SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Water Resources Special Report”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16Linked to original sources

USGS2008

Ground-water quality data in the southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006— Results from the California GAMA program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 3,800 square-mile Southeast San Joaquin Valley study unit (SESJ) was investigated from October 2005 through February 2006 as part of the Priority Basin Assessment Project of Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Statewide Basin Assessment project was developed in response to the Ground-Water Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The SESJ study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality within SESJ, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 99 wells in Fresno, Tulare, and Kings Counties, 83 of which were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area (grid wells), and 16 of which were sampled to evaluate changes in water chemistry along ground-water flow paths or across alluvial fans (understanding wells). The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], pesticides and pesticide degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine, and 1,2,3-trichloropropane), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, and carbon-14, and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon), and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the source and age of the sampled ground water. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, samples for matrix spikes) were collected at approximately 10 percent of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Assessment of the quality-control data resulted in censoring of less than 1 percent of the detections of constituents measured in ground-water samples. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of drinking water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable drinking-water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to the treated water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with regulatory and other health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns by CDPH. Two VOCs were detected above health-based thresholds: 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), and benzene. DBCP was detected above the U.S. Environmental Protections Agency’s maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) in three grid wells and five understanding wells. Benzene was detected above the CDPH’s maximum contaminant level (MCL-CA) in one grid well. All pesticide detections were below health-based thresholds. Perchlorate was detected above its maximum contaminate level for California in one grid well. Nitrate was detected above the MCL-US in six samples from understanding wells, of which one was a public supply well. Two trace elements were detected above MCLs-US: arsenic and uranium. Arsenic was detected above the MCL-US in four grid wells and two understanding wells; uranium was detected above the MCL-US in one grid well and one understanding well. Gross alpha radiation was detected above MCLs-US in five samples; four of them understanding wells, and uranium isotope activity was greater than the MCL-US for one understanding well. Radon-222 was detected above the proposed MCL-US in all wells sampled. Total coliforms were detected in two wells and somatic coliphage was detected in one well.

California↗

USGS2012

Status of groundwater quality in the Coastal Los Angeles Basin, 2006-California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in the approximately 860-square-mile (2,227-square-kilometer) Coastal Los Angeles Basin study unit (CLAB) was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The study area is located in southern California in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The GAMA CLAB study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of untreated (raw) groundwater in the primary aquifer system. The assessment is based on water-quality and ancillary data collected in 2006 by the USGS from 69 wells and on water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database. The primary aquifer system was defined by the depth interval of the wells listed in the CDPH database for the CLAB study unit. The quality of groundwater in the primary aquifer system may be different from that in the shallower or deeper water-bearing zones; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. This study assesses the status of the current quality of the groundwater resource by using data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and naturally occurring inorganic constituents, such as major ions and trace elements. This status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources in the primary aquifer system of the CLAB study unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the health- or aesthetic-based benchmark concentration) were used for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal and (or) California regulatory or non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. A relative-concentration greater than (>) 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than a benchmark, and a relative-concentration less than or equal to (≤) 1.0 indicates a concentration equal to or less than a benchmark. Relative-concentrations of organic and special-interest constituents [perchlorate, N -nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), 1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP), and 1,4-dioxane] were classified as "high" (relative-concentration>1.0), "moderate" (0.5 status assessment for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifer system with a relative-concentration greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents; percentage is based on an areal rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the percentage of the primary aquifer system with moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches-grid-based and spatially weighted-were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable in the CLAB study unit (within 90-percent confidence intervals). Inorganic constituents with human-health benchmarks were detected at high relative-concentrations in 5.6 percent of the primary aquifer system and moderate in 26 percent. High aquifer-scale proportion of inorganic constituents primarily reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of arsenic (1.9 percent), nitrate (1.9 percent), and uranium (1.2 percent). Inorganic constituents with secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCL) were detected at high relative-concentrations in 18 percent of the primary aquifer system and moderate in 47 percent. The constituents present at high relative-concentrations included total dissolved solids (1.9 percent), manganese (15 percent), and iron (9.4 percent). Relative-concentrations of organic constituents (one or more) were high in 3.7 percent, and moderate in 13 percent, of the primary aquifer system. The high aquifer-scale proportion of organic constituents primarily reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of solvents, including trichloroethene (TCE; 1.7 percent), perchloroethene (PCE; 1.1 percent), and carbon tetrachloride (1.0 percent). Of the 204 organic constituents analyzed, 44 constituents were detected. Eleven organic constituents had detection frequencies of greater than 10 percent: the trihalomethanes chloroform and bromodichloromethane, the solvents TCE, PCE, cis -1,2-dichloroethene, and 1,1-dichloroethene, the herbicides atrazine, simazine, prometon, and tebuthiuron, and the gasoline additive methyl tert -butyl ether (MTBE). Most detections were at low relative-concentrations. The special-interest constituent perchlorate was detected at high relative-concentrations in 0.5 percent of the primary aquifer system, and at moderate relative-concentrations in 35 percent. The special-interest constituent 1,4-dioxane was detected at high relative-concentrations, but an insufficient number of samples was analyzed to provide a representative estimate of aquifer-scale proportion.

California↗

USGS2008

Ground-water quality data in the Central Eastside San Joaquin Basin 2006: Results from the California GAMA program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 1,695-square-mile Central Eastside study unit (CESJO) was investigated from March through June 2006 as part of the Statewide Basin Assessment Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Statewide Basin Assessment project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality within CESJO, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 78 wells in Merced and Stanislaus Counties. Fifty-eight of the 78 wells were selected using a randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells). Twenty of the wells were selected to evaluate changes in water chemistry along selected lateral or vertical ground-water flow paths in the aquifer (flow-path wells). The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents [volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, pesticides and pesticide degradates], constituents of special interest [perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), and 1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP)], inorganic constituents that can occur naturally [nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements], radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes [tritium, carbon-14, and uranium isotopes and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and carbon], and dissolved noble and other gases also were measured to help identify the source and age of the sampled ground water. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, samples for matrix spikes) were collected for approximately one-sixth of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Assessment of the quality-control results showed that the environmental data were of good quality, with low bias and low variability, and resulted in censoring of less than 0.3 percent of the detections found in ground-water samples. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to treated water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CADPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CADPH. VOCs and pesticides were detected in approximately half of the grid wells, and all detections in samples from CESJO wells were below health-based thresholds. All detections of nutrients and major elements in grid wells also were below health-based thresholds. Most detections of constituents of special interest, trace elements, and radioactive constituents in samples from grid wells were below health-based thresholds. Exceptions included two detections of arsenic that were above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US), one detection of lead above the USEPA action level (AL-US), and one detection of vanadium and three detections of 1,2,3-TCP that were above the CADPH notification levels (NL-CA). All detections of radioactive constituents were below health-based thresholds, although fourteen samples had activities of radon-222 above the lower proposed MCL-US. Most of the samples from CESJO grid wells had concentrations of major elements, total dissolved solids, and trace elements below the non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic concerns. A few samples contained manganese or total dissolved solids at concentrations above the SMCL-CA thresholds.

California↗

USGS2011

Groundwater-quality data in the northern Coast Ranges study unit, 2009: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the 633-square-mile Northern Coast Ranges (NOCO) study unit was investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from June to November 2009, as part of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program's Priority Basin Project (PBP) and the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA). The GAMA-PBP was developed in response to the California Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted in collaboration with the SWRCB and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The NOCO study unit was the thirtieth study unit to be sampled as part of the GAMA-PBP. The GAMA Northern Coast Ranges study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of untreated-groundwater quality in the primary aquifer systems, and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of untreated groundwater quality throughout California. The primary aquifer systems (hereinafter referred to as primary aquifers) are defined as that part of the aquifer corresponding to the perforation intervals of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database for the NOCO study unit. The quality of groundwater in shallow or deep water-bearing zones may differ from the quality of groundwater in the primary aquifers; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. In the NOCO study unit, groundwater samples were collected from 58 wells in 2 study areas (Interior Basins and Coastal Basins) in Napa, Lake, Mendocino, Glenn, Humboldt, and Del Norte Counties. The 58 wells were selected by using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study areas. GAMA-PBP wells sampled as part of the spatially-distributed, randomized grid-cell network are referred to as "grid wells."The groundwater samples were analyzed for organic and special-interest constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, and perchlorate), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (trace elements, nutrients, dissolved organic carbon [DOC], major and minor ions, silica, total dissolved solids [TDS], and alkalinity), radioactive constituents (radon-222, radium isotopes, gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity, lead-210, and polonium-210), and microbial indicators (F-specific and somatic coliphage, Escherichia coli [E. coli] and total coliform). Naturally occurring isotopes (stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in water, stable isotopes of carbon in dissolved inorganic carbon, activities of tritium, and carbon-14 abundance), and dissolved noble gases also were measured to identify the sources and ages of the sampled groundwater. In total, 239 constituents and 12 field water-quality indicators were measured. Three types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and matrix-spikes) were collected at up to 12 percent of the wells in the NOCO study unit, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the groundwater samples. Blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination from sample collection procedures was not a significant source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Replicate samples generally were within the limits of acceptable analytical reproducibility. Matrix-spike recoveries were within the acceptable range (70 to 130 percent) for approximately 89 percent of the compounds. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, untreated groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory benchmarks apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to untreated groundwater. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the untreated groundwa

Data Series↗

USGS1985

Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States

This classification, to be used in a new inventory of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States, is intended to describe ecological taxa, arrange them in a system useful to resource managers, furnish units for mapping, and provide uniformity of concepts and terms. Wetlands are defined by plants (hydrophytes), soils (hydric soils), and frequency of flooding. Ecologically related areas of deep water, traditionally not considered wetlands, are included in the classification as deepwater habitats.Systems form the highest level of the classification hierarchy; five are defined-Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine, and Palustrine. Marine and Estuarine Systems each have two Subsystems, Subtidal and Intertidal; the Riverine System has four Subsystems, Tidal, Lower Perennial, Upper Perennial, and Intermittent; the Lacustrine has two, Littoral and Limnetic; and the Palustrine has no Subsystems.Within the Subsystems, Classes are based on substrate material and flooding regime, or on vegetative life form. The same Classes may appear under one or more of the Systems or Subsystems. Six Classes are based on substrate and flooding regime: (1) Rock Bottom with a substrate of bedrock, boulders, or stones; (2) Unconsolidated Bottom with a substrate of cobbles, gravel, sand, mud, or organic material; (3) Rocky Shore with the same substrates as Rock Bottom; (4) Unconsolidated Shore with the same substrates as Unconsolidated Bottom; (5) Streambed with any of the substrates; and (6) Reef with a substrate composed of the living and dead remains of invertebrates (corals, mollusks, or worms). The bottom Classes, (1) and (2) above, are flooded all or most of the time and the shore Classes, (3) and (4), are exposed most of the time. The Class Streambed is restricted to channels of intermittent streams and tidal channels that are dewatered at low tide. The life form of the dominant vegetation defines the five Classes based on vegetative form: (1) Aquatic Bed, dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water; (2) Moss-Lichen Wetland, dominated by mosses or lichens; (3) Emergent Wetland, dominated by emergent herbaceous angiosperms; (4) Scrub-Shrub Wetland, dominated by shrubs or small trees; and (5) Forested Wetland, dominated by large trees.The Dominance Type, which is named for the dominant plant or animal forms, is the lowest level of the classification hierarchy. Only examples are provided for this level; Dominance Types must be developed by individual users of the classification.Modifying terms applied to the Classes or Subclasses are essential for use of the system. In tidal areas, the type and duration of flooding are described by four Water Regime Modifiers: subtidal, irregularly exposed, regularly flooded, and irregularly flooded. In nontidal areas, eight Regimes are used: permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, semipermanently flooded, seasonally flooded, saturated, temporarily flooded, intermittently flooded, and artificially flooded. A hierarchical system of Water Chemistry Modifiers, adapted from the Venice System, is used to describe the salinity of the water. Fresh waters are further divided on the basis of pH. Use of a hierarchical system of soil modifiers taken directly from U.S. soil taxonomy is also required. Special modifiers are used where appropriate: excavated, impounded, diked, partly drained, farmed, and artificial.Regional differences important to wetland ecology are described through a regionalization that combines a system developed for inland areas by R. G. Bailey in 1976 with our Marine and Estuarine provinces.The structure of the classification allows it to be used at any of several hierarchical levels. Special data required for detailed application of the system are frequently unavailable, and thus data gathering may be prerequisite to classification. Development of rules by the user will be required for specific map scales. Dominance Types and relationships of plant and anima

FWS/OBS↗

USGS1979

Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States

This classification, to be used in a new inventory of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States, is intended to describe ecological taxa, arrange them in a system useful to resource managers, furnish units for mapping, and provide uniformity of concepts and terms. Wetlands are defined by plants (hydrophytes), soils (hydric soils), and frequency of flooding. Ecologically related areas of deep water, traditionally not considered wetlands, are included in the classification as deepwater habitats.Systems form the highest level of the classification hierarchy; five are defined--Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine, and Palustrine. Marine and Estuarine systems each have two subsystems, Subtidal and Intertidal; the Riverine system has four subsystems, Tidal, Lower Perennial, Upper Perennial, and Intermittent; the Lacustrine has two, Littoral and Limnetic; and the Palustrine has no subsystem.Within the subsystems, classes are based on substrate material and flooding regime, or on vegetative life form. The same classes may appear under one or more of the systems or subsystems. Six classes are based on substrate and flooding regime: (1) Rock Bottom with a substrate of bedrock, boulders, or stones; (2) Unconsolidated Bottom with a substrate of cobbles, gravel, sand, mud, or organic material; (3) Rocky Shore with the same substrate as Rock Bottom; (4) Unconsolidated Shore with the same substrate as Unconsolidated Bottom; (5) Streambed with any of the substrates; and (6) Reef with a substrate composed of the living and dead remains of invertebrates (corals, mollusks, or worms). The bottom classes, (1) and (2) above, are flooded all or most of the time and the shore classes, (3) and (4), are exposed most of the time. The class Streambed is restricted to channels of intermittent streams and tidal channels that are dewatered at low tide. The life form of the dominant vegetation defines the five classes based on vegetative form: (1) Aquatic Bed, dominated by plants that grow principally on or below the surface of the water; (2) Moss-Lichen Wetland, dominated by mosses or lichens; (3) Emergent Wetland, dominated by emergent herbaceous angiosperms; (4) Scrub-Shrub Wetland, dominated by shrubs or small trees; and (5) Forested Wetland, dominated by large trees.The dominance type, which is named for the dominant plant or animal forms, is the lowest level of the classification hierarchy. Only examples are provided for this level; dominance types must be developed by individual users of the classification.Modifying terms applied to the classes or subclasses are essential for use of the system. In tidal areas, the type and duration of flooding are described by four water regime modifiers: subtidal, irregularly exposed, regularly flooded, and irregularly flooded. In nontidal areas, six regimes are used: permanently flooded, intermittently exposed, semipermanently flooded, seasonally flooded, saturated, temporarily flooded, intermittently flooded, and artificially flooded. A hierarchical system of water chemistry modifiers, adapted from the Venice System, is used to describe the salinity of the water. Fresh waters are further divided on the basis of pH. Use of a hierarchical system of soil modifiers taken directly from U.S. soil taxonomy is also required. Special modifiers are used where appropriate: excavated, impounded, diked, partly drained, farmed, and artificial.Regional differences important to wetland ecology are described through a regionalization that combines a system developed for inland areas by R. G. Bailey in 1976 with our Marine and Estuarine provinces.The structure of the classification allows it to be used at any of several hierarchical levels. Special data required for detailed application of the system are frequently unavailable, and thus data gathering may be prerequisite to classification. Development of rules by the user will be required for specific map scales. Dominance types and relationships of plant and animal co

FWS/OBS↗

USGS2009

Groundwater quality data for the northern Sacramento Valley, 2007: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the approximately 1,180-square-mile Northern Sacramento Valley study unit (REDSAC) was investigated in October 2007 through January 2008 as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of raw groundwater used for public water supplies within REDSAC and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of groundwater quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 66 wells in Shasta and Tehama Counties. Forty-three of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area (grid wells), and 23 were selected to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). The groundwater samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial constituents. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, and carbon-14, and stable isotopes of nitrogen and oxygen in nitrate, stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen of water), and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled ground water. In total, over 275 constituents and field water-quality indicators were investigated. Three types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and sampmatrix spikes) were collected at approximately 8 to 11 percent of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data obtained from the groundwater samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination was not a noticeable source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Differences between replicate samples were within acceptable ranges for nearly all compounds, indicating acceptably low variability. Matrix-spike recoveries were within acceptable ranges for most compounds. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, raw groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, or blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw groundwater were compared with regulatory and nonregulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and with aesthetic and technical thresholds established by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and drinking-water thresholds are for illustrative purposes only and do not indicate compliance or noncompliance with those thresholds. The concentrations of most constituents detected in groundwater samples from REDSAC were below drinking-water thresholds. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) and pesticides were detected in less than one-quarter of the samples and were generally less than a hundredth of any health-based thresholds. NDMA was detected in one grid well above the NL-CA. Concentrations of all nutrients and trace elements in samples from REDSAC wells were below the health-based thresholds except those of arsenic in three samples, which were above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US). However, none of these wells were public-supply wells. Concentrations of all radioactive constituents were below health-based thresholds except radon-222, which was detected above the proposed MCL-US of 300 pCi/L in samples from 11 grid wells. Most of the samples from REDSAC wells had concentrations of major elements, total dissolved solids, and trace elements below the non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic or technical concerns. A few samples contained iron, manganese, or pH at levels above the SMCL-CA or SMCL-US thresholds.

California↗

USGS2011

Status of groundwater quality in the Southern, Middle, and Northern Sacramento Valley study units, 2005-08: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in the Southern, Middle, and Northern Sacramento Valley study units was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The study units are located in California’s Central Valley and include parts of Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Placer, Sacramento, Shasta, Solano, Sutter, Tehama, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The three study units were designated to provide spatially-unbiased assessments of the quality of untreated groundwater in three parts of the Central Valley hydrogeologic province, as well as to provide a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality regionally and statewide. Samples were collected in 2005 (Southern Sacramento Valley), 2006 (Middle Sacramento Valley), and 2007–08 (Northern Sacramento Valley). The GAMA studies in the Southern, Middle, and Northern Sacramento Valley were designed to provide statistically robust assessments of the quality of untreated groundwater in the primary aquifer systems that are used for drinking-water supply. The assessments are based on water-quality data collected by the USGS from 235 wells in the three study units in 2005–08, and water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database. The primary aquifer systems (hereinafter, referred to as primary aquifers) assessed in this study are defined by the depth intervals of the wells in the CDPH database for each study unit. The quality of groundwater in shallow or deep water-bearing zones may differ from quality of groundwater in the primary aquifers; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to contamination from the surface. The status of the current quality of the groundwater resource was assessed by using data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOC), pesticides, and naturally occurring inorganic constituents, such as major ions and trace elements. This status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources within the primary aquifers of the three Sacramento Valley study units, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. Relative-concentrations (sample concentrations divided by benchmark concentrations) were used for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal or California regulatory or non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. A relative-concentration greater than 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than a benchmark. For organic (volatile organic compounds and pesticides) and special-interest (perchlorate) constituents, relative-concentrations were classified as high (greater than 1.0); moderate (equal to or less than 1.0 and greater than 0.1); or low (equal to or less than 0.1). For inorganic (major ion, trace element, nutrient, and radioactive) constituents, the boundary between low and moderate relative-concentrations was set at 0.5. Aquifer-scale proportions were used in the status assessment for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifers that have a relative-concentration greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents; percentage is based on an areal rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the percentage of the primary aquifers that have moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid-based, which used one value per grid cell, and spatially-weighted, which used the full dataset—were used to calculate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. High and moderate aquifer-scale proportions were significantly greater for inorganic constituents than organic constituents in all three study units. In the Southern Sacramento Valley study unit, relative-concentrations for one or more inorganic constituents with health-based benchmarks (HBBs) were high in 30 percent (%), moderate in 30%, and low in 40% of the primary aquifer. In the Middle Sacramento Valley study unit, aquifer-scale proportions for inorganic constituents with HBBs were high in 24%, moderate in 38%, and low in 38% of the primary aquifer. Arsenic, boron, and nitrate were detected at high relative-concentrations in the Southern and Middle Sacramento Valley study units. In the Northern Sacramento Valley study unit, high, moderate, and low relative-concentrations of inorganic constituents relative to HBBs were 2.1, 12, and 86% of the primary aquifer, respectively. Arsenic was the only constituent detected at high relative-concentrations. The high aquifer-scale proportions for inorganic constituents with non-health-based benchmarks were 32, 27, and 4.6% of the primary aquifer for the Southern, Middle, and Northern Sacramento Valley study units, respectively. The high aquifer-scale proportions for organic constituents with HBBs were less than 1% in the Southern, Middle, and Northern Sacramento Valley study units. Organic constituents were detected at moderate relative-concentrations in about 3% of the Southern and Middle Sacramento Valley study units and in 1% of the Northern Sacramento Valley study unit. Of the 227 organic constituents analyzed for, 86 were detected, and of those detected, 56 have HBBs. Six organic constituents (atrazine, bentazon, chloroform, simazine, tetrachloroethene, and trichloroethene) were detected in 10% or more of the sampled wells in one or more of the three Sacramento Valley study units.

California↗

USGS2012

Status of groundwater quality in the California Desert Region, 2006-2008: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in six areas in the California Desert Region (Owens, Antelope, Mojave, Coachella, Colorado River, and Indian Wells) was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The six Desert studies were designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of untreated groundwater in parts of the Desert and the Basin and Range hydrogeologic provinces, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing groundwater quality to other areas in California and across the Nation. Samples were collected by the USGS from September 2006 through April 2008 from 253 wells in Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Two-hundred wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide a spatially unbiased representation of the study areas (grid wells), and fifty-three wells were sampled to provide additional insight into groundwater conditions (additional wells). The status of the current quality of the groundwater resource was assessed based on data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and inorganic constituents such as major ions and trace elements. Water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database also were incorporated in the assessment. The status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of untreated groundwater resources within the primary aquifer systems of the Desert Region, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. The primary aquifer systems (hereinafter, primary aquifers) in the six Desert areas are defined as that part of the aquifer corresponding to the perforation intervals of wells listed in the CDPH database. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the benchmark concentration) were used as the primary metric for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal and (or) California benchmarks. A relative-concentration (RC) greater than (>) 1.0 indicates a concentration above a benchmark, and an RC less than or equal to (≤) 1.0 indicates a concentration equal to or below a benchmark. Organic and special-interest constituent RCs were classified as “low” (RC ≤ 0.1), “moderate” (0.1 < RC ≤ 1.0), or “high” (RC > 1.0). Inorganic constituent RCs were classified as “low” (RC ≤ 0.5), “moderate” (0.5 < RC ≤ 1.0), or “high” (RC > 1.0). A lower threshold value RC was used to distinguish between low and moderate RCs for organic constituents because these constituents are generally less prevalent and have smaller RCs than inorganic constituents. Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the primary metric for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion was defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifers with an RC greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents; percentage is based on an areal rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the percentage of the primary aquifers with moderate and low RCs, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid-based and spatially weighted—were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable in the Desert Region (within 90 percent confidence intervals). The status assessment determined that one or more inorganic constituents with health-based benchmarks had high RCs in 35.4 percent of the Desert Region’s primary aquifers, moderate RCs in 27.4 percent, and low RCs in 37.2 percent. The inorganic constituents with health-based benchmarks having the largest high aquifer-scale proportions were arsenic (17.8 percent), boron (11.4 percent), fluoride (8.9 percent), gross-alpha radioactivity (6.6 percent), molybdenum (5.7 percent), strontium (3.7 percent), vanadium (3.6 percent), uranium (3.2 percent), and perchlorate (2.4 percent). Inorganic constituents with non-health-based benchmarks were also detected at high RCs in 18.6 percent and at moderate RCs in 16.0 percent of the Desert Region’s primary aquifers. In contrast, organic constituents had high RCs in only 0.3 percent of the Desert Region’s primary aquifers, moderate in 2.0 percent, low in 48.0 percent, and were not detected in 49.7 percent of the primary aquifers in the Desert Region. Of 149 organic constituents analyzed for all six study areas, 42 constituents were detected. Six organic constituents, carbon tetrachloride, chloroform, 1,2-dichloropropane, dieldrin, 1,2-dichloroethane, and tetrachloroethene, were found at moderate RCs in one or more of the grid wells. One constituent, N -nitrosodimethylamine, a special-interest VOC, was detected at a high RC in one well. Thirty-nine organic constituents were detected only at low concentrations. Three organic constituents were frequently detected (in more than 10 percent of samples from grid wells): chloroform, simazine, and deethylatrazine.

California↗

USGS2013

Status and understanding of groundwater quality in the San Francisco Bay groundwater basins, 2007—California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in the approximately 620-square-mile (1,600-square-kilometer) San Francisco Bay study unit was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The study unit is located in the Southern Coast Ranges of California, in San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa Counties. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The GAMA San Francisco Bay study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of untreated groundwater within the primary aquifer system, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout the State. The assessment is based on water-quality and ancillary data collected by the USGS from 79 wells in 2007 and is supplemented with water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database. The primary aquifer system is defined by the depth interval of the wells listed in the CDPH database for the San Francisco Bay study unit. The quality of groundwater in shallower or deeper water-bearing zones may differ from that in the primary aquifer system; shallower groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. The first component of this study, the status of the current quality of the groundwater resource, was assessed by using data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and naturally occurring inorganic constituents, such as major ions and trace elements. Water- quality data from the CDPH database also were incorporated for this assessment. This status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources within the primary aquifer system of the San Francisco Bay study unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the benchmark concentration) were used for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal and (or) California benchmarks. A relative-concentration greater than (>) 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than a benchmark, and a relative-concentration less than or equal to (≤) 1.0 indicates a concentration equal to or less than a benchmark. Relative-concentrations of organic and special-interest constituents were classified as low (relative- concentration ≤ 0.1), moderate (0.1 < relative- concentration ≤ 1.0), or high (relative-concentration > 1.0). Inorganic constituent relative- concentrations were classified as low (relative-concentration ≤ 0.5), moderate (0.5 < relative-concentration ≤ 1.0), or high (relative- concentration > 1.0). A lower threshold value of relative-concentration was used to distinguish between low and moderate values of organic constituents because organic constituents are generally less prevalent and have smaller relative-concentrations than naturally occurring inorganic constituents. Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the metric for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the percentage of the primary aquifer system that has relative-concentration greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents; proportion is based on an areal rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the percentages of the primary aquifer system that have moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid-based and spatially weighted—were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportion for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable in the San Francisco Bay study unit (90-percent confidence intervals). Inorganic constituents with health-based benchmarks were present at high relative-concentrations in 5.1 percent of the primary aquifer system, and at moderate relative-concentrations in 25 percent. The high aquifer-scale proportion of inorganic constituents primarily reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of barium (3.0 percent) and nitrate (2.1 percent). Inorganic constituents with secondary maximum contaminant levels were present at high relative-concentrations in 14 percent of the primary aquifer system and at moderate relative-concentrations in 33 percent. The constituents present at high relative-concentrations included total dissolved solids (7.0 percent), chloride (6.1 percent), manganese (12 percent), and iron (3.0 percent). Organic constituents with health-based benchmarks were present at high relative-concentrations in 0.6 percent and at moderate relative-concentrations in 12 percent of the primary aquifer system. Of the 202 organic constituents analyzed for, 32 were detected. Three organic constituents were frequently detected (in 10 percent or more of samples): the trihalomethane chloroform, the solvent 1,1,1-trichloroethane and the refrigerant 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane. One special-interest constituent, perchlorate, was detected at moderate relative-concentrations in 42 percent of the primary aquifer system. The second component of this work, the understanding assessment, identified some of the primary natural and human factors that may affect groundwater quality by evaluating land use, physical characteristics of the wells, and geochemical conditions of the aquifer. Results from these evaluations were used to explain the occurrence and distribution of constituents in the study unit.

California↗

USGS2014

Status of groundwater quality in the Borrego Valley, Central Desert, and Low-Use Basins of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts study unit, 2008-2010: California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in the approximately 963-square-mile Borrego Valley, Central Desert, and Low-Use Basins of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts study unit was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The study unit is located in southern California in San Bernardino, Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial Counties. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The GAMA Borrego Valley, Central Desert, and Low-Use Basins of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of untreated (raw) groundwater in the primary aquifer system. The assessment is based on water-quality and ancillary data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey from 52 wells (49 grid wells and 3 understanding wells) and on water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health database. The primary aquifer system was defined by the depth intervals of the wells listed in the California Department of Public Health database for the Borrego Valley, Central Desert, and Low-Use Basins of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts study unit. The quality of groundwater in the primary aquifer system may be different from that in the shallower or deeper water-bearing zones; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. This study assesses the status of the current quality of the groundwater resource by using data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and naturally occurring inorganic constituents, such as major ions and trace elements. This status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources in the primary aquifer system of the Borrego Valley, Central Desert, and Low-Use Basins of the Mojave and Sonoran Deserts study unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the health- or aesthetic-based benchmark concentration) were used for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal or California regulatory or non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. A relative-concentration greater than 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than a benchmark, and a relative-concentration less than or equal to 1.0 indicates a concentration equal to or less than a benchmark. Relative-concentrations of organic constituents and special-interest constituents [perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)] were classified as high (relative-concentration greater than 1.0), moderate (relative-concentration greater than 0.1 and less than or equal to 1.0), or low (relative-concentration less than or equal to 0.1). Relative-concentrations of inorganic constituents were classified as high (relative-concentration greater than 1.0), moderate (relative-concentration greater than 0.5 and less than or equal to 1.0), or low (relative-concentration less than or equal to 0.5). Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the primary metric in the status assessment for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifer system with a high relative-concentration for a particular constituent or class of constituents; this percentage is based on an areal rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the percentages of the primary aquifer system with moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively, of a constituent or class of constituents. Two statistical approaches—grid-based and spatially weighted—were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable to each other (within 90-percent confidence intervals) in the study unit. Inorganic constituents (one or more) with health-based benchmarks were detected at high relative-concentrations in 48 percent of the primary aquifer system and at moderate relative-concentrations in 26 percent of the primary aquifer system. The high aquifer-scale proportion of inorganic constituents primarily reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of fluoride (27 percent), arsenic (18 percent), molybdenum (16 percent), boron (10 percent), uranium (5.6 percent), gross alpha radioactivity (9.7 percent), and nitrate (2.7 percent). The inorganic constituents with secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCLs) were detected at high relative-concentrations in 13 percent of the primary aquifer system and at moderate relative-concentrations in 39 percent. The high aquifer-scale proportion for SMCL constituents reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of total dissolved solids (TDS, 11 percent), manganese (2.8 percent), and chloride (2.8 percent). Organic constituents were not detected at high relative-concentrations in the primary aquifer system, and were present at moderate relative-concentrations in 5.0 percent, and at low relative-concentrations or were not detected in 95 percent of the primary aquifer system. Of the 148 organic constituents analyzed, 12 constituents were detected. Two organic constituents, chloroform and tetrachloroethene (PCE), were detected in more than 10 percent of samples, but were detected mostly at low relative-concentrations.

California↗

USGS2009

Groundwater quality data for the Tahoe-Martis study unit, 2007: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the approximately 460-square-mile Tahoe–Martis study unit was investigated in June through September 2007 as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of raw groundwater used for public water supplies within the Tahoe–Martis study unit (Tahoe–Martis) and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of groundwater quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 52 wells in El Dorado, Placer, and Nevada Counties. Forty-one of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area (grid wells), and 11 were selected to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). The groundwater samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate and N -nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, carbon-14, strontium isotope ratio, and stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen of water), and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled groundwater. In total, 240 constituents and water-quality indicators were investigated. Three types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and samples for matrix spikes) each were collected at 12 percent of the wells, and the results obtained from these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the groundwater samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that data for the groundwater samples were not compromised by possible contamination during sample collection, handling or analysis. Differences between replicate samples were within acceptable ranges. Matrix spike recoveries were within acceptable ranges for most compounds. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, raw water typically is treated, disinfected, or blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to raw groundwater. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw groundwater were compared with regulatory and nonregulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), and with aesthetic and technical thresholds established by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and drinking-water thresholds are for illustrative purposes only and do not indicate of compliance or noncompliance with regulatory thresholds. The concentrations of most constituents detected in groundwater samples from the Tahoe–Martis wells were below drinking-water thresholds. Organic compounds (VOCs and pesticides) were detected in about 40 percent of the samples from grid wells, and most concentrations were less than 1/100th of regulatory and nonregulatory health-based thresholds, although the conentration of perchloroethene in one sample was above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US). Concentrations of all trace elements and nutrients in samples from grid wells were below regulatory and nonregulatory health-based thresholds, with five exceptions. Concentrations of arsenic were above the MCL-US in 20 percent of the samples from grid wells. Gross alpha particle activity (MCL-US), boron (CDPH notification level, NL-CA), and molybdenum (USEPA lifetime health advisory, HAL-US) were each detected above thresholds in two of the samples from grid wells, and radon (proposed alternative MCL-US) was detected above the threshold in one sample from a grid well. Most of the samples from Tahoe–Martis grid wells had concentrations of major elements, total dissolved solids, and trace elements below the CDPH secondary maximum contaminant levels, nonenforceable thresholds set for aesthetic and technical concerns. Fifteen percent of the samples from grid wells contained iron, manganese, or total dissolved solids at concentrations above these levels.

California, Nevada↗

USGS1987

Results of a workshop concerning assessment of the functions of bottomland hardwoods

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is authorized under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) to participate in the regulation of the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States. This regulatory authority is exercised in partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which has responsibility for permit issuance, and in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Through amendments to the original statute, a series of legal actions and court decisions, and the development of operating guidance among the responsible agencies, Section 404 has evolved into the primary mechanism afforded Federal authorities for the protection of wetlands. EPA recognizes the importance of wetlands in achieving the goals of the Clean Water Act, which are to protect and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. EPA Administrator Lee Thomas has identified wetlands protection as among the highest of Agency priorities. EPA recognizes that bottomland hardwood (BLH) wetlands have vital and unique attributes that, if lost, would severely impact the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. As part of a broad program to better protect the Nation's wetlands, EPA has therefore identified bottomland hardwood wetlands as a priority resource requiring special attention on a national basis. Recognizing the importance of implementing an effective, nationally consistent, and scientifically defensible regulatory program, EPA, in October 1984, issued Interim Operating Guidance to its field personnel for implementing the Section 404 regulatory program in bottomland hardwood wetlands. With the goal of improving and finalizing that guidance, EPA is sponsoring a series of workshops designed to answer key questions concerning BLH wetlands, based on the best scientific and technical information currently available. The first two workshops were directed toward summarizing existing scientific and technical knowledge concerning the functions of BLH ecosystems, the characteristics that are important to each function, and the impact of various development activities on those characteristics. The first workshop, which was held in St. Francisville, Louisiana, in December, 1984, examined a wetland zonation concept as a framework for gaining a greater understanding of BLH structure and function. The workshop set out to determine whether characterization of BLH resources as a series of relatively distinct zones, defined by concomitant variation in hydrologic regime, soils, and vegetation, might provide the basis for a useful and scientifically sound regulatory framework. For examp1e, if certain zones are of particular importance to one or more wetland functions that the Clean Water Act was intended to protect, then the zonation concept might be useful from the perspective of how various activities should be regulated. Discussions during the first workshop, however, indicated that the zonation concept provides, at best, only an incomplete picture of the structure and function of BLH ecosystems. In many cases, BLH functions are not limited to or closely correlated with particular zones and, furthermore, many factors other than zone are important determinants of BLH functions. With these responses in mind, the second workshop, held at Lake Lanier, Georgia, in July, 1985, was designed to elicit information on two questions. First, if zones are not an adequate framework for understanding the functions of BLH systems, what characteristics (predictors) can be used to assess the extent to which a particular site performs these functions? And second, what are the impacts of various development activities that often occur in BLH ecosystems on those characteristics and thus on the functions themselves? At the second workshop, individual workgroups dealing with particular subject areas (e.g., hydrology, water quality, fisheries, wildlife, ecosystem processes, and cultural/recreational/economic resources) were able to identify site characteristics that are important determinants of the performance of various functions. For example, the Hydrology Workgroup identified flood storage as one of three major hydrologic functions that BLH ecosystems perform. The workgroup then identified the most important characteristic (e.g., surface area of the site, soil saturation, and others) that determine flood storage and the likely impact of several common activities (e.g., conversion to soybean production and levee construction) on these characteristics. Some of the workgroups also provided estimates of the aggregate impact of activities, acting through all of the characteristics, on certain functions. The workgroups also identified key characteristics that could be used to identify high-value wetlands for various functions. In addition, the workgroups pointed out a number of topics needing further examination and discussion. First, all of the workgroups identified the need to develop the technical basis and information sources to address the problem of cumulative impacts in the regulatory process. Second, most of the workgroups noted the important of contextual variables in assessing the function of a particular site. For example, the location of a BLH site in relationship to other tracts of habitat is an important variable for many wildlife species. Similarly, the extent to which a site retains or transforms contaminants is depended not only on the characteristics of the site, but also on its position in a watershed relative to contaminant inputs. And finally, several of the workgroups pointed out that assessing the impact of an activity on a function is not as simple as "adding up" the impact on individual characteristics, but may depend instead on complex interactions among characteristics. Addressing these questions, as summarized in the objectives and discussions that follow, was the focus of the third workshop, the results of which are described in this report.

Report↗

USGS2017

Rare-earth elements

The rare-earth elements (REEs) are 15 elements that range in atomic number from 57 (lanthanum) to 71 (lutetium); they are commonly referred to as the “lanthanides.” Yttrium (atomic number 39) is also commonly regarded as an REE because it shares chemical and physical similarities and has affinities with the lanthanides. Although REEs are not rare in terms of average crustal abundance, the concentrated deposits of REEs are limited in number. Because of their unusual physical and chemical properties, the REEs have diverse defense, energy, industrial, and military technology applications. The glass industry is the leading consumer of REE raw materials, which are used for glass polishing and as additives that provide color and special optical properties to the glass. Lanthanum-based catalysts are used in petroleum refining, and cerium-based catalysts are used in automotive catalytic converters. The use of REEs in magnets is a rapidly increasing application. Neodymium-iron-boron magnets, which are the strongest known type of magnets, are used when space and weight are restrictions. Nickel-metal hydride batteries use anodes made of a lanthanum-based alloys. China, which has led the world production of REEs for decades, accounted for more than 90 percent of global production and supply, on average, during the past decade. Citing a need to retain its limited REE resources to meet domestic requirements as well as concerns about the environmental effects of mining, China began placing restrictions on the supply of REEs in 2010 through the imposition of quotas, licenses, and taxes. As a result, the global rare-earth industry has increased its stockpiling of REEs; explored for deposits outside of China; and promoted new efforts to conserve, recycle, and substitute for REEs. New mine production began at Mount Weld in Western Australia, and numerous other exploration and development projects noted in this chapter are ongoing throughout the world. The REE-bearing minerals are diverse and often complex in composition. At least 245 individual REE-bearing minerals are recognized; they are mainly carbonates, fluorocarbonates, and hydroxylcarbonates (n = 42); oxides (n = 59); silicates (n = 85); and phosphates (n = 26). Many of the world’s significant REE deposits occur in carbonatites, which are carbonate igneous rocks. The REEs also have a strong genetic association with alkaline magmatism. The systematic geologic and chemical processes that explain these observations are not well understood. Economic or potentially economic REE deposits have been found in (a) carbonatites, (b) peralkaline igneous systems, (c) magmatic magnetite-hematite bodies, (d) iron oxide-copper-gold (IOCG) deposits, (e) xenotime-monazite accumulations in mafic gneiss, (f) ion-absorption clay deposits, and (g) monazite-xenotime-bearing placer deposits. Carbonatites have been the world’s main source for the light REEs since the 1960s. Ion-adsorption clay deposits in southern China are the world’s primary source of the heavy REEs. Monazite-bearing placer deposits were important sources of REEs before the mid-1960s and may be again in the future. In recent years, REEs have been produced from large carbonatite bodies mined at the Mountain Pass deposit in California and, in China, at the Bayan Obo deposit in Nei Mongol Autonomous Region, the Maoniuping deposit in Sichuan Province, the Daluxiang deposit in Sichuan Province, and the Weishan deposit in Anhui Province. Alkaline igneous complexes have recently been targeted for exploration because of their enrichments in the heavy REEs. Information relevant to the environmental aspects of REE mining is limited. Little is known about the aquatic toxicity of REEs. The United States lacks drinking water standards for REEs. The concentrations of REEs in environmental media are influenced by their low abundances in crustal rocks and their limited solubility in most groundwaters and surface waters. The scarcity of sulfide minerals, including pyrite, minimizes or eliminates concerns about acid-mine drainage for carbonatite-hosted deposits and alkaline-intrusion-related REE deposits. For now, insights into environmental responses of REE mine wastes must rely on predictive models.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2009

Ground-water quality data in the San Francisco Bay study unit, 2007: Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 620-square-mile San Francisco Bay study unit (SFBAY) was investigated from April through June 2007 as part of the Priority Basin project of the Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples in SFBAY were collected from 79 wells in San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa Counties. Forty-three of the wells sampled were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells). Thirty-six wells were sampled to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and potential wastewater-indicator compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, trace elements, chloride and bromide isotopes, and uranium and strontium isotopes), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, carbon-14 isotopes, and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, boron, and carbon), and dissolved noble gases (noble gases were analyzed in collaboration with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) also were measured to help identify the source and age of the sampled ground water. Quality-control samples (blank samples, replicate samples, matrix spike samples) were collected for approximately one-third of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Assessment of the quality-control information from the field blanks resulted in applying “V” codes to approximately 0.1 percent of the data collected for ground-water samples (meaning a constituent was detected in blanks as well as the corresponding environmental data). See the Appendix section “Quality-Control-Sample Results.” This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to treated water that is delivered to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. VOCs were detected in about one-half of the grid wells, while pesticides were detected in about one-fifth of the grid wells. Concentrations of all VOCs and pesticides detected in samples from all SFBAY wells were below health-based thresholds. No pharmaceutical compounds were detected in any SFBAY well. One potential wastewater-indicator compound, caffeine, was detected in one grid well in SFBAY. Concentrations of most trace elements and nutrients detected in samples from all SFBAY wells were below health-based thresholds. Exceptions include nitrate, detected above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) in 3samples; arsenic, above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) in 3 samples; cadmium, above the MCL-US in 1 sample; boron, above the CDPH notification level (NL-CA) in 2 samples; and strontium, above the USEPA lifetime health advisory level (HAL-US) in 2 samples. The radioactive constituent radon-222 was detected above the proposed MCL-US in two grid wells, but no wells had detections above the proposed alternative MCL-US. Most of the samples from all SFBAY wells had concentrations of major ions, total dissolved solids, and trace elements below the non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic concerns. Six or fewer samples contained chloride, sulfate, or iron at concentrations above the SMCL-CA thresholds. No microbial indicators were detected in SFBAY grid wells.

California↗

USGS2012

Status of groundwater quality in the Upper Santa Ana Watershed, November 2006--March 2007--California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Groundwater quality in the approximately 1,000-square-mile (2,590-square-kilometer) Upper Santa Ana Watershed (USAW) study unit was investigated as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The study unit is located in southern California in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is being conducted by the California State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with the U.S. Geological Survey and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The GAMA USAW study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of untreated groundwater quality within the primary aquifer systems in the study unit. The primary aquifer systems (hereinafter, primary aquifers) are defined as the perforation interval of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database for the USAW study unit. The quality of groundwater in shallower or deeper water-bearing zones may differ from that in the primary aquifers; shallower groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. The assessment is based on water-quality and ancillary data collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) from 90 wells during November 2006 through March 2007, and water-quality data from the CDPH database. The status of the current quality of the groundwater resource was assessed based on data from samples analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), pesticides, and naturally occurring inorganic constituents, such as major ions and trace elements. The status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of groundwater resources within the primary aquifers of the USAW study unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers by water purveyors. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by the health- or aesthetic-based benchmark concentration) were used for evaluating groundwater quality for those constituents that have Federal or California regulatory or non-regulatory benchmarks for drinking-water quality. A relative-concentration greater than (>) 1.0 indicates a concentration above a benchmark, and a relative-concentration less than or equal to (≤) 1.0 indicates a concentration equal to or less than a benchmark. Organic and special-interest constituent relative-concentrations were classified as "high" (> 1.0), "moderate" (0.1 < relative-concentration ≤ 1.0), or "low" (≤ 0.1). Inorganic constituent relative-concentrations were classified as "high" (> 1.0), "moderate" (0.5 < relative-concentration ≤ 1.0), or "low" ( ≤ 0.5). Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the primary metric in the status assessment for evaluating regional-scale groundwater quality. Aquifer-scale proportions are defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifer system with concentrations above or below specified thresholds relative to regulatory or aesthetic benchmarks. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the percentage of the area of the primary aquifers with a relative-concentration greater than 1.0 for a particular constituent or class of constituents; percentage is based on an areal, rather than a volumetric basis. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the percentage of the primary aquifers with moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid-based and spatially weighted—were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable in the USAW study unit (within 90-percent confidence intervals). Inorganic constituents with human-health benchmarks had relative-concentrations that were high in 32.9 percent of the primary aquifers, moderate in 29.3 percent, and low in 37.8 percent. The high aquifer-scale proportion of these inorganic constituents primarily reflected high aquifer-scale proportions of nitrate (high relative-concentration in 25.3 percent of the aquifer), although seven other inorganic constituents with human-health benchmarks also were detected at high relative-concentrations in some percentage of the aquifer: arsenic, boron, fluoride, gross alpha activity, molybdenum, uranium, and vanadium. Perchlorate, as a constituent of special interest, was evaluated separately from other inorganic constituents, and had high relative-concentrations in 11.1 percent, moderate in 53.3 percent, and low or not detected in 35.6 percent of the primary aquifers. In contrast to the inorganic constituents, relative-concentrations of organic constituents (one or more) were high in 6.7 percent, moderate in 11.1 percent, and low or not detected in 82.2 percent of the primary aquifers. Of the 237 organic and special-interest constituents analyzed for, 39 constituents were detected (21 VOCs, 13 pesticides, 3 pharmaceuticals, and 2 constituents of special interest). All of the detected VOCs had health-based benchmarks, and five of these—1,1-dichloroethene, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), tetrachloroethene (PCE), carbon tetrachloride, and trichloroethene (TCE)—were detected in at least one sample at a concentration above a benchmark (high relative-concentration). Seven of the 13 pesticides had health-based benchmarks, and none were detected above these benchmarks (no high relative-concentrations). Pharmaceuticals do not have health-based benchmarks. Thirteen organic constituents were frequently detected (detected in at least 10 percent of samples without regard to relative-concentrations): bromodichloromethane, chloroform, cis-1,2-dichloroethene, 1,1-dichloroethene, dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12), methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), PCE, TCE, trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11), atrazine, bromacil, diuron, and simazine.

California↗

USGS2010

Hydrogeomorphic segments and hydraulic microhabitats of the Niobrara River, Nebraska— With special emphasis on the Niobrara National Scenic River

The Niobrara River is an ecologically and economically important resource in Nebraska. The Nebraska Department of Natural Resources’ recent designation of the hydraulically connected surface- and groundwater resources of the Niobrara River Basin as “fully appropriated” has emphasized the importance of understanding linkages between the physical and ecological dynamics of the Niobrara River so it can be sustainably managed. In cooperation with the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, the U.S. Geological Survey investigated the hydrogeomorphic and hydraulic attributes of the Niobrara River in northern Nebraska. This report presents the results of an analysis of hydrogeomorphic segments and hydraulic microhabitats of the Niobrara River and its valley for the approximately 330-mile reach from Dunlap Diversion Dam to its confluence with the Missouri River. Two spatial scales were used to examine and quantify the hydrogeomorphic segments and hydraulic microhabitats of the Niobrara River: a basin scale and a reach scale. At the basin scale, digital spatial data and hydrologic data were analyzed to (1) test for differences between 36 previously determined longitudinal hydrogeomorphic segments; (2) quantitatively describe the hydrogeomorphic characteristics of the river and its valley; and (3) evaluate differences in hydraulic microhabitat over a range of flow regimes among three fluvial geomorphic provinces. The statistical analysis of hydrogeomorphic segments resulted in reclassification rates of 3 to 28 percent of the segments for the four descriptive geomorphic elements. The reassignment of classes by discriminant analysis resulted in a reduction from 36 to 25 total hydrogeomorphic segments because several adjoining segments shared the same ultimate class assignments. Virtually all of the segment mergers were in the Canyons and Restricted Bottoms (CRB) fluvial geomorphic province. The most frequent classes among hydrogeomorphic segments, and the dominant classes per unit length of river, are: a width-restricted valley confinement condition, sinuous-planview pattern, irregular channel width, and an alternate bar configuration. The Niobrara River in the study area flows through a diversity of fluvial geomorphic settings in its traverse across northern Nebraska. In the Meandering Bottoms (MB) fluvial geomorphic province, river discharge magnitudes are low, and the valley exerts little control on the channel-planview pattern. Within the CRB province, the river flows over a diversity of geologic formations, and the valley and river narrow and expand in approximate synchronicity. In the Braided Bottoms (BB) fluvial geomorphic province, the river primarily flows over Cretaceous Pierre Shale, the valley and channel are persistently wide, and the channel slope is generally uniform. The existence of vegetated islands and consequent multithread channel environments, indicated by a higher braided index, mostly coincided with reaches having gentler slopes and less unit stream power. Longitudinal hydrology curves indicate that the flow of the Niobrara River likely is dominated by groundwater as far downstream as Norden. Unit stream power values in the study area vary between 0 and almost 2 pounds per foot per second. Within the MB province, unit stream power steadily increases as the Niobrara gains discharge from groundwater inflow, and the channel slope steepens. The combination of steep slopes, a constrained channel width, and persistent flow within the CRB province results in unit stream power values that are between three and five times greater than those in less confined segments with comparable or greater discharges. With the exception of hydrogeomorphic segment 3, which is affected by Spencer Dam, unit stream power values in the BB province are generally uniform. Channel sinuosity values in the study area varied generally between 1 and 2.5, but with locally higher values measured in the MB province and at the entrenched bedrock meanders of hydrogeomorphic segment 18 in the CRB province. The differences in channel morphology and hydraulic geometries between fluvial geomorphic provinces are evident in the types, relative abundance, and response of hydraulic microhabitats to changing discharges. The four gaging stations chosen for hydraulic microhabitat analysis are distributed among three different fluvial geomorphic provinces. In the MB province, the smaller channel and lower discharges resulted in the dominance of shallow and intermediate-depth hydraulic environments with the vast majority of hydraulic microhabitat restricted to shallow categories even during upper-decile discharges. In the CRB province, intermediate depth hydraulic conditions, particularly intermediate-swift, dominate over all ranges of discharge. Hydraulic microhabitat conditions were most diverse in the BB province, with most hydraulic microhabitat categories present over the entire range of discharges analyzed. The calculated differences in hydraulic microhabitat distributions, abundance, and adjustments between streamflow-gaging stations were the result of differences in physical structure of the channel and subsequent channel hydraulic geometry. At the reach scale, field measurements made in water years 2008 and 2009 in four study reaches within the Scenic Reach were used to (1) characterize the elevation and geomorphic processes associated with fluvial landforms, (2) build hydraulic geometry relations, (3) examine flow hydraulics over a range of discharges, and (4) examine the types and responses of hydraulic microhabitats to a range of flow magnitudes. Four landform groups were identified and named in order of increasing elevation: low flood plains, intermediate flood plains, low terraces, and high terraces. The terraces were poorly characterized because the surveys did not extend across the full width of the alluvial valley bottom. The two lowest fluvial landforms are likely active in the modern hydroclimatic regime. Sediment samples obtained in the study reaches indicate that the primary bed material in the active channel ranged in size from coarse silt to coarse sand. Grain-size distributions from samples also indicate that the bed of the Niobrara River among the study reaches coarsens and has increasing grainsize variability in the downstream direction. Values of at-a-station hydraulic geometry exponents indicate that the Niobrara River in the study reaches adjusts its geometry to changing discharges primarily through increases in flow depth and velocity. Relations at one cross section indicated that, at least locally, changes in width were also an important channel adjustment mechanism. Hydraulic behavior over the range of flows measured was not consistent among all study reaches, but two general modes of hydraulic behavior were observed in the reaches with substantial coverage of the bed by fine sediment. At the Sunny Brook and Muleshoe study reaches, average boundary-shear stress remained approximately constant, and hydraulic resistance decreased, for discharges below 900 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s). Above 900 ft 3 /s, average boundary shear stress and hydraulic resistance both increased. The Rock Barn study reach did not exhibit the same two-mode hydraulic behavior observed at the Sunny Brook and Muleshoe reaches. The coincident increase in boundary shear stress above 900 ft 3 /s observed at the Sunny Brook and Muleshoe study reaches represents a potential hydraulic threshold above which bedload transport rates were likely to increase markedly. No consistent bed-adjustment pattern (scour or fill) was identified in the study reaches over the range of flows or over the measurement season. Analysis of hydraulic microhabitats over the range of discharges measured at the study reaches indicates that some percentage of most habitat niche categories was available for at least one discharge condition, but the majority of hydraulic habitat available was within the intermediate-swift and deepswift habitat niche categories. Deep-swift conditions dominated nearly all study reaches under all measured discharge conditions. Slight differences in habitat distributions were observed between the study reaches with substantial coverage of the bed by fine sediment—Sunny Brook, Muleshoe, and Rock Barn—and the bedrock-dominated reach, Crooked Creek. Although the four study reaches occupy three different hydrogeomorphic segments, the types, relative abundance, and response of hydraulic microhabitat niche distributions to changing discharge conditions generally were similar among all reaches.

Nebraska↗

USGS1975

Geochemical Exploration Techniques Applicable in the Search for Copper Deposits

Geochemical exploration is an important part of copper-resource evaluation. A large number of geochemical exploration techniques, both proved and untried, are available to the geochemist to use in the search for new copper deposits. Analyses of whole-rock samples have been used in both regional and local geochemical exploration surveys in the search for copper. Analyses of mineral separates, such as biotite, magnetite, and sulfides, have also been used. Analyses of soil samples are widely used in geochemical exploration, especially for localized surveys. It is important to distinguish between residual and transported soil types. Orientation studies should always be conducted prior to a geochemical investigation in a given area in order to determine the best soil horizon and the best size of soil material for sampling in that area. Silty frost boils, caliche, and desert varnish are specialized types of soil samples that might be useful sampling media. Soil gas is a new and potentially valuable geochemical sampling medium, especially in exploring for buried mineral deposits in arid regions. Gaseous products in samples of soil may be related to base-metal deposits and include mercury vapor, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, carbon oxysulfide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, the noble gases, the halogens, and many hydrocarbon compounds. Transported materials that have been used in geochemical sampling programs include glacial float boulders, glacial till, esker gravels, stream sediments, stream-sediment concentrates, and lake sediments. Stream-sediment sampling is probably the most widely used and most successful geochemical exploration technique. Hydrogeochemical exploration programs have utilized hot- and cold-spring waters and their precipitates as well as waters from lakes, streams, and wells. Organic gel found in lakes and at stream mouths is an unproved sampling medium. Suspended material and dissolved gases in any type of water may also be useful media. Samples of ice and snow have been used for limited geochemical surveys. Both geobotanical and biogeochemical surveys have been successful in locating copper deposits in many parts of the world. Micro-organisms, including bacteria and algae, are other unproved media that should be studied. Animals can be used in geochemical-prospecting programs. Dogs have been used quite successfully to sniff out hidden and exposed sulfide minerals. Tennite mounds are commonly composed of subsurface material, but have not as yet proved to be useful in locating buried mineral deposits. Animal tissue and waste products are essentially unproved but potentially valuable sampling media. Knowledge of the location of areas where trace-element-associated diseases in animals and man are endemic as well as a better understanding of these diseases, may aid in identifying regions that are enriched in or depleted of various elements, including copper. Results of analyses of gases in the atmosphere are proving valuable in mineral-exploration surveys. Studies involving metallic compounds exhaled by plants into the atmosphere, and of particulate matter suspended in the atmosphere are reviewed these methods may become important in the future. Remote-sensing techniques are useful for making indirect measurements of geochemical responses. Two techniques applicable to geochemical exploration are neutron-activation analysis and gamma-ray spectrometry. Aerial photography is especially useful in vegetation surveys. Radar imagery is an unproved but potentially valuable method for use in studies of vegetation in perpetually clouded regions. With the advent of modern computers, many new techniques, such as correlation analysis, regression analysis, discriminant analysis, factor analysis, cluster analysis, trend-surface analysis, and moving-average analysis can be applied to geochemical data sets. Selective use of these techniques can provide new insights into the interpretatio

Professional Paper↗