.dtes Office of Acid Deposition, EPA/600/9-88/006
nental Protection Environmental Monitoring and March 1988
Quality Assurance
Washington DC 20460
Research and Development
&EPA Research Activity
Descriptors
FY88
-------
Research Activity Descriptors
FY 88
October 1987 - September 1988
A Contribution to the
National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Acid Deposition and Atmospheric Research Division
Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC 20460
Environmental Research Laboratory - Corvallis, OR 97333
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Las Vegas, NV 89114
Environmental Research Laboratory - Duluth, MN 55804
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Cincinnati, OH 45268
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Atmospheric Sciences Research Laboratory - Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
U.S. Fnvlronmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (5PL-16)
230 S. Dearborn St-eet, Room IG70
Chicago, iL 60604
-------
NOTICE
This document, which describes the research strategy and ongoing and proposed activities for
the Aquatic Effects Research Program (AERP), was prepared for distribution through the AERP
Technology Transfer Program. Every effort has been made to ensure that the content of this
document is consistent with the current research program plans; the exact content of the
descriptions, however, is subject to change as new information is received from AERP Program
Managers. Therefore, the information contained herein should not be considered final. The
information in this document is to be updated on an annual basis to reflect the most current
program plans. In addition, because the authors were instructed to limit the length of the
summaries to one page, the descriptions do not contain a lot of detailed information The reader is
encouraged to contact key individuals (as designated on each research activity summary) for more
specific information.
in
-------
PREFACE
This document has been prepared to provide scientists and administrators, both within and
outside the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the most current information on the research
strategy in the Aquatic Effects Research Program (AERP) and the projects contributing to that
strategy. The AERP is a program within the Acid Deposition and Atmospheric Research Division of
the Office of Ecological Processes and Effects Research within the Environmental Protection Agency's
Office of Research and Development- The AERP also is part of the National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program (NAPAP), a research program comprised of seven federal agencies for which the
Environmental Protection Agency is the lead.
The materials contained herein represent a brief description ofnAERP research activities
funded in FY1987 and FY1988 and those proposed for funding in FY1989. For information on
currently funded research, the technical contact indicated on each summary should be consulted.
For information on activities that are proposed (indicated as such in the "status" category on each
description), or on the AERP in general, contact:
Rick A. Linthurst
Director, Aquatic Effects Research Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Drop 39
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919)541-4048
-------
ABSTRACT
The Aquatic Effects Research Program was developed to determine the effects of acidic
deposition on surface waters of the United States. The program focuses on four policy questions:
(1) What is the extent and magnitude of past change attributable to acidic deposition? (2) What
change is expected in the future under various deposition scenarios? (3) What is the target loading
below which change would not be expected? (4) What is the rate of recovery if deposition
decreases? The goal of the program is to characterize and quantify with known certainty the
subpopulation of surface waters that will respond chemically to current and changing acidic
deposition and to determine the biological significance of observed or predicted changes. The
Aquatic Effects Research Program has five major component programs designed to increase
understanding of long-term acidification: the National Surface Water Survey, the Direct/Delayed
Response Project, Watershed Processes and Manipulations, Long-Term Monitoring, and Indirect
Human Health Effects. Short-term acidification is being addressed through the Episodic Response
Project, and issues of both chronic and acute acidification are addressed through Biologically
Relevant Chemistry. The results of these eight programs will be used collectively in the Synthesis and
Integration Program, designed to provide information that allows (1) the policy questions to be
addressed quantitatively and (2) the AERP goal to be satisfied.
Critical issues for the future include (1) contributing to the 1990 goal of the National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program to assess the effects of acidic deposition on surface waters in the
United States, (2) implementing research to verify model predictions relating to future effects of
acidic deposition on aquatic ecosystems, and (3) establishing a long-term monitoring network
capable of detecting biologically significant changes in the chemistry of representative lakes and
streams that can be related to known regional populations of aquatic systems.
VII
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Notice iii
Preface v
Abstract vii
List of Figures xv
List of Tables xv
1 RESEARCH STRATEGY 1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
-1
-2
1.1.1 Background and Purpose of the Research Program
1.1.2 Approach
1.2 PROGRAM ELEMENTS
1.2.1 National Surface Water Survey
1.2.2 Direct/Delayed Response Project
1.2.3 Watershed Processes and Manipulations
1.2.4 Episodic Response Project
-4
-5
-6
-7
-8
1.2.5 Biologically Relevant Chemistry 1-9
1.2.6 Synthesis and Integration 1-10
1.2.7 Long-Term Monitoring 1-11
1.2.8 Indirect Human Health Effects 1-12
1.3 PROGRAM COORDINATION AND LINKAGE 1-13
1.4 FUTURE PLAN
1.4.1 Overview of Research Program Integration
1.4.2 Focus
1.4.3 Program Elements - Future Activities and Emphasis
1.4.4 Program Guidance
1.4.5 MajorOutputs
-16
-16
-19
-20
-23
-23
(continued)
IX
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
2 PROJECT SUMMARIES 2-1
2.1 PROGRAM STRUCTURE-OVERVIEW 2-1
2.2 NATIONAL SURFACE WATER SURVEY-PROGRAM E-01 2-3
E-01: National Surface Water Survey (6A-1) 2-5
E-01.1 Regional and Subregional Studies (6A-1.01) 2-6
E-01.1 A National Lake Survey (6A-1.01 A) 2-8
E-01.1A1 Western Lake Survey (6A-1.01A1) 2-9
E-01.1A2 Northeastern Seasonal Variability (6A-1.01A2) --- 2-10
E-01.1A3 Front Range Lake Acidification (6A-1.01A3) 2-11
E-01.1A4 Mt.Zirkel Lake Study (6A-1.01 A4) 2-12
E-01.1A5 New Mexico Lake Study (6A-1.01 AS) 2-13
E-01.1B National Stream Survey (6A-1.01B) 2-14
E-01.1B1 Southern Blue Ridge Stream Survey (6A-1.01B1) 2-15
E-01.1B2 Middle Atlantic Stream Survey (6A-1.01B2) 2-16
E-01.1B3 Southeast Screen!ng (6A-1.01 B3) 2-17
E-01.2 Subpopulational Studies (6A-1.02) 2-18
E-01.2A Seepage Lake Studies (6A-1.02A) 2-19
E-01.2A1 Seepage/Evaporation Evaluation Project
(6A-1.02A1) 2-20
E-01.2A2 Seepage Lake Acidification (6A-1.02A2) 2-21
E-01.2B Western Alpine Lakes (6A-1.02B) 2-22
2.3 DIRECT/DELAYED RESPONSE PROJECT-PROGRAM E-07 2-23
E-07: Direct/Delayed Response Project (6B-1) 2-25
E-07.1 Soil Surveys (6C-2.11) 2-26
E-07.1A Regional Soil Surveys (6C-2.11 A) 2-28
E-07.1A1 Northeastern Soil Survey (N/A) 2-30
E-07.1A2 Southern Blue Ridge Soil Survey (N/A) 2-32
E-07.1 A3 Mid-Appalachian Soil Survey (N/A) 2-34
E-07.1B Special Soil Studies (Sulfate Retention) (6C-2.11B) 2-36
E-07.2 Regionalization of Soil Chemistry (6C-2.12) 2-37
E-07.3 Correlative Analyses (6C-2.09) 2-38
E-07.3A Evidence of Sulfur Retention (6C-2.09A) 2-39
E-07.3B Hydrology/Water Chemistry (6C-2.09B) 2-40
E-07.3C Soil Aggregation (6C-2.09C) 2-41
E-07.3D Soil/Water Interactions (6C-2.09D) 2-42
E-07.3E Water Chemistry/Vegetation (6C-2.09E) 2-43
E-07.3F Surface Water/Wetland Relationships (6C-2.09F) 2-44
E-07.4 Single-Factor Analyses (6C-2.10) 2-46
E-07.4A Sulfate Adsorption (6C-2.10A) 2-47
E-07.4B Base Cation Supply (6C-2.1 OB) 2-49
E-07.5 Predicting Surface Water Acidification (6B-1.01) 2-51
(continued)
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
2.4 WATERSHED PROCESSES AND MANIPULATIONS-PROGRAM E-05 2-53
E-05: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (6C-2, 6C-3, 6C-4) 2-55
E-05.1 Watershed Acidification (6C-3.01) 2-57
E-05.1A Maine Acidification Project (6C-3.01 A) 2-59
E-05.1B Acidification of Organic Systems (6C-3.01C) 2-61
E-05.1C Southeastern Acidification Project (6C-3.01D) 2-62
E-05.2 Surface Water Acidification (6C-3.02) 2-64
E-05.2A Little Rock Lake (6C-3.02A) 2-66
E-05.2B Within-Lake Alkalinity Generation (Sulfate Reduction)
(6C-3.02B) 2-68
E-05.2C Comparative Analyses of an Acidified Lake (6C-3.02C) 2-69
E-05.3 Soil/Hydrologic Processes (6C-2) 2-71
E-05.3A Sulfate Mobility in Soils (6C-2.03) 2-72
E-05.3A1 Adsorption Rates and Processes (6C-2.03A) 2-74
E-05.3A2 Effect of pH, Temperature, and Ionic Strength
(6C-2.03B) 2-75
E-05.3A3 Batch versus Intact Soil Cores (6C-2.03C) 2-76
E-05.3A4 Desorption Rates and Processes (6C-2.03D) 2-77
E-05.3A5 Methods for Sulfate Determination in Soils
(6C-2.03E) 2-78
E-05.3A6 Desorption Rates in DDRP Soils (6C-2.03F) 2-79
E-05.3B Cation Supply and Mineral Weathering in Soils (6C-2.04) 2-81
E-05.3B1 Clay Mineralogy (6C-2.04A) 2-82
E-05.3B2 Acidification Effects on Base Cation Supplies
(6C-2.04B) 2-83
E-05.3C Aluminum Mobility in Soils (6C-2.05) 2-84
E-05.3D Hydrologic Pathways/Residence Times (6C-2.06) 2-85
E-05.3E Organic Acid Influence on Acidification (6C-2.07) 2-86
E-05.3F Nitrate Acidification Processes (6C-2.08) 2-87
E-05.3F1 Nitrate Mobility in Soils (6C-2.08A) 2-88
E-05.3F2 Nitrate Saturation Evidence (6C-2.08B) 2-89
E-05.3F3 Nitrate in Snowpack (6C-2.08C) 2-90
E-05.4 Model Development and Testing (6B-1.02) 2-91
E-05.4A Model Sensitivity (6B-1.02A) 2-93
E-05.4B Recovery of Surface Waters (6B-1.02B) 2-95
E-05.4B1 Clearwater Lake Recovery Study (6B-1.02B1) 2-96
E-05.4B2 Deacidification Modeling (6B-1.02B2) 2-98
E-05.4B3 RAIN Data Evaluation (Norway) (6B-1.02B3) 2-99
E-05.5 Watershed Studies Coordination (6C-4) 2-100
(continued)
XI
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
2.5 EPISODIC RESPONSE PROJECT-PROGRAM E-08 2-101
E-08: Episodic Response Project (6A-2) 2-103
E-08.1 Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulations (6A-2.01) 2-104
E-08.2 Monitoring of Episodic Events (6A-2.02) 2-106
E-08.2A Eastern Episodes (6A-2.02A) 2-108
E-08 2B Western Episodes (6A-2.02C) 2-110
E-08.3 Modeling of Episodic Acidification (6A-2.03) 2-111
2.6 BIOLOGICALLY RELEVANT CHEMISTRY-PROGRAM E-03 2-113
E-03: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (6D-1) 2-115
E-03.1 Current Status of Biological Communities (6D-1 01) 2-116
E-03.1A Fish Populations of Florida Lakes (6D-1.01 A) 2-117
E-03.1B Surface Water Chemistry and Fish Presence (Ml)
(6D-1 01B) 2-118
E-03.1C Surface Water Chemistry and Plankton Distributions (6D-
1.01C) 2-119
E-03.2 Biological Model Development and Testing (6D-1.02) 2-120
E-03 2A Baseline Probability (6D-1.02A) 2-121
E-03.2B Defining Critical Values (6D-1.02B) 2-122
E-03.2C Modeling Fish Population-Level Responses (N/A) 2-123
E-03.2D Empirical Bayes Models of Fish Population Response (N/A) 2-124
E-03.3 Biological Effects of Acidic Episodes (6D-1.03) 2-125
E-03.3A Models of Fish Response to Episodes (N/A) 2-126
E-03.38 Surveys of Stream Fish Populations (N/A) 2-127
E-03.3C Mechanisms of Fish Population Response (N/A) 2-128
E-03.4 Organismal Development/Physiology (6D-2) 2-129
E-03.4A Osmoregulation-Loss/Recovery (6D-2.01G) 2-130
E-03.4B Effects on Osmoregulatory/Reproductive Organs
(6D-2.01H) 2-131
2.7 SYNTHESIS AND INTEGRATION-PROGRAM E-09 2-133
E-09: Synthesis and Integration (6G) 2-135
E-09.1 Regional Case Studies (6G-1) 2-136
E-09.2 1990 Aquatic Effects Research Program Report (6G-2) 2-137
E-09.2A Current Resource Status (6G-2 01) 2-139
E-09.2A1 Chemistry of "Small" Lakes (6G-2.01 A) 2-140
E-09.2A2 Chemistry of Streams in Small Catchments
(6G-2.01B) 2-141
E-09.2A3 Natural Acidification (6G-2.01C) 2-142
E-09.2B Classification of Surface Waters (6G-2.02) 2-143
E-09.2B1 Spatial Patterns in Lake Water Chemistry
(6G-2.02A) 2-145
E-09.2B2 Spatial Patterns in Stream Water Chemistry
(6G-2.02B) 2-146
E-09.2B3 Classification Analyses (6G-202C) 2-147
(continued)
XII
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
E-09.2C Quantifying Past Change (6G-2.03) 2-148
E-09.2D Effects of Acidification on Biota (6G-2.04) 2-149
E-09.2E Prediction of Future Surface Water Acidification
(6G-2.05) 2-150
E-09.2F Biological Implications of Past/Future Change
(6G-2.06) 2-151
E-09.2G Region-Specific Dose Response (6G-2.07) 2-152
E-09.2G1 Deposition Estimation (6G-2.07A) 2-153
E-09.2G2 Dose-Response Model Predictions (6G-2.07B) 2-154
E-09.2H Quantifying the Rate of Recovery (6G-2.08) 2-156
E-09.3 Technology Transfer (6G-3) 2-157
2.8 LONG-TERM MONITORING-PROGRAM E-06 2-159
E-06: Long-term Monitoring (6B-2) 2-161
E-06.1 Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (6B-2.01) — 2-163
E-06.1A Monitoring (6B-2.01A) 2-164
E-06.1B Optimizing Trends Detection (6B-2.01B) 2-166
E-06.1B1 Analysis of Constituent Variability (N/A) 2-167
E-06.1B2 Protocolsfor Evaluating Detection Limits (N/A) 2-169
E-06.1B3 Acquisition of Existing Data Records (N/A) 2-170
E-06.1B4 Utility of Diatom Records (N/A) 2-171
E-06.1B5 Statistical Tests for Trends Analysis (N/A) 2-172
E-06.1B6 Inventory of Emissions Sources (N/A) 2-173
E-06.1C Methods Development (6B-2.01C) 2-174
E-06.1C1 Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry
(6B-2.01C1) 2-175
E-06.1C2 Aluminum Methodology (6B-2.01C2) 2-176
E-06.1C3 Automated Field pH Measurements (6B-2.01C3) 2-177
E-06.1C4 Fractionationof Acid Neutralizing Capacity
(6B-2.01C4) 2-178
E-06.1C5 Remote Sensing Applications (6B-2.01C5) 2-179
E-06.1 D Quality Assurance/Quality Control Interpretation
(6B-2.01D) 2-180
E-06.1E Paleolimnological Studies in Adirondack Lakes
(6B-2.01E) 2-182
2.9 INDIRECT HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS-PROGRAM E-04 2-183
E-04: Indirect Human Health Effects (6E) 2-185
E-04.1 Effectsof Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (6E-1) 2-186
E-04.1A Cistern and Groundwater Drinking Supplies (6E-1.01) 2-187
E-04.1A1 Cistern Drinking Water Quality (6E-1.01 A) 2-188
E-04.1A2 Modification of Shallow Water Aquifers
(6E-1.01B) 2-189
(continued)
XIII
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
E-04.1B Surface Water Drinking Supplies (6E-1.02) 2-190
E-04.1B1 Reanalysis of Rural Drinking Water Data
(6E-1.02A) 2-191
E-04.1B2 Exceedanceof Drinking Water Standards
(6E-1.02B) 2-192
E-04.2 Bioaccumulation of Metals (6E-2) 2-193
E-04.2A Metals in Biota (6E-2.01) 2-194
E-04.2A1 Distribution of Mercury in the Upper Peninsula of
Michigan (6E-2.01A) 2-195
E-04.2A2 Existing Evidence of Mercury Contamination
(6E-2.01B) 2-196
E-04.2B Metals in Surface Water/Sediments (6E-2.02) 2-197
E-04.2B1 Mercury Dynamics in Lakes of the Upper Midwest
(6E-2.02A) 2-199
E-04.2B2 Regional Patterns of Metals in Lake Waters
(6E-2.02B) 2-200
3 INDICES 3-1
3.1 INDEX BY CONTACT 3-3
3.2 INDEXBY REGION 3-7
3.3 INDEXBYSTATE 3-9
3.4 INDEX BY KEY WORD 3-13
XIV
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1 Regionalized classification approach employed in the Aquatic Effects
Research Program 1-3
2 Relationships between the Episodic Response Project, the Watershed
Manipulation Project, and the Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulations
Project 1-9
3 Conceptual strategy for Long-Term Monitoring 1-12
4 A series of internal and external checks ensures that the projects within the
Aquatic Effects Research Program provide quantitative answers with known
certainty bounds to policy, assessment, and scientific questions 1-14
5 Integration of projects within the Aquatic Effects Research Program 1-15
6 Classification approach to lead to the identification of region-specific dose-
response relationships and corroboration of these relationships through
long-term monitoring 1-17
7 Conceptualization of the levels within each Planned Program
Accomplishment 2-1
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1 General Schedule for the Aquatic Effects Research Program 1-5
2 Regional Prioritization of Projects within the Aquatic Effects Research
Program 1-24
3 Target Dates for Addressing Policy Questions in Terms of Chronic Exposure
(Long-Term Acidification) or Acute Exposure (Short-Term Acidification) to
Acidic Deposition 1-24
4 Example of Aquatic Effects Research Program Structure and Codes 2-2
xv
-------
SECTION 1
RESEARCH STRATEGY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
In 1980, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) instituted the Aquatic Effects
Research Program as a part of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP).1 The
Aquatic Effects Research Program is one of many programs within EPA's Acid Deposition and
Atmospheric Research Division that is addressing the environmental effects of acidic deposition. The
Aquatic Effects Research Program is administered through the Office of Ecological Processes and
Effects Research within the Office of Research and Development.
Presently, six EPA Laboratories are conducting research projects within the Aquatic Effects
Research Program: the Environmental Research Laboratories in Corvallis, OR, and Duluth, MM; the
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratories in Las Vegas, NV, Cincinnati, OH, and Research
Triangle Park, NC; and the Atmospheric Sciences Research Laboratory also in Research Triangle Park,
NC. The scope, complexity, and policy relevance of the Aquatic Effects Research Program necessitate
close coordination and communication among the laboratories, the administrative office, other
federal agencies, and state agencies. The purpose of this document is to provide a mechanism by
which such coordination and communication can be facilitated. This document is a summary of the
fiscal year 1988 research strategy, the projected five-year plan, research projects funded in fiscal
years 1987 and 1988, and research projects proposed for funding in fiscal year 1989.
1.1.1 Background and Purpose of the Research Program
Four policy questions have guided the design, direction, and focus of the Aquatic Effects
Research Program:
1. What is the extent and magnitude of past change attributable to acidic
deposition?
2. What change is expected in the future under various deposition scenarios?
3. What is the target loading below which change would not be expected?
4. What is the rate of recovery if deposition decreases?
1NAPAP was established as a federal, interagency program by Congress through the Acid Precipitation Act of 1980. The
activities of the federal agencies are collectively funded by NAPAP. The lead agency for the Aquatic Effects Task Group within
NAPAP is EPA. The strategy presented here is applicable only to EPA's program.
1-1
-------
In light of these policy questions, the primary goal of the Aquatic Effects Research Program is
to characterize and quantify with known certainty the subpopulation of surface waters that will
respond chemically to current and changing acidic deposition, and to determine the biological
significance of observed or predicted changes. The objectives of the component projects are to
address the effects of both chronic and acute exposure to acidic deposition, i.e., the potential for
long-term and short-term acidification. The four major elements of the present program include
characterizing the chemical status and quantifying the extent of surface waters at risk, predicting
the future chemical and biological changes in aquatic ecosystems, verifying these predictions and
improving the understanding of controlling mechanisms, and validating these findings through
long-term monitoring.
1.1.2 Approach
Providing scientifically sound answers to the four policy questions requires regional-scale data
collection efforts and model applications. From 1980 to 1983, however, research on the effects of
acidic deposition on aquatic resources was focused primarily on the processes and mechanisms
underlying surface water response to acidic inputs. This type of research typically requires intensive
investigation, conducted on a limited number of sites and was essential to refine our understanding
of factors controlling acidification. Because a primary goal of EPA is to provide information that can
be used to assess the national-scale risk that acidic deposition poses to aquatic resources, the focus of
the Aquatic Effects Research Program was redirected in 1983. The present design was implemented
in 1984 upon recognition that present knowledge is limited, not necessarily by the level of
understanding of the processes, but by an understanding of the extent, rate, and magnitude of
effects. Site-specific research remains essential for advancing and refining our understanding of the
mechanisms that control aquatic response to acidic deposition. However, to avoid drawing
conclusions relevant only to specific study sites, the Aquatic Effects Research Program now includes
projects designed to characterize surface waters and watersheds on large geographical scales. The
data from these projects are being used to test the applicability of hypotheses generated by site-
specific research to systems at regional scales. Thus, the Aquatic Effects Research Program is now
pursuing both regionally extensive and locally intensive research efforts.
The present program is predicated on a broad-scale (top-down) perspective as opposed to a
narrow-scale, individual system (bottom-up) approach (Figure 1). The top-down approach allows
many lakes, streams, or watersheds within many geographic regions to be described on the basis of a
few samples collected from a subset of selected systems. The first step in this approach is a synoptic
survey, providing a "snapshot" of surface water chemistry or soil characteristics on a regionally
significant geographic scale. The approach employs statistically based site selection, standardized
sampling procedures and analytical methods, and rigorous quality assurance protocols. The
1-2
-------
resulting regional characterization provides a frame by which the characteristics of subsets of
systems (i.e., subpopulations) can be defined. The results of intensive studies conducted on systems
within these subsets can then be scaled to the regional population or to any intermediate
subpopulation.
Subpopulational
Present Approach
Frequent/Usual Approach
Figure 1. Regionalized classification approach employed in the Aquatic Effects
Research Program. This approach focuses on identifying the subpopulation of aquatic
systems at risk due to acidic deposition, permitting hypotheses developed from site-
level research to be tested at subregional, regional, and national scales. Such testing
increases understanding of the extent, magnitude, and rate of effects of acidic
deposition.
Conversely, inferential analyses resulting from the extensive approach may provide important
hypotheses that can be tested only in individual systems. The information gained when the two
approaches are combined can be used to develop a quantitative evaluation of the regional effects of
acidic deposition, as well as the relative importance of processes or mechanisms in particular regions.
Ideally, the two approaches should converge at the subpopulation level, in order to provide a
comprehensive understanding of the effects of acidic deposition on lakes and streams identified as
sensitive. The research strategy reflects this goal by coupling the large-scale projects with locally
intensive projects.
The Aquatic Effects Research Program has thus evolved from an initial focus (1980-1983) on
site-selective, process-oriented research to its present (1983-1987) emphasis on regionalization. As
now planned, future research efforts in the program (beyond 1987) primarily will involve testing or
verifying acidification hypotheses and developing model forecasts of regional aquatic effects.
Through 1990, considerable effort will be focused on integrating the results of the program to allow
1-3
-------
surface waters to be classified on a regional and subpopulational basis. Issues include examining
evidence of historical change, and refining estimates of current status and forecasts of future
change. Beyond 1990, the focus will continue to be on verifying and developing models of
acidification and recovery and on quantifying biological and chemical change through long-term
monitoring.
1.2 PROGRAM ELEMENTS
The Aquatic Effects Research Program has eight major component programs:
• National Surface Water Survey,
• Direct/Delayed Response Project,
• Watershed Processes and Manipulations,
• Episodic Response Project,
• Biologically Relevant Chemistry,
• Synthesis and Integration,
• Long-Term Monitoring, and
• Indirect Human Health Effects.
The general schedule for completion of these programs is shown in Table 1. The National
Surface Water Survey, focusing on chronic acidification, is divided into two components: the
National Lake Survey and the National Stream Survey. Phase I efforts of both components
concentrate on quantifying the current chemical status of lakes and streams. Phase II of the lake
survey is designed to quantify seasonal variability in lake chemistry. The Direct/Delayed Response
Project is designed to investigate, distinguish, and predict the time scales over which surface waters
are expected to become chronically acidic given various levels of acidic deposition. Watershed
Processes and Manipulations is a research effort designed to develop and verify hypotheses relevant
to the factors and mechanisms under investigation in the Direct/Delayed Response Project. The
Episodic Response Project focuses on surface water response resulting from acute or short-term,
episodic exposures to acidic deposition (as might occur during storms and snowmelt). The
Biologically Relevant Chemistry Program is evaluating the extent to which changes in surface water
chemistry due to acidic deposition pose a risk to aquatic biota. Synthesis and Integration is an
intensive, integrated analysis of results from ail research activities in the Aquatic Effects Research
Program that provides a regional-scale assessment of the risk that acidic deposition poses to aquatic
resources. The Long-Term Monitoring effort is designed to examine trends in the status of surface
waters and to test the validity of conclusions derived from other program research activities. Indirect
1-4
-------
TABLE 1. GENERAL SCHEDULE FOR THE AQUATIC EFFECTS RESEARCH PROGRAM
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
1995
National Surface Water Survey
Direct/Delayed Response Project
Watershed Manipulation Project
Episodic Response Project
Biologically Relevant Chemistry
Synthesis and Integration
Long-Term Monitoring
Indirect Human Health Effects
Human Health Effects focuses on modification to drinking water supplies by acidic deposition and on
bioaccumulation of metals, particularly mercury, in game fish used for human consumption.
1.2.1 National Surface Water Survey
The National Surface Water Survey was implemented to determine the present chemical status
of lakes and streams in regions of the United States where the majority of surface waters with low
acid neutralizing capacity are expected to occur. The objectives of the survey were to locate surface
waters that are acidic or have low acid neutralizing capacity, based on an index sampling period, and
to create a regional data base that would allow surface waters to be classified according to their
physical and chemical characteristics.
In Phase I of the National Lake Survey, samples from approximately 2,500 lakes were collected
for determining a number of physical and chemical variables during fall of 1984 in the northeastern,
southeastern, and upper midwestern United States, and during fall of 1985 in the western United
States. These data have served to classify lakes so that subsets can be identified for more detailed
studies in Phase II of the National Lake Survey and in other programs in the Aquatic Effects Research
Program.
Phase II of the National Lake Survey - the Northeastern Seasonal Variability Study - was
conducted in 1986. This project was implemented to refine the conclusions of Phase I with respect to
1-5
-------
the present chemical status of lakes. Sampling was conducted during the spring, summer, and fall to
determine whether lakes found not to be acidic in Phase I, during the fall index period, are acidic at
other times of the year.
The National Stream Survey was implemented in 1985 with a pilot survey of 61 stream sites in
the Southern Blue Ridge Province. Phase I was conducted in the spring and summer of 1986 in the
Middle Atlantic region with the sampling of approximately 270 stream reaches. Information from
the Southeastern Screening Survey (conducted on about 200 stream reaches in concert with the
Middle Atlantic sampling) helped prioritize other stream sites for possible future survey activities.
The screening covered areas of the Southern Appalachians, the Piedmont, and the Ouachita
Mountains, and parts of the Florida Panhandle and Florida Peninsula identified in the National Lake
Survey as having a large number of acidic lakes. Results of the National Stream Survey also were or
will be used to select systems for analysis in the Direct/Delayed Response Project, Episodic Response
Project, and the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project.
1.2.2 Direct/Delayed Response Project
Predicting how constant, increasing, or decreasing acidic inputs will affect the chemical and
biological status of lakes and streams in the future requires knowledge of the current conditions and
primary factors that influence surface water response. Accurate predictions also require an
understanding of complex watershed-mediated processes and mechanisms, as well as the ability to
quantify time frames within which responses are expected to occur. The Direct/Delayed Response
Project was designed to provide the data needed to classify watersheds, based on the time frames
during which surface waters would be expected to become acidic (i.e., the time expected for the
annual average acid neutralizing capacity to decrease to zero), at various levels of sulfate deposition.
The primary objectives of this research are to (1) characterize the regional variability of soil and
watershed characteristics, (2) determine which soil and watershed characteristics are most strongly
related to surface water chemistry, (3) estimate the relative importance of key watershed processes
across the study regions, and (4) classify a sample of watersheds, according to the time frames during
which they would reach acidic status, and extrapolate the results from the sample to the study
regions.
In the soil survey component of the Direct/Delayed Response Project, a survey was conducted
in 1985 in the Northeast on the watersheds of 145 lakes. Eighty-nine percent of these lakes also were
selected for the Northeastern Seasonal Variability Study, and all were sampled in Phase I. In 1986, a
second soil survey was completed on 35 watersheds in the Southern Blue Ridge Province, selected in
conjunction with the pilot stream survey. A third soil survey is being conducted on a subset of the
stream sites in the Mid-Appalachians that also was sampled in the Middle Atlantic Stream Survey.
1-6
-------
Three levels of data analyses are being used in the Direct/Delayed Response Project. Level I
analyses employ multivariate statistical procedures and steady-state calculations such as sulfur input-
output budgets. When integrated with available data, including those from the National Surface
Water Survey, the analyses evaluate possible correlations between watershed characteristics and
surface water chemistry.
Level II analyses provide order-of-magnitude time estimates of the system response rates to
various levels of acidic deposition. These analyses are being used to estimate changes in individual
system components considered to be important in controlling surface water acidification, such as
sulfate retention and base cation supply.
Level III analyses use dynamic models to integrate key mechanisms controlling surface water
chemistry to simulate changes in water chemistry over a long period of acidic deposition. These
mechanisms include soil-water interactions (including water contact time), replacement of base
cations through mineral weathering, sulfate retention, and base cation buffering. The predicted
response times assist in classifying watersheds and estimating the number and geographic
distribution of each watershed class.
1.2.3 Watershed Processes and Manipulations
Watershed Processes and Manipulations studies focus on testing acidification hypotheses
through experimental acidification of aquatic systems and investigations of soil processes. The
artificial acidification of a lake in the Upper Midwest and a watershed in Maine are the key
manipulation studies.
Before Little Rock Lake in Wisconsin was acidified in 1985, a number of hypotheses had been
developed regarding the chemical changes and biological responses that might occur in a lake
following the addition of acids. One-half of the lake is being acidified to decrease its pH
incrementally over a six-year period. The second half of the lake also may receive the same
treatment, lagged by a four-year period. The ongoing study is providing direct evidence that will
allow the hypotheses to be tested and modified, if necessary, to increase the understanding of
potential ecological effects of acidic deposition on an aquatic ecosystem, and to develop effective
predictive models.
The Watershed Manipulation Project was implemented in Maine in 1987 to evaluate
watershed response to artificial acidification. One watershed receives acid and a second, similar site
serves as a control. This project, through a series of laboratory, plot, hillslope, and catchment scale
experiments, is designed to (1) assess the quantitative and qualitative response of watershed soils
and surface waters to altered deposition, (2) determine the interactions among biogeochemical
mechanisms controlling surface water response to acidic deposition, and (3) test the behavior of the
1-7
-------
Direct/Delayed Response Project models, evaluate model predictions of manipulation outcomes, and
refine model structure to improve the reliability of model predictions. The Direct/Delayed Response
Project models thus will serve as a framework for the hypothesis-testing experiments.
The first watersheds research site is Bear Brook Watershed in Maine, where pre-manipulation
studies began in spring 1987. One to three additional sites are being proposed for other regions
potentially sensitive to acidic deposition. Some activities within the Watershed Manipulation Project
and Episodic Response Project have been proposed for integration into the Regional Episodic and
Acidic Manipulations Project (Section 1.2.4).
An integral component of this research area is soil process studies, which complement the
Watershed Manipulation Project as well as contribute to the Direct/Delayed Response Project. These
studies are investigating soil-related processes hypothesized to be key factors controlling the rate of
surface water acidification. The processes include sulfate mobility, sulfate retention and release,
cation exchange, cation supply and mineral weathering (including aluminum), organic acids, and
nitrate mobility.
1.2.4 Episodic Response Project
The Episodic Response Project is designed to investigate the regional response of surface
waters to acidic episodes and to provide data on the level of acidic deposition below which
biological effects would not occur. The risk to surface waters posed by short-term, acute exposure to
acidic inputs will be examined through model-based, regional estimates of the duration, frequency,
extent, and magnitude of acidic events, such as those accompanying storms and snowmelt. As part
of the Northeastern Seasonal Variability Study and Phase I of the National Stream Survey, pilot
studies were conducted to determine the feasibility of conducting episodes studies on a broad-scale,
survey basis. Results of the pilot studies led to the conclusion that a survey approach, similar to that
used in the National Surface Water Survey, was not feasible for quantifying episodic effects.
As an alternative approach, the Episodic Response Project will begin by developing an
empirical model of catchment episodic response. The data for the model development will be
collected from a few intensively monitored research sites, including sites funded as part of the
Episodic Response Project plus sites jointly funded and coordinated by both the Episodic Response
Project and Watershed Manipulation Project. This joint effort, termed the Regional Episodic and
Acidic Manipulations Project (Figure 2), will involve both watershed manipulation experiments and
episodes monitoring and is to be implemented in Fernow, West Virginia. Studies at these sites will
focus on integrating hydrology, soil processes, water chemistry, and aquatic biology, providing data
for model development for the Episodic Response Project and model enhancement for the
Watershed Manipulation Project. Each proposed site will consist of a pair of watershed-stream
1-8
-------
systems for which water quality and flow data exist. One of the paired sites will be experimentally
acidified while the second will serve as a control. Chronic and episodic acidification will be measured
at each of the paired sites through intensive collection of stream chemical data. The model, which
will include components addressing important site-specific factors such as deposition loadings and
hydrologic factors, will be applied to empirical data from subregions of interest to estimate the
regional extent of episodes.
Process Research
Figure 2. Relationships among the Episodic Response Project, the Watershed
Manipulation Project, and the Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulations (REAM)
Project.
1.2.5 Biologically Relevant Chemistry
The goal of the Biologically Relevant Chemistry research area is to provide data that will allow
regional assessments to be made of the risk to aquatic biota posed by acidic deposition. These
regional assessments will be based principally on an understanding of the types of chemical
conditions that cause adverse biological effects and regional estimates of the extent and duration of
such chemical conditions.
The chemical variables instrumental in effecting biotic response are reasonably well-known,
but the "critical values" (the concentration above or below which significant biological effects are
expected to occur) of these variables are not well-defined. A study of existing data has therefore
been initiated to estimate critical values, identify the associated magnitude and type of biological
1-9
-------
response, summarize the uncertainty associated with each critical value, and outline the research
needed for improved estimates and predictions of biological response.
Two other projects address potential biological effects resulting from long-term and short-
term acidification - the Upper Midwestern Fish Survey and Biological Effects of Acidic Episodes. A
subset of 50 lakes in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan sampled during Phase I of the National Lake
Survey will be surveyed to evaluate the relationship between surface water chemistry and the
presence or absence of fish. This project will determine the present status of fish populations in lakes
potentially sensitive to acidic deposition and evaluate the chemical characteristics of lakes with and
without fish. These activities will serve to corroborate or to refine, if necessary, critical values of
chemical variables (e.g., pH, aluminum, and calcium) defined on the basis of existing data. Because
the study sites represent a subpopulation of lakes defined within the National Lake Survey frame,
the results of this project can be extrapolated to other systems in the subregion and will be useful in
evaluating biological risk in other National Lake Survey subregions.
A study dealing with the effects of episodic acidification on fish populations in streams is
planned as part of the Episodic Response Project. Fish transplant experiments in conjunction with
detailed chemical monitoring will evaluate the degree to which episodes may influence fish
movement, mortality rates, and reproductive success. Of particular importance is the need to
identify key characteristics of episodes that control the severity and nature of effects on fish
populations. In addition, field survey data will provide the basis for models of fish population
responses to episodes that, in turn, can be used for regional estimates of effects.
1.2.6 Synthesis and Integration
Three key activities within the Aquatic Effects Research Program are targeted at synthesizing
and integrating all project results. First, the Regional Case Studies project is using data from many
sources, including the National Surface Water Survey, to provide an integrated evaluation of the
potential and measured effects of acidic deposition on surface waters with low acid neutralizing
capacity. Current chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of surface waters are being
compared on a subregional basis to identify the key determinants of surface water chemistry. Past
chemical and biological status are being inferred and future changes are being predicted. The
focused, specific activities in the Regional Case Studies will help refine estimates of present chemical
status and projections of future change.
The second key activity is the preparation of a comprehensive report of results from the
Aquatic Effects Research Program that will serve as a partial foundation for a 1990 NAPAP
assessment of the regional-scale change to aquatic resources as a result of acidic deposition. The
report will focus on providing answers to the policy questions (Section 1.1.1) regarding the present
1-10
-------
status of surface waters, the potential for future change, region-specific dose-response (i.e.,
expected system response to various reductions in acid loadings), and recovery. Key analyses include
regional classification of surface water chemistry and regionalization of soil chemistry. Integration
of wet and dry deposition monitoring results is a critical component of these analyses, all of which
depend on sound estimates of acidic deposition levels. Another area of major emphasis is to
evaluate the biological implications of chemically related conclusions, including historical change,
current status, and future change.
The third key activity is the Technology Transfer project, designed to distribute products from
the Aquatic Effects Research Program to interested parties such as state agencies, federal agencies,
and universities. These products include a quarterly program status report, presentations on
acidification processes, documents produced in conjunction with major project reports, overviews of
individual project activities and results, data base packages, users' handbooks, a biennial journal
listing program publications, special interest materials, and news media briefing materials. The goal
of this project is to inform a wide audience about activities in the Aquatic Effects Research Program
on a regular basis.
1.2.7 Long-Term Monitoring
The Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems program element is a long-term
monitoring effort that will serve to validate the conclusions from the component research activities
in the Aquatic Effects Research Program. Individual site data from research sites that were part of
NAPAP's previous monitoring effort are being compared to the estimated characteristics of the
populations of systems surveyed in the National Surface Water Survey to determine what
subpopulation these systems represent. Results from past monitoring efforts are also being
evaluated to determine how much change in specific chemical variables is needed for a confident
conclusion that a long-term trend is occurring. These evaluations are being conducted in two
complementary projects: methods development and interpretation of quality control results.
The goal of the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems program element, as now
planned, is to detect changes or trends in the chemistry of surface waters that indicate a risk to
aquatic organisms. This study is proposed as an integrated monitoring effort, employing
standardized sampling and analytical methods and rigorous quality assurance protocols. New
monitoring sites likely will be selected based on systematic classification of lakes and streams in the
National Surface Water Survey sampling frame. The present design is conceived to be multi-tiered,
with each tier representing a specific monitoring approach, according to the degree of detail needed
to assess trends in regional-scale change (Figure 3). The base of the tier represents broad-scale data
collection conducted infrequently on a subpopulation for which the relationship to the total
1-11
-------
regional population is known. Seasonal variability studies can be conducted on a subset of systems
selected from those represented by the base tier. Each tier represents successively smaller
subpopulations and increasingly complex and intense studies. In most cases, existing watershed and
episodes studies will be included in these tiers. At each level, the relationship of the subpopulation
to the resource base established at the base tier is known; hence the results of special studies (e.g.,
rates of mineral weathering or artificial acidification of watersheds) will have regional applicability.
The research plan and final design are expected to be completed in 1988, following extensive
interaction, discussion, and coordination with state and federal agencies and EPA Regional Offices.
Implementation is targeted for 1989 or 1990.
Intensity
of
Studies
Frequency
of
Sampling
Figure 3. Conceptual strategy for Long-Term Monitoring. The multi-tiered approach
will permit the results of special studies or intensive research conducted at the site-
specific level to be evaluated in terms of their regional applicability, because the
relationship of these sites to the regional aquatic resource (base tier) will be known.
1.2.8 Indirect Human Health Effects
Research on the indirect human health effects of acidic deposition has two main areas of
focus. One is the alteration of drinking water supplies as a result of acidic inputs. The second is the
accumulation of mercury and other potentially toxic metals in the muscle tissues of edible fish.
1-12
-------
Drinking water studies include examining existing data to determine the potential
modification of drinking water quality by acidic deposition, emphasizing precipitation-dominated
systems. A survey of shallow aquifers used as drinking water sources will focus on areas receiving
high levels of acidic deposition that were sampled during the eastern component of the National
Lake Survey. Another proposed study will examine the numbers, proportions, and locations of lakes
in the National Lake Survey for which concentrations of key chemical variables exceed primary and
secondary drinking water standards. Following this examination, the systems serving as drinking
water supplies will be identified. The results of these studies may be refined for the Northeast using
data from the Northeastern Seasonal Variability Study.
Existing process-oriented and survey data are being examined to evaluate the relationship
between mercury bioaccumulation in sport fish and surface water chemistry in areas receiving high
levels of acidic deposition. Key watershed characteristics will be identified and data will be reviewed
to determine the feasibility of modeling mercury bioaccumulation across a gradient of acidic
deposition. The feasibility of regionally extrapolating model results will be examined. Mercury
bioaccumulation also will be examined as part of the fishery survey in the Upper Peninsula of
Michigan. The objectives of this study are to determine (1) if fish in acidic lakes have higher tissue
concentrations of mercury than do fish in otherwise similar, nonacidic lakes, and (2) the association
between physicochemical lake characteristics and fish tissue mercury concentrations. The extent to
which mercury bioaccumulation in fish occurs in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and the extent to
which dissolved mercury is related to lake water pH will be examined.
1.3 PROGRAM COORDINATION AND LINKAGE
The designs, goals, and objectives of the projects within the Aquatic Effects Research Program
reflect the need to classify systems to (1) further scientific understanding and (2) assess on a regional
scale the risk of aquatic resources to acidic deposition. The degree of confidence in answering policy,
assessment, and scientific questions about surface water acidification is enhanced by a common
approach employed throughout Aquatic Effects Research Program projects (Figure 4) for the
collective program goal of regionalization.
When a project is initiated, its goals are evaluated from the perspective of their relevance to
regional risk assessment. Peer-review workshops are held to assist in planning and to ensure that the
approach is scientifically sound and the objectives are relevant to the project goal. Within each
project, the design, analysis, and interpretive phases are completed under a system of internal
reviews, emphasizing quality assurance, regional classification, and scientific validity. External
review of products ensures that conclusions are scientifically sound, leading to a refined
1-13
-------
Policy Questions
Assessment Questions
Scientific Questions
Scientific Understanding
Assessment
Policy
Figure 4. A series of internal and external checks ensure that the projects within the Aquatic Effects
Research Program provide quantitative answers with known certainty bounds to policy,
assessment, and scientific questions.
1-14
-------
understanding of acidification issues, upon which regional risk assessments with known certainty
bounds can be based. Sound policy decisions, in turn, then can be formulated.
The integrated structure of the Aquatic Effects Research Program also emphasizes
regionalization. Statistically based site selection procedures and standardized protocols improve
efficiency of data collection and ensure data comparability. The regional population estimates
.generated by the National Surface Water Survey serve as the statistical frame for other
geographically extensive projects and provide the basis for classifying discrete subpopulations of
surface waters upon which more intensive investigations can be focused. The identification of
subpopulations at risk within the regional frame, coupled with integrated chemical, biological, and
soil surveys, enhances the ability to extrapolate results of watershed studies to regional scales (Figure
5). The integrated program structure allows an assessment of the geographical extent of aquatic
resources at risk and permits the results of watershed-level, process research to be evaluated on
regional scales.
Figure 5. Integration of projects within the Aquatic Effects Research Program.
Geographically extensive surveys of soils and surface water chemistry and
biology are integrated through the use of standardized methods of data
collection and common study sites. This integration permits the understanding
of effects at the watershed level to be extrapolated to regional scales.
1-15
-------
1.4 FUTURE PLAN
1.4.1 Overview of Research Program Integration
The research strategy for the Aquatic Effects Research Program, designed in 1983 and
implemented in 1984, lays the foundation for answering the four policy questions listed in Section
1.1.1 on a regional scale with known confidence The focus from 1988 to 1990 is to advance, through
synthesis and integration of results from the various research activities, the primary goal of the
program:
Characterize and quantify with known certainty the subpopulation of surface waters
that will respond chemically to current and changing acidic deposition, and determine
the biological significance of observed changes.
Identifying the subpopulation that is likely to change chemically in response to various acid
loadings is primarily a classification procedure (Figure 6). The statistical frame and the standardized
protocols applied in the National Surface Water Survey permit regional (based on geography) and
subpopulational (based on physical and chemical attributes) characteristics to be quantified with
known certainty. More intensive studies that address a specific question beyond the scope of the
original survey goals (but within the frame and design criteria of the survey) then can be focused in a
particular geographical area (e.g., the Sierra Nevada) or on a particular type of system (e.g., seepage
lakes or those with conductance £ 10^5 cm1).
The extent to which chemistry of surface waters has changed historically also can be evaluated
using the National Surface Water Survey data. Based on current chemical status, and empirical
models that hindcast changes in acid neutralizing capacity or pH, for example, it is possible to
evaluate the response of surface waters to increases in sulfate and nitrate concentrations.
Developing relationships between the increases of these anions and acidic deposition would permit
an evaluation of the extent to which currently acidic systems are so because of chronic or episodic
acidic deposition.
The Direct/Delayed Response Project, like the National Surface Water Survey, also focuses on
classifying the subpopulation at risk, but enhances or refines the classification by considering the
time frames over which surface water chemistry would be expected to change as well as the
characteristics of the watersheds in which the systems are located. Primarily employing various
models for forecasts of future status, the Direct/Delayed Response Project benefits from the
Watershed Manipulation Project, which seeks to verify the dynamic, as well as the more simplistic,
steady-state surface water acidification models through controlled acidification experiments.
Results of the studies on subpopulations of special interest also will be useful in modifying or
1-16
-------
AERP Classification Scheme
Refinement
Current Status
ERP
Regional/Subpopulation Classification
Historical Change
Subpopulational Studies
Future Status
DDRP
(Current Loads)
Subpopulational
Response Classification
Model
Development
Verification
Acidification
(Varying Loads)
Subpopulation Response
Recovery
(Varying Loads)
Subpopulation Response
Region-Specific Dose-Response
Subpopulations/Subregions at Risk
Biological Significance
BRC
Episodic Influence
ERP
Validation
TIME
Subregional/Subpopulational
Figure 6. Classification approach to lead to the identification of region-specific dose-
response relationships and corroboration of these relationships through long-term
monitoring.
1-17
-------
developing models if the results of the model verification studies indicate that the processes
represented in the models or the input parameters are inaccurate.
Knowing how surface waters would respond to increased or decreased acid loadings can be
addressed using an approach similar to that for current acid loadings. The subpopulations classified
as responding to current loads can be re-examined to project whether they would recover if acidic
deposition were decreased. Conversely, those forecast as not responding at current loads could be
re-examined to determine whether they would acidify if deposition increased.
This stepwise, integrative analysis leads to completion of the primary output of the Aquatic
Effects Research Program - producing data that allow a definition, on a region-specific basis, of the
expected chemical response of surface waters and the biological implications of that response for
various decreases in levels of acidic deposition. Development of region-specific dose response
relationships involves evaluating the response of a subset or regional population of lakes or streams
(e.g., the number of lakes in the Adirondacks that might have pH < 5.5 per year, change in fish
presence, or others). Dose measures might include both wet and dry deposition or consideration of
hydrogen ion, ammonium, and nitrate, as well as sulfate, as input acids.
As presently structured, the major emphasis of the program has been on sulfate and its role in
long-term acidification. Nitrate and its role in episodic acidification has become increasingly
important in understanding the effects of acidic deposition on surface waters. Consequently, a
major focus of the Aquatic Effects Research Program in 1988 and beyond is to understand more
completely the relative role of episodes in altering surface water chemical status. Region-specific
dose response relationships must consider acidification as a result of episodes as well as chronic
exposure to acidic deposition. Understanding the regional-scale importance of episodes requires
field studies that foster a better understanding of the factors and processes controlling frequency,
duration, and magnitude of episodic events. Interactive model development procedures are
required, then, to evaluate the regional extent of such events. Thus, the Episodic Response Project
contributes to refining the current status of surface water chemistry (by accounting for estimates of
lakes and streams that are acidic during times other than those identified in the National Surface
Water Survey). Model development as part of the Episodic Response Project both contributes to and
benefits from the subpopulational response classifications identified from analyses of future status.
Finally, comprehensive, integrative analyses of the regional importance of episodes contributes to
the development of region-specific dose response relationships.
The key to all Aquatic Effects Research Program activities is to understand the biological
implications of the findings and conclusions. Analyses of historical change must consider the
relevance to biological effects. For example, an inferred change in pH from a historical value of 6.0
1-18
-------
to a current value of 5.0, but not from 7.0 to 6.0 may be significant from a biological perspective.
Likewise, the historical loss of acid neutralizing capacity from 125 peq L1 to 25 peq L1, may have
significant biological implications, but an equivalent loss from 400 to 300 peq L-1 may be less
important in determining the extent to which the biotic resource is at risk. Understanding biological
implications of chemical changes is vitally important in developing region-specific dose response
relationships, because risk assessments of the subpopulations or subregions ultimately must involve
the response of surface water biota.
The final component of the classification scheme is to examine whether the conclusions are
sound through acquisition of empirical data. This process requires examination of how surface
waters respond in the long-term as a result of changes in acidic deposition. Projections of future
status in response to increased or decreased acid loadings that indicate acidification or recovery can
be validated by results of the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystem study. If conclusions
cannot be corroborated by empirical observations, the mechanism exists in the program to re-
examine the factors controlling sensitivity and the criteria used to define the subpopulation at risk.
1.4.2 Focus
The research strategy for the Aquatic Effects Research Program established the frame from
which regional-scale conclusions can be inferred quantitatively. This strategy permits and lays the
groundwork for the following steps:
1. Estimating the current status, extent, and location of surface waters in the United
States that are potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
2. Forecasting the future status of surface waters potentially affected by current
levels of acidic deposition.
3. Critically assessing existing effects models to identify the most influential factors
controlling changes in surface water chemistry.
4. Identifying research to improve the understanding of the most critical factors
(identified in model evaluation) controlling sensitivity.
5. Developing an approach to verify model predictions of the expected time frames
of acidification at various deposition levels through manipulation and process
level studies on watersheds.
Beyond 1987, the program will concentrate on the study of fewer sites. Studies will be
integrated at selected sites to maximize the effectiveness of funding and scientific gain and in the
interest of whole-ecosystem risk analysis. The regional significance and applicability of the issues to
be investigated, however, will remain a primary criterion for determining whether a project is
undertaken. From 1987 on, the program will focus on the following:
1-19
-------
1. Contribute to the 1990 NAPAP goal of assessing the effects of acidic deposition on
surface waters in the United States, through synthesis and integration of program
results.
2. Implement research designed to verify model predictions and assessment
conclusions related to future effects of acidic deposition on aquatic ecosystems.
3. Establish a regionally meaningful long-term monitoring network to detect
biologically significant changes in surface water chemistry (both acidification and
recovery) that can be related to a known population of aquatic systems.
Some specific questions will guide additional research and analysis of existing data:
1. What is the current chemical status of aquatic resources in regions potentially
sensitive to acidic deposition?
2. What is the biological resource at risk in these regions and what are critical values
indicating this resource is at risk?
3. What are the important biogeochemical factors influencing the resource at risk
and controlling its sensitivity to acidic deposition?
4. What has happened to the chemical status of the resource at risk relative to its
current status as a result of acidic deposition?
5. What will happen to the resource at risk in the future at current levels of
deposition?
6. What are the biological implications of past changes in the chemical status of this
aquatic resource?
7. What are the levels of acidic deposition below which adverse biological effects are
minimized?
8. What is the rate of recovery of currently acidic systems at various levels of
deposition?
9. How will we know whether additional systems are acidifying or whether recovery
is occurring?
1.4.3 Program Elements - Future Activities and Emphasis
The Aquatic Effects Research Program will be redirected from survey activities to forecasts,
verification, and validation for the final report. After completion of the Mid-Appalachian survey,
the Direct/Delayed Response Project will shift in emphasis toward data synthesis, project integration,
and data analysis using output from the manipulation studies and classification activities. The five-
year plan assumes that the analyses of National Surface Water Survey data will establish a sufficient
foundation for further, well-focused extrapolation. Should the data warrant continuing the
1-20
-------
National Surface Water Survey in certain regions or subregions in order to address questions for the
final report, present plans may be altered.
National Surface Water Survey
The emphasis of the National Surface Water Survey, now in the final stages of the synoptic
survey approach, will shift from collecting high-quality baseline data to refining estimates of the
current status and extent of acidic and potentially sensitive aquatic systems. Of primary importance
will be an effort to maximize the usefulness of information available from the synoptic survey data
base to classify systems. The approach will be to focus on refining the estimates by considering small
lakes and streams, aquatic systems outside the National Surface Water Survey study regions, seepage
lakes, and alpine lakes. Smaller scale studies addressing a specific question (e.g., mercury in fish,
drinking water studies, and shallow aquifer acidification) will continue to focus on policy-relevant
issues.
DirectlDelayed Response Project
The Direct/Delayed Response Project will continue to analyze watershed response to acidic
deposition in the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge Province. These analyses are being extended to
include the Mid-Appalachians. Future activities will emphasize the integration of watershed and
surface water data and the development of procedures to classify watershed responses as a function
of acidic deposition. The classification approach will employ multivariate statistical procedures,
empirical models, and dynamic watershed models to correlate future watershed response estimates
with the current resource status. These classification procedures and protocols will contribute to the
development of dose-response relationships through predictions of acidification or recovery of
surface waters.
Watershed Manipulation and Process Studies
The Watershed Manipulation Project will continue manipulation and process studies at the
Maine watershed site. These studies, which will continue beyond 1990, will provide long-term
verification of Direct/Delayed Response Project forecasts and identification of processes and
watershed interactions controlling surface water acidification, through a number of highly
integrated soil process studies, e.g., sulfate mobility, aluminum mobilization, and base cation supply
and mineral weathering. Some of the Watershed Manipulation Project studies will be integrated
with the Episodic Response Project, as part of the Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulations
Project. Other studies will be implemented to determine if the Direct/Delayed Response Project
dynamic models and other more simplistic, steady-state models can be used to predict recovery in
response to lower levels of acidic deposition relative to current levels. The Little Rock Lake
acidification study will continue to examine chemical and biological response to direct additions of
1-21
-------
acids, providing data for examination of a number of acidification-related hypotheses. Studies are
being initiated to evaluate the applicability of the findings to other regions and to examine how
similar the response of Little Rock Lake is to other sites in the region that have longer-term data
records. Both of these projects will offer the opportunity to study the rate and nature of recovery
after acid addition is terminated.
Episodic Response Project
The Episodic Response Project will help to refine estimates of the size of the aquatic resource
that has changed or is at risk of changing due to acidic deposition. The Episodic Response Project
focuses on acquiring biologically relevant chemical data in order to gain a better understanding of
biological effects due to acute acidification, principally effects on fish. The specific objectives are to
understand the frequency, duration, and magnitude of episodes, the key factors that influence their
occurrence, the impacts episodes have on fish populations, and their regional extent. A fifth
objective, although not expected to be completed by 1990, is to contribute to the identification of
region-specific, dose-response estimates.
Data from intensive experimental studies on hydrochemical and biological processes, along
with limited surveys of chemistry and fish will form the basis for developing regionally applicable
models of chemical and biological response. After calibration and verification, the models will be
applied to the statistical frame of the National Surface Water Survey to provide estimates of
biologically relevant chemical data as well as effects on fish on a regional basis.
The Fernow Watershed in West Virginia has been selected for implementing the first intensive
experimental studies. This site has been the focus of an ongoing study funded by the U.S.D.A.-Forest
Service, and thus provides empirical data needed to begin model development and verification.
Field studies at Fernow are expected to begin late this year.
Long-Term Monitoring
As now planned, sites for the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems study will be
established throughout the United States by 1990. The objective of studying these sites is the timely
identification of changes in surface water chemistry related to increased or decreased levels of acidic
deposition. The monitored systems will be selected so that evidence of recovery or acidification can
be used to infer regional changes through the regionalized frame developed for the Aquatic Effects
Research Program. If significant changes or trends are detected, an additional survey of the
potentially affected surface waters can be conducted. The data from this survey, when compared to
the results of the National Surface Water Survey data, will serve as a warning or a recovery index.
Complementing this project are two supporting projects designed to improve presently used
analytical methods and to quantify data quality through rigorous quality assurance evaluations.
1-22
-------
These projects will enhance the capability of detecting trends and will improve the certainty with
which long-term, regional-scale conclusions can be made.
Synthesis and Integration
A major emphasis for the program through 1990 will involve developing the classification
scheme described above. These analyses are the foundation for the report on program results that
will contribute to the 1990 NAPAP assessment. Because not all components of the program are
expected to be completed in time to contribute to the assessment, synthesis and integration will
continue beyond 1990. Key issues to be examined beyond 1990 include the influence of episodes on
surface water response, provision of data on potential nitrate acidification to refine dose-response
relationships, and corroboration or modification of acidification and recovery predictions through
long-term monitoring.
1.4.4 Program Guidance
The present program is guided by NAPAP, the Multimedia Energy Research Committee, the
Policy/Assessment Committee (established specifically for this program), and the Aquatic Effects
Research Program management team. As the program shifts direction, its guidance will have to be
precise and focused; future goals and objectives, as well as assessment, policy, and scientific needs,
will have to be integrated carefully. Policy, assessment, scientific, and management team members
will continue to cooperate as a guidance committee on activities designed to contribute to NAPAP's
1990 assessment and to plan research on important issues to address in the future.
1.4.5 Major Outputs
The major output from the Aquatic Effects Research Program will be to provide information
for answering the policy questions listed in Section 1.1.1 on a region-specific basis. When answering
these questions, acidification must be considered from both a regional and a site-specific
perspective, and some acidification processes may be more important in some regions or at some
sites than others. Because of these considerations, prioritizing projects in specific regions is the most
effective way to provide quality information. The National Surface Water Survey has been and will
continue to be the basis for this prioritization (Table 2). The target dates for responding to the policy
questions are shown in Table 3.
1-23
-------
TABLE 2. REGIONAL LOCATION OF PROJECTS WITHIN THE
AQUATIC EFFECTS RESEARCH PROGRAM
Region
AERP Projects3
Northeast
Middle Atlantic
Southern Blue Ridge Province
Southeast
Florida
Upper Midwest
Upper Peninsula of Michigan
Northcentral Wisconsin
West
NLS/DDRP/WMP/ERP/BRC/TIME
NSS/DDRP/REAM/TIME/ERP
NLS/NSS/DDRP/TIME
NSS/TIME
NLS/NSS/BRC/TIME
NLS/TIME
NLS/BRC/TIME
NLS/TIME
NLS/TIME
3 NLS-National Lake Survey
NSS - National Stream Survey
DDRP- Direct/Delayed Response Project
WMP - Watershed Manipulation Project
REAM - Regional Episodes and Acidic Manipulation
ERP - Episodic Response Project
BRC - Biologically Relevant Chemistry
TIME - Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems
(proposed locations)
TABLE 3. TARGET DATES FOR ADDRESSING POLICY QUESTIONS IN TERMS OF
CHRONIC EXPOSURE (LONG-TERM ACIDIFICATION) OR
ACUTE EXPOSURE (SHORT-TERM ACIDIFICATION) TO ACIDIC DEPOSITION
Issue
Resource
Location
Date
Long-Term Acidification
Change
Change
Future/Dose-Response
Future/Dose-Response
Validation/Monitoring
Short-Term Acidification
Change
Dose/Response
Synthesis/Integration
Lakes
Streams
Lakes, Streams
Lakes, Streams
Lakes, Streams
Northeast, Florida, Southern Blue Ridge
Province, Upper Midwest, West
Southern Blue Ridge Province,
Mountainous Southeast, Middle Atlantic
Northeast, Southern Blue Ridge Province
Middle Atlantic
All Regions
Streams Northeast, Middle Atlantic
Streams Northeast, Middle Atlantic
Lakes, Streams All Regions
1987/88
1988/89
1988/89
1989/90
1995
1990/91
1991
1989/90
1-24
-------
SECTION 2
PROJECT SUMMARIES
2.1 PROGRAM STRUCTURE - OVERVIEW
This section contains summaries of research activities within the Aquatic Effects Research
Program (AERP) that have been approved for funding in fiscal years 1987 and 1988 or are being
proposed for funding in fiscal year 1989. Each subsection corresponds to one of the Planned
Program Accomplishments (PPA), the mechanism by which EPA's Office of Research and
Development tracks its research projects and deliverables. Each PPA is based on a Program within
the AERP designed to focus on a particular research goal:
PPA Code Program Title
E-01 National Surface Water Survey
E-07 Direct/Delayed Response Project
E-05 Watershed Processes and Manipulations
E-08 Episodic Response Project
E-03 Biologically Relevant Chemistry
E-09 Synthesis and Integration
E-06 Long-Term Monitoring
E-04 Indirect Human Health Effects
Within each PPA, there are four levels of summaries that can be conceptualized by a hierarchical tier,
as shown in Figure 7. The summaries at the higher levels of the tier (Program, Program Element)
reflect the research activities of their respective lower levels (Project, Subproject), but individual
summaries for all levels are included to provide more specific information.
\. Program /
\L Program Element /
\. Project /
Figure 7. Conceptualization of the levels within each Planned Program Accomplishment.
2-1
-------
Each summary is identified and tracked by an EPA code number. Each summary also is
identified by a second code number that corresponds to a research framework established by NAPAP
(see Section 1, page 1-1). These codes allow the project to be tracked both within the EPA's AERP
and within the context of the broader program that involves a number of other agencies. For more
information on the NAPAP organizational structure, consult the Council on Environmental Quality,
722 Jackson Place NW, Washington, DC (202-395-5771). An example of the hierarchy with its paired
codes is shown in Table 4.
TABLE 4. EXAMPLE OF AQUATIC EFFECTS RESEARCH PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND CODES
Level EPA Code (NAPAP Code) Short Title
Program E-01 (6A-1) National Surface Water Survey
Program Element E-01.1 (6A-1.01) Regional and Subregional Studies
Project E-01.1A(6A-1.01A) National Lake Survey
Subproject E-01.1A1 (6A-1.01A1) Western Lake Survey
Each summary provides the following key information:
• the complete title and short title of the program (or program element, project,
subproject);
• region(s) and state(s) (where the research is being conducted);
• goal(s) and objective(s) (what the research hopes to accomplish);
• rationale (reason for conducting the research); and
• approach (direction taken to reach the research goals).
In addition, a list of key words is provided for each summary, upon which an index was
developed to facilitate the use of the document by scientists and administrators interested in a
particular aspect of research. The key words are divided into five categories : (1) 'medium' - the
primary discipline (chemistry, biology) or specific component or process of the ecosystem (e.g.,
cisterns, deposition, snowpack) that the activity focuses on; (2) chemicals - principal chemical
constituents measured in the study; (3) approach - types of data acquisition and analysis used; (4)
goal - one- or two-word description of the principal question the research activity addresses; and (5)
processes - type of mechanism related to acidification being studied (e.g., sulfate adsorption, base
cation supply).
At the end of each summary, the EPA and NAPAP code numbers, status, period of
performance, and the key contact individual(s) are also included. It must be mentioned that
although these summaries provide useful information regarding various levels of the PPAs, they are
not intended to be thorough descriptions of all AERP activities. For more detailed information on a
research activity, the designated technical contact should be consulted.
2-2
-------
2.2 NATIONAL SURFACE WATER SURVEY - PROGRAM E-01
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-01: National Surface Water Survey (6A-1) 2-5
E-01.1 Regional and Subregional Studies (6A-1.01) 2-6
E-01.1A National Lake Survey (6A-1.01A) 2-8
E-01.1A1 Western Lake Survey (6A-1.01A1) 2-9
E-01.1A2 Northeastern Seasonal Variability (6A-1.01A2) 2-10
E-01.1A3 Front Range Lake Acidification (6A-1.01A3) 2-11
E-01.1A4 MtZirkel Lake Study (6A-1.01A4) 2-12
E-01.1A5 New Mexico Lake Study (6A-1.01A5) 2-13
E-01.1B National Stream Survey (6A-1.01B) 2-14
E-01.1B1 Southern Blue Ridge Stream Survey (6A-1.01B1) 2-15
E-01.1B2 Middle Atlantic Stream Survey (6A-1.01B2) 2-16
E-01.1B3 Southeast Screening (6A-1.01B3) 2-17
E-01.2 Subpopulational Studies (6A-1.02) 2-18
E-01.2A Seepage Lake Studies (6A-1.02A) 2-19
E-01.2A1 Seepage/Evaporation Evaluation Project (6A-1.02A1) 2-20
E-01.2A2 Seepage Lake Acidification (6A-1.02A2) 2-21
E-01.2B Western Alpine Lakes (6A-1.02B) 2-22
2-3
-------
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Surface Waters in Low Alkalinity Regions of the United States
SHORT TITLE: National Surface Water Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN),
Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl),
West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To quantify with known statistical confidence the current status, extent, and
chemical and biological characteristics of surface waters in regions of the United States potentially
sensitive to the effects of acidic deposition. To examine, by applying scientific principles, concepts,
and resolution of uncertainty in methods and approach, the extent to which current chemical status
of aquatic ecosystems can likely be attributed to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Acidic deposition has been found to regionally alter the biologically relevant chemical
attributes of aquatic ecosystems. Assessing the current resource at risk and estimating change will
provide a basis for sound policy decisions.
APPROACH: Regional-scale studies focus on those areas of the United States where existing chemical
and geological data indicate waters with low alkalinity. The population of interest is identified and
a statistical sample of these systems is obtained using appropriate methods followed by field
sampling and complete chemical analyses. Estimates of the chemical status (e.g., proportion of lakes
with low acid neutralizing capacity and of acidic lakes) of entire resource populations or
subpopulations are possible using this approach. Uncertainties in estimates are further refined
through specific research projects.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Conductance,
Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Organic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01 NAPAPCode: 6A-1
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1983to1991
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-5
-------
TITLE: Estimated Chemical Characteristics of Lakes and Streams in National Surface Water Survey
Regions and Subregions
SHORT TITLE: Regional and Subregional Studies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN),
Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl),
West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate the regional-scale chemical characteristics of surface waters in
large geographical areas of the United States that are potentially sensitive to acidic deposition. To
identify regions and subregions upon which to focus a more intense study of the relationship
between present surface water chemistry and potential effects of acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Prior to the National Surface Water Survey, there were no complete regional-scale
data bases with sufficiently documented quality assurance protocols. Also, no standardized,
comparable analytical methods existed for quantitatively estimating the present chemical status of
surface waters on a large geographical basis. To assess with known confidence the degree of
damage caused by acidic deposition and to predict the future risk to surface waters requires
regionally extensive, standardized data, with known uncertainty estimates. Such data bases improve
the ability to make sound, relevant policy decisions regarding acidic deposition effects on aquatic
resources.
APPROACH: To meet the objectives of this program element, it is necessary to divide potentially
sensitive areas of the United States into relatively homogeneous physiographic regions. Lake or
stream reaches are identified in each region, and a statistical probability sample of these water
bodies is taken to identify a subset of water bodies for field measurements. Samples are collected
during a period when chemical variability within any single system is expected to be low. This
"index" period was identified as fall mixing for lakes and nonstorm spring runoff for streams. Water
samples are collected and analyzed for a number of chemical variables according to rigidly defined,
standardized analytical and quality assurance protocols. Because of the probability-based design
and the standardized approach, characteristics of the sampled lakes and streams can be predicted
with known estimates of certainty. By developing this standardized data base, particular areas of
the United States can be identified for further study, and the results of other studies (not within the
survey frame) can be compared and evaluated with these survey estimates.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Nitrate, Organics,
pH,Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Organic Acidification
2-6
-------
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.1 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1983 to 1991
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-7
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Lakes in Low Alkalinity Regions of the United States
SHORT TITLE: National Lake Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (FL, GA, NC, SC,
TN, VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR,
UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To quantify, with known statistical confidence, the current status, extent,
and chemical and biological characteristics of lakes in regions of the United States that are
potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Many geographic regions of the United States with important lake resources are
currently experiencing acidic deposition which is changing ecosystems. Responsible policy decisions
can be made by assessing current chemical and biological conditions and past change.
APPROACH: Lake resources are estimated on a regional scale, and a randomly selected subset of
lakes is sampled using appropriate methods. The sample results are then weighted in order to
estimate the chemical compositions of lake populations with known confidence. Uncertainties with
time of sampling (i.e., season), spatial variability, and population definition (i.e., lake size) are
included in specific research projects to improve confidence in estimates.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Conductance,
Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Organic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.1A NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1983 to 1991
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-8
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Lakes in the Mountainous Western United States
SHORT TITLE: Western Lake Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate the number, distribution, and characteristics of lakes in those
areas of the western United States believed to contain the most low alkalinity lakes.
RATIONALE: Existing data on western lakes are inadequate to make regional-scale, quantitative
assessments about the current chemical status of lakes, particularly in high altitude wilderness areas
of the West.
APPROACH: A probability-based survey of lakes in areas believed to contain the most low alkalinity
lakes in the mountainous areas of the western United States was conducted in fall 1985. This
"index" sample provides a basis for assessing lakes in the West and a framework for comparing them
with lakes in the East. The Western Lake Survey differs from the Eastern Lake Survey in several
respects: the Western Lake Survey was conducted in fall 1985; the minimum lake size in the
sampling frame was 1 hectare; and lakes in wilderness areas were accessed by ground rather than by
helicopter.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Conductance,
Metals, Nitrate, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification
EPA Code: E-01.1A1
NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01A1
PPA: E-01
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Lake Survey (E-01.1 A)
Status: Ongoing
Contact: Joseph Eilers
Period of Performance: 1985 to 1988
2-9
-------
TITLE: Quantifying Seasonal Variability in Lakes in the Northeastern United States
SHORT TITLE: Northeastern Seasonal Variability
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To assess the seasonality of chemical status of lakes in the northeastern
United States that was developed during Phase I of the National Surface Water Survey.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey was designed as a three-phase project for
documenting the present chemical and biological status of lakes and streams in regions of the
United States that are potentially sensitive to acidic deposition. By seasonally sampling select surface
waters, temporal variability in Phase I aquatic resources will be quantified. Phase I of the National
Surface Water Survey quantified surface water chemistry in areas of the United States expected to
contain the majority of low alkalinity waters during a fall "index" period. Phase II will quantify
chemical variability within and among lakes on a regional basis using the subset of lakes sampled in
Phase I and adjusting the Phase I estimates.
APPROACH: One hundred and fifty lakes sampled in the northeastern United States during Phase I
of the Eastern Lake Survey were resampled in the spring, summer, and fall of 1986 to assess seasonal
lake chemical variability. The specific water chemistry variables measured in Phase I have also been
measured in Phase II.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Metals, Nitrate,
Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Aluminum Speciation, Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.1A2 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01A2
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Lake Survey (E-01.1 A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1988
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-10
-------
TITLE: Lake Acidification in the Front Range of Colorado
SHORT TITLE: Front Range Lake Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (CO)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To sample lakes in the Front Range of Colorado to determine if literature
references to lake acidification are consistent with analyses of complete chemical data.
RATIONALE: Of the regions in the West receiving acidic deposition, the Front Range of Colorado is
an area of concern because it is close to the Denver metropolitan area and previous studies have
concluded that lake acidification has occurred. Concern over lake acidification in this area is typical
of localized situations in the West.
APPROACH: Approximately 43 lakes will be sampled annually, as per a previous study (1979), and
5-10 lakes will be sampled biweekly to determine if lake sulfate concentrations reflect acidification
by acidic deposition. Complete chemical characterization will be performed. Maximum acidification
will be estimated using a new method that differentiates estimated normal regional atmospheric
deposition of sulfate from weathering of sulfur minerals in watersheds. It is anticipated that this
subprojectwill become part of the long-term monitoring project, Temporally Integrated Monitoring
of Ecosystems.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Base Cations, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Mineral Weathering
EPA Code: E-01.1A3
NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01A3
PPA: E-01
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-05, E-06, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Lake Survey (E-01.1 A)
Status: Ongoing
Contact: Dixon Landers
Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
2-11
-------
TITLE: Chemistry of Lakes in High Elevation, Western Wilderness Areas
SHORT TITLE: Mt. Zirkel Lake Study
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (CO)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To characterize the chemistry of 10 high-elevation lakes in the Mount Zirkel
and Weminuche Wilderness Areas during a summer index period; to determine temporal variability
of key chemical parameters in four of the lakes; and to examine the relationship between major ions
in precipitation and lake water.
RATIONALE: Concern about acidic deposition is growing in the western United States.
Development of energy and metal resources is expected to increase atmospheric emissions of acid-
precursors and trace metals. Of particular note are the developments near wilderness areas or
national parks. Since federal permits are required for these areas, air quality is protected from
degradation. This project will evaluate the present water quality of lakes in these areas to help
develop emissions permits and control strategies, to establish a data base for monitoring long-term
effects, and to evaluate selected monitoring methods.
APPROACH: Ten lakes (four in Mt. Zirkel Wilderness Area and six in Weminuche Wilderness Area)
were selected for study because of their low alkalinity and sulfate concentrations. These lakes would
exhibit the strongest trends when responding to acidic inputs if sulfate deposition is the major
source of acidity. Sampling is conducted in the summer at two depths for the Mt. Zirkel lakes and at
the outflow for the Weminuche lakes. Samples from the Mt. Zirkel lakes are preserved and analyzed
for a number of chemical properties, while samples from the Weminuche lakes are analyzed for
major ions only. Yearly sampling will show long-term trends, if any occur. It is anticipated that this
subproject will become part of the long-term monitoring project, Temporally Integrated Monitoring
of Ecosystems.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes
Chemicals: Conductance, Major Ions, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent, Trends Detection
Processes: Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPACode: E-01.1A4 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01A4
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-05, E-06, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Lake Survey (E-01.1 A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-12
-------
TITLE: Seasonal and Episodic Water Quality Changes in Precipitation and Lake Water in Northern
New Mexico
SHORTTITLE: New Mexico Lake Study
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West(NM)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To monitor atmospheric deposition at a high altitude site characteristic of
northern New Mexico, and to determine the frequency, duration, and magnitude of acidic episodes
in precipitation, snowmelt, and adjacent lakes.
RATIONALE: The Western Lake Survey provided only fall data for lakes in high mountainous regions.
Very little is known of the possible effects of spring snowmelt or precipitation events on these dilute
systems. Further, there are very few high altitude sites at which deposition chemistry is measured.
The New Mexico Lake Study will provide needed information in both of these areas.
APPROACH: Precipitation chemistry will be monitored by an NADP-type deposition sampling station
at the 3,110-foot level in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains in northern New Mexico. Snowpack
chemistry at that location will be determined monthly during the winter, and snowmelt will be
sampled using a 1.5-m diameter fiberglass snowmelt collector. The nine adjacent Latir lakes will be
monitored for changes in water chemistry associated with snowmelt and precipitation. It is
anticipated that this subproject will become part of the long-term monitoring project, Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Snowpack
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Ammonium, Major Ions,
Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: E pi sod i c Ac i d i f i cati on
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.1A5 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01A5
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-05, E-06, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Lake Survey (E-01.1 A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-13
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Streams in Low Alkalinity Regions of the United States
SHORTTITLE: National Stream Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Southeast (AL, AR, FL,
GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the percentage, extent, and location of streams in the United
States that are presently acidic or have low acid neutralizing capacity, and are therefore susceptible
to becoming acidic in the future. To identify streams that represent important classes in each region
for possible use in more intensive studies or long-term monitoring.
RATIONALE: To understand the environmental effects of acidic deposition, it is necessary to have a
quantitative regional estimate with known confidence of the status and extent of acidic and low
acid neutralizing capacity streams. Current water quality data bases for streams are used for making
such estimates because the studies they document employed inadequate statistical sampling designs,
inconsistent field and laboratory methods, or insufficient chemical measurements to adequately
characterize stream water quality.
APPROACH: The National Stream Survey gives an overview of stream water chemistry in regions of
the United States that are expected, on the basis of previous alkalinity data to contain
predominantly low acid neutralizing capacity waters. The National Stream Survey employs a
randomized, systematic sample of regional stream populations, and uses rigorous quality assurance
protocols for field sampling and laboratory chemical analysis. Many chemical variables important to
aquatic biota are measured, in addition to major cations, anions, pH, and acid neutralizing capacity.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Major Ions, Metals, Nitrate,
Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPACode: E-01.1B NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1991
Contact: Philip Kaufmann
2-14
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Streams in the Southern Blue Ridge Province
SHORT TITLE: Southern Blue Ridge Stream Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To test the feasibility of the National Stream Survey sampling design. To
test, evaluate, and refine the National Stream Survey logistics plan, data analysis plan, and
alternative sample collection, preparation, and analytical techniques before undertaking the full-
scale survey.
RATIONALE: Prior to this pilot survey, a large-scale synoptic survey of stream water quality had not
been successfully conducted over a short period of time using a probability sampling frame and
rigorous quality assurance protocols. This survey is providing unbiased regional estimates with
known confidence of the present chemical status of streams.
APPROACH: The Southern Blue Ridge Stream Survey used a randomized, systematic sample of
streams and rigorous quality assurance protocols for field sampling, sample transport, and
laboratory chemical analysis. A relatively complete set of biologically and geochemically relevant
variables was measured. The survey maximized regional sampling density and the number of
samples taken in the spring and summer to optimize the sampling design in the full National Stream
Survey.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Major Ions, Metals, Nitrate,
Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification
EPA Code: E-01.1B1
NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01B1
PPA: E-01
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Stream Survey (E-01.1B)
Status: Completed
Contact: Philip Kaufmann
Period of Performance: 1984 to 1987
2-15
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Streams in the Middle Atlantic Region
SHORT TITLE: Middle Atlantic Stream Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the percentage, extent, and location of streams in the Middle
Atlantic that are presently acidic or have low acid neutralizing capacity, and are therefore
susceptible to becoming acidic in the future. To identify streams that represent important classes in
this region for possible use in more intensive studies or long-term monitoring.
RATIONALE: Previously existing stream water quality data bases are inadequate for making
quantitative regional chemical distribution estimates in this region. The Middle Atlantic is a region
of high acidic deposition. To understand the environmental effects of acidic deposition, it is
neccessary to quantify the status and extent of acidic and low acid neutralizing capacity streams.
APPROACH: The Middle Atlantic Stream Survey is a synoptic survey of water chemistry in this region.
It employs a randomized systematic sample of streams and uses rigorous quality assurance protocols
for field sampling, sample transport, and laboratory chemical analysis. A relatively complete set of
biologically and geochemically relevant variables has been measured. Some measure of temporal
and upstream/downstream variability is included in the sampling design.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Major Ions, Metals, Nitrate,
Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPACode: E-01.1B2 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01B2
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Stream Survey (E-01.1B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1988
Contact: Philip Kaufmann
2-16
-------
TITLE: Present Chemical Status of Streams in the Southeastern United States - Synoptic Chemical
Survey
SHORT TITLE: Southeast Screening
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the percentage, extent, and location of streams in the
Southeast and Florida that are presently acidic or have low acid neutralizing capacity, and are
therefore susceptible to becoming acidic in the future. To identify streams that represent important
classes in this region for possible use in more intensive studies or long-term monitoring.
RATIONALE: Previously existing stream water quality data bases are inadequate for making
quantitative regional chemical distribution estimates in this region. To understand the effect of
acidic deposition on streams in this region, it is necessary to quantitatively estimate, with known
confidence, the status and extent of acidic and low acid neutralizing capacity streams.
APPROACH: The Southeast Screening is a synoptic survey of water chemistry in this region. It
employs a randomized, systematic sample of streams and uses rigorous quality assurance protocols
for field sampling and laboratory chemical analysis. A relatively complete set of biologically and
geochemically relevant variables has been measured. The index chemical values were evaluated
from single springtime samples at the upstream and downstream ends of sample stream reaches in
the drainage network.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Major Ions, Metals, Nitrate,
Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.1B3 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.01B3
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Regional and Subregional Studies (E-01.1)
Project: National Stream Survey (E-01.1 B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1988
Contact: Philip Kaufmann
2-17
-------
TITLE: Refining Estimates of Current Chemical Status of Special Subpopulations
SHORT TITLE: Subpopulational Studies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southeast (FL), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN. Wl), West (CA, AK)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To resolve questions regarding particular subsets of lakes identified in
Phase I of the National Surface Water Survey, which constitute a major portion of the acidic or low
acid neutralizing capacity population of lakes. Specifically, to examine in more detail the chemistry
of seepage lakes and of dilute lakes.
RATIONALE: Two Subpopulations of lakes identified in the Eastern and Western Lake Surveys
require additional scrutiny to determine the present chemical status of the aquatic resources within
potentially sensitive regions of the United States. Seepage lakes, those without surface water inlets
and outlets, constitute two-thirds of the acidic lake population in the eastern United States. Very
little is known, however, about the relationship between regional seepage lake chemistry and acidic
deposition. A high proportion of lakes in the western United States have very low conductance, and
because of their dilute water chemistry, they are assumed to have a very low acid neutralizing
capacity. Studying the Phase I data base in more detail and analyzing other data bases should
further characterize these important Subpopulations.
APPROACH: Seepage lakes are being examined by two methods. First, existing data on lake and
deposition chemistry are being compared to calculate enrichment/depletion ratios of major ions.
These results will provide regional estimates of the amount of groundwater inputs, the amount of
acid neutralizing capacity that is internally generated, and the relative contribution of acidic
deposition to the acid status of these waters. Second, measurements of deposition and groundwater
inputs are proposed for a small number of acidic seepage lakes to determine whether these lakes are
acidic due to deposition or natural processes. Dilute lakes are proposed to be examined in more
detail by extensively analyzing data from the Western Lake Survey, comparing lake chemistry to
deposition chemistry, and surveying in the spring a subset of lakes in the California Subregion that
were previously surveyed in the fall of 1985. With results of the spring survey, the population of all
dilute lakes in the California Subregion can be estimated, and lake chemistry between spring and fall
can be compared to assess the importance of spring snowmelt in altering western alpine lake
chemistry.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Groundwater, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Conductance, Major Ions,
Nitrate, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Hydrology, Within-Lake Acid Neutralizing
Capacity Generation
PPA: E-01
EPA Code :E-01.2
NAPAPCode: 6A-1.02
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Joseph Eilers
2-18
-------
TITLE: Refining Estimates of the Present Chemical Status of Seepage Lakes
SHORT TITLE: Seepage Lake Studies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southeast (FL), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (AK)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To describe the relationship between the chemistry of acidic seepage lakes
and atmospheric deposition, to quantify factors controlling current seepage lake chemistry, and to
predict the future response of acidic seepage lakes to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Most of the research on lake acidification concerns drainage lakes with short hydraulic
times. Seepage lakes constitute two-thirds of the acidic lakes in the United States; determining their
current status will help in understanding all sensitive aquatic resources.
APPROACH: Field sampling will be done to quantify the relationship between groundwater and
seepage lake chemistry in Florida and the Upper Midwest. Chemical enrichment factors will be
evaluated for seepage lakes in the Upper Midwest. Background chemistry in seepage lakes not
impacted by deposition will be conducted in the far West.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Groundwater, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: Nitrate, Su I fate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Hydrology, Organic Acidification, Within-Lake
Acid Neutralizing Capacity Generation
PPA: E-01 EPA Code:E-01.2A NAPAPCode: 6A-1.02A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Subpopulational Studies (E-01.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Joseph Eilers
2-19
-------
TITLE: Evaluating the Relationship between Atmospheric Deposition and Seepage Lake Water
Chemistry
SHORT TITLE: Seepage/Evaporation Evaluation Project
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To evaluate the relationship between deposition chemistry and the
chemistry of seepage lakes in the Upper Midwest.
RATIONALE: By comparing deposition chemistry (wet and dry) with lake chemistry and accounting
for the concentration of solutes due to evaporation in seepage lakes with long hydraulic residence
times, the internal generation of acid neutralizing capacity and other important processes that
control the chemistry of seepage lakes can be estimated.
APPROACH: Wet deposition chemistry from the National Acid Deposition Program, with small-scale
studies of dry deposition, will be used to estimate total deposition in the Midwest. Lakes from the
Eastern Lake Survey - Phase I will be screened to include only those with minimal watershed
disturbances. The chemistry of these undisturbed lakes will be compared to deposition chemistry.
Assuming that chloride is conservative, evapoconcentration will be computed, and adjusted
concentrations will be used to calculate enrichment factors for major ions.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: Major Ions, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Literature
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Hydrology, Within-Lake Acid Neutralizing
Capacity Generation
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.2A1 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.02A1
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Subpopulational Studies (E-01.2)
Project: Seepage Lake Studies (E-01.2A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: Joseph Eilers
2-20
-------
TITLE: Evaluating Chemistry of Groundwater and Seepage Lakes in Areas Receiving Acidic
Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Seepage Lake Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southeast (FL), Upper Midwest (Wl), West (AK)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To quantify the relationship between groundwater chemistry and seepage
lake chemistry in Wisconsin and Florida to describe more fully the relationship between deposition
and lake water chemistry; to describe background chemistry in remote seepage lakes.
RATIONALE: Unlike drainage lakes, which receive most of their hydrologic input from surface
runoff, most watershed input to seepage lakes comes from groundwater. Therefore, to assess the
susceptibility of seepage lakes it is necessary to measure groundwater inputs directly.
APPROACH: Seepage lakes in Florida and Wisconsin will be monitored intensively for meteorologic
and terrestrial inputs and outputs. The lakes will be either acidic or have low acid neutralizing
capacity and will be located in sandy soils typical of lake districts in both states. The detailed
hydrologic and chemical budgets will make it possible to refine existing seepage lake models or
develop new models for predicting seepage lake response to acidic deposition. Background
chemistry of seepage lakes will be determined by a probability sample of seepage lakes in Alaska in
an ecoregion similar to that for Wisconsin.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Groundwater, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Hydrology, Organic Acidification, Within-Lake
Acid Neutralizing Capacity Generation
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.2A2 NAPAPCode: 6A-1.02A2
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Subpopulational Studies (E-01.2)
Project Area: Seepage Lake Studies (E-01.2A)
Status: Proposed Period of Performance: 1989 to 1991
Contact: To be determined
2-21
-------
TITLE: Spring Chemistry of Selected Subpopulations of Lakes in the Western United States
SHORT TITLE: Western Alpine Lakes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West(CA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide a population-based estimate of spring chemistry of potentially
sensitive lakes in the West, and to relate that spring chemistry with deposition chemistry from the
previous winter.
RATIONALE: The Western Lake Survey - Phase I identified a subpopulation of highly dilute lakes
that may have a high potential for responding to relatively small loadings of acidic deposition
accumulated in the massive snowpacks of lakes located at high elevations. Early meltwaters could
conceivably depress the low acid neutralizing capacity values measured in the fall survey to negative
values in the spring.
APPROACH: Fifty dilute lakes (conductance <10 nS/cm), selected in the Sierra Nevada, will be
sampled twice during the spring snowmelt period. Other subregions may be sampled in subsequent
years depending on the results of this study. Deposition chemistry will be monitored at or near the
50 study sites and compared with lake water chemistry. Population estimates of this subpopulation
will be compared with Western Lake Survey results from the fall.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Snowpack
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification, Hydrology
PPA: E-01 EPA Code: E-01.2B NAPAPCode: 6A-1.02B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: National Surface Water Survey (E-01)
Program Element: Subpopulational Studies (E-01.2)
Status: Proposed Period of Performance: 1989 to 1991
Contact: To be determined
2-22
-------
2.3 DIRECT/DELAYED RESPONSE PROJECT - PROGRAM E-07
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-07: Direct/Delayed Response Project (6B-1) 2-25
E-07.1 Soil Surveys (6C-2.11) 2-26
E-07.1A Regional Soil Surveys (6C-2.11A) 2-28
E-07.1 A1 Northeastern Soil Survey (6C-2.11A1) 2-30
E-07.1A2 Southern Blue Ridge Soil Survey (6C-2.11A2) 2-32
E-07.1 A3 Mid-Appalachian Soil Survey (6C-2.11A3) 2-34
E-07.1B Special Soil Studies (Sulfate Retention) (6C-2.11B) 2-36
E-07.2 Regionalization of Soil Chemistry (6C-2.12) 2-37
E-07.3 Correlative Analyses (6C-2.09) 2-38
E-07.3A Evidence of Sulfur Retention (6C-2.09A) 2-39
E-07.3B Hydrology/Water Chemistry (6C-2.09B) 2-40
E-07.3C Soil Aggregation (6C-2.09C) 2-41
E-07.3D Soil/Water Interactions (6C-2.09D) 2-42
E-07.3E Water Chemistry/Vegetation (6C-2.09E) 2-43
E-07.3F Surface Water/Wetland Relationships (6C-2.09F) 2-44
E-07.4 Single-Factor Analyses (6C-2.10) 2-46
E-07.4A Sulfate Adsorption (6C-2.10A) 2-47
E-07.4B Base Cation Supply (6C-2.10B) 2-49
E-07.5 Predicting Surface Water Acidification (6B-1.01) 2-51
2-23
-------
-------
TITLE: Prediction of Regional-Scale Surface Water Acidification in Potentially Sensitive Regions of
the United States
SHORT TITLE: Direct/Delayed Response Project
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl,
VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To predict future effects of acidic deposition on surface water chemistry in
the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge Province and (1) to characterize the regional variability of
soil and watershed characteristics, (2) to determine which soil and watershed characteristics are most
strongly related to surface water chemistry, (3) to estimate the relative importance of key watershed
processes across the regions of concern, and (4) to classify a sample of watersheds according to their
response characteristics to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: This work will predict future effects of acidic deposition on surface water chemistry to
help assess potential adverse effects.
APPROACH: This project applies to the Northeast (New York and New England) and the Southern
Blue Ridge Province (eastern Tennessee, western North Carolina, northern Georgia), and is proposed
to extend to the Mid-Appalachian Region (Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Maryland, Virginia). This
project includes sampling soil, analyzing characteristics for a select number of watersheds, and
applying analytical and predictive methods to explain the interaction of acidic deposition within
such systems. This study will help predict future effects of acidic deposition on these watersheds and
associated lakes and streams.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Soils,Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Major Ions, Sulfate
Approach: Aggregation, Correlative Analyses, Field Mapping, Field Sampling,
Input-Output Budgets, Laboratory, Modeling, Single-Factor Analyses
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification, Hydrology, Mineral
Weathering, Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07 NAPAP Code: 6B-1
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1991
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-25
-------
TITLE: Regional Surveys of Physicochemical Characteristics of Soils for Use in Predicting Surface
Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Soil Surveys
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl,
VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with high-quality, internally
consistent data on soils and other watershed characteristics needed for Level I, II, and III analyses; to
provide related projects with data to help select sites and develop programs.
RATIONALE: The Direct/Delayed Response Project aims to characterize the responses of watersheds
to varying levels of acidic deposition on a regional basis. Related projects (Watershed Manipulation
Project, Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems) will focus on the responses of
representative watersheds. Both of these projects require two types of high-quality, internally
consistent data bases on watershed characteristics of importance for relating the response of surface
waters to acidic deposition: (1) regional data bases and (2) watershed-specific data bases.
A pilot soil survey conducted in 1984 concluded that existing data bases were not adequate because
of the following: (1) most sites of interest are in remote areas are not covered by existing soil maps
of adequate resolution; (2) most soils of interest are nonagricultural soils for which few, if any, data
on physical and chemical properties exist; (3) the laboratory analyses rarely include certain critical
parameters, such as sulfate adsorption or unbuffered cation exchange capacity; and (4) major
questions regarding data comparability and reliability arise because many different analytical
techniques were used and because quality assurance/quality control information generally is not
available. Therefore, it is impossible for these projects to access the required data bases without
performing soil surveys specifically designed to meet their needs.
APPROACH: Activities in each region include watershed selection, watershed mapping, soil
sampling, and laboratory analysis. Soil survey field activities have been completed in the Northeast
and the Southern Blue Ridge Province. They are proposed for the Mid-Appalachian region.
1. Watershed Selection. Watersheds are selected probabilistically from National Surface
Water Survey sites or according to criteria developed for special purposes.
2. Watershed Mapping. Experienced Soil Conservation Service field crews map soils,
vegetation, and depth-to-bedrock at a scale of 1:24,000. Bedrock geology maps for each
watershed are produced from existing maps.
3. Soil Sampling. The soil maps are used to define soils representing each region or
watershed as appropriate. Soil Conservation Service personnel sample these soils at
locations specified by the Direct/Delayed Response Project.
4. Laboratory Analysis. Field crews deliver soil samples to laboratories that dry and otherwise
prepare the samples for chemical and physical analysis, analyze some samples, then ship
the samples and audit samples to the analytical laboratories where most of the analyses
are performed.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Field Mapping, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification,
Mineral Weathering, Sulfate Adsorption
2-26
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.1 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.11
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1991
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-27
-------
TITLE: Regional Soil Surveys in the Northeast, Southern Blue Ridge Province, and Mid-Appalachians
SHORTTITLE: Regional Soil Surveys
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl,
VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECHVE(S): To provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with high-quality, internally
consistent regional data on soils and other watershed characteristics that can be extrapolated for
regions of concern to generate and test statistical hypotheses within and among regions; to provide
related projects (Watershed Manipulation Project, Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems)
with a basis for ensuring and documenting that sites selected for study are representative.
RATIONALE: The Direct/Delayed Response Project aim is to characterize the responses of watersheds
to varying levels of acidic deposition on a regional basis. Related projects (Watershed Manipulation
Project, Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems) will focus on the responses of
representative watersheds. The success of these projects depends upon access to high-quality,
regionally consistent data bases on watershed characteristics of importance for relating the response
of surface waters to acidic deposition. A pilot Soil Survey conducted in 1984 demonstrated that
existing data bases were not adequate for use in the Direct/Delayed Response Project. Therefore, it
was impossible for these projects to access the required regional data bases without performing soil
surveys specifically designed to meet their needs.
APPROACH: Activities in each region include watershed selection, watershed mapping, soil
sampling, and laboratory analysis. Soil survey field activities have been completed in the Northeast
and Southern Blue Ridge Province. They are proposed for the Mid-Appalachian region.
1. Watershed Selection. Watersheds are selected from those included in the National Surface
Water Survey and constitute a probabilistic sample of surface waters in the populations of
interest.
2. Watershed Mapping. Experienced Soil Conservation Service soil scientists map soils,
vegetation, and depth-to-bedrock at a scale of 1:24,000. Bedrock geology maps for each
watershed are produced from existing maps.
3. Soil Sampling. The soil maps are used to define soil sampling classes that represent soils
within each region. Soil Conservation Service personnel sample these classes at randomly
selected locations. Each pedon is not meant to represent the soil of the watershed from
which it was obtained. Instead, the pedons of a given soil sampling class collectively
represent that class throughout the region.
4. Laboratory Analysis. Field crews deliver soil samples to laboratories that dry and otherwise
prepare the samples for chemical and physical analysis, conduct some soil analyses, then
ship the samples along with audit samples to the analytical laboratories where most of the
analyses are performed.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Field Mapping, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Chronic Acidification, Mineral Weathering,
Sulfate Adsorption
2-28
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.1A NAPAP Code: 6C-2.11A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Soil Surveys (E-07.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1991
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-29
-------
TITLE: Survey of Physicochemical Characteristics of Soils in the Northeastern United States for Use in
Predicting Surface Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Northeastern Soil Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT)
GOAL{S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with high-quality, internally
consistent regional data on soils and other watershed characteristics that can be extrapolated for the
Northeast region; to provide related projects (Watershed Manipulation Project, Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems) with a basis for ensuring and documenting that sites selected
for study are representative.
RATIONALE: The Direct/Delayed Response Project aims to characterize the response of watersheds
to varying levels of acidic deposition on a regional basis. The Northeast was identified as a region of
concern because it contains many resources of interest (i.e., lakes), it receives large amounts of acidic
deposition, and it is geologically different from other parts of the eastern United States (i.e., north of
the line of glaciation). The Northeastern Soil Survey was implemented to provide the Direct/Delayed
Response Project with the necessary high-quality, internally consistent data base on soils and other
watershed characteristics that was not available from any existing source.
APPROACH: Activities include watershed selection, watershed mapping, soil sampling, laboratory
analysis, and data management. All activities except data management have been completed.
1. Watershed Selection. Watersheds were selected from those included in the National
Surface Water Survey and constitute a probabilistic sample of surface waters in the
population of interest. In the Northeast, 145 watersheds were randomly selected from
Eastern Lake Survey lakes with ANC < 400 neq L-1, depth > 1 m, and watershed area
< 3000 ha. Watersheds were distributed approximately evenly among three ANC strata:
< 25peq L-1, 25-100 peq L-i, 100-400 peq L-1. There is about a 85% overlap between DDRP
and Phase II ELS lakes.
2. Watershed Mapping. Experienced Soil Conservation Service soil scientists mapped soils,
vegetation, and depth-to-bedrock at a scale of 1:24,000. Point observations on selected
transects were made to verify the regional composition of map units. Bedrock geology
maps for each watershed were produced from existing maps. Color infrared aerial
photographs were taken and interpreted for wetlands, beaver activity, landuse, and
drainage.
3. Soil Sampling. Mapped soils were grouped into 38 sampling classes that are representative
of the Northeast. The Soil Conservation Service sampled these classes at randomly selected
locations; usually, 8 pedons were sampled for each class.
4. Laboratory Analysis. Field crews delivered the samples to laboratories that dried and
otherwise prepared the samples for chemical and physical analysis, did some of the
analyses, and then shipped the samples to analytical laboratories where most of the
analyses were performed.
5. Data Management. Watershed maps have been entered into a Geographic Information
System. Other data (including quality assurance data) are being entered into a data base
that is being subjected to rigorous documentation and verification procedures.
2-30
-------
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Field Mapping, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Chronic Acidification, Mineral Weathering,
Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.1A1 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.11A1
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Soil Surveys (E-07.1)
Project: Regional Soil Surveys (E-07.1 A)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1984 to 1987
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-31
-------
TITLE: Survey of Physicochemical Characteristics of Soils in the Southern Blue Ridge Province for Use
in Predicting Surface Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Southern Blue Ridge Soil Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with high-quality, internally
consistent regional data on soils and other watershed characteristics that can be extrapolated for the
Southern Blue Ridge Province; to provide related projects (Watershed Manipulation Project,
Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems) with a basis for ensuring and documenting that
sites selected for study are representative.
RATIONALE: The Direct/Delayed Response Project aims to characterize the response of watersheds
to varying levels of acidic deposition on a regional basis. The Southern Blue Ridge Province was
identified as a region of concern because it contains many resources of interest (i.e., streams), it
receives large amounts of acidic deposition, and it is geologically different from other parts of the
eastern United States (i.e., from the Northeast and Mid-Appalachians). The Southern Blue Ridge Soil
Survey was implemented to provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with the necessary high-
quality, internally consistent data base on soils and other watershed characteristics that was not
available from any existing source.
APPROACH: Activities include watershed selection, watershed mapping, soil sampling, laboratory
analysis, and data management. All activities except laboratory analysis and data management have
been completed.
1. Watershed Selection. Watersheds were selected from those included in the National
Surface Water Survey and constitute a probabilistic sample of surface waters in the
population of interest. In the Southern Blue Ridge Province, all watersheds sampled in the
Pilot National Stream Survey with watershed area < 3000 ha and ANC < 400 peq L-1 were
included in the Soil Survey.
2. Watershed Mapping. Experienced Soil Conservation Service soil scientists mapped soils,
vegetation/landuse, drainage, and depth-to-bedrock at a scale of 1:24,000. Point
observations on random transects were made to verify the regional composition of map
units. Bedrock geology maps for each watershed were produced from existing maps.
3. Soil Sampling. Mapped soils were grouped into 12 sampling classes that are
representative of the Southern Blue Ridge Province. The Soil Conservation Service
sampled these classes at randomly selected locations; usually, 8 pedons were sampled for
each class.
4. Laboratory Analysis. Field crews delivered the samples to laboratories that dried and
otherwise prepared the samples for chemical and physical analysis, did some of the
analyses, and then shipped the samples to analytical laboratories where most of the
analyses are being performed.
5. Data Management. Watershed maps have been entered into a Geographic Information
System. Other data (including quality assurance data) are being entered into a data base
that is being subjected to rigorous documentation and verification procedures.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Field Mapping, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Chronic Acidification, Mineral Weathering,
Sulfate Adsorption
2-32
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.1A2 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.11A2
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Soil Surveys (E-07.1)
Project: Regional Soil Surveys (E-07.1 A)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1986 to 1988
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-33
-------
TITLE: Survey of Physicochemical Characteristics of Soils in the Mid-Appalachian Region for Use in
Predicting Surface Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Mid-Appalachian Soil Survey
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, PA, VA, WV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with high-quality, internally
consistent regional data on soils and other watershed characteristics that can be extrapolated for the
Mid-Appalachian Region; to provide related projects (Watershed Manipulation Project, Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems) with a basis for ensuring and documenting that sites selected
for study are representative.
RATIONALE: The Direct/Delayed Response Project aims to characterize the response of watersheds
to varying levels of acidic deposition on a regional basis. The Mid-Appalachian Region was identified
as a region of concern because it contains many resources of interest (i.e., streams), it receives large
amounts of acidic deposition, and it is geologically different from other parts of the eastern United
States (i.e., from the Northeast and the Southern Blue Ridge Province). The Mid-Appalachian Soil
Survey is being implemented to provide the Direct/Delayed Response Project with the necessary
high-quality, internally consistent data base on soils and other watershed characteristics that was not
available from any existing source.
APPROACH: Activities include watershed selection, watershed mapping, soil sampling, laboratory
analysis, and data management. All activities are being planned.
1. Watershed Selection. Watersheds are being selected from those included in the National
Surface Water Survey and will constitute a probabilistic sample of surface waters in the
population of interest. In the Mid-Appalachian Region, preliminary selection of
watersheds includes all those sampled by the National Stream Survey in regions 2B and 2C
with watershed area < 3000 ha and ANC < 200 ueq L-1 that are not known to have been
seriously disturbed by mining or other activities.
2. Watershed Mapping. Experienced Soil Conservation Service soil scientists will map soils,
vegetation/landuse, drainage, and depth-to-bedrock at a scale of 1:24,000. Point
observations on random transects will be made to verify the regional composition of map
units. Bedrock geology maps for each watershed will be produced from existing maps.
3. Soil Sampling. Mapped soils will be grouped into sampling classes that are representative
of the Mid-Appalachian Region. The Soil Conservation Service will sample these classes at
several randomly selected locations.
4. Laboratory Analysis. Field crews will deliver the samples to laboratories that will dry and
otherwise prepare the samples for chemical and physical analysis, do some of the analyses,
and then ship the samples to analytical laboratories where most of the analyses will be
performed.
5. Data Management Watershed maps will be entered into a Geographic Information
System. Other data (including quality assurance data) will be entered into a data base that
will be subject to rigorous documentation and verification procedures.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Field Mapping, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Chronic Acidification, Mineral Weathering,
Sulfate Adsorption
2-34
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.1 A3 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.11A3
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Soil Surveys (E-07.1)
Project: Regional Soil Surveys (E-07.1 A)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-35
-------
TITLE: Verifying the Extent of Sulfate Retention in Northeastern Watersheds
SHORT TITLE: Special Soil Studies (Sulfate Retention)
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To identify watersheds in the northeastern United States that have high
rates of net sulfate retention, then to (1) identify the process(es) that retain sulfate, and (2) if the
process is adsorption, estimate time needed to reach sulfur steady state.
RATIONALE: Available data suggest that sulfur budgets for most watersheds in the northeastern
United States are at or very close to steady state, yet some systems in the region are calculated to
retain a significant fraction of sulfur inputs. To make reliable predictions of the future effects of
acidic deposition on surface water quality in the region, it is essential to determine if net sulfate
retention is actually occurring (or alternatively, if it is an artifact resulting from uncertainty in input-
output budgets). If retention is occurring, then it must be determined whether and at what rate
sulfate concentrations will increase to steady state. The processes that retain sulfate and the
capacity of the watershed to continue retention must be evaluated. If these systems are retaining
sulfate through processes other than adsorption, watershed chemistry models currently used may
have to be modified to accurately predict future watershed response.
APPROACH: Based on existing, preliminary input-output budgets for approximately 700 drainage
lakes and impoundments in the northeastern United States sampled during the Eastern Lake Survey,
45 lakes with high computed sulfate retention rates have been selected for further study. Aerial
photos of each site will be taken and interpreted to determine potential land-use factors affecting
sulfate mobility (e.g., wetlands, agricultural disturbance), and soils in the watersheds will be mapped
in detail to identify soil taxonomic units and to characterize bedrock, vegetation, and soil physical
features. Data will be compared to those collected from the original 145 Direct/Delayed Response
Project watersheds to identify factors contributing to sulfur retention. If the causes of retention are
not resolved on the basis of watershed mapping data, additional soil sampling at some or all of the
watersheds will be considered. For sites where retention occurs by adsorption, time to reach steady
state will be predicted using soil chemistry data with the sulfate subroutine of a watershed chemistry
model.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Soils, Wetlands
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Aggregation, Existing Data Analysis, Field Mapping, Input-Output
Budgets
Goal: Classification, Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Reduction, Sulfur Cycling
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.1B NAPAP Code: 6C-2.11B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05. E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Soil Surveys (E-07.1)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-36
-------
TITLE: Developing Relationships Among Regional Soil Survey Data Bases to Extend the Utility of
Analyses in the Direct/Delayed Response Project
SHORT TITLE: Regionalization of Soil Chemistry
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, NH, NY, PA, Rl,
VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To combine information from the Direct/Delayed Response Project soil
survey data bases with information contained in the SOILS 5 and other preexisting data bases for
soils in other regions.
RATIONALE: This work will combine information from the Direct/Delayed Response Project soil
surveys with information from existing soils data bases to make extrapolations to other regions not
surveyed in the Direct/Delayed Response Project. This will help to a priori characterize soils in other
regions and evaluate their potential responses to continued acidic deposition.
APPROACH: This work will combine the Direct/Delayed Response Project soil survey data from the
Northeast, Southern Blue Ridge Province, and Mid-Appalachians with information on soils in other
regions in the East, such as other areas of the Blue Ridge and Appalachians. Statistical analyses of
the relationship between specific chemical analyses undertaken in the Direct/Delayed Response
Project and standard analyses used in previous soil surveys will be used to compare and combine the
data bases.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Base Cations, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory, Literature
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.2 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.12
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1988to1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-37
-------
TITLE: Relationships between Watershed Characteristics and Surface Water Chemistry
SHORT TITLE: Correlative Analyses
REGION(S)/STATE(S):
Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA,
Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine which soil and watershed characteristics are most strongly
related to surface water chemistry. To estimate the relative importance of key watershed processes
in the regions of study.
RATIONALE: These analyses will show clearly how watershed and soil characteristics relate to surface
water chemistry. This relationship is important for determining the types of models that are best
suited for predicting future surface water chemistry and the best methods for evaluating surface
water chemistry both through single-factor response time estimates and complex dynamic
watershed models.
APPROACH: This work is being undertaken for sample watersheds in the Northeast, the Southern
Blue Ridge Province, and the Mid-Appalachians. This work will apply statistical analyses to data
gathered from watershed mapping and sampling in the Direct/Delayed Response Project. It will
assess the relationships among these factors and surface water chemistry measured in the
watersheds. The standard mapping and sampling data sets from the Direct/Delayed Response
Project will allow the clearest determination of relationships possible. Previous investigations on
regional relationships have been limited by the lack of internal consistence of the data sets
examined.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Base Cations, Organics, pH, Silica, Sulfate
Approach: Aggregation, Correlative Analyses, Field Mapping, Field Sampling,
Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Hydrology, Mineral Weathering, Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-07
EPA Code: E-07.3
NAPAPCode: 6C-2.09
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-38
-------
TITLE: Extent of Sulfur Retention in Watersheds in the Eastern United States
SHORT TITLE: Evidence of Sulfur Retention
REGION(S)/STATES(S): Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA,
Rl, VT), Southeast (AK, AL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The purpose of this work is to determine the amount of sulfur retained in
watersheds studied in the Direct/Delayed Response Project.
RATIONALE: Retention of sulfur from atmospheric deposition in watersheds is an important factor
affecting surface water acidification. Sulfate can act as a mobile anion, carrying with it combinations
of base cations and acid cations. In general, northern soils have relatively little ability to adsorb
sulfate, whereas southern soils have a greater ability to do so. The sulfur retention status of soils can
change with time due to the effects of continued loading from atmospheric deposition. Such soils
can lose part of their ability to retain sulfur, possibly resulting in increased leaching of acids to
surface waters. Determining the current status of sulfur retention in soils and watersheds is useful in
projecting future effects of constant or altered levels of sulfur deposition.
APPROACH: This project will employ an input/output analysis approach. Annual inputs are being
provided from NAPAP's Task Group IV (Deposition Monitoring and Air Quality). Outputs are
computed using lake and stream chemistry from the National Surface Water Survey in the East and
estimates of annual runoff from maps produced by the U.S. Geological Survey. Input/output status
of northeastern watersheds will be compared with that of southeastern watersheds. The hypothesis
that northeastern watersheds are at steady state under current loadings will be examined.
Input/output status will be examined in light of the potential for internal watershed sources of sulfur
and with regard to relationships of status with soils characteristics. Results of the analyses will be
displayed both as distribution of percent sulfur retention and as maps of percent sulfur retention.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Correlative Analyses, Field Sampling, Input-Output Budgets, Literature
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Sulfur Retention
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.3A NAPAP Code: 6C-2.09A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Correlative Analyses (E-07.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-39
-------
TITLE: Relationship between Hydrologic Factors and Surface Water Chemical Characteristics
SHORT TITLE: Hydrology/Water Chemistry
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province
(GA, NC, SC, TN)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Within watersheds, hydrologic flowpath has been identified as an
important factor determining the relationship between acidic deposition and surface water
chemistry. Detailed information on hydrologic flowpath is difficult to obtain, often requiring
extensive field studies on individual watersheds. The goals of this project are (1) to use indirect
methods, such as mapped geomorphic parameters, to estimate the hydrologic flowpath, (2) to relate
flowpath to hydrologic soil contact, and (3) to relate hydrologic soil contact to surface water
chemistry.
RATIONALE: The route that precipitation follows through a watershed to receiving surface waters is
an important factor in determining surface water chemistry. If the flowpath is predominantly
shallow, subsurface flow resulting in rapid runoff, the chemistry of the water reaching the surface
water system will more closely reflect the precipitation chemistry. If the major flowpath is deep,
resulting in longer residence times in the soil, the increased contact with exchange and adsorption
sites yields a greater potential for neutralization of acidic deposition inputs. Determining the
correlation between hydrologic soil contact and surface water chemistry will provide important
information about the long-term effects of acidic deposition on surface water chemistry.
APPROACH: Hydrologic contact time is being estimated by (1) using topographic maps of individual
watersheds to measure geomorphic and hydrologic parameters, (2) applying a modified Darcy's Law
to soil permeability and hydraulic conductivity data collected as part of the Direct/Delayed Response
Project Soil Survey, and (3) using the hydrologic model TOPMODEL to study watersheds and
estimating hydrologic parameters for determining possible flowpath. Correlations between these
estimates and surface water chemistry collected in the Eastern Lake Survey - Phase I will be
performed.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Base Cations, Sulfate
Approach: Correlative Analyses, Modeling
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Prediction
Processes: Hydrology
PPA: E-07
EPA Code: E-07.3B
NAPAP Code: 6C-2.09B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Correlative Analyses (E-07.3)
Status: Ongoing
Contact: M. Robbins Church
Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
2-40
-------
TITLE: Aggregation of Soils Data to Develop Regional Soil Chemical Characteristics at Watershed
Scales
SHORTTITLE: Soil Aggregation
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl,
VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): This study will evaluate and select an appropriate aggregation scheme to
estimate typical soil characteristics in watersheds located in regions susceptible to acidic deposition.
The resulting aggregated (or lumped parameter) data will be used in all three levels of analysis in the
Direct/Delayed Response Project. The primary objective of the Direct/Delayed Response Project is to
aggregate soils to identify the factors controlling surface water acidifcation and the future
watershed response to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Soil sampling for physical and chemical characteristics is expensive and time
consuming. In describing the regional characteristics of soils, it is impractical to perform detailed and
complete studies of all soils that exist within the study area. By designing a probabilistic sampling
scheme within the region, this problem becomes manageable. Although the detail within individual
watersheds is reduced by aggregation techniques, sufficient information on soil characteristics is
retained to correlate soil properties with observed surface water chemistry on a regional basis.
APPROACH: A probability sample of watersheds, stratified by alkalinity, was selected from the
Eastern Lake Survey target population. Soils, along with other watershed characteristics, were
mapped to a six-acre resolution. Based on the mapped information, soils (representing about
365 identified soil series) in the Northeast were grouped into 38 sampling classes. In the Southern
Blue Ridge Province, soils were grouped into 12 sampling classes. Similarly, soils in the Mid-
Appalachians also will be addressed. Subsequent analyses are based on data aggregated within
these sampling classes. According to the needs of the user, data may be aggregated by horizon, by
pedon, or across sampling classes. Also, data may be areally weighted for whole watersheds or
specific "buffer" zones (e.g., 30-m buffer strips around the perimeter of the lakes, the riparian
zones), again, according to the requirements of the data user.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Soil Chemistry
Approach: Aggregation, Correlative Analyses, Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.3C NAPAP Code: 6C-2.09C
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Correlative Analyses (E-07.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-41
-------
TITLE: Relationship between Surface Water Chemistry and Soil Chemical Properties
SHORT TITLE: Soil/Water Interactions
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl,
VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this project is to establish, on a regional basis, a statistically valid
description of those physical and chemical soil characteristics that correlate with observed surface
water chemical composition, including pH and acid neutralizing capacity.
RATIONALE: Meteoric waters, for the most part, must pass through soils before emerging as surface
waters. Interactions between soils and water, therefore, play a major role in determining the final
compositions of waters that emerge. While numerous, process-level studies provide information
regarding the type of interactions that should be expected from individual processes, it is difficult to
develop a unified understanding of the most critical processes, especially from a regional
perspective, from the information now available. This statistical study will establish, within the
constraints of the sampling program, those processes that are most closely correlated with, and
therefore, presumably related to, observed surface water chemical composition. The study also will
provide a way to test hypotheses relating to those processes, and help define those areas in which
additional process-level research might be needed.
APPROACH: Physical and chemical soils data have been collected from a probability sample of
watersheds in the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge Province. Water chemistry data are available
from the Eastern Lake Survey - Phase I. The soils data are being grouped by predefined sampling
classes. According to the needs of the specific analysis, data may be aggregated by horizon, by
pedon, or across sampling classes. Data will be areally weighted for whole watersheds or specific
"buffer" zones (30-m buffer strips around the perimeter of the lakes, the riparian zones, etc.), again,
according to the specific analysis being conducted. Bivariate and multivariate analyses, using water
chemistry as the dependent variable, will then be conducted using the data aggregated according to
these various schemes.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Base Cations, Organics, pH, Soil Chemistry
Approach: Aggregation, Correlative Analyses, Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Hydrology, Mineral Weathering, Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.3D NAPAP Code: 6C-2.09D
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Correlative Analyses (E-07.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-42
-------
TITLE: Relationship between Surface Water Chemistry and Vegetation
SHORT TITLE: Water Chemistry/Vegetation
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To generate and statistically test hypotheses relating vegetation of
watersheds to surface water chemistry.
RATIONALE: Relationships between vegetation type and surface water chemistry might exist
because foliage or litter directly intercept and alter the chemistry of water flowing through
watersheds, because (1) indirect effects are mediated by the effects of vegetation on chemical
cycling (e.g., cations), (2) vegetation affects soil-forming processes, or (3) the distribution of
vegetation depends on watershed status or processes that also affect surface water chemistry. For
instance, wetland vegetation might indicate that sulfate reduction is important. The regional data
bases of the Direct/Delayed Response Project provide a statistical basis for testing many of the
hypotheses that may link vegetation and surface water chemistry.
APPROACH: Vegetation cover maps (six-acre minimum delineations) are available for each
watershed from the mapping phase of the Direct/Delayed Response Project. Data on where specific
classes of wetlands occur (one-acre minimum delineations) are available from ground-truthed
interpretation of aerial photos (stereo color infrared) of Direct/Delayed Response Project
watersheds. The latter are available for the Northeast and for the Mid-Appalachians. Statistical
analysis relating vegetation classes in watersheds or portions of watersheds provides a way to test
the importance of proposed vegetation-water chemistry relationships on a regional scale.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Vegetation, Watersheds
Chemicals: Base Cations, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Correlative Analyses, Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Prediction
Processes: Community Response, Sulfate Reduction
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.3E NAPAP Code: 6C-2.09E
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Correlative Analyses (E-07.3)
Status: Ongoing (Northeast, Southern Blue Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990
Ridge Province); Initiating (Mid-Appalachians)
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-43
-------
TITLE: Relationship between Surface Water Chemistry and Wetlands
SHORTTITLE: Surface Water/Wetland Relationships
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the relationship(s) between presence/area of wetlands and
surface water chemistry in Direct/Delayed Response Project watersheds; in particular, to determine
the relationship between wetlands and sulfate retention. If a significant correlation exists between
wetlands and sulfate retention, identify and quantify the processes involved.
RATIONALE: A principal objective of the Direct/Delayed Response Project is to characterize sulfate
mobility in watersheds of the northeastern United States, and to predict future changes in sulfate
mobility under current or altered levels of deposition. Data analyses and predictive models used in
the Direct/Delayed Response Project have heretofore assumed that adsorption is the principal
control on surface water chemistry, and that sulfate reduction in wetlands and lake sediments is a
minor sulfur sink. Preliminary analysis of data from the Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I suggests a
positive correlation between the fraction of a watershed covered by wetlands and sulfate retention
by that watershed. Adsorption is an improbable sulfur sink in wetlands, so confirmation of a
wetland-sulfate retention relationship in further data analyses would suggest a need to reassess the
assumptions and models used in the Direct/Delayed Response Project, at least for watersheds with
significant wetland areas. The purpose of this project is to conduct a thorough analysis of existing
data to determine whether a significant relationship, in fact, exists between wetlands and sulfate
retention, or between wetlands and other water chemistry parameters of concern. If such
relationships are identified, additional studies will be required to determine the nature and capacity
of the processes involved.
APPROACH: The initial approach to this project will be to compile existing data from the Eastern
Lake Survey and the Direct/Delayed Response Project, and to evaluate relationships between sulfate
budgets and wetlands using statistical approaches. A concurrent activity within the Direct/Delayed
Response Project, the Northeast Sulfate Retention Project (listed as a project under the "Soil Surveys"
program element of the Direct/Delayed Response Project) will generate detailed mapping data for
45 watersheds in the Northeast with high sulfate retention, many of which also have substantial
wetlands cover. Data from those 45 sites will be examined in detail to evaluate the relationship
between sulfate retention and wetlands. If such relationships do exist, and if retention cannot be
effectively characterized on the basis of map data, consideration will be given to further soil
sampling and/or quantification of sulfate reduction processes within wetlands.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Vegetation, Wetlands
Chemicals: Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Correlative Analyses, Input-Output Budgets, Literature
Goal: Classification, Model Development, Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: Sulfate Reduction, Sulfur Retention
2-44
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.3F NAPAP Code: 6C-2.09F
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Correlative Analyses (E-07.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-45
-------
TITLE: Single-Factor Analyses of Direct/Delayed Response Project Data
SHORT TITLE: Single-Factor Analyses
REGION(S)/STATE(S):
Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To use mathematical/model representations of two key processes - sulfate
adsorption and base cation supply; to determine current and predicted future responses of
watersheds in the Northeast, Mid-Appalachians, and the Southern Blue Ridge Regions to various
levels of acidic deposition. More specifically, to determine if these processes are in steady state or
whether they are undergoing dynamic change such that the effects of acidic deposition in the future
may be more pronounced than those currently observed.
RATIONALE: These types of analyses allow prediction based upon an examination of individual soil
processes in isolation from all other confounding factors. Changes can be examined that might
occur even at the current loadings of deposition. Predictions of future responses of these factors are
required to verify and place in context the importance of the roles of each of these processes in
future surface water acidification.
APPROACH: These analyses will be undertaken with information gathered as part of the soils
surveys in the Northeast, Mid-Appalachians, and the Southern Blue Ridge Province. Chemical data
from the soils analyses will be combined with mapping data in watersheds to predict future
responses of these processes on a watershed basis and the resulting effects on surface water
chemistry.
KEYWORDS:
Medium:
Chemicals:
Approach:
Goal:
Processes:
Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Base Cations, Cation Exchange Complex, Clay Minerals, Sulfate
Aggregation, Field Sampling, Laboratory, Modeling
Classification, Prediction
Base Cation Exchange, Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification, Sulfate
Adsorption, Sulfur Retention
PPA: E-07
EPA Code: E-07.4
NAPAP Code: 6C-2.10
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-46
-------
TITLE: Sulfate Adsorption: Time to Sulfur Steady State
SHORT TITLE: Sulfate Adsorption
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The objectives of these analyses are (1) to determine the relationship
between soil solution and surface water sulfate concentrations, and (2) to estimate time for
watershed sulfate concentrations to reach steady state in Direct/Delayed Response Project study
areas.
RATIONALE: This project, representing one of the Single-Factor Analyses for the Direct/Delayed
Response Project, is designed to quantify sulfate partitioning between soil solution and absorbed
phases, then to use those data to estimate how long sulfate is retained by soils on a net basis, and the
resulting time over which surface water chemical changes are moderated by sulfate adsorption.
Sulfate is the dominant anion in acidic deposition, and is the principal mobile anion mediating the
rate of cation leaching from soils. Consequently, the extent to which sulfate is immobilized by soil
reactions, primarily adsorption, plays a major role in determining whether, and at what rate, surface
water acidification by acidic deposition will occur. It has been hypothesized that there are major
regional differences in sulfate retention between the northeastern and southeastern United States
(Northeast at steady state, Southeast with high sulfate retention), thus, there will be major regional
differences in the extent and rate of future effects on surface water chemistry. This hypothesis has
not been evaluated on a regional scale, using soils data collected in large-scale, uniform soil surveys.
Sulfate analyses in the Direct/Delayed Response Project will provide such an assessment at intra- and
interregional scales, and will estimate response time (time to steady state) for sulfate on a watershed
and regional basis.
APPROACH: For all soils collected in the Direct/Delayed Response Project soil survey, present sulfate
content of the soil has been measured, and adsorption isotherms, which define the ability of soils to
retain additional sulfate, have been determined. For each soil, the concentration of sulfate in soil
water will be estimated from isotherm data; isotherm data are also being used to compute
coefficients for a partitioning equation that predicts dynamics of sulfate added to the soil. Data will
be aggregated from values for individual soils to weighted averages for sampling classes and then
for watersheds. Average watershed values for soil solution sulfate will be compared with measured
surface water sulfate concentrations to determine the relationship between soil water and surface
water sulfate (and by implication, the extent to which soil processes control surface water sulfate
concentration). Aggregated watershed data for adsorption isotherms will be used with a dynamic
watershed model subroutine to predict the temporal response of the watershed to sulfate
deposition, and specifically to predict time to steady state for sulfate at current or altered deposition
loading rates.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Aggregation, Existing Data Analyses, Input-Output Budgets, Modeling,
Single-Factor Analyses
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfur Retention
2-47
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.4A NAPAP Code: 6C-2.10A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Program Element: Single-Factor Analyses (E-07.4)
Status: Ongoing (Northeast and Southern Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Blue Ridge Province); Initiating (Mid-Appalachians)
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-48
-------
TITLE: Base Cation Response to Acidic Deposition in Soils from the Northeast and Southern Blue
Ridge Province
SHORTTITLE: Base Cation Supply
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province
(GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Within watersheds, base cation exchange processes in soils have been
identified as one of the primary mechanisms for mitigating the effects of acidic deposition.
However, details regarding the extent to which this process is actually involved in acid neutralization
within watersheds in the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge Province are not currently available.
The goals of this study, therefore, are to determine (1) whether base cation exchange is, in fact, a
dominant soil process for neutralizing acidic deposition inputs, (2) whether this capacity is now
changing in response to acidic deposition, and (3) the rate of base cation depletion, if it is occurring.
RATIONALE: The depletion of exchangeable base cations in soils is hypothesized to be a major
factor delaying acidification of surface waters in regions receiving acidic deposition. However, very
little is currently known about cation supply and exchange processes in those regions. To
understand the effects of acidic deposition in the context of an ecosystem's ability to neutralize
acidic inputs over the long term (e.g., 100 years), it is essential to improve the understanding of
neutralization mechanisms and of the ecosystem's existing capacities. Addressing these issues will
provide the information required to determine long-term impacts of acidic deposition, at various
loading levels, on a variety of ecosystems.
APPROACH: Input data for existing soil genesis/soil chemistry models are being developed, using
soils data (cation exchange capacity, percent base saturation, exchangeable bases, exchange
coefficients, pH, etc.) collected as part of the soil surveys in the Direct/Delayed Response Project,
precipitation data from the National Trends Network, lake chemistry data from the Eastern Lake
Survey-Phase I, and U.S. Geological Survey runoff data. The models will address two questions:
(1)Can observed soil chemical parameters be used to predict parameters in the study watersheds?
and (2) Assuming that parameters can be successfully predicted, what changes would be expected to
occur in both soil and surface water chemistries over the course of the next century under acid
loading scenarios? As part of the study, sensitivity analyses of the models will be conducted.
Data were gathered so that the exchangeable cation resource could be estimated regionally, and
reliability estimates quantified. These data and information on sulfate chemistry will be used to
project the future impact of acidic deposition, at various acid loading levels, on watersheds located
in potentially sensitive regions of the country.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Base Cations, Cation Exchange Complex, Clay Minerals
Approach: Aggregation, Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling, Modeling, Single-
Factor Analyses
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification
2-49
-------
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.4B NAPAP Code: 6C-2.10B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project
Program Element: Single-Factor Analyses
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-50
-------
TITLE: Predicting the Effects of Acidic Deposition on Surface Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Predicting Surface Water Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this program is to estimate the number of aquatic systems that
might become acidic in the future at current levels of acidic deposition. Two primary objectives are
(1)to estimate the relative importance of key watershed processes in controlling surface water
chemistry across the regions of concern, and (2) to forecast watershed responses to current levels of
deposition over the next 50 years and extrapolate these results from the sample of watersheds to the
regions of concern. The regions in which the Direct/Delayed Response Project is being conducted are
the Northeast and the Southern Blue Ridge Province; the Mid-Appalachians is being considered as a
third region of study.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey estimated the current regional status and extent of
acidic lakes and streams plus the aquatic systems potentially susceptible to acidic deposition. With
this estimate of the current regional status of lakes and streams, the next question is how many of
these lakes and streams might become acidic in the future at current levels of acidic deposition. This
program element, as part of the Direct/Delayed Response Project, is designed to forecast the change
in surface water chemistry over the next 50 years for lakes in the Northeast and streams in the
Southern Blue Ridge Province and the Mid-Atlantic, assuming current levels of deposition. The Mid-
Atlantic area represents a transition zone between the Northeast and Southeast.
APPROACH: The Direct/Delayed Response Project is designed to forecast the effects of acidic
deposition on surface water chemistry over the next 50 years using several approaches. One of these
approaches, Level III (this program element), will use three dynamic watershed acidification models -
Enhanced Trickle Down, Integrated Lake/Watershed Acidification Study, and Model for Acidification
of Groundwaters in Catchments - to make these forecasts. A Level III modeling protocol for the
Direct/Delayed Response Project has been developed that includes model calibration, sensitivity
analyses, long-term consistency checks, future 50-year forecasts, and regionalization of the
individual watershed modeling results to the Northeast, Southern Blue Ridge Province, and Mid-
Atlantic Region. Three northeastern lakes (Woods, Panther, and Clear Pond) and three streams
(Coweeta Watersheds 34 and 36 and White Oak Run) will be used for model calibration and
confirmation. Similar watersheds are currently being evaluated for the Mid-Atlantic. Sensitivity
analyses will include both single-parameter and multiparameter perturbations. The long-term
consistency check will use a constant, annual precipitation/deposition record from nearby National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National
Trends Network stations reflecting a typical year, watershed data from the Direct/Delayed Response
Project Soil Surveys, and water chemistry data from the National Surface Water Survey for each of
145watersheds in the Northeast and 35 watersheds in the Southern Blue Ridge Province. The
number of watersheds in the Mid-Atlantic is currently being determined. The Direct/Delayed
Response Project was designed within a statistical frame similar to the National Surface Water
Survey, which will permit extrapolating the individual watershed responses to the target population
of lakes in the Northeast and streams in the Southern Blue Ridge Province and the Mid-Atlantic.
Uncertainty estimates will be provided for the regional extrapolations.
2-51
-------
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds, Wetlands
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Classification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Mineral Weathering, Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-07 EPA Code: E-07.5 NAPAP Code: 6B-1.01
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-03, E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Direct/Delayed Response Project (E-07)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-52
-------
2.4 WATERSHED PROCESSES AND MANIPULATIONS-PROGRAM E-05
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-05: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (6C-2,6C-3,6C-4) 2-55
E-05.1 Watershed Acidification (6C-3.01) 2-57
E-05.1A Maine Acidification Project (6C-3.01A) 2-59
E-05.1B Acidification of Organic Systems (6C-3.01C) 2-61
E-05.1C Southeastern Acidification Project (6C-3.01D) 2-62
E-05.2 Surface Water Acidification (6C-3.02) 2-64
E-05.2A Little Rock Lake (6C-3.02A) 2-66
E-05.2B Within-Lake Alkalinity Generation (Sulfate Reduction) (6C-3.02B) 2-68
E-05.2C Comparative Analyses of an Acidified Lake (6C-3.02C) 2-69
E-05.3 Soil/Hydrologic Processes (6C-2) 2-71
E-05.3A Sulfate Mobility in Soils (6C-2.03) 2-72
E-05.3A1 Adsorption Rates and Processes (6C-2.03A) 2-74
E-05.3A2 Effect of pH, Temperature, and Ionic Strength (6C-2.03B) 2-75
E-05.3A3 Batch versus Intact Soil Cores (6C-2.03C) 2-76
E-05.3A4 Desorption Rates and Processes (6C-2.03D) 2-77
E-05.3A5 Methods for Sulfate Determination in Soils (6C-2.03E) 2-78
E-05.3A6 Desorption Rates in DDRPSoils (6C-2.03F) 2-79
E-05.3B Cation Supply and Mineral Weathering in Soils (6C-2.04) 2-81
E-05.3B1 Clay Mineralogy (6C-2.04A) 2-82
E-05.3B2 Acidification Effects on Base Cation Supplies (6C-2.04B) 2-83
E-05.3C Aluminum Mobility in Soils (6C-2.05) 2-84
E-05.3D Hydrologic Pathways/Residence Times (6C-2.06) 2-85
E-05.3E Organic Acid Influence on Acidification (6C-2.07) 2-86
E-05.3F Nitrate Acidification Processes (6C-2.08) 2-87
E-05.3F1 Nitrate Mobility in Soils (6C-2.08A) 2-88
E-05.3F2 Nitrate Saturation Evidence (6C-2.08B) 2-89
E-05.3F3 Nitrate in Snowpack (6C-2.08C) 2-90
E-05.4 Model Development and Testing (6B-1.02) 2-91
E-05.4A Model Sensitivity (68-1.02A) 2-93
E-05.4B Recovery of Surface Waters (6B-1.028) 2-95
E-05.4B1 Clearwater Lake Recovery Study (6B-1.02B1) 2-96
E-05.4B2 Deacidification Modeling (6B-1.02B2) 2-98
E-05.4B3 RAIN Data Evaluation (Norway) (6B-1.0283) 2-99
E-05.5 Watershed Studies Coordination (6C-4) 2-100
2-53
-------
-------
TITLE: Factors Controlling the Response of Surface Waters to Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Watershed Processes and Manipulations
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, DE, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To investigate and quantify watershed systems and subsystems that
influence the acidity of surface waters and to determine the effect acidic deposition has on the
function of these systems.
RATIONALE: The response to a major policy question being addressed within the Aquatic Effects
Research Program depends on predicting future acidification effects, the primary aim of the
Direct/Delayed Response Project (Program E-07). That project bases such estimates on the processes
of sulfate adsorption and base cation supply. However, other processes such as sulfur cycling and
desorption, cation loss, nutrient cycling, organic acids, and hydrologic flow paths are also important
in determining the response of watersheds to acidic inputs. Aquatic systems within these watersheds
respond to acidic inputs by changes in water chemistry, within-lake processes, and biota. To
determine the uncertainties and limitations associated with predicting future status of surface
waters, all these processes must be investigated. Therefore, the biogeochemical response of
watershed systems or subsystems must be evaluated and understood before properly assessing the
consequences of alternative policy decisions.
APPROACH: Watershed studies within the Aquatic Effects Research Program are using three
approaches to further understand the effects of acidic deposition on surface waters: process-
oriented research on natural systems, watershed manipulation studies, and surface water
acidification model development and testing. The watershed manipulations focus on understanding
the integrated response of the biogeochemical processes that operate within a watershed and
contribute to surface water quality. The process-oriented research aims to improve our
understanding of the nature and function of specific watershed mechanisms that contribute to
surface water acidification. Modeling combines current understandings of surface water
acidification with the results of the other two areas of research to help quantify the uncertainties
met when predicting future surface water chemistries with models. These approaches are designed
to increase our understandings of effects, with the process studies contributing primarily to
hypothesis development, the manipulation studies to hypothesis testing, and modeling studies to
evaluating policy and deposition alternatives.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Base Cations, Clay Minerals, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Mapping, Field Sampling, Input-Output
Budgets, Laboratory, Modeling, Trends Analyses
Goal: Model Development, Model Verification, Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification,
Community Response, Hydrology, Mineral Weathering, Nitrogen
Cycling, Organic Acidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption,
Sulfur Cycling, Within-Lake Acid Neutralizing Capacity Generation
2-55
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05 NAPAPCode: 6C
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-03, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-56
-------
TITLE: Whole System Manipulations - Artificial Acidification of Watersheds
SHORT TITLE: Watershed Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (PA, WV), Northeast (ME), Southeast (AK, AL, FL, GA, KY,
MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To investigate and quantify watershed systems and subsystems that
influence the acidity of surface waters through field manipulation studies and to determine the
impact that acidic deposition has on the functioning of these systems.
RATIONALE: A major policy question being addressed within the Aquatic Effects Research Program
concerns predicting future acidification effects, a primary goal of the Direct/Delayed Response
Project (Program E-07). That project bases its estimates primarily on surface water acidification
models that simulate the processes of sulfate adsorption and base cation supply. In addition, other
processes such as sulfur cycling, cation loss, nutrient cycling, and hydrologic flow paths are also
represented in some of the models and are hypothesized to be important in determining the
response of watersheds to acidic inputs. Aquatic systems within these watersheds also respond to
acidic inputs through changes in water chemistry, within-lake processes, and biota, and in general,
are less well represented in the Direct/Delayed Response Project models. To determine the
uncertainties and limitations of predicting future status of surface waters, all these processes must
be investigated at the whole-system level. Therefore, the comparative response of watershed
systems or subsystems must be evaluated and understood to assess properly the consequences of
alternative policy decisions.
APPROACH: The primary approach in this program area is to study the response of watershed
systems to altered or manipulated acidic inputs. The program is based on field manipulations at the
system or subsystem level to evaluate their integrated response to the individual processes and
mechanisms. At present, a watershed manipulation project has been implemented in Maine. At the
site, atmospheric inputs will be monitored, annual budgets for major ions developed, and chemical
transformations in soils and vegetation quantified; elevational stream sampling transects will allow
characterization of spatial variation of stream chemistry patterns. Using a paired watershed
approach, one of the watersheds at the site will be manipulated by controlled addition of acidic
substances. Watershed responses will be determined and interpreted in light of biogeochemical
processes. Small-scale pilot studies will also be conducted at the site. Two additional watershed
sites, in the Mid-Appalachian region, will be established and manipulated using a similar, but
simpler, experimental design to gain additional information on watershed response to altered
sulfate deposition.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Base Cations, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Development, Model Verification, Recovery
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification,
Hydrology, Mineral Weathering, Nitrogen Cycling, Organic
Acidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption, Sulfur Cycling
2-57
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.1 NAPAPCode: 6C-3.01
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-03, E-06, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990 +
Contact: Parker J. Wigington, Jr.
2-58
-------
TITLE: Artificial Acidification of Bear Brook Watershed, Maine
SHORT TITLE: Maine Acidification Project
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the soil and hydrological processes, rates, and interactions
that control the response of surface waters to acidic deposition. To establish appropriate ways to
represent critical watershed processes within static and dynamic models. To test the behavior and
predictions of static and dynamic acidification models.
RATIONALE: The Aquatic Effects Research Program, through the National Surface Water Survey, has
established the status and extent of surface water chemistry for regions of the United States
susceptible to acidic deposition effects. The Direct/Delayed Response Project is predicting the time
required for surface waters to become acidic at current rates of deposition using both static and
dynamic acidification models. Unfortunately, the long-term data sets required to test these models
do not exist, resulting in uncertainties in model predictions and the way in which processes are
represented within the models. This project is designed to increase understanding of key processes
that control acidification, and to evaluate the behavior and predictions of the dynamic models being
used in the Direct/Delayed Response Project.
APPROACH: The watershed is the basic ecosystem that integrates all processes that control surface
water chemistry responses to acidic deposition. Using a paired watershed experimental design,
baseline studies are conducted to determine the relationships between surface water chemistry in
two watersheds. Subsequently, one of the watersheds is artificially acidified by applying an acidic
substance to the soil. By comparing water chemistry in the two watersheds, effects of the treatment
are determined. In addition, the key processes that are hypothesized to be the most important in
surface water acidification, including sulfate mobility, cation supply and mineral weathering,
aluminum mobility, hydrologic routing, organic acid interactions, and nitrate mobility, are being
studied through a series of plot-level and laboratory experiments (see Program Element "Soil
Processes"). The first watershed study site has been established near Orono, ME. In cooperation
with the Episodic Response Project (E-08), at least two additional acidic watershed manipulation
studies are planned to provide a more complete picture of regional watershed responses to acidic
deposition.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Ammonium, Base Cations, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate, Total
Nitrogen
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Development, Model Verification, Recovery
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Base Cation Supply, Chronic Acidification,
Hydrology, Mineral Weathering, Nitrogen Cycling, Organic
Acidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption, Sulfur Cycling
2-59
-------
PPA: E-05 EPACode: E-05.1A NAPAPCode: 6C-3.01A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Watershed Acidification (E-05.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: Parker J. Wigington, Jr.
2-60
-------
TITLE: Artificial Acidification of Naturally Acidic Watersheds
SHORT TITLE: Acidification of Organic Systems
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast, Southeast (FL), Upper Midwest, states not yet determined
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the change in organic acidity, as indicated by dissolved
organic carbon and organic anion estimates, in lake water subsequent to acidification of an organic-
rich catchment with strong mineral acids. To determine the extent to which mineral acidity
exacerbates and/or replaces existing organic acidity and the resulting effects on aluminum
concentration, speciation, and toxicity.
RATIONALE: In the past, changes in water quality due to acidic deposition have been typically
evaluated using current water chemistry based on the charge balance of acidic cations by sulfate.
However, both limited field data and theoretical considerations suggest that organic anions, as well
as bicarbonate, may have been titrated from solution by mineral acidity. This potentially important
process largely has been ignored, and it is not known to what extent clearwater, acidic,
sulfate-dominated waters may have been acidic (or had low acid neutralizing capacity)
organic-dominated systems prior to acidic deposition. The role of organic anions before acidic
deposition and their potential change after strong acid is added constitute a major uncertainty when
estimating change attributed to acidic deposition. At present, lakes containing high concentrations
of organic anions are particularly important in the Upper Midwest, Maine, and Florida.
APPROACH: This project involves experimental acidification (sulfuric and nitric acid additions) of a
minicatchment that contains a small, organic-rich lake and currently receives a low level of
deposition. Manipulation likely to be performed in the Upper Midwest or Maine will involve
catchment (rather than lake) acidification, adding acid from both snowpack and rainfall (irrigation).
Lake water chemistry and selected biota will be monitored.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Snowpack, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Historical Change, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Organic Acidification
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.1B NAPAPCode: 6C-3.01C
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Watershed Acidification (E-05.1)
Status: Proposed Period of Performance: 1989 to 1991
Contact: To be determined
2-61
-------
TITLE: Reducing the Uncertainty in Estimates of the Number of Southeastern Streams Projected to
Become Acidic
SHORTTITLE: Southeastern Acidification Project
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, MS, IMC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this project is to reduce the uncertainty in the estimate of the
number of streams in the Southeast that might become acidic in the future at various levels of acidic
deposition. The key objective is to develop a means to quantify or bound the value of the F-factor
used in surface water acidification models. The F-factor is a measure of the change in base cations
relative to the change in surface water sulfate concentration resulting from anthropogenic
atmospheric input.
RATIONALE: In an internal evaluation conducted by the Aquatic Effects Research Program, 2 to 67
percent of the stream reaches in the Southern Blue Ridge Province were projected to become acidic
within the next 100 years at current levels of acidic deposition. The range in this estimate was
considered too broad to be of value in evaluating the potential outcome of various decreases in
acidic deposition that might result from emissions reductions. The broad range in the percentage
was, at least in part, attributable to the uncertainty in the assumed F-factor. The value of F is most
likely watershed-specific. Therefore the surface water acidification models that use F as an input
parameter must specify a value that somehow bounds the range of all F values for individual
watersheds so that accurate, regional-scale acidification projections can be made. Successful
completion of this project will help reduce the uncertainty in acidification projections in the
Southeast by reducing the uncertainty associated with the regional value of F.
APPROACH: The general approach to be employed in this project is to develop or modify procedures
to bound F and to provide insight into watershed response to acidic deposition in the Southeast.
Seven areas of emphasis are targeted at reducing uncertainty in the forecasts: hydrologic response
index, deposition estimates, steady-state sulfate concentrations and base cation supply, dynamic
model forecasts, data from the National Stream Survey, empirical relationships, and integration.
Development of a hydrologic response index would help distinguish quick-flow systems with shallow
flow paths from those with slow flow and deeper flow paths. Better estimates of both wet and dry
deposition will be obtained by coordinating data needs with the deposition group and by cross-
validating deposition/runoff maps. Column and plot studies, along with analyses of the results of
the Soil Aggregation Study (E-07.3A), will be conducted to estimate more accurately base cation
depletion and sulfate steady state. Dynamic models (Integrated Lake/Watershed Acidification Study
and Model for Acidification of Groundwaters in Catchments) will be used to calculate site-specific
values for F; F will be partitioned as a function of subpopulation attributes; and the relationships
among F, the hydrologic response index, and watershed attributes will be examined. Chemical data
from the National Stream Survey and results from the Direct/Delayed Response Project will be subject
to exploratory analysis to select specific subpopulations of interest; the slopes of the resulting
relationships then will be compared to bound the values of F. Examination of empirical relationships
include reevaluating the sulfate steady-state regression for this region; developing aggregated,
time-varying models that incorporate the subpopulational factors (above); and estimating
uncertainty associated with model parameters or inputs and propagating this uncertainty through
the model application. Finally, the results of all analyses will be evaluated integratively to reduce the
uncertainty in forecasts of surface water acidification for the Southeast.
2-62
-------
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Base Cations, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Aggregation, Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory, Modeling
Goal: Prediction, Model Development, Model Verification
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Base Cation Mobilization, Base Cation Supply,
Chronic Acidification, Episodic Acidification, Hydrology, Sulfate
Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption, Sulfate Retention
PPA: E-05 EPACode: E-05.1C NAPAP Code: 6C-3.01D
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Watershed Acidification (E-05.3)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-63
-------
TITLE: Whole-System Manipulations-Artificial Acidification of Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Surface Water Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this program element is to refine the understanding of the
effects of acidification on the chemistry and biology of surface waters through artificial acidification
of a warmwater lake in Wisconsin. Project objectives include (1) identifying subtle and dramatic
responses of the biotic community to decreased pH, (2) comparing direct (chemically mediated) and
indirect (food chain-, habitat-mediated) effects on fish, (3) quantifying the effects on in-lake
alkalinity generation by sulfate-reducing microbes, and (4) evaluating the ability to extrapolate
these find ings to lakes in the Upper Midwest and in other geographic areas.
RATIONALE: The effects of acidic deposition on surface water chemistry and biotic communities
have been documented largely on the basis of correlative analyses. The complex interactions of
acidic deposition in watersheds, differences in the susceptibility among aquatic ecosystems to
acidification, fisheries management manipulations, the possible influence of other contaminants,
and other variables generally preclude direct cause-and-effect conclusions regarding the response of
lakes to anthropogenic acid inputs. The experimental, whole-lake, manipulation study at Little Rock
Lake, Wl, provides data on direct chemical and biological responses to mineral acid addition. This
type of data alleviates uncertainties associated with studies that rely on assumptions necessitated by
the inability to quantify or hold constant key variables related to surface water acidification. The
results of this program element, although site-specific, will improve the understanding of the
acidification phenomenon, particularly when the regional applicability of the conclusions are
evaluated.
APPROACH: Baseline biological and chemical data were collected for two years from a warmwater
seepage lake (Little Rock Lake, Wl), before sulfuric acid was added to one half to decrease lakewater
pH incrementally. Changes in lakewater chemistry and in fish, plankton, and benthic communities
are being monitored throughout the six-year acidification experiment. Rates of bacterial sulfate
reduction in response to decreased pH are being measured in situ to quantify the effects of
decreased pH on within-lake generation of acid neutralizing capacity. The end product of the
reduction is being identified (i.e., iron sulfide or hydrogen sulfide) to determine if it is oxidizable; if
it is, no net hydrogen ion reduction will occur. Effects of acidification on the accumulation of
mercury in fish tissues is also being examined. To alleviate the problems associated with the fact that
the acidification experiment is not replicated, a third approach involves cross-calibrating the
unacidified lake basin in Little Rock Lake with seven lakes serving as Long-Term Ecological Research
sites. Establishing relationships between these lakes and the control basin in Little Rock Lake will
allow an experimental design to be developed, which in turn will allow the significance of whole-
system manipulation results to be tested statistically.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: Major Ions, Mercury, pH, Sulfate, Trace Metals
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Ion Balance, Laboratory
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Chronic Acidification, Community Response,
Hydrology, Indirect Effects, Mineral Weathering, Nutrient Cycling,
Primary Productivity, Sulfate Reduction, Tissue Mercury Accumulation,
Trophic Interactions, Within-Lake Acid Neutralizing Capacity
Generation
2-64
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.2 NAPAPCode: 6C-3.02
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1982 to 1991
Contact: John Eaton
2-65
-------
TITLE: Warmwater Lake Community Responses to Artificial Acidification
SHORTTITLE: Little Rock Lake
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The major objectives of the project are (1) to determine the subtle (early
indicator) as well as more dramatic responses of a non-trout, warmwater, fish-dominated lake
community to lakewater pH decreases; (2) to determine and compare the significance of direct
(water chemistry-mediated) and indirect (food chain-, habitat-, etc., mediated) effects of increasing
acidity on fish populations in Little Rock Lake; (3) to evaluate state-of-the-art capabilities for
predicting acidification impacts in systems like the one being studied from existing laboratory and
field data; (4) to determine the mechanisms of response of various ecosystem biotic components
through detailed chemical and biological observation, in-situ experimentation, and directly related
laboratory testing; (5) to relate the observed effects of Little Rock Lake to possible acidic
precipitation impacts on other lakes, with the aid of the many hydrological, limnological, and biotic
studies (both short-term and long-term), being conducted in the area; and (6) to determine the
degree of generality of biological effects from acidic deposition on lakes in different geographic
areas (Canadian Shield, Adirondack Mountains, Upper Midwest, etc.).
RATIONALE: Although the effects of acidic precipitation on stream and lakewater chemistry have
been documented, the response of fish and other biota, especially in warmwater systems, to altered
water chemistry due to acidic deposition has been examined primarily through field surveys and
laboratory bioassay experiments. One reason is that acidification field experiments are difficult to
conduct on scales large enough to provide a meaningful evaluation of population-level responses.
This project is designed to collect these needed data.
APPROACH: A multidisciplinary, integrated research project involving artificial acidification of a
45-acre lake in north central Wisconsin was started in the summer of 1983. The study design has
followed a two-year preacidification period in which baseline conditions and variability were
observed in the lake. In-situ (limnocorral) and laboratory experiments were conducted during the
second year to help refine hypotheses and analysis techniques and to define the nature, rate, and
duration of acidification. After dividing the lake into two sections with a plastic curtain, acidification
started in one-half of the lake during the third year will progress for six years in a two-year stepped
approach.
KEYWORDS: Medium:
Chemicals:
Approach:
Goal:
Processes:
Biology, Chemistry, Seepage Lakes
Major Ions, Mercury, pH, Sulfate, Trace Metals
Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Ion Balance, Laboratory
Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction
Base Cation Exchange, Chronic Acidification, Community Response,
Hydrology, Indirect Effects, Mineral Weathering, Nutrient Cycling,
Primary Productivity, Sulfate Reduction, Tissue Mercury Accumulation,
Trophic Interactions, Within-Lake Acid Neutralizing Capacity
Generation
2-66
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.2A NAPAPCode: 6C-3.02A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program Area: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Surface Water Acidification (E-05.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1983 to 1991
Contact: John Eaton
2-67
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidification on Bacterial Sulfate Reduction in a Warmwater Lake
SHORT TITLE: Within-Lake Alkalinity Generation (Sulfate Reduction)
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To establish baseline values for bacterial sulfate reduction in lakes. To
determine the influence of acidification in bacterial sulfate reduction using water column enclosures
(limnocorrals).
RATIONALE: Within-lake alkalinity generation, particularly in seepage lakes, has been proposed as
an important way for mitigating the effects of acidic deposition on surface waters. If iron sulfide, a
product of bacterial sulfate reduction, is not reoxidized, an equivalent net neutralization of
hydrogen ion results. Little data exist on the direct effects of acidification on the rates of this process
or on the quantitative importance of the process in neutralizing acidic inputs.
APPROACH: Two approaches are used in this study: (1) baseline studies of the whole lake and
(2) limnocorral (in situ) experiments. The baseline studies are conducted to determine rates of
bacterial sulfate reduction, investigate the form of sulfur being produced, and quantify this process
relative to other acid neutralizing processes. Limnocorral experiments (in which portions of the
water column and underlying sediment are isolated) are being conducted while the rates of sulfate
reduction in sediments are being monitored in response to various loadings of sulfuric acid.
Hydrogen ion mass balance budgets for the enclosures are being calculated. Models are being
developed and tested for extrapolating limnocorral results to the entire lake and subsequently to
similar lakes in the region of study.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Ion Balance
Goal: Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Mineral Weathering, Sulfate Reduction, Within-
Lake Acid Neutralizing Capacity Generation
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.2B NAPAPCode: 6C-3.02B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Surface Water Acidification (E-05.2)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1984 to 1987
Contact: M. Robbins Church, Patrick Brezonik
2-68
-------
TITLE: Cross-Calibration of Little Rock Lake and Long-Term Ecological Research Sites as a Means for
Replicating Whole-Lake Manipulation Results
SHORT TITLE: Comparative Analyses of an Acidified Lake
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To develop a series of analytical comparisons involving the two lake basins
that are currently being investigated in the Little Rock Lake Experimental Acidification Program and
the seven lakes currently being studied at the Northern Lakes Long-Term Ecological Research Site.
Comparisons will be based both on data that are currently available and on information that would
be generated specifically by the support requested here.
RATIONALE: Although major insights into ecosystem scale processes have been gained by whole-
system manipulations, the interpretation of such experiments is confounded by lack of replication in
either manipulated or reference systems. Difficulty in interpreting experimental results can be
particularly great when subtle rather than dramatic effects of manipulations are addressed. This
situation presents a dilemma to ecosystem scientists who seek to determine the early effects of
anthropogenic contaminants within the range of conditions represented by natural systems. The
Little Rock Lake Experimental Acidification Project is being conducted to examine the effects of
acidification on aquatic organisms and to document the mechanisms by which such effects occur.
Our experimental approach to date has involved a standard design involving a control and reference
basin in an hourglass-shaped lake; it suffers from lack of replication. However, seven lakes within
7 km of Little Rock are currently being studied with the Long-Term Ecological Research Program and
thus have the potential to serve as additional references for the experimental system. This has
suggested the possibility of an innovative design in our whole-lake experiment in which the acid
additions in one lake basin are repeated in the second with a four-year lag, thus providing some
element of replication. A critical element in this design is the use of the Long-Term Ecological
Research lakes as references; this requires a cross calibration of the Long-Term Ecological Research
lakes with the present Little Rock Lake reference basin.
APPROACH: The establishment of the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) lakes as references
requires the availability of parallel data for the LTER systems and Little Rock Lake and the
development of analytical procedures for comparisons. In many cases, such data are already
available; however, in the case of zooplankton, samples from the LTER lakes have been archived for
future use, but not yet counted. Since biological parameters are most likely to provide difficulty in
interpreting the unreplicated Little Rock experiment, comparisons of these samples are critical. We
propose to process the archived LTER samples to provide a zooplankton data set. We have already
completed the early development of analytical procedures for comparisons between LTER and Little
Rock Lake. However, this work will require a number of extensive tests of varied analytical
procedures. We propose to conduct such tests to develop an appropriate analytical scheme. The
primary value of the work we propose will be in testing a significantly different and potentially
powerful experimental design for whole-ecosystem manipulation experiments.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: pH,Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Biological Effects, Prediction
Processes: Community Response
2-69
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.2C NAPAP Code: 6C-3.02C
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Surface Water Acidification (E-05.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: John Eaton
2-70
-------
TITLE: Investigating Soil and Hydrologic Processes Controlling Surface Water Response to Acidic
Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Soil/Hydrologic Processes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA. WV), Northeast (CT, DE, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the soil and hydrologic processes, rates, and interactions that
control the response of surface waters to acidic deposition. To establish appropriate ways for
representing critical soil processes within static and dynamic models.
RATIONALE: The Aquatic Effects Research Program, through the National Surface Water Survey, has
established the status and extent of surface water chemistry for regions of the United States
potentially susceptible to acidic deposition. The Direct/Delayed Response Project is predicting the
time needed for surface waters to become acidic at current rates of deposition. Unfortunately, our
understanding of the soil and hydrologic processes that control surface water acidification is
incomplete, resulting in uncertainties in our ability to represent these processes accurately in
predictive models. Activities in this program are designed to increase understanding of key
processes that control acidification and consequently improve predictive capabilities.
APPROACH: The processes that are hypothesized to be the most important in surface water
acidification, including sulfate mobility, cation supply and mineral weathering, aluminum mobility,
hydrologic routing, organic acid interactions, and nitrate mobility, are being studied through a series
of plot-level and watershed-level artificial acidification experiments at the Bear Brook Watersheds in
Maine (see Project "Maine Acidification Project" within the "Watershed Acidification" Program
Element). For each of these processes, cooperating scientists are testing hypotheses in laboratory,
plot, and watershed-scale experiments to determine the controlling reactions and interactions of
acidification. In addition, laboratory experiments are being investigated in cation supply and sulfate
adsorption and desorption.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Soils,Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Base Cations, Clay Minerals, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Base Cation Supply, Denitrification, Hydrology,
Mineral Weathering, Nitrification, Nitrogen Cycling, Nitrogen Fixation,
Organic Acidification, Organic Chelation, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate
Desorption, Sulfur Cycling
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3 NAPAPCode: 6C-2
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-71
-------
TITLE: Soil Characteristics and Processes Affecting Sulfate Mobility in Watersheds
SHORTTITLE: Sulfate Mobility in Soils
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, DE, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To identify major processes and soil parameters affecting sulfur mobility in
watersheds. To verify sulfate dynamics of existing watershed chemistry models, and to provide data
to revise models as necessary. To determine response time of watershed sulfur mobility at current
and altered deposition levels.
RATIONALE: Sulfate is a principal anion in acidic deposition, and is the primary mobile anion
associated with cation leaching from soils and surface water acidification. Existing watershed
chemistry models assume that adsorption is the only process significantly affecting sulfate mobility in
watersheds, and further assume that adsorption would be completely reversible under conditions of
reduced sulfur deposition. It has been well documented that other processes affect sulfur cycling in
terrestrial and aquatic systems (e.g., organic reactions in soils, reduction in wetlands and sediments,
and mineral precipitation). The net effect of these processes is believed to be small, but is basically
unknown; their role could be significant, especially during periods when sulfur deposition is
changing. Similarly, laboratory data indicate that sulfate desorption from soils varies widely,
depending on soil type, aging, and other (poorly understood) factors. Policy decisions regarding
controls on sulfur emissions will rely heavily on model predictions of future watershed chemistry;
given the critical role of sulfate mobility in determining watershed and surface water response to
acidic deposition, it is imperative that watershed chemistry models accurately represent sulfate
dynamics.
APPROACH: Activities are under way or planned at several scales to identify and quantify key
processes affecting sulfate mobility. Field monitoring is under way, with plans for manipulating plot
and whole catchment scales. The Bear Brook Watershed in Maine (see Project "Maine Acidification
Project" under the "Watershed Acidification" Program Element) will be treated with sulfate;
watershed inputs and outputs will be quantified to assess total system response, and sulfate pools
and internal fluxes will be measured at plots within the treated and adjacent control catchments.
Multiple levels of sulfate will be applied to replicated field plots adjacent to the Bear Brook site to
provide more detailed data on sulfur cycling within the soil; stable isotopes (and potential
radioisotopes) of sulfur will be included in plot treatments to provide additional data on transfers
among soil sulfur pools. Laboratory studies are being planned to characterize effects of pH,
temperature, and other soil variables on sulfate adsorption, and to assess desorption of sulfate from
soils. Laboratory studies are also planned to evaluate methods issues, such as methods comparison,
development of improved laboratory methods, etc.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification, Recovery
Processes: Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption, Sulfate Reduction, Sulfur
Cycling, Sulfur Oxidation
2-72
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3A NAPAPCode: 6C-2.03
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: ParkerJ. Wigington, Jr.
2-73
-------
TITLE: Adsorption Rates and Processes Affecting Sulfate Mobility in Watersheds
SHORT TITLE: Adsorption Rates and Processes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine if sulfate mobility is controlled by adsorption. To determine
the influence of acidic deposition of sulfate adsorption in both whole soils and soil components. To
evaluate the relative importance of biological cycling in controlling sulfate mobility.
RATIONALE: In predicting watershed responses to acidic deposition, sulfate adsorption is assumed
to be one of the dominant processes determining soil and surface water acidification and the
dominant process controlling sulfate mobility. This subproject examines these assumptions in both
field and laboratory settings.
APPROACH: As a component of the Watershed Manipulation Project, the general approach in this
subproject is to combine laboratory, field-plot manipulation, and watershed manipulation
experiments to determine the role of sulfate adsorption and cycling in regulating surface water
acidity. Specific analyses include measuring soluble and insoluble sulfate, as well as determining
sulfate adsorption isotherms of soil horizons in catchment and plot level studies. Sulfate adsorption
is being determined over a wide range of solution pHs. Extractable iron and aluminum fractions for
soil horizons will be determined and the relationship of these characteristics to sulfate adsorption
examined. Laboratory studies will be used to assess immobilization-mineralization and
adsorption-desorption of sulfur under controlled conditions using soil columns and batch
experiments.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification
Processes: Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfur Cycling
PPA: E-05
EPA Code: E-05.3A1
NAPAPCode: 6C-2.03A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Sulfate Mobility in Soils (E-05.3A)
Status: Ongoing
Contact: Parker J.Wigington, Jr.
Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
2-74
-------
TITLE: Evaluating the Effects of pH, Temperature, and Ionic Strength on Methods for Sulfate
Adsorption Determination
SHORT TITLE: Effect of pH, Temperature, and Ionic Strength
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province
(GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the effect pH, temperature, and ionic strength have on the
current batch method for measuring sulfate adsorption. If a significant difference is found, methods
will be revised.
RATIONALE: pH, temperature, and ionic strength may significantly affect results of analyzed sulfate
adsorption isotherms. Current protocols do not stipulate control of these variables. If differences
occur, methods may have to be adjusted.
APPROACH: Using soils collected as part of the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge Province soil
surveys in the Direct/Delayed Response Project, investigators are conducting laboratory experiments
to determine if pH, temperature, and ionic strength individually affect isotherm results.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Major Ions, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Laboratory
Goal: Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3A2 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.03B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Sulfate Mobility in Soils (E-05.3A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Louis Blume
2-75
-------
TITLE: Comparison of Sulfate Adsorption Determinations using Batch versus Intact Soil Cores
SHORT TITLE: Batch versus Intact Soil Cores
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province
(GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To validate the batch sulfate adsorption method currently being used in the
Direct/Delayed Response Project by comparing it to sulfate adsorption determined from undisturbed
intact cores. This work will also evaluate each approach in adequately predicting sulfate adsorption.
RATIONALE: Results obtained in undisturbed soils under actual field conditions have not been
compared to those of sulfate adsorption determinations using batch methods. Furthermore, intact
soil column adsorption determinations are not logistically possible on a large-scale survey basis.
Therefore, the survey mode batch method needs to be related to true field conditions.
APPROACH: Disturbed and undisturbed soils from the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge Province
are collected from sampling classes used in the Direct/Delayed Response Project and subsequently
characterized for sulfate adsorption before quantifying the difference. Additionally, in the
undisturbed soil core the extent of aluminum released at various sulfate loadings will be
determined, and the aluminum species will be identified by the flow injection analysis/pyrocatechol
violet method.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Aluminum, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3A3 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.03C
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Sulfate Mobility in Soils (E-05.3A)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Louis Blume
2-76
-------
TITLE: Examining the Rates and Processes of Sulfate Desorption in Recovery of Acidified Surface
Waters
SHORT TITLE: Desorption Rates and Processes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA,
Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To identify and quantify processes affecting recovery of sulfate in systems
with decreasing sulfur deposition. To determine the extent and kinetics of sulfate desorption from
soils; to identify and quantify other processes that release sulfate from soils when deposition is
reduced; to determine the time frame of sulfate recovery.
RATIONALE: Sulfur deposition, which has declined in some areas in recent years, may continue to
decline if emissions controls are implemented. There is little available information, however, to
quantify the rate and degree to which acidified surface waters will recover in response to various
decreases in emissions. Nor does much information exist on the process of recovery and whether
sulfate adsorption is partially or completely reversible. Resolving these issues is critical for making
sound, defensible, and effective policy decisions on emissions controls.
APPROACH: Two approaches are being employed in this subproject. Approximately 50 soil samples,
collected and archived during the Direct/Delayed Response Project soil surveys, will be analyzed to
provide tentative identification of the major processes affecting sulfate recovery and the extent of
sulfur release. In this feasibility study, soil sulfur pools will be examined and the ability for further
sulfate adsorption will be quantified. Sulfate release kinetics on samples prepared in various ways
will be measured. The results of these analyses will be used to modify, if needed, subsequent
research projects. The second approach is to assess desorption and recovery under field conditions
and to provide quantitative data that can be used in regional assessments and predictive models.
Based on the results of the feasibility study and a workshop to identify major scientific uncertainties,
a research plan will be developed to assess the potential for recovery on regional scales.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Inorganic Sulfur, Organic Sulfur, Sulfate
Approach: Laboratory, Modeling
Goal: Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Deacidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption, Sulfur Cycling
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3A4 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.03D
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Sulfate Mobility in Soils (E-05.3A)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1986to1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-77
-------
TITLE: Optimizing Methods for Determining Sulfate in Soils for Regionalization of Soil Chemical
Characteristics
SHORT TITLE: Methods for Sulfate Determination in Soils
REGION(S)/STATE(S): N/A
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To optimize current methods and to develop alternate techniques for
analyzing sulfate in soil solutions. To increase efficiency in acquiring data by reducing analysis time
while maintaining data quality.
RATIONALE: Routine characterizations of soil sulfate involve the use of eight sulfate measurements
per soil sample. Six are for developing sulfate adsorption isotherms, one is for extractable sulfate,
and one is for phosphate-extractable sulfate. Optimizing these methods could substantially reduce
costs and time of analysis.
APPROACH: The current isocratic, high-performance, ion chromatographic method for sulfate
analysis will be optimized with respect to eluent composition, flow rate, and temperature. A
gradient-elution ion chromatographic method and an automated wet chemical method will be
developed. After comparing results using the three methods, the optimal method will be selected.
The primary criteria for the method of choice will be optimal speed and cost of analysis, while
maintaining acceptable data quality.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Laboratory
Goal: Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3A5 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.03E
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Sulfate Mobility in Soils (E-05.3A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Louis Blume
2-78
-------
TITLE: Determining Sulfate Desorption Rates in Selected Soils Sampled as Part of the
Direct/Delayed Response Project
SHORT TITLE: Desorption Rates in DDRP Soils
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (DE, MD, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA,
Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, SC, TN, VA)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To identify and quantify processes affecting recovery of sulfate in systems
with decreasing sulfur deposition. Specifically to (1) determine the extent and kinetics of sulfate
desorption from soils, (2) identify and quantify other processes that release sulfate from soils when
deposition is reduced, and (3) determine the time frame of sulfate recovery (i.e., the time for sulfur
to re-equilibrate to steady-state following decreases in sulfur deposition).
RATIONALE: Research to date on aquatic effects of acidic deposition have focused principally on
acidification. Declines in sulfate deposition in some geographic areas have recently been
documented; however, the extent to which surface waters may respond to such decreases is
relatively unknown. Although there is an increasing level of interest in issues related to recovery,
there has been little research on the topic, and fundamental questions remain: how much and how
quickly will surface water chemistry in acidified systems recover; how quickly will sulfate come to
steady-state with decreased sulfur loadings; what are the controls on sulfate recovery and how do
they vary in space and time. The issue of sulfate recovery is not straightforward, and likely is much
more complex than assuming that the recovery process is a linear reversal of the adsorption process.
Adsorption is likely to be at least partially irreversible, and processes such as mineralization of soil
organic sulfur and dissolution of basic aluminum sulfate minerals may release large quantities of
sulfate as systems re-equilibrate.
APPROACH: As presently planned, two approaches are to be employed: a pilot laboratory study to
bound preliminarily sulfate release from soils, and a field study to collect data on sulfate desorption
and recovery processes and rates for use in making regional assessments and/or in applying
predictive models. The laboratory study design is being developed in conjunction with subproject
E-05.3A5. Sulfate release from fresh and archived soils will be measured in laboratory batch and
column experiments. Results will be used to optimize methods for the field study and to provide
preliminary data on the rate and extent of sulfate release by desorption and other mechanisms. The
second approach (conducted in conjunction with the Maine Acidification Project) will focus on
quantifying desorption/recovery processes in the field, using methods developed in the laboratory
study. A workshop with researchers having expertise in terrestrial sulfur biogeochemistry will be
held to identify major scientific uncertainties and to discuss research approaches. Implementation of
the field study is scheduled to begin late 1988.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Inorganic Sulfur, Organic Sulfur, Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Deacidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption, Sulfur Cycling
2-79
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3A6 NAPAPCode: 6C-2.03F
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Sulfate Mobility in Soils (E-05.3A)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1988to1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-80
-------
TITLE: The Role of Base Cation Supply and Mineral Weathering in Soil Neutralization Processes
SHORT TITLE: Cation Supply and Mineral Weathering in Soils
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, DE, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Within watershed ecosystems, soil base cation exchange processes and
primary mineral weathering have been identified as primary mechanisms for mitigating the effects
of acidic deposition. The goals of this project are (1) to determine the extent of base cation
exchange and mineral weathering in dominant soils of the Northeast and Southern Blue Ridge
Province, (2) to characterize the exchange processes in regionally representative soils in a
thermodynamically consistent, yet survey-compatible, manner, and (3) to determine the rate at
which these processes respond to inputs of acidic meteoric waters. If these resources are being
depleted by acidic deposition, a further goal will be to evaluate the rate of depletion and the size of
the remaining resource.
RATIONALE: Both cation exchange processes and mineral weathering have been identified as
mechanisms for neutralizing acidic deposition. However, the extent to which these processes are
actually involved in acid neutralization, especially in relation to other soil processes, is not well
known. To evaluate the importance of these processes in regulating observed surface water
composition, it is necessary to develop an internally consistent and defensible procedure for
describing these processes as they occur in the soil environment. This project is directed toward that
goal.
APPROACH: Representative soil samples, collected as part of the Direct/Delayed Response Project,
have been distributed to university investigators. Using these soils, they are conducting process-
oriented studies with the goal of addressing specific hypotheses regarding the relationship between
certain soil chemical and physical properties and surface water chemistry as described above. In
addition, the research includes a component of the Watershed Manipulation Project, which will
combine laboratory experiments, field-plot manipulation, and watershed manipulation experiments
to examine cation supply/mineral weathering processes.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Base Cations, Clay Minerals, Primary Minerals
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Base Cation Supply, Mineral Weathering
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3B NAPAP Code: 6C-2.04
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1985 to 1990 +
Contact: Parker J. Wigington, Jr.
2-81
-------
TITLE: Clay Mineralogy of Direct/Delayed Response Project Soils
SHORTTITLE: Clay Mineralogy
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province
(GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To characterize and quantify clay and primary minerals in soils. To
determine relative weathering rates between dominant minerals of sampling classes.
RATIONALE: To characterize soils and determine anion adsorption/desorption potentials, it is
necessary to define, quantify, and determine weathering rates of major minerals. By characterizing
these minerals, hypotheses can be made regarding the type and amount of cations that can be
released into the soil solution. The ability of a soil to supply cations to an ecosystem is a critical factor
to consider when predicting a watershed's ability to neutralize acidic deposition inputs.
APPROACH: Researchers are characterizing primary and secondary minerals on a subset of soils from
selected watersheds using X-ray powder diffraction. Each mineral is quantified using various ratios
of internal to external standards. Elemental analysis of the clay and the bulk soil fractions is
completed using X-ray fluorescence. Physical weathering characteristics and local elemental
chemistry are assessed using scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence.
Weathering rates are determined by comparing highly weathered soils against poorly weathered
soils on similar strata. Differential scanning calorimetry is used to quantify kaolinitic or 1:1
structured clays of soils from the Southern Blue Ridge Province soils.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Clay Minerals, Primary Minerals
Approach: Laboratory
Goal: Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Mineral Weathering
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3B1 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.04A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Cation Supply and Mineral Weathering in Soils (E-05.3B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1989
Contact: Louis Blume
2-82
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidification on Base Cation Supply in Soils
SHORT TITLE: Acidification Effects on Base Cation Supplies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians (MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, DE, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Base cation exchange processes within soils tentatively have been identified
as one of the primary mechanisms for neutralizing incident acidic deposition. While much
theoretical and applied research has been conducted to characterize soil ion exchange reactions,
procedures to relate this information to the soils in acidic deposition effects research are not
available. Furthermore, effects research requires information not normally collected or reported in
the soils literature. The purpose of this subproject is to investigate internally consistent procedures
for describing soil ion exchange reactions. The procedures must apply to developing quantitative
relationships between soil chemistry and the composition of surface waters that evolve from those
soils.
RATIONALE: Ion exchange reactions are one of two or three major processes potentially involved in
the neutralizing acidic deposition inputs to watersheds. To date, internally consistent methods for
describing the relationships between soil chemical parameters and surface water quality parameters
are not available, especially for effects research in acidic deposition. The research described here
should provide baseline information to help establish those relationships.
APPROACH: Using soils collected as part of the Direct/Delayed Response Project, investigators are
conducting experimental studies on soil property/water composition relationships; developing
parameters for thermodynamic and mass balance models that describe these relationships will give
certain input information. Research focuses on identifying the best formats for the parameters and
the information required to implement the appropriate models. In addition, the research includes a
component of the Watershed Manipulation Project, which will combine laboratory experiments,
field-plot manipulations, and watershed manipulation experiments to examine cation
supply/mineral weathering processes.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils
Chemicals: Base Cations
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Base Cation Supply, Mineral Weathering
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3B2 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.04B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Cation Supply and Mineral Weathering in Soils (E-05.3B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1985 to 1990 +
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-83
-------
TITLE: Factors Controlling Aluminum Mobility in Soils
SHORTTITLE: Aluminum Mobility in Soils
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the influence of acidic deposition on the mobility and release
of aluminum and associated base cations. To determine the controls of aluminum mobility and
solubility in soils.
RATIONALE: Concern over surface water acidification in the United States has focused largely on the
Northeast, a region experiencing elevated loading of acidic substances. Spodosolic soils in the
northeastern United States are acidic and have limited capacity to retain sulfate. If pools of
exchangeable or easily weatherable basic cations are limited in these soils, then strong acidic inputs
will be incompletely neutralized. Incomplete neutralization can cause acidic cations, hydrogen, and
aluminum to be transported from terrestrial to aquatic environments. Some of the first effects on
fish and other biota is toxicity associated with aluminum leached from soils.
APPROACH: As a component of the Watershed Manipulation Project, this project will combine
laboratory experiments, field-plot manipulations, and watershed manipulation experiments to
ascertain the influence of acidic deposition on mobility of aluminum and cations in soils and water.
Specific techniques include laboratory batch titration studies, potentiometric titrations, and soil
column leaching experiments, as well as analyses of solutions and soils gathered at the field plots
and catchments.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Base Cations
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Aluminum Solubility, Base Cation
Mobilization, Base Cation Supply
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3C NAPAP Code: 6C-2.05
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: ParkerJ. Wigington, Jr.
2-84
-------
TITLE: Examining the Role of Hydrologic Pathways and Water Residence Times in Altering Acidic
Deposition Inputs
SHORT TITLE: Hydrologic Pathways/Residence Times
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the pathways of water flowing within the soil mantle and
regolith of upland catchments, typical of those susceptible to acidic deposition. To determine the
flow processes or domains (e.g., micropore versus macropore flow) by which water moves within
watersheds. To establish classes of watersheds, based on runoff and physical watershed
characteristics, that reflect the pathway and process by which water reaches bodies of water.
RATIONALE: Many watershed processes collectively determine the chemical responses of surface
water chemistry to acidic deposition. Watershed hydrology critically links the response of
watersheds to acidic deposition. The route and mechanism by which water moves determines which
particles of soil or regolith come in contact with water and for how long. Traditionally, engineering
hydrology has emphasized predicting flood peaks without regarding the means by which the water
reached streams and lakes. This project seeks to answer these important questions for upland
catchments.
APPROACH: Hillslope-scale sprinkler plots are being established at the Bear Brook watershed
manipulation site (see "Maine Acidification Project," E-05.1A) to determine the relative contribution
of micropore and macropore flow to streamflow. In addition, tracers will be used to evaluate the
relative contribution of regions within the watershed to streamflow. Extensive measures of
flowpath using, for example, crest piezometers and recording piezometers, will be conducted at the
Bear Brook site and at additional watershed sites in the future. Hydrologists are currently examining
rainfall-runoff data from catchments located in various areas of the United States, as well as
internationally, to produce a classification system that can be applied to any region potentially
sensitive to acidic deposition.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Groundwater, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: N/A
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Modeling
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: Hydrology
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3D NAPAP Code: 6C-2.06
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: Parker J. Wigington, Jr.
2-85
-------
TITLE: The Influence of Organic Acids on Acidification and Aluminum and Sulfur Dynamics
SHORT TITLE: Organic Acid Influence on Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine how organic acid mobilization is influenced by acidic
deposition. To evaluate the effect of organic acids on aluminum mobilization and toxicity. To
determine the effect of organic acids and changes in organic acids due to acidic deposition on sulfate
sorption dynamics.
RATIONALE: In those natural systems unaffected by acidic deposition, organic acids originating from
plants decomposing within the ecosystem are a natural source of acidity. These acids substantially
influence the mobility of metals, such as aluminum, and strong acid anions, such as sulfate. These
influences must be quantified accurately to predict watershed acidic deposition responses.
APPROACH: As a component of the Watershed Manipulation Project, the general approach in this
project is to combine laboratory experiments, field-plot manipulations, and watershed manipulation
experiments to ascertain the role of organic anions in regulating surface water acidity. Specific
analyses include determining total carbon and humic and fulvic acids in watershed soils. Titrations of
dissolved organic carbon samples will be made for lysimeter, throughfall, and streamflow samples.
Laboratory studies will be used to assess carbon dynamics and mobilization-mineralization under
controlled conditions using soil columns and batch experiments.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Organic Sulfur, Organics
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification
Processes: Organic Acidification, Organic Chelation, Organics Cycling
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3E NAPAP Code: 6C-2.07
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: ParkerJ. Wigington, Jr.
2-86
-------
TITLE: The Role of Nitrate in Chronic and Episodic Acidification of Watersheds
SHORTTITLE: Nitrate Acidification Processes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME), Norway
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the influence of increased deposition of sulfate and nitrate on
the nitrogen cycle and its subsequent influence on surface water acidification. To assess if nitrate
saturation in watershed soils has occurred or is occurring and if this nitrate saturation is causing
watershed acidification. To determine the role that nitrate in snowpack meltwater plays in episodic
acidification of watersheds.
RATIONALE: Nitrate is a large component anion of acidic deposition, but generally has been
assumed to be less important than sulfate in controlling chronic acidification of surface waters.
Although nitrate cycling can be strongly controlled by biological processes, nitrate anion is highly
mobile in soils and, unlike sulfate, is not significantly adsorbed. If watershed vegetation exceeds its
nutrient requirements, nitrate saturation may develop, causing nitrate to leach out, and
subsequently, mobilizing base cations and hydrogen ions.
APPROACH: As part of the Maine Acidification Project, sulfuric and nitric acids will be applied at
various loading rates in laboratory, field-plot manipulation, and watershed manipulation
experiments at paired watershed sites. Responses to treatments will be monitored in each
watershed by analyzing elevational transects of stream water chemistry, determining leaching of
nitrate and ammonium from soils, and quantifying component processes in the nitrogen cycle.
Investigations on nitrate are also being conducted on a stream in Norway, acidifying the catchment
with nitrate additions to snowpack.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Snowpack, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Ammonium, Nitrate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification
Processes: Denitrification, Nitrate Saturation, Nitrification, Nitrogen Cycling
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3F NAPAP Code: 6C-2.08
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Status: Ongoing Periodof Performance: 1986 to 1991
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-87
-------
TITLE: Nitrate Uptake and Leaching in Soils in Response to Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Nitrate Mobility in Soils
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine if nitrogen amendment (an analog for increased acidic
deposition) will cause mineral nitrogen to accumulate in soils that will, after a delay of one or more
years, induce nitrification even at low soil pH values. To determine if nitrification causes nitrate
leaching. To determine if chronic nitrogen additions will cause a relatively small increase in foliar
biomass and nitrogen concentration, and if, when the systems become non-nitrogen limited, higher
rates of nitrogen mineralization and nitrogen cycling occur. To determine if losses due to nitrate
leaching rise near input rates as the biological uptake capacity becomes saturated.
RATIONALE: Acidic deposition primarily involves two strong acids, sulfuric acid and nitric acid.
Nitrate is one of the strong acid anions that serves as a carrier to remove hydrogen ions from soils.
To quantify the response of watersheds to acidic deposition, the nitrogen cycle must be understood.
This cycle is driven largely by biological processes that modify or dominate the nitrate derived from
deposition. This subproject relates nitrate response in soils to acidic deposition.
APPROACH: As a component of the Watershed Manipulation Project, this subproject combines
laboratory experiments, field-plot manipulations, and watershed manipulation experiments to
determine the role of nitrate in soils to regulate surface water acidity. Specific analyses include
measuring total nitrogen in vegetation and soils. Nitrogen mineralization and nitrification will be
measured using soil cores, while litter decay rates and nitrogen release will be measured using nylon
mesh bags.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Vegetation, Watersheds
Chemicals: Nitrate, Total Nitrogen
Approach: Field Manipulation, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Model Verification
Processes: Denitrification, Nitrification, Nitrogen Cycling
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3F1 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.08A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Nitrate Acidification Processes (E-05.3F)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990 +
Contact: Parker J.Wigington, Jr.
2-88
-------
TITLE: Evidence of Nitrate Saturation in Watersheds
SHORT TITLE: Nitrate Saturation Evidence
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Canada, United States
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this project is to evaluate the role of nitrate in acidification of
surface waters. The specific objective is to examine existing evidence on the occurrence of nitrate
saturation in watersheds.
RATIONALE: Investigations of the role of acidic deposition in chronic surface water acidification
have focused almost exclusively on sulfate. Nitrate deposition, however, has emerged recently as a
key issue in acidic deposition effects research. Like sulfate, nitrate is a strong acid anion that
potentially could be a significant factor in watershed/surface water acidification. Biologically
mediated processes, such as nitrogen fixation, denitrification, nitrification, plant uptake, and
mineralization control the form of nitrogen in watersheds. Additionally, soils do not significantly
adsorb nitrate. Consequently, nitrate can be very mobile in soils. Plant uptake is the primary
watershed process controlling nitrate export to surface waters. If nitrate inputs to watersheds
exceed the nutrient demands of watershed vegetation, it is plausible that nitrate saturation could be
reached. In turn, nitrate, along with base cations or hydrogen ion, could be leached.
APPROACH: Existing input-output budgets for nitrate and other nitrate-related data are being
examined in North American watersheds to evaluate the potential for nitrate-induced surface water
acidification. The major elements of the approach are to identify existing relevant data bases,
identify key questions to be addressed, assemble the data and interpret the evidence, conduct an
international workshop to present the results, and recommend watershed studies to refine
conclusions or test hypotheses. Examples of questions follow: What are the extent and patterns of
nitrate saturation? Does nitrate saturation occur and, if so, does it appear to be related to acidic
deposition? What comparisons can be made of the relative contributions of nitrate versus sulfate to
surface water acidification? This project is closely coordinated with a parallel effort in northern and
central Europe.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Soils,Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acidic Cations, Base Cations, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Input-Output Budgets, Ion Balance, Literature
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Denitrification, Hydrology, Nitrate Leaching,
Nitrate Saturation, Nitrification, Nitrogen Cycling, Nitrogen Fixation,
Nitrogen Uptake
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3F2 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.08B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Process and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Nitrate Acidification Processes (E-05.3F)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-89
-------
TITLE: Determining the Magnitude and Duration of Nitrate-Induced Acidification of Surface Waters
During Snowmelt
SHORTTITLE: Nitrate in Snowpack
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Norway
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the magnitude and duration of nitrate-induced acidification
of surface waters during snowmelt in an otherwise pristine alpine/subalpine environment. To
determine the impact of snowmelt nitrate pulse on acid neutralizing capacity, pH, and aluminum
concentration and speciation. To compare episodic nitrate acidification with natural episodic
processes, such as organic enrichment, dilution, and sodium retention, i.e., the neutral salt effect.
RATIONALE: Acidic episodes associated with snowmelt have emerged as a principal uncertainty in
evaluating aquatic effects of acidic deposition. Although field data are limited, nitrate has been
postulated as a major factor in snowmelt acidification. Natural episodic processes (e.g., increased
dissolved organic carbon, sodium retention, and dilution) are poorly understood, thus greatly
complicating an evaluation of the nitrate component of episodic depressions in acid neutralizing
capacity. Manipulation-based research in a pristine environment is needed to quantify the impact of
episodic nitrate pulses that are superimposed upon natural episodic processes involving changes in
acid neutralizing capacity, pH, and aluminum including subsequent effects on biota.
APPROACH: The experimental approach proposed to be employed in this subproject is the addition
of nitrate to the snowpack of a subcatchment in the H0ylandet research area of western central
Norway, a pristine alpine/subalpine environment. Stream runoff chemistry from manipulated and
control subcatchments will be monitored. This subproject is proposed to be conducted in
cooperation with the ongoing, British-funded Surface Water Acidification Program, which is
currently investigating surface water chemistry, biota, soils, vegetation, and mineralogy.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Snowpack, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Biological Effects,Status/Extent
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Aluminum Speciation, Community Response,
Episodic Acidification, Neutral Salt Acidification, Organic Acidification
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.3F3 NAPAP Code: 6C-2.08C
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-06, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Soil/Hydrologic Processes (E-05.3)
Project: Nitrate Acidification Processes (E-05.3F)
Status: Proposed Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: To be determined
2-90
-------
TITLE: Validating Surface Water Acidification Models Used in Forecasting Regional-Scale
Responses to Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Model Development and Testing
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, SC, TN, VA), Upper Midwest
(Ml, MN, Wl), Norway, Canada (Sudbury)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To evaluate and validate the surface water acidification models being
applied within the Direct/Delayed Response Project (Program E-07). The primary objective is to
identify and quantify model sensitivities and uncertainties including identification of the bounds
within which the model predictions can be considered to be reliable forecasts of future conditions.
RATIONALE: Significant aquatic and terrestrial resources, particularly in the Northeast, may be at
risk from current levels of acidic deposition. Therefore, to develop sound environmental policy, it is
important to determine if potentially sensitive watersheds are at or near steady-state conditions, or
if further acidification of lakes is likely to occur at current deposition levels. Likewise, it is important
to evaluate the probable effect of increasing and decreasing emissions over the next few decades on
the surface water chemistries of potentially sensitive lakes.
Because of the complexity of watershed systems, dynamic models of natural phenomena are
essential for testing process-level hypotheses at the watershed scale. This is particularly true for
forecasting the probable future consequences of current or reduced acidic deposition loadings on
surface waters. However, the models used for forecasting must be adequately evaluated and tested
to provide the necessary assurance of their reliability. Because adequate long-term records for
validation do not exist, the ability of these models to simulate important processes must be
determined. Similarly, it is necessary to evaluate their behavior under conditions of inadequate data
for calibration. The sensitivity of response variables (e.g., acid neutralizing capacity and pH) to the
interrelationships among variables and to changes in input values also must be understood. Because
previous studies on watershed acidification models have been directed primarily toward predicting
acidification, it is important also to test the capability of the models to forecast recovery under
reduced deposition loadings.
APPROACH: The principal hypothesis to be tested is that those hydrologic, geochemical, and
biological processes that are important in watershed acidification can be simulated with sufficient
reliability to be useful in interpreting manipulation experiments and in forecasting the future course
of watershed acidification and recovery for particular acidic deposition scenarios. The modeling
studies are integrated with the watershed manipulation and soil process studies to test more
detailed hypotheses at the catchment and plot scale.
Three approaches are being employed: (1) evaluation of model behavior, (2) model sensitivity
analysis, and (3) experimental and observational field studies. Efforts will be made in the first
category to review and evaluate the process formulations, comparisons of process formulations
among models and with the literature, testing of model behavior, uncertainty analysis, and
consequences of alternative calibration procedures. Sensitivity analysis will determine the
interrelationships among input variables, changes in model output resulting from alternative input
variables, and initial conditions. Experimental and observational studies will evaluate the predictive
model capabilities by comparison of results with observed data from field studies. These field studies
will include the manipulation experiments being conducted in Maine and other available data sets
(e.g., lakes near Sudbury, RAIN project).
2-91
-------
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.4 NAPAP Code: 6B-1.02
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990 +
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-92
-------
TITLE: Sensitivity Analyses of Direct/Delayed Response Project Models to Inputs and Parameters
SHORTTITLE: Model Sensitivity
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To investigate and evaluate the sensitivity and behavior of the
Direct/Delayed Response Project model predictions of future water chemistry to the accuracy and
uncertainties in data, model inputs, parameter values, process formulations, and calibration
procedures.
RATIONALE: Because of the complexity of watershed systems, dynamic models of natural
phenomena are essential for forecasting the probable future consequences of current or reduced
acidic deposition loadings on surface waters. However, the models used for forecasting must be
evaluated and tested adequately to provide the necessary assurance of their reliability. The
sensitivity of variables (e.g., acid neutralizing capacity and pH) upon which the predictions are based
must be understood with respect to the interrelationships among variables and to uncertainties of
input values. In addition, it is essential to evaluate model behavior under conditions of limited data
for calibration, and thereby provide guidance or bounds on the situations that produce reliable
predictions.
APPROACH: The three models that are being evaluated are Model for Acidification of
Groundwaters in Catchments, Enhanced Trickle Down, and Integrated Lake/Watershed Acidification
Study. Three Direct/Delayed Response Project watersheds (Woods, Panther, and Clear Pond) are
being used for the behavioral evaluation and sensitivity analysis studies because sufficient time-
series data are available for these watersheds. The initial step in these studies is to identify all input
data, all computed variables, and all output variables. The input variables, boundary conditions, and
initial data are being classified to provide the following identification: model compartment,
temporal nature, estimation procedure, and units of measurement. This effort is being followed by
an estimation of the realistic ranges and interdependence among variables. The behavior evaluation
and comparison study will address the following: a review of the process formulations of each
model, comparisons of process formulations among models and with alternative approaches in the
literature, testing of model behavior, uncertainty analysis, and consequences of alternative
calibration procedures. The sensitivity analysis will address the following: interrelationships among
the model inputs, sensitivity of model output to changes in data-derived input variables, and initial
boundary conditions. These results will permit a thorough evaluation of the model predictions and
their associated uncertainty and reliability within the Direct/Delayed Response Project application.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction
Processes: N/A
2-93
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.4A NAPAP Code: 6B-1.02A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Model Development and Testing (E-05.4)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-94
-------
TITLE: Modeling the Recovery of Sensitive Surface Waters Following Decreased Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Recovery of Surface Waters
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, TN, VA), Upper Midwest,
(Ml, MN, Wl), Norway, Canada (Sudbury)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To test and develop, or enhance, predictions of surface water recovery
associated with decreases in deposition that result from the application of existing surface water
acidification models.
RATIONALE: One of the predicted benefits from a policy decision resulting from reduction of acidic
deposition is that some currently acidic surface waters would recover, i.e., become less acidic. The
current Direct/Delayed Response Project models were developed to simulate surface water chemistry
under either constant or increasing deposition. The sources of data for model building, testing, and
forecasting have been derived from areas receiving nearly constant deposition. The ability of these
models to represent adequately the processes and changes associated with reduced acidification has
not been tested and evaluated. Proper evaluation of policy alternatives that reduce deposition
requires that this aspect of current models be tested and the uncertainties understood.
APPROACH: The approach within this project area is twofold. Initially, the project is compiling
existing data from sites where documented reductions in emissions have occurred and where surface
water recovery has been observed. These data bases then will be used to calibrate the models, using
the data prior to the emission reduction, and evaluating the model predictions during the post-
reduction period. Direct/Delayed Response Project modeling approaches and protocols will be
followed to the maximum extent possible during this effort.
The second line of investigation will examine the current literature to develop relationships and
hypotheses relevant to the processes involved in recovery. These relationships and processes then
will be examined through existing or modified models. Iterative interactions are anticipated
between this effort and efforts within the Soil/Hydrologic Processes Program Element (E-05.3) to
estimate parameters and to test hypotheses and model predictions.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH
Approach: Literature, Modeling
Goal: Model Verification, Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Deacidification
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.4B NAPAP Code: 6B-1.02B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Model Development and Testing (E-05.4)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-95
-------
TITLE: Model Testing with Recovery Data for Clearwater Lake, Sudbury Region, Canada
SHORT TITLE: Clearwater Lake Recovery Study
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Canada (Sudbury)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To test and evaluate the Direct/Delayed Response Project predictive models'
utility to predict correctly the magnitude and rate of recovery for watersheds that have had
documented reductions in emissions and increases in pH.
RATIONALE: Key elements within the Aquatic Effects Research Program are three computer
simulation models of surface water acidification and their predictions of future conditions assuming
alternative deposition scenarios. The three Direct/Delayed Response Project models - Model for
Acidification of Groundwaters in Catchments, Integrated Lake/Watershed Acidification Study, and
Enhanced Trickle Down - are being used extensively within the Level III analyses for the Northeast
and Southern Blue Ridge Province. In addition, the Watershed Manipulation Project is conducting
manipulation experiments to test and evaluate these models. An additional need exists for testing
and evaluating these models under conditions of reduced deposition and subsequent recovery of
surf ace waters.
This effort will increase our knowledge of the usefulness and limitations of these three models. This
application of the models will enhance our ability and confidence for assessment of future policy
scenarios that include reductions in sulfate deposition.
APPROACH: Canadian researchers conducted extensive studies in the Sudbury region during and
after reduction of emissions (1973-1986). Four lakes were studied and one, Clearwater Lake, was
studied as a control along with three other lakes that were manipulated by neutralization. Current
evidence indicates that Clearwater Lake has improved substantially since reductions of emissions in
1980. This would support the hypotheses that this is a direct responding lake. The Canadian data are
being compiled and prepared for model calibration and testing.
A two-phase approach is being employed in this subproject. The first phase involves testing and
evaluation of model predictions with the existing data. The primary information that is anticipated
to be missing for the Clearwater Lake watershed, but which exists for the Direct/Delayed Response
Project watersheds, is soils data. Thus, this effort additionally will examine the potential benefits
(e.g., improved predictions and reduced uncertainty) that could be obtained by further watershed
mapping and soil sampling. Based on this information, a potential Phase II effort will apply
Direct/Delayed Response Project sampling and mapping protocols and provide additional soil and
watershed information.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Model Verification, Recovery
Processes: Deacidification
2-96
-------
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.4B1 NAPAP Code: 6B-1.02B1
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Model Development and Testing (E-05.4)
Project: Recovery of Surface Waters (E-05.4B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-97
-------
TITLE: Evaluating the Application of Existing Surface Water Acidification Models to Predict
Recovery of Presently Acidic Systems
SHORT TITLE: Deacidification Modeling
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD. NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, TN, VA), Upper Midwest
(MI.MN.WI)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To evaluate the application of surface water acidification models in
examining recovery (or deacidification) of surface waters at current or reduced levels of acidic
deposition. The objectives are to (1) review and evaluate existing algorithms and models for
forecasting the recovery of currently acidic systems and (2) estimate the number of currently acidic
systems that might recover in response to decreased acidic deposition levels.
RATIONALE: Although surface waters in some parts of Canada and Scandinavia have been
documented to respond (i.e., acidification-related chemical variables have been restored, at least in
part, to levels prior to the onset of acidic deposition) to decreased levels of acidic deposition, little is
known in U.S. regions concerning the rate of recovery or even if the acidification process is
reversible. Predicting, with known certainty, the number and geographic extent of surface waters
that would recover in response to various decreased deposition scenarios has important implications
for policy decisions on proposed emissions reductions.
APPROACH: The objectives of this subproject are being addressed using four approaches: (1) review
of the literature on sulfate adsorption/desorption, ion exchange, and recovery of acidic systems;
(2) review and evaluation of existing algorithms and models using experimental and field data;
(3) modification of existing algorithms, if necessary, to incorporate deacidification process
formulations; and (4) application of these watershed models to currently acidic systems and
extrapolation from the sample to the regional population for different levels of acidic deposition.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Soils,Streams,Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Laboratory, Literature, Modeling
Goal: Model Development, Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Deacidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate
Desorption
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.4B2 NAPAP Code: 6B-1.02B2
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Model Development and Testing (E-05.4)
Project: Recovery of Surface Waters (E-05.4B)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1988 to 1991
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-98
-------
TITLE: Evaluating the Application of Surface Water Acidification Models to Predict Recovery Using
Data from the Norway Study on Reversing Acidification
SHORTTITLE: RAIN Data Evaluation (Norway)
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Norway
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this subproject is to evaluate the application of surface water
acidification models in examining recovery (deacidification) of surface waters at current and reduced
levels of acidic deposition. The objectives are to examine model forecasts, uncertainties, and
structure based on data from the watershed manipulation study, Reversing Acidification in Norway
(RAIN).
RATIONALE: Data that address the extent and rate of recovery in acidified surface waters in
response to decreased acidic deposition are limited. The degree to which the key processes
hypothesized to control acidification (i.e., sulfate sorption and base cation supply) are reversible also
is unknown. Predicting with known certainty the number and geographic extent of surface waters
that would de-acidify in response to decreased deposition scenarios has important implications for
policy decisions on proposed emissions reductions. Examining the application of acidification
models to predict recovery using experimental data from the RAIN project will help reduce the
uncertainty associated with predicting how effective various reduction scenarios for acidic
deposition are in restoring surface water chemistry in affected systems.
APPROACH: Monitoring of two parallel catchments in Norway began in 1983. In 1984, acids were
applied to one catchment and acidic deposition was excluded from the second. The models to be
evaluated are being calibrated with pretreatment monitoring data. Observed and predicted surface
water response are then being compared during the treatment period to evaluate the models'
ability to forecast both acidification and recovery. This effort also will compare each process that
controls acidification as they are represented in the models.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Base Cations, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Manipulation, Modeling
Goal: Model Development, Model Verification, Prediction, Recovery
Processes: Base Cation Exchange, Deacidification, Hydrology, Sulfate Adsorption,
Sulfate Desorption
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.4B3 NAPAP Code: 6B-1.02B3
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Program Element: Model Development and Testing (E-05.4)
Project: Recovery of Surface Waters (E-05.4B)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-99
-------
TITLE: Coordinating Watershed Studies as a Means for Implementing an Integrated Environmental
Monitoring Program
SHORT TITLE: Watershed Studies Coordination
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Appalachians, Middle Atlantic, Midwest, Northeast, Southeast, Upper
Midwest, West (states to be determined)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this program element is to establish an interagency, integrated
watersheds research effort that will allow ongoing and proposed studies to be coordinated into a
long-term environmental monitoring research program. The objectives are to identify sites presently
being studied and, through the agency sponsoring the research, evaluate the potential for including
the sites as part of a research program that addresses environmental issues including and beyond
those associated with acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Many presently ongoing watersheds studies have periods of record dating to the early
1980s. Although the research is part of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, and
therefore the focus has been primarily on acidic deposition effects, most of the project's objectives
also are relevant to environmental issues that extend beyond acidification issues. Because long-term
data records are few, though extremely valuable in assessing trends, coordinating these and future
research activities into a program with a common goal and set of objectives would allow the
maximum opportunity to assess how and to what degree aquatic ecosystems are being affected by
anthropogenic activities.
APPROACH: The first task is to select a mutually agreeable set of research questions that most or all
sites can address in the near future that remain relevant to the National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program. The selected questions will consider the benefits of combining information
from all sites without jeopardizing the success of the present mission. The second approach will be
to identify, as a coordinated agency effort, the key goals and objectives for a long-term
environmental monitoring program. Contacts will be established for the U.S. Geological Survey, the
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, the U.S. Department of Interior-National Park Service,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and others involved in environmental monitoring.
Periodic meetings and correspondence will help facilitate this coordination effort.
KEYWORDS: Medium: N/A
Chemicals: N/A
Approach: N/A
Goal: Trends Detection, Verification
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-05 EPA Code: E-05.5 NAPAP Code: 6C-4
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Watershed Processes and Manipulations (E-05)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1980 to 1990 +
Contact: Rick Linthurst, Daniel McKenzie
2-100
-------
2.5 EPISODIC RESPONSE PROJECT - PROGRAM E-08
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-08: Episodic Response Project (6A-2) 2-103
E-08.1 Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulations (6A-2.01) 2-104
E-08.2 Monitoring of Episodic Events (6A-2.02) 2-106
E-08.2A Eastern Episodes (6A-2.02A) 2-108
E-08.2B Western Episodes (6A-2.02C) 2-110
E-08.3 Modeling of Episodic Acidification (6A-2.03) 2-111
2-101
-------
-------
TITLE: Effects of Snowmelt and Storm Episodes on Surface Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Episodic Response Project
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), West
(CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The Episodic Response Project has four main objectives: (1) to determine
the magnitude, duration, and frequency of episodic chemical changes that accompany hydrologic
events; (2) to determine the critical site factors and forcing functions including deposition and
hydrologic flowpath; (3) to determine whether episodes can potentially impact long-term fish
survival; and (4) to develop a model to predict the regional extent of episodic chemical changes in
the United States.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey was designed and implemented to characterize the
extent of "chronic" acidic conditions that may adversely affect aquatic biota in lake and stream
ecosystems. Because these population estimates pertain only to index conditions (seasonal,
hydrologic, etc.), they do not provide an estimate of the "worst-case" chemical conditions from an
acidification perspective, such as short-term acidification of lakes and streams that accompanies
snowmelt and rainstorm events. Preliminary analyses using simple conceptual and empirical models
of episodic acidification indicate that lake acidification in the Adirondacks during snowmelt and
stream acidification in the Middle Atlantic region may be underestimated significantly if based solely
on index conditions.
APPROACH: A key design element is the integration of research with the Watershed Manipulation
Project at selected catchment research sites where existing flow and water chemistry data are
available for a pair of calibrated catchments. Using whole-catchment acidic manipulations, the
response of catchments to an increased deposition loading will be determined relative to a control
catchment. Intensive hydrologic research, including snowmelt studies, will be conducted to
elucidate the role of hydrologic flowpath in mediating the chemical response of catchments to acidic
deposition on both episodic and chronic time scales. A second group of presumed sensitive systems
will be similarly instrumented and studied for a period of two years, but these sites will not be
manipulated. These sites will be located in regions of the eastern United States in which episodic
acidification represents a key uncertainty in assessing current status and extent. An additional
monitoring effort for sensitive regions of the western United States is also being designed. Model-
based techniques for regionalizing the results from all three projects to National Surface Water
Survey target populations also will be developed.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Snowpack, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Biological Effects,Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification, Hydrology, Mineral Weathering
PPA: E-08 EPA Code: E-08 NAPAP Code: 6A-2
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-01, EO-3, E-05, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-103
-------
TITLE: Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulation Studies
SHORT TITLE: Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulations
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (PA, WV), Northeast (ME)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the surface water chemical responses, at both chronic and
episodic time scales, of regionally representative watersheds and associated streams to altered
deposition of sulfur and/or nitrogen; to determine the important site factors and forcing functions
that control chronic and episodic response of watersheds and associated streams, including the
importance of deposition; to test the behavior of the Direct/Delayed Response Project models,
evaluate model prediction of manipulation outcomes, and refine model structure to improve
reliability of predictions; to determine the magnitude, duration, and frequency of episodic chemical
changes that accompany hydrologic events in regionally representative streams; and to develop
modeling approaches (either empirical or conceptual) for predicting the occurrence of episodic
chemical changes that could potentially be applied on a regional basis.
RATIONALE: Results from the National Surface Water Survey and the Direct/Delayed Response
Project have revealed a critical need for testing acidification hypotheses -formulated using regional
water chemistry and soils data bases - through application of watershed-based research. The
Episodic Response Project and the Watershed Manipulation Project are being designed and
implemented to test these hypotheses. Conducting the two projects independently would be a
costly duplication of effort, given their similar study site, logistical, analytical, and quality assurance
needs. Therefore, the Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulation studies are being designed to meet
the objectives of both projects.
APPROACH: The overall approach of this project from the Watershed Manipulation Project
perspective is to provide additional tests of acidification hypotheses that have been formulated from
regional data bases and mechanistic hydrochemical models. Each of these hypotheses deals with the
response of a calibrated catchment to an increased loading of an acidic substance relative to the
response of a control system. The acidic manipulations will be applied over at least a three-year
period, during which time the response will be determined through quantification of the chemical
output in streamflow. From the Episodic Response Project perspective, streams from both the
experimental and the control catchment will be monitored to determine the extent to which short-
term chemical changes in water chemistry (particularly pH, acid neutralizing capacity, and aluminum
species) occur. These data will be integrated with comparable episodes from a group of larger
streams located in regions of the eastern United States to formulate an empirical or conceptual
model of episodic acidification that could potentially be used in a regionalization context.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Soils, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification, Hydrology, Mineral Weathering, Sulfate
Adsorption, Sulfate Desorption
2-104
-------
PPA: E-08 EPA Code: E-08.1 NAPAP Code: 6A-2.01
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, EO-5, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Episodic Response Project (E-08)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1992
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-105
-------
TITLE: Monitoring Episodic Acidification in Surface Waters
SHORTTITLE: Monitoring of Episodic Events
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), West
(CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the magnitude, duration, and frequency of episodic chemical
changes that accompany hydrologic events, to determine the critical site factors and forcing
functions including deposition and hydrologic flowpath, to determine whether episodes can
potentially impact long-term fish survival, and to develop a model to predict the regional extent of
episodic chemical changes in the United States.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey was designed and implemented to characterize the
extent of "chronic" acidic conditions that may adversely affect aquatic biota in lake and stream
ecosystems. Because these population estimates pertain only to index conditions (seasonal,
hydrologic, etc.), they do not provide an estimate of the "worst-case" chemical conditions from an
acidification perspective, such as short-term acidification of lakes and streams that accompanies
snowmelt and rainstorm events. Preliminary analyses using simple conceptual and empirical models
of episodic acidification indicate that lake acidification in the Adirondacks during snowmelt and
stream acidification in the Middle Atlantic region may be significantly underestimated if based solely
on index conditions.
APPROACH: The fundamental technical approach is that an understanding of the occurrence and
causes of episodic acidification can be gained through a combination of surface water monitoring
and watershed research aimed at determining the appropriate variables (e.g., percent "new water,"
baseflow acid neutralizing capacity) that are correlated with the occurrence of episodes. Empirical
and conceptual models can be developed using such data sets, which have the potential for being
employed on a regional basis. The greatest current limitation of these techniques is an inadequate
amount of field data with which to formulate and calibrate such models. Past approaches have
typically failed because they have relied predominantly on manned data collection. This project is
being designed to include continuous and automated field data collection protocols, thereby
minimizing the amount of missing episodes data. Episodic research sites will be selected so as to
provide a range of watershed, deposition, and water chemistry characteristics, as opposed to a
statistical sample. In the eastern United States, the Northeast and Middle Atlantic regions are the
highest priority. Less intensive monitoring efforts are being considered for the western United
States and the Southeast, efforts which may be implemented in conjunction with the Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project. Biological studies are being conducted as part of
E-03.3, Biological Effects of Acidic Episodes.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Snowpack, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification, Hydrology
2-106
-------
PPA: E-08 EPA Code: E-08.2 NAPAP Code: 6A-2.02
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Episodic Response Project (E-08)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-107
-------
TITLE: Monitoring of Acidic Episodes in Surface Waters: Eastern United States
SHORT TITLE: Eastern Episodes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the magnitude, duration, and frequency of episodic chemical
changes that accompany hydrologic events, and to determine the site factors and forcing functions
(including deposition and hydrologic flowpath) that affect the characteristics of acidic episodes.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey estimates of the status and extent of aquatic
resources pertain to "index" conditions, and thus do not correspond to the "worst-case" chemical
conditions from an acidification perspective. Short-term acidification of lakes and streams
significantly affect interpretation of status and extent.
APPROACH: Several approaches to acidic episodes in surface waters have been only marginally
successful for several reasons. Both intensive studies and survey approaches have been generally
data-limited, primarily as a result of the unpredictable nature of snowmelt and rainstorm events.
Most of these studies have employed manual sampling as the principal field sampling approach, and
thus episodes that begin on weekends or at night are typically missed. Survey approaches have
failed because of logistical difficulties associated with unfamiliar sampling systems. In addition, any
regional interpretation of many intensive studies is limited because it is not known what population
or subpopulation of surface waters were "represented" by the intensive systems. These limitations
will be minimized in the eastern episodes project by (1) focusing on particular regions or subregions
of interest from an acidification prospective, (2) using the National Surface Water Survey and
Direct/Delayed Response Project data bases to select accessible yet representative systems for study,
(3) utilizing automated, continuous and semi-continuous monitoring techniques, and (4) collecting
sufficient hydrologic and deposition data to develop, calibrate, and apply empirical and mechanistic
models of episodic response during regional assessment. For the episodes research,
"representativeness" refers to a sample of sites that provides sufficient range in parameter values for
model development (model-based sampling approach), as opposed to the statistical design-based
approach employed in the National Surface Water Survey. Currently, the northeastern United States
and the Middle Atlantic regions are of highest priority, and the initial data collection will focus on
stream chemistry (as opposed to lake chemistry), because streams are expected to provide the least
attenuated episodic signal. Five to ten stream systems will be monitored for a two-year period, and
the episodic acidification potential of each site will be assessed from these complete, continuous
chemistry data bases.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification, Hydrology
2-108
-------
PPA: E-08 EPA Code: E-08.2A NAPAP Code: 6A-2.02A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Episodic Response Project (E-08)
Program Element: Monitoring of Episodic Events (E-08.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-109
-------
TITLE: Monitoring of Acidic Episodes in Surface Waters: Western United States
SHORTTITLE: Western Episodes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of the episodes studies proposed for the western United States is
to determine whether acidic episodes occur in surface waters in specific subregions of interest in the
western United States.
RATIONALE: Results of the Western Lake Survey revealed virtually no acidic lakes in the West using
the fall index protocol, and the western United States typically receives an acidic deposition loading
that is an order of magnitude lower than the eastern United States. However, there is limited field
evidence that suggests that these extremely low acid neutralizing capacity systems may become
acidic during snowmelt or during acidic summer rainfall events. This project will address this
uncertainty in estimates or regional status and extent based on National Surface Water Survey
results.
APPROACH: Because of the geographical expanse of the target population of surface waters in the
western United States, resource constraints dictate that the focus of the project be on specific
subregions of interest. As with the eastern episodes work, a model-based design is proposed, in
which a sample of surface waters for intensive study are selected using objective criteria based on
the National Surface Water Survey data bases. Ongoing chemical monitoring studies will be
supplemented through (1) application of state-of-the-art, automated, continuous monitoring
techniques, (2) use of a quality assurance program that provides data of quality comparable to those
from the National Surface Water Survey, and (3) intensive studies of snowpack processes.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Snowpack, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Base Cations, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification, Hydrology
PPA: E-08 EPA Code: E-08.2B NAPAP Code: 6A-2.02C
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Episodic Response Project (E-08)
Program Element: Monitoring of Episodic Events (E-08.2)
Status: Proposed Period of Performance: 1988 to 1991
Contact: To be determined
2-110
-------
TITLE: Development and Application of Models to Quantify the Importance of Episodes in Surface
Water Acidification on Regional Scales
SHORT TITLE: Modeling of Episodic Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The National Surface Water Survey, through application of an "index"
sampling protocol and a statistically rigorous design, allowed the extent of "chronic" acidic
conditions in target populations of lakes and streams in regions of interest to be quantified. Because
"acute" or "episodic" acidification is by definition transient, the data requirements and logistical
constraints of making direct regional estimates would be prohibitive. Such approaches undertaken
as part of the National Surface Water Survey were deemed unfeasible. An alternative method is the
application of simple empirical or conceptual models that can predict the occurrence of episodic
acidification with more readily available data. The objective of this project is to develop such models
from existing data bases, and to calibrate and verify them using data that will be collected as part of
the Episodes Monitoring and Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulation research efforts.
RATIONALE: Understanding the importance and causes of episodic acidification is crucial to a
complete assessment program, because of the possibility that biological effects are associated with
transient acidic conditions, rather than with "index" conditions. Acute toxicity to fish has been
documented under both laboratory and field conditions, and preliminary analyses suggest that the
number of acidic systems in the eastern United States is significantly underestimated using the
"index" sample approach. Predictive models of episodic acidification would ultimately permit
estimation of the "target loadings" for systems, given some objective criteria are provided.
APPROACH: The technical approach will include a formulation of both empirical and deterministic
mathematical models using existing data from a variety of episodes studies. In some cases, existing
deterministic models will be used (decreasing the time steps); more hydrologically realistic models
will presumably be easier to calibrate, however, and several of these models are already in the
development stage. Several empirical models have also been proposed, and these will also be tested
using data from the Regional Episodic and Acidic Manipulation and Episodes Monitoring studies.
Regional predictions using the empirical techniques will be made, and the deterministic models will
be used for estimating target loadings.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Major Ions, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-08 EPA Code: E-08.3 NAPAP Code: 6A-2.03
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Episodic Response Project (E-08)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-111
-------
-------
2.6 BIOLOGICALLY RELEVANT CHEMISTRY - PROGRAM E-03
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-03: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (6D-1) 2-115
E-03.1 Current Status of Biological Communities (6D-1.01) 2-116
E-03.1A Fish Populations of Florida Lakes (60-1.01A) 2-117
E-03.1B Surface Water Chemistry and Fish Presence (Ml) (6D-1.01B) 2-118
E-03.1C Surface Water Chemistry and Plankton Distributions (6D-1.01C) 2-119
E-03.2 Biological Model Development and Testing (6D-1.02) 2-120
E-03.2A Baseline Probability (6D-1.02A) 2-121
E-03.2B Defining Critical Values (6D-1.02B) 2-122
E-03.2C Modeling Fish Population-Level Responses (N/A) 2-123
E-03.2D Empirical Bayes Models of Fish Population Response (N/A) 2-124
E-03.3 Biological Effects of Acidic Episodes (6D-1.03) 2-125
E-03.3A Models of Fish Response to Episodes (N/A) 2-126
E-03.3B Surveys of Stream Fish Populations (N/A) 2-127
E-03.3C Mechanisms of Fish Population Response (N/A) 2-128
E-03.4 Organismal Development/Physiology (6D-2) 2-129
E-03.4A Osmoregulation-Loss/Recovery (6D-2.01G) 2-130
E-03.4B Effects on Osmoregulatory/Reproductive Organs (6D-2.01H) 2-131
2-113
-------
-------
TITLE: Determining the Regional Risk of Aquatic Biota in Response to Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Biologically Relevant Chemistry
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide the information necessary to assess at a regional level the risk
that acidic deposition poses to aquatic biota, focusing on past and future potential impacts on fish
populations.
RATIONALE: Acidification of surface waters is of concern principally to the degree that biological
processes and communities are adversely affected. Public interest centers on potential losses or
decline in the fishery resource resulting from acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Biological responses to acidic deposition and acidification are complex and varied. As a
result, the program emphasis is to identify those chemical characteristics and changes in surface
waters that cause "undesirable" biological effects, rather than to define in detail the specific nature
and mechanisms of biological response. These analyses draw primarily upon the existing literature,
and thus are derived from a broad range of studies: laboratory bioassays, field bioassays, field
experiments, and field surveys. Several modeling approaches are being pursued, based on data from
field surveys and laboratory bioassays, to quantify levels of key chemical parameters associated with
the loss of fish populations in lakes and streams as a result of acidic deposition. The existing
literature and data are being supplemented by several major field studies that address uncertainties.
Surveys of fish populations focus on selected subregions with little existing data but relatively large
numbers of acidic or potentially sensitive surface waters (e.g., Upper Peninsula of Michigan and
Florida), providing additional information on the current status of the fishery resource and levels of
acidity associated with fish population loss or absence. In addition, the role and importance of acidic
episodes in determining fish population response to acidification are being investigated as part of
field studies associated with the Episodic Response Project in streams across the eastern United
States.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Fluoride, Mercury, Metals, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response, Chronic Acidification, Community Response,
Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03 NAPAP Code: 6D-1
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-01, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-115
-------
TITLE: Current Status of Fish and Other Biotic Communities in Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Current Status of Biological Communities
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME. NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (FL), Upper Midwest
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To establish the current status of fish populations and other selected
biological communities in waters considered potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Survey data provide a baseline for the design and implementation of long-term
monitoring and information on levels of acidity associated with observed biological effects, e.g., the
absence or loss of fish populations.
APPROACH: Field surveys and literature review focus on the status of fish populations, with more
limited attention on other biological communities such as zooplankton. Regions to be surveyed are
those with little existing data, but relatively large numbers of acidic waters or waters considered
potentially sensitive to acidic deposition, e.g., the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and Florida. Waters
selected for biological sampling represent a subset of those sampled during the National Surface
Water Survey, thereby contributing to regional assessments of the current status of biological
communities. Survey data are used to quantify regional distributions of biological parameters of
interest (e.g., estimate the number of lakes without fish) and to develop and test models of
biological response to acidification and estimates of critical values for effects.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Mercury, Metals, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Model Verification,
Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.1 NAPAP Code: 6D-1.01
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-116
-------
TITLE: Present Status of the Fishery Resource in Three Areas of Florida
SHORT TITLE: Fish Populations of Florida Lakes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southeast (FL)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To assess the current status of fish communities and fish populations in
selected lakes in three areas of Florida (Ocala National Forest, Trail Ridge, and Florida Panhandle).
RATIONALE: In the Eastern Lake Survey, the Florida subregion was identified as having the highest
percentage of acidic lakes in the target population surveyed. Relatively few data exist on the status
of the fishery resource in this subregion regarding potential effects of acidic deposition. The data
acquired in this project will continue to improve the understanding of the current status of
biological communities in an area with a high proportion of acidic lakes and also receiving relatively
high levels of acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Four lakes, covering a range of pH levels and dissolved organic carbon concentrations,
in each of the three areas were selected for sampling. Fish populations in the lakes are being
sampled by electrofishing, gill netting, and blocknets. A mark-recapture study in each lake is being
conducted in conjunction with the electrofishing technique. Results of the mark-recapture
technique will provide information on species composition and abundance population size structure,
condition factor coefficients, and fish age and growth rates.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Biological Effects, Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-03 EPACode: E-03.1A NAPAP Code: 6D-1.01A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Current Status of Biological Communities (E-03.1)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1986 to 1988
Contact: Joan Baker
2-117
-------
TITLE: Present Status of the Fishery Resource in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan
SHORT TITLE: Surface Water Chemistry and Fish Presence (Ml)
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Ml, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To assess the current status of fish communities and fish populations in lakes
in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.
RATIONALE: In the Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I, three subregions were identified as having the
highest percentages of acidic lakes in the target populations of lakes surveyed - the Adirondacks,
Florida, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Of these three subregions, extensive data on the
current status of fishery resources exist only for the Adirondack Subregion. The current status of the
fishery resource in Florida is being addressed in a separate project, Fish Populations of Florida Lakes.
This project will provide information on the present status of fish populations in the Upper Peninsula
of Michigan.
APPROACH: A variable probability, systematic sample of 50 lakes was selected from the Eastern Lake
Survey-Phase I frame in Region 2. Lake selection was optimized to include those lakes with a range
of key chemical parameters affecting fish, including pH, calcium, and dissolved organic carbon. A
number of chemical parameters will be measured in conjunction with fish sampling by use of gill
nets, fish nets, and beach seines. Results of these efforts will provide information on fish species
presence/absence and estimates of population abundance (through calculations of catch per unit
effort). The project is also being conducted in cooperation with a mercury study (described in
Program E-04, Indirect Human Health) to determine the concentrations and regional distribution of
mercury in fish tissues.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology,Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Fluoride, Mercury, Metals, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Biological Effects, Status/Extent
Processes: ISI/A
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.1B NAPAP Code: 6D-1.01 B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Current Status of Biological Communities (E-03.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-118
-------
TITLE: Relationship between Zooplankton Distributions and Surface Water Chemistry in the
Northeastern United States
SHORT TITLE: Surface Water Chemistry and Plankton Distributions
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, PA, Rl, VT)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To characterize summer zooplankton communities; to examine
relationships between zooplankton and water chemistry; to evaluate zooplankton community
structure with respect to existing data on fish populations and lake basin characteristics; to assess
potential of acidification to alter structure and function of zooplankton communities; and to
evaluate project results in light of application to long-term monitoring.
RATIONALE: Zooplankton are a component of aquatic biological communities, and their
assemblages are particularly sensitive to direct (chemical) and indirect (food web interactions) effects
of acidification. Surveys of zooplankton communities can provide a sensitive, reliable, and accurate
means to examine relationships between biological resources and water chemistry, contributing to
an overall assessment of biological status of lakes at risk to acidic deposition effects.
APPROACH: Zooplankton samples were collected in conjunction with the Northeastern Seasonal
Variability Study during the spring, summer, and fall by vertical tows from 150 lakes statistically
selected from the Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I in the Northeast. Taxonomic composition, species
abundance, size class abundance, and feeding category abundance are being determined on each
zooplankton sample. Data analysis includes a number of statistical evaluations between
zooplankton community structure and regional patterns of zooplankton distribution.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Calcium, Major Ions, Nitrate,
Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Status/Extent
Processes: Community Response
PPA: E-03 EPACode: E-03.1C NAPAP Code: 6D-1.01C
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Current Status of Biological Communities (E-03.1)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1986 to 1988
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-119
-------
TITLE: Model Development and Testing: Identifying Values of Chemical Variables Critical to Fish
Populations
SHORT TITLE: Biological Model Development and Testing
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To quantify the relationship between surface water acidification and key
biological responses, in particular the loss of fish populations. Critical values for effects (e.g., levels
of pH, aluminum, and calcium at which adverse effects are likely to occur) are also to be identified.
RATIONALE: Acidification of surface waters is of concern principally to the degree that biological
processes and communities are adversely affected. Public interest centers on the potential loss or
decline in the fisheries resource. Thus, it is important to define what chemical characteristics and
levels of key chemical parameters are associated with adverse biological effects, in particular, effects
on fish populations.
APPROACH: Three alternative approaches are being pursued: (1) qualitative evaluation and
integration of the existing literature, (2) empirical models based on field survey data, and
(3) response models based on both field surveys and laboratory bioassay data. The existing literature
includes data derived from laboratory bioassays, field bioassays, field experiments, and field surveys.
Critical pH values for effects observed or tested are identified and combined across studies to
estimate the critical pH range for effects. Empirical models rely on the spatial association between
water chemistry and biological status (e.g., fish presence or absence) to quantify critical levels for
effects. In addition to models of biological response to acidification, empirical models are being
developed to assess the likelihood that fish occur, or do not occur, for reasons other than acidity,
termed the baseline probability of fish presence. The third approach quantitatively integrates
bioassay data with field survey data, using bioassay data to define the interactive effects of pH,
aluminum, and calcium, and survey data to identify levels of stress (e.g., decreased reproductive
potential) that result in population extinction. Results from these three alternative approaches will
be compared directly, in terms of estimated critical values or ranges for effects, and as they influence
regional predictions of responses to acidic deposition.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory, Literature, Modeling
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.2 NAPAP Code: 6D-1.02
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program Area: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Joan Baker
2-120
-------
TITLE: Development of Empirical Models for Estimating the Baseline Probability of Fish Presence
SHORTTITLE: Baseline Probability
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME, NH, NY, VT)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To develop empirical models for prediction of fish species distribution
among lakes in the northeastern United States as a function of factors other than lake acidity or
acidification.
RATIONALE: Models of the "baseline probability" of fish presence are eventually to be coupled with
models of fish response to acidification and predictions of lake chemistry in order to estimate
regional impacts from acidic deposition. Although it is expected that these models of baseline
probability will be rather crude, such models are needed to supplement and integrate existing survey
data to quantify patterns of fish species distribution in waters considered potentially sensitive to
acidic deposit!on.
APPROACH: Models for predicting the baseline probability of fish presence will be strictly empirical,
based on the observed spatial association between fish species distribution and physical and
chemical lake characteristics other than lake acidity. The models will be developed and tested, for
the most part, using fish survey data collected in 1984 and 1985 in the Adirondack region of New
York by the Adirondack Lake Survey Corporation. The Adirondack Lake Survey Corporation data set
(n = 842) will be subdivided into data for model development (two-thirds) and model testing (one-
third). Models also will be evaluated with limited survey data for Maine (n = 87), Vermont (n = 29),
and New Hampshire (n = 20). Models will focus initially on predicting the distribution of brook trout
and other important game fish. Independent factors considered will include lake area, lake depth,
elevation, watershed area, hydrologic type, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and fish stocking.
Model development principally will involve logistic regression analysis. Data sets may be restricted,
initially, to only lakes with pH>6.0, to eliminate potential confounding effects due to lake acidity.
Colinearity among independent parameters will be assessed using linear regression (PROCREG),
colinearity diagnostics, the Mallows Cp statistic, and other criteria. Depending on the utility of the
results for lakes in the Northeast, future projects may apply similar techniques for streams or lakes in
other regions of the United States.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Organics
Approach: Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.2A NAPAP Code: 6D-1.02A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program Area: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Biological Model Development and Testing (E-03.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Joan Baker
2-121
-------
TITLE: Defining Critical Values for Effects of Acidification on Aquatic Biota
SHORT TITLE: Defining Critical Values
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To define best possible estimates of levels of acidity (and associated
parameters) that cause significant damage to aquatic biota, in particular, fish populations and
zooplankton communities.
RATIONALE: Acidification of surface waters is of concern principally to the degree that biological
processes and communities are adversely affected. Public interest centers on the potential loss or
decline in the fishery resource. Thus, it is important to define what chemical characteristics and
levels of key chemical parameters are associated with adverse biological effects, in particular effects
on fish populations.
APPROACH: Three alternative approaches are being pursued: (1) qualitative evaluation of the
existing literature, (2) empirical models based on field survey data, and (3) response models based on
both field surveys and laboratory bioassay data. The existing literature includes data derived from
laboratory bioassays, field bioassays and experiments, and field surveys. Literature reviews cover all
aspects of effects of acidification on aquatic biota and biological communities. Critical pH values for
effects observed or tested are identified from individual studies, and then combined to estimate a
critical pH range for effects. Empirical models rely on the spatial association between water
chemistry and biological status (e.g., fish presence or absence) to quantify acidity levels for effects.
Logistic regression models are being developed for selected species of fish and zooplankton. The
third approach quantitatively integrates bioassay data with field survey data, using bioassay data to
define the interactive effects of pH, aluminum, and calcium, and survey data to identify levels of
stress (e.g., decreased reproductive potential) that result in population extinction. This third
approach is being applied for fish populations only, based largely on efforts funded by the Electric
Power Research Institute as part of the Lake Acidification and Fisheries Project. Results from these
three alternative approaches will be compared directly, in terms of estimated critical values or ranges
for effects, and as they influence regional predictions of responses to acidic deposition.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response, Community Response
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.2B NAPAP Code: 6D-1.02B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program Area: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Biological Model Development and Testing (E-03.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Joan Baker
2-122
-------
TITLE: Modeling the Effects of Acidification on Fish Population Status
SHORT TITLE: Modeling Fish Population-Level Responses
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To develop models of fish population response to acidification for use in
estimating the regional effects of acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Estimation of the regional extent and severity of effects of acidic deposition of fish
populations is a primary goal of the Aquatic Effects Research Program. Models that express changes
in fish population status as a function of changes in surface water chemistry and acidity provide a
framework for quantifying potential effects on fish populations. These models may then be used
with results from the National Surface Water Survey (E-01) and the Direct/Delayed Response Project
(E-07), translating regional estimates of changes in chemical status into regional estimates of
biological effects.
APPROACH: The primary approach used for model development is empirical, relying on the spatial
association between fish population status and water chemistry among surface waters across a
broad geographic region. Given the limited field data available for streams, modeling efforts to
date have focused on lakes, principally lakes in the Adirondack region of New York and in Ontario.
Data sets for model calibration have been restricted to those lakes with historical survey data (or
other information) indicating the presence of the fish species of interest in the past. Fish population
status is defined simply as fish species catch or no catch in field surveys as an indicator of fish species
presence/absence. Models are defined based on logistic regression analysis relating fish
presence/absence as a function of lake pH, calcium, aluminum, elevation, area or other chemical and
physical characteristics. Exploratory analyses using Bayesian statistical techniques to pool
information across regions or to pool field data with expert judgment have also been initiated.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.2C NAPAPCode: N/A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry
Program Element: Biological Model Development and Testing
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1988
Contact: Joan Baker
2-123
-------
TITLE: Empirical Bayes Models of Fish Population Response to Acidification: Linking Laboratory
Bioassay and Empirical Modeling Studies
SHORT TITLE: Empirical Bayes Models of Fish Population Response
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast. (ME, NH, NY, VT)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To develop models of fish population response to acidification that take
advantage of both results from laboratory bioassays (defining the functional relationship between
fish survival and pH, aluminum, and calcium levels) and results from field surveys (i e., the observed
spatial association between fish population status and water chemistry).
RATIONALE: Modeling efforts to date to predict changes in fish populations with acidification have
relied principally on field survey data and the observed spatial association between fish population
status and the chemical (and physical) characteristics of the surface water. These empirical
approaches have several inherent problems, in particular, problems related to multicolinearity, or
correlations among the independent predictor variables that make it difficult to distinguish causal
relationships based on field survey data alone. Bioassays provide another major source of
information on effects of acidic conditions on fish. The pooling of laboratory bioassay data and
empirical field observations is expected to result in improved predictive models.
APPROACH: Four tasks are planned: (1) compile and review existing data sets from laboratory
bioassays, (2) use appropriate statistical methods (e.g., Bayesian techniques or weighting schemes)
for pooling among bioassay data sets from different investigators or for different life stages, (3)
develop a Bayesian model for combining laboratory bioassay and empirical models (E-03.2C) of fish
response to acidification, and (4) statistically compare the resultant model parameter estimates and
predictions with existing models. Models are to be developed for brook trout and lake trout
populations in lakes. A particularly critical issue to be explored is the nature of the relationship
between the bioassay survival data or model and observed responses in field surveys. Several
alternative strategies will be explored that incorporate the concept of compensatory reserve, i.e.,
mechanisms by which the population may compensate for increases in acid -induced mortality.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.2D NAPAPCode: N/A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry
Program Element: Biological Model Development and Testing
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Joan Baker
2-124
-------
TITLE: Determining the Effects of Acidic Episodes on the Status of Populations of Aquatic Biota
SHORT TITLE: Biological Effects of Acidic Episodes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine whether acidic episodes have definitive, long-term effects on
fish populations, and to determine the general characteristics of episodes (i.e., magnitude, duration,
frequency) associated with adverse effects.
RATIONALE: While it has been demonstrated that chronic acidification can result in the loss of fish
populations and other adverse biological effects, the specific role and influence of short-term acidic
episodes remains uncertain. Acidic episodes occur in many lakes and streams, including surface
waters experiencing no measurable chronic acidification. Thus, an understanding of the importance
of acidic episodes is required for improved assessments of the regional extent of biological effects
related to acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Laboratory and field bioassays have demonstrated that short-term exposures to acidic
conditions typical of those that occur during acidic episodes can kill individual fish. Uncertainties
remain, however, regarding the long-term effects of episodes on fish population status. Thus,
studies of episodic effects will concentrate on population-level responses in the field environment,
evaluating key processes and parameters such as behavioral avoidance, reproductive success, and
changes in population abundance overtime. Studies will be conducted at several stream sites in the
eastern United States, in conjunction with chemical monitoring, as part of the Episodic Response
Project (E-08).
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Organics
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Biological Effects, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response, Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.3 NAPAP Code: 6D-1.03
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987to1990
Contact: Joan Baker
2-125
-------
TITLE: Regional Models of Fish Population Response to Episodic Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Models of Fish Response to Episodes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY), Middle Atlantic (PA)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To develop models of fish population response to acidification that
explicitly incorporate potential effects from acidic episodes. To apply these models using the
National Stream Survey (E-01.1B) framework to improve regional estimates of the effects of acidic
deposition on fish populations in streams in selected regions of the United States.
RATIONALE: Estimation of the regional extent and severity of effects of acidic deposition on fish
populations is a primary goal of the Aquatic Effects Research Program. To date, models developed
and applied as the basis for these estimates have focused on effects from chronic acidification.
Short-term acidic episodes may also, however, have significant adverse effects on fish populations.
Thus, models that do not incorporate effects from acidic episodes may underestimate the regional
effects from acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Development of models that incorporate effects of episodes will build upon existing
Aquatic Effects Research Program models and modeling approaches (E-03.2B and E-03.2C). Two
primary approaches are being considered: (1) empirical models based solely on spatial associations
between fish population status and chemical conditions in streams as measured in field surveys, and
(2) semi-empirical approaches that take advantage of both field survey data and laboratory bioassay
information. The field survey data to be used for model calibration will be collected as part of
Project E-03.3B. Fish response models will be integrated with regional chemistry models (predicting
chemical conditions during episodes)(E-08.3), and will rely on watershed and water chemistry data
collected during the National Stream Survey (E-01.1B) as the basis for regional extrapolations.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Modeling
Goal: Biological Effects, Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response, Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.3A NAPAPCode: N/A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry
Program Element: Biological Effects of Episodes
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Joan Baker
2-126
-------
TITLE: Surveys of Fish Population Status in Streams
SHORT TITLE: Surveys of Stream Fish Populations
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY), Middle Atlantic (PA)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To quantify the status of fish populations in streams in regions considered
potentially susceptible to acidic deposition. To evaluate relationships between fish population
status and stream water chemistry, including predicted chemical conditions during episodes. To
provide data for development and calibration of fish response models.
RATIONALE: Few data are available on fish population status in streams suitable for evaluation of
the potential regional effects from acidic deposition. Data collected as part of these extensive
surveys will be used to develop and calibrate models of fish population response to acidification
(E-03.3A). In addition, these data will provide a regional framework for comparison with results
from intensive field studies of fish population response to acidic episodes (E-03.3C), conducted on a
small number of the streams surveyed.
APPROACH: Thirty to fifty streams will be surveyed per region, in two or three high priority regions.
Fish communities will be surveyed at I east once, during the low flow period in late summer/early fall.
In some regions, streams may also be surveyed during late spring. Fish communities will be sampled
using backpack electroshockers. A 100-m section of the stream will be blocked off using fine-mesh
seine nets. At least three consecutive electrofishing passes of equal effort will be made through the
100-m study reach. Parameters to be measured include (1) fish species composition, (2) fish
population abundance (estimated based on catch-depletion models), (3) fish population standing
stock, and (4) for game fish, abundance of age 0 + fish (young-of-the-year fish). In conjunction with
these surveys of fish population status, chemical conditions will be measured during spring baseflow,
consistent with the techniques applied during the National Stream Survey (E-01.1B).
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Field sampling
Goal: Biological Effects, Status/Extent
Processes: Biological Response, Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.3B NAPAPCode: N/A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry
Program Element: Biological Effects of Episodes
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Joan Baker
2-127
-------
TITLE: Mechanisms of Fish Population Responses to Episodic Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Mechanisms of Fish Population Response
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY), Middle Atlantic (PA)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To improve understanding of mechanisms of fish population response to
episodic acidification. To define key characteristics of episodes that determine the severity of effects
on fish populations. To aid in interpretation of fish survey data and evaluation of models of fish
population responses to episodic acidification.
RATIONALE: The effects of episodic acidification on fish communities and fish population status are
uncertain. Numerous laboratory and field bioassays have demonstrated that short-term exposures
to acidic conditions can cause increased mortality and other adverse effects on fish. Yet, definitive
population-level effects on fish from short-term depressions in pH or acid neutralizing capacity have
been demonstrated in few systems. Ideally, chemical characterization of the extent and severity of
episodes should focus on those features that determine or influence biological response.
Unfortunately, our understanding of these factors is incomplete. These uncertainties contribute to
uncertainties in models of fish population response and uncertainties in regional estimates of the
effects of acidic episodes and acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Intensive field studies of fish population responses to acidic episodes will be conducted
in 4-6 streams per region, in two or three high priority regions. Stream reach section of 300 to 500 m
will be blocked off with fish weirs/traps. Existing fish in the study reach will be removed with
electrofishing, and each study reach will be restocked with a known number of brook trout and a
forage species common to the region and likely to be sensitive to stream acidification. These fish
transplant experiments are to be initiated in late summer/fall 1988 and will continue through late
1990/early 1991. Response variables to be measured or estimated include (1) patterns of fish
movement into and out of the study reach, (2) changes in fish abundance over time in the study
reach, (3) population-level mortality rates (estimated from observed changes in fish abundance
corrected from outmigration and inmigration), (4) reproductive success and behavior, and(5) fish
growth rates. Values for these response variables will be assessed as a function of changes in
chemical conditions through time in any one stream, particularly with respect to potential effects
from acidic episodes, and also as a function of differences in water chemistry (and the severity of
episodes) among streams.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Field sampling, Field manipulation
Goal: Biological Effects
Processes: Biological Response, Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.3C NAPAPCode: N/A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry
Program Element: Biological Effects of Episodes
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Joan Baker
2-128
-------
TITLE: Investigating Physiological and Population-Level Responses of Aquatic Organisms
Resulting from Changes in Surface Water Chemistry
SHORT TITLE: Organismal Development/Physiology
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (MM, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The objective of this program element is to determine changes in the
structure and function of gills and other organs in fish exposed to low pH water.
RATIONALE: Although low pH has been documented to be detrimental to fish and fish populations,
many of the direct effects are poorly understood. Careful examination of the histological,
anatomical, and physiological effects of low pH on fish will help refine our understanding of how
acidification of surface waters might adversely affect physiology and population structure of an
important biotic component of aquatic ecosystems.
APPROACH: The projects in this program element are being conducted in conjunction with the
artificial acidification of Little Rock Lake, Wl (E-05.2A). Warmwater fish are being collected from
Little Rock Lake as the pH declines in response to incremental additions of sulfuric acid. One study is
focusing on anatomical changes in fish gills and the consequent effects on blood osmoregulatory
control. The second focuses on examining histological and histopathological changes in fish gills,
kidneys, and ovaries, and evaluating if such changes can be used reliably to detect early acidification
effects on fish.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: pH
Approach: Field Manipulation, Laboratory
Goal: Biological Effects
Processes: Biological Response, Chronic Acidification, Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.4 NAPAP Code: 6D-2
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-06, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Howard McCormick
2-129
-------
TITLE: Loss of Osmoregulatory Control in Warmwater Fish in Response to Artificial Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Osmoregulation - Loss/Recovery
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (MM, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The objectives of this project are to define the types of gill anatomical
changes associated with exposure to lethal pH of sublethal duration and to relate such changes to
the loss of blood osmoregulatory control and its recovery when neutral pH is restored.
RATIONALE: Brief pulses of low pH conditions have been documented for lakes and streams during
spring snowmelt and storm events and reportedly are responsible for fish morbidity and mortality.
No studies have been published, however, that document (1) concurrent effects of an acute pH
reduction on osmotic balance and histopathological changes in ionoregulatory organs of fish, or
(2) recovery of osmoregulatory tissues and ionoregulatory control when pH returns to circumneutral
levels.
APPROACH: The fish species being examined are three of the four prevalent in Little Rock Lake:
largemouth bass, black crappie, and rock bass, plus the acid-sensitive fathead minnow (see E-05.2A).
Work conducted to date with largemouth bass, black crappie, and rock bass has shown that
osmoregulatory control is maintained over a wide range of pH values from 8.0 to 4.5, but that at pH
4.0 control is lost and death ensues. Recovery occurs, however, if pH 7.0 is restored in time. Current
research is focused on the recovery process, documenting the sequence of anatomical, histological,
and cytological changes taking place in the key osmoregulatory organ system, the gills, as the
experiment progresses from pH exposure through recovery. Samples were collected from a
complete set of exposures. Histological analyses are ongoing.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: pH
Approach: Field Manipulation, Laboratory
Goal: Biological Effects
Processes: Biological Response, Episodic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.4A NAPAP Code: 6D-2.01G
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-06, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Organismal Development/Physiology (E-03.4)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Howard McCormick
2-130
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidification in Osmoregulatory and Reproductive Organs in Warmwater Fish
SHORT TITLE: Effects on Osmoregulatory/Reproductive Organs
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (MM, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The objective of this project is to document histological and
histopathological changes in fish gills and other organs during the experimental sulfuric acid
acidification of Little Rock Lake, Wl (E-05.2A).
RATIONALE: In addition to performing a vital respiratory function, gills are the chief organs of ionic
and acid-base regulation in fish. Thus, they are a principal organ likely to be affected by
acidification. Kidneys and ovaries also may be affected by chronic acid exposure. Examining how
progressive acidification affects these organs (1) may provide an indication as to how fish are directly
harmed by acidification (e.g., direct damage to ionocytes in gills and kidneys may adversely affect
ionoregulatory ability) and (2) may allow development of simple microscopic methods (or indicators)
for detecting acid-associated stress before measurable decreases in fish population abundance are
observed.
APPROACH: Gills, kidneys, and ovaries of yellow perch and largemouth or rock bass from Little Rock
Lake are being examined by light and electron microscopy. Fish samples were collected for analysis
when the pH in Little Rock Lake was 5.5 (1985 and 1986) and when it was 5.0 (1987). Observations of
histological or histopathological changes in these organs will be related to the population status or
health (e.g., breeding success, blood osmolality, and other parameters being measured as part of the
whole-lake experiment). In particular, the outputs will focus on the occurrence of acid-stressed
tissue changes that may affect the health of the fish first, what these changes are, and whether
histopathological methods represent a reliable means of detecting early effects of acidification on
fish.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Seepage Lakes
Chemicals: pH
Approach: Field Manipulation, Laboratory
Goal: Biological Effects
Processes: Biological Response, Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-03 EPA Code: E-03.4B NAPAP Code: 6D-2.01H
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Biologically Relevant Chemistry (E-03)
Program Element: Organismal Development/Physiology (E-03.4)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Howard McCormick
2-131
-------
-------
2.7 SYNTHESIS AND INTEGRATION - PROGRAM E-09
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-09: SynthesisandIntegration (6G) 2-135
E-09.1 Regional Case Studies (6G-1) 2-136
E-09.2 1990 Aquatic Effects Research Program Report (6G-2) 2-137
E-09.2A Current Resource Status (6G-2.01) 2-139
E-09.2A1 Chemistry of "Small" Lakes (6G-2.01A) 2-140
E-09.2A2 Chemistry of Streams in Small Catchments (6G-2.01B) 2-141
E-09.2A3 Natural Acidification (6G-2.01C) 2-142
E-09.2B Classification of Surface Waters (6G-2.02) 2-143
E-09.2B1 Spatial Patternsin Lake Water Chemistry (6G-2.02A) 2-145
E-09.2B2 Spatial Patterns in Stream Water Chemistry (6G-2.02B) 2-146
E-09.2B3 Classification Analyses (6G-2.02C) 2-147
E-09.2C Quantifying Past Change (6G-2.03) 2-148
E-09.2D Effects of Acidification on Biota (6G-2.04) 2-149
E-09.2E Prediction of Future Surface Water Acidification (6G-2.05) 2-150
E-09.2F Biological Implications of Past/Future Change (6G-2.06) 2-151
E-09.2G Region-Specific Dose Response (6G-2.07) 2-152
E-09.2G1 Deposition Estimation (6G-2.07A) 2-153
E-09.2G2 Dose-Response Model Predictions (6G-2.07B) 2-154
E-09.2H Quantifying the Rate of Recovery (6G-2.08) 2-156
E-09.3 Technology Transfer (6G-3) 2-157
2-133
-------
-------
TITLE: Synthesis and Integration of Data to Understand Past, Current, and Future Effects of Acidic
Deposition on Aquatic Resources
SHORT TITLE: Synthesis and Integration
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Provide comprehensive and integrated interpretation of data germane to
understanding the effects of acidic deposition on surface waters, including the extent of past and
future change, current status, and target loadings.
RATIONALE: The complexity of the questions surrounding the regional-scale effects of acidic
deposition on surface waters has mandated investigation via several regionalized, integrated
projects (e.g., the National Surface Water Survey, the Direct/Delayed Response Project, the Episodic
Response Project, and Watershed Process and Manipulation Studies). Informed policy decisions
require that the results and predictions from these component projects be integrated to allow
comprehensive assessments of past, current, and future aquatic effects.
APPROACH: Synthesis and integration will proceed at several levels with the intention of using a
spiral approach, incorporating new information as projects are completed and as we near the 1990
Assessment. One effort will be to integrate National Surface Water Survey results with other data
sets and synthesize them into Regional Case Studies. A second effort will involve the synthesis of
research results, including documents, reports, and data bases, for dissemination to the public, state
and federal agencies, and universities. The major effort in Synthesis and Integration will be the
development of an AERP report to contribute to NAPAP's 1990 Assessment. The AERP report will
include refining the current resource status, classifying surface waters, quantifying past chemical
change, quantifying present biological status, predicting future acidification, evaluating biological
implications of past and future change, estimating target loadings and attendant surface water
response, and quantifying recovery rates given various acidic loadings.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds, Wetlands
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Classification, Dose Response, Prediction, Recovery,
Status/Extent, Verification
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09 NAPAP Code: 6G
Element: Program
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1988 to 1991
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-135
-------
TITLE: Regionalized, Integrated Evaluation of the Current and Potential Future Effects of Acidic
Deposition on Surface Waters in Low Alkalinity Regions - Regional Case Studies
SHORT TITLE: Regional Case Studies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME, NH, NY, VT), Southeast (FL, GA, NC, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide an integrated assessment of current and potential effects of
acidic deposition on aquatic ecosystems in regions with large proportions of surface waters with low
acid neutralizing capacity; to characterize important factors controlling surface water chemistry; to
examine past and current status of biological communities; to compare and contrast regional
characteristics of surface waters; to assess the effects of changes in acidic deposition loadings; to
summarize, synthesize, and integrate the results of acidic deposition-related research funded by the
National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program and other agencies and institutions.
RATIONALE: Since acidic deposition was identified in the late 1970s as an important issue relative to
aquatic effects, much research by a variety of agencies, institutions, and universities has been
conducted. The analysis of this wide body of information has not been conducted on an integrated,
regional-scale basis. The Regional Case Studies project will synthesize previously existing
information and newly acquired information from the Aquatic Effects Research Program to provide
regional comparisons of surface water quality (including chemistry and biology) in areas of the
United States identified as being potentially sensitive to or at risk due to acidic deposition.
APPROACH: The primary outputs from this project will be a book and journal articles emphasizing
intra- and inter-regional descriptions and characterizations of surface waters. Individual book
chapters will be authored by individuals with expertise in particular regions or on particular
processes, or directly involved with ongoing research programs. The completion of this project
involves extensive planning and coordination among a diversity of groups and institutions, including
government laboratories, universities, state agencies, and private industry.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Sediments, Soils,
Streams, Watersheds, Wetlands
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Classification, Dose Response, Prediction, Recovery,
Status/Extent, Verification
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.1 NAPAP Code: 6G-1
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987to1990
Contact: Donald Charles
2-136
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Aquatic Resources in the United States: The 1990 Report of
the Aquatic Effects Research Program
SHORT TITLE: 1990 Aquatic Effects Research Program Report
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To prepare a comprehensive, integrated report on the effects of acidic
deposition on aquatic resources, summarizing the findings of research funded by the Aquatic Effects
Research Program.
RATIONALE: As a major component of the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
(NAPAP), the Aquatic Effects Research Program has been investigating the effects of acidic
deposition on aquatic resources since 1983. The results of the many research projects are required to
be submitted to Congress in 1990 as part of the NAPAP Final Assessment. This Final Report will
satisfy a key goal of NAPAP, identified when the Program was initiated in 1982 -quantifying change
to aquatic resources as a result of acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Development of the 1990 Report will focus on answering the key questions formulated
when the Aquatic Effects Research Program was initiated. Four key policy questions have served as
the basis for the design and implementation of all research projects: (1) What is the extent and
magnitude of past change attributable to acidic deposition? (2) What change is expected in the
future under various deposition scenarios? (3) What is the target loading of deposition below which
change would not be expected? (4) What is the rate of recovery if deposition decreases? The 1990
Final Report will be organized to provide information to answer the four major policy questions and
the more focused questions that follow: What is the current chemical and biological status of the
aquatic resources in the United States, including surface waters not addressed within the frame of
the National Surface Water Survey? To what extent can their present status be explained by factors
other than acidic deposition (e.g., natural acidification mechanisms)? What are the broad-scale
patterns in lake and stream water chemistry across potentially sensitive U.S. regions? What are the
characteristics of those lakes and streams that appear to be most sensitive to change as a result of
acidic deposition? To what extent have surface waters been changed (e.g., lost acid neutralizing
capacity) as a result of acidic deposition, and in what regions of the United States does it appear that
historical change has been most pronounced? What is the most accurate assessment of the degree
to which the present status of biotic communities in affected surface waters can be attributed to
acidification as a result of acidic deposition? Given various scenarios for reduction in emissions, what
is the most likely number of surface waters to become acidic, or alternatively, to recover in the
future? What are the best estimates of past change and most reasonable predictions of future
change to biota, given estimates of past and future chemical change? What are the target loadings
of acidic deposition below which future change is unlikely to occur and recovery at a given rate could
be expected?
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds, Wetlands
Chemicals: Aluminum, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects, Classification, Prediction, Recovery, Status/Extent,
Verification
Processes: N/A
2-137
-------
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2 NAPAP Code: 6G-2
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-138
-------
TITLE: Refining Estimates of the Current Chemical Status of Aquatic Resources in Potentially
Sensitive Regions of the United States
SHORTTITLE: Current Resource Status
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV). Northeast (ME, NY),
Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide comprehensive and integrated interpretation of the current
status of lakes and streams in areas of the United States potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey provides a statistical framework for making
quantitative assessments of the current status of lakes and streams. However, the sampling frames
do not include very small lakes or streams in small catchments. Furthermore, the index approach to
sampling employed in the survey does not provide a complete representation of the current status of
these systems (e.g., within-system or among-season chemical variability). Information from other
research projects can be used to supplement and extend the results from the National Surface Water
Survey.
APPROACH: Several projects are being conducted or are proposed to provide a more complete
assessment of the current resource status, including (1) analysis of small lakes (<4 hectares) in the
Adirondacks, (2) evaluation of small lakes in other areas of the East, (3) evaluation of streams in areas
not sampled by the National Stream Survey, and (4) revised population estimates of acidic lakes and
streams based on spring and episodic chemistry.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2A NAPAP Code: 6G-2.01
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: Joseph Eilers
2-139
-------
TITLE: Comparison of Water Chemistry in Small (1.2 to 4 hectares) and Larger (>4 hectares) Lakes in
Adirondack Park, New York
SHORTTITLE: Chemistry of "Small" Lakes
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To quantify differences in chemical parameters (including acid neutralizing
capacity, pH, dissolved organic carbon, and sulfate) between small lakes (<4 hectares) and larger
lakes in Adirondack Park, NY. Calculate revised Eastern Lake Survey population estimates for major
chemical variables in Adirondack Park lakes, including lakes > 1.2 hectares in area.
RATIONALE: Logistical limitations precluded the sampling of lakes <4 hectares in area in the
Eastern Lake Survey. Population descriptions for the Eastern Lake Survey, therefore, pertain only to
lakes >4 hectares. Many of the most susceptible, and possibly most impacted, lake systems may have
been omitted by excluding this small lake resource. A large data base for portions of Adirondack
Park is currently being assembled by the Adirondack Lake Survey Corporation. This data base
includes lakes > 1.2 hectares in area and provides a mechanism by which new Eastern Lake Survey
population estimates can be calculated for the small lake resource (1.2 to 4 hectares).
APPROACH: Analyze data from both large and small lakes collected by the Adirondack Lake Survey
Corporation in 1984 and 1985 and by the Eastern Lake Survey in 1984 within three large watersheds
of Adirondack Park. Quantify differences in lake water chemistry between small and larger lakes,
including acid neutralizing capacity, pH, dissolved organic carbon, sulfate, and base cations.
Generate a list frame to identify and quantify the small lake resource in Adirondack Park. Construct
revised population estimates for Adirondack Park, including small lakes.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Nitrate, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2A1 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.01A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Current Resource Status (E-09.2A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Tim Sullivan
2-140
-------
TITLE: Estimating the Relative Importance of Streams in Small Catchments
SHORT TITLE: Chemistry of Streams in Small Catchments
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA,
KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Estimate the amount of important fish habitat in streams smaller than those
targeted by the National Stream Survey. Extend, if possible, the regional distribution estimates of
stream chemistry to small streams.
RATIONALE: A significant biologically important aquatic resource may exist in streams smaller than
those targeted by the National Stream Survey. Portions of this resource may be acidic or may have
low acid neuturalizing capacity, and therefore, National Stream Survey population estimates may
have underestimated the number of streams potentially affected by acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Contact regional fishery experts to refine estimates of size or map designation of
streams constituting important fish habitat in the eastern United States. Obtain chemical data for
small streams from existing sources if available. Analyze National Stream Survey and other data sets
to ascertain whether population estimates of acidic streams and streams with low acid neutralizing
capacity can be extended to a subpopulation of smaller streams.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutral!zing Capacity
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2A2 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.01B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Current Resource Status (E-09.2A)
Status: Proposed Period of Performance: 1988 to 1991
Contact: To be determined
2-141
-------
TITLE: Evaluating Alternative Mechanisms of Acidification in Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Natural Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC,
SC, TN), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Evaluate and summarize natural processes that contribute to acidity and
buffering in surface waters, including acidification by organic acids and neutral salt. Qualitatively
describe the importance of natural acidification processes to current regional patterns of lake acid
neutralizing capacity and pH. Where possible, quantify impact of natural mechanisms on the
acid/base status of lakes.
RATIONALE: Although acidic emissions of sulfur and nitrogen compounds are believed to be
responsible for the observed acidification of surface waters, natural substances, such as organic acids
and neutral salt, can often contribute to the acidification process and complicate evaluation of acidic
deposition effects. The role of these substances in acidification is poorly understood.
APPROACH: Evaluate, using Eastern Lake Survey data, the contribution of organic acids and neutral
salt to the acid/base status of lakes. Compare precipitation chemistry data with lake water chemistry
data for sodium and chloride to infer the contribution of neutral salt acidification to chronic
chemical conditions in lake water. Estimate the concentration of organic anions in lake water and
the importance of these organic anions relative to anions of anthropogenic origin. Couple organic
anion estimates with an equilibrium modeling approach to quantify the impact of organic acids on
acid neutralizing capacity and pH.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Major Ions, Neutral Salts, Nitrate, Organics,
pH, Sulfate
Approach: Literature, Modeling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Neutral Salt Acidification, Organic Acidification
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2A3 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.01C
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Current Resource Status (E-09.2A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Tim Sullivan
2-142
-------
TITLE: Characterizing Regional Spatial Patterns in Surface Water Chemistry and Developing
Classification Criteria for Potentially Sensitive Lakes and Streams
SHORT TITLE: Classification of Surface Waters
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The objectives of this research are to describe patterns in surface water
chemistry in geographic regions that are potentially sensitive to acidic deposition. The primary
objective is to classify surface waters into various categories of interest and non-interest with respect
to past or future susceptibility to change as a result of acidic deposition. Developing classification
criteria enhances the ability to estimate with greater confidence the regional extent of change, as
well as fosters an improved understanding of acidic deposition effects by allowing intensive studies
to be focused on those lakes and streams that are most likely to be affected.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey targeted lakes and streams within regions expected
to contain large numbers of surface waters with low acid neutralizing capacity. However, not all of
the lakes and streams are apparently sensitive to acidic deposition, and thus can be excluded from
the population of interest on the basis of their geochemistry or apparent pollution level. Potentially
sensitive systems that warrant further consideration may be of different geochemical types, and may
require application of various pre- or post-predictive models (or model coefficients) or parameters to
minimize predictive error.
APPROACH: Quantitative and spatial classification techniques will be applied to all National Surface
Water Survey subregions. Quantitative techniques will include objective multivariate statistical
procedures such as principal components analysis, cluster analysis, and canonical correlation, as well
as geochemical techniques such as Piper plots and stability field diagrams. Spatial classification
analyses will include examination of mapped chemical data, spatial correlations with watershed
characteristics (including hydrology), and mapping techniques such as kriging. These combined
approaches are expected to yield successively more refined delineations of lakes and streams that
could be classified as susceptible to acidic deposition. The lake and stream chemical data will be
combined with hydrologic properties of the systems to assess their potential responsiveness under
different time frames. Results from modelling approaches (such as those used in the Direct/Delayed
Response Project) will be used in an iterative process to describe more completely the sensitivity of
aquatic resources. An example of a possible classification scheme that could be tested for lakes
might include the following elements:
• Hydrologic Inputs
- Ground water
- Surf ace Water
- Precipitation
• Hydraulic Residence Time
- Relative importance of internal processes
• Deposition
- Loading
- Characterization
- Timing
• Evaporation Rates
• Organic Acid Inputs
- Allochthonous
- Autochthonous
2-143
-------
• Catchment Character'!sties
- Size (relative to lake)
- Vegetation (type, age, and density)
- Soils, Bedrock
- Till (thickness, composition)
• Lake Morphometry
- Inlets/outlets
- Depth (max and mean)
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds, Wetlands
Chemicals: Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Modeling
Goal: Classification, Prediction, Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2B NAPAPCode: 6G-2.02
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program Area: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: Joseph Eilers
2-144
-------
TITLE: Spatial Patterns in Lake Water Chemistry Across Regions Potentially Sensitive to Acidic
Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Spatial Patterns in Lake Water Chemistry
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA. ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (FL, GA, NC, SC, TN,
VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, UT, WA,
WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECT1VE(S): To identify regional patterns in lake water chemistry in geographic areas of
the United States potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Not all areas of the United States are susceptible to acidic deposition. Within those
regions that contain the majority of potentially sensitive systems, certain types of lakes may be more
susceptible to change than others. Examining the current index lake chemistry on a spatial basis will
help identify locations of lakes that may require more focused analyses to determine the relationship
between their chemical condition and acidic deposition patterns or the extent to which mechanisms
other than anthropogenically induced acidification explain their present status.
APPROACH: Spatial patterns of lake water index chemistry will be examined using broad-scale,
geographic mapping techniques, correlation analyses of watershed characteristics including
hydrologic patterns, and kriging.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Major Ions, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2B1 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.02A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Current Resource Status (E-09.2A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-145
-------
TITLE: Spatial Patterns in Stream Water Chemistry Across Regions Potentially Sensitive to Acidic
Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Spatial Patterns in Stream Water Chemistry
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Southeast (AL, AR, FL,
GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To identify regional patterns in stream water chemistry in geographic areas
of the United States potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Not all areas of the United States are susceptible to acidic deposition. Within those
regions that contain the majority of potentially sensitive systems, certain types of streams may be
more susceptible to change than others. Examining the current index stream chemistry on a spatial
basis will help identify locations of streams that may require more focused analyses to determine the
relationship between their chemical condition and acidic deposition patterns or the extent to which
mechanisms other than anthropogenically induced acidification explain their present status.
APPROACH: Spatial patterns of stream water index chemistry will be examined using broad-scale
geographic mapping techniques, correlations of watershed characteristics including hydrologic
patterns, and kriging.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Major Ions, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2B2 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.02B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Current Resource Status (E-09.2A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Philip Kaufmann
2-146
-------
TITLE: Development of Criteria to Classify Sensitive Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Classification Analyses
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Mid-Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, PA, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, Rl),
Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN,
OH, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To describe and account for natural patterns in surface water chemistry in
geographic regions that are potentially sensitive to acidic deposition. The primary objective is to
classify waters into various categories of interest and noninterest with respect to past or future
susceptibility.
RATIONALE: The National Surface Water Survey targeted lakes and streams within regions expected
to contain large numbers of surface waters with low acid neutralizing capacity. However, not all of
the lakes and streams apparently are sensitive to acidic deposition, and thus can be excluded from
the population of interest on the basis of their geochemistry or apparent pollution level. Potentially
sensitive systems that warrant further consideration may be of different geochemical types, and may
require application of various pre- or post-predictive models (or model coefficients) or parameters to
minimize predictive error.
APPROACH: Quantitative and spatial classification techniques will be applied to all National Surface
Water Survey subregions. Quantitative techniques will include objective multivariate statistical
procedures such as principal components analysis, cluster analysis, and canonical correlation, as well
as geochemical techniques such as Piper plots and stability field diagrams. Spatial classification
analyses will include examination of mapped chemical data, spatial correlations with watershed
characteristics (including hydrology), and mapping techniques such as kriging.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds, Wetlands
Chemicals: Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Modeling
Goal: Classification
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2B3 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.02C
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-05, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1988 to 1990
Contact: Joseph Eilers
2-147
-------
TITLE: Quantifying Historical Changes in Surface Water Chemistry as a Result of Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Quantifying Past Change
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY), Upper Midwest (Ml, Wl), Southeast (FL)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Describe the observed relationship between atmospheric sulfate deposition,
lake sulfate concentrations, and surface water chemistry. Quantify historical changes in acid
neutralizing capacity attributable to sulfate deposition.
RATIONALE: Although lake sulfate concentrations typically increase with increasing deposition
across regions, the relationship between lake sulfate concentration and other aspects of surface
water chemistry is generally complex. Predictions of future effects of acidic deposition must be
evaluated in the context of past change, which has not been well described on a regional basis. Past
changes in water chemistry can be evaluated on a regional basis by using empirical models and
paleoecological investigations of sediment cores.
APPROACH: Examine relationships between estimated sulfate deposition, lake sulfate
concentration, and lake water chemistry. Estimate historical changes in acid neutralizing capacity
attributable to sulfate deposition using empirical models. Determine diatom assemblages in
sediment cores obtained from lakes selected by a systematic, probability approach. Using
paleoecological techniques, infer historical regional distributions of pH, dissolved organic carbon,
and acid neutralizing capacity.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Organics, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature, Paleolimnology
Goal: Prediction, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2C NAPAP Code: 6G-2.03
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Tim Sullivan
2-148
-------
TITLE: Summary of Existing Data on the Effects of Acidic Deposition on Biological Resources
SHORT TITLE: Effects of Acidification on Biota
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN.WI)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To summarize biological changes associated with surface water
acidification; to identify key chemical parameters that control biological response; and to estimate
critical values or ranges (e.g., for pH, aluminum, and calcium) for effects, focusing on those affecting
fish populations.
RATIONALE: Acidification of surface waters is of concern primarily because of the risk that biological
processes and communities can be adversely affected. Predicted changes in surface water chemistry
resulting from acidic deposition, therefore, must be interpreted relative to associated anticipated
biological responses.
APPROACH: Analysis of the effects of acidification on aquatic biota will be based primarily on the
existing literature, including results from laboratory bioassays, field bioassays, field experiments
(including whole-lake manipulations), and field surveys. Critical values or ranges for effects will be
derived from integrating existing data in the literature, plus developing and applying models of
biological response to acidification, focusing on the presence or absence of fish populations. A
workshop, planned for summer 1987, will provide the basis for finalizing specific plans for
assessment of biological effects.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects,Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Biological Response
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2D NAPAP Code: 6G-2.04
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-03, E-06
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-149
-------
TITLE: Predicting the Future Effects of Acidic Deposition on Surface Water Acidification
SHORT TITLE: Prediction of Future Surface Water Acidification
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR. UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate the number and location of aquatic systems that might become
acidic in the future at current levels of deposition. The primary objectives of this goal are to identify
and synthesize additional techniques for forecasting aquatic system responses to acidic deposition,
and to integrate forecasts using these various techniques, extrapolating the results from the sample
of watersheds to regions.
RATIONALE: The status and extent of currently acidic and potentially sensitive aquatic systems will
be documented for specific regions throughout the United States. A critical remaining question,
related to potential target loadings, is the number and location of aquatic systems that might
become acidic in the future at current levels of deposition. The answer to this question has
significant policy implications for different regions of the United States.
APPROACH: The Direct/Delayed Response Project will provide estimates of the number and location
of aquatic systems forecast to become acidic in the Northeast, Middle Atlantic, and Southern Blue
Ridge Province. The Direct/Delayed Response Project also will develop multivariate empirical
approaches that relate the potential for surface water acidification to soil, vegetation, and other
watershed characteristics. Other investigators have developed techniques for forecasting surface
water acidification. These techniques (steady-state, dynamic, empirical, and process-oriented
models) will be evaluated, synthesized, and used to estimate the location and number of aquatic
systems forecast to become acidic in the future at current levels of deposition in the Middle Atlantic,
the Upper Midwest, the West, Florida, and other areas in the Southeast. Estimates of the future
number of acidic systems in these regions will be extrapolated to the population by using both
statistical design-based and model-based approaches. The results will be integrated with
information on watershed, lake, and stream characteristics to identify subpopulations of aquatic
systems and subregions that are particularly susceptible to current levels of acidic deposition.
Multiple approaches will be used to transmit and display these results, including regional maps that
indicate changes in the subregional and regional patterns of surface water chemistry with time.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds,
Wetlands
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature, Modeling
Goal: Prediction, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Mineral Weathering, Sulfate Adsorption
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2E NAPAP Code: 6G-2.05
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: M. Robbins Church
2-150
-------
TITLE: Biological Implications of Historical and Future Change in Surface Water Chemistry
SHORT TITLE: Biological Implications of Past/Future Change
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl. VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate the past and future impacts of acidic deposition on aquatic
biota, particularly fish populations, for regions of the United States considered potentially sensitive
to acidic deposition.
RATIONALE: Acidification of surface waters is of concern primarily because biological processes and
communities can be adversely affected. Thus, policy decisions regarding acidic deposition require
information on the regional extent and magnitude of impacts to date, and anticipated future
changes, particularly relative to the fishery resource.
APPROACH: Estimates of historical (background) chemical conditions in surface waters, and
prediction of future acidification or recovery are to be derived from the projects Quantifying Past
Change and Prediction of Future Surface Water Acidification. Using the framework established by
these projects, and estimated critical values for biota, regional estimates of surface water chemistry
can be translated quantitatively into regional estimates of adverse biological effects or recovery.
Models linking biological response and surface water acidification, which are presently being
developed, can be directly linked to models or estimates of past and future chemical change.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Biological Effects,Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Biological Response
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2F NAPAP Code: 6G-2.06
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-151
-------
TITLE: Estimating Target Loadings of Acidic Deposition and Associated Ecosystem Effects
/
SHORT TITLE: Region-Specific Dose Response
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECT1VE(S): To evaluate the extent of change relative to particular rates of deposition
(e.g., target loadings) for the population of lakes and streams within potentially sensitive regions of
the United States.
RATIONALE: The term "target loading" refers to the sulfate deposition rate required to protect all
but the most sensitive systems (Memorandum of Intent on Transboundary Air Pollution 1983). A
similar term, "critical load," also has been used and represents the maximum sulfate deposition rate
that will not cause long-term, deleterious effects on the most sensitive ecosystems (Nilsson 1986).
Both of these loading concepts, however, assume the most sensitive systems and deleterious effects
can be delineated, and this has been extremely difficult. This effort will focus on providing data to
permit an assessment of the extent of change associated with particular rates of deposition. This
information will be essential in the 1990 AERP Report to evaluate the policy alternatives for
controlling sulfate deposition.
APPROACH: The 1990 AERP Report requires that a range of target loadings be evaluated over a
range of water chemistry and biological end points. The initial efforts in this project will focus on
establishing the range of potential loading rates that require assessment. The range of relevant
biological and water chemistry end points also will be established in conjunction with efforts in
other projects. These two sets of requirements then will be examined through application of
dynamic surface water acidification models. The results from the models will be applied to provide
regional estimates to the dose-response relationship to aid in the assessment of policy alternatives.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Modeling
Goal: Biological Effects, Synthesis/Integration, Target Loadings
Processes: Biological Response, Chronic Acidification, Deacidification, Episodic
Acidification
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2G NAPAP Code: 6G-2.07
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report
Status: Initiating Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-152
-------
TITLE: Estimating Deposition Loadings to Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Deposition Estimation
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ. NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To integrate acidic deposition loading information from the deposition
monitoring program with the needs of and results from the Aquatic Effects Research Program. The
objectives are to enhance the utility of deposition loading data for activities in the Aquatic Effects
Research Program to the extent compatible with the deposition program goals and objectives and to
provide a means of evaluating deposition loading estimates on the basis of integrating patterns of
surface water chemistry.
RATIONALE: Deposition data are collected for a variety of reasons, including trends monitoring,
source-receptor model validation, and as inputs for assessment of probable aquatic and terrestrial
effects. Network designs, averaging intervals, collection equipment, and data analysis and
integration schemes are expected to differ, depending on the needs of the data users. To the extent
that such differences are not mutually exclusive, it is critical that the acquisition of deposition data
be adequate to allow construction of predictive assessment models that incorporate atmospheric
input. Likewise, it is known that deposition monitoring equipment does not measure some types of
deposition accurately and that microclimatic and micrometeorologic factors can produce complexity
in deposition patterns that cannot be captured with existing, sparsely distributed monitoring sites.
To the extent that surface water chemistry patterns (corrected for watershed geochemical patterns)
integrate atmospheric deposition patterns, National Surface Water Survey data can be used to
identify potential anomalies in apparent deposition patterns for further field or numerical analysis.
APPROACH: This subproject will allow close liaison to be established between staff of the deposition
monitoring and aquatic effects programs. Such liaison will provide critical input to deposition
network design and data interpretation by familiarizing the deposition staff with aquatic modeling
and assessment needs and philosophies. It also will provide data on patterns of water chemistry data
to deposition staff for use in assessing the adequacy and accuracy of present data collection and
analysis activities.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling
Goal: Synthesis/Integration
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2G1 NAPAP Code: 6G-2.07A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-06, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Region-Specific Dose Response (E-09.2G)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1993
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-153
-------
TITLE: Target Loading Model Predictions
SHORT TITLE: Dose-Response Model Predictions
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOALS(S)/OBJECnVE(S): To provide information that can be used to estimate specific levels of
deposition that would provide various degrees of protection for aquatic resources. The objectives
are to integrate the results of four other program elements on current surface water status (E-
09.2A), future acidification (E-09.2E), recovery (E-09.2H), and biological effects (E-09.2F), in order to
allow (1) specifications of several levels of protection for aquatic resources in specific study regions,
(2) estimation of the deposition rate required to achieve this level of protection, and (3) estimation
of uncertainty about these levels of protection.
RATIONALE: In order to implement effective policy on emissions reductions, policymakers must have
information that will allow current status of aquatic resources and future predictions of change due
to acidic deposition to be translated into a specific acid loading rate. Uncertainty associated with
estimates of current and future status must be quantified. Before target loadings can be specified,
the desired level of protection must be identified. This level of protection must be related to a
range in surface water chemistry. In turn, surface water chemistry for a subpopulation of surface
waters then must be related quantitatively to a given deposition level.
APPROACH: The relationship between the level of protection and surface water chemistry is not
likely to be linear, considering the variability in surface water response to acidic deposition. It is also
unlikely that surface waters will respond linearly to various levels of deposition. To explore these
relationships, two approaches are being employed: multivariate analyses and process-oriented
modeling. Discriminant analysis, principal components analysis, and/or multivariate regression will
be used to evaluate relationships or associations among biotic indices (related to a given level of
protection) and physiochemical predictor variables. Similarities among factors such as fish
presence/absence or species abundance and several individual or groups of chemical constituents will
be used to identify candidate predictor variables. Similar associations will be sought between these
chemical predictor variables or indices and atmospheric deposition rates. Ideally, a response surface
relating indices of biotic integrity or protection, chemical indices, and deposition rates can be
developed. Although it might be highly convoluted, a response surface would greatly simplify the
evaluations of alternative deposition scenarios and the corresponding chemical and biotic response.
Empirical and process-oriented models also will be used to relate deposition, surface water
chemistry, and biotic indices. The indices of biotic integrity or levels of protection can be used to
formulate objective functions and establish penalty functions for use in optimization programs.
Empirical and/or watershed process models can be used to compute the optimum range of
deposition rates and surface water chemistry responses to protect aquatic resources. Convergence of
the modeling results with the multivariate analyses will provide greater confidence in the deposition
rates estimated to protect aquatic resources.
Uncertainty estimates will be provided for both the multivariate analyses and the modeling analyses.
2-154
-------
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Modeling
Goal: Recovery, Target Loadings
Processes: Deacidification
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2G2 NAPAPCode: 6G-2.07B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-03, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Project: Region-Specific Dose Response (E-09.2G)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-155
-------
TITLE: Quantifying the Rate of Recovery of Surface Waters Affected by Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Quantifying the Rate of Recovery
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH,
NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN, VA), Upper
Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate how quickly aquatic systems will recover at various deposition
rates; to provide regional population estimates, with known certainty, of the number and location
of presently acidic lakes that will recover at these various deposition rates.
RATIONALE: Although existing evidence in Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Sweden documents recovery
of surface waters following reductions in atmospheric emissions, similar evidence has not yet been
investigated for potentially sensitive regions of the United States. Quantification of the regional
response of surface waters to various emissions reduction scenarios is one of the most critical issues in
acidic deposition effects research being addressed by the Aquatic Effects Research Program. Only
when the numbers and proportions (with known uncertainty bounds) of lakes and streams that
would recover at various levels of deposition are quantified can informed and effective policy
regarding emissions controls be implemented.
APPROACH: This project, relying on the synthesis of research results throughout the Aquatic Effects
Research Program and information from other areas where recovery has been documented, will
employ three approaches. Case histories derived primarily from Canada and Europe will be
extensively examined to formulate hypotheses related to recovery that can be tested for systems in
the United States. Existing experimental evidence on the dynamics of acidification and recovery will
be examined to formulate hypotheses that predict how sulfate sorption and base cation supply will
respond to decreased deposition levels. The third approach is to extend the empirical analyses in the
Direct/Delayed Response Project to examine the potential for recovery in light of watershed
characteristics and to employ steady-state, empirical, dynamic, and process-oriented models, to
provide regional-scale estimates of the number and location of surface waters forecast to recover at
given deposition rates within given time frames.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Soils, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Major Ions, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Synthesis/Integration, Target Loadings
Processes: Base Cation Supply, Deacidification, Sulfate Adsorption, Sulfate
Desorption
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.2H NAPAP Code: 6G-2.08
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-06, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Program Element: 1990 AERP Report (E-09.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Daniel McKenzie
2-156
-------
TITLE: Dissemination of Information and Technology from the Aquatic Effects Research Program
SHORT TITLE: Technology Transfer
REGION(S)/STATE(S): N/A
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To transfer effectively and efficiently technology and information
emanating from the Aquatic Effects Research Program to the users of that technology and
information. To establish communication lines from the user to the Environmental Protection
Agency.
RATIONALE: Since its implementation in 1983, the Aquatic Effects Research Program has produced
extensive technical information including data bases, analytical methods and quality assurance
manuals, field and laboratory operating plans, data reports, and scientific publications. To maximize
the use of this information requires that an effective communications and dissemination plan be
developed. Active transmittal of Aquatic Effects Research Program products to federal and state
agencies, universities, the private sector, and other parties interested in or conducting research on
environmental issues will afford maximal opportunity for all to benefit from the knowledge gained
in executing this program.
APPROACH: Identify categories of users for the information and design mechanisms by which the
information can be distributed in a timely and efficient manner. Also, establish a communication
channel for users to distribute information to the Environmental Protection Agency.
KEYWORDS: Medium: N/A
Chemicals: N/A
Approach: Literature
Goal: Synthesis and Integration
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-09 EPA Code: E-09.3 NAPAP Code: 6G-3
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-04, E-05, E-06, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Synthesis and Integration (E-09)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990
Contact: Robert Crowe
2-157
-------
-------
2.8 LONG-TERM MONITORING - PROGRAM E-06
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-06: Long-term Monitoring (6B-2) 2-161
E-06.1 Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (6B-2.01) 2-163
E-06.1A Monitoring (6B-2.01A) 2-164
E-06.1 B Optimizing Trends Detection (6B-2.01B) 2-166
E-06.1B1 Analysisof Constituent Variability (N/A) 2-167
E-06.1B2 Protocolsfor Evaluating Detection Limits (N/A) 2-169
E-06.1B3 Acquisition of Existing Data Records (N/A) 2-170
E-06.1B4 Utility of Diatom Records (N/A) 2-171
E-06.1B5 Statistical Tests for Trends Analysis (N/A) 2-172
E-06.1B6 Inventory of Emissions Sources (N/A) 2-173
E-06.1C Methods Development (6B-2.01C) 2-174
E-06.1C1 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (6B-2.01C1) .. 2-175
E-06.1C2 Aluminum Methodology (6B-2.01C2) 2-176
E-06.1C3 Automated Field pH Measurements (6B-2.01C3) 2-177
E-06.1C4 Fractionation of Acid Neutralizing Capacity (6B-2.01C4) 2-178
E-06.1C5 Remote Sensing Applications (6B-2.01C5) 2-179
E-06.1D Quality Assurance/Quality Control Interpretation (6B-2.01 D) 2-180
E-06.1E Paleolimnological Studies in Adirondack Lakes (6B-2.01E) 2-182
2-159
-------
TITLE: Long-term Monitoring of Surface Waters to Verify Predictions of Surface Water Response to
Various Levels of Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Long-term Monitoring
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA,
ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, OK, SC,
TN), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT,
WA, WY) (Additional states to be identified)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide an early and ongoing indication of regional trends in surface
water acidification or recovery, using the most appropriate techniques to detect such trends; to
quantify, with known certainty for defined subpopulations of lakes and streams, the rate at which
changes in relevant chemistry are occurring, the subpopulation characteristics of these affected lakes
and/or streams, and the subregional extent of these systems; and to compare trends in local and
regional atmospheric deposition with regional trends in surface water chemistry.
RATIONALE: Predictions of surface water response to future changes in acid loadings can be
corroborated only through the long-term collection and analysis of chemical and biological data.
Informed policy decisions to implement or continue emissions controls can be made only with an
understanding of trends in aquatic ecosystems.
APPROACH: Long-term monitoring has one program element - the Temporally Integrated
Monitoring of Ecosystems (TIME). Within the TIME Project, five projects are identified:
(1) Monitoring (to collect long-term chemical and biological data records), (2) Optimizing Trends
Detection (a series of subprojects essential for completion of an optimal design for the project),
(3) Methods Development (a series of subprojects essential for development and refinement of
analytical methods), (4) Quality Assurance/Quality Control Interpretation (analyses of extensive
quality assurance data to quantify error associated with environmental sampling), and
(5) Paleolimnological Studies (a study of Adirondack lake chemistry using paleolimnological
techniques to infer historical water chemistry from sediment records). The basis for selecting lakes
and streams for monitoring is derived from the results of the National Surface Water Survey in which
regional lake and stream population characteristics were developed. Historical monitoring data are
used to improve designs proposed for future studies. Methods proposed for monitoring activities
will be compatible with those used in the National Surface Water Survey. Appropriate statistical
analyses will be applied to the resulting data.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Mercury, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Model Verification, Trends Detection
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Community Response, Deacidification, Within-
lake Acid Neutralizing Capacity Generation
2-161
-------
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06 NAPAP Code: 6B-2
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1982 to 1990 +
Contact: Jesse Ford, Dixon Landers
2-162
-------
TITLE: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems to Detect Trends in Surface Water Chemical
Status and Acidification or Recovery Processes
SHORT TITLE: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN),
Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA,
WY) (Additional states to be identified)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide an early indication of regional trends in surface water
acidification or recovery; to quantify with known certainty for defined subpopulations of surface
waters the rate of chemical change and the geographical extent of these changes; to compare
trends in local and regional deposition with regional trends in surface water chemistry.
RATIONALE: Predictions of surface water response to future changes in acid loadings can be
corroborated only through the long-term collection and analysis of chemical and biological data.
Informed policy decisions to implement or continue emissions controls can be made only with an
understanding of trends in aquatic ecosystems.
APPROACH: Using the National Surface Water Survey data bases as a frame, select lakes and streams
for broad-scale monitoring on a relatively infrequent basis. From these results, implement a
hierarchical approach for sampling on a more frequent basis to establish seasonal trends. Sample
successively smaller subsets of systems to quantify mechanisms and testing hypotheses at regional
scales through relating results back to the base tier population. The project design is expected to be
sufficiently flexible to accommodate the use of existing long-term data bases and research activities
within relevant scientific areas such as forests, soils, and meteorology.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Mercury, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Model Verification, Trends Detection
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Community Response, Deacidification, Within-
lakeAcid Neutralizing Capacity Generation
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1 NAPAP Code: 68-2.01
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1990 +
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-163
-------
TITLE: Regional-scale Field Sampling to Determine Long-term Trends in Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Monitoring
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN),
Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA,
WY) (Additional states to be identified)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine, via an integrated aquatic ecosystem monitoring program, the
long-term regional trends in acidification or recovery. To compare results of trends monitoring to
the forecasts of surface water chemical change as determined by the Direct/Delayed Response
Project (DDRP). To analyze the relationship between patterns and trends in atmospheric deposition
and trends in surface water chemistry for defined subpopulations of aquatic resources in areas
particularly susceptible to acidification or recovery.
RATIONALE: Aquatic ecosystem change in both the near and distant future is likely to result from
projected increases or decreases in emissions of SOX and NOx in the United States. If costly emission
controls are installed, the efficiency of these measures in reversing surface water acidification is an
important issue. Conversely, no action to curb current emissions or to limit increased emissions in the
United States could result in changes in surface water chemistry that affect biological populations
(i.e., fish) or human health (i.e., heavy metal availability). A coordinated, integrated regional
monitoring program is the only way of determining the rate of change in potentially affected
ecosystems on a time frame of years, rather than decades. In the case of deterioration or recovery,
the regional nature of the problem translates into an important environmental issue affecting
valuable resources.
APPROACH: Important acidic deposition effects are manifest as changes in biological populations,
yet the direct measurement and interpretation of biota is not straightforward. Chemical
measurements, on the other hand, are more easily obtained and can be interpreted with regard to
biological relevance. The approach is to design a multi-tiered monitoring program in which
biologically relevant chemical parameters are measured over time. A balance between extensive
and intensive monitoring will be struck among the tiers and will be customized for the individual
regions of the country and the expected change that would occur within them.
Seasonal samples from "fast response" aquatic systems will form the core of the study and will
provide an early detection of change in those systems most likely to demonstrate effects.
Quantification of the proportion of the population that may also be changing could be
accomplished by annual sampling of a statistically chosen subsample or by resampling a statistically
chosen subsample after a change has been identified in a specific subpopulation.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes, Seepage Lakes, Soils, Streams,
Watersheds
Chemicals: Aluminum, Calcium, Mercury, Nitrate, Organics, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Classification, Model Verification, Recovery, Target Loadings, Trends
Detection
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Deacidification
2-164
-------
PPA: E-06 EPACode: E-06.1A NAPAP Code: 6B-2.01A
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1982 to 1990 +
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-165
-------
TITLE: Optimizing Trends Detection for Long-term Monitoring of Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Optimizing Trends Detection
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, MO, MS, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Midwest (IN,
OH), Northeast (a, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AK, FL,
GA, KY, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (AK,
AZ, CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To ensure that the design and implementation plan for the Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems project adequately addresses the issues related to detecting
subtle changes in chemistry and biology of surface waters that may have regional-scale significance
in terms of recovery or acidification.
RATIONALE: Six key areas for which insufficient information exist have been identified that need to
be addressed before the research plan and implementation plan of the Temporally Integrated
Monitoring of Ecosystems project can be optimally developed. Completion of the six subprojects
within this project will improve the chances of implementing a well-designed, efficient, and
appropriate monitoring program.
APPROACH: Investigators in the private sector, universities, and federal laboratories will be tasked
with six key subprojects: (1) examining the effects of constituent variability on estimating temporal
change in surface water quality, (2) developing protocols for analysis of detection limit data, (3)
identifying and acquiring existing long-term data records, (4) evaluating the utility of
diatom/chrysophyte data for examining long-term trends in chemistry, (5) devising robust statistical
testing procedures for establishing trends, and (6) developing an inventory of emissions point
sources likely to affect monitoring sites.
KEYWORDS: Medium: N/A
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1B NAPAP Code: 6B-2.01B
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-166
-------
TITLE: Analysis of Constituent Variability for Use in Designing Trends Studies of Surface Water
Chemistry
SHORT TITLE: Analysis of Constituent Variability
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To analyze the variability in acid neutralizing capacity, hydrogen ion, and
sulfate in Upper Midwest and Adirondack lakes; based on constituent variability, to estimate the
number of lakes required to obtain a given precision and confidence level; and to estimate the
length of time lakes need to be monitored to detect a change in these constituents.
RATIONALE: To detect, evaluate, and understand future effects of acidic deposition, a cost-effective
monitoring program needs to be designed so that significant changes and trends in constituent
concentrations based on acidic deposition can be identified. However, the detection of changes or
trends in constituent concentrations is influenced by constituent variability. The components of
variance (i.e., within-lake, among-lake, among-season, among-year, and among-subregion variance)
must be estimated and factored into the statistical design. This will ensure that a sufficient number
of lakes are incorporated into the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project to satisfy
its objectives.
APPROACH: Acid neutralizing capacity, hydrogen ion, and sulfate data from EPA Long-Term
Monitoring lakes in the Upper Midwest and Adirondacks were analyzed to estimate constituent
variability. A nested ANOVA was used to partition the total variance for each constituent into
within- and among-lake, within- and among- season, among-year, and among-subregion
components. These variance components were used to estimate the number of lakes that should be
sampled to detect significant changes in mean acid neutralizing capacity, hydrogen ion, and sulfate
concentrations at different precision and confidence levels. The number of lakes required for
detection of changes in these constituent concentrations were calculated for spring, summer, and
fall seasons and for average annual estimates of constituent change. The data were analyzed for
trends using both parametric and non-parametric procedures. The non-parametric procedure was a
modification of the Seasonal Kendall Tau test to permit multiple lake rather than individual lake
trend detection. Constituent variability and trend detection procedures were used to estimate the
monitoring duration that might be required to detect a statistically significant trend in acid
neutralizing capacity, hydrogen ion, and sulfate at different precision and confidence levels. The
estimated number of lakes required for detection of changes or trends were summarized in tables.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, pH, Sulfate
Approach: Statistical Analyses
Goal: Verification
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Deacidification
2-167
-------
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1 B1 NAPAP Code: N/A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Optimizing Trends Detection (E-06.1B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-168
-------
TITLE: Protocol Development for Evaluating Detection Limits for Use in Studies of Trends in Surface
Water Quality
SHORT TITLE: Protocols for Evaluating Detection Limits
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN,
VA), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA), Upper Midwest (Ml,
MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To improve the ability to detect chemical trends in surface waters that
characteristically have very low concentrations of chemical constituents. To develop a standardized
method of reporting chemical data for which the measured concentrations are less than the
analytical detection limits.
RATIONALE: Many chemical constituents in oligotrophic lakes are at or below the analytical
detection limits at which the constituent concentration can be accurately measured. Although the
analytical instrumentation may produce a signal, interpretation of the response in terms of
concentration has been confounded because of the lack of standardized protocols for data
reporting. Establishing a standardized reporting technique for constituents that have
concentrations below the analytical detection limit will help determine whether or not trends in
surface water chemistry are occurring, particularly in regions where very small changes in
constituents that are low in concentration may be important.
APPROACH: Procedures for analyzing and reporting chemical data that are below analytical
detection limits are being evaluated using two approaches. Researchers active in various fields (such
as chemistry, toxicology, limnology, geology, and statistics) were surveyed by telephone to obtain
information on how they report such data, and a literature review of relevant, published studies was
conducted. The methods identified in these surveys may be applied to the National Surface Water
Survey data base to assist in the design of the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems
Project.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: N/A
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1B2 NAPAP Code: N/A
Element: Subpreject
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Optimizing Trends Detection (E-06.1B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-169
-------
TITLE: Identification and Acquisition of Existing Long-term Data Records on Surface Water Quality
SHORT TITLE: Acquisition of Existing Data Records
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (MD, MO, MS, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV), Midwest (OH), Northeast
(CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, VT), Southeast (AR, FL, GA, KY, NC, OK, SC, TN,
TX, VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (AK, AZ, CA, CO, ID, NM, OR, UT,
WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The principal goal of this subproject is to review an existing watersheds data
base, compiled in a 1986 survey of ongoing research and monitoring activities at watersheds
throughout the United States, to begin the process of selecting candidate research sites for the
Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project (E-06.1). The objective of this initial phase is
to indicate which sites meet the general criteria required for consideration as possible monitoring
sites.
RATIONALE: In 1986, a survey was conducted that (1) provided a general overview of current
watershed research activities in the United States, (2) provided a qualitative evaluation of the types
of watershed parameters measured and the techniques used to measure them, and (3) laid the
foundation for evaluating the prospects of coordinating watershed studies on a national or regional
scale. Data for approximately 713 watersheds are contained in the data base. More thorough
examination of this assembled data base, therefore, will provide information to the Temporally
Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project on which sites might be considered in the initial phase
of site selection.
APPROACH: Sites with reported acid neutralizing capacity <100 peq L-1 will be grouped into a
separate computer file. Data within this file then will be described by various criteria including site
name, location, and sponsoring agency, and the type of system (lake, stream, watershed). If the acid
neutralizing capacity values were not specified, a letter survey will be conducted for additional
information. Information on additional sites not contained in the data base, e.g., those sponsored
by federal agencies in the National Acid Deposition Assessment Program or those sponsored by the
National Academy of Sciences, also will be obtained by telephone contacts.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity
Approach: Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1 B3 NAPAP Code: N/A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Optimizing Trends Detection (E-06.1B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-170
-------
TITLE: Diatom and Chrysophyte Analysis for Long-Term Monitoring of Lake Acidification Trends
SHORT TITLE: Utility of Diatom Records
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Midwest (IN)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Evaluate the potential for using diatom and chrysophyte analysis to
complement and supplement a water survey-based monitoring program (chemistry and fish) for
determining trends in surface water acidification, and to make specific recommendations as to how
this work could be incorporated into EPA's plans for long-term monitoring.
RATIONALE: Diatoms and chrysophytes are excellent indicators of lake acidification trends. They
include a large number of taxa, occur in a wide variety of habitats, have distributions correlated
closely with pH and related factors, and their assemblages can be analyzed quantitatively to
reconstruct pH changes. They are probably the best organisms to use for detecting long-term pH-
related trends in lakes.
APPROACH: Describe and discuss state of the art use of diatoms and chrysophytes (1) as "early
warning indicators," (2) to corroborate measured changes in water chemistry, especially when
frequency of chemical measurements is low, and (3) as indicators of biological response to acidity-
related changes. The project report will contain (1) a brief review of the use of diatoms and
chrysophytes in acidification studies in general, (2) a description of potential project components
(e.g., sampling technique, sediment trap collections, counting, taxonomy) including quality control
and quality assurance, (3) general guidelines and principles for designing a monitoring program, and
(4) a description of example monitoring program scenarios.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Sediments
Chemicals: N/A
Approach: Literature
Goal: Trends Detection
Processes: Chronic Acidification
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1B4 NAPAPCode: N/A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-07
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Optimizing Trends Detection (E-06.1B)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1986 to 1987
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-171
-------
TITLE: Statistical Tests for Trends Analysis in Long-term Monitoring of Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Statistical Tests for Trends Analysis
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (ME, NY, PA, VT), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, TN),
Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO)
GOAL(S)/OBJECDVE(S): To evaluate long-term data sets to determine (1) the number of samples
necessary to detect trends of given magnitudes in given chemical parameters for given levels of
statistical power and significance at individual sites, and (2) the most useful statistical techniques for
detecting trends under the expected range of conditions. To evaluate parts of the National Surface
Water Survey data set to determine the number of sites necessary to accurately reflect
subpopulation status with respect to individual chemical parameters.
RATIONALE: The Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project is designed to provide an
early and ongoing indication of regional trends in acidification or recovery. In order to design this
national monitoring program in a cost-effective manner, sampling design must be optimized. It is
also highly desirable to have some indication of how long monitoring must continue before patterns
of acidification and/or recovery are likely to emerge.
APPROACH: (1) Several long-term data sets are being analyzed, including in particular those from
EPA's Long-Term Monitoring Program. Other useful long-term records relevant to long-term surface
water acidification and recovery have also been identified for this purpose. Finally, several thousand
synthetic data sets from Monte Carlo simulations containing introduced trends of reasonable,
expected magnitudes are being evaluated using a variety of trend detection techniques to identify
the most useful statistical techniques. (2) Analyses of the National Surface Water Survey - Phase II
data set will help determine the number of sites necessary to reflect subpopulation status in
particular subregions.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Major Ions, pH
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Modeling, Trends Analyses
Goal: Status/Extent, Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1B5 NAPAP Code: N/A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-05, E-06, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Optimizing Trends Detection (E-06.1B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Jesse Ford
2-172
-------
TITLE: Inventory of Emissions Point Sources Potentially Affecting Long-term Monitoring Sites
SHORT TITLE: Inventory of Emissions Sources
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic (DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VA, WV), Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, OK, SC, TN,
VA), Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, SC, TN, VA), Upper Midwest (Ml,
MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this subproject is to assist in identifying research sites for the
Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project. The objective is to identify emissions point
sources near candidate monitoring sites as a means for developing exclusion criteria for final site
selection.
RATIONALE: Results of research investigating surface water response to broad-scale acidic
deposition can be confounded by the presence of nearby point sources of emissions. Therefore,
before research sites can be selected for the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems Project
(designed to monitor regional, long-term trends in surface water chemistry in response to acidic
deposition), localized emissions sources near candidate sites must be identified.
APPROACH: Candidate sites for the TIME Project are being identified by latitude and longitude. All
emissions point sources within a 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-km radius are being determined using data
from existing emissions data bases. These data bases include the National Emissions Data System, the
National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program, and the Multistate Atmospheric Power Production
Study. This information will be supplemented by data from the Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory in Research Triangle Park, NC. Each emissions point source is being identified by
latitude/longitude, distance from the candidate monitoring site, total annual emissions of NOx and
S02, source combustion code, and standard industrial code. The inventory includes the location of
the nearest National Acid Deposition Program/National Trends Network monitoring site and its
distance from the candidate site. Results are being presented in tabular form and as maps.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Deposition, Lakes,Streams
Chemicals: N/A
Approach: Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1B6 NAPAP Code: N/A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: N/A
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Optimizing Trends Detection (E-06.1B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-173
-------
TITLE: Methods Development for Long-term Monitoring of Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Methods Development
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West(NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): The goal of this project is to provide analytical methods of sufficient
accuracy, precision, and sensitivity to meet the requirements of the Temporally Integrated
Monitoring of Ecosystems project. Although present research focuses on methods required for
trends analysis in long-term monitoring, the development of these methods is important to a
number of research areas within the Aquatic Effects Research Program.
RATIONALE: Detection and interpretation of trends in surface waters depend on the quality of the
analytical measurements. Because many of the methods are state-of-the-art, the surface waters
being studied have relatively dilute chemical composition, data quality objectives are rigorously
defined, and chemical data from the Aquatic Effects Research Program will contribute significantly
to policy decisions on potential emissions controls, the methods selected for analyzing chemistry of
surface waters must be of the highest quality possible. The current emphasis of this project is on the
use of inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry for monitoring trends in trace metal
distributions, and on the development of automated methods such as flow injection analysis for
measuring water quality parameters.
APPROACH: Analytical methods requirements for research projects are identified. Initial research
identifies one (or more) method(s) that may be applied to the analysis. A protocol is developed,
optimized, tested, and modified if necessary before incorporating the method into the program.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes,Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Metals, pH
Approach: Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1C NAPAP Code: 6B-2.01C
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1989
Contact: Edward Heithmar
2-174
-------
TITLE: Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry for Monitoring Trends in Trace Metal
Distributions
SHORT TITLE: Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECT1VE(S): To develop the inductively coupled plasma - mass Spectrometry method for
application in monitoring trends in trace metal distributions in surface waters, sediments, and biota
as affected by acidification.
RATIONALE: Many trace metals can be highly toxic to aquatic biota and, under conditions of surface
water acidification, can be mobilized with resultant increased concentrations. Detecting long-term
trends in regional distributions of trace metals, therefore, is an important mechanism by which to
monitor effects of acidification or recovery in surface waters. Inductively coupled plasma - mass
Spectrometry has the potential of measuring over 50 trace metals in a single analysis.
APPROACH: A protocol for using inductively coupled plasma - mass Spectrometry to provide
semiquantitative estimates of trace metals present in surface water in detectable quantities has been
developed. It was optimized and tested on National Lake Survey - Phase II lakes. A similar protocol
will be developed for sediments and tissue samples. Relationships between the trace metal data and
other water quality parameters will be investigated.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Sediments
Chemicals: Metals
Approach: Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Trends Detection
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1C1 NAPAPCode: 6B-2.01C1
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project Area: Methods Development (E-06.1C)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990
Contact: Edward Heithmar
2-175
-------
TITLE: Evaluation and Modification of Existing Methods for Aluminum Species for Use in Trends
Detection
SHORT TITLE: Aluminum Methodology
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To identify and evaluate various methods of determining aluminum species
in surface waters; to select the optimal method for determining aluminum in low ionic strength
waters of varying chemical composition on a broad survey basis; to quantify precision and accuracy
and optimize detection limits of the selected method.
RATIONALE: Certain forms of aluminum have been identified as having toxic effects on
physiological and reproductive functions of aquatic organisms. Toxic forms of aluminum can
increase with decreasing pH (increasing hydrogen ion concentration), thereby increasing the risk of
damage to biological communities in surface waters potentially sensitive to acidic deposition.
Mobilization of aluminum in groundwater and surface waters may also have indirect human health
implications.
APPROACH: An extensive literature review identified the most feasible aluminum method for
application in the Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I, the 8-hydroxyquinoline, methyl-isobutyl ketone
extraction method. Subsequent to this survey, a workshop was held in which it was recommended
that an alternative method, pyrocatechol violet, be evaluated by comparing it to the
8-hydroxyquinoline method during the National Stream Survey and the Northeastern Seasonal
Variability Study. Both methods yielded comparable data for aluminum, but the pyrocatechol violet
method improved minimum detection limits, precision, and accuracy. A third method, the
aluminum/fluoride complex kinetic method, has also been evaluated and offers comparable
detection limits, precision, and accuracy, while being less affected by the presence of organics.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: Aluminum
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory, Literature
Goal: Classification, Trends Detection
Processes: Aluminum Speciation
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1C2 NAPAPCode: 6B-2.01C2
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-Term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Methods Development (E-06.1C)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1985 to 1987
Contact: Edward Heithmar
2-176
-------
TITLE: Development of an Automated Method for Field pH Measurements in Low Ionic Strength
Surface Waters
SHORT TITLE: Automated Field pH Measurements
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West(NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To assess the feasibility of using flow injection technology for measurement
of pH and to develop a method applicable to field use in environmental monitoring.
RATIONALE: The development of automated methods for large-scale environmental monitoring
programs is desirable because automation generally improves precision and facilitates the analysis of
many samples. The flow injection analysis method for the determination of pH presents an
attractive alternative method for field measurements of pH in surveys of dilute surface waters, which
is the key focus of acidic deposition effects research because potentiometric methods for pH
determination can be problematic.
APPROACH: The approach employed in this project includes reviewing existing literature for
potentially applicable methods; developing protocols for evaluating methods preliminarily deemed
to be feasible; and testing, evaluating, and selecting the most efficient method on the basis of
precision, accuracy, sensitivity, and comparability. Synthetically prepared samples of known pH and
natural surface water samples with chemical composition reasonably similar to those to be
monitored will be used to verify the feasibility of the selected method.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Streams
Chemicals: pH
Approach: Laboratory, Literature
Goal: Classification, Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1C3 NAPAPCode: 6B-2.01C3
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Methods Development (E-06.1C)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1989
Contact: Edward Heithmar
2-177
-------
TITLE: Development of a Method to Distinguish between Carbonate and Noncarbonate Acid
Neutralizing Capacity in Surface Waters
SHORTTITLE: Fractionation of Acid Neutralizing Capacity
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West(NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To improve the method of determining acid neutralizing capacity currently
employed in the Aquatic Effects Research Program to minimize the underestimation of this chemical
parameter in systems for which the amount of the noncarbonate fraction (i.e., organic protolytes)
may be significant.
RATIONALE: The standardized protocol for measuring acid neutralizing capacity in the Aquatic
Effects Research Program is the Gran analysis titration, a procedure that assumes the majority of acid
neutralizing potential of the water is due to the presence of carbonate species. Because the design
of the National Surface Water Survey was predicated on alkalinity (by definition, nonorganic acid
neutralizing capacity), some lakes selected within the design contain appreciable amounts of
dissolved organic carbon, and therefore by inference, organic protolytes that affect acid neutralizing
capacity. The Gran analysis procedure does not measure acid neutralizing capacity due to the
presence of organic protolytes; therefore the estimated number and proportion of acidic lakes (acid
neutralizing capacity <0 peq L-1) and lakes with low acid neutralizing capacity could be misleading.
Improving the method for determining acid neutralizing capacity with respect to systems containing
appreciable organics will improve population estimates of the number of systems for which the
acid/base status can be explained by nonorganic acidity.
APPROACH: Improve the system for conducting the Gran analysis by excluding atmospheric carbon
dioxide exchange, thereby ensuring constant total carbonate; computerize the system to enhance
resolution of added titrant volume, resultant pH, and data reduction capabilities; and improve data
reduction capabilities through literature analysis and subsequent testing of samples with known acid
neutralizing capacity.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity
Approach: Laboratory
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1C4 NAPAP Code: 6B-2.01C4
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Methods Development (E-06.1C)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1986to1987
Contact: Edward Heithmar
2-178
-------
TITLE: Applicability of Remote Sensing Techniques in the Detection of Long-term Trends of
Chemistry and Biology in Surface Waters
SHORTTITLE: Remote Sensing Applications
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West(NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To investigate the applicability of remote monitoring methods for long-
term monitoring of acidic deposition-related effects on surface water.
RATIONALE: Major surface water surveys are expensive and time-consuming. Remote sensing
methods provide mechanisms for extending the results of water surveys to much larger areas as well
as providing synoptic views of entire regions. A wide variety of techniques is available to provide
correlations between remotely sensed data and surface water for establishing the optimum
combination of sensor and contact techniques that will permit the cost-effective monitoring of the
nation's water quality.
APPROACH: An international symposium will be conducted that will focus on (1) a study by
Louisiana State University (1981) on the use of remote sensing for lake trophic state classification,
(2) a technical session at the annual meeting of the American Society for Photogrammetry and
Remote Sensing (1983) on remote sensing of acidic deposition effects, and (3) the work done at
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory-Las Vegas on laser fluorosensing and multispectral
scanner technologies for quantification of acidic deposition effects in surface waters. The workshop
will convene a panel of experts to review the work performed at Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory-Las Vegas and elsewhere, to determine the applicability and reliability of state-of-the-art
remote sensing systems for long-term monitoring of surface water quality. New directions in remote
sensing research for water quality mapping will be presented, and a document of the results will be
prepared.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: pH
Approach: Remote Sens!ng
Goal: Classification, Status/Extent
Processes: N/A
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1C5 NAPAP Code: 6B-2.01C5
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-05, E-07, E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-Term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Project: Methods Development (E-06.1C)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Thomas Mace
2-179
-------
TITLE: Quality Assurance/Quality Control Interpretation for Application in Long-term Monitoring
SHORTTITLE: Quality Assurance/Quality Control Interpretation
REGION(S)/STATE(S): West (NV)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To provide and define to data users and project planners quality
assurance/quality control guidance that is technically correct, easily understood, cost effective, and
based on Aquatic Effects Research Program experience.
RATIONALE: The effective application of quality assurance/quality control data is sometimes
confounded by the complexity of its derivation and the diversity of the information that can be
obtained from the data. This can be especially true of environmental monitoring where analyte
concentrations are often at the limits of detection and where numerous sources of variability are
present through the sampling and analytical process. In addition, quality assurance project plans for
environmental studies are to a great degree based on a number of assumptions and theoretical
statistical manipulations.
The National Surface Water Survey data bases contain a wealth of quality assurance/quality control
information not yet extracted as part of the program. A unique opportunity exists to develop from
these data bases practical quality assurance/quality control guidance for environmental scientists
based on actual field experience. Such guidance can be essential for long-term monitoring activities
where knowledge of system imprecision is important for trends detection and for reducing
uncertainties that impact policy decisions.
APPROACH: A team of University Cooperatives, contractors, and Environmental Protection Agency
staff at the Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory-Las Vegas, will examine all quality
assurance/quality control aspects of the existing verified National Surface Water Survey data bases.
Emphasis will be on the efficiency of the procedures used to detect and estimate bias and variability
and on the identification of the various components of variability (e.g., sampling, sample processing,
analytical). The latter will be particularly useful to project planners. The risk versus cost benefit of an
increased or decreased number of quality assurance/quality control samples such as blanks,
replicates, and audits for a study will be determined. Procedures for estimating the appropriate
number and frequency of such samples during project planning will be described and will be based
on actual National Surface Water Survey field data.
Particular attention will be given to the problems of concentration-dependent precision in terms of
use during data interpretation, and of the representativeness of audit samples. The National Surface
Water Survey data will be used to develop and examine a variability model based on analyte
concentration. The model should provide data users and project planners with a variability estimate
based on actual or expected concentrations.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Soils, Streams
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Aluminum, Conductance, Major Ions,
Organics, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Ion Balance, Literature
Goal: Trends Detection
Processes: N/A
2-180
-------
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1 D NAPAP Code: 6B-2.01D
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-05, E-07. E-08
Cross Reference: Program: Long-Term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990
Contact: Robert Schonbrod
2-181
-------
TITLE: Paleoecological Assessment of Changes in Adirondack Lake pH and Alkalinity, pre-1850 to
the Present
SHORT TITLE: Paleolimnological Studies in Adirondack Lakes
RE6ION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (NY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the percentage of a representative set of Adirondack lakes
with current pH <5.5 that were naturally acidic prior to 1850, and the extent to which these and
other lakes have acidified since the onset of acidic deposition. To assess which lakes appear to have
been most susceptible to acidic inputs and thus would be best candidates for long-term monitoring.
To develop procedures and strategies for use of diatoms and chrysophytes in other studies, such as
E-09.2C (Quantifying Past Change).
RATIONALE: Although the National Lake Survey is providing an accurate estimate of the number
and surface area of lakes with currently low pH (<5.5) and alkalinity (ANC <25 ueq/l), the
proportion of these lakes that were/are naturally acidic is unknown. Likewise, the extent to which
different categories of lakes have acidified since the onset of acidic deposition is unknown. Limited
historical water chemistry and fisheries data provide evidence of acidification, but interpretations
are controversial. Analysis of diatom and chrysophyte remains in sediment cores, a technique that
has developed rapidly in the past five years, has been used successfully in several European and U.S.
studies. Studies have indicated significant recent acidification trends in several regions, and that
many lakes were naturally acidic prior to 1850.
APPROACH: Analyze diatom and chrysophyte assemblages in the top (0.1 cm) and bottom (below
20-30 cm; pre-1850) of sediment cores from 20-25 Adirondack lakes, and calculate inferred pH and
ANC, using procedures and predictive equations developed in the PIRLA project (Paleoecological
Investigation of Recent Lake Acidification). A representative set of study lakes (ANC <25ueq/l) will
be selected from a set of 30 that have been cored but not analyzed for diatoms, and from lakes
sampled as part of the Eastern Lake Survey. Estimates of the percent of naturally acidic lakes and
magnitude of acidification trends will be based on these 20 lakes combined with comparable
existing data on about 20 other Adirondack lakes. Conclusions based on analysis of tops and
bottoms of cores will be compared with conclusions based on full stratigraphic analysis of previously
studied cores. The characteristics of the best candidate lakes for long-term monitoring will be
identified and incorporated into screening criteria for the Temporally Integrated Monitoring of
Ecosystems Project.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology,Chemistry, Lakes,Sediments
Chemicals: Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Laboratory, Paleolimnology
Goal: Model Verification, Quantification, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Chronic Acidification, Organic Acidification
PPA: E-06 EPA Code: E-06.1E NAPAPCode: 6B-2.01E
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-03, E-07, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Long-Term Monitoring (E-06)
Program Element: Temporally Integrated Monitoring of Ecosystems (E-06.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Don Charles
2-182
-------
2.9 INDIRECT HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS - PROGRAM E-04
[Program/Program Element/Project/Subproject]
E-04: Indirect Human Health Effects (6E) 2-185
E-04.1 Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (6E-1) 2-186
E-04.1A Cistern and Groundwater Drinking Supplies (6E-1.01) 2-187
E-04.1A1 Cistern Drinking Water Quality (6E-1.01 A) 2-188
E-04.1A2 Modification of Shallow Water Aquifers (6E-1.01B) 2-189
E-04.1B Surface Water Drinking Supplies (6E-1.02) 2-190
E-04.1B1 Reanalysis of Rural Drinking Water Data (6E-1.02A) 2-191
E-04.1B2 Exceedanceof Drinking Water Standards (6E-1.02B) 2-192
E-04.2 Bioaccumulation of Metals (6E-2) 2-193
E-04.2A Metals in Biota (6E-2.01) 2-194
E-04.2A1 Distribution of Mercury in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan
(6E-2.01A) 2-195
E-04.2A2 Existing Evidence of Mercury Contamination (6E-2.01B) 2-196
E-04.2B Metals in Surface Water/Sediments (6E-2.02) 2-197
E-04.2B1 Mercury Dynamics in Lakes of the Upper Midwest (6E-2.02A) ... 2-199
E-04.2B2 Regional Patterns of Metals in Lake Waters (6E-2.02B) 2-200
2-183
-------
TITLE: Indirect Human Health Effects due to Acidic Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Indirect Human Health Effects
REGION(S)/STATE(S):
Canada, Netherlands Antilles (St. Maarten), Scandinavia, United States,
Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (GA, KY, NC, TN),
Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA,
WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Research on post-depositional health effects due to acidic deposition has
two main areas of focus. One is the alteration of drinking water supplies in response to acidic inputs.
The second is the accumulation of mercury and other potentially toxic metals in the muscle tissue of
edible fish. The program objective is to determine the risk to human health due to acidic deposition
through these two routes of exposure.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have been demonstrated to be
toxic to humans. Because of its broad geographic scope, acidic deposition has the potential to
adversely affect a significant proportion of the population through water-mediated effects.
APPROACH: The approach to assess the extent of acidic deposition effects on precipitation-
dominated, noncommunity drinking water supplies (which are not federally regulated) and food
sources (e.g., metals bioaccumulation in edible fish) includes analyzing existing survey data,
sampling in areas of high and low deposition, and quantifying the potentially exposed population.
KEYWORDS: Medium:
Chemicals:
Approach:
Goal:
Processes:
PPA: E-04
Biology, Chemistry, Cisterns, Groundwater, Lakes
Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, pH, Sulfate
Field Sampling, Literature
Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Cycling, Mercury Mobilization,
Metals Bioaccumulation, Metals Mobilization
EPA Code: E-04
NAPAP Code: 6E
Element: Program
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: None
Status: Ongoing
Contact: Rick Linthurst
Period of Performance: 1985 to 1990
2-185
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Noncommunity Drinking Water Supplies
SHORT TITLE: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Netherlands Antilles (St. Maarten), Middle Atlantic, Northeast (CT, MA, ME,
NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (GA, KY, NC, TN), Upper Midwest, West
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the extent of effects of acidic deposition on drinking water
supplies, including cisterns, groundwater, and surface water, and to determine the magnitude of the
risk to human health.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. Federal regulations do not apply to noncommunity systems, many of which are
precipitation-dominated drinking water supplies (cisterns, springs, shallow aquifers, surface waters).
APPROACH: Analysis of existing survey data and sampling of water supplies in areas receiving high
acidic deposition is used to determine the extent of effects. The population potentially affected will
also be determined through survey data and additional surveys as needed.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Cisterns, Groundwater
Chemicals: Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1 NAPAP Code: 6E-1
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01.E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1985 to 1990
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-186
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Chemistry of Cisterns and Groundwaters used for Drinking
Water
SHORT TITLE: Cistern and Groundwater Drinking Supplies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Netherlands Antilles (St. Maarten), Southeast (GA, KY, NC, TN)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the role of acidic deposition in modifying the quality of
drinking water supplied by cisterns and groundwaters. The objectives of the cistern study are (1) to
compare the chemistry of cisterns in an area receiving acidic deposition, and (2) to determine
changes in water quality as the water passes from the collection device to the storage tank, through
the plumbing system, to the tap. The objectives of the groundwater, or shallow aquifer study, is to
investigate different well and spring designs and varying geology and to examine the relationship of
these factors to trace contaminants in the shallow aquifer itself and in the home plumbing system.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals and trace substances that have been
demonstrated as toxic to humans. Federal standards for these substances do not extend to
noncommunity drinking water systems, including cisterns, springs, and shallow aquifers. Examining
water quality of noncommunity drinking water supplies in areas receiving acidic deposition will help
to evaluate the potential, indirect human health risk posed by anthropogenically induced
acidification.
APPROACH: The cistern study involves deposition monitoring and cistern sampling for 19 water
quality parameters at four points in each system. Sampling is conducted throughout the year in one
area that receives acidic deposition and one that does not. the groundwater study will use data from
the Eastern Lake Survey and other sources to identify areas where the geology might indicate the
presence of potentially sensitive water supplies. Within these areas, the presence of shallow wells
and springs will be identified, and the geologic characteristics of these sites will be determined.
Samples from home taps will be collected and analyzed for various chemical constituents.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Cisterns, Groundwater
Chemicals: Conductance, Metals, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Human Health, Status/Extent, Synthesis and Integration
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1A NAPAP Code: 6E-1.01
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01,E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (E-04.1)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1984 to 1989
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-187
-------
TITLE: Drinking Water Quality in Cisterns
SHORT TITLE: Cistern Drinking Water Quality
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Netherlands Antilles (St. Maarten), Southeast (KY, TN)
GOALS(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine the role of acidic deposition in modifying the quality of
drinking water supplies. The objectives are (1) to quantify the water quality characteristics in cisterns
located in one area receiving acidic deposition and in one area not receiving acidic deposition and
(2) to determine how water quality changes as it passes from the collection device to the home tap.
RATIONALE: Acidic water has been shown to mobilize potentially toxic trace metals and other
substances that may pose a threat to human health. Acidic water collected in cisterns located in
areas receiving acidic precipitation may leach potentially toxic metals from the collection system or
from any point in the water distribution system. Quantifying the modification of drinking water for
cisterns will help identify whether acidic deposition presents an indirect human health risk in these
areas.
APPROACH: Cistern water quality in the Tennessee Valley region, which receives acidic deposition,
was compared to that in the St. Maarten, Netherlands Antilles, which does not. Samples were
collected throughout each year from four points along the distribution system and analyzed for 19
water quality parameters. Results from both regions were compared and evaluated with respect to
deposition levels.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Cisterns
Chemicals: Metals, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Human Health, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1A1 NAPAPCode: 6E-1.01A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (E-04.1)
Project: Cistern and Groundwater Drinking Supplies (E-04.1 A)
Status: Completed Period of Performance: 1984 to 1988
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-188
-------
TITLE: Acidic Deposition and Contaminants in Shallow Aquifers Used as Drinking Water Supplies
SHORT TITLE: Modification of Shallow Water Aquifers
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Southern Blue Ridge Province (GA, NC, TN)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): One focus of health effects research is to determine the extent of effects of
acidic deposition on drinking water supplies and to evaluate the magnitude of the risk to human
health.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. Federal regulations do not protect users of noncommunity systems, many of which are
precipitation-dominated drinking water supplies (cisterns, springs, shallow aquifers, surface waters).
Studies have shown that water quality of shallow aquifers is affected by acidic deposition. The
population relying on these supplies for drinking water has not been determined.
APPROACH: Following analysis of existing survey data, sampling of shallow aquifers in areas
receiving high acidic deposition is used to determine the extent of effects. Investigation includes
different well and spring designs, varying geology, and the relation of these factors to trace
contaminants in the shallow aquifer itself and those leached from home plumbing systems. Running
and standing tap water chemistry is determined for 19 parameters.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Groundwater
Chemicals: Metals, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1A2 NAPAP Code: 6E-1.01B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (E-04.1)
Project Area: Cistern and Groundwater Drinking Supplies (E-04.1 A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: RickLinthurst
2-189
-------
TITLE: Investigating Potential Indirect Human Health Effects in Surface Waters Used as Drinking
Water Supplies
SHORT TITLE: Surface Water Drinking Supplies
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic, Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast,
Upper Midwest, West
GOAL(S)/OBJECT1VE(S): The goals of this project are to evaluate (1) the potential effects of acidic
deposition in modifying the chemistry of surface waters used as drinking water supplies and (2) the
potential risk that such changes might pose to the population relying on these sources of drinking
water. One objective is to determine whether the water quality of noncommunity systems used for
drinking water is related to patterns of acidic deposition. A second is to determine if metals
concentrations in lakes in the National Lake Survey (E-01.1A) exceed federally established standards,
and if so, whether these lakes are used as drinking water supplies.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have been demonstrated to be
toxic to humans. Federal standards for the metals do not extend to noncommunity drinking water
systems, including lakes used as water supplies. Examining water quality in lakes located in areas
that receive, and are potentially sensitive to, acidic deposition may allow the extent to which acidic
deposition potentially threatens human health to be evaluated.
APPROACH: The National Statistical Assessment of Rural Drinking Water was conducted previously
for the Office of Drinking Water. This data base is being used to examine noncommunity,
precipitation-dominated water supplies to determine if they have generally lower water quality
than federally regulated systems, and to determine if the water quality of these systems is related to
patterns of acidic deposition. If a relationship is apparent, further analyses, e.g., examining water
quality with respect to geological patterns, may be conducted. A second approach is to calculate
regional estimates of the lakes in the National Lake Survey regions that have metals concentrations
exceeding federal standards, and to identify their locations. Information on whether the lakes are
used as drinking water supplies, the type of system construction, etc., will be collected from state
contacts.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Acid Neutralizing Capacity, Metals, pH
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Human Health, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1B NAPAP Code: 6E-1.02
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (E-04.1)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-190
-------
TITLE: Investigation of the Relationship between Drinking Water from Unregulated Precipitation-
Dominated Systems and Acidic Deposition
SHORTTITLE: Reanalysis of Rural Drinking Water Data
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Middle Atlantic, Northeast, Southeast, Upper Midwest, West
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): One focus of health effects research is to determine the extent of effects of
acidic deposition on drinking water supplies and to determine the magnitude of the risk to human
health.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. Federal regulations do not protect users of noncommunity systems, many of which are
precipitation-dominated drinking water supplies (cisterns, springs, shallow aquifers, surface waters).
Studies have shown that water quality of shallow aquifers is affected by acidic deposition. The
population relying on these supplies for drinking water has not been determined.
APPROACH: Data on selected constituents collected during the National Statistical Assessment of
Rural Water Conditions will be processed using a range of statistical methods. The National
Statistical Assessment, a cross-sectional study conducted in 1978 and 1979, assayed the water
supplies of 2654 rural households for 19 chemical substances or physical indicators. A subsample of
10% was tested for another 24 contaminants. Cadmium, lead, mercury, and selenium were found in
concentrations over maximum contaminant levels in large proportions of the water supplies. These
data are being examined to determine any associations with acidic deposition using correlational
analyses and multivariate procedures.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Mercury Mobilization, Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1B1 NAPAP Code: 6E-1.02A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (E-04.1)
Project: Surface Water Drinking Supplies (E-04.1B)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-191
-------
TITLE: Exceedance of Metals Drinking Water Standards in Lakes Sampled in the National Lake
Survey
SHORT TITLE: Exceedance of Drinking Water Standards
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl, VT)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): One focus of health effects research is to determine the extent of effects of
acidic deposition on drinking water supplies and to determine the magnitude of the risk to human
health.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. Federal regulations do not protect users of noncommunity systems, many of which are
precipitation-dominated drinking water supplies (cisterns, springs, shallow aquifers, surface waters).
The population relying on these supplies for drinking water has not been determined.
APPROACH: Data on metal concentrations collected in the northeastern United States during the
National Lake Survey are being compared to drinking water standards. Lakes with exceedances are
investigated as possible drinking water sources. Contacts in the states where exceedances occur are
requested to supply information on the number of users, system construction, operation, historical
problems, and pollution in the watershed. The population at risk from consumption of unregulated
drinking water affected by acidic deposition is estimated.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses
Goal: Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.1B2 NAPAP Code: 6E-1.02B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Effects of Acidic Deposition on Drinking Water (E-04.1)
Project: Surface Water Drinking Supplies (E-04.1B)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1987 to 1988
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-192
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidification on Metals Bioavailability and Bioaccumulation
SHORT TITLE: Bioaccumulation of Metals
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Canada, Scandinavia, United States, Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, PA, Rl),
Southeast (FL. GA, NC. SC, TN, VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA,
CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT, WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): One focus of health effects research is to determine the extent of effects of
acidic deposition on bioaccumulation of toxic metals by biota used as food sources by humans.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. These may be accumulated in the tissues of fish and other biota used as sources of food.
APPROACH: Existing survey data and sampling of biota in areas receiving high acidic deposition is
used to determine the extent of effects. The population potentially affected may also be
determined through existing survey data of consumption habits and additional surveys as needed.
Models may be developed to help identify potentially affected resources and/or species.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Sediments, Watersheds
Chemicals: Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling, Literature
Goal: Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Cycling, Mercury Mobilization,
Metals Bioaccumulation, Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2 NAPAP Code: 6E-2
Element: Program Element
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1985 to 1990
Contact: Rick Linthurst
2-193
-------
TITLE: Effects of Acidic Conditions on Bioaccumulation of Toxic Metals in Aquatic Organisms
SHORT TITLE: Metals in Biota
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Canada, Scandinavia, United States, Upper Midwest (Ml, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): One focus of health effects research is to determine the extent of effects of
acidic deposition on bioaccumulation of toxic metals by biota used as food sources by humans.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. These may be accumulated in the tissues of fish and other biota used as sources of food.
Bioaccumulation of metals, especially mercury, by sport fish has been documented in areas of the
United States and Canada receiving acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Existing survey data and sampling of biota in areas receiving high acidic deposition is
used to determine the extent of effects. The population potentially affected may also be
determined through existing survey data of consumption habits and additional surveys as needed.
Models may be developed to help identify potentially affected resources and/or species.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Sediments, Watersheds
Chemicals: Mercury, Metals, Nitrate, Sulfate
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling
Goal: Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Cycling, Mercury Mobilization,
Metals Bioaccumulation, Metals Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2A NAPAP Code: 6E-2.01
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05. E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Bioaccumulation of Metals (E-04.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1986 to 1990
Contact: Dixon Landers
2-194
-------
TITLE: Distribution of Mercury in Lakes Located in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan
SHORT TITLE: Distribution of Mercury in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Ml, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To determine if an association between fish mercury content and water
chemistry exists and to determine the distribution of lakes in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and
northwest Wisconsin with fish that contain a high body burden of mercury.
RATIONALE: Although many references in the literature imply a cause-and-effect relationship
between lake acidity and enhanced mercury bioaccumulation, conclusive results associating elevated
mercury concentrations in fish with acidity, acidification, or acidic atmospheric deposition have not
yet been obtained. Data obtained as part of this study will serve (1) to determine whether lake
acidity and fish mercury content are significantly correlated, (2) to quantify the number and extent
of lakes in this area with fish mercury levels that pose a potential human health risk, and (3) to
provide a basis for conducting detailed research on processes of mercury bioaccumulation.
APPROACH: Fish will be collected for mercury analysis from 50 lakes located in the National Surface
Water Survey Subregion 2B (Upper Peninsula of Michigan and northwest Wisconsin). Lakes to be
surveyed were selected using a variable probability systematic sample from among lakes sampled
during Phase I of the Eastern Lake Survey. This approach is consistent with the probability sampling
used for the Eastern Lake Survey - Phases I and II.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Mercury, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Status/Extent
Processes: Community Response, Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Cycling,
Mercury Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2A1 NAPAP Code: 6E-2.01A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-05, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Bioaccumulation of Metals (E-04.2)
Project: Metals in Biota (E-04.2A)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1989
Contact: Robert Cusimano
2-195
-------
TITLE: Evaluation of Existing Process-oriented and Survey Data to Assess the Relationship between
Bioaccumulation of Mercury in Fish and Surface Water Chemistry in Areas of High Acidic
Deposition
SHORT TITLE: Existing Evidence of Mercury Contamination
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Canada, Scandinavia, United States
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): One focus of health effects research is to determine the extent of effects of
acidic deposition on bioaccumulation of toxic metals by biota used as food sources by humans.
RATIONALE: Acidic water is known to mobilize certain metals that have a demonstrated human
toxicity. These may be accumulated in the tissues of fish and other biota used as sources of food.
Bioaccumulation of metals, especially mercury, by sport fish has been documented in areas of the
United States and Canada receiving acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Existing process-oriented and survey data on bioaccumulation of mercury in fish in
areas receiving high acidic deposition is used to determine the extent of effects. The data are
compared by species, concentrating on sport fish. In addition to pH, key watershed parameters that
may assist in modeling bioaccumulation of mercury (e.g., land use, water chemistry, hydrology,
vegetation, and geology) are identified. State and local survey data on mercury content of fish in
surface waters are obtained. Data are examined geographically to determine if the gradient in
deposition is sufficiently represented to attempt modeling, and to identify areas where more
research would be necessary to characterize mercury bioaccumulation in relation to acidic
deposition. If possible, models by fish species along deposition gradients are constructed. Regional
extrapolation possibilities of model results are assessed.
KEY WORDS: Medium: Biology, Chemistry, Lakes, Streams, Watersheds
Chemicals: Mercury, pH
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Literature
Goal: Model Development, Prediction, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Mobilization
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2A2 NAPAP Code: 6E-2.01B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Bioaccumulation of Metals (E-04.2)
Project: Metals in Biota (E-04.2A)
Status: Concluding Period of Performance: 1986 to 1987
Contact: RickLinthurst
2-196
-------
TITLE: Accumulation of Toxic Metals in Surface Waters and Sediments
SHORT TITLE: Metals in Surface Water/Sediments
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (FL, GA, NC, SC, TN,
VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT,
WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): Two subprojects are being conducted as part of this project. The objectives
of the first subproject are to collect and compare dissolved mercury data for lakes in the Upper
Midwest, examine which mercury pool best explains variance in fish tissue mercury content (see E-
04.2A1), develop sediment-water mercury distribution coefficients, and develop a model to predict
dissolved mercury concentrations based on suspended/surficial bed sediment content, pH, and
dissolved organic carbon. The objectives of the second subproject are to determine the regional
distribution and the relationships to other water quality parameters for trace metals in lakes that are
potentially sensitive to acidic deposition. Additionally, efforts will be made to identify an element or
group of elements to be used as an index to lake acid status.
RATIONALE: Acidic deposition potentially may affect metals mobility in lakes through direct metals
loading to surface waters or watersheds, accelerating release rates from watersheds or sediments, or
altering aqueous speciation of metals into biologically available forms. Two metals that are
particularly important with respect to biota are aluminum and mercury, both of which can be
affected by changes in acidic status. Other metals have also been documented to be toxic either to
humans or to aquatic biota. Little is known, however, about the distributions of these metals on a
regional basis, or the degree to which increases in their concentrations or changes in their aqueous
forms present a risk to human health.
APPROACH: Sediment and water samples will be collected from a subset of lakes in the Upper
Midwest that is part of the National Lake Survey (E-01.1 A) regional frame. Samples will be analyzed
for mercury content and a variety of other chemical parameters. The data will be used to examine
regional patterns of mercury in lakes located in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Metals data
collected in the Eastern Lake Survey-Phase I, the Northeastern Seasonal Variability Study (E-01.1 A2),
and the Upper Midwestern Fish Survey (E-03.1B), are being or will be used to estimate their regional
distribution. Regional estimates with known confidence bounds can be made, because the sampled
lakes were selected from the National Lake Survey statistical frame.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Sediments
Chemicals: Mercury, Metals, Organics, pH
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling
Goal: Human Health, Model Development, Status/Extent,
Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Cycling,
Mercury Mobilization, Metals Mobilization, Organic Chelation
2-197
-------
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2B NAPAP Code: 6E-2.02
Element: Project
Contributing to: E-01.E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Bioaccumulation in Metals (E.04.2)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Dixon Landers, Robert Cusimano
2-198
-------
TITLE: Mercury Dynamics in Lakes in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan
SHORT TITLE: Mercury Dynamics in Lakes of the Upper Midwest
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Upper Midwest (Ml, Wl)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To (1) collect and compare dissolved mercury data from lakes located in the
Upper Peninsula of Michigan, (2) determine which mercury pool (total, dissolved, bed sediment) best
explains variance in fish tissue mercury content, (3) develop sediment-water mercury distribution
coefficients, and (4) develop a model that predicts dissolved mercury concentrations based on
suspended/surficial bed sediment content, pH, and dissolved organic carbon.
RATIONALE: Maximum mercury concentrations of 0.1 ± 0.1 ug L-1 in snow and 3.4ug L-1 in rain have
been published for the north central states. Thus, mercury in acidic precipitation potentially may
explain, in part, mercury concentrations found in acidic lakes in this area. Little is known abut
mercury concentrations in lakes on a regional basis, or about mercury cycling or release in individual
lakes. Furthermore, very little is known about the relationship between acidic deposition and
mercury content or cycling in surface waters. Mercury has been documented to have human health
effects and can be accumulated by aquatic biota.
APPROACH: Fifty lakes in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan were selected for this subproject and a
companion project (E-03. IB) from the National Lake Survey frame. Thus, results and conclusions can
be extrapolated to the subregion with known confidence. Sediment and water mercury
concentrations will be measured on samples collected from each lake. At 18 of the 50 lakes, water
samples will be split and analyzed for total and dissolved mercury. Surficial sediment samples also
will be analyzed for mercury content. Mercury will be analyzed with cold-vapor atomic adsorption
spectrophotometry.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes, Sediments
Chemicals: Mercury, Organics, pH
Approach: Field Sampling
Goal: Human Health, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Mercury Bioaccumulation, Mercury Cycling, Mercury Mobilization,
Organic Chelation
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2B1 NAPAP Code: 6E-2.02A
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Bioaccumulation of Metals (E-04.2)
Project: Metals in Surface Waters/Sediments (E-04.2B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Dixon Landers, Robert Cusimano
2-199
-------
TITLE: Regional Patterns of Metals in Lake Water
SHORT TITLE: Regional Patterns of Metals in Lake Waters
REGION(S)/STATE(S): Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, Rl, VT), Southeast (FL, GA, NC, SC, TN,
VA), Upper Midwest (Ml, MN, Wl), West (CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, UT,
WA, WY)
GOAL(S)/OBJECTIVE(S): To (1) determine the distribution of trace elements for lakes surveyed in the
National Lake Survey (E-01.1A), (2) evaluate the relationships between trace elements and other
water quality parameters, (3) determine whether an element or group of elements exists that can be
used as an index of the acidification status of a lake, and (4) determine whether the relationships
and correlations developed for study lakes are applicable to other regions.
RATIONALE: Acidification of dilute lakes, which often have low concentrations of complexing
organic ligands, can mobilize toxic forms of aluminum and other trace metals. Direct deposition of
metals in acidic precipitation also can potentially increase toxic metals concentrations in lakes. Until
the National Lake Survey was conducted, no data bases appropriate for regional analyses of trace
metals were available. This study is designed to examine trace metals in four regions of the United
States and to evaluate the extent to which regional distributions might be related to patterns in
acidic deposition.
APPROACH: Metals data collected in Phase I of the National Lake Survey and in the Northeastern
Seasonal Variability Study (E-01.1A2) are being examined to develop regional estimates of their
distributions. Data being collected as part of the Upper Midwestern Fish Survey (Project E-03.1A)
also will be used. Samples were or will be analyzed with atomic absorption spectrophotometry
and/or inductively coupled plasma/mass spectrometry. Methods comparisons are an integral part of
this study.
KEYWORDS: Medium: Chemistry, Lakes
Chemicals: Metals, Organics, pH
Approach: Existing Data Analyses, Field Sampling, Laboratory
Goal: Human Health, Status/Extent, Synthesis/Integration
Processes: Aluminum Mobilization, Metals Mobilization, Organic delation
PPA: E-04 EPA Code: E-04.2B2 NAPAP Code: 6E-2.02B
Element: Subproject
Contributing to: E-01, E-03, E-09
Cross Reference: Program: Indirect Human Health Effects (E-04)
Program Element: Bioaccumulation of Metals (E-04.2)
Project: Metals in Surface Waters/Sediments (E-04.2B)
Status: Ongoing Period of Performance: 1987 to 1991
Contact: Dixon Landers, Edward Heithmar
2-200
-------
SECTION 3
INDICES
All page numbers in the indices refer to Section 2 only.
3-1
-------
3.1 INDEX BY CONTACT
Contact, Name and Address
Page
Joan Baker 117.120-128
Highway 70 West
Water Garden
Raleigh, NC 27612
(919)781-3150
Louis Blume 75-76. 78, 82
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
944 East Harmon Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702)798-2213, FTS 545-2213
Patrick Brezonik 68
103 Experimental Engineering Building
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN 55455
(612)625-5000
Donald Charles 136,182
Indiana University
Present Address:
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503)757-4329, FTS 420-4329
M. Robbins Church
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4666, FTS 420-4666
Robert Crowe 157
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
944 East Harmon Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702) 798-2273, FTS 545-2273
Robert Cusimano 195,197,199
Northrop Services, Inc.
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4709, FTS 420-4709
25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-44, 46-47,49, 51, 68, 83,
150
(continued)
3-3
-------
INDEX BY CONTACT (Continued)
Contact, Name and Address
Page
John Eaton
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
6201 Congdon Boulevard
Duluth, MN 55804
(218) 720-5557, FTS 780-5557
Joseph Eilers
Northrop Services, Inc.
U.S. EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4724, FTS 420-4724
Jesse Ford
Cornell University
Present Address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4600, FTS 420-4600
Edward Heithmar
U.S Environmental Protection Agency
Quality Assurance & Methods Development Div.
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
944 East Harmon Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702) 798-2626, FTS 545-2626
Philip Kaufmann
Utah State University
Present Address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503)757-4612, FTS 420-4612
Dixon Landers
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4695, FTS 420-4695
64, 66, 69
9, 18-20, 139, 143, 147
161, 172
174-178,200
14-17, 146
5-6,8, 10-13, 115-116, 118-121, 135, 145, 149,
151, 161, 163-164, 166-167, 169-171, 173, 194,
197,199-200
(continued)
3-4
-------
INDEX BY CONTACT (Continued)
Contact, Name and Address
Page
Rick Linthurst
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Mail Drop 39
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919) 541-4048, FTS 629-4048
Thomas Mace
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
944 East Harmon Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702) 798-3154, FTS 545-3154
Howard McCormick
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
6201 Congdon Boulevard
Duluth, MN 55804
(218)720-5557, FTS 780-5557
Daniel McKenzie
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4666, FTS 420-4666
Robert Schonbrod
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
944 East Harmon Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702) 798-2229, FTS 545-2229
Tim Sullivan
Northrop Services, Inc.
U.S EPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4794, FTS 420-4794
Parker J. Wigington, Jr.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 S.W. 35th Street
Corvallis, OR 97333
(503) 757-4666, FTS 420-4666
100,137,153,185-193,196
179
129-131
55, 62, 66, 69, 71, 77, 79, 87, 89, 91, 93, 95-96, 98-
100, 103-104, 106, 108, 111, 125, 152, 154, 156
180
140, 142, 148
57,59,73-74,81,84-86,88
3-5
-------
3.2 INDEX BY REGION
Region Page
Canada 89, 91,95-96,185,193-194,196
Mid-Appalachians 25-26, 28, 34, 37-39,41-44, 46-47, 55, 57, 71-72, 77, 79, 81, 83, 100
Middle Atlantic 5-6, 14, 16,51,91,93,95,98, 100, 103-104, 106, 108, 111, 115, 120,
122, 125-128, 135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 146-147, 149-154, 161, 163-
164, 166, 169-170, 173, 186, 190-191
Midwest 100,149,170-171
Netherlands Antilles 185-188
Northeast 5-6,8, 10, 25-26, 28, 30, 36-44,46-47,49, 51, 55, 57, 59, 61, 71-72, 74-
77,79,81-88,91,93,95,98,100, 103-104, 106, 108, 111, 115-116,
119-128, 135-137, 139-140, 142-143, 145, 147-154, 156, 161, 163-164,
166-167, 169-170, 172-173, 182, 185-186, 190-193, 197, 200
Norway 87,90-91,95,99
Scandinavia 185,193-194,196
Southeast 5-6,8, 14, 17-19,21,39,57,61-62,91,93,95,98, 100, 103, 106, 111,
115-117, 120, 122, 135-137, 139, 141, 143, 145-154, 156, 161, 163-
164, 166, 169-170, 173, 185-188, 190-191, 193, 197,200
Southern Blue Ridge 5-6, 15, 25-26, 28, 32, 37-38, 40-44, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 71-72, 75-77, 79,
Province 81-83, 142, 169, 172-173, 189
Upper Midwest 5-6,8, 18-21,55,61,64,66,68-69,91,95,98, 100, 115-116, 118, 120,
122-123, 129-131, 135-137, 142-143, 145, 147-156, 161, 163-164, 166-
167, 169-170, 172-173, 185-186, 190-191, 193-195, 197, 199-200
West 5-6,8-9, 11-13, 18-19,21-22, 100, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122,
125, 135-137, 143, 147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170,
172-180, 185-186, 190-191, 193, 197, 200
3-7
-------
3.3 INDEX BY STATE
State
Page
AK (Alaska) 18-19,21,39,57,166,170
AL (Alabama) 5-6, 14, 17, 39, 57, 62, 91, 93, 95, 98, 103, 106, 111, 115, 120, 122,
135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 146-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166,
169, 173
AR(Arkansas) 5-6,14,17,62,91,93,95,98,103,106, 111, 115,120,122,135, 137,
139, 141, 143, 146-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 169-170, 173
AZ (Arizona) 166,170
CA (California) 5-6,8-9, 18,22, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125, 135-137, 143,
145, 147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 172-173, 185,
193,197,200
CO (Colorado) 5-6,8-9, 11-12, 103, 106, 108,110, 115,120, 122, 125, 135-137, 143,
145, 147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 172-173, 185,
193, 197,200
CT (Connecticut) 5-6, 8, 10, 25-26, 28, 30, 36-44, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 71-72, 75-77, 79, 81-
83,91,93,95,98, 103, 106, 108, 111, 115-116, 119-120, 122-123,
125, 135, 137, 142-143, 145, 147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166,
169-170, 173, 185-186, 190, 192-193, 197, 200
DC (District of Columbia) 14, 16, 146, 161, 163-164, 166, 169, 173
DE (Delaware) 5-6, 14, 16, 37-39, 46-47, 51, 55, 71-72, 77, 79, 81, 83, 91, 93, 95, 98,
103, 106, 108, 111, 115, 120, 122,125, 135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 146-
147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169, 173
FL(Florida) 5-6, 8, 14, 17-19, 21, 57, 61-62, 91, 93, 95, 98, 103, 106, 111, 115-117,
120, 122, 135-137, 139, 141, 143, 145-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166,
169-170, 173, 193,197,200
GA (Georgia) 5-6, 8, 14-15, 17, 25-26, 28, 32, 37-43, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 57, 62, 71 -72,
75-77, 79, 81-83, 91, 93, 95, 98, 103, 106, 111, 115, 120, 122, 135-137,
139, 141-143, 145-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166. 169-170,
172-173, 185-187, 189, 193, 197, 200
ID(ldaho) 5-6,8-9, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125, 135-137, 143, 145,
147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 173, 185, 193, 197,
200
IN (Indiana)
KY (Kentucky)
MA (Massachusetts)
166, 171
5-6, 14, 17,39,57,62,91,93,95,98, 103, 106, 111, 115, 120, 122,
135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 146-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166,
169-170, 173, 185-188
5-6, 8, 10, 25-26, 28, 30, 36-44, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 71-72, 75-77, 79, 81-
83,91,93,95,98, 103, 106, 108, 111, 115-116, 119-120, 122-123, 125,
135, 137, 142-143, 145, 147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-
170, 173, 185-186, 190, 192-193, 197,200
(continued)
3-9
-------
INDEX BY STATE
State
Page
MD (Maryland)
ME (Maine)
Ml (Michigan)
MN (Minnesota)
MS (Mississippi)
MT (Montana)
NC (North Carolina)
NH (New Hampshire)
NJ (New Jersey)
NM (New Mexico)
NV (Nevada)
NY (New York)
OH (Ohio)
OK (Oklahoma)
5-6,14,16,25-26,28,34,37-39,41-43,46-47, 51,55,71-72,77,79,
81,83,91,93,95,98,103,106,108,111,115, 120, 122, 125,135, 137,
139,141,143,146-147,149-154, 156,161,163-164,166, 169-170,173
5-6,8,10,25-26, 28, 30,36, 38-44,46-47,49, 51, 55, 57, 59, 71-72,74-
77, 79,81-88,91,93,95,98, 103-104,106,108,111, 115-116,119-
123,125,135-137, 139, 142-143, 145, 147,149-154, 156,161,163-
164,166,169-170,172-173, 185-186,190,192-193, 197,200
5-6,8,18-20,91,95,98,113, 115-116, 118,120,122-123, 135-137,
142-143,145,147-154,156, 161,163-164, 166-167, 169-170,172-173,
185,193-195,197,199-200
5-6,8,18-20,91,95,98, 115, 120, 122-123, 129-131, 135-137, 142-
143,145,147,149-154,156,161,163-164, 166-167,169-170,172-
173,185,193,197,200
39, 57,62,161,163-164,166, 169-170,173
5-6,8-9,103,106,108,110, 115,120,122, 125,135-137, 143,145,
147,150-154,156,161, 163-164,166, 169,173,185,193, 197,200
5-6,8,14-15,17,25-26,28,32,37-43,46-47,49, 51, 55, 57,62.71 -72,
75-77,81-83,91,93,95,98,103,106,111,115,120, 122,135-137,
139, 141-143, 145-147,149-154,156, 161,163-164, 166,169-170,
172-173, 185-187, 189, 193, 197,200
5-6,8,10,25-26, 28,30,36-44,46-47,49, 51, 55,71-72,75-77,79,81-
83,91,93,95,98, 103,106,108, 111,115-116,119-125,135-137,142-
143,145, 147,149-154,156,161,163-164,166,169-170, 173.185-
186,190,192-193,197,200
5-6,8,10,14,16,39,43,46-47,51,55,71,81,83,91,93,95,98,103,
106,108, 111,115, 120,122-123,125, 135,137,139, 141-143, 145-
147.149-154, 156, 161,163-164, 166,169-170,173,197,200
5-6,8-9,13,103,106,108,110,115,120, 122,125, 135-137, 143,145,
147,150-154,156, 161,163-164,166, 169-170,173,185, 193,197,
200
5-6,8-9,103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125, 135-137, 143, 145,
147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166. 169, 173-180, 185, 193, 197,
200
5-6,8, 10, 14, 16, 25-26, 28, 30, 36-44, 46-47,49, 51, 55, 71-72, 75-77,
79,81-83,91,93,95,98,103, 106,108,111,115-116,120-128,135-
137,139-143,145-154, 156, 161, 163-164,166-167,169-170,172-173,
182,185-186,190,192-193,197, 200
147,166,170
5-6,14,17, 57,62,103, 106,115,120, 122,135,137, 139, 141,143,
146-147, 149-154,156, 161,163-164,166,169-170,173
(continued)
3-10
-------
INDEX BY STATE
State
Page
OR (Oregon)
PA (Pennsylvania)
Rl (Rhode Island)
SC (South Carolina)
TN (Tennessee)
TX (Texas)
UT (Utah)
VA (Virginia)
VT (Vermont)
WA (Washington)
Wl (Wisconsin)
WV (West Virginia)
WY( Wyoming)
5-6, 8-9, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125, 135-137, 143, 147.
150-154, 156, 161, 163-164,166, 169-170,173, 185, 193, 197,200
5-6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 25-26, 28, 30, 34, 36-44, 46-47,49, 51, 55, 57, 71 -72,
75-77, 79, 81-83, 91, 93,95, 98, 103-104, 106, 108, 111, 115-116, 119-
120, 122-128, 135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 145-147, 149-154, 156, 161,
163-164, 166, 169-170, 172-173, 185-186, 190, 192-193, 197, 200
5-6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 25-26, 28, 30, 36-44, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 71-72, 75-77,
79,81-83,91,93.95,98, 103, 106, 108, 111, 115-116, 119-120, 122-
123, 125, 135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 145-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-
164, 166, 169, 173, 185-186, 190, 192-193, 197,200
5-6, 8, 14-15, 17, 25-26, 28, 32, 37-43, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 57, 62, 71-72,
75-77,79,81-83,91, 103, 106. 115, 120, 122, 135-137, 139, 141-143,
145-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 173, 193, 197, 200
5-6, 8, 14-15, 17, 25-26, 28, 32, 37-43, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 57, 62, 71-72,
75-77, 79, 81-83, 91, 93, 95, 98, 103, 106, 111, 115, 120, 122-124, 135-
137, 139, 141-143, 145-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-
170, 172-173, 185-189, 193, 197, 200
147, 166, 170
5-6, 8-9, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125, 135-137. 143, 145,
147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 173, 185, 193, 197,
200
5-6. 8, 14, 16-17, 25-26, 28, 32, 34, 37-39, 41-43, 46-47, 49, 51, 55, 57,
62, 71-72, 75-77, 79,81-83,91,93, 95, 98, 103, 106, 108. 111, 115,
120,122, 125,135-137,139, 141,143, 145-147,149-154, 156, 161,
163-164, 166, 169-170. 173, 193, 197, 200
5-6, 8, 10, 25-26, 28, 30, 36-44,46-47, 49, 51, 55, 71-72, 75-77, 79. 81-
83, 91, 93, 95, 98, 103, 106, 108, 111, 115-116, 119-122, 125, 135-137,
143, 145, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 172-173, 185-
186.190,192,197,200
5-6, 8-9, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125, 135-137, 143, 145,
147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170, 173, 185, 193, 197,
200
5-6, 8, 18-21,55, 64, 66, 68-69, 91, 95,98, 115-116. 118, 120, 122-123,
129-131, 135-137, 142-143, 145, 147-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166-167,
169-170. 172-173, 185, 193-195, 197, 199-200
5-6, 14, 16, 25-26, 28, 34, 37-39, 41-43,46-47, 51, 55, 57, 71-72, 77,
79, 81, 83, 91,93, 95, 98, 103-104, 106, 108, 111, 115, 120, 122, 125,
135, 137, 139, 141, 143, 146-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166,
169-170, 173
5-6, 8-9, 103, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125. 135-137, 143, 145,
147, 150-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 166, 169-170. 173, 185, 193, 197,
200
3-11
-------
3.4 INDEX BY KEY WORD
Keyword
Page
'Medium'
Biology
Chemistry
Cisterns
Deposition
Groundwater
Lakes
Seepage Lakes
Sediments
Snowpack
Soils
Streams
Vegetation
Watersheds
Wetlands
55, 61, 64, 66, 69, 90, 103, 115-131, 135-137, 141, 143, 145-147, 149-
152, 154, 156, 161, 163-164, 171, 182, 185, 193-196
5-6, 8-22, 25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-44,46-47,49, 51, 55, 57, 59, 61-62,
64, 66, 68-69, 71-72, 74-79.81-91.93, 95-96, 98-99. 103-104, 106,
108, 110-111, 115-131, 135-137, 139-143, 145-154, 156, 161, 163-164.
167, 169-180,182, 185-197,199-200
185-188
11-13,18,20-21,62, 106,108,110, 111,135-137, 143, 145-148.150-
154,156,161,163-164,173
18-19,21,85,185-187,189
5-6, 8-13, 18-22, 25. 36, 38-39, 42,47, 51. 55, 61, 71, 87, 89,95-96, 98.
103, 115-124, 129-131, 135-137, 139-140, 142-143. 145, 147-154, 156,
161, 163-164, 169-180, 182, 185, 190-197, 199-200
5-6,8, 18-21,64,66,68-69, 129-131, 135-137, 143, 145, 147, 161, 163-
164
136,171,182,193-194,197,199
13,22,61,87.90,103,106.110
25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-42.44,46-47,49, 51, 55, 57, 59, 62. 71-72,
74-79,81-89,95-96.98. 104, 135-137, 143, 145-147, 150, 152, 154,
156,161.163-164,180
5-6, 14-17, 25, 38-39,42,47, 51, 55, 57, 59, 62, 71, 85-87, 89-90. 95,
98, 103-104,106, 108,110-111,115-116,120,122, 125-128,135-137,
139, 141, 143, 146-147, 149-154, 156, 161, 163-164, 167, 169-170,
173-174, 176-177,180,196
88
25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 38-40,42-43,46-47,49, 51, 55, 57, 59, 61-62, 71-
72, 74, 84-85,87-91, 93. 95-96,98-99, 103, 106, 108, 110-111, 135-
137, 143, 146-147, 150, 152-154. 156, 161, 163-164, 170, 193-194, 196
36, 44, 52, 135-137, 143, 147, 150
(continued)
3-13
-------
INDEX BY KEY WORD (Continued)
Key Word
Page
Chemicals
Acidic Cations
Acid Neutralizing Capacity
Aluminum
Base Cations
Calcium
Cation Exchange Complex
Clay Minerals
Conductance
Fluoride
Major tons
Mercury
Metals
Trace Metals
Neutral Salts
Nitrogen
Ammonium
Nitrate
Total
Organics
PH
89
5-6, 8-11, 13-18. 22, 25. 38.42. 91. 93, 95-96,98-99. 103-104, 106,
108, 110, 119, 140-142, 145-146, 148, 150, 156, 166-167, 170, 172,
174,178,180,190
5-6, 8-10, 13-18, 21. 26. 28, 30, 32, 34, 55, 57, 59. 61, 71, 76, 84, 86,
90, 103-104, 106, 108, 110, 115-116, 118-120. 122-128, 135-137, 139-
140, 145-146, 149, 151. 161, 163-164, 176, 180
5-6,8-11,37-38,40,42-43,46,49, 55, 57, 59, 62. 71,81,83-84,89,99,
103,106,108,110
118-120, 122-124, 126-128, 149, 151, 161, 163-164
46,49
46,49,55,71,81-82
5,8-9,12,18,180,187
115, 118
12-18,20,25,64,66, 75, 111, 119, 142, 145-146, 156, 172, 180
5. 8, 64, 66, 115-116, 118, 139, 161, 163-164. 185-186, 191-197, 199
5,8-10,14-17,115-116,118,139. 174-175,185-194,197,200
64,66
142
13,59,87
5-6, 8-11, 14-22, 26, 28, 30, 32. 34,43, 55, 57, 59, 61-62, 71, 87-90,
103-104, 106,108, 110-111, 119, 135-137, 139-140,142-143, 147,
154, 156. 161. 163-164, 180, 185-186. 189, 191-194
59,88
5-6,8-10, 13-18,21,38,42-44,55,57,59,61,71,86, 115-128, 135-
137, 139-140. 142-143, 145-149, 151, 161, 163-164, 180, 197, 199-200
5-6, 8-18, 22, 38,42, 64, 66. 68-69. 75, 91. 93,95-96, 98-99, 103-104,
106, 108, 110,115-120, 122-124, 126-131, 140, 142,145-146,148-
149, 151, 156. 166-167, 172, 174, 177, 179, 185, 187-188, 190. 195-
197, 199-200
(continued)
3-14
-------
INDEX BY KEY WORD (Continued)
Key Word
Primary Minerals
Silica
Soil Chemistry
Sulfur
Inorganic
Organic
81-82
38
41-42
77,79
77, 79, 86
Page
Sulfate
5-6, 8-12, 14-22, 25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-40, 43-44, 46-47, 51, 55, 57,
59, 61-62, 64, 66, 68-69, 71-72, 74-79, 89, 98-99, 103-104, 106, 108,
110-111,119, 135-137, 139-140, 142-143,145-148,150, 152-154, 156,
161, 163-164, 166-167, 180, 182, 185-186, 189, 191-194
Approach
Data Acquisition
Field Studies
Manipulation
Mapping
Paleolimnology
Remote Sensing
Surveys/Sampling
Laboratory
Literature
55, 57, 62, 64, 66, 69, 72, 74, 79, 81, 83-88, 98-99, 128-131
25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 55
148, 182
179
5-6, 8-19, 21-22, 25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 37-39, 46, 49, 55, 57, 59, 61-62,
64,66,68-69,71-72,74,76,79,81,83-88,90, 103-104, 106, 108, 110,
115-120, 125, 127-128, 148-149, 151, 153, 161, 163-164, 176, 182,
185-189, 193-195, 197, 199-200
25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 37-38, 46, 55, 57, 59, 62, 64, 66, 69, 71-72, 74-79,
81,83-84,86-88,98, 120, 129-131, 174-178, 182,200
6, 11, 18-20,37,39,44,89,95,98, 115, 119-122, 135-137, 139-142,
148-151, 156-157, 166, 169, 171, 176-177, 180, 185-186, 189-190,
193,196
Data Analysis
Aggregation
Correlation
Existing Data
Input-Output Budgets
Ion Balance
25,36,38,41-42,46-47,49,62
25, 38-44
36,41-43,47,49,89, 135-137, 139-141, 143, 145-147, 150, 152-154,
156, 166, 169-170, 172-173, 180, 189-194, 196-197,200
25, 36, 39, 44, 47, 55, 89
64,66,68,89,180
(continued)
3-15
-------
INDEX BY KEY WORD (Continued)
Keyword
Page
Data Analysis (Continued)
Modeling 25,40,46-47,49, 51, 55.62, 77,85,91,93,95-96,98-99, 111. 120,
123-124, 126, 142-143, 147, 150, 152, 154, 172
Single Factor 25,47,49
Statistical Analyses 167
Trends Analyses 55,172
Processes
Acidification
Chronic 5-6, 8-12, 14-21, 25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 46-47, 49. 55, 57, 59, 62, 64, 66,
89, 115,129, 131,152,161, 163-164, 167. 171, 182
Episodic 13,22,62,90, 103-104, 106, 108, 110-111, 115, 125-130, 152
Neutral Salt 90,142
Organic 5-6,8, 19,21,55,57,59,61,71,86,90, 142, 182
Aluminum
Mobilization 55, 57, 59, 71, 76, 84, 90, 197, 200
Solubility 84
Speciation 10,90,176
Base Cation
Cation Exchange 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 46, 49, 62, 64, 66, 68, 81, 83, 98-99
Mineral Weathering 11, 25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 38,42, 51, 55, 57, 59, 64, 66, 68, 71, 81-83,
103-104,150
Mobilization 62,84
Supply 25-26,37-38,42,46,49,51,55,57,59,62,71,81-84, 150, 156
Biological
Biological Response 115,120-131, 149, 151-152
Community Response 43,55,64,66,69,90. 115, 119, 122, 161, 163, 195
Buffering
Within-lake ANC 18-21, 55, 64, 66,68,161,163
Generation
Deacidification 77,79,95-96,98-99, 152, 154, 156, 161, 163-164, 167
Hydrologic 18-22, 25, 38.40, 42, 55, 57, 59, 62, 64, 66, 71, 85,89. 99. 103-104.
106,108,110
(continued)
3-16
-------
INDEX BY KEY WORD (Continued)
Key Word
Page
Indirect Effects
Mercury
Bioaccumulation
Cycling
Mobilization
Tissue Accumulation
Metals
Bioaccumulation
Mobilization
Neutral Salt
(see Acidification)
Nitrogen
Cycling
Denitrification
Fixation
Nitrate Leaching
Nitrification
Saturation
Uptake
Nutrient Cycling
Organics (see Acidification)
Chelation
Cycling
Primary Productivity
Sulfur
Adsorption
Cycling
Desorption
Oxidation
Reduction
Retention
Trophic Interactions
64,66
185, 193-197, 199
185, 193-195, 197, 199
185, 191,193-197, 199
64,66
185, 193-194
175,185-194,197,200
55,57,59,71,87-89
71,87-89
71,89
89
71,87-89
87,89
89
64,66
71,86,197,199-200
86
64,66
25-26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36-38, 42,46-47, 51,55, 57, 59, 62, 71 -72, 74-79,
98-99,104, 150, 156
36,55,57,59,71-72,74,77,79
55,57,59,62,71-72,76-79,98-99, 104, 156
72,
36, 43-44, 64, 66, 68, 72
39, 44, 46-47, 63
64,66
AU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 548-158/67089
3-17
------- |