vvEPA
United States      Office of Acid Deposition, Environmental  EPA/600/8-87/018
Environmental Protection Monitoring and Quality Assurance     April 1987
Agency        Washington DC 20460
Research and Development
Western Lake Survey
Phase I

Field Operations Report
Field Operations
Report

-------
Pacific
Northwest (4BJ
 California (4A
                                                   Northern
                                                   Rockies (4C)
Central
Rockies  (4D!
                                                                                         Southern
                                                                                         Rockies (4E
                            Subregions of  the Western Lake Survey  -  Phase I

-------
                                            EPA 600/8-87/018
                                            April 1987
Western  Lake Survey
            Phase  I
   Field Operations Report
           A Contribution to the
 National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program
                  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                  Office of Research and Development
                      Washington, DC 20460
       Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Las Vegas. NV 89119
           Environmental Research Laboratory - Corvallls, OR 97333

-------
                                       NOTICE
     The  information  in  this  document  has  been  funded  by  the  U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency under  contract  no.  68-03-3249  to Lockheed  Engineering  and  Manage-
ment  Services Company, Inc.   It has  been subject  to  the  Agency's  peer and  administra-
tive review, and it has been approved for publication as an EPA document.

     The  mention  of  corporate   names,   trade  names,  or commercial   products  in  this
report  is  for  illustration purposes only and  does  not  constitute  endorsement  or  recom-
mendation for  use.

-------
                                      ABSTRACT
     The  Western Lake  Survey-Phase  I  was  conducted  during the  fall  of  1985 as  a
synoptic  chemical  survey  to  characterize  lakes  located  in  regions  of  the  western  and
northwestern  United   States   thought  to  be   potentially  susceptible  to  the  effects  of
acidic  deposition.   The  Western  Lake Survey is  part of  Phase  I of the National  Surface
Water  Survey which is designed to assess the  problem  of  acidic deposition on a  national
scale.   This document describes  the  planning  and execution of  the  Western Lake  Survey-
Phase  I field sampling and field laboratory operations.

     To  facilitate  lake  sampling,  field  stations  were  established in  Missoula,  Montana;
Bozeman,  Montana; Aspen,  Colorado;  Wenatchee, Washington;  and  Carson  City,  Nevada.
Sampling crews deployed from these  base sites sampled 757 lakes between  September  11
and  November 5,  1985.   The  lakes  were sampled  either by  helicopter  crews  or,  in the
case  of  lakes located in  designated  National  Forest wilderness  areas,  by Forest  Service
field ground crews.   Helicopter crews collected 54  percent  of  the samples; ground crews
collected 46  percent.   Field  protocols  for   both groups  are  described.    To  determine
whether or  not the two  sampling methods  provided data  of  comparable quality, 45  lakes
in wilderness areas were sampled twice,  once by a  helicopter crew  and  once  by a ground
crew, during a special calibration study.

     The  water   samples  were  delivered to   mobile  laboratories located  at  each  field
station.  At  the  mobile  laboratories,  some  analyses were conducted,  and samples were
processed   into  aliquots  which  were  preserved.    The  samples  were  then  shipped  to
contract, analytical laboratories for more detailed  analyses.

     At  the  close  of the  Western   Lake  Survey-Phase I,  base site  coordinators,  field
managers,  and Survey management personnel  met to discuss  the field sampling and  field
laboratory  operations and  to  make  recommendations  for  future National Surface Water
Survey  activities   and  for  similar  surveys.     The   group  noted that   all  sampling  was
completed   within  the  scheduled  sampling  windows and  that  the  safety record  for the
Survey  was  excellent.    Communication  between   the  helicopter  crews  and  the  field
stations  was  good.    The  use  of  satellite remote sites  (in  conjunction  with  the  field
stations)  improved  the  cost-effectiveness   of  helicopter  sampling.    Although  modifica-
tions  made  to   the  field   laboratory  trailers   improved  laboratory   operations,   it   was
decided  that locating  the  field  laboratory  in  a  warehouse  would  reduce  the  potential
effects  of  temperature  extremes,  wind,  and  dust on the  laboratory environment,   in-
strumentation,  and  data  quality.    It  was   also decided  that  better  communication  to
coordinate   ground  crew  and helicopter  crew  sampling  activities   could  minimize  the
problems  encountered  when  unusually large numbers   of  samples  arrived for  processing
at the  field  laboratory  within a  short time.

     This  report   was  submitted  in  partial  fulfillment  of  Contract  no.  68-03-3249   by
Lockheed  Engineering  and Management  Services  Company,  Inc.  under  the  sponsorship  of
the  U.S. Environmental  Protection  Agency.   This report covers  a  period  from February
1985 to December 1985, and work was completed as of December 1986.
                                               in

-------
                                    CONTENTS

Abstract	iii
Figures	v
Tables	  v
Acknowledgements	vi

Introduction	1

Field Operations	1
     Survey Planning	1
     Field Station Selection	1
     Procurement	2
     Personnel Training Program	  2
     Field Station Organization	3
     Field Laboratory Set-Up	5
     Communications	  5

Field Sampling Operations	  7
     Field Sampling Equipment	  7
     Field Quality Assurance	7
     Field Sampling Protocols	  8
     Calibration Study	 10

Field Laboratory Operations	11

Results	11

Observations  and Recommendations	 13

References	 16

Appendix A	 17
                                            IV

-------
                                    FIGURES

Number                                                                     Page

  1 Subregions studied during the Western Lake Survey-Phase 1	4

  2 Field station organization for Western Lake Survey-Phase I .	6

 A-1 Lake data form for Western Lake Survey-Phase I	17

 A-2 Sample custody form for Western Lake Survey-Phase I	18
                                     TABLES
Number                                                                     Page

  1    Field Stations and Remote Base Sites for
         Western Lake Survey-Phase 1	5

  2    Period of Operation, Number of Regular Lakes Visited, and
         Number  of Regular  Lakes Sampled by Helicopter and Ground
         Crews During the Western Lake Survey-Phase I	12

  3    Summary, by Field Station, of Regular Lakes that were
         not Sampled  During  the Western Lake Survey-Phase I	13

  4    Summary, by Field Station, of Samples Processed During
         the Western Lake Survey-Phase I	14

-------
                                 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
     Lockheed-EMSCO field operations were  managed  by S. L Pierett and K.  Asbury.
K.  Cabbie  (Lockheed-EMSCO)  assisted  with field  station  and  base  site  selection.  J.
Baker,  F. Morris,  B. Baldigo,  C. Hagley,  J. Wilson,  and  C.  Mayer  (Lockheed-EMSCO)
provided  training  for field  samplers.   D.  Peck,  L.  Drewes,  and M.  Morison (Lockheed-
EMSCO) organized the training program for field laboratory personnel.

     C.  Mayer and D.  Peck  provided helpful  revisions to  the  manuscript.    M. Faber
(Lockheed-EMSCO)  served  as  technical  editor.     R.   Doty  (Forest  Service)   and   L.
Svoboda  (U.S. EPA, Region  VIII) formally reviewed the report.

     L Steele  and S. Reppke  (Computer Sciences  Corporation)  typed the  various drafts
of  the manuscript.  R. Sheets, R. Buell,  and S.  Garcia (Lockheed-EMSCO) prepared the
figures.

     This document  is  a  contribution  to   the  National  Acid   Precipitation  Assessment
Program.
                                            VI

-------
 INTRODUCTION
      The  Western   Lake  Survey  Phase  I
 (WLS-I),  counterpart  to  the  Eastern  Lake
 Survey-Phase   I   (ELS-I)  completed  during
 the  fall of  1984,  is  the second and  final
 synoptic lake survey of the  National Surface
 Water  Survey  (NSWS).   The  U.S.  Environ-
 mental  Protection Agency (EPA)  implemented
 the  NSWS  in  early  1984  as  part  of  the
 National   Acid   Precipitation   Assessment
 Program  (NAPAP).   A  subset of regionally
 characteristic  lakes  identified during Phase
 I  may  be  studied during  Phase II to quan-
 tify  biological resources  and temporal varia-
 bility.   The  design,  results,  and  interpreta-
 tion of the data  from WLS-I are presented
 in Landers et al.  (1987).

      The  regions  of  the  western  United
 States  that  contain  the  majority  of  low
 alkalinity waters  were delineated  by  Omernik
 and Powers  (1983) who developed a national
 surface  water  alkalinity  map on  the basis
 of  historical  data.    From   this  map,  five
 subregions  of  interest  (Figure 1) were  iden-
 tified for WLS:   (1) the Sierra  Nevada  and
 the   Klamath  Mountains  (California  [4A]),
 (2) the Cascade Mountains  and the Olympic
 Mountains  (Pacific  Northwest [4B])   (3)  the
 northern  Rocky   Mountains   and  the  Blue
 Mountains  (Northern Rockies  [4C]),   (4)  the
 central  Rocky  Mountains  [4D],  and  (5)  the
 southern Rocky Mountains  [4E].   To ensure
 that  the  maximum  number  of  lakes could
 be sampled during a limited sampling season,
 a  field  station   was  established  in  each
 subregion.    The  field  station  served as  a
 staging  area  for  sampling  activities   and
 was the center for communication with the
 other WLS-I  participants.  A field laboratory
 trailer was also located at each field  station.

     Although the ELS Pilot Study and  ELS-
 I both demonstrated that helicopters provide
the most rapid  and efficient means of sample
collection, helicopters  could  not  be  used in
the wilderness  areas of the  West.  The  use
of  helicopters  (or  other  motorized  vehicles)
in  wilderness  areas  is  prohibited  by  the
Wilderness Act of 1964.   Consequently,  the
 WLS-I  wilderness   area  lakes  had  to  be
 sampled  by  ground   teams.    Helicopters
 equipped  with floats  were  used to  sample
 lakes outside the wilderness areas. Helicopter
 sampling  teams followed  methodology  and
 protocols  established for  ELS-I; ground sam-
 pling  teams  followed  protocols  designed
 specifically for WLS-I.   To determine whether
 or  not  the  method  of  sample  collection
 affected  sample  characteristics  and  data
 comparability,  a  calibration  study was  con-
 ducted  during which  45  WLS-I  lakes were
 sampled  both by  helicopter  teams and  by
 ground  teams.

 FIELD  OPERATIONS

      The   activities  that  were  required  to
 carry out  field sampling operations  for WLSI
 included planning  and  implementing a logis-
 tical   support   capability,    selecting   field
 stations,  developing field  sampling protocols,
 and training personnel.

 Survey Planning

      In addition to the expendable  supplies
 and equipment necessary for WLS-I laboratory
 and  helicopter  operations,  the  inclusion  of
 the  ground  sampling  operation  required  a
 much  larger  procurement  effort  than  was
 required  for  ELS-I.    Coordination  among
 the  Environmental Monitoring Systems Labo-
 ratory  (EMSL) of  the EPA  in  Las  Vegas,
 Nevada; the Environmental Research Center
 (ERL) of  the  EPA  in  Corvallis, Oregon;  and
 the Forest Service was essential to all aspects
 of survey  planning.

 Field Station Selection

      Both  field  laboratory  and  helicopter
 operations were directed  from  the  individual
 field  stations.    The  primary  concern  in
 selecting  a  site  for   helicopter  operations
 was  that  of  finding a location that would
 allow the  maximum number of lakes to  be
 sampled within  a  150-mile  radius.   When a
group of target lakes  was  beyond  normal

-------
helicopter  sampling  range,  a remote  base
site  was  established.   The  criteria used  to
select the field stations are presented below.

Field Station  Requirements-
     Airport access  was  the  primary consid-
eration.    All field stations were  located  at
or  near   airports  to  facilitate  the  landing,
refueling,  communications, and maintenance
of the contract helicopters.   Field  sampling
operations required a room near the helicop-
ter  landing area for  storage  of supplies and
for  calibration  of  instruments.    A source
of jet  A  fuel for the  helicopters  was  also
required at each field station.

Field Laboratory  Requirements-
     Each field  laboratory  was  located  in
a  secure  area  near  the  helicopter landing
area  to  facilitate the  transfer of  samples.
The  proper  electrical  service  was  required,
as  was a telephone line.  A  minimum water
pressure of 50  psi  and a sewer  drain were
also  required  for the proper  operation  of
the  field  laboratory.    Specific requirements
for  the  operation of the trailers are describ-
ed in Morris et al. (1986).

     Full  service  overnight  carrier  pickup
and  delivery  and  major or commuter airline
service  were  required  at  each field station.
These  services  were also required  for ship-
ments  of equipment  and supplies  to  field
stations   from   the  Las  Vegas   warehouse.
Charter  airplane service   or  Forest Service
aircraft  at each field  station were  required
so that  samples and supplies could be trans-
ported between remote base  sites and  the
field  station.    Aircraft  were  also  used  to
deliver  samples  collected by some ground
teams to  some of the  field stations.

Personnel Support Requirements--
     Suitable  lodging   and restaurant  facili-
ties  near  the  field  station  were  required.
Paging systems were  used at some sites to
assure  that  key personnel  could  be called
on  a 24-hour basis.   The field  station had
to  be  located  near  a hospital  for safety
purposes.  Arrangements had  to be establish-
ed  with a local  bank to allow field personnel
to cash out-of-town  travel  checks.
Sites Selected-
     The  geographic  distribution  of  lakes
to be  sampled  (Figure 1) required  five field
stations  to  complete  the WLS-I within  the
fall  turnover  period.     The   selected  field
stations  and  associated  remote  sites  are
shown in Table 1.

Procurement

     Many aspects of procurement, such  as
the  computer  based  inventory  system,   a
warehouse facility for storage  and  receipt
of  supplies  and  equipment,  and  inventory
control forms  were already in  place because
they  had  been  implemented  during   ELS-I.
Field  equipment  used  by  ground  sampling
crews, such as inflatable  rafts and dry suits,
was purchased  by the  Forest Service, and
all sampling gear was provided by EPA.

Personnel Training Program

     Field personnel for WLS-I were recruited
by  Lockheed  Engineering and Management
Services  Company,  Inc.   (Lockheed-EMSCO)
or were  provided  by  Forest Service or EPA
regional offices.   A number of the  Lockheed-
EMSCO  field  personnel  involved  in  WLS-I
had  been  directly involved  in ELS-I.   The
additional personnel were hired by  Lockheed-
EMSCO as  temporary employees;  prior aca-
demic and professional experience was requir-
ed  for  employment.    All  Lockheed-EMSCO
personnel underwent   an   intensive  technical
and safety training program at  the Las Vegas
facility  of  Lockheed-EMSCO.     Laboratory
personnel  were  given medical  surveillance
physicals  and were   fitted  for respirators.
Training also included  cardiopulmonary resus-
citation, first aid,  and defensive driving.

     EPA and Forest  Service personnel were
trained  at  each  field station  over a  3-day
period  by   Lockheed-EMSCO  management
and   field   sampling   personnel.    Training
emphasized field  protocol,  safety,  and  the
proper handling  and  transport  of samples
to  minimize   the  potential  for  contamina-
tion.   Hands-on  training  was  given to heli-
copter crews and ground crews.  Each person
was  individually  tested   on  the use  of  all

-------
equipment  and on  the  collection  of  each
type  of  sample  (blank,  routine,   syringe,
and  nitrate/sulfate  aliquot).    All  helicopter
sampling  personnel were instructed  in  heli-
copter safety  by  a  representative from  the
U.S.  Department  of  the  Interior,  Office  of
Aircraft Services.

Field Station Organization

     The   organizational   structure   of   the
field station  was  similar  to that used during
ELS-I  (Morris  et  al.,   1986),  except  that
several staff  positions were added for WLSI:
Forest  Service  field  manager,  Lockheed-
EMSCO  logistics   coordinator,  and  Forest
Service  ground sampling  teams  (Figure  2).
Each  field  station was  staffed by  12 to  14
scientists   and  technicians,   1  to  2  pilots,
and  a  mechanic.   The  base coordinator,
duty officer,  and  two to  three members  of
the helicopter sampling crew  were personnel
from the regional  EPA offices  (Regions VIII,
IX,  and X).   All field station  personnel were
accountable  to the  base  coordinator  who
was  responsible  for the  overall  operation
of the field  station and  remote base sites.
The duties of the base coordinator  included:
•    coordinating daily sampling activities

•    acting as on-site project officer for
     OAS helicopter contracts

•    coordinating visits from the NSWS
     management team and the press

•    scheduling fixed wing  aircraft services

•    obtaining permission to access
     privately owned lakes

•    assigning helicopter sampling
     personnel daily

•    debriefing helicopter crew
     members

•    updating the master sampling
     plan
      initiating search and rescue
      operations

      maintaining a daily operations  log
      with the duty officer
      preparing a final report on
      site operations.
base
     The   duty    officer    was   directly
responsible to the base coordinator. Responsi-
bilities of the duty officer included:

•      planning daily sampling  activities  with
       base coordinator

•      preparing lake  coordinate lists

•      receiving flight  plans from pilots

•      providing  sampling teams  with  lake
       maps and data forms

•      assisting  base coordinator in updating
       master  sampling plan

•      debriefing helicopter sampling teams

•      overseeing remote base site operations

•      acting as base coordinator in the coor-
       dinator's absence.

     The EPA field sampling personnel were
rotated on a  regular (approximately 2 week)
basis.    One  or two Lockheed-EMSCO  field
personnel remained  at  the field  station  or
associated  remote   site   throughout   the
operation to provide  continuity  and  to train
incoming  EPA field  personnel when  necess-
ary.

     The Forest Service  field manager  was
responsible  for  the ground sampling opera-
tion  and for  coordinating the  pickup from
the field  and the  delivery to the field lab-
oratory of samples collected by ground teams.
The  EPA base  coordinator and  the  Forest
Service field manager had  several joint duties.
These  duties included:

-------
                             NORTHERN ROCKY
                             MOUNTAINS (4C)
PACIFIC
NORTHWEST (48)
CALIFORNIA (4A)V"t     NV
                                        /—^4~/4-
                                           TriJl? —r	
                                                   SOUTHERN ROCKY
                                                   MOUNTAINS (4E)
    	Subregion Boundary
       Figure 1.  Subreglons studied during the Western Lake Survey-Phase I.

                                    4

-------
TABLE 1.  FIELD STATIONS AND REMOTE BASE SITES
      FOR WESTERN LAKE SURVEY - PHASE I
Field Station
Carson City,
Nevada
Wenatchee,
Washington
Bozeman,
Montana
Missoula,
Montana
Aspen,
Colorado
Subregion
4A
4B
4C
4D
4E
Re mote Base Sites
Bishop, California
Redding, California
Everett, Washington
Bend, Oregon
Red Lodge, Montana
Evanston, Wyoming
Pinedale, Wyoming
D'Alene, Idaho
McCall, Idaho
Saratoga, Wyoming
Granby, Colorado
 •     coordinating  the  sampling  efforts  of
      the calibration study lakes

 •     tracking  lakes   sampled  by  helicopter
      and ground crews

 •     providing  a  daily  summary  of  field
      sampling operations  to  the  laboratory
      coordinator.

      The logistics  coordinator was responsi-
 ble  for  disbursement   of  equipment  and
 supplies to  the  ground  sampling crews, as
 well as  for  maintaining an  up-to-date inven-
 tory of  all  field  equipment.   The  logistics
 coordinator was  also  trained as a  laboratory
 analyst or a field  sampler  and in the ship-
 ment of  samples to the contract laboratories.
 Laboratory   personnel   responsibilities  were
 identical to   those defined  for  ELS-I  and
 are described in Morris et al. (1986).

     The ground  crew  member of  the  heli-
 copter crew  was  responsible  for  all  post-
 flight  activities.    After the  helicopter  de-
 parted, the  ground  crew  member  assisted
 the  duty  officer  in   organizing  lake  maps,
 completing  appropriate  parts  of  the  field
 data  forms   (lake  name,  coordinates,  and
 lake sketch), and  completing  the  lake  co-
 ordinates form for the  next day's sampling
 sites.    Upon the  return  of  a  helicopter,
the  ground   crew  member  received   field
samples,  verified  completeness  of  the  lake
data forms, conducted a quality control check
on the Hydrolab units, and prepared supplies
for the following day of sampling.

Field Laboratory Set up

     All  five  field laboratories  used  during
WLS-I  had been  used previously for  ELS-I.
The  trailers  were towed  to  their respective
field  sites  where  they  were positioned  to
minimize exposure to wind-borne  particulates
and  were  connected  to  utilities.   Two  to
three days  were  required  for the laboratory
to become fully operational.

Communications

     The   WLS-I  communications center  in
Las  Vegas functioned  similarly  to  the  one
that  had been established for ELS-I.  Details
of the operation  and  function of the WLS-
I  communications  center  can be  found  in
Morris  et  al.  (1986).   Local  communications
centers  were established at each field station
to coordinate site  activities  with Las  Vegas
and  with  the other field  stations.   Coordi-
nation  among base sites  was necessary  to
ensure  that  samples  were  transferred  cor-
rectly from the  base  sites  to the  contract
analytical laboratories.

-------
                       BASE COORDINATOR
                              (EPA)

1
HELICOPTER
OPERATIONS
. ...


1
FIELD LABORATORY
OPERATIONS

GROUND
OPERATIONS
 DUTY OFFICER
     (EPA)
  PILOTS  AND
H  MECHANIC
  Contracted]
 SAMPLING CREWS
 3 person crews
   1-2  crews
 (EPA,  Lockheed)
LABORATORY COORDINATOR
     (Lockheed)
LABORATORY
SUPERVISOR
(Lockheed)
 LOGISTICS
COORDINATOR
(Lockheed)
FIELD MANAGER
(Forest Service)


 SAMPLING CREWS
 2  person crews
   8-12 crews
[Forest Service]
LABORATORY
 ANALYSTS
3 persons
(Lockheed)
                  SAMPLE PICK-UP
                      CREWS
                 (Forest Service)
             Figure 2.  Field station organization for Western Lake Survey-Phase I.

-------
FIELD SAMPLING OPERATIONS

 Field  Sampling Equipment

Helicopter Sampling--
     The mountainous terrain of the western
United  States required  a  helicopter capable
of prolonged  high altitude flying.   The  Ae-
rospeciale  Lama  315B  fulfilled  this  need
and was used at all sites with the  exception
of Wenatchee,  Washington,   where  a  Bell
Long Ranger was used because the  target
lakes  were  located  at lower  elevations in
this subregion.  The helicopters used during
WLS-I  sampled  an average of three to six
lakes per day.

     The field equipment used  for helicopter
sampling during  WLS-I  was identical to that
used during  ELS-I, except that  the specifica-
tions of the  Van Dorn  sampler were  differ-
ent.  The Van Dorn used  during WLS-I was
identical  in  volume  (6.2  L)  but  measured
81.5 crn by 10 cm as opposed to  47 cm by
17 cm  for  the Van  Dorn used during ELS-
I.   Both surveys  used Van  Dorn  samplers
that  were  equipped  with  LuerLok fittings
to allow syringe  samples to be  taken without
atmospheric  contact.

     A  Hydrolab model 4041  with  a 50-m
cable  was used for  in  situ  measurement of
pH, temperature, and  conductance.   A 20cm
diameter black and  white  Secchi  disk was
used to measure lake  transparency.

     Site  depth  was  measured with a  Ray
Jefferson model 220  electronic depth  finder
mounted on  the  helicopter float.   Accuracy
of the  depth  sounder  was  checked against
a  sounding  line on  the first  lake sampled
each day.

Ground Sampling-
     The  Van  Dorn  sampler,  Secchi disk,
and sounding lines used by the  ground teams
were identical  to those  used  by the helicop-
ter crews.  Temperature was measured with
a  YSI  model  425C  telethermometer with a
YSI 400-series probe.   A 30-m  cable  was
used  with  the  telethermometer.    The  pH
was  measured  using   ColorpHast  indicator
strips  (pH   ranges  4.0-7.0  and  6.5-10.0).
Conductance was  not  measured  by the  gro-
und sampling teams.

Field Quality Assurance

     A strict quality assurance (QA) program
was required  for WLS-I field sampling ope-
rations  (Silverstein  et  al.,  1987a,  in prepa-
ration).  QA protocols for helicopter sampling,
including   equipment   calibration,   collection
of QA and field  samples,  and data recording
were  identical  to  those   used during  ELS
(Drouse et al., 1986).  The ground sampling
QA protocols specific to WLS-I were designed
to correspond as closely as possible to those
followed   by  helicopter  crews.    Duplicate
and blank samples  were assigned in  such a
way  that  each  field  crew  would collect at
least one of each during the survey.  Custody
forms were  employed  to  track ground sam-
ples  from the time of  collection to the time
of analysis  at the contract analytical labo-
ratory.

Field Instrument Calibration--
     The   Hydrolab   and   telethermometer
required  daily calibration  or  calibration  ch-
ecks.    The  Hydrolab  was  calibrated  daily
prior to use  and was  checked for drift after
completion of the day's sampling.  A  Nati-
onal  Bureau of Standards (NBS)  traceable
thermometer was used to  check the accuracy
of  the  temperature  probe.   Thermometer
and  meter  values  were  required  to  agree
within  2°C.    NBS  color-coded buffers  (pH
4.01  and  7.00) were  used  as standards in
calibration.  The   conductivity   probe  was
standardized with  a  0.001 M KCI  solution
that  had a  specific conductance  of 147  ~S
cm-1.

     A quality control  check sample  (QCCS)
was  used to  check the accuracy  of  calibra-
tion  in the  morning and  to check the  drift
of the instrument  after the  day's  sampling.
The  QCCS  was  prepared by  bubbling  C02
through deionized  water  at  a rate  of  1 to
2  L  min-1  for  20  to  30  minutes.   Meter
values  were  compared  to theoretical values
of pH and  specific  conductance  at given
temperatures and  barometric  pressures.   If

-------
the meter value differed by more  than  0.15
pH units or  20 ~S cm-1,  recalibration  was
performed by following procedures  recomm-
ended  by  the  manufacturer.    Calibration
data  were recorded  on  a calibration form
and  were submitted  to the  field  laboratory
coordinator  at  the end of  the day.   The
initial and  final QCCS values  for  pH  and
specific  conductance   were entered  on  the
lake  data form.

     The thermistor unit used by the ground
sampling crews was  checked and  calibrated
by  measuring  the temperature of  an  ice
slurry  (approximately   0°C)  and  a  water
sample  (10   to  20°C)  with the meter  and
with a thermometer.   If  the  thermistor and
thermometer  readings  differed  by 0.5°C  or
more, the  meter was not used.

Quality Assurance  Samples--
     The  QA plan (Silverstein et  al.,  1987a,
in   preparation)   required   that   helicopter
teams collect  blank  and   duplicate  samples
each day.  Each ground crew collected blank
samples at two of their assigned lakes which
were  selected  at  random.   Blank samples
consisted  of  water from  the  field  laboratory
meeting Type I reagent grade specifications.
Crews processed blank samples with the Van
Dom  sampler at the first  lake sampled each
day.  The blank samples  were processed  by
the  field   laboratory   by  using  the   same
sample  protocol  used  for routine  samples.
Blank samples  were   used as  a  check for
field and laboratory contamination.

      A duplicate water sample was collected
on one  lake  per day  by one  helicopter crew
at  each  field  station.    Each  ground team
collected  duplicate  samples   from  two  of
their  assigned  lakes  which were selected at
random.   The  duplicates   were  samples  col-
lected with  the  Van  Dorn  sampler  at  the
same  location  and  depth   as  the  routine
samples.,  duplicates   were  used  to  check
the  replicability  of  sample  collection   and
analysis.    Quality  assurance  requirements
for duplicate samples  are  described in detail
in the QA plan (Silverstein  et  al.,  1987a, in
preparation).
Data Recording--
     Field observations and in situ measure-
ments  were  recorded  on  multicopy  forms
(Appendix A)  similar to those  used  during
ELS-I.    The  forms  were  modified  slightly
so that they could be used by both ground
sampling crews  and helicopter crews.  While
on  the  lake,  the  ground  crews  recorded
data on  waterproof  Nalgene  copies of  the
data form contained in a field logbook;  later
they transcribed  the data  to the  standard
multicopy forms.   A copy of each  form  was
sent to  Oak  Ridge National  Laboratory for
entry   into  the   WLS-I  database.  Quality
assurance  personnel in  Las  Vegas received
a second copy.

Field Sampling  Protocols

     Helicopter  sampling protocols for WLS-
I were  identical to  those  used during  ELS-
I,  these  protocols  are  described  in  Morris
et al.  (1986).   Ground sampling  protocols
were  developed   to  follow   as  closely as
possible  those   previously  established   for
helicopter sampling and  documented  in a
draft operations manual.  Sampling protocols
used by  ground teams are described  in the
following sections.

     Wilderness lakes were sampled by Forest
Service  personnel   who  hiked to   the  lakes
or traveled  to the  lakes via pack animals.
The  Forest  Service  crew   usually  departed
for  the  lake the  day before it  was  to be
sampled,  spent the  night   at the  lake,   and
sampled  the lake  on  the following morning.
Each crew carried  a radio and kept in contact
as  much as  possible with  a  local  Forest
Service  district  dispatcher.    The  dispatcher,
in turn,  communicated  frequently  with  the
Forest Service  field  manager  at  the  field
station.   The field  manager  coordinated all
ground  sampling  operations  at  a  particular
field station.

 Lake Shore Activities--
At  the  lake  shore, ground sampling crews
assembled equipment and  supplies, and in-
flated the rafts that were  used as sampling
platforms.  Rocks  were gathered and cleaned

-------
and  were  placed  in  nylon  mesh  bags  for
use  as an anchor if needed.   The crew then
completed  labels for all  samples to be colle-
cted and  recorded site  description  informa-
tion  on  the  lake data form.   They checked
the  operation  of  the  thermistor  by com-
paring  the thermistor  value  to the tempera-
ture  recorded  by  a  thermometer.   If  the
two  values differed by  2*C or more, the  in
situ  temperature data  were qualified.

 Sampling  Site Selection--
     Shoreline   topography   was   used   to
determine what part of the lake was deepest.
The  deepest  spot was selected for sampling.
For  multilobed or  dendritic  lakes,  the  spot
in  the  deepest,  most  downstream  lobe was
selected.   In  all  sampling  site   selections,
influences  from  major inflows  or local  dis-
turbances  were  avoided.  After the sampling
site  was selected,  it was marked on a lake
sketch.

     An anchor  was  not used if  local condi-
tions were favorable  (i.e.,  lack of wind   or
a  shallow lake).    If  required,  the  anchor
was  slowly  lowered  to the  bottom;  care
was taken to avoid disturbing the sediments.

Lake  Site Activities-
     Once the  raft  was  positioned  at  the
sampling site,  the following  activities were
performed  sequentially.

     Site depth-Depth at the sampling  site
was determined  by  using  the  anchor  and
calibrated  line.   Site  depth  was recorded
in  the field logbook.

     Stratification   status—Ground   crews
used the YSI telethermometers to determine
temperature  profiles  at  each lake.   Thermal
stratification  status of a lake was determined
by using the same criteria as those estab-
lished  for  the  helicopter  crews   (Morris   et
al.,  1986).    If  the  lake was  found to  be
stratified and it  was  feasible  for  the crew
to  return at a  later  date,  no sample  was
obtained.

     Secchi  disk  transparency-Jhe protocol
for  determining  Secchi  disk  transparency
was identical  to that  used by  the  helicopter
crews  (Morris  et al., 1986).

     Sample co//ecf/on-Water samples  were
collected by the ground  crews  by following
the  protocol  established  for  the  helicopter
crews  (Morris  et al., 1986) with the exception
that ground crews (1) collected  a  125-mL
nitrate/ sulfate  aliquot  and  (2)  determined
pH by  using indicator strip.

 The nitrate/sulfate  aliquot was    collected
from the  Van  Dorn sampler  after  collection
of  the  bulk  water  sample.   Aliquots  were
also collected for blank and duplicate samples.
The  aliquot bottles  were  rinsed three times
with 20-mL  portions   of  sample,  and  the
samples were  preserved  with  three  drops
(0.1 mL) of 5 percent HgCI2.

     Field   pH   determination-ln   addition
to the  nitrate/sulfate aliquots,  two   additional
10-mL  borosilicate  glass  vials,  rinsed three
times  with sample,  were  filled  from  the
Van Dorn   sampler  for  pH  determination
using ColorpHast  indicator strips.   A 4.0 to
7.0 pH  test strip  was  placed in  one of the
vials and  was allowed  to  develop  for 10
minutes.   The  pH  was  then  estimated to
the nearest 0.1 pH unit  by using  the color
chart  provided  by  the   manufacturer.     If
the  pH was  6.2  or greater,  the  procedure
was repeated by  using the second vial  and
a  pH 6.5-10.00  test.  The pH  value  was then
recorded in the  field  logbook.   A duplicate
measurement  was  obtained  from all  field
duplicate samples.

     Data   transcription-Lake   data   were
transcribed  from  the  Nalgene  field logbook
to the  multicopy lake data forms.  To ensure
that the   data  were  recorded   accurately,
the  crew   member  who  had  not  recorded
the data originally checked over both forms.

     Sample   packing   and   fransporf-AI I
samples,  including  syringes   and  aliquots,
were placed in ice chests and were maintain-
ed  at  4*C  during transport to  the  field  lab-
oratory. Syringes  were placed in hard plastic
containers  with foam  padding  to minimize
disturbance  and  leakage.    Custody  forms

-------
(Appendix A) were signed by the field mana-
ger or  by  transfer  personnel if  crews  did
not return  to the base  site.   The  tempera-
ture  of  the  coolers  was  recorded  on  the
custody  form  if  samples  were  transferred
from  a  ground crew  to a transport  crew,
and again upon arrival at a  field station.

Calibration Study

     To   determine   whether  it  would   be
necessary  to  apply  a  calibration factor  to
data from water samples collected by ground
crews,  a calibration  study  was  performed.
The  calibration  factor derived  was  intended
to be  applied to data for a given parameter
and  would  account  for  differences  between
samples  collected by  the  ground  method
and  those  collected  by the helicopter me-
thod.  The  likely  causes for differences  be-
tween  these  samples  were  thought to  be
temperature   fluctuations   in  transportation
containers, agitation of  samples  on the trail,
airborne  contaminants, and extended holding
times.   There  were  no  a priori assumptions
that  a calibration  factor  would be necessary,
i.e.,  the  null  hypothesis of the  study was
that  there would be  no difference between
data obtained  by  ground and those obtained
by - helicopter  for a  given  study lake.  Fifty
wilderness  area  lakes   were  selected   for
sampling by  both   helicopter  and ground
crews  throughout the five  regions.   Results
of  the  calibration study  are  presented   in
Landers  et al.  (1987).

     There  were  no  changes in field sam-
pling  protocol  which  distinguished calibration
lakes  from  other  lakes sampled,  and  the
identity  of  calibration   lakes was  unknown
to the  ground  sampling crews.   Helicopter
crews  were  aware that they were  sampling
calibration  lakes, primarily because the  maps
indicated that  the lakes were in wilderness
areas  and because the  helicopter crews had
to meet  specific  requirements  in the  sam-
pling protocol (discussed below).

     An effort was  made to sample calibra-
tion  lakes by helicopter  as  soon  as  possible
after  sampling  by the  ground  crews.    The
base  coordinator and  Forest  Service  field
manager worked together to coordinate timing
of sampling
operations.

 Helicopter Protocol-
     Three bulk water samples were collected
by  helicopter  crews  on  calibration  lakes.
Two syringe samples were obtained for each
bulk water sample.   In addition to the syringe
and  Cubitainer  samples,  which were collected
following  standard   survey protocols,  a  125-
mL  nitrate/sutfate aliquot  was  collected  for
each bulk water sample.    These  aliquots
were preserved  with  0.1  ml_ of  5  percent
HgCI2.   Blank nitrate/sulfate  aliquots  were
obtained  from   selected  calibration  study
lakes by rinsing the Van Dorn sampler three
times and then  by  filling  it  with  a 200- to
300-mL  portion  of  deionized  distilled  water.
The   125-mL   blank  nitrate/sulfate   aliquot
was collected from this "sample," and preser-
vative was added.

Ground Sampling Protocol-
     Ground crews  collected  two bulk water
samples on each calibration  lake. The  collec-
tion  of  a duplicate sample  did not  reveal
to  the  crews  that they  were  sampling  a
calibration lake,  since these  were  lakes  for
which  a  duplicate  was  required  based  on
the  schedule  given  the crews by  the  field
manager. Syringe samples and nitrate/sulfate
aliquots  were collected by following standard
protocols.

  Laboratory  Protocol--
     The purpose  of  the third  sample col-
lected  by  helicopter crews  was to  provide
data on  extended holding times.  This sample
was to  be randomly  chosen and was  held
for  processing at  the  field  laboratory  until
arrival of the corresponding samples collected
by the ground  crew.  For the remaining two
samples collected by  helicopter, a  coin  was
tossed  to  determine which analytical labora-
tory would receive  the  routine  sample and
which  would  receive   the duplicate.    The
same procedure  was applied to the two  sa-
mples  collected  by  the ground  crew.   This
provided  a  means  to  quantify  laboratory
bias for  the WLS-I.
                                               10

-------
      The  majority   of  calibration  samples
 arrived at the field  laboratory on the  same
 day,  and  all five  samples were  processed
 on the same day.   Because  this procedure
 provided no  data on extended holding times,
 it was decided  midway through  the  survey
 to randomly choose and  hold one of  the
 three  helicopter  samples for  a  period  of 48
 hours,  regardless  of  whether or  not  the
 samples  arrived at  the field  laboratory on
 the  same  day.   The  withheld  samples were
 stored at 4°C until processing.

 FIELD LABORATORY  OPERATIONS

      Field  laboratory operations  for  WLS-I
 were  closely adapted from   the  procedures
 followed  during  ELS-I.   Refinements  based
 on  experience   gained   during  ELS-I   field
 operations  and  the  need  to  accommodate
 special  requirements  of the  ground  crews
 brought  about some modifications in labora-
 tory design.

      A field laboratory  was located at each
 base  site  during the  survey  because of  co-
 ncerns about sample stability and  because
 of the desire to process and preserve  sam-
 ples  in  the  field.   The  measurement  requi-
 rements  and data  quality objectives (Drouse
 et-al.,  1986;  Silverstein  et al.,  1987a,  in p-
 reparation)  defined  during  ELS-I  and  follo-
 wed  during  WLS-I required that  processing
 and  preservation of samples  be done at  the
 field  station.   Concerns about the  stability
 of pH, dissolved inorganic carbon  (DIG), true
 color,  and  turbidity  after  sample collection
 necessitated  that these  parameters  be ana-
 lyzed  at the field station.    Samples  were
 processed and preserved as soon as  possible
 after   collection.    The   analytical  methods
 and  preservation procedures   used  at  the
 field  laboratory are summarized  in the WLS-
 I methods  manual  (Kerfoot and Faber,  1987,
 in preparation) and are  detailed in the  ELS-
 I methods manual (Hillman et al., 1986)

     The  primary  goals   of   field  station
operations  were  to   collect  representative
lake   samples    without   contamination,  to
obtain  data  at  each  lake  site,  to preserve
sample  integrity  so  that samples  could  be
 analyzed  accurately at the  contract analytical
 laboratories, and to perform limited analyses.
 During  the  development of  the  operational
 protocol,  the objectives  of  the  field labora-
 tory were defined as follows:

 •     Receive  lake  and  QA  samples  and
       field data  from each  sampling team,
       and   verify   sample   condition  upon
       receipt.

 •     Review  field  data forms  for  accuracy
       and completeness.

 •     Incorporate  audit  samples  with each
       batch, and analyze the batch samples
       for pH, DIG. true color,  and  turbidity.

 •     Process, preserve,  and  ship  samples
       to   contract  laboratories  for  detailed
       analysis, and  ship  the nitrate/sulfate
       splits collected  by the ground crews
       to  EMSL-Las  Vegas for analysis.

 •     Coordinate sample shipment  information
       with  the  sample  management office
       and with EMSL

 •     Distribute field  station  data forms to
       the  appropriate offices.

 •     Provide  high quality  deionized water
       to  ground crews  and helicopter crews
       for use as QA blanks.

      Modifications   made  to  the  laboratory
 for WLS-I  included  a  larger reverse  osmosis
 cartridge  for  increased  output  of  deionized
 water,  an  adjustable  induction  blower  for
 optimal operation  of the laminar flow hood,
 and  an  improved  sink  drain  design.    A
 photoionization detector  was  placed in  each
 laboratory to warn the laboratory crew when
 the air  contained  50  percent  of the  chronic
 (8-hour) safety level of methylisobutyl ketone
 (MIBK).

 RESULTS

     A  total  of  912  lakes were  visited  by
ground  crews  and  helicopter crews during
WLS-I.  Of   these, 757  (83 percent)  were
                                              11

-------
 Table 2.  Period of Operation, Number Of Regular Lakes Visited, and Number of Regular Lakes
         Sampled by Helicopter (H) and Ground (G) Crews During the Lake Survey-Phase I
Field Station

Carson City, Nevada
Wenatchee, Washington
Bozeman, Montana
Missoula, Montana
Aspen, Colorado
Period of

9/19/85
9/20/85
9/11/85
9/11/85
9/11/85
Operation

- 11/1/85
- 11/5/85
- 10/19/85
- 10/9/85
- 10/15/85
Number of
Visited
H
112
103
98
102
110
Lakes
Ga
63
81
82
91
70
Number of
Sampled
H
91
86
73
70
75
Lakes
Ga
61
78
78
77
68
                               Totals
                                              525
         387
                                                                       395
                                                                                 362
  Calibration study lakes are included as lakes visited and sampled by ground crews only, even though
  helicopter crews also visited these lakes, because the lakes were located within wilderness areas.
actually  sampled.   The  period  of operation
of  each field  station,  the number  of  lakes
visited,  and the number of lakes sampled
by  helicopter crews  and  ground  crews  are
shown in Table 2.

     Ten lakes were visited for sampling a
second   time  to  avoid  stratification  or  to
replace  lost or contaminated samples.

     Some  lakes that were originally selected
for  sampling  were  not   sampled.  Most  of
these lakes  were frozen,  thermally stratified,
or too shallow.  Some were  lakes for which
no  access  permission  could  be obtained  or
that had dried  up since  they were mapped
(nonlakes).    Local  weather  conditions  pre-
vented access to some lakes.  In some cases,
disturbances  or hazardous  conditions  near
the  lake  prevented   the  lake  from  being
sampled.   Table  3 summarizes the  number
of lakes selected but not sampled because
of the conditions described.

     Considerable  effort  on the part of  the
Forest Service  ground  sampling crews  and
field managers  ensured  that samples arrived
at the field station as soon as possible after
collection.    Of  the  samples  collected  by
ground teams,  over 50 percent were delivered
to  the  field laboratory  on  the day of  col-
lection,  and almost two-thirds  were delivered
by  the  day after collection.   The  longest
delay was  6 days  (1 sample).   Details of
the effects of  these extended holding  times
are  reported  in  Landers  et  al. (1987)  and
Silverstein et al. (1987b, in preparation).

      Of  the 50 lakes  originally designated
as  calibration study lakes, 45  were sampled
by  ground  crews and by helicopter crews.
The  lakes  that were  not  sampled  were  froz-
en;   these  were  in   the   Northern  Rockies
subregion  assigned  to   the   Bozeman  field
station.  Of the  45 lakes sampled, 25 were
sampled  by both types of crews on the  same
day (56 percent).  Twelve  lakes were sampled
1  day apart, and  the  other  eight were  sam-
pled 2 to 9 days  apart.   The time  difference
in   sampling was  due  to   the  inability  of
helicopter crews to  reach the  lakes  during
inclement  weather.  Often, this weather  was
                                               12

-------
 Table 3.   Summary, by Field Station, of Regular Ukes That Were Not Sampled During the Western Uke
         Survey-Phase I
                   (NAP = No access permission, H = Helicopter crew , G = Ground crew)
Field Station
Carson City,
Nevada
Wenatchee ,
Washington
Bozeman ,
Montana
Missoula ,
Montana
Aspen ,
Colorado

H
G
H
G
H
G
H
G
H
G
NAP
2
0
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Inaccessible
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
Non - Lake
6
0
2
0
2
1
4
1
3
0
Too Shallow
8
2
12
3
13
0
15
3
8
2
Frozen
1
0
0
0
12
12
7
0
21
0
Other
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
Total
18
2
17
3
32
13
26
4
33
2
not severe enough to prevent ground crews
from reaching the  lake.

     The numbers and types of samples pro-
cessed  by  each field station are summarized
in Table 4.  Routine samples accounted for
49  percent of  the samples  processed,  with
duplicate,  blank,  and audit samples making
up  21,  15,  and 13 percent of  the  total, re-
spectively.

OBSERVATIONS AND
    RECOMMENDATIONS

     In December 1985  after the completion
of  WLS-I  field operations,  a  meeting  was
held  in  San  Francisco,  CA,  for  all  base
coordinators,  Forest  Service  field managers,
and members of the WLS project management
team.   The purpose  of  the  meeting was to
review   WLS-I  operations  and  to  provide
recommendations  for future  NSWS  activities
and for other  similar surveys.   The obser-
vations   and  recommendations  developed
during that meeting are  described  below.

     Sampling  at  all five  sites  was  com-
pleted  by  ground  crews  and  by helicopter
crews  within  the  scheduled  sampling  win-
dows.  Although  there  were  several frozen
lakes  encountered  in  the Rocky Mountains
subregions, no field  station  was forced  to
end  operations  prematurely because of  in-
clement weather.

     Barring two  instances  in  the Central
Rockies subregion,  the WLS-I was  completed
with  an  excellent  safety  record.    In  one
instance,  a  Forest  Service  ground  crew  me-
mber was charged  by a moose and suffered
a  broken  rib.   In  another  instance, a  pack
horse  was  killed  in  a fall  while  returning
from  a lake.   Some survey participants su-
ggested that helicopter  training  should  have
been  more  closely tailored to  specifics of
WLS-I helicopter sampling  protocols, to  in-
clude,  for     example,  working  safely  on
the  pontoon  platforms,  working  under  icy
conditions, and packing samples in the coolers
on  the  outside  of  the  helicopters.   For any
future  surveys  of  this  type, "on-board" field
training to  complement  classroom  presenta-
tions will  be emphasized.

     The  overlapping sampling  schedules of
helicopter  crews and  ground  crews  made
communication  and planning a critical aspect
of WLS-I  field operations.

    The addition of the  logistics coordinator,
whose  primary  duty  was  to  keep  Forest
Service ground  crews  supplied  with neces-
sary  field equipment  and  to  maintain  an
inventory  of field  equipment,   proved very
                                              13

-------
Table 4.  Summary, by Field Station, of Samples Processed During the Western Lake Survey-Phase I
       (H = Helicopter, G = Ground.  TB = Trailer blank, when D.I. water was substituted for an audit sample.
                  X = routine and blank samples from lakes that were sampled a second time.)
Routine
H G
Carson City,
Nevada
Wenatchee,
Washington
Bozeman,
Montana
Missoula,
Montana
Aspen,
Colorado
Totals

101

95

73

83

88
440

54

77

78

78

68
355
Duplicate
H G

38

42

31

36

31
178

25

31

37

40

33
166
Blank
H G

23

30

24

26

24
127

17

20

28

32

26
123
Others
Audit TB

52

42

32

40

44
210

10

1

2

0

9
22
X

4

3

0

3

0
10
Total

324

341

305

338

323
1631
 successful.  Supply shortages were experienc-
 ed to some degree at all the  sites but did
 not prevent sampling of any lakes.

      Communication    between   helicopter
 crews and base  sites was greatly improved
 over  ELS-I.    This was  due  to  the  flight-
 following  program  provided  by the  Forest
 Service.     The  base   coordinator  or  duty
 officer   could  track  the  progress  of  the
 helicopters  and  could  relay  messages  to
 the  crews during  flights  through  the  local
 Forest Service dispatcher who  was in contin-
 ual  radio  contact.    Similarly, the  Forest
 Service  field  manager  could  communicate
 with the ground crews.

      The  use of  remote base sites  greatly
 improved  the  economy  of  using helicopters
 during the WLS-I.  In terms of the helicop-
 ters used, the Aerospeciale  Lamas provided
 the   high  altitude  capability  required  for
 sampling in  the mountainous western states.

      As  in  ELS-I,  field  samplers  trained  in
 Las Vegas  remained on-site  throughout the
 project.    EPA personnel  rotated in  as field
 samplers on a regular  (approximately 2-week)
 basis.    Having  the  trained  field  samplers
 on-site  for  the  duration of  the  study pro-
 vided  continuity  and ensured  adherence  to
 established protocols at  all sites.
  Laboratory operations  generally proceeded
smoothly  during  WLS-I.  The  physical  chan-
ges  to the laboratory trailers  proved  bene-
ficial.  The  increased  capacity for generating
deionized  water  met  the   increased  needs
easily.    The  adjustable  induction  blower
allowed the laminar-flow  hood to have  static
flow  while  MIBK was in  use and so that
no  vapors  entered  the  laboratory.   Centri-
fuging samples in  the hood and  using cen-
trifuge tubes different  from  those  used during
ELS-I  virtually  eliminated any  MIBK vapors
in the laboratory.

      Maintaining  a  comfortable  temperature
within the laboratory  could  only be  achieved
with  extra   space  heaters  on   particularly
cold   nights   (below   freezing).   The  crew
members  working  in  the  laminarflow  hood
were  exposed  to  these  cold temperatures
no  matter how comfortable the  rest of  the
laboratory was,  and  some of the  reagents
froze  when they  were placed in the  hood.
Having a  lab in  a warehouse  would reduce
interferences from  this problem  and  would
reduce wind and  possible airborne contamina-
tion.

      At  some  sites,  the combined total  of
samples  delivered  by the   helicopter led  to
very  long  hours  for the  laboratory  crew
that had  to process and analyze all samples
                                                14

-------
before the next day's batch arrived.   These
high sample loads also exceeded the  number
of  samples the  contract  laboratories  were
obligated  to  handle  within  specified times.
Some of  these problems  were unavoidable:
bad weather  often   required that sampling
schedules be  altered.  The  problem  can be
minimized in  future  operations  by improved
communication  to  coordinate  ground  and
helicopter sampling.
                                              15

-------
                                      REFERENCES
Drouse, S. K., D.  C.  J.  Hillman, L W. Creelman,  J.  F.  Potter, and  S.  J.  Simon.  National
     Surface  Water  Survey,  Eastern  Lake  Survey-Phase   I,  Quality   Assurance   Plan.
     EPA-600/4-86-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, Nevada,  1986.

Hillman, D.  C. J.,  J. F.  Potter,  and S.  J.  Simon.   National  Surface Water Survey,  Eastern
     Lake  Survey-Phase  I.    Analytical Methods   Manual.  EPA-600/4-86-009,  U.S.  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency, Las  Vegas,  Nevada, 1986.

Kerfoot, H.  B.,  and  M.  L. Faber.   National  Surface  Water Survey, Western  Lake Survey-
     Phase I.   Analytical Methods  Manual.   U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  Las
     Vegas, Nevada, 1987  (in  preparation).

Landers, D. H.,  J.  M.  Eilers,  D. F. Brakke,  W. S.  Overton. P.  Kellar, M. L.  Silverstein, R.
     D. Schonbrod,  R.  E.  Crowe,  R.  A.  Linthurst,  J. M. Omernik, S. A.  league, and E.
     P. Meier.  Characteristics of  Lakes in the Western United States Volume I:  Popula-
     tion   Descriptions   and   Physico-Chemical  Relationships.     EPA-600/3-86/054a,   U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,  D.C., 1987.

Morris,  F. A.,  D. V. Peck,  M. B.  Bonoff, and  K. J.  Cabbie.   National Surface  Water Survey,
     Eastern  Lake  Survey-Phase  I.    Field  Operations  Report.    EPA-600/4-86-010,  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Las  Vegas, Nevada, 1986.

Omernik,  J.  M.,  and  C.  F.  Powers.   Total  alkalinity of surface  waters--a  national  map.
     Ann. Assoc. Amer. Geographers, 73:133-136. 1983.

Silverstein, M. E.,  S. K.  Drous§, T. E. Mitchell-Hall,  and  M.   L. Faber.   National Surface
     Water Survey, Western  Lake  Survey-Phase I.   Quality  Assurance Plan.   U.S.  Environ-
     mental Protection Agency,  Las Vegas,  Nevada,  1987a  (in  preparation).

Silverstein, M. E.,  S. K.  Drous6, T. E. Mitchell-Hall,  and  M.   L Faber.   National Surface
     Waters  Survey,  Western  Lake  Survey-Phase  I.   Quality  Assurance  Report.    U.S.
     Environmental  Protection Agency, Las  Vegas,  Nevada, 1987b (in  preparation).
                                                16

-------
                           APPENDIX A
FIELD DATA FORMS  USED DURING  THE WESTERN LAKE SURVEY
        NATIONAL SURFACE WATER SURVEY
               FORM 1  LAKE DATA
            ' CD HELICOPTER    l~l GROUND TEAM
                                                       O  D M  M M
                                                  DATE.	i -	. ,	. .	. •	.
                                           SAMPLING TIME,	, ,	...	. ,	. h
                                                METER ID i	, i	, i	,
       MAP COORDINATES
    IAT
  LONG
               O
                             LORAN READINGS
                                          O
INITIAL
 FINAL
INITIAL
 FINAL
                                                           I	1 I	!•!	I I I pH
                                 DISTURBANCES WITHIN 100 METERS OF SHORE
                     LJ ROADS    Lj LIVESTOCK CD MINES/QUARRIES O FIHE

                     CH DWELLINGS CD INDUSTRY  C] LOGGING Cl OTHER	
  PHOTOCRAPHSf)
FRAME ID  AZIMUTH
^ ^    LAP CARD
                     S6CCHI DEPTH DISAPPEAR I—I I—1.1	I r
                                                       REAPPEAR I
                        SITE DEPTH (III . 0 3048 m/ll =
                                                        AIR TEMP
                          LAKE STRATIFICATION DATA
  BOTTOM -1 5"
                              ^O
               _0   ™O
               15. B-ISm) i	. ,	..,	,   C
             06 SITE DEPTH
              .  .. _  .Q
             AT-CIt 5 06DEPTHI
                              T-C
                           —O
                                O
                                               IF i -<• C PROCEED
                                                IF NOT STOP HERE
                                                 IF AT >4'C FILL IN

Elevation (t duttots <«)

|N ""•""" 	







VftnfHMl hy

4

CHECK ONE T'C
Q<*0m Q >20*n

B 15 i — i t 	 —• •
in ?n . ,, .,. ,
12 25 >_.>_,.u_,
14 .in ^., , . ... .
Ifi AS 4 ,..,..
18 40 ._, ^_,.u_-
20 45 I 	 . . 	 ... 	 1
50 ._, ._J.._.
4


O
0
O
0
O
O
0
0
O
O



,_,,_,,_. ^_. O
<—> ^_i ^_i L_, O
_,_..__o
»_,._,,_,._, O
^^^^^_^ o
^^^^ ^_,o
.-J^L—I ^_|O
___^o
  COMMENTS Q NOT SAMPLED. SEE BELOW
                                                     DATA OUAll*ICMS
                                                     (A) INSTRUMENT UNSTABLE
                                                     (Jt) REDONE FIRST READING NOT
                                                       ACCEPTABLE

                                                       NOT VERTICAL IN WATER COLUMN
                                                     \ti) SLOW STABILIZATION
                                                     II) CABLE TOO SHOOT
                                                     iQ) DID NOT MEET occ
                                                     (<) SAMPLE COLLECTED AT 05m
                                                    1){1) OTHER (Mplwnin COMMENTS McMn|
NOTSSAUPIEO a FLOWN6WWER D INACCESSIBLE D NO ACCESS PERMIT DURBAN/INDUSTRIAL FROZEN
ICMCCKI n HIGH CONO (>SX>/SI O NON-LAKE D TOO SHALLOW i STOCK POND OOTHER
FIELD LAS Mf ONLY
TRAU ea in
BATCH ID
«UUPI f in (nruiTiuf:)
DATE RECEIVED
TIME RECEIVED 	
FIELD CREW DATA
| HELICOPTER ID f-REW in
OBSFRVP B IPRINT1
SAUP1 FH IPRIMT1
OBS Sir.N
GROUND CREW MEMBER
sir.N
FORM DISTRIBUTION
WHITE COPV-OHNL
PINK COPV-EMSL-LV
rELLOW COPY-FIELD
      Figure A-1.  Lake data form for Western Lake Survey-Phase I.

                                       17

-------
 BASE SITE:
 CREW ID:_
               NATIONAL SURFACE WATER  SURVEY
                       WESTERN LAKE  SURVEY
                SAMPLE TRACKING AND CUSTODY  FORM
               	              DATE  OUT: 	
           	              DATE RETURNED: 	
                       NUMBER OF CONTAINERS
                                                 COMPLETED
            4-L                 NITRATE/SULFATE   LAKE DATA
LAKE ID   CUBITAINER  SYRINGES       ALIQUOT         FORM      COMMENTS
1. Relinquished by:
(Sampler)
3. Received by:
(Field Manager)
Date

Time

Temps

2. Received by:
(Pick-up Crew)
4. Received by:
(Lab Coordi nator)
Date

Time

Temps

COMMENTS:
COPIES: Base Coordinator, Field Manager, Field Lab, EMSL-LV (Comm. Ctr.
            Figure A-2.  Sample custody form for Western Lake Survey-Phase

                                       18
                           Government Printing Office  1989 -617-003/84344

-------
Q
 O  O
Q_ 2

-------