periphery of the mined land in the material representative
•of soils originally present in the disturbed area. Detailed morphological descrip-
tions of the profiles (Appendix A) were made according to the Soil Survey Manual
(Soil Survey Staff, 1951) and the soils were subsequently classified according to
Soil Taxonomy (Soil Survey Staff, 1975). i Soil pH was determined in the field on
moist samples using indicator dyes (Soil Survey Staff, 1951).
Three to five soil clods were removed from each horizon, when possible, and
coated with saran solution in the field. In addition to clods, bulk samples of
3
about 5000 cm were collected from each horizon.
Within the mined and reclaimed area four pits were located at random. These
profiles were also sampled and described morphologically. Bulk samples from each
horizon were sieved in the field and material less than 1.9 cm was retained for
analysis. When possible, clods were also collected. From each of the eight
profiles, composite samples combining material from all horizons were obtained
(25-35 kg) . The bulk samples and clods were submitted for analysis to The
Pennsylvania State University Soil Characterization Laboratory.
Laboratory Characterization
Bulk soil samples collected in the field were allowed to air dry. The samples
were sieved to separate coarse fragments from the fine earth (<2 mm). The fine
earth and coarse fragments were weighed and stored in cardboard containers for
subsequent analyses. Percent moisture (Ciolkosz and Fletcher, 1974) was determined
on all air-dried samples and used later to convert all laboratory data to an
oven-dry basis. All characterization data reported are on an oven-dry, <2-mm
basis.
-------
Soil pH was determined in the laboratory with a pH meter and glass electrode
on a soil .'solution suspension (1:1 by weight) with distilled water, IN KC1 and
0.01M CaCl2.
The Ca, Mg, K and Na were extracted with IN NH.OAc solution at pH 7 (Peech
et al., 1947). Levels of Ca and Mg were determined by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry, and K and Na contents were determined by flame emission
spectrophotometry (Perkin-Elmer Corporation, 1968). Exchangeable acidity was
determined by titration of BaCl - triethanolamine soil extract of pH 8.1 (Mehlich,
1948). The Aluminon method (Yuan, 1959) was used to determine Al, which was
extracted with a IN KCl solution. Free Fe00_ extracted with Na.S-O.—Na^C^BLO-^H-
— 23 /Z43DD/2
was analyzed colorimetrically. Organic C was determined by the ignition method in
a Fischer induction furnace (Young and Lindbeck, 1964) and, subsequently, by the
Walkley-Black method (Richards, 1965).
The Pennsylvania State University Soil Testing Laboratory determined total N
by the Kjeldahl method (Jackson, 1958).
Samples from each horizon were prepared for X-ray diffraction analysis (copper
radiation) by removing free iron oxides and organic matter (Anderson, 1963). Clay
material (<2 ym) was removed by centrifugation and two subsamples obtained. One
subsample was saturated with Mg and the other with K. X-ray diffraction patterns
were run on the Mg-saturated slides at room temperature (25 C) and again after
solvation with ethylene glycol at 80°C. Patterns were also obtained from the
K-saturated slides at room temperature (25 C), after 2 hours of heat treatment at
300°C, and again after 2 hours of heat treatment at 500 C. X-ray diffraction
traces were analyzed for relative peak height. Clay mineralogy data are presented
to the nearest 5% of the clay minerals present in the <2 inn soil material.
The Pennsylvania State University Mineral Constitution Laboratory determined
the types and amounts of S present in selected horizons of the minesoils and
natural soils. The horizons selected for analysis were representative of surface
-------
or subsurface horizons for each pit. Horizons to be subsampled were compared as to
Munsell color, pH, CEC, and percent base saturation.
Pyritic sulfur was determined either by atomic absorption spectroscopy of Fe
when small amounts of S were present, or by Eschka method D271-70 (ASTM, 1971).
Sulfate sulfur was obtained by ASTM D2492-68 (ASTM, 1971) method as adapted by
The Mineral Constitution Laboratory. Quantitative spectrometric and semiquantitative
spectrographic analyses of these samples were also obtained.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses of chemical data were made using an experimental design
with nested classification. Natural soils were compared with minesoils with four
replications within each soil type (with three missing values). Soil depths
within each pit were compared as follows:
(1) Al and A2 horizons in natural soils were compared with surface
horizons in minesoils.
(2) The first B horizons encountered in the natural soils were compared
with the Cl horizons in the minesoil.
(3) B22, B23 (Pits 1, 2, and 4) and Bxlt through Bx3t (Pit 3) horizons
in soils were compared with the C2 and C3 horizons of the minesoil.
(4) C horizons of natural soils were compared with C4 and C5 horizons of
minesoils. (No horizons from Pits 3, 4, and 6 were compared at this
depth.)
Fixed effects included soil types and depths. Replications within soil types
are random effects.
Statistical calculations were made using library programs provided by the
Computation Center of The Pennsylvania State University. The RUMMAGE program
was used to obtain analysis of variance and the FOLUP program was utilized for
mean separation using Tukey's WSD criterion. Square root transformations were
used to insure that the experimental errors had common variances.
-------
Chemical factors analyzed included Ca, Mg, Na, K, total bases, percentage base
saturation, H, CEC, Al, percentage Fe 0 , and percentage of N.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Soil and Minesoil Morphology
Field Morphology—
The undisturbed Hazleton and Dekalb soils, at Pits 1 and 2, were located in an
area that had a natural forest vegetation, while the trees on the Cookport and
Hazleton soils, at Pits 3 and 4, had been removed. The pedogenetic features common
in well-developed soils were expressed in the soils at these four locations.
Soils at Pits 5 through 8 were located within the area, which has been stripmined
and reclaimed, and exhibited characteristics of minimal pedogenetic development.
Structural development and horizon differentiation (Appendix A) are evident
in the Hazleton silt loam taxadjunct soil (Pit 1). The very dark grayish brown
(10YR 3/2) color of the Al horizon due to the influence of the solum ranges from
brown (10YR 5/4) to dark brown (7.SYR 5/8). The reddish yellow (7.SYR 6/6)
color of the C horizon is lithochromic. Clay films in the B22t and B3t horizons
indicated pedogenetic development; however, the amount of clay accumulated does
not make either of these horizons as argillic. The texture of the soil ranges
from silt loam to loam and reaction (pH) of the solum ranges from 4.8 to 5.6.
The Dekalb silt loam, taxadjunct soil (Pit 2) resembles the Hazleton soil
(Pit 1), except in depth to bedrock. The Hazleton soil is deep (>75 cm to
bedrock), whereas the Dekalb is moderately deep (50-75 cm to bedrock). Except
for depth, the morphologies of the two profiles (Pits 1 and 2) were virtually
identical.
The Al horizon of the Cookport channery loam, taxadjunct (Pit 3) was compacted
depositional material. This material seemed to have been eroded from the upper
areas of the stripmine. The very firm thick platy structure of this horizon was an
evidence of compaction. This soil (Pit 3) was also the only one described with a
fragipan. Clay films were evident in the Exit through the Bx4t horizon and the
10
-------
Exit horizon had enough illuvial clay to qualify as an argillic horizon. Mottles
in the Bx2t through the Bx4t horizons indicated the impeded drainage of this
pedon. The fragipan extended from 66 cm to the bottom of the pit at 167 cm.
The Hazleton channery silt loam, taxadjunct (Pit 4) also had a surface horizon
which has been subjected to erosion as a result of stripmining and reclamation of
adjacent areas. Beneath this horizon, the soil appeared undisturbed.
The Hazleton channery silt loam, taxadjunct (Pit 4) soil resembled the soil
encountered in Pit 1; the difference was the higher percentage of channers in
the particle-size-control section. In this profile, a weathered coal seam (coal
blossom) was found at a depth of 94 cm (IIC1) overlying mottled underclay (IIIC2).
The surface horizon of minesoil in Pit 5 had moderate medium platy structure
parting to weak very fine subangular blocky structure, indicating that some
soil-forming processes had already taken place. The abrupt color change from the
Ap to the Cl horizon indicated the topsoiled nature of this profile. The C
horizons were all structureless with textures ranging from loam to loamy sand.
The moist consistence ranged from friable to firm and wet consistence ranged from
slightly sticky, slightly plastic to nonsticky, nonplastic.
The Ap horizon of the minesoil in Pit 6 had granular and weakly developed
subangular blocky structure. The vegetation had exerted its effect enhancing
this development. The transitional (AC) horizon had subangular blocky structure
grading to structureless, massive soil material. The C horizon (as in Pit 5)
exhibited no structural development. The C3 horizon was composed entirely of
rock fragments with about 15 to 20% void space.
The surface horizons, Apl and Ap2, in Pit 7 had a weakly developed fine
subangular blocky structure grading to massive material at about 30 cm. This
minesoil did not have an abrupt color change from the A to C horizon because
no topsoil was spread over this area of the site. The color of Ap horizons in
this profile seemed to be influenced largely by the shale fragments present.
The C horizons of this profile all had structureless, massive soil. In the C3
11
-------
horizon of this profile, no fine material was present. The horizon was composed
mainly of rock fragments with 20% void space.
The Ap horizon in the Pit 8 minesoil had developed a weak fine granular and a
weak very fine subangular blocky structure. The subsurface horizons of this
minesoil were all structureless and massive. The texture ranged from loam to
loamy sand. Bands of different colored materials were present in the C4 and C5
horizons, and the C5 horizon (145 cm) was composed primarily of rock fragments.
Pedogenetic development was minimal in the minesoils studied. The greatest
amount of development had taken place in the surface horizons. The C horizons
in all cases were structureless and massive with wavy horizon boundaries. An
extremely large portion of the soil consisted of coarse fragments. The minesoils
described herein contained an average of 67% coarse fragments by volume. In
contrast, the average coarse fragment content of 14 West Virginia minesoils,
described by Sobek et al. (1976), was only 24% by volume.
The continuity of larger pores in natural soils with well-developed structure
is well documented (Crompton, 1967). These cavities drain quickly after rain and
provide essential aeration channels for root respiration and growth. Many fine
capillaries are also present which retain water for plant utilization. Minesoils
studied lacked structural development. The larger pores, created in part by the
large volume of coarse fragments, generally were not as effective in their
water-holding capacity, and lack of fine capillaries inhibited water utilization
by plants. The most prominant characteristics of minesoils seemed to be extremely
high rock fragment content and lack of pedogenetic development.
Soil Classification—
Field morphology (Appendix A) and laboratory characterization data (Appendix
B) were used in the classification of the eight pedons (Pits 1-8).
The soil in Pit 1 was classified as a coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Typic
Dystrochrepts. This pedon falls slightly outside the range of characteristics
of the Hazleton series (Typic Dystrochrepts; loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic) and
12
-------
is a taxadjunct to that series. The pedon contained less than 35% rock fragments
by volume in the particle-size-control section (25-100 cm) and, therefore, did
not fit the modal concept of the Hazleton series.
Hazleton soils have developed from weathered gray and brown acid sandstone.
The soils are generally found on nearly level to very steep uplands and ridges.
Modal Hazleton soils, in general, have a thin organic (02) horizon overlying a
dark gray sandy loam mineral (Al) horizon. The subsoil ranges from dark reddish
brown through dark brown sandy loam and channery sandy loam. The C horizon is a
reddish yellow very channery sandy loam. Solum thickness ranges from 65 to 130
cm and depth to bedrock ranges from 100 to 180 cm or more. Usually, there are
from 5 to 70% angular sandstone fragments in the solum and from 35 to 80% in the
C horizon. Reaction is strongly acid to extremely acid where unlimed. The most
abundant clay minerals are kaolinite, illite, and vermiculite. The soil is
typically well drained with rapid permeability.
The soil in Pit 2 was classified as a coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic, Typic
Dystrochrepts. This pedon falls slightly outside the range of characteristics
of the Dekalb series (Typic Dystrochrepts; loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic) and
is a taxadjunct to that series. It contained less than 35% rock fragments by
volume in the particle size control section (25-100 cm) and, therefore, did
not fit the modal concept of the Dekalb. The pedon was well drained and
moderately deep. In general, Dekalb soils have formed in material weathered
mainly from sandstone on gently sloping to very steep uplands and ridges.
The modal Dekalb soil, in wooded areas, has a surface layer of very dark gray
channery sandy loam over light yellowish brown channery sandy loam. The subsoil,
typically, is yellowish brown channery sandy loam and the substratum is dark brown
very flaggy loam. Depth to bedrock ranges from 50 to 100 cm. Flat sandstone
fragments increase with depth ranging from 10 to 60% in the B horizons and from
50 to 90% in the C horizons. The reaction of the soil is extremely to strongly
acid when unlimed. Common clay minerals are predominantly illite, kaolinite, and
13
-------
vermiculite. The soil typically is well drained with moderately rapid (6.3-12.5
cm/hr) through rapid (12.5-25 cm/hr) permeability.
The soil in Pit 3 was classified as a coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic
Fragiudult. This pedon falls slightly outside the range of characteristics of
the Cookport series (Aquic Fragiudults; fine-loamy, mixed, mesic) and is a
taxadjunct to that series. The fine-earth fraction of this pedon contains less
than 18% clay in the particle-size-control section (25-100 cm) and, therefore,
does not fit the modal concept of the Cookport series. This pedon was moderately
well drained.
Cookport soils have formed in materials weathered from acidic sandstone and
siltstone. They are found on nearly level to strongly sloping broad ridge tops
of the Allegheny Plateau. The modal Cookport soil has a very dark grayish brown
and brown loam upper horizon and a yellowish brown, friable fine gravelly clay
loam subsoil, which is mottled below about 40 cm.
A firm, brittle fragipan is usually encountered at a depth of 50 to 95 cm.
The substratum is grayish brown very channery sandy loam and is underlain by
sandstone bedrock below 100 cm. The surface layer and upper part of the subsoil
is moderately permeable, and the lower part of the subsoil has a slow (0.13-0.5
cm/hr) to very slow (<0.13 cm/hr) permeability.
The soil in Pit 4 was classified as a coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Typic
Dystrochrept. The pedon falls slightly outside the range of characteristics
of the Hazleton series (Typic Dystrochrepts; loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic) and
is a taxadjunct to that series. This pedon contains less than 35% rock fragments
by volume in the particle-size-control section (25-100 cm) and, therefore, does
not fit the modal concept of the Hazleton series.
General properties and occurrence of the Hazleton series was described in
detail for Pit 1.
The soils in Pits 5-8 were classified as loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic
members of the Udorthent group. The minesoils (Pits 5-8) were classified as
14
-------
Entisols because of their lack of horizon differentiation. The epipedons of the
minesoils were the only horizons to exhibit any pedogenetic development. Pits 5,
6, and 8 were located in C-Spoil material and Pit 7 was located in B-Spoil
material (Figure 2). The color changes from the A to C horizons in minesoils of
Pits 5, 6, and 8 were due to the "topsoiling" practice. The "topsoil" stockpiled
before stripping is now required to be spread over the spoil material after
stripmining. Operators, in general, consider any material above unconsolidated
bedrock as topsoil. The "topsoil" that was placed on the spoil at this experi-
mental site was a mixture of all the loose surface material pushed aside before
the actual stripping.
Ciolkosz et al. (1977) sampled and characterized 25 minesoil pedons in
Pennsylvania. They found most of these minesoils to have pH values of 4 to 5.
The texture of these samples was usually sandy loam to loam. The Research
Committee on Coal Mine Spoil Revegetation in Pennsylvania (1971) also found that
minesoil developed from Lower Kittanning and Middle Kittanning spoil in
Pennsylvania generally had loam texture.
Rock fragment content of the 25 minesoils analyzed by Ciolkosz et al. (1977)
ranged between 50 and 90% (by volume), while the fine earth content of Lower and
Middle Kittanning minesoils was found to be 30 and 25% (by weight), respectively
(Research Committee on Coal Mine Spoil Revegetation in Pennsylvania, 1971).
Root Distribution—
Root penetration in natural soils (Pits 1-4) was controlled by either bedrock
or a limiting zone. Direct comparison of root distributions in Hazleton and
Dekalb soils (Pits 1 and 2) with the minesoils (Pits 5-8) cannot be made since the
forest vegetation of Pits 1 and 2 is not comparable to the grass and legume
vegetation in Pits 5 through 8. However, vegetation in Pits 3 and 4 is comparable
to that on minesoils, and a comparison of root distribution can be made. Detailed
root-distribution descriptions are given in Appendix A.
15
-------
2
Few roots (10,000/m ) to a
depth of 43 cm, below which they decreased in number and size until they reached
the fragipan at 66 cm. Below this, the root number decreased significantly with
only a few fine (1-2 mm diam.) roots penetrating the fragipan. The roots seemed
to grow laterally along the upper boundary of the fragipan and those that
penetrated the fragipan were located along prism walls.
Many roots were present in the Al horizon of the Hazleton taxadjunct profile
in Pit 4. Most of them were present in the A2 horizon (8-20 cm) and few were
present below this horizon. No roots penetrated the IIIC2 horizon at 125 cm.
Many very fine (
-------
Many very fine to fine fibrous roots were evenly distributed throughout the AC
horizon (0-18 cm) in Pit 8. Many fine to medium (2-5 mm diam.) taproots extended
to 3 cm in this horizon. Nodules and lesions were observed on these taproots. Few
very fine roots penetrated the Cl horizon (18-36 cm) to 20 cm. Taproots within the
Cl horizon became increasingly branched and followed ped faces and voids associated
with coarse fragments. Few very fine roots extended to a depth of 124 cm.
Roots seldom penetrated the massive C horizons of the minesoils. The roots
within the minesoils were located predominantly on coarse fragments. These roots
were associated with the cracks and fissures in the soil material near the coarse
fragments. Although deeper profiles for root proliferation do exist in minesoils,
the structureless nature of the subsoil limits root extension.
Roots also will not penetrate horizons, which do not supply adequate moisture.
The large pores associated with horizons composed entirely or predominantly of
rock fragments drain rapidly leaving little available water for roots. These
horizons are effective barriers to root extension as well.
Laboratory Analyses
Chemical Characterization Data—
Complete chemical characterization data for the natural soils and minesoils
are given in Appendix B. Cation exchange capacity, percent base saturation, pH
and total acidity are also depicted on Figures 3 and 4. The cation exchange
capacity ranged from 8.5 to 61.2 meq/100 g in the natural soils and from 7.3 to
22.4 meq/100 g in the minesoils.
The IIC1 horizon of Pit 4 represented a seam of decomposing coal. The high
absorptive capacity of carbonaceous matter (Rankama and Sahama, 1950) accounts
for the high CEC value of this horizon. The high CEC's of the Al horizons of
Pits 1 and 2 are attributed to the high organic matter content of these
horizons—6.3 and 3.6% organic carbon (Ignition), respectively. Most of these
+ +3
exchange sites are likely to be occupied by H and Al ions.
17
-------
Figure 3. Cation exchange capacity, base saturation, PH and
total acidity for the natural soils.
18
-------
PIT HORIZON
DEPTH
(cm)
CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY
(meq/lOOg)
BASE SATURATION
A I
A2
B2I
B22t
B3t
C
t
A I
B2I
B 22
B23
lc
Al
A2
B I
B XI t
Bx2t
B X3t
Bx4t
'A I
A2
B 2lt
B 22t
B 23t
nci
fflC2
0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
0-10
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
135-167
0-8
8-20
20-48
48-74
74-94
94-125
125-183
10
I
20 30 40 0
I I I
10 20 30 2
I I I
pH TOTAL ACIDITY
(hi. soil: water) imeq/iOOg)
2 4 60 10 20 30 40
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1
1
["
|
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
\
1
1
66.3
1 1
II III
-------
Figure 4. Cation exchange capacity, base saturation, pH and
total acidity for the minesoils.
19
-------
PIT
7
8
ORIZON
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
'Ap
AC
Cl
C2
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
AC
C 1
C2
C3
C4
C5
DEPTH
(cm)
C
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-1 14
114-152
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-157
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY
(meq/lOOg)
) 10 20 30 40
1 1 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
ZT1
i
i
I — I
i
i
BASE SATURATION
pH
(1:1, soil:water)
TOTAL ACIDITY
(meq/iOOg)
0 10 20 30 i
\ \ \
\
|
1
1
J
1
|
1
~~1
1
1
I
T 45;2
— i
jm
i
zr
I 4
1 1
1
|
|
6 (
1 1
J
1
1
) 10 20 30 4
1 1 1 1
1
|
1
1
|
j
1
1
1
|
~~l
1
|
|
-------
The average CEC in the minesoils (17 meq/100 g) was higher than in the natural
soils (14 meq/100 g). The differences, however, were not significant at the 5%
level. Because of inconsistencies with depth, a significant (soil x depth)
interaction was found. The relative CEC values were not equal over depth.
Smith et al. (1971) found lower cation exchange capacities and total bases
for Fe ore spoil than for the upper layer (3 cm) of natural Gilpin and Dekalb
soils. Below this depth the exchange capacities, bases and base saturation for
natural soil horizons were lower than that for corresponding spoil.
The percentage base saturation for the AC horizon of Pit 8 and the Ap
horizon of Pit 6 showed the effect of liming. In general, the percentage base
saturation was higher in the minesoils; Pit 7 was an exception. Pit 7 is
composed primarily of shaly materials, which could account for this discrepency.
The lower base saturation of the natural soils was due to leaching which has
taken place over time. The fragipan horizons of Pit 3 have a higher base
saturation than overlying horizons because these horizons do not transmit much
water and, therefore, are not as extensively leached as the overlying horizons.
Some of the bases measured in the minesoil could also have been due to free
salts, like gypsum.
20
-------
The amount of Ca (Appendix B) present in the natural soils ranged from 0 to
1.9 meq/100 g and from 0 to 5.1 meq/100 g in the minesoils. The high values of
5.1 and 2.4 meq/100 g for surface horizons of Pits 6 and 8, respectively, are due
to effects of liming. In general, the amount of Ca decreased with depth, except
where fragipans or lithologic discontinuities were present. No significant
difference between minesoils and natural soils in respect to Ca existed.
Extractable Mg ranged from 0.1 to 2.2 meq/100 g in natural soils and from
0.4 to 1.5 in minesoils. Magnesium behaved similarly to Ca in its distribution
throughout the soils, but slightly more Mg 'was present in the minesoils.
The surface horizons of natural soils contained slightly more K than did the
corresponding horizons of the minesoils.
Grube et al. (1974) reported that high levels of plant available Ca, Mg, and
K are found in young minesoils as compared with old natural soil. In this study,
no significant differences between the minesoils and natural soils existed for
these three elements and in general; the natural soils tended to have slightly
higher levels of these elements. These results can also be contrasted with the
results of Smith et al. (1971), who found that fresh spoil derived from non-
calcareous acid shales and fine grained sandstones retained slightly more basic
cations (Ca, Mg, K) than did the natural soils.
The average amount of extractable Na present in both minesoils and natural
soils was 0.06 meq/100 g with very little variation between horizons, sites, or
soils. Excess amounts of Na tend to disperse clays, but quantities sufficient
to adversely affect the soils and minesoils were not present in any of the
horizons.
The pH values of the natural soils (Pits 1-4) were generally lower and total
acidity generally higher due to leaching of bases in these soils over time. The
high total acidities of the Al horizons of Pits 1 and 2 are attributed to the
high organic matter content of these horizons and the effect of an acid leaf
21
-------
litter overlying these mineral horizons. The large difference in total acidity for
the AC horizon of Pit 8 is again due to the liming of the minesoil.
The pedogenetically younger minesoils have not been exposed to the leaching
that the mature natural soils have. The relatively equal pH values throughout
the natural soils indicated that these soils are in equilibrium with their
environment .
The low pH values of Pit 7 can be attributed to its high S content (Table 1).
The oxidation of sulfides to sulfates has contributed to the acidity. The
oxidation reaction which liberates H-SO, is as follows:
4 FeS2 + 15 02 + 2 H20 = 2 Fe^SO^ + 2 H2S04.
This oxidation reaction produces Fe (SO.) , which is characterized by a yellow
color (Black, 1968). These yellow colors were observed at the site on shale
fragments, and on the minesoil surface.
The range of SO, found in the minesoils was 0.01 to 0.16%, and total S content
in the natural soils was not high enough to warrant further analyses. In
comparison, Jackson (1964) reported that the total SO, content of humid temperate
soils ranged from 0.01 to 0.15%. The minesoils would be expected to retain more
SO because of their lower pH's. High levels of Fe (Chao et al., 1963) and the
presence of kaolinite clay (Russell, 1961) also enhance SO, retention.
The amount of S present in the minesoils ranged from 0.03 to 0.38%. Total S
of some eastern Kentucky acid-forming coal spoil materials ranged from 0.11 to
3.86% (Barnhisel et al., 1969). The amount of S present in the minesoils of
this study was comparatively low, however, the S present in the minesoils is in
an environment optimum for acid production. The rainwater, which percolates
through the soil, could be expected to solubilize much of the S present. The S
is not concentrated in a localized seam, as it would be in coal, but is
distributed throughout the minesoil and spoil. The amount of S, therefore,
distributed throughout this material with depth might contribute significantly
22
-------
TABLE 1. TOTAL SULFUR, SULFATE SULFUR, PYRITIC SULFUR AND
ORGANIC SULFUR OF SELECTED HORIZONS
Site
P-l
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
Depth
cm
3-10
41-74
0-10
33-51
15-43
43-66
117-135
8-20
48-74
94-125
0-10
74-114
0-13
58-84
10-31
51-66
0-18
58-102
Horizon
A2
B22t
Al
B22
A2
Bl
Bx3t
A2
B22t
IIC1
Ap
C4
Ap
C2
Ap2
C2
AC
C3
Total S
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.19
0.03
0.13
0.03
0.13
0.10
0.38
0.04
0.08
Form of S
Sulfate-S Pyritic-S Organic-S
%
*
_ _ _
- - -
0.01 0.03 0.15
0.05 0.07 0.01
0.05 0.08 0.00
0.05 0.02 0.03
0.16 0.07 0.15
0.04 0.04 0.00
*
Total S <0.05%, no further analysis.
to acid production. However, Sobek et al. (1976) reported that total S only
accurately quantifies the materials' potential acidity when all the S is
present in the pyritic form.
Barnhisel and Massey (1969) reported that most of the acidity present in the
minesoils was from the H resulting from the oxidation of sulfide minerals. In
the minesoils (Pits 6, 7, and 8), the amount of H increased with depth, whereas
the concentration of H decreased with increasing depth in the natural soils.
23
-------
Pit 5, however, showed no clear trend with depth. The shaly material at this site
probably supplied enough S throughout to offset any leaching effects.
In old Fe ore spoil, Smith et al. (1971) found no significant pH differences
with depth. They found the pH range resembled that in the natural Dekalb soils.
They concluded that long-time soil forming processes, in their region, did not
change soil horizon pH appreciably when the soil material initially was within
the acid range.
The natural soils contained significantly more extractable Al than the mine-
soils (Appendix B). The higher levels of extractable Al present in the natural
soils were due to their more mature state. The leaching of these soils has lead
to weathering of clays, release of Al, and removal of bases. Toxic levels of Al,
however, did not exist in any horizon.
Iron oxide redistribution in soils is associated with weathering. Increasing
concentration of Fe~0_ is an indication of increasing weathering (Buol et al. ,
1973).
The natural soils had greater percentage of Fe^O^ in general; however, Pit 7
contained an appreciable quantity of the oxide. This was probably related to
the weathering of the FeS7 present.
Iron oxides tend to render a reddish yellow color to the soil. They also
promote aggregate stability. Over time the Fe weathering in the minesoils
might be of benefit in this respect.
Spectrometric and Spectrographic Analyses
Quantitative spectrometric analyses (Table 2) revealed that very little
difference existed between soil and minesoil composition.
The higher SiO? contents of the natural soils were due to their higher con-
centration of quartz. Since these soils are derived from sandstone, these
results were expected, whereas the minesoils which are developing from a mixture
of soil, sandstone, and shale have lower contents of quartz.
24
-------
Ul
TABLE
2. QUANTITATIVE SPECTROMETRIC ANALYSIS OF SELECTED HORIZONS
Component Oxides
Site
P-l
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
Depth
cm
3-10
41-74
0-10
33-51
15-43
43-66
117-135
8-20
48-74
94-125
0-10
74-114
0-13
53-84
10-31
51-66
0-18
58-102
Horizon
A2
B22t
Al
B22
A2
Bl
Bx3t
A2
B22t
IIC1
Ap
C4
Ap
C2
Ap2
C2
AC
C3
Ash
94.03
94.81
90.05
96.12
95.22
96.47
95.76
94.35
94.10
70.12
95.43
94.27
95.03
94.07
92.96
77.09
95.54
91.80
sio2
79.0
76.5
84.0
86.0
84.0
83.0
81.5
78.5
74.0
71.0
82.0
90.5
82.0
79.0
78.5
73.0
86.0
77.5
A1203
12.0
13.8
9.0
8.7
9.3
10.0
12.1
14.1
15.8
18.9
12.6
11.7
11.2
12.6
13.3
15.5
8.3
14.2
Ti02
0.92
0.89
0.80
0.74
0.79
0.79
0.79
1.04
1.02
1.19
0.87
0.63
0.82
0.69
0.77
0.92
0.64
0.91
Fe2°3
4.75
5.75
2.92
2.71
2.65
3.30
4.58
4.55
5.95
5.30
4.22
5.62
3.93
6.80
5.23
8.75
3.85
6.55
MgO
-
0.78
0.61
0.76
0.39
0.39
0.49
0.75
0.69
0.91
0.68
0.53
0.49
0.48
0.54
0.51
0.72
0.37
0.69
CaO
0.11
0.14
0.12
0.12
0.09
0.17
0.17
0.11
0.08
0.32
0.18
0.11
0.40
0.15
0.09
0.19
0.27
0.10
MnO
0.061
0.076
0.039
0.039
0.039
0.049
0.075
0.069
0.046
0.067
0.046
0.058
0.074
0.055
0.088
0.074
0.064
0.102
Na2°
0.33
0.27
0.29
0.24
0.25
0.28
0.47
0.37
0.40
0.03
0.26
0.12
0.24
0.12
0.14
0.19
0.20
0.30
K2°
1.96
2.24
1.43
1.46
1.63
1.85
2.25
2.35
2.67
3.10
2.09
2.23
1.87
2.39
2.40
2.66
1.37
2.53
Total
99.9
100.3
99.4
100.4
99.1
99.9
102.7
101.8
100.9
100.9
102.8
101.5
101.0
102.4
101.0
102.0
101.1
102.9
-------
The Fe2°o content of soils, generally, ranges from 1 to 6% (Jackson, 1968).
Data obtained for the natural soils fall within this range but the minesoils
subsurface horizons approach the upper end of this range or exceed it. These
higher values are due to the dissolution of FeS and redistribution of this
compound in the soil, as previously discussed.
According to Jackson (1968), CaO and MgO contents of natural soils, are
generally less than 1%. Values obtained from minesoils and natural soils agreed
with this value, however, we noted no distinct trend in distribution of these
compounds.
The K_0 content of the minesoils was slightly higher than that of corresponding
natural soil horizons. The K 0 content of soils ranges from 0.05 to 3.5% according
to Jackson (1968). The greater proportion of K_0 in the minesoils is possibly due
to the weathering of illite which liberates K.
All other elements analyzed for spectrometrically fell into expected ranges
for natural soils.
Little, if any difference, was observed between trace elements of minesoils
and natural soils (Table 3), when semiquantitative spectrographic analysis was
performed.
The amount of Cu present in the minesoils, composed dominantly of shale coarse
fragments (Pits 7 and 8), was slightly higher than that in natural soils. The Cu
content of the soils and minesoils, however, fell within the range of Cu found in
natural soils (Baker and Chesin, 1975).
The amount of Co present in the Ap2 of Pit 7 and C3 of Pit 8 exceeded the
1 to 40 ppm range reported by Baker and Chesin (1975). This higher amount of Co
could be attributed to the shaly nature of these profiles, which generally
contain more Co than sandstone materials.
The amounts of Ba, Cr, V, Be, and Ni found in the minesoils and soils fell
within ranges established by Baker and Chesin (1975) for natural soils.
26
-------
TABLE 3. SEMIQUANTITATIVE SPECTROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF SELECTED HORIZONS
N>
*
Element
Site
P-l
P-2
P-3
P-4
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
Depth
cm
3-10
41-74
0-10
33-51
15-43
43-66
117-135
8-20
48-74
94-125
0-10
74-114
0-13
53-84
10-31
51-66
0-18
58-102
Horizon
A2
B22t
Al
B22
A2
Bl
Bx3t
A2
B22t
IIC1
Ap
C4
Ap
C2
AP2
C2
AC
C3
Ba
350
380
390
310
380
320
350
410
430
300
340
300
340
270
390
440
290
430
Be
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
4
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3
Ce
120
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
120
100
<100
120
<100
<100
110
<100
<100
Co
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
<20
39
<20
<20
<20
<20
50
<20
<20
43
Cr
74
100
74
56
70
66
84
100
100
120
76
80
86
60
96
110
50
100
Cu
23
31
16
16
15
18
24
20
32
54
22
26
21
30
35
50
12
50
Ga
23
25
15
18
19
18
21
25
28
39
22
23
23
22
26
26
16
29
La
ppm
40
32
23
30
30
31
38
48
52
60
43
34
50
43
43
44
29
40
Ni
25
32
<25
<25
26
<25
31
25
33
74
<25
44
<25
27
27
40
<25
46
Sc
12.0
15.0
6.6
8.0
8.4
10.0
12.0
12.0
17.0
25.0
13.0
13.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
18.0
5.4
16.0
Sr
41
47
35
30
50
43
50
64
86
160
42
46
45
45
64
120
41
80
V
96
100
66
62
72
74
100
110
130
150
110
100
100
100
110
120
120
120
Y
31
33
33
26
26
36
29
35
40
60
32
22
33
35
30
37
30
39
Zr
420
390
440
290
340
340
340
340
410
330
340
250
490
310
240
370
380
310
Not detected in all samples: Ag, Bi, Ge, Mo, Nb, Pb, Sn, Yb.
-------
Clay Mineralogy
Clay mineralogical data for the natural soils and minesoils are presented in
Appendix B.
Vermiculite and kaolinite were the dominant clay minerals in the natural soils
(Pits 1-4), while illite and kaolinite were dominant in the minesoils (Pits 5-8).
In Pennsylvania soils, the dominant clay-weathering transformation is the
conversion of illite to vermiculite or to vermiculite-chlorite intergrades
(Ciolkosz et al., 1975).
The illite of the natural soils has been weathered to vermiculite. Over time
the amount of vermiculite in the minesoils will most likely increase at the expense
of illite. The high proportions of illite in the minesoils, however, could be
expected to supply part of the K needed for plant growth (Barnhisel, 1969).
Kaolinite, the most resistant of common clays, occurs when leaching is extensive.
This explained the high proportion of kaolinite found in the highly weathered
natural soil.
Barnhisel (1969) reported that the clay minerals serve as "buffers" by reacting
with acids produced by the oxidation of sulfides.
The large amount of montmorillonite in Pit 3 can be attributed to the impeded
drainage of this profile. The fragipan effectively slows down the rate of
weathering of this mineral within this horizon. The fact that montmorillonite is
present in Pit 4 is possibly due to this soil's topographic position. The
montmorillonite in the minesoils will probably be weathered from the soil over
time because this mineral is unstable in leaching environments.
The clay minerals present in the IIC1 and IIIC2 horizons of Pit 4 agreed with
generalizations proposed by Grim (1953). Bituminous coal is usually high in
kaolinite, whereas kaolinite and illite are associated with underclay.
Smith et al. (1971) found no great differences between clay mineralogy of
natural soils and minesoils. They also found similarities between young minesoil
28
-------
and contiguous natural (Gilpin) subsoil, which they claimed indicates that the
mineralogy of the minesoils may be inherited from disintegration of parent rock.
From mineralogical data obtained, minesoils seem to be similar to the con-
tiguous natural soils. The minesoils, however, have not been exposed to the
weathering processes that natural soils have encountered.
Sand grain mineralogy of the minesoils might give a better idea of what
minerals will be present in the future and better predict soil development.
Organic Carbon and Organic Nitrogen
Organic C data are presented in Appendices B and C, and organic N data are
presented in Appendix B.
As indicated in the Materials and Methods section, two methods were used to
determine the amount of organic C present in the soil. The values obtained by
the ignition method seemed high in some instances, and we questioned the validity
of this procedure for these materials since carboniferous shale and coal fragments
in the samples could account for the high organic C contents obtained.
Organic matter has a marked effect on minesoil development. Organic matter
acts as a cementing agent which aids in the formation of aggregates. Jones et al.
(1975) reported that newly reclaimed minesoils generally contain less than 0.3%
organic matter. Caspall (1975) found that 30- and 76-year-old minesoils, which
were improperly managed, also had low organic matter contents.
In general, organic C content decreased with depth in the natural soils and
increased with depth in the minesoils. The highest amounts of organic C were
found in the IIC1 horizon of Pit 4, followed by the Al horizons of Pits 1 and 2.
The IIC1 horizon (Pit 4) was a partially decomposed coal seam. The horizons
above (B23t) and below (IIIC2) this seam also had high organic C values. The Al
horizons (Pits 1 and 2) seem to have accumulated organic matter over time from
the forest vegetation at these locations and the darker colors of these surface
horizons were due in part to their organic matter contents. The soil at Pit 7
had very high organic C content. This soil is composed mainly of material
29
-------
derived from carboniferous shale and the high C values could possibly be due to
this material.
The Walkley-Black method seemed to agree in general with the ignition method
values for the surface horizons of the natural soils, but gave lower values for
subsurface horizons. The values obtained by the Walkley-Black method for the
tninesoils did not agree with those determined by ignition. The values obtained
by ignition were 1/3 to 6 times higher than those obtained by the Walkley-Black
method; however, this relationship was not constant and the AC horizon of Pit 8
had higher organic C when determined by Walkley-Black method.
Apparently the organic C in minesoils cannot be accurately determined by
either of these methods when shale and coal fragments are present. Alternate
methods should be sought, which could give more reliable determinations.
The organic N of the natural soils decreased with depth, whereas in minesoils
it increased with depth. Carbon to nitrogen (C/N) ratios are presented in Tables
A and 5 for natural soils and minesoils, respectively. The C/N ratios for the
natural soils were higher than expected and generally became smaller with depth.
The organic-N values (Appendix B) fell within the range of those expected for
natural soils (Black, 1968); however, the organic C values were suspect. Values
obtained for organic C (Appendices B and C) were high.
The C/N ratios for Pit 4 are inconsistent with those obtained for the other
three natural soils. The coal blossom (IIC1) and underclay (IIIC2) had high
organic C content and resulting high C/N ratios as expected.
The C/N ratios obtained for the minesoils were very eratic. In general, the
rainesoils higher in shaly material and darker in color had higher organic C values
and higher C/N ratios than could be attributed to organic matter alone.
30
-------
TABLE 4. CARBON/NITROGEN RATIOS FOR NATURAL SOILS
Pit Depth
cm
1 0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
2 0-10
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
3 0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
135-167
4 0-8
8-20
20-48
48-74
74-94
94-125
125-183
Horizon
Al
A2
B21
B22t
B3t
C
Al
B21
B22
B23
C
Al
A2
Bl
Exit
Bx2t
Bx3t
Bx4t
Al
A2
B21t
B22t
B23t
IIC1
IIIC2
Ignition
18.1
33.3
10.5
8.7
2.1
3.5
21.4
15.1
14.3
10.5
5.9
12.4
26.7
7.7
10.9
6.9
12.6
9.5
61.9
14.7
26.2
7.2
26.5
36.3
34.4
Method
Walkley-Black
20.2
15.0
18.0
14.4
15.4
34.5
11.8
27.5
31
-------
TABLE 5. CARBON/NITROGEN RATIOS FOR MINESOILS
Pit Depth
cm
5 0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
6 0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
7 0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-157
8 0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
Horizon
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Ap
AC
Cl
C2
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
AC
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Ignition
10.5
26.6
27.1
38.2
28.5
27.5
13.5
37.5
27.8
36.5
39.7
42.2
37.2
40.0
34.6
70.0
13.8
7.6
25.5
36.8
29.7
24.5
Method
Walkley-Black
4.9
8.3
7.5
11.5
11.2
9.3
12.6
20.3
13.9
17.0
18.4
00.6
11.7
8.2
4.7
4.1
18.7
16.7
11.4
14.7
15.0
21.3
32
-------
SUMMARY
A study was conducted to determine soil changes that have occurred as a result
of coal stripmining and reclamation procedures. Soil and minesoil morphology and
root distributions were described in the field. Samples were obtained from each
horizon and soil chemical tests were performed. Pedogenetic development in the
minesoils was minimal and the most prominent feature of the minesoils was their
high degree of coarseness and their high rock fragment content. Roots tended to
concentrate along soil-coarse fragment interfaces. Few roots penetrated the
massive minesoil material in the C horizons.
In general, the chemical constituents of the minesoils resembled those of
natural soils. However, the weathering of the natural soils has leached bases
from them and significantly more extractable Al was found in these soils than
in minesoils.
Organic C and N determination were affected by the high content of
carboniferous shale and coal fragments in the minesoils.
The clay minerals present in the minesoils have not been weathered as
much as the clay minerals in the natural soils. The mineralogy suggested
that these minesoils and the natural soils were derived from the same
materials.
33
-------
SECTION 3
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
INTRODUCTION
Typically, minesoils are low in organic matter and high in coarse fragments,
with little or no natural structure. Their surface horizons contain the greatest
amounts of fine soil material, less than 2 mm in diameter. Large boulders and
fragmented rock pieces are common. During the mining operation, overburden rock is
shattered by blasting, and as a result many "fines" essentially consisted of pul-
verized unweathered rock materials.
This chapter deals with the effects of surface stripmining and reclamation
operations on some physical and hydrologic properties of minesoil. The objectives
of this study were to determine the moisture characteristics, particle-size
distributions, and specific surface of minesoils as compared with contiguous natural
soil; to establish the range and variation in bulk density of the minesoil; to
determine the hydraulic conductivity of the material; and to ascertain evapotrans-
piration from the minesoil.
Bulk densities of minesoils are usually greater than those of undisturbed soils
because of their compacted state, immature pedogenetic nature and higher coarse
fragment content. Natural soils tend to be more porous with an intricately develop-
ed system of cracks and fissures. Although, in general, the total porosity is
lower, pores in minesoils are typically larger.
Physical and morphological properties of both natural soils and minesoils in-
fluence water retention and movement within a profile. Soil-water retention
depends mainly on the amount of the "soil" fraction (<2 mm) and soil structure.
34
-------
The degree of tension with which the water is held determines its availability to
plants. The specific retention decreases with an increase in particle size (Farmer
and Richardson, 1976), resulting from a decrease in surface area and an increase in
pore size; however, it does not seem to be changed significantly by the shape or
type of fragments, nor by the time allowed for drainage (ElBoushi, 1966).
It is difficult to obtain undisturbed samples for determination of hydraulic
properties of minesoils because of the large percentage of coarse fragments and
weak structural development of these materials. Sieved samples, although not
necessarily representative of the natural minesoil, give a useful estimate of
hydraulic properties, like moisture characteristic and hydraulic conductivity,
particularly when corrected for coarse-fragments content.
Shaykewich (1970) showed that sample disturbance lowered the limit of avail-
able water and that disturbed samples differed in water retention more frequently
at the lower tensions. Moisture tension data for natural soils indicated that
moisture content at -15 bars of sieved sample and loose aggregate samples was
highly correlated, and moisture content at -0.3 bar of natural clods and loose
aggregate samples was also highly correlated (Holtan et al., 1968). Unger (1975)
found that at -0.3 bar, cores retained more water than sieved samples when water
content was below 11% and the opposite was true at higher moisture contents.
Unger (1975) also found that throughout the encountered water-content range,
cores contained about 1% more water than sieved soils at -15 bar. Young and
Dixon (1966) have shown that sieved samples have higher gravimetric water con-
tents due to an increase in total pore space and an increase in the number of
pores that hold water at -0.3 bar. Bruce (1972) concluded that sieving of
coarse-textured, organic-matter-deficient materials does not significantly
modify their water retention properties. In general, research results (Bruce,
1972; Unger, 1975) indicated that if natural soil structure is present, any
type of sample disturbance will disrupt it, modifying pore-size distribution
and pore volume. However, in soils with little or no structured development,
35
-------
like minesoils, this effect should either be minor or absent. Because of the mine-
soils' coarser texture, greater rock fragment content and associated larger pores,
storage of plant available water is reduced. However, Plass and Vogel (1973)
reported that under normal conditions minesoils can supply ample water to plants.
Rates of infiltration and hydraulic conductivity usually increase as the soil
becomes coarser textured. The coarser texture, however, restricts unsaturated
moisture movement within the profile due to a decrease in area for flow and
increase in tortuosity (Mehuys et al., 1975). Minesoils may occupy up to 25%
greater volume than the natural material (Van Voast, 1974), with the subsurface
containing large channels which allow rapid drainage. Therefore, values for water
movement into and through minesoils are highly variable. Coleman's (1951) results
showed that infiltration on minesoils had a lag period after which it increased
significantly. In contrast, adjoining natural soil generally had lower infiltra-
tion rates which leveled off or decreased with time. In related studies,
ElBoushi (1966) has shown that water infiltrating through loose granular material
(similar to subsurface horizons of many minesoils) tends to concentrate into
discrete paths. Similar flow due to wetting front instability has been discussed
by Hill and Parlange (1972), and more recently by Raats (1973) and Philip (1975).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Laboratory Analyses
Bulk samples from individual horizons were analyzed for particle-size distribu-
tion by the pipette method (Kilmer and Alexander, 1949), and sand-size particles
were sieved to obtain required separates. To obtain an overall average of the
particle-size-distribution, composite samples, obtained from each soil pit, were
sieved and weighed.
The Soil Characterization Laboratory determined the bulk densities, 1/3 and 15
atmo water retention (Brasher et al., 1966), and coefficient of linear extensi-
bilities (Grossman et al., 1968) as outlined by Ciolkosz and Fletcher (1974).
36
-------
Soil moisture characteristics of sieved (<2 mm) materials from each horizon of
the soils and minesoils were obtained experimentally by desorption (Richards, 1965).
Triplicate samples were run emphasizing the low tension end of the curve.
Subsequently, these values were corrected for coarse fragments by multiplying the
value obtained by the percentage of material <2 mm and adding a correction factor
which was multiplied by the percentage of material >2 mm. Correction factors were
obtained by determining the amount of water retained by the coarse fragments. The
correction factor for sandstone fragments was 0.0282 and for shale fragments it
was 0.0687. <
Percentage of organic matter (OM) was estimated by multiplying the percentage
C, determined by the Walkley-Black or the ignition method by a factor of 2.5.
This value, along with -15 bar water content (W) of the matrix soil, was used to
estimate specific surface of the mineral fraction (SS) (in square meters per gram
of soil) using a recently proposed equation of Young and Onstad (1976):
SS = -2.36 + 7.96 (W) - 4.49 (OM).
Field Studies
Bulk densities were determined at 10 sites randomly located within the reclaimed
area (L-l to L-10; Figure 2), and three sites located in adjacent natural soils (L-ll
to L-13; Figure 2). Five replicate readings around each site were made with a gamma
density probe (Blake, 1965; Troxler, 1970) at the 15 and 30 cm depths. Bulk density
was also determined gravimetrically using a modified excavation technique (Bertram,
1973). At each of the 10 sites a steel ring 90 cm in diameter was placed on the
spoil surface and loose stones and excessive vegetation were removed. A pliable
rubber liner was then fitted inside the steel ring and the volume of water needed to
fill the ring was determined. The minesoil within the ring was then removed to
about the 45 cm depth and weighed. Small grab subsamples were taken to determine
gravimetric water content. The rubber liner was then replaced in the excavation and
water added to the same level as before. From volume differences and soil weight,
37
-------
corrected for water content, dry bulk density was determined. Soil clods were obtain-
ed when possible to make an additional check on the bulk density at these sites.
Some of the excavated minesoil at each site was repacked by hand into small
plastic microlysimeters (20 cm ID x 30 cm) (Rogowski and Jacoby, 1977), to approxi-
mate field wet bulk density. The microlysimeters were seeded with ryegrass (Lolium
perenne L.) and set on collecting pans in the excavations. Acrylic liners were
placed around each microlysimeter and the minesoil returned to its original level.
Vegetation was reestablished at each site and an evapotranspiration (ET) study
initiated. The amount of water seeping through the minesoil and the weight of each
cylinder was recorded twice weekly. Rainfall, evaporation, maximum-minimum
temperatures and solar radiation data were also monitored during this time. Follow-
ing the ET study, bulk densities of the minesoil in each microlysimeter were
determined by oven drying.
Field capacity estimates were also made. When saturated from below, tops of
the microlysimeters were covered with plastic film to prevent evaporative loss
and the weight after 2 days of drainage was obtained. Concurrently, field capacity
was studied on the experimental site. Two days after a 3 cm rain, which effectively
saturated the minesoil, gravimetric samples were obtained from the surface and
subsurface of minesoils in close proximity to each of the 10 microlysimeter sites
within the reclaimed area. Water content was determined on the dried and weighed
samples and apparent field capacity was calculated.
Before and after the evapotranspiration study, saturated hydraulic conductivities
were measured in the 10 microlysimeters. The microlysimeters used for ET study were ;
saturated from below by raising the water level to expel any trapped air and ensure
total saturation. Hydraulic conductivities were run under a low head (Klute, 1973).
Infiltration values were computed using steel cylinder infiltrometer data
following Coleman (1951) at nine sites (1-1 - 1-9; Figure 2). Three sites each
were located within the B-spoil, C-spoil, and the natural soil, respectively. :
Soil was excavated from the circumference of the ring to a depth of 10 to 15 cm
and the infiltrometer installed. Bentonite clay was used to form an impervious
38
-------
barrier to lateral flow from the bottom of the cylinder. Clay was also used to
decrease the seepage down the side of the cylinder. Coleman's (1951) procedure
for determining infiltration was followed with some slight modifications. The
cylinder was 50.8 cm in diameter and about 20 cm in height. Five liters of water
were added to the cylinder and allowed to infiltrate. This amount was equivalent
to an application of 2.5 cm of water.
"In situ" determination of water-holding capacity and unsaturated conductivity
was attempted on the minesoil using a modification of a procedure outlined in
Nielsen et al. (1964), Davidson et al. (1966), Cassell and Sweeney (1974), and
Cassell (1974). The experimental plot is denoted by K on Figure 2. The modifica-
tion included trenching to the 1-m depth, using a metal perimeter coated with a
corrosion-resistant paint, backfilling in place and predrilling holes for the
access tubes and tensiometers. Subsequently, the space around the tensiometers
was packed with a slurry of fine minesoil (<2 mm). Because of safety considera-
tions and remoteness of the site, gage-type tensiometers, rather than mercury
tensiometers, were used. Duplicate tensiometers and two neutron access tubes were
placed at 60, 90, 120 and 150 cm below the minesoil surface within the plot.
Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of the plot. The plot was irrigated several times
before the run to insure stability of the repacked material. Moisture and density
determinations were made using nuclear methods before the initial run.
Water was then applied to the plot (890 liters) and when one-half the surface
area of the plot remained ponded, the initial readings time zero were taken. The
surface was then covered with black polyethelene to prevent evaporative loss and
tensiometer readings and moisture determinations, by nuclear methods, were made
periodically during the drainage period.
Statistical Analyses
Physical data were analyzed using a nested classification analysis of variance.
Natural soils were compared with minesoils with four replications within each soil
type as described previously in Section 2.
39
-------
Figure 5. Schematic representation of unsaturated
hydraulic conductivity plot.
40
-------
Housing
Coated
Steel Border
Access Tubes -
Tensiometers:
60cm Depth
90 "
120 "
150 "
II II
II II
II II
-o
E
10
CVJ
2-5m
-------
Fixed effects include soil types and depths. Replications within soil types
are random effects.
Statistical calculations were made using library programs provied by the
Computation Center of The Pennsylvania State University. The RUMMAGE program
was used to obtain analysis of variance and the FOLUP program was utilized for
mean separation using Tukey's WSD criterion. Square root transformations were
used to insure that the experimental errors had common variances.
The MINITAB II program was used to run unpaired t-tests on means.
Physical factors analyzed included percent sand, silt, and clay in <2-mm
material and percent sand, silt, clay, and various rock fragment fractions of
the total material.
The means and standard deviations for other physical parameters were also
obtained.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Physical Properties
Particle Size—
Particle-size-distribution data for the natural soils and minesoils are
reported in Appendix B. Summation percentages for 2- to 254-mm material are
presented in Appendix D. Summation percentages, for 0.15- to 102-mm material,
of the composite samples (Table 6) indicated the general difference between
natural soils (Pits 1-4) and minesoils (Pits 5-8). About 50% (by weight) of
the natural soil consisted of soil-size material, in contrast to the minesoil
where only 25% of the material was made up of soil-size material.
The composite sample of the natural soil contained significantly more material
between 0.15 to 0.30 mm in diameter than the minesoils. The other size fractions of
the composite samples were not significantly different from each other.
In Figure 6 summation curves of selected composite samples are presented. The
curves for Pits 5, 6, and 8 approximated each other. Pit 7, composed largely of
shaly material, was coarser. The summation curve for Pit 2 approached that of the
41
-------
TABLE 6. COMPOSITE SAMPLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Fraction
mm
0.15
0.30
0.60
1.18
2.36
4.75
9.50
19.1
25.4
50.8
76.2
101.6
P-l
4.1
15.5
38.7
45.8
52.5
58.8
63.6
69.0
73.2
82.3
91.9
99.8
P-2
10.0
18.0
29.8
36.3
40.6
43.8
47.6
54.2
•58.0
74.2
82.8
93.1
P-3
7.1
22.7
35.5
41.9
47.3
54.0
61.7
69.7
75.2
86.1
98.1
99.9
P-4
- % finer
3.5
18.7
32.6
43.9
56.6
72.0
86.7
93.7
95.9
97.2
97.6
100
Pit
P-5
by weight -
1.7
7.3
17.6
22.7
28.0
33.1
36.8
41.8
44.2
52.5
67.7
80.7
P-6
1.3
5.9
16.9
22.7
29.3
36.1
42.0
49.9
55.8
66.3
78.4
100.2
P-7
0.1
2.6
5.9
8.6
12.8
17.0
21.2
25.2
25.4
30.7
43.0
57.8
P-8
2.6
8.6
18.6
22.8
27.8
34.1
41.1
49.6
54.1
69.2
88.0
100.1
minesoils at the coarser end of the curve. Pit 4, however, differed from the others
in having most of its material less than 2 mm in size. Figures 7 through 12 show
the sand, silt, clay, and coarse fragment (>2 mm-25 cm diam.) distribution with
depth for selected soil and minesoil profiles.
The distribution with depth of sand, silt, and clay in Pits 1 and 2 (Figures 7
and 8) agreed with each other. These two soils, which are derived from the same
material, would be expected to be similar. The distributions for Pits 3 and 4
(Figures 9 and 10) also seemed to agree, but Pit 4 had considerably less sand than
Pit 3. The percentage of 2-mm material for Pit 5 (Figure 11) indicated that the
Ap horizon in the minesoil had weathered or was finer because of its topsoiled
nature. The sand content increased sharply in the Cl horizon and the silt and
clay fractions decreased. The increase in percent of rock fragments (>2 mm diam.)
in the Cl horizon indicated that the Ap horizon had been topsoiled. The distribu-
tion of materials in Pit 6 resembled that of Pit 5.
42
-------
Figure 6. Particle size summation curves for composite samples.
43
-------
h-
0
UJ
CD
tr
UJ
C
UJ
o
o:
UJ
a.
IUU
80
60
40
20
n
o PIT 4
D PIT
PARTICLE SIZE (mm)
-------
Figure 7. Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution
with depth for Pit 1.
44
-------
0
0
40
£
o
Q.
CD
Q
80
120
20
Percent by Weight
40 60
80
100
Al
A Clay
Silt
<2 mm
O Sand
Rock Fragments
B3t
160
-------
Figure 8. Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution
with depth for Pit 2.
45
-------
0
0
20
Percent by Weight
40 60
80
100
§40
Q.
CD
Q
80
Al
B2
B22
B23
C
I
I
I
A Clay
• Silt}<2mm
O Sand
9
A Rock Fragments
-------
Figure 9. Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution
with depth for Pit 3.
46
-------
Percent by Weight
0
0
20
4 0
6 0
8 0
100
I A I I
40 -
E
o
a
(U
a
80
20
60
I I
A Clay
0 Silt
<2mm
O Sand
A Rock Fragments
i i
-------
Figure 10. Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution
with depth for Pit 4.
47
-------
0
0
40
E
o
Q.
Q)
Q
80
120
20
Percent by Weight
40 60
80
100
B2lt
160
A Clay
• Silt
<2mm
O Sand
/
A Rock Fragments
nC2
-------
Figure 11. Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution
with depth for Pit 5.
48
-------
0
0
40
£
o
I" 80
120
20
Percent by Weight
40 60
80
A Clay'
Silt
<2 mm
O Sand
A Rock' Fragments
IOD
I
-------
A slight increase in sand content was apparent in the C2 horizon at Pit 7
(Figure 12). The sand, silt, and clay content in the Apl and Ap2 were virtually
the same. The Cl horizon had less clay and more silt than the overlying horizons.
The rock fragment content of the Ap2 was much less than that of the Apl horizon.
This could indicate that fines have been eroded from the surface horizon. The
rock fragment content again increased in the Cl and was eratic below 40 cm. The
distribution of fines in Pit 8 was consistent with depth, and no changes were
apparent either in the fines or in the rock fragment content with depth.
In general, the minesoils were dominated by sand in their fine earth fraction.
The distribution of rock fragments in the minesoils was eratic and generally
greater than 60%, whereas the rock fragment content of the natural soils was
generally less than 50%.
In general, the minesoils had considerably less silt and more sand in their
fine earth fraction, than did the natural soils.
Figure 13 shows depth distributions of percent clay (<2 urn). Clay content of
the natural soils ranged from 9.6 to 24.9% and for the minesoils it ranged from
8.8 to 17.5%. The decrease in clay at about 110 cm for Pit 4 was associated with
the coal blossom (IIC1). The clay content of the fine earth did not vary signif-
icantly from horizon to horizon nor from pit to pit.
The percent coarse fragments in the natural soils and minesoils is shown in
Figure 14. The data showed that most materials in minesoils (by weight) were
coarse fragments.
Surface horizons of the natural soils contained an average of 8.3% clay,
33.3% silt, and 19.7% sand. The remaining 38.7% was made up of material
>2 mm. The surface horizons of the minesoils contained an average of 4.1%
clay, 11% silt, 13% sand, and 71.9% consisted of material >2 mm.
The surface horizons of minesoils contained a greater percentage of fine soil
material (<2 mm) than any underlying horizon. The amount of fine material would
increase as weathering continued if removal of fines by erosion was not greater
49
-------
Figure 12. Sand, silt, clay and coarse fragment distribution
with depth for Pit 7.
50
-------
0
0
40
E
o
Q.
O
Q
80
120
20
Percent by Weight
40 60
I
A Clay
Silt
<2 mm
O Sand"
A Rock Fragments
80
100
Cl —
C2 _
C4 —
160
-------
Figure 13. Clay (<2 ym) distribution with depth
for Pits 1 through 8.
51
-------
PERCENT CLAY
PITS 1-4
10 20
30 0
20
40
60
E
o
Q_
UJ
Q
80
100
120
140
160
PITS 5-8
10 20
30
oPIT I
oPIT 2
A PIT 3
oPIT 4
©PIT 5
• PIT 6
A PIT 7
» PIT 8
-------
Figure 14. Coarse fragment (>2 mm) distribution with
depth for Pits 1 through 8.
52
-------
PERCENT COARSE FRAGMENTS
20 40 60 80 100
20
40
60
80
8]
120
140
160
o
D
A
O
180
PIT I
PIT 2
RT3
PIT 4
PITS
RT6
PITT
RT8
-------
than their genesis. Plass and Vogel (1973) reported that the percentage of soil
material (<2 mm) of natural soils in areas adjacent to minesoils ranged between
35 and 95%, whereas minesoils contained from 17 to 64% of fine material.
The minesoil contained significantly more material between 19 and 254 mm than
did the natural soil. Minesoils typically were high in coarse fragment content.
The high percentage of coarse material was due to the mixing of consolidated
materials with the subsoil in spoil piles. The coarse fragments in the minesoils
were distributed throughout the profile, possibly causing a proliferation of
irregularly sized and spaced pores. These larger pores would be expected to drain
faster by gravity. Coarse fragments have less surface area than equal volumes of
finer material, thus reducing the surface area for adsorption of water.
Coarse-fragment data of several researchers (Smith et al., 1971; Plass and
Vogel, 1973; Coleman, 1951) showed that coarse fragment content (by weight) can
range from about 40 to 70%. Plass and Vogel (1973) found that for 39 West
Virginian minesoils, 63% (by weight) of the minesoil was greater than 2 mm. Smith
et al. (1971) studied about 100-years-old minesoil derived from Fe ore surface
mining in West Virginia. The methods used to extract this ore resembled strip-
mining techniques currently in use. Higher proportions of coarse fragments were
found in minesoils derived from fine-grained sandstone and silty brown shales,
possibly due to the increased resistance to weathering of the material, as compared
with minesoils derived from dark gray and brown shales.
The soil-size material (<2 mm) of the minesoils was predominantly sand-sized,
whereas silt-size-material predominated in all but Pit 3 of the natural soils.
The silt present in the natural soils was significantly greater than that in
the minesoils, and the minesoils contained significantly more sand than the
natural soils.
There was a highly significant difference between the minesoil and natural
soil with respect to clay and sand content of the total material; the minesoil
containing generally less clay and more sand.
53
-------
Specific Surface—
The amount of surface area in soils is determined largely by the amounts and
type of colloidal material (<2 ym) present. Of the common clay minerals, mont-
morillonite has the greatest specific surface per unit weight, followed by
vermiculite, illite, and kaolinite (Baver et al., 1972). The specific surface
areas of the natural soils and minesoils studied are presented in Tables 7 and 8,
respectively. Organic C values, determined both by ignition and the Walkley-Black
methods, were used to calculate specific surface of the mineral fraction.
Horizons in which montmorillonitic clays were detected (Appendix B) had high
specific surface. The B21 and B22t horizons of Pit 1, and the Bx2t and Bx3t
horizons of Pit 3 had higher specific surface than all other subsoil horizons.
These higher values were attributed to the presence of montmorillonite. The Ap
horizon of Pit 5 had a greater specific surface than any underlying horizon in
this pedon also due to the presence of montmorillonite.
In general, those horizons which had greater quantities of vermiculite than
illite had higher specific surfaces. The specific surface values of the mine-
soils were slightly less than those of the natural soils. This was probably due
to their higher kaolinite and illite contents.
Bulk Density and Porosity—
Bulk density values of 10 minesoil sites are illustrated in Figure 15. Bulk
densities were determined by three methods. A Troxler gamma moisture/density
probe gave lower bulk density values than the other two methods at most sites
(L-l, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9 and 10). However, at L-5, results for gamma probe were higher
than either of the other methods, while at L-7 and L-8 gamma-probe-density values
were higher than the excavation technique but lower than microlysimeter values.
The steep slopes at sites L-9 and 10 made excavation difficult and measurements
questionable. We found greater differences in bulk densities measurements
between the methods when a larger percentage of the rock fragments was made up of
shale. Average values of bulk density obtained by various methods are listed in
54
-------
TABLE 7. CALCULATED VALUES OF SPECIFIC SURFACE AREA FOR PITS 1 THROUGH 4
Pit Depth
cm
1 0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
2 0-10
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
3 0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
135-167
4 0-8
8-20
20-48
48-74
74-94
94-125
125-183
Horizon
Al
A2
B21
B22t
B3t
C
Al
B21
B22
B23
C
! Al
A2
Bl
Bxlt
Bx2t
Bx3t
Bx4t
Al
A2
B21t
B22t
B23t
IIC1
IIIC2
Specific Surface
Ignition Walkley-Black
m /g
72.21 64.26
34.86 48.02
63.77
69.03
45.23
39.93
34.47 40.95
40.79
56.33
60.08
49.06
68.74 66.05
32.24 39.46
49.11
53.69
65.92
65.86
51.58
36.03
43.82 45.82
59.05 48.39
65.15
43.18
35.03
39.79
55
-------
TABLE 8. CALCULATED VALUES OF SPECIFIC SURFACE AREA FOR PITS 5 THROUGH 8
Pit
5
6
7
8
Depth
cm
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-157
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
Horizon
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Ap
AC
Cl
C2
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
AC
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Specific
Ignition
2
m
50.49
24.29
25.91
30.06
36.09
30.06
49.30
29.73
26.51
29.01
1.28
31.46
-
-
-
—
33.04
43.83
19.86
21.11
22.18
34.78
Surface
Walkley-Black
/g
52.83
38.26
38.07
44.74
46.39
40.67
49.87
39.02
35.72
34.71
27.59
45.72
26.03
28.52
18.78
17.67
30.31
36.64
37.54
39.71
38.81
38.72
56
-------
Figure 15. Dry bulk densities of minesoil determined by
various methods.
57
-------
u
o
X.
o>
CO
Z
2.2
2.0
CD
1.8
1.6
14
= GAMMA PROBE
QsMICROLYSIMETER
J9J = EXCAVATION
MICROLYSIMETER SITE
-------
Table 9. The bulk density values obtained with the gamma probe, excavation, lysimeter
and clod methods were not significantly different from each other at the 0.05% level.
TABLE 9. BULK DENSITY STANDARD DEVIATION, AND COEFFICIENT OF
VARIATION OF MINESOILS DETERMINED BY VARIOUS METHODS
Method
Excavation
Gamma Probe
Lysimeters
Clods
Mean
g/cm
1.81
1.70
1.81
1.78
SD
0.24
0.19
0.08
0.12
CV%
13
11
5
7
The average value obtained by the excavation method agreed with density of the
material handpacked into the lysimeters. These lysimeters were exposed to environ-
mental conditions after packing, after which their oven-dry densities were
determined. The density of these lysimeters remained essentially unchanged after
the exposure. Bulk-density determinations at three sites (L-ll, L-12 and L-13) in
undisturbed soil are presented in Table 10. The excavation method was not used at
site L-13 because the soil material exhibited properties (i.e., platy structure,
shale fragments) which indicated that it was disturbed. The A horizons at site
L-ll had been eroded and the density values obtained here were probably represent-
ative of the natural soil B horizon. At site L-12 the natural soil litter layer
was removed before density determinations. Excavation was difficult in this
wooded area because of the many large roots present in the soil and voids in the
soil material were created when roots were removed. These voids, as well as the
roots, tended to lower the bulk density value of the soil determined by excavation.
Clod data (Appendix B) showed that bulk densities of the natural soils in-
creased with depth. Bulk density of surface horizons of the natural soils
(Pits 1 and 2) ranged from 0.88 to 1.39 g/cm . Very few clods were obtained for
determination of surface bulk density in the minesoils. Bulk densities of clods
58
-------
obtained at the lysimeter sites are presented in Table 11. The average density of
the surface minesoils obtained at the lysimeter sites was 1.78 g/cm , whereas the
3
density of the surface clods obtained at Pits 5 and 7 averaged 2.20 g/cm .
TABLE 10. BULK DENSITIES OF NATURAL SOILS
Site
L-ll
L-12
L-13
Method
Gamma Probe Excavation
, 3
g/cm
1.75 1.99
1.26 1.52
1.79
TABLE 11. BULK DENSITIES OF MINESOILS DETERMINED BY THE CLOD METHOD
Bulk Density
Site Uncorrected
g/cm
L-l 1.78
1.71
1.60
L-4 1.83
L-5 1.71
1.89
1.72
L-6 1.65
1.86
1.73
L-7 1.68
1.69
1.72
L-8 1.40
1.56
1.43
L-9 1.97
1.69
1.80
Values
Corrected
1.42
1.65
1.58
1.63
1.66
1.65
1.57
1.52
1.75
1.51
1.61
1.63
1.63
1.39
1.51
1.37
1.80
1.60
1.75
59
-------
The excavation technique had the highest coefficient of variation, whereas the
lysimeters had the lowest. The mean bulk density value of the sites did not vary
significantly from one another. The gamma probe gave reasonable results, which
were comparatively easy to obtain. This method was acceptable when total density
was desired, however, when values corrected for coarse fragments were desired,
additional samples were needed.
Bulk densities reported by Smith et al. (1971) for minesoil ranged from 1.41
3 3
to 1.52 g/cm , whereas those for natural soils ranged from 0.90 to 1.13 g/cm .
The corrected values obtained from the surface minesoils in this study ranged from
3
1.39 to 1.85 g/cm . The surface soils of Pits 1 through 4 had average bulk densities
of 1.02, 1.08, 1.63, and 1.40, respectively.
The higher bulk densities in the minesoils were attributed in part to the higher
coarse fragment content of these materials. The minesoils were also coarser
textured (loam to sandy loam) than the natural soils (silt loam to loam). The
coarser-textured materials tended to pack closer increasing the bulk density. Higher
bulk densities could also be attributed to the compacted state of this material.
The effect of organic matter on decreasing bulk density in the natural soil is
usually correlated with structural development.
Calculated porosities for B-spoil and C-spoil surface minesoil were 39 and 34%,
respectively, whereas the surface soils of Pits 1 and 2 had an average of 65% pore
space. Smith et al. (1971) found minesoils had from 40 to 47% pore space as
compared with 57 to 66% for associated soils.
Coarse-textured soils with little organic matter usually have porosities
between 30 and 40% (Nielsen et al., 1964). Natural soils are porous due to their
intricately developed system of cracks and fissures. Pores in minesoils are
generally larger but fewer.
The degree of soil structural development decreased as profile depth of the
minesoil increased. The subsurface horizons were usually characterized as
structureless and massive. Because of structural deterioration related to
60
-------
mining processes, minesoils tended to be denser and less porous than naturally
occurring soils.
Freeze, thaw, root action, and organic matter accumulation normally would be
expected to decrease the bulk density and increase the porosity of the minesoil
with time.
Soil Water
Moisture Characteristics—
Detailed moisture characteristics of soils and minesoils studied are tabulated
in Appendix E.
The average amount of water retained (uncorrected) at any matric potential by
the A or B horizons of the natural soils was greater than that retained by the A
horizons of the minesoils. The fragipan horizon at Pit 3 also was more effective
in retaining water than the minesoils. At equal matric potential, the amount of
water retained by the C horizons of the natural soils resembled that retained by
the C horizons of the minesoils.
The minesoils generally had loam A horizons and sandy loam C horizons,
whereas the natural soils had silt loam to loam A horizons and loam to fine
sandy loam C horizons. The textural differences and organic matter deficien-
cies of the minesoils accounted for their lower water-holding capacities. When
corrected for coarse fragments, the minesoils retained substantially less water
than comparable natural soil horizons.
Moisture characteristics for the A2 and Ap horizons of Pit 1 and Pit 6,
respectively, are presented in Figure 16. These horizons were found at about
the same depth and both had silt loam textures. When corrected for coarse
fragments, the curve of the A2 horizon (Pit 1) was not displaced as much as
that of the Ap (Pit 6) horizon. The Ap horizon, corrected for coarse
fragments, retained much less water at comparable matric potential than the
A2 horizon. At higher water contents, the water retained by both horizons
approximated each other.
61
-------
Figure 16. Moisture characteristics for A2 horizon, Pit 1, and
Ap horizon, Pit 6.
62
-------
-i0.5
A2(PIT DUNCORRECTED
6)UNCORRECTED
A2(P!T I) CORRECTED
Ap(PIT6) CORRECTED
0.4
o
o
0.2
O.I
\-
UJ
(T
0
-1000
-100 -10
MATRIC POTENTIAL (cm of water)
-I
-------
less water at comparable matric potential than the A2 horizon. At higher water
contents, the water retained by both horizons approximated each other.
Figure 17 shows the moisture characteristics of the B22 (Pit 2) and C2 (Pit 8)
horizons. Both of these horizons were found at about the same depths and both had
loam textures. The uncorrected curves of the soils and minesoils did not differ
from one another appreciably. However, corrected curves showed the effect of
coarse fragments on moisture retention.
Water Retention
The percentage of water retained (by weight) at -15 bar matric potential of
the natural soils and minesoils corrected for coarse fragments are tabulated in
Tables 12 and 13, respectively. The surface horizons of the natural soils retained
more water at this matric potential than any subsoil horizons, except the IICl
horizon of Pit 4. This horizon, being composed largely of organic material, was
able to retain more water than other horizons within this pedon. The surface
horizons of minesoils did not retain significantly more water at -15 bar than their
subsurface horizons.
Tables 14 and 15 give values of water retained between -0.3 and -15 bar matric
potential, for natural soils and minesoils, respectively. The amounts of water
retained in both natural soils and minesoils generally decreased with increasing
depth of the pedons. The surface horizons of the natural soils were able to retain
more water due to their organic matter content and structural development. The
natural soils retained an average of 14.3% (0.143 g of water/g of soil), whereas
the minesoil retained only 10.3%. This difference is even more pronounced when
moisture characteristics are corrected for coarse fragments. The water content in
the separate horizons of the minesoil ranged from 5.5 to 16.7% as compared with
7.1 to 39.2% in the natural soils. The minesoil located within the B-spoil (Pit 7)
had the lowest water content.
Plass and Vogel (1973) reported that minesoils were able to supply ample water
to plants under normal environmental conditions. However, under stress conditions
the amount of water available to plants in minesoils could be critically low due
63
-------
Figure 17. Moisture characteristics for B22 horizon, Pit 2, and
C2 horizon, Pit 8.
64
-------
B22 (PIT 2) UNCORRECTED
C2(PIT8)UNCORRECTED
0.5
0.4
B22 (PIT 2) CORRECTED
C2(PIT8) CORRECTED
O.I
LU
o
o
fe
I-
UJ
o:
-1000
-100 -10
MATRIC POTENTIAL (cm of water)
-I
-------
TABLE 12. GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT AT -15 BAR MATRIC POTENTIAL FOR
NATURAL SOILS
Site
P-l
P-2
P-3
P-4
Depth
cm
0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
0-19
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
135-167+
0-8
8-20
20-48
48-74
74-94
94-125
125-183+
Horizon
Al
A2
B21
B22t
B3t
C
Al
B21
B22
B23
C
Al
A2
Bl
Exit
Bx2t
Bx3t
Bx4t
Al
A2
B21t
B22t
B23t
IIC1
IIIC2
Mean
g/g
0.1821
0.0768
0.0890
0.0942
0.0612
0.0544
0.0976
0.0621
0.0798
0.0815
0.0670
0.1109
0.0649
0.0679
0.0738
0.0886
0.0905
0.0727
0.0728
0.0700
0.0866
0.0896
0.0785
0.1365
0.0812
*
SD
0.0104
0.0003
0.0028
0.0042
0.0004
0.0019
0.0048
0.0007
0.0010
0.0002
0.0021
0.0037
0.0001
0.0015
0.0009
0.0023
0.0008
0.0001
0.0009
0.0012
0.0025
0.0042
0.0009
0.0015
0.0008
cvf
%
5.73
0.42
3.14
4.46
0.71
3.40
4.92
1.11
1.24
0.19
3.08
3.31
0.15
2.14
1.16
2.64
0.89
0.19
1.23
1.68
2.87
4.67
1.08
1.06
0.92
Standard deviation.
Coefficient of variation.
65
-------
TABLE 13. GRAVIMETRIC WATER CONTENT AT -15 BAR MATRIC POTENTIAL
FOR MINESOILS
Site
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
Depth
cm
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-154
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
Horizon
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Ap
AC
Cl
C2
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
AC
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Mean
g/8
0.0719
0.0590
0.0592
0.0671
0.0696
0.0609
0.0759
0.0657
0.0594
0.0528
0.0662
0.0776
0.0661
0.0721
0.0645
0.0620
0.0542
0.0655
0.0681
0.0684
0.0731
0.0853
*
SD
0.0012
0.0019
0.0016
0.0013
0.0017
0.0014
0.0009
0.0009
0.0040
0.0006
0.0020
0.0011
0.0008
0.0015
0.0013
0.0005
0.0007
0.0005
0.0009
0.0001
0.0006
0.0009
cvf
%
1.67
3.30
2.75
1.86
2.39
2.24
1.14
1.33
6.74
1.04
3.00
1.38
1.21
2.02
1.96
0.74
1.20
0.81
1.25
1.50
0.82
1.02
Standard deviation.
t
Coefficient of variation.
66
-------
TABLE 14. WATER RETAINED BETWEEN -0.3 AND -15 BAR MATRIC POTENTIAL
FOR PITS 1 THROUGH 4
Site
P-l
P-2
P-3
P-4
Depth
cm
0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
0-10
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
135-167+
0-8
8-20
20-48
48-74
74-94
94-125
125-183+
Horizon
Al
A2
B21
B22t
B3t
C
Al
B21
B22
B23
C
Al
A2
Bl
Exit
Bx2t
Bx3t
Bx4t
Al
A2
B21t
B22t
B23t
IIC1
IIIC2
Water
Retained
8/g
0.3918
0.2020
0.1136
0.1214
—
—
_
—
0.1302
0.0856
0.1259
0.0804
0.1931
0.1410
0.1338
0.1468
0.0936
0.0709
0.1525
0.1240
0.1478
0.1420
0.1323
0.1673
0.1100
67
-------
TABLE 15. WATER RETAINED BETWEEN -0.3 AND -15 BAR MATRIC POTENTIAL
FOR PITS 5 THROUGH 8
Site
P-5
P-6
P-7
P-8
Depth
cm
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-154
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
Horizon
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Ap
AC
Cl
C2
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
AC
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Water
Retained
8/8
0.1078
0.0862
0.0804
0.1013
0.0989
0.0973
0.1396
0.0975
0.0696
0.0605
0.0999
0.0996
0.1108
0.0928
0.0660
0.0550
0.1667
0.0957
0.1246
0.1394
0.1175
0.1668
68
-------
to the larger pores, coarser texture, and greater percentage of rock fragments in
the minesoils.
Field Soil Water-
Gravimetric and volumetric water contents of the lysimeters at saturation and
"field capacity" are shown in Table 16. The amount of water retained by the mine-
soils 2 days after 3 cm of rain along with water retained by clods at -1/3 bar
matric potential are shown in Table 17. The clods retained less water than the
gravimetric sample at "field capacity" in all cases. However, water retention of
sieved samples from the surface horizons of the minesoils, corrected for coarse
fragments, at -0.3 bar, agreed with values obtained from the gravimetric samples.
The average corrected values for the surface horizons retention for Pits 5 through
8 (Appendix E) was 9.1% as compared with 8.3% retained by gravimetric samples.
The field capacity of the minesoils (determined gravimetrically) did not
agree closely with values obtained from the lysimeters. "In situ" determinations
yielded between 6 and 12% (by weight) of water retention, whereas the minesoils
in the microlysimeters retained from 12 to 19% of water after 2 days of drainage.
Particle-size-distribution data for the lysimeters are presented in Table 18.
Lysimeters, which contained greater amounts of material >76 mm had lower field
capacity values. Thus, L-8, which had the greatest amount of material >76 mm
retained the least amount of water at "field capacity."
Evapotranspiration—
Meteorological data collected during the evapotranspiration study are
presented in Appendix F. Evapotranspiration losses (ET), determined by a
model (Ritchie, 1972), A-pan data, and lysimeter data are presented in Table 19.
Lysimeter 4 had an average ET of 0.22 cm/day for the period of October 19
through November 2. During this same period, the model gave a value of 0.15
cm/day and the A-pan a value of 0.23 cm/day.
69
-------
TABLE 16. GRAVIMETRIC (G) AND VOLUMETRIC (V) WATER CONTENTS OF LYSIMETERS AT
SATURATION AND "FIELD CAPACITY"
Saturated
Site
L-l
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
L-7
L-8
L-9
L-10
*
G
g/g
0.213
0.258
0.193
0.158
0.234
0.218
0.198
0.218
0.232
0.222
vf
3, 3
cm /cm
0.367
0.502
0.365
0.324
0.352
0.353
0.279
0.331
0.484
'• 0.489
"Field Capacity"
G
g/g
0.185
0.187
0.155
0.120
0.176
0.150
0.173
0.129
0.123
0.147
V
3. 3
cm /cm
0.318
0.364
0.294
0.246
0.264
0.241
0.245
0.195
0.256
0.323
G is water content by weight.
t
V is water content by volume.
TABLE 17. GRAVIMETRIC (G) AND VOLUMETRIC (V) WATER CONTENT AT "FIELD CAPACITY1
Site
L-l
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
L-7
L-8
L-9
L-10
Gravimetric
G
g/g
0.106
0.088
0.082
0.082
0.091
0.092
0.105
0.079
0.062
0.121
*
Samples
V
0.180
0.155
0.150
0.159
0.161
0.177
0.125
0.103
0.130
0.128
Clods -1/3 Bar
V
3/ 3
cm /cm
0.143
-
-
0.106
0.109
0.116
0.114
0.078
0.085
-
Gravimetric samples obtained 2 days after 3 cm rain.
70
-------
TABLE 18. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF LYSIMETERS BY WEIGHT
Site
L-l
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
L-7
L-8
L-9
L-10
Particle Size
>76 nun 76-19 mm
%. ,
4.95 7.03
3.89 22.17
6.71 23.75
0 18.45
0 10.87
8.05 16.11
0 13.02
15.25 20.70
7.20 16.42
0 25.97
<19 mm
88.02
73.94
69.54
81.55
89.13
75.84
86.98
64.05
76.38
74.03
Figure 18 presents the cumulative evapotranspiration during the study period
measured by lysimeters and A-pan evaporation. The evapotranspiration from both
the B and C spoil minesoil by the lysimeters was approximated by A-pan evaporation.
Because of the large amount of rainfall over the study period, many seepage
values obtained were inaccurate. Seepage in excess of the amount of rainfall
indicated that water collected in the pans and bags due to either interflow,
runoff, or both. Temperatures also fell below freezing during the study period
having an adverse effect on the evapotranspiration estimates.
Soil-Water Movement
Infiltration—
Infiltration data (Table 20) indicated the extreme heterogeneous behavior of
the minesoil. In Figure 19, cumulative infiltration was plotted against elapsed
time. The infiltration rates on the shaly B-spoil (1-7, 1-8, K-Plot) and those on
the C-spoil (1-4, 1-6) were lower on the average than on natural soil (1-1, 1-2).
The surface horizons of the soil at infiltration site 1-1 had been eroded.
The infiltration rates probably represented natural subsoil (B horizons).
71
-------
TABLE 19. EVAPOTRANSPIRATIONAL LOSS ESTIMATED BY VARIOUS METHODS
S3
•
Mo /Day
9/28
10/1
10/5
10/8
10/12
10/15
10/19
10/22
10/26
10/29
11/2
Total
Model
.49
.24
.68
.26
.50
.53
.58
.29
.26
.47
.41
4.71
A-Pan
.62
.46
.61
.50
.76
.44
.89
.85
.33
.52
.35
6.33
Lyslmeter
12 34 567
cm
.8 .3 .3 5.4 .3 .2
2.2 .6
2.1
1.4 2.3 .5
.7 .8 1.2 .8 .5
.4 .4 .7 .3 .2 .2
.7
.6
4.3 .6 .5 .5 .5
.2 .3 .4 .4
8 9
.1
.2 .2
.6
.1
2.3
.7 .7
.2 .5
.2
.6
.4 .3
.2
5.8
10
.6
.2
.6
-------
Figure 18. Cumulative evapotranspiration (ET) from lysimeters, and
evaporation from A-pan during study.
73
-------
E
E
60
50
a.
o
CL
u
20
10
0
0
OCT. I
1
DATE
I I
LYSIMETERS->
1
NOV. I
I
• CLASS A-PAN
O ET-MODEL
i
0
10 ~
20 J
30 z
40 <
50
60
500
TIME (hrs)
1000
-------
Figure 19. Infiltration on minesoil using single ring infiltrometer (I),
infiltration on the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity plot
(K-Plot).
74
-------
100 r
1-2
1-6
40
80 120 160
ELAPSED TIME (MIN.)
200 240
-------
TABLE 20. INFILTRATION RATES ON MINESOILS AND NATURAL SOILS
Site
1-1
1-2
1-4
1-6
1-7
1-8
K-Plot
Material
Soil
Soil
C-spoil
C-spoil
B-spoil
B-spoil
B-spoil
Infiltration
Initial
, , , ., jim /T-iT-
cro/ nr
14.01
60.30
1.91
28.57
9.52
0.48
0.75
Rate
Final
2.67
28.22
0.32
0.48
0.32
0.48
0.11
At site 1-2, the organic litter layer was removed before installation of the
infiltrometer.
The B-spoil minesoil at 1-8 and K-Plot sites had lower initial infiltration
rates than the 1-4 and 1-6 C-spoil because of compaction and packing of these
shaly materials, which have broken down more easily than the sandstone material
of the C-spoil. The higher infiltration amounts on the 1-6, C-spoil could be
related to better structural development and vegetative cover. Infiltration curves
for sites 1-4, 1-6, and 1-7 showed the characteristic decrease in infiltration rate
with time, as contrasted with Coleman's (1951) findings that infiltration rates on
minesoils had a lag period, after which they increased significantly. The
increasing infiltration rates, reported by Coleman (1951), could possibly have been
due to washing of fines from the surface horizons. Coleman (1951) studied spoil
that had not been topsoiled and found higher infiltration rates on shaly materials
(>240 cm/hr) than on adjacent natural soils (<70 cm/hr). Verma and Thames (1975)
reported lower final infiltration rates on minesoils as compared with natural
soils. They found the average final infiltration rate on the minesoil was 0.4
cm/hr as compared with 14.7 cm/hr on the natural soils. Jones et al. (1975) found
infiltration rates on minesoils ranging from 0.08 to 0.74 cm/hr using a double-ring
75
-------
infiltrometer. Final infiltration rate on Kylertown minesoils was 0.40 cm/hr, which
agreed with values reported previously (Jones et al., 1975; Verma and Thames, 1975),
and final infiltration on contiguous natural soils was 15.4 cm/hr. Smith et al.
(1971) noted significantly higher infiltration rates for soils as compared with
associated minesoils. Rates of infiltration also tended to decrease with increasing
percentage soil-size material on minesoils (Coleman, 1951). The dense compact
nature of the surface horizon of minesoils also contributed to lower infiltration
rates.
Infiltration on the K-Plot was extremely slow and decreased with time from
0.75 cm/hr after 1.5 hr to less than 0.11 cm/hr after 60 hours. Because water
was added to the plot at a slow rate, the initial infiltration reading was taken
after the maximum rate had passed.
i
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity—
Saturated hydraulic conductivity values of the 10 lysimeters are presented in
Table 21. The conductivities were measured before (I) and after (II) 4 months of
field exposure. Extreme variability in conductivity existed between the
lysimeters. The very high values obtained for the second run (L-6, L-8) were due
to initial washing out of fine material from the lysimeters. The conductivities
generally were less after being exposed to the elements and ranged from 0.4 to
>300 cm/hr.
Use of these lysimeters as an estimate of saturated hydraulic conductivities
did not prove successful. Problems associated with flow along the walls of the
container as well as voids created by packing were evident.
Unsaturated Hydraulic Conductivity—
Tensiometer readings taken during water addition are presented in Table 22.
From these data, no indication of a uniform wetting front advance was apparent.
The matric potential of the minesoils over time indicated a general drying trend.
76
-------
TABLE 21. SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITIES (K), SAMPLING VARIABILITY (S), AND
RELATIVE MEASURE OF VARIABILITY (S/K), BEFORE (I) AND AFTER (II) 4
MONTHS OF EXPOSURE
I
Site
L-l
L-2
L-3
L-4
L-5
L-6
L-7
L-8
L-9
L-10
K
cm/hr
3.0
17.5
7.0
12.5
743.4
170.8
148.2
297.3
123.2
47.3
S
2.0
2.1
1.8
1.9
1.3
1.2
1.8
1.4
2.0
2.3
log S/log K
%
63
26
30
25
4
4
12
6
14
22
K
0.3
2.0
2.8
2.2
150.5
-
304.4
1930.5
14.2
15.3
II
S
cm/hr
1.5
1.1
1.1
1.0
2.2
-
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.2
log S/log K
%
>100
14
9
3
16
-
2
<1
7
8
TABLE 22. TENSIOMETER READINGS ON MINESOIL DURING UNSATURATED HYDRAULIC
CONDUCTIVITY STUDY
Time (Hours)
Depth
cm
60
90
120
150
0
*
50
50T
90
90
100
110
150
120
20
50
40
80
80
90
110
120
140
48
60
50
90
90
100
110
140
120
115
70
70
100
100
100
120
140
120
138
70
50
100
90
110
120
140
120
168
80
70
80
100
110
120
160
140
Values for Box 1.
t
Values for Box 2.
77
-------
Tensiometer readings taken during the course of water addition and drainage
indicated no clear wetting front or an insensitivity of the tensiometers to the
water movement through the material. The water movement was extremely slow and
the volumetric water content indicated that the minesoil was drying after initial
time. The readings at the 90-cm depth for both Box 1 and 2 behaved similarly.
However, at the 60-, 120-, and 180-cm depth, variations existed.
The volumetric water content at time zero and after 138 hours (Figure 20) also
indicated that the minesoil has dried over this period. The general drying trends
for both Box 1 and 2 approximated each other.
Neutron depth probe standardization data (Table 23) indicated varying water
contents with depths. These variations could be attributed to pockets of fine
material interspersed within the coarse material.
The tensiometers utilized in this study were gauge-type and, possibly, were
not sensitive enough to record matric potential changes as water moved past them.
Poor tensiometer, ceramic cup/minesoil contact could contribute to problems.
However, these results could also support the idea of channelized flow within the
minesoil.
The dense surface layer of the K-Plot accounted for the extremely slow infil-
tration on this material. However, beneath this layer coarse fragments and void
space predominates. Coarse-textured horizons, underlying finer textured ones,
will not conduct significant amounts of water until many of the pores in the upper
horizon are saturated and a pressure-head develops (Miller, 1973). ElBoushi (1966)
has shown that water infiltrating through loose granular material (similar to
subsurface horizons of many minesoils) tends to concentrate in small parts of the
total area into discrete paths. This leads to a decrease in percentage of, surface
wetted by percolating waters.
78
-------
Figure 20. Volumetric water content within the unsaturated
hydraulic conductivity plot.
79
-------
0.
0
18
0.20
VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT
0.22 0.24
0.26
0.28
30
6 60
o
90
120
150
•BOX I
•BOX 2
HRS.
138 HRS.
OHRS.
-------
TABLE 23. GAMMA AND NEUTRON DEPTH PROBE STANDARDIZATION OF K-PLOT. BULK DENSITY
(BD) AND VOLUMETRIC WATER CONTENT (V)
Depth
cm
15
20
25
31
36
41
46
51
56
61
66
71
76
81
86
91
97
102
107
112
117
122
127
132
137
142
147
1
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.83
1.80
1.77
1.75
1.75
1.74
1.72
1.72
1.68
1.67
1.70
1.70
1.72
1.71
1.66
1.63
1.61
1.59
1.60
1.58
1.61
1.63
1.65
(BD)
2
3
g/cm
1.74
1.76
1.75
1.79
1.80
1.79
1.80
1.77
1.71
1.68
1.62
1.56
1.57
1.57
1.59
1.64
1.67
1.72
1.72
1.72
1.69
1.61
1.60
1.61
1.60
1.59
1.57
1
0.2800
0.2777
0.2755
0.2718
0/2620
0.2546
0.2514
0.2469
0.2491
0.2529
0.2565
0.2586
0.2516
0.2321
0.2221
0.2116
0.2092
0.2103
0.2158
0.2246
0.2340
0.2404
0.2474
0.2541
0.2583
0.2564
0.2501
(V)
2
0 0
J / J
cm /cm
0.2974
0.2999
0.2935
0.2846
0.2813
0.2647
0.2473
0.2367
0.2241
0.2178
0.2213
0.2327
0.2404
0.2367
0.2355
0.2300
0.2245
0.2183
0.2056
0.1887
0.1814
0.1847
0.1993
0.2123
0.2206
0.2216
0.2235
80
-------
SUMMARY
Comparison of physical and hydraulic properties of minesoils with contiguous
natural soils indicated that surface mining and reclamation operations have had
a significant effect on the particle-size distribution. The minesoils studied
had a greater percentage of rock fragments but less sand and clay than natural
soils due to lower organic matter and vermiculite contents. Average bulk
densities of the minesoils were greater than that of adjacent soils.
The average amount of water retained by the A and B horizons of the natural
soils at any matric potential was greater than that retained by the A horizons
of the minesoils. The natural soils also retained more water between -1/3 and
-15 bars than did the minesoils. Evapotranspiration from the minesoil was
approximated by A-pan results.
Single-ring-infiltrometer data and saturated hydraulic conductivity values
of minesoils varied considerably. Use of a small plot to determine unsaturated
hydraulic conductivity indicated that water flow followed voids present in the
minesoil.
81
-------
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. L. 1963. An improved pretreatment for mineralogical analysis of
samples containing organic matter. Clays and Clay Minerals. 10:380-388.
ASTM. 1971. Standard methods of coal analyses. Am. Soc. for Testing
Materials, Philadelphia, Pa.
Baker, D. E., and L. Chesin. 1975. Chemical monitoring of soils for environmental
quality and animal and human health. Adv. Agron. 27:305-374.
Barnhisel, R. I., and H. F. Massey. 1969. Chemical, mineralogical and physical
properties of eastern Kentucky acid forming coal spoil materials. Soil Sci.
108:367-372.
Baver, L. D., W. H. Gardner, and W. R. Gardner. 1972. Soil physics. 4th Edition.
I
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y.
i
Bertram, G. E. 1973. Field tests for compacted rockfill. pp 1-20. In R. C.
Hirshfield and S. J. Poules (ed.) Embankment-Dam Engineering Casagrande
Volume. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y.
Black, C. A. 1968. Soil plant relationships. 2nd Edition. John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., New York, N. Y.
Blake, G. R. 1965. Bulk density. _In C. A. Black (ed.) Methods of Soil Analyses,
Part I. Agronomy. 9:374-390. Am. Soc. of Agron., Madison, Wis.
Brasher, B. R., D. P. Franzmeir, V. Valassis, and S. E. Davidson. 1966. Use of
saran resin to coat natural soil clods for bulk density and water retention
measurements. Soil Sci. 101:108.
Bruce, R. R. 1972. Hydraulic conductivity evaluation of the soil profile from
soil water retention relations. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 36:555-561.
Buol, S. W., F. D. Hole, and R. J. McCracken. 1973. Soil genesis and
classification. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.
Caspall, F. C. 1975. Soil development on surface mine spoils in western Illinois.
_In Third Symp. on Surface Mining and Reclamation, National Coal Association,
Volume II. pp 221-228.
82
-------
Cassel, D. K. 1974. "In situ" unsaturated soil hydraulic conductivity for selected
North Dakota soils. North Dakota Agr. Expt. Stn. Bull. No. 494.
Cassel, D. K., and M. D. Sweeney. 1974. "In situ" soil water holding capacities of
selected North Dakota soils. North Dakota Agr. Expt. Stn. Bull. No. 495.
Chao, T. T. , M. E. Harward, and S. G. Fang. 1963. Cationic effects of sulfate
adsorption by soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 27:35-38.
Ciolkosz, E. J., R. L. Cunningham, and G. W. Petersen. 1979. Characteristic
interpretations and uses of Pennsylvania minesoils. Pa. Agr. Expt. Stn.
Prog. Report. (In Press).
Ciolkosz, E. J., G. W. Petersen, R. L. Cunningham, and R. P. Matelski. 1975.
Soils developed from colluvium in the ridge and valley area of
Pennsylvania. 1973 Int. Geobotany Conf. Proc., University of Tennessee
Press. (In Press).
Ciolkosz, E. J., and R. M. Pletcher. 1974. Laboratory procedures of the
Pennsylvania State University soil characterization laboratory. The
Pennsylvania State University Agronomy Series I No. 36.
Coleman, G. B. 1951. A study of water infiltration into spoil banks in central
Pennsylvania. Unpublished M.S. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University,
University Park, Pa.
Crompton, E. 1967. Soil formation. In Selected Papers on Soil Formation and
Classification. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Spec. Pub. No. 1.
Davidson, J. M., D. R. Nielsen, and J. W. Biggar. 1966. The dependence of soil
water uptake and release upon the applied pressure increment. Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. Proc. 30:298-304.
ElBoushi, I. M. 1966. Geologic interpretations of recharge through coarse gravel
and broken rock. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Stanford University, Stanford,
Ca.
83
-------
Farmer, E. E. , and B. Z. Richardson. 1976. Hydrologic and soil properties of coal
mine overburden piles in southeastern Montana. In Fourth Symposium on Surface
Mining and Reclamation, National Coal Association, pp 120-130.
Glass, G. B. 1972. Geology and mineral resources of the Philipsburg 7-1/2 minute
quadrangle, Centre and Clearfield Counties, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Geol.
Survey 4th Series. Dept. of Environ. Res., Harrisburg, Pa.
Grim, R. E. 1953. Clay mineralogy. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Grim, E. C., and R. D. Hill. 1974. Environmental protection in surface mining of
coal. Environmental Protection Technology Series, EPA-670/2-74-093.
Grossman, R. B., B. R. Brasher, D. P. Franzmeier, and J. L. Walker. 1968. Linear
extensibility as calculated from natural-clod bulk density measurements.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc^ 32:570-573.
Grube, W. E., Jr., R. M. Smith, J. C. Sencindiver, and A. A. Sobek. 1974. Over-
burden properties and young soils in mined lands, jn Second Research and
Applied Technology Symposium on Mined-land Reclamation, Bituminous Coal
Res., Inc., Monroeville, Pa.
Hill, D. E., and J. -Y. Parlange. 1972. Wetting front instability in layered
soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 36:697-702.
Holtan, H. N., C. B. England, G. P. Lawless, and G. A. Schumaker. 1968. Moisture-
tension data for selected soils on experimental watersheds. USDA Agr. Res.
Service Publ. ARS 41-144.
Jackson, M. L. 1958. Soil chemical analysis—advanced course. University of
Wisconsin, Dept. of Soils, Madison, Wis.
Jackson, M. L. 1964. Chemical composition of soil. In F. E. Bear (ed.) Chemistry
of the Soil. 2nd Edition. Am. Chem. Soc. Monograph Ser. No. 160.
Jones, J. N. , Jr., W. H. Arminger, and 0. L. Bennett. 1975. Forage grasses aid
the transition from spoil to soil. T_n Third Symp. on Surface Mining and
Reclamation, National Coal Association, Volume II. pp 185-194.
84
-------
Kilmer, V. J., and L. T. Alexander. 1949. Methods for making mechanical analyses
of soils. Soil Sci. 68:15-24.
Klute, A. 1973. Soil water flow theory and its application in field situations.
In R. R. Bruce, K. W. Flack, H. M. Taylor (ed.) Field Soil Water Regime.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Spec. Publ. No. 5, Madison, Wis. pp 9-35.
Massey, H. F., and R. I. Barnhisel. 1972. Copper, nickel and zinc released from
acid coal mine spoil materials of eastern Kentucky. Soil Sci. 113:207-212.
McCormack, D. E. 1974. Soil reconstruction: for the best soil after mining. In
Second Research and Applied Technology Symposium on Mined Land Reclamation,
National Coal Association, pp 150-161.
Mehlich, A. 1948. Determination of cation and anion exchange properties of soils.
Soil Sci. 66:429-445.
Mehuys, G. R. , L. H. Stolzy, J. Letey, and L. V. Weeks. 1975. Effect of stones
on the hydraulic conductivity of relatively dry desert soils. Soil Sci.
Soc. Am. Proc. 39:37-42.
Miller, D. E. 1973. Water retention and flow in layered soil profiles. In R. R.
Bruce et al. (ed.) Field Soil Water Regime. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Spec. Publ.
No. 5, Madison, Wis. pp 107-117.
Nielsen, D. R., J. M. Davidson, J. W. Biggar, and R. J. Miller. 1964. Water
movement through Panoche clay loam soil. Hilgardia. 35:491-506.
Perkin-Elmer Corporation. 1968. Analytical methods for atomic absorption
spectrophotometry. Norwalk, Conn.
Philip, J. R. 1975. Stability analysis of infiltration. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Proc. 39:1042-1049.
Plass, W. T., and W. G. Vogel. 1973. Chemical properties and particle size
distribution of 39 surface-mine spoils in southern West Virginia.
Northeast For. Expt. Stn. Res. Paper NE-276.
Raats, P. A. C. 1973. Unstable wetting fronts in uniform and non-uniform soils.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 37:681-685.
85
-------
Rankama, K., and T. G. Sahama. 1950. Geochemistry. The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, 111.
Research Committee on Coal Mine Spoil Revegetation in Pennsylvania. 1971. A guide
for revegetating bituminous strip-mine spoils in Pennsylvania.
Richards, L. A. 1965. Physical conditions of water in soil. In C. A. Black (ed.)
Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I. Agron. 9:128-152. Am. Soc. Agron.,
Madison, Wis.
Ritchie, J. T. 1972. Model for predicting evaporation from a row crop with
incomplete cover. Water Resour. Res. 8:1204-1213.
Rogowski, A. S., and E. L. Jacoby, Jr. 1977. Assessment of water loss patterns
with microlysimeters. Agron. J. 69:419-424.
Russell, E. W. 1961. Soil conditions and plant growth. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.,
New York, NY. \
Shaykewich, C. F. 1970. Hydraulic properties of disturbed and undisturbed soils.
Can. J. Soil Sci. 50:431-437.
Smith, R. M. 1971. Properties of coal overburden that influence revegetation and
economic use of minesoils. Proceedings of the Revegetation and Economic Use
of Surface-mined Land and Mine Use Symposium. West Virginia University.
Smith, R. M., E. H. Tryon, and E. H. Tyner. 1971. Soil development on mine
spoil. West Virginia Agr. Expt. Stn. Bull. 604T.
Sobek, A. A., R. M. Smith, W. A. Schuller, and J. R. Freeman. 1976. Overburden
properties that influence minesoils. In Fourth Symposium on Surface Mining
and Reclamation. National Coal Association, pp 153-159.
Soil Survey Staff. 1951. Soil Survey Manual U.S. Dept. Agr. Handb. No. 18.
U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington, D. C.
Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. U.S. Dept. Agr. Handb. No. 436.
U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington, D. C.
86
-------
Troxler Electronic Laboratories, Inc. 1970. 240 Series COMPAQ, Surface moisture-
density gauge manual. Raleigh, N. C.
Unger, P. W. 1975. Water retention by core and sieved samples. Soil Sci. Soc.
Am. Proc. 39:1197-1200.
Van Voast, W. A. 1974. Hydrologic effects of strip coal mining in southeastern
Montana—Emphasis: One year mining near Decker. Montana College of
Mineral Science Technology.
Verma, T. R. , and J. L. Thames. 1975. Rehabilitation of land disturbed by surface
mining coal in Arizona. J. of Soil and Water Conserv. 30:129-132.
Young, J. L. , and M. R. Lindbeck. 1964. Carbon determination in soils and organic
materials with a high frequency induction furnace. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc.
28:377-381.
Young, K. K., and J. D. Dixon. 1966. Overestimation of water content at field
capacity from sieved sample data. Soil Sci. 101:104-107.
Young, R. A., and C. A. Onstad. 1976. Predicting particle-size composition of
eroded soil. Trans. Am. Soc. Agr. Eng. 19:1071-1075.
Yuan, T. L. 1959. Determination of exchangeable hydrogen in soils by a titration
method. Soil Sci. 88:164-167.
87
-------
APPENDIX A
PROFILE DESCRIPTIONS FOR SOILS AND MINESOILS
88
-------
Soil and Minesoil Profile Descriptions
Soil pits 1 through 8 were located within a 4 ha site. Pits 1 through 4 were
located in undisturbed soils and pits 5 through 8 were located in minesoils. The
site is located 1.2 km northeast of Kylertown in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania.
The area is in the Pittsburgh Plateau section of the Appalachian Plateaus
Province; the geologic system is Pennsylvanian. Sedimentary bedrock is horizontal
to gently folded. Coal seams in the immediate vicinity are the Middle and Lower
Kittanning (C & B) of the Allegheny group. The mean elevation is 450 m and the
climate is humid temperate. All colors were described moist.
89
-------
Hazleton Silt Loam, Taxadjunct, Pit 1
This pedon is classified as a member of the coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Family
of Typic Dystrochrepts, it is well drained and has developed in gray acid sand-
stone residuum. Site characteristics include: oak and hemlock native vegetation,
no erosion, moderate to moderately rapid permeability!, north 30 degrees east
aspect and a 6% slope. This pedon was described by J. Hallowich, R. Pennock, Jr.,
and T. Pedersen on May 4, 1976.
01—8-3 cm, Deciduous leaf litter mainly from oaks.
02—3-0 cm, Black (SYR 2.5/1) decomposed and partially decomposed oak leaf litter.
Al—0-3 cm, Very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam; moderate very fine
granular structure; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; very strongly acid
(pH 4.8); clear wavy boundary.
A2—3-10 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) silt loam to loam; weak medium platy
structure parting to moderate fine and medium subangular blocky; friable,
nonsticky, nonplastic; many medium and fine roots; medium acid (pH 5.6);
clear smooth boundary.
B21—10-41 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) loam; weak medium platy structure parting
to moderate fine and medium subangular blocky; friable, nonsticky, slightly
plastic; many fine roots; 7% sandstone fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.4);
gradual smooth boundary.
B22t—41-74 cm, Brown (7.5YR 5/4 and 7.5YR 4/4) channery loam; weak coarse sub-
angular blocky structure, friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; few thin clay
films; some bridging of sand grains; abundant fine roots; 15% sandstone
fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.4); clear wavy boundary.
B3t—74-109 cm, Strong brown (7.SYR 5/8) and brown (7.SYR 4/4) channery silt loam
and light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) weathered sandstone; weak coarse sub-
angular blocky structure; firm, nonsticky, nonplastic; few roots below 74
cm; few thin patches in pores and bridging sand grains; 40% sandstone
fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.2); gradual wavy boundary.
90
-------
C—109-176 cm, Reddish yellow (7.SYR 6/6) very channery silt loam, loamy sand around
rock fragments; weak medium subangular blocky structure and single grained
around rock fragments; firm, nonsticky, nonplastic; 80% sandstone fragments;
strongly acid (pH 5.2); gradual wavy boundary.
R—176-203 cm, Pale red (2.SYR 6/2) bedded sandstone.
Dekalb Silt Loam, Taxadjunct, Pit 2
This pedon is a member of the coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Family of Typic
Dystrochrepts, it is well drained and has developed in gray acid sandstone residuum.
Site characteristics include: oak and hemlock native vegetation, no erosion, moderate
permeability, a north 30 degrees east aspect and a 6% slope. This pedon was described
by J. Hallowich, R. Pennock, Jr., and T. Pedersen on May 4, 1976.
!
01—8-5 cm, Deciduous leaf litter mainly from oaks.
02—5-0 cm, Black (SYR 2.5/1) decomposed and partially decomposed oak leaf litter.
Al—0-10 cm, Very dark gray brown (10YR 3/2) silt loam; moderate fine granular
structure; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 5% sandstone fragments; very
strongly acid (pH 4.8); clear smooth boundary.
B21—10-33 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) loam; weak, fine and moderate subangular
blocky structure; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 7% sandstone fragments;
strongly acid (pH 5.4); gradual wavy boundary.
B22—33-51 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) channery loam; moderate medium subangular
blocky structure; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 15% sandstone fragments;
strongly acid (pH 5.2); gradual wavy boundary.
B23—51-71 cm, Strong brown (7.SYR 5/6) channery loam; moderate medium subangular
blocky structure; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 40% sandstone fragments;
very strongly acid (pH 5.0); clear wavy boundary.
C—71-74 cm, Reddish yellow (7.SYR 6/6) very channery loam; structureless massive;
firm to friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 60% sandstone fragments; very strongly
acid (pH 4.8); clear wavy boundary.
91
-------
R—74-122+ cm, Pale red (2.SYR 6/2) bedded sandstone.
Cookport Channery Loam, Taxadjunct, Pit 3
This pedon is classified as a member of the coarse—loamy, mixed, mesic Family
of Aquic Fragiudult; it is moderately well drained and has developed in sandstone
residuum. Site characteristics include: white pine and black cherry vegetation,
slow permeability, north 5 degrees east aspect and a 14% slope. This pedon was
described by J. Hallowich, A. Topolanchik, R. Pennock, Jr., and T. Pedersen on
May 6, 1976.
Al—0-15 cm, Overburden material (not described). Soil very firm with thick platy
structure due to heavy machine activity; very strongly acid (pH 4.6); diffuse
irregular boundary.
A2—15-43 cm, Light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) channery loam; weak fine and medium
angular blocky structure; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; abundant roots to
43 cm; 20% rock fragments; very strongly acid (pH 4.8); gradual wavy boundary.
Bl—43-66 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) channery loam; moderate medium angular
blocky; friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; 25% rock fragments;
strongly acid (pH 5.2); clear wavy boundary.
Exit—69-91 cm, Dark brown (7.SYR 4/4) channery loam; weak very coarse prismatic
structure parting to fine angular blocky; firm, slightly sticky, plastic;
few thin discontinuous clay films in pores and on ped faces, common fine
Mn concretions; few roots below 66 cm; 20% rock fragments; very strongly
acid (pH 4.8); gradual wavy boundary.
Bx2t—91-117 cm, Brown (7.SYR 4/4) clay loam; few fine distinct light brownish
gray (10YR 6/2) mottles; weak very coarse prismatic structure, parting to
weak medium subangular blocky; firm, slightly sticky, slightly plastic;
few thin discontinuous clay films in pores and on ped faces; 15% rock
fragments; very strongly acid (pH 5.0); gradual wavy boundary.
92
-------
Bx3t—117-135 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) silt loam; many medium distinct strong
brown (7.SYR 5/6) and light brownish gray (10YR 6/2) mottles; weak very coarse
prismatic structure parting to weak coarse subangular blocky; firm, sticky,
plastic; few thin discontinuous clay films in pores and on ped faces; 10% rock
fragments; very strongly acid (pH 5.0); clear wavy boundary.
Bx4t—135-167+ cm, Dark brown (10YR 3/3) very channery loam; few medium distinct
light brownish gray (10YR 6/2) mottles; weak very coarse prismatic structure
parting to weak coarse subangular blocky; very firm, nonsticky, slightly
plastic; few thick clay films discontinuous in pores and on ped faces; prism
face light brownish gray (10YR 6/2) matrix strong brown (7.SYR 5/6); 70% rock
fragments; very strongly acid (pH 5.0).
Hazleton1 Channery Silt Loam, Taxadjunct, Pit 4
This pedon is classified as a member of the coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Family
of Typic Dystrochrepts, it is moderately well drained and has developed in sandstone
residuum. Site characteristics include: white pine and black cherry natural
vegetation, moderate permeability, north 5 degrees east aspect and a 12% slope.
This profile was described by J. Hallowich, A. Topolanchik, R. Pennock, Jr., and
T. Pedersen on May 6, 1976.
Al—0-8 cm, Dark gray brown (10YR 4/2) channery silt loam; moderate very thin platy
structure parting to weak very fine granular; friable, slightly sticky,
plastic; many roots; 15% rock fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.2); clear wavy
boundary.
A2—8-20 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) channery silt loam; moderate very thin and
thin platy structure parting to weak very fine and fine subangular blocky;
friable, sticky, plastic; abundant roots; 15% rock fragments; very strongly
acid (pH 5.0); clear wavy boundary.
B21t—20-48 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) channery silt loam; weak fine and medium
subangular blocky structure; friable, sticky, plastic; few thin clay films in
93
-------
pores; few roots; 15% rock fragments; very strongly acid (pH 4.8); gradual
irregular boundary.
B22t—48-74 cm, Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) channery silt loam; few fine faint
mottles; moderate fine subangular blocky structure; firm, slightly sticky,
slightly plastic; thin discontinuous clay films in pores and on ped faces;
few fine and medium Mn concretions; few roots; 15% rock fragments; very
strongly acid (pH 4.8); gradual irregular boundary.
B23t—74-94 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/8) channery silt loam; moderate fine sub-
angular blocky structure; friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; thin
discontinuous (thick in places) clay films in pores and on ped faces and on
coarse fragments; few roots; 15% rock fragments; very strongly acid (pH 4.8);
abrupt wavy boundary.
IIC1—94-125 cm, Black (N 2/0) very channery silt loam; weathered coal; structureless,
massive, friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; few roots; 75% rock fragments; abrupt
irregular boundary.
IIIC2—125-183+ cm, Light gray (10YR 6/1) and light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) very
channery silt loam varigated with strong brown (7.SYR 5/8); structureless,
massive; very friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 90% rock fragments; very strongly
acid (pH 4.8).
Minesoil Very Channery Loam, Pit 5
This pedon is classified as a loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic member of the Udorthen
great group and is well drained. Site characteristics include: grass and legume
vegetation, slight erosion, moderate permeability, northeast aspect and a 5% slope.
This pedon was described by E. J. Ciolkosz and T. Pedersen on June 9, 1976.
Ap—0-20 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) very channery loam and dark yellowish brown
(10YR 4/4) very channery loam; moderate medium platy parting to weak very fine
subangular blocky structure and weak fine subangular blocky structure; friable
to firm, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; many very fine grass roots
94
-------
predominantly parallel to plates on ped faces and through some plates to 3 cm,
common, very fine fibrous roots flattened along coarse fragments to 20 cm; 55%
rock fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.2); abrupt wavy boundary.
Cl—20-36 cm, Dark brown (10YR 3/3) very channery sandy loam; structureless, massive;
friable, slightly sticky, nonplastic; few very fine roots on surface of coarse
fragments; 65% rock fragments; very strongly acid (pH 5.0); gradual wavy boundary.
C2—36-56 cm, Dark brown (10YR 3/3) very channery sandy loam, structureless, massive,
friable, slightly sticky, nonplastic; no roots; 65% rock fragments; very strongly
acid (pH A.8); diffuse smooth boundary.
C3—56-74 cm, Dark brown (10YR 3/3) very channery sandy loam; structureless, massive;
firm, slightly sticky, nonplastic; 65% rock fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.2);
clear wavy boundary.
C4—74-114 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) very channery sandy loam; structureless,
massive; firm, slightly sticky, nonplastic; 65% rock fragments; strongly acid
(pH 5.2); gradual wavy boundary.
C5—114-152 cm, Dark brown (10YR 4/3) very channery loamy sand; structureless, massive;
friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 75% rock fragments; strongly acid (pH 5.4).
Minesoil Very Channery Loam, Pit 6
This pedon is classified as a loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic member of the Udorthent
great group and is well drained. Site characteristics include: grass and legume
vegetation, slight erosion, moderate permeability, northeast aspect and an 11% slope.
This pedon was described by E. J. Ciolkosz and T. Pedersen on June 9, 1976.
Ap—0-13 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) very channery silt loam; moderate fine granular
and weak very fine subangular blocky; friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic;
many very fine fibrous grass roots, on and through weakly developed granules,
roots decreased in number below 12 cm; 55% rock fragments; medium acid (pH 6.0);
abrupt wavy boundary.
95
-------
AC—13-28 cm, Dark brown (10YR 4/3) very channery sandy loam; weak very fine sub-
angular blocky to structureless, massive; friable to firm, slightly sticky,
slightly plastic; many very fine roots flattened between structural units,
roots concentrated on, around, and below coarse fragments to 20 cm; common
very fine roots in and around pockets associated with coarse fragments, few
roots penetrating massive material to 25 cm; 55% rock fragments; strongly
acid (pH 5.2); gradual wavy boundary.
Cl—28-53 cm, Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) very channery sandy loam;
structureless, massive; firm, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; few
very fine roots to 41 cm, no roots below 41 cm; 55% rock fragments;
very strongly acid (pH 5.0); clear wavy boundary.
C2—53-84 cm, Brown (7.SYR 5/4) very channery loamy sand; structureless, massive;
friable, nonsticky, nonplastic; 85% rock fragments; very strongly acid
(pH 4.8); gradual irregular boundary.
C3—84-152 cm, 100% rock fragment, about 15-20% void space.
Minesoil Very Shaly Loam, Pit 7
This pedon is classified as a loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic member of the
Udorthent great group and is well drained. Site characteristics include: grass
vegetation, moderate erosion, moderate permeability, northeast aspect and a 9%
slope. This pedon was described by E. J. Ciolkosz and T. Pedersen on June 9, 1976.
Apl—0-10 cm, Dark brown (7.5YR 3/2) very shaly loam; weak fine subangular blocky;
friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; many very fine grass and clover
roots, roots flattened on sandstone fragments; 55% rock fragments; very
strongly acid (pH 4.6); abrupt broken boundary.
Ap2—10-31 cm, Dark brown (10YR 4/3) very shaly sandy loam; weak fine subangular
blocky to structureless, massive; friable to firm, slightly sticky, slightly
plastic; one fine tap root extending to 13 cm, common very fine roots
flattened between ped faces and in pores, few roots on shale fragments to
96
-------
13 cm, few very fine roots, one very fine root extending to 33 cm on ped faces
and surfaces of coarse fragments; 55% rock fragments; extremely acid (pH 4.4);
abrupt broken boundary.
Cl—31-51 cm, Grayish dark brown (10YR 4/2) very shaly sandy loam; structureless,
massive; firm, slightly sticky, nonplastic; no roots; 55% rock fragments;
extremely acid (pH 4.2); gradual wavy boundary.
C2—51-66 cm, Very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) very shaly loamy sand; structureless,
massive; friable; nonsticky, nonplastic; 70% rock fragment 5% voids; extremely
acid (pH 4.4); clear wavy boundary
C3—66-127 cm, 100% rock fragment, 20% void space; few Fe 0_ coatings, few gypsum
crystals, clear wavy boundary.
C4—127-152 cm, Very dark gray (10YR 3/1) very shaly loamy sand and black (N 2/0)
loamy sand coal bands; structureless, massive; friable, nonsticky, nonplastic;
65% rock fragments; extremely acid (pH 4.0).
Minesoil Very Shaly Sandy Loam, Pit 8
This pedon is classified as a loamy-skeletal, mixed, mesic member of the
Udorthent great group and is well drained. Site characteristics include: grass
and legume vegetation, slight erosion, moderate permeability, northeast aspect
and a 16% slope. This pedon was described by E. J. Ciolkosz and T. Pedersen on
June 9, 1976.
AC—0-18 cm, Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) very shaly sandy loam; weak fine granular
and weak very fine subangular blocky; friable, slightly sticky, slightly
plastic; many very fine to fine fibrous roots, and fine to medium tap roots
extending to 3 cm, common very fine to fine roots evenly distributed to 18
cm, nodules and lesions on roots; 50% rock fragments; medium acid (pH 5.6);
abrupt smooth boundary.
Cl—18-36 cm, Dark brown (10YR 4/3) very shaly sandy loam; structureless, massive;
friable to firm, slightly sticky, nonplastic; few very fine roots to 20 cm,
97
-------
tap roots becoming increasingly branched following ped faces and voids
associated with coarse fragments; 65% rock fragments, very strongly acid
(pH 5.0); gradual wavy boundary.
C2—36-58 cm, Dark brown (10YR 3/3) very shaly sandy loam; structureless, massive;
firm slightly sticky, nonplastic; no roots; 65% rock fragments; very
strongly acid (pH 4.8); gradual wavy boundary.
C3—58-102 cm, Dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) very shaly sandy loam; structureless,
massive; firm, slightly sticky, nonplastic; 65% rock fragments; extremely
acid (pH 4.4); gradual wavy boundary.
C4—102-145 cm, Very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) with bands of dark yellowish
brown (10YR 4/4) very shaly loam; structureless, massive; firm, slightly
sticky, slightly plastic; some very fine roots at 124 cm; 65% rock
fragments; very strongly acid (pH 4.6); clear irregular boundary.
C5—145-183+ cm, Dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) with bands of dark yellowish brown
(10YR 4/4) very shaly loamy sand; structureless, massive; firm, nonsticky,
nonplastic; 90% rock fragments; 5% fines; strongly acid (pH 5.2).
98
-------
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PEDONS DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX A
99
-------
TABLE B-l. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 1
Coarse
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
Horizon
Al
A2
B21
B22t
B3t
C
>76
76-
19
10.6
5.6
11.5
7.3
25.0
29.5
Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
19- 4.7-
4.
4.
6.
8.
10.
9.
22.
7 2.0
1 8.5
5 11.0
8 11.9
9 15.8
3 10.0
7 5.2
Total
Wt.
23.2
23.1
32.2
33.9
14.3
57.4
Textural
Total Class
Vol
17.3
12.6
13.6
14.4
16.9
23.8
Lab Field
SIL
SIL
L
L
FSL
FSL
SIL
SIL
L
L
SIL
SIL
Total
Bulk
Density
(g/cm3)
0.88
1.39
1.78
1.92
2.07
Particle
Size
Distribution (mm) (%
Sand
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
2.0-
1.0
7.3
9.4
11.5
11.5
1.1
2.3
1.0- 0.5-
0.5 0.25
5.0 6.7
4.6 7.9
5.5 10.0
7.3 11.0
2.9 23.7
3.6 23.3
0.25-
0.10
9.7
10.2
11.2;
10.8
22.0
27.1
0.10- 0
0.07 0
3.
2.
2.
2.
6.
3.
1
8
8
6
3
3
.07-
.05
2.9
2.4
2.8
2.4
2.6
2.9
Silt
0.02- 0
0.002 0
36.3
33.2
24.4
25.2
19.4
15.9
.005-
.002
9.5
9.8
8.0
7.0
6.3
7.1
<2mm)
Sand
2.0-
0.05
34.8
37.3
43.9
45.6
58.7
62.5
Silt
0.05-
0.002
55.6
51.1
42.0
40.3
29.7
23.4
Clay
<
0.002
9.6
11.6
14.1
14.1
11.7
14.1
Moisture (%) Retained
Bulk Density (g/cmJ)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1/3 Atm
Entire
Clod
0.83
1.38
1.69
1.84
1.95
Moisture
<2mm in
Clods
0.82
1.31
1.59
1.70
1.87
Dry
1/3 Atm
<2rnm in >2mm in
Clods
1.02
1.32
1.66
1.73
2.02
Clods
1.
1.
2.
2.
2.
32
84
36
62
41
COLE
<2mm
0.027
0.015
0.017
0.025
Entire
Clod
26.1
20.6
15.6
13.1
10.6
15 Atm
<2mm in <2mm
Wt
at
1/3 to
15 Atm
cm/ cm
Clods Sieved (%) of Soil
24.
22.
19.
16.
12.
8 18.4
2 5.6
0 7.2
8 7.1
9 4.9
4.8
5.
12.
7.
6.
4.
6 0.046
7 0.177
8 0.155
4 0.123
5 0.093
100
-------
TABLE B-2. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 1
Extractable Cations (Meq/100 g <2 mm material)
Base
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-3
3-10
10-41
41-74
74-109
109-176
Horizon
Al
A2
B21
B22t
B3t
C
Ca
1.9
0
0
0
0
0
Mg
0.7
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.2
Na
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
08
06
06
06
06
06
Total
K Bases
0.18 3.0
0.08 0.3
0.07 0.5
0.07 0.6
0.06 0.3
0.10 0.3
CEC
H (SUM)
40.1 43
14.7 15
12.7 13
15.6 16
12.7 13
8.9 9
.1
.0
.2
.2
.0
.2
Sat.
Al I
6.22
4.17
4.95
5.09
3.61
3.82
(%) Ca/Mg
6.9 2.7
2.3 0
3.2 0
3.5 0
2.0 0
3.5 0
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Water
4.8
4.7
4.8
5.0
4.8
5.0
PH
IN 0
.01M
Organic
Matter
KC1 CaCl- C(%) N(%)
2
3.7
3.9
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.4
4.3
4.3
6.27
2.13
.42
.32
.10
.09
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
346
064
040
037
048
026
Feo03
<*>
3.3
2.8
3.1
3.2
2.6
2.2
Clay Minerals
Mont Verm
45
40
15 30
15 20
5 15
(%) of
111
15
20
25
30
35
(<0.002
Kaol
40
35
35
35
45
mm material)
Int Qtz
tr
5
5
tr
-------
TABLE B-3. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 2
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Depth
cm
0-10
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
Horizon
Al
B21
B22
B23
C
Coarse
76-
>76 19
22.4
5.6 12.4
4.8 15.2
21.5
27.7
Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
19-
4.7
16.8
12.8
12.5
12.0
11.8
Textural
4.7- Total Total Class
2.0 Wt. Vol. Lab Field
2.5 41.7 41
6.9 37.7 16
5.8 38.3 16
7.0 40.5 17
6.3 45.8
.7 L SIL
.9 L L
.7 L CNL
.7 L CNL
L VCNL
Total
Bulk
Density
(g/cm3)
0.99
1.78
1.88
1.89
Particle Size
Distribution (mm) (% <2 mm)
Sand
No.
1
2
3
4
5
2.0-
1.0
2.0
3.8
4.0
3.4
2.4
1
0
3
3
4
4
4
.0- 0.5-
.5 0.25
.2 17.9
.6 20.4
.8 20.9
.7 19.8
.1 20.8
0.25- 0
0.10 0
i
7.9
14.6 \
13.7
6.7
14.2
.10- 0
.07 0
6.2
2.6
2.5
9.4
3.8
.07-
.05
1.8
2.2
2.0
2.3
3.1
Silt
0.02- 0
0.002 0
34.4
27.7
29.0
26.3
26.9
.005-
.002
10.8
6.9
7.2
8.0
8.2
Sand
2.0-
0.05
39.1
47.3
47.9
46.2
48.4
Silt
0.05-
0.002
46.7
38.8
39.0
40.9
41.4
Clay
<
0.002
14.1
13.8
13.1
12.9
10.2
•3
Moisture
(%) Retained at
Bulk Density (g/cmJ)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
1/3 Atm
Entire
Clod
1.00
1.71
1.79
1.81
Moisture
<2mm in
Clods
1.00
1.58
1.69
1.67
Dry
<2ram in
Clods
1.08
1.55
1.67
1.64
>2mm in
Clods
1.00
2.23
2.29
2.38
COLE
<2mm
0.021
0.004
0.013
0.005
1/3
Entire
Clod
19.4
13.1
13.3
11.8
Atm
<2mm in
Clods
15.4
17.4
16.8
16.5
15 Atm
<2mm
Sieved
9.5
5.1
4.9
5.5
4.2
1/3 to
15
Wt.
(%)
3.4
7.7
7.4
6.6
Atm
cm/ cm
of Soil
0.035
0.137
0.138
0.124
102
-------
TABLE B-4. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 2
Extractable Cations (Meq/100 g <2 mm material)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Depth
cm
0-10
10-33
33-51
51-71
71-74
Horizon
Al
B21
B22
B23
C
Ca Mg
0 0.4
0 0.5
0 0.3
0 0.2
0 0.2
Na
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.07
0.07
K
0.14
0.07
0.08
0.06
0.05
Total CEC
Bases H /SUM)
0.7 31.5 32.2
0.7 11.0 11.7
0.4 11.0 11.4
0.4 11.0 11.4
0.4 9.5 9.9
Al
6.22
2.76
2.76
3.54
2.97
Base
Sat.
(%) Ca/Mg
2.1 0
5.7 0
3.8 0
3.2 0
3.6 0
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Water
5.0
5.1
5.0
5.0
4.9
pH
IN
KC1
3.6
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
0.01M
CaCl2
4.0
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.4
Organic
C(%)
3.64
.56
.43
.22
.17
Matter
N(%)
0.170
0.037
0.030
0.021
0.029
FeoOa
(%)
2.4
2.1
1.9
1.8
1.9
Clay Minerals (%) of
Mont Verm 111
tr 50 20
55 15
55 15
tr 50 20
tr 35 30
(<0.002
Kaol
30
30
25
30
35
mm material)
Int Qtz
tr
tr
5
tr
tr
-------
TABLE B-5. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 3
Coarse Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Depth
cm
0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
76- 19- 4.7-
Horizon
Al
A2
Bl
Bxlt
Bx2t
Bx3t
>76
135-167+ Bx4t
19 4
17.0 25
13.8 14
28.0 8
21.5 18
12 . 3 11
7.5 8
16.4 24
.7 2.0
.0 13.7
.9 9.8
.2 8.4
.2 10.0
.9 12.3
.0 13.5
.1 9.0
Total
Wt
55.
38.
44.
49.
36.
29.
49.
•
7
5
7
6
5
0
5
Total
Vol.
25.2
13.1
26.1
26.8
20.4
16.9
26.5
Textural
Lab
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
Class
Field
CNL
CNL
CNL
CNL
SIL
VCNL
Total
Bulk
Density
(g/cm3)
1.84
1.95
1.93
2.13
1.90
1.85
2.22
Particle Size Distribution
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2.0-
1.0
11.3
3.6
2.9
4.0
4.6
3.1
4.9
1.0- 0.5-
0.5 0.25
7.8 10.8
3.7 16.0
4.4 15.9
4.5 14.9
4.6 13.3
3.9 12.0
5.4 12.4
Sand
0.25-
0.1Q
5.7
13.5
15.5
12.0
11.3
5.5
10.4
0.10- 0
0.07 0
8.0
3.0
3.1
3.3
2.3
6.2
2.4
.07-
.05
3.5
2.9
3.2
2.7
2.1
2.0
2.6
0.02-
0.002
25.9
30.6
27.4
27.2
28.4
32.7
29.7
(mm)
Silt
0.
0.
(% <2
005-
002
7.9
9.2
7.3
6.8
6.3
7.5
7.9
mm)
Sand
2.0-
0.05
47.1
42.7
45.1
41.4
38.4
32.6
38.2
Silt
0.05-
0.002
37.5
44.0
42.2
44.3
43.4
47.4
44.4
Clay
<
0.002
15.4
13.3
12.7
14.3
18.2
20.0
17.6
Moisture (%)
Bulk Density
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1/3 Atm
Entire
Clod
1.76
1.79
1.91
2.08
1.82
1.76
2.18
Moisture
(g/cm3)
Dry
<2mm in <2mm in
Clods
1.52
1.63
1.66
1.89
1.69
1.68
2.10
Clods
1.63
1.72
1.71
1.85
1.79
1.72
1.87
>2mm in
Clods
2.21
2.93
2.44
2.43
2.47
2.44
2.38
COLE
<2mm
0.024
0.018
0.010
0.008
0.012
0.019
.021
1/3 Atm
Entire
Clod
10.
13.
10.
10.
8
0
8
2
13.7
15.8
9.9
15
Retained
Atm
<2mm in <2mm Wt.
Clods
18.7
17.8
18.4
16.2
17.7
18.5
15.3
Sieved (%)
6
5
5
6
7
8
.3 5.4
.1 7.8
.0 7.4
.5 4.9
.9 6.2
at
1/3 to
15 Atm
cm/ cm
of Soil
0.101
0.148
0.140
0.104
0.118
.6 7.1 0.130
0.114
104
-------
TABLE B-6. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 3
o
Ul
Extractable Cations (Meq/100 g <2 mm material)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Depth
cm
0-15
15-43
43-66
66-91
91-117
117-135
135-167+
Horizon
Al
A2
Bl
Exit
Bx2t
Bx3t
Bx4t
Ca Mg
0 0.6
0 0.3
0.7 1.3
1.1 1.3
1.6 1.1
1.5 1.3
0.6 1.2
Na
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.06
K
0.06
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.14
0.14
0.10
Total
Bases
0.7 16
0.4 12
2.1 6
2.6 7
3.0 10
3.0 10
2.0 9
H
.5
.7
.4
.2
.1
.1
.8
CEC
(SUM)
17.2
13.1
8.5
9.8
13.1
13.1
11.8
Al
4.17
2.76
.99
1.06
2.62
2.97
3.54
Base
Sat.
(%) Ca/Mg
4.1 0
3.2 0
25.0 0.5
26.8 0.8
22.8 1.5
22.9 1.2
17.0 0.5
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Water
4.0
4.6
5.0
5.2
5.1
4.9
4.9
PH
IN 0.01M
KC1 CaCl2
3.4 3.8
3.8 4.3
4.0 4.7
4.1 4.8
4.0 4.6
4.0 4.6
4.1 4.6
Organic
C(%)
1.53
1.52
.23
.24
.20
.34
.35
Matter
N(%)
0.123
0.057
0.030
0.022
0.029
0.027
0.037
Fe2°3
(%)
4.1
2.2
2.7
3.0
3.3
3.7
4.5
Clay
Mont
10
10
10
10
15
20
15
Minerals (%) of (<0.002
Verm 111
15
20
20
15
15
15
15
35
25
30
30
35
30
30
Kaol
40
45
40
45
35
35
40
mm material)
Int Qtz
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
-------
TABLE B-7. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 4
Coarse Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Depth
cm Horizon
0-8 Al
8-20 A2
20-48 B21t
48-74 B22t
74-94 B23t
94-125 IIC1
125-183+ IIIC2
76- 19-
>76 19 4.7
2.
2.
1.
2.
0.
4.
2 12.6
4 11.7
0 10.9
7 12.2
5 10.6
5 14.8
15.3
Total
Textural Bulk
4.7- Total Total Class Density
2.0 Wt. Vol. Lab Field (g/cm3)
19.2 34.1 15
21.4 35.5 15
22.2 34.2 13
23.8 38.8 15
23.4 34.5 14
11.9 31.2 13
19.8 35.1 14
.4 SIL CNSIL 1.57
.3 SIL CNSIL 1.82
.9 SIL CNSIL 1.85
.9 L CNSIL 1.86
.1 L VCNSIL 1.81
.7 SIL VCNSIL 1.45
.0 VCNSIL 2.01
Particle Size
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
2.0-
1.0
5.9
5.0
7.3
8.0
9.7
4.8
6.0
1.0- 0.5-
0.5 0.25
4.1 7.3
4.7 6.8
5.3 6.8
8.8 8.2
8.9 8.8
7.0 9.9
6.2 3.5
Sand
0.25-
0.10
3.4
4.6
4.7
5.7
0.7
11.5
2.2
Distribution (mm) (% <2
Silt
0.10- 0
0.07 0
3.0
1.9
1.7
2.3
7.2
5.1
1.0
.07-
.05
2.1
2.6
1.9
2.5
2.8
4.2
2.6
0.02- 0
0.002 0
41.6
41.7
35.9
31.1
28.8
29.2
21.0
.005-
.002
11.6
11.7
10.9
7.1
5.4
8.6
14.5
mm)
Sand
2.0-
0.05
25.7
25.6
27.8
35.4
38.0
42.5
21.4
Silt
0.05-
0.002
58.0
57.1
54.3
46.7
47.2
47.4
53.7
Clay
<
0.002
16.3
17.3
17.9
17.8
14.8
10.1
24.9
Bulk Density
1/3 Atm Moisture
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Entire
Clod
1.54
1.71
1.74
1.76
1.69
1.41
1.84
(8/cm3)
Dry
<2mm in <2mm in
Clods
1.36
1.62
1.64
1.62
1.59
1.25
1.82
Clods
1.40
1.67
1.71
1.68
1.67
1.39
1.98
>2mm in
Clods
2.22
2.32
2.45
2.43
2.44
2.28
2.51
COLE
<2mm
0.010
0.009
0.013
0.012
0.017
0.038
.029
Moisture
1/3 Atm
Entire
Clod
17.1
15.4
16.2
14.3
15.7
21.5
16.1
<2mm in
Clods
24.5
18.4
19.6
18.8
19.0
29.1
16.8
(%) Retained at
15 Atm
<2mm
Sieved
7.1
6.6
7.3
8.1
6.9
12.3
7.1
1/3
15
Wt.
to
Atm
cm/ cm
(%) of Soil
11.4
7.7
8.1
6.6
7.9
11.6
6.3
0.177
0.138
0.150
0.122
0.143
0.168
0.128
106
-------
TABLE B-8. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 4
Extractable Catipns (Meq/100 g
<2 mm
material)
Base
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Depth
cm
0-8
8-20
20-48
48-74
74-94
94-125
125-183+
Horizon
Al
A2
B21t
B22t
B23t
IIC1
IIIC2
Ca
0
0
0
0
0
0.8
0.4
Mg Na K
0.2 0
0.3 0
0.3 0
0.3 0
0.8 0
1.1 0
2.2 0
.06 0.11
.06 0.07
.06 0.07
.06 0.05
.06 0.07
.07 0.05
.06 0.07
Total
Bases
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.9
2.0
2.7
H
16.
13.
16.
15.
16.
59.
16.
CEC
(SUM)
7 17.1
9 14.3
2 16.7
9 16.3
5 17.4
2 61.2
2 18.9
Sat.
Al
2.97
3.82
4.95
5.94
5.38
7.07
3.54
(%'
2
2
2
2
5
3
14
) Ca/Mg
.3 0
.7 0
.8 0
.4 0
.3 0
.3 0.7
.2 0.2
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Water
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.1
5.1
5.2
PH
IN
KC1
4.0
3.9
3.9
4.0
4.0
3.8
3.9
0.01M
CaCl2
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.4
4.5
4.4
4.5
Organic
f f*3/\
L* \fo )
6.25
.85
0.67
0.34
1.51
12.59
2.03
Matter
N(%)
0.101
0.058
0.058
0.047
0.057
0.347
0.059
Fe203
(%)
3.0
3.3
3.4
3.8
4.0
1.7
4.0
Clay
Mont
15
15
10
10
10
5
5
Minerals
Verm
25
25
25
20
10
5
(%) of (<0
.002
111 Kaol
20
20
25
30
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
50
55
mm material)
Int Qtz
tr
tr
tr
-------
TABLE B-9. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 5
Coarse Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
Horizon >76
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
33.3
43.9
19.3
32.2
29.5
32.2
76-
19
11.5
25.9
36.9
30.2
37.7
46.8
19-
4.7
10.9
10.2
17.0
13.3
9.9
8.1
4.7-
2.0
8.7
4.6
6.5
3.7
3.3
2.9
Total Total
Wt.
64.4
84.6
79.7
79.4
80.4
90.0
Vol.
25.7
Lab
L
SL
SL
SL
SL
SL
Total
Textural Bulk
Class
Field
VCNL
VCNSL
VCNSL
VCNSL
VCNSL
VCNLS
Density
(g/cm3)
2.19
Particle Size Distribution (mm)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
2.0- 1.
1.0 0.
4.0 4.
8.1 8.
8.2 9.
9.0 8.
8.3 7.
8.6 7.
0- 0.5-
5 0.25
9 11.1
3 22.8
0 23.8
3 22.7
7 23.5
5 25.2
Sand
0.25- 0
0.10 0
14.9 1
15.1
11.3
14.0
15.6
15.8
.10- 0
.07 0
6.7
3.8
6.9
4.5
3.4
4.4
.07-
.05
3.8
3.3
3.1
3.7
3.8
3.0
0.02-
0.002
25.4
16.4
15.3
14.7
15.6
13.9
Silt
0.005-
0.002
7.0
5.3
5.4
4.8
4.4
4.8
(% <2 mm)
Sand
2.0-
0.05
45
61
62
62
62
64
.5
.4
.3
.1
.3
.6
Silt
0.05-
0.002
38.3
26.6
27.2
25.4
24.3
22.2
Clay
<
0.002
16.3
12.0
10.5
12.4
13.3
13.2
Moisture (%)
Retained
Bulk Density (g/cnr3)
No.
1/3 Atm
Entire
Clod
Moisture
<2mm in
Clods
Dry
<2mm in >2mm
Clods
in
Clods
1/3
Atm
COLE Entire <2mm in
<2mm
Clod
Clods
15
Atm
<2mm Wt.
Sieved (%)
at
1/3 to
15 Atm
cm/ cm
of Soil
1.91
1.79
1.85
2.51
0.013 11.5
14.8
6.4 3.0
0.066
108
-------
TABLE B-10. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 5
Extractable Cations (Meq/100
g <2 mm
material)
Base
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
Horizon Ca
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
1.4
0
0.1
0
0
0
Mg
0.2
0.5
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
Total
Na K Bases
0.06 0.07 1.7
0.06 0.07 0.6
0.06 0.09 1.1
0.07 0.08 0.8
0.07 0.09 0.9
0.06 0.07 0.8
H
11.8
9.8
14.0
14.9
14.6
13.0
CEC
(SUM)
13.5
10.4
15.1
15.7
15.5
13.8
Al
3.
1.
,
1.
1.
»
54
41
99
34
27
71
Sat
(%)
12
6.
7.
5.
5.
5.
.
Ca/Mg
8 70
0 0
5 0.1
4 0
6 0
8 0
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Water
5.1
4.4
4.3
4.4
4.6
4.9
PH
IN
KC1
4.2
3.7
3,7
3.8
3.9
4.1
0.01M
CaCl2
4.6
4.1
4.2
4.2
4.3
4.7
Organic
c(X)
.39
1.81
1.68
1.87
1.51
1.43
Matter
Fe2°3
N(%) (%)
0.037 1.7
0.068 1.9
0.062 2.1
0.049 1.8
0.053 1.8
0.052 1.8
Clay
Mont
10
5
5
5
Minerals
Verm
15
10
10
10
5
5
(%) of
111
35
45
40
45
40
45
(<0.
002
Kaol
40
40
45
40
45
40
mm material)
Int Qtz
tr
5
5
tr
5
5
-------
TABLE B-ll. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 6
Coarse Fragment Distribution
(mm) CO
No.
1
2
3
4
Depth
cm
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
76-
Horizon >76 19
Ap
AC
Cl
C2
52
7
21
52
.1 10.2
.0 36.6
.7 37.5
.3 32.0
19-
4.7
8.7
19.8
16.7
7.0
4.7-
2.0
2.3
7.7
3.5
1.5
Total
Wt.
73.3
71.1
79.3
92.8
Total
Textural Bulk
Total Class Density
Vol. Lab Field (g/cm3)
L
SL
SL
VCNSIL
VCNSL
VCNSL
VCNLS
*
Particle
Size
Distribution
Sand
No.
1
2
3
4
2.0-
1.0
4.6
6.8
8.5
12.5
1.0-
0.5
4.9
7.6
8.5
10.1
0.5-
0.25
11.9
18.5
22.2
24.2
0.25- 0
0.10 0
1
15.2 :
13.0 1
8.3
10.1
.10-
.07
7.0
3.5
7.8
6.5
0.07-
0.05
4.0
3.6
3.5
3.2
(mm) (% <2
Silt
0.02-
0.002
24.3
18.9
15.8
12.6
0.005-
0.002
7.8
4.9
4.8
4.5
mm)
Sand
2.0-
0.05
47.6
53.0
58.8
66.5
Silt
0.05-
0.002
35.7
31.0
26.1
20.3
Clay
<
0.002
16.7
16.0
15.2
13.2
No clods were obtained from this profile.
110
-------
TABLE B-12. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 6
Extractable Cations (Meq/100 g <2 mm material)
No.
1
2
3
4
Depth
cm
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
Horizon Ca
Ap 5.1
AC 0.8
Cl 0.2
C2 0
Mg
0.4
1.0
0.7
0.6
Na
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.08
Total CEC
K Bases H (SUM)
0.08 5.6 16.8 13.8 0
0.10 2.0 19.2 22.4 1
0.07 1.1 7.5 21.2 2
0.06 0.7 5.9 8.6 1
Base
Sat.
Al (%) Ca/Mg
.14 25.1 12.7
.70 9.4 0.8
.62 12.4 0.3
.34 1.34 0
No.
1
2
3
4
Water
5.9
4.8
4.2
4.6
PH
IN 0.01M
KC1 CaCl2
5.0 5.7
4.1 4.7
3.7 4.0
3.9 4.4
Organic
C(%)
0.78
1.80
1.64
0.95
Matter
N(%)
0.058
0.048
0.059
0.026
Clay Minerals (%) of
Fe2t>3
(%) Mont Verm 111
1.2 10 15 30
1.7 10 40
1.6 tr 5 50
2.2 10 40
(<0.002 mm material)
Kaol Int Qtz
40 tr 5
45 5
45 tr
50
-------
TABLE B-13. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 7
Coarse Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-154
Horizon
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
76- 19-
>76 19 4.7
21.3 47
9.0 19
36 . 7 30
25.5 45
17
45
.0 9.3
. 6 16. 5
.0 14.4
.0 14.2
.7 40.7
.6 24.8
4.7-
2.0
4.6
9.0
5.3
4.2
7.6
10.5
Textural
Total Total
Wt . Vol . Lab
82
54
86
88
66
80
.2 33.97 L
.1
.4
.9
.0
.9
SL
SL
COSL
COSL
COSL
Class
Field
VSHL
VSHSL
VSHSL
VSHLS
VSHLS
Total
Bulk
Density
(g/cm3)
2.21
Particle Size
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
2.0-
1.0
9.8
6.6
13.3
18.1
18.9
22.1
1.0-
0.5
7.5
6.5
10.3
11.6
14.7
19.7
0.5-
0.25
14.3
19.9
12.7
13.7
14.5
12.5
Sand
0.25-
0.10
9.4
13.5
9.8
8.9
10.2
6.8
0.10- 0
0.07 0
6.3
3.8
3.6
5.6
4.2
1.9
Distribution (mm) (% <2 mm)
.07-
.05
4.4
3.3
3.8
3.6
3.2
1.5
0.
0.
20
19
19
17
15
16
Silt
02- 0
002 0
.3
.2
.7
.3
.3
.8
Sand
.005- 2.0-
.002 0.05
7.5 51.7
7.0 53.6
7.0 53.5
6.0 61.4
5.5 65.7
6.1 64.6
Silt
0.05-
0.002
31.9
28.9
32.7
28.1
25.5
26.1
Clay
<
0.002
16.4
17.5
13.8
10.5
8.8
9.3
o
Moisture (%)
Retained
Bulk Density (g/cmJ)
1/3 Atm Moisture
No.
1
Entire
Clod
1.81
<2mm in
Clods
1.
6
Dry
<2mm in
Clods
1.67
>2mm in COLE
Clods
2.42
<2mm
0.015
1/3 Atm 15
Entire
Clod
10.8
Atm
<2mm in <2mm Wt.
Clods Sieved (%)
16.5
6.6 1.8
at
1/3 to
15 Atm
cm/ cm
of Soil
0.039
112
-------
TABLE B-14. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 7
u>
Extractable Cations (Meq/100 g <2 mm
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-154
Horizon
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
Ca Mg
0 0.5
0 0.8
0 1.5
0.4 0.8
0 0.5
0 0.6
Na
0.06
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.05
K
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.02
0.02
Total
Bases H
0.6 12
0.9 12
2.0 14
0.9 15
0.6 11
0.6 20
material)
CEC
(SUM)
.7
.7
.3
.2
.8
.5
13.
13.
16.
16.
12.
21.
3 3
6 3
3 2
1 2
4 2
1 1
Al
.61
.11
.62
.76
.12
.84
Sat.
(%) Ca/Mg
4.4 0
6.7 0
12.4 0.3
5.3 0
4.9 0
3.1 0
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Water
4.4
4.4
4.0
4.1
3.8
3.6
pH
IN
KC1
3.7
3.9
3.5
3.5
3.3
3.1
0.01M
CaCl2
4.2
4.3
3.9
3.9
3.6
3.5
Organic
C(%)
4.37
2.49
6.88
11.40
19.90
22.83
Matter
N(%)
0.110
0.059
0.185
0.285
0.576
0.644
Fe203
(%)
2.3
2.2
2.3
1.9
2.4
3.1
Clay
Mont
tr
5
tr
5
5
5
Minerals
Verm
10
10
5
5
10
5
(%) of
111
40
40
45
40
40
40
(<0.002
Kaol
50
45
45
45
40
40
mm material)
Int Qtz
tr
tr
5
5
5
10
-------
TABLE B-15. PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 8
Coarse Fragment Distribution
(mm) (%)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
76- 19- 4.7-
Horizon >76
AC 26.7
Cl 44.3
C2 41.6
C3 31.7
C4 14.2
C5 22.0
19 4
23.7 13
12.2 14
20.0 15
25.4 18
29.7 22
22.0 21
.7 2.0
.3 4.1
.7 5.3
.4 4.0
.2 6.0
.1 5.6
.0 4.8
Total
Wt.
67.8
76.5
81.0
81.4
71.6
69.9
Total
Vol.
Textural
Total
Bulk
Class Density
Lab
SL
SL
L
L
L
L
Field
VSHSL
VSHSL
VSHSL
VSHSL
VSHL
VSHLS
(g/cm3)
*
Particle Size Distribution
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
2.0-
1.0
4.0
9.7
8.8
10.6
9.3
5.9
Sand
1.0- 0.5- 0.25-
0.5 0.25 0.10
5.3 21.5 17.5
8.1 16.3 8.5
7.5 14.8 9.2
8.7 12.8 5.9
7.8 13.4 10.9
5.1 11.8 11.8
(mm) (%
Silt
0.10-
0.07
4.4
8.3
6.8
8.2
3.5
2.9
0.07-
0.05
2.3
3.7
3.5
3.7
3.0
3.6
0.02-
0.002
22.8
21.3
23.7
24.7
27.0
31.1
0.005-
0.002
7.3
7.2
6.0
7.6
8.7
8.7
<2 mm)
Sand
2.0-
0.05
55.1
54.8
50.6
50.0
48.0
41.1
Silt
0.05-
0.002
35.1
33.1
37.1
38.9
41.7
46.5
Clay
<
0.002
9.8
12.1
12.3
11.1
10.3
12.4
No clods were obtained from this profile.
114
-------
TABLE B-16. CHEMICAL AND MINERALOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION DATA FOR PIT 8
Extractable Cations (Meq/100 g <2 mm material)
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Depth
cm
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
Horizon Ca
AC
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
2.4
1.0
0.2
0.1
0
0
Mg
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
Na
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.07
K
0.07
0.08
0.08
0.07
0.07
0.09
Total CEC
Bases H (SUM)
3.3 4.0 7.3
2.0 18.8 20.8
0.9 11.2 12.1
0.7 13.0 13.7
0.6 13.3 13.9
0.6 19 . 2 19 . 8
Al
.14
1.91
2.62
2.76
3.61
5.09
Base
Sat.
f °/ \
\/o /
45.2
9.4
7.4
5.2
4.5
3.2
Ca/Mg
3.4
1.3
0.3
0.2
0
0
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Water
5.9
5.0
4.8
4.8
4.7
4.6
PH
IN
KC1
5.0
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
0.01M
CaCl2
5.8
4.8
4.6
4.6
4.5
4.4
Organic
C(%)
0.69
0.53
2.85
2.76
3.00
2.74
Matter
N(%)
0.050
0.070
0.112
0.075
0.101
0.112
Fe2°3
(%)
1.2
1.6
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.9
Clay Minerals (%) of
Mont Verm 111
5 30 20
5 10 45
10 15 35
5 15 35
5 20 35
10 15 30
(<0.002
Kaol
35
40
40
40
35
40
mm material)
Int
Qtz
10
tr
5
5
5
-------
APPENDIX C
ORGANIC CARBON (WALKLEY-BLACK) VALUES FOR SELECTED HORIZONS
116
-------
TABLE C-l. ORGANIC CARBON OF SELECTED HORIZONS DETERMINED
BY THE WALKLEY-BLACK METHOD
Pit
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Depth
cm
0-3
3-10
0-10
0-15
15-43
0-8
74-94
125-183
0-20
20-36
36-56
56-74
74-114
114-152
0-13
13-28
28-53
53-84
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-157
0-18
18-36
36-58
58-102
102-145
145-183
Horizon
Al
A2
Al
Al
A2
Al
B23t
IIIC2
Ap
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Ap
AC
Cl
C2
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
AC
Cl
C2
C3
C4
C5
Organic
Carbon
%
6.978
0.958
3.063
1.770
0.877
1.742
0.672
1.620
0.182
0.565
0.596
0.562
0.593
0.485
0.729
0.973
0.820
0.442
2.026
1.214
2.158
2.326
2.691
2.612
0.933
1.170
1.276
1.103
1.516
2.589
117
-------
APPENDIX D
SIZE DISTRIBUTION DATA FOR PEDONS DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX A
118
-------
TABLE D-l. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT I
VO
Horizon
Fraction
nun
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
> 254
Al
7.37
14.67
35.25
50.07
52.30
54.68
62.13
67.28
71.12
76.80
85.30
89.40
100
A2
8.92
16.46
34.45
48.22
50.07
52.22
60.06
66.14
69.68
76.90
87.90
94.40
100
B21
W f J-__
A rinsr
9.56
17.56
28.68
38.04
39.94
41.84
49.43
56.21
59.94
67.80
79.70
88.50
100
B22t
,
by wGlgnt
9.32
16.32
28.35
35.96
37.55
39.27
46.41
53.68
58.51
66.10
81.90
92.80
100
B3t
6.52
12.82
20.12
23.06
24.51
28.02
40.27
53.47
55.09
55.70
65.70
75.00
100
C
6.01
13.11
16.86
15.98
17.22
18.63
30.18
40.11
41.64
42.60
47.80
70.50
100
-------
TABLE D-2. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 2
Fraction
mm
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
g 2.0
4.7
19
76
254
>254
Al
8.22
14.52
28.28
35.45
36.50
40.11
44.72
55.16
57.03
58.30
60.80
77.60
100
B21
8.60
12.90
25.86
32.77
34.14
35.76
44.86
57.57
59.81
62.30
69.20
82.00
94.40
100
Horizon
B22
%C J _ _ — t J __1_ j_
r iner oy weignc
8.08
12.52
25.97
32.14
33.37
34.91
43.36
56.26
59.22
61.70
67.50
82.00
95.20
100
B23
7.68
12.44
23.33
32.02
33.39
38.98
42.97
54.75
57.55
59.50
66.50
78.50
100
C
5.53
8.53
18.63
27.97
29.65
31.71
39.41
50.68
52.90
54.20
60.50
72.30
100
-------
TABLE D-3. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 3
Fraction
mm
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
> 254
Al
6.82
10.32
18.29
23.43
27.20
30.74
33.27
38.05
4.1.51
44.30
38.00
83.00
100
A2 .
8.18
13.84
27.00
35.24
37.02
38.87
47.17
57.01
59.29
61.50
71.30
86.20
100
Bl
7.02
11.06
22.18
30.36
32.13
33.84
42.41
51.20
53.63
55.30
63.70
71.90
99.9
100
Horizon
Bxlt
% finer by weight
7.21
10.64
20.92
28.48
29.84
31.50
37.55
45.06
47.33
50.40
60.40
78.60
100.1
Bx2t
11.56
15.56
29.59
39.12
40.45
41.91
49.09
57.54
60.46
63.50
75.80
87.70
100
Bx3t
14.20
19.53
37.42
47.85
49.27
53.67
57.58
66.10
68.87
71.00
84.50
92.50
100
Bx4t
8.89
12.88
23.89
31.31
32.62
33.83
39.08
45.34
48.07
50.50
59.50
83.60
100
-------
TABLE D-4. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 4
N>
Fraction
mm
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
> 254
Al
10.74
18.09
37.86
48.96
50.34
52.32
54.56
59.37
62.07
65.90
85.10
97.70
99.90
A2
11.16
18.71
38.06
47.99
49.67
50.89
53.86
58.25
61.28
64.50
85.90
97.60
100
B21t
11.78
18.95
35.40
47.51
48.76
49.88
52.97
57.45
60.93
65.80
88.00
98.90
99.90
Horizon
B22t
% finer by weight
10.89
15.24
29.93
39.47
41.00
42.41
45.90
50.92
56.30
61.20
85.00
97.20
99.90
B23t
9.69
13.23
28.56
40.61
42.44
47.16
47.62
48.27
54.10
65.50
88.90
99.50
100
IIC1
6.95
12.87
27.04
39.56
42.44
45.96
53.87
60.68
65.50
68.80
80.70
95.50
100
IIIC2
16.16
25.57
29.79
51.01
52.70
53.35
54.77
57.08
61.07
64.90
84.70
100
-------
TABLE D-5. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 5
to
LO
Horizon
Fraction
mm
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
> 254
Ap
5.80
7.15
13.70
19.43
20.78
23.17
28.47
32.42
34.17
35.60
44.30
55.20
66.70
100
Cl
1.85
2.36
4.07
5.95
6.46
7.04
9.37
12.88
14 . 16
15.40
20.00
30.20
56.10
100
C2
%f -! «»•>•••
liner
2.13
2.76
4.77
7.65
8.28
9.68
11.97
16.81
18.63
20.30
26.80
43.80
80.70
83.44
16.56
C3
by weight "
2.55
3.31
5.35
7.78
8.54
9.47
12.35
17.03
18.74
20,60
24.30
37.60
67.80
73.20
26.8
C4
2.61
3.36
5.56
7.37
8.14
8.78
11.84
16.44
17,95
19.60
22.90
32.80
70.50
100
C5
1.32
1.62
2.53
3.54
3.84
4.28
5.86
8.38
9.13
10.00
12.90
21.00
67.80
100
-------
TABLE D-6. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 6
S3
Fraction
ram
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
>254
AP
4.46
5.53
9.94
13.99
15.06
16.92
20.99
24.16
25.47
26.70
29.00
37.70
47.90
100
AC
4.62
5.66
4.34
13.59
14.62
15.63
19.39
24.74
26.93
28.90
36.60
56.40
93.00
100
Horizon
Cl
finsr by wsignt
3.15
3.87
6.15
8.55
9.28
10.89
12.61
17.20
18.96
20.70
24.20
40.90
78.40
100.1
C2
0.95
1.18
1.76
2.41
2.64
3.11
3.84
5.58
6.31
7.20
8.70
15.70
47.70
59.82
40.18
-------
TABLE D-7., PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 7
Horizon
Fraction
mm
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
>254
Apl
2.92
3.70
5.98
8.60
9.38
10.50
12.17
14.72
16.06
17.80
22.40
31.70
78.70
100
Ap2
8.03
9.54
15.14
21.30
22.81
24.56
30.76
39.89
42.87
45.90
54.90
71.40
91.00
91.78
8.22
ci
"/ fjr..
k rint
1.88
2.40
4.13
6.33
6.85
7.34
8.65
10.38
11.78
13.60
18.90
33.30
63.30
73.11
26.89
C2
jr by weight
1.17
1.57
2.82
4.29
4.69
5.31
6.30
7.82
9.11
11.10
15.30
29.50
74.50
76.36
23.64
C3
2.99
4.08
7.41
11.66
12.75
14.18
17.64
22.57
27.57
34.00
41.60
82.30
100
C4
1.78
2.07
4.11
6.65
6.94
7.30
8.60
10.99
14.75
19.10
29.60
54.40
100
-------
TABLE D-8. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION FOR PIT 8
Horizon
Fraction
mm
0.002
0.005
0.02
0.05
0.07
0.10
0.25
0.50
1.0
2.0
4.7
19
76
254
>254
AC
3.16
3.90
8.89
14.46
15.20
16.62
22.25
29.18
30.88
32.20
36.30
46.90
73.30
100
Cl
2.84
3.71
7.02
10.62
11.49
13.44
15.44
19.27.
21.17
23.50
28.80
43.50
55.70
100
C2
"' f-ir-lf
^ rint
2.34
3.01
6.37
9.39
10.06
11.35
13.10
15.91
17.33
19.00
23.00
33.40
58.40
100
C3
jr by weight
2.07
2.76
5.94
9.31
10.00
11.52
12.62
15.00
16.62
18.60
24.60
42.80
68.20
99.90
C4
2.93
3.78
8.98
14.77
15.62
16.62
19.71
23.52
25.73
28.40
34.00
56.10
85.80
100
C5
3.73
4.81
11.55
17.73
18.81
19.69
23.24
26.79
28.33
30.10
34.90
55.90
77.90
99.90
-------
APPENDIX E
MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PEDONS DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX A
127
-------
TABLE E-l. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 1
S3
c»
Matric Potential (cm
Depth Horizon
cm
0-3 Al
3-10 A2
10-41 B21
41-74 B22t
74-109 B23t
109-176 C
0
.9315*
.7218
.4372
.3427
.3839
.2694
.3604
.2478
.3582
.2120
.3531
.1666
-10
.8581
.6655
.4017
.3154
.3512
.2472
.3220
.2224
.3297
.1961
.3230
.1537
-20
.8551
.6632
.3808
.2993
.3168
.2239
.3179
.2197
.3048
.1822
.3006
.1442
-40
.8275
.6420
.3699
.2909
.2685
.1911
.2980
.2065
.2780
.1673
.2830
.1367
-60
.7833
.6080
,3495
.2752
.2387
.1709
.2713
.1889
.2651
.1601
.2695
.1310
-80
g/g
.7450
.5786
.3322
.2619
.2279
.1636
.2542
.1776
.2458
.1494
.2483
.1219
of water)
-100
.6585
.5122
.3031
.2395
.2241
.1610
.2349
.1648
.2250
.1378
.2222
.1108
-150
.6266
.4877
.2963
.2343
.2086
.1505
.2294
.1612
.2180
.1339
.2115
.1062
-240
.6050
.4711
.2884
.2282
.2071
.1495
-
.2107
.1248
.1959
.0996
-330
.5739
.4472
.2788
.2208
.2026
.1465
.2156
.1521
-1000
.5180
.4043
.2607
.2069
.1977
.1431
.2153
.1519
Uncorrected.
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-2. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 2
N>
VO
Matric Potential (cm of water)
Depth Horizon
cm
0-10 Al
10-33 B21
33-51 B22
51-71 B23
71-74 C
0
•7963*
.4760T
.4400
.2847
.4232
.2717
.3899
.2433
.3354
.1946
-10
.7506
.4493
.4118
.2671
.4097
.2633
.3701
.2316
.3297
.1915
-20
.6808
.4087
.3691
.2405
.3794
.2446
.3442
.2161
.3113
.1816
-40
.6071
.3657
.3280
.2149
.3334
.2163
.2982
.1888
.2902
.1701
-60
.5713
.3448
.2998
.1973
.3062
.1995
.2743
.1746
.2744
.1616
-80
g/g
.5255
.3181
.2709
.1793
.2887
.1887
.2585
.1652
.2629
.1553
-100
.4594
.2796
.2565
.1703
.2659
.1746
.2498
.1600
.2457
.1460
-150
.4426
.2698
.2478
.1649
.2476
.1633
.2249
.1452
.2323
.1388
-240
.4265
.2604
.2377
.1586
.2398
.1585
.2111
.1370
.2194
.1318
-330
.2100
.1401
.1671
.1108
.1929
.1174
-1000
.1982
.1328
.1481
.0995
.1817
.1113
Uncorracted.
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-3. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 3
CO
o
Depth Horizon
cm
0-15 Al
15-43 A2
43-66 Bl
66-91 Exit
91-117 Bx2t
117-135 Bx3t
135-167+ Bx4t
0
.3595*
.1749T
.4623
.2952
.3965
.2318
.3994
.2152
.4133
.2769
.4023
.2938
.3436
.1875
-10
.3465
.1691
.4164
.2669
.3449
.2033
.3540
.1924
.3794
.2512
.3785
.2769
.3131
.1721
-20
.3186
.1568
.3854
.2479
.3239
.1917
.3326
.1816
.3569
.2369
.3611
.2645
.2999
.1654
-40
.2845
.1417
.3460
.2236
.2943
.1753
.3019
.1661
.3207
.2139
.3144
.2314
.2582
.1443
-60
.2659
.1334
.3288
.2131
.2763
.1653
.2777
.1539
.2978
.1994
.2965
.2187
. 2402
.1353
-80
g/8
.2535
.1280
.3092
.2010
.2608
.1568
.2629
.1465
.2801
.1881
.2789
.2062
.2259
.1280
-100
.2416
.1227
.2982
.1942
.2477
.1495
.2538
.1419
.2707
.1821
.2654
.1966
.2201
.1251
-150
.2290
.1171
.2850
.1861
.2225
.1430
.2384
.1341
.2576
.1738
.2524
.1874
.2113
.1207
-240
.2199
.1131
.2740
.1794
.2225
.1356
.2220
.1258
.2460
.1665
.2290
.1707
.1834
.1066
-330
.1913
.1004
.2580
. 1695
.2089
.1281
.2076
.1186
.2354
.1597
.1841
.1389
.1436
.0856
-1000
.1797
.0953
.2497
.1644
.1939
.1198
.1974
.1134
.2229
.1518
.1764
.1334
.1285
.0788
Uncorrected.
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-4. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 4
Matric Potential (cm of water)
Depth Horizon
cm
0-8 Al
8-20 A2
20-48 B21t
48-74 B22t
74-94 B23t
94-125 IIC1
125-183+ IIIC2
0
*
.4715
.3203T
.3554
.2392
.4184
.2849
.4089
.2611
.3992
.2711
.4753
.3358
.3797
.2563
-10
.4246
.2894
.3263
.2204
.3790
.2589
.3721
.2386
.3533
.2411
.4229
.2997
.3204
.2178
-20
.3834
.2622
.3073
.2082
.3577
.2449
.3469
.2232
.3297
.2256
.4125
.2926
.3037
.2070
-40
.3197
.2202
.2733
.1862
.3098
.2134
.2997
.1943
.2927
.2014
.3826
.2720
.2736
.1874
-60
.2969
.2052
.2573
.1759
.2925
.2020
.2840
.1847
.2789
.1923
.3625
.2582
.2602
.1787
-80
.
g/g
.2838
.1966
.2494
.1708
.2780
.1925
.2819
.1833
.2642
.1827
.3471
.2476
.2511
.1728
-100
.2777
.1926
.2445
.1677
.2735
.1895
.2645
.1727
.2549
.1766
.3376
.2410
.2431
.1676
-150
.2703
.1877
.2376
.1632
.2669
.1852
.2603
.1702
.2502
.1735
.3342
.2387
.2255
.1562
-240
.2480
.1730
.2277
.1568
.2457
.1712
.2384
.1568
.2244
.1593
.3118
.2233
.2135
.1484
-330
.2253
.1580
.1940
.1351
.2344
.1638
.2316
.1526
.2108
.1477
.3038
.2178
.1912
.1339
-1000
.2153
.1514
.1887
.1317
.2301
.1610
.2205
.1458
.1997
.1405
.2901
.2083
.1826
.1284
Uncorrected
t
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-5. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 5
u>
Depth Horizon
cm
0-20 Ap
20-36 Cl
36-56 C2
56-74 C3
74-114 C4
114-152 C5
0
.4205*
.1678T
.3271
.0734
.3267
.0888
.3483
.0931
.3588
.0966
.3308
.0584
-10
.3494
.1425
.2856
.0678
.2786
.0790
.2828
.0798
.3009
.0846
.2771
.0531
-20
.3337
.1369
.2727
.0658
.2650
.0762
.2696
.0771
.2848
.0813
.2636
.0517
-40
.2975
.1241
.2337
.0598
.2249
.0681
.2289
.0688
.2395
.0720
.2231
.0477
-60
.2766
.1166
.2208
.0579
.2158
.0663
.2141
.0658
.2189
.0677
.2098
.0463
-80
_/_ „
8/g
.2650
.1125
.2128
.0566
.2017
.0634
-
-
-
-100
.2569
.1096
.2098
.0562
.1989
.0628
.1999
.0629
.2017
.0642
.1934
.0447
-150
.2265
.0988
.1890
.0530
.1799
.0590
.1792
.0593
.1823
.0602
.1783
.0432
-240
.2122
.0937
.1715
.0503
.1686
.0567
.1772
.0589
.1790
.0595
.1724
.0426
-330
.1797
.0821
.1452
.0462
.1396
.0508
.1684
.0570
.1685
.0574
.1582
.0412
-1000
.1667
.0775
.1370
.0449
.1338
.0496
.1621
.0557
.1634
.0563
.1510
.0405
Uncorrected.
t
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-6. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 6
M
10
Matric Potential (cm of water)
Depth Horizon
cm
0-13 Ap
13-28 AC
28-53 Cl
53-84 C2
0
*
.4250
.1341
.3457
.1200
.3409
.0929
.2921
.0472
-10
.3777
.1215
.2900
.1039
.2852
.0814
.2270
.0425
-20
.3577
.1162
.2716
.0985
.2801
.0803
.2255
.0424
-40
.3115
.1038
.2343
.0878
.2564
.0754
.1930
.0400
-60
.2892
.0979
.2081
.0802
.2193
.0677
.1690
.0383
-80
8/g
.1983
.0774
.2084
.0647
.1492
.0369
-100
.2687
.0924
.1930
.0758
.1999
.0637
.1426
.0364
-150
.2331
.0829
.1816
.0725
.1780
.0592
.1312
.0356
-240
.2273
.0813
.1678
.0685
.1483
.0530
.1201
.0348
-330
.2155
.0782
.1632
.0672
.1290
.0491
.1133
.0343
-1000
.1956
.0729
.1524
.0641
.1207
.0473
.1017
.0335
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-7. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 7
to
Matric Potential (cm of water)
Depth
cm
0-10
10-31
31-51
51-66
66-127
127-154
Horizon
Apl
Ap2
Cl
C2
C3
C4
0
.3087*
.1114T
.3309
.1890
.3815
.1112
.3680
.1019
.3574
.1668
.4057
.1331
-10
.2668
.1039
.2954
.1727
.3092
.1014
.3034
.0947
.2905
.1440
.3066
.1142
-20
.2568
.1022
.2779
.1647
.2972
.0998
.2970
.0940
.2724
.1379
.2764
.1084
-40
.2328
.0979
.2498
.1518
.2525
.0937
.2509
.0889
.2162
.1188
.2314
.0998
-60
.2007
.0922
.2134
.1351
.2244
.0899
.2156
.0850
.1794
.1062
.2073
.0952
-80
.
g/g
.1930
.0908
.2005
.1292
.2084
.0877
.1924
.0824
.1679
.1023
.1920
.0923
-100
.1876
.0898
.1946
.1265
.1999
.0865
.1875
.0819
.1610
.1023
.1770
.0894
-150
.1786
.0882
.1900
.1244
.1865
.0847
.1774
.0807
.1466
.0951
.1559
.0850
-240
.1677
.0863
.1815
.1205
.1749
.0831
.1587
.0787
.1365
.0917
.1361
.0816
-330
.1661
.0860
.1772
.1185
.1769
.0834
.1573
.0785
.1305
.0896
.1170
.0779
-1000
.1544
.0839
.1641
.1125
.1615
.0813
.1440
.0770
.1241
.0874
.1071
.0761
Uncorrected.
t
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
TABLE E-8. MOISTURE CHARACTERISTICS FOR PIT 8
OJ
Matric Potential (cm of water)
Depth Horizon
cm
0-18 AC
18-36 Cl
36-58 C2
58-102 C3
102-145 C4
145-183 C5
0
•4277*
.18431"
.3912
.1445
.3969
.1310
.3779
.1262
.3054
.1359
.4418
.1810
-10
.3954
.1739
.3558
.1362
.3621
.1244
.3503
.1211
.2953
.1331
.3943
.1667
-20
.3523
.1600
.3261
.1292
.3276
.1179
.3206
.1155
.2775
.1280
.3556
.1550
-40
.3102
.1465
.2899
.1207
.2890
.1105
.2835
.1086
.2507
.1204
.3398
.1503
-60
.2921
.1406
.2676
.1155
.2708
.1071
.2692
.1060
.2352
.1160
.3022
.1390
-80
g/g
.2757
.1354
.2515
.1117
.2592
.1048
.2569
.1037
.2240
.1128
.2843
.1336
-100
.2559
.1290
.2349
.1078
.2386
.1009
.2421
.1009
.2123
.1094
.2704
.1293
-150
.2403
.1240
.2085
.1016
.2192
.0973
.2278
.0983
.2003
.1061
.2607
.1265
-240
.2313
.1211
.1993
.0994
.2025
.0941
.2212
.0970
.1963
.1050
.2561
.1251
-330
.2209
.1177
.1612
.0900
.1927
.0922
.2078
.0946
.1906
.1033
.2521
.1239
-1000
.2053
.1127
.1538
.0887
.1771
.0892
.1876
.0908
.1833
.1013
.2450
.1217
Uncorrected.
Corrected for coarse fragments.
-------
APPENDIX F
METEOROLOGICAL DATA
136
-------
TABLE F-l. METEOROLOGICAL DATA
DATE
MO DAY YR
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
24
1
3
4
7
9
14
18
21
23
24
26
28
30
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
TIME
OF
OBS
EST
9:10
13:00
12:00
10:30
10:30
12:00
9:00
9:30
8:20
9:15
10:20
13:10
9:30
8:55
AIR TEMP °C
MAX
MIN
OBS
HYGROTHERMOGRAPH
TA
°C
26.7
23.9
18.3
21.7
23.9
29.4
30.0
30.6
27.8
27.2
28.3
27.2
30.6
29.4
1.1
0.6
5.6
5.6
6.7
10.6
10.0
11.7
14.4
17.2
16.1
15.0
14.4
15.6
13.3
17.8
20.0
17.2
20.6
26.7
21.7
21.1
19.4
24.4
26.1
26.7
29.4
18.3
13.9
17.2
17.8
20.0
18.3
26.7
22.8
21.1
20.6
23.9
25.6
26.7
25.6
19.4
RH
%
54
100
48
42
88
46
100
81
100
72
58
41
60
100
MAX
TA °C
25.6
22.8
21.1
23.3
26.7
28.3
26.1
26.7
25.0
27.8
26.1
27.2
30.6
30.6
MIN
TA °C
2.2
4.4
6.7
6.1
11.7
12.2
13.3
11.7
15.0
17.2
16.1
15.0
16.1
16.7
A PAH
WATER TEMP °C
MAX
35
26.7
24.4
26.7
27.8
31.7
31.1
31.1
29.4
30.0
32.2
32.8
32.8
32.2
MIN
-0.6
4.4
7.8
5.0
7.8
10.6
10.6
13.9
16.1
17.2
17.2
14.4
13.9
15.6
OBS
12.2
15.6
18.9
14.4
—
26.7
21.7
19.4
17.8
23.9
26.7
32.2
23.3
17.2
EVAP
LITERS
21.0
17.4
48.8
-85,6
0
ONE
METER
WIND
KM/HR
3.48
12.24
3.54
4.24
4.84
7.78
6.61
6.70
4.71
3.96
6.70
4.44
4.60
PPT
CM
0
1.27
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.81
0
0.51
0
0.38
0.89
-------
TABLE F-l (continued)
DATE
MO DAY YR
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
1
2
6
7
9
12
13
14
16
19
20
26
30
2
6
18
26
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
TIME
OF
OBS
EST
7:05
9:35
9:25
8:20
8:50
8:45
8:20
8:30
3:55
9.10
9:05
8:20
11:00
13:10
13:30
10:25
10:30
AIR TEMP °C
MAX
MIN
OBS
HYGROTHERMOGRAPH
TA
°C
23.9
20.0
32.8
27.2
23.3
28.3
20.0
21.7
28.9
26.1
27.8
27.8
29.4
25.6
26.7
29.4
30.0
14.4
11.1
11.1
15.6
10.6
9.4
2.8
11.7
14.4
9.4
12.2
6.1
12.2
6.7
6.1
8.9
8.3
15.6
19.4
23.3
17.2
16.7
17.2
16.7
16.7
20.6
22.2
23.9
18.9
23.9
21.7
21.7
21.1
27.2
16.7
19.4
23.9
16.7
16.1
17.2
16.7
16.7
20.0
21.7
23.3
18.3
22.2
22.2
21.7
21.1
27.2
RH
%
88
64
60
100
93
73
67
76
90
59
64
58
86
40
92
50
70
MAX
TA °C
18.9
13.3
31.1
26.7
23.3
19.4
21.1
21.1
25.6
26.7
27.8
26.7
25.0
23.3
23.3
25.6
28.9
MIN
TA °C
13.3
11.7
11.7
16.1
13.3
14.4
12.2
12.2
16.1
12.2
13.3
7.8
17.8
7.8
18.3
10.0
13.3
A PAN
WATER TEMP °C
MAX
23.9
20.6
26.1
30.6
30.0
30.6
17.2
21.1
30.0
27.8
31.1
29.4
32.2
26.7
29.4
30.6
33.3
MIN
12.8
10.6
10.6
16.1
14.4
12.8
11.7
11.7
14.4
10.0
13.9
11.7
12.8
7.2
5.6
9.4
10.6
OBS
13.3
18.9
25.0
16.7
16.1
16.7
14.4
15.6
23.3
18.9
21.1
16.7
22.2
25.6
23.3
19.4
26.7
EVAP
LITERS
8.0
15.5
-14.2
- 1.0
- 6.0
6.8
- 4.7
19.0
19.0
16.0
-27.0
20.0
ONE
METER
WIND
KM/HR
6.53
7.65
3.71
3.43
4.01
4.85
11.02
9.28
4.27
5.86
2.49
6.34
3.89
4.16
3.63
3.78
3.21
PPT
CM
0
0
0
2.16
0.13
0
0
1.52
0.13
0
0
0
0.13
0
0.13
0
0
(continued)
-------
TABLE F-l (continued)
DATE
MO DAY YR
0
9
9
9
9
r>
j
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
2
7
14
21
24
23
1
5
8
12
15
19
22
26
29
76
76
76
76
Id
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
TIME
OF
OB'S
EST
9:40
3:50
8:40
12:45
14:00
S:50
10:30
3:50
10:05
8:45
10:30
9:00
10:00
9:20
10:00
AIR TEMP. °C
MAX
MIN
OBS
HYGROTHERMOGRAPH
TA
°C
29.4
25.6
29 . 4
28.3
23.3
13.9
17.2
21.7
20.6
12.8
20.6
22.2
7.8
11.7
5.0
3.3.
2.8
5.0
8.9
—
-11.1
1.7
3.3
8.9
- 3.9
2.2
- 6.1
1.1
- 6.1
- 9.4
14 . 4
16.1
16.1
16.7
15.6
10.6
11.1
10.6
11.1
4.4
19.4
1.1
1.1
1.7
4.4
14.4
16.1
16.1
16.7
16.1
1.1
11.7
11.1
11.7
3.9
19.4
1.1
2.2
2.2
5.0
RH
%
93
60
90
43
39
84
100
94
100
90
37
61
75
64
54
MAX
TA °C
24.4
26.7
28.9
28.9
17.2
19.4
17.8
22.2
16.7
15.6
20.0
22.2
3.3
12.2
11.1
MIN
TA °C
14 . 4
14.4
9.4
9.4
4.4
5.6
3.9
5.0
10.0
1.7
3.9
- 3.9
0.6
- 1.7
- 7.8
A PAN
WATER TEMP °C
MAX
31.1
26.7
30.0
28.9
21.7
21.7
18.9
22.2
21.7
14.4
17.2
21.7
6.1
10.6
6.1
MIN
4.4
4.4
4.4
9.4
1.1
1.7
2.8
6.1
8.9
-1.1
1.7
-0.6
-0.6
-0.6
-2.2
OBS
15.0
12.8
13.9
18.3
21.7
10.0
10.6
10.0
10.6
1.7
12.8
0
0.6
1.7
-0.6
EVAP
LITERS
22.5
22.3
19.5
34.0
8.7
-25.3
3.8
- 1.9
- 9.0
-52.6
2.9
5.9
-27.2
-29.7
6.1
ONE
METER
WIND
KM/HR
4.64
5.21
4.93
4.52
6.36
3.26
3.70
2.73
5.95
5.91
7.92
6.39
9.33
7.32m
7.44
PPT
CM
1.14
0
1.27
4.45
0
2.79
0.13
0.95
1.27
5.27
0.32
0.3G
3.18
2.87
0
(continued)
-------
TABLE F-l (continued)
DATE
MO DAY YR
11
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
9
15
22
29
6
13
20
27
3
21
28
2
9
16
23
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
76
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
TIME
OF
OBS
EST
12:30
9:35
12:25
9:50
9:45
10:10
11:00
10:35
14:40
10:45
9:00
12:00
12:30
10:45
12:05
10:00
AIR TEMP °C
MAX
MIN
OBS
HYGROTHERMOGRAPH
TA
°C
10. C
11.1
5.6
11.7
15.6
—
10.0
11.1
3.9
10.0
- 1.7
-
0
0.6
5.0
12.8
- 5.6
-11.1
- 6.7
-10 . 6
- 7.8
—
-25.6
-15.0
-16.7
-22.8
-29.4
-
-26.1
-21.1
-15.0
-19.4
7.8
- 3.3
1.7
- 3.9
- 4.4
-
- 9.4
12.8
- 9.4
- 7.8
-10.0
-
- 6.1
- 6.1
- 9.4
12.8
5.0
- 2.8
2.2
- 3.3
-4.4
-
-10.0
9.4
10.0
- 7.8
- 8.9
-11.1
-5.6
- 3.3
- 9.4
10.0
RH
%
51
71
56
81
88
-
100
92
60
98
93
94
72
52
54
51
MAX
TA °C
10.6
11.1
6.1
11.7
15.6
1.1
10.0
21.1
10.0
- 2.2
- 1.7
- 1.7
1.1
0.6
10.0
10.0
MIN
TA °C
- 3,9
- 8.9
- 4.4
- 6.1
- 5.0
-15.6
-12.8
-14.4
-13.9
-20.0
-17.8
-23.3
-22.2
-18.9
-12.8
-19.4
A PAN
WATER TEMP °C
MAX
6.7
MIN
-0.6
OBS
5.0
EVAP
LITERS
-10.2
ONE
METER
WIND
KM/HR
7.65
7.42
7.57
7.80
8.63
8.35
10.07
7.07
9.96
8.87
-
12.83
5.25
10.73
9.65
7.99
PPT
CM
1.22
0.23
0.25
0.13
1.24
0.38
2.92
0.13
0.76
1.24
1.35
-
0.13
0.76
1.19
0.41
(continued)
-------
TABLE F-l (continued)
DATE
MO DAY YR
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
1
9
16
23
30
6
13
20
27
5
11
in
24
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
77
TIME
OF
OBS
EST
12:00
9:20
10:50
10:35
11:40
9:45
10:35
9:55
12:50
15:35
11:00
10:15
10:35
AIR TEMP °C
MAX
MIN
OBS
HYGROTHERMOGRAPH
TA
°C
16.1
11.7
20.0
10.0
25.6
26.7
27.2
26.7
26.7
24.4
26.7
30.0
30.0
- 6.1
-19.4
- 2.2
- 6.1
-10.0
- 3.3
-10.6
- 2.2
- 0.6
- 4.4
- 3.9
0
9.4
0
11.7
6.7
2.2
25.6
- 0.6
23.9
15.6
15.0
22.2
15.6
25.6
25.6
0
11.1
6.7
2.2
25.6
0
23.9
15.6
15.6
22.2
16.7
26.1
26.1
RH
%
69
46
58
38
42
84
43
54
36
75
44
58
62
MAX
TA °C
16.1
11.1
19.4
10.0
_
26.7
27.2
26.7
26.7
24.4
26.7
30.0
30.6
MIN
TA °C
- 4.4
- 7.8
0
- 3.3
- 9.4
- 2.2
- 8.9
- 0.6
1.1
- 2.8
1.7
1.1
12.2
A PAH
WATER TEMP °C
MAX
26.1
-
30.6
MIN
- 1.1
-
12.2
OBS
16.7
-
24.4
EVAP
LITERS
27.0
6.8
13.0
22.0
-
24.0
ONE
METER
WIND
KM/HR
11.50
8.50
7.71
11.88
10.96
12.58
9.32
6.08
6.60
6.81
11.06
6.94
4.49
PPT
CM
1.91
3.81
2.79
3.48
1.91
7.37
0
0.20
1.65
1.84
0.25
0
0.57
(continued)
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-78-162
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
A. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Comparison of some properties of minesoils and
contiguous natural soils
5. REPORT DATE
August 1978 issuing date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Tom A. Pedersen, Andrew S. Rogowski, and
Roger Pennock. Jr.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
1
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Northeast Watershed Research Center
USDA-SEA-AR, 110 Research Building A
University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHA-541
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
EPA-IAG-D5-E763
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research & Development
Office of Energy, Minerals & Industry
Washinaton, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Interim 9/1/75-8/31/77
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA-ORD
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
This project is part of the EPA-planned and coordinated Federal Interagency
Energy/Environment R&D Program.
16. ABSTRACT
Four minesoil pits located within the disturbed area and four natural soil pits
located in adjacent undisturbed areas were described and sampled. Bulk densities
were determined at ten randomly located sites. Microlysimeters were subsequently
installed at these sites and used to determine saturated hydraulic conductivities
and evapotranspiration.
The most prominent feature of the minesoils was their high degree of coarseness
and their high rock fragment content. Roots tended to concentrate along soil-coarse
fragment interfaces. Few roots penetrated the massive minesoil material in the C
horizons.
The weathering of the natural soils has leached bases from them and significantly
more extractable aluminum was found in these soils than in minesoils. Organic carbon
and nitrogen determinations were affected by the high content of carboniferous shale
and coal fragments in the minesoils. The clay minerals present in the minesoils had
not been weathered as much as the clay minerals in the natural soils.
Average bulk density of the minesoil surface was 1.70 g/cc contrasted with
1.26 g/cc for adjacent soils.
17.
(Circle One or More)
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Ecology
Environments
Earth Atmnsprprp
(Environmental Engineering*1^
Geography
JLimnology
r.enustry
-. Hydrosphere
rustion
Energy Conversion
Physical Chemistry
Materials Handling
Inorganic Chemistry
Organic Chemistry
Chemical Engineering
8H
48A 48E 48F
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
141
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
------- |