United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Monitoring
Systems Laboratory
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
Research and Development
EPA/600/S4-87/043 Jan. 1988
&EPA Project Summary
A Comparative Study of Water
Chemistry Analyses from
Canada, Norway, and the
United States: Analytical
Methods and Raw Data
Martin A. Stapanian
This report is a description of
analytical methods and a data
compendium of results obtained by
Canadian and Norwegian laboratories
for a comparative study conducted
during the Eastern Lakes Survey
(Phase I) of the National Surface
Water Survey.
One-hundred-and-ten
identical split samples from 97 lakes
in North Carolina were routed to one
analytical laboratory in Norway and
one in the United States. In addition,
105 split samples from 92 lakes in
New York State were routed to two
laboratories in Canada and to a
second laboratory in the United
States. The analytical methods used
by each of the five laboratories are
documented. The data from the
analyses conducted by the
Norwegian and Canadian laboratories
are presented. Results from the U.S.
laboratories are published
elsewhere. Statistical analyses and
interpretation of the data are
encouraged for subsequent
investigation.
This Project Summary was
developed by EPA's Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las
Vegas, NV, to announce key findings
of the research project that is fully
documented in a separate report of
the same title (see Project Report
ordering information at back).
Introduction
The National Surf ace. Water Survey
(NSWS) is a three-phase project within
the National Acid Precipitation
Assessment Program (NAPAP). The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
initiated the NSWS in 1983. The purpose
of Phase I of the NSWS was to document
the present chemical status of lakes and
streams in areas of the United States that
are potentially susceptible to the effects
of acid deposition.
There are no standard international
methodologies for the analysis of water
samples. Observed differences in water
chemistry analysis from different
laboratories may be attributed to
acidification processes, differences in
methodologies, or both. This study was
to provide information for the comparison
of analytical methods used during the
NSWS Eastern Lake Survey - Phase I
with those used in Canadian and
Norwegian laboratories Samples from
two regions were used in the study.
Identical split samples from lakes in New
York state were analyzed by two
Canadian laboratories and by an EPA
contract laboratory. The two Canadian
laboratories analyzed for different
parameters. Split samples from lakes in
North Carolina were analyzed by a
Norwegian laboratory and by a second
EPA contract laboratory.
Method
Collection of Samples
All ELS-I samples were collected,
preserved, and prepared as aliquots by
using standard techniques. For the study
described here, 110 identical split
samples from 97 lakes in the Southern
-------
Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina
were routed by air charter to the
Norwegian Institute for Water Research
and to Global Geochemical Corporation.
In addition, 105 split samples from 92
lakes in the Adirondack region of New
York were routed by air charter to three
laboratories: the Water Quality National
Laboratory of the Canada Centre for
Inland Waters, Environmental Monitoring
and Services, Inc., and the Water Quality
Section of the Ontario Ministry of the
Environment. The samples were
analyzed for different parameters at the
two Canadian laboratories.
A rigorous quality assurance
program was implemented to minimize
the variance introduced during sample
collection, transportation, and
preservation.
Laboratory Analytical Methods
The Canada Centre for Inland
Waters analyzed for 13 parameters, and
the Ontario Ministry of the Environment
analyzed for 5 parameters. The
Norwegian Institute for Water Research
analyzed for 11 parameters. Global and
EMSI analyzed for all ELS-I parameters.
Eighteen of these parameters correspond
to parameters for which the Canadian
and Norwegian laboratories analyzed. All
the parameters measured, type of
method used and references are given in
tabular form.
Results and Discussion
The results from this study will be
used to compare the various analytical
methods used for surface water
analyses. Statistical analyses of the data
will be presented in publications in the
scientific literature.
Martin A. Stapanian is with Lockheed Engineering and Management Services
Company. Las Vegas, NV89119..
R. D. Schonbrod is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "A Comparative Study of Water Chemistry A nalyses
from Canada, Norway, and the United States: Analytical Methods and Raw
Data." fOrder No. PB 88-139 753/AS; Cost: $12.95, subject to change) will
be available only from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, NV 89193-3478
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
EPA/600/S4-87/043
V- - - • • ~ - j < it: I
/-4""7|r 0.2 2
vOhrtix f.. r-;,L.v::
------- |