20.11.2014 Views

field determination of chloride in salt impacted soils – just add ... - IPEC

field determination of chloride in salt impacted soils – just add ... - IPEC

field determination of chloride in salt impacted soils – just add ... - IPEC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

FIELD DETERMINATION OF CHLORIDE IN<br />

SALT IMPACTED SOILS – JUST ADD WATER!<br />

David G. Boyer, P.G., Safety and Environmental Solutions, Inc., Hobbs, New Mexico<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

The standard method for <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>soils</strong> has been modified for<br />

quick <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>in</strong> the <strong>field</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g commercially available <strong>chloride</strong> test<br />

strips <strong>in</strong>stead <strong>of</strong> laboratory chemicals. The method utilizes a portable scale to obta<strong>in</strong> a<br />

weighted sample <strong>of</strong> dry material that is placed <strong>in</strong> a 250 mL plastic bottle. Distilled water<br />

is <strong>add</strong>ed to the bottle and it is shaken vigorously for several m<strong>in</strong>utes. The mixture is<br />

allowed to settle for a few m<strong>in</strong>utes to reduce turbidity and decanted <strong>in</strong>to a funnel l<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

with a piece <strong>of</strong> filter paper. The filtered liquid is collected <strong>in</strong> a small jar or 40 mL vial<br />

that holds the <strong>chloride</strong> test strip. The strip requires only a few drops <strong>of</strong> the filtrate, which<br />

is absorbed by capillary action. A quick calculation converts the concentration shown on<br />

the strip to mg/Kg (ppm). The entire test takes less than ten m<strong>in</strong>utes and results are<br />

comparable with laboratory results. Field and laboratory results for a number <strong>of</strong> sites <strong>in</strong><br />

the vic<strong>in</strong>ity <strong>of</strong> Lov<strong>in</strong>gton, New Mexico, are presented.<br />

1


INTRODUCTION<br />

Water produced concurrent with the extraction <strong>of</strong> crude oil or natural gas<br />

commonly conta<strong>in</strong>s chemical constituents with concentrations many times those found <strong>in</strong><br />

fresh water or even sea water. When <strong>in</strong>troduced to the surface environment through<br />

planned or unplanned releases produced water will adversely affect or destroy surface<br />

vegetation and can potentially contam<strong>in</strong>ate fresh groundwater supplies.<br />

In the past, common disposal <strong>of</strong> produced water was by placement <strong>in</strong> unl<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

surface impoundments or pits. For example, <strong>in</strong> rural Lea County New Mexico south <strong>of</strong><br />

Hobbs, approximately 29 million barrels <strong>of</strong> br<strong>in</strong>e were produced <strong>in</strong> 1955 with most<br />

disposal to unl<strong>in</strong>ed pits (1). Beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the 1950’s, the state regulatory agency, the Oil<br />

Conservation Division, <strong>in</strong>stituted restrictions on disposal to unl<strong>in</strong>ed pits <strong>in</strong> southeastern<br />

New Mexico and today, with some exceptions, such disposal is prohibited statewide.<br />

Although surface disposal is generally prohibited, produced water still can<br />

impact the environment through accidental releases from leaks or breaks <strong>in</strong> flowl<strong>in</strong>es,<br />

tank failure, or from transportation accidents.<br />

Whether the concern is environmental effects from old disposal pits or from<br />

accidental releases, it is important to del<strong>in</strong>eate the area affected to assess impacts to<br />

surface resources and the potential for groundwater contam<strong>in</strong>ation. Follow<strong>in</strong>g such<br />

evaluation, the <strong>in</strong>formation collected is used as a basis for decision mak<strong>in</strong>g for physical<br />

clean up or to allow risk-based closure <strong>of</strong> the pit or spill location.<br />

Aside from obvious visible surface impacts such as dead vegetation or <strong>salt</strong><br />

deposits, del<strong>in</strong>eation <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> impacts from produced water can be difficult without<br />

laboratory analytical test<strong>in</strong>g. Some test kits are available that use reagent chemicals such<br />

as silver nitrate and require mix<strong>in</strong>g and titration to determ<strong>in</strong>e <strong>chloride</strong> concentration <strong>in</strong><br />

the solution. Such kits are difficult to use <strong>in</strong> the <strong>field</strong> for <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>in</strong> water,<br />

let alone soil.<br />

Recently, the Hach® Company has produced two <strong>chloride</strong> test strips (Quantab®<br />

High and Low Range) that allow test<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the <strong>chloride</strong> concentration <strong>in</strong> water by merely<br />

dipp<strong>in</strong>g a strip <strong>in</strong> water and wait<strong>in</strong>g a few m<strong>in</strong>utes for capillary action to saturate it.<br />

Follow<strong>in</strong>g saturation, the strip is read and the correspond<strong>in</strong>g <strong>chloride</strong> concentration is<br />

found us<strong>in</strong>g a chart pr<strong>in</strong>ted on the bottle. The method has been adapted to enable<br />

environmental personnel to quickly and <strong>in</strong>expensively determ<strong>in</strong>e <strong>chloride</strong> concentration<br />

<strong>in</strong> soil <strong>in</strong> the <strong>field</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g readily available pieces <strong>of</strong> equipment.<br />

2


PROCEDURE DESCRIPTION<br />

A generalized description <strong>of</strong> the procedure is provided <strong>in</strong> this section. A detailed<br />

list <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structions, suitable for provid<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>field</strong> technicians, is provided <strong>in</strong> the Appendix<br />

at the end <strong>of</strong> this paper.<br />

One method by which soluble <strong>salt</strong>s <strong>in</strong> <strong>soils</strong> such as <strong>chloride</strong> can be determ<strong>in</strong>ed or<br />

estimated is from measurements made on aqueous extracts <strong>of</strong> soil samples (2). Other<br />

methods may be more useful for <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong> soil sal<strong>in</strong>ity and its relation to <strong>field</strong> soil<br />

water content necessary for crop growth, but are not relevant <strong>in</strong> this <strong>in</strong>stance. Aqueous<br />

extracts on the order <strong>of</strong> 1:4 or 1:5 weight to volume commonly are used by analytical<br />

laboratories for <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>in</strong> soil. The procedure described <strong>in</strong> this paper uses<br />

a 1:4 extract.<br />

Necessary Equipment<br />

A m<strong>in</strong>imum <strong>of</strong> special equipment is needed to perform the <strong>field</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>chloride</strong>. A sta<strong>in</strong>less steel spoon and mix<strong>in</strong>g bowl are commonly used <strong>in</strong> collect<strong>in</strong>g soil<br />

samples. Additional items are a portable battery operated scale (0 to 200 gram range),<br />

disposable weigh<strong>in</strong>g dishes, a 250 mL wide mouth plastic bottle, a small graduated<br />

cyl<strong>in</strong>der, a plastic funnel, filter paper, a small jar or 40 mL vials, distilled water and the<br />

Hach Quantabs®. The Quantabs come <strong>in</strong> high and low range strips with <strong>chloride</strong><br />

concentration rang<strong>in</strong>g from 300 to 6000 ppm and 30 to 600 ppm, respectively. All<br />

reusable equipment should be clean before use; the funnel and small jar or 40 mL vials<br />

must be completely dry. The equipment is carried <strong>in</strong> a foam-l<strong>in</strong>ed hard plastic case (e.g. a<br />

Pelican Case®) for protection aga<strong>in</strong>st vibration and moisture.<br />

Sample Preparation<br />

Samples are commonly collected from the soil surface or from boreholes drilled<br />

with a hollow stem auger equipped with a split-spoon or core barrel sampler. The sample<br />

is placed <strong>in</strong> a mix<strong>in</strong>g bowl and organic matter such as roots discarded. Rock and gravel<br />

larger than small pebbles are commonly removed. Homogenize the sample by thoroughly<br />

mix<strong>in</strong>g it prior to weigh<strong>in</strong>g or placement <strong>in</strong> a sample jar (if laboratory analysis is to be<br />

performed). To the extent possible the material placed <strong>in</strong> a sample jar for laboratory<br />

analysis should be as much like the sample selected for <strong>field</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong>. In <strong>add</strong>ition<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ate with the analytical laboratory to ascerta<strong>in</strong> if they have a standard protocol for<br />

selection <strong>of</strong> small volume samples (e.g. a maximum size <strong>of</strong> pebbles <strong>in</strong> the sample).<br />

A tared weigh<strong>in</strong>g dish is placed on the scale and 25 grams <strong>of</strong> the sample is<br />

weighed and then placed <strong>in</strong> the plastic bottle. 100 mL <strong>of</strong> water is <strong>add</strong>ed and the mixture<br />

shaken for one m<strong>in</strong>ute or longer. Allow the sample mixture to settle for a short time<br />

period so that heavy particles drop out. Fold a piece <strong>of</strong> filter paper <strong>in</strong>to quarters and place<br />

<strong>in</strong> the funnel. Place the funnel <strong>in</strong> the small jar or 40-mL vial together with a Quantab®<br />

strip. Decant the sample <strong>in</strong>to the folded filter paper and allow approximately ½ <strong>in</strong>ch <strong>of</strong><br />

clear filtrate to accumulate <strong>in</strong> the vial before remov<strong>in</strong>g the funnel. Turbid solutions <strong>in</strong> the<br />

vial will clog the capillary pores and cause very slow or <strong>in</strong>complete reactions.<br />

3


Chloride Determ<strong>in</strong>ation<br />

When a Quantab® strip is placed <strong>in</strong> an aqueous solution, fluid rises up the strip<br />

by capillary action until the strip is completely saturated. The strip conta<strong>in</strong>s silver ions,<br />

which comb<strong>in</strong>e with <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>in</strong> the sample to form a white column <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong>. A<br />

moisture sensitive yellow str<strong>in</strong>g across the top <strong>of</strong> the tab turns blue-black when saturated<br />

and <strong>in</strong>dicates completion <strong>of</strong> capillary action and the reaction. The length <strong>of</strong> the white<br />

silver <strong>chloride</strong> column on the strip is proportional to the <strong>chloride</strong> concentration.<br />

Follow<strong>in</strong>g saturation, the value on the tab is read and the chart on the back <strong>of</strong> the<br />

appropriate bottle used to get the <strong>chloride</strong> value for the strip. Each Quantab® lot is<br />

calibrated <strong>in</strong>dependently; the <strong>chloride</strong> concentration chart on the bottle from which the<br />

strip was removed is used as values may differ from those <strong>of</strong> a previous bottle. Multiply<br />

the chart value by four (4) to get the <strong>chloride</strong> concentration <strong>in</strong> soil <strong>in</strong> ppm (mg/Kg).<br />

Depend<strong>in</strong>g on the time taken to shake the sample, decant and filter the liquid, and the<br />

turbidity <strong>of</strong> the filtrate, the time required to conduct a s<strong>in</strong>gle test is usually from five to<br />

ten m<strong>in</strong>utes.<br />

COMPARISON WITH LABORATORY RESULTS<br />

The <strong>field</strong> results are compared with laboratory results for four sites located <strong>in</strong> the<br />

vic<strong>in</strong>ity <strong>of</strong> Lov<strong>in</strong>gton, New Mexico (Tables 1 through 4). The geologic sett<strong>in</strong>g is the<br />

Tertiary Ogallala formation which is chiefly a calcareous, unconsolidated sand but with<br />

some zones <strong>of</strong> sandstone <strong>of</strong> vary<strong>in</strong>g hardness (1). In the upper ten to twenty feet <strong>in</strong> the<br />

study areas the formation is capped by a layer <strong>of</strong> caliche <strong>of</strong> vary<strong>in</strong>g thickness and density.<br />

The borehole splitspoon/core barrel samples taken near the surface usually are<br />

quite rocky and prior to test<strong>in</strong>g the samples must be prepared as described above to<br />

remove pieces <strong>of</strong> caliche and sandstone rock as big a 3-<strong>in</strong>. <strong>in</strong> diameter. Notwithstand<strong>in</strong>g<br />

sample preparation problems, the laboratory results show good agreement with the <strong>field</strong><br />

tests.<br />

Table 5 presents the results <strong>of</strong> the comparison for the 62 samples tested.<br />

Twenty-three samples (37 percent) <strong>of</strong> the <strong>field</strong> results were with<strong>in</strong> 0 to 10 percent <strong>of</strong> the<br />

laboratory results and another 14 samples (23 percent) were between 11 and 20 percent.<br />

A total <strong>of</strong> 37 <strong>field</strong> samples (60 percent) were with<strong>in</strong> 20 percent <strong>of</strong> the laboratory value.<br />

Only 4 <strong>field</strong> samples (6 percent) exhibited greater than 50 percent difference from the<br />

laboratory result. The highest percent difference between <strong>field</strong> and laboratory test results<br />

was 63 percent.<br />

Unlike water samples, soil samples are rarely homogenous with vary<strong>in</strong>g particle<br />

size and with soluble constituent concentrations dependent on the <strong>in</strong>itial soil water<br />

concentration, the pathway followed <strong>in</strong> the porous medium, and the amount <strong>of</strong> sorption<br />

on the soil particles. Given this <strong>in</strong>nate variability, which exists even with<strong>in</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle soil<br />

sample, agreement between <strong>field</strong> and laboratory results is consistent and certa<strong>in</strong>ly<br />

acceptable for purposes <strong>of</strong> <strong>field</strong> del<strong>in</strong>eation <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> impacts from the types <strong>of</strong> releases<br />

described <strong>in</strong> this paper.<br />

4


COST CONSIDERATIONS<br />

The cost per <strong>chloride</strong> test is m<strong>in</strong>imal. A bottle <strong>of</strong> 40 Quantabs® available from<br />

the Hach Company is currently priced at $32; therefore, each strip costs $0.80. The scale<br />

used to weigh the soil samples is an Ohaus model CS200 available from<br />

www.scalesonl<strong>in</strong>e.com at a cost <strong>of</strong> $55. The other test equipment is available from<br />

laboratory supply companies at m<strong>in</strong>imal cost.<br />

SUMMARY<br />

A quick and <strong>in</strong>expensive test for <strong>field</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>salt</strong> <strong>impacted</strong><br />

<strong>soils</strong> has been developed and has proven to be very useful <strong>in</strong> the del<strong>in</strong>eation <strong>of</strong> produced<br />

water releases from oil and gas operations. The test requires a m<strong>in</strong>imum <strong>of</strong> equipment to<br />

perform and does not require the use <strong>of</strong> chemicals <strong>in</strong> the <strong>field</strong>, only distilled water. The<br />

test can be completed with<strong>in</strong> five to ten m<strong>in</strong>utes depend<strong>in</strong>g on the turbidity <strong>of</strong> the<br />

aqueous extract and the time required for settl<strong>in</strong>g and filter<strong>in</strong>g the sample. Results from<br />

the test are quite comparable with results from laboratory tests performed on the same<br />

sample. Field results for sixty percent <strong>of</strong> the samples exam<strong>in</strong>ed were with<strong>in</strong> twenty<br />

percent <strong>of</strong> the laboratory results. Although the cost per test is very <strong>in</strong>expensive, the real<br />

value <strong>of</strong> the test is the time saved on site by be<strong>in</strong>g able to directly del<strong>in</strong>eate horizontal<br />

and vertical extent <strong>of</strong> a release without the <strong>add</strong>ed expense <strong>of</strong> hav<strong>in</strong>g outside contractors<br />

return to a site for <strong>add</strong>itional <strong>in</strong>vestigation.<br />

REFERENCES CITED<br />

1. Nicholson, A., Jr. and Clebsch, A. Jr., Geology and Ground-Water Conditions <strong>in</strong><br />

Southern Lea County, New Mexico, Ground-Water Report 6, State Bureau <strong>of</strong><br />

M<strong>in</strong>es and M<strong>in</strong>eral Resources, New Mexico Institute <strong>of</strong> M<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and Technology,<br />

Socorro, New Mexico (1961).<br />

2. Rhoades, J.D., “Soluble Salts,” <strong>in</strong> Methods <strong>of</strong> Soil Analysis, Part 2. Chemical<br />

and Microbiological Properties, Chapter 10, American Society <strong>of</strong> Agronomy −<br />

Soil Science Society <strong>of</strong> America Agronomy Monograph no. 9, Madison,<br />

Wiscons<strong>in</strong> (2 nd Edition, 1982).<br />

3. Franson, M. H. (editor), Standard Methods for the Exam<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> Water and<br />

Wastewater, Seventeenth Edition, American Public Health Association,<br />

Wash<strong>in</strong>gton, DC (1989).<br />

5


Table 1. Site 1, <strong>salt</strong> water l<strong>in</strong>e leak, northeast <strong>of</strong> Lov<strong>in</strong>gton, NM, north <strong>of</strong> US Hwy 82<br />

Sample Location<br />

Depth<br />

(ft.)<br />

Strip Range<br />

(high or<br />

low)<br />

Field<br />

Test<br />

(ppm)<br />

Laboratory<br />

Analysis<br />

(mg/Kg)<br />

Percent<br />

Difference from<br />

Lab<br />

BH-1 5 H 5,144 8,397 -38.7<br />

BH-1 10 H 6,156 5,918 4.0<br />

BH-1 15 H 3,856 3,679 4.8<br />

BH-1R 18 H 5,632 6,958 -19.1<br />

BH-1R (duplicate) 18 H 6,156 6,958 -11.5<br />

BH-1R 22-24 L 372 496 -25.0<br />

BH-2 5 H 2,800 3,759 -25.5<br />

BH-2 10 L 1,816 2,719 -33.2<br />

BH-2 15 L


Table 3. Site 3, leaky concrete-l<strong>in</strong>ed hold<strong>in</strong>g pond at <strong>salt</strong> water disposal facility,<br />

northeast <strong>of</strong> Lov<strong>in</strong>gton, NM, south <strong>of</strong> US Hwy 82.<br />

Sample<br />

Location<br />

Depth (ft.)<br />

Strip Range<br />

(high or low)<br />

Field Test<br />

(ppm)<br />

Laboratory<br />

Analysis<br />

(mg/Kg)<br />

Percent<br />

Difference<br />

from Lab<br />

BH-1 5 L 680 976 -30.3<br />

BH-1 10 L 1,384 1,456 -4.9<br />

BH-1 15 L 636 736 -13.6<br />

BH-1 20 L 212 528 -59.8<br />

BH-2 10 L 280 576 -51.4<br />

BH-2 15 L 436 720 -39.4<br />

BH-2 20 L 960 1,136 -15.5<br />

BH-2 25 L 1,200 2,143 -44.0<br />

BH-2 30 L 1,956 2,399 -18.5<br />

BH-2 35 H 3,292 3,538 -7.0<br />

BH-2 40 H 2,326 2,799 -16.9<br />

BH-2 45 H 2,108 2,623 -19.6<br />

BH-3 15 L 1,592 976 63.1<br />

BH-3 20 L 1,036 1,120 -7.5<br />

BH-3 25 L 528 576 -8.3<br />

BH-3 30 L 280 400 -30.0<br />

BH-3 35 L 692 544 27.2<br />

BH-3 40 L 392 368 6.5<br />

BH-3 45 L 280 240 16.7<br />

Table note: Chloride analysis us<strong>in</strong>g Standard Methods 4500-Cl - B.<br />

7


Table 4. Site 4, tank overflows at <strong>salt</strong> water disposal facility, southeast <strong>of</strong> Lov<strong>in</strong>gton,<br />

NM, west <strong>of</strong> NM Hwy 18.<br />

Sample<br />

Location<br />

Depth (ft.)<br />

Strip Range<br />

(high or low)<br />

Field Test<br />

(ppm)<br />

Laboratory<br />

Analysis<br />

(mg/Kg)<br />

Percent<br />

Difference<br />

from Lab<br />

BH-1 17-18 H 2,208 1,504 46.8<br />

BH-1 24-25 H 1,944 1,344 44.6<br />

BH-1 30 L 492 592 -16.9<br />

BH-1 35 L 204 272 -25.0<br />

BH-2 15 H 1,052 912 15.4<br />

BH-2 19-20 L 824 928 -11.2<br />

BH-2 24-25 L 368 464 -20.7<br />

BH-2 30 L 148 208 -28.8<br />

BH-3 10 L 492 496 -0.8<br />

BH-3 15 L 700 720 -2.8<br />

BH-3 20 L 540 464 16.4<br />

BH-3 25 L 492 544 -9.6<br />

BH-3 30 L 328 496 -33.9<br />

BH-3 35 L 588 640 -8.1<br />

BH-3 39-40 L 1,620 1,664 -2.6<br />

BH-3 45 L 1,620 1,615 0.3<br />

BH-3 55 L 1,620 1,711 -5.3<br />

BH-3 60 L 2,020 1,951 3.5<br />

Table note: Chloride analysis us<strong>in</strong>g Standard Methods 4500-Cl - B.<br />

Table 5. Summary table show<strong>in</strong>g relationship <strong>of</strong> <strong>field</strong> sample results to laboratory<br />

analyses.<br />

Percent Difference from Laboratory Result (±), n=62<br />

0-10% 11-20% 21-30% 31-40% 41-50% >50%<br />

23 14 11 5 5 4<br />

37% 23% 18% 8% 8% 6%<br />

8


Figure 1. Equipment setup for <strong>field</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong>s <strong>in</strong> <strong>soils</strong>.<br />

Figure 2. Soil preparation and weigh<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> soil sample for <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong>.<br />

9


Figure 3. Hach® Quantab® test strips used for <strong>field</strong> <strong>determ<strong>in</strong>ation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>soils</strong>.<br />

Figure 4. Hach® Quantab® <strong>chloride</strong> test strip at completion <strong>of</strong> <strong>chloride</strong> <strong>field</strong> test.<br />

10


APPENDIX<br />

Procedure for Field Determ<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> Chloride <strong>in</strong> Soil<br />

Equipment:<br />

4-oz. sampl<strong>in</strong>g jars, spoon, sta<strong>in</strong>less steel mix<strong>in</strong>g bowl, 250 mL plastic wide<br />

mouth plastic bottle, 25 mL graduated cyl<strong>in</strong>der, scale, disposable weigh<strong>in</strong>g<br />

dishes, funnel, filter paper (Whatman® #4 Qualitative 125 mm diameter circles<br />

or equivalent), 40 mL vials, Hach Quantab® strips (low and high range), distilled<br />

water. Prior to use, all equipment should be clean and dry.<br />

Sampl<strong>in</strong>g and preparation procedure:<br />

Collect a soil sample from the surface or from a splitspoon/core barrel and place<br />

<strong>in</strong> a mix<strong>in</strong>g bowl and homogenize. Remove rocks and gravel larger than small<br />

pebbles. Weigh 25 grams <strong>of</strong> soil and place <strong>in</strong> the wide-mouth bottle. For a 1:4<br />

weight to volume dilution, <strong>add</strong> 100 mL <strong>of</strong> distilled water to the bottle. Shake<br />

vigorously for several m<strong>in</strong>utes (no longer than 5 m<strong>in</strong>utes). Let the sample settle<br />

for a m<strong>in</strong>ute or two to allow heavy particles to drop out. Fold and place filter <strong>in</strong><br />

the funnel and decant sample <strong>in</strong>to the filter. Collect the filtrate <strong>in</strong> a clean 40 mL<br />

vial. Only about ½ <strong>in</strong>ch <strong>of</strong> clear filtrate <strong>in</strong> the vial is needed for the procedure.<br />

Chloride Determ<strong>in</strong>ation:<br />

Place a high or low range Quantab® strip <strong>in</strong> the vial (replace cap on Quantabs<br />

bottle to prevent moisture from degrad<strong>in</strong>g the tabs). Wait until the yellow strip at<br />

the top <strong>of</strong> the tab turns blue-black. Read the value on the tabs and use the chart<br />

on the back <strong>of</strong> the appropriate bottle to get the <strong>chloride</strong> value for each strip. Each<br />

Quantab® lot is calibrated <strong>in</strong>dependently, so use the chart on the bottle where<br />

you removed the strip; the <strong>chloride</strong> concentration chart may differ from a<br />

previous bottle. Multiply the chart value by four (4) to get the concentration <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>chloride</strong> <strong>in</strong> soil <strong>in</strong> ppm (mg/Kg). Record the value <strong>in</strong> <strong>field</strong> book.<br />

For laboratory analysis, place sample from mix<strong>in</strong>g bowl <strong>in</strong> a 4-oz jar and<br />

transport to the laboratory with a cha<strong>in</strong>-<strong>of</strong>-custody form.<br />

11

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!