United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
 Environmental Monitoring
 Systems Laboratory
 Las Vegas NV 89193-3478
Research and Development
EPA/600/S8-87/020 Jan. 1988
Project Summary
Analytical  Methods Manual for the
 Direct/Delayed  Response  Project
Soil Survey

K. A. Cappo, L. J. Blume, G. A. Raab, J. K. Bartz, and J. L. Engels
  The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, in conjunction with the National
Acid Precipitation Assessment Program,
has designed and  implemented a re-
search program to predict the long-
term  response of watersheds and
surface waters in the United States to
acidic deposition. On the basis of this
research, each watershed  system
studied will be classified according to
the time scale in which it will reach an
acidic steady state, assuming current
levels of acidic deposition.
  The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency requires that data collection
activities be based on a program which
ensures that the resulting data are of
known quality and  are suitable for the
purpose for which they are intended. In
addition,  it is necessary that the data
obtained be consistent and comparable
throughout the survey. For these rea-
sons, the same detailed analytical
methodology must  be available to and
must be used by all analysts participat-
ing in the study.
  The manual specifies the analytical
methods  and internal quality control
used to process and analyze samples
for the Direct/Delayed Response Pro-
ject Soil Survey. This document was
submitted in partial fulfillment of con-
tract number 68-03-3249 by Lockheed
Engineering and Management Services
Company, Inc. under sponsorship of
the U.S.  Environmental Protection
Agency.  Work on this document
spanned a period from February  1985
to March 1987.
  This Project Summary was developed
by ERA'S Environmental  Monitoring
Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV, to
announce key findings of the research
project that Is fully documented In a
separate report of the same title (see
Project Report ordering Information at
back).

Introduction
  The U.S.  Environmental  Protection
Agency (EPA), in conjunction with the
National Acid Precipitation Assessment
Program (NAPAP),  has designed and
implemented a research program to pre-
dict the long-term response of watersheds
and surface waters in the United States
to acidic deposition. On the basis of this
research, each watershed system studied
will be classified according to the time
scale in  which it will reach an  acidic
steady state, assuming current levels of
acidic deposition.
  As an element of NAPAP, the National
Surface Water Survey (NSWS) was initi-
ated to evaluate the water chemistry of
lakes and streams, to determine the status
of fisheries and other biotic resources,
and to select regionally representative
surface waters for a long-term monitoring
program that will study future changes in
aquatic resources.  Subsequently,  the
Direct/Delayed Response Project (DDRP)
was designed as the soil study comple-
ment  to NSWS. DDRP,  like NSWS,
focuses on areas of the United States
that have been identified as potentially
sensitive to surface-water acidification.
  Specific goals of the DDRP soil survey
are (1) to define physical, chemical, and
mineralogical  characteristics of the soils
and to define other watershed charact-
eristics across these regions, (2) to assess

-------
    the buffering  capacity of the soil."
    Two saturating solutions are used:
    buffered  ammonium  acetate
    (NH4OAc) solution to measure total
    CEC and neutral ammonium chloride
    (NH4CI) solution to measure effective
    CEC. Analysis is by titration or by
    flow injection analysis.
  • Exchangeable Basic Cations — The
    exchangeable basic cations, CA2+,
    Mg2+, 1C, and Na+ extracted during
    the CEC determinations, are deter-
    mined by atomic absorption  (AA) or
    by inductively coupled plasma (ICP).
    Measurement of the  level  of ex-
    changeable basic cations indicates
    the base saturation of the soil.
  • Exchangeable Acidity — Exchange-
    able  acidity  is a  measure  of the
    exchangeable cations that are not
    part  of the  base saturation. Two
    methods of analysis are used. One
    employs a buffered BaCI2-TEA ex-
    traction; the other, a  neutral 1.0 N
    KCI  extraction. The  BaCI2-TEA
    method  is a back-titration method
    which indicates total  exchangeable
    acidity. The KCI method is a direct
    titration method which estimates ef-
    fective  exchangeable acidity.  KCI-
    extractable Al is determined by AA
    or by ICP.                         {

Chemical Parameters
  • Lime and  Aluminum  Potential —
    Lime potential is used in place of
    base saturation as an input for cer-
    tain models. Lime potential is defined
    as [pH-1 /2 pCa]. Another character-
    istic important to watershed model-
    ing  is the  relationship of pH to
    solution  AI3+ levels. This is defined
    as aluminum potential (KA) which is
    equal to [3pH-pAI]. This method in-
    volves extracting soil wjth 0.002 M
    CaCI2 and determining Ca2+ and AI3+
    in the extract. The cations,  Na+, K+
    and Mg2+, and  exchangeable Fe3+
    are also determined in this extract
    for comparison to cation concentra-
    tions in other extracts.
  • Extractable Iron and Aluminum —
    Iron and aluminum oxides are highly
    correlated to sulfate adsorption and
    are important in standard soil char-
    acterization.  Extractable Fe  and Al
    are determined  by  AA or by ICP in
    three different extracts. Each extract
    yields an estimate of a specific Al or
    Fe  fraction. The three fractions of
    extractable iron and  aluminum in-
    clude those  extracted  by:  sodium
    pyrophosphate which  estimates I
    organic Fe and Al, ammonium oxalate
the variability of these characteristics,
and  (3) to determine  which  of  these
characteristics are most strongly related
to surface-water chemistry. Additional
DDRP goals are (4) to estimate the relative
importance of key watershed processes
in controlling surface-water  chemistry
across the regions of concern, and (5) to
classify the sample of watersheds as
direct  response,  delayed  response,  or
capacity protected (to the degree that is
scientifically defensible) and to extrapolate
the results from the sample of watershed
to the regions of concern.
  The  three classes of  watersheds are
defined as follows:
  •  Direct response systems — Water-
     sheds in which  surface waters are
     presently acidic (i.e., alkalinity < O
     ^ieq/L) or will become acidic within
     3 to 4 mean water residence times
     (i.e., within 10 years). A mean water
     residence time is the average time
     period required  to replenish  totally
     the water contained in a lake.
  •  Delayed response systems — Water-
     sheds in which  surface waters will
     become acidic in the time frame of a
     few mean residence times to several
     decades (i.e., 10 to 100 years).
  •  Capacity Protected Systems  —
     Watersheds in which surface waters
     will not become acidic for centuries
     to millennia.
  The proposed methods of data analysis
fall into three  levels of complexity: (1)
system description, (2)  single-factor
response time estimates, and (3) dynamic
systems modeling. Each level of analysis
involves decision criteria that are used to
classify watersheds  as  direct response,
delayed response, or capacity protected.
After the representative watersheds are
classified, the results will be extrapolated
to classify the response time  of each
watershed in a given region. This manual
defines  the physical,  chemical, and
mineralogical procedures used to analyze
the soils from these watersheds.


Procedures
   The manual  describes the analytical
methods and quality assurance/quality
control procedures utilized during the col-
lection, preparation,  and analysis of soil
samples. Included are sections on sample
handling and shipping,  labware cleanli-
ness standards, calibration  procedures,
and quality control samples
   The detailed procedures for physical
and chemical parameters are  described
in 17  separate sections of the manual,
according to the analysis being conducted.
Each section addresses the following:
  • Scope and Application
  • Summary of Method
  • Interferences
  • Safety
  • Apparatus and Equipment
  • Reagents and Consumable Materials
  • Sample Collection, Preservation,
    and Storage
  • Calibration and Standardization
  • Quality Control
  • Procedure
  • Calculations
  • Precision and Accuracy
  • References
  The physical, chemical, and mineralogi-
cal procedures presented in the manual
are briefly summarized below:

Physical Parameters
  • Moisture Content — A standard soil
    testing method is used to determine
    soil moisture  content  on a dray
    weight basis. Air-dry soil is weighed,
    dried in  an oven, then  reweighed.
    The moisture content is then used to
    place all measurements on an over-
    dry basis.
  • Particle Size — Soil textural analysis
    is  routinely determined for soil
    characterization and  classification
    purposes. Rock fragments greater
    than 20 mm are determined by field
    sieving and weighing.  Rock frag-
    ments 2 to 20 mm are determined at
    the preparation  laboratory, and  soil
    particles less than 2 mm are deter-
    mined at the analytical laboratory by
    the standard sieve/pipet method.
  • Specific  Surface — A  gravimetric
    method that employs saturation with
    ethylene glycol monoethyl  ether
    (EGME) is used to measure specific
    surface.  Specific surface is highly
    correlated to cation exchange capac-
    ity, sulfate adsorption,  analyte  ad-
    sorption/desorption, and the type of
    clay minerals.

    Physical/Chemical
    Parameters
  • pH — pH is an indication of free
    hydrogen ion activity. pH measure-
    ments are determined in three soil
    suspensions: deionized  water, 0.01
    M CaCI2, and 0.002 M CaCI2.
  • Cation Exchange Capacity — Cation
    exchange capacity (CEC) is a standard
    soil characterization parameter. CEC
    indicates the ability of a soil to adsorb
    cations, especially the exchangeable
    basic cations,  Ca2+, Mg2+, K+,  and
    Na+.  CEC is highly correlated with

-------
    which measures organic Fe and Al
    plus sequioxides, and citrate-dithio-
    nite which indicates nonsilicate Fe
    and Al. Analysis is performed by AA
    or by ICP.
  • Extractable Sulfate and Nitrate —
    The amount  of extractable sulfate
    and nitrate indicates the sulfate and
    nitrate saturation of the anion ex-
    change sites. Sulfate is determined
    in two different extracts: deionized
    water and  500  mg P/L  sodium
    phosphate. Nitrate is determined only
    in  the deionized  water extract.
    Analysis is by ion chromatography.
  • Sulfate Adsorption Isotherms — The
    ability of soil to adsorb sulfate is
    related to soil buffering capacity.
    Isotherms are developed by placing
    soil samples  in six magnesium sul-
    fate solutions of different concentra-
    tions: 0, 2, 4, 8,16,  and 32 mg S/L
    Subsequently the amount of sulfate
    remaining in solution after contact
    with  the  soil is determined.  Sub-
    traction yields the amount of sulfate
    adsorbed by the soil. These isotherms
    represent  the  maximum  sulfate
    adsorption capacity of the soil under
    laboratory conditions.
  • Total Carbon and Total Nitrogen —
    These two parameters are closely
    related to soil organic matter type
    and quantity. The method of analysis
    is rapid oxidation followed by thermal
    conductivity detection  using an
    automated CHN analyzer.
  • Inorganic Carbon — Inorganic carbon
    is quantified because of the inherent
    ability of carbonates to buffer acidic
    input. In soils  with a water pH
    greater than or equal to 6.0, car-
    bonates  are  determined by coulo-
    metric detection of evolved CO2 after
    decomposition with  a strong acid.
  • Total Sulfur — Total sulfur  is mea-
    sured to  inventory existing sulfur
    levels in  order  to  monitor future
    input of anthropogenic sulfur. An
    automated method involving sample
    combustion  followed  by infrared
    detection or  titration  of  evolved
    sulfur dioxide is specified.

Mlneraloglcal Parameters
  • Semiquantitative X-Ray Diffraction
    — The mineral content is quantified
    by X-rating the samples selected for
    mineralogical study. To determine
    the  mineral  content, the samples
    are  X-rayed  and  are compared
    against mineral  standards for
    quantification. Physical separations
    of the <0.002-mm fraction and the
    2-mm  to  0.002-mm fractions  are
    required.
  • X-ray Fluorescence — This method
    gives the  general chemistry of the
    bulk sample and of the clay fraction.
    The samples are pulverized, pressed
    into pellets, and analyzed. These data
    combined with data from X-ray dif-
    fraction identify the distribution of
    the elements.
  • Scanning  Electron  Microscopy/
    Energy Dispersive XRF— With these
    two  methods,  topographic features
    are examined, and local  chemistry
    of discrete  particles  is  analyzed.
    These results give information con-
    cerning type and degree of mineral
    weathering.


Conclusion
  The Analytical Methods Manual will be
of interest to those involved in environ-
mental  research  and analysis.  The
methods are innovative in their u«|jzation
of state-of-the-art  instrumentation  and
procedures,  including  the  Centurion
mechanical extractor, coulometric tech-
niques, and quantitative clay mineralogy.
The application of QA/QC criteria is more
extensive than in other soils investiga-
tions of this magnitude.
  This manual is a key document in a
series of reports concerning various facets
of the DDRP soil survey. Other recom-
mended  DDRP documents  include  the
following:
  • Direct/Delayed Response Project:
    Quality Assurance Plan for  Soil
    Sampling, Preparation, and Analysis
    by Bartz, Drouse, Papp, Cappo, Raab,
    Blume, Stapanian,  Garner,  and
    Coffey(1987).
  • Direct/Delayed Response Project:
    Field Operations and Quality Assur-
    ance Report for Soil Sampling and
    Preparation in the  Northeastern
    United States, Volume I: Sampling
    (in preparation).
  • Direct/Delayed Response Project:
    Field Operations and Quality Assur-
    ance Report for Soil Sampling and
    Preparation in the Southern Blue
    Ridge Province of the United States,
    Volume  II:  Preparation  (in pre-
    paration).
  • Direct/Delayed Response  Project:
    Quality Assurance Report for Physical
    and Chemical Analyses of Soils from
    the Northeastern United  States (in
    preparation).
  • Direct/Delayed Response  Project:
    Quality Assurance Report for Miner-
   alogy of Soils from the Northeastern
   United States (in preparation).
• Direct/Delayed Response Project:
   Field Operations and Quality Assur-
   ance Report for Soil Sampling and
   Preparation in the Southern  Blue
   Ridge Province of the United States,
   Volume I: Sampling (in preparation).
• Direct/Delayed Response Project:
   Field Operations and Quality Assur-
   ance Report for Soil Sampling and
   Preparation in the Southern  Blue
   Ridge Province of the United States,
   Volume II: Preparation  (in  pre-
   paration).
• Direct/Delayed Response Project:
   Quality Assurance Report for Physical
   and Chemical Analyses of Soils from
   the Southern Blue Ridge Province of
   the United States (in preparation).
• Direct/Delayed Response Project:
   Quality Assurance Report for Miner-
   alogy of Soils from the Southern
   Blue Ridge  Province of the United
   States (in preparation).

-------
     The EPA author, L. J. Blume (a/so the EPA Project Officer, see below) is with
       Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478;
       and K. A. Cappo, G. A. Raab, J. K. Bartz, and J. L. Engels are with Lockheed
       Engineering and Management Services Company, Inc., Las Vegas, NV 89119.
     The complete report, entitled "Analytical Methods Manual for  the Direct/
       Delayed Response Project Soil Survey," (Order No. PB 87-227 468/AS; Cost:
       $30.95, subject to change) will be available only from:
            National Technical Information Service
            5285 Port Royal Road
            Springfield. VA 22161
             Telephone: 703-487-4650
     The EPA Officer can be contacted at:
            Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
            Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
       --,   l'3.GFi


{   F;:3i7'88   i'-r-ir.  |

       rrt—> ' —M r t ir TI ,
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300

EPA/600/S8-87/020
             0000329   PS
             U  S  EHW*  PROTECTION »66«CT

-------