Prepared in cooperation with the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

Sampling and Analysis Plan for the Characterization of 

Groundwater Quality in Two Monitoring Wells near 

Pavillion, Wyoming

Open-File Report 2012–1197

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Sampling and Analysis Plan for the Characterization of 

Groundwater Quality in Two Monitoring Wells near 

Pavillion, Wyoming

By Peter R. Wright and Peter B. McMahon

Prepared in cooperation with the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

Open-File Report 2012–1197

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Suggested citation:

Wright, P.R., and McMahon, P.B., 2012, Sampling and analysis plan for the characterization of groundwater 

quality in two monitoring wells near Pavillion, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1197, 

90 p.

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
iv

Contents

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................................................................... 1

Study Area ................................................................................................................................................................. 2

Background................................................................................................................................................................ 2

Study Approach ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Study Organization and Responsibilities.................................................................................................................... 4

Sampling and Analysis Plan .......................................................................................................................................... 4

Documentation........................................................................................................................................................... 5

Groundwater-Quality Sampling Procedures............................................................................................................... 6

Preparation............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Water-Level Measurement ..................................................................................................................................... 7

Instrument Calibration ............................................................................................................................................ 8

Well Purge.............................................................................................................................................................. 8

Well MW01 ......................................................................................................................................................... 9

Well-Purging Procedures ................................................................................................................................ 9

Well MW02 ........................................................................................................................................................11

Sample Collection, Analysis, and Processing........................................................................................................13

Decontamination ...................................................................................................................................................16

Chain of Custody and Documentation Requirements...................................................................................................18

Field Logbooks and Other Documentation................................................................................................................18

Sample Container Labels..........................................................................................................................................19

Transfer of Custody and Sample Shipment ..............................................................................................................19

Sample Packaging ....................................................................................................................................................20

Quality Assurance and Quality Control.........................................................................................................................20

U.S. Geological Survey Quality-Assurance Program................................................................................................21

Field Quality Control .................................................................................................................................................22

Laboratory Quality Control ........................................................................................................................................24

Data Management and Reporting.............................................................................................................................24

Data Review..............................................................................................................................................................24

Health and Safety .........................................................................................................................................................25

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................................26

Appendix A. Table of chemical analytes, laboratory methods, and laboratory quantitation limits .................................45

Appendix B. Method detection limits and method reporting levels of selected compounds identified by U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as affecting geochemistry in deep groundwater monitoring wells 

near Pavillion, Wyoming ..........................................................................................................................................59

Appendix C. Field forms. ..............................................................................................................................................60

Appendix D. List of Groundwater Sampling Equipment and Supplies ..........................................................................78

Appendix E. Job Hazard Analysis.................................................................................................................................79

Appendix F. USGS Central Region Research Drilling Chief’s Project Log for Redevelopment of MW02 .....................87
v 

Figures

Figure 1. Location of monitoring wells MW01 and MW02 near the town of Pavillion, Wyoming ............................... 3

Figure 2. Cleaning procedures for sampling equipment used to collect samples for analysis of inorganic 

and organic constituents ..................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 3. Cleaning procedures for silicon tubing used to collect samples for analysis of inorganic constituents .... 18

Figure 4. Example of a sample container label....................................................................................................... 19

Tables

Table 1. List of agencies and organizations participating with the technical team and organizational 

responsibilities during this study.......................................................................................................... 31

Table 2. Key organizational responsibilities of on-site personnel. ......................................................................... 31

Table 3. Laboratory analytical methods, approaches, and method references...................................................... 32

Table 4. List of age dating analytes the U. S. Geological Survey added to sampling that the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency has not collected and an explanation of their use.......................... 35

Table 5. Water-quality property stabilization criteria and calibration guidelines..................................................... 37

Table 6. Well-yield data for well MW02.................................................................................................................. 37

Table 7. Analytical laboratories, laboratory schedules and codes, and applicable field collection and 

processing information ........................................................................................................................ 38

Table 8. Schedule for collection of quality-control samples (per sample set) ........................................................ 42

Table 9. Proposed analytical laboratories and contact information........................................................................ 43

Table 10. Summary of laboratory quality-assurance/quality-control requirements................................................... 44
vi 

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to SI 

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

inch (in.) 25,400 micron (μm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 Kilometer (km)

Volume

ounce, fluid (fl. oz) 0.02957 liter (L) 

ounce, fluid (fl. oz) 29.57 milliliter (mL) 

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3) 

gallon (gal) 3.785 cubic decimeter (dm3) 

Flow rate

gallon per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liter per second (L/s)

gallon per hour (gal/h) 3.785 liter per hour (L/h)

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius 

(μS/cm at 25°C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or 

micrograms per liter (μg/L).
vii 

Abbreviations and Acronyms

> greater than

< less than

≤ less than or equal to

± plus or minus

ASR Analytical Services Request (U.S. Geological Survey)

bls below land surface

BQS Branch of Quality Systems (U.S. Geological Survey)

δ13C DIC ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 in dissolved inorganic carbon relative to the ratio in a reference 

standard

14C carbon-14

CoC chain of custody

E estimated

e-tape electronic water-level indicator

GWSI Groundwater Site Inventory (U.S. Geological Survey)

GRO gasoline range organics

δ2H ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard

JHA Job Hazard Analysis (U.S. Geological Survey)

LRL laboratory reporting level

MDL method detection limit

MDT Mountain Daylight Time

MP measuring point

MST Mountain Standard Time

NFQA National Field Quality Assurance Program (U.S. Geological Survey)

NWIS National Water Information System (U.S. Geological Survey)

NWISWeb National Water Information System Web interface (U.S. Geological Survey)

NWQL National Water Quality Laboratory (U.S. Geological Survey)

δ18O ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference standard

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

QA/QC quality assurance/quality control

QC quality control

SAP sampling and analysis plan (U.S. Geological Survey)

TAL TestAmerica Laboratories

TIC tentatively identified compound

TNI The NELAC Institute

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

V value could be affected by contamination

VOC volatile organic compound

WYDEQ Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality

WYWSC Wyoming Water Science Center (U.S. Geological Survey)
1 

Sampling and Analysis Plan for the Characterization of 

Groundwater Quality in Two Monitoring Wells near

Pavillion, Wyoming

By Peter R. Wright and Peter B. McMahon

Abstract

In June 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency installed two deep monitoring wells 

(MW01 and MW02) near Pavillion, Wyoming to study groundwater quality. The U.S Geological 

Survey, in cooperation with the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, designed a plan to 

collect groundwater data from these monitoring wells. This sampling and analysis plan describes the 

sampling equipment that will be used, well purging strategy, purge water disposal, sample collection

and processing, field and laboratory sample analysis, equipment decontamination, and quality-assurance 

and quality-control procedures. 

Introduction 

On December 8, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) released the draft 

report Investigation of Ground Water Contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2011a) for public review. The draft report describes the analysis of data collected 

from 2009 to 2011 during an investigation of groundwater near Pavillion, Wyoming, and indicates that 

groundwater may contain compounds associated with gas production practices. In discussions with the 

State of Wyoming, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Wyoming Department 

of Environmental Quality (WDEQ), agreed to collect additional groundwater-quality data from two 

USEPA monitoring wells for public dissemination in 2012 and to design a plan for the data collection 

effort. The data collection effort will proceed only if authorization to access and sample the wells is 

granted by USEPA and the individual landowners on whose land the wells are located. The purpose of 

this data collection effort is to provide an independent perspective of the quality of groundwater pumped 

from two USEPA monitoring wells located near Pavillion, Wyoming. It is anticipated that this data 

collection effort may become part of a larger groundwater-quality assessment of the Pavillion area. 

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present the USGS sampling and analysis plan (SAP) for the 

characterization of groundwater quality in two monitoring wells near Pavillion, Wyoming. As agreed to 

by USGS and the WYDEQ, this SAP relies on the standard operating policies and procedures of the 

USGS, specifically, the USGS National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data (U.S. 

Geological Survey, variously dated; “Field Manual”). This SAP defines the standard operating 

procedures to be used for the collection and processing of groundwater-quality samples pumped from 

two USEPA monitoring wells near Pavillion, Wyoming. Standard procedures described in this 

document ensure samples collected in the field and analyzed by the laboratory meet the data needs 

described herein. This report describes documentation, sampling equipment that will be used, well 
2 

purging strategy, purge water disposal, sample collection, sample processing, field and laboratory 

sample analysis, equipment decontamination, and quality-assurance and quality-control (QA/QC) 

procedures. This report also contains information related to data management, review, and publication, 

as well as health and safety concerns and procedures. 

Study Area

The study area is located in west-central Wyoming near the town of Pavillion (fig. 1), which has 

a population of 231 people (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). The local school district is housed in the town 

of Pavillion. The surrounding agricultural area is sparsely populated and primarily composed of largeacreage irrigated farms. Natural gas development began in the area northeast of Pavillion in the early

1960s, was further developed in the 1980s, and in recent years has been developed by a succession of 

owner operators. The town of Pavillion and rural households in the area all produce their water supply 

from wells installed in the Tertiary-age Wind River Formation (James Gores and Associates, 2011). 

Background

In September 2008, the USEPA initiated a groundwater investigation in response to concerns 

from domestic well owners near the town of Pavillion, Wyoming. Well owners complained of changes 

in well-water taste and odor following hydraulic fracturing at nearby gas production wells. The USEPA 

investigation, initiated under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

and Liability Act (enacted by congress in 1980), included four sampling events (phases I–IV). A brief 

chronology of USEPA sampling events follows. A detailed sampling chronology is included in the 

USEPA draft report (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). 

During phases I (March 2009) and II (January 2010), methane and diesel-range organics were 

detected in water from deep domestic wells prompting USEPA to add a new phase. During phase III, 

USEPA installed “2 deep monitoring wells screened at 233 – 239 meters (MW01) and 293 – 299 meters 

(MW02) below ground surface, respectively” (765 – 785 feet and 960 – 980 feet, respectively) during 

June and July 2010 to evaluate these and other constituents in groundwater in the Pavillion area (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a, p. xi). Phase III included the sampling of wells MW01 and 

MW02 (fig. 1). USEPA collected gas (September 2010) and groundwater-quality samples (October 

2010) from these wells. During the last sampling event (phase IV, April 2011), wells MW01 and MW02 

were resampled to compare with earlier analytical results and expand the analyte list. The USEPA 

concluded that the groundwater geochemistry in water from wells MW01 and MW02 is distinctive from 

that of nearby domestic wells (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). For example, the pH 

measured in water from wells MW01 and MW02 is elevated (11.2–12.0) in comparison to pH measured 

by USEPA in water from domestic wells (6.9–10.5) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a, 

Table A1 and A2a.) and to the pH range of 5.3 to 10.0 previously reported for the Wind River 

Formation (Plafcan and others, 1995). Groundwater-quality results for USEPA phases I through IV are 

available in the USEPA draft report (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). 

According to the USEPA, monitoring wells MW01 and MW02 were installed using primarily 

mud rotary drilling with blowout prevention. Both wells were screened with 20 ft of 8.5-inch (in.) 

outside diameter, 4-in. inside diameter prepacked 0.020 slot stainless steel screen and completed to 

approximately 3.5 ft above the ground surface with 4-in. inside diameter, threaded and coupled, black 

painted/coated carbon steel casing (figures 6a and 6b in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). 

Portland cement was used to grout each well from the top of the well screen to land surface. A 

dedicated submersible 3-horsepower (hp) pump was installed in each well. (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2011a).
3 

Figure 1. Location of monitoring wells MW01 and MW02 near the town of Pavillion, Wyoming.
4 

Study Approach

The approach of this characterization of groundwater quality is to: 

• Collect a representative groundwater-quality sample from each of two USEPA 

monitoring wells and collect quality-control samples using standard USGS sampling 

protocols; 

• Analyze samples collected from each well and quality-control samples for a list of 

analytes that replicates the USEPA analyte list and uses USEPA-approved methods to the 

extent possible, including constituents of interest to the State of Wyoming and USGS; 

• Review analytical results for environmental and quality-control samples; 

• Distribute approved environmental results to the public using the USGS National Water 

Information System (NWIS) Web interface (NWISWeb), accessible at 

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wy/nwis/qw and provide results to Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality (WDEQ); and 

• Prepare a USGS Open-File Report describing the sampling and analysis plan that 

includes data collection, analytical methods, QA/QC procedures, and quality control and 

analytical results. 

Groundwater samples will be collected soon after applicable sections of this SAP have been approved 

by the Director of the USGS Wyoming Water Science Center (WYWSC) in spring 2012. The USGS 

will attempt to collect a representative groundwater-quality sample that will include both whole water 

and filtered water. Sample processing will include filtering with a disposable 0.45-micron filter and

addition of preservation additives (such as nitric acid) required for the analytical schedules specified. 

After all data have been quality reviewed, the approved quantitative water-quality data will be made 

available to the public through a peer reviewed USGS Data Series Report and NWISWeb. 

Study Organization and Responsibilities

The study of groundwater quality in two USEPA monitoring wells is the responsibility of the 

USGS in cooperation with the State of Wyoming. Several government agencies and organizations have 

interest in the data being collected during this study. For this reason, a multi-agency technical team was 

formed to provide the USGS with technical advice during the compilation of this SAP. The agencies and 

organizations involved with this study, including organizations participating with the technical team, are 

listed in table 1. 

The roles and responsibilities for key on-site personnel involved in this study are listed in 

table 2. These personnel may be replaced with appropriately qualified personnel, if necessary. The 

project chief is responsible for ensuring that personnel who do the sample collection have appropriate 

groundwater-quality training and are cognizant of on-site safety considerations. 

Sampling and Analysis Plan

Groundwater data will be collected in association with the two USEPA monitoring wells (MW01 

and MW02) installed for the USEPA Pavillion, Wyo. groundwater investigation. USEPA scientists will 

be on-site to collect samples and to assist USGS scientists with well access, pump operation, and 

collection of split samples. USGS scientists will collect samples to be analyzed for a full suite of target 

analytes (table 3). Laboratories will be requested to report tentatively identified compounds (TICs) while 

performing some organic analyses. TICs are compounds detected during analytical testing that are not 

part of the standard suite of reported analytes and would require additional analytical testing to confirm 

their presence and quantify their concentration in the sample. TIC analyses provide a qualitative 
5 

measure of the presence of compounds, and TIC data can be included in reports with sufficient 

documentation, but will not be stored in the USGS NWIS database. A sufficient number of sample 

bottles will be collected so that both USGS (including USGS contract laboratories) and USEPA 

laboratories can perform analyses. This allows for a direct comparison of analytical results without 

having to qualify differences that could be attributed to different sampling dates. 

Several laboratory analyses performed by the USEPA for samples from the deep monitoring 

wells will not be performed by the USGS because USGS does not have the analytical method available 

in-house or through contract laboratories such as TestAmerica Laboratories (TAL). These analytes are 

highlighted in appendixes A and B. Similarly, the laboratories and methods available to USGS do not 

always provide detection and reporting limits that match USEPA methods. These differences also are 

provided in appendixes A and B. 

Other differences between the USEPA sampling and sampling for the USGS study are the 

addition of constituents requested by USGS, the State of Wyoming, and representatives from the Wind 

River Reservation. For example, USGS has added sample-collection and laboratory analyses related to 

groundwater age dating, which are explained in table 4. The State of Wyoming requested a suite of 

analyses that relate to their water-quality standards and routine testing (see appendix A). Wind River 

Reservation representatives requested the addition of radium-226, radium-228, and radon to the list of 

analytes, which are included in table 3. 

In addition to the differences in analyte lists between USGS and USEPA, there is one difference 

in a method of sample preservation. The USGS is collecting several volatile samples (volatile organic 

compounds, gasoline range organics, and dissolved hydrocarbon gases) for which the standard method 

of preservation is the addition of hydrochloric acid until the sample pH < 2.0. USEPA has expressed 

concern that the addition of hydrochloric acid to the sample matrix will cause a loss of VOCs in the 

sample. TestAmerica Laboratories is not able to modify methods to accommodate the trisodium 

phosphate preservative as recommended by USEPA, so the USGS agreed to collect volatile samples 

both with chemical preservative (hydrochloric acid and iced) and without (iced only). 

Data to be collected during this study include information describing the site and well condition, 

field properties measured during well purging, and final field water-quality measurements. Sample 

collection, handling, and shipping procedures will be in accordance with laboratory and USGS 

requirements (U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated). Samples will be handled and shipped in 

compliance with chain-of-custody requirements (U.S Environmental Protection Agency, 2002). 

Documentation

Ancillary well site information, site observations, well purging, and field sample collection 

information will be documented on field forms and field notes (appendix C). The field data collected as 

part of this study will be entered into the USGS NWIS database. Much of this data will be accessible at 

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wy/nwis/qw. Data entry will be timely, accurate, and quality assured. 

Ancillary data that comply with the National Groundwater Monitoring Network Framework 

guidance (National Ground Water Association, 2009) and meet USGS minimum data elements to 

establish a groundwater site as published in USGS Groundwater Technical Procedure Document 2 

(GWPD-2) (Cunningham and Schalk, 2011a) will be collected for each monitoring well. These ancillary 

data are required to enter any information about a well into NWIS. Ancillary data to be described for 

each well include point of contact, site identifier, geologic/hydrologic description, well location, well 

characteristics, Wyoming State Engineer’s Office permit number, land-surface altitude, well 

construction and completion information, and photographs at the wellhead. Data are recorded in the 
6 

field on the USGS Groundwater Site Inventory (GWSI) Groundwater Site Schedule (Form 9-1904-A, 

appendix C–1).

Site observations, well purge volume and time, and other data collected as part of groundwater 

sampling will be noted on a USGS Groundwater Field Form (appendix C–2). These data include 

sampling equipment; sampling conditions and weather information; field instrument calibration; waterlevel depth; a log of field properties measured during the well purge; calculations of well and purge 

volumes; preservation chemicals, blank water, and. lot numbers of filters. A chain-of-custody (CoC) 

form will accompany samples to each laboratory. At least two different styles of forms will be used to 

track samples sent to laboratories—a modified “Contract” Analytical Services Request (ASR) (appendix 

C–3) required for samples sent to TAL under USGS contract, and appropriate sample request/CoC 

forms that will accompany samples sent to laboratories other than TAL. All field observations and any 

deviations from this SAP will be documented using the field forms described in this section of the report 

or in logbooks. 

Groundwater-Quality Sampling Procedures

This section describes procedures that will be used to collect groundwater samples from 

monitoring wells MW01 and MW02. Preparation for sample collection, instrument calibration, waterlevel measurement, well purge, environmental sample collection, and sample shipping and tracking are 

described. A list of equipment needed to accomplish groundwater sampling is provided in appendix D. 

Preparation

Upon arrival at each well site, field personnel will perform the following preparation steps: 

1. Conduct a safety inspection of the well site and vicinity as outlined in the Job Hazard 

Analysis (appendix E).

2. Describe well and site conditions in field notes or on field forms, as appropriate, to include 

the well number, sampling date, sampling personnel, weather conditions, and condition of the 

outer well casing, concrete pad, and any other unusual conditions around the well 

(Cunningham and Schalk, 2011a). 

3. Prepare site for purging and sampling by spreading plastic sheeting on the ground to keep 

sampling equipment and tubing clean. 

4. Unload and set up equipment and instrumentation for well purging and measurement of field 

properties. 

a. All sampling equipment will be precleaned and quality assured. Wells MW01 and 

MW02 each have dedicated pumps installed that will be used for sampling. This 

study will use Teflon® tubing with stainless steel fittings past the wellhead point of 

discharge for sampling. All field instruments will be checked before deployment. 

b. Unlock and open protective casing. 

c. Release gas pressure from well by opening valve; as valve is opened, collect 

measurements of released gas at discharge point and 2 ft away using a four-gas meter 

(oxygen, flammable gasses (lower explosive limit), hydrogen sulfide, and carbon 

dioxide) and document readings. 

5. When safe (safe four-gas meter measurements are described in the Job Hazard Analysis, 

appendix E), a water-level measurement can be made using an electric water-level indicator 

(e-tape), a steel tape, or a sonic water-level meter. Additionally, an intrinsically safe pressure 

transducer may be installed at this time to monitor water level continuously throughout the 

well purge and sampling process. 
7 

6. All field instruments will be calibrated at the site before use. 

Water-Level Measurement

Collecting water-level measurements during a groundwater-quality study is important. The initial 

water level, which commonly is “static,” is used when determining the well purge volume, and can be 

used with other aquifer data to determine hydraulic head. Sufficient data may allow evaluation of the 

direction of horizontal and vertical groundwater flow. It is important to also monitor water levels during 

the well-purging process to determine the effect pumping is having on the aquifer. If a well is pumped at 

too high a flow rate, the water level could be drawn down to the pump level before sampling is possible. 

This would cause pumping to stop until the water level in the aquifer has time to recover sufficiently to 

allow for the collection of samples. Commonly, this cycle continues throughout the purging and 

sampling process. By reducing (drawing down) the water level to the pump level, the well-purging 

process essentially becomes a surging process, which could negatively affect the quality of samples. By 

monitoring water levels throughout the purging process, pumping rates can be adjusted so they do not 

exceed well recharge rates and well surging can be minimized. Purge data from wells MW01 and 

MW02 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a) indicate that both wells could be affected by 

water-level drawdown during purging. Water levels will be determined both before and during the well 

purge. Because both wells are known to have gas in the water, it also should be noted that some 

component of hydraulic head may be attributable to gas rather than hydraulic pressure. 

Once it has been determined that the monitoring well is not pressurized and the workspace and 

well casing have been cleared of combustible gasses (if necessary), the water level will be measured 

using an electronic water-level indicator (e-tape), a steel tape, or a sonic water-level meter. If well 

construction allows, each well will be instrumented with a transducer and data logger to continuously 

record water levels. The general procedure for measuring a static water level using an e-tape follows; a 

detailed description of the method used to measure water levels by use of an e-tape or a steel tape can be 

found in Cunningham and Schalk (2011b, 2011c).

Procedure:

1. Determine location of a measuring point (MP). If not previously established, measure 

distance from the MP to the land surface. Note the height of the MP, and describe MP 

location in notes. 

2. Using a calibrated e-tape, make two or more consecutive water-level measurements to the 

nearest 0.01 ft. 

3. Repeat measurement until precision is within 0.01 percent (±0.01 ft per 100 ft) of depth to 

water below the MP (Cunningham and Schalk, 2011d; Garber and Koopman, 1968), until the 

reason for lack of agreement is determined, or the results are shown to be reliable. If two or 

more measurements are collected, use best professional judgment to select the measurement 

most representative of field conditions. If well construction allows, each well additionally 

will be instrumented with a transducer and data logger to continuously record water levels. 

4. Record e-tape identification (brand and serial number), date, and time of each measurement. 

5. If e-tape is to be used to measure water levels throughout well purge then leave it in the well. 

If e-tape will not be used during well purge, disinfect and rinse the part of the e-tape that was 

introduced to the casing as described in the USGS National Field Manual (U.S. Geological 

Survey, variously dated). 

If a pressure transducer is used during the well purge, manufacturer’s recommendations and USGS 

guidelines (Cunningham and Schalk, 2011d) will be followed for instrument selection, installation and 

data collection.
8 

Instrument Calibration

All instruments, including water-level meters, pressure transducers, and water-quality 

instruments will be tested or calibrated before departing for the field and again before each use at each 

new sampling site. Water-level meters and pressure transducers will be tested according to 

manufacturer’s recommendations and USGS guidelines (Cunningham and Schalk, 2011d). Field waterquality instruments will be tested according to manufacturer's recommendations and USGS guidelines 

(U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, chapter 6); these recommendations and guidelines will be 

followed for instrument testing, calibration, and calibration checks of water-quality instruments. USGS 

calibration guidelines for water-quality properties regularly measured in the field are summarized in 

table 5. Calibration information will be recorded in instrument logbooks or on the groundwater field 

form (appendix C–2) as appropriate. If at any time instrument readings seem inaccurate based on 

historical data or professional judgment, the instrument calibration will be checked and the instrument 

recalibrated if necessary. 

Well Purge

Before collection of groundwater samples, the well will be purged of standing water and field 

properties of the purge discharge will be monitored as indicators of when the water is being withdrawn 

directly from the formation. The purging process is meant to reduce chemical and biochemical artifacts 

caused by the materials and practices used for well installation, by reactions occurring within the well 

casing and annular space between casing and borehole wall, and by the long residence time of water 

within the pump tubing; purging also serves to condition sampling equipment with well water and helps 

to remove chemical residues that might be introduced by the equipment. USGS well-purge procedures, 

as outlined in chapter 4 of the USGS National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data

(“Field Manual;” U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, p. 92 and 103; Yeskis and Zavala, 2002), will be 

followed for this study and are summarized in this section as they apply to MW01 and MW02. 

The Field Manual identifies standard procedures and exceptions to standard procedures for 

purging wells before sample collection (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Chap 4, section 4.2.3). 

Application of standard procedures to field situations generally falls into three categories: (1) a purge of 

one borehole volume (see equation 2 in the “Well-Purging Procedures” subsection) is the minimum 

standard procedure required and is predicated on the condition that variability of field-measured waterquality properties has stabilized (table 5) prior to initiation of sample collection, (2) preferably, the well 

is purged of three or more well (casing) volumes (see equation 1 in the “Well-Purging Procedures” 

subsection) to ensure the evacuation of at least one borehole volume, while monitoring the stabilization 

of field-measured water-quality properties prior to sampling, and (3) when the two previous standard 

procedures cannot be followed (for example, the need to sample at a low-yield well), alternative 

purging, field-property measurement, and sampling procedures that meet the data-quality objectives of 

the investigation can be considered (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, chap. 4, p. 103-104, 107-108). 

The USEPA has collected samples from wells MW01 (785 ft deep) and MW02 (980 ft deep) and 

provided a subset of their purging, drawdown, and well-development records, for both wells and 

previous sampling periods in a draft report (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a) and online 

at http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/ (Accessed July 26, 2012). The USEPA wellpurging history indicates that well MW01 provides sufficient yield to collect representative samples

using the existing dedicated sampling equipment while applying the USGS standard purge and fieldproperties stabilization criteria. The purge and sampling history for well MW02, on the other hand, 

indicates that USEPA experienced much difficulty in collecting hydrologic information (water levels) 

because pumping caused a rapid decline in water level and exsolution of formation gasses caused by 
9 

reduction in hydrostatic head during purging (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). 

Procedures for purging and determination of field-measured purge-water-quality properties before 

sampling are described in the following subsections, as are the considerations to be applied to determine 

well-yield information and the approach to sampling at well MW02. Purge water discharged from these 

wells will be collected in an approved container obtained from a licensed wastewater hauler and purge 

water will be disposed of by a licensed wastewater hauler as directed by WDEQ. Procedures to mitigate 

dangers from buildup and exposure to methane gas will be rigorously implemented. 

Well MW01

Following standard procedures in the Field Manual (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, chap. 4, p. 

103-106), the purge approach for MW01 was determined by considering well-equipment, construction, 

development, and purge history. If followed properly, the purge procedures described in this section 

should remove standing water in the well screen and bore; providing a sample representative of water in 

the formation in contact with well MW01. Previous field tests conducted at USEPA monitoring well 

MW01 from 2010-2011 indicate that this well provides sufficient yield required to conform to the USGS 

standard purge and field water-quality properties monitoring criteria (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2011a). 

MW01 will be purged and subsequently sampled as described in this subsection, using the 

dedicated submersible pump currently (2012) in the well. To best meet the input of representatives on 

the Technical Team regarding the choice of standard purging procedures of (a) a minimum of one 

borehole volume, or (b) a larger volume associated with three or more well or borehole volumes, the 

decision was made to collect two sets of split samples from well MW01. The first sample will be 

collected after one borehole volume (see the following “Well-Purging Procedures” subsection) has been 

purged from the well, contingent on evaluation of stabilization criteria for sequential measurements of 

temperature, pH, and specific conductance (table 5).1 The second sample will be collected after removal 

of three borehole volumes (equation 2 in the following “Well-Purging Procedures” subsection), which 

includes the volume removed for the first borehole purge and the volume removed for the first sample 

collection, contingent upon meeting the stabilization criteria for the same field-measured water-quality 

properties (table 5).

In addition to splitting samples with the USGS, USEPA has proposed to collect several samples in 

times series to document changes in water quality throughout the well purge. USEPA’s sampling methods 

are described in the Ground Water and Ecosystems Restoration Research (GWERD) Quality Assurance 

Project Plan for the Ground-Water Investigation in Pavillion, Wyoming at 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/r8/pavilliondocs/QA_Documents/QAPPs/SignedCopyPavillionQAPPv6Feb17_2012.pdf.

Well - P urging P rocedures

Initially, the standing water in MW01 will be purged at a rate of approximately 6 gal/min while 

monitoring drawdown, until the well has been purged of one well-casing volume. A well-casing volume 

(V) will be calculated using equation 1. 

V = 0.0408HD2 (1) 

where 

V is the volume of water in the well, in gallons,

 

1 Table 5 lists the standard USGS stabilization criteria for routine field-measured water-quality properties as they are to be applied to this study.
10 

D is the inside diameter of the well casing, in inches, and

H is the height of water column, in feet. 

After MW01 has been purged of the equivalent of one well-casing volume, the pumping rate will 

be reduced to 2–3 gal/min (to be determined at the time of purging), with the first complete borehole 

purge continuing through the removal of the first effective borehole volume. For this study, a borehole 

volume is defined as the wetted volume of unscreened casing plus the borehole volume throughout the 

screened interval, but excluding the volume of prepacked sand in the screened interval. The borehole 

volume can be calculated using equation 2, with values specific to well MW01 given in parentheses 

after the variable description: 

VB = (0.0408(HWC − HSS)DWC

2 ) +

(0.0408)(HSS)(DBH

2 ) − �[(0.0408)(HSS)(DOS

2 ) − (0.0408)(HSS)(DWC2 )]� × VS (2)

 where 

VB is the borehole volume, in gallons, 

HWC is the depth to base of screen minus static water level in feet,

HSS is the length of screen in feet (20 ft), 

DWC is the inside diameter of well casing in inches (4.026 in), 

DBH is diameter of borehole in inches (9.875 in), 

DOS is outside diameter of pre-packed screen in inches (8.5 in), 

VS is the volume of sand in the pre-packed screen expressed as a fraction (0.55). 

Assuming the space within the pre-packed screen is 100 percent filled with only sand and water, the 

sand volume (VS) was calculated by subtracting the effective porosity of the sand (0.45) from a total 

volume (Carmeuse Natural Chemicals, 2012). The volume of the infrastructure within the well (pump, 

power cord, and riser pipe) is not factored into these calculations as they are estimated to be less than 10 

percent (USEPA, oral commun., 2012 date) and exclusion of this volume ensures that other uncertainties 

in the borehole volume calculation (for example pre-packed screen porosity) do not result in an 

underestimation of the volume of water to be removed.

Field water-quality properties, water levels, and pumping rates and volumes will be monitored 

throughout the purge process at regular intervals of about 5- to 15-minutes2 (determined by the 

professional judgment of the field team), and the data recorded on the Groundwater Field Form (appendix 

C–2). To monitor these and other water-quality properties3, water will be split from the discharge line 

and run to a flow-through cell instrumented with a multi-parameter water-quality instrument (YSI 6920 or 

equivalent), designed to minimize sample contact with the atmosphere. A dissolved-gas monitoring 

system developed by the USEPA Office of Research and Development, necessitating a third discharge 

line, also will be installed [see USEPA Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) at

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/r8/pavilliondocs/QA_Documents/QAPPs/SignedCopyPavillionQAPPv6Feb17_2012.pdf, 

accessed July 16, 2012]. In addition, aliquots of water will be collected from the purge discharge line to 

measure turbidity using a portable turbidimeter (HACH 2100P), and turbidity measurements and water 

odor and color information will be recorded on the Groundwater Field Form (appendix C–2). Field-

 

2 The frequency at which sets of field-measured water properties are sequentially monitored can depend on the purging rate, which in turn is a function of 

well depth and diameter, and aquifer transmissivity (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006).

3 Field measurements of turbidity, dissolved oxygen, and oxidation-reduction potential also are to be monitored over time but will not be used to evaluate 

inflow of fresh formation water or when to sample.
11 

measured water-quality properties will be collected, collated, and documented throughout the period of 

purging and sample collection. 

During removal of the first borehole volume of well water, the variability among sequentially 

collected sets of measurements for temperature, pH, and specific conductance will be evaluated, as 

described below. Sampling can begin after the well has been purged of at least one complete borehole 

volume, conditional upon field-measured water-quality property stabilization (table 5) and field-team 

expertise. The well-water discharge will be split for concurrent USEPA and USGS sample collection.

The second set of split samples will be collected after a total of three borehole volumes of water 

have been removed (including sampling) and in accordance with USGS field water-quality property 

stabilization protocols, summarized below: 

• A minimum of 5 sets of water-quality field properties will be recorded sequentially at regular 

5- to 15-minute intervals, or as determined by the professional judgment of the field team. 

– After five sets of measurements have been collected, the set of measurement values 

for the each field water-quality property will be checked against the fieldmeasurement stabilization criteria (table 5). The median of the final five 

measurements is put on record as the value that represents formation water. This 

signals that sample collection can begin.

– If criteria have not been met, an additional three to five sets of field water-quality 

property measurements will be collected at regular time intervals, in accordance with 

USGS guidelines or the professional judgment of the USGS field team. The extent to 

which an individual field water-quality property meets the stabilization criteria will 

be evaluated after each additional measurement set is collected. If the variability 

among measurements for a given property continues to fluctuate beyond the 

established criterion, the decision of when and whether or not to commence with 

sampling relies on the expertise of the field team. 

• The field conditions, problems encountered, and any modifications of standard field 

procedures are to be documented on the Groundwater Field Form or in study log notes, as 

appropriate. 

USEPA will collect additional samples at well MW01 during the USGS sampling sequence as described 

in their QAPP 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/r8/pavilliondocs/QA_Documents/QAPPs/SignedCopyPavillionQAPPv6Feb17_2012.pdf.

Well MW02

Previous field tests conducted by USEPA at deep monitoring well MW02 from 2010-2011 

indicate that formation water enters the well at an exceedingly low flow rate (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2011a), characterizing well MW02 as a low-yield well. The USGS operationally 

defines a low-yield well as a well that produces substantially less than 1 gal/min and for which 

drawdown occurs such that the well can be rapidly pumped dry or for which recovery to at least 90 

percent of the pre-pumping water level (after removal of at least one borehole volume) takes many hours 

to several days or longer (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, p. 93). During phase IV sampling of well 

MW02 by the USEPA in April 2011, the USEPA reported a yield in well MW02 of about 1 gallon per 

hour (gal/h), (about 0.017 gal/min) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, oral commun., 2012). 

Given a well yield of 1 gal/h and given that a single borehole volume of water in well MW02 equals 

about 510 gallons (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a), recovery of the water level in the 

well following purging of 1 borehole volume would take considerably longer than 24 hours, depending 

on the water-level drawdown in the well. 
12 

Standard USGS practice is to avoid sampling at low-yield wells, if possible, because of difficulty 

and uncertainties in achieving an adequate purge to clear the well of artifacts inherent in standing wellbore water that can compromise the representativeness of water flowing to or withdrawn from the 

screened section of the well. The Field Manual allows for circumstances, such as specific study 

objectives, well or formation characteristics, and other constraints, for which sampling at low-yield 

wells might be necessary and states that the criterion for representativeness of formation water is defined 

also by the specific sampling and data-quality requirements established for a given investigation (U.S. 

Geological Survey, 2006, p. 107-108). It allows, for example, that the study team may customize purge 

protocols to include stabilization of specific constituent analyses relevant to the purpose of the study, as 

discussed by Gibs and Imbrigiotta (1990). The Field Manual provides technical information regarding 

selection of low-flow purge techniques to address sampling needs at low-yield wells. As MW02 was 

determined to be a low-yield well, the initial intention of the USGS to sample well MW02 using purge 

procedures that would be as consistent as possible with the standard USGS approaches implemented at 

well MW01 could not be carried out. 

Since determination of an alternative approach for purging and sampling MW02 could not be 

concluded prior to the April 22 sampling date set by USEPA, USGS and USEPA agreed, instead, that 

USEPA would collect a split set of samples from MW02 on April 22 and send these samples for 

chemical analysis to the USEPA laboratories and the USGS contract laboratory TAL, to allow a 

comparison of results among the laboratories. The TAL sample results will be provided by USGS to the 

USEPA. 

An abbreviated description follows of the observations and further work done at well MW02 

after the sample-collection activities were completed by USGS and USEPA at MW01 and by USEPA at 

MW02 in April 2012. Because of the low yield of well MW02, resulting in long recovery or purge times 

relative to standard USGS procedures, the USGS, with permission from USEPA, redeveloped the well 

during the week of April 30, 2012 in an attempt to increase the well yield (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2006, p. 93). As a safety precaution prior to redevelopment, the well casing was filled with potable 

water from the City of Riverton to reduce methane concentrations in the well. The City of Riverton 

water was split sampled by USGS and USEPA as a quality control measure and USGS results will be 

provided in the USGS Data Series Report for this study. The dedicated submersible pump was removed 

from the well and the WYDEQ used a previously decontaminated down-hole video camera to examine 

and film the well screen, the overall structure of which appeared to be intact; it was not possible to 

determine the degree to which the screen slots may be plugged. Three hours were spent surging the well 

using a 4-inch-diameter surge block attached to the stainless steel discharge pipe that formerly ran from 

the well head to the pump. During well redevelopment precautionary steps were taken to monitor 

methane levels from the well and ensure the safety of the field team. After surging, the well was bailed 

from the bottom for 4.5 hours and from the top of the water column for 11.5 hours. The USGS Central 

Region Research Drilling Chief’s project log for this redevelopment activity is contained in appendix F. 

Redevelopment of well MW02 was completed on May 4, 2012. Subsequent repeated 

measurements of water-level recovery were made using an e-tape, as attempts to install a pressure 

transducer near the well bottom by USEPA were unsuccessful. On the basis of the water-level 

measurements made in well MW02 on May 4 and May 10, 2012, the USEPA calculated a well yield of 

approximately 0.65 gal/h (about 0.011 gal/min) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, oral 

communication, 2012). The USGS calculated the same well yield based on the available information 

(table 6). On the basis of the water-level measurements made in well MW02 on May 10 and May 21, 

2012, the USGS calculated a well yield of about 0.44 gal/h (about 0.007 gal/min) (table 6). These yield 
13 

estimates are somewhat less than the 1 gal/h previously estimated by the USEPA, indicating that the 

redevelopment effort did not improve the flow of groundwater into the well. 

At this point alternatives to the purge procedures used at MW01 (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, 

chap. 4, p. 107-108) were considered again for well MW02, including the use of a low-flow pump with 

or without a packer system. These techniques are reported in the literature as used to maximize yield 

and alleviate the problems associated with long recovery or purge times, and are provided as options in 

the Field Manual (Puls and Barcelona, 1996; Shapiro, 2001; U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, p. 108; 

ASTM International, 2007). To date, those techniques have not been tested at MW02. Considering the 

depth, yield, and gas-producing characteristics of MW02, in the experience and professional opinion of 

the authors of this report, some period of testing would be required to determine whether such 

methodologies could be applied successfully at MW02, both with respect to hydraulic and technical 

capabilities of the sampling systems and the ability to meet the study and data-quality criteria 

established for this investigation. 

The Technical Team discussed using the Bennett low-flow sampling pump Model 1800-6. 

Given the very low well yields (estimated at 0.007 to 0.011 gal/min) and potential head lift of several 

hundred feet, it is not certain that the Bennett pump could reliably pump at those low rates. That kind of 

pump performance appears to be at the margin of the pump specifications provided by Bennett (Bennett 

Sample Pumps, Inc.). For example, author experience in the High Plains aquifer with the Bennett pump 

Model 1800-6 indicates that the pumping rate may not always be adjustable down to near zero gal/min 

and still produce a steady stream of water for measuring field properties and collecting samples. 

Given that development, testing, and evaluation of the purge and sampling procedures 

appropriate for MW02 are beyond the scope of this study as agreed to by the USGS and WYDEQ, and 

given the mid-September 2012 deadline for publishing the USGS Data Series Report for MW01, the 

USGS, in consultation with the Technical Team, concluded that it would not be possible to complete 

sampling at MW02 and evaluate the results by the report deadline. In summary, USGS did not collect 

samples from MW02 in April or following the attempted redevelopment. Sample-collection 

discussions for well MW02 by USGS and the Technical Team have been placed on hold, although 

collegial deliberation on possible sampling strategies within the Technical Team could be reconvened at 

some point in the future. 

Sample Collection, Analysis, and Processing

Immediately after the well has been satisfactorily purged, a portion of the pump discharge water 

will be redirected to the USGS sample-processing chamber using a flow manifold. Sample collection 

will begin after approximately 5 minutes of rinsing water through the processing chamber to rinse 

sample tubing with a minimum of 2 gallons of well water. To minimize the possibility of sample 

contamination, all sample tubing from the wellhead will be Teflon® with stainless steel fittings. All 

sampling equipment will be decontaminated before and immediately after sampling according to the 

methods described in the “Decontamination” section. Samples will be collected in containers as 

specified for the method used for each analyte and according to laboratory preference. USGS and 

USEPA sampling teams will each have a separate line for sample collection. A modified splitter will be 

added at the wellhead to allow for the concurrent collection of samples and monitoring of field waterquality properties by both USGS and USEPA personnel. 

Several laboratories will be used to analyze groundwater samples (table 3). Each laboratory was 

selected on the basis of analytical capabilities. Most of the chemical analyses of the USGS samples will 

be done by TAL, because they routinely use approved USEPA analytical methods. The USGS Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon and Stable Isotopes Laboratories in Reston, Va., will be analyzing dissolved gasses 
14 

and isotopes, respectively. The USGS National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) will be analyzing 

radon-222. Eberline Services will be analyzing radionuclides (radon-222, radium-226, and radium-228). 

The USGS Tritium Laboratory in Menlo Park, Calif., will analyze for tritium (3H), which is an unstable 

(radioactive) isotope of hydrogen. The Lamont/Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., will 

analyze for dissolved gases (helium, neon, argon, krypton, and xenon). Carbon-14 age dating will be 

performed by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution-National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass 

Spectrometry Facility in Woods Hole, Mass. Natural gasses and isotopes of methane will be analyzed by 

Isotech Laboratories, Inc. in Champaign, Ill. Selected laboratories, laboratory schedules and codes, and 

applicable field collection and processing information are listed in table 7. A detailed list of chemical 

analytes to be collected during this study, including laboratory methods and laboratory quantification 

limits, is provided in appendix A. In their draft report, the USEPA identified many constituents that 

indicated “geochemical impacts” to the deep groundwater in monitoring wells in the Pavillion area 

(table 3, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). A list of these constituents with the laboratory 

reporting levels used in the USEPA study and the laboratory reporting levels for the proposed sampling 

are shown in appendix B. 

All sample bottles will be labeled with a site identification number, collection date and time, 

bottle type, requested laboratory analytical schedules and chemical treatment, if required. Samples will 

be collected in a sample-processing chamber following procedures described in Chapter 5 of the USGS 

National Field Manual (Wilde and others, 2004). The processing chamber will be constructed of a 

polyvinyl chloride frame with a clear plastic bag mounted inside, which reduces sample exposure to 

airborne contamination sources. The chamber bag will be changed as necessary to minimize sample 

contamination. Samples requiring preservation that are not collected in prepreserved containers will be 

preserved in a preservation chamber, which is similar to the sampling chamber. Inorganic and organic 

samples requiring chemical preservation will be set aside after collection; volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) that require chemical treatment will be collected using pretreated bottles. Samples requiring 

similar treatments will be preserved together as a set. Field personnel will replace nitrile gloves and the 

preservation chamber bag between treatment sets as necessary to prevent sample contamination. Field 

personnel collecting and processing samples will wear disposable nitrile gloves during sample collection 

and processing; gloves will be changed frequently and as necessary. 

Bottle requirements and sample collection and preservation methods vary by constituent type and 

laboratory (table 7). Bottles designated for chemical analysis will not be rinsed. Special bottle collection 

and preservation information are included with sampling method descriptions in this section. 

Samples to be analyzed for organic constituents will be collected first, starting with collection of 

VOCs. USEPA has expressed concern that the hydrochloric acid regularly used to preserve VOC 

samples will react with the sample matrix of samples from well MW01 causing a loss (poor recovery) of 

VOCs in the sample. VOCs will be preserved using two methods, warranting the collection of replicate 

samples differing only by preservation method. One VOC sample will be collected without chemical 

preservation into 40-milliliter (mL) septum vials and chilled. The replicate VOC sample will be 

collected into three 40- mL septum vials provided by TAL, pretreated with hydrochloric acid (preserved 

at a pH of less than 2.0), and chilled. During sample collection, pre-preserved bottles are carefully filled 

to minimize over filling. A convex meniscus is left; if the sample will not be acidified, the vial will be 

capped securely, inverted, and checked for gas bubbles. If gas bubbles are present, the vial will be 

discarded and the process repeated. If degassing of the sample is evident and it is impossible to exclude 

bubbles, this will be recorded on the Groundwater Field Form (appendix C–2) and ASR form (appendix 

C–3) (Wilde and others, 2006). The preservation chamber bag will be replaced. Remaining unfiltered 
15 

organic samples will be collected and if necessary set aside for preservation (table 7). If needed, the 

chamber bag will be replaced.

Collection of samples to be analyzed for inorganic constituents will follow the collection of 

organics. Filtered inorganic constituent samples (trace elements, major ions, nutrients, and alkalinity) 

will be collected first. Flow will be directed away from the sampling chamber and a pre-rinsed 

disposable 0.45-micron (μm) capsule filter [pre-rinsed with 2 liters (L) of deionized water] will be 

attached to the sample discharge line. Flow will be redirected to the sampling chamber; the filter will be 

inverted to allow sample flow to force trapped air out of the filter, and then sampling will begin. Starting 

with the trace element sample bottle, bottles will be filled, and if necessary, set aside for preservation 

(table 7). Samples will be treated in sets as described in this subsection once all samples requiring 

preservation have been collected. 

Dissolved hydrocarbon gasses sent to TAL will be collected using 40-mL septum vials and will 

be collected immediately after the VOCs. Carbon-14 (14C) samples will be collected with the filtered 

inorganic samples. Once the collection of chemical samples is completed, isotope, dissolved-gas, and 

age-dating samples will be collected. Collection and processing information for isotopes, dissolved 

gasses, and age-dating methods are listed in table 7. A short summary of each collection and processing 

method is described in this section; links to detailed sampling instructions are provided. 

Detailed instructions for collecting isotope samples are provided by the USGS Reston Stable 

Isotope Laboratory at http://isotopes.usgs.gov/lab/instructions.html. Samples for analysis of stable 

isotope ratios of hydrogen (ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ2

H) and 

oxygen (ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference standard; δ18O) in water will be 

collected by filling two 60-mL glass bottles two-thirds full with filtered sample water. Bottles will be 

capped with polyseal caps and stored at ambient temperature until shipped to the laboratory. Samples for 

analysis of isotope ratios of carbon (ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12) of dissolved inorganic carbon in 

water (δ13C DIC) will be collected using a 60-mL syringe. The sample is then filtered into 40-mL vials, 

containing copper sulfate preservative, using a 25-millimeter (mm) polysulfone GD/X syringe filter.

Three vials will be collected for each δ13C DIC sample. 

Dissolved-gas samples to be analyzed by the USGS Reston Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory will 

be collected following the detailed instructions provided by the laboratory at 

http://water.usgs.gov/lab/dissolved-gas/sampling/. To summarize, dissolved-gas samples will be 

collected into 150-mL serum bottles provided by the laboratory. In preparation, a needle is inserted 

through the provided rubber stopper, and a container (larger and taller than the serum bottle) is filled 

with sample water. The water discharge tube is placed in the bottom of serum bottle and the bottle is 

filled to overflowing. The serum bottle, with sample tube still flowing, is placed in the container of 

sample water. When it is evident there are no bubbles adhering to the bottle, the rubber stopper is 

inserted. The needle will allow gas trapped under the stopper to exit the bottle. Once the stopper is 

firmly seated, the needle is removed carefully, and the bottle is inverted and checked for bubbles. If 

bubbles are found, the stopper will be removed, the bottle emptied, and the collection process repeated 

as described in this paragraph. 

Helium and other noble gases will be collected to evaluate the apparent age of groundwater 

samples. The method used to collect the helium and noble gas samples to be analyzed by the LamontDoherty Earth Observatory is available at http://water.usgs.gov/lab/dissolved-gas/sampling/. Special 

copper sample tubes that are fixed in an aluminum channel with stainless steel pinch-off clamps are 

flushed with sample water to rinse the tubes and to remove bubbles. Back pressure is applied to sample 

discharge to eliminate degassing, and the tubes are sealed by crimping both ends of each copper tube 

using the stainless steel pinch-off clamps. 
16 

Tritium, sulfur hexafluoride, chlorofluorocarbon, and 14C samples will be collected and analyzed 

to evaluate the apparent age of groundwater samples collected from wells MW01 and MW02. Tritium 

samples will be collected into 1-L polyethylene bottles with no headspace and capped with a polyseal 

cone cap. The sulfur hexafluoride samples will be collected using the bottles and caps described at 

http://water.usgs.gov/lab/sf6/sampling/. The sample tube will be placed at the bottom of the sample 

bottle and the bottle will be filled to overflowing. After 3 L of water have flowed through the bottle, the 

bottle will be capped with no headspace. The chlorofluorocarbon samples will be collected in 

accordance with the method described at 

http://water.usgs.gov/lab/chlorofluorocarbons/sampling/bottles/. The sample bottle and cap (off) are 

placed into a container. The sampling tube is placed at the bottom of the sample bottle and at least 2 L of 

sample are allowed to overflow into the container. The bottle and cap are checked for bubbles. When 

there are no bubbles present, the bottle is capped while still underwater. 

Samples for 14C will be collected with chemical samples, immediately after all filtered inorganic 

samples have been collected. Using the same filter that is used for inorganics, a 1-L plastic coated glass 

bottle is filled to overfilling and capped using a polyseal cone cap. The samples for 14C should have no 

headspace.

Alkalinity (filtered) and acid neutralizing capacity (whole water) samples will be collected in 

replicate and will be determined using the incremental titration method as described in Chapter 6 of the 

National Field Manual (Rounds, 2006). Measurements of ferrous iron, sulfide, and low-range dissolved 

oxygen will be performed in the field using a HACH DR 2800 spectrophotometer. Methods of analysis 

include HACH method 8146, the 1,10-phenanthroline method using Accu Vac ampoules for ferrous 

iron; HACH method 8131, a methylene blue method for sulfide; and HACH method 8316, the indigo 

carmine method using Accu Vac ampoules for low-range dissolved oxygen (HACH, 2007). The lowrange dissolved oxygen analysis is a quality-assurance check for the dissolved oxygen probe. The 

HACH DR 2800 is factory calibrated and will be checked following manufacturer’s instructions before 

field deployment. For this study, this quality-assurance check will consist of checking the accuracy of 

dissolved oxygen and ferrous iron measurements and the precision of ferrous iron measurements. The 

dissolved oxygen accuracy will be checked using a hydrosulfite reagent; the result should be 0 plus or 

minus (±) 6 micrograms per liter (μg/L). The ferrous iron accuracy will be checked by measuring a 2 

milligram per liter (mg/L) standard; the results should be between 1.80 and 2.20 mg/L. The precision 

will be tested by measuring the standard 3 times. The single operator error should be ± 50 μg/L. 

Sample bottles will be sorted by time of collection and analyzing laboratory. In order to 

minimize the possibility of sample cross contamination, environmental samples from each well will be 

shipped in separate coolers. Additionally, quality-control samples such as blanks and spikes will be 

shipped separately from environmental samples. Appropriate laboratory ASR forms and chain-ofcustody documentation will be completed and placed with sample bottles. Samples will be placed into a 

cooler (or other appropriate packaging) and packed in ice if required; coolers will be sealed with custody 

labels, taped shut, and shipped overnight by courier to each laboratory. 

Decontamination

USGS policy requires that all water-sampling equipment is properly cleaned (decontaminated) 

before sample collection and that the effectiveness of cleaning procedures be quality controlled 

(Sandstrom, 1990; Horowitz and others, 1994; Koterba and others, 1995; Wilde, 2004). Equipment is 

decontaminated to ensure that the equipment is not a source of contaminants that could affect the 

ambient concentrations of target analytes. Additionally, the proper removal of contaminants from 

equipment minimizes the likelihood of sample cross contamination and reduces or eliminates the 
17 

transfer of contaminants to clean areas. This section summarizes the cleaning protocols that will be used 

to decontaminate sampling equipment used during this study. A description of samples collected as part 

of quality control of the cleaning procedures is included in the “Field Quality Control” section of this 

report.

In preparation for sampling, all equipment to be used for collection of groundwater samples will 

be cleaned in accordance with standard USGS protocols (Wilde, 2004). Any deviations from cleaning 

protocols required by this study will be described in this section. Equipment will be cleaned onsite 

directly after use or rinsed well with deionized water and returned to the USGS WYWSC office for 

cleaning. Cleaning procedures vary depending on the types of water samples that will be collected and 

processed with each piece of equipment. Samples for this study will be collected for both inorganic and 

organic analytes.

The monitoring wells to be sampled have dedicated pumps installed for sampling. For the 

purposes of this study, it will be assumed that these pumps and the tubing running from the pumps to 

above land surface were clean and will not contribute contamination. If practical, the fitting where 

portable sample tubing is attached will be rinsed with deionized water before attaching the portable 

sample tubing. Above land surface, groundwater samples will be routed through Teflon® sample tubing 

with stainless steel valves and fittings. The tubing and fittings will be used for collection of all 

groundwater samples and will be cleaned thoroughly using the method described in figure 2. Each well 

will have a dedicated set of sample tubing and fittings. 

Figure 2. Cleaning procedures for sampling equipment used to collect samples for analysis of inorganic and 

organic constituents.

A short piece of silicon tubing will be attached to the end of the sampling line during the collection of 

filtered samples for analysis of inorganics. This will allow field personnel to attach a 0.45-μm filter to 

the end of the sample tubing. This short piece of silicon tubing will be cleaned following the procedures 

outlined in figure 3. 
18 

Figure 3. Cleaning procedures for silicon tubing used to collect samples for analysis of inorganic constituents.

Equipment used to collect isotope samples, dissolved gasses, and age-dating samples do not require 

special cleaning procedures and will be cleaned following the procedures outlined in figure 2. 

Chain of Custody and Documentation Requirements

Data collected as part of this study of groundwater quality from monitoring wells near Pavillion, 

Wyo., need to be legally defensible. Groundwater-quality samples collected from USEPA wells MW01 

and MW02 will be treated as physical evidence in an investigation, and transfer of physical samples and 

sampling data will be controlled. Standard chain-of custody (CoC) procedures will be followed for field 

documentation, sample labeling, packaging, and shipping as applied to environmental samples. This 

section summarizes instructions and procedures provided by Standard Operating Procedure for Chain of 

Custody Samples, Office of Environmental Measurement and Evaluation, USEPA New England – 

Region 1 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002) . The chain of custody and documentation 

section of U.S. Geological Survey Protocol for Sample Collection in Response to Deepwater Horizon 

Oil Spill, Gulf of Mexico, 2010 (Wilde and Skrobialowski, 2011) has been used as a guide for this 

section of the report. 

Field personnel are legally responsible for the care and custody of the samples collected until the 

samples have been transferred to the laboratory. For this reason, it is important that field personnel 

understand and follow basic documentation, sample identification, and CoC procedures. As few people 

as possible will handle samples. All field documentation (logbooks, field forms, sample labels, and CoC 

forms) will be completed using indelible ink. If it is necessary to use a pencil instead of a pen, this must 

be noted in the field logbook. 

Field Logbooks and Other Documentation

Field observations and data-collection activities will be documented in the field logbook 

(logbook). The logbook will be a bound, paginated book, preferably with weather-resistant properties. It 

is important that logbook entries are detailed enough so that others can reconstruct field activities 

without relying on field personnel memory. The following steps will be followed to document activities:

• At the beginning of each day, record the date, start time, station identification number 

and description, names of field team members present, and the signature of the person 

making the entry; 

• Include a record of all the names of all visitors to the site and the purpose of their visit; 
19 

• Record measurements made and samples collected; 

• Record CoC information for samples. Note courier, tracking information, and laboratory 

to which samples were being transferred; 

• All entries will be made in indelible ink as described in this section, and no erasures will 

be made. If an incorrect entry is made, the information will be crossed out with a single 

strike mark and the entry will be initialed and dated; and

• Logbook entries and field record sheets must all include the station identification number, 

date, time, and names or initials of all personnel handling the environmental and qualitycontrol samples. 

The Groundwater Field Form (appendix C–2) has been designed by the USGS to include all 

necessary field documentation when properly completed by field personnel. To reduce duplication of 

effort (documenting all field data in both the logbook and on field forms), field forms will be printed 

onto adhesive-backed paper for addition into the logbook. All relevant field forms, logbook notes, 

photographs, and other information will be included as appendixes in the final USGS Data Series Report 

and will be available to the public in an online version of the report. 

Sample Container Labels

Sample labels will be completed for each sample container collected for analysis, using indelible 

ink. Figure 4 provides an example of a sample label. Each label will include the following: 

• Station identification number; 

• Sample collection date: a six-digit number indicating month, day, year; 

• Sample collection time: a four-digit number indicating the local time [Mountain Standard 

Time (MST) or Mountain Daylight Time (MDT)] of collection using the military or 24-

hour time convention; 

• Laboratory schedule(s), laboratory code(s), or USEPA method(s); 

• Sample preservation method; and 

• Initials of personnel collecting and handling the sample(s). 

Figure 4. Example of a sample container label.

Transfer of Custody and Sample Shipment

To maintain a clear record of environmental sample custody from collection through sample 

analysis, sample CoC will be documented. An ASR form will be completed to inform the laboratory of 

the analyses being requested for each sample and will be used to document sample possession and 

USGS Pavillion Project

431525108371901 (Well MW01) 

Date Time

EPA 6020 1-500 mL FA ph<2 w/HN03 
20 

custody. The transfer of samples from the field to a courier, to the laboratory, and through the analytical 

process will be documented to clearly reflect movement of the samples. 

A CoC/ASR form will be completed for each sample being sent for laboratory analysis. The 

CoC/ASR form will include the station identification number, sample collection date, sample collection 

time, requested analyses, and bottle types and numbers included in the sample shipment. At the bottom 

of the CoC/ASR form is a location for signature. An example CoC/ASR form for a water sample being 

sent to TAL is provided in appendix C–3. 

Samples will be properly packaged for shipment (sample and laboratory dependent) and sent to 

the appropriate laboratory for analysis, preferably as a batch shipment. Three copies of the CoC/ASR 

form will be completed for each sample. Two properly completed CoC/ASR forms will accompany each 

shipment of samples and one will be saved for study records. The CoC/ASR forms will all be signed and 

dated by a member of the field team with the date and time of sample transfer. If samples will be 

transferred to the laboratory by courier, tracking numbers will be included on the CoC/ASR form to 

track sample chain-of-custody throughout the shipping process. Upon receipt of the samples at the 

laboratory, the receiver will complete the transfer by signing and dating both CoC/ASR forms shipped 

with the samples. The laboratory will keep one copy of the CoC/ASR form for their records and return 

one copy to the USGS WYWSC for their records.

Sample Packaging

The lids or caps on all sample bottles will be checked to verify they are tightly sealed. If directed 

by the receiving laboratory, lids or caps will be taped on sample containers with appropriate tape. Glass 

containers will be wrapped in foam or bubble wrap to prevent breakage during shipping. Sample 

containers will be sealed in Ziploc® bags. Similar containers (for example, VOC vials) can be sealed in 

the same Ziploc® bag. Each sample will be compared to entries on the CoC/ASR form to ensure bottles 

and CoC entries match. If ice is required for sample preservation, samples will be packaged in thermally 

insulated, rigid coolers with ice and temperature blanks. The temperature blank is a small bottle filled 

with deionized water that travels with iced samples to the laboratory; upon arrival at the laboratory, the 

temperature of water in the bottle is measured to evaluate if samples were adequately cooled during 

shipment. Each package of samples will be sealed with a signed and dated custody seal and appropriate 

shipping tape. 

Quality Assurance and Quality Control 

The quality-assurance and quality-control procedures described in this section have been 

developed to provide routine application of field and laboratory procedures to control the measurement 

process and ensure the usability and reliability of sampling and analysis data. This Sampling and 

Analysis Plan (SAP) is the first step to ensuring high-quality environmental data. Following standard 

procedures for decontaminating field equipment; maintaining, calibrating, and operating field equipment 

and instrumentation in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions; following standard operating 

procedures outlined in the USGS National Field Manual (U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated); 

using standard field forms; using skilled personnel for sampling; and adhering to this SAP constitute the 

quality-assurance procedures for the study. Errors that affect environmental measurements can be 

introduced in the field during sample collection, processing, shipment, in the laboratory, and during 

database entry. Quality-control (QC) samples described in this section ensure that data collected in the 

field, analyzed by the laboratory, and entered into the USGS National Water Information System 

(NWIS) database will be of known and appropriate quality to meet the objectives of the study. 
21 

U.S. Geological Survey Quality-Assurance Program

The USGS maintains personnel in Water Mission Area technical offices who work to ensure data 

collected by the USGS are of the highest quality. The technical offices relevant to this study are the 

Office of Water Quality and the Office of Groundwater. These offices along with the Office of Surface 

Water establish the technical guidelines water science center personnel follow. Technical guidelines 

applicable to this study can be found in the USGS National Field Manual for the Collection of WaterQuality Data (U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated) and Groundwater Technical Procedures of the 

U.S. Geological Survey (Cunningham and Schalk, 2011e). The technical offices are also responsible for 

ensuring USGS water science center personnel are following established technical guidelines. One 

method that the technical offices use to ensure all water science centers are producing hydrologic data 

and information that meets USGS standards is through technical reviews of water activities in USGS 

water science centers. The technical offices assemble multidiscipline teams that conduct reviews of 

science center water activities within the USGS at integrated and water science centers. These technical 

reviews are scheduled onsite at approximately 3-year intervals. The review includes a variety of 

activities designed to accomplish the objectives of the review. A few of these activities include the 

following: 

• Visiting representative offices to observe field methods, equipment and field installations, 

vehicles, laboratories, and warehouses for adequacy, safety, and compliance with policies 

and guidelines; 

• Reviewing selected data records and analytes, technical files, and documentation such as 

flood plans and model archives; 

• Evaluating NWIS and other databases;

• Reviewing quality-assurance plans and procedures that cover program planning, field 

measurements, sample collection, laboratory analyses, data interpretation, and report 

preparation and publication; 

• Reviewing quality-control procedures for activities involving field measurements, sample 

collection, laboratory analyses, and data interpretation provided by non-USGS personnel, 

such as technical contractors, cooperators, observers, volunteers, and others; 

• Reporting the findings of the review team to the science center at the conclusion of the 

review, including major comments and recommendations resulting from the review. 

The USGS WYWSC was last reviewed by the Office of Water Quality and Office of Groundwater 

during the summer 2011. No major deficiencies were found, and recommendations made were unrelated 

to the efforts involved with the proposed data collection activities at Pavillion, Wyo. 

In addition to the USGS technical offices described in this section, the USGS also maintains a 

Branch of Quality Systems (BQS) (http://bqs.usgs.gov/). The BQS conducts evaluations of USGS field 

and laboratory quality assurance. The National Field Quality Assurance (NFQA) Program was created to 

provide quality-assurance reference samples to field personnel who make field water-quality 

measurements. The program monitors the proficiency of alkalinity, pH, and specific conductance 

measurements determined by water-quality field analysts. The USGS WYWSC field analysts are all 

participants in the NFQA Program. BQS laboratory programs focus on evaluating the USGS National 

Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) and USGS sediment laboratories. 

Most of the chemical analyses for the USGS samples will be done by TAL, under contract to the 

USGS NWQL. Both the NWQL and TAL are accredited by the National Environmental Laboratory 

Accreditation Conference Institute (TNI; http://www.nelac-institute.org/), actively participate in the TNI 

National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP), and participate in the proficiency 

testing program specified by TNI. Most TAL methods comply with the most current version of the 
22 

Department of Defense Quality Systems Manual (http://www.denix.osd.mil/edqw/upload/QSM-V4-2-

Final-102510.pdf) and provide technical and quality-assurance information for USGS studies preparing 

and using the Uniform Federal Policy of Quality Assurance Project Plans (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2005) or other study-specific QAPPs. The TAL Arvada participates in the USGS 

Standard Reference Sample (SRS) Program and is currently in the approval process of the USGS BQS 

Laboratory Evaluation Program. Additional information on both of these programs is available at the 

USGS BQS website available at http://bqs.usgs.gov/srs/. As the primary subcontractor to the NWQL, 

TAL’s Arvada laboratory is also audited on an annual basis as part of the NWQL’s Quality Management 

System, with the most recent audit being performed by members of the NWQL quality staff in 

November 2011. 

Field Quality Control

 Collection of QC samples is critical for evaluating the procedures and protocols used during 

sampling, as well as providing confirmatory information concerning concentration values for target 

analytes. Many different types of QC samples are necessary. Although some of these samples are 

complementary, each type of QC sample provides different information about site conditions, sampling 

equipment and procedures, sample preservation, sample transport, and laboratory procedures and 

analytical methods. 

Several QC samples are described in this section because they are collected in the field. The QC 

samples to be collected during this study include source-solution blanks, ambient blanks, field blanks, 

replicates, matrix spikes, matrix spike duplicates, trip blanks, and temperature blanks. Some of these QC 

sample types and definitions differ from those used by USEPA. Equivalent USEPA terms were 

determined by comparing the QC samples listed in this section with descriptions of QC samples 

published in USEPA SW-846 Chapter 1 and a USEPA table available at 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/dfa/download/qctable.pdf, which is a summary of qualitycontrol samples and the information they provide (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996a; 

2011b). In the following descriptions of QC samples, equivalent USEPA terms are indicated in 

parentheses. The schedule for QC sample collection is presented in table 8. A brief description of each 

type of QC sample follows: 

• Source-solution blanks are collected by pouring certified organic-grade blank water 

directly into the sample vial or bottle in the office, laboratory, hotel, or other clean area 

on the day of sampling, before going to the field. These blanks are used to determine if 

the blank water, sample container, or preservation chemicals are contaminated. One 

source-solution blank will be included with each set of VOC, glycol, gasoline range 

organics (GRO), and dissolved gas samples sent to the laboratory in 40-mL vials. Sample 

bottles used to collect source-solution blanks are provided by the selected laboratory. The 

blank water used in source-solution blanks will be from the same source as will be used 

to prepare ambient and field blanks. 

• Ambient blanks (USEPA also calls these pour or field blanks) are collected by pouring 

certified organic-grade blank water directly into the sample vial or bottle in the field and 

are used to determine if the environment in which samples are collected will contribute to 

sample contamination. Ambient blanks are preserved in the same manner as 

environmental samples. 

• Field blanks (USEPA equipment blanks or rinsate blanks) consist of certified organic or 

inorganic blank water (depending on the type of analysis) that has been processed 

through the sampling system after field cleaning and is subjected to all aspects of sample 
23 

collection, field processing, preservation, transportation, cleaning, and laboratory 

handling as the environmental sample. Field blanks are used to evaluate the adequacy of 

field equipment cleaning, and the cleanliness of sample collection, processing, storage, 

and transport protocols. For this study, field blanks will be collected by passing water 

through the entire sample tubing, from the connection to the well spigot, through the 

sampling chamber, and the capsule filter (for filtered samples), before the sample tubing 

is connected to the well to collect analytical samples. For filtered blanks, a peristaltic 

pump with a small piece of precleaned silicone tubing (this tube also will be used during 

collection of filtered inorganics) will be used to push the sample from the sample tubing 

through the capsule filter. A separate piece of precleaned silicone tubing will be used for 

sampling at each well.

• Replicate samples are two or more samples collected or processed so that the samples are 

considered to be essentially identical in composition. Replicate samples will be used to 

evaluate the reproducibility (precision) of analyte concentration values reported by the 

laboratory. Although two replicates are not adequate to assess precision, they can be used 

to show whether variability of results for the samples is within the range of expected 

precision based on the larger dataset available to the laboratory.

• Matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate samples are environmental samples that will be 

fortified (spiked) in the laboratory with a known mass of the analyte(s) of interest. These 

samples are used to assess the potential bias for organic and inorganic analytes in a 

particular sample matrix. In spiked samples, the bias is estimated by calculating the 

percentage of each added analyte that is measured (recovered) in the sample. Bias can be 

either positive or negative with possible recoveries greater than or less than 100 percent. 

Because these samples are spiked at the laboratory, a separate sample aliquot will be 

collected and identified for this purpose. Custom spike solutions have been determined 

for selected organic and inorganic compounds identified by USEPA (Table 3, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a). These spike solutions will be purchased by 

the USGS and provided to TAL to use as spike solutions, in addition the spike solutions 

TAL regularly uses. 

• Trip blanks are VOC samples of analyte-free water that are prepared in the laboratory. 

Trip blanks will be supplied by each laboratory providing VOC, GRO, and dissolved 

hydrocarbon gas (ethane, ethane, methane, and propane) analyses and will be transported 

with VOC bottles to the field, kept with these sample bottles throughout sampling, and 

then returned to the laboratory for analysis with environmental samples. Trip blanks are 

used to identify contamination introduced during sample transport and storage.

• Temperature blanks (cooler blank) are sample bottles of deionized water included in each 

shipping container so that the laboratory can measure the internal temperature of the 

sample upon receipt. If the internal temperature of the temperature blank is at or below 

the required holding temperature, it is assumed that all other containers in the cooler also 

meet the required holding temperature. 

In addition to the QC samples described previously, the USEPA has requested that USGS submit 

proficiency samples to TAL. These proficiency samples will be used to validate TAL’s ability to 

measure particular compounds of interest. USEPA will provide the USGS WYWSC with proficiency 

samples that will be forwarded as blind samples to TAL. Laboratory contact information is shown in 

table 9. 
24 

Laboratory Quality Control

Laboratory QC samples are used to evaluate the performance of the analytical methods. The QC 

measures used by laboratories while performing analytical tests, including both internal and external QC 

audits and performance evaluations, are described in each laboratory’s quality-assurance manual—

TestAmerica Laboratories (2010), NWQL Quality Management System (Maloney, 2005), and Isotech 

Laboratories, Inc. (2009). For laboratory specific QC information contact the analyzing laboratory 

(table 9). A summary of laboratory QA/QC requirements including acceptance or performance limits 

of analyses performed by TestAmerica Laboratories, the primary laboratory to be used by USGS in this 

study, is included in table 10. 

Data Management and Reporting

USGS laboratories and USGS contract laboratories routinely transmit analytical results 

electronically. All laboratories analyzing samples for this study will be requested to complete data 

packages including electronic results. The results for the analyses from this study will be stored in the 

NWIS database. Additional paper reports will be stored in study files. All data that meet or exceed the 

method detection limit (MDL) will be entered into the NWIS database. The MDL is the minimum 

concentration of a substance that can be measured and reported with 99 percent confidence that the 

analyte concentration is greater than zero (U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, 2011). Although 

compounds are detected with concentrations greater than the MDL, they will not be published in NWIS 

without qualification unless concentrations are greater than the laboratory reporting level (LRL). 

If a water-quality result is measured at a concentration less than the MDL, it will be reported as 

less than the LRL, with a “<” remark code. The value following the “<” symbol will be the LRL 

associated with that analysis. If a measured value is greater than the MDL but less than the LRL, it will 

be reported as the measured value, but qualified with an “E” remark code, indicating an increased level 

of uncertainty. 

Data Review

All data collected in the field and generated by the laboratories will be extensively reviewed 

before release of the data to identify unreliable or invalid field and laboratory measurements. The data 

review process is used to qualify data for interpretive use. As part of the review process for this study, 

chemical data (along with a full data package) received from TAL will be sent to a USGS NWQL data 

validation contractor. Data validation services include the following: 

• Receipt of the laboratory data package from the USGS, and logging/securing the data 

package into a document control system; 

• Assemble analytical documents and data to be validated, and review data records to 

determine method, procedural, and contractual requirements needed and completeness of 

the data package. If needed, acquire necessary supplements or corrections to the data 

packages; 

• Review and validate the reported analytical results collectively for the data package as a 

whole, including laboratory data qualifiers in accordance with the appropriate criteria and 

guidelines; 

• Summarize data and quality control (QC) deficiencies and evaluate the effect on overall 

data quality; and 

• Assign appropriate data validation qualifiers as necessary and prepare a data validation 

report.
25 

The following steps will be followed by USGS staff while reviewing field and laboratory data: 

• All field and laboratory data will be reviewed promptly for possible transcription errors, 

data omissions, and suspect or anomalous values. If reported results are considered 

suspect, analysis reruns may be requested. If other problems are noted, corrective actions 

will be taken by appropriate personnel. 

• Laboratory sample receipt forms will be reviewed to determine if all samples listed on 

the ASR/CoC form were received and if coolers were received with an internal 

temperature of 4 ± 2 degrees Celsius. Many samples require chilling as a preservation 

method and analytical data will be flagged (qualified) if recommended temperatures are 

not met.

• The CoC forms will be reviewed to verify samples were analyzed for requested 

constituents, using required preservatives, and within specified holding times. Results 

that do not meet preservation and holding time requirements will be flagged. 

• Compounds with results for both filtered and unfiltered samples will be compared. 

Filtered (dissolved) sample concentrations should be equal to or less than unfiltered 

(total) sample concentrations. Sample results with filtered concentrations greater than 

unfiltered concentrations will be flagged. 

• Field and laboratory blank results will be reviewed and evaluated relative to the 

concentrations detected in the environmental samples. If an analyte is detected in a field 

blank, the following actions will be taken, depending on concentrations of the analyte 

measured in the field blank (CB) and the associated environmental samples (CS):

Relation of CS to CB

NWIS database 

modification

Use in data 

interpretation

CS > 10 x CB No action No action

3 x CB ≤ CS ≤ 10 x CB Add an “E” remark code No action

CS < 3 x CB and CS ≤ LRL Add a “V” remark code Change CS to “< LRL”

CS < 3 x CB and CS > LRL Add a “V” remark code Change CS to “< CS”

The “E” remark code indicates an increased level of uncertainty, and the “V” code 

indicates that the value could be affected by contamination. 

• Variability will be determined from replicate samples and incorporated into the 

evaluation. 

• Percent recoveries will be determined from spiked samples and used to evaluate the 

concentrations found in the environmental samples relative to the concentrations that 

may actually be in the environment. 

All relevant information provided by the laboratories and used in QA/QC analysis of the data will be 

included in an appendix in the final USGS Data Series Report and available to the public online or will 

be available in USGS files at the WYWSC. 

Health and Safety

Under direction of USGS Central Region Program Memorandum 2000.01, a Job Hazard 

Analysis (JHA) has been prepared for this study and will be provided to field personnel and reviewed 

during a “tailgate” safety session each morning onsite. The JHA includes an assessment of job tasks; 

potential hazards, unsafe acts, or conditions; required personal protective equipment and job 
26 

responsibilities; and telephone contacts. A copy of the JHA for this study has been attached as appendix 

E. Additional health and safety considerations are addressed in the USGS National Field Manual for the 

Collection of Water-Quality Data chapter on Safety in Field Activities (Lane and Fay, 1998). Personnel 

collecting samples from USEPAs wells MW01 and MW02 are required to be Hazwoper certified.

References Cited

ASTM International, 2007, Standard guide for sampling ground-water monitoring wells: West 

Conshohocken, Pa., ASTM D4448–01, 17 p. 

ASTM International, 2010, Standard test method for analysis of natural gas by gas chromatography, 

ASTM D1945, accessed July 18, 2012, at http://www.astm.org/Standards/D1945.htm. 

Bennett Sample Pumps, Inc., 2012, Bennett sample pumps brochure: Amarillo, Tex., Bennett Sample 

Pumps, Inc., accessed August 31, 2012, at http://www.bennettsamplepump.com/Brochureemail.pdf.

Bullister, J.L., 1984, Atmospheric chlorofluoromethanes as tracers of ocean circulation and mixing—

Studies in the Greenland and Norwegian seas: La Jolla, Calif., University of California, San Diego, 

unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 172 p. 

Bullister, J.L., and Weiss, R.F., 1988, Determination of CFC3F and CCl2F2 in seawater and air: Deep

Sea Research, v. 35, p. 839–854. 

Busenberg, E., and Plummer, L.N., 2000, Dating young ground water with sulfur hexafluoride—Natural 

and anthropogenic sources of sulfur hexafluoride: Water Resources Research, v. 36, p. 3,011–3,030. 

Carmeuse Natural Chemicals, 2012, Technical Bulletin--Water well gravel pack and Colorado Silica 

Sand®: Pittsburgh, Pa., Carmeuse Industrial Sands, accessed July 27, 2012, at http://premiersilicasf.

 blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity-container/docs-brochures/colorado_operations.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Clescerl, L.S., Greenberg, A.E., and Eaton, A.D., eds., 1998, Standard methods for the examination of 

water and wastewater (20th ed.): Washington D.C., American Public Health Association, American 

Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation, Standard Methods 3120, p. 3–37 to 

3–43. 

Cunningham, W.L., and Schalk, C.W., comps., 2011a, Groundwater technical procedures of the U.S. 

Geological Survey, GWPD 2—Identifying a minimum set of data elements to establish a groundwater 

site: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 1–A1, 10 p. 

Cunningham, W.L., and Schalk, C.W., comps., 2011b, Groundwater technical procedures of the U.S. 

Geological Survey, GWPD 4—Measuring water levels by use of an electric tape: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques and Methods 1–A1, 6 p. 

Cunningham, W.L., and Schalk, C.W., comps., 2011c, Groundwater technical procedures of the U.S. 

Geological Survey, GWPD 1—Measuring water levels by use of a graduated steel tape: U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 1–A1, 4 p. 

Cunningham, W.L., and Schalk, C.W., comps., 2011d, Groundwater technical procedures of the U.S. 

Geological Survey, GWPD 16—Measuring water levels in wells and piezometers by use of a 

submersible pressure transducer: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 1–A1, 6 p. 

Cunningham, W.L., and Schalk, C.W., comps., 2011e, Groundwater technical procedures of the U.S. 

Geological Survey: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 1–A1, 151p. 

Garber, M.S., and Koopman, F.C., 1968, Methods of measuring water levels in deep wells: U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 8, chap. A1, 23 p. 

Gibs, Jacob, and Imbrigiotta, T.E., 1990, Well-purging criteria for sampling purgeable organic 

compounds: Ground Water, v. 28, no. 1, p. 68-78. 
27 

James Gores and Associates, 2011, Pavillion area water supply, Level I study: Riverton, Wyo., James 

Gores and Associates, P.C. Report, 136 p. 

HACH, 2007, DR 2800 Spectrophotometer procedures manual, June (2d ed.), accessed February 27, 

2012, at http://www.hach.com/dr-2800-portable-spectrophotometer-with-lithium-ion-battery/productdownloads?id=7640439012&callback=qs. 

Horowitz, A.J., Demas, C.R., Fitzgerald, K.K., Miller, T.L., and Rickert, D.A., 1994, U.S. Geological 

Survey protocol for the collection and processing of surface-water samples for the subsequent 

determination of inorganic constituents in filtered water: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

94–539, 57 p. 

Isotech Laboratories Inc., 2009, Quality assurance plan for Isotech Laboratories, Inc.: Champaign, Ill., 

Isotech Laboratories, Inc., 27 p. 

Karlen, I., Olsson, I.U., Kallburg, P., and Kilici, S., 1964, Absolute determination of the activity of two 

14C dating standards: Arkiv Geofysik, v. 4, p. 465–471. 

Koterba, M.T., Wilde, F.D., and Lapham, W.W., 1995, Ground-water data-collection protocols and 

procedures for the National Water-Quality Assessment Program—Collection and documentation of 

water-quality samples and related data: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95–399, 113 p. 

Lane, S.L., and Fay, R.G., 1997, Safety in field activities: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A9, October 1997, accessed January 18, 2012, at 

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/Chap9/chap9.pdf

Law, C.S., Watson, A.J., and Liddicoat, M.I., 1994, Automated vacuum analysis of sulfur hexafluoride 

in seawater—Derivation of the atmospheric trend (1979–1993) and potential as a transient tracer: 

Marine Chemistry, v. 48, p. 57–69. 

Maiss, Manfred, Ilmberger, J., Zenger, A., and Munnich, K.O., 1994, A SF6 tracer study of horizontal 

mixing in Lake Constance: Aquatic Sciences, v. 56, no. 4, p. 307–328. 

Maloney, T.J., ed., 2005, Quality management system, U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005-1263, version 1.3, 9 November 2005, 

chapters and appendixes variously paged. 

National Groundwater Association, 2009, Subcommittee on ground water—A national framework for 

ground-water monitoring in the United States: Advisory Committee on Water Information, 81 p. 

Olsson, I.U., 1970, The use of oxalic acid as a standard, in Olsson, I.U., ed., Radiocarbon variations and 

absolute chronology, Proceedings of the 12th Nobel Symposium: New York, John Wiley and Sons, 

p. 17. 

Pankow, J.F., 1986, Magnitude of artifacts caused by bubbles and headspace in groundwater 

determination of volatile compounds in water: Analytical Chemistry, v. 58, p. 1,822–1,826. 

Pankow, J.F., 1990, Minimization of volatilization gasses during sampling and analysis of volatile 

organic compounds, in Ram, N.M., Christman, R.N., and Cantor, K.P., eds., Significance and 

treatment of volatile organic compounds in water supplies: Chelsea, Mich., Lewis Publishers, Inc., 

p. 73–86. 

Plafcan, M., Eddy-Miller, C.A., Ritz, G.F., and Holland, J.P.R., II, 1995, Water resources of Fremont 

County, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95–4095, 133 p. 

Puls, R.W., and Barcelona, M.J., 1996, Low-flow (minimal drawdown) ground-water sampling 

procedures: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/540/S–95/504, 12 p. 

Rasmussen, R.A., and Khalil, M.A.K., 1983a, Interlaboratory comparison, preparation, and stability of 

dichlorofluoromethane samples and standards: Analytical Chemistry, v. 55, p. 1,834–1,836. 

Rasmussen, R.A., and Khalil, M.A.K., 1983b, Rare trace gases at the South Pole: Antarctic Journal of 

the United States, v. 18, p. 250–252. 
28 

Révész, Kinga, and Coplen, Tyler, B., 2008a, Determination of the δ(

18O/16O) of water—RSIL lab code 

489, chap. C2 of Révész, Kinga, and Coplen, Tyler B., eds., Methods of the Reston Stable Isotope 

Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, 10–C2, 28 p. 

Révész, Kinga, and Coplen, T.B., 2008b, Determination of the δ (2H/1H) of water—RSIL lab code 1574, 

chap. C1 of Révész, Kinga, and Coplen, T.B., eds., Methods of the Reston Stable Isotope Laboratory: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 10–C1, 27 p. 

Révész, K.M., and Doctor, D.H., 2012, Automated determination of the stable carbon isotopic 

composition of total dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) and total nonpurgeable dissolved organic 

carbon (DOC) in aqueous samples: RSIL lab codes 1851 and 1852 chap. 20 of Stable isotope-ratio 

methods, sec. C of Révész, K.M., and Coplen, T.B., eds., Methods of the Reston Stable Isotope 

Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 10. 

Reynolds, G.W., Hoff, J.T., and Gillham, R.W., 1990, Sampling bias caused by materials used to 

monitor halocarbons in groundwater: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 24, p. 135–142. 

Rounds, S.A., 2006, Alkalinity and acid neutralizing capacity (version 3.0): U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A6., sec. 6.6, accessed February 27, 

2012, at http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/Chapter6/section6.6/pdf/6.6.pdf. 

Sandstrom, M.W., 1990, Sampling requirements for organic contaminants: Cincinnati, Ohio, 

Management Challenges of New Monitoring Requirements for Organic Chemicals, American Water 

Works Association Seminar Proceedings, p. 71–85. 

Shapiro, A.M., 2001, Characterizing ground-water chemistry and hydraulic properties of fractured rock 

aquifers using the multifunction Bedrock-Aquifer Transportable Testing Tool (BAT3): U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS–075–01, 4 p. 

Sliwka, I., and Lasa, J., 2000, Optimisation of the head-space method in measuring SF6 concentration in 

water: Chemical Analysis (Warsaw), v. 45, p. 59–72. 

Stuiver, Minze, and Polach, H.A., 1977, Discussion—Reporting of 14C data: Radiocarbon, v. 19, no. 3, 

p. 355–363. 

Stuiver, Minze, 1980,Workshop on 14C data reporting: Radiocarbon, v. 22, no. 3, p. 964 –966. 

Stute, Martin, Clark, J.F., Schlosser, P., Broecker, W.S., and Bonani, G., 1995, A 30,000 yr continental 

paleotemperature record derived from noble gases dissolved in groundwater from the San Juan Basin, 

New Mexico: Quaternary Research, v. 43, p. 209–220. 

TestAmerica Laboratories, 2010, Quality assurance manual: Denver, Colo., TestAmerica Laboratories, 

157 p. 

Thatcher, L.L., Janzer, V.J., and Edwards, K.W., 1977, Methods for the determination of radioactive 

substances in water and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 5, chap. A5, p. 79–81. 

U.S. Census Bureau, 2010, 2010 Census interactive population search, accessed on January 21, 2012, at 

http://2010.census.gov/2010census/popmap/ipmtext.php?fl=56. 

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, 2011, Title 40, v. 23, part 136, Appendix B. Definition and procedure 

for the determination of the method detection limit—Revision 1.11: Washington, D.C., U.S. 

Government, p. 343–345. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980a, Prescribed procedures for measurement of radioactivity 

in drinking water, EPA-600/4-80-032: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, section 7, 

p. 38–48.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980b, Prescribed procedures for measurement of radioactivity 

in drinking water, EPA-600/4-80-032: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
29 

Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, section 8, 

p. 49–57.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes, 

method 425.1: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring 

and Support Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, 2 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993a, Determination of ammonia nitrogen by automated 

colorimetry, rev. 2., method 350.1: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, 15 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993b, Determination of nitrate-nitrite nitrogen by automated 

colorimetry, rev. 2., method 353.2: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, 14 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993c, Determination of phosphorus by semi-automated 

colorimetry, rev. 2., method 353.2: Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, 17 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994, Sample preparation and calculations for dissolved gas 

analysis in water samples using a GC headspace equilibration technique, RSKSOP-175, rev. 0, August 

1994: Ada, Okla., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, R.S. Kerr Environmental Research 

Laboratory, 14 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996a, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; Chapter 1—Quality control, rev. 1: 

Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, p. 30, accessed January 31, 2012, at 

http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/chap1.pdf. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996b, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 8260B, volatile organic compounds 

by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS): Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 92 p., accessed July 19, 2012, at 

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/8260b.pdf. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996c, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 8270C, semivolatile organic 

compounds by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS): Washington D.C., U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 54 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996d, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 6020A, inductively coupled plasmamass spectrometry: Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 30 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996e, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 9056A, determination of inorganic 

anions by ion chromatography: Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 19 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996f, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 6010b, inductively coupled plasmaatomic emission spectrometry: Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 25 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996g, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 7470A, mercury in liquid waste 

(manual cold-vapor technique): Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 6 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996h, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 8015B, nonhalogenated organics 

using GC/FID, rev. 2: Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, [variously paged]. 
30 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996i, Test methods for evaluating solid waste, 

physical/chemical methods, SW-846 (3d ed.), update IV; method 9060, total organic carbon: 

Washington D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 5 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002, Standard operating procedure for chain of custody 

samples: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Measurement and 

Evaluation, New England–Region 1, March 25, 2002, 10 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005, Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force—Uniform 

Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans—Evaluating, assessing, and documenting 

environmental data collection and use programs—Part 1. UFP-QAPP Manual: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency EPA-505-B-04-900A, accessed July 18, 2012, at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedfac/pdf/ufp_qapp_v1_0305.pdf. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2011a, Investigation of ground water contamination near 

Pavillion, Wyoming: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA–600–R–00–000, 104 p. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund Division, 2011b, Summary of quality control 

samples and the information they provide, accessed January 30, 2012, at 

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/dfa/download/qctable.pdf. 

U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1–A9, 

accessed January 30, 2012, at http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Collection of water samples (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, accessed January 10, 2012, at 

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter4/pdf/Chap4_v2.pdf. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012, The Reston Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory—Analytical procedures for 

dissolved gasses N2/Ar, accessed July 13, 2012, at http://water.usgs.gov/lab/dissolvedgas/lab/analytical_procedures/. 

Wanninkhof, Rik, Ledwell, J.R., and Watson, A.J., 1991, Analysis of sulfur hexafluoride in seawater: 

Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 96, no. C5, p. 8733–8740. 

Wilde, F.D., ed., 2004, Cleaning of equipment for water sampling (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A3, , accessed January 12, 2012, at 

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter3/final508Chap3book.pdf. 

Wilde, F.D., ed., 2006, Collection of water samples (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, , accessed January 13, 2012, at 

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter4/pdf/Chap4_v2.pdf. 

Wilde, F.D., and Skrobialowski, S.C., 2011, U.S. Geological Survey protocol for sample collection in 

response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Gulf of Mexico, 2010: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2011–1098, 178 p., accessed January 13, 2012, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1098/. 

(Supersedes USGS Open-File Report 2010–1191.) 

Wilde, F.D., Radke, D.B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R.T., eds., 2004 with updates through 2009, 

Processing of water samples (ver. 2.2): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, April 2004, accessed January 17, 2012, at 

http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/chapter5/pdf/chap5_2-2009.pdf. 

Yeskis, Douglas, and Zavala, Bernard, 2002,Groundwater sampling guidelines for Superfund and RCRA 

project managers—Ground Water Forum Issue Paper: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA/542/S–02/001, 53 p., accessed July 17, 2012, at 

http://www.epa.gov/tio/tsp/download/gw_sampling_guide.pdf. 
31 

Table 1. Key organizational responsibilities of on-site personnel.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; SAP, Sampling and Analysis Plan; QA/QC, quality assurance/quality control; WDEQ, 

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality; WOGC, Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission]

Key personnel Organization Role Responsibility

David Mott USGS Site management Coordinates with other agencies, media, and local 

residents’ concerns.

Peter Wright USGS Project chief Leads sampling crew and ensures SAP is followed.

Dave Mueller USGS Quality 

Assurance/Quality 

Control manager

Tracks QA/QC requirements, assures 

implementation, documents use.

Scott Edmiston USGS Field technician Assist with sampling as directed by project chief.

Pete McMahon USGS Technical advisor Assist with quantification of well hydraulics and 

planning for monitoring well MW02 sampling.

Deborah Harris WDEQ Purge water manager Coordinate contract water collection and disposal

and on-site requirements.

Tom Kropatsch WOGC Safety monitoring Monitors gas sensors in USGS mobile laboratory.

Table 2. List of agencies and organizations participating with the technical team and organizational responsibilities during 

this study. 

[SAP, Sampling and Analysis Plan; ORD, USEPA Office of Research and Development]

Agency or organization Responsibilities

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ)

Cheyenne, Wyoming

Cooperating agency responsible for supporting this study of 

characterization of groundwater quality.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Wyoming Water Science 

Center Cheyenne, Wyoming 

Responsible for compilation of the SAP and collection of 

groundwater-quality samples. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8 and ORD

Denver, Colorado and Ada, Oklahoma 

Well owners and principal investigators in the Pavillion, 

Wyo. groundwater investigation.

Wind River Indian Reservation Tribal concerns.

USGS Office of Water Quality

Reston, Virginia

Leadership of Technical Team, technical assistance.

USGS Water Science Field Team

Denver, Colorado

Study quality control and agency protocol adherence.

USGS National Water Quality Laboratory

Denver, Colorado

Technical advice regarding protocols and methods and 

management of USGS contract with Test America 

Laboratories.

TestAmerica Laboratories

Arvada, Colorado

USGS contract laboratory, providing technical input 

regarding their capabilities.
32 

Table 3. Laboratory analytical methods, approaches, and method references.

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; TAL, TestAmerica Laboratories; SIM, selective ion monitoring; DAI, direct aqueous injection; LC, U.S. 

Geological Survey laboratory code; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert-butyl ether; RSKSOP, Robert S. 

Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory standard operating procedure.; NWQL, National Water Quality Laboratory; RCFC, U.S. Geological Survey Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory; RSIL U.S. Geological Survey Reston Stable Isotopes Laboratory; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference 

standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12; MPTL, U.S. Geological Survey Menlo 

Park Tritium Laboratory; WHOI-NOSAMS, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution-National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility; --, not 

available] 

Method number Analytical 

laboratory Description Analytical approach Reference

USEPA method 

8260B

TAL Volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) including ethanol, 

isobutanol, isopropyl alcohol

Full scan gas chromatography 

with mass spectroscopy

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996b 

USEPA method 

8270C and 

8270/SIM

TAL Semivolatile compounds Full scan gas chromatography 

with mass spectroscopy

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1996c. 

USEPA method 

6020 (for both 

total and dissolved 

metals)

TAL Metals: antimony, arsenic, barium, 

beryllium, cadmium, chromium, 

cobalt, copper, lead, manganese, 

molybdenum, nickel, selenium, 

silver, thallium, uranium, 

vanadium, zinc

Inductively coupled plasma–

mass spectrometry

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996d. 

USEPA method 

9056

TAL Anions: bromide, chloride, fluoride, 

sulfate

Ion chromatography U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996e.

USEPA method 

6010B (for both 

total and dissolved 

metals)

TAL Metals: aluminum, boron, calcium, 

iron, lithium, magnesium, 

potassium, silicon, sodium,

strontium, titanium

Inductively coupled plasma–

atomic emission 

spectrometry

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996f. 

USEPA method 

7470A (for both 

total and dissolved 

mercury)

TAL Mercury Manual cold-vapor technique U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996g. 

Method 2540C TAL Total dissolved solids Evaporation Clescerl and others, 1998.

USEPA method 

350.1

TAL Nitrogen, ammonia Automated colorimetry U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1993a.

USEPA method 

353.2

TAL Nitrate + nitrite Automated colorimetry U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1993b.

USEPA method 

365.1

TAL Phosphorus, dissolved, total Semi-automated colorimetry U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1993c.
33 

Table 3. Laboratory analytical methods, approaches, and method references.—Continued

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; TAL, TestAmerica Laboratories; SIM, selective ion monitoring; DAI, direct aqueous injection; LC, U.S. 

Geological Survey laboratory code; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert-butyl ether; RSKSOP, Robert S. 

Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory standard operating procedure.; NWQL, National Water Quality Laboratory; RCFC, U.S. Geological Survey Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory; RSIL U.S. Geological Survey Reston Stable Isotopes Laboratory; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference 

standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12; MPTL, U.S. Geological Survey Menlo 

Park Tritium Laboratory; WHOI-NOSAMS, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution-National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility; --, not 

available]

Method number Analytical 

laboratory Description Analytical approach Reference

USEPA method 

8015B

TAL Diesel range organics Gas chromatography/flame 

ionization detection

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996h.

USEPA method 

8015B DAI in 

water (8015B)

TAL Diethylene glycol, ethylene glycol, 

triethylene glycol, methanol, nbutanol

Gas chromatography/flame 

ionization detection

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996h. 

USEPA method 

8015B/8021 

modified

TAL Gasoline range organics + BTEX + 

MTBE

Gas chromatography/ 

photoionization-flame 

ionization detection

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996h. 

USEPA method 

425.1

TAL Methylene blue active substances Ultraviolet-visible 

spectroscopy

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1983.

RSKSOP-175 TAL Ethane, ethylene, methane, propane Gas chromatography

headspace equilibration

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1994.

USEPA method 

9060

TAL Total carbon, total inorganic carbon, 

total organic carbon, dissolved 

organic carbon

Carbonaceous analyzer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1996i. 

LC 1369 NWQL Radon-222 Scintillation counting ASTM D 5072-98 (ASTM 

International, 2010)

LC 794, USEPA

903.1

Eberline 

Services

Radium-226 Radon emanation U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1980a.

LC 1364, USEPA

904.0 - modified

Eberline 

Services

Radium-228 Radiochemical separation and 

beta counting

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1980b.

-- RCFC Chlorofluorocarbons Purge and trap gas 

chromatography procedure 

with an electron capture 

detector

Bullister, 1984; Bullister and Weiss, 

1988; Pankow, 1986, 1990; 

Rasmussen and Khalil, 1983a, 1983b; 

Reynolds and others, 1990.

-- RCFC Dissolved gasses: nitrogen (N2), 

argon (Ar), methane (CH4), 

carbon dioxide (CO2), oxygen

(O2)

Gas chromatography/flame 

ionization detection

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012.

-- RCFC Sulfur hexaflouride (SF6) Purge and trap gas 

chromatography procedure 

with an electron capture 

detector

Busenberg and Plummer, 2000; Law 

and others, 1994; Maiss and others, 

1994; Sliwka and Lasa, 2000; 

Wanninkhof and others, 1991.
34 

Table 3. Laboratory analytical methods, approaches, and method references.—Continued

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; TAL, TestAmerica Laboratories; SIM, selective ion monitoring; DAI, direct aqueous injection; LC, U.S. 

Geological Survey laboratory code; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert-butyl ether; RSKSOP, Robert S. 

Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory standard operating procedure.; NWQL, National Water Quality Laboratory; RCFC, U.S. Geological Survey Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory; RSIL U.S. Geological Survey Reston Stable Isotopes Laboratory; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference 

standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12; MPTL, U.S. Geological Survey Menlo 

Park Tritium Laboratory; WHOI-NOSAMS, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution-National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility; --, not 

available]

Method number Analytical 

laboratory Description Analytical approach Reference

-- RCFC/LamontDohertyDissolved gasses: helium (He), neon

(Ne), argon (Ar), krypton (Kr), 

xenon (Xe)

Gas mass spectrometer with 

electrostatical analyzer

Stute and others, 1995.

LC 1142 RSIL Isotope ratios of oxygen (δ18O) and 

hydrogen (δ2H) in water

Double-focusing mass 

spectrometer (DI-IRMS)

Révész and Coplen, 2008a, 2008b.

-- RSIL Isotope ratio of carbon (δ13C) of 

dissolved inorganic carbon in 

water

Total inorganic carbon-total 

organic carbon method

Révész and Doctor, 2012

-- Isotech Complete compositional analysis Shimadzu 2010 gas 

chromatograph

Based on ASTM D1945 (ASTM 

International, 2010)

-- Isotech Isotope ratios of carbon (δ13C) and

hydrogen (δ2H) in methane

Offline prep/dual inlet isotope 

ratio mass spectrometry

Industry approved method with no 

reference. Please contact Isotech for 

more detailed information.

LC 1565 MPTL Tritium (

3

H) Electrolytic enrichment—

liquid scintillation

Thatcher and others, 1977.

LC 3212 WHOINOSAMSCarbon-14 content of dissolved 

inorganic carbon

Accelerator mass spectrometer 

with gas ionization counter

Karlen and others, 1964; Olsson, 1970; 

Stuiver and Polach, 1977; Stuiver, 

1980.
35 

Table 4. List of age dating analytes the U.S. Geological Survey added to sampling that the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency has not collected and an explanation of their use. 

[δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference standard; δ2H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a 

reference standard; δ13C, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12]

Analytical laboratory Analytes Analytical approach Explanation of use

Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon 

Laboratory

Chlorofluorocarbons Purge and trap gas 

chromatography 

procedure with an 

electron capture 

detector

Chlorofluorocarbons are used in hydrologic studies to 

trace the flow of young water and to determine the time 

elapsed since recharge (infiltration) to groundwater.

Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon 

Laboratory

Dissolved gasses: 

nitrogen (N2), argon 

(Ar), methane (CH4), 

carbon dioxide 

(CO2), oxygen (O2) 

Gas 

chromatography/flame 

ionization detection

Provides concentrations of these dissolved gases in 

groundwater.

Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon 

Laboratory

Sulfur hexaflouride 

(SF6) 

Purge and trap gas 

chromatography 

procedure with an 

electron capture 

detector

Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is used in hydrologic studies to 

trace the flow of young water and to determine the time 

elapsed since recharge (infiltration) to groundwater. 

Lamont-Doherty Earth 

Observatory

Dissolved noble 

gasses: helium (He), 

neon (Ne), argon 

(Ar), krypton (Kr), 

xenon (Xe)

mass spectroscopy Helium together with its isotopes could give particular 

information of detailed hydrogeological conditions. The 

results of noble gasses (He, Ne, Ar, Kr, Xe) support 

interpretations of the relative residence times, 

palaeohydrogeology, and the concept of mixing. 

Characterization of mean groundwater age and recharge 

temperature through the use of noble gas techniques 

provides information that is relevant to answering 

questions that are not accessible through traditional 

hydrogeologic approaches.

Reston Stable Isotope 

Laboratory

Isotope ratios of 

oxygen (δ18O) and 

hydrogen (δ2

H) in 

water, and carbon 

(δ13C) in dissolved 

inorganic carbon 

Double-focusing mass 

spectrometer (DIIRMS)

The oxygen and hydrogen isotopes are used to evaluate 

sources and timing of groundwater recharge . The 

carbon isotopes are used to evaluate sources of 

dissolved inorganic carbon and chemical reactions that 

affect it.
36 

Table 4. List of age dating analytes the U.S. Geological Survey added to sampling that the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency has not collected and an explanation of their use.—Continued

[δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen-16 relative to a reference standard; δ2H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a 

reference standard; δ13C, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12]

Analytical laboratory Analytes Analytical approach Explanation of use

Menlo Park Tritium 

Laboratory

Woods Hole 

Oceanographic 

Institution-National 

Ocean Sciences 

Accelerator Mass 

Spectrometry Facility

Tritium (

3

H)

(

14 Carbon-14 C) in 

dissolved 

inorganic carbon

Electrolytic enrichment—

liquid scintillation

Accelerator mass 

spectrometer with gas 

ionization counter

Tritium is an unstable (radioactive) isotope of hydrogen 

(

3

H). Tritium is principally of interest to the hydrologist 

as a water-dating tool and as a tracer, introduced either 

naturally or artificially, for investigating groundwater 

hydrodynamics in areas of relatively rapid flow. Tritium 

exists fairly uniformly in the environment as a result of 

natural production by cosmic radiation and residual 

fallout from nuclear weapons tests of the mid-20th 

century. Naturally occurring tritium is most abundant in 

precipitation and lowest in aged water because of its 

physical decay by beta emission to helium. The half-life 

of tritium is 12.32 years.

Carbon-14 is a radioactive isotope with a half-life of 5,730

years, is useful for age dating as well as for tracing 

hydrologic processes

 
37 

Table 5. Water-quality property stabilization criteria and calibration guidelines.

[±, plus or minus value shown; °C, degrees Celsius; ≤, less than or equal to value shown; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25°C; >, greater than value shown; unit, standard pH unit; mg/L, milligrams 

per liter; NTRU, nephelometric turbidity ratio units]

Water-quality 

property

Stabilization criteria1

(variability should be 

within value shown) 

Calibration guidelines

Temperature:

Thermistor 

Liquid-in-glass 

±0.2°C 

±0.5°C

Calibrate annually, check calibration 

quarterly.

Conductivity (SC):

for ≤100 μS/cm 

for >100 μS/cm

 ±5 percent

 ±3 percent

Calibrate each morning and at end of 

each day. Check calibration at each 

additional site; recalibrate if not 

within 3 to 5 percent of standard 

value.

pH:

(displays to 0.01) ±0.1 unit

 Allow ±0.3 pH units if 

drifting persists

Calibrate each morning and at end of 

each day. Check calibration at each 

additional site; recalibrate if not 

within 0.05 pH units of standard.

Dissolved oxygen:

Amperometric or

optical/luminescentmethod sensors

NA2

Calibrate each morning and at end of 

each day. If electrode uses a Teflon® 

membrane, inspect electrode for 

bubbles under membrane at each 

sampling site; replace if necessary.

Turbidity:

≤ 100 NTRU 

> 100 NTRU

NA2

Calibrate with a primary standard on a 

quarterly basis. Check calibration 

against secondary standards (Gelex) 

each morning and at end of each day; 

re-calibrate if not within 5 percent. 

Redox potential

NA2

Check against Zobell solution each 

morning and at end of each day. 

Recalibrate if not within ±5 

millivolts (mv).

1

Allowable variability between five or more sequential field measurements. For dissolved oxygen, ±0.2 to ± 0.3 mg/L; turbidity,

±0.5 NTRU or 5 percent of the measured value, whichever is greater when < 100 NTRU; 

redox potential, this property is not a stabilization criteria, however it can often be useful for groundwater studies. 

2

These field-measured properties will not be used in this study to evaluate inflow of fresh groundwater.

Table 6. Well-yield data for well MW02.

First water-level measurement Second water-level measurement

Well yield Date (gallons per hour) 

Depth to water 

(feet below land 

surface)

Date

Depth to water 

(feet below land 

surface)

5/04/2012 955.03 5/10/2012 817.29 0.65

5/10/2012 817.29 5/21/2012 641.34 0.44
38 

Table 7. Analytical laboratories, laboratory schedules and codes, and applicable field collection and processing information.

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; mL, milliliter; <, less than; HCL, hydrochloric acid; mod, modified; LC, U.S. Geological Survey laboratory code; SIM, 

selective ion monitoring; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert- butyl ether; HNO3, 

nitric acid; H2SO4, sulfuric acid; RSKSOP, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, Okla., standard operating procedure; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen16 relative to a reference standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C of DIC, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 of dissolved inorganic 

carbon; mm, millimeter; --, not applicable] 

Laboratory 

method Method description (Number of bottles) Bottle 

type/s Processing Preservation Hold Time

TestAmerica 

USEPA 8260B Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

including ethanol, isobutanol, 

isopropyl alcohol

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered Chill 7 days1

USEPA 8260B Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

including ethanol, isobutanol, 

isopropyl alcohol

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered pH to <2 with HCL, chill 14 days1

USEPA 8270C Semivolatile compounds (2) 1,000-mL baked amber 

glass

Unfiltered Chill 7 days2

USEPA 8270C PAHs, SIM (2) 1,000-mL baked amber 

glass

Unfiltered Chill 7 days2

USEPA 9056 Anions (1) 1,000-mL polyethylene 

bottle

Filtered, 0.45 micron Chill 48 hours to 28 

days3

USEPA 6020, 

6010B

Metals, filtered (1) 500-mL polyethylene bottle Filtered, 0.45 micron pH to <2 with HNO3 6 months1

USEPA 6020, 

6010B

Metals, total (1) 500-mL polyethylene bottle Unfiltered pH to <2 with HNO3, chill 6 months1

USEPA 7470A Mercury, filtered (1) 250-mL glass Filtered, 0.45 micron pH to <2 with HNO3 28 days1

USEPA 7470A Mercury, total (1) 250-mL glass Unfiltered pH to <2 with HNO3 28 days1

Method 2540C Total dissolved solids (1) 250-mL polyethylene bottle Filtered, 0.45 micron Chill 7 days1

USEPA 365.1 Phosphorus, dissolved (1) 250-mL amber glass Filtered, 0.45 micron pH to <2 with H2SO4, 

chill

28 days

1

USEPA 365.1 Phosphorus, total (1) 250-mL amber glass Unfiltered pH to <2 with H2SO4, 

chill

28 days1

USEPA 350.1, 

353.2

Nutrients: nitrate (NO3) + nitrite 

(NO2), ammonia (NH4)

(1) 250-mL polyethylene bottle Filtered, 0.45 micron pH to <2 with H2SO4, 

chill

28 days1
39 

Table 7. Analytical laboratories, laboratory schedules and codes, and applicable field collection and processing information.—Continued

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; mL, milliliter; <, less than; HCL, hydrochloric acid; mod, modified; LC, U.S. Geological Survey laboratory code; SIM, 

selective ion monitoring; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert- butyl ether; HNO3, 

nitric acid; H2SO4, sulfuric acid; RSKSOP, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, Okla., standard operating procedure; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen16 relative to a reference standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C of DIC, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 of dissolved inorganic 

carbon; mm, millimeter; --, not applicable]

Laboratory 

method Method description (Number of bottles) Bottle 

type/s Processing Preservation Hold Time

USEPA 9060 Total inorganic carbon (1) 500-mL amber glass Unfiltered Chill 14 days1

Total organic carbon (1) 500-mL amber glass Unfiltered pH to <2 with H2SO4, 

chill

28 days1

Dissolved inorganic carbon (1) 500-mL amber glass Filtered Chill 14 days1

Dissolved organic carbon (1) 500-mL amber glass Filtered pH to <2 with H2SO4, 

chill

28 days1

USEPA

8015B/8021 

modified

Gasoline range organics + BTEX +

MTBE

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered Chill 7 days1

USEPA

8015B/8021 

modified

Gasoline range organics + BTEX +

MTBE

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered pH to <2 with HCL, chill 14 days1

USEPA 8015B Diethylene glycol, ethylene glycol, 

and triethylene glycol, methanol, nbutanol,

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered Chill 14 days1

USEPA 8015B Diesel range organics (DRO) (2) 1-liter baked amber glass Unfiltered Chill 7 days2

RSKSOP-175 Dissolved gasses (ethane, ethylene, 

methane) 

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered Chill 7 days1

RSKSOP-175 Dissolved gasses (ethane, ethylene, 

methane) 

(3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered pH to <2 with HCL, chill 14 days1

Propane (3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered Chill 7 days1

Propane (3) 40-mL clear glass vials Unfiltered pH to <2 with HCL, chill 14 days1

USEPA 425.1 Methylene blue active substances (1) 500-mL polyethylene bottle Unfiltered Chill 48 hours4

Reston Chlorofluorocarbon Laboratory

-- Sulfur hexaflouride (2) 1-liter amber safety glass Unfiltered Keep in cooler, out of sun 180 days

-- Chlorofluorocarbons (2) 125-mL clear glass with 

caps5 

Unfiltered Ice 180 days

-- Dissolved gasses: nitrogen (N2), 

argon (Ar), methane (CH4), carbon 

dioxide (CO2), oxygen (O2)

(2) 150-mL glass serum bottle Unfiltered Ice 180 days
40 

Table 7. Analytical laboratories, laboratory schedules and codes, and applicable field collection and processing information.—Continued

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; mL, milliliter; <, less than; HCL, hydrochloric acid; mod, modified; LC, U.S. Geological Survey laboratory code; SIM, 

selective ion monitoring; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert- butyl ether; HNO3, 

nitric acid; H2SO4, sulfuric acid; RSKSOP, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, Okla., standard operating procedure; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen16 relative to a reference standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C of DIC, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 of dissolved inorganic 

carbon; mm, millimeter; --, not applicable]

Laboratory 

method Method description (Number of bottles) Bottle 

type/s Processing Preservation Hold Time

National Water Quality Laboratory

LC 1369 Radon-222 (1) Radon sampling bottle Unfiltered Scintillation cocktail 

solution

48 hours4

Eberline Services

LC 794 Radium-226 (2) 1-liter acid rinsed 

polyethylene bottles

Filtered, 0.45 micron pH to <2 with HNO3 Requested

LC 1364 Radium-228 (2) 1-liter acid rinsed 

polyethylene bottles

Filtered, 0.45 micron pH to <2 with HNO3 Requested

Reston Stable Isotope Laboratory

LC 1142 Isotopes ratios of oxygen (δ18O) and 

hydrogen (δ2H) in water

(2) 60-mL glass with polyseal 

cone cap

Filtered, 0.45 micron Ambient temperature Indefinite

-- Isotope ratio of carbon (δ13C) of 

dissolved inorganic carbon in water

(3) 40-mL glass vials Filtered, 25-mm 

polysulfone GD/X filter

Blue copper sulfate 90 days

Menlo Park Tritium Laboratory

LC 1565 Tritium (1) 1-liter polyethylene bottle 

with polyseal cap

Unfiltered None 365 days

Lamont/Doherty Earth Observatory

-- Dissolved noble gasses: helium (He), 

neon (Ne), argon (Ar), krypton 

(Kr), xenon (Xe)

(2) copper tubes Unfiltered None 10 years

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute - National Ocean Sciences Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Facility

LC 3212 Carbon-14 (

14C) in dissolved 

inorganic carbon

(1) 1-liter plastic coated glass 

with polyseal cone cap

0.45-micron capsule filter, 

no headspace

Chill, pH and alkalinity 

required, perform 

required test of sulfide6

Indefinite

LC 3223 Carbon-14 (

14C) preparation5 -- -- -- --

Isotech Laboratories, Inc.

-- Complete compositional gas analysis (1) 1,000-mL glass septum 

bottle

Unfiltered Bactericide capsule 3 months1

-- Isotope ratios of carbon (δ 13C) and

hydrogen (δ2H) in methane

Can be taken from above bottle Unfiltered Bactericide capsule 3 months1
41 

Table 7. Analytical laboratories, laboratory schedules and codes, and applicable field collection and processing information.—Continued

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; mL, milliliter; <, less than; HCL, hydrochloric acid; mod, modified; LC, U.S. Geological Survey laboratory code; SIM, 

selective ion monitoring; PAH, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene; MTBE, methyl tert- butyl ether; HNO3, 

nitric acid; H2SO4, sulfuric acid; RSKSOP, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, Okla., standard operating procedure; δ18O, ratio of oxygen-18 to oxygen16 relative to a reference standard; δ2

H, ratio of hydrogen-2 to hydrogen-1 relative to a reference standard; δ13C of DIC, ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 of dissolved inorganic 

carbon; mm, millimeter; --, not applicable]

Laboratory 

method Method description (Number of bottles) Bottle type/s Processing Preservation Hold Time

Field Analyses

-- Specific conductance None Unfiltered None Field

-- pH None Unfiltered None Field

-- Ferrous iron None Unfiltered None Field

-- Sulfide None Unfiltered None Field

-- Dissolved oxygen, low range None Unfiltered None Field

-- Alkalinity, hydroxide, bicarbonate, 

carbonate

(1) 250-mL polyethylene Filtered None Field

-- Acid neutralizing capacity, 

hydroxide, bicarbonate, carbonate

(1) 250-mL polyethylene Unfiltered None Field

1 Number of days from sample collection to start of sample analysis.

2 These analyses have hold times of 7 days to extraction and 40 days from extraction to analysis.

3 Nitrite, nitrate, and phosphorus have a 48-hour holding time from sample collection to start of sample analysis; bromide, chloride, fluoride, and sulfate have 28 days from sample collection to start of sample analysis.

4

 Sample hold time is 48 hours from sample collection to completion of analysis.

5 Bottles and caps are sold by Scientific Specialties, Hanover, Md.; item numbers B73504 and A69522, respectively.

6 Samples sent to the Woods Holes Institute for carbon-14 analysis that contain hydrogen sulfide will require additional preparation. If hydrogen sulfide (positive sulfide test) is present, a statement indicating the 

presence of hydrogen sulfide and an additional laboratory code (LC 3223) must be entered on Analytical Services Request/chain of custody form(s).
42 

Table 8. Schedule for collection of quality-control samples (per sample set). 

[USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; SIM, selective ion monitoring; DAI, direct aqueous injection; BTEX, the compounds benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and 

xylene; MTBE, methyl tert- butyl ether; --, not applicable; RSKSOP, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada, Okla., standard operating procedure.] 

Laboratory analytical method Method description

Number 

of 

source- solution 

blanks

Number 

of 

ambient 

blanks

Number 

of field 

blanks

Number 

of 

replicates

Number 

of 

matrix 

spikes

Number of 

matrix 

spike duplicates

Number 

of trip 

blanks

Tempe

rature

blanks

USEPA method 

8260B

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 

including ethanol, isobutanol, isopropyl 

alcohol

1 per 

cooler

1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

cooler 1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 

8270C and 

8270/SIM

Semivolatile compounds -- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 6020 Metals: aluminum, antimony, arsenic, 

barium, beryllium, boron, cadmium,

chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, lithium, 

manganese, molybdenum, nickel, 

selenium, silver, strontium, thallium, 

uranium, vanadium, zinc

-- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well --

1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 9056 Anions: bromide, chloride, fluoride, sulfate -- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 

6010B

Metals: calcium, iron, magnesium, mercury, 

potassium, silicon, sodium

-- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 

350.1

Nitrogen, ammonia -- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 

353.2

Nitrate + nitrite -- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 

365.1

Phosphorus, dissolved -- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

8015B DAI in water 

(8015B)

Diesel range organics, glycols, methanol, nbutanol11 per 

cooler

1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well -- 1 per 

cooler

8015B/8021 modified Gasoline range organics + BTEX + MTBE 1 per 

cooler

1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

cooler2

1 per 

cooler

RSKSOP-175 Ethane, ethylene, methane, propane 1 per 

cooler

1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

well

1 per well 1 per 

cooler2

1 per 

cooler

USEPA method 

425.1

Methylene blue active substances -- 1 per 

well

1 per 

well

1 per well -- -- -- 1 per 

cooler

1 Only analyses requiring 40-mL vials for collection will include source-solution and ambient blanks.

2 One trip blank per cooler containing VOCs samples.
43 

Table 9. Proposed analytical laboratories and contact information.

Laboratory Abbreviation Address

Isotech Laboratories Inc. Isotech Isotech Laboratories, Inc.

1308 Parkland Court 

Champaign, IL 61821

Lamont-Doherty Earth 

Observatory

LamontDohertyLamont-Doherty Earth Observatory Comer 

Building

61 Route 9W

Palisades, NY 10964

TestAmerica 

Laboratories

TAL TestAmerica Denver

4955 Yarrow Street 

Arvada, CO 80002

U.S. Geological Survey

Reston 

Chlorofluorocarbon

Laboratory

RCFC U.S. Geological Survey

CFC Laboratory 

12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 20192

U.S. Geological Survey

Reston Stable Isotope 

Laboratory

RSIL U.S. Geological Survey

Isotope Laboratory

431 National Center

Sunrise Valley Dr. 

Reston, VA 20192

U.S. Geological Survey

Menlo Park Tritium 

Laboratory

MPTL Tritium Laboratory

345 Middlefield Dr. 

MS 434 

Menlo Park, CA 94025

Woods Hole 

Oceanographic 

Institute, National 

Ocean Sciences 

Accelerator Mass 

Spectrometry Facility

WHOINOSAMSNational Ocean Sciences AMS Facility

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

McLean Laboratory, Mail Stop #8

266 Woods Hole Road

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1539
44 

Table 10. Summary of laboratory quality-assurance/quality-control requirements.

[< MDL, less than the method detection limit; %, percent; TOC, total organic carbon; DOC, dissolved organic carbon; TIC, 

total inorganic carbon; DIC, dissolved inorganic carbon] 

Compounds/analytes

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Blanks1 (frequency) Laboratory control 

samples2 (frequency)

Matrix spike 

samples3

(frequency)

Nitrate plus nitrite as 

nitrogen

(NO3+NO2-n)

353.2 < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery (one 

per sample set )

Dissolved phosphorus (P) 365.1 < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery (one 

per sample set)

Metals by inductively 

coupled plasma / mass 

spectrometry

6020 < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery with 

all metals between 

50–150% recovery 

(one per sample set)

Anions (bromide, 

chloride, fluoride, 

sulfate) 

9056 < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery (one 

per sample set)

Metals by inductively 

coupled plasma

6010B < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery with 

all metals between 

50–150% recovery 

(one per sample set)

Diesel range organics 8015B < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

60–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

60–120% of known 

value (one per sample 

set)

Glycols 8015B < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery (one 

per sample set)

Gasoline range organics 8015B < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

48–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

48–120% recovery (one 

per sample set)

Total petroleum 

hydrocarbons as 

gasoline

8015B < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

60–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

60–120% of known 

value (one per sample 

set)

Volatile and semi-volatile 

organic compounds

8260B < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

40–130% of known value 

(one per sample set)

40–130% recovery (one 

per sample set)

Carbons (TOC, DOC, 

TIC, DIC)

9060 < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery (one 

per sample set)

Methylene blue active 

substances

425.1 < MDL (before and 

after each sample 

group)

80–120% of known value 

(one per sample set)

80–120% recovery (one 

per sample set)

1 <MDL for 90% of all analytes. 

2 Analyte specific laboratory control sample information is included in the quality-control section of each TestAmerica Laboratories data packet. Data 

packets include analytical and quality-control data. It is expected that at least 90% of the analytes in this group will meet these criteria.

3 Analyte specific matrix spike information is included in the quality-control section of each TestAmerica Laboratories data packet. Data packets include 

analytical and quality-control data. It is expected that a greater than normal number of analytes will be outside this criteria based on the expected matrix of 

the sample. 
45 

Appendix A. Table of chemical analytes, laboratory methods, and laboratory quantitation limits

[Shaded rows indicate analytes for which the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory and TestAmerica Laboratories, the USGS contract laboratory, 

currently (2012) do not have an analytical method. CASRN, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number; MDL, method detection limit; RL, reporting level; RSK-SOP, 

Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Ada Okla., standard operating procedure.; USEPA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; mg/L, milligrams per liter; 

Rev., revision; μg/L, micrograms per liter; --, none or unavailable; ng/L, nanogram per liter; ORGM, USEPA Region 8 Laboratory, Golden, Colo., standard operating 

procedure; LC/MS/MS, liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry] 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Dissolved bromide (Br-) 7726–95–6–BR 0.113 0.2 mg/L 9056 RSKSOP-276, Rev. 3 (USEPA

Method 6500)

--

Dissolved chloride (Cl-) 16887–00–6 0.254 3 mg/L 9056 RSKSOP-276, Rev. 3 (USEPA

Method 6500)

--

Dissolved fluoride (F-) 7782–41–4 0.06 0.5 mg/L 9056 RSKSOP-276, Rev. 3 (USEPA

Method 6500)

--

Dissolved sulfate (SO4

-2

) 14808–79–8 0.232 5 mg/L 9056 RSKSOP-276, Rev. 3 (USEPA

Method 6500)

--

Dissolved calcium (Ca) 7440–70–2 34.5 200 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved magnesium 

(Mg)

7439–95–4 10.7 200 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved potassium (K) 7440–09–7 237 3,000 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved sodium (Na) 7440–23–5 91.6 1,000 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved aluminum 

(Al)

7429–90–5 18 100 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved antimony (Sb) 7440–36–0 0.4 2 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved arsenic (As) 7440–38–2 0.33 5 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved barium (Ba) 7440–39–3 0.29 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved beryllium (Be) 7440–41–7 0.08 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved boron (B) 7440–42–8 4.37 100 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--
46 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Dissolved cadmium (Cd) 7440–43–9 0.1 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved chromium 

(Cr)

7440–47–3 0.5 2 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved cobalt (Co) 7440–48–4 0.054 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved copper (Cu) 7440–50–8 0.56 2 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved iron (Fe) 7439–89–6 22 100 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved lead (Pb) 7439–92–1 0.18 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved manganese 

(Mn)

7439–96–5 0.31 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved mercury (Hg) 7439–97–6 0.027 0.2 μg/L 7470A RSKSOP-257 Rev. 2 (USEPA

Method 6020) or RSKSOP-332 

Rev. 0

--

Dissolved molybdenum 

(Mo)

7439–98–7 0.14 2 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved nickel (Ni) 7440–02–0 0.3 2 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved phosphorus 

(P)

7723–14–0 0.005 0.05 mg/L 365.1 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved selenium (Se) 7782–49–2 0.7 5 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved silicon (Si) 7440–21–3 34.7 500 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved silver (Ag) 7440–22–4 0.033 5 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved strontium (Sr) 7440–24–6 0.3 10 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved thallium (Tl) 7440–28–0 0.05 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved titanium (Ti)1 7440–32–6 0.595 10 μg/L 6010B RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved uranium (U) 7440–61–1 0.05 1 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--
47 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Dissolved vanadium (V) 7440–62–2 0.5 5 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Dissolved zinc (Zn) 7440–66–6 2 10 μg/L 6020 RSKSOP-213 Rev. 4 (USEPA

Method 200.7)

--

Total arsenic -- 0.33 5 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total boron -- 4.37 100 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total iron -- 22 100 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total silica -- 74.3 500 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total calcium -- 34.5 200 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total magnesium -- 10.7 200 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total sodium -- 91.6 1,000 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total aluminum -- 18 100 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total antimony -- 0.4 2 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total phosphorus -- 13.5 3,000 mg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total cobalt -- 0.054 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total silver -- 0.033 5 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total uranium -- 0.05 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total mercury -- 0.27 0.2 μg/L 7470A Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total cadmium -- 0.1 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total beryllium -- 0.08 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total molybdenum -- 0.14 2 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming
48 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Total lead -- 0.18 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total nickel -- 0.3 2 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total strontium -- 0.3 10 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total manganese -- 0.31 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total chromium -- 0.5 2 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total copper -- 0.56 2 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total barium -- 0.29 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total selenium -- 0.7 5 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total vanadium -- 0.5 5 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total zinc -- 2 10 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total thallium -- 0.05 1 μg/L 6020 Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Total lithium (schedule 

extra)

-- 2.61 10 μg/L 6010B Not analyzed by USEPA Requested by State 

of Wyoming

Nitrogen, ammonia 6484–52–2 0.022 0.1 mg/L 350.1 RSKSOP-214 Rev. 5 (USEPA

Method 350.1 and 353.2)

--

Nitrate+Nitrite as 

nitrogen (NO3+NO2-n)

00630 0.019 0.1 mg/L 353.2 RSKSOP-214 Rev. 5 (USEPA

Method 350.1 and 353.2)

--

(R)-(+)-Limonene -- -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

1,1,1,2-

Tetrachloroethane

630–20–6 0.21 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 71–55–6 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,1,2,2-

Tetrachloroethane

79–34–5 0.21 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 79–00–5 0.27 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--
49 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

1,1-Dichloroethane 75–34–3 0.22 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,1-Dichloroethene 75–35–4 0.23 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,1-Dichloropropene 563–58–6 0.19 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 87–61–6 0.21 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 96–18–4 0.33 2.5 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 526–73–8 0.27 2 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene -- 0.21 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 95–63–6 0.15 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2-Dibromo-3-

chloropropane

96–12–8 0.47 5 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2-Dibromoethane 

(EDB)

106–93–4 0.18 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 95–50–1 0.15 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2-Dichloroethane 107–06–2 0.13 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2-Dichloropropane 78–87–5 0.22 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,2-Dinitrobenzene -- Used as surrogate 

8330

 -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 108–67–8 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,3-Dichlorobenzene 541–73–1 0.13 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,3-Dichloropropane 142–28–9 0.22 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,3-Dimethyl

adamantine

-- -- -- -- -- ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,3-Dinitrobenzene 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--
50 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 106–47–7 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

1,4-Dinitrobenzene -- 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

1-Methylnaphthalene -- 5.66 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,2-Dichloropropane 594–20–7 0.18 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

2,3,4,6-

Tetrachlorophenol

 -- 2 50 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,3,5,6-

Tetrachlorophenol

 -- -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol -- 0.45 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol -- 0.29 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,4-Dichlorophenol -- 0.64 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,4-Dimethylphenol -- 0.58 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,4-Dinitrophenol -- 10 30 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,4-Dinitrotoluene -- 1.66 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2,5-Dimethylfuran 625–86–5 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

2,6-Dinitrotoluene -- 1.89 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Butanone 78–93–3 2 6 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

2-Butoxyethanol 111–76–2 0.5 2 μg/L TIC/8260B ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Butoxyethanol 

phosphate

78–51–3 -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Chloronaphthalene -- 0.26 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Chlorophenol -- 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--
51 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

2-Chlorotoluene 95–49–8 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

2-Hexanone 591–78–6 1.7 5 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

2-Methylnaphthalene 91–57–6 5.15 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Methylphenol 65–48–7 0.98 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Nitroaniline 88–74–4 1.73 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

2-Nitrophenol 88–75–5 0.39 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

3 & 4-Methylphenol 108–39–4, 106–

44–5

0.25 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

3,3 ́-Dichlorobenzidine -- 2 50 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

3-Nitroaniline 99–09–2 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4,6-Dinitro-2-

methylphenol

 -- 4 50 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4-Bromophenyl phenyl 

ether

101–55–3 0.43 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4-Chloro-3-

methylphenol

59–50–7 2.41 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4-Chloroaniline -- 2.14 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4-Chlorophenyl phenyl 

ether

7005–72–3 1.66 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4-Chlorotoluene 106–43–4 0.21 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

4-Methyl-2-pentanone 108–10–1 0.98 5 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

4-Nitroaniline -- 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

4-Nitrophenol 100–02–7 1.23 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Acenaphthene 83–32–9 10.8 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--
52 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Acenaphthylene 208–96–8 9.96 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Acetone 67–64–1 1.9 10 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Acrylonitrile 107–13–1 1.4 20 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Adamantane -- -- -- -- -- ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Allyl chloride 107–05–1 0.17 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Aniline -- 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Anthracene 120–12–7 14.2 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Azobenzene -- 0.23 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzene 71–43–2 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Benzo(a)anthracene 56–55–3 3.21 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzo(a)pyrene 50–32–8 5.14 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 205–99–2 3.44 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 191–24–2 3.55 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 207–08–9 5.05 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzoic acid -- 10 25 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Benzyl alcohol -- 0.23 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Bis(2-

chloroethoxy)methane

111–91–1 0.97 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 111–44–4 0.41 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Bis(2-

chloroisopropyl)ether

108–60–1 0.28 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--
53 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Bis-(2-ethylhexyl) 

adipate

 -- -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Bis(2-

ethylhexyl)phthalate

117–81–7 0.56 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Bromobenzene 108–86–1 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Bromochloromethane 74–97–5 0.1 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Bromodichloromethane 75–27–4 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Bromoform 75–25–2 0.19 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Bromomethane 74–83–9 0.21 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Butyl benzyl phthalate 85–68–7 1 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Carbazole 86–74–8 0.43 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Carbon disulfide (CS2) 75–15–0 0.45 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Carbon tetrachloride 

(CCl4)

56–23–5 0.19 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Chlorobenzene 108–90–7 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Chlorodibromomethane 124–48–1 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Chloroethane 75–00–3 0.41 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Chloroform 67–66–3 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Chloromethane 74–87–3 0.3 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Chrysene 218–01–9 3.19 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

cis-1,2-dichloroethene 156–59–2 0.15 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

cis-1,3-dichloropropene 10061–01–5 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--
54 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 53–70–3 4.82 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Dibenzofuran -- 0.29 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Dibromomethane 74–95–3 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Dichlorodifluoromethane 75–71–8 0.31 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Diesel range organics -- 3.26 25 μg/L 8015B ORGM-508 Rev. 1.0 & USEPA

Method 8015D

--

Diethyl phthalate 84–66–2 0.38 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Di-isopropyl ether 108–20–3 0.74 10 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

Dimethyl phthalate 131–11–3 0.21 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Di-n-butyl phthalate 84–74–2 1.16 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Di-n-octyl phthalate 117–84–0 0.35 4 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Diphenylamine -- 1.06 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Ethanol 64–17–5 94 300 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

Ethyl ether 60–29–7 0.26 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Ethyl tert-butyl ether

(ETBE)

637–92–3 1.2 5 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

Ethylbenzene 100–41–4 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Fluoranthene 206–44–0 4.53 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Fluorene 86–73–7 18.8 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Hexachlorobenzene 118–74–1 0.66 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Hexachlorobutadiene 87–68–3 0.36 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--
55 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Hexachlorocyclopentadi

ene

77–47–4 10 50 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Hexachloroethane 67–72–1 2.1 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene 193–39–5 14.7 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Iodomethane 74–88–4 0.23 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Isobutanol 78–83–1 36.5 110 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

Isophorone 78–59–1 0.21 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Isopropanol 67–63–0 13 40 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

Isopropylbenzene 98–82–8 0.19 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

m,p-Xylene 179601–23–1 0.34 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Methacrylonitrile 126–98–7 1.6 10 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Methanol 3.9 5 mg/L 8015B --

Methyl acrylate 96–33–3 -- -- -- -- ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Methyl tert-butyl ether

(MTBE)

1634–04–4 0.25 5 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Methylene chloride 75–09–2 0.32 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Naphthalene 91–20–3 0.22 1 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

n-Butanol 71–36–3 17 60 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

n-Butyl benzene 104–51–8 0.32 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Nitrobenzene 98–95–3 0.81 10 μg/L 8270C RSKSOP-194 rev4 or RSKSOP175 rev5--

N-nitrosodimethylamine 62–75–9 0.29 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--
56 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

N-nitrosodi-npropylamine621–64–7 0.35 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

n-Propanol 71–23–8 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

n-Propyl benzene 103–65–1 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

o-Xylene 95–46–6 0.19 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Pentachlorophenol 87–86–5 20 50 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Phenanthrene 85–01–8 9.75 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Phenol 108–95–2 2 10 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

p-Isopropyltoluene -- 0.2 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Pyrene 129–00–0 8.08 100 ng/L 8270C/SIM ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Pyridine -- 1.7 20 μg/L 8270C ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

sec-Butylbenzene 135–98–8 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Squalene -- -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

Styrene 100–42–5 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Terpiniol -- -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & USEPA

Method 8270D

--

tert-Amyl methyl ether

(TAME)

994–05–8 1.4 5 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

tert-Butyl alcohol 75–65–0 11 50 μg/L 8260B RSKSOP-259 Rev. 1 (USEPA

Method 5021A plus 8260C)

--

tert-Butylbenzene 98–06–6 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Tetrachloroethene 127–18–4 0.2 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--
57 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Toluene 108–88–3 0.17 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Total petroleum 

hydrocarbons (TPH) as 

gasoline

 -- 10 25 μg/L 8015B ORGM-508 r1.0 or ORGM-506 

r1.0 & USEPA 8021B/8015D

--

trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 156–60–5 0.15 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

trans-1,3-

Dichloropropene

10061–02–6 0.19 3 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA Method 

8260B/C

--

Tri(2-butoxyethyl) 

phosphate

78–51–3 -- -- -- -- ORGM-515 Rev. 1.1 & 

USEPA Method 8270D

--

Trichloroethene 79–01–6 0.16 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA

Method 8260B/C

--

Trichlorofluoromethane 75–69–4 0.29 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA

Method 8260B/C

--

Vinyl chloride 75–01–4 0.1 1 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA

Method 8260B/C

--

Xylenes (total) -- 0.19 2 μg/L 8260B ORGM-501 & USEPA

Method 8260B/C

--

Gasoline range organics -- 10 25 μg/L 8015B ORGM-506 rev. 1.0 & 

USEPA method 8015D

--

Dissolved lithium -- 2.61 10 μg/L 6010B -- --

Dissolved carbon (DC) 7440–44–0–DC -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-102 rev. 5 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--

Dissolved inorganic 

carbon (DIC)

7440–44–0–DIC 0.155 1 mg/L 9060 RSKSOP-102 rev. 5 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--

Dissolved organic 

carbon (DOC)

7440–44–0–DOC 0.155 1 mg/L 9060 RSKSOP-102 rev. 5 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--

Non-purgeable dissolved 

organic carbon 

(NPDOC)

7440–44–0–

NPDOC

 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-330 rev. 0 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--

Total carbon (TC) 7440–44–0–TC -- -- -- --- RSKSOP-102 rev. 5 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--

Total inorganic carbon 

(TIC)

7440–44–0–TIC 0.155 1 mg/L 9060 RSKSOP-102 rev. 5 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--

Total organic carbon 

(TOC)

7440–44–0–TOC 0.155 1 mg/L 9060 RSKSOP-102 rev. 5 

(USEPA Method 9060A)

--
58 

Analyte (abbreviation)

U.S.Geological Survey parameter code

or CASRN1 

TestAmerica Laboratories

Method used in U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Pavillion study

Comments Labor- atory

MDL

Labor- atory

RL

Repor- ting

units

Laboratory

analytical 

method

Acetylene 74–86–2 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-194 rev4 and

RSKSOP-175 rev5

--

Butane 106–97–8 -- -- % ASTM D1945RSKSOP-194 rev4 and

RSKSOP-175 rev5

--

Ethane 74–84–0 0.57 5 μg/L RSKSOP-175 RSKSOP-194 rev4 and

RSKSOP-175 rev5

--

Ethylene (C2H4) -- 0.398 5 μg/L RSKSOP-175 -- --

Methane 74–82–8 0.218 5 μg/L RSKSOP-175 RSKSOP-194 rev4 and

RSKSOP-175 rev5

--

Propane (TestAmerica 

Laboratories

Pittsburgh)

74–98–6 5 5 μg/L RSKSOP-175 RSKSOP-194 rev4 and

RSKSOP-175 rev5

--

Diethylene glycol 111–46–6 7.73 25 mg/L 8015B USEPA Region 3 

LC/MS/MS method

--

Ethylene glycol 107–21–1 8.63 25 mg/L 8015B USEPA Method 8015M --

Propylene glycol 57-55-6 18.7 25 mg/L 8015B USEPA Method 8015M

Tetraethylene glycol 112–60–7 -- -- -- -- USEPA Region 3 

LC/MS/MS method

--

Triethylene glycol 112–27–6 8.45 25 mg/L 8015B USEPA Region 3 

LC/MS/MS method

--

Acetate 127–09–3 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-112 Rev. 6 --

Butyrate 156–54–7 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-112 Rev. 6 --

Formate 141–53–7 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-112 Rev. 6 --

Isobutyrate 19455–20–0 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-112 Rev. 6 --

Lactate 867–56–1 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-112 Rev. 6 --

Propionate 137–40–6 -- -- -- -- RSKSOP-112 Rev. 6 --

1

This report contains Chemical Abstracts Services Registry Numbers (CASRN)®, which is a Registered Trademark of the American Chemical Society. The CASRN online database provides the latest 

registry number information: http://www.cas.org/. Chemical Abstracts Services recommends the verification of the CASRNs through CAS Client ServicesSM.
59 

Appendix B. Method detection limits and method reporting levels of selected 

compounds identified by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as 

affecting geochemistry in deep groundwater monitoring wells near Pavillion, 

Wyoming

[NA, not applicable; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; no available method, currently (2012) the USGS 

National Water Quality Laboratory and TestAmerica Laboratories, the USGS contract laboratory, do not have an analytical 

method for this compound; R8, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 laboratory analysis; R3, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Region 3 laboratory analysis] 

Compound

(abbreviation) USEPA reporting level

TestAmerica Laboratories

method detection limits

for proposed analyses

TestAmerica 

Laboratories

reporting level for 

proposed analyses

pH NA NA NA

Potassium (K) 0.127 mg/L 0.237 mg/L 0.3 mg/L

Chloride (Cl) 1.00 mg/L 0.254 mg/L 3.0 mg/L

Methane (CH4) 2.5 μg/L 0.22 μg/L 5 μg/L

Benzene 0.25 μg/L 0.16 μg/L 1.0 μg/L

Toluene 0.25 μg/L 0.17 μg/L 1.0 μg/L

Ethylbenzene 0.25 μg/L 0.16 μg/L 1.0 μg/L

Xylenes (total) 1.0 μg/L 0.19 μg/L 2 μg/L

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 0.25 μg/L 0.15 μg/L 2 μg/L

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 0.25 μg/L 0.16 μg/L 1 μg/L

Diesel range organics 20 μg/L 32.6 μg/L 25 μg/L

Gasoline range organics 20 μg/L 10 μg/L 25 μg/L

Phenol 0.5 μg/L 2 μg/L 10 μg/L

Naphthalene 0.25 μg/L 0.22 μg/L 0.1 μg/L

Isopropanol 100 μg/L 13 μg/L 40 μg/L

tert-Butyl alcohol 5 μg/L 11 μg/L 50 μg/L

2-Butanone 0.5 μg/L 2 μg/L 6 μg/L

Diethylene glycol 50 μg/L 7,730 μg/L 25,000 μg/L

Triethylene glycol 10 μg/L 8,450 μg/L 25,000 μg/L

Tetraethylene glycol 10 μg/L No available method No available method

2-Butoxyethanol 1.0 μg/L (R8), 10 μg/L (R3) 0.5 μg/L 2 μg/L

Acetone 1.0 μg/L 1.9 μg/L 10 μg/L

Benzoic Acid 1.0 μg/L 10 μg/L 25 μg/L

Acetate 0.1 mg/L No available method No available method

Formate 0.1 mg/L No available method No available method

Lactate 0.1 mg/L No available method No available method

Propionate 0.1 mg/L No available method No available method
60 

Appendix C. Field forms.

Appendix C–1. Groundwater Site Schedule, Form 9-1904-A.
61 

 Appendix C–1. Groundwater Site Schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
62 

Appendix C–1. Groundwater site schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
63 

Appendix C–1. Groundwater site schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
64 

Appendix C–1. Groundwater site schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
65 

Appendix C–1. Groundwater site schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
66 

Appendix C–1. Groundwater site schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
67 

Appendix C–1. Groundwater site schedule, Form 9-1904-A.—Continued
68 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0.
69 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0.--Continued 
70 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
71 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
72 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
73 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
74 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
75 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
76 

Appendix C–2. Groundwater Field Form, version 8.0—Continued.
77 

Appendix C–3. U.S. Geological Survey – contract laboratory analytical services request form.
78 

Appendix D. List of Groundwater Sampling Equipment and Supplies
79 

Appendix E. Job Hazard Analysis

Collection of groundwater samples near 

Pavillion, Wyoming

JOB HAZARD ANALYSIS

JOB: Collecting Groundwater

Samples from Wells

Date Created: 1/30/12

 

PREPARED BY: 

P.R.Wright PAGE 1 OF 3

REVIEWED BY: Recommended Protective Clothing and Equipment: 

See JHA on Environmental 

Hazards – attached below Safety goggles, appropriate 

gloves, foul weather gear.

Emergency 

Contacts

Local 

Hospital

Ambulance 911

Fremont County Fire Protection District 911 

Fremont County Sheriff 911 

Poison Control Center 800-222-1222 

David Mott – WYWSC Chief Office. 307-775-9162 

Cell 307-631-9816 

Peter Wright – Proj. Safety Office 406-656-1444, ext. 11 

Officer Cell 406-696-23375 

Riverton Memorial Hospital (307)856-4161 

2100 West Sunset Drive 

Riverton, WY 82501

Sequence of 

Basic Job 

Steps

Potential 

Accidents/Hazards

Recommended Safe Job 

Procedures

Conduct a 

safety 

inspection

Slip, trip and fall hazards Assess work area around monitor well and 

remove hazards if necessary.

Breathing hazardous 

fumes

Make a site assessment. Using a calibrated 

(document in project logbook) four-gas meter 

(oxygen, combustible gasses (LEL), carbon 

monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide) measure air 

in work area, particularly around monitor 

well for hazardous (explosive or low oxygen) 
80 

conditions. Document gas meter readings in 

project logbook. If conditions are hazardous 

(see real-time air monitoring action levels 

below), ventilate work area and evaluate why 

conditions changed. If conditions persist and 

are explosive stop all work, shut down all 

powered equipment, such as generators, take 

four-gas meter, and evacuate all personnel to 

a safe location upwind from the site. If 

conditions persist and are hazardous due to 

low oxygen and/or high carbon monoxide or 

hydrogen sulfide stop all work, take four-gas 

meter and evacuate all personnel to a safe 

location upwind of the site. If appropriate, 

contact the local fire department. Use fourgas meter to determine when it is safe to 

return to site. Be aware of hazardous fumes. 

Work upwind and in a well-ventilated area.

Real-time air monitoring 

action levels

Oxygen: ≤20% O2

Oxygen: ≥22% O2 

Combustible gas: ≤10% LEL 

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S): ≥10 ppm H2S 

Carbon monoxide (CO): ≤25 ppm CO

All measurements must be confirmed prior 

to any action.

Pressurized monitoring 

well

Open pressure release valve on monitoring 

well and allow pressure to equilibrate before 

continuing sampling operation. Continue air 

monitoring during this process.

Collecting 

water 

samples 

Back or muscle strain Use proper lifting techniques when lifting 

pumps or generators. 

Back or muscle strain Use proper lifting techniques when lifting 

pumps or generators. 

Fire / explosion / 

contamination hazard 

from refueling generators 

Before refueling generator, let the generator 

cool down. 

Fuels and other hydrocarbons will be 

segregated from samples to minimize 

contamination. 

All fuels will be transported in approved 

safety containers. The use of containers other 

than "safety types" is prohibited. 

See attached JHA for Gasoline Use -attached

Electrocution A ground fault circuit interrupter device must 

protect all AC electrical circuits. Make sure 
81 

the electrical cords from generators and 

power tools are not allowed to be in contact 

with water. Do not stand in a wet area while 

operating power equipment.

Fire / explosion hazard 

from refueling generators.

Before refueling generator, let the generator 

cool down. 

Breathing hazardous 

fumes

Monitor air quality during well purge and 

groundwater sampling using a calibrated 

four-gas meter (oxygen, combustible gasses 

(LEL), carbon monoxide, and hydrogen 

sulfide) conditions to ensure safe air quality 

throughout sampling activities. Document 

gas meter readings in project logbook. If 

conditions become hazardous (see real-time 

air monitoring action levels, above), verify 

instrument measurements, ventilate work 

area and evaluate why conditions changed. If 

conditions persist and are explosive stop all 

work, shut down all powered equipment, 

such as generators take four-gas meter, and 

immediately. If conditions persist and are 

hazardous due to low oxygen and/or high 

carbon monoxide or hydrogen sulfide stop all 

work take four-gas meter and immediately 

evacuate all personnel to a safe location 

upwind of the site. If appropriate, contact the 

local fire department. Use four-gas meter to 

determine when it is safe to return to site. Be 

aware of hazardous fumes. Work upwind and 

in a well-ventilated area.

Infectious water-borne

diseases

Wear appropriate gloves. Prevent water from 

contacting your skin.

Breathing fumes from 

sample preservatives

Always work in a well-ventilated area. 

Sample 

processing

Contaminated water 

source 

Wear appropriate gloves and safety glasses. 

Prevent water from contacting your skin. A 

pair of coveralls or Tyvek suit or apron can 

be worn to minimize skin contact. Work in 

well-ventilated area.

Well water will be contained onsite in a 

container truck provided by a waste hauler 

contracted by the State of Wyoming. Waste 

water will be disposed in accordance with 

State of Wyoming requirements. 

See JHAs for use of appropriate sample 

preservatives such as Nitric Acid, 
82 

Hydrochloric Acid, and Sulfuric Acid 

Ampoules – attached.

Shipping 

samples

Freeze burns, back strain, 

hazardous chemical or 

sample leakage.

Wear appropriate gloves when handling dry 

ice. Follow safe lifting techniques. 

Vehicles that transport chemicals shall be 

equipped with applicable Material Data 

Safety Sheets (MSDSs). Chemicals will be 

transported in compliance with Wyoming 

Department of Transportation (WDOT) 

regulations. 

Samples shipped to laboratories will be 

appropriately labeled for potential hazards. 

All reasonable precautions will be used to 

prevent leaks or broken samples. 

Samples that contain hazardous materials 

must be packed, manifested, and shipped by 

personnel that have WDOT or appropriate 

HazMat training.

Good hygiene Wash hands prior to touching food or 

smoking (There will be no smoking on site!)
83 

JOB HAZARD ANALYSIS

JOB: Environmental Hazards Date Created: 2/13/12

PREPARED BY: Peter 

Wright PAGE 1 OF 2

REVIEWED BY: Recommended Protective Clothing and Equipment: 

Safety glasses, appropriate gloves, appropriate foot wear, 

personal floatation device (PFD), water, sunblock, 

sunglasses, protective clothing, foul weather gear, rope, 

and shovel.

Sequence of 

Basic Job 

Steps

Potential 

Accidents/Hazards

Recommended Safe Job Procedures

Walking to, 

from and 

around field 

site

Slip, trip and fall hazards Ensure path is clear and free of obstructions. 

Ensure footing at the field site work area is 

sound. 

Lightning strikes Do not work around or during thunderstorms.

Dehydration/heat 

exhaustion/sun stroke

In warm/hot weather, rest often and drink 

plenty of water or electrolyte drink.

Hypothermia/frostbite Wear foul weather gear during winter months.

Sunburn Protect yourself from the sun. Use sunblock 

when it will not interfere with water-quality 

samples, wear light protective clothing, 

sunglasses and hat.

Slippery conditions Use appropriate footwear when mud, snow or 

ice conditions exist.

Snake bites Wear appropriate foot and leg protection. If 

you are bitten seek help immediately. DO NOT 

CUT and SUCK!! This may make the bite 

worse.

Attack by wild animals Be familiar with animal behavior. If firearms 

are needed for protection from animals follow 

regulations as stated in WRD memo 98.27.

Insect bites or stings Wear appropriate insect repellant if it will not 

impair water-quality samples. At the end of the 

work day check body for ticks. Avoid wasp or 

hornet nests.

Poisonous plants Wear appropriate clothing. Wash all exposed 

areas of skin with cold water only.
84 

Opening gage 

house or 

monitoring well

Insect bites or stings Check carefully around shelter for wasps or 

spiders. Use sprays to kill insects. Do not use 

chemicals if they will contaminate a well or 

could cause contamination of water-quality 

samples.

Infectious diseases Watch for bats, rodent nests or droppings. If a 

nest or droppings are present special 

precautions must be taken to prevent illness or 

death. 

Working in or 

around surface 

waters

Infectious water-borne

diseases

Wear appropriate gloves. Prevent water from

touching your skin. 

Contaminated water 

source 

Wear appropriate gloves. Prevent water from 

touching your skin. Work in a well ventilated 

area.

Snake bites Wear appropriate foot and leg protection. If 

you are bitten seek help immediately. DO NOT 

CUT and SUCK!! This may make the bite 

worse. 

Drowning/rapidly rising 

stage

Wear appropriate personal floatation device 

(PFD). Be familiar with weather conditions 

occurring upstream. Be prepared to move to 

higher ground.
85 

JOB HAZARD ANALYSIS

JOB: Gasoline Use Date Created: 2/13/12

PREPARED BY: Peter 

Wright PAGE 1 OF 1

REVIEWED BY: Recommended Protective Clothing and Equipment: 

Safety glasses, Appropriate gloves

Sequence of 

Basic Job 

Steps

Potential 

Accidents/Hazards

Recommended Safe Job Procedures

Filling up gas 

cans

Fire, explosion Remove gas cans from field vehicle to fill. Do 

not fill gas cans in pickup truck with plastic bed 

liners. Static electricity may cause fire or 

explosion.

Breathing fumes/toxic 

vapors

Avoid breathing fumes. Stand up wind if 

possible. Gasoline contains harmful fumes.

Chemical burns Wear appropriate gloves. Avoid contact with 

skin. May cause serious chemical burns.

Transporting 

gasoline

Fire/explosion Transport gasoline in an approved container 

with a flash arrestor vent. Transport no more 

than 5 gallons. Do not store overnight in field 

vehicles.

Breathing fumes/toxic 

vapors 

Use only cans that are in good working order. 

Secure caps tightly to prevent fumes from 

entering the vehicle. Secure can tightly to 

vehicle. When transporting gasoline cans do not 

mount cans outside of motor vehicle.

Refueling small 

engines

Fire, explosion Let engine cool down before refueling.
86 

JOB HAZARD ANALYSIS

JOB: Sample preservation: Nitric 

Acid and Hydrochloric acid ampoule

Date Created: 2/14/12

PREPARED BY: 

Peter Wright PAGE 1 OF 1

REVIEWED BY: Recommended Protective Clothing and Equipment:

Safety glasses, safety goggles, protective gloves, eye 

wash

See MSDS for additional HNo3 and/or HCL safety information

Sequence of 

Basic Job 

Steps

Potential 

Accidents/Hazards

Recommended Safe Job 

Procedures

Opening box 

of ampoules

Cuts or punctures with a 

knife

Use appropriate techniques when using a 

knife.

Open/leaking ampoules in 

box 

Wear protective eyewear and gloves when 

removing ampoules from box. Dispose of 

preservative and ampoules by an approved 

method.

Open ampoules in box –

Breathing fumes

Always work in a well ventilated area.

Opening 

ampoules

Skin contact chemical 

burns 

Wear protective eyewear and gloves. Fumes 

may come in contact with perspiration on your 

skin and rehydrate to form acid. If skin itches, 

flush affected area for up to 15 minutes with 

water. Tap water is kept in vehicle for 

cleaning.

Eye contact Wear protective eyewear. If acid splashes in 

the eyes, flush eyes using eye bottle and seek 

medical advice.

Breathing fumes HNO3 and HCL have high vapor pressure. 

Always work in a well ventilated area.

Adding acid 

to sample

Chemical reaction Wear protective eyewear and gloves. Acid 

may react with highly alkaline sample and fizz

(releasing CO2).

Eye contact Wear protective eyewear. If acid splashes in 

the eyes, flush eyes using eye bottle and seek 

medical advice.

Skin contact chemical 

burns

Wear protective eyewear and gloves.

Ampoule 

disposal

Eye and skin contact 

chemical burns

Follow recommended procedures listed above 

until ampoules are disposed of properly. 
87 

Appendix F. USGS Central Region Research Drilling Chief’s Project Log for 

Redevelopment of MW02

USGS ACTION PLAN FOR REDEVELOPING EPA WELL MW-02 SITE AT PAVILLION, 

WYOMING

The following is the action plan developed by Art Clark (Chief, USGS Central Region Research 

Drilling Project) in conjunction with the Pavillion Technical Team during April, 2012 for 

redevelopment activities for deep monitoring well MW-02 at Pavillion, Wyo. The effort was 

undertaken to extract the existing pump and to attempt to improve the yield on the monitoring pump. 

The planned activities are given below (black) with a review of the actual activities and observations 

(blue).

Monday 4/30/12 planned: 

• Drive from Denver to Riverton. Meet with USEPA at MW02 at ~ 14:00 to discuss plans and 

logistics.

• USGS (Denver) brings two new enclosed 500-gallon water tanks for storing Riverton water at 

site.

• Water truck arrives with 1,000 gallons of Riverton water at 15:00 – transfer water into holding 

tanks. 

• Drill rig and equipment drives from Denver to Riverton. 

Monday 4/30/12 actual: 

• Art Clark (Chief, USGS Central Region Research Drilling Project) and Jeff Eman (USGS drill 

foreman) drove from Denver to Pavillion, WY site MW-02 to meet with USEPA, USGS-WY, and 

WY-state personnel to discuss and finalize site plans and stimulation methods. We delivered two 

new 550-gallon water storage tanks to hold Riverton drinking water and water removed from 

well. 

• Water truck contracted by WY DEQ delivers 1,100 gallons of Riverton water to the site and the 

holding tanks are filled. 

• Monitored for methane (CH4) at the wellhead: 14% CH4 inside wellhead and was 0% CH4 

outside wellhead. 

• The drilling rig and associated equipment was driven by the drill crew from Denver to Riverton. 

Tuesday 5/1 planned: 

• Mobilize drilling equipment to Pavillion, Wyo., site MW-02 

• Set up decon area and steam-clean drill rig and equipment as necessary

• Monitor for CH4 at wellhead and inside 20-in protective well cover

o Vent accumulated CH4 from inside cover if/as necessary

• Inside protective cover, remove 2-in side bushing from 4-in well casing

• Insert hose in 2-in side opening and pump Riverton water into 4-in casing at 10-20 gallons per 

minute (gpm) until full

o Collect splits of purge water from discharge side during purging activities

o Monitor vented gas during purge 

o When 4-in casing is filled, let sit for 1⁄2 hour and top off with fluid 

• Reinsert 2-in bushing, monitor and vent gas from wellhead area if/as necessary, and cut 20-in 

well cover to ~2-ft height for increased rig accessibility

• Position drill rig over MW-02 and move other equipment onsite as required 

o Install visqueen liner beneath rig 
88 

• Attach to 4-in well cover and raise from 4-in well casing

o Assess discharge pipe, monitor pipe, and pump cable configuration and determine 

optimum equipment removal methodology 

• Remove equipment from well 

o Pipe to be placed on saw horses or designated trailer 

o Pump cable to be coiled on designated spool 

o Pump to be left attached to cable or disconnected and placed on pipe trailer

o Wellhead area to be monitored for CH4 throughout pull. 

Tuesday 5/1/12 actual: 

• The drill rig was driven from Riverton to MW-02 site and steam-cleaned. The drill rig was also 

steam-cleaned in Denver prior to leaving as was all equipment used at the site. 

• Removed the 2-in bushing from side of the wellhead, assembled the pumps and hoses, and slowly 

pumped Riverton water from one 550-gallon tank into the well. USGS-WY and EPA collect 

samples of water used to purge well. 

• Monitored for CH4 vented from the well during purge. The concentration inside wellhead 

increased from 14% CH4 at start to 100% CH4 towards end of the well purging. Once the 

water inside well reached land surface, CH4 readings drop to 0%. 

• Cut the 20-in diameter protective well cover to 2 ft above land surface to allow for better rig 

access. Set rig over the well and pull the submersible pump assembly (1-in stainless steel 

discharge pipe, 1-in PVC tagging tube, 4-strand pump wire, and 4-in pump) from well. 

• Monitor for CH4 during pull – 0% readings. 

• Based on the removed discharge pipe, the pump intake was set at 964 ft below land surface (bls). 

Run tagging tape down well and tag bottom at 990 ft bls. 

Wednesday 5/2 planned: 

• Run state-owned optical televiewer in well

o Verify well bottom depth with televiewer or tag line

• Attach 4-in surge block to 1-in drop pipe removed from well and insert to well bottom 

o 1-in ball valve attached to top of pipe will allow for vacuum or venting as desired

• Begin surging activities.

Wednesday 5/2/12 actual: 

• Monitored for CH4 at wellhead – 0%.

• Set up and ran WY state-owned and operated down-hole camera in well to bottom. Saw that the 

screen was intact but some mud/sediment was noted along screen surface. Impossible to tell 

whether screen was plugged because only the inner-surface of the screen slots can be seen.

• Removed camera, attached 4-in surge block to cleaned 1-in stainless steel discharge pipe and 

installed it to 924 ft bls. Note: Did not run block inside well screen as the screen’s internal ribs 

would have cut the rubber block rendering it useless and leaving rubber material in the bottom 

of the well.

• Spent 3 hours surging the well between 904 ft and 924 ft bls using 1-in ball-valve attached to the 

top of the pipe to alternatively create under- and over-pressure conditions at the well screen. 

• Removed surge block from the well while monitoring for CH4 – 0%. Well water was not pulled 

to surface during the removal of the surge block as anticipated. Therefore, no additional 

Riverton water was added to the well. 
89 

• Attempted to run 3-in diameter bailer down hole to remove sediment and collect water sample 

from well bottom for observation purposes only. Bailer wedged in well at approximately 200 ft 

bls and could not be worked past this point. 

• Removed 3-in bailer and installed a 2-in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) bailer. Made five runs with 

bailer to well bottom, removing moderate amount of sediment and approximately 15 gallons 

total fluid. Fluid removed was very dark and had a strong odor. 

• Tag water level in well at day’s end at approximately 235 ft bls. 

Thursday 5/3 planned: 

• Continue surging activities

o Surge slowly thru screened interval

o Monitor at wellhead for CH4 during surging activities

• Remove surge block from well and tag well bottom

o Collect and store purged water (between 4-in and 1-in pipe) in emptied 500-gallon tank. 

o Add Riverton water in top of 1-in pipe every 20 ft to keep well area below surge block 

fluid filled 

• Use bailer to remove sediment from well bottom if/as necessary

Thursday 5/3/12 actual: 

• Monitored for CH4 in wellhead – 0%. Tag water level at ~234 ft bls. 

• Set up and ran downhole camera in well to bottom. However, the fluid in the well was too turbid 

to view anything. 

• Removed camera and bailed well from bottom for 4.5 hrs then begin bailing from top of fluid. 

Fluid removed from well bottom became slightly less turbid, but continued to have a strong 

odor. Fluid from the top is turbid but odor-free. All removed fluid is captured and held in 

emptied 550-gallon water tank. 

• Bailed well for 2.5 hrs from top of fluid. 

• Tag water level at day’s end at ~503 ft bls. CH4 reading at day’s end is 0%. 

Friday 5/4 planned:

• Run downhole camera in well 

• Install downhole equipment or purge water from well as directed.

o Collect purge water in 500-gallon tanks 

o Monitor for methane gas during water purge 

Friday 5/4/12 actual: 

• Monitor for CH4 in wellhead – 0%. Tag water level at ~498 ft bls and begin bailing. 

• Collected one bail from well bottom then bailed ~9 hrs from fluid surface to within ~40 ft of well 

bottom. Water continued to be turbid and water from well bottom continued to have a strong 

odor. 

• Discontinued bailing and tagged water level at ~950 ft bls. 

• Water truck arrived to transport well fluid for disposal. Pumped water from holding tank into 

truck. 

• Dropped water storage tanks, pipe, and 4-in submersible pump and cable in rancher’s yard. 

Packed equipment.

• Reattached 20-in protective well cover and drove equipment from Pavillion site to Riverton. 

Saturday 5/5 planned: 

• Monitor for methane gas and install lockable well cover 
90 

o If no methane at surface, weld removed 20-in well pipe and cover onto well. 

o If methane is present (no torch or welder can be used), install prefabricated lockable 4-in 

well cover to well.

• Water truck arrives to collect and dispose of purged water. 

• Remove rig and equipment from site 

• Steam-clean rig and/or other equipment before leaving location if/as necessary 

• Drive rig and equipment to Riverton 

Saturday 5/5/12 actual: 

Drove drilling equipment from Riverton to Denver. 

Sunday 5/6 

• Transport equipment from Riverton to Denver.