Geology topics

Tricia A. Lincoln

Publications and source records attributed to Tricia A. Lincoln.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2009

Quality-Assurance Data for Routine Water Analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey Laboratory in Troy, New York - July 2001 Through June 2003

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Science Center in Troy, N.Y., analyzes samples collected by USGS projects throughout the Northeast. The laboratory's quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures that were developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. The quality-assurance and quality-control data were stored in the laboratory's Lab Master data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of data. This report presents and discusses results of quality-assurance and quality control samples analyzed from July 2001 through June 2003. Results for the quality-control samples for 19 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts indicate that data for six of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, chloride, magnesium, nitrate (ion chromatography), potassium, and sodium. The calcium procedure was biased throughout the analysis period for the high-concentration sample, but was within control limits. The total monomeric aluminum and fluoride procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the low-concentration sample, but were within control limits. The total aluminum, pH, specific conductance, and sulfate procedures were biased for the high-concentration and low-concentration samples, but were within control limits. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that the procedures for 16 of 18 analytes were within control limits, although the concentrations for blanks were occasionally outside the control limits. The data-quality objective was not met for the dissolved organic carbon or specific conductance procedures. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in the procedures for 18 of the 21 analytes. At least 90 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for all procedures except total monomeric aluminum (83 percent of samples met objectives), total aluminum (76 percent of samples met objectives), ammonium (73 percent of samples met objectives), dissolved organic carbon (86 percent of samples met objectives), and nitrate (81 percent of samples met objectives). The data-quality objective was not met for the nitrite procedure. Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample (SRS) Project indicated satisfactory or above data quality over the time period, with most performance ratings for each sample in the good-to-excellent range. The N-sample (nutrient constituents) analysis had one unsatisfactory rating for the ammonium procedure in one study. The T-sample (trace constituents) analysis had one unsatisfactory rating for the magnesium procedure and one marginal rating for the potassium procedure in one study and one unsatisfactory rating for the sodium procedure in another. Results of Environment Canada's National Water Research Institute (NWRI) program indicated that at least 90 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for 10 of the 14 analytes; the exceptions were acid-neutralizing capacity, ammonium, dissolved organic carbon, and sodium. Data-quality objectives were not met in 37 percent of samples analyzed for acid-neutralizing capacity, 28 percent of samples analyzed for dissolved organic carbon, and 30 percent of samples analyzed for sodium. Results indicate a positive bias for the ammonium procedure in one study and a negative bias in another. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 90 percent of the samples analyzed for calcium, chloride, magnesium, pH, potassium, and sodium. Data-quality objectives were met by 78 percent of

Open-File Report↗

USGS2009

Quality-assurance data for routine water analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey laboratory in Troy, New York - July 2003 through June 2005

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Science Center in Troy, N.Y., analyzes samples collected by USGS projects throughout the Northeast. The laboratory's quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures that were developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. The quality-assurance and quality-control data were stored in the laboratory's Lab Master data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of data. This report presents and discusses results of quality-assurance and quality control samples analyzed from July 2003 through June 2005. Results for the quality-control samples for 20 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts indicate that data for five of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, total monomeric aluminum, pH, silicon, and sodium. Seven of the analytical procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the high-concentration sample, but were within control limits; these procedures were: dissolved organic carbon, chloride, nitrate (ion chromatograph), nitrite, silicon, sodium, and sulfate. The calcium and magnesium procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the low-concentration sample, but were within control limits. The total aluminum and specific conductance procedures were biased for the high-concentration and low-concentration samples, but were within control limits. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that the procedures for 17 of 18 analytes were within control limits, although the concentrations for blanks were occasionally outside the control limits. The data-quality objective was not met for dissolved organic carbon. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in the procedures for 18 of the 22 analytes. At least 85 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for all analytes except total monomeric aluminum (82 percent of samples met objectives), total aluminum (77 percent of samples met objectives), chloride (80 percent of samples met objectives), fluoride (76 percent of samples met objectives), and nitrate (ion chromatograph) (79 percent of samples met objectives). The ammonium and total dissolved nitrogen did not meet the data-quality objectives. Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample (SRS) Project indicated good data quality over the time period, with ratings for each sample in the satisfactory, good, and excellent ranges or less than 10 percent error. The P-sample (low-ionic-strength constituents) analysis had one marginal and two unsatisfactory ratings for the chloride procedure. The T-sample (trace constituents)analysis had two unsatisfactory ratings and one high range percent error for the aluminum procedure. The N-sample (nutrient constituents) analysis had one marginal rating for the nitrate procedure. Results of Environment Canada's National Water Research Institute (NWRI) program indicated that at least 84 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for 11 of the 14 analytes; the exceptions were ammonium, total aluminum, and acid-neutralizing capacity. The ammonium procedure did not meet data quality objectives in all studies. Data-quality objectives were not met in 23 percent of samples analyzed for total aluminum and 45 percent of samples analyzed acid-neutralizing capacity. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 86 percent of the samples analyzed for calcium, chloride, fluoride, magnesium, pH, potassium, sodium, and sulfate. Data-quality objectives were not met by samples analyzed for fluoride.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2009

Quality-Assurance Data for Routine Water Analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey Laboratory in Troy, New York - July 2005 through June 2007

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Science Center in Troy, N.Y., analyzes samples collected by USGS projects throughout the Northeast. The laboratory's quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures that were developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. The quality-assurance and quality-control data were stored in the laboratory's Lab Master data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of data. This report presents and discusses results of quality-assurance and quality control samples analyzed from July 2005 through June 2007. Results for the quality-control samples for 19 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts indicate that data for eight of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: total aluminum, calcium, magnesium, nitrate (colorimetric method), potassium, silicon, sodium, and sulfate. Eight of the analytical procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the high-concentration sample, but were within control limits; these procedures were: total aluminum, calcium, dissolved organic carbon, chloride, nitrate (ion chromatograph), potassium, silicon, and sulfate. The magnesium and pH procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the low-concentration sample, but were within control limits. The acid-neutralizing capacity, total monomeric aluminum, nitrite, and specific conductance procedures were biased for the high-concentration and low-concentration samples, but were within control limits. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicated that the procedures for 16 of 17 analytes were within control limits, although the concentrations for blanks were occasionally outside the control limits. The data-quality objective was not met for dissolved organic carbon. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in the procedures for 18 of the 21 analytes. At least 93 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for all analytes except acid-neutralizing capacity (85 percent of samples met objectives), total monomeric aluminum (83 percent of samples met objectives), total aluminum (85 percent of samples met objectives), and chloride (85 percent of samples met objectives). The ammonium and total dissolved nitrogen did not meet the data-quality objectives. Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample (SRS) Project met the Troy Laboratory data-quality objectives for 87 percent of the samples analyzed. The P-sample (low-ionic-strength constituents) analysis had two outliers each in two studies. The T-sample (trace constituents) analysis and the N-sample (nutrient constituents) analysis had one outlier each in two studies. Results of Environment Canada's National Water Research Institute (NWRI) program indicated that at least 85 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for 11 of the 14 analytes; the exceptions were acid-neutralizing capacity, total aluminum and ammonium. Data-quality objectives were not met in 41 percent of samples analyzed for acid-neutralizing capacity, 50 percent of samples analyzed for total aluminum, and 44 percent of samples analyzed for ammonium. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 86 percent of the samples analyzed for calcium, magnesium, pH, potassium, and sodium. Data-quality objectives were met by 76 percent of the samples analyzed for chloride, 80 percent of the samples analyzed for specific conductance, and 77 percent of the samples analyzed for sulfate.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2006

Quality-Assurance Data for Routine Water Analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey Laboratory in Troy, New York-July 1997 through June 1999

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Science Center in Troy, N.Y., analyzes samples collected by USGS projects throughout the Northeast. The laboratory's quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures that were developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. The quality-assurance/quality-control data for the time period addressed in this report were stored in the laboratory's SAS data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of data. This report presents and discusses results of quality-assurance and quality- control samples analyzed from July 1997 through June 1999. Results for the quality-control samples for 18 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts indicate that data for eight of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased for either high-concentration and (or) low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, total monomeric aluminum, total aluminum, ammonium, calcium, chloride, specific conductance, and sulfate. The data from the potassium and sodium analytical procedures are insufficient for evaluation. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that the procedures for 11 of 13 analytes were within control limits, although the concentrations for blanks were occasionally outside the control limits. Blank analysis results for chloride showed that 22 percent of blanks did not meet data-quality objectives and results for dissolved organic carbon showed that 31 percent of the blanks did not meet data-quality objectives. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in the procedures for 14 of the 18 analytes. At least 90 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for all analytes except total aluminum (70 percent of samples met objectives) and potassium (83 percent of samples met objectives). Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample (SRS) Project indicated good data quality for most constituents over the time period. The P-sample (low-ionic-strength constituents) analysis had good ratings in two of these studies and a satisfactory rating in the third. The results of the T-sample (trace constituents) analysis indicated high data quality with good ratings in all three studies. The N-sample (nutrient constituents) studies had one each of excellent, good, and satisfactory ratings. Results of Environment Canada's National Water Research Institute (NWRI) program indicated that at least 80 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for 9 of the 13 analytes; the exceptions were dissolved organic carbon, ammonium, chloride, and specific conductance. Data-quality objectives were not met for dissolved organic carbon in two NWRI studies, but all of the samples were within control limits for the last study. Data-quality objectives were not met in 41 percent of samples analyzed for ammonium, 25 percent of samples analyzed for chloride, and 30 percent of samples analyzed for specific conductance. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 84 percent of the samples analyzed for calcium, chloride, magnesium, pH, and potassium. Data-quality objectives were met by 73 percent of those analyzed for sulfate. The data-quality objective was not met for sodium. The data are insufficient for evaluation of the specific conductance results.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2006

Quality-Assurance Data for Routine Water Analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey Laboratory in Troy, New York--July 1999 through June 2001

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Science Center in Troy, N.Y., analyzes samples collected by USGS projects throughout the Northeast. The laboratory's quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures that were developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. The quality-assurance and quality-control data were stored in the laboratory's LabMaster data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of data. This report presents and discusses results of quality-assurance and quality-control samples analyzed from July 1999 through June 2001. Results for the quality-control samples for 18 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts indicate that data for eight of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, total monomeric aluminum, total aluminum, calcium, chloride and nitrate (ion chromatography and colormetric method) and sulfate. The total aluminum and dissolved organic carbon procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the high-concentration sample, but were within control limits. The calcium and specific conductance procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for the low-concentration sample, but were within control limits. The magnesium procedure was biased for the high-concentration and low concentration samples, but was within control limits. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that the procedures for 14 of 15 analytes were within control limits, although the concentrations for blanks were occasionally outside the control limits. The data-quality objective was not met for dissolved organic carbon. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in the procedures for 17 of the 18 analytes. At least 90 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for all analytes except ammonium (81 percent of samples met objectives), chloride (75 percent of samples met objectives), and sodium (86 percent of samples met objectives). Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample (SRS) Project indicated good data quality over the time period, with most ratings for each sample in the good to excellent range. The P-sample (low-ionic-strength constituents) analysis had one satisfactory rating for the specific conductance procedure in one study. The T-sample (trace constituents) analysis had one satisfactory rating for the aluminum procedure in one study and one unsatisfactory rating for the sodium procedure in another. The remainder of the samples had good or excellent ratings for each study. Results of Environment Canada's National Water Research Institute (NWRI) program indicated that at least 89 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for 10 of the 14 analytes; the exceptions were ammonium, total aluminum, dissolved organic carbon, and sodium. Results indicate a positive bias for the ammonium procedure in all studies. Data-quality objectives were not met in 50 percent of samples analyzed for total aluminum, 38 percent of samples analyzed for dissolved organic carbon, and 27 percent of samples analyzed for sodium. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 91 percent of the samples analyzed for calcium, chloride, fluoride, magnesium, pH, potassium, and sulfate. Data-quality objectives were met by 75 percent of the samples analyzed for sodium and 58 percent of the samples analyzed for specific conductance.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2005

Quality-assurance data for routine water analyses by the U.S. Geological Survey Laboratory in Troy, New York—July 1995 through June 1997

The laboratory for analysis of low-ionic-strength water at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) office in Troy, N.Y. analyzes samples collected by USGS projects in the Northeast. The laboratory’s quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. For the time period addressed in this report, the quality-assurance/quality-control data were stored in the laboratory’s SAS data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of quality-assurance/quality-control data. This report presents and discusses samples analyzed from July 1995 through June 1997. Quality-control results for 19 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts show that data from ten of the analytical procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, total monomeric aluminum, ammonium, calcium, chloride, dissolved organic carbon, magnesium, nitrate (ion chromatography), nitrate (colorimetric method), and sulfate. Four of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased but were within control limits; they were: fluoride, pH, silicon, and sodium. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that all analytical procedures in which blanks were run were within control limits, although values for a few blanks were outside the control limits. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in 14 of the 19 procedures. Data-quality objectives (DQO’s) were met by at least 92 percent of the samples analyzed in all procedures except acid neutralizing capacity (80 percent of samples met objectives), total monomeric aluminum (87 percent of samples met objectives), organic monomeric aluminum (89 percent of samples met objectives), and chloride (89 percent of samples met objectives). The data are insufficient to evaluate the DQO’s for total aluminum. Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample Program indicated acceptable data quality for most constituents over the time period. The results of the P-sample (low-ionic strength constituent) analysis indicated high data quality with good ratings in all studies. The T-sample (trace constituent) had unacceptable ratings in two studies, but received satisfactory ratings in the others. The N-sample (nutrient constituent) studies had an unacceptable rating in one and an excellent rating in the other. Environment Canada’s NWRI program results indicated that at least 90 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives in 9 of the 12 analyses; exceptions were calcium, chloride, and silicon. Data-quality objectives were not met for calcium samples in two NWRI studies, but all of the samples analyzed were within control limits for the remaining studies. Data-quality objectives were not met for 32 percent of samples analyzed for chloride and 27 percent of samples analyzed for silicon. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data-quality objectives were met by at least 90 percent of the calcium, pH, potassium, and sodium samples. Data-quality objectives were met by 77 percent of the chloride samples, 83 percent of the magnesium samples, and 80 percent of the sulfate samples. There is insufficient data to evaluate the specific conductance samples.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2001

Quality-assurance data for routine water quality analyses by the U. S. Geological Survey laboratory in Troy, New York; July 1993 through June 1995

A laboratory for analysis of low-ionic strength water has been developed at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) office in Troy, N.Y., to analyze samples collected by USGS projects in the Northeast. The laboratory's quality-assurance program is based on internal and interlaboratory quality-assurance samples and quality-control procedures developed to ensure proper sample collection, processing, and analysis. The quality-assurance/quality-control data are stored in the laboratory's SAS data-management system, which provides efficient review, compilation, and plotting of quality-assurance/quality-control data. This report presents and discusses samples analyzed from July 1993 through June 1995. Quality-control results for 18 analytical procedures were evaluated for bias and precision. Control charts show that data from seven of the analytical procedures were biased throughout the analysis period for either high-concentration or low-concentration samples but were within control limits; these procedures were: acid-neutralizing capacity, dissolved inorganic carbon, dissolved organic carbon (soil expulsions), chloride, magnesium, nitrate (colorimetric method), and pH. Three of the analytical procedures were occasionally biased but were within control limits; they were: calcium (high for high-concentration samples for May 1995), dissolved organic carbon (high for highconcentration samples from January through September 1994), and fluoride (high in samples for April and June 1994). No quality-control sample has been developed for the organic monomeric aluminum procedure. Results from the filter-blank and analytical-blank analyses indicate that all analytical procedures in which blanks were run were within control limits, although values for a few blanks were outside the control limits. Blanks were not analyzed for acid-neutralizing capacity, dissolved inorganic carbon, fluoride, nitrate (colorimetric method), or pH. Sampling and analysis precision are evaluated herein in terms of the coefficient of variation obtained for triplicate samples in 14 of the 18 procedures. Data-quality objectives were met by more than 90 percent of the samples analyzed in all procedures except total monomeric aluminum (85 percent of samples met objectives), total aluminum (70 percent of samples met objectives), and dissolved organic carbon (85 percent of samples met objectives). Triplicate samples were not analyzed for ammonium, fluoride, dissolved inorganic carbon, or nitrate (colorimetric method). Results of the USGS interlaboratory Standard Reference Sample Program indicated high data quality with a median result of 3.6 of a possible 4.0. Environment Canada's LRTAP interlaboratory study results indicated that more than 85 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives in 6 of the 12 analyses; exceptions were calcium, dissolved organic carbon, chloride, pH, potassium, and sodium. Data-quality objectives were not met for calcium samples in one LRTAP study, but 94 percent of samples analyzed were within control limits for the remaining studies. Data-quality objectives were not met by 35 percent of samples analyzed for dissolved organic carbon, but 94 percent of sample values were within 20 percent of the most probable value. Data-quality objectives were not met for 30 percent of samples analyzed for chloride, but 90 percent of sample values were within 20 percent of the most probable value. Measurements of samples with a pH above 6.0 were biased high in 54 percent of the samples, although 85 percent of the samples met data-quality objectives for pH measurements below 6.0. Data-quality objectives for potassium and sodium were not met in one study (only 33 percent of the samples analyzed met the objectives), although 85 percent of the sample values were within control limits for the other studies. Measured sodium values were above the upper control limit in all studies. Results from blind reference-sample analyses indicated that data

Open-File Report↗

USGS1995

Analytical methods of the U.S. Geological Survey's New York District Water-Analysis Laboratory

The New York District of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Troy, N.Y., operates a water-analysis laboratory for USGS watershed-research projects in the Northeast that require analyses of precipitation and of dilute surface water and soil water for major ions; it also provides analyses of certain chemical constituents in soils and soil gas samples. This report presents the methods for chemical analyses of water samples, soil-water samples, and soil-gas samples collected in wateshed-research projects. The introduction describes the general materials and technicques for each method and explains the USGS quality-assurance program and data-management procedures; it also explains the use of cross reference to the three most commonly used methods manuals for analysis of dilute waters. The body of the report describes the analytical procedures for (1) solution analysis, (2) soil analysis, and (3) soil-gas analysis. The methods are presented in alphabetical order by constituent. The method for each constituent is preceded by (1) reference codes for pertinent sections of the three manuals mentioned above, (2) a list of the method's applications, and (3) a summary of the procedure. The methods section for each constitutent contains the following categories: instrumentation and equipment, sample preservation and storage, reagents and standards, analytical procedures, quality control, maintenance, interferences, safety considerations, and references. Sufficient information is presented for each method to allow the resulting data to be appropriately used in environmental investigations.

Open-File Report↗