Geology topics

B.A. Malo

Publications and source records attributed to B.A. Malo.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS1993

Quality assurance plan for the collection and processing of sediment data by the U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Division

The U.S. Geological Survey sediment data quality assurance plan identifies and explains required quality assurance and suggested quality control practices. The approach is to subdivide the process for obtaining sediment data into 3 parts: (1) field, (2) office, and (3) laboratory operations. The report also summarizes recommended goals for each subcategory. The quality assurance and quality control practices are described by stating the minimum acceptable activities that a district should conduct. For example, the plan describes field calibration of thermometers and standards used to calibrate a thermometer. The plan also proposes corrective actions if the quality control procedures identify a problem. The plan describes the formal reports prepared by a district that describe the completeness of sediment data and presents an evaluation of data obtained by the quality assurance program. Also described in the plan are the external (non-district) reviews that are needed to examine district sediment operations for conformity with district quality assurance plans and national quality assurance programs.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1986

Quality-assurance results for field pH and specific-conductance measurements, and for laboratory analysis, National Atmospheric Deposition Program and National Trends Network; January 1980-September 1984

Five intersite comparison studies for the field determination of pH and specific conductance, using simulated-precipitation samples, were conducted by the U.S.G.S. for the National Atmospheric Deposition Program and National Trends Network. These comparisons were performed to estimate the precision of pH and specific conductance determinations made by sampling-site operators. Simulated-precipitation samples were prepared from nitric acid and deionized water. The estimated standard deviation for site-operator determination of pH was 0.25 for pH values ranging from 3.79 to 4.64; the estimated standard deviation for specific conductance was 4.6 microsiemens/cm at 25 C for specific-conductance values ranging from 10.4 to 59.0 microsiemens/cm at 25 C. Performance-audit samples with known analyte concentrations were prepared by the U.S.G.S.and distributed to the National Atmospheric Deposition Program 's Central Analytical Laboratory. The differences between the National Atmospheric Deposition Program and national Trends Network-reported analyte concentrations and known analyte concentrations were calculated, and the bias and precision were determined. For 1983, concentrations of calcium, magnesium, sodium, and chloride were biased at the 99% confidence limit; concentrations of potassium and sulfate were unbiased at the 99% confidence limit. Four analytical laboratories routinely analyzing precipitation were evaluated in their analysis of identical natural- and simulated precipitation samples. Analyte bias for each laboratory was examined using analysis of variance coupled with Duncan 's multiple-range test on data produced by these laboratories, from the analysis of identical simulated-precipitation samples. Analyte precision for each laboratory has been estimated by calculating a pooled variance for each analyte. Interlaboratory comparability results may be used to normalize natural-precipitation chemistry data obtained from two or more of these laboratories. (Author 's abstract)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗

USGS1985

Interlaboratory comparability, bias, and precision for four laboratories measuring constituents in precipitation, November 1982-August 1983

Four laboratories were evaluated in their analysis of identical natural and simulated precipitation water samples. Interlaboratory comparability was evaluated using analysis of variance coupled with Duncan 's multiple range test, and linear-regression models describing the relations between individual laboratory analytical results for natural precipitation samples. Results of the statistical analyses indicate that certain pairs of laboratories produce different results when analyzing identical samples. Analyte bias for each laboratory was examined using analysis of variance coupled with Duncan 's multiple range test on data produced by the laboratories from the analysis of identical simulated precipitation samples. Bias for a given analyte produced by a single laboratory has been indicated when the laboratory mean for that analyte is shown to be significantly different from the mean for the most-probable analyte concentrations in the simulated precipitation samples. Ion-chromatographic methods for the determination of chloride, nitrate, and sulfate have been compared with the colorimetric methods that were also in use during the study period. Comparisons were made using analysis of variance coupled with Duncan 's multiple range test for means produced by the two methods. Analyte precision for each laboratory has been estimated by calculating a pooled variance for each analyte. Analyte estimated precisions have been compared using F-tests and differences in analyte precisions for laboratory pairs have been reported. (USGS)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗