&EPA
United States
'imenta
Age.
1820
Research and Development
Wastewater
Renovation and
Retrieval on
Cape Cod
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports oi the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5, Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-79-176
August 1979
WASTEWATER RENOVATION AND RETRIEVAL ON CAPE COD
by
R.F. Vaccaro, P.E. Kallio, B.H. Ketchum,
W.B. Kerfoot, A. Mann, P. L. Deese,
C. Palmer, M.R. Dennett, P.C. Bowker,
N. Corwin and S.J. Manganini
WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION
WOODS HOLE, MASSACHUSETTS 02543
Grant No. S-802037
Project Officer
William R. Duffer
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
This study was conducted
in cooperation with
Division of Water Pollution Control
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Westborough, Massachusetts 01581
ROBERT S. KERR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ADA, OKLAHOMA 74820
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and Development,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names
or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established to coordinate
administration of the major Federal programs designed to protect the quality
of our environment.
An important part of the agency's effort involves the search for infor-
mation about environmental problems, management techniques and new technolo-
gies through which optimum use of the nation's land and water resources can
be assured and the threat pollution poses to the welfare of the American
people can be minimized.
EPA's Office of Research and Development conducts this search through a
nationwide network of research facilities and by cooperative efforts with
state agencies and private institutions. In this case, we are pleased to
acknowledge the active participation of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts.
The Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory is responsible for
the management of programs to: (a) investigate the nature, transport, fate
and management of pollutants in groundwater; (b) develop and demonstrate
methods for treating wastewaters with soil and other natural systems; (c)
develop and demonstrate pollution control technologies for irrigation return
flows; (d) develop and demonstrate pollution control technologies for animal
production wastes; (e) develop and demonstrate technologies to prevent, con-
trol or abate pollution from the petroleum refining and petrochemical indus-
tries; and (f) develop and demonstrate technologies to manage pollution re-
sulting from combinations of industrial wastewaters or industrial/municipal
wastewaters .
This report contributes to the knowledge essential if the EPA is to meet
the requirements of environmental laws that it establish and enforce pollu-
tion control standards which are reasonable, cost effective and provide ade-
quate protection for the American public.
William C. Galegar
Director
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
111
-------
ABSTRACT
A rapidly increasing population on maritime Cape Cod has generated con-
siderable interest in alternative wastewater disposal techniques which pro-
mise to maintain high groundwater quality and promote its conservation.
Such deliberations, five years ago, led the authors to undertake an assess-
ment of agricultural spray-irrigation as a potential means of lessening
groundwater contamination and depletion. In the course of these studies
individual components of an entire wastewater-cropping facility have been
isolated and subjected to detailed examination. Experimental emphasis has
been placed on variations in the rates and methods of wastewater application
and in the types of rennovative agricultural crops placed under wastewater
irrigation.
Results from these studies have been highly promising and suggest that
under ideal circumstances, the coupling of secondary domestic effluent to
animal forage crops can bring about a degree of wastewater renovation which
exceeds direct disposal to sand filter beds and approaches the goals of ter-
tiary treatments. Moreover, three desirable consequences, i.e., water con-
servation, crop irrigation and nourishment and wastewater renovation are
simultaneously achievable. Further confirmation and extentions of these
results could mean an elevation of domestic wastewaters into the category of
a significant natural resource.
Geologically, Cape Cod is viewed as a glacial outwash plain connected to
a series of drown river valleys. The local geohydrology features several
hundred feet of glacial till overburdening deep basement rock, a condi-
tion ideally suited for wastewater irrigation. Also available is a consid-
erable amount of undeveloped acreage which could be committed to wastewater
recycling. The soil is generally sand and poor in an agricultural sense,
yet usage and conditioning has resulted in dry forage grass yields in excess
of 8.9 metric tons (four short tons) per hectare per year.
Relative to crop requirements, there is characteristically an excess of
phosphorus over nitrogen in most secondary effluents. However, excess phos-
phorus which the plants are unable to utilize is readily bound within the
uppermost foot of soil. A similar fate is accorded unassimilated heavy
metal ions which are also stabilized within the soil and denied access to
underlying groundwater. Distinct from the above behavior, other chemical
elements of secondary effluent such as chloride, sodium, potassium and boron
have been observed to penetrate the groundwater to a considerable extent.
The ultimate impact of such penetration has not been fully resolved.
IV
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword
Abstract iv
Figures vii
Tables ix
List of Abbreviations xiii
List of Symbols xiv
Acknowledgments xv
Section
1 INTRODUCTION 1
Background 1
Objectives 3
2 CONCLUSIONS 4
General 4
Hydrogeology 4
Physical Characteristics of the Soil 5
Recharge Time 5
Irrigation Water: Crop Relations 5
Chemical Soil Characteristics 6
Groundwater Quality Changes 6
Public Health Considerations 6
3 RECOMMENDATIONS 8
4 THE EXPERIMENTAL SITE 10
Otis Sewage Treatment Plant 10
System Design and Installation 14
5 CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL METHODS 16
6 SAND FILTER BED PERFORMANCE 21
Nitrate, Nitrite, Phosphate and Chloride Modification
by a Sand Filter Bed 21
Trace Metal Modifications by a Sand Filter Bed 24
7 CHANGES IN NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS DURING AGRICULTURAL
SPRAY-IRRIGATION 26
8 IRRIGATION-CROP RELATIONS 30
Crop Yields vs Irrigation Applied 30
Chemical Composition and Nutrient Characteristics of Crops 34
-------
CONTENTS (Concluded)
Nitrogen:Phosphorus Balance and Exchange 36
Additional Chemical Elements Measured in Otis Forage Crops 39
Wastewater Renovation by Crops 41
9 GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY AND THE IMPACT OF SPRAY-IRRIGATION 47
Hydrogeological Studies 47
Groundwater Quality Changes 53
10 CHLORINATION OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS IRRIGATED WITH
DOMESTIC WASTEWATER 61
References 70
Appendix 73
vi
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1. Plan of Otis Sewage Treatment Plant, sand filter beds,
lagoon and irrigated sites 13
2. Sand filter bed with location of wells and lysimeters 18
3. Location of monitoring wells adjacent to the sand
filter bed 19
4. Groundwater quality beneath sand filter bed 22
5. Winter and summer phosphate-phosphorus concentrations 27
6. Winter-spring ammonia, oxidized and total inorganic
nitrogen concentrations 28
7. Summer-fall ammonia, oxidized and total inorganic
nitrogen concentrations 29
8. Effluent applied vs crop yields 31
9. Total hydraulic load vs crop yields 32
10. Total effluent delivered to subplots and equivalent amounts
of nitrogen and phosphorus applied and retained 37
11. Long-term renovative efficiencies for nitrogen, phosphorus
and potassium 42
12. Long-term renovative efficiencies for copper, cadmium
and zinc 43
13. Geology of the Falmouth area of Cape Cod, Massachusetts 49
14. Water table map for Falmouth area, Cape Cod, Massachusetts 50
15. Saturation thickness, Falmouth area aquifer Cape Cod,
Massachusetts 51
16. Location of the observation wells and discharge point
with respect to the Retrieval Well, Otis AFB, Cape Cod,
Massachusetts 52
VI i
-------
FIGURES (Concluded)
Number Page
17. Time related chloride changes in groundwater beneath
Site A 55
18. Time related nitrate-nitrogen changes in groundwater
beneath Site A 56
19. Time related sodium changes in groundwater beneath
Site A 57
20. Time related potassium changes in groundwater beneath
Site A 58
21. Time related boron changes in groundwater beneath Site A 59
22. Typical experimental format for studying coliphage, MS-2,
survival in response to controlled chlorine concentrations
and contact times at Otis Air Force Base 63
23. Graphic presentation of coliphage, MS-2, survival in the
presence of experimentally added chlorine concentrations
at Otis Air Force Base 65
24. Seasonal variations in temperature, pH, ammonia-nitrogen
and the corresponding chlorination indices for coliphage,
MS-2, in lagoon water, Otis Air Force Base 66
25. Computer-tested relations describing the combined effect
of pH and temperature and ammonia-nitrogen on the inactiva-
tion of coliphage, MS-2, by chlorine 68
V111
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1. Wastewater Characteristics of Otis Treatment Plant 12
2. Laboratory Intercalibration Results 20
3. Heavy Metal Supply to Experimental Sand Filter Bed 24
4. Heavy Metal Build-up in a Sand Filter Bed 25
5. Annual Productivity and Yield Ratios for Wastewater
Irrigated Forage Crops 33
6. Yield Ratios for Total Plants, Leaf Plus Turf Produced
Per Unit Irrigation Volume : 34
7. Elementary Composition, Major Elements, Otis Forage Crops 35
8. Energy and Nutritional Potential, Otis Forage Crops 38
9. Nitrogen-phosphorus Content of Otis Soils 39
10. Nitrogen-phosphorus Ratios, Otis Forage Crops 1974-1977 40
11. Elementary Composition, Major Cations, Otis Forage Crops
1975-1977 41
12. Elementary Composition, Trace Elements, Otis Forage Crops
1975-1977 44
13. Renovative Efficiencies, Percent, for Various Chemical
Elements Applied to Crops of Site A, 1974-1977.... 45
14. Renovative Efficiencies, Percent, for Various Chemical
Elements Applied to Crops of Site B, 1974-1977 46
Baseline Water Analyses
A-l. Otis Treatment Plant, Secondary Effluent 75
A-2. Lagooned Secondary Effluent 78
A-3. Chlorinated Irrigation Water 80
A-4. Tap Water, Otis Treatment Plant (source, local deep well) 82
A-5. Tap Water, Otis Field Laboratory (source, local shallow well) 84
A-6. Tap Water, Woods Hole Potable Water Supply 86
A-7. Surface Water, Ashumet Pond, Fisherman' s Landing 88
ix
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number page
Subsurface Water, Site A, East Plot
A- 8. Well Water, Well /M 90
A- 9. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 93
A-10. Soil Water from 1', Lysimeter 95
A-ll. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 96
A-12. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 97
A-13. Soil Water from 4', Lysimeter 99
Subsurface Water, Site A, South Plot
A-14. Well Water, Well #5 101
A-15. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 104
A-16. Soil Water from 1', Lysimeter 105
A-17. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 106
A-18. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 107
A-19. Soil Water from 4', Lysimeter 108
Subsurface Water, Site A, West Plot
A-20. Well Water, Well #6 110
A-21. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 113
A-22. Soil Water from 1', Lysimeter 115
A-23. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 116
A-24. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 117
A-25. Soil Water from 4', Lysimeter 118
Subsurface Water, Site A, Control Plot
A-26. Well Water, Well #3 , 120
A-27. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 123
A-28. Soil Water from I1, Lysimeter 124
A-29. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 125
A-30. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 126
A-31. Soil Water from 4', Lysimeter 127
Subsurface Water, Site B, Timothy Quadrant
A-32. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 129
A-33. Soil Uater from 1', Lysimeter 130
-------
TABLES (Continued)
Number Page
A-34. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 131
A-35. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 132
A-36. Soil Water from 4 ', Lysimeter I33
Subsurface Water, Site B, Smooth Brome Quadrant
A-37. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 13^
A-38. Soil Water from 1', Lysimeter 135
A-39. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 136
Subsurface Water, Site B, Timothy-Alfalfa Quadrant
A-40. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 137
A-41. Soil Water from I1, Lysimeter 138
A-42. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 139
A-43. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 140
A-44. Soil Water from 4', Lysimeter 141
Subsurface Water, Site B, Reed Canary Quadrant
A-45. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 142
A-46. Soil Water from 1*, Lysimeter 143
A-47. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 144
A-48. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter 145
A-49. Soil Water from 4 ', Lysimeter 146
Subsurface Water, Site B, Control
A-50. Well Water, Well #8 !47
A-51. Soil Water from 6", Lysimeter 149
A-52. Soil Water from 1', Lysimeter 15°
A-53. Soil Water from 2', Lysimeter 151
A-54. Soil Water from 3', Lysimeter I52
A-55. Soil Water from 4', Lysimeter I53
Subsurface Water, Site B
A-56. Well Water, Well #7 I54
Hay and Turf, Site A
A-57. Reed Canary, East Plot I56
XI
-------
TABLES (Concluded)
Number Page
A-58. Reed Canary, South Plot 157
A-59. Reed Canary, West Plot 158
A-60. Reed Canary, Control Plot 159
Hay and Turf, Site B
A-61. Timothy 16°
A-62. Smooth Brome i61
A-63. Timothy-Alfalfa 162
A-64. Reed Canary I63
A-65. Control Plot 164
Soil Samples, Site A
A-66. East Plot 165
A-67. South Plot i66
A-68. West Plot 167
A-69. Control Plot 168
Soil Samples, Site B
A-70. Northeast Plot, Timothy 169
A-71. Southeast Plot, Smooth Brome 170
A-72. Southwest Plot, Timothy-Alfalfa 171
A-73. Northwest Plot, Reed Canary 172
A-74. Control Plot, Timothy 173
Xll
-------
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Special
AFB Air Force Base
A Delta, difference between
two values
DPD Diethyl-p-phenylene diamine
E East
EPA Environmental Protection
Agency
ET Evapotranspiration
F-ratio Significance level
HC
I
K
Hydraulic conductivity
Chlorination index - concen-
tration of chlorine (mg per
1) necessary to provide a 90
percent reduction in MS-2
concentration
Linear intercept
Linear slope
MS-2
N:P
P4 X 6
PFU
ROW
R-value
S
Sd
SFB
SPSS
SY
TEA
THL
Coliphage, culture designa-
tion
Nitrogen:phosphorus ratio
Escherichia coil, culture
designation
Plaque forming units
Retrieval observation well
Degree of chemical reduction
South
Standard deviation
Sand filter bed
Statistical package for the
social sciences
Specific (hydraulic) yield
Total effluent applied
Total hydraulic load
cals calories
cm centimeter
gal gallon
ha hectare
in inch
kg kilogram
km kilometer
1 liter
m meter
Quantity
3
m
mm
Mi
Mi2
ml
pH
ppm
cubic meter
millimeters
mile
square mile
milliliter
-log hydrogen ion concentration
part per million
ppb part per billion
ym micrometer
xiii
-------
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Miscellaneous
°C Degrees Celsius
P Protein
C Carbohydrate
L Lipid
> More than
< Less than
= Equal to
EP Total phosphorus
Chemical
B Boron
C Carbon
Ca Calcium
Cd Cadmium
Cl Chloride
Cr Chromium
Cu Copper
Fe Iron
H Hydrogen
K Potassium
Mg
Mn
N
NH.
4
N02
N03
Na
P
P04
Zn
Magnesium
Manganese
Nitrogen
Ammonium
Nitrite
Nitrate
Sodium
Phosphorus
Phosphate
Zinc
XIV
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
An inordinate amount of assistance from a variety of sources was re-
ceived during the course of these studies. To the many who gave generously
of their time, expertise and resources because of a sincere interest in fur-
thering research on wastewater renovation the authors are most grateful.
Special thanks are accorded Clifford Man, Chief, Facilities and Services,
U.S. Department of Defense and to the staff of the Water and Sewage Group,
Otis Air Force Base for helping to coordinate the research efforts of the
authors, while also performing their responsibilities at the base.
For valuable advice on matters relating to accepted agricultural prac-
tice, and for information on crop and soil chemistry and pathology our
thanks are expressed to the resident staff of the University of Massachu-
setts, Amherst and to the State Cooperative Extention Service, Hyannis. In
these respective areas, we are grateful to Drs. Martin Weeks, Ralph Morgan
and Thomas Peters and to the Messers Richard Rhode, Arnold Lane and Chuck
Simmons.
The Lockwood Corporation of Gering, Nebraska kindly provided a rotary
irrigation machine at no cost to the project and rendered assistance with
its errection and maintenance. Also, the Rainbird Company of Glendora, Cal-
ifornia was an important source of advice on sprinkler selection compatible
with the irrigation requirements for the research activity.
We also acknowledge the cooperation received from the Groundwater Branch
of the U.S. Geological Survey on matters relating to hydrological measure-
ments and information concerning aquifer characteristics of the local Cape
Cod groundwater. Prominent contributors in this area are Michael Frimter,
Jack Guswa and Dennis LeBlanc.
For valuable advice relating to facilities construction including the
design and installation of lagoon and retrieval well systems the authors are
respectively indebted to Frank Sullivan of Lancaster, Massachusetts and to
Everett Hinkley of Falmouth, Massachusetts.
Finally, the authors wish to thank Fred Medeiros, our resident engineer
at Otis, for contributions beyond the scope of his normal duties and also
William Richards for practical assistance with agricultural methods compat-
ible with local farming peculiarities.
XV
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Between 1974-78 the Cape Cod Wastewater Renovation and Retrieval Project
of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution investigated spray-irrigation-
cropping as a means of furthering secondary wastewater treatment on Cape Cod.
These efforts have been generously supported by the Research and Development
Office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and by the Division of
Water Pollution Control, Commonwealth of Massachusetts. A series of interim
reports [1-4] prepared at this institution describes the background, concepts,
research facilities, and scientific contributions attached to these efforts.
Coastal areas, such as Cape Cod, which have evolved geologically as ter-
minal moraines, often present unique hydrological features which can markedly
influence groundwater management. The topsoil of such areas is ofte.n a wind-
blown sandy loam which overlies deposits of coarse sand and gravel extending
to bedrock several hundred feet below the surface. The bulk of this overbur-
den is water saturated and in some instances subdivided into an upper fresh-
water lens which floats above a deeper and denser saltwater layer. The high
permeability characteristic of these soils tends to favor the development of
lakes and ponds rather than river formations; the former representing surface
exposure of the local groundwater table [5, 6]. In this situation, ground-
water is the only reliable source of freshwater available for domestic and
industrial use.
Groundwater reserves are highly vulnerable to excessive exploitation and
quality deterioration associated with rapid industrial development and popu-
lation growth. Cape Cod, a summer recreational area of southeastern Massachu-
setts has a year round population of about 115,000. During the summer months
a tenfold increase in population is not unusual. The native population, in-
creasing each year by about 3.8 percent, is expected to double by the year
2000. Within the same time period, an average increase of 20 percent in daily
individual water usage is predicted. To meet anticipated demand, community
water facilities will need to double over the next 20 years.
In coastal areas a finite amount of recharge to groundwater is essential
to maintain the subsurface hydraulic barrier which controls saltwater intru-
sion across the seawater/freshwater interface. Excessive groundwater losses,
i.e., excessive wastewater disposal to the sea, can upset the existing fresh-
water-seawater equilibrium with damaging consequences. A case in point is
that of Nassau County, Long Island where the combined effects of excessive
groundwater removal by a burgeoning population has led to excessively high
1
-------
concentrations of sea salts and nitrates in the groundwater [7].
Many coastal or peninsula towns, typical of Cape Cod are slowly but
surely approaching the maximum recommended rate of groundwater removal, which
has been placed at about one half the annual amount of groundwater recharge
[6]. Over the entire Cape area, present demand amounts to about 16% of the
annual recharge volume but three communities are already withdrawing more than
30 percent of the recommended maximum. A return of a prolonged drought, such
as was encountered during the mid 1960's, could dramatically increase the
threat of a domestic water shortage on Cape Cod.
An additional challenge to Cape Cod's groundwater resource is the in-
creasing amount of pollution which inevitably accompanies population growth.
Short-term impactions of fast-moving natural waters, having relatively short
flushing times are usually transitory whereas pollution of an underground
aquifer can persist for a much longer period of time. Presently the most
popular means of domestic wastewater disposal on Cape Cod is via on-site sep-
tic tanks, cesspools and/or leaching fields. Wastewater disposal via marine
outfalls is not practiced to any appreciable extent. Where municipal collec-
tion and sewage treatment facilities are operative, terminal wastewater dis-
posal is to groundwater via sand filter beds. Sludge separated during the
treatment process is delivered to sludge drying beds and ultimately removed
for burial.
In summary, groundwater deterioration on Cape Cod emanates from the fol-
lowing major considerations [8].
1. Inadequate municipal wastewater and sludge disposal techniques.
2. Leachates and run-off from poorly operated land-fills and septage
ponds.
3. Encroachment of saltwater into wells designated to provide potable
water due to excessive groundwater exploitation.
4. Contamination from pleasure boating in freshwater ponds.
5. Combined effects ranging from reduced recharge due to an increased
amount of paved area, pond eutrophication and inadvertent industrial
contamination.
6. Long-and short-term population instabilities which impose uncertain
demands on municipal water supply and wastewater disposal.
By 1973 the above considerations led to deliberations concerning appro-
priate means of upgrading wastewater quality to advance groundwater utility
and public health safety. The need for such measures was underlined by chemi-
cal observations on the status of soil - and groundwaters which receive
secondary treated sewage effluent via sand filter beds at Otis Air Force Base,
Cape Cod. In part, these observations revealed concentrations of inorganic
combined nitrogen which greatly exceeded the potable water quality standard
recommendations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Subsequently, a
-------
pilot scale agricultural spray-irrigation system employing animal forage
grasses, soil infiltration and terminal groundwater deposition was proposed
to the Office of Research and Development of the Environmental Protection
Agency and to the Division of Water Pollution Control of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.
In conventional wastewater spray-irrigation systems involving agricul-
tural crops, the crop is but one of several renovative components which con-
tribute to water quality improvement. The renovative process is also ad-
vanced by lagooning, atmospheric exchanges, soil interactions and dilution
by groundwater. The nature and abundance of accepted chemical and biologi-
cal indicators in influent wastewater, as opposed to the underlying ground-
water, is a measure of the overall effectiveness of the combined system.
OBJECTIVES
The principal objective of the authors has been to demonstrate the long-
term advantages of an agricultural wastewater spray-irrigation system on
Cape Cod as a basis for encouraging increased wastewater recyling and
groundwater conservation. A variety of experimental regimes affecting agri-
cultural parameters along with the extent of soil and groundwater modifica-
tions have been scrutinized. Appropriate comparisons have been ma'de for
wastewater recharge systems which exclude agricultural crops and for agri-
cultural crops denied wastewater irrigation.
The overall program has placed specific emphasis on the following cri-
teria in order to encourage and help shape future wastewater-irrigation pro-
grams on Cape Cod.
1. Facilities design and season operations.
2. Agricultural acreage and irrigation rates.
3. Crop yields and irrigation rates employed.
4. Wastewater renovation attributable to crops.
5. Wastewater renovation attributable to soils.
6. Requirement for pathogen control.
7. Ultimate impact on groundwater quality.
-------
SECTION 2
CONCLUSIONS
GENERAL
A favorable opinion is advanced that spray-irrigation cropping is prefer-
able to direct sand filter percolation as a means of protecting and preserv-
ing groundwater resources on Cape Cod. The bulk of the chemical constituents
of concern in secondary effluents are shown to be effectively removed by the
combined action of an agricultural crop and the favorable depth of soil and
gravel which overlies the water-saturated aquifer.
The single most important contribution of the agricultural component is
likely to be nitrogen separation and removal whereas adsorption on soil, sand
and gravel is probably the major consideration affecting heavy metal removal.
Reaction times and saturation estimates for these interactions predict that a
wastewater spray-irrigation facility on Cape Cod should have a life expec-
tancy well in excess of 50 years.
HYDROGEOLOGY
1. Hydrogeologically the Falmouth area of Cape Cod can be considered a
single, homogeneous, anisotropic aquifer with maximum hydraulic conduc-
tivity (HC) in the north-south direction roughly parallel to the direc-
tion of deposition of the outwash sand and gravels. The east-west HC com-
ponent is considerably smaller and in a direction which is roughly per-
pendicular to that of general deposition. The north-south HC ranges be-
tween 43-51 m (140-167 ft) per day while the comparable movement in an
east-west direction ranges from 5.3-6.4 m (17.5-20.9 ft) per day.
2. Four aquifer tests involving a series of 'groundwater observation wells
showed specific hydraulic yields that ranged between 0.13 and 0.25.
3. The uppermost layer of water-saturated sand occurs at a depth of about
20 m (65 ft) just north of Otis Air Force Base. Comparable depths within
the vicinity of the Otis spray-irrigation facility were reduced to about
15 m (50 ft) in accordance with a tendency for these depths to diminish
in a seaward direction.
4. The saturation thickness of the glacial outwash aquifer in the vicinity
of Otis Air Force Base measures between 70-76 m (230-250 ft).
5. Maximum estimated recharge rates for 1975 were respectively estimated to
-------
be 73, 79 and 84 percent for the 2.54, 5.08 and 7.62 cm (1, 2, and 3 inch)
per week plots of Site A. Minimum recharge estimates for the same areas,
also during 1975, were 32, 49 and 34 percent respectively.
6. A digital model constructed to simulate the steady-state water table con-
figuration has indicated that sewering the town of Falmouth and transport-
ing the effluent for disposal at Otis would result in a 1.67 m (5.5 ft)
rise in the underlying water table.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SOIL
Baseline soil samples taken from the irrigation plots show a layer of sur-
face loam underlain by about 1 m (3 ft) of windblown light, sandy loam. Oc-
casionally, deposits of silt-clay, distinctly different in texture and color
occur in clumps immediately beneath the surface. Below 1.8 m (6 ft) there is
a shift from fine sandy loam to medium sand. Deeper cores indicate a shift
from medium to coarse sand interspersed with cobblestones down to bedrock
some 79 m (258 ft) below the surface. Typically the pH range for the upper
15.2 cm (6 in) of soil was 5.50-6.50.
RECHARGE TIME
Chloride changes observed in the saturated aquifer following the onset of
spray-irrigation showed an S-shaped curve with time. At a hydraulic loading
of 7.6 cm (3 in) per week, the arrival time for a measurable amount of
chloride was under 200 days. For a lesser hydraulic loading of 3.1 cm (2 in)
per week the arrival time estimate increased to something less than 275 days.
IRRIGATION WATER:CROP RELATIONS
1. For a given variety of forage grass and within the irrigation rates sup-
plied, crop yields were consistently proportional to the amount of waste-
water provided and the surplus amount of water added by atmospheric pre-
cipitation had an insignificant influence on crop yields.
2. On an annual basis, the highest rates of productivity were attained with
reed canarygrass irrigated at 7.6 cm (3 in) per week, a combination which
led to the production of about 8.8 metric tons per hectare (4.0 tons per
acre).
3. The most favorable ratio between irrigation applied to crop yield (yield
ratio) was recorded for the combined timothy-alfalfa crop which had the
potential for supplementing available nitrogen via nitrogen fixation
within alfalfa root nodules.
4. The calorific values of the wastewater-irrigated forage grasses ranged
from 4800-4950 cals per gram of ash-free dry weight. The comparable range
for protein was 9.5-12.8 percent.
5. Maximum elementary renovation in an agricultural spray-irrigation system
was provided for manganese, potassium, nitrogen and zinc, the renovation
efficiencies for these elements being in excess of 30 percent.
-------
6. Minimum elementary renovation was recorded for iron, calcium, copper and
sodium at a range of 0.30-10 percent.
7. Intermediate elementary efficiencies were noted for magnesium, phosphorus,
cadmium and lead whose percent removal consistently ranged from 10-20
percent.
8. Domestic wastewater is not a well-balanced crop fertilizer due to the
presence of excessive amounts of phosphorus relative to nitrogen. Forage
grasses exhibit a nitrogen:phosphorus ratio, by weight, of about 4.5:1
while the same ratio in the wastewater is only about 1.25:1. Ultimately
this imbalance leads to an underutilization of phosphorus.
CHEMICAL SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Extended irrigation with secondary effluent has caused significant changes
in the chemical composition of the upper 30 cm (1 ft) of topsoil. In part,
these changes reflect mediated changes imposed by wastewater-crop interac-
tions and in part they can be attributed to ionic exchanges between soil,
sand and soil water. In accounting for the fate of those elements which fail
to measurably accumulate in the groundwater, soil analysis can be an impor-
tant means of determining the degree of renovation achieved. Among the ele-
ments we have observed to accumulate most consistently in Otis agricultural
soils were phosphorus, iron, manganese, copper, cadmium, chromium, nickel and
lead.
Presumably the excessive amounts of phosphorus over nitrogen in secondary
effluent leads to the observed increase in adsorbable phosphorus within the
soil column since each unit of crop nitrogen assimilated leads to a fixed
amount of phosphorus being underutilized. Also the heavy metal enrichment of
these irrigated soils is believed to follow an explanation not unlike that
of phosphorus.
GROUNDWATER QUALITY CHANGES
1. Various elements have been observed to accumulate with time in the under-
lying groundwater but their present concentrations do not exceed EPA or
US Public Health Service standards for potable waters.
2. Certain elements such as sodium, potassium and boron are continuing to
appear at increasing concentrations and additional information on their
ultimate stabilization levels is needed.
3. Groundwater concentrations of phosphate, nitrate, magnesium and calcium
appear to have stabilized at levels which are in line with public health
and esthetic considerations.
PUBLIC HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS
1. Proper public health safety would recommend that domestic wastewaters in-
tended for agricultural spray-irrigation undergo protective disinfection
prior to their release to the atmosphere and soil surface.
-------
2. Chlorine is potentially a suitable chemical disinfectant for the above
purpose providing that a favorable balance between the implications of
pathogen control, overchlorination and crop damage can be maintained.
3. In the experience of the authors safe and satisfactory levels of chlo-
rine can best be assured by diligent monitoring and quick reaction to
changes in the water parameters describing pH, temperature and ammonia-
nitrogen content.
-------
SECTION 3
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The concepts and documentation offered in this report offer a first-step
toward the design of wastewater spray-irrigation agricultural systems for
the Cape Cod area.
2. Maximum benefits from agricultural wastewater irrigation, in the form of
better crop yields and extended chemical renovation, can be anticipated
providing the plant nutrient components of secondary effluents can be
modified and more precisely tailored to the nutritional requirements of
the agricultural component.
3. To ensure safety and continuous operation during severe Cape Cod winters,
a lagoon system providing three months storage capacity for the predicted
rate of effluent release is an important consideration. Also the winter
advantages of fixed nozzle irrigation over delivery by a center pivot
rotary rig appear to be substantial.
4. The important renovative advantages provided by an agricultural crop over
that of direct rapid infiltration via a sand filter bed has been clearly
established and has important implications with regard to the ultimate
protection of groundwater quality.
5. Inclusion of an effective, but safe method of wastewater disinfection
prior to crop application is strongly recommended. Whether chlorination
provides the ideal answer to this requirement cannot be fully established
at this time.
6. The possibility that persistent organochlorine combinations having poten-
tially detrimental public health implications are generated and dispersed
during the chlorination of wastewater seems remote, yet conclusive infor-
mation on this subject exceeds the scope of these studies.
7. The concentrations of certain ions on the groundwater underlying waste-
water irrigated agricultural crops can be expected to increase in propor-
tion to the irrigation rates employed. For this reason persistent and
effective groundwater monitoring is a prime management responsibility
with regard to all wastewater-irrigation systems.
8. The importance of the dilution phenomenon is frequently overlooked. As
irrigation rates increase and land area decreases, the percent of the
total hydraulic load made up of precipitation also decreases. The de-
8
-------
creased dilution at higher irrigation rates is partly but not completely
balanced by a commensurate decrease in evapotranspiration. The end result
is that at higher irrigation rates, ionic concentrations in the recharge
water are higher. It may be possible to compensate for decreased dilution
at higher rates by maximizing dilution with groundwater. This could be
accomplished by a facility design which orients long rectangular fields
perpendicular to the ground-water gradient. The results would be a larger
but less concentrated ground-water plume. Another approach would be to
divide the irrigation operation into two or more sites.
9. Spray irrigation of perennial grasses and subsequent groundwater recharge
should be considered a preferred alternative to direct sand filtration,
which is currently the most commonly employed alternative for centralized
wastewater disposal on Cape Cod.
-------
SECTION 4
THE EXPERIMENTAL SITE
The geology of the Falmouth area of Cape Cod has been summarized in
various reports [9-11]. In general, these reports describe a single, homo-
geneous, anisotropic aquifer with maximum hydraulic conductivity in a north-
south direction and minimum hydraulic conductivity in the east-west direction.
Field observations of this program were conducted at Otis Air Force Base,
Cape Cod, a military installation located 120 km (75 miles) south of Boston,
Massachusetts. Geologically the site is constructed of a mass of unconsoli-
dated gravel, sand and silt deposited by glacial outwash and underlain by im-
permeable consolidated bedrock roughly 260 feet below the surface. In a
north-south direction, the bedrock maintains an average depth of 52 m (170 ft)
below sea level; however, just east of the site, it drops to a depth of 122 m
(400 ft) below sea level. Given this situation, the rates at which ground-
water is transmitted through a unit width of the aquifer can be expected to
vary in accordance with the thickness of the water-saturated layer.
3 2
The annual rainfall at Otis averages about 3100 m per day per km (2.14
million gallons per day per square mile), but evaporation and transpiration
losses reduces the estimated amount of recharge to considerably less than
1550 m^ per day per km2 (1.07 million gallons per day per square mile). The
result is a groundwater table which reaches a maximum height of 18.3 m (60 ft)
above sea level north of Otis. Groundwater levels then subside in all direc-
tions towards the ocean. Monitoring wells installed within the project area
reveal groundwater elevations ranging from 16.4-15.1 m (53.8-49.7 ft) above
sea level in accordance with the north-south hydraulic gradient previously
described by Meade and Vaccaro [12].
Base-line soil samples taken from the irrigation plots show a surface
layer of loam underlain by roughly 1 m (3 ft) of windblown Enfield sandy loam.
Quite frequently deposits of silt-clay, visually and mineralogically distinct
from the surrounding sandy loam, occur in layers or clumps immediately be-
neath the surface. Below the 2 m (6 ft) depth, the topsoil grades from fine
sandy loam to medium sand. Deep geological cores indicate a substrate of
medium to coarse sand with occasional cobblestone layers to the vicinity of
bedrock 78.6 m (258 ft) below the surface.
OTIS SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
The sewage treatment plant at Otis Air Force Base has been in operation
since 1942 and processes wastewater generated at the base. Primary sewage
10
-------
treatment at the plant consists of a comminutor with a by-pass bar screen, a
Parshall flume, a grease-skimming and flocculation tank and two Imhoff
tanks. Two trickling filters of 1 m (3 ft) depth and two settling tanks or
clarifiers comprise the secondary treatment component. The plant effluent
is typically discharged onto sand filter beds for final disposal to the un-
derlying ground water. Sludge removed from the Imhoff and settling tanks is
flushed to sand drying beds and periodically removed for burial.
The plant was designed to accommodate an average summer flow of 14,000 m3
(3.7 million gallons) per day and to serve a population of about 37,000.
Its load has averaged substantially less than 3800 m^ (one million gal-
lons) per day for the past 10 years due to reduction of personnel and activ-
ities at the base. Presently, the plant treats slightly less than 189 m3
(50,000 gallons) per day and is principally serving the stable but skeleton
population which occupies base housing. Because the waste load is much less
than the design capacity, the treated effluent is actually recycled in order
to maintain minimum volumes. Only one Imhoff tank, one trickling filter and
one secondary tank are currently being used at any one time.
Strengthwise, the secondary effluent of Otis Air Force Base is rather
dilute and tends to be low in total dissolved solids. Concentrations of
nitrogen, phosphorus and metallic cations are thus somewhat low in terms of
national averages. Presumably this reflects the sparse population currently
being serviced and the recirculation which reduces the concentrations of
particulate bound cations to relatively low levels of iron, zinc, lead, cad-
mium and magnesium. Table 1 shows the results of some typical analyses of
the chemical constituents in the secondary effluent of Otis Air Force Base.
For comparative purposes some accepted national averages for secondary
effluents are also included [13, 14].
Since irrigation was initiated, in the summer of 1974, a continuous log
has been kept which records the amounts of wastewater irrigation applied to
each of the agricultural subplots of Sites A and B. Unpredictable interrup-
tions caused by equipment failures, weather extremes, or harvesting opera-
tions ensure that planned irrigation rates are rarely achieved and inevit-
ably total less than planned. In a similar vein, a distinction must be made
between total wastewater applied to crops and the total hydraulic load since
the latter term includes the total amount of precipitation contributed by
rainfall.
The original design of the Otis sewage treatment plant provided sand
filter beds for the terminal disposal of secondary effluents. Over the past
33 years more than 22 million cubic meters (6 billion gals) of effluent have
been discharged onto the 6.9 ha (17 acres) reserved for this purpose. The
latter area consists of 22 separate beds which measure 61 m (200 ft) in
length and 30.5 m (100 ft) in width. At full operation, 11,400 m3 (3 mil-
lion gallons) per day, the rate of application was 1400 m-* per hectare
(150,000 gallons per acre) per day. Effluent is delivered to the filter
beds by gravity mains and distributed by wooden sluiceways. The depth of
the water table at this location varies from 5.5-6.1 m (18-20 ft). Geogra-
phical relations between the Otis sewage treatment plant and surrounding
facilities are also shown in Figure 1.
11
-------
TABLE 1. WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS OF OTIS TREATMENT PLANT
SECONDARY EFFLUENT (CONCENTRATIONS AS MG/1: PPM).
Typical Secondary
Constituent Treatment Effluent
Nitrogen (as N)
Total inorganic
Nitrate
Nitrite
Ammonium
Phosphorus (as P)
Total dissolved
Orthophosphate
Other Elements*
Cadmium
Calcium
Chloride , . ~
Chromium (Cr + Cr )
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese „
Mercury (Hg )
Potassium
Sodium
Zinc
20
—
—
—
—
10
—
0.01-0.03
24
45
0.02-0.14
0.07-0.14
0.10-4.3
0.01-0.03
17
0.02
0.01
14
50
0.20-0.44
Otis Secondary
Effluent
(mean; St. Dev.)
17.90 + 3.25
10.18 + 5.17
0.29 + 0.15
7.43 + 5.46
8.49 + 0.83
6.93 + 0.78
0.00024 + 0.0001
10.77 + 0.70
26.78 + 2.39
0.01
0.050 + 0.020
0.502 + 0.07
0.00054 + 0.0001
3.79 + 0.17
0.021 + 0.016
0.00027 + 0.0001
8.94 + 1.09
37.91 + 6.34
0.047 + 0.025
Typical values from Pound and Crites or from Driver et al.
12
-------
IRRIGATION SITE
AREA = 22.6 ACRES
EXISTING ABANDONED
SAND FILTER BEDS
SEWAGE DISPOSAL PLANT
SLUDGE BEDS
LAGOON
PUMPING STATION
FEET
R03
R04
RO 5
Figure 1. Plan of sewage treatment plant, sand filter beds, lagoon and irrigated sites.
-------
SYSTEM DESIGN AND INSTALLATION
To ealuate a spray irrigation-cropping program for wastewater manage-
ment, a pilot facility was assembled to provide year-round irrigation and to
test the water quality effects of a holding basin, prechlorination and the
performance of fixed versus rotary rigs for wastewater distribution. The
supply of wastewater comes from the Otis Air Force Base sewage treatment
plant, and enters a pair of holding basins or lagoons each having a capacity
of 1100 m^ (300,000 gallons) of secondary effluent, which represents but a
small diversion of the total plant output. Residence, or holding time, in
the lagoon is about three weeks.
The remainder of the system includes a pump house and control station, a
415 m (1360 ft) force main, the irrigation equipment and irrigated fields.
The main pump has a capacity of .606 m^ (160 gal) per min and is started
with a secondary priming pump. Safety valves are installed to prevent high
pressures and to provide automatic shutoff if pressure drops suddenly. A
semi-automatic gas chlorinator is used for chlorination. The effluent is
pumped through a 10.2 cm (4 in) Johns-Manville PVC force main to the irriga-
tion site.
The relationship between the original Otis sewage treatment installation
and the facilities added for experimental purposes is included in Figure 1.
The figure shows two irrigation Sites A and B which have been seeded with
forage crops. Irrigation Site A employs fixed deflection head sprinklers
which supply three subplots at rates of application of 2.5-7.6 cm (1-3 in)
per week to irrigate three equal areas of .11 hectares (0.268 acres). Site
B contains a 45.7 m (150 ft) rotary irrigator anchored on a center pivot.
Six deflection heads 8 ft apart mounted downward and of decreasing opening
diameter toward the center deliver at the rate of 5.08 cm (2 in) of effluent
per week to each of four subplots, each encompassing 0.18 ha (0.445 acres).
Both Site A and Site B include appropriate control areas which are non-irri-
gated and whose monitoring provides a basis for background comparison. Each
subplot is equipped with banks of lysimeters which are used to sample inter-
stitial groundwater from depths of .15, .30, .60, .90, and 1.20 m (0.5, 1,
2, 3, and 4 ft). A total of six wells have been installed throughout the
agricultural areas which are oriented according to groundwater flow so that
groundwater monitoring can be provided.
Reed canarygrass is the crop at all Site A locations, while at Site B
smooth brome, timothy, a mixture of timothy and alfalfa and reed canarygrass
are grown. The control area at Site A is planted with reed canarygrass
while control areas of Site B have been seeded with timothy.
Monitoring provides information on short- and long-term trends in terms
of nitrogen, phosphorus and trace metals after various degrees of treat-
ment. All wells are constructed of PVC plastic which allows sampling for
groundwater nutrients, metals and pesticides and many other organic sub-
stances without undue contamination. Measurements at the sand filter beds
show groundwater levels at 6.4 m (21 ft) below the surface and from 14.6-
16.8 m (48-55 ft) below the surface of the experimental irrigation fields.
The locations of nine groundwater sampling wells used to monitor these Sites
14
-------
are also numbered in Figure 1.
The principle field sampling effort of the authors has focussed on the
time-related changes affecting the chemical composition of surface and sub-
surface waters, hay, turf, and soils. All water samples are collected in
2-liter polyethylene bottles, 200 ml aliquots being filtered CO.40 ym poro-
sity) in the field through a vacuum assisted membrane filter unit. Filtered
samples are refrigerated and within 24 hrs analyzed for.the crop nutrients
phosphate, ammonia, nitrite and nitrate.
Well water samples are obtained with a vacuum pressure apparatus de-
signed for deep lysimeter sampling [15]. With this equipment, samples of
groundwater from depths greater than 7.62 m (25 ft) below the surface are
possible.
Lysimeters are used to collect interstitial soil water by applying
vacuum to permeable ceramic cups (pore size ca 1.0 um) buried below ground
level. During dry periods, particularly in the nonirrigated control plots
it was not always possible to accumulate an adequate volume of sample water
on a routine basis.
Mature crops were cut, field dried, baled, and weighed according to
accepted agricultural practice. During sample processing desiccated hay
samples were macerated in a blender and stored pending chemical analysis for
carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and phosphorus content along with a variety of
selected anions and cations. Soil samples were removed via a horizontal
core taken from trench side walls exposed manually by shoveling or backhoe
assistance.
Early water sampling was conducted on a bimonthly basis, but in 1977 and
1978 the sampling frequency was reduced to one complete sampling each
month. Hay sampling was timed to coincide with crop maturation which led to
three samplings per summer except for 1977 when only two hay crops were har-
vested. To date there have been a total of 10 hay crops which have been
cut, dried and removed from the agricultural Sites. Nine of these have been
subjected to complete chemical analyses. Turf and soil samples were col-
lected on an annual basis in the fall of the year after the growing season
was complete.
15
-------
SECTION 5
CHEMICAL ANALYTICAL METHODS
In general chemical analytical methods used correspond to those de-
scribed in the EPA Manual for the Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes
16 . Where more sensitive methods have been necessary, particularly for
well- and groundwater samples, such exceptions are noted and referenced
below.
Certain major cations (Ca, Na, K, Mg) were analyzed using flame atomic
absorption with direct aspiration of known standards or of sample unknowns
by methods also recommended by the EPA [l6]. Standard response curves pre-
pared from multiple and known concentrations of each cation were used to
interpolate the appropriate unknown concentrations.
Cations of trace metals (Mn, Cd, Cr, Cu. Fe, Pb) were originally ana-
lyzed by chelation-extraction using ammonium pyrrolidine dithiocarbamate and
methyl isobutyl ketone [17]. Later, these elements were determined more
efficiently via heated graphite atomization wherein a small amount of solu-
tion was injected into an electrically heated graphite furnace connected to
an atomic absorption spectrophotometer.
The authors relied upon the method of standard additions to evaluate
matrix interference in atomic absorption analyses conducted on various
sample types. Except for calcium analyses, significant matrix interference
has not occurred. For calcium calibration curves, interference associated
with the use of the air-acetylene flame did require some corrective modifi-
cation.
Boron was measured by the curcumen reagent technique as described in
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1971 [18].
Chloride was determined with a Buchler-Cotlove chloridometer [l9] which
supplies a constant direct current to a pair of ion generating electrodes
which release silver ions at a constant rate. An end point is reached when
all the chloride is precipitated as AgCl and the time elapsed in reaching
this condition is directly proportional to the chloride concentration. Sul-
fate analyses were made according to the turbidiometric method described in
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 1971 ClS].
The inorganic plant nutrients phosphate-phosphorus and nitrite-,
nitrate- and ammonia-nitrogen were all determined colorimetrically with a
Beckman DU spectrophotometer. The colorimetric reagent used for phosphate
analyses was acid molybdate [20]. Nitrite was analyzed in acid solution
16
-------
using sulfanilamide to produce a highly colored red azo-dye [20]. Nitrate
was analyzed by a modification of the brucine method as described in the EPA
Manual for the Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, 1974 [16]. Ammonia
was determined by the phenolhypochlorite method [22].
Hay samples for each harvest were analyzed for organic carbon, nitrogen,
phosphorus, calorie content and residual moisture after being coarsely
ground in a Waring blender. Pre-weighed subsamples for major cation and
trace metal analyses were ashed at 400°C and reweighed to determine the
loss of weight on ignition. Nitric acid was added and evaporated off
several times to complete digestion. Samples were solubilized in 50% hydro-
chloric acid and filtered through a 3 ym membrane filter and then diluted
with deionized distilled water to a final volume of 25 mis. Trace metals
were analyzed by flame atomic absorption via direct aspiration of unknown
solutions and an ultimate comparison with comparable responses from known
standard solutions.
Elementary analyses for carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen in hay samples
were measured on material macerated (40 mesh) in Perkin-Elmer 240 elemental
analyzer. Total elementary phosphorus was measured after ignition, at 600°C
for two hours and after wet digestion in acid persulfate at 15 Ibs steam
pressure (240°C) for 30 minutes [23]. The inorganic phosphate released by
the above treatment was then measured with acid molybdate [20]. Analyses of
plant material for caloric content were made with a Parr Calorimeter.
Turf and soil samples from irrigated and control plots were taken at the
end of each growing season. For turf samples, a 15.2 cm (6 in) cube was cut
from the soil surface and subdivided so as to obtain integrated samples from
the upper, middle and lower thirds of the cube. Soil cores were taken at
selected depths between 15.2 cm (6 in) and 122 cm (4 ft).
Soil samples were sieved and particle sizes greater than 2 mm (.08 in)
were not analyzed. Turf samples included the roots and stubble of the har-
vested crop contained in the top 15.2 cm (6 in) of soil and were collected
prior to the onset of winter. Soil and turf samples were treated and ana-
lyzed in the same manner as the hay samples except that in the case of soil
pH measurements were included and calorific measurements excluded.
Early in these studies a single sand filter bed was selected for experi-
mental observations on the dissipation of various constituents of secondary
effluent in the absence of agricultural crops. Eight suction lysimeters,
placed to sample a depth range of 0.15-1.22 m (0.5-4 ft), and two ground-
water observation wells were installed for this purpose. Later the number
of wells serving this location was increased to seven in support of addi-
tional studies on the local groundwater hydrology via draw-down and recovery
observations. The wells were located at strategic points, downstream with
respect to the flow of groundwater from beneath the sand filter bed. De-
scriptions of these facilities are shown in Figures 2 and 3.
In 1976 the project's analytical chemistry laboratory participated in
the Quality Control Program administered by the EPA to evaluate techniques
selected for the manual, Methods for Analysis of Water and Wastes. We
17
-------
CROSSECTION
co
CLAMP
HOSE-
STOPPER-^
PVC
TUBE-
POROUS
PORCELAIN
CUP
SUCTION
LYSIMETER
^MONITORING WELLS
-SUCTION LYSIMETERS
DIKE ROADWAY
TOP VIEW
OF BEDS
MONITORING WELL NO t
MONITORING WELL NO 2
SUCTION
'To.RDW.LK «««EVFLF4LVOR"'
^ BLOCKS
TO TREATMENT PLANT
Figure 2. Sand filter bed with location of wells and lysimeters.
-------
DISCHARGED
PIPE
N
50
FEET
100
R.O.W. NO. 1
74.27
4848.5
4952.5
S.F.B. SOUTH
72.65
4810.6
4997.2
. EAST 73.33
4804.9
5036.9
PUMP HOUSE (Retrieval Well)
R.O.W.
._ 47288
88.14 4966.7
TYP2"WELL
ELEVATION
R.O.W.
. 46868
76.95 5070.8
RO.W. NO. 4 46407
.86.88 ^5016.0
DETAIL
NO SCALE
R.O.W. NO. 5
97.03
5103.3
Figure 3. Location of monitoring wells adjacent to the sand filter bed. R.O.W. de-
notes retrieval observation well. Elevations in feet above mean sea level.
Coordinates are in feet and are based on an arbitrary origin and magnetic
bearings. The North coordinate is on top, East coordinate is on the bottom,
both in feet relative to 5,000 at the origin.
19
-------
received coded samples containing low and high concentrations of ammonia,
nitrite and nitrate and a single sample for total phosphorus. A sealed en-
velope was also provided which was opened after completion of analyses to
compare the laboratory results with the EPA reference sample standards. As
summarized in Table 2, this exercise was highly successful since it vali-
dated the precision and accuracy of the laboratory nutrient chemistry. Dif-
ferences between the laboratory values and the quoted EPA standards were
generally comparable to the standard deviation of the laboratory methods,
and generally differed by 5% or less from EPA quoted concentrations.
TABLE 2. LABORATORY INTERCALIBRATION: WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC
INSTITUTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER,'CINCINNATI, OHIO
W.H.O.I. RESULTS*
Ampule Stated
Number Range
NH4-N
mg/1 + Sd
NO -N
mg/1 + Sd
PO.-P
mg/1 + Sd
IP
mg/1 + Sd
1. low 0.445 + .006 0.179 + .010 0.020 + .0001
2. high 9.52 + .009 1.06 + .019 0.389 + .002 0.723 + .001
EPA REFERENCE SAMPLES, PARAMETER VALUES
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
J. •
2.
high
\J • ^*T
9.47
• \j\j — /
.05
\s • *• \J
1.11
• W£> -J-
.05
W • \J *. J-
0.393
• \J WJ.
.004
0.713
.01
*Mean, five replicate analyses
20
-------
SECTION 6
SAND FILTER BED PERFORMANCE
NITRATE, NITRITE, PHOSPHATE AND CHLORIDE MODIFICATION BY A SAND FILTER BED
At Otis, terminal wastewater disposal is accomplished by percolation of
secondary effluent through sand and gravel down to groundwater level. Evalua-
tion of the renovative capacity of a single, isolated sand filter bed was un-
dertaken early in these studies. Information on the sand filter bed selected
for this work and its location with regard to the field facilities provided is
given in Figures 2 and 3.
The initial phase of this work was addressed to a dormant or inactive
filter and was carried out between January and June of 1974. Samples of soil-
water and groundwater from beneath the filter were removed at predetermined
intervals to assess time-related changes for certain chemical constituents in
the absence of active inundation. The most recent previous flooding of this
bed had occurred in May of 1973 after which water application was limited to
natural rainfall. On 15 occasions analyses were completed which provided
measurements of the groundwater concentrations of nitrite, nitrate, ammonia,
phosphate, and chloride. The results, shown in Figure 4, indicate that during
the dormant period nitrate and ammonia gradually decreased with time, that
chloride remained essentially unchanged while nitrite and phosphate showed
intermittent pulses, but no consistent trends. It is significant that the
nitrate concentration reached 55 parts per million (ppm) thereby exceeding the
recommended limit (10 ppm) of the U.S. Public Health Service for potable
waters.
On July 19, 1974 the same bed was inundated with secondary effluent at a
maximum loading rate of 378 m^ (100,000 gals) per day which corresponded to
.204 m per m* (5 gals per ft2) per day until September when it was again de-
activated for drying. A total volume of 16,430 in (4.34 million gals) was
applied during this 72 day interval.
Within a week following inundation, the arrival of recharged wastewater
to groundwater level was indicated by an abrupt increase in chloride from 4
to 25 ppm (Figure 4). Also the nitrate and phosphate concentrations showed a
corresponding increase which essentially duplicated their original concentra-
tion in the applied effluent. During the remainder of these observations
phosphate concentrations stabilized at about 8 ppm but marked fluctuations in
the nitrite, nitrate, and ammonia concentrations were observed.
The entire sand filter bed appears to act as an ion exchange column al-
21
-------
100
r>o
IM
J J
MONTH
D
Figure A. Groundwater quality beneath sand filter bed before, during and after inundation (July 17-September
27, 1974) with secondary treated effluent.
-------
though nonadsorbable nitrate and chloride appear to escape the soil matrix.
In this case, the tenfold decrease in ammonia, between the filter surface and
the recharged groundwater, suggests that the bulk of the ammonia was retained
within the filter. A rough estimate of the total amount of ammonia bound to
the filter during inundation, based on ammonia-nitrogen input (2.10 ppm) vs out-
put (0.19 ppm) comes to about 27 kg (60 Ibs) for the 16,430 m3 (4.34 million
gals) of sewage plant effluent applied.
The concept of restricted ammonia passage is also supported by the
failure of groundwater ammonia to increase during a subsequent period of low
oxygen tension; a situation decidedly unfavorable for ammonia oxidation. As
documented, anoxic conditions within the filter developed during the latter
stages of inundation and were accompanied by a corresponding decrease in ni-
trate measured. This correspondence has been attributed to the microbial re-
duction of nitrate to molecular nitrogen during a period of reduced oxygen
tension.
By November 1974 after a month of drying, aerobic conditions were re-
stored and the nitrate content of the groundwater increased from a minimum of
0.28 ppm to a maximum of 50 ppm by mid February. Oxidation of adsorbed am-
monia to nitrate within the filter during this period and a subsequent mobi-
lization of nitrate by rainfall recharge presumably accounted for these
changes.
An alternative possibility is that the elevated concentrations of ni-
trate which appeared late in these studies resulted from eluted nitrate being
resolubilized in a smaller volume of water. The amount of rainfall recorded
adjacent to the site between the end of inundation on September 27 and the
nitrate peak in the recharge water on February 12 (138 days) was 39.4 cm
(16.52 in). Assuming 50 percent recharge, the total volume for the area of
the bed (100 x 200 ft; 30.5 x 61.0 m) would thus be 366 m3 or 12,942 ft3.
The effluent applied was 42 times greater in terms of volume. If all the
29.7 kg (65.5 Ibs) of adsorbed ammonia-nitrogen were converted to nitrate
and dissolved in this volume of recharge rainwater, the nitrate-nitrogen con-
centration would be 76 ppm. Later, nitrate observations showed further in-
creases to 67 and 57 ppm on March 12 and April 9, followed by a decrease to
34 and 33 ppm on May 7 and June 4 respectively. Thus, it appears that nitri-
fication continued for at least 250 days, which compares with 72 days of in-
undation of the bed with effluent.
Sampling of soil water removed from the four-foot lysimeter revealed
nitrate concentrations near 10 ppm prior to inundation. During the initial
stages of flooding, the level of nitrate remained between 7 and 9 ppm. When
water began to pond on the surface, nitrate decreased in the percolate to
5.5 ppm implying an onset of denitrification once anoxic conditions were es-
tablished. A sample taken during the later drying stage showed a tenfold
higher nitrate concentration, 77 ppm, while the ammonia concentration was re-
duced to a trace amount. These changes indicate reversals in the potential
modification of combined nitrogen dependent upon oxygen availability which in
turn is regulated by the prevailing rates of organic decomposition.
23
-------
TRACE METAL MODIFICATIONS BY A SAND FILTER BED
The ability of sand filter beds to remove trace metals was also evaluated
by sampling the subsoil at various depths and it has been observed that heavy
metals tend to accumulate within the upper few centimeters of sand. The con-
centration in the effluent and the 33-year supply of copper, zinc, cadmium,
lead and chromium to a typical sand filter bed is shown in Table 3. At Otis
Air Force Base wet sludge is separated and deposited on sludge beds for dry-
ing and ultimate disposal by burial. Thus, the filter beds have been exposed
to only a small fraction of the total heavy metal load produced by the treat-
ment plant, the major concentration of these heavy metals being retained in
the dried sludge material as compared with the secondary effluent (Table 3).
In this case the sludge beds have not been evaluated as a possible source of
groundwater contamination.
TABLE 3. HEAVY METAL SUPPLY TO EXPERIMENTAL SAND FILTER BED
Metal Concentration
Cu Zn Cd Pb Cr*
Sample Source
Secondary Effluent (ppb)
Soluble 80 55 0.24 0.50 <10
Particulate 32 12 0.58 9.30 0.6
(ppm)
Dry Otis Sludge 2,799 246 13 358 96
2
Total 33-yr Metal Loading (g/m )
Soluble 48.06 33.70 0.151 0.302 < 6.15
Particulate 19.66 7.24 0.356 5.72 0.012
Total 67.72 40.94 0.507 6.022 < 6.162
*Soluble chromium concentration was less than the sensitivity of the analyti-
cal method.
In terms of supply, the order of abundance for heavy metal additions to
the sand filter bed was Cu > Zn > Cr = Pb > Cd. The surface enrichment fac-
tors, derived from appropriate comparisons with a nearby control soil, varied
from 20- to 360-fold, the enrichment order being Cu > Cd > Pb = Zn > Cr.
By comparing the integrated amounts of these metals distributed within
the upper 52 cm (20.4 in) with the heavy metal supply over the past 33 years
it is possible to assign removal efficiencies for each of the five metals ex-
amined. As recorded in Table 4, the data of the authors indicate that 85 per-
cent of the Cu, 49 percent of the Zn, 113 percent of the Cd, 129 percent of
24
-------
the Pb and > 62 percent of the Cr supplied are bound within the surface soil.
Thus, of the metals examined only Zn and possibly Cr would appear to have a
reasonable chance of becoming entrained in the groundwater some 740 cm (21 ft)
below the surface.
TABLE 4. HEAVY METAL BUILD-up IN A SAND FILTER BED. METAL
CONCENTRATIONS CORRECTED FOR APPROPRIATE CONTROL ANALYSIS
Metal Concentration (mg/kg)
Depth (cm)
Surf
0-4
4-6
14-16
24-26
29-31
44-46
50-52
Control Soil, Surf
Surface Enrichment Factor
Integrated Metal Content
Cu
679
236
272
7.2
6.1
2.4
2.5
0.7
1.9
360
57.89
Zn
320
67
60
5.5
9.3
1.3
3.9
0.0
5.8
56
20.19
Cd
10.5
1.7
1.8
0.11
0.25
0.09
0.07
0.07
0.07
150
0.572
Pb
166
28
26
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.80
0.00
2.70
60
7.75
Cr
82
4.7
10.0
0.10
2.30
0.00
0.90
0.00
4.30
20
3.81
(g/m2 to 52 cm)*
Percent Retention 85 49 113 129 62
(Content/Loading) 100
*Assumes soil density of 1.85, i.e., 938 kg under am to a depth of 52 cm.
The major accumulation of heavy metals on Otis sand filter beds after
33 years of service occurs within the uppermost 6 cm (2.4 in) of sand. The
extent of enrichment for Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb and Zn ranges from 20 to 360-fold.
Excepting Zn and possibly Cr, more than 85 percent of the applied amounts of
each of the above metals resides within the upper 52 cm (20.4 in) of sand.
25
-------
SECTION 7
CHANGES IN NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS DURING
AGRICULTURAL SPRAY-IRRIGATION
The removal of phosphorus from secondary effluent during agricultural
spray-irrigation treatment increases with the stage of treatment. The phos-
phorus concentrations (as PO^-P) in Otis secondary effluent before lagooning
range from about 8 to 10 (mean = 9.25) ppm and are typically higher during
winter than in summer (Fig. 5). Following chlorination and distribution over
the irrigation field the phosphorus concentration was reduced to less than
0.5 ppm in the interstitial water recovered from 15.2 cm (6 in) below the
surface. At successively greater depths, no significant changes in phos-
phorus were observed down to the depth of the groundwater sampling at 15.2 m
(50 ft).
Nitrogen is more versatile than phosphorus chemically and is affected by
a greater variety of biological processes. Gains or losses of nitrogen to or
from the system are regulated by the relative importance of nitrogen fixation,
ammonification, nitrification and denitrification. Thus, much greater uncer-
tainty exists regarding nitrogen distributions as compared with phosphorus
and phosphorus rather than nitrogen is the more appropriate element for mass
balance"analysis.
Total inorganic nitrogen concentrations in Otis secondary effluent be-
fore lagooning range from about 12.5-18.5 (mean = 11.6) ppm and show a com-
parable reduction pattern to that of phosphorus following successive stages
of treatment (Figures 6 and 7). During the winter-spring period, ammonia is
the most abundant form of inorganic nitrogen in secondary effluent although
appreciable amounts of oxidized nitrogen (nitrite or nitrate) also occur.
During the summer-fall months the oxidized forms of nitrogen are more abun-
dant than ammonia. In the interstitial soil water, ammonia is almost com-
pletely absorbed in the first foot of soil, but oxidized nitrogen penetrates
at reduced concentrations to the ground water. The data on inorganic nitro-
gen distribution suggest that soil nitrification occurs throughout the year.
26
-------
ISi
12.0
10.0
~N
| 8.0
-S-
Q.
o;6°
CL
4,0
2.0
AVERAG
o — c
o
— \ n r
\
N,
~ °\ ^^"s
D"^v\
/ \ /
- /. {/
~ ,
-------
200
18.0
16.0
14.0
1 2.0
10.0
'I
6.0
4.0
2.0
NITROGEN
WINTER- SPRING, 1975
TOTAL INORGANIC-N
NH4-N
V
N03+N02-N\\
^ / I / J J J / /
£' / ^ fe ^ Ax
ox
^y
>c
JP
G
cf
5xJA//°Z.£
Figure 6. Winter-spring ammonia, oxidized and total inorganic nitrogen concentrations
(ppm) for secondary effluent after lagooning, chlorination, irrigation and
percolation through the ground. Site A-west; nominal rate of application
3 in./wk.
28
-------
14 0 -
12.0 -
10.0 -
i 8.0 -
ro
NITROGEN
SUMMER- FALL ,1975
i3+N02 -N
SAMPLE
Figure 7. Summer-fall ammonia, oxidized and total inorganic nitrogen concentrations (pptn) for secondary
effluent after lagooning, chlorination, irrigation and percolation through the ground. Site
A-west; nominal rate of application 3 in./wk.
-------
SECTION 8
IRRIGATION-CROP RELATIONS
Over a five year period irrigation-crop relations have been examined
from nine cuttings of mature plants taken from 10 different agricultural sub-
plots. As previously stated the experimental variables included the follow-
ing.
1. Differences in rates of wastewater application (2.54, 5.08, 7.62
and 10.2 cm per week).
2. Differences in the wastewater delivery system, (fixed nozzle vs
rotary rig).
3. Different varieties of forage grasses.
4. Control crops exposed to precipitation only.
Yield characteristics and renovative efficiencies observed in each of
the above situations are discussed in this section.
CROP YIELDS VS IRRIGATION APPLIED
Tallying the accumulated amounts for crop yields vs total irrigation
applied requires a distinction between total effluent applied (TEA) and total
hydraulic loading (THL). The latter is always larger than a comparable TEA
value since it represents the sum of TEA and the additional amount of crop
watering provided by precipitation.
Data from Site A describing three different reed canarygrass plots
treated with three different rates of wastewater"application are shown in
Figures 8 and 9. In Figure 8, marked proportionality between crop yields and
TEA is demonstrated. When the same crop yields are plotted against THL, how-
ever, as in Figure 9, three different levels of proportionality result. In
the latter case, crop yields were decided by the fractional amount of
wastewater provided and the additional water increment supplied by precipita-
tion had a minimal effect on crop size.
The overriding influence of TEA over THL in affecting crop growth has
led the authors to adopt the following relation to express yield ratios.
„• -I j i, ... Harvested crop, kg/ha
Yield Ratio = —— -V , p,—77—
Wastewater applied, kg/ha
30
-------
32 r
28
24
i
16
12
8
4
SITE A
• WEST PLOT
o SOUTH PLOT
* EAST PLOT
10 20 30 40 50 - 60 70 80
EFFLUENT APPLIED, THOUSANDS OF METRIC TONS
Figure 8. Relation between effluent applied and dry crop yields (accumulated values)
-------
CO
no
20
28
<: 24
\
K
Jo
^ 16
S*
§ l2
£
& 8
4 -
0
o
x
• WEST
o SOUTH
x EAST
20
30 40 50 60 70 80
THOUSANDS OF METRIC TONS /ha
90
too
110
Figure 9. Relation between total hydraulic load and dry crop yields (accumlated values).
-------
Thus, the yield ratio for Site A data, Figure 8, is 0.36, a value which is
common to each of the three subplots.
Yield ratios calculated for Site B, where four different grass crops
were irrigated at the same target rate of 5.08 cm (2 in) per week show a much
wider variation than comparable Site A values. In part, this difference
could reflect the inability of the investigators to maintain rotary irriga-
tion of Site B during the three or four coldest winter months. Yield ratios
for Site B crops were minimal for smooth brome (0.29) and maximum for mixed
timothy-alfalfa (0.55) with intermediate values recorded for timothy (0.35)
and reed canarygrass (0.40). A summary of the information on crop yields vs
irrigation appears in Table 5.
Another significant parameter in agriculture is the tonnage of harvest-
able crop accumulated over an annual growing season. Efficient mid-western
farms of this country readily produce about 4.54 metric tons (5 short tons)
per acre per year. As shown in Table 5 none of our experimental areas at-
tained the above level of productivity. Rather, the average annual yield of
our most productive combination (reed canarygrass irrigated at 7.62 cm (3 in)
per week) totaled 3. 67 metric tons (4.04 short tons) per acre. The mixed crop of
timothy-alfalfa irrigated at 5.08 cm (2 in) per week showed a lesser amount of
production, 2.94 metric tons (3.24 tons) per acre, whereas the corresponding
averages for timothy and smooth brome were consistently less than the above.
TABLE 5. ANNUAL PRODUCTIVITY AND YIELD RATIOS FOR
WASTEWATER IRRIGATED FORAGE CROPS
Irrigation Rate
inches per week
Productivity
Short Tons/Acre
Yield Ratio*
Site A
Reed canarygrass
Reed canarygrass
Reed canarygrass
Site B
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
1.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.91
2.60
4.04
3.24
2.36
1.91
1.71
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.55
0.40
0.35
0.29
*Weight of dry crop harvested r weight total effluent applied.
Strictly speaking, extension of wastewater renovation by agricultural
systems requires that the harvestable plant material, generated by wastewater
irrigation, be collected and disassociated from the local biochemical cycle.
33
-------
Thus, crop harvesting and dispersal are integral parts of the process. How-
ever, agricultural productivity also involves the development of considerable
amounts of primary and secondary organic biomass which escape harvesting.
Nonetheless the presence of non-harvested organic material represents at
least a temporary change in phase for many chemical constituents supplied
during the wastewater irrigation. For these reasons the authors have also
calculated yield ratios on the basis of complete plant biomass; i.e., the sum
of leaf plus turf. The latter term includes unharvested stubble and roots.
Yield ratios calculated in this manner are shown in Table 6 and in general are
about double the magnitude of those calculated for leaf structure alone.
TABLE 6. YIELD RATIOS FOR TOTAL PLANTS, LEAF PLUS
TURF, PRODUCED PER UNIT IRRIGATION
1974 - 1977
Yield
Leaf Turf
m tons/ha
Total
Yield Ratio
Total Plant
Site A
Reed Canary
Reed canarygrass (E)
Reed canarygrass (S)
Reed canarygrass (W)
14.8
17.5
27.2
9.40
5.13
25.6
Site B
24.2
22.6
52.8
0.60
0.47
0.70
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
21.2
16.0
13.0
11.6
6.84
18.8
5.98
8.55
28.0
34.8
19.0
20.2
0.93
0.87
0.47
0.50
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND NUTRIENT CHARACTERISTICS OF CROPS
Chemical elements such as carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and phosphorus are
major constituents of all plant and animal assemblages wherein their propor-
tions vary according to molecular configurations, species origin and envir-
onmental conditions. Chemical constituents such as nitrogen and phosphorus
along with an array of heavy metals are often the principle target elements
of supplementary wastewater treatment systems. In practice the nutritional
requirements of wastewater-irrigated-crops help determine the level of waste-
water renovation achieved. Also the chemical composition of the various
grasses determines their nutrient values as forage crops.
In terms of ash-free dry weight, carbon, which is somewhat more promi-
34
-------
nently represented than oxygen, is the most abundant element in the Otis
crops. Together, these two elements account for about 90 percent of the ash-
free dry weight. However, the bulk of the carbon probably originates from
atmospheric rather than wastewater sources hence its presence in the plant is
not a direct indication of wastewater attenuation. Together, the fractional
percentages of nitrogen and phosphorus totaled less than 2.5 percent of the
total dry weight, but each of these elements is more intimately involved in
wastewater modification. Nitrogen, as shown in Table 7, presents the strong-
est contrast between irrigated and non-irrigated (control) crops and appears
to be the element most likely limiting plant growth.
TABLE 7. ELEMENTARY COMPOSITION,* MAJOR ELEMENTS
OTIS FORAGE CROPS
1974 - 1977
Ash-free
dry wt.
H N
PERCENT
0**
Site A, Reed canarygrass
East-plot 91.34
South-plot 91.30
West-plot 92.13
Control-plot 92.94
Site B
43.86
46.26
46.50
47.45
6.87
6.67
6.78
5.99
2.00
1.58
1.93
1.16
.420
.457
.454
.384
44.81
42.96
41.89
42.88
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
Control, timothy
92.80
92.74
93.18
92.90
92.86
46.34
46.22
47.65
47.05
46.21
6.77
6.13
6.92
6.77
6.41
2.05
1.79
1.53
1.89
1.65
.404
.301
.265
.336
.207
42.14
43.18
41.41
41.66
43.41
* Based on weighted means of ash-free dry weights
**Calculated from: 100 - [(%C) + (%H) + (%N)]
Green plants have the unique ability to use carbon dioxide and water as
their principal raw materials from which they produce a multitude of organic
compounds of varying complexity. The initial stages of the above process is
accomplished by photosynthesis which from a chemical point of view is a pro-
cess of reduction. An input of energy is required to bring about this reac-
tion hence the reduced end products which are formed represent a potential
energy source. The extent of the overall chemical reduction largely deter-
mines the level of plant-stored energy and can be expressed in terms of the
R-value which quantifies the degree of carbon reduction in an organic compound
35
-------
in accordance with the percentages of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen [24]. The
general formula for calculating R-values is given as:
[.(% C x 2.66) + (% H x 1.936) .- % 0] x 100 _
398.9 ~ R~value-
Although R-values are calculated on the relative abundance of specific
elements, they express the energy content of organic materials and hence
should compare with calorific value, the heat of combustion per gram. Small
variations from linearity between these parameters are probably due to vary-
ing nitrogen content caused by different rates of nitrogen availability. In
part, Table P summarizes the pertinent information on R-values and calorific
values from nine cuttings of Otis forage crops. Calorific values for the ir-
rigated sites ranged from about 4800-4950 cals per gram, ash-free dry weight
basis, while the comparable range of R-values was 30.65-34.25.
Once elementary analyses and R-values are determined it is possible to
estimate by calculation the approximate llpid, protein and carbohydrate con-
tent of an organic entity. First the percent nitrogen multiplied by 6.25 is
used to estimate percent protein. Using values for percent protein as one
constant and the R-values of the entire sample as another, an algebraic solu-
tion of two simultaneous equations can be used to estimate the percentages of
carbohydrates and lipid [24]. These equations are:
(% P. x 42) + (% £ x 28) + (% L x 67.5) = R-value x 100%, and (1)
% J? + % C + % L = 100 (2)
where £ = protein; £ = carbohydrate and L = lipid. The results of these
calculations as applied to Otis hay samples also appear in Table 8.
NITROGEN:PHOSPHORUS BALANCE AND EXCHANGE
The total amounts of irrigation water and the equivalent amounts of
available nitrogen and phosphorus provided for the crops of Sites A and B be-
tween 1974-1977, are shown in Figure 10. Unforeseeable interruptions in ir-
rigation during crop drying and adverse weather conditions have meant that
the actual amount of irrigation accomplished was typically less than planned.
The available nitrogen application to Site A varied between 504 and 905 kg
per ha (.227-.403 tons per acre), the range reflecting the three different
rates of applied irrigation. The quadrants of Site B, which were all irri-
gated at a constant rate, received 491 kg/ha (.219 tons per acre) within the
same time period. The amount of available phosphorus applied at Site A
ranged from 358-642 kg per ha (.160-.286 tons per acre) while each subplot of
Site B received, in common, 348 kg/ha (.155 tons per acre).
As iterated above, the value of an agricultural spray-irrigation system
as an effective supplement to conventional sewage treatment largely depends
upon the combined amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus intercepted by the crops
and underlying soil, processes which deny these elements access to the ex-
terior environment. Consequently, close attention should be given to the
36
-------
60-
40
Uj ^ 20H
oo
"xj
1400-
1200-
1000-
800 H
600
400
200
E S W
SITE A
SITE B
N P
SOUTH
N P
WEST
N P
TIMOTHY
ALFALFA
60-
40-
20-
= < uo
(-(El-
N P
REED
CANARY
N P
TIMOTHY
£ i^^T
< H bS
OZ O go
CO
N P
SMOOTH
BROME
Figure 10. Total effluent delivered to subplots (inserts) and equivalent amounts of nitrogen and phosphorus
applied (dark areas) and retained (clear areas) by crops 1974-1977.
-------
TABLE 8. ENERGY AND NUTRITIONAL POTENTIAL,*
OTIS FORAGE CROPS
1975 - 1977
R- Gals Carbo. Protein Lipid
Value per gm - Percent -
Site A, Reed canarygrass
East plot
South plot
West plot
Control
30.65
32.41
32.88
4934
4809
4810
31.97 4848
85.28
82.46
79.86
85.27
12.50
9.88
12.06
2.22
7.66
8.08
7.25 7.48
Site B
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
Control
32.71
31.16
34.25
33.36
31.78
4807
4808
4936
4823
4701
79.76
84.78
78.01
78.81
83.77
12.81
11.19
9.56
11.81
10.31
7.43
4.03
12.43
9.38
5.92
*Based on weighted means of ash-free dry weights.
establishment of an effective quantitative balance between the supply (waste-
water) of, and the demand (crops and soil) for, these nutrients within the
overall system.
The data of Figure 10 also show that the total amounts of nitrogen and
phosphorus intercepted by the irrigated crops varies with the rates of appli-
cation. Nitrogen uptake is shown to be consistently higher than that of
phosphorus both on an absolute and on a relative basis. The latter observa-
tion reinforces the earlier contention of the authors that nitrogen rather
than phosphorus was the element more likely limiting to plant growth. A third
revelation is that nitrogen:phosphorus ratios, by weight, consistently fall
below a value of 2 in irrigation water whereas the same ratio increases by
3-6 fold in the mature crops. The above observation again stresses the
marked imbalance between available nitrogen and phosphorus abundance in secon-
dary effluent as opposed to the chemical make-up of these forage grasses.
Prior to October 1973, the Otis agricultural plots were woodlands yet
to be cleared and planted in hay crops. In the fall of 1975, after the
seeded crops had developed a firm root system, soil sampling profiles taken
to a depth of 122 cm (4 ft) were examined for each subplot and in addition
the uppermost 30 cm (1 ft) was subjected to soil and root analyses. Results
for the observed amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen measured in these samples
are given in Table 9. At each of the subplots, irrigation resulted in an in-
crease in phosphorus content above that recorded for the corresponding soil
38
-------
TABLE 9. NITROGEN-PHOSPHORUS CONTENT (GM/M2) OF OTIS
SOILS SAMPLED TO A DEPTH OF 30 CM
Phosphorus Nitrogen
Site A, Reed canarygrass
East 108 234
South 115 207
West 122 213
Control 93.6 276
Site B
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
Control
76.4
102
112
88.3
73.2
186
224
-
231
192
control sample. Phosphorus enrichment in the underlying soil was particu-
larly apparent in the case of reed canarygrass and timothy subplots. Re-
garding nitrogen, the situation was not so clear-cut, however, unlike phos-
phorus, there was little or no indication of a nitrogen build-up in the up-
per-most foot of agricultural soil.
Nitrogenrphosphorus (N:P) ratios of leaf, turf and soil samples, collected
from each of the agricultural plots, have also been examined. The resulting
data, as summarized in Table 10, show that the turf of these grasses does
not differ systematically from leaf material with regard to nitrogen and
phosphorus aportionment. The mean N:P ratio observed for all irrigated
crops was 5.03 whereas the comparable ratio in the irrigation water was only
1.48. Also the irrigated soils showed an N:P ratio of 1.66 whereas the soils
on non-irrigated control plots showed a significantly higher average N:P
ratio of 3.40. The above nitrogen:phosphorus relations when expressed in
terms of a single unit of phosphorus, indicates that the nitrogen deficiency
of secondary effluent corresponds to 3.40 units of nitrogen for each unit of
phosphorus provided.
Nitrogen limitation not only reduces potential productivity, but also
ensures an underutilization of phosphorus and possibly other elements. Fur-
thermore, the low N:P ratios described for irrigated soils may reflect sig-
nificant scavangering of soil nitrogen by nitrogen deficient crops and/or
above-ambient adsorption of underutilized phosphorus to soil particles.
ADDITIONAL CHEMICAL ELEMENTS MEASURED IN OTIS FORAGE CROPS
Elementary chemical analyses of harvested crop material has also
39
-------
TABLE 10. NITROGEN:PHOSPHORUS RATIOS (BY WT)
OTIS FORAGE CROPS
1974 - 1977
Crop Turf Soil
N:P N:P N:P
Site A, Reed canarygrass
East 4.76 3.83 1.68
South 3.46 4.03 1.31
West 4.25 4.33 1.62
Control 3.02 5.47 4.04
Site B
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
Control
Mean, irrigated plots
Mean, Otis secondary effluent
5.07
5.95
6.12
5.63
7.98
5.05
1.48
5.21
4.59
4.96
4.38
6.33
4.48
1.50
1.61
1.83
2.05
2.75
1.66
included an evaluation of 10 additional elements besides carbon, hydrogen,
nitrogen and phosphorus. These other entities can be conveniently divided
into two groups, the major cations and the minor cations or elements present
at trace concentration. Among the major cations measured were potassium,
calcium, magnesium and sodium. The minor cations or trace elements included
iron, manganese, zinc, copper, lead and cadmium.
The fractional proportions of major cations measured on an ash-free dry
weight basis in the Otis crops are shown in Table 11 where the percentages
entered reflect weighted means for all crops harvested between 1974 and 1977.
The most abundantly represented element of this group was potassium which
consistently represented between 1.50 and 2.00 percent of the harvested
material. Sodium, on the other hand, was the least abundant of these ele-
ments, its highest concentration measuring less than 0.05 percent. The pro-
portions of calcium and magnesium in these grasses were quite comparable at
a concentration roughly intermediate between that of potassium and sodium.
A significant aspect of these data is the extent to which these crops dis-
criminate against sodium in favor of potassium. Another interesting point is
that potassium and magnesium alone showed enrichment in the irrigated crops
above that of the non-irrigated controls. The relative proportions of these
elements does not appear to differ significantly for the unique grass species.
40
-------
TABLE 11. ELEMENTARY COMPOSITION* MAJOR CATIONS
OTIS FORAGE CROPS
1974 - 1977
K
Ca Mg
- Percent -
Na
Site A, Reed canarygrass
East
South
West
Control
Site B
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
Timothy, control
1.66
1.88
1.45
1.70
1.97
1.91
2.00
1.51
.193
.142
.173
.295
.169
.165
.164
.202
.192
.178
.234
.024
.165
.169
.119
.110
.098
.035
.026
.042
.011
.049
.025
.012
.018
*Based on weighted means of ash-free dry weight.
The representation of minor cations or trace elements, given in parts
per million ash-free dry weight basis, is shown in Table 12. Again, the
values entered represent weighted means for all irrigated and non-irrigated
crops harvested between 1974 and 1977. In this case iron is the most
prominent trace metal, followed by a preferential order of uptake whereby
manganese exceeds zinc, copper, lead and cadmium. In terms of concentration,
iron exceeds cadmium by three orders of magnitude whereas the remaining ele-
ments occur at concentrations about 100 times greater than that of cadmium.
There is no consistent trend supporting luxury uptake by the irrigated crops
of any of these cations over that observed for the non-irrigated control
crops.
WASTEWATER RENOVATION BY CROPS
The renovation efficiency whereby crops remove a given chemical sub-
stance from wastewater is defined as:
Efficiency, %
mass in harvested crop
±n applied
„ .....
X 100.
(3)
Accumulated values describing the long-term renovative efficiencies for
nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, copper, cadmium and zinc are shown in
Figures 11 and 12 and Table 13. Within the observed scatter and for the
41
-------
no
SITE A
to
\ 400
•*:
uT
:j 200
5;
^
0
A
A NITROGEN
A A
•o *
o
— • o
. O A
A
-
. * |A 1 1 1 !
ZOO 400 600 800 1000
N APPLIED, kg /ha
A
O
I 80
*
kT
^c
5 40
J^*
2
Q.
0
A
0 A
0 * PHOSPHORUS
o'
o
— £ O A
o, ob
o •
• P A 1 1 1 1 1 l^t
tOO 200 3OO 400 500 60O TOO 745
P APPLIED, kg /ha
«S
\400
"*
^"
JJ 200
^
^
0
POTASSIUM
4. A
A A
o
a *>*»• °
^ *
"
• "1 A 1 1 1 1 1
IOO 200 300 400 500 600
K APPLIED, kg /ha
SITE B
-C 400
^
2*
5 200
JJ
^
^ o
NITROGEN
- A
A
— A
A
A A «
* a °
- * & o
* s *
A 1 ' 1 1 1
10 200 300 400 500
N APPLIED, kg /ha
**
•c
\ 60
*
kT
V
Jt 4O
K^
^
d.
0
PHOSPHORUS
A
A
— *
A *
A
A A
A A * • 8
A £ 0 0 0
A
•a i i i i i
(00 2OO 300 400 500
5 400
\
•*
^ 200
J5
%
V 0
POTASSIUM
A
A * * f
t • « ' °
A • o
A o ° °
4
•fi 1 1 ' <
f 100 200 300 400
K APPLIED, kg /ha
tsubpoof > osporus an potassium at
three sublots of Site A and four subplots of Site B. Site A data correspond
^" °f "ed,can«y g-s« irrigation; solid circles, 1 ln per vk
SiteR H ^ Per f" 1977; °Pen ClrCleS 2-; and °Pen triangles 3 in per wi.
Site B data correspond to different forage crops irrigated at 2 in per wk -
solid triangles timothy-alfalfa; solid circles, timothy; open triangles reed
canary and open circles smooth brome. triangles, reed
-------
SITE A
U)
to
^ IO.O
ur
k
* 6.0
Q
5>
X>
^ 2.0
CADMIUM
A
A
o&
o- °
. * 200
n
— O JL LCt JD A
A
A CADMIUM
- A
__ •
A •
• O
* S o o o
ft « *
Ti 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 10 15 20 25 30
Cd ADDED, g/ha
200
5:
\
, «
3'°°
iv
a
COPPER
A
A
A
A A
A C
A
; . - * * * ft
„ i i i i i
** 500 1000 (500 2000 2500
Cu APPLIED, g/ha
600
(a
** 400
ly
9; 200
•o
•5
_
-_
ZINC
A
— A *
A *
A *
A a *
A * 5 ° ° °
1 * b °
^ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
° *250 500 750 1000 (250 (500 (750
Zn APPLIED, ka/ha
Zn APPLIED, g/ha
Figure 12.
Long-term (1974-77) renovation efficiencies for cadmium, copper and zinc at
three subplots of Site A and four subplots of Site B. Site A data correspond
to different rates of reed canary grass irrigation; solid circles, 1 in per wk.,
1974-76 and 4 in per wk., 1977; open circles 2-; and open triangles 3 in per wk.
Site B data correspond to different forage crops irrigated at 2 in per wk.;
solid triangles, timothy-alfalfa; solid circles, timothy; open triangles, reed
canary and open circles smooth brome.
-------
TABLE 12. ELEMENTARY COMPOSITION-TRACE ELEMENTS
OTIS FORAGE CROPS
1974 - 1977
Fe Mn Zn Cu Pb
- Parts per million -
Cd
Site A, Reed canarygrass
East
South
West
Control
Site B
Timothy-alfalfa
Reed canarygrass
Timothy
Smooth brome
Timothy control
138
123
145
178
89
78
76
85
52
50
23
46
21
33
29
37
34
37
46
29
33
31
23
18
14
9
12
16
11
3 0.2
2 0.3
2 0.3
3 0.4
2
2
2
2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
delivery rates applied, these data consistently describe a linear relation be-
tween the application and uptake variables. Other elements such as magnesium,
calcium, and sodium were also observed to behave in a similar manner, whereas
calcium and iron behaved differently and exhibited a unique response for each
wastewater delivery rate.
Information on elementary efficiences for the four different crop varie-
ties of Site B has also been compiled. In Figure 11 and Tables 13 and 14,
nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium exchanges are shown while Figure 12 pro-
vides information on copper, cadmium and zinc. In each of the above instances
the maximum removal efficiency was accomplished by the mixed timothy-alfalfa
crop. Other elements which were most effectively removed by the timothy-al-
falfa crop were calcium, iron, and lead. Regarding other Site B crops there
was little or no difference between the long term trends describing renovation
efficiencies for the elements described in Figures 11 and 12. On the other
hand, the individual crops of Site B showed separate uptake patterns for the
elements zinc, manganese, sodium and magnesium.
Values representing the ultimate extent of renovation accomplished for
all the chemical entities examined for Site A and B crops also appear in
Tables 13 and 14 respectively. These combined data suggest that neither the
irrigation rates, nor crop varieties employed, exclusively regulate the uptake
behavior of these crops. The authors would anticipate, however, that irriga-
tion rates in excess of some undefined, but critical level would ultimately
lead to a breakdown in renovation efficiencies.
44
-------
TABLE 13. RENOVATION EFFICIENCIES, PERCENT, FOR VARIOUS CHEMICAL
ELEMENTS APPLIED TO CROPS OF SITE A*
1974 - 1977
Reed Canarygrass Plot
Chemical Element
Manganese
Potassium
Nitrogen
Zinc
Magnesium
Phosphorus
Cadmium
Lead
Iron
Calcium
Copper
Sodium
*Irrigation rates:
East
-
144
55.3
51.8
29.7
18.0
15.3
11.7
14.1
8.97
8.09
6.60
0.29
East 1 inch per week, 1974-1976
4 inches per week, 1977
South 2 inches per week, 1974-1977
West 3 inches per week, 1974-1977
South
Percent -
92.3
62.9
42.8
28.7
17.6
17.4
11.5
10.0
8.38
6.28
4.19
0.23
West
92.7
74.0
54.7
32.9
24.2
18.0
13.0
10.7
10.1
7.98
5.80
0.39
45
-------
TABLE 14. RENOVATION EFFICIENCIES, PERCENT, FOR VARIOUS CHEMICAL
ELEMENTS APPLIED TO FOUR DIFFERENT CROPS OF SITE B
1974 - 1977
Timothy-
alfalfa
Chemical Element
Reed
canarygrass
- Percent
Timothy
Smooth
brome
Manganese
Potassium
Nitrogen
Zinc
Magnesium
Phosphorus
Cadmium
Lead
Iron
Calcium
Copper
Sodium
89.5
82.2
53.8
26.0
16.7
12.5
10.8
10.2
5.84
7.97
5.74
0.48
60.6
95.2
82.7
30.5
21.7
22.6
20.2
15.4
17.1
19.6
3.84
1.10
37.4
72.0
41.5
22.0
10.6
10.0
9.67
9.73
5.23
7.48
2.99
0.22
47.6
62.1
42.4
13.7
8.07
10.4
7.95
7.24
4.27
6.08
2.95
0.09
46
-------
SECTION 9
GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY AND THE IMPACT OF SPRAY-IRRIGATION
HYDROGEOLOGIC STUDIES
The geohydrography of Cape Cod (Figure 13) has been reviewed in reports
by Oldale [9]; Mather et a.1. [10]; Mather et al. [11]; Strahler [5, 6]; and
Palmer [25]. From these sources it can be inferred that the hydrogeology of
the area can be considered a single, homogeneous, anisotropic aquifer with
maximum hydraulic conductivity (HC) in the north-south direction roughly
parallel to the direction of deposition of the outwash sands and gravels.
The east-west HC is considerably smaller in a direction which is roughly per-
pendicular to that of glacial deposition. The water table map for the Fal-
mouth area shown in Figure 14 and the saturation thickness map shown in
Figure 15 have been used to prepare replicate estimates of the hydraulic con-
ductivities in each of the above directions. This analysis provided a range
of north-south HC values of 42.7-50.9 m (140-167 ft) per day and an east-west
range of 18.9-24.7 m (62-81 ft) per day for annual recharge rates of 5.35-
6.36 m (17.54-20.88 ft) per day.
Analyses of data from four aquifer tests, involving the array of ground-
water observation wells shown in Figure 16, yielded an estimated range of
35.7-48.2 m (117-158 ft) per day for HC and 0.13-0.26 for specific yield (SY)
defined as:
sy _ Volume water yielded by gravity from saturated rock
Volume of rock source •
The averages of four independent HC and SY measurements were 40.5 m (133 ft)
per day for HC and 0.18 for SY.
Average annual recharge was estimated by three different methods: a
Thornthwaite estimation of evapo-transpiration (ET), a flownet analysis, and
a chloride balance method. These methods yielded estimates of 53.04, 42.27,
45.21 cm (20.88, 16.64 and 17.80 in) per year respectively. Maximum and
minimum recharge rates for the irrigation plots were estimated using a
Thornthwaite calculation (assuming no ET loss from the irrigation water) and
a chloride balance method (using the maximum measured chloride concentration
in the percolate) respectively. The maximum recharge rates for 1975 were
respectively estimated to be 73%, 79% and 84% for the 2.54, 5.08, and 7.62 cm
(1, 2, and 3 in) per week plots of Site A. For 1976 the maximum recharge
rates were 68%, 75%, and 80% for the 2.54, 5.08 and 7.62 cm per week plots
respectively. The minimum recharge for the same plots, respectively, are
placed at 32%, 49% and 34% for 1975 and 33%, 57% and 53% for 1976.
47
-------
Qb
Qs
Q]
Qbo
Qsn>
Qmp .•. '.' Mashpee Pitted Plain Deposits
Beach and Dune Deposits
(Contemporaneous with Qs)
Marsh Deposits
(Contemporaneous with Qb)
Cape Cod Bay Glacial Lake
Deposits
Buzzards Bay Outwash Deposits
(Contemporaneous with Qsm)
Sandwich Moraine Deposits
(Contemporaneous with Qbo)
Buzzards Bay Ground Moraine
Buzzards Bay Moraine Deposits
/ Holocene
) Woodfordian ) Pleistocene
Qnd
Nantucket Sound Ice-Contact
Deposits
Cape Cod Wastewater Renovation
Experiment Site
Bedrock Elevation Contour
(Contour Interval = 25 m)
Figure 13. Legend
48
-------
4I°45'
4I°40
41-35' '
41° 30'
70° 40'
A
70° 35' 70° 30'
0 4 8 12 16 thousand ft
C I 2 3 4 kilom«teri
70s 25'
Figure 13. Geology of the Falmouth Area of Cape Cod, Massachusetts
(Legend continued.)
49
-------
4IM5
4I°4O' -
41
• •«- j- <^,
j. \( —-ii* /*
CAPE COO CANAL
BUZZARDS
BAY
NANTUCKET
SOUND
Grou«dvwt«r «l«vattoo contour
(contour Interval = 5 f««t)
Exp«rim«nt sit« at Otl* AFB
• Pumping etnttrt at Otl* AFB
O Lang Pond pumping Italian
VINEYARD SOUND
41° 35'
70° 40'
>
70-35' 70' 30'
0 4 8 12 16 thousand ft
| 2 3
70* 25'
Figure 14. Watertable map for Falmouth area, Cape Cod, Massachusetts November, 1975.
50
-------
BUZZARDS
BAY
NANTUCKET
SOUND
Otis B-Well
• R Retrieval well
• 3 Folmouth well no. 3
S Fdlmoutti well no. 6-74
" Saturated thickness contour
(contour interval20ft)
VINEYARD SOUND
4I-30'
70° 40'
70° 35' 70-30'
0 4 8 12 16 thousand ft
C I 2 3 4 Kilom«rtrs
70° 25'
Figure 15. Saturated thickness
map,
-------
:
oppronimat* ~
center of recharge area
retrieval well— __ _
SAND FILTER BED AREA
CfTIS AIR FORCE BASE,
MASSACHUSETTS
Figure 16. Map showing the Location of the observation wells and discharge point with respect to the
Retrieval Well, Otis AFB, Cape Cod, Massachusetts.
-------
A digital model was proposed and was used to simulate a steady state
watertable configuration based on existing conditions. This was
obtained for a homogeneous, anisotropic aquifer with an east-west HC = 26.2 m
(86 ft) per day and north-south HC = 38.1 m (125 ft) per day and with a re-
charge rate of 53.04 cm (20.88 in) per year. Thus far, no attempt has been
made to model any other recharge rates. Recharge for spetic tanks in the
Falmouth area was estimated from other reports [26] to be .089 cm (.035 in)
per day. Pumping at Long Pond, the source of most of the municipal fresh-
water for Falmouth, was set at 10,370 m3 (366,000 ft3) per day. Pumping at
Otis AFB was estimated to be 2082 m3 (73,530 ft3) per day and was distributed
evenly over its two pumping centers and recharged evenly over the area of the
sand filter beds, since the prepared irrigation plan called for a 5.08 cm
(2 in) per week irrigation schedule, recharge rates of 49%, 69% and 79% of
the total applied water (irrigation and precipitation) were simulated.
The results of those simulations were that regardless of whether ocean
outfall or spray-irrigation are used as the wastewater management method, the
effect of sewering will be the same within the sewered areas, i.e., up to
39.62 cm (1.3 ft) of groundwater level decline will result. Ocean outfall
will have the effect of dropping the water level of Long Pond by 15.2 cm
(0.5 ft) and spray-irrigation may reduce this drop to only 9.14 cm (0.3 ft).
These effects will be greater during the summer months when pumping is
greater and there is a net loss of water from the aquifer by ET. To evaluate
the effects during the summer months a non-steady-state model would be re-
quired.
Areas around the Otis irrigation site that are not far above the present
seasonably high water table may be affected by rising water levels resulting
from increased recharge; up to 1.68 m (5.5 ft). In particular, areas on the
west side of Ashumet Pond may be affected.
The model compiled has limitations. It needs further refinement of
hydraulic conductivity values. It was modeled upon only one recharge value,
and it is a steady-state model. Furthermore, it does not take into account
the effects from large ponds on the water table configuration. Streams can
also have a controlling influence on the water table configuration, for stream
flows may increase in response to increased recharge rather than waterlevels
within a particular area. Better estimates of all parameters (recharge,
specific yield, hydraulic conductivity, etc.) are also needed for formulation
of an improved model along with validation studies involving more waterlevel
measurements over a much longer period of time.
In spite of all of these short-comings the model presented should repre-
sent at least a first and best presently available approximation of the po-
tential affects from a full scale wastewater-irrigation facility at Otis for
the town of Falmouth.
GROUNDWATER QUALITY CHANGES
Groundwater samples have been routinely collected from wells located im-
mediately down gradient from each Site A plot and also from upstream control
sources. All wells were assembled with 1.82 m (6 ft) well points which
53
-------
intersect the top several feet of the aquifer where the greatest groundwater
attenuation was anticipated.
Numerous cations and anions have been observed to occur at increased
concentrations with time, but the abundance has not as yet exceeded either
EPA or U.S. Public Health Service standards for potable waters. At the same
time, however, this subject cannot be lightly dismissed since certain of the
ions examined are continuing to appear at accelerated concentrations in the
groundwater. The following paragraphs describe groundwater characteristics
after the four years of wastewater irrigation.
Time related changes for chloride, nitrate, sodium, potassium and boron
from beneath Site A plots prior to and after four years of irrigation are
shown in Figures 17 through 21. These data have been expressed as three
point running averages to help overcome background noise. Also we have
purposely omitted data relating to the intermediate rates of irrigation,
[south plot, irrigation 5.08 cm (2 in) per week], since these data consis-
tently took an inbetween, but often overlapping position between results re-
corded for the minimum and maximum rates of irrigation.
Since chloride is one of the least likely ions to be intercepted by
crops or soil, its increase in groundwater can provide a useful measure of
the recharge time for irrigation water. At Otis the arrival of chloride in
the wells followed an S-shaped curve and a mean arrival time has been defined
as the interval between the start of irrigation and the arrival of one-half
of initial plateau concentration. Using this technique, the fastest rate of
irrigation corresponded to a recharge time of about 200 days or a descent of
7.6 cm (3 in) per day (Figure 17). Greater uncertainty is associated with the
lesser rates of irrigation, but the data clearly suggest an arrival time in
excess of 200 days. Information on recharge indicates a time requirement
which is strongly influenced by the total hydraulic loading applied at the
surface.
Starting about mid 1976 a second pulse of chloride arrival began to
appear under the west plot and a maximum concentration of 40 ppm was reached
during the first half of 1977. The very moderate increase in chloride asso-
ciated with the east plot is probably an independent effect since the irriga-
tion rate at this location was increased from 2.54 to 10.16 cm (1 to 4 in)
per week during 1977. However, the reason for the secondary chloride pulse
under the west plot cannot be satisfactorily explained at this time.
Data describing the appearance of nitrate-nitrogen in the groundwater
under Site A are shown in Figure 18. Again the mid-point of the initial
pulse under the west plot correspond to an arrival time of about 200 days.
However, early in 1975 a marked decrease in nitrate concentration commenced
and persisted well into 1976. During the latter half of 1976 and throughout
1977 the nitrate changes stabilized at 1.0 and 0.30 ppm respectively for the
west and east plot groundwaters. There is reason to believe that the abrupt
decrease in nitrate in 1975 corresponded to an increase in crop biomass and
a more efficient nitrate uptake provided by a fully established root system.
Figure 19 shows comparable groundwater results for sodium and provides
54
-------
30
en
tn
JM
ft 20
§
10
X X
ARRIVAL TIME
— 200 DAYS-
X xxx
o
(T
01
or
te
XXX X
X x x x xx x x x x x
A A
A A
AAAA
A AAAA
A«
A
A
..
1974
1975
T
1976
1977
Figure 17. Chloride concentrations vs. time, Site A wells, located on west (crosses), south (triangles)
and east (solid dots) subplots.
-------
01
a\
t.u
-------
tn
30
^f \f
r
S
^
1
^
10
z
o
H-
O
-------
CO
1.50
I
I
^
5
.75
.00
X
XXX
A
A • A
XX
—
cc
a:
en
xxxxx
xxx
XXA
AAAA
• •
X X
1974
A A
1975
1976
1977
Figure 20. Potassium concentrations vs. time, Site A wells located on west (crosses), wouth (triangles)
and east (solid dots) subplots.
-------
CJl
.ou
.40
|.30
1
Q^-20
.10
—
z
o
\-
0
— CC
tr
u_
o
.
CC
~" CO
x SJ
A
X
X X
x x
X
X
XXX
X XX
x „ x x x
X
x xxx
A
A AA
A
XAA AA ..A. -A A^-
X x A A A •
v vXXA^A. «AA • ••
{ .XwA • A • • • • A ••••
A AAAX.« •• •
• » " X • • A A •
A • • • • & &
1974
1975
1976
1977
Figure 21. Boron concentrations vs. time, Site A wells located on west (crosses), south (triangles) and
east (solid dots) subplots.
-------
unmistakable evidence of a continuing increase in concentration (up to 27
ppm) and the prolonged period required for a steady state development. In
view of recent adverse disclosures concerning the effects of sodium on
hypertensive individuals, the incompleteness of the sodium record will
remain a matter of concern unless follow-up analyses are completed. In
Massachusetts the drinking water recommendation for sodium is under 20 ppm,
which is significantly less than the current sodium content of the
groundwater beneath the agricultural crops.
The time related changes for potassium as shown in Figure 20 also de-
scribe an initial arrival time of about 200 days. As was the case with
chloride and nitrate, the maximum observed concentrations of potassium
occurred during the first half of 1975. Late potassium changes during 1977
which demonstrated an accelerated increase in abundance are difficult to
interpret in view of a simultaneous and inexplicable increase in the potas-
sium content of the upstream control well. This is the only instance where-
in such broad fluctuations were encountered in the control situation.
Groundwater changes in boron with time underneath Site A are shown in
Figure 21. Among the elements examined boron demonstrated the longest
groundwater arrival time; in excess of 500 days. Also, the pattern of boron
enrichment was characterized by prominent pulses which appeared in mid 1976
and again in 1977.
The investigators had hoped to make mass balance analyses, describing
the partitioning of some 15 critical chemical elements into crops, soil
water, and groundwater, an integral part of these studies. However, the
unexpected delay encountered with respect to steady-state arrivals in the
groundwater presently preclude this possibility pending the appearance of
constant concentrations of sodium, potassium, boron and chloride.
Distinct from the above, the Otis data also identify a second group of
ions which includes phosphate, nitrate, magnesium and calcium that display
groundwater concentrations which appear to have stabilized within the past
year. Providing the behavior of these elements can be compared with the
equilibrium behavior of more conservative ions, such as chloride, their
potential as tracer ions can be more fully exploited. Ultimately, this
should provide a much better understanding of the physical and biological
phenomenon which regulate the movement and quality of the groundwater of the
southern Cape Cod aquifer [27, 28].
60
-------
SECTION 10
CHLORINATION OF AGRICULTURAL SYSTEMS IRRIGATED
WITH DOMESTIC WASTEWATER
Spray irrigation of agricultural crops with partially treated wastewater
is already a popular means of extending water renovation and improving its
conservation. However, as with all waste disposal techniques, acceptance of
this form of recycling requires pathogen elimination as well as an avoidance
of other adverse environmental consequences.
Unfortunately, conventional wastewater treatments do not guarantee path-
ogen-free effluents unless their end products are subjected to terminal dis-
infection. In this country, chemical disinfection of wastewaters used for
irrigation is generally achieved by chlorination, especially if crops intend-
ed for human consumption are involved. In the absence of chlorination,
disease entities can be transmitted from incompletely disinfected irrigation
waters by way of the following:
1. Inhalation of aerosols carrying pathogenic bacteria or viruses,
2. Consumption of contaminated food crops,
3. Ingestion of drinking water containing pathogenic organisms.
While terminal disinfection would appear mandatory for safe spray irri-
gation, chlorine usage can also lead to undesirable environmental effects.
Chlorine residuals as low as 0.20 mg per 1 or less have been shown to be dis-
ruptive to many aquatic plants and animals. Also, free chlorine can seriously
inhibit photosynthesis in higher agricultural crops. Even more disconcerting
is the increasing number of references in the environmental literature which
warn of biological hazards from persistent chloro-organic compounds in nature.
Clearly, there is a need for improved criteria to restrain an overzealous use
of chlorine for disinfecting purposes. Ultimately, it may even become de-
sireable to assign optimal chlorine dosages which take into account the pecu-
liarities of individual chlorination facilities.
During the past year, the authors have investigated the effects of
chlorine on the inactivation of MS-2 bacteriophage at the spray-irrigation
and agricultural facility located at Otis Air Force Base, Massachusetts.
In this case, secondary effluent is lagooned for two to three weeks and then
disinfected with liquid chlorine immediately before application to a series
of experimental agricultural plots. A (10.2 cm) polyethylene force main
415 m (1360 ft) long, serves as an experimental contact chamber for chlorina-
61
-------
tion and provides a controllable retention time (12 min. at a normal pumping
rate of 265 1 (70 gals) per minute). Initially, the chlorine dosage applied
was fixed at 10 mg per 1; but since 1976, after evaluating preliminary test
results, a more flexible chlorination program was adopted whereby chlorine
dosage is varied. Usually residual chlorine (free available chlorine) is
maintained within the range of 1 to 2 mg per 1.
The experimental studies of the authors with chlorine have emphasized viral
rather than bacterial survival since the former typically display more resis-
tance to chlorine. The virus of the bacterial species, Escheptchia coli
P4 X 6, known as MS-2, has become the test organism of choice. This virus
has similar size and structure to Poliovirus 1 and is considered equally or
more resistant to chlorine than most enteric viruses. The experience of the
authors has verified that bacteriophage MS-2 is indeed more resistant to
chlorine than is the coliform group of bacteria.
To assess the disinfection potential of chlorine at the Otis spray-irri-
gation facility, nine survival studies were conducted with MS-2 coliphage.
In a typical experiment, a known concentration of coliphage in the density
range 1 x 1010 to 1 x 1011 Plaque Forming Units (PFU) per ml was introduced
continuously into the origin of the force main with a peristaltic pump. The
static concentration of phage in the force main after its complete dispersal
and dilution with lagoon effluent was typically reduced to 1 x 10-> to 1 x 10
PFU/ml. Before initiating chlorination, a sufficient number of samples was
taken over a 40-minute period to accurately establish the control MS-2 den-
sity in the absence of added chlorine. Subsequently, known and increasing
increments of chlorine were applied, each for a 40-minute period, for ulti-
mate comparison of MS-2 levels with the non-chlorinated control. At each
chlorine concentration, four samples were taken at 10-minute intervals and
immediately dechlorinated with sodium thiosulfate and preserved with chloro-
form. Finally, each sample was quantitatively assayed in the laboratory for
MS-2 using the agar overlay method described by Adams [29]. To help clarify
the experimental format, the record from a typical survival study is shown in
Figure 22. Seasonal repetition of such observations along with other appro-
priate water analyses has enabled the authors to intercompare antiviral
chlorine effectiveness with irrigation water parameters such as temperature,
pH and ammonia content.
Free residual chlorine was measured colorimetrically by the DPD method,
which uses the indicator solution diethyl-p-phenylene diamine. Either a pH
meter or colorimeter was used to determine pH. Ammonia-nitrogen was deter-
mined, following Millipore filtration (0.45 ym porosity) of the primary
water sample by the alkaline phenolhypochlorite method.
Reductions in MS-2 density on nine different occasions following timed
exposures to experimentally added chlorine are shown in Figure 23. For each
experiment the log^o of the surviving coliphage is plotted against the appro-
priate amount of experimentally added chlorine. The relative steepness of
the negative slopes describes coliphage inactivation and provides an assess-
ment of the relative effectiveness of chlorination on each of the indicated
dates.
62
-------
CHLORINATION AND COLIPHAGE
MS-2 INACTIVATION
JULY 23,1975
CHLORINE CONC. ppm
0 6.7 12.8
1000000 -
Figure 22.
LAGOON WATER
TEMP. 26°C
pH 7.6
NH4-N 0.35ppm
20 40
60 80 ^ 100 120 140 160
TIME (min.)
Typical experimental format for studying coliphage, MS-2, survival in
response to controlled chlorine concentrations and contact times at Otis
Air Force Base.
63
-------
The amounts of chlorine dosage necessary to Inactivate a majority of the
MS-2 particles varied from 2 to 3 rag per 1 in November 1975 to 25 mg per 1 in
February 1976. Generally, the chlorine requirement for a comparable amount
of disinfection was higher during winter than summer and maintenance of 1.0
to 2.0 mg per 1 free available chlorine residual in the effluent insured ade-
quate disinfection. However, closer examination reveals that such high chlo-
rine concentrations are not always required and may represent over-dosage.
Because each coliphage measurement shown in Figure 23 corresponds to a
uniform contact period of 12 minutes, the slopes of the individual lines also
correspond to the time rates of change for coliphage inactivation. The
authors have expressed these data in terms of a chlorination index defined as
the concentration of chlorine (mg per 1) necessary to accomplish a 90 percent
inactivation of the initially provided MS-2 concentration after 12 minutes
contact. This index is inversely related to the effectiveness of chlorina-
tion since small chlorination indices correspond to relatively high chlorine
efficiencies. The relations shown in Figure 24 record chlorination indices
ranging from 0.4 mg per 1 chlorine (November 10, 1975) to 17.8 mg per 1 chlo-
rine (February 27, 1976).
Seasonal changes in the environmental variables, temperature, pH and
ammonia-nitrogen are linearly plotted in Figure 24 along with the nine chlo-
rination indices derived from Figure 23. The pH varied from 6.5 to 9.6.
Hence, as described by White [30, 31], most of the chlorine should have
occurred as HOC1 at the lower pH value but as OC1~ at the higher value.
However, the relations shown in Figure 24 indicate that these pH changes per
se do not have an overriding effect on chlorination efficiency although
chemical theory predicts a significant role for this variable. Conversely,
seasonal changes in ammonia do appear to impart significant variations on
the chlorination index, with low indices corresponding to low ammonia concen-
trations and vice versa. As expected, temperature shows an inverse relation
to the chlorination index since high temperatures play a dual role by enhanc-
ing both ammonia removal via oxidative nitrification and the disinfection
process.
A large number of plausible mathematical relations were examined to
evaluate the influence of variations in pH, temperature, and ammonia-nitrogen
on the effectiveness of chlorination. Each of the empirical expressions was
computer-tested for statistical significance by means of the multiple re-
gression analysis available in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(SPSS). The overall test for statistical goodness of fit in the SPSS pro-
gram involves the calculation of an F-ratio which is distributed approxi-
mately as the F-distribution. In this case, an examined relationship becomes
statistically significant to the .001 level only when the F-ratio is greater
than or equal to the critical F of 29.00.
The above analysis has enabled the authors to identify the following
emperical expressions 5 and 6 which have proven useful for evaluating the re-
lative influence of pH, temperature, and ammonia-nitrogen on the variation of
the chlorination index (I ):
64
-------
100
.0001
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
CHL ORINE ADDED ppm
Figure 23.
Graphic presentations of coliphage, MS-2, survival in the presence of experimentally added
chlorine concentrations at Otis Air Force Base. All contact times 12 minutes. The concen-
tration of chlorine required for the initial 90 percent inactivation has been taken as the
chlorination index.
65
-------
30.0
25.0
•
20.0
•
U
15.0
10.0
5.0
CHLORINATION
INDEX
\ '
\t
•
'>,<
/ a
/ /
/r
D-..
i
~OQ- Q-
/° /
/ /
J.-U
9'
3O.O
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
I
-
I
•i-
I
•>
-
•
;
5.0
f
, MONTHS
Figure 24. Seasonal variations in temperature, pH, ammonia-nitrogen and the cor
responding chlorination indices for coliphage, MS-2, in lagoon water.
Otis Air Force Base.
66
-------
T
PH - -4 (5)
and
Nfl* - N
PH + — (6)
where temperature is in °C and ammonia-N in mg/1. The chlorination index,
when plotted against these parameters, describes the two exponential relations
shown in Figure 25a and 25c. For a statistical analysis of each of the above,
a simple least squares bivariate regression was performed which provided the
linearized relations shown in Figure 25b and 25d defined as:
i -*. + v[pH~-'1
O 1 2
F-ratio = 58.6 (8)
where K and K represent the intercepts and slopes respectively for each of
the above expressions.
The F-ratio in both cases is much greater than the critical F of 29.00
discussed above, thus indicating an extremely good fit between the experimen-
tal observations and empirical relations proposed. An important implication
of this analysis is that pH modification by either temperature or ammonia ex-
erts a comparable influence on chlorination thereby suggesting that tempera-
ture and ammonia may also be interdependent. Verification of this concept is
provided by a general acceptance that the oxidative conversion of ammonia to
nitrite and nitrate via bacteria nitrification is indeed temperature dependent
and proceeds most rapidly during the summer months. The above relations pro-
vide useful terms of reference for predicting chlorination indices at Otis
when pH, temperature and ammonia content of the lagoon water are known. Pre-
sumably a more stringent use of these parameters to describe safer chlorine
dosages can be obtained by redefining the chlorination index in terms of 99
rather than 90 percent removal of the test MS-2 concentration.
These chlorination studies have underlined the complexity of chlorine
disinfection especially when overchlorination of secondary wastewater efflu-
ents is a matter of concern. Optimal chlorine dosage implies a studious
avoidance of overchlorination as well as successful control of pathogenic
agents. This definition is especially valid for spray-irrigation systems
wherein chlorine-sensitive agricultural crops intended for consumption by
animals along with soils and groundwaters are exposed to chlorinated waste-
water effluents.
In the experience of the authors, sole reliance on a particular free-
available chlorine residual to dictate chlorine dosage will not always guaran-
tee a pathogen-free effluent. Also, such a practice can at times result in
excessive overchlorination involving unnecessary cost and greater environmen-
tal hazard. Avoidance of this possibility emphasizes the need for vigilant
67
-------
CTl
c»
I
^x
1
I
i
s
I
I
§
18
16
14
10
8
6
4
2
0
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
2.0 4.0 6,0
M-[T/4]
8.0
12
12
1 6
S 4
F RATIO = 78.6
INDICATING A
SIGNIFICANCE
LEVEL >.001
200
400
600
800
e
[PH]-[V4]
18
14
$ 10
i. 8
r
•
F RATIO = 58.2
INDICATING A
SIGNIFICANCE
LEVEL >.001
20
40
60
80
100
Figure 25. (Figures 25a, 25b) Computer-tested relations describing the combined effect of pH and
temperature on the inactivation of coliphage, MS-2, by chlorine. Figure 25a, exponential
form; Figure 25b, linear form having a significance level >0.001. (Figure 25c, 25d) Com-
puter-tested relations describing the combined effect of pH and ammonia-nitrogen concen-
trations on the inactivation of coliphage, MS-2, by chlorine. Figure 25c, experimental
form; Figure 25d, linear form having a significance level >0.001.
-------
monitoring and assessment of additional water parameters besides free-avail-
able chlorine.
These experiments again demonstrate that pH, temperature and ammonia-
nitrogen play an important role among the factors which control the effective-
ness of chlorination. How these same parameters affect the general environ-
mental toxicity of chlorine is, however, less certain. The inverse influence
of temperature as opposed to ammonia is clearly discernible in the data pre-
sented. The authors attributed this difference to the accelerated rates of
biological ammonia oxidation which lead to ammonia removal during the warmer
months of the year. Thus, both temperature and ammonia-nitrogen appear to
exert comparatively long-term but opposite influences on chlorination. Also,
variations in pH, which can occur within a much shorter time frame by rela-
tively rapid fluctuations in algal photosynthesis or by inputs of industrial
waste, can also have a profound influence.
Regression analysis has been used to isolate empirical parameters which
incorporate both long- and short-term variables as a means of predicting
chlorination efficiency. The results of these calculations are encouraging
and demonstrate a high degree of statistical significance. Future studies
are contemplated to measure the effect of different chlorine contact times
on the disinfection index of the authors. Also, for those involved in waste-
water irrigation, more and better information on the uptake and tolerance
characteristics of agricultural crops exposed to known chlorine residuals is
needed.
69
-------
REFERENCES
1. Kerfoot, W. B. and B. H. Ketchum. Cape Cod Waste Water Renovation and
Retrieval System, A Study of Water Treatment and Conservation. Techni-
cal Report, WHOI 74-13, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 1974.
2. Kerfoot, W. B., B. H. Ketchum, P. Kallio, P. Bowker, A. Mann, and C.
Scolari. Cape Cod Wastewater Renovation and Retrieval System, A Study
of Water Treatment and Conservation. Technical Report, WHOI 75-32,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 1975.
3. Ketchum, B. H., R. F. Vaccaro, P. E. Kallio, A. Mann, P. L. Deese, and
C. Palmer. Cape Cod Wastewater Renovation and Retrieval System, A Study
of Water Treatment and Conservation. Technical Report, WHOI 76-39,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 1976.
4. Ketchum, B. H., R. F. Vaccaro, P. E. Kallio, A. Mann, P. L. Deese, C.
Palmer, M. R. Dennett, P. C. Bowker, and N. Corwin. Cape Cod Wastewater
Renovation and Retrieval System, A Study of Water Treatment and Conser-
vation. Technical Report, WHOI 77-32, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institu-
tion, 1977.
5. Strahler, A. N. The environmental impact of ground water use on Cape
Cod. Prepared for the Association for the Preservation of Cape Cod,
Orleans, Massachusetts, 1971.
6. Strahler, A. R. A geologist's view of Cape Cod, Natural History Press
(Double Day Company) Garden City, New York, 115 p.
7. McGuinness, W. V. and R. Pitchai. Integrated water supply and waste
water disposal on Long Island. The Center for the Environment and Man,
Inc., Hartford, Conn., 1972.
8. Lawson, B. R. and D. Dupee. Can Cape Cod Solve Its Water Problems?
Country Journal, August, 1978.
9. Oldale, R. N. Geologic Map of the Hyannis Quadrangle, Barnstable County,
Cape Cod, Massachusetts, U. S. Geol. Surv. Geol. Quad, map GQ-1158,
Scale 1:24,000. 1974.
10. Mather, K. F., R. P. Goldthwait and L. R. Theismeyer. Preliminary re-
port on the Geology of Western Cape Cod, Massachusetts: Mass. Dept. of
Public Works Bull. 2, 1940.
70
-------
11. Mather, K. F., R. P. Goldthwait and L. R. Theismeyer. Pleistocene geo-
logy of Western Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Bui. Geol. Soc. Am., 3: 1127-
1174, 1942.
12. Meade, R. and R. F. Vaccaro. Sewage disposal in Falmouth, Massachusetts.
III. Predicted Effects of Inland Disposal and Sea Outfall on Ground-
water, J. Boston Soc. Civ. Eng., 58: 278-297, 1971
13. Driver, C. H., B. F. Hrutfiord, D. E. Spyridakis, E. B. Welch and D. D.
Wooridge. Assessment of the effectiveness and effects of land methodo-
logies of waste water management. University of Washington, Final Re-
port, Contract Nos. DACW 73-73-C-OO 41 through 0043 for the Office of
the Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1972.
14. Pound, C. E. and R. W. Crites. Wastewater treatment and reuse by land
application. Environmental Protection Technology Series EPA-660/2-73-
006a, Office of Research and Development, U.S.E.P.A., Washington, D.C.
1973.
15. Wood, W. W. A technique using porous cups for Water Sampling at Any
Depth in the Unsaturated Zone. Water Resource. Res. 9: 486-488 1973.
16. Environmental Protection Agency. Manual of Methods for Chemical Analy-
sis of Water and Wastes. EPA-625-/6-74003, U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, NERC Analytical Control Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268,
1974.
17. Brewer, P. G., D. W. Spencer, and C. L. Smith. Determinations of trace
metals in seawater by Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry. Special
Technical Report 443, American Society for Testing Materials, 1969.
18. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 13th Edi-
tion. American Public Health Association, Publication Office, Washing-
ton, D.C., 1971.
19. Cotlove, E., H. V. Trantham, and R. L. Bowman. An Instrument for and
Method for automatic rapid, accurate and sensitive titration of chloride
in biological samples. J. Lab. and Clin. Med., 51: 461-468, 1958.
20. Murphy, J. and J. P. Riley. A Modified Single Solution Method for the
Determination of Phosphate in Natural Waters. Anal. Chim. Acta. 26:
31-36, 1962.
21. Strickland, J. D. H. and T. R. Parsons. A Practical Handbook for Sea
Water Analyses. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada, Bulletin 167, 1968. 311 pp.
22. Solorozano, L. Determination of Ammonia in natural waters by the phenol-
hypochlorite method. Limnol. Oceanogr. 14: 799-801, 1969.
23. Menzel, D. W. and N. Corwin. The Measurement of Total Phosphorus in
Seawater based on the liberation of organically bound fractions by per-
sulfate oxidation. Limnol. Oceanog., 10: 280-282, 1965.
71
-------
24. Spoehr, H. A. and H. W. Milner. The chemical composition of chlorella;
effects of environmental conditions. Plant Physiol., 24: 120-149, 1948.
25. Palmer, C. D. Hydrogeological Implications of Various Wastewater Manage-
ment Proposals for the Falmouth Area of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, Mas-
ters Thesis, Dept. of Geology, Penn. State University, College Park,
Pennsylvania, 1977.
26. Bauer, W. J. Wastewater Management Engineering Report Town of Falmouth,
Massachusetts, Bauer Engineering, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts, 1972.
27. Ketchum, B. H. and R. F. Vaccaro. The Removal of Nutrients and Trace
Metals by Spray Irrigation and in a Sand Filter Bed. In: Land as a
Waste Management Alternative. R. C. Loehr, Ed. Ann Arbor Science Publ.
Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich., 1977. 811 pp.
28. Deese, P. L., R. F. Vaccaro, B. H. Ketchum, P. C. Bowker, and M. R.
Dennett. Ionic Distributions in a Spray-Irrigation System. In: Food,
Fertilization and Agricultural Residues. R. C. Loehr, Ed. Ann Arbor
Science Publ. Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich., 1977. 727 pp.
29. Adams, M. H. Bacteriophages. Interscience Publ. Inc., New York, New
York, 1959. 592 pp.
30. White, G. C. Handbook of Chlorination. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New
York, New York, 1972. 713 pp.
31. White, G. C. Chlorination and Dechlorination: A Scientific and Practi-
cal Approach. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 60: 540-555, 1968.
72
-------
DATA APPENDIX
The principle field sampling effort has focussed on the time-related
changes affecting the chemical composition of surface and subsurface waters,
hay, turf, and soils. All water samples are collected in 2-liter polyethy-
lene bottles, 200 ml aliquots being filtered (0.40 ym porosity) in the field
through a vacuum assisted membrane filter unit. Filtered samples are refri-
gerated and within 24 hrs analyzed for the crop nutrients phosphate, ammonia,
nitrite and nitrate.
Well water samples are obtained with a vacuum pressure apparatus modi-
fied from the design of Wood (1967) for deep lysimeter sampling. With this
equipment, samples of groundwater from depths greater than 25 ft below the
surface are possible.
Lysimeters are used to collect interstitial soil water by applying vacuum
to permeable ceramic cups (pore size ca 1.0 urn) buried below ground level.
During dry periods, particularly in the non-irrigated control plots it was
not always possible to accumulate an adequate volume of sample water on a
routine basis.
Mature crops were cut, field dried, baled, and weighed according to ac-
cepted agricultural practice. During sample processing desiccated hay samples
were macerated in a blender and stored pending chemical analysis for carbon,
hydrogen, nitrogen and phosphorus content along with a variety of selected
anions and cations. Soil samples were removed via a horizontal core taken
from trench side walls exposed manually by shoveling or backhoe assistance.
Early water sampling was conducted on a biomonthly basis, but in 1977
and 1978 the sampling frequency was reduced to one complete sampling each
month. Hay sampling was timed to coincide with crop maturation which led to
three samplings per summer except for 1977 when only two hay crops were har-
vested. To date there have been a total of 10 hay crops which have been cut,
dried, and removed from the agricultural sites. Only nine of these have been
subjected to complete chemical analyses. Turf and soil samples were collected
on an annual basis in the fall of the year after the growing season was com-
plete. Identifications of the analytical techniques employed appears in Sec-
tion 5.
Since irrigation was initiated, in the summer of 1974, a continuous log
has been kept which records the amounts of wastewater irrigation applied to
each of the agricultural subplots of Sites A and B. Unpredictable interrup-
tions caused by equipment failures, weather extremes, or harvesting opera-
tions ensure that planned irrigation rates are rarely achieved and inevitably
73
-------
total less than the planned application totals. In a similar vein, differen-
tiation must be made between total wastewater applied to crops and the total
hydraulic load since the latter term includes the total amount of precipita-
tion contributed by rainfall.
The time-related, accumulated, amounts of secondary effluent applied to
the east, south and west subplots of Site A between July, 1974 and August,
1977 are shown in Figure 8, Section 8. The respective totals amount to 40,
49 and 62 million kgs per hectare (.109, .133, and .168 million tons per
acre). The total hydraulic loadings (irrigation plus rainfall) for the same
subplots during this period are shown in Figure 9, Section 8, and respectively
amounted to 76, 85 and 109 million kgs per hectare (.207, .232 and .297 mil-
lion tons per acre). These data demonstrate that, on Cape Cod, rainfall pro-
vides a significant fraction of the total amount of water applied, given ir-
rigation rates ranging from one to four inches per week. Percentage-wise the
fractional rainfall contribution amounted to 30-50 percent of the total hy-
draulic loading.
74
-------
TABLE A-I OTIS TREATMENT PLANT, SECONDARY EFFLUENT
^y/x.yAM^A^
7 V «,
pH
^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOz-+NOj-N
NOZ-N
NH*-N
PO.-P
CALCIUM
MASNESIUM
.MANGANESE
fgB .
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
"BoitoH pff*
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO«
7.?
/•to
ie
~j.i>
7-4
//v
.14
ft. '2
s.n
3.si
2.0
1.3
3i.<)
Jo
y «?/
id
7-3
Uo
• OS
to
S"o
132.
27V
7.3
3.2f
• IS
/S-l
6.72
3. ill
g
f.e
W-7
• SS
to
4-2
to-1
3.3
27.7
7.2
336
• 11
li.1
-7.13
l.io
6,
tl.o
V7-V
• off
to
Jo
loo
.2
J».f
/*
7.2
f.+7
•23
f-2t
4.72
3.9o
/8
y-v
tl,2
• oS
JO
45
US
. 2
21.5
(*
1.0
//.So
•26
rii
7-ot
3.86
2¥
/O.J
w.z
.of
Jo
42
/4
V-3V
fiti
3.11
12
1-8
36.4
• to
/£>
S~3
Jfr
• 2
10.fi
/$
1.4.
2^2_
ff-V
?.7n
t>
ft.7
3?,a
•flff
/o
t,0
2oS
.2.
24.1
7 w # y/ $/ y y/ $/ ^ ^y $ 3/f!/?
(. i
/3.4J
•ft
i.tsi
vr*
HS
7,3
~*t 8
• /O
s*
ft
2.5-0
1.4
23.4
L4
I2.fi.
2-t2
Cl 1
9.1i
4-OO
2J
7.2
?f!V
• 05-
/o
3f
2t>f
-Z
2V. 1
i K
10.12
l.4ti
8 11
TW
if
7. /
•>>o.t.
*t>5
/o
42.
/OO
/•3
•33.0
(. i
101 A
"2.16
P. to
•? f 7
tft
g.S
141
•n<
Jo
92
S~a
.Z
U.I
L*
tr\
4-9
loo
-2
2.91
X'NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
f.1
,„-,(
.It
rn
r..u
^ 1$
T4
1 »
,7ftt>
•/><
/ o
79
*7f
7?0
If
W
6+1
,m
t/.f
fyl
.MT
X.1
374
111
7. 3
4i/
Vll
• 05
/f.o
fgt
3.V5
2.5"
Kfl
7n f?
74
//77
I't
• flf
Ig.l
S~43
1 4«
10.1
T7?
VT
14
7ff
.1?
U f
•f.+ft
I'/o
to*
U4
/:Cj
If
6.ffi
yfg
2Ji
f-4
?PT
^f?
(CONTIN
(• f?
177
mi
i?n
755
—
47S
2. ft
10. <)
rr.i
•^T
UED)
tn
-------
TABLE A-1 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
S"
6.6
£.0
6.0
7.°
7-4-
(-.7
7.Z.
7.7
i /
/(Mho/cm
386.
3J0
3(30
3Z+
332.
326
300
237 Z?0
V//
2%.
Iff
&L
•too
G_ NI
fr
INORG_ NITROGEN
m
N02- 4NOj-N
Iffn 7.07
IZ-S*
fo.f*.ll.?+ it.lf
//J
2-A5 £.
-------
TABLE A-/ (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
PM
CONDUCTANCE
^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ- +NOj-N
NOj-N
NH4-N
P04-P
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
.MANGANESE^g
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
KOKOfJ (fPn)
ANCNS^pm
CHLORIDE-CI
SULFATE-SO«
6-7
3/f
6.08
J&t
3.68
t.(8
II.Q
+1
30.5"
9.3
38.0
11
3.1o
•t
38.6
M
1.1
Z83
/o.?3
.4io
/i5"
^^
/o-3
+/
l/.o
8.6
4-1.0
/S~
180
-*r
H.l
&
£.&
Z€7
(o.oB
.3&
I-*?
ffl
£-!L
}.f
ro.t
9 -a.
49-f
*3
US'
•V+
**>£
9+
?.i.
34/
IL.9L
•3&>
/••3J&
170
tf
3.8
//.5"
a.?
/?!
//r
3#f
•*?
fro
&-
7.o
Z?o
Ui
x$
*'7
7.of
?-7
•+-r
/0.0
8.6
5-6. o
1?
US'
.60
11. 6"
&
7-3
JH
wy
.A5Z
8.-f7
577jT
77
4°
/6.o
e.i
&.z
re.s
•S9
26.0
1/>
7.5-
W7
+.6t
•/*(,
//.as
?.&
fS
+ 7
/6.f
//.7
&.?
38.$
• 63,
w-7
V.
6S
72.?
f.8l
•°?f
£ft
3.6/
4.6
W
/t.o
&.3
Wf
tt.S
• 1?
&.o
1C
X-NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-2 LAGOONED SECONDARY EFFLUENT
ANALYSIS
V AV^/A*
PH
CONDUCTANCE
//Mho/cm
INORG. NITROGEN
ppiri
NOj- +NO,-N
NOj-N
NH4-N
P04-P
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
• MANGANESJ^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
SOZOH Pfln
ANONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO«
TEMP °C
.57
.07
.0?
-11
//.3
.2V
-/V
•01
•04
H.2
?.o
.15
•/V
•13
•>fi
r.v
J.7o
as
•7.2
2?.o
&/
/2/
22.7
ao.S"
*7.f
.OS
r.t3
T.i
3.U
2.5"
•7.2
a?.j
97
/^o
22.9
4.5
/J.Z
2-V#
^.^V
5:^
3.5-0
3*
1-0
3*3
7s-
i/o
27- 1>
L-t
3.yo
•2./0
£.32
.<,'(>
3, S3
15"
7.2
37.7
rr
/2<5
2fr.S"
ifM
•2Z
tti
MS
s~,t.
3,?o
-it,
?.<1
37.2
V^
3to
2f.r
?./
2^r
7.ff
• IS
&.?^
J/.5
AT?
loo
•n.f
7-3
v*/
5T/5
.ot
HS
7- II
V-fi
J.V5"
/^
?.r
J7.2
9^
27o
Iff*
¥.e>
*•¥
3fZ
3.86
.oB
J6.I
7.35
4.6
3. fig
¥
f.e
36.1.
93
.2/0
2^v
f.o
*.7
Wi
f.to
•Of
1.0i
(,.32
s..r
72"
//77
.oaf
.0/0
7-4-1
J3.&
4-.I
£3 7
9.3
3J-0
7.0
Jo.S
S'O
J3O
JOO
&Z
2S.f
2JL
6.0
oo
X-NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-2 (CONTINUED)
CALCIUM
•i-e
73
S.3
5.V
A,/
y./
9 1
MAGNESIUM
33
3.1,
3,o
X?
MANGANESE
/f.o
££
6-3
J+.3
rn
Jo
POTASSIUM
9.3
If
10.3
?J_
S.I
8.1
7-7
79
ft. 7
SODIUM
3?.$
18S
i2£2£
6 f/.f -53.0
•4?. <" 4?.
3-?. 5
CATIONS,ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
ft
ya-
3?
zz.
^
fs-
33
/7
30-G
3d o
Iffl)
//) 0
IRON
/Of
XL
33
57
V
/7-r
I/O
LEAD
ZINC
SO
A?
AS"
J.T
J.
off*.
£L
42.
72
afl
AN»NS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
£8.(>
tf.3,
y-3
36.7
if}.!
1ft 4
SULFATe-S04
1*
li.
a?
I/
10
34.
1 1
TEMP °C
.0
t,.o
ff.o
•C./
SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A~5 CHLORINATED IRRIGATION WATER
f
ANALYSIS / o
PH
T.I
(,7
73
"7.T
k-8
7-1
7.3
73
tf.5"
.$
(,.3
CONDUCTANCE
370
30?
3*7
v/o
3/6
INORG NITROGEN
fl.S'
733
6.60
613
ffl
. (3,
NOj-N
OOA
0/3
SQL
,oo\
• Off/
-oio
• oof
oof
• 3
oof-
002,
OOZ,
00,3
6.28
001
NH,-N
,nf
iM-
.off
,o£
.OS&
/.7JD
2.6& /O.&l
a^L
4£L
PO4-P
(>o8
7.32.
7. Off
ff97
7.85
416
7.23
7.00
ZZ3
£•?¥
(£3
6.s-/
CATlONS.ppm
CO
o
CALCIUM
17.1
ff-4
fo.1
7.8
t.o
S.1
,V3
to
MAGNESIUM
3 -*f
33
S-ff
z.t.
3.3
a.r
a.?
30
MANGANESE
eek
1°..
&.
ILL
7A.
SSJ.
/7.fj
±2.
3.o
2A7_
POTASSIUM
Rfi
18
9. ft
ft.
7.3
A3
9.2.
9.3
7.1
SODIUM
3.1.1
K-f 372-
3?.o
3S.S 30.3"
33.0
37.5-
¥6.0
CATION S.ppt
CADMIUM
.HO
LG3_
d±
LOL
xZZ
.5*0
/.Si
CHROMIUM
COPPER
//r
2L
2i-
JO
IRON
M
3£
I3S
3S2.
31
LEAD
12.
.57
£L
^L
3o_
ZINC
as
SfT
7T
.TO
100
7.T
vr
AT
i3»nw ff*
Si.
OL
m
£L
47.
.S9
41
iSA
,t,a
.70
.S3
57
ANONS,ppm
CMLORIOE-CI
39-7
376
3^3
3S.1
fy&o.
yj./
SULFATE-SO«
If
/7
Zf
H
X: NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-3 (CONTINUED)
INORG NITROGEN
2- +NOj-N
/•w
S.67
W
9.13
N02-N
,00%.
06*
oof
.001
.CO?
.oaf,
NH«-N
frt,
oto
•0/3
PO.-P
S-78 7.U-
CALCIUM
4.0
a-i
*'/
MAGNESIUM
14
'•I
f-7
4-f,
.MANGANESE..),
! - ttS.
n-ft
/o.A
3.3
4.0
/.O
/££
POTASSIUM
7-,1?
7:0
V-fl
4.0
7.H.
ft.l
9.7
1.8
t.fi
SODIUM
fS.O
43.
ffo
?.o
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
./V
.31
CHROMIUM
COPPER
/O
9-f
10.0
IRON
Mo
fff>
LEAD
ZINC
.7V
.J&_
.•a
ANONSjipm
CHLORIDE -Cl
3/5
37-Y
-v/
S8^L
4J3_
tf.3.
SULFATE-SO*
IO
j-i
228
SO
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-4 TAP WATER. OTIS TREATMENT PLANT
INORG. NITROGEN
NOj- +NOj-N
.pff
.03
50
03
o/
NOj-N
.oW
.0,10
NH«-N
.04.
•CA
• pa.
• 02.
.oa
.12-
3-19
•M
.o/
•M-
32
^
P04-P
/.YO
.0"?
.07
.07
o/
.Pi
.03
SB
(22i
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
7-1/
ft-Y
"? 9s
MAGNESIUM
00
.MANGANE
SE^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
7.-T
7.0
*2.
1£
o//
/94
CATIONS,ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.n
/A.
13
H
iO
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
i?
SULFATE-S04
X'NO SAMPLE;BLANK:ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-4 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
6-+
.8
£.(,
7-i
CONDUCTANCE
57
230
J+3.
/$&
s+z
X53
INORG. NITROGEN
<*"*
N02-
.tt
/.*?
40? 3.#S
NOj-N
002.
QIO
125.
.oo/
•0+3
•Off,
02?
00/
NH4-N
03k
Oo&
.33?
-&0
Stf/
P04-P
133,
.tie
/£>&
•J38
of?
CATIONS.MHK
CALCIUM
131
SLZ
730
8.10
CO
co
MAGNESIUM
&8.L
1.1?
6.
4.82.
£c«
.MANGA
lO^
50
37.5"
38. t>
POTASSIUM
/.0U
/.-fo
/.a.
SODIUM
-
H/.2.
7.3o SJ.o
CATIONS,ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
43
J7.&
'7
IRON
37°
LEAD
ZINC
lelto*, PPI*
.Iff
.If
./v
.17
.08
•S-l
•/*
. i
.'¥
ANK)NS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
133.
f/,7
/£/
&1L
/J.8
SULFATE-S04
II
/A.
37
S3
'3
'7
/A
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-5 TAP WATER. OTIS FIELD LABORATORY
ANALYSIS
// AD/ nV/'V/AV %
/////&
pH
CONDUCTANCE
//Mho/cm
(,.0
(,-3
*•*-
f?
,5-7
57?
£&
ZL
(09
I7f
77
INORG NITROGEN
73
.73
•01
.01
.03
02,
•ajft
0(3
00 ft
,03$-
.j&te
J32.
.iW
N02-N
.01 ft
.005_
^Si
SODIUM
7-5"
7-3
-
s.o
7.3.
7.?
71.
CATION S.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
ft*
.07
.09
.ot
.OV
.06
.0}.
.07
.Of
.13.
.03,
,o.
-------
TABLE A-5 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
PM
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
«PAl
NOj- + NOj-N
NOj-N
NH.-N
PO«-P
CATlONS.wm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
.MANGANESE^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppt
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
2fflto*' ff>*
ANOMSrfjpm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-S04
W
/{.&
.116
X
.046
.aooj
108
i.ef
.10
.<»
S2
.to
jt.e,
to
f-f
/S7
.013
^
J°
.o&
/0+
?-*
6.f
/7f
.30
.001
.016
-eoi.
&&
3.tf
1100
.•XL
S.f
7.<*
2750
./>(,
//.o
tt
6*
/93
•/&
.005
<*V
<»y~
$*t
3.fr
1100
.BO
if8
2°
4oro
./O
&A.
//
67
I0/
• 130
X
.QQ&
.001
,7Jfc
s-'A
110°
/.70
9./
r>-°
/euro
./£>
8-f
9
63
/&
.otf
.0<£
.acCL
• O°l
3.3+
300
X3L5»
-7Z
<8
4<
7aoo
./£
?.o
S~
61
W
.Off.
.OOf
.a/6
• oaof
W
USD
.60
*3
l.o
46av
• 3.0
7-7
6
6./
/oS
.o>+
.003
• oil
•ax>3
3.3f
looo
.70
to
3.0
•of
7
.00A"
.006
.a/7
•ooZ
I8f
/USD
.-Jt>
*.(,
/.o
•/i
*f
r
oo
CT1
SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-6 TAP WATER. WOODS HOLE POTABLE WATER SUPPLY
ANALYSIS
*f
$
M,k
A7 AV iv/
$W<
PH
CONDUCTANCE
p Mho /cm
(,-f
C.7 x
6-ft
6.9
u
LSL
22
-
70.A.
1D.O
INORG NITROGEN
• Oof,
ftff
Of3
oiL
o?
./a*,
2-7
.(,0
•2L
NH«-N
03
•oo'f
£73
i?/'
J2£
•JlL
&L
J&L
P04-P
l3
.i
.10
.0-7
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
CD
CT>
MAGNESIUM
l-o
/.o
/.o
/.o
/.O
/.o
J22
^2
J^
MANGANESE
^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
7.3
7V
7.3
7.3-
73
it
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
^aftfV ^y.^7
07
Of
07
5Z
o¥
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
//-i
SULFATE-S04
MQ
^C
/ft
/ '2.
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-6 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
£L£.
7.o
7.1
8,1*
6.0
7.1. 7.1 C.I 6.B J^l
CONDUCTANCE
.33 (A.8
U.I
73&Sti
70.0
&•(,
INORG NITROGEN
N02-
OL
£01
•OM
lot,
.080
.047
.358
.oaf .o?i-
.so
vo
to
0.6
/.o
0-?
0-3
1.0
Q£LL
•OoS
00?
.633
•ool
.0/3
PO«-P
a
.33.
•'71
•if
•VI
.117
•iff
.OSl
.03
.ojo
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
4Z&.
V-7V
484
-f./f
40.
&£
f of
CO
MAGNESIUM
.73
,76
.Co
/.fO
f.av
/.go
L&
/./J
MANGANE
SE^
3-0
J.o
2-0
£o
/•
2^
POTASSIUM
.5-5-
.Co
.82.
.70
.(,0
.70
SODIUM
t.to
-
B.2.
9.1
9.3
7.8
3.3
CATIONS.ppD
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
•370
IRON
130
/So
LEAD
ZINC
.06
.01
.03
.OS.
.0.1
.03
.03
.0+
.0-3
.10
fo
ANONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
//.A
11.3
II.
/A?
10,
11.7
//
if -7
9.7
//.O
1/4
SULFATE-SO,
s
*>.&
4-
S'
X:NO SAMPLE;BLANK:ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-7 SURFACE WATER, ASHUMET POND
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
7-f
/fMHo/cm
INORG NITROGEN
rr"
r?,*
NOj- +NOS-N
.60
(.01
.76
.73
Ztt
N08-N
00?
• oaft
00^
• 007
00(3
oot>
.38
2.30
&2-
/.S~7
.&L
PO«-P
.OCU.
•SSL
£££
£01
.CSL
sol
00^
.££
3&
QO^
&L
£0±
££3
002,
%£
002,
£03
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
7-7
CO
GO
MAGMESIUM
. a
3*L
ft
L3SL
/.ftf
,10
MANGANESE
^
POTASSIUM
3-3
LJL
/ e
/ft
SODIUM
&J
ft. 3
r
7-?
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ofc
07
CHLORIDE -Cl
fS-f
Ho.
//.a-
//O
Iff
SULFATE-SO4
il
30
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-7 ( CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
Zi
LQ_
7.2,
5? 5
£.
• oo(,
oof
004-
.oof
oof
oof
NR,-N
.*£>!
./6o
•/ft
094
/of
PO«-P
007
.noS.
ao/
.DO
.001
033.
.001
•041
t.-ool
• ool.
.ooi
.002.
.00 1
• oof
.oil
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
Z£i
V-V,?
Y-4V
wo
f. ft
+ 71
41
CO
UD
MAGNESIUM
O2.
h2Q_
L2L
m
1. 7 A
f.tnir>
2.30
33?
3.10
.MANGANESE^
£0.0
POTASSIUM
I-V7
1-loQ
'•tiff
/.B
/.
/.fo
1.60
i.
SODIUM
7
-
-
.
9.8
9.8
/o.8
94
t.
9.
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
4-7
3.0
f-o
2.0
yr/o
IRON
5°
fo
LEAD
ZINC
.08
.13.
.07.
.07
.04
.Of
4t
•of
.01
^L
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
&5
HA
UL&_
l&l
IJJa.
41.
. 3
'33
it -7
SULFATE-SCU
UL
11
IL
XL
jr-7
&.
a .
8
10
8
SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-8 WELL WATER, WELL '4
INORG NITROGEN
NO,-
0/6
,0/1
d/,2.
001
0/3
032.
£24.
oi£_
N H4 - N
•061
oof
-001
oof
.not
V73
039
P04-P
_££
ZL
tOS*.
J&.
ai£.
o&S.
S&.
£al
oj^
02^
CALCIUM
13.
/.fl
MAGNESIUM
tf?
£i
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
.13.
89
SODIUM
£.'
ai
££.
TJ,
CATIONS, ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
130
LEAD
ZINC
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
7-f
l.f
77
77
7-9
73
SULFATE-SO4
J-O.
/JO
ELEVATION FT
]^/£
S3-07
tt.lo
jry/ 5^. /t> &. y?3~o.
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK'-ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-8 (CONTINUED)
INORG NITROGEN
NO,- +NO5-N
.682.
V?
37
///K
.137
N02-N
.70
.By
•36
••70
57?
0.4-
0/3
006
CO&
• on
pfm
• oo6
.el/
•o/o
• OfO
.<*??
co8
22.
M£~
MB.
ao£
CALCIUM
/./o
t.ol
'•ID
!•<#>
/•A?
3-26
MAGNESIUM
'•'J
/•ft
1.3
/
. MANGANESE
ft.p,
POTASSIUM
.75
.70
.73
.73
-VJ
.7J
(0
•So
SODIUM
.T.I
Ft*
^•8
CADMIUM
75
75"
CHROMIUM
COPPER
a-fl
3.3.
v./
r?
IO-&
fff,
IRON
11,3
f.o
19 <
//.O
LEAD
fl (.
ZINC
Zf
SfT
QOKOH
•OH
Oi
of
fft
off
a*/
of
to
f4-
CHLORIDE -Cl
A7.Z
9-*
-fi
st,
9-7
SJL
£6.
73
^
if.
3
SULFATE-S04
V
13.0
S.ti
JO-0
tl.t
t.fr
/.o
(S^SL
£0_
/so
ft
ELEVATION FT
f^6^\f/.3')\s:i.it>\so.'j3sa.iti\fo.^\si).il SOM yg.'jltf.01
o.80 £/./S~ 37.33.
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-8 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
PM
CON&UCTANte
&.0
6-2.
INOAG. NITROGEN
l-lf?
0.8
'•1
/.o
0.8
NH4-N
.oaf
*//
.0/2
•0/3
.0/7
CAT»NS.p»«
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
146
ro
16.0
*?•*
If
POTASSIUM
0.79
SODIUM
t?.o
CATIONS**
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
8.0
mow
LEAD
ZINC
'Ban-on. Pfin
• /i
.3 A
ANONS
CHLORIDE -Ct
31.3
31."
SULFATt-SO,
s
ELEVATION FT.
X-NO SAMPLE;BLANK:ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-9 SOIL WATER FROM 6", LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
^Mho/cm
-7.7
7.?
7.4
7-3
7.2
b.te
73.
ZL
7V
463
587
6/8
310
118
277
INORG NITROGEN
2- +NOj-N
01,
.£>/
•031
.01+
•XII
.O&O
.77-?
.71
/.6B
• 70
NH4-N
.Of
.O/
•034
• Olf
•oo(-
.007
-47J
• ooj
/•L
1*5
1-2+
IZ-I
oi&
^1
375"
&st,
POTASSIUM
.36
.4-1
.18
LXL
•JL
SODIUM
38 i.
Ji.?
1 0
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
aft
ift
.(ft
*L
17
.37
CHLORIDE -D
713
3JI
397
33
843
783 ».i
7.V
SULFATE-S04
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-9 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
6-0
77
f-f
e-1
/fMho/c
Wo
INORG NITROGEN
,097
VAT
.'73
.taf
N02-N
X
9.9
6.8
3-7
NH4-(*
0/3
• (Xtf
oo3
.0/3.
.0/4-
P04-P
CALCIUM
&&.O
MAGNESIUM
440
If,. 03
/
-------
TABLE A-10SOIL WATER FROM l' , LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
at
/a,
52 »
.IV-
433_
LBL
NO,-N
z
,
pot,
If
t./f
7.1
' V
l-Ole
• 33
.Ok
..93
.07
.o3
.003
034
.0/0
.9o
t.LO
2.3
22.3
/Jf
85.°
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
3b.l
373
37 S
Vo
to
en
MAGNESIUM
//P
{,,8
2-70
3.77
2£o.
1M
17
MANGANESE
• A?*"
POTASSIUM
.6,8
-3V
l.li,
SODIUM
I3L.4
/*?
'.S 795
875
0
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.3ft
37
,/ft
ae
HO
fl?
70
70
Sf
ANONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFAT£-SO«
4*7
37.+
ZS.S
/aa.
/r
i/
/3_
A.
X^NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-M SOIL WATER FROM 2'. LYSiMETER
CT>
,«Mho/ei»i
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ-
NH«-N
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS,ppt>
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
CHLORIOE-CI
SULFATE-S04
3.30
/.tf
./at)
J-7
/.a
•*•/
30
xv
.02
Ao
/.o
.or
.061
-3f
3^7
./JO
.37
f/
.33?
•o'Jo
2L
.£63
17.1
.A"!
19.0
2.2
70.6
1.4-7
ta.7
•9o
.9o
it,. ft
D-l
3A&
I.'S
33.1
/Of
7C.K
.62.
HI
•*«
./oft
3.O.
71
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
/.v
afl T
308
££
3a
/Of,
1L&
32.
ij"j
-------
TABLE A-12 SOIL WATER FROM 3X, LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
//),
y//
ale
S3L
./3Z
.116
06+
.83°
.140
•281
(.10
foe
I.DO
•/f
Qoz,.o4
NH«-N
.(ft
.3o
33
.1$.
.10
.10
.3.1
.ox
.01
.03
.oil
_2*t
oaa.
0/7
P04-P
3.60
S.t.3.
./o
ti
/.33
32+
3/t,
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
/a 8
8.6
ft,*,
MAGNESIUM
3-1
r?-/
/8o
/.37
2.73
(,.50
&22
MANGANESE
J.OI
POTASSIUM
18
.68
-ea
SODIUM
/
5/.O
30.0
5. i
rt.ft
3o. i
CATlONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
/A-
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.5"3
31*.
.23
•11
.3?
.TV
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORlOE-Cl
li-f
73
77
tfl
-f
37.
UP
£3^
SULMTE-S04
/ft
/7
3.T
X-NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-12 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOj- ^NOs^Np^^
NO*-N p,i
NH«-N p,m
PO,-P ^pi
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
~£fat/v ff/*t
ANIONS.ppm
CMLORIDE-CI
SULFATE-SO.
£.3.
Wi
.070
.IfO
.oaL
/S.ij
//•(e
Mti
X
.78
,s8
V>{,
3F
M
m
./a
,
-------
TABLE A-13 SOIL WATER FROM 4X, LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
7-3-
7-3
6.0
66
6-0
-3
£••5"
CONDUCTANCE
27Z
243
3&S
2/4
31 (^
¥?/
INORG NITROGEN
NO,-
S45L
472_
.
1.3.
•o/7
a/4-
oil,
V/7
.01$
PO,-P
.01 *•
.DOS'
,099.
003.
030
•oil
014-
• 023
•152.
.Olio
CATlONS.ppm
CALCIUM
17.2.
V±
13d.
31L
//r
MAGNESIUM
3-V
{•$
A3-
J.&I
/•/f
/.&,
A-./o
07
f.il
a -iff
. MANGANESE
^i
.oa,
X
POTASSIUM
3.00
.80,
,70
SODIUM
4f.fi
ft
t?-3
4^-5' S0-S~
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
3.0
y/
IRON
ilo
^1^
LEAD
ZINC
BottaH
.11
• 33
,10
.65"
flNONS.ppm
CM LOR IDE -Cl
89*
/!LL
31.0
/4-.1.
3+3
SULFATE-S04
ZL.
30
X^NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COVPLETE
(COflTKIUED)
-------
TABLE A-15 (CONTINUEDj
ANALYSIS
pM
£.7
£,.$
C..L
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/cm
3A3
3/5
$70
iNORG NITROGEN
.331
60S
/.33
j.iTJ y.e&
NO,-N
10.Q
3-1
/•¥$
3.7
L£-
.063
•oil
.0/7
.0/6
PO.-P
.(03,
aa-8
3-^0
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
A-7
Sft.t
MAGNESIUM
a- it
TV*
££o_
MANGANESE
/.r
/.<*
JLR.
o
o
POTASSIUM
5~.ce
£.30
S.30
s:yo
b-to
SODIUM
1/0
11 8
CATIONS.PJ*
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
37.0
M.o
K.o
IRON
X
rl
£d.
LEAD
ZINC
-35
.68
flNIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE-CI
377
yj.y
fa.
SULFATE-SO«
a a.
/A
£(.
ELEVATION FT
X-NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-14 WELL WATER. WELL *5
j My*/,
MNMLTSIO
INORG NITROGEN
NO,- + N03-N flpfl
NOj-N pffc
NH4-N pp^
P°4-P tfyW
MAGNESIUM
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
***** ^"l
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-S04
ELEVATION FT
/ '
-^-
.OOJ
fo
,0/J
0/3
f.'->
'/
£L
• /
<.30
t-tf
Xs
X
K7.0o
s/
.oil,
1
<.o»7
•°e2-
^
• b
<.6I
t.o
&J3
'/
*-
X
(.000'
.Oof
6.0
53.05
/ ^
X
V
.0
X.
.Ot^
/
.0/0
• oofe
^T
.x/l
4-i
?r>
x
j
Ji_
or^r
,Y
.nil
.Jo
l.i 4"
7^
7<^
o..V
6 3
we\
<-r
.0/3
JLk.
/.if
V?
/? //
/^.^
i^.
-T??
P
oil
l-rf
flY
, ^
fa*
^l_
T?'fT
' f^
.oot
y / "5
1 £7
?(*
6- 7
//<7
£A
r-"1
1
t
•11
9 1
', -
//y
x "3
/.
-------
TABLE A-14 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
s?
7.f
£.0
6.0
S.I
H2L
LQ.
s.s
L3_
.{•7
CONDUCTANCE
/f Mho /cm
S&3
773
8X0
77 i
XV
SO.?
JO 4
n.
INORG NITROGEN
NO,- +NOj-N ftm
1-37?
1.088
73
377
7f3
N02-N
ffb
• 10
84
.64-
$3
-6Z
.73
A2.
X
(5-3
NH..-N
'13
.oof
00&
007
.020
.olZ.
.0/0
0$,
fl?7
o/?
.r>/7
PO,-P
.004.
• ood
• ooi
.OO'f
oof
.03
CXtj-
out
ld
.ot-4-
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
,.,1
1. 10
/.*?
/.as
/f)
/•I?
ML
&JL
.*•*-
MAGNESIUM
?•*
.2-7
3-7
S.o
A 9
i.s-
2A.
23-
2J*.
LSL
UL
o
ro
MANGANESE
re.s
/?£>
POTASSIUM
-ar
.&/
.03
.559
22-
.IS
Jo.
i.os-
.flo
££.?_
ee?
SODIUM
3.8
9-f
-
//
8.3
/ff.i.
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
34.1
/ftf
^0-7
i&3_
CHROMIUM
COPPER
7?
V-7
5-3
3.1
AL
5.5.
/o-j-
1.8
IRON
7A-
/fl.ft
/tl
380
LEAD
X
o-3
o.l
ZINC
&OROU (ffn)
•oH
.If
^7_
&L
.if)
io_
^L
• /A
ANK)NS,ppm
CHLOfilDE-Cl
191
/?•*
243
/£Z
2i2
fft,
/^
X..2.
SULFATE-SO.,
7
&
16
6~
Y_
ft
TEMP °C
/r
JS.f
/J.o
//.r
7-f
fo.o
I3.S
I/.0
/i'i
ZZ^
fo.o lo.o /J_-5_
/r.o
ELEVATION FT
50.0.0
SI-U.
51-03
«>.*
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-14 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/cm
63
6.0
/J
INORG NITROGEN
N02- +NOj-N
.as
.8*7
20?
N02-N
ppy
1.6
NH.-N
•008
.003
.007
PO«-P
ee1?
•cy?
• a/O
CATIONS, pprn
CALCIUM
L6£
MAGNESIUM
37°
o
U)
MANGANESE
32.0
a/.r
POTASSIUM
/.Ho
/•SZ
SODIUM
36.0
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
li.
7.5
/a.o
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-S04
IS
X
TEMP °C
ELEVATION FT 0..f£ SO.if
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-15 SOIL WATER FROM 6", LYSIMETER
CONDUCTANCE
^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
n&_
.oot
•732.
1-043
a.n
,273.
3J-I
X
7/
•57
11.7*
1.0
0.9
J-7
NH.-N ppm
.03
•ol
o/7
•nt
PO«-P
.005-
.00^
•ooj.
X
•&»
284-0^
0/7
of?
•
•o7
o
->
CATIONS.***
CALCIUM
/8J_
2L2.
n-1
££
/a./
MAGNESIUM
2.5-
1,53
j.sz,
.MANGANESE
X
X
X
3.2
Zi£
J.o
8.0
POTASSIUM
..SB
Laa
4-.U-
1.07
t.?o
2<_
o.Jo
/.-fa
SODIUM
34.0
ao.5
C4TIONS.IX*
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
Wo
f?.o
IRON
go
73
170
LEAD
ZINC
SO HOW
•Ifi
.30
^as:
.5-5-
33
30
ANONS^pm
CHLORIDE -Cl
*.?
26.5
S±L
377
45-3
39.1
SULFATE-SO*
At
1?
18
X
X^NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPUETE
-------
TABLE A-16 SOIL WATER FROM I' , LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
«>,-**>,-..„„
"0,-N pfn
NH.-N pfn
P°«-P I»A
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
. CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
BORON (pf*)
ANWNS.ppm
CHLORIDE-CI
SULFATE-S04
4-8
1Q2,
1,11
*
./a*?
*
fl.O
*
X-
.?.?o
f?-0
,7J
(fl.O
*
1-le
3A7
,tn
K
K
1C
7-f.
V-flC
/<;
,?,3A
X
.t¥
3J.3
X
M
Y/o
o^V
X
.05D
X
aff.3
*
A
X
X
•4
*
i.
*
x
X.
.90
X
?A
4.5*
j^fO
37,f
<
,P»7
.05^
-------
TABLE A-17 SOIL WATER FROM 2', LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
22.
6+
6.3
62.
6.V
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/cm
•Z3B
222-
AT3
35"
378
335"
INORG NITROGEN
.367
.260
364
NO,-N
xr"
2^L
3.7Z
.70
2./0
A62
NH,-N
330V
go
lo
20
/At,
V-3
PO.-P
62
J-7
J.
X
A 67
z.&ftf.?/
/Oi
(03
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
li.7
/2.7
3-0
rf.7
/M.
MAGNESIUM
AV7
/.4-3
3,/o
o
CTi
MANGANESE
A
X
X
POTASSIUM
.33
.16
.4-6
.V?
• 7J
SODIUM
53.0
34.5"
32.5"
370
5X5
CATlONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
Oattn,
.41
•ft
.32.
•OL
.3.3
,4.3
.77
.50
.5-9
ANK>NS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
&L
26.1
250
3ft/
V5-./
SULFAT£-SO«
/&
22.
/e
ae
X'NO SAMPLE,BLANK:ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-18 SOIL WATER FROM 3', LYSIMETER
PO«
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
IZ.I
tf.o
tl.f
LL&
MAGNESIUM
*J-
.£&.
L/L
y..oo
2.9*
L30.
A3£
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
1.8
l-o
53T
•20
.10
.a'?
SODIUM
22. 1
ri.8
23-
33.0
5J5~
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
X
CHROMIUM
COPPER
1L
13.
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.37
40
if
,75"
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORIDE-CI
26.?
2i.8
31. y
ffl
SULFATE-SO,
10
/7
33.
10
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-19 SOIL WATER FROM 4 . LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
NO,-
A*/
.17
.0-7
.077
•Jfo
*g_
070
Jfli
l.O
• 4-7
09V
01'
./•v
-o/
OS
.01
.01
-004-
.0/3
/ -A?
3-3
CD
CO
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
V-V
I.OO
POTASSIUM
1,9
50
.5-0
SODIUM
9-8
• V?
77. ,
87
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
/o
IRON
/fr;
LEAD
ZINC
v
?7
tfi_
CHLORIDE -Cl
54?
40
77
fa. a.
SULFATE-SO4
2
33
X'NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(cormriuED)
-------
TABLE A-19 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
£•/
6.6
&.I
/
-------
TABLE-A 20 WELL WATER, WELL *6
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
/°M.
Ofjj_
.008
^££_
£2L
oiS~
oof
oof
008
at
.008
.00?
. 31O
ogs'
0>3
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
,74,
A2^
J-A
MAGNESIUM
(,08
/.o3
X/5"
S33
/•S~7
J.fc
O
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
.6
,<*/
.70
• Si
.76
.7V
•7?
.7?
/.&/
//J
SODIUM
.6
y.-s
7-ie
9,3
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPEH
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
_pp£S_
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
(,.1
7?
22.
7.7
77
7.?
7.0
ffl
/ra-
SULFAT£-SO<
TEMP °C
/•/o
/J.o
//n
/J.o
Jt.a
/a. o
ELEVATION FT
r/rr
&?$
filfl
n.o?
X-NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(COriTINURD)
-------
TABLE A-20 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
6ft
CJ
6.0
5:7
6.0
1$
-r.7
AJJ
/Jo
nj
f/3,
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ-
-J88
7S?
,$10
?-*
V
/.2o
.36
/.1 2
•Jf
•7o
JO,
52)
.36
.67
.ait,
oi7
oil
.033
.0/3
008
.o&J
.oof
010
.001
• oof
.003
.002.
.00+
0*8
•of*.
.008
.006
.oof
Ooi
.00?
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
3-33
J8&
/>"£
SL.M
J.Ofl
a /ft
zsa
.as
I.*/
MAGNESIUM
7*7.1
3.3
3.0
3 •<•
3.-I
4-7
LB-
'•3
MANGANESE^
17,5"
HSL
9.8
POTASSIUM
/.3S-
/./o
f./4-
i.OO
1.06
1.00
/.£»
/•Oo
^L.
SODIUM
,*•?
I.3M
13.1
11,.°
/77
?9.r
CATJONS.ppb
CAOMtUM
1,3
L3-
L3~
CHROMIUM
COPPER
3JL
4L
3.7
7.7 •
IRON
X
X.
ff
LEAD
o-l
.8
ZINC
75-
a.r
fO
,OB_
•1L
£Z
JO.
33.
30
AS,
XL
/J
an
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
Ifl.t
277
38.3,
It*
43,2.
SULFATE-SO,
7_
/•r
nL
!±L
TEMP °C
/t.o
13.0
/J.O
'3.0
U.Q
/f.o S3. o
ELEVATION FT.
S2./7
*/.¥»
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(COHTiriUED)
-------
TABLE A-20 (CONTINUED)
PH
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/Cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ- »MOj-N pff,
N02-N ffr
NM4-N pfq
P04-P />pm
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE f^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
J&>rc~t (ffln
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO,
TEMP °C
ELEvaTiON FT
6.3
/76
• 3(-o
0.4-
•Olj
.oof
334-
•f.S~
/o.f
/.4*
MB
17.0
9.3
•7
•?-&
42.S
d
v:i\
v.fA
?•*-
/ii
.34+
4.3
• o/t.
.Olf
ffO
•9--1
/0.0
/.&?
Jf.5
/£..*
&.0
^
43
W.&
/a
&
^
3o?
3.2.
oO,
o.Z3
3.6,1
$.8
(, --f
'•7$'
rtf.5
J0.°
J7.o
\
• 3t>
3*2,
J-7
.^4
I8O
•Ul
&•?
oo£>
.*lt
Z64-
3f
f.a
/.£o
34?
*
$1.0
•38
32.6
*!>'
If./
&.L7
$.(.
tts
.yno
fi.t
*/£
3.t°
3-1
9..»7
£--2
rt(
.260
°f
.00$
.0/4.
g.oS.
5-2
/
MS
• 3/
tf.O
3?.
to*
.0.87
X*1 fJ
J '-t?
180.
./&$
of
Of/
<&J
.5.34-
3?
?.o
/.&
32?
/oS
^
+3
43 S
A5
K
flff
tf
'%
"•7
.003
.0/6
3.8f
4--I
S0.0
/#"
3fo
//s
X.
•36
4Z-1
J-i
too
&•'&
SI
<%>3
\
/
3.93'
J-?
?.e
/•?°
37.£
1
s+S
X
_/t-7
Slf\ S*
iU'3
3&
/o-l
&•¥/
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-21 SOIL WATER FROM 6", LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
/•»*•
/3S
.07
.20+
/£/
NO*-N
/.OO
Z..IO 2
J 7
•'V
.03
.03-
o/O
0/6
0/6
03
0/7
-eeofe
oof
61.
£Z£
7 S
AGNESIUM
1.HC.
'1,11
2 vr
4-.&O
ANGANESE^
.03
POTASSIUM
3?
SODIUM
V/.T
if 7
CATION S,p(*
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
para
37
•St,
AMONS.ppm
CHLORIDE-Cl
38ft
Tf-V
9.o
SULFJU£-SO«
a/ft
22i
5^
^ffk
3/7
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CO;iTI!IUCD)
-------
TABLE A-21 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
/^Who/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOJ-4N03-N/y)/r,
"02-N ffb
NH4-N pprf-
P04-P pf>rn
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE^, ^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATlONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
do/lam ?/>"
ANONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO.
£.8
&/
>3
30
0/3
•ISB
&+
3.&0
18
•G->'
-Ti'i'
/7-0
^3
.r/
B.o
^
c.e
2?3
•Hi
X
-Off
.»f/
'?•<•
U3
3.3
30
Sl.f
330
34-
• tf
X
/&
&••?
IK
/.IB?
A
00^
•xsf
/*.£.
3.&
/•o
32
3**
\3.f
7o
•11
,\
^
6-8
36°
•3 if
/8
.ofl
• 4*B
AT.3
f/0
8.f
.&
40 .0
14-.0
/&
•28
3fS
Z4-
?.3
3do
-iff
X.
K
K.
/??
-------
TABLE A-22 SOIL WATER FROM I , LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
PH
CONDUCTANCE
?
.02?
Me.
QLL
nrv,
.009
.0/6
O34
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
pip
MAGNESIUM
/.S8
1.00
i2£l
J.CO
.MANGANESE
.OS.
POTASSIUM
.30
-47
.08
.3.1
.37
7?
SODIUM
S7.6
J/J
18
575"
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
ppn
dL
3k.
70
AN(ONS,ppni
CHLORIDE -Cl
5&.7
SULFATE-SO4
34.
X^NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-23 SOIL WATER FROM 2', LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
;.&
7.o
(--9
{••3
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/cm
JOB
INORG NITROGEN
/V9
/•/f
/•TO
JO.O
.235"
158
.Ql 9.-W
2.AO
.fio
J37
/./Z
•8+
10.
/.v
-ft>
a/-?
.ar
.o/
o/l
.01$
.01 3
.3/7
023
-O33
.008
oof
.no
/.**?
O8l
783
.52
CATK>NS,MMl
CALCIUM
Z7.3
14.3
tff.1
MAGNESIUM
7.32.
/.6o
3.70
a. 79
MANGANESE
-73
POTASSIUM
P-?
.36
VJ
.Ola
/ao
.u
•3?
.39
SODIUM
If.l
.t,
0
CATlOHS^pb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
,81
.37
7?
.70
ANONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -CI
3/3
37.8
40.6
9.4-
S3L-C
xi t
SULFATE-SO«
38
23
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-24 SOIL WATER FROM 3', LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
CONDUCTANCE
^Mho/cm
13
6-7
fr-7
6.0
le.i.
£30
JS8
2<3/
218
27 /
INORG. NITROGEN
NOj- +NOS-N
US
.//d
.1*6
/x.
iffl
• Iff)
l.o
J.oo
/*»
-30
NH4-N
•v/
,03
.o\
.01
0*1
.014.
• 070
.031
P04-P
.f
z.v?
•3.1
Z.I7
£/£
2£
CAT IONS, ppM
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
3-3
/7.V
J5.Q
a?./
l.li
3.50
Z-SY
• MANGANESE
.008
• D/V
POTASSIUM
•42
•4-7
.2?
./r
iff
SODIUM
J3T.O
•27.0
CATIONS.M*
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
/V
IRON
tfii
Jlfco
LEAD
ZINC
BoOo* fP*
53
7
f-02.
ANQNS^lpm
CHLORIDE -Cl
/7
77.7
•ft*
SULFATE-S04
/fl
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-25 SOIL WATER FROM 4\ LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
r-v
t-*-
£•3
S.7
f-7
6J
6.J
7.3
188
Z23
ZZ3
/Jtt
IKS'
22 f
3.4-3
INORG. NITROGEN
.73
iTJO
•39
.3.10
.301
.,7?
f.ffl
./Si
f8t,
.7
• g
/ o
2.38
.92.
.
/.a.
<..&
7.83
U-76
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
S3.+
3.3.0
31.1
/ft 1
MAGNESIUM
•w
tf*
/•78
/.TO
/.Z/
i7.fr.r
757
.MANGANESE
.010
,0<,f
X
X
X.
POTASSIUM
.5-3
X/3
i.OO
.to
.30
Ji.
SODIUM
/Vtf
33.7
at.i
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.5??
-Y7
•2L
ANONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
Yfp.7
ft. I
3J-1-
9.7
37.0
I9J
114,
5V. 5
SULFATE-SO,
24
27
14
3/
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CO;!TI!!UED)
-------
TABLE A-25 (CONTINUED)
INORG NITROGEN
t- +NOj-N
/ft?
1%
.133
1.013.
/.as? 2.6/2.
N02-N
/r
/.of.
2-Z
2.3
O.&
NH4-N
Of?
o//
•osl
.033
•o/Z.
.00*
PO«-P
Pfb
88.7
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
32J
if./
iB^L
MAGNESIUM
2..8B
330
+ 0$
.MANGANESE^
POTASSIUM
/./O
.go
•f*
.30
50
SODIUM
33.0
37. £ +3.&
•36.0
CATIONS,ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
7.8
//.o
//•o
/7-0
VO
6.0
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
fppiw)
.TO
•4+
•33.
4&
flNONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
^2.7
17
SULFATE-S04
a?
/7
/n
/ft
K
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-26 WELL WATER, WELL *3
INORG NITROGEN
.008
.aaff
007
.oaf
o//
067
010
go£_
00?
>/&
/o
V
.oi4
.0067
,008
O//
.008
£13_
0/f
//r
ni,
PO«-P
-4
,06$
S&.
0/7
£&
gg£
CALCIUM
.73
/.*/
9ft
1*
MAGNESIUM
/.*•/
ui
/.I7
l.ll
t tn
/.3.O
/at.
MANGANESE
^
ro
o
POTASSIUM
.7
.11
.file
• to
•if!
,7o
3-
70
SODIUM
f.-T
5-.;
i'o
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
<: Jo
LEAD
6.°
ZINC
CHIOS IDE -CI
73
7.3
7-V
7.3
7-V
7-0
7 7
7-
7
SULFATE-SO4
ELEVATION FT
/J
/J.O
//r
/O.O
/t>.\-
y.f
/J.O
£U£
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
LU
•33
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-26 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/Cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOj-*NOj-N/>f>f
NOZ-N p/t
NH4-N ffffj
P04-P f"/Vt
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATlONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
BOSON (ff+
ANOMS.ppm
CHLORIOC-CI
SULFATE-SO»
TEMP«C
El EVATION FT
f.6
£4.1
.043
.84
.oil
.a off
,7*
t.f
x
.£4
3.0
JM
7.8
//
IZ.O
W.44
£.0
•S4.2
.031
.£4
•Olf
&ofy
-62.
'•+
<
.£3
£&
,10
0.2
//
J*'.f
SUi
-0*1
• 006
/.&0
/.6
IOJ
•<£/
t-f
M
5.7
Wr
SKX3
OK
8.4-
/?
fo.o
&.*?
7-?
f/.i
.036.
.AT
-ac*
;.ft3
/•v
X-
4 (00L,
v*^
of
73.
fT
d^
1/al
6.5-
47-V
04Z
• S3
.0/&
.004
/.HO
M
X.
.i?
4.6"
Ol
7<
£
I*.*
sa.v)
74
•Oif
.42.
.007
•00$
1.90
X.3
_jffl2
.lol
f.7
ft
3,0
• IO
.07
$r>
7
K-o
5/.S?
70
11.0
.010
.22.
.007
•O&4
l.nz.
X
,1,0
¥•?
07
flfi
6
n.f
S/.7O
s-.fl
.01?
.00ft
.oo5"
.KB
/.3U
<
i(j-
^7
ol
P*~
7
II.O
flH?
b.O
ff.ft
oit
t.H
.01 Z,
.003
/.ao
/Y
103
,4>?
Y-?
IP
jj tl
03,
,/S)
^
tl.n
SI. if
1..3.
S8.O
.flfit
ool
.otrf
/.3ft
Jf_
u
oS~
f/(,
Y
rVn
SO-7L
Lf
.001
.70
.eW
f a
jj£_
X
(«%•
{?•?
f?
/ft
,T
fTf>
-------
TABLE A-26 (CONTINUED)
pH
£.1
CONDUCTANCE
^Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
051
070
118
034-
.101
.036
NOj-N
1-1
o.B
a.t,
NH«-N
0/0
.06
P04-P
03.4
.0/5"
.001
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
1.58
MAGNESIUM
/•ft
Z£
ro
ro
.MANGANESE
^
-0
POTASSIUM
i./e
/./o
/.of
SODIUM
8.*
7.1
CATION S.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
30.0
133
10.0
IRON
y.o
LEAD
ZINC
nr**i
D*.
ANKDNS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
li. to
f/.t
££
SULFATE-SO«
TEMP °C
I/.2.
so. 7
ELEVATION FT
'.fi fU/S/.aJ
SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-27 SOIL WATER FROM 6'", LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
<\v ,*
c\^V (b/ J-
YT
'/ In/
^
.v
V L
NH,-N pPj?
po«-p P/"fc
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
3VV* CfP^}
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO4
)t
X.
6f J
X
100.3
$•.<*
X
A
>r
Ztf
x.
^0
A. tf
^
X
/
5-27
X
.20
<.6i
/•X
X
i'
2.38
X
20
• V
X
6.3
537
./f
,2
^r
//.6
?-?
£./
^•^
.Ps"
/
/ '
f.i
i>
.21?/
i H
J>'33
,-r./^
//f
<
r.z>1
3-t
<39
^,^
v'
<-f
7<5,<
244
/^
7. 70
9?^
/J.V
/S6
XL
y.7,4
a*
04
{33
«
fnft
in?
?
_^
30 2
-
x
O,?
<£
Oft
1%
f-f
< +
4/,i,
-^
tip
<1
C (.
t
-------
TABLE A-28 SOIL WATER FROM l" . LYSiMETER
INORG NITROGEN
£27
.7V?
ni
HI,
.w
.76
3.3
3 /
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
3-6
1C.
/•?£
f-
ro
/o.
•f.v
/ 60
o.V
3L.7
/.I
/77
I3o
1,8
ZINC
AMONS.ppm
CHLOR'D£-Cl
SULF«TE-S04
X
10
01
of,
0+
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-29 SOIL WATER FROM 2 , LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
03
.10
.1*2.
.077
NOj-N
'7
I.7/
O.f
n 8
NH«-N
PO«-P
13
V
/./z
4.3
/ (47
CALCIUM
£&
-------
TABLE A-30 SOIL WATER FROM 3 . LYSIMETER
ro
en
INORG NITROGEN
NH.-N ff>l,
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
ANIONS.ppni
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO,
X-
X.
X
X
3-7
r.r
^4^
a?
.JO
23.9
3.3
X
.60
-3.Y
,4-Jo
,53
ML
.01
07
.08
,1.8
4.0
a.R
./8J
X
3ft
.lot
X
AMI
4-7
ISA.
/.PC
a?
07
£i_
AtoO
.11,0
l.o
t,.J>
.10
7
-o?/
73.3
.lot.
/./D
n.f.
7.3
/fD
4-0
7-0
./03
/./o
7.S
7-0
.of,
3.5
• oB7
fitc,
4J.
0.58
5-5"
13.$
.05"
7V
12. -3
• /JL
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-31 SOIL WATER FROM 4', LYSIMETER
/7¥y ¥#
'y/ ~\Y
.//Z
.fn
• 5-0
4-6
.63
5-4J
•O-t
• /8
/gg/ *.")
-------
TABLE A-51 fCQNTJNUED)
ANALYSIS
PH
CONDUCTANCE
^/Mho/cm
INOBG NITROGEN
NOZ- 4NO,-Nfley,r
NOj-N pft
NH«-N m.
PO4-P pfl,
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE^
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS, ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
BOYCM (fW*)
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORlDE-G
SULFATE-SO.,
t.i
75 J
.otf
o.a
/./
/?
tf7
^./o
^^
-f.^
30
£.2
af
.of
3
3$
//./
fl If
2
^
/6
fB
M.i
."W
Q.iif
t1.+
2.7
If.
/fto
&?,
3./S
4-?
nr#
e.s"
.0&
£•7
/+
^.0
7s--8
.of?
0.6
JS.&
/.7
4 f
/,lc>
/fl.O
Jot
5-+
£.0
V
•//
f.1
/o
C^f
W
.etc
o-7
6*8
/8*
&(,
/.fft
//.S'
4.0*,
3-i"
/3.5
•it.?
•*1
4J
/o
<7.£
*U
/•
X
X
X
K
y
X
X
*
X
X
*
X
X
ro
c»
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-52 SOIL WATER FROM 6", LYSIMETER
INORG. NITROGEN
sf-f
5V
yz-
18?
3-67
.S-ll
^z
NOZ-N
2,
2-
1.80
-42
NH,-N
y
•o'i
ooB
PPb
<.*>!.
/o
IZ
i'7
tti
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
trt.b
//a.f,
SL
MAGNESIUM
'*.'&
/./J."
ro
vo
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
\.T~-
.42.
SODIUM
IL
^L
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
(PPm)
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
. 7
0. 1.
37.6
SULfATE-SO.
if
3V
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-33 SOIL WATER FROM l' . LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
-o/
SI
*?
.086
£0_
71
(.21
A.
/.a
CALCIUM
MX
38.^
ijlj
MAGNESIUM
U.I*
i.lf
1.88
MANGANESE
O
POTASSIUM
.62
.57
(,7
SODIUM
V9.5-
28.O
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
ZINC
2B.
30
ChLORiDE-Cl
#>.*.
If.o
SULFATE-S04
If!
tft
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-34 SOIL WATER FROM 2', LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
CONDUCTANCE
//Mho/cm
7,2,
7.7
7.0
7.2
13
367
/as
MR
INORG NITROGEN
M.I
,21Z£
*./
(,-*,
0?
07
.on
.520
.198
NO,-N
X,
.as
,£42 H, 3? U
u3_
/•ss
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
/•f3
33.
.MANGANESE
.23
POTASSIUM
X
-AS
.a/
SODIUM
77
CATIONS,**
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
X
ao
ANK>NS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
A.
f&L
l
SULFATE-SO«
A
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-35 SOIL WATER FROM 5'. LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
/v
.27
34+
140
.2L1
•to
V
•-
/v
y/
(f
/ft
?.*
,8O
<.62.
'•18
7.
-3$
38
ANESE
.260
m
POTASSIUM
/.*>
ft
1.07
SODIUM
1ft
-'tt
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COWER
'V
/.T
IRON
7V
LEAD
ZINC
BoVOM
ANONS,ppm
CHLORIDE-Cl
SULFATE-S04
7V
17
.0 /
T.7
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-36 SOIL WATER FROM 4X. LYSIMETER
INORG. NITROGEN
,
• 0-7
33
J'i
33
.<;&
34
Mi
tit,
•f-2.
.3*
/•9
CATK)NS,f>pm
/t>
.?
J.C3-
Z2.<
?./8
9.1
l-
01.
37
33
CO
CO
.060
.0(0
.Oft
.age
3-r
Y-Y
f.l
f.oo
3.40
3..&
'.&
/.o
.2-7. y
CATIONS.ppb
a/./
2,2 a
IS.
LEAD
Ql
37
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
n-i
3? 8
m
9-fl
TE-SO,
3
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
a
TABLE A-37 SOIL WATER FROM 6 . LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pM
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NO^+NOj-N^
N°Z-N Pf>l,
NH,-N fprf
P04-P pfM
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
TZofiotJ fyM
CHLORIDE -ci
SULFATE-SO,
H
V*r
J-X
3-
.01
.A5*•
4363-
H.Z.
8.0
W2~
• t,o
X"
)f
*
X
1.3
*a
.&o
<./f
.OIL
.oil
u
n
*
*
X.
It
>c_
X.
<.
f.
1C
<
tf./
X
.
X
X
•£3
f/^
^
<
.030
.01}
X
X
X.
X
x:
/-
X
X
X
X
X
_x ,
X
A
tf.7
22.
.174-
X
.Of/
X
U.2
tit
3.%
/f-7
• 39
*7
//»
^-f
Z^L
..53/
/.5"
.o//
•fY7
)<
X
X.
•».
rf
<
K.
K
K
X
X
\ . ...
x
/7
72.
ML
• W
X
.Of/
X
?«V
i. 10
.w
^.5-
.«
-J/7.3
/.^
^./?
^2,
•/A3
,90
,«x>^
419 <
m
*•!*
.37
Ki°
.SH
31. t*
**-
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-38 SOIL WATER FROM l' , LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
//>m
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-S04
( \
JL
3ti"
X
.7V
t.o»i
?f-9
7.7,1
•*>f
1-1
JZ..7
?<•?
r
'
.00-?
X
.a/7
• o»a.
/
X
x
K
»
x:
y tt
/.
y*7
x.
.«V/
/««4
/^i:«
s-.sr
•a*5-
. 3
a.;
Vfj
y
*
.Lo
a
-<.3«,
f
X
V
7.V
337
JJL»
3L.
.007
.c/a.
J3.V
i/
7.7
t'*
.7»-i
.10
v'
y
X
x-
y
f- f?
27
>/»
o/9
&&'
ft-1
77
.2f
oa/
03?
j-j 7
/^,g
,3o
^<
.3fc
34. <*
V >
^ V
x
ff
<-7
Vo
•jf T
">
r7
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
CO
01
X^NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-39 SOIL WATER FROM 3\ LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
.nil
IS/
.050
• 18
i.o
/•O
NH»-N
5"
ft?
P0« P
CALCIUM
2i
S~ Z5.7
/£2
2L3_
MAGNESIUM
CO
cr>
MANGANESE
opt-
.0^.0
POTASSIUM
-5-8
19.1
.44
.It,
77
SODIUM
-700
'+.4
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
33
3)
a?
11
/fl
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-S04
31
33.0
77 *
I9-+
/f
*£L
35"
X NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-40 SOIL WATER FROM 6*, LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
7-8
7-3-
77
7.3
<*.?.
CONDUCTANCE
/iMho/cm
j
-7V0
.2/0
5-70
V57
Z7T
INORG NITROGEN
NOj-
tff'
of
.03
.3-3-
•it?
l.7f)
n
<:./*
.10
1,0
NH,-N
.art
._o£_
012.
,*>£
P04-P
fflt,
/5V
01?
010
CATIONS, pf>m
CALCIUM
•U.O
MAGNESIUM
t,™
45"
t ff
CO
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
XT
2L
SODIUM
.2
CATIONS.ppt
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
aoM
30
ANIONS^m
CHLORIDE -Cl
iff*
ro.
/a./
22.6
&2*L
•&&
SULFATE-SO«
£.
L2-
n
3SL
X:|MO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-4I SOIL WATER FROM I , LYSIMETER
PH
6-7
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/cm
335-
l&l
//S
91
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ- +NO$-N
co 7
.370
153
s&o
/ta.
3M
N02-N
S.o
2-0
•8f
.67
s?
.0
NH4-N
033
0/4
040
• 01+
01 7
012.
PO<-P PPb
A?
1.7
1.2.
JQ.
33.0
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
j-.po
52,
42-
co
CO
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
A
• 43
.13
vr
SODIUM
/3.9
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.51/
• 7/
ANONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
J4.J
S2.5
VZL
SULFATE-SO4
3.1
.—+
X'NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-42 SOIL WATER FROM 2X. LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
PH
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/Cfn
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ- +NOS-N ff«
NOj-N pf>J,
NH..-N pf>W
PO..-P ppfe
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS,ppt>
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
GrJtV* (Pffl
ANIONS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-S04
A
X
f»'7
X
.0^
X
loa.
4.0
A,
<
A
<
<
X
M-
<
*
V
<
X
X
7./
y.2^
^)/0
<-^
-cad
A
X.
A
X.
A
<.
X
X
X
/
<
<
<4.o
A
7^
S£3
.tf
X
X
A
X
y.
<
X
A
X
X
X
*
jf
i
<5.9
A
7-3
'31
.o&$
X
-009
A
A
X
X
<
A
<
X
<
X
X
X
A
X
£.7
X^j
•*2*
X
.o/L
X
*
X
X.
X
A
X
A
A
A
X
A
X
X
X
7.0
24-2
•K7
X
.»a>
A
X
X
X
X
*
X
A
A
X
X
X
X
#6
X
7/
2J7
03?
X
X
A
A
A
X
/*r
*
X
X
X
x-
X
X
X
/,T.6
X
^.3
75?
.»6;
/V5~
.003
<-
-------
TABLE A-43 SOIL WATER FROM 3 . LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
6-7
f.J
J.&
f-B
4.0
516
5.2.
5.1
S.I.
(..0
CONDUCTANCE
//Mno/cm
88. /
20$
2/0
INORG NITROGEN
//v
./a
.235-
.353
• K9
.23?
.001-
.35-0
.3/3
l.oB
33?
/•f
.7
-n
/•3f
uf
-42
/4O
3..80
3.37
f.7D
1.00
.03
.63-
01
.00+
.CO?
•S?/
.OSB
.OS3
£*?.
.0/0
PO,-P
/•&,
7-?
9-3
13LA.
.
CATlONS.ppm
CALCIUM
V,
/J.V
/a-5"
1-0
3.3
/?•$
7o
(,.0
MAGNESIUM
2L
ZL
*&.
.38
.20
.20
MANGANESE
.oiO
POTASSIUM
2.8
L3*.
Qi
. 7f
-V/
^L
SODIUM
77
.i
.3
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
au
02.
ifii.
M.
ANIONS,pp
-------
TABLE A-44 SOIL WATER FROM 4'. LYSIMETER
INORG NITROGEN
/f.o
6.762
tJ
fipl
ff.ft
33-
Iff
a.t,o
Jfa
fo
Q.jb
.48
3.
CAT IONS .
4.t3-
/•£.
/^.5O
lB.0
lO.,
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
t-l
.030
.0*0
in
4BL
^23
,.$
175"
.
CHROMIUM
PER
/si
/to
LEAD
ZINC
CHLORIDE -Cl
SUl_FATE-SO«
M.
f-f
n i
11
yfl
33 0
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-45 SOIL WATER FROM 6". LYSINETER
ANALYSIS
pH
//Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ- + *>!-*,#,#
N°2-N ffii
NH« N ^/H
P04-P p/>m
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
Soaotv /V"1
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO4
77
&
?.18
2-
.e>S.~>
.OOlJ
fS.o
&*
/
.S3
x
•01*1
,00^
M
7./
&:>
•&8
X
-£U/
• oif\
X-
X-
X-
/.
X
X.
X.
/-
X-
X
X.
X
«Ha
X
6-7
J37
./5b
*38
.OJ,4
.^>/y
;&-t>
3, 'ft
•13
44,
-Ji
/Y.t
4>.5
^0£
rAJft
ASO
-ft?/
.6>i-t
W.1*
/,V^
.HO
in.f)
.H
IW
40
-------
TABLE A-46 SOIL WATER FROM |x, LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
7.7
7-0
7-+
6.8
7.0
6-7
6.Q
£.0
({.•7
CONDUCTANCE
//Mno/cm
ZBf 345
29
INORG NITROGEN
NOZ-
01*
130
.(,73.
we
23?
•36
•4-2
40
7-3
NH«-N
2B-
.OOi
.004.
•OXL
• 010
Qll
.008
P04-P
77
.oU,
• OaSL
CATIONS.ppin
CALCIUM
Ml
MAGNESIUM
.51
OJ
MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
^a
48.
a^
17
SODIUM
t.S
.5
.00
-
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
-»/"">
•<£_
*SL
^i
ANONS,ppm
CHLCWIOE-CI
?.*!
s
X
A3.. .0
18.7,
27.8
Ji£
SULFATE-SCU
X
X
13-
X:NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-47 SOIL WATER FROM 2X. LYSIMETER
/ , I
INORG NITROGEN
93$
171
112.
LA
<.7<3
3.00
J73
£1
121
11
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
30,1
&}
4A
AKGANESE
POTASSIUM
-43
1
SODIUM
28$
3ft n
yy<-
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
ANlONS.ppm
V-3
13
So
HiORlDE-CI
SULFATE-SO.
7--J
*>.?
£Z
tl
X NO SAVPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-48 SOIL WATER FROM 3X, LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
7-2.
6.O
•TO
£fl
/•Mho
/cm
7J-?
3.9+
IBS
INORG. NITROGEN
3L*L
/f
/*-
.'41
.'37
.of/
083
7-9
/. o
/.O
A 6
'.It,
.Of
.03
•0/8
0/0
OI7
03ft
SJ-
/93~
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
a A
ag
J-f
7°
53
C71
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
tif-,
/.Off
SODIUM
22J
a*.
23.8
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
**>
LEAD
2INC
3o*ofi/
30
CHLORIDE -Cl
f*-?
*,-*
99
5-
9-IS 3/
37/
SULFATE-SO*
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-49 SOIL WATER FROM 4X. LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
PH
^Mho/cm
/
/ 2
2
t?7
:8
INORG NITROGEN
v/
a-ff
tefl
f*
.off
A*
•o/
a/ . 01
• 70
.70
.9-r
006
21-8
?
5-
37
POTASSIUM
i.r
•*¥•
•1ft
,j:
SODIUM
CATlONS.ppb
.5
33. /
33.5-
ft:
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
t.ol
s/o
a.o
LEAD
ZINC
ANIONS.ppm
.37
•V /
rr
27
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-50 WELL WATER. WELL 'I
ANALYSIS
HIMHLI OIO
pH
CONDUCTANCE
INORG NITROGEN
NOj- +NOj-N
NO*-N ffl
NH4-N pfn
P04-P /yr*
CALCIUM
MAGNESIUM
MANGANESE., /
PF9
POTASSIUM
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
fcttt/ fa/*
CHLORIDE -Cl
SUL FATE-SO.,
TEMP °C
ELEVATION FT
/
»
,JA
-/
,00 1
,0»f
/•*>*
(•'1
f.3L
$.sr
4-5
f-B
t3o
Ft -4
#•$
5V.77
'( \
,07
1
t.eef
.£»/
,t>0
/£>i
.f9
>'/
<1&
r.7
,n
i
s.e'l
.oel
• 5~8
f-**
.5-9
f 3
&e>
£-*
W
/
^
/
.00>(
,eu>?
f.3
f
.&a
.6
,04*.
,oay
/.?&
•?f
At
yv
xf
5T-*
f
.of
.8
s.~>l
.aot,
<*.a-
<^
/ \
.17
8
.oof
.0'*.
/.6Z-
102
.U
Mv
7.V
™
(
x
.3/
/
.oo3
,0)2.
9ft
-
( \
X.
•3V
.o/f
.^y
/./(,
J.w
• 73
•(.#«
9s-
Tf.
{
e.
.11
^
.0/0
.D6t,
SI
>
x
.3.1
f.f
.o3r
/.£0
/. 5-7
fff
f.80
7-f
r««
/ '
<
.*{
3f
.60"}
.31
7 J
.-«,
x
fl-~>3
1 '.
*
tfi
}f-
.0/6
, -,
y
&1*
^
.03.
X
.0~tf
rv%?
fl?
/o6
' o -2_
5"_i?^
/ 0
1 y''-^
.2.3-
rf
o^7
^ /?
"" 1
// 1
x
.)•?
o3v
9S~
/a3
.11
Cff,
"~>
- —
rt
.ol
X
a»X
7J
/O3<-
' 0
r-f)
/ 7
j
' \(
#,*
,7
x
ftj*
y /
^^
r 1
y
,0
I/
ok
, j
;°s
f T
V (^
y ^
f7'--3
y \7 '/ y
' -7
./3.
3
0 a
77
/AD.
-7-1
7-3
&-8I
ofc
/ O
//s
/.a-/
^1
73
,-A
°3
' "/
T'
•»•»
/<37
^V
r '
iw^~
X'NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CC'ITI.'IUCD)
-------
TABLE A-50 (CONTINUED)
ANALYSIS
pH
L4_
71
6.1
C.Q
75"
6.0
^o
to*
CONDUCTANCE
/^Mho/cm
5S+
$76
533
50.0
INOSG NITROGEN
NO,-
J£-
.re
02.
.470
./SO
.-7
/v
• 31
•17
.62
22_
60
/v
.AO
NM4-N
OtJ
Z
SSS.
4£2_
001
P04-P
,0/i.
ooK
009
Oil
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
32.
62L
TL
J£
MAGNESIUM
I-/0
//r
f.2
/.Oft
t-H
oo
MANGANESE
8.6
&3L
3±_
POTASSIUM
.&,£.
41
•57
..51-T
.67
.loO
.SI
SODIUM
S'j'O
(,.0
,
s-a.
6.3
CATIONS.Ppb
CADMIUM
.89
.78
CHROMIUM
COPPER
7.0
1L
IRON
&i
S.1
LEAD
ZINC
A5L
5V7
/>/»«
.04,
'ML
.01
.0*1
.07.
.OS
&L
.01
.OQ.
t&L
ANIONIS.ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
8.1*
8.3
8-8
9.3
9.9
IO.O
73
/„.?
SULftATE-S04
XL
4_
2_
2_
^
1-
TEMP °C
J3-
tiL
a.
/f
LLSL
ELEViTiON FT
>.// ¥9.91 SD.otSb.'&st.aft SA
$1.0
S2S6S
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-51 SOIL WATER FROM 6 LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
7.2
22-
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/cm
737
INORG NITROGEN
.72
x-yf
./a?
.56.
NH,-N
1-3.0
'7
.13
CATIONS, ppm
CALCIUM
UL.
21o
MAGNESIUM
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
•'3
J£l
SODIUM
CATIONS.ppb
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.Ob_
£L
^L
flN»NS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
OS
0?
SULFATE-50«
HL
X'NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-52 SOIL WATER FROM l' LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pM
CONDUCTANCE
/
-------
TABLE A-53 SOIL WATER FROM 2,' LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pH
A
-7
6.7
f-7
5:7
7?
7-9.
CONDUCTANCE
//Mho/cm
211.
2A3
163
INORG NITROGEN
55"
.7(7
• J74-
,/5-J
112.
335-
L£-
I.8Z
3-02.
/.3V
'80,
AO
60
•034-
.008
.ooj-
-006
.oof
0/0
OS/?
-63
£-62.
CATIONS, t>
CALCIUM
L£
:fc^
5#/
£2A
MAGNESIUM
J.6
• 43
•37
-V/
,30
en
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
X
.(,0
.26
.AD
.23
./o
VJ
•1?
SODIUM
.t,
/•a-
/.J
(-7
O.I*
0.5"
0.1,
as
CATlONS.ppb
CADMIUM.
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
LEAD
ZINC
.03,
•oi.
.OS,
•&L
.03
ANIONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
if.C,
<$.(,
13.1
II. 5
SULFATE-SO4
28
£L
SAMPtE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-54 SOIL WATER FROM 3, LYSIMETER
ANALYSIS
pM
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/cm
X
1.1
(,.0
&.&
«*./
fT.lt,
//£
,
INORG NITROGEN
N02-
.8*.
33
-234
07S
BSL
.^L
IMOZ-N ppfc
1-
J.4S
• 18
Uc_
ik
NH.-N
/3
_Z_
X7/?
35.0
PO.-P
< 62.
L
CAT IONS, ppm
CALCIUM
X-
.10.6,
3A7
MAGNESIUM
• 4-1
,Tt
•&.
P
AT
ANK>NS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
SULFATE-SO«
n/
if
17-0
IB.7
X NO SAVPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-55 SOIL WATER FROM 4, LYSIMETER
PO.-P
CATIONS,p»in
CALCIUM
A?
5:;
7.7
MAGNESIUM
• SSL
•if 3
tn
co
.MANGANESE
POTASSIUM
.50
^L
37
SODIUM
'
.8
•
CATIONS.ppt)
CADMIUM
CHROMIUM
COPPER
IRON
x:
LEAD
ZINC
&L
&L
.01
• bin
ANK)NS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
U
*&
¥.3
.fl
4.0
SULFAT£-SO4
JZL
ft
^L
J3..
IS-
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-56 WELL WATER, WELL '7
CONDUCTANCE
//Mho/cm
INORG NITROGEN
NOj-
.07,
01
.1-0-
.10
• oS.
.oti
01
NOZ-N
Y
-7
3
/r
.7
^?_
z.
.3
NH4-N
olZ
Of/
Ooi
•Oll
012.
.010
oil
.&!(,
.03J
,&&_
.eot-
003
00 3-
Oo
*7'
olO
oo~?
,00 &
.OJ/
CATIONS.ppm
CALCIUM
• 77
MAGNESIUM
,7?
/.
ANONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
Z&
1£-
9.3
SULFATE-S04
TEMP °C
X.
X
/o
i/
//.r
ELEVATION FT
53.17 &./,
51.13
.52.33
&.00
Sb.
so /^
X NO SAMPLE, BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
(CONTINUED)
-------
TABLE A-56 (CONTINUED)
PH
6.2.
77
577
7?
CONDUCTANCE
/(Mho/cm
-
93.3 89.0
7J.7/3/.7
INOftG. NITROGEN
NOj-
NH«-N
L2i
AP7
/ 12.
f'T
<.H .3?
.ao
.0/7
00
OO7
P04-P
.ottf
CATK3NS.pp.il
CALCIUM
Ale-
UL
JJL
LS.
MAGNESIUM
ZA
1Z
LSL
&L
&&
CJ1
.MANGANESE
'££.
70
8-2
&i
POTASSIUM
^ZZ
JL
ZL
SODIUM
-
-
S.
CATIONS,**
CADMIUM
•47
.16
3±
CHROMIUM
COPPER
£L
IRON
8*
IQ.r?
LEAD
ZINC
if
PV!*
13.
.03
03-
JOS'
,os_
09
Ik-
.Ob_
.of)
.ex,
ANONS,ppm
CHLORIDE -Cl
9.9
U±
SULFATC-SO*
m.
!L
T£MP.°C
ri
a
10
l£L
£L
/SSW.5
ELEVATION FT.
rtsrvv.
•/fw aist
SJ.tJf S7.Q3
X:NO SAMPLE; BLANK: ANALYSIS NOT COMPLETE
-------
TABLE A-57 REED CANARY. EAST PLOT
tn
'74 HARVEST I
'75 HARVEST H
'75HARVESTBI
'75 HARVESTS
'75 TURF
' 76 HARVEST Y
'76
'76 HARVESTS
'76 TURF
'77 HARVEST3ZEI
'77 HARVESTS
'77 TURF
HARVESTS! jg;/
HJ-3
vw
Y3,0
Ml
A7V
AY?
.97
2.03
o.ft
ic-ee
4.13
f.3/
•Uf
Vf
4,*#P
1,841
1,190
iSflk
ijeo
* EST. AS % N X 6.25 ®- No DATA X« Mo «AMf^C
JA1
^i
/ate.
/a&
Z22.
6*0
352T
tAi
^a.
59
*./
1-7 2
t!L
+1
8.0
&L
1O7
'&.
&A&2
,<&
LL
ll.o
Li.
3.1
+.0
32.
&
3J_
5V
fS
fcr
38
3+
,11
3Ji
HO
l.tl
1.03
If
9.Z,
13.1
3/.0
14.Q
J/.Z.
4-f.o
-------
TABLE A-58 REED CANARY, SOUTH PLOT
01
• EST. AS % N x 6.25 0: NoBArA x: No Snnn.1
-------
TABLE A-59 REED CANARY. WEST PLOT
en
oo
,„
'74 HARVEST I
'75 HARVEST H
'75 HARVEST HI
'75 HARVEST JY
'75 TURF
'76 HARVESTS:
'76 HARVESTSI
'76 HARVESTm
'76 TURF
'77 HARVEST2HI
'77 HARVEST IX
'77 TURF
91.1
ne
-58.8
AAk
Lkk
Lit
C.ff
/V-/3
7-86
7.00
If 6?
370
.in,
V/f
fLO&L
%&&
yo8o tyefl
LQ23*.
f,700
8,07*
ML
£,&<*>
£23
l&L
221.
S3L.
^i
^151
^&.
•53..
* EST. AS % N x 6,25 ®-'
LS-
2J-
&3_
$.$
£L
1^
Z3-
&L.
2i.
liS_
M-
U-
±fL
+•4-
/5.5*
£Q_
LZ.
.J.a,
32.
3.0
£L
•3£-
§31
L°3_
3S--7
J3T.3
60-7
X:
-------
TABLE A-60 REED CANARY, CONTROL PLOT
01
1C
'EST.AS %Nx6.25
1- No DATA X: Wo .SAM RLE
-------
TABLE A-61 TIMOTHY
o
'74 HARVEST I
'75 HARVESTS
'75 HARVEST III
'75 HARVEST Iff
'75 TURF
' 76 HARVEST 3T
'76 HARVESTS!
'76 HARVEST3ZE
'76 TURF
'77HARVEST3ZI1
'77 HARVEST IX
'77 TURF
134
*1
39.7
m
313
W-/
U.o
n?
V3-3
*?•/
<*r
**r
I.tp0
l.io
LSI
t.te
I.IQ
W
*o<
A.**
.«.
/.*
/*
1000
6,80
W
,0cp
^.flfl
9-w
»^»
/^o/fl
*7S
13.31
8.56
,.?<*>
*,**
w
/,7?t
/*¥/
?m
»/3
(314.
^v?i?
/,/V/
Wo
tf&
a&iic
A, 5V
5; 0/7
rfM
?TO|
^d.
A^
^//^>
#04,
/5"7
t^XS"
/9V
J^O
IMI
J+3
Jte
xa
.AS
11
.30
^
31
.5^8
<-0
">
V5
•*
il i
jjl
J.O
ff9
^.^
/7
7./
^.7
//.O
v.v
77
If.O
n.v
^^
/^
9o
rr
3Q8
3,099
^9
7*r
•^3
^^s>
l.l
1-t,
3.1
S.S"
0.9
/.7
3.0
V.fl
*/
/^
jia.
JV
sj
17
flT
/3
//
*r
3.1
V.O
IS"
•S" 7
J.3
7.t
3..O
/*
3S
*/
it
2.3
HI
HI
is
33u
+/
67
^
,¥3
j 57
0-
«
.^
w
(2>
3.3
/Of
/$'£
30,0
3&.S
Z3.O
KB
30.Q
3/.r
5^.p
^
4>/.o
-------
TABLE A-62 SMOOTH BROME
CTi
'74 HARVEST I
"75 HARVEST H
'75 HARVEST IE
'75 HARVEST IZ
'75 TURF
'76 HARVEST 3T
'76 HARVEST 32
'76 HARVEST 3ZD.
'76 TURF
'77 HARVESTS
'77 HARVEST IX
'77 TURF
VV.fc
Ytf.o
423
/.ft
I.?/
A7?
/•v?
.80
J.73
I.&7
l.oi
9.13
A'.OO
/,31/S
/,¥/?
JjM.
UhB
A2£
2Q3L
l&L
ZI6
544
* EST. AS % N x 6.25 © : NoDATA X: NoiAMPUt
,3o
a?
•JlL
47_
./r
.75
J^L
6±_
8
4EL
ii.
75"
J2.
J3&
loo
Sift
A0_
L^,
<2.O
3.3
7-5"
3-O
3.2
Ill-
2L.
J7
U_
'f
4-0
ZZ.
VL
/-f
JZ.
yy_
4-7
4.73
.70
JS_
J.3
;Z
-------
TABLE A-63 TIMOTHY ALFALFA
cn
ro
'74 HARVEST I
'75 HARVEST E
'75 HARVEST IE
'75 HARVESTS
'75 TURF
'76 HARVEST 2
'76 HARVESTS!
'76 HARVEST2EL
'76 TURF
'77 HARVEST3ZIE
'77 HARVEST IE
'77 TURF
v/.o
ff£J_
43.5
A4&
3.00
L2L
f.60
/•<&
tQ.50
,s\o
SBO
983
M33
11,707
12SS1
tf,9oo
fy80°
332-
AftlQ
30A.
1,3-SI,
H2L
1,171
±23*.
.7.-T
^L
1.02*
J.fc
S^L
UL
5-7
p.o
He
8.8
iao
441
a,73/
loz.
JA-
13*.
J.o
J.O
53
17-
A/
3V
/JZ
(3.0
<3-7
ZL.
Y-3
/y
^fi_
30
37
U/
JT-5
*EST. AS % N x 6.25
: No DATA X'- No .SAMPLE.
Jo.o
. 8
33.0
3o.Q
3*0
39.0
4-1-0
-------
TABLE A-64 REED CANARY
cr»
oo
'74 HARVEST I
'75 HARVEST II
'75 HARVEST III
'75 HARVEST Iff
'75 TURF
176 HARVEST 3T
'76 HARVESTS!
'76 HARVEST3ZE
'76 TURF
'77 HARVEST3ZE
'77 HARVEST JX
'77 TURF
V3-7
1.07
I.SQ
/.7t>
{•&>
.88
338
/.oo
7/3
34,?
352
1,13-1
I7AR
^038
itfft
1,1/0
aA
32fe_
3V23
32_
7
£2_
3, $$3
S&.1
L2_
.
7?
&2_
7V
-f-/
^2_
^9
2?
3.1
,0
33,
31
IL
aJzi
3.3
3.0.0
£.0.8
Z3.0
30.8
34-.0
4-/.0
-------
TABLE A-65 CONTROL PLOT
cr>
'74 HARVEST I
'75 HARVEST E
'75 HARVEST m
'75 HARVEST JZ
'75 TURF
' 76 HARVEST Y
'76 HARVESTS!
'76 HARVEST3ZK
'76 TURF
'77HARVEST3ffll
'77 HARVEST JX
'77 TURF
VV.a.
4*1
L
I.ZS
.71
0.7JL
BJBL
HL
.373
.//f
10300
fl??
3.29
^57
.a?
•n
79
fl.9
V.fc
6*31
Z&.
3.0
7.1
V.3
3.7
213_
76
400
3O3,
HS7
3,319
32..C
too
St.S
J/
iLl.
/3
H
It,
• '3
rf?1/
0?
&.
EST. AS % N x 6.25
®:
X-
_®
£>
4L
-------
TABLE A-66 EAST PLOT
01
Aua. /17J
DfC,/f75.
Nov. I17L
mi
0-ta
/a.
04-
0-3
UL
0-3
0-6
3-6
S3-
£2_
,5"- 7
,3.87
4a
OP
'JtL
•O
fJff
.Of
3.6?
3.77
1.38
0-32
/v
-if
.07
•'4-
-03
.ol
QJ£L
QJ3-
01 /
•CM
.0/7_
0/3
• Off-
.0/7
OI3, I L.O
0/t> I tf.0
/a/9
370
&a_
£31
3L.
ML
303
a. &t
2,0*0
•5^10
7*0
/7A.
l&L
A18
I&L
/fff
48-
A^
L
/OH,
trf
Joo
J/0
42-
.27
.AO
• *L
&.
Ii
J&.
•39
1.0
££-
£&_
V-7
9.8
27
/a 3.
/o. 6
•525-
{03S
£&_
3.3
3.6
I 1.80°
&L.
73
£.7
JJ.o
/C'-i
ZZ_
3J-
&±_
^.
sj_
/J
40.0
A£L
JL£.
3.3
33_
J.V
7-3
&L
t&-
J(
LfL
JO
//r
V: Wo >S AMPLE
-------
TABLE A-67 SOUTH PLOT
cn
Dre. 11 is
Nov. mi
0-4,
0-3
V8
0-3
3d*.
JJL.
0-6
0-3
IS.
_&
o
©
/..sa
L£L
.it,
.07
.04,
.OS
L*8_
LBQ_
in
o.tf
,01
.02.
.03
n
• A3
.07
.01
•Of
£)&„
.Q/Q
OJ1,
LOAA
£&_
.017
.046
.of/
.&*
49
21.
&5L
242.
,5^
33±
2XL
XT
37
33L
Vfl
/to
/oo
800
.AO
• 17
.]&,
JA^
.10
.52-
•9ft
•49
•S3T
±2*.
h^L-
g.A,
V-o
f-Z
/.v
£L
Lai.
A2L
LB_
03-
3.3
v-i
V-fl
£0_
S^,
/o.o
A^L
*7_
/r
JJ_
s.o
J7
3.0
ZCL-
y.s
2J_
A&_
£B_
f.o
7-7
/o
so
7s2__
AO
^£10
lf-0
X-' Wo 5AM RLE
: Wo DATA
-------
TABLE A-68 WEST PLOT
Pu6. /17.3
O-b
L3-.
Dec. I11S
O-L,
A30
771
3.0
8-1
3&ZL
4333
&L
L£_
Q3&
joo
15&.
S^_
30
LZ_
3.a,
-5-y
3-7
SD/O
13,
/3
33B
aoe
.CW
.18
/.£,
34,
311*
£.0
J-7
.07
yjf
.*&
3.3
Men/. 1V7L
04,
$38
.33
J 7
5.7
J.to
JO
35-
jo_
-of
V-f
s.o
{,.0
I3L
.35-
,03
.o/
37
.222
ttft
/3
7-3
0-6
Jo
.062.
275V
-•3?
3.8
0-3
.000
•58
6,1
I8.o
4.1
3-6
.oj
Otf
4-9-
0-50
3.0
8.0
M.
•02.
.013
.13
6.1
3.1
-------
TABLE A-69 CONTROL PLOT
en
oo
No\t
. /977
LL
Q^L
3=±
0-f,
a
•L3L
30
O
£21
.57
.93
1-4+
o±_
Q±_
f>7
o-r
ML
.11
10
03
>Q3£
.033
otf
.03)
,052.
M.
lo.
60
//f
3/0
Ml.
£&
•3*0
310
/¥?
/7f
no
230
•500
305
AS"
£0
l?L
37
5°
5°
•(0
,12,
-Oft
.flu
.30
.30
.30
•32.
.21
¥•/
VV
rf.V
4.7
• 7Y
J.ft
a?
t>OII
4^2
1.7
Y/
t.fl
3.0
347
0,9 ft
to.*-
6- 33
Wo
JQ.O
to.)
tf.o
no
9.*
33
f-A
J.I
y.o
5.3
f.l
4.0
.3-9
3-7
+0
7-3
/o
IQ
8-7
7,o
7o
f.o
.1 Wo SAMPLE
-------
TABLE A-70 NORTHEAST PLOT, TIMOTHY
cr>
PfC.U75
Q^_
0-2
0-6
0-3
5T0
£L
.30
.10
/.B7
.33
36
O.37
,03
o/
.07
-Oi
,0?
•07
.0^7
.01 J
If.l
V-fl
a- 5"
sss-
1O1
5J3_
S'V^'
/33
J13.
330
SLQO
/ao
330
22.
92? £s*>
180
37
Hi
36,
30_
SO
32.
So
loo
60
.3.0
^L
.20
.9.0
.38
.3.3
3f
a.5"
J.3
3-1
3.3
Vv
-2-5
3.9
A3
/Y
A3
s-o
/A-
/3
^
(^775
±2-
J-ft
2*.
3^_
3.0
9.5
L.O
/ft
31
£-.9
3.0
-2-tf
3.y
S-3
49
Y-7
*Av&. of 4-
^ AM PLES
-------
TABLE A-71 SOUTHEAST PLOT, SMOOTH BRdE
„.,.
-pff.. 117*
ot/, mt
mi
Q4_
Jo,
ZL
4S
0-2
3-L
0-Q
0-5
3-6
£&.
%Z_
m.
til.
173>
033
Bit'
£08
Sdl
/w
366
v/
38
»i.
y*.
M>
77
57
60
.a?
.57
./
3-B
*L2.
£.0
&•?
3.1
S.I
3.1
3.Z-
6.2.
s-.i
/•Y
f-9
.03
3.o
3d
=?./
LM>1
Stff
9.0
f,?
3.7
3.7
/f.o
13.*
3-8
f-B
L£-
SL-I
/.e
3-7
3. 7
3-0
3.6
&L
3.1
3-7
7-3
f-.f
•50
X: No CAMPLE
*Av6. of 4-
-------
TABLE A-72 SOUTHWEST PLOT. TIMOTHY ALFALFA
flufi. 1173
DEC. /1 75
AW
tfot ft 11
IS-
O-(e
V8
0-6
0-3
J..7
.02,
(.57
/.&
.vr
A#
0.57
• 01
.09
Q£_
&L_
,01
.Of,
-JSL
.06
.02.
©
•StS-
OIO
&1Q.
•007
.013
.031
,033
42L
.031
•0+7
•0/6>
&L
&o_
&L
a.3
63?
ie>L
LJ^L
49-
£JO_
m.
2S8-
&3-
no
160
no
113
ZL
v/
UL
2L
fffT
7o
.Si3
^o_
.US'
.34,
Jk.
AL
.3.3
.3.3.
,/fl
37
33
'3
&_
&L
S-.7
*7_
£.0_
4-4
3-7
£°L
JZ.
3.1
34
2^L
A3_
3.Z.
7^57
3.1
Jtf.o
3.P,
S-¥
3.1,
3.0
3-0
2.. 3
3.1
6.0
&£.
7.9
Al
L.3;
93
/r
^3_
5.3
£.5"
&'• No DATA
* A vs. OF 4
•CAMPLES
-------
TABLE A-75 NORTHWEST PLOT. REED CANARY
no
„„,
Nov.ini.
- 1-117
o=3_
a.4
oi
3iL
o-e>
0-3
3-6
A.
±S_
Z&.
•J0_
•02_
.31
.oil
3.60
i.h"
O.22
c&_
1L
O&
..£L
.05-
.ot,.
.01
.03
./.a
.of
,o*fi
Q/fc
AH
.OOS"
.008
.007
.OZL
.0*7
a/A
.06?
.037
• 014.
Z£Z
ti?_
/oB
2£&
53=2.
2£l
3?
Vff
37
VO
.30
J.S
V.3
.?.*>
3.0
3JL-
U_
Q.o
6.5
9.7
/•a*
/.t
A3
3.1
77^7
14400
#8
t-8
7-8
33,
J.I,
3-1
/.o
7-3
Y.o
3.3
ll.o
/6.0
//
JO
10
$••?
7-?
/f,
MS
31.0
3-ft
9-1
3.0
3.3
37
¥-7
3.2-
&3-
7-9
6.0
£L_
^2L
Z^_
^P
$-.8
8.0
* A vs. OF +
-------
TABLE A-74 CONTROL PLOT, TIMOTHY
PU&. 1173
Jkc,
co
Nov. IV7U
0^2.
2^.
48.
Q^Ja_
3-L
12*.
0-6
0-3
3-6
&£-
£2-
ZL
QL-
•os'
1.70
1.68
•2L
0.9/
Qj_
01
^QL
.of
•QS
.07
.OL
.of,
.0+
-03L.
ojjL
OIL.
CQ1
002.
osa.
.oil,
•CCU
B!L
£o_
<&L
LZB.
IGD
i&
I9B
1?
16-
£L
33
su
5V
5V
.33
.3.L,
^i.
AS,
^£2_
Ji.
.as*
,3V
.£L
&_
M-.
£&_
a.*
&o_
&L.
49
£.0
,<$.?
l^.
/3
3-1
*•**
6.3
Jto
70
18
18
/*-
J-7
/. 7
?•&
y-7
/7
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(/'lease read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-79-176
2.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
WASTEWATER RENOVATION AND RETRIEVAL ON CAPE COD
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSI ON-NO.
5. REPORT DATE
August 1979 issue date
T.AUTHORIS)
> Vaccaro> P> E> Kallio, B. H. Ketchum,
W. B. Kerfoot, A. Mann, P. L. Deese, C. Palmer, M. R.
P.r. Bnwker. N. Corwin. and S. J. Maneanini
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMfNG ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Woods Hole Oce anographic Institution
Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1BC822
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
S802037
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Lab-Ada, OK
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ada, Oklahoma 74820
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA-600/15
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
A rapidly increasing population on maritime Cape Cod has generated considerable
interest in alternative wastewater disposal techniques which promise to maintain high
groundwater quality and promote its conservation. Such deliberations, five years ago,
led the authors to undertake an assessment of agricultural spray-irrigation as a
potential means of lessening groundwater contamination and depletion. In the course
of these studies individual components of an entire wastewater-cropping facility have
been isolated and subjected to detailed examination. Experimental emphasis has been
placed on variations in the rates and methods of wastewater application and in the
types of renovation agricultural crops placed under wastewater irrigation.
Results from these studies have been highly promising and suggest that under
ideal circumstances, the coupling of secondary domestic effluent to animal forage
crops can bring about a degree of wastewater renovation which exceeds direct disposal
to sand filter beds and approaches the goals of tertiary treatments. Moreover, three
desirable consequences, i.e., water conservation, crop irrigation and nourishment and
wastewater renovation are simultaneously achievable.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Land use, water quality
Sewage treatment
Trace elements
Nutrient removal
Water reclamation
Groundwater recharge
Slow rate land treatment
Sewage effluents
Spray irrigation
Secondary pre-treatment
(wastewater)
43F
91A
68D
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
190
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
174
U.S. GOVERNMENT HUNTING OFflCE: 1979 -657-060/5403
------- |