EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Research and
Development
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
EPA-600/7-78-021
February 1978
VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION
OF SPENT OIL SHALES:
Vegetation Moisture
Salinity & Runoff
1973-1976
Interagency
Energy-Environment
Research and Development
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-600/7-78-021
February 1978
VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION OF SPENT OIL SHALES
Vegetation, Moisture, Salinity, and Runoff - 1973-1976.
by
H.P. Harbert III and W.A. Berg
Department of Agronomy
Colorado State University
and
Colorado State University Experiment Station
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
Grant Number R-803059
Project Officer
Eugene F. Harris
Resource Extraction and Handling Division
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names of commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.
ii
-------
FOREWORD
When energy and material resources are extracted, processed, converted,
and used, the related pollutional impacts on our environment and even on our
health often require that new and increasingly more efficient pollution con-
trol methods be used. The Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory -
Cincinnati (lERL-Ci) assists in developing and demonstrating new and improved
methodologies that will meet these needs both efficiently and economically.
The data presented in this study will aid government and private
companies to evaluate the potential for establishing vegetation on areas
used for the disposal of retorted oil shale. The Extraction Technology
Branch, Resource Extraction and Handling Division, may be contacted for
further information.
David G. Stephan
Director
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati
iii
-------
PREFACE
Presently, there is no commercial development of the western oil shales.
However, the magnitude of this petroleum resource indicates that development
will eventually occur.
When development does occur a major problem will be the disposal of
massive amounts of spent shale. However, a major problem faced by those
working with spent shale disposal today is that only a very limited amount
of spent shale is available. This limited the size and configuration of the
spent shale plots in this study. Another limitation of the study is that
the spent shales used were produced under experimental conditions in which
the main objective was to test retorting methodology. Thus the spent shales
used in the study may not be representative of commercial operations. The
study includes a fine-textured and coarse-texture spent shale. Both of these
spent shales have pH's within the acceptable range for growth of adapted
plant species. Some higher-temperature retorting processes produce spent
shales that have very high pH's (11-12) and some have cementing properties.
These spent shales are not represented in this study but are being investi-
gated in other studies.
A large amount of data has been collected on this study since initiation
in 1973. The text covers only the highlights - even then we feel it is too
long but lacking in detail. For those requiring more in-depth information
all data gathered is in the appendix.
IV
-------
ABSTRACT
Disposal of massive amounts of spent shale will be required if an oil
shale industry using surface retorting is developed. Field studies were
initiated in 1973 on two types of spent oil shale coarse-textured (USBM),
and fine-textured (TOSCO). The objectives of these studies were to investi-
gate surface stability of and salt movement in spent shales and spent shales
covered with soil after vegetation has been established by intensive treat-
ment and then left under natural precipitation conditions. The plots were
established at low-elevation (1,700 m) and high-elevation (2,220 m) study
sites in northwestern Colorado.
A good cover of native species was established on all plots by leaching,
N and P fertilization, seeding, mulching, and irrigation. The plots have
not been irrigated since establishment and now support an adequate cover of
vegetation dominated by perennial grasses with the exception of the low-
elevation TOSCO plots which are dominated by a mixture of annuals and
perennial grasses. High levels of Mo were in plants grown in the spent
shales when compared to plants grown in soil.
Water applied during leaching and establishment was being used by
plants during the third growing season. Thus, only one year's information is
available for growth under seasonal precipitation. Resalinization occurred
following leaching of the fine-textured TOSCO spent shale and salt moved up
into 15 cm of soil cover over leached TOSCO spent shale. The USBM spent
shale was resalinized at the high-elevation site following inadequate
leaching but was not resalinized at the low-elevation site. The 30 cm of
soil cover over the unleached spent shale was not salinized at either study
site.
The greatest runoff was from the TOSCO spent shale. Runoff was moder-
ately to highly saline. The sodium adsorption ratio was low for all runoff.
Sediment yields were very low reflecting the use of mulch and establishment
of adequate plant cover.
-------
CONTENTS
FOREWORD iii
PREFACE iv
ABSTRACT v
FIGURES , viii
TABLES x
ABBREVIATIONS, SYMBOLS, AND PLANT NAMES xii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . xiv
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 3
3. RECOMMENDATIONS 7
4. STUDY DESIGN, INSTRUMENTATION, AND METHODS 9
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 21
Low-Elevation Study Site 21
High-Elevation Study Site 46
REFERENCES 68
APPENDICES 70
A. Low-Elevation Study Site 70
B. High-Elevation Study Site . . . : 125
VII
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Schematic of spent shale and spil-covered spent shale plots . . 11
2 Location of the low and high-elevation vegetative stabilization
of spent oil shale study site. Federal oil shale lease tracts
Ca and Cb are also shown 12
3 Construction of the USBM spent shale plots at the low-elevation
study site 13
4 Nearly completed construction of the low-elevation spent shale
soil plots 14
5 Surface runoff and sediment collection system for an individual
plot 15
6 Vegetation cover on north-aspect, low-elevation spent shale
study site, July 1976 21
7 Vegetation dominated by perennial grasses but with substantial
amounts of winterfat (small white shrub) and fourwing saltbush
on south-aspect, low-elevation USBM spent shale plots, July
1976 26
8 Volumetric moisture profiles for TOSCO spent shale and soil
treatments. Low-elevation study site, north-aspect 29
9 Volumetric moisture profiles for TOSCO spent shale and soil
treatments. Low-elevation study site, south-aspect 30
10 Volumetric moisture profiles for USBM spent shale and soil
treatments. Low-elevation study site, north-aspect 32
11 Volumetric moisture profiles for USBM spent shale and soil
treatments. Low-elevation study site, south-aspect 33
12 Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and soil treatments.
North-aspect, low-elevation study site 35
13 Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and soil treatments.
South-aspect, low-elevation study site 36
viii
-------
Number Page
14 Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and soil treatments,
North-aspect, low-elevation study site 38
15 Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and soil treatments,
South-aspect, low-elevation study site 39
16 Maximum temperatures at depths of 1 cm on TOSCO spent shale
and soil plots, low-elevation study site ~ 45
17 North-aspect moisture measurements for TOSCO spent shale and
soil-covered TOSCO spent shale treatments. High-elevation
study site 51
18 South-aspect moisture measurements for TOSCO spent shale and
x soil-covered TOSCO spent shale treatments. High-elevation
study site 52
19 North-aspect moisture measurements for USBM spent shale and
soil-covered USBM spent shale treatments. High-elevation
study site 53
20 South-aspect moisture measurements for 'USBM spent shale and
soil-covered USBM spent shale treatments. High-elevation
study site 54
21 Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and soil treatments.
North-aspect, high-elevation study site 57
22 Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and soil treatments.
South-aspect, high-elevation study site 58
23 Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and soil treatments.
North-aspect, high-elevation study site 60
24 Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and soil treatments.
South-aspect, high-elevation study site 61
IX
-------
TABLES
Number Page
Physical and chemical characteristics of TOSCO II and USBM
spent shales
2 Species seeded and rate of seeding on the oil shale research
plots at the low-elevation study site on June 11, 1973 17
3 Species and rates seeded on June 10, 1975 on the high-elevation
study site 18
4 Summary of vegetation cover values (%) for all treatments of
years and aspects. Low-elevation study site 22
5 Percent vegetation cover for each treatment by year. Low-
elevation study site 23
6 Relative composition in percent by species categories for each
treatment. North-aspect, low-elevation study site, 1976 .... 24
7 Relative composition in percent by species categories for each
treatment. South-aspect, low-elevation study site, 1976 .... 25
8 Summer storm surface runoff and water quality data for TOSCO
spent shale, soil-covered TOSCO spent shale, and soil control
plots. Low-elevation study site. 1974-1975 40
9 Snowmelt runoff data and water quality for TOSCO spent shale,
soil-covered TOSCO spent shale, and soil control plots. Low-
elevation study site. 1975-1976 41
10 Surface runoff and water quality data for USBM spent shale,
soil-covered USBM spent shale, and soil control plots. Low-
elevation study site. 1974-1975 42
11 Snowmelt runoff data and water quality for USBM spent shale,
soil-covered USBM spent shale, and soil control plots. Low-
elevation study site. 1975-1976/ 43
12 Percent vegetation cover for each treatment by year. High-
elevation study site 47
x
-------
Number Page
13 Relative composition in percent by species categories for each
treatment. North-aspect, high-elevation study site, 1976 .... 48
14 Relative composition in percent by species categories for each
treatment. South-aspect, high-elevation study site, 1976 .... 49
15 Surface runoff and water quality data for TOSCO and USBM spent
shale, soil-covered spent shale, and soil control plots following
a 12.7 mm storm on August 14, 1974. High-elevation study site
average of two replications 63
16 Snowmelt runoff and water quality for TOSCO and USBM spent shale,
soil-covered TOSCO and USBM spent shale, and soil control plots.
High-elevation study site. 1975, average of two replications 63
17 Snowmelt runoff and water quality samples for TOSCO spent shale,
soil-covered TOSCO spent shale, and soil control plots. High-
elevation study site, 1976 65
18 Snowmelt runoff and water quality samples for USBM spent shale,
soil-covered USBM spent shale, and soil control plots. High-
elevation study site, 1976 67
xi
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
ABBREVIATIONS
BLM
C
Ca
Cl
cm
C03
EC
mmhos/cm
ymhos/cm
ERDA
F
g
HC03
ha
ha/m
K
kg/ha
km2
m
m3
Mg
Mo
mm
N
Na
NO3
P
pH
ppm
SAR
SD
S04
TOSCO
USBM
X
Bureau of Land Management
Celsius
calcium
chlorine
centimeter
carbonate
electrical conductivity
millimhos per centimeter
micromhos per centimeter
Energy Research and Development Adminstration
fahrenheit
grams"
bicarbonate
hectare
hectare per meter
potassium
kilogram per hectare
square kilometer
meter
square meter
magnesium
molybdenum
millimeter
nitrogen
sodium
nitrate
phosphorus
negative log of hydrogen ion concentration
parts per million
sodium adsorption ratio
standard deviation
sulfate
The Oil Shale Corporation
United States Bureau of Mines
mean
XII
-------
COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF PLANT SPECIES
Mentioned in this Report
Common Name
Antelope bitterbrush
Arrowleaf balsamroot
Basin wildrye
Beardless wheatgrass
Big sagebrush
Bitterbrush
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Cheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Fourwing saltbush
Galleta
Globe mallow
Indian ricegrass
James penstemon
Lupine
Mint
Mountain mahogany
Mustard
Penstemon
Rabbitbrush
Rocky Mountain penstemon
Russian thistle
Serviceberry
Timothy
Utah sweetvetch
Western wheatgrass
Wild barley
Wild lettuce
Winterfat
Scientific Nomenclature
Pwpshia. tvidentata
Balsamorhiza. sa.gi-tta.ta.
Elymus einereus
Agropyvon inerme
Artemisia, tvidentata.
Pupshia tridentata
Agropyron spicatum
Bromus teotommi
Agropyron desertorum
Atvip'iex oanesaens
Hita^cia jamesii
Sphaevaloea, grossulariaefolia.
Oryzopsis kymenoides
Penstemon jamesii
Lupine spp.
Mint spp.
Cercocarpus montanus
Malaolmia spp.
Penstemon spp.
Ckpysothcamus spp.
Penstemon montanus
Salsola kali tenuifolia
AmelanchieT spp.
Phleum pvatense
Hedysanm boveale utahensis
Agropyron smithii
Hordeum jubatum
Laotuoa
Cevatoides lanata
Xlll
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Our thanks to the following agencies and individuals who helped and
cooperated on this study:
The Governor's Oil Shale Advisory Committee who required the study.
The Colorado Department of Natural Resources who secured the initial
funding from state, federal, and private sources.
The EPA, National Environmental Research Center in Cincinnati, for
funds to instrument and continue observations on the study.
The U.S. Bureau of Mines who provided the Anvil Points study site
and irrigation water in addition to the USBM spent shale .
The Colony Development Operation for providing and loading the
TOSCO spent shale.
The Bureau of Land Management for the Piceance Basin study site
and use of their water storage tank.
The Department of Navy for providing funds for fencing the Anvil
Points site.
The Soil Conservation Service for seeds of certain hard-to-obtain
native species.
And above all, to the following people who worked long and hard on
various stages of the project:
Bob Squires
Curley George
Chub Squires
Enrique Barrau
Jim Herron
Bob Foley
Jean Chandler
Susan Steinberg
Mark Phillips
Jean Keil
Lori Nukaya
xiv
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
Limited domestic oil and natural, gas reserves and the increased price of
imported oil have renewed interest in developing the nation's western oil
shale reserves. These reserves are located with a 6,500 km2 (25,000 square
mile) area of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming and are estimated to contain
96 billion m^ (600 billion barrels) of recoverable crude oil with present day
technology (U.S. Department of Interior, 1973). Six hundred billion barrels
of oil is about 100 years petroleum supply at the 1977 consumption rates. If
an oil shale industry is to develop, many environmental as well as technical
problems must be resolved. One of the major environmental problems is the
long-term stabilization of the massive amounts of waste material (spent or
retorted shale) which will be produced.
A mature oil shale industry could produce an estimated one million barrels
of oil per day (U.S. Department of Interior, 1973). If surface retorted,
approximately 2,200 ha/m (18,000 acre/feet) of spent shale waste, would be
generated each year. Part of this spent shale might be disposed of in the
mined out areas but a large portion, maybe over half, would require surface
disposal" as either canyon fills or built-up into mesas. Thus, from 200-400 ha
(500-1,000 acres) of land per year would be required for disposal sites. The
spent shale would have to be managed to avoid air and water pollution not only
in the immediate future (the 20-30 year life expectancy of an individual plant)
but also on a long-term basis. Stabilization of the exposed surfaces could
be attempted by establishing vegetation directly on spent shales or by
covering the spent shales with soil material and then establishing vegetation.
The physical and chemical characteristics of spent shale are a function
of the origin of the raw shale, the particle size when crushed, and the
retorting temperatures.
The degree to which the raw shale is crushed prior to retorting directly
affects the texture of the spent shale. If the materials are finely crushed,
such as the TOSCO material, then a fine silty spent shale is produced.
However, if the raw shale is coarsely crushed as in the gas combustion
processes, then a coarse-textured spent shale is produced.
Spent shales retorted at temperatures of about 500 C have pH's in the
8-9 range, while retorting at 750-800 C results in spent shales with pH's of
11-12. The pH of the high-temperature processed spent shale must be reduced
before it can be considered as a plant growth media.
-------
Previous research has shown that spent shales retorted at lower
temperatures were extremely salty for plant growth and deficient in plant-
available nitrogen and phosphorus (Schmehl and McCaslin, 1973). Good stands
of vegetation were established on low-temperature, fine-textured, highly
saline spent shales after leaching, N and P fertilization, and sprinkling for
seedling establishment (Block and Kilburn, 1973).
The study reported here is the first field research on coarse-textured
spent shale as a plant growth medium.
The objectives of this study were to investigate surface stability and
salt movement in spent shales and spent shales covered with soil after vege-
tation was established by intensive treatment and then left under natural
precipitation conditions.
-------
SECTION 2
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
LOW-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
Vegetation
1. A good cover of native perennial grasses and shrubs was established
with intensive management, including irrigation and fertilization,
on both TOSCO and USBM spent shales and soil-covered spent shales in
1973. The plots have not been irrigated since 1973.
2. The vegetation cover has increased each year since 1974 on all
treatments. However, in 1976, the TOSCO treatment was dominated by
a combination of perennial grass (western and bluebunch wheatgrass)
and annual species (mustards and cheatgrass), whereas all the other
treatments were dominated by perennial grasses or a combination of
perennial grasses and shrubs.
3. The abundance of annuals on the TOSCO spent shale is apparently a
reflection of the loss in perennial vegetation in 1974 as a result
of resalinization.
4. North-aspect treatments have more vegetation cover (88%) than south-
facing treatments (69%).
Moisture
1. Water stored in the profiles by the 1973 leaching was still being
used by the vegetation in 1975. Thus, 1976 was apparently the first
year the vegetation depended entirely on seasonal precipitation.
2. Moisture recharge to a depth of 90 to 140 cm in all treatments has
occurred each spring as the result of normal to above-normal preci-
pitation in 1974-1976.
Salinity
1. Soluble salts were leached to depths of 120 cm to over 180 cm by
application of 100 cm of leach water in 1973.
-------
2. Salts moved up into the leached zone and accumulated on the surface
of the fine-textured TOSCO spent shale and the 15 cm soil cover over
TOSCO spent shale as the result of capillary water movement from the
nearly-saturated subsurface spent shale.
3. Salt did not move.up into the 30 cm soil cover over TOSCO spent shale
which was unleached and thus did not have a reservoir of water sub-
ject to capillary rise.
4. Resalinization of the leached coarse-textured USBM spent shale did
not occur.
5. Salts that accumulated on the surface of the TOSCO spent shale and
15 cm of soil cover over TOSCO spent shale in 1974 were leached to
depths of 30-60 cm in 1975 by winter and spring precipitation.
6. The soluble salts have remained at the 30-60 cm depths through the
1975 and 1976 growing seasons, apparently maintained at this depth
by a balance between precipitation and evapotranspiration.
Surface Runoff and Sediment Yield
1. Two summer storms in three years produced runoff. Runoff was
greater from the TOSCO treatment (0.13 cm) than the USBM spent
shale (0.005 cm) and the soil control (0.04 cm) .
2. Water quality of the rather limited amount of summer storm runoff
from the spent shales was rated as having a high salinity hazard
for irrigation.
3. Runoff from snowmelt in 1975 and 1976 was much greater than from
summer storms. The TOSCO spent shale had the greatest amount of
runoff with 1.0 cm in 1976 and the lowest water quality (EC 195 to
1300 ymhos/cm). The USBM had only a trace of runoff in 1976 with
an EC of 400 ymhos/cm while the soil control had 0.06 cm of runoff
with an EC of 130 to 500 ymhos/cm.
4. Sediment yields from both summer storms and spring runoff were very
low for all treatments, this is a reflection of the initial mulching
treatment and the large amount of vegetation cover maintained on
each treatment.
5. The sodium adsorption ratio was low for all runoff water.
Surface Temperatures
1. Surface temperatures of 50-60 C were recorded in late June and July
each year on the south-aspect TOSCO spent shale and on the soil
control plots.
-------
2. These high mid-summer temperatures do not appear to be influencing
the mature vegetation already established except that the south-
aspect is more xeric as reflected by less vegetation cover.
HIGH-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
Vegetation
1. The initial vegetation stand established by seeding in 1974 was
unsatisfactory because of (a) perennial grasses were seeded at a
very low rate; (b) a dense population of big sagebrush was esta-
blished; and (c) inadequately leached TOSCO and USBM spent shales
which resalinized.
2. The study site was releached, rototilled, and reseeded in June 1975.
A good stand of native perennial plants was established on all
treatments in 1975 with ground cover ranging from 43-90 percent.
3. Perennial grasses dominated all treatments in 1976 although forbs
and shrubs were prominent on most treatments.
4. The 30 cm of soil cover over USBM spent shale had the least vegeta-
tion cover in 1976 as the result of pocket gopher activity which
resulted in the loss of some vegetation and considerable surface
disturbance.
5. A major contrast in the vegetation at the two sites is that in 1976
annuals were a major component of the vegetation on the TOSCO spent
shale at the low-elevation site, whereas annuals were only a minor
component at the high-elevation site.
Moisture
Moisture profiles taken in 1974 showed that the water penetrated only
to a depth of 30 cm and that most of the 150 cm of water applied for
leaching in 1974 and 1975 was lost to evaporation. This shows that
the leaching technique of applying 2.5 cm of water every two days
was a very ineffective leaching procedure.
Salinity
1. Salinity measurements on core samples taken in 1974 showed that the
TOSCO and USBM spent shale treatments were only leached to 30 cm
under the alternate day irrigation schedule and that the leached
layer was resalinized by fall 1974.
2. These results differed with the low-elevation site where the USBM
was not resalinized.
-------
3. Both the TOSCO and USBM spent shales were releached in 1975 with
100 cm of water applied continuously over a 10-day period in May.
This method proved to be effective and resalinization did not occur
on any treatments in 1975 or 1976.
4. Soluble salts did not move upward through the 15 cm of soil cover
over TOSCO spent shale as occurred at the low-elevation site. This
is probably because leaching through the silt loam soil cover was
more effective in moving the salt to greater depths as there was
less surface evaporation than on the black TOSCO spent shale.
5. There was no evidence of salt movement upward into the 30 cm of soil
covering unleached TOSCO spent shale.
Surface Runoff and Sediment Yield.
1. A small (12.7 mm) summer storm in August 1974 produced 0.02 to
0.05 cm of runoff from the TOSCO spent shale and 0.002 to 0.004 cm
from the USBM spent shale. The water quality for all runoff
(EC 1200-2900 pmhos/cm) was rated as posing a high salinity hazard
for irrigation. The control had 0.002 cm of runoff with an EC of
730 umhos/cm.
2. The runoff and sediment yields from summer storms for the high-
elevation site are similar to those on the low-elevation site.
3. Runoff from snowmelt in 1975 and 1976 was much greater from the
high-elevation plots than from snowmelt runoff from the low-
elevation site.
4. The 1976 snowmelt runoff from the TOSCO spent shale had an EC range
of 400-1500 ymhos/cm while the USBM spent shale was 200-700 pmhos/cm.
The SAR (Sodium Adsorption Ratio) was low on all runoff.
5. Sediment yield for all treatments for both the summer storm and
snowmelt runoff was very low.
-------
SECTION 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. If highly-saline, lower pH (8-9) spent oil shales such as the ones used
in this study are to be quickly stabilized with native vegetation they
will require very intensive management including leaching, N and P ferti-
lization and irrigation for establishment. Nitrogen application will be
required for a number of years after establishment.
2. The infiltration rate on the fine-textured spent shale is very slow, thus
the erosion potential is high when this material is subjected to high-
intensity summer storms. Although no major summer storms occurred during
this study, the slow infiltration rate must be considered when planning
stabilization of this spent shale.
3. Resalinization of leached fine-textured spent shale occurred in this study.
Application of more leach water than the 100 cm used in this study would
move the salt further and decrease the resalinization potential. It
should be noted that applications of additional leach water should be
under continuous application at slightly less than the infiltration rate
of the fine-textured spent shale. The disposition of the leach water
within the spent shale disposal pile has not been addressed in this study
but must be considered in large-scale operations.
4. A surface stabilization alternative indicated by this study would be to
use a minimum of 30 cm of soil over unleached spent shale. This will
work only for lower pH spent shales in which roots of adapted species can
grow into and thus utilize water stored there. High pH (11-12) spent
shales which the roots will not grow into would require thicker soil
cover. Even with soil cover, irrigation and fertilization the first year
would still be required for fast cover establishment.
5. An initial survey of vegetation grown on spent shale and soil-covered
spent shales showed higher levels of Mo and Zn than on vegetation grown
on the soil control. Studies are recommended and are currently underway
by other investigators on trace elements in vegetation grown on these
plots.
6. Deer and domestic livestock use of the revegetated disposal areas must
be carefully controlled, this may initially require exclusion by fencing.
-------
7. Pocket gophers and other burrowing animals can be expected to move into
the revegetated areas. Control is difficult or impossible, thus the site
stabilization scheme must be sufficiently resilient to allow for disturb-
ances such as pocket gophers pushing spent shale up through 30 cm of soil
cover as happened in this study.
8. Disposal sites on south-aspects at the lower elevations (<2,000 m) have
xeric microclimatic conditions and would require more intensive manage-
ment than most moist locations.
9. Erosion is a continuous natural process. Thus soil cover or spent shale
modified for plant growth will eventually erode, particularly from steep
upper slopes. This eventuality must be considered and addressed in
future waste stabilization research and planning.
10. Up to now stabilization of spent shales has been thought of in terms of
plans that might work with the spent shales produced by a given retorting
process. Consideration needs to be given to spent shale disposal when
designing the retorting process. It may be that spent shale which has
cementing properties will pose fewer long-term environmental problems.
11. It is recommended that both study sites continue to be monitored for the
following reasons:
(a) 1973 leach water was still being depleted from the profile in
1975, thus, only one year's data under natural precipitation is
available. Information is needed on vegetation persistence
through several years with below-normal precipitation.
(b) Additional data is needed on the runoff, sediment yield, and
water quality from both spring runoff and high intensity
summer storms.
-------
SECTION 4
STUDY DESIGN, INSTRUMENTATION, AND METHODS
STUDY DESIGN
Spent Shales
The two spent shales used in this study were products of retorting pro-
cesses developed by The Oil Shale Corporation (TOSCO II), and the U.S. Bureau
of Mines (USBM). Certain chemical and physical characteristics of these spent
shales have been determined by Schmehl and McCaslin (1973, Table 1) and Ward,
Margheim, and Lof (1971). In addition, Striffler et al. (1974) reviewed the
literature on spent oil shales as plant growth media.
TABLE 1. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TOSCO II
AND USBM SPENT SHALES,. DATA FROM SCHMEHL AND
McCASLIN, 1973
TOSCO II USBM
PH
EC (mmhos/cm on
saturation extract)
Sodium Adsorption Ratio
Texture
>2 mm
<2 mm
Field Moisture Capacity % HJ)
(<2 mm material)
9.2
17.7
29.0
silt loam
14%
86%
20.9%
8.6
16.6
14.1
gravely
silt loam
62%
38%
19.8%
The TOSCO II (shortened to TOSCO in the rest of the report) spent shale
is black, silt loam material retorted at the Colony Development Operation near
Grand Valley, Colorado. A description of the design and mechanical operations
of TOSCO retort is given by Lenhart (1969). The USBM spent shale is black to
gray and contains about 60% coarse particles (>2 mm in diameter) and 40% soil-
size particles (<2 mm in diameter). The USBM spent shale was retorted by the
-------
gas-combustion method as described by Matzick et al. (1966) and was obtained
from the waste pile at the USBM (now Energy Research and Development Admini-
stration) Anvil Points oil shale research facility near Rifle, Colorado.
The reader is cautioned that the spent shales were retorted under experi-
mental conditions in- which the main objective was to test retorting methodol-
ogy. Therefore, the spent shales may not be representative of material pro-
duced by commercial operations. Several years had elapsed between retorting
and the initiation of these field studies, thus some physical and chemical
changes may have occurred in the spent shales. The TOSCO spent shale was
retorted in the period 1970 to 1972 whereas the USBM spent shale was retorted
earlier and may initially have had a higher pH. This field study was
initiated in 1973.
The soils used were a calcareous silty clay loam on the low-elevation
site and a non-calcareous silt loam on the high-elevation site.
Treatments
The study design consists of two spent shale types at two different
elevations (study sites). The seven spent shale and/or soil treatments at
each site are:
1. leached TOSCO spent shale
2. leached TOSCO spent shale with 15 cm soil cover
3. unleached TOSCO spent shale with 30 cm soil cover
4. leached USBM spent shales
5. leached USBM spent shale with 15 cm soil cover
6. unleached USBM spent shale with 30 or 60 cm soil cover
7. soil control
Each treatment has a north and a south exposure on a 4:1 (25%) slope and
is replicated. Thus, there are a total of twenty-eight individual
3.3 x 6.6 m plots at each site. A schematic of the study design and plot
layout is given in Figure 1.
Study Sites
The study sites were at Anvil Points 1,700 m (5,700 feet) in elevation
and within Piceance Basin at 2,200 m (7,200 feet). The Anvil Points study
site is located on the Energy Research and Development Adminstration research
facility 13 km (8 miles) west of Rifle, Colorado (Figure 2). The site has a
hot, dry summer climate and sparse natural vegetation and is representative
of one of the more difficult areas to revegetate within the Colorado oil
shale region. The mean annual precipitation is estimated as 30 cm. The
adjacent vegetation is low-elevation pinyon-juniper woodland as described
by Ward et al. (1974). Throughout this report, the Anvil Points location
will be referred to as the low-elevation study site.
The Piceance Basin study site is located on Bureau of Land Management
land within the Piceance Basin (Figure 2). The access to the site is up Black
Sulfur Creek from Piceance Creek. The site has an estimated average annual
precipitation of 40-45 cm and a hot, dry summer climate. The study site is
10
-------
NORTH
SOILl
SOUTH
SOIL
T
2.4
i
2.4 m
SOIL
14.6 m
-H
SOIL
SOIL
SOIL
SOIL
SOIL
Figure 1. Schematic of spent shale and soil-covered spent shale plots.
Top - Side view of cross section through plots. Bottom -
Overview of north aspect of TOSCO (upper) and USBM (lower)
spent shale plots showing treatments and replications.
11
-------
r~"
j J^T-J, &<-ody flrea-
//,
Denver
COLORADO
L i
MOFFAT CO.
HIGH ELEVATION STUDY SITE
OW ELEVATION
15km
Figure 2. Location of the low and high-elevation vegetative stabili-
zation of spent oil shale study sites. Federal oil shale
lease tracts Ca and Cb are also shown.
12
-------
indicative of the climate, elevation, and vegetation type associated with the
federal oil shale lease tracts, Ca and Cb. The natural vegetation around the
study site is high-elevation, big sagebrush, and low-elevation pinyon-juniper
woodland as described by Ward et al. (1974). In this report, the Piceance
Basin study site will be referred to as the high-elevation study site.
Construction Procedures
Construction at each study site was initiated by excavating two areas
15 m wide x 20 m long and 0.6m deep along an east-west axis. The excavated
areas were located side by side and 30 m apart. The excavated soil material
was stockpiled adjacent to the study site. The spent shale was dumped into
the excavated area and piled to a height of 2-2.7 m at the center, the height
depending on the depth of soil cover. The spent shale was then shaped to a
4:1 slope (Figure 3). The excavated soil was then used to construct the soil
cover-over-spent shale and soil control plots (Figure 4).
A plywood divider was placed between the 15 cm soil cover treatments and
the 30 or 60 cm of soil cover treatments. This divider was used to separate
the leached treatments (15 cm soil cover) from the unleached treatments
(30 or 60 cm soil cover).
During the construction and filling operation, no attempt was made to
compact the spent shale, however, some compaction resulted from the small-
tracked loader which was used for shaping. The fine-textured TOSCO spent
shale at the low-elevation site settled when the plots were leached. There-
fore, when the high-elevation plots were constructed, the TOSCO material was
lightly compacted with a D4 caterpillar.
Figure 3. Construction of the USBM spent shale plots at
the low-elevation study site. The excavation
for the TOSCO spent shale plots is to the left
center of the photo. April 1973.
i ,
-------
Figure 4. Nearly completed construction of the low-
elevation spent shale-soil plots. The USBM
spent shale-soil plots are in the foreground
and the TOSCO soil plots are in the center
of the photograph. The plot treatments are
shown in Figure 1.
Construction of the low-elevation plots was completed in April 1973, and
the high-elevation plots was completed in August 1973.
INSTRUMENTATION
Salinity Sensors
Salinity sensors, model 5100 manufactured by the Soil Moisture Equipment
Company, were installed in each replication. The sensors were buried in the
middle of each plot at 20 and 50 cm. Sixty cm leads were left above the soil
surface and were attached to wooden stakes.
Moisture Probe Access Tubes
Moisture probe access tubes were placed in the upper 1/3 of each plot for
monitoring the in-place moisture content of the spent shale and soil treat-
ments throughout the growing season. The moisture probe access tubes are
3.8 cm diameter steel electrical conduit placed to a depth of 180 cm. Each
tube was capped with a #9 rubber stopper. All moisture measurements were
made with a Troxler model S6A neutron probe and a model G100 rate meter.
-------
Surface Runoff Collection Systems
Surface runoff collection systems were installed in 1974 on all 28 plots
at each study site. The runoff collection system consists of surface plot
dividers and sills, sheet metal runoff collectors, and metal storage cisterns.
Each plot was divided with redwood boards extending 5 cm below the surface.
At the toe of each slope, a redwood sill was set lengthwise across the plot
to hold the 3.3 m wide sheet metal collector in place. The collector was then
connected with a 5 cm metal pipe to a 106 cm diameter culvert set on end. The
bottom of the 1 m deep culvert was sealed with 10 cm of concrete and then the
interior was sealed with Farbertite, a water-proofing compound. Finally, the
metal culvert was fitted with a sheet metal lid (Figure 5). A 120 £ plastic
container was placed inside each culvert as the primary runoff and sediment
collector.
Figure 5. Surface runoff and sediment collection system
for an individual plot.
Meteorological Equipment
Each study site was instrumented in 1974 with a Weather Measure Corpora-
tion model P501 tipping bucket remote-recording rain/snow gauge and a model
H311 31-day recording hydrothermograph. Snowfall measurements were also made
at the high-elevation site with a 20.8 cm diameter standard U.S. Weather
Bureau gauge. The precipitation measurements for each study site, for each
year are listed in Appendix Table 1.
1
-------
Spent Shale and Soil Temperatures
Spent shale and soil temperatures were measured only at the low-elevation
study site and only on the TOSCO spent shale and soil control plots. Tempera-
tures were measured using Lambrecht 30-day recording thermographs with 16-foot
capillary tube sensor leads. Two recorders with three sensors each were used.
The following treatments were measured:
1. North-aspect TOSCO
2. North-aspect soil
3. South-aspect TOSCO
4. South-aspect TOSCO (duplicate)
5. South-aspect soil
6. Air temperature in the box
Sensors were buried 1 cm beneath the soil or spent shale surface following
construction in June 1973. Temperatures were recorded continuously until
Spetember 1973 and starting again in April and continuing through September
of 1974, 1975, and 1976.
METHODS
Leaching
The irrigation system at both study sites was a solid-set sprinkler
system using Rainbird model 14 TNT VLA sprinkler heads operated at 2-3 kg/cm .
The sprinklers were set on 60 cm risers and spaced 6 m apart along laterals.
A total of three laterals spaced 8 m apart were used per each spent shale
pile. The application rate of this system was measured at 0.4 cm per hour.
The application rate was designed to be slightly less than the infiltration
rate of the fine-textured TOSCO spent shale and thus avoid surface runoff.
Each system was automated with a 7-day time clock and solenoid valves.
Although the systems were identical, the leaching procedure used at each
study site was different. The low-elevation plots were leached with a total
of 100 cm of water in May 1973. The leach water from the water system at
Anvil Points had a conductivity of 200 to 300 micromhos per cm at 25 C. The
plots were leached by running the sprinkler continuously for two 5-day
periods separated by a 4-day rest period.
In contrast, the high-elevation plots were leached at three separate
times. The first leaching was in fall 1973 when 50 cm of water was applied,
the second was the following May 1974 when 100 cm of water was applied, and
finally, in April 1975, when an additional 100 cm of water was applied. In
the first two applications, the Irrigation system was operated to apply 2.5 cm
of water every other day. This application technique proved to be ineffective
as the evaporation rate was high. Hauling water 4.8 km to the high-elevation
plots was a problem and contributed to the first two ineffective leaching
attempts.
16
-------
In May 1975, 100 cm of water was applied by continuous sprinkling over a
10-day period. The leach water was from Black Sulfur Creek and had a con-
ductivity of 1,000 micromhos/cm.
The 30 cm of soil cover over the spent shale treatments at both study
sites were covered with plastic and not leached.
Fertilization
Nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers were applied to all treatments at
both study sites. Phosphorus was applied following construction at the rate
of 400 kg P/ha in the form of triple superphosphate. The P was then roto-
tilled into each plot to a depth of 10 cm.
Nitrogen was applied as ammonium nitrate at the rate of 66 kg N/ha
following germination, and an additional 66 kg N/ha was applied later in the
growing season. In subsequent years, 66 kg/ha was applied in April just as
regrowth was starting. We anticipate nitrogen fertilizer applications will
be required for several more years.
Seeding and Mulching
The low-elevation study site was seeded on June 11, 1973 with the mixture
of native grasses and shrubs listed in Table 2. The plots were then raked
lightly and mulched with grass hay at the rate of 1680 kg/ha. The hay mulch
was held in place with a cotton netting.
TABLE 2. SPECIES SEEDED AND RATE OF SEEDING ON THE OIL
SHALE RESEARCH PLOTS AT THE LOW-ELEVATION
STUDY SITE JUNE 11, 1973.
GRASSES
Bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) 2.2
Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) 2.2
Western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii) 1.1
SHRUBS
Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) 0.5
Fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) 1.1
Rabbitbrush (Chyrsothamnus spp.) 0.5
Winterfat (Ceratoides lanata) 1.1
17
-------
The high-elevation study site was initially seeded on June 26, 1974 with
a mixture of native grasses, shrubs, and forbs and mulched with barley straw.
The high-elevation study site was reseeded on June 10, 1975 with the mixture
of native grasses, shrubs, and forbs listed in Table 3. Prior to seeding,
these plots were rototilled to the depth of approximately 10 cm. Following
seeding, the plots were raked lightly and then mulched with wheat straw at a
rate of 1680 kg/ha. The wheat straw was held in place with cotton netting
to prevent the straw mulch from blowing.
TABLE 3. SPECIES AND RATES SEEDED ON JUNE 10, 1975
ON THE HIGH-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
Rate
Species (kg/ha)
GRASSES
Bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) 0.5
Western wheatgrass (Agropyron smithii) 1.1 f
Gall eta (Hilaria jamesii) 0.5
Basin wildrye (Elymus cinereus) 0.5
Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) 2.2
FORBS
Lupine spp. (Lupine spp.) 0.5
Utah sweetvetch (Hedysarum boreale utahensis) 1.7
Arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata) 0.5
James penstemon (Penstemon jamesii) 1.1
Penstemon spp. "Bandera" (Penstemon spp.) 0.2
SHRUBS
Antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) 2.2
Foiirwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens) 2.2
Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.] 2.2
Winterfr.t (Ceratoides lanata) 2.2
This rate was doubled on both the TOSCO and USBM spent shale plots.
Moisture Measurements
Neutron probe moisture measurements were made approximately monthly or
bimonthly on each plot during the growing season. The count ratios were
converted to percent moisture by volume (cm /cm^) using the standard soil
moisture curve provided by the probe manufacturer as differences in moisture
content with time are of major interest. However, comparison of gravimetric
samples collected during core sampling and neutron probe measurements at the
same time indicate that there is a 6-7% higher reading from the probe than
the actual volumentric moisture content in the spent shales.
18
-------
Salinity Measurements
Salinity measurements consisted of both salinity sensor readings and
laboratory analysis of core samples taken from each plot. The salinity
sensors were read periodically at both study sites during each growing
season (April through August).
Core samples were collected at the beginning and the end of each growing
season between 1973 and 1975. In 1976 the plots were core sampled only in
the fall. The cores were taken in the upper 1/3 of each plot and were col-
lected in 15 cm increments to a depth of 180 cm using a soil coring tube with
a 2 cm diameter bit. The samples were then placed in either metal cans or
plastic bags and returned to CSU for laboratory analysis. The samples were
dried and screened through a 2-mm sieve. Ten grams of the <2-mm fraction was
mixed with 10 ml of distilled water in a 50 ml beaker and allowed to stand for
1 hour. The sample was then remixed and filtered. Electrical conductivity was
determined on the solution. The soils in the soil-cover treatments and soil-
controls were also analysed using a 1:1 soil-water ratio. The reason the 1:1
ratio was used rather than a saturated paste was that the latter requires a
much larger sample and only a limited amount of sample was taken in order to
minimize plot destruction.
Stand Establishment
The irrigation system used for leaching was also used to ensure stand
establishment. The system was automated and irrigation was scheduled to apply
0.4 cm of water per hour. The low-elevation study site was irrigated with
46 cm of water between June 12, 1973 and August 14, 1973. The water was
applied daily for approximately two hours with the exception of several days
during this period when water was not available or the timing mechanism mal-
functioned. The water application rate was calculated to be slightly in
excess of the evapotranspiration demand at the study site (Wymore et al., 1974).
The high-elevation study site was irrigated, following the 1975 seeding,
from June 10 thorugh July 21 with about 1.5 cm of water applied approximately
every third day, however, some days were missed due to water hauling problems.
A total of 20 cm of water was applied for stand establishment.
Vegetation Measurements
Two different methods were used to analyze the vegetation. The quadrat
method was used the first two years after seeding to provide an estimate of
germination and establishment. The line-intercept method was used the last
two years, since it proved a more quantitative measurement on the mature
bunch grass vegetation.
The quadrat method consisted of randomly placing four 20 x 40 cm quadrats
on each plot and counting the number of individual plants found within the
quadrat. Ground covered by living vegetation was also estimated for each
quadrat.
19
-------
The procedure for the line-intercept method was to divide each plot into
thirds or fourths moving vertically up the slope. A steel tape was then
placed along the transect lines. The total cm of vegetative cover was then
measured for each species along the tape. In addition, the blank areas were
also recorded to calculate the total vegetation cover for each line. These
lines were laid in approximately the same location each year, however, in 1975,
four lines were used at the low-elevation study site as opposed to 3 lines in
1976.
The low-elevation study site was analyzed in 1976 for total above-ground
standing biomass. The procedure was to randomly place three 20 x 40 cm quad-
rates in the upper, middle, and lower 1/3 of each plot and clip all the above-
ground standing vegetation. The samples were placed in paper bags and
returned to CSU where they were oven-dried and total dry matter determined.
Total vegetation cover for all years and the species composition for 1976
were statistically analyzed using a split plot factorial design and a Control
Data 6400 computer. Significant mean values were separated using Tukey's Q
mean separation test at the 5% level.
Surface Runoff Measurements
Surface runoff measurements were made each spring during and following
snowmelt and during the growing season following runoff producing thunder-
storms. The procedure for collecting runoff data was as follows:
1. The total runoff collected was measured directly in the
collectors using a meter stick and then converting this value
to total liters of water.
2. The water collected in the plastic container was thoroughly
mixed to suspend the sediment and a 500 ml sample was taken.
3. The samples were returned to CSU for water quality analyses
by the CSU Soil and Water Testing Laboratory.
4. Sediment yields consisted of evaporating the water samples and
weighing the remaining sediment. This figure was then used to
calculate the total sediment within each plastic can, which was
assumed to be the total sediment yield per plot. No correction
was made for soluble salt content of the sediment.
20
-------
SECTION 5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
LOW-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
Vegetation
Overall vegetation establishment and growth was satisfactory on the low-
elevation study site (Figure 6). A fairly uniform cover of the species
seeded was obtained on the USBM and soil-covered USBM spent shales. However,
timothy brought in inadvertently as seed in the hay mulch was a major species
on most of the TOSCO and soil-covered TOSCO treatments in 1973 (Appendix
Tables 2-5). Without irrigation in 1974, the amount of timothy dropped dras-
tically (Appendix Tables 6 & ). Vegetation cover increased in 1975 and
remained constant in 1976 compared to 1975 (Table 4 Appendix Tables 8-15).
Precipitation was estimated to be near to above normal for 1974 through 1976
(Appendix Table 1). As might be expected, the north-aspect plots have more
vegetation cover than the south-aspect plots (Table 4), this effect was even
Figure 6. Vegetation cover on north-aspect, low-elevation
spent shale study site, July 1976. Treatments
are in the positions sketched in Figure 1.
21
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF VEGETATION COVER VALUES (%) FOR ALL TREAT-
MENTS BY YEARS AND ASPECTS. LOW-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
Year Aspect
1973
1974
1975
1976
67.4 bf
58.5 c
77. 8a
80. la
North
South
F
74.2
67.5
**
**
t Values with a common letter within columns are not significantly different
as tested by Tukey's Q mean separation test at 5% level.
** .
Significantly different at 1.0% level.
more obvious in 1976 when the south-facing plots averaged 69% vegetation
cover compared to 88% for the north-facing plots (Table 5). The standing
crop of vegetation was also greater in 1976 on the north-aspect then on the
south-aspect treatments (Appendix Table 16).
There are some differences in total vegetation cover and even greater
differences in cover by species categories among spent shale and soil treat-
ments, these are discussed below:
TOSCO Spent Shale
Vegetation cover established by irrigation in 1973 was somewhat less on
the TOSCO spent shale than on the soil-cover treatments (Table 5). After
three growing seasons without irrigation the vegetation cover on the TOSCO
spent shale was still significantly less than on the soil-cover and soil
treatments on the south-aspect and comparable to all other treatments on
the north-aspect (Tabje 5).
Of much greater magnitude and importance than total vegetation cover are
differences in relative cover by species categories. In 1976 the TOSCO
treatments were dominated by a combination of perennial grasses and annual
species, whereas all the other treatments were dominated by perennial grasses
or a combination of perennial grasses and shrubs (Tables 6 S 7). The abun-
dance of annuals (largely cheatgrass and mustard, Appendix Tables 12 & 13) on
the TOSCO spent shale plots is apparently a reflection of the loss in peren-
nial vegetation in 1974 as a result of resalinization (see salinity section).
In 1975 and 1976 the annuals filled in the bare areas to give a total ground
cover comparable to that on the other treatments. Since abundance and pro-
ductivity of annuals within a stand of perennials is usually a function of
annual precipitation it will be of interest to observe the plots through a
below-normal precipitation cycle.
22
-------
TABLE 5. PERCENT VEGETATION COVER FOR EACH TREATMENT BY YEAR LOW-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
to
w
NORTH ASPECT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Treatment
TOSCO Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
30 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
USBM Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/USBM
60 cm Soil Cover/USBM
Soil Control
F
1973
52 cf
80a
80a
55 be
72a
72a
65abc
**
1974
42 c
62ab
62ab
55 be
75a
67ab
62ab
**
1975
67
70
72
87
92
87
80
NS
1976
85ab
87ab
75 b
87ab
97a
90a
95a
*
1973
47 c
80a
80a
57 be
67ab
67ab
62 be
**
SOUTH
1974
42 b
57ab
60a
55ab
62a
60a
55ab
*
ASPECT
1975
67
85
77
77
75
70
80
NS
1976
60 b
72a
75a
67ab
77a
77a
75a
**
t Values with a'Common letter within columns are not significantly different as tested by Tukey's Q mean
separation test at 5% level.
* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at U level; NS No significant difference.
-------
TABLE 6. RELATIVE COMPOSITION IN PERCENT BY SPECIES CATEGORIES
FOR EACH TREATMENT NORTH-ASPECT, LOW-ELEVATION STUDY
SITE, 1976.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Treatment
TOSCO Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
30 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
USBM Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/USBM
60 cm Soil Cover/USBM
Soil Control
F
Perennial
Grasses
ABf .
29 b3
A
79a
A
61afc
A
66a
A
83a
A
69a
A
79a
*
Forbs
B
0
C
0
B
0
B
0
C
0
B
0
C
1
NS
Shrubs
B
15
BC
4
B
20
B
16
B
15
B
24
B
13
NS
Annuals
A
56a
B
17 b
B
19 b
B
18 b
C
2 b
B
7 b
C
2 b
**
F
*
**
**
**
**
**
**
t Values with common letters (ABC) within rows (comparing species category
within a treatment) are not significantly different by Tukey's test at the
5% level.
§ Values with cornnon italicized letters (aba) within columns (comparing spent
shale treatments within species categories) are not significantly different
by Tukey's test at the 5% level.
* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level.
NS No significant difference.
24
-------
TABLE 7. RELATIVE COMPOSITION IN PERCENT BY SPECIES CATEGORIES
FOR EACH TREATMENT. SOUTH-ASPECT, LOW-ELEVATION STUDY
SITE, 1976.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Treatment
TOSCO Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
30 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
USBM Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/USBM
60 cm Soil Cover/USBM
Soil Control
F
Perennial
Grasses
At
35
A
85
A
52
A
56
A
64
A
66
A
79
NS
Forbs
B
0
B
0
B
0
C
0
C
0
B
0
3
2
NS
Shrubs
A
32
B
6
A
42
AB
29
B
28
AB
30
B
13
NS
Annuals
A
33as
B
9 b
B
6 b
BC
15ab
BC
8 b
B
4 b
B
6 b
*
F
*
**
**
**
**
*
**
t Values with common letters (ABC) within rows (comparing species category
within a treatment) are not significantly different by Tukey's test at the
5% level.
§ Values with common italicized letters (aba) within columns (comparing spent
shale treatments within species categories) are not significante different
by Tukey's test at the 5% level.
* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level.
NS No significant difference.
25
-------
15 cm Soil Over TOSCO
After four growing seasons this treatment has a total vegetation cover
(87%) comparable to all other treatments on the north-aspect and significantly
greater (72%) than the TOSCO (60%) on the south-aspect (Table 5). This
treatment is dominated by perennial grasses and generally contains less
shrubs than any other treatment (Tables 6 & 7). Fewer annuals are found on
this treatment than the TOSCO treatment.
30 cm Soil Over TOSCO
Total vegetation cover on this treatment is similar to the 15 cm of soil
cover over TOSCO spent shale (Table 5). However, this treatment has more
shrubs on it than the 15 cm soil cover over TOSCO.
USBM Spent Shale
In 1973, total vegetation cover established on this treatment was compar-
able to that on the TOSCO treatments and tended to be less than that on the
soil-covered treatments (Table 5). By 1976, total vegetation cover was not
significantly different on this treatment than any other treatment. Perennial
grasses dominated this treatment in 1976 although shrubs and annuals were also
obvious (Figure 7, Tables 6 & 7) .
Figure 7. Vegetation dominated by perennial grasses but
with substantial amounts of winterfat (small
white shrub) and fourwing saltbush on south-
aspect, low-elevation USBM spent shale plots,
July 1976.
2<
-------
15 cm Soil Over USBM
This treatment tends to have greater vegetation cover than the USBM
treatment, however, the difference is not statistically different (Table 5).
The relative composition by species categories is also similar for this
treatment to the USBM treatment except for a trend to more annuals and less
perennial grasses on the USBM (Tables 6 & 7).
60 cm Soil Over USBM
Total vegetation cover and species categories tend to be the same for
this treatment as for the 15 cm of soil-cover over USBM spent shale.
Soil
Total vegetation cover on this treatment in 1973 was statistically less
than on some of the soil-cover treatments (Table 5). These results are diffi-
cult to explain except that the soil-cover over the shaped spent shales may
have been a firmer and better seedbed than the soils. By 1976 vegetation
cover had increased on the soil treatments to one of the highest cover values
for any of the treatments (Table 5}. The soil treatments were dominated by
perennial grasses but included a number of shrubs and few annuals
(Tables 6 & 7).
In summary, a rather large amount of vegetation cover was maintained on
all the treatments during the 1974-1976 growing seasons. However, a substan-
tial amount of the vegetation on the TOSCO treatment was annuals which might
be expected to produce considerably less cover under below-average precipi-
tation conditions. The south-facing plots had less standing crop and less
ground cover than the north-facing plots.
Moisture in Spent Shale and Soil Treatments
Plant available moisture is usually the most limiting factor which
determines the amount and type of vegetation which can be maintained in the
semiarid oil shale area. Thus, moisture was monitored at least monthly in
each plot throughout each growing season (Appendix Tables 17 thru 32).
To summarize this large amount of moisture data, early spring and fall
moisture profiles were plotted by years for each treatment (Figures 8-11).
The spring moisture profiles are reflections of spring snowmelt recharge,
while the fall profiles show soil moisture late in the growing season. The
soil moisture readings (Figure 8-11) for each year were made on the following
dates:
Spring Fall
1973 June 27 September 13
1974 April 18 September 9
1975 April 9-10 October 13
1976 March 10 or April 1 August 8
27
-------
In the discussion to follow all moisture is in percent by volume. It
also must be noted that the neutron probe gives quite low moisture values at
the 15 cm depth under dry conditions. This is apparently because the 15 cm
layer of dry soil material is not thick enough to moderate the neutron flux
and some neutron loss to the atmosphere occurs.
TOSCO Spent Shale
The profiles of the TOSCO spent shale treatment were filled to saturation
(about 40%) as the result of leaching in June 1973 (Figures 8 & 9). By the
fall of 1973, moisture in the top 60 cm had been reduced to 20-30% and mois-
ture at greater depths was reduced to about 30%. The water loss in the upper
60 cm was probably primarily lost to evapotranspiration, the water loss below
60 cm was probably due to gravitational loss and possibly some transpiration.
Irrigation with 50 mm of water in the fall of 1973 and 127 mm of over-
winter precipitation resulted in the TOSCO profiles containing about 35%
moisture in the spring of 1974. Thirty to 35% moisture appears to be near
field capacity for the TOSCO spent shale. By the fall of 1974 soil moisture
was reduced to about 20%.
In 1975, there was moisture recharge to depths of 130 cm on the TOSCO
plots from a total of 137 mm of precipitation received between March 1 and
July 1, 1975. By fall 1975, moisture was again depleted throughout the
profile to about 20% (Figures 8 a 9).
Recharge in 1976 was much less than in 1975 (Figures 8 & 9) even though
the site received 190 mm of precipitation between March 1 and July 1. Note
that in 1976 moisture recharge and depletion was only from the upper 90 cm of
the profile as compared to about 130 cm of the profile in 1975. An explana-
tion for the limited recharge on the north-aspect is that there was 28 mm of
surface runoff from snowmelt.
15 cm of Soil Over TOSCO
Moisture recharge and depletion patterns for the 15 cm soil cover over
TOSCO spent shale were similar to the TOSCO spent shale treatments as just
discussed.
30 cm Soil Over TOSCO
The 30 cm of soil cover over TOSCO treatment was not leached, this
resulted in considerably less moisture in the profile in the spring of 1973
than in the TOSCO, 15 cm of soil over TOSCO, or soil treatments (Figures 8 &
9). Recharge in 1974 and 1975 appears to be less for this treatment than the
other treatments mentioned above. This may be because there was less moisture
left at the end of the 1973 and 1974 growing seasons in the 30 cm of soil over
TOSCO treatment than the other treatments. This in turn is throught to be a
reflection of less moisture in the profile to start with and implies that some
water stored in 1973 was used in 1974 and 1975 by plants growing on the
leached treatments. Note that by 1976 the moisture extraction patterns were
similar for all treatments. This indicates that all of the residual moisture
from leaching had been depleted. The moisture available and extracted in 1976
from the north-aspect 30 cm soil-covered TOSCO and soil control treatments
(Figure 8) are greater than the TOSCO spent shale and 15 cm soil-cover
28
-------
TOSCO SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol. /. Moisture ty vol. 1973 ., Moisture
by vol % Moisture by vol
O 10 20 30 4O 0 10 20 30 43 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
1974-
XIII
0,
30
£eo
^J
|BO
at
3-20
150
180
-1975-
0
3o'
i60
U
c SC
15C
180
--1976---
A-FALL
0-SPRING
Figure 8. Volumetric moisture profiles for TOSCO spent
shale and soil treatments. Low-elevation study
site, north-aspect.
29
-------
TOSCO SPENT SHALE 15 CM SOIL COVER 30 CM SOIL COVER SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol. ~% Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol.
0 10 20 30 40 O 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
30
60
80
120
150
180
0
30
^ GO
^u
680
d
S120
150
180
1974--
Yi
li
o
30
-§60
^J
^ 80
Q,
-120
150
180
---1975---
0
30
| 60
£ 80
a
150
180
--1976-
A-FALL
O-SPRING
Figure 9. Volumetric moisture profiles for TOSCO spent
shale and soil treatments. Low-elevation study
site, south-aspect.
30
-------
treatments. This appears to be the result of considerably more surface runoff
from the latter two treatments, and thus less recharge (see the surface
runoff section).
USBM Spent Shale
Leaching in 1973 resulted in saturation of the profile of this treatment.
By the fall of 1973, the moisture had been depleted somewhat but considerable
plant-available water was left in the profile as indicated by the fact that
the moisture content was about 25% as compared to fall moisture content of
15-20% in later years (Figures 10 & 11).
Recharge in the springs of 1974 and 1975 appears to have returned the
profiles of this treatment on the north-aspect to field capacity (Figure 10).
In contrast, recharge on the south-aspect in 1975 was only to a depth of
120 cm (Figure 11). Moisture appears to be depleted to lower levels in 1975
than in 1974, indicating use of water stored in 1973 by transpiration in 1975.
In 1976, recharge occurred to a depth of about 140 cm on the north-aspect
and only to 90 cm on the south-aspect. This reduced plant-available water
(the area between the spring and fall moisture profiles) rather dramatically
on the south-aspect plots.
No major differences are evident in the moisture patterns between the
USBM spent shale treatments and the TOSCO spent shale treatments.
15 cm Soil Over USBM
Moisture recharge and depletion patterns for this treatment were similar
to the USBM spent shale treatment discussed above.
60 cm Soil Over USBM
This treatment was not leached in 1973 and thus does not show quite as
much water in the profile in spring 1973 as the USBM spent shale and 15 cm
soil cover over USBM treatments. In 1974-1976 the moisture patterns appeared
similar for all USBM and soil-covered over USBM spent shale treatments.
Soil Control
No major differences in moisture profiles among the spent shale treat-
ments and the soil treatments were evident except that recharge in the soil
was greater in the spring in 1976 on the north-aspect than in the TOSCO and
15 cm soil cover over TOSCO treatments. This was apparently a reflection of
greater runoff from the latter treatments.
In summary, there is evidence of use in 1974 and 1975 of moisture stored
in 1973 from the leaching treatment. This means that 1976 was apparently the
first year the vegetation had to depend entirely on seasonal precipitation.
In 1976 recharge occurred to maximum depths of 140 cm on the north-aspects
and only 90 cm on the south aspects. Recharge in 1976 on the north-aspect
TOSCO treatment and 15 cm of soil cover over TOSCO was less than on the other
treatments, this was apparently because of greater runoff from snowmelt.
31
-------
USBM SPENT SHALE
% Moisture by vol.
O 10 2O 30 40
30
.. 50
= 80
^120
150
180
15 CM SOIL COVER 60 CM SOIL COVER
°/o Moisture ty vol. 1973 % Moisture by vol.
10 20 30 40 0 JO 20 _J» 40
SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol.
10 20 30 40
.1974-
30
60
5 80
a
S120
150
180
- 5
-13
0
30
i60
u
i80
ED
°120
150
180
1975-
- -1976-
A-FALL o-SPRING
Figure 10. Volumetric moisture profiles for USBM spent
shale and soil treatments. Low-elevation study
site, north-aspect.
32
-------
JSBM SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
60 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol. °/» Moisture by vol. 1973 % Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol.
0 10 20 30 40 0 10 2030400 10203040 0 1020X40
30
5 80
Q120
150
180
a
30
§60
£80
150
180
- -1974
0
30
E6Q
-1975 -
;80
I
'120
150
180
- -1976--
1801
A-FALL
0-SPRI NG
Figure 11. Volumetric moisture profiles for USBM spent
shale and soil treatments. Low-elevation study
site, south-aspect.
33
-------
Leaching and Movement of Soluble Salts
The salinity levels of the spent shales were initially too high for the
materials to be considered as suitable plant growth media. Thus the spent
shale was leached as were the 15 cm of soil cover over spent shale treat-
ments. The 30 cm of soil over TOSCO and 60 cm of soil over USBM spent shale
treatments were not leached.
Soluble salts were determined by electrical conductivity (EC) measure-
ments on core samples (Appendix Tables 33-40) and by monitoring in-place
salinity sensors (Appendix Tables 41-45). The salinity sensors gave erratic
data and appear to be unsuitable for long-term monitoring studies, thus the
sensor data was not used in the following discussion.
The EC data used in the following presentation is on the 1:1 soil-water
extracts, thus the data are not directly interpretable in terms of plant
growth by the common salinity standards for saturation extracts. A rough
approximation for plant growth interpretation on the 1:1 extracts can be made
by multiplying these EC values by 2. The common interpretations are that
soils with saturation extract EC values of 4 mmhos/cm and greater are saline,
and that soils with saturation extract EC values of 16 mmhos/cm and greater
are extremely saline (Richards, 1954).
TOSCO Spent Shale
Soluble salts in the TOSCO spent shale were leached in 1973 to depths of
greater than 180 cm on the north-aspect plots (Figure 12) and to 150 cm on the
south-aspect plots (Figure 13). Initially, these spent shales had saturation
extract conductivities of about 18 mmhos/cm. By the fall of 1974, the TOSCO
spent shales had resalinized, somewhat throughout the profile, but particu-
larly at the surface where conductivities were 15-17 mmhos/cm on the 1:1
extract (Figures 12 & 13). This resalinization was the result of water and
the dissolved salts moving upward by capillary action in the siIty-textured
TOSCO spent shale.
In the spring of 1975, the salts were moved downward as a result of
127 mm of precipitation received during the winter and spring. By fall of
1975 there was1 no indication of salt movement upward, a situation which also
prevailed in 1976 (Figures 12 & 13). Thus it appears that the soluble salts
have reached somewhat of an equilibrium with their environment in that rapid
plant utilization of moisture in the spring reduces greatly the potential for
upward movement of water and dissolved salt. These are the results that were
predicted for semi arid areas when the soil surface is beyond the capillary
rise potential from a water table (Striffler et al., 1974).
15 cm Soil Over TOSCO
Salt movement patterns on the 15 cm soil over TOSCO spent shale treat-
ments are nearly identical to those discussed above for the TOSCO spent
shale (Figures 12 s 13). Of particular interest is that by the fall of 1974
soluble salt had moved through the 15 cm of soil cover and concentrated at
the surface. But as in the case of the TOSCO treatments the salt was moved
down by precipitation in 1975 and did not concentrate on the surface by the
fall of 1975 or 1976.
34
-------
0
30
eeo
, u
-80
a
120
150
180
TOSCO SPENT SHALE
EC X 103
5 10 15 20 0
15 CM SOIL COVER 30 CM SOIL COVER SOIL CONTROL
ECxIO3 1973 ECxIO3 ECxIO3
b 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 O 5 10 15 20
0
30
eo
(J
80
12O
150
160
-1974-- -
I
xnr
0
30
t 60
U
5 80
Q.
£L>
Q120
150
180
1975
- 1976
0
30
1 ^
%0
150
180
TFALL
SPRING
Figure 12. Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and
soil treatments. North-aspect, low-elevation
study site.
35
-------
TOSCO SPENT SHALE 15 CM SOIL COVER 30 CM SOIL COVER SOIL CONTROL
0
30
"E so
u
£ 80
*.
150
180
CxIO3 ECX103 1973 ECX103 ECX103
5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 3D 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
\\
1
1 t 9
V^
.
'
-
.
.
'
.
1974
11
y
0
30
f 60
£80
*-
150
180
1975-
0
30
r
£80
Q.
1976 --
Q,
120
150
180
TFALL
SPWNG
Figure 13. Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and
soil treatments. South-aspect, low-elevation
study site.
36
-------
30 cm Soil Over TOSCO
These plots were unleached thus when initially core sampled in the spring
of 1974 the soluble salt content in the 30-120 cm zone was considerably
greater than in the TOSCO and 15 cm soil cover over TOSCO plots (Figures 12 &
13) . Soluble salt did not accumulate on the surface of these unleached
treatments by the fall of 1974 (Figures 12 & 13) , this is in direct contrast
to the TOSCO leached treatments. Salt apparently did not move to or accumu-
late on the surface because water stored in the profile was less in the
unleached treatments (Figures 8 & 9) and thus did not have the potential to
move by capillary action to the surface carrying salts with it.
USBM Spent Shale -
The soluble salt content of the 180 cm profile of USBM spent shale was
reduced to low levels by the 1973 leaching (Figures 14 & 15) . In contrast
to the TOSCO spent shale, resalinization of the USBM spent shale surface did
not occur by the fall of 1974 (Figures 12-15) . This is because the coarse-
textured USBM spent shale does not have the potential for capillary movement
of water that the fine-textured TOSCO has.
There may be a slight increase in soluble salt levels in the USBM spent
shales at depths of 60-180 cm over the 1974-1976 span, this is probably due
to salt diffusion out of large particles rather than from salt movement from
above or below.
15 cm Soil Over USBM
Soluble salt movement in this treatment was quite similar to that for
the USBM treatment discussed above.
60 cm Soil Over USBM
The 60 cm soil over USBM spent shale was unleached and thus in 1974 shows
a high soluble salt content at 60 cm and below (Figures 14 & 15). There was
no tendency for the soluble salt to move upward into the soil cover, on the
contrary, the soluble salt appears to be moving downward over the 1974-1976
period (Figures 14 & 15).
Soil
The soil was initially non-saline and there was no indication of salt
accumulation or movement over the 1974-1976 period.
In summary, these patterns of salt movement in the spent shales and soil
cover over spent shale treatments are probably the most important findings of
the study. The soluble salts were leached to depths of 120 to 180 cm by
application of 100 cm of leach water. On the fine-textured TOSCO spent shale
the salt moved back into the leached zone and accumulated on the surface as
a result of capillary water movement from rather high subsurface moisture
accumulations. Resalinization did not occur on the 30 cm of soil cover over
TOSCO spent shale which was unleached and thus did not have a reservoir of
water subject to capillary rise. Resalinization of the coarse-textured USBM
spent shale did not occur.
37
-------
-
^
0
30
60
80
120
1bO
180
USBM SPENT SHALE
ECxIO-
15 CM SOIL COVER
60 CM SOIL COVER
N o
m
ECxIO3 1973 ECxIO3
) 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
e a s u r e m
.in 1973
e n t s t a k
-
SOIL CONTROL
ECxICH
e n
1974
13
0
30
E60
U
£80
&
°120
150
180
1975
J
0
30
- 60
u
c80
a
150
180
1976
T-FALL
SPRING
Figure 14. Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and
soil treatments. North-aspect, low-elevation
study site.
38
-------
USBM SPENT SHALE 15 CM SOIL COVER
60 CM SOIL COVER
ECX103 1973 ECx103 EC x 103
5 10 15 20 .0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
EC x 103
0
30
i 60
o
5 90
Q.
150
180
0
30
I60
5 80
Q.
150
180
0
30
^60
U
t80
S120
150
180
5 10 15 20
N o
T i . . . ,
"I
' ' t 6
.IT
. .
K
v/
. w
1-
'
SOIL CONTROL
m
e a s u r e m
e n t s t a k
i n
1973
e n
1974
10
14
1975
0
30
I 60
5
120
150
180
1976
T-FALL
SPRING
Figure 15.
Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and
soil treatments. South-aspect, low-elevation
study site.
39
-------
Of even more interest is that the accumulation of salt on the surface
of the TOSCO spent shales was leached to depths of 30-60 cm in 1975 by winter
and spring precipitation. The soluble salts have remained at this depth
through the 1975 and 1976 growing seasons, apparently maintained at about this
depth by a balance among precipitation, evaporation, and transpiration.
Surface Runoff and Sediment Yields
The runoff and sediment collection system was completed in June 1974.
Measureable amounts occurred from one summer storm in 1974, snowmelt runoff
in spring 1975, one summer storm in 1975, and snowmelt runoff in the spring
Of 1976. The amounts of runoff, sediment yields, conductivity, and chemical
analysis for common ions are reported in Appendix Tables 47-54. The data is
summarized in the body of this report in Tables 8-11.
TOSCO Spent Shale
The 19 mm of rainfall which fell in 30 minutes in July 1974 was about a
10-year maximum probable storm for the low-elevation study site. The storm
resulted in an average of 36 liters of runoff from the TOSCO north-aspect
treatment (Table 8) this is 1.6 mm or about 8% of the rainfall. There was
no runoff from the north-aspect soil treatments and only a small amount of
runoff from the south-aspect treatments including the TOSCO spent shale
(Table 9). The limited amount of runoff water presents a high salinity
hazard if used for irrigation (Richards, 1954).
TABLE 8. SUMMER STORM SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL
PLOTS. LOW-ELEVATION STUDY SITE. 1974-1976.
1974, 19 mm rain in 30 minutes on August 14
North As'pect
South Aspect
15 cm 30 cm Soil
TOSCO Soil Cover Soil Cover Control
15 cm 30 cm Soil
TOSCO Soil Cover Soil Cover Control
Runoff/plot (1:)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhos/cm
@ 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
36
505
1450
1.0
n_
<4-
0
c
3
i_
o
1-
4-
0
C
3
i.
O
z
,,_
-------
TABLE 9.
SNOWMELT RUNOFF DATA AND WATER QUALITY FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. LOW-
ELEVATION STUDY SITE. 1975-1976.
1975
North Aspect
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC nmhos/cm
8 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
TOSCO
94
76
265
0.3
15 cm
Soil Cover
106
89
105
0.2
30 cm
Soil Cover
120t
91
100
0.3
Soil
Control
3.5
3
310
0.4
TOSCO
120f
94
195
0.4
South Aspect
15 cm
Soil Cover
165f
98
. 230
0.2
30 cm
Soil Cover
112
. 105
265
0.6
Soil
Control
20
18
150
0.2
1976
North Aspect
South Aspect
15 cm 30 cm Soil 15 cm 30 cm Soil
TOSCO Soil Cover Soil Cover Control TOSCO Soil Cover Soil Cover Control
Runoff/plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC uiii.hos/cm
@ 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
622
3
350
0.2
495
8
150
0.1
71
1
150
0.1
36
0.4
200
0.3
92
2
1300
0.1
73
6
250
0.2
61
4
300
0.3
14
1
200
0.2
* Total runoff was not accurately measured because of leaks in the collection basins.
The sediment yield for the TOSCO spent shale plots for the August 1974
storm (Table 8) calculates out to about 200 kg/ha (200 pounds/acre) which is
quite low by agricultural standards.
The sodium adsorption ratio which is an indication of the possible
hazard posed by sodium in causing soil dispersion was low for this and all
other runoff events for all spent shale and soil treatments.
The summer storm on July 16, 1975 (Table 8) produced some runoff from
the TOSCO spent shale treatments. The quality of this runoff for irrigation
was poor. Sediment yields and the sodium adsorption ratio were low for
runoff from this storm.
The amount of runoff and its quality are difficult to interpret for the
1975 snowmelt (Table 9) because the total amount of runoff was unknown due
to leaking collection basins. The basins were sealed in the summer of 1975.
The north-aspect TOSCO plots yielded an average of 622 liters of runoff or
nearly 3 cm from snowmelt in 1976 (Table 9). Runoff on the south-aspect was
much less. Water quality of the north slope runoff was high for irrigation,
whereas on the south slope water quality was marginal. Note that the lesser
amounts of runoff produce higher quantities of dissolved salts, which is what
41
-------
is expected for salts accumulated on the surface which are dissolved and
moved by the initial water flow- The snowmelt produced very little sediment
and the sodium adsorption ratio of the runoff was low.
15 cm Soil Over TOSCO
In general, runoff and water quality for this treatment were similar to
that of the TOSCO spent shale discussed above. There are some differences
but the results are quite variable between replications.
30 cm Soil Over TOSCO
Runoff was less from this treatment than for the TOSCO spent shale for
the summer storms except for the south-aspect treatment on the July 1975
storm. Runoff from snowmelt in 1976 was much less from this treatment than
from the TOSCO spent shale and 15 cm of soil cover TOSCO spent shale - this
may be because the latter two treatments were frozen resulting in more
runoff. The water quality of spring runoff for the 30 cm of soil over TOSCO
spent shale was high.
USBM Spent Shale
Runoff from the two summer storms was very little for the USBM spent
shale treatments (Table 10) and considerably less than the runoff from the
TOSCO spent shale (Table 8). These results are consistent with the textures
of the spent shales. The conductivities of the runoff water was rather high,
but what might be expected from such a small amount of runoff.
TABLE 10. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FROM USBM SPENT SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. LOW-
ELEVATION STUDY SITE. 1974-1975.
i
1974, 19 mm rain in 30 minutes on
North Aspect
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhos/cm
9 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
USBM
1.2
30
1880
3.3
15 cm
Soil Cover
<4~
O
3
S.
Z
60 cm
Soil Cover
**-
<*-
0
C
3
!-
O
Soil
Control
*fc.
o
C
3
&.
0
2:
USBM
1.2
131
1400
1.3
August 14
South Aspect
15 cm
Soil Cover
£
o
C
3
O
g
60 era
Soil Cover
1.2
21.2
1640
0.8
Soil
Control
V
o
C
o
-^
1975, 10.6 mm rain over three 30-minute periods on July 16
North Aspect
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhos/cm
@ 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
USBM
2.0
5
2300
1.5
15 cm
Soil Cover
1.8
7
2600
2.3
60 cm
Soil Cover
2.6
5
1000
0.6
Soil
Control
t-
«*-.
o
C
3
O
USBM
it-
o
C
3
t.
O
South Aspect
15 cm
Soil Cover
1.5
6
4100
3.2
60 cm
Soil Cover
2.0
10
2300
1.5
Soil
Control
-
O
C
3
O
42
-------
Snowmelt runoff from USBM plots was low in 1976 (Table 11) and much less
than from the TOSCO plots (Table 9) . The conductivity of the runoff water
was relatively low when the small amount of runoff is considered.
TABLE 11. SNOWMELT RUNOFF DATA AND WATER QUALITY FOR USBM SPENT SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. LOW-
ELEVATION STUDY SITE. 1975-1976.
1975
North Aspect
Runoff/plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC wnhos/cm
1? 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
USBM
83
49
115
0.2
15 cm
Soil Cover
8
6
205
0.4
60 cm
Soil Cover
29
22
100
0.2
Soil
Control
49
23
150
0.2
USBM
1371"
103
230
0.2
South Aspect
15 cm
Soil Cover
120f
94
190
0.2
60 cm
Soil Cover
144f
92
160
0.4
Soil
Control
25
17
130
0.2
1976
North Aspect
South Aspect
15 cm 60 cm Soil
USBM Soil Cover Soil Cover Control
15 cm 60 cm Soil
USBM Soil Cover Soil Cover Control
Runoff/plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC 'jmhos/cra
@ 25 C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
7
0.2
450
0.3
10
0.6
350
0.3
16
0.3
300
0.2
22
0.9
400
0.3
1
0.7
400
0.3
2
0.2
900
0.4
2
0.2
750
0.3
13
2.1
500
0.2
Total runoff was not accurately measured because of leaks in the collection basins.
15 cm of Soil and 60 cm of Soil Over USBM
The runoff and water quality of these treatments are about the same as
for the USBM plots discussed above.
Soil
The runoff on the soil plots tended to be less than from the TOSCO plots
(Tables 8 S 9) and similar to the runoff from the USBM plots (Tables 10 & 11).
In summary, only two summer storm events over three years produced
runoff. The runoff was greater for the TOSCO plots than for the USBM or
soil plots. Water quality of the rather limited amount of summer storm
runoff was rated as having a medium to high salinity hazard for irrigation.
Runoff from snowmelt was much greater than from the summer storms.
Quality of the snowmelt runoff was rated as posing a low salinity hazard for
irrigation with the exception of the TOSCO south-aspect treatment which was
rated as posing a high salinity hazard. Caution has to be used in interpre-
ting the water quality for irrigation as large amounts of runoff tend to
43
-------
produce water low in soluble salts whereas small amounts of runoff are high
in soluble salts.
Sediment yield on all treatments was very low - this is a reflection of
the initial mulching treatments and then the rather large amount of vegetation
cover maintained on the plots.
The sodium adsorption ratio was low for runoff water from all treatments.
Near-Surface Temperatures
Temperatures 1 cm below the surface of TOSCO spent shale and soil plots
were continuously recorded during the 1973-1976 growing seasons. Maximum
temperatures were plotted along with the air temperatures (Figure 16) and are
used in the following discussion.
In 1973, the near-surface temperatures were approximately the same for
both aspects and treatments (Figure 16). The temperatures never exceeded
35 C during the growing season as the result of daily irrigation during most
of June and July. The low temperature probably contributed to the successful
plant establishment on the black-colored TOSCO spent shale.
In 1974-1976 the near-surface temperatures for all treatments showed a
gradual rise during April and May, but increased greatly in June and early
July (Figure 16). The rise in temperature is directly related to the maturity
of the vegetation cover. In April and May, the cool-season grasses are
growing rapidly and the surface is being cooled by both the green transpiring
plants and moisture evaporation from the spent shale surface. When the
moisture was depleted and the vegetation reached senescence or maturity, the
rapid rise in temperatures occurred for all treatments and aspects.
The temperatures on the south-aspect treatments have exceeded those on
the north-aspect by an average of 10-15 C during April and May, and by as
much as 20 C in late June, July, and August. These temperature differences
with aspects are what were expected but do indicate one of the major problems
in vegetation establishment on south-facing slopes.
In 1975 and 1976, the north-aspect TOSCO spent shale treatments were
10-15 C warmer than the north-aspect soil, this is a reflection of less
vegetation cover and decomposition of the mulch thereby exposing some black
surface of the shale. There was little difference in the near-surface tem-
peratures when comparing south-aspect TOSCO spent shale and soil in 1975 and
1976.
The difference between the air temperature in the instrument box in
1973-1974 as compared to 1975-1976 is result of moving the instrument box,
which housed the recorders, approximately 20 cm off the ground surface in
1975. This resulted in a cooler air tempearture in the box in 1975 and 1976.
44
-------
U
60
55
50
45
40
35
3°
25
20
15
10
5
0
1973
oo TOSCO SOUTH
TOSCO NORTH
SOIL SOUTH
SOIL NORTH
AIR (BOX)
MARCH APRIL
MAY
JUNE
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
Figure 16. Maximum temperatures at depths of
1 cm on TOSCO spent shale and soil
plots. Low-elevation study site.
45
-------
In summary, surface temperatures are sufficiently high in late June and
July on the south-aspect TOSCO spent shale and soil control plots to limit
seedling establishment. This does not appear to be directly influencing the
mature vegetation cover already established except that the south-aspect is
more xeric as reflected by less vegetation cover.
HIGH-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
The high-elevation study site is 80 km from Rifle which serves as our
base of operations. Water for leaching and irrigation was hauled 4.8 kilo-
meters to the plots. Because of the remoteness of the site and the difficult
water hauling logistics, these plots did not get the intensive and timely
management that the low-elevation plots received. The initial stand esta-
blished by seeding in 1974 was unsatisfactory so the plots were reseeded in
1975. Thus only one year's results (1976) for vegetation growth without
irrigation are available. Because of the shorter time span since the high-
elevation plots were established, the following discussion is more limited
than for the low-elevation plots.
Vegetation
A thin stand of vegetation dominated by big sage resulted from seeding
the high-elevation plots in June of 1974. The thin stand was due to: 1. too
low of a seeding rate of perennial grasses; 2. inadequate leaching of the
spent shales and subsequent resalinization. The low seeding rate for the
perennial grasses (2.5 kg/ha, Appendix Table 55) was used in an effort to
reduced competition thereby encouraging establishment of forbs and shrubs.
The results of the 1974 seeding are included in this report (Appendix Tables
56-59) for documentation and also to raise the question if big sage should be
included in seed mixes for similar sites. This species dominated the 1974
seeding. Incontrast, only several plants were established in 1973 on the low-
elevation plots. Viability of this species varies greatly among seed lots.
As there are about 8 million seeds per kilogram, there appears to be no way
to adjust the seeding rate to obtain a desirable mix of big sage with other
species.
Barley straw was used as a mulch for the 1974 seeding. As a result some
barley grew on the plots, this was sampled and certain trace elements deter-
mined in the foliage by Ward and Nagey (1977). Molybdenum and zinc were
higher in the barley grown on the spent shales than in the soil.
Due to the thin stand of vegetation established by the 1974 seeding, the
plots were rototilled and reseeded on June 10, 1975, irrigation was used for
establishment. A good stand of native perennial plants was established on
all treatments in 1975 with ground cover ranging from 43-90 percent (Table 12).
In 1976 the vegetation cover on all north-aspect treatments was similar except
for the 30 cm soil cover over USBM spent shale. The latter treatment was
invaded by pocket gophers which resulted in a loss of some vegetation and
considerable surface disturbance, including pushing piles of spent shale up
through the soil cover. On the south-aspect treatments there was no differ-
ence in cover among the treatments.
46
-------
TABLE 12. PERCENT VEGETATION COVER FOR EACH TREATMENT BY YEAR. HIGH-
ELEVATION STUDY SITE.
North Aspect South Aspect
Treatment 1975 1976 1975 1976
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
TOSCO Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
30 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
USBM Spent Shale
15 cm Soil Cover/USBM
30 cm Soil Cover/USBM
Soil
F
63af
44 b
58ab
53ab
54ab
43 b
49ab
*
91a
89a
75ab
78ab
73ab
60 b
83a
**
53
43
54
54
54
52
50
NS
77
76
77
83
73
70
74
NS
t Values with a common letter within columns are not significantly different
as tested by Tukey's Q mean separation test at 5% level.
* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level;
NS No significant difference.
Perennial grasses tended to dominate all treatments in 1976 (Tables 13 &
14) although forbs and shrubs were prominent on most treatments. There ap-
pears to be a tendency for fewer forbs to be established on the TOSCO and USBM
plots, this is probably a reflection of the higher seeding rate of western
wheatgrass (Table 3) seeded on these plots. The higher seeding rate of this
species was used to ensure a stand, and in retrospect should have been used
on all treatments.
Fourwing saltbrush is by far the dominant shrub on the high-elevation
site (Appendix Tables 64-67). If it continues to increase in size comparable
to that grown on the low-elevation site it will eventually dominate the plots,
and probably should be thinned.
As the high-elevation plots have only gone through one growing season
without irrigation it is difficult to make comparisons with the low-elevation
plots which have gone through 3 growing seasons without irrigation. Overall,
the amount of vegetation cover is similar for both sites. A major contrast
between the two sites is that annuals make up a major component of the vege-
tation on the TOSCO low-elevation plots whereas they are a minor component on
the TOSCO high-elevation plots. The difference is due to partial loss of the
perennial vegetation stand on the low-elevation study site. Thus salt leach-
ing management had a great influence upon the type of vegetation established.
47
-------
TABLE 13. RELATIVE COMPOSITION IN PERCENT BY SPECIES CATEGORIES
FOR EACH TREATMENT. NORTH-ASPECT, HIGH-ELEVATION
STUDY SITE, 1976.
Treatment
1. TOSCO Spent Shale
2. 15 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
3. 30 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
4. USBM Spent Shale
5. 15 cm Soil Cover/USBM
6. 30 cm Soil Cover/USBM
7. Soil
F
Perennial
Grasses
Af
70a§
A
51oZ>
A
55afc
A
72a
A
Slab
42 b
<**
*
Forbs
C
2ab
AB
27a
B
24afc
B
1 b
B
16aZ>
1*»
16,,
*
Shrubs
B
22
B
15
B
11
B
24
B
9
18
19
NS
Annuals
C
6
B
7
B
10
B
3
B
14
25
16
NS
F
**
**
**
**
**
NS
NS
Values with common letters (ABC) within rows (comparing species category
within a treatment) are not significantly different by Tukey's test at the
5% level.
Values with common italicized letters (aba) within columns (comparing spent
shale treatments within species categories) are not significantly different
by Tukey's test at the 5% level.
* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level;
NS No significant difference.
48
-------
TABLE 14. RELATIVE COMPOSITION IN- PERCENT BY SPECIES CATEGORIES
FOR EACH TREATMENT. SOUTH-ASPECT, HIGH-ELEVATION
STUDY SITE,1976.
Treatment
1. TOSCO Spent Shale
2. 15 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
3. 30 cm Soil Cover/TOSCO
4. USBM Spent Shale
5. 15 cm Soil Cover/ USBM
6. 30 cm Soil Cover/USBM
7- Soil
F
Perennial
Grasses
Af
76
A
56
A
51
A
48
A
50
A
37
37
NS
Forbs
C
1 fc§
B
24a
A
12 b
B
3 b
B
8 b
B
7 b
11 b
**
Shrubs
B
20
B
15
A
28
A
38
AB
21
A
31
29
NS
Annuals
C
3
B
5
A
9
B
11
AB
21
AB
25
23
NS
F
**
**
*
**
**
*
NS
"*" Values with common letters (ABC) within rows (comparing species category
within a treatment) are not significantly different by Tukey's test at the
5% level.
§ Values with common italicized letters (aba} within columns (comparing spent
shale treatments within species categories) are not significantly different
by Tukey's test at the 5% level.
* Significant at 5% level; ** Significant at 1% level;
NS No significant difference.
49
-------
Moisture in Spent Shale and Soil Treatments
TOSCO Spent Shale
Neutron probe readings taken on May 24, 1974 after the application of
approximately 50 cm of leach water in the fall of 1973 indicate the water
had moved to a depth of only 60 cm in the profile (Figures 17 & 18). Below
60 cm, the moisture content was only 15% by volume. By the September 10, 1974
sampling date, the moisture content below 60 cm in the profile had increased
to greater than 20% by volume, thus indicating that water had moved through
the profile as a result of the applications of an additional 100 cm of leach
water and irrigation water during the summer. The profiles for the TOSCO
spent shale treatments in fall 1974 indicate that moisture used by the seed-
lings was only from the upper 15 cm of the profiles.
In 1975, the TOSCO spent shale treatment was releached with 100 cm of
irrigation water. Approximately 20 cm of irrigation was applied for plant
establishment in June and July; however, by the fall moisture reading date,
moisture had been depleted to approximately 20-25% by volume throughout the
profile (Figures 17 & 18).
The spring 1976 moisture reading shows that the moisture content was
greater than 20% by volume in the profile indicating that there was moisture
recharge from snowmelt on the north-aspect. Supplemental irrigation was not
applied in 1976. The fall 1976 reading shows that moisture was depleted to
less than 10% by volume to a depth of 90 cm and to less than 20% by volume
throughout the remainder of the profile. This shows that moisture was
extracted throughout the profile in 1976 by the large amount of vegetation
established on these plots in 1975.
15 cm Soil Over TOSCO
In the spring of 1974 there was more moisture in the 15 cm soil cover
over TOSCO than in the TOSCO treatments (Figures 17 & 18). In 1975 and 1976,
moisture patterns for the 15 cm soil cover TOSCO were very similar to the
TOSCO treatments.
30 cm Soil Over TOSCO
These plots were unleached and tend to show a lower moisture content in
1974 than the TOSCO plots and the 15 cm soil over TOSCO plots (Figures 17 &
18). By fall 1976 the moisture profile for the 30 cm soil over TOSCO treat-
ments was very similar to that for the other TOSCO treatments.
USBM Spent Shale
Spring moisture profiles for the north and south-aspect USBM spent shales
in 1974 (Figures 19 S 20) indicate that more water moved into the profile than
in the corresponding TOSCO spent shale treatments (Figures 17 & 18) . The
moisture content is about 25% by volume for the USBM spent shale as compared
to 15% for the TOSCO at depths greater than 60 cm. The fall 1974 moisture
curves indicate that moisture was only extracted to a depth of 30-45 cm from
the USBM spent shale.
The spring 1975 moisture profiles (Figures 19 S 20) show that moisture
was 30-40% by volume throughout the profile following leaching.
50
-------
TOSCO SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
"/. Moisture by vol. 'I, Moisture by vol. °/0 Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol.
30
60
80
120
150
180
No me
.
.
asuremen
-
"in 1973
-
t s taken
-1974-
0
30
60
80
120
150
180
- 1975
1976
A-FALL
o-SPRING
Figure 17. North-aspect moisture measurements for TOSCO
spent shale and soil-covered TOSCO spent shale
treatments. High-elevation study site.
51
-------
3O
?60
>J
§80
a
120
150
180
TOSCO SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol. °/o Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol.
n 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 4p 9 10 20 30 4p 9 10 23 30 40
N o
m
e a s u r e m
i n
1973
e n t s
t a k
e n
1974
0
30
v
_>
3 80
s
120
150
180
1975 -
0
30
?60
u
"80
120
150
180
1976
a.
IV
a
A-FALL
o-SPRING
Figure 18. South-aspect moisture measurements for TOSCO
spent shale and soil-covered TOSCO spent shale
treatments. High-elevation study site.
52
-------
30
SO
i
^90
D.
g120
150
180
USBM SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol. »/. Moisture by vol. «/ Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol
10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40
No me
a s u r e m
in 1973
e n t s t a k
e n
o.
30
g60
5
5-90
12O
150
180
-1974-
-13
. 1
°r
30 .
i
:go .
150
160
- - 1975
0
30
§60
u
c 90
I
3 120
150
180
-1976
A-FALL
o-SPRING
Figure 19. North-aspect moisture measurements USBM spent
shale and soil-covered USBM spent shale
treatments. High-elevation study site.
53
-------
30
£60
u
£ 80
°120
180 L
USBM SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
% Moisture by vol. % Moisture b/vol. °l* Moisture by vol. % Moisture by vol.
0| 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0 10 20 30 4O 0 10 20 30 4O
N o
m
easureme
in 1973
n t s take
°
30
reo
150
180
1974 -
10
. 14
. 2
0
30
£60
(J
ao
120
150
180
1975- -
0
30
60
80
150
180
-1976-
AFALL
o SPRING
Figure 20. South-aspect moisture measurements USBM spent
shale and soil-covered USBM spent shale
treatments. High-elevation study site.
54
-------
Recharge from snowmelt in 1976 was greater on the south-aspect USBM
spent shale treatment (Figure 20) than on the north-aspect treatment (Figure
19). Note that the moisture content on the south-aspect treatment is approxi-
mately 40% by volume while the moisture content on the north-aspect treatment
for the same reading date was approximately 21% by volume. The moisture ex-
traction patterns for 1976 show that on the south-aspect treatment moisture
was extracted from throughout the entire profile and that the moisture con-
tent was less than 20% by volume by the fall reading date. However, on the
north-aspect treatment, moisture was only used to a depth of 45 cm and that
the moisture content was greater than 20% by volume below 60 cm in the profile.
The differences between the north and south-aspect recharge patterns for the
USBM spent shale in 1976 are the direct result of surface runoff following
snowmelt. The north-aspect treatments had approximately 4 times more surface
runoff than the south-aspect, this will be discussed in more detail on the
surface runoff sections. The lack of moisture recharge in 1976 may also be
evident on the total vegetation cover in 1976. Note that there is a slightly
greater vegetation cover on the USBM south-aspect treatments than on the
north-aspect treatments in 1976 (see the vegetation section) . The fall 1976
curves show that moisture was extracted from 120 cm in the profile from the
south-aspect treatments and only to 60 cm in the north-aspect treatments
(Figures 19 & 20).
15 cm Soil Over USBM
The 1974 spring and fall moisture curves are similar to those of USBM
spent shale treatment (Figures 19 & 20) . The 1975 and 1976 moisture recharge
and extraction curves for the 15 cm soil cover treatment are similar to the
USBM spent shale treatment and they also show the same effect of a greater
recharge on the south-aspect treatment than on the north-aspect treatment in
1976 (Figures 19 & 20).
30 cm Soil Over USBM
The spring of 1974 moisture readings indicate that there was moisture
recharge following snowmelt in 1974 on both the north and south-aspect treat-
ments (Figures 19 & 20) . The 1974 fall moisture reading shows that moisture
was extracted to a depth of 60 cm in both the north and south-aspect plots.
In 1976 the spring moisture recharge was somewhat less on the north-aspect
plots than on the south-aspect plots.
Soil --
In 1974, the spring moisture readings show that moisture had moved into
the soil profiles to a depth of 60 cm. By fall 1974 the moisture had moved
deeper and had also been extracted to a depth of 90 cm (Figures 17-20) .
The spring 1975 reading for both the north and south-aspects showed the
moisture content was greater than 40% by volume throughout the profiles.
The results for 1976 soil recharge are variable. One north-aspect soil
plot (Figure 17) was recharged to a depth of 120 cm, the other north-aspect
soil plot (Figure 19) did not show this much recharge. This difference can
be explained by much more runoff from the soil plots shown in Figure 19
(Appendix Tables 92 & 93).
55
-------
On the south-aspect a similar situation existed where recharge was
greater for one soil plots (Figure 20) than the other (Figure 18). By the
fall of 1976 moisture had been depleted to 10-15 percent for all soil plots.
In summary, moisture had penetrated only 60 cm into the TOSCO spent
shale by May 1974, this despite application of 50 cm of water in the fall of
1973. This data indicates that much of the water applied was lost to surface
evaporation. Water penetration into the USBM and soil-cover treatments was
deeper. Recharge in the spring of 1976 varied for the various treatments,
this was apparently a reflection of considerable snowmelt runoff from some of
the plots.
Leaching and Movement of Soluble Salts
TOSCO Spent Shale
.Core samples taken in October 1973 following the application of 50 cm
of leach water in August show that the north-aspect TOSCO spent shale treat-
ments had an EC of 10 mmhos/cm below 30 cm and an EC of 5 mmhos/cm in the
upper 30 cm (Figure 21). The south-aspect treatment had EC of 10 mmhos/cm
below 60 cm, but the EC increased to 20 mmhos/cm at 30 cm and 15 mmhos/cm at
the surface (Figure 22). These results indicate that the north-aspect plots
were partially leached to a depth of 30 cm. Whereas on the south-aspect,
water moved upward as the result of capillary rise carrying soluble salts
upward.
These results illustrate the inefficiency of the leaching technique
which was to apply 2.5 cm of water every other day. Most of this water was
apparently lost to surface evaporation.
Core samples taken in May 1974 indicate that there was leaching of
soluble salts in the upper 60 cm of the south-aspect TOSCO spent shale treat-
ment (Figure 22) by the 117 mm of snowmelt water. The results for the north-
aspect indicate that leaching did not occur from snowmelt water since the
fall 1973 and spring 1974 salinity profiles are similar. There was greater
surface runoff from the north-aspect treatment and thus less water on-site
for leaching.
The salinity profiles for TOSCO spent shale following application of
100 cm of water in May and June 1974, indicate the salts were moved out of
only the top 30-60 cm of the profile on both the north and south-aspect
treatments (Figures 21 & 22). This limited amount of salt movement indicates
that probably only about one half of the 100 cm of water applied moved into
the spent shale. The remainder of the water was evaporated.
The fall 1974 core samples show resalinization of the TOSCO spent shale
surface but moderate salt contents at depths of 15-45 cm (Figures 21 & 22).
The concentration of salt at the surface was similar to the resalinization of
the low-elevation site TOSCO treatments in 1974. Resalinization at both
sites was due to upward movement of salt in water moving upward by capillary
action from high-moisture spent shale at depths of greater than 60 cm.
56
-------
TOSCO SPENT SHALE
EC X103
n 5 1O IS ?n
30
60
150
180
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
ECX1Q3 1973 ECx1o3
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 2O
\
SOIL CONTROL
EC X103
5 10 15 2(
0
30
i eo
u
5 80
Q.
150
180
1974-
I AFTER LEACHING
XTTT
0
30
ieo
U
580
Q.
S
120
150
180
I
I
. 1
B
1
.
r
ii>
n
30
"I 60
u
5 80
I120
150
180
fs
.
'
. 1
_ 1
f
r
T FALL
, SPRING
t
(
\
-1975
r
1976
Figure 21. Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and
soil treatments. North-aspect, high-elevation
study site.
57
-------
0
30
|eo
£80
V
Q
133
150
180
TOSCO SPENT SHALE Ib CM SOIL COVER 30 CM SOIL COVER SOIL CONTROL
ECX103 ECx 103 1973 ECX103 ECX103
5 10 15 33 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
>
i
4
/
t
f
.
-
.
.
.
-
.
-
0
30
E 60
U
S BO
»
150
180
- 1974-
AFTER LEACHING
1975-
1976
30
? 60
£ 80
n.
(L)
Q120
150
180
i
i
- i
1
T FALL
SPRING
r
J'
>
1
1
1
r
i
Figure 22. Soluble salt profiles in TOSCO spent shale and
soil treatments. South-aspect, high-elevation
study site.
58
-------
The resalinized profiles were leached over the winter of 1974-1975 with
approximately 59 mm of snowmelt water (Figures 21 & 22). Note, however, that
the profile below 60 can had an EC of 10 mmhos/cm or greater on both aspects.
The TOSCO spent shale plots were releached with 100 cm of irrigation water
during May 1975 which reduced the EC to less than 5 mmhos/cm throughout both
the north and south-aspect treatments. Results of the fall 1975 and fall
1976 core sample analyses show no indication of resalinization or increased
salinity levels in either the north or south-aspect profiles (Figures 21 & 22).
15 cm Soil Over TOSCO
This treatment was initially core sampled in fall of 1974, these core
analyses showed no resalinization on either aspect (Figures 21 & 22) .
In 1975, the spring core samples taken following snowmelt showed that
the EC was 2-3 mmhos/cm lower than the fall 1974 core analyses in the upper
120 cm of the profile. Leaching in May 1975 with 100 cm of water reduced
soluble salts to low levels which persisted through fall 1976.
30 Soil Over TOSCO (unleached)
This treatment was not leached in either 1974 or 1975, and the salinity
levels of the spent shale below the soil-cover are 10-15 mmhos/cm higher in
1975 and 1976 than either of the leached treatments (Figures 21 & 22) . In
1975 and 1976, the salinity levels of the soil cover were between 0.5 and
3.0 mmhos/cm and are within the same range as the soil control. Thus,
salinization of the soil cover does not appear to be occurring.
USBM Spent Shale
The 50 cm of water applied in the fall of 1973 and the 100 cm of leach
water applied in the spring of 1974 reduced the salt content only in the
surface 45 cm of the USBM spent shale plots (Figures 23 & 24) . As pointed
out for the TOSCO plots, this leach water was applied at the rate of 2.5 cm
every two days. The limited downward movement of the soluble salts indicates
that this was an ineffective leaching method. The surface of the USBM plots
were resalinized by fall 1974.
Leaching with 100 cm of water applied continuously over a 10-day period
in May 1975 leached the soluble salts out of the profile and no resalinization
occurred in 1975 or 1976.
15 cm Soil Over USBM
The surface soil on this treatment did not become salinized as did the
USBM spent shale treatment in the fall of 1974. In 1975 and 1976, the
salinity profile of this treatment was similar to that of the USBM shale
treatment.
30 cm Soil Over USBM
This treatment was unleached in 1974 and 1975. There was no indication
of salt movement upward into the soil cover (Figures 23 & 24). In 1976, the
north-aspect treatment (Figure 23) shows soluble salt on the surface, no
explanation is offered for this except that it may have been an experimental
error. The replication that was not plotted on Figure 23 shows no soluble
salt on the surface (Appendix Table 85).
59
-------
30
60
80
120
150
180
USBM SPENT SHALE
15 CM SOIL COVER
30 CM SOIL COVER
SOIL CONTROL
ECX1Q3 ECX1Q3 1973 ECX103 EC x103
0, 5 ip 15 2p Q 5 19 15 _2g Q 5 10 15 ,20 0 5 10 15__20
N O
mea surem
i n
1973
e n t s
t a
ken
o,
30
? 6O
^80
L
150
180
-- 1974 --
13
AFTER LEACHING
0
30
?60
u
I
150
180
-- -1975 --
I
o,
30
£60
u
g 80
120
150
180
1976- -
Q
t
T FALL
SPRING
\
Figure 23. Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and
soil treatments. North-aspect, high-elevation
study site.
60
-------
USBM SPENT SHALE 15 CM SOIL COVER 3Q CM SOIL COVER
0. 5
30
£ 60
it
5 80
°120
150
180
.
-
0
30
1 60
u
-c 80
K
150
180
.
.
ECX103
10 15 29 0
N
_
y
U
_ j
f ,
T
0 me
.
"
-
_ _ _ _
i
6
ECX103 1973 ECX103 ECX103
5 10 15 20 05 10 15 20 O 5 1O 1R ?n
1 1 1 t
a s u r e m
n 1973
.
ents take
-
-
-
n
.
- - 1974
f -'"'' '"-' 1 ' ' ' '
v I -- --
m '
k I >
r T
1
10 I T 14
t
r ' "
2
I AFTER LEACHING
0
30
"g 60
120
150
180
1975 -----
3O
£60
I80
°120
150
180
\
. \
t
r
V FALL
SPRING
-1976-
f
Figure 24. Soluble salt profiles in USBM spent shale and
soil treatments. South-aspect, high-elevation
study site.
61
-------
Soil
The soil was non-saline to start with. There was little or no change
in the soluble salt profile of soil as a result of the irrigation treatments
(Figures 21 & 22).
In summary, leaching the spent shales by applying 2.5 cm of water every
two days for a total of 150 cm of water was very inefficient. The soluble
salts were only moved down a short distance and the surface of both the
fine-textured TOSCO spent shale and coarse-textured USBM spent shale later
resalinized. In contrast, only the TOSCO spent shale was resalinized at
the low-elevation study site, however, the initial leaching had moved the
soluble salts deeper.
Leaching with another 100 cm of water applied continuously over 10 days
leached the soluble salts to depths below 180 cm, after this leaching
resalinization did not occur.
The soluble salts did not move upward through the 15 cm of soil cover
over the leached spent shales. This is probably because leaching through the
silt loam soil cover appears to be more effective in moving the salt to
greater depths.
There was no evidence of salt movement upward into the 30 cm of soil
covering the unleached TOSCO spent shale.
Surface Runoff and Sediment Yields
The runoff and sediment collection system was installed in July 1974.
However, the culverts acting as overflow catchments from the 120 liter
plastic containers were not water-proofed until the summer of 1975, thus an
accurate total snowmelt runoff in 1975 was not measured. Measureable runoff
occurred from a summer rainstorm on 14 August 1974 and from snowmelt in 1975
and 1976. The amounts of runoff, sediment yields, conductivity, and chemical
analysis are reported in Appendix Tables 85-95. The data is summarized in
the body of this report in Tables 15-18.
TOSCO Spent Shale
A small 12.7 mm thunderstorm on 14 August 1974 produced 10 A of runoff
from the south-aspect TOSCO spent shale and 28 £ from the north-aspect. The
EC was quite high, 2900 ymhos/cm and 2200 ymhos/cm, respectively. The sedi-
ment yield ranged from 60 g on the south-aspect to 410 g on the north-aspect.
The SAR ranged from 1.4 to 0.9 and indicates sodium should not pose a soil
dispersion hazard (Table 15).
A total of 200 plus liters of runoff was measured from the TOSCO spent
shale treatments'following snowmelt in 1975 (Table 16). Total runoff, that
in excess of the plastic collection containers was not accurately measured
because of leaks. The EC of water was 725 ymhos/cm on the north-aspect and
375 pmhos/cm on the south-aspects which poses only a medium salinity hazard
(Richards, 1954). The total sediment yields was 126 to 175 g on the TOSCO
treatment in 1975 which was higher than in 1976. This was apparently the
62
-------
TABLE 15. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO AND USBM SPENT
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS FOLLOWING
A 12.7 mm STORM ON AUGUST 14, 1974. HIGH-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
AVERAGE OF TWO REPLICATIONS.
Runoff/plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC u mhos/cm
9 25 C
Sodium Adorption
Ratio
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC wmhps/cm
9 25° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
TOSCO
10
68
2900
1.4
USBM
1.1
1.7
1210
1.3
North
15 cm
Soil Cover
2
30
850
1.5
North
15 cm
Soil Cover
1.7
6
1210
2.0
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
<*-
a
e
j_
o
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
^
o
C
3
t.
O
Z
TABLE 16. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
i i r~ ii '
Soil
Control
n-
o
C
3
O
Soil
Control
v_
o
C
3
i.
O
QUALITY
AND USBM SPENT
HIGH-ELEVATION STUDY SITE.
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC vmhos/cm
925° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC ymhos/cm
925°C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
TOSCO
200+t
175
725
0.3
USBM
200+f
86
1190
0.8
North
15 cm
Soil Cover
200ft
140
240
0.3
North
15 cm
Soil Cover
200+f
84
1020
0.5
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
200ft
89
135
0.3
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
200+f
76
750
0.3
_HMBBBBflHBB^^HH_^^^^^
TOSCO
28
410
2200
0.9
USBM
2.8
22
1900
2.3
ta_^N_^^^^^^^B^^^^H^ktf
South
15 cm
Soil Cover
-
o
C
3
O
South
15 cm
Soil Cover
2.1
14
920
1.6
**^^ 1 1 ^^^^.^^^^^
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
-
o
e
t.
0
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
4-
O
e
3
u
o
3S
FOR TOSCO AND USBM SPENT
SHALE,
1975 AVERAGE
AND SOIL
CONTROL
Soil
Control
1.5
22
730
0.6
Soil
Control
<*
o
e
3
L.
o
z
SHALE,
PLOTS.
OF TWO REPLICATIONS.
South Aspect
Soil
Control
200+t
70
160
0.3
Soil
Control
200+f
76
80
0.2
TOSCO
200+t
126
375
0.8
USBM
200+f
79
180
15 cm
Soil Cover
200+f
135
160
0.4
South
15 an
Soil Cover
200+t
84
110
0.3 0.4
30 cm
Soil Cover
' 200+t
146
95
0.2
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
200+f
83
80
0.2
Soil
Control
200+t
87
80
0.2
Soil
Control
200+t
92
80
0.2
t Total runoff was not accurately measured because of leaks in the collection basins.
63
-------
result of compacting soil and shale behind the collectors following installa-
tion. The SAR of all runoff water was very low (0.3 to 0.8).
In 1976, surface runoff following snowmelt was measured on 3 separate
dates during March at the high-elevation study site (Table 17). The TOSCO
spent shale south-aspect treatment had 431 H of runoff by the March 10
sampling date. The conductivity of this water was high at 1500 ymhos/cm, the
total amount of sediment was very low 21.6 g per plot (Table 17). No surface
runoff was measured for the north-aspect treatment since there was approxi-
mately 30 cm of snow on this treatment at this date. Total runoff was again
measured on March 17 and samples were collected. At this time the north-
aspect treatment had 311 £ of runoff while the south-aspect treatment only
had 12.7 A. The conductivity of the north-aspect runoff was 250 ymhos/cm
while the south-aspect had a conductivity of 900 umhos/cm, sediment yeild was
again quite low. Note that the conductivity of the south-aspect treatment is
still high which suggests that soluble salts were still being washed off of
this treatment. At the time of sampling on March 17, the north-aspect treat-
ment still had approximately 10 cm of snow and water running off the plots.
Both aspects were again sampled on March 31 and 287 liters had runoff the
north-aspect treatment while only 1 liter had runoff the south-aspect treat-
ment. The conductivity of the north-aspect water was 400 ymhos/cm while the
conductivity of the south-aspect was 850 ymhos/cm the sediment yield was
quite low on all treatments (Table 17).
15 cm Soil Over TOSCO
In 1976, a total of 2.72 cm of runoff was measured from the south-aspect
soil-covered treatment for the three measuring dates in March, while only
1.76 cm of runoff water was recorded from the north-aspect treatment. This
total runoff was similar to that from the TOSCO spent shale treatment, how-
ever, the conductivity of this water (200-300 ymhos/cm) was considerably less
than from the TOSCO spent shale treatment and approximately the same as the
soil control (Table 17).
30 cm Soil Over TOSCO (unleached)
The total runoff, sediment yield, EC, and SAR for the 30 cm soil over
TOSCO spent shale treatments in 1975 and 1976 will approximately be the same
as for the 15 cm soil cover and soil control treatments (Table 16 & 17) .
USBM Spent Shale
Total surface runoff water, following a 12.7 mm storm in August 1974,
from the USBM spent shale was less than from the TOSCO spent shale, the EC of
the runoff and total sediment were also lower (Table 15). The differences
in runoff between the two spent shales is a reflection of the textural dif-
ference and its effect on infiltration rates.
In 1976, the total snowmelt runoff from the north-aspect USBM spent shale
treatments was 4.3 cm while the south-aspect had 1.1 cm. These results corres-
pond directly with the moisture readings taken at the same time, while show
that the majority of the snowmelt water moved into the south-aspect profile
while very little of it moved into the north-aspect profile. However, the
north-aspect profile was later filled by April and May precipitation. The
EC of runoff from USBM spent shale was considerably lower (200-700 ymhos/cm)
64
-------
TABLE 17. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. HIGH-
ELEVATION STUDY SITE, 1976.
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhqs/cm
8 25°. C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhos/cm
9 25° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhqs/cm
9 25° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
TOSCO
<*-
M-
O
C
3
!_
O
Z
TOSCO
311
1.2
650
0.2
TOSCO
487
6.7
400
0.1
North Aspect
15 cm 30 cm
Soil Cover Soil Cover
4- v
«- t-
O O
C C
a 3
L. S,
O O
z 2:
North Aspect
15 cm 30 cm
Soil Cover Soil Cover
22 163
1.2 1.6
250 250
0.4 0.4
North Aspect
15 cm 30 cm
Soil Cover Soil Cover
370 244
6.7 6.8
95 85
0.1 0.2
March
10
South Aspect
Soil
Control
ii-
it.
o
C
. 3
£.
O
March
TOSCO
430
22
1500
0.4
17
15 cm
Soil Cover
516
18
350
0.6
30 cm
Soil Cover
459
17
350
0.4
Soil
Control
505
11
200
0.4
South Aspect
Soil
Control
22
0.2
300
0.3
March
Soil
Control
83
6.9
100
0.2
TOSCO
13
0.4
900
0.2
31
TOSCO
1.0
6.9
850
0.3
15 cm
Soil Cover
83
6.0
200
0.4
South
15 cm
Soil Cover
9.0
6.7
200
0.2
30 cm
Soil Cover
31
4.0
200
0.3
Aspect
30 cm
Soil Cover
2.0
7.2
200
0.2
Soil
Control
1.0
0.1
200
0.2
Soil
Control
1.0
6.7
200
0.3
65
-------
than from the TOSCO spent shale (400-1500 ymhos/cm) in 1976. The runoff
water from the USBM would pose a low to medium salinity hazard for irrigation
(Table 18).
15 cm Soil Over USBM
In 1976, the total runoff from snowmelt on this soil-cover treatment was
approximately the same as from the USBM and TOSCO spent shale (Tables 17 & 18).
However, the EC of the runoff was 2 to 3 times lower than for runoff from
either spent shale treatment. The north-aspect soil-cover treatment was
apparently frozen and thus had greater runoff than the south-aspect treatment
(Table 18).
30 cm Soil Over USBM (unleached)
In 1976, the snowmelt runoff was less from the 30 cm of soil-cover (121-
525 £) than from USBM spent shale (257-960 £) or 15 cm of soil-cover (258-
1061 H). The EC of runoff water ranged from 150 to 400 ymhos/cm approximately
the same as the 15 cm soil-cover and soil control (Table 18).
Soil Control
In 1976, the north-aspect soil control treatments adjacent to the TOSCO
spent shale treatments had only 0.18 cm of snowmelt runoff as compared to
3.69 cm of runoff from the north-aspect soil control plots attached to the
USBM treatments. The south-aspect soil control treatments showed a reversed
effect with the soil treatment on the TOSCO spent shale pile (the south pile)
yielding 2.27 cm of runoff water while the.soil on the USBM spent shale pile
had 0.56 cm of runoff (Tables 17 & 18). The moisture results also show the
same effect in that those soil plots with large amounts of runoff had very
little moisture recharge while those plots with little runoff show a greater
moisture recharge. The differences are probably explained by the fact that
soil plots are located on the end of each spent shale pile and the differences
are due to snow drifting. In the future, more intensive data on snow depth
and distribution will have to be obtained in order to explain runoff results.
In summary, runoff from a summer thunderstorm in 1974 was greater from
the fine-textured TOSCO spent shale than from the coarse-textured USBM, soil-
covered spent shale treatments, and soil control. The EC of the limited
amount of runoff was 1200 to 2900 ymhos/cm for the spent shales, but was
lower for the soil-covered treatments and soil control.
Runoff in 1975 from snowmelt was not accurately measured because of leaks
in the secondary collector. Snowmelt in 1976 produced greater runoff from
the north-aspect than from the south-aspect treatments apparently because of
frozen surface layers on the north-aspect.
Sediment yields were very low for all treatments in all years when com-
pared to sediment yields from agricultural soils. SAR values were also very
low and indicate that sodium would not present a dispersion problem if the
water was used for irrigation.
66
-------
TABLE 18. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR USBM SPENT SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. HIGH-
ELEVATION STUDY SITE, 1976.
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC umhos/cm
@ 25° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC pmhos/cm
9 25° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
Runoff /plot (1)
Sediment/plot (g)
EC pmhos/cm
@ 25° C
Sodium Adsorption
Ratio
North Aspect
15 cm 30 cm
USBM Soil Cover Soil Cover
t*- <*- M-
-------
REFERENCES
1. Block, M.B., and P.D. Kilburn. 1973. Processed shale revegetation
studies, 1965-1973. Colony Development Operation, Atlantic Richfield
Co., Denver, Colorado 209 pp.
2. Lenhardt, A.F. 1969. The TOSCO process: Economic sensitivity to the
variables of production. Am. Petrol. Inst. Div. of Refining, 34th Mid-
year Meeting, Chicago. Preprint No. 52-69.
3. Matzick, A., R.O. Dannenberg, J.R. Ruark, J.E. Phillips, J.D. Lankford,
and B. Guthrie. 1966. Development of the Bureau of Mines gas-combustion
oil shale retorting process. U.S. Bureau of Mines Bulletin 635. 635 pp.
4. Richards, L.A. (ed.). 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and
alkali soils. USDA Handbook 60. 160 pp.
5. Schmehl, W.R., and B.D. McCaslin. 1973. Some properties of spent oil
shale significant to plant growth. In R.J. Hutnik and G. Davis (eds.).
Ecology and Reclamation of Devastated Land. Vol. I. p. 27-43. Gordon
and Breach, London.
6. Striffler, W.D., I.F. Wymore, and W.A. Berg. 1974. Characteristics of
spent oil shale which influence water quality, sedimentation, and plant
growth, p. 181-227. Surface Rehabilitation of Land Disturbances
Resulting from Oil Shale Development. Tech. Report I. Environ.
Resources Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
7. Ward, G.M. and J.G. Nagy. 1977. Molybdenum and copper in Colorado
forages, molybdenum toxicity in deer, and copper supplementation in
cattle, p. 97-113. Iri W.R. Chappell and K.K. Peterson (eds.).
Molybdenum in the Environment. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.
8. Ward, J.C., G.A. Margheim, and G.O.G. Lof. 1971. Water pollution
potential of spent oil shale residues. Water Poll. Control Res. Series
14030 EDB 12/71 EPA, Washington, D.C. 117 pp.
9- Ward, R.T., W. Slauson, and R.L. Dix. 1974. The natural vegetation in
the landscape of the Colorado oil shale region, p. 30-66. In Surface
Rehabilitation of Land Disturbances Resulting from Oil Shale Develop-
ment. Tech. Report I. Environ. Resources Center, Colorado State
University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
68
-------
10. U.S. Department of Interior. 1973. Final environmental statement for
the prototype oil shale leasing program. Vol. I. Washington, D.C.
11. Wymore, I.F., W.D. Striffler, and W.A. Berg. 1974. Water requirements
for stabilizing and vegetating spent shale in the Piceance Basin.
p. 228-255. In Surface Rehabilitation of Land Disturbances Resulting
from Oil Shale Development. Tech. Report. I. Environ. Resources Center,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
69
-------
APPENDIX TABLES
LOW-ELEVATION STUDY SITE
The following Appendix Tables (1-54) are a complete tabulation of all
data collected for each treatment and replication between 1973 and 1976.
A guide to the plot layout and number system for the appendix tables
is given below:
Plot Plan and Numbering System
(Low elevation and High elevation study sites)
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
TOSCO
USBM
Runoff collection basins
7Q
-------
Appendix
Number Pa<3e
1 Precipitation measurements - Anvil Points and Piceance
Basin, 1973-1976 73
2 - 5 Vegetation density and ground cover - 1973
2 - TOSCO - north-aspect 74
3 - TOSCO - south-aspect 75
4 - USBM - north-aspect 75
5 - USBM - south-aspect 77
6 - 7 Vegetation density and ground cover - 1974
6 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 78
7 - USBM - north and south-aspects ....'. 79
8-11 Vegetation analysis (transect method) - 1975
8 - TOSCO - north-aspect 80
9 - TOSCO - south-aspect 81
10 - USBM - north-aspect 82
11 - USBM - south-aspect 83
12 - 15 Vegetation analysis (transect method) - 1976
12 - TOSCO - north-aspect 84
13 - TOSCO - south-aspect 85
14 - USBM - north-aspect 86
15 - USBM - south-aspect 87
16 Above ground standing bio-mass clipping data TOSCO & USBM
1976 88
17 - 20 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1973
17 - TOSCO - north-aspect 89
18 - TOSCO - south-aspect . 90
19 - USBM - north-aspect 91
20 - USBM - south-aspect 92
21 - 24 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1974
21 - TOSCO - north-aspect 93
22 - TOSCO - south-aspect 94
23 - USBM - north-aspect 95
24 - USBM - south-aspect 96
25 - 28 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1975
25 - TOSCO - north-aspect 97
26 - TOSCO - south-aspect 98
27 - USBM - north-aspect 99
28 - USBM - south-aspect 100
71
-------
Appendix page
Number
29 - 32 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1976
29 - TOSCO - north-aspect 101
30 - TOSCO - south-aspect 102
31 - USBM - north-aspect 103
32 - USBM - south-aspect 104
33 - 40 Salinity measurements (EC)
33 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects (1973 & 1974) . . 105
34 - USBM - north and south-aspects (1974) 106
35 - TOSCO - north-aspect (1975) 107
36 - TOSCO - south-aspect (1975) 108
37 - USBM - north-aspect (1975) 109
38 - USBM - south-aspect (1975) 110
39 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects (1976) Ill
40 - USBM - north and south-aspects (1976) 112
41 - 46 Salinity sensor measurements
41 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects (1973-1974) . . . 113
42 - USBM - north and south-aspects (1973-1974) . . . 114
43 - TOSCO - north-aspect (1975-1976) 115
44 - TOSCO - south-aspect (1975-1976) 115
45 - USBM - north-aspect (1975-1976) 116
46 - USBM - south-aspect (1975-1976) 116
47 - 48 Surface runoff and water quality data - 1974
47 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 117
48 - USBM - north and south-aspects 118
49 - 50 Snowmelt runoff and water quality data - 1975
49 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 119
50 - USBM - north and south-aspects 120
51 - 52 Surface runoff and water quality data - 1975
51 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 121
52 - USBM - north and south-aspects 122
53 - 54 Snowmelt runoff and water quality samples - 1976
53 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 123
54 - USBM - north and south-aspects 124
72
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 1. PRECIPITATION MEASUREMENTS IN mm FOR ANVIL POINTS AND PICEANCE BASIN
STUDY SITES. 1973-1976
January February March April May June July August September October November December
OJ
ANVIL POINTS
1973
1 Q7JI
iy/H
1975
1976
PICEAKCE BASIN
1973
i974
1975
1976
*
|« Plot const
>U
1*
61.3mm 16.7 41.9
3.6 59.1 37.1 33.5
72.3 m 6.8 30.7
50.6 70.6 6.3 34.3
5
49.0 29.4 18.7 7.3 7.3 12.2 9.3 22.3
39.8 17.5 11.6 24.8 37.5 13.7 t t
1
Irrigation 11.9 19.8 25.1 7.8 6.1
52.0 24.8 12.1 33.5 21.6 7.3 t t
* Missing data observation.
t Observations not completed
§ October 13, 1973 thru April 28, 1974 - 127 mm ppt from snowfall.
# October 13, 1973 thru May 10, 1974 - 116.8 mm ppt from snowfall.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 2. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT
SHALE
STUDY
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bl uebtmch wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
fourwing saltbush
FORBS
Globe mallow
WEEDY ANNUALS
Mustards
Totals
* Cover/plot
30
I
1 2
6* 4
4 4
8 6
- 4
18 18
85
cm
3
2
1
1
10
14
, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND
SITE
*
(12") Soil
4
6
3
1
11
21
1
3
1
2
1
1
8
SEPTEMBER 1973
Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover
III V VII
234 1234 123
353 2422 735
211 4 1 2 - 222
2 1 - - -
426 2579 2 16 4
12 9 10 8 10 11 11 11 21 11
75 80 80
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. .ANVIL
TOSCO Spent Shale
IX XI
4 1234 1234
5 1422 3154
1 3231 5433
11-1 -11-
4 10 893 5433
1
10 15 16 14 8 13 11 12 11
50 55
POINTS
Soil
XIII
1 2 3
454
2 2 1
- - 1
968
- - -
15 13 14
65
4
3
7
-
11
* Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 3. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT
en
GLASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Wlnterfat
Fourwing saltbush
FORES
Globe mallow
WEEDY ANNUALS
Mustards
Totals
% Cover/plot
SHALE , SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE , AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS . ANVIL POINTS
STUDY SITE. SEPTEMBER 1973
1
*
2
3
1
6
"
_
-
1
13
30 cm (12")
II
234
322
734
1 - 2
1 8 2
. . .
1 2 -
- - -
- - .
1 - -
14 15 10
80
Soil Cover
IV
1234
6435
3324
-
- 7 1 1
_ _
1 - - -
- 1 - -
- 1 - -
- 1 1 1
10 17 7 11
80
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
1
3
6
l
2
2
-
-
1
15
VI
234
1 1 6
444
2 - 1
2-6
- " -
- - 1
-
- 1 -
- - 1
9 6 19
85
VIII
1234
1221
6433
111-
6 2 9 12
1 - - -
-
- - . .
1 - - -
16 9 15 16
75
TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
X XII XIV
1234 1234 1234
1322 4234 4531
3353 3444 1333
2112 22-2 -11-
44111 1-41 859 10
- - - 1 -
---- --__ ____
- - -
- - - 1 - - 1
10 11 19 8 10 8 11 11 14 14 17 15
45 50 65
* Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 4. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT
en
SHALE , SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE , AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS . ANVIL POINTS
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Founding saltbush
FOR3S
Globe mallow
WEEDY ANNUALS
Mustards
TOTALS
% COVER/PLOT
STUDY SITE
60 cm (24")
13
1234
*
2122
3412
2311
10 7 1 2
- - 1 -
1 2 - -
- 1 1 -
- 1 - -
- - - -
18 19 7 7
70
SEPTEMBER 1973
Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover USBM Spent Shale
11 9 7 5
1234 1234 1234 1234
3434 3324 3322 2332
4224 7348 3531 2244
1121 1111 2122 3-13
464- 1-51 2112 2-11
i
- 1-- --21 --21 1---
1 - -
1
12 14 11 9 12 8 15 15 10 10 10 8 10 6 9 10
75 70 75 55
3
1234
2214
2126
121-
3921
- 1 2 -
- - 1 -
. . . .
- - - -
8 15 9 11
55
Soil
1
1 2 3
343
356
1 2 1
2 1 2
- - -
1 1 -
- - -
. . .
1 - 1
11 13 13
65
4
3
2
1
2
-
.
-
-
-
8
* Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 5. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT
SHALE,
STUDY
SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
SITE. SEPTEMBER 1973
60 cm (24"
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing sal bush
FORBS
Globe mallow
WEEDY ANNUALS
Mustards
TOTALS
2 COVER/PLOT
1 2
3* 2
4 1
1 1
3 8
- 1
- 1
- -
11 14
14
3
2
1
7
1
-
1
12
70
4
4
4
2
5
1
-
-
16
) Soil Cover
12
1234
1334
2525
1121
1-76
- 1 - 2
- 1 - -
- - - 1
. . - -
5 11 14 19
65
15 cm (6"]
10
1234
2233
3324
1 - - 1
^ 7 10 6
- 1 - -
1 - - -
1 - 1 -
10 13 16 14
65
I Soil Cover
8
1234
2233
4255
3112
2 10 - -
- - 1 -
1 - 1 -
I ....
- - - .
13 15 11 10
70
CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS
USBM Spent Shale Soil
642
1234 1234 1234
1434 5223 3372
1546 6425 4353
- 134 13 3' 2 -1-2
- - 2- 1--- 3412
1-11 11
11-- - - - - ......
1 - -
4 11 13 15 13 9 7 10 10 12 14 10
60 55 60
* Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 6. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON TOSCO SPENT SHALE,
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Sluebunch wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
SHRUBS
Wi r hm-f a t
WEEDY ANNUALS
rhp/*^nra^<*
TOTALS
Jj % COVER/PLOT
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
BlueBunch wneatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
SHRljRS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
TOTALS
% COVER/PLOT
SOIL-COVERED SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS . ANVIL POINTS STUDY
SEPTEMBER 1974
NORTH ASPECT
30 (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover TOSCO Spent Shale
I III V VII IX XI
1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1
1*243 3323 1121 1131 3111 2211 1
33-3 2235 3323 3222 3221 3221 1
1--1 2121 1--2 1-11 1-12 2322
-?-- »_._ __«. --_. _ 1 _ . -___
. . . . . . . . . - . . --_- ? ? 1 2 -122
5847 8779 5657 6375 9657 7 10 76 2
65 60 60 65 45 40
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover TOSCO Spent Shale
II IV VI VIII X XII
1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1
-*5-2 -153 11-1 11-1 111- -11- 3
23-2 3112 1121 3322 -21- 2--2 1
- 1-1 ---1 21-- 121- 1-23 232-
. . . - - 1-- .... .... 23-1 2-22
2905 3366 4322 5633 4844 6566 4
60 60 60 55 40 45
SITE.
Soil
XIII
234
3 5 1
1 1 -
- - 1
462
65
Soil
XIV
234
3 2 1
2 1 2
-
533
60
* Values are total number of Individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 7. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON USBM SPENT
ID
BRASSES
Western wheati.-ass
Bluebunch trtieatgrass
Indian rlcegrass
Timnthtf
SHRUBS
Winterfat
WEEDY ANNUALS
TflTAI ^
X COVER/PLOT
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
aiucbunch wheatgrass
Indian rlcegrass
Tinnfhu
SHRUBS
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
TOTALS
S COVER/PLOT
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE . SEPTEMBER 1974
NORTH ASPECT
60 on (24") Soil Cover IS cm (6*) Soil Cover USBM Spent Shale Soil
13 11 9 7 S 3 1
1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 123
2* 3-1 143- 111- 3-3- 1--1 1 - - 1 311
-123 2225 4333 1433 2233 3213 323
21-1 1--- -111 1--2 1-11 -r2- - 2 -
--1 11 .-11 l . - - -21- ...
65 70 75 75 55 55 60
SOUTH ASPECT
60 en (24") Soil Cover . 15 on (S") Soil Cover USBM Spent Shale Soil
14 12 10 8 6 42
1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 1234 123
1*--. .1.3 33-- .1-1 -11. 2--- 1-3
-323 1231 -223 -132 1322 1112 14-
1 S - 1 2-2- ---1 32-1 -222 3432 ---
60 .60 60 65 ' 55 55 50
4
4
1
4
3
1
1
* Values are total nunber of Individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 OB) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 8. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS .
ANVIL POINTS
STUDY SITE. SEPTEMBER 1975
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
OaVtKi 4*h VM ich
KdDU 1 UDi Uafl
FORBS
Globe mallow
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
Wild lettuce
Russian thistle
Hint
Mustards (spp)
No Vegetative Cover
* Valuoc arp tnral rp
I
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
i cvj ro *J-
oi ta tu
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 9. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
oo
COVERED
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
CONTROL PLOTS.
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE.
AUGUST 1975
II
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourvnng saltbush
Rabbi thrush
FORBS
Globe mallow
WFEOY AUTWALS
Chestgrass
U-ilri lol-fnro
Russian thistle
Hint
Mustard (spp)
No Vegetative Cover
i CM
Q) (U
c c
98*137
13 -
10 9
-
-
27 29
172 17
_ _
5
-
-
.
- 21
42 131
co «a-
03 ft)
C C
153 124
9 -
- 25
-
80 11
- 52
. *
7 4
15
.
28 -
64 93
IV
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
r CM CO Tt
01
c
75
21
*
*
-
1 c
13
76
oo
.
_
77
124
XIV
Soil
CM
01
C
216
23
*
-
"37
-J/
15
_
_
10
126
CO
0>
c
193
18
_
_
*
12
-
16
88
«±
o>
c
219
11
.
.
17
-
_
26
115
* Values are total centimeters of above ground vegetation cover by species. Transect lines averaged 335 on in length. Line 1 in upper, line 2 and 3 in
middle, and line 4 in lower, k of each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 10. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL
PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS
STUDY SITE.
AUGUST 1975
13
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch whaatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
°° Rabbi thrush
FORES
Globe mallow
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
Wild lettuce
Russian thistle
Mint
Mustards (spp)
No Vegetative Cover
at
c
115
67
-
35
15
-
14
121
12
-
-
.
-
.
-
187
OJ
at
c
224
47
-
9
6
-
32
.
17
-
-
-
13
_
16
62
0) 01
c c
187 210
26 26
-
27 6
12 -
-
_
- 86
-
5 -
4 -
14 -
.
11 -
198 94
11
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
at at
c c
209 226
65 10
-
8 -
.
-
41 24
- 37
.
- -
-
6
.
8 -
-
176 58
at at
c c
115 207
33 81
-
6 14
.
-
18 -
114 -
21 18
- -
-
3 -
-
.
17 5
62 108
9
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
m a* ai
c c c
193 266 253
66 87 43
...
- - 5
- - 5
- - 10
8 - 8
- - 37
- ...
. . .
12 32 -
. _ -
-
...
...
202 94 111
at
c
246
57
.
8
-
16
11
.
7
-
11
-
-
~
14
143
7
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
at at at at
C C C f=
258 279 293 209
78 59 52 42
....
7 - 6 17
....
- 20 - -
55 7 6 8
.
8 - - 16
- - - -
- - - 68
-
....
....
- - 3 5
123 98 183 207
5
USBM Spent Shale
at at at at
c c c c
253 223 259 128
42 46 44 83
_
3 21 - 19
....
18 20 7 -
-
7 - 57 -
_
. _ . -
- 22 25 94
-
- 31 - -
.
4 - 3
129 133 131 64
3
USBM Spent Shale
01
c
72
88
-
n
-
-
57
-
-
-
23
4
9
-
2
168
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 11. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
CO
COVERED USBM SPENT
AUGUST
14
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
QLL* * W | |t Wl
FORES
Globe mallow
WEEDY AlliiUALS
Cheatgrass
Wild lettuce
Russian thistle
Hint
Mustards (spp)
No Vegetative Cover
,_
01
.5
157
57
-
-
14
-
27
c.
o
-
_
-
-
-
55
172
CM CO «*
QJ O) OJ
C C C
~ " "~
60 102 91
36 36 44
...
- - 16
12 9 8
_
- 25 -
121 - -
- fi
O
- - -
- 15 77
...
-
-
124 42 6
85 122 127
1975
12
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
CNJ .n
QJ 01 QJ
c c c
131 146 160
55 60 12
-
-
- - 7
-
- - 15
97 - 36
14
I >f
- _ _
- 24 19
-
-
-
35 147 14
192 162 155
c
106
43
_
.
-
-
11
-
9
25
6
-
_
50
132
SHALE,
AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE.
10
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
f~ CM
Qt QJ
C C
176 97
60 38
-
7
- 12
3 -
52 -
10 10
- -
'
5 32
-
.
.
- 49
123 147
CO
oj
c
129
75
.
5
.
-
23
83
^ H
-
6
-
_
'_
11
85
^» ^
lu
c
122
72
_
.
-
-
14
-
-
16
.
.
*
10
140
8
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
01 V QJ QJ
C C C C
124 166 154 92
60 36 51 77
-
_ - -
-
- - - 7
16 17 32 36
97 - 11 3
- . - -
5 36 - 44
-
- - 8 -
-
8 - - 18
116 145 160 106
6
USBM Spent Shale
CO QJ QJ
.i: .jr £
75 82 90
93 109 132
.
8 -
.
- - -
69 20 -
28 52 27
- - -
14 8 21
-
_ ~
89 16 4
140 126 127
33
97
-
5
-
-
37
67
-
3
11
54
140
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 12. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
CO
COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE.
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
Rabbi tbrush
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
FORBS
Globe mallow
Penstemon
Utah sweetvetch
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
Mustard (spp)
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
No Vegetative Cover
* Ualnac ayo t-nfal rpnt
AUGUST 1976
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
I III
1 CM CO i CM
-------
CD
ui
APPENDIX TABLE 13. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED TOSCO SPENT !
AUGUST 1976
30 (12") Soil Cover
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian rlcegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
Rabbitbrush
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
FOP.BS
Globe mallow
Penstemon
Utah sweetvetch
WEEDY ANNUALS.
Chaatgrass
Mustard (spp)
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
II
CO f
138 140 142
6 14 -
155
14
11
IV
CM
HI
7 -
36 8
3 -
23
123 120
21 7
5-28 7 18 7
94 297 69 114 97
14 19
L.E,
,_
C
V
94
33
_
-
CO
OJ
c
18
11
14
199
._
c
r
104
77
-
IS
Soil
XIV
CNJ
0)
c
227
11
.
19
CO
Of
c
*
114
49
-
-
14 - 44 38 - .34
g - 3
38 29 40 20 39 22
13 25 39 30 11 22
83 - 5 11 10 -
22
5 33 19
17 -
Ho Vegetative Cover
153 89 25 71 60 106
47 133 53 138 102 51
169 148 70 154 158 64
* Values are total centimeters of above ground vegetative cover by species. Transect lines averaged 335 cm in length. Line 1 in upper,
and line 3 in lower, 1/3 of each plot.
149 54 146
line 2 in middle,
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 14.
00
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbush
Rabbitbrush
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
FORBS
Globe mallow
Penstemon
Utah sweetvetch
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
Mustard (spp)
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT S;
AUGUST 1976
60 cm (24") Soil Cover
13
11
I CM
Gt 0)
122 170 88 203 138 132
103 88 75 46 63 97
19 7 14
39 39 176
11 - 26
16
21
6
50
7 68
14 11
39
31
E, AND SOIL CONTROL PIX
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
9 7
r- CM CO 1 CM CO
CO QJ CU CU GJ GJ
c c c c c c
195 158 104 146 158 f59
103 174 92 123 128 163
_ -
14 11 32 43 51 28
- 108 12 -
5 13 -
11
10 - 9 - - -
DTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE.
USBM Spent Shale Soil
5 3 1
» CM rn r CM PO r CM f>
CU 01 CU CU CU CU CUCDCU
CCC C C C ECC
132 192 104 159 115 21 150 70 132
46 132 89 78 128 49 89 155 207
9- --- ...
13 - 27 47 14 21 11
18 - 135 25 - 26 36 104 -
62 - 22 22 37 183 -
6-- 64- ...
No Vegetative Cover
48 30
53 20 15
17
26
73 17
60 39 24
Values are total centimeters of above ground vegetative cover by species. Transect lines averaged 335 cm in length. Line 1 in upper,
and line 3 in lower, 1/3 of each plot.
18 0 0
line 2 in middle,
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 15.
00
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Wild barley
SHRUBS
Uinterfat
Fourwing saltbush
Rabbitbrush
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
FORSS
Globe mallow
Penstemon
Utah sweetvetch
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatgrass
Mustard (spp)
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT SK
AUGUST 1976
60 cm (24") Soil Cover
14
CO I
41 6
59 130
11
5
14
79
29
26
26
6
12
72 69 63 118 132 154
42 72 69 91 63 115
17 29
15 -
19
C, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE.
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
10 8
eg co f CM co
C C C
r- »- 'r-
196 232 104
86 52 64
16 19 24
- 112
25
10 -
No Vegetative Cover
120 62 83 88 104 35
117 69 87 93 76 49
119 81 147 141 133 11
52 137 21
* Values are total centimeters of above ground vegetative cover by species. Transect lines averaged 335 cm in length. Line 1 in upper, line 2 in middle,
and line 3 in lower, 1/3 of each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 16.
03
CO
ABOVE GROUND STANDING BIO-MASS CLIPPING DATA ON TOSCO AND USBM SPENT SHALES,
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO AND USBM
STUDY SITE. AUGUST 15, 1976
NORTH ASPECT
Location
upper
middle
lower
I
SD
30 cm
Soil
I
17.1*
23.0
39.3
26.5
11.5
(12")
Cover
III
11.0
19.0
29.1
19.7
9.1
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
13.8
14.1
34.9
20.9
12.1
VII
19.2
25.5
41.5
28.7
11.5
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX XI
25.7 9.0
27.9 20.5
35.8 23.0
29.8 17.5
5.3 7.5
Soil
XIII
21.5
69.0
32.6
41.0
24.8
NORTH ASPECT
Location
upper
middle
lower
X"
SD
60 cm
Soil
13
39.3
31.0
13.8
28.0
13.0
(24")
Cover
11
57.1
10.8
13.2
27.0
26.1
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
26.4
42.7
71.5
46.8
22.8
7
87.9
49.0
52.8
63.2
21.4
USBM
Spent Shale
5
40.8
60.1
31.3
44.1
14.7
3
16.0
14.5
15.8
15.4
0.8
Soil
1
67.8
35.1
49.4
50.7
16.4
Location
upper
middle
lower
X"
SD
Location
upper
middle
lower
X
SD
ND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm
soil
ii
16.6
22.1
36.9
25.2
10.5
60 cm
Soil
14
20.9
15.4
12.4
16.3
4.3
(12")
Cover
IV
16.9
10.1
9.2
12.1
4.2
(24")
Cover
12
18.5
57.2
12.8
29.5
24.1
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
16.4
24.9
33.9
25.1
8.8
VIII
14.3
12.0
14.3
13.5
1.3
SOUTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10
14.2
31.2
71.9
39.1
29.6
8
4.2
4.5
18.5
9.1
8.2
ANVIL POINTS
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
5.5
13.0
15.0
11.2
5.0
XII
7.7
21.7
5.2
11.5
8.9
USBM
Spent Shale
6
8.9
10.1
4.1
7.7
3.2
4
4.8
3.6
21.1
9.8
9.7
Soil
XIV
8.7
23.2
18.6
16.8
7.4
Soil
2
7.4
45.0
21.1
24.5
19.0
Values are total grains (over dry weight) of above ground standing bio-mass within a 20.3 x 40.6 cm quadrat, randomly placed in upper, middle, and lower,
1/3 of each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 17. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) PROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE , SOIL-
GO
10
COVERED TOSCO. SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
30
6/27
30.0*
31.7
35.2
35.2
32.5
29.0
26.5
24.7
23.7
24.7
27.2
27.2
cm (12")
I
8/1
17.5
29.7
37.7
37.7
37.7
35.7
37.7
36.7
36.7
35.7
>40.0
>40.0
Soil
9/19
6.0
12.5
14.0
14.0
16.2
17.0
17.5
17.5
18.2
21.2
21.2
22.7
Cover
10/13
10.0
17.0
20.5
21.2
21.2
21,2
21.2
23.0
23.0
24.7
25.5
25.5
30
6/27
36.0
33.5
31.7
31.7
31.0
27.2
24.0
24.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
cm (12")
III
8/1
11.2
17. S
32.0
30.2
28.0
28.0
30.2
28.7
30.2
33.5
>40.0
Soil
9/19
11.0
13.2
14.0
15.5
17.0
18.2
19.7
21.2
22.7
23.5
24.2
Cover
10/13
1.7
17.2
26.5
26.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
29.0
15
6/27
27.2
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
cm (6")
V
8/1
19.2
32.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
__
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE
Soil Cover
9/19
11.0
17.5
19.7
19.7
22.0
22.7
24.0
25.5
25.5
27.0
10/13
12.0
22.2
22.2
24.0
24.0
25.5
26.5
28.2
28.2
28.2
15
6/27
22.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
cm (6")
VII
8/1
21.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
Soil
9/19
8.2
16.2
19.7
20.5
23.5
24.7
24.2
21.2
23.5
24.2
. 1973
Cover
10/13
12.0
21.7
23.2
23.2
24.0
24.7
25.5
25.5
26.5
27.2
TOSCO Spent Shale TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
=ii'."-siBMag'i. -J-'.,, . ,ar,,s,-'i ;-._, ..M-.-.M- , . im. n, ,. .a-..-^ ; .. ... ..._ . g > - ' ''-^-< - _. ... _
IX XI XIII
Depth
(cm) 6/27 3/1 9/19 10/13 6/27 8/1 9/19 10/13 6/27 8/1 9/19 10/13
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150 - >40.0 27.2 30.0 26.5
165
180 -- -
* Values in percent moisture by volume as determined from a stadard soil moisture curve.
~ No readings.
36.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
25.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
18.7
25.5
26.5
30.0
28.2
28.2
28.2
30.0
31.7
4.2
21.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
28.0
28.0
27.2
28.0
32.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
21.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
18.0
26.5
28.2
28.2
29.0
28.2
29.0
29.0
30.7
5.0
28.0
29.7
29.7
30.5
29.7
29.7
29.7
31.?
29.2
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
6.0
17.7
23.2
25.5
29.5
29.5
28.7
26.5
27.2
5.5
12.5
19.2
23.0
24.7
26.5
28.2
28.2
28.2
3.5
11.5
14.0
19.0
19.7
22.2
24.7
25.5
26.5
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 18. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
vfl
o
Depth
(cm}
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
30
6/27
30.0*
30.7
37.7
34.2
30.7
30.0
29.0
30.7
34.2
34.2
35.2
cm (12")
II
8/1
12.0
24.0
34.0
35.0
32.2
31.5
33.2
36.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS
Soil Cover 30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil
9/19
5.2
14.7
19.7
19.7
20.5
20.5
20.5
22.0
22.7
24.2
25.5
10/13
3.5
13.0
21.5
22.2
23.0
23.0
23.0
24.0
25.5
27.2
27.2
6/27
23.0
32.5
36.0
37.0
23.5
32.5
29.0
28.2
27.2
26.5
IV
8/1
19.0
28.0
34.5
32.2
31.2
30.5
33.0
34.5
>40.0
>40.0
--
9/19
14.2
20.7
23.5
23.5
25.5
25.5
27.5
28.5
29.5
29.5
10/13
0.2
13.0
20.5
24.0
23.0
22.2
22.2
23.0
24.7
25.5
6/27
26.5
36.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
VI
8/1
19.2
33.2
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
9/19
10.7
20.5
23.0
24.0
24.7
26.5
27.2
28.2
27.2
27.2
ANVIL POINTS
Cover
10/13
<0.2
15.0
18.0
18.0
19.7
21.5
23.0
24.0
24.7
24.7
15
6/27
36.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
STUDY SITE. 1973
cm (6")
VIII
8/1
26.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
40.0
Soil
9/19
9.0
19.5
24.7
25.2
26.5
27.2
30.0
30.7
31.7
31.7
Cover
10/13
1.7
23.0
28.0
27.2
29.0
29.0
29.0
30.5
31.2
31.2
TOSCO Spent Shale TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
X
6/27
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
__
8/1
28.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
__
9/19
21.2
25.5
26.5
29.0
28.2
30.0
30.0
30.7
30.7
--
__
10/13
11.2
24.0
25.5
26.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
26.5
27.2
_
6/27
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
XII
8/1
21.7
31.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
9/19
13.7
22.2
22.2
22.2
23.2
24.0
26.5
28.0
28.0
10/13
4.7
24.7
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
28.0
--
6/27
30.5
39.7
31.7
36.7
37.7
>40.0
39.7
30.7
37.7
37.7
37.7
XIV
8/1
6.0
18.5
21.0
24.7
26.2
31.0
20.0
27.2
26.2
27.2
28.0
9/19
4.5
13.7
21.5
22.2
24.0
24.7
26.6
28.2
29.7
29.7
31.5
10/13
1.7
14.0
16.5
19.7
19.7
19.7
22.2
24.0
24.7
28.0
28.0
-------
PENDIX TABLE 19.
60 cm (24")
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
6/27
26.5*
35.7
34.7
35.7
35.7
35.7
35.7
33.0
34.0
32.0
32.0
13
8/1
13.2
21.2
23.0
31.5
32.5
32.5
31.5
31.5
30.0
31.5
35.2
MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM NORTH- ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
Soil Cover 60 cm (24") Soil Cover . 15 cm (6") Soil
9/19
7.2
13.2
16.0
23.0
25.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
28.2
10/13
2.7
13.7
13.7
18.7
22.2
24.0
24.0
25.0
25.0
24.7
27.2
6/27
23.7
32.0
33.0
34.7
39.5
>40.0
39.5
34.0
34.7
39.5
39.5
11
8/1
13.7
20.5
23.7
29.0
35.7
35.7
31.5
31.5
33.2
35.0
35.0
9/19
5.5
15.0
16.0
20.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
28.2
10/13
6.2
13.7
15.5
16.2
24.0
25.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
__
6/27
30.2
38.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
__
9
8/1
28.2
33.2
32.2
31.5
34.0
34.0
37.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
_^
9/19
2.7
16.2
24.0
24.7
25.5
27.2
28.2
27.2
29.0
26.5
_
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE.
Cover
10/13
3.5
17.0
21.5
22.2
24.0
24.7
25.5
27.2
27.2
27.2
-7
__
15
6/27
22.7
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
39.5
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.Q
cm (6")
7
8/1
14.2
32.5
36.0
38.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
1973
Soil Cover
9/19
4.7
18.7
25.5
25.5
21.5
26.5
28.2
29.0
30.0
31.5
31.5
10/13
4.2
15.0
20.7
24.0
24.7
24.7
24.7
26.5
26.5
28.0
28.0
VO
H1
USBM Spent Shale USBM Spent Shale Soil
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
12"
135
150
165
180
5
6/27
17,2
35.7
38.5
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.n
>40.0
>40.0
8/1
20.5
30.0
34.2
37.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
9/19
5.5
18.7
24.7
29.0
33.5
31.5
30.0
30. n
30.0
33.5
10/13
7.2
21.2
22.0
24.7
29.0
30.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
28.2
6/27
26.5
37.5
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
38.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
8/1
23.7
31.5
35.2
36.7
36.7
38.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
3
9/19
6.5
23.0
25.5
28.2
30.0
28.2
30.0
30.0
28.2
30.0
10/13
8.5
21.2
24.7
25.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
27.2
28.2
27.2
6/27
22.7
33.0
37.5
34.7
37.5
39.5
37.5
38.5
37.5
37.5
1
8/1
23.0
30.0
30.0
34.2
37.7
37.7
37.0
35.2
35.2
35.2
9/19
3.0
16.0
18.7
19.2
23.0
25.5
26.5
27.2
30.0
30.0
10/13
6.7
15.0
16.5
18.2
19.0
21.5
22.2
22.2
24.0
26.5
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 20. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE. SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT
Deoth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
60
6/27
19.2*
33.7
34.7
35.7
37.5
39.5
39.5
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
cm (24")
14
8/1
17.0
21.2
24.7
29.0
37.0
37.0
37.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
Soil
9/19
1.7
12.0
17.0
19.7
20.5
25.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
30.7
32.2
Cover
10/13
1.7
11.5
12.5
18.2
19.7
24.0
25.5
26.5
27.2
28.0
29.0
60
6/27
13.7
31.0
35.7
33.7
39.5
38.5
38.5
38.5
37.5
>40.0
>40.0
SHALE
cm (24")
12
8/1
19.5
24.7
26.5
34.2
35.2
36.0
36.0
35.2
33.5
37.7
>40.0
, AND SOIL
Soil
9/19
3.0
13.2
17.7
19.2
25.5
26.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
Cover
10/13
2.5
12.5
14.0
15.7
21.5
23.0
24.7
24.7
24.0
24.0
26.5
CONTROL
15
6/27
24.7
36.7
38.5
39.5
37.5
33.0
37.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1973
cm (6")
10
8/1
27.2
30.0
30.7
30.0
29.0
30.7
37.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
Soil Cover
9/19
2.2
14.2
19.2
23.0
24.7
24.7
25.5
28.2
30.7
33.2
10/13
2.5
15.0
18.2
19.0
21.5
20.7
23.2
25.5
26.5
27.2
15
6/27
14.5
35.7
35.7
37.5
>40.0
>40.0
39.5
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
cm (6")
8
8/1
27.2
29.0
30.7
37.7
37.7
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
Soil Cover
9/19
4.7
15.0
20.5
24.7
30.0
30.0
29.0
31.5
31.5
31.5
10/13
2.5
14.0
19.0
21.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
27.2
28.0
29.0
USBM Spent Shale USBM Spent Shale Soil
6 4 2
Depth
(cm) 6/27 8/1 9/19 10/13 6/27 8/1 9/19 10/13 6/27 8/1 9/19 10/13
21.0
34.7
35.7
39.5
39.5
36.7
33.7
38.5
39.5
>40.0
__
24.0
29.0
30.5
29.0
29.0
28.0
29.7
33.0
36.2
>40.0
10.7
21.2
24.0
24.7
25.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
29.0
31.5
1.0
15.7
19.7
19.7
22.2
24.0
24.7
24.7
26.5
27.2
21.7
>40.a
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
>40.0
13.2
29.0
31.2
33.0
32.2
33.0
33.0
33.7
34.5
36.2
36.2
5.5
19.2
24.7
26.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
28.2
30.0
30.7
30.7
1.7
17.2
21.0
22.2
24.7
25.5
25.5
27.2
27.2
27.2
26.5
18.2
33.0
34.7
37.5
37.5
38.5
36.7
36.7
37.5
34.7
33.0
20.5
25.5
29.0
31.5
31.5
30.7
33.2
33.2
35.2
30.0
30.0
5.5
16.0
17.7
21.2
23.0
24.0
24.7
26.5
27.2
28.2
30.0
1.7
13.7
15.5
16.2
19.7
21.2
23.0
24.7
25.5
28.2
28.2
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 21. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) PROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1974
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
VO
w
30 cm (12")
I
4/18 5/16
19.5* 13.5
27.2 20.5
29.0 24.5
29.0 26.7
28.2 27.5
26.5 23.5
25.5 24.5
26.5 24.0
25.5 24.0
28.2 27.5
28.2 27.5
29.0 28.0
Soil
7/12
0.2
5.0
15.7
21.2
20.2
20.2
20.2
20.2
21.2
22.0
23.7
24.7
Cover
9/6
3.7
15.2
17.7
17.7
18.7
17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7
20.5
22.2
22.2
30
4/18
10.7
24.7
31.7
30.0
30.0
30.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
31.7
35.2
--
cm (12
5/16
13.0
20.0
23.5
27.3
27.2
28.6
29.0
27.5
29.0
30.3
34.7
~
") Soil
III
7/12
<0.2
14.2
18.7
17.7
17.7
19.5
21.2
24.0
24.0
25.5
26.5
TOSCO Spent Shale
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
4/18
21.2
33.5
35.2
35.2
37.0
37.0
38.7
37.0
37.7
~
--
IX
5/16 7/12
20.5 5.5
29.0 16.0
29.0 15.2
31.5 23.0
31.5 24.7
32.2 24.7
33.2 26.5
34.0 26.5
34.0 26.5
--
9/6
5.5
16.0
18.7
23.0
23.0
22.7
23.0
23.0
23.0
--
4/18
20.5
34.0
35.7
37.5
36.5
35.0
35.0
35.7
37.5
37.5
~
Cover
9/6
5.5
17.0
17.0
16.0
17.0
19.5
21.2
23.0
24.0
24.7
25.5
~
15
4/18
7.5
33.5
33.5
33.5
35.2
36.0
37.0
37.0
37.0
37.0
~
cm (6") Soil
V
5/16 7/12
12.0 <0.2
28.2 12.5
28.5 16.0
29.7 19.5
30.2 20.5
30.7 23.0
32.0 24.7
34.0 28.2
36.5 26.5
37.5 28.2
--
TOSCO Spent Shale
XI
5/16 7/12
19.5 4.0
25.6 14.2
29.2 20.5
31.5 23.0
31.5 24.0
32.2 24.7
32.5 24.7
33.2 25.5
34. Q 27.2
34.0 27.2
--
9/6
6.0
16.7
21.2
23.0
23.7
23.7
24.7
24.7
24.7
24.7
~
4/18
10.2
18.7
24.7
28.2
28.2
29.0
31.5
29.7
29.0
29.7
Cover
9/6
4.7
T2.5
15.2
17.7
18.7
21.2
24.7
24.7
25.5
26.5
Soil
XIII
5/16 7/12
3.5 3.7
3.5 12.5
15.5 15.0
25.5 17.7
25.5 17.7
25.5 19.5
26.5 22.0
27.2 23.0
29.0 25.5
31.5 25.5
15
4/18
17.2
33.2
34.0
34.0
34.0
35.7
35.0
34.0
35.7
35.7
~
9/6
7.2
15.2
16.0
17.0
17.0
17.7
17.7
18.7
19.5
19.5
cm (6") Soil Cover
VII
5/16 7/12 9/6
9.0 3.7 7.2
28.3 14.2 16.0
28.5 17.7 17.7
29.7 22.2 21.2
30.5 24.0 22.2
30.5 24.7 24.0
31.2 25.5 23.0
32.8 24.7 23.0
31.6 26.5 24.7
33.6 27.2 24.7
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 22. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
10
COVERED TOSCO
Copth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
1?0
135
150
165
180
30 cm (12
4/18 5/16
*
14.7 13.0
17.0 15.2
29.0 18.6
28.2 22.5
25.5 22.0
24.7 22.5
24.7 23.2
27.2 25.5
28.2 27. C
29.0 29.0
28.2 29.0
29.0 29.1
11 ) Soil
II
7/12
4.0
14.2
21.2
21.2
21.2
21.2
21.2
23.7
25.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
Cover
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1974
30 cm (12'
') Soil
Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
IV
9/6
6.5
15.2
22.2
23.7
19.5
21.2
21.2
23.0
24.7
24.7
26.5
26.5
4/18 5/16
15.5 13.5
24.0 23.5
29.7 26.7
31.5 21.5
29.5 24.3
28.2 25.5
29.0 25.5
29.5 25.5
30.7 27.6
31.5 29.0
7/12
10.7
14.2
16.0
17.7
18.7
19.5
21.2
24.7
24.7
24.7
TOSCO Spent Shale
ueptn
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
-
4/18
34.0
34.0
34.0
35.7
35.0
35.0
35.7
35.7
-36.5
~
~
X
5/16 7/12
3.0 9.0
29.5 20.5
30.2 23.0
32.3 24.7
31.6 26.5
33.3 25.5
33.3 25.5
33.2 25.5
35.7 26.5
..
--
..
9/6
7.2
17.7
21.2
23.0
23.0
24.0
24.7
24.7
24.7
~
4/18
30.7
34.0
34.0
35.7
34.0
34.0
35.7
35.7
35.7
9/6 4/18 5/16
8.
16.
16.
17.
17.
17.
18.
19.
23.
24.
TOSCO
5/16
2.0
2 19-5 3.0
0 31.7 27.0
0 31.7 28.5
0 31.7 29.5
7 31.7 30.1
7 33.5 30.6
7 34.2 30.2
5 33.5 32.5
0 33.5 33.0
7 34.2 33.0
..
Spent Shale
XII
7/12 9/6
9.0 7.2
29.0 19.5 17.0
30.5
32.2
32.5
33.2
33.2
33.2
35.7
21.2 18.7
23.0 21.2
24.0 23.0
24.7 24.0
26.5 24.0
28.2 24.7
28.2 24.7
..
VI
7/12
5.5
12.5
15.2
19.5
19.5
22.2
23.0
24.7
24.7
24.7
4/18
17.0
24.0
24.7
26.5
29.0
30.7
30.0
30.7
30.0
30.0
31.0
15 em (6")
Soil Cover
VIII
9/6
7,5
14.2
15.2
16.0
17.7
18.7
21.2
23.0
24.7
24.7
Soil
XIV
5/16 7/12
3.0 4.0
20.6 12.5
22.6 16.0
23.5 16.0
25.6 17.7
28.5 17.7
28.6 18.7
28.6 24.0
28.4 24.7
28.3 26.5
28.2 28.2
4/18 5/16
26.5 2.0
34.0 25.5
35.0 27.3
34.0 29.0
33.2 2S.5
34.0 30.7
35.7 32.6
37.5 34.0
36.5 34.5
36.5 35.0
,-
9/6
6.5
15.2
16.0
16.0
17.0
17.0
17.0
22.2
23.0
24.7
26.5
7/12 9/6
3.7 7.5
14.2 14.2
19.5 17.0
21.2 17.7
22.0 20.5
23.7 21.2
27.2 22.2
27.2 25.5
28.2 26.5
28.2 26-5
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
-------
PENDIX
TABLE
23. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM NORTH-ASPECT USBM
COVERED USBM
Depth
(en)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
60
4/1 S
20. 5*
24.7
26.5
31.5
30.7
32.2
29.7
31.5
29.7
29.7
32.2
cm (24:1)
13
5/16
3.5
7.0
11.2
15.5
20.5
25.5
26.5
27.2
27.2
28.2
28.2
Soil
7/12
6.0
11.2
13.0
16.7
18.5
21.2
.22.0
23.7
23.7
25.5
27.5
Cover
9/6
3.7
12.5
13.5
16.0
17.0
17.7
19.5
23.0
24.0
24.0
24.7
SPENT SHALE,
60
4/18
17.2
24.7
25.5
32.2
34.0
34.0
32.2
32.2
32.2
32.2
32.2
cm (24")
11
5/16
4.0
8.0
12.0
15.5
20.5
22.5
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.3
28.3
AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
Soil
7/12
2.2
12.2
12.2
14.7
18.5
21.2
22.0
23.7
24.7
25.5
25.5
__
Cover
9/6
5.5
12.5
13.5
16.0
17.7
20.5
21.2
23.0
23.0
24.7
24.7
15
4/18
22.2
29.0
31.5
32.2
33.2
34.0
34.0
32.2
33.2
33.2
33.2
._
cm (6")
9
5/16
2.0
5.2
14.6
24.0
25.0
26.5
27.7
29.0
31.5
32.2
32.2
--
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1974
Soil Cover
7/12
2.2
13.0
15.7
16.7
18.5
21.2
22.0
24.7
26.5
25.5
27.2
__
9/6
3.7
15.0
16.0
16.0
17.0
17.7
21.2
24.0
24.7
24.7
26.5
__
IS
4/18
27.2
31.5
33.2
34.0
32.5
32.5
33.2
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
__
cm (6")
7
5/16
4.0
6.0
18.5
24.5
25.0
26.5
23.5
29.0
31.0
33.0
33.0
__
Soil Cover
. 7/12
4.2
14.0
16.7
18.5
19.5
22.0
23.0
24.7
25.5
26.5
26.5
__
9/6
2.2
15.0
16.0
16.0
17.0
19.5
22.2
24.0
24.7
26.5
28.2
10
in
USBM Spent Shale USBH Spent Shale Soil
Depth
(cm)
4/18
27.2
29.0
30.7
35.7
34.0
34.0
34.0
34.0
35.0
35.0
5/16
2.0
15.5
23.0
30.7
31.5
32.2
31.2
30.7
32.0
32.2
5
7/12
4.0
11.2
14.0
17.5
23.0
25.5
25.5
26.5
27.2
30.0
9/6
4.0
14.2
15.0
16.0
21.2
23.0
23.0
23.0
24.7
26.5
4/18
28,2
30.0
33.5
31.7
34.2
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
33.0
3
5/16
5.0
15.9
22.5
31.3
31.5
32.0
32.0
31.0
32.0
33-0
7/12
6.0
12.2
17.5
21.2
23.7
25.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
27.2
9/6
2.2
14.2
16.0
18.7
22.2
23.0
24.0
25.5
24.7
24.7
4/10
24.0
28.2
29.7
29.0
30.7
29.7
27.2
26.5
27.2
29.0
1
D/1C
14.7
22.2
23.5
24.7
24.5
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.7
7/12
3.7
11.2
13.7
13.7
13.7
15.5
15.5
15.5
18.0
22.2
9/6
3.7
14.2
15.0
15.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
17.7
21.2
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165 29-0 29.0 24.0 23.0
180
* Values are In percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
- No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 24. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1974
cr>
Death
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
Dorrf-h
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
60 cm (24
4/18 5/16
it
13.7 3.5
18.7 5.2
22.0 10.3
24.0 15.5
29.7 20.5
30.7 25.5
32.5 26.3
32.5 26.8
32.5 27.2
33.2 28.1
34.0 28.5
34.0 29.0
") Soil
14
7/12
0.5
9.0
10.7
12.5
15.0
17.7
24.7
24.7
27.2
28.2
30.0
30.0
4/18
22.2
24.7
27.2
27.2
29.0
23.2
29.0
34.0
32.5
32.5
--
«
Cover
9/6
3.7
13.5
14.2
15.2
16.0
21.2
24.7
26.5
26.5
27.2
28.2
30.0
USBM
5/16
5.0
18.5
19.5
21.5
2SJ.6
20.0
26.7
28.5
30.5
30.5
60
4/18
17.2
24.0
24.0
29.7
32.5
32.5
30.7
31.5
30.7
32.5
32.5
32.5
Spent Shale
6
7/12 9/6
3.7 5.5
11.2 12.5
13.0 15.2
14.7 15.2
18.5 16.0
20.2 17.7
22.0 19.5
23.7 22.0
27.2 24.7
27.2 24.7
cm (24
5/16
3.5
5.3
10.4
15.6
20.6
25.6
25.3
26.7
27.3
27.3
29.5
30.0
11 ) Soil
12
7/12
2.2
9.5
12.0
13.0
18.5
20.2
22.0
23.7
23.0
23.7
27.5
27.5
Cover
9/6
4.7
12.5
13.5
16.0
17.7
19.5
22.2
21.2
21.2
23.0
24.7
24.7
15
4/18
23.0
28.2
27.2
27.2
27.2
27. 2
27.2
32.5
34.0
34.0
34.0
cm (6") Soil
10
5/16 7/12
4.0 2.2
19.0 12.2
21.0 14.7
23.0 14.7
24.7 14.7
26.5 14.7
29.5 18.5
32.5 22.0
32.9 25.5
33.0 28.2
33.0 28.2
,-
USBM Spent Shale
4/18
27.2
31.0
30.0
30.0
31.0
31.0
31.7
33.5
33.5
33.5
33.5
~
4
5/16 7/12
5.5 0.5
19.0 10.7
20.3 12.5
23.3 14.2
26.6 19.5
2C.6 21.2
26.7 24.0
28.9 24.0
31.2 26.5
33.5 26.5
33.5 26.5
9/6
7.2
14.2
15.2
16.0
21.2
23.0
24.7
24.7
25.5
25.5
25.5
--
4/18
10.5
22.2
25.5
25.5
27.2
29.7
26.5
29.0
29.0
29.7
29.0
--
Cover
9/6
3.7
14.2
16.0
15.2
15.2
16.0
17.7
23.0
24.7
25.5
26.5
--
Soil
2
5/16 7/12
3.0 0.2
3.5 10.7
14.0 13.5
20.5 14.2
23.5 14.2
25.5 14.2
27.0 15.2
28.2 16.0
29.0 17.7
29.0 19.5
29.0 21.2
15
4/18
23.0
25.5
30.7
30.7
30.7
30.7
32.5
32.5
32.5
32.5
9/6
5.5
12.5
14.2
15.2
15.2
15.2
16.0
16.0
17.0
17.7
21.2
~
ca (6") Soil Cover
8
5/16 7/12 9/6
3.5 2.2 3.7
18.7 11.7 14.2
22.1 14.2 16.0
25.5 15.2 16.0
27.2 21.2 17.7
29.0 22.2 23.0
30.5 24.7 24.0
32.5 25.5 24.7
32.5 26.5 26.5
32.5 26.5 26.5
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 25. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
vo
COVERED TOSCO
30 cm (12")
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
ieo
4/10 5/12
*
19.8 5.0
24.0 16.5
27.0 23.0
26.3 24.8
24.0 24.0
22.5 22.3
21.0 21.5
18.5 20.5
18.5 21.5
18.5 20.5
19.3 21.5
19.3 23.0
5/20
12.5
27.3
28.3
27.3
23.8
21.3
19.5
20.3
20.3
21.3
21.3
21.3
Soil
I
6/20
5.5
12.8
18.3
18.3
19.3
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.0
22.3
22.3
24.0
Cover
7/16
6.5
10.0
13.3
14.8
16. b
17.3
18.3
18.3
18.3
20.5
21.5
22.3
10/13
9.0
12.8
13.8
14.5
15.0
16.5
15.3
16.0
16.0
19.0
20.0
20.8
4/10
15.8
24.0
27.0
25.5
23.3
23.3
23.3
23.3
24.8
24.8
26.3
26.3
TOSCO Spent Shale
IX
Deoth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
1 £fl
ICC
1 Ob
Iftf)
4/10
*
25.5
30.3
31.0
31.0
31.0
30.3
30.3
31.0
31.0
5/12
17.5
28.8
32.8
32.0
32.8
33.5
32.8
33.5
33.5
5/20
24.8
34.3
35.3
36.8
36.0
36.0
33.3
33.3
33.3
6/20
6.8
18.5
22.5
24.8
26.3
26.3
27.0
28.8
28.8
7/16
5.8
14.8
22.3
23.0
24.0
24.8
26.3
27.3
27.3
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6")
III
5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16 10/13 4/10 5/12 5/20
6.3 12.5 4.8 5.0 9.0 .24J0._12J3 .22..0.
19.3 25.5 16.0 13.3 14.8 30.5 27-3 32.5
26.3 32.5 22.3 17.3 16.3 31.3 29.8 32.5
24.8 28.3 21.5 17.3 15.5 33-0 33.0 33.3
24.8 25.5 20.8 17.3 15.5 32-3 33.0 33.3
24.0 25.5 21.5 18.3 16.3 33-° 33.8 35.3
25.5 24.8 23.3 19.8 17.8 32.3 33.8 33.3
26.3 24.8 25.5 21.5 20.0 33.0 34.5 33.3
26.3 24.8 25.5 24.0 20.8 32.3 34.5 32.5
29.5 25.5 27.3 24.8 21.5 32-3 34-5 31.8
£9.5 Z5.5 35.3 E4.8 22.8
Z9.5 26. 5 35.3 24.8 23.5
TDSCO Spent Shale
XI
10/13 4/10 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16
9.3 27.0 20.8 17.8 7.5 5.8
16.5 31.8 30.3 35.3 21.0 16.5
20.5 32.5 32.0 35.3 24.0 21.5
21.8 32.5 32.8 36.8 25.5 23.0
23.3 30.3 31.3 35.3 28.0 23.0
23.3 30.3 31.3 32.5 26.3 24.8
23.5 30.3 32.8 31.8 27.0 26.3
25.3 30.3 32.8 30.8 28.0 26.3
25.3 31.0 32.8 31.8 28.0 25.3
Soil Cover
V
6/20 7/16
-1*5...5&
17.8 10.8
21.0 15.8
22.5 18.3
24.8 21.5
26.3 23.0
26.3 24.8
34.3 27.3
34.3 26.3
34.3 26.3
10/13
7.5
14.8
18.3
19.3
19.5
20.3
21.0
21.5
21.8
10/13
...&$....
11.3
16.0
17.3
19.5
21.8
22.5
23.5
23.5
25.0
4/10
22.5
24.8
27.0
27.0
28.8
28.8
28.0
27.0
26.3
15 cm
4/10 5/12
24.8._]7.,5_.
29.3 28.0
30.3 28.0
28.5 30.3
29.3 32.0
30.3 32.8
29.3 32.8
29.3 32.8
29.3 34.3
29.3 34.3
(6") Soil Cover
VII
5/20 6/20
.21..3...8..9.
32.5 18.3
32.5 22.3
31.8 24.0
32.5 24.8
32.5 28.0
31.8 27.3
32.5 27.3
31.8 28.0
31.8 28.0
Soil
XIII
5/12 5/20 6/20
10.8 19
20.5 26
24.0 30
26.3 30
27,3 31
28.8 33
29.8 30
27.3 29
27.3 28
i
.5 6.5
.5 12.0
.0 16.5
.8 18.0
.8 19.5
.3 22.5
.8 24.0
.0 24.0
.3 24.0
7/16
5.8
13.3
18.3
21.5
23.0
24.8
24.0
24.8
25.5
25.5
7/16
6.8
24.8
28.0
28.8
29.8
31.3
28.8
27,3
26.3
10/13
7.8
13.0
17.8
19.5
21.5
21.5
21.5
21.8
25.3
26.8
10/13
8.8
12.0
15.0
15.8
16.0
16.5
17.8
16.8
16.8
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE
30 cm (12")
Depth
(on)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
tnrt
26.
Soil
MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO
COVffTTiD TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL
Cover 30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6")
II
4/10
19.3
24.0
28.8
29.5
27.0
25.5
24.0
25.5
26.3
27.0
26.3
5/12
8.8
16.8
31.3
32.8
27.3
25.5
24.8
26.3
28.8
29.5
32.0
5/20
16.0
24.8
32.5
33.3
31.8
29.0
26.5
25.5
26.5
25.5
23.8
6/20
7.5
13.8
21.5
22.5
21.5
22.5
21.5
23.3
26.3
26.3
26.3
7/16
5.8
12.3
18.3
19.0
19.8
20.5
20.5
23.0
24.8
24.8
26.3
10/13
6.8
13.3
19.0
18.3
17.8
17.8
18.8
20.3
22.5
23.8
24.0
4/10
21.0
24.0
27.0
27.0
26.3
25.5
24.0
25.5
26.3
26.3
5/12
10.8
17.3
27.3
26.3
25.5
24.8
24.8
27.3
28.8
29.8
IV
5/20
23.3
26.5
33.3
31.8
31.8
28.3
28.3
26.5
27.3
26.5
6/20
7.3
13.5
14.3
17.3
18.8
19.5
20.3
21.8
24.0
25.5
7/16 10/13
6.8 10.3
UU5..JLU5..
10.8 12.3
13.3 15.8
15.8 16.0
16.5 17.5
19.0 18.8
20.5 20.0
23.0 19.5
24.0 21.8
4/10
19 >
25.5
26.3
26.3
27.0
26.3
27.0
26.3
24.8
24.0
5/12
in n
23.0
24.8
24.8
25.5
27.3
27.3
28.8
28.8
28.8
PLOTS .
Soil Cover
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
ANVIL POINTS
15 cm
VI
5/20
ifi n
28.3
30.0
30.0
30.0
31.8
30.0
30.0
26.5
26.5
6/20
fi 1
16.0
18.3
20.8
23.3
24.8
25.5
25.5
24.8
25.5
7/16
4 ?
10.0
14.0
18.3
19.8
22.3
23.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
10/13
5 3
10.3
13.0
16.5
19.3
20.3
22.3
21.8
22.3
23.0
4/10
10 3
28.5
28.5'
27.8
27.8
27.8
29.3
28.5
29.3
29.3
5/12
n s
25.5
26.3
27.3
28.0
29.5
31.3
32.0
31.3
31.3
STUDY SITE.
(6")
1975
Soil Cover
VIII
5/20
17 P,
31.8
33.3
31.8
31.8
31.8
32.5
33.3
33.3
33.3
6/20
s s
13.5
20.8
22.3
23.3
24.8
25.5
28.0
29.5
29.5
7/16
4 1
9.0
15.8
17.3
20.5
23. 0
24.8
27.3
27.3
27.3
10/13
6 8.
10.3
16.0 ,
18.0
19.3
21.5
23.5
25.8
26.5
26.5
VO
00 TOSCO Spent Shale TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
X XII XIV
°(cm) 4/10 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16 10/13 4/10 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16 10/13 4/10 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16 10/13
15 28.8* 19.3 28.3 8.0 4.3 8.0 26.3 19.8 30.8 9.3 8.3 12.0 21.0 9.5 17.8 7.3 6.8 8.8
30 29.5 26.3 30.8 20.8 16.5 20.0 31.0 28.8 33.3 20.0 16.5 18.5 25.5 17.5 27.3 12.5 13.3 14.3
45 30.3 27.3 31.8 24.0 20.5 21.3 30.3 28.8 33.3 23.3 20.5 19.5 24.0 20.8 27.3 15.0 14.8 14.8
60 31.8 30.3 34.3 25.5 23.0. 22.8 29.3 28.8 32.5 24.0 21.5 20.8 24.0 21.5 27.3 15.8 14.8 15.8
75 31.8 32.0 35.3 35.3 25.5 24.0 28.5 28.8 32.5 24.0 22.3 21.5 24.0 23.3 28.3 17.3 16.5 15.8,
90 31.0 30.3 35.3 29.5 27.3 24.3 28.5 31.3 33.3 26.3 24.8 23.5 27.0 27.3 33.3 18.0 16.5 16.5
105 30.3 30.3 33.3 27.3 26.3 24.3 29.3 31.3 35.3 27.0 26.3 23.5 26.0 26.3 31.8 19.5 16.5 16.5
120 29.5 Z9.5 33.3 28.0 25.5 24.8 30.3 32.3 33.3 28.0 27.3 25.3 24.0 26.3 29.0 21.0 19.8 18.8
135 31.0 32.0 33.3 27.3 27.3 26.0 22.5 24.0 24.8 22.5 21.5 19.5
15Q 21.8 24.0 24.8 22.5 23.0 22.8
1g5 23.3 25.5 26.5 24.0 23.0 22.8
180 -
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 27.
vo
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
Deoth
Com)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
60 cm (24")
i Soil Cover 60 cm (24") Soil Cover 15 cm (6")
13
4/9 5/12 5/20
19.5* 8.0 17.8
25.5 19.3 24.8
24.8 21.5 25.5
26.3 24.0 28.3
27.0 27.3 30.0
27.0 26.3 29.0
25.5 26.3 28.3
26.3 25.5 26.5
26.3 26.3 26.5
25.5 27.3 24.8
26.3 28.0 27.3
6/20 7/16
5.5 4.3
11.3 10.8
14.3 11.5
16.8 14.0
22.3 15.8
23.3 19.0
24.8 20.5
24.8 22.3
25.5 23.0
24.8 22.3
27.3 23.0
10/13
8.8
11.3
12.3
13.8
15.8
16.8
18.0
20.0
20.
19.3
23.0
4/9 5/12
21.8 11.3
24.0 20.0
27.0 22.3
27.8 26.3
28.5 29.5
25.5 28.8
27.0 27.3
25.5 29.5
27.0 28.0
27.0 28.8
11
5/20 6/20 7/16
9.0 7.5 6.8
24.8 12.3 11.5
25.5 14.8 13.3
27.3 17.8 14.0
30.0 23.3 15.8
30.8 24.0 19.8
25.5 23.3 21.5
26.52 23.3 22.3
26.5 24.0 23.0
26.5 24.8 24.0
10/13 4/9 5/12
7.
11.
11.
14.
17.
17.
17.
18.
18.
19.
USBM Spent Shale
4/9
22.5*
25.5
27.8
28.5
30.3
30.3
31.0
31.0
31.0
31.0
5/12 5/20
14.8 19.5
24.0 25.5
28.0 28.3
28.8 30.8
33.0 30.8
31.3 30.8
31.3 30.0
31.3 30.0
32.0 28.3
32-0 28.3
5
6/20
10.0
18.5
20.0
24.8
27.3
29.5
28.3
27.8
27.8
27.8
7/16 10/13
6.5 7.0
11.5 12.0
13.3 12.5
14.8 14.3
21.5 18.8
23.0 17.5
22.3 17.3
22.3 18.8
26.5 20.5
26.5 24.0
4/9
21.8
27.8
27.8
28.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
29.5
27.8
27.8
5/12
14.3
24.8
27.0
27.0
28.8
29.5
29.5
30.5
28.8
29.5
5 21.0 10.3
0 27.0 25.5
3 29.5 26.5
0 27.5 26.5
5 27.0 26.5
8 27.5 27.3
8 28.5 28.0
8 29.5 29.5
8 27.5 28.0
8 27.5 28.0
27.5 26.5
USBM Spent Shale
3
5/20 6/20
21.3 10.3
28.3 19.3
29.8 24.0
28.3 25.5
29.8 27.0
30.8 27.0
28.3 28.8
28.3 28.0
26.5 27.0
26.5 28.8
5/20
19.5
29.0
30.0
30.8
28.3
29.0
28.3
29.0
27.3
27.3
27.3
Soil Cover
9
6/20 7/16
7.5 5.8
17.8 14.0
19.3 14.8
20.0 15.8
21.8 15.8
24.0 19.0
26.3 21.5
27.0 23.0
27.0 24.0
26.3 24.8
26.3 24.8
10/13
6.0
13.5
14.5
13.8
13.0
15.8
17.0
19.3
22.0
22.3
23.0
15 cm (6
") Soil Cover
7
4/9 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16
18.8 7.5 16
28.5 25.5 29
30.3 27.3 30
29.5 28.8 30
29.5 28.8 29
27.8 29.8 28
27.0 28.0 28
27.0 28.8 28
30.3 29.0 28
31.0 30.5 28
31.0 31.3 28
.0 8.3 5.0
.8 19.0 13.3
.8 20.5 14.8
.8 29.8 15.8
.8 25.5 17.3
.3 28.0 19.0
.3 27.3 22.3
.3 28.0 22.3
.3 28.0 24.8
.3 29.8 26.5
.3 34.5 26.5
10/13
9.0
15.5
15.3
16.0
15.5
18.0
19.8
21.0
22.3
25.8
26.8
Soil
7/16
5.8
13.3
16.5
19.0
21.5
23.0
24.0
24.0
24.8
24.8
10/13
8.5
12.5
13.8
15.0
17.0
18.5
19.8
19.5
19.5
22.3
4/9
20.0
26.3
27,0
28.8
22.5
18.5
17.8
18.5
17.8
18.5
5/12 5/20
11.3 16.0
20.5 25.5
27.3 27.3
24.8 24.8
27.3 26.5
28.0 26.5
27.3 19.5
24.8 17.0
19.5 16.0
22.3 17.8
1
6/20 7/16
8.5 5.0
13.3 10.8
15.8 12.5
18.3 12.5
19.0 13.3
20.8 14.8
19.8 14.0
20.8 15.8
20.8 17.3
21.5 17.3
10/13
9.8
11.8
13.3
11.5
13.0
14.5
12.0
14.3
14.8
18.3
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 28. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
o
o
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975
Deoth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
1 fi^
ion
flon-Hi
ueptn
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
1 ££
180
60 cm (24") Soil
14
4/9 5/12 5/20 6/20
it
18.8 6.3 17.8 6.3
23.3 15.0 23.8 12.8
22.5 16.8 24.8 14.5
21.8 16.8 22.0 14.5
21.8 16.8 21.3 19.3
24.3 26.5 21.3 27.8
24.32 27.0 21.3 25.5
24.8 27.0 23.8 25.5
25.5 28.8 24.9 27.0
25.5 27.0 24.9 28.0
91 H 9R n ?fi R ?ft R
9C C 97 fl 9fi £ 9p p
Cover
60 era (24")
Soil Cover
15 cm
12
7/16
6.5
10.0
11.5
12.5
16.5
22.3
24.8
24.8
25.5
26.5
pr C
97 Q
10/13
8.3
11.0
12.3
13.5
17.0
20.3
22.0
22.5
24.3
24.8
?fi 0
9c n
4/9
21.0
24.8
24.8
23.3
25.5
24.8
24.8
22.5
21.8
22.5
?R ^
5/12 5/20
8.3 19.5
14.5 22.0
16.3 25.5
20.0 24.8
25.5 26.5
25.5 26.5
24.0 23.0
23.3 21.3
23.3 21.3
27.0 22.0
97 n 71 1
6/20 7/16
8.0 6.8
12.0 11.5
12.8 13.3
13.5 14.0
19.3 15.8
23.3 19.8
23.3 22.3
22.3 23.0
23.3 24.0
24.0 24.0
9C c 74 n
USBM Spent Shale
4/9 5/12
21.8 14.0
24.0 23.0
26.3 25.5
25.5 24.8
24.8 24.8
23.3 24.0
22.5 23.0
22.5 25.5
24.0 28.0
24.0 28.0
5/20
23.0
27.3
26.5
27.3
27.3
24.8
23.0
21.3
23.8
23.0
6
6/20
8.3
16.5
19.8
19.8
21.5
22.5
22.5
23.0
28.0
28.0
7/16
6.5
11.5
13.3
14.0
15.8
16.5
18.0
20.5
25.5
24.8
10/13
7.5
12.5
13.0
13.8
15.5
16.3
17.3
19.5
21.8
22.5
4/9
23.3
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
26.3
26.3
26.3
26.3
25.5
10/13
7.5
11.0
11.3
13.5
17.0
18.3
18.0
17.0
17.5
18.3
?1 5
4/9
17.3
25.5
24.8
24.0
22.5
23.3
21.0
22.5
23.3
23.3
5/12
6.3
18.3
22.3
22.3
21.5
20.8
23.3
24.8
26.5
26.5
(6»)
Soil Cover
10
5/20
14.3
26.5
28.3
27.3
25.5
22.0
20.3
21.3
23.8
24.8
6/20 7/16
4.8 2.5
11.3 11.5
11.3 13.3
16.0 13.3
16.8 13.3
18.3 13.3
19.3 16.5
23.3 19.0
27.3 24.0
27.3 23.0
USBM Spent Shale
5/12
15.3
24.0
25.5
26.3
26.3
27.0
26.3
28.0
27.0
28.0
4
5/20
23.0
29.8
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.8
26.5
26.5
25.5
23.0
6/20
27.5
17.8
21.0
21.8
25.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.0
7/16
5.8
11.5
15.8
19.0
20.8
23.0
24.0
24.8
24.8
25.5
10/13
8.3
12.3
13.8
16.8
18.8
19.8
21.0
23.0
23.8
24.0
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
8
10/13 4/9 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16 10/13
5.3 16.5 6.3 14.3 6.3 4.3 6.8
13.0 24.8 19.3 25.5 13.5 11.5 13.3
12.5 25.5 21.5 26.5 18.3 14.8 15.0
12.3 25.5 24.8 28.3 19.3 14.8 15.0
11.3 27.8 28.8 29.0 24.0 19.0 18.0
10.5 27.8 28.0 29.8 26.3 21.5 20.5
14.5 26.3 27.3 27.3 27.3 23.0 22.0
16.8 27.8 28.0 27.3 28.0 24.8 23.8
20.8 26.3 28.0 26.5 28.0 25.5 24.8
21.0 26.3 28.8 26.5 28.8 26.5 25.5
Soil
2
4/9 5/12 5/20 6/20 7/16 10/13
20.3 10.3 21.3 8.5 5.5 7.5
24.0 17.0 26.5 11.5 10.8 12.0
24.0 19.8 28.3 14.0 12.5 12.5
27.0 20.5 28.3 14.8 13.5 13.0
25.5 23.0 28.3 17.8 13.5 13.0
24.0 23.0 26.5 17.8 14.3 13.0
21.8 23.0 23.8 18.5 15.3 14.5
18.0 21.3 16.8 18.5 16.0 14.8
18.0 20.5 17.8 18.5 16.8 16.5
18.8 20.5 19.5 19.3 18.5 17.0
T ft ft 9A K TOC 1 Q C 1"7O Ice
to.o tu.D iy ,t> lo, 3 17. o 10.5
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 29. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
Oepth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
1ZO
135
150
165
180
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE,
-
3/10
VII
15 cm (6»)
3/10
--
~
~
4/1
16.3*
26.5
27.3
27.3
27.3
26.0
24.8
24.3
24.3
yji -a
5/10
12.8
21.5
22.3
24.0
24.0
25.5
24.0
24.8
25.5
?c c
30 cm
4/1
11.5*
22.3
26.5
27.3
24.8
22.3
21.3
19. 3
17.5
17.5
18.8
17 5
I
(12")
Soil Cover
AND
SOIL CONTROL
III
30 cm (12")
5/10 6/4 7/9 8/4
8.3 5.3 1.0 0.8
13.8 12.0 9.5 10.5
3/10
20.0 16.3 11.3 11.8
21.8 17.0 11.3 12.5
20.8 18.0 13.8 15.3
18.5 19.5 16.3 16.3
18.5 19.5 17.0 17.3
18.5 21.3 18.8 17.3
17.0 20.5 18.8 18.3
17.8 21.3 18.0 21.0
17.8 21.3 20.5 23.8
IB 5 71 1 71 t ?K K
Soil Cover
6/4
5.5
16.0
19.3
22.3
24.8
24.8
25.5
24.8
26.3
77 t
7/9
0.25
7.8
15.5
21.3
23.0
24.8
26.3
25.5
25.5
79 n
8/4
2.5
10.0
17.5
22.3
24.3
25.0
26.0
26.0
28.0
yo n
4/1
2.3
22.3
27.3
26.0
24.3
22.3
21.8
21.8
21.3
21.8
21.8
5/10
9.5
16.8
Soil Cover
PLOTS.
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE
V
15 cm (6")
6/4 7/9 8/4
6.5 1.0 2.0
15.8 11.3 12.3
3/10
22.3 20.5 14.5 15.3
22.3 20.5 15.5 16.3
20.8 20.5 16.3 17.5
20.8 22.3 18.0 18.3
21.5 23.0 19.5 20.0
23.3 24.0 21.3 21.8
22.3 26.3 22.3 23.8
24.8 25.5 24.0 23.8
25.5 25.5 25.5 24.8
IX
TOSCO Spent Shale
3/10 4/1
~ 17.5
29.0
~ 29.8
29.8
-- 29.0
-- 27.8
27.3
27.3
- 27.3
5/10
19.3
24.8
26.3
27.0
27.0
28.0
26.3
28.0
28 .'0
6/4
6.3
19.3
24.0
26.3
27.3
27.3
25.5
28.0
28.0
7/9
< .25
13.3
21.5
23.0
24.8
26.3
27.3
27.3
27.3
8/4
0.5
15.8
23.3
26.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
28.0
28.0
4/1
17.0
27.3
27.3
27.3
24.3
24.8
24.3
24.8
24.3
24.3
5/10
IS. 8
23.0
23.0
24.0
24". 8
26.3
26.3
28.0
27.3
28.0
Soil Cover
. 1976
6/4 7/9 8/4
8.0 2.8 3.5
14.3 7.8 10.0
20.8 14.5 17.5
22.3 20.5 23.3
24.0 20.5 24.3
24.8 22.3 25.0
24.8 24.0 26.0
28.0 26.3 28.0
27.3 27.3 28.8
26.3 28.0 28.8
XI
TOSCO Spent Shale
3/10 4/-1
19.3
29.8
-- 29.8
- 30.3
-- 29.0
-- 27.8
-- 27.3
- 27.8
27.8
5/10
19.3
25.5
27.0
27.0
28.0
27.0
28.8
27.0
27.0
6/4
8.3
19.8
24.8
26.3
26.3
28.0
28.0
29.8
28.0
7/9
.25
14.5
21.3
24.0
25.5
27.3
28.0
28.0
29.8
8/4
0.8
15.8
22.3
23.8
25.5
25.5
28.3
28.3
28.3
3/10 4/1
18.8
24.8
27.3
27.8
- 27.8
-- 27.3
-- 24.8
17.0
16.3
XIII
Soil
5/10
12.0
15.3
22.0
23.8
25.5
25.5
24.8
18.8
17.0
6/4
7.3
11.3
17.5
19.3
19.3
19.3
20.8
17.5
16.8
7/9
1.8
10.0
14.8
15.8
16.5
16.5
16.5
17.3
16.5
8/4
2.5
10.8
16.3
18.3
18.3-
19.3
20.0
18.3
18.3
.
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 30. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
CD
to
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
COVERED TOSCO
II
30 cm (12")
3/10 4/1
21.3*
28.5
33.3
32.0
24.8
21.3
20.0
20.0
21.3
21.3
22.6
10.8
21.8
27.3
27.3
26.0
23.5
21.3
20.0
21.3
21.8
OT "3
£1.3
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
Soil Cover
5/10 6/4 7/9 8/4
7.5 6.5 1.0 3.5
13.3 12.3 11,3 11.8
22.3 19.0 15.5 16.3
22.3 20.5 17.0 18.3
21.5 19.8 18.0 18.3
21.5 20.5 18.8 18.3
19.8 20.5 19.5 20.0
20.5 22.3 19.5 21.8
22.3 22.3 20.5 23.8
24.0 23.0 23.0 23.8
m f nn i f\ n A Ort C
3/10
22.3
26.0
29.0
27.3
18.8
16.3
16.3
17.5
18.8
20.0
IV
30 cm (12")
4/1
16.3
21.8
27.3
24.8
22.3
21.3
19.3
19.3
18.8
18.8
Soil Cover
5/10 6/4 7/9 8/4
11.0 8.5 2.8 ' 3.5
14.3 12.0 10.3 10.8
16.8
18.3
19.3
19.3
18.3
19.3
20.8
20.8
12.8 10.3 10.8
15.5 13.8 13.5
17.0 15.5 16.3
19.5 17.0 18.3
19.5 17.0 19.3
19.5 19.5 20.0
21.5 20.5 20.0
15.5 21.3 20.0
3/10
20.J5_
29.8
29.0
29.0
24.8
24.3
23.0
22.3
22.3
22.3
, ANVIL
POINTS STUDY
SITE. 1976
VI
15 cm (6"). Soil Cover
4/1
10.8
24.3
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
26.0
24.3
23.5
22.3
5/10 6/4 7/9 8/4
J0.3_ jijj _J_.3_ J
16.8 11.5 6.5 f
L_5
3.0
19.3 17.3 13.3 13.5
20.8 21.5 18.5 19.3
22.3 22.3 21.3 21.8
23.3 23.0 24.8 23.8
23.3 24.0 25.5 23.8
22.3 24.8 26.5 23.8
22.3 24.8 26.5 24.8
22.3 24.0 27.3 25.0
VIII
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
3/10
20.0*
31.5
31.5
29,0
26.0
24.3
24.8
26.0
26.0
~
4/1
13.8
26.5
27.8
27.3
26.0
26.0
26.0
27.8
27.3
"""
5/10
10.8
16.5
20.5
22.3
22.3
24.8
25.5
28.0
26.3
"
6/4
3.3
10.0
18.3
21.5
22.3
23.0
25.5
28.0
28.0
""
7/9
0.25
6.0
13.8
20.5
18.8
20.5
22.3
24.8
25.5
8/4
.25
6.3
13.5
20.0
21.8
21.8
24.8
26.5
27.5
3/10
28.5
33.3
32.0
30.3
30.3
28.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
X
TOSCO Spent Shale
4/1
20.0
26.5
26.5
26.5
.27.8
27.8
27.3
26.0
27.3
5/10
10.8
19.8
23.0
24.0
24.8
26.3
26.3
24.8
26.3
6/4
6.5
19.8
21.5
23.0
24.0
26.3
24.8
26.3
25.5
7/9
0.25
15.5
21.3
24.0
25.5
26.3
25.5
27.3
27.3
8/4
2.5
19.3
22.8
24.8
26.5
27.5
27.5
28.5
28.5
3/10
29.0
31.0
31.0
31.0
28.5
26.0
27.3
26.0
27.3
XII
TOSCO Spent Shale
4/1
21.8
27.3
27.3
27.3
27.3
27.8
27.8
27.8
27.8
5/10
12.8
20.8
22.3
23.3
24.0
24.0
25.5
25.5
25.5
6/4
7.5
18.3
23.0
23.0
23.0
24.8
26.3
27.3
27.3
7/9
1.0
14.5
18.8
22.3
22.3
24.0
26.3
27.3
27.3
8/4
2.5
17.3
21.0
21.8
22.8
25.5
26.5
27.5
27.5
3/10
20.5
31.0
27.3
24.3
20.0
15.8
15.8
17.5
18.8
21 8
24.3
4/1
14.5
24.3
24.3
24.3
21.8
18.3
13.8
16.3
19.3
20 0
20:0
XIV
Soil
5/10
11.5
15.8
17.3
17.3
19.0
19.0
15.8
17.3
18.0
19 0
21.5
5/",
7.3
12.8
16.8
16.8
16.0
16.0
15.0
17.5
16.8
19 3
21.5
7/9
2.0
12.0
13.8
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
14.5
18.8
18 8
20.5
8/4
3.5
14.5
16.3
16.3
16.3
17.3
16.3
19.3
21.0
21.8
21.8
* Values are In percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
o
u>
APPENDIX TABLE 31. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) PROM NORTH-ASEPCT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
COVERED USBM
13
60 cm (24") Soil
3/10 4/1 5/10 6/4
*
11.5 9.5 8.3
-- 26.5 17.5 14.3
27.3 17.5 17.0
-- 27.3 23.3 17.0
-- 27.8 25.5 17.8
26.5 24.0 18.5
-- 27.3 24.0 17.0
24.3 24.0 17.8
-- 23.5 24.8 17.0
20.0 24.0 18.5
21.3 24.0 21.3
SPENT SHALE.
AND
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
11
Cover
7/9
1.0
9.5
12.0
14.5
16.3
18.8
21.3
22.3
24.0
23.0
24.8
8/4 3/10
2.0
9.5
11.3
12.8
14.5
15.5
18.8
19.5
20.5
19.5
20.5
5
60 cm (24"
4/1 5/10
18.8 12.8
24.8 17.5
26.0 19.3
26.0 23.3
30.3 27.3
29.0 27.3
24.8 24.8
. 23.5 24.8
20.0 24.8
19.3 24.8
) Soil
6/4
9.0
17.3
21.5
24.0
24.8
26.3
26.3
25.5
24.0
28.8
~
USBM Spent Shale
3/10
--
--
4/1
*
15.0
24.8
27.3
29.0
31.5
29.0
27.8
26.5
24.8
24.8
5/10 6/4
20.5 6.3
23.0 16.0
24.8 19.3
27.3 20.0
29.8 20.8
28.0 22.3
28.0 24.0
27.3 24.8
28.0 25.5
28.8 25.5
7/9 8/4
2.5 1.0
12.3 10.3
12.3 11.3
14.8 12.0
12.3 17.0
22.3 18.8
21.5 18.0
24.8 17.0
25.5 19.5
26.3 20.5
3/10
~
Cover
7/9
2.0
10.3
12.0
12.8
18.8
20.5
20.5
23.0
22.3
22.3
--
8/4
2.8
10.3
11.3
12.0
16.3
18.0
18.8
18.8
18.8
18.8
3/10
~
3
15 cm (6")
4/1 5/1 Q
12.0 15.0
27.3 21.5
29.8 24.0
29.0 24.0
27.3 24.0
29.8 25.5
27.3 25.5
26.0 26.3
24.3 25.5
23.5 25.5
9
Soil
6/4
10.8
16.5
21.5
23.0
28.0
28.0
26.3
26.3
27.3
28.0
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1976
Cover
7/9
2.0
12.5
16.0
15.0
17.0
19.5-
22.0
24.8
24.8
27.3
USBM Soent Shale
4/1
15.0
27.8
27.8
29.0
29.0
29.0
27.8
27.3
26.5
26.5
5/10
19.8
16.5
25.5
26.3
26.3
28.0
27.3
28.0
28.0
28.0
6/4
8.8
13.5
14.3
16.8
23.3
24.0
23.3
23.3
23.3
24.8
7/9 8/4
3.5 1.0
9.5 7.8
13.8 11.3
25.5 13.8
21.3 16.3
24.0 18.8
24.0 19.5
24.0 18.8
24.0 18.8
25.5 18.8
3/10
~
~
4/1
14.5
26.0
27.8
27.8
26.0
27.3
20.0
14.5
15.0
17.5
17.5
8/4
2.0
12.0
13.8
12.8
13.8
15.5
18.0
18.8
19.5
21.3
~
15 cm (6")
3/10 4/1 5/10
~
1
11.5 11.5
27.8 21.5
30.3 26.3
29.8 27.3
27.8 24.8
27.3 26.3
24.8 26.3
26.0 26.3
24.3 28.0
24.3 29.8
24.3 29.8
7
Soil Cover
6/4 7/9 8/4
7.3 < .2 < .2
14.3 11.5 11.3
17.5 14.8 13.8
22.3 15.8 14.5
22.3 16.5 n.5
23.3 18.3 18.0
23.3 19.8 19.5
24.8 22.3 19.5
24.8 21.5 20.5
28.0 24.0 23.0
29.0 25.5 23.0
Soil
5/10
14.8
18.3
21.5
21.5
22.3
23.0
19.0
15.8
15.8
16.5
20.5
6/4
8.3
14.0
14.8
17.3
21.5
22.3
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.8
7/9 8/4
2.0 2.8
10.3 10.3
13.8 11.3
13.8 12.0
13.8 11.3
14.5 13.8
13.8 11.3
13.8 12.8
15.5 14.5
18.8 17.0
20.5 17.0
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 32. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) PROM SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED
14
Oepth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
60 cm (21") Soil
3/10 4/1 5/10 6/4
23.0* 12.5 9.3 7.5
26.0 23.5 12.3 12.3
29.0 26.0 14.5 13.3
29.0 ?4.8 16.3 14.0
28.5 24.8 20.0 19.0
23.0 26.5 23.3 21.5
22.3 26.0 23.3 24.0
23.0 24.3 23.3 24.8
23.0 24.3 23.3 24.0
24.3 24.3 23.3 25.5
26.0 24.3 24.0 26.3
26.5 27.8 25.5 28.0
Cover
7/9 8/4
.2 2.0
10.3 9.5
11.3 11.3
13.8 12.0
15.5 14.5
20.5 19.5
24.0 22.3
24.0 21.3
24.0 23.0
25.5 23.0
27.3 24.0
29.8 26.3
USBM SPENT SHALE,
12
60 cm (24"
3/10 4/1
20.0 12.
26.0 22.
27.3 24.
27.8 23.
27.8 27.
26.0 27.
21.3 24.
17.5 21.
18.8 19.
19.3 19.
21.3 21.
6
5/10
0 10.3
3 13.5
3 13.0
5 16.0
3 20.8
3 22.3
8 22.3
8 20.8
3 20.0
3 19.3
3 21.5
) Soil
6/4
7.8
11.3
12.0
13.5
18.3
19.3
20.8
20.0
20.0
20.0
21.5
USBM Spent Shale
3/10
22.3*
27.8
26.0
24.8
22.3
18.8
16.3
17.5
19.0
20.0
4/1 5/10
17.0 11.5
24.8 18.3
24.8 20.5
24.3 21.5
22.3 22.3
21.8 21.5
19.0 20.5
18.8 20.5
21.3 22.3
21.3 22.3
6/4 7/9
8.8 .2
14.5 12.0
18.0 13.8
18.8 15.5
19.5 17.0
20.5 19.5
20.5 22.3
19.5 22.3
24.0 24.8
23.0 25.5
8/4
2.0
10.3
12.0
12.8
14.5
15.5
15.5
17.0
18.8
19.5
__
3/10
24.2.
31.5
29.8
29.8
27.3
26.0
24.3
23.0
22.3
23.0
24.8
AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
10
Cover
7/9
2.8
11.3
13.8
14.5
16.3
17.0
15.5
15.5
22.3
22.3
22.3
15 cm (6")
8/4
2.8
7.8
11.3
11.3
14.5
17.0
18.8
18.8
18.0
18.8
20.5
3/10 4/1
17.5 8.
26.0 22.
31.0 26.
27.3 24.
20.0 23.
13.3 20.
14.5 18.
16.3 17.
28.5 18.
21.8 20.
22.3 20.
4
5/10
3 6.3
3 14.3
0 17.5
3 17.5
5 17.5
0 17.5
8 17.5
0 16.8
8 19.3
0 20.0
0 20.0
Soil
6/4
5.3
12.8
14.5
15.5
14.5
13.8
15.5
17.0
20.5
22.3
22.3
ANVIL
Cover
7/9
3.0
10.8
12.5
12.5
17.0
19.5
21.3
21.3
20.3
21.3
21.3
USBM Spent Shale
4/1
14.5
26.0
27.3
26.0
26.0
26.5
24.8
24.8
24.5
24.5
24.5
5/10
12.8
21.5
22.3
22.3
24.0
24.0
24.8
24.0
24.0
24.3
24.8
6/4 7/9
8.3 1.0
18.3 11.3
21.5 15.5
22.3 18.8
24.0 20.5
24.8 23.0
24.8 24.8
24.8 26.3
25.5 26.3
M.8 26.3
24.8 26.3
8/4
2.0
11.3
13.8
17.0
19.5
21.3
21.3
22.3
23.0
22.3
22.3
3/10
20.5
29.0
29.0
29.0
31.0
26.0
20.5
15.8
15.8
in. 3
18.8
18.8
4/1
13.8
24.3
24.3
27.3
26.0
24.3
23.5
17.5
17.0
17.0
16.3
16.3
8/4
.2
11.3
12.8
12.0
10.3
10.3
13.8
15.5
18.8
19.5
19.5
POINTS STUDY SITE. 1976
15
3/10 4/1
16.3 9.0
29.0 23.5
27.8 23.5
26.5 24.3
24.8 27.8
24.8 26.5
21.3 24.8
21.8 24.3
22.3 24.8
21.8 24.8
2
cmJjQ
5/10
6.3
16.0
17.5
20.8
23.3
24.0
24.0
24.0
23.3
23.3
--
8
Soil Cover
6/4 7/9 8/4
7.0 .5 .2
13.8 13.0 10.3
17.0 14.0 13.8
18.0 13.0 13.8
22.3 13.0 15.5
24.8 12.0 18.8
24.8 12.0 19.5
24.0 13.0 19.5
24.0 14.8 21.3
24.0. 17.5 22.3
..
Soil
5/10
11.8
17.0
17.8
19.5
21.3
21.3
21.3
20.3
17.8
10.5
17.8
18.5
6/4 7/9
7.5 2.0
13.3 11.3
14.8 12.8
14.8 13.8
15.8 13.8
16.5 13.8
16.5 14.5
16.5 15.5
16.5 16.4
18.3 17.0
16.5 16.3
18.3 18.8
8/4
2.0
10.3
12.0
12.8
13.8
12.8
14.5
14.5
15.5
17.0
15.5
15.5
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 33.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES
OF TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
O
ui
Depth
(cm)
S
IS
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
Depth
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
CONTROL
10/73
--
10/73
-
--
30 en (12*)
I
5/74 9/74
0.95* 2.0
1.1 3.1
5.6 7.5
8.2 8.0
6.9 7.9
8.1 8.1
5.9 9.0
6.8 9.0
8.6 9.9
9.3
12.0 -
11.0 -
30 en (12*)
II
5/74 9/74
3.7* 2.8
0.95 5.6
5.5 8.1
S.S 8.1
51 71
9.4
7.1 8.0
-- .7.1
7.9 7.9
8.0 -
an
Soil Cover
III
10/73 5/74
1.1
- 6.9
- 5.5
7.0
-- 9.1
-- 9.0
-- 9.1
- 9.1
-- 9.1
Soil Cover
IV
10/73 5/74
5.6
- 0.95
I 10.0
5.8
-- 4.4
- 7.8
-- 9.0
a a
9/74
1.5
8.1
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
11.5
11.5
11.5
9/74
2.4
2.5
8.6
11.5
10.8
10.5
10.5
10.5
PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1973 AND
15 cm (6*)
V
10/73 5/74 9/74
- 2.3 10.0
-- 2.0 7.7
~ 3.0 5.6
- 3.1 3.4
- 3.8 4.0
-- - 4.0
- 3.8 4.7
.- - 5.8
- 6.7 7.1
« 15.0 -
- 15.0 ~
15 en (6*)
VI
10/73 5/74 9/74
-- 3.5 15.0
1.8 6.2
-- 4.4 4.7
-- 4.2 4.0
-- -- 4.2
45 53
- - 7.0
-- 5.5 9.2
-- 11.2 --
11.3
NORTH ASPECT
Soil Cover
VII
10/73 5/74
- 4.6
-- 3.1
-- 3.5
- 3.6
- 4.0
- 4.0
- 5.3
- 8.8
- 13.0
SOUTH ASPECT
Soil Cover
VIII
10/73 5/74
- 3.1
-- 3.0
-- 3.4
.. 3.4
38
-- 3.9
6.3
.. 11.0
TOSCO
9/74
11.0
8.0
5.1
4.3
4.9
4.9
5.5
6.3
7.6
6/73
2.0
3.0
3.8
3.8
3.9
4.0
5.0
5.6
8.0
9.1
10.0
11.0
IX
10/73 5/74
Z.I 2.0
4.6 3.1
- 3.8
5.3 3.9
-- 4.3
3.3 5.0
- 9.2
6.3 10.5
-- 11.5
1974
Spent Shale
9/74 6/73
17.0
6.5
6.7
5 8
5.1
5.9
6.9
8.8
9.2
7.2
TOSCO
9/74
10.0
6.
4.
4.
4.
3.9
5.1
4/73
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.9
4.4
4.6
5.1
8.8
10.4
12.0
19.0
X
10/73 5/74
3.3 3.6
3.7 3.6
-- 3.4
3.6 4.0
4.4
5.5 4.8
6.8 5.1
- 8.9
9.4 10.5
-- 12.4
-- 19.5
9/74
15.0
11.0
7.9
7.8
7.7
8.4
11.5
12.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
2.3
4.2
3.5
3 9
3.9
3.9
5.1
10.1
11.5
12.5
XI
10/73 5/74
2.1 2.3
3.9 4.3
3.5
3.9
4.1 3.9
- 4.0
4.9 5.4
7 5
- 10.4
7.1 11.$
- 12.5
9/74
16.6
7.2
5.5
5.1
6.3
7.2
9.3
10.0
11.5
Spent Shale
4/73
3.2
3.9
3.9
4.6
4.6
5.1
8.8
10.2
11.5
14.0
14.0
XII
10/73 5/74
2.1 3.2
2.8 3.7
3.9
4.0 4.7
4.6
6.3 5.3
6.5 8.9
-- 10.2
7.7 11.5
9.5 14.7
9.8 14.5
9/74
17.0
16.7
8.3
5.0
5.0
5.6
8.4
9.7
10.3
10.3
12.0
Soil
XIII
9/74
1.3
2.1
Soil
XIV
9/74
1.9
2.4
1.4
2.2
* EC Values are In mhos/en 25° C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sanple.
Ha sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 34.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES OF
USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL
Depth
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
i:
5/74
0.73*
0.7
0.9
8.3
5.2
7.9
6.9
6.1
_
60 cm (24-
1
9/74
1.4
1.1
2.9
6.1
4.4
-
4.5
-
5.5
..
PL
} Soil Cove
11
5/74
0.
0.
0.
6.
2.
7.7
6.5
6.1
OTS 1
r
9/74
2.1
1.4
l.D
1.7
3.8
8.0
7.0
7.0
6.9
..
._
\NVIL
5/74
2.2
1.5
1.8
3.0
3.1
..
3.8
..
4.5
..
4.2
..
POINTS
NO
IS cm (6'}
9
9/74
0.9
1.7
3.0
3.8
3.6
4.8
4.8
4,2
3.9
..
..
..
STUDY
RTH ASPECT
Soil Cover
3
5/74
2.1
1.6
1.8
2.9
3.1
..
3.9
..
4.3
..
4.1
..
__
SITE.
9/74
1.5
1.2
3.4
3.8
2.7
2.1
2.1
3.1
3.5
..
..
..
_.
1974
5/74
1.2
1.5
2.4
2.3
2.4
2.7
»
3.5
..
3.9
USBM Spe
5
6/74 9/74
1.2
1.9
3.1
3.0
2.4
2.9
3.1
2.8
..
..
..
..
w- «
nt Shale
5/74
1.0
1.5
<2.3
2.3
2.4
2.5
..
3.2
..
3.8
..
_.
3
6/74 9/74
1.1
1.8
1.7
2.5
2.5
3.5
3.7
3.5
3.7
- . 3.5
..
..
__
Soil
1
9/74
1.2
0.8
1.0
0.5
..
..
_
..
._
SOUTH ASPECT
Depth
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
EC V»lues «r« In «mhos/c» » 25° C neiiured on 1:1 Jpent shllo to wt«r by weight simple.
No tuple collected.
60 cm (24*)
14
5/74
0.8*
0.8
1.2
1.3
.9
6.1
..
6.0
--
5.0
4.9
Soil Cover
12
9/74
0.9
0.9
0.9
2.2
8*
6.4
4.5
4.5
4.S
..
_ ^
..
5/74
0.7
1.0
1.7
2.2
«7
5.6
..
5.6
5.2
__
4.5
9/74
1.3
1.1
1.1
2.7
2ft
4.7
4.5
5.0
4.2
..
..
..
15 cm (6')
10
5/74
2.2
2.0
1.8
2.5
3 A
3.4
4.8
4.7
9/74
1.6
1.7
2.1
2.7
Jn
3.0
3.0
3.2
4.0
..
..
«
Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shale
8
5/74
2.1
1.1
1.9
2.6
20
3.2
4.6
..
4.6
..
~
9/74
1.6
1.6
2.5
3.5
37
3.9
3.9
3.9
4.1
..
-
..
~
6
5/74 . 6/74
1.7
2.0
2.5 --
2.3
2.3
--
2.5
..
3.2
..
3.2 -
9/74
1.1
3.7
3.7
2.9
4 3
4.3
3.7
4.0
4.5
4.4
3.9
3.7
3.9
5/74
1.7
2.0
2.5
2.2
2 0
2.5
2.5
3.1
3.1
4
6/74 9/74
1.5
3.9
2.7
2.7
27
2.8
3.7
4.7
4.6
3.5
3.7
4.6
4.5
Soil
2
9/74
0.9
1.7
1.1
1.5
..
--
-
--
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 35. SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON NORTH-ASPECT
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. SPRING AND FALL 1975
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
I III V VII IX XI XIII
Depth .
(cm) 4/75 11/75 4/75 11/75 4/75 11/75 4/75 11/75 4/75 11/75 4/75 11/75 11/75
S 2.4* 1.2 1.5 1.9 1.0 1.9 2.0 4.2 4.4 4.5 5.2 3.2 1.3
15 1.1 1.4 1.5 1.0 .1^6 4.2 4^9 5.8 5.6 5.7 5.2 6.1 1.5
30 _9;d 11.0 6.2 11.0_ 4.3 5.8 4.7 6.2 4.5 5.4 5.3 5.7 0.8
45 15.0 - 7.3 -- 4.5 4.8 -- 4.8 7.0
I- 60 15.0 9.0 9.8 10.0 5.0 5.3 7.3 6.6 5.4 5.8 7.4 4.9
-J 75 13.6 14.4 5.5 -- 7.1 7.0 7.0
90 12.6 8.4 10.4 10.0 7.5 5.6 6.0 7.9 8.8 6.4 7.4 6.5
105 12.2 -- 10.2 -- 6.9 5.9 -- 11.0 -- 8.8
120 11.2 9.2 9.8 9.2 9.2 8.1 8.8 9.4 11.9 8.3 10.0 8.8
135 11.8 11.0 -- 10.8 -- 10.8 -- 13.6 -- 11.2
150 12.0 9.2 10.4 12.0 13.0 9.7 12.2 8.2 11.9 8.4 11.2 8.6
165 11.3 -- 10.2 -- 13.6 -- 12.8 -- 7.3
180 10.4 8.2 10.2 10.7 12.1 9.8 10.2 8.2 .5.8 8.1
195 .. 9.0 -- -- 6.0
210
* EC Values are in nmhos/cm @ 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
o
CO
APPENDIX TABLE 36. SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON SOUTH-ASPECT
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SI
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. SPRING AND FALL 1975
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
II
4/75 11/75
IV
4/75 11/75
1.4
0.9
2.9
7.4
12.2
18.0
14.2
12.7
11.4
10.0
9.1
9.6
8.6
6.9
4.6
1.5
0.6
7.5
6.5
7.6
~
8.8
9.9
10.3
9.9
2.3
1.1
3.1
4.9
4.3
5.2
7.0
12.6
13.4
12.5
13.3
12.8
9.8
6.1
1.0
7.2
8.6
9.5
8.5
9.4
~
11.0
9.0
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
VI
4/75 11/75
VIII
4/75 11/75
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
* EC Values are in rondos/cm @ 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
2.1
1.1
3.9
4.3
4.6
8.9
8.4
7.3
8.4
8.9
11.2
12.7
12.8
9.7
1.7
3.6
4.9
4.1
~
4.1
4.4
4.8
4.9
1.5
0.9
4.0
4.8
5.8
5.6
6.2
6.5
7.4
7.7
9.5
10.4
1.9
5.3
4.4
4.0
4.1
4.5
5.9
9.3
..
E,
4/75
6.1
5.7
5.0
5.8
7.2
8.0
6.6
6.8
7.5
9.7
11.6
10.5
AND SOIL CONTROL
TOSCO Spent Shale
X
11/75
4.7
5.5
4.6
5.1
--
6.5
8.1
8.6
8.6
XII
4/75
5.4
5.6
4.8
5.7
8.9
7.8
7.8
8.7
10.5
12.2
13.6
11.9
PLOTS.
11/75
4.6
6.5
7.8
7.1
6.9
8.9
9.0
8.2
Soil
XIV
11/75
1.2
1.5
0.9
--
-
-
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 37. SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON NORTH-ASPECT
O
vo
USBM
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. SPRING AND
60 cm {24")
Depth
(en.)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
13
4/75
2.7*
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.3
3.4
6.6
__
--
11/75
1.2
0.7
4.5
5.6
6.2
8.5
9.0
._
Soil Cover
11
4/75
2.7
1.2
1.3
1.0
0.8
4.2
5.2
6.6
9.0
8.2
7.6
4.2
11/75
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.5
4.8
4.9
5.6
5.9
5.1
~
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
4/75
1.8
1.0
1.3
2.4
3.9
5.2
5.3
4.9
~
~
~
--
11/75
0.8
0.9
2.3
4.0
4.0
3.7
4.5
~
4/75
1.7
0.9
1.2
2.1
3.8
4.6
5.1
4.8
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL
FALL 1975
PLOTS.
USBM Spent Shale
7
11/75
1.1
1.0
1.5
1.9
2.9
3.8
4.0
4.4
4.2
4.0
--
4/75
1.8
1.4
1.7
3.8
4.4
5.0
5.0
6.2
5.0
4.2
6.8
6.8
6.6
5.1
5
. 11/75
0.7
1.0
1.4
1.7
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.9
1.3
1.7
4/75
1.5
1.2
1.7
3.6
4.2
4.4
4.7
4.6
4.6
4.6
5.4
6.8
6.9
4.3
2.8
3
11/75
0.8
1.1
1.3
1.6
4.1
3.5
3.3
4.1
4.5
4.0
Soil
1
11/75
1.2
1.3
0.8
;;
~
~
~
~
* EC Values are in mmhos/cm & 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 38.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS
USBM SPENT SHALE. SOI]
(EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON SOUTH-ASPECT
I-1
o
4/75
0.4
0.5
0.6
2.5
6.6
6.8
6.7
5.9
5.7
5.1
5.1
6.6
5.6
--
60 cm {24")
14
11/75
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
2.1
6.8
7.5
«.o
8.0
ANVIL
Soil Cover
12
4/75
1.9
1.3
0.7
1.0
1.2
5.7
7.3
6.8
6.6
7.0
6.8
6.8
6.0
POINTS
11/75
0.9
0.5
0.6
0.5.
0.7
~
3.0
--
4.5
7.2
~
8.0
STUDY s:
4/75
1.2
1.1
2.2
2.7
6.5
5.5
5.2
5.2
6.4
5.9
5.7
6.7
5.4
:TE. SPRING
15 cm {6") Soil
10
11/75
1.2
0.4
1.5
3.6
3.5
4.5
5.7
5.4
5.8
5.6
5.3
6.5
5.6
AND
Cover
4/75
0.8
0.9
1.7
2.8
5.0
4.7
5.0
5.5
5.5
5.6
4.8
5.5
2.7
FALL 1975
8
11/75
0.5
0.7
1.1
3.7
3.7
-
4.1
5.0
--
--
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
* EC Values are in mmhos/cm 9 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
-- No sample collected.
AND SOIL CONTROL
USBM Spent Shale
4/75
1.2
1.4
1.7
2.7
4.7
6.0
4.8
6.0
5.1
5.4
5.2
5.1
5.8
6.5
6
11/75
0.7
1.3
2.0
2.9
~
3.7
3.5
~
4/75
0.9
1.4
2.4
4.7
6.2
4.3
4.4
5.2
5.6
5.7
6.4
4.9
4.7
2.8
PLOTS.
4
11/75
1.2
1.8
1.8
2.4
3.9
~
4.1
4.5
Soil
2
11/75
1.3
1.4
0.9
~
--
--
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 39.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES OF TOSCO SPENT
STUDY SITE. AUGUST 1976
NORTH ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
130
195
210
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
I
1.3 *
2.1
2.9
9.5
11.1
8.8
9.0
7.5
8.6
9.1
8.8
7.8
8.7
7.6
Ill
2.6
1.8
5.7
8.1
10.0
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
8.9
6.9
9.6
8.1
6.9
5.0
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
2.4
3.3
7.1
5.0
5.0
4.9
5.6
5.9
7.2
8.0
9.5
VII
1.5
3.2
5.3
6.6
6.6
4.8
4.7
5.1
5.2
7.5
8.6
9.1
8.4
7.9
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX
4.3
5.9
6.6
6.6
6.2'
7.3
7.7
8.6
9.0
8.1
8.8
7.9-
4.9
XI
1.6
5.1
6.5
7.2
5.3
5.0
5.6
7.1
7.3
8.2
8.1
8.0
Soil
XIII
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5.
0.7
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.1
~
ND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
ANVIL
POINTS
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II
en
c w
|S
(0
+J
,3
en
r
Vt
t/l
.,_
IV
0.8
0.9
2.5
2.6:
3.0
4.4
4.4
5.0
5.9
5.5
6.5
7.6
4.2
4.3
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
1.1
3.9
7.0
7.1
5.8
5.0'
5.9
6.9
7.4
8.3
7.9
8.1
8.8
VIII
0.9
2.7.
4.8
5.2
5.8
4.6
4.2
4.5
5.2
9.1
7.7
7.6
1.9
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
3.0
5.3
5.0
5.7
6.1
7.6
8.1
8.3
7.9
8.7
7.4
6.0
XII
2.4
6.8
5.3
8.1
5.2
5.7
5.9
7.1
7.9
8.5
8.6
8.7
7.4
Soil
XIV
0.5.
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.9
1.4
1.5
1.2
::
* EC Values are in mmhos/cm @ 25 C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 40.
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
SALINITY MEASURMENETS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES OF USBM SPENT
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE,
STUDY SITE. AUGUST 1976
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
13
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.0
liL
5.7
5.8
6.0
11
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.7
_0i6
5.3
9.1
7.2
8.4
6.7
7.5'
7.0
NORTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
0.7
0.8
2.1
3.0
3.7
3.5
4.4
4.0
4.3
0.7
_0.7_
1.0
3.1
3.3
3.8
3.4
USBM
Spent Shale
1.1
1.?
1.8
1.3
3.7
4.4'
3.6
4.5
0.4
1.2
1.3
2.2
1.7
4.3
3.2
3.3
4.2'
3.6
4.8
5.3i
5.4
Soil
1
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.2
0.5
D SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS
SOUTH ASPECT
60 cm
Soil
14
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5'
3.1
3.2
4.7
«
--
__
(24")
Cover
12
0.7
0.9
0.9
0.6
1.3
4.0
3.1
3.9
5.8
6.2
__
15 cm
Soil
10
0.5
0.5
1.1
3.3
3.4
3.9
4.5
~
~
(6")
Cover
8
0.4
0.9.
1.1
1.8
4.0
5.6
5.5
4.3
~
USBM
Spent Shale
6
1.4
1.3-
1.9
2.6
4.2
5.4
_.
4
0.6
0.8
1.4
2.6
3.8
7.6
7.1
4.7'
4.8
5.1
5.2
4.3
3.7
3.2
Soil
2
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
--
--
* EC Values are in mmhos/cro @ 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 41. SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT
SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
Plot
No.
I
III
V
VII
IX
XI
XII
Plot
No.
11
IV
VI
VIII
.X
xir
Depth Serial
(cm) No.
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
TOSCO Spent Shale
TOSCO Spent Shale
Soil Control
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
TOSCO Spent Shale
TOSCO Spent Shale
18
50
18
50
18
SO
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
Depth
(cm)
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
1970
1952
1962
1712
1752
1941
1751
1969
1943
1965
1981
1975
1954
Serial
No.
1447
1967
1715
1541
1968
1753
1448
1304
1971
1580
1980
1608
5/13
--
2.0
5.4
<1.5
5.5
3.1
8.1
4.2
9.3
<1.5
5/13
~
2.1
4.1
<1.5
1.5
4.0
13.4
3.5
3.6
5/16
2.5
5.8
<1.5
6.8
3.3
8.3
5.3
9.6
<1.5
5/16
1.9
3.8
<1.5
1.5
3.7
16.5
3.5
3.5
5/25
<1.5
5.6
<1.5
5.1
2.0
5.8
4.0
5.4
<1.5
5/25
-
<1.5
3.2
<1.5
3.3
2.2
10.8
3.3
2.0
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1973-1974
6/5
<1.5
3.3
2.6
30.0
<1.5
4.9
<1.5
4.9
3.1
5.6
4.2
5.2
<1.5
6/5
<1.5
2.7
<1.5
22.0
1.6
3.3
<1.5
3.5
3.4
10.8
3.3
2.1
1973
6/20
1.6
4.4
1.5
32.0
<1.5
4.7
<1.5
4.9
4.1
5.5
4.7
5.2
<1.5
1973
6/20
<1.5
4.2
<1.5
3.9
2.2
3.5
<1.5
3.5
4.0
11.0
3.7
2.3
7/18
1.9
4.4
2.7
6.9
- 2.3
4.4
3.8
5.1
5.4
5.5
5.3
5.3
<1.5
7/18
1.6
5.0
<1.5
4.0
2.8
4.0
2.7
3.5
5.5
7.1
4.7
4.0
NORTH
8/13
6.4
5.6
5.8
14.2
5.3
5.2
4.9
5.7
6.4
6.2
6.2
5.7
<1.5
SOUTH
8/13
3.5
6.0
<1.5
5.7
4.7
2.7
6.1
3.5
5.6
7.3
5.1
4.8
ASPECT
9/18
11.3
7.2
30.2
40.0
8.2
5.6
10.5
7.3
7.2
9.6
'5.8
4.9
<1.5
ASPECT
9/18
3.6
9.0
3.3
18.5
7.3
3.4
20.0
7.2
7.2
7.2
5.1
5.3
4/18
3.6*
8.0
5.8
35.0
5.5
9.2
3.2
20.0
4.5
13.0
6.0
6.8
<1.5
4/18
<1.5*
5.9
<1.5
11.5
7.2
6.2
<5.3
8.4
5.1
11.0
5.8
8.8
4/30
4.2
8.9
8.6
38.0
6.2
9.7
3.6
19.0
5.0
12.5
6.5
6.6
<1.5
4/30
<1.5
10.1
<1.5
12.8
7.4
6.4
7.6
9.0
6.0
10.8
5.4
9.2
5/16
7.3
10.1
15.1
35.0
7.3
9.7
5.6
14.2
7.8
12.0
7.9
6.7
<1.5
5/16
2.3
11.1
<1.5
15.0
8.5
5.4
9.2
10.1
12.3
10.5
6.7
7.8
1974
5/23
13.8
11.5
25.0
40.0
11.2
10.3
14.0
13.0
' 10.3
12.5
9.4
6.5
<1.5
1974
5/23
2.7
15.0
1.9
17.0
12.0
5.9
13.0
11.5
14.0
10.7
7.3
8.2
7/15
14.2
10.7
25.0
40.0
11.3
9.7
14.2
13.6
10.4
12.6
9.9
6.7
<1.5
7/15
3.0
15.1
1.9
18.0
12.6
5.7
13.2
11.9
14.3
10.8
7.9
8.9
8/19
15.1
11.4
26.7
40.0
14.2
10.5
14.9
20.1
12.2
13.5
10.2
6.5
<1.5
8/19
3.5
14.9
2.0
17.5
13.0
5.9
13.6
12.4
14.7
11.3
8.2
9.2
XIV
Soil Control
18
1958
<1.5 <1.5 <1.5 Si.5 si.5 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5
1.8 1.9 <1.5 <1.5 <1.5
* Values are EC in mmhos/cm 8 25°C.
No reading.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 42. SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE,
Plot
Ho.
13
11
9
7
5
3
1
Plot
\\0.
14
12
10
8
6
4
AND
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shale
USBM Spent Shale
Soil Control
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shale
USBM Spent Shale
SOIL CONTROL
Depth Serial
(cm) No.
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
118
Depth
(cm)
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
1955
1931
1959
1754
1936
1637
1679
1767
1757
1646
1678
1713
1958
Serial
No.
1720
1717
1445
1716
1949
1681
1938
1673
1675
1724
1683
1934
PLOTS .
, ANVIL POINTS STUDY
SITE
NORTH
. 1973-1974
ASPECT
1973
5/13
~-
2.1
7.05
3.25
13.3
<1.5
5/13
~~
-
2.05
6.48
4.85
10.6
5/16
2.65
7.56
3.8
11.5
<1.5
5/16
-_
--
3.16
6.80
5.6
10.6
5/25
-
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
3.66
<1.5
3.85
"1.5
6.4
<1.5
5/25
*"
<1.5
2.59
<1.5
2.7
1.7
3.9
2.fi
5.2
6/5
2.1
<1.5
<1.5
1.8
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
3.4
<1.5
3.9
2.0
5.4
<1.5
6/5
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
<1.5
2.8
<1.5
2.C
2.2
4.0
3.0
5.1
6/20
2.35
1.75
<1.5
1.9
<1.5
2.75
<1.5
3.65
<1.5
4.0
2.35
5.5
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 43. SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE AND SOIL
Plot
No.
I
III
V
VII
IX
XI
CONTROL PLOTS .
Depth Serial
(cm) No.
30 cm Soil Cover
30 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
TOSCO Spent Shale
TOSCO Spent Shale
XIII Soil Control
* Values are EC in mmhos/cm
-- No reading.
APPENDIX TABLE 44.
Plot
No.
II
IV
VI
VIII
X
XII
XIV
30 cm Soil Cover
30 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
TOSCO Spent Shale
TOSCO Spent Shale
Soil Control
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
1970
1952
1962
1712
1752
1941
1751
1969
1943
1965
1981
1975
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975-1976
1975
4/9 5/12 6/4
5.52* 6.1 11.1
13.0 11.75 13.0
5.35 6.80 15.9
30.0 34.0 <1
3.28 6.6 12.2
13.0 11.5 12.8
3.96 5.0 8.4
18.0 12.3 18.5
2.15 4.35 5.62
10.7 12.7 20.0
4.10 4.20 7.8
14.0 17.0 16.0
1976
8/21
4o!o
40.0
40.0
33.0
30.0
28.0
27.0
21.0
11.5
18 No sensor
50 No sensor
9 25° C.
SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FROM SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
CONTROL
Depth
(cm)
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
PLOTS.
Serial
No.
1447
1967
1715
1541
1968
1753
1448
1394
1971
1580
1980
1608
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975-1976
1975
4/9 5/12 6/4
*7.4 11.3 19.5
2.85 3.05 4.45
6.0 12.5 16.5
5.32 7.1 6.75
2.04 6.1 6.55
6.50 9.8 16.0
2.30 4.13 8.2
23 23.5 20.2
3.2 4.7 7.5
10.6 13.5 15.0
No sensor
No sensor
1976
8/21
Data Missing
35.0
20.5
22.0
10.2
4o!o
20.0
18.0
20.0
14.5
Values are EC in mmhos/cm @ 25U C.
No reading.
115
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 45. SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
Plot
No.
I
III
V
VII
IX
XI
30 cm Soil Cover
30 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shale
USBM Spent Shale
XIII Soil Control
* Values are EC in nrohos/cm
No reading.
APPENDIX TABLE 46.
CONTROL
Depth
(cm)
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
PLOTS.
Serial
No.
1958
1678
1713
1757
1646
1679
1767
1936
1637
1959
1754
18 1955
50 1931
8 25° C.
SALINITY SENSOR
ANVIL
4/9
2.06*
<1
3.4
3.76
<1
4.55
1.58
6.40
2.56
POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975-1976
1575 1976
5/12 6/4 8/21
1.6 <1 <1.5 Data Hissing
<1 1.5 <1.5
5.3 7.4 10.0
4.8 5.8 6.3
2.15 6.3 <1.5
4.85 6.1 10.3
2.45 7.2 <1.5
5.90 6.3 <1.5
2.47 5.6 8.0
<1 <1 <1
2.06 2.42 2.95 <1.5
MEASUREMENTS FROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
Plot
No.
II
IV
VI
VIII
X
XII
XIV
30 cm Soil Cover
30 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
15 cm Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shale
USBK Spent Shale
Soil Control
CONTROL
Depth
(cm)
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
13
50
18
50
PLOTS .
Serial
No.
1954
1683
1934
1675
1724
1938
1673
1949
1681
1445
1716
1720
1717
ANVIL
4/9
POINTS STUDY SITE. 1975-1976
1975 1976
5/12 6/4 8/21
4.10* 3.67 4.55 <1.5 Data Missing
<1 3.5 7.25 6.7
7.4 8.4 13.0 31.0
1.63
5.91
3.10
<1
5.02
1.72
3.05 5.55 <1.5
7.6 9.2 6.7
3.3 3.6 <1.5
2.38 5.85
4.4 4.2 1.9
<1 <1 <1?5
* Values are EC in rmhos/cm 9 25° C.
No reading.
116
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 47. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
PH
EC v5]hos/CHi
Ha (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg {ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
NO, (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
No runoff.
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS, FOLLOWING A 0.75 INCH (19.05 mm) 30-MINUTE
STOPM. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. August 14, 1974
NORTH ASPECT
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6") TOSCO
Soil Cover Soil Cover Spent Shale
I III V VII IX
26
581.4
7.1
2099
120
174
115
24
0
120
- ... 7
W Bw «w VM £
1236
20
1.7
XI
45
428.2
6.8
817
14
120
32
20
0
106
4
408
14
0.3
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6")
Soil Soil Cover Soil Cover
XIII II IV VI VII
2.9
63.4
7.0
1314
34
100
21
70
o
500
5
144
35
0.8
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
9.8
327.7
7.2
1097
30
151
36
30
0
147
3
408
34
0.6
XI
7.6
404
7.0
1164
138
30
28
39
0
210
3
394
37
0.5
Soil
XIV
1.7
32
7.7
1106
70
75
16
69
0
451
4
115
40
0.8
-------
APPENDIX
TABLE 48. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM
00
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. FOLLOWING A 0.75 inch (19.05 mm)
STORM. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. AUGUST 14, 1974
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC nmhos/cm
925°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
NO, (ppm)
j
so4
Cl (ppffl)
SAR
Ho runoff
NORTH ASPECT
60 cm (24") 15 cm (6") USBM
Soil Cover Soil Cover Spent Shale Soil
13 11 97 53 1
1.2
30
7.6
1875
161
122
36
70
0
543
6
192
198
3.3
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
14 12
1.2
21.2
7.3
1640
79
108
20
98
0
584
7
254
71
0.8
SOUTH
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10 8
_.
--
..
--
_.
..
--
ASPECT
30 -MINUTE
USBM
Spent Shale
6
1.2
155.7
7.2
1189
44
98
21
57
0
386
6
168
66
1.0
4
1.2
107.3
7.4
1624
80
148
31
70
0
449
1
206
150
1.6
Soil
2
~
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 49. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
SPENT SHALE,
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/ plot
(grams)
pH
EC urnhos/cm
@ 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
* The primary
sealed, the
I
III
120+ 120+
98.
7.
100
4.
8.
2
3
0
42
1
9
7
collector,
leaks were
4 84.1
0 7.4
100
.6 2.3
.0 8.0
.4 2.4
.9 3.9
0
.7 42.7
.2 1.2
.6 9.6
.1 3.6
.37 .18
AND SOIL CONTROL
NORTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
93
86.7
7.3
110
2.3
10.0
2.4
3.9
0
42.7
1.2
14.4
7.1
.17
VII
120+
92.2
7.5
100
2.3
8.0
2.4
3.9
0
30.5
1.2
14.4
7.1
.18
a plastic container, held 113 1;
sealed in July 1975.
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX
69
55.3
7.6
350
13.8
32.0
10.8
3.9
0
36.6
1.2
148.8
7.1
.42
overflow
XI
120+
97.2
7.1
180
2.3
22.0
3.6
2.0
0
18.3
0.6
72.0
3.6
.12
into the
PLOTS.
ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. MARCH 13, 1975
SOUTH ASPECT
Soil
XIII
3.5
2.6
7.5
310
11.5
24.0
9.6
15.6
0
73.2
18.6
43.2
21.3
.42
culvert was
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II
105.0
93.7
7.3
200
6.9
20.0
4.8
7.8
0
85.4
3.1
14.4
7.1
.36
measured but
IV
120+
115.9
7.3
190
6.9
18.0
4.8
7.8
0
79.3
3.1
19.2
7.1
.37
some water
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
120+
92.3
7.3
260
6.9
30.0
16.8
7.8
0
61.0
3.1
76.8
10.7
.25
was lost
VIII
210.8+
104.5
7.2
200
4.6
22.0
4.8
7.8
0
67.1
3.1
52.8
3.6
18
as the
TOSCO
Spent Shale Soil
X
120+
89.2
7.1
500
2.3
82.0
6.0
3.9
0
24.4
1.2
216.0
3.6
.07
culvert was
XII XII
120+ 20.0
99.4 17.7
7.2 7.7
750 150
2.3 2.3
144.0 14.0
8.6 2.4
3.9 3.9
0 0
54.9 48.8
0.6 12.4
360.0 9.6
3.6 7.1
.04 .15
not well
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 50. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TJSBM SPENT SHALE, SOTL-COVERED USBM
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL
NORTH ASPECT
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC uf;hos/an
6 25°C
^ Na (ppm)
0 Ca (ppm)
Hg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (PP»)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
13
22.0
16.0
7.3
100
2.3
12.0
2.4
3.9
0
61.0
6.2
4.8
3.6
.16
11
37.0
28.9
7.3
100
2.3
10.0
2.4
7.8
0
61.0
6.2
4.8
3.6
.17
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
8.5
6.1
7.3
200
6.9
14.0
3.6
15.6
0
48.8
24.8
4.8
17.8
.42
7
8.0
6.0
7.5
210
11.5
14.0
3.6
11.7
0
67.1
6.2
14.4
21.3
.70
USBM
Spent Shale
5
46.0
28.2
7.6
.160
2.3
16.0
2.4
3.9
0
61.0
0.6
14.4
3.6
.14
3
120+*
69.6
7.5
70
2.3
6.0
2.4
3.9
0
30.5
0.6
1.4
3.6
.20
PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. MARCH 13, 1975
SOUTH ASPECT
Soil
1
49.0
23.0
7.5
150
2.3
8.0
2.4
7.8
0
61.0
0.6
4.8
3.6
.18
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
14
95.0
66.5
7.4
160
6.9
14.0
3.6
7.8
0
85.4
4.3
9.6
7.1
.42
12
193. 8+*
117.2
7.4
160
6.9
20.0
3.6
7.8
0
85.4
1.2
14.4
14.2
.37
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10
120+*
82.7
7.6
215
4.6
26.0
4.8
7.8
0
85.4
6.2
14.4
7.1
.22
8
120+*
106.2
7.4
170
4.6
16.0
3.6
7.8
0
67.1
3.7
9.6
7.1
.27
USBM
Spent Shale
6
154+*
124.1
7.5
220
2.3
20.0
9.6
7.8
0
91.5
1.2
52.8
3.6
.14
4
120+*
82.2
7.6
240
4.6
16.0
12.0
11.7
0.
97.6
0.6
43.2
3.6
.21
Soil
2
25.0
17.4
7.5
130
2.3
14.0
2.4
3.9
0
42.7
6.2
4.8
7.1
.15
* The prireary collector, a plastic container, held 113 1; overflow into the culvert was measured but some water was lost as the culvert was not well
sealed, the leaks were sealed in July 1975.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 51. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS, FOLLOWING A 0.42 INCH (10.6 mm) STORM
DURING THREE 30-MINUTE INTERVALS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. JULY 16 1975
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6")
Soil Cover Soil Cover
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pK
EC litnhos/cm
@ 25°C
Ma (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppni)
HCOj (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppni)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
No runoff
I III V
34.0
5.7
7.1
300
2.30
38.08
3.65
11.73
0
36.61
135.31
33.62
10.64
0.10
VII
27.0
6.4
7.8
400
6.90
64.13
7.30
15.64
0
231 .84
3.69
24.02
3.55
0.18
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX XI
39.0
9.7
7.9
2400
128.8
292.58 ~
132.54 --
39.10 --
0
146.42
4.92
1277.6
21.28
1.56 -
SOUTH ASPECT
Soil
XIII
2.0
2.4
7.9
1300
13.8
230.46
44.99
15.64
0
122.02
2.46
725.25
3.55
0.22
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II IV
22
5
8
1200
23
102
13
50
0
616
3
33
39
0
15 cm (6»)
Soil Cover
VI VIII
.0
.9
.2
.0
.2
.38
.83
.20
.69
.62
.01
.57
2
6
9
8200
418
94
105
828
522
3276
18
100
673
7
.0
.0
.7
.6
.19
.79
.92
.0
.24
.45
.86
.74
.0
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
25.0
10.7
7.6
600
11.5
88.18
15.81
15.64
0
170.83
19.68
144.09
10.64
0.30
XII
22.0
12.3
9.0
5700
227.7
404.81
321.02
332.35
240.0
1964.52
7.38
1051.86
460.98
2.04
Soil
XIV
22.0
2.7
7.9
700
13.8
40.08
7.30
31.28
0
359.96
3.69
24.02
21.28
0.52
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 52. SURFACE RUNOFF.AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR USBM SPENT SHALF, SOIL-COVERED USBM
tO
SPENT
THREE
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC umhos/cm
@^3c^r
£J \*
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Hg (ppm)
K {ppm)
C03 (ppn)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppra)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppro)
SAR
13
3.2
4.7
8.1
800
16.10
90.18
14.59
27.37
0
439.27
1.86
14.41
17.73
0.46
11
2.0
5.9
8.2
1200
34.5
136.27
21.89
58.65
0
646.71
1.24
24.02
42.55
0.72
SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS, FOLLOWING A 0.42 INCH (10.6 mm) STORM DURING
30-MINUTE INTERVALS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. JULY 16, 1975
NORTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9 7
1
7
8
2600
126
152
41
168
0
1189
3
14
177
2
USBM
Spent Shale Soil
.8
.3
.3
.5
.30
.34
.13
.70
.10
.41
.30
.34
5
2
6
8
2300
103
184
48
164
0
1134
2
76
159
1
3 1
.0
.7
.3
._
.5
.37 --
.64 --
.22
..
.79 «
.48 --
.85
.57 --
.75 --
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
14 12
2
10
-- 8
2300
85
178
32
144
0
1183
3
100
141
1
.0
.2
.2
.10
.36
.83
.67
.59
.10
.86
.84
.53
SOUTH
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10 8
1.
5.
9.
4100
202.
164.
81.
355.
294.
1220.
4.
76.
354.
ASPECT
USBM
Spent Shale
6 4
5
7
0
--
4
33
47
81
0
2
34
,85
,60
Soil
2
--
3.21
No runoff
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 53. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
CO
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. MARCH 18, 1976
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
PH
EC pmhos/cm
S 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
I
64.0
1.9
6.9
200
2.3
18.0
4.9
15.6
0
109.8
1.9
9.6
<3.5
0.13
III
78.0
0.78
6.8
100
2.3
14.0
3.6
11.7
0
73.2
1.2
9.6
<3.5
0.14
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
341.4
6.0
6.9
200
2.3
18.0
4.9
11.7
0
54.9
2.5
28.8
<3.5
0.12
VII
648.0
9.6
6.9
100
<2.3
14.0
2.4
7.8
0
61.0
1.2
4.8
<3.5
0.15
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX
369.8
4.3
6.7
400
6.9
48.1
9.7
7.8
0
85.4
0.6
134.5
<3.5
0.24
XI
875.2
1.2
6.6
300
<2.3
40.0
4.9
3.9
0
36.6
0.6
96.1
<3.5
0.09
Soil
XIII
36.0
0.36
7.0
200
4.6
18.0
4.9
15.6
0
85.4
1.2
4.8
<3.5
0.25
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II
47.0
1.9
7.0
300
6.9
26.1
8.5
31.3
0
134.2
2.5
9.6
7.1
0.30
IV
75.2
6.0
7.1
300
6.9
34.1
8.5
31.3
0
146.4
3.1
9.6
10.6
0.27
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
78.0
6.2
7.0
300
6.9
34.1
10.9
27.4
0
122.0
1.9
38.4
3.5
0.26
VIII
8.0
2.0
6.8
200
4.5
24.0
7.3
19.6
0
97.6
2.5
9.6
<3.5
0.21
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
88.0
0.8
6.7
1600
9.2
310.6
48.6
27.4
0
97.6
1.2
893.4
<3.5
0.13
XII
96.0
3.8
6.8
1000
4.6
166.3
28.0
27.4
0
103.7
1.9
470.7
<3.5
0.09
Soil
XIV
13.7
1.1
6.8
200
4.6
24.0
4.9
11.7
0
79.3
1.9
14.4
<3.5
0.22
No sample collected this date.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 54. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM
K>
SPENT
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
PH
EC umhos/cm
@ 25°C
Na {ppra)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppw)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppra)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
13
21.6
0.22
6.8
200
4.6
16.0
3.6
11.7
0
61.0
1.9
19.2
<3.5
0.27
11
9.7
0.29
7.1
400
9.2
38.1
8.5
27.4
0
122.0
37.2
28.8
3.5
0.35
SHALE
, AND SOIL CONTROL
NORTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
10.0
0.80
7.3
400
6.9
38.1
8.5
27.4
0
176.9
1.9
24.0
17.7
0.26
7
10.5
0.32
7.2
300
6.9
20.0
6.9
23.5
0
115.9
1.2
28.8
3.5
0.35
USBM
Spent Shale
5
8.0
0.08
7.1
400
6.9
28.1
9.7
46.9
0
128.1
1.9
38.4
31.9
0.20
3
6.0
0.30
7.1
500
6.9
36.1
21.9
54.7
0
152.5
3.1
91.3
39.0
0.22
PLOTS. ANVIL POINTS STUDY SITE. MARCH 18
, 1976
SOUTH ASPECT
Soil
1
22.0
0.88
7.3
400
6.9
34.1
7.3
46.9
0
158.6
1.9
28.8
28.4
0.28
60 cm (24")
Soil Cover
14
<1.0
0.12
7.1
1200
13.8
70.1
31.6
199.
-------
APPENDIX TABLES
HIGH-ELEVATION STUD^ SITE
The following Appendix Tables (55-95) are a complete tabulation of all
data for each treatment and replication between 1973 and 1976.
A guide to the plot layout and number system for the appendix tables
is given below:
Plot Plan and Numbering System
(Low elevation and High elevation study sites)
TOSCO
USBM
\i
Runoff collection basins
125
-------
Appendix page
Number
55 List of species and rate of seeding - 1974 128
56 - 59 Vegetation density and ground cover (quadrat method) - 1974
56 - TOSCO - north-aspect 129
57 - TOSCO - south-aspect 130
58 - USBM - north-aspect 131
59 - USBM - south-aspect 132
60 - 63 Vegetation density and ground cover (quadrat method) - 1975
60 - TOSCO - north-aspect 133
61 - TOSCO - south-aspect 134
62 - USBM - north-aspect 135
63 - USBM - south-aspect 136
64 - 67 Vegetation analysis (transect method) - 1976
64 - TOSCO - north-aspect 137
65 - TOSCO - south-aspect 138
66 - USBM - north-aspect 139
67 - USBM - south-aspect 140
68 - 69 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1974
68 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 141
69 - USBM - north and south-apsects 142
70 - 71 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1975
70 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 143
71 - USBM - north and south-aspects 144
72 - 75 Moisture measurements (neutron probe) - 1976
72 - TOSCO - north-aspect 145
73 - TOSCO - south-aspect 146
74 - USBM - north-aspect 147
75 - USBM - south-apsect 148
76 - 81 Salinity measurements (EC)
76 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects (1973-1974) . . . 149
77 - USBM - north and south-aspects (1973-1974) . . . 150
78 - TOSCO - north-aspect (1975) 151
79 - TOSCO - south-aspect (1975) 152
80 - USBM - north-aspect (1975) 153
81 - USBM - south-aspect (1975) 154
82 - 83 Salinity sensor measurements - 1975-1976
82 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects 155
83 - USBM - north and south-aspects 156
126
-------
Appendix
Number
84 - 85 Salinity sensor measurements - 1976
84 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects
85 - USBM - north and south-aspects
86 - 87 Surface runoff and water quality data - 1974
86 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects
87 - USBM - north and south-aspects
88 - 95 Snowmelt runoff and water quality data
88 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects
89 - USBM - north and south-aspects
90 - TOSCO T north and south-aspects
91 - USBM - north and south-aspects
92 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects
93 - USBM - north and south-aspects
94 - TOSCO - north and south-aspects
95 - USBM - north and south-aspects
Page
157
158
159
160
(March 13, 1975)
(March 13, 1975)
(March 10, 1976)
(March 10, 1976)
(March 17, 1976)
(March 17, 1976)
(March 31, 1976)
(March 31, 1976)
. 161
. 162
. 163
. 164
. 165
. 166
. 167
. 168
127
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 55. LIST OF SPECIES AND RATE OF SEEDING (kg/ha)
ON THE OIL SHALE RESEARCH PLOTS AT PICEANCE
BASIN STUDY SITE. JUNE 24, 1974
Rate (kg/ha)
Grasses
Bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) 0.5
Beardless wheatgrass (Agropyron inerme) 0.5
Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides) 1.0
Western wheatgrass (Agropyron snrithii) 0.5
Forbs
Lupine spp. (Lupinus spp.) 1.0
Utah sweetvetch (Hedysarum boreale utahensis) 0.8
Arrow!eaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata) 0.5
James penstemon (Penstemon jamesii) 0.8
Rocky Mountain penstemon (Penstemon montanus) 0.8
Shrubs
Antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) 2.0
Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) 1.0
Fourwing saltbush (Atrip!ex canescens) 1.0
Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.) 0.5
Serviceberry (Amelanchier utahensis) 1.0
Mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus) 1.0
Winterfat (Ceratoides) 0.5
128
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 56. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT
to
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT
STUDY SITE. SEPTEMBER 1974
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6")
I III V
1234 1234 1234
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass 2* -23 -3-1 1331
Bluebunch wheatgrass 3235 1412 2432
Indian ricegrass 1--- 1--- 1-31
SHRUBS
Hinterfat - -. - 2 ---- - - i -
Fourwing saltbush .... .... ....
Rabbi thrush .... . _ _ j ....
Bitterbrush --1- 1--- - - 1 -
Big sagebrush 4 8 11 18 12-1 4922
Ht. Mahogany 211- 3
FORBS
Utah sweetvetch ...- -... -)-_
Penstemon (spp.) 5352 -3-- 25-1
Lupine (spp.) . 1 . _ . - . 2 ^ . 1 _
TOTALS 17 17 23 30 7 12 1 7 10 22 14 7
% COVER/PLOT 45 40 35
SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL 1
Soil Cover TOSCO Spe
VII IX
1234 1234
1 2 1 - 4312
1 4 7 - 6713
22-1 21-2
.... ....
.... ....
.... ....
1 - 1 - 11--
- 10 12 - 7758
1
_ _ . ] _ ) - -
232- 2--T
1 - - - 1 - - -
9 30 23 2 23 20 7 16
30 30
PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN
int Shale Soil
XI XIII
1234 1234
1-24 - 1 1 2
21-4 1211
--1- ....
«. » V
. _ _ _ _-..
- - - . I ...
.... ....
. - 1 - 1 - - -
4263 2835
1222 1 - - -
- - - i ....
1 1 2 - 34-2
1 1
9 6 14 14 9 15 6 11
35 35
Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 on) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 57. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Basin wildrye
FOR_BS
Winterfat
fjj Fourwing saltbush
O Rabfaitbrush
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
Mt. Mahogany
FORBS
Utah sweetvetch
Penstemon (spp.)
Lupine (spp.)
TOTALS
% COVER/PLOT
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN
STUDY SITE. SEPTEMBER 1974
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
II IV VI VIII X XII XIV
1234 1234 1234 1234 1234. 1234 1234
2* 121 1--1 2--- 2-22 2-11 -1-2 2 - - -
1222 31-2 1-23 2-22 2123 -212 2323
- i-l .-1- 2 11 113- .... 1...
_ _ _ . « _ _ .p..... » _ _ _
1-- --1
1 1-
____ .... .... -__- ._-- ..-_- ----
1 -11- 1
3638 3225 .--8 -234 --2 11 932- 2-32
- . . _ - 1_- .-1- ..-2 _.ll .--- ...I
2 1 2
- 145 -215 -223 1-12 --2- 1 1
1 - - 1
9 11 11 18 7 6 4 13 5 2 5 15 5 4 10 13 6 2 12 17 12 6 3 4 7367
30 35 30 25 20 15 25
* Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 58. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Indian rlcegrass
Basin wildrye
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwi no ssl tbush
Rabbi tbrush
BitterbruSh
Big sagebrush
Mt. Mahogany
FOR3S
Utah sweetvetch
Penstemon (spp.)
Lupine (spp.)
TOTALS
S COVER/PLOT
SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPEN
STUDY SITE. SEPTEMBER 1974
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm
13 11 9
1234 1234 123
1* 2 1 4 - 1 1 - - 2 1
3224 -22- 131
- 1 1
---- --.-_ __«
1
!--_ _ - _ - ...
1
- 1 1 -
- - 44 15 8-3 798
1 1 - -
- - - - 1
- 222 3351 ...
1 - ...
7 8 9 14 19. 14 9 4 9 16 12
35 30 25
IT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANC]
(6") Soil Cover USBM Spent Shale
753
4 1234 1234. 1234
1 1-13 .-12 22-1
1 2223 1223 3312
1 -1-1 . 2 - - 1 - - -
---- ---- - - _ _
---- - - _ i
2 -
1 - - 1 - - -
10 3 10 45 --23 10---
1-12 -1-- 2-11
11 -
3 2522 -2
---- .--- .-.-
18 10 18 10 16 2958 19 5 2 5
20 15 20
3 BASIN
Soil
1
1234
2 - - 2
22-3
1-11
- - - -
- . _ -
_
7 10 4 3
- - - -
-
31-1
1 - - -
16 13 5 10
35
Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 59. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER (QUADRAT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebur.r.h wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Racin wildrVP
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourvrir.g saltbush
Rabbitbrush
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
Mt. Mahogany
FORBS
Utah sweetvetch
Penstemon (spp.)
Lupine (spp.)
TOTALS
% COVER/PLOT
SHALE,
STUDY
30 cm (12"
14
1234
*
3213
2122
- 1 - 1
- - 2 -
- 11 - -
.
.
6 - - 4
- - 1 1
....
2 - - -
13 15 6 11
40
SOIL-COVERED
SITE
) Soil
1
1
1
-
.
-
-
-
3
_
2
7
USBM SPENT
SHALE, AND SOIL
CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN
. SEPTEMBER 1974
Cover
12
234
1 4 1
222
- 2 -
-
...
-
_
- 2 7
- 1 -
_ _ -
23-
5 14 10
45
15 cm (6")
10
1234
2111
2312
- - - 2
- - - 1
....
....
-
4333
- ...
2 - - -
1 - - -
11 7 5 9
20
Soil Cover
8
1234 1
"
2221 2
2321 2
- 1 1 - 2
- - 1 - 2
_
....
- 1 - 2 2
- - 1 1
. i - - i
53-4
9 11 7 9 11
25
USBM Spent Shale Soil
642
234 1234 123
2-2 2321 2-2
223 3212 2-3
1-1 - - 1 - - - 1
- 1
- . . . 1-1 - - -
._ .... ._.
1 -
135 2--3 744
- 1 1 -
. . . . . . i ...
- - 2 --22 232
6 7 13 7 6 6 10 13 9 13
20 45 25
4
1
3
-
.
-
1
-
6
"
_
-
11
* Values are total number of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 60. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER ON NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
u>
CO
Quadrat I
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
Totals
Quadrat t
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
Totals
COVERED TOSCO
SPENT
SEPTEMBER 1975
I
30 cm (12") Soil
Grass
5*
4
4
6
5
5
4
4
8
45
Shrub Forb
1 3
0 3
2 8
0 5
Z 3
0 4
0 0
Z 4
1 3
8 33
Cover
45
70
90
30
55
40
35
55
45
x51
IX
30
Grass
4
7
5
5
4
4
4
6
5
44
TOSCO Spent Shale
Grass
10*
4
7
6
6
5
7
4
7
56
Shrub Forb
0 5
3 7
1 3
2 3
2 2
1 3
1 5
4 3
1 2
15 33
%
Cover
60
65
70
45
75
65
80
60
45
x 62
SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
Ill
cm (12") Soil 15 cm
Shrub Forb Cover Grass Shrub
4 4 60 32
3 2 90 63
2 6 60 30
4 3 55 20
7 2 95 24
4 3 80 30
0 3 40 40
4 3 50 42
3 7 55 32
31 33 3T65 30 13
XI
TOSCO Spent Shale
V
PICEANCE
BASIN
(6"j Soil
Forb
8
8
7
4
3
9
4
5
9
.57
Grass Shrub Forb Cover
824
7 1 2
742
700
820
5 2 1
340
8 4 1
7 1 0
60 20 10 x
80
75
75
50
70
70
30
70
55
63
Cover
45
65
35
25
35
40
50
40
55
743
Grass
5
6
4
5
5
5
3
2
3
38
Grass
3
4
4
5
5
3
4
4
5
37
STUDY
VII
SITE,
15 era (6") Soil
Shrub Forb
0
0
1
1
3
1
0
1
2
9
8
3
3
4
4
2
3
1
3
31
xni
Soil
Shrub Forb
3
0
0
2
3
0
3
2
1
15
2
3
5
4
4
2
7
3
2
32
Cover
65
40
35
40
65
50
35
25
50
*«S
a
Cover
40
50
45
50
60
30
60
55
55
x"44
* Values are total numbers of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each quadrat.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 61. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER ON SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE , SOIL-
w
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Totals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Totals
COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE
Grass
5*
3
6
6
6
4
3
6
5
44
SEPTEMBER 1975
II IV VI
30 cm (12") Soil 30 cm (12") Soil 15 cm (6") Soil
Shrub Forb Cover Grass Shrub Forb Cover Grass Shrub Forb Cover
1 0 65 5 3 4 55 7 3 7 60
2 0 50 6 0 5 45 4 3 1 50
1 3 60 4 3 3 60 4 2 4 45
1 2 55 3 4 2 85 6 3 2 35
1 0 60 6 0 2 35 4 2 1 40
0 1 25 4 0 3 40 4 2 4 40
2 0 50 5 1 4 60 2 1 3 30
4 0 80 5 1 3 55 6 2 1 55
0 0 40 5 3 4 60 5 2 3 50
12 6 x"54 43 15 30 755 45 20 26 145
X XII
TOSCO Soent Shale TOSCO Sjjent Shale
* %
Grass Shrub Forb Cover Grass Shrub Forb Cover
8* 0 0 55 7 3 5 60
10 3 0 60 8 4 2 55
6 4 2 50 6 2 2 45
9 2 4 45 7 2 0 40
11 2 1 70 7 1 3 50
7 3 0 50 5 0 1 30
6 3 5 55 7 0 0 50
12 2 1 90 5 1 0 60
10 1 0 50 6 0 2 50
79 20 13 x" 58 58 13 15 x" 49
VIII
Grass
5
5
6
6
6
7
5
3
2
45
15 cm 16
Shrub
1
4
2
3
0
0
1
0
1
12
") So
Forb
6
6
3
10
4
8
4
3
6
50
il
Cover
35
45
45
45
50
60
40
25
30 -
X42
XIV
Soil
Grass
4
6
5
6
3
3
7
3
3
40
Shrub
1
Z
2
2
0
2
1
3
1
14
Forb
2
3
7
4
0
1
3
0
2
22
Cover
40
55
60
45
15
40
40
45
55
JT44
Values are total numbers of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each quadrat.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 62. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER ON NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
u>
in
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Totals
Quadrat *
1
2
3
d
5
6
7
3
9
Totals
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE
SEPTEMBER
13
30 cm (12") Soil
Grass
6*
6
3
4
4
4
3
3
6
39
Shrub Forb
0 2
0 5
2 1
0 3
1 3
2 3
1 1
4 5
2 4
12 27
%
Cover
45
55
25
35
60
45
35
55
50
145
5
USBM Spent
Grass
6*
6
5
7
6
4
6
7
9
56
1975
11 9
30 cm (12") Soil 15 cm (6") Soil
% %
Grass Shrub Forb Cover Grass Shrub Forb Cover
4 1 4 55 3 0 2 35
4 1 3 60 6 1 2 85
6 0 3 60 4 0 2 45
4 0 2 35 5 0 4 50
1 0 2 20 4 1 3 55
3 1 4 40 4 0 3 45
4 0 3' 35 4 3 3 45
3 0 3 30 6 2 4 70
5 1 2 45 5 1 3 60
34 4 26 x~ 42 41 8 26 >T 54
3
Shale USDM Spent Shale
% %
Shrub Forb Cover Grass Shrub Forb Cover
0
1
1
0
1
1
1
1
3
9
0 50 6 1 0 35
0 45 6 0 0 85
3 35 7 0 2 80
2 55 4 3 0 50
1 55 9 2 2 65
1 60 3 2 0 45
1 45 G 1 0 45
1 55 5 4 0 55
1 55 6 0 1 40
10 JT 44 45 13 5 5" 56
Grass
3
5
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
44
BASIN STUDY SITE
15 cm
Shrub
0
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
1
5
7
(6") Soil
Forb
2
3
5
3
3
6
4
3
3
32
1
et
*
Cover
75
60
40
50
45
55
60
50
50
753
Soil
Grass
6
6
3
5
4
4
5
7
5
45
Shrub
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
Forb
5
6
7
3
5
3
3
7
2
41
Cover
60
85
30
70
40
50
50
40
25
I 50
* Values are total numbers of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each quadrat.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 63. VEGETATION DENSITY AND GROUND COVER ON SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
u>
en
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Totals
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Totals
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE. AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN
SEPTEMBER 1975
14
30 cm (12"J Soil
Grass
*
2
4
4
3
3
2
4
4
5
31
Shrub Forb Cover
0 3 55
2 3 60
0 5 75
1 4 35
1 1 80
1 0 20
0 2 30
0 0 40
0 1 45
5 19 x 49
6
USBM Spent Shale
Grass Shrub Forb
6* 3 0
700
10 0 4
6 3 1
822
5 1 4
420
6 1 0
430
12 10
30 cm (12") Soil 15 cm (6") Soil
Grass Shrub
4 2
6 1
5 0
5 1
4 2
3 1
7 0
4 1
3 0
41 8
Cover
60
50
55
45
65
55
40
50
55
56 15 11 x"53
* %
Forb Cover Grass Shrub Forb Cover
5 65 5 2 3 50
5 75 4 1 2 70
6 50 4 3 4 50
3 55 5 1 5 50
4 60 7 1 5 60
1 70 7 2 3 55
4 55 6 1 3 60
2 45 3 1 3 40
0 30 4 0 4 45
30 x 56 45 12 32 x 53
4
USBM Spent Shale
Grass Shrub Forb Cover
7 3 0 60
8 2 0 40
11 3 0 80
8 3 2 50
6 2 0 60
8 2 0 45
6 2 1 55
7 2 0 55
7 2 4 60
68 21 7 x56
8
15 cm (6P
Grass
7
4
6
8
3
3
3
4
7
45
Grass
8
4
5
4
6
Z
1
2
3
35
STUDY s:
') Soil
Shrub Forb
2
1
2
1
0
2
1
2
0
11
2
Soi
Shrub
0
1
4
2
0
1
0
0
1
9
3
5
5
5
2
6
3
5
7
41
1
Forb
4
5
6
2
3
1
4
4
2
31
Cover
70
45
60
65
40
65
30
40
80
x 55
or
Cover
85
70
60
60
50
45
25
30
55
x~56
* Values are total numbers of individual plants per (20.3 x 40.6 cm) quadrat. Percent vegetative cover was estimated for each quadrat.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 64. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE ,
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT
SHALE,
SITE. AUGUST 1976
30 cm (12")
GLASSES
"""- "~
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Ti'aoLhy
Essin wildrye
Bluegrass
I** Winterfat
Fcurwing saltbush
Rabbi tbrush
Bi tterbrush
Big sagebrush
£QRBS_
Gloija mallow
Penstenan (spp. )
Utah swectvetch
UEE3Y_ ANNUALS
Cheanrass
Mustard (spp)
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
Barley
Wheat
No Vegetative Cover
s
f"
74
19
.
26
_
28
-
49
.
.
-
_
65
14
11
-
-
-
-
34
30
AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
Soil Cover
1
-=-
109
_
.
21
.
6
-
96
.
5
-
42
13
.
-
-
-
-
5
93
VIII
CM
pup
198
.
.
17
.
14
~
34
.
2
4
-
57
7
.
-
-
-
.
~
17
en
a>
cr
mfm
r
117
8
.
9
17
14
.
13
_
79
11
6
-
-
-
.
-
64
TOSCO Spent Shale
IX XI
i CM CO t CM
At m 01 ry Qf
c c c c c
^ -^ -^~ -^- -^
176 254 251 142 230
... .
... .
69 8 17
9 5 8 - -
110 43 50 123 44
... _
3 - -
5
... . .
... _
6 4 21 - -
21
6 - -
... -
... .
... -
11 50 - - 11
32 11 6 87 27
CO
£
-=-
229
.
.
11
5
51
.
.
-
_
6
-
12
.
-
.
.
16
20
Soil
XIII
^ (U
c c
^ ^L.
55 111
-
_
46 37
.
.
-
138 110
_
.
-
_
10 7
6 -
11 21
18 -
-
_
_
6
66 67
CO
0)
c
-=-
122
-
.
14
-
14
-
30
.
.
-
_
51
-
34-
15
-
.
_
-
66
* Values are total centimeters of above ground vegetative cover by species. Transect lines averaged 335 on in length. Line 1 in upper, line Z in middle,
and line 3 in lower, 1/3 of each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 65. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE ,
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT
SITE. AUGUST 1976
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
B'uebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Basin wildrye
Bluegrass
SHRUBS
Winterfat
I"! Four-wing saltbush
00 Rabbi tbrtjsh
Bitterbrush
Big sagebrush
Ei?12
Globe mallow
Penite^on (spp.)
Utah sweetvetch
WEEDY ANNUALS
Chcatarass
Vustarc (spp)
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
Barley
Wheat
Ho. Vegetative Cover
* Values are total
O)
E:
48*
-
-
63
-
-
-
_
141
-
-
5
.
13
-
32
-
-
-
-
-
51
centimeters
30 cm (12"]
II
at a)
c c
70 53
-
-
49 57
-
.
-
_
39 67
-
-
28 13
_
33 38
8 -
12 38
29 -
-
-
- _
-
81 92
1 Soil Cover
i
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 66. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE , SOIL-
U)
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.- PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
SITE.
AUGUST 1976
GRASSES
Western wheatgrass
Bluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Indian ricegrass
Timothy
Basin wltdrye
Bluegrass
SHRUBS
Winterfat
Fourwing saltbusn
Rabbi tbrush
Bitter-brush
Big sagebrush
FORES
Globe mallow
Penster.on (spp.)
Utah sweetvetch
Yellow sv-'eetclover
WEEDY ANNUALS
Cheatqrass
Lambsquarter
1','jstard (spp)
Snap-dragon
Russian thistle
Wild lettuce
Barley
Wneat
No Vegetative Cover
* Values are total
30 cm (12") Soil
13
« CM CO f-
0) O)
84* 56 67 77
12 -
-
7 37 4 22
...
19
- . -
-
91 47 6 57
-
.
8
...
13 27 7
55-
- -
15
-
14
44 9 70 17
-
8 4 45 -
159 167 72 170
centimeters of above ground
Cover
11
CO
Q>
C
46
-
-
33
-
-
-
_
14
-
-
-
-
-
24
-
-
-
-
33
-
-
168
CO
or
c
.
64
.
.
23
«
35
-
_
27
-
.
9
-
91
-
33
-
-
14
71
-
-
60
vegetative
15 cm
9
r- CM
<1J O
c c
178 78
19
.
4 8
.
13
-
_
44 8
15 -
-
19
.
13 41
9 -
-
-
-
-
21
-
7
87 136
cover by species
(6") Soil Cover
ro
01 01
C C
161 102
27 18
-
17
.
2 14
-
.
23
-
.
9
-
72 25
7
-
7
-
_
13
-
13 31
69 110
. Transect
7
CM
c
97
16
.
-
.
-
-
.
15
-
.
-
.
50
7
-
9
-
-
_
-
62
94
lines
USBM Spent Shale
5
CO r CNJ CO
CD d ^ fl)
C C= C C
.
165 123 159 212
16 ...
- - -
7 - -
.
29 5 5
-
...
154 79 26
_
-
...
.
35 ...
11
...
4 11 2
-
6 -
41 ...
- - _
9 65-
49 60 85 94
averaged 335 cm in length.
3
1 CM CO t
tU V Q) 0>
_c c c c
^__ ^_
180 239 249 135
13
_
12 - - 38
. . -
6 -
...
...
54 54 17
-
...
9 11
- - .
37
8
.
15 26
59
- - -
15
14
- - -
4 - -
100 51 56 71
Line 1 in upper, line 2 in
Soil
1
CM
I
r
109
-
-
7
-
22
-
.
-
-
-
23
-
41
7
-
18
-
-
22
-
-
40
ro
c
"^
70
10
-
-
-
12
-
.
-
-
.
13
-
109
-
-
-
-
-
14
-
-
22
middle.
and line 3 in lower, 1/3 of each plot.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 67. VEGETATION ANALYSIS (TRANSECT METHOD) ON SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE , SOIL-
COVERED
AUGUST
Western wh.es tqrass
Sluebunch wheatgrass
Crested wheatgrass
Ir-oian ricejrass
Tinctiry
Basin wildrye
Binegrass
SHRUBS
wi('t»rfat
Fo'jrwirc saltbush
Rabbitbrush
Bitterbrush
Bin saaebrush
Glob" mallow
P»n3ti--on (spp.)
Utah sweetvetch
WEE3* ANNUALS
Cl-^=tyrass
"ustard (spp)
Russian thistle
li'ild lettuce
Barley
Wheat
No Veief'vive Cover
7
C
51
-
-
26
.
-
3
_
25
-
-
-
8
3
.
-
91
-
13
130
30 cm
14
CM
V
42
-
-
30
.
-
-
_
80
-
.
-
15
-
.
-
14
-
26
143
(12")
CO
__*""!
66
-
-
11
-
-
4
_
81
-
-
~
28
-
17
-
-
-
44
90
USBM SPENT
SHALE, AND SOIL
CONTROL
PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE .
1976
Soil
OJ
r~
67
-
-
38
.
-
-
.
102
.
-
~
13
-
4
2
37
-
5
82
Cover
12
CVJ CO
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 68. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
SPENT SHALE,
AND
SOIL CONTROL
PLOTS. PICEANCE
BASIN
STUDY SITE.
1974
NORTH ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
5/24
12.5*
21.5
21.5
19.7
19.7
14.0
12.5
13.2
13.2
13.2
14.0
30 cm (12")
I
6/5 9/10
5.5
16.0
-- 17.0
19.2
-- 18.7
-- 17.0
-- 17.0
-- 16.0
-- 16.0
16.0
-- 17.7
Soil Cover
III
5/24 6/5
19.7 --
23.0
19.0
16.5 --
15.0 --
13.2 --
11.5 -
11.5 -
11.5 --
11.5 --
11.5 --
9/10
7.2
17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7
17.7
17.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
5/24
29.7
32.2
31.2
28.0
26.5
25.5
23.0
22.2
19.7
19.7
19.7
15 cm (6")
V
6/5 9/10
3.7
-- 31.5
~ 29.0
28. 2
-- 27.2
-- 28.2
-- 30.0
-- 30.0
30.0
-- 33.2
33.2
Soil Cover
5/24
23.0
34.5
30.5
27.2
24.0
21.5
19.0
17.2
16.5
15.7
15.0
15.7
VII
6/5 9/10
2.2
-- 24.7
26.5
-- 24.7
-- 24.7
-- 26.5
26.5
-- 28.2
28.2
-- 30.0
-- 31.5
31.5
5/24
19.0
19.7
19.0
14.0
14.0
13.2
13.2
13.2
12.5
13.2
13.2
TOSCO Spent
IX
6/5
18.2
19.0
17.2
15.7
15.7
15.0
13.2
12.5
11.7
13.2
15.0
9/10
4.7
17.0
21.2
22.0
23.7
24.7
23.0
23.7
23.7
24.7
24.7
Shale
5/24
13.2
23.0
18.2
15.7
16.5
16.5
16.5
15.7
17.2
19.7
20.5
XI
6/5
8.2
19.0
19.7
18.2
16.5
18.2
18.2
15.7
17.2
18.2
19.7
9/10
10.7
22.0
21.2
23.0
22.0
24.7
26.5
25.5
26.5
27.2
28.2
5/24
26.2
37.2
33.0
25.0
20.2
16.7
14.7
-
Soil
XIII
6/5 9/10
3.7
17.2
21.5
- 17.7
-- 17.7
-- 17.7
-- 19.5
~
SOUTH ASPECT
Depth
(en.)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
15
180
5/24
18.2
26.5
28.0
23.0
19.7
16.5
12.5
9.0
8.2
8.2
8.2
30 cm (12")
II
6/5 9/10
7.2
-- 17.0
-- 22.0
-- 23.0
21.2
21.2
-- 21.2
20.5
-- 19.2
19.2
-- 19.2
Soil Cover
IV
5/24 6/5
24.7 --
33.0 --
30.5
27.2
21.5 --
20.5
13.2 --
15.0
12.5
12.5
13.2 -
--
9/10
3.2
17.7
21.2
21.2
22.2
21.2
23.0
22.2
22.2
23.0
23.7
5/24
28.0
35.5
32.2
31.2
28.0
24.7
21.5
19.7
17.2
17.2
19.7
21.5
15 cm (6")
VI
6/5 9/10
2.2
-- 28.2
30.0
28.2
23. 2
-- 26.5
-- 28.2
28.2
28.2
28.2
-- 31.5
-- 31.5
Soil Cover
5/24
27.2
34.7
29.7
26.5
Zf..7
21.5
23.0
21.5
18.2
19.0
19.7
VIII
6/5 9/10
2.2
29.0
26.5
24.7
-- 26.5
26.5
28.2
30.0
30.0
30.0
-- 30.0
5/24
24.7
23.0
16.5
15.0
14.0
13.2
12.5
13.2
15.0
15.0
15.0
TOSCO Spent
X
6/5
17.2
23.0
19.0
18.0
17.2
13.2
13.2
13.2
13.2
14.0
15.0
9/10
10.7
10.7
21.2
23.0
23.0
24.0
24.0
24.0
24.7
24.7
26.5
*
Shale
5/24
21.5
24.0
18.2
16.5
15. 0
16.5
14.0
13.2
12.5
12.5
15.0
15.0
XII
6/5
15.5
22.2
21.5
16.5
17.2
17.2
14.0
14.0
12.5
12.5
15.7
16.5
9/10
13.2
21.2
21.2
21.2
23.0
24.0
24.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
24.7
24.7
5/24
29.0
35.5
33.0
29.7
25.5
17.5
15.7
15.7
16.5
Soil
XIV
6/5 9/10
5.5
17.7
-- 17.7
17.7
-- 18.7
19.5
24.7
-- 25.5
-- 31.7
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
~ No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 69. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM USBM SPENT SHALE , SOIL-COVERED USBM
depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
1?0
135
150
165
130
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
SPENT SHALE,
5/24
19.7*
29.7
29.7
28.0
27.2
24.0
22.2
21.5
21.5
21.5
--
5/24
26.5
24.7
27.2
23.2
27.2
26.5
27.2
27.2
26.5
24.7
24.0
30 cm (12")
13
6/5 9/10
5.5
16.0
21.2
-- 24.7
- 26.5
24.7
24.7
24.0
24.7
26.5
--
30 cm (12")
14
6/5 9/10
5.5
-- 16.0
21.2
-- 24.7
26.5
- 26.5
28.2
23.2
27.2
26.5
-- 28.2
Soil Cover
11
5/24 6/5
33.0
33.0
29.7 --
24.7
24.7
24.7 --
23.0 --
21.5
20.7
21.5
:: --
Soil Cover
12
5/24 6/5
24.7
23.0
26.5
24.0 --
21.0
22.2
22.2 --
22.2
22.2
22.2
22.2 --
9/10
7.2
19.2
26.5
25.5
25.5
27.2
27.2
28.2
26.5
26.5
"
9/10
10.7
16.0
21.2
24.0
25.5
25.5
25.5
25.5
24.7
24.7
24.7
AND
5/24
33.0
32.2
32.2
29.7
28.0
28.0
26.5
24.7
25.5
25.5
"
5/24
29.7
33.2
33.2
32.2
30.7
30.7
30.7
29.7
30.7
30.7
30.7
SOIL CONTROL
15 cm (6")
9
6/5 9/10
18.7
28.2
27.2
-- 26.5
-- 29.0
29.0
-- 28.2
28.2
31.5
-- 31.5
:: ::
15 cm (6")
10
6/5 9/10
6.5
-- 18.7
-- 27.2
-- 29.0
- 29.0
-- 30.0
31.0
32.5
-- 32.5
-- 33.2
-- 35.2
PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN
NORTH ASPECT
Soil Cover
5/24
31.2
31.2
33.0
29.7
29.7
29.7
26.5
28.0
28.0
26.5
"-
7
6/5 9/10
-- 16.0
-- 26.5
28.2
30.7
30.0
-- 30.0
-- 30.0
- 31.5
33.5
33.5
:: ::
SOUTH ASPECT
5/24
29.0
29.7
27.2
26.5
24.7
24.7
24.7
24.7
26.5
26.5
--
Soil Cover
5/24
34.0
34.0
29.0
28.2
25.5
25.5
25,5
25.0
25.0
25.0
8
6/5 9/10
10.7
28.2
28.2
28.2
26.5
-- 24.7
26.5
-- 26.5
30.0
31.5
5/24
24.0
32.2
29.0
25.5
26.5
24.7
24.7
24.7
24.7
--
USBM Spent
5
6/5
27.2
29.0
29.0
26.5
25.5
24.7
24.7
24.7
24.0
24.7
--
9/10
16.0
27.2
23.2
27.2
29.0
27.2
29.0
29.0
30.0
31.5
-
USBM Spent
6
6/5
23.0
28.2
27.2
27.2
26.5
24.7
23.0
24.0
24.7
--
9/10
14.2
26.5
27.2
29.0
29.0
30.7
28.2
28.2
31.5
--
STUDY SITE. 1974
Shale
5/24
28.0
31.2
27.2
26.5
26.5
25.5
24.7
24.7
26.5
26.5
--
Shale
5/24
24.7
28.0
26.5
26.5
24.7
25.5
25.5
26.5
26.5
26.5
3
6/5
26.5
28.0
29.7
26.5
26.5
24.7
23.0
24.0
25.5
26.5
--
4
6/5
24.7
25.5
27.2
27.2
26.5
26.5
27.2
25.5
27.2
27.2
9/10
17.0
28.2
28.2
29.0
28.2
29.0
28.2
29.7
29.7
31.2
--
9/10
15.0
25.5
27.2
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.7
30.7
32.5
33.2
5/24
29.7
33.0
30.5
30.5
24.7
15.7
13.2
13.2
15.0
15.7
15.7
5/24
31.2
33.0
33.0
29.7
29.7
18.2
13.2
13.2
13.2
15.0
15.0
Soil
1
6/5 9/10
1.?.
23.0
24.0
2S.2
29.0
30.0
30.7
30.7
30.7
30.0
33.2
Soil
2
6/5 9/10
-- 12.5
-- 17.0
22.0
- 23.0
28.2
-- 31.5
- 31.5
- 31.5
-- 30.0
- 32.5
35.2
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No readings.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 70. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
ISO
30 cm (12"
I
3/19 5/17 10/12
27.8* 27.3 16.5
24.0 35.8 24.0
18.8 33.3 24.5
20.3 33.3 25.5
17.3 32.3 24.0
15.0 29.8 24.5
13.5 24.8 23.0
14.3 24.0 22.0
16.5 24.0 21.0
16.5 24.8 22.0
17.3 25.5 Zl.'O
SPENT SHALE,
) Soil Cover
III
3/19 5/17 10/12
30.3 28.8 17.0
25.5 32.3 23.5
18.8 31.3 24.5
17.3 29.8 25.0
16.5 29.8 24.0
15.0 28.0 23.5
13.5 25.5 23.5
13.5 25.5 24.0
14.3 24.8 22.0
15.0 25.5 22.0
14.5 25.0 21.0
AND
3/19
18.0
28.5
27.8
25.5
24.8
24.8
24.0
25.5
24.0
24.8
24.8
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE
NORTH ASPECT
15
V
5/17
24.8
34.5
35.5
34.5
35.5
36.3
36.3
35.5
35.5
38.0
38.0
cm (6")
10/12
22.5
26.8
26.3
25.8
27.3
28.5
28.3
29.3
29.3
29.3
28.8
Soil Cover
3/19
14.3
37.5
32.8
24.8
24.0
24.0
23.3
24.0
24.0
24.8
25.5
VII
5/17
18.3
34.5
35.5
34.5
34.5
33.8
34.5
36.3
35.5
35.5
35.5
10/12
23.5
27.8
26.3
25.7
27.3
28.5
28.5
28.5
29.3
29.3
28.3
3/19
34.3
25.5
21.5
21.5
22.5
21.0
20.0
19.3
19.3
20.0
21.5
IX
5/17
17.3
34.5
34.5
35.5
35.5
35.5
35.5
35.5
36.3
37.0
37.0
BASIN STUDY SITE.
TOSCO
10/12
13.3
22.3
23.0
24.5
25.0
26.0
26.3
25.5
27.3
27.5
27.5
1975
Spent Shale
3/19
26.3
33.0
25.5
19.8
21.5
23.0
22.3
21.5
24.0
24.0
25.5
XI
5/17
21.5
33.0
33.0
32.3
33.0
34.5
34.5
34.5
36.3
37.0
36.3
10/12
20.5
23.8
23.5
22.8
24.8
26.0
26.8
26.8
28.0
29.3
29.8
3/19
23.3
28.8
20.8
19.3
18.3
17.5
19.3
19.0
18.5
__
Soil
XIII
5/17
27.3
33.8
34.5
33.8
35.5
33.8
34.5
35.6
35.0
10/12
25.3
26.5
20.8
19.3
19.5
19.8
21.0
23.8
30.8
--
__
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12'
II
3/19 5/17 10/12
20.8*23.8 15.5
27.3 37.0 25.0
24.0 34.5 27.6
22.3 33.0 25.5
24.8 31.3 24.0
19.3 30.5 23.2
19.3 28.8 22.1
17.5 28.0 20.5
18.3 28.0 21.3
18.3 28.0 21.3
') Soil Cover
IV
3/19 5/17 10/12
20.0 36.3 16.0
26.3 36.3 24.5
24.0 34.5 25.5'
21.5 33.8 26.5
20.0 33.0 23.3
21.0 32.3 22.0
20.0 29.8 23.2
18.5 28.8 20.5
17.8 28.0 21.5
18.5 28.0 22.5
22.5 31.3 23.0
3/19
11.3
33.5
32.0
27.3
27.3
25.5
24.8
24.0
24.8
24.0
28.8
15
VI
5/17
21.5
35.5
37.0
35.5
36.3
34.5
36.3
34.5
34.5
36.3
36.3
cm (6")
10/12
18.8
24.5
24.5
23.0
27.3
28.3
28.5
29.3
29.3
28.8
28.0
Soil Cover
3/19
8.0
35.3
30.3
27.3
25.5
24.8
25.5
26.3
25.5
25.5
25.5
VIII
!>/17
14.8
38.0
37.0
34.5
35.5
34.5
36.3
36.0
35.5
36.0
36.0
10/12
18.0
24.0
25.0
24.0
26.0
29.0
28.5
29.0
29.0
29.0
29.0
3/19
17.8
24.8
23.3
23.3
22.5
21.5
21.0
21.0
21,0
21.0
21.5
IX
5/17
17.0
33.3
35.3
34.3
36.0
36.8
37.8
38.5
38.5
39.5
39.5
TOSCO
10/12
16.8
24.8
26.3
23.5
25.6
27.3
28.3
29.7
30.8
31.0
33.0
Spent Shale
3/19
24.0
29.5
25.5
23.3
20.3
21.5
21.0
22.0
21.5
21.0
21.0
XI
5/17
26.3
35.8
36.5
34.0
34.8
36.5
36.5
37.5
37.5
38.3
38.3
10/12
17.8
25.8
26.3
23.8
25.8
27.3
28.3
29.8
31.8
31.0
31.8
3/19
20.5
28.8
23.0
19.8
19.8
20.5
24.0
24.0
.24.5
~
Soil
XIV
5/17
28.8
33.0
34.5
33.8
33.8
33.8
34.5
33.0
33.0
10/12
24.5
23.3
20.5
19.3
20.5
20.3
20.3
20.0
20.0
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 71. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM USBM SPENT SHAT.F. , SOIL-COVERED USBM
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
SPENT SHALE,
AND SOIL CONTROL
PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
SITE.
1975
NORTH ASPECT
30
13
3/19 5/17
30.5* 30.5
28.5 35.3
26.3 34.8
26.3 34.8
2S.5 31.0
23.8 29.8
22.5 28.0
22.5 26.3
23.0 26.3
23.8 26.3
.-
cm (12")
10/12
23.8
21.3
19.5
22.5
25.0
28.0
31.5
29.3
28.0
28.0
Soil Cover
3/19
30.5
32.3
28.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
23.0
22.5
22.5
22.5
--
11
5/17
27.5
35.3
34.8
29.8
29.8
29.8
30.5
28.0
29.8
29.8
10/12
25 0
22.5
20.0
22.5
25.5
26.8
29.3
28.5
28.5
29.8
15 cm 46"
9
3/19 5,'17 10/12
31.5 29.8 23.0
33.5 34.0 29.3
30.5 33.0 29.8
24.3 32.3 29.8
24.3 31.0 28.5
23.0 31.0 30.5
23.0 31.0 31.0
23.0 32.3 32.3
25.5 34.8 32.3
27.5 35.3 33.0
27.5 35.3 34.0
) Soil Cover
3/19
34.8
34.8
31.5
28.0
26.3
26.3
25.5
26.3
28.5
26.3
::
7
5/17
28.0
32.3
33.0
33.0
34.0
33.0
34.0
35.3
35.3
35.3
:
10/12
28.0
31.0
29.8
26.3
28.0
28.0
28.0
28.5
31.0
31.5
USBM
5
3/19 5/17 10/12
34.8 27.5 23.0
34.8 32.3 29.3
28.0 33.0 28.0
25.0 32.3 29.3
24.3 32.3 29.8
24.3 33.0 28.0
25.0 33.0 26.8
25.5 33.0 30.5
25.0 33.0 31.0
25.0 33.0 31.0
:: :: ::
Spent Shale
3/19
32.3
34.8
31.0
25.0
25.5
25.5
23.0
28.0
28.0
27.5
::
3
5/17
28.5
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
10/12
25.5
29.3
29.8
29.8
29.8
31.5
30.5
29.8
32.3
34.0
3/19
30.5
28.5
27.5
28.0
27.5
25.5
26.3
27.5
27.5
25.0
28.5
Soil
1
5/17
32.3
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
10/12
28.5
29.8
26.3
22.5
23.8
25.5
28.0
26.8
23.5
31.5
34.0
SOUTH ASPECT
30
14
3/19 5/17
19.0*26.3
19.5 32.3
20.0 32.3
22.5 31.0
23.0 29.8
25.0 '36.5
24.3 25.5
25.5 25.5
25.0 26.3
23.0 26.3
22.5 25.0
cm (12")
10/12
31.3
20.8
25.0
28.5
27.5
25.5
24.3
26.8
28.5
28.5
28.5
Soil Cover
3/19
19.5
18.3
19.5
19.5
22.0
22.5
22.0
22.0
19.5
21.3
12
5/17
25.5
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
10/12
23.8
28.5
29.3
25.0
28.0
27.5
28.0
26.3
28.0
28.0
15 cm (6"
10
3/19 5/17 10/12
) Soil Cover
3/19
8
5/17
10/12
.2.3...Q. . 2S..5, . .28._5_ . ... & .,5. . .2.8. ..0. __2.7.,5__
26.8 40.0 31.5
28.0 40.0 31.0
26.8 40.0 28.0
25.0 40.0 28.0
25.0 40.0 27.5
26.8 40.0 27.5
26.3 40.0 30.5
26.3 40.0 33.0
28.0 40.0 34.0
30.5
29.3
25.5
23.0
22.5
23.0
24.3
24.3
24 .-3
-
40.0
40.0
40.0
1
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
--
31.0
33.0
32.3
30.5
31.5
33.0
33.5
34.8
35.3
USBM
6
3/19 5/17 10/12
22.5 31.0 23.8
33.0 40.0 29.3
29.8 40.0 29.8
28.5 40.0 29,3
35.3 40.0 28,5
26.3 40.0 29,3
25.5 40.0 31.0
26.3 40.0 31.0
28.5 40.0 29.3
28.5 40.-0 29-8
Spent Shale
3/19
26.3
34.0
34.0
32.3
28.5
28.5
28.5
28.5
29.8
31.0
4
5/17
34.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
10/12
16.5
29.3
28.5
28.5
29.8
29.3
28.5
31.5
33.0
33.5
3/19
20.8
22.5
23.0
23.8
26.0
28.0
28.5
28.0
25.5
28.5
28.5
Soil
2
5/17
35.3
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
40.0
10/12
16.5
23.8
23.0
25.5
25.5
25.0
26.3
27.5
29.8
29.3
32.3
Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil motsture curve.
No reading made.
-------
Ul
APPENDIX TABLE 72. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM NORTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
SITE. 1976
I III V
30 cm (12") Soil Covar 30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover
Depth =
(on) 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14
15 -- 27.8*18.8 13.8 7.8 7.8 4.3 30.1 18.0 15.0 7.8 7.0 6.8 17.3 6.50 9.5 3.5 2.5 <.2
30 29.8 26.5 17.5 13.8 10.3 11.5 _ 31.0 26.5 21.3 13.8 12.0 15.8 -- 15.8 29.0 26.5 13.8 10.0 9.0
45 31.526.519.317.014.512.3 34.026.523.517.515.317.3 -- 37.031.527.320.514.811.5
60 -- 29.827.321.820.517.017.3 -- 32.824.822.318.817.019.8 -- 34.030.327.322.318.517.3
75 29.024.322.321.316.318.3 -- 29.024.822.320.520.519.8 32.829.026.524.320.320.5
90 26.523.521.321.316.318.3 28.523.522.322.320.519.8 31.531.527.826.021.320.5
105 -- 24.321.821.821.317.017.3 -- 27.324.323.522.320.519.0 31.529.829.027.323.323.0
120 -- 22.321.321.821.318.017.3 -- 26.522.324.322.322.019.0 32.831.529.028.525.022.3
135 21.824.824.326.522.023.0 -- 24.823.5224.322.322.022.3 -- 32.831.529.827.325.026.3
150 -- 24.3 26.5 27.8 28.5 23.8 26.3 -- 24.8 24.3 24.8 26.0 23.8 22.3 -- 32.8 29.8 29.8 29.0 27.8 Z8.0
165 -- 26.029.029.032.023.827.3 -- 24.824.324.826.025.522.3 -- 31.532.831.531.027.828.0
180
VII IX XI XII
15 cm (6") Soil Cover TOSCO Spent Shale TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
Depth
(cm) 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14
15 !4.5* .-,.S H.3 3.5 5.0 0.2- -- 22.3 13.8 9.5 3.5 .2 .2 15.0 9.5 4.0 2.3 .2 .2 27.3 21.3 15.0 10.8 7.5 -5.5
30 14.5 26.5 26.5 12.0 10.8 9.5 22.326.017.0 7.3 2.8 2.8 13.026.013.8 5.3 2.8 2.5 27.327.821.817.513.013.8
45 40.0.30.326.013.8 8.8 8.8 32.826.019.310.8 6.5 5.3 -- 32.827.318.812.0 7.5 4.3 35.329.023.518.818.015.5
60 37.527.323.815.8 8.8 7.0 -- 29.026.022.315.8 8.5 4.5 31.524.318.815.8 9.3 6.8 35.8 29.8 24.3 18.S 17.0 15.5
75 29.826.526.518.812.8 8.8 29.026.024.317.510.3 7.0 23.526.521.317.515.011.5 35.829.826.517.518.014.5
90 29.027.327.322.315.012.0 -- 29.027.824.320.515.0 9.5 29.026.526.022.321.815.8 35.329.824.818.818.015.5
105 29.8 27.3 25.5 22.3 15.R 14.5 29.826.526.022.317.012.0 -- 29.027.824.826.023.818.3 31.529.826.518.818.014.5
123 29.027.328.524.322.518.0 -- 29.027.326.524.321.816.3 -- 29.829.026.527.325.519.8 26.527.826.518.818.014,5
135 29.8 27.8 29.8 26.5 21.5 18.8 29.8 27.8 27.3 24.3 21.8 18.8 - 31.0 30.3 29.0 31.0 28.5 23.0
150 31.029.831.027.324.520.5 31.0 27.3 27.3 26.0 21.8 1R.8 33.330.329.032.929.324.0
165 - 31.529.831.029.027.522.3 -- 31.027.827.327.325.520.5 -- 34.032.829.831.030.326.3
130 -- 31.5 27.8 27.3 27.3 25.5 20.5 33.3 32.8 29.8 31.0 30.3 26.3
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 73. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT TOSCO SPENT SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
SITE. 1976
II IV VI
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 30 cm (12") Soil Cover 15 cm (6") Soil Cover
Depth
(cm) 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14
15 >40.0*15.3 18.8 12.5 <.2 9.8 6.3 30.321.818.814.510.8 8.5 5.3 20.0 4.8 3.5 10.8 3.5 1.3 <.2
30 - >40.0 32.8 26.5 17.0 8.3 15.3 12.0 33.3 31.5 29.0 16.3 13.8 13.0 12.0 >40.0 32.8 29.0 20.0 10.3 9.5 6.0
« >40.0 31.0 27.3 17.5 15.0 11.8 11.3 31.031.529.019.315.813.012.0 >40.0 35.3 31.5 24.5 15.0 13.0 8.3
60 >40.0 31.5 26.5 20.0 13.3 18.3 11.3 29.029.829.020.017.514.813.8 38.835.330.320.013.018.311.5
75 39.5 28.8 26.5 20.0 17.0 19.0 13.5 26.5 29.3 27.3 20.5 20.5 18.3 16.3 38.3 33.3 29.8 24.3 23.0 22.0 17.3
90 39.5 28.5 23.5 20.0 18.0 20.0 15.0 24.8 28.5 26.5 20.5 22.3 20.3 17.0 35.8 31.5 29.0 21.8 23.0 20.3 18.3
105 39.5 26.5 24.8 20.5 20.0 19.0 16.0 24.3 26.5 26.0 20.5 22.3 20.3 18.8 35.8 32.8 27.3 24.3 24.8 23.8 19.0
120 37.0 26.5 24.8 20.5 21.8 21.8 17.5 24.3 26.5 26.0 20.5 22.3 22.0 18.8 35.8 31.0 27.3 24.3 23.0 24.5 19.8
135 37.0 26.5 24.8 21.3 23.0 22.8 17.5 24.3 26.5 26.0 20.5 22.3 21.0 19.5 35.8 31.0 29.0 26.0 24.8 25.5 20.5
150 37.0 26.5 24.8 21.8 23.0 24.5 17.5 29.0 26.5 27.3 21.3 24.3 22.8 21.3 35.8 31.5 29.0 24.5 26.5 25.5 21.5
165 37.0 26.5 24.8 21.-8 24.8 24.5 17.5 29.031.031.024.829.025.524.8 35.835.332.027.829.829.025.5
180
VIII X XII XIV
15 cm (6") Soil Cover TOSCO Spent Shale TOSCO Spent Shale Soil
(cm) 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/U
15 21.3 7.3 8.3 11.5 5.3 1.3 .7 18.810.8 9.0 7.8 1.8 <.2 <.2 26.522.317.011.5 7.8 <-2 <.2 30.326.018.815.8 9.0 9.5 6.0
30 35.337.030.320.012.0 9.0 7.3 30.329.024.812.0 6.5 4.0 1.8 31.031.023.515.810.3 5.8 3.5 32.035.329.020.018.816.517.0
45 "33.335.330.320.015.812.5 9.5 29.028.524.317.0 8.3 5.8 4.3 28.529.823.520.515.010.3 8.8 30.333.327.320.518.816.517.0
60 32.031.527.818.818.815.015.0 28.529.027.319.310.3 6.R 4.3 24.827.323.520.516.312.010.8 22.329.826.521.813.818.316.3
75 30.332.830.320.520.516.816.0 28.529.827.321.813.3 7.8 5.0 26.5 27.3 22.3 21.8 2l".3 14.8 13.8 21.324.824.823.018.818.320.5
90 30.331.527.821.324.319.519.3 28.529.827.323.017.011.3 6.8 26.529.024.324.521.318.317.0 20.020.519.321.817.518.315.5
105 30.331.529.821.326.021.320.0 28.531.029.024.313.014.3 9.0 27.328.524.824.324.819.318.0 21.321.818.821.818.810.316.3
120 30.334.029.023.526.022.020.8 27.329.828.524.520.015.811.5 30.329.024.826.024.320.318.8 23.023.027.324.318.818.314.5
135 30.333.329.023.526.023.821.5 29.029.829.024.521.816.514.8 29.029.826.527.326.522.020.5 31.029.826.528.518.818.317.0
150 32.033.330.323.527.325.522.3 30.331.028.526.523.018.318.3 29.029.826.529.028.523.820.5
165 32.035.330.326.027.324.822.3 30.331.529.826.524.820.318.3 31.031.027.829.030.325.523.0
180
* Values are In percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
-- No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 74. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NEUTRON PROBE) FROM NORTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE
Pepth
(cm)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
13b
159
165
180
"Depth
(cm)
15
30
45
69
75
90
105
120
ns
150
165
180
SOIL-COVERED USBM
SITE. 1976
13
SPENT
n
SHALE,
AND SOIL
30 cm (12") Soil Cover 30 cm (12") Soil Cover
3/10 3/31 5/3 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8
22.0*19.8 15.0 10.3 10.0 6.0 18.5 16.3
-- 21.0 28.0 20.5 15.0 16.0 15.5 22.0 26.3
19.029.826.018.017.817.0 21.527.0
19.530.527.323.021.320.5 19.024.8
18.5 26.3 26.5 24.8 23.0 22.3 19.5 26.3
17.5 24.8 24.3 24.8 23.8 22.3 19.5 26.3
16.5 23.0 24.3 24.8 22.0 20.5 19.0 26.3
16.5 23.0 24.3 24.8 23.8 20.5 18.5 24.0
17.0 22.3 26.5 26.5 24.8 20.5 18.0 25.5
-- 17.0 25.5 26.5 28.5 26.5 23.0 -- 19.0 26.3
6/9 7/8
17.5 8.8
24.3 18.8
28.5 24.3
24.8 24.3
27.3 24.3
28.5 27.3
28.5 27.3
27.3 27.3
28.5 27.3
28.5 29.0
8/12 9/14
10.8 5.3
15.8 15.5
18.0 18. 8
19.8 20.5
19.8 18.8
20.5 18.8
24.0 20.5
22.3 22.3
24.0 22.3
25.5 22.3
3/10
_
--
£
15 cm (6";
3/31
22.0
22.0
20.5
19.5
19.0
18.5
18.5
19.0
20.5
21.5
5/8
21.5
28.8
27.0
26.3
25.5
26.3
25.5
25.5
26.3
28.8
CONTROL PLOTS,
)
. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
I Soil Cover
6/9 7/8
21.3 15.8
24.3 20.5
26.5 22.3
26.0 24.3
26.0 24.8
26.0 26.5
27.3 27.3
27.3 29.0
29.0 31.0
31.5 32.8
8/12
12.3
14.8
18.0
18.0
19.8
2C.5
21.5
24.0
24.8
27.3
9/14
9.5
17.0
1P..8
18.8
20.5
22.3
22.3
24.0
29.0
29.8
3/10
..
..
-
7
15 cm (6"!
3/31 5/8
21.5 23.0
21.0 28.8
21.0 30.5
21.0 30.5
20.0 30.5
20.5 30.5
20.5 30.5
21.0 30.5
22.0 31.3
22.0 33.8
) Soil Cover
6/9 7/3 8/12 9/14
19.3 12.0 11.8 7.0
22.3 15.0 16.3 15.5
27.3 20.0 2i.O 18.8
27.8 24.3 26.5 24.0
27.3 25.5 28.3 25.5
29.0 26.5 31.0 29. n
29.8 29.8 31.0 29.0
30.3 29.8 33.0 29.0
30.3 31.5 33.8 30.8
32.0 31.5 35.8 32.3
5
USBM Spent Shale
3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14
23.5*26.5 17.5 12.0 10.0 7.8
21.5 33.5 21.8 15.0 16.0 17.0
-- 20.5 36.3 26.5 24..S 19.5 20.5
20.0 34.3 27.3 26.5 23.0 20.5
-- 18.5 34.3 26.0 26.5 24.8 22.3
-- 18.5 34.3 27.3 28.5 24.8 25.5
19.5 34.3 27.8 29.3 27.3 26.3
-- 20.5 35.3 29.0 29.8 29.8 29.0
20.0 34.3 29.0 29.8 29.0 29.0
20.0 34.0 27.829.8 29.0 28.0
3
USBM Spent
3/10 3/31 5/3 6/9
15
-- 23
20
20
20
-- 20
13
20
-- 21
20
.0 17.5 14.5
.0 28.0 24.8
.5 28.0 26.5
.0 27.0 27.3
.0 28.0 27.3
.0 27.0 26.5
.0 25.5 27.8
.0 23.8 29.8
.0 30.3 30.3
.5 30.3 30.3
Shale
7/8
12.0
15.8
22.3
24.3
26.0
27.3
29.0
29.0
31.0
32.8
8/12
8.5
15.0
19.8
20.8
21.8
23.8
25.5
29.3
33.3
33.3
9/14
5.0
14.0
19.0
19.8
19.8
22.3
19.8
28.0
28.0
30.5
1
Soil
3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9
-- 24
-- 23
.0 20.
.0 27.
-- 20.5 27.
-- 21
-- 20
18
-- 18
19
-- 19
-- 19
yn
.0 27.
.0 28.
.0 25.
.5 21.
.0 24.
.5 25.
.0 24.
.5 26.
8 14.5
8 16.3
8 27.8
8 27.3
8 26.5
5 26.0
3 26.0
8 26.0
5 26.0
0 27.8
3 27.8
7/8
10.8
16.3
1S.O
20.5
21.3
22.3
30.3
26.5
28.5
28.5
30.3
8/12 9/14
9.0 2.8
14.3 12.8
16.8 16.3
17.8 15.5
17.8 17.0
16.8 15.5
16.8 15.5
15.0 14.5
15.8 15.5
16.8 15.5
19.5 15.5
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 75. MOISTURE MEASUREMENTS (NUETRON PROBE) FROM SOUTH-ASPECT USBM SPENT SHALE ,
SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
SITE. 1976
14
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
12
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
10
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
ueptn
(en)
15
30
45
eo
75
90
105
120
130
150
165
IfiO
3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/3 3/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/8 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14
30.318.817.312.0 6.5 7.5 5.3 31.024.317.813.312.012.5 8.8 35.810.811.512.0 6.5 9.0 2.0
23.5 29.0 26.3 17.0 14.5 13.0 13.8 29.0 29.0 24.8 15.0 15.0 15.0 12.0 40.0 29.8 27.3 18.0 15.0 16.0 12.0
23.0 2?,. 5 26.3 20. b 17.0 15.8 18.8 27.3 29.0 24.8 19.3 17.0 15.0 15.5 40.0 32.8 28.8 23.0 20.0 17.8 18.0
24.8 27.3 23.0 24.8 18.0 16.5 18.8 24.8 27.3 24.8 22.3 18.0 16.0 16.3 38.3 29.8 28.0 24.3 20.0 18.5 17.0
26.0 24.8 26.0 24.8 20.0 17.5 16.3 26.0 28.5 26.3 24.8 20.0 18.5 17.0 37.0 29.8 28.0 24.8 23.0 18.5 17.0
27.3 24.3 25. 5 26.0 24.3 20.3 22.3 28.5 27.3 27.0 26.5 23.0 19.5 17.0 37.0 31.0 28.8 27.3 26.5 21.3 20.5
27.3 24.3 26.3 26.5 26.5 20.3 20.5 30.3 31.5 27.0 28.5 24.8 22.0 20.5 38.3 32.8 31.3 29.8 28.5 24.8 23.0
28.5 27.3 26.3 27.3 28.5 24.5 22.3 28.5 27.3 25.5 27.3 26.5 22.0 20.5 37.0 32.8 32.0 32.0 29.8 27.3 27.3
27.3 26.5 26.3 27.3 28.5 25.5 25.5 28.5 26.5 24.8 26.5 28.5 24.8 20.5 38.3 31.5 31.3 31.0 31,5 29.0 27.3
26.5 26.5 24.8 26.0 28.5 25.5 24.8 30.3 28.5 27.0 29.0 28.5 26.5 25.5 38.8 32.8 33.0 32.0 33.3 29.8 30.8
27.3 24.3 24.8 26.0 28.5 27.3 29.0 38.8 32.8 33.8 32.0 34.5 31.5 30.8
3/1
34.
40.
37.
35.
35.
32.
35.
34.
35.
35.
0
0
0
0
3
8
8
8
0
8
8
3/
15
32
32
29
29
28
29
29
31
31
-
31
.8
.8
.8
.8
.0
.5
.8
.0
.0
.0
-
5/8
14.5
27.8
27.0
24.8
24.8
24.8
26.3
26.3
27.8
29.5
6/
12
20
26
26
26
24
24
27
29
31
-
9
.5
.0
.5
.0
.5
.8
.8
.3
.8
.0
-
7/8
8.3
18.0
20.0
23.0
24.8
26.5
28.5
29.8
29.8
29.8
8/12
8.0
17. S
19.5
20.3
21.3
23.0
24.8
27.3
29.8
30.8
--
9/14
5.3
15.5
20.5
18.8
20.5
20.5
24.0
24.0
27.3
29.0
00
Depth
fern)
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
USBM Spent Shale
USBM Spent Shale
3/10
32.8*
40.0
38.3
38.3
38.3
34.0
34.0
37.0
38.3
3/31 5/8 6/9 7/B 8/12 9/14 3/10 3/31 5/3 6/9 7/8 8/12 9/14
15.8 17.0 10.8 10.8 11.5 5.3 38.3 20.0 17.8 10.8 10.3 12.3 6.0
31.0 24.0 19.3 17.5 14.3 13.8 40.0 29.8 22.5 18.0 15.0 14.5 13.8
31.0 24.8 21.3 18.8 16.0 16.3 38.8 31.0 24.8 22.3 18.0 10.5 15.5
29.8 26.3 17.5 20.5 16.8 16.3 38.8 32.8 27.0 24.8 20.0 20.5 17.0
31.0 27.8 27.3 22.3 17.8 16.3 35.8 31.0 26.3 26.5 23.0 21.5 17.0
29.8 26.3 26.0 24.3 19.5 16.3 37.0 31.5 27.0 28.5 24.8 23.5 19.5
28.5 25.5 26.5 26.0 21.3 17.0 34.0 29.8 27.8 27.3 26.5 23.5 19.5
31.0 27.0 29.0 27.3 23.0 20.5 38.3 28.5 27.0 27.3 28.5 25.5 19.5
31.0 29.5 29.0 29.0 26.5 24.8 38.3 31.0 27.0 31.0 31.5 30.5 24.0
38.3 31.0 26 3 31 5 33 3 31.5 25.5
3/
38
38
40
38
40
35
34
32
31
3?
35
10
.3
.8
.0
.8
.0
.8
.0
.0
.0
a
g
3/3
22.
31.
33.
32.
35.
32.
31.
28.
25.
?fi
?fi
1
3
5
3
n
3
8
0
5
8
<;
K
5/8
19.5
28.0
29.0
29.8
32.3
32.3
31.5
29.0
27.3
29.8
30 5
6/'
13
18
20
21
18
24
24
24
24
?R
?t
3
.8
.S
.5
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
.8
5
R
7/8
12.0
17.5
18.8
20.5
18.8
18.8
18.8
17.5
17,5
20.5
20 5
8/12
10.8
15.0
16.0
16.0
16.8
16.8
16.0
14.3
14.3
15.0
16 8
9/14
8.0
12.5
17.3
17.3
18.3
17.3
17.3
16.3
15.5
15.5
17 3
* Values are in percent moisture by volume as determined from a standard soil moisture curve.
No reading made;
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 76.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES
OF TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL
vo
Depth
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 77.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES
OF USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE , AND SOIL CONTROL
V
O
Depth
(en)
S
IS
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
5/74
_--
~
--
5/73
._
~~
__
_
30 on (12*) Soil Cover
13 11
9/74 5/74
0.4*
0.4
0.4
4.6
5.3
4.0
__
"*'" ~~
30 cm (12') Soil Cover
14 12
9/74 S/74
0.6*
0.4
0.4
0.8
3.9
4 1
4.5
«
» -
« ~
9/74
O.S
0.2
1.4
~
0.4
4.1
--
4.4
--
9/74
0.6
0.4
0.5
1.3
3.6
3.5
3.7
3.1
4.0
..
..
NORTH ASPECT
15 cm (6*) Soil Cover
9 7
5/74 9/74 S/74
0.4
0.4
0.9
..
1.9
1.8
..
--
SOUTH ASPECT
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
10 8
5/74 9/74 S/74
2.7
1.4
0.2
1.8
2.0
2.0
..
2.0
..
..
_-
SITE
9/74
1.1
0.7
0.1
0.1
-.
2.0
2.S
..
>»
9/74
2.3
1.2
O.S
0.8
1.2
1.1
--
2.0
..
..
. 1974
5/74
8.8
5.0
6.2
6.0
6.0
..
6.0
«
6.5
-.
..
--
5/74
4.3
5.4
5.9
5.9
5.7
5.7
S.I
..
..
..
5
6/74
1.0
3.1
4.2
9.6
10.0
10.0
10.0
::
6
6/74
1.7
2.7
S.O
10.0
12.0
«
12.0
12.0
USBM Spent
9/74
9.2
4.9
4.4
5.8
5.8
5.9
6.4
7.3
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
USBM Spent
9/74
18.0
4.7
7.2
7.1
8.0
7.5
7.3
6.7
7.7
9.8
8.3
Shale
5/74
6.0,
5.2
4.3
7.5
7.3
..
7.3
7.1
..
5.3
**""
Shale
5/74
6.6
5.0
5.9
6.6
6.6
5.5
«
6.9
..
3
6/74
1.6
3.0
5.0
9.6
14.2
12.5
13.0
::
4
6/74
1.5
3.0
6.1
11.5
15.0
15.0
12.0
--
9/74
11.0
5.6
7.2
5.6
5.4
6.1
7.4
7.6
8.1
8.1
7.8
9/74
16.0
2.2
5.6
6.2
6.0
5.9
7.4
6.0
6.3
6.2
7.1
Soil
1
9/74
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
~
«
--
Soil
2
9/74
0.7
1.0
0.8
0.6
--
~
...
Depth
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 78. SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON NORTH-ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
H" 90
ui
H- 105
120
135
150
155
180
195
210
TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE. SPRING AND FALL 1975
30 cm (12»)
I
4/75
*
2.5
0.6
3.8
6.7
8.8
12.3
12.5
14.2
13.0
12.0
11.7
12.2
12.3
11.8
K Q
Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
III
11/75
1.7
1.2
6.2
6.4
9.6
10.6
11.6
12.0
9.3
9.7
10.4
9.4
6.4
4/75
0.6
1.5
1.5
6.7
8.6
9.8
15.0
14.0
13.2
12.8
14.5
13.5
14.5
10.5
K 1
11/75
0.8
0.7
8.8
8.6
5.4
7.2
9.4
--
~
4/75
1.1
1.1
2.9
3.1
3.2
3.5
3.5
4.1
5.4
8.3
8.7
10.5
15.5
17.5
i? *
V
11/75
1.3
3.0
4.3
5.1
5.6
5.7
6.6
6.8
-.
~
VII
4/75
1.5
1.7
3.5
3.9
3.9
3.8
4.5
4.5
5.1
6.2
10.0
14.5
17.5
18.0
11/75
2.0
1.6
3.7
--
3.8
3.7
3.9
4.5
4.5
5.0
4/75
4.9
4.9
4.6
4.5
5.4
7.3
8.9
11.5
13.0
15.3
12.5
TOSCO Spent Shale
IX
6/75
3.8
4.2
3.8
3.7
3.7
4.0
4.3
3.8
~
11/75
5.0
5.3
4.2
4.3
4.5
4.3
4.4
4.4
4.7
5.1
4.8
5.2
5.2
4/75
4.5
4.8
6.6
7.2
6.5
7.5
8.5
10.5
13.0
15.3
15.0
--
XI
6/75
3.8
5.3
4.3
4.1
4.0
4.2
4.5
4.5
4.8
11/75
4.9
5.8
5.2
5.5
4.3
4.1
5.0
4.6
4.6
4.2
5.1
5.3
5.6
6.4
Soil
XIII
11/75
1.2
1.1
0.9
~
~
-_
~
* EC Values are in mmhos/cm & 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 79. SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON SOUTH-ASPECT
to
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO SPENT
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY
30 cm (12")
II
Do nth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
4/75
0.9*
0.7
1.9
4.7
6.0
13.0
13.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
12.5
13.2
10.7
11.6
5.2
11/75
0.5
0.6
1.5
6.5
7.6
8.8
9.9
10.3
9.9
7.2
Soil Cover
SHALE,
AND
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
SITE. SPRING AND 'FALL 1975
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
IV
4/75
0.6
0.9
2.9
3.9
5.3
8.4
14.3
14.3
16.2
15.9
15.8
15.0
13.5
7.1
4.7
11/75
1.1
0.9
7.4
6.4
8.2
9.0
9.0
11.1
11.4
--
5.8
VI
4/75
0.8
2.8
3.6
3.1
3.5
3.6
4.2
4.7
6.4
8.5
12.2
15.5
16.5
15.5
11/75
1.7
3.6
4.9
«
4.1
4.1
4.4
4.9
4.9
5.5
VIII
4/75
0.5
1.4
3.2
3.5
3.6
4.2
4.3
5.3
6.9
13.0
17.0
18.5
18.0
17.2
13.5
11/75
0.9
2.3
4.2
5.4
3.7
5.7
3.9
--
4.1
4.1
5.3
4.7
4/75
5.4
4.5
4.3
4.8
7.0
6.8
5.8
6.3
7.9
9.0
11.0
10.0
--
--
TOSCO Spent Shale
X
6/75
2.7
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.7
4.1
--
~
11/75
3.9
2.8
4.2
5.3
4.3
4.7
4.5
4.0
4.4
4.7
5.0
4.4
4. P
4.8
4/75
4.8
4.4
4.6
5.3
8.5
7.5
7.3
9.1
11.5
13.0
15.0
15.0
XII
6/75
3.3
4.1
3.9
4.1
4.1
4.3
4.?
~
11/75
6.0
5.9
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.0
4.6
4.7
5.1
4.9
5.0
5.3
5.2
5.9
Soil
XIV
11/75
1.5
1.4
0.9
--
--
--
~
~
* EC values are in mmhos/cm @ 25° C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 80.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES ON NORTH-ASPECT
ui
u>
Depth
(on)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
1ZO
135
150
165
180
195
Z10
USBM SPENT SHALE/ SOIL-COVERED USBM
SPENT SHALE , AND SOIL CONTROL
PLOTS-
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE. SPRING AND FALL 1975
30 cm (12")
13
4/75
0.6*
0.5
0.6
3.2
6.6
6.6
6.5
5.5
7.2
6.6
6.3
6.1
6.0
5.8
Soil Cover
11
11/75
0.8
0.8
0.7
4.8
7.4
9.2
6.8
7.0
6.2
7.0
«
.-
4/75
1.2
0.6
0.6
4.3
5.6
6.4
6.9
6.9
6.8
6.5
5.6
5.5
5.3
4.2
11/75
1.0
1.1
5.5
6.2
8.2
7.7
9.0
8.8
8.1
8.0
._
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
4/75
2.4
1.2
2.9
3.6
3.5
3.8
4.5
4.7
6.0
6.1
6.1
6.2
6.1
4.5
11/75
1.2
1.3
2.1
1.8
3.5
4.5
5.4
6.2
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.3
4.3
3.4
4/75
2.1
1;5
3.7
4.3
4.8
4.9
5.6
6.8
--
6.0
7.2
USBM Spent Shale
7
11/75
1.0
2.9
3.6
4.3
4.6
5.1
4.8
5.2
6.6
4.9
4.7
3.5
..
4/75
2.1
3.6
3.8
5.1
5.8
6.1
6.6
~
~
--
..
5
6/75
2.2
2.7
4.0
5.7
5.5
5.9
6.7
5.1
5.3
6.0
6.2
6.0
11/75
1.7
2.2
4.6
4.5
4.6
4.4
4.2
5.0
5.5
6.0
5.0
4.8
5.0
5.2
4/75
2.6
3.8
5.4
6-. 2
5.8
6.2
5.6
6.0
5.3
4.5
3
6/75
2.3
2.0
2.6
3.0
4.2
4.4
5;3
5.1
5.0
5.2
5.5
6.0
-_
11/75
1.9
1.7
2.5
4.9
4.9
4.9
5.0
5.0
4.4
5.8
5.2
4.5
4.5
Soil
1
11/75
1.5
1.3
0.8
--
~
* EC Values are in imihos/cm @ 25 C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
~ No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 81. SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:L SAMPLE FROM CORES ON SOUTH-ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND
PICEANCE BASIN
30 cm (12";
14
4/75
1.0*
1.4
1.4
6.8
6.1
7.3
7.0
6.8
8.1
6.8
7.6
7.3
6.6
6.2
6.5
11/75
0.4
0.5
0.7
2.5
6.6
6.8
6.8
5.9
5.8
5.1
5.1
6.7
5.6
5.8
5.3
) Soil Cover
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
STUDY SITE. SPRING AND FALL 1975
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
12
4/75
1.1
0.6
0.5
0.7
5.6
6.3
6.0
5.7
6.2
5.3
6.3
5.1
5.5
5.1
5.3
11/75
1.0
0.9
1.2
1.4
3.5
7.0
4.0
7.0
7.9
8.6
9.2
8.1
10
4/75
1.1
0.4
1.4
3.2
3.1
4.5
4.6
5.8
5.4
5.9
5.6
5.2
6.5
5.6
11/75
1.2
1.1
2.2
2.7
6.3
5.5
5.2
6.4
6.0
5.7
4.7
5.4
5.1
5.4
8
4/75
0.8
0.9
1.7
2.8
5.0
4.8
~
5.0
5.5
5.4
5.6
4.8
5.5
2.7
--
11/75
1.3
0.5
1.9
3.5
3.5
4.0
3.6
4.3
6.2
6.8
5.9
5.3
--
--
4/75
2.8
3.0
3.1
6.3
5.4
5.9
5.5
5.9
6.2
5.7
5.3
4.7
~
USBM Spent Shale
6
6/75
1.8
2.9
5.1
5.7
5.6
--
--
..
~
~
11/75
2.8
2.0
._
~
5.2
4.3
4.5
3.1
4/75
2.6
3.8
5.4
6.2
5.8
5.6
6.0
5.1
4.5
' --
~
4
6/75
1.7
2.5
' 4.9
5.7
5.4
5.4
5.0
5.3
5.8
6.0
6.2
6.5
6.5
~
11/75
1.5
2.2
4.4
4.3
4.6
5.0
5,0
5.1
5.4
5.1
3.8
~
--
Soil
2
11/75
1.5
1.7
0.7
--
--
T-
~
--
~
* EC Values are in mmhos/cm @ 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 82.
SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE. 1975-1976
Plot
No.
NORTH ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
Serial
No.
197S
4/23 6/11
8/28
1976
6/9
B/12
9/14
I
III
V
VII
IX
XI
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12*) Soil Cover
15 cm («) Soil Cover
15 cm (6*) Soil Cover
TOSCO Spent Shale
TOSCO Spent Shale
18
SO
18
50
18
50
18
SO
18
50
90
120
ISO
18
50
90
120
150
3511
3337
3334
3353
3336
3576
3361
3327
3348
3359
3574
3585
3598
3363
3342
3267
3S83
3599
1.99*
20. S
1.93
39.0
4.8
5.53
5.07
5.88
10.80
18.0
29.0
30.0
29.0
9.0
16.0
32. S
28.0
24.0
2.04
15.00
1.0
>40.0
<1.50
3.80
1.90
2.90
2.65
2.25
3.40
4.50
14.0
<1.5
3.1
4.10
6.8
19.0
9.2
>4o!o
3.3
3.35
1.7
3.1 '
3.7
3.4
35
4.0
5.1
<1.S
3.9
4.0
S.3
6.6
*
is!o
9J
4.1
4.0
410
3.7
10.0
6.1
4.8
4.6
4.8
4.1
4.9
5.3
5.3
0
>4o!o
>4o!o
' 9.2
4.1
2.15
5.9
31.0
20.0
5.6
5.15
5.35
2.3
11.4
6.4
6.7
0
--
_
..
-
~
26.0
18.0
9.0
6.5
7.3
2.7
16.0
16.0
8.0
10.5
XIII
Soil Control
No salinity tensor
SOUTH ASPECT
Dlnfr
No.
II
IV
VI
VIII
X
XII
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12*) Soil Cover
IS cm (6") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
TOSCO Spent Shale
TOSCO Spent Shale
fianf h
(on)
18
SO
18
50
18
50
18
SO
18
50
90
120
150
18
50
90
120
ISO
NO.
3351
3362
3330
3567
3571
3561
3570
3578
3344
3568
3503
3580
3597
3573
3519
3566
3588
3595
4/23
1.0*
9.8
3.10
6.62
4.60
7.30
3.64
4.3
11.25
14.25
30.0
35.0
27.0
12.0
24.0
25.0
29.0
34.0
1975
6/11
2.20
9.50
3.3
7.0
<1.S
3.50
<1.5
2.2
3.0
3.50
3.9
6.50
2.06
3.5
6.1
>40.0
16.0
8/28
2.2
6.7
3.3
2.2
4.8
3.2
2.5
1.8
3.5
3.2
3.6
5.0
4.8
t'.a
4.6
4.5
C.6
6/9
<] 5
10.0
3.7
6.3
8.0
3.8
5.5
2.3
5.1
3.4
4.4
5.7
4.2
2.6
6.0
4.6
< 1.5
""*
1976
8/12
<1.5
15.0
<1.5
9.5
34.0
3.85
11.8
"1.5
9.7
2.4
2.25
7.5
2.9
1.85
7.5
5.2
11.5
0
9/14
-
-
-
""
6.5
4.5
6.0
.0
.5
.0
.0
.0
11.0
16.0
XIV
Soil Control
* Values are EC fn Mhos/aa t 25°C.
-- No reading.
No salinity sensor
155
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 83. SALINITY SENSOR MEASUREMENTS FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-
COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE. 1975-1976
NORTH ASPECT
1975
1976
riot
NO.
13
11
9
7
5
3
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
15 cm (6") Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shale
USBM Spent Shale
uepin
(cm)
18
50
18
50
IB
50
18
50
18
50
90
120
150
18
SO
90
120
150
No.
3346
3341
3355
3517
2991
3345
3326
3562
3564
3575
3593
3581
3569
3338
3563
3592
3589
4/23
10.5
1.0
8.9
3. 25
2.50
4.95
2.30
3.25
s.os
8.80
7.90
7.90
4.35
11.25
9.25
10.30
10.25
6/11
35.0
--
1.5
12.0
1.5
2.4
~
1.5
1.7
2.7
7.8
4.2
2.0
2.8
2.6
6.6
3.6
8/28
11.0
l.S
7.9
l.S
1.5
1.7
2.8
1.5
l.S
2.4
4.5
3.2
2.3
2.5
1.5
4.3
1.5
6/9
*
11.8
--
1.5
11.8
6.8
l.S
4.1
3.8
2.4
l.S
2.4
4.5
3.2
2.8
2.6
1.5
3.9
3.2
8/12
14.5
1.5
36.0
l.S
1.5
3.3
3.7
1.5
2.05
3.0
4.55
5.1
l.S
3.7
1.5
4.O.,
6.0
9/14
--
.»
--
..
1.5
2.0
3.S
S.O
5.2
1.5
4.0
1.5
4.1
6.5
Son Control
No salinity sensor
SOUTH ASPECT
1975
1976
noi
No.
14
12
10
8
6
4
30 cm {12") Soil Cover
30 cm (12") Soil Cover
IS cm (6°) Soil Cover
IS cm (6") Soil Cover
USBM Spent Shile
USBM Spent Shale
uepui
(cm)
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
18
50
90
120
150
18
50
90
120
ISO
No.
3329
3354
3273
3269
3325
3340
3506
3358
3579
3560
3572
3582
3596
3505
3514
3577
3590
3584
4/23
1.9*
7.05
1.0
10.85
2.98
4.23
1.74
1.0
4.10
7.33
9.0
8.65
11.5
2.75
6.0
3.35
10.40
12.50
6/11
1.5
13.0
1.5
9.8
1.5
2.3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.7
2.65
2.9
6.0
1.5
1.6
4.0
7.0
2.3
8/28
1.5
8.2
1.5
3.8
1.5
2.3
1.5
2.4
1.5
1.7
2.3
2.7
1.5
1.5
1.6
2.3
4.6
2.0
6/9
1.5*
9.2
1.5
6.5
2.3
2.1
1.5
3.9
1.5
l.S
2.1
2.6
3.5
l.S
1.5
l.S
4.C
2.8
,8/12
1.5
4.95
l.S
2.9
1.5
1.9
1.5
2.35
1.5
l.S
l.S
0
0
1.5
1.5
1.5
10.4
1.62
9/14
-
--
--
..
--
1.5
l.S
2.0
1.5
1.5
l.S
2.0
7.1
9.6
3.7
2 Soil Control
* Values are EC In oahos/ca » 25°C.
- No reading.
No salinity tensor
156
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 84.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES OF TOSCO SPENT
in
SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND
SOIL CONTROL
PLOTS.
PICEANCE BASIN
STUDY SITE. AUGUST 1976
NORTH ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
I
3.0 *
3.5
3.8
11.3
11.1
11.1
9.4
11.4
11.5
11.5
9.7
9.9
9.7
III
0.9
0.7
2.4
10.4
10.4
10.1
10.2
10.2
7.4
10.1
10.3
10.3
10.0
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
0.6
0.6
3.2
3.5
3.5
3.7
4.5
4.1
4.0
4.3
4.4
4.4
9.1
4.1
7.6
VII
1.1
3.8
3.1
3.3
3.3
3.2
3.5
3.3
3.4
3.8
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.5
SOUTH ASPECT
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX
3.0
5.8.
4.6
4.2
4.1
4.2'
3.6
4.5
4.0
4.4
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.2
10.0!
XI
4.2
5.4
4.4
4.5
5.4
5.4
4.9
5.3
5.6
5.7
5.t
6.5
5.7
7.0
7.3
Soil
XIII
1.8
2.4
2.2
Z.4
~
2.2
1.5
1.6
1.9'
1.0
1.4
1.4
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II
1.0.
0.8
6.6
7.2
9.3
8.4
10.1
10.1
8.9
9.2
9.6
10.1
9.7
6.9
IV
0.6
1.2
2.6
7.0.
9.4
10.3
10.4
«
10.4
_.
10.2
6.2
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
2.4
3.2
4.0
4.0.
3.8
4.1
4.3
4.2
4.4
4.8
4.3
5.0
5.0'
4.9
5.fr
VIII
0.6
1.9
2.9
2.9
3.0
3.0.
3.3
3.4
3.4
3.8
3.8
3.9
4.5
4.1
4.1
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
2.8
4.0
3.9
3.8
3.6
3.6
3.6
4.1
3.8
4.6
4.3
5.6
4,9
5.7
6.0
XII
2.1
3.7
5.7
4.0
3.6
3.0
4.0'
3.9
4.8
5.7
5.9
6.0
7.0
7.2
Soil
XIV
1.6
3.7
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.9
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.4
1.0
0.8
* EC Values are in mhos/cm @ 25 C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
-- No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 85.
SALINITY MEASUREMENTS (EC) DETERMINED ON A 1:1 SAMPLE FROM CORES OF USBM SPENT
ui
CO
SHALE,
SOIL-COVERED USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS.
PICEANCE BASIN
STUDY SITE. AUGUST 1976
NORTH ASPECT
Depth
(cm)
S
15
30
45
60
75
90
105
120
135
150
165
180
195
210
30 era (12")
Soil Cover
13
5.0 *
5.0
1.5
1.3
7.6
8.1
9.3
6.4
5.4
6.8
5.8
6.8
11
1.2
0.8
1.0
5.4
5.6
8.0
5.9
9.1
9.1
7.4
7.0
7.5
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
1.3
1.0
2.1
3.3
3.5
3.9
3.9
3.8
4.0
4.0
3.8
4.3
4.2
4.1
4.1
7
1.1.
0.9
1.9
1.9
3.3
3.1
3.5
3.E
3.5
3.8
3.5
3.6
SOUTH ASPECT
USBM
Spent Shale
5
0.9
2.5
3.0
3.8
4.3
4.0
4.3
4.6
4.3
5.2
5.1
4.7
4.3
5.4
3
1.1
2.9'
3.1'
3.9
3.8
3.0'
4.0
4.1
4.2
3.9<
~
--
Soil
1
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.5
o.e
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
14
0.8
2.2
1.1
4.9
7.4
6.7
8.2
5.4
8.3
5.9
6.5
6.5'
~
12
2.2
1.8
6.1
3.1
3.0
8.3-
9.2
7.2
6.0
6.3
7.0
5.2
6.0'
7.3.
6.8:
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10
1.1
0.8
1.8
1.8
3.2
3.5
3.2
2.7
3.4
3.3
3.9
3.6
3.7
3.8.
-.
8
1.2
0.9
1.6
3.2
3.8
3.3
3.7
4.0
3.7
2.9
3.5
--
USBM
Spent Shale
6
1.5
1.7:
3.8
4.0
3.8,
3.6
3.7
4.01
3.6
--
3.4
--
4
1.2
3.6
3.1
3.7
3.4
3.5
3.7
3.9
4.2
3.7
3.6
--
Soil
2.
1.1
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.6
1.1
0.5
0.7
-
0.7
0.9
* EC Values are in mmhos/cnt & 25°C measured on a 1:1 spent shale to water by weight sample.
No sample collected.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 86. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS, FOLLOWING A 0.50
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/ plot
(grams)
PH
EC umhos/cm
9 256C
J^ Na (ppm)
VO
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
Ho sample
PICEANCE BASIN
NORTH
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6")
Soil Cover Soil Cover
I III V VII
1.5
30
7.4
845
52.4
68.75
17.13
9.17
0
195
0.8
175
40
1.5
collected this date.
STUDY SITE. AUGUST 14, 1974
ASPECT
TOSCO 30 cm (12")
Spent Shale Soil Soil Cover
IX XII XIII II IV
10.5
68
7.1
2863
131.10
350.0
174.0
12.1
0
88
0.3
1584
15
1.4
INCH (12.7 mm) STORM
SOUTH ASPECT
15 cm (6") TOSCO
Soil Cover Spent Shale
VI VIII X XII
24 32
587.5 234
7.5 7.5
2260 2147
66.70 66.7
302.50 301.3
106.50 100
9.75 IT
00
107 95
0.5 0.3
1248 1224
10 10
0.8 0.9
Soil
XIV
1.5
22
7.6
730
22
67
17
3
0
238
1
77
12
0.6
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 87. SURFACE RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM
SPENT SHALE, AND
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS, FOLLOWING A
0.50 INCH (12.
7 mm) STORM
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE. AUGUST 14, 1974
NORTH ASPECT
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC uphos/cm
@ 25°C
Na (ppra)
Ca (ppra)
Hg (pp'n)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppra)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
No sample
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6")
Soil Cover Soil Cover
73 11 97
1.7
6.02
7.9
1213
73.60
57.50
25.1
27.50
0
364
0.3
233
40
2.0
collected this date.
USBM 30 cm (12")
Spent Shale Soil Soil Cover
53 7 14 12
1.1
1.7
8.0
1210
56.4
89
32.00
7.4
o
251
0.8
276
35
1.3
SOUTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10 8
2.1
13.7
7.6
924
59
72.50
17.4
5.8
0
207
0.3
238
25
1.6
USBM
Spent Shale Soil
64 2
4.2 1.5
27.7 16.80
7.2 7.8
1874 1945
131.1 142.60
167.5 161.3
86.5 61.0
23.6 21.3
00
157 239
5.3 3.4
828 660
15 . 40
2.1 2.4
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 88. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED TOSCO
SPENT
MARCH
SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
13, 1975
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
PH
EC wshos/csi
9 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03((ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
I
200+
82.8
7.3
130
4.6
16.0
3.7
3.9
0
79.3
1.2
4.8
3.6
.27
III
200+
95.6
7.6
140
4.6
16.0
3.7
3.9
0
67.1
1.9
9.6
3.6
.27
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
200+
143.9
7.6
160
4.6
20.0
3.7
3.9
0
85.4
0.6
4.8
3.6
.25
VII
200+
135.2
7.4
320
9.2
30.1
12.2
7.8
0
91.5
1.9
72.1
10.6
.36
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX
200+
209.3
7.4
750
12.5
95.3
23.2
20.1
0
90.5
2.0
310.6
6.7
.27
XI
200+
141.7
7.3
700
11.5
96.2
23.1
19.6
0
91.5
1.9
302.6
7.1
.27
SOUTH ASPECT
Soil
XIII
200+
69.8
7.3
160
4.6
14.0
3.7
7.8
0
73.2
3.7
9.6
3.6
.29
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II
250+
146.1
7.5
80
2.3
8.0
1.2
2.0
0
36.6
0.6
1.4
3.6
.20
IV
250+
146.1
7.9
no
2.3
14.0
1.2
2.0
0
30.5
0.6
9.6
3.6
.16
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
250+
135.2
7.9
160
6.9
18.0
3.7
3.9
0
61.0
0.6
9.6
3.6
.38
VIII
250+
135.2
7.7
160
6.9
18.0
3.7
3.9
0
85.4
1.2
9.6
3.6
.38
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
250+
115.5
7.7
410
2.3
72.0
4.9
3.9
0
48.8
0.6
192.1
3.6
.07
XII
250+
137.3
7.8
340
2.3
54.1 =
3.7
3.9
0
73.2
0.6
124.9
3.6
.08
Soil
XIV
250+
87.2
7.8
80
2.3
10.0
1.2
3.9
0
36.6
0.6
1.4
3.6
.18
* Total runoff was not accurately measured because of leaks in the collection basins. Leaks were sealed in July 1975. The total seaiment was collected
from each plot and reported in total gram per plot (plots are 3.5 x 6.7 m).
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 89. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY DATA FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED USBM
SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
to
MARCH 13, 1975
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC uphos/cm
9 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mi; (ppm)
K (ppm)
CO 3 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
NOj (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
13
200+
82.8
7.3
800
6.9
22.0
9.7
7.8
0
79.3
322.4
9.6
3.5
.31
11
200+
69.8
7.3
690
9.2
40.1
10.9
7.8
0
85.4
254.2
9.6
14.2
.33
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
9
200+
93.7
7,4
1240
13,8
48.1
18.2
7.8
0
67.1
508.4
38.4
3.5
.43
7
200+
74.1
7.3
800
18.4
40.1
23.1
11.7
0
109.8
272.8
48.0
7,1
.57
SOUTH ASPECT
USBM
Spent Shale
.......... . - .-...!..,., ....-.,.-.
5
200+
78.5
7.3
1200
41.4
62.1
51,1
39.1
0
170.8
155.0
384.2
14.2
1.15
3
200+
93.7
7.3
1180
16.1
38.1
24.3
27.4
0
122.0
372.0
124.9
7.1
.50
Soil
1
200+
76.3
7.5
80
2.4
8.0
2.3
3.9
0
43.7
1.2
4.8
10.6
.19
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
14
250+
91.6
7.5
80
2.3
10.0
2.4
3.9
0
42.7
0.6
0.5
3.6
.17
12
250+
74.1
7.3
80
2.3
8.0
2.4
3.9
0
48.8
0.6
4.8
3.6
.18
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10
250+
85.0
7.8
100
4.6
8.0
6.1
3.9
0
73.2
0.6
4.8
3.6
.30
8
250+
82.8
7.8
120
6.9
10.0
3.7
3.9
0
61.0
0.6
9.6
3.6
.47
USBM
Spent Shale
- ' - .
6
250+
87.2
7.4
190
4.6
18.0
7,3
7.8
0
42.7
1.2
76.9
3.6
.23
4
250+
71'.9
7.3
170
4.6
14,0
6.1
7.8
0
48,8
1.2
52.8
3.6
.26
Soil
2
250+
91.6
7.5
80
2.3
8.0
2.4
3.9
0
42.7
1.2
4.8
10.6
.18
* Total runoff was not accurately measured because of leaks in the collection basins. Leaks were sealed in July 1975. The total sediment was collected
from each plot and reported in total gram per plot (plots are 3.5 x 6.7 m).
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 90. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
MARCH 10, 1976
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6") TOSCO
Soil Cover Soil Cover Spent Shale Soil
I III V VII IX XI XIII
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC umhos/cm -
0 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Kg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppra)
H03 (ppm)
S04((ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
II
432.7
18.0
7.1
300
11.5
34.1
13.4
11.7
0
183.0
1.2
19.2
<3.5
0.42
IV
485.4
16.8
7.1
400
9.2
42.1
14.6
11.7
0
183.0
1.9
19.2
<3.5
0.31
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
VI
377.5
12.0
7.2
400
20.7
38.1
17.0
3.9
0
170.8
0.6
52.8
<3.5
0.70
VIII
654.4
24.0
7.3
300
16.1
36.1
14.6
3.9
0
152.5
1.2
48.0
<3.5
0.57
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
507.8
30.0
6.9
1500
20.7
246.5
60.8
11.7
0
97.6
1.2
773.3
<3.5
0.31
XII
354.8
13.2
6.9
1500
32.2
236.5
64.4
15.6
0
97.6
0.6
816.5
<3.5
0.48
Soil
XIV
205.2
10.8
7.0
200
9.2
24.0
7.3
7.8
0
109.8
0.6
14.4
<3.5
0.43
No sample collected this date.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 91. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
USBM SPENT SHALE, AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
MARCH 10, 1976
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12") 15 cm (6") USBM
Soil Cover Soil Cover Spent Shale Soil
13 11 97 53 1
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC pmhos/cm
@ 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Kg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
C1 (ppm)
SAB
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
14
171.8
14.4
7.1
300
20.7
24.0
15.8
3.9
0
152.5
1.2
28.8
<3.5
0.49
12
38.9
3.9
7.1
500
23.0
24.0
26.8
15.6
0
183.0
0.6
96.1
<3.5
0.57
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10
216.5
15.6
7.3
600
29.9
36.1
38.9
15.6
0
183.0
1.9
163.3
<3.5
0.95
8
287.7
7-Z
7.2
400
25.3
24.0
18.2
7.8
0
170.8
1.9
28.8
<3.5
0.95
USBM
Spent Shale
6 4
383.9
14.4
7.1
300
23.0
24.0
12.2
3.9
0
152.5
1.2
28.6
<3.5
0.8?
107.5
1.1
7,0
300
13.8
26.1
10.9
7.8
00
134.2
1.2
24.0
<3.5
0.77
Soil
2
318.7
7.2
7.1
300
11.5
30.1
7.3
3.9
0
128.1
0.6
14.4
<3.5
0.80
No sample collected this date.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 92. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
TOSCO SPENT SHALE ,
MARCH 17, 1976
AND SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE
NORTH ASPECT
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
.(grams)
pH
EC umhos/cm
@ 25°C
Ma (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppra)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
I
285.8
2.4
6.8
200
4.6
12.0
7.3
19.6
0
79.3
1.9
14.4
<3.5
0.26
III
40.5
0.81
7.1
300
13.8
26.1
10.9
7.8
0
109.8
1.9
33.6
<3.5
0.57
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V
223.3
1.2
7.0
200
6.9
16.0
9.7
3.9
0
79.3
1.2
19.2
<3.5
0.33
VII
200.6
1.2
7.1
300
9.2
24.0
12.2
3.9
0
103.7
1.2
33.6
<3.5
0.38
TOSCO
Spent
IX
234.7
1.2
6,7
700
9.2
100.2
21.9
7.8
0
54.9
1.2
283.4
<3.5
0.22
Shale
XI
388.0
1.2
6.8
600
6.9
86.2
18.2
7.8
0
54.9
1.2
240.0
<3.5
0.18
Soil
XIII
21.9
0.23
7.4
300
6.9
30.1
9.7
11.7
0
164.7
1.9
9.6
<3.5
0.28
BASIN
STUDY
SITE.
SOUTH ASPECT
30 cm
(12")
Soil Cover
II
21.9
4.6
7.3
200
4.6
26.1
4.9
<3.9
0
97.6
1.2
4.8
<3.5
0.22
IV
39.0
3.5
7.3
200
6.9
24.0
4.9
3.9
0
97.6
1.2
14.4
<3.5
0.33
15 cm
(6»)
Soil Cover
VI
92.7
5.6
7.3
200
9.2
20.0
7.3
7.8
0
97.6
<0.6
19.2
<3.5
0.44
VIII
72.6
7.3
7.4
200
9.2
24.0
7.3
3.9
0
103.7
<0.6
14.4
<3.5
0.42
TOSCO
Spent
X
18.1
0.72
7.0
900
9.2
140.3
25.5
3.9
0
73.2
<0.6
398.6
<3.5
0.19
Shale
XII
7.2
0.07
6.9
900
6.9
162.3
20.7
3.9
0
54.9
1.2
456.3
<3.5
0.14
Soil
XIV
0.7
0.02
7.1
200
4.6
22.0
6.9
3.9
0
103.7
1.2
4.8
<3.5
0.22
-------
APPENDIX TABIiE 93. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FROM USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
cn
USBM SPENT SHALE
MARCH 17,
1976
, AND
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
NORTH ASPECT
Runoff/plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC umhos/cm
6 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Hg (ppra)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
C1 (ppm)
SAR
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
13 11
290.3
2.4
7.1
300
11.5
24.0
12.2
11.7
0
134.2
1.2
19.2
<3.5
0.48
15 cm
(6")
Soil Cover '
9
528.8
4.8
7.0
200
6.9
18.0
10.9
7.8
0
103.7
1.9
14.4
<3.5
0.32
7
533.4
12.0
7.2
300
13.8
26.1
14.6
7.8
0
146.4
1.9
28.8
<3.5
0.53
USBM
Spent
5
427.8
3.6
7.2
500
16.1
24.0
34.0
15.6
0
146.4
1.9
110.5
<3.5
0.49
Shale
3
533.4
48.0
7.5
500
13.8
36.1
24.3
15.6
0
164.7
1.2
96.0
<3.5
0.44
Soil
1
415:3
24.0
7.3
200
4.6
26.1
7.3
3.9
0
109.8
1.2
4.8
<3.5
0.21
30 cm
(12")
Soil Cover
14
7.5
0.15
7.1
200
11.5
24.0
6.1
3.9
0
97.6
1.2
24.0
<3.5
0.38
12
8.0
0.16
7.0
200
11.5
18.0
6.1
3.9
0
91.5
1.2
14.4
<3.5
0.60
SOUTH ASPECT
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
10 8
3.5
0.04
7.0
200
11.5
14.0
8.5
3.9
0
85.4
1.2
14.4
<3.5
0.60
USBK
Spent Shale
6 4
<1.0 --
0.07 --
7.1
700
34.5
42.1
41.3
19.6
0
195.2
5.0
201.7
<3.5
0.90 --
Soil
2
__
._
--
--
No sample collected this date.
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 94. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR TOSCO SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
TOSCO SPENT SHALE, AND
MARCH 31, 1976
NORTH ASPECT
30 era (12")'
Soil Cover
I III
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
pH
EC umhos/cm
9 25°C
Na (ppm)
Ca (ppm)
Mg (ppm)
K (ppm)
COj (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl {ppm)
SAR
393.7
7.0
100
2.3
18.0
4.9
3.9
0
8B.4
0.6
4.8
<3.S
0.13
95.8
6.7
70
<2.3
8.0
2.4
3.9
0
30.5
0.6
4.8
<3.5
0.18
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover
V VII
376.6
6.7
90
2.3
8.0
3.6
3.9
0
48.8
0.6
4.8
«3.S
0.17
365.3
6.8
100
2.3
16.0
4.9
3.9
0
61.0
0.6
9.6
<3.5
0.13
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS .
PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
SOUTH ASPECT
TOSCO
Spent Shale
IX XI
336.9
6.8
400
2.3
76.2
8.5
3.9
0
48.8
0.6
172.9
<3.5
0.07
637.8
6.7
400
2.3
54.1
8.5
7.8
0
36.6
0.6
139.3
<3.5
0.08
Soil
XIII
83.3
6.9
100
2.3
10.0
4.9
3.9
0
48.8
0.6
9.6
<3.5
0.15
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
fe^AV^IWBV^W
II
2.3
7.3
200
2.3
30.1
4.9
3.9
0
103.7
0.6
4.8
<3.5
0.23
IV
1.7
7.2
200
4.6
32.1
4.9
3.9
0
115.9
0.6
14.4
«3.5
0.20
15 cm (6")
Soil Cover .
VI
17.4
7.4
200
6.9
32.1
8.5
3.9
0
122.0
0.6
19.2
<3.5
0.28
VIII
1.7
6.1
200
4.6
22.0
4.9
<3.9
0
73.2
<0.6
9.6
<3.5
0,23
TOSCO
Spent Shale
X
1.1
7.0
900
20.7
124.2
41.3
3.9
0
85.4
0.6
437.1
<3.5
0.41
XII
1.0
6.9
800
6.9
148.3
15.8
3.9
0
115.9
1.2
321.8
<3.5
0.14
Soil
XIV
1.0
6.7
200
6.9
22.0
6.1
3.9
0
97.6
1.9
14.4
<3.5
0.34
-------
APPENDIX TABLE 95. SNOWMELT RUNOFF AND WATER QUALITY SAMPLES FOR USBM SPENT SHALE, SOIL-COVERED
USBM SPENT SHALE, AND
MARCH 31, 1976
NORTH ASPECT
Runoff /plot
(liters)
Sediment/plot
(grams)
PH
EC urahos/cm
9 25°C
0? Na (ppm)
00
Ca (ppm)
Kg (ppra)
K (ppm)
C03 (ppm)
HC03 (ppm)
N03 (ppm)
S04 (ppm)
Cl (ppm)
SAR
30 cm
Soil
13
121.1
7.1
200
2.3
20.0
4.9
7.8
0
S5.4
1.2
<4.8
<3.5
0.12
(12»)
Cover
11
348.3
6.9
100
2.3
10.0
7.3
7.8
C
73.2
1.2
<4.8
<3.5
0.14
15 cm (6")
Soil
9
529.9
7.0
200
6.9
14.0
7.3
7.8
0
85.4
0.6
4.8
<3.5
Cover
7
530.0
6.8
100
2.3
14.0
6.1
3.9
0
67.1
1.2
4.8
<3.5
0.38 0.13
SOIL CONTROL PLOTS. PICEANCE BASIN STUDY SITE.
SOUTH ASPECT
USBM
Spent
5
433.4
7.0
200
2.3
14.0
9.7
7.8
0
67.1
<0.6
28.8
<3.5
0.12
Shale
3
530.0
7.5
200
2.3
24.0
8.5
7.8
0
97.6
<0.6
9.6
<3.5
0.10
Soil
1
410.7
7.1
200
4.6
20.0
6.1
3.9
0
85.4
0.6
4.8
<3.5
0.23
30 cm (12")
Soil Cover
14 12
7.5
7.0
200
11.5
22.0
7.3
3.9
0
97.6
0.6
19.2
<3.5
0.54 «
15 cm
(6")
Soil Cover
10
3.4
6.9
200
6.9
18.0
7.3
3.9
0
85.4
0.6
9.6
<3.5
0.35
8
<1.0
6.9
200
6.9
16.0
8.5
3.9
0
85.4
0.6
9.6
<3.5
0.35
USBM
Spent
6
<1.0
6.1
200
6.9
18.0
10.9
3.9
0
6.71
1.9
38.4
<3.5
0.32
Shale
4
<1.0
7.1
300
6.9
24.0
10.9
7.8
0
103.7
<0.6
43.2
<3.5
0.29
Soil
2
<1.0
7.2
300
9.2
24.0
9.7
7.8
0
143.2
0.6
9.6
<3.5
0.4
No sample collected this date.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. 2.
EPA-600/7-78-021
t
y.
TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Vegetative Stabilization of Spent Oil Shales
Vegetation Moisture Salinity & Runoff ' 1973-1976
AUTHOR(S)
H. P. Harbert, III
W. A. Berg
PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Department of Agronomy
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory -cin,OI
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
5. REPORT DATE
February 1978 issuing date
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
EHE 623
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
R-803059
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
r Final C4/74 - 8/76)
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE '
EPA/600/12
^^^^^^^^^~i^^^*~~^~~***~~~***mmmmmmmmmmmi^*i^^m^mm^affmi*mf^^^^^^*f^f^*^^
16. ABSTRACT
Disposal of massive amounts of spent shale will be required if an oil shale
industry using surface retorting is developed. Field studies were initiated
in 1973 on two types of spent oil shale coarse-textured (USBM) , and fine-
textured (TOSCO). The objectives of these studies were to investigate surface
stability of and salt movement in spent shales and spent shales covered with
soil after vegetation has been established by intensive treatment and then
left under natural precipitation conditions. The plots were established at
low-elevation (1,700 m) and high-elevation (2,220 m) study sites in north-
western Colorado.
A good cover o'f native species was established on all plots by leaching, N and P
fertilization, seeding, mulching, and irrigation. High levels of Mo were found
in plants grown in the spent shales compared to plants grown in soil. Re-
salinization occurred following leaching of the TOSCO spent shale. The greatest
runoff was from the TOSCO spent shale. Runoff was moderately to highly saline.
17
a.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
Oil Shale
Waste Disposal
Pollution
Agronomy
Soil Chemistry
13
DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COS ATI Field/Group
Colorado
Solid Waste
Land Disposal 13B
TOSCO II Spent Shale
USBM Spent Shale
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report) 21. NO. OF PAGES
UNCLASSIFIED 183
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE
UNCLASSIFIED
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
169
* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1978 757-140/6679
------- |