U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Data Series 351

In cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board

A product of the California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program

Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley, 2005-2006—Results from the California GAMA 

Program

Tulare Lake Bed

5

99

Fresno

Visalia
Photographs by Michael Wright and Justin Kulongoski, U.S. Geological Survey.
Ground-Water Quality Data in the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 

2005–2006—Results from the California 

GAMA Program

By Carmen A. Burton and Kenneth Belitz

Prepared in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board

Data Series 351

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2008

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

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 materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Burton, C.A., and Belitz, Kenneth, 2008, Ground-water quality data in the southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005– 

2006—Results from the California GAMA Program: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 351, 103 p. Available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/351/
iii

Contents

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

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................2

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................2

Acknowledgements..............................................................................................................................4

Hydrogeologic Setting of the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Study Unit.............................................4

Methods and Quality Assurance and Quality Control .............................................................................7

Study Design..........................................................................................................................................7

Sample Collection and Analysis.........................................................................................................9

Data Reporting.....................................................................................................................................11

Quality-Assurance and Quality-Control ..........................................................................................11

Ground-Water-Quality Results ..................................................................................................................11

Quality-Control-Sample Results .......................................................................................................11

Comparison with Regulatory and Health-Based Thresholds .....................................................11

Water-Quality Data.............................................................................................................................12

Field Parameters........................................................................................................................13

Organic Constituents.................................................................................................................13

Volatile Organic Compounds and Gasoline Additives ................................................13

Pesticides...........................................................................................................................13

Constituents of Special Interest..............................................................................................13

Inorganic Constituents..............................................................................................................13

Radioactive Constituents..........................................................................................................14

Microbial Constituents..............................................................................................................14

Tracer Constituents ...................................................................................................................15

Future Work ..................................................................................................................................................15

Summary........................................................................................................................................................15

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................16

Tables. ...........................................................................................................................................................22

Appendix........................................................................................................................................................89

Sample Collection...............................................................................................................................89

Sample Analysis..................................................................................................................................90

Data Reporting ....................................................................................................................................91

Laboratory Reporting Conventions .........................................................................................91

Constituents on Multiple Analytical Schedules....................................................................92

Quality Assurance ..............................................................................................................................92

Blanks. .........................................................................................................................................92

Replicates ...................................................................................................................................93

Matrix Spikes..............................................................................................................................93

Surrogates ..................................................................................................................................94

Quality-Control-Sample Results .......................................................................................................94

Detections in Field Blanks and Source-Solution Blanks.....................................................94

Variability in Replicate Samples..............................................................................................95

Matrix-Spike Recoveries..........................................................................................................95

Surrogate Compound Recoveries...........................................................................................95
iv

Figures

Figure 1. Map of the hydrogeologic provinces of California GAMA study and the location 

of the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study unit............................................................ 3

Figure 2. Map showing the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit, locations of California's 

Department of Water Resources ground-water subbasins (study areas) within 

the study unit, and major hydrologic features, cities, and highways.................. 5

Figure 3. Map showing the four ground-water subbasins (study areas) and associated 

surficial geology in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit, California ........................... 6

Figure 4. Map showing the four study areas, the distribution of grid cells used for 

randomized well selection, and grid wells sampled in the Southeast San 

Joaquin Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit, 

California .................................................................................... 8

Figure 5. Map showing the locations of flow-path and transect wells, water-level 

contours, alluvial fans, and Tulare lakebed in the Southeast San Joaquin 

study unit, California ........................................................................ 10

Tables

Table 1. Identification, sampling, and construction information for wells sampled for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 23

Table 2. Classes of water-quality indicators, and chemical and microbial constituents 

collected for the slow, intermediate, and fast sampling schedules in the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 26

Table 3A. Volatile organic compounds and gasoline additives, primary uses or sources, 

comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water 

Quality Laboratory Schedule 2020 ......................................................... 27

Table 3B. Gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, primary uses or sources, 

comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National 

Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 4024 ................................................ 30

Table 3C. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) and 1,2-dibromoethane (EDB), primary 

use or source, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS 

National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 1306 .................................... 31

Table 3D. Pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative 

thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality 

Laboratory Schedule 2033 .................................................................. 32

Table 3E. Polar pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative 

thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality 

Laboratory Schedule 2060 .................................................................. 34

Table 3F. Constituents of special interest, primary use or source, comparative thresholds, 

and reporting information for the Montgomery Watson Harza Laboratory ......... 36

Table 3G. Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon, comparative thresholds, and reporting 

information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2755 and 

Lab Code 2612 .............................................................................. 37
v

Table 3H. Major and minor ions and trace elements, comparative thresholds, and reporting 

information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 1948 ...... 38

Table 3I. Arsenic, chromium, and iron species, comparative thresholds, and reporting 

information for the USGS Trace Metal Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado ............... 39

Table 3J. Isotopic and radioactive constituents, comparative thresholds, and reporting 

information for laboratories ............................................................... 40

Table 3K. Noble gases, comparison thresholds, and reporting information for the 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory................................................ 41

Table 3L. Microbial constituents, comparison thresholds, and reporting information 

for the USGS Ohio Microbiology Laboratory parameter codes 90901, 90900, 

99335 and 99332.............................................................................. 42

Table 4. Water-quality indicators in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, 

California, October 2005 through February 2006 ....................................... 43

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates 

detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley GroundWater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, 

October 2005 through February 2006 ...................................................... 46

Table 6A. Pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates (Schedule 2033) detected in samples 

collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006 .............................................................................. 57

Table 6B. Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and caffeine (Schedule 2060) 

detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley GroundWater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, 

October 2005 through February 2006 ...................................................... 61

Table 7. Constituents of special interest [Perchlorate, N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), 

and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP)] detected in samples collected in the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 65

Table 8. Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 66

Table 9. Major and minor ions and total dissolved solids detected in samples collected 

for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 68

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, 

California, October 2005 through February 2006 ....................................... 70

Table 11. Species of inorganic arsenic and iron in samples collected for the Southeast San 

Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 76

Table 12. Results for analyses of radioactive constituents, tritium, and carbon isotopes 

in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 

through February 2006 ..................................................................... 78

Table 13. Results for analyses of microbial indicators in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment 

(GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ..................... 82
vi

Table 14. Hydrogen and oxygen isotopes of water, and oxygen and nitrogen isotopes of 

nitrate in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 

through February 2006 ..................................................................... 83

Table 15. Results for analyses of noble gases and tritium in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment 

(GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ..................... 86

Appendix tables

Table A1. Analytical methods used for the determination of organic, inorganic, and 

microbial constituents by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water 

Quality Laboratory (NWQL) and additional contract laboratories ..................... 96

Table A2. Preferred analytical schedules for constituents appearing on multiple 

schedules for samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley 

Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, 

October 2005 through February 2006 ...................................................... 98

Table A3. Quality-control summary for constituents detected in blanks collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ...... 99

Table A4. Quality-control summary of replicate analyses of constituents detected in 

samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006 ..............................................................................100

Table A5. Quality-control summary of matrix-spike recoveries for volatile organic 

compounds, gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, N-Nitrosodimethylamine 

(NDMA), and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane added to samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006 ......101

Table A6. Quality-control summary for surrogate recoveries of volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, pesticides and 

pesticide degradates, and constituents of special interest added to samples 

collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley study area, California, 

October 2005 through February 2006 ......................................................103
vii

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AB Assembly Bill (through the California State Assembly)

AL Action Level 

CAS Chemical Abstract Service (American Chemical Society)

CSU combined standard uncertainty

D detected

DIW deionized water

E estimated value or having a higher degree of uncertainty

GAMA Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment program

GPS Global positioning system

HAL Lifetime Health Advisory (USEPA)

HPLC high-performance liquid chromatography

Hwy99T Highway 99 transect well

KINGFP Kings study area flow-path well

KWH Kaweah study area

KING Kings study area

LRL laboratory reporting level

LSD land-surface datum

LT-MDL long-term method detection level

MCL-CA maximum contaminant level (CDPH)

MCL-US maximum contaminant level (USEPA)

MDL method detection limit

MRL minimum reporting level

MW monitoring well

na not available; not applicable

nc sample not collected

nd no data

NELAP National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program

NL-CA California Department of Public Health notification level (CDPH)

nr not reported

NTU nephelometric turbidity unit

NWIS National Water Information System (USGS)

PCFF-GAMA Personal Computer Field Forms program designed for GAMA sampling

QA quality assurance

QC quality control

RSD relative standard deviation

RSD5 risk-specific dose at 10–5 (USEPA)

SESJ Southeast San Joaquin Valley study unit

SMCL-CA secondary maximum contaminant level (CDPH)

SMCL-US secondary maximum contaminant level (USEPA)

SMOW secondary Standard Mean Ocean Water 

SSMDC sample-specific minimum detectable concentration

TT-US treatment technique (USEPA) – a required process intended to reduce the level of a 

contaminant in drinking water

TLR Tulare Lake study area

TULE Tule study area

V analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in 

ground-water quality assessment

VPDB Vienna Peedee Belemnite

VSMOW Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water

* value is above threshold

— not detected
viii

Organizations

CDPH California Department of Public Health (was California Department of Health 

Services until July 1, 2007)

CADWR California Department of Water Resources

LLNL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

MWH Montgomery-Watson-Harza Laboratory

NAWQA National Water-Quality Assessment (USGS)

NWQL National Water Quality Laboratory (USGS)

SITL U.S. Geological Survey Stable Isotope and Tritium Laboratory

SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board (California)

TML U.S. Geological Survey Trace Metal Laboartory

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

Selected chemical names

DBCP 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane

DO dissolved oxygen

DOC dissolved organic carbon

EDB 1,2-dibromoethane

HCl hydrochloric acid

MTBE methyl tert-butyl ether

NDMA N-nitrosodimethylamine

PCE tetrachloroethene

SC specific conductance

1,2,3-TCP 1,2,3-trichloropropane

TDS total dissolved solids

THM trihalomethane

VOC volatile organic compound

Units of Measure

cm3 STP/g cubic centimeters at standard temperature and pressure (0 degrees Celsius and 

1atmosphere of pressure) per gram of water

δiE standard delta notation, the ratio of a heavier isotope of an element (iE) to the more 

common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material, 

expressed in per mil

ft foot (feet)

in. inch (inches)

kg kilogram

km2 square kilometers

L liter

mg milligram

mg/L milligrams per liter

mi miles

mi2 square miles

mL milliliter

mm millimeter

μg/L micrograms per liter

μL microliter

μm micrometer

μS/cm microSiemens per centimeter
ix

pCi/L picocuries per liter

per mil parts per thousand

ppb parts per billion (μg/L)

ppm parts per million (mg/L)

Notes

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

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88).

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

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

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). Milligrams per liter is equivalent to parts per million (ppm) and 

micrograms per liter is equivalent to parts per billion (ppb).
x
Abstract

Ground-water quality in the approximately 3,800 squaremile Southeast San Joaquin Valley study unit (SESJ) was 

investigated from October 2005 through February 2006 as part 

of the Priority Basin Assessment Project of Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The 

GAMA Statewide Basin Assessment project was developed 

in response to the Ground-Water Quality Monitoring Act of 

2001 and is being conducted by the California State Water 

Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in collaboration with the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory (LLNL). 

The SESJ study was designed to provide a spatially 

unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality within SESJ, 

as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water 

quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 

99 wells in Fresno, Tulare, and Kings Counties, 83 of which 

were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized gridbased method to provide statistical representation of the study 

area (grid wells), and 16 of which were sampled to evaluate 

changes in water chemistry along ground-water flow paths or 

across alluvial fans (understanding wells).

The ground-water samples were analyzed for a 

large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile 

organic compounds [VOCs], pesticides and pesticide 

degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds), constituents 

of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine, 

and 1,2,3-trichloropropane), naturally occurring inorganic 

constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace 

elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. 

Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, and carbon-14, and 

stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon), 

and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify 

the source and age of the sampled ground water.

Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, samples for 

matrix spikes) were collected at approximately 10 percent 

of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to 

evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. 

Assessment of the quality-control data resulted in censoring of 

less than 1 percent of the detections of constituents measured 

in ground-water samples.

This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of 

drinking water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from 

the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) 

blended with other waters to maintain acceptable drinkingwater quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to the treated 

water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground 

water. However, to provide some context for the results, 

concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground 

water were compared with regulatory and other health-based 

thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) 

and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns by CDPH.

Two VOCs were detected above health-based thresholds: 

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), and benzene. DBCP 

was detected above the U.S. Environmental Protections 

Agency’s maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) in three 

grid wells and five understanding wells. Benzene was detected 

above the CDPH’s maximum contaminant level (MCL-CA) 

in one grid well. All pesticide detections were below 

health-based thresholds. Perchlorate was detected above its 

maximum contaminate level for California in one grid well. 

Nitrate was detected above the MCL-US in six samples from 

understanding wells, of which one was a public supply well. 

Two trace elements were detected above MCLs-US: arsenic 

and uranium. Arsenic was detected above the MCL-US in four 

grid wells and two understanding wells; uranium was detected 

above the MCL-US in one grid well and one understanding 

well. Gross alpha radiation was detected above MCLs-US 

in five samples; four of them understanding wells, and 

uranium isotope activity was greater than the MCL-US for 

one understanding well. Radon-222 was detected above the 

proposed MCL-US in all wells sampled. Total coliforms were 

detected in two wells and somatic coliphage was detected in 

one well.

Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the 

California GAMA Program

By Carmen A. Burton and Kenneth Belitz
2 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Introduction

Ground water comprises nearly half of the water used 

for public-supply in California (Hutson and others, 2004). 

To assess the quality of ground water from public-supply 

wells and establish a program for monitoring trends in 

ground-water quality, the State Water Resources Control 

Board (SWRCB), in collaboration with the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 

(LLNL), implemented a statewide Groundwater Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) program (http://www.

swrcb.ca.gov/gama/). The GAMA program consists of three 

projects: Priority Basin Assessment, conducted by the USGS 

(http://ca.water.usgs.gov/gama/); Voluntary Domestic Well 

Assessment, conducted by the SWRCB; and Special Studies, 

conducted by LLNL.

The SWRCB initiated the GAMA Priority Basin 

Assessment project in response to the Ground-Water Quality 

Monitoring Act of 2001 [Sections 10780-10782.3 of the 

California Water Code, Assembly Bill (AB) 599]. AB 599 is 

a public mandate to assess and monitor the quality of ground 

water used for public supply in California. The project is 

a comprehensive assessment of statewide ground-water 

quality designed to help better understand and identify risks 

to ground-water resources, and to increase the availability of 

information about ground-water quality to the public. The 

USGS, as part of the AB 599 process and in collaboration 

with the SWRCB, developed the monitoring plan for the 

project (Belitz and others, 2003). A key aspect of the project 

is inter-agency collaboration and cooperation with local water 

agencies and well owners. Local participation in the project is 

entirely voluntary.

The GAMA Priority Basin Assessment project is unique 

because the data collected during the study include analyses 

for an extensive number of chemical constituents at very low 

concentrations, analyses that are not normally available. A 

broader understanding of ground-water composition will be 

especially useful for providing an early indication of changes 

in water quality and for identifying the natural and human 

factors affecting water quality. Additionally, the GAMA 

Priority Basin Assessment project will analyze a broader suite 

of constituents than required by the California Department of 

Public Health (CDPH, formerly the California Department 

of Health Services). An understanding of the occurrence and 

distribution of these constituents is important for the long-term 

management and protection of ground-water resources. 

The range of hydrologic, geologic, and climatic 

conditions that exist in California must be considered in 

an assessment of ground-water quality. Belitz and others 

(2003) partitioned the state into 10 hydrogeologic provinces, 

each with distinctive hydrologic, geologic, and climatic 

characteristics (fig. 1). Eighty percent of California’s 

approximately 16,000 public-supply wells are located in 

ground-water basins within these 10 hydrogeologic provinces. 

These ground-water basins, defined by the California 

Department of Water Resources (CADWR), generally 

consist of relatively permeable, unconsolidated deposits of 

alluvial or volcanic origin (California Department of Water 

Resources, 2003). Ground-water basins were prioritized for 

sampling based on the number of public-supply wells in the 

basin (Belitz and others, 2003). Secondary consideration was 

given to municipal ground-water use, agricultural pumping, 

the number of leaking underground fuel tanks, and pesticide 

application within a basin. In addition, some ground-water 

basins or groups of adjacent similar basins with relatively few 

public-supply wells were assigned high priority so that all 

hydrogeologic provinces would be represented in the subset 

of basins sampled. The 116 priority basins were grouped into 

35 study units. Some areas not in the defined ground-water 

basins were included in several of the study units to achieve 

representation of the 20 percent of public-supply wells not 

located in the ground-water basins. 

Three types of water-quality assessments are being 

conducted with the data collected in each study unit: (1) 

Status: assessment of the current quality, of the ground-water 

resource, (2) Trends: detection of changes in ground-water 

quality, and (3) Understanding: identification of the natural 

and human factors affecting ground-water quality (Kulongoski 

and Belitz, 2004). This report is one of a series of reports 

presenting the status of current water-quality conditions in 

each study unit (Wright and others, 2005; Bennett and others, 

2006; Kulongoski and others, 2006; Fram and Belitz, 2007; 

Kulongoski and Belitz, 2007; and Dawson and others, 2008). 

Subsequent interpretive reports will address the trends and 

understanding aspects of the water-quality assessments. 

The Southeast San Joaquin Valley study unit, hereafter 

referred to as SESJ, is comprised of four ground-water 

subbasins located in the San Joaquin ground-water basin. 

Ground water is the sole source of public supply for many of 

the cities located in the SESJ (Water Education Foundation, 

2006, http://www.water-ed.org/watersources/default.asp). 

Therefore, SESJ study unit was selected as a high priority 

for sampling, to provide adequate characterization of Central 

Valley ground-water quality (Belitz and others, 2003).

Purpose and Scope

The purposes of this report are: (1) to describe the study 

design and methods of the SESJ study unit, (2) to present the 

results of quality-control tests, and (3) to present the analytical 

results for ground-water samples collected in the SESJ study 

unit. Ground-water samples were analyzed for organic, 

inorganic, and microbial constituents, general water-quality 

indicators, and chemical tracers. Samples for pharmaceutical 

compounds also were collected as part of this study; however, 

the presentation of these results and their associated Quality 

Assurance/Quality Control are beyond the scope of this report 

and will be presented in a future report.
Introduction 3

Figure 1. The hydrogeologic provinces of California GAMA study and the location of the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Groundwater 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit. (Modified from Belitz and others, 2003).

Basin and Range

Central

Valley

Klamath

Mountains

Desert

Cascades and

Modoc Plateau

Transverse Ranges and

selected Peninsular Ranges

Southern Coast

Ranges

Sierra

Nevada

Northern

Coast

Ranges SOUTHEAST SAN

JOAQUIN VALLEY GAMA

STUDY UNIT

(figure 2)

San Diego

Drainages

Bakersfield

San

Francisco

Sacramento

OREGON

NEVADA

MEXICO

ARIZONA

Redding

Los Angeles

San Diego

PACIFIC OCEAN

0 200 MILES

0 200 KILOMETERS

Shaded relief derived from U.S. Geological Survey

National Elevation Dataset, 2006. 

Albers Equal Area Conic Projection

Provinces from Belitz and others, 2003.
4 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

The chemical and microbial data presented in this 

report were evaluated by comparison to State and Federal 

drinking-water regulatory thresholds and other health-based 

standards that are applied to treated drinking water. Regulatory 

thresholds considered for this report are those established 

by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and 

the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The 

data presented in this report are intended to characterize the 

quality of untreated ground-water resources within the study 

unit, not the treated drinking water delivered to consumers 

by water purveyors. Discussions of the factors that influence 

the distribution and occurrence of the constituents detected 

in ground-water samples will be the subject of subsequent 

publications.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the following cooperators for their 

support: California State Water Resources Control Board 

(SWRCB), California Department of Public Health (CDPH), 

California Department of Water Resources (CADWR), and 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). We 

especially thank the cooperating well owners and water 

purveyors for their generosity in allowing the USGS to collect 

samples from their wells. In addition, two reviewers, Jan 

Stepek (SWRCB) and Timothy G. Rowe (USGS), provided 

comments to improve this work. Funding for this work was 

provided by State bonds authorized by Proposition 50 and 

administered by the SWRCB.

Hydrogeologic Setting of the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Study Unit

The Southeast San Joaquin (SESJ) study unit covers 

approximately 3,780 mi2 (9,790 km2) in the San Joaquin 

Valley ground-water basin of the Central Valley hydrogeologic 

province, as described by Belitz and others (2003) (fig. 1). The 

study unit is bounded by the San Joaquin River on the north, 

the Sierra Nevada s to the east, Kern County to the south, 

and the Kettleman Hills and the Westside and Delta-Mendota 

subbasins to the west (fig. 2). 

SESJ has a Mediterranean climate with hot, dry summers 

and cool, moist winters. Average rainfall across the study 

unit ranges from 7 in. (18 cm) in the western portion of the 

study unit to 13 in. (33 cm) in the eastern portion of the study 

unit (California Department of Water Resources, 2006a–d). 

More than 90 percent of the precipitation falls between 

October and April. Several creeks and rivers drain the SESJ. 

The San Joaquin, Kings, Kaweah, and Tule Rivers are the 

primary streams draining the study unit but most of their flow 

originates in the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east. The San 

Joaquin River flows north and empties into the Sacramento–

San Joaquin Delta. The Kings River is diverted to the San 

Joaquin River by the Fresno Slough and James Bypass. The 

Kaweah and Tule Rivers flow south or west toward the Tulare 

lakebed. 

Primary sources of recharge are irrigation, seepage 

from rivers, streams, and irrigations canals, percolation of 

precipitation, urban runoff, and in the area near Fresno, 

engineered recharge of runoff from the nearby Sierra Nevada 

(California Department of Water Resources, 2003; Wright and 

others, 2004). Discharge from the aquifer is primarily from 

ground-water pumping for irrigation and public water supply. 

About 40 percent of the water used in the study unit comes 

from ground water. Most municipalities located in the study 

unit, such as Visalia and Tulare, use ground water as their sole 

source of public supply.

 The study unit is divided into four study areas: the 

Kings study area, Kaweah study area, Tule study area, and the 

Tulare Lake study area. The boundaries of these study areas 

correspond to the ground-water subbasins of the same names 

in the Tulare Lake hydrologic region as described by CADWR 

(California Department of Water Resources, 2003) (fig. 2).

The Kings study area is composed of the Kings groundwater subbasin, which covers 1,530 mi2

 (3,960 km2) in Fresno 

County and the northern part of Kings and Tulare Counties. 

It is bounded to the north by the San Joaquin River, to the 

east by the Sierra Nevadas, to the south by the Kaweah and 

Tulare Lake ground-water subbasins, and to the west by the 

Delta-Mendota and Westside ground-water subbasins. The 

San Joaquin and Kings Rivers are the two major rivers within 

or bordering the subbasin (California Department of Water 

Resources, 2006a) (fig. 2). 

The ground-water aquifer system consists of 

unconsolidated marine and continental deposits of the Tertiary 

and Quaternary age overlain by younger alluvial deposits 

of Quaternary age. The eastern two-thirds of the study area 

consists of the quaternary alluvial fans of the Kings River, 

with compound alluvial fans of intermittent streams to the 

north and south (Burow and others, 1997). These deposits 

generally are permeable. The western one-third of the study 

area consists of the less permeable basin deposits. Vertical 

flow in this area is restricted by silt and clay layers, of which 

the Corcoran Clay member of the Tulare formation ranging in 

depths of about 250–550 feet, is the most extensive (California 

Department of Water Resources, 2006a) (fig. 3).

The Kaweah study area is composed of the Kaweah 

ground-water subbasin which covers 700 mi2 (1,810 km2) 

and is located in Tulare County. It is bounded by the Kings 

ground-water subbasin to the north, the Sierra Nevadas to the 

east, Tule ground-water subbasin to the south, and the Tulare 

Lake ground-water subbasin to the west. The Kaweah and St. 

Johns Rivers are the two major rivers within the subbasin. The 

primary source of ground-water recharge is the Kaweah River 

(California Department of Water Resources, 2006b) (fig. 2). 
Hydrogeologic Setting of the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Study Unit 5

Figure 2. The Southeast San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit, locations of 

California's Department of Water Resources ground-water subbasins (study areas) within the study unit, and major hydrologic features, 

cities, and highways.

EXPLANATION

Kings study area

Kaweah study area

Tule study area

Tulare Lake study area

Tulare lakebed County line

Southeast San Joaquin

 study unit boundary

Urban area with name

Tule River

Kings River

Fresno Slough

San Joaquin River

St. Johns River

Deer Creek

White River

Kaweah River

Kings County

Kern County

Fresno County Tulare County

5

41

33

65

41

180

180

198

198

99

99

0 10 20 30 Miles

0 10 20 30 Kilometers

Fresno

Visalia

Tulare

Tulare

Sierra Nevada Mts

Kettleman Hills

Shaded relief derived from U.S. Geological Survey

National Elevation Dataset, 2006. 

Albers Equal Area Conic Projection

Westside

Delta-Mendota
6 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Figure 3. The four ground-water subbasins (study areas) and associated surficial geology in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley 

Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit, California. 

Tule River

Kings River

Fresno Slough

San Joaquin River

St. Johns River

Deer Creek

White River

Kaweah River

0 10 20 30 Miles

0 10 20 30 Kilometers

Shaded relief derived from U.S. Geological Survey

National Elevation Dataset, 2006. 

Albers Equal Area Conic Projection

Geology from Jennings, C.W., 1977,

Geologic Map Of California,

California Department of Conservation,

Division of Mine and Geology,

Geologic Data Map No. 2, 1:750,000. EXPLANATION

Kings

study area

Kaweah

study area

Tule

study

area

Tulare Lake

study area

Sub-basin (Study area)

 boundary

Corcoran clay

 boundary

Quaternary alluvium

Quaternary basin fill

Quaternary cenozoic

Quaternary fans

Quaternary lake deposits

Quaternary pleistocene

Quaternary sand dunes deposits

Quaternary stream channel

Water

Qa

Qa

Qa

Qb

Qb

Qb

Qb

Qc

Qc

Qc

Qc

Qc

Qc

Qf

Qf

Qf

Qf

Qf

Qf

Ql

Ql

Qp

Qp

Qp

Qs

Qs

Qs

Qsc

Qsc

Qsc
Methods and Quality Assurance and Quality Control 7

The aquifer system of the Kaweah subbasin consists of 

unconsolidated marine and continental deposits of Pliocene, 

Pleistocene, and Holocene age. The eastern half of the 

subbasin consists of three stratigraphic layers: continental 

deposits, older alluvium, and younger alluvium. The 

continental deposits are from the Pliocene and Pleistocene 

age and are poorly permeable. The older alluvium is 

moderately-to-highly permeable and is the major aquifer in 

the subbasin. Also, the younger alluvium fan is moderatelyto-highly permeable. The alluvial fan interfingers with the less 

permeable basin deposits in the western half of the subbasin. 

The ground-water aquifer is confined by the Corcoran Clay 

layer in the western half of the subbasin (fig. 3) (California 

Department of Water Resources, 2006b).

The Tule study area, located in Tulare County, is 

composed of the Tule ground-water subbasin and covers 

730 mi2 (1,900 km2). It is bounded by the Kaweah subbasin to 

the north, the Sierra Nevadas to the east, Kern County to the 

south, and the Tulare Lake subbasin and Kings County to the 

west. Tule River, Deer Creek, and White River are the major 

rivers within the subbasin, and they flow westward into the 

Tulare Lake bed (California Department of Water Resources, 

2006c) (fig. 2). 

The aquifer system of the Tule subbasin consists of 

continental deposits of Pliocene, Pleistocene, and Holocene 

age. The basin and lake deposits in the western half of the 

subbasin consist mainly of silt and clay and are relatively 

impermeable. The Corcoran Clay layer in the western half of 

the subbasin (fig. 3) creates a confining layer to the groundwater aquifer of the Tulare Formation. The older alluvium is 

very permeable and is a major aquifer in the subbasin. The 

younger alluvial fans are very permeable but contain little 

water. The continental deposits in the eastern part of the 

subbasin are poorly sorted deposits of clay, silt, sand, and 

gravel from the Sierra Nevada Mountains and are a major 

source of ground water (California Department of Water 

Resources, 2006c).

The Tulare Lake study area is composed of the 

Tulare Lake ground-water subbasin, which covers 820 mi2

(2,120 km2) and is located in Kings County. It is bounded 

by the Kings subbasin to the north, the Kaweah and Tule 

subbasins to the east, Kern County to the south, and the 

Kettleman Hills and Westside ground-water subbasin to the 

west. The southern half of the subbasin is located in the former 

Tulare Lake bed (California Department of Water Resources, 

2006d) (fig. 2).

The aquifer system of the Tulare Lake subbasin consists 

of older and younger alluvium, and continental deposits. 

Continental deposits are poorly sorted deposits of clay, sand, 

and gravel; their permeability is low-to-moderate. Older 

alluvium is poorly sorted deposits of clay, sand, silt, and 

gravel. The older alluvium is moderately to highly permeable 

and is a major aquifer in the subbasin. The younger alluvium 

consists of sorted and unsorted beds of clay, sand, silt and 

gravel. The younger alluvium is very permeable but lies above 

the water table. Flood-basin and lake deposits, which include 

the Corcoran Clay layer, are not an important source of 

ground water in the subbasin (California Department of Water 

Resources, 2006d) (fig. 3).

Methods and Quality Assurance and 

Quality Control

 Methods used for the GAMA program were selected to 

provide: (1) a sampling design suitable for statistical analyses; 

(2) sample collection in a consistent manner; (3) samples 

analyzed using proven and reliable laboratory methods; (4) 

assurance of the quality of the ground-water data; and (5) a 

secure data archive with appropriate documentation. 

Study Design

The wells selected for sampling in this study reflect 

the combination of two well selection strategies. Eightythree wells were selected to provide a statistically unbiased, 

spatially distributed assessment of the quality of groundwater resources used for public drinking-water supply, and 

16 additional wells were selected to provide greater sampling 

density in several areas to address specific ground-water 

quality issues in the study unit.

The spatially distributed wells were selected using a 

spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method (Scott, 

1990). Each of the study areas was subdivided into grid cells 

approximately 38 mi2 (100 km2) (fig. 4) with the minimum 

number of 20 grid cells in a study area. Based on the size of 

the study areas, the Kings study area was divided into 40 grid 

cells, the Kaweah and Tule study areas each were divided into 

20 grid cells, and Tulare Lake study area was divided into 22 

grid cells.

Initial target wells were obtained from statewide 

databases maintained by the CDPH and the USGS. If a grid 

cell contained more than one public-supply well, each well 

in that grid cell was randomly assigned a rank. In each grid 

cell with multiple wells, the highest ranked well was given 

priority for sampling. An attempt was made to select one well 

per grid cell, but some grid cells did not contain accessible 

wells. Wells from adjacent cells were selected to account for 

grid cells that had no active wells. In this fashion, a publicsupply well was randomly selected from each cell to provide 

a spatially distributed, randomized monitoring network for 

each study area. If a public-supply well was not available in a 

cell, an irrigation well was selected. If an irrigation well was 

not available, a domestic well was sampled. Wells sampled 

as part of the grid-cell network are referred to, hereafter, as 

“grid wells”. Grid wells in SESJ were numbered in the order 

of sample collection, with the prefix varying by study area: the 

Kings study area (KING), the Kaweah study area (KWH), the 

Tule study area (TULE), and the Tulare Lake study area (TLR) 

(fig. 4). 
8 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Figure 4. The four study areas, the distribution of grid cells used for randomized well selection, and grid wells sampled in the 

Southeast San Joaquin Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study unit, California.

Tulare lakebed

Kings River

San Joaquin River

TLR-09

TLR-08

TLR-07

TLR-06

TLR-05

TLR-04

TLR-03

TLR-02

TLR-01

KWH-18

KWH-16

KWH-15

KWH-14

KWH-13 KWH-12

KWH-11 KWH-10

KWH-09

KWH-08

KWH-07

KWH-06

KWH-05

KWH-04

KWH-03

KWH-02

KWH-01

TULE-17 TULE-16

TULE-15

TULE-14

TULE-13

TULE-12

TULE-11

TULE-10

TULE-09

TULE-08

TULE-07

TULE-06

TULE-05

TULE-04

TULE-03

TULE-02

TULE-01

KING-39

KING-38

KING-37

KING-36

KING-35

KING-34

KING-33

KING-32 KING-31

KING-30

KING-29 KING-28

KING-27

KING-26

KING-25

KING-24

KING-23

KING-22

KING-21

KING-20

KING-19

KING-17 KING-18

KING-16

KING-15

KING-14

KING-13

KING-12

KING-11

KING-10

KING-09

KING-07

KING-06 KING-05

KING-04

KING-02 KING-03

KING-01

KWH-17

KING-08

0 10 20 30 Miles

0 10 20 30 Kilometers

Shaded relief derived from U.S. Geological Survey

National Elevation Dataset, 2006. 

Albers Equal Area Conic Projection

EXPLANATION

Kings study area

Kaweah study area

Tule study area

Grid cell

Sub-basin boundary Sampled grid well

 and identifier

Tulare Lake study area

Fresno

Visalia

Tulare

Tulare

City location with name

KWH-17
Methods and Quality Assurance and Quality Control 9

Of the 83 grid wells sampled, 39 were in the King study 

area (34 public-supply wells and 5 irrigation wells), 18 were 

in the Kaweah study area (16 public-supply wells, 1 irrigation 

well, and 1 domestic well), 17 were in the Tule study area 

(13 public-supply wells, 3 irrigation wells, and 1 domestic 

well), and 9 were in the Tulare study area (8 public-supply 

wells and 1 irrigation well) (table 1; all tables shown in back 

of report). 

Well locations and identifications were verified using 

a Global Positioning System (GPS), 1:24,000-scale USGS 

topographic maps, comparison with existing well information 

in USGS and CDPH databases, and information provided 

by well owners. Driller’s logs for wells were obtained when 

available. Well information was recorded by hand on field 

sheets and electronically using specialized software on field 

laptop computers. All information was verified and then 

uploaded into the USGS National Water Information System 

(NWIS). In order to maintain confidentiality of well owners 

and well locations, the standard USGS protocol for identifying 

sites in NWIS with a site-id containing latitude and longitude 

was modified and all data associated with the sites were made 

inaccessible to the public.

Wells in SESJ were sampled using a tiered analytical 

approach. All wells were sampled for a standard set of 

constituents which is the basis of the grid-well analytical 

design. The standard set of constituents included dissolved 

oxygen, temperature, and specific conductance, VOCs, 

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) and 1,2-dibromoethane 

(EDB), pesticides and pesticide degradates, perchlorate, stable 

isotopes of water, and dissolved noble gases and tritium/

helium age dates. The standard set of constituents was termed 

the “fast” schedule (table 2). Wells on the “intermediate” 

schedule were sampled for all the constituents on the fast

schedule, plus pH, alkalinity, polar pesticides and degradates, 

N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), 1,2,3-trichloropropane 

(1,2,3-TCP), nutrients, major and minor ions and trace 

elements, chromium abundance and speciation, arsenic and 

iron abundances and speciation, stable isotopes of nitrogen 

and oxygen of nitrate, uranium isotopes, and tritium. Wells on 

the “slow” schedule were sampled for all the constituents on 

the intermediate schedule, plus turbidity, gasoline oxygenates 

and degradates, dissolved organic carbon, stable isotopes of 

carbon, carbon-14 abundance, and radioactive and microbial 

constituents (table 2). Fast, intermediate, or slow refers to the 

time required to sample the well for all the analytes on the 

schedule, and not which groups of constituents are included 

in each schedule. The intermediate and slow schedules were 

used for wells sampled for better understanding of a specific 

topic or served the dual purpose of the grid-well network 

and for special topics. Fifty-five wells were sampled on the 

fast schedule, 20 wells were sampled on the intermediate

schedule, and 24 wells were sampled on the slow schedule. 

Understanding wells that were monitoring wells were sampled 

on the slow schedule except for the microbial constituents. 

Additional sampling was done to assess changes in 

water chemistry (1) along selected sub-regional ground-water 

flow-paths, (2) from shallow to deeper depths in the aquifer, 

or (3) along a transect across alluvial fans radiating from the 

Sierra Nevada. This assessment was accomplished by either 

sampling grid wells for additional constituents and (or) by 

sampling additional wells (understanding wells) for two flowpath studies (Kings study area flow-path and Kings River 

flow-path) and a transect study across alluvial fans (Highway 

99 transect). 

The Kings study area flow-path study followed the 

ground-water flow from where the Kings River enters the 

basin and moves westward away from the Kings River and 

toward Fresno (fig. 5). Fifteen additional understanding wells 

(4 public-supply wells, 11 monitoring wells) and three grid 

wells in the Kings study area were sampled using the slow

schedule of constituents to evaluate changes in water quality 

from shallow to deeper depths in the aquifer along this flowpath. The Kings River flow-path followed the flow of ground 

water southwesterly along the Kings River (fig. 5). Ten grid 

wells were sampled using the intermediate schedule for this 

assessment. The Highway 99 transect followed Highway 

99 and includes wells in the various alluvial fans and interfan areas located in the SESJ study unit (fig. 5). Fourteen 

grid wells in Kings, Kaweah, and Tule study areas and one 

additional public supply well in the Kings study area were 

sampled for this study using the intermediate schedule of 

constituents. 

Fifteen additional (understanding) wells sampled in 

the Kings study area for the Kings study area flow-path 

study were numbered in the order of sample collection with 

the prefix “KINGFP”; the additional understanding well 

for the Highway 99 transect was numbered in the order of 

sample collection with the prefix “HWY99T”. The additional 

understanding wells sampled as part of these studies were 

excluded from the overall statistical characterization of water 

quality in the SESJ study unit, as the inclusion of these wells 

would have caused overrepresentation of certain grid cells

The GAMA identification number for each of the 

99 sampled wells, along with the date sampled, sampling 

schedule, and well-construction information is provided on 

table 1. Ground-water samples were collected October 2005 

through February 2006. 

Sample Collection and Analysis

Samples were collected in accordance with the protocols 

established by the USGS National Water Quality Assessment 

(NAWQA) program (Koterba and others, 1995) and the 

USGS National Field Manual (U.S. Geological Survey, 

variously dated). These sampling protocols ensure that a 

representative sample of ground water is collected at each 

site and that the samples are collected and handled in a way 

that minimizes the potential for contamination of samples and 

(or) cross contamination between samples collected at wells. 

The methods used for sample collection are described in the 

Appendix.
10 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Figure 5. The locations of flow-path and transect wells, water-level contours, alluvial fans, and Tulare lakebed in the Southeast San 

Joaquin study unit, California.

Kings River

San Joaquin River

20

60

60

60

100

100

140

140

140

180

220

220

260

260

300

300

340

340

380

380

180

180

180

180

180

99

99

KING-20

KING-04

KING-04

KINGFP-15

KINGFP-14

KINGFP-13

KINGFP-12

KINGFP-11

KINGFP-10

KINGFP-09

KINGFP-04

KWH-14

KWH-12

KWH-11

KWH-03

TULE-17

TULE-08

TULE-08

TULE-07

TULE-03

TULE-01

KING-38

KING-25

KING-25

KING-16

KING-10

KING-09

HWY99T-01

TLR-08

TLR-06

TLR-05

TLR-04

TLR-02

KING-30

KING-13

KING-12

KING-11

KINGFP-08

KINGFP-07

KINGFP-06

KINGFP-05 KINGFP-03

KINGFP-02

KINGFP-01

KING-15

KING-17

0 10 20 30 Miles

0 10 20 30 Kilometers

Fresno

Visalia

Tulare

Tulare

Shaded relief derived from U.S. Geological Survey

National Elevation Dataset, 2006. 

Albers Equal Area Conic Projection

EXPLANATION

Kings study area

Kaweah study area

Tule study area

Tulare Lake study area

Tulare lakebed boundary

Alluvial fans (from Weissman

 and others, 2005)

Line of equal water-level elevation, 2001

 (from CADWR). Contour interval is 40 feet City location with name

Fresno flow-path well and identifier

Kings River flow-path well and identifier

Highway 99 transect well and identifier
Ground-Water Quality Results 11

For this study, raw (untreated) ground-water samples 

were analyzed for VOCs (table 3A) , gasoline additives 

(table 3B), fumigants (DBCP and EDB) (table 3C), pesticides 

and pesticide degradates (table 3D), polar pesticides and 

pesticides degradates (table 3E), constituents of special 

interest (NDMA, 1,2,3-TCP, and perchlorate) (table 3F), 

nutrients and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) (table 3G), 

major and minor ions and trace elements (table 3H), arsenic, 

chromium, and iron species (table 3I), isotopic and radioactive 

constituents (table 3J), noble gases (table 3K), and the 

microbial constituents (coliform and coliphage) (table 3L). 

General water-quality indicators that were determined in 

the field included pH, specific conductance (SC), dissolved 

oxygen (DO), temperature, alkalinity, and turbidity.

Data Reporting

The methods and conventions used for reporting the data 

are described in the Appendix. Twelve constituents analyzed 

in this study were measured by more than one method at the 

USGS National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL); only 

the results from the preferred method are reported. Arsenic, 

iron, and 1,2,3-TCP concentrations and tritium activities were 

measured by more than one laboratory; both sets of results are 

reported. 

Quality-Assurance and Quality-Control

The quality-assurance (QA) plan used for this study 

follows the protocols described in the NWQL QA plan 

(Pirkey and Glodt, 1998; Maloney, 2005) and the protocols 

used by the USGS NAWQA program (Koterba and others, 

1995). Quality-control (QC) samples collected in SESJ 

include source-solution blanks, field blanks, replicates, and 

matrix and surrogate spikes. QC samples were collected to 

evaluate bias and variability of the water chemistry data that 

may have resulted from sample collection, processing, storage, 

transportation, and laboratory analysis. The QA plan and 

results are described in the Appendix.

Ground-Water-Quality Results

The results of analyses of quality-control and groundwater samples are described briefly in the sections below. 

Thresholds compared to concentrations in ground-water 

samples also are described. 

Quality-Control-Sample Results

Results of QC analyses (blanks, replicates, matrix spikes, 

and surrogates) were used to evaluate the quality of the data 

for the ground-water samples. Assessment of the qualitycontrol information from blanks resulted in the censoring of 

less than one percent of the detections of VOC, pesticides, 

nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements measured 

in ground-water samples. Censored data are indicated with 

“V” codes in tables 4–15, and the censored data are not used 

in assessments of water quality. Data from replicates indicated 

that variability between measurements was acceptably low, 

confirming that the procedures used to collect the samples 

were consistent. Matrix spike recoveries for 58 of 231 organic 

constituents were lower than the acceptable limits, which may 

indicate that these constituents might not have been detected in 

some samples if they were present at very low concentrations. 

Ten of these 58 constituents were detected in ground-water 

samples. Surrogate recoveries were all within acceptable 

limits for the analyses that use surrogates. The QC results are 

described in the Appendix.

Comparison with Regulatory and Health-Based 

Thresholds 

Concentrations in ground-water samples were compared 

with CDPH and USEPA drinking-water regulatory and 

health-based thresholds and thresholds established for 

aesthetic purposes (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2006; California Department of Public Health, 2007a) as 

a way to give context to the detected concentrations. The 

chemical and microbial data presented in this report are 

meant to characterize the quality of the untreated groundwater resources within SESJ and in no way are intended to 

represent the treated drinking water delivered to consumers 

by water purveyors. The chemical and microbial composition 

of treated drinking water may differ from untreated ground 

water because treated drinking water may be subjected to 

disinfection, filtration, and blending with other waters prior to 

its delivery to consumers. 

The following thresholds are used for comparisons:

•	 MCLs—Maximum Contaminant Level. Legally 

enforceable standards that apply to public-water 

systems and are designed to protect public health by 

limiting the levels of contaminants in drinking water. 

MCLs established by the USEPA are the minimum 

standards with which states are required to comply, 

and individual states may choose to set more stringent 

standards. CDPH has established MCLs for additional 

constituents not regulated by the USEPA and has 

lowered the threshold concentration for a number of 

constituents with MCLs established by the USEPA. In 

this report, a threshold set by the USEPA and adopted 

by CDPH is labeled “MCL-US”, and one set by CDPH 

that is more stringent than the MCL-US is labeled 

“MCL-CA”. CDPH is notified when constituents 

are detected at concentrations exceeding MCL-US 

or MCL-CA thresholds in samples collected for the 

GAMA Statewide Basin Assessment project.

•	 SMCLs—Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level.

Non-enforceable standards applied to constituents that 
12 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

affect the aesthetic qualities of drinking water, such 

as taste, odor, and color. Both the USEPA and CDPH 

define SMCLs, but unlike MCLs, SMCLs established 

by CDPH are not required to be at least as stringent 

as those established by USEPA. SMCLs established 

by CDPH are used in this report (SMCL-CA) for 

all constituents that have SMCL-CA values. The 

SMCL-US is used for pH because no SMCL-CA has 

been defined.

•	 HAL—Lifetime Health Advisory Level. The 

maximum concentration of a constituent at which its 

presence in drinking water is not expected to cause any 

adverse carcinogenic effects for a lifetime of exposure. 

HALs are established by the USEPA (HAL) and are 

calculated assuming consumption of 2 liters of water 

per day over a 70-year lifetime by a 70-kilogram adult 

and that 20 percent of a person’s exposure comes from 

drinking water.

•	 AL—Action Level. Legally enforceable standards 

that apply to public water systems and are designed to 

protect public health by limiting the levels of copper 

and lead in drinking water. Detections of copper 

or lead above thresholds trigger requirements for 

mandatory water treatment to reduce the corrosiveness 

of water to water pipes. The action levels established 

by the USEPA and CDPH are the same, thus the 

thresholds are labeled “AL” in this report.

•	 RSD5—Risk-Specific Dose. The concentration of 

a constituent in drinking water corresponding to an 

excess estimated lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 100,000. 

RSD5 is an acronym for risk-specific dose at 10-5. 

RSD5s are calculated by dividing the 10-4 cancer 

risk concentration established by the USEPA by 10 

(RSD5).

•	 NL—Notification Level. Health-based notification 

levels established by CDPH for some of the 

constituents in drinking water that lack MCLs 

(NL-CA). If a constituent is detected above its 

NL-CA, State law requires timely notification of 

local governing bodies and recommends consumer 

notification. 

•	 TT—Treatment Technique. Legally enforceable 

standards that apply to public-water systems and are 

designed to protect public health by limiting the levels 

of copper, lead, and microbial constituents in drinking 

water. TT requirements are applied when water 

delivered to consumers exceeds specified action levels. 

Detections of copper or lead above thresholds trigger 

requirements for mandatory water treatment to reduce 

the corrosiveness of water to water pipes. Detections 

of microbial constituents above thresholds trigger 

requirements for mandatory additional disinfection 

during water treatment. The action levels established 

by the USEPA and CDPH are the same, thus these 

thresholds are labeled “TT-US” in this report

For constituents with MCLs, detections in groundwater samples were compared to the MCL-US or MCL-CA. 

Constituents with SMCLs were compared with the SMCL-CA. 

For chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved solids, CDPH defines 

a “recommended” and an “upper” SMCL-CA; detections of 

these constituents in ground-water samples are compared with 

both levels. The SMCL-US for these constituents corresponds 

to the recommended SMCL-CA. Detected concentrations 

of constituents that lack MCLs and SMCLs were compared 

to NL-CAs. For constituents that lack an MCL, SMCL, or 

NL-CA, detected concentrations were compared with the 

HAL. For constituents that lack an MCL, SMCL, NL-CA, 

or HAL, detected concentrations were compared with the 

RSD5. Note that this hierarchy of selection of comparison 

thresholds means that for constituents that have multiple types 

of established thresholds, the threshold used for comparison 

purposes may not be the one with the lowest concentration. 

The comparison thresholds used in this report are listed 

in tables 3A–L for all constituents and in tables 4–15 for 

constituents detected in ground-water samples from SESJ. 

Detections of constituents at concentrations greater than the 

comparison threshold are marked with an asterisk. 

Water-Quality Data

Results from the analyses of raw (untreated) groundwater for the SESJ study are presented in tables 4–15. Groundwater samples collected in SESJ were analyzed for more than 

300 constituents (tables 3A–L); 172 of those constituents were 

not detected in any of the samples. The tables present only 

the constituents that were detected, and list only samples that 

had at least one constituent detected. For constituent classes 

that were analyzed at all of the grid wells, the tables include 

the number of wells at which each analyte was detected, the 

frequency at which it was detected (in relation to the number 

of grid wells), and the total number of constituents detected 

at each well. Results from the understanding wells are 

presented in the tables, but these results were excluded from 

the detection frequency calculations to avoid statistically overrepresenting the areas in the vicinity of the flow-paths.

Table 4 includes water-quality indicators measured in the 

field and at NWQL, while tables 5–15 present the results of 

ground-water analyses organized by the compound types and 

classes: 

•	 Organic constituents

•	 VOCs and gasoline oxygenates (table 5)

•	 Pesticides and pesticide degradates (table 6A)

•	 Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and 

caffeine (table 6B)

•	 Constituents of special interest (table 7)

•	 Inorganic constituents

•	 Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon (table 8)

•	 Major and minor ions (table 9)

•	 Trace elements (table 10)
Ground-Water Quality Results 13

•	 Arsenic and iron species (table 11)

•	 Radioactive constituents (table 12)

•	 Microbial indicators (table 13)

•	 Tracer constituents

•	 Stable isotopes of oxygen and hydrogen in water and 

oxygen and nitrogen in nitrate (table 14)

•	 Noble gases, helium isotopes, and tritium (table 15)

Field Parameters

Field and laboratory measurements of dissolved 

oxygen, pH, specific conductance, alkalinity, turbidity, water 

temperature and associated parameters are presented in 

table 4. Dissolved oxygen and alkalinity are used as indicators 

of natural processes that control water chemistry. Specific 

conductance is the unit electrical conductivity of the water and 

is proportional to amount of dissolved salts in the water. The 

pH value indicates the acidity or basicity of the water. Eleven 

of the 83 grid wells had specific conductance values above 

the recommended SMCL-CA, but only one well also was was 

above the upper threshold. Eight grid wells had field-measured 

pH values outside of the SMCL-US range for pH.

Organic Constituents

Volatile Organic Compounds and Gasoline Additives

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are present in paints, 

solvents, fuels, fuel additives, refrigerants, fumigants, and 

disinfected water and are characterized by their tendency to 

evaporate. VOCs generally persist longer in ground water 

than in surface water because ground water is isolated from 

the atmosphere. Fifty-nine of the 88 VOCs analyzed were 

not detected in any samples. Approximately 60 percent of the 

83 grid wells sampled had at least one detection of a VOC 

(table 5). Four VOCs were detected in more than 10 percent 

of the wells: chloroform (a disinfection by-product), DBCP 

(a soil fumigant and nematocide), tetrachloroethene (PCE, a 

solvent used for dry-cleaning), and m- and o-xylenes (gasoline 

component, solvent). Two VOCs were detected above a 

regulatory threshold: DBCP and benzene. Benzene (gasoline 

component, organic synthesis) was detected at a level almost 

80 times its MCL in one well. This concentration is similar 

to what has been detected historically. The water is treated 

to reduce benzene concentrations before it enters the public 

supply system. Most of the other VOCs detected were at 

concentrations one-tenth to less than one-hundredth of the 

threshold value.

Pesticides

Pesticides include herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides 

and are used to control weeds, insects, fungi, and other pests 

in agricultural, urban, and suburban settings. All detections 

of pesticides or pesticide degradates that had health-based 

thresholds in samples from SESJ were below these thresholds, 

and almost all were less than one-hundredth of the threshold 

values (tables 6A, 6B). More than half of the grid wells 

sampled had at least one pesticide detection. Seven pesticides 

were detected in more the 10 percent of the grid wells 

sampled. Five of these (simazine, deethylatrazine, atrazine, 

prometon, and bromacil) are among the most commonly 

detected pesticides in ground water nationally (Gilliom and 

others, 2006).

Caffeine was detected in 36 percent of the 28 grid 

wells sampled for polar pesticides. Caffeine, which is not a 

registered pesticide, is included on the polar pesticide class 

of constituents because its molecular structure allows it to 

be detected using the same analytical methods as the polar 

pesticides.

Constituents of Special Interest

Perchlorate, NDMA, and 1,2,3-TCP are constituents of 

special interest in California because they recently have been 

found in water supplies (California Department of Public 

Health, 2007b). Perchlorate was detected in 19 percent of 

the grid wells, but only one had a concentration above the 

MCL-CA (table 7). NDMA and 1,2,3-TCP were not detected 

above their thresholds.

Inorganic Constituents

Unlike the organic constituents and the constituents of 

special interest, most of the inorganic constituents are present 

naturally in ground water, although their concentrations may 

be influenced by human activities. Forty-four of the 99 SESJ 

wells were sampled for nutrients, major and minor ions, and 

trace elements. 

The nutrients—nitrogen and phosphorus—and the 

dissolved organic carbon present in ground water can affect 

biological activity in aquifers and in surface-water bodies 

that receive ground-water discharge. Nitrogen may be 

present in the form of ammonia, nitrite, or nitrate, depending 

on the oxidation-reduction state of the ground water. High 

concentrations of nitrate can adversely affect human health, 

particularly the health of infants. Nitrate was detected in 

22 grid wells and 14 understanding wells, with six of the 

detections above the MCL-US (table 8). All six of the 

detections above the MCL-US were in understanding wells, of 

which only one was a public-supply well. Concentrations of 

orthophosphate and dissolved organic carbon were low.

The major-ion composition, total dissolved solids (TDS) 

content, and levels of certain trace elements in ground water 

affect the aesthetic properties of water such as taste, color, and 

odor, and the technical properties such as scaling and staining. 

Although there are no adverse health effects associated with 

these properties, they may reduce consumer satisfaction 

with the water or may have economic impacts. CDPH has 

established non-enforceable thresholds (SMCL-CAs) that are 

based on aesthetic or technical properties rather than health-
14 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

based concerns for the major ions chloride and sulfate, TDS, 

and a few trace elements.

Sulfate, TDS, (table 9) and manganese (table 10) were 

detected above recommended threshold values. Samples from 

one grid well and six understanding wells had concentrations 

of TDS above the recommended SMCL-CA, of which one 

was greater than the upper threshold. This sample was not 

from a public supply well. Samples from two wells had sulfate 

concentrations greater than the recommended SMCL-CA. 

Manganese was detected above its SMCL-CA in one grid well 

and two understanding wells. Manganese is a trace element 

whose concentration is affected by the oxidation-reduction 

state of the ground water. Precipitation of minerals containing 

manganese may cause orange or black staining of surfaces.

Eighteen of the 25 trace elements analyzed in this study 

have health-based thresholds; 2 trace elements have 

SMCL-CAs; 2 trace elements have NL-CAs. Of the 23 trace 

elements detected (table 10), 4 were detected at concentrations 

above established health-based thresholds. Arsenic and 

uranium were detected above their MCLs. Boron and 

vanadium were detected above their NL-CAs. 

Arsenic, iron, and chromium occur in different species 

depending on the oxidation-reduction state of the ground 

water. The oxidized and reduced species have different 

solubilities in ground water and may have different effects 

on human health. The relative proportions of the oxidized 

and reduced species of each element also are used to aid in 

interpretation of the oxidation–reduction state of the aquifer. 

Concentrations of arsenic and iron and the concentrations of 

either the reduced or oxidized species of each element are 

reported on table 11. The concentration of the other species 

can be calculated by difference. The concentrations of arsenic 

and iron reported in table 11 may be different than those 

reported in table 10 because different analytical methods were 

used (see Appendix). The concentrations reported in table 10

are considered to be more accurate. Chromium species are 

not shown in the table because of suspected contamination of 

samples during the preservation process.

Radioactive Constituents

Radioactivity is the release of energy or energetic 

particles during changes in the structure of the nucleus of an 

atom. Most of the radioactivity in ground water comes from 

decay of naturally occurring isotopes of uranium and thorium 

that are present within minerals in the saturated sediments or 

fractured rocks. Both uranium and thorium decay in a series of 

steps, eventually forming stable isotopes of lead. Radium-226, 

radium-228, and radon-222 are radioactive isotopes formed 

during the uranium and thorium decay series. In each step in 

the decay series, one radioactive element turns into a different 

radioactive element by emitting an alpha or a beta particle 

from its nucleus. For example, radium-226 emits an alpha 

particle, and thus, turns into radon-222. Radium-228 decays 

to form actinium-228 by emission of a beta particle. The 

alpha and beta particles emitted during radioactive decay are 

hazardous to human health because these energetic particles 

may damage cells. Radiation damage to cell DNA may 

increase the risk of getting cancer.

Activity often is used instead of concentration for 

reporting the presence of radioactive constituents. Activity 

of radioactive constituents in ground water is measured in 

units of picocuries per liter (pCi/L), and one picocurie is 

approximately equal to two atoms decaying per minute. The 

number of atoms decaying is equal to the number of alpha or 

beta particles emitted. 

In nature, uranium atoms exist as uranium-238 

(99.275 percent), uranium-235 (0.711 percent), and a very 

small amount of uranium-234 (0.0058 percent). Natural 

uranium only is weakly radioactive. Scientists have never 

detected cancer caused by radiation from low levels of natural 

uranium. However, exposure to some of uranium’s decay 

products, especially radon, can pose a significant health threat 

(Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999). 

Uranium isotope activities were detected above the MCL-CA 

for uranium-234 and -238 in 1 well of the 44 that were 

sampled (table 12). This well was an understanding well and 

was not used for public supply.

The activity of 72-hour counts of gross alpha radiation 

were above the MCL-US in 5 of the 24 wells sampled for 

radioactive constituents; one of these wells was a grid well, 

and the remaining four were understanding wells. Two wells 

were above the MCL-US for 30-day counts of gross alpha 

radiation; one of these was a grid well. Activities of gross 

beta radiation and radium all were less than the established 

health-based standards (table 13). The activities of radon-222 

in all samples collected were above the proposed MCL-US 

of 300 pCi/L, however, no samples had an activity that also 

was above the proposed alternative MCL-US of 4,000 pCi/L. 

The alternative MCL-US will apply if the State or local water 

agency has an approved multimedia mitigation program to 

address radon in indoor air (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1999a). 

Microbial Constituents

Water is disinfected during drinking-water treatment 

to prevent diseases that may be spread by water-borne 

microbial constituents derived from human or animal wastes. 

The specific viruses and bacteria responsible for diseases 

generally are not measured because routine analytical methods 

are not available. Measurements are made of more easily 

analyzed microbial constituents that serve as indicators of the 

presence of human or animal waste in water. Coliforms and 

coliphage are used as indicator organisms for water-borne 

pathogens. Coliforms indicate that the potential for bacterial 

contamination and coliphage are viruses that infect coliform 

bacteria and are indicators for fecal contamination in the well 

as well as represent the potential survival and transport of 

viruses. Drinking water purveyors respond to detections of 

microbial indicators by applying additional disinfection to the 

water.
Summary 15

Two grid wells of the nine grid and understanding wells 

sampled for microbial constituents had total coliforms above 

the MCL-US, however, Escherichia coli, an indicator of fecal 

contamination, was not detected (table 13). Somatic coliphage 

was detected in one grid well, but not the F-specific coliphage, 

which comes from warm-blooded animals or sewage.

Tracer Constituents

Stable isotope ratios, tritium and carbon-14 activities, 

and noble gas concentrations can be used as tracers of natural 

processes affecting ground-water composition. Hydrogen 

and oxygen stable isotope ratios of water can be used to 

aid in interpretation of ground-water recharge sources. 

The stable isotope ratios of water (table 14) depend on the 

altitude, latitude, and temperature of precipitation and on 

the extent of evaporation of surface or soil water. Nitrogen 

and oxygen stable isotope ratios of nitrate can be used to aid 

in interpretation of sources and processes affecting nitrate 

concentrations (table 14). Carbon-14 (table 12) is a radioactive 

isotope of carbon that is incorporated into dissolved carbonate 

species in water. Low levels of carbon-14 are produced 

continuously by cosmic ray bombardment of nitrogen in 

the atmosphere. Because carbon-14 decays with a half-life 

of approximately 5,700 years, low activities of carbon-14, 

relative to modern values, generally indicate presence of 

ground water that is several thousand years old.

Tritium activities (tables 12 and 15), carbon-14 activities 

(table 12), and helium isotope ratios (table 15) can provide 

information about the time since the water entered the groundwater system (ground-water age). Tritium is a radioactive 

isotope of hydrogen that is incorporated into the water 

molecule. Low levels of tritium are produced continuously 

by cosmic ray bombardment of water in the atmosphere, 

and a large amount of tritium was produced by atmospheric 

testing of nuclear weapons between 1952 and 1963. Thus, 

concentrations of tritium above background generally indicate 

the presence of water recharged since the early 1950’s. Helium 

isotope ratios (table 15) can be used in conjunction with 

tritium concentrations to estimate more exact ages for young 

ground water. Noble gas concentrations (table 15) can be 

used to aid in interpretation of ground-water recharge sources 

because the concentrations of the different noble gases depend 

on water temperature.

Of the tracer constituents analyzed for this study, the only 

one with a health-based threshold is tritium. All measured 

tritium activities were less than one-thousandth of the 

MCL-CA.

Future Work

 Subsequent reports will be focused on assessment of 

the data presented in this report using a variety of statistical, 

qualitative, and quantitative approaches to assess the natural 

and human factors affecting ground-water quality. Waterquality data contained in the CDPH and USGS-NWIS 

databases and other water-quality data available from State 

and local water agencies will be compiled, evaluated, and used 

to complement the data presented in this report.

Summary

Ground-water quality in the approximately 3,800-mi2

(9,700-km2) Southeast San Joaquin (SESJ) study unit was 

investigated from October 2005 through February 2006 as part 

of the Priority Basin Assessment Project of Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The 

GAMA Priority Basin Assessment project was developed 

in response to the Ground-Water Quality Monitoring Act of 

2001 Survey (http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/gama/; Belitz and 

others, 2003); and is being implemented by the California 

State Water Resources Control Board in collaboration with 

the U.S. Geological Survey and Lawrence-Livermore National 

Laboratory. The project is a comprehensive assessment of 

statewide ground-water quality designed to help identify and 

characterize risks to ground-water resources, and to increase 

the availability of information about ground-water quality to 

the public. SESJ was the seventh study unit sampled as part of 

the project. 

 SESJ is in the southeast portion of the San Joaquin 

Valley in the Central Valley hydrogeologic province. The 

study unit includes four ground-water subbasins, as defined 

by the California Department of Water Resources (California 

Department of Water Resources, 2003). SESJ included 

assessment of the ground-water quality from 99 wells in 

Fresno, Tulare, and Kings Counties. Eighty-three of the wells 

were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized gridbased method to achieve a statistically unbiased representation 

of ground water used for public drinking-water supplies (“grid 

wells”). Sixteen additional wells (“understanding wells”) were 

selected to provide additional sampling density to aid in the 

understanding of processes affecting ground-water quality. 

Ground-water samples were analyzed for VOCs, pesticides 

and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, 

nutrients, major and minor ions, trace elements, radioactivity, 

and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (stable 

isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon, and 

activities of tritium and carbon-14) and dissolved noble gases 

also were measured to provide a data set that can be used in 

the interpretation of the source and age of the sampled ground 

water. This report describes the hydrogeologic setting of the 

SESJ region; details the sampling, analytical, and qualityassurance methods used in the study; and presents the results 

of the chemical and microbial analyses made of the groundwater samples collected October 2005 through February 2006.
16 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, samples 

for matrix spikes) were collected from about 10 percent of 

the wells, and the results for these samples were used to 

evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. 

In addition, surrogates were added to all VOC and pesticide 

samples. Assessment of the quality-control data showed 

that the sample data were of good quality (low bias and low 

variability), and resulted in censoring of less than 1 percent of 

the ground-water-quality data.

This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water 

delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, 

water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with 

other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory 

thresholds apply to treated water that is served to the 

consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some 

context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured 

in the raw ground water were compared with health-based 

thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health 

(CDPH). 

Fifty-nine of the 88 VOCs analyzed were not detected. Of 

the VOCs detected, most were detected at concentrations onetenth to less than one-hundreth of the health-based threshold 

value for those compounds that had health-based thresholds. 

Two VOCs were detected above a regulatory threshold: 

DBCP and benzene. All detections of pesticides or pesticide 

degradates that had health-based thresholds were below their 

thresholds, and most were less than one-hundredth of the 

threshold values. Nitrate was detected above its maximum 

contaminant level (MCL) in six understanding well samples 

of which one was a public supply well. Two trace elements 

were detected above MCLs: arsenic and uranium. Perchlorate 

was detected above its MCL-CA in one grid well. Gross 

alpha radiation activities were detected above their MCL in 

one grid well and four understanding wells. Uranium isotope 

activity was greater than the MCL for one understanding 

well. Radon-222 was detected above the proposed MCL-US 

of 300 pCi/L in all wells sampled, but none were above the 

proposed alternative MCL-US of 4,000 pCi/L. Total coliforms 

were detected in two grid wells and somatic coliphage was 

detected in one grid well. Total dissolved solids, specific 

conductance, sulfate, and manganese were detected above 

their SMCL-CAs, and pH was detected above its SMCL-US, 

non-enforceable thresholds for aesthetic concerns, in samples 

from several of the grid and understanding wells. NDMA, 

boron, and vanadium were detected above their respective 

NL-CAs. Future work will evaluate the data presented in this 

report using a variety of statistical, qualitative, and quantitative 

approaches to assess the natural and human factors affecting 

ground-water quality. 

References Cited

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1999, 

Public health statement for uranium, http://www.atsdr.cdc.

gov/toxprofiles/phs150.html (accessed June 6, 2007).

American Public Health Association, 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, p. 3-37–3-43.

American Society for Testing and Materials, 1998a, Annual 

book of ASTM standards - water and environmental 

technology: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, American Society 

for Testing and Materials, v. 11.02 (Water II), 1048 p.

American Society for Testing and Materials, 1998b, Annual 

book of ASTM standards - water and environmental 

technology, v. 11.01 Water (I), 890 p.

American Society for Testing and Materials, 2005, Annual 

book of ASTM standards - water and environmental 

technology, v. 11.02 (Water II), 1288 p.

Anderson, C.W., 2005, Tubidity (ver. 2.1): U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 

9, chap. A6.7, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/twri9A6.7/

Ball, J.W. and McCleskey, R.B., 2003a, A new cationexchange method for accurate field speciation of hexavalent 

chromium: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 03-4018, 17 p.

Ball, J.W., and McCleskey, R.B., 2003b, A new cationexchange method for accurate field speciation of hexavalent 

chromium: Talanta, v. 61, p. 305–313.

Belitz, Kenneth, Dubrovsky, N.M., Burow, K.R., Jurgens, 

B., and Johnson, T., 2003, Framework for a ground-water 

quality monitoring and assessment program for California: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 03-4166, 78 p.

Bennett, G.L., V, Belitz, Kenneth, and Milby–Dawson, B.J., 

2006, California GAMA Program—Ground-water quality 

data in the northern San Joaquin basin study unit, 2005: 

U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 196, 122 p.

Brenton, R.W. and Arnett, T.L., 1993, Methods of analysis 

by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality 

Laboratory - determination of dissolved organic carbon 

by UV-promoted persulfate oxidation and infrared 

spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

92-480, 12 p.
References Cited 17

Burow, K.R., Weissmann, G.S., Miller, R.D., and Placzek, G., 

1997, Hydrogeologic facies characterization of an alluvial 

fan near Fresno, California, using geophysical techniques: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-46, 15 p.

Bushon, R.N., 2003, Fecal indicator viruses: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 

9, chap. A7.2, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/twri9A7.2/

California Department of Public Health, 2007a, California 

Code of Regulations. Title 22, Division 4 Environmental 

Health, Chapter 15 Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring 

Regulations. Register 2007, No. 4 (current as of January 26, 

2007), http://ccr.oal.ca.gov/ (accessed February 10, 2007).

California Department of Public Health, 2007b, Chemical 

contaminants in drinking water: http://www.dhs.ca.gov/ps/

ddwem/chemicals/default.htm (accessed March 31, 2007).

California Department of Water Resources, 2003, California’s 

groundwater: California Department of Water Resources 

Bulletin 118, update 2003, 246 p, http://www.groundwater.

water.ca.gov/bulletin118/update2003/index.cfm (accessed 

April 4, 2007).

California Department of Water Resources, 2006a, California 

Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118, individual 

basin descriptions, Kings subbasin, http://www.dpla2.water.

ca.gov/publications/groundwater/bulletin118/basins/pdfs_

desc/5-22.08.pdf (accessed April 4, 2007).

California Department of Water Resources, 2006b, California 

Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118, individual 

basin descriptions, Kaweah subbasin, http://www.dpla2.

water.ca.gov/publications/groundwater/bulletin118/basins/

pdfs_desc/5-22.11.pdf (accessed April 4, 2007).

California Department of Water Resource, 2006c, California 

Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118, individual 

basin descriptions, Tule subbasin, http://www.dpla2.water.

ca.gov/publications/groundwater/bulletin118/basins/pdfs_

desc/5-22.13.pdf (accessed April 4, 2007).

California Department of Water Resources, 2006d, California 

Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118, individual 

basin descriptions, Tulare Lake subbasin, http://www.dpla2.

water.ca.gov/publications/groundwater/bulletin118/basins/

pdfs_desc/5-22.12.pdf (accessed April 4, 2007).

Casciotti, K.L., Sigman, D.M., Galanter Hastings, M., Böhlke, 

J.K., and Hilkert, A., 2002, Measurement of the oxygen 

isotopic composition of nitrate in seawater and freshwater 

using the denitrifier method: Analytical Chemistry, v. 74, 

p. 4905–4912.

Childress, C.J.O., Foreman, W.T., Connor, B.F., and Maloney, 

T.J., 1999, New reporting procedures based on long-term 

method detection levels and some considerations for 

interpretations of water-quality data provided by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–193, 19 p.

Clarke, W.B., Jenkins, W.J., and Top, Z., 1976, Determination 

of tritium by mass spectrometric measurement of He-3: 

International Journal of Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 

v. 27, p. 515–522.

Connor, B.F., Rose, D.L., Noriega, M.C., Murtagh, L.K., 

and Abney, S.R., 1998, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory - 

determination of 86 volatile organic compounds in water 

by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry, including 

detections less than reporting limits: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 97–829, 78 p.

Coplen, T.B., Wildman, J.D., and Chen, J., 1991, 

Improvements in the gaseous hydrogen-water equilibrium 

technique for hydrogen isotope analysis: Analytical 

Chemistry, v. 63, p. 910–912.

Coplen, T.B., 1994, Reporting of stable hydrogen, carbon, and 

oxygen isotopic abundances: Pure and Applied Chemistry, 

v. 66, p. 273–276.

Coplen, T.B., Hopple, J.A., Bohlke, J.K., Peiser, H.S., Rieder, 

S.E., Krouse, H.R., Rosman, K.J.R., Ding, T., Vocke Jr., 

R.D., Revesz, K.M., Lamberty, A., Taylor, P., and DeBierve, 

P., 2002, Compilation of minimum and maximum isotope 

ratios of selected elements in naturally occurring terrestrial 

materials and reagents: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 01–4222, 98 p.

Dawson, B.J., Bennett, G.L., V, and Belitz, Kenneth, 2008, 

California GAMA Program: Ground-water quality data 

in the Southern Sacramento Valley study unit, California, 

2005: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 285, 93 p.

Donahue, D.J., Linick, T.W., and Jull, A.J.T., 1990, Ratio and 

background corrections for accelerator mass spectrometry 

radiocarbon measurements: Radiocarbon, v. 32, p. 135–142.

Eaton, G.F., Hudson, G.B., and Moran, J.E., 2004, Tritiumhelium-3 age-dating of groundwater in the Livermore Valley 

of California: American Chemical Society ACS Symposium 

Series, v. 868, p. 235–245.

Epstein, S., and Mayeda, T.K., 1953, Variation of O-18 

content of water from natural sources: Geochimica et 

Cosmochimica Acta, v. 4, p. 213–224.
18 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Faires, L.M., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

determination of metals in water by inductively coupled 

plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 92–634, 28 p.

Firestone, R.B., Shirley, V.S., Baglin, C.M., Chu, S.Y.F., and 

Zipkin, J., 1996, Table of Isotopes, 8th ed.: New York, John 

Wiley & Sons, 3168 p. http://ie.lbl.gov/toipdf/toi20.pdf

Fishman, M.J., and Friedman, L.C., 1989, Methods for 

determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial 

sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chap. A1, 545 p.

Fishman, M.J., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

determination of inorganic and organic constituents in water 

and fluvial sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 93–125, 217 p.

Fram, M.S., and Belitz, K., 2007, Ground-water quality data 

in the Southern Sierra, California, 2006: Results from the 

California GAMA program: U.S. Geological Survey Data 

Series 301, 78 p.

Furlong, E.T., Anderson, B.D., Werner, S.L., Soliven, P.P., 

Coffey, L.J., and Burkhardt, M.R., 2001, Methods of 

analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water 

Quality Laboratory—determination of pesticides in 

water by graphitized carbon-based solid-phase extraction 

and high-performance liquid chromatography/mass 

spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 01–4134, 73 p.

Garbarino, J.R., 1999, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory–

determination of dissolved arsenic, boron, lithium, 

selenium, strontium, thallium, and vanadium using 

inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 99–093, 31 p.

Garbarino, J.R. and Damrau, D.L., 2001, Methods of analysis 

by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—determination of organic plus inorganic 

mercury in filtered and unfiltered natural water with cold 

vapor —atomic fluorescence spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4132, 

16 p.

Garbarino, J.R., Kanagy, J.R., and Cree, M.E., 2006, 

Determination of elements in natural-water, biota, sediment, 

and soil samples using collision/reaction cell inductively 

coupled plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques and Methods, book 5, chap. B1, 88 p.

Gilliom, R.J., Barbash, J.E., Crawford, C.G., Hamilton, P.A., 

Martin, J.D., Nakagaki, N., Nowell, L.H., Scott, J.C., 

Stackelberg, P.E., Thelin, G.P., and Wolock, D.M., 2006, 

The quality of our Nation’s waters: Pesticides in the nation’s 

streams and ground water, 1992–2001: U.S. Geological 

Survey Circular 1291, 172 p.

Grob, R.L., ed., 1995, Modern practice of gas chromatography 

(3rd ed.): New York, John Wiley & Sons, 888 p.

Hamlin, S.N., Belitz, Kenneth, Kraja, S., and Dawson, B.J., 

2002, Ground-water quality in the Santa Ana watershed, 

California: Overview and data summary: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 02–4243, 

137 p.

Hautman, D.P., Munch, D.J., Eaton, A.D., and Haghani, 

A.W., 1999, Method 314.0 Determination of perchlorate in 

drinking water using ion chromatography, revision 1.0: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, accessed June 22, 2004, 

at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/methods/pdfs/methods/

met314.pdf

Hutson, S.S., Barber, N.L., Kenny, J.F., Linsey, K.S., Lumia, 

D.S., and Maupin, M.A., 2004, Estimated use of water in 

the United States in 2000: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

1268, 46 p.

Jennings, C.W., 1977, Geologic map of California. California 

Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and 

Geology, Geologic Data Map No. 2, scale 1:750,000.

Jull, A.J.T., Burr, G.S., McHargue, L.R., Lange, T.E., Lifton, 

N.A., Beck, J.W., Donahue, D.J., and Lal, D., 2004, 

New frontiers in dating of geological, paleoclimatic, 

and anthropological applications using accelerator mass 

spectrometric measurements of 14C and 10Be in diverse 

samples: Global and Planetary Change, v. 41, p. 309–323.

Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., 

Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and Buxton, H.T., 2002, 

Pharmaceuticals, hormones and other organic wastewater 

contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999–2000: Environmental 

Science & Technology, v. 36, no. 6, p. 1202–1211. 

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.

Kulongoski, J.T., and Belitz, Kenneth, 2004, Groundwater ambient monitoring and assessment program: U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2004–3088, 2 p.
References Cited 19

Kulongoski, J.T., Belitz, Kenneth, and Dawson, B.J., 2006, 

Ground-water quality data in the North San Francisco Bay 

Hydrogeologic provinces, California, 2004: Results form 

the California Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) Program: U.S. Geological Survey 

Data Series 167, 100 p.

Kulongoski, J.T., and Belitz, Kenneth, 2007, Ground-water 

quality data in the Monterey Bay and Salinas Valley basins, 

California, 2005—Results from the California GAMA 

Program: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 258, 84 p.

Lane, S.L., Flanagan, S., and Wilde, F.D., 2003, Selection of 

equipment for water sampling (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 

9, chap. A2, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/twri9A2/

Lewis, M.E., 2006, Dissolved oxygen (ver. 2.1): U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chap. A6.2, accessed June 28, 2007, 

at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A6.2/

Lindley, C.E., Stewart, J.T., and Sandstrom, M.W., 1996, 

Determination of low concentrations of acetochlor in 

water by automated solid-phase extraction and gas 

chromatography with mass selective detection: Journal of 

AOAC International, v. 79, no. 4, p. 962–966.

Madsen, J.E., Sandstrom, M.W., and Zaugg, S.D., 2003, 

Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey National 

Water Quality Laboratory—A method supplement for 

the determination of fipronil and degradates in water by 

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 02–462, 11 p.

Maloney, T.J., 2005, Quality management system, U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005–1263, http://

pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1263/pdf/OFR2005-1263.pdf

McCleskey, R.B., Nordstrom, D.K., and Ball, J.W., 2003, 

Metal interferences and their removal prior to the 

determination of As(T) and As(III) in acid mine waters by 

hydride generation atomic absorption spectrometry: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

03–4117, 14 p.

McLain, B., 1993, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—determination 

of chromium in water by graphite furnace atomic absorption 

spectrophotometry: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 93–449, 16 p.

Moran, J.E., Hudson, G.B., Eaton, G.F., and Leif, R., 

2002, A contamination vulnerability assessment for the 

Livermore-Amador and Niles Cone Groundwater Basins 

UCRL-AR-148831, 25 p.

Myers, D.N., 2004, Fecal indicator bacteria (ver. 1.2): 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chap. A7.1, accessed June 28, 2007, 

at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A7.1/

Patton, C.J. and Kryskalla, J.R., 2003, Methods of analysis 

by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—evaluation of alkaline persulfate digestion as 

an alternative to Kjeldahl digestion for determination of 

total and dissolved nitrogen and phosphorous in water: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

03–4174, 33 p.

Pirkey, K.D. and Glodt, S.R., 1998, Quality control at the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact-Sheet FS-026-98, 4 p., http://pubs.

er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/fs/fs02698

Radtke, D.B., Davis, J.V., and Wilde, F.D., 2005, Specific 

electrical conductance (ver. 1.2): U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, 

chap. A6.3, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/twri9A6.3/

Rose, D.L. and Sandstrom, M.W., 2003, Methods of analysis 

by the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory—determination of gasoline oxygenates, selected 

degradates, and BTEX in water by heated purge and trap/

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4079, 

31 p.

Rounds, S.A., 2006, Alkalinity and acid neutralizing capacity 

(ver. 3): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A6.6, accessed June 

28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A6.6/

Sandstrom, M.W., Stroppel, M.E., Foreman, W.T., and 

Schroeder, M.P., 2001, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

determination of moderate-use pesticides and selected 

degradates in water by C-18 solid-phase extraction and 

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4098, 

70 p.

Scott, J.C., 1990, Computerized stratified random site 

selection approaches for design of a ground-water quality 

sampling network: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 90–4101, 109 p.

Shelton, J.L., Burow, K.R., Belitz, Kenneth., Dubrovsky, 

N.M., Land, M.T., and Gronberg, J.M., 2001, Low-level 

volatile organic compounds in active public supply wells 

as ground-water tracers in the Los Angeles physiographic 

basin, California, 2000: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 01–4188, 29 p.
20 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Stookey, L.L., 1970, FerroZine—a new spectrophotometric 

reagent for iron: Analytical Chemistry, v. 42, p. 779–781.

Thatcher, L.L., Janzer, V.J., and Edwards, K.W., 1977, 

Methods for the determination of radioactive substances 

in water: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chap. A5, 95 p.

Timme, P.J., 1995, National Water Quality Laboratory 1995 

services catalog: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

95–352, 120 p.

To, T.B., Nordstrom, D.K., Cunningham, K.M., Ball, J.W., 

and McCleskey, R.B., 1998, New method for the direct 

determination of dissolved Fe(III) concentration in acid 

mine waters: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 33, 

p. 807–813.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980, Prescribed 

procedures for measurement of radioactivity in 

drinking water: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

EPA-600-4-80-032, 6 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995, Method 524.2, 

Measurement of purgeable organic compounds in water by 

capillary column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA/600/R-95-131, 

48 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996, Method 

8270C—semivolatile organic compounds by gas 

chromatography/mass spectrometry, revision 3.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999a, National 

Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Radon-222: Federal 

Register, v. 64, no. 211, p. 59245–59294.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999b, Method 1625 

revision B—semivolatile organic compounds by isotope 

dilution GC/MS, 40 CFR Part 136, Appendix A.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001, Method 

1601—Male-specific (F+) and somatic Coliphage in water 

by two-step enrichment procedure—April 2000 Draft: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency EPA 821-R-00-009.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002a, Guidelines for 

establishing procedures for the analysis of pollutants: U.S. 

Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, 136 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002b, Method 

1604—total coliforms and Escherichia coli in water 

by membrane filtration using a simultaneous detection 

technique (MI medium): U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency EPA 821-R-02-024.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004, National 

primary drinking water regulations—analytical method for 

uranium: U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, part 

141, revised as of June 2004, p. 31008-31013.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006, 2006 Edition 

of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, 

updated August 2006: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Water EPA 822-R-06-013, http://www.

epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/drinking/dwstandards.pdf

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, National field manual for the 

collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, 

chap. A1–A9, http://water.usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/

Water Education Foundation, 2006, Where does my water 

come from? http://www.water-ed.org/watersources/default.

asp

Weiss, R.F., 1968, Piggyback sampler for dissolved gas 

studies on sealed water samples: Deep Sea Research, v. 15, 

p. 721–735.

Weissmann, G.S., Bennett, G.L., and Lansdale, A.L., 2005, 

Factors controlling sequence development on Quaternary 

fluvial fans, San Joaquin basin, California, USA in Harvey, 

A.M., Mather, A.E. and Stokes, M, (eds), Alluvial fans: 

geomorphology, sedimentology, dynamics; Geological 

Society, London, Special Publication 251, p. 169–186.

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 

June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A3/

Wilde, F.D., 2006, Temperature (ver. 2): U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 

9, chap. A6.1, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/twri9A6.1/

Wilde, F.D., Busenberg, E., and Radtke, D.B., 2006a, pH 

(ver. 1.3): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A6.4, accessed June 

28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A6.4/

Wilde, F.D., and Radtke, D.B., 2005, General information and 

guidelines (ver. 1.2): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques 

of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A6.0, 

accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/

twri9A6.0/

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo, R.T., 2004, 

Processing of water samples: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, 

chap. A5, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.usgs.

gov/twri9A5/

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, J., and Iwatsubo, R.T., 2006b, 

Collection of water samples: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, 

chap. A4, accessed June 28, 2007, at http://pubs.water.usgs.

gov/twri9A4/
References Cited 21

Wright, M.T., Belitz, Kenneth, and Johnson, T., 2004, 

Assessing susceptibility to contamination of two aquifer 

systems, Modesto and Fresno, California, 2001 and 2002: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2004–5149, 35 p.

Wright, M.T., Belitz, Kenneth, and Burton, C.A., 2005, 

California GAMA program—ground-water quality in the 

San Diego drainages hydrologic province, California, 2004: 

U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 129, 91 p.

Zaugg, S.D., Sandstrom, M.W., Smith, S.G., and Fehlberg, 

K.M., 1995, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination 

of pesticides in water by C-18 solid-phase extraction and 

capillary-column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95–181, 60 p.

Zaugg, S.D., Smith, S.G., Schroeder, M.P., Barber, L.B., and 

Burkhardt, M.R., 2002, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

determination of wastewater compounds by polystyrene 

divinylbenzene solid-phase extraction and capillary-column 

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4186, 

37 p.
22 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Tables
Tables 23

Table 1. Identification, sampling, and construction information for wells sampled for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued 

[King, Kings study area well; KWH, Kaweah study area well; TULE, Tule study area well; TLR, Tulare Lake study area well; KINGFP, Kings study area flowpath wells; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MW, monitoring well; LSD, land-surface datum; ft, foot; nd, no data]

GAMA 

identification 

number

Sampling information Elevation 

of LSD 

(ft above NAVD88)2

Construction information

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Sampling 

schedule1

Well depth 

(ft below LSD)

Top perforation 

(ft below LSD)

Bottom perforation 

(ft below LSD)

Kings Grid Wells

KING-01 10/17/2005 Fast 185 610 580 600

KING-02 10/17/2005 Fast 208 nd nd nd

KING-03 10/17/2005 Fast 225 380 145 358

KING-04 10/17/2005 Slow 200 500 240 500

KING-05 10/18/2005 Fast 201 555 505 545

KING-06 10/18/2005 Fast 246 705 345 695

KING-07 10/18/2005 Fast 256 410 194 410

KING-08 10/19/2005 Fast 341 540 287 540

KING-09 10/19/2005 Intermediate 314 582 202 380

KING-10 10/19/2005 Intermediate 308 228 228 open bottom

KING-11 10/20/2005 Intermediate 340 540 280 520

KING-12 10/20/2005 Intermediate 354 246 126 246

KING-13 10/20/2005 Intermediate 315 420 260 400

KING-14 10/24/2005 Fast 224 800 640 780

KING-15 10/25/2005 Intermediate 282 440 270 440

KING-16 10/25/2005 Intermediate 305 nd nd nd

KING-17 10/26/2005 Slow 280 650 320 640

KING-18 10/26/2005 Fast 370 370 160 360

KING-19 10/27/2005 Fast 300 260 218 260

KING-20 10/27/2005 Slow 393 124 nd nd

KING-21 10/27/2005 Fast 228 210 150 210

KING-22 11/1/2005 Fast 338 510 280 500

KING-23 11/1/2005 Fast 362 540 150 510

KING-24 11/1/2005 Fast 325 236 140 236

KING-25 11/2/2005 Intermediate 288 384 168 384

KING-26 11/2/2005 Fast 174 480 240 480

KING-27 11/2/2005 Fast 228 409 nd nd

KING-28 11/3/2005 Fast 485 76 40 74

KING-29 11/3/2005 Fast 388 390 120 390

KING-30 11/3/2005 Intermediate 383 490 330 470

KING-31 11/14/2005 Fast 173 520 280 520

KING-32 11/14/2005 Fast 257 445 370 445

KING-33 11/17/2005 Fast 315 675 175 655

KING-34 11/28/2005 Fast 232 nd nd nd

KING-35 12/1/2005 Fast 256 nd nd nd

KING-36 12/8/2005 Fast 258 452 nd nd

KING-37 12/14/2005 Fast 274 nd nd nd

KING-38 12/15/2005 Intermediate 305 700 nd nd

KING-39 12/15/2005 Fast 176 nd nd nd

Table 1. Identification, sampling, and construction information for wells sampled for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006. 

[King, Kings study area well; KWH, Kaweah study area well; TULE, Tule study area well; TLR, Tulare Lake study area well; KINGFP, Kings study area flowpath wells; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MW, monitoring well; LSD, land-surface datum; ft, foot; nd, no data]
24 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 1. Identification, sampling, and construction information for wells sampled for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued 

[King, Kings study area well; KWH, Kaweah study area well; TULE, Tule study area well; TLR, Tulare Lake study area well; KINGFP, Kings study area flowpath wells; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MW, monitoring well; LSD, land-surface datum; ft, foot; nd, no data]

GAMA 

identification 

number

Sampling information Elevation 

of LSD 

(ft above NAVD88)2

Construction information

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Sampling 

schedule1

Well depth 

(ft below LSD)

Top perforation 

(ft below LSD)

Bottom perforation 

(ft below LSD)

Kaweah Grid Wells

KWH-01 10/31/2005 Fast 348 640 245 620

KWH-02 10/31/2005 Fast 356 225 116 225

KWH-03 10/31/2005 Intermediate 318 310 nd nd

KWH-04 11/15/2005 Fast 430 205 80 200

KWH-05 11/15/2005 Fast 373 nd nd nd

KWH-06 11/15/2005 Intermediate 371 580 300 580

KWH-07 11/16/2005 Fast 488 nd nd nd

KWH-08 11/16/2005 Fast 413 nd nd nd

KWH-09 11/16/2005 Fast 327 nd nd nd

KWH-10 11/17/2005 Fast 410 323 nd nd

KWH-11 11/17/2005 Intermediate 270 700 300 700

KWH-12 11/28/2005 Slow 288 404 205 381

KWH-13 11/30/2005 Fast 254 220 nd nd

KWH-14 11/30/2005 Slow 295 400 175 390

KWH-15 12/1/2005 Fast 229 nd nd nd

KWH-16 12/7/2005 Fast 306 240 200 240

KWH-17 12/13/2005 Fast 226 350 225 338

KWH-18 12/13/2005 Fast 328 165 95 155

Tule Grid Wells

TULE-01 11/29/2005 Slow 286 800 400 800

TULE-02 11/30/2005 Fast 338 nd nd nd

TULE-03 11/30/2005 Intermediate 266 280 169 270

TULE-04 12/5/2005 Fast 515 820 550 800

TULE-05 12/5/2005 Fast 577 1368 930 1348

TULE-06 12/5/2005 Fast 486 1641 702 1641

TULE-07 12/6/2005 Intermediate 276 600 nd nd

TULE-08 12/7/2005 Slow 272 810 340 810

TULE-09 12/7/2005 Fast 450 587 160 587

TULE-10 12/7/2005 Fast 403 965 201 965

TULE-11 12/8/2005 Fast 212 1150 600 1150

TULE-12 12/8/2005 Fast 206 nd nd nd

TULE-13 12/13/2005 Fast 379 400 120 400

TULE-14 12/13/2005 Fast 250 600 280 600

TULE-15 12/14/2005 Fast 213 1330 970 1265

TULE-16 12/14/2005 Fast 357 nd nd nd

TULE-17 2/28/2006 Intermediate 243 245 185 240
Tables 25

Table 1. Identification, sampling, and construction information for wells sampled for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued 

[King, Kings study area well; KWH, Kaweah study area well; TULE, Tule study area well; TLR, Tulare Lake study area well; KINGFP, Kings study area flowpath wells; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MW, monitoring well; LSD, land-surface datum; ft, foot; nd, no data]

GAMA 

identification 

number

Sampling information Elevation 

of LSD 

(ft above NAVD88)2

Construction information

Date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Sampling 

schedule1

Well depth 

(ft below LSD)

Top perforation 

(ft below LSD)

Bottom perforation 

(ft below LSD)

Tulare Lake Grid Wells

TLR-01 11/28/2005 Fast 217 nd nd nd

TLR-02 11/29/2005 Intermediate 240 1330 1000 1330

TLR-03 11/29/2005 Fast 246 1420 1067 1395

TLR-04 12/1/2005 Slow 254 1320 980 1300

TLR-05 12/5/2005 Slow 238 561 311 561

TLR-06 12/6/2005 Intermediate 204 nd nd nd

TLR-07 12/6/2005 Fast 278 570 210 545

TLR-08 12/12/2005 Intermediate 349 nd nd nd

TLR-09 12/14/2005 Fast 197 1200 nd nd

Understanding Wells

KINGFP-01 10/18/2005 Slow 310 320 160 310

KINGFP-02 10/19/2005 Slow 307 620 410 610

KINGFP-03 10/20/2005 Slow 301 550 445 540

KINGFP-04 10/25/2005 Slow 295 420 150 240

KINGFP-05 10/31/2005 Slow (MW) 345 172 162 167

KINGFP-06 11/1/2005 Slow (MW) 345 265 255 260

KINGFP-07 11/1/2005 Slow (MW) 345 70 60 65

KINGFP-08 11/2/2005 Slow (MW) 356 81 71 76

KINGFP-09 11/2/2005 Slow (MW) 356 168 158 163

KINGFP-10 11/3/2005 Slow (MW) 356 268 258 263

KINGFP-11 11/14/2005 Slow (MW) 332 158 148 153

KINGFP-12 11/14/2005 Slow (MW) 332 80 70 75

KINGFP-13 11/15/2005 Slow (MW) 281 148 108 138

KINGFP-14 11/16/2005 Slow (MW) 243 140 110 130

KINGFP-15 11/16/2005 Slow (MW) 243 208 178 198

HWY99T-01 10/25/2005 Intermediate 311 681 213 670 1

 Sampling schedules are described in table 2.

2

 Land-surface datum (LSD) is a datum plane that is approximately at land surface at each well. The elevation of the LSD is described in feet above the North 

American Vertical Datum 1988.
26 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Analyte classes Analyte list 

table

Slow 

schedule

Intermediate 

schedule

Fast 

schedule

Water-quality indicators

Dissolved oxygen, temperature, specific conductance X X X

pH, alkalinity X X

Turbidity X

Organic constituents

Volatile organic compounds, including DBCP 3A X X X

Gasoline additives and oxygenates 3B X

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) and 1,2-Dibromomethane (EDB) 3C X X X

Pesticides and pesticide degradates 3D X X X

Polar pesticides and pesticide degradates 3E X X

Constituents of special interest

Perchlorate 3F X X X

N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) 3F X X

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 3F X X

Inorganic constituents

Nutrients 3G X X

Major and minor ions and trace elements 3H X X

Chromium abundance and speciation 3I X X

Arsenic and iron abundances and speciation 3I X X

Dissolved organic carbon 3G X

Stable isotopes

Stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in water 3J X X X

Stable isotopes of nitrogen and oxygen in nitrate 3J X X

Stable isotopes of carbon and carbon-14 abundance 3J X

Radioactivity and gases

Tritium 3J X X

Tritium and noble gases 3K X X X

Radium isotopes 3J X

Radon-222 3J X

Gross alpha and beta radiation 3J X

Uranium isotopes 3J X X

Microbial constituents

Microbial constituents 3L X1

 1 Not collected at monitoring wells.

Table 2. Classes of water-quality indicators, and chemical and microbial constituents collected for the slow, intermediate, and fast 

sampling schedules in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, 

October 2005 through February 2006.
Tables 27

Table 3A. Volatile organic compounds and gasoline additives, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2020.—Continued[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; RSD5, risk-specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not available; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent 

(synonym or abbreviation)

Primary use 

or source

USGS 

parameter 

code

CAS number LRL (μg/L) Threshold type1 Threshold value (μg/L) Detection

Acetone Solvent 81552 67-64-1 6 na na DAcrylonitrile Organic synthesis 34215 107-13-1 0.8 RSD5 0.6 —Benzene Gasoline 34030 71-43-2 0.021 MCL-CA 1 DBromobenzene Solvent 81555 108-86-1 0.028 na na —Bromochloromethane Fire retardant 77297 74-97-5 0.12 HAL 90 —Bromodichloromethane Disinfection by-product (THM) 32101 75-27-4 0.028 MCL-US 280 DBromoform (tribromomethane) Disinfection by-product (THM) 32104 75-25-2 0.10 MCL-US 280 D2-Butanone (MEK, methyl ethyl ketone) Solvent 81595 78-93-3 2 HAL 4,000 Dn-Butylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77342 104-51-8 0.12 NL-CA 260 —sec-Butylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77350 135-98-8 0.06 NL-CA 260 —tert-Butylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77353 98-06-6 0.06 NL-CA 260 —Carbon disulfide Organic synthesis 77041 75-15-0 0.038 NL-CA 160 DCarbon tetrachloride (Tetrachloromethane) Solvent 34506 71-55-6 0.032 MCL-CA 0.5 DChlorobenzene Solvent 34301 108-90-7 0.028 MCL-CA 70 —Chloroethane Solvent 34311 75-00-3 0.12 na na —Chloroform (Trichloromethane) Disinfection by-product (THM) 32106 67-66-3 0.024 MCL-US 280 D Chloromethane Refrigerant/organic synthesis 34418 74-87-3 0.17 HAL 30 —3-Chloro-1-propene Organic synthesis 78109 107-05-1 0.5 na na —2-Chlorotoluene Solvent 77275 95-49-8 0.04 HAL 100 —4-Chlorotoluene Solvent 77277 106-43-4 0.05 HAL 100 —Dibromochloromethane Disinfection by-product (THM) 32105 124-48-1 0.10 MCL-US 280 D1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) Fumigant 82625 96-12-8 0.51 MCL-US 0.2 D1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) Fumigant 77651 106-93-4 0.036 MCL-US 0.05 —Dibromomethane Solvent 30217 74-95-3 0.050 na na D1,2-Dichlorobenzene Solvent 34536 95-50-1 0.048 MCL-US 600 —1,3-Dichlorobenzene Solvent 34566 541-73-1 0.03 HAL 600 —1,4-Dichlorobenzene Fumigant 34571 106-46-7 0.034 MCL-CA 5 Dtrans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene Organic synthesis 73547 110-57-6 0.70 na na —Dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12) Refrigerant 34668 75-71-8 0.18 HAL 1,000 —1,1-Dichloroethane Solvent 34496 75-34-3 0.035 MCL-US 5 D1,2-Dichloroethane Solvent 32103 107-06-2 0.13 MCL-CA 0.5 —1,1-Dichloroethene Organic synthesis 34501 75-35-4 0.024 MCL-CA 6 Dcis-1,2-Dichloroethene Solvent 77093 156-59-2 0.024 MCL-CA 6 Dtrans-1,2-Dichloroethene Solvent 34546 156-60-5 0.032 MCL-CA 10 —Dichloromethane (Methylene chloride) Solvent 34423 75-09-2 0.06 MCL-US 5 D1,2-Dichloropropane Fumigant 34541 78-87-5 0.029 MCL-US 5 D

Table 3A. Volatile organic compounds and gasoline additives, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2020.[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; RSD5, risk-specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not available; D, detected; —, not detected]
28 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program Table 3A. Volatile organic compounds and gasoline additives, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2020.—Continued [The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; RSD5, risk-specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not available; D, detected; —, not detected] Constituent (synonym or abbreviation) Primary use or source USGS parameter code CAS number LRL (μg/L) Threshold type1 Threshold value (μg/L) Detection 1,3-Dichloropropane Fumigant 77173 142-28-9 0.06 MCL-US 5 — 2,2-Dichloropropane Fumigant 77170 594-20-7 0.05 na na

—

1,1-Dichloropropene Organic synthesis 77168 563-58-6 0.026 na na

—

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene Fumigant 34704 10061-01-5 0.05 RSD5 3

4 —

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene Fumigant 34699 10061-02-6 0.09 RSD5 3

4 —

Diethyl ether Solvent 81576 60-29-7 0.08 na na

—

Diisopropyl ether (DIPE) Gasoline oxygenate 81577 108-20-3 0.10 na na

—

Ethylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 34371 100-41-4 0.030 MCL-CA 300

D

Ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) Gasoline oxygenate 50004 637-92-3 0.030 na na

—

Ethyl methacrylate Organic synthesis 73570 97-63-2 0.18 na na

—

1-Ethyl-2-methylbenzene o-Ethyl toluene) Gasoline hydrocarbon 77220 611-14-3 0.06 na na

D

Hexachlorobutadiene Organic synthesis 39702 87-68-3 0.14 HAL 1 —Hexachloroethane Solvent 34396 67-72-1 0.14 HAL 1 —2-Hexanone (n-Butyl methyl ketone) Solvent 77103 591-78-6 0.4 na na

—

Isopropylbenzene (Cumene) Gasoline hydrocarbon 77223 98-82-8 0.038 NL-CA 770

D

4-Isopropyl-1-methylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77356 99-87-6 0.08 na na

—

Methyl acrylate Organic synthesis 49991 96-33-3 1.0 na na

—

Methyl acrylonitrile Organic synthesis 81593 126-98-7 0.40 na na

—

Methyl bromide (Bromomethane) Fumigant 34413 74-83-9 0.26 HAL 10

—

Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) Gasoline oxygenate 78032 1634-04-4 0.10 MCL-CA 13

D

Methyl iodide (Iodomethane) Organic synthesis 77424 74-88-4 0.50 na na

—

Methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) Solvent 78133 108-10-1 0.37 NL 120

—

Methyl methacrylate Organic synthesis 81597 80-62-6 0.20 na na

—

Methyl tert-pentyl ether (tert-Amyl methyl 

ether, TAME)

Gasoline oxygenate 50005 994-05-8 0.04 na na

—

Naphthalene Gasoline hydrocarbon 34696 91-20-3 0.52 HAL 100

—

n-Propylbenzene Solvent 77224 103-65-1 0.042 NL-CA 260

—

Styrene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77128 100-42-5 0.042 MCL-US 100

—

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane Solvent 77562 630-20-6 0.030 HAL 70

—

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Solvent 34475 127-18-4 0.030 MCL-US 5 —Tetrachloroethene (PCE) Solvent 32102 56-23-5 0.06 MCL-CA 0.5

D

Tetrahydrofuran Solvent 81607 109-99-9 1.0 na na

D

1,2,3,4-Tetramethylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 49999 488-23-3 0.14 na na

—

1,2,3,5-Tetramethylbenzene 

(Isodurene)

Gasoline hydrocarbon 50000 527-53-7 0.14 na na

—
Tables 29

Table 3A. Volatile organic compounds and gasoline additives, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2020.—Continued[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; RSD5, risk-specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not available; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent 

(synonym or abbreviation)

Primary use 

or source

USGS 

parameter 

code

CAS number LRL (μg/L) Threshold type1 Threshold value (μg/L) Detection

Toluene Gasoline hydrocarbon 34010 108-88-3 0.02 MCL-CA 150 D1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene Organic synthesis 77613 87-61-6 0.18 na na —1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Solvent 34551 120-82-1 0.12 MCL-CA 5 —1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA) Solvent 34516 79-34-5 0.08 MCL-CA 1 —1,1,2-Trichloroethane Solvent 34511 79-00-5 0.04 MCL-US 5 —Trichloroethene (TCE) Solvent 39180 79-01-6 0.038 MCL-US 5 DTrichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11) Refrigerant 34488 75-69-4 0.08 MCL-CA 150 D1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) Solvent/organic synthesis 77443 96-18-4 0.18 HAL 40 D1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane (CFC-113) Refrigerant 77652 76-13-1 0.038 MCL-US 1,200 D1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77221 526-73-8 0.06 na na D1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77222 95-63-6 0.056 NL-CA 330 D1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene Organic synthesis 77226 108-67-8 0.044 NL-CA 330 —Vinyl bromide (Bromoethene) Fire retardant 50002 593-60-2 0.10 na na —Vinyl chloride (Chloroethene) Organic synthesis 39175 75-01-4 0.08 MCL-CA 0.5 —m- and p-Xylene Gasoline hydrocarbon 85795 108-38-3/106-42-3 0.06 MCL-CA 1,750 Do-Xylene Gasoline hydrocarbon 77135 95-47-6 0.038 MCL-CA 1,750 D

1 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.2 The MCL-US thresholds for trihalomethanes is the sum of chloroform, bromoform, bromodichloromethane, and dibromochloromethane.3 The RSD5 threshold for 1,3-dichloropropene is the sum of its isomers (cis and trans).
30 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Constituent Primary use 

or source

USGS 

parameter 

code

CAS number LRL 

(μg/L)

Threshold 

type1

Threshold 

(μg/L) Detection

Acetone Degradate/solvent 81552 67-64-1 1.2 na 6000 D 

tert-Amyl alcohol Oxygenate 77073 75-85-4 1.0 na na —

tert-Butyl alcohol (TBA) Degradate 77035 75-65-0 1 NL 12 —

Diisopropyl ether Oxygenate 81577 108-20-3 0.04 na na —

Ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) Oxygenate 50004 637-92-3 0.04 na na —

Methyl acetate Degradate 77032 79-20-9 0.43 na na —

Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) Oxygenate 78032 1634-04-4 0.04 MCL-CA 13 D

Methyl tert-pentyl ether (TAME) Oxygenate 50005 994-05-8 0.030 na na —

Table 3B. Gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for 

the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 4024.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; LRL, Laboratory reporting 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; na, not 

available; μg/L, micrograms per liter; D, detected; —, not detected]

1

Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 
Tables 31

Constituent Primary use

or source

USGS 

parameter 

code

CAS number MRL 

(μg/L)

Threshold 

type1

Threshold 

(μg/L) Detection

1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) Fumigant 82625 96-12-8 0.030 MCL-US 0.2 D 

1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) Fumigant 77651 106-93-4 0.040 MCL-US 0.05 — 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.

Table 3C. 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) and 1,2-dibromoethane (EDB), primary use or source, comparative thresholds, and 

reporting information for the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 1306.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; LRL, Laboratory reporting 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; μg/L, micrograms per liter; D, detected; —, not detected]
32 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 3D. Pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the 

USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2033.—Continued

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; RSD5, risk specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not 

available; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent Primary use

or source

USGS 

parameter

code

CAS number LRL 

(μg/L)

Threshold

type1

Threshold

(μg/L) Detection

Acetochlor Herbicide 49260 34256-82-1 0.006 na na D

Alachlor Herbicide 46342 15972-60-8 0.005 MCL-US 2 D

Atrazine Herbicide 39632 1912-24-9 0.007 MCL-CA 1 D

Azinphos-methyl Insecticide 82686 86-50-0 0.05 na na —

Azinphos-methyl-oxon Insecticide degradate 61635 961-22-8 0.070 na na —

Benfluralin Herbicide 82673 1861-40-1 0.01 na na —

Carbaryl Insecticide 82680 63-25-2 0.04 RSD5 400 —

Carbofuran Herbicide 82674 1563-66-2 0.02 MCL-CA 18 —

2-Chloro-2,6-diethylacetanilide Herbicide degradate 61618 6967-29-9 0.0021 na na —

4-Chloro-2-methylphenol Herbicide degradate 61633 1570-64-5 0.0056 na na —

Chlorpyrifos Insecticide 38933 2921-88-2 0.005 HAL 2 —

Chlorpyrifos oxon Insecticide degradate 61636 5598-15-2 0.0562 na na —

Cyanazine Herbicide 04041 21725-46-2 0.018 HAL 1 —

Cyfluthrin Insecticide 61585 68359-37-5 0.0267 na na —

λ-Cyhalothrin Insecticide 61595 91465-08-6 0.0089 na na —

Cypermethrin Insecticide 61586 52315-07-8 0.0086 na na —

DCPA (Dacthal) Herbicide 82682 1861-32-1 0.003 HAL 70 —

Deethyl atrazine (2-Chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine)

Herbicide degradate 04040 6190-65-4 0.006 na na D 

Desulfinylfipronil Insecticide degradate 62170 na 0.012 na na D

Desulfinylfipronil amide Insecticide degradate 62169 na 0.029 na na —

Diazinon Insecticide 39572 333-41-5 0.005 HAL 1.0 D

3,4-Dichloroaniline Herbicide degradate 61625 95-76-1 0.0045 na na D

3,5-Dichloroaniline Herbicide degradate 61627 626-43-7 0.004 na na D

Dichlorvos Fumigant 38775 62-73-7 0.0118 na na —

Dicrotophos Insecticide 38454 141-66-2 0.0843 na na —

Dieldrin Insecticide 39381 60-57-1 0.009 RSD5 0.02 D

2,6-Diethylaniline Herbicide degradate 82660 579-66-8 0.006 na na —

Dimethoate Insecticide 82662 60-51-5 0.0061 na na —

Disulfoton Insecticide 82677 298-04-4 0.021 HAL 0.7 —

Disulfoton sulfone Insecticide degradate 61640 2497-06-5 0.0059 na na —

α-Endosulfan Insecticide 34362 959-98-8 0.005 na na —

Endosulfan sulfate Insecticide degradate 61590 1031-07-8 0.0138 na na —

EPTC (S-Ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate) Herbicide 82668 759-94-4 0.004 na na D

Ethion Insecticide 82346 563-12-2 0.004 na na —

Ethion monoxon Insecticide degradate 61644 17356-42-2 0.002 na na —

Ethoprophos Herbicide 82672 13194-48-4 0.005 na na —

2-Ethyl-6-methylaniline Herbicide degradate 61620 24549-06-2 0.0045 na na —

Fenamiphos Insecticide 61591 22224-92-6 0.029 HAL 0.7 —

Fenamiphos sulfone Insecticide degradate 61645 31972-44-8 0.0491 na na —

Fenamiphos sulfoxide Insecticide degradate 61646 31972-43-7 0.0387 na na —

Fipronil Insecticide 62166 120068-37-3 0.016 na na —

Fipronil sulfide Insecticide degradate 62167 120067-83-6 0.013 na na D

Fipronil sulfone Insecticide degradate 62168 120068-36-2 0.024 na na —

Fonofos Insecticide 04095 944-22-9 0.003 HAL 10 —

Hexazinone Herbicide 04025 51235-04-2 0.0129 HAL 400 D

Iprodione Fungicide 61593 36734-19-7 0.538 na na —

Isofenphos Insecticide 61594 25311-71-1 0.0034 na na —

Malaoxon Insecticide degradate 61652 1634-78-2 0.0298 na na —

Malathion Insecticide 39532 121-75-5 0.027 HAL 100 —

Table 3D. Pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the 

USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2033.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; RSD5, risk specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not 

available; D, detected; —, not detected]
Tables 33

Table 3D. Pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the 

USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2033.—Continued

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; RSD5, risk specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not 

available; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent Primary use

or source

USGS 

parameter

code

CAS number LRL 

(μg/L)

Threshold

type1

Threshold

(μg/L) Detection

Metalaxyl Fungicide 61596 57837-19-1 0.0051 na na —

Methidathion Insecticide 61598 950-37-8 0.0058 na na —

Metolachlor Herbicide 39415 51218-45-2 0.006 HAL 700 D

Metribuzin Herbicide 82630 21087-64-9 0.006 HAL 70 —

Molinate Herbicide 82671 2212-67-1 0.003 MCL-CA 20 —

Myclobutanil Fungicide 61599 88671-89-0 0.008 na na D

1-Naphthol Insecticide degradate 49295 90-15-3 0.0882 na na D

Oxyfluorfen Herbicide 61600 42874-03-3 0.0073 na na —

Paraoxon-methyl Insecticide 61664 950-35-6 0.0299 na na —

Parathion-methyl Insecticide 82667 298-00-0 0.015 HAL 1 —

Pendimethalin Herbicide 82683 40487-42-1 0.022 na na —

cis-Permethrin Insecticide 82687 54774-45-7 0.006 na na —

Phorate Insecticide 82664 298-02-2 0.011 na na —

Phorate oxon Insecticide degradate 61666 2600-69-3 0.1048 na na —

Phosmet Insecticide 61601 732-11-6 0.0079 na na —

Phosmet oxon Insecticide degradate 61668 3735-33-9 0.0511 na na —

Prometon Herbicide 04037 1610-18-0 0.01 HAL 100 D

Prometryn Herbicide 04036 7287-19-6 0.0054 na na D

Pronamide Herbicide 82676 23950-58-5 0.004 RSD5 20.000 —

Propanil Herbicide 82679 709-98-8 0.011 na na —

Propargite Insecticide 82685 2312-35-8 0.023 na na —

cis-Propiconazole Fungicide 79846 60207-90-1 0.008 na na —

trans-Propiconazole Fungicide 79847 60207-90-1 0.0133 na na —

Propyzamide (Pronamide) Herbicide 82676 23950-58-5 0.004 na na —

Simazine Herbicide 04035 122-34-9 0.005 MCL-US 4 D

Tebuconazole Fungicide 62852 107534-96-3 0.0136 na na —

Tebuthiuron Herbicide 82670 34014-18-1 0.016 HAL 500 —

Tefluthrin Insecticide 61606 79538-32-2 0.0077 na na —

Terbufos Insecticide 82675 13071-79-9 0.017 HAL 0.4 —

Terbufos oxon sulfone Insecticide degradate 61674 56070-15-6 0.0676 na na —

Terbuthylazine Herbicide 04022 5915-41-3 0.0102 na na —

Thiobencarb Herbicide 82681 28249-77-6 0.010 MCL-CA 70 —

Tribufos Herbicide 61610 78-48-8 0.0044 na na —

Trifluralin Herbicide 82661 1582-09-8 0.009 HAL 10 — 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.
34 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 3E. Polar pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for 

the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2060.—Continued

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; RSD5, risk specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not 

available; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent Primary use

or source

USGS

parameter

code

CAS number LRL 

(μg/L)

Type of 

comparison 

threshold

Threshold 

type1 Detection

Acifluorfen Herbicide 49315 50594-66-6 0.028 na na —

Aldicarb2 Insecticide 49312 116-06-3 0.04 MCL-US 3 —

Aldicarb sulfone Insecticide/

degradate 

49313 1646-88-4 0.018 MCL-US 3 —

Aldicarb sulfoxide Degradate 49314 1646-87-3 0.022 MCL-US 4 —

Atrazine Herbicide 39632 1912-24-9 0.008 MCL-CA 1 —

Bendiocarb Insecticide 50299 22781-23-3 0.020 na na —

Benomyl Fungicide 50300 17804-35-2 0.022 na na —

Bensulfuron-methyl Herbicide 61693 83055-99-6 0.018 na na —

Bentazon Herbicide 38711 25057-89-0 0.012 MCL-CA 18 D

Bromacil Herbicide 04029 314-40-9 0.018 HAL 70 D

Bromoxynil Herbicide 49311 1689-84-5 0.028 na na —

Caffeine Wastewater 

indicator

50305 58-08-2 0.018 na na D 

Carbaryl Herbicide 49310 63-25-2 0.018 RSD5-US 400 —

Carbofuran Herbicide 49309 1563-66-2 0.016 MCL-CA 18 —

Chloramben, methyl ester Herbicide 61188 7286-84-2 0.024 na na —

Chlorimuron-ethyl Herbicide 50306 90982-32-4 0.032 na na —

3-(4-Chlorophenyl)-

1-methyl urea 

Degradate 61692 5352-88-5 0.036 na na —

Clopyralid Herbicide 49305 1702-17-6 0.024 na na —

Cycloate Herbicide 04031 1134-23-2 0.014 na na —

2,4-D 

(2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic 

acid) plus 2,4-D 

methyl ester 

(2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic 

acid methyl ester)

Herbicides 66496 94-75-7; 1928-38-7 0.038 MCL-US 70 —

2,4-DB 

(4-[2,4-Dichlorophenoxy]

butyric acid)

Herbicide 38746 94-82-6 0.020 na na —

DCPA (Dacthal) monoacid Degradate 49304 887-54-7 0.028 na na —

Deethylatrazine (2-Chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-amino-striazine)

Degradate 04040 6190-65-4 0.028 na na —

Deethyldeisopropyl atrazine 

(2-Chlor-4,6-diamino-striazine)

Degradate 04039 3397-62-4 0.04 na na D

Deisopropyl atrazine 

(2-chloro-6-ethylamino-4-

amino-s-triazine)

Degradate 04038 1007-28-9 0.08 na na D

Dicamba Herbicide 38442 1918-00-9 0.036 HAL 4000 —

Dichlorprop Herbicide 49302 120-36-5 0.028 na na —

Dinoseb Herbicide 49301 88-85-7 0.038 MCL-CA 7 D

Diphenamid Herbicide 04033 957-51-7 0.010 HAL 200 —

Diuron Herbicide 49300 330-54-1 0.015 RSD5 20 D

Fenuron Herbicide 49297 101-42-8 0.019 na na D

Flumetsulam Herbicide 61694 98967-40-9 0.040 na na —

Fluometuron Herbicide 38811 2164-17-2 0.016 HAL 90 —

Table 3E. Polar pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for 

the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2060.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; RSD5, risk specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not 

available; D, detected; —, not detected]
Tables 35

Table 3E. Polar pesticides and pesticide degradates, primary uses or sources, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for 

the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory Schedule 2060.—Continued

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; RSD5, risk specific dose at 10–5 μg/L; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not 

available; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent Primary use

or source

USGS

parameter

code

CAS number LRL 

(μg/L)

Type of 

comparison 

threshold

Threshold 

type1 Detection

Hydroxyatrazine (2-Hydroxy4-isopropylamino-6-

ethylamino-s-triazine)

Degradate 50355 2163-68-0 0.032 na na —

3-Hydroxycarbofuran Degradate 49308 16655-82-6 0.008 na na —

Imazaquin Herbicide 50356 81335-37-7 0.036 na na —

Imazethapyr Herbicide 50407 81335-77-5 0.038 na na D

Imidacloprid Insecticide 61695 138261-41-3 0.020 na na —

Linuron Herbicide 38478 330-55-2 0.014 na na —

MCPA (2-Methyl-4-

chlorophenoxyacetic acid) 

Herbicide 38482 94-74-6 0.030 HAL 30 —

MCPB (4-[2-Methyl-4-

chlorophenoxy]butyric acid)

Herbicide 38487 94-81-5 0.010 na na —

Metalaxyl Fungicide 50359 57837-19-1 0.012 na na —

Methiocarb Insecticide 38501 2032-65-7 0.010 na na —

Methomyl Insecticide 49296 16752-77-5 0.020 HAL 200 —

Metsulfuron methyl2 Herbicide 61697 74223-64-6 0.025 na na D

Neburon Herbicide 49294 555-37-3 0.012 na na —

Nicosulfuron Herbicide 50364 111991-09-4 0.04 na na —

Norflurazon Herbicide 49293 27314-13-2 0.020 na na —

Oryzalin Herbicide 49292 19044-88-3 0.012 na na —

Oxamyl Insecticide 38866 23135-22-0 0.030 MCL-CA 50 D

Picloram Herbicide 49291 1918-02-01 0.032 MCL-US 500 —

Propham Herbicide 49236 122-42-9 0.030 HAL 100 —

Propiconazole Fungicide 50471 60207-90-1 0.010 na na —

Propoxur Insecticide 38538 114-26-1 0.008 na na —

Siduron Herbicide 38548 1982-49-6 0.020 na na —

Sulfometuron-methyl Herbicide 50337 74222-97-2 0.038 na na —

Tebuthiuron Herbicide 82670 34014-18-1 0.026 HAL 500 —

Terbacil Herbicide 04032 5902-51-2 0.016 HAL 90 —

Triclopyr Herbicide 49235 55335-06-3 0.026 na na — 1

Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

Although listed as an LRLs, these constituents were reported using method reporting levels (MRLs) during this study.
36 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Constituent Primary use

or source

CAS number MRL 

(μg/L)

Threshold 

type

Threshold 

(μg/L) Detection

Perchlorate Rocket fuel, fireworks, 

flares

14797-73-0 0.5 MCL-CA 6 D

1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) Industrial solvent, 

organic synthesis

96-18-4 0.005 HAL 40 D

N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) Rocket fuel, plasticizer, 

disinfection-byproduct

62-75-9 0.002 NL-CA 0.010 D

Table 3F. Constituents of special interest, primary use or source, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the 

Montgomery Watson Harza Laboratory.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; MRL, minimum reporting 

level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; μg/L, micrograms per liter; D, detected]
Tables 37

Constituent 

USGS 

parameter

code

CAS number LRL 

(mg/L)

Threshold 

type1

Threshold 

(mg/L) Detection

Ammonia (as nitrogen) 00608 7664-41-7 0.04 HAL 224.7 D

Nitrite (as nitrogen) 00613 14797-65-0 0.002 MCL-US 1 D

Nitrate plus nitrite (as nitrogen) 00631 na 0.060 MCL-US 10 D

Total nitrogen (ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, 

organic nitrogen)

62854 17778-88-0 0.06 na na D

Phosphorus, orthophosphate (as phosphorus) 00671 14265-44-2 0.006 na na D

Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) 00681 na 0.33 na na D

Table 3G. Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water 

Quality Laboratory Schedule 2755 and Lab Code 2612.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory level; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant 

level; na, not available; mg/L, milligrams per liter; D, detected]

1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 The published HAL for ammonia is 30 mg/L as NH3; using molar mass ratios, the HAL can be converted for ammonia as nitrogen. This value is 24.7 mg/L.
38 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 3H. Major and minor ions and trace elements, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS National Water 

Quality Laboratory Schedule 1948.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; LRL, Laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum 

contaminant level; SMCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency secondary maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health 

notification level; na, not available; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; D, detected; —, not detected]

Constituent

USGS

parameter 

code

CAS number LRL Threshold

type1 Threshold Detection

 Major and minor ions (mg/L)

Bromide 71870 24959-67-9 0.02 na na D

Calcium 00915 7440-70-2 0.02 na na D

Chloride 00940 16887-00-6 0.20 SMCL-CA 250 (500)2 D

Fluoride 00950 16984-48-8 0.10 MCL-CA 2 D

Iodide 78165 7553-56-2 0.002 na na D

Magnesium 00925 7439-95-4 0.008 na na D

Potassium 00935 7440-09-7 0.16 na na D

Silica 00955 7631-86-9 0.04 na na D

Sodium 00930 7440-23-5 0.20 na na D

Sulfate 00945 14808-79-8 0.18 SMCL-CA 250 (500)2 D

Residue on evaporation (total dissolved solids, TDS) 70300 na 10 SMCL-US 500 (1,000)2 D

 Trace elements (μg/L)

Aluminum 01106 7429-90-5 1.6 MCL-CA 1,000 D

Antimony 01095 7440-36-0 0.2 MCL-US 6 D

Arsenic 01000 7440-38-2 0.12 MCL-US 10 D

Barium 01005 7440-39-3 0.2 MCL-CA 1,000 D

Beryllium 01010 7440-41-7 0.06 MCL-US 4 D

Boron 01020 7440-42-8 8 HAL 1,000 D

Cadmium 01025 7440-43-9 0.04 MCL-US 5 D

Chromium 01030 7440-47-3 0.04 MCL-CA 50 D

Cobalt 01035 7440-48-4 0.040 na na D

Copper 01040 7440-50-8 0.4 HAL 1,300 D

Iron 01046 7439-89-6 6 SMCL-CA 300 D

Lead 01049 7439-92-1 0.08 HAL 15 D

Lithium 01130 7439-93-2 0.6 na na D

Manganese 01056 7439-96-5 0.2 SMCL-CA 50 D

Mercury 71890 7439-97-6 0.010 MCL-US 2 —

Molybdenum 01060 7439-98-7 0.4 HAL 40 D

Nickel 01065 7440-02-0 0.06 MCL-CA 100 D

Selenium 01145 7782-49-2 0.08 MCL-US 50 D

Silver 01075 7440-22-4 0.20 HAL 100 —

Strontium 01080 7440-24-6 0.4 HAL 4,000 D

Thallium 01057 7440-28-0 0.04 MCL-US 2 D

Tungsten 01155 7440-33-7 0.06 na na D

Uranium 22703 7440-61-1 0.04 MCL-US 30 D

Vanadium 01085 7440-62-2 0.10 NL-CA 50 D

Zinc 01090 7440-66-6 0.6 HAL 2,000 D 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 The recommended SMCL-CA and SMCL-US thresholds for chloride, sulfate, and TDS are listed with the upper thresholds in parentheses.
Tables 39

Constituent

(valence state)

USGS

parameter

code

CAS number MDL

(μg/L)

Threshold

type1

Threshold

(μg/L) Detection

Arsenic (total) 01000 7440-38-2 0.5 MCL-US 10 D 

Arsenic(III) 99034 22569-72-8 1 na na D 

Chromium (total) 01030 7440-47-3 1 MCL-CA 50 D2

Chromium(VI) 01032 18540-29-9 1 na na D2

Iron (total) 01046 7439-89-6 2 SMCL-CA 300 D 

Iron(II) 01047 7439-89-6 2 na na D 

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 Data are not reported because of suspected contamination of samples during the preservation process.

Table 3I. Arsenic, chromium, and iron species, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS Trace Metal 

Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; MDL, method detection 

limit; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant 

level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; μg/L, micrograms per liter; na, not available]
40 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Constituent

USGS

parameter

code

CAS number Reporting

level type

Reporting level 

or uncertainty

Threshold

type1 Threshold Detection

Stable isotope ratios (per mil)

δ2H of water2 82082 na MU 2 na na D 

δ18O of water2 82085 na MU 0.20 na na D 

δ15N of nitrate2 82690 na MU na na na D 

δ18O of nitrate2 63041 na MU na na na D 

δ13C of dissolved carbonates3 82081 na 1 sigma 0.05 na na D 

Radioactive constituents (percent modern)

Carbon-144 49933 14762-75-5 1 sigma 0.0015 na na D 

Radioactive constituents (pCi/L)

Tritium5,6 07000 10028-17-8 MRL 1 MCL-CA 20,000 D 

Radon-2227 82303 14859-67-7 SSMDC 19–44 Proposed 

MCL-US

300 (4,000)8 D 

Gross-alpha radioactivity, 72-hour count9 62636 12587-46-1 SSMDC 0.42–6.4 MCL-US 15 D 

Gross-alpha radioactivity, 30-day count9 62639 12587-46-1 SSMDC 0.24–5.0 MCL-US 15 D 

Gross-beta radioactivity, 72-hour count9 62642 12587-47-2 SSMDC 0.52–1.8 MCL-CA 50 D 

Gross-beta radioactivity, 30-day count9 62645 12587-47-2 SSMDC 0.38–4.4 MCL-CA 50 D 

Radium-2269 09511 13982-63-3 SSMDC 0.008–0.018 MCL-US10 5 D 

Radium-2289 81366 15262-20-1 SSMDC 0.085–0.23 MCL-US10 5 D 

Uranium-2349 22610 13966-29-1 SSMDC 0.1 MCL-CA11 20 D 

Uranium-2359 22620 15117-96-1 SSMDC 0.1 MCL-CA11 20 D 

Uranium-2389 22603 7440-61-1 SSMDC 0.1 MCL-CA11 20 D 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 U.S. Geological Survey Stable Isotope Laboratory, Reston, Virginia.

3

 University of Waterloo, Environmental Isotope Laboratory.

4

 University of Arizona, Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory (contract laboratory).

5

 U.S. Geological Survey Stable Isotope and Tritium Laboratory, Menlo Park, California.

6

 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

7

 U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory.

8

 Two MCLs have been proposed for Radon-222. The proposed alternaltive MCL is in parentheses.

9

 Eberline Analytical Services.

10 Combined radium-226 plus radium-228.

11 Combined Uranium-234 plus uranium-235 plus uranium-238.

Table 3J. Isotopic and radioactive constituents, comparative thresholds, and reporting information for laboratories.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; MCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; δ, notation, in per 

mil, of the differences in oxygen-18/oxygen-16 and hydrogen-2/hydrogen-1 ratios relative to Standard Mean Ocean Water (SMOW), and the difference in the 

carbon-13/carbon-12 ratio relative to University of Chicago Peedee Formation Standard; MU, method uncertainty; MRL, minimum reporting level; SSMDC, 

sample-specific minimum detectable concentration; na, not available; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; D, detected]
Tables 41

Constituent

USGS

parameter

code

CAS number MU

(percent)

Reporting

units

Threshold

type

Threshold

(pCi/L) Detection

Argon 85563 7440-37-1 2 cm3

STP/g na na D 

Helium-3/helium-4 ratio 61040 na/7440-59-7 0.75 na na na D 

Helium-4 85561 7440-59-7 2 cm3

STP/g na na D 

Krypton 85565 7439-90-9 3 cm3

STP/g na na D 

Neon 61046 7440-01-09 2 cm3

STP/g na na D 

Xenon 85567 7440-63-3 3 cm3

STP/g na na D 

Table 3K. Noble gases, comparison thresholds, and reporting information for the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

[The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; CAS, Chemical Abstract Service; MCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MU, method uncertainty; na, not available; cm3STP/g, cubic centimeter of gas at standard 

temperature and pressure per gram of water; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; D, detected]
42 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program Table 3L. Microbial constituents, comparison thresholds, and reporting information for the USGS Ohio Microbiology Laboratory parameter codes 90901, 90900, 99335 and 99332. [The five-digit USGS parameter code is used to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; TT, treatment technique - a required process intended to reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water; mL, milliliters; D, detected; na, not available; —, not detected] Constituent USGS parameter code Primary use/source MDL Threshold type1 Threshold Detection Escherichia coli2 90901 Sewage and animal waste indicator/ Intestinal tracts of humans and animals 1 colony/100 mL TT No fecal coliforms are allowed.

—

Total coliform2

(including fecal coliform and E. coli)

90900 Water-quality indicator/Soil, water, and 

intestinal tracts of animals

1 colony/100 mL MCL-US No more then 5 percent of samples coliformpositives in one month. Every sample that has 

total coloforms must be analyzed for fecal coliforms; no fecal coliforms are allowed.

D 

F-specific coliphage3 99335 Viral indicator/Intestinal tracts of warmblooded animals na TT 99.99 percent killed/inactivated

—

Somatic coliphage3 99332 Viral indicator/Fecal contaminated waters na TT 99.99 percent killed/inactivated D 1 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.

2 Analyzed in the field.3 Analyzed by the U.S. Geological Survey Ohio Microbiology Laboratory.
Tables 43

Table 4. Water-quality indicators in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. KING, 

Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, 

Highway 99 transect well; C, celsius; E, estimated value; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mm, millimeter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; na, not available; 

nc, sample not collected; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; RL, reporting level; TT, treatment technique - a required process intended to reduce the level of a 

contaminant in drinking water; SMCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency secondary maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department 

of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA 

identification no.

Turbidity

(NTU)

(63676)

Dissolved 

oxygen

(mg/L)

(00300) 

Water 

temperature (°C)

(00010)

pH, field 

(standard

units)

(00400)

pH, laboratory 

(standard

units)

(00403)

Specific 

conductance, 

field

(μS/cm

at 25 °C)

(00095)

Alkalinity, field

(mg/L 

as CaCO3)

(29802)

Alkalinity, 

laboratory, fixed 

endpoint (pH 4.5)

(mg/L as

CaCO3)

(29801)

RL 0.1 0.2 0.0–38.5 0–14 0–14 5 1 1

Threshold type TT na na SMCL-US SMCL-US SMCL-CA1 na na

Threshold 1 na na 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 900 (1,600) na na

Grid wells

KING-01 nc <0.2 21.5 nc nc *939 nc nc

KING-02 nc 0.2 20.5 nc nc 778 nc nc

KING-03 nc <0.2 21.0 nc nc 454 nc nc

KING-04 0.2 2.0 23.0 8.2 8.3 534 142 147

KING-05 nc <0.2 22.5 nc nc 770 nc nc

KING-06 nc <0.2 24.5 nc nc 170 nc nc

KING-07 nc 1.1 19.0 nc nc 218 nc nc

KING-08 nc 4.4 20.5 nc nc 147 nc nc

KING-09 nc 4.1 21.0 nc 8.3 171 nc 51

KING-10 nc 5.3 20.0 nc 7.8 259 nc 110

KING-11 nc 5.7 22.5 nc 8.0 409 nc 149

KING-12 nc 7.9 21.0 nc 7.4 522 nc 202

KING-13 nc 6.9 23.0 nc 7.7 318 nc 132

KING-14 nc 3.2 24.5 nc nc 220 nc nc

KING-15 nc 6.5 22.5 nc 7.6 372 nc 136

KING-16 nc 8.7 21.5 nc 7.7 206 nc 89

KING-17 0.1 4.7 23.5 7.9 7.8 322 131 128

KING-18 nc 6.6 18.0 nc nc 123 nc nc

KING-19 nc 4.3 21.5 nc nc 367 nc nc

KING-20 0.1 4.5 15.5 7.4 8.2 133 54 57

KING-21 nc 0.3 19.5 nc nc 415 nc nc

KING-22 nc 6.6 21.5 nc nc 145 nc nc

KING-23 nc 9.8 20.5 nc nc 350 nc nc

KING-24 nc 5.9 21.0 nc nc 480 nc nc

KING-25 nc 3.1 22.0 nc 6.8 522 nc 134

KING-26 nc 0.3 21.0 nc nc *1510 nc nc

KING-27 nc 6.1 30.0 nc nc 254 nc nc

KING-28 nc 2.2 20.0 nc nc 153 nc nc

KING-29 nc 3.1 21.5 nc nc 332 nc nc

KING-30 nc 5.1 22.0 nc 7.1 262 nc 102

KING-31 nc 1.3 19.0 nc nc 690 nc nc

KING-32 nc 1.0 23.5 nc nc 744 nc nc

KING-33 nc 1.9 24.0 nc nc 427 nc nc

KING-34 nc 4.6 21.5 nc nc 503 nc nc

KING-35 nc 6.7 21.0 nc nc 366 nc nc

Table 4. Water-quality indicators in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. KING, 

Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, 

Highway 99 transect well; C, celsius; E, estimated value; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mm, millimeter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; na, not available; 

nc, sample not collected; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; RL, reporting level; TT, treatment technique - a required process intended to reduce the level of a 

contaminant in drinking water; SMCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency secondary maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department 

of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]
44 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 4. Water-quality indicators in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. KING, 

Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, 

Highway 99 transect well; C, celsius; E, estimated value; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mm, millimeter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; na, not available; 

nc, sample not collected; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; RL, reporting level; TT, treatment technique - a required process intended to reduce the level of a 

contaminant in drinking water; SMCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency secondary maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department 

of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA 

identification no.

Turbidity

(NTU)

(63676)

Dissolved 

oxygen

(mg/L)

(00300) 

Water 

temperature (°C)

(00010)

pH, field 

(standard

units)

(00400)

pH, laboratory 

(standard

units)

(00403)

Specific 

conductance, 

field

(μS/cm

at 25 °C)

(00095)

Alkalinity, field

(mg/L 

as CaCO3)

(29802)

Alkalinity, 

laboratory, fixed 

endpoint (pH 4.5)

(mg/L as

CaCO3)

(29801)

RL 0.1 0.2 0.0–38.5 0–14 0–14 5 1 1

Threshold type TT na na SMCL-US SMCL-US SMCL-CA1 na na

Threshold 1 na na 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 900 (1,600) na na

KING-36 nc 4.2 23.5 8.1 nc 222 nc nc

KING-37 nc 7.0 20.0 nc nc 385 nc nc

KING-38 nc 3.2 24.5 nc 7.9 298 nc 129

KING-39 nc <0.2 20.5 nc nc *1680 nc nc

KWH-01 nc 3.1 19.0 nc nc 309 nc nc

KWH-02 nc 6.3 18.0 nc nc 175 nc nc

KWH-03 nc 6.7 18.5 nc 8.1 230 nc 78

KWH-04 nc 3.7 19.0 nc nc 418 nc nc

KWH-05 nc 7.0 21.5 nc nc *1050 nc nc

KWH-06 nc 8.8 23.0 nc 7.0 *1000 nc 122

KWH-07 nc 2.1 21.0 nc nc *1050 nc nc

KWH-08 nc 7.9 21.0 nc nc 738 nc nc

KWH-09 nc 8.3 18.5 nc nc 478 nc nc

KWH-10 nc 11 21.0 nc nc 650 nc nc

KWH-11 nc 0.4 22.0 nc *9.1 366 nc 130

KWH-12 0.6 5.8 19.5 8.5 8.0 218 65.3 66

KWH-13 nc 3.9 20.0 nc nc 327 nc nc

KWH-14 0.1 7.9 18.5 7.9 7.2 317 106 102

KWH-15 nc 4.1 21.5 nc nc *1060 nc nc

KWH-16 nc 9.5 19.5 nc nc 493 nc nc

KWH-17 nc 5.2 20.0 nc nc 519 nc nc

KWH-18 nc 7.8 19.5 nc nc 680 nc nc

TULE-01 0.1 4.0 23.5 *8.8 8.5 264 57.2 60

TULE-02 nc 7.3 19.5 nc nc 430 nc nc

TULE-03 nc 1.5 19.0 nc *8.6 293 nc 107

TULE-04 nc 0.6 25.5 nc nc 523 nc nc

TULE-05 nc 0.4 27.5 nc nc *1120 nc nc

TULE-06 nc nc 33.5 nc nc 535 nc nc

TULE-07 nc 5.5 21.5 nc *9.1 450 nc 98

TULE-08 1.9 1.1 25.0 *9.8 *9.7 203 74 77

TULE-09 nc 1.0 19.5 nc nc 354 nc nc

TULE-10 nc 7.5 21.0 nc nc 580 nc nc

TULE-11 nc 0.3 22.0 nc nc 331 nc nc

TULE-12 nc <0.2 29.5 nc nc 231 nc nc

TULE-13 nc 2.2 19.5 nc nc 409 nc nc

TULE-14 nc 8.6 22.0 nc nc 417 nc nc

TULE-15 nc 0.4 26.0 nc nc 479 nc nc
Tables 45

Table 4. Water-quality indicators in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. KING, 

Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, 

Highway 99 transect well; C, celsius; E, estimated value; mg/L, milligrams per liter; mm, millimeter; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; na, not available; 

nc, sample not collected; NTU, nephelometric turbidity unit; RL, reporting level; TT, treatment technique - a required process intended to reduce the level of a 

contaminant in drinking water; SMCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency secondary maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department 

of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA 

identification no.

Turbidity

(NTU)

(63676)

Dissolved 

oxygen

(mg/L)

(00300) 

Water 

temperature (°C)

(00010)

pH, field 

(standard

units)

(00400)

pH, laboratory 

(standard

units)

(00403)

Specific 

conductance, 

field

(μS/cm

at 25 °C)

(00095)

Alkalinity, field

(mg/L 

as CaCO3)

(29802)

Alkalinity, 

laboratory, fixed 

endpoint (pH 4.5)

(mg/L as

CaCO3)

(29801)

RL 0.1 0.2 0.0–38.5 0–14 0–14 5 1 1

Threshold type TT na na SMCL-US SMCL-US SMCL-CA1 na na

Threshold 1 na na 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 900 (1,600) na na

TULE-16 nc 6.9 20.5 nc nc 617 nc nc

TULE-17 nc 6.8 20.5 nc 8.1 287 nc 85

TLR-01 nc 10.9 19.5 nc nc 359 nc nc

TLR-02 nc 1.0 23.5 nc *9.1 402 nc 182

TLR-03 nc <0.2 24.0 nc nc 425 nc nc

TLR-04 0.5 <0.2 25.0 8.8 8.0 791 133 137

TLR-05 0.8 0.2 21.5 *9.4 *9.2 408 146 149

TLR-06 nc 0.9 21.5 nc 8.2 *1,320 nc 243

TLR-07 nc 0.2 27.0 nc nc *1,110 nc nc

TLR-08 nc 1.8 21.5 nc *8.6 353 nc 146

TLR-09 nc <0.2 15.5 nc nc *1,440 nc nc

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 0.1 6.2 22.5 7.4 7.4 853 247 286

KINGFP-02 0.1 3.5 24.0 8.0 7.7 321 131 139

KINGFP-03 0.1 3.5 24.0 8.1 8.0 292 115 121

KINGFP-04 0.1 6.5 21.5 7.5 7.5 515 193 206

KINGFP-05 0.3 4.5 23.5 7.1 7.5 792 309 322

KINGFP-06 0.3 5.7 22.5 7.7 7.8 370 174 161

KINGFP-07 2.3 6.1 24.0 6.6 6.9 *1,020 305 284

KINGFP-08 2.8 8.3 21.0 7.2 7.5 796 269 249

KINGFP-09 1.5 9.1 21.5 7.4 7.5 356 150 148

KINGFP-10 0.8 5.3 21.5 7.6 7.4 343 166 142

KINGFP-11 2.3 6.4 22.5 7.5 6.5 *1,210 451 435

KINGFP-12 0.4 6.1 22.5 7.2 6.8 *2,020 465 405

KINGFP-13 0.7 4.9 23.0 7.5 7.2 866 245 220

KINGFP-14 0.4 <0.2 17.5 7.3 7.4 836 265 263

KINGFP-15 0.9 <0.2 21.0 7.3 7.6 786 249 245

HWY99T-01 nc 6.8 21.5 nc 7.8 315 nc 146

1

 The SMCL-CA for specific conductance has recommended and upper threshold values. The upper value is shown in parentheses.
46 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 

grid wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path 

well; μg/L, microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

Chloroform 

(trichloromethane) 

(μg/L) 

(32106)

1,2-Dibromo3-chloropropane 

(DBCP) 

(μg/L) 

(82625)

Tetrachloroethene 

(PCE) 

(μg/L) 

(34475)

m-Xylene 

plus 

p-xylene 

(μg/L) 

(85795)

Carbon 

disulfide 

(μg/L) 

(77041)

Bromodichloromethane 

(μg/L) 

(32101)

Bromoform

(tribromomethane)

(μg/L) 

(32104)

1,2-Dichloropropane 

(μg/L) 

(34541)

LRL 0.020 0.030 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.028 0.10 0.03

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA NL-CA MCL-US MCL-US MCL-US

Threshold (μg/L) 280 0.2 0.5 1,750 160 280 280 5

Grid wells

KING-07 — — — — — — — —

KING-08 — E0.02 — — — — — —

KING-09 — E0.02 — — — — — —

KING-10 — — E0.04 E0.04 — — — —

KING-11 — E0.05 — E0.04 — — — —

KING-12 — — — E0.04 — — — —

KING-13 E0.04 *0.37 E0.02 — — — — —

KING-15 — — E0.02 — — — — —

KING-18 E0.07 E0.02 — — — — — —

KING-19 — E0.02 — — — — — E0.08

KING-23 E0.04 0.1 E0.04 — — — — —

KING-24 E0.07 *0.35 — — 0.10 — — —

KING-26 — — — — E0.02 — — —

KING-29 — — — — — — — —

KING-34 — 0.17 — — — — — 0.25

KING-35 E0.02 — — — — — — —

KING-37 — E0.04 — E0.02 — — — —

KING-39 — — — — E0.05 — — —

KWH-02 E0.06 — — — — — — —

KWH-03 — — — — — — 0.13 —

KWH-05 0.18 — — — — E0.05 — —

KWH-06 0.18 E0.05 — — — — — —

KWH-07 — — 0.45 — — — — —

KWH-08 E0.08 — — — — 0.13 2.14 —

KWH-09 E0.08 — — — — — — —

KWH-10 1.35 — — — — E0.04 — —

KWH-12 E0.04 — 0.24 — — — — —

KWH-13 E0.02 — — — — — — —

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]
Tables 47

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 

grid wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path 

well; μg/L, microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

Chloroform 

(trichloromethane) 

(μg/L) 

(32106)

1,2-Dibromo3-chloropropane 

(DBCP) 

(μg/L) 

(82625)

Tetrachloroethene 

(PCE) 

(μg/L) 

(34475)

m-Xylene 

plus 

p-xylene 

(μg/L) 

(85795)

Carbon 

disulfide 

(μg/L) 

(77041)

Bromodichloromethane 

(μg/L) 

(32101)

Bromoform

(tribromomethane)

(μg/L) 

(32104)

1,2-Dichloropropane 

(μg/L) 

(34541)

LRL 0.020 0.030 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.028 0.10 0.03

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA NL-CA MCL-US MCL-US MCL-US

Threshold (μg/L) 280 0.2 0.5 1,750 160 280 280 5

KWH-14 E0.07 — E0.04 — — — — —

KWH-15 E0.04 — — — — E0.03 — —

KWH-16 E0.02 — 0.11 — — — — E0.08

KWH-17 0.42 — — E0.04 — 0.39 0.15 —

KWH-18 0.30 — 0.17 E0.01 — — — —

TULE-01 E0.01 — — — — — — —

TULE-02 — — E0.02 — — — — E0.06

TULE-04 — E0.05 — — — — — —

TULE-05 1.83 — — E0.12 E0.05 2.16 3.08 —

TULE-06 — — — — E0.05 — — —

TULE-09 — — 0.22 — — — — —

TULE-10 0.31 0.18 — — — E0.05 — —

TULE-11 — — — — 0.17 — — —

TULE-12 — — — — E0.05 — — —

TULE-14 — 0.10 — E0.02 — — — —

TULE-16 — *0.22 — E0.01 — — — —

TLR-01 E0.04 — — — — — — —

TLR-04 — — — — E0.04 — — —

TLR-06 0.14 — — — — — — —

TLR-07 — — — E0.12 — — — —

TLR-08 — — — — — — — —

Number of 

detections

23 15 11 10 8 7 4 4

Detection 

frequency 

(percent)

28 18 13 12 9.6 8.4 4.8 4.8
48 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 

grid wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path 

well; μg/L, microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

Chloroform 

(trichloromethane) 

(μg/L) 

(32106)

1,2-Dibromo3-chloropropane 

(DBCP) 

(μg/L) 

(82625)

Tetrachloroethene 

(PCE) 

(μg/L) 

(34475)

m-Xylene 

plus 

p-xylene 

(μg/L) 

(85795)

Carbon 

disulfide 

(μg/L) 

(77041)

Bromodichloromethane 

(μg/L) 

(32101)

Bromoform

(tribromomethane)

(μg/L) 

(32104)

1,2-Dichloropropane 

(μg/L) 

(34541)

LRL 0.020 0.030 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.028 0.10 0.03

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA NL-CA MCL-US MCL-US MCL-US

Threshold (μg/L) 280 0.2 0.5 1,750 160 280 280 5

Understanding Wells3

KINGFP-01 E0.04 *0.36 — E0.06 — — — —

KINGFP-04 E0.03 E0.05 E0.03 — — — — —

KINGFP-05 — 0.09 — V0.05 — — — —

KINGFP-07 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-08 — *2.03 — — — — — E0.04

KINGFP-09 — *0.45 — — — — — —

KINGFP-10 — *0.2 — — — — — —

KINGFP-11 E0.01 *1.04 — — — — — E0.08

KINGFP-12 — — E0.03 — — — — —

KINGFP-13 0.14 — — — — — — —

KINGFP-14 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-15 — — — — — — — —
Tables 49

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1,2,4-

Trimethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(77222)

Dibromochloromethane 

(μg/L) 

(32105)

1,1-Dichloroethene (DCE) 

(μg/L)

(34501)

Trichloroethene (TCE) 

(μg/L) 

(39180)

Trichlorofluoromethane 

(CFC-11) 

(μg/L) 

(34488)

1,1-Dichloroethane 

(μg/L) (34496)

Ethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(34371)

Toluene 

(μg/L) 

(34010)

LRL 0.056 0.10 0.024 0.038 0.08 0.04 0.03 0.02

Threshold type1 NL-CA MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) 330 280 6 5 150 5 300 150

Grid wells

KING-07 — — E0.03 — — E0.02 — —

KING-08 — — — — — — — —

KING-09 — — — — — — — —

KING-10 — — — — — — — —

KING-11 — — — — — — — —

KING-12 — — — — — — — —

KING-13 — — — — — — — —

KING-15 — — — — — — — —

KING-18 — — — — — — — —

KING-19 — — — — — — — —

KING-23 — — — — E0.04 — — —

KING-24 — — — — — — — —

KING-26 — — — — — — — V0.03

KING-29 — — — E0.06 — — — —

KING-34 — — — — — — — —

KING-35 — — — — — — — —

KING-37 — — — — — — — —

KING-39 — — — — — — — —

KWH-02 — — — E0.03 — — — —

KWH-03 — — — — — — — —

KWH-05 — — — — — — — —

KWH-06 — — — — E0.04 — — —

KWH-07 — — — — — — — —

KWH-08 — 0.4 E0.07 — — — — —

KWH-09 — — — — — — — —

KWH-10 — — — — — — — —

KWH-12 — — — — — — — —

KWH-13 — — — — — — — —

KWH-14 — — — — — — — —

KWH-15 — — — — — — — —

KWH-16 E0.02 — — — — — — —

KWH-17 — 0.4 — — — — — —

KWH-18 — — E0.02 — 0.54 E0.06 — —
50 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1,2,4-

Trimethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(77222)

Dibromochloromethane 

(μg/L) 

(32105)

1,1-Dichloroethene (DCE) 

(μg/L)

(34501)

Trichloroethene (TCE) 

(μg/L) 

(39180)

Trichlorofluoromethane 

(CFC-11) 

(μg/L) 

(34488)

1,1-Dichloroethane 

(μg/L) (34496)

Ethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(34371)

Toluene 

(μg/L) 

(34010)

LRL 0.056 0.10 0.024 0.038 0.08 0.04 0.03 0.02

Threshold type1 NL-CA MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) 330 280 6 5 150 5 300 150

TULE-01 — — — — — — — —

TULE-02 — — — — — — — —

TULE-04 — — — — — — — —

TULE-05 E0.02 4.1 — — — — E0.04 E0.09

TULE-06 — — — — — — — —

TULE-09 — — — — — — — —

TULE-10 — — — — — — — —

TULE-11 — — — — — — — —

TULE-12 — — — — — — — —

TULE-14 — — — — — — — —

TULE-16 — — — — — — — V0.02

TLR-01 — — — E0.05 — — — —

TLR-04 E0.04 — — — — — — —

TLR-06 — — — — — — — —

TLR-07 — — — — — — 0.46 E0.09

TLR-08 E0.02 — — — — — — —

Number of 

detections

4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2

Detection 

frequency 

(percent)

4.8 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 2.4 2.4 2.4

Understanding Wells3

KINGFP-01 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-04 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-05 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-07 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-08 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-09 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-10 E0.02 — — — — — — —

KINGFP-11 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-12 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-13 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-14 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-15 — — — — — — — —
Tables 51

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 

grid wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path 

well; μg/L, microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane 

(CFC-113) 

(μg/L) 

(77652)

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(77221)

o-Xylene 

(μg/L) 

(77135)

Benzene 

(μg/L)

(34030)

Carbon 

tetrachloride 

(Tetrachloromethane) 

(μg/L) 

(32102)

Dibromomethane 

(μg/L) 

(30217)

cis-1,2-

Dichloroethene 

(μg/L) 

(77093)

Dichloromethane 

(methylene

chloride) 

(μg/L) 

(34423)

LRL 0.04 0.06 0.038 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.024 0.06

Threshold type1 MCL-US na MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-CA na MCL-CA MCL-US

Threshold (μg/L) 1,200 na 1,750 1 0.5 na 6 5

Grid wells

KING-07 — — — — — — — —

KING-08 — — — — — — — —

KING-09 — — — — — — — —

KING-10 — — — — — — — —

KING-11 — — — — — — — —

KING-12 — — — — — — — —

KING-13 — — — — — — — —

KING-15 — — — — — — — —

KING-18 — — — — — — — —

KING-19 — — — — — — — —

KING-23 — — — — — — — —

KING-24 — — — — — — — —

KING-26 — — — — — — — —

KING-29 — — — — — — — —

KING-34 — — — — — — — —

KING-35 — — — — — — — —

KING-37 — — — — — — — —

KING-39 — — — — — — — —

KWH-02 — — — — — — — —

KWH-03 — — — — — — — —

KWH-05 — — — — — — — —

KWH-06 — — — — — — — —

KWH-07 — — — — — — — —

KWH-08 — — — — — — — —

KWH-09 — — — — — — — —

KWH-10 — — — — — — — —

KWH-12 — — — — — — — —

KWH-13 — — — — — — — —
52 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 

grid wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path 

well; μg/L, microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane 

(CFC-113) 

(μg/L) 

(77652)

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(77221)

o-Xylene 

(μg/L) 

(77135)

Benzene 

(μg/L)

(34030)

Carbon 

tetrachloride 

(Tetrachloromethane) 

(μg/L) 

(32102)

Dibromomethane 

(μg/L) 

(30217)

cis-1,2-

Dichloroethene 

(μg/L) 

(77093)

Dichloromethane 

(methylene

chloride) 

(μg/L) 

(34423)

LRL 0.04 0.06 0.038 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.024 0.06

Threshold type1 MCL-US na MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-CA na MCL-CA MCL-US

Threshold (μg/L) 1,200 na 1,750 1 0.5 na 6 5

KWH-14 — — — — E0.05 — — —

KWH-15 — — — — — — — —

KWH-16 — — — — — — — —

KWH-17 — — — — — — — —

KWH-18 E0.13 — — — — — — —

TULE-01 — — — — — — — —

TULE-02 — — — — — — — —

TULE-04 — — — — — — — —

TULE-05 0.31 E0.03 E0.06 — — 1.54 — 1.4

TULE-06 — — — — — — — —

TULE-09 — — — — — — — —

TULE-10 — — — — — — — —

TULE-11 — — — — — — — —

TULE-12 — — — — — — — —

TULE-14 — — — — — — — —

TULE-16 — — — — — — — —

TLR-01 — — — — — — E0.03 —

TLR-04 — — — — — — — —

TLR-06 — — — — — — — —

TLR-07 — E0.02 0.16 *78.9 — — — —

TLR-08 — — — — — — — —

Number of 

detections

2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

Detection 

frequency 

(percent)

2.4 2.4 2.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
Tables 53

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 

grid wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path 

well; μg/L, microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane 

(CFC-113) 

(μg/L) 

(77652)

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 

(μg/L) 

(77221)

o-Xylene 

(μg/L) 

(77135)

Benzene 

(μg/L)

(34030)

Carbon 

tetrachloride 

(Tetrachloromethane) 

(μg/L) 

(32102)

Dibromomethane 

(μg/L) 

(30217)

cis-1,2-

Dichloroethene 

(μg/L) 

(77093)

Dichloromethane 

(methylene

chloride) 

(μg/L) 

(34423)

LRL 0.04 0.06 0.038 0.02 0.03 0.05 0.024 0.06

Threshold type1 MCL-US na MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-CA na MCL-CA MCL-US

Threshold (μg/L) 1,200 na 1,750 1 0.5 na 6 5

Understanding Wells3

KINGFP-01 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-04 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-05 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-07 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-08 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-09 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-10 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-11 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-12 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-13 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-14 — — — — — — — —

KINGFP-15 — — — — — — — —
54 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1-Ethyl2-methylbenzene 

(o-Ethyl 

toluene) 

(μg/L) 

(77220)

Isopropylbenzene

(Cumene) 

(μg/L) 

(77223)

Methyl 

tert-butyl 

ether 

(MTBE)

(μg/L) 

(78032)

1,2,3-

Trichloropropane 

(1,2,3-TCP) 

(μg/L) 

(77443)

Acetone 

(μg/L) 

(81552)

1,4-

Dichlorobenzene 

(μg/L) 

(34571)

2-Butanone 

(Methyl 

ethyl 

ketone) 

(μg/L) 

(81595)

Tetrahydrofuran

(μg/L) 

(81607)

Number of 

detections 

per well

LRL 0.06 0.038 0.10 0.18 6 0.03 2 1.0

Threshold type1 na NL-CA MCL-CA HAL na MCL-CA HAL na

Threshold (μg/L) na 770 13 40 na 5 4,000 na

Grid wells

KING-07 — — 0.1 — — — — — 3

KING-08 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-09 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-10 — — — — — — — — 2

KING-11 — — — — — — — — 2

KING-12 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-13 — — — — — — — — 3

KING-15 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-18 — — — — — — — — 2

KING-19 — — — — — — — — 2

KING-23 — — — — — — — — 4

KING-24 — — — — — — — — 3

KING-26 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-29 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-34 — — — E*0.15 — — — — 3

KING-35 — — — — — — — — 1

KING-37 — — — — — — — — 2

KING-39 — — — — — — — — 1

KWH-02 — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-03 — — — — — — — — 1

KWH-05 — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-06 — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-07 — — — — — — — — 1

KWH-08 — — — — — — — — 5

KWH-09 — — — — — — — — 1

KWH-10 — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-12 — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-13 — — — — — — — — 1
Tables 55

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1-Ethyl2-methylbenzene 

(o-Ethyl 

toluene) 

(μg/L) 

(77220)

Isopropylbenzene

(Cumene) 

(μg/L) 

(77223)

Methyl 

tert-butyl 

ether 

(MTBE)

(μg/L) 

(78032)

1,2,3-

Trichloropropane 

(1,2,3-TCP) 

(μg/L) 

(77443)

Acetone 

(μg/L) 

(81552)

1,4-

Dichlorobenzene 

(μg/L) 

(34571)

2-Butanone 

(Methyl 

ethyl 

ketone) 

(μg/L) 

(81595)

Tetrahydrofuran

(μg/L) 

(81607)

Number of 

detections 

per well

LRL 0.06 0.038 0.10 0.18 6 0.03 2 1.0

Threshold type1 na NL-CA MCL-CA HAL na MCL-CA HAL na

Threshold (μg/L) na 770 13 40 na 5 4,000 na

KWH-14 — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-15 — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-16 — — — — — — — — 4

KWH-17 — — — — — — — — 5

KWH-18 — — — — — — — — 7

TULE-01 — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-02 — — — — — — — — 2

TULE-04 — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-05 — — — — — — — — 14

TULE-06 — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-09 — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-10 — — — — — — — — 3

TULE-11 — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-12 — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-14 — — — — — — — — 2

TULE-16 — — — — — — — — 2

TLR-01 — — — — — — — — 3

TLR-04 — — — — — — — — 2

TLR-06 — — — — — — — — 1

TLR-07 E0.02 E0.03 — — — — — — 8

TLR-08 — — — — — — — — 1

Number of 

detections

1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 4119

Detection 

frequency 

(percent)

1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0 0 0 0 559
56 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 5. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates detected in samples collected for the 

Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through 

February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; HAL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; na, not available; E, estimated value; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold; percentage values are detection frequencies]

GAMA

identification

no.

1-Ethyl2-methylbenzene 

(o-Ethyl 

toluene) 

(μg/L) 

(77220)

Isopropylbenzene

(Cumene) 

(μg/L) 

(77223)

Methyl 

tert-butyl 

ether 

(MTBE)

(μg/L) 

(78032)

1,2,3-

Trichloropropane 

(1,2,3-TCP) 

(μg/L) 

(77443)

Acetone 

(μg/L) 

(81552)

1,4-

Dichlorobenzene 

(μg/L) 

(34571)

2-Butanone 

(Methyl 

ethyl 

ketone) 

(μg/L) 

(81595)

Tetrahydrofuran

(μg/L) 

(81607)

Number of 

detections 

per well

LRL 0.06 0.038 0.10 0.18 6 0.03 2 1.0

Threshold type1 na NL-CA MCL-CA HAL na MCL-CA HAL na

Threshold (μg/L) na 770 13 40 na 5 4,000 na

Understanding Wells3

KINGFP-01 — — — — — — — — 3

KINGFP-04 — — — — — — — — 3

KINGFP-05 — — — — — — — — 2

KINGFP-07 — — — — 6V6 — 6V28.1 6V65 0

KINGFP-08 — — — — — — — — 2

KINGFP-09 — — — — — — — — 1

KINGFP-10 — — — — — — — — 2

KINGFP-11 — — — — — — — — 3

KINGFP-12 — — — *0.22 — — — — 2

KINGFP-13 — — — — — — — — 1

KINGFP-14 — 0.14 — — — E0.08 — — 2

KINGFP-15 — 0.19 E0.1 — — — — — 2 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 The MCL-US threshold for trihalomethanes is for the sum of chloroform, bromoform, bromodichloromethane, and dibromochloromethane.

3

 Non-grid wells were not included in statistical calculations.

4

 Total number of VOC detections in grid wells.

5

 Frequency of detection of at least one VOC in the grid wells. Detections with V remark codes are not included.

6

 This value is V-coded because modifications to the well housing may be the source of this constituent.
Tables 57

Table 6A. Pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates (Schedule 2033) detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; nc, not collected; 

RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Simazine 

(μg/L) 

(04035)

Deethylatrazine 

(2-Chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-

amino-s-triazine) 

(μg/L)

(04040)

Atrazine 

(μg/L) 

(39632)

3,4-Dichloroaniline

(μg/L)

(61625)

Prometon

(μg/L)

(04037)

EPTC

(S-Ethyl

dipropylthiocarbamate)

(μg/L)

(82668)

3,5-Dichloroaniline

(μg/L)

(61627)

Dieldrin 

(μg/L)

39381)

Hexazinone

(μg/L)

(04025)

LRL 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.0045 0.01 0.004 0.004 0.009 0.0129

Threshold Type1 MCL-US na MCL-CA na HAL na na RSD5 HAL

Threshold (μg/L) 4 na 1 na 100 na na 0.02 400

Grid wells

KING-03 — — — E0.004 — — — — —

KING-04 — E0.004 — — — — — — —

KING-07 0.013 E0.014 0.027 E0.060 — — — — —

KING-09 0.012 — — — — — — — —

KING-10 0.024 E0.021 0.014 — — — — — —

KING-13 0.012 E0.015 E0.006 — — — — — —

KING-16 — E0.003 — — — — — — —

KING-18 0.020 E0.004 E0.007 — E0.010 — — — —

KING-19 0.011 E0.008 E0.004 E0.009 — — E0.006 — —

KING-20 0.052 E0.009 E0.004 — — — — — —

KING-22 0.009 E0.008 E0.005 — — — — E0.006 —

KING-23 — E0.011 E0.006 — — — — — —

KING-24 0.012 — 0.015 — — — — — —

KING-25 0.009 E0.004 E0.006 — — — — — —

KING-28 0.008 — — — — — — — —

KING-29 0.009 — — E0.006 — — — — —

KING-32 0.008 — — — — — — — —

KING-34 E0.004 — — — — — — — —

KING-37 0.087 E0.006 0.010 E0.005 — — E0.004 — —

KING-39 — — — E0.020 — 0.038 — — E0.013

KWH-01 0.015 E0.008 E0.004 — — — — — —

KWH-02 0.073 E0.008 — — — — — — —

KWH-03 0.021 E0.004 E0.007 — — — — — —

KWH-04 0.023 E0.003 — E0.001 — — — — —

KWH-05 0.111 E0.014 E0.008 E0.002 E0.010 — — — —

KWH-06 0.014 E0.012 0.009 E0.001 E0.004 — — — —

KWH-07 0.045 E0.008 — — E0.004 — — — —

KWH-08 0.008 E0.003 — — — — — — —

KWH-09 0.017 E0.004 E0.007 — — — — — —

KWH-10 0.024 E0.007 0.009 — — — — — —

Table 6A. Pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates (Schedule 2033) detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley 

Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006. 

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; nc, not collected; 

RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected]
58 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 6A. Pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates (Schedule 2033) detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; nc, not collected; 

RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Simazine 

(μg/L) 

(04035)

Deethylatrazine 

(2-Chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-

amino-s-triazine) 

(μg/L)

(04040)

Atrazine 

(μg/L) 

(39632)

3,4-Dichloroaniline

(μg/L)

(61625)

Prometon

(μg/L)

(04037)

EPTC

(S-Ethyl

dipropylthiocarbamate)

(μg/L)

(82668)

3,5-Dichloroaniline

(μg/L)

(61627)

Dieldrin 

(μg/L)

39381)

Hexazinone

(μg/L)

(04025)

LRL 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.0045 0.01 0.004 0.004 0.009 0.0129

Threshold Type1 MCL-US na MCL-CA na HAL na na RSD5 HAL

Threshold (μg/L) 4 na 1 na 100 na na 0.02 400

KWH-11 0.008 E0.003 E0.007 — — — — — —

KWH-12 0.026 E0.006 0.021 — E0.005 — — — —

KWH-14 0.103 E0.011 0.017 — — — — — —

KWH-15 0.008 — — — — — — — —

KWH-16 0.009 — — E0.002 — — — — —

KWH-17 E0.007 — — — — — — — —

KWH-18 0.023 E0.010 0.009 E0.006 — — — — —

TULE-02 0.008 E0.005 E0.005 — — — — — —

TULE-03 E0.005 — — — — — — — —

TULE-05 0.008 E0.005 0.009 — — — — — —

TULE-09 — E0.009 0.009 — — — — — —

TULE-10 0.019 E0.007 0.009 E0.006 — 0.039 — — E0.010

TULE-13 E0.007 — — — — — — — —

TULE-14 — — — — — E0.004 — — —

TULE-16 0.138 E0.005 — — — — — E0.003 —

TLR-01 E0.007 E0.005 E0.006 — — — — — —

Number of 

detections

39 32 26 12 5 3 2 2 2

Detection 

Frequency

47 39 31 14 6.0 3.6 2.4 2.4 2.4

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 0.025 E0.014 — E0.009 — — — — —

KINGFP-04 0.009 E0.004 — E0.001 — — — — —

KINGFP-05 0.014 E0.01 E0.005 — — — — — —

KINGFP-07 sample 

ruined

E0.02 0.01 sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

KINGFP-08 0.042 E0.004 E0.008 E0.019 — — — — —

KINGFP-10 — E0.003 — — — — — — —

KINGFP-11 0.048 E0.005 E0.007 E0.001 — — E0.002 — —

KINGFP-12 0.044 E0.007 — — — — — — —

KINGFP-14 — — — E0.288 — — — — —

KINGFP-15 0.027 — — E0.082 — — — — —
Tables 59

Table 6A. Pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates (Schedule 2033) detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; nc, not collected; 

RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Acetochlor 

(μg/L)

(49260)

Alachlor

(μg/L)

(46342)

Diazinon 

(μg/L)

(39572)

Metolachlor 

(μg/L) 

(39415)

1-Naphthol 

(μg/L) 

(49295)

Desulfinyl 

fipronil 

(μg/L) 

(62170)

Fipronil 

sulfide

(μg/L) 

(62167)

Myclobutanil 

(μg/L) 

(61599)

Prometryn 

(μg/L) 

(04036)

Number 

of detections

per well LRL 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.0882 0.012 0.013 0.008 0.0054

Threshold Type1 na MCL-US HAL HAL na na na na na

Threshold (μg/L) na 2 1 700 na na na na na

Grid wells

KING-03 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-04 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-07 — — — — — — — — — 4

KING-09 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-10 — — — — — — — — — 3

KING-13 — — — — — — — — — 3

KING-16 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-18 — — — — — — — — — 4

KING-19 — — — — — — — — — 5

KING-20 — — — — — — — — — 3

KING-22 — — — — — — — — — 4

KING-23 — — — — — — — — — 2

KING-24 — — — — — — — — — 2

KING-25 — — — — — — — — — 3

KING-28 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-29 — — — — — — — — — 2

KING-32 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-34 — — — — — — — — — 1

KING-37 — — — — — — — — — 5

KING-39 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-01 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-02 — — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-03 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-04 E0.006 E0.004 E0.003 E0.002 E0.005 — — — — 8

KWH-05 — — — — — — — — — 5

KWH-06 — — — — — — — — — 5

KWH-07 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-08 — — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-09 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-10 — — — — — — — — — 3
60 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 6A. Pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates (Schedule 2033) detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from all 99 wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency in the 83 grid wells. 

KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; 

California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; nc, not collected; 

RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Acetochlor 

(μg/L)

(49260)

Alachlor

(μg/L)

(46342)

Diazinon 

(μg/L)

(39572)

Metolachlor 

(μg/L) 

(39415)

1-Naphthol 

(μg/L) 

(49295)

Desulfinyl 

fipronil 

(μg/L) 

(62170)

Fipronil 

sulfide

(μg/L) 

(62167)

Myclobutanil 

(μg/L) 

(61599)

Prometryn 

(μg/L) 

(04036)

Number 

of detections

per well LRL 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.0882 0.012 0.013 0.008 0.0054

Threshold Type1 na MCL-US HAL HAL na na na na na

Threshold (μg/L) na 2 1 700 na na na na na

KWH-11 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-12 — — — — — — — — — 4

KWH-14 — — — — — — — — — 3

KWH-15 — — — — — — — — — 1

KWH-16 — — — — — — — — — 2

KWH-17 — — — — — — — — — 1

KWH-18 — — — — — — — — — 4

TULE-02 — — — — — — — — — 3

TULE-03 — — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-05 — — — — — — — — — 3

TULE-09 — — — — — — — — — 2

TULE-10 — — — — — — — — — 6

TULE-13 — — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-14 — — — — — — — — — 1

TULE-16 — — — — — — — — — 3

TLR-01 — — — — — — — — — 3

Number of 

detections

1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2128

Detection 

Frequency

1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0 0 0 0 355

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 — — — — — — — — — 3

KINGFP-04 — — — — — — — — — 3

KINGFP-05 — — — — — — — — — 3

KINGFP-07 sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

sample 

ruined

2

KINGFP-08 — — — — — — — — — 4

KINGFP-10 — — — — — — — — — 1

KINGFP-11 — — — — — — — — — 5

KINGFP-12 — — — — — — — — — 2

KINGFP-14 — — — — — E0.005 E0.006 0.034 E0.006 5

KINGFP-15 — — — — — E0.005 E0.006 — — 4

1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 Total number of pesticide detections in grid wells.

3

 Frequency of detection of at least one pesticide or pesticide degradate in the grid wells.
Tables 61

Table 6B. Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and caffeine (Schedule 2060) detected in samples collected for 

the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 

2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent 

or property. Samples from 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in 

order of decreasing detection frequency. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk-specific dose at 

a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; —, not detected]

GAMA

identification

no.

Caffeine 

(μg/L)

(50305)

Deisopropyl 

atrazine (2-Chloro-6-

ethylamino-4-

amino-s-triazine)

(μg/L)

(04038)

Metsulfuron 

methyl

(μg/L)

(61697)

Bromacil 

(μg/L)

(04029)

Dinoseb 

(μg/L)

(49301)

Diuron 

(μg/L)

(49300)

LRL 0.018 0.08 0.025 0.018 0.038 0.015

Threshold Type1 na na na HAL MCL-CA RSD5

Threshold (μg/L) na na na 70 7 20

Grid wells

KING-04 0.024 E0.005 — — — —

KING-09 0.023 E0.01 — — — —

KING-10 E0.011 E0.05 — — — —

KING-12 — E0.01 — — — —

KING-13 0.02 — — — — —

KING-15 V0.01 — — — — —

KING-16 V0.009 — — — — —

KING-20 V0.01 E0.18 — E0.01 — —

KING-30 0.023 — — — — —

KWH-03 — E0.03 — — — —

KWH-06 E0.006 E0.02 — — — 0.02

KWH-11 E0.005 — — — — —

KWH-12 — E0.03 E0.07 E0.01 E0.003 —

KWH-14 — E0.10 E0.07 — — E0.02

TULE-01 — — E0.07 — — —

TULE-03 — E0.004 E0.07 — — —

TLR-02 — — E0.07 — — —

TLR-04 — — E0.07 — — —

TLR-05 E0.004 — E0.07 — — —

TLR-06 E0.007 — E0.07 — — —

TLR-08 E0.011 — — E0.01 — —

Number of detections 10 10 8 3 2 2

Detection Frequency 36 36 31 11 7.1 7.1

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 — E0.2 — 0.91 — 0.25

KINGFP-02 V0.004 — — — — —

KINGFP-04 E0.008 E0.01 — — — 0.03

KINGFP-05 — E0.06 — — — —

KINGFP-07 — E0.3 — — — —

KINGFP-08 — 0.3 — 0.54 — 0.67

Table 6B. Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and caffeine (Schedule 2060) detected in samples collected for 

the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 

2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent 

or property. Samples from 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in 

order of decreasing detection frequency. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk-specific dose at 

a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; —, not detected]
62 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 6B. Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and caffeine (Schedule 2060) detected in samples collected for 

the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 

2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent 

or property. Samples from 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. Analytes are listed in 

order of decreasing detection frequency. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant 

level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; RSD5, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency risk-specific dose at 

a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, 

microgram per liter; —, not detected]

GAMA

identification

no.

Caffeine 

(μg/L)

(50305)

Deisopropyl 

atrazine (2-Chloro-6-

ethylamino-4-

amino-s-triazine)

(μg/L)

(04038)

Metsulfuron 

methyl

(μg/L)

(61697)

Bromacil 

(μg/L)

(04029)

Dinoseb 

(μg/L)

(49301)

Diuron 

(μg/L)

(49300)

LRL 0.018 0.08 0.025 0.018 0.038 0.015

Threshold Type1 na na na HAL MCL-CA RSD5

Threshold (μg/L) na na na 70 7 20

KINGFP-10 — E0.01 — E0.01 — —

KINGFP-11 V0.007 E0.32 — — — 0.03

KINGFP-12 — E0.29 — — — 0.17

KINGFP-13 V0.012 — — — — —

KINGFP-14 — — — — — E0.54

KINGFP-15 — — — — — E0.44
Tables 63

Table 6B. Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and caffeine (Schedule 2060) detected in samples 

collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) 

study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific 

constituent or property. Samples from 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. 

Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study 

area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime 

Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California Department 

of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; RSD5, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency risk-specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected] 

GAMA

identification

no.

Fenuron

(μg/L) 

(49297)

Bentazon 

(μg/L) 

(38711)

Deethyldeisopropyl 

atrazine 

(chlorodiamino-striazine) 

(μg/L) 

(04039)

Imazethapyr 

(μg/L) 

(50407)

Oxamyl 

(μg/L) 

(38866)

Number of 

detections 

per well

LRL 0.019 0.012 0.04 0.038 0.030

Threshold Type1 na MCL-CA na na MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) na 18 na na 50

Grid wells

KING-04 — — — — — 2

KING-09 — — — — — 2

KING-10 — — — — — 2

KING-12 — — — — — 1

KING-13 — — — — — 1

KING-15 — — — — — 0

KING-16 — — — — — 0

KING-20 — — — — — 2

KING-30 — — — — — 1

KWH-03 — — — — — 1

KWH-06 — — — — — 3

KWH-11 0.02 — — — — 1

KWH-12 — — — — — 3

KWH-14 — — — — — 2

TULE-01 — — — — — 0

TULE-03 — — — — — 1

TLR-02 — — — — — 0

TLR-04 — — — — — 0

TLR-05 — — — — — 1

TLR-06 — — — — — 1

TLR-08 — — — — — 2

Number of detections 1 0 0 0 0 226

Detection Frequency 3.6 0 0 0 0 357

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 — E0.01 E0.06 — — 5

KINGFP-02 — — — — — 0

KINGFP-04 — — — — — 3

KINGFP-05 — — — — — 1

KINGFP-07 — — E0.07 — — 2

KINGFP-08 — — E0.08 — E0.03 5
64 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 6B. Polar pesticides and (or) pesticide degradates and caffeine (Schedule 2060) detected in samples 

collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) 

study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific 

constituent or property. Samples from 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed, but only samples with detections are listed. 

Analytes are listed in order of decreasing detection frequency. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study 

area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime 

Health Advisory; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA; California Department 

of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; RSD5, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency risk-specific dose at a risk factor of 10–5; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus 

data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected] 

GAMA

identification

no.

Fenuron

(μg/L) 

(49297)

Bentazon 

(μg/L) 

(38711)

Deethyldeisopropyl 

atrazine 

(chlorodiamino-striazine) 

(μg/L) 

(04039)

Imazethapyr 

(μg/L) 

(50407)

Oxamyl 

(μg/L) 

(38866)

Number of 

detections 

per well

LRL 0.019 0.012 0.04 0.038 0.030

Threshold Type1 na MCL-CA na na MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) na 18 na na 50

KINGFP-10 — — — — — 2

KINGFP-11 — — E0.18 — — 3

KINGFP-12 — — E0.22 — — 3

KINGFP-13 — — — — — 0

KINGFP-14 — — — — — 1

KINGFP-15 — — — 0.43 — 2 1 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA 

when the MCL-CA is lower than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 Total number of pesticide detections in grid wells.

3

 Frequency of detection of at least one pesticide or pesticide degradate in the grid wells (not including caffeine).
Tables 65

GAMA 

identification no.

Perchlorate 

(μg/L) 

(61209)

N-Nitrosodimethylamine 

(NDMA) 

(μg/L) 

(64176)

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 

(μg/L) 

(77443)

MRL 0.5 0.002 0.005

Threshold type MCL-CA NL-CA HAL

Threshold (μg/L) 6 0.010 40

Grid wells

KING-11 0.94 — —

KING-12 1.5 — —

KING-13 0.62 — —

KING-15 0.71 — —

KING-34 0.62 nc nc

KING-35 0.89 nc nc

KWH-04 0.71 nc nc

KWH-05 1.8 nc nc

KWH-06 *10 — —

KWH-08 2.2 nc nc

KWH-09 0.71 nc nc

KWH-10 2.7 nc nc

KWH-11 — 0.0062 —

KWH-12 — — 0.008

KWH-13 1.1 nc nc

KWH-18 0.63 nc nc

TULE-10 0.64 nc nc

TULE-14 0.94 nc nc

Number of wells with detections 16 1 1

Detection frequency (percent) 19 2.2 2.2

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 1.9 — —

KINGFP-02 — 0.0033 —

KINGFP-03 0.52 — —

KINGFP-04 0.86 — —

KINGFP-05 0.95 — 0.009

KINGFP-07 1.7 — —

KINGFP-08 1.1 — 0.045

KINGFP-09 0.73 — 0.010

KINGFP-10 — — 0.017

KINGFP-11 3.9 — 0.43

KINGFP-12 5.8 — 0.29

KINGFP-13 0.91 — —

Table 7. Constituents of special interest [Perchlorate, N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane 

(1,2,3-TCP)] detected in samples collected in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006. 

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent 

or property. Analyses done by the Montgomery Watson Harza laboratory. Samples from all 99 wells were analyzed for perchlorate, samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were sampled for NDMA and 1,2,3-TCP; only wells with at least one detection are listed. KING, 

Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; MCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health defined maximum contaminant level; NL-CA, California Department of Public Health notification level; 

HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime health advisory; MRL, minimum reporting level; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not 

detected; nc, not collected; *, value is above threshold]
66 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 8. Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley GroundWater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; LRL, laboratory reporting level; mg/L, 

milligram per liter; na, not available; E, estimated value; nc, not collected; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; *, value is above threshold; —, not detected]

GAMA 

identification no.

Ammonia, 

as nitrogen

(mg/L) 

(00608)

Nitrite plus nitrate, 

as nitrogen

(mg/L) 

(00631)

Nitrite, 

as nitrogen 

(mg/L) 

(00613)

Total nitrogen 

(nitrate + nitrite 

+ ammonia + 

organic-nitrogen), 

as nitrogen 

(mg/L) 

(62854)

Orthophosphate, 

as phosphorous 

(mg/L) 

(00671)

Dissolved 

organic 

carbon 

(mg/L) 

(00681)

LRL 0.04 0.06 0.008 0.03 0.006 0.3

Threshold Type1 HAL MCL-US MCL-US na na na

Threshold (mg/L) 224.7 10 1 na na na

Grid wells

KING-04 — 2.53 E0.006 32.49 0.015 0.3

KING-09 — 1.79 — 1.82 0.006 nc

KING-10 — 1.69 — 1.69 0.006 nc

KING-11 — 4.09 — 33.94 0.014 nc

KING-12 — 8.24 — 37.95 0.030 nc

KING-13 — 3.21 — 3.29 0.020 nc

KING-15 — 6.95 — 36.75 0.035 nc

KING-16 — 2.09 — 2.20 0.048 nc

KING-17 — 4.80 — 34.76 0.014 0.4

KING-20 — 1.01 — 1.05 0.078 V0.3

KING-25 — 5.14 — 5.26 0.006 nc

KING-30 — 2.75 — 32.71 0.024 nc

KING-38 — 2.45 — 2.51 0.011 nc

KWH-03 — 2.65 — 2.65 — nc

KWH-06 — 9.13 — 9.20 0.007 nc

KWH-11 — — — — 0.042 nc

KWH-12 — 3.26 — 3.37 — V0.2

KWH-14 — 2.71 — 2.72 — 0.6

TULE-01 — 3.37 — 33.27 0.006 —

TULE-03 — 2.30 — 2.29 0.020 nc

TULE-07 — 2.34 — 2.54 E0.005 nc

TULE-08 — 0.43 — 0.42 0.028 V0.2

TULE-17 — 1.75 — 1.80 0.006 nc

TLR-02 0.23 — — 0.38 0.054 nc

TLR-04 — — — — 0.021 —

TLR-05 E0.03 — — 0.07 0.105 1.3

TLR-06 1.23 — — 1.35 0.154 nc

TLR-08 E0.02 — — 0.06 0.032 nc

Table 8. Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake 

study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health 

Advisory Level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; LRL, laboratory reporting level; mg/L, milligram per liter; na, 

not available; E, estimated value; nc, not collected; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality 

assessment; *, value is above threshold; —, not detected]
Tables 67

Table 8. Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley GroundWater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; LRL, laboratory reporting level; mg/L, 

milligram per liter; na, not available; E, estimated value; nc, not collected; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not 

included in ground-water quality assessment; *, value is above threshold; —, not detected]

GAMA 

identification no.

Ammonia, 

as nitrogen

(mg/L) 

(00608)

Nitrite plus nitrate, 

as nitrogen

(mg/L) 

(00631)

Nitrite, 

as nitrogen 

(mg/L) 

(00613)

Total nitrogen 

(nitrate + nitrite 

+ ammonia + 

organic-nitrogen), 

as nitrogen 

(mg/L) 

(62854)

Orthophosphate, 

as phosphorous 

(mg/L) 

(00671)

Dissolved 

organic 

carbon 

(mg/L) 

(00681)

LRL 0.04 0.06 0.008 0.03 0.006 0.3

Threshold Type1 HAL MCL-US MCL-US na na na

Threshold (mg/L) 224.7 10 1 na na na

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 — *12.1 — 12.3 0.017 0.5

KINGFP-02 — 2.82 — 2.82 0.020 —

KINGFP-03 — 3.54 — 33.43 0.016 —

KINGFP-04 — 6.41 — 36.14 0.025 0.3

KINGFP-05 — 7.17 — 7.31 0.040 nc

KINGFP-06 — 2.38 — 2.40 0.026 nc

KINGFP-07 — *25.8 — 324.5 0.051 nc

KINGFP-08 — *12.8 — 312.6 0.049 nc

KINGFP-09 — 2.80 — 32.68 0.059 nc

KINGFP-10 — 2.44 — 2.45 0.039 nc

KINGFP-11 — *10.3 — 39.17 0.045 nc

KINGFP-12 — *34.3 — 332.5 0.030 nc

KINGFP-13 — *10.3 — 310.0 0.029 nc

KINGFP-14 8.10 — — 8.06 1.34 nc

KINGFP-15 0.73 — — 0.88 1.56 nc

HWY99T-01 — 1.76 — 1.75 0.023 nc 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 Total nitrogen in these samples is less than the sum of the filtered nitrogen analytes, but falls within the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality 

Laboratory acceptance criteria of 10 percent relative percent difference. 3

 The published HAL for ammonia is 30 mg/L as NH3; using molar mass ratios, the HAL can be converted for ammonia as nitrogen. This value is 24.7 mg/L.
68 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program Table 9. Major and minor ions and total dissolved solids detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued [The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; na, not available; mg/L, milligram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold value] GAMA Identification no. Calcium, filtered (mg/L) (00915) Magnesium, filtered (mg/L) (00925) Potassium, filtered (mg/L) (00935) Sodium, filtered (mg/L) (00930) Bicarbonate1

,

dissolved 

(mg/L 

as HCO3

–) 

(63786)

Carbonate1, 

dissolved 

(mg/L 

as CO32–)

(63788)

Bromide, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(71870) 

Chloride,

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00940) 

Fluoride, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00950)

Iodide, 

filtered

(mg/L) 

(71865)

Silica, 

filtered

(mg/L)

(00955) 

Sulfate, 

filtered 

(mg/L)

(00945) 

Total 

dissolved

solids

(residue on

evaporation) 

(mg/L)

(70300)

LRL 0.02 0.008 0.16 0.2 1 1 0.02 0.2 0.1 0.002 0.04 0.18 10Threshold type2 na na na na na na na SMCL-CA MCL-CA na na SMCL-CA SMCL-CAThreshold (mg/L) na na na na na na na 250 (500)3 2 na na 250 (500)3 500 (1,000)3

Grid wells

KING-04 17.9 1.09 7.24 86.9 170 1.4 0.15 60.7 0.21 0.016 62.4 22.4 364KING-09 16.3 0.279 1.56 19.6 nc nc 0.05 14.5 E0.07

— 15.4 8.48 111

KING-10 31.9 4.67 2.46 19.8 nc nc 0.05 11.3 E0.09 E0.001 27.3 8.76 173KING-11 33.9 15.4 2.10 31.4 nc nc 0.10 32.4 0.14 0.002 36.6 7.55 263KING-12 56.7 22.0 3.38 25.6 nc nc 0.07 13.6 0.20 E0.001 62.6 34.6 373

KING-13 28.6 10.7 2.32 24.3 nc nc 0.06 13.5 0.15 E0.002 47.0 5.30 224

KING-15 27.4 18.0 6.55 21.5 nc nc 0.08 15.4 0.11 E0.003 74.8 7.50 272

KING-16 15.8 8.39 3.40 11.9 nc nc 0.03 4.38 0.15

— 64.7 4.07 173

KING-17 23.3 12.3 3.51 26.0 159 0.6 0.05 10.9 0.16 E0.001 39.7 4.30 200

KING-20 9.86 6.54 1.47 6.51 65 0.1 E 0.01 1.72 E0.05

— 26.2 7.94 91

KING-25 40.4 14.9 3.01 39.6 nc nc 0.16 56.5 0.17 0.002 49.0 13.3 328KING-30 20.0 4.34 1.67 29.9 nc nc 0.05 8.79 E0.09

— 20.1 6.97 162

KING-38 16.1 6.99 1.95 39.9 nc nc 0.05 6.62 0.18

— 25.8 6.08 184

KWH-03 30.8 1.31 1.12 12.6 nc nc 0.03 6.21 E0.05

— 19.3 13.1 143

KWH-06 71.1 37.4 4.22 64.2 nc nc 0.36 200 0.12 0.011 34.9 28.3 *554

KWH-11 1.79 0.040 0.30 75.6 nc nc 0.05 18.7 1.38 0.062 14.3 6.65 202KWH-12 17.4 0.549 1.36 27.8 78 0.8 0.04 8.61 E0.10

— 15.0 12.9 144

KWH-14 33.1 1.33 1.32 33.8 129 0.4 0.07 19.7 E0.06 E0.001 17.7 10.5 197TULE-01 10.6 0.497 1.04 43.4 65 2.1 0.07 15.9 0.20 E0.001 26.5 18.3 165

TULE-03 14.4 1.19 0.17 49.2 nc nc 0.02 6.93 0.27 0.005 25.1 13.5 190TULE-07 6.00 0.192 0.22 53.3 nc nc 0.03 10.6 0.19 0.006 16.0 12.0 168TULE-08 1.22 V0.01 0.21 42.4 58 14.9 0.03 6.91 0.34 0.006 17.7 8.51 119TULE-17 23.6 1.65 0.52 27.6 nc nc 0.07 15.3 0.24

— 53.0 13.2 192

Table 9. Major and minor ions and total dissolved solids detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; na, not available; mg/L, milligram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold value]
Tables 69

Table 9. Major and minor ions and total dissolved solids detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; LRL, laboratory reporting level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; na, not available; mg/L, milligram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold value]

GAMA 

Identification no.

Calcium, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00915) 

Magnesium, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00925) 

Potassium, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00935) 

Sodium, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00930) 

Bicarbonate1,

dissolved 

(mg/L 

as HCO3–) 

(63786)

Carbonate1, 

dissolved 

(mg/L 

as CO32–)

(63788)

Bromide, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(71870) 

Chloride,

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00940) 

Fluoride, 

filtered 

(mg/L) 

(00950)

Iodide, 

filtered

(mg/L) 

(71865)

Silica, 

filtered

(mg/L)

(00955) 

Sulfate, 

filtered 

(mg/L)

(00945) 

Total 

dissolved

solids

(residue on

evaporation) 

(mg/L)

(70300)

LRL 0.02 0.008 0.16 0.2 1 1 0.02 0.2 0.1 0.002 0.04 0.18 10Threshold type2 na na na na na na na SMCL-CA MCL-CA na na SMCL-CA SMCL-CAThreshold (mg/L) na na na na na na na 250 (500)3 2 na na 250 (500)3 500 (1,000)3TLR-02 1.46 0.075 0.39 99.4 nc nc 0.08 19.9 1.87 0.048 18.1 0.31 252TLR-04 3.57 0.315 0.76 154 151 5.5 0.45 157 1.23 0.427 15.2 — 415TLR-05 0.87 0.025 0.42 90.0 147 14.8 0.10 35.0 1.56 0.096 33.0 1.19 260TLR-06 14.8 3.60 1.76 269 nc nc 0.25 86.8 0.40 0.101 31.3 *282 853TLR-08 8.56 0.253 0.86 71.3 nc nc 0.06 15.8 0.23 0.037 59.6 13.8 261

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 79.5 44.0 3.53 36.3 299 0.7 0.27 37.0 0.12 0.003 42.6 64.2 *543KINGFP-02 17.6 7.00 1.73 38.7 158 1.1 0.05 11.0 0.14 E0.001 21.6 3.64 190

KINGFP-03 15.4 5.20 1.62 36.7 138 1.3 0.06 9.72 0.15 E0.001 23.1 3.57 181

KINGFP-04 44.8 31.6 4.73 19.9 234 0.5 0.06 12.2 0.11 0.003 62.9 23.5 332

KINGFP-05 61.8 49.0 4.02 41.7 376 0.5 0.13 18.7 0.12 0.025 48.7 64.8 *501KINGFP-06 25.7 21.9 2.56 20.6 E208 E2.1 0.05 8.30 E0.09 — 43.7 5.93 233KINGFP-07 105 39.1 4.21 61.2 372 0.2 0.31 24.2 E0.09 0.007 67.0 112 *714KINGFP-08 60.7 51.3 3.94 37.3 327 0.6 0.23 14.1 0.11 0.004 53.5 98.5 530

KINGFP-09 24.6 21.0 2.44 19.6 182 0.3 0.04 7.62 0.12 E0.001 46.1 11.1 228

KINGFP-10 21.5 20.4 2.16 20.7 E201 E0.6 0.05 5.92 0.12 — 41.1 13.1 211

KINGFP-11 95.0 80.3 4.58 53.0 548 1.0 0.34 43.5 E0.09 0.003 53.3 124 *762KINGFP-12 189 98.7 6.54 120 566 0.6 0.68 124 E0.07 0.007 61.0 *360 *1,420KINGFP-13 80.5 38.2 8.98 32.3 297 0.5 0.19 83.7 E0.09 0.003 71.8 27.0 *520KINGFP-14 34.7 19.5 9.42 92.9 322 0.5 0.09 88.4 0.18 0.043 63.1 14.4 482

KINGFP-15 34.6 21.9 11.1 88.8 302 0.4 0.14 79.1 E0.09 0.042 71.0 9.22 468HWY99T-01 28.1 11.3 3.84 21.4 nc nc 0.03 5.88 0.12 E0.001 50.9 7.98 214

1 Bicarbonate and carbonate concentrations were calculated from the laboratory alkalinity and pH values (table 4) using the advanced speciation method (http://or.water.usgs.gov/alk/methods.html) with 

pK1 = 6.35, pK2 = 10.33, and pKW = 14.

2 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 3 The recommended SMCL-CA thresholds for chloride, sulfate, and TDS are listed with the upper SMCL-CA thresholds in parentheses.
70 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected 

in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above 

threshold value]

GAMA 

identification no.

Aluminum, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01106) 

Antimony, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01095) 

Arsenic, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01000) 

Barium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01005) 

Beryllium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01010)

Boron, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01020) 

Cadmium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01025) 

Chromium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01030) 

LRL 2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.06 8 0.04 0.8

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-US NL MCL-US MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) 1,000 6 10 1,000 4 1,000 5 50

Grid wells

KING-04 3.3 E0.17 6.8 17 E0.04 68 — 1.6

KING-09 4.6 — 1.4 8 — E 7 — 1.3

KING-10 E1.1 — 1.7 28 — 14 — 1.2

KING-11 — — 1.8 58 — 27 E0.03 1.3

KING-12 E1.0 — 1.7 100 — 28 E0.02 1.2

KING-13 — — 2.6 55 — 32 — 2.0

KING-15 — — 1.6 59 — 28 0.04 5.7

KING-16 — — 2.3 24 — 16 — 4.2

KING-17 — — 2.5 46 — 23 0.04 6.6

KING-20 E0.9 — 1.4 5 — E 8 — 0.36

KING-25 E1.0 — 2.2 87 — 36 — 3.6

KING-30 E1.3 — 2.8 27 — 15 — 1.1

KING-38 2.2 — 3.0 53 — 21 — 4.7

KWH-03 E1.0 — 0.64 41 — 19 — 0.96

KWH-06 — — 2.0 244 — 98 — 4.7

KWH-11 34.1 — 3.4 5 — 767 — 0.04

KWH-12 2.3 — 0.66 25 — 19 — 1.8

KWH-14 E1.2 E0.17 0.62 55 — 22 — 0.65

TULE-01 5.1 E0.11 4.5 11 — 33 — 9.5

TULE-03 7.5 — *14.9 16 — 90 — 0.41

TULE-07 31.3 E0.18 7.6 9 E0.03 72 — 0.56

TULE-08 121 E0.16 *19.8 6 E0.04 52 — 2.2

TULE-17 E0.8 E0.12 *12.8 30 — 33 — 9.6

TLR-02 263 — 5.1 10 — 597 E0.02 0.35

TLR-04 29.1 — 5.5 19 — *1,150 E0.03 E 0.03

TLR-05 46.8 — 12.0 2 — 440 E0.03 0.06

TLR-06 E1.5 — 8.2 22 — *1,170 0.12 0.09

TLR-08 4.3 — *27.3 13 — 75 — 0.04

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected 

in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above 

threshold value]
Tables 71

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected 

in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above 

threshold value]

GAMA 

identification no.

Aluminum, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01106) 

Antimony, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01095) 

Arsenic, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01000) 

Barium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01005) 

Beryllium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01010)

Boron, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01020) 

Cadmium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01025) 

Chromium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01030) 

LRL 2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.06 8 0.04 0.8

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-US NL MCL-US MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) 1,000 6 10 1,000 4 1,000 5 50

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 E0.9 — 1.4 114 — 12 — 2.8

KINGFP-02 E1.4 — 2.1 49 — 11 — 3.0

KINGFP-03 1.8 — 2.5 42 — 17 E0.02 5.2

KINGFP-04 — — 1.7 88 — 20 — 3.4

KINGFP-05 E0.9 — 0.90 95 — 15 E0.03 1.9

KINGFP-06 E1.0 — 2.1 54 — 17 — 2.8

KINGFP-07 — — 0.66 220 — 37 — 1.1

KINGFP-08 1.8 — 0.94 148 — 17 — 0.77

KINGFP-09 E0.8 — 1.5 47 — 12 — 2.9

KINGFP-10 E1.3 — 1.9 64 — 13 — 1.3

KINGFP-11 E0.8 — 1.2 95 — 15 — 3.2

KINGFP-12 — — 0.73 48 — 28 E0.03 3.6

KINGFP-13 — — 2.2 114 — 22 — 5.7

KINGFP-14 — — *18.8 86 — 129 0.24 0.13

KINGFP-15 — — *15.4 64 — 176 — 0.25

HWY99T-01 — — 1.6 45 — 18 — 3.9
72 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected 

in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above 

threshold value]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Cobalt, 

filtered

(μg/L) 

(01035) 

Copper, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01040) 

Iron, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01046) 

Lead, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01049) 

Lithium,

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01130) 

Manganese, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01056) 

Molybdenum, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01060) 

Nickel,

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01065) 

LRL 0.014 0.4 6 0.08 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.06

Threshold type1 na AL SMCL-CA AL na SMCL-CA HAL MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) na 1,300 300 15 na 50 40 100

Grid wells

KING-04 — E0.2 E 5 0.20 19.7 0.3 5.6 0.08

KING-09 — — — 0.22 0.9 E0.1 0.7 —

KING-10 — 0.7 — 1.42 2.3 — 1.3 E0.03

KING-11 — 0.7 7 E0.07 E0.4 1.5 3.5 —

KING-12 — 1.5 — 0.36 0.9 E0.1 1.8 0.13

KING-13 — 3.0 — 0.89 1.2 E0.1 2.0 E0.03

KING-15 — 0.78 — 0.17 5.1 — 1.7 0.10

KING-16 — 4.5 — 0.78 1.4 E0.2 2.2 0.06

KING-17 — 1.9 — 0.91 1.4 E0.1 1.6 —

KING-20 — 1.0 E 3 1.22 — — 0.4 E0.05

KING-25 — 2.2 E 4 0.36 2.5 0.3 3.1 0.10

KING-30 — 0.88 — 0.32 1.0 — 1.9 E0.04

KING-38 E0.020 1.9 — 0.54 1.0 E0.2 2.7 0.32

KWH-03 — 0.72 E 4 0.19 E0.4 — 0.8 0.06

KWH-06 0.060 4.7 22 2.95 9.4 0.5 2.2 0.20

KWH-11 — E0.2 15 E0.04 0.9 2.3 5.6 0.14

KWH-12 E0.023 1.6 9 1.68 0.9 0.4 1.4 0.27

KWH-14 0.046 1.2 — 0.55 1.3 — E0.2 0.48

TULE-01 — E0.3 E 6 0.20 2.4 — 5.3 0.15

TULE-03 E0.020 — E 4 0.24 2.0 E0.1 1.3 0.28

TULE-07 — E0.3 — 0.12 2.3 — E0.3 0.12

TULE-08 E0.023 1.1 6 0.12 0.9 0.2 3.5 E0.04

TULE-17 E0.030 0.7 — 0.26 3.6 — 5.7 0.30

TLR-02 0.051 0.6 20 0.23 1.0 2.3 10.9 0.14

TLR-04 — — E 6 — 2.0 16.9 8.0 —

TLR-05 — 0.8 26 0.12 1.3 1.0 7.4 0.08

TLR-06 0.061 1.7 181 — 7.2 *66.2 38.2 0.40

TLR-08 E0.024 0.8 E 5 0.19 3.0 6.6 3.9 0.27
Tables 73

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and 

Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study 

area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California 

Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected 

in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above 

threshold value]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Cobalt, 

filtered

(μg/L) 

(01035) 

Copper, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01040) 

Iron, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01046) 

Lead, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01049) 

Lithium,

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01130) 

Manganese, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01056) 

Molybdenum, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01060) 

Nickel,

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01065) 

LRL 0.014 0.4 6 0.08 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.06

Threshold type1 na AL SMCL-CA AL na SMCL-CA HAL MCL-CA

Threshold (μg/L) na 1,300 300 15 na 50 40 100

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 E0.02 4.9 9 0.34 1.7 — 0.8 0.21

KINGFP-02 — 0.7 E 5 0.32 0.9 — 2.4 —

KINGFP-03 — 0.8 E 6 0.13 0.9 — 2.5 E0.04

KINGFP-04 — 1.3 — 0.19 2.3 E0.1 1.5 0.15

KINGFP-05 0.26 0.42 11 — 1.9 0.5 1.0 0.94

KINGFP-06 V0.02 — E 5 — 0.9 E0.1 1.2 0.40

KINGFP-07 0.10 0.52 — — 6.5 0.2 E0.2 0.69

KINGFP-08 1.0 — E 4 — 2.4 28.4 8.4 26.9

KINGFP-09 0.07 — 7 — E0.5 0.4 2.2 1.7

KINGFP-10 0.07 — — — 1.4 — 1.4 0.29

KINGFP-11 0.09 0.95 E 5 — 2.2 0.8 0.9 0.98

KINGFP-12 0.24 V0.54 — E0.05 3.7 E0.2 0.5 0.74

KINGFP-13 0.18 V0.41 — — 6.8 — 1.1 V0.65

KINGFP-14 5.8 V0.37 50 E0.06 8.8 * 2,910 3.1 8.9

KINGFP-15 10.2 1.2 168 — 18.4 * 651 4.0 16.7

HWY99T-01 — 0.89 — 0.28 4.7 — 1.3 —
74 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or 

property. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study 

area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department 

of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California 

Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, 

estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included 

in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold value]

GAMA identification 

no.

Selenium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01145) 

Strontium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01080)

Thallium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01057) 

Tungsten, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01155)

Uranium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(22703)

Vanadium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01085) 

Zinc, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01090)

LRL 0.4 0.4 0.04 0.5 0.04 0.1 0.04

Threshold type1 MCL-US HAL MCL-US na MCL-US NL HAL

Threshold (μg/L) 50 4,000 2 na 30 50 2,000

Grid wells

KING-04 0.66 143 — 3.0 21.6 22.1 0.87

KING-09 0.11 181 — 0.33 1.79 8.0 E0.44

KING-10 0.12 261 — 0.67 10.7 11.7 1.9

KING-11 0.22 262 — E0.04 0.69 46.6 1.4

KING-12 0.09 354 — 0.11 3.89 32.8 4.8

KING-13 0.27 172 — 0.11 0.53 44.4 1.7

KING-15 0.28 193 — 0.30 2.41 17.7 1.3

KING-16 0.14 104 — 0.22 0.54 23.4 0.67

KING-17 0.26 173 — 0.39 1.56 37.1 3.1

KING-20 — 58.9 — 0.23 0.98 4.7 2.6

KING-25 0.33 300 0.05 0.40 6.79 43.6 2.0

KING-30 0.44 192 — 0.34 0.77 48.4 2.2

KING-38 0.30 235 — 0.26 0.95 *60.1 1.5

KWH-03 0.09 329 — 0.08 4.95 6.1 0.94

KWH-06 0.94 540 — E0.04 1.31 19.1 7.2

KWH-11 — 20.9 — 30.9 0.07 0.55 1.1

KWH-12 0.30 275 — 0.10 3.53 7.5 3.2

KWH-14 0.09 410 E0.03 0.08 5.30 6.5 1.2

TULE-01 0.41 125 — 1.0 0.69 39.3 —

TULE-03 E0.04 142 — 1.3 8.74 1.4 1.5

TULE-07 0.10 91.0 — 0.67 3.37 35.6 —

TULE-08 0.08 18.4 — 1.7 0.16 8.8 —

TULE-17 0.45 254 — 3.4 2.04 37.2 2.7

TLR-02 — 21.1 — 99.2 0.05 0.38 —

TLR-04 — 46.1 — 21.7 — — —

TLR-05 — 14.2 — 61.0 0.23 0.22 0.7

TLR-06 — 111 — 25.6 0.41 0.29 13.5

TLR-08 0.28 80.9 — 6.1 *38.3 2.2 —
Tables 75

Table 10. Trace elements detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or 

property. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study 

area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; AL, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency action level; HAL, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lifetime Health Advisory Level; MCL-CA, California Department 

of Public Health maximum contaminant level; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; NL, California 

Department of Public Health notification level; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; E, 

estimated value; LRL, laboratory reporting level; na, not available; V, analyte detected in sample and an associated blank, thus data are not included 

in ground-water quality assessment; μg/L, microgram per liter; —, not detected; *, value is above threshold value]

GAMA identification 

no.

Selenium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01145) 

Strontium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01080)

Thallium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01057) 

Tungsten, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01155)

Uranium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(22703)

Vanadium, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01085) 

Zinc, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01090)

LRL 0.4 0.4 0.04 0.5 0.04 0.1 0.04

Threshold type1 MCL-US HAL MCL-US na MCL-US NL HAL

Threshold (μg/L) 50 4,000 2 na 30 50 2,000

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 0.18 516 — 0.21 17.1 26.4 2.2

KINGFP-02 0.21 196 — 0.23 0.92 39.4 E0.52

KINGFP-03 0.23 200 — 0.35 0.94 43.1 0.89

KINGFP-04 0.11 277 — 0.33 7.17 23.7 1.2

KINGFP-05 — 432 — 0.70 14.8 17.4 1.3

KINGFP-06 0.21 176 — 0.25 0.97 35.1 —

KINGFP-07 — 866 — E0.04 19.2 12.3 —

KINGFP-08 E0.05 402 — 0.71 10.9 16.1 E0.30

KINGFP-09 0.10 148 — 0.26 0.93 28.4 —

KINGFP-10 0.18 144 — 0.80 0.66 26.3 —

KINGFP-11 — 558 — 0.96 22.2 24.3 E0.57

KINGFP-12 0.09 1140 — 0.12 *78.3 17.3 1.0

KINGFP-13 0.18 560 — 0.35 18.8 20.7 E0.52

KINGFP-14 — 366 — 7.6 1.23 4.0 —

KINGFP-15 — 312 — 10.8 0.93 15.8 E0.40

HWY99T-01 0.11 236 — 0.20 6.11 10.4 —

 1 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.
76 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 11. Species of inorganic arsenic and iron in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Analyses 

made by the U.S. Geological Survey Trace Metals Laboratory. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, 

Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; 

MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; 

MDL, method detection limit; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; na, not available; μg/L, micrograms 

per liter; *, value is above threshold; — not detected]

GAMA 

identification no.

Arsenic, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(99033)

Arsenic (III), 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(99034)

Iron,

 filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01046)

Iron (II), 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01047)

MDL 0.5 1 2 2

Threshold type1 MCL-US na SMCL-CA na

Threshold (μg/L) 10 na 300 na

Grid wells

KING-04 3.2 — — —

KING-09 0.85 — — —

KING-10 1.0 — — —

KING-11 1.1 — 6 —

KING-12 0.97 — — —

KING-13 1.5 — — —

KING-15 1.0 — — —

KING-16 1.4 — — —

KING-17 1.5 — — —

KING-20 0.9 — — —

KING-25 1.4 — — —

KING-30 1.9 — — —

KING-38 2.5 — 3 3

KWH-03 — — — —

KWH-06 0.84 — 14 8

KWH-11 2.6 2.4 5 3

KWH-12 — — 2 —

KWH-14 — — — —

TULE-01 1.7 — — —

TULE-03 7.7 5.8 2 —

TULE-07 6.7 — — —

TULE-08 18 5.0 6 5

TULE-17 8.8 — — —

TLR-02 3.8 5.4 11 10

TLR-04 4.7 4.7 6 6

TLR-05 17 14 10 10

TLR-06 8.2 5.4 119 104

TLR-08 *24 14 3 2

Table 11. Species of inorganic arsenic and iron in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Analyses 

made by the U.S. Geological Survey Trace Metals Laboratory. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, 

Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; 

MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; 

MDL, method detection limit; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; na, not available; μg/L, micrograms 

per liter; *, value is above threshold; — not detected]
Tables 77

Table 11. Species of inorganic arsenic and iron in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient 

Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Analyses 

made by the U.S. Geological Survey Trace Metals Laboratory. Samples from the 44 intermediate and slow wells were analyzed. KING, Kings study area; KWH, 

Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; 

MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; 

MDL, method detection limit; SMCL-CA, California Department of Public Health secondary maximum contaminant level; na, not available; μg/L, micrograms 

per liter; *, value is above threshold; — not detected]

GAMA 

identification no.

Arsenic, 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(99033)

Arsenic (III), 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(99034)

Iron,

 filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01046)

Iron (II), 

filtered 

(μg/L) 

(01047)

MDL 0.5 1 2 2

Threshold type1 MCL-US na SMCL-CA na

Threshold (μg/L) 10 na 300 na

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 0.81 — 4 3

KINGFP-02 1.2 — — —

KINGFP-03 1.5 — — —

KINGFP-04 0.9 — — —

KINGFP-05 — — — —

KINGFP-06 1.3 — — —

KINGFP-07 — — 6 4

KINGFP-08 1.1 — 4 4

KINGFP-09 — — 3 —

KINGFP-10 1.3 — — —

KINGFP-11 0.71 — 3 2

KINGFP-12 — — 2 —

KINGFP-13 1.1 — — —

KINGFP-14 7.2 1.5 75 72

KINGFP-15 8.5 1.6 17 15

HWY99T-01 1.2 — — — 1

Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.
78 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 12. Results for analyses of radioactive constituents, tritium, and carbon isotopes in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 24 slow wells were analyzed for alpha and beta radioactivity, radon, radium, and carbon isotopes. Samples from the 44 intermediate and 

slow wells were analyzed for tritium and uranium isotopes. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a heavier isotope 

to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule 

study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; na, not 

available; nc, sample not collected; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA

identification

no.

Alpha 

radioactivity, 

72-hour count 

(pCi/L) 

(62636)

Alpha 

radioactivity, 

30-day count 

(pCi/L) 

(62639) 

Beta 

radioactivity, 

72-hour count 

(pCi/L) 

(62642)

Beta 

radioactivity, 

30-day count 

(pCi/L) 

(62645)

Radium-226 

(pCi/L) 

(09511) 

Radium-228 

(pCi/L) 

(81366)

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-US2 MCL-US2

Threshold 15 15 50 50 5 5

Grid wells

KING-04 *21 *22 8.7 18 0.067 E0.23

KING-06 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-09 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-10 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-11 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-12 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-13 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-15 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-16 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-17 E2.0 E1.2 4.3 4.0 0.071 E0.36

KING-20 E1.5 E0.7 E2.2 E1.8 E0.026 <0.47

KING-25 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-30 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KING-38 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KWH-03 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KWH-06 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KWH-11 nc nc nc nc nc nc

KWH-12 E2.3 3.4 <2.3 2.7 E0.016 <0.46

KWH-14 4.5 2.9 E1.2 E2.8 E0.017 E0.36

TULE-01 E1.4 <0.84 E1.9 <1.3 E0.019 <0.46

TULE-03 nc nc nc nc nc nc

TULE-07 nc nc nc nc nc nc

TULE-08 E0.8 <1.9 <2.4 <2.2 <0.033 <0.54

TULE-17 nc nc nc nc nc nc

TLR-02 nc nc nc nc nc nc

TLR-04 E2.0 <1.9 E5.1 E1.3 E0.026 <0.51

TLR-05 E4.8 E4.9 E4.8 E4.4 E0.051 <0.48

TLR-06 nc nc nc nc nc nc

TLR-08 nc nc nc nc nc nc

Table 12. Results for analyses of radioactive constituents, tritium, and carbon isotopes in samples collected for the Southeast San 

Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 24 slow wells were analyzed for alpha and beta radioactivity, radon, radium, and carbon isotopes. Samples from the 44 intermediate and 

slow wells were analyzed for tritium and uranium isotopes. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a heavier isotope 

to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule 

study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; na, not 

available; nc, sample not collected; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]
Tables 79

Table 12. Results for analyses of radioactive constituents, tritium, and carbon isotopes in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 24 slow wells were analyzed for alpha and beta radioactivity, radon, radium, and carbon isotopes. Samples from the 44 intermediate and 

slow wells were analyzed for tritium and uranium isotopes. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a heavier isotope 

to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule 

study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, estimated value; na, not 

available; nc, sample not collected; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA

identification

no.

Alpha 

radioactivity, 

72-hour count 

(pCi/L) 

(62636)

Alpha 

radioactivity, 

30-day count 

(pCi/L) 

(62639) 

Beta 

radioactivity, 

72-hour count 

(pCi/L) 

(62642)

Beta 

radioactivity, 

30-day count 

(pCi/L) 

(62645)

Radium-226 

(pCi/L) 

(09511) 

Radium-228 

(pCi/L) 

(81366)

Threshold type1 MCL-US MCL-US MCL-CA MCL-CA MCL-US2 MCL-US2

Threshold 15 15 50 50 5 5

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 *24 14.0 5.9 12.0 0.110 E0.75

KINGFP-02 E2.7 E1.1 E1.6 E1.6 E0.078 <0.52

KINGFP-03 E2.9 E1.7 E2.2 E1.9 E0.082 E0.30

KINGFP-04 7.3 5.1 6.2 7.7 E0.041 E0.40

KINGFP-05 12.0 12.1 5.2 10.3 E0.048 E0.47

KINGFP-06 E3.3 E1.7 E2.2 E4.0 E0.074 <0.37

KINGFP-07 14 6.9 8.0 16.8 0.106 0.59

KINGFP-08 10.7 11.3 5.7 11.4 0.130 0.71

KINGFP-09 E1.6 E0.6 E2.1 E3.0 E0.021 <0.46

KINGFP-10 E1.6 <2.0 E3.3 E2.7 E0.058 <0.46

KINGFP-11 *21 11.2 5.8 13.8 0.063 <0.47

KINGFP-12 *52 *38 11.9 42 E0.035 0.77

KINGFP-13 *20 12.1 11.0 15.8 0.125 E0.47

KINGFP-14 7.4 E2.5 11.9 10.6 0.174 0.99

KINGFP-15 E3.4 <2.3 14.3 13.3 0.071 0.63

HWY99T-01 nc nc nc nc nc nc
80 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 12. Results for analyses of radioactive constituents, tritium, and carbon isotopes in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 24 slow wells were analyzed for alpha and beta radioactivity, radon, radium, and carbon isotopes. Samples from the 44 intermediate 

and slow wells were analyzed for tritium and uranium isotopes. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a heavier 

isotope to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; 

TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-US, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, 

estimated value; na, not available; nc, sample not collected; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA

identification

no.

Radon-222 

(pCi/L) 

(82303)

Tritium 

(pCi/L) 

(07000)

Carbon-14 

(percent 

modern) 

(49933)

δ13C 

(per mil) 

(82081)

Uranium-234, 

filtered,

(pCi/L) 

(22610)

Uranium-235, 

filtered, 

(pCi/L) 

(22620)

Uranium-238, 

filtered, 

(pCi/L) 

(22603)

Threshold type1 Proposed 

MCL-US MCL-CA na na MCL-CA4 MCL-CA4 MCL-CA4

Threshold 300 (4,000)3 20,000 na na 20 20 20

Grid wells

KING-04 *490 7.7 60.5 –15.2 9.4 0.28 6.6

KING-06 nc <1 nc nc nc nc nc

KING-09 nc 5.1 nc nc 0.72 <0.056 0.64

KING-10 nc 16.0 nc nc 4.65 0.14 3.65

KING-11 nc <1 nc nc 0.53 <0.043 0.20

KING-12 nc 10.8 nc nc 1.92 E0.08 1.22

KING-13 nc <1 nc nc 0.45 <0.041 0.21

KING-15 nc 1.0 nc nc 1.35 E0.034 0.78

KING-16 nc 4.2 nc nc 0.30 <0.041 0.19

KING-17 *490 <1 66.9 –14.1 0.88 E0.021 0.55

KING-20 *2,720 14.4 116 –15.0 0.44 <0.048 0.30

KING-25 nc 2.6 nc nc 3.10 0.12 2.28

KING-30 nc <1 nc nc 0.58 E0.021 0.29

KING-38 nc <0.6 nc nc 0.56 E0.023 0.36

KWH-03 nc 24.0 nc nc 2.06 E0.10 1.65

KWH-06 nc 2.9 nc nc 0.81 E0.036 0.35

KWH-11 nc 1.9 nc nc E0.036 <0.029 E0.026

KWH-12 *590 16.0 85.7 –15.3 1.47 0.097 1.28

KWH-14 *810 13.8 105 –15.3 2.14 0.11 1.84

TULE-01 *480 5.4 42.5 –12.6 0.18 E0.018 0.16

TULE-03 nc 20.2 nc nc 3.44 0.15 2.87

TULE-07 nc 11.8 nc nc 1.38 E0.042 1.03

TULE-08 *620 <0.6 42.1 –13.2 E0.02 <0.003 E0.039

TULE-17 nc 1.6 nc nc na E0.020 na

TLR-02 nc <1 nc nc <0.034 <0.033 E0.022

TLR-04 *720 <0.6 0.73 –20.9 E0.020 <0.029 <0.024

TLR-05 *1,200 1.0 7.7 –16.7 0.12 E0.020 0.18

TLR-06 nc <0.6 nc nc 0.35 <0.031 0.14

TLR-08 nc <0.6 nc nc 7.5 0.38 6.1
Tables 81

Table 12. Results for analyses of radioactive constituents, tritium, and carbon isotopes in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. 

Samples from the 24 slow wells were analyzed for alpha and beta radioactivity, radon, radium, and carbon isotopes. Samples from the 44 intermediate 

and slow wells were analyzed for tritium and uranium isotopes. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a heavier 

isotope to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; 

TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-US, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health maximum contaminant level; E, 

estimated value; na, not available; nc, sample not collected; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than; *, value is above threshold]

GAMA

identification

no.

Radon-222 

(pCi/L) 

(82303)

Tritium 

(pCi/L) 

(07000)

Carbon-14 

(percent 

modern) 

(49933)

δ13C 

(per mil) 

(82081)

Uranium-234, 

filtered,

(pCi/L) 

(22610)

Uranium-235, 

filtered, 

(pCi/L) 

(22620)

Uranium-238, 

filtered, 

(pCi/L) 

(22603)

Threshold type1 Proposed 

MCL-US MCL-CA na na MCL-CA4 MCL-CA4 MCL-CA4

Threshold 300 (4,000)3 20,000 na na 20 20 20

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 *580 5.1 105 –14.4 9.3 0.29 6.3

KINGFP-02 *600 <1 47.9 –16.5 0.66 E0.025 0.28

KINGFP-03 *620 <1 42.8 –16.3 0.47 E0.018 0.28

KINGFP-04 *720 7.7 102 –13.5 3.66 E0.08 2.13

KINGFP-05 *300 10.2 nc nc 7.0 0.20 4.82

KINGFP-06 *560 <1 79.2 –13.1 0.58 E0.016 0.32

KINGFP-07 *300 12.5 114 –16.1 7.3 0.35 6.6

KINGFP-08 *520 21.8 118 –15.9 4.91 0.16 3.68

KINGFP-09 *910 <1 93.0 –14.1 0.69 E0.053 0.24

KINGFP-10 *350 1.9 nc nc 0.46 <0.03 0.22

KINGFP-11 *400 7.0 121 –14.1 10.7 0.41 6.9

KINGFP-12 *550 8.3 124 –13.3 *27.4 1.13 *22.9

KINGFP-13 *680 5.4 91.6 –10.9 8.1 0.33 5.6

KINGFP-14 *1340 11.5 97.3 –7.8 0.54 E0.032 0.39

KINGFP-15 *400 12.8 96.7 –10.6 0.43 E0.017 0.28

HWY99T-01 nc 16.3 nc nc 2.74 E0.12 2.1

1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists. 2

 Combined radium-226 plus radium-228.

3

 The MCL-US threshold for radium is the sum of radium-226 and radium-228.

4

 Combined uranium-234, uranium-235 and uranium-238.
82 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 13. Results for analyses of microbial indicators in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

were analyzed for the thirteen slow wells that were not monitoring wells. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; MCL-US, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level; TT, treatment technique - a required process intended to 

reduce the level of a contaminant in drinking water; M, presence verified but not quantified; nc, not collected; >, greater than; —, not detected; *, value is above 

threshold value]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Coliphage F-specific (99335) Coliphage somatic (99332)

Escherichia coli

(colonies/100 mL)

(90901)

Total coliforms 

(colonies/100 mL) 

(90900)

Threshold type TT TT TT MCL-US

Threshold 99.9 percent killed/inactive 99.9 percent killed/inactive No fecal coliforms

are allowed

No more then 5 percent of 

samples positive for total 

coliform in a month

TULE-01 — — — *44

TLR-04 — M — —

TLR-05 — — — * >80
Tables 83

Table 14. Hydrogen and oxygen isotopes of water, and oxygen and nitrogen isotopes of nitrate in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from 98 wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of water; samples from 34 of the intermediate and slow wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of nitrate, 

nitrate was not detected in the remaining 10 intermediate and slow wells. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a 

heavier isotope to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; 

TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; na, not available; nc, not 

collected]

GAMA 

identification no.

δ2H in water 

(per mil) 

(82082)

δ18O in water 

(per mil) 

(82085)

δ15N in nitrate 

(per mil) 

(82690)

δ18O in nitrate 

(per mil) 

(63041)

Threshold type na na na na

Threshold na na na na

Grid wells

KING-01 –71.6 –9.67 nc nc

KING-02 –82.9 –11.20 nc nc

KING-04 –72.2 –9.41 6.95 3.06

KING-05 –81.1 –11.01 nc nc

KING-06 –102 –13.76 nc nc

KING-07 –94.2 –13.03 nc nc

KING-08 –100 –13.75 nc nc

KING-09 –101 –13.59 nc nc

KING-10 –96.7 –13.29 6.97 –1.22

KING-11 –61.3 –8.14 4.25 0.56

KING-12 –77.1 –10.27 5.51 1.77

KING-13 –61.7 –8.10 3.58 0.36

KING-14 –68.4 –9.23 nc nc

KING-15 –64.5 –8.56 4.71 0.42

KING-16 –73.2 –9.95 3.73 –0.56

KING-17 –61.2 –7.71 3.96 1.40

KING-18 –99.0 –13.54 nc nc

KING-19 –66.1 –8.60 nc nc

KING-20 –98.8 –13.39 5.38 3.85

KING-21 –96.5 –13.12 nc nc

KING-22 –91.0 –11.97 nc nc

KING-23 –84.2 –11.30 nc nc

KING-24 –85.2 –11.50 nc nc

KING-25 –62.4 –8.28 3.49 –0.55

KING-26 –70.9 –9.47 nc nc

KING-27 –64.6 –8.78 nc nc

KING-28 –95.5 –13.30 nc nc

KING-29 –68.2 –8.70 nc nc

KING-30 –75.0 –10.22 2.98 0.59

KING-31 –85.5 –11.06 nc nc

KING-32 –101 –13.86 nc nc

KING-33 –64.8 –8.57 nc nc

KING-34 –86.4 –11.50 nc nc

KING-35 –72.7 –9.80 nc nc

Table 14. Hydrogen and oxygen isotopes of water, and oxygen and nitrogen isotopes of nitrate in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from 98 wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of water; samples from 34 of the intermediate and slow wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of nitrate, 

nitrate was not detected in the remaining 10 intermediate and slow wells. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a 

heavier isotope to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; 

TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; na, not available; nc, not 

collected]
84 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 14. Hydrogen and oxygen isotopes of water, and oxygen and nitrogen isotopes of nitrate in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from 98 wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of water; samples from 34 of the intermediate and slow wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of nitrate, 

nitrate was not detected in the remaining 10 intermediate and slow wells. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a 

heavier isotope to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; 

TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; na, not available; nc, not 

collected]

GAMA 

identification no.

δ2H in water 

(per mil) 

(82082)

δ18O in water 

(per mil) 

(82085)

δ15N in nitrate 

(per mil) 

(82690)

δ18O in nitrate 

(per mil) 

(63041)

Threshold type na na na na

Threshold na na na na

KING-36 –66.1 –9.04 nc nc

KING-37 –94.0 –12.93 nc nc

KING-38 –62.0 –8.10 3.42 1.04

KING-39 –68.3 –9.01 nc nc

KWH-01 –86.7 –12.09 nc nc

KWH-02 –87.0 –11.92 nc nc

KWH-03 –90.4 –12.56 4.27 –2.54

KWH-04 –80.2 –11.10 nc nc

KWH-05 –72.2 –9.51 nc nc

KWH-06 –61.0 –7.84 nc nc

KWH-07 –63.9 –8.33 nc nc

KWH-08 –75.9 –9.68 nc nc

KWH-09 –86.6 –12.09 nc nc

KWH-10 –64.0 –7.84 nc nc

KWH-11 –83.1 –11.43 nc nc

KWH-12 –87.2 –12.21 4.91 –3.21

KWH-13 –80.8 –11.00 nc nc

KWH-14 –83.3 –11.48 6.77 –0.90

KWH-15 –90.5 –12.13 nc nc

KWH-16 –86.7 –12.01 nc nc

KWH-17 –86.1 –11.70 nc nc

KWH-18 –83.7 –11.63 nc nc

TULE-01 –68.6 –9.50 3.84 –0.44

TULE-02 –80.9 –11.29 nc nc

TULE-03 –82.8 –11.50 5.78 –0.62

TULE-04 –65.9 –8.44 nc nc

TULE-05 –68.4 –8.66 nc nc

TULE-06 –69.9 –8.93 nc nc

TULE-07 –79.4 –11.16 4.14 –1.20

TULE-08 –70.0 –9.82 2.70 –1.97

TULE-09 –73.1 –10.28 nc nc

TULE-10 –72.9 –10.30 nc nc

TULE-11 –78.1 –10.78 nc nc

TULE-12 –67.4 –9.32 nc nc

TULE-13 –83.9 –11.62 nc nc

TULE-14 –68.6 –9.93 nc nc

TULE-15 –78.5 –10.88 nc nc
Tables 85

Table 14. Hydrogen and oxygen isotopes of water, and oxygen and nitrogen isotopes of nitrate in samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 

2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

from 98 wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of water; samples from 34 of the intermediate and slow wells were analyzed for stable isotopes of nitrate, 

nitrate was not detected in the remaining 10 intermediate and slow wells. Stable isotope ratios are reported in the standard delta notation (δ), the ratio of a 

heavier isotope to more common lighter isotope of that element, relative to a standard reference material. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; 

TULE, Tule study area; TLR, Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; na, not available; nc, not 

collected]

GAMA 

identification no.

δ2H in water 

(per mil) 

(82082)

δ18O in water 

(per mil) 

(82085)

δ15N in nitrate 

(per mil) 

(82690)

δ18O in nitrate 

(per mil) 

(63041)

Threshold type na na na na

Threshold na na na na

TULE-16 –94.9 –12.74 nc nc

TULE-17 –65.2 –9.07 6.04 –0.06

TLR-01 –84.5 –11.32 nc nc

TLR-02 –79.8 –10.72 nc nc

TLR-03 –80.5 –11.06 nc nc

TLR-04 –80.2 –10.57 nc nc

TLR-05 –85.3 –11.69 nc nc

TLR-06 –65.4 –8.93 nc nc

TLR-07 –66.1 –9.02 nc nc

TLR-08 –88.2 –11.78 nc nc

TLR-09 –73.0 –10.11 nc nc

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 –63.3 –8.12 5.40 3.84

KINGFP-02 –60.1 –7.62 3.97 1.00

KINGFP-03 –59.0 –7.56 3.94 1.29

KINGFP-04 –71.8 –9.43 5.18 –1.07

KINGFP-05 –80.3 –10.59 6.14 2.35

KINGFP-06 –61.6 –7.89 3.49 1.37

KINGFP-07 –81.4 –10.98 6.24 3.22

KINGFP-08 –86.3 –11.71 5.37 2.31

KINGFP-09 –73.7 –9.78 4.69 –0.02

KINGFP-10 –71.0 –9.33 4.24 0.75

KINGFP-11 –64.7 –8.53 5.80 1.08

KINGFP-12 –62.4 –7.86 6.19 3.03

KINGFP-13 –72.2 –9.36 6.84 0.87

KINGFP-14 –68.7 –8.43 nc nc

KINGFP-15 –70.9 –8.98 nc nc

HWY99T-01 –77.7 –10.55 3.64 0.79
86 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 15. Results for analyses of noble gases and tritium in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

were analyzed for 99 wells by the Lawrence-Livermore National Laboratory. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health 

maximum contaminant level; cm3 STP g–1 H2O, cubic centimeters at standard temperature and pressure per gram of water; na, not available; nc, sample not 

collected; nr, not reported, analysis failed laboratory quality-assurance tests; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Collection 

date 

(mm/dd/

yyyy)

Tritium 

(pCi/L) 

(07000)

Tritium 

measurement 

uncertainty 

(+/-) 

(pCi/L) 

(07001)

Dissolved 

gas 

analysis date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Helium-3/ 

Helium-4 

(atom ratio) 

(61040)

Helium-4 

(85561)

Neon 

(61046)

Argon 

(85563)

Krypton 

(85565)

Xenon 

(85567)

(cm3 STP g–1 H2O)

x 10–6 x 10–7 x 10–7 x 10–4 x 10–8 x 10–8

Threshold type1 na MCL-CA na na na na na na na na

Threshold na 20,000 na na na na na na na na

Grid wells

KING-01 10/17/2005 <1 0.2 11/23/2005 0.30 3.60 2.58 3.93 8.58 1.17

KING-02 10/17/2005 3.9 0.4 11/23/2005 0.87 7.46 2.31 8.30 7.10 1.07

KING-03 10/17/2005 15.7 0.9 11/23/2005 1.26 5.05 2.39 4.03 7.88 1.10

KING-04 10/17/2005 7.9 0.7 11/23/2005 0.78 3.43 2.36 3.57 7.68 1.00

KING-05 10/18/2005 <1 0.2 11/30/2005 0.34 5.93 2.42 8.52 7.75 1.15

KING-06 10/18/2005 <1 0.2 11/23/2005 0.71 3.26 2.15 3.63 8.12 1.11

KING-07 10/18/2005 23.5 1.1 11/30/2005 1.88 0.82 3.46 4.23 8.84 1.14

KING-08 10/19/2005 1.0 0.3 11/30/2005 1.66 0.60 2.43 3.66 8.14 1.09

KING-09 10/19/2005 5.7 0.5 11/30/2005 2.00 0.64 2.58 3.84 8.37 1.11

KING-10 10/19/2005 17.1 0.9 11/30/2005 2.39 0.66 2.71 3.84 8.30 1.11

KING-11 10/20/2005 1.3 0.4 11/30/2005 0.64 2.28 2.47 3.48 7.39 0.94

KING-12 10/20/2005 11.8 0.7 12/01/2005 1.91 0.74 2.88 3.84 8.17 1.02

KING-13 10/20/2005 <1 0.3 12/01/2005 0.65 1.58 2.24 3.34 7.15 0.95

KING-14 10/24/2005 <1 0.3 12/01/2005 0.73 1.29 2.49 3.72 8.02 1.10

KING-15 10/25/2005 <1 0.4 11/29/2005 1.14 0.77 2.16 3.23 7.17 0.95

KING-16 10/25/2005 <1 0.2 11/29/2005 1.70 0.66 2.59 3.82 8.13 1.07

KING-17 10/26/2005 1.2 0.3 12/06/2005 0.92 0.98 2.12 3.29 7.18 0.94

KING-18 10/26/2005 24.3 1.1 12/02/2005 3.57 0.65 2.60 3.90 8.60 1.16

KING-19 10/27/2005 3.5 0.4 12/02/2005 1.18 0.92 2.58 3.55 7.38 0.98

KING-20 10/27/2005 17.5 0.9 12/02/2005 2.09 0.55 2.40 3.69 8.21 1.13

KING-21 10/27/2005 5.3 0.4 12/06/2005 1.28 1.47 1.93 4.78 7.56 1.04

KING-22 11/01/2005 14.4 0.8 12/03/2005 1.79 0.73 3.03 3.85 7.85 1.00

KING-23 11/01/2005 25.7 1.2 12/05/2005 2.03 0.97 3.73 4.26 8.58 1.06

KING-24 11/01/2005 20.9 1.0 12/05/2005 2.34 0.55 2.29 3.51 7.70 1.02

KING-25 11/02/2005 2.6 0.4 12/05/2005 0.64 2.71 2.45 3.46 7.31 0.96

KING-26 11/02/2005 1.0 0.4 12/08/2005 0.20 11.64 2.68 8.80 7.98 1.12

KING-27 11/02/2005 <1 0.3 12/07/2005 0.90 1.01 2.28 3.52 7.72 0.97

KING-28 11/03/2005 11.7 0.6 12/07/2005 1.35 0.55 2.37 3.64 8.04 0.98

KING-29 11/03/2005 13.9 0.7 12/07/2005 0.88 2.57 2.35 3.45 7.08 0.98

KING-30 11/03/2005 <1 0.3 12/07/2005 0.46 2.40 2.15 3.29 7.33 0.98

KING-31 11/14/2005 1.0 0.3 12/07/2005 0.68 1.43 30.31 3.66 8.06 1.10

KING-32 11/14/2005 <1 0.5 12/07/2005 1.28 0.58 2.18 3.58 8.11 1.13

KING-33 11/17/2005 2.8 0.4 02/16/2006 0.76 64.06 2.36 3.47 7.40 1.02

KING-34 11/28/2005 nr nr 02/18/2006 2.17 0.86 3.11 3.47 7.39 0.99

KING-35 12/01/2005 nr nr 03/21/2006 1.53 0.62 2.32 3.42 7.57 0.97

Table 15. Results for analyses of noble gases and tritium in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

were analyzed for 99 wells by the Lawrence-Livermore National Laboratory. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health 

maximum contaminant level; cm3 STP g–1 H2O, cubic centimeters at standard temperature and pressure per gram of water; na, not available; nc, sample not 

collected; nr, not reported, analysis failed laboratory quality-assurance tests; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than]
Tables 87

Table 15. Results for analyses of noble gases and tritium in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

were analyzed for 99 wells by the Lawrence-Livermore National Laboratory. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health 

maximum contaminant level; cm3 STP g–1 H2O, cubic centimeters at standard temperature and pressure per gram of water; na, not available; nc, sample not 

collected; nr, not reported, analysis failed laboratory quality-assurance tests; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Collection 

date 

(mm/dd/

yyyy)

Tritium 

(pCi/L) 

(07000)

Tritium 

measurement 

uncertainty 

(+/-) 

(pCi/L) 

(07001)

Dissolved 

gas 

analysis date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Helium-3/ 

Helium-4 

(atom ratio) 

(61040)

Helium-4 

(85561)

Neon 

(61046)

Argon 

(85563)

Krypton 

(85565)

Xenon 

(85567)

(cm3 STP g–1 H2O)

x 10–6 x 10–7 x 10–7 x 10–4 x 10–8 x 10–8

Threshold type1 na MCL-CA na na na na na na na na

Threshold na 20,000 na na na na na na na na

KING-36 12/08/2005 <1 0.3 03/23/2006 1.14 0.76 3.97 4.46 8.32 1.14

KING-37 12/14/2005 17.2 1.0 03/24/2006 1.88 0.67 2.77 3.74 7.82 1.01

KING-38 12/15/2005 <1 0.3 03/28/2006 0.62 2.87 1.99 3.10 7.03 0.91

KING-39 12/15/2005 <1 0.3 03/29/2006 0.41 3.68 2.57 8.57 7.43 1.10

KWH-01 10/31/2005 22.3 1.0 12/03/2005 2.81 0.74 2.69 3.87 8.17 1.10

KWH-02 10/31/2005 14.5 0.8 12/02/2005 1.68 0.67 2.76 3.85 8.20 1.09

KWH-03 10/31/2005 30.0 1.3 12/02/2005 3.23 0.74 3.10 4.12 8.66 1.11

KWH-04 11/15/2005 14.0 0.8 12/08/2005 1.34 2.46 2.39 3.62 7.85 1.06

KWH-05 11/15/2005 24.1 1.2 12/08/2005 1.61 0.61 2.43 3.39 7.36 0.95

KWH-06 11/15/2005 <1 1.7 12/08/2005 1.21 5.43 5.05 5.13 9.33 1.16

KWH-07 11/16/2005 15.9 0.9 12/09/2005 0.74 10.38 2.32 3.42 7.41 0.97

KWH-08 11/16/2005 9.7 0.7 12/09/2005 1.12 7.87 2.16 3.31 7.21 0.97

KWH-09 11/16/2005 29.9 1.4 02/16/2006 2.27 0.92 3.77 4.57 8.70 1.15

KWH-10 11/17/2005 10.3 0.7 02/17/2006 1.26 8.36 14.04 7.79 14.51 1.48

KWH-11 11/17/2005 nr nr 02/17/2006 1.02 7.98 2.52 3.82 8.30 1.13

KWH-12 11/28/2005 nr nr 02/18/2006 2.86 0.68 3.59 4.06 8.52 1.13

KWH-13 11/30/2005 nr nr 03/20/2006 1.53 0.73 3.09 4.17 8.42 1.08

KWH-14 11/30/2005 nr nr 03/21/2006 2.15 0.66 2.77 3.92 8.25 1.14

KWH-15 12/01/2005 nr nr 03/21/2006 1.59 1.09 2.48 3.68 8.03 1.08

KWH-16 12/07/2005 28.5 1.3 03/22/2006 2.07 1.02 4.17 4.77 9.16 1.16

KWH-17 12/13/2005 35.1 1.6 03/23/2006 2.27 0.97 4.02 4.78 9.10 1.12

KWH-18 12/13/2005 18.8 0.9 03/24/2006 1.78 0.83 3.07 4.15 8.47 1.08

TULE-01 11/29/2005 nr nr 03/20/2006 1.42 0.68 2.52 3.66 7.81 1.05

TULE-02 11/30/2005 nr nr 03/20/2006 2.16 0.97 3.92 4.61 9.11 1.14

TULE-03 11/30/2005 nr nr 03/21/2006 3.02 0.74 3.02 3.99 8.25 1.12

TULE-04 12/05/2005 <1 0.3 03/28/2006 0.97 1.35 3.78 4.35 8.43 1.06

TULE-05 12/05/2005 1.9 0.4 03/22/2006 0.74 38.57 1.76 4.46 7.06 0.99

TULE-06 12/05/2005 <1 0.3 03/28/2006 0.46 17.25 2.45 4.27 8.05 1.12

TULE-07 12/06/2005 13.6 0.8 03/22/2006 2.09 0.74 2.78 3.82 8.28 1.09

TULE-08 12/07/2005 <1 0.4 03/22/2006 1.02 0.76 2.38 3.51 7.62 1.05

TULE-09 12/07/2005 11.6 0.8 03/22/2006 2.43 0.59 2.51 3.66 7.94 1.11

TULE-10 12/07/2005 6.0 0.5 03/22/2006 1.56 0.74 3.66 4.21 8.29 1.07

TULE-11 12/08/2005 2.0 1.9 03/23/2006 0.46 1.96 3.81 8.56 7.88 1.22

TULE-12 12/08/2005 <1 0.3 03/23/2006 0.60 1.26 3.08 4.59 7.94 1.06

TULE-13 12/13/2005 13.9 0.8 03/23/2006 1.84 0.58 2.52 3.63 7.94 1.04

TULE-14 12/13/2005 6.6 0.5 03/23/2006 1.67 0.79 3.24 4.13 8.37 1.09

TULE-15 12/14/2005 <1 0.2 nc nc nc nc nc nc nc
88 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table 15. Results for analyses of noble gases and tritium in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[The five-digit parameter code below the constituent name is used by the U.S. Geological Survey to uniquely identify a specific constituent or property. Samples 

were analyzed for 99 wells by the Lawrence-Livermore National Laboratory. KING, Kings study area; KWH, Kaweah study area; TULE, Tule study area; TLR, 

Tulare Lake study area; KINGFP, Kings study area flow-path well; HWY99T, Highway 99 transect well; MCL-CA, California Department of Public Health 

maximum contaminant level; cm3 STP g–1 H2O, cubic centimeters at standard temperature and pressure per gram of water; na, not available; nc, sample not 

collected; nr, not reported, analysis failed laboratory quality-assurance tests; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; <, less than]

GAMA 

identification 

no.

Collection 

date 

(mm/dd/

yyyy)

Tritium 

(pCi/L) 

(07000)

Tritium 

measurement 

uncertainty 

(+/-) 

(pCi/L) 

(07001)

Dissolved 

gas 

analysis date 

(mm/dd/yyyy)

Helium-3/ 

Helium-4 

(atom ratio) 

(61040)

Helium-4 

(85561)

Neon 

(61046)

Argon 

(85563)

Krypton 

(85565)

Xenon 

(85567)

(cm3 STP g–1 H2O)

x 10–6 x 10–7 x 10–7 x 10–4 x 10–8 x 10–8

Threshold type1 na MCL-CA na na na na na na na na

Threshold na 20,000 na na na na na na na na

TULE-16 12/14/2005 8.1 0.6 03/23/2006 1.96 0.73 2.91 3.55 7.42 0.97

TULE-17 02/28/2006 2.8 0.3 05/15/2002 1.34 0.81 3.09 4.16 8.51 1.08

TLR-01 11/28/2005 nr nr air 

contaminated

na na na na na na

TLR-02 11/29/2005 nr nr 03/20/2006 0.51 3.85 2.27 3.88 8.22 1.16

TLR-03 11/29/2005 nr nr 03/20/2006 0.87 17.69 2.27 3.70 8.22 1.14

TLR-04 12/01/2005 nr nr 03/21/2006 1.13 52.97 2.31 3.99 8.01 1.15

TLR-05 12/05/2005 1.7 0.3 03/21/2006 0.99 9.07 2.22 3.88 8.27 1.18

TLR-06 12/06/2005 <1 0.3 03/22/2006 0.29 2.81 2.79 4.04 8.90 1.19

TLR-07 12/06/2005 <1 0.3 03/22/2006 0.83 1.23 3.16 4.59 9.13 1.29

TLR-08 12/12/2005 2.2 0.4 03/28/2006 1.23 3.13 2.26 3.64 7.99 1.08

TLR-09 12/14/2005 <1 0.3 03/28/2006 0.11 2.04 0.71 8.64 7.14 0.77

Understanding wells

KINGFP-01 10/18/2005 4.8 0.4 11/30/2005 1.16 0.83 2.23 3.29 7.22 0.95

KINGFP-02 10/19/2005 2.2 0.4 11/30/2005 0.58 3.57 2.08 3.13 6.70 0.90

KINGFP-03 10/20/2005 <1 0.3 11/30/2005 0.63 2.67 2.06 3.13 6.93 0.90

KINGFP-04 10/25/2005 5.0 1.2 11/29/2005 1.61 0.62 2.33 3.48 7.53 0.99

KINGFP-05 10/31/2005 nr nr 12/02/2005 1.86 0.74 2.56 3.61 7.65 1.00

KINGFP-06 11/01/2005 <1 0.3 12/05/2005 0.64 2.44 2.12 3.22 6.96 0.94

KINGFP-07 11/01/2005 13.2 0.7 12/06/2005 1.45 0.55 2.44 3.70 7.84 0.98

KINGFP-08 11/02/2005 23.1 1.1 12/06/2005 2.39 0.55 2.39 3.59 7.58 0.95

KINGFP-09 11/02/2005 1.8 0.3 12/06/2005 1.05 1.29 3.25 4.02 8.21 1.00

KINGFP-10 11/03/2005 nr nr 12/08/2005 0.71 2.60 2.49 3.53 7.58 1.00

KINGFP-11 11/14/2005 6.5 0.6 12/07/2005 1.33 0.71 2.52 3.59 7.32 0.99

KINGFP-12 11/14/2005 8.5 0.6 12/08/2005 1.46 0.51 2.20 3.31 7.11 0.95

KINGFP-13 11/15/2005 4.6 0.5 12/08/2005 1.62 0.59 2.42 3.50 7.51 0.99

KINGFP-14 11/16/2005 12.5 0.8 12/09/2005 1.33 0.59 2.50 3.61 7.13 0.89

KINGFP-15 11/16/2005 12.3 0.7 02/16/2006 1.31 0.66 2.68 3.91 8.12 1.07

HWY99T-01 10/25/2005 15.1 0.9 12/01/2005 1.80 0.80 2.35 3.57 7.97 1.07 1

 Maximum contaminant level thresholds are listed as MCL-US when the MCL-US and MCL-CA are identical, and as MCL-CA when the MCL-CA is lower 

than the MCL-US or no MCL-US exists.
Appendix 89

Appendix

This appendix includes discussions of the methods used 

for sample collection, data analysis, data reporting, and quality 

assurance. The methods used for the GAMA Priority Basin 

Assessment project were selected to obtain representative 

samples of the ground water from each well, and to minimize 

the potential for contamination of the samples or bias in the 

data. Procedures used to collect and assess quality-control data 

and the results of these assessments also are discussed.

Sample Collection

Ground-water samples were collected using standard 

and modified USGS protocols from the USGS NAWQA 

program (Koterba and others, 1995) and the USGS National 

Field Manual (Lane and others, 2003; Wilde, 2004; Wilde 

and others, 2004; 2006b), and protocols described by Weiss 

(1968); Shelton and others (2001); and Wright and others 

(2005). These sampling protocols ensure that a representative 

sample of ground water was collected at each site, and that the 

samples were collected and handled in a way that minimized 

the potential for airborne contamination of samples and crosscontamination between samples collected at wells. 

Prior to sampling, each well was pumped continuously 

to purge at least three casing-volumes of water from the well 

(Wilde and others, 2006b). Wells were sampled using Teflon 

tubing with brass and stainless-steel fittings attached to a 

sampling point on the well discharge pipe as close to the well 

as possible (Lane and others, 2003). The sampling point was 

located upstream of any well-head treatment system, such as 

chlorination, or of any water storage tanks. If a chlorinating 

system was attached to the well, the chlorinator was shut 

off at least 24 hours prior to purging and sampling the well 

to purge the system of extraneous chlorine. For the fast and 

intermediate schedules, samples were collected at the well 

head using a foot-long length of Teflon tubing attached to 

a spigot on the discharge pipe. For the slow schedule, the 

samples were collected inside an enclosed flow-through 

chamber located inside a mobile laboratory and connected to 

the well head by a 25–50 ft length of the Teflon tubing (Lane 

and others, 2003). All fittings and lengths of tubing were 

cleaned between samples (Wilde, 2004).

For the field measurements (water-quality indicators), 

ground water was pumped through a flow-through chamber 

fitted with a multi-probe meter that simultaneously measures 

dissolved oxygen (DO), water temperature, pH, and specific 

conductance (SC). Field measurements were made in 

accordance with protocols in the USGS National Field Manual 

(Radtke and others, 2005; Wilde and Radtke, 2005; Lewis, 

2006; Wilde, 2006; Wilde and others, 2006a). All sensors 

on the multi-probe meter were calibrated daily. Measured 

DO, temperature, pH, and SC values were recorded at 3- to 

5-minute intervals, for at least 30 minutes, and when these 

values remained stable for at least five readings, samples for 

laboratory analyses were collected. Aliquots were collected 

to measure turbidity with a portable turbidity meter. Samples 

for alkalinity titrations were collected by filtering ground 

water into 500-mL polyethylene bottles. Alkalinities for slow

samples were titrated in the field. Alkalinities for intermediate

samples were titrated at NWQL.

Field measurements and instrument calibrations were 

recorded by hand on field record sheets and electronically 

in personal-computer-field-form-GAMA (PCFF-GAMA), a 

software package designed by the USGS with support from 

the GAMA program. Analytical service requests and chain of 

custody documentation also were managed by PCFF-GAMA. 

Information from PCFF-GAMA was uploaded directly into 

NWIS at the end of every week of sample collection.

For analyses requiring filtered water, ground water was 

diverted through a 0.45-micrometer (μm) vented capsule 

filter, disk filter, or a baked glass-fiber filter, depending on the 

collection protocol for the analyte (Wilde and others, 2004; 

2006b). Polyethylene sample bottles were pre-rinsed three 

times using de-ionized water (DIW) in the office laboratory. 

DIW from the third rinse was left in the bottles until sample 

collection. Prior to sample collection, the DIW was discarded 

and the polyethylene bottles were rinsed once with native 

water. Samples requiring acidification were acidified to a 

pH of 2 or less with the appropriate acids using ampoules 

of certified, traceable concentrated acids obtained from the 

USGS National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL).

 Temperature-sensitive samples were stored on ice 

prior to shipping to various laboratories. Volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), pesticides, compounds of special interest, 

dissolved organic carbon (DOC), radium isotopes, gross alpha 

and beta radioactivity, and radon-222 samples were shipped 

daily. The non-temperature-sensitive samples for tritium, 

noble gases, chromium speciation, and the stable isotopes 

were shipped monthly. 

Detailed sampling protocols for individual analyses 

and groups of analytes are described in Koterba and others 

(1995) and the USGS National Field Manual (Wilde and 

others, 2004; 2006b), and in the references for analytical 

methods in table A1; only brief descriptions are given here. 

Samples for VOCs, and gasoline additives (tables 3A–C), and 

1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) (table 3F) were collected 

in 40-mL baked amber glass sample vials that were purged 

with three vial volumes of sample water before bottom-filling 

to eliminate atmospheric contamination. Six normal (6 N) 

hydrochloric acid (HCl) was added as a preservative to the 

VOC samples, but not to the gasoline additive samples, nor 

to the 1,2,3-TCP samples. Pesticides, polar pesticides, and 

pesticide degradation products (tables 3D and E), and NDMA 

(table 3F) samples were collected in 1-L baked amber glass 

bottles. Pesticide samples were filtered with a glass-fiber filter, 

whereas the NDMA samples were filtered at the Montgomery 

Watson-Harza Laboratory prior to analysis. Perchlorate 

(table 3F) samples were collected in 125-mL polyethylene 

bottles. 
90 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water samples for major and minor ions, and 

trace element analyses (table 3H) each required filling one 

250-mL polyethylene bottle with raw (unfiltered) ground 

water, and one 500-mL and one 250-mL polyethylene bottles 

with filtered ground water (Wilde and others, 2004). Filtration 

was done using a 0.45-μm Whatman capsule filter. Each 

250-mL filtered sample then was preserved with 7.5 N nitric 

acid. Mercury (table 3H) samples were collected by filtering 

ground water into 250-mL glass bottles and preserving each 

with 6 N HCl. Arsenic and iron speciation (table 3I) samples 

were each filtered into 250-mL polyethylene bottles that were 

covered with tape to prevent light exposure, and preserved 

with 6 N HCl. Nutrient (table 3G) samples were filtered 

into 125-mL brown polyethylene bottles. Radium isotopes 

and gross alpha and beta radiation (table 3J) samples were 

filtered through a 0.45-μm Whatman capsule filter into 1-L 

polyethylene bottles and then each were acidified with 7.5 N 

nitric acid. Each carbon isotope (table 3J) sample was filtered 

before bottom-filling two 500-mL glass bottles that first were 

overfilled with three bottle volumes of ground water. These 

samples had no headspace and were sealed with a conical 

cap to avoid atmospheric contamination. Tritium (table 3J) 

samples were collected by bottom-filling 1-L polyethylene 

bottles with unfiltered ground water, after first overfilling 

the bottles with three volumes of water (Wilde and others, 

2004). Samples for the isotopic composition of oxygen and 

hydrogen in water (table 3J) were collected in 60-mL clear 

glass bottles filled with unfiltered water, sealed with conical 

caps, and secured with electrical tape to prevent leakage and 

evaporation. 

DOC, radon-222, chromium, noble gases, and microbial 

constituents were collected from the hose bib at the well 

head, regardless of the sampling schedule (fast, intermediate, 

or slow). DOC was not collected at monitoring wells. 

Submersible sampling pumps and tubing used to collect 

samples from monitoring wells could not be used for DOC 

sample collection because the equipment was cleaned with 

methanol after sampling each well and residual methanol 

from cleaning has been shown to bias DOC samples. Each 

ground-water sample for DOC was collected using a 50-mL 

syringe and 0.45-μm disk filter to filter the water into 125-mL 

baked glass bottles and then preserved with 4.5 N sulfuric 

acid (Wilde and others, 2004). For the collection of radon-222 

(table 3J), a stainless-steel and Teflon valve assembly was 

attached to the hose bib at the well head (Wilde and others, 

2004). The valve was closed partially to create back pressure, 

and a 10-mL sample was taken through a Teflon septum on the 

value assembly using a glass syringe affixed with a stainlesssteel needle. The sample then was injected into a 25-mL vial 

partially filled with scintillation mixture (mineral oil) and 

shaken. The vial then was placed in a cardboard tube to shield 

it from light during shipping. 

Chromium speciation (table 3I) samples were collected 

using a 10-mL syringe with an attached 0.45-μm disk filter 

(Ball and McCleskey, 2003a, b). After the syringe was rinsed 

thoroughly and filled with ground water, 4 mL were forced 

through the disk filter and the next 2 mL of the ground water 

were filtered slowly into a small centrifuge vial for analysis 

of total chromium. Hexavalent chromium, Cr (VI), then was 

collected by attaching a small cation-exchange column to the 

disc filter on the syringe, and after conditioning the column 

with 2 mL of sample water, 2 mL were collected in a second 

centrifuge vial. Both vials were preserved with 10 μL of 7.5 N 

nitric acid.

Noble gases (table 3K) were collected in 3/8-in. copper 

tubes using reinforced nylon tubing connected to the hose 

bib at the wellhead (Weiss, 1968). Ground water was flushed 

through the tubing to dislodge any bubbles before flow was 

restricted with a back pressure valve. Clamps on either side 

of the copper tube then were tightened, trapping a sample of 

ground water for analyses of noble gases. 

Microbial constituents (table 3L) also were collected 

at the well head, following protocols described in Bushon 

(2003) and Myers (2004). Prior to the collection of samples, 

the sampling port was sterilized using isopropyl alcohol, and 

ground water was run through the sampling port for at least 

3 minutes to remove any traces of the sterilizing agent. Two 

sterilized 500-mL bottles then were filled with ground water 

for coliform analyses (total and Escherichia coli coliform 

determinations), and one sterilized 3-L carboy was filled 

for coliphage analyses (F-specific and somatic-coliphage 

determinations).

Sample Analysis

Nine laboratories performed chemical and microbial 

analyses for the SESJ study (see table A1). Most of the 

analyses were performed at the NWQL or by laboratories 

contracted by the NWQL. The NWQL maintains a rigorous 

quality-assurance program (Maloney, 2005). Laboratory 

quality-control samples, including method blanks, continuing 

calibration verification standards, standard reference samples, 

reagent spikes, external certified reference materials, and 

external blind proficiency samples, are analyzed regularly. 

Method detection limits are tested continuously and laboratory 

reporting levels updated accordingly. NWQL maintains 

National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NELAP) and other certifications (http://nwql.usgs.gov/lab_

cert.shtml). In addition, the Branch of Quality Systems within 

the USGS Office of Water Quality maintains independent 

oversight of quality assurance at the NWQL and laboratories 

contracted by the NWQL. The Branch of Quality Systems also 

runs a National Field Quality Assurance program that includes 

annual testing of all USGS field personnel for proficiency 

in making field water-quality measurements (http://nfqa.

cr.usgs.gov/). Results for analyses made at the NWQL or by 

laboratories contracted by the NWQL are uploaded directly 

into NWIS by the NWQL. Laboratory quality-control data 

also are stored in NWIS.
Appendix 91

Alkalinity, total coliforms and Escherichia coli (E. 

coli) were measured in the mobile laboratory at the well 

site. Alkalinity was measured on filtered samples by Gran’s 

titration method (Rounds, 2006). Titration data were entered 

into PCFF-GAMA, and the concentrations of bicarbonate 

(HCO3

–

) and carbonate (CO3

2–) were calculated automatically 

from the titration data using the advanced speciation method. 

Total coliforms and E. coli plates were prepared using 

sterilized equipment and MI reagents (Myers, 2004). Plates 

were counted under an ultraviolet light, following a 22–24 

hour incubation time. 

Data Reporting 

Laboratory Reporting Conventions

The USGS NWQL uses the laboratory reporting level 

(LRL) as a threshold for reporting analytical results. The 

LRL is set to minimize the reporting of false negatives 

(not detecting a compound when it actually is present in a 

sample) to less than 1 percent (Childress and others, 1999). 

The LRL is set at two-times the long-term method detection 

level (LT-MDL). The LT-MDL is derived from the standard 

deviation of at least 24 method detection limit (MDL) 

determinations made over an extended period of time. The 

MDL is the minimum concentration of a substance that can 

be measured and reported with 99 percent confidence that 

the concentration is greater than zero (at MDL there is less 

than 1 percent chance of a false positive) (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2002a). The USGS NWQL regularly 

updates LRL values, and the values listed in this report were in 

effect during the period analyses were made for ground-water 

samples from the SESJ study (October 2005 through February 

2006).

Detections between the LRL and the LT-MDL are 

reported as estimated concentrations (designated with an 

“E” before the value in the tables and text). For informationrich methods, detections below the LT-MDL have high 

certainty of detection, but the precise concentration is 

uncertain. Information-rich methods are those that utilize gas 

chromatography or high-performance liquid chromatography 

(HPLC) with mass spectrometry detection (used to analyze 

for VOCs, gasoline additives, and pesticides). For these 

methods, compounds are identified by the presence of 

characteristic fragmentation patterns in their mass spectra, in 

addition to being quantified by measurement of peak areas 

at their associated chromatographic retention times. E-coded 

values also may result from detections outside the range of 

calibration standards, from detections that did not meet all 

laboratory quality-control criteria, and from samples that were 

diluted prior to analysis (Childress and others, 1999). 

Some compound concentrations in this study are 

reported using minimum reporting levels (MRLs) or 

method uncertainties. The MRL is the smallest measurable 

concentration of a constituent that may be reliably reported by 

using a given analytical method (Timme, 1995). The method 

uncertainty generally indicates the precision of a particular 

analytical measurement; it gives a range of values wherein the 

true value will be found. 

Detections that may have resulted from sample 

contamination are reported with a “V” before the values in the 

tables). The potential for sample contamination was assessed 

using results from field, source-solution, and laboratory 

blanks.

The reporting levels for radiochemical constituents 

(gross-alpha radioactivity, gross-beta radioactivity, radium-226 

and -228, and uranium-234, -235, and -238) are based on a 

sample-specific minimum detectable concentration (SSMDC), 

a sample-specific critical value, and the combined standard 

uncertainty (CSU) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2004; Bennett and others, 2006). A result above the critical 

value represents a greater-than-95-percent certainty that the 

result is greater than zero (significantly different from the 

instrument’s background response to a blank sample), and a 

result above the SSMDC represents a greater-than-95-percent 

certainty that the result is greater than the critical value. 

Using these reporting level elements, three unique cases 

were possible when screening the raw analytical data. If the 

analytical result was less than the critical value (case 1), the 

analyte was considered “not detected”, and the concentration 

is reported on table 13 as less than the SSMDC. If the 

analytical result was greater than the critical value, the ratio 

of the CSU to the analytical result was calculated as a percent 

(percent relative CSU). For those samples with percent-relative 

CSU greater than 20 percent (case 2), concentrations were 

reported as estimated values (designated by an “E” preceding 

the value). For those samples with percent-relative CSU less 

than 20 percent (case 3), concentrations were reported on 

table 13 with no qualifiers.

Stable isotopic compositions of oxygen, 

hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen are reported as 

relative isotope ratios in units of per mil using the 

standard delta notation (Coplen and others, 2002):

δ

i

E

R

R

i

sample

eference

= − 















1 1 × ,000

Where

is the atomic mass of the heavier isotope

of the element

E is the element (O

,

for oxygen C for carbon

or H for hydrogen)

is the r

, ,

,

Rsample atio of the abundance of the heavier 

isotopeof the element O C or H

to thelighter isotope of the element

18 13 2 ( ) , ,

( O C or H)in the sample and

is the ratio of

16 12 1 , , ,

Rreference the abundance of the heavier 

isotopeof the element to the lighter isotope 

of theelement in the reference material 

hydrogen.
92 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

 The reference material for oxygen and hydrogen is 

Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water (VSMOW), which is 

assigned δ18O and δ2H values of 0 per mil (note than δ2H is 

also written as δD because the common name of the heavier 

isotope of hydrogen, hydrogen-2, is deuterium). The reference 

material for carbon is Vienna Peedee Belemnite (VPDB), 

which is assigned a δ13C value of 0 per mil, and the reference 

material for nitrogen is atmospheric nitrogen gas, which is 

assigned a δ15N value of 0 per mil. Positive values of δiE 

indicate enrichment of the heavier isotope, and negative values 

indicate depletion of the heavier isotope, compared to the 

ratios observed in the standard reference material.

Constituents on Multiple Analytical Schedules

Seventeen constituents targeted in SESJ were determined 

by more than one analytical schedule or by more than one 

laboratory (table A2). The preferred methods for these 

constituents were selected on the basis of the procedure 

recommended by the NWQL (http://wwwnwql.cr.usgs.gov/

USGS/Preferred_method_selection_procedure.html). Methods 

with full approval are preferred over those with provisional 

approval, and approved methods are favored over research 

methods. The method with greater accuracy and precision and 

lower LRLs for the overlapping constituents is preferred. A 

method may be selected as the preferred method to provide 

consistency with historical data analyzed by the same method. 

If a VOC, gasoline additive, or pesticide constituent appears 

on multiple NWQL analytical schedules, then only the 

measurement determined by the preferred method is reported. 

If a constituent was analyzed by more than one laboratory, 

then both measurements are reported. For example, the VOC, 

1,2,3-TCP, was analyzed at the NWQL and at the Montgomery 

Watson Harza Laboratory (MWH). Since the MWH 

Laboratory had a lower reporting level (0.005 μg/L), it was the 

preferred method for this constituent for this study, although 

both are reported. For arsenic and iron concentrations, the 

standard method used by the NWQL is preferred over the 

research method used by the USGS Trace Metal Laboratory, 

although both are reported. The concentrations measured by 

the Trace Metal Laboratory are used only to calculate ratios 

of redox species for each element, 

As V

As III

( )

( ) for arsenic, and

Fe III

Fe II

( )

( ) for iron. For example:

Fe III

Fe II

Fe T Fe II

Fe II

Fe T

( )

( )

( ) ( )

( )

( )

= −

Where

is the total ironconcentration (measured),

Fe( ) II is the concentration of ferrous iron (measured) and,

Fe( ) III is the concentration of ferric iron (calculated).

Tritium results from both the USGS Stable Isotope 

and Tritium Laboratory and LLNL are reported. The USGS 

Stable Isotope and Tritium Laboratory method is the preferred 

method for this study because suspected instrument error at 

LLNL increased the uncertainty of the tritium values.

Quality Assurance 

The quality-assurance procedures used for this study 

followed the protocols used by the USGS NAWQA program 

(Koterba and others, 1995) and described in the USGS 

National Field Manual (U.S. Geological Survey, variously 

dated). The quality-assurance plan followed by the NWQL, 

the primary laboratory used to analyze samples for this study, 

is described in Pirkey and Glodt (1998) and Maloney (2005). 

Quality-control (QC) samples were collected to evaluate 

contamination, bias, and variability of the data that may 

have resulted from sample collection, processing, storage, 

transportation, and laboratory analysis. QC samples collected 

in the SESJ study include blanks, field replicates, and matrix 

and laboratory surrogate spikes. 

Blanks

Blank samples (blanks) were collected using water 

(nitrogen-purged “universal” blank water) certified by the 

NWQL to contain less than the LRL or MRL of the analytes 

investigated in the study. Two types of blanks were collected: 

source-solution and field blanks. Source-solution blanks 

were collected to verify that the blank water used for the 

field blanks was free of analytes of interest. Field and source 

solution blanks were collected at more than 10 percent of the 

wells sampled to determine if equipment or procedures used 

in the field or laboratory introduced contamination. Field 

blanks were analyzed for VOCs, gasoline additives, pesticides, 

perchlorate, NDMA, 1,2,3-TCP, nutrients, dissolved organic 

carbon, major and minor ions, trace elements, iron, arsenic, 

and chromium species, and coliform indicators. Certified 

blank water was not available for tritium or noble gases; 

thus, field blanks were not collected for these constituents. 

Constituents that were detected in field blanks are given in 

table A3.

Source-solution blanks were collected at the sampling 

site by pouring blank water directly into sample containers 

that were then preserved, stored, shipped, and analyzed in 

the same manner as the ground-water samples. For field 

blanks, blank water either was pumped or poured through 

the sampling equipment (fittings and tubing) used to collect 

ground water, then processed and transported using the same 

protocols for the ground-water samples. 
Appendix 93

Contamination in field blanks may originate from 

several different types of sources, including: contamination 

of the source-solution water, carry-over from the previous 

sample, contamination from known sources specific to a field 

site, and systematic or random contamination from field or 

laboratory equipment or processes. These different sources 

of contamination require different strategies for censoring 

detections in environmental samples based on detections in 

field blanks.

Detections in source-solution blanks were used to 

evaluate potential contamination of the source-solution water. 

If a constituent was detected in a source-solution blank at a 

concentration equal to or greater than the lowest concentration 

detected in any field blank collected using the same lot of 

source-solution water, then the source-solution water was 

interpreted as the origin of the contamination in the blanks, 

and detections of that constituent in field blanks collected 

using the same lot of source-solution water were disregarded.

If a field blank detection could not be attributed to the 

source solution, then the ground-water samples collected prior 

to, and following, the blank were evaluated. If the constituent 

was not detected in the ground-water sample collected prior 

to the contaminated field blank, then contamination of that 

field blank resulting from carry-over was ruled out. If nondetections were reported in field blanks or ground-water 

samples collected after ground-water samples containing 

high concentrations of the constituent, then carry-over 

contamination was considered unlikely in the whole dataset. 

If carry-over contamination in the dataset could not be ruled 

out, then all detections in ground-water samples and field 

blanks collected after a ground-water sample containing a high 

concentration of the constituent were examined for potential 

censoring. 

Contamination from known sources may produce 

distinctive patterns of detections in field blanks and groundwater samples, particularly for the VOCs. Substances that 

may be encountered at the field site, such as lubricants (for 

example, penetrating oil), cements used on PVC-piping, 

exhaust fumes from pump engines, and the methanol used to 

clean sample lines, contain recognizable associations of VOC 

constituents. If a recognizable association of VOC constituents 

was detected in a field blank, and the field notes indicated that 

a known source was present and may have affected collection 

of the field blank, the field blank was not used to censor 

detections of individual VOCs in ground-water samples. If a 

recognizable association of VOC constituents was detected 

in a ground-water sample, and the field notes indicated that 

a known source was present and may have affected sample 

collection, the detections in the ground-water sample were 

examined for potential censoring. However, detection of these 

co-occurring VOC constituents in ground-water samples 

does not necessarily indicate contamination during sample 

collection, because these VOC constituents also may occur 

together in ground water. The censoring level was defined as 

the concentration of the constituent in field blanks plus onehalf the LRL for that constituent. Detections in ground-water 

sample below the censoring level were censored. Censored 

values are indicated by a ‘V’ preceding the value in the data 

tables and they are excluded from the summary statistics.

Replicates 

Sequential replicate samples were collected to assess 

variability that may result from the processing and analyses of 

inorganic and organic constituents. Relative standard deviation 

(RSD) of the measured values was used in determining 

the variability between replicate pairs for each compound 

(table A4). The RSD is defined as the standard deviation 

divided by the mean concentration for each replicate pair of 

samples, multiplied by 100 percent. If one value in a sample 

pair was reported as a non-detection and the other value was 

reported as an estimate below the LRL or MRL, the RSD was 

set to zero because the values were analytically identical. If 

one value in a sample pair was reported as a non-detection 

and the other value was greater than the LRL or MRL, then 

the non-detection value was set equal to one-quarter of the 

LRL and the RSD was calculated (Hamlin and others, 2002). 

Values of RSD less than 20 percent are considered acceptable 

in this study. High RSD values for a compound may indicate 

analytical uncertainty at low concentrations, particularly for 

concentrations within an order of magnitude of LT-MDL or 

MDL. Sequential replicate samples were collected at 9 percent 

of the wells sampled. 

Matrix Spikes

Addition of a known concentration of a constituent 

(‘spike’) to a replicate environmental sample enables the 

laboratory to determine the effect of the matrix, in this case 

ground water, on the analytical technique used to measure the 

constituent. The known compounds added in matrix spikes 

are the same as those being analyzed in the method. This 

enables an analysis of matrix interferences on a compoundby-compound basis. Matrix spikes in SESJ were added 

at the laboratory performing the analysis. Compounds 

with low recoveries (less than 70 percent of the added 

compound detected) are of potential concern if environmental 

concentrations are close to the MCLs; a low recovery could 

falsely indicate a concentration below the MCL. Conversely, 

compounds with high recoveries (greater than 130 percent of 

the added compound detected) are of potential concern if the 

environmental concentrations exceed MCLs: a high recovery 

could falsely indicate a concentration above the MCL. 

Acceptable ranges for matrix-spike recoveries are based 

on the acceptable ranges established for laboratory “set” spike 

recoveries. Laboratory set spikes are aliquots of laboratory 

blank water to which the same spike solution used for the 

matrix spikes has been added. One set spike is analyzed with 

each set of samples. Acceptable ranges for set spike recoveries 

are 70–130 percent for VOCs and gasoline oxygenates 

(NWQL schedules 2020 and 4024, Connor and others, 1998; 
94 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Zaugg and others, 2002; and Rose and Sandstrom, 2003), 

60–120 percent for pesticides (NWQL schedules 2033 and 

2060, Furlong and others, 2001; and Sandstrom and others, 

2001). Based on these ranges, we defined 70–130 percent as 

the acceptable range for matrix-spike recoveries for organic 

compounds in this study. 

Matrix spike tests were done for VOCs, gasoline additive 

compounds, pesticide compounds, NDMA, and 1,2,3-TCP 

because the analytical methods for these constituents 

are chromatographic methods that may be susceptible to 

matrix interferences. Coliphage samples also were spiked 

to determine if the matrix interferes with growth. Replicate 

samples for matrix-spike additions were collected at 9 percent 

of the wells sampled, although not all analyte classes were 

tested at every well (table A5).

Surrogates 

Surrogate compounds are added to environmental 

samples in the laboratory prior to analysis to evaluate the 

recovery of similar constituents. Surrogate compounds were 

added to all of the ground-water and quality-control samples 

that were analyzed for VOCs, gasoline oxygenates, pesticide 

and pesticide degradates, NDMA, and 1,2,3-TCP (table A6). 

Most of the surrogate compounds are deuterated analogs 

of compounds being analyzed. For example, the surrogate 

toluene-d8 used for the VOC analytical method has the same 

chemical structure as toluene, except that the eight hydrogen-1 

atoms on the molecule have been replaced by deuterium 

(hydrogen-2). Toluene-d8 and toluene behave very similarly 

in the analytical procedure, but the small mass difference 

between the two results in slightly different chromatographic 

retention times, thus, the use of a toluene-d8 surrogate does 

not interfere with the analysis of toluene (Grob, 1995). Only 

0.0156 percent of hydrogen atoms are deuterium (Firestone 

and others, 1996), thus, deuterated compounds like toluene-d8 

do not occur naturally and are not found in environmental 

samples. Surrogates are used to identify general problems that 

may arise during sample analysis that could affect the analysis 

results for all compounds in that sample. Potential problems 

include matrix interferences (such as high levels of dissolved 

organic carbon) that could produce a positive bias, and (or) 

incomplete laboratory recovery (possibly due to improper 

maintenance and calibration of analytical equipment) that 

produces a negative bias. A 70–130 percent recovery of 

surrogates generally is considered acceptable; values outside 

this range indicate possible problems with the processing 

and analysis of samples (table A6) (Connor and others, 1998; 

Sandstrom and others, 2001).

Quality-Control-Sample Results

Detections in Field Blanks and Source-Solution 

Blanks

Field and source-solution blanks were collected at more 

than 10 percent of the sites sampled in SESJ. A summary of 

detections in field blanks is given in table A3. Nine VOCs 

were detected in one or more of the eleven field blanks. Two 

VOCs, toluene and m-Xylene plus p-xylene, had detections in 

environmental samples collected prior to or following these 

field blanks. Two of the toluene detections in environmental 

samples were near the concentrations found in the blanks and 

were censored. One environmental sample had a m-xylene 

plus p-xylene detection preceded by a blank detection. This 

environmental sample was censored. The concentrations of 

three VOCs—acetone, 2-butanone, and tetrahydrofuran—were 

censored for one sample from an understanding well because 

of potential contamination resulting from modifications to the 

wellhead that occurred a few weeks prior to sampling.

One constituent on the pesticide schedules, caffeine, was 

detected in three field blanks (table A3). Detections of caffeine 

were observed in environmental samples collected before or 

after the associated field blanks. Six of the caffeine detections 

in environmental samples were near the concentrations found 

in the blanks and were censored.

Five major and minor ions were detected in six field 

blanks. Four of these constituents were detected in every field 

blank collected. However, only magnesium was detected 

in a blank at a concentration high enough to require an 

environmental sample to be censored. 

Fourteen trace elements were detected in field blanks. 

The NWQL determined that high concentrations of aluminum, 

barium, chromium, iron, manganese, and strontium in 

field blanks and source solution blanks collected in late 

2005 through early 2006 were the result of systematic 

contamination of the blank water by leaching from the glass 

bottles (written communications: USGS NWQL Rapi-Note 

06-008, April 2006; USGS NWQL Rapi-Note 06-022, June 

2006; James A. Lewis, U.S. Geological Survey, August 2008). 

All bottles with the same lot numbers as the affected bottles 

were discarded. No other field blanks were collected for trace 

element analyses in SESJ, thus, it was not possible to assess 

potential contamination of the ground-water samples for 

these three trace elements. The comparison of concentrations 

of field blank detections with the other trace elements with 

detections in the environmental samples resulted in the 

censoring of some of the environmental data for four trace 

elements (table A3): cobalt, copper, lead, and nickel. Detection 

of Cr and Cr(VI) in all six field blanks collected for speciation 

analysis resulted in the censoring of all Cr and Cr(VI) 

environmental samples. Chromium species were not shown in 

table 11 because of suspected contamination of samples during 

the preservation process. 
Appendix 95

Detections of DOC were observed in both blanks. These 

concentrations were greater than the concentration detected 

in two environmental samples, therefore, these two DOC 

detections were censored. Total nitrogen was detected in 

one of three blanks, but at a concentration that would have 

negligible effect on the concentration of environmental 

samples collected after the blank. Therefore, no total nitrogen 

analyses were censored.

Variability in Replicate Samples

A summary of the results of replicate analyses for 

constituents detected in ground-water samples collected in 

SESJ are presented in table A4. The majority of replicate 

sample pairs had relative standard deviations (RSDs) of 

less than 20 percent. Concentrations or activities in the 

environmental and replicate samples are reported for all 

replicate analyses with RSD values greater than 20. Two 

replicate pairs representing two pesticides, nine replicate 

sample pairs representing eight minor trace elements, six 

replicate sample pairs for alpha and beta radioactivity, three 

replicate sample pairs for uranium-234, -235, and -238, 

and one replicate pair for δ18O in nitrate had RSDs greater 

than 20 percent (table A4). However, many of the replicate 

sample pairs with high RSDs had concentrations near the 

LRL for these constituents; at these low concentrations, small 

deviations in measured values may account for the large 

RSDs. No detections were censored as a result of variability in 

replicate samples.

Matrix-Spike Recoveries

A summary of matrix-spike recoveries for the SESJ 

study is presented in table A5. Addition of a spike or known 

concentration of a constituent to an environmental sample 

enables the analyzing laboratory to determine the effect of the 

matrix, in this case ground water, on the analytical technique 

used to measure the constituent. Nine environmental samples 

were spiked with VOCs, 18 environmental samples with 

DBCP, and five environmental samples were spiked with 

NDMA and 1,2,3-TCP (constituents of special interest) to 

calculate matrix-spike recoveries. Eighty-one of the 88 VOCs 

and constituents of special interest had spike recoveries 

within the acceptable range of 70–130 percent. Six VOCs 

had spike recoveries greater than 130 percent and one VOC 

had a spike recovery below 70 percent (table A5); only two 

of these VOCs were detected in ground-water samples. 

Trichlorofluoromethane and DBCP were not detected in the 

environmental samples for which the corresponding spiked 

samples had recoveries outside of the acceptable range of 

70–130 percent. No VOC data were censored on the basis of 

matrix-spike results.

Seven ground-water samples were spiked with pesticide 

and pesticide degradate compounds, and three ground-water 

samples were spiked with polar pesticide and degradate 

compounds. Sixty-nine of the 142 spiked compounds had 

recoveries within the acceptable range. Seventeen pesticide 

compounds had spike recoveries greater than 130 percent; only 

two were detected in ground-water samples (table A5). Both 

compounds, dinoseb and imazethapyr, were not detected in the 

unspiked environmental samples corresponding to the spiked 

samples with high recoveries. Fifty-six pesticide compounds 

had spike recoveries less than 70 percent (table A5); 10 of 

these compounds were detected in ground-water samples, of 

which two compounds were detected in the environmental 

samples corresponding to the spiked samples with low 

recoveries. Low recoveries may indicate that the compound 

might not have been detected in some samples if it was present 

at very low concentrations.

Two microbial indicator samples were spiked F-specific 

and somatic coliphage. Both samples tested positive for 

F-specific and somatic coliphage, which indicates matrix 

interference was not a problem.

Surrogate Compound Recoveries

Surrogate compounds were added to environmental 

samples in the laboratory and analyzed to evaluate the 

recovery of similar constituents. Table A6 lists each surrogate; 

the analytical schedule on which it was applied; the number 

of analyses for ground-water samples, blanks, and sample 

replicates; and the number of surrogate recoveries below 

70 percent and above 130 percent for the ground-water 

samples, blanks, and replicates. Greater than 92 percent of 

the ground-water samples, blanks, and replicate samples 

had recoveries of the surrogates with the acceptable range of 

70–130 percent. Diazinon-d10 surrogate recoveries were less 

than 70 percent in about 14 percent of the samples. Diazinon 

had one detection below the LRL. Surrogate recovery data 

suggests the detection could be at a higher concentration 

than reported. 2,4,5-T surrogate recoveries were greater than 

130 percent for 40 percent of the samples. This suggests 

some pesticide compounds on the 2060 schedule may have 

concentrations higher than reported. No ground-water sample 

detections were censored as a result of surrogate recovery 

data.
96 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table A1. Analytical methods used for the determination of organic, inorganic, and microbial constituents by the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) and additional contract laboratories.—Continued

[MI agar, supplemented nutrient agar in which coliforms (total and Escherichia) produce distinctly different fluorescence under ultraviolet lighting; DBCP, 

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane; HPLC, high-pressure liquid chromatography; UV, ultraviolet; VOCs, volatile organic compounds]

Analyte Method Laboratory Citation(s)

Water-quality indicators

Field parameters Calibrated field meters and kits USGS field measurement Anderson, 2005; Radtke and 

others, 2005; Lewis, 2006; Rounds, 

2006; Wilde, 2006; Wilde and 

others, 2006a

Organic constituents

VOCs Purge and trap capillary gas 

chromatography-mass 

spectrometry

NWQL, Schedule 2020 Connor and others, 1998

DBCP Microextraction and gas 

chromatography 

NWQL, Schedule 1306 U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1995

Gasoline oxygenates Heated purge and trap, gas 

chromatography-mass 

spectrometry 

NWQL, Schedule 4024 Rose and Sandstrom, 2003

Pesticides and pesticide 

degradates

Solid-phase extraction and 

gas chromatography-mass 

spectrometry

NWQL, Schedules 2033 Zaugg and others, 1995; Lindley 

and others, 1996; Sandstrom and 

others, 2001; Madsen and others, 

2003 

Polar pesticides and pesticide 

degradates

Solid-phase extraction and 

gas chromatography-mass 

spectrometry

NWQL, Schedule 2060 Furlong and others, 2001

Pharmaceuticals Solid-phase extraction and HPLC/

mass spectrometry

NWQL, Lab code 9003 Kolpin and others, 2002

Constituents of special interest

Perchlorate Chromatography and mass 

spectrometry 

Montgomery Watson Harza 

Laboratory

Hautman and others, 1999

N-Nitrosodimethylamine 

(NDMA)

Chromatography and mass 

spectrometry 

Montgomery Watson Harza 

Laboratory

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1996; U.S. 

Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1999b

1,2,3-Trichloropropane Gas chromatography/electron 

capture detector

Montgomery Watson Harza 

Laboratory

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1995

Inorganic constituents

Nutrients Alkaline persulfate digestion, 

Kjedahl digestion

NWQL, Schedule 2755 Fishman, 1993; Patton and 

Kryskalla, 2003

Dissolved organic carbon UV-promoted persulfate oxidation 

and infrared spectrometry

NWQL, Schedule 2612 Brenton and Arnett, 1993

Major and minor ions, and 

trace elements 

Inductively coupled plasma mass 

spectrometry, graphite furnace 

atomic absorption, atomic 

fluorescence, and colorimetry

NWQL, Schedule 1948 Fishman and Friedman, 1989; 

Faires, 1993; Fishman, 1993; 

McLain, 1993; American Public 

Health Association, 1998; 

Garbarino, 1999; Garbarino and 

Damrau, 2001; Garbarino and 

others, 2006

Chromium, arsenic, and iron 

speciation

Ultraviolet visible (UV-VIS) 

spectrophotometry and atomic 

absorbance spectroscopy

USGS Trace Metal Laboratory, 

Boulder, Colorado

Stookey, 1970; To and others, 

1998; Ball and McCleskey, 

2003a, 2003b; McCleskey and 

others, 2003

Table A1. Analytical methods used for the determination of organic, inorganic, and microbial constituents by the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) and additional contract laboratories.

[MI agar, supplemented nutrient agar in which coliforms (total and Escherichia) produce distinctly different fluorescence under ultraviolet lighting; DBCP, 

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane; HPLC, high-pressure liquid chromatography; UV, ultraviolet; VOCs, volatile organic compounds]
Appendix 97

Table A1. Analytical methods used for the determination of organic, inorganic, and microbial constituents by the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) and additional contract laboratories.—Continued

[MI agar, supplemented nutrient agar in which coliforms (total and Escherichia) produce distinctly different fluorescence under ultraviolet lighting; DBCP, 

1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane; HPLC, high-pressure liquid chromatography; UV, ultraviolet; VOCs, volatile organic compounds]

Analyte Method Laboratory Citation(s)

Stable isotopes

Stable isotopes of water Gaseous hydrogen and carbon 

dioxide-water equilibration

USGS Stable Isotope Laboratory, 

Reston, Virginia, schedule 1142

Epstein and Mayeda, 1953; Coplen 

and others, 1991; Coplen, 1994 

Stable isotopes of nitrate Bacterial conversion of nitrate 

to nitrous oxide and mass 

spectrometry

USGS Stable Isotope Laboratory, 

Reston, Virginia, lab code 2900

Casciotti and others, 2002

Carbon isotopes Accelerator mass spectrometry University of Waterloo, 

Environmental Isotope 

Laboratory; University of 

Arizona Accelerator Mass 

Spectrometry Laboratory, 

Schedule 2015

Donahue and others, 1990; Jull and 

others, 2004

Radioactivity and gases

Radon-222 Liquid scintillation counting NWQL, Lab code 1369 American Society for Testing and 

Materials, 1998a, b

Radium 226/228 Alpha activity counting Eberline Analytical Services, 

NWQL, Schedule 1262

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1980 (USEPA methods 

903 and 904)

Gross alpha and beta 

radioactivity

Alpha and beta activity counting Eberline Analytical Services, 

NWQL, schedule 1792

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1980 (USEPA method 

900.0)

Tritium Electrolytic enrichment-liquid 

scintillation

USGS Stable Isotope and Tritium 

Laboratory, Menlo Park, 

California, Lab code 1565

Thatcher and others, 1977

Tritium and noble gases Helium-3 in-growth and mass 

spectrometry

Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory

Clarke and others, 1976; Moran 

and others, 2002; Eaton and 

others, 2004

Uranium-234, -235, -238 Alpha particle spectrometry Eberline Analytical Services, 

Schedule 1130

American Society for Testing and 

Materials, 2005, Method D3972

Microbial constituents

F-specific and somatic 

coliphage

Single-agar layer (SAL) and twostep enrichment methodsUSGS Ohio Water Microbiology 

Laboratory, Method 1601

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2001

Total and Escherichia

coliform

Membrane filter technique with 

"MI agar", colony counting

USGS field measurement U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2002b
98 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table A2. Preferred analytical schedules for constituents appearing on multiple schedules for samples collected for the Southeast 

San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[Preferred analytical schedules usually are the methods of analysis with the greatest accuracy and precision out of the ones used for the compound in question. 

Abbreviations: MWH, Montgomery-Watson-Harza Laboratory; LLNL, Lawrence-Livermore National Laboratory; SITL, U.S. Geological Survey Stable Isotope 

and Tritium Laboratory; TML, U.S. Geological Survey Trace Metal Laboratory, Boulder, Colorado; VOC, volatile organic compound] 

Constituent Primary constituent classification Analytical 

schedules

Preferred 

analytical 

schedule

Results from preferred method reported

Acetone VOC, gasoline oxygenate degradate 2020, 4024 2020

Diisopropyl ether VOC, gasoline oxygenate 2020, 4024 2020

Ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) VOC, gasoline oxygenate 2020, 4024 2020

Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) VOC, gasoline oxygenate 2020, 4024 2020

Methyl tert-pentyl ether (TAME) VOC, gasoline oxygenate 2020, 4024 2020

DBCP (1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane) VOC, fumigant 2020, 1306 1306

EDB (1,2-Dibromoethane) VOC, fumigant 2020, 1306 1306

Atrazine Pesticide 2033, 2060 2033

Carbaryl Pesticide 2033, 2060 2033

Deethylatrazine (2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino6-amino-s-triazine)Pesticide degradate 2033, 2060 2033

Metalaxyl Pesticide 2033, 2060 2060

Results from both methods reported

1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP) VOC 2020, MHW MWH

Arsenic, total trace element 1948, TML 1948

Chromium, total trace element 1948, TML 1948

Iron, total trace element 1948, TML 1948

Tritium Radioactive LLNL, SITL —
Appendix 99

Constituent

Number of field 

blank detections/

analyses

Maximum 

concentration 

detected in 

field blanks 

Minimum concentration 

detected in groundwater samples

Number of 

ground-water 

samples censored

Volatile organic compounds and gasoline additives and (or) oxygenates (μg/L)

Acetone 1/11 27 6 0

2-Butanone (Methyl ethyl ketone) 2/11 3.3 28.1 0

Ethylbenzene 3/11 E 0.06 E 0.04 0

m-Xylene plus p-xylene 3/11 0.37 E 0.01 1

o-Xylene 1/11 E 0.03 E 0.06 0

Tetrachloroethene (PCE) 1/11 E 0.03 E 0.02 0

Toluene1 6/11 0.23 E 0.01 2

Trichloroethene (TCE) 1/11 E 0.02 E 0.03 0

Trichloromethane (chloroform) 2/11 E 0.04 E 0.01 0

Pesticides and (or) pesticide degredates (μg/L)

Caffeine 3/6 E 0.011 E 0.004 6

Major and minor ions (mg/L)

Calcium 6/6 0.53 0.87 0

Magnesium 6/6 0.014 0.01 1

Sodium 6/6 1.04 7 0

Silica 6/6 6.16 14 0

Residue on evaporation 2/6 10 91 0

Trace elements (μg/L)

Aluminum2 6/6 nr E 0.8 0

Barium2 1/6 nr 2 0

Beryllium 1/6 E 0.05 E 0.03 0

Chromium 6/6 0.47 E 0.03 0

Cobalt 1/6 0.13 E 0.02 1

Copper 4/6 3.20 E 0.2 3

Iron 5/6 36 E 3 0

Lead 5/6 0.26 E 0.04 3

Manganese 5/6 0.20 E 0.01 0

Nickel 4/6 0.42 E 0.03 1

Strontium2 6/6 nr 14 0

Tungsten 2/6 0.38 E 0.04 0

Vanadium 1/6 0.21 1.40 0

Zinc 3/6 4.80 E 0.03 0

Chromium (VI)3 6/6 46 1.00 all

Nutrients and dissolved organic carbon (mg/L)

Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) 2/2 0.19 E 0.20 3

Total nitrogen (nitrate + nitrite + ammonia + 

organic-nitrogen)

1/3 0.12 0.06 0

1

 Constituents also detected in associated source solution blanks.

2

 Constituents detected in unversal blank water tested by the National Water Quality Lab (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006). Environmental data were not 

censored. 3

Chromium (VI) analyses made by U.S. Geological Survey’s Trace Metal Laboratory.

Table A3. Quality-control summary for constituents detected in blanks collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley Ground-Water 

Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[Censored data are reported but not used in summary statistics; mg/L, milligrams per liter; μg/L, micrograms per liter; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; E, estimated 

value; nr, not reported].
100 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Constituent

Number of relative 

standard deviations 

greater than 

20 percent/

replicate pairs

Maximum 

relative standard 

deviation 

(percent)

Median of relative 

standard deviations

(percent)

Concentrations for 

replicate pairs with

RSD greater than 20

(environmental,

replicate) 

(μg/L)

Volatile organic compounds, gasoline oxygenates and additives from schedules 2020 and 4024

VOCs 0/9 6 0 na

Pesticides and pesticide degradates from schedules 2033 and 2060

3,4-Dichloroaniline 1/9 21 0 (0.019, 0.014)

Deethyldeisopropyl atrazine (Chlorodiamino-striazine) 

1/5 20 0 (E0.08, E0.06)

Constituents of special interest

Perchlorate 0/10 12 0 na

1,2,3-Trichlorpropane 1/6 103 0 (—, 0.032)

N-Nitrosodimethylamine 0/6 4 0 na

 Major ions, minor ions, trace elements, and nutrients 

Major and minor ions 0/5 17 0 na

Boron 1/5 21 4 (23,17)

Cadmium 1/5 47 0 (0.04, E0.02)

Iron 2/5 66 0 (E4,11)(15,11)

Lead 1/5 23 0 (0.91,0.66)

Molybdenum 1/5 40 0 (8.4,4.7)

Nickel 1/5 42 11 (26.9,14.6)

Zinc 1/5 22 18 (1.1,0.8)

As(III) 1/5 24 0 (2.4,1.7)

Nutrients 0/5 16 0 na

Isotopes, radioactivity, and noble gases

δ18O in nitrate 1/4 35 14 (1.4,0.84)

Radium-228 2/3 41 29 (0.36,0.24)(0.15,0.27)

Alpha radioactivity—72 hour count 1/3 78 4 (1.39,0.4)

Alpha radioactivity—30 day count 2/3 27 21 (11.3,8.4)(0.19,1.13)

Beta radioactivity—72 hour count 1/3 104 9 (1.9,0.3)

Beta radioactivity—30 day count 2/3 82 24 (4.0,2.8)(0.47,1.79)

Uranium-234 1/5 25 1 (0.036,0.025)

Uranium-235 1/5 141 14 (0,0.045)

Uranium-238 1/5 67 1 (0.026,0.074)

Microbial indicators

F-specific and somatic coliphage, E. Coli, and 

total coliforms

0/2 0 0.0 na

Table A4. Quality-control summary of replicate analyses of constituents detected in samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[RSD, relative standard deviation; μg/L, micrograms per liter; VOCs, volatile organic compounds; E, estimated value; na, not available; —, not detected]
Appendix 101

Table A5. Quality-control summary of matrix-spike recoveries for volatile organic compounds, gasoline oxygenates and their 

degradates, N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane added to samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[Acceptable recovery range is between 70 and 130 percent, only constituents outside of acceptable range are given; na, not applicable]

Constituent Number of spike samples Minimum recovery

(percent)

Maximum recovery 

(percent)

Median recovery 

(percent)

Volatile Organic Compounds

1,2-Dibromo-3-

chloropropane (DBCP)1

18 43 114 97

Bromoethene 9 117 138 133

Bromomethane (methyl 

bromide)

9 102 155 131

Chloromethane 9 94 144 138

Iodomethane 9 75 147 103

Naphthalene 9 104 134 113

Trichlorofluoromethane1 9 94 131 120

Pesticide Compounds

Azinphos-methyl 7 47 83 52

Azinphos-methyl-oxon 7 29 56 40

Benfluralin 7 43 67 57

4-Chloro-2-methylphenol 7 31 59 54

Chlorpyrifos oxygen analog 7 0 30 19

Cyfluthrin 7 32 59 39

λ-Cyhalothrin 7 16 30 21

Cypermethrin 7 31 57 39

Deethylatrazine (2-Chloro4-isopropylamino-6-

amino-s-triazine)1

7 32 41 39

Desulfinyl fipronil1 7 35 47 41

Desulfinylfipronil amide 7 25 46 28

Diazinon, oxon 7 60 85 69

Dichlorvos 7 9 40 29

Dicrotophos 7 19 39 28

Dimethoate 7 20 29 27

Disulfoton 7 28 58 40

Disulfoton sulfone 7 68 104 80

Ethion 7 55 104 68

Ethion monoxon 7 51 104 70

Fenamiphos 7 60 104 69

Fenamiphos sulfone 7 39 90 53

Fenamiphos sulfoxide 7 40 75 48

Fipronil 7 61 102 63

Fipronil sulfide1 7 33 53 37

Fipronil sulfone 7 24 42 29

Hexazinone1 7 56 84 63

Iprodione 7 9 24 18

Malaoxon 7 41 81 68

Metribuzin 7 65 78 67

Myclobutanil1 7 66 100 71

1-Naphthol1 7 5 30 10

Oxyfluorfen 7 43 76 52

Paraoxon-methyl 7 39 60 49

Parathion-methyl 7 57 91 71

Pendimethalin 7 59 122 78

cis-Permethrin 7 36 65 47

Phorate 7 40 69 50

Phorate oxon 7 59 78 66

Phosmet 1 8 8 8

Phosmet oxon 1 51 51 51

Table A5. Quality-control summary of matrix-spike recoveries for volatile organic compounds, gasoline oxygenates and their 

degradates, N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane added to samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.

[Acceptable recovery range is between 70 and 130 percent, only constituents outside of acceptable range are given; na, not applicable]
102 Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005–2006—Results from the California GAMA Program

Table A5. Quality-control summary of matrix-spike recoveries for volatile organic compounds, gasoline oxygenates and their 

degradates, N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), and 1,2,3-Trichloropropane added to samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin 

Valley Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) study, California, October 2005 through February 2006.—Continued

[Acceptable recovery range is between 70 and 130 percent, only constituents outside of acceptable range are given; na, not applicable]

Constituent Number of spike samples Minimum recovery

(percent)

Maximum recovery 

(percent)

Median recovery 

(percent)

Propargite 7 50 94 69

cis-Propiconazole 7 16 32 21

trans-Propiconazole 7 51 85 60

Tebuconzole 7 39 85 50

Tefluthrin 7 30 47 43

Terbufos 7 59 78 71

Terbufos oxygen analog 

sulfone 

7 61 104 78

Tribuphos 7 42 77 48

Trifluralin 7 50 72 63

Polar Pesticide Compounds

Acifluorifen 3 136 152 140

Aldicarb 3 50 61 56

Aldicarb sulfoxide 3 84 140 88

Benomyl 3 58 93 91

Bensulfuron 3 107 188 109

Bromacil1 3 65 107 101

Chlorimuron-ethyl 3 81 172 81

Chlorodiamino-s-triazine 3 83 134 97

Deethylatrazine (2-Chloro4-isopropylamino-6-

amino-s-triazine)1

3 65 78 77

2,4-D 3 131 142 136

DCPA (Dacthal) monoacid 3 97 142 123

Deisopropyl atrazine 

(2-Chloro-6-ethylamino4-amino-s-triazine)1

3 65 71 70

Dinoseb1 3 111 180 132

Flumetsulam 3 19 163 159

Hydroxyatrazine 

(2-Hydroxy-4-

isopropylamino-6-

ethylamino-s-triazine)

2 125 144 134

Imazaquin 3 91 172 120

Imazethapyr1 3 116 149 119

Imidacloprid 3 123 140 138

Methomyl 3 31 116 55

Metsulfuron1 3 48 77 62

Nicosulfuron 3 99 284 136

Norfluazon 3 107 140 130

Sulfometuron 3 99 195 104

Triclopyr 3 115 134 116

Microbial constituents

F-specific coliphage 2 detected2 na na

Somatic coliphage 2 detected2 na na

1 Constituents detected in ground-water samples.

2

 A detection indicates the ground-water matrix does not affect the detection of coliphage.
Appendix 103

Constituent Analytical schedule Constituent or constituent class analyzed Number of blank analyses Median recovery in blanks (percent)

Number of 

surrogate 

recoveries 

below 

70 percent 

in blanks

Number of 

surrogate 

recoveries 

above 

130 percent in 

blanks

Number 

of sample 

analyses

Median 

recovery 

of samples 

(percent)

Number of 

surrogate 

recoveries 

below 

70 percent 

in samples

Number of 

surrogate 

recoveries 

above 

130 percent 

in samples

1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 2020, 4024 VOC, gas 

oxygenate

21 100 0 2 134 101 0 11

1-Bromo-4-fluorobenzene 2020, 4024 VOC, gas 

oxygenate

21 97 2 0 134 95 10 0

Toluene-d8 2020, 4024 VOC, gas 

oxygenate

21 100 0 0 134 100 0 0

Isobutyl alcohol-d6 4024 Gas oxygenate 4 89 0 0 27 86 0 0α-HCH-d6 2033 Pesticide 11 78 0 0 105 81 2 0Diazinon-d10 2033 Pesticide 11 80 1 0 105 81 15 02,4,5-T 2060 Pesticide 6 128 0 1 49 130 0 21Barban 2060 Pesticide 6 99 0 0 49 101 1 0Caffeine-13C 2060 Pesticide 6 113 0 3 49 114 0 7N-Nitrosodimethylamnine-d6 MWH NDMA 12 114 0 0 51 94 2 1Toluene-d8 MWH 1,2,3-TCP 12 99 0 0 50 98 0 2

Table A6. Quality-control summary for surrogate recoveries of volatile organic compounds (VOC), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, pesticides and pesticide degradates, and constituents of special interest added to samples collected for the Southeast San Joaquin Valley study area, California, October 2005 through February 2006.[MWH, Montgomery Watson Harza Laboratory; VOC, volatile organic compound; 1,2,3-TCP, 1,2,3-Trichloropropane; NDMA, N-Nitrosodimethylamine]
Burton and others—Ground-Water Quality Data in the Southeast San Joaquin Valley, 2005-2006—Results from the California GAMA Program—Data Series 351