Open-fileReport 245
New Mexico Bureau o f Mines
and Mineral Rssources
New MexicoTech
Socorro, NM 87801
ENVIRONMENTAL GEOLOGY OF THE
KEERS ENVIRONMENTAL,
INC.
ASBESTOS
DISPOSAL SITE,
TORRANCE COUNTY, NEW MEXICO
John W. Hawley
Senior Environmental Geologist
July, 1986
Summary
the Keers Environmental,
Inc.
Geologic,
hydrologic,
and soilsconditionsat
Asbestos
Disposal
S i t e i n Torrance County have been reviewed apsa r t
of the
Environmental Geology programs of the New Mexico Bureau of Mines
and
Mineral
Resources, New Mexico Tech,Socorro.
The sanitarylandfilloperationforasbestosdisposalislocatedin
the north
part of Sections 19 and 20, T. 2 N . , R. 8 E. in southern Torrance County about
10 milessoutheastofMountainair
( F i g s . 1-3). The s i t e i s on the summit of the
"West Mesa" areaof northern Chupadera Mesa. This h i g h plateausurfac?, w i t h r o l l i n g
t o h i l l y topography and numerous closeddepressions, i s underlain by a thick(about
1,500 f t ) sequenceofinterbeddedsandstone,siltstone,shale,
ypsum.and
limestone
San
Andres Formations ?Fig. 4 ) . Resistant
of the Permian, Yeso, Glorieta, and
caps
the mesa. A
San Andres limestone, w i t h interbedded gypsum and sandstone,
north-south-trending zone o f structural
deformation,
faulted
or folded down t o
the e a s t , i s locatedjusteastof
the s i t e (Fig. 5). This feature,herecalled
the Monte Prieto-LibertyHillstructural
zone,includes
a number of igneous dikes
and s i l l s .
The regionalwatertable
( t o p of the zone ofground-water
saturation)occurs
i n the GlorietaSandstone
and the gypsiferous Yeso Formation about 500 f e e t below
the mesa s u r f a c ea t the disposal site. Bodiesof"perched"
ground water have been
reported by local residents above theregional
zone ofsaturation,
b u t theselocal
of
ground-wateroccurrencesarenot
documented i n l i t e r a t u r e on the hydrogeology
the area. Cavernous voids and open fracturesoccur
bothabove
and below the water
are very common
t a b l e i n the Chupadera Mesa area.Solution-subsidencedepressions
surface
and a r pe r e s e nat t
the disposal site. The s i t e appears
to
a t the land
be located just southof the d i v i d e thatseparatesregionalground-watwflowsystems
withdischargeareas
i n EstanciaValley(to
the n o r t h ) and Tularosa Basin ( t o the
south).Surface-waterdischarge
a t the s i t e i s intoseverallocalcloyeddepressions
Mesa
(including Brown Lake).
Additional
work i s needed t o
on the summit of West
better document ground-water and surface-water
conditions
i n the
disposal
site
area,particularlyalong
the Monte Prieto-LibertyHillstructural
trenl.
S o i l sa t
the s i t e a r e developed i n a t h i n layer of unconsolidatedgeologic
mixtures of fine sand, s i l t , and c l a yt)h a t
co-rer bedrock of
materials
(mostly
San Andres Formation. Surficialdepositsareprobably
no
more
t h e n 10 t o 15 f t
thick. Pedogenic s o i lp r o f i l e s developed i n the upper 5 t o 6 f e e t of these deposits
are
characterized
by well-developed
horizons
clay
of
and carboyate
(caliche)
i n organic
matter
are
lccally
present.
accumulation.
Surface
horizons
enriched
The published U.S. Soil
Conservation
Service
(USDA) Soil Survey 07 the Torrance
County Area c l e a r l y documents the f a c t h a ts o i l sa t
the Asbestos
Disposal
Site
material
for
have major limitations i n terms
of
p r o v i d i n g a suitable capping
erosion
waste-disposal
trenches.
The s o i l s a r es u s c e p t i b l et o
wind (and water)
and difficult
to
revegetate.
Clay-enriched
horizons
i n most s o i l s of the s i t e
also have h i g h shrink-swell
(and
cracking)
potential
as
soil-moisture
contents
decrease and increase.
The finalsectionof
the report reviews recentresearch a t LosAlamos National
Laboratory (LANL) on the designoftrenchcoversforwasterepositories
i n areas
(climate,
vegetation,
and s o i l st)h aatrve e r syi m i l a r
w i t h surface
conditions
t ot h o s ea t
the Chupadera (West) Mesa site. Furthermore, LANL research on trench
serious disturbanceof
burrowing
covers shows thatthey can be quitevulnerableto
i s here suggested t h a t the soil/gravel/cobble
animals and p l arnoto tIst .
(soil/rock)intrusionbarriertechnology
developed a t Los
Alamos
be used i n trench
covers a t the Keers AsbestosDisposaloperation.Otherwise,long
te-m burial (more
than a few decades) of hazardousmaterial i n the l a n d f i l l cannot be assured.
i
Environmental6eology o f the
Keers Environmental, Inc. AsbetosDisposal
Torrance County, New Mexico
Site,
Introduction
This report summarizes availablegeologic,hydrologic
on the areaof
the Keers Environmental,Inc.AsbestosDisposal
landfill
operation
located
Quivira, i n
S i t ? , asanitary
on Chupadera Mesa between Mountainair and
Gran
southernTorrance
The report
also
includes
a
County.
brief
on the technologyofshallowlandburial
discussionofrecentresearch
with
and soilsinformation
(SLB)
respect
landfill
to trench-cover
design
involving
biointrusion
capillary
barriers.
and
Cited references on general
geology,
hydrclogy,
soils,
i n the attachedbibliography.
and landfilltrench-covertechnologyarelisted
Figures 1, 2, and 3 , areindex maps of landforms and surficialgeologicfeatures
of the l a n d f i l l s i t e area, and Figure 4 i s ageneralizedgeologiccrosssection
s i t e area from the vicinity of Gran Quivira
extendingsouthtonorththroughthe
on Chupadera Mesa totheEstanciaValleynearEstancia.Figure
5 is a more
the disposal
site
area
detailed
hydrogeologic
cross
section
through
(Fig.
2).
This study i s based on currentresearch
the s t a t e environmentalgeology
aspartof
of Mines and Mineral
Resources
by theauthor
program of the New Mexico Bureau
(Hawley and Love, 1981) and on previous work
(1962-1977) when he serveda,sArealGeologist
Investigations d i v i s i o n of the U.
f o r t h ? S o i l Survey
Soil
Conservation
Service
S.
of the Desert Soil-Geomorphology P r o j e c ta t
et. al.
i n Torrance County (1977-1986)
and Leader
New Mexico StateUniversity(Gile
1981).
Landforms and Topographic Features
The asbestos
disposal
19
and
the northwestquarter
s i t e i s located i n the northern
half
of Section
of Section 20 Township 2 North, Rmge 8East,
1
Mesa Draw Quadrangle(7.5minute
1972).
series, topographic, U. S. GeologicalSurvey,
of a broadupland
The s i t e i s on the r o l l i n gt oh i l l ys u r f a c e
designated Chupadera Mesa.
the disposal s i t e , steep
Several
miles
north
of
by canyons and draws form the northern
escarpment
north-facing
slopes
cut
of the mesa and the southern border o f theEstanciaValley
(Fig. 1).
of the disposal s i t e the summit area
of
inmediate
vicinity
plain
is designated West Mesa (Figs. 1 and 2 ) .
In the
Ckupadera Mesa
This upland area i s separated from
the northeastern prong of Chupadera Mesa (Mesa de 10s Jumanos) by Liberty
Valley and Gooch Flats.
The 200 t o 250-ft,
separates West Mesa and LibertyValley
end of major
a
5; Woodward e t al.,1978).
zone t h a ot f f s e t s
the surfaceof
units down t o the e a s t (Figs. 1, 2, and
This structuralfeatureincludes
the "Monte Prieto
scuthward
past
and others (1946, p. 10, 4 4 ) , which extends
bluff"
of
Bates
Gran QuiviraintoSocorro
Hillstructural
The
i s near the northern
a t LibertyHill
s t r u c t u r a (l f a u l ot rf o l d )
Chupadera Mesa and underlying
rock
north-trending escarpment t h a t
County.
I t i s herecalled
the Monte P,-ieto-Liberty
zone.
summit area
of
i s characterized
West Mesa
by numrrous
closed
by deep loamy soils (discussed below) ard low h i l l s
depressions
underlain
and ridges capped w i t h limestone, gypsite, and sandstone bedrock (Figs. 2-5).
Solution
subsidence
features
associated
with
subsurface
dissolution
of
gypsiferous and carbonate bedrock units a r e the dominant landforms of mesa
summit area.
Active
sinkholes
associated
within one mileof
the disposal site.
i n the bottoms
of
draws and closeddepressionstonearly
highest ridge c r e s t s .
Elevationsrange
from 6,625-6,630 f e e t
6,800 f e e t on the
A low drainage d i v i d e a t about 6,655-6,660 feet elevation
(estimated from topographic maps, Fig.
3)
separates
the
closec'
basin
area
a t the disposal s i t e from the Chavez Draw system that drains north
Valley.
that
runoff
Local residents report
the s i t e flowsinto
present
w i t h cavernous
voids
are
Brown
Lake
from very
large
rainstorms
basin, which i s locatedto
Highway 14.
2
i n t o Estancia
at
the soufhwestacross
Bedrock Geology and Hydrogeology
The summit of Chupadera Mesa ( F i g s . 4 and 5) i s capped w i t h the lower
(limestone) member of the San Andres Formation (Bates e t a l . ,
u n i t i s a s much as 250 f t thick and
This
rock
1946; Smith, 1957).
e ta l . ,
massive white gypsum, and white
consists of finely
crystalline
limestone,
t o yellow
sandstone.
1947; Wilpolt
on the sumit of West Mesa
Much of the localrelief
gypsum beds i n the San Andres and underlying
i s produced by dissolutionof
Yeso Formations.
member of the San Andl-es Formation
The GlorietaSandstone(basalsandstone
on older maps) is a white t o yellowsandstone,
i s usually well cemented.
from 150 t o 280 f t t h i c k ,t h a t
I t may be highlyfractured
or jointed i n the v i c i n i t y
of f a u l t zones,
igneous
intrusive
bodies,
or
areas
in the underlying Yeso Formation.
the northernescarpmentof
of solution
subsidence
The Glorieta
Sandstone
crops
out
along
Chupadera Mesa southofWillard
and i t underlies Chupadera Mesa (Figs. 4 and 5).
( t o p of zone of ground-water saturation)occursnear
and Mountainair,
The regional
water
table
the baseof
the Glorieta
i n the s i t e area and about 500 feet below the West Mesa surface; however,
local
perched
zones
of
particularly
saturation
probably
occur
i n areas of
overlying
rocks,
in
ground-water
recharge
beneath
draws and closed
depressions that collect surface runoff.
The next lower
rock
u n i t i n the 'stratigraphicsuccession
disposal
5 ) , and the main aquifer i n the asbestos
(Figs. 4 and
s i t e a r e ai,s
the Yeso
e t a l . , 1947; Hunter aidIngersoll ,
Formation.
The Yeso Formation ranges(Bates
1981)
from
600 t o 1,000 f e e t i n thickness and includes beds of
orange-red,
b u f f and yellow
sandstone,
and gray
limestone.
white togray
gypsum, p i n k and graysiltstone,
The upper 100 t o 200 f e e t of
the
formation
comprises
(1) a s i l t s t o n e and sandstone u n i t , the Joyita Member, which i s transitional
w i t h the
overlying
Glorieta
Sandstone,
and ( 2 ) thick
a basal
the Canas Gypsum Member, w i t h t h i n beds of siltstone,sandstone,
Much of this member may be l o c a l l y missing due to dissolution of
3
gypsum layer,
aqd limestone.
gypsum.
The maiakody
of the Ye.x Formation, the Torres Member is an interbedded
sequence of sandstone,siltstone,limestone,
and gypsum350
t o 600 f e e tt h i c k .
This member i s underlain by about 100 t o 200 f e e t ofsandstone
and minor shale,
the Meseta Blanca Sandstone Member, which r e s t s conformably on dark-redshale
and sandstone of Abo Foramtion.
The Yeso Formation is the oldestpartof
t h a t i s exposed i n the north
escarpment
of
north(Willard-Estanciaarea),
andwindblown
the sequenceof
Permian rocks
Chupadera Mesa (Fig. 4 ) .
the formationextends
(eolian)depositsthatcover
To the
under thealluvial,lake,
the f l o o r of EstanciaValley
(Smith,
not discussed
this
in
1957; Titus, 1973).
Underlying
formations,
report,
b u t i l l u s t r a t e d i n Figures 4 and 5, include the (1) Abo and Bursum Formations
(mostly red shales and sandstones)ofearly
and sandstones of Pennsylvanianage
( 3 )c r y s t a l l i n e
Permian age, (2) limestone,shales,
(Madera
Group
and
metamorphic rocks of Precambrianage
SandiaFormation),
and
(Foster and S t i p p , 1961).
These rocks have n o t been penetrated by water wells on Chupade-a
Mesa,
but
they have been explored by a few o i l t e s t holes.
Recent o i l tests indicate
Sandia)
formations
t h a t the Paleozoic (San Andres to
above the Precambrian
rocksare
more than 4,000 f t thick (Figs. 4 and 5 ) .
Limestonesof
the Madera
Group form the major aquifer on the westslopeofEstanciaValley(eastslope
of the Manzano and SandiaMountains)northofEstancia(Jenkins,
1982; Titus,
1980); however, these rocksprobablycontainground-waterofvery
poor quality
in the Chupadera Mesa area.
trend,
here called the Monte P-ieto-Liberty
Hill
structural
zone,
is located
about
one mile e a s t of the disposal s i t e
(Figs. 1, 2, and 5).
The San Andres Foramtion is t i l t e dt o
A north-south
structural
the eastalong
(dikes and s i l l s ) of middle Tertiary
this zone, and intrusiveigneousrocks
age a r e present along the escarpment between Liberty
Hill
(Bates, e t a l . , 1947; Wilpolt, e ta l . ,
1946).
and Monte Prieto
These igneousbodies
have been
the San Andres and underlying
injectedalongdeep-seatedfacturesystemsinto
4
formations.
Woodward and others (1978) map the Monte Prieto-Literty
Hill
s t r u c t u r a l zone a s the surfaceexpression
zone t h a to f f s e t s
of major
a down-to-the-east
Precambrian and Paleozoicrocksacrosssouthern
Bates and others (1947, p.
Chupadera Mesa.
fault
and central
this structural
44) i n f etrh a t
trend may extend intothesoutheasternEstanciaValleyacross
an area of folded
rocks a t the north edge of Chupadera Mesa.
Hydrology
The asbestosdisposal
s i t e i s locatednear
the surface-water d i v i d e on
West Mesa and i s probably just southofasubsurface
Both these dividesseparatesurface
ground-waterflowsystem.
flowsthatdrain
d i v i d e i n the regional
northward i n t o the EstanciaValley
and subsurface
and southward toclosed
basins of the Chupadera Mesa surface and u l t i m a t e l yt o
the Tularosa Basin
ground-watersystem.
The main reference on ground-water resourcesofsouthernTorrance
i s the 1957 report by R. E. Smith.
Geological
Survey
study of potentialfuture
a1
.,
on ground-water
flow
systems
i n the Chupadera Mesa area have been reviewed recently by
and waterquality
the U. S.
Basicdata
County
1984; Brady e ta l . ,
and the NMBM&MR s t a f fasps a r t
sites forradioactive
1984; and
Thompson
regional
of
a
et
waste
disposal
(Bedinger
e t a l . , 1984).
modern
used i n the above c i t e d studies were replotted on
Water-well
data
topographic maps
f o r t h i s report (Figs. 2 , 3 ) , and tentativecorrectionsofwater-tablecontours
have
been
made f o r
published
maps
(Smith,
Ground-water flow i n the GlorietaSandstone
theasbestosdisposal
1957;
Brady e t
.
a1 , 1984).
and Yeso Formation aquifer below
s i t e , using the correctedwaterlevels,
is southeastward
toward LibertyValley and Gooch Flat and southward i n t o the Gran Quivira-Claunch
areaof
Chupadera Mesa (NE SocorroCounty).
i s s i m i l atro
The regional southwardflowpattern
the more generalized
interpretations
of
water-level
data
However, on the basisofwater-level
Smith (1957) and Brady and others(1984).
5
by
corrections made i n the present study, a local
ground-water
trough
noted i n the Liberty Valley-Gran Quiviraarea
i n the regionalwatertable
This trough
(Figs. 1, 2, 5).
may reflect higher hydraulic conductivity associated
increased
fracturing
with
has been
the north-trending,
and dissolution
along
Prieto-Liberty
Hill
'structural
I t i s possible
that
zone.
Monte
some ground-water
discharge from Estancia Valley moves along this zone.
Reports by residents of the s i t e area(5/28/86)indicate
present above the regionalwatertable
ofsaturationare
i n the
and basal San Andres Formation) and the ridges or mounds
i n the regionalwatertablenear
the s i t e ( F i g . 2; Smith, 1957) indicatethat
the northern end of Chupadera Mesa (West and
Jumanos
areas of
and theGlorieta-Yeso
These reports of perched ground water
(probably
Formation aquifer.
GlorietaSandstone
Ferched
zones
Mesas) ircludeslocal
ground-water recharge.
been
No detailed
study
of
water-well
or
other
subsurface
records
has
made i n the areasince
the e a r l y 1950's, so generalconclusions
s t i l l remain t o be documented on a s i t e - s p e c i f i c
conditionspresentedherein
basis.
However,
d r i l l e r s i n the area
concur
geologists and well
Mesa (San Andres-Yeso sequence, Figs. 4 and 5).
and subsurfacefeatures
of integrated surface drainage, active
(e.g.
closeddepressions,lack
sink holes, and cavernsor o7en fractures
caused by the dissolutionofverysolublp
less
soluble
limestone
beds
in
Chupadera
They agree on the common
i n subsurface)thatare
subsidenceofoverlying
on one
the geologicformationsthatcap
significantpointwithrespectto
occurrenceofsurface
on ground-water
gypsum
and
the San Andres and Yeso For-nations, and
beds into voids created
by such dissolution.
Sol 1s
Soilsof
the disposal s i t e area, and elsewhere i n TorranceCounty,
been mapped and characterized i n detailaspartof
of the Torrance
area
(Bourlier,
Neher e t a l . ,
6
the publishelSoil
1970).
have
Survey
The unconsolidated
form theparentmaterialsforthedeepersoils
depositsthat
and i n most other parts of
Chupadera Mesa, are primarily wind-deposited mixtures
si1 t s , and claysthat
of finesands,
mass
movement
on
havebeen
reworked by runningwater
on thefloorsofcloseddepressions.Gravelly
locallypresentnearthe
baseof
sediment!: arealso
hillslopesortheyoccuraswidelyscattered
remnantsofancientalluvialdeposits(Tertiaryage)laid
ofthepresent
bedrock ofthe
ofthe
down beforeformation
mesa uplands (Hawley, 1984).
These s u r f i c i adl e p o s i t s
Mesa (Fig.
form a t h i n ,
b u t f a i r l y continuous
veneer
San Andres Formation that caps the
3).
WestMesa
Limestone and some sandstone beds form theridges
in
( b u t rarely
exceeding
i n valley and basinareasof
West
Mesa,
such
being utilized for asbestos disposal.
Local
erosion-sedimentation,
accumulation
organic
ofmatter,
of time, and under semiarid
climatic
conditions,
s o i l s on s t a b l es u r f a c e s( p l a c e sl i t t l ea f f e c t e d
by erosionorsedinentation)
by s o f t upper
horizons
of
organic
matter
accumulation,
underlying
horizons
of
clay
enrichment,
carboanteaccumulation(softto
--
have produced a d i s t i n c t
i n s o i l s of thearea.Profilesofwell-developed
s e t of pedogenic
horizons
are
characterized
and
on or throughthesesurficialdepositsoverlongspans
i n f i l t r a t i o n ofwater
cemented
and
knobs
t h i n orabsent
such places.
Relatively
thick
unconsolidated
deposits
10 t o 15 f t i n thickness)occur
on
section of Chupadera
mesa summit, and unconsolidateddepositsarevery
as the site
and
T h i n localized,
playa-lake
deposits
s t e e p ehri sl l o p e s .
arepresent
on
West
Mesa,
indurated).
and
basal
horizons
hard c a l i c h et h a tl o c a l l y
On surfaces
subject
to
of
may
be
secondary
irreversably
wind or water
erosion
the
CdXWCiie
upper partoftheprofile
may
be
exposed a tt h e
i s truncated and the,,*-enriched
ground surface.
much i f any s o i lp r o f i l e
on f l o o r s
Areasofrapidsedimentation
ofvalleysorcloseddepressionsusuallycontain
texture from sand and g r a v e lt os i l t
( c a l i c h e ) zone
young deposits
ranging
and clay.
These deposits do
nj3t
development exceptforsurfacehorizonsoforganic
matter accumulation.
7
in
exhibit
Sheet 98 (northwestcorner)
Neher e ta l . ,
a tt h eS i t e
of theTorrance
Area SoilSurvey(Bourlier,
mapping units
1970) includestheasbestosdisposalsite.Soil
( F i g . 3) includethreephases
of theWittSoilSeries,
which cover
most ofthearea,
and one phase of thePenistajaSeries.
u n i t alsoincludes
unnamed, fine-grainedsoils
closed
depressions
and draws, which a r e commonly subjecttofloodingafter
intense rainfall events or episodes of rapid
The Witt mapping
on thefloorsofsev"?ral
snow melt.
(map units
Relatively uneroded phases of the Witt and Penistajaseries
Wp-Witt loam
and
complete
Pg-Penistaja
fine
sandy
s opirlo f i l e s
the
with
small
loam, b o t h 1-6% slope
range)
downward
sequence
of
have
organic-enriched,
clay-enriched, and carbonate-enriched(caliche)horizons.Soilsaregenerally
deep (more than 60 inchesthick),
s o i l s may overlielimestone
Eroded phasesofthe
b u t theslightlycoarser-texturedPenistaja
or sandstone bedrock a t depthsof
Witt Series (map units Wo-Witt clay loam 0-1% slopes,
and Wr-Witt clay loam 1-6% slopes)arethe
Site (Fig. 3).
40 t o 60 inches.
Wind and watererosion
dominant soils a t h e
Disposal
(some occurring d u r i n g and sincethe
dry-farming e r a ) have truncated upper parts of these soils,
and thelaydsurface
i s now atthelevelofthehorizonsofclayorcarbonate(caliche)accumulation.
Slightly
undulating
topography
redeposition of wind-eroded
is
produced
wind
erosion
by rainstorm
or
usesfor
.
of s o i l sn, o t
and w i l d l i f e management, b u t a l s o for engineering
11 (Engineering
Interpretations,
which s o i l s may
be
snow-melt runoff
Neher e t a1 , 1970) includes
much information ( i n t e x t and t a b l e s ) on use and
management'
uses.
Table
local
i n map u n i t Wr.
The Torrance Area SoilSurvey(Bourlier,
only for agricultural, range,
and
As noted
previously,
several
large
material.
depressions
that
are
subject
to
flooding
are also present, particularly
by
p.
98, 104) l i s t s major
land
s u i t a b l e or have seriouslimitations.
and Penistaja
soils
of
the
Asbestos
Disposal
Site
clearly
i n terms of being
suitable
for
safe
landfill
disposal
operations.
a
The Witt
have limitations
All the
mapping units a t the s i t e have potentialfor
been affected by) wind erosion.
(and show clearevidenceof
In addition, the eroded phases
of
Series (Wo, Wr-Witt clay loam,0-6%
having
the Witt
slopes)containhorizonsofclayenrichment
t h a t have h i g h shrink-swellpotential(indicatingpresence
of expansiveclays
of the smectite group and tendency f o r soils toseverelycrack
when dry).
these s o i l s , which cover most of the
Table 11 ( p . 104) a l s oi n d i c a t e st h a t
Disposal S i t e , a r e " d i f f i c u l t t o v e g e t a t e . "
Biointrusion and Capillary Barriers in
TrenchCovers
Laboratory
Research during the past decade a t Los Alamos National
the Hanford Reservationincentral
Washington hasdemonstrated
processes (e.g. burrowing animals,plantrootactivity)
adverseeffect
The research
at
disposal
activity
i n the
thatbiological
can have a significant
i n an arid/semiarid
on theintegrityofwaste-sitetrenchcovers
environment (Hakonson,1986;
and
Hakonson e t a l . , 1982,1983;
Nyhan e t a l . ,
1986).
Los Alamos i s p a r t i c u l a r l y pertinent t o ongoin?
asbestos
While underlying bedrock units differ
on Chupadera Mesa.
and West Mesa areas
(volcaric
respective
Pajarito
Plateau
versus
sedimentary
rocks),
surficial
deposits,
soils,
grassland-pinon-juniper
communities, localclimaticconditions,
similar.
and elevationof
Animal burrows (e.g. gophers, prairiedogs,
both areasare
quite
and badgers)are
common
features i n s o i l s of the s i t e area.
The topsoil/gravel/cobble
trench
caps
designed and developed f o r use
(Hakonson e t a l . ,
atfull-scaleradioactivewastedisposaloperations
and Nyhan e t a l . , 1986) a r ea l s oi d e a l l y
as the asbestosdisposaloperation
suited for capping l a n d f i l l s such
i n question.
Not only do such trenchcaps
limit
biological
intrusion
into
shallowly-buried
hazardous
mate-ial,
research by
Nyhan
and others (1986)also
( w i t h no i n t e r s t i t i a l
fines--silt,
but
shows thatcoarse-grainedmaterials
clay, and fine
sand)
placed
a5
9
LA.
1986;
a cover
on o r envelope around the upper p a r t
a c ta s
o f a waste-disposal
t o soil waterthat
a c a p i l l a r yb a r r i e r
(SLB) trench can
might otherwise move i n t o and
possibly through the buried wastes.
The recent
cited
research
at
Los Alamos
and
long-term
studies
by the
author (and SCS, USSA a s s o c i a t e s ) on desert
soil-geomorphic
relationships
( G i leaetl . ,
recommended
by
1981) indicate
that
neither
the
trench-capping
procedures
theState
Environmental Improvement Divisionnorthoseplanned
by Keers Environmental,
Inc.
fortheasbestosdisposaloperationinquestion
will be adequate t o prevent
exposure
A
combination
of
of trenchcontentstotheatmosphere.
natural
processes,
including
soil
cracking,
biological
i n t r u s i o n , and wind and water erosion, can readily expose the hazardous contents
o f thedisposaltrenches
i n short spansoftime(one
caps using thedesigntechnologydeveloped
Gravel
a t Los Alamos NationalLaboratory
and moisture intrusion,
would provide
not
only
barriers
against
biological
b u t such coarse-grained
caps
tothreedecades).
would
be
completelyresistantto
and reasonably resistant t o water erosion.
10
wind erosion
Bibliography
References on General and Environmental Geology
Bates, R. L., Wilpolt, R. H., MacAlpin, A. J . , and Vorbe, G . , 1947, Geology
New Mexico
Bureau
of Mines and Mineral
of Gran Quivira
quadrangle:
Resources,Bulletin 26, 52 p.
Foster, R. W., and Stipp, T. W., 1961, Preliminary
geologic
an"l r e l i e f map
o f the Precambrian
rocks
i n New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines
and
MineralResources, Circular 57, p. 35.
Hawley, J. W., 1984, The Ogallala Formation i n eastern New Mexico, &
I
G. A.
Whetstone ( e d . ) , Proceedings
of
the Ogallala
Aquifer
Sympcsium: Texas
Tech University Water ResourcesCenter, p. 157-175.
Hawley, J. W., and
Love,
D. W., 1981, Overview of
geology
arse l a t e tdo
environmental
concerns
i n New Mexico: New Mexico Geological
Society,
SpecialPublication No. 10, p . 1-10.
Hunter, J. C . , and Ingersoll, R. V., 1981, Canas Gypsum
Member of Y~?soFormation
(Permian) i n New Mexico: New Mexico Geology, v 3, no. 4, p. 43-53.
Machette, M. N . , 1978, Preliminarygeologic
map of the Socorro 1'
Survey
Open-File
Report
rangle, New Mexico: U. s. Geological
scale 1:250,DOO.
x '2 quad78-607,
Wilpolt, R. H., MacAlpin, A. J . , Bates, R. L . , and Vorbe, G., 1946, Geologic
o f Paleozoic
rocksof
the rloyita Hills,
map and stratigraphicsections
Los Pinos
Mountains,
and northern Chupadera Mesa, Valencia,
Torrance,
and Socorro
Counties,
New Mexico: U . S. Geological
Survey,
Oil and Gas
InvestigationsPreliminary Map 61, scale 1:62,500.
Woodward, L. A., Callender, J. F., Seager, W. R., and others, 1978, Tectonic
map of the Rio Grande r i f t region i n New Mexico, Chihuahua, and Texas,
Sheet 2, i n Guidebook t o .Rio Grande r i f t i n New Mexico end Colorado:
New MexicoBureauof Mines and MineralResources,Circular
163.
References on Hydrology and Hydrogeology
Bedinger, M. S., Sargent, K. A., and others, 1984, Studies of geology and
Southwestern
Urited S t a t e s ,
hydrology i n the Basin and Range Province,
of high-levelradioactivewaste;basisofcha-acterization
f o ri s o l a t i o n
and evaluation: U. S. Geological
Survey,
Professional
Pape- 1370-A ( i n
press), Open-FileReport 84-738, 189p.
Bedinger, M. S., Sargent, K. A., and Langer, W. H., 1984, Studies of geology
and hydrology i n the Basin and Range Province,Southwestern United S t a t e s ,
for
isolation
of
high-level
radioactive
waste;
characterization
of the
Rio Grande region, New Mexico
and
Texas:
U . S. Geological
Survey,
ProfessionalPaper 1370-C ( i n press), Open-File Report 84-740, 148p.
Brady, B. T . , Mulvihill , D. H . , Hart, D. L., J r . , and Langer, W. H., 1984,
Maps showing ground-water l e v e l s , springs, and depth t o cround water,
U. S. Geolog'cal
Survey,
Basin and Range province, New Mexico:
Water-Resources Investigation Report 83-4118-8.
11
Jenkins, D. N., 1982,Geohydrologyof
the Madera Group, westernEstanciaBasin,
New Mexico:
New Mexico Geological
Society
Guidebook, 33rd Field
Conference, p. 361-366.
S m i t h , R. E . , 1957, Geology and Ground-water resources of Torrance County,
New Mexico: New MexicoBureau of Minesand Mineral Resources, Ground-Water
Report5, 186 p.
Thompson, T. H., Chappell, R . , and Hart, D. L . , J r . , 1984, Maps showing distributionofdissolvedsolids
and dominantchemical
type i n ground water,
U. S. Geological
Survey,
Basin and Range province, New Mexico:
Water-Resource Investigations Report 83-4118-C.
Titus, F. B . , 1973, Hydrogeologicevolution of EstanciaValley,
a closedbasin
i n central New Mexico: New Mexico
Bureau
of Mines
and
Mineral Resources,
Open-FileReport 69, 223 p.
Titus, F. B . , 1980, Ground water i n the
Sandia
and
Manzano
Mcuntains, New
and
Mineral Resources,
Hydrologic
Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines
Report5, 66 p.
soils
Bourlier, B. G., Neher, R. E . , and others, 1970, SoilSurveyoftheTorrance
Area, New Mexico: U. S. Department of
Agriculture,
Soil
Conservation
U. S. Government P r i n t i n g Office, Washington,
Service and ForestService:
D. C. 20402, 149 p . , 120 soilsurveysheets,scale
1:31,680.
Gile, L. H., Hawley, J. W . , andGrossman,
R. B., 1981, S o i l s and geomorphology
i n the Basin and
Ranae
area
of
southern
New Mexico--Guidebook t ot h e
DesertProject:
New Mexico
Bureau
of Mines
and
Mineral Resources, Memoir
39, 222 p.
Trench Covers, and Biointrusion and Capillary Barriers
Hakonson, T. E . , 1986, Evaluation of geologicmaterialstolimitbiological
intrusion
into
low-level
radioactive
waste
disposal
sites:
Los
Alamos
NationalLaboratory,Publication
LA-10286-MS, 91 p.
Hakonson, T. E., Lane, L. J . , Steger, J. G . , DePoorter, G. L., 1982, Some
i n t e r a c t i v ef a c t o r s affectingtrenchcoverintegrity
on low-levelwastes,
i n M. G. Yalcintas(compiler),
Symposium
on
low-levelwaste
disposal,
Proceedings Volume 2:
Oak Ridge National
Laboratory,
NUREG/CPOO28,
CONF-820674, V . 2.
Hakonson, T. E., Martinez,J.
.waste
burial
site
cover
6, P. 868-87 1.
L., White, G. C . , 1982, Disturbanceof alow-level
by pocket
gophers:
Heath Physics, v. 42, no.
Nyhan, J . W., Abeele, W., Hakonson, T. E., Lopez, E. A . , 198€,
Technology
of w a s t er e p o s i t o r i e asat r i ds i t e sf:i e l d
development forthedesign
studies
of
biointrusion
and c a p i l l a rbya r r i e r s :
Los Alaaos
National
Laboratory,Publication LA-10574-MS,50
p.
12
F i g u r e 1. Index map t o a s b e s t o s d i s p o s a l s i t e (A D S i t e ) area',.:':-'.,, .
7/&6'
m
,
I.
30x60 W
U
T
E SERIYS (TOPOGRAPHIC]
S
C h u p a ' d e r a mesa
Figure 4.
Estancia
Diagrammatic geologic cross section of asbestosdisposal
site (ALI S i t e ) area from Gran Quivira on ChupaderaMesa
to Estancia.in Estancia Valley
(DRAFT 7/86 JWE)
N
V o. l I ey
-"
-
1,000
"1,000
- -
MSL 0
-
0
"
"
-0
I
+I--
Figure 5.
1
7152
2
,
3
4
I
1
5 M;(-
8.3X Verfical
~~~ggmikhn
Diagrammatic geologic c r o s s section'of'asbestos site area
fr'om West Mesa to LibertyValley. Preliminary interp7etations
oil test holes based only on scout card data.
7/86 JWH)
(e