Determination of study reporting limits for pesticide constituent data for the California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project, 2004–2018—Part 1: National Water Quality Schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033, and 2060

Miranda S. Fram; Sylvia V. Stork

doi:10.3133/sir20195107

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20195107

Determination of study reporting limits for pesticide constituent data for the California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project, 2004–2018—Part 1: National Water Quality Schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033, and 2060

Miranda S. Fram·Sylvia V. Stork

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project (GAMA-PBP) is a long-term cooperative project designed to assess the quality of groundwater resources used for public and domestic drinking water supplies in the State of California, to monitor and evaluate changes to that quality, to investigate the human and natural factors controlling water quality, and to improve the availability of comprehensive groundwater quality data and information. Between May 18, 2004, and May 3, 2018, the GAMA-PBP collected 3001 groundwater samples for analysis of pesticide constituents by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL)(note that ‘pesticide constituents’ includes parent compounds and degradates). Of these samples, 2994 were analyzed for pesticide constituents on schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033 (65 to 84 constituents), and 840 were analyzed for pesticide constituents on schedule 2060 (58 constituents). The original dataset reported by the NWQL to the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) database contained a total of 2,688 detections of 78 pesticide constituents and 253,825 non-detections. In this original dataset, 33 percent of the 3,001 samples analyzed had reported detections of one or more pesticide constituents. This report describes the GAMA-PBP data-quality objectives for pesticide data, the procedures used to establish study reporting limits, and use of those reporting limits to censor the data from the NWQL so that the final data published by the GAMA-PBP meet these data-quality objectives. The final GAMA-PBP dataset for samples collected from May 2004 to May 2018, after censoring, had a total of 1,632 detections of 37 pesticide constituents. In the final GAMA-PBP dataset, 25 percent of the 3,001 samples analyzed had detections of one or more pesticide constituents. The presence of pesticides in groundwater is commonly evaluated by calculating detection frequencies. Detection frequencies for pesticides are sensitive to detection limits and method performance for concentrations near those limits; therefore, the two primary data quality issues addressed in the GAMA-PBP data-quality objectives for pesticides are (1) establishing criteria for classifying data from the laboratory as detections or non-detections for the purpose of data reporting by the project and (2) accounting for changes in analytical methods or method performance over time. The GAMA-PBP addresses these issues by developing study reporting limits that are used as the boundary between detections and non-detections for the reporting of GAMA-PBP results. These reporting limits are defined from method detection limits (MDLs) provided by the NWQL, unless examination of results from laboratory set blanks (LSBs) and GAMA-PBP field blanks indicates that a higher concentration censoring limit is warranted. The GAMA-PBP selected the MDL as the primary choice for defining study reporting limits for consistency with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines for reporting detections of pesticides and other organic constituents. A five-step procedure is used to develop study reporting limits and censor the GAMA-PBP dataset accordingly. The effect of the censoring at each step is described to provide information about the relative effect of each step on the overall censoring of the dataset. Steps 1 and 2 can be implemented at the time the data are received, whereas steps 3−5 require information accumulated over an extended period. Step 1: Reject results that were most likely the result of specific contamination instances attributable to unusual field or laboratory conditions during sample collection or processing. Two such instances were identified, leading to rejection of 25 detections, which were assigned a data-quality indicator code of “Q” for “reviewed and rejected” in the NWIS database. Step 2: Use the NWQL MDLs in effect at the time each sample was analyzed as the reporting limit. A total of 506 detections were censored on this basis. Step 3: Use the maximum MDL established by the NWQL during July 2004–August 2018 (MDLmax) as the reporting limit. The rationale for using the MDLmax as the reporting limit is based primarily on the observation that the concentrations of MDLs generally increased over time. A total of 438 detections were censored on this basis. Step 4: Use the LSBs to identify periods of greater potential laboratory contamination bias and define raised reporting limits to be used during those periods. These periods were defined by using a moving average detection frequency approach. For consistency with the NWQL procedures for defining raised reporting limits on the basis of detections in LSBs, the raised reporting limits were defined as equal to three times the highest concentration measured in an LSB during the period. A total of 25 detections in groundwater samples analyzed during periods of increased laboratory contamination bias were censored. Step 5: Use the LSBs and field blanks to identify potential contamination bias from field or laboratory processes outside of the time periods identified in step 4. The NWQL protocols were used to define the MDLs from blanks analyzed outside of the periods identified in step 4. If an MDL defined from blanks was greater than the MDLmax, the MDL defined from blanks was used to censor the data. One constituent had a study reporting limit defined on this basis, and a total of 62 detections in groundwater samples were censored. As of 2019, the USGS NWIS database does not have the capability to store both the original value reported by the NWQL and the final value published by the GAMA-PBP that reflects application of the quality-control censoring described in this report. In the interim, while this capability is developed, the 1,031 results censored in steps 2−5 are blocked from public release in NWIS, and the GAMA-PBP has published the original and final values in a USGS data release accompanying this report. The entire GAMA-PBP final dataset for pesticide constituents on schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033, or on schedule 2060 is publicly available in that USGS data release, through the USGS GAMA-PBP public web portal, and through the California State Water Resources Control Board GAMA public groundwater information system.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 32.534156° to 42.009247° latitude; -124.409591° to -114.134768° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Miranda S. Fram, Sylvia V. Stork. 2019-12-17. Determination of study reporting limits for pesticide constituent data for the California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment Program Priority Basin Project, 2004–2018—Part 1: National Water Quality Schedules 2003, 2032, or 2033, and 2060. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195107

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Monitoring recreation on federally managed lands and waters—Aspects of visitor use

Federally managed public lands and waters receive around 1 billion recreational visits each year. Data on these visitors can aid in guiding policy decisions, managing resources effectively, and communicating the economic contributions of lands and waters. This report explores the methods used by agencies to collect data on aspects of recreational visitor use to Federal lands and waters (apart from visitation numbers, which are the focus of a companion publication). Aspects of recreational visitor use include visitor demographics, recreational activity participation, visitor satisfaction, visitor attitudes and experiences, trip characteristics, and economic contributions. We review practices used to understand aspects of visitor use across seven Federal agencies, revealing similarities such as the use of visitor intercept surveys and coverage of similar topic areas, and differences in how survey programs are operationalized and how specific questions on visitor surveys are worded. We also evaluate emerging technologies, such as geolocated social media and mobile device location data, for their potential to aid in understanding aspects of visitor use. This report concludes with potential opportunities to enhance data collection and coordination, ensuring cost-effective data collection and informed decision making.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Evaluation of best management practices at an edge-of-field site in the Eagle Creek watershed, Ohio, 2012–20

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey worked in partnership with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to identify farm fields in priority watersheds—watersheds critically important to Great Lake health. Intensive best management practices were implemented in five States to test the efficacy of best management practices, also referred to as agricultural conservation practices, to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff on agricultural fields. These fields were chosen as representatives of the priority watersheds because their farming practices and geographical conditions were common among farms in those watersheds. A farm site located near Findlay, Ohio, in the Eagle Creek watershed used two conservation practices, cover crop (Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 340) and variable rate technology (VRT; Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 590), which represent common practices in the Maumee priority watershed. This study monitored surface runoff and subsurface tile runoff at the Eagle Creek watershed site. The effects of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on sediment and nutrient runoff were assessed from October 2012 to September 2020. Cover crops were applied in fall of 2016, 2017, and 2018, coinciding with VRT applications. The following parameters were analyzed as part of the study: runoff discharge; peak discharge; and concentrations and loads of total phosphorus, particulate phosphorus, dissolved reactive phosphorus, and suspended sediment. High peak runoff events disproportionally affected nutrient concentrations and loads in runoff. A threshold of the 85th percentile of the peak discharge was chosen to assess the effect of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on nutrient mitigation at each gage. Runoff events below the 85th percentile were considered small, and runoff events over the 85th percentile were considered large. Concentrations from collected water-quality samples were used for the analysis; estimated concentrations were excluded from the statistical evaluation. All surface runoff parameters during small runoff events, except surface runoff volume, were significantly lower in the period with cover crops and VRT implementation. Contrarily, subsurface runoff parameters during small events were not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. Surface and subsurface parameters during large events were also not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. These results indicate cover crops and VRT may improve water quality during small runoff events, but additional best management practices that mitigate large runoff events may lead to greater water-quality improvement given the contribution of large events to overall losses.

Ohio↗

USGS2026

Continuous monitoring and temporal variability of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter in karst groundwater of the Edwards aquifer, south-central Texas, 2019–24

Widespread urbanization on the Edwards aquifer recharge zone in south-central Texas has prompted the development of new approaches and tools for evaluating the current and future status of water quality in the San Antonio and Barton Springs segments of the Edwards aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio Water System and the City of Austin, applied continuous monitoring of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter (fDOM) to characterize the sources and transport of dissolved organic matter and associated constituents in the Edwards aquifer. Continuous fDOM time-series data were adjusted using empirically derived temperature, turbidity, and inner-filter-effect correction factors prior to analysis and interpretation. Fully corrected fDOM time-series data from the study sites were evaluated for short- and long-term temporal variability in fDOM in the context of the hydrologic and climatic conditions that occurred during the 5-year study period to understand vulnerability of the aquifer to potential contaminants in recharge. Study results indicate that fDOM is an effective proxy for dissolved organic carbon that, in turn, is indicative of the influx of recent surface water and associated contaminants, and thus, aquifer vulnerability to those contaminants. Although other continuously monitored water-quality parameters provide insights into changes in water quality in response to varying hydrologic conditions, the quantitative relation between fDOM and dissolved organic carbon directly indicates the timing and magnitude of pulses of organic constituents derived from the land surface, whereas other water-quality parameters do not.

Texas↗