NC0004979_Allen CAP Part 1_Appx D_Final_20151120

This page intentionally left blank

uivc CIURLOTM
The W ILLIAM STATES LEE COLLEGE of ENGINEERING
Soil Sorption Evaluation
Allen Steam Station
Prepared for
HDR Engineering, Inc.
Hydropower Services
440 S Church Street # 1000,
Charlotte, NC 28202
Investigators
William G. Langley, Ph.D., P.E.
Shubhashini Oza, Ph.D.
UNC Charlotte
Civil and Environmental Engineering
EPIC Building, 3252,
9201 University City Blvd,
Charlotte, NC 28223
October 30, 2015

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table of Contents
Listof Tables------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ iii
Listof Figures----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iv
1. Introduction--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
2. Background--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
3. Experiment: Kd Determination----------------------------------------------------------------------- 2
3.1 Sample Storage and Preparation---------------------------------------------------------------- 2
3.2 Metal Oxy-hydroxide Phases-------------------------------------------------------------------- 3
3.3 Test Solution--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3
3.4 Equipment Setup---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3
4. Model Equations for Kd Determination------------------------------------------------------------- 4
5. Leaching for Ash Samples---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
6. Results--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5
7. References----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8
Appendix— A ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9
Appendix— B------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 20
iiIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
List of Tables
Table 1: Site specific soil samples analyzed for Kd........................................................................ 9
Table 2: Synthetic ground water formulation and trace metals concentrations .............................. 9
Table 3: Oxidation-reduction potential values for selected soil samples (ASTM G 200-09) ......
10
Table 4: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 20 D..........................................................
11
Table 5: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 28 D..........................................................
11
Table 6: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 29 D..........................................................
11
Table 7: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 31 D..........................................................
12
Table 8: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 35 R..........................................................
12
Table 9: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 20 S..........................................................
12
Table 10: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 33 S........................................................
13
Table 11: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 34 S........................................................
13
Table 12: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB — 35 S........................................................
13
Table 13: Summary of batch and column Kd for GWA — 3 BR ...................................................
14
Table 14: Summary of batch and column Kd for GWA — 7 S......................................................
14
Table 15: Summary of batch and column Kd for GWA — 9 S......................................................
14
Table 16: Kd Qualifiers for batch and column plots.....................................................................
15
Table 17: Ogata-Banks parameters used in developing column Kd.............................................
16
Table 18: HFO, HMO and HAO...................................................................................................
18
Table 19: Method 1313 leaching - pH, ORP and conductivity (at natural pH) ............................
18
Table 21: Method 1313 leaching (at natural pH) data for ash samples collected at the site ........
19
iiiIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
List of Figures
Figure 1: Tumbler for 1313, 1316 and batch Kd...........................................................................
20
Figure 2: Batch filtration set-up....................................................................................................
20
Figure3: Column set-up...............................................................................................................
21
Figure 4: Syringe filtration for extraction of HFO/HMO/HAO...................................................
22
Figure 5: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 20 D......................................................................................
23
Figure 6: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 20 D...................................................................................
23
Figure 7: Boron column Kd — AB — 20 D.....................................................................................
24
Figure 8: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 20 D................................................................................
25
Figure 9: Chromium batch Kd — AB — 20 D.................................................................................
25
Figure 10: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 20 D........................................................................
26
Figure 11: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 20 D..................................................................................
27
Figure 12: Selenium column Kd — AB — 20 D..............................................................................
27
Figure 13: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 20 D..................................................................................
28
Figure 14: Thallium column Kd — AB — 20 D...............................................................................
28
Figure 15: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 20 D................................................................................
29
Figure 16: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 20 D.............................................................................
29
Figure 17: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 28 D....................................................................................
30
Figure 18: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 28 D.................................................................................
30
Figure 19: Boron column Kd — AB — 28 D...................................................................................
31
Figure 20: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 28 D.................................................................................
32
Figure 21: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 28 D..............................................................................
32
Figure 22: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 28 D...........................................................................
33
Figure 23: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 28 D........................................................................
33
Figure 24: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 28 D..............................................................................
34
Figure 25: Iron batch Kd — AB — 28 D..........................................................................................
34
Figure 26: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 28 D..................................................................................
35
Figure 27: Selenium column Kd — AB — 28 D..............................................................................
35
Figure 28: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 28 D..................................................................................
36
Figure 29: Thallium column Kd — AB — 28 D...............................................................................
36
Figure 30: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 28 D................................................................................
37
ivIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 31: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 28 D.............................................................................
37
Figure 32: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 29 D....................................................................................
38
Figure 33: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 29 D.................................................................................
38
Figure 34: Boron column Kd — AB — 29 D...................................................................................
39
Figure 35: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 29 D.................................................................................
40
Figure 36: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 29 D..............................................................................
40
Figure 37: Chromium batch Kd — AB — 29 D...............................................................................
41
Figure 38: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 29 D........................................................................
41
Figure 39: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 29 D..................................................................................
42
Figure 40: Selenium column Kd — AB — 29 D..............................................................................
42
Figure 41: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 29 D..................................................................................
43
Figure 42: Thallium column Kd — AB — 29 D...............................................................................
43
Figure 43: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 29 D................................................................................
44
Figure 44: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 29 D.............................................................................
44
Figure 45: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 31 D....................................................................................
45
Figure 46: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 31 D.................................................................................
45
Figure 47: Boron batch Kd — AB — 31 D.......................................................................................
46
Figure 48: Boron column Kd — AB — 31 D...................................................................................
46
Figure 49: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 31 D.................................................................................
47
Figure 50: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 31 D..............................................................................
47
Figure 51: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 31 D........................................................................
48
Figure 52: Selenium column Kd — AB — 31 D..............................................................................
48
Figure 53: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 31 D..................................................................................
49
Figure 54: Thallium column Kd — AB — 31 D...............................................................................
49
Figure 55: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 31 D.............................................................................
50
Figure 56: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 35 R....................................................................................
51
Figure 57: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 35 R.................................................................................
51
Figure 58: Boron column Kd — AB — 35 R....................................................................................
52
Figure 59: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 35 R.................................................................................
53
Figure 60: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 35 R..............................................................................
53
Figure 61: Chromium batch Kd— AB — 35 R................................................................................
54
v I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 62: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 35 R........................................................................
54
Figure 63: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 35 R..................................................................................
55
Figure 64: Selenium column Kd — AB — 35 R..............................................................................
55
Figure 65: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 35 R..................................................................................
56
Figure 66: Thallium column Kd — AB — 35 R...............................................................................
56
Figure 67: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 35 R................................................................................
57
Figure 68: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 35 R.............................................................................
57
Figure 69: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 20 S..................................................................................
58
Figure 70: Boron column Kd — AB — 20 S....................................................................................
58
Figure 71: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 20 S..................................................................................
59
Figure 72: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 20 S..............................................................................
59
Figure 73: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 20 S............................................................................
60
Figure 74: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 20 S........................................................................
60
Figure 75: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 20 S...............................................................................
61
Figure 76: Iron batch Kd — AB — 20 S...........................................................................................
61
Figure 77: Selenium column Kd — AB — 20 S...............................................................................
62
Figure 78: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 20 S...................................................................................
63
Figure 79: Thallium column Kd — AB — 20 S...............................................................................
63
Figure 80: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 20 S.............................................................................
64
Figure 81: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 33 S..................................................................................
65
Figure 82: Boron column Kd — AB — 33 S....................................................................................
65
Figure 83: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 33 S..................................................................................
66
Figure 84: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 33 S..............................................................................
66
Figure 85: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 33 S............................................................................
67
Figure 86: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 33 S........................................................................
67
Figure 87: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 33 S...............................................................................
68
Figure 88: Selenium column Kd — AB — 33 S...............................................................................
68
Figure 89: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 33 S...................................................................................
69
Figure 90: Thallium column Kd — AB — 33 S...............................................................................
69
Figure 91: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 33 S.............................................................................
70
Figure 92: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 34 S.....................................................................................
71
viIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 93: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 34 S..................................................................................
71
Figure 94: Boron batch Kd — AB — 34 S.......................................................................................
72
Figure 95: Boron column Kd — AB — 34 S....................................................................................
72
Figure 96: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 34 S..................................................................................
73
Figure 97: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 34 S..............................................................................
73
Figure 98: Chromium batch Kd — AB — 34 S................................................................................
74
Figure 99: Iron batch Kd — AB — 34 S...........................................................................................
74
Figure 100: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 34 S.............................................................................
75
Figure 101: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 34 S......................................................................
75
Figure 102: Selenium column Kd — AB — 34 S.............................................................................
76
Figure 103: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 34 S.................................................................................
77
Figure 104: Thallium column Kd — AB — 34 S.............................................................................
77
Figure 105: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 34 S...........................................................................
78
Figure 106: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 35 S...................................................................................
79
Figure 107: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 35 S................................................................................
79
Figure 108: Boron column Kd — AB — 35 S..................................................................................
80
Figure 109: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 35 S...............................................................................
81
Figure 110: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 35 S............................................................................
81
Figure 111: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 35 S..........................................................................
82
Figure 112: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 35 S......................................................................
82
Figure 113: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 35 S.............................................................................
83
Figure 114: Iron batch Kd — AB — 35 S.........................................................................................
83
Figure 115: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 35 S................................................................................
84
Figure 116: Selenium column Kd — AB — 35 S.............................................................................
84
Figure 117: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 35 S.................................................................................
85
Figure 118: Thallium column Kd — AB — 35 S.............................................................................
85
Figure 119: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 35 S...........................................................................
86
Figure 120: Arsenic batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR..............................................................................
87
Figure 121: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 3 BR..........................................................................
87
Figure 122: Boron column Kd — GWA — 3 BR.............................................................................
88
Figure 123: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR.......................................................................
88
viiIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 124: Molybdenum batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR.....................................................................
89
Figure 125: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 3 BR.................................................................
89
Figure 126: Selenium batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR...........................................................................
90
Figure 127: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR........................................................................
90
Figure 128: Thallium batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR............................................................................ 91
Figure 129: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR........................................................................
91
Figure 130: Vanadium batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR..........................................................................
92
Figure 131: Vanadium column Kd — GWA 3 BR......................................................................
92
Figure 132: Arsenic batch Kd — GWA — 7 S................................................................................. 93
Figure 133: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A................................................................. 93
Figure 134: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B................................................................. 94
Figure 135: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C................................................................. 94
Figure 136: Boron column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A................................................................... 95
Figure 137: Boron column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B.................................................................... 95
Figure 138: Boron column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C.................................................................... 96
Figure 139: Cadmium batch Kd — GWA — 7 S.............................................................................. 97
Figure 140: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A.............................................................. 97
Figure 141: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B.............................................................. 98
Figure 142: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C.............................................................. 98
Figure 143: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A ........................................................ 99
Figure 144: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B........................................................ 99
Figure 145: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C......................................................
100
Figure 146: Manganese batch Kd — GWA — 7 S.........................................................................
100
Figure 147: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A ............................................................
101
Figure 148: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B............................................................
101
Figure 149: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C............................................................
102
Figure 150: Thallium batch Kd — GWA — 7 S.............................................................................
103
Figure 151: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A.............................................................
103
Figure 152: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B.............................................................
104
Figure 153: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C.............................................................
104
Figure 154: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A ...........................................................
105
viiilPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 155: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B...........................................................
105
Figure 156: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C...........................................................
106
Figure 157: Arsenic batch Kd — GWA — 9S................................................................................
107
Figure 158: Arsenic column Kd — GWA 95.............................................................................
107
Figure 159: Boron column Kd — GWA 9S...............................................................................
108
Figure 160: Cadmium batch Kd — GWA — 95.............................................................................
109
Figure 161: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 9S.........................................................................
109
Figure 162: Molybdenum batch Kd — GWA — 95.......................................................................
110
Figure 163: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 9S...................................................................
110
Figure 164: Selenium batch Kd — GWA — 9S.............................................................................
111
Figure 165: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 9S..........................................................................
111
Figure 166: Thallium batch Kd — GWA — 95..............................................................................
112
Figure 167: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 9S..........................................................................
112
Figure 168: Vanadium batch Kd — GWA — 95............................................................................
113
Figure 169: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 9S........................................................................
113
Figure 170: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 28 D.....................................
114
Figure 171: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 28 D..................................
114
Figure 172: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 28 D .....................
115
Figure 173: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 29 D.....................................
115
Figure 174: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 29 D..................................
116
Figure 175: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing o AB — 29 D ......................
116
Figure 176: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 31 D.....................................
117
Figure 177: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 31 D..................................
117
Figure 178: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 31 D .....................
118
Figure 179: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 20 S......................................
118
Figure 180: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 20 S...................................
119
Figure 181: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 20 S ......................
119
Figure 182: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 32 S......................................
120
Figure 183: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 32 S...................................
120
Figure 184: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 32 S ......................
121
Figure 185: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 34 S......................................
121
ixIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 186: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 34 S...................................
122
Figure 187: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 34 S ......................
122
Figure 188: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 35 S......................................
123
Figure 189: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 35 S...................................
123
Figure 190: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 35 S ......................
124
Figure 191: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 3 BR ................................
124
Figure 192: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 3 BR ..............................
125
Figure 193: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 3 BR ................
125
Figure 194: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 9 5....................................
126
Figure 195: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 9 5.................................
126
Figure 196: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 9 5....................
127
Figure 197: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (2FT).................................................................................
128
Figure 198: Boron 1316 AB - 39S(2FT)....................................................................................
128
Figure 199: Molybdenum 1316 AB - 39S(2FT)........................................................................
129
Figure 200: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (2FT)..............................................................................
129
Figure 201: Vanadium 1316 AB - 39S(2FT).............................................................................
130
Figure 202: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (3FT).................................................................................
131
Figure 203: Boron 1316 AB - 39S(3FT)....................................................................................
131
Figure 204: Manganese 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)...........................................................................
132
Figure 205: Molybdenum 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)........................................................................
132
Figure 206: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)..............................................................................
133
Figure 207: Vanadium 1316 AB - 39S(3FT).............................................................................
133
Figure 208: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (4 — 6FT)...........................................................................
134
Figure 209: Boron 1316 AB - 39S (4 — 6FT).............................................................................. 134
Figure 210: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (4 — 6FT)........................................................................ 135
Figure 211: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)............................................................................... 136
Figure 212: Boron 1316 AB - 39S(53FT).................................................................................. 136
Figure 213: Iron 1316 AB - 39S(53FT)..................................................................................... 137
Figure 214: Manganese 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)......................................................................... 137
Figure 215: Molybdenum 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)...................................................................... 138
Figure 216: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)............................................................................ 138
x l P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 217: Vanadium 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)...........................................................................
139
Figure 218: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S(2FT)...................................
140
Figure 219: ORP at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S(2FT)................................
140
Figure 220: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (2FT)...................
141
Figure 221: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S(3FT)...................................
142
Figure 222: ORP at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S(3FT)................................
142
Figure 223: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (3FT)...................
143
Figure 224: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (4 - 6FT) .............................
144
Figure 225: ORP at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (4 - 6FT)...........................
144
Figure 226: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (4 - 6FT) .............
145
Figure 227: pH at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (53FT).................................
146
Figure 228: ORP at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (53FT)..............................
146
Figure 229: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (53FT).................
147
xiIPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
1. Introduction
Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy), owns and operates the Allen Steam Station located
in Gaston County, North Carolina. The coal ash residue from the coal combustion process for
power generation was placed in the plant's ash basin, which is permitted by the North Carolina
Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water Resources
(DWR) under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System.
In a Notice of Regulatory Requirements (NORR) letter dated August 13, 2014, the Division of
Water Resources (DWR) requested that Duke Energy prepare a Groundwater Assessment Plan to
identify the source and cause of possible contamination, any potential hazards to public health
and safety, and actions taken to mitigate them, and all receptors and complete exposure
pathways. In addition, the plan should determine the horizontal and vertical extent of possible
soil and groundwater contamination and all significant factors affecting contaminant transport
and the geological and hydrogeological features influencing the movement, chemical, and
physical character of the contaminants. The work plan was also prepared to fulfill the
requirements stipulated in Coal Ash Management Act 2014 — North Carolina Senate Bill 729.
The Groundwater Assessment Plan includes the collection of groundwater and surface water
information to prepare a Comprehensive Site Assessment Report and support the development of
a groundwater computer model to evaluate the long term fate and transport of constituents of
concern (COC) in groundwater associated with the ash basin.
Critical input parameters for the model are site specific soil sorption coefficients Kd for each
COC. This report presents the initial results of sorption testing on selected soils from the Allen
Steam Station to quantify the Kd terms. Testing was performed at the Civil and Environmental
Engineering laboratories in the EPIC building at UNC Charlotte. Soil samples were collected
during the geotechnical and environmental exploration program at the facility between March
and June 2015, twenty nine of which were delivered to UNC-Charlotte between March 5th and
June 29th of 2015.
2. Background
In groundwater, sorption is quantified by the equilibrium relationship between chemicals in the
dissolved and adsorbed phases. Experiments to quantify sorption can be conducted using batch
or column procedures. A batch sorption procedure consists of combining soil samples and
solutions across a range of soil -to -solution ratios, followed by shaking until chemical equilibrium
is achieved. Initial and final concentrations of chemicals in the solution determine the adsorbed
amount of chemical, and provide data for developing plots of adsorbed versus dissolved
chemical. If the plot, or isotherm, is linear, the single -valued coefficient Kd, with units of volume
per unit mass, represents the slope of the isotherm. Depending on the chemical, its dissolved
phase concentration, and the soil characteristics, nonlinear isotherms, characterized by two or
more coefficients, may result.
The column sorption procedure consists of passing a solution of known chemical concentration
through a cylindrical column packed with the soil sample. A plot of the chemical constituent
measured in the column effluent is plotted versus time or its equivalent, pore volumes passed.
1 I Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
This so-called breakthrough curve is plotted together with the analytical solution of the
advection-dispersion-adsorption equation from which the linear sorption coefficient Kd is
estimated by visual curve fitting [1]. When comparing the merits of the two procedures for
quantifying sorption, the batch procedure provides a more effective contact between the solution
and soil, while the column procedure is more representative of in -situ groundwater flow
conditions where solution soil contact may non -uniform and less than fully effective. Both batch
and column procedures were employed for the sorption experiments on soils from the facility.
Depending on practical considerations, the batch procedure may be designed to capture a wide
range of Kd values.
Metal oxy-hydroxide phases of iron, manganese, and aluminum in soils are considered to be the
most important surface reactive phases for cationic and anionic constituents in many subsurface
environments [2]. Quantities of these phases in a given soil can thus be considered as a proxy
for COC sorption capacity for a given soil. In this study, oxy-hydroxide phases of iron,
manganese, and aluminum (hereafter referred to as HFO, HMO, and HAO) were measured
concurrently with sorption coefficients for selected COCs and soil samples.
3. Experiment: Kd Determination
3.1 Sample Storage and Preparation
Twelve soil samples were selected for determination of sorption coefficients (Table 1). The basis
for selection was to provide adequate coverage of the saturated zone beneath and down gradient
of the ash basin. Preserved soils arrived at the EPIC lab in air -tight plastic bags on ice in coolers.
Samples were stored in their original containers in a cold room at less than 4° C until tested. For
batch and column procedures, soil samples were disaggregated, homogenized, and air-dried at
room temperature in aluminum pans (21" x 13" x 4"), for a minimum of 72 hours, with turning
every 12 hours. The dry samples were then sieved to a particle diameter of less than 2 mm (#10
U.S. Standard mesh). Sample splits for column testing were sieved a second time to remove
particles less than 0.30 mm (#50 U.S. Standard mesh) in order to have sufficient permeability of
the sample such that water passed through the column without operational problems, such as
leaking or reduced flow.
Bedrock samples were fragmented using a Sotec Systems Universal Testing Machine (UTM).
Fragmentation was continued until the approximate grain size was 2.0 to 0.30 mm by visual
inspection. Like the soil samples, bedrock samples intended for column testing were sieved a
second time to remove particles less than 0.30 mm (#50 U.S. Standard mesh) to minimize
operational problems associated with the smaller particle size fraction.
Soil samples for batch sorption testing were weighed and placed in 250 mL wide -mouth HDPE
bottles with polypropylene screw tops (in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Technical Resource Document EPA/530/SW-87/006-F). For each test on a single
sample, soil masses of 10, 25, 50, 75, and 100 grams were placed in separate bottles. The
columns were 8 inch long (20.3cm) polyethylene tubes with dimensions 0.675 in. (16 mm) I.D.
by 0.75 in. (19 mm) O.D. Each column setup included two polypropylene end caps with barbed
fittings which accept 0.25 to 0.375 in. (6.4 to 9.5 mm) I.D. tubing. Two discs of porous
2 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
polyethylene and polymer mesh screen were placed between the end cap and tube to retain the
soil in the column.
A modified slurry packing method was used to provide homogenous sample packing without
preferential flow in the columns [3]. With one end cap in place acid -washed Ottawa sand was
added through the open end to a depth of about 2 cm to ensure the effective dispersal of flow
across the column cross section. With the lower end cap and sand in place, 3 mL of 18 MQ water
(high purity de -ionized water) was added to the column. Then sample material was added in 5
cm lifts. The column assembly was weighed after each addition of water and soil. In order to
eliminate trapped air, the column was placed on a vibrating table for 15 seconds. This process
also ensured proper compaction while promoting a uniform density throughout the column. The
sequence of adding water and sample material followed by vibrating was continued until roughly
2 cm of column head space remained. A 2 cm thick sand layer was added at the top of the
compacted sample and the upper end cap was attached. The length of material in the column was
measured in order to estimate the dry bulk density and porosity of the packed sample.
Experimental set-up is presented in Figure 4.
3.2 Metal Oxy-hydroxide Phases
The analytical method for determining hydrous ferric oxide (HFO) and hydrous aluminum oxide
(HAO) was adapted from Chou and Zhou [4] and that of hydrous manganese oxide (HMO) from
T. T. Chao [5]. The HFO and HAO method calls for extracting the soil sample using a 0.25M
NH2OH•HCl-0.25M HCl combined solution as the extractant at 50' C for 30 minutes (soil/liquid
= 0.1 g of soil/25 mL of extractant). The HMO methods calls for extracting the soil samples
using a 0.1 MNH2OH•HCl-0.25M HCl combined solution as the extractant at 25' C for 2 hours
(soil/liquid = 0.025 g of soil/50 mL of extractant) (Figure 4).
3.3 Test Solution
A synthetic groundwater, with the chemical composition provided in provided in Table 2, was
prepared using reagent grade solid chemicals and 18 MSZ water. Target COC concentrations
were attained by diluting concentrated reference standards to the synthetic groundwater solution.
After adding the reference standards, the COC-amended feed solution was back-titrated as
needed to an approximate pH range of 6.5 to 7.5 using 0.1N sodium hydroxide solution. Iron and
manganese were omitted from the list of target COC given that they were considered likely to
leach when exposed to the synthetic groundwater.
3.4 Equipment Setup
The COC-amended solutions were prepared in 10 liter and 20 liter LDPE carboys for the batch
and column experiments, respectively. For each batch experiment, 200 mL of solution and soil
was added to each 250 mL bottle to obtain soil mass to solution ratios of 50, 125, 250, 375, and
500 mg/L. The soil -solution mixtures were equilibrated in a rotary mixer operating at 60 rpm for
24 hours. The experimental set-up and filtration details are presented in Figure 1 and 2.
Following equilibration, water samples were drawn, filtered, and preserved for analysis of ten
COCs (arsenic (As), boron (B), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn),
3 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
molybdenum (Mo), selenium (Se), thallium (Tl), and vanadium (V)). Sample blanks were
included in selected experiments to confirm stability of the solution.
For the column experiments, Masterflex peristaltic pump drives with 12-channel, 8-roller
cartridge pump heads and cartridges were connected between the carboys and the columns using
Tygon tubing, valves, and fittings. The columns were operated in the up -flow mode. The flow
rate was set to pass approximately twelve pore volumes, or approximately 200 mL, per day
through each column. Before pumping began with the COC-amended solutions, the columns
were fully saturated by slowly pumping reagent water in the up -flow mode. The COC-amended
solutions were stirred continuously using magnetic stirrers. The arrangement of the carboys,
pump, and columns is shown in Figure 4. Real-time, grab sample volumes of approximately 50
ml were drawn for each sampling event. The sample time and total volume pumped since the
previous sampling event were recorded for calculating flow rates and pore volume passed.
Concurrent samples of the feed solutions were also taken for each sampling event. Each sample
was proportioned, filtered, and preserved for the analyses of eight COCs (arsenic, boron,
cadmium, chromium, molybdenum, selenium, thallium, and vanadium). Iron and manganese Kd
values were determined from the combination of batch and HFO-HMO values and not by the
column method.
4. Model Equations for Kd Determination
After equilibration of a batch soil -solution mixture, the COC concentration in solution will be
reduced due to sorption. This may be expressed as
x
m = [(CO — C)/m] * V
where, x/m is the soil concentration (µg/g), Co is the initial solution concentration (µg/L,), C is
the final solution concentration, in is the soil sample mass, and V is the volume of solution. For
sorption characterized by a linear isotherm, a plot of measured solution concentration versus
calculated soil concentration for each soil sample (five data points: one for each soil to solution
ratio) will yield the linear Kd term as the slope of x/m versus C.
For the steady-state flow regime considered in the column tests, van Genuchten and Alves
[1982] presented the following form of the Ogata-Banks equation for one-dimensional,
advection-dispersion equation with sorption as a close approximation to that for a finite length,
lab -scale column [1, 6]:
C — vtRx + VtC(x, t) = 22 [erfc(Rx 2 DRt I + exp(vx/D)erfc (2 DRt /J
where, C(x,t) is the solute concentration (M/L,3), x is the column length (L), t is the elapsed time
(T), Co is the feed concentration (M/L3), R is the dimensionless retardation coefficient, v is the
seepage velocity (L/T), and D is the soil dispersion coefficient (L2/T). For sorption characterized
by a linear isotherm, the Kd term (L3/M) is incorporated in R:
4 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
R=1+PbK d
n
where, Pb is the dry bulk density of the soil (M/L3) and n is the porosity. For the given test
conditions where dispersion was dominant over diffusion, the soil dispersion coefficient D is
equal to the product of the longitudinal dispersivity, aL (L) and the seepage velocity. Supporting
data used to estimate Kd based on O-B equation are provided in Table 17. For plotting the
analytical results together with the O-B equation, cumulative pore volumes corresponding to the
elapsed time of each sampling event were calculated using measured water volumes pumped and
the column pore volume. For each COC and soil column, Kd was estimated by visually fitting
the plotted O-B equation to the measured solution concentrations.
5. Leaching for Ash Samples
The site specific ash samples were subjected to two leaching protocols, Method 1313 and
Method 1316.
Method 1313: Liquid -Solid Partitioning as a Function of Extract pH using a Parallel Batch
Extraction Procedure [6]. The procedure calls for reaching nine specific pH targets after mixing.
If the natural pH of the material, without acid or based addition, is not one of the target pH
positions, the natural pH is a tenth position in the procedure. For the purpose of this study, the
test was conducted at the natural pH of the material only. The ash samples were extracted for
24 hours with 18 MQ water. The leachate from the extraction step were filtered using 0.45 µ filter
paper and analyzed for pH, ORP, conductivity, and concentration of anions and cations.
Method 1316: Liquid -Solid Partitioning as a Function of Liquid -Solid Ratio using a Parallel
Batch Extraction Procedure [7]. This method consists of five parallel extractions over a range of
US values from 0.5 to 10 mL eluent/g dry material. In addition to the five test extractions, a
method blank without solid sample was carried out to verify that analyte interferences are not
introduced as a consequence of reagent impurities or equipment contamination. The 250 mL test
bottles were equilibrated for 24 hours with 18 MS2 water (and as per method specification). At
the end of the contact interval, the leachate from the extraction step was filtered (0.45 filter
paper) and analyzed for pH, ORP, conductivity, and concentration of anions and cations.
6. Results
The oxidation and reduction potential (ORP) values of soil samples, measured as per ASTM G
200 — 09, are listed in Table 3[8].
The sorption test results are grouped by soil sample. Batch and column results are tabulated in
Tables 4 to 15. The Kd result for COCs are assigned qualifiers as presented in Table 16. The
parameters used in Ogata-Banks equation for developing the Kd column plots are presented in
Table 17. Batch and column test results for the COCs are shown in Figure 5 through 169 for each
soil sample.
5 l P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
At the conclusion of the breakthrough experiment six pore volumes of 18 MQ water was passed
through the column (data not shown in column Kd plots). No significant COC desorption was
observed based on the column effluent monitoring.
General comments for Kd experiments:
The sorption coefficients extracted from the experimental results in this study may be affected to
some extent by factors related to the experimental design. They include the following:
• The goal of the batch and column sorption studies was to expose each soil sample to
COCs in the aqueous phase and allow COC adsorption to occur until equilibrium is
achieved. A solution intended to represent a generic groundwater was used as the
background solution to which COCs were added. This solution differs from the in -situ
solution in groundwater from which the soil sample was sampled. As a result, the soil
sample is exposed to a geochemical environment in which a number of chemical
reactions may take place in addition to sorption.
• The number of COCs for which sorption estimates are required for each sample
necessitates combining a number of COCs in a single solution for simultaneous
measurement. These COCs may interact chemically, thus altering their respective
sorption characteristics for individual soil samples.
• Sorption characteristics for selected COCs are sensitive to redox conditions. Experiments
in the lab were conducted in atmospheric conditions unless otherwise noted. The
resulting sorption coefficients may not be representative of other redox settings.
• Sample splits for column testing were sieved to remove particle sizes less than 0.30 mm
in order to have sufficient permeability of the sample to pass water through the column
without operational problems such as leaking and reduced flow. This could also affect the
observed Kd value.
Specific comments for batch and column Kd experiments are summarized as follows:
• Batch Kd for As in ranged from 10.1 to 2780.0 mL/g and column Kd ranged from 100 to
750 mL/g.
• Batch and column Kd for B was negligible.
• Batch Kd for Cd ranged from 12 to 437.1 mL/g and columns, Kd ranged between 125 to
650 mL/g.
• Batch Kd for Cr ranged from 635.7 to 3749.5 mL/g.
• Fe and Mn were not included in the test solution, so their occurrence in the batch test
solution is indicative of leaching. HFO and HMO values converted to an equivalent mass
were used as the initial concentration to predict the Kd values for Fe and Mn. If the
6 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
concentration of Fe and Mn increased with mass of soil per unit volume of test solution
during batch experiments, leaching is indicated as opposed to sorption. Kd for Fe in batch
ranged from 1225.7 to 3 0,5 66 mL/g and for Mn ranged between 1.4 to 31.1 mL/g.
• Batch Kd for Mo ranged from 57.5 to 2669.0 mL/g and column Kd ranged from 60 to 375
mL/g.
• Batch Kd for Se ranged from 2.8 to 1846.7 mL/g and column Kd ranged from 75 to 675
mL/g.
• Batch Kd for Tl ranged from 60.3 to 1973.9 mL/g and column Kd ranged from 200 to 670
mL/g.
• Batch Kd for V ranged from 6.5 to 1171.2 mL/g, and column Kd ranged between 170 to
700 mL/g.
pH, ORP, and conductivity at different liquid to solid (L/S) ratios for the batch experiments are
depicted through Figures 170 to 196.
HFO, HMO and HAO results are presented in Table 18.
The leaching test results for 1313 are tabulated in Table 19 and 20. From Table 20 it can be
observed that leaching was negligible (close to minimum detection limit of 1 ppb) for beryllium,
cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, nickel, lead, thallium and zinc. Arsenic, boron, iron,
manganese, molybdenum, selenium and vanadium indicated leaching.
The leaching trends of metals for 1316 is depicted Figure 197 through 229.
7 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
7. References
1. Akio Ogata, R.B.B., A Solution of the Differential Equation of Longitudinal Dispersion
in Porous Media. Geological Survey Professional Paper 411 - A, 1961: p. 1-13.
2. Robert G. Ford, R.T.W., Robert W. Puls, Monitored Natural Attenuation of Inorganic
Contaminants in Ground Water. 2007, National Risk Management Research Laboratory,
U.S. EPA: Cincinnati, Ohio.
3. Oliviera, I.B., A.H. Demond, and A. Salehzadeh, Packing of Sands for the Production of
Homogeneous Porous Media. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1996. 60(1): p.
49-53.
4. Chao, T.T. and L. Zhou, Extraction Techniques for Selective Dissolution of Amorphous
Iron Oxides from Soils and Sediments. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 1983.47(2): p. 225-232.
5. Chao, T.T., Selective Dissolution of Manganese Oxides from Soils and Sediments with
Acidified Hydroxylamine Hydrochloride. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 1972.
36(5): p. 764-768.
6. W.J.Alves, M.T.v.G.a., Analytical Solutions of the One -Dimensional Convetive-
Dispersive Solute Transport Equation. 1982.
7. USEPA, Method 1316: Liquid -Solid Partitioning as a Function of Liquid -to -Solid Ration
in Solid Materials Using a Parallel Batch Procedure. 2012, USEPA: Alexandria, VA. p.
1-20.
8. ASTM, ASTM G 200 - 09 "Standard Test Method for Measurement of Oxidation -
Reduction Potential (ORP of Soil) ". 2014, ASTM International: West Conshohocken,
PA.
8 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Appendix — A
Table 1: Site specific soil samples analyzed for Kd
Sample
Name
Depth
ft.
AB-20D
131-132
AB-28D
70-72
AB —
29 D
60 —
62
AB-31
D
45-50
AB-35R
160-161
AB —
20 S
23 —
25
AB-33
S
30-35
AB-34S
33-35
AB —
35 S
72
GWA — 3 BR
146.5
— 148
GWA-7 S
28-30
GWA-9 S
19-21
Table 2: Synthetic ground water formulation and trace metals concentrations
Chemical
Concentration
Units
CaSO4.2H20
20.0
PPM
M SO4
5.0
PPM
Na HCO3
10.0
ppm
Arsenic
500
ppb
Boron
500
ppb
Cadmium
500
ppb
Chromium
500
ppb
Molybdenum
500
ppb
Selenium
500
ppb
Thallium
500
ppb
Vanadium
500
ppb
9 l P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 3: Oxidation-reduction potential values for selected soil samples (ASTM G 200-09)
Sl.
No.
Sample Name
Depth
ORP (mv)
ft.
Trial A
Trial B
Trial C
Average
1
AB-35S
72.0
105.7
225.7
112.0
147.8
2
AB - 22D
48-49.5
390.8
421.6
411.2
407.9
3
AB - 22D
58-62
398.7
403.9
411.7
404.8
4
AB - 26D
95-105
404.3
418.6
412.9
411.9
5
AB - 29D
60-62
275.6
291.5
285.6
284.2
6
AB - 31D
70-75
317.2
319.6
326.5
321.1
7
AB - 31D
45-50
411.3
420.2
409.1
413.5
8
AB - 33S
30-35
306.9
286.6
256.8
283.4
9
AB - 37D
20.0
338.0
337.5
341.8
339.1
10
AB -26D
75-80
379.6
408.2
416.6
401.5
11
AB-20S
23-25
-60.6
-71.6
-64.9
-65.7
12
AB-27D
28.5-30.5
283.8
337.1
288.9
303.3
13
AB-28
70-72
-516.5
-545.2
-536.1
-532.6
14
AB-30D
39-40.5
355.2
363.0
380.3
366.2
15
AB-33S
30-35
-550.3
-531.3
-544.6
-542.1
16
AB-34S
33-35
192.4
255.8
153.4
200.5
17
AB-38D
25.0
-640.4
-650.1
-650.6
-647.0
18
GWA-1S
18-20
-335.8
-469.0
-496.3
-433.7
19
GWA-4S
19-20
-437.1
-506.2
-521.0
-488.1
20
GWA-5S
24-26
402.3
393.3
384.4
393.3
21
GWA-7s
28-30
427.9
464.5
474.6
455.7
22
GWA-9S
19-21
344.1
333.6
327.3
335.0
23
GWA-9S
19-21
394.1
424.6
420.9
413.2
24
AB - 35 R
160 - 161
BED ROCK
25
AB - 32 S
50 - 55
Dry - ORP reading cannot be measured
26
AB - 20 D
131 - 132
BED ROCK
27
AB - 35 BR
160 -161
BED ROCK
28
GWA - 3 BR
146.5 - 148
BED ROCK
10lPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 4: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 20 D
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial - I
R
Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
13.7
0.95
12.9
0.78
175
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
Non -linear Sorption
650
Chromium
635.7
1 0.95
1 --
--
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Molybdenum
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Selenium
7.0
0.93
--
--
75
Thallium
286.2
0.57
--
--
675
Vanadium
11.1
0.96
11.0
0.78
170
Table 5: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB 28 D
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R
Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
2628.1
0.79
2780.0
0.74
445
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
156.7
1 0.85
142.9
0.85
280
Chromium
Non
-linear Sorption
NA
Iron
--
--
30,566.0
0.56
NA
Manganese
3.7
0.83
4.0
0.69
NA
Molybdenum
288.1
0.94
419.4
0.94
150
Selenium
1846.7
0.67
--
--
200
Thallium
324.5
0.98
327.9
0.99
335
Vanadium
856.7
0.92
1171.2
0.74
370
Table 6: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 29 D
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R2
Trial - 2
RZ
Arsenic
30.5
0.98
29.6
0.98
375
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
--
--
1325.7
0.85
600
Chromium
2697.2
1 0.80
--
--
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Molybdenum
Non -linear Sorption
150
Selenium
6.4
0.97
6.5
0.94
185
Thallium
1973.9
0.81
951.8
0.91
565
Vanadium
32.5
0.88
28.8
0.93
290
11IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 7: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 31 D
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial - I
R
Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
2723.4
0.82
2470.1
0.77
625
Boron
2.7
0.77
--
--
NA
Cadmium
40.4
0.99
39.1
0.99
210
Chromium
Non
-linear Sorption
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Molybdenum
Non -linear Sorption
60
Selenium
Non -linear Sorption
625
Thallium
91.7
1 0.80
1 84.0
0.70
625
Vanadium
Non -linear Sorption
625
Table 8: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 35 R
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R
Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
--
--
9.0
0.55
100
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
--
--
248.3
0.49
350
Chromium
3570.4
1 0.64
--
--
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Molybdenum
Non -linear Sorption
70
Selenium
6.9
0.55
--
--
85
Thallium
334.8
0.71
--
--
345
Vanadium
--
--1
6.5
0.48
110
Table 9: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 20 S
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R21
Trial - 2
R2
Arsenic
Non -linear Sorption
470
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
182.7
1 0.97
178.5
0.99
350
Chromium
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Iron
12,371.0
0.98
13,641.0
0.69
NA
Manganese
3.6
0.64
3.7
0.71
NA
Molybdenum
2669.0
0.65
--
--
275
Selenium
Non -linear Sorption
340
Thallium
78.3
1 0.73
1 75.0
0.83
200
Vanadium
Non -linear Sorption
440
12IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 10: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 33 S
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial - I
R 2
1 Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
Non -linear Sorption
575
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
437.1
1 0.94
1 419.4
0.96
520
Chromium
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
3.5
0.84
3.4
0.85
NA
Molybdenum
435.8
0.94
375.5
0.90
350
Selenium
Non -linear Sorption
600
Thallium
128.3
1 0.99
1 115.2
0.97
440
Vanadium
Non -linear Sorption
580
Table 11: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 34 S
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R
Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
1784.3
0.87
1831.2
0.87
500
Boron
2.1
0.63
--
--
NA
Cadmium
12.0
0.93
12.6
0.94
125
Chromium
3749.5
0.51
--
--
NA
Iron
1225.7
0.87
--
--
NA
Manganese
1.4
0.81
--
--
NA
Molybdenum
Non
-linear Sorption
360
Selenium
Non -linear Sorption
480
Thallium
60.3
1 0.72
1 61.0
0.70
425
Vanadium
Non -linear Sorption
490
Table 12: Summary of batch and column Kd for AB - 35 S
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R2
Trial - 2
R2
Arsenic
518.7
0.67
498.7
0.70
750
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
Cadmium
63.8
1 0.99
64.4
0.99
350
Chromium
Non
-linear Sorption
NA
Iron
--
--
2176.7
0.62
NA
Manganese
--
--
5.1
0.46
NA
Molybdenum
511.5
0.99
753.4
0.90
375
Selenium
--
--
1738.7
0.51
400
Thallium
63.2
0.99
66.2
0.99
475
Vanadium
Non
-linear Sorption
700
13IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 13: Summary of batch and column Kd for GWA - 3 BR
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial - I
R
Trial - 2
R
Arsenic
11.5
0.85
10.1
0.73
125
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
70
Cadmium
Non -linear Sorption
360
Chromium
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
Non
-linear Sorption
NA
Molybdenum
--
--
375.5
0.90
75
Selenium
2.8
0.73
--
--
100
Thallium
111.2
0.54
--
--
370
Vanadium
132.6
0.99
--
--
150
Table 14: Summary of batch and column Kd for GWA - 7 S
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial - I
R
Trial - 2
R
Trial A
Trial B
Trial C
Arsenic
2054.5
0.89
2018.5
0.89
520
520
675
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
24.9
0.83
21.8
0.97
145
150
175
Chromium
715.3
1 0.48
--
--
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
31.1
T 0.86
1 --
--
NA
Molybdenum
Non -linear Sorption
260
325
325
Selenium
Non -linear Sorption
325
325
350
Thallium
78.3
0.73
85.0
0.83
425
450
500
Vanadium
Non -linear Sorption
500
575
575
Table 15: Summary of batch and column Kd for GWA - 9 S
Batch
Column
COCs
Trial -1
R2
Trial - 2
RZ
Arsenic
206.1
0.90
220.5
0.91
250
Boron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Cadmium
304.4
1 0.93
1 322.7
0.99
600
Chromium
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Iron
Non -linear Sorption
NA
Manganese
Non
-linear Sorption
NA
Molybdenum
57.5
0.90
--
--
100
Selenium
51.1
0.89
57.0
0.92
75
Thallium
339.2
0.98
337.2
0.96
600
Vanadium
108.9
0.97
120.3
0.99
250
14IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table l 6: Kd Qualifiers for batch and column plots
Batch Kd Qualifiers
Sl.
Description
Qualifier
No.
Identification Number
1
The concentration distribution is sufficient for the selected L/S
Q — B — 1
ratio and given COC under consideration.
2
The range of final COC concentration is narrow, such that
Q — B — 2
normal variation due to the analytical method resulted in a
non -linear isotherm.
3
The range of final COC concentration is narrow and low, such
Q — B — 3
that normal variation due to the analytical method resulted in a
non -linear isotherm.
4
Leachable COC is present in the soil sample prior to testing.
Q — B — 4
This resulted in higher concentration of COC in the final COC
concentration at the end of batch experiment. The mass
balance approach for estimating sorption can only be done if
leachable COC is known.
5
Anomalous variability in the experimental results resulted in a
Q — B — 5
non -linear isotherm.
6
Initial COC concentration in the synthetic ground water is not
Q — B — 6
sufficient to produce a well-defined linear isotherm.
Column Kd Qualifiers
Sl.
Description
Qualifier
No.
Identification Number
1
The breakthrough curve is sufficient for applying the Ogata-
Q — C — 1
Banks model equation.
2
The COC reached breakthrough although the concentration
Q — C — 2
was less than the feedstock. Other chemical interactions
between soil and synthetic ground water occurring after the
initial breakthrough caused a transient decrease in effluent
concentration with increased pore volumes.
3
Effluent and influent concentrations are essentially the same
Q — C — 3
over the period of data collection, indicating minimal COC
sorption onto the soil (observed frequently with boron and
molybdenum).
4
Breakthrough was not observed. A conservative estimate of
Q — C — 4
sorption was made by assuming breakthrough occurred at the
end of the data collection period.
5
The model equation is fit to the initial segment of the
Q — C — 5
breakthrough curve to yield a conservative estimate of
sorption.
15IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 17: Ogata-Banks parameters used in developing column Kd
Sample Name
AB-20D
AB-28D
AB-29D
AB-31D
AB-35R
AB-20S
AB-33S
Depth
ft.
131 - 132
70 - 72
60 - 62
45 - 50
160 - 161
23 - 25
30 - 35
Parameter
Units
Effective porosity (n)0.42
0.34
0.29
0.31
0.52
0.33
0.52
Bulk density (b)
/cm
1.54
1.74
1.87
1.82
1.28
1.76
1.28
Column diameter
cm
1.50
Column area
cm
1.77
Column length
cm
16.50
17.00
17.00
16.50
17.00
17.00
17.00
Diffusivity Do
cm /s
9.00E-06
b
0.05
a
0.66
w=a*(n-b)
0.24
0.19
0.16
0.17
0.31
0.19
0.31
Effective molecular
diffusion coefficient D*
cm2/s
2.19E-06
1.73E-06
1.45E-06
1.56E-06
2.76E-06
1.69E-06
2.78E-06
Dispersivity factor
0.02 - 0.20
Dis ersivi
cm
0.33 - 3.40
Average flow rate (Q)
cm /da
122.15
108.88
124.76
119.30
92.94
112.79
121.36
Bulk volume
cm3
29.16
30.04
30.04
29.16
30.04
30.04
30.04
Pore volume
cm
12.21
10.28
8.82
9.12
15.48
10.06
15.54
Hydraulic detention
Day
0.24
0.28
0.24
0.24
0.32
0.27
0.25
Linear velocity
cm/day
165.11
180.11
240.45
215.85
102.09
190.64
132.78
161Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Ogata - Banks parameter's continued...
Sample Name
AB - 34 S
AB - 35 S
GWA - 3 BR
GWA - 7 S
GWA - 9 S
Depth
ft.
33 - 35
72
146.5 - 148
28 - 30
19 - 21
Parameter
Units
Trial A
Trial B
Trial C
Effective porosity (n)
0.44
0.34
0.39
0.34
0.35
0.37
0.56
Bulk density b
/cm
1.49
1.76
1.63
1.76
1.72
1.68
1.16
Column diameter
cm
1.50
Column area
cm
1.77
Column length
cm
17.00
17.00
17.50
17.00
17.00
17.40
17.30
Diffusivity (Do)
cm2/s
9.00E-06
b
0.05
a
0.66
w = a*(n - b)
0.25
0.19
0.22
0.19
0.20
0.21
0.34
Effective molecular
diffusion coefficient (D*)
cm2/s
2.29E-06
1.71E-06
1.99E-06
1.70E-06
1.79E-06
1.87E-06
3.05E-06
Dispersivity factor
0.02 - 0.20
Dis ersivi
cm
0.34 - 3.50
Average flow rate Q
cm'/day
110.12
133.03
94.15
108.03
113.58
134.82
125.09
Bulk volume
cm 330.04
30.04
30.93
30.04
30.04
30.75
30.57
Pore volume
cm
13.10
10.13
11.93
10.11
10.57
11.24
17.21
Hydraulic detention
Day
0.27
0.23
0.33
0.28
0.26
0.23
0.24
Linear velocity
cm/day
142.92
223.16
138.12
181.73
182.62
208.69
125.73
171Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 18: HFO, HMO and HAO
Sample Name
Depth
HFO
HMO
HAO
ft.
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
mg/Kg
AB - 20 D
131 - 132
2203.8
332.6
1111.3
AB - 27 D
28.5 - 30.5
1310.7
333.8
1093.4
AB - 28 D
70 - 72
1888.8
137.2
1125.0
AB - 29 D
60 - 62
3691.3
239.1
1953.8
AB - 30 D
39.0 - 40.5
2246.4
414.6
2490.7
AB - 31 D
45 - 50
2013.8
225.7
1980.0
AB - 35 R
160 -161
2128.8
161.8
1478.8
AB - 20 S
23 - 25
3933.8
19.1
1175.0
AB - 33 S
30 - 35
1208.5
228.8
1487.5
AB - 34 S
33 - 35
161.0
184.9
15.8
AB - 35 S
72
1785.0
23.9
2087.5
GWA - 3 BR
146.5 - 148
4697.5
688.8
7244.2
GWA - 7 S
28 - 30
1016.3
283.0
1051.3
GWA - 9 S
19 - 21
1490.4
795.1
1507.5
Table 19: Method 1313 leaching - pH, ORP and conductivity (at natural pH)
Sample Name
Depth Collected
Trial
ORP
Conductivity
pH
ft.
mV
gs1cm.
AB - 39S
53
A
239.7
52.7
8.87
B
239.8
49.4
8.85
AB - 39S
3
A
239.8
23
7.05
B
239.7
25
6.87
AB - 39S
2
A
238.7
101.4
9.13
B
239.8
98.2
9.11
AB - 39S
4-6
A
239.7
46.2
8.02
B
239.5
49.2
7.23
18IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Table 20: Method 1313 leaching (at natural pH) data for ash samples collected at the site
Sample Name
Depth Collected
Trial
As
I B
I Be
I Cd
Cr
Co
Cu
I Fe
I Mn
I Mo
Ni
I Pb
I Se
Tl
V
I Zn
ft.
ppb
AB - 39S
53
A
26.1
62.6
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
8.0
2.6
27.5
<1
<1
119.3
<1
29.4
2.1
B
29.2
63.3
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
9.6
2.7
29.0
<1
<1
131.4
<1
34.5
1.7
AB - 39S
3
A
23.4
83.0
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
11.7
20.4
23.7
<1
<1
111.5
<1
26.9
2.1
B
27.0
89.2
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
20.4
22.0
26.3
1.0
<1
127.9
<1
32.7
1.7
AB - 39S
2
A
9.1
150.7
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
25.8
2.8
7.8
<1
<1
3.6
<1
11.9
1.1
B
9.1
162.8
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
8.9
2.0
7.9
<1
<1
3.4
<1
11.5
2.2
AB-39S
4-6
A
13.2
82.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
1.4
186.8
1 199.1
6.6
<1
<1
17.6
<1
6.5
1.4
B
20.7
84.6
< 1
< 1
3.3
3.7
15.6
2289.4
433.9
3.4
< 1
6.0
16.3
< 1
25.9
8.6
191Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Appendix — B
Figure 1: Tumbler for 1313, 1316 and batch Kd
Figure 2: Batch filtration set-up
201Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 3: Column set-up
21IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Figure 4: Syringe filtration for extraction of HFO/HMO/HAO
22IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Kd plots
Arsenic
4
3
bm
2
I
0
Kd = 13.7 mT
Kd = 12.9 mL.--g v = 0.0137x
R2 = 0.94-56 •
0-0129x
RI = 0.7773
50 10D
Figure 5: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 20 D
Q-13-1
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLurnes passed
Figure 6: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C—I
@ Trial A * Trial B
150 200 250 300
AgfL
Arsenic - Column AB - 20 D
200
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 160 nLL/g
Kd 175 mL/g
Kd 190 rnL/g
23IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Boron - Colunm AB - 20 D
600
500
400 • ••
•
300
100 1
0 1 1 1 1 1
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 7: Boron column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C-3
• B in Effluent
• B in Feed
24IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium - Column AB - 20 D
500
400
300
200 •
•
100
• Cd in Effluent
• Cd in Feed
- - Kd 600 mLfg
Kd 65 0 n Lfg
- - Kd 700 mLlg
©
0 50 100 150 200
Fore volumes gassed
Figure 8: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C-5
Chromium
12
an
I
an
6
3
-
•
r'
0
0
5
Figure 9: Chromium batch Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—B-3
y 0.6357x
R-2 = 0.947
10 15
µgm
• Trial C
20
25IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
500
I
300
200
100
01
Molybdenum - Column AB - 20 D
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 10: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C-3
• Mo in Effluent
• Mo in peed
26IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium
4
Kd = 7.0 mLlg
3 �' r
na
2
r y — 0.007x
R2 — 0.9275
r
1 •
r Trial C
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Ftg/L
Figure 11: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—B-1
Selenium - Column AB - 20 D
500
400
300
CIO
a
U
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 12: Selenium column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C—I
200
Se in Effluent
Se in Feed
Kd 60 mLlg
Kd 75 mUg
Kd 90 mLlg
27IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
I Kd= 286-2mL..'g •
R
Thallium
v = 0.2962x
bt
4 R2 = 05659
•
..........................................................
2
•
•
0 10 20
......................................................................................................................................... J191L
Figure 13: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—B-3
500
400
300
4
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 14: Thallium column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C-5
•
•
Trial A a Trial B
30 40 50
Thallium - Column AB - 20 D
• TI in Effluent
• TI in Feed
— • — Kd 650 mL/g
Kd 675 mL/g
— • — Kd 700 niL/g
200
28 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium
2
1.5
Kd= 11.1
r1iLg
Kd= 11.0
r,,Lg
•
v = O.011lx •
R2 = 0_9603 , �� •
-rr
y = 0.011x
R' = 0.7774
• Trial A • Trial B
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
u
Figure 15: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—B-1
300
250
• • •••• • ••• •
200 •
a 150
100
50 !••
i
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 16: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 20 D
Q—C-1
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
- • - Kd 150 rnL/g
Kd 170 mL/g
- • - Kd 190 mL/g
200
29IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
8
6
4
2
0
(l
Kd = 262S.1 tnL:t
I) -
Arsenic
y = 2.78x
R2 = 4.7354
y = 2.62S1x
R� = 0.7947
•
•
•
•
1 2
Ag/L
Figure 17: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B-3
Arsenic - Column AB - 28 D
500
400
300
a
Q
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 18: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C-5
• Trial A
200
3
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd430 mL/g
Kd 445 mL/g
Kd 460 mL/g
30IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Boron - Column AB - 28 D
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 19: Boron column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C-3
r B in E ffluent
• B in Feed
31IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium
5
Kd= 156.7 mL.ig
Kd = 142.9 mL.-"-g
• 0
4
U 3
y = 0.1567x
R2 = 0.8489
v = 0.1429x
2
R2 = 0.8488
0•
Trial A • Trial B
D 5
10 15
20 25 3D
Mg/L
Figure 20: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B-3
Cadmium - Column AB - 28 D
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 21: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C-4
200
• Cd in Effluent
• CdinFeed
Kd 260 mL/g
Kd 280 niL/g
Kd 300 mLJg
32 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Molybdenum
Kd = 288.1 mL!'g
Kd = 419.4 mL.--'g
y = G4194x
R'= 0-9406
6
0-'-)Sglx
R 2 = 0-9393
4
2
• • Trial A Trial B
•
5 10 15
Ag/L
Figure 22: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B-3
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 23: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C—1
20 25 30
Molybdenum - Column AB - 28 D
200
Mo in Effluent
Mo in Feed
Kd 140 mL/g
Kd 150 niL/g
Kd 160 mL/g
33 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
16
Kd= 3-7 mLig
Kd = 4.0 niL-g
12
U
sl 8
4
0 L
D
I
T%Janmam-u-
y = 3-9766x
R" = 0.691
y = 3-7083x
R'= 0.831
00
mg/L
Figure 24: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B—I
Iron
250
Kd = 30566.0 mL/9
2
A a Trial B
3
200 — -- ----- -------------- ----- -
y = 30566x
R2 = 0.5605
150
IDD
50
0 *Trial A @Trial B
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01
mg/L
Figure 25: Iron batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q-13-4
34 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium
14
Kd = 1846.7 mL/g
12
10
s
an
a�
6
•
4
•
2 •
• Trial C •
0
0 1 2
Figure 26: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B-3
�7663 4
Cg/]L
Selenium - Column AB - 28 D
500 •—
400 •• • •• •
•
300 P '
200 • r rr
� r
I r.
100 + r
i r
0 - •
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 27: Selenium column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C-1
y=1.8467x
RI = 0.6714
5
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
— • — Kd 175 mL/g
Kd 200 mL/g
— • — Kd 225 mL/g
200
r�
35IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
Kd = 324-5 mL :g
Kd = 327-9 m1
8
6
M
=L 4
0
0 5
Thallium
y = 0-3279x
R2 = 0.992
Figure 28: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B-3
500
400
300
a
H
200
100
0
10 15
11
Thallium - Column AB - 28 D
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 29: Thallium column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C-4
y = 0-3245x
R2 = 0-9844
* Trial A .Trial B
24 25
200
TI m Effluent
TL in Feed
Kd 325 mLfg
Kd 335 mLfg
Kd 345 mLfg
36IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium
4
Kd = 856.7 mLlg i
Kd = 1171 _? mL:.
3
y = LI712.x = 0.8567x
R" = 0.7392. R2 = 0.9237
2.
i
1
i
i
i . Trial A . Trial B
0
0 1 2 3 4 5
991L
Figure 30: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—B-3
Vanadium - Column AB - 28 D
300
250
200
a
a
a 150
}
100
50
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 31: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 28 D
Q—C-4
• V in Eiiluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd 360 mL/g
Kd 370 mL/g
— • — Kd 380 mL/g
200
37IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
6
4
Arsemic
Kd = 30-5 mLlg
Kd = 29-6 mDg
y = 0-03 05x
v = 0-0296x
k' = 0-9807
2
L
0
50 100
AWL
Figure 32: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—B-1
Arsenic - Column AB - 29 D
500
400
300
2
Q
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 33: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—C-4
. Trim A • Trial B
150 200
a As in Effluent
• As in Feed
— — Kd 350 mL/g
Kd 375 mLIg
— • — Kd 400 nmL/g
200
381Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500
400
a
¢ 300
200
100
0
Boron - Column AB - 29 D
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 34: Boron column Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—C-3
* B in Effluent
• B in Feed
39IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium
6
Kd = 1325.7 mLlg
y = 1.3257x
• Rz U516
4
tM
•
0
0 1 2
Fig/L
Figure 35: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—B-3
500
400
300
200
100
0
Cadmium - Column AB - 29 D
• Trial A • Trial B
3 4
Cd in Effluent
• Cd in Feed
— Kd 580 mLlg
—Kd 600 mL/g
— Kd 620 mLlg
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 36: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—C-5
40IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Chromium
12
Kd = 2697.2 mLlg
•
9
y = 2.6972x
R2 — 0-7952
DA
a 6
•
3
•
• Trial C
•
•
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5
µgiL
Figure 37: Chromium batch Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—B-3
Molybdenum - Column AB - 29 D
500
400 • a •
•
• Mo in Effluent
300 �' • Mo in Feed
—.— Kd140n-L/g
200
• • r Kd 150 mLlg
! — • — Kd 160 mLlg
100
r
• r
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 38: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—C—I
41IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium
3
Ind = 6.4 mL.'g
Kd = 6.5 mL!'g
4
2
y = 0.0065x
C° R = 0.9415
y = 0.0064x
1 °' '-
�° R_ = 0.966
�#°fe
°c
• Trial A @ Trial B
0
0 100 200 300 400
u9(L
Figure 39: Selenium batch Kd - AB - 29 D
Q-B-1
500
400
300
a
200
100
0
Selenium - Column AB - 29 D
VDI/40
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
-•— Kd175mL1g
Kd 185 mLfg
- — Kd 195 mLlg
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 40: Selenium column Kd - AB - 29 D
Q-C-1
42IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Thallium
1 [}
Kd= 1973.9 m .+g
Kd = 951.9 mLlg
8 •
6 0.918x
= 1.9739x R� = 0.9076
i Rt — 0.8093
4
• •
2 _
• Trial A Trial B
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
11
Figure 41: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—B-3
500
400
300
•
200
Thallium - Column AB - 29 D
•
100 —i
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 42: Thallium column Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—B-5
• Tlin Effluent
• TI in Feed
— Kd 550 mL/g
Kd 565 mL/g
— — Kd 580 mL/g
200
43IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
3 ,
2
b,
l
0 L
D
Vanadium
Kd = 32.5 mL.ig
Kd = 28.8 mL!g
•
= 0.0325x
R2 = 0.8804 -
= 0.0288x
R2 = 0.934
•
•
• Trial A • Tria] S
20 40 60
119(L
Figure 43: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 29 D
Q—B-3
Vanadium - Column AB 29 D
300
250
200
a
150
100
50
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 44: Vanadium column Kd— AB — 29 D
Q—C-1
80
• V in Effluent
• V inFeed
— • — Kd 280 mLfg
Kd290 mLlg
— • — Kd 300 mLlg
200
44IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
6
4
21
Arsenic
Kd = 2723.4 mLlg
Kd = 2470.1 mL/g '
y = :7234x
R2 = 0.815
v = 2.4701x
• R 2= 0.7718
•
.Trial A Trial B
D
0.0 0.5 LO 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
liJ
Figure 45: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—B-3
Arsenic - Column AB - 31 D
500
400
300
a
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 46: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-5
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 600 mL/g
Kd 625 mL/g
Kd 650 mL/g
45IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Boron
1.2
1.0
0.8
Ca 0.6
0.4
0.2
• Trial C
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Ag/L
Figure 47: Boron batch Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—B—I
Boron - Column AB - 3 1 D
600
500
400
¢ 300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 48: Boron column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-3
200
127x
'742
350 400
• B in Effluent
* B in Feed
46IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
4
Kd=40.4niL g
Kd = 39.1 mLfg
3
u 2
1
Cadmium
y = 0.0404x
R' = 0.9914
y = 0-0391x
R2 = 0.9928
• Trial A • Trial B
20 40 60 80 100
Irk
Figure 49: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—B-2
Cadmium - Column AB - 31 D
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 50: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-2
• Cd in Effluent
+ Cd in Feed
— Kd 200 mL/g
—Kd 210 mL/g
— Kd 220 mL/g
200
47IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Molybdenum - Column AB - 31 D
500
400
300
2
0
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 51: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-5
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 52: Selenium column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-5
Selenium - Column AB - 31 D
• Mo in Effluent
Mo in Feed
- • — Kd 600 mL/g
Kd 60 mL/g
- — Kd 650 mL/g
200
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
- — Kd 600 mL/g
Kd 625 mL/g
- — Kd 65 0 mL/g
200
48IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Thallium
8 -
Kd= 9 1 -7 mLig
Ind = 84-0 mL:'g
6
= 0-0917x
R-- = 0-8024
M
q4
2
Y = 0-084x
•
•• R2 = 0-6995
Trial A Trial 13
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
A
Figure 53: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—B-3
Thallium - Column AB - 31 D
500
400
300
a
H
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 54: Thallium column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-5
• T1 in Effluent
• T1in Feed
— • — Kd 600 mL/g
Kd 625 mL/g
— • — Kd 650 mL/g
200
49IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
jUU
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
Vanadium - Column AB - 3 1 D
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
- • - Kd 600 m.L/g
- Kd 625 m.L/g
- • - Kd 650 m.L/g
50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 55: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 31 D
Q—C-5
50 1 P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
5
Kd = 9 mL..'g
4
3
on
2
1
P Trial A • Tria] B
0
0 50 100
Figure 56: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—B-4
s00
400
300
a
200
100
0
Arsenic
y = 0.009x
R2 = 0.5475
i
150 200 250 300
9
Arsenic - Column AB - 35 R
0 40 80
Pore volumes passed
Figure 57: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C—I
120
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 90 mLlg
Kd 100 mLlg
Kd 110 mLlg
51IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500
400
300
200
100
Boron - ColunmAB - 35 R
40 80 120
Pore volumes passed
Figure 58: Boron column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C-3
i B in Effluent
• B in Feed
52IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
5
IKd = 248.3 ml,f'g
4
Cadmium
6
y = 0.12.8lx
y = 0.2483x R2 = 0.042
U 3 R2 = 0-4947
2
0 s Trial A
0 5 10 15 20 25
M
Figure 59: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—B-3
500
400
300
j
200
100
0
0 40 s0
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 60: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C-5
Cadmium - ColumnA13 - 35 R
•
•
• Cd in Effluent
. Cd in Feed
- — Kd 325 mLlg
—Kd 350 mL/g
— Kd 375 mLlg
120
5 3 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Chromium
12
Kd = 3570.4 mLlg
9
nr,
6
y — 3.5704x
• R2 = 0.6392
3
•
0
0.0 0.5 1-0 1.5 2.0
N91L
• Trial C
Figure 61: Chromium batch Kd— AB — 35 R
Q—B-3
500
400
300
c+.
u.
0
200
100
0
0 40 80
Pore volumes passed
Figure 62: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C—I
Molybdenum - Column AB - 35 R
ii •
• •
•
2.5
• Mo in Effluent
• Mo in Feed
— • — Kd 60 mLL/g
Kd 70 mUg
— • — Kd 80 mL/g
120
54IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
5
4
3
U
2
1
0 -
0
Selenium
1.00 200 300 400 500
P9/L
Figure 63: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—B-4
Selenium - Column AB 35 R
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 40 80
Pore volumes passed
Figure 64: Selenium column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C-1
120
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
— Kd 75 n-Llg
—Kd 85 mLlg
— Kd 95 mLlg
55IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Thallium
14
Kd — 334.8 mL/g
12
10
8
as
6
•
4
•
2 •
•
0
0 5 10 15 20
gg/L
Figure 65: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—B-3
500
400
300
200
100
0
25
Thallium - Column AB - 35 R
0 40 s0
Pore volumes passed
Figure 66: Thallium column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C-5
y = 0.3348x
R2 — 0.7141
• Trial C
30 35 40
Tl in Effluent
• Tl in Feed
— • — lid 325 mL/g
Kd 345 mL/g
— • — Kd 365 mL/g
120
56IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium
2
Kd = 6 - 5 mL•.'g
1-5
a� 1
y = 0-0065x
= 0-0064x
0-5 ��• � R2 = 0.2503
• Trial • Trial: B
D
0 50 100 150
A
Figure 67: Vanadium batch Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—B-4
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
Vanadium - Column AB - 35 R
•
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 68: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 35 R
Q—C-1
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
- • - Kd 1001nL1g
Kd 110 mL/g
- - - Kd 1201nUg
120
57IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Arsenic - Column AB - 20 S
500
400
300
a
200
100
1 0
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 69: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C-5
600
500
400
300
ai
200
100
0
0
Boron - Column AB - 20 S
• As in Effluent
• As in Feed
— • — Kd 450 mL/g
Kd 470 mLlg
— — Kd 490 mLlg
200
50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 70: Boron column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C-3
• B in Effluent
• B in Feed
58IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium
6
Kd =183.7 mL.?g
Kd =178.5 mUg
4 —
on y = 0.1827x
Iil'1.1 5.S �1�E'•i•
R2 = 0.9689
Y 4YIt}Yfl -
1,,V1++ y = 0.1785x
R2 = 0.9856
• + Trial A + Trial B
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
9
Figure 71: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—B-3
Cadmium - Column AB - 20 S
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pare voLumes passed
Figure 72: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C-4
• Cd in Effluent
+ Cd in Feed
- Kd 325 mL/g
—Kd 350 mLlg
- Kd 375 mLlg
200
59IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Molybdenum
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
K/L
Figure 73: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—B-3
Molybdenum - Column AB - 20 S
500
400
• Mo in Effluent
300 •' + Mo in Feed
u
� ✓' . ✓' — - — Kd 250 mLlg
� 200 •+ ++++ +• � ✓
✓ • i Kd 275 mL/g
r ✓
✓' — — Kd 300 mLlg
100 --
0 '� •
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 74: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C—I
60IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Kd = 36 mL!g
Kd = 3-7 rnL."g
I
0 1
0.0 0.1
mangsinese
y = 3.6922x
R'= 0.7086
y = 3.5997x
& 0 R= 0.6431
rr a Trial A a Trial B
0-2 0.3 0-4 0.5
M911L
Figure 75: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 20 S
Q-13-4
500
Kd= 12371-0mIJg
Kd = 13,641.0 mL."g
400
300
tw
bb
1-00
100
46
0
0.000 0.010
Figure 76: Iron batch Kd — AB — 20 S
Q-13-1
Iron
y = 13641x
R2 = 06982
2372x
).9815
P Trial A e Trial B
0-020 0.-03,0 0.040
M9/1L
61 IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium - Column AB - 20 S
500
400 r ��• •� �• •
• Se in Effluent
300 o Se in Feed
J
n l•
— • — Kd 330 mLfg
200 �• f Kd 340 mLlg
— — Kd 350 mLlg
100
0 �`+� i�•
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 77: Selenium column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C-4
62IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Th2IIium
8
Kd= 78.3 mL!g
Kd = 75.0 mL:'g
6
•
4 -
y = 0.0783x
R2 = 0.7345 ,.
2
_ y = 0.075x
•• R2=0.8265 •TrialA .Trial
•
0
0 1.0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
1Lg/L
Figure 78: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—B-4
Thallium - Column AB - 20 S
500
400
300
a
a,
F
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 79: Thallium column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C-1
• T1 in Effluent
• Tlin Feed
— • — Kd 190 mL/g
Kd 200 mL/g
— • — Kd 210 mL/g
200
63IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
Vanadium - Column AB - 20 S
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd 420 1nL./g
Kd 440 mLfg
— • — Kd 460 1nLlg
50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 80: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 20 S
Q—C-5
641Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Arsenic - Column AB - 33 S
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore voLurnes passed
Figure 81: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—C-5
600
500
400
a 300
cq
200
100
0L
0
Boron - Column AB - 33 S
•
• As in Effluent
• As in Feed
— • — Kd 550 mLlg
Kd 575 nLlg
— • — Kd 600 nLig
150
50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 82: Boron column Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—C-3
• B in Effluent
. B in Feed
65IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium
5
Kd = 437.1 mL!g
Kd = 419.4 mL.+g
4 v = 0.4371x ,=
R- = 0.942
3 -
tM y = 0.4194x
R2 = 0.9632
2
1
• Trial A • Trial 13
D
0 2 4 6 8 to 12
Ate
Figure 83: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—B-3
500
400
300
a
U
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 84: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—C-5
Cadmium - Column AB - 33 S
• •i
•i
i
•
•• i • •••
• Cd in Effluent
. Cd in Feed
- — Kd 500 mL/g
—Kd 520 mL/g
Kd 540 mL/g
150
66IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
6
4
2
0 -
Molybdenum
Kd = 435.8 mL/g
Kd = 3755 mL.Ig
y = 0.4358x
R 2= 0.9421
y = 03755x
R2 09032
a Trial A o Trial B
0 5 10 15
Aa
Figure 85: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—B-3
Molybdenum - Column AB - 33 S
jUU
400
300
CT
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 86: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—C-4
2D 25
150
• Mo in Effluent
• MoinFeed
Kd 325 mL/g
Kd 350 nlL/g
Kd 375 niL/g
67 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
5
Kd = 3.5 mUg
Kd = 3.4 mLfg
4
3
U
2
1
0.0
• •
Manganese
y = 3.5124x
R.2 = 0.8388 . •
1
y = 3.387x
R.' = 0-8475
a Trial A • Trial B
0_2 0.4 06
mglL
Figure 87: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—B-1
500
400
300
a
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 88: Selenium column Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—C-5
0.8 1.0 1.2
Selenium - Column AB - 33 S
150
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
— Kd 575 mLlg
—Kd 600 mL/g
— Kd 625 mLlg
68IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
r rr
s
Kd= 128-3 mLig
Ind = l 15-? mL!g
6
y =
D.1283x
R2
= 0.9902
bm
y = 0.1152x
0.9692
2
4r.'.
a Trial A Trial B
0
0 10 20
34 40
50 60 70
Pg/1•
Figure 89: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—B-3
Thallium - Column AB - 33 S
500
400
300
F
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 90: Thallium column Kd — AB — 33 S
Q—C-4
• Tl in Effluent
• Tlin Feed
— • — Kd 430 mL/g
Kd 440 mL/g
— • — Kd 450 mL/g
150
69IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
Vanadium. - Column AB - 3 3 S
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd 560 mLfg
Kd 580 mLfg
— • — Kd 600 mLlg
50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 91: Vanadium column 1d — AB — 33 S
Q—C-5
70IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
8
6
i�
4
2
0
0
Arsenic
Kd = 1784.3 mLlg
Kd = 1831.2 mL!g • •
y = 1.8312x
R2 = 08745
y = 1.7843x
R2 = 0_8706..
00
• •
60
1 2 3
ftg/L
Figure 92: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—B-3
Arsenic - Column AB - 34 S
Soo
400
300
a
200
100
0
0 50 100
Fore volumes passed
Figure 93: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-5
• Trial A • Trim B
4 5
150
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 475 mLlg
Kd 500 mLlg
Kd 525 mLlg
71IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Boron
100 200 300
Pg/]L
Figure 94: Boron batch Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—B-4
600
500
400
¢ 300
200
100
0
0
Boron - Colut nAB - 34 S
50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 95: Boron column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-3
• B m Effluent
• B in Feed
400
72IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
3
Ind= 12.0mL?g
Ind = 12.6 mi.,''g
2
0 1
0
Cadmium
•
y=0.0126X :.•'''*' Y=0.012X
Rz = 0.9401 R� = 0.9341
+ Trial A a Trial B
40 so 120 160
LlgAL
Figure 96: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—B-2
Cadmium - Column AB - 34 S
500
•
•
•
400
• • • + • • Cd in Effluent
•
300 — + Cd in Feed
Kd 100 mL�g
200 + ••+•••+ �.
• + i .' Kd 125 mLlg
i ° • — Kd 150 mLlg
100 • �• • •
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 97: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-2
73IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
12
9
3
0
0.0
Chromium
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
ligAL
Figure 98: Chromium batch Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—B-3
20
Kd=1225.7 mL/g
Iron
y = 1225.7x •
15 R2 = 0.8741
•
10
5
i
• • Trial C
0
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014
mg/L
Figure 99: Iron batch Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—B-2
74IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
UNC Charlotte
Mangenese
20
Kd =1.4 mLlg
16
y = 1.4338x
Rz = 0.8059
12
on
on
S
4 — •
0 '
0 2 4 InZ-1
Figure 100: Manganese batch Ka — AB 34 S
Q—B—I
Sao
400
300
0
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 101: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-4
• Trial C
8 10 12
Molybdenum - Column AB - 34 S
• Mo in Effluent
• Mo in Feed
- - Kd 340 mLlg
Kd 360 mLlg
- • - Kd 380 mL/g
150
75IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
Selenium - Column A13 - 34 S
• Se in Effluent
a Se in Feed
— • — Kd 460 mLlg
Kd 480 mLlg
— • — Kd 500 mLlg
50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 102: Selenium column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-5
76IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
Thallium
7
Kd= 60.3 mIJg
6 Kd = 6 1. 0 in g
5
y = 0.061x
R2 = 0.7015
4
3
2
�M
••
1 •—•
••
0
0 20 40 60
ug/L
Figure 103: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—B-3
Thallium - Column AB - 34 S
Sao
400
300
a
a,
F
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 104: Thallium column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-2
UNC Charlotte
Ic
y = 0.0603x
R2 = 0.721
• Trial A • Taal B
80 100
• T1 in Effluent
• Tlin Feed
— — Kd 400 mL/g
Kd 425 mL/g
— • — Kd 450 mL/g
150
77IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
Vanadium - Column AB - 3 4 S
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd 470 mLfg
Kd 490 mLfg
— • — Kd 510 mLlg
50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 105: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 34 S
Q—C-5
78IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
Kd = 518.71n.Llg
Kd = 498.7 inLlg
8
6
4
0
0 2 4
Arsenic
y = 0.5187x
R2 = 0.6686 Y — 0.4987x
R2 = 0.7023
e* • Trial A + Trial B
Figure 106: Arsenic batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—B-3
500
400
300
a
200
100
0
6 8 10 12 14
Pg/L
Arsenic - Column AB - 35 S
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 107: Arsenic column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-5
250
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 725 mL/g
Kd 750 mL/g
Kd 775 mL/g
79IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500
400
300
200
100
Boron - Column AB - 35 S
50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 108: Boron column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-3
• B in Effluent
• B in Feed
80IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium
5
Kd= 63-8 mLrg
Kd = 64"4 mL!g
4 .}
y = 0"0644x
R2 = 0-994 7
3
bf
= 0.0638x
R` = 0.9946
f�
1 �*
. Trial A • Trial B
C}
4 10 24 30 40 50 60 70
A
Figure 109: Cadmium batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—B-3
Cadmium - Column AB - 35 S
500
4D0 •
•
••
•
300
J
200 • •••' • .-��
100
0
D 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 110: Cadmium column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-2
250
• Cd in Effluent
• Cd in Feed
• — Kd 325 mL/g
—Kd 350 mLlg
— Kd 375 mLlg
81IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
ID
8
r,
bb
4
2
Molybdenum
Kd = 511.5 mL!g
Kd = 753.4 mL!g
•
y = (}_7534x y = M 115x
R2 = � .9009 R2=0-9876
+ • . Trial A • Trial B
0
0
5 10 15 20
p
Figure 111: Molybdenum batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—B-3
Molybdenum - Column AB - 35 S
500
•
400 a • •
• Mo in Effluent
•
. J
300 , • Mo in Feed
CT / • - • - Kd 55 mLlg
o
200 • •
/ / • Kd 375 mLlg
/ - Kd 400 mLlg
100
•
f /
0 •'�-�-•
0 50 100 150 200 250
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 112: Molybdenum column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-4
82IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Manganese
30
Kd = 5.1 mL.-g
25
OP
20
4D
en y = 51143x
1-5 R2 = D.4373
y = 51489x
05 • R2 = 0459
a Trial A a Trial B
o-O.
0-00 0.05 0.10 015 0.20 0.25 030 0.35
__rl
Figure 113: Manganese batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q-13-4
Iron
200
Kd = 2176.7 mL.. g
150
v= '1176-7x •
R 2 0.6167
bm
100 ------
50 Z
y = 1652.7x
R2 = 0-1692
a Trial A Trial B
000 002 004 006 008 010 012
mg/L
Figure 114: Iron batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q-13-4
83 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium
10
Kd = 173 5 _" mL?'g
r r
8..........................................................................
6
bf y = 1.7954x
a R� = 0-4241
4
rr _ y = 1.7387x
R2 = il_51 H
2
r r
r r
r r
• Trial A • Trial B
0
0 1 2 3 4
119/]L
Figure 115: Selenium batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—B-3
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 116: Selenium column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-4
Selenium - Column AB - 35 S
it
r
A'
/
I
I:
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
- — Kd 375 mL/g
Kd 400 mL/g
- — Kd 425 mL/g
250
84IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
7
6 -
5
4 -
�n
3
2
1
(}
0
ThaRium
Kd = 63.2 mL/g
Kd = 662 mUz
y = 0.0662x =
R= = 0.9949
_ 0_0632x
R09902
®Tria1A oTria1B
20 40 60 80 100 120
M
Figure 117: Thallium batch Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—B-2
Thallium - Column AB - 35 S
500
400
300
a
a,
F
200
100
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 118: Thallium column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-2
• T1 in Effluent
• Tlin Feed
— • — Kd 450 mL/g
Kd 475 mL/g
— • — Kd 500 miL/g
250
85IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
Allen Steam Station
Vanadium - Column AB - 3 5 S
50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 119: Vanadium column Kd — AB — 35 S
Q—C-5
200
UNC Charlotte
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd 675 mLfg
Kd 700 mLfg
— • — Kd 725 mLlg
250
86IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
4
31
2
M4
Arsenic
Kd = 11.5 mL.19
Kd = 10.1 mLg
y = 0.0115x
R2 = 0-8549 •
y = 0.0101x
• # R2 = 0.7329
Trial A • Trial B
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
..-fw
Figure 120: Arsenic batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—B-4
Arsenic - Column GWA - 'I BR
Soo
400
300
a
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 121: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C—I
150
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 115 mL/g
Kd 125 mLlg
Kd 135 mL/g
87IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500
400
a
300
200
100
0
Boron - Column AB - GWA - 3 BR
ta..00 '
=i!••:12
1
�•
r
1 r
r r
r r
r 1
r� r
1 /
• •
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 122: Boron column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C— 1
Cadmium - Column AB - GNVA - 3 BR
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 123: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C-5
• B in Effluent
• B in Feed
— Kd 60 nL/g
Kd 70 mL/g
— • — Kd 80 mL/g
150
150
Cd in Effluent
Cd in Feed
Kd 340 mL/g
Kd 360 mL/g
Kd 380 mL/g
88IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Molybdenum
denum
10
S
6
bb
r�
2
U
0 5 10 15
AWL
Figure 124: Molybdenum batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—B-3
Molybdenum - Column AB - GWA - 3 BR
500
Go
• •••r • r •• toot*
• •
• • . . •
400 •
300 r r
C
200 • r •
r r
r r'
100
r �
0 iL �
0 50 100
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 125: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C-1
20 25
150
• Mo in Effluent
• Mo in Feed
— Kd 65 mLlg
— Kd 75 mLlg
— Kd 85 mLlg
89IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
ug/L
Figure 126: Selenium batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—B-4
Selenium - Column AB - GWA - 3 BR
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 127: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C-1
150
Se in Effluent
Se in Feed
Kd 90 mL/g
Kd 100 mL/g
Kd 110 mL/g
90IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Thallium
8
IKd= 111_2 mL1g
............................................. . .
on 4 y = 0.1112x ,..• _ _ _. _ _
R2 = 0.5423
2
•
• Trial A • Trial B
0 10 20 30 40 50
1a
Figure 128: Thallium batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—B-3
Thallium - Column AB - GWA - 3 BR
500
400
300
a
a,
F
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore voLum¢es passed
Figure 129: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C-5
• T1 in Effluent
• Tlin Feed
— • — Kd 350 mL/g
Kd 370 ML,/g
— • — Kd 390 mL/g
150
91IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium
12
6
6
3
0
0 20 40 60
A9/L
Figure 130: Vanadium batch Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—B-3
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Vanadium - Column AB - GWA - 3 BR
•• i
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 131: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 3 BR
Q—C— 1
0.1326x
= 0.9999
�= Trial C
80 100
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
- • - Kd 140 mLlg
Kd 150 mL/g
- • - Kd 160 mL/g
150
92IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Arsenic
1 L}
Kd = 2054.5 mL/g
Kd = 2018.5 mL/g
8
6 -
y = 2.0545x
cm R2 = 0.8889
cm
4
•
2
•
•
•
0 1
Figure 132: Arsenic batch Kd — GWA — 7 S
Q—B-3
500
400
300
200
100
0
y = 2_0185x
172 — fti RC?TF
2 3
1
Arsenic - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
••
• Trial A • Trial. B
4 5
•
•
• As in Effluent
• As in Feed
- • — Kd 500 mL/g
Kd 520 mL/g
- • — Kd 540 n►L/g
0 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 133: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-5
93IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
500
400
300
a
Q
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes Passed
Figure 134: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B
Q—C-5
Arsenic - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes Passed
Figure 135: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-5
Arsenic - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
•
r'
• As in Effluent
• As in Feed
- — Kd 500 mLlg
Kd 520 mUg
- • — Kd 540 rnUg
200
200
As in Effluent
As in Feed
Kd 650 nL/g
Kd 675 nUg
Kd 700 mLlg
94IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500 ••
400
~ 300
Boron - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
00
•
•
200 •gar•••''•
•
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pare voLumes passed
Figure 136: Boron column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-3
Boron - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
600
r•r• •r rr• •
500 •• ••• •
•
400 • • •• •
300
200 •+•.••••.•
•
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 137: Boron column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B
Q—C-3
200
200
• B m Effluent
• B in Feed
B in Effluent
+ B in Feed
95IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Boron - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
600
500 • • . —�
• ••• �•' •• r••r'•r•'rr
400 ' ' •
300 • B in Effluent
r
200 •••••••••• •BinFeed
•
100
01
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 138: Boron column Ka — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-3
96IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium
4
Kd = 24.9
nlL.'g
Kd=21.8
3 :nL g !
•
y = 0_024 9x
U RE = 0.827
& 2 y=1_1218x
R0-972
1.
!f
0
4
20 40
Figure 139: Cadmium batch Kd — GWA — 7 S
Q-13-2
500
60 so
u9/L
! Trial A ! Trial $
too 12D 140
Cadmium - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
400 +
40
300 •
200
i i
100 iR • •�+l�r! •��+��r��ir+
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 140: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-2
• Cd in Effluent
! Cd in Feed
- • - Kd 130 mL/g
Kd 145 mL/g
- • - Kd 160 mL/g
200
97IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Cadmium - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
500
.•
400 .. . • •
•
300
200 •.•••
100 OXi! !!!•!••!• !!!•!!!•!•!
i
0-�♦!'• -
0 50 100 150
Pare voLumes passed
Figure 141: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B
Q—C-2
Cadmium - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
500
• Cd in Effluent
• Cd in Feed
- • - Kd 140 mL/g
Kd 150 mL/g
- • - Kd 160 mL/g
200
•
400
••
•' • • • Cd in Effluent
300 • • Cd in Feed
Kd 160 mL/g
200 . • • • •' Kd 175 mL/g
.• r•
' — • — Kd 190 mLlg
. • •
100 •• ••••••••• oeo, •••
0 �- — A_
0 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 142: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-2
981Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
L NC Charlotte
Molybdenum - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
500 •
400 •
• Mo in Effluent
S•
300 Mo in Feed
•r' r — — Kd 240 mL/g
z 200 •• •••• -r--.r
r • Kd 260 mL/g
r
Kd 280 mL/g
100 r �' •
r.
r
r•
0 L •i•••
0 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 143: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-4
Molybdenum - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
500
400
300
a
a.
n.
0
200
N
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 144: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA 7 S Trial B
Q—C-4
• Mo in Effluent
• Mo in Feed
- • — Kd 300 mL/g
Kd 325 mL/g
- • — Kd 350 mL/g
200
99IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Molybdenum - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100 150
Pare voLumes passed
Figure 145: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-4
3D
25
20
15
10
5
A
00
maimganese
02 04 06
-911.
Figure 146: Manganese batch Kd — GWA — 7 S
Q—B—I
• Mo in Effluent
• Mo in Feed
- — Kd 300 mL/g
Kd 325 mL/g
- — Kd 350 mL/g
200
1001Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
500
Selenium - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
400 • ••• ••• so •.•.
•
• Se in Effluent
300 • • Se in Feed
,i
+'• — — Kd 305 mL/g
AD
` 200 *-so
/a i Kd325 mL/g
i — • — Kd 345 mL/g
100
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 147: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-4
Selenium - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
500
400 . ••• . ••
• Se in Effluent
300 . + Se in Feed
• — • — Kd 310 mL/g
200 +••••••• +• Kd325mL/g
W 10
• — — Kd 340 mL/g
100
•
0 i •— -
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 148: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B
Q—C-4
101 (Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
500
400
—
300
200
•+-i—s �=
100
0 •-w •-� �-f•
0 50
• Se in Effluent
• Se in Feed
— — Kd 325 mLlg
Kd 350 mLlg
Kd 375 mLlg
100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 149: Selenium column 1d — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-4
102IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
6b 4
2
Thallium
Kd = 78.3 nL:2g
Kd = 750 mUg
y = 00783x
R 2 = 0.7345
y = 0.075x
R 2 = 08265
00
•
o Trial A o Trial B
to 20 30 40 50 60 70 so
991L
Figure 150: Thallium batch Kd — GWA — 7 S
Q-13-3
Thallium - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
50(
400
0 TI in Effluent
300 • TI in Feed
— - — Kd 400 nil -/a
200 Kd 425 niL/g
— - — Kd 450 mL/g
100
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore voLumes passed
Figure 15 1: Thallium, column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-4
103 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Thallium - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
500
400
• TI in Effluent
300 • Tlin Feed
* • • .... • - • - Kd 425 mL/g
200
Kd 450 mL/g
' I - • - Kd 475 mL/g
100 .' +ram••••
•
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 152: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B
Q—C-4
500
400
300
A
F�
200
100
•
Thallium - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
• ..
• T1 in Effluent
. TI in Feed
- • - Kd 480 nil -,'a
^'.g Kd 500 mL/g
'i••• -•- Kd520mL/g
•
0 •--
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 153: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-4
200
104IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium - Column GWA - 7S Trial A
300
250
200
_ 150
100
50
• V inEffluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd 475 mL/g
Kd 500 mL/g
— • — Kd 525 mL/g
0 • —
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 154: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial A
Q—C-5
300
250
200
Vanadium - Column GWA - 7S Trial B
• • • + • • • V inEffluent
• V in Feed
a
R 150 — .
} — Kd 525 mL/g
•••••"•'•• Kd550mL/g
100
— • — Kd 575 mL/g
50
0 i•
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 155: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial B
Q—C-5
1051Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium - Column GWA - 7S Trial C
300
250
••••• •••• • ••• •
• • • • • • • V inEffluent
200
• V in Feed
_ 150 — .
— Kd 560 mL/g
••••••••••• Kd570mL/g
100
— • — Kd 580 mL/g
50
0
0 50 100 150 200
Pore volumes passed
Figure 156: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 7 S Trial C
Q—C-5
1061Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
UNC Charlotte
Arsenic
10
lid= 206.1 mL:'g
Ind = 220.5 niL g
y = 0 22Q5m
RT = 0.9101
6
bm y = 0.2061m
= Rz = 0.8994
4
2 y`
o- Thal A • Trial B
€} 14 20 30 40
Figure 157: Arsenic batch Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—B-3
Arsenic - Column GWA - 9 S
500
400
300
2
U
d
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 158: Arsenic column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C-4
50
• As in Effluent
+ As in Feed
— • — Kd 240 mL/g
Kd 250 mLlg
— • — Kd 260 mLlg
150
107IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
600
500
400
300
200
100
�aai�i�•�i
a
Boron - Column GWA - 9 S
•••• •• ••• •
eat
•
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 159: Boron column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C-3
150
• B in Effluent
• B in Feed
108IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
6
Kd = 304.4 mL!g
Kd = 322.7 in
H
=L
2
0
5
Cadmium
y = G3227x
R'= 09867
y = 0.3044x
R 2 = 0.9339
@ Trial A * Trial B
Figure 160: Cadmium batch Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—B-3
75
j
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 161: Cadmium column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C-5
10 15 20
AWL
Cadmium - Column GWA - 9 S
150
• Cd in Effluent
CdinFeed
Kd 575 rnL/g
Kd 600 mL/g
Kd 625 mL/g
109 I P a g e

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Molybdenum
7.0
Kd = 57.5 mLfg
6.0
5.0 y = 0.0575x
Rz = 0.9012
4.0
on
3.0 •
2.0
•
1.0 a
• • Trial C
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
ltg/L
Figure 162: Molybdenum batch Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—B-3
Molybdenum - Column GWA - 9 S
500
400 •
•
• Mom Effluent
300 r I • Mo in Feed
- • - Kd 90 mL/g
o �
200
Kd 100 mLlg
i
— • — Kd 110 mLlg
100
0 1" •
0 50 100 150
Pore volumes passed
Figure 163: Molybdenum column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C—I
110IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Selenium
Kd= 51-0 mL1g
Kd = 57-0 mL,'g
6
y = 0.057x
RI = 0,.9245
U
bp 4
= 0.051x
R= = 0.893
•
•!
Trial A - Trial B
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
FOWL
Figure 164: Selenium batch Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—B-2
Selenium - Column GWA - 9 S
500
400 • ••• •++ • •�
• • • • • • • SeinEffluent
300 • • Se in Feed
fl.
J
- - Kd 60 mL/g
• d • : ,
200 • t, . , Kd 75 mL/g
• — — Kd 90 niL/g
100 r
� r
0 . •
0 50 100 150
Pore voCumes passed
Figure 165: Selenium column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C-1
111 (Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
10
Kd= 339.2 mL.-g
Kd= 337_? mL'
8
TMWHIIM
•
y = i)_3392x
bt
y = [}_3372x
R 2 = 0_955
2 -
+ • Trial A • Trial B
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
P
Figure 166: Thallium batch Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—B-3
Thallium - Column GWA - 9 S
500
400
300
•
200
100
• T1 in Effluent
• Tlin Feed
— • — Kd 575 mL/g
Kd 600 mLlg
— • — Kd 625 mLlg
0
0 50 100 150
Fore voCumes passed
Figure 167: Thallium column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C-5
112IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Vanadium
4
Kd = 108.9juLt • '
Kd = 120.3 niUg y = 0.1203x
3 R2 = 09858
a`n 2. Y=0.108 X
•
R2 = 0-9735
1
•
• Tri al A r Tiral R
4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Ply
Figure 168: Vanadium batch Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—B-3
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Vanadium - Column GWA - 9 S
• • •••• • ••• •
0 50 100
Pore volumes passed
Figure 169: Vanadium column Kd — GWA — 9S
Q—C-4
• V in Effluent
• V in Feed
— • — Kd240 mL/g
Kd250 mL/g
— • — Kd260 mL/g
150
113IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
pH vs LA`S
6.35
Trial A Trial B
6-25
6-15
6-05
5-95
5-S-7
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
L `S
Figure 170: pH at varying US ratio for batch Ka testing of AB — 28 D
RP vs LIS
3 77 0
Trial A Trial B
360
350
4U
330
i?0
V 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
LS
Figure 171: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 28 D
114IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
31D
28D
25D
onductvity vs LA`S
i
22
o •
190
• Trial A • Trial B
160
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
US
Figure 172: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 28 D
pH vs L1S
9_Q
a Tri al A w Trial B
8.8
8 6
8.4
8.2 •
8_0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
LDS
Figure 173: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 29 D
1151Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
ORP vs L/S
260
250
240
230
220
210
w Trial A • Trial B
0 20 40 60 80 1DO 120
US
Figure 174: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 29 D
320
290
2{}
23 (}
200
170
C onductivit vs LA'S
8
I
• Trial A a Trial B
0 20 40 64 so 100 120
US
Figure 175: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing o AB — 29 D
1161Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
UNC Charlotte
pH vs L/S
o Trial A *Trial B
5.10
5.05
5_00
4_95
4_90
L/S
Figure 176: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 31 D
CIRP vs L/
420
• Trial A a Trial B
410 #
400 •
390 s
380
370
0 20 40 60 84 1DO 120
L/S
Figure 177: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 31 D
1171Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
onductvity vs LI
1U4
162
160
158
0
15
154
0 20 40 60 80 LGO 120
US
Figure 178: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AB — 31 D
pH vs L/
_2
w Trial A *Trial B
6_0
5.8 •
5_
•
54 •
5.2
0 20 40 60 8o 100 120
US
Figure 179: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 20 S
1181Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
ORP vs Ll
380
w Trial A • Trial B
360
340
3?0
300 •
20
0 ?0 40 60 80 1DO 1.20
US
Figure 180: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 20 S
C onductivit vs LA'S
250
+Trial A r Tr al B
230
210
190
o
170
•
150 L
0 20 40 60 80 100 110
L'S
Figure 181: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 20 S
119IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
pH vs L/S
7_4
Trial A • Trial B
7-2
•
TO
6.8
6i
•
6_4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
US
Figure 182: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 32 S
C3RP vs LIS
30
■ Trial A • Trial S
370
350 s
0 330
310
290
0 20 40 60 80 100 1.20
L/
Figure 183: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 32 S
1201Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
3D
32D
284
24D
0
200
160
onductvity vs LI
•
• Trial A • Trim S
0 20 40 60 80 too 120
US
Figure 184: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 32 S
pH vs L/
4_5
• Trial A *Trial S
4.85
•
4_ 75
4.65
4.55
4.45
0 20 40 60 8o 100 120
US
Figure 185: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 34 S
121 IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
ORP vs L/S
500
w Trial A a Trial B
480
=x 460
- i
440
420
400
0 -)0 40 60 80 1 DO 1.20
US
Figure 186: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 34 S
C onductivit vs LA'S
350
3114
25(}
:200
0
150
*Trial A *Trial B
104
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
LDS
Figure 187: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 34 S
1221Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
UNC Charlotte
pH vsL/
4_95
*Trial A *Trial B
4_90
4_85
4_80
4_75 •
7 0 —.
0 24 40 60 so 100 120
L"S
Figure 188: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 35 S
ORP vs L.'S
410
400
390
0 380
370
360
• Trial A • Trial P
•
4 20 40 60 80 100 120
LS
Figure 189: ORP at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS 35 S
123IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
Conductivity vs L/S
173
a Trial A a Trial B
170
18
165
163
•
L 60
0 20 40 (Y0 80 too 120
LIS
Figure 190: Conductivity at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of AS — 35 S
pH vs LA'S
9.0
*Trial a1 A .* Trial B
8.5
•
8.0 •
M
r.
0
•
6_v
1) 20 40 60 80 100 120
US
Figure 191: pH at varying US ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 3 BR
124IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
305
295
285
0 25
165 •
ORP ors L/S
0
8
0
0
e Trial A • Trial B
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
L/S
Figure 192: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 3 BR
176
174
172
170
0
168
166
Conductivity vs L/S
I
•Trial A *Trial B
0 20 40 60 80 LOO 120
LDS
Figure 193: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 3 BR
1251Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
pH vs LDS
TO
w Trial A *Trial B
•
6.
6.6
•
6.4
6.2
6.0
p 24 40 64 so IDD 12D
US
Figure 194: pH at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 9 S
OP vs L'S
390
30
•
371? •
0 360
•
350
340
■ Trial A a Trial S
•
0 24 40 60 80 100 120
US
Figure 195: ORP at varying L/S ratio for batch Kd testing of GWA — 9 S
1261Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
.M
185
180
175
0
170
15
Conduc" vs L/
0 20 40 60 80 LGO 120
US
Figure 196: Conductivity at varying L/S ratio for batch 1d testing of GWA — 9 S
1271Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation
Allen Steam Station
4316 plots
3 6 9
12
92
9
6
3
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 197: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (2FT)
0 3 6 9 12
400 400
300
a
200
c
O
O
m
100
0
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 198: Boron 1316 AB - 39S (2FT)
•
300
200
100
0
12
UNC Charlotte
1281Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
40
30
Q
CL
c
3 20
0
3 6 9 12
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 199: Molybdenum 1316 AB - 39S (2FT)
20 0 2 4 6
15
CL
10
7
N
d
U3
5
0
12
8 10
20
Trial (A)
15
10
5
fl
0 3 6 9 'fit
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 200: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (2FT)
129IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
4 6 8 10
12
9
6
3
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 201: Vanadium 1316 AB - 39S (2FT)
0 2
12
9
•
Trial
130IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0 2
60
45 •
rL
PL U 30
U)
4 6 8 10
• Trial
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mUg-dry)
Figure 202: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)
0 2 4 6
400
C
•
300
a
E- 200
0
L
MO
W
100 •
0
60
45
30
15
0
12
8 10
400
Trlai (A)
300
200
100
•
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mUg-dry)
Figure 203: Boron 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)
131 (Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0 2
60
45 •
0
4 6 8 10
o
• Trial
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 204: Manganese 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)
0 2 4 6
120
90
a
A
60
a
0
30
0
W
45
30
15
0
12
8 10
20
Trial (A)
90
60
• 30
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 205: Molybdenum 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)
132IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
600
450
2
a
E 300
d
ai
U)
150
0
3 6 9 12
600
450
300
150
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 206: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)
0 3 6 9 12
80
60
M
a
E
40
3
�a
m
c
R
20
0
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 207: Vanadium 1316 AB - 39S (3FT)
• Trial (A)
•
80
60
40
20
0
12
133IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
Q
2
0
3 6 9 12
• Trial
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 208: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (4 — 6FT)
0 3 6 9 12
600 600
450
•
150
0
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 209: Boron 1316 AB - 39S (4 — 6FT)
12
450
300
150
0
134IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
3 6 9 12
0
32
24
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 210: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (4 — 6FT)
32
24
16
8
0
12
1351Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
320
240
2
2 160
N
N
3 6 9 12
320
240
160
80
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 211: Arsenic 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
0 3 6 9 12
$40
630
a
420
c
O
O
m
210
0
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 212: Boron 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
• Trial (A)
$40
630
420
210
0
12
136IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
3 6 9 12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 213: Iron 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
0 3 6 9 12
8D
60
Q
N 40
O
ai
c
m
20
0
4
3
•
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 214: Manganese 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
• Trial (A)
Trial (B)
• Trial (A)
80
60
40
20
0
12
137IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
UNC Charlotte
0 3 6 9 12
200
150
Q
100
c
ar
7.
O
50
0
200
150
100
50
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 215: Molybdenum 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
0 3 6 9 12
360 360
270
2
Q
E
180
d
m
cn
90
0
• Trial (A)
270
180
90
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 216: Selenium 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
•
•
• Trial (A)
•
1381Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
100
75
25
0
3 6 9 12
0 3 6 9
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 217: Vanadium 1316 AB - 39S (53FT)
100
75
50
25
0
12
139IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
16
12
2 8
Q
4
0
3 6 9 12
16
12
8
4
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 218: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (2FT)
p 3 6 9 12
4
00
300
E
200
a
O
100
0
• Trial (A)
Trial (B)
•
•
400
300
200
100
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 219: ORP at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (2FT)
1401Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation
0
—V
330
c�
a
.�,, 220
Allen Steam Station
3 6 9
12
440
330
220
110
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 220: Conductivity at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (2FT)
UNC Charlotte
141 IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0 2
16
12
x 8
C. • • •
4
0
4 6 8 10
16
12
8
4
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 221: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (3FT)
0 2 4 6 8 10
360 360
320
E
280
d
O
240
200
•
• Trial
320
280
240
200
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 222: ORP at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (3FT)
142IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
4 6 8 10
60
45
30
15
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 223: Conductivity at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (3FT)
_U
0 2
60
•
45
30
•
143IPage

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
16
12
2 8
!Z
4
0
3 6 9 12
16
12
8
4
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 224: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (4 - 6FT)
0 3 6 9 12
2
30
240
E
160
a
O
80
0
• Trial (A)
320
240
160
80
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 225: ORP at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (4 - 6FT)
1441Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0 3 6 9 12
160
120
P
c�
a
�
80
w
0
U
40
0
160
120
80
40
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 226: Conductivity at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (4 - 6FT)
1451Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station UNC Charlotte
0
16
12
2 8
!Z
4
0
3 6 9 12
16
12
8
4
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 227: pH at varying L/S ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (53FT)
0 3 6 9 12
2
80
210
E
140
a
O
70
0
• Trial (A)
280
210
140
70
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 228: ORP at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (53FT)
1461Page

Soil Sorption Evaluation Allen Steam Station
0 2 4 6
240
180
c�
a
.�,, 120
U 60
0
8 10
240
180
120
60
0
0 3 6 9 12
L:S Ratio (mLlg-dry)
Figure 229: Conductivity at varying US ratio for 1316 testing of AB - 39S (53FT)
UNC Charlotte
1471Page