SEPA
           United States
           Environmental Protection
           Agency


           Research and Development
           Environmental Monitoring
           anrt Supp n Laboratory
           P.O Box 15027
           Las Vegas NV 89114
EPA-600/7-79-023
January, 1979
Ground water Quality
Monitoring of Western Oil
  il Shale Development:
           Identification and Priority
           Ranking of Potential
           Pollution Sources

           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 categories
were established/to  facilitate further development and application of  environmental
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 systems. The goal of the Pro-
gram is to assure the rapid development of domestic energy supplies in an environ-
mentally-compatible manner by providing the necessary  environmental data and
control technology, tnvestigations include analyses of the transport of energy-related
pollutants and their health andecological effects; assessments of, and development of,
control technologies for energy systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range
of energy-related environmental issues.
This document is available to the public'through the National Technical Information
Service Springfield, Virginia 22181

-------
                                                            EPA-600/7-79-023
                                                              January 1979
GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING OF WESTERN OIL SHALE DEVELOPMENT:
                       Identification and Priority Ranking
                        of Potential Pollution Sources
                                Edited by

                             G.C. Slawson, Jr.


                      General Electric Company—TEMPO
                         Center for Advanced Studies
                       Santa Barbara, California 93102
                          Contract No. 68-03-2449
                              Project Officer
                             Leslie G. McMillion
              Monitoring Systems Research and Development Division
                 Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
                          Las Vegas, Nevada  89114
         ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND SUPPORT LABORATORY
                 OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
                U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                        LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89114

-------
                                 DISCLAIMER
     This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory-Las Vegas, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for
publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial  products constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
                                    ii

-------
                                  FOREWORD


     Protection of the environment requires effective regulatory actions which
are based on sound technical and scientific information.  This information
must include the quantitative description and linking of pollutant sources,
transport mechanisms, interactions, and resulting effects on man and his envi-
ronment.  Because of the-complexities involved, assessment of specific pollu-
tants in the environment requires a total systems approach which transcends
the media of air, water, and land.  The Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory-Las  Vegas  contributes  to  the  formation and enhancement of  a  sound
monitoring data base for exposure assessment through programs designed to:

     •  Develop and optimize systems and strategies for monitoring
        pollutants and their impact on the environment

     •  Demonstrate new monitoring systems and technologies by
        applying them to fulfill special monitoring needs of the
        Agency's operating programs.

     This report presents the initial phases of a study to design and implement
groundwater quality monitoring programs for Western United States oil shale
operations.  The development of a preliminary priority ranking of potential
pollution sources and the pollutants associated with these sources is present-
ed.

     The results of this report are the initial segment of the design and
field implementation effort.  The priority ranking will be combined in  sub-
sequent study phases with evaluations of deficiencies in existing or  proposed
monitoring efforts and alternative monitoring technologies to design  a  cost-
effective groundwater quality monitoring program.  This study considered the
type of oil shale operation proposed for Federal Prototype Oil Shale  Leases
U-a and U-b in  Eastern Utah.  Proposed development plans for these tracts,
which include room-and-pillar mining and surface retorting and waste  disposal,
form the case study evaluations included in this report.

     The research program,  of which this report is part, is intended  to pro-
vide technical  information  and a planning format for the design of ground-
water quality monitoring programs for this type of oil shale development.
The study results may be used by  industrial developers and their consultants
as well as  by the various local, State, and Federal agencies with responsi-
bilities in environmental monitoring and planning.
                                     m

-------
     Further information on this study and the subject of groundwater quality
monitoring in general can be obtained by contacting the Monitoring Systems
Design and Analysis  Staff, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, Nevada.
x^xX
                                             u   •       /
                                         George B.  Morgan
                                             Director
                            Environmental Monitoring  and Support Laboratory
                                            Las Vegas
                                  iv

-------
                                   PREFACE


     General Electric-TEMPO, Center for Advanced Studies, is conducting a 5-
year program dealing with the design and implementation of groundwater quality
monitoring programs for Western oil shale development.   The type of oil shale
project being evaluated in this study is that presently proposed for Federal
prototype oil shale leases U-a and U-b in Eastern Utah.  This type of operation
includes room-and-pillar mining, surface retorting (utilizing Paraho and TOSCO
II processes), and surface disposal of processed (or spent)  oil  shale.  This
study is using a stepwise monitoring methodology developed by TEMPO.

     This report represents the initial phase of this  research program.  •
Described herein is the development of a preliminary priority ranking of
potential pollution sources and their associated pollutants.  This  priority
ranking will  be utilized  in subsequent phases of the research as the  basis
for defining  monitoring needs and  for ultimately designing the monitoring
program.

     In the  next phases of this research program, a preliminary monitoring
design is to  be developed and implemented  in the field.   Initial field study
results may  result  in  a revaluation of the priority ranking presented in
this report.  The final product of the 5-year program  will be a planning
document which will provide a technical basis and a methodology for the
design of groundwater  quality monitoring programs for  oil shale industrial
developers and the  various governmental agencies concerned with environmental
planning and  protection.

-------
                                    SUMMARY


      General  Electric-TEMPO has developed a methodology for designing ground-
 water quality monitoring programs.   This  was  a  conceptual  design  which
 involved a series of data compilations  and evaluation  steps  leading  to a moni-
 toring system in place.   General  Electric-TEMPO is now applying that method-
 ology to design a system to monitor the impact  of  western  oil  shale  develop-
 ment on groundwater quality.   This  document reports  the  field  survey and
 literature research performed  during the  first  phase of  the  design process.
 The goal  of this phase  is to identify and rank  the major sources  of  ground-
 water quality degradation.  The site for  which  the monitoring  system is being
 designed is the Federal  Prototype Lease Tracts  U-a and U-b in  eastern Utah.
 The oil  shale operation  proposed  for this site  includes  room-and-pillar
 mining,  surface retorting by the  Paraho and TOSCO  II process,  and surface
 disposal  of spent oil shale.

      The priority ranking is based  on a sequence of  data compilation  and eval-
 uation steps.   These  steps  include  identification  of potential pollution
 sources,  methods  of waste disposal,  and potential  pollutants associated with
 the various waste sources;  and an assessment of the  potential  for infiltration
 and subsequent mobility  of  these pollutants in  the subsurface.  The three
 basic criteria  used to develop the  source-pollutant  ranking are:

         •  Mass of  waste, persistence,  toxicity, and concentration

         •  Potential mobility

         •  Known  or anticipated harm  to water use.

      The  information base and related assessments  utilized to develop rank-
 ings  based  on  these three criteria are  summarized  in the main body of this
 report.  A  ranking  based on the first criterion was developed after an in-
 depth  review of operations proposed for Tracts U-a  and U-b and of literature
 on oil shale operations, waste characterization, and control  technology.   Over
 two dozen potential sources of groundwater quality  impact were identified,
 including elements of extraction,  retorting, upgrading, and waste disposal
 processes.

     These potential pollutant sources vary greatly in mass of waste  material.
At full commercial scale development, 100,000  tons  per day of processed  shale
 (of which perhaps 600 to 2,000  tons  may be soluble  material)  will  be  produced.
Other sources  are much smaller  in  mass (e.g.,  less  than 2,000 tons of spent
catalysts per  year) or highly variable (e.g.,  storm runoff),  but still may
have potential for impact on groundwater quality.   A broad  spectrum of inor-
ganic and organic constituents  are associated  with  these  sources.   Salinity,
                                     VI

-------
certain trace elements (As, Se, F), and organics present significant potential
pollutants, although characterization (including biological  activity) of many
constituents (particularly organics) is uncertain.

     Available background information and field reconnaissance were employed
to describe the hydrogeology and water quality of the study area.   These data
were used in concert with the source-pollutant characterization to assess the
potential for pollutant mobility.

     The second ranking criterion calls for setting priorities based on the
mobility of the potential pollutants which have been identified.  Waste
disposal plans for Tracts U-a and U-b include concentration of process and
related facilities and common disposal of a wide spectrum of liquid and
solid wastes in the processed shale disposal pile.   Hence for the mobility
evaluations, the individual sources were grouped into source areas.  Three
source areas are evaluated:  the spent shale disposal area, the process area,
and the Southam Canyon retention dams.  Assessments related to characterizing
potential pollutant mobility include infiltration mobility in the unsaturated
zone and mobility in the saturated zone.  The most likely mobile constituents,
mobility pathways, and attenuation mechanisms are identified by this analysis.
These data provide second-criterion ranking of potential pollutants.  Mobili-
ties may also be enhanced by the proposed reservoir behind the White River dam
and by formation of fissures associated with subsidence stress.

     The third-criterion ranking addresses potential harm to existing or
potential water users.  Use of groundwater which flows under Tracts U-a and
U-b is largely limited to stock watering and possibly agriculture.  Potential
future changes in availability and allocation of surface waters could appre-
ciably alter the present perspective on depth-quality restrictions on ground-
water.   In addition, some potential exists for mobility within the Uinta
Formation and associated alluvial materials.  By these routes, pollutants may
enter the White River alluvium and eventually be discharged into the White
River.  The consequences of these releases  (e.g., high TDS wastes, organics,
etc.) on downstream agricultural and municipal users are difficult to quanti-
fy because of the uncertainties associated with estimating release rates.  For
this preliminary assessment, the concentration-toxicity ranking developed for
the first criterion expresses the possible hazards to potential water users.

     From consideration of the rankings developed for each of  these three
criteria, a preliminary priority ranking of potential pollution sources and
causes and potential pollutants was developed.  The  highest priority potential
pollutant sources were associated with  the spent shale disposal area:  spent
shale; high TDS wastewater, sour water, and retort water used  to moisten the
spent shale; and  spent catalysts deposited  in the disposal area.  As the
retention dams are  located below the  spent  shale piles, these  are also the
highest  ranked sources for the retention dams.  Associated with these sources
are numerous chemical constituents  of which total dissolved salts, selected
macroinorganics  (sodium,  sulfate,  and chloride), selected trace elements
 (arsenic,  fluoride, selenium,  and  molybdenum),  and organics  (polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons and carboxylic  acids) are considered the most  signifi-
cant potential pollutants.   In the  process  area, the proposed  effluent  hold-
 ing pond which drains  the process  area  watershed,  raw  shale  storage, and

                                     vii

-------
the tankage area was ranked with highest priority.  Dissolved salts, organics
selenium, arsenic, and tankage contents (fuels, oil additives, and ammonia)
were considered of highest priority.

     The complete priority ranking is shown in the following table.  A great
deal of effort has been expended on the study of the hydrogeology of the
study area and a large amount of research has been conducted on oil shale
development and environmental effects.  However, significant information voids
exist with regard to potential pollutant characterization and the mobility of
these materials in the hydrosphere.  Hence, professional judgment plays a
large role in proposing this preliminary source-pollutant ranking.

     This ranking will  serve as the basis  for the design of a monitoring plan
of the Tracts U-a and U-b oil shale development.   The next phase of the design
program includes evaluation of existing monitoring programs, identification of
alternative monitoring approaches to address the source-pollutant ranking,  and
selection of a monitoring program for field implementation.   This implementa-
tion will  be used to verify (and quite probably revise)  the  preliminary rank-
ing provided here.
                                   viii

-------
PRELIMINARY RANKING OF POLLUTANT SOURCES AND
POLLUTANTS FOR OIL SHALE TRACTS U-a AND U-b
Source Area
Spent shale disposal area













Process area





Retention dams
Source
priority
ranking
Highest




Intermediate




Lowest



Highest


Intermediate

Lowest
(Sources same :
area. )
Potential
pollution
source
Spent shale
High TOS waste water
Sour water
Retort water
Spent catalysts
Stormwater runoff
Mater treatment plant
sludges
Miscellaneous landfill
materials
Sulfur byproducts
Oily waste waters
Spent filters
Sewage Sludge
Mine water
Sanitary waste water
Surface disturbance
Effluent holding pond
Raw shale
Tankage area
Storm water runoff
Miscellaneous process
waste streams
Surface disturbance
is spent shale disposal
Potential pollutant ranking
Highest
TDS, Na, SO*, As, Se, f,
organics (PAH, carcinogens)
TDS
Ammonia, phenols
As, Cl, S, organics (POM,
carboxylic acids, phenols)
As. Ho
TDS, organics. As, Se
TDS
Sulfides, organics
Sul fides, sul fates
Organics
Organics. As
Organics
TDS, oil and grease
Organics
Calcium salts, TDS
TDS, organics
TDS, As, Se, organics
Miscellaneous fuels, oil
additives, ammonia, TDS
TDS, organics
TDS, organics, ammonia
Calcium salts, TDS
TDS, organics (PAH, carcino-
gens, phenols, etc., As,
Se, Mo, ammonia, Na, SO^
Intermediate
Ca, Mg, Zn, Cd, Hg, B,
organics (phenols, etc.)
—
Organics
TDS, organics (amines, etc.)
Zn, Ni
Na, Ca, S04, HCOj, organics
Major macroinorganics
Sulfides
—
Trace metals
Trace metals
Nutrients
Trace metals, organics
Nutrients
Macroinorganics
Trace metals, nutrients
Macroinorganics
—
Macroinorganics
Macroinorganics, trace
metals
Macroinorganics
Ca, Mg. Zn, NI, Cd, Hg,
other organics
Lowest
Pb, Cu, Fe
...
...
Carbonates, PO., NO.
Fe, Cu, Co
Zn, Cd, Hg
Trace metals
—
—
—
—
—
Macroinorganics
Macroinorganics
—
...
Trace metals
...
...
Nutrients
...
Pb, Cu, Fe, nutrients

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                    Page

Foreword                                                             iii
Preface                                                                Y
Summary                                                               V1
List of Figures                                                      xii
List of Tables                                                      xvii
List of Abbreviations                                                 xx
List of Mathematical Formulae Abbreviations                          xx"i
English/Metric System                                               xxii
Acknowledgments                                                    xxiii
Section

   }      SELECTION OF AREA FOR MONITORING                             1
              Introduction                                             1
              Criteria for Selecting the Monitoring Area               3
              Selection of the Project Area                            6
              Development of Pollution-Source Priority Ranking         7

   2      POLLUTION SOURCES, CAUSES, AND METHODS OF DISPOSAL          11
              Overview of Utah Oil  Shale Region                       11
              Solid Waste Sources and Disposal  Methods                13
              Liquid Waste Sources  and Disposal Methods               17
              Miscellaneous Sources and Causes                         20

   3      POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS                                        39
              Potential Pollutants  from Solid Wastes                  39
              Potential Pollutants  from Liquid  Wastes                 58
              Miscellaneous Sources and Causes                         64

   4      GROUNDWATER USE                                             65

   5      HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK                                     66
              Climate                                                 66
              Topography                                              66
              Soils                       .                            66
              Geology                                                 67
              Groundwater Hydrology                                   71
              Surface Water Hydrology                                 75

   6      EXISTING GROUNDWATER QUALITY                               111
              General Groundwater Quality                            111
              Water Quality Distribution                             112

-------
                        TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  (CONTINUED)

Section

               Water  Quality  as Affected  by Recharge                   113

  7         INFILTRATION POTENTIAL  OF WASTES AT THE LAND SURFACE       141
               Introduction
               Soil  Properties
               Process Area
               Spent Shale Disposal  Area
               Retention Dams
               Summary of Infiltration Potential                       157

  8        MOBILITY OF POLLUTANTS  FROM THE LAND SURFACE TO THE
           WATER TABLE                                                ]|>9
               Vadose Zone Characteristics                            ltjy
               Mobility of Pollutants                                  63
               Summary of Mobility
               Hydrogeologic Modification

  9        MOBILITY AND ATTENUATION OF POLLUTANTS IN THE SATURATED
           ZONE
               Attenuation Mechanisms
               Pollutant Movement
               Saturated Flow Alternatives                            '91

 10        PRIORITY  RANKING OF SOURCES AND CAUSES                     192
               Priority Ranking Scheme
               First-Criterion Ranking
               Second-Criterion Ranking
               Third-Criterion Ranking
               Summary-Preliminary  Priority Ranking

                                                                      203
 REFERENCES

 APPENDIX A —  THE  WATER BALANCE METHOD                                209
                                       XI

-------
                                LIST OF FIGURES

Number                                                                    Page
 1-1       Oil  shale mineral  rights map for Northeastern Utah                4
 1-2       Map  showing boundaries of Federal  Oil  Shales Leases                8
          U-a  and U-b
 2-1       Most probable plan- schedule of facility development             21
 2-2       General site plan  for development  of Tracts  U-a  and  U-b           22
 2-3       Phase II process area plot plan                                  23
 2-4       Process area plot  plan,  Phases  III and IV                        24
 2-5       Solid waste disposal  schematic  for White River Shale Project     25
 2-6       Phase II flow diagram                                            26
 2-7       Phases III  and IV  flow diagram                                    27
 2-8       Phase II spent shale  fill  plan                                    28
 2-9       Phases III  and IV  spent  shale fill  plans                         29
 2-10      Surface modification  and vegetation on processed shale            30
 2-11      Proposed contouring of spent shale pile for  revegetation          31
 2-12      General  water-use  flow schematic                                 32
 3-1       Approximate ionic  composition of spent shale leachate and
          runoff waters                                                    44
 3-2       Observed changes in total  dissolved solids (TDS)  concentra-
          tion versus volume of water  leached through  spent oil shale       47
 3-3       Observed changes in concentrations  of  sodium (Na), calcium
          (Ca),  magnesium (Mg),  and  sulfate  (SO/j)  versus volume of          48
          water  leached through spent  oil  shale
 3-4       Classification of  polycyclic organic materials                    53
                                      xii

-------
                           LIST OF FIGURES  (CONTINUED)
Number                                                                   —^—
 5-1       Precipitation  in  vicinity of  oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b,        ^
          October 1974-September  1975
 5-2      Precipitation  in  vicinity of  oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b,        7g
          October 1974-April  1975
 5-3      Precipitation  in  vicinity of  oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b,        7g
          May 1975-September 1975
 5-4      Topographic map of oil shale  Tracts U-a  and U-b showing
          hydrologic and geologic monitoring stations used in
          environmental  baseline studies                                   80
 5-5      Soils map of oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b                        81
 5-6      Hydrologic soils map                                             82
 5-7      Major  structural features in study area                          83
 5-8      Geologic map of oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b                     84
 5-9      Stratigraphic sections  of (a) Uinta Formation and  (b)
          contact  between Uinta and Green  River Formations                 85
 5-10    Stratigraphic section of upper portion of  Parachute
          Creek  Member                                                     bb
 5-11    Subsurface  structural contour map  of the Mahogany
          Marker Tracts U-a and U-b                                       87
 5-12    Geologic cross section  of Tracts U-a and U-b                     88
  5-13    Geologic cross section  of Tract  U-a                              89
  5-14     Geologic cross  section  of Tract  U-b                               90
  5-15     Hydrogeologic interactions between Evacuation  Creek               91
           and the Bird's  Nest Aquifer
  5-16     Bird's Nest Zone outcrop, recharge,  and discharge  areas           92
  5-17     Structural contours of the top of the  Bird's Nest  Aquifer         93
  5-18     Water table and artesian conditions in  the Bird's  Nest
           Aquifer                                                          94
  5-19     Water levels in Bird's Nest Aquifer, March 1975
95
                                       xi n

-------
                          LIST OF FIGURES  (CONTINUED)
Number                                                                   Page
 5-20     Water-level map  of the Bird's Nest Aquifer, March 1975           96
 5-21      Water-level map  of Bird's Nest Aquifer modified after
          data evaluation                                                  97
 5-22     Hydrograph for the White River near Watson for period
          1951 to  1970                                                     98
 5-23     Mean daily streamflow, temperature, and specific
          conductance measured in the White River above Southam
          Canyon,  October  1974 - September  1975                             99
 5-24     Mean carbonate,  bicarbonate, and chloride concentrations
          of the White River near Watson                                  100
 5-25     Mean water quality of the White  River near Watson, Utah         101
 5-26      Mean daily streamflow, temperature, and specific
          conductance measured in Evacuation Creek at Watson,  Utah,
          October  1974-September 1975                                    102
 5-27      Mean daily streamflow, temperature, and specific
          conductance measured near the mouth of Evacuation Creek,
          October  1974 - September 1975                                    103
 5-28      Distribution of major ions in the White River and
          Evacuation Creek during 1975 base flow period                   104
 5-29      Distribution of major ions in the White River and
          Evacuation Creek during May through July 1975 high
          flow period                                                     105
 6-1       Water analysis diagram for Bird's Nest Aquifer                  ^g
 6-2       Water analysis diagram for Bird's Nest Aquifer and
          Evacuation Creek                                                H7
 6-3       Water analysis diagram for non-Bird's  Nest Aquifer
          analyses                                                        112
 6-4      Mean total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in  the
          Bird's Nest Aquifer                                             119
 6-5      Water levels in Bird's  Nest Aquifer, March 1975                 120
 6-6      Mean calcium concentrations in  the Bird's  Nest Aquifer           121
 6-7      Mean magnesium concentrations in  the Bird's  Nest Aquifer        122

                                      xiv

-------
                         LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Number                                                                   Page
 6-8      Mean sodium plus  potassium concentrations  in  the  Bird's
          Nest Aquifer                                                    123
 6-9      Mean sulfate concentrations in  the  Bird's  Nest Aquifer           124
 6-10     Mean carbonate and bicarbonate  concentrations in  the
          Bird's Nest Aquifer                                             125
 6-11     Mean chloride concentrations in the Bird's Nest Aquifer          126
 6-12     Mean temperature  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer                     127
 6-13     Mean temperature  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer,  May  1974            128
 6-14     Mean temperature  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer,  November 1974       129
 6-15     Mean temperature  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer,  March  1975          130
 6-16     Mean temperature  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer,  November 1975       131
 6-17     Mean total  dissolved solids (TDS) concentration in  the
          Bird's Nest Aquifer, May 1974                                   132
 6-18     Mean total  dissolved solids (TDS) concentration in  the
          Bird's Nest Aquifer, November 1974                               133
 6-19     Mean total  dissolved solids (TDS) concentration in  the
          Bird's Nest Aquifer, March 1975                                 134
 6-20     Mean total  dissolved solids (TDS) concentration in  the
          Bird's Nest Aquifer, November 1975                               135
 6-21     Mean sulfate concentration in the Bird's Nest Aquifer,
          May 1974                                                        136
 6-22     Mean sulfate concentration in the Bird's Nest Aquifer,
          November 1974                                                   137
 6-23     Mean sulfate concentration in the Bird's Nest Aquifer,
          March 1975                                                      138
 6-24     Mean sulfate concentration in the Bird's Nest Aquifer,
          November 1975                                                   139
 6-25     Distribution of major ions in Evacuation Creek during
          1975 water year base-flow period                                140
 7-1      Hydrologic soils  map                                            144
                                      xv

-------
                         LIST OF  FIGURES  (CONTINUED)
Number                                                                    Pagg
 7-2      Cumulative grain-size  distribution of processed oil  shales        149
 7-3      Soil texture of processed oil  shales                             150
 7-4      Permeability ranges of TOSCO II  and Bureau of Mines  spent
          shale                                                            151
 8-1      Schematic cross section of spent shale pile                      160
 8-2      Mobility,of copper, lead, beryllium, zinc, cadmium,
          nickel, and mercury                                              167
 8-3      Mobility of selenium,  vanadium,  arsenic,  and chromium             157
 8-4      Hydraulic conductivity of Pachappa sandy  loam as related
          to salt concentration  and exchangeable sodium percentage          175
 9-1      Flow net for Bird's Nest Aquifer                                 187
 A-l      Schematic drawing showing components of water balance
          evaluation                                                       210
                                     xv i

-------
                               LIST OF TABLES
Number                                                                 Page
 1-1      Oil Shale Reserves in the Green River Formation                2
 1-2      Stepwise Process of TEMPO Groundwater Quality
          Monitoring Methodology                                         2
 2-1      Projected Size of Disturbed Areas                             33
 2-2      Summary of Solid Wastes from Commercial Mine and Plant
          Operation                                                     34
 2-3      Summary of Waste Water Streams                                38
 3-1      Major Minerals in Raw Shale and Oil Shale Ashed at 525° C —
          Determinations by Bulk X-Ray Diffractometer Analysis          41
 3-2      Results of Oil Shale Leachate Water Quality Experiments       43
 3-3      Summary of Oil Shale Leachate and Runoff Water Quality
          Experiments                                                   45
 3-4      Trace Element Concentrations (ppm) in Raw Oil Shale
          and Spent Shale Leachate                                      49
 3-5      Concentrations of Minor Constituents  in Raw and Spent
          Shale Leachate                                                50
 3-6      Results of Trace Metal Analysis of Processed Shale
          Leachate from Five Water Penetration  Studies                  50
 3-7      Leaching of  Soluble Material from Processed Shale
          Moisturized  with Retort Water                                 51
 3-8      Benzene-Extractable Organic Matter from Spent Shale           52
 3-9      Polycondensed Aromatic Hydrocarbons Identified in
          Benzene Extracts of Carbonaceous Spent Shale                  54
 3-10    POM Compounds Identified in Benzene Extract of
          Carbonaceous Shale Coke from Green River Oil Shale            55
                                     xvii

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Number                                                                 Page
 3-11     Evaluation of Benzo(a)pyrene Content in Samples of
          Benzene Extracts from Various Spent Shale,  Soils,
          Plants, and Leached Salt Samples                              56
 3-12     Foul Water Analysis, Rocky Flats Pilot Plant Run              59
 3-13     Approximate Composition of TOSCO II Combined Process
          Waste Water                                                   60
 3-14     Trace Element Analysis of Condensate Water  and  Process
          Water for Paraho Process                                      61
 3-15     Maximum and Minimum Expected Concentrations in  Waste
          Water Streams for White River Shale Project                   62
 5-1      Soil Analyses                                                106
 5-2      Aquifer Pump Test Results                                    107
 5-3      Water Balance Within Tract for Water Year 1975, Southam
          Canyon                                                       109
 5-4      Estimated Peak Streamflows for Hell's Hole  Canyon,
          Southam Canyon, and Asphalt Wash                             110
 7-1      Estimated and Measured Soil  Properties Significant to
          Engineering Requirements                                     142
 7-2      Monthly Water Balance for the Oil  Shale Tracts—Landfill
          Case                                                         147
 7-3      Monthly Water Balance on Oil  Shale Tracts—Leaching Case      154
 7-4      Monthly Water Balance for Oil  Shale Tracts—Water
          Harvesting Case                                              156
 8-1      Regular Physical  Properties of Colorado Paraho—Processed
          Shale                                                        162
 8-2      Experimental  Results of the Percolation Experiment
          Conducted on TOSCO Spent Oil  Shale Retorting Residue          165
 8-3      Characteristics of the Soils                                 169
 8-4      Leaching of Soluble Material  from Processed Shale
          Moisturized with a 4:1  Dilution of Foul  Water                172
                                   xvi i i

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)
Number                                                                 Page
 8-5      Leaching of Soluble Material  from Processed Shale
          Moisturized with a 2.5:1 Dilution of Foul Water              173
 8-6      Possible Process Area Pollutants                             177
 8-7      Characteristics of Soils on Oil  Shale Tracts                 178
 10-1     Summary of Potential Pollutant Sources and Causes            193
 10-2     Summary of Infiltration and Mobility Evaluations
          Presented in Sections 7 through 9                            198
 10-3     Preliminary Ranking of Pollutant Sources and Pollutants
          for Oil Shale Tracts U-a and U-b                             202
 A-l      Soil Moisture Retention Table                                213
                                     xix

-------
                           LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AA               aza-azarines
ANFO             ammonium nitrate-fuel oil
ASTM             American Society of Testing and Materials
BaP              benzo(a)pyrene
BOD              biochemical oxygen demand
BSF              benzene-soluble fraction
BTU              British thermal unit
CEC              cation exchange capacity
COD              chemical oxygen demand
DMA              designated monitoring agency
Eh               oxidation reduction potential
ESP              exchangeable sodium percentage
ft3/s            cubic feet per second
ft^/min          cubic feet per minute
g                grams
HDN              hydrogenation-denitrogenation
HPLC             high-pressure liquid chromatograph
1/min            liters per minute
m^/s             cubic meters per second
meq/1            mi 11iequivalents per liter
mg/1             milligrams per liter
ml               milliliters
P                precipitation and applied water
PAH              polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
PCA              polycondensed aromatics
PCB              polychlorinated biphenols
PET              potential  evapotranspiration
PNA              polynuclear aromatics
POM              polycyclic organic  materials
ppm              parts per million
SAR              sodium adsorption ratio
ST               storage
TDS              total dissolved solids
TLC              thin-layer chromatography
TOC              total organic carbon
UOC              Union Oil  Company
USBM             U.S. Bureau of Mines
WRSP             White River Shale Project
                                    xx

-------
                LIST OF MATHEMATICAL FORMULAE ABBREVIATIONS

Q   = discharge
T   = transmissivity
n   = number of flow tubes
Ah  = head drop across each square
V   = total volume of water
A   = area
m   = saturated thickness
p   = porosity
v   = groundwater velocity
L   = length of area along which discharge is occurring
S   = moisture surplus
P   = precipitation
PET = potential evapotranspiration
R/o = runoff
AST = change in storage
AET = actual evapotranspiration
K   = crop-use coefficient
F   = consumptive use factor
t   = mean monthly temperature
d   = percentage of annual daytime hours during each month
SMR = soil moisture retention
                                     xx i

-------
                        ENGLISH/METRIC SYSTEM
                o
1  cubic meter (m )  = 1.308 cubic yards
1  cubic meter (m )  = 6.25 barrels
1  tonne (1  metric ton)  = 2,204.6 Ibs
1  hectare (10,000 square meters) = 2.471  acres
                      p
1  square kilometer (km ) = 0.3861 square  miles
1  liter (1) = 1.0567 liquid quarts
                                 xx ii

-------
                               ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


     Dr. Guenton C. Slawson, Jr.  and Dr.  Lome G.  Everett of General  Electric-
TEMPO were responsible for management and technical  guidance of the project
under which this report was prepared.  Mr. Fred M. Phillips, Department of
Hydrology and Water Resources, University of Arizona,  Tucson, and Dr.  L. Graham
Wilson, Water Resources Research  Center,  University of Arizona, Tucson, were
the principal authors of the report.  Supporting TEMPO authors were:

     Dr. Lome G. Everett
     Dr. Guenton C. Slawson, Jr.
     Mr. Edward W. Hoy!man

     Supporting consultant authors were:

     Dr. S.N. Davis
     Dr. Kenneth D. Schmidt
     Dr. David K. Todd

     Technical consultation and review for this study were provided by Mr.
Glen A. Miller, U.S. Geological Survey, Conservation Division, Area Oil
Shale Supervisor's Office.
                                   xxiii

-------
                                  SECTION 1

                      SELECTION OF AREA  FOR MONITORING
INTRODUCTION

     Groundwater presently plays a key role in satisfying United States water
needs for municipal, agricultural, and industrial uses.  In addition, ground-
water discharges to streams and rivers make up a significant percentage of
surface water supplies.  During low flow periods, almost all surface flow
results from grbundwater discharges.  This interaction between surface water
and groundwater is an important consideration in the evaluation of ground-
water pollution; subsurface contamination may ultimately affect both surface
water and groundwater users.

     The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (P.L. 92-500)
and the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-523) provide for protection
of groundwater quality.  These mandates call for programs to prevent, reduce,
and eliminate pollution of both navigable waters and groundwater and for par-
ticular protection of drinking water resources.  The national responsibility
for these activities is given to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA).  Various State agencies also have similar responsibilities via State
enabling legislation.

     Synthetic petroleum products recovered from western oil shales are ex-
pected to play an important part in supplying future energy needs of the
United States.  Various estimates of the magnitude of western oil shale
reserves have been made.  The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that an equiv-
alent of about 640 billion m3 (4,000 billion bbl) of oil are contained in the
oil shales of the Green River Formation of Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming (Table
1-1).  These oil shale resources account for 80 percent of the known world
resources, but of course are not completely recoverable.  Recoverable
resources are a function of mining and retorting technology and economics,
but may amount to about 290 billion m3 (liSOO billion bbl) of oil (Hendricks
and Ward, 1976).  As the estimated remaining world ultimate oil resources are
about 320 billion m3 (2,000 billion bbl) (Tiratsoo, 1976), of which less than
150 billion barrels are in the United States, Western oil shale is clearly a
significant energy resource.

     The mandates of P.L. 92-500 necessitate implementation of a system for
detecting and delineating groundwater pollution before points of use are
affected and preferably before pollutants enter the subsurface.  Monitoring
approaches for these requirements are in marked contrast with more tradi-
tional programs aimed at sampling water quality and quantity at the point of


                                     1

-------
          TABLE 1-1.  OIL SHALE  RESERVES IN THE GREEN  RIVER FORMATION0

Shale grade .
liters oil /tonne
(gallons oil /ton )c
104-270 (25-65)
41.7-104 (10-25)
20.9-41.7 (5-10)

Billion cubic meters (barrels)
Uinta Basin,
Utah
14.4
36.8
240.0
291.2
*From Hendrickson, 1975
DTonne = 1 metric ton
Ton = assay ton
(90)
(230)
(1.500)
(1,820)



Piceance Creek
Basin,
Colorado
80.
128.
32.
240.



0
0
0
0



(500)
(800)
(200)
(1,500)



of oil equivalent
Green River
Basin,
Wyoming
4.
64.
48.
116.



8
0
0
8



(30)
(400)
(300)
(730)



99.
228.
320.
648.





Total
2
8
0
0



(620)
(1,430)
(2.000)
(4,050)



supply for  a  specific use.  The design  problem described in this  report has
been addressed  using a systematic approach  for predictive groundwater quality
monitoring  developed by General Electric-TEMPO of Santa Barbara,  California
(Table 1-2).  This  stepwise methodology includes identification of pollution
sources, their  associated pollutants, and the potential for mobility  of these
pollutants  in the  specific hydrogeologic framework of the study area.
           TABLE  1-2.   STEPWISE PROCESS  OF TEMPO GROUNDWATER QUALITY
                        MONITORING METHODOLOGY
      STEP
                    DESCRIPTION
       1
       2
       3
       4
       5
       6
       7
       8
       9
       10
       11
       12
       13
       14
       15
SELECT AREA FOR MONITORING
IDENTIFY POLLUTION SOURCES, CAUSES, AND METHODS OF DISPOSAL
IDENTIFY POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS
DEFINE GROUNDWATER USAGE
DEFINE HYDROGEOLOGIC SITUATION
DESCRIBE EXISTING GROUNDWATER QUALITY
EVALUATE INFILTRATION POTENTIAL OF WASTES AT THE LAND SURFACE
EVALUATE MOBILITY OF POLLUTANTS FROM THE LAND SURFACE TO WATER TABLE
EVALUATE ATTENUATION OF POLLUTANTS IN THE SATURATED ZONE
PRIORITIZE SOURCES AND CAUSES
EVALUATE EXISTING MONITORING PROGRAMS
IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVE MONITORING APPROACHES
SELECT AND IMPLEMENT THE MONITORING PROGRAM
REVIEW AND INTERPRET MONITORING RESULTS
SUMMARIZE AND TRANSMIT MONITORING INFORMATION

-------
      This report presents the results of implementation of the first 10 steps
of the monitoring methodology (Table 1-2).  These steps lead to a prioritiza-
tion, or priority ranking, of the most important sources or causes of ground-
water quality degradation.  This ranking provides a basis for the rational
design and implementation of a cost-effective groundwater quality monitoring
program for oil shale development.

CRITERIA FOR SELECTING THE MONITORING AREA

      The potential for development of oil shale resources in the Western
United States is briefly summarized in the preceding paragraphs.  Because of
the magnitude of these resources and the likely expansion of this new industry
to meet ever-accelerating energy needs of the United States, proposed oil shale
developments were reviewed by the EPA to identify candidate study areas.

      Originally six Federal oil shale leases were proposed.  Of these, two
each were located in Wyoming (Tracts W-a and W-b), Colorado (Tracts C-a and
C-b), and Utah (Tracts U-a and U-b).  No bids were received for leasing Tracts
W-a and W-b.  Various consortiums of oil companies became lessees of the Utah
and Colorado tracts, and exploration, environmental baseline studies, and
development plans were initiated and are in progress.  The vast oil shale
resources of Eastern Utah (Figure 1-1) and favorable attitudes toward develop-
ment at the time of initiation of this study supported selection of this region
for study.

      After a review of the proposed developments, the Utah Federal lease
tracts were considered generally representative of deep mining-surface retort-
ing oil shale developments.  The results of this study should be transferable
in many ways to the design of groundwater quality monitoring programs for sim-
ilar oil shale enterprises both in Utah and in other parts of the Western
United States.  However, the site-specific features of Tracts U-a and U-b,
which were considered in this study, produce results that in detail may not be
characteristic of other locations in the Western oil shale region.  For the
study described in this report, proposed development plans for Tracts U-a and
U-b have been considered and evaluated.  Changes in the proposed development
plans, such as implementation of alternative process or control technologies,
may alter these assessments.

      The monitoring program developed in this study is intended to eventually
become part of a State's environmental monitoring programs-including air,
land, and water programs.  Thus, selection of monitoring areas should be made
by the appropriate State agency responsible for water quality monitoring rel-
ative to P.L. 92-500 and P.L. 93-523.  The basis for this selection is governed
by a combination of administrative, physiographic, and priority considerations.
The following paragraphs illustrate this area selection process as it might be
carried out by the appropriate State agency.

Administrative Considerations

      The initiation of a monitoring program requires that a locally designated
monitoring agency (DMA) be specified.  In many situations, the requisite agency
with the necessary technical staff may be a county, district, State, or regional

-------
                                                       ^>   vS?
                                                         [j, jus.flFrfd'Y^ o.
                                                      „   Ut (WWHTLT
                                                UK,,'.  -
-------
water organization.  Thus, the area to be monitored can often be made to
correspond to the jurisdictional area of the DMA.  The size of a particular
area may vary from a few square miles to thousands of square miles.  Size
alone is less important than the ready accessibility of all portions of the
area to the DMA, as well as hydrogeologic knowledge of the area possessed by
the DMA.

     Selection of the DMA may involve a review of a State's institutional
structure.  In some instances, it will be readily apparent which agency should
be designated as the monitoring agency.  In other instances, several agencies
may have overlapping responsibility and authority.  Situations such as this
may require organizational changes to provide for an efficiently operated
DMA.

     It should be recognized that political boundaries frequently create prob-
lems in terms of water management.  Such a boundary may cross a major ground-
water basin so that, for example, pollutants from an adjoining area may be
entering from sources not subject to monitoring by the DMA.  Such situations
should be minimized as much as possible; alternatively cooperation among DMA's
showing common groundwater pollution problems will be essential to the success
of their respective monitoring programs.

Physiographic Considerations

     The physiographic basis for selecting monitoring areas recognizes that
groundwater basins are distinct hydrographic units containing one or more
aquifers.  Such basins usually, but not always, coincide with major surface
water drainage basins.  By establishing a monitoring area related to a ground-
water basin, total hydrologic inflows to and outflows from the basin are fully
encompassed.  This permits all pollution sources and their consequent effects
on groundwater quality to be monitored by a single DMA.  Where basins are
extensive, monitoring areas may become too large to be practical.  Boundaries
should then be drawn parallel to groundwater flows or where cross-flow com-
ponents are insignificant.

Priority Considerations

     Resource administrators at all  levels, Federal, State, and local, are
faced with a common problem-how to allocate monetary resources equitably to
deal  with a host of environmental  problems.  For political  reasons, these
individuals must be attentive to the needs of all  areas under their jurisdic-
tion.   Rarely are funds available in a timely manner to deal  with more than
just a fraction of the problems brought to their attention.  A procedure for
ranking both existing and potential  environmental  impacts for monitoring and
control  would be particularly useful.

     The logical  starting point,  relative to groundwater pollution control, is
for the administrator at the highest State level  responsible for groundwater
quality to issue a request to the various existing local-level  agencies,
backed by funding, for an inventory of existing and potential  sources of
groundwater pollution resulting from various activities in  each local  area.
In many instances, e.g., such as  in this study, there may be one candidate

-------
activity paramount among the rest.  Whatever the case, after the initial in-
ventory, preliminary priorities for additional monitoring can be established.
Assuming that the State carries out similar inventories of the other environ-
mental impacts it is faced with, the responsible decision-makers will then
find it possible to allocate resources for monitoring and control to those
areas and problems posing the greatest threat to the State's environmental
quality.

     The following discussion details the application of the administrative,
physiographic, and priority considerations for the selection of the Federal
Oil Shale Leases U-a and U-b as the project area, and this will be followed
by a description of how the ranking scheme works, before presenting the
results of the ranking scheme.

SELECTION OF THE PROJECT AREA

     The richest oil shale reserves in the Uinta Basin and the existing oil
shale mineral rights ownership are illustrated in Figure 1-1.  As indicated,
the richest oil shale deposits, and thus the likely locations of the re-
covery efforts, are located in the White River Basin in Uinta County near the
Utah-Colorado boundary.  The scope of this study precludes consideration of
this entire region of Eastern Utah.  In order to select that portion of the
Utah oil shale region which is best suited for the goals of this research
effort, the administrative, physiographic, and priority considerations out-
lined above are applied below to the selection of the project area.

Administrative Considerations

     The initial  administrative consideration is the selection of the DMA.
In Utah, there are several  organizations which are in some manner involved
with water resources.  However, environmental  areas of all  types (water qual-
ity, air quality, public health, etc.) are collectively under the Division
of Health,  a component of the Utah Department of Social  Services.  The Bureau
of Water Quality (part of the Division of Health) appears to be the State
agency most suited to become the DMA.

     The responsibilities of the Division of Health are presented in the Utah
Water Pollution Control Act.  These responsibilities include development of
programs for the "prevention, control, and abatement of new or existing pollu-
tion of the waters of the State."   The definition of "waters of the State"
includes both surface water and groundwater.   Other State agencies, such as
the Utah National Resources Department,  have responsibilities related to
water supply (quantity) and water  rights.  Operation of a groundwater quality
monitoring  program should include  interaction  with these agencies because of
the close interrelationship between water quantity and quality.   In addition,
administrative coordination between the  State  of Utah and the U.S.  Geological
Survey, the United States agency for administration of Federal  oil  shale
leases, is  indicated at least with regard to operations  on  these Federal
leases.

     Other  administrative considerations include interaction with local
governmental  agencies.   Limiting the study area to a single county aids in

-------
simplifying relations between the monitoring agency and local governments.
Coordination of monitoring efforts and access are also enhanced by locating
the study area reasonably close to an urban center, in this case, probably
Vernal, Utah.

     The Federal oil shale leases U-a and U-b provide a development of signi-
ficant magnitude (i.e., a commercial operation) to obtain results that are
generally representative of deep mining-surface  retorting oil  shale  develop-
ments.  This study area is wholly located within one of the regions of an
appropriate DMA, the Utah Bureau of Water Quality.

Physiographic Considerations

     The boundaries of the oil shale lease tracts served as a preliminary
definition of the monitoring project area (Figure 1-2).  These legal  bound-
aries were later superseded by physiographic boundaries delineated by the
watersheds encompassing Tracts U-a and U-b (Figure 1-2).  This includes the
Southern Canyon, Evacuation Creek, and small unnamed watersheds draining into
the White River from the lease areas.

     As the details of mine and refinery development are better defined and
the potential spatial extent for environmental effects becomes more evident,
it may be necessary to expand this physiographic region.  This eventuality
exists with particular reference to potential effects on bedrock aquifers
which bound the mining zone.

priority Considerations.

     The emphasis of the monitoring program will  be to address water quality
effects associated with oil shale extraction and processing.  Perhaps the
primary consideration for selection of the White River Shale Project area as
the monitoring area is the significant potential  for pollution from the pro-
posed activities.  This oil shale region is expected to be among the first
developed.   Due to the estimated size of the energy reserves in this  region,
future expanded development is highly likely.

     Commercial-scale oil  shale mining and processing is in the developmental
stages.  The quantity and quality characteristics of the wastes to be pro-
duced remain speculative.   Such uncertainties, in concert with the projected
expansion of the oil shale industry, result in a high priority for monitoring.
The results of monitoring these initial  activities will serve not only to
measure the effects of this particular project, but will also serve as input
to design planning for subsequent oil shale development.

DEVELOPMENT OF POLLUTION-SOURCE PRIORITY RANKING

     The implementation of the ranking scheme calls for three iterations
through the steps of the monitoring methodology.   Each consideration  of the
methodology sequence is at a different level  of detail and is intended to
accomplish different goals.  With each iteration, the overall  monitoring
design program progresses further toward attaining the ultimate monitoring
goals embodied in P.L. 92-400 and P.L. 93-523.

-------
CD
                 Figure 1-2.  Map showing boundaries of Federal Oil  Shale  Leases  U-a  and  U-b.

-------
Level-One Ranking

     The first time through the ranking scheme, several objectives are met:

     •  Review of the existing data and information on known sources and
        causes of groundwater pollution

     •  Identification of potential sources and causes of groundwater
        pollution

     •  Identification of potential pollutants associated with the
        pollution-source groupings

     •  Evaluation of the hydrogeologic framework in the project insofar
        as it relates to the known and potential sources and causes of
        pollution

     •  Superimposition of the sources and causes of pollution on the
        hydrogeologic framework to determine their mobilities.

     The final goal in this first pass through the ranking scheme will be
establishment of priorities for monitoring those sources which appear to
present the greatest threat to the area's groundwater quality.  Unless a
great deal of study has previously taken place in an area, considerable hydro-
logic judgment and, more importantly, a sound appreciation for the mechanisms
of transport of the various pollutants through the soil and vadose zone will
be required to make the ranking.

     When the preliminary ranking is completed (Step 10), the DMA will then
be in a stronger position to approach the appropriate funding agency for
support to deal with the problem of groundwater quality degradation.  It will
be particularly important to try to present some estimate of damages which
may result if monitoring, and eventually control, are not undertaken.

Economics^

     Acceptance by the funding agency that a potential  problem exists should
result in funding to design a monitoring program, complete with data storage
and dissemination provisions.   Design of the monitoring program will involve
a review of all existing monitoring activities in the project area, the selec-
tion of cost-effective monitoring alternatives, and the implementation of
those alternatives which constitute the preferred monitoring program.  Before
the preferred monitoring program can be implemented, the funding agency must
again be consulted to gain funding for implementation.   More often than not,
tradeoffs will be required when funding is not completely available.

Level-Two Ranking

     Implementation of the monitoring program will  require a return to the
beginning of the methodology steps (Table 1-2).  This time the objective will
be to verify the preliminary ranking sources with hard  data.  Considerable
time may be involved in this exercise, depending on the number of sources

-------
involved and the size of the area-several years  to a  decade  or more  to  reach
a mature^ stage.  Undoubtedly the intensive monitoring will result in a revi-
sion of the original priorities.  Some monitoring activities will have to be
decreased or eliminated, while others will need to be intensified.

     Utilizing the results of the second pass through the ranking scheme, a
much more accurate estimate of the threat to the area's groundwater quality
will be available, and controls or mitigating measures can be devised to deal
with the threat.  If the need for instituting controls is obvious after the
first preliminary ranking, they should be implemented at that time.  The moni-
toring design process aids in setting priorities for implementing migration or
control procedures.  The implementation of controls will again require funding
by the appropriate State agency.

Level-Three Ranking

     The final iteration of the ranking steps will involve monitoring to check
on the effectiveness of the controls that are implemented.  If these controls
prove effective, then the intensity of monitoring can be reduced and eventu-
ally dropped if the threat can be shown to no longer exist.

     New sources of potential pollution will  continually appear.   The monitor-
ing program should plan to include these sources.  They should be brought into
the program through the orderly process of Environmental Impact Reviews  by
State and Federal agencies.
                                     10

-------
                                  SECTION  2

              POLLUTION  SOURCES,  CAUSES, AND METHODS OF DISPOSAL


OVERVIEW OF UTAH OIL SHALE REGION

     The White River Shale Project (WRSP)  is located in Northeastern Utah and
encompasses the two Federal Oil Shale Leases U-a and U-b (Figure 1-2).  These
lease tracts are 2,068 hectares (5,110 acres)  each in size.

     Tract U-a is located immediately south of the White River in the eastern
part of the Uinta Basin.  The valley of the White River occupies a narrow
strip about 240 meters (800 feet) wide in  the  northcentral  part of the tract.
Southam Canyon, a slightly meandering drainage, extends northwestward across
the tract and joins the White River just outside the tract.  Numerous minor
drainages in the tract are tributary to Southam Canyon and to White River,
the only perennial stream.  The topography is  character!'zed-by high, sinuous
ridges bounded by cliffs and separated by lower areas of narrow branching
ridges and stream valleys.  Altitudes within the tract range from about 1,494
meters (4,900 feet) on the White River to  about 1,817 meters (5,960 feet) in
the southcentral part.  Greatest altitude  difference in a short distance is
about 137 meters (450 feet) in eight-tenths of a kilometer (one-half mile) in
the northwestern corner of the tract.

     Tract U-b, which abuts Tract U-a, is  located immediately south of the
White River in the eastern part of the Uinta Basin.  The White River is a
perennial stream and flows near the northern boundary of the tract.  The can-
yon of Evacuation Creek trends northward across the central part of the tract.
East of Evacuation Creek the topography is characterized by rounded, forked
ridges with scattered ledges and cliffs.  West of Evacuation Creek the terrain
is more rugged and is characterized by ledges  and cliffs  along the canyon
walls and numerous buttes along the drainage divides.   Altitudes range from
1,512 meters (4,960 feet) along the White  River to about 1,783 meters (5,850
feet) near the southwest corner.  Greatest altitude difference in a short
distance is about 91 meters (300 feet) in  eight-tenths of a kilometer (one-
half mile) in the southwestern part of the tract.

     The estimated average thickness of the Tract U-a oil shale sequence, that
averages 125 liters of shale oil per tonne (30 gallons per ton), is about 13.5
meters (45 feet).  This is based on data from  core holes  outside the tract and
from exploratory wells within the tract.  Overburden above the Mahogany Zone
(the major oil shale-bearing zone) ranges  from 167 to 372 meters (550 to 1,225
feet) and the average is approximately 258 meters (850 feet).  The shale oil
resource recoverable from the tract by underground mining methods is estimated
to be 39.1 million m3 (244.4 million bbl).   Nahcolite is  probably present in

                                     11

-------
the tract as very thin lenses or beds and small pods.  There are no reports
of significant amounts of surface or subsurface bituminous sandstone in the
tract, and no obvious gilsonite (uintaite) veins.  The Southam Canyon field
has produced gas from the Wasatch Formation in Tract U-a.  Although the Uinta
Formation produces gas in some parts of the Uinta Basin, it is very unlikely
that commercial amounts of gas in this formation underlie Tract U-a.

     Assayed samples from core holes in Tract U-b show the average thickness
of oil shale yielding an average of 125 liters of oil per tonne (30 gallons
per ton) to be approximately 15 meters (50 feet).  Overburden above the prin-
cipal oil shale beds ranges from 91 to 380 meters (300 to 1,150 feet) and the
average is about 213 meters (700 feet).  The shale oil resource recoverable
from the tract by underground mining methods is estimated to be 42.6 million
m3 (265.8 million bbl).  Nahcolite occurs as very thin lenses or beds and
small pods in the upper part of the Green River Formation.  No oil or gas has
been discovered in the tract nor is there any known occurrence of significant
amounts of bitumen in sandstone.  One narrow gilsonite vein, less than two
inches wide, outcrops in the westcentral  part of the tract.

     The White River Shale Project is a venture formed by Phillips Petroleum
Company and Sunoco Energy Development Company, owners of lease U-a, and Sohio
Petroleum Company, owner of lease U-b.  The shale sequence to be mined is
about 17 meters (55 feet) thick.  Present plans call for raw shale extraction
to be by room-and-pillar methods.  The shale is planned to be processed on
the surface, at a common facility for both tracts, using three retort types:

     •  Paraho direct heat mode

     •  Paraho indirect heat mode

     •  TOSCO II.

The Paraho retort uses hot gases to pyrolize the kerogen in the oil shale.
In the directly heated mode, the gases are provided by combustion of carbona-
ceous residue in the pyrolized shale, and in the indirectly heated mode they
are provided by indirect heating of recycled gases from the retort.  The
indirectly heated mode produces higher BTU gases.

     Finely ground raw oil  shale produced by crushers will be processed by
the TOSCO II retorting method which utilizes heated alumina balls to volatilize
the kerogen.  The solid oil  shale residue (processed or spent shale) from the
various retorts will  be disposed of in surface dump sites.  The crude shale oil
will  be upgraded onsite by severe hydrotreating to render it amenable to pipe-
line transport.

     Mining and refining development is scheduled in four phases:

     •  Phase I  -  Settlement of lease agreement; mineral exploration;
                    formulation and approval  of the Detailed Development
                    Plan (DDP); environmental  baseline studies
                                     12

-------
     •  Phase  II  - Sink mine access to Mahogany Zone; mine maximum of
                    9,100 tonnes (10,000 tons) per day; operate single
                    Paraho retort; decide feasibility of commercial
                    operation (Figures 2-2 and 2-3)

     •  Phase  III- Develop commercial operation of 73,200 tonnes
                    (84,000 tons) per day mining from U-b and refinery
                    capacity of 8,000 m3 (50,000 bbl) per day (first
                    train operation) (Figures 2-2 and 2-4)

     •  Phase  IV  - Develop additional operation of 73,200 tonnes
                    (84,000 tons) per day mining from U-a and increase
                    refinery capacity to 16,000 m3 (100,000 bbl) per
                    day (second train operation) (Figures 2-2 and 2-4).

These phases are projected to cover some 10 years before initial commercial
mine operation commences and approximately 20 years total (Figure 2-1).

     The waste disposal plans described in this report, and evaluated in this
study are as presently proposed by the White River Shale Project (WRSP, 1976a).
Provisions of the U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, refer-
ring to the handling and disposal of hazardous wastes, may result in altera-
tion of these disposal plans and hence the final design of the monitoring
program.

SOLID WASTE SOURCES AND DISPOSAL METHODS

     Solid waste generation and disposal  methods are summarized in Figure 2-5.
Figures 2-6 and 2-7 are flow diagrams for Phases II through IV.   A detailed
discussion of construction- and operation-generated solid wastes is presented
in the following paragraphs.

Construction and Mine Development

     During construction of the mine adits and processing plant, about 161
hectares (400 acres) of land will be denuded, excavated, or disturbed (Table
2-1).  This altered land surface presents a potential  groundwater pollution
threat due to leaching through the disturbed soil.

     In the course of Phase II, about 48 hectares (120 acres) will  be affected.
During Phases III and IV,  an additional  113 hectares (280 acres) will  be dis-
turbed.   Most of the debris from the mine shafts will  go onto the spent shale
Pile, but about 76,000 m3 (100,000 yd3)  from ventilation shafts  on Tract U-b
will be placed in a landfill of 1 hectare (2.4 acres)  (WRSP,  1976a).   The loca-
tion of this landfill  has not been specified.

     Some of the topsoil  which is suitable for aiding revegetation will be
removed and stockpiled.  This topsoil  will  later be spread over  areas  to be
revegetated.  Revegetated areas where the soil  is deficient will be fertilized,
giving rise to another possible source of leached pollutants.

     Large amounts of debris will be generated during construction of the

                                     13

-------
 facilities  for  various phases of development.  This will consist of scrap
 lumber  and  metal, excess concrete, packing containers, and similar construc-
 tion waste,  and general trash and garbage from shop, warehouse, and employee
 facilities.   Construction waste is expected to average about 13.7 tonnes (15
 tons) per day and general waste about 1.8 tonnes  (2 tons) per day.  The
 former  will  be  collected in twenty 34 m3 (45 yd3) bins and the latter in one
 3.8 m3  (5 yd3)  bin for truck haulage to a landfill where it will be spread
 and covered.  For the construction period of Phase II, the waste will be dis-
 posed of in  a side canyon of Southam Canyon.  The area method of landfill ing
 will be employed.  A catchment will be constructed west of the landfill to
 catch any leachate.  The landfill will be covered with spent shale during the
 latter  part  of  Phase II.  The same procedure will be followed during construc-
 tion for Phases  III and IV.

 Mine and Refinery Operation

 Raw Shale-

     A  large  amount of raw shale dust and fines will be disposed of as waste.
 During  Phase  II  processing, no TOSCO retorts will be in operation, and all  of
 the shale fines  from the crushers will be dumped on the spent shale pile.
 About 1,180  tonnes (1,300 tons) per day of this fine shale will be produced.
 During  Phases III and IV, the fine shale will  be retorted but significant
 amounts of shale dust too fine to be retorted will be produced by the crush-
 ers.  At full-scale operation, the shale dust will total about 519 tonnes
 (570 tons) per day, of which 491 tonnes (540 tons) will be raw shale dust and
 the rest spent shale dust.   This dust will  be trapped by water sprays in the
 dust control  system and pumped to the processed shale moisturizer, and thence
 to the  spent  shale pile.  About 36 tonnes (40 tons) per day of raw shale dust
will be produced by the primary crushers located in the mine during full opera-
 tion.   This dust will  be pumped as slurry to mined out areas and will  not be
 disposed of on the surface.

     Stockpiles of crushed raw shale will be maintained on the surface during
 plant operations.  Although not actually waste products, these piles do
 present a groundwater pollution potential.   The shale will  be stored in
 unprotected conical piles on the ground surface.

Spent Shale-

     By far the largest single possible groundwater pollution source is the
processed shale.  Under the Unified Soil  Classification System, the shale
residue has the texture of a silty gravel,  and exhibits little resistance to
wetting, in contrast to spent TOSCO shale.   The shale residues will  have a
pH of 10.7 to 11.8 and will  contain from 6,000 to 20,000 ppm of soluble salts.

     During Phase II,  5,270 tonnes (5,900 tons) per day of spent shale will
be produced.  This shale will  be moisturized to about 10 percent by weight
and moved by conveyor belt  to the disposal  site where it will  be loaded on
trucks  for distribution and dumping (Figure 2-8).  About 53 hectares p30
acres)  on the eastern edge  of Southam Canyon will be covered to a maximum
depth  of 30 meters (100 feet)  to accommodate a total  volume of 3.4 million  m3

                                     14

-------
 (4.5 million yd3) of  spent  shale.  This pile will contain no TOSCO processed
 shale,  but will  contain a larger amount of raw shale fines than the Phases  III
 and IV  shale pile.

     The  processed  shale pile will gradually cover Southam Canyon in a fanlike
 pattern over the course of  Phases  III and IV (Figure 2-9).  The method of
 transport will  be the same, except that the conveyor belt will be relocated.
 The total area  covered during the  life of the project will amount to 930 hect-
 ares (2,300 acres)  to a maximum depth of about 150 meters (500 feet).  The
 total volume is  projected to be 725 million m3 (950 million yd3).

     At the disposal  site, moisturized shale will be dumped on the ground
 surface and compacted by the trucks driving over it.  The upper surface of
 the pile  will be specially compacted to reduce its permeability to 2.5 to 5
 cm (1 to  2 inches)  per hour.

     The  DDP states that the spent shale will be moisturized to 10 percent by
 weight  and will  have  a field capacity of about 20 percent (White River Shale
 Project,  1976a).  Due to the arid  nature of the region (potential evapotrans-
 piration  is about 48  inches and precipitation is about 10 inches), most pre-
 cipitation will  be absorbed by the spent shale and subsequently discharged to
 the atmosphere as evapotranspiration draws it to the surface, according to the
 DDP.  However, depending on the exact nature of the Paraho and TOSCO spent
 shale mixtures,  the details of the dumping and compaction, the degree of
 revegetation, and the climatic conditions under which infiltration might occur,
 leachate  from the shale pile could become a source of groundwater pollution.
 A particularly critical period is during buildup of the spent shale pile, prior
 to compaction, grading, covering with topsoil and revegetation.  After revege-
 tation, decay of sealants used between revegetation trenches may be followed  .
 by formation of  a surface layer of concentrated salts and other materials
 brought to the surface by capillary action in the compacted surface.   These
 materials may subsequently wash into revegetation trenches and infiltrate Into
 the shale pile.

     During Phase II, a small  retention dam will  be constructed to the west of
 the shale pile to catch any runoff or leachate.   Before Phase III, a larger
 dam will be placed at the mouth of Southam Canyon for the same purpose.  Any
water which collects  in these impoundments will  be used for moisturizing the
 shale.

 Revegetation-

     The spent shale  disposal  area will  be revegetated.   When filling is
complete in an area,  the surface will  be trenched and fertilized soil  deposit-
ed in the trenches to support revegetation.   The  surface of the shale pile
will  be temporarily sealed to  direct precipitation into  the trenches  (Figure


     The edges of the pile will  be formed to a  4:1  slope and contoured to fit
the topography.   Revegetation  trenches will  be  constructed along the  face to
 intercept runoff.  To further reduce erosion, three 6-meter (20-foot)  wide
benches with a 10 percent reverse slope will  be provided.   The top of the pile

                                     15

-------
 will  be diked to prevent runoff from the  surface.   Figure  2-11  is  an  artist's
 conception of the appearance  of the  side  of the  shale  pile after revegetation.

 Oil  Upgrading Wastes-

      Large quantities of industrial  wastes  will  be  generated  by the processes
 of recovering and treating the  shale oil.   All of these wastes  will be  hauled
 to the  shale  pile,  moisturized,  spread, and covered with spent  shale.   Alter-
 natively,  some of these  materials  (e.g.,  spent catalysts)  may be reclaimed.

      The most important  category of  industrial waste from  the standpoint of
 pollution  potential  is the catalysts and  filters used  in the  hydrotreating
 process, consisting of activated carbon and diatomaceous earth  filters  which
 have  become clogged,  and spent  catalysts.   These wastes will  total about 1,550
 tonnes  (1,700 tons)  per  year.   The largest  single contribution  will be  1,180
 tonnes  (1,300 tons)  per  year  of spent HDN (proprietary) catalyst.  Industrial
 solid wastes  are detailed in  Table 2-2.  Along with the filters and catalysts,
 about 637  tonnes (700 tons) per year of more inert  wastes  will  be  buried,
 including  attrited  alumina heat transfer balls from the TOSCO retorts and
 burned  fire bricks.

 Processing  Material  Stockpiles-

      During operation, the catalyst  and filter material described  above will
 be stockpiled on site prior to  use.   Hence,  the  potential  exists for  spills
 and releases  of these materials  from stockpiles.  Releases  of these poten-
 tially  toxic  materials from stockpiles are  less  likely than releases  after use.

 Miscellaneous  Solid Wastes-

      At  full  commercial  operation, approximately 4.6 tonnes (5 tons) per day
 of general  employee and  facility garbage and other waste will be produced.
 During  Phase  III operation, about half this  amount will be  disposed of, and
 during  Phase  II, far  less  than half.   This waste will be disposed of by sani-
 tary  landfill  in Southam  Canyon.  At  the beginning of Phase II, the landfill
 will  be on  the  ground surface; after  mining  commences, it will be  interlayered
 with  the spent  shale.

     A small amount of sludge will  be produced by the sanitary sewage second-
 ary treatment plant.  This will  amount to about  0.46 tonnes (0.5 ton) per day
 (dry weight) at full  production.  This organic material will be stored  in dry-
 ing beds for use in conditioning soil for revegetation.

     River water used for plant operations will  be treated, generating approxi-
mately 2.7 tonnes (3 tons) per day (dry weight;  270 tonnes  per day  wet weight)
of sludge material.  These wastes will be collected in a settling tank,  then
 pumped to the processed shale moisturizer and conveyed to the processed  shale
disposal site.
                                     16

-------
 LIQUID WASTE  SOURCES AND  DISPOSAL METHODS

 Construction  and  Mine  Development

      During facility construction and mine development, the volume of liquid
 wastes will be  small.   Portable chemical toilets will be used during construc-
 tion,  with at present  unspecified disposal off-tract, until completion of the
 sanitary waste  water treatment plant.  Stockpiles of supplies, such as gaso-
 line  and oils,  and  shop and maintenance areas where these materials are used,
 are other potential construction-related pollution sources.

      Approximately  0.9  tonne  (1 ton) of waste oil per week will be generated.
 This  will be  collected  in drums for salvage or disposal offsite.  Plans for
 disposition of  these materials are not complete at this time.

 Mine  and Refinery Operation

     General water  use  and waste product generation projections for proposed
 operations are  given in Figure 2-12.  The various processes involved in mining,
 processing, and upgrading the shale oil will  generate a large volume of waste
 waters of many  types.   During Phase II, total  waste water, including sanitary
waste water, oily waste water, storm runoff,  sour water bottoms, high TDS waste
 water, and sulfur slurry flow will  amount to  about 230 1/min (liters per minute)
 (60 gal/min) and, during Phase II about 5,800 1/min (1,530 gal/min).  Although a
 large amount of water will be used for dust control and other uses (680 1/min
 [180 gal/min])  during Phase II (12,000 1/min [6,065 gal/min] during Phase IV), a
 high level of reuse is  planned so that no surface or below-ground discharge of
 waste water is  planned.  The magnitude and mode of collection of various waste
 water streams are summarized in Table 2-3.

 Retorting and Related Facilities-

     Waste water from cleaning the facilities and industrial area will  contain
 oil and other organic products, suspended solids, and miscellaneous chemicals.
 The sewer will be vapor sealed and vented to  prevent fires or explosions from
 spreading through the plant in the sewers. The oily waste water will  be treat-
 ed by gravity separation and the skimmings will be stored and recovered.   The
 remaining water may be  treated by flotation,  and then will go to the waste
water holding pond.   Phase II is expected to  produce about 68 1/min (18 gal/
min) and Phase  IV about 1,100 1/min (290 gal/min) of waste water.

     The retorting and upgrading processes will also produce waste water.   The
retort units,  hydrotreating facilities, light-ends compression units,  flares,
and the ammonia wash will  all  emit sour water containing sulfides, ammonia,
 phenol, and other organics.   The Phase II operations will  produce about 95
 1/min (25 gal/min) and Phase IV operations about 4,740 1/min (1,250 gal/min)
of sour water.  This water will  be stripped and reused at the rate of 3,030
 1/min (800 gal/min), and the other 1,710 1/min (450 gal/min) of stripper
bottoms will  be released to the oil  water sewer and thence to the waste water
holding pond.

     The water supply treatment sedimentation  unit, ion exchange regenerator,

                                     17

-------
 cooling  tower,  tail gas unit,  sulfur plant, hydrogen plants, hydrotreating
 units, and  the  fines retorts will produce water with a  high inorganic dissolv-
 ed  solids level.  This water will be collected in a separate sewer and stored
 in  a  high-TDS waste water  tank.  The water in the tank  will be used for dust
 control  in  the  secondary crusher scrubbers and subsequently to wet the pro-
 cessed shale.   The total high-TDS waste water in Phase  II  is estimated to
 amount to 38 1/min (10 gal/min) and in Phase IV to 1,940 1/min (775 gal/min).
 Proposed development plans do  not call for treatment of this water.

      Sulfur byproduct, disposed of as a slurry, is included as a waste water.
 About 150 tonnes  (165 tons) per day of pure sulfur will be available for sale
 to  the fertilizer and chemical industries, but 79 tonnes (87 tons) per day
 (2.1  tonnes [2.3 tons] per day during Phase II) of low-grade sulfur will be
 slurried and added to the waste shale before it is transported to the disposal
 site.  This sulfur is produced by the Stretford unit.   Sulfur, however, is not
 in  great commercial demand; therefore, the commercial-grade sulfur may also
 be  transported  to the shale pile.

      All of these waste water streams, whether treated  or not, will be used
 for dust control in the scrubbers.  About 95 percent of this water will be
 recovered, with whatever additional materials it has acquired from the raw
 shale dust, and used for processed shale wetting.  The  processed shale will
 be  wetted to about 10 percent by weight.

 Mine  Water-

      Saline waters produced in the mine will  be pumped  into the high-TDS
 waste water holding tank.  No treatment will  be provided.  Sources of mine
 waste include the Bird's Nest Aquifer (downward leakage), and sources of
 recharge to the Bird's Nest Aquifer.  The head in the Douglas Creek is above
 the mining zone and creates a moderate potential  for upward leakage into the
 mine.

 Explosive Residues-                                         '

     A serious source of water pollution in some mining areas is explosive
 residues.  On the Utah tracts, ammonium nitrate-fuel  oil-based explosives
will  be used in the mine.  In the event of water leakage through the mined
 area, nitrates may contaminate the area groundwaters.   Collected mine water
will  be pumped to the surface to be used for moisturizing the processed shale.
 Hence these explosive residues may also end up in the shale pile.

 Sanitary Wastes -

      Employee facilities will produce waste water needing sanitary treatment.
 The Phase II flow will  be about 35 1/min (9 gal/min)  and the Phase IV about
 170 1/min (45 gal/min).   Portable chemical toilets will be used in the mine,
and their contents dumped into the sanitary sewers.   Sanitary waste water will
 be treated by sedimentation,  biological  oxidation,  and clarification process-
es, followed by chlorination.   It will  then be discharged to the waste water
holding pond.   All water in the holding pond will  be  used for dust control  in
the secondary crushers,

                                     18

-------
Storm Water Runoff-

     The largest single waste water stream on an instantaneous basis (though
not on the average) is expected to be storm runoff.  The runoff from the
plant itself will be carried in storm sewers, and the runoff from the rest of
the plant area in open ditches, to a screening, degritting, and oil  gravity
separation facility.  In violent storms, the degritting and oil gravity
separation may be bypassed.  The water will then be stored in the waste water
holding pond.  The holding pond and the drainage facilities are planned to
handle a 100-year flood runoff of 231,000 1/min (61,000 gal/min) from the
plant area.

     Waste water will  be created by storm runoff from the spent shale pile
in Southern Canyon or by leachate from under the pile.  This water will  very
likely have an extremely high inorganic salt level, and possibly dangerous
levels of organic compounds.  Surface runoff will  be trapped by the  impound-
ment on the western side of Southam Canyon (Phase II) or at the mouth of
Southam Canyon (Phases III and IV) and pumped back up to the shale pile for
dust control and compaction wetting.

Catastrophic Failures-

     In addition to pollution potential from normal plant and mine operations,
the potential also exists for groundwater quality degradation from accidents
or equipment failure.  It is evident that a major fire or explosion at the
retorting or upgrading facilities could release a great variety of contami-
nants which could infiltrate to the water table.  More likely, and potentially
more serious, is tank failure.

     The largest tankage volume will contain crude shale oil in a number of
containers totaling 240,000 m3 (1,500,000 bbl).  Also stored in large volumes
are naphtha, 56.000 m3 (350,000 bbl); high total dissolved solids (TDS) waste
water, 35,200 m3 (220,000 bbl); fuel oil, 11,200 m3 (70,000 bbl); ammonia,
8,000 m3 (50,000 bbl); and diesel  fuel, 5,600 m3 (35,000 bbl).  Stored  in
smaller volumes are butane, liquid nitrogen, and shale oil pour-point
depressant.

     All tankage will  be stored in a dike and holding pond system to minimize
the effects of tank failure.  According to the lease terms, this dike and hold-
ing pond system must be capable of containing 150 percent of the tank capacity
it surrounds plus the 100-year flood runoff for the drainage area of the tanks.
However, the WRSP considers this stipulation excessive and is petitioning for
its mitigation.

Miscellaneous Liquid Wastes-

     Approximately. one ton per week of waste oil and chemicals will  be  gener-
ated by equipment maintenance and plant laboratories.  These wastes  will  be
collected in drums for salvage or disposal.  Their transfer and handling
create some potential  for spillage and subsequent contamination of groundwater.
                                     19

-------
MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES AND CAUSES

Exploration Drilling and Testing

     During initial  exploration of the tracts and development of baseline data,
numerous holes were drilled to collect geologic, lithologic,  resource,  and
hydro!ogic data.  Such holes may be or become pollution sources by the  follow-
ing mechanisms:

     •  Flow of groundwater to the surface

     •  Aquifer interconnections due to improper well  completion or plugging

     •  Pumping of wells during hydrologic surveys (Section 5).

Exploration holes are identified in Figure 5-4.

Oil and Gas Wells

     Eight oil and gas wells have been drilled on the tracts.  Only one,  in
the central portion of Tract U-a, has produced significant amounts of gas.
The others were dry holes.  By the mechanisms identified above, these holes
are potential pollution sources.

White River Dam

     Oil shale development will require large volumes of industrial quality
water.   The source of water favored by the iilhite River Shale Project is a dam
proposed by the State of Utah, to be built on the White River.  The dam site
is just below the mouth of Southam Canyon.  The dam will be 38 meters (125
feet) high and will  impound a lake with a surface elevation of approximately
1,524 meters (5,000 feet).  The lake will extend upstream well past Hell's
Hole Canyon.

     Such a dam and lake could seriously alter the hydrogeologic framework.
The hydrology of the White River would obviously be drastically changed.   The
lake could have several effects on the groundwater.  The Bird's Nest zone
crops out beneath the projected surface of the lake.  The increased hydrostatic
head of the lake would reduce discharge of water from the Bird's Nest Aquifer
into the White River at the point where the Bird's Nest zone outcrops cross
beneath the lake.  Water might drain into the mine workings, particularly in
the event of mine subsidence and fracturing.  The hydrostatic pressure of water
penetrating laterally into the Uinta Formation might open bedding plane seams,
allowing an increased flux of leachates or pollutants entering from above.

Subsidence

     Present plans for room-and-pillar extraction will aid to mitigate sub-
sidence potential.  Additional data on oil shale compressibility and over-
burden rock mechanics are needed to even qualitatively address this problem.
Related factors are formation of fissures above the mining zone which could
affect pollution potential of mine water, effects of the White River Dam, and
disruption of the spent shale pile which will lie above the U-a mine zone.

                                     20

-------
Figure 2-1.   Most  probable plan-schedule of facility development  (WRSP, 1976a)

-------
rv>
                     Figure 2-2.  General site plan  for  development of Tracts U-a and U-b.

-------
co
                                                                               r/v*:  Ntf
                                            .WATER FROM SOUR V^TER SfWPPER
                                            flAWWATER   \ ' -
                                             ALtOlt '
                                             *L OH.

      COOLING TOWEB^
      ,'SECOND*lpY CRUSH
                            ^P*       g
                                                        BfeK    •/•-—
                                                                         ;
                                                              -^        j     i
                                                                        ;
                                                                  ,
                                                                        /
                                                                       >*^ - . .-   ^^_"_-
       NOTE: SINGLE RETORT PHASE
           FACILITY IN SOLID BLACK
                          Figure 2-3.   Phase II  process  area  plot plan  (WRSP,  1976a)

-------
ro
LEGEND:
A - TREATED EFFLUENT AND STORM RUNOFF
  HOLDING POND
B - PRODUCT PIPELINE PUMP STATION
C - WATER TREATING
D-LAB
E - CONTROL HOUSE
F - SHOPS/WAREHOUSE
G - FIRE ENGINE GARAGE
H - SUBSTATION AND SWITCHGEAR
I - MINE ENTRANCE
J — CHANGE HOUSE
K- CAFETERIA
L - ADMINISTRATION PARKING
M-ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
N - BOILER HOUSE
0-AIR COOLING
P - SECONDARY CRUSHING AND SCREENING
Q -PRIMARY CRUSHED SHALE
  STOCKPILE/STORAGE
R - SULFUR STORAGE
S - AMMONIA STORAGE
      /t.  COARSE SHALE REACTOR
      2.  FINE SHALE REACTOR
      3.  COMPRESSOR - HIGH Btu GAS
      4.  CRUDE SHALE OIL HYDROTREATER
         UNIT
      5.  AMINE REGENERATOR
      6.  HYDROGEN PLANT
      7.  NAPHTHA HYDROGEN TREATOR UNIT
      8.  SULFUR PLANT
      9.  WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
     10.  COMPRESSOR - LOW Btu GAS
                                                                    '•A ^•'•?  l.rV   .   .     3* '  ^S'         .   /
                                                                 £i*^   I            M$5       7
                                                        -/r-a.  ;lc                 «     •   r
                             Figure 2-4.   Process  area  plot plan,  Phases  III and  IV  (WRSP,  1976a).

-------
ro
CJ1
PROJECT
ACTIVITY
<
SOLID
WASTE
GENERATED
<
SOLID
WASTE
DISPOSITION
PHASE II PHASE III
START SINGLE RETORT START
MME FACILITY COMMERCIAL PLANT
OPENING STARTUP CONSTRUCTION
1 I 1
| CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCT
> 1 OPERATION

CONSTRUCTION WASTE CONSTRUCTIC
* 3.000 TONS * 30.000
PROCESS WASTE
* 4.000 TONS/YEAR
>
LANDFILL LANDFILL
PHASE IV
START
FIRST FULL END
TRAIN COMMERCIAL OF
STARTUP OPERATION OPERATIONS
1 1 '
I 1
RON //
FIRST TRAIN FIRST AND SECOND TRAIN OPERATION ^
1
MM WASTE
TONS
//
1 25.000 TONS/YEAR / ^
PROCESS WASTE *- 7 /
250,000 TONS/ YEAR S /
//
//
LANDFILL ^ ^
ALL WASTE (IN FUTURE) SINGLE RETORT PHASE ALL OTHER PROCESS AND CONSTRUCTION WASTE IN SINGLE RETORT PHASE ALL OTHER PROCESS WASTE IN
PROCESSED SHALE DISPOSAL AREA PROCESSED SHALE PILE PROCESSED SHALE PILE
^PUJOT w'lT>TpROMSSEOE»tALE'*t 1* 	 SLURRY WASTES ADMIXED IN PLANT WITH PROCESSED SHALE 	 »
234SS7S 9 10
PROJECT YEAR
11 12 1J 14 Y
               Figure 2-5.  Solid waste disposal schematic for  White River Shale Project (1976a).

-------
      GAS TO
     THERMAL
     OXIDIZER
                   2SMILLIONSCFD
     DIESEL FUEL
       58BPCD
                             PROCESSED
                               SHALE
                              DISPOSAL
TOMINE35GPM
^	
7,220 TPCD
RAW WATER
230 GPM
                                                   TREATED
                                                    WATER
IMPORT
POWER
                                                       ENERGY
                                                     DISTRIBUTION
                                                          \
                                                        USAGE
                                               CRUDE SHALE OIL
                                                  4,730 BPCD
                                            SULFUR
                                            2.3 TPCD
               PROCESSED SHALE, SULFUR,
               AND FINES
                                             DISTRIBUTION
       Figure 2-6.   Phase II Flow  Diagram (WRSP,  1976a).
                                26

-------
                                                                     LOW-BTU GAS  ^
                                   13.900
MINED OIL SHALE
150.600 TPCO
  TO MINING
 AND CRUSHING
•4
  2.380 GPM
  HIGH-TDS
REUSE WATER.
 2'350GPM
RAW WATER

 5.960 GPM

                          24,000
              2.200 GPM
A
                 PROCESSED
                   SHALE
                  DISPOSAL
                                   TPCD
                                                          CRUDE
                                             RETORT
                                                                     TO TREATING
                                                                    HIGH-BTU GAS
                                                 HIGH-BTU GAS
                                   TPCD
                                           INDIRECT HEATED,
                                                          CRUDE
                                                   TO SOUR
                                                    WATER
                                                   STRIPPER
                                                   HIGH-BTU GAS
                                TPCD
                                SHALE
                                    CONTAINS
                                  520 GPM WATER
                                                680
                                               GPM
                                                                       TREATING
                                                                     TO UPGRADING
                                                                      100.000 BPCD
                                                    TO SOUR
                                                     WATER
                                                    STRIPPER
                                                               TO VERTICAL-TYPE
                                                                 RETORTS FOR
                                                                DUST CONTROL
                                                                     Tl
                                                                      lOOGPM
                                                    TO RAW WATER TREATING 3.730 GPM
     Figure  2-7.   Phases  III and IV  Flow Diagram  (WRSP, 1976a),
                                        27

-------
Figure 2-8.   Phase II spent shale fill  plan (WRSP, 1976a).
                           28

-------
ro
10
                             YEAR 5 (APPROXIMATELY)
                                       t ' *^^s ..jiir. -,-, ,-r*4 .  -.,«  .'
                 »   \  i   - • 1 MtSpSp^ S.
                        ":      v  ;:: :%5 -"1":
                               ' •'^^  \  * 3  . ,*    i " . /  - ' "*r -    i •* '

                                 1
                                                                          igSU   i    A.      •   -   -

                                                                             ?X.     J_^U^ »  3
                                                                                 V^'"^-    £f T^_^  '• ^~"
                                                                            '•• . 1_.  *•*»	 ^•f*- '     -••>:

                                                                                  YEAR 10 (APPROXIMATELY)
                            YEAR 15 (APPROXIMATELY)
                                                                                  YEAR JO (APPROXIMATELY)
                        Figure 2-9.   Phases  III and IV spent shale fill  plans  (WRSP,  1976a).

-------
                                                     4 : 1 SLOPE
                    TEMPORARILY SEALED
                  WATER COLLECTING SURFACE
              OMPACTEO SHALE LAVER
            PERMEABILITY 1 TO 2IN./HR.
                               SLOPE SURFACE

      LOWER BOUNDARY Of COMPACTED SHALE
                          TEMPORARILY SEALED
                       WATER COLLECTING SURFACE
                                FLAT AREA
Figure 2-10.
Surface modification and vegetation  on processed
shale  (conceptual-not  to scale) (WRSP, 1976a).
                                   30

-------
x ^--^^-^•V^^
                            ..
 '~«&.£&'»! PLANTING TRENCHESj&fr.s$y?\»,     •*'"?-* ^
               ;"-» '    >'•'• *, •' -• .i, ; ' */
           ^^^:-^.^ -w.- -^ 'W7^

           •;l^i^''^
           ^^   X>^^^1^^
 Figure 2-11. Proposed contouring of spent shale pile for

       revegetation (WRSP, 1976a).
             31

-------
               OUST CONTROL IN
               MINE, CRUSHERS; '
               COMPACTION
                                                                        SEDIMENTATION UNDERFLOW
                                              PROCESSED
                                              (HALE
                                              WETTING
RAW WATER
               WATER
            TREATMENT PLANT
00
                                  SERVICE WATER
                                      STRETFORD
                                        UNIT
                                      SULFUR
                                      SLURRY
                      OILY
                   WASTE WATER
                                        SOUR WATER
                                         BOTTOMS
                                 WASTE WATER
                                  TREATMENT
                                                      SOUR WATER
     1—1
                                                                                        BOILER FEED WATER
                                                                       HIGH TDS
1
                                                                     WASTE WATER
rn
                                                                                                               CLEAN
                                                                                                             CONDENSATE
                                                            TREATED LOW TDS
                                                             WASTE WATER
             SANITARY
            WASTE WATER
                                                              OUST CONTROL.
                                                              CRUSHERS. SCRUBBERS
                                                                                                              PROCESSED SHALE WETTING
                           Figure 2-12.   General  water-use  flow  schematic  (from WRSP, 1976a).

-------
                                      TABLE 2-1.   PROJECTED  SIZE OF  DISTURBED  AREAS  (WRSP,  1976a)
to
CO




Types of Disturbance
Access Roads0"'
Utility Corridors'0'
Processed Shale Landfill and Conveyance'11'
Single Retort Phase Dam'*1""' Dam!?
Pool(£)
Southam Canyon Retention Dam'"' Dam«i
Pool'1'
Process Site
Tank farm
Tank farm emergency dikes
Wastewater holding basin Darn/n
Pool'*'
Freshwater reservoir'*' Dam,!!
Pool'"
Process pad, roads, buildings, sulfur
product chipping and NHj storage, etc.
Mining adits and shafts, stockpiles,
changehouse, secondary crushing, etc.
Mine Vent Shafts and Excavation Landfill
Total Disturbed Area



Single
Retort
(Acres)
44
11
130
3
19
-

1
3
6
-
—
26
8
-
251



First
Train
(Acres)
-
31
119
—
6
35

14
23
1
4
4
9
74
10
3
333



Two-
Train
(Acres)
-
-
2,046
-
-

—
-
-
—
-
1
<1
2,047



Total
(Acres)
44
42
2,295
3
19
6
35

15
23
4
10
4
9
100
19
3
2,631
Paved<"'
and Built-
Over Areas
Including
Dam Pools
(Acres)
20
-
7
19
35

9
10
—
9
75
16
-
200

Are..'"'
Revegetated
During
Operation
(Acres)
22
42
2, 183
3
5

~~
23
4
—
~
12
3
3
2,304
                  (a)  Total of these columns do not agree with "Total Disturbed Area" because owing to fire hazards, some
                      slopes may not be revegetated.  Also, some areas revegetated during the single retort phase will be
                      filled over during construction of commercial-scale units.
                  (b)  Area* for access roads include allowances for an electric utility line.
                  (c)  Single retort phase 6-inch freshwater pipeline includes an allowance for an electric utility line.
                  (d)  Single retort catchment is filled over during first-train operation.  Commercial operation disturbances
                      are calculated for first-train disturbances and two-train disturbances.
                  (e)  Pool areas for all impoundments except freshwater reservoir are maximum design areas.
                  (f)  Dam areas indicated are the areas left exposed when maximum design pool is impounded.

-------
                  TABLE 2-2.  SUMMARY OF SOLID WASTES FROM COMMERCIAL MINE AND PLANT OPERATION*
Waste source
Type and major
constituents
Approximate quantity generated
As produced
As disposed
Waste collection
and storage
Waste disposition
i-^rcial mining During commercial mining for the first train, about one-half as much waste will be produced
".ZOO tonnes as during full commercial mining (see below). The waste sources, types, and disposition
(80.400 tons) per day will be the same as below.
«C^rC^inPiilIltKKi?rat10Il Dur1"9 f1rst tra1n °Perat1on« about one-half as much waste will be produced as during full
8,000 ra (50,000 bbl) per day commercial plant operation (see below). The waste sources, types, and disposition will be
the same as below.
Full commercial mining; 146,300 tonnes (160,800 tons) per day
Primary crushing
Equipment maintenance
Shops, warehouse, and
employee facilities
Raw shale dust
(95% moisture)
Waste oils
General trash and
garbage
Full commercial plant operation — first and
Secondary crushing
and screening
Raw shale feeding
to vertical retorts
Processed shale dis-
charge from vertical
retorts
Raw shale dust
(95% moisture)
Raw shale dust
(95% moisture)
Processed shale
dust (95%
moisture)
36 tonnes (40 tons)
per day (dry)
About .91 tonne
(1 ton) per week
1.8 tonnes (2 tons)
per day
728 tonnes (800 tons)
per day (wet)
(503 1/min; 133 gal/min)
1.8 tonnes (2 tons)
per day
Wet scrubber and
settling tank
Collected in drums
for salvage
Collected in one
3.8 m3 (5 yd3)
bin
second train; 16,000 m3 (100,000 bbl) per day
109 tonnes (120 tons)
(dry) per day
6.2 tonnes (6.8 tons)
per day (dry)
5 tonnes (5.5 tons)
per day (dry)
2,200 tonnes (2,400 tons)
per day (wet)
(1520 1/min; 400 gal/min)
12.1 tonnes (13.3 tons)
per day (wet)
(83 1/min; 22 gal/min)
9.6 tonnes (10.5 tons)
per day (wet)
(7.6 1/min; 2 gal/min)
Wet suppression
and scrubber
Wet scrubber and
settling tank
Wet scrubber and
settling tank
a From WRSP, 1976a
Slurry pumped to disposal site
in mine
Hauled to slop oil tanks for
reclaiming
Taken to surface and hauled
by truck to landfill site for
disposition

Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to pro-
cessed shale disposal site
Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to pro-
cessed shale disposal site
Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to pro-
cessed shale disposal site

co
                                                                                                    CONTINUED

-------
                                                 TABLE  2-2 (continued)
Waste source
Type and major
constituents
Approximate quantity generated
As produced
As disposed
Waste collection
and storage
Waste disposition
Full commercial plant operation - first and second train; 16,000 m3 (100,000 bbl) per day (continued)
Raw shale feeding
to fines- type
Fines-type retorts
Fines- type retort
preheater exhausts
Fines-type retort
ball elutriators
Fines-type retort
processed shale
moisturizer ex-
haust
Crude shale oil
hydrotreaters
Naphtha hydro-
treater reactor
Hydrogen plant

Raw shale dust
(95% moisture)
Attrited alumina
balls
Raw shale dust
(95% moisture)
Processed shale
dust (95%
moisture)
Processed shale
dust (85%
moisture)

Spent HDN catalyst
(nickel-based pro-
prietary; arsenic
trapped in top
portion of bed)
Spend HON catalyst
(cobalt-molybdate
based)
Catalyst support
(Alundum balls)

2.2 tonnes (2.4 tons)
per day (dry)
637 tonnes (700 tons)
328 tonnes (360 tons)
per day (dry)
27 tonnes (30 tons)
per day (dry)
1.73 tonnes (1.9 tons)
per day (dry)

42.8 tonnes (47 tons)
per day (wet)
30.2 1/min, 8 gal/min)
per day (average)
6,534 tonnes (7,180 tons)
per day (wet)
541 tonnes (594 tons)
per day (wet)
34.6 tonnes (38 tons)
per day (wet)

1,183 tonnes (1,300 tons)
per year (average)
7.3 tonnes (8 tons) per
year (average)
76.4 tonnes (84 tons) per
year (average)

Wet scrubber and
settling tank
Discharged from
retorts along with
processed shale
Wet scrubber and
settling tank
Wet scrubber and
settling tank
Wet scrubber and
settling tank

Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able, container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to
processed shale disposal site
Conveyed along with processed
shale to processed shale dis-
posal site
Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to
processed shale disposal site
Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to pro-
cessed shale disposal site
Pumped to processed shale
moisturizer; conveyed to
processed shale disposal site

Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed

CO
01
                                                                                                      CONTINUED

-------
                                                  TABLE  2-2 (continued)
Waste source
Full commercial plant
Hydrogen plant
guard bed reactor
Hydrogen plant
HDS reactor
Hydrogen plant
HT shift converter
Hydrogen plant
LT shift converter
Hydrogen plant
primary reformer
Hydrogen plant
met ha na tor
Hydrogen plant
Type and major
constituents
Approximate quantity generated
As produced Ad disposed
Waste collection
and storage
operation — first and second train; 16,000 m3 (100,000 bbl) per day (continued)
Spent guard bed
catalyst (zinc
sulfide-zinc
oxide)
Spent HOS catalyst
(cobalt-molybdate
based)
Spent catalyst (iron-
chromium oxides)
Spent converter
catalyst (copper-
zinc oxides)
Spent reformer
catalyst (nickel-
based)
Spent methanation
catalyst (nickel-
based)
Total spent catalysts
see below
see below
see below
see below
see below
see below
296 tonnes (325 tons) per
year (average)
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Special handling
procedure; trans-
ferred to air-
tight transport-
able container
Waste disposition

Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled. to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
Either hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered; or reclaimed
co
                                                                                                   CONTINUED

-------
                                             TABLE 2-2  (continued)
Waste source
Hydrogen plant
Benfield solution
filter
Sulfur plant Claus
unit reactors
Amine plant
DEA filter
Amine plant
DEA filter
Shops, warehouse,
employee facilities
Type and major
constituents
Deactivated carbon
filter cake
(adsorbed hydro-
carbons)
Spent Claus unit
catalyst (de-
activated alumina)
Diatomaceous earth
filter cake
(absorbed hydro-
carbons)
Deactivated carbon
filter cake
(adsorbed hydro-
carbons )
General trash
and garbage
Approximate quantity generated
As produced
As disposed
24.6 tonnes (27 tons) per
year (average)
30.9 tonnes (34 tons) per
year (average)
51.9 tonnes (57 tons) per
year (average)
16.4 tonnes (18 tons) per
year (average)
4.6 tonnes (5 tons)
per day
4.6 tonnes (5 tons)
per day
Waste collection
and storage
Drained and dumped
into liquid-tight
transportable con-
tainers
Drained and dumped
into liquid-tight
transportable con-
tainers
Drained and dumped
into liquid-tight
transportable con-
tainers
Drained and dumped
into liquid tight
transportable con-
tainers
Collected in one
3.8 m3 (5 yd3)
bin
Waste disposition
Hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered
Hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered
Hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered
Hauled to landfill site,
moisturized, spread, and
covered
Picked up and hauled to pro-
cessed shale landfill area,
spread, and covered
co

-------
                                   TABLE 2-3.   SUMMARY OF WASTE WATER STREAMS3
Wastewater
stream
Sour
water

Bl owdown



Slowdown
Wash down
Sanitary
wastewater
Contaminated
storm runoff

Saline mine
water



c
"a.
v\

o
5

Source
Vertical -type IH retorts
Fines-type retorts
Low-Btu gas treating
Hydrotreating units
Light ends compression
Gas flares
Fines-type retorts
Hydrotreating units
Hydrogen plant
Sulfur plant
Tail gas units
Cooling tower
Power and boiler plant
BFU treatment
General process area
Employee facilities
General plant area,
product pump station,
and tank farms
Groundwater

Flow. 1/min (qal/min)
Phase II
57 (15)
38.(10)
91 (25)



19 (5)
j 19 (5)
38 (10)
72 (20)
38 (10)
49,350 m3
(40 acre-feet)

Nil

Phases III
and IV6
19 (5)
152 (40)
948 (250)
3,468 (915)
72 (20)
72 (20)
4,730 (1,250)
72 (20)
19 (5)
227 (60)
19 (5)
19 (5)
356 (95)
1,743 (460)
379 (100)
379 (100)
2,500 (660)
1,100 (290)
170 (45)
55,500 m3
(45 acre-feet)

Nil

Collection
Oily sewer
(after stripping)

High-TDS sewer



High-TDS sewer
Oily sewer
Sanitary sewer
Storm sewer,
culverts, ditches

High-TDS sewer

Remarks
During commercial plant operation, 3,030 1/min
(800 gal/min) of the stripped sour water Is
reused In the hydrotreating units. Net dis-
charge to the sewer is 1,700 1/min (450 gal/min).





Steam generators will be used during Phase II.


Volume for expected surface runoff during the
100-year storm.

If present, the stream will be used for dust
control inside the mine. Any excess will be
used for processed shale wetting.
a From WRSP , 1976a
Flows during Phase II operation are projected to be about 50 percent of those expected during full commercial plant operation (Phase IV)
CO

-------
                                  SECTION 3

                             POTENTIAL  POLLUTANTS


      Potential pollution sources in the study area were identified in Section
 2 and methods of disposal were described.  In this section,  the characteris-
 tics of potential pollutants are described in detail.

 POTENTIAL POLLUTANTS FROM SOLID WASTES

 Construction and Mine Development

      Construction of mine and processing plant facilities will  be  the initial
 source of possible pollution.  A total of 162 hectares  (400  acres)  of land
 surface will  be disturbed during construction.  Most of the  soils  involved
 are Lithic Calciorthids (Section 5),  indicating an accumulation of calcium
 salts.   The principal  anions involved  are probably sulfate and  carbonate.
 These salts,  particularly sulfates  which are  generally  more  soluble than
 carbonates, may be leached from disturbed soils and potentially affect ground-
 water quality.

      All  of the debris  produced by  construction will be disposed on the site.
 The debris will  consist largely of  waste lumber, scrap  metal, and excess
 concrete.   Many of these materials  are relatively  inert.

Mne and  Refinery Operation

 Raw Shale-

      The  shale  crushers  will  produce 491  tonnes (540 tons) per day of shale
dust  too  fine to  be processed by the retorts.  This dust will be trapped by
water sprays and  pumped  to the  processed  shale moisturizer.   Although the
J*aw shale  is water repellent  due to its  large organic content, the dust will
be  a  factor in possible  groundwater pollution due to the large surface area
°f  the fine dust and the  fact that the dust is in intimate contact with the
water during the dust control and moisturizing process.   The pollutants poten-
tially released from the  raw shale may be similar to those produced from
spent shale as discussed  below.  The relative magnitude  of such releases  may
be  substantially different from spent shale.

Spent Shale-

     By sheer volume, the processed shale overwhelms all of  the other possible
groundwater pollutants.   It is estimated (White River Shale  Project, 1976a)
that 725 million cubic meters (950 million cubic yards)  of processed shale

                                    39

-------
 will  be disposed of during the  life of the  project.   The  shale will  be dumped
 in Southam Canyon on the  west edge  of Tract U-a,  eventually  filling  it to a
 depth of 150 meters (500  feet).  If water should  penetrate the pile,  the
 water would be expected to leach  substantial  amounts  of soluble salts, trace
 elements,  and organic compounds from the spent  shale.  If this leachate were
 to infiltrate to the groundwater, it would  cause  serious  pollution of the
 aquifer.

      The quality of leachate  through or runoff  from spent shale disposal
 piles is highly dependent upon  the  site-specific  characteristics of  the oil
 shale body and the retorting  and  recovery processes used.  Specific  informa-
 tion  on certain spent shale characteristics for the Paraho process is not
 available.   In the absence of these specific  data, information on various
 retorting  processes,  including  the  U.S. Bureau  of Mines Gas  Combustion
 process, the Union Oil Company  process, and the TOSCO process'(which will be
 employed by the White River Shale Project)  is presented in the following
 pages.  The vertical  direct heating kiln of the Paraho process is somewhat
 similar to  the direct heating gas combustion  kiln employed in the Bureau of
 Mines and  Union Oil  processes.  Hence,  the  data provided  may serve in the
 absence of  process-specific data to address the question  of  spent shale
 characteristics.

      The raw oil  shale consists of  mineral  grains imbedded in a kerogen
 matrix.  The minerals composing the grains  are, in roughly descending order of
 abundance,  quartz,  dolomite,  calcite, and albite  (Table 3-1; Desborough et
 al.,  1974).   Because  of its chemical  stability, the quartz presents little
 pollution hazard.   The calcite and  dolomite, however, are soluble after
 release from the  kerogen  matrix.  The albite and  smaller  amounts of dawsonite
.and nahcolite release sodium  after  retorting.   Sulfur occurs in the kerogen
 and composes about  1  percent  of the organic material.  Sulfur in oil  shale
 also  occurs  as  sulfide.   There is a correlation between the  richness  of the
 oil shale and the  sulfide content (Desborough et  al., 1974).   This sulfide
 is oxidized  during  retorting, producing sulfates.

      Two factors combine  to give the spent oil  shale a high  soluble salt
 content:  the release of  salts formerly trapped in the organic matrix and
 the decomposition of minerals in the intense heat of retorting.   It is expect-
 ed that the  soluble salt  content will be from 6,000 to 20,000 ppm by weight
 (White  River Shale  Project, 1976).  The actual  figure may be on the high side
 of this range.  Schmidt-Collerus (1974) reports salt contents of 20,000 to
 50,000  ppm.   If the total   projected volume of retorted shale (approximately
 909 million  tonnes  [1 billion tons]) is produced, it may contain more than
 18.2  million  tonnes (20 million tons) of soluble salts.

      Such a  high level of  soluble salt is certain to give a high TDS  load to
 any water in  contact with  it  for even a short length of time.  Typical TDS
 concentrations of leachates can be  very high.   In one experiment (Ward,  1972),
 the first leachate collected after  percolation through a 120 cm thickness of
 spent shale  had a TDS value of 140,000 ppm.

      Several  experiments have been done by various groups to  determine the
major ions and their concentrations  in the spent shale leachate.   Ward (1971)

                                     40

-------
TABLE 3-1.   MAJOR MINERALS IN RAW SHALE AND OIL SHALE ASHED AT 525° C -
            DETERMINATIONS BY BULK X-RAY DIFFRACTOMETER ANALYSIS9
Sample 011
yield
source (»dolomite>calcite, K-feldspar>dawsonite, nahcolite(?)
Quartz>»dolomite, analcite>dawsonite, K-feldspar>calcite 	

Oil shale ashed
at 525° C
Quartz, albite>»dolomite (anhydrite)
Quartz>»dol omi te>cal ci te>al bi te (anhydri te)
Quartz» -dolomite, albite (anhydrite)
Quartz >albite»>dolomite (anhydrite)
Quartz »dol omi te>al bite, calcite
Quartz>dolomite, calcite>albite
Quartz»>K-feldspar, calcite (anhydrite)
Quartz >»K- feldspar, calcite>dolomite
>siderite (anhydrite)
Quartz »K-f el dspar»cal cite, dolomite,
albite, mica (anhydrite)
Quartz »K- feldspar, calcite, dolomite, siderite,
albite (anhydrite)
., 1974
in order of decreasing abundance: Quartz, Si02; Albite, NaAlSi3Og; Dolomite, CaMg(C03)2; Calcite, CaCO.,; Siderite, FeC03;
Dawsonite, Na3Al(C03)3 • 2A1(OH)3; Analcite, NaAlSi-O, • H-0; Nahcolite, NaHCO,;
K- feldspar, variable composition.

-------
 performed  an experiment  in which he put 100 grams of shale residue through a
 No.  40  sieve, mixed  it with 250 ml of distilled water for 5 minutes in a
 blender, added 750 ml more water, filtered and analyzed.  The results are
 summarized in Table  3-2  and show that the TOSCO, USBM, and especially the
 UOC  spent  shale,  produce sodium sulfate leachate.

      In another experiment, 100 grams of shale were put through a No. 40 sieve
 and  shaken manually  with 1 liter of distilled water for 5 minutes.  The
 results are tabulated in Table 3-2.  These results are similar to the TOSCO
 data  from  the blender experiment.

      In a  more physically realistic experiment, Ward (1971) filled a 120-cm
 column  with 12,500 grams of TOSCO shale residue and maintained a constant head
 of 2  cm of distilled water.  The leachate was analyzed in serial batches to
 reveal  changes in concentration as leaching continued.  The initial leachate
 had a TDS  of 140,000 mg/1.  Other data from this experiment are summarized in
 Table 3-2.  These data show a shift in the chemical composition of the leachate
 over  time.  Initially the cations are dominated by sodium (73.7 percent of the
 milliequivalent total of sodium, calcium, and magnesium), while the estimated
 ultimate leachate water  is predominantly magnesium (58.4 percent of the total
 sodium, calcium, and magnesium milliequivalents).  The proportion of calcium
 also  increases with  time, but to a smaller extent than magnesium.  Sulfate is
 the predominant (90  percent) anion in both the initial and ultimate leachate
 water.

      In addition to  column studies. Ward (1972) also performed snowmelt leach-
 ing studies under realistic conditions.  Sixty-two tonnes (68 tons) of TOSCO
 shale were  formed into a  bed 24.4 meters (80 feet) long, 2.4 meters (8 feet)
 wide at the lower end, and 3.6 meters (12 feet) wide at the top, with a maxi-
 mum thickness of 0.6 meter (2 feet) and a 0.75 slope.  Eighteen centimeters
 (7 inches)  of artificial  snow containing 4.5 centimeters (1.75 inches) of
 water were  sprayed on the surface.   The first leachate was produced after 2
 weeks and the bed was not saturated at the time.   A total  of 0.187 centimeter
 (0.073  inches) of leachate was produced.  Data from this experiment are con-
 tained  in Table 3-2.   The initial  percolation data show that the dominant
 anion is again sulfate,  as was shown in Ward's earlier column percolation
 studies.  However, the sodium concentration is reduced and calcium and magne-
 sium are greater in  this  study; in this sense, the results are similar to
 samples collected midway  through the earlier column studies.   By contrast,
 calcium is  the predominant cation in the runoff,  and bicarbonates are rela-
 tively  greater than  observed in percolation samples.   Additionally, the ionic
 composition of the runoff water is rather uniform between the initial  and
 final samples (Figure 3-1).

     Metcalf and Eddy (1975) performed similar tests.   A bed with a sealed
 base and drains was prepared and 45.5 tonnes (50 tons)  of TOSCO shale were
 shaped  into a pile 2.4 by 7.3 meters (8 by 24 feet),  1.4 meters (4.5 feet)
 deep, with a 4:1  sloping foot, 2.4 by 5.5 meters  (8 by 18 feet).   Water was
 applied at  the rate of 20.4 liters per square meter per hour (0.5 gal  per
 sq ft per hour) to test the penetration of water through the pile.   The
 results are contained in Table 3-3.   Table 3-3 also contains  results from a
water injection test and results of runoff and leachate water quality from
 simulated rainfall experiments.

                                    42

-------
                     TABLE 3-2.  RESULTS OF OIL SHALE LEACHATE WATER QUALITY EXPERIMENTS
Reference/ exper 1 merit
Ward, 1971 /Blender
Ward, 1971 /Shaker3

Ward, 1971/Column
Percolation



Ward, 1972/Snow Melt
Percolation
Sample type
Raw Shale
USBM
UOC
TOSCO
Raw Shale
USBM
TOSCO
TOSCO, 254 mlb
TOSCO, 1 ,060 ml
TOSCO, 1,600 ml
TOSCO, 2,500 ml
TOSCO, 4,560 ml
TOSCO, » (esti-
mated)
TOSCO, initial runoff
TOSCO, final runoff
Initial Percolate
Composite Percolate
a IDS is residue after evaporation at 103"
TDS
(mg/1)
146
1,001
9,702
1,115
270
970
1,121
46,800°
15,060C
4,410C
3,420C
2,310C
1,080C

446
43
lonductivity
(ymhos/cm)
310
1,495
11,050
1,750
300
1,320
1,640
78,100
25,100
7,350
5,700
3,850
1,800

572
60
10,730
9,630
(mg/1)
24
72
625
32
-
10
-
-
:

1.8
<0.1
23
23
Na
(mg/1)
48
225
2,100
165
-
206
35.200
6,900
735
-
86

11
0.92
3,400
3,040
Ca
(mg/1)
10
42
327
114
-
102
3,150
900
585
~
64

83
9.2
1,360
1,120
Mg
(mq/1)
1.0
3.5
91
27
-
31
4,720
1,450
468
~
118

22.3
1.3
1,525
1,175
HC03
(">g/i)
75
38
28
20
-
20
_
~
-

88
13
363
358
Cl
(mq/1)
2.2
13
33
7.6
-
5.8
3,080
370
138

11

92
73
so4
(ma/1)
49
600
6,230
730
-
775
90,000
21 ,500
4,520

740

239
18
14,400
11,900
P" .
8.15
7.78
9.94
8.40
8.41
7.82
8.43
-

-

7.58
7.89
7.90
7.79
C (others are 180° C)
b Total leachate volume given
c Estimated at 0.6 x conductivity
CO

-------
  Ward
initial
  water
IUU

r— U) ne\

-------
TABLE 3-3.   SUMMARY OF OIL SHALE LEACHATE AND RUNOFF WATER  QUALITY  EXPERIMENTS
Type of
test
Water
Penetra-
tion,
Bed 1






Water
Injection,
Bed 2
Runoff
and
Leachate,
Bed 1







Type of
sample
Leachate
(slope
drain)0



Leachate
(deep
drain)


Leachate

Runoff









Leachate

Other description
Up to 0830, day 1 (5/2)a
0830-1620, day 1
1620-1820. day 1
1820. day 1 - 0800. day 2
0800-0900, day 2
2 hours after raind
Up to 1730, day 4
Up to 1930. day 5
Up to 1430. day 7
Initial 1730, day 38 (6/9)
Mean
(range, 5 samples)

8 hours
16 hours
24 hours
40 hours
48n hours
g
9
..9
	 9
.3
Mean
(range)
(n-12)
TDS
(mg/1)
29,742
40,568
43,771
28,425
32,793
38,719
49.181
52,725
57,137
48,774
—
-

_
.
.
_
-
_
.
_
_
_
-
a Data are for cumulative volumes collected in indicated time frame;
volumes collected not reported
L
Samples were alkaline when collected but underwent pH reversal
during storage
c Slope drain was that beneath sloped portion of shale bed; deep
drain was located beneath level portion of bed
d Total water collected in 2-hour period after artificial rainfall
was halted
K
(mg/1)
74
84
88
76
82
100
59
61
68
82
8.8
(5-10)

6.6
6.1
6.5
6.4
6.4
7.3
6.1
6.1
5.8
6.1
110
(79-140)

Na
(mg/1)
8,510
9,488
10,293
7,820
9,315
10,465
10,293
10,465
17,825
12,650
149
(74-185)

82
50
48
48
48
63
57
57
55
55
10.370
(9.050-
12.750)
e Three
F
(mg/1)
16.4
-
17.1
-
16.8
-
-
15.6
-
17.2
1.3
HC03
(mg/1)
_
-
-
.
-
-
.
-
-
-
155e
Cl
(mg/1)
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
192
so4
(mg/1 )
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
272 f

pH<
2-5b
2-|b

2-fb
2.6b
2.6
2>7b
_ * _ b
2.7
-
7.5
(0.4-3) (98-189) (64-343) (158-380)(7.2-7.7)

3.2
1.8
1.8
2.3
1.5
2.1
1.2
1.5
1.2
1.0
12.9
(5.2-
17.5)

116
153
85
116
116
_
_
_
_
-

6
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
3
3

127
40
16
16
15
376
68
28
24
13
30.270"
- (29.110-
31,120)

7.4
8.3
8.4
8.2
8.1
7.7
8.0
8.1
H
8.2
2.6b
(2.4-
4.8)
samples collected
Four samples collected
' Time unspecified-
h




11 N=4
























-------
      All  of  these  analyses demonstrate that both the concentration and the
 quality of spent shale leachate can change dramatically with time.  In
 Figures 3-2  and 3-3, the results of Ward's column studies are plotted.  The
 values of IDS decrease from an initial high of 140,000 mg/1 to around 1,000
 mg/1  equilibrium value (calculated).  The water quality shifts from a sodium
 sulfate water to a sodium-calcium-magnesium sulfate water.  This change can
 be explained by a  rapid leaching of the more soluble nahcolite and sodium and
 sulfate created during retorting, leaving a residue of dolomite and calcite
 which is  less soluble than these other materials.  Thus leaching from spent
 shale disposal piles would result in an initial pulse of highly concentrated
 (sodium sulfate) waters which would change eventually to lower concentration
 hard water leachate.

      In addition to long-term changes in leachate composition, there are rapid
 character changes after it is exposed to air.  When it emerges from the shale
 pile, it  is  yellow, with a pH of 8 to 9.  In a few weeks the color changes to
 blue and  the pH to 2 or 3 (Metcalf and Eddy, 1975).  The pH change is ascribed
 to the oxidation of sulfides and polythionates, and the color change to the
 reduction of hexavalent molybdenum blue complex.

     Major ions are not the only source of potential groundwater pollution
 from the  oil  shale residues.  The spent shale also contains varying amounts of
 a great variety of trace elements.  Table 3-4 lists measured concentrations of
 various trace elements in raw oil  shale and trace elements in shale retorted
 by both the  direct and indirect modes of the Paraho process.  Data on concentra-
 tions in  raw and processed shale may be compared  if changes in density (mass
 per unit  volume) during retorting are considered.

     Many of these trace elements are readily soluble in water.   In Table 3-5,
 Ward lists the maximum observed concentrations of a number of minor elements.
 He notes  that maximum concentrations in runoff would be less than these report-
 ed values, but this is not true for leachate; in  fact,  they might well be
 higher.   Table 3-6 is a compilation of trace analyses of leachate from five
 penetration  studies by Metcalf and Eddy (1975) using TOSCO shale residue.

     As indicated in the preceding discussion, potential  releases of inorganic
 salts from raw and spent shale pose a substantial risk  of water quality degra-
 dation.   Organic compounds created during the retorting process  are also
 important potential pollutants.  All  of the carbon compounds in  the raw shale
are not volatilized if the heat of retorting is below 1,200° C (2,192° F).
Below this temperature, between 2 and 5 percent of the  organic carbon will
 remain on the spent shale (Schmidt-Collerus,  1974).   The TOSCO II shale residue
contains 4.5  percent by weight (45,000 ppm) organic carbon (Whitcombe and
Vawter,  1976),  and the Paraho residue contains 3  percent (30,000 ppm)  (Schmidt-
Coll erus et al., 1976).   Data listed in Table 3-7 provide some indication  of
the potential for leaching of organics  from spent shale.   Because of the high
total organic carbon (TOC)  content of the water added in these experiments,  the
amount of material  leached from the spent shale is  difficult to  address  from
these data.   However,  these data  (Table 3-7)  do indicate that overall  attenuat-
ing of organic  levels,  as  retort  waters leach through spent shale,  may not  be
great, as  the TOC level  added in  the retort water (mass  TOC per  unit mass  spent
shale) is  comparable to the TOC in the  resulting  leachate water.

                                     46

-------
      150
                      I   I
                                                               IDS
   o
      100
       80
       60
      40
      20
             -I	1	1	1—|	'   >   '
+
                          1000             2000
                                VOLUME LEACHED (ml)
               3000
3600
Figure 3-2.   Observed changes in total dissolved solids (IDS) concentration
             versus volume of water leached through spent oil shale (Ward,
             1971).
                                   47

-------
        vt
        0>



        i

       UJ
       o

       o
       o
 2.0



 1.5




 1.0




 0.5



 0


 0.08



 0.06




 0.04



 0.02



 0




 0.02



 0.01



0



 1.5




 1.0



0.5
                                                         NaT    -
                                               I	I
                          M  1   M   1  I   'i  H   1  11  I  !
                 0    400  800            2000


                             VOLUME LEACHED (ml)
                                                3000
Figure 3-3.  Observed changes in concentrations of sodium (Na), calcium

             (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and sulfate (S04) versus volume of

             water leached through spent oil shale (Ward, 1971).
                                  48

-------
TABLE 3-4.  TRACE ELEMENT CONCENTRATIONS (ppm) IN RAW OIL SHALE
            AND SPENT SHALE FROM PARAHO DIRECT HEATING MODES



Constituent 	
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
Fluoride
Uranium
Thorium
Cesium
Iodine
Tin
Molybdenum
Strontl urn
Bromine
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Manganese
Vanadium
Chlorine
Boron
Beryl 1 1 urn
Lithium
Terbium
Gadolinium
Europium
Samarium
Neodymlum
Praseodymium
Cerium
Lanthanum
Antimony
Niobium
Zirconium
Yttrium
Rubidium
Germanium
Gallium
Scandium
Titanium
Zinc



Raw shale3
40
410 rt
<0.8
40
34.7
0.47e
1.7
_
1,290
-
.
-
-
_
23
306
-
59
29
10
234
132
0
104
-
83
-
-
-
-
-
-
~ >
43J
2.4
_
52h
10h

-
9.49
6.3f
1,330
84
' Mean of 10 samples from Mahogany
b TRW, 1977
c Iron, calcium,
and sodium
potassium, sulfur
all present 1n qua
d Maximum concentration observed -
Concentration
Pilot plant
Paraho b<
Direct mode
35
180
<0.2
230
23
0.06
0.5
<0.2
>1,000
5
7
6
<0.2
0.2
14
970
0.2
57
75
19
800
180
43
48
2
85
0.7
1
0.7
2
6
2
59
21
0.7
7
65
40
110
0.9
17
26
>1.000
22
(oorn)
Semi works
.. Paraho h -
c Direct mode >c
18
310
<0.2
110
24
0.06
0.4
<0.2
920
7
4
10
<0.2
2
18
760
0.2
53
20
15
700
110
42
82
1
370
0.6
0.9
0.6
1
9
5
100
33
1
8
41
17
85
<0.2
13
20
>1,000
17
bed and R-4 zone (Desborough et al., 1974)
, phosphorus,
silica, aluminum, magnesium,
ntltles >1.00o ppm
1.2 ppm

* n«8; maximum concentration observed - 2.9 ppm
J n-8
•1 n»5






                              49

-------
TABLE 3-5.  CONCENTRATIONS OF MINOR CONSTITUENTS IN RAW
            AND SPENT SHALE LEACHATE3
Ion
Ba++
Br"
Cu++
Cr+6
F"
Fe"1"4"1"
I"
Pb"
Zn++
Maximum
concentration observed
(mg/1)
2.5
4.0
<0.1
<0.1
<0. 1
3.4
1.7
0.16
2.5
Source
TOSCO
Raw
—
uoc
TOSCO
—
TOSCO
TOSCO
Test
column (first leachate)
blender
—
blender
column (first leachate)
—
column (first leachate)
column (first leachate)
a Ward, 1971
   TABLE  3-6.   RESULTS  OF  TRACE  METAL  ANALYSIS OF
               PROCESSED SHALE LEACHATE .FROM  FIVE
               WATER  PENETRATION STUDIESa

Element
Mercury
Lead
Cadmi urn
Strontium
Arsenic
Copper
Fluorine
Lithium
Selenium
Zinc
Concentration (ppm)
Maximum
0.005
0.004
0.006
6
0.2
0.2
12
0.8
2
3
Minimum
<3xlO"6
<0.001
<0.001
0.6
0.02
0.06
0.006
0.007
0.002
0.9
Mean
0.0016
0.0021
0.0012
4.52
0.044
0.116
3.8
0.237
1.01
1.58
a Metcalf and Eddy, 1975
                         50

-------
TABLE 3-7.  LEACHING. OF SOLUBLE MATERIAL FROM PROCESSED
            SHALE MOISTURIZED WITH RETORT WATER3

Shale sample size (g)
Total water applied (ml)
Leachate recovered (ml )
Water recovery (%)
TOC in water added
(kg/tonne shale)
(lb/ton shale)
TOC in dry shale
(kg/tonne shale)
Ob/ton shale)
TOC in leach ate
(kg/tonne shale)
(lb/ton shale)
TOC leached (35 of TOC in
water added and dry
shale)
Dilution of retort waterb
4:1
500
1,250
1,100
88.0
0.19
0.37
0.13
0.26
0.17
0.33
52.4
1,000
2,500
2,245
89.8
0.19
0.37
0.13
0.26
0.19
0.37
58.7
2.5:1
500
1,250
1,110
88.8
0.30
0.60
0.13
0.26
0.20
0.39
45.3
1,000
2,500
2,285
91.4
0.30
0.60
0.13
0.26
0.26
0.52
60.5
a Metcalf and Eddy, 1975
Retort water composition is shown in Table 3-12
                         51

-------
     The process of pyrolysis produces a great variety of organic compounds.
A common approach used for analysis of orgam'cs is the measurement of the
amount of material extracted using various organic solvents such as benzene
(Table 3-8).


      TABLE 3-8.  BENZENE-EXTRACTABLE ORGANIC MATTER FROM SPENT SHALE3
Sample description
Spent shale stored In sealed
drums for 7 years




Spent shale from pile 6
months old

Six-year-old spent shale from
Bureau of Mines Anvil Points
operation
Sample
weight (g)
1,135.5
1,866.0
2,000.0
765.0
400.0
800.0
2,000.0
2,000.0
2,000.0
1,600.0
Sample moisture
content (%)
10.0
10.2
10.6
4.4
4.4
4.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.1
Weight of
extracted
solubles (g)
0.2090
0.2648
0. 1 387
0.0497
0.0232
0.0736
4.4472
4.6510
5.0703
5.0734
Percent weight
of solubles
% wet wt
0.018
0.014
0.007
0.007
0.006
0.009
0.222
0.232
0.254
0.254
% dry wt
0.020
0.014
0.008
0.007
0.006
0.011
0.226
0.236
0.258
0.256
aSchm1dt-Collerus, 1974
     Typically, spent shales may contain 200 to 2,000 ppm benzene-soluble
organics.  USBM spent shale has an average of 2,560 mg/1  benzene solubles,
and TOSCO spent shales vary from 70 to 2,600 ppm (Schmidt-Collerus, 1974).
The 70 ppm figure was from TOSCO shale that had been sealed in barrels for
7 years.  Some oxidation of the carbon compounds may have occurred.  In con-
trast, pristine soils from the Piceance Basin contain 74 to 593 ppm benzene-
soluble extracts (Schmidt-Collerus, 1974).  In general, spent oil  shales
contain two to three orders of magnitude higher concentrations of benzene-
soluble organics (Schmidt-Collerus et al., 1976).  Assuming a benzene-soluble
organic level of 2,500 ppm in spent shale, the approximately 86,000 tonnes
(95,000 tons) per day spent shale produced by the White River Shale Project
during Phase IV would contain over 180 tonnes (200 tons)  per day benzene-
soluble organics.  In order to assess the environmental hazard posed by the
presence of these organic constituents, the evaluation of their mobility in
the environment of the spent shale disposal area must be considered as well
as the mass loading to surface streams or groundwater resulting from this
mobility (see Sections 7, 8, and 9).

     One problem of concern is the possible cardnogenicity of components of
the organic complex of the oil shale residues.  One large group of organic
compounds is known as polycyclic organic materials (POM)  (Figure 3-4).
                                     52

-------
                                          POM
                                (Polycycllc Organic Materials)
                     PNA (PCA)                                  PCNA


               (Polynuclear Aromatlcs)                    (Polycondensed Non-Arbmatlcs)
              (Polycondensed Aromatlcs)
         PAH (PCAH)                  AA

     (Polycycllc Aromatic         (Aza-Azarlnes)
           Hydrocarbons)             I
                            I              I
                         Acr1dines      Carbazoles
         Figure  3-4.   Classification of polycyclic organic materials
                      (Schmidt-Collerus, 1974).


      A subgroup, the polynuclear (or polyconclensed)  aromatics (POM) (PNA or
 PCA),  is known  to include carcinogens.  Table  3-9  contains  a list of PCA's
 that  have been  detected in oil shale residues.   The  PNA's  that have been
 proven to have  carcinogenic effects are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
 (PAH)  and aza-azarines (AA), and in particular benzo(a)pyrene (BaP), a PAH.
 Table  3-10 illustrates the potential carcinogenicity of compounds identified
 in  benzene extracts  of oil shale residue.  PAH  compounds are known to occur
 in  naturally growing organisms, but only in minute amounts.   The shale resi-
 dues contain about three orders of magnitude more PAH than  natural soils.
 Schmidt-Collerus (1974) states that a 20 mg/1 solution of BaP painted three
 times  weekly on C3H  mice produced tumors with a  mean appearance time of 48
 weeks.   BaP  is  just  one of several  known carcinogens that have been identified
 in  the shale residues.

     The  water  solubility of POM's  is generally  proportional  to the carcino-
 genicity.  Schmidt-Collerus (1974)  found that 20 to  40 percent of the total
 benzene-soluble organics from water-leached spent shale were contained in  the
shale  residue,  and that most of the carcinogens in the  shale were dissolved
 and concentrated in  the salt residue (see Table  3-11).   The  amount of carcino-
 genic  material  mobilized is increased because the salts in  the leachate enhance
the solubility  of the POM's.   Thus  it may be expected  that leachate from the
spent shale  pile will contain at  least three or four times the  PAH content  of
Pristine groundwater.


                                      53

-------
                      TABLE 3-9.  POLYCONDENSED AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS IDENTIFIED IN BENZENE
                                  EXTRACTS OF CARBONACEOUS SPENT SHALE3
Compound
phenanthrene
benz(a)anthracene
d ibenz( a, h) anthracene
7s12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
fluoranthene
3- methyl chol anthrene
pyrene
benzo(a)pyrene
dibenz(c,d, j , kjpyrene
peryl ene
benzo(g ,h , i Jperylene
Detection method
TLCb, RB, color
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Fluorescense
spectrum
_
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
-
HPLCC
Retention
time
_
X
-'

-
-
-
X
X
X
-
a Schmidt-Coll erus et al., 1976
Thin-Layer Chromatography
High-Pressure Liquid Chromatography
Remarks



Fluorescence spectrum
indicates a possible
mixture with another
compound. Separation
of these by HPLCC in
progress

Further confirmation by
HPLCC in progress


Separated by HPLCC from
BaP

Fluorometric identifi-
cation in progress

en

-------
                    TABLE 3-10.   POM COMPOUNDS IDENTIFIED IN BENZENE EXTRACT OF CARBONACEOUS
                                 SHALE COKE FROM GREEN RIVER OIL SHALE
en
en
                                 Name of compound
phenanthrene
fluoranthene
pyrene
anthanthrene (dibenzo[c,d,j,k]pyrene)
benz(a)anthracene (1,2-benzanthracene)
benzo(a)pyrene
7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene
perylene
acridine
dibenz(a,j)acridine  (1,2,7,8-dibenzacridine)
phenanthridine
carbazole
3-methylcholanthrene
                                                     Potential    .
                                                  carcinogenity  '
-H-+

+4-H-
                      a  Particulate polycyclic organic matter (from Schmidt-Collerus
                           et al.,  1976)
                         Number of + symbols  indicates increasing potential as carcinogen

-------
            TABLE  3-11.   EVALUATION OF BENZO(A)PYRENE CONTENT IN SAMPLES OF BENZENE EXTRACTS FROM
                          VARIOUS  SPENT SHALE,  SOILS,  PLANTS,  AND LEACHED SALT SAMPLES**
Sample
size (q)
Spent shale (6
months old)
Spent shale (6
months old, water
leached)
Spent shale (6
months old, weathered)
Water soluble salts
from spent shale
Soil from Middle Fork,
Parachute Creek,
Colorado
Artemesia oanis
(sage plant)
4000
4000
2000
2000
2000
50
1097
200
Size of Weight of
benzene-soluble PAH in BSF
fraction, BSF [g(X)] [g(%)]
9.24 (0.231)
9.24 (0.231)
4.66 (0.233)
4.66 (0.233)
5.12 (0.256)
0.09 (0.188)
0.32 (0.029)
10.20 (5.10)
3.06 (33.11)*
3.06 (33.11)
1.37 (29. 31)^
1.73 (29.31)
1.29 (25.15)
- ( - )
0.05 (16.70)
- ( - )
Weight of
BaP in BSF
[§(*)]
0.000074 (0.0008)
0.000185 (0.002)
0.000093 (0.002)
0.000233 (0.005)
0.000031 (0.0006)
0.000001 (0.0011)
0.000001 (0.0002)
0.000010 (0.0001)
BaP in
sample
(ppm)
0.019
0.046
0.046
0.116
0.015
0.0002
0.0000337
0.00059
a On sulfur-free basis
b Schmidt-Col lerus, 1974
en
cr>

-------
     When the amount of spent shale to be produced is  taken  into  consideration,
the scale of the problem is enormous.   At full  16,000  cubic  meters  (100,000
barrels) per day production, the operation could produce 1.6 million tonnes
(1.8 million tons) of carbonaceous material  and over 91,000  tonnes  (100,000
tons) of benzene-soluble organics per year.   If process  water is  used to
moisten the shale, up to 364,000 tonnes (400,000 tons) of benzene-soluble
organic compounds could be produced per year and disposed of in the spent  shale
Pile.

Revegetation-

     Aspects of the revegetation plans that may result in pollutant releases
Include spreading of native soils, the use of sewage sludge  as a  soil amend-
ment/fertilizer, and potential  use of additional fertilizers. The  potential
for leaching of calcium salts from native soils was presented earlier as part
of the discussion of surface disturbance during construction. Possible pollu-
tants from the use of sewage sludge and fertilizers are  organic,  phosphates,
and nitrates.

Oil Upgrading-

     A great variety of spent catalysts and clogged filters  are planned for dis-
posal in the spent shale pile.   The largest single item  is the 1,182 tonnes
(1,300 tons) per year of spent hydrogenation-denitrogenation (HDN)  catalyst
from the naphtha hydrotreater reactor.  The composition  of HDN is proprietary,
but it is nickel-based and the spent catalyst also contains  arsenic.  Each year
the hydrogen plant will use about 295 tonnes (325 tons)  of various  other
catalysts, which are largely composed of iron,  copper, nickel, zinc oxides,
zinc sulfides, and cobalt molybdate.  In addition, the hydrogen plant and  the
anrine plant will discard about 124 tonnes (136 tons) per year of  deactivated
carbon and diatomaceous earth filters  containing adsorbed hydrocarbons.  It
is possible that some of the hydrocarbons may be phenolics and potential carci-
nogenic compounds.

Miscellaneous Solid Wastes-

     The operation of the completed mine and processing  plant will  produce
many kinds of solid waste.  Employee facilities will generate garbage to be
deposited in sanitary landfills in the spent shale pile.  Typical land-
fill leachate pollutants are nitrates, sulfides, and iron and heavy metals.
These solid wastes will be included within the spent shale pile,  so production
of consequential amounts of leachate will be dependent upon  movement of water
through the pile.  Landfill leaching will  be a source of concern only in  con-
junction with leaching of the spent shale pile and not as a  separate problem.

     The sludge generated by the sanitary waste treatment plant will be stock-
Piled and used as fertilizer for the revegetation of the spent shale pile.  The
areas undergoing revegetation will have to be irrigated  in the initial stages,
and organic pollutants could be leached from the sewage  sludge and  from other
fertilizers and infiltrate through the shale pile to the groundwater. The
Principal pollutants in such a situation would be nitrates and phosphates.

                                     57

-------
      The TOSCO  II  shale  retorts  use heated alumina balls to pyrolize the shale.
 About 640  tonnes  (700  tons) per year of these balls will be discarded due to
 wear,  and  these will be  disposed  in the shale pile.  They should not present a
 groundwater  pollution  threat, as  they are relatively inert.

 POTENTIAL  POLLUTANTS FROM LIQUID  WASTES

 Construction and Mine  Development

      During  construction and mine development, the major liquid wastes gener-
 ated  will  be waste oils.  Approximately 0.9 tonne (1 ton) of such wastes per
 week  will  be collected in drums and periodicaly hauled off-tract for reclaim-
 ing or disposal.   Spillage during transfer and stockpiling may result.

      Sanitary facilities will consist of chemical toilets during construction.
 Spillage during servicing or moving of these temporary facilities may occur,
 but should be minor.

 Mine  andRefi nery  Operation

 Retorting  and Related  Facilities-

      Some of the retort  process water will be used directly to moisten the
 spent  shale  and some will be treated in the sour water stripper and reused.
 The sour water  stripper bottoms will be used to moisten the spent shale.
 Tables 3-12  through 3-14 contain  analyses of TOSCO and Paraho process water.
 General ranges of major constituents, in milligrams per liter, are:  bicar-
 bonate, 500  to  31,000; carbonate, 500 to 30,000; chloride, 0 to 1,300; arsenic,
 0 to  1.0; ammonia, 10  to 13,000;  nitrate, 0.02 to 300; phenol, 42 to 390.

      In addition to the  normal organic and inorganic contaminants, the process
 water contains  15,000  to 20,000 mg/1 organic carbon, some of which is contain-
 ed in  POM's.  Schmidt-Collerus (1974) analyzed retort process water using
 benzene extraction methods.  The water contained 7,370 ppm benzene solubles.
 Since this water will  be used to moisten the shale, it will  increase the POM
 content proportionately.   Schmidt-Collerus (1974) observed that if these
 process waters were used to moisten shale to 13 percent moisture, then for
 every kilogram of shale,  0.96 gram of organic matter would be added to the 2.31
 grams already present, making a total of 3.27 grams (or 3,270 ppm on a dry
 weight basis).  Hence, moisturizing spent shale with retort process water, as
 is proposed, will appreciably increase the potential release of organic wastes,
 including carcinogens.

     Table 3-15 indicates the maximum and minimum expected concentrations of
 various pollutants in the individual process waste water streams, and gives
weighted-mean calculations of the composition of the composite water used to
moisten the shale.

     The sour water stripper bottoms, which  contain water from upgrading and
 refining processes as well  as retort water,  will  have a pH of 8.5 to 9.5.  They
will  contain 50 to 100 mg/1  oil  and grease,  25 to 50 mg/1  ammonia,  and 80 to
 150 mg/1  phenols, and have a chemical  oxygen demand (COD)  of 500 to 1,500 mg/1.

                                     58

-------
TABLE 3-12.  FOUL WATER ANALYSIS, ROCKY FLATS PILOT PLANT RUN (TOSCO PROCESS)6
Analysis
Inorganics
Total dissolved solids (organics
removed)
pH
Specific conductance (vimhos per
cm)
Calcium (Ca)
Magnesium (Mg)
Sodium (Na)
Potassium (K)
Arsenic (As)
Selenium (Se)
Molybdenum (Mo)
Lithium (Li)
Bicarbonate (HC03)
Carbonate (C03)
Chloride (Cl)
Fluoride (F)
Cyanide (Cn)
Silica
Nitrate (N03)
Phosphate (P04)
Ammonia (NH3)
Total sulfur
Sulfide
Sulfate
Elemental sulfur
Organics
Neutral oil
Amines
Carboxylic acids
Phenols
Total organic carbon
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)
5-day biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD5)

1
6,660
8
12,500
45
<0.
<1.
<5.
0.
0.
<1.
<10
5,400
1,560
1,300
<1.
<0.
8
330
0.
3,685
855
848
8
<1.
2,560
602
6,480
390
16,300
24,600
10,800
a Units are mg/1 unless otherwise indicated.
b Metcalf and Eddy, 1975
Concentration
Production
2
1,980
6 8.7
14,800
9.8
1 6.2
0 <1.0
0 <5.0
07 0.09
03 0.04
0 <1.0
<10
12,600
2,550
855
0 <1.0
01 <0.01
4
330
5 0.21
4,025
1,210
1,200
8
0 <1.0
2,840
856
1,680
220
21,000
31,000
9,400
Values of pM are

(mg/l)a
day
o
5,940
8.1
15,300
25
<0.1
<1.0
<5.0
0.08
0.03
<1.0
<10
6,920
2,130
1,090
<1.0
<0.01
12
320
15.6
3,960
775
768
8
<1.0
2,115
916
1,215
270
18,200
27,100
27,100

4
15,300
8.6
13,300
12
19
<1.0
<5.0
0.06
0.05
<1.0
<10
12,900
2,850
1,160
<1.0
<0.01
12
170
0.5
1 ,740
1,240
1,230
8
<1.0
1,950
1,600
515
115
14,200
23,500
9,000
standard units


                                     59

-------
              TABLE 3-13.
APPROXIMATE COMPOSITION OF TOSCO II
COMBINED PROCESS WASTE WATERa
      Component
      Concentration in water added to
             spent shale (mg/l)b
Inorganics
  Calcium
  Magnesium
  Sodium
  Bicarbonate (HC03)
  Carbonate
  Sulfate (S04)
  Thiosulfate (S203)
  Chloride
  Ammonia (NHg)
  Phosphate (P04)
  Zinc
  Arsenic
  Chromium (+6)
  Cyanide
Orgam'cs
  Phenols
  Amines
  Organic acids
  Neutral oils
  Chelate
                     280
                     100
                     670
                     100
                     360
                     850
                      90
                     570
                      15
                       5
                       5
                0.015 to 0.30
                       2
                       5

                     315
                     410
                   1,330
                     960
                       5
  TRW, 1976
  In addition to the above, elements present in trace quantities (less
  than 1 ppm) are Pb, Ce, Ag, Mo, Zr, Sr, Rb, Br, Se, Cu,  Ni,  Co, Fe,
  Mn, V, Ti, K, P-, Al, P, B, Li
                                  60

-------
TABLE 3-14.
TRACE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF CONDENSATE WATER AND PROCESS
WATER FOR PARAHO PROCESS3



Element
Uranium
Lead
Mercury
Praseodymium
Cesium
Lanthanum
Barium
Iodine
Tin
Molybdenum
Zirconium
Yttrium
Strontium
Rubidium
Bromine
Selenium
Arsenic
Gallium
Z1nc
Copper
Nickel
Cobalt
Germanium
Iron
Manganese
Chromium
Vanadium
Titanium
Scandium
Calcium
Potassium
Chlorine
Sulfur
Phosphorus
Silicon
Aluminum
Magnesium
Sodium
Fluorine
Boron
Lithium
Pilot plant cold
condensate water
(ug/ml)
3/10/76
0800-1700 h
0.03
0.7
<0.01
0.008
0.01
0.04
0.1
0.008
O.OS
0.3
0.05
0.007
0.1
0.4
0.02
0.04
0.09
0.04
0.2
0.1
0.1
<0.01
--
>10
0.2
0.07
<0.01
0.9
0.01
8
3
0.4
3
0.2
4
n.2
3
5
<0.1
0.06
0.02
Semlworks
process water
(ug/ml)
3/15/76
1500 h
--
0.2
<0.01
--
0.01
--
2.0
--
--
0.1
--
--
3.0
--
0.009
0.1
1.0
<0.02
0.4
0.2
0.2
<0.04
<0.05
5.0
0.3
0.3
0.03
0.3
<0.05
>10
>10
2.0
>10
5.0
>10
n.R
>10
>10
7
5.0
1.0
8 TRW, 1977
                                61

-------
                            TABLE  3-15.
MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM EXPECTED CONCENTRATIONS IN
WASTE WATER STREAMS FOR WHITE RIVER SHALE PROJECT
Stream
Sour water bottoms
Oily water
Sanitary waste water
High TDS
Freshwater
Process water
(in shale)
Weighted mean
TDS
(mg/1 )
Max Min
-
2,000 500
1,000 800
10,000 5,000
800 400
15,000 2,000
7,253 2,225
Oil and grease
(mg/1 )
Max Min
100 50
1 ,000 50
50 20
-
-
3,000 2,000
880 506
Phenol
(mg/l)
Max Min
150 80
500 50
1 1
-
-
390 115
124 44
Ammonia
(mg/1)
Max Min
50 25

15 10
-
1 1
4,000 1,700
989 420
pH
(mg/1 )
Max Min
9.5 8.5
9 7
8.5 7
8 7
8.5 7
8.7 8.1
8.3 7.6
ro

-------
      The high IDS waste water stream will  have  a  TDS of 5,000  to  10,000 mg/1.
 Since it is  largely concentrated by  simple evaporation  and  the source  is  the
 White River,  the major ions  probably would be very similar, with  the addition
 of large amounts of nitrate  from explosives.

      The oily waste water  stream will  go through  oil gravity separation and
 be used  to moisten the spent shale.   It will contain 50  to  1,000  mg/1  oil and
 grease,  50 to 500 mg/1  phenol, and 500 to  2,000 mg/1 TDS.   The biochemical
 oxygen demand (BOD) is expected  to be 100  to 20,000 mg/1, and  since the water
 comes from plant washdown, it may contain  miscellaneous  spilled chemicals.

      Finally,  sulfur slurry  will  be  added  to the  spent shale.   There is a
 possibility of sublimation of the sulfur,  and of  oxidation; but unless speeded
 by chemical reactions  with percolating leachate,  either  process would  probably
 be too slow to cause significant  pollution.

 Mine  Water-

      The  composition of mine  water is  expected  to be similar to that of the
 Bird's Nest Aquifer.   The TDS of  this  aquifer is over 2,500 mg/1  in many areas
 (Section  6).   More  detail on  the  quality of the groundwater is  provided in
 Section 6.  If upward  leakage from the Douglas  Creek Aquifer occurs, the water
 Is  somewhat less  saline (approximately 850 to 1,100 mg/1 TDS)  than the Bird's
 Nest  Aquifer.   Other contaminants expected in mine water are similar to those
 described for  raw shale, and  they also include oil and fuel from mine machinery
 and explosive  residues.

 Explosive Residues-

      The major  potential pollutants from the use of ANFO explosive are nitrogen
 compounds, particularly  ammonium nitrate.

 Sanitary Wastes-

      Sanitary sewage will undergo secondary treatment.   It will then be used
 to  moisten the  spent shale.   One potential  pollutant is the organic matter
 remaining after secondary treatment.   After typical  secondary treatment,
 sewage will  contain  10 to 20 mg/1 nitrate,  5 to 10 mg/1 phosphate, and 15 to
 20  mg/1 ammonia.  Total dissolved solids are expected to range from 800 to
 1.000 mg/1.

 Storm Water Runoff-

     Storm runoff will be diverted to the waste water holding pond and be used
 to moisturize the shale.  Various contaminants,  including soluble salts and
oil and grease, may be picked up by storm runoff.   These potential pollutants
    be further concentrated by evaporation  in the  holding pond.
Stockpiles-

     The variety of liquid products to be stockpiled on the tracts is  listed
1n Section 2.   These include naphtha,  fuel  oil,  ammonia, diesel  fuel,  shale

                                    63

-------
oil pour-point depressant, and high IDS waste water.  Leakage, spills, or tank
failure would release these materials.  The composition of most of these wastes
is self-explanatory.  The composition of the high TDS waste water is derived
from several sources described earlier in this subsection on liquid wastes from
mine and refinery operation.

MISCELLANEOUS SOURCES AND CAUSES

Exploratory Drilling and Testing

     Aquifer interchange and release at the surface are the main sources of
pollution from exploration drilling and testing.  Hence the potential  pollu-
tants involved are those described in Section 6 (Groundwater Quality).

Oil and Gas Wells

     The same pollution mechanisms characterizing the exploration well drill-
ing and testing program also create a potential for pollution from oil and
gas wells.  The potential pollutants are as referenced above.

White River Dam

     The White River Dam and reservoir produce no pollutants.  However, poten-
tial pollutants which may be associated with the dam and reservoir are those
related to mine water and spent shale.  The proposed dam and reservoir may
alter the hydrogeologic framework and hence appreciably influence the  mobility
and effect of pollutants from these sources.

Subsidence

     Subsidence and/or fissures formation produce no pollutants.   However,
they may significantly enhance the mobility and rate of production of  pollu-
tants associated with mine water and spent shale disposal.
                                    64

-------
                                 SECTION 4

                              GROUNDWATER USE


     There is no known use of groundwater from aquifers beneath the Lease
Tracts.  The water is of poor quality, possessing a total dissolved solids
content of over 2,500 mg/1 in many areas.  High sodium content renders the
water undesirable for agricultural use.  The sulfate content exceeds recom-
mended public health limits for human consumption.  Water quality is described
in more detail in Section 6.

     Two oil and gas exploration wells in Asphalt Wash have been converted to
stock watering wells.  These wells tap the Douglas Creek Aquifer and flow at
the surface.  They are supposedly sealed through the Bird's Nest Aquifer,
although leakage may be occurring.  The water quality of the wells is inter-
mediate between the quality of the Douglas Creek Aquifer and that of the Bird's
Nest Aquifer, but the fact that the Douglas Creek Aquifer is under higher head
than the Bird's Nest Aquifer indicates that leakage from the Bird's Nest Aqui-
fer to the stock wells could not take place.

     A few other stock wells to the west may tap the Bird's Nest or Douglas
Creek Aquifers.   Water from these aquifers is probably discharged into the
Green River, or its tributaries, and thus used indirectly.   It may leak
upward in the center of the basin and be tapped by agricultural wells near
Vernal  or near the Duchesne River.   These are the only known possibilities of
use of groundwater from aquifers under the tracts.

     As summarized above,  direct use of groundwaters from aquifers below the
tracts is limited.   However, discharge of these aquifers to surface waters and
movement through the alluvial  systems tributary to the White River may indi-
rectly influence a variety of municipal  and agricultural  water uses downstream
in the Colorado River Basin.
                                    65

-------
                                 SECTION 5

                          HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK


     The assessment of potential pollution associated with the development of
Tracts U-a and U-b requires detailed knowledge of the hydrogeologic and
geologic configuration of the project area.  The following subsections present
available information on the hydrogeologic framework.  These data will be
utilized in concert with proposed development information presented in Sections
2 and 3 to evaluate pollutant mobility and thus the pollution potential.

CLIMATE

     The climate of the study region is typical of continental high desert
areas.  Summers are warm, characterized by mean daily temperatures near 27° C
(80° F).  Winters are cold with midwinter means below 0° C (32° F).  Very low
humidity results in high potential evaporation rates (99 cm; 39 inches) for
the May to September period.

     Precipitation is low, averaging 24.5 cm (10 inches) annually over the
Tracts (Figure 5-1).   About 60 percent of the precipitation takes the form of
winter snow.  Most of the other 40 percent occurs as summer convective rain-
fall (Figures 5-2 and 5-3).   The precipitation in both winter and summer is
related to elevation, increasing about 8.2 cm (3.2 inches) per 300-meter (984-
foot) increase in altitude (WRSP, 1976b).   Rainfall, however, is influenced by
elevation to a greater extent than snowfall.

TOPOGRAPHY

     Federal oil shale lease Tracts U-a and U-b lie between 1,500 and 1,800
meters (5,000 and 6,000 feet) above sea level.  The White River occupies a
narrow steep valley at the north end of the tracts (see Figure 5-4).   The
tracts are drained by north-south trending valleys separated by narrow
mesas.  The valleys drain into the White River.  Erosion of outcrops  is slow,
but valley bottoms are occasionally quickly cut downward by flash floods.
Chemical weathering has created numerous solution cavities on outcrops of the
Uinta Formation.  Regions underlain by the Green River Formation are  charac-
terized by gentler topography.   Only where Evacuation Creek has cut a deep,
narrow canyon in the Green River Formation do prominant cliffs exist.

SOILS

     The soils of the tracts fall into three  general groups.   Most of the
tract surface is covered by  shallow, immature, rocky soils.   The small canyon
bottoms are filled with deeper, better-sorted soils.  The White River and


                                    66

-------
 Evacuation Creek canyons contain deeper,  more mature alluvial  soils.   Charac-
 teristics of some representative soils  are listed in Table  5-1.

      The upland soils are typically very  shallow, 5  to  25 cm (2  to  10  inches),
 and very sandy.   They contain many rock fragments and are classified as  flaggy
 loams or channery loams  under the Aridisol  and Entisol  orders  (Figure  5-5).
 Infiltration rates are low to very low, averaging 3.6 cm/hr (1.4 in/hr).   Soil
 composition and texture  are fairly homogeneous with  depth except for the  pro-
 Portion of rock fragments, which increases  with depth.  Most of  these  soils
 are alkaline (pH 8 to 9), reflecting their calcic composition.   They are  de-
 rived directly from the  underlying Uinta  sandstone.   A  large part of the  upland
      is bare of soil  and the Uinta sandstone  is exposed.
      The  canyon-bottom soils  in  ephemeral  stream valleys were formed by
 erosion from  the  surrounding  upland.  Hence, they are generally similar to
 the  upland  soils.  They differ mainly in their greater depth and better sort-
 ing.  They  are over  150 cm  (60 inches) deep in many places and up to a few
 tens  of feet  near the  canyon  mouths.  They contain much less rock and somewhat
 ]ess  silt than upland  soils.  Canyon-bottom soils are of sandy loam texture,
 in the Typic  Torrifluvent subgroup of the  Entisol order (Figure 5-5).  The
 better sorting results  in higher infiltration rates, averaging 6.1 cm/hr
 (2.4  in/hr).  The soil  is fairly homogeneous, although in some places mud
 flows of  a  more silty  texture can be distinguished.  Such buried strata may
 restrict  downward percolation.

     The  bottom land soils of the White River are moderately deep to very deep
 in the tracts area.  They are well sorted and moderately fine- textured as a
 result of fluvial  deposition.  They are quite alkaline and some have exchange-
 able sodium percentages, lowering the infiltration rates.

     The  soils classifications mapped in Figure 5-5 have been reorganized into
 hydrologic  soil types  (Figure 5-6).  It may be seen that most of the soils in
 areas where development is planned have low to very low infiltration rates.
 The shallowest bedrock  aquifer,  the Bird's Nest Aquifer, lies 185 to 215
 meters (600 to 700 feet) below the land surface and the soil  comprises only
 the first few centimeters.  The  rest of the overlying material  is Uinta
 Formation sandstone, with about  18 meters  (60 feet) of Green River Formation
 mudstone above the aquifer.   Due to the impermeable nature of the Green River
 Formation and the numerous mudstone layers within the Uinta Formation,  it does
 not seem likely that percolation to the Bird's Nest Aquifer could occur except
 through fractures or joints.  Fractures and joints  are not common in the Uinta
 Formation, and they tend to close at the mudstone layers.   Percolating ground-
water might, however, collect above the mudstone and migrate down dip into the
alluvium of the White River.  Extensive evaporite deposits resulting from
seepage can be observed on the cliffs above the White River.  These  geologic
features  of the study area are discussed in the following  paragraphs.

GEOLOGY

General  Regional  Structure

     The  Utah  oil  shale lease tracts  are within the structural, depositional ,

                                    67

-------
 and topographic region called the Uinta Basin (Figure 5-7).   The basin has
 an area of about 18,000 km^ (7,000 mi?),   it is bounded by the Uinta Mountains
 to the north and the Roan Cliffs  to the south.   The basin is highly asymmetric.
 The strata dip gently to the north from the southern edge to the base of the
 Uinta Mountains.  From the axis of the basin to the Uinta Mountains, the dip
 is steep to the south.   The oil shale tracts are near the middle of the gently
 sloping southern limb.

 Regional  History

      A thick sequence of Mesozoic and Paleozoic sediments lies beneath the
 Tertiary formations  exposed in the Uinta  Basin.   For much of the Paleozoic and
 Mesozoic,  the area lay beneath warm epicontinental  seas which deposited shales
 and limestones.   Occasional  uplift and erosion  cycles resulted in thick sand-
 stone formations.  Near the end of the Cretaceous,  the last  of the shallow
 seas  to cover the region began to retreat.   The regressive sequence contains
 thick beds of alternating sand and coal deposited on the wide,  swampy shores.
 The regression culminated in the  Laramide Orogeny which lifted the Uinta
 Mountains  for the first time.

      By the Late Pal eocene,  the Uinta  Mountains  had experienced  considerable
 erosion.   The material  that  eroded off the  Uinta Mountains and the Wasatch
 Mountains  to  the west was  deposited in the  fluvial  Wasatch Formation.   When
 peneplanation of the  mountains was  nearly complete,  the large Green  River
 Lake  formed in the subsiding sedimentary  basin.   This  lake  covered  both the
 Uinta  and  Piceance Basin  areas and  was  probably continuous with  the  Wakashie-
 Bridger Lake  north of the  Uinta Mountains,  although  the  location  of  the
 connecting  channel is uncertain.    The  lake  possessed  an  unusual  longevity.
 Although more than 2,100 meters (7000  feet) of sediments were  deposited in
 its center  during the early  and middle  Eocene, it never  completely dried.
 Frequently  a  large part of the lake was quite shallow,  6 meters  (20  feet) or
 less.   At times  the lake extended  far  to  the south of the present Uinta Basin
 and exhibited  freshwater characteristics.   Under adverse conditions  the lake
 shrank  and  became saline.  During  long periods, algae were the dominant life
 form in the lake.

     Renewed  uplift and erosion in the late Eocene finally filled the lake
and resulted  in  the fluvial siltstones and sandstones of the Uinta Formation,
deposited by  rivers on the floodplains and deltas adjacent to the retreating
Green River Lake.  At the end of the Eocene more fluvial sediments, the
Duchesne Formation sandstones, were unconformably laid on the Uinta Formation.
Since that time little sedimentation has taken place, except for outwash fans
below the Uinta Mountains, the product of renewed Pliocene uplift.  The Green
River and Uinta sediments have compacted,  giving the Uinta Mountains greater
relative relief.  Lateral tensions and uneven compaction created long tension
fractures which have  since filled  with gilsonite (uintaite),  a petroleum
residue (IAPG, 1957;  Hunt, 1954).
                                    68

-------
 Regional  Stratigraphy

 Green  River Formation-

     The  Green  River Formation was deposited on the fluvial sandstones of the
 Wasatch and Mesa  Verde Formations.  The characteristic feature of the Green
 River  Formation is  its lacustrine nature.  The Green River Formation is divid-
 ed into the Douglas Creek,  Garden Gulch, and Parachute Creek Members.

     Douglas Creek  Member-The Douglas Creek Member dates from the  Early to
 Middle Eocene.  At  Hell's Hole Canyon  near the eastern boundary of the tract,
 it is  about 265 meters (870 feet) thick, but is as much as 610 meters (2,000
 feet)  thick near  the axis of the basin.  It is composed of interbedded shale,
 fine-  to  medium-grained quartz sandstone, siltstone, and limestone.  Most of
 the limestone is  oolitic and algal, and some is ostracodal, occurring in thin
 to massive  beds.  The member contains  little oil shale.  Bedding is even,
 continuous,  and uniform.

     The  Douglas  Creek Member intertongues extensively with the underlying
 Wasatch Formation.   It is sometimes difficult to distinguish the fluvial
 Wasatch tongues from the lacustrine Douglas Creek Member.  Part of this diffi-
 culty  stems  from  the fact that the Douglas Creek Member was laid down in a
 shallow,  near-shore zone of the freshwater lake.

     Garden  Gulch Member-The Garden Gulch Member of the  Green  River  Formation
 is  about  90  meters  (300 feet) thick in the vicinity of the tracts.   It is
 composed  of  fine-grained sediments; magnesian marlstone, oil shale, and silt-
 stone.   The  beds are thin and even.  This member contains less oil  shale than
 the  Parachute Creek Member  above it.   It was deposited in shallow water,
 probably  less than  23  meters  (75 feet) deep.

     Parachute  Creek Member-The Parachute Creek Member is approximately 230
 meters (750  feet) thick beneath the Federal  oil shale lease tracts  in Utah.
 It  is formed of marlstone,  oil shale,  and siltstone.  Most beds range from
 2.5  cm (1  inch) thick  to paper-thin and are laterally very continuous.   Dis-
 tinctive  beds less  than a centimeter thick can be traced over thousands  of
 square kilometers.   This member contains most of the oil  shale in the Green
 River Formation.  Much of the rich oil shale in the Parachute Creek Member is
 contained in the "Mahogany  Ledge," a 0.6- to 18-meter (2- to 60-foot) thick
 zone of rich oil shale.  The  rich brown color produced by weathering of the
 oil  shale explains  the  name.  The oil  shale occurs  in beds ranging  from sever-
 al centimeters  to paper-thin.  Low-grade oil  shale  weathers to a yellow tan,
 rich shale to a deep brown,  and the richest may remain black,  with  a white
 deposit on the  surface.

     The Parachute Creek Member was evidently deposited in fairly deep water,
 at it does not show  signs of wave disturbance.   A chemically reducing environ-
ment due tp thermal  stratification contributed to the  preservation  of organic
matter.  Some shallow water  sediments  are mixed with the  deep  water layers,
 indicating fluctuating lake  levels.

     The thick sequences of  oil  shale  are a  feature of the lake's longevity.

                                    69

-------
 The lake was fairly saline during this period.  Lake biota was dominated by
 algae and insect larvae.  The remains of these organisms, along with wind-
 blown pollen and other plant material from the shore, drifted down through the
 still, oxygen-deficient depths of the lake.   The rate of inorganic sedimen-
 tation was very low.  Thick beds of highly organic mud were deposited which,
 under the compaction of further burial, were transformed into kerogen.   Very
 fine grains of quartz and calcite are imbedded in the kerogen matrix.

      The sequence at the top of the Green River Formation was named the Evacu-
 ation Creek Member by Bradley (1931).  Recently Cashion (1974) has demonstrat-
 ed that the Evacuation Creek Member at its type locality near the White River
 a short distance above Evacuation Creek is,  in fact,  identical to the Parachute
 Creek Member at its type locality in the Piceance Basin.   The name "Evacuation
 Creek Member" has,  therefore, been abandoned and the  name Parachute Creek
 Member given to the entire section below the Uinta Formation.

      The sequence formerly called the Evacuation Creek Member was originally
 distinguished from  the Parachute Creek Member by a decrease in the number  of
 oil  shale beds.   The predominant rocks are siltstone  and  marl stone.   A  parti-
 cularly interesting stratum consists of large crystals of nahcolite (NaHCOa)
 imbedded in  a si Its tone-marl stone matrix.  In many places the  nahcolite has
 been dissolved by water and only cavities  remain.   Because of the resemblance
 these  cavities  bear to mud swallow's nests,  Cashion (1967)  named  the  beds  the
 "Bird's  Nest Zone."  Directly above  the Bird's  Nest Zone  is  a  fairly  thick
 (1 to  10 meters)  bed of sandstone.   This sandstone is  erosion-resistant and
 stands  out prominently on  canyon walls,  thus  forming a convenient marker bed.
 Although this  has been called "Horse Bench Sandstone,"  it is probably strati -
 graphically  higher  than Cashion's  Horse Bench  Sandstone.   The  top of  the
 Parachute Creek Member is  dated  to the mid-Late  Eocene.

 Uinta  Formation-

     The Uinta Formation is composed  of massive  tuffaceous sandstone  alter-
 nating with  claystone.   It  is  divided  into "a" and "b"  units by a  distinctive
 bed  of tuffaceous sandstone 0.6  to 1.8  meters  (2 to 6  feet) thick  at  the base
 of the "b,"  or upper,  unit.  The top  portion of  the "b" unit is formed of
 massive  sandstone river channels running from east to west  (Dane,  1954).  The
 formation was laid  down in floodplain and deltaic environments.   In many places
 the  contact  with the Green River Formation has been distorted by  plastic flow
 of the fine-grained Green River sediments beneath the  load of the denser
 Uinta sandstones.

 Stratigraphy and Structure of Utah Tracts

     Nearly all the rock exposed at the surface of the tracts belongs to the
 Uinta Formation, unit "a."  A small part of the Uinta  Formation, unit "b,"
 has escaped erosion on the highest ridges (see Figure  5-8).  Strati graphic
 sections of the Uinta Formation are presented in Figure 5-9.  The Green
 River Formation crops out only along Evacuation Creek.   Here the Bird's Nest
Zone is traversed by the creek.

     The entire sequence of the Green River Formation  is found beneath the

                                     70

-------
surface of the tracts.  The Douglas Creek Member lies 281  to 533 meters
(1,250 to 1,750 feet) below the surface and is about 200 meters (650 feet)
thick.  The Garden Gulch Member lies between 244 and 366 meters (800 and
1,200 feet) deep, but is only about 70 meters (230 feet) thick.  The average
thickness of the Parachute Creek Member below the tracts is 222 meters (725
feet).  The Mahogany Marker is a 15-cm (6-inch) thick bed of analcitized tuff
3 to 5 meters (10 to 16 feet) above the Mahogany Bed, the thickest bed in the
Mahogany Ledge (Figure 5-10 and 5-11).  The Mahogany Marker is a convenient
reference point because the mining on Tracts U-a and U-b is planned to extend
from 6.1 meters (20 feet) above the marker to 12.2 meters (40 feet) below it.

     The structure of the Mahogany Marker characterizes the structure of the
tracts.  The rest of the beds of the Green River Formation lie parallel to
the Mahogany Marker, with a dip of less than 5 degrees to the north or north-
west.  This orientation is typical of the regional structure.  Figures 5-12
through 5-14 are cross sections of the tract area made from borehole data.

Faults and Dikes

     No faults have been mapped on the tracts.  The sandstone-claystone fabric
of the Uinta Formation is quite resistant to fracturing.  Joints are widely
spaced.  The major joint set is oriented N62W, 80SW.

     Although no gilsonite (uintaite) was found on the tracts by the White
River Shale Poject (1976b), Cashion (1967) had mapped two small gilsonite
dikes in the area.  Field investigations during 1977 verified the dikes
(Figure 5-8).  The southern dike could not be traced to Evacuation Creek, but
the northern dike was observed in the wall of Evacuation Creek Canyon near
the Highway 40 crossings.  At this location, gilsonite could be seen filling
the evaporite solution cavities which form the aquifer, indicating that the
dike could serve as an effective aquitard.  Despite this characteristic, no
effect on either water level or quality caused by the dikes has been detected.
The southern dike passes between the closely spaced wells G-10 and X5, yet the
water levels in these wells differ by only 2 meters (6 feet).

     Possibly the dikes are heavily fractured and thus do not prevent the
flow of groundwater.  However, even if the dikes are impermeable, they would
probably not disturb the groundwater flow significantly because they are
nearly parallel to the direction of flow.  Recharge or other water flowing
from the direction of Evacuation Creek would simply divide and flow parallel
to.the dikes without alteration in direction.

     The fractures were not created by movement of gilsonite.  The gilstonite
moved into preexisting fractures.  The existence of dikes on the tracts indi-
cates the possibility of the presence of unfilled fractures.  Such fractures
would act as connections between the Douglas Creek and deeper aquifers, and
the Bird's Nest Aquifer.

GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY

     Three aquifers contain nearly all of the water found beneath the tracts.
The main aquifer is the Bird's Nest Zone in the Parachute Creek Member.  The

                                     71

-------
 Douglas Creek Member also contains significant amounts of groundwater.  A
 small, isolated aquifer was found below well P-2.  The deep Wasatch and Mesa
 Verde Formations may contain significant aquifers, but no water wells have
 been drilled below the Green River Formation.

 Bird's Nest Aquifer

     Near Evacuation Creek, and in general beneath the tracts, the Bird's
 Nest Aquifer is formed by approximately six zones 1 meter (3 feet) thick
 pocked with numerous nahcolite solution cavities.  These solution cavities
 have an irregular, elliptical shape 1 to 30 cm (0.5 to 15 inches) long.  The
 spacing of the zones varies from 1 to 5 meters (3 to 20 feet).  Occasional
 solution cavities occur between the zones.  About 18 meters (60 feet) above
 the topmost zone is a 2-meter (6-foot) bed of yellow, fine-grained, moderately
 sorted, compact,  massive sandstone.   According to well logs, the water con-
 tained in this sandstone has a higher electrical resistivity than that in the
 solution cavity zone.  The aquifer is in contact with the alluvium of Evacu-
 ation Creek for the entire distance between the site of Watson (surface water
 gaging station S-6) and Station S-2 at the Highway 40 bridge (Figure 5-16).
 The White River traverses the aquifer a short distance below its confluence
 with Evacuation Creek.

     Characterization of the nature and extent of the aquifer is crucial in
 determining recharge-discharge relationships.  Figure 5-16 is a map of the
 outcrop of the Bird's Nest Zone and related water-bearing zones.  Near the
 oil shale lease tracts nahcolite solution cavities are numerous and form the
 most important water-bearing zone.  The solution cavity aquifer is still well
 developed in the Asphalt Wash area to the southwest of the tracts.  Although
 no solution cavity zone was observed at Bitter Creek in the measured section
 or above or below it, Cashion (1967)  does record them in his stratigraphic
 section of the area.   This inconsistency would be natural  if the solution
 cavity zone were feathering out in the area.

     West of Bitter Creek the sandstone zone predominates.  Although solution
 cavities are still  present, they are scattered and assume much less importance
 as groundwater conductors.  The sandstone zone, on the other hand, is thicker
 and interbeds with thin marlstone layers.  In summary, the aquifer beneath the
 tracts is predominantly a solution cavity aquifer with some sandstone, while
 it is mainly a sandstone aquifer with some solution near the Green River.

     One interesting feature of the stratigraphic sections is the association
of oil shale and nahcolite nodules.   Although only in one location (the
 Evacuation Creek section) does a nahcolite zone actually lie in an oil shale
 bed, they generally occur in close proximity.  Outcrops without these zones
 do not possess oil  shale.  This suggests that the thermal  stratification
which produced reducing conditions important for formation of oil shale was
accompanied by saline density stratification.  Such a phenomenon has been
observed in East African lakes.   The greater density of the saline water helps
 to permanently prevent annual  overturn.   If such is the case, the development
of the nahcolite nodules, and thus a  solution cavity zone, should coincide
with oil  shale thickness.  Figure 1-1  shows extensive oil  shale development
all the way from the lease tracts to  the vicinity of Willow Creek, suggesting

                                    72

-------
a direct hydro!ogic connection between these points.

     A continuous, well-developed, water-bearing zone connects the Asphalt
Wash areas and the tracts, and probaby the area north of Willow Creek and
the tracts.  The connection of the creek west of Asphalt Wash with the well-
developed solution cavity aquifer is through less continuous and less per-
meable sandstone.  The same situation exists where the aquifer zone is
traversed by the Green River.

     Just east of the tracts, the Uinta Basin begins  to curve to the north
and finally to the west.   Because of the asymmetric nature of the basin the
strata along the northern edge of the basin dip steeply to the south.  The
Bird's Nest Aquifer may lie beneath the Duchesne Formation in this area.   The
structure of the aquifer conforms to the general basin shape (Figure 5-17).

     Although the zone is everywhere confined by impermeable layers except
where erosion has removed them close to outcrops, in  many places the complete
thickness is not saturated and thus the aquifer is under water table condi-
tions.  From Figure 5-18 it can be seen that water table conditions prevail
close to Evacuation Creek and around the southern boundary of the tracts.
North of the boundary the entire thickness of the zone is saturated and forms
a confined aquifer.

     The hydraulic characteristics of the Bird's Nest Aquifer are by no means
homogeneous.  The transmissivity of the aquifer under Tract U-b is only about
5 percent of that under Tract U-a.  Transmissivities  calculated by various
methods are summarized in Table 5-2.  The transmissivity at well P-l is about
0.2 liters per second per meter or 17,280 liters per  day per meter (1,500
gallons per day per foot).  The test pumping rate was limited to 2.8 liters/
second (45 gallons/minute) due to the necessity of disposing of the pumped
water in a holding pond.   Well P-3, also in Tract U-b, was found to have a
transmissivity of only 0.002 liters per second per meter (15 gallons per day
per foot).  Pumping at the rate of 0.2 liters/second  (3.17 gal/min) dewatered
the aquifer in this location in 30 minutes.  The aquifer is under water table
conditions and the saturated thickness at this point  is much less than at
well P-l.

     In contrast, the aquifer at well P-2, in Tract U-a, was determined to
have a transmissivity of 10.8 liters per second per meter (75,000 gallons per
day per foot).  Six days of pumping at 35 liters/second (550 gal/min) produced
only 5.5 meters (18 feet) of drawdown.  Groundwater evaluations conducted for
this monitoring design study indicated steep gradients under Tract U-b and
more flat gradients under Tract U-a (Figure 5-19).  The probable explanation
is the great increase in transmissivity beneath U-a.   The water-level map
developed by the White River Shale Project is included for comparison (Figure
5-20).  The assumptions used in constructing Figure 5-19 are:

     1.  Well P-4 was not included as it clearly taps the Douglas
         Creek Aquifer.

     2.  Well G-17 was excluded since it stops short of the Bird's
         Nest Aquifer.

                                     73

-------
      3.  Well X-5 was excluded because the water level,  130 feet
          above Evacuation Creek at a distance of 800 feet from the
          Creek, seemed unrealistic.   This well  was a geologic bore-
          hole and was never pumped.   It may be receiving leakage
          from above the Bird's Nest Aquifer,  rainwater,  or contain
          drill fluid.

      4.  Recharge was assumed from upper Evacuation Creek and
          discharge from lower Evacuation Creek.

      5.  Discharge was assumed into  White River below Evacuation
          Creek and no other connection.   Figure 5-18 has  been
          redrawn on the basis of these assessments and is  shown
          in Figure 5-21.

      The  Bird's Nest Aquifer must be recharged  by  Evacuation  Creek, since it
 is  in contact with the saturated alluvium of  the creek and  the aquifer gradi-
 ent would lead to westward  flow.   However,  if such recharge is occurring, the
 flow of Evacuation Creek  should  be diminished between  stream  gages  S-6 and
 S-2,  but  it is not.   Recharge from Evacuation Creek also does not  satisfacto-
 rily explain the water quality distribution of  the Bird's Nest Aquifer (see
 Section 6).   Discharge from the  aquifer  to  Evacuation  Creek can  be  observed
 below the Highway 45 bridge,  and to  White  River  below  its confluence with
 Evacuation Creek.   The observed  discharge  is  small.  These  are the only
 observed  discharge points of the  aquifer.

      Probably some recharge  of the aquifer  from Asphalt Wash occurs.  The
 curvature of the 1,480-meter (4,850-foot) equipotential line  in  Figure 5-20
 supports  this  observation.   Recharge very likely also  takes place where the
 alluvial  channels  of the perennial streams to the west of the tracts traverse
 the aquifer.   Water  passing  beneath  the  tracts could not discharge to any of
 the streams  to  the west since  they all traverse the aquifer at a higher ele-
 vation  than  the  White  River  traverses  it just north of the tracts.  The Green
 River,  however,  traverses the aquifer at a lower elevation than the White
 River,  and thus  may  be a discharge point for water passing beneath the tracts.
 Thomas  (1952)  estimates that groundwater inflow to the river between Ouray and
 Green River,  Utah, amounts to 56.6 liters/second (120 ft3/min).  Since the
 river traverses  several other water-bearing formations in this distance,  only
 a part of the  inflow could be from the Bird's Nest Aquifer.  Considering  the
 discontinuous and heterogeneous nature of the aquifer between the tracts  and
 the Green River, and the distance of about 48 km (30 miles), it is likely
 that the rate of discharge is slow.  The aquifer may also discharge by upward
 leakage to higher formations.  Such leakage has been noted in a similar aqui-
 fer in the Piceance Basin in Colorado.

 Douglas Creek Aquifer

     The Douglas Creek Member lies about 500 feet below the Mahogany Zone in
the vicinity of the tracts.   Two wells were drilled into  this  member during
environmental baseline studies on the tracts.   Well G-16A flowed  at the
surface after the Douglas Creek Member was tapped.   Two oil  and gas explora-
tion wells in Asphalt Wash have been  converted to stock-watering  wells.   These

                                     74

-------
 wells draw from the Douglas Creek Aquifer and also flow at the surface.  Thus
 the Douglas Creek Aquifer seems to be at a higher head than any of the aqui-
 fers above it.  No aquifer tests were performed on it, so its hydraulic
 properties are unknown.  It may, however, have the highest production rate of
 any water-bearing zone in the Green River Formation.

 fj-2 Upper Aquifer

      A small  aquifer was discovered above the Bird's  Nest Aquifer at well  P-2.
 The aquifer is of limited areal  extent and low transmissivity (0.02 liters per
 second per meter [150 gallons per day per foot]).   Calculations  of the storage
 coefficient varied from 1.0 x 10-5 to 1.5 x 10~5.   The water level  in P-2
 lower (Bird's Nest Aquifer) is below the base of the  P-2 upper aquifer, indi-
 cating the possibility that P-2  upper is a perching layer.   Pumping in either
 of the aquifers did not affect the other.   Several  months after  an aquifer
 pump test at  the P-2 upper aquifer, the water levels  had not fully recovered.

 Alluvial  Aquifers

      Little information is  available on the hydrologic characteristics of
 the alluvial  materials in ephemeral  stream valleys  on the tracts.   Some water
 quality  data  have  been collected and are presented  in Section  6.

 SURFACE  WATER HYDROLOGY

     The  largest surface  flow  through the  tracts is that  of  the  White River.
 The mean  annual  flow is 19.9 m3/s  (cubic meters per second)  (702 ft3/s).   A
 20-year  hydrograph  is  presented  in  Figure  5-22.  The  source of the yearly  maxi-
 mum flow  is snowmelt.   The August-April  flow  is supplied  by groundwater base
 flow (Figure  5-23).  Since  the source of the  White River  is the  high  mountains
 to  the east,  its flow  is  more  dependable than  that of streams  originating  in
 the arid  Uinta  Basin.

     The  water  quality of White  River is better than  that of the other  streams
 in  the area.  The mean total dissolved solids concentration is about  500 mg/1.
 As  expected, the dissolved solids concentration decreases with increased flow.
 The water quality is typical of  the region in that the major dissolved consti-
 tuents are calcium, sodium, bicarbonates, and sulfates.  The fact that these
 constituents decrease  dramatically during high flow periods while the other
 constituents decrease  proportionately less indicates that they are probably
 contributed by the groundwater base flow (Figures 5-24 and 5-25).  Data col-
 lected during baseline studies of the project area (WRSP, 1976b)  commonly
 showed increases in major groundwater quality constituents, sodium and sulfate,
 between Hell's Hole Canyon and Southam Canyon.  Part of this increase is prob-
 ably due  to inflow from Evacuation Creek, but some may be due to  seepage from
 the Bird's Nest Aquifer.

     Evacuation Creek  is a small  tributary of the White River.  The mean
daily flow (at gaging station S-2) has varied from zero to 2.0 m3/s (71 ft3/s).
The drainage area of the creek is 770 km? (280 mi^).   Peak flows  in the creek
depend much more on local  rainfall  than do peak flows  of the White River.  The
hydrograph (Figures 5-26 and 5-27)  is typical  of small streams  in arid regions,

                                    75

-------
 and is  characterized  by  long  periods of  very  low  flow broken by short, steep
 flood peaks.   In  many locations  the surface of the streambed is regularly dry
 with water movement continuing in the  alluvial aquifer.  The streamflow near
 the confluence with the  White River is equal  to or slightly less than the flow
 upstream near  the site of Watson.

     The quality  of Evacuation Creek water is much poorer than that of White
 River water (Figures  5-28 and 5-29).   Total dissolved solids average about
 3,800 mg/1.  The  predominant  constituents are sodium and sulfate.  One of the
 interesting features  of  this  creek system is  that the concentrations of some
 of the  major constituents are less at  the downstream station than they are
 upstream,  near Watson (Figure 5-28).   Under low flow conditions, average
 dissolved  solids  content near Watson is  4,950 mg/1 while near the confluence
 with the White River  it  averages 3,830 mg/1.  Figure 5-28 shows that, the
 decrease is  largely accounted for by lower sodium sulfate concentration.
 Figure  5-29, a comparison of  high water  period composition, shows what would
 more normally  be  expected, a  slight increase  in dissolved solids downstream
 due to  additions  by dissolution  and concentration by evaporation.  The fact
 that this  phenomenon  is  observed only  during  base flow periods suggests that
 it is groundwater related.  Simple dilution cannot account for the change
 because no tributaries enter  the stream  and the streamflow does not increase
 between the  two stations.

     Two possible explanations exist.   Precipitation of sodium sulfate may
 occur along the stream source.  However, the high solubility of sodium
 sulfate  does not  support this explanation.   Ion exchange might change the
 ionic balance, but would not decrease the total  equivalent concentration.
 The  other  possible explanation is groundwater exchange.   The creek alluvium
 is  in contact with the Bird's Nest Zone for the entire distance between the
 stations.  Exchange of high TDS creek water for lower TDS aquifer water
 could lower the dissolved solids  content of the creek water without increas-
 ing  the  flow.  This problem is discussed in more detail  in Section 6.

     Other watercourses on the tracts  flow only after local  rainfall  events.
The  largest of these ephemeral stream drainages  is Southam Canyon.   Water
typically flows out of this canyon only once or twice a  year.   Table 5-3 is
a water balance for the 1975 water year in  Southam Canyon.   Note  that  this
tabulation assumes, probably incorrectly, no groundwater outflow.

     Table 5-4 presents peak streamflow statistics for Hell's  Hole and
Southam Canyons and Asphalt Wash.  The  results vary widely depending on  the
method used.  All  of the methods  are designed to  work with general  area
precipitation and  basin characteristics rather than historic flow  data.
                                     76

-------
LEOENO
 O JM GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION BORE MOLE
 0 G 1 GKOUMDWATER MOMITOfflNG MffiLL
 O *G1 ALLUVIAL GftOUMOWATEnUOMITOftlPtGNCILI.
 6 f-l AOmFEMTE>T AMD CnOUNOWATEBMONITORIMG WILL
 • SlSUMFACeMATCftMONrTORIMG STATION
r
Figure  5-1.   Precipitation  (millimeters)  in vicinity of  oil shale Tracts  U-a and  U-b,
               October  1974-September 1975 (data  from WRSP,  1976b;  map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
•-J
CO
                   • X-tGCOt£GK EXPLORATION COME MOLE

                   • G 1 OMOUMONATEM WMrTtmMG WILL

                   • *c-i ALLUVIAL

                   • f I AOVfffn TEST AMD

                   • 1-1 HJHFACC WATtn UOMrrOMWG STATION
r
              Figure  5-2.  Precipitation  (centimeters) in vicinity of oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b,
                            October 1974-April  1975 (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by  GE-TEMPO).

-------
ID
             Figure  5-3.   Precipitation  (millimeters) in vicinity of oil shale Tracts U-a and
                          May 1975-September 1975 (data from WRSP, 19765; map by GE-TEMPO).
U-b,

-------
03
O
           LEGEND

           • s
           • p
           • e
           • K
           • is

           • i
           • u
             WITEl  RONITDIIRC STITIOI
      PILOT  TEST IOU (WITEl)
      GROUNOWATER MONITORING
       STATION
      EIISTIIC CEOUCIC COIE IOU,
       EUCMTION
      EIISTINC CEOLOCIC COK IOU,
       SOITIII
       XPLOIITIOI CEOUCIC COIE  IOU
      IlLIVIIl  WEIL (WITEl)
      PIECIPITITIOI.  IITO (WITEl)
 IS    PIECIPITITION,  STIIIGE (WITEl)
•EfP   EVIPOIITMI PIN (WITEl)

                 SCIIE  • Mill

           Figure  5-4.   Topographic  map of oil  shale Tracts U-a and U-b  showing  hydro!ogic and geologic
                           monitoring stations  used  in environmental  baseline  studies  (WRSP,  1976b).

-------

                                                                                                                             •-
     LEGEU

KVU • aiuM CUIKI; LUIS. 3 n M
     KNOT ttlftl

M1-9 • tllUH CUHIIT UNT HIM, I
     n N mew sum


Km - tuun MUCH in FUCCT uus.
     s n « Ktem suns
     - SMUM CIMKIT in FIMH
     SHIT uus. ii n N KICEIT sum

fc») • su»r uus, s n i* mcur  suns

ECU) • KET uus. s n n nictn suns

F («) • suun uun  tint, i n 7 KMHT
     sum

m. m • MET. MouniT m muni
     SWL i n 11  mcnr suns

f • ntp «tT IUITM. i n i mcin suns
UTAH
                                                -x
                                                     V ^-^
                     Figure  5-5.   Soils  map  of oil shale  Tracts  U-a  and  U-b  (WRSP,  1976b)

-------
oo
       HYDROLOGIC SOL GROUPS FOR OIL
      SHALE TRACTS  m, U..AND CORRIDOR

             EXPLANATION
        n.
                              Figure 5-6.   Hydrologic soils map  (data from WRSP,  1976b).

-------
112-
                                                                        106'
                            ARIZONA
                              25
                             • . I -
                                       NEW MEXICO
                                    50
                         100 MILES
                        	I
         Figure 5-7.
Major structural  features in  study
area (modified from Cashion,  1967).
                                   83

-------
00
-ti
         LECENI
          matt Krtta>
       0
    '•-4
        •a
       M MAHOGANY MARKER
         BED. (OCCURS 3-SM
         ABOVE THE
         MAHOGANY BED.
t BAS€ Oft"
  STRATlGRAPHIC
  SEQUENCE.

o ' o ' BED

» LINE OF MEASURED
  STRATIGRAPHIC
  SECTIONS.
                                                                     •
                                                         /              - ,
                                                        /              . - "•"
                                                                                                                         -.   i
                                                                                                                    ..    •
                                                                                                                  ••-•."s1^-  M   O
                                                                                                                          --   !
                         Figure 5-8.  Geologic map  of oil  shale Tracts  U-a and U-b  (WRSP,  1976b).

-------
(a)
      co LOU

SURFACE-,   .-WEATHERED SURFACE
                                            NOTES:
                                            (P)-PRIMARY JOINT SET.
                                            (3).SECONDARY JOINT SET.
                                            SEE TABLE I FOR DEFINITIONS
                                            Of DESCRIPTIVE TIRUS. SEE
                                            FIGURE 1.1-7 FOR LOCATIONS
                                            OF THE SECTIONS.
                                                               MOOKHATI
                                                               TO
                                                               HARD
                                                               MODCRATCLY HARD
                                                          MODC*ATELY HAM
                                                          TO
                                                          VERY HARD
                                                              MODERATELY HAM)
                                                              MOOCH ATE 11 HARD
                                                              MODERATELY HARD
                                                              MQC HARP - V HARJJ


                                                              MOOCRATELV HARD
                                                                         DEGREE
                                                                         OF
                                                                         WEATHERING
                                                                         MODERATE
                                                                         TO
                                                                         EXTREME
                                                                         SU4OT
                                                                         TO
                                                                         HOI  RAT)
                                                                         VCNY K.IMU
                                                                                  10-WOM
                                                                                  (4"-II")
                                                                                  Z.S-9OM
                                                                                  11"-it")
                                                                                 025-610*
                                                                                 0/10" -2'}
                                                                                 025-I3c«
                                                                                 (I/JO'-1/2")
                                                                                         in
                                                                                         N law
                                                                                             CHARACTER   ORIENTATION  LENGTH
                                                                                             AWO t MCI Nil
                                                                                             OKH. SMOOTH,
                                                                                             FLAT.
                                                                                             KJ-ISJcm
                                                                                                 OPEN,KOUOH,
                                                                                                 CURVED TO
                                                                                                 UNDULATINQ
                                                                                                 10 em - 41 em
                                                                                                 (4"- 20')
                                                                                                 CLOSED, JAOOEO,
                                                                                                 cunvto.
                                                                                                 10 CM -•!«•
                                                                                                 OPEN, NOUOH,
                                                                                                 CURVED
                                                                                                 10cm -41 em
                                                                                                 (4"-tO'l
                                                                                                          N IS E/M
                                                                                                          N TOt
                                                                                                          n NC
                                                                                                      NMC ...
                                                                                                      arw ,
                                                                                                      M 1* '•'
• ,|M- t»M
120-90)
4.1 M- 12m
 1
                                                                                                              I W - ?00')
                                                                                                              •iw-Mn
                                                                                                              tM'-200>
                                                              MODERATCLT HAND
                                                              HOOCRATCLY HARO
                                                                     UOOCRATC
                                                                     n
                                                                     SLlOHT
        Figure 5-9.
                        Stratigraphic  sections  of  (a)  Uinta  Formation  {Section  1-C
                        in  Figure  5-8)  and  (b)  contact  between  Uinta  and Green  River
                        Formations   (Section  1-B  in  Figure 5-8)  (WRSP,  1976b).
                                                          85

-------
         COLOR

FRESH SURFACED    y-WEATHEREO SURFACE
                                       TUFFACEOUS SANDSTONE

                                       SOLUTION CAVITY ZONE w.th
                                       NAHCOLITE MODULES
                                                MAHOGANY MARKER
                                                MAHOGANY BCD
                                                MAHOGANY LEDGE
CONSISTENCY
MODERATELY HARD
TO
VERY HARD
HARD
TO
VERY HARD
MODERATELY HARD
MODERATELY HARD
TO
HARD
MODERATELY HARD
MAM)
MODERATE
TO
VERY HARD
HARD
TO
VCRT HARD
MQOCRATEJJ HMD

MODERATELY HARD
TO MARg
VERY HARD
MODERATELY SOFT
MUM)
TO
VERY HARD
MOOERATEUT HAIIO
TO
HMD

Of
WEATHERING
MODERATE
TO
SLIGHT

SLIGHT
MODERATE
TO EXTREME
SLI9HT
MODERATE
	 B U
SL IGHT
MODERATE
TO
SLIGHT
MsM»r T°
MODERATE
TO
SLIGHT




SLIGHT

•mS 	
MODERATE
SLIGHT
TO
FRESH

TO
SL10MT
BEDDING
THICKNESS
0.25cm- 5cm
(o.i"-a.o"i
0 29- 0.64cm
(Ql"-0.2&")
0 25 cm - Sen
[0.l"-2 0")
0 29- i Jew
lor-o.s")
029 CM- Sen
(01"- 09")
• i ',,. i ' •

O.Zflem 9cm
(0 1"- 2"1

ORIENTATION
[STRIKES DIP)
N48W
»9w
*UW
IZ SW
N78W
BHE
SSf
y:
WWW
7SW
N40 W
29*
NMW
4NW
NR4E
49C
NiSW
N4OW
«&W
NlAW
7SW
H-l
'aw
6NE
E-W
' 2»N
NI1E
2NW
NISE
HI
HBE
«NW
NS4 W
0
N34W
48. *
NIOC
NI8W
ssw
N35E
4NW
NI7C
3NW
NMW

T9W
NMW
IM
N22W
• MM
N84I
II NW
N MW
1 Nt
NMC
1 NW
N24E
2 3E
JOINTS
CHARACTER
AND
9MCIN6
OPEN, JAGGED
& UNOULA1ING-
t.9cM-*i'an
(!"-»')
OPEN, SMOOTH,
FLAT.
OPEN B CLOSED
2 Jem- 15cm
M"-*"J
CLOSED. SMOOTH,
FLAT
10 on -Mom
(4" -12")
OPEN, SMOOTH,
CURVED
OPEN A CLOSED
ROUGH,
UNDULATIN8
ZScm - 30cm
(l"-)2">
CLOSED, SMOOTH
FLAT
(4"-«"J
OPEN. ROUSM.
UHDULATINS
ZSem-SOem
ir-a")
OPEN. SMOOTH.
CURVED
2 S em- Kern
It"- 12")
CLOSED, SMOOTH,
FLAT.
0.28cm -1 3cm
I0l"-0.5")
14 "-24"}
SMOOTH, FLAT,
ROUGH, CURVED
D 29 en -«t cm
(O.I "-2")
QPtH, SMOOTH,
FLAT
10cm - 15cm
(4" -9"!
OPEN, SMOOTH,
CURVED.
lOcm- SOcm
(4"-IJn)
' 02 NE (5)
'.,!•( N. SMOOTH,
FLAT
.. ,
FLAT
CLOSED, ROUGH,
FLAT
CLOSED. ROUGH.
FLAT
SMOOTH,
JNDULATINQ
ORIENTATION
(STRIKC ft DIP)
N42E(*t
•7SE ISI
N*9W ,p,
(19 NE (P}
N SOW ,„,
84 SW (P)
N«5W.pl
»
JW lp|
«B"5: »p»
E-W
as N
N 38 E
76 SE
«tE 1PI
N SOW
64 N
Nfll W ,p.
7«NC 1P1
Sasl ls)
N60E (p)
9O
M 76 W
re ME
H /at
84 NW
N39E
H
N&3W , ,
•ssw '•'
V 59 E ,„,
T4 SE IS'
NTBW ,p,
S4NE 1P
NZ7C ...
90
N33W
92 NE 

E-« (p( N-l 92 W N 12 E BO NW H 83 * U NE N 7BE 99 SE uu 18) LEMOTH ISm -81m (BO -tOff I 81 m (ZOO'J ISm -91m iso'-aoo't 61m - Aim 120' -200') (> 200') 6 lm - 13.1" ttO -HO) ISm - Clflt ( SO' - 200'> IS* (50') 61 m- 905m (ZQO'HOOO) film -503m {2OO'-IOOO'l •lm 1200') 6 in. - «1j» 110' - 200 ) ( --. 20') NOTES: (P) • PRIMARY JOINT SET (S) • SECONDARY JOINT SET SEE GEOUOCIC MAP Of TRACTS Ua - Ub FOR THE LOCATION OF THE SECTION SCE TABLE I FOR DEFINITIONS OF THE TERMS USED TO DESCRIBE THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Of BEDROCK Figure 5-10. Strati graphic section of upper portion of Parachute Creek Member (Section 1-A in Figure 5-8) (WRSP, 1976b). 86


-------
00
           Figure 5-11.  Subsurface structural  contour map (elevation in feet above sea  level)  of the
                         Mahogany Marker Tracts U-a and U-b (data from WRSP, 1976b; map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
                                                                                                                    HliU HOti CAMTOM
00
co
                  U*fN
                            =

                            5

                            i
                            E

                            S
                                                                               M mu riKit. hi*
                                             >      i
                                                                           MIIIKI M Wtll
                                                                                                     IKltIM W HISS UCTIM
                                                                                              NOTE: T J>. IS TOTAL DEPTH Of KMU HOLE IN FEET
                       Figure  5-12.   Geologic  cross  section of  Tracts  U-a and U-b (WRSP, 19765).

-------
                                                                                                                                            (SMI
                     IBM
                                       UK)
                                                      in.)
                                                                     (JEt)             !«§.)             iS»J


                                                                       DISTUKCE IN K1LCMETEIS (MILES)
       UCEII
       liiiEiair
hi  Illlllli
'—*  Illllllll  MCMfltllTI
       niriiii
tub  HIT t, "•)
    ....   r  """
TUB  HIT a J
tgp  MIICIITi  CIEII
Igg  UIIII CUM Wllll     CIEII IIIEI FtUIIIII
Igd  IIIILIt CIEEI IEIIEI  J
HIE: IIIIIIIH CIIIICT! lltltl  IIEIE IIIUIEI
imi
   TUCT
Ml
L<-*
 \IS-J
                         L
                    TMCI 0-b
                \

   SCILI ID (I lltiS

        IU     ill
   I   (111)  (211)  (111)
                                                                                                                                                          N«-»
                                                                                                                                                          t-I3 •
                              Figure  5-13.    Geologic  cross  section  of Tract  U-a  (WRSP,  1976b).
                                                                                                                                        IOC»IIO» IF CIOSS SECTION

-------
vo
o
                                                                       IISTtlCE II IILIUTEIS (BILES)
             UGUI
(•I  I11IIIM
—  Elltllllt
      rEiiiui
Tub  HIT
Tu«  MIT
I,p  PIIICIITE CIEEI IEHEI
Tgg  MIIEII CILCI IEIIEI
Igd  IHCUt CKEI •CIIEI
                                 IIIEI FUUTIII
       MTE: FHIIIIN CMIICIS NUII ••!« IHEIIEI.
                                  Figure  5-14.   Geologic  cross section  of  Tract  U-b  (WRSP,  1976b).
                                                                                                                                        ir CHSS SECTIM

-------
    mm
  It 1111 IIPCIIU IHCI imiciu
    GROUNDWATER SEEPAGE
    nmti irnici
 ----- in mi


  HISIHIIEI1I If IIKPilllUll 111 SPECIFIC COHICTHCf


  •  EIICIIIIOI CIEII 1SMOWN EMT Of CRCCKI


  o  IPIIHI fill Illl! «ST IIIIFII ISMOWK WEST or emit!


    111! Ill Illl
II.]
 ,11
 11.1 •1EIPIUIIH. ID HIKES CEIIII1
 4711
    SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE, IN MICROHMS/CENTIMETER
        MIITS ILOH TIC
    CUHTIII riINT til IIBIS HtlT HUIFfl CIITICT.
    WITH IIMIH HIMEI
 POINT  ELEVATION
If 1     S1U.B
IP 3     BillD
       A3H.B
       •1JO.O
       8117.0
       I1ll.lt
-  *
irt
IP »
If 13
wu
11-11
      •177.2
      11WJ
      • Itl 0
       U17.B   *«7»,flI3
                    I.CM.100
                    I.MB,*70
                    2.H4.M4
                    .
                   2.HT.1B1
                   2.CH.KM
   OIL  SlUi  TUCTS U-.
                          BOUNDARIES
  Figure  5-15.

                        Hydrogeologic  interactions  between  Evacuation  Creek
                        and  the  Bird's  Nest Aquifer  (WRSP,  1976b).
                                              91

-------
ro
    fe3-vc
                                                                                             OUTCROP
                                                                                             RECHARGE
                                                                                             DISCHARGE
                       Figure 5-16.   Bird's Nest  Zone outcrop,  recharge, and discharge  areas.

-------
CO
              KMf mt HAIl
                 Figure 5-17.  Structural  contours  of  the  top of the Bird's Nest Aquifer (WRSP, 1976b).

-------
          LEGEND
           O » t GtOlOGK EXPLORATION (OHEHOLI
           O 01 GHOUMDNATfll HONITOOING IKLL
           O »Q I A4.1UVIKL GKOUfWIMTEII UOMITCWINC «KLL
           9 f 1 AQUIFER TCIT AND CKOU«D«I*TEII HONITOHIMC HCLL
           • S 1 SU«mCt »«TE« KOI1ITIXINC tT«TK»
F
Figure  5-18.   Water table and artesian  conditions in  the  Bird's  Nest  Aquifer.   Water levels  shown  are
                 in meters above the  top of the aquifer  (data  from  WRSP, 1976b;  map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
en
                          /            I
                         L i
                     LCQCNO                                              ( m
                     • X lGtOLOGICEXPLO«ATKmiO*EHOL£                                          ;	j
                     • GlCKOUNOWATEH MONITORING WELL                                 N /
                     • AG-1 ALLUVIAL CI»CHmD«VATEttMONtTOft>MG WCLL
                     • M AOUIFEU THT ANOCMOUNOWATEH MOHtTCMINGtVCLL
                     • I 1 tUMFACt WATER MONITORING rTrnOM




              Figure 5-19.  Water levels (in  feet above sea  level)  in Bird's Nest Aquifer, March  1975.


                             Map redrawn after data evaluation (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO)

-------
10
en
               L
                LEOENO
                 *O«tTO«lNC HCLL
                 • ft AOUlf f" TtlT AMD G«OL«Dl»*TtRUO>IITOIIIWG«lL
                 O 11 SURFACE NATCH MONITORING RATION
                Figure  5-20.   Water-level  map  of the Bird's  Nest  Aquifer,  March 1975.   Data  are  in feet
                                 above sea level  (data  from WRSP, 1976b;  map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
—I
               LEO!NO
                 O X 1 GEOLOGIC EXPLORATION MAE MOLC
                 O G 1 CMOUNDWATeRMOMITOMINCWCLL
                 O AC 1 ALLUVIAL GftOUWDWATE R HOMITORIfM* WE LL
                 • PI AQUIFER TEST A«DG«>U«0«»ATERIilONCTORI»«O«lfLL
                 • 11 9URFACE WATER MONITORING ITATIOH
         Figure  5-21.
Water-level  map  of Bird's Nest Aquifer modified after data evaluation.   Water levels
shown are  in meters relative  to the top  of the  aquifer  (data from WRSP,  1976b; map by
GE-TEMPO).

-------
       8 • = a i i § a i • i a 5 • I  a • s I a i • • a 5 i • a n I in j • i  5 j § s  5 i j a 3
  1951    19M   WSJ   1t54   l»53    19M   1937   1*51   1939
                                                      If40
                                                                       If63    1t64
                                                                                        t»66
                                                         Mil
                                                                                                    1961    1969
Figure  5-22.   Hydrograph for the  White  River near  Watson  for period  1951 to  1970  (WRSP, 1976b).

-------
                    muwm
                    CIUMIIKE
                    MUUTT umit
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      i
                                                                                                      •Mi
                                                                                                      «*

                                                                                                      I
KTNII
                                                                                            SErTEIIII
 Figure 5-23.  Mean daily  streamflow,  temperature, and specific  conductance measured in the
               White River above Southam Canyon, October 1974-September 1975 (WRSP, 1976b).

-------
8 8 8 6 i8S8858^r2t22S2S = 2
MILLIGRAM/I
m
» 8
C 5
X 4
_ 3
0 2
0



























f



























-
.



























HI



























•— .



























«••



























— *«



























•"*
OCT.
LEGEND






















































&»


























-•»

























«•

























-»


























—«
NOV.

























.

























•»



























—•


























-«



























•^«



























*-«e
DEC
CARROKIA
















'









I



























--
—



























««



























MM



























-«
JAN.
TF



























«-*


: '
'••



-


•

.'











































•-



























—*



























— '



























«c»
FEB.
/ RirADO,



























^«







'





































—
-


































«»•


























«•


























••

























•-«
MARCH
^Kl ATC






-


• '















'A

























••*
•
























S




















































S

























/



/ ~~
APRIL





















/

























>

























>































MAY




















*-


























=>»






















.










J




















^^





ur




















\





>
-------
OCT.
  NOV.
DEC
JAN.
FEB.
                                           MARCH
                                              APRIL
                                                              MAY
                                                                JUNE
                                                              JULY
                                                                                        AUG.
                                                                                          SEPT.
LEGEND
       /A: SILICA
           % CALCIUM
                                           :: MAGNESIUM
                                                      = SODIUM
                                                                            POTASSIUM
                                                                                     SULFATE
                  • MEAN STREAM DISCHARGE
Figure 5-25.  Mean water
                                quality of the White River near  Watson, Utah (WRSP, 19765).

-------
o
ro
                IMKUTHI

                STIEMFltl

                CIIIICTIICE

                MHITI Mines
                                                                                                                    s
                                                                                                                    a
          KTHEI
                                                                                                         SEFTEIIEI
        Figure 5-26.  Mean  daily stream-flow,  temperature,  and specific conductance measured in Evacuation

                      Creek at Watson, Utah,  October 1974-September  1975 (WRSP, 1976b).

-------
o
CO
           	tmunw

           	CMMCttMt

           	|I»U» ttWUt

                      i  i
            Figure 5-27.  Mean daily streamflow, temperature, and specific conductance measured near
                          the mouth of Evacuation Creek, October 1974-September 1975 (WRSP, 1976b).

-------
   42.5
                 S-l WHITE RIVER ABOVE  HELLS HOLE CANYON
                                       \         -2%
                                    540


                S-7 EVACUATION  CREEK  BELOW PARK CANYON
                                                  -2%
                                    3610
S-6  EVACUATION CREEK  AT WATSON, UTAH
                                -IK
                                    4950
                    S-2 EVACUATION CREEK NEAR  MOUTH
                                    3830
                    S-3 WHITE  RIVER  NEAR WATSON,  UTAH
                                 c
                                    550

                  S-4 WHITE RIVER ABOVE  SOUTHAM CANYON
                                       V        -ir,
                                    560

                   S-ll  WHITE RIVER BELOW  ASPHALT WASH
                                       \        -0.2%
                                    580

                                  SCALE
                   15     10     5    0      5     10     IS
                       (me/I) CATIONS
                                  LEGEND
                       (m«/l)No tK

                         (me/I) Co

                         (me/l)Mg
                                    TOS

                                  (mg/l)
                       (me/I)  ANIONS
                        Cl(me/l)

                        HCOj(me/l)

                        S04 (me/I)
                                                                                 60.2
00%«PERCENT  BY WHICH
    ANIONS EXCEED  CATIONS
Figure  5-28.   Distribution of  major ions  in the White  River and  Evacuation
                Creek during 1975  base flow period (WRSP,  1976b).
                                        104

-------
               S-l  WHITE RIVER ABOVE  HELLS HOLE CANVON
                                                -0.3R
                                  264
               S*7  EVACUATION  CREEK BELOW PARK  CANYON
                                               +2*
                                  3173

                S-6 EVACUATION CREEK  AT WATSON, UTAH
                                                -IK
                                  3273

                   S-2  EVACUATION CREEK NEAR  MOUTH
                                                -0.3%
                                  3452

                   S-3  WHITE RIVER NEAR WATSON, UTAH
                                                -0.3%
                                   272
                 S-4  WHITE RIVER ABOVE  SOUTHAM  CANYON
                                 CD
                                   278
                  S-ll WHITE  RIVER  BELOW ASPHALT WASH

                                 (b         '"
                                   270
                                 SCALE
                        10    5     0     5     10    15
                        H
                              1 - 1
                       (me/D CATIONS
                                 LEGEND
                       (m«/l)No + K
                         (me/DCo
                         (me/I) Mg
                                   TDS
                                  (mg/0
                         (me/I) ANIONS
                           Cl (me/I)
                           HCOj(me/l)
                           SO, (me/t)
00% - PERCENT  BY WHICH
     ANIONS EXCEED CATIONS
Figure 5-29.
Distribution of major  ions  in the White  River and Evacuation
Creek during May through  July 1975 high  flow period  (WRSP, 1976b)
                                       105

-------
TABLE 5-1.  SOIL ANALYSES


Soil3
As



Bs-4


D










Depth
(cm)
0-15
15-25
25-30
30-35
0-10
10-20
20-30
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
60-70
70-80
25-45

Soil
moisture
(%)
—

—
—
1.26
1.43
3.78
4.33
6.33
—
—
—
2.25
—
—
2.60


CEC
(meq/lOOgsoil)
9.80
10.98
10.88
11.30
5.65
8.93
9.80
5.45
7.18
9.45
10.88
9.03
9.13
9.03
9.75

TSS

(Ecexl03)
0.52 364
0.43 301
0.64 448
1.02 714
.80 560
.61 427
. 50 350
.94 658
.44 308
.43 301
.36 252
.29 203
.35 285
.42 294
.37 259



Ca
80
63
48
44
75
60
50
62
44
50
38
45
99
40
31



Mg
3.5
3.0
3.0
2.9
11.4
4.1
2.3
8.1
3.1
2.0
1.8
1.0
1.5
2.2
2.2



Na
20
29
84
132
34
56
61
44
30
35
36
36
45
50
46



K
3.5
2.5
3.5
2.5
75.0
3.5
20.0
130.0
25.0
2.0
2.4
2.0
2.7
3.5
2.8



Sand
(%}
57
56.6
58
55.5
71
69
68.5
64
69
58
58
65.5
66
69
68



Silt
(%)
35
35.4
35
36.5
23
27
29.5
28
25
38
41
32.5
30
27
28



Clay
(%)
8
8
7
8
6
4
2
8
6
4
1
2
4
4
4

a See Figure 5-5, also White River Shale Project (1976b)
Some moisture loss during shipping suspected

-------
TABLE 5-2.  AQUIFER PUMP TEST RESULTS (WRSP, 1976b)
Test No./
Pump rate/
Pump time

P-l Test
Q=2.839 1/s
(45 gal /ml n)
Duration of
pumping =
1800 min
P-2 Upper
Test
0=0.631 1/s
(10 gal /min
Duration of
pumping =
1676 min
Observation well
distance from
pumping well (r)
in meters (feet)
—
15.85
(52.0)
30.94
(101.5)

14.63
(48.0)
29.87
(98.0)
Observation
well
designation
P-l pump
P-l pilot
P-l core
P-2 upper
pump
P-2 upper
pilot
P-2 upper
core
Method of analysis
Time-drawdown
'(Jacob)
Time- drawdown
(Jacob)
Residual drawdown
Calculated recovery
drawdown vs. radius
Time-drawdown
(Jacob)
Residual drawdown
Time- drawdown
(Jacob)
Time-drawdown
(Jacob)
Residual drawdown
Time-drawdown
(Jacob)
Residual drawdown

Period of test
Pumping
Recovery
Pumping
Recovery
Pumping
Pumping
Recovery
Pumping
Recovery
Calculated aquifer coefficients
Transmissivity, T
1/s/m (gal/day/ft)
0.344 (2475) (early slope)
0.209 (1458) (late slope)
0.131 (914) (early slope)
0.234 (1627) (late slope)
0.140 (972)
0.147 (1024)
0.259 (1800)
0.257 (1789)
0.228 (1584)
0.017 (120) (early slope)
0.004 ( 27) (middle slope)
0.002 ( 15) (late slope)
0.017 (120) (early slope)
0.004 (27) (middle slope)
0.002 (15) (late slope)
0.004 (25) (middle slope)
0.018 (123) (early slope)
0.005 (36) (middle slope)
0.002 (17) (late slope)
0.004 (28) (middle slope)
	 (continued) 	
Storage
-—
3.55xlO~4
—
3.40xlO"4
3.80xlO"4
—
—
1.6xlO"5
...
1.07xlO"5
—

-------
                                             TABLE 5-2 (continued)
Test No./
Pump rate/
Pump time
P-2 Lower
Test
Q=34.6961/s
(550ga\Wn)
Duration of
Pumping =
8765 min
P-3 Test
Q=0.189 1/s
(3 gal/min)
Duration of
pumping =
30 min
Observation well
distance from
pumping well (r)
in meters (feet)

14.81
(48.0)
28.93
(94.9)


Observation
well
designation
P-2 lower
pump
P-2 lower
pilot
P-2 lower
core
P-2 lower
core &
pilot
P-3 pump
Method of analysis

Time-drawdown
(Jacob)
Calculated
recovery
Residual
drawdown
Time-drawdown
(Jacob)
Calculated
recovery
Residual
drawdown
Di stance-drawdown
drawdown vs. radius
Time-drawdown
(Thels)
Time-drawdown
(Jacob)
Residual drawdown
Period of test
Pumping
Recovery
Pumping
Recovery
Pumping
Recovery
Pumping
Pumping
Recovery
Calculated aquifer coefficients
Transmissivity, T
1/s/m (gal/day/ft)
— •«
8.984 (62,586) (early slope)
16.043 (111,692) (late slope)
9.935 (69,173)
9.935 (69,173)
9.068 (63, 130) (early slope)
14.897 (103,714)(late slope)
9.841 (68,514)
9.523 (66,304)
9.959 (69,339)
10.701 (74,500)
0.0080 (58)
0.009 (61) (early slope)
0.004 (26) (late slope)
— (6.7)
Storage
_•_
6.77xlO"6
1.14xlO"5
...
8.29xlO"5
3.13xlO"5
—
1.68xlO"4
0.105
0.085
___
o
oo

-------
          TABLE 5-3.   WATER BALANCE  WITHIN  TRACT  FOR WATER  YEAR  1975, SOUTHAM CANYON, cm (inches)
Time
period
Oct. 1974
through
April 1975
May 1975
through
Sept. 1975
Oct. 1974
through
Sept. 1975
Average
precipi-
tation
12.67
(4.99)
12.34
(4.86)
25.02
(9.85)
Total
runoff
0.15
(0.06)
0
(0)
0.15
(0.06)
Soil
storage
change
0
(0)
0
(0)
0
(0)
Total
evapo-
trans-
pi rat ion
12.52
(4.93)
12.34
(4.86)
24.87
(9.79)
Percent
evapo-
trans-
pi ration
(%}
98.9
100.0
99.4
Pan
evapo-
ration

99.62
(39.22)

Pan .
coefficient

0.70

Potential
evaporation

69.73
(27.45)

a Assumed to be in static condition or zero change.
Average coefficient suggested by Vente Chow: "Handbook of Applied Hydrology" to account for
radiation effects on pan.
c Potential free surface evaporation which is comparable to the potential consumptive use factor.
o
vo

-------
TABLE 5-4.  ESTIMATED PEAK STREAMFLOWS FOR HELLS HOLE CANYON,
            SOUTHAM CANYON, AND ASPHALT WASH, rn3/s (ft3/s)
Drainage
Hells Hole
Canyon
Southern
Canyon

Asphalt
Wash
Method
USGSa
USGSb
SCSC
USGSa
USGSb
SCS
USGSa
USGSb
SCSC
2 Yr
1.6 (55)
1.3 (47)
3.2 (115)
0.6 (21)
0.3 (12)
1.1 (40)
4.0 (140)
4.0 (140)
12 (400)
5 Yr
2.8 (100)
2.5 (87)
2.6 (924)
1.1 (39)
.7 (25)
9.1 (320)
6.8 (240)
7.5 (263)
100 (3600)
10 Yr
4.0 (140)
3.3 (116)
40 (400)
1.6 (55)
1.1 (38)
14 (480)
10 (360)
10 (360)
155 (5300)
25 Yr
5.9 (2.0)
3.9 (137)
46 (1600)
2.2 (80)
1.2 (41)
16 (560)
15 (540)
12 (470)
180 (6200)
50 Yr
7.6 (270)
58 (2100)
3.0 (105)
20 (720)
19.8 (700)
220 (8000)
100 Yr
70 (2500)

24 (850)
270 (9550)
a Regional drainage method.
General characteristics method.
Soil Conservation Service method modified for limited data.

-------
                                   SECTION 6

                         EXISTING GROUNDWATER QUALITY


 GENERAL GROUNDWATER QUALITY

 Bird's Nest Aquifer

      The chemical  composition of the groundwater in the Bird's  Nest  Aquifer
 beneath Oil  Shale  Tracts U-a and U-b can be characterized  as  varying from
 sodium sulfate to  sodium bicarbonate.   Figure  6-1  is  a  plot of  the yearly
 mean of analyses from wells in the  Bird's Nest Aquifer.  These  analyses are
 generalized into two groups in Figure  6-2.   The area  labeled  "NE" contains
 analyses from wells near well  P-l in the northern  half  of  Tract U-b,  and  the
 area "SW" contains analyses from wells in Tract U-a.  The  well  samples from
 the SW group contain a higher percentage of magnesium and  bicarbonate than  do
 the samples  from the NE group.

      This division into water quality  groups corresponds to another  division.
 If the water samples are divided on  the  basis of total  dissolved solids (TDS)
 concentration,  all  of the analyses labeled  SW will  fall below 2,000 mg/1.
 Those labeled NE will  fall  above 2,000 mg/1, and most of them above 3,000 mg/1.

      In summary, the NE group  is characterized  by a TDS content of between
 4,500 mg/1 and  2,500 mg/1,  and a sodium-sulfate composition.  Magnesium is
 minor (<30 percent),  and the TDS content  may be up  to 20 percent calcium.
 Chloride is  very minor,  but up to 30 percent of the anions may be bicarbonate.
 In  contrast,  the TDS content of  the SW group lies between  1,300 mg/1 and 1,700
 mg/1,  and the composition is sodium bicarbonate.  The cation composition is
 nearly pure  sodium,  while the anions may  include up to 50  percent sulfate and
 30  percent chloride.

      Several wells  (G-8, G-12, and G-14) do not fall into either group,  but lie
 between  them.  The  chemical composition of water from these wells is inter-
 mediate  between  that of the NE and SW  groupings.  All of these wells penetrate
 the Bird's Nest Aquifer beneath Evacuation Creek.  The dissolved solids  levels
 also  lie between that of the NE and SW groups.

     The general explanation of the groundwater quality is  not difficult.   The
 Bird's Nest Aquifer  is formed of solution cavities left after  the dissolution
of nahcolite (NaHCOs) crystals imbedded in a marl stone matrix.   Thus  sodium
bicarbonate water would be created during the dissolution process by  which the
aquifer was created, and by the dissolution of any residual nahcolite after the
 initial process.  Since the marlstone matrix of the aquifer is  formed of fine
grains of dolomite  and calcite, some magnesium and calcium  could also be

                                     111

-------
expected.  The only remaining major ion is sulfate.  Evacuation Creek is
probably the source of the sulfate in the Bird's Nest Aquifer water.  Analyses
of water from Evacuation Creek and its alluvium show that 75 to 85 percent of
the anions are sulfate (Figure 6-2).

Douglas Creek Aquifer

     Wells P-4 and G-16A are reported to penetrate the Douglas Creek Member of
the Green River Formation.  Water from well P-4 has lower IDS than either the
Bird's Nest NE or SW and is sodium bicarbonate-chloride in composition (Figure
6-3).  The P-4 water was analyzed once during 1975 and the cation analyses may
be in error.  The G-16A anion analyses do not agree with the P-4 analyses, but
this difference may be explained by the large distance (11 kilometers or 7
miles) between the two wells.

P-2 Aquifer

     The small isolated aquifer found above the Bird's Nest Aquifer at well  P-2
contains sodium bicarbonate water-nearly pure dissolved nahcolite.

Alluvial Aquifers

     Figure 6-2 shows one other group of analyses:  those from Evacuation Creek
and the alluvium beneath it.   The composition of Evacuation Creek water is
similar to that of the NE Bird's Nest Aquifer, but with a slightly lower sodium
and bicarbonate content.   The TDS concentration, varying from 4,950 mg/1  to
3,830 mg/1, is comparable to the NE Bird's Nest Aquifer.

WATER QUALITY DISTRIBUTION

     The spatial  distribution of the major water quality constituents in  the
Bird's Nest Aquifer is discussed in the following paragraphs.   The data plotted
and described are the means of the 1974 and 1975 data collections.  During this
period, six to eight samples  were collected from "P"  wells and one to five were
collected from "G" wells.   Detailed data are presented in White River Shale
Project (1976b).

     In general,  the distribution of TDS concentration is  typical  of the  indi-
vidual dissolved constituents.   The NE Bird's Nest Aquifer region  of poor water
quality is  clearly delimited.   The SW region of  better water quality can  be
seen to extend across the  southern corner of Tract U-b (Figure 6-4).   An
interesting feature is the decrease in dissolved solids concentration along
Evacuation  Creek between Watson and the Highway  45 crossing.   Another interest-
ing phenomenon is the low  TDS area underlying Tract U-a that is downgradient
(Figure 6-5)  of the Evacuation Creek recharge area.

     Calcium and  magnesium concentration distributions  reflect the same
pattern as  the TDS distribution (Figures 6-6 and 6-7).   The  sodium plus
potassium map (Figure 6-8)  is also similar,  but  the area  of  high concentration
is larger and less well  defined.   This pattern may result  from the presence  of
sodium, in  the form of nahcolite, throughout the aquifer.


                                    112

-------
      The distribution of sulfate concentrations very closely follows  that of
 the total dissolved solids (Figure 6-9).   The distribution of carbonate and
 bicarbonate does not (Figure 6-10).   Again,  this fact may indicate that while
 the source of sodium and bicarbonate is the nahcolite within the aquifer,  the
 source of the larger part of the other ions  is from outside the aquifer,  from
 Evacuation Creek.

      Both bicarbonate and chloride concentrations  show an anomalous distri-
 bution.   In the case of carbonate plus bicarbonate,  there exists a long,  narrow
 zone of higher concentration extending northwest from Evacuation Creek.   This
 zone extends in a direction perpendicular to  the equipotential  lines  (Figure
 6-5),  suggesting a plume moving down gradient from a source along Evacuation
 Creek.

      The distribution of chloride concentration is even more anomalous  (Figure
 6-11).   A north-south zone of slighly higher  concentration exists along the
 boundary between the tracts,  with well  G-5 possessing a consistent concentra-
 tion nearly four times that of any other  well.   This high concentration is
 unexplained, but does not seem to be of regional significance.   The chloride
 concentration in the rest of the aquifer  and  Evacuation Creek  is  low, and it
 probably reflects nothing more than  slight differences  in chloride content  of
 the rock forming the aquifer.

     The aquifer temperature  distribution (Figure 6-12) is  informative.  Cold
 water  in a  zone along Evacuation Creek  reflects  both  recharge of  cold stream
 water  and seasonal  cooling of the near-surface  aquifer  water.  The aquifer  is
 progressively more  deeply covered toward  the west and  the water  is warmed by
 geothermal  heat as  it flows.   This temperature  distribution  strongly supports
 the idea  of recharge from Evacuation  Creek.

     Another significant  feature is the lower temperature at well  P-2L located
 near the  White River just north  of Tract  U-a.   Figures  6-13  through 6-16 are
 successive  temperature distributions  through the two years  for which data are
 available.   Although  the  data  for March 1975 are missing, lower winter than
 spring temperatures  are indicated.  During May the average temperature of the
 White River  is  11°  C  (52°  F), while during November it  is 3° C (36° F).  This
 correlation  of river  and  aquifer  temperatures supports the possibility of
 recharge  of  the  Bird's Nest Aquifer in the region of well  P-2L by downward
 leakage from the White River.

     Figures  6-17 through 6-24 illustrate the concentration of TDS and sulfate
 at  various times.  Unfortunately, lack of uniform sampling has resulted in
 spotty data.   However, the distribution does not show significant change with
 time.

WATER QUALITY AS AFFECTED BY RECHARGE

     The major groundwater quality feature of the Bird's Nest Aquifer  is the
poor water quality zone in the NE area.  The uninhabited and unutilized nature
of the region makes human-originated pollution unlikely.  The fact that the
ions which are characteristic of the aquifer material itself (sodium and bicar-
bonate) are widely distributed, while the ions characteristic of Evacuation

                                     113

-------
 Creek waters  (calcium, magnesium, and sulfate) are concentrated in the high IDS
 zone, indicates that Evacuation Creek recharge is the source of the high IDS
 water.  The TDS of the aquifer water is somewhat higher than the water of
 Evacuation Creek, and the difference is mainly in sodium and bicarbonate.  This
 increase would be expected if the recharge water dissolved some nahcolite as it
 moved through the aquifer.

     Two facts are not explained by the recharge from Evacuation Creek indi-
 cated by water quality and temperature considerations.  They are the source of
:tfce better quality water in the Bird's Nest Aquifer beneath Tract U-a and the
 improvement in water quality along the course of Evacuation Creek (Figure 6-25;
 see Section 5).  There is no plausible mechanism for the removal of such solu-
 ble and mobile ions as sodium and sulfate from either the creek or the aquifer.
 A more likely mechanism is dilution.

     Five possible sources of the relatively good quality water beneath Tract
 U-a exist:

     1.   Upward leakage through the Mahogany Zone from the Douglas
         Creek or Caver Aquifers

     2.   Downward leakage from the White River

     3.   Downward leakage from precipitation

     4.   Recharge from alluvium of Asphalt Wash

     5.   Downgradient recharge from Bird's Nest Aquifer above
         Evacuation Creek.

     The first possibility seems unlikely due to the low permeability of the
Mahogany Zone, but such leakage has been reported in the Piceance Basin.   An
argument from groundwater temperature has already been presented for the second
possibility.   Downward leakage from precipitation is not likely because of the
low precipitation and high evaporation of the region, but it is not impossible.
The curve of the 1,478-meter (4,850-foot) equipotential  line in Figure 6-5
would support the fourth possibility.   Unfortunately, no water quality analyses
from the alluvium of Asphalt Wash are available.

     The fifth possibility seems unlikely, but it does have some support and
could explain several problems.   If there were a source of good-quality water
in the Bird's Nest Aquifer upgradient from Evacuation Creek, just to the south
of the Tract U-b boundary, with enough head to intercept the alluvium of the
creek, the water would flow in two directions.  Some would continue to flow
downgradient, mixing with some Evacuation Creek water, to contribute at least
part of the lower TDS water beneath Tract U-a.  The rest of the water would
flow down Evacuation Creek through the alluvium,  mixing with the high TDS
Evacuation Creek water as it flowed.   Such an exchange of aquifer and creek
water would explain the improvement of the Evacuation Creek water without any
increase in discharge.   In Figure 6-1  the position of well  P-3 is near the
sodium bicarbonate end of the SW Bird's Nest Aquifer field.  If water of such
quality were mixing with Evacuation Creek water in the creek bed alluvium,

                                    114

-------
analyses of wells penetrating the creek alluvium and the aquifer beneath the
alluvium should fall between the Evacuation Creek and the SW Bird's Nest
Aquifer fields.  In fact, this is where these analyses do plot.   The underlined
points in Figure 6-2 are wells along Evacuation Creek.

     The presence of water from another source than Evacuation Creek in the
Bird's Nest Aquifer above the creek would also explain the curve of the equi-
potential lines above the creek in Figure 6-5.  Possible sources for such
water would be downward leakage of precipitation or recharge by  precipitation
at the outcrop of the Bird's Nest Aquifer on the wall  of Hell's  Hole Canyon,
or upward leakage from the Douglas Creek or deeper aquifers.

     Thus such a recharge of the aquifer would explain the source of the good-
quality water moving past well  P-3,  the cause of the improvement of water
quality in Evacuation Creek without  increased discharge,  the quality of water
in wells along Evacuation Creek,  and the position of the  equipotential  lines
in the Bird's Nest Aquifer above Evacuation Creek.
                                   115

-------
                                        20      40      60
                                                   Cl
       CATIONS
PERCENTAGE REACTING VALUES
AN IONS
Figure 6-1.   Water analysis  diagram for  Bird's Nest Aquifer.
                            116

-------
  60      40
 	 Ca
   CATIONS
   20                  20

 PERCENTAGE REACTING VALUES
40     60
    CI-
  ANIONS
80
Figure 6-2.
Water analysis diagram for Bird's Nest
Aquifer and Evacuation Creek.

           117

-------
        EVACUATION CREEK
        IME BIRD'S NEST
        AQUIFER
        SW BIRD'S NEST
        AQUIFER
               CATIONS
PERCENTAGE REACTING VALUES
                                                         AN IONS
Figure 6-3.  Water analysis diagram for  non-Bird's  Nest Aquifer analyses.
                                     118

-------
           e XtGCOLOGK EXPLORATION KME HOLE
           • G-l GMOUWDWATEfl HOMITOfllMG WELL
           0 AG 1 ALLUVIAL GflOUNOMATffl MONITORING WELL
           • ».| AOUtFEH TEXT AND OACXJHOiVATER MONITOfllHG HCLL
                        G IT«TION
r
Figure 6-4.   Mean  total dissolved  solids  (IDS)  concentrations (mg/1) in  the Bird's Nest Aquifer
               (data  from WRSP, 1976b; map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
ro
o
                                                            F
         Figure 6-5.  Water levels  (in feet above sea level) in Bird's Nest Aquifer, March 1975.  Map

                     redrawn after data evaluation (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
r\>
                   K 1 HtPtPmC I0UMATKM MUM MQLf

                  i AO-1AIUWML
                 Figure  6-6.   Mean calcium concentrations  (mg/1) in the Bird's  Nest  Aquifer
                               (data from WRSP, 1976b; map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
ro
ro
• f-l MMWMTWT JMO4HOUMMMTBII

• H jUHUfcCt IMTCR MOMTOfllMG fTATKW
                                                                                                B
                 Figure 6-7.  Mean magnesium  concentrations (mg/1) in  the  Bird's Nest Aquifer

                              (data from WRSP,  1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
ro
OJ
                                               V     >    \  '
                                                 X"\     \
                    • ogi UJJHUU. a*aam*n* namomMS ntu.
                    • ft HOUffBI TOT MO OHOIMnWTei
                    • 11 IUH»ACf MATCH MOMTOnma fTA'
             Figure 6-8.   Mean sodium plus potassium concentrations Cmg/1)  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer
                           (data from WRSP, 1976b;  map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
Figure 6-9.   Mean sulfate concentrations  (mg/1) in the Bird's Nest Aquifer
             (data from WRSP,  1976b; map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
ro
en
                                                          F
         Figure 6-10.   Mean  carbonate and bicarbonate concentrations  (mg/1) in the Bird's Nest Aquifer

                       (data from WRSP,  1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
rsj
                                                            r
                  Figure 6-11.  Mean chloride concentrations  (mg/1) in the Bird's Nest
                                (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).
    B
    •V L«UTM

Aquifer

-------
no
                   | X-1 GEOLOGIC fxn.OH*TIOM BOME HOLE
                    C I GAOUMMMTEK HOMrTOMIMC WELL
                   ' *G ' ALLUVIAL G*OU*fO«*TtH WOMITQMMIQ W
                   • i i *UA*ACE WATW WMKTOMNO RATION
                  Figure 6-12.   Mean temperature  (degrees Celsius)  in the Bird's Nest Aquifer
                                  (data from WRSP,  1976b; map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
PO
ca
                  • *gi aiuivuu. onommmTui
                  * M MMFM Tttt AMD OMMMD
               Figure 6-13.  Mean temperature (degrees Celsius)  in  the  Bird's Nest Aquifer, Hay  1974
                             (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
       • X-1 GEOLOGIC tXPLOKATOM KftE HOLE
       • O-l OMOUMCMATIII MMITOfttNG MU
       0 ACM ALLUVIAL QKOUMOWATEfl WOWTOAWG WBiL
       • F.I AOUIflP TUT AMD QffOUMMA'
       • »1 IUMFACC HATM HOMfTOHMM STATION
Figure 6-14.   Mean temperature (degrees  Celcius) in  the Bird's  Nest Aquifer,  November  1974
                (data from WRSP, 1976b; map  by 6E-TEMPO).

-------
co
o
                 AC 1 ALLUVIAL GfKKmCMMTEHHONITOniNG WELL

                 PI AOLflFEflTCfTAJWAJKXJMmATEMMONfTOftlWGM.

                 tltUMM* MATE* MOMITO«HWGfTATOM
           Figure 6-15.   Mean temperature (degrees Celsius)  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer, March  1975

                           (data from WRSP, 1976b;  map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
—•
                  aiGMXMtMATEMUONITOIttttGWiLL
                 O *G I ILLWIAL GnOUMpWATtH MOWITOMIWG «KLL
                 9 ri-AQUIFEflTUTANOaMOUHOWATEItMONfTONlMGMffiiL
r
            Figure 6-16.   Mean temperature  (degrees Celsius)  in the Bird's  Nest Aquifer,  November  1975
                           (data  from WRSP,  1976b;  map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
CO
ro
             Figure 6-17.  Mean total dissolved solids (IDS) concentration  (mg/1) in the Bird's Nest
                          Aquifer, May 1974  (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
• o-i a*nuMtm*rt* uamnoHma m
• MM ALLUVIAL
              TKM MM HOU
                Hma mu.
               lTIM MOMfTOMINC Wf U
F
Figure 6-18.   Mean total dissolved solids  (IDS) concentration (mg/1)  in  the Bird's Nest
               Aquifer, November 1974 (data  from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
Figure 6-19.   Mean total  dissolved  solids  (IDS) concentration  (mg/1)  in the Bird's Nest
              Aquifer,  March  1975  (data  from WRSP,  1976b; map  by GE-TEMPO).

-------
         • n
Figure 6-20.   Mean  total dissolved solids  (IDS) concentration (mg/1) in the Bird's Nest Aquifer,
              November  1975  (data from WRSP, 1976b; map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
CO
cr>
                  ' * ' OTOtjOCIC «*«JO**TIOII MM MOU


                  < AO t JU.USVIAJL OHOUMMMTM MVHTOMi
               Figure  6-21.  Mean sulfate concentration (mg/1) in the  Bird's Nest Aquifer, May 1974
                              (data  from WRSP, 1976b;  map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
—I
u>
             Figure 6-22.  Mean sulfate concentration (rag/1)  in the Bird's Nest Aquifer,  November  1974
                           (data from WRSP, 1976b;  map by GE-TEMPO).

-------
Figure 6-23.
Mean sulfate concentration  (mg/1)  in  the Bird's Nest Aquifer, March
(data from WRSP, 1976b;  map by 6E-TEMPO).
1975

-------

   e X TOKMjOdCtxnJXMTIOHKlHi HOLE
   • O t OMOUfcOWATEft UONITOAMC **U-
   O AQ-1 ALLUVIA4 OKXMimATCfl HOWTDHmC «f LL
   * PI AOJIVfNTfCT AIM GMOUMOWfcTtMMONITCMIMG NELL
   • •-« Klftf ACC MATIR MOWITOAIMC VTATIOM
F
Figure  6-24.   Mean sulfate concentration (mg/1) in  the Bird's Nest  Aquifer,  November 1975
                (data from WRSP,  1976b;  map by  GE-TEMPO).

-------
               EVACUATION CREEK  BELOW PARK CANYON
                                            -2%
                               3610
                 EVACUATION CREEK  AT WATSON, UTAN
                                            -1%
                               49SO

                   EVACUATION  CREEK NEAR  MOUTH
                                            +2*
                               3830
                                       60.2
                              SCALE
              15	10 	5	0     5     10    15
                   (iM/0 CATIONS
                              LEGEND
                   (m«/l)No + K

                     (m«/l)Co
                     (mt/l)Mg
                                TDS
                               (mfl/l)
(m./l) UNIONS
 Cl (nw/l)
 HCOs(iM/l)
 S04 (m«/l)
00%-PERCENT  IY WHICH
    UNIONS EXCEEB  CATIONS
Figure  6-25.   Distribution of  major ions  in Evacuation  Creek during
                1975 water year  base-flow period  (WRSP, 1976b).
                                    140

-------
                                   SECTION  7

             INFILTRATION  POTENTIAL OF WASTES AT THE LAND SURFACE


 INTRODUCTION

      This  section  and  the two which follow it address the mobility of pollu-
 tants (identified  in Sections 2 and 3)  in  the hydrogeologic framework of the
 study area  (described  in  Sections  5 and 6).  The study area has been arbi-
 trarily  segmented  into three parts:  spent shale disposal area, plant process
 area, and  retention dam sites.

 SOIL  PROPERTIES

      According to  Philip  (1969), infiltration is defined "as a process of the
 entry into  the soil of water made  available (under appropriately defined
 conditions)  at its surface.  This  "surface" may be the natural, more or less
 horizontal  upper surface  of the soil; or It may be the bed of a natural or
 artificial  furrow or stream..."  The infiltration properties of native soils
 on the tract are briefly  described in the  following paragraphs.

      Nearly all of the soils on the oil  shale tracts fall into the category of
 channery sandy loams.  Only the soils of the White River valley bottom have a
 predominantly silty or clay texture.  In general,  the sandy loams have moder-
ate to very slow infiltration rates.  Infiltration through the silty clay soils
 is very slow.  The tract soils,  shown in Figure 5-5, have been classified into
 hydrologic soil groups (Table 7-1).  The soil  groups (U*S'.  Department of
Agriculture, 1972) are as follows:

     A.  (Low runoff potential).   Soils  having high infiltration rates even
         when thoroughly wetted  and consisting chiefly of deep, well  drained
         to excessively drained  sands or gravels.   These soils have a high
         rate of water transmission.

     B.  (Moderately low runoff  potential).  Soils  having moderate infiltra-
         tion rates when thoroughly wetted  and consisting chiefly of
         moderately deep to deep, moderately well  drained to well  drained
         soils with moderately fine to moderately  coarse textures.   These
         soils have a moderate rate of water  transmission.

     C.  (Moderately high  runoff potential).   Soils having slow infiltration
         rates when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of soils  with  a
         layer that impedes downward movement  of water,  or soils  with
         moderately fine to fine  texture.   These soils have  a  slow rate  of
         water transmission.
                                    141

-------
TABLE 7-1.  ESTIMATED AND MEASURED SOIL PROPERTIES SIGNIFICANT TO ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS'
Soil
A


As


Bb

Bsb

Os


E


Fb

Nb



W



Slope
range (2)
3 to 40


5 to 60


5 to 40

10 to 60

5 to 10


5 to 10


3 to 7

5 to 10



0 to 2



Depth to
bedrock.
(cm)
30 to 50


30 to 50


5 to 25

5 to 25

150+


150+


10 to 40

150+



150+



Texture class
Channery
loam

Channery
sandy loams

Channery
loams
Channery
sandy loams
Sandy loam
to channery
sandy loam
Fine sandy
loams to
loams
Loamy sands

Fine sandy -
loam surface
silty clay
loam subsoil
Silt loams to
silty clay
loams - some
sands
Unified
SM
GC

SM
GM

SM
GM
SK
GM
SM


ML CL
SM

SM

CL



CL
SM


AASHO
A-2-4


A-2-4


A-2-4

A-2-4

A-2-4


A-4
A-6

A-2

A-4
or
A-6

A-4
A-6


Liquid
1 i mi t
24-33


24-36


20-30

20-30

20-30


20-27


20-30

20-30



20-47



Plastic
limit
NP-0


HP


NP

NP

NP


NP-8


NP

5-15



2-16



Permeability
(in/h)
1.0-2.5


1.5-3.0


1.0-2.5

1.5-3.0

1.0-2.4


1.0-2.5


2.0-4.0

0.05-0.20



0.20-1.50



In/In
available
water
capacity
0.09-0.11


O.lc


O.lc

O.lc

0.12-0.14


0.14-0.16


O.lc

0.14-0.16



0.16-0.18



PH
7.5-8.7


8.1-8.5


7.5-8.2

7.5-8.3

7.9-8.3


7.7-8.6


8.1-8.5

8.1-8.9



8.0-8.3



ECd
(mmhos/cm)
0.4-5.4


0.3-6.0


0.7-3.0

0.7-2.5

1.0-19.0


0.4-18.0


0.3-0.6

5.0-15.0



1.5-28.0



Shrink-
swell
potential
Low


Low


Low

Low

Low


Low


Low

Moderate



Moderate



Hydrologic
soil groups
C (moderately
high runoff
potential )
C (moderately
high runoff
potential }
D (high runoff
potential)
0 (high runoff
potential)
B (moderately
low runoff
potential )
B (moderately
low runoff
potenti al
D (high runoff
potential)
D (high runoff
potential )


B (moderately
low runoff
potential)

aFrom White River Shale Project, 1976b
bEstimate
cLess than
Electrical conductivity

-------
     D.  (High runoff potential).  Soils having very slow infiltration rates
         when thoroughly wetted and consisting chiefly of clay soils  with a
         high swelling potential, soils with a permanent high water table,
         soils with a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and shal-
         low soils over nearly impervious material.   These soils have a very
         slow rate of water transmission.

     The infiltration data on which the hydrological classification was made
are included in Table 7-1.  On the basis of this classification, the soils
map (Figure 5-5) has been redrawn, regrouping the soil categories into hydro-
logic categories (Figure 7-1).  From Figure 7-1, it may be seen that most of
the proposed processed shale pile is underlain by soils in the D and C cate-
gories, indicating slow to very slow infiltration, and by bare rock.   The
main drainage channels are lined with soils in the B category; these soils
are suitable for revegetation and will be removed and stockpiled before they
are covered by the advancing shale pile (WRSP, 1976a).

     As shown by the criteria used to categorize the hydrologic properties of
soils, the relatively shallow depths and steep slopes of many of the soils on
the tracts will restrict infiltration.  In particular, such soils will have a
low water-storage capacity (relative to deep soils) and consequently a reduced
infiltration capacity.  Water will run off the surface into depressions or
stream channels and will possibly also produce perched water tables above bed-
rock.  From Table 7-1, shallow soils (depths less than 50 cm) on the tract
include:  A (channery loams), As (channery sandy loams), B (channery loams),
Bs (channery sandy loams), and F (loamy sands).  Deeper soils (greater than
150 cm) include:  Ds (sandy loam to channery sandy loam), E (fine sandy loams
to loams), fl (fine sandy loam surface, silty clay subsoil), and W (silt loams
to silty clay loams).  Note that the N-type soil with a silty clay subsurface
may also develop a perched water table condition at the interface of two soil
types.

PROCESS AREA

     Potential sources that may infiltrate the soils of the process area
include:  stockpiled soil leachate and runoff; treated effluent and storm
runoff in a proposed holding basin; water reservoir storage; product  tankage
leaks; leaks from the sulfur and ammonia storage tanks; stockpiled raw shale
runoff and leachate; and possibly explosive residues.

     Predominant soil types in the process area include:  Bs(3) and Bs(5),
shallow channery and flaggy sandy loams; D, sandy loams; As(l), shallow
channery sandy loam; A(2), shallow channery loams.  In addition, a large pro-
portion of the area is classified as rock, R.  Infiltration will be minimal
in the rocky areas except where fractures or joints exist.  In addition, from
Table 7-1 and Figure 7-1, infiltration will be restricted in the following
soils because of shallow depths and relatively steep slopes:  A(2), As(l),
Bs(3), and Bs(5).  In contrast, infiltration will be moderately high in the
sandy loam soils which are classified as B under the hydrologic soil  grouping
(see Figure 7-1).  The latter soils are located in stream channels and will
receive surface and possibly subsurface drainage from higher areas.  Conse-
quently, pollutants leaching from other areas probably would concentrate in

                                     143

-------
 HYOROLOGIC SOL GROUPS FOR OIL
SHALE TRACTS  U., Ui.AND CORRIDOR

        EXPLANATION

  mrauMK   mnLTMTKM    son.
                  I?
      •   »OCM«T E    ( w
      •   vtwtLOB
  n.
                                                                                         * — « -» — taV
                           Figure 7-1.   Hydrologic  soils  map  (data from WRSP,  1976b).

-------
these channel deposits.

     Infiltration or seepage may occur through the base of the waste water
holding pond and water reservoir, depending on the type of sealant used.  The
sealants to be used are, at present, unspecified.  Because of the shallow
soils, seepage would occur into the underlying bedrock, the Uinta sandstones.
Consequently, flow possibly would be restricted to fissures and small cracks,
unless by chance the ponds are located on large cracks.  Small cracks probably
would seal in time with organic, benthic deposits.

SPENT SHALE DISPOSAL AREA

     The disposal area in Southam Canyon will incorporate sanitary landfills
for the burial of solid wastes and the spent shale pile.  It is envisioned
that initially a landfill will be located in side canyons, ahead of the spent
shale pile.  Later, landfills will be incorporated within the spent shale pile.

     Solid wastes presently proposed (WRSP, 1976a) to be deposited in sanitary
landfills include:  construction materials, trash and garbage, spent converter
catalysts, spent reformer catalysts, spent methanation catalysts, deactivated
carbon filter cakes, spent Glaus unit catalyst, diatomaceous earth filter
cakes, spent HDN catalyst, catalyst support materials, spent guard bed cata-
lyst, spent HDS catalyst, and elemental sulfur slurry.  Sources deposited
within the spent shale pile include the above, when landfill materials are
incorporated into the pile, and in addition include the following:  raw shale
dust, discarded alumina balls, water treatment sludge, processed shale, treat-
ed effluent and storm runoff, and leachate pumped back from the retension dams.

General  Landfill
     The potential for leachate production by infiltration into the sanitary
landfill was estimated using a water balance method described by Fenn, Hanley,
and DeGeare (1975).  Their approach is a modification of a technique origi-
nally proposed by Thornthwaite and Mather (1957).  The rationale of Fenn,
Hanley, and DeGeare (1975) in using the water balance method was:  "The infil-
tration fraction of precipitation is the principal  contributor to leachate
generation from a sanitary landfill.  The infiltration into the soil cover and
any subsequent percolation down to the solid waste  will  be determined by sur-
face conditions of the sanitary landfill and by the climatological  character-
istics of the site's location...the water balance method is presented as a
satisfactory and feasible procedure for performing  the required task."

     Details of the water balance calculations used in this study are present-
ed in Appendix A.  Basically, the water balance method is an application of
the hydrologic equation to the soil surface.  Inputs to  the system consist of
precipitation and irrigation.  The outputs comprise evapotranspiration losses,
surface runoff, and deep percolation.   The storage  component includes the pore
space of the soil.  The method of Thornthwaite and  /tether (1957) is a book-
keeping procedure that determines soil-water surplus or  deficiencies.   The
rationale of the procedure as applied  to landfills  by Fenn, Hanley, and DeGeare
(1975) is that surplus soil-water above field capacity is available for either
runoff or deep percolation.   Field capacity is generally regarded as that


                                    145

-------
water content at which gravitational and capillary effects are in approximate
balance.  Thornthwaite and Mather (1957) include a method for calculating
evapotranspiration.  However, the method of Blaney-Criddle is more satisfac-
tory for western regions and was used in this and the following analyses.

     Assumptions of this analysis include:

     1.  Soil surface of the landfill will have a sandy loam texture,
         with the following properties:  permeability, 2.5 to 5 cm
         per hour (1 to 2 inches per hour); apparent specific gravity,
         1.50; field capacity, 14 percent; permanent wilting percentage,
         6 percent; and water stored between the two limits is 120 mm
         per meter (1.4 inches per foot) (Israelsen, 1962).

     2.  Total depth of cover:  1.0 meter.

     3.  Applied water in excess of field capacity goes to runoff
         or percolation.

     4.  Snow melt runoff does not occur.  Fenn, Hanley, and DeGeare (1975)
         point out that surface runoff may be assumed to be negligible for
         the dry months in an arid climate.  For our analysis, we have
         assumed that runoff will be zero throughout the entire year.

     The value of 120 mm per meter (1.4 inches per foot) was calculated with
the following equation (Fenn, Hanley, and DeGeare, 1975).
                               u  _ A  	ZL
                               D  " MS 100  '

where

     d   = depth of water in soil

     D   = depth of soil

     Ac  = apparent specific gravity
      S

     APw
     ysTT = difference in water content between the permanent wilting
           percentage and field capacity, dry weight basis


         • (14o"d'6) = 8 Percent-

     Results of the water balance  calculations for the landfills  are shown
in Table 7-2.  Based on_the assumptions used to calculate the moisture surplus
shown on the table, it appears that infiltration into the surface of the land-
fill will be negligible.  Water which neither runs off nor percolates deeply
is held in storage near the surface until lost through evapotranspiration.


                                    146

-------
          TABLE 7-2.   MONTHLY WATER BALANCE  ON OIL  SHALE  TRACTS-LANDFILL  CASE
 Parameter     Jan
        Feb
          Mar    Apr     May    Jun    Oul
                                        Aug
                                       Sep     Oct
                                               Nov
                                                Dec
PET
Pb
P - PET
ZNEG(P-PET)
ST
AST
S
15.2
 0
 1.39
+1.39
  24.8
   0
  16.2
 +16.2
-158 c
  35
  33
  47
  35.7
 -11.3
-169.3
  31
  -4
   0
 46.1
 70.6
 86.7
 16.1
-119d
 47.1
 16.1
   0
  57.2
 100
  37.5
 -62.5
-181.5
  29
 -18.1
   0
 63.8
115
  9.6
•105.4
•286.9
 12
 -17
  a
 73.1
103
 22.4
-80.6
-367.5
   6
  -6
   0
  67.9
 110
   9.6
-100.4
-467.9
   3
  -3
   0
  60.3
  86.7
  39.7
 -47
•514.9
   2
  -1
   0
  45.2
  60
   0
 -60
•574.9
   1
  -1
   0
  34.4
  39.4
   0
 -39.4
-614.3
   1
   0
   0
24.4
 0
 0
 0
 Assumptions:  1 meter of soil:  available water = 120 nm/meter; total  soil moisture retention
              120 mm/meter
 T « temperature (°F)
 PET =  potential evapotranspiration (mm)
 P * precipitation and applied water (mm)
 ENEG  (P -  PET)  = accumulated potential water loss  (mm)
 ST » storage  (mm)
 AST  = change in storage
 S = moisture  surplus
 a  Temperature data for 1976, Vernal Airport
 b  Precipitation data for 1976, reported at Vernal  Airport and adjusted to project site
 c  Calculated by method of successive approximations  (see Appendix B)
 d  When a  positive value of P - PET occurs  between two negative values,  the ENEG(P - PET)
	value is found by a method discussed by Fenn et al. (1975)	

-------
Processed Shale Pile

General Features-

     The proposed spent shale pile on the U-a and U-b tracts will be composed
of a mixture of processed shales from the Paraho and the TOSCO retorting
processes.  Paraho-processed shale is somewhat similar to the USBM-processed
shale  (see Figure 7-2); since some data have been published on the USBM-
processed shale that are not available for the Paraho-processed shale, data
on the USBM shale are included in this report.  Particle size distribution
data for these types of processed shales and the combined (15:85 TOSCOrParaho)
wastes are presented in Figure 7-2.

     The Detailed Development Plan (WRSP, 1976a) indicates that the ratio of
TOSCO- to Paraho-processed shale will be approximately 15:85.  The mixture of
very fine TOSCO- and coarser Paraho-processed shales will result in a poorly
sorted material that will have a lower permeability than the pure Paraho-
processed shale.  From the diagram of soil texture in Figure 7-3, it may be
seen that the Paraho-processed shale falls into the category of a sand and
the TOSCO-processed shale that of a silt.  The 15 percent TOSCO and 85 percent
Paraho mixture is a sandy loam.  Although the sandy loam classification was
used in determining hydrologic  properties for the water balance equation, it
should be noted that 29 percent of the total is gravel, which is not included
in the soil classification scheme (Figure 7-3).  Hence, actual permeabilities
may be somewhat greater than indicated here.

     Figure 7-4 illustrates the permeability ranges of TOSCO II and USBM
spent shales in relation to other earth materials.  Although permeability and
infiltration rate are not strictly equivalent, permeability (hydraulic con-
ductivity) provides a reasonably good estimate of the asymptotic infiltration
rate in one-dimensional flow systems.  From Figure 7-4, both spent shale
materials would be expected to exhibit permeability similar to that of poor
aquifers, with specific permeabilities between about 10" 1 and 10"2 darcy.
From these considerations, relatively low infiltration rates for the processed
shale pile may be inferred.

     The infiltration characteristics of spent shale may be related somewhat
to the ease of wetting; i.e., the presence of possibly hydrophobic organics
might inhibit wetting and, consequently, infiltration.  Tract development
plans (WRSP, 1976a) indicate, for example, that resistance to wetting of
TOSCO-processed shale has been reported in the literature.  However, Utah
Fischer assayed and calcined shales have not shown resistance to wetting.  The
plan also indicates that Paraho-processed shale "...took water readily and
appeared to be porous."  Thus resistance to wetting is not expected to be
significant in the processed shale pile as proposed for Southam Canyon.

Infiltration During Construction-

     Two aspects of shale pile construction should be considered in relation
to infiltration:  (1) infiltration during construction, and (2) infiltration
on the completed, contoured, and revegetated pile.  During disposal, spent
shale will be deposited in Southam Canyon in a fanlike progression away from

                                    148

-------
0.001
0.01
100
              Figure 7-2.  Cumulative grain-size distribution of  processed oil  shale.

-------
PARAHO
COMBINATION
                                         USBM
TOiCO
            Figure  7-3.   Soil texture of processed oil  shales,
                                     150

-------
                                      SPECIFIC PERMEABILITY, k  (darcys)
10-
            10
10"
                            10
:,:
I
                                                          10
                                                            '1
                                                                  10
                                                                   '2
                                                        10
                                                          -3
                                                                                      ID
                                                                                        '4
                                                                                              10'

-
SOIL CLASS 	 ^
FLOW
CHARACTERISTICS
1

•< — CLEAN GRAVEL — *•

-* 	 HIG
i
CLEAN SANDS; MIXTURES OF
CLEAN SANDS AND GRAVELS

PERMLABIL1 TY

1
„ >




1
n;

$

1 1 1
H
IY FINE SANDS; SILTS; MIXTURES
)F SAND, SILT, AND CLAY; ETC

	 ^ 	 , 	 , 	
1
UNWEATHERED
CLAYS
•* — IMPERVIOUS — *•
' 	 1 	 1 	
     r      ~r
               10'
                      10
                               10
                                                                       10
                                                                        -I
                                                                              10
                                                                                -2
                              LABORATORY COEFFICIENT OF PERMEABILITY, K$ (gal/day per ft  )
                                                   BUREAU OF    TOSCO II
                                                     MINES   SPENT SHALE
                                                   SPENT SHALE
                                                                    10
                                                                      -3
                                                           10'
Figure  7-4.  Permeability ranges  of TOSCO II and  Bureau  of Mines  spent shale (data
              from Ward et al.,  1971 and  1972; figure adapted from Todd,  1959).

-------
the process area.  The deposited wastes will  gradually increase in lateral  and
vertical extent.  In other words, the infiltration "surface"  will  be continu-
ally changing.  Water will be sprayed onto the spent shale to bring the total
water content to 10 percent by weight.  In addition, rain and snow will wet the
surface.  To estimate the potential  amount of infiltration during  construc-
tion, a water balance was calculated.  Assumptions used were:  (1) sandy loam
texture in the spent shale; (2) a "soil" depth of about 1 meter (3 feet); (3)
initial water content 10 percent by weight; (4) field capacity 18  percent by
weight  (WRSP, 1976a); (5) apparent specific gravity of spent  shale, 1.50; (6)
runoff  is negligible; and (7) total  available storage of 120  mm in 1 meter of
soil.

     For this evaluation, water storage in the spent shale is identical to that
in the  landfill  soil, and the same water balance given in Table 7-2 applies.
Additional details are explained in Appendix A.  Again it appears  that the
amount  of surplus water available for deep percolation remains zero throughout
the year.  However, piles of snow might contribute locally to infiltration
during  melting.

Infiltration of Completed Disposal Pile-

     Several factors should be taken into account when evaluating  infiltration
potential through the completed spent shale pile.  The top of the  shale pile
will be diked around the edge to prevent runoff.  The pile face will include
reverse-sloped benches, again to minimize runoff (Section 2).  Thus it may be
expected that there will be no runoff from the top of the shale pile and very
little  runoff from the sides.  Nearly all of the precipitation falling on the
shale pile will  either infiltrate or evaporate.

     Eventually, the spent shale pile will be revegetated.  Trenches about 1
meter deep  (3 to 4 feet) will be constructed along the contour on  the slopes
and on  the  flat  top of the pile  (see Figure 2-10).  The trenches will be
backfilled with  soil from the process area and planted.  It  is anticipated
that vegetation will eventually spread throughout the surface of the entire
pile.

     The salt content of  the pile is  so high that leaching will be  required to
flush the salts  from the  root zone of prospective vegetation.  Cook  (1974)
indicated that at least 1.5 meters (5 feet) of water may be  required to render
the shale suitable for use as a plant growth medium.

     Water  harvesting will be practiced on the shale pile as a method of
irrigating  the  plantings.  As shown on Figure  2-10, the  surface of  the pile
will be sculpted and temporarily sealed to direct water  into the trenches.
Polyvinyl acetate, paraffin, and polyethylene  are some of the alternative
sealant materials  (McKell, 1976).  Until decaying,  these sealants would pre-
vent infiltration between the trenches.  Later, as  vegetation spreads out from
the trenches, decomposition of the sealant would permit  entry of water into
the area between trenches.

     In summary, the establishment of vegetation on the  spent shale pile may
consist of  the  following  successive  stages:   (1) leaching salts from the top

                                     152

-------
0.6 to 0.9 meter  (about 2 to 3 feet) of the pile; (2) constructing soil trench-
es and laying down water-harvesting materials; and (3) eventual deterioration
of the surface sealant.  Infiltration into the pile will be related to these
stages.

     A water balance was prepared to estimate infiltration into the completed
spent shale pile  during the first stage, involving leaching of surface salts.
Assumptions used  were identical to those above for infiltration into the
pile during construction.  In addition, it was assumed that 1,524 mm (5 feet)
of water was added in June to the monthly precipitation of about 10 mm, to
give a total of about 1,534 mm applied to the surface.  Results are given in
Table 7-3.  The table shows that a surplus of about 1,328 mm of water resulted
from applying 1,534 mm of water in June.  This excess would move into the
vadose zone.  Using the relationship


                                  D = d(10°)                               (2)
                                      A  AP  *                             * '
                                      As AKw

it is calculated  that the surplus 1,328 mm would drain 11.1 meters (about 36
feet) below the upper 1 meter.  Considering that the completed shale pile may
be as much as 150 meters (500 feet) deep, it appears that leached pollutants
will reach the interface between the spent shale pile and natural ground
surface only from regions near the toe of the pile.

     The soil trenches will essentially represent line sources for the entry
of surplus water  into the vadose zone.  Only a conceptual picture of the
trench arrangement is provided in present development plans (WRSP, 1976a).  It
was, therefore, necessary to make some assumptions about the construction of
trenches; the distance between trenches; and the slope of the water-harvesting
surface.

     As a first estimate, it was assumed that the trenches will be constructed
with straight sides, as shown on Figure 2-10 (this may be difficult to achieve
in practice because of the instability of the spent shale).  Dimensions of the
hypothetical trenches are assumed to be 1 meter wide and 1 meter deep (about 3
feet by 3 feet).  As a further simplification (in the ensuing water balance),
only the water-harvesting system for flat areas is considered.  For these
areas, it is assumed that the collecting surface rises at a slope of 10:1 for
a distance of 5 feet (1.52 meters) in both directions away from the trench
(see Figure 2-10).  In other words, the trenches will receive drainage from 10
feet (3.05 meters) of lateral surface.

     A water balance was calculated for soils in trenches within the flat
water-harvesting areas.   It was assumed that the properties of soils in the
trenches will  be identical  to those for soils of the sanitary landfills,  i.e.,
sandy loam texture; apparent specific gravity,  1.50;  field capacity, 14
percent; wilting point,  6 percent; total water stored in a meter of soil, 120
mm.   In addition,  it was assumed that all  precipitation falling on the sloping
collection surface and trench will be applied as an  equivalent head of water
over the trench.


                                     153

-------
                          TABLE 7-3.   MONTHLY WATER BALANCE  ON OIL  SHALE  TRACTS-LEACH ING CASE
en
                 Parameter
                T3
                PET
                Pb
                P -  PET
                ZNEG(P-PET)
                ST
                AST
                S
             Jan
             15.2
              0
              1.39
              1.39
Feb
24.8
 0
16.2
16.2
                     35
 Mar
  33
  47
  35.7
 -11.3
-169.3
  31
  -4
   0
 Apr
 46.1
 70.6
 86.7
 16.1
•119d
 47.1
 16.1
   0
  May
  57.2
 100
  37.5
 -62.5
-181.5
  29
 -18.1
   0
  Jun
  63.8
 115
1534
1419
   0
 120
  91
1328
 Jul
 73.1
103
 22.4
-80.6
-80.6
 47
-83
  0
  Aug
  67.9
 110
   9.6
-100.4
-181
  29
 -18
   0
  Sep
  60.3
  86.7
  39.7
 -47
-228
  20
  -9
   0
                                                                                                  Oct
  45.2
  60
   0
 -60
-288
  12
  -8
   0
                                                                                          Nov
  34.4
  39.4
   0
 -39.4
-327.4
   9
  -3
   0
Total soil moisture  retention = 120 mm/meter
T = temperature (°F)
PET = potential evapotranspiration (mm)
P = precipitation and applied water (mm)
ZNEG (P - PET)  =  accumulated potential water loss (mm)
ST = storage (mm)
AST = change in storage
S = moisture surplus
                 Dec
24.4
 0
 0
 0
                a  Temperature data for 1976, Vernal Airport
                b  Precipitation data for 1976, reported at Vernal Airport and  adjusted to project site
                c  Calculated by method of successive approximations (see Appendix A)
                   When a positive  value  of P - PET occurs between two  negative values, the ZNEG (P - PET)
                     value is found by  a  method outlined by Fenn et al.  (1975)

-------
      Results of the water balance  area  are  shown  in  Table  7-4.   Note  that
 precipitation depths (P)  for the water-harvesting case  are about four times
 greater than for the landfill  case (Table 7-2}.   Precipitation amounts during
 January and February,  when temperatures are below zero, were considered  to
 infiltrate into the trench in  March.  From  the table, surplus soil water would
 be available in March,  April,  and  May.   The total  surplus  is about 420 mm.

      From relationship (2), it was calculated that 420  mm  (16.5  inches)  of water
 would move 3.5 meters  (11.5 feet)  below the trench.  Again, assuming  that the
 spent shale pile may be as much as 150  meters (500 feet) in thickness, the move-
 ment of solutes during a  single year  will not be  significant.  However,  in 10
 years, solutes would penetrate to  a depth of 35 meters  (115 feet), assuming  that
 precipitation remains  the same.  Once the sealant deteriorates,  infiltration
 will then occur over the  entire surface.  That is, the  water balance  will shift
 to the case shown on Table 7-2.  The  extent of deep  percolation  beneath  the
 revegetation trenches  will  depend  upon  the  longevity of the surface seal.

      In calculating the depths  of  penetration of  water  for the water-harvesting
 case and other cases,  it  was assumed  that flow was one-dimensional.   In
 reality, flow would be  two-dimensional  from a line source,  such  as the revege-
 tation trenches.   The  depth of water  penetration  would  not be as  great as
 calculated because of  lateral  flow.   In time, however, water infiltrating
 from adjoining trenches would merge and flow would then occur essentially in
 the vertical  direction.

      For trenches  on the  sloping surface of the spent shale pile  (see  Figure
 2-10),  it is  assumed that the water balance on Table 7-4 applies.  In  this
 case,  harvested water moving through  the trenches at lower elevations  would
 seep out of the toe of  the  pile, or flow into the underlying vadose zone
 through fractures  and bedding planes.   Leachate moving  from the  toe of the
 pile would drain into the Southam  Canyon retention dam.

 RETENTION DAMS

      Retention dams  are planned to  collect  leachate from the Phase II  spent
 shale  pile,  from the Phase  III and  IV piles  (the  Southam Canyon retention dam),
 and from the  sanitary landfill.

      The Phase II  retention dam will be located in the northeast quarter of
 Section 28.   From  Figure  5-5, soils at  the  dam site are predominantly  type
 As(l),  shallow channery loams, and  type Bs(4), shallow channery and flaggy
 sandy  loams.   From Table  7-1, these soils are less than 50 cm (1.6 ft) deep
and belong  in  hydrologic  group C,  with low infiltration potential.  Eventually,
leachate  retained by the  dam would fill  up the  small  storage capacity of  the
soils with  the excess running off.   Leachate could also seep into the dam,
creating  a  free surface within the structure.  Unless an effective cutoff wall
is  provided, leakage could occur out of the  downstream face, possibly intro-
ducing  leachate onto soils and channel deposits.   Again, the soils downstream
of  the dam, in Southam Canyon, are mainly shallow channery  and  flaggy sandy
loams with an admixture of deeper sandy  loams.  The latter  soils  are  classi-
fied hydro!ogically as B,  with moderately high  infiltration potential. Leachate
movement  into the vadose zone would be a problem  with these soils.

                                    155

-------
                     TABLE 7-4.   MONTHLY WATER BALANCE FOR  OIL SHALE TRACTS-WATER-HARVESTING  CASE
                Parameter
en
o»
              T*
              PET
              Pb
              P - PET
              ZNEG(P-PET)
              ST
              AST
              S
              Jan
             15.2
              0
              6
              6

             47
Feb
24.8
 0
65
65

47
 Mar
 33
 47
143
 96

120
 73
 94
 Apr
 46.1
 70.6
348
277

120
  0
277
 May
 57.2
100
151
 51
 (0)
120
  0
 51
 Jun
 63.8
115
 39
-76
-76
 67
-53
  0
Jul
 73.1
103
 90
-13
-89
 60
 -7
  0
  Aug
  67.9
 110
  39
 -71
-160
  34
 -26
  0
 Sep
 60.3
 87
159
 72
-20C
106
+72
  0
 Oct
 45.2
 60
  0
-60
-80
 65
-41
  0
 Nov
Dec
Total soil moisture  retention =120 mm/meter
T - temperature (°F)
PET » potential evapotransplration (mm)
P * precipitation and applied water (mm)
£NEG (P - PET)  =  accumulated potential water loss (mm)
ST - storage (mm)
AST  * change In storage
S = moisture surplus
  34.4
  39
   0
 -39.4
-119.4
  47
 -18
   0
24.4
 0
 0
47
                 Temperature data for 1976,  Vernal Airport
                 Precipitation data for 1976,  reported at Vernal Airport and adjusted  to project site
              c  When a positive value  of P  - PET occurs  between two negative values,  the £NEG (P - PET)
                   value is found by a  method outlined by Fenn  et al., 1977

-------
     No information is provided on the location of the  proposed  landfill and
retention dam other than they will be located in a side canyon.   As  shown  by
the water balance, leachate generation is  not expected  in  the  landfill  proper.
However, some runoff from the sloping face of the landfill  may occur,  possibly
producing leachate in the toe of the fill.  Such leachate  would  flow downstream
and be retained by the dam.  If conditions are similar  to  those  for  the Phase
II retention dam, infiltration of leachate might occur  into the  shallow soils.
Similarly, seepage through the retention dam could introduce leachate  into
deeper sandy soils with greater infiltration potential.

     The Southern Canyon retention dam will collect leachate and  surface runoff
from the spent shale pile.  The quality of this water probably will  be extreme-
ly poor, with high TDS, organics, and trace elements (see  Section 8).   Develop-
ment plans call for removing soils immediately upstream of the retention dam
and placing an impermeable membrane on the exposed Uinta Formation.   If the
membrane fails, leakage will occur into the underlying sandstones.  Downward
movement will be restricted to cracks and fissures.  Consequently, unless  a
fracture is exposed, infiltration should be minimal.

     The proposed retention dam probably will be constructed as  an earthen
structure, with a cutoff wall.  Seepage through the dam conceivably could
bypass the cutoff wall and exit from the downstream face.   Leachate would then
flow into the White River alluvium.  The infiltration potential  of this allu-
vium is probably quite high.  Furthermore, surface runoff of leachate might,
in time, drain into the White River.

SUMMARY OF INFILTRATION POTENTIAL

     Three principal areas of the tracts were identified in regard to infiltra-
tion potential:  the process area, the processed shale disposal  area, and the
areas associated with retention dams.  The soils of the process  area are
generally shallow with consequently poor  infiltration characteristics.  Pollu-
tants applied or deposited onto these soils would possibly run off onto lower*
deeper soils.  Infiltration characteristics of the latter soils  are good.

     The processed shale disposal area will include sanitary landfills and
the spent shale  pile.  A water balance on- the landfill indicated that surplus
gravitation water may not  be available for movement beyond a depth of about
1.0 meter (about  3 feet).  Similarly, infiltration may not be significant in
the spent shale  pile during construction  under normal  precipitation conditions.
The completed pile will be shaped to minimize the surface runoff for both top
and sides.  During leaching of the spent  shale pile, preparatory to eventual
revegetation, as much as  1.5 meters  (5 feet) of water may be flushed through
the top  1 meter  (3 feet)  of the pile.  A water balance indicated that surplus
water might drain to a depth of about 11  meters  (36 feet).

     Water "harvested" from sealed surfaces on the pile and applied to soil
trenches  used  for revegetation might  produce surplus soil water during 3  to 4
months  of the year.  A water balance  calculation  showed that surplus water
would move about 3.5 meters below the base at the trenches.   If the sealant
deteriorates within  10 years,  the surplus would  probably not migrate deeper
than 35  meters.   Leachate might seep  from the toe of the pile as a result of

                                     157

-------
deep percolation from trenches or the sloping face.

     Retention dams will be constructed to trap leachate from the sanitary
landfills, the Phase II spent shale pile, and the Phases III and IV spent shale
piles.  Leachate from the landfill  would spread upon the shallow soils of
Southam Canyon, which have poor infiltration characteristics.  Seepage from the
downstream face of the dam could drain onto deeper channel  soils, which have
good infiltration characteristics.   The scenario for leachate infiltration from
the Phase II retention dam is similar.  Finally, leachate from the Phases III
and IV spent shale piles is expected to be of very poor quality.  Seepage
through the dam (which will be provided with a cutoff wall) might introduce
leachate into the White River alluvium and possibly also into the White River.
                                    158

-------
                                 SECTION 8

      MOBILITY OF POLLUTANTS FROM THE LAND SURFACE TO THE WATER TABLE


     This section reviews factors relating to the mobility of pollutants
in vadose zone sediments underlying the U-a and U-b oil shale tracts.  First,
a description of the vadose zone is presented.  Secondly, mobility of pollu-
tants characterized in Section 3 is reviewed.

VADOSE ZONE CHARACTERISTICS

     The vadose zone is generally defined as that subsurface region extend-
ing from the land surface to the water table.  For the oil shale tracts, the
aquifer of concern (the Bird's Nest Aquifer) is confined.  Nevertheless, for
purposes of discussion, the indigenous vadose zone for the tracts is arbi-
trarily defined as that region extending from land surface to the interface
between the confining Green River Formation mudstones and the Bird's Nest
Aquifer.  In vertical extent, the vadose zone consists of about 180 meters
(600 feet) of Green River mudstones.  Processing -and disposal activities on
the tracts will modify the indigenous vadose zone as follows.

Spent Shale Disposal  Area

     Spent shale will be deposited in a fanlike progression with Southam
Canyon.  The estimated total storage area will be 931 hectares (2,300 acres)
and total depth will  be about 150 meters (500 feet) above the floor of Southam
Canyon.  Native soil  will be stripped from the storage area and stockpiled.

     The definition of the vadose zone beneath the spent shale disposal  area
must be modified to account for changes during deposition of shale wastes;
i.e., the vadose zone in this area will be of a dynamic nature as layer upon
layer of spent shale is stacked above the surface of the Uinta Formation.
The final configuration is represented schematically in Figure 8-1.   The sur-
face of the fabricated plus indigenous vadose zone will consist of a temporar-
ily sealed layer and soil trenches for vegetation.  The final total  thickness
of the vadose zone will be about 320 meters (1,100 feet).

Process Area

     The process area will  include facilities associated with the processing
of raw shale and kerogen and peripheral facilities, including a treated
effluent and storm runoff holding pond and a water reservoir.  Piles of  debris
are expected, and soils stripped from Southam Canyon will be stockpiled;   For
details, see Section 2.

                                    159

-------
   N
                                                          SOLID WASTE CELLS
SOUTHAM CANYON RETENTION DAM
               Figure 8-1.   Schematic cross section of spent shale pile.

-------
      The shallow soils  on  the  area will  not  be disturbed except by construc-
 tion of facilities.   Consequently, the above description of  the vadose zone
 will  be essentially  valid  for  the process area.

 Southern Canyon  Retention Dam

      A  retention dam will  be constructed at  the outlet from  Southam Canyon
 near the White  River.   Plans call for the removal of alluvium within the
 reservoir area  and sealing of  the basin.  Consequently, the  vadose zone at
 this  site will  extend downward through the Uinta and Green River Formations to
 the  Bird's Nest Aquifer.

 Hydraulic Properties of the  Vadose Zone

      The hydraulic properties  of the vadose  zone beneath the process area and
 Southam Canyon  retention dam will be essentially the same as those for the
 indigenous vadose zone.  For the spent shale disposal area,  the hydraulic
 properties of both indigenous  plus fabricated vadose zone must be considered.

      Water and  contaminant movement in the Uinta sandstones would occur pri-
 marily  through  cracks,  fissures, and along bedding planes.  Because of the
 constrictive nature  of  such  cracks and openings, flow rates would probably be
 very  slow.  In  addition, field observations  indicate that cracks tend to pinch
 out within claystone beds  in the Uinta Formation and where the Uinta sandstones
 merge with underlying Green  River mudstones.  The latter deposits serve as the
 overlying  confining  beds for the Bird's  Nest Aquifer.  Obviously water and
 pollutants seeping within  the  vadose zone must form saturated conditions above
 the confining bed with  head  higher in the saturated area than the head in the
 Bird's  Nest Aquifer  before movement into the aquifer will  occur.

      Because of the  numerous claystone layers within the Uinta Formation and
 the Green  River Formation, the polluted water moving through the vadose zone
 may form saturated perching  layers.   The regional  structure would cause the
 water to flow down dip  to  the northwest.   If the clay beds along which the
 pollutants were  flowing are deep in the section, the pollutants would pass
 beneath the White River, eventually being dissipated within the Uinta Formation.
 If the  perching  beds were  higher in elevation,  the pollutants would flow into
 the alluvium of the White  River valley and thus eventually into the river.  The
 presence of evaporite deposits on sheltered outcrops of the claystone beds of
 the Uinta  Formation  indicates that,  at the present time,  small  amounts  of
 infiltration and movement of moisture along these  beds are occurring.

     Unlike the  Uinta sandstones, the spent shale  pile will  be of a porous
 nature.   Hydraulic properties, e.g.,  hydraulic  conductivity of the spent shale,
will  depend on the compactive effort  employed during construction.   Permeabil-
 ity values for  Paraho-processed shale are given in Table 8-1  as representative
 of possible values on the U-a and U-b tracts.  As  shown,  permeability varies
 from a high of almost 5 meters (15.5  feet)  per  year to a  low of 0.02 meter
 (0.08 foot) per year, depending on compactive effort and  loading.

     Water movement in the spent shale pile will probably  occur mainly  as
 unsaturated flow.  Flux of pollutants will  consequently be less than that  for

                                    161

-------
  TABLE 8-1.   REGULAR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES  OF COLORADO
                PARAHO-PROCESSED SHALE (WRSP, 1976a)a
Gradation (ASTM D422)
       Maximum particle size
       Clay size (0.005 mm)
       Silt and clay size (- No. 200 sieve)
       Sand size (No. 200 to No. 4 sieves)
       Gravel size (+ No. 4 sieve)

Plasticity (ASTM D423 and D424)
       Liquid limit
       Plasticity index

Specific gravity (ASTM D854)
       Apparent (all sizes)

Relative density
-------
 saturated flow.   In order to estimate saturated  flow velocities,  assume  a
 hydraulic head gradient of unity and steady state  saturated  flow  in  homogeneous
 spent shale.   Darcian velocity (flux) becomes  then equal  to  the hydraulic  con-
 ductivity.   Assuming that a moderate compact!ve  effort  is applied to the spent
 shale, the Darcian velocity, under the above assumptions, would be 0.4 meter
 (1.4 feet)  per year (see Table 8-1).   The  spatial  inhomogeneity of the per-
 meability of the processed shale pile due  to the deposition  of other solid
 wastes with the  processed shale is not considered  here, but  may significantly
 affect flow within the pile.   Dividing the Darcian velocity  by the volumetric
 water content (10 percent),  the real  velocity  of water would be 426  cm (14
 feet) per year.   In other words,  for the full  150-meter (500-foot) depth of
 the spent shale  pile,  saturated movement of water  (and pollutants) from  the
 surface to  the interface with  the underlying Uinta Formation would require
 about 36 years.   Pollutant movement during unsaturated flow  would take a
 correspondingly  greater time.

      The spent shale pile will  be built up in  layers and  compacted by trucks
 rolling over  the surface.   Water  movement  through  the pile may be affected by
 layering,  i.e.,  by the so-called  interface effect.   In stratified soils, for
 example,  it is known that water content values increase in the vicinity  of the
 interfaces  between soils  of different texture.   Lateral flow may  occur above
 the interface until  sufficient hydraulic gradient  develops to permit vertical
 flow.   An interface  effect could  also occur between the spent shale pile and
 underlying  Uinta sandstones.   However,  because of  the low hydraulic conduc-
 tivity values expected within  the spent shale  pile, the effect of layering on
 the movement  of  water  and  pollutants  in the  piles  will probably be minimal.
 An  exception  may be  in the region where the  toe of the pile  thins out, near
 the retention dam.

 MOBILITY OF POLLUTANTS

      Pollutant sources  can be  divided  into  four general categories:  (1)  major
 inorganic ions (or macroinorganics),  (2) inorganic trace elements, (3) organ-
 ics,  and  (4)  microorganisms.   Pollutant mobility underlying  three principal
 source  areas-(1) spent shale disposal area, (2)  the  process  area, and (3)
 retention dams and reservoirs-will be considered.   Characteristics of the
 vadose  zone beneath each of these  areas were discussed in the previous
 paragraphs.

 Spent Shale Disposal Area

     The disposal area  in Southam Canyon will include sanitary landfills  for
 the elimination of solid wastes, and the spent  shale pile.  Initially, a  land-
 fill will be  prepared  in a side canyon.  Eventually this landfill  and others
will be incorporated within the spent shale pile (see Figure  8-1).

     The spent shale pile represents the largest potential source  of  ground-
water contamination on the tracts.  In fact, the pile constitutes  not only  a
source but also a part of the vadose zone.   Sources within the  spent  shale
fill include macroconstituents and microconstituents present  in  the residue
from oil shale retorting.  Of particular concern is that such residues also
contain between 0.02 and 0.2 percent benzene-soluble organics,  some of which

                                    163

-------
may be carcinogenic  (see Section 3; Schmidt-Collerus, 1976).  Also deposited
within the spent shale area are the solid wastes.  Included in the solid
wastes are construction materials, trash and garbage, spent catalysts, filter
cakes, and elemental sulfur slurry.  Waste water will be used to wet down the
spent shale during waste disposal, contributing bacteria and viruses.  Sewage
sludge will be added to soils in vegetative trenches which will be constructed
on top of the shale pile.  Sludge contributes high concentrations of heavy
metals.

     Mobility in the fabricated vadose zone within the spent shale pile is
discussed separately from mobility in the underlying vadose region.

Mobility in the Spent Shale Pile-

     The mobility of inorganic, organic, and microbial pollutants within the
upper vadose region will be affected by physical-chemical reactions within the
porous matrix of the spent shale and by changes in the hydraulic properties of
the media.

     Physical-chemical reactions-Specific physical-chemical reactions affect-
ing the mobility of pollutants in general are reviewed by Todd et al. (1976)
and by Runnel!s (1976).  Runnel!s (1976) lists 1! such reactions:  dilution,
buffering of pH, precipitation by reaction of wastes with indigenous waters
or solids, precipitation due to hydrolysis,  removal due to oxidation or reduc-
tion, mechanical infiltration, volatilization and loss as a gas, biological
assimilation or degradation, radioactive decay, membrane filtration, and
sorption.

     tJacpoinortianiee-ldLb}e  8-2  indicates the concentration of macroinorganics
present in leachate from processed oil shale.   The initial  sample contained
about 140,000 mg/1  of IDS,  with a high concentration of sodium and sulfate.
This concentration is assumed, for this discussion, to represent the undiluted
concentration of solute within the porous matrix.

     Should leachate occur,  the mobility of the macroconstituents in the matrix
solution is difficult to predict because of the excessive concentration of
total salts.  According to  Fuller (1977), "no general statement about ion con-
centration and attenuation  can be made because the subject is  too complex and
very little work has been done with the chemistry of high concentration-
multiple ion systems."  Studies by soil scientists show that as the soil
solution becomes more concentrated, the salt species likely to precipitate
first are the alkaline-earth carbonates, such as CaCOs (calcite, aragonite, or
vaterite), MgC03, and (Ca,  Mg) C03 (McNeil,  1974).  Precipitation-solution of
CaC03 may be predicted knowing the pH and the activities of constituents in
solution.  The activity, in  turn,  may be determined from the Debye-Huckel
equation.  As pointed out by Back and Hanshaw (1965), the Debye-Huckel  equation
may be used for waters with  salt contents up to about 8,000 mg/1.   In other
words, the Debye-Huckel relationship cannot  be used to determine the extent of
CaC03 precipitation in the  initial  solution  shown in Table 8-2.   For lower
concentrations, it may be possible to use a  method developed by Bower et al.
(1965) to determine the tendency of CaCOo to precipitate.


                                    164

-------
                   TABLE 8-2.  EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF THE PERCOLATION EXPERIMENT CONDUCTED

                               ON TOSCO SPENT OIL SHALE RETORTING RESIDUE
CTt
cn
Volume of
leachate
sample (ml)
254
340
316
150
260
125
155
250
650
650
650
760

Total volume
of leachate
(ml)
254
594
910
1,060
1,320
1,445
1,600
1,850
2,500
3,150
3,800
4,560
«>a
Conductance
of sample
(jimhos/cm at 25° C)
78,100
61,600
43,800
25,100
13,550
9,200
7,350
6,825
5,700
4,800
4,250
3,850
1,800
Concentration (mg/1 ) of sample
Na+
35,200
26,700
14,900
6,900
2,530
1,210
735
502
—
—
—
—
86
Ca++
3,150
2,145
1,560
900
560
569
585
609
—
—
—
—
64
Mg++
4,720
3,725
2,650
1,450
500
579
468
536
—
—
—
—
118
S04
90,000
70,000
42,500
21,500
8,200
5,900
4,520
4,450
—
—
—
—
740
cr
3,080
1,900
913
370
205
138
138
80
™ •
—
—
—
11
HCO-
7,021
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
™
^^
~™
—
— ~
Extrapolated values that are probably accurate to within ±6 percent

-------
    Next to CaC03, the precipitation of gypsum (CaSC^) is important as a
process for removing salts from solution.  It may be possible to predict the
precipitation of gypsum using Debye-Huckel theory (Dutt et al., 1972).  How-
ever, as pointed out for the case of CaCOs, the leachate values shown in Table
8-1 exceed the IDS limits for which the theory is valid.

    Although it is not possible to quantify the changes in solute composition
within a spent shale pile, a qualitative estimate is possible.  In particular,
the dominance of sodium and sulfate indicates that soluble sodium sulfate will
become dominant in the leachate after calcite and gypsum have precipitated
(see Section 3).  The high solubility of these constituents in leaching waters
will probably result in insignificant attenuation.  Thus the major ionic
species are expected to be very mobile should leachate occur in the processed
shale pile.

    Sulfate may have an effect on heavy metal mobility if reducing conditions
promote the formation of sul fides.  The movement of ammonia and nitrate pro-
duced in solid waste cells buried within the disposal pile will be affected
by oxidation reduction conditions.  Thus ammonia and nitrate will be generated
if conditions are favorable for the associated microorganisms, such as plenti-
ful oxygen and favorable pH, and salinity.  Similarly, denitrification will
occur if anaerobic conditions occur (e.g., in perched water tables) together
with an organic food supply.  It appears that the extreme salinity of the
leachate may limit the activity of microorganisms.

    Of the other mechanisms for physical -chemical attenuation of major inor-
ganic constituents besides precipitation, only sorption by organics may be of
importance.  The extent to which surfaces within the spent shale are reactive
and thus can act to reduce the high concentrations of cations in the leachate
is not well understood.  Certain organic compounds,  however, are known to
possess a larger cation exchange capacity than clays.

          elements— Trace elements of concern  in  the  retorted  shale  include
iron, nickel, molybdenum, selenium, strontium, rubidium, manganese,  chromium,
arsenic, lead, mercury, and cerium.  Results of leaching studies by  Metcalf
and Eddy (1975) indicate that arsenic, strontium, selenium,  fluoride,  and
zinc may be present in excessive concentrations.   Also, high levels  of copper,
nickel, cobalt, and molybdenum occur in spent catalysts.

    Fuller (1977) lists 10 general  factors as important in migration of heavy
metals:  hydrogen ion activity (pH), oxidation reduction, particle size distri-
bution of soils (surface area), pore size distribution, lime,  organic  matter,
concentration of ions or salts, certain hydrous oxides, climate (weathering),
and aerobic and anaerobic conditions.  In controlled laboratory experiments,
Korte et al .  (1977) found that soil properties dominant in influencing trace
contaminant mobility are soil texture and surface area, percentage of  free
oxides (i.e., oxides of iron existing as discrete patches or coatings  on soil
minerals) and pH.  Although Table 8-1 shows some of the physical properties of
Paraho-processed shale, data on surface area unfortunately are not available.
Inferring from the particle size information, however,  it appears that corre-
sponding to the low clay content the active surface is  probably small.   Data on
the percentage of free oxides also are not available at this time.  The pH of

                                     166

-------
spent oil shale is on the alkaline side (about pH 10).
        figures developed by Korte et al.  (1977)  on the relative mobility of
        in the 10 most prominant soils orders in  the United States are used
    The
cations
as a first estimate of the mobility of heavy metals in the processed shale.
These figures are reproduced as Figures 8-2 and 8-3.
                       Cu     Pta     B.    Zn     Cd     Ni
       Figure 8-2.  Mobility of copper, lead, beryllium, zinc,
                   nickel, and mercury (Korte et al.,  1977).
                                                               cadmium,
        Figure 8-3.  Mobility of selenium, vanadium, arsenic, and
                     chromium (Korte et al., 1977).
                                    167

-------
    Characteristics of the soils used in the study by Korte et al. (1977) are
described  in Table 8-3.  Comparing soils of Table 8-3 with spent shale on the
Uinta tracts, it appears that the Mohave soil is the closest in properties.
Mohave is  of the Order Aridisol as, for example, are the soils on the tracts.
As a first approximation, the mobility of trace elements in the spent shale
is assumed to be similar to Mohave sandy loam.  From Figure 8-2, copper and
lead have  low mobilities; beryllium, zinc, cadium, nickel, and mercury have
moderate mobilities.  Similarly, from Figure 8-3, selenium, vanadium, arsenic,
and chromium have high mobilities.

    Summarizing for the trace elements of concern in spent shale leachate, the
mobility of arsenic and selenium may be high, while the mobility of zinc and
nickel may be moderate.  The mobility of copper may be low.  According to
Fuller (1977), the principal  mechanism for attenuation of arsenic is adsorp-
tion by soil colloids.  Because of the low clay content, mobility of arsenic
may be high.  If waterlogging should occur in the spent shale pile, reducing
conditions will favor the mobility of arsenic.  In addition, according to
Fuller (1977), "At the low concentrations usually found in waste waters, land-
fill leachates, and other aqueous waste streams, arsenic probably will not
precipitate in soils except possibly as an impurity in phosphorus compounds
formed over a long period of time."

    The complex chemistry of selenium is described by Fuller (1977).   The
behavior of selenium is closely related to that of sulfur in acid formation
and other  properties.   Based on experimental  studies at the University of
Arizona,  Fuller concluded that other factors  being equal, selenium is less
mobile in  acidic than in neutral or alkaline  soils.

    Regarding the mobility of zinc, Fuller (1977) indicates that Zn+2 forms
slowly soluble precipitates with carbonate,  sulfides, silicate,  and phosphate
ions.   Elemental sulfur which is disposed in  the pile in slurry form may be
converted  to sulfide,  promoting precipitation of zinc (and other cationic
heavy metals).  Zinc is also strongly sorbed  on the exchange complex of soil.
Because of the low cation exchange of spent  shale, this factor may not be of
great importance in attenuation of zinc.

    Unlike other members of the halogen group, fluorine compounds tend to be
rather insoluble (Hem, 1970).   The mobility of fluoride in spent oil  shale
leachate  may be limited by the formation of  fluorite (CaF;?), with a solubility
product of 10~'0*57.   jhe high concentrations of calcium in leachate  (see
Table 8-2) would tend  to favor fluorite formation, in spite of common ion
effects.    Even so,  fluoride concentrations about 10 mg/1  may be  expected.

    Reactions of strontium in water are similar to those of calcium.   Strontia-
nite,  formed by the reaction  of strontium and bicarbonate,  is slightly less
soluble than calcite (Hem, 1970).   In addition,  relatively insoluble  strontium
sulfate may be formed  in sulfate rich waters  (Davis  and DeWiest,  1966).   Both
reactions may occur in spent  shale leachate,  limiting the mobility of
strontium.

    Copper appears  to  be strongly complexed to organic matter (Fuller, 1977);
consequently,  soluble  and mobile copper-organic  chelates  may form in  the spent

                                    168

-------
                                   TABLE 8-3.  CHARACTERISTICS  OF  THE SOILS9
Soil
Wag ram
(N. Carolina)
Ava
(Illinois)
Kalkaska
(Michigan)
Davidson
(N. Carolina)
Molokai
nu i UKO *
(HawaiiJ
Chalmers
(Indiana)
Nicholson
(Kentucky)
Fanno
(Arizona)
Ho have
r^Mitt vc
(Arizona)
Ho have
(Arizona)
Anthony
(Arizona)
Order
Utisol
Alfisol
Spodosol
Ultisol

Oxisol
Moll iso 1
Alfisol
Alfisol

Aridisol
Aridisol
Entisol
pH
4.2
4.5
4.7
6.2

6.2
6.6
6.7
7.0

7.3
7.8
7.8
CECb
(me/100 g)
2
19
10
9

14
26
37
33

10
12
6
ECC
(umhos/cm)
225
157
237
169

1.262
288
176
392

615
510
328
Surface
area
(m2/g)
8.0
61.5
8.9
51.3

67.3
125.6
120.5
122. 1

38.3
127.5
19.8
Free
iron
oxides
(percent)
0.6
4.0
1.8
17

23
3.1
5.6
3.7

1.7
2.5
1.8
Total
Mn
(ppm)
50
360
80
4,100

7.400
330
950
280

825
770
275
Sand
(percent)
88
10
91
19

23
7
3
35

52
32
71
Silt
(percent)
8
60
4
20

25
58
47
19

37
28
14
Clay
(percent)
4
31
5
61

52
35
49
46

11
40
15
Texture
class
loamy sand
silty clay
loam
sand
clay

clay
silty clay
loam
silty clay
clay

sandy loam
clay loam
sandy loam
Predominant .
clay minerals
Kaolinite,
chlorite
Vermiculite,
kaolinite
Chlorite,
kaolinite
Kaolinite
Kaolinite,
gibbsite
Montmorillonite,
vermiculite
Vermiculite
Hontmorillonite,
mica

Hica, kaolinite
Hica.
montmoril lonite
Montmorillonite.
mica
aFrom Korte et al., 1977
Cation Exchange Capacity
c£lectrical Conductivity
Listed In order of importance
(ft
CO

-------
shale pile.  The formation of hydrous oxides of manganese and iron provides  the
main control in the immobilization of copper.  No data are available on hydrous
oxides in spent shale.  Hem (1970) reports that copper solubility is generally
lower in reducing systems than in oxidizing systems, particularly if reduced
sulfur species are present.  Reducing or anaerobic conditions could exist if
saturation develops in fissures or cracks above claystone beds.   Reduction of
sulfate, present in spent shale leachate, would then lead to precipitation of
copper (as well as iron, zinc, cadmium, lead, and mercury [Fuller, 1977]).

    Both nickel and cobalt are strongly adsorbed by iron and manganese oxides
(Hem, 1970).  The significance of this effect in immobilizing cobalt and nickel
in spent shale cannot be defined at this time.  The low solubility of cobalt
carbonate may be an important factor in limiting cobalt concentrations in the
disposal pile, particularly in light of the high bicarbonate concentrations  in
leachate.

    According to Hem (1970) there are no effective solubility controls over
molybdenum concentrations in water.  Consequently, the mobility  of the anionic
form, molybdate, will probably be high in the waste  pile.  This mobility will
be enhanced by the high pH of the processed shale leachate.

    The potential for mobility of boron within the spent shale disposal area
is unclear.  In soils the principal limitation upon boron mobility is sorption
on clay surfaces.  This may not be important in the processed shale pile.
Boron may also be tied up with organics associated with the processed shale  and
thus be attenuated.  Other mechanisms of boron sorption include  interaction
with oxidized and hydrous forms of iron and aluminum, with magnesium hydroxy
coatings of ferromagnesium minerals, and with the interlattice structures of
micateous minerals (Soil Science Society of America et al.,  1977; Hem, 1970).

    The possibility of chelation of trace elements with organics present in  oil
shale and subsequent transport was discussed by Schmidt-Collerus (1974):  "A...
potential effect on the...environment may arise from the depletion of the soil
of important trace elements due to complex bonding of these elements onto
specific organic compounds (aromatic or polyaromatic)...Furthermore, solubil-
ization and transporation in colloidal form of these organic compounds in
surface and groundwaters may have long-range chronic effects (of as yet unknown
nature) on the aquatic ecology in creeks, rivers, ponds, and on  the purity of
potable water."

    The properties of leachate within the spent shale pile will  be altered when
exposed to air, e.g., when seeping out of the face of the pile near Southam
Canyon retention dam.  The pH of leachate emerging from the shale pile is
between 8 and 9.  Within a few weeks, the color changes to blue  and the pH to
2 to 3 (Metcalf and Eddy, 1975).  The pH change is attributable  to the oxi-
dation of sulfides and polythionates.  A major effect of reducing the pH to
such low values is that the attenuation of trace elements, except selenium,
chromium, and arsenic, tends to decrease, i.e., mobility accelerates (Fuller,
1977).  Consequently, surface water entering the Southam Canyon  retention
damsite from the spoil piles may have elevated concentrations of heavy metals.

    Organ-las -Spent oil  shales  may  contain  two  to  three orders of  magnitude

                                    170

-------
 greater  concentrations of  benzene-soluble organics than native soils  (Schmidt-
 Collerus  et  al.,  1976).  Carcinogenic organics are of particular concern since
 leachate  from  the spent shale pile may contain from three to four times the
 concentration  of  polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons found in native groundwater.
 When  the  amount of spent shale  is taken into consideration, the scale of the
 potential  problem (of organics) is enormous.  At full 100,000 barrels per day
 production,  the operation  could produce 1.8 million tons of carbonaceous mate-
 rial  and  over  100,000 tons of benzene-soluble organics per year.  If process
 water is  used  to  moisten the shale, up to 400,000 tons of benzene-soluble
 compounds  could be released per year.

    Organics are  also added during wetting of the spent shale pile with waste
 water from the secondary treatment plant, oily waste water (including oils and
 grease, phenols,  etc.), and process water.

    A problem  in  specifying the mobility of specific organics is that quanti-
 tative studies have only recently been reported.  One problem is that analyti-
 cal procedures to identify organics are still being developed.  Research is
 needed to  improve capabilities to analyze samples comprehensively so that
 significance of trace organics in the environment can be determined (Donaldson,
 1977).  Recently,  Leenheer and Huffman (1976) described the development of the
 dissolved  organic carbon (DOC) technique for fractionating organics into hydro-
 phobic and hydrophilic components using macroreticular resins.  The technique
 was applied to several natural waters.  This technique has advantages over
 other methods for concentrating organics, such as activated carbon.   For exam-
 ple,  Robertson, Touissant, and Jorque (1974) reported that only 10 percent of
 organics present  in groundwater beneath a landfill  in Oklahoma were identified
 using carbon adsorption followed by carbon chloroform and carbon alcohol
 extraction.

    Because of limited information on the attenuation of organics in a porous
 matrix such as spent shale, only general, qualitative estimates of mobility
 can be presented  at this time.  Sorption may be an important factor in attenu-
 ation.  It is known, for example, that polychlorinated biphenols (PCBs) tend
 to be adsorbed strongly by soils and also are very insoluble in water (Robert-
 son,  Toussaint, and Jorque, 1974).   Leenheer and Huffman (1976) indicate that
 both  hydrophobic  and hydrophilic organics may be sorbed by sediment.

    Adsorption may be a factor in the spent shale because of the fairly high
 carbon content:   TOSCO II shale residue contains 4.5 percent by weight organic
 carbon and Paraho  residue contains  3 percent (Yen,  1976).   Schmidt-Collerus
 (1974) indicated:  "Carbonaceous spent shale from commercial  oil  shale opera-
 tions may  be present as finely divided or coarse particles with relatively
 large surface area...The larger surface area and the possible presence of
active sites on the residual  carbon of the ash  particles can  provide  strong
adsorption and/or chemisorption forces..."  Brown (1977) noted a  marked
attenuation of fluorocarbons  during miscible displacement studies  using coal.

    The pH may also be a factor in  mobility of  organics.   For example, Leenheer
and Huffman (1976) observed the formation of an organic precipitate  upon acidi-
fication of a groundwater sample from an  oil  shale  area near  Rock  Springs,
Wyoming.   Raising the pH dissolved  the precipitate.   Since the pH  within the
spent shale pile will  be above 7.0,  the precipitation of organics  may not be

                                     171

-------
a factor.  However, leachate seeping from the toe of the spent shale pile  will
gradually change from high pH values to values as low as 2.0 (Metcalf and  Eddy,
1975).  Organics could precipitate out at these low pH values.

    Schmidt-Collerus (1974) states:  "Solutilization of ROMs (polycondensed
organic materials) is also enhanced by the presence of various inorganic salts
which may play an important role in the transportation of PAH (polycondensed
aromatic hydrocarbons) compounds by saline water or from soils (rich in soluble
salts) by runoff water or seepage water."  Because of the great salt content  of
spent shale leachate, considerable movement of polycyclic aromatic  compounds
would be expected.  Some notion of the mobility of organics  in spent shale is
apparent in results from leaching studies reported by Metcalf and Eddy (1975)
shown in Tables 8-4 and 8-5.  Samples of processed shale were moistened with
two dilutions of "foul  water" in ratios of 4:1 and 2.5:1. The organics leach-
ed were expressed as TOC (total organic carbon).  The total  TOC leached aver-
aged 55.5 percent for the 4:1 dilution and 53 percent for the 2.5:1  dilution.
   TABLE 8-4.  LEACHING OF SOLUBLE MATERIAL FROM PROCESSED SHALE
               MOISTURIZED WITH A 4:1 DILUTION OF FOUL WATER3
1 	
Constituent

Total water applied, ml
Total leachate recovered, ml
Water recovery, percent
TOC leached, mg
TOC leached, kg/tonne
(lb/ton) raw shale
TOC added in water, kg/ tonne
(lb/ton)
TOC in dry shale, kg/tonne
(lb/ton)
Total water soluble TOC,
kg/tonne (Ib/ton)
TOC leached, percent
Shale sample
size, qrams

500
1,250
1,100
88.0
99.8
0.165 (0.33)

0.185 (0.37)

0.129 (0.26)

0.315 (0.63)

52.4

1,000
2,500
2,245
89.8
226.9
0.185 (0.37)

0.185 (0.37)

0.129 (0.26)

0.315 (0.63)

58.7
a From Metcalf and Eddy, 1975
                                     172

-------
            TABLE 8-5.   LEACHING OF SOLUBLE MATERIAL FROM PROCESSED SHALE
                        MOISTURIZED WITH A 2.5:1  DILUTION OF FOUL WATER9
Constituent
Total water applied, ml
Total water recovered, ml
Water recovery, percent
TOC leached, mg
TOC leached, kg/tonne (Ib/ton)
TOC added in water, kg/ tonne
(Ib/ton)
TOC in dry shale, kg/tonne
(Ib/ton)
Total water soluble TOC,
kg/tonne (Ib/ton)
TOC leached, percent
Shale sample
size, grams
500
1,250
1,100
88.8
119.4
0.179 (0.39)
0.299 (0.60)
0.129 (0.26)
0.429 (0.86)
45,3
1,000
2,500
2,285
91.4
314.4
0.259 (0.52)
0.299 (0.60)
0.129 (0.26)
0.429 (0.86)
60.5
a From Metcalf and Eddy, 1975
     Discussing  the air  pollution aspects of waste dumps,  Schmidt-Collerus
 (1974)  speculates on  the  loss of volatile hydrocarbons  by surface evaporation
 and  self-heating.  The  possibility  is also raised of auto-oxidation  releasing
 carbon  dioxide, carbon  monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and volatile hydrocarbons
 such as alkanes and olefins.  No data are available on  the overall loss of
 organics by  volatilization and/or oxidation.

     Finally, as an attenuation mechanism, the effect of microorganisms on
 organics should be mentioned.  In particular, biodegradable organics will be
 decomposed by microorganisms rendering potentially harmful constituents into
 gases.  Davis (1956)  reports that microbiologists have  observed the  utiliza-
 tion of hydrocarbons  by certain bacteria, actinomycetes,  filamentous fungi,
 and yeasts.  In general, however, hydrocarbons are not  as  readily decomposed
 as carbohydrates, proteins, or fats.  Furthermore, the  cyclic hydrocarbons
 are  less susceptible  to microbial decomposition than are  the aliphatic hydro-
 carbons.  Quantitative estimates of biodegradation of organics in spent shale
 are  not available.
    .,^x^.^.^..o^,..^—...... v,w. 3~	  (including  viruses) will  be  added during
wetting down of the spent shale pile with secondary treated waste waters, and
possibly with solid wastes.  According to Gilbert et al.  (1976), bacteria are
removed at the soil surface by filtration, sedimentation, and adsorption.

                                    173

-------
 Other  factors  listed by Gilbert et al.  (1976) as important in attenuating
 bacteria and viruses are salt concentration, pH, organic matter, soil composi-
 tion,  infiltration rates, and climatic  conditions.  Survival and movement of
 microorganisms within a soil relate to  soil moisture content, temperature, pH,
 nutrient availability, and antagonisms.

    Undoubtedly, the above mechanisms will limit the migration of bacteria and
 viruses to within a short vertical distance of the spoil pile surface.  There
 may be a problem during the initial stages of the spoil pile, during which
 microorganisms could cross into the lower vadose zone.  Another possible factor
 in promoting the particular movement of viruses is snow or rainfall on the
 surface.  Lance, Gerba, and Melnick (1976) observe the desorption and migration
 of viruses in  soil columns following the application of deionized water.
 Resorption occurred further down the column.  Applying these results to the
 spent oil shale pile means that viruses may become desorbed following the
 infiltration of snowmelt.  When the spoil pile is of limited thickness, such
 as during initial buildup, viruses could migrate through fissures into the
 lower vadose zone.  Later, with increased thickness of the spent shale pile,
 the viruses would be resorbed with depth.

    Effects on hydraulic properties-In  areas receiving scanty rainfall,  salts
 moving with the soil solution tend to accumulate in indurated layers within a
 short distance of the surface (McNeal, 1974).  Soil layers with high concen-
 trations of gypsum or carbonate minerals may develop.  Total concentrations of
 salt may amount to 10 to 50 percent of the soil mass (McNeal, 1974).  Such
 layers restrict vertical movement of water and hence mobility of pollutants.

    This condition is possible in the spent shale pile, which is excessively
 high in total salts.  Calcite and gypsum salts  may be precipitated from the
 soil solution, and form an indurated layer, reducing the mobility of
 pollutants.

    Quirk and Schofield (1955) have shown a relationship of total salt concen-
 tration of the soil solution, hydraulic conductivity, and exchangeable sodium
 percent (ESP).  Figure 8-4, from McNeal  (1974), illustrates that for a given
 ESP, the hydraulic conductivity increases with  total salt content.  This
 relationship will be estimated using salt concentration values for leachate
 from Table 8-2, together with estimates of ESP  to approximate the relation-
 ship of salt content and ESP on the hydraulic conductivity of spent shale
 (and hence mobility of pollutants).

    The following analysis  assumes that a response of spent shale to salt
vis-a-vis hydraulic conductivity is  similar to  that for Pachappa sandy loam
 (Figure 8-4).

    Exchangeable sodium percentages  (ESP) of a  soil  may be calculated from
the relationship (Richards, 1954):

                   rep _ 100 (-0.0126  + 0.01475 SAR
                   t:>K   1  + (-0.0126  + 0.01475 SAR
                                    174

-------
  where SAR = sodium adsorption ratio

                       Na+
(Ca
                         Mg++)/2
  (all  units  in milliequivalents per liter [meq/1]).


               PACHAPPA

        \2
                                     40  60
                      SALT'CONCENTRATION (m«q/r
Figure 8-4.  Hydraulic conductivity of Pachappa sandy loam as related to salt
             concentration and exchangeable sodium percentage (McNeal, 1974).


     For the initial leachate of Table 8-2, SAR = 92.6 and ESP = 57.50, the
total salt concentration is 4,080 meq/1.  From Figure 8-4, the hydraulic value
(for Pachappa sandy loam) would be maximum for a salt content of about 200
meq/1, corresponding to an ESP of 57.5.  Consequently, for the high salt
content observed in initial leachate, one would expect the flux to be high.
With later volumes of leachate, precipitation of calcium and magnesium
carbonate would modify SAR and ESP values.  For example, using the values of
Table 8-2 for the final aliquot of leachate, the SAR = 1.5, the ESP = 0.90,
and total salt is 33 meq/1.  The latter value approaches the horizontal  line
on Figure 8-4, indicating that the maximum hydraulic conductivity obtains for
all values of total salt.  In other words, flux (and pollutant mobility) remains
high at both high and low total salt contents.

"Indigenous" Vadose Zone Pollutant Mobility-

     Assuming that pollutants migrate into the indigenous vadose zone from the
overlying spent shale pile, further downward movement will  occur through frac-
tures and fissures, rather than through a porous matrix.  Because of the non-
reactive nature of the Uinta sandstones,  attenuation of pollutants  by exchange

                                     175

-------
reactions will be minimal.  (The possibility of reactions on clay beds within
the Uinta sandstones is uncertain.)  Attenuation of macroconstituents in spent
shale leachate will probably depend upon precipitation reactions, such as the
formation of calcite or gypsum.  In the presence of bacteria and organic
matter, sulfates may be reduced to sulfides (Hem, 1970).  Since the solubility
of the sul fides of most metals is low, metals in spent shale leachate may be
precipitated out.  This effect may occur if biodegradable organics from the
overlying shale pile migrate into the Uinta formation; however, no quantita-
tive data are available on this possibility.  Similarly, nitrates moving into
the Uinta formation may be denitrified in saturated fissures, e.g., near clay
lenses, if biodegradable organics (and bacteria) are present.

     The fate of trace elements in the Uinta vadose zone may be similar to
that of macroconstituents.  Surface reactions within the sandstones will be
minimal.  Reactions with organics present in spent shale leachate may
promote chelation of trace elements, and possibly enhance their mobility
(Fuller, 1977).  However, the exchange capacity of organics may also be great
enough to inhibit movement of sorbed trace elements.  Again, quantitative
data are lacking.  Development of saturated regions within the indigenous
vadose zone will promote anaerobic conditions and favor the mobility of heavy
metals, unless insoluble metallic sulfides are formed.  Another possible
mechanism affecting trace element movement is the formation of organic acids,
which lower the pH and accelerate the mobility of cationic elements (Fuller,
1977).  Finally, adsorptive reactions may occur with hydrous oxides of Fe++,
Mn++, and Al+++.

     Adsorptive reactions with the Uinta sandstones will probably not be
significant in limiting the mobility of organics.   Possibly the formation
of organic acids will  lead to the precipitation of certain organic compounds.

     Bacteria may be filtered out by the fine fissures within the Uinta sand-
stones, but free movement will occur through larger cracks.  Similarly, virus
removal by sorption will not be significant.  Changes in pH may be a factor
in virus mobility, however.

Process Area

     Possible pollutants in the process area are summarized in Table 8-6.
Inorganics will be present in high TDS waste water.  Ammonia will  also be
present in tankage.  Organics will  be included in crude shale oil, refined
shale oil, naphtha, fuel oil, diesel fuel, and oil  and grease.   Micro-
organisms  will be found in the waste water holding pond.

     Movement of some pollutants will  occur across  the shallow soil  (except
for the holding pond reservoir) into the underlying Uinta sandstones.   Prop-
erties of the soils of the area are reported in Table 8-7.   These soils are
classified as sandy loams.  Note the low cation exchange capacity (CEC),
averaging 9.14 meq/100 g.  According to Buckman and Brady (1969),  the  CEC of
soils in semiarid regions is commonly between 20 and 26 meq/100 g, but may
sometimes exhibit a much wider range.
                                   176

-------
TABLE 8-6.  POSSIBLE PROCESS AREA POLLUTANTS3
Tankage b»c
Crude shale oil
Refined 'shale oil
Naphtha
High TDS waste water
Fuel oil
Ammonia
Diesel fuel
Waste water holding pond
Total dissolved solids
Oil and grease
Phenol
Ammonia
PH
Amount
Cubic meters
(thousands)
240.0
176.0
56.0
35.2
11.2
8.0
5.6
Barrels
(thousands)
1,500.0
1,100.0
350.0
220.0
70.0
50.0
35.0
Amount, mg/1
Maximum
800^
100
85
30
9.25
Minimum
200
50
45
50
7.9
a from WRSP, 1976a
b Includes butane, liquid nitrogen, and shale oil pour-point
depressant in addition to products listed
c Process facilities also contain all tankage products in
lesser amounts
TDS may be more than amount shown
                     177

-------
                          TABLE 8-7.  CHARACTERISTICS OF SOILS ON OIL SHALE TRACTS*
Sample
D-l
D-l
D-l
D-l
D-2
D-2
D-2
D-2
D-2
D-2
D-2
D-2
D-3
D-3
D-3
a Samples
Depth Ca++
(cm) (pp«i)
0-15
15-25
25-30
30-35
0-10 .
10-20
20-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
60-70
70-80
0-10
10-20
20-30
collected during
80
63
48
44
62
44
50
33
45
99
40
31
75
60
50
1977
Mg++
(ppm)
3.5
3.0
3.0
2.9
8.1
3.1
2.0
1.8
1.0
1.5
2.2
2.2
11.4
4.1
2.3
surveys for
Na+
(ppm)
20
29
84
132
44
30
36
37
37
45
50
46
34
56
61
EC x 103
0.52
0.43
0.64
1.02
0.94
0.44
0.43
0.36
0.29
0.35
0.42
0.37
0.80
0.61
0.50
TSS
364
301
448
714
653
308
301
252
203
245
294
259
560
427
350
CEC
9.50
10.98
10.88
11.30
5.45
7.18
9.45
10.88
9.03
9.13
9.03
7.95
5.65
8.93
9.89
Sand Silt Clay
(percentXpercent) (percent)
57.0
56.6
58.0
55.5
64.0
69.0
53.0
58.0
65.5
66.0
69.0
68.0
71.0
69.0
63.5
35.0
35.4
35.0
36.5
28.0
25.0
38.0
41.0
32.5
30.0
27.0
28.0
23.0
27.0
29.5
8.0
8.0
7.0
8.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
1.0
2.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
General Electric-TEMPO
co

-------
      Because  of  the  thinness of the soil mantle and the low CEC, it appears
 that  attenuation of  inorganic pollutants by exchange reactions may not be
 very  significant.  High IDS water containing calcium, magnesium, sulfate,
 and bicarbonate may  lose  some salts due to the precipitation of calcite and
 gypsum,  as  described above.  A perched water table might develop at the
 interface between the oil and underlying Uinta sandstones, promoting sulfide
 formation (if sulfates are present) and the consequent precipitation of
 metals.

      High salinity waste  water will favor the movement of organics in soils
 (Schmidt-Collerus, 1974).  Soil microorganisms may be capable of attenuating
 organics by biodegradation, particularly if the soils are well aerated and
 if the salinity is reduced.

      Filtration of bacteria may not be too effective because of the coarse
 texture  of  the soils.  Similarly, significant attenuation of viruses in
 waste water by sorption on the exchange complex may not occur.

      Movement and attenuation of pollutants in the Uinta Formation underlying
 the process area will be  governed by mechanisms described above for the spent
 shale disposal area.

 Retention Dams
     Retention dams will be constructed downstream of the Phase II spent
shale pile, the sanitary landfill, and the Phase III and Phase IV spent
shale pile  (the Southam Canyon retention dam).  These dams will be used to
collect and store leachate as well as surface runoff.  Collected water will
be used for irrigation of vegetation or for dust control.  Alluvium will be
stripped from the Southam Canyon dam site, and a liner will be installed on
the reservoir area to minimize leakage.  To date (August 1977), a liner
material has not been selected (R.C. Madsen, private communication, 1977).

     Leachate flowing out of the spent shale piles into the retention dams
may contain excessive concentrations of salt (see Table 8-1), the pH may be
reduced to values as low as 2 or 3 (Metcalf and Eddy, 1975), and levels of
trace elements may increase accordingly.  Leachate entering the calcareous
soils would be expected to increase in pH, thus affecting trace metal
mobility.  In addition, "Polycyclic aromatic compounds can apparently be
leached from the carbonaceous shale by water to a considerable extent in the
presence of water-soluble inorganic salts," (Schmidt-Collerus, 1974).  Simi-
larly, surface runoff from the pile may contain high levels of salt and
organics.

     Seepage into the vadose zone underlying the Southam Canyon retention dam
site will occur if the lining fails.  Downward flow in the Uinta sandstones
will then occur through cracks or along bedding planes,  as discussed above.
Attenuation mechanisms will  be similar to those discussed for the spent shale
disposal area and the process area.  In addition to such  mechanisms,  the
possibility exists that precipitated salts (e.g., calcite and gypsum) may
close off fissures,  restricting downward flow.   Movement  of pollutants in
the vadose zone underlying the Phase II retention dam site and the landfill

                                    179

-------
site will also be governed by these mechanisms.

SUMMARY OF MOBILITY

     The principal source of groundwater contamination on the oil shale tracts
will be the spent shale pile, which also will constitute a fabricated yadose
region overlying the indigenous vadose zone.  Particular contaminants in the
spent shale pile will include an extremely high salt concentration (possibly
as high as 140,000 mg/1, TDS) and a high loading of organics.  The mobility
of salt will be limited mainly by precipitation reactions, which could remove
calcium and magnesium carbonates, and gypsum.  Some sorption on organics may
occur.  The mobility of organics will be enhanced by the high TDS, and leach-
ing of both contaminants (organics and inorganics) will occur together.
Organic concentrations may be diminished by precipitation at higher pH values,
by surface reactions, by auto-oxidation, and by microbial decomposition.
Trace metal mobility will be affected by pH, complexing with organics, sorp-
tion on organics, precipitation as sulfides, etc.  Microorganism levels
probably will be limited by the high TDS.

     Movement of water and pollutants in the fabricated vadose zone may be
reduced by the presence of indurated layers formed by the precipitation of
calcite and gypsum.  Values of ESP, SAR, and TDS are such that the hydraulic
conductivity will remain high.

     Flux in the Uinta and underlying formations of the indigenous vadose
zone will be restricted to fine cracks and fissures along bedding planes.
Attenuation may be effected mainly by precipitation of salts, because sorptive
effects will be limited (except possibly to organics).

     The above discussion suggests that pollutants in spent shale leachate
may be attenuated by a variety of physical-chemical processes.  However,
because of the initially high concentrations of the major inorganic consti-
tuents, the overall salinity level will  remain high in leachate.  In fact, if
leachate were somehow to penetrate shallow alluvial aquifers, or the Bird's
Nest Aquifer, serious quality impairment would occur.

     It appears that movement of pollutants in the vadose zone underlying
the spent shale tracts may be of importance only (1) when the spent shale
pile is of minimum thickness, i.e., during the beginning of construction,
and (2) when leachate from the toe of the pile accumulates in the Southam
Canyon retention dam.  The quality of the leachate in the latter situation
will be particularly bad.  Even for these conditions, it is not anticipated
that pollutant movement in the indigenous vadose zone will be significant.
An important point to remember is that the potentiometric level of water and
pollutants above the Bird's Nest Aquifer must exceed the corresponding level
within the aquifer and continuous hydraulic connection must exist before
water movement will occur into the aquifer.  Such a hydraulic continuum does
not appear likely under present circumstances, but conceivably could be
created by mining-induced subsidence.
                                     180

-------
 HYQROGEOLOGIC  MODIFICATION

 Subsidence

      One  possible side effect of oil shale mining is land subsidence.  When
 rock  is removed from the subsurface, increased stress on the remaining rock
 is created by  the removal of support.  This stress is accommodated by strain
 on the walls and pillar of the cavity and by the formation of a compressive
 strain over the cavity.  If the dimensions of the cavity are such that the
 top of the arch extends above the surface, the cavity will collapse until
 the strain arch is sufficiently reduced that the strain can be taken up within
 the rock.  Outside of the arch (away from the cavity), extensional strain is
 created by the movement of rock into the cavity.

      The  planned mine at the U-a and U-b tracts is of the room-and-pillar
 type.  The pillars are planned to be of sufficient dimensions to support the
 weight of the overburden.  Thus rapid collapse of the mining cavity probably
 will  not  occur.  Under these circumstances, some subsidence can be expected
 from  compression of the mine pillars and the cavity roof.  Rock mechanical
 data  on the compressibility of the pillar rock are needed to evaluate the
 expected  extent of subsidence.

      Possible hydrogeologic effects of subsidence do not depend on the magni-
 tude  of subsidence so much as the resultant structural damage.  Very ductile
 rocks can sustain considerable subsidence with little fracturing, while
 brittle rock may fracture extensively in response to slight subsidence.  It
 is the cracking and fracturing which provide hydrogeologic connection.

      The  rocks above the Mahogany Zone are the marl stones of the Green River
 Formation and the sandstone of the Uinta Formation.  The marl stone may be
 moderately ductile.   Kerogen and clay would tend to increase plasticity, while
 calcium carbonate would decrease it.  The Uinta Formation probably would be
 fairly brittle, but mudstone partings would tend to close fractures.

     Although at present only partial extraction is planned,  in the future,
 changing technological  or economic conditions may encourage the practice of
 pillar extraction.   This method involves the removal  of pillars from,a mining
 area when normal  extraction is complete.  Pillar extraction would certainly
 result in major subsidence and hydrogeologic modification.

     Whatever the method, the location of subsidence would depend on  the area
mined out.  If the mined area corresponds closely to the tract boundaries, as
 planned,  the result would be a large area of compressive strain inside the
tract boundaries.   This strain could result in lowered transmissivity of
aquifers in the area.   The central  area of the tracts could be under  compres-
sive strain or  no strain at all.   This area would experience maximum sub-
sidence,  but probably little structural  damage.

     The area just outside of the tract boundaries would experience exten-
sional strain, very likely resulting in vertical  cracking and fracturing.
The extent of fracturing would depend on rock properties, extent of subsidence,
rate of subsidence,  and amount of curvature produced  by subsidence.   One effect

                                    181

-------
of the tensional  strain would be increased transmissivity within  the  strain
zone.
     The opening of vertical  fractures would result in increased  hydraulic
interaction between the surface and aquifers, and  between different  aquifers.
Since the tract boundaries intersect the White River in several places,  it
may be expected that, in the  event of serious subsidence and  fracturing,  a
connection between the White  River and the Bird's  Nest Aquifer would result.
The effect of this connection would be increased leakage from the White
River into the Bird's Nest Aquifer, since the aquifer level  is below the
river level.  The downgradient flow in the aquifer would increase and some
improvement'in aquifer water quality would result, since the  river water  is
of better quality.  Discharge of the White River downstream of the leakage
area would be decreased, although the magnitude of the change cannot be
estimated with certainty.

     If the subsidence fractures were of such scale as to extend  through  the
Green River Formation to the mine zone, a serious mine drainage  problem
would be encountered.  Water from both the Bird's Nest Aquifer and the White
River would enter the mine.  The dissolved solids content of water entering
the mine would vary from more than 4,500 mg/1 in the northeast corner of
Tract U-b to less than 1,000 mg/1 in areas where most of the leakage was
contributed by the White River.  The leakage might pick up some  additional
dissolved constituents while moving through the fractures or in  the  mine.
If the leakage were of sufficient extent, it could result in substantially
reduced flow in the aquifer downgradient of the mine, since most  of  the
aquifer recharge  in the region is from Evacuation Creek and the  White River
and could then be intercepted by the mine.

     The possibility of subsidence-induced fracturing below the  level of
the mine does exist, but is very unlikely.  Normally the solid rock  beneath
a mine is sufficient to accept the stresses created by mining without
structural damage.  Usually it is only when mining is commenced  below an
existing mine that these stresses cause damage.   If deep fracturing  did
occur below the mine, groundwater from the Douglas Creek Member and  lower
aquifers could rise upward into the mine.  Evidence exists that at the
present time groundwater from lower aquifers is leaking upward into  the
Bird's Nest Aquifer below Evacuation Creek  (see Section 6).   If this is  the
case, this water  would be intercepted by the mine.  Subsidence-induced
stress might further open fractures responsible for this leakage.

     The major groundwater pollution problems associated with the possibility
of mine drainage  do  not result from any undesirable characteristics  of the
mine water  itself, but from the disposal of  the water.   It is proposed in
the Detailed Development  Plan  (WRSP, 1976a)  that  this water will  be used
for dust control  and wetting of the spent shale.   If  large quantities of
mine water  must be disposed, the  amount spread on the spent shale pile
may be  sufficient to  induce percolation through^ the pile and  the production
of high TDS leachate.  This leachate  could  then' degrade  local groundwater.
                                   182

-------
 White River Dam

      Both the White River Shale Project and the State of Utah are encourag-
 ing the construction of a dam on the White River.  The White River Shale
 Project favors a dam site near the northwest corner of Tract U-a (see Figure
 2-3).  Another dam site upstream of the tracts has also been proposed.  At
 the present time, no dates have been set for dam construction.

      The proposed dam would be 38 meters (125 feet) high.   It would impound
 a reservoir with surface elevation approximately 1,524 meters (5,000 feet)
 in elevation.   The lake would extend upstream well past Hell's  Hole Canyon.

      The existence of such a reservoir could alter the hydrogeology in
 several  ways.   Water filling the reservoir would slowly seep into the Uinta
 Formation through the reservoir walls.   At present, the hydraulic gradient
 of the shallow alluvial  aquifers on the tracts is northward, into the White
 River valley.   For a period of time,  at least, this gradient would  be
 reversed as  seepage from the reservoir penetrated southward.  Since the
 regional structure rises to the south,  the seepage from the  reservoir prob-
 ably would eventually fill  all  of the available alluvium and Uinta  Forma-
 tion above the relatively impermeable Green River Formation.  At  this  time,
 the natural  gradient would  be reestablished.   During the period of  reverse
 gradient,  any  pollutants moving through the alluvium or Uinta Formation
 could tend to  be  stagnated  south  of the reservoir until  the  gradient  return-
 ed to normal,  when  they  would be  flushed out.

      The presence of a water table  within  the  Uinta  Formation would cause
 increased  attenuation of any pollutants  through dilution.  However, the
 buoyant  force  of  the water may open bedding planes within the Uinta Forma-
 tion, thus increasing pollutant velocity and mobility.   If pollutant flow
 is constrained by claystone  beds within the Uinta  Formation, the reservoir
 may increase the  volume of pollutants able  to enter  the White River.  Pollu-
 tants which would otherwise  seep out of the Uinta  Formation above the White
 River and  precipitate would  flow directly  into the reservoir.

     Evidence  for downward leakage  from the White River into the Bird's
 Nest Aquifer is discussed in Section 7.  The raised head of the White River
 created by the reservoir would probably substantially increase the rate of
 leakage  into the  Bird's Nest Aquifer.  This would improve the quality and
 flow of the aquifer.

     If leakage of river water into the oil shale mine should occur due to
 subsidence-induced (or other) fracturing, the raised head created  by the
 reservoir and the extended water table around the reservoir would  undoubted-
 ly greatly increase leakage into the mine.   Finally, if subsidence does
 become a problem,  the large additional weight of the reservoir above and
adjacent to the mine would probably aggravate the problem.
                                   183

-------
                                SECTION 9

      MOBILITY AND ATTENUATION OF POLLUTANTS IN THE SATURATED ZONE


ATTENUATION MECHANISMS

     Knowledge of possible pollutant movement and concentration change is
very important in the formulation of any groundwater monitoring system.
Most of the basic data used to evaluate these factors in this section will
be drawn from Section 5 (Hydrogeologic Framework).  Elements covered will
include chemical mechanisms of attenuation operating in both the saturated
and the unsaturated regions.  Thus much of the discussion of attenuation in
Section 8 is applicable to this topic and will  not be repeated in detail.
Significant differences between the saturated and unsaturated zones and
processes operating in only the saturated zone will be treated.

     The primary influences on pollutants in the saturated zone are the
physical and chemical characteristics of the aquifer.  Parameters such as
aquifer mineralogy, contact area, pH, and Eh are important.  The peculiar
solution cavity nature of the Bird's Nest Aquifer affects all of these pa-
rameters.  Most of the cavities are large, typically 15 to 25 cm (5.9 to 9.8
inches) in diameter.  The large scale of the individual "pores" of the aqui-
fer greatly reduces the contact area of the aquifer minerals with the water
in comparison with fine-grained aquifers.  This in turn reduces chemical
reaction between the two.

     Most of the aquifer matrix is composed of rock classified as either
highly organic marlstone or low-grade oil shale.   The principal minerals are
quartz and calcium and magnesium carbonates.  Some feldspar and clay (illite)
are also present.   Kerogen, like most petroleum minerals, is hydrophobic and
would further inhibit contact between aquifer water and the mineral  matrix.
However, it might promote adsorption of organic pollutants.

     The Environmental Baseline Report (WRSP, 1976b) does not state whether
pH measurements of sample water were performed  in the field or the labora-
tory.   The highly erratic sequences reported indicate the latter.   It is
evident that the water is basic, probably near pH 8.  The Eh has never been
reported; however, in general, reducing conditions exist in confined aqui-
fers due to lack of oxygen.  The presence of iron sulfide nodules  near the
contact of the Uinta and Green River Formations indicates reduction of
sulfates, which supports the concept of reducing conditions within the
aquifer.
                                   184

-------
Macroinorganics

     The heavily predominant cation in the shale pile leachate is sodium,
which is very mobile.  Sodium is also the predominant cation in the aquifer
water.  This is due to the dissolution of nahcolite (NaHCX^) modules.  The
present high concentrations of sodium indicate that little attenuation would
occur.  If attenuation did occur, it would probably be due to precipitation
of nahcolite, or to dilution by aquifer water of lower sodium concentration.

     The other major cation in the leachate is calcium.  Again, this ion is
common in the water of the Bird's Nest Aquifer.  The most likely attenuation
mechanism would be precipitation of calcite.  Leachate concentrations are
too high to use Debye-Hickel theory to predict precipitation.

     The predominant anion is sulfate.  The moderate solubility of gypsum
could lead to the precipitation of sulfate as calcium sulfate.   If conditions
were sufficiently reducing, the sulfate might be converted to sulfide and
immobilized by iron or other heavy metals.

     The major anion in the aquifer water beneath the proposed processed
shale pile is bicarbonate.  Precipitation of this ion as both nahcolite and
calcite has already been discussed.  Dilution, again, may play a major role
in attenuation.

Trace Elements

     Arsenic is one of the trace elements of prime concern,  due to both leach-
ing from the shale pile and disposal  of arsenic-impregnated  wastes.   The
major attenuation mechanism is adsorption onto clays, which  is unlikely to be
important in the Bird's Nest Aquifer due to the small clay content and small
surface contact.  However, reduction of sulfate to sulfide might result in
the precipitation of the arsenic sulfide minerals orpiment or realgar.

     Selenium and zinc are both quite mobile and attenuation mechanisms are
few.  Strongly reducing conditions might lead to reduced mobility of both
elements.   Reduced selenium might form insoluble minerals with heavy metals.
Zinc might precipitate in combination with sulfide as sphalerite.

     The mobility of both fluoride and strontium may be limited by precipi-
tation.   Sufficient excess calcium in the leachate may precipitate the
fluoride as fluorite.   The strontium may be precipitated by  either bicar-
bonate or sulfate.

Organics

     The high pH of aquifer water rules out the precipitation of organics
mentioned in Section 8.  However, the kerogen contained in the  walls of the
solution cavities may prove effective in adsorbing complex and  possibly
carcinogenic compounds.  The small  area of surface contact would tend to
limit this sorption.   As the effectiveness of kerogen as an  adsorbent has
never been tested, its importance cannot be estimated with confidence at
this time.  This is true with regard  to both quantitative (i.e.,  how much

                                   185

-------
 1s adsorbed) and qualitative  (I.e., what organic components are adsorbed)
 adsorption characteristics.

 POLLUTANT MOVEMENT

     One of the major uncertainties involves the flux of possible pollutants.
 Calculations in Section 7 indicate that under present plans for operation of
 the waste shale dump and present climatic conditions, little infiltration of
 water and resultant leaching will occur.  It is impossible to assign specific
 figures to concentration and flux of possible pollutants.  However, this
 uncertainty does not render an analysis of the flow and change of concentra-
 tion of possible pollutants useless, for changing disposal procedures could
 result in shale pile leachate production.  Unforeseen accidents or design
 faults could cause pollutant spills or sources of pollution such as leakage
 through waste water holding pond sealers.  Long-term considerations include
 climatic factors.

     Evaluation of flow in the Bird's Nest Aquifer beneath oil  shale Tracts
 U-a and U-b is complicated by the nonhomogeneous hydraulic and water quality
 characteristics present.  In an effort to create a workable model  of the
 aquifer, it has been divided into four units, indicated in Figure 9-1.  The
 crosses in the figure represent the boundary between the high and the low
 salinity portions of the aquifer.  Unit A comprises the southeast section of
 the aquifer.  The transmissivity, calculated from tests at well P-3, is
 about 0.007 liters per second per meter (50 gallons per day per foot).
 Salinity is relatively low, the total dissolved solids concentration averag-
 ing below 2,000 mg/1.  Unit B is the northeast section, west of Evacuation
 Creek.  This is the high salinity portion of the aquifer, with TDS levels
 varying between 3,000 and 4,500 mg/1.  The transmissivity at well  P-l is
 about 0.2 liters per second per meter (1,500 gallons per day per foot).
 Unit C, the southwest portion, is the high transmissivity, low salinity area.
 TDS levels are below 2,000 mg/1 and the transmissivity is about 9.3 liters
 per second per meter (70,000 gallons per day per foot).  The entire proposed
 spent shale dump area is located above this portion of the aquifer.  Finally,
 Unit D possesses high transmissivity and high salinity.  The dissolved solids
 range from 2,000 to 4,000 mg/1.  Transmissivity values taken from well P-2
are used for both Units C and D.  The proposed process area will  be above
 Unit D.

     The use of a flow net analysis assumes that the groundwater flow within
an aquifer follows Darcy's law and that the transmissivity is constant over
each grid area.  Although this assumption is not strictly valid for this
 particular system, the system has been simplified in order to allow analysis.

     When examining the flow net shown on Figure 9-1, it should be kept 1n
mind that different areas have different T values and thus the net cannot be
 Interpreted in the normal manner.  The head drop across each square of Units
A and B 1s 50 feet; the drop across the squares of Units C and D is 16 feet.
                                   186

-------
* • 1 GCOLOGKExn-OflATKM
• G-1 GKXMOWATEM MOM!
• AG-I ALLUVIAL GMOUNOMM'
 It *J*f ACt WATtP MONTTCMWC
                 LTEH MOM iTOftlNG •
                 STATION
                       Figure 9-1.   Flow net  for  Bird's  Nest Aquifer.

-------
     Discharge can be calculated with the formula:
                              Q = nT Ah ,
where
     Q  = discharge
     n  = number of flow tubes
     T  = transmissivity
     Ah = head drop across each square.
The discharge from aquifer Unit A is:
               Q = 3(50 gal/d/ft)(50 ft) = 7,500 gal/d
                 = 1,003 ft3/d (28.3 m3/d)
The discharge from Unit B is:
               Q = 7(1,500 gal/d/ft)(50 ft) = 525,000 gal/d
                 = 70,193 ft3/d (1,983 m3/d)
This discharge figure may be high since it is based on aquifer test data from
well P-l, at the northern end of the area.  The much lower transmissivity at
well P-3 indicates that the transmissivity decreases to the south.  Therefore,
the 0.2 liters per second per meter (1,500 gallons per day per foot) used for
Unit B may~represent a high limit.  The combined discharge of Units A and B
is 2,000 nr/day (70,000 ft3/d), equivalent to 0.824 ft3/s.  This would seem
to be a little high if the source of recharge is really Evacuation Creek,
which has a flow of 1 ft3/s or less.
     The discharge from Unit C is:
               Q = 1(70,000 gal/d/ft)(16 ft) = 1,120,000 gal/d
                 = 150,000 ft3/d (4,200 m3/d)
This discharge figure depends on several assumptions.  The 1,473-meter
(4,834-foot) equipotential line is based on just one data point, well P-2.
However, the data from this well  are quite reliable.  The shape of the line
was simply mirrored from the 1,478-meter (4,850-foot) line above it.  The
actual shape may be somewhat different.  A change in the 1,473-meter (4,834-
foot) line would change the flow lines somewhat, but it is difficult to con-
ceive of a realistic shape that would radically alter the flow lines.  The
fact that the water quality difference (see Section 6) boundary follows the
flow line between Units C and D is a strong support for the flow line's
accuracy.  A more serious difficulty is the actual head difference in the
high transmissivity portion of the aquifer.  The figure of 4.9 meters (16
                                   188

-------
feet) is taken from the difference between the last 50-foot line and the
P-2 well elevation.  In fact, an examination of the water level data (see
Figure 9-1} indicates that the difference is probably somewhat less.  Unfor-
tunately, water level data do not exist for wells in this area, so the exact
difference cannot be ascertained.  The map indicates that 3.1 meters (10 feet)
is approximately correct.  The-discharge thus would be

                Q = 1(70,000 gal/d/ft)(10 ft) = 700,000 gal/d

                  a 94,000 ft3/d (2,600 m3/d)

     A discrepancy is immediately apparent.  According to the flow net, the
inflow to Unit C is 1,000 ft3/d (30 m3/d) while the discharge from it is
94,000 ft3/d.  A deficit of 93,000 ft3/d (2,600 m3/d) exists.  Even if the
Unit C flow net "square" is so incorrect that all of the recharge from the
Evacuation Creek area should enter the Unit C square, the deficit would still
be 22,000 ft3/d (600 m3/d).  Some of this difference may be made up by
recharge from the alluvium of Asphalt Wash.  Neither T values nor water
levels are available from this area.  Even so, the volume of recharge is
estimated to be small, due to the absence of any perennial water course in
the canyon and the lack of a large drainage area.  Two possible further
sources of recharge exist:  upward leakage from lower aquifers and downward
leakage from the White River.  Downward leakage is more likely, because up-
ward leakage into the Bird's Nest Aquifer would have to penetrate the
Mahogany oil shale zone and because low water temperatures have been measured
at well P-2, indicative of surface recharge (see Section 6).

     In summary, Unit A discharges about 1,000 ft3/d (30 m3/d), Unit B about
70,000 ft3/d (2,000 m3/d), and Units C and D each about 90,000 ft3/d (2,500
m3/d).  This leaves a discrepancy of 20,000 to 90,000 ft3/d (500 to 2,500
m3/d) in Units C and D, probably made up by downward leakage from the White
River.  The small  data base must be kept in mind when evaluating these
conclusions.

     Although these figures are very rough, they do have some significance
for evaluating possible dilution of pollutants.   The total daily discharge
of the area under the proposed spent shale pile is only 90,000 ft3 (2,500 m3)
or about 1.1 ft3/s.  Thus the continuous inflow from a pollution source of
1  ft3/s would equal the natural discharge.  Although this calculation seems
to indicate that very little dilution would take place, there is a large
volume of water in the aquifer to mix with possible pollutants.  The total
volume of water is given by:

                                  V = Amp,

where
    ' V = volume

     A = area

     m = saturated thickness

     p = porosity.

                                   189

-------
If Unit C covers about 5.5 square miles and the aquifer is 130 feet thick with
a porosity of 7 percent, then

                   V = 5.5 (5,280 ft)2 (130 ft) (0.07)

                     = 1.4 billion ft3 (39 million m3)

or about 32,000 acre-feet.- This is about 16,000 times the volume introduced
daily by an inflow of 1 ft /s.

     The "mixing" referred to in this discussion is due to hydrodynamic
dispersion of pollutants which occurs in groundwater.  This dispersion
results on a microscopic scale from nonuniform velocity distributions
resulting from tortuous water flow in the porous medium of the aquifer.  On
a macroscopic scale, dispersion results from heterogeneities in the spatial
distribution of aquifer permeability, causing flow lines to deviate, con-
verge, or diverge.  Molecular diffusion also contributes to the overall
dispersive action.  The result of these processes is longitudinal and lateral
spreading of a pollutant within the groundwater body.  Although these mechan-
ical and physiochemical processes are analogous to the commonly observed
atmospheric mixing of smoke from a smoke stack or turbulent mixing in surface
waters, the rates of these processes are much reduced in groundwater systems.

     Both flow rate and flow pattern profoundly affect possible dilution.
From the storage/discharge ratio, it is obvious that the flow rate is moderate.
Using the formula

                                v = Q/Lmp ,

where

     v = groundwater velocity

     Q = discharge

     L = length of area along which discharge is occurring

     m = thickness of aquifer

     p = porosity,

the groundwater velocity is

               v = (90,000 ft3/d)/(5,280 ft)(130 ft)(0.07)

                 = 1.9 ft/d = about 700 ft/y (213.5 m/y)

Increasing the recharge rate by pollution inflow would eventually increase
the outflow and thus the flow rate.  Faster  mixing could be expected at
higher flow rates.  The flow rates discussed refer to the northern boundary
of Unit C, and the average flow rate would be much slower, perhaps one-half
the calculated velocity.

                                    190

-------
     The flow pattern would not encourage dilution of pollutants in the
aquifer.  From the configuration of the flow lines in Figure 9-1, it may
be seen that even a wide, diffuse source of pollution in either Units C or D
could be expected to form a relatively long, narrow plume extending northwest.
Such a pattern would concentrate the pollutant, restricting the contact area
with aquifer water.  The increase in velocity accompanying the concentration
would enhance mixing within the restricted zone of contact.

SATURATED FLOW ALTERNATIVES

     An alternative to the penetration of pollutants into the Bird's Nest
Aquifer should be considered.  Due to the numerous claystone layers within
the Uinta Formation and the marlstone Green River Formation above the Bird's
Nest Aquifer, pollutants are likely to form perching saturated layers above
the Bird's Nest Zone.  The regional structure would cause the water to flow
down to the northwest.  If the clay beds along which the pollutants were flow-
ing were deep in the section, the pollutants would pass beneath the White
River and probably eventually be dissipated within the Uinta Formation.  If
the perching beds were higher, the pollutants would flow into the alluvium of
the White River valley and thus eventually into the river.  The presence of
evaporite deposits on sheltered outcrops of the claystone beds of the Uinta
Formation indicates that infiltration and movement of moisture along these
beds is occurring at the present time.

     Since no saturated zones within the Uinta Formation have been found or
investigated, little can be stated on the effects of existing water chemistry.
The major difference in the Uinta Formation relative to the Bird's Nest Aqui-
fer is that the water would be flowing through bedding planes and partings in
clay beds.  Intimate contact with a large surface area of clay would result.
The major effects on pollutant attenuation would be an increase in attenuation
of arsenic and zinc due to adsorption.

     Little hydrologic analysis of the White River alluvium has been performed.
From soil analyses it seems similar to the soil beneath the proposed spent
shale pile in clay content.  Thus the effects of movement through it probably
would be similar to those discussed in Section 8.  Strongly reducing condi-
tions are unlikely in the highly permeable portions of the shallow,  unconfined
aquifer.  However, alluvial clay deposits may become anaerobic and reduced.
Considerable dilution might occur.   The pollutants probably would move slowly
downstream through the alluvium, mixing with better quality water as they
moved.  They would eventually be removed from the aquifer by slow discharge
into the river during the low flow periods.  The mass of this loading and thus
the effects on water quality cannot be estimated with certainty.
                                    191

-------
                                SECTION 10

                  PRIORITY RANKING OF SOURCES AND CAUSES


PRIORITY RANKING SCHEME'

     In the preceding sections, proposed oil shale operations on Federal
Lease Tracts U-a and U-b have been described.   These descriptions have iden-
tified potential pollution sources, methods of waste disposal, and potential
pollutants associated with the various sources, and an evaluation of the
infiltration and subsequent mobility of these pollutants has been provided.
These descriptions and assessments allow the prioritization or ranking of
sources and pollutants presented in this section.

     Three basic criteria have been used to develop the source-pollutant
ranking.  The first criterion ranks these items relative to volume of waste,
persistence, toxicity, and concentration.   Certainly the source with the
largest waste volume with pollutants of longest persistence, highest toxicity,
and highest concentration will receive the highest priority for monitoring.

     The second ranking criterion is based on the mobility of pollutants.
Mobility is a function of method of disposal,  waste loading, and sorptive
and chemical interactions.  The most mobile pollutants will receive the high-
est priority or ranking.

     The third criterion in the ranking scheme addresses the known or antic-
ipated harm to water use.  This is a function of the existing or potential
magnitude of various water uses and the concentration changes which may
result from contamination.

FIRST-CRITERION RANKING

     Basic data on potential  pollutant sources and causes and potential pollu-
tants are provided in Table 10-1.   The data on waste loads address Phase  IV
or full commercial operation.  More detailed information is presented in
Sections 2 and 3.  Information in Table 10-1 indicates the following partial
ranking with regard to size (i.e,  volume of waste) of the potential sources
and causes.
                                    192

-------
                          TABLE 10-1.   SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL  POLLUTANT SOURCES AND CAUSES
Pollution source
or cause
Solid wastes
Surface disturbance
Construction debris


Raw oil shale
Spent oil shale

























Disposal methods

Some stockpiles, revegetation use
Landfill


Stockpiled or placed on spent
shale pile
Pile in Southern Canyon

























Potential pollutants

Salts-CaS04
Nitrates
Sul fides
Trace metals
Possible concentration

Uncertain
Uncertain


-See discussion of spent shale -
Major inorganics0:
TOS
Sodium
Calcium
Magnesium
Potassium
Sul fates
Chlorides
Fluoride
Trace elements:
Mercury
Lead
Cadmium
Arsenic
Copper
Zinc
Selenium
Iron
Boron
Organ ics:
Oil and grease
Phenols
TOC

Benzene extracts
(POM. PAH)
Carcinogens
(mg/D
140,000
35,000
3,000
4,700
600
90.000
3,000
17
(mg/1)
0.005
0.004
0.006
0.2
0.2
3
2
2
10

Unknown
Unknown
3 to 5 percent
by weight
2,500 ppm
possibly
Unknown
Volume of wastea

400 acres total disturbed
17 t/d maximum


240t/d dust and 168, 000t/dd mined

100, 000 t/d spent shale produced;
6,000-20,000 ppm soluble; thus
600-2,000 t/d soluble material
produced















Unknown
Unknown H
1,000-5,000 t/da
J
200 t/da possibly
Unknown
vo
GO
                                                                                                        (continued)

-------
                                                 TABLE  10-1 (continued)
Pollution source
or cause
Sulfur byproducts
Oil upgrading
catalysts:
HDN (naphtha,
hydrotreater)
Miscellaneous
catalysts


Spent filters
(carbon and
diatomaceous
earth)
Miscellaneous Land-
fill (garbage, etc.)

Sewage sludge
Water treatment
plant sludges
Liquid wastes
\^ ^~
Retort water













Disposal methods
Sale or disposal in spent
shale pile
Spent shale pile (landfill)
or recycle





Landfilled or put in spent
shale pile

Soil amendment for revege-
tation
Spent shale disposal pile


Moisten spent shale; some
recycled via sour water
stripper












Potential pollutants
Sulfur compounds

Nickel, arsenic
Iron, copper, nickel,
zinc oxides and
sulfides, cobalt
molybdate
Adsorbed hydrocarbons
Nutrients
Sulfides
Organics
Organics
Nutrients
IDS


Bicarbonate
Carbonate
Chloride
Arsenic
Nitrate
Ammonia
Phenols
TOC
Carboxylic acids
Amines
BODt.
POM'-s, etc.
Phosphates
Sulfides
TDS
Possible concentration
50 percent
elemental S
Unknown: solubility
characteristics
of spent catalysts
unknown



Unknown; nature and
solubility of
these organics
uncertain
Uncertain

Uncertain
Uncertain
/ i * \
(mg/l)
500-31 ,000
500-30,000
0-1,300
0-1
<1-330
10-13,000
42-390
15,000-20,000
Up to 6.000
Up to 1,600
Up to 27,100
Unknown
15
1,200
>1 5,000
Volume of waste4
85 t/dd (dry)

1,300 t/y
325 t/y


136 t/y
3 t/dd(dry); 300 t/d^et)

2.5 t/rf^wet); 0.5t/dd(dry)
3t/dd(dry); 300 t/dd (wet)


80 gpm production rate













10
                                                                                                              (continued)

-------
                                               TABLE 10-1  (continued)
Pollution source
or cause
Sour water stripper
High IDS waste
water
01 ly waste water
stream
Sanitary waste
water
Storm water runoff
Mine water
Explosive residues
Catastrophic fail-
ures (tankage
failure)
Disposal methods
-2/3 reused In hyd retreating;
1/3 to plant sewers and use
in dust control, spent
shale moisturizing
Tank storage, use in dust
control and spent shale
moisturizing
011s reclaimed
Moisten spent shale pile;
dust control (after treat-
ment)
Holding pond; moisten spent
shale
Dust control in mine;
moisturize spent shale
Potential pollutants
Armenia
Phenols
COD
Oil and grease
IDS
Oil and grease
Nitrates
Ammonia
Phosphates
TDS
Organic*
Miscellaneous
inorganics (Ca,
Na, HC03, S04)
Oils and grease
Nitrates (explosives)
Soluble materials
(Bird's Nest or
Douglas Creek aqui-
fers)
-See mine water discussion-
Materials held by dikes
around tanks; cleanup
plan not defined
Naphtha
High TDS wastes
Fuel oil
Ammonia
Diesel fuel
Pour-point depressers
Possible concentration
(mg/i)
25-50
80-150
500-1,500
50-100
5,000-10,000 mg/1
Unknown
(mg/l)
10-20
15-20
5-10
800-1 ,000
Highly variable
Explosive residues-
unknown
See Existing Water
Quality for aqui-
fers (Section VI)
Unknown
Uncertain
Volume of waste9
1,250 gpm
775 gpm
30 t/dd (wet)
45 gpm
Variable with time: maximum
design 45 acre- feet (100 y
storm)
Unknown
Unknown
350,000 bbl
220,000 bbl
70,000 bbl
50,000 bbl
35,000 bbl
" Phase IV unless otherwise stated c High levels for spent shale leachate
Levels for raw shale probably lower than those listed for spent shale d tons/day
(£>
cn

-------
     •  Solid waste sources
        1.  Spent shale
        2.  Sulfur byproducts
        3.  Spent catalysts
        4.  Miscellaneous landfill trash, etc.
        5.  Water treatment plant sludges
        6.  Sewage sludge
        7.  Spent filters
        8.  Surface disturbance.
     •  Liquid waste sources
        1.  High IDS waste water
        2.  Sour water stripper wastes
        3.  Retort water
        4.  Storm water runoff
        5.  Oily waste water
        6.  Mine water
        7.  Sanitary waste water.
     This listing provides a general ordering with regard to waste volume
rather than a strict ranking.  For example, over a short period, storm water
runoff can be the largest liquid waste stream but, in general,  will  be small.
Mine water discharges are assumed to be small at this time but  are,  to some
extent, an unknown.
     A second general ranking under the first criterion can be  developed
based on the concentration of potential releases and on their possible
toxicity.  This partial ranking is as follows:
     •  Solid waste sources
        1.  Spent shale (TDS, Na, SO., trace metals, organics)
        2.  Spent catalysts (Ni, As, Cu, Zn, Co, Mo, etc.)
        3.  Spent filters (organics, As)
        4.  Water treatment plant sludges (TDS)
        5.  Miscellaneous landfill (organics, sulfldes)
        6.  Sewage sludge (nutrients, organics)
        7.  Sulfur byproducts (sulfur compounds)
        8.  Surface disturbance (Ca salts).

                                    196  .

-------
     •  Liquid waste sources

        1.  Retort water (IDS, trace metals, organics)

        2.  Sour water (phenols, ammonia, organics)

        3.  High IDS waste water (IDS)

        4.  Storm water runoff (salts, organics)

        5.  Oily waste water (organics)

        6.  Mine water (salts, oil  and grease)
        7.  Sanitary waste water (nutrients, organics).

     Combining the results of these two partial rankings provides a. prelimi-
nary first-criterion ranking.  Solid waste sources may be grouped into three
categories:

     •  Solid waste sources

        - Highest priority:  spent shale, spent catalysts

        - Intermediate priority:  water treatment plant sludges,
           miscellaneous landfill materials, sulfur byproducts, and
           spent filters
        - Lowest priority:  sewage sludges, surface disturbance.

Similarly, liquid waste sources may be grouped as follows:

     •  Liquid waste sources

        - Highest priority:  high  IDS waste water, sour water,
           retort water

        - Intermediate priority:  storm water runoff, oily waste water
        - Lowest priority:  mine water, sanitary waste water.

SECOND-CRITERION RANKING

     The second-criterion ranking calls for setting priorities  based on the
mobility of the potential pollutants which have been identified.   Table 10-2
presents a brief summarization of the pollutant mobility information provided
in Sections 7 through 9.   Because of the nature of the waste disposal  plans
for Tracts U-a and U-b (Table 10-1; see Section 2) for the mobility evalua-
tions, the sources have been lumped into source areas.  Thus, for example,  the
discussion of the spent shale disposal  area takes into account  the mobility of
pollutants from a variety of solid  sources to be deposited in the spent shale
pile and on a variety of liquid wastes to be used to moisturize the spent
shale (Table 10-2).
                                    197

-------
        TABLE 10-2.  SUMMARY OF  INFILTRATION AND MOBILITY EVALUATIONS  PRESENTED IN SECTIONS 7 THROUGH  9
Source area
Spent shale disposal and
landfill:
spent shale leaehate
construction material
trash and garbage
spent catalysts
spent filters
elemental sulfur
spent shale
raw shale dust
water treatment sludge
miscellaneous effluent
and storm water dis-
charges
Infiltration potential
Infiltration potential low
during construction
Probably increased during
leaching and water
harvesting phases, but
chance of deep percola-
tion is limited
Potential
pollutants
Major macro-
inorganics:
IDS
Ca
Kg
Na
S04
F
Trace metals:
As
Sr
Se
Zn
Cu
Hi
Co
Ho
Pb
B
Organics
Micro-
organisms
Mobility in vadose zone
Little attenuation
Some CaCO-j and CaS04
precipitation
Some MgCCh precipitation
Little attenuation
Some CaS04 precipitation
Little attenuation
Precipitated as Cap2
High mobility
Probably limited mobility
High mobility
Moderate mobility
Low mobility
Moderate mobiltiy
Probably precipitated
H i gh mob i 1 i ty
Low mobility
Possibly moderate mobility
Some adsorbed
Some mobile at high IDS
Removed by adsorption
and filtration
Mobility in saturated zone
Bird's Nest Aquifer:
Attention low for macro-
organics; possibly some
precipitation
Trace metal precipitation as
sulfides and bi carbonates
expected
Some adsorption; little pre-
cipitation expected
Little effect expected
Perched aquifers in Uinta:
Attenuation low for
niacroinorganics;
possibly some
precipitation
Some trace metal
precipitation,
adsorption on
clays of bedding
planes
Some adsorption on
clays
Adsorption expected
03
                                                                                                        (continued)

-------
                                               TABLE 10-2 (continued)
Source area
Process area:
stockpiled soils
treated effluent hold-
ing pond
tankage area
raw shale
storm water runoff
miscellaneous process
wastes
Retention dams
General features
of source areas
Infiltration potential
Infiltration restricted
due to shallow soils,
steep slopes, exposed
rock
Infiltration greater in
alluvial channels
Infiltration through
holding pond and
water reservoir possi-
ble depending on seal
Low in infiltration
potential; soils
with small storage
capacity
Some seepage into dams
may occur, possibly
into downstream
alluvium (with
moderately high
infiltration poten-
tial
Movement in cracks in
Uinta if seal fails

Potential
pollutants
.Major macro-
inorganics:
IDS
Ca
Hi
NCfh
S04 .
Ammonia
Trace metals
Organics:
Phenols
Naphtha
Miscellaneous
fuels
Oil additives
Oil and
grease
Miscellaneous
orqanics
Micro-
organisms
Similar to
those list-
ed for
spent shale
disposal
area; leach-
ate and run-
off water to
be collected

Mobility in vadose zone
Little attenuation in
soils (e.g., low CEC)
Some precipitation
Some perching layers
may develop in soils
and in Uinta Forma-
tion
Some precipitation
expected
Same as for spent shale
disposal in general
Mobility of fuels,
naphtha, phenols
largely unknown
Mobility limited
Same as for spent
Soils largely shallow
and on steep slopes.
Thus interaction low.
Movement in Uinta For-
mation is in cracks,
fissures, etc.
Mobility in saturated zone
Bird's Nest Aquifer:
Attenuation low for
inorganics probably
Some precipitation
expected
Mobility and chemical
reactions for N species
uncertain
Some precipitation and
adsorption expected
Some adsorption will occur
Interaction with micro-
organisms uncertain
Mobility in cracks and
fissures but adsorption,
filtration continue
Bird's Nest Aquifer:
shale disposal area
Dilution in Bird's Nest
Aquifer not encouraged
Mobility affected by com-
pression strain related
to subsidence
Perched aquifers in Uinta:
Attenuation low
Precipitation of
carbonates and
sul fates probable
Some precipitation
and adsorption
Adsorption possible
Biological inter-
actions unclear
Attenuated by adsorp-
tion and filtration
Perched aquifers in Uinta:
Movement enhanced by
White River Dam
and subsidence (if
occurs)
Movement may be into
White River allu-
vium or beneath
river into Uinta
Formation
vo
vo

-------
     Three source areas are evaluated in Sections 7 through 9.  These are:
the spent shale disposal area, the process area, and the Southern Canyon
retention dams.  Most of the highest priority pollutants (based on the first-
criterion ranking) are associated with the spent shale pile and the retention
dams associated with this disposal area.  Based on Table 10-2, the following
categorization was developed:

     •  Spent shale disposal area

        -  High mobility:  TDS, sodium, sulfate, chloride,  trace
           metals (arsenic, selenium, molybdenum), organics (PAH)
        -  Moderate mobility:  calcium, magnesium, fluoride, trace
           metals (zinc, nickel, mercury, cadmium, and possibly
           boron), some organics (phenols, organic acids, organic
           nitrogen compounds)
        -  Low mobility:  strontium, copper, cobalt, lead,  some
           organics, microorganisms.

These data provide second-criterion ranking of potential  pollutants.   Mobili-
ties may also be enhanced by the proposed reservoir behind  the White River
dam and by formation of fissures associated with subsidence stress.  Because
of their influence on the mobility of many constituents,  water quality
measures such as pH and Eh may be important measures for monitoring purposes.

THIRD-CRITERION RANKING

     The third-criterion ranking addresses potential harm to existing or poten-
tial water users.   As outlined in Section 4, use of groundwater which flows
under Tracts U-a and U-b is largely limited to stock watering and possibly agri-
culture.  Limitations on present use of water in the Bird's Nest Aquifer and
the Douglas Creek Aquifer result largely from water quality (see Section 6)
and depth (see Section 5) considerations and availability of surface water
sources in the region.  Potential future changes in availability and alloca-
tion of surface waters could appreciably alter the present  perspective on
depth-quality restriction.

     In addition,  some potential exists for mobility within the Uinta For-
mation and associated alluvial materials.  By these routes, pollutants may
enter the White River alluvium and eventually be discharged into the White
River.  The consequences of these releases (e.g., of high TDS wastes,
organics, etc.) on downstream agricultural and municipal  users are difficult
to describe because of the uncertainties associated with  estimating release
rates.  For this preliminary assessment, the concentration-toxicity ranking
developed for the first criterion expresses the possible  hazards to potential
water users.

SUMMARY-PRELIMINARY  PRIORITY  RANKING

     From the preceding discussion, a preliminary ranking of potential pollu-
tion sources and causes and potential  pollutants can be developed.   This
result of the first pass through the monitoring methodology is termed the
Level-One Ranking (see Section 1).

                                    200

-------
     A great deal of effort has been expended on the study of the hydro-
geology of the study area and a large amount of research has been conducted
on oil shale development and environmental effects.   However, significant
information voids exist with regard to potential pollutant characterization
and the mobility of these materials in the hydrosphere.   Hence,  professional
judgment plays a large role in proposing the preliminary source-pollutant
ranking shown in Table 10-3.

     This ranking will serve as the basis for the design of a monitoring plan
of the Tracts U-a and U-b oil shale development.  The next phase of the design
program includes evaluation of existing monitoring programs, identification of
alternative monitoring approaches to address the source-pollutant ranking,  and
selection of a monitoring program for field implementation.   This implemen-
tation will be used to verify (and quite probably revise) the preliminary rank-
ing provided here.
                                   201

-------
                          TABLE  10-3.
PRELIMINARY RANKING OF POLLUTANT SOURCES AND

POLLUTANTS FOR OIL SHALE TRACTS U-a AND U-b
Source Area
Spent shale disposal area

















Process area







Retention dams


Source
priority
ranking
Highest





Intermediate







Lowest



Highest



Intermediate


Lowest
Potential
pollution
source
Spent shale
High 70S waste water
Sour water
Retort water

Spent catalysts
Stormwater runoff
Water treatment plant
s 1 udges
Miscellaneous landfill
materials
Sulfur byproducts
Oily waste waters
Spent filters
Sewage Sludge
Mine water
Sanitary waste water
Surface disturbance
Effluent holding pond
Raw shale
Tankage area

Storm water runoff
Miscellaneous process
waste streams
Surface disturbance
(Sources same as spent shale disposal
area.)



Potential pollutant ranking
Highest
TDS, Na, S04, As, Se, F,
organics (PAH, carcinogens)
TDS
Ammonia, phenols
As, Cl, S, organics (POM,
carboxylic acids, phenols)
As, Mo
TDS, organics. As, Se
TDS

Sul fides, organics

Sul fides, sul fates
Organics
Organics, As
Organics
TDS, oil and grease
Organics
Calcium salts. TDS
TDS, organics
TDS, As, Se, organics
Miscellaneous fuels, oil
additives, ammonia, TDS
TDS, organics
TDS, organics, ammonia

Calcium salts, TDS
TDS, organics (PAH, carcino-
gens, phenols, etc., As,
Se, Mo, ammonia, Na, SO.
Intermediate
Ca, «g. Zn, Cd, Hg, B,
organics (phenols, etc.)
—
Organics
TDS, organics (amines, etc.)

Zn, Ni
Na, Ca, 50^, ,HC03, organics
Major macroinorganics

Sul fides

—
Trace metals
Trace metals
Nutrients
Trace metals, organics
Nutrients
Macroinorganics
Trace metals, nutrients
Macroinorganics
—

Macroinorganics
Macroinorganics, trace
metals
Macroinorganics
Ca, Hg, Zn, Ni, Cd, Hg.
other organics

Lowest
Pb, Cu, Fe
...
-—
Carbonates, PO., NO,
* J
Fe. Cu, Co
Zn, Cd, Hg
Trace metals

__.

—
—
—
—
Macroinorganics
Macroinorganics
—
...
Trace metals
—

—
Nutrients

—
Pb, Cu, Fe, nutrients


o
ro

-------
                                  REFERENCES


Back, W., and B.B. Hanshaw, "Chemical Geohydrology," Advances in Hydrosclence
     (V.T. Chow, ed), Academic Press, Vol 2, 1965.

Bower, C.A., L.V. Wilcox, C.W. Akin, and M.G. Keyes, "An Index of the Tendency
     of CaCOa to Precipitate from Irrigation Waters," Soil  Science, Vol 29,
     pp 91-92, 1965.

Bradley, W.H., Origin and Microfossils of the.Oil Shale of the Green River
     Formation of Colorado and Utah, USGS Professional  Paper 168, 1931.

Bradley, W.H., "Green River Oil Shale:  Concept of Origin Extended," Geological
     Society of America Bulletin, Vol 81, pp 985-1000,  1970.

Brown, J., "An Evaluation of Freon Compounds as Ground-Water Tracers; Soil
     Column Studies," M.S. thesis, The University of Arizona, Tucson, (in
     preparation), 1977.

Buckman, H.O., and N.C. Brady, The Nature and Properties of Soils, The MacMillan
     Co., 1969.

Cashion, W.B., Geology and Fuel Resources of the Green River Formation. South-
     western Uinta Basin, Utah and Colorado. USGS Professional Paper 548, 1967.

Cashion, W.B., and J.R. Donnel, Revision of the Nomenclature of the 'Jpper Part
     of the Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Colorado and Eastern
     Uinta Basin. Utah, USGS Bulletin 1394-G, 1974.

Conkle, Nick et al., Environmental Considerations for Oil Shale Development.
     National Environmental Research Center, EPA-650/2-74-099 (NTIS PB-241 942),
     1974.

Cook, C.W., Executive Summary-Surface Rehabilitation of Land Disturbances
     Resulting from Oil Shale Development, Environmental Resources Center,
     Colorado State University, Ft.  Collins, Colorado,  Information Series
     No. 11, 1974.

Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Application of Sewage Sludge
     to Cropland;  Appraisal of Potential Hazards of the Heavy Metals to Plants
     and Animals, Denver, Colorado,  U.S. Government  Printing Office, 1976.

Dane, C.H., "Stratigraphic and Facies Relationships  of Upper Part of Green
     River Formation and Lower Part of Uinta Formation  in Duchesne, Uintah,
     and Wasatch Counties, Utah," Bulletin American  Association of Petroleum
     Geologists, Vol 38, No. 3, pp 405-425, 1954.

                                     203

-------
Davis, J.B., "Microbial Decomposition of Hydrocarbons," Industrial and Engineer-
     ing Chemistry, Vol 48, No. 9, pp 1444-1448, 1956.

Davis, S.N., and R.J.M. DeWiest, Hydrogeology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966.

Desborough, G.A., J.K. Pitman, and G. Huffman, Jr., Concentration and Mineral-
     ological Residence of Elements in Rich Oil Shales of the Green River
     Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Colorado, and the Uinta Basin, Utah-A
     Preliminary Report, USGS Open File Report 74-77. 1974.

Donaldson, W.T., "Trace Organics in Water," Environmental  Science and Tech-
     nology, Vol 11, No. 4, pp 348-351, 1977.

Dutt, G.R., M.J. Shatter, and W.J. Moore,  "Computer Simulation Model of Dynamic
     Bio-Physiochemical Processes in Soils," Department of Soils, Water, and
     Engineering, University of Arizona, Technical  Bulletin 196, 1972.

Farquhar, G.J., and F.A. Rovers, "Leachate Attenuation in  Undisturbed and
     Remoulded Soils," Gas and Leachate from Landfills:  Formation, Collection,
     and Treatment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  pp 54-70, 1976.

Fenn, D.G., K.J. Hanley, and T.V. DeGeare, Use of the Water Balance Method for
     Predicting Leachate Generation from Solid Waste Disposal  Sites, U.S.
     Environmental  Protection Agency, EPA/530/SW-168, 1975.

Fletcher, K., and M. Baldwin (ed),  A Scientific Policy Review of the Proto-
     type Oil Shale Leasing Program, Institute of Ecology, 1973.

Fuller, W.H., "Liners for Disposal Sites to Retard Migration of Pollutants,"
      Residual Management by Land Disposal:  Proceedings of the Hazardous
      Waste Research Symposium,  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
      Cincinnati, Ohio, pp 112-126, 1976.

Fuller, W.H., Movement of Selected Metals, Asbestos, and Cyanide in Soil:
     Applications to Waste Disposal Problems, EPA-60012-77-020, U.S. Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, 1977.

Fuller, W.H., and Nic Korte, "Attenuation Mechanisms of Pollutants through
     Soils," Gas and Leachate from Landfills:  Formation,  Collection, and
     Treatment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, pp 111-122, 1976.

Gilbert, R.G., C.P. Gerba, R.C. Rice, H. Bouwer, C. Wall is, a,nd J.L. Melnick,
     "Virus and Bacteria Removal from Wastewater by Land Treatment," Applied
     and Environmental Microbiology, Vol 32, No. 3, pp 333-338, 1976.

Goode, H.D., and R.D. Feltis, "Water Production from Oil Wells of the Uinta
     Basin, Uintah and Duchesne Counties,  Utah," Utah Geological Mining
     Survey, Water Resources Bulletin No.  1. 1962.

Griffin, R.A., and N.F. Shimp, "Leachate Migration through Selected Clays,"
     Gas and Leachate from Landfills;  Formation, Collection, and Treatment,
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, pp 92-95, 1976.

                                     204

-------
Griffin, R.A., "Effect of pH Removal of Heavy Metals from Leachates by Clay
     Minerals," Residual Management by Land Disposal; Proceedings of the
     Hazardous Waste Research Symposium, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Cincinnati, Ohio, 1976.

Hem, J.D., Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural
     Water, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Supply Paper 1473. 1970.

Hendricks, D.W., and J.C, Ward, "Environmental Analysis of an Oil-Shale
     Industry in the Upper Colorado Region," Oil Shale (T.F. Yen and G.V.
     Chilingarian, eds), 1976.

Hendrickson, T.A.  (ed), Synthetic Fuels Data Handbook. Cameron Engineers, Inc.,
     Denver, Colorado, 1975.

Hunt, J.M., F. Stewart, and P. Dickey, "Origin of Hydrocarbons of the Uinta
     Basin, Utah," Bulletin American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
     Vol 38, No. 8, pp 1671-1698, 1954.~

Intermountain Association of Petroleum Geologists, Guidebook to the Geology of
     the Uinta Basin, Eighth Annual Field Conference, 1957.

lorns,  W.V., C.W.  Hembrice, and G.L. Oakland, Water Resources of the Upper
     Colorado River Basin-Technical Report. U.S. Geological Survey Professional
     Paper 441, 1965.

Israelsen,  O.W.,  Irrigation Principles and Practices, third ed, John Wiley and
     Sons,  Inc.,  New York,  1962.

Jensen, H.B., W.I.  Barnet,  and W.I.R.  Murphy, Thermal Solution and Hydro-
     generation of Green River Oil  Shale.  U.S. Bureau of Mines, Bulletin 533,
     1953.

Korte,  N.E., J.  Skopp,  W.H.  Fuller, E.E.  Niebla, and B.A.  Alesii,  "Trace
     Element Movement in Soils:   Influence of Soil  Physical  and Chemical
     Properties,"  Soil  Science.  Vol 122,  No.  6,  pp 350-359, 1976.

Korte,  Nic, "Trace Element  Migration in Soils:  Desorption of Attenuated
     Ions and Effects of Solution Flux,"  Residual  Management by Land Disposal;
     Proceedings  of the Hazardous Waste Research Symposium. U.S.  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency,  Cincinnati,  Ohio, pp 243-258, 1976.

Kouda, U.A., Origin of Saline Soils and Their Regime. Keter Press, Jerusalem,
     1946.

Lance, J.C., C.P.  Gerba, and J.L. Melm'ck, "Virus Movement in Soil Columns
     Flooded with Secondary Sewage Effluent," Applied and Environmental Micro-
     biology. Vol  32, No. 4, pp 520-526, 1976.

Leenheer, J.A., and E.W.D.  Huffman, Jr., "Classification of Organic Solutes in
     Water by Using Macroreticular Resins," Journal Research. U.S. Geological
     Survey, Vol  4, No. 6,  pp 737-751, 1976.

                                   205

-------
McKell, C.M., Achieving Effective Revegetation of Disposed Processed Oil
     Shale, Agricultural Experiment Station, Land Rehabilitation Series No.
     1, Utah State University, 1976.

McNeal, B.L., "Soil Salts and Their Effects on Water Movement in Drainage
     for Agriculture," Agronomy, No. 17 (J. Van Schilfgaarde, ed), American
     Society of Agronomy, 1974.

Metcalf and Eddy Engineering, Inc., Water Pollution Potential from Surface
     Disposal of Processed Oil Shale from the TOSCO II Process, Palo Alto,
     California, Vol 1, 1975.

Milton, Charles, "Authigenic Minerals of the Green River Formation," Contri-
     butions to Geology, Vbl 10, No. 1, pp 57-63, 1971.

Mohr, G.W., "Hydrogeologic Effects of Oil Shale Operations with Specific
     Reference to the Colorado Prototype Development," Senior Thesis,
     Department of Environmental Studies, University of California at Santa
     Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, 1976.

Philip, J.R., "Theory of Infiltration," Advanced Hydroscience, Vol 5, pp 216-
     296, 1969.

Price, D., and T. Arrow, Summary Appraisals of the Nation's Ground Water
     Resources-Upper Colorado Region, U.S. Geological  Survey Professional
     Paper 813-C, 1974.

"Proceedings of the Environmental Oil Shale Symposium," Quarterly of the
     Colorado School of Mines. Vol  70, No. 4, October 1970.

Quirk, J.P., and R.K.  Schofield, "The Effect of Electrolyte Concentration  on
     Soil Permeability," Journal of Soil Science, Vol  6, pp 163-178, 1955.

Richards, L.A.  (ed), "Diagnosis and Improvement of Saline and Alkali Soils,"
     Agricultural Handbook No. 60,  U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1954.

Robertson, J.C., C.R.  Toussaint, and M.A.  Jorque, Organic Compounds Entering
     Ground-Water from a Landfill,  U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,
     EPA-660/2-74-077, 1974.

Runnells, D.D.,  "Wastewaters in the Vadose Zone of Arid Regions:  Geochemical
     Interactions." Ground Water, Vol 14, No.  6, pp 374-385, 1976.

Schmidt-Collerus, J.J., The Disposal and Environmental  Effects of Carbonaceous
     Solid Wastes from Commercial Oil Shale Operations, Denver Research
     Institute,  National Science Foundation Report 34282X1, 1974.

Schmidt-Collerus, J.J., F.  Bonomo,  K. Gala, and L.  Leffler, "Polycondensed
     Aromatic Compounds (PCA) and Carcinogens in the Shale Ash of Carbonaceous
     Spent Shale from  Retorting of Oil  Shale," Science and Technology of Oil
     Shale (T.F. Yen,  ed),  1976.


                                    206

-------
 Schultz,  E.F.,  Problems  In Applied Hydrology, Water  Resources Publications,
      Ft.  Collins,  Colorado,  1973.

 Smith,  John  W.,  and  Mark T.  Atwood  (eds),   Oil  Shale and Tar Sands. American
      Institute  of  Chemical Engineers Symposium  Series, Vol  72, No. 155, 1976.

 Soil  Science Society of  America, American Society of Agronomists and Crop
      Science Society of  America, "Soils  for the Management  of Wastes and
      Waste Waters,"  Symposiurn  Proceedinqs,  Madison,  Wisconsin, 1977.

 Thomas, H.E., Hydro!ogic Reconnaissance  of  the  Green River  in Utah and
      Colorado,  U.S.  Geological Survey Circular  129,  1952.

 Thornthwaite, C.W.,  and  J.R. Mather, "Instructions and Tables for Computing
      Potential  Evapotranspiration and Water Balance," Publications in
      Climatology,  Drexel Institute of Technology, Laboratory in Climatology,
      Centerton,  New  Jersey,  Vol X, No. 3, 1957.

 Tiratsou, E.N.,  Oilfields of the World,  second  ed, Scientific Press, Ltd.,
      Beaconsfield, England,  1976.

 Todd, O.K.,  Ground Water Hydrology. John Wiley  and Sons, Inc., New York, 1959.

 Todd, O.K.,  R.M. Tinlin, K.D.  Schmidt, and  L.6. Everett, Monitoring Groundwater
      Quality;  Monitoring Methodology, EPA-600/4-76-076, U.S. Environmental
      Protection  Agency,  1976.

 TRW Environmental Engineering  Division, A Preliminary Assessment of the
      Environmental Impacts from Oil Shale Development, Denver Research
      Institute,  1976.

 TRW Environmental Engineering, Sampling and Analysis Research Program at the
      Paraho Oil  Shale Demonstration Plant,  1977.

 U.S.  Department of Agriculture, Hydrology, Soil  Conservation Service National
      Engineering Handbook, Section 4, 1972.

 U.S.  Department of Interior.  The Proposed Prototype Oil  Shale Leasing Program.
      EIS-AA-5242-D, Vols 1,  2, and 3, September 1972.

Ward, J.C., G.A. Margheim,  and G.O.G. Lof, Water Pollution Potential  of Spent
     Oil Shale Residues, Colorado State University,  EPA Water Pollution
     Control  Research Series  14030 EDB 12/71, 1971.

Ward, J.C., G.A. Margheim,  and G.O.G. Lof, Water Pollution Potential  of Snow-
     fall  on Spent Oil  Shale  Residues,  Colorado State University,  Ft.  Collins,
     Colorado, Bureau of Mines Open File Report No.  20-72 (NTIS  PB-210 930),
     1972.

White River Shale Project,  Detailed Development  Plan  for Federal Oil  Shale
     Leases U-a and U-b,  1976a.


                                   207

-------
White River Shale Project, First Year Environmental  Baseline Report,  Vols 1
     and 2, 1976b.

Yen, T.F., and 6.V.  Chilingarian (eds), Oil  Shale, Developments in Petroleum
     Science, Vol 5, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co.,  New York, 1976.

Yen, T.F. (ed), Science and Technology of Oil  Shale, Ann  Arbor Science
     Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan,  1976.
                                    208

-------
       APPENDIX A
THE WATER BALANCE METHOD
         209

-------
as
For the purposes of this report, the water balance equation is written

                   S = (P - PET) - R/o - AST  ,
where
     S   = moisture surplus
     P   = precipitation
     PET = potential evapotranspiration
     R/o = runoff
     AST = change in storage (see Figure A-l)
            POTENTIAL
        EVAPOTRANSPIRATION
              (PET)


        ,VV*_x*^i  .?•
                       \\ \ \ \
                                         PRECIPITATION  (P)
                                            SURFACE RUNOFF
                                         \\\\\ \\

               :::x::::::xx:>:x:x8lL MOISTURE•
                                                               VEGETATIVE
                                                                 COVER
                                                                     \l
               NT SHALE
               PILE
                           SOLID WASTE MOISTURE STORAGE
Figure A-l.  Schematic drawing showing components of water balance evaluation.
                                     210

-------
 Assuming R/o is  essentially zero  throughout  the year on  the oil  shale  tract,
 the equation reduces  to

                            S =  (P -  PET)  - AST   .

      Fenn,  Hanley,  and DeGeare  (1975)  write  the equation slightly  differently:

                         S  = (P  -  AET)  -  R/o  -  AST   ,

 where

      AET =  actual evapotranspiration

 The differences  will  be  explained later.

      As  pointed  out in Section  7, the  water  balance  method developed by
 Thornthwaite and Mather  (1957)  is simply  a bookkeeping procedure to account
 for soil-water surplus or  deficiencies.   The first line  in the water balance
 table (see  Table 7-2) lists the monthly  temperatures in  degrees  Fahrenheit.
 The temperatures for  the oil  shale tract  were  adjusted from data at the  Vernal
 Airport.

      The second  line  in  the table represents potential evapotranspiration,
 PET,  which  was calculated  for each month  by  the Blaney-Criddle equation
 (Schultz, 1973):                                                	

                                PET  =  KF   ,

 where

      K = crop-use coefficient

      F = consumptive-use factor

       = sum of  monthly  consumptive-use factors for  each month during
         the  growing season = Ztd
                              100

      t = mean monthly temperature  (degrees Fahrenheit)

     d = percentage of annual daytime hours during each month

 For the oil   shale tract,  the crop-use factor was assumed to be 0.70 for
 sparse, native vegetation receiving only precipitation (Schultz,  1973).  For
 months with mean temperatures below 32° F, it is assumed that precipitation
 falls as snow.  Thornthwaite and Mather (1957)  indicated a procedure for
 accommodating snow melt  runoff during the months following those with
 temperatures below freezing.  This procedure is discussed below.

     The fourth line in the water budgets used  in  this report represents the
monthly differences  between precipitation and potential  evapotranspiration
 (P - PET).  For those months with  negative values, soil  water must  be  extract-
ed from storage to  accommodate evapotranspiration.  Months with positive
 values represent periods  when excess  water, above  storage requirements, is
available for making up soil water deficits or  for runoff and  deep  percolation.

                                    211

-------
     The fifth line lists the monthly accumulated potential water losses,

                              ZNEG (P - PET).

If the sum of the positive (P - PET) values exceeds the sum of the negative
(P - PET) values, accumulated losses are initiated by placing a value of zero
in the last column with a positive P - PET value (see Table 7-4).  However,
for dry conditions with storage less than the maximum or potential value, it
is necessary to determine a value of potential water deficiency with which to
start accumulating the negative values of (P - PET).  The technique to deter-
mine the value is called the method of successive approximation.  This method
requires the use of a soil moisture retention table given by Thornthwaite and
Mather (1957).  For the oil shale tracts, it was determined that the "water-
holding capacity" of the sqils and spent shale is about 120 mm, reproduced
as Table A-l.  Note that this table shows the soil moisture retained for
different amounts of potential evapotranspiration (PET).

     The method of successive approximation involves the following algorithm:

     1.  Sum up the positive and negative values of (P - PET)

         a.   If the sum is positive, the value of accumulated potential
             water loss at which to start accumulating negative values = 0
         b.   If the sum is negative, use successive approximations.  Go to
             Step 2.
     2.  Use appropriate soil moisture retention (SMR) (Table A-l)

     3.  Select the value of SMR = ENEG(P - PET) = SMR(l)

     4.  SMR(l) + ZPOS(P - PET) = Sf1R(2)

     5.  Read PE on left-hand column corresponding to SMR(s) = PE(1)

     6.  PE(1) + ZNEG(P - PET) = SMR(3)
     7.  SMR(3) + ZPOS(P - PET) = SMR(4)

     8.  Repeat until no change occurs in the SMR estimate.

     The method of successive approximations was used to determine the value
-158 in Table 7-2.  Note that after the initial  value of ZNEG(P - PET),
subsequent values are obtained by adding (P - PET) values from the successive
months.

     The sixth row in the table, ST, is the amount of water in storage in the
selected soil depth (1  meter).  For months when ZNEG(P - PET) values are zero,
ST values may be (1) equal to maximum storage, or (2) some lesser value repre-
senting deficiencies for previous dry months.  For the latter case, successive
months with zero values of INEG(P - PETj will increase soil water to maximum
storage/  For months where ZNEG(P - PET) values are negative, storage values
are found from the related soil moisture retention Table A-l.

     During months with temperatures below freezing, the assumption is that
precipitation collects  on the ground as snow and does ;not contribute to
storage,  runoff, or percolation.  On successive months with temperatures above

                                     212

-------
TABLE A-l.  SOIL MOISTURE RETENTION TABLE - 125 mma
Water retained
PETb
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340

350
360
370
380
390
400
410
420
430
440
0
125
115
106
98
90
83
76
70
65
60
55
51
47
43
40
37
34
31
29
26
24
22
21
19
18
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
8
• o
7
- 7
6
6
5
5
4
4
4
3
1
124
114
105
97
89
82
76
70
64
59
55
51
47
43
40
37
34
31
29
26
24
22
21
19
18
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
8
5
7
6
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
aThornthwa1te and
bPotent1a!
2
123
113
104
96
88
82
75
69
64
59
54
50
46
42
39
36
33
31
29
26
24
22
21
19
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
8











Mather,
3
122
112
103
95
87
81
74
69
63
58
54
50
46
42
39
36
33
30
29
26
24
22
21
19
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
8

450
460
470
480
490
500
510
520
530
540
1957.
4
121
111
102
94
86
80
74
68
63
58
53
49
45
41
39
36
33
30
28
26
24
22
20
19
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
8
0
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

in soil
5
120
110
102
94
86
80
73
68
62
57
53
49
45
41
38
35
32
30
28
25
23
22
20
18
17
16
14
13
12
11
10
10
9
8
7
5
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1

6
119
109
101
93
85
79
73
67
62
57
53
49
45
41
38
35
32
30
28
25
23
22
20
18
17
16
14
13
12
11
10
10
9
8
7












7
118
108
100
92
84
79
72
67
61
56
52
48
44
41
38
35
32
30
27
25
23
21
20
18
17
16
14
13
12
11
10
10
9
8
7

550
560
570
580
590
600
610
620
630
640

8
117
107
99
91
84
78
72
66
61
56
52
48
44
40
38
35
32
30
27
25
23
21
20
18
17
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
9
8
7
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

9
116
106
99
90
83
77
71
65
60
55
51
47
43
40
37
34
31
29
27
25
23
21
20
18
17
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
9
8
7












evapotranspi ration.
                        213

-------
freezing, accumulated snow is added to the additional precipitation.   For the
cases examined in this report, accumulated snow generally was not sufficient
to bring soil water storage up to the maximum.

     The seventh line on the water balance table represents the change in
storage between successive months.

     The final row, S, represents surplus water available for either runoff or
deep percolation.  In this report we have assumed zero runoff, so surplus
water is assumed to drain into the vadose zone.  Note that surplus values are
obtained only during those months that storage equals maximum SMR.  Values in
this row are calculated from the water balance equation.  Fenn, Hanley, and
DeGeare (1975) recommend using actual evapotranspiration (AET) rather than PET
when soil water deficits reduce evapotranspiration rates, i.e., when AET is
less than PET.  In this report the method of Thornthwaite and Mather (1957),
which does not account for SMR-AET relationships, has been strictly applied.

REFERENCES

Fenn, D.C., K.J.  Hanley, and T.V. DeGeare, Use of the Water Balance Method for
     Predicting Leachate Generation from Solid Waste Disposal Sites, U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/530/SW-168, 1975.

Schultz, E.F., Problems in Applied Hydrology, Water Resources Publications,
     Fort Col 11ns, Colorado,1973.

Thornthwaite, C.W., and J.R. Mather, "Instructions and Tables for Computing
     Potential Evapotranspiration and Water Balance," Drexel Institute of
     Technology,  Laboratory of Climatology; Publications in Climatology,
     Vol X, No. 3, Centerton, New Jersey, 1957.
                                                               £ U.S. GPO.-I979-684-270-2111


                                      214

-------