U.S. Geological Survey 2004 1.5 tables U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1001 Reston VA U.S. Geological Survey http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/ http://mrdata.usgs.gov/services/ngs?request=getcapabilities&service=WMS&version=1.0.0& http://mrdata.usgs.gov/services/ngs?request=getcapabilities&service=WFS&version=1.0.0& The USGS, in collaboration with other federal and state government agencies, industry, and academia, is conducting the National Geochemical Survey (NGS) to produce a body of geochemical data for the United States based primarily on stream sediments, analyzed using a consistent set of methods. These data will compose a complete, national-scale geochemical coverage of the US, and will enable construction of geochemical maps, refine estimates of baseline concentrations of chemical elements in the sampled media, and provide context for a wide variety of studies in the geological and environmental sciences. The goal of the NGS is to analyze at least one stream-sediment sample in every 289 km2 area by a single set of analytical methods across the entire nation, with other solid sample media substituted where necessary. The NGS incorporates geochemical data from a variety of sources, including existing analyses in USGS databases, reanalyses of samples in USGS archives, and analyses of newly collected samples. At the present time, the NGS includes data covering ~71% of the land area of the US, including samples in all 50 states. This version of the online report provides complete access to NGS data, describes the history of the project, the methodology used, and presents preliminary geochemical maps for all analyzed elements. Future editions of this and other related reports will include the results of analysis of variance studies, as well as interpretive products related to the NGS data. This database provides in digital form many geochemical analyses reported by USGS in its published literature. These data will compose a complete, national-scale geochemical coverage of the US, and will enable construction of geochemical maps, refine estimates of baseline concentrations of chemical elements in the sampled media, and provide context for a wide variety of studies in the geological and environmental sciences. The goal of the NGS is to analyze at least one stream-sediment sample in every 289 km2 area by a single set of analytical methods across the entire nation, with other solid sample media substituted where necessary. 19670711 2007 Sample collection dates Complete As needed -178.763350 158.257500 71.318300 6.906500 Gateway to the Earth Geochemistry Unconsolidated deposits Field sampling Chemical analysis Atomic absorption analysis Neutron activation analysis Particle-beam spectroscopy X-ray fluorescence spectrometry Atomic emission spectrometry ISO 19115 Topic Categories geoscientificInformation Augmented FIPS 10-4 and FIPS 6-4, version 1.0 US = United States none Mercury is a difficult element for which to obtain accurate analyses. Samples can easily be contaminated with Hg during handling, storage, and preparation for analysis. Mercury can also be lost from samples during the drying process or while in storage. Recently collected samples were handled and stored in a manner that should result in few such problems. However, many Hg data in the NGS are based on reanalyses of archival samples, e.g., NURE samples, that were neither collected using protocols appropriate for Hg analysis, nor stored under conditions that would necessarily preserve the original Hg concentrations. Some NURE samples in the eastern US were very likely contaminated by Hg at some point after collection (e.g., all samples from Allegany County, Maryland). At the present time, it is not known which archival samples may have been contaminated with Hg in the laboratory, and thus extreme caution should be exercised in interpreting NGS data. Jeffrey N Grossman U.S. Geological Survey, ER mailing address

Mail Stop 954 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive

Reston VA 20192 USA 703-648-6184 703-648-6383 jgrossman@usgs.gov http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/statusmaps/sample-types.jpg The image below shows the area of the United States currently covered by the NGS and for which data are available in this report. Colors are used to indicate which sample media are represented in different parts of the country. Note that overlapping symbols may obscure some points. At present, 88% of the land area of the US has sample coverage. ~70% of the analyzed samples are stream sediments and the majority of the rest are soils. 976x480 pixels, 202k bytes. JPEG http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/statusmaps/sample-density.jpg Density of geochemical sampling in the NGS. Density is shown both as the number of samples per 1000 km2 (right side of legend) and as the approximate linear spacing between samples had they been collected along a perfect two-dimensional grid (left side of legend). Hot colors indicate dense sampling and cool colors show areas where sampling is relatively sparse; white areas are not yet covered. Sample density is not uniform across the nation due to the incorporation of many different types of studies into the NGS, although a minimum density of ~1 sample per 289 km2 (dark blue) is maintained in all sampled areas (gray areas on the map, with lower densities, are not yet complete). 969x534 pixels, 243k bytes. JPEG http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/statusmaps/ngs-status-07-07.jpg Plans for completing the NGS in the year 2008 For planning purposes, the nation was divided into ~33,000 cells, each with ~289 sq km area. These cells are shown in this map, color-coded by the status of sampling within the cell. Green areas are done. Pale green cells were missed during initial phases of the NGS and may be filled at some future date. In dark blue regions, collaborative sampling efforts by the USGS and state government agencies are under way. Red areas include both cells that will probably not be sampled (e.g., the Nevada Test Site) and cells for which sampling plans have not yet been developed. 967x484 pixels, 186k bytes. JPEG Jeffrey N. Grossman: Principal author of this report; database design and data processing; development of geochemical mapping methods; development of computer methods in support of geochemical sampling. Andrew E. Grosz: Project concept, design, and leadership; development and supervision of sampling protocols and field methods; development of collaborative activities between the USGS and other agencies. Peter N. Schweitzer: Development of data retrieval software; website programming. Paul G. Schruben: GIS support; report generation; sample site maps; sample preparation. The database files are maintained in-house using Paradox and ArcView software; the web version is stored using MySQL and accessed using PHP. Grossman, J.N. 1998 U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 98-622 Gustavsson, N. Bølviken, B. Smith, D.B. Severson, R.C. 2001 U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1648 http://minerals.usgs.gov/news/v2n1/2geochem.html The database contains a wide variety of analytical results from methods whose reliability is generally well understood. The most reliable analytical methods are the following fields: > AL_ICP40 > CA_ICP40 > FE_ICP40 > K_ICP40 > MG_ICP40 > NA_ICP40 > P_ICP40 > TI_ICP40 > BA_ICP40 > BE_ICP40 > CE_ICP40 > CO_ICP40 > CR_ICP40 > CU_ICP40 > EU_ICP40 > GA_ICP40 > LA_ICP40 > LI_ICP40 > MN_ICP40 > NB_ICP40 > ND_ICP40 > NI_ICP40 > PB_ICP40 > SC_ICP40 > SR_ICP40 > TH_ICP40 > V_ICP40 > Y_ICP40 > YB_ICP40 > ZN_ICP40 > CS_ICP40 > RB_ICP40 > SB_ICP40 > ZR_ICP40 > AS_AA > SE_AA > HG_AA > SB_AA > TE_AA > TL_AA > W_VS > AU_AA > PD_AA > PT_AA > AS_ICP10 > AU_ICP10 > CD_ICP10 > CU_ICP10 > MO_ICP10 > PB_ICP10 > ZN_ICP10 > GA_ICP10 > HG_ICP10 > SE_ICP10 > TE_ICP10 > TL_ICP10 > AL_ICP16 > CA_ICP16 > FE_ICP16 > K_ICP16 > MG_ICP16 > NA_ICP16 > P_ICP16 > SI_ICP16 > TI_ICP16 > BA_ICP16 > CR_ICP16 > MN_ICP16 > NB_ICP16 > SR_ICP16 > Y_ICP16 > ZR_ICP16 > NA_INAA > SC_INAA > TI_INAA > CR_INAA > FE_INAA > CO_INAA > NI_INAA > ZN_INAA > AS_INAA > BR_INAA > RB_INAA > SR_INAA > ZR_INAA > SB_INAA > CS_INAA > BA_INAA > LA_INAA > CE_INAA > ND_INAA > SM_INAA > EU_INAA > TB_INAA > YB_INAA > LU_INAA > HF_INAA > TA_INAA > W_INAA > AU_INAA > TH_INAA > U_INAA > U_DN > TH_DN > SIO2_XRF > AL2O3_XRF > FE2O3_XRF > MGO_XRF > CAO_XRF > NA2O_XRF > K2O_XRF > TIO2_XRF > P2O5_XRF > MNO_XRF > LOI925C > TH_NURE > U_NURE The samples and data that compose the NGS come from a wide variety of sources. These sources can be placed in 5 broad categories based on who collected and analyzed the samples. The CATEGORY field of the database is used to store this information. Within each category, records can be broken down into a large number of datasets, each of which contains data on samples collected and analyzed together. The DATASET field of the database stores this information. Descriptions of Datasets and Categories in the NGS: http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/groups-cats.htm A limited number of analytical methods were used for samples in the NGS in order to provide the maximum level of internal consistency possible to the database. For every analytical data field in the NGS, there is an associated field pointing to information about the method used to make the analyses. These fields contain "job numbers," which are names laboratories assigned to batches of samples that were all run together. Multi-element methods (all ICP and neutron activation methods, XRF, PGE analysis, and forms-of-carbon) each have a single field containing job information that is applicable to all analyzed elements. Single-element methods (As, Au, Hg, Sb, Se, Te, Tl, and W) each have their own field containing this information. Analytical Methods and Database Fields in the NGS: http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/analysis.htm At the present time, the NGS includes data covering about 71% of the land area of the US, including samples in all 50 states. Four of the analytical methods are considered to be most important for general coverage of the subject: the ICP 40-element acid dissolution group, and determination of Arsenic, Mercury, and Selenium by hydride-generation atomic absorption. Data from other analytical methods are provided when available but it was not the principal goal of the study to ensure that these analyses were completed on most samples. Only about 5% of the samples lack data from the ICP 40-element methods, and 25% to 35% of samples lack data from the primary AA methods (for As, Hg, and Se). The following table shows for each database field the number of empty cells and the proportion of the whole database that number represents. > Field name Missing Percent >Sample identification > REC_NO 0 0.0 > LABNO 0 0.0 > DATASET 0 0.0 > CATEGORY 2729 3.9 > TYPEDESC 6 0.0 >Geographic location > DATUM 13579 19.3 > LATITUDE 2803 4.0 > LONGITUDE 2803 4.0 > QUAD24CODE 9362 13.3 > QUAD250COD 2782 4.0 > QUAD100COD 2808 4.0 > FIPS_INT 2782 4.0 > HUC_8 2804 4.0 > QD250NAME 2782 4.0 > ZIP3 2806 4.0 > CONGDIST 2806 4.0 >Sample characteristics > FLDNAM 2 0.0 > COLL_DATE 0 0.0 > DESCRIPT 2532 3.6 > STYPE 6 0.0 > SOIL_HORIZ 63183 89.8 > COLOR 36315 51.6 > SMPGRSIZE 59512 84.6 > MEDIUM 6 0.0 > SOURCE 2720 3.9 > SOURCE_MOD 19641 27.9 > UPSIEVE 3540 5.0 > DRIED 11771 16.7 > STYPENOTE 45047 64.0 >Site characteristics > SETTING 60013 85.3 > ACCHANWID 33857 48.1 > WATERDEP 33875 48.1 > WATCOL 45163 64.2 > FLOWSTAGE 21486 30.5 > FLOWRATE 44492 63.2 > STRBED 19804 28.1 > CONTAMSOU 14126 20.1 > CONTAMPOT 58672 83.4 > CONTAMDEGR 68546 97.4 > VEG 16267 23.1 > PH 51554 73.3 >Sample characteristics (details) > GRAINSIZE 46988 66.8 > COLLECTOR 30813 43.8 > PRIME_ID 19976 28.4 > LASLID 55035 78.2 > ORNLID 54452 77.4 > SRLID 45473 64.6 > LLLID 65548 93.2 > SITE 63631 90.4 > XSITE 70336 100.0 > REPLC 25323 36.0 > LABCOND 70351 100.0 > GRABS 40119 57.0 > SAMPHR 49733 70.7 > ORGN_PCT 65007 92.4 > STUDY 70026 99.5 > ODOR 64856 92.2 >Site characteristics (details) > PHOTOS 66893 95.1 > FLDPLNWID 64933 92.3 > RELIEF 18458 26.2 > FORMATION 48761 69.3 > SGEOUNIT 51700 73.5 > ALK 59919 85.2 > O_DISS 67280 95.6 > SCIN 45205 64.2 > AIRTEMP 49965 71.0 > WTRTEMP 51416 73.1 > COND 51352 73.0 > STRFLOW 65019 92.4 > STR_CHAN 49211 69.9 > WEATH 38168 54.2 > VEG_DENS 24891 35.4 > ROCK_TYPE 42150 59.9 > ROCK_COL 58434 83.0 >Analyses by ICP/Acid dissolution > ICP40_JOB 3540 5.0 > AL_ICP40 3563 5.1 > CA_ICP40 3563 5.1 > FE_ICP40 3563 5.1 > K_ICP40 3563 5.1 > MG_ICP40 3575 5.1 > NA_ICP40 3563 5.1 > P_ICP40 3607 5.1 > TI_ICP40 3563 5.1 > AG_ICP40 3563 5.1 > AS_ICP40 3797 5.4 > AU_ICP40 3797 5.4 > BA_ICP40 3571 5.1 > BE_ICP40 3563 5.1 > BI_ICP40 4729 6.7 > CD_ICP40 3563 5.1 > CE_ICP40 3563 5.1 > CO_ICP40 3563 5.1 > CR_ICP40 3563 5.1 > CU_ICP40 3563 5.1 > EU_ICP40 7287 10.4 > GA_ICP40 3563 5.1 > HO_ICP40 8441 12.0 > LA_ICP40 3563 5.1 > LI_ICP40 3563 5.1 > MN_ICP40 3581 5.1 > MO_ICP40 3563 5.1 > NB_ICP40 3823 5.4 > ND_ICP40 7275 10.3 > NI_ICP40 3563 5.1 > PB_ICP40 3563 5.1 > SC_ICP40 3563 5.1 > SN_ICP40 4729 6.7 > SR_ICP40 3576 5.1 > TA_ICP40 8441 12.0 > TH_ICP40 3563 5.1 > U_ICP40 4729 6.7 > V_ICP40 3563 5.1 > Y_ICP40 3563 5.1 > YB_ICP40 7275 10.3 > ZN_ICP40 3565 5.1 > CS_ICP40 66653 94.7 > RB_ICP40 66653 94.7 > SB_ICP40 66653 94.7 > ZR_ICP40 66653 94.7 >Analyses by AA > AS_JOB 16009 22.8 > AS_AA 16009 22.8 > SE_JOB 22236 31.6 > SE_AA 22236 31.6 > HG_JOB 21206 30.1 > HG_AA 21206 30.1 > SB_JOB 67852 96.4 > SB_AA 67852 96.4 > TE_JOB 69195 98.3 > TE_AA 69195 98.3 > TL_JOB 68415 97.2 > TL_AA 68415 97.2 > W_JOB 69061 98.1 > W_VS 69061 98.1 > AU_JOB 45579 64.8 > AU_AA 45579 64.8 > PDPT_JOB 63301 90.0 > PD_AA 63301 90.0 > PT_AA 64701 92.0 >Analyses by ICP Partial Chem > ICP10_JOB 55996 79.6 > AG_ICP10 55996 79.6 > AS_ICP10 55996 79.6 > AU_ICP10 59622 84.7 > BI_ICP10 55996 79.6 > CD_ICP10 55996 79.6 > CU_ICP10 56001 79.6 > MO_ICP10 55996 79.6 > PB_ICP10 55996 79.6 > SB_ICP10 55996 79.6 > ZN_ICP10 56000 79.6 > GA_ICP10 66737 94.8 > HG_ICP10 67058 95.3 > SE_ICP10 67510 95.9 > TE_ICP10 66737 94.8 > TL_ICP10 66737 94.8 >Analyses by Fusion ICP > ICP16_JOB 68464 97.3 > AL_ICP16 68464 97.3 > CA_ICP16 68464 97.3 > FE_ICP16 68464 97.3 > K_ICP16 68464 97.3 > MG_ICP16 68464 97.3 > NA_ICP16 68464 97.3 > P_ICP16 68464 97.3 > SI_ICP16 68688 97.6 > TI_ICP16 68464 97.3 > BA_ICP16 68464 97.3 > CR_ICP16 68464 97.3 > MN_ICP16 68464 97.3 > NB_ICP16 68464 97.3 > SR_ICP16 68464 97.3 > Y_ICP16 68464 97.3 > ZR_ICP16 68464 97.3 >Analyses by NAA > INAAJOB_US 64649 91.9 > INAAJOB_BE 61829 87.9 > NA_INAA 57519 81.7 > SC_INAA 57487 81.7 > TI_INAA 61963 88.1 > CR_INAA 57493 81.7 > FE_INAA 57507 81.7 > CO_INAA 57487 81.7 > NI_INAA 57566 81.8 > ZN_INAA 58474 83.1 > AS_INAA 57533 81.8 > BR_INAA 61833 87.9 > RB_INAA 57588 81.8 > SR_INAA 65165 92.6 > ZR_INAA 57500 81.7 > MO_INAA 61833 87.9 > SB_INAA 57559 81.8 > CS_INAA 57518 81.7 > BA_INAA 57536 81.8 > LA_INAA 57488 81.7 > CE_INAA 57487 81.7 > ND_INAA 57493 81.7 > SM_INAA 57488 81.7 > EU_INAA 57487 81.7 > TB_INAA 57489 81.7 > YB_INAA 57489 81.7 > LU_INAA 57491 81.7 > HF_INAA 57489 81.7 > TA_INAA 57488 81.7 > W_INAA 57696 82.0 > AU_INAA 57537 81.8 > TH_INAA 57487 81.7 > U_INAA 57487 81.7 > DN_JOB 69766 99.2 > U_DN 69766 99.2 > TH_DN 69766 99.2 >Analyses by XRF > XRF_JOB 66795 94.9 > SIO2_XRF 66798 94.9 > L2O3_XRF 66795 94.9 > FE2O3_XRF 66796 94.9 > MGO_XRF 66795 94.9 > CAO_XRF 66795 94.9 > NA2O_XRF 66795 94.9 > K2O_XRF 66795 94.9 > TIO2_XRF 66797 94.9 > P2O5_XRF 66796 94.9 > MNO_XRF 66795 94.9 > LOI925C 66795 94.9 >Analyses for light elements > C_S_JOB 69416 98.7 > C_TOT 69416 98.7 > C_ORG 69841 99.3 > C_CO3 69792 99.2 > S_TOT 69782 99.2 >Analyses by NURE program > AL_NURE 26857 38.2 > CA_NURE 38881 55.3 > FE_NURE 26462 37.6 > K_NURE 36952 52.5 > MG_NURE 36938 52.5 > NA_NURE 26806 38.1 > AG_NURE 35790 50.9 > AS_NURE 54102 76.9 > AU_NURE 40720 57.9 > B_NURE 54459 77.4 > BA_NURE 36587 52.0 > BE_NURE 41728 59.3 > BI_NURE 59027 83.9 > BR_NURE 70304 99.9 > CD_NURE 59027 83.9 > CE_NURE 27641 39.3 > CL_NURE 58971 83.8 > CO_NURE 36384 51.7 > CR_NURE 36288 51.6 > CS_NURE 58954 83.8 > CU_NURE 35896 51.0 > DY_NURE 44479 63.2 > EU_NURE 42409 60.3 > F_NURE 70229 99.8 > HF_NURE 30650 43.6 > HG_NURE 70294 99.9 > LA_NURE 31508 44.8 > LI_NURE 41087 58.4 > LU_NURE 43320 61.6 > MN_NURE 26030 37.0 > MO_NURE 47168 67.0 > NB_NURE 36001 51.2 > NI_NURE 35849 50.9 > P_NURE 47185 67.1 > PB_NURE 39617 56.3 > PT_NURE 69372 98.6 > RB_NURE 58955 83.8 > SB_NURE 58955 83.8 > SC_NURE 25602 36.4 > SE_NURE 54405 77.3 > SM_NURE 41562 59.1 > SN_NURE 51643 73.4 > SR_NURE 39715 56.4 > TA_NURE 59059 83.9 > TB_NURE 59736 84.9 > TH_NURE 25845 36.7 > TI_NURE 27042 38.4 > V_NURE 25946 36.9 > W_NURE 51609 73.3 > Y_NURE 47735 67.8 > YB_NURE 45068 64.1 > ZN_NURE 35890 51.0 > ZR_NURE 48695 69.2 > U_NURE 25751 36.6 >Processing information > LABNO2 59440 84.5 > PREV_LABNO 68420 97.2 > FLDNAM_AN 18 0.0 > AOV_CODE 65468 93.0 > REPLICATE 65468 93.0 > LOC_COUNT 2801 4.0 > ANAL_NOTES 69685 99.0 > NURE_METH 24730 35.1 The accuracy of geographic sample locations depends on the procedures used by the original sampling program. Some general statements can be made, however. NGS Samples: For samples collected by the NGS (SW-ALASKA and State datasets) all coordinates were measured by handheld global positioning systems (GPS). Data were recorded in a variety of formats (decimal degrees, degrees plus decimal minutes, degrees-minutes-seconds, and UTM coordinates), and all were translated into decimal degrees. NURE samples: The coordinates of NURE samples (in all NURE datasets) , measured in the pre-GPS era, were digitized from field maps; a discussion of these methods and what datum was used may be found here. Other samples: The coordinates of all other samples (PLUTO and RASS datasets) were determined by unknown methods, unless specifically discussed in any primary publications on these datasets. Because most were collected in the pre-GPS era, most were probably digitized or otherwise read from field maps used during collection. It is likely that the NAD27 datum and Clarke 1866 ellipsoid were used on most such maps, but this is not known with confidence. Smith, Steven M. 1997 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-492 http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/ digital data 1975 1980 Sample collection period NURE-HSSR Samples collected between 1975 and 1980 as part of the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program. Goldhaber, Martin B. Irwin, Elise Atkins, Brian Lee, Lopaka Black, Dee Dee Zappia, Humbert Hatch, Joe Pashin, Jack Barwick, Larry H. Cartwright, Walter E. Sanzolone, Rick Ruppert, Leslie Kolker, Allan Finkelman, Robert 2001 U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2357 http://pubs.usgs.gov/mf/2001/mf-2357/ digital data 1998 Reanalysis of samples Goldhaber and others (2001) Data identified in the database where DATASET='NURE Alabama II' A suite of 1690 samples from northern Alabama (excluding the northeast corner), was pulled from the NURE archive and analyzed in 1998 for a project by M. Goldhaber (Goldhaber and others, 2001). Most were analyzed by the ICP40 and As methods only. Cannon, W.F. Woodruff, L.G. Pimley, Shana 2003 Journal of Geochemical Exploration v. 81 digital data 1998 Reanalysis of samples Cannon and others (2003) A suite of 400 samples from the Ashland and Rice Lake 1x2 degree quadrangles in northern Wisconsin, pulled from the NURE archive and analyzed in 1998 for a project by W. Cannon (Cannon and others, 2003). All were analyzed by the ICP40 and As methods, and ~1/4 were also analyzed for Hg. Folger, H.W. 2000 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-421 digital data 1998 Reanalysis of samples Folger (2000) A large number of samples reanalyzed from the NURE collection. Tuttle, Michele L.W. Goldhaber, Martin B. Ruppert, Leslie F. Hower, James C. 2002 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-28 http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2002/ofr-02-0028/ digital data 2000 Reanalysis of samples Tuttle and others (2002) A suite of 1280 samples from eastern Kentucky was pulled from the NURE archive and analyzed in 2000 for a project by M. Goldhaber and M. Tuttle (see Tuttle and others, 2002). All were analyzed by the ICP40 and As methods, and ~1/8 were also analyzed by the Hg and Se atomic absorption methods. King, H.D. Fey D.L. Motooka, J.M. Knight, R.J. Roushey B.H. McGuire, D.J. 1996 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-62-B digital data 1996 publication date King and others (1996) Part of a large number of NURE samples reanalyzed by USGS. Kilburn, J.E. Smith, D.B. Hopkins, R.T. 1990 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-204 digital data 1985 1986 Reanalysis of samples Kilburn and others (1990) A group of 809 samples from the Reno quadrangle in west-central Nevada was pulled from the NURE archive and analyzed for Hg, Au, W, and other trace elements in 1985-1986 (Kilburn and others, 1990). No ICP analyses were done on the samples. Analytical data for the samples was extracted from the RASS component of the National Geochemical Database (Carl Abston, written comm. 2000). Baedecker, Phillip A. Grossman, Jeffrey N. Buttleman, Kim P. 1998 U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-47 digital data 1998 publication date PLUTO The PLUTO database contains the results of analyses of geological material done by the Branch of Analytical Laboratories (and its successors and predecessors at the USGS) between the late 1960's and mid 1990's. PLUTO is one component of the National Geochemical Database at the USGS. Colman, John A. Sanzolone, Richard F. 1990 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-571 digital data 1990 publication date Colman and Sanzolone (1990) A series of stream sediments from the upper Illinois River basin was collected in the late 1980's, and most were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods. Colman, John A. Sanzolone, Richard F. 1992 U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin v. 28, no. 5 digital data 1992 publication date Colman and Sanzolone (1992) A series of stream sediments from the upper Illinois River basin was collected in the late 1980's, and most were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods. Sanzolone, Richard F. Ryder, Jean L. 1989 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-658 digital data 1989 publication date Sanzolone and Ryder (1989) A series of stream sediments from the upper Illinois River basin was collected in the late 1980's, and most were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods. Wilson, S.A. Kennedy, K.R. Gent, C.A. Briggs, P.H. Tidball, R.R. McNeal, J.M. 1990 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-214 digital data 1990 publication date Wilson and others (1990) In the early 1980's, the USGS collected a large suite of stream sediment samples on a 10x10 km grid across the entire southern half of California (the "CALMAP" project). In the San Joaquin Valley, soils were collected due to the absence of suitable streams, with most of the sampling being done in 1983. This dataset comprises analyses of these soils from 1985, done by Wilson and others (1990), using the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods. Bailey, Eizabeth A. Smith, David B. Abston, Carl C. Granitto, Matthew Burleigh, Kuuipo A. 1999 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-433 http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1999/of99-433/ digital data 1999 publication date RASS Alaska A diverse group of 677 stream sediment samples from across Alaska, with many from the Alaska Peninsula, were extracted from the RASS sample archive at the Denver Federal Center for reanalysis. These samples were originally submitted for analysis by 35 different USGS scientists during the period 1967-1992; original publications for these samples are unknown to the authors of the present report. Original analyses, many of which are by semiquantitative methods, may be found in the RASS component of the National Geochemical Database, but are not included in this database. All were reanalyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods in 2001 as part of the National Geochemical Survey project, to fill in areas of Alaska not covered by NURE samples. In addition, several quadrangles in north-central Alaska (Survey Pass, Wiseman, and Chandalar) were included in order to duplicate areas covered by the NURE program. Thompson D.E. Grosz A.E. McNeal J.M. Grossman J.N. 1998 Mississippi Geology v. 19, no. 2 digital data 1998 Sample collection year Thompson and others (1998) A suite of 1421 stream sediments and soils was collected as part of a joint USGS-Mississippi Geological Survey project (Thompson and others, 1998, 2002). Samples were collected in 1998, covering the entire state. Most Mississippi samples were analyzed by the ICP40, ICP10, As, Se, Hg, and INAA methods, and ~half were also analyzed by XRF. Thompson D.E. Grosz A.E. Schruben P.G. Grossman J.N. 2002 Curry, K.J. (editor) 2002 Journal of the Mississippi Academy of Sciences v. 47, no. 1 digital data 1998 Sample collection year Thompson and others (2002) A suite of 1421 stream sediments and soils was collected as part of a joint USGS-Mississippi Geological Survey project (Thompson and others, 1998, 2002). Samples were collected in 1998, covering the entire state. Most Mississippi samples were analyzed by the ICP40, ICP10, As, Se, Hg, and INAA methods, and ~half were also analyzed by XRF. Prior sample collection programs Sampling has been carried out over several decades in a variety of field programs run by numerous Federal and state agencies. Groups of samples collected by the same agency or research program are referred to in the documentation as separate "datasets", meaning the samples will have a common value for the fields CATEGORY and DATASET. The CATEGORY field indicates the general type of research program collecting the samples, while the DATASET field identifies the specific project, state government, or investigator in whose effort the samples were collected. These are described more fully in http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/groups-cats.htm 1967 - 2002 National Geochemical Survey project By 1998-1999, it had become clear within the USGS Mineral Resources Prgram that there would be great benefits to combining earlier efforts in the southeastern states with other regional geochemical assessments being conducted by the program in the western US, and expanding to a national scale. A new national effort comprising four interlinked regional "Surveys and Analysis" projects was begun, including a task to undertake a National Geochemical Survey (NGS). A complete national geochemical coverage was sought, using an internally consistent set of analytical methods and principally based on stream sediments. The minimum sample density was planned to be 1 sample per 289 km2 in all land areas of the country (i. e., based on a 17x17 km sampling grid). Analytical methods were chosen to include a 40-element ICP package plus single-element determinations of As, Se, and Hg by atomic absorption for every sample. 1999 Field parties from 7 states collected samples in 2001-2003, and all were analyzed together, in random order, in 2004-2005. (a) 190 samples were collected in southwest Alaska by USGS geologists, in an area not covered previously by the USGS or NURE programs; (b) 14 samples were collected by A. Grosz and D. Bickerstaff (USGS) in Hawai`i, covering the islands of Hawai`i, O`ahu, Maui, Kaua`i, Moloka`i, and Lana`i; (c) 423 samples were collected across Illinois as part of a joint USGS-Illinois Geological Survey project; some of these samples were also analyzed above in the States 2002 dataset; (d) 250 samples were collected across Indiana as part of a joint USGS-Indiana Geological Survey project; some of these samples were also analyzed above in the States 2002 dataset; (e) 2 samples were collected in central South Dakota by a joint USGS, North Dakota Geological Survey, and South Dakota Geological Survey team as part of a field orientation study; (f) 654 soil samples were collected in North Dakota by the North Dakota Geological Survey as part of a statewide study; (g) 1095 soil samples were collected in Iowa by the Iowa Geological Survey as part of a statewide study; All samples were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods, as well as by a fire-assay method for Au, Pd, and Pt. Index map showing distribution of these samples: http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/doc/indexmaps/states-2003.jpg 20050930 States 2003 Field parties from 13 states collected samples in 2003-2004, and all were analyzed together, in random order, in 2005. (a) 56 samples were collected on Kodiak Island, Alaska, by USGS geologists, in an area not covered previously by the USGS or NURE programs; (b) 362 samples were collected across Arkansas as part of a joint USGS, Arkansas Geological Commission study; (c) 186 samples were collected across northern California as part of a joint USGS, California Geological Survey project; (d) 38 samples were collected in an area of northern Kentucky not covered by the NURE program as part of a joint USGS, Kentucky Geological Survey study; (e) 57 samples were collected in an area of northern Maine not covered by the NURE program as part of a joint USGS, Maine Geological Survey study; (f) 379 samples were collected across Minnesota as part of a joint USGS, Minnesota Geological Survey study; (g) 780 soil samples were collected in North Dakota by the North Dakota Geological Survey as part of a statewide study (see the States 2003 dataset); (h) 581 samples were collected across Ohio as part of a joint USGS, Ohio Geological Survey study; (i) 125 samples were collected across Oregon as part of a joint USGS, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries study; (j) 125 samples were collected in western Pennsylvania as part of a joint USGS, Pennsylvania Geological Survey study; (k) 42 samples were collected in central Texas as part of a joint USGS, Texas Bureau of Economic Geology study; (l) 782 samples were collected across Washington State as part of a joint USGS, Washington DNR Division of Geology & Earth Resources study; (m) 260 samples were collected across Wisconsin as part of a joint USGS, Wisconsis Geological & Natural History Survey study. All samples were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods, as well as by a fire-assay method for Au, Pd, and Pt. 20060221 States 2004 Field parties from 8 states collected samples in 2003-2005, and all were analyzed together, in random order, in 2006. (a) 599 samples (533 soils and 66 sediments) were collected across northern California as part of a joint USGS, California Geological Survey project; (b) 33 samples left over from the States 2002 and 2003 datasets (above), collected across Indiana as part of a joint USGS-Indiana Geological Survey project, were analyzed; (c) 170 samples (126 soils and 44 stream sediments) were collected from Kansas as part of a joint USGS, Kansas Geological Survey project; (d) 242 stream sediment samples were collected across Missouri and part of a joint USGS, Missouri Dept. Natural Resources study; (e) 294 soil samples were collected in North Dakota by the North Dakota Geological Survey as part of a statewide study (see the States 2003 and 2004 datasets); (f) 65 stream sediment samples were collected in western New York by a USGS team; (g) 446 samples (half soils, half stream sediments) were collected across Oregon as part of a joint USGS, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries study; (h) 360 samples (309 soils, 51 stream sediments) were collected in central Texas as part of a joint USGS, Texas Bureau of Economic Geology study; All samples were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods, as well as by a fire-assay method for Au, Pd, and Pt. States 2005 Field parties from 16 states collected samples between 2001 and 2006, and all were analyzed together, in random order, in 2006. (a) 88 samples (85 soils, 3 stream sediments) were collected across Arkansas as part of a joint USGS, Arkansas Geological Commission study; (b) 59 soil samples were collected from wetlands in Iowa by the Iowa Geological Survey; (c) 7 samples left over from the States 2002 and 2003 datasets (above) from Illinois were analyzed; (d) 88 samples (half soils and half stream sediments) were collected from Kansas as part of a joint USGS, Kansas Geological Survey project; (e) 1 stream sediment from Maine was analyzed, beginning a joint USGS, Maine Geological Survey project; (f) 583 samples (all but 2 are soils) were collected across Minnesota as part of a joint USGS, Minnesota Geological Survey study; (g) 309 stream sediment samples were collected across Missouri and part of a joint USGS, Missouri Dept. Natural Resources study; (h) 11 soil samples were collected in North Dakota by the North Dakota Geological Survey as part of a statewide study (see the States 2003 and 2004 datasets); (i) 80 soils and 5 stream sediments were collected in Nebraska as part of a joint USGS-State of Nebraska project; (j) 24 stream sediment and soil samples were collected in Long Island, New York by a USGS team; (k) 35 soils plus 1 stream sediment were collected in Ohio as part of a joint USGS, Ohio DNR study; (l) 308 samples (76 soils, 308 stream sediments) were collected across Oregon as part of a joint USGS, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries study; (m) 78 stream sediments were collected in Pennsylvania as part of a joint USGS, Penn. Geological Survey study; (n) 38 soils and stream sediments were collected in Tennessee as part of a joint USGS, Tenn. Division of Geology study; (o) 22 samples were collected across Washington State as part of a joint USGS, Washington DNR Division of Geology & Earth Resources study; (p) 3 samples were collected from Wisconsin, completing a joint USGS, Wisconsis Geological & Natural History Survey study (see States 2004); All samples were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods, as well as by a fire-assay method for Au, Pd, and Pt. States 2006a Field parties from 16 states collected samples between 2001 and 2006, and all were analyzed together, in random order, in 2006. (a) 42 samples (39 soils, 3 stream sediments) were collected across Arkansas as part of a joint USGS, Arkansas Geological Commission study; (b) 20 samples (17 soils and 3 sediments) were collected across northern California as part of a joint USGS, California Geological Survey project; (c) 351 samples (312 soils and 39 stream sediments) were collected from Kansas as part of a joint USGS, Kansas Geological Survey project; (d) 76 samples were collected in an area of northern Kentucky not covered by the NURE program as part of a joint USGS, Kentucky Geological Survey study; (e) 165 stream sediments from northern Maine were analyzed, completing a joint USGS, Maine Geological Survey project; (f) 230 samples (all but 3 are soils) were collected across Minnesota, mostly completing a joint USGS, Minnesota Geological Survey study; (g) 24 stream sediment samples were collected across Missouri and part of a joint USGS, Missouri Dept. Natural Resources study, were analyzed; (h) 10 remaining soil samples collected in North Dakota by the North Dakota Geological Survey as part of a statewide study (see the States 2003 and 2004 datasets); (i) 95 soils and 1 stream sediment were collected in Nebraska as part of a joint USGS-State of Nebraska project; (j) 49 samples (9 soils, 40 stream sediments) were collected across Oregon as part of a joint USGS, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries study; (k) 30 samples (29 soils, 1 stream sediment) were collected in central Texas as part of a joint USGS, Texas Bureau of Economic Geology study; (l) 18 soil samples were collected across Washington State as part of a joint USGS, Washington DNR Division of Geology & Earth Resources study; (m) 1 stream sediment sample was collected from Wisconsin, completing a joint USGS, Wisconsis Geological & Natural History Survey study (see States 2004); All samples were analyzed by the ICP40, As, Se, and Hg methods, as well as by a fire-assay method for Au, Pd, and Pt. States 2006b Coordinates corrected for samples with labno C-277186 and C-277197 by Jeff Grossman 20080225 Field parties in 9 states plus Guam, the Northern Marianas Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia collected samples between 2004 and 2007, and all were analyzed together, in random order, in 2008. (a) 19 sediment and soil samples were collected in the Bristol Bay area, Alaska, by USGS geologists; (b) 36 soil samples were collected in southern Louisiana by USGS geologists; (c) 269 samples of glacial till were collected across Minnesota, with a few in adjacent parts of Manitoba and Ontario, Canada, as part of a joint USGS, Minnesota Geological Survey study; (d) 239 soils and 3 stream sediment samples were collected in Nebraska as part of a joint USGS-State of Nebraska project; (e) 159 soils plus 8 stream sediment samples were collected in Ohio as part of a joint USGS, Ohio DNR study; (f) 213 soils plus 14 stream sediments were collected in Pennsylvania as part of a joint USGS, Penn. Geological Survey study; (g) 584 soils samples were collected in South Dakota as part of a joint USGS-South Dakota Geological Survey project; (h) 6 soils and 119 stream sediments were collected in Tennessee as part of a joint USGS, Tenn. Division of Geology study; (i) 28 soils and 33 stream sediments were collected in northeastern Utah by a team of USGS geologists; (j) 59 samples, mostly soils, were collected by USGS geologists on Pacific islands: 46 were from the territory of Guam; 4 were from Saipan, 3 from Tinian, and 3 from Rota in the Northern Marianas Islands; 4 were from Pohnpei in the Federated States of Micronesia. 200809 Point Entity point 75423 decimal degrees North American Datum of 1927 Clarke 1866 6378206.4 294.98 The database contains 284 different attributes in a single table. These are documented in detail on the web site. The following list shows, by general category, the attribute labels, type, width and precision, and a short description of the field. > Basic sample info > REC_NO Text 10 NURE record ID or USGS record ID code > LABNO Text 19 Unique laboratory name for analyzed sample > DATASET Text 26 Description of group of samples of which this one is a member > CATEGORY Text 20 General type of sample to which the sample-set belongs > TYPEDESC Text 12 Abbreviated description of sample type: stream/pond/spring/soil/etc > > Geographic information > DATUM Text 7 Datum of the geographic coordinates > LATITUDE Real 20.5 Latitude in decimal degrees > LONGITUDE Real 20.5 Longitude in decimal degrees (negative = West) > QUAD24CODE Text 10 Code for the USGS 1:24,000 (7.5 minute) quadrangle in which sample is located > QUAD250COD Text 5 Code for the USGS 1:250,000 (1x2-degree) quadrangle in which sample is located > QUAD100COD Text 7 Code for the USGS 1:100,000 (1:62,500 in Alaska) quadrangle in which sample is located > FIPS_INT Integer 5 FIPS of county calculated from geographic coordinates > HUC_8 Text 8 8-digit hydrologic unit code calculated from geographic coordinates > QD250NAME Text 50 Name of USGS 1:250,000 (1x2-degree) quadrangle in which sample is located > > Sample attributes > FLDNAM Text 19 Field name of sample, possibly corrected after laboratory analysis. > COLL_DATE Date 8 Day on which the sample was collected in the field > DESCRIPT Text 220 Sample description and field notes > STYPE Integer 4 3-digit code for the sample medium and collection protocol > SOIL_HORIZ Text 11 Soil horizon from which the sample was collected (soils only). > COLOR Text 26 Observed color of powdered sample during splitting, prior to USGS analysis > SMPGRSIZE Text 18 Grain size of material collected in the field (descriptive) > MEDIUM Text 9 Sample medium (rock, sediment, standard, or unknown) > SOURCE Text 14 Geological source of the sample medium that was collected > SOURCE_MOD Text 18 Adjective describing sample source > UPSIEVE Integer 4 Sieve size (micrometers) through which sample passed prior to analysis > DRIED Text 7 Manner in which sample was dried prior to analysis > STYPENOTE Text 72 Notes relevant to medium, source, source_mod, upsieve, and dried fields > > Site attributes > SETTING Text 31 Physiographic setting of sample site > ACCHANWID Text 14 Width of active stream channel at collection site > WATERDEP Text 11 Depth of water at collection site > WATCOL Text 17 Color of water at collection site > FLOWSTAGE Text 17 Flow stage of stream at time of sample collection > FLOWRATE Text 23 Description of flow rate of stream at time of sample collection > STRBED Text 45 Material in stream bed at sample collection site > CONTAMSOU Text 30 Observed sources of anthropogenic contamination near sample site > CONTAMPOT Text 46 Likelihood that the sample is contaminated > CONTAMDEGR Text 13 Degree to which sample is likely to be contaminated > VEG Text 76 Description of vegetation around sample site > PH Real 10.3 pH of water at sample site > > Sample attributes - detailed > GRAINSIZE Text 16 Grain size observed during splitting prior to USGS analysis (coarse or fine) > COLLECTOR Text 25 Name, abbreviation, or code for person or team that collected the sample > PRIME_ID Text 9 Primary NURE sample name > LASLID Text 6 Los Alamos NURE field name > ORNLID Text 7 Oak Ridge NURE field name > SRLID Text 9 Savannah River NURE field name > LLLID Text 8 Lawrence Livermore NURE field name > SITE Text 8 Other NURE name info > XSITE Text 7 Quality control/assurance info for Lawrence Livermore Lab > REPLC Text 3 NURE Replicate codes > LABCOND Real 10.3 Conductivity meaured in laboratory > GRABS Integer 2 Number of grabs or subsamples > SAMPHR Integer 2 Time of day that sample was collected > ORGN_PCT Integer 2 Estimated %organics > STUDY Text 4 Special NURE study code > ODOR Text 12 Sample odor observed in field > > Site attributes - detailed > PHOTOS Text 19 Names of photographs taken at collection site > FLDPLNWID Text 11 Width of flood plain at sample collection site > RELIEF Text 27 Relief in drainage basin from which sample was collected > FORMATION Text 44 Code or name of geologic formation in which sample area was located > SGEOUNIT Text 4 Geologic unit at sample site > ALK Real 10.5 Total alkalinity of water at sample site > O_DISS Real 10.5 Dissolved oxygen (ppm) in water at sample site > SCIN Real 10.5 Gamma activity at sample site > AIRTEMP Real 10.3 Air temperature at time of collection > WTRTEMP Real 10.3 Water temperature at time of collection > COND Real 10.3 Conductivity of water at sample site > STRFLOW Real 10.5 Stream velocity (m/s) at sample collection site > STR_CHAN Text 10 Describes whether stream is depositing or eroding at collection site > WEATH Text 25 Weather observations at time of sample collection > VEG_DENS Text 12 Density of vegetation around sample site > ROCK_TYPE Text 20 Rock type in area of sample collection > ROCK_COL Text 15 Rock color in area of sample collection > > Analyses by ICP/Acid dissolution > ICP40_JOB Text 10 Job number for ICP 40-element method > AL_ICP40 Real 12.5 Al (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CA_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ca (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > FE_ICP40 Real 12.5 Fe (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > K_ICP40 Real 12.5 K (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > MG_ICP40 Real 12.5 Mg (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > NA_ICP40 Real 12.5 Na (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > P_ICP40 Real 12.5 P (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > TI_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ti (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > AG_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ag (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > AS_ICP40 Real 12.5 As (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > AU_ICP40 Real 12.5 Au (ppb) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > BA_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ba (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > BE_ICP40 Real 12.5 Be (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > BI_ICP40 Real 12.5 Bi (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CD_ICP40 Real 12.5 Cd (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CE_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ce (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CO_ICP40 Real 12.5 Co (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CR_ICP40 Real 12.5 Cr (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CU_ICP40 Real 12.5 Cu (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > EU_ICP40 Real 12.5 Eu (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > GA_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ga (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > HO_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ho (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > LA_ICP40 Real 12.5 La (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > LI_ICP40 Real 12.5 Li (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > MN_ICP40 Real 12.5 Mn (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > MO_ICP40 Real 12.5 Mo (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > NB_ICP40 Real 12.5 Nb (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > ND_ICP40 Real 12.5 Nd (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > NI_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ni (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > PB_ICP40 Real 12.5 Pb (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > SC_ICP40 Real 12.5 Sc (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > SN_ICP40 Real 12.5 Sn (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > SR_ICP40 Real 12.5 Sr (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > TA_ICP40 Real 12.5 Ta (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > TH_ICP40 Real 12.5 Th (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > U_ICP40 Real 12.5 U (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > V_ICP40 Real 12.5 V (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > Y_ICP40 Real 12.5 Y (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > YB_ICP40 Real 12.5 Yb (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > ZN_ICP40 Real 12.5 Zn (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > CS_ICP40 Real 10.3 Cs (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > RB_ICP40 Real 10.3 Rb (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > SB_ICP40 Real 10.3 Sb (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > ZR_ICP40 Real 10.3 Zr (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after acid dissolution > > Analyses by AA > AS_JOB Text 10 Job number for As method > AS_AA Real 11.3 As (ppm) by Hydride Atomic Absorption > SE_JOB Text 10 Job number for Se method > SE_AA Real 11.3 Se (ppm) by Hydride Atomic Absorption > HG_JOB Text 10 Job number for Hg method > HG_AA Real 12.5 Hg (ppm) by Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption > SB_JOB Text 10 Job number for Sb method > SB_AA Real 10.3 Sb (ppm) by Hydride Atomic Absorption > TE_JOB Text 10 Job number for Te method > TE_AA Real 11.3 Te (ppm) by Hydride Atomic Absorption > TL_JOB Text 10 Job number for Tl method > TL_AA Real 11.3 Tl (ppm) by Hydride Atomic Absorption > W_JOB Text 10 Job number for W method > W_VS Real 10.3 W (ppm) by Visible Spectrophotometry > AU_JOB Text 10 Job number for Au method > AU_AA Real 14.5 Au (ppb) by Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption > PDPT_JOB Text 10 Job number for Pd and Pt method > PD_AA Real 10.3 Pd (ppb) by Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption > PT_AA Real 10.3 Pt (ppb) by Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption > > Analyses by ICP Partial Chem > ICP10_JOB Text 10 Job number for ICP 10-element partial extraction method > AG_ICP10 Real 13.5 Ag (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > AS_ICP10 Real 13.5 As (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > AU_ICP10 Real 13.5 Au (ppb) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > BI_ICP10 Real 13.5 Bi (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > CD_ICP10 Real 13.5 Cd (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > CU_ICP10 Real 13.5 Cu (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > MO_ICP10 Real 13.5 Mo (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > PB_ICP10 Real 13.5 Pb (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > SB_ICP10 Real 13.5 Sb (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > ZN_ICP10 Real 12.5 Zn (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > GA_ICP10 Real 10.3 Ga (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > HG_ICP10 Real 10.3 Hg (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > SE_ICP10 Real 10.3 Se (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > TE_ICP10 Real 10.3 Te (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > TL_ICP10 Real 10.3 Tl (ppm) by Partial Extraction Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry > > Analyses by Fusion ICP > ICP16_JOB Text 10 Job number for ICP 16-element fusion method > AL_ICP16 Real 9.3 Al (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > CA_ICP16 Real 9.3 Ca (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > FE_ICP16 Real 9.3 Fe (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > K_ICP16 Real 9.3 K (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > MG_ICP16 Real 9.3 Mg (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > NA_ICP16 Real 9.3 Na (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > P_ICP16 Real 9.3 P (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > SI_ICP16 Real 9.3 Si (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > TI_ICP16 Real 9.3 Ti (wt%) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > BA_ICP16 Real 9.3 Ba (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > CR_ICP16 Real 9.3 Cr (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > MN_ICP16 Real 9.3 Mn (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > NB_ICP16 Real 9.3 Nb (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > SR_ICP16 Real 9.3 Sr (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > Y_ICP16 Real 9.3 Y (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > ZR_ICP16 Real 9.3 Zr (ppm) by Inductively Coupled Plasma Spectrometry after peroxide fusion > > Analyses by NAA > INAAJOB_US Text 10 Job number for USGS INAA method > INAAJOB_BE Text 10 Job number for Becquerel INAA method > NA_INAA Real 11.3 Na (wt%) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > SC_INAA Real 11.3 Sc (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > TI_INAA Real 11.3 Ti (wt%) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > CR_INAA Real 11.3 Cr (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > FE_INAA Real 11.3 Fe (wt%) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > CO_INAA Real 11.3 Co (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > NI_INAA Real 11.3 Ni (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > ZN_INAA Real 11.3 Zn (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > AS_INAA Real 11.3 As (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > BR_INAA Real 8.3 Br (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > RB_INAA Real 11.3 Rb (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > SR_INAA Real 11.3 Sr (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > ZR_INAA Real 11.3 Zr (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > MO_INAA Real 9.3 Mo (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > SB_INAA Real 11.3 Sb (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > CS_INAA Real 11.3 Cs (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > BA_INAA Real 11.3 Ba (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > LA_INAA Real 11.3 La (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > CE_INAA Real 11.3 Ce (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > ND_INAA Real 11.3 Nd (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > SM_INAA Real 11.3 Sm (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > EU_INAA Real 11.3 Eu (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > TB_INAA Real 11.3 Tb (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > YB_INAA Real 11.3 Yb (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > LU_INAA Real 11.3 Lu (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > HF_INAA Real 11.3 Hf (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > TA_INAA Real 11.3 Ta (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > W_INAA Real 11.3 W (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > AU_INAA Real 11.3 Au (ppb) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > TH_INAA Real 11.3 Th (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > U_INAA Real 11.3 U (ppm) by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis > DN_JOB Text 10 Job number for Delayed Neutron method > U_DN Real 8.3 U (ppm) by Delayed Neutron Activation Analysis > TH_DN Real 8.3 Th (ppm) by Delayed Neutron Activation Analysis > > Analyses by XRF > XRF_JOB Text 10 Job number for XRF method > SIO2_XRF Real 10.3 SiO2 (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > AL2O3_XRF Real 10.3 Al2O3 (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > FE2O3_XRF Real 10.3 Fe2O3 (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > MGO_XRF Real 10.3 MgO (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > CAO_XRF Real 10.3 CaO (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > NA2O_XRF Real 10.3 Na2O (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > K2O_XRF Real 10.3 K2O (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > TIO2_XRF Real 10.3 TiO2 (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > P2O5_XRF Real 10.3 P2O5 (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > MNO_XRF Real 10.3 MnO (wt%) by Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > LOI925C Real 10.3 Loss on Ignition (wt%) preceding Wavelength-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence > > Analyses for light elements > C_S_JOB Text 10 Job number for Carbon and Sulfur method > C_TOT Real 13.3 Total carbon (wt%) by Combustion > C_ORG Real 10.3 Organic carbon (wt%) by difference from c_tot and c_co3 > C_CO3 Real 10.3 Carbonate carbon (wt%) by Coulometric Titration > S_TOT Real 10.3 Total sulfur (wt%) by Combustion > > Analyses by NURE program > AL_NURE Real 12.5 Al (wt%) measured by the NURE program > CA_NURE Real 12.5 Ca (wt%) measured by the NURE program > FE_NURE Real 12.5 Fe (wt%) measured by the NURE program > K_NURE Real 12.5 K (wt%) measured by the NURE program > MG_NURE Real 12.5 Mg (wt%) measured by the NURE program > NA_NURE Real 12.5 Na (wt%) measured by the NURE program > AG_NURE Real 12.5 Ag (ppm) measured by the NURE program > AS_NURE Real 12.5 As (ppm) measured by the NURE program > AU_NURE Real 12.5 Au (ppb) measured by the NURE program > B_NURE Real 12.5 B (ppm) measured by the NURE program > BA_NURE Real 12.5 Ba (ppm) measured by the NURE program > BE_NURE Real 12.5 Be (ppm) measured by the NURE program > BI_NURE Real 12.5 Bi (ppm) measured by the NURE program > BR_NURE Real 12.5 Br (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CD_NURE Real 12.5 Cd (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CE_NURE Real 12.5 Ce (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CL_NURE Real 12.5 Cl (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CO_NURE Real 12.5 Co (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CR_NURE Real 12.5 Cr (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CS_NURE Real 12.5 Cs (ppm) measured by the NURE program > CU_NURE Real 12.5 Cu (ppm) measured by the NURE program > DY_NURE Real 12.5 Dy (ppm) measured by the NURE program > EU_NURE Real 12.5 Eu (ppm) measured by the NURE program > F_NURE Real 12.5 F (ppm) measured by the NURE program > HF_NURE Real 12.5 Hf (ppm) measured by the NURE program > HG_NURE Real 12.5 Hg (ppm) measured by the NURE program > LA_NURE Real 12.5 La (ppm) measured by the NURE program > LI_NURE Real 12.5 Li (ppm) measured by the NURE program > LU_NURE Real 12.5 Lu (ppm) measured by the NURE program > MN_NURE Real 12.5 Mn (ppm) measured by the NURE program > MO_NURE Real 12.5 Mo (ppm) measured by the NURE program > NB_NURE Real 12.5 Nb (ppm) measured by the NURE program > NI_NURE Real 12.5 Ni (ppm) measured by the NURE program > P_NURE Real 12.5 P (ppm) measured by the NURE program > PB_NURE Real 12.5 Pb (ppm) measured by the NURE program > PT_NURE Real 12.5 Pt (ppm) measured by the NURE program > RB_NURE Real 12.5 Rb (ppm) measured by the NURE program > SB_NURE Real 12.5 Sb (ppm) measured by the NURE program > SC_NURE Real 12.5 Sc (ppm) measured by the NURE program > SE_NURE Real 12.5 Se (ppm) measured by the NURE program > SM_NURE Real 12.5 Sm (ppm) measured by the NURE program > SN_NURE Real 12.5 Sn (ppm) measured by the NURE program > SR_NURE Real 12.5 Sr (ppm) measured by the NURE program > TA_NURE Real 12.5 Ta (ppm) measured by the NURE program > TB_NURE Real 12.5 Tb (ppm) measured by the NURE program > TH_NURE Real 12.5 Th (ppm) measured by the NURE program > TI_NURE Real 12.5 Ti (wt%) measured by the NURE program > V_NURE Real 12.5 V (ppm) measured by the NURE program > W_NURE Real 12.5 W (ppm) measured by the NURE program > Y_NURE Real 12.5 Y (ppm) measured by the NURE program > YB_NURE Real 12.5 Yb (ppm) measured by the NURE program > ZN_NURE Real 12.5 Zn (ppm) measured by the NURE program > ZR_NURE Real 12.5 Zr (ppm) measured by the NURE program > U_NURE Real 12.5 U (ppm) [Preferred value if more than one method was used by NURE] > > Analytical details > LABNO2 Text 19 A second name under which the same sample was analyzed > PREV_LABNO Text 16 Unique laboratory name for sample when analyzed at USGS 1980-1997. > FLDNAM_AN Text 19 Field name of sample as analyzed (authoritative name in FLDNAM field) > AOV_CODE Text 2 Analysis of variance code > REPLICATE Text 10 Lab number of duplicate analysis > LOC_COUNT Integer 2 Number of samples at these coordinates > ANAL_NOTES Text 40 Notes made during processing of data > NURE_METH Text 40 Analytical method codes for ~1980 NURE data > http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/about.php Peter N Schweitzer U.S. Geological Survey, ER Geologist mailing address

Mail Stop 954 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive

Reston VA 20192 USA 703-648-6533 703-648-6252 pschweitzer@usgs.gov USGS Open-File Report 2004-1001 The USGS makes no guarantee or warranty concerning the accuracy of information contained in the geographic data. The USGS further makes no warranties, either expressed or implied as to any other matter whatsoever, including, without limitation, the condition of the product, or its fitness for any particular purpose. The burden for determining fitness for use lies entirely with the user. Although this data has been processed successfully on computers at the USGS, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by the USGS regarding the use of this data on any other system, nor does the fact of distribution constitute or imply any such warranty. In no event shall the USGS have any liability whatsoever for payment of any consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or tort damages of any kind, including, but not limited to, any loss of profits arising out of use of or reliance on the geographic data or arising out of the delivery, installation, operation, or support by the USGS. Shapefile 1.0 Sample information and geochemical measurements, geographic areas of coverage specified by the user unzip http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/select.php DBF dBase III Sample information and geochemical measurements, geographic areas of coverage specified by the user unzip http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/select.php HTML 2.0 Sample information and geochemical measurements, geographic areas of coverage specified by the user unzip http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/select.php Text Tab-delimited or comma-delimited, at user's option Sample information and geochemical measurements, geographic areas of coverage specified by the user unzip http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geochem/select.php OGC WMS 1.1.1 Sediment sample information and geochemical measurements, geographic areas of coverage specified by the user. http://mrdata.usgs.gov/services/ngs&request=getcapabilities&service=WMS&version=1.0.0& OGC WFS 1.0.0 Sediment sample information and geochemical measurements, geographic areas of coverage specified by the user. http://mrdata.usgs.gov/services/ngs?request=getcapabilities&service=WFS&version=1.0.0& none 20091118 Peter N Schweitzer U.S. Geological Survey, ER Geologist mailing address

Mail Stop 954 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive

Reston VA 20192 USA 703-648-6533 703-648-6252 pschweitzer@usgs.gov Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998