USGS - science for a changing world

Mineral Resources On-Line Spatial Data

Mineral Resources > Online Spatial Data

National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance data

Metadata also available as - [Outline] - [Parseable text] - [XML]

Frequently anticipated questions:


What does this data set describe?

Title:
National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance data
Abstract:
The National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program was initiated by the Atomic Energy Commission (now the Department of Energy; DOE) in 1973 with a primary goal of identifying uranium resources in the United States. The Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program was one of nine components of NURE. Planned systematic sampling of stream sediments, soils, groundwater, and surface water over the entire United States began in 1975 under the responsibility of four DOE national laboratories: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL), Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL), Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP), and Savannah River Laboratory (SRL). Each DOE laboratory developed its own sample collection, analytical, and data management methodologies and hired contractors to collect the samples.

The NURE HSSR sampling program ended prematurely in 1980. The samples were analyzed and the resultant geochemical data were released on 9-track tapes and in a series of publications. By 1984, the NURE program was finished as Congressional funding disappeared. Out of a total of 625 2-degree quadrangles that cover the entire lower 48 States and Alaska, only 307 quadrangles were completely sampled and another 86 quadrangles were partially sampled. The HSSR data consisted of 894 separate data files stored on magnetic tape in 47 different file formats.

The University of Oklahoma's Information Systems Programs of the Energy Resources Institute (ISP) was contracted by the Department of Energy to enhance the accessibility and usefulness of the NURE HSSR data. ISP created a single standard-format master file to replace 894 original files. ISP converted only 817 of the 894 original files before their funding ended. Unfortunately, this conversion process was never completed and introduced several systematic errors into the database.

In 1985, the NURE HSSR sample archive, original field maps, field notes, and data tapes became the responsibility of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). A copy of the ISP-formatted NURE HSSR database was released as two CD-ROM publications (Hoffman and Buttleman, 1994; 1996).

A new effort to recompile the NURE HSSR was begun by the USGS in 1995. All of the original 894 files have been examined, reformatted, and added to this USGS enhanced version of the NURE HSSR data. The data are contained in 2 major database files: one for water samples and one for sediment samples (which also includes soil and some rock samples.) An earlier version of this USGS enhanced version of the NURE HSSR data was released as an online Open-File Report at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/

References Cited

Hoffman, J.D., and Buttleman, Kim, 1994, National Geochemical Data Base: National Uranium Resource Evaluation data for the conterminous United States, with MAPPER display software by R.A. Ambroziak and MAPPER documentation by C.A. Cook: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-0018-A, CD-ROM.

Hoffman, J.D., and Buttleman, Kim, 1996, National Geochemical Data Base: 1. National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) data for Alaska, formatted for GSSEARCH data base search software, 2. NURE HSSR data formatted as dBASE files for Alaska and the conterminous United States, 3. NURE HSSR data as originally compiled by the Department of Energy for Alaska and the conterminous United States, with MAPPER display software by R.A. Ambroziak and MAPPER documentation by C.A. Cook: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-0018-B, CD-ROM.
Supplemental_Information:
More information about the NURE HSSR program, the sampling protocols and manuals, analytical methods, individual studies, data, reformatting procedures, and interpretive reports can be found in Smith (1997) at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/ and in individual NURE GJBX, GJQ, and PGJ/F series publications from the Department of Energy. (See http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/faq_nure.htm#q13 for information on how to obtain NURE publications.)

Smith, S.M., 2001, National Geochemical Database: Reformatted data from the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) Program, Version 1.30: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-492, WWW release only, URL: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/index.html
  1. How might this data set be cited?
    U.S. Geological Survey, 2004, National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance data: U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO.

    Online Links:

    This is part of the following larger work.

    Smith, Steven M., 1997, National Geochemical Database: Reformatted Data from the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) Program: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-492.

    Online Links:

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?
    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -168.0153
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -66.9507
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 71.3183
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 25.872
  3. What does it look like?
  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?
    Beginning_Date: 1975
    Ending_Date: 1980Currentness_Reference: Publication date
  5. What is the general form of this data set?
    Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: tabular digital data
  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      This is a Vector data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):
      • Point (397625 records in the sediment dataset, 335547 records in the water dataset)
    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
      Horizontal positions are specified in geographic coordinates, that is, latitude and longitude. Latitudes are given to the nearest Variable, generally a few thousandths of a degree. Longitudes are given to the nearest Variable, generally a few thousandths of a degree. Latitude and longitude values are specified in Decimal degrees. The horizontal datum used is North American Datum of 1927.
      The ellipsoid used is Clarke 1866.
  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?
    Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:
    The data set contains 226 different attributes in two tables, a sediment table and a water table. These are documented in detail in a database manual. The following list shows, by general category, the attribute labels, the dataset (sediment, water, or both), type, width and precision, and a short description of the field.

     Sample identification
         REC_NO  Both      Text      8    A sequential record number assigned during reformatting process
       PRIME_ID  Both      Text      9    Primary laboratory sample identification number
          REPLC  Both      Text      3    Replicate code
         DOELAB  Both      Text      5    Department of Energy (DOE) laboratory responsible for collecting and analyzing the sample
         LASLID  Both      Text      6    Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory site identification number
         ORNLID  Both      Text      7    Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant sample number
          SRLID  Both      Text      9    Savannah River Laboratory sample number
          LLLID  Both      Text      8    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory sample number
           SITE  Both      Text      8    Additional site number (Definition of field varies slightly with lab responsible for the sample)
    
     Geographic location
            LAT  Both      Real     10.4  Latitude in decimal degrees (NAD27, Clarke 1866)
           LONG  Both      Real     10.4  Longitude in decimal degrees (negative = west; NAD27, Clarke 1866)
          STATE  Both      Text      2    State in which the sample was collected (Post office abbreviation)
           QUAD  Both      Text     25    The name of the USGS 1° by 2° quadrangle in which the sample was reported collected
        MAPCODE  Both      Text      6    Alphanumeric NTMS map code for the USGS 1° by 2° quadrangle (incompletely populated and not diagnostic)
           FIPS  Both      Text      5    FIPS code of county and state calculated from geographic coordinates
           HUC8  Both      Text      8    8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code calculated from geographic coordinates
         LS_MAP  Both      Text      9    Hierarchical code that identifies different scale USGS quadrangles calculated from geographic coordinate
          STUDY  Both      Text      4    A code that identifies the Pilot/Orientation study or Detailed Study for which the sample was collected
          PHASE  Both      Text      1    Sampling phase
       STRBASIN  Both      Text     11    Drainage basin identification number and stream order
        B_LAT_C  Both      Real     10.4  Latitude of basin centroid
       B_LONG_C  Both      Real     10.4  Longitude of basin centroid
       COORDPRB  Both      Text    250    Comments added during the reformatting process to document problems specifically with latitude and longitude coordinates in the record
    
     Processing information
         SPECMS  Both      Text      1    An indicator for when special measurements were recorded for a sample site
       TAPEDATA  Both      Text      6    Tape release data
       ANALDATE  Both      Text     10    Date on which the multielement analysis was completed
       BATCH_ES  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for multielement emission spectroscopy analyses
        ASBATCH  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for arsenic and selenium analyses
        CLBATCH  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for chlorine and sulfate analyses
       NO3BATCH  Water     Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for nitrate analyses
       PO4BATCH  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for orthophosphate analyses
        RNBATCH  Water     Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for radon analyses
       HENBATCH  Water     Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for helium/neon ratios
        SNBATCH  Sediment  Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for tin analyses
        HGBATCH  Sediment  Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for mercury analyses
      UBATCH_DN  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for delayed neutron counting uranium analyses
      UBATCH_FL  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for fluorescence spectroscopy uranium analyses
      UBATCH_MS  Both      Text      5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for mass spectrometry uranium analyses
      UBATCH_XX  Both      Sediment  5    ORGDP analytical laboratory batch number for extra or multiple uranium analyses
       TAPEFILE  Both      Text      9    The original NURE tape name and file number used as the primary source of information for each record
       REFORMAT  Both      Text    250    Comments added during the reformatting process to document problems, changes, additions, and data sources in the record
    
     Sample characteristics
        SAMPTYP  Both      Text      2    Sample type code that identifies the source, medium, and treatment of the sample
        REC_CNT  Both      Integer   1    Multiple record counter that was incremented for additional records on a single sample
       SMPMEDIA  Sediment  Text     10    Type of sample media that was collected and analyzed as derived from the SAMPTYP code
        SAMPSRC  Both      Text     15    Source of the sample that was collected and analyzed as derived from the SAMPTYP code
        SEDCOND  Sediment  Text      3    Condition (wet or dry) of sediment collected as derived from the SAMPTYP code
       SIZEFRXN  Sediment  Text     15    Seive size fraction of the sediment material that was ultimately analyzed as derived from the SAMPTYP code
       SMPTREAT  Water     Text     15    Field treatment of water samples with respect to acidification and filtering
       OSAMPTYP  Both      Text     15    ORGDP sample type and sample source classification
       LSAMPTYP  Both      Text      8    ORGDP Laboratory sample type classification
       SSAMPTYP  Sediment  Text     23    Savannah River Laboratory sample type classification
       SEDTREAT  Sediment  Text      6    Sediment sample treatment (apparently field pre-treatment information)
       WTRTREAT  Water     Text     20    Water sample treatment (apparently field pre-treatment information)
        SAMPDAT  Both      Text     10    Sample collection date, reformatted to YYYY/MM/DD
         SAMPHR  Both      Text      2    Sample collection time rounded to the nearest whole hour (24-hour clock)
        SAMPLER  Both      Text      3    Sampler initials or sampling team number (Definition of field varies slightly with lab responsible for the sample)
          GRABS  Both      Text      2    Number of grabs or subsamples collected at a site to composite the sample
    
     Site characteristics
        WEATHER  Both      Text     26    A description of the prevalent weather conditions at the time of sampling
        AIRTEMP  Both      Real      6.1  The air temperature measured at the sample site, reported in degrees Celsius
        WTRTEMP  Both      Real      6.1  The water temperature measured at the sample site, reported in degrees Celsius
             PH  Both      Real      4.1  The pH of water at the site as determined by a pH meter
       PH_LOION  Water     Real      4.1  The pH of water at the site as determined by Lo-Ion paper
           COND  Both      Real      9.2  The specific conductance measured in water at the site with a conductivity meter (in µmhos/cm)
        LABCOND  Water     Real      9.2  The specific conductance measured in the water sample at the laboratory (in µmhos/cm)
            ALK  Both      Real      8.2  Field measurement of the total alkalinity in water at the site (Definition, method, and reporting unit varies by lab)
           ALKP  Water     Real      8.2  Field measurement of phenolphthalein alkalinity in water at the site (Definition and reporting unit varies by lab)
           ALKM  Water     Real      8.2  Field measurement of ALKP plus remaining alkalinity in water at the site to get approximate total alkalinity (reporting units not clear)
         O_DISS  Both      Real      9.1  Amount of oxygen dissolved in water at site, reported in ppm
           SCIN  Both      Real     10.4  Scintillometer measurement of the local gamma-ray activity at a sample site, expressed as equivalent uranium in ppm
       ORGN_PCT  Both      Text      2    Field estimate of the percentage of organic material present in the sample
       SAMPODOR  Both      Text     10    An indication of any odor from the sampled material
        SMPCOLR  Both      Text     27    Color of sample material collected
       SGEOUNIT  Both      Text      4    A two to four letter code that designates the formation name or the age of the surface bedrock at the sampling site
        ROCKTYP  Both      Text     26    The predominant type of surficial bedrock in the vicinity of the sample site
        ROCKCLR  Both      Text     10    Dominant color of local bedrock exposures
        SEDTYPE  Both      Text     17    Type of dominant bed material or loose sediment at the sample site
        SEDCOLR  Both      Text     10    Dominant color of loose sediment at sample site
        STRWDTH  Both      Real      7.2  Estimated width of the stream at the sample site, in meters
       STRWDTHC  Both      Text     10    Estimated width range (in feet) of the stream at the sample site
        STRDPTH  Both      Real      7.2  Estimated depth of the stream at the sample site, in meters
       STRDPTHC  Both      Text     10    Estimated depth range (in feet) of the stream at the sample site
       WTRLEVEL  Both      Text      6    A field judgement of the water level at the sample site
        STRFLOW  Both      Real      7.2  The average velocity of the stream flow reported in meters/second
       STRFLOWC  Both      Text      8    A field judgement of the stream flow velocity at the sample site
       WTRDCHRG  Water     Real      9.2  The discharge rate of the well or spring, in liters/minute
        WTRCOLR  Both      Text     11    Amount and type of dissolved or suspended load in water at the site based on its color or appearance
       VSBLDPTH  Water     Real      6.2  Depth of visibility estimated from water collected in a liter bottle and reported in meters
       STRCHANL  Both      Text     10    A field judgement of the stream channel depositional character at the sample site when the sample was collected
        VEGTYPE  Both      Text     19    Dominant type of vegetation in the area of the sampled location
        VEGDENS  Both      Text     10    Density of plant cover at the sample site
         RELIEF  Both      Text     23    An estimate of the relief or difference in elevation in the vicinity of the sample site (reported as a range in meters)
        CONTAMC  Both      Text     45    A field judgement of possible contaminant sources or major activities near the sample site
       WELLPUMP  Water     Text     17    Type of pump used to draw water from the sampled well
       WELLTYPE  Water     Text     11    Type of well that was sampled
        WELLUSE  Water     Text     40    Primary use of well
       WELLUSE2  Water     Text     15    Most typical use of well water
       WELLFREQ  Water     Text     27    Frequency of well pumping or use
       WLSMPLOC  Water     Text     30    An indication of where in the water system a well water sample was collected
       WLDIST_M  Water     Integer   4    An estimate of the distance from the well head to the location where the sample was collected, in meters
       WELLPIPE  Water     Text     10    Composition of the pipe from which the well water sample was collected
       WELLCASE  Water     Text     10    Composition of the well casing below the water table
       WELLDIAM  Water     Integer   3    Inside diameter of the well casing, in inches
       WELLDPTH  Water     Integer   6    Total drilled depth of well from the surface, in feet
       WLDPTSRC  Water     Text     18    Source of total well depth (WELLDPTH) information
       WLDPTCNF  Water     Text     14    An indication of the confidence in the accuracy of the total well depth (WELLDPTH) information
       WWTRDPTH  Water     Integer   4    Depth from the ground surface to the water level in a well, in feet
       WLPRDPTH  Water     Integer   6    Depth from the ground surface to the top of the producing horizon in the well, in feet
        WLPDSRC  Water     Text     18    Source of information for the depth to top of producing horizon (WLPRDPTH) information
        WLPDCNF  Water     Text     14    An indication of the confidence in the accuracy of the depth to top of producing horizon (WLPRDPTH) information
        WELLAGE  Water     Integer   4    Age of the sampled well recorded to the nearest whole year
       WLAGECNF  Water     Text     14    An indication of the confidence in the accuracy of the well age (WELLAGE) information
          PUNIT  Water     Text      4    A 2 to 4 letter code that designates the formation name, aquifer name, or the age of the producing unit
       PUNITSRC  Water     Text     18    Source of producing horizon geologic unit (PUNIT) information
       PUNITCNF  Water     Text     14    An indication of the confidence in the accuracy of the producing horizon geologic unit (PUNIT) identification
       COMMENTS  Both      Text    250    Sample collector's comments
       COMMENT2  Both      Text    250    Sample collector's comments (continued)
    
     Chemical Analyses
         AG_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of silver in water, in parts per billion
         AG_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of silver in sediments, in parts per million
         AL_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of aluminum in water, in parts per billion
         AL_PCT  Sediment  Real      8.4  Concentration of aluminum in sediments, in percent
         AS_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of arsenic in water, in parts per billion
         AS_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of arsenic in sediments, in parts per million
         AU_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of gold in sediments, in parts per million
          B_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of boron in water, in parts per billion
          B_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of boron in sediments, in parts per million
         BA_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of barium in water, in parts per billion
         BA_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of barium in sediments, in parts per million
         BE_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of beryllium in water, in parts per billion
         BE_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of beryllium in sediments, in parts per million
         BI_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of bismuth in sediments, in parts per million
         BR_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of bromide ions in water, in parts per billion
         BR_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of bromine in sediments, in parts per million
         CA_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of calcium in water, in parts per million
         CA_PCT  Sediment  Real      8.4  Concentration of calcium in sediments, in percent
         CD_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of cadmium in water, in parts per billion
         CD_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of cadmium in sediments, in parts per million
         CE_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of cerium in water, in parts per billion
         CE_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of cerium in sediments, in parts per million
         CL_PPM  Both      Real     12.4  Concentration of chloride ions in water or sediments, in parts per million
         CO_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of cobalt in water, in parts per billion
         CO_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of cobalt in sediments, in parts per million
         CR_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of chromium in water, in parts per billion
         CR_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of chromium in sediments, in parts per million
         CS_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of cesium in sediments, in parts per million
         CU_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of copper in water, in parts per billion
         CU_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of copper in sediments, in parts per million
         DY_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of dysprosium in water, in parts per billion
         DY_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of dysprosium in sediments, in parts per million
         EU_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of europium in sediments, in parts per million
          F_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of fluoride ions in water, in parts per billion
          F_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of fluorine in sediments, in parts per million
         FE_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of iron in water, in parts per billion
         FE_PCT  Sediment  Real      8.4  Concentration of iron in sediments, in percent
         HE_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of helium in water, in parts per million
         HF_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of hafnium in sediments, in parts per million
         HG_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of mercury in sediments, in parts per million
          K_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of potassium in water, in parts per million
          K_PCT  Sediment  Real      8.4  Concentration of potassium in sediments, in percent
         LA_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of lanthanum in sediments, in parts per million
         LI_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of lithium in water, in parts per billion
         LI_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of lithium in sediments, in parts per million
         LU_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of lutetium in sediments, in parts per million
         MG_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of magnesium in water, in parts per million
         MG_PCT  Sediment  Real      8.4  Concentration of magnesium in sediments, in percent
         MN_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of manganese in water, in parts per billion
         MN_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of manganese in sediments, in parts per million
         MO_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of molybdenum in water, in parts per billion
         MO_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of molybdenum in sediments, in parts per million
         NA_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of sodium in water, in parts per million
         NA_PCT  Sediment  Real      8.4  Concentration of sodium in sediments, in percent
         NB_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of niobium in water, in parts per billion
         NB_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of niobium in sediments, in parts per million
         NI_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of nickel in water, in parts per billion
         NI_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of nickel in sediments, in parts per million
          P_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of phosphorus in water, in parts per billion
          P_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of phosphorus in sediments, in parts per million
         PB_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of lead in water, in parts per billion
         PB_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of lead in sediments, in parts per million
         PT_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of platinum in sediments, in parts per million
         RB_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of rubidium in sediments, in parts per million
         SB_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of antimony in sediments, in parts per million
         SC_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of scandium in water, in parts per billion
         SC_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of scandium in sediments, in parts per million
         SE_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of selenium in water, in parts per billion
         SE_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of selenium in sediments, in parts per million
         SI_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of silicon in water, in parts per million
         SM_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of samarium in sediments, in parts per million
         SN_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of tin in sediments, in parts per million
         SR_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of strontium in water, in parts per billion
         SR_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of strontium in sediments, in parts per million
         TA_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of tantalum in sediments, in parts per million
         TB_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of terbium in sediments, in parts per million
         TH_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of thorium in water, in parts per billion
         TH_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of thorium in sediments, in parts per million
         TI_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of titanium in water, in parts per billion
         TI_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of titanium in sediments, in parts per million
       U_DN_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in water, in parts per billion, determined by delayed neutron counting
       U_DN_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in sediments, in parts per million, determined by delayed neutron counting
       U_FL_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in water, in parts per billion, determined by fluorescence spectroscopy
       U_FL_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in sediments, in parts per million, determined by fluorescence spectroscopy
       U_MS_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in water, in parts per billion, determined by mass spectrometry
       U_MS_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in sediments, in parts per million, determined by mass spectrometry
       U_NA_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in sediments, in parts per million, determined by neutron activation
       U_XX_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in water, in parts per billion, determined by an extra or multiple uranium analysis
       U_XX_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of uranium in sediments, in parts per million, determined by an extra or multiple uranium analysis
      U_XX_MTHD  Both      Text      8    Analytical method code for extra or multiple uranium analyses (U_XX_PPM or U_XX_PPB)
          V_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of vanadium in water, in parts per billion
          V_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of vanadium in sediments, in parts per million
          W_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of tungsten in sediments, in parts per million
          Y_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of yttrium in water, in parts per billion
          Y_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of yttrium in sediments, in parts per million
         YB_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of ytterbium in sediments, in parts per million
         ZN_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of zinc in water, in parts per billion
         ZN_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of zinc in sediments, in parts per million
         ZR_PPB  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of zirconium in water, in parts per billion
         ZR_PPM  Sediment  Real     12.4  Concentration of zirconium in sediments, in parts per million
       METH_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of methane in water, in parts per million
        ETH_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of ethane in water, in parts per million
       PROP_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of propane in water, in parts per million
        BUT_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of butane in water, in parts per million
       RN_PCI-L  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of radon in water, in picocuries per liter (pCi/l)
        NO3_PPM  Water     Real     12.4  Concentration of nitrate in waters, in parts per million
        PO4_PPM  Both      Real     12.4  Concentration of phosphate in water or sediments, in parts per million
        SO4_PPM  Both      Real     12.4  Concentration of sulfate in water or sediments, in parts per million
       HENRATIO  Water     Real     12.4  The measured ratio of helium/neon in water
        METHODS  Both      Text     40    Analytical method codes for each method used to determine the element concentrations listed in the record
    
    Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: https://mrdata.usgs.gov/nure/sediment/NURE_Manual.html

Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
  2. Who also contributed to the data set?
    The reformatting effort for the USGS enhanced version of the NURE HSSR database was done by Steven M. Smith, Andrew W. Holt, and Bryan G. Moravec. This effort was aided greatly by the earlier work of James D. Hoffman in obtaining, reading, converting, and preserving the original NURE files found on deteriorating 9-track magnetic tapes.
  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
    Smith, Steven M.
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Box 25046, MS 973
    Denver Federal Center
    Denver, Colorado
    United States of America

    1-303-236-1192 (voice)
    1-303-236-3200 (FAX)
    smsmith@usgs.gov

Why was the data set created?

The NURE HSSR samples were collected specifically to explore the United States for undiscovered uranium resources. Initially, the samples were only analysed for uranium contents but a due to a change in policy, most samples were eventually analyzed for as many as 45 different constituents. Although the data were originally intended for mineral exploration purposes, these data have also found application in the fields of earth science, ecology, environmental geochemistry, health, and medical geology. Since all of the samples were collected and analyzed within a short period of time (1975-1980) they represent a snapshot or a baseline of geochemical conditions during that period. Some of the sampled sites may no longer be accessible for resampling due to continued urban and industrial development.

How was the data set created?

  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?
    (process 1 of 6)
    The NURE HSSR data were originally generated by four Department of Energy Laboratories (Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL), Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL), Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP), and Savannah River Laboratory (SRL)) and at least one unspecified subcontractor laboratory. These data were determined from samples collected between 1975 and 1980. The analytical determinations were completed between 1975 and 1982. The data were originally released in published GJBX-series reports and as digital data files on 9-track magnetic tape by study area, quadrangle and/or state. When finished, the NURE HSSR database consisted of at least 847 different files in 49 different digital formats.
    (process 2 of 6)
    In 1982, the Information Systems Program (ISP) of the Energy Resources Institute at the University of Oklahoma was contracted to "enhance the accessibility and usefulness" of the NURE HSSR data. ISP created a new standard format database file and converted 817 of the original NURE HSSR files to this format.
    (process 3 of 6)
    In 1985, the responsibility for the NURE HSSR data was transferred from the Department of Energy to the U.S. Geological Survey. The data were downloaded from magnetic tapes and then re-released as a series of CD-ROM publications. All of these CD-ROM publications utilized the NURE HSSR database that had been compiled by the Information Systems Program (ISP) of the Energy Resources Institute at the University of Oklahoma. The final CD-ROM (Hoffman and Buttleman, 1996) also included a subdirectory with all of the original NURE HSSR files archived in a compressed format.

    Hoffman, J.D., Gunnells, G.B., and McNeal, J.M., 1991, National Geochemical Data Base; National Uranium Resource Evaluation data for the conterminous western United States: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-1, CD-ROM (Superceded by DDS-18-A).

    Hoffman, J.D., and Buttleman, Kim, 1994, National Geochemical Data Base; National Uranium Resource Evaluation data for the conterminous United States, with MAPPER display software by R.A. Ambroziak and MAPPER documentation by C.A. Cook: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-18-A, CD-ROM.

    Hoffman, J.D., and Buttleman, Kim, 1996, National Geochemical Data Base; 1. National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) data for Alaska, forrmatted for GSSEARCH data base search software; 2. NURE HSSR data formatted a dBASE files for Alaska and the conterminous United States; 3. NURE HSSR data as originally compiled by the Department of Energy for Alaska and the conterminous United States; with MAPPER display software by R.A. Ambroziak and MAPPER documentation by C.A. Cook: U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series DDS-18-B, CD-ROM.
    Date: 1994 (process 4 of 6)
    Use of the ISP-compiled version of the NURE HSSR database revealed several inconsistencies, some introduced systematic errors, duplicated records, and missing data. Beginning in 1994, efforts to use large amounts of NURE HSSR data from the state of Montana led to a decision to recompile the NURE HSSR data from the original files. The success of this task led to a larger project with the goal of reformatting the entire NURE HSSR database.

    A new comprehensive database structure was created after examining the ISP database structure, each of the laboratory sampling manuals, the field sampling note forms, and the GJBX-3(84) publication (Zinkl, R.J., and Brock, D.S., 1984, User's guide to NURE HSSR tape formats: Report of Bendix Field Engineering Corporation prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-3(84), 168 p.) It was also determined that the data were easier to compile and use if separated into a sediment dataset and a water dataset.

    Reformatting began with data from 2-degree quadrangles in Montana and then proceeded, quadrangle-by-quadrangle, across the conterminous U.S. and Alaska. The original NURE HSSR files were obtained from a subdirectory on the Hoffman and Buttleman (1996) CD-ROM. For each quadrangle, all of the original files were first compared with the corresponding GJBX-series data release and data interpretation publications. Data missing in the digital files were added from the hard copy publications. The data were then reformatted and compiled. Often multiple files from a quadrangle contained records for the same sample. These records were compared and, when possible, combined into single records per sample. Additional data, not included in the original data formats, were also added to the database records based on the information found in the publications; including quadrangle names and analytical methods. Occasionally, it was necessary to check original field notes and maps to resolve problems but this was not done systematically.

    Finally, a summary was written for each quadrangle that included descriptions of each NURE study in the quadrangle; information about the samples collected and analytical methods used; a brief description of how the data were processed during the reformatting phase; notes about known inconsistencies or potential problems; indications of other known but unobtained sources of NURE-related geochemical data; and a quadrangle bibliography. These NURE HSSR quadrangle summaries are published online at <http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/index.html>.
    Date: 24-Mar-2006 (process 5 of 6)
    For the sediment data:

    Added, corrected, or confirmed coordinates for 9,949 samples based on the re-digitizing of selected original field maps or from researching published tables. Updated comments in COORDPRB and REFORMAT fields and values in FIPS, HUC8, LS_MAP, and QUAD based on the new coordinates. Standardized or corrected several comments in the REFORMAT field. Removed 16 duplicated records.

    For the water data:

    Added, corrected, or confirmed coordinates for 11,542 samples based on the re-digitizing of selected original field maps or from researching published tables. Updated comments in COORDPRB and REFORMAT fields and values in FIPS, HUC8, LS_MAP, QUAD, and STATE based on the new coordinates. Standardized or corrected several comments in the REFORMAT field.
    Date: 10-Apr-2009 (process 6 of 6)
    For the sediment data:

    Updated comments in COORDPRB and REFORMAT fields and added or corrected values in SITE, LASLID, STATE, SAMPTYP, SAMPSRC, or COMMENT for 1,590 records. Also converted values of 0 (zero) in coordinate fields to 'null'.

    For the water data:

    Updated comments in COORDPRB and REFORMAT fields and added or corrected values in SITE, LASLID, STATE, QUAD, SAMPTYP, SAMPSRC, or COMMENT for 2,374 records. Also converted values of 0 (zero) in coordinate fields to 'null'.

    Person who carried out this activity:
    Steven M Smith
    USGS CR GD
    Geologist
    Box 25046
    Denver, CO
    USA

    303-236-1192 (voice)
    303-236-3200 (FAX)
    smsmith@usgs.gov
  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

  1. How well have the observations been checked?
    The site and sample description parameters were recorded on preprinted field forms by the individual collectors working for sub-contractors. Many of these parameters required critical judgement by the collector or information obtained from the landowner or resident. The accuracy of site and sample description parameters varies with the Dept. of Energy Laboratory responsible for the regional sampling program, the study, the subcontractor, and the individual sample collector.

    The samples in this dataset were chemically analyzed by several laboratories using a variety of techniques that changed over time. The accuracy of the geochemical data varies with the laboratory, the study, the analytical methodology, the element, and with the concentration of the element being analyzed. Values that were less than the lower detection limits of an analytical method were reported as a negative number: A value of -2 in the AG_PPM field is equivalent to <2 ppm Ag.
  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
    The latitude-longitude coordinates for sample locations were determined by digitizing sites from maps of various scales and sources. For most the United States the maps were USGS 1:24,000-scale, 1:62,500-scale, or 1:63,360-scale topographic quadrangles. In the eastern quarter of the U.S. that was sampled by Savannah River Laboratory subcontractors, county highway maps of various scales and quality were the main source of maps used for locating sites. The accuracy is dependent upon the scale and quality of the map from which the location was determined as well as the care taken by the individual responsible for digitizing. Latitude-longitude coordinates were reported as decimal degrees. All labs except for the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP) reported coordinates with 4 decimal places implying an accuracy to within 11 meters (36 feet). ORGDP reported coordinates only to 3 decimal places with an implied accuracy of 110 meters (360 feet).

    The USGS topographic maps, from which latitude and longitude coordinates were determined, use the 1927 North American Datum (NAD27) based on the Clarke 1866 ellipsoid. Most county highway maps do not identify the projection, datum, or ellipsoid used. It is assumed that coordinates on these maps are also derived from NAD27 and the Clarke 1866 ellipsoid.

    Coordinates for a small percentage of samples are either missing or obviously incorrect. In both cases, the latitude and/or longitude fields were populated with a value of 0 (zero) and any known information about the location, including the incorrect values, were recorded in the COORDPRB comment field during the reformatting process. Some, but not all, of the missing or incorrect coordinates have been recovered from original field maps. More of these problem locations may be fixed at a later date.
  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
    This dataset provides chemical data for Ag, Al, As, Au, B, Ba, Be, Bi, Br, Ca, Cd, Ce, Cl-, Co, Cr, Cs, Cu, Cy, Eu, F, Fe, Ga, He, Hf, Hg, K, La, Li, Lu, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb, Pt, Rb, Sb, Sc, Se, Si, Sm, Sn, Sr, Ta, Tb, Th, Ti, U, V, W, Y, Yb, Zn, Zr, PO4 (phosphate), NO3 (nitrite), SO4 (sulfate), methane, ethane, propane, and butane in samples of stream sediment, spring sediment, lake or pond sediment, soil, rock, well water, stream water, and spring water. In addition, the dataset provides location and descriptive information for each sample.

    No sample contains data in all of the descriptive fields or in all of the chemical data fields. Additionally, no descriptive field or chemical data field is completely populated within the NURE HSSR dataset. The amount of data in descriptive fields varies with the DOE Laboratory that was responsible for sample collection. The amount of data in elemental fields varies with the responsible DOE Laboratory and with the analytical methods used.

    Descriptions of the sample collection protocols, preprinted sample field note forms, and analytical methods are found in the following publications.

    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory:

    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, 1976, Hydrogeochemical and stream-sediment survey of the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program - western United States; quarterly progress report, April through June 1976: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory UCID-16911-76-2, University of California, Livermore, Calif., U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-59(76), 71 p.

    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, 1977, Hydrogeochemical and stream-sediment survey of the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program - western United States; quarterly progress report, January through March 1977: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory UCID-16911-77-1, University of California, Livermore, Calif., U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-53(77), 15 p.

    Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, 1977, Hydrogeochemical and stream-sediment survey of the National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program - western United States; quarterly progress report, July through September 1976: Lawrence Livermore Laboratory UCID-16911-76-3, University of California, Livermore, Calif., U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-10(77), 44 p.

    Puchlik, K.P., 1977, Collection of wet and dry stream-sediment samples, in Symposium on Hydrogeochemical and Stream-Sediment Reconnaissance for Uranium in the United States: U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-77(77), p. 297-300.

    Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory:

    Sharp, R.R., Jr., and Aamodt, P.L., 1978, Field procedures for the uranium hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance as used by the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory: Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory manual LA-7054-M, Los Alamos, N.M., U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-68(78), 64 p.

    Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant:

    Arendt, J.W., Butz, T.R., Cagle, G.W., Kane, V.E., and Nichols, C.E., 1979, Hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance procedures of the Uranium Resource Evaluation project: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-100, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-32(80), 55 p.

    Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1978, Procedures manual for groundwater reconnaissance sampling: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-12, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-62(78), 57 p.

    Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1978, Procedures manual for stream sediment reconnaissance sampling: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-13, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-84(78), 56 p.

    Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Supplement to hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance basic data reports K/UR-405 and K/UR-408 through K/UR-443 [GJBX-52(82) through GJBX-88(82)]: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-412, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-51(82), 25 p.

    Savannah River Laboratory:

    Ferguson, R.B., Price, Van, and Baucom, E.I., 1976, Field manual for stream sediment reconnaissance: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-76-358, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-30(77), 56 p.

    Ferguson, R.B., Price, Van, and Baucom, E.I., 1977, Field manual for ground water reconnaissance: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-76-416, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-26(77), 70 p.

    Ferguson, R.B., Price, Van, and Baucom, E.I., 1977, Field manual for stream water and sediment reconnaissance: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-76-363, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-80(77), 78 p.

    Price, Van, and Jones, P.L., 1979, Training manual for water and sediment geochemical reconnaissance: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-79-219, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-420(81), 104 p.

    NURE project:

    Bolivar, S.L., 1980, An overview of the National Uranium Resource Evaluation Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance Program: Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory informal report LA-8457-MS, Los Alamos, N.M., U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-220(80), 24 p.

    Grimes, J.G., 1984, NURE HSSR geochemical sample archives transfer report - geochemical analysis: Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-500, Part 3, 150 p.

    Information Systems Programs, Energy Resources Institute, 1985, A technical history of the NURE HSSR program: Norman, Oklahoma, University of Oklahoma, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-2(85), 58 p.

  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
    The responsibility for the NURE HSSR program was given to four U.S. Dept. of Energy Laboratories. Each lab was assigned a region of the United States and given the authority to develop their own collection, analytical, and data management methodologies. This decision resulted in the creation of several different sample collection manuals, preprinted sample collection note forms, analytical methods, and data report formats. Thus there is a large amount of inconsistency in reported data between laboratories; especially in the site and sample description fields. Program changes over time also introduced additional inconsistencies, even within data reports from a single laboratory.

    One of the primary goals of this reformatting effort has been the elimination of as many inconsistencies as possible. These problems with consistency fall into at least 7 categories. The following describes each category of consistency problem and the formatting process used to resolve the issue. Many database fields had some combination of these consistency problems.

    1) A common parameter was recorded using different format styles. As an example, all four labs reported the sample collection date in differing formats (March 5, 1976 was reported as 03/05/76, 3/ 5/76, 3/05/76, 030576, 760305, or 76 3 5). All of these have been changed to a consistent format for every record (1976/03/05).

    2) A common parameter was recorded using different units of measure. For example, in sediment data the concentration of magnesium (Mg) was originally reported in percent or parts-per-million (ppm) or parts-per-billion (ppb). In these cases, all values were converted to a common unit: All Mg values in the sediment database are now reported in percent. This same issue was also found and resolved for measurement parameters that were originally recorded either in feet or meters.

    3) A common descriptive parameter was recorded on sample collection note forms and entered into the database using different coding schemes with differing lists of choices. An example of this problem is illustrated by the SEDTYPE field, which describes the dominant type of sediment found at the sample site. The choice of 'sand' was recorded as a code '4' by two sample collection forms, a code '3' by one, and a code 'S' by another. 'Muck' was recorded as a code '5', '6', or '7' depending upon the responsible lab, but was not even an available choice for sample collectors for a fourth lab. A code for 'mud' was available on only one sample collection form. This issue was resolved by replacing all codes with the corresponding defined value of 'SAND', 'MUCK', 'MUD', and so on. However, since all values were not available to all of the sample collectors, fields with this problem will not be entirely consistent.

    4) A descriptive parameter was not recorded by all of the responsible laboratories. This is a very common problem. There are very few descriptive parameter fields that were actually used and recorded for all samples. Whereas the water temperature at the site was recorded on all sample collection field forms, only forms from two labs recorded air temperature, and only one lab recorded the percentage of organic material in the sample. Thus these fields are incompletely populated and consistent only for the laboratories that reported data.

    5) A common parameter was given slightly different definitions by individual laboratories. For example, all of the labs recorded information about possible contamination sources at the sample site but each lab defined what constituted a contaminant source in a slightly different way. For fields with this problem, the original value was preserved in the field and the individual definitions were recorded in the documentation for that field.

    6) A descriptive parameter called for the subjective judgement of the sample collector. Several sample description note forms included parameters that are inherently subjective. Parameters such as sample color, vegetation density, and contaminant sources are likely to have a lot of variation depending upon the skill and consistency of each individual sampler. Subjective color identifications between observation are often inconsistent for a single person and even more so for multiple people. These variations can be observed in the database between samplers within the same area. A similar inconsistency is found in the quality and quantity of sample site comments recorded on sample collection forms. Inconsistencies of this sort could not and were not addressed during the reformatting effort. The values given in the database are the original values recorded by the person or persons responsible for collecting the sample.

    7) Two or more descriptive parameters for a single sample appear to contain contradictory information. For example, the sample may be described as a 'DRY' stream sediment collected from stream with a water depth of 1 ft. This type of inconsistency is common. It may be due to sampler error, data entry error, or situations that could not be adequately described with the parameter choices available. Most of these inconsistencies were left in the database. In a few cases, values for parameters that were clearly impossible were removed (such as a well depth value for a stream sediment). Whenever an offending value was removed from a record, that event and the original value was recorded in the REFORMAT comment field.

    More information about possible inconsistencies within any database field is available in the Manual for Interpreting NURE HSSR Data at <https://mrdata.usgs.gov/nure/sediment/NURE_Manual.html>


How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?
Access_Constraints: None
Use_Constraints: None
  1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
    Smith, Steven M.
    U.S. Geological Survey
    Geologist
    Box 25046, Mailstop 973, Denver Federal Center
    Denver, Colorado
    United States of America

    1-303-236-1192 (voice)
    1-303-236-3200 (FAX)
    smsmith@usgs.gov
  2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?
  3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
    These data are released on the condition that neither the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) nor the United States Government may be held liable for any damages resulting from authorized or unauthorized use. The USGS provides these data "as is" and makes no guarantee or warranty concerning the accuracy of information contained in the 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.
  4. How can I download or order the data?

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:
Last modified: 07-Dec-2016
Metadata author:
Smith, Steven M.
U.S. Geological Survey
Geologist
Box 25046, Mailstop 973, Denver Federal Center
Denver, Colorado
United States of America

1-303-236-1192 (voice)
1-303-236-3200 (FAX)
smsmith@usgs.gov
Metadata standard:
Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)

This page is <https://mrdata.usgs.gov/metadata/nurehssr.faq.html>

Accessibility FOIA Privacy Policies and Notices

USA.gov logo U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey
Page Contact Information: Peter Schweitzer
Page Last Modified: Friday, 15-Sep-2017 15:26:37 MDT

Generated by mp version 2.9.41 on Fri Sep 15 15:21:42 2017