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 statusGround 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 II I1.1 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^LI ^_|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
------- |