THESIS - 'A HYDROGEOCHEMICAL INVESTIGATION OF …

i iciuum > - i i > LUIIUIHI

Doc. # 136

- 1 • I1

A HYDROGEOCHEMICAL INVESTIGATION OF INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS

IN SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER IN THE VICINITY OF A II

DISPOSAL SITE IN CLARK COUNTY, OHIO 4z

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science

By

LORI HOOSEB.S., Waynesburg College, 1982

1987Wrieht State universitv

ABSTRACT

Hoose, Lori, M.S., Department of Geological Sciences, Wright StateUniversity, 1987. A Hydrogeochemical Investigation of InorganicConstituents in Surface Water and Ground Water in the Vicinity of aDisposal Site in Clark County, Ohio.

The possibility of groundwater and surface water contamination

originating from a disposal site located 1.25 miles west of the town of

Tremont City, located in Clark County, Ohio, has been the concern among

area residents. The disposal site, which began its initial operations

in 1969, has been subdivided into three sections: a liquid chemical

disposal facility; a waste oil treatment facility and a sanitary

landfill. Only the sanitary landfill is presently operating. Due to

the nature of the materials buried at the disposal site, residents of

the area are apprehensive about possible contamination of their water

supply, which is derived from the area's Silurian Limestone aquifer.

Also of concern is the water of Chapman Creek, a tributary of the Had

River which recharges the buried valley aquifer used as the water

supply for the city of Springfield, Ohio.

A total of fifty ground water and surface water samples were

collected in December 1984 and May 1985. Samples were obtained from

domestic wells, streams, seeps and ponds located at varying distances

from the disposal site. Analyses were performed for the physical

parameters (i.e., pH, Eh, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and

total dissolved solids) and a wide range of inorganic constituents.

ABSTRACT (continued)

Groundwater samples from sampling sites 9 and 11, located in

proximity to the eastern border of the disposal site, contain high

concentrations of Ca, Mg, Ni, Fe, Zn, Pb, Ba, K, Cl, N03, SOA,

HCC^, TDS and high values of specific conductivity, in comparison to>

background samples. This is evident in both sampling periods. The

samples from site 11 are at or above the EPA drinking water standards

for Pb, Cd and Fe concentrations.

The surface water sample from site CC, along the disposal sitesI

western border, contains high concentrations of Ca, Fe, Mn, HCO^ and

SO^. Along Chapman Creek at site 3, in the December sampling period,

elevated values of Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, N03, Si02, S04,

specific conductivity and TDS are present in comparison to samples

taken upstream.

In comparing the samples taken from proximity to the disposal site

with background samples, it is evident that the disposal site has had

an impact on the area's natural water, but to what extent cannot be

determined without further studies on the geology and water chemistry

of the area.

TABLE OF CONTENTSI

Page |

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. |i

Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Geography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The Disposal Site and Its History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A*

Tremont Landfill Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

IWD Liquid Waste, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Chemical Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Geologic Histroy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Local Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Bedrock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Glacial Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Hydrogeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Purpose and Scope of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

GEOCHEMICAL METHODS AND TECHNIQUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Sample Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Sample Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Error Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Sample Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Physical Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Specific Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

Page

Total Dissolved Solids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

pH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36•

Eh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 fts

Dissovlved Oxygen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 fiMajor Constituents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Bicarbonate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Calcium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Chloride . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . 50

Magnesium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Nitrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Potassium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Sodium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Sulfate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Minor Constituents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Barium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

Boron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Cadmium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

Chromium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Cobalt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

Copper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Lead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Manganese . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) ft

Page <

Nickel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 I»

Silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 f*

Strontium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 t

Zinc . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 ti

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 j

Sunnnary of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

Comparison of Fall versus Spring Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Chemical speciation using WATEQF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . Ill '

Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Environmental Impact of the Disposal Site . . . . . . . . . . . 115

CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 j

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure , Page

1 Study Area Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

2 Disposal Site Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3 Disposal Site Subdivisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

4 Sampling Site Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

5a Specific Conductance - December 1984 Sampling Period . . 30

5b Specific Conductance - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . 31

6a Total Dissolved Solids - December 1984 Sampling Period . 34

6b Total Dissolved Solids - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . 35

7a pH - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 37

7b pH - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

8a Eh - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 39

8b Eh - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

9a Dissolved Oxygen - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . 42

9b Dissolved Oxygen - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . 43

lOa Bicarbonate - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . 44

10b Bicarbonate - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 45

lla Calcium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 48

lib Calcium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 49

12a Chloride - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . 51

12b Chloride - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 52

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

(continued)

Figure Page

13a Magnesium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . 54

13b Magnesium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . 55

14a Nitrate - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 57

14b Nitrate - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 58

15a Potassium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . 60

15b Potassium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . 61t

16a Sodium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 63

16b Sodium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

17a Sulfate - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 66

17b Sulfate - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 67

18a Barium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 69

18b Barium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

19a Boron - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . 72

19b Boron - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

20a Cadmium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 75

20b Cadmium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 76

21a Chromium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . 78

21b Chromium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 79

22a Cobalt - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 81

22b Cobalt - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

23a Copper - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . 84

23b Copper - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

24a Iron - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . 87

24b Ircr. - May 1955 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

LIST OF FIGURES

(continued)

Figure Page

25a Lead - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 90

25b Lead - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

26a Manganese - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . 93

26b Manganese - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 94

27a Nickel - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . 96

27b Nickel - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 97i

28a Silica - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . 99

28b Silica - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

29a Strontium - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . 102

29b Strontium - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 103

30a Zinc - December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . 105

30b Zinc - May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

31 Total Organic Carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1 Generalized Section of the Consolidated Rocks in

Clark County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2 Sampling Site Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3a Field Measurements and Anion Concentrations ,

December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3b Concentrations of Cations in mg/1

December 1984 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4a Field Measurements and Anion Concentrations

May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4b Concentrations of Cations in mg/1

May 1985 Sampling Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5 Drinking Water Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

xi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to express my appreciation and thanks to the many people who

made the completion of ny thesis"possible. I would first like to

express special thanks to Dr. Paul Pushkar for the guidance and moral

support he has given me throughout my thesis work, and for his

friendship. I also thank my committee members, Dr. Galen Kenoyer and

Dr. Ken Kramer for their patience and help, and Dr. Ronald Schmidt for

giving me the original idea for my thesis.

For all the assistance given to me in my analytical and field work

I thank: Brent Huntsman and the Brehm Research Lab for the use of

their equipment and analytical knowledge; the Argonne National

Laboratories for the use of their ion chromatograph and Florence

Williams for her humor and assistance; Mark Rickertsen, Dan Fenno and

John Pavlik for their much needed assistance with my field work and for

making the days amusing. A special thank you Is extended to the

Department of Geological Sciences and all the friends I made during my

stay at Wright State.

To Laura Kaffenbarger, CF/WATER, and the citizens of Tremont City,

Ohio, I extend my appreciation and thanks. Without them,, this thesis

would not have been possible. A special thanks to Laura, who showed me

Just how far a dream and some determination can take someone. To

Marnee Hathaway I say thanks for everything, for typing this paper and

xii

being a friend. To my husband, Randy, I extend my love and gratitude,

for always being there when I need him and for being my friend.

Throughout the writing of this thesis I have had love, support and

guidance from my family. I thank them for being so patient with me;

Bruce, David, Marsha and especially Mom, I love you!

Finally, I wish to thank Kar"en and all the people who helped me

learn to live one day at a time.

xili

DEDICATION

To the memory of my Father,

Leonard Venner

xiv

( - INTRODUCTIONII

Location

The area of study surrounds a disposal site, located in the northeast

, section of German Township, Clark County, Ohio (Figure 1). It is bound byI

latitude 40"00e30" to 40'02'00" and longitude 83°53'00" to 83°50'00n. The

area includes portions of section 17, 11, 10, 23 and 16 of the Urbana West

7.5' quadrangle. The nearest settlement is the small town of Tremont City

with a population of approximately 400 people, located 1.25 miles east of

the disposal site (Figure 2). The city of Springfield, with a population

of 75,000 people, is located three miles southeast of the area of

investigation.

The disposal site, which is the focal point of the investigation, is

located on the north side of Snyder-Domer Road, 1.25 miles west of Tremont

City. The entire site includes 80 acres of land.

Geography

The entirety of Clark County is within the Till Plains Region of

the Central Lowlands Physiogeographic Province (Pirkle and Yoho,

1977). The area of study is located among the rolling hills of a

glaciated upland terrain. It is bounded and drained by two streams:

Storms Creek to the north and Chapman Creek to the south (Figure 2).

Both streams drain to the east-southeast and are tributaries of the Mad

River, located directly east. The Mad River flows past the City of

Sprinrfiald. rsch rzir.g the city's well field. Elevations range from

FIGURE 1. Study Area Location Map.

GERMANTOWNSHIP

CLARK COUNTY

FIGURE 2. DISPOSAL SITE LOCATION

li? • P."f:U7- ;*7TBr«

#• \F: :05? v • ' I/A.' ^^ i&^$% fe.^...i.- r,(>?>N/ s.-.Tt -'vyV;?'-«.:-5^C^;l:.ffl.lfe^^^StJfW--!^ *%«,»/ . ^S^SsiyiiaiB^h 'bi '• ^-f'L-^-'-L ':--•••-•?..**.iIBil'W i> .-.-.-.- —— •- —— -../.

Jl,4

4

960 feet at the base of the site in the Mad River flood plain to 1150

feet in the upland terrain.

Land use in the area is mostly agricultural including the raising

of hogs, cattle, and sheep and the growing of soybeans and corn.

(Kaser, 1962).

The Disposal Site and Its History

The focal point of this study is an 80 acre tract of land owned by

Danis Industries. It is a disposal site subdivided into three4

sections: a liquid chemical disposal facility, a hazardous waste

storage and waste oil treatment facility, and a sanitary landfill

(Figure 3). Although all these facilities were active in the past, the

only facility in operation at the time of writing is the sanitary

landfill. Each subdivision operated separately and was regulated by

codes set by the United State Environmental Protection Agency (US

EPA). The following briefly describes each facility:

Treniont Landfill Company: The 80 acre tract of land was originally

purchased by Danis Industries for the operation of the Tremont City

Landfill, a subdivision of Danis Industries. The sanitary landfill has

been in operation since 1969. The landfill operates on the southern 56

acres of the land tract. At present, it handles only non-hazardous

waste, but from 1969-1976 hazardous liquid chemicals were buried at the

site. The primary constituents presently being disposed of are

domestic garbage, industrial waste and construction debris from the

Clark County area. The means of disposal is excavation and burial.

INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISPOSALLIQUID WASTE INC.

CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT

TREMONT LANDFILL CO

FIGURE 3. DISPOSAL SITE SUBDIVISIONS

6

IWD Liquid Wasce. Inc.: In 1976, 8.5 acres of land was acquired by

Danis Industries from the northern portion of the Tremont Landfill

Company, and used as a liquid chemical disposal facility. This was

operated by Industrial Waste Disposal (IWD) Liquid Waste, Incorporated,

a subdivision of Danis Industries. This facility was in operation from

1976 to early 1980. The following constituents are known to have been

disposed of at this facility: Polyol, glues, adhesives, paint sludges,

asbestos slurry, polymerized resin scrap (phenolic), metal sludges andt

still bottoms (Ohio EPA, 1973). Some of these constituents are

classified as hazardous waste.

All materials buried at the facility were encapsulated in metal

drums and disposed of in cells excavated into the glacial till. After

each cell was filled, it was covered with the excavated till. Two to

three cells were open at any one time to segregate incompatible wastes.

In the summer of 1977, a liquid farming project was implemented on

the site. This involved the injection of waste margarine into the

soil, with aeration of the soil two to three times a day. This

practice continued through 1984.

Chemical Waste Management

In 1978, Danis Industries began the operation of a waste oil

treatment facility on a 15 acre parcel of land, north of the sanitary

landfill. In March 1980, this land and facility was sold to Chemical

Waste Management, Incorporated (CWM). CWM continued its operation

until it was sold back to Danis Industries in early 1985. This land

also served as a hazardous waste storage facility. When this practice

7

began is not clear, but it continued through 1984. Waste not suitable f\for the liquid chemical disposal facility was stored at this site until «

»

enough drums were accumulated for transfer to a proper disposal £i«

facility. . k

The waste oil treatment facility processed approximately 900,000 i

gallons of waste oil annually. The final product was sold to asphalt y

plants as fuel. Oil processed was Industrial waste oils primarily from

auto manufacturers and metal processors.I

Geologic History

During the Paleozoic era, Ohio was covered with a succession of

shallow seas which deposited what is now the bedrock of Clark County.

While these rocks were being deposited, a regional uplift was taking

place to the west. This uplift is a tectonic feature known as the

Cincinnati Arch. It is a northward plunging arch whose axis passes

through western Ohio in a north-south direction. To the south, the

axis passes just west of Cincinnati and continues south into Kentucky.

In the Paleozoic era, the last of the shallow seas receded and

erosion proceeded to destroy much of the deposited sediments. The

Mesozoic era was a period of stream erosion and deposition for the Ohio

region, which continued into the Tertiary Period.

During the Pleistocene epoch, glaciation altered the Ohio landscape

significantly. Prior to this, Clark County and much of the surrounding

area were part of the Teays River drainage system, the principle river

in northeastern North America. It flowed northwest through Ohio,

passing through eastern Clark County and exiting the county in the area

jusz east of German Township (Mcrris, 1932). The river system was

eliminated by a Pre-Illinoian ice sheet which dammed the river in the

region northwest of Clark County. Subsequent glaciations served to

fill in the entire drainage system with alluvium and till. During the

last of these glacial cycles, the Wisconsin, the Miami and Scioto lobes>

of the ice sheet formed in the west central Ohio region as the ice

front passed over the highlands north of Champaign County, near

Bellfontaine, Ohio. During the late Wisconsin period (23,000 - 10,000

B.P.). the Miami and Scioto lobes advanced and retreated over west•

central Ohio several times (Dreimanis, 1973). These fluctuations are

evidenced by the alternating till and gravel layers throughout the

ground moraine of west central Ohio.

After the final glacial retreat, two types of deposits remained,

till and outwash. In the Clark County area, the deposits occur in the

form of ground moraine, end moraines, outwash, and valley train

deposits left by glacial meltwaters (Norris, 1952).

Local Geology

Bedrock - The rocks that underlie the area of study are Ordovician

and Silurian carbonates with minor amounts of shale (Table 1). The

Silurian carbonates compose most of the bedrock of Champaign County

(Neese, 1978). Silurian rocks of the Brassfield formation and Niagara

underlie the glacial drift in Clark County (Norris, 1952). Included in

the Niagara group are the Cedarville and Springfield limestones, porous

dolomitic limestones believed to underlie the area of study.

The rocks underlying the Silurian carbonates are the Richmond,

Maysville, and Eden groups of Ordovician age. This is a thick sequence

of fine-textured calcareous shales with thin lavers of crystalline

TABLE 1

GENERALIZED SECTION OF THE COKSOLDATED ROCKS M CLARK COUNTY

SYSTEM

Silurian

Ordovician

GROUP

Cayuga

Niagara

Beds ofClinton Age

RichnxxxlMaysville.

and Edengroups

undifferentiated

Beds ofpre-Eden age

FORMATION

No data available

Cedarville limestone

Springfieldlimestone

Euphemia dolomite otFoerste

Massie clay shaleot Foerste

Laurel dolomite

Osgood shate

Oayton limestone

Brassfield limestone

So-called Trertonlimestone of

drillers

AVERAGEHICKNESS(FT)

?

150

14

8

4

5

20

6

30

1075

SOO

CHARACTEROF MATERIAL

Massive, porousdolomillc

Thin-bedded, densedolomilic

Massive, porous

Calcareous, dense

Thin-bedded, dense

Calcareous, withImestooe beds

Thin-bedded, dense

FossiWerous, massiveto Irregularly bedded

Shale, soft, calcareoustnterbedded with thinhard limestone layerscalled Cincinnati shale

In old reports

Limestone or dolomitewith come shale

WATER-BEARINGPROPERTIES

Generally adequate walersupplies available for

farm and domesticrequirements, except from

the Osgood and Massie shales.

Wells ordinarily yieldIrom 5 to 1 5 gallons a

minute. Water very hard.

Important spring horizonsat base of system, above

Massie shale, and inSpringfield formation.

Generally does not yieldmore than 1 gallon a minute

to wells. Waler in placesIs high in iron and total

hardnoss. Water, wherepresent, generally occurs

in top few feet of strata.

Generally yields salt waterat base from so called

Blue Lick rone of drillers.

Alter Morris. 1952

10

limestone (Norris, 1952).

Glacial Deposits - The glacial deposits in the study area consist I|

almost entirely of ground moraine. This includes thick sequences of "

glacial till with interbedded lenses of sorted sands and gravel. Well i;'

logs indicate the thickness of the till is greater than 100 feet in the s3

upland portion of the study area.

Glacial outwash deposits were laid down in then existent meltwater

stream valleys and consist of well-sorted sand and gravel. The Mad

River, located east of the study area, flows through an extensive

outwash deposit. Valley train deposits exist under the strearabed of

f Chapman's Creek near Tremont City (Norris, 1952).t

Detailed hydrogeologic studies have been conducted on two of the

three subdivisions within the disposal site: the Tremont City Landfill

and the liquid chemical disposal facility. The studies were performed

, by H. Eagon (1984 a & b), the hydrogeologist at the disposal site. The

till underlying the disposal site is described by Eagon (1984a) as a

! sandy pebbly till with low to moderate plasticity. He infers four

major till zones underlying the disposal site: 1) an upper layer of

brown weathered till, 10 to 20 feet thick, 2) the underlying upper

i unoxidized grey till, approximately 30 feet thick, 3) a sandy intertill

zone, of varying thickness and 4) the lower dense grey till with a

maximum known thickness of 35 feet (Eagon, 1984a). Throughout the till

zones, continuous and discontinuous sand and gravel seams are present.i

Logs from monitoring wells at the disposal site have been used to

i construct cross sections in an attempt to located and determine the

extent of these sand and gravel seams, but the data are insufficient to

trace each seam accurately, a common problem in glaciated terrain

, 'Hanoi:. 198 a and 19

11The upper unoxidizeci grey till is observed in well logs from the

liquid chemical disposal facility, located in the upland portion of the

disposal site. It is also observed in the northern portion of the

sanitary landfill, but extensive excavation in the southern portion

leaves no evidence of this till zone. The sandy intertill zone is

observed in well logs from both facilities, supporting the belief that

it is an extensive continuous sand seam.

The lower grey till is again present in well logs from the liquid4

chemical disposal facility, but well depths are not sufficient to

determine its thickness. More information supplied by the well logs

indicates extensive sand and gravel seams throughout the lower grey

till zone. In the eastern third of the sanitary landfill, well logs

denote sand and gravel seams being thinner and fewer with till being

more abundant. These sand and gravel seams thicken to the southwest

and towards the southern border of the disposal site. These seams are

believed to lie directly on the bedrock in the southern most portion of

the site (Eagon, 1984b).

Studies conducted by graduate students in the Department of

Geological Sciences, Wright State University in the vicinity of the

disposal site emphasize the discontinuous nature of the till and sand

zones of this area (Clause, personal communication, 1985).

Hvdrogeology

Clark County has two principal groundwater sources: the valley

train and glacial outwash deposits of the Mad River Valley, and the

limestone bedrock underlying the glacial drift.

12

In the area of investigation, water is obtained from the Silurian

limestones of the Niagara group and sand and gravel deposits that rest

on the bedrock. The limestone aquifer, consisting of massive porous

limestones and dolomites, produces adequate water supplies for domestic

and farm use (Norris, 1952). The glacial drift covering the bedrock is

considered a poor water source, though some domestic wells located in

the thicker sand and gravel seams have obtained adequate supplies.

Laboratory permeability tests on till samples from the Liquid*

Chemical Disposal Facility disclosed permeabilities of 10"7 to 10"8

cm/sec. This is an average permeability for glacial tills (Eagon,

1984b).

Understanding groundwater flow patterns is essential to a water

quality study. Groundwater in the vicinity of the disposal site is

believed to flow in a south-southeast direction (Eagon, 1984a & b).

This would conform to the topography around the disposal site, which is

located on a hillside sloping to the south-southeast. Surface water

from the disposal site flows into Chapman Creek through a drainage pipe

along its southern border. Topography within the site has been altered

significantly due to excavation practices, and drainage ditches have

been emplaced to direct runoff water to the discharge pipe. Surface

water in the northern portion of the disposal site drains into the

intermittent stream flowing east of the disposal site.

Groundwater migration in the glacial till in and around the

disposal site is a concern of the citizens in the area due to the

possibility of contaminant migration offsite. Many of the sand seams

encountered in drilling operations are saturared (Eagon, 1954 a Q b).

13 5Due to the low permeability of the glacial till, Eagon believes that i

vertical migration of groundwater is non-existent. Instead, any *f

seepage into the till layers would migrate laterally along sand seams , |

resulting in seeps along the ravine cut by the intermittent stream or ;:-

the ravine on the west side of the oanitary landfill (Eagon, 1984 a & jI

b) . Since the sand seams within the till are discontinuous in many 1i

areas (Clause, personal communication, 1985), it is believed by the

author that the possibility of vertical migration of groundwater cant

not be discarded.

Purpose and Scope of Study

The disposal site located on Snyder-Domer Road has been the cause I

of concern to the residents of Tremont City and the surrounding area. «

Concerns of the citizens include: odor complaints, the discovery of 30

buried tanks in the sanitary landfill containing unknown wastes, the !

discharge of runoff water from the disposal site into Chapman Creek,

and the possibility of the migration of contaminants from the disposal

site into the local groundwater (CF/WATER, 1985).

The purpose of this study is to survey the geochemistry of ground-

water and surface water in the area surrounding the disposal site. It

is a preliminary study designed to examine water quality at various

distances from the site to determine if there has been any degradation

of the natural waters .

Geochemical interpretation of data collected from two separate

sampling periods is used to delineate trends in concentrations of

individual constituents in the waters.

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS

The hydrology of Clark County was first studied by Fuller and Clapp

(1912) in an investigation of underground waters of southwestern Ohio.(1 A later study by W. Stout et al. (1944) discusses the hydrology of

Clark County and changes in surface drainage patterns due to

glaciation. A detailed study of the water resources of the county

I including depth-to-bedrock measurements was conducted by Norris et al.

(1952). Kaser (1962) investigated groundwater resources of the Eagle

City area northwest of Springfield, approximately two miles south of

the study area.

Geologic investigation of Clark County include a study of the

I glacial geology by Goldthwait (1959) and several geophysical studies.i

Spicer (1949) conducted an electrical resistivity investigation toI! determine depth to bedrock. Richard (1969) has used gravity

i measurements to delineate river valleys buried by till in the Clark

County area. Contrino (1973) expanded on Richard's study using seismic

; refraction ar.d gravity measurements.

Two hydrogeologic assessments have been conducted by Eagon (1984a,

1984b) on two subdivisions of the disposal site: the liquid chenical

disposal facility and the Tremont City Landfill. These are detailed

studies of the geology, hydrology and water quality of the disposal

site. Ongoing water quality studies are being conducted by the Ohio

EPA and Danis Industries at the disposal site.ij Students of the Department of Geological Sciences, Vright State

University, have completed or are in the process of completing studies

15

of the disposal site. These studies Include: a more extensive water

quality study (Dorinda Clause), a geophysical Investigation (Smith,

1986) and a hydrogeochemical modelling study (Herin, 1986).

Griffen and Shimp (1978) and Cartwright, et al. (1977) have studied

metal attenuation through glacial clays in areas similar in character-

istic to that of this study. These studies discuss the effect of

various clays on municipal landfill leachates.

GEOCHEMICAL METHODS AND TECHNIQUES

Sample Collection !I

Fifty water samples, comprising two sets of samples, were collected i

from 13 domestic wells, two streams, three ponds, and one spring in the jj

study area. The first set of 24 samples was collected in early !

December, 1984; the second set of 26 samples in mid-May, 1985. The two I

collection periods were chosen to observe any seasonal variations in '

groundwater and stream water chemical concentrations.

Groundwater samples were obtained from domestic wells and one

spring. Well selection was determined by the proximity to the disposal

site and the availability of well logs. Domestic wells located at '

varying distances up to 1.2 miles from the disposal site were sampled

for background chemical data. Well logs were obtained from the Ohio

Department of Natural Resources and the Clark County Health Department,

where available, and are presented in Appendix I.

At each sampling site, samples were collected in tvo 12.5 ml and

one 500 ml polyethelene bottles for alkalinity and total dissolved

solids, anion concentration, and cation concentration, respectively.

The bottles were cleaned by soaking in concentrated nitric acid,

rinsing with double quartz-distilled and exchanged water and air drying

in an oven.

All stream samples were taken near the center of the stream to

obtain representative samples. With few exceptions, groundwater

santplss from domestic wells were obtained from the outside tap located

closest to the well head, ensuring as little effect as possible from

17

household pipes. Water was run for approximately five to ten minutes

before collection to obtain a representative sample from the aquifer.

All samples were filtered in the field through a .45 micror. nucleopore

filter and care was taken to ensure minimal contact with the

atmosphere. Samples for cation analysis were preserved by

acidification with concentrated hydrochloric acid after filtration.

All samples were refrigerated until analysis.

•Sample Analysis

Water and air temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance,

Eh and pH were measured at the sampling site, immediately after

sampling and filtering. Instruments used were; the model PEL pH - Eh

meter by the Sargent-Welch Scientific Company, the YSI model 33

Specific Conductivity meter and the YSI model 57 Oxygen meter.

Alkalinity was determined in the laboratory by potentiometric

titration the same day as the collection. Each sample was preserved by

refrigeration until analysis. pH was re-determined in the lab as a

check against the field measurement.' Total dissolved solids

determination was conducted on an unacidified filtered volume of sample

according to standard procedures (APHA et al., 1976).

Anion determination was conducted approximately three months after

sample collection at Argonne National Laboratories in Argonne,

Illinois. Filtered samples were preserved by refrigeration until

analysis. Anions determined include fluoride, chloride, sulfate,

nitrate. Analysis was performed on a Dionex Ion Chromatograph at

Argonne National Laborarory. Bicarbonate was determined by converting

18

alkalinity data Co milligrams of calcium carbonate per liter. This was

then divided by 0.8202 for conversion to an equivalent concentration of

bicarbonate (HCO-j-) (Hem, 1970).

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) vas determined only on the second

sampling set. Borosilicate glass bottles with teflon-lined caps vere

used to collect the samples and analysis vas completed within 24 hours

of collection. The Dohrmann Environtech Total Organic Carbon Analyzer

in the Brehm Environmental Sciences Laboratory was used.

Cations were analyzed using a Perkin-Elmer 3030 Atomic Absorption

Spectrophotometer. Samples were filtered and acidified with

concentrated HCL in the field to a pH<2 to keep all constituents in the

dissolved state. Cations analyzed were: Barium, Boron, Cadmium,

Calcium, Chromium, Cobalt, Copper, Iron, Lead, Magnesium, Manganese,

Nickel, Potassium, Silica, Sodium, Strontium, Titanium, and Zinc.

Standard procedures were used according to APHA et al., 1976 and the

Perkin-Elmer 3030 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer User Manual.

After all analyses were completed, a cation-anion balance was

performed on the data using WATEQF, a chemical speciation numerical

model. All samples show less than a ten percent difference in the

balance, with most samples showing less than a five percent

difference. This suggests that no major constituents were neglected in

the analysis and that there were no major analytical errors.

Error Calculations

In any analytical procedure there is a degree of error that is

introduced by the use of glassware, pipettes, etc., which must be

considered when presenting data. All cations were analyzed with an

arscir abscrpcian specrrsphorcmersr. This ir_srr- ssr.r hs

19 ;limit for each element, but which does not account for the error factor

introduced in the preparation of standards and substandards. |I

In determining the concentration of a constitutent in a sample, Ji

standards of predetermined concentrations are used. For this reason, «f

the analysis is only as accurate as the standards used. The instrument J

calibrates itself to the first standard aspirated. Therefore, the

analysis is only as accurate as the first standard aspirated.

Each standard was prepared using a commercial 1000 mg/1 atomic«

absorption standard, containing an accuracy of ±1%. Class A

glassware was used, each with its own degree of accuracy, which had to

be taken into account. Using the formula:

Final Concentration -

Initial Concentration x Volume of Initial ConcentrationVolume of Final Concentration

and including the maximum and minimum error for each standard, an error

range was determined for each elements' lowest standard. In presenting

the data, the standard deviation was taken into account as well as the

degree of error. In most cases, the standard deviation was

insignificant, therefore, minimizing the degree of error.

Sample Locations

The map showing the sampling sites for each sampling period is

presented in Figure 4.

Four sites were sampled along Chapman Creek. Sites 1 and 2 are

upstream from the disposal site and are used for background data. Site

3 is downstream from the mixing zone below the discharge pipe for the

disposal site. This pipe discharges runoff water fron the sits

20

directly into Chapman Creek. Site 10 is some distance downstream from

the point of discharge of the intermittent stream into Chapman Creek

(refer to Figure 4).

The intermittent stream flows to the south-southeast along the•»

eastern border of the disposal site. Previous work indicates there is

concern that leachate from the disposal site could migrate through the

glacial till and discharge into this stream (Eagon 1984A). Site 5 is

located along the northern border of the liquid chemical disposal

facility, where the intermittent stream begins as a small spring

emerging from the crest of the upland region. This stream then passes

through the far northeast corner at the disposal site. Sampling sites

6, 7, 8 and 23 are located along the stream, downstream of the point

where it passes out of the disposal site and flows along its eastern

border. Small springs and seeps are found along the length of this

stream.

Site 4 is located along & small stream which flows south along the

western border of the disposal site. Stream site 24 is located east of

the site and is used for background data. Site 9 is a spring located

along the eastern border of the disposal site.

Groundwater samples used as background data include well sites 12,

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20. The distance of the sampling sites

from the disposal site varies and this is taken into consideration in

the interpretation of the data. Well sites 11, 21 and 25 are closest

to the disposal site and are believed by the author to be representa-

tive of ground water in the vicinity of the sire.

CHAMPAIQN_COUNTYciTRK COUNTY

Inlermlllent stream

24

TREMONT CITY

FIGURE 4

SAMPLING SITE LOCATIONS• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

" GROUNDWATER SAMPLE

A POND SAMPLE

Figure 5. Sampling Site Locations

22

The May 1985 sampling period resulted in minor alterations to the

sampling scheme. Due to the need for more data from the western side i

of the site, stream samples AA from the site's discharge pipe and CC >

from the stream to the west of the disposal site were added, as were $

the three ponds previously mentioned. Groundwater sample BB was also

added. Deleted from the May 1985 sampling were sites 7, 24, 15 and 21

due to lack of accessability to domestic wells or lack of water at the

stream sites. ji

« ;A detailed description of each sampling site is given in Table 2.

Sampling sites along the southeastern border of the disposal site are

mentioned often in the following discussion. These sites include 3, 9,

11 and 21 and are brought to the reader's attention at this point.

23

TABLE 2

SAMPLING SITE DESCRIPTIONS

SAMPLE[NUMBER

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

B

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

SAMPLETYPE

surfacewater

surfacewater

surfacewater

surfacewater

surfacewater

surfacewater

surfacewater

surfacewater

groundwater

surfacewater

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

LOCATION

Chapman Creek at intersection ofSyr.der-Domer Rd. and Cotfin Pk.

Chapman Creek at intersection ofWillowdale Rd. and Snyder-Domer Rd.

Chapman Creek south of disposalsite

Small stream west of disposal she

The intermittent stream




Spring east of disposal site

Chapman Creek

residenc*-

residence

residence

residence

residence

COMMENTS

stream sample upstreamfrom disposal site

stream sample upstreamfrom disposal site

stream sample below disposalsite discharge pipe

stream sample from cowpasture

north of disposal site adjacentto liquid chemical disposal site

downstream from northernborder of disposal site

sample taken dose to seepon west side of ravine

sample taken downstreamfrom disposal site

domestic well sample fromtrailer SE of disposal she

domestic well sample usedfor background data




DISTANCE/DIRECTIONFROM CLOSEST POINT

TO SITE(approximate)

.75 mi. west

.5 mi. west

100' south

*

500' west

50' north

<25' north

200' east

700' east

200' east

.35 mi. east

200' east

1.2 mi. west

1 mi. east

.6 ml. east

1.2 mi. east

TABLE 2 (continued)24

^PLE,MBER

16

17

18

19

20

21

23

; 24

25

AA

88

CC

PI

P2

P3

SAMPLETYPE

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

groundwater

surfacewater

surfacewater

groundwater

surfacewater

groundwater

surfacewater

poodsample

poodsample

Dondr*~ f*J

sample

LOCATION

s residence

residence

farm

residence

residence

Barn east of landfill

Intermittent stream

Small stream east ofintermittent stream

residence

Discharge pipe at the disposal site

residence

Stream west of disposal she

East of disposal site

Northeast of disposal site

At residencenorthwest of disposal site

COMMENT'S






significant sample forwater quality

downstream from disposalsite

used for background streamdata

significant sample forwater quality

sample taken directly fromdischarge pipe

significant water qualitysample

sample taken from seepfrom she's western border

DISTANCE/DIRECTIONFROM CLOSEST POINT

TO SITE(aDoroximata)

.5 ml. northwest

1 mi. east

.3 mi. west

.5 mi. easti

.5 mi. west

300' east

600' east

.5 mi. east

.25 mi. east

<50' south

<50' southwest

<50' west

100' easi

800' east

.35 mi. west

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Chemical data from both sampling periods is presented in Tables 3A,

3B, 4A and 43. The occurrence and trends observed of each constituent

will be discussed separately in terms of physical parameters, major

constituents and minor constituents. Major constituents are those which

are commonly found in natural watars in concentrations exceeding 1 mg/14

(Freeze and Cherry, 1979). Minor constituents are those usually found in

concentrations below 1 mg/1.

Significant features and anomalous values noted in any of the

constituents are discussed separately following the section on minor

constituents.

Physical Parameters

Specific Conductivity

Specific conductivity is a measure of the electric conductance of

substances in water. The 2resence of charged ionic constituents makes

the solution conductive, i.e. the more ionic constituents present, the

more conductive the solution. For this reason, the measure of specific

conductance is used as an indicator of ion concentration (Hem, 1970).

The specific conductivity measurements in the December 1984

sampling period range from 320 micromhos to 625 micromhos in surface

water samples and from 395 micromhos to 950 micromhos in groundwater

samples (Figure 5a). The specific conductivity of the stream waters in

Chapman Creek increases significantly at site 3, located below the

FIELD MEASURbMbNTS ANU »NlOn oONCbm nATIOMaDECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD

SAMPLINGSITE

12345

678910

1112 1131415 1

1617IB1920

21232425

pH

8.398.5

7.748.127.51

7.27.5

8.127.118.4

6.637.157.147.277.2

7.267.097.347.197.37

7.248.097.97.3

Eh'

354.9395.9365.6361.3355.7

237.89355.5372.1391.5274.7

237.12361.6380.3395.1396.4

204.4399.7187.5289.9344.3

155.2346.7388.8303.5

SPECIFICCONDUCTANCE

umhos/cm

440430600510455

550575495950 '625

950575480480550

530700395460415

460370320NA

DISSOLVEDOXYGENfppm)

11.49.611.99.658.0

6.66.98.64.58.8

1.71.81.8

1.254.9

2.054.752.752.10.9

5.411.310.0,3

ALKALINITY(meq/l)

5.0665.3257.3128.3495.896

7.8848.7486.8549.1855.372

16.0576.6796.8176.4636.522

7.9177.246.8587.4596.831

6.9695.3434.6466.461

TDS(ppm)

600580780700780

460760300700600

880560240180280

260380200340240

140360120260

HC03-(mg/l)

308.94324.88446.11509.39359.46

481.00533.73418.12560.41327.75

979.68407.49415.92394.31397.90

483. C7441.71418.42455.08416.78

425.17325.98283.48394.18

(mq/l)

•:-.•

0.35NA

0.35

0.77NA0.4

0.35NA

1.1NA

0.75NA1.0

0.52<.3NA

0.55

Cl-(mq/U |

21.419.421.820.611.8

12.312.313.524.221.7

10.3NA3.7<12.0NA

1.956.93.0NA4.1

5.1910.9NA

3.45

N03-(mg/l)-1^L_L_

33.9533.442.86.3

14.5

1.85<.5<.5

23.12°;<.5NA

10.61.05NA

<.524.6<.5NA<.5

<.57.85

NA<.5

SO4-_(mg/l)-L_a_z_

40.640.7

131.237.836.0

42.441.176.396.548.9

42.2NA

30.154.2NA

6.4527.514.6NA8.6

14.953.1NA I

10.2

' - mlllivolis- - nono observedMA - nol analyzed for that specific constituent.

(Tl

TABLE 3b

CONCENTRATIONS OF CATIONS IN mg/1DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD

SAMPLINGsire

III)10

II12131415

1617101020

21232425

Da

0.0390.1060.1170.0390.001

0.0040.1730.1060.1280.128

0.4070.2730.1280.1620.128

0.3510.0040.2960.0610.385

0.2510.061<.01

0.162

B

.

.

.•

<.7.

<.7.-

.

.

.

.-

.

.

.

.-

<.7..-

Cd

0.0010.0030.0050.007

•

0.0020.0040.0030.0020.002

0.0050.0070.005.-

0.001...

0.001

.

.-

•

Ca

84.883.7103.1111.586.3

109.4120.6100.3112.982.5

185.390.386.591.591 9

85.7100.176.685.371.6

82.379.264.071.7

Cr

0.0120.005<.003

-0.055

0.003-

<.003 i--

.-.-•

r

<.003-.-

.

.

.•

Co

0.020.0210.0210.0190.014

<.010.020.0130.020.013

0.0270.011<.01<.01

0.012

0.0120.01<.01

0.0180.027

0.030.0110.014<.01

Cu

0.0040.0030.007<.0020.004

.0.002<.0020.003<-002

<.0020.0030.0030.008

•

.0.046

---

.0.003

-0.002

Fe

0.067<.0090.1720.3210.273

0.0570.2760.0650.2960.356

3.7660.1930.1720.5370.272

2.510.1911.4950.4130.546

1.4680.235<.0090.508

Pb

_---

<.03

.-

--

0.07<.03<.030.050.03

.<.030.05

-0.04

.--"

Mq

29.329.540.340.329.3

34.042.535.141.629.3

67.232.830.631.531.5

35.030.428.533.526.4

29.326.923.726.3

Mn

0.0030.0030.1080.1570.002

0.0510.3780.0880.0090.007

0.0860.0020.0020.070.002

0.0270.0020.0340.0120.034

0.0950.0260.0030.003

Nl

0.0330.0270.0490.0260.049

0.0660.0710.0550.0850.052

0.0740.040.0610.0490.048

0.0510.060.0520.0580.048

0.0390.0460.0380.043

K

1.791.762.388.810.59

0.780.781.237.341.72

2.242.141.271.191.28

1.182.181.041.161.12

1.142.130.681.17

SI

3.413.215.335.68 •4.74

3.995.653.396.412.67

7.244.715.726.065.81

8.44.9

7.767.717.43

7.413.243.516.14

Na

.

.42.61.0-

4.921.51.8

47.4•

13.76.7---

16.132.33.71.94.4

.1.4-

0.5

Sr

1.2021.2410.4820.360.09

0.1080.1270.1170.121.37

0.3051.7672.8701.8880.239

10.2570.3896.8172.9827.927

2.070.0680.0344.843

Zn

.

.

.

.0.003

.

.

.

.-

1.710.0260.0460.0560.075

0.1320.0340.030.0530.191

0.234--

0.226

- - nono observedNJ

TABLE 4aFIELD MEASUREMENTS AND ANION CONCENTRATIONS

MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIOD

SAMPLINGSIFE

I2345

68g

1011

1213141617

1819202325

I'll'2l'3AA118CC

PH

7.88.28.3

8.057.45

7.88.26.98.5

6.65

7.27.27.47.46.9

7.257.27.2

8.057.3

7.59.28.97.87.07.2

Eh'

381.6441.5401.3427.3421.5

494.1472.7454.1481.9232.1

639.8307.1541.9159.4644.5

177.1224.4301.2446.9136.1

438.7388.6387.8438.7179.7252.4

SPECIFICCONDUCTANCE

umhos/cm

460465500650600

525600850470

1050

510550540590825

525600490480520

330185310675525510

DISSOLVEDOXYGEN(PPm)

9.810.510.39.6

15.0

11.49.23.0

1 10.48.0

4.82.30.6

0.754.7

8.50.90.99.0

0.75

5.511.410.27.70.7

4.75

ALKALINITY(meq/l)

5.0095.0325.0597.0885.427

6.4815.9318.6565.00913.884

5.8886.S495.9727.7576.954

6.5547.2916.4635.1446.418

3.2911.8842.5385.9946.4067.725

TDS(PPm)

396397.5427.5455430

347.5380688350855

400392374332596

354342334318285

190130202

787.5350

427.5

HCO3--. (mfl/l) ...

305.63307.04308.72432.48331.14

395.44361.87528.13305.63847.08

359.25399.6364.4473.26424.27

399.87444.86394.31313.84391.6

200.81114.97154.87365.69390.85471.35

F-Limg/l)

NA---•

.NA..-

.

.-

1.0-

0.67-

0.8<.3<.3

0.4----"

Cl-(mfl/|)

18.417.1518.013.09.75

9.48.9524.5

18.2515.0

NANANA1.0#

1.92-

1.228.11.3

6.173.17NA

16.857.256.0

NO3-I (mq/l)

28.1518.524.01.75

20.25

1.75.

18.923.6

•

NANA'NA.

25.75

.

NA---

1.04-NA--*

SO4-(mg/D

36.534.038.526.2536.5

35.043.591.537.050.8

NANANA6.2

32.5

13.8NA

12.250.0210.2

25.72C.6NA

95.041.067.5

TOG-(PPm)

12.51.3.

3.60.6

7.05.04.3.

3.6

4.01.3..if

1.31.02.61.0

12.0

4.53.0

0.669.728.01.0

' = millivolts n - none observed at a 2/10 dilution.- >» nonu observedIIA - not nnalyzed for that specific constituent.

CO

TABLE 4b

CONCENTRATIONS OF CATIONS IN mg/lMAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIOD

SAMPLINGSflE Da

0.0500.022.

0.10.033

.

0.0780.1110.0660.379

0.2230.10.1

0.2450.033

0.256.

0.1090.0660.123

_

.

0.0550.1

0.0670.176

B

0.72<J<.7<.7

0.84

.

.<.7.

<.7

•c.7<.7..-

_...-

,,...-

Cd

0.0030.0050.0010.0050.003

0.0010.0040.0050.0050.012

0.0030.0050.0090.010.008

0.0080.010.010.0080.012

0.0050.0050.0020.0070.0080.011

Ca

76.376.173.994.978.8

88.177.2119.775.8177.9

86.984.583.584.6105.1

74.283.472.066.572.5

41.823.833.267.985.9111.2

Cr

<.0030.004.

0.0030.008

0.010.005<.003 '.•

».

0.0080.003

-

.

.-.•

.

.

.

.

.•

Co

<.010.0130.0160.021

-

.-

<.01.

<.01

.

<.01<.01.

<.01

„

<.01<.01

--

.

.

.<.01<.01<.01

Cu

.-..-

.

.

.

.-

0.0030.002.-

0.01

.

.-.-

.

.--.*

Fe

0.0140.018

-0.01

0.019

<.008<.0080.012<.0082.922

0.0380.0190.0311.9260.023

1.5160.3580.1350.0091.101

0.0680.021

-0.0220.9991.225

Pb

0.040.060.10.1

0.08

0.040.030.040.030.06

0.030.050.050.050.03

0.040.040.060.040.06

0.040.040.050.040.060.03

Mq

30.731.229.938.631.2

33.334.249.630.990.8

33.533.332.638.935.8

30.836.630.234.129.3

21.312.518.345.733.942.9

Mn

0.010.0090.0050.0990.049

0.0270.0680.0090.0070.089

0.002<.0020.0750.0270.002

0.0390.0130.001

-0.037

0.0230.0020.0140.0070.0620.37

Nl

<.0090.0180.0140.0240.012

0.0240.0180.0360.0290.044

0.0210.0230.0310.0330.023

0.0290.0240.018C.0120.018

<.009<.009<.0090.0180.0140.023

K

1.191.251.251.810.41

0.250.697.591.172.28

1.680.9

0.790.852.43

0.710.730.770.820.73

2.440.331.882.3

0.750.68

SI

1.31.281.684.073.14

3.332.526.241.567.05

4.165.314.947.644.08

7.157.078.661.955.51

0.54--

5.645.085.99

Na

7.68.48.24.13.5

6.34.4

42.311.322.7

16.28.95.7

13.166.4

9.47.18.34.817.7

3.71.8

11.429.98.93.2

Sr

1.5451.5201.5680.0880.069

0.0670.1040.1121.59

0.309

1.8923.1721.72511.4

0.396

8.33.162

7.20.079

5.1

0.023-

0.0290.2092.1220.139

2n

_

_

,

-

,

.

.

.0.901

f

0.0840.0270.010.024

0.1240.0690.175.

0.017

_---

0.171~

4r>

101 1

1213141617

1019202325

P1P2P3AABB(C

norm observed

. _ _ _ _ _ _6ITRK COUNTY

000

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 5a.SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIODIn umhos/cm

• SURFACE WATER S A M P L E• OROUNOWATER S A M P L E

POND SAMPLE

CHAMPAION_COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY

Inlarmlltant ilr»am

TREMONT CITYC H A P M A N CREEK

FIGURE 5b.SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCEMAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIOD

• OURFACE WATER SAMPLEQROU'NOWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE

in umhos/cm

32

site's di.scharge pipe, and continues to increase downstream.

Groundwater samples contain the highest values at sites 11 and 9,

adjacent to the east side of the disposal site, each containing values

of 950 rnicromhos. The next highest value noted in the groundwater

samples is from site 17, containing 700 micromhos.

The specific conductivity in the May 1985 sample collection range

from 460 micromhos to 675 micromhos In the stream samples and 490

micromhos to 1050 micromhos in groundwater samples. Pond samples range4

from 185 to 330 micromhos (Figure 5b). The highest conductivity value

among the surface water samples is from site AA, taken directly from

the sites discharge pipe containing 675 micromhos. A slight increase

in conductivity is noted at site 3, which then decreases downstream.

Site 4 contains a high value of 650 micromhos. The highest values in

the groundwater samples are found at sites 11, 9, and 17 with values of

1050, 850 and 825 micromhos, respectively. All other groundwater

samples measured less than 610 micromhos.

Significant features noted with specific conductivity values

include: 1) conductivity in groundwater samples from sites 9 and 11,

along the eastern border of the disposal site, are consistently higher

than other groundwater samples. 2) Conductivity of both stream and

groundwater samples are higher in the May 1985 sampling period, with

few exceptions.

Total Dissolved Solids

The concentration of total dissolved solid (TDS) concentration in

water is the amount of dissolved material in a sample measured by

drying an aiiquioc of che sample and veighir.g chc remaining residue.

33

The accuracy of this measurement depends on the drying temperature and

any volatile behavior of the constituents present. It is useful for a

rough estimate of dissolved constituent quantities in a sample (Hem,

1970).

Total dissolved solid concentrations in the December 1984 sampling

period range from 120 mg/1 to 780 mg/1 in surface water samples and

from 140 mg/1 to 880 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure 6a). A

significant increase in TDS is noted in Chapman Creek water at site 3,

below the site's discharge pipe. The concentration decreases

downstream to levels present in the upstream samples used as background

data. Concentrations along the intermittent stream are highly variable

from 300 mg/1 to 780 mg/1. Groundwater samples containing the highest

TDS are from sites 11 and 9, containing 880 mg/1 and 700 mg/1,

respectively. It is notable that site 21 contains the lowest TDS in

the groundwater samples, though it is located in close proximity to the

sites containing the highest TDS concentrations.

TDS concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from 318

mg/1 to 787.5 mg/1 in surface water samples and from 285 mg/1 to 855

mg/1 in groundwater samples. Pond samples range from 130 mg/1 to 202

mg/1 (Figure 6b). A slight increase in TDS occurs at site 3 along

Chapman Creek. The highest TDS value in the surface water samples is

from site AA, the discharge pipe, containing 787.5 mg/1. Groundwater

samples containing the highest TDS are from sites 9 and 11 with

concentrations of 688 mg/1 and 855 mg/1, respectively.

Significant features in TDS concentrations are: 1) The highest TDS

are from sites 9 and 11, east of the disposal site. 2) The highest

surface water values are from sites AA and 3, south of che disposal

site.

CHAMPAIQN_COUNTYCtTflK COUNTY

700/ Inlcrmltttnt ttrtim

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 6a.TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDSSURFACE WATER SAMPLE

QROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLEDECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD

CONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

CHAMPAIGN_COUNTYcTTRK COUNTY

Inlermltlanl ttrtem

TREpONT CITYCHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 6b.TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

• (3ROUNDWATER S A M P L E

• POND SAMPLEMAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIOD

CONCENTRATIONS IN mg/l

UJUl

36

EH

pH is the hydrogen-ion activity of a solution. The abbreviation pH

stands for the negative base-10 log of the hydrogen ion in moles per

liter (Hem, 1970).

The ranges of pH in the December 1984 sampling period are from 7.2

to 8.5 in surface water samples and 6.63 to 7.37 in groundwater samples

(Figure 7a). There is a notable decline in the pH of Chapman Creek at

site 3, south of the disposal site. The most acidic pH in the

groundwater samples is from site 11, with a value of 6.63.

The ranges of pH in the May 1985 sampling period are from 7,45 to

8.05 in the surface water samples and 6.65 to 7.4 in groundwater

samples. Pond samples range from 7.5 to 9.2 (Figure 7b). Surface

water samples contain no anomalous values. The most acidic groundwater

value is from site 11, east of the disposal site, with a value of 6.65.

Eh

Eh is termed as the oxidation potential of a sample. It indicates

whether a solution is chemically oxidizing or reducing by a positive or

negative number. This is an important parameter in determining the

chemical equilibrium of water (Hem, 1970).

Eh readings in the December 1984 sampling period range from 237.89

millivolts to 395.92 millivolts in surface water samples and 187.5

millivolts to 399.7 millivolts in groundwater samples (Figure 8a). Eh

values in surface water and groundwater from this sampling set are all

highly variable with no apparent trends present.

Eh readings in the May 1985 sampling set range from 252.41

millivolts to 49 .1 millivolts in surface water samples and 136.2

CHAMPAIGN COUNTYCLA~RK COUNTY

Intermittent atreim

7.8

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 7a.PH

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD

• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE• OnOUNDWATER SAMPLE• POND SAMPLE

u>-J

CHAMPAIGN CO_UNTYCOUNTY

Intermittent atreim

TREMONT CITYCHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 7b.PH


• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• QROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLE

u>m

CHAMPAIQNJCOUNTYCL.TRX COUNTY

TREMONT CITY

FIGURE 8aEh

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE• OnOUNDWATER SAMPLE

A POND SAMPLE

u>

X •Jl.l

le» o0*?f*311.1

*o,

to mil .

I5».4

224.4

30t.2

MM«21.5

ASSI...^' 4,4., »£• x

;Tii

L««./.»!/

472.7

*»*.!

«4I.I>

• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE• QROU'NOWATER SAMPLEi POND SAMPLE

<Ot.J

CHAPMAN CREEK^

MM48T.9

_ . _COUNTY

«<».?

FIGURE 8bEh


in millivolts

>or.r

\ /

• l r » a m

—— sj

/ */ w/ >/ a

/ °

4r- —— 1, (TREV°NT

^~ »t

millivolts to 644.52 millivolts in groundwater samples. Pond samples j

range from 387.81 to 438.69 millivolts (Figure 8b). Eh values are |f

again highly variable in this sampling period with no trends evident. (

Dissolved Oxygen ',

Dissolved oxygen is the measure of the dissolved oxygen content in [

water. This parameter is good only for the time of measurement because

it can change significantly with time due to contact with air. This

measurement is included in this study to supply additional data to

assist in the running of the computer program WATEQF.

Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the December 1984 sampling

period range from 6.6 ppm to 11.9 ppm in surface water samples and 0.9

ppm to 5.3 ppm in groundwater samples (Figure 9a).

Dissolved oxygen concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period

range from 4.7 ppm to 15.0 ppm in the surface water samples and .7 ppm

to 8.5 ppm in groundwater samples. Pond samples range from 5.5 ppm to

11.4 ppm (Figure 9b).

Major Constituents

Bicarbonate

Bicarbonate, a dissolved form of carbon dioxide, occurs in

groundwater and surface water in variable concentrations, depending on

the environment. The concentration is highly dependent on the

carbonate equilibria of the water system.

Bicarbonate concentrations in the December 1984 samples range from

283.46 mg/1 to 533.73 mg/1 in surface water samples and 394.18 mg/1 to

979.67 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure lOa). The bicarbonate

C2r.cer.tra.tior. at sits 3 alcr.g Chapnan Creek is sirr.i£±-ar.t:lv hizier

thar. ether ccncer.traticr.s along the creek. Site 7, along the

CHAMP AiqN_COUNTYCLTRK COUNTY

4.81 lnt*rmllt«nl


FIGURE 9aDISSOLVED OXYGEN

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN ppm

• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE"» OROUNDVYATER SAMPLE

A POND SAMPLE

Intermittent Blrsam

CHAPMAN CREEKTREMONT CITY

FIGURE 9bDISSOLVED OXYGEN


CONCENTRATIONS IN ppm

• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

« QROUNOWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLE

Ul

CHAMPAiqN_COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY

680.41 Inlarmllttnl stream

TREMONT CITYCHAPMAN CREEK'

FIGURE 10aBICARBONATESURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

QROUNDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIODCXDNCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

CHAMP AIQN_COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY

18-4.87 .* 308.87

381.87

Intermittent s t ream


FIGURE 10bBICARBONATE• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLEMAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIOD


46

intermittent stream, contains a high value of 53?-. 734 mg/1. The

highest bicarbonate concentrations in the groundwater samples are from

sites 9 and 11, containing 560.A15 mg/1 and 979.676 mg/1 respectively.

Bicarbonate concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range

from 305.63 mg/1 to 471.35 mg/1 in surface water samples and 359.25

mg/1 to 847.08 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Pond samples range from

114.973 mg/1 to 200.812 mg/1 (Figure lOb). The highest bicarbonate

concentrations in the surface water samples are found at sites 4 and

CC, near the west border of the disposal site. The highest groundwater I

concentrations are found at sites 11 and 9, containing 847.08 mg/1 and

528.13 mg/1, respectively, significantly higher than backgroundi

samples. j

Significant features noted among the samples include: 1) The *4

highest bicarbonate concentrations among the groundwater samples are J

from sites 9 and 11 during both sampling periods. 2) Surface water |i

samples located closest to the disposal site contain the highest

bicarbonate concentrations.

Calcium

Calcium is a principal cation found in fresh water. In carbonate

terrain, it is usually the cation found in the highest concentration

(Hem, 1970).

Calcium concentration in samples collected during December 1984

range from 64.0 mg/1 to 120.6 mg/1 in surface water samples and 71.6 ;

mg/1 to 185.3 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure lla). Surface water

samples contain high calciua concentrations only in the vicinity of the

47

disposal site. Site 3, along Chapman Creek, contains 103.0 mg/1

calcium, 20.0 mg/1 higher than other samples along the creek. Calcium

concentrations notably higher than background values are found in

samples from sites 4, 6, 7ând 8, containing concentrations of 111.5

mg/1, 104.0 mg/1, 120.0 mg/1 and 100.3 mg/1, respectively. The highest

calcium concentrations in the groundwater samples are from sites 11 and

9. The sample from site 11 contains a concentration of 185.3 mg/1,

twice that of background concentrations.*

Calcium concentrations in samples collected in May 1985 range from

66.5 mg/1 to 111.2 mg/1 in surface water samples and 72.1 mg/1 to 177.9

mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure lib). Concentrations in pond

samples range from 23.8 mg/1 to 41.8 mg/1. The highest calcium

concentrations in surface water samples are located west of the

disposal site at sites 4 and cc. Site 6 also contains an elevated

concentration. High calcium concentrations are present in groundwater

samples from sites 9 and 11, containing 119.74 mg/1 and 177.95 mg/1,

respectively. The sample from site 11 has approximately twice the

calcium concentration of the background sites.

The samples from the study area contain calcium concentrations

typical of other carbonate terrains; however, certain significant

features are apparent from the data: 1) The surface water samples

along the western border of the disposal site contain the highest

calcium concentrations. 2) Groundwater samples containing the highest

calcium concentrations are from the southeast border of the disposal

site. The samples from site 11 are consistently high in calcium. 3)

The highest calcium concentration among the pond samples is from PI,

next to the disposal site.

CLTRK COUNTY "" f~———— — — —

103.1

CHAPMAN CREEK TREMONT CITY

FIGURE 11aCALCIUM• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

• QROU'NDWATER SAMPLE• POND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD


CHAMP AIONCOUNTYCOUNTY

Intermittent vtreim

----' » TREMONT CITY105.1 '

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 11bCALCIUM

SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLEDROUNDWATER SAMPLE


CONCENTRATIONS IN mo/l

VO

50

Chloride

Chloride is the ionic form of the element chlorine, and is found at

low concentrations in most natural water (Hem, 1970). One of ^

chloride's attributes is its non-reactive characteristic. It does not 5

readily complex with other compounds, is not affected by

oxidation-reduction conditions, and is not readily adsorbed onto

mineral surfaces. This chemical behavior makes chloride a good tracer

for some hydrogeologic studies (Hem, 1970).

Chloride concentrations from the December 1984 sampling period

range from 10.9 mg/1 to 21.8 mg/1 in surface water samples and 1.9 mg/1

to 56.9 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure 12a). No significantly

anomalous values are noted among the surface water samples.

Groundwater samples containing high chloride concentrations are from

sites 17 and 9, containing 56.9 mg/1 and 24.2 mg/1, respectively. All

other groundwater samples contain concentrations below 12.0 mg/1.

The May 1985 samples contain chloride concentrations ranging from

8.1 mg/1 to 18.4 mg/1 in surface water samples and 0 mg/1 to 24.5 mg/1

in groundwater samples (Figure 12b). Only samples from ponds PI and P2

were included in the chloride analysis, containing 6.17 mg/1 and 3.17

mg/1, respectively. No anomalous values are noted in the surface water

samples. Groundwater samples containing the highest chloride

concentrations are from sites 9, 11, and BB, containing 24.5 mg/1, 15.0

mg/1 and 7.25 mg/1, respectively. Background samples analyzed

contained less than 1.92 mg/1. The sample from site 17 showed no

chloride with a 2/10 dilution of the sample. An undiluted analysis

could not be run.

CHAMPAIGN _COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY

Intermittent itream

NO


FIGURE 12aCHLORIDE• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• QROUNDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

CHAMPAIONpOUNTYCOUNTY

24.61 Intermittent f t t reamL^8.1

19.0

CHAPMAN CREEK TREMONT.CITY

FIGURE 12bCHLORIDE• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE


» POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/l

LHNJ

53t

Significant features observed from the chloride distributions are: I

1) There are high concentrations in the hillside spring, site 9; 2) ji

High chloride concentrations in the groundwater samples occur in the ,

south-southeast areas near the disposal site; and 3) High concentration !•» v

of chloride in the December Sampling at site 17, a domestic well beside \

Snyder-Domer Road.

Magnesium

In carbonate terrain, magnesium is one of the predominant

constituents in both groundwater and surface water, in most cases

second only to calcium (Hem, 1970).

Magnesium concentrations in samples from the December 1984 sampling

period range from 26.9 mg/1 to 42.5 mg/1 in surface water samples and

23.7 mg/1 to 67.2 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure 13a). Surface

water samples from sites 3 and 4 each contain a high concentration of

40.3 mg/1. The northern section of the intermittent stream also shows

high magnesium concentration. Groundwater samples show the highest

magnesium concentrations at sites 9 and 11. The sample from site 11

contains the highest concentration of 67.2 mg/1.

Magnesium concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

29.9 mg/1 to 45.7 mg/1 in the surface water samples and 29.4 mg/1 to

90.8 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Concentrations in the pond samples

range from 12.5 mg/1 to 21.3 mg/1 (Figure 13b). The sample from site

AA, from the discharge pipe, contains the highest magnesium

concentration of the surface water samples, at 45.7 mg/1. Another high

concentration is from the sample at site CC. Groundvater samples

containing high magnesium values are from the sûrheasr area of the

CHAMPAIGN .COUNTYClTRK COUNTY

Intermittent <tr»im

23.7


FIGURE 13aMAGNESIUM• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

OROU'NDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/l

CHAMPAIGN_COUNTY6TTRK COUNTY

34.2

40.6J Intermittent ctrtam


FIGURE 13bMAGNESIUM• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

• QROUNDWATER S A M P L E



56

background concentrations. Pond sample PI contains the highest

magnesium concentration of 21.3 mg/1.

Magnesium concentrations from samples in the study area are

similar, in comparison, with concentrations in other carbonate terrains

(Hem, 1970). Significant features observed in the distribution of

magnesium are: 1) All surface water samples in the upper range of

magnesium concentrations are located in the proximity of the disposal

site. 2) Groundwater concentrations from samples at sites 11 and 9i

have the overall highest concentrations in the study area in both

sampling periods.

Nitrate i————— INitrate, one of the dissolved nitrogen species, is an element found I

throughout nature and is essential to all living species (Hem, 1970).

It is commonly used in fertilizers, and may reach high levels in .

groundwater near fields where livestock are kept. In landfills,

however, nitrogen is found at high concentrations only in its reduced

state (NH4+). •

Nitrate concentrations in the December 1984 sampling period range f5

from less than 0.5 mg/1 to 42.8 mg/1 in surface water samples and less j

than .5 mg/1 to 24.6 mg/1 in the groundwater samples (Figure 14a). !j

Surface water samples in Chapman Creek show a significant increase in ii

nitrate concentration at site 3 at the disposal site. Other surface •

water concentrations are extremely variable. Groundwater

concentrations are low with the exception of sites 17 and 9, containing

24.6 mg/1 and 23.1 mg/1, respectively.

CHAMPAIGN COUNTY

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 14aNITRATESURFACE WATER SAMPLE

QROUNDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE


CHAMP AIQN_COUNTYcTTnK COUNTY

I n t e r m l l l o n t i l r a a m

TREMONT C!TYC H A P M A N CREEK

FIGURE 14bNITRATESURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/l

inoo

59

The May 1985 sampling period presents nitrate concentrations

ranging from 0 mg/1 to 28.15 mg/1 in surface water samples and 0 mg/1

to 25.75 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Only two pond samples were

analyzed for nitrate, of which only one contains nitrate (Figure 14b).

Nitrate concentrations in surface water samples from Chapman Creek all

range between 18 mg/1 to 28 mg/1. Of the groundwater samples analyzed,

only site 17 and 9 contain high nitrate concentrations.

The only significant feature observed in the nitrate analyses is*

the consistently high concentrations from groundwater samples at sites

9 and 17.

Potassium

Potassium is an alkali metal commonly found in all rocks,

especially in rock or soil containing clay minerals (Hem, 1970).

Potassium concentrations in waters from the December 1984 sampling

period range from .59 mg/1 to 8.61 mg/1 in surface water samples and

1.04 mg/1 to 7.34 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure 15a). Surface

water samples containing high concentrations of potassium are present

at sites 3 and 4. Other surface water samples are highly variable.

Groundwater samples contain less variable potassium concentrations.

The highest concentration, 7.34 mg/1, is from site 9. All other

groundwater samples contain potassium concentrations below 2.25 mg/1.

Potassium concentrations in waters from the May 1985 sampling


0.71 mg/1 to 7.59 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Potassium

concentrations from Pond samples range from 0.33 mg/1 co 2.44 mg/1

(Figure 15b) .

CHAMPAIONJOUNTYCOUNTY

Inttrmltttnt itrgtm

2.13 .96

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 15aPOTASSIUM• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

QROU'NDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE


CH AMP AIQN_C OUNTYCLA~RK COUNTY

Intermittent strtBtn

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 15bPOTASSIUM• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROU'NDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE

MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/l

62

Surface water samples contain high potassium concentrations only at

sites 4 and AA. Ground water samples with upper range potassium

concentrations are located on the southeast side of the disposal site,

specifically sites 9 and 11. Site 17 contains an anomalously high

concentration of 2.43 mg/1, highest of the background wells sampled.

The highest concentration from a pond sample is located at PI.

Potassium concentrations from the study area are typical of

concentrations found in carbonate terrains. Significant features

observed are : 1) Groundwater samples containing high potassium

concentrations are located southeast of the disposal site. 2) The

groundwater sample from site 17 is consistently higher than background

concentrations.

Sodium

Sodium is a member of the alkali metal group and occurs in a wide

range of concentrations in natural water (Hem, 1970). Sodium

concentrations in waters from the December 1984 sampling period range

from undetectable to 42.6 mg/1 in surface water samples and

undetectable to 47.4 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure 16a). No

detectable sodium concentrations are evident along Chapman Creek except

at site 3, where the sample contains an elevated concentration of 42.6

mg/1. The sample at site 7 contains 21.5 mg/1, four times as much as

other samples along the intermittent stream. Groundwater concentra-

tions are high in samples at sites 9 and 17, containing 47.4 mg/1 and

32.3 mg/1, respectively.

CHAMPAIQN_COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY

47.4] Inlermltlinl tlrvam


FIGURE 16aSODIUM• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER SAMPLE



cr>OJ

CHAMPAIQNCOiUNTYCOUNTY

Intermittent itnam


FIGURE 16bSODIUM• SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L E

• OROUNDWATER SAMPLE



65

Sodium concentrations in waters from the May 19S5 sampling period


to 66.4 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Concentrations in the pond

samples range from 1.8 mg/1 to 11.4 ag/1 (Figure 16b). Surface water

samples show little variation along both Chapman Creek and the

intermittent stream. The sample from site AA contains a high

concentration of 29.9 mg/1. Groundwater samples with elevated sodium

concentration at sites 17, 11 and 9 contain 66.4 mg/1, 22.7 gm/1 and

42.3 mg/1, respectively.

Significant features in sodium concentrations include: 1) The

samples from site 17 are consistently high in sodium. 2) Samples from

the southeast side of the disposal site are consistently higher than

background concentrations.iI

Sulfate

The element sulfur generally occurs in water in the oxidized state

as sulfate. One of the principal sources of sulfur in humid regions is

believed to be rainwater, often high in sulfur concentrations due to

air pollution. Fertilizers and sulfide minerals in the soils are other

sources (Hem, 1970). Landfills commonly have high SO " concentra-

tions in groundwater near the fills.

Sulfate concentrations in waters from the December 1984 sampling


6.45 mg/1 to 96.5 mg/1 in groundwater samples analyzed (Figure 17a).

Among the surface water samples, site 3, containing a concentration of

131.2 mg/1 is significantly higher than any other samples. Along the

intermittent stream, concentrations increase from 36.0 -g/1 at site 5

CHAMPAIGN JOUNTY

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 17aSULFATE• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROU'NDWATER SAMPLEt POND SAMPLE


en01

CHAMPAIGN COUNTY

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 17bSULFATE

MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

68

to 76.3 mg/1 at site 8. Groundwater samples with high sulfate ji

concentrations include sites 9 and 11, containing 96.5 mg/1 and 42.2 jI

mg/1, respectively. |ii

Sulfate concentrations in waters from the May 1985 sampling period


to 91.5 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Only ponds PI and P2 were

analyzed for sulfate, containing 25.7 mg/1 and 8.6 mg/1, respectively

(Figure 17b). The highest sulfate concentrations in the surface water

samples are found at sites CC and AA, containing 67.5 mg/1 and 95.0

mg/1, respectively. Groundwater samples containing high sulfate

concentrations are from sites 9, 11 and BB, all containing over 40.0

mg/1. All other groundwater analyzed contains less than 32.5 mg/1.

Pond PI contains the highest sulfate concentrations of the pond

samples, containing 25.7 mg/1.

Minor Constituents

Barium

Barium is an alkali earth metal commonly found in nature (Fetter,

1980). It is toxic in high concentrations and an EPA limit of 1 mg/1

is set for drinking water.

Barium concentrations in waters from the December 1984 sampling

period range from less than 0.01 mg/1 to 0.17 mg/1 in surface water

samples and 0.06 mg/1 to 0.41 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure

18a). Barium concentrations increase steadily in a downstream

directicr. ai—.g Chapsar. Creek but without any narked increase at

station 2. This is also the situation along the northern portion of

CHAMPAIQN_COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY"

251-106

.124 Intermittent itrtim

.351.

.081,

.3fl5_

* .288

.273

Vl rnll*

• SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L E

• QROUNOWATER SAMPLE

A POND 3AMPLE

FIGURE 18aBARIUM


CTvU5

CHAMPAIGN JCOUNTYcLTRK COUNTY

.1111 Inlsrmltltnl •Irtim

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 18bBARIUM• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

• QROUNDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE


71

the Intermittent stream. The highest concentration in the groundwater

samples are from site 11, containing .41 mg/1 barium.

Barium concentrations in waters from the May 1985 sampling period

range from undetectable to 0.1 mg/1 in surface water samples and

undetectable to 0.38 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Pond samples range

from undetectable to 0.05 mg/1 (Figure 18b). Barium concentrations in

surface water samples are variable with the highest concentrations at

sites 4, 8, and AA. Groundwater samples are also highly variable. , The

highest barium concentration is found at site 11, containing .379

mg/1. No significant features were noted other than consistently high

barium concentrations in samples from site 11.

Boron

Boron is found in most natural waters as a minor constituent. It

is essential to plant growth but is toxic to some plants in high

concentrations (Hem, 1970). No levels have been set for drinking water

standards as of this writing.

Boron concentrations in waters from the December 1984 sampling

period range from undetectable to less than .7 mg/1 in surface water

samples (Figure 19a). Only one groundwater sample contains any

detectable boron, site 21 containing less than .7 ug/1. Boron is

detected only at sites 6 and 8 among the surface water samples, both

containing less than .7 mg/1.

Boron concentrations in waters of the May 1985 sampling period

range from undetectable to 0.84 mg/1 in surface vater samples and from

undetectable to less than 0.7 mg/1 In grour.dvater samples. No boron

CHAMPAIGN COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY


FIGURE 19aBORON• SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L E


• POND SAMPLEDECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD

CONCENTRATIONS IN m<j/1

CHAMPAIQNJCOUNTYCJLTflK COUNTY

Intermittent • Irtam


FIGURE 19bBORON• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROUNDWATER SAMPLE• POND SAMPLE

MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/l

u>

74

was detected in the pond samples. Boron concentrations in the surface

water samples are highest at sites 1 and 5, with concentrations of .72

ng/1 and .84 ffig/1 respectively. Groundwater samples showed no

anomalous values (Figure 19b).

Cadmium

Cadmium is not abundant in the environment and is toxic to animals

and humans in small concentrations (Fetter, 1980). A drinking water

standard of .01 mg/1 has been set by the EPA. •

Cadmium concentrations from the December 1984 sampling period in

both the surface water and groundwater samples ranged from undetectable

to .007 mg/1. The highest concentration of cadmium in the surface

water samples is from site 4, containing .007 mg/1. A slight increase

is noted at sample site 3 below the discharge pipe in Chapman Creek.

The highest groundwater concentration is found at site 12, containing

.007 mg/1 cadmium. Site 11's sample contains the next highest cadmium

concentration, .005 mg/1. All other samples contain .002 mg/1 or less

(Figure 20a).

Cadmium concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

.001 mg/1 to .011 mg/1 in surface water samples and .005 mg/1 to .012

mg/1 in groundwater samples. Concentrations in pond samples range from

.002 mg/1 to .005 mg/1. The only anomalous concentration in the

surface water samples is from the site CC, containing .011 mg/1

cadmium. The highest concentrations in the groundwater samples are

from sites 11 and 25, both containing .012 =g/l. Other high

concentrations are noted at sites 16, 19 and 20, each containing .010

mg/I cadmium (Figure 20b).

CHAMPAIGNCOUNTYCOUNTY

Intermittent tlritm


FIGURE 20aCADMIUM3URFACE WATER SAMPLE

• "3ROUNOWATER SAMPLE

4 PONO 3AMPLEDECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD

CONCENTRATIONS IN mgfl

CHAMPAIGN _COUNTYCLTRK COUNTY

Intermittent tlrttm


FIGURE 20bCADMIUMSURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

CTl

77

Though no clear trends are apparent in the cadmium concentrations,

the values are notably high in the May 1985 groundwater samples, some

above the EPA drinking water standard of .01 mg/1.

Chromium

Chromium is a metallic element which is found in the earth's crust

in moderate concentrations, but only at low concentrations, usually

less than .010 mg/1, in natural water (Fetter, 1980). A drinking water

standard of 0.05 mg/1 of total chromium has been set due to the

toxicity of chromium in a hexavalent state (EPA, 1976). Chromium

occurs in several oxidation states dependent on the thermodynamic

conditions present in the system. The analysis included in this study

is referred to as total chromium and does not indicate the element's

oxidation state. Chromium is often associated with industrial

pollution and can be corrosive in higher concentrations.

Chromium concentrations from waters of the December 1984 sampling

period range from undetected to .055 mg/1 in surface water samples and

from undetected to less than .003 mg/1 in groundwater samples. The

only anomalous value noted in December's samples is the .055 mg/1

chromium concentration from site 5, located next to the northern border

of the site. This drops off significantly downstream from this site

(Figure 21a).

Chromium concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

undetectable to 0.01 mg/1 in surface water and from undetectable to

.008 mg/1 in groundwater samples. The highest concentrations Ir. the

surface samples are form site 6 and 5. near the northeast border cf the

* OURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

* OROUNOWATER S A M P L E* POND SAMPLE

FIGURE 21aCHROMIUM

DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PER.QDCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/|

CHAMPAIGN _COUNTYCI.TRK COUNTY

IntormltUnt itrttm


FIGURE 21bCHROMIUM• SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L E

• OROUNDWATER S A M P L E


UD

80

site. The household well at site 14 contains the highest groundwater

chromium concentration of .008 mg/1 but this is well below EPA

standards for chromium (Figure 21b).

Significant features noted in the chromium analysis are: 1)

Chromium is found primarily in the surface water samples, in most cases

at lew concentrations, 2) The highest concentrations are found along

the northeast border of the site in the surface watei samples,

primarily site 5 and 6.

Cobalt

Cobalt is a minor constituent found in nature and is found in low

concentrations in groundwater and surface water (Hem, 1970). Cobalt is

also a known constituent in some industrial products such as paints and

lacquers. For this reason, it has been included in the analysis of

this study, as paints and paint by-products are known to have been

disposed of at this site.

Cobalt concentrations in the December 1984 sampling period range

from less than 0.01 mg/1 to 0.021 mg/1 in surface water samples and

from less than 0.01 ing/1 to 0.03 mg/1 in groundwater samples. No

anomalous values are noted in the surface water samples. The highest

concentrations in the groundwater samples are contained in samples fron

the east side of the disposal site, sampling sites 21 and 11,

containing .03 mg/1 and .027 mg/1 respectively. The samples from site

20 northwest of the disposal site also show a value of .027 mg/1

(Figure 22a).

CHAMPAIGN _COUNTYCL.TRK COUNTY

Inttrrnltlent •iriam

.011. <.014

,..-' \ YREMONT CITYI .010

CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 22aCOBALTSURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROUNDWATER SAMPLE*. POND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD


oo

CHAMPAIGN COUNTY5LTRK COUNTY

Intermittent ctrtam


FIGURE 22bCOBALT• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

" OROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

00

83

The cobalt concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range

from undetectable to .021 mg/1 in the surface water samples and from

undetectable to less than .01 mg/1 in groundwater samples. The only

notable value in this sampling is the concentration of .021 mg/1

contained in the surface water sample from site 4. This is the highest

value in this sampling and occurs at the west side of the disposal

site. All other values for surface water are below 0.016 mg/1 cobalt.

Groundwater values were all below .01 mg/1 (Figure 22b). •

Observed features in cobalt concentrations include: 1) Higher

overall values occur during the December 1984 sampling, notably in the

groundwater samples and 2) The highest values in both sample sets

appear to occur near the boundaries of the disposal site.

Copper

Copper is a common element found in the earth's crust and is

essential for plant and animal growth. It is found in most ground and

surface water in minimal concentrations. Copper piping used in many

water supply systems is responsible for some high concentrations in

drinking water (Hem, 1970).

Copper concentrations in the December 1984 sampling period fall

below 0.01 mg/1 with one exception from site 17. This sample contains

.046 mg/1 copper from the domestic well. Copper piping in the house's

plumbing system may explain this anomalous value (Figure 23a).

Copper in the May 1985 sampling period was undetectable with three

exceptions from the groundwater samples, sites 12, 13, and 17,

containing .003 mg/1, .002 mg/1 and .010 mg/1 respectively (Figure

CHAMPAION_COUNTYCt-TRK COUNTY

002

Inttrmlttant itrtim

TREÔNT CITY

FIGURE 23aCOPPER• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

" OROUNOWATER SAMPLEt POND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD


C H A M A I G N COUNTYCOUNTY

Inlermlllent itr(«m

7REMONT CITYCHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 23bCOPPER• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROUNDWATER SAMPLE« POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIOD


86

No features were noted among the copper concentrations with the

exception of high concentrations from site 17, most likely due to the

house's copper piping.

Iron

Iron is an element found throughout nature in abundant

proportions. Iron is essential to all animals and plants metabolism.

Dissolved iron concentrations in natural waters are dependent upon the

chemical equilibrium of the system. This is controlled by pH,

oxidation and reduction, complexing and the presence of hydroxides,

carbonates and sulfides in the solution (Hem, 1970).

Iron concentrations in the December 1984 sampling period range from

less than .009 mg/1 to .36 mg/1 in surface water samples and .17 mg/1

to 3.12 ng/1 in groundwater samples. Iron in surface water samples

increases considerably at sites 3 and 10 along Chapman Creek, below the

discharge pipe. A high concentration is also noted at site 4,

containing .321 mg/1 iron. Groundwater iron concentrations are

significantly high from samples at sites 11 and 16, containing 3.12

mg/1 and 2.51 mg/1, respectively. Other high concentration over 1.0

mg/1 are present at sites 18 and 21. All other groundwater samples

contain concentrations less than .55 mg/1 (Figure 24a) .

Iron concentrations from the May 1985 sampling period range from

•undetectable to 1.22 mg/1 in surface water samples and less than .008

ng/1 to 2.92 mg/1 in surface water samples. Pond samples range from

undetectable to .07 mg/1. Many of the surface water samples contain

iron concentrations below the .008 mg/1 detection limit, with some

C H A M P A I G N COUNTYCLARK COUNTY

.005

I n te rm i t ten t s t r e a m

236 Coog


FIGURE 24aIRON

DECEMBEH 1984 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE• OROUNDWATER S A M P L E

POND SAMPLE

00

CHAMPAIQN_COU_NTYCI.TRK coUNfv

.012/ Jnlermlttent alrenm


FIGURE 24bIRON• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE


4 POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mgA

39

exceptions including site CC, containing 1.22 mg/1. Grcundwater

samples containing the highest iron concentrations are from sites 11

and 15, containing 2.92 mg/1 and 1.93 mg/1, respectively. Sites 18, 25

and BB have samples containing above .99 mg/1 iron. All other

groundwater samples contain less than .37 mg/1 (Figure 24b).

Significant features in iron concentrations are: 1) Groundwater

samples from sites 16 and 11 are the highest in iron concentrations i

from both sampling periods. 2) Groundwater samples from the vicinity '4

cf the disposal site are higher in iron concentrations compared to

background values.

Lead*

Lead is an element known to be toxic to most species at elevated j

concentrations. The drinking water standard set by the EPA is .05

mg/1. ;

Lead concentrations from the December 1984 sampling period range

from undetectable to less than .03 mg/1 in surface water samples and

range from undetectable to .07 mg/1 in groundwater samples. The

highest lead concentration in the groundwater samples is from site 11,

containing .07 mg/1. Samples from site 18 and 14, both contain

concentrations of .05 mg/1 (Figure 25a).

Lead concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from .03

mg/1 to .10 mg/1 in surface water samples and .03 mg/1 to .10 mg/1 in

groundwater samples. Pond samples range from .04 mg/1 to .05 mg/1.

High concentrations of lead in surface water samples are found at sites

4 and 3, both containing .10 ng/1. The sample froa site 5 contains an

CHAMPAIGN COUNTYCOUNTY

Intermittent s t ream


FIGURE 25aLEAD• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROUNDWATER SAMPLE4 POND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD


CHAMPAK3N DOUNTYCO"UNfY

TREMCNT CITYCHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 25bLEAD• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER SAMPLE


92

elevated concentration of .08 mg/1. Groundwater samples near the

disposal site contain slightly higher concentrations of lead than that

of background samples (Figure 25b) .

Features noted in the distribution of lead are: 1) Groundwater

samples from the May 1985 sample set contain lead concentrations near

or exceeding EPA limits. 2) High concentrations of lead occur in

Chapman Creek in the May 1985 sampling period. 3) The groundwater

sample from site 11 is elevated in both sampling sets.«

Manganese

Manganese is a trace element found in rock and soils, and essential

to plant and animal growth. Manganese is often found in natural waters

containing high iron concentrations. In other situations, manganese is

present in only small concentrations (Hem, 1970).

Manganese concentrations from the December 1984 sampling period

range from .002 mg/1 to .378 mg/1 in surface water samples and from

.002 mg/1 to .095 mg/1 groundwater samples. Surface water samples

contain high concentrations of manganese at sites 3,4 and 7,

containing .109 mg/1, .157 mg/1 and .378 mg/1, respectively.

Groundwater samples containing high manganese concentrations are from

sites 21, 11 and 14, containing .095 mg/1, .086 ng/1, and .07 mg/1,

respectively. All other groundwater samples contain less than .034

mg/1 (Figure 26a).

The May 1985 sampling period presents manganese concentrations

ranging from undetectable to .370 mg/1 in surface water samples and

less than .022 sg/1 to .089 mg/1 in ground-water samples. Pond samples

range from less than .002 mg/1 to .023 ag/1. The highest aariganese

_ _.ClTRK COUNTY


FIGURE 26aMANGANESE

SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L EOROU'NOWATER S A M P L EPOND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD


voU)

CHAMjMION_COUNTYCLA~RK COUNTY

.008

•0091 Intermittent strum

----' » TREMONT CITY

002CHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 26bMANGANESESURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

OFIOUNDWATER SAMPLE


CONCENTRATKDNS IN mg/t

95

concentrations in surface water samples are form sites 4 and CC,

containing .099 mg/1 and .370 mg/1 respectively. Manganese

concentrations in groundwater samples are highest at sites 11, 14, and

BB, containing .089 mg/1, .075 ng/1 and .062 mg/1, respectively. The

highest concentrations for pond samples Is from Pond PI, containing

.023 mg/1 (Figure 26b).

Notable features in manganese distribution are: 1) High manganese

concentrations in surface water samples are limited to the vicinity of•the disposal. 2) Groundwater samples indicate decreasing manganese

concentrations at samples further distances from the site.

Nickel is a metal non-toxic to humans, and found in low concen-

trations in natural waters. It is often found in high concentrations

in waters from highly mineralized regions.

Nickel concentrations in the December 1984 sampling set range from

.026 irg/1 to .071 ng/1 in surface water samples and .04 mg/1 to .085

mg/1 in groundwater samples. No anomalous nickel concentrations are

noted in the surface water samples except for a slight increase at site

3 along Chapman Creek. The highest nickel concentration in the

groundwater samples are from sites 11 and 9, but these are only

slightly higher than background concentrations (Figure 27a).

Nickel concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

below .009 mg/1 to .029 mg/1 in surface water samples and .012 mg/1 to

.044 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Pond samples all contained

concentrations below .009 mg/1. Surface water samples contain no

CH AMPAI ON _COUNTYCtTRK COUNTY

Întermittent s t ream

.048 .038


FIGURE 27aNICKELSURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER S A M P L E

POND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

UDCTi

_ _ ._CL.TRK COUNTY

CHAPMAN CREEKTREMONT CITY

FIGURE 27bNICKEL

• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE• QROUNDWATER SAMPLE


98

anomalous nickel concentrations. Groundwater samples containing the

highest nickel concentrations are found at sites 11 and 9, as in

December's sampling set (Figure 27b). The only features evident are

consistently higher values at site 11 and 9 from groundwater samples.

Silica

Silica is the second most abundant element in the earth's crust and

is found in variable amounts in natural water. Groundwater samples are

generally higher in dissolved silica than surface water samples, as is

the case in both sampling periods of this study.

Silica concentrations from the December 1984 sampling period range

from 2.67 mg/1 to 5.68 mg/1 in surface water samples and 4.71 mg/1 to

8.40 mg/1 in groundwater samples (Figure 28a).

Silica concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

1.28 mg/1 to 5.64 mg/1 in surface water samples and 4.08 mg/1 to 7.64

mg/1 in groundwater. Pond samples range from undetectable to .54 mg/1

(Figure 28b).

Silica concentrations are highly variable in both sampling periods

with no evident trends.

Strontium

Strontium is a common element found in minor amounts throughout

nature. It is usually found only in low concentrations in natural

waters with few exceptions (Hem, 1970).

Strontium concentrations in the December 1984 sampling period range

from .034 mg/1 to 1.37 mg/1 in surface water samples and .12 mg/1 to

10.26 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Surface water samples show a high

CHAMP AIGN_COUNTYCtTRK COUNTY

{.41g.4l/ IntBrmttlent • t r tam


FIGURE 28aSILICA• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

» OROUNDWATER SAMPLE



CHAMPAIGN COUNTYCtTflK COUNTY

2.62

0.24' Intermittent s t ream

, , TREMONT CITY

' j4.oeCHAPMAN CREEK

FIGURE 28bSILICA• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

OROUNDWATER SAMPLE

POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mo/1

oo

101

degree in variability in strontium concentrations as do groundwater

samples. Groundwater samples contain anomalous concentrations at sites

16, 18 and 20, containing 10.26 mg/1, 6.82 mg/1 and 7.93 mg/1,

respectively. Other groundwater samples contain less than 4.85 mg/1

strontium (Figure 29a).

Strontium concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

.067 mg/1 to 1.59 mg/1 in the surface water samples and .11 mg/1 to

11.40 mg/1 in groundwater samples. Pond samples range from•

undetectable to .029 mg/1. No elevated strontium concentrations are

noted in the surface water samples. Groundwater samples containing the

highest strontium concentrations are from 16, 18 and 20, containing

11.40 mg/1, 8.3 mg/1 and 7.2 mg/1 strontium (Figure 29b).

The groundwater and surface water in the study area contain

unusually high concentrations of strontium. Samples from sites 16, 18

and 20 are consistently high. The limestones in the study area contain

unusually high concentrations of celestite (SrSO ) which may explain

the high concentrations of strontium in the water samples.

Zinc

Zinc is a trace metal commonly found in many rocks and throughout

the environment. It is essential to human metabolism but can be toxic

in large quantities. There is no EPA drinking water standard for zinc

but a suggested criterion of 5 mg/1 has been set for esthetic reasons.

Zinc concentrations In the December 1984 sampling period range from

.026 mg/1 to 1.71 mg/1 in the groundwater samples. The sample from

site 5 is the only surface water sample that contains detectable zinc.

CHAMPAIQN_COUNTYCI.TRK COUNTY

Intermittent s t r e a m

.034

.482


FIGURE 29aSTRONTIUM• SURFACE WATER SAMPLE

• OROU'NOWATER SAMPLEA POND SAMPLE


ofO

CHAMP AiqN_COUNTYcLTRK COUNTY

.104

ml Inltrmllltnt itrtam


FIGURE 29aSTRONTIUM• SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L E

• OROUNDWATER SAMPLE

A POND SAMPLE MAY 1985 SAMPLING PERIODCONCENTRATIONS IN mg/1

104

The highest zinc concentrations are contained in samples from the east

side of the disposal site, at sites 21, 11 and 25. The sample from

site 11 contains a zinc concentration of 1.71 mg/1, over seven times

higher than the next highest groundwater sample. Only site 5 from the

intermittent stream shows any zinc, .003 ng/1, in the surface water

samples (Figure 30a).

Zinc concentrations in the May 1985 sampling period range from

undetectable to .90 mg/1 in groundwater samples. No detectable zinc is*

found in either surface water or pond water samples. The only

anomalous zinc concentration is from the groundwater sample at site 11,

containing .90 mg/1 (Figure 30b).

The only obvious trend noted in zinc concentrations is the

continuously high zinc concentrations at site 11.

Total Organic Carbon (TOC)

Total organic carbon measurements are a comprehensive way of

looking at the total organic pollution load in a water system. This

measurement is very nonspecific because as it does not delineate

between different organic compounds. There can also be a high degree

of error due to poor instrumentation calibration.

TOC determination was performed only on the May 1985 samples set.

TOC concentrations range from 0 ppm to 12.5 ppm in surface water

samples and 0 ppm to 28.0 ppm in groundwater samples. Pond samples

range from 1.0 ppm to 3.0 ppm TOC (Figure 31).

The only evident feature is in the groundwater samples, which

contain the highest TOC concentrations near the disposal sits.

CH^ AMPAI ON _C OUN TYCLA~RK COUNTY

CHAPMAN CREEKTREfÔNT CITY

FIGURE 30aZINC• SURFACE W A T E R SAMPLE

• QROUNDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE DECEMBER 1984 SAMPLING PERIOD


C H A MA I ON C OUN TYCO~UNfY

In termit tent i t ream


FIGURE 30bZINC

SURFACE W A T E R S A M P L EOROU'NDWATER SAMPLEPOND SAMPLE


CHAMPAIGN COUNTY

Intermittent s t r e a m


FIGURE 31TOTAL ORGANIC CARBONS U R F A C E W A T E R S A M P L E

Q R O U N D W A T E R S A M P L E

POND SAMPLE CONCENTRATIONS IN ppm


o

108

Summary of Results

The purpose of this snudy is to determine if them has been any

degradation to surface water or groundwater in the area surrounding the

disposal site, in comparison to background concentrations. The

concentrations and values from the analysis suggest certain notable

trends:

1. Samples from site 11, located a few hundred feet from the

southeast border of the disposal site, contain the highest•

concentrations of Mg, Ca, Ni, Fe, Zn, Pb, Ba and HC03

determined in this study, some considerably higher than

background concentrations. They also contain the highest IDS

and specific conductivity values and the lowest pH readings.

2. The hillside spring (site 9), is located north of site 11

along the east border of the disposal site. High

concentrations of Mg, NO-j-, SO^-, Cl-, Ni, K and Na are

contained in samples from this site. High TDS and specific

conductivity values are also present.

3. Samples from domestic wells at sites 17 and 16 contain

unusually high concentrations of certain constituents. Site

16 contains high concentrations of Fe, SiOo and Sr. Site 17

contains concentrations of Na, Cu, C1-, and NOo- well above

background values.

4. Surface water from Chapman Creek shows increases in

concentrations of Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, N03-, Si02,

SO,.-, specific conductivity and TDS at site 3. This is

evident only in the December 1984 sampling period.

II

1094

5. Samples from site CC, just west of the site's western border, ,8f

contain high concentrations of Fe, Mn, HCO-j-, and SO^- .7

Samples from site AA, the discharge pipe, contain high $

concentrations of IDS, SO^-, Mg and Na.

From these trends it is evident that many of the constituents

analyzed for are high in concentration only at sites surrounding the j

disposal site. J

110

Comparison of Fall versus Spring Analysis

Water samples from 20 different sites were analyzed in both sampling

periods to note any chemical differences. No major seasonal variations

occur in the groundwater samples. Surface water samples along Chapman

Creek from the December 1984 sampling period contain significant increases

in concentrations at site 3 of Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, Ni, N03-, Si02,

SO--, and increases in specific conductivity and total dissolved^ «

solids. These increases are not evident in the May 1985 sampling period.

Hem (1970) states that the solute concentration of stream water tends

to be inversely related to a stream's flow rate. Precipitation in

November and December of 1984 was 4.69 inches and 4.11 inches,

respectively, as measured in Springfield, with no major precipitation

events prior to the sampling period (Pastor, 1985). The precipitation in

May 1985 was 4.93 inches with major precipitation events just prior to the

sampling period. It is probable that the rainfall prior to May 1985

sampling period increased the overland runoff in the area. This increase

in runoff would cause a decrease in stream sample concentrations due to

dilution. The same effect would not be noticed in groundwater samples in

the same area due to the lag time between a precipitation event and its

infiltration into the aquifer system. This may explain the lower

concentrations in the stream samples of the May 1985 sampling period, most

notably at site 3, below the disposal site's discharge pipe.

IllChemical Speciation Using WATEQF

After all analyses were completed, the collected data was fed into the

computer program WATEQF (Plummer, L.N., et al., 1976). This program takes

the chemical analysis of major and important minor inorganic aqueous

species and the in situ measurements of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH

and Eh and calculates the equilibrium distribution of each element and the

states of reaction of the water with solid and gaseous phases. WATEQF

accomplishes this by using analytical concentrations, the mass balance

equation, experimental solution equilibrium constants and measured pH.

Other calculations produced by using WATEQF include molal concentration

ratios, ion activity ratios, and cation-anion balances. This program can(

be very useful in determining which chemical processes are controlling »

rock-water systems (Truesdell, A.H. and B.F. Jones, 1974). ;

Most of the calculations which are produced by the use of WATEQF are \i

beyond the scope of this study. It is used in this study for determining

what species are saturated, undersaturated or at equilibrium in each

sample.

From the output of WATEQF, it is evident that most of the samples in

the study area are saturated with respect to calcite, dolomite, goethite,

amorphous ferric hydroxide, strontianite and witherite. Calcite and

dolomite are understandably in the saturated state due to the area's

carbonate bedrock. Goethite and amorphous ferric hydroxide most likely

originate from the glacial material, since goethite is not a common

constituent in carbonate terrains. Saturation of strontianite and

vitherite is =:ost likely due to high celestite concentrations in the

area's limestone.

112

Water Quality

The concern of citizens in the Tremont City area is directed to r.he

possible contamination of drinking water and stream water near the

disposal site. The EPA has set drinking water standards of recommended

limits and maximum permissible limits for a wide range of constituents.

The recommended limits are set for acceptable esthetic and taste

qualities in water and the maximum limits are set according to health

criteria (Table 5).

Several constituents analyzed in the study area show concentrations

above the EPA drinking water standards. The chromium concentration at

site 5 from the December sampling period has a concentration of 0.055

mg/1, slightly above the maximum permissible limit of 0.05 mg/1. This is

the only elevated chromium concentration.

Lead is found in concentration above the maximum permissible limit of

0.05 mg/1 at several sampling sites. In the December 1984 sampling

period, water from sites 11, 14, and 18 contain lead concentrations of

0.05 mg/1 or above. In the May, 1985 sampling period, many of the

sampling sites have water with elevated lead concentrations, the highest

being 0.1 mg/1 at sites 3 and 4.

The EPA limit for cadmium is 0.01 mg/1. Almost all the samples

contain detectable concentrations of Cd and some concentrations in the

May, 1985 sampling period are above or close to EPA limits. The samples

from sites 11 and 25 both contain .012 mg/1 cadmium, .002 mg/1 above EPA

limits. Other sanules are close to this

113

Table 5 Drinkiug Water Standards

R«cc.T)m«ndffdconcentration limit*

Constituent (mg/0

InorganicTotal dissolved solids 500Chloride (Cl) 150Sulfate (SO4

:") 250Nitrate (NO}) 45fIron (Fe) 0.3Manganese (Mn) 0.05Copper (Cu) 1.0Zinc (Zn) 5.0Boron (B) J.OHydrogen sulfide (H2S) 0.05

Maximum permissible concentration;Arsenic (As) 0.05Barium (Ba) 1.0Cadmium (Cd) 0.01Chromium (Crvl) 0.05Selenium 0.01Antimony (Sb) 0.01Lead \,?uj u.05Mercury (Hg) 0.002Silver (Ag) 0.05Fluoride (F) 1.4-2.4 §

OrganicCyanide 0.05Endrine 0.0002Linda ne 0.004Methoxychlor 0.1Toxaphene 0.0052,4-D 0.12,4,5-TP silvcx 0.01Phenols 0.001Carbon chloroform extract 0.2Synthetic detergents 0.5

SOURCIS: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975 and WorldHealth Organization, European Standards, 1970.

•Recommended concentration limits for these constituents are mainlyto provide acceptable esthetic and taste characteristics.

tLJmii for NO; expressed as N is IQmgJC according to U.S. andCar~idian standards; according to WHO European standards, it is11..1 mill as N and 50 mgjt as NO;.

Reference: Freeze and Cherry; 1979

114

Iron has a recommended limit of 0.3 mg/1 in drinking water because of

taste and laundry-staining properties at higher concentrations. Many

groundwater samples contain concentrations significantly higher than this

limit. Most notable is site 11, containing the highest iron concentration

in both sampling sets, 3.76 mg/1 iron.

Manganese is also found in concentrations above the recommended limit

of 0.05 mg/1 at several sampling sites from both periods. Sites 7 and CC

contain concentrations above 0.30 mg/1. Both of these sites are locatedI

near seeps along the border of the disposal site. In high concentrations,

manganese behaves like iron in that it can cause staining of laundry. No

other samples contain concentrations of constituents above US EPA limits.

However, samples from sites 9, 11, CC and 3 in proximity of the disposal

site contain concentrations of constitutents significantly above

background levels.

TOC concentrations from the May 1985 sampling period are highly

variable in the stream water samples but ground water samples indicate

high concentrations in samples from sites 25 and BB, containing 12.0 ppm

and 28.0 ppm, respectively. Site BB is located adjacent to the disposal

site's southern border. This suggests that the wells may contain high

concentrations of organic constituents, but further analyses are needed

for confirmation. No water quality standard is set for TOC at the present

time.

No drinking water standards have been set for many of the elements

analyzed. Different standards have been set for livestock and Irrigation

purposes, but these standards almost always are less stringent than the

drinking water standards.

c

115 »From the data collected, it appears that all the domestic well waters, •

with the exception of site 11, is safe to drink at the present time. It 1*

should be noted that this study does not take into account organic .»I

compounds which could be present in the samples. '

Environmental Impact of the Disposal Site

In order to evaluate the data, it is important to understand some of

the chemical properties of the elements in relation to their geologicalI

environments. The principal geochemical processes that occur in a

landfill environment are biological decay, ion exchange, sorption of

chemical constituents, dissolution and precipitation of inorganic

constituents, the generation and diffusion of gases, and the movement of ,

dissolved materials. Most of these processes cannot be addressed in this

study due to the limited information on flow patterns, recharge areas, and

the lack of data concerning organic constituents.

The disposal site on Snyder-Domer Road has been excavated into the

thick glacial materials which overlay the limestone bedrock. This glacial

material consists mostly of clay, with minor amounts of silt and

sand(Eagon, 1984a). It has been assumed that glacial till with high

concentrations of clay will create an impermeable barrier to leachate

migration, but this has not been proven or disproven (Kunkle and Shade,

1976). However, the presence of sand lenses within the glacial till may

provide avenues for landfill leachate migration (Clause, personal

communication, 1985; Eagon, 1984a and b).

The clayey till in which the site is located has the ability to adsorb

or scavenge certain elements, thus attenuating their concentrations in

water. Different elements are affected to various degrees in this way.

116

Heavy metals such as Pb, Cd, Zn, and Hg have a very strong tendency to

attenuate to clay surfaces. Si, Mg, Fe, and K have only a moderate

tendency to attenuation while Na and Cl have a very low tendency. Ca and

Mn are also known to have low attenuation tendencies. Ion exchange is

evident, from other studies, as a property of calcium which can cause

calcium to form a halo of high concentrations in ground water preceding a

leachate plume. This process involves the exchange of calcium bonded to

the clay particle surfaces to exchange with metal ions in the leachate,4

thus decreasing the metal concentration in ground water but increasing the

calcium concentration. Griffin and Shimp (1978) have found this process

to be highly dependent on the elements and the form of the elements

involved, the pH of the leachate, the absorption capacity of the area's

clay, and the ionic strengths of the leachate.

The hardness halo effect has been noted in several municipal and

sanitary landfills around the country (Griffin and Shimp, 1978). The halo

effect is observed as high concentrations of calcium from wells very close

to the landfills, with the calcium concentrations decreasing with distance

from the fills. This effect is observed at the disposal site in this

study. In the December 1984 sampling period, high concentrations of

calcium are observed at sampling site 9 and sampling site 11 in the ground

water samples. These samples are located along the eastern side of the

disposal site, the direction in which ground water is believed to be

flowing (Eagon, 1984a). Stream samples also indicate high concentrations

of calcium only near the disposal site. These are evidenced at sites 6,

7, 3, and 4. la the May 1985 sampling period, the streas sites do not

show high calcium concentrations but high concentrations are noted in

ground water samples from sites 9 and 11. Sample CC from the site's

117

western border also shows a high calcium concentration as compared to the

background stream samples. It should be noted that the sample at site CC

is taken from water which appears to be coming from seeps along the

western side of 'the disposal site. It is evident from this data that high

calcium occurs only around the disposal site. The hardness halo effect

may explain the low concentrations of many heavy metals in the disposal

site area and the high concentrations of calcium from samples in proximity

to the site. If ion exchange is occurring at the site, the clayi

underlying the landfill is not acting as an impermeable barrier as

previously presumed by Eagon (1984a and b).

The impact of leachate on ground water initiates some change in water

quality. In such cases, increases in alkalinity, total hardness, HCO^,

calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, chloride, and sulfate are often

found, as are high level of iron and ammonium nitrogen (Kunkle and Shade,

1976).

High concentrations of many of these constituents are contained in

samples from sites 11, 9, 3 and CC, from the disposal sites southern

borders. Alkalinity values from both sampling periods are highest in

ground water samples from sites 9 and 11 as are the concentrations of

HCO.j~. Samples from site 9 contain concentrations of Mg, CL", K and

SO^ above the background samples. Samples from site 11 contain

concentrations of Mg, Ca, Fe, TDS and specific conductivity values

significantly above those of background samples. In the December sampling

period, site 3's samples contain elevated concentrations of Ca, Fe, K, Mg,

Mn, Na, Ni, N03", 50 , TDS and specific conductivity. Seep sample

CC shows high concentrations of Ca, Mg, HCO-j and SO^.

118

These samples indicate that the disposal site has had an effect on the

waters in proximity to its borders. This may be due to leachate from the

disposal site. Another indicator of possible leachate migration is the

low pH at site 11, evident in both sampling periods. Since this well is

finished in the limestone (CaCOo) bedrock, the low pH values measured at

this site are not expected since the limestone would act as a neutralizing

agent to the water, thus raising the pH. A possible explanation for these

low pH values is chemical reactions from leachate migration have lowered

the pH.

Additional studies are needed to further access the impact of the

disposal site on the area's water. Further studies on the geology of the

area are essential to determine the extent of sand seams in the glacial

till. Chemical studies should include organic analyses. From the limited

information available regarding the contents of the disposal site, it

appears the organic analyses including volatile organic compounds and

PCB's are necessary. This would set a chemical baseline for further

organic analyses. Additional monitoring wells should be installed to

expand the disposal sites existing monitoring system. Some of these wells

should pentrate the limestone bedrock.

CONCLUSIONS

The groundwater samples from site 11, in proximity to the east side of

the disposal site, contain high concentrations of Mg, Ca, Ni, Fe, Zn, Pb,

Ba, HCO^, IDS, and values of specific conductivity. It is probable that

these high values are caused by constituents leaching from the disposal

site area, as background values are considerably lower than these

concentrations. If this is the case, it is likely that the glacial till

beneath the site is not acting as an impermeable barrier, because the well

at site 11 is set in the limestone bedrock.

Samples from the hillside spring, site 9, contain high concentrations

of Mg, N03, SO^, CL, Ni, K, and Na. Chloride and nitrate at this site

are much higher than most of the background samples with the exception of

site 17. Many of these constituents are indicative of landfill leachate

as noted in other studies (Kunkle and Shade, 1976, Griffen and Shimp,

1978, Cartwright, et al., 1977).

The sand seams observed in monitoring well logs from the disposal site

cannot be confirmed as discontinuous, and could be avenues for leachate

transport.

The groundwater samples in the study area exhibit unusually high

concentrations of strontium, most likely caused by the high celestite

concentrations in the area's limestone.

Leachate from the landfill is discharging into Chapman Creek in the

form of runoff water as evidenced at site 3.

119

120

Due to high concentrations of contaminants in samples from site 11,

the water from this well is deemed unsatisfactory for human consumption.

To adequately assess the impact of the disposal site on local ground

and surface waters, further studies should be implemented. These studies

should include analysis for organic pollutants of both surface waters and

groundwaters, and further geology investigations.

APPENDIX I

Well Logs

121

122

PLEASE USE PENCILOR TYPEWRITERDO NOT USE INK.

County K

WELL LOG AND DRILLING REPORTState of Ohio

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCESDivision of Water

Ji62 Wt Fim ATenoe

Columbia 12, Ohio

j^\ i i rN9 279978

f

Tnnm.hip J3————Section of Township.

Owner ree Z -Addrai

Location of property.

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

Casing diameter O / ff I-«npth of casingth of screen

_^_

WELL LOG k

FormationsSandstone, shale, limestone,

(ravel and clay

^K^/'C^J.c/,.},

S ,)•» / J c/i .<2/t y

5 > •>» i - J. »i=»'iy-«- /"

^tx-t// CO--0/'/-'-/

__ f i -* . . ^'J

I/

From

0 Feet

^- o

J /

To

3~ £

0 V

BAILING OR PUMPING TEST

Pumping Rate ——— -G.P.M. Duration of test — K-hrs.

^tatie l»vil-depth to water /^ ' ft

Quality (clear, cloudy, taste, o^nr)

1

f +~ ' I /Purnp fT i*T^l^fd by /'I ^ *" ya t i^ ' -^* / j« '** * *" / y

SKETCH SHOWING LOCATION

Locate in reference to numberedState Highways, St. Intersections, County roads, etc.

N.

N

W.

•eX

See reverse side

**/-*

o_ \V^/ E.

)'

[or instructions

Date .

123

/ 3-^- GO'S , wtu- LU(-> AMD UKULLJMG Ki>TJRTX - * 1 . _„ ~ « ^ K l -E-^/,C'CQ/ State of Ohio


/ *y Colurobux'dhio0 tf /f jt' IT Section of Township^^gxVr, TownjJaio_^lZA' ' " '

i v^' if cN? 94S87

Number

Own

Location of property

Addreu


AX- /i r"Casing diameter •? ^f /S/? -Ltnph of easing._/j_i ————

WELL LOG4.

FordationsSandstone, «baJe, limestone,

gravel and clay

^^ "

From

0 Feet

/ / /

:: '.To

if

PUMPING TEST

Pumping rate ——— p.P.M. Duration of tejt_.>;SL,_.hri.

Drawdown.- ~"!Sl.ft. Date/!^<<_,_^__/.^./IX.



N.

NO CABBON PAPERNECESSARY-

SELF-T«ANSCR.B.NG

WELL LOG AND DRILLING REPORT VJ^\\ ** \b

r- o -5 -7 r Q0 £ O / D 3

Suit of OhioDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE

Divfcion of W.urFountain Sauirc

Columbuj. OWo 43224

COUNTY V l ft P( A

*

J//f fc> f f f / < ft*'-*-* C^.t^fj^-^ C". />*•*.


Caving ditmmtmr V^X^* Length ttl easing. lm /'^ lt ,

WELL LOG* ».

Formations: Mndsun*. irttl*.

^ /^:*•+*<./- (L!A^

1 ^ /iTrV^v <^ *L.>Al, C /

(?/«*!-< / 1$ a-r^ i - 4 r* •*••<!•)

From

0 h

/ C^

*7 ^^

vf^JS

e Q f*^

• • - - •

To

y/' h

JZ-f^/s—J-J—/&)-//t-

BAILING OR PUMPING TEST

»«l r*t» "^ Qfyn D\if»tton Bf y*' ^-^ hr-

S^7 £T*


Locjlt in rtftrcne* to numOtrtOflat* highwiyf . «tr»«t inttrscciions. counry roads, cic.

•4/t *' I

^

W ^ ^

/) SDHILJ-IHC

l ipac* if n»«J*d B campltu mil log, UM rwn eon«»ajtiv« numtwfxl form.

125

X* I, <= iy= } 5County

DO W7;.'-L LOG AND DRnT1NG REPORT[i'~, O00 ^tatt of Ohio ('vDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Division of WaterColumbus, Ohio

Section of Township______or Lot Number____

(X/C-H

hN? 135523

D. Leonard __Addre»a R- H. 3, Springfield, Ohio _____

Location of On Willow Dale Rd. '£ Ml. N of Snyder & Doaer Rd


Casing diameter jy .'j — 0—0 — Length of casing^3-10 ——

Typ* of pump

WELL LOG

FormationsSandstone, lhaJe, limestone,

[ravel and clayRed Clay £ Eeai Sa^dDry Grsival

"~ Hard PanHock

1 ."" ' t •

From •

0 Feet203070

To

-20__Ft.307083^^

PUMPING TEST

Pumping rate^rf^***G.P.M. Duration of te»tl... ......... hrt_ . 14 1C-25-54

iDcvclopxl ciplcity4?0 (i?1 t> = — pr

41Stitic liv.l —— depth fr> «r>,fr ...•*• —— —— fr



N. ^>.• \ "\ _;.-

T° \VW. . « _ / £ „ . ; ' '^ E.

i __ __ __ .

' cf" J "^s.

See reverie side for instructions

Drilling Fi

Addrtu

* vy\ f 2_ 6 CCO ;"ELL— I / c "~ ' ^t •; j eo '

~'

LOG AND DRILLING REPORT

J2.%0

/

County.

Owner

suit of OhioDEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Diviiioo of WaterColumbui, Ohio

I * A3/f 6

N9 '141257Section of Towmhip / >sor Lot Number I U

70*%*,

Location of T/

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS PUMPING TEST

Casing diameter ^-^^~ £\) 1 »-ph of casing..,//

Typ« of screen__________Length of screen————

Type of pump_________________:—————————————

Capacity of pump_______________________

Depth of pump letting____________________,

umping rate.

>rawdown.

Static level—depth to

Pump installed by__

WELL LOG «. SKETCH SHOWING LOCATION

FormationsSandstone, shale, limcitone,

(ravel and clayFrom To Locitt in reference to numbered

State Highways, St. Intersection!, County roids, etc.

0 Feet N.

s.Set reverse side for instructions

Addrea

Datt_

Signed__

127

WEL'~LOG AND DRILLING REP^.VT Re-state of Ohio "'

NO CAABON PAPER DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES u- 977170NECESSARY— Divtaion of Water " ' ° ' ' •*- ' °

lEiy-TRANSCJUBING 65 S. Front St. Rm. 815 Phone (614) 469-2M6Columbua, Ohio 4321S .'-—

County b //7 A A_______ Townahip_U:t I M •!* I

Oira

fc/#A K

•Tae o.J

m of property

•5 T^-A v, /,->,

,./o~ £>«,..-,- .

y>* **^-i S»r^nn of Tmrnthi'n ' ' .'

A^rlr,,, e?-f7i': $•* t^r*''-r- !?.'*,.

ft-J* .A 4 «>-/ -X J-s ../' S*<:~~ '* S'S. /•'.

_.)

• t .' -. • \--


i of caiin^ •7*'—— —

WELL LOG*

Formation!Saaditonc, shale, Jimeitone,

fravel and clay

J*^»

^~ *ttl „. / */ s*~ t(hj /_,.-, jcjtî

J + ' <- 1JL i >i., i r * -n •<—

-S&-

-ja" ---1—

From

0 Feet

rA 7

:î—————

To

<T Ft

^-v,M_ _ _ - _ — , - , - _

BAILING OR PUMPING TEST(Specify om by circling)

e»t Rate. .... $\. G.P.M. Duration of tr« . . .7-- .hr».

tatic Irrel-depth to water. _ — -J? .-'T ————————— ft

Pump IniUlltd by.,.I<lj7" -.2^ —— •* • ^ —————


Locate in reference to numberedState Highway*, St. Intenectionj, County roads, ttc.

N.

X

_^&^^__ *.^..... A/'"^~^~C k«i»_>— ••*•*-. -.-iLj-.r*^ ^j

^y//./ ..t-.^^y /-P/:/ / .1; ^"12-"

5

' ' ' — • - - . - .

s.fl 7 Date .

*if additional apace i* needed to complete -well log, use next consecutive numbered

._JL28

PLEASE USE PENCILOR TYPEWRITER

I DO NOT USE INK. |

WELL LOG AND DRILLING REPORTState of Ohio


1562 W. Pint ArenueColumbus, Ohio 43212

"XTO 350130

. Tawnship_z£U^"»^

--Section of Township-

.Address T 2. "b - _r_;/,

of 1Jy=/-*S

EPRING'IZID CH'O '*LT additiotuul s'pa.ce is needed to complete well log, use next consecutive numbered form.

REFERENCES . ;

American Public Health Association; 1976, Standard Methods for theExamination of Water and Wastewater, 14 Edition, ° 1976,Washington, DC 20036.

Cartwright, Griffin, A., and Gilkeson, Robert H. , 1977, Migration ofLandfill Leachate through Glacial Tills. Ground Water, v. 15, no.4.

CF/WATER, Newsletter, 1985. ,

Clause, Dorinda, 1985, Personal Communication.i

Contrino, Charles T., 1973, A Study of a Buried Valley in West CentralOhio Using Seismic Refraction and Two-Dimensional Gravity ModelStudies, Wright State University, M.S. Thesis.

Dreimanis, A. and Goldthwait, 1973, Wisconsin Glaciation in the Huron,Erie, and Ontario Lobes. Geological Society of America, Memoir136.

iEagon, Herbert B. 1984, Hydrogeologic Assessment Tremont City *

.Landfill, Tremont City, Ohio. Smith and Schackne, Dayton, Ohio.June. 1984 (a). ;

Eagon, Herbert B. 1984, Hydrogeologic Assessment of the Closed Barrel IFill, Tremont City, Ohio. Smith and Schackne, Dayton, Ohio.January, 1984 (b).

Fetter, C.W. Jr., 1980, Applied Hvdropeologv. ° 1980, Charles E.Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, Ohio 43216.

Fuller M.L., and Clapp, F.G., 1912, The Underground waters ofSouthwestern Ohio: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 259.

Griffen, R.A. and Shimp, N.F., 1978, Attenuation of Pollutants inMunicipal landfill Leachate by Clay Minerals. Illinois StateGeological Survey, EPA-600/2-78-157, 147 p.

Hem, J.D., 1970, Study and Interpretation of the ChemicalCharacteristics of Natural Water. Geological Survey Water SupplyPaper 1473.

129

130Kaser, P., 1962, Report to the Ohio Water Commission on the

Investigation of Ground Water Levels in the Vicinity of Eagle City,Clark County, Ohio Division of Water, 82 p.

Kunkle, G.R. and J.W. Shade, 1976, Monitoring Ground-Water Quality neara Sanitary Landfill. Ground Water, v. 14, no. 1.

Neese, Michael C., 1978, Delineation of the Bedrock Topography ofChampaign County, Ohio using the Gravity-Geologic Method. WrightState University, M.S. Thesis.

Norris, S.E., Cross, W.P., Goldthwait, R.P., and Sanderson, E.E., 1952The Water Resources of Clark County, Ohio. State of Ohio Divisionof Natural Resources, Bulletin 22, Columbus, Ohio 1952.

Ohio EPA, 1979, Personal letter to Mr. John Norman, from Thomas A.Winston. February 12, 1979.

Pastor, Keith, 1985, Personal Communication, Miami Conservatory NorthSpringfield Data Center.

Pirkle, E.G. and Yoho, W.H.; 1977. Natural Regions of the UnitedStates, c 1977, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa52001.

Plummer, N.L., Jones, B.F., and Truesdell, A.B., 1976, WATEQF. U.S.Geol. Survey WAter Resources Investigation, no. 76-13.

Richard, B.H., 1969, Gravity Anomalies in Parts of Clark and ChampaignCounties, Ohio: Geologic Society of America proceedings, Abs.

Spicer, H.C., 19A9, Electrical Resistivity of Bedrock in Clark County.U.S. Geological Survey.

Stout, W., and Versteeg, K., and Lamb, G.F., 1943, Geology of Water inOhio: Geologic Survey of Ohio, 4th ser., Bull. 44, 694 p.

Truesdell, A.H. and Jones, B.F.; 1974, WATEQF, A computer program forCalculating Chemical Equilibria of Natural Waters. Journal ofResearch, U.S.G.S. vol. 2, no. 2.

United State EPA, 1976, Quality Criteria for Water. Washington, DC.

Documents

THESIS - 'A HYDROGEOCHEMICAL INVESTIGATION OF …