GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 756

Collection, Storage, Retrieval, and 

Publication of Water-Resources Data
Collection, Storage, Retrieval, and 

Publication of Water-Resources Data

Standardization of Hydrologic Measurements

By G. F. Smoot

Use of Earth Satellites for

Automation of Hydrologic Data Collection

By R. W. Paulson

Operational Hydrometeorological 

Data-Collection System for the 

Columbia River

By N. A. Katlio

Storage and Retrieval of 

Water-Resources Data

By C. R. Showen

Publication of Water-Resources Data

By S. M. Lang and C. B. Ham

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 756

7978
United States Department of the Interior

CECIL D. ANDRUS, Secretary

Geological Survey 

V. E. McKelvey, Director

International Seminar on Organization and Operation of Hydrologic

Services, Ottawa, 1976.

Collection, storage, retrieval, and publication of water-resources data. 

(Geological Survey Circular 756) 

Supt. of Docs. No.: I 19.4/2:756 

Papers presented at the International Seminar on Organization and Operation

of Hydrologic Services, Ottawa, Canada, July 15-16, 1976, sponsored by

the World Meteorological Organization. 

CONTENTS: Smoot, G. F. Standardization of Hydrologic Measurements.-

Paulson, R. W. Use of earth satellites for automation of hydrologic data

collection.-Kallio, N. A. Operational hydrometeorological data-collection

system for the Columbia River, [etc.] 

1. Hydrology-Information services-Congresses. 2. Hydrology-Data

processing-Congresses. I. World Meteorological Organization. II. Title.

HI. Series: United States. Geological Survey. Circular 756. 

QE75.C5 no. 756 [GB657.2] 557.3'08s [029'.9'5537]

77-608124

Free on application to Branch of Distribution, U.S. Geological Survey, 1200 South Eads Street, Arlington, VA 22202
FOREWORD

This publication represents a series of papers 

devoted to the subject of collection, storage, retrieval, and publication of hydrologic data. The 

papers were presented by members of the U.S. 

Geological Survey at the International Seminar 

on Organization and Operation of Hydrologic 

Services, Ottawa, Canada, July 15-16, 1976, 

sponsored by the World Meteorological Organization.

The first paper, "Standardization of Hydrologic 

Measurements," by George F. Smoot discusses the 

need for standardization of the methods and instruments used in measuring hydrologic data.

The second paper, "Use of Earth Satellites for 

Automation of Hydrologic Data Collection," by 

Richard W. Paulson discusses the use of inexpensive battery-operated radios to transmit realtime 

hydrologic data to earth satellites and back to 

ground receiving stations for computer processing.

The third paper, "Operational Hydrometeorological Data-Collection System for the Columbia River," by Nicholas A. Kallio discusses 

the operation of a complex water-management 

system for a large river basin utilizing the latest 

automatic telemetry and processing devices.

The fourth paper, "Storage and Retrieval of 

Water-Resources Data," by Charles R. Showen 

discusses the U.S. Geological Survey's National 

Water Data Storage and Retrieval System 

(WATSTORE) and its use in processing water resources data.

The final paper, "Publication of Water Resources Data," by S. M. Lang and C. B. Ham discusses the requirement for publication of waterresources data to meet the needs of a widespread 

audience and for archival purposes.

These papers represent the state-of-the-art 

today in the collection, storage, retrieval, and 

publication of water-resources data.

HI
CONTENTS

Page

Foreword ________________________________________________ III

Standardization of hydrologic measurements, by G. F. Smoot ___________________ 1

Use of earth satellites for automation of hydrologic data collection, by R. W. Paulson ______ 8

Operational hydrometeorological data collection system for the Columbia River, by N. A.

Kallio __________________________________________________________________________ 15

Storage and retrieval of water-resources data, by C. R. Showen _____________________ 20

Publication of water-resources data, by S. M. Lang and C. B. Ham ______ ___ ___ 26

ILLUSTRATIONS

Page

FIGURE 1. Sketch of submerged jet calibration facility ____________________________________________ 2

2. Organizational relationships involved in the recommended methods activity __________________ 4

3. Basic elements of a satellite data collection system: (1) Remote site sensor and data collection platform, (2)

satellite transponder, and (3) data receiving sites and distribution system __________________ 9

4. Satellite communications occur only when a data collection platform and data receiving site are mutually

visible from the satellite ________________________________________________ 9

5. Map indicating location of WATSTORE computer terminals __ _ _________________ ____ 21

6. Schematic representation of WATSTORE files _______________________________ ____ 22

7. Example of streamflow data table as published by U.S. Geological Survey ________________ 28

8. Example of water-quality data table as published by U.S. Geological Survey__________________ 29

9. Example of ground-water-level data tables as published by U.S. Geological Survey _______________ 30

10. Example of table of annual maximum discharge at crest-stage partial-record stations as published by U.S.

Geological Survey __________________________________________________________ 32

11. Example of table of discharge measurements made at low-flow partial-record stations as published by U.S.

Geological Survey __________________________________________________________ 33

12. Examples of tables of miscellaneous water-quality analyses as published by U.S. Geological Survey ____ 34

13. Map of United States showing OWDC map numbers and Water Resources Regions______________ 36

14. Data elements in the Master Water Data Index of the National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX) __ 37

15. Data elements in the Water Data Sources Directory of NAWDEX________________________ 38

TABLES

Page

TABLE 1. Comparison of functional characteristics of DCS systems under evaluation by the U.S. Geological Survey__ 13
STANDARDIZATION OF 

HYDROLOGIC MEASUREMENTS

By George F. Smoot

ABSTRACT

The need for standardization of the methods and instruments used in measuring hydrologic data is discussed. The 

process by which standards are derived is then described. The 

ongoing standardization efforts in the United States are reported, including the activities of the Federal Interagency 

Work Group for the Designation of Standards for Water Data 

Acquisition and the activities within the American Society for 

Testing and Materials. On the international front, work being 

done by the various Technical Committees of the International Organization for Standardization, the World Meteorological Organization, and other international groups is described. Recognition of some duplication of effort is noted. The 

recommendation is made that better liaison and cooperation 

be established between the various standards-writing organizations.

INTRODUCTION

Standards are rules that specify how a thing 

should be done, just as laws are rules that specify 

how individuals should behave in society. Civilization would never have evolved without acceptance of laws and standards. As the world's population increased, so did the need for more and 

more specific laws. As technology became more 

complex, the need for more detailed and effective 

standards increased proportionately.

Concern over the quantity and quality of the 

world's water resources has deepened in recent 

times. Water in a stream in a specific locality 

knows no jurisdictional boundary, local or national. That same water may eventually move to 

any other part of the earth through the hydrologic 

cycle. Therefore, water data are needed from all 

parts of the earth to enable hydrologists to discover the quantity and quality of the earth's 

water resources on a comprehensive and continuous basis.

Hydrologists cannot validly compile water data 

that have been gathered by nonstandardized 

methods. In many cases the data on streamflow or 

quality of water are not even compatible. This 

makes it impossible to compare them in an effort 

to discern patterns or trends or to draw conclusions. Many individuals and organizations who

are concerned with water data have recognized 

the need for standardization.

A system of developing standards that is 

founded on voluntary consensus works best. No 

one element of society, whether industrial or governmental, is competent to keep pace with a 

rapidly changing technology. A standard written 

by representatives from all affected segments is 

more likely to be unbiased, authoritative, and 

utilized. In the process of formulating such a 

standard, people with diverse interests come together, resolve their differences, and make 

mutual concessions that result in the greatest 

good for the greatest number. The standard produced by such a process protects everyone's interests while seriously injuring none. The key to a 

sound standard is compromise.

Some fear standardization, taking the viewpoint that it tends to lead to uniformity, inhibit 

innovation, and generally retard progress. These 

fears are unfounded. Standards are not meant to 

be restrictive but to make the use of a particular 

method uniform so that data derived will be compatible and comparable. The hydrologist may 

choose the method that best suits the particular 

situation from the many available. Only proven 

methods and instruments should be standardized, 

and the door should be, and is, left open for new 

developments.

The fact that there is a standard method in no 

way deters hydrologists from searching for an 

even better method. For example, the only standardized and accepted method for calibrating current meters at present is by towing them through 

sensibly still water in a straight open tank at 

known velocities. The method is a good one, but 

certainly not perfect. It is time consuming and 

costly. Moreover, there is a spread in the standard 

deviation of repeated calibrations of the same 

meter which can be attributed in part to persistent thermal currents and (or) threads of circulating currents stirred up in the water by previous 

passages (Smoot and Carter, 1968).
Dimensions in meters (approx.)

Upstream stilling basin Volumetric 

measuring tank

FIGURE 1. Sketch of submerged jet calibration facility.

In an attempt to overcome some of these objections, the U.S. Geological Survey is investigating 

the feasibility of calibrating meters in a submerged jet issuing from a conelike nozzle. Test 

results of a prototype system were sufficiently encouraging to warrant further study and provided 

the design criteria for a permanent structure 

which has been constructed at the Geological 

Survey's Gulf Coast Hydroscience Center in Bay 

St. Louis, Miss. (Davidian, 1970). In this facility, 

water from a constant head tank is introduced 

into an upstream stilling basin and, after baffling, 

flows smoothly into a contracting conical section. 

The jet issuing from the conical section is submerged in a tail box, and the getaway flow is recirculated (fig. 1). The velocity field from the 

submerged jet is uniform and can be easily 

changed and quickly stabilized. At each established velocity, many meters can be successively 

placed in the jet and calibrated very quickly, with 

a consequent saving in costs.

The Geological Survey is conducting tests to determine the suitability of this method for calibrating current meters. Velocity traverses with a 

Pitot tube are being taken at the end of the cone

section to verify that the velocity field from the 

submerged jet is truly uniform. Concurrently 

with the traverses volumetric measurements of 

flow are made. Different types of current meters 

are being calibrated both in the submerged jet 

and by the straight open-tank methods, and their 

calibrations are being compared. Results to date 

certainly indicate that the submerged jet is a 

satisfactory method of calibrating current meters. 

However, not until exhaustive tests have been 

conducted and conclusive evidence accumulated 

that it is indeed a satisfactory method will it be 

accepted by the Geological Survey. Of course, the 

test results will be published; and, if they are sufficiently conclusive, the method will be accepted 

by the hydrologic community and eventually be 

standardized.

STANDARDIZATION EFFORT IN THE 

UNITED STATES

Within the United States, several groups are 

presently engaged in the preparation of standards 

for instruments and methods of water-data collection. Prior to the recent increased environmental
concern, standardization and quality control were 

looked upon largely as internal operations and 

responsibilities; that is, each organization established its own procedures. Each organization had 

established, within the organization, standards 

for methodology to be used in carrying out the 

operational mission of the organization. Examples in the Federal sector are the technique manuals of the Geological Survey and the chemical 

and biologic laboratory manuals of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

In 1970, the Office of Water Data Coordination 

of the U.S. Geological Survey impaneled a Federal Interagency Work Group for Designation of 

Standards for Water Data Acquisition. The tasks 

of the work group encompassed six areas: (1) Surface water including storage, stage, streamflow, 

and gage data; (2) chemical and physical quality 

including inorganic constituents, dissolved gases, 

temperature, conductance, pH, radiochemical 

analyses, and nutrients; (3) biologic quality and 

organic substances including coliforms, microorganisms, pesticides, detergents, and carbon; (4) 

sediment including concentration, size, and load; 

(5) ground water including storage, water level, 

discharge, lithology, and aquifer characteristics; 

and (6) automatic water-quality monitors 

(Langford and Doyel, 1974).

More than 70 scientists and engineers representing 17 Federal agencies participated in the 

activities. Their efforts resulted in the production 

in December 1972 of a report, "Recommended 

Methods for Water Data Acquisition." During 

preparation of the report, all concerned Federal 

agencies were kept informed of the progress of the 

effort through representation of the work group, 

through the Department of the Interior's Interagency Advisory Committee on Water Data, and 

through the Water Resources Council's Committee on Hydrology. Prior to publication, the report 

was subjected to rigorous review by the concerned 

Federal agencies.

It was recognized that the production of the report was only a beginning and that a continuing 

activity was needed. Therefore, the Interagency 

Advisory Committee on Water Data has recommended (1) that the activity continue, (2) that the 

scope be expanded to cover all phases of the hydrological cycle, (3) that the results of the activity 

be distributed in the form of a handbook, which 

would be updated continuously, and (4) that a 

more formal structure for continuing the activity

be developed. The activity has been continued 

with an expanded scope and a more formal structure (fig. 2). Completion of the first handbook was 

scheduled for 1976 and involved a major effort to 

keep standards consistent with those already in 

existence.

Another major effort in standardization of hydrologic instruments and methods is sponsored by 

the American Society for Testing and Materials 

(ASTM). In 1973, ASTM's Committee D-19 on 

Water, in response to a demand for more standards, methods, and recommended practices for 

flow measurement, initiated new activity in the 

areas of hydraulic sampling, velocity, and flow 

measurement. Hence, Committee D-19 is currently "concerned with the study of water, the 

promotion of knowledge thereof, and the standardization of terminology and of methods for (1) 

sampling and analysis of water, water-formed 

deposits, waterborne materials, and wastes; (2) 

surface water hydraulics and hydrological mea<- 

surements; and (3) the determination of the performance of materials used to modify water 

characteristics." 1

The technical activities of Committee D-19 are 

carried out by the following subcommittees:

D-19.01 Biological Monitoring

D-19.02 General Specification and Technical 

Resources

D-19.03 Sampling of Water and WaterFormed Deposits, and Surveillance of Water

D-19.04 Methods of Radiochemical Analysis

D-19.05 Inorganic Constituents in Water

D-19.06 Methods for Analysis for Organic 

Substances in Water

D-19.07 Methods for Testing of WaterFormed Deposits and the Properties of Water

D-19.08 Membranes and Ion Exchange 

Materials

D-19.09 Saline Water

D-19.10 Identification of Waterborne Oils 

Of particular interest here is that part of the 

expanded activity assigned to Section D-19.03.03, 

Hydraulic Sampling, Velocity and Flow Measurement, and placed under Subcommittee 

D-19.03. Section D-19.03.03 is further subdivided 

into seven task groups for the development of the 

specific standards. The task groups and their as-

'From the Introduction, 1975 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Part 31.
Interagency 

Advisory 

Committee 

on

Water Data

Coordinat

Council

for Water-Data 

Acquisition

Methods

U.S. Department

of the 

Interior

Geological Survey 

Office of Water Data Coordination

Methods 

Coordinator

Advisory

Committee on

Water Data

for 

Public Use

Ad Hoc 

Working Group

on

Recommended 

Methods

Technical Working Groups

1. Surface Water 

(Quantity)

2. Ground Water 

(Quantity)

3. Sediment

4. Quality of Water 

(Bio/Bact)

5. Quality of Water 

(Chem/Phys)

6. Soil 

Moisture

7. Basin Characteristics

8. Evaporation and 

Transpiration

9. Snow and Ice

10. Hydrometeorological 

Observations

FIGURE 2. Organizational relationships involved in the recommended methods activity.

signed subject matter are as follows:

Task Group D-19.03.03.01 Hydraulic Sampling 

and Measurement: Work in this task group 

will cover standard methods and (or) standard practices for measuring stage, pressure, 

depth, capacity, volume, and area of water 

bodies. This work will also include standards 

for position fixing, direction, and measurement of cross section.

Task Group D-19.03.03.02 Velocity Measurements: Work in this task group will involve 

standard methods and practices for measuring the velocity of water in open channels and 

closed conduits. This work will cover the 

techniques and methodologies for the various 

types of current meters (cup-type, propeller, 

deflection, optical, and pendulum), ultrasonic 

methods, dye, Pitot tubes, differential pressure, surface floats, manometers, and electromagnetic methods of velocity measure-
ments.

Task Group D-l9.03.03.03 Velocity-Area Flow 

Measurements: Work in this task group will 

cover standard methods and standard practices for measurement of flow in open channels using velocity-area techniques. Methods 

used for assessing velocity distribution, subsectioning the stream cross section, mean 

velocity measurement in subsections, and determination of total flow (discharge) will be 

covered. Methods for accommodating oblique 

flow, pulsating flow, velocity deflection, unsteady flow, and depth effects will be tested. 

Assessment of mean velocity distribution by 

various methods such as one-point, two-point, 

surface one-point, alternative one-point, and 

integration methods and the measurement 

procedures will be documented. The principles, methods, and techniques for indirect determination of flow (slope area, etc.) for flow 

measurement in tidal or backwater reaches 

and for flow measurement using new 

techniques or special devices (moving-boat 

technique, for instance) are possible considerations.

Task Group D-l9.03.03.04 Weirs, Flumes, and 

Notches: This task group will consider standard methods and standard practices for 

measurement of flow in open channels using 

various types of weirs (triangular or V-notch, 

rectangular, trapezoidal, broad crested, Cippoleti, and so forth) and various types of 

flumes (Parshall, Venturi, standing wave, 

and so forth). Installation, instrumentation, 

limitations, measurement procedures, calibration, and accuracy will be documented for 

the information of potential users.

Task Group D-19.03.03.05 Flow Measurement 

by Dilution-Tracer Methods: Work in this 

task group will involve standard methods 

and standard practices of measurement of 

flow by various dilution-tracer methods such 

as salt dilution, color dilution, radioisotope 

tracers, and radioactive-isotope dilution 

techniques. Methodology will include documentation of types of tracers, site selection, 

various methods, injection procedures, sampling, measurement of concentration, and 

computation of discharge (flow). Limitations 

on use will also be documented.

Task Group D-19.03.03.06 flow Measurements 

in Conduits: This task group will be concerned with standard methods or standard 

practices for flow measurement in conduits 

through the use of nozzles, Venturi flowmeters, orifice meters, propeller (totalizing) 

flowmeters, trajectory methods, laminar 

meters, variable area meters, turbine flowmeters, magnetic flowmeters, positive displacement meters, and ultrasonic flowmeters. 

The advantages, limitations, general operating procedures, configurations, and calibration will be documented.

Task Group D-l9.03.03.07 Definitions (including units of measurement): This task group 

will be concerned with defining terms and 

units of measurement used in the standard 

methods, and standard practices written 

under Section D-l9.03.03 which are not already defined and identified in D-l 129-72 or 

other associated standard method designations.

In 1975, Task Group D-19.03.03.06, Flow 

Measurements in Conduits, was discontinued and 

that portion of the activities of Section D-l 9.03.03 

dealing with flow in closed conduits was eliminated. The Section will confine its efforts to flow 

measurement in open channels. This action was 

taken by agreement of ASTM and the American 

Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), to 

avoid duplication of effort because of the existing 

ASME Standards Committee on Measurement of 

Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits.

Another standardization activity is that of the 

National Oceanographic Instrumentation Center 

(NOIC), which is chartered for the purpose of 

evaluating, calibrating, and standardizing oceanographic instruments. Although this activity 

is not directly involved with what is normally 

considered to be hydrology, many of the instruments used are similar to, and some identical to, 

those used by hydrologists.

INTERNATIONAL STANDARDIZATION 

EFFORT

Internationally there is a large ongoing effort 

in the preparation of standards directly or indirectly related to hydrology. Among the organizations engaged in this effort are the International 

Organization for Standardization (ISO), World 

Meteorological Organization (WMO), International Electro-Technical Commission (IEC), International Current Meter Group (ICMG), and In-
ternational Association of Scientific Hydrology 

CASH).

Three technical committees of ISO are working 

in the general area.

ISO Technical Committee 113, Measurement of 

Liquid Flow in Open Channels, is composed of the 

following six work groups:

WG1 Velocity Area Methods

WG2 Notches, Weirs, and Flumes

WG3 Glossary of Terms

WG4 Dilution Methods

WG5 Flow Measuring Instruments and

Equipment

WG6 Sediment Flow Measurements 

The work of this committee has resulted in the 

following documents:

ISO Standards

ISO 555 Dilution Methods for Measurement of 

Steady Flow-Part I, Constant Rate Injection 

Method; Part II, Integration (Sudden Injection) 

Method

ISO 748 Velocity-Area Methods 

ISO 772 Vocabulary and Symbols 

ISO 1070 Slope-Area Method 

ISO 1088 Velocity-Area Methods Collection of 

Data for Determination of Errors in Measurement

ISO 1100 Establishment and Operation of a 

Gaging Station and Determination of the StageDischarge Relation

ISO 1438 Liquid Flow Measurement in Open 

Channels using Thin-Plate Weirs and Venturi 

Flumes

ISO 2537 Cup-Type and Propeller-Type Current 

Meters 

ISO 3454 Sounding and Suspension Equipment

ISO Draft International Standards

DIS 2425 Measurement of Flow in Tidal Channels

DIS 3455 Calibration of Current Meters in 

Straight Open Tanks

DIS 3716 Requirements and Characteristics of 

Suspended Sediment Load Samples 

DIS 3846 Free Overfall Weirs of Finite Width 

(Rectangular Broad-Crested Weirs) 

DIS 3847 End-Depth Method for Estimation of 

Flow in Rectangular Channels with a Free Overfall 

DIS Triangular Profile Weirs

DIS Cableway System 

DIS Water Level Measuring Equipment 

DIS Method of Measurement of Suspended Sediment

DIS Uncertainty in a Single Measurement of 

Discharge (Joint document with ISO/TC30)

Standards in Preparation

In addition to the above, there are approximately 20 documents in various stages of completion on measurement of flow in open channels.

ISO Technical Committee 147, Water Quality, 

is composed of six subcommittees dealing with all 

aspects of water quality. TC 147 is a relatively 

new committee and has only recently begun preparation of documents. They do not, as yet, have 

any published standards.

ISO Technical Committee 30, Measurement of 

Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits, is a very active 

committee. Although their work is not directly in 

the field of hydrology, several areas are very 

closely related. Their work in measurement of 

flow by dilution methods, glossary of terms, current meters and their calibration, and several 

other instruments is similar to that being done by 

ISO/TC113.

One of the purposes of the WMO, as laid down 

in the Convention, is to promote the standardization of meteorological observations and to ensure 

the uniform publication of observations and 

statistics. With this aim in mind, the World 

Meteorological Congress has adopted from time to 

time Technical Regulations .which lay down the 

meteorological practices and procedures to be followed by the member countries of the organization. These Technical Regulations are supplemented by a number of Guides, which describe in 

more detail the practices, procedures, and specifications which members are invited to follow or 

implement in establishing and conducting their 

arrangements for compliance with the Technical 

Regulations (World Meteorological Organization, 

1970).

WMO is now preparing its 3d edition of the 

"Guide to Hydrometeorological Practices." For 

the purposes of the guide, hydrometeorology is 

defined as: "hydrometeorology is concerned with 

the study of the atmospheric and land phases of 

the hydrological cycle, with emphasis on the interrelationships involved." The guide is concerned with the following elements of the hydro-
logical cycle:

1. Precipitation (including dew)

2. Snow cover characteristics

3. Water levels of lakes and streams

4. Streamflow and storage

5. Evaporation and evapotranspiration

6. Soil moisture and groundwater

7. River and lake ice

8. Frost in the ground

9. Water temperature

10. Chemical quality of water

11. Sediment discharge

12. Radiation

13. Air temperature

14. Humidity

15. Wind

Both the IEC/TC4 and Hydraulic Turbines and 

the ICMG are concerned with current meters and 

their calibration and carry on some activities in 

this area. Additionally, the Hydrometry Committee of IASH publishes state-of-the-art reports 

covering a multitude of hydrometric equipment.

SUMMARY

There is no doubt that standardized methods of

hydrologic measurement are needed, for without 

such methods data collected by different individuals or agencies cannot be compared. The validity of much valuable data which was not only 

costly and time consuming to acquire but irreplaceable in many instances would be questionable. There is no evidence to support the fear of 

some that standards retard the development of 

better methods by inhibiting innovation.

That the most effective standards are those 

which have been developed through the cooperative efforts of all concerned sectors is indisputable. However, this method is not without its 

drawbacks. This process is a slow and arduous one 

and frequently the instrument or method is approaching obsolescence before the standard is 

completed.

The size of the standardization effort, both on 

the national scene and on the international scene, 

appears to be adequate. As a matter of fact, one 

criticism is that there is a duplication of effort. 

Many of us frequently find ourselves preparing 

documents on the same subject for two or more 

organizations. There very definitely needs to be 

better liaison and cooperation between the various standards-writing organizations.
USE OF EARTH SATELLITES

FOR AUTOAAATION OF 

HYDROLOGIC DATA COLLECTION

By Richard W. Paulson

ABSTRACT

The U.S. Geological Survey is evaluating a recently developed earth-satellite technology that is expected to provide a 

cost-effective technique for the automatic collection of data 

from hydrologic stations. These data include water stage, 

water quality, precipitation, and snow depth. The technology, 

which is referred to as satellite Data Collection Systems 

(DCS), provides an opportunity to collect data from inexpensive battery-operated radios located at literally tens of 

thousands of hydrologic stations distributed over national or 

continental areas. The U.S. Geological Survey is evaluating 

the Data Collection Systems on three series of earth satellites 

to forecast the costs and benefits of using earth-satellite technology for a national operational system for the automatic 

collection of hydrologic data.

INTRODUCTION

During the last decade, worldwide communications using earth-orbiting satellites have become 

a cost-effective reality. Almost a hundred countries presently are members of the International 

Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT), which provides telecommunications 

via satellite between many national capitals and 

major cities in the world. During the last several 

years a new application for satellite communication has been experimentally demonstrated. 

Using inexpensive battery-operated radios as the 

communication link to the satellite, environmental data have been collected in realtime via satellite from remotely located environmental sensors. 

Experiments have been performed to collect 

geologic data on seismic activity and land surface 

tilt and hydrologic data on water stage, water 

quality, precipitation, and snow depth. There is 

great potential for using this technology to automate the collection of hydrologic data.

The U.S. Geological Survey operates a network 

of hydrologic sensors that automatically record 

the data on site. These data routinely are manually retrieved at intervals of 4 to 6 weeks, are 

manually preprocessed, and are entered into the 

Geological Survey's national telecomputing network. This network, which includes a computer 

center at the Survey's National Center in Reston, 

Va., and computer terminals across the United 

States, is used to perform most of the Survey's 

basic hydrologic data processing and hydrologic 

analysis. Thus the Geological Survey operates a 

system of automatic hydrologic data recording 

stations, and a system of automatic data processing, but the two systems are linked by an operational procedure that requires a great deal of 

manual labor, which is becoming increasingly expensive. The satellite technology discussed herein 

offers an opportunity to link the two systems into 

a realtime system for automatic collection and 

processing of hydrologic data. Moreover, the total 

system would provide an opportunity for hydrologic organizations to have realtime hydrologic 

data available for forecasting and management. 

This paper discusses recent experimental integrations of satellite Data Collection Systems 

(DCS) with the Geological Survey's networks of 

hydrologic sensors and computers, and discusses 

the potential for automatic data collection and 

processing.

SATELLITE DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS

A satellite Data Collection System is a telemetry system that uses an earth-orbiting satellite 

to relay data from a very large number of widely 

distributed transmitting stations to one or a few 

receiving stations. There are three basic elements 

of any DCS, as shown in figure 3. The first is a 

field radio, usually called a Data Collection Platform (DCP), which could be connected to a hydrologic sensing device such as a precipitation or 

water-stage recorder. The second element is a 

radio transponder (receiver and transmitter) on 

an earth-orbiting satellite that can receive data 

from a large number of DCP's. The third element 

is the earth receiving station where data are retrieved from the satellites and disseminated to

8
(3) 

RECEIVING 

SITE

DATA 

DISTRIBUTION

UA 1 A to!f%W,

COLLECTION 

PLATFORM 

(not in range)i||r

FIGURE 3. Basic elements of a Satellite Data Collection System: (1) Remote site sensor and Data Collection Platform, 

(2) satellite transponder, and (3) data receiving sites and 

distribution system.

users. A satellite DCS can be configured in 

numerous ways which affect the cost, versatility, 

and ease of operation of the total system. Two 

major U.S. Government satellite DCS's are presently available for use in North America, and a 

third commercial-type system will be demonstrated in 1978. The existing U.S. Government 

systems are aboard the LANDSAT satellite series 

and the Synchronous Meteorological Satellite/ 

Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (SMS/GOES) series. The commercial-type 

system, to be demonstrated in 1977, is being designed by the COMSAT General Corporation. The 

following descriptions of the functional characteristics of these systems demonstrate three of 

many alternative systems designs that are 

possible.

LANDSAT DCS

The first of the U.S. Government's LANDSAT 

satellite series, formerly known as the Earth Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS) series, was 

launched in July 1972. The experimental 

LANDSAT-1 DCS provided the first large-scale 

field introduction of this technology to agencies 

responsible for environmental monitoring.

Many LANDSAT-DCS characteristics are controlled by the satellite's orbit. The satellite is in a 

near-polar orbit and, at an altitude of approximately 890 km (kilometers), makes one complete 

orbit of the earth e,very 103 min (minutes). The 

orbit periodically carries the satellite from the 

North Polar region down over the daylight side of 

the earth, crossing the equator at an angle of 99°,

FIGURE 4. Satellite communications occur only when a data 

collection platform and data receiving site are mutually visible from the satellite.

to the South Polar region, then up over the dark 

side of the earth to the vicinity of the North Pole. 

The relationship of the satellite's orbital plane to 

the centers of the sun and the earth remains constant while the earth rotates beneath the satellite. When the next orbital transit is made, the 

earth will have rotated on its axis about 25° under 

the satellite's orbital plane, and the path of the 

satellite is displaced to the west (of the previous 

orbit), crossing the equator about 2,900 km to the 

west of the previous orbit. At higher latitudes the 

distance between orbital transits is smaller.

The LANDSAT DCP is a small batteryoperated radio that is designed to transmit 64 bits 

of earth-resources data plus station identification. 

This transmission lasts 38 ms (milliseconds) and 

is emitted from the DCP antenna once every approximately 180 s (seconds).

The antenna emits the radio transmission to a 

140° cone above the antenna plane. At any instant the satellite is capable of receiving data 

from LANDSAT DCP's that are within radio 

range, which is approximately 2,000 km from the 

point on the earth's surface below the satellite. If 

both a DCP and a receiving station are within 

radio range of the satellite, and the DCP transmits a message, it is instantaneously relayed to 

the receiving station as shown in figure 4. DCS 

experiments in North America have shown that 

the typical DCP transmits data during two and 

occasionally three orbits to the receiving stations 

in Maryland and California during the daylight 

transits of the satellite. Two or three orbits also
are used to relay data during the night transits of 

the satellite.

The modest power requirements of the DCP 

permit it to be powered by solar panels, or a series 

of low-cost disposable dry-cell batteries. Four 6-v 

(volt) dry-cell batteries have been used to power a 

DCP for periods of as much as 6 months. The average power drain is approximately 50 mW (milliwatts).

The LANDSAT DCS is a random-access system 

with one radio frequency channel. This means the 

times of a DCP's transmissions are completely independent of the times of transmissions of other 

DCP's and mutual interference from two or more 

DCP's is expected to occur at a random but predictable rate. In the event of mutual interference 

of the transmissions, no data are relayed by the 

system. Stochastic models are available to predict 

the probability of successfully relaying data 

through a random-access system. For the LANDSAT DCS there is a 95 percent probability that 

one transmission per DCP will be successfully relayed every 12 h (hours) for a network of 1,000 

DCP's. The probability of successfully relaying a 

transmission through a random-access system is 

affected by the number of DCP's in the system, 

the radio frequency bandwidth, the data coding 

convention, the orbital characteristics of the 

satellite, and other system characteristics. The 

communications parameters, and the stochastic 

models required to predict the performance of this 

type of system, are well known to the communications engineering community.

In summary, a brief data transmission, known 

as a data burst, is emitted once every 180 s continually around the clock, regardless of whether 

the satellite is within radio range. During several 

orbits each day the satellite passes within range 

of the DCP, receives one or more data bursts, and 

relays the data immediately to a receiving station, if it is in range. For most locations in North 

America the satellite is within range of that location and a receiving station only about 2 to 3 percent of the 24-h day.

It is significant that technicians can easily install and operate the DCP's with a minimum of 

training. The random-access LANDSAT DCS 

permits the field technician to turn on the DCP 

after installation, with no requirement for knowing the time of satellite transit nor the precise 

time of transmissions of any other DCP's in the 

network

SYNCHRONOUS METEOROLOGICAL

SATELLITE/GEOSTATIONARY

OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

SATELLITE (SMS/GOES)

The first satellite of the U.S. Government's 

SMS/GOES-DCS series was launched in May 

1974. It was the first of a multisatellite system 

that is programmed for operation in the last half 

of the 1970's. In contrast to the experimental 

random-access LANDSAT DCS, the SMS/ 

GOES-DCS is operational and uses 150 radio frequency channels for communication as opposed to 

the single channel employed by LANDSAT. The 

SMS/GOES-DCS operates in a time-ordered or 

interrogate mode.

In a time-ordered mode of operation, to which 

50 SMS/GOES channels are dedicated, a DCP is 

assigned a frequency channel and time interval 

for transmission. A precision timer in the DCP is 

set to initiate a transmission during a predetermined time interval, for example, during a 2-min 

period once every 6 h on a particular channel. If 

the system is well managed, no other DCP will 

transmit during that time on that channel, and 

communications can be established. The communications rate of the SMS/GOES-DCP is much 

slower than the LANDSAT DCP, and the nominal 

transmission period for a self-timed DCP is in the 

range of 10 to 20 s. The DCP precision timer, 

which generally is designed to be accurate to 1 

part in 106 , is designed to permit a drift of no more 

than approximately 30 s per year in the time of 

message initiation. Thus, if self-timed DCP's are 

assigned 2-min reporting intervals and broadcast 

in the central point of their time interval, they 

should continue to operate with no mutual interference for at least 1 year. The SMS/GOES-DCS 

capacity of 50 self-timed channels, with DCP's reporting every 3 h with a 2-min reporting interval, 

totals 4,500 DCPs per satellite.

In the interrogate mode of operation, to which 

100 channels are dedicated, a DCP is interrogated 

through the satellite from the data receiving station. Under command from the receiving station, 

the satellite initiates a request for a DCP with the 

specified ID (identification number) to reply on a 

preprogrammed channel. Upon recognizing its ID 

the DCP transmits its data. Under this mode of 

operation, the receiving station maintains control 

of the DCP's, causing them to adhere to the receiving station's schedule. In times of emergency,

10
or if communications have failed for some reason, 

the receiving station can reschedule interrogation 

and attempt to initiate communications under a 

new schedule.

The SMS/GOES-DCS can initiate interrogation 

commands at a rate of two interrogations per second per satellite. At that rate 21,600 interrogations can be initiated in a 2-h period. That would 

permit up to 216 replies per channel per 3-h 

period, if each reply averaged 50 s per transmission. Although the actual system for managing 

150 channels of the SMS/GOES-DCS is presently 

evolving, it is obvious that the system is capable 

of handling a large number of DCP's.

COMMERCIAL SATELLITE DCS

The COMSAT General Corporation will conduct a demonstration of a satellite DCS service for 

the U.S. Geological Survey in 1977 using, for this 

demonstration, an existing Telesat of Canada 

ANIK geostationary communication satellite. 

The commercial-type demonstration system will 

use a small part of one transponder on a commercial communication satellite, which normally has 

12 communications transponders, each of which 

could carry data from several hundred thousand 

DCP's. The other transponder will continue to 

carry high volume commercial telecommunication traffic from and to major population centers. 

The demonstration is intended to show that the 

use of existing commercial satellites operating at 

the 4,000 and 6,000 MHz (megahertz) bands is 

technically viable, and that it is possible to share 

the use of the satellite on a noninterference basis 

with other commercial users. The economic viability of any satellite system depends heavily 

upon maximizing multiple usage of the expensive 

space segment to minimize unit utilization cost of 

the satellite for all users.

The characteristics of the commercial-type DCS 

system include some of the best characteristics of 

the LANDSAT and SMS/GOES systems. All of 

the DCP's in the commercial-type system will be 

operated in the random-access self-timed mode 

analogous to the LANDSAT system; however, use 

is made of a geostationary satellite, which means 

mutual visibility for a large geographic area is 

maintained. The DCP's are programmed to 

transmit as frequently as every 15 min, although 

some will operate at transmit intervals of 30 to 60 

min. The DCP's will transmit at a frequency between 5,925 and 6,425 MHz, and the duration of

message transmission will be about 150 ms. Each 

DCP message will transmit up to 64 bits of sensor 

data although the expansion to a larger data message is possible. In the demonstration, which will 

include the field testing of only about 15 DCP's in 

Virginia, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, the probability of mutual interference is small, and each 

DCP will transmit its message once at its assigned time. In an operational system each message would be transmitted two or more times to 

decrease the probability of unsuccessful relay of 

the data because of mutual interference. The DCP 

capacity of one transponder on a communications 

satellite is forecast by COMSAT General to be 

greater than 300,000 depending on the temporal 

reporting schedule of the DCFs.

Finally, in an operational commercial system 

the users could lease the DCS service from the 

commercial vendor, who would be responsible for 

procuring, installing, maintaining, and repairing 

all communications equipment, including the 

DCP. This can free the user groups from maintaining duplicate staffs of communication professionals required to perform these tasks, as they 

presently do with the government system.

COMPARISON OF LANDSAT DCS, 

SMS/GOES-DCS AND COMMERCIAL DCS

A comparison of the three systems shows the 

merits of several DCS design alternatives. The 

interrogate mode of operation provides great system control and flexibility, but increases the cost 

and complexity of the DCP because an interrogate 

DCP includes a receiver, which must be powered 

at all times. The capital expense and power requirements can be significant considerations for 

large numbers of remote site installations. The 

self-timed DCP operating in a time-ordered mode 

requires an expensive precision timer. Moreover, 

great care must be exercised in initiating the 

timer when the DCP is installed and maintained. 

A self-timed DCP, when operating in the 

random-access mode, does not require a receiver 

or a precision timer. To the contrary, the 

random-access mode is best served by an inexpensive inaccurate timer to insure temporal randomness in the transmissions of the DCP. An additional bonus to the random-access DCP is that no 

care is required in initiating the DCP.

A further comparison of the three satellite systems shows the tradeoffs that occur with the orbital characteristics of the satellite. A geostation11
ary satellite has one obvious advantage over a 

single, or series of, polar orbiting satellites, the 

former is always in view of a specified geographic 

area. The alternative merits of a low-altitude orbiting satellite are that its launch cost is significantly less, and that it does have potential for 

global coverage. A LANDSAT-type satellite 

passes within DCS radio range of all inhabited 

parts of the earth at least twice daily, while the 

geostationary satellite is fixed relative to one 

geographical area.

It is possible for data to be retrieved from the 

satellites at numerous earth receiving stations, 

each serving a particular regional operational or 

research purpose. Although one receiving station 

must manage the schedule of interrogation for interrogate DCP's, data from all three types of systems (interrogate, time-ordered, and randomaccess) can be received by passive earth receiving 

stations. Each receiving site could acquire all 

DCP transmissions, but would further process 

only data from DCP's in the region for which the 

receive site is responsible. The tracking of a geostationary satellite by a receiving station is significantly easier than the tracking of a polarorbiting satellite, since a fixed antenna can be 

used.

The LANDSAT and SMS/GOES series are multipurpose government satellites. Other data systems on the LANDSAT satellites are imaging 

systems that produce multispectral scenes of most 

areas of the earth's surface. The imaging systems 

provide data on scenes that are 185 by 185 km in 

area, and can provide the data on any land mass 

of the earth's surface between 81° north and south 

latitude, on an 18-day repeat cycle. Image data 

are being gathered from both operating LANDSAT satellites. The primary data system of the 

SMS/GOES satellite is an imaging system that 

gathers visible and thermal infrared data on the 

cloud cover on the surface of the earth that is 

visible to the satellite. The imagery can be collected as frequently as every 15 min.

The DCS's in the LANDSAT and SMS/GOES 

series are part of multiuse satellite missions. As a 

result, many of the satellites' characteristics are 

optimized for operating the imaging systems as 

well as the DCS systems. Feasibility studies have 

shown that purely DCS satellites do not require 

many of the stringent altitude and orbital control 

features that are required for satellites that collect imagery.

The commercial communication satellite that is 

used for the DCS application is also a multiuse 

satellite, in the sense that other transponders on 

the satellite are used for high-volume point-topoint telecommunications. One disadvantage to 

the high-frequency channel used on the commercial satellite is that the path from the DCP antenna to the satellite must be reasonably free of 

any obstruction, which is less the case for the 

LANDSAT and SMS/GOES systems. Moreover, 

great care must be exercised in positioning the 

azimuth and elevation angles of the antenna, 

which is not the case with other systems. The 

LANDSAT DCP omnidirectional antenna must 

be positioned generally in the horizontal orientation while the SMS/GOES DCP antenna must be 

pointed within 10° to 15° of the satellite position. 

The commercial DCP antenna must be pointed to 

within approximately 0.5° of the satellite's position. However, this is only an initial setup requirement and should pose no operational difficulty.

Table 1 is a summary of most of the important 

functional characteristics of the three systems 

discussed above.

STATUS OF LANDSAT, SMS/GOES, 

AND COMMERCIAL SATELLITES

Two LANDSAT satellites presently are in orbit. LANDSAT-1, which was launched in July 

1972, is no longer transmitting DCS data. The 

fully redundant DCS, after successfully operating 

for 2^ years, has been turned off and is an inorbit spare. LANDSAT-2 was launched in 

January 1975 and is providing effective DCS 

communications.

Three SMS/GOES satellites are presently in 

orbit. SMS-1 was launched in May 1974. After a 

brief period of operation, the interrogate mode of 

DCS communications failed. Although the satellite's communication equipment was designed to 

be fully redundant, the total interrogate system 

failed. The self-timed system has worked well, 

but, because of other failures in the satellite, the 

prospect of long-term continued operation is in 

doubt. SMS-2 was launched in January 1975 and 

all systems of the satellite are performing well. 

GOES-1 was launched in the fall of 1975, and also 

is functioning well.

A third LANDSAT satellite is programed for 

launch in 1977 or 1978. Fourth and fifth SMS/

12
TABLE 1. Comparison of functional characteristics of DCS systems under evaluation by the U.S. Geological Survey

Name

Tvnp

Satellite altitude

DCP capacity per

DCP type

DCP reporting

DCP radio frequency ____

LANDSAT

experimental

"W^Ql* fkftlsil*

900km

1,000

serial digital, 

analog 

401.55 MHz

SMS/GOES

operational

38,000 km

Multiple satellites

20,000

per 3-6 hours (self-timed)

digital, analog 

401.7 to 402 MHz

accuracy required

COMSAT General

demonstration

38,000 km

multiple satellites 

300,000

5,925 to 6,425 MHz 

Directional, 0.5° pointing

accuracy required

1Depends on DCP manufacturer.

GOES satellites are being constructed. The operational plan for the SMS/GOES satellite series includes two operational satellites at 75° to 135° 

west longitude, and an in-orbit spare, which will 

be activated upon failure of one of the operational 

satellites.

There is a growing population of domestic 

communications satellites that can be used for a 

commercial communications service.

From the end of 1974, when 24 transponders 

were in orbit on U.S. domestic commercial satellites, to the end of 1977, when 148 transponders 

are forecast to be available, the capacity will grow 

by a factor of six. If the use of the commercial 

satellite is successful, the technology can be used 

on any domestic satellite operating in the 6,000 

MHz uplink frequency.

HYDROLOGIC DATA PROCESSING

The Data Collection Systems described above 

may provide a potentially cost-effective and 

timely technique for retrieving hydrologic data 

from thousands of stations and providing them to 

a central data processing facility. The data being 

collected experimentally with these systems are 

being processed at the Geological Survey's central 

computer facility at the National Center in Reston, Va.

The Geological Survey's national telecomputing network consists of two 370/155 computers in 

Reston and a network of over 180 remote computer terminals across the United States. The 

terminals are located in district, regional, and 

project offices of the Survey. A modest but increasing number of these terminals are being acquired by other agencies to enable them to directly acquire hydrologic data from the Survey's 

WATSTORE (National Water Data Storage and 

Retrieval) system. The WATSTORE system is a 

collection of computer programs and files that are 

used by the Survey to process virtually all the 

water-resources data that the Survey collects. 

One of the tasks being undertaken in the Survey's 

testing of the satellite DCS's is the experimental 

use of the WATSTORE system for processing and 

filing the satellite-relayed data.

All DCS data relayed through the LANDSAT 

system are routinely sent in realtime to the 

LANDSAT Operation Control Center in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

(NASA) Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. Under a NASA-U.S. Geological Survey 

agreement these data also are sent in realtime via 

a dedicated line to Reston where they are recorded on a 9-track magnetic ..tape recorder. 

Periodically these data are transferred to an online disk file in the Reston computer center, 

where programs are available to retrieve, process, 

and disseminate the data over the remote terminal network.

All DCS data relayed through the SMS/GOES 

system are routinely received by a National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/

13
National Environmental Satellite Service 

(NOAA/NESS) tracking station at Wallops Island, Va., and sent in realtime to the NO A A 

World Weather Building in Suitland, Md. These 

data are filed in a NOAA/NESS minicomputer. 

Under a NESS-Geological Survey agreement this 

minicomputer, one or more times a day, will sign 

on to the Reston computer and will enter a computer job containing all of the Survey's DCS data 

that have been accumulated since the last time of 

data entry. These data then are processed and 

placed in an online file in the computer for retrieval.

The DCS data to be relayed through the commercial COMSAT General system will be accumulated at the COMSAT General earth station 

in Southbury, Conn. At regular intervals, the 

DCS data will be automatically transferred from 

a COMSAT General computer to the Reston computer, where they will be filed on an online disk 

file. In addition, the two Geological Survey district offices in Harrisburg, Pa., and Portland, 

Ore., using their Reston computer-compatible 

terminals, may connect to the COMSAT computer 

to directly retrieve unprocessed realtime data.

All the satellite-relayed hydrologic data are 

being made available on online disk files at the 

Reston computer. The data from the files can be 

retrieved using remote terminal-entered jobs that 

cause the retrieved data to be processed using 

programs and files of the existing WATSTORE 

system. Integrating the DCS data with the 

WATSTORE system provides the user with a 

powerful set of existing programs, and also provides the data to remote terminal users in a familiar format.

CONCLUSION

The Geological Survey operates a network of

hydrologic stations across the United States that 

include thousands of continuously operating hydrologic sensors. These data on water quantity 

and quality are operationally retrieved using a 

manual technique based upon frequent visits to 

the stations by hydrologic technicians and engineers. Using a system of computer terminals 

the data are routinely entered into the Reston 

computer where they are processed and filed 

using the WATSTORE system. Satellite Data 

Collection Systems offer a potentially costeffective system for making the field instrument 

data available to its WATSTORE system in realtime.

The automatic collection of data in realtime offers two benefits to the Geological Survey and to 

the water-resources management community. 

The first benefit is that the realtime-processed 

hydrologic data can be used by the Survey to 

monitor the performance of its hydrologic instrument network. Instead of routinely visiting the 

stations on a fixed-time schedule, it may be possible to visit the stations only when instruments 

fail or hydrologic conditions warrant the collection of supplementary data; that is, when water 

quality or discharge are outside the normal 

range. The second benefit is that the Survey can 

offer a realtime data service to the waterresources managment community. Growing pressure of municipal and industrial use, and concern 

for environmental protection, are generating a 

need for realtime data for more effective waterresources management.

Satellite DCS's offer the opportunity to automatically collect hydrologic data. It is likely 

that the increasing cost of manpower, the decreasing cost of electronics, and the cost-effectiveness 

of satellite telemetry will result in eventual automation of the collection of hydrologic data.

14
OPERATIONAL HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL

DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM

FOR THE COLUMBIA RIVER

By Nicholas A. Kallio

ABSTRACT

The Columbia River is a valuable source of energy and 

water supply to the Northwest region of the United States and 

the Southwest region of Canada. Operation of its complex 

water-management system requires reliable and timely information on the amount of water received by, flowing 

through, and stored in all parts of the basin. To provide this 

information, an interagency hydrometeorological date collec-. 

tion system is being developed, utilizing latest telemetry and 

processing devices. The experience gained in developing this 

system may be helpful to planners of other similar systems. 

Pertinent considerations are: (1) A telemetry system should be 

chosen with care so as to avoid early obsolescence and costly 

maintenance. Satellite and meteor-burst systems seem to 

have greatest potential. (2) Data verification is very important 

in a realtime system. (3) The cost of operating a realtime system is dependent on data-accuracy requirements, but generally will be more than operation for collection of historical 

records.

INTRODUCTION

The Columbia River Operational Hydromet 

Management System (CROHMS) is a comprehensive hydrometeorological data collection-anddata-management system designed and operated 

cooperatively by several governmental agencies 

in the Pacific Northwest region of the United 

States. This system, when fully implemented, will 

automatically provide realtime data on streamflow, storage, weather, and snow accumulation as 

needed for forecasting and management of waters 

in the Columbia River basin.

The Columbia River basin covers 102,300 km2 

in British Columbia and 565,900 km2 in the 

United States, encompassing all of Idaho, most of 

Oregon and Washington, and parts of Montana, 

Wyoming, and Nevada. The river drains mostly 

rugged mountain areas where altitudes range to 

higher than 4,000 m (meters) and precipitation 

ranges from 150 to more than 4,000 mm (millimeters) per year. The precipitation varies seasonally and orographically and in the higher elevations occurs mostly as snow during the wet

winter months. Accumulation of water as snow 

during the wet season serves as natural storage 

and carryover to the dry summer months, but 

presents a serious flood hazard when the accumulation is heavy and weather conditions produce a 

fast rate of melt.

The objective of water managers, of course, is to 

capture as much water as possible in available 

impoundments during the wet season, yet allow 

storage space to control floods. This presents a 

challenging task in snow-storage areas where the 

major part of the runoff occurs over a short period 

in the spring. Effective water control requires 

judicious forecasting of the amount and potential 

rate of snowmelt runoff and delicate coordination 

of reservoir operation by several organizations.

The water-control system of the Columbia 

River basin includes nearly 80 major reservoir 

projects, integrated hydraulically or electrically 

for joint operation by public and private organizations in the United States and Canada. The 

system is designed for multipurpose benefits; 

primarily electric power, flood control, irrigation, 

recreation, and navigation. Of the major projects, 

29 are U.S. Army Corps of Engineers multipurpose reservoirs, 20 are U.S. Bureau of Reclamation multipurpose reservoirs, 23 are non-Federal 

multipurpose or hydroelectric reservoirs, and 5 

are Canadian multipurpose or hydroelectric reservoirs. The basin is nearly fully developed for 

water regulation, and the 20.9 million kW 

(kilowatts) of installed hydroelectric capacity 

(27.8 million in the next few years) represents the 

most highly developed hydropower resource of 

any major river basin in the world. Reportedly, 

annual benefits attributable to this development 

average in excess of $100 million from prevention 

of flood damage and $600 million from irrigated 

crops (Columbia River Water Management Reports, 1973-75). Revenues from power sales in 

1974 exceeded $900 million (Statistical Year 

Book, 1974, Edison Electric Institute).

15
Management of water by several organizations 

with different interests and responsibilities requires utmost cooperation and coordination. Although the reservoirs in the United States are 

operated by several organizations, the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers has primary responsibility for 

flood control and navigation, Bonneville Power 

Administration for power scheduling, and the 

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for irrigation. These 

three agencies carry out their responsibilities in 

coordination and cooperation with their Canadian 

counterparts (United States-Canadian Treaty 

agreements) as well as with various United 

States public and private water-management organizations.

Operation of this complex water-control system 

is accomplished with the aid of computerized subsystems for forecasting runoff, optimizing reservoir storage, and scheduling power generation. 

The success of the whole operation is totally dependent on timely and reliable hydrometeorological data.

PRESENT STATUS OF CROHMS

Although agency missions vary, there is in 

common the need for hydrometeorological data 

and runoff forecasting. This mutual need was recognized years ago; hence, the development of data 

collection, communication, and forecasting systems has been a cooperative achievement among 

data collection as well as water management 

agencies. A Columbia River Teletype network, 

operated by the Corps of Engineers, serves as the 

main communication link among many agency 

offices and projects, and a microwave system, installed by Bonneville Power Administration, aids 

in power scheduling and data communication.

CROHMS provides the data collection and 

data-handling functions for the agency missions. 

The system is by no means complete, but the 

course of its past and future development has 

been well planned to serve the needs of all participant agencies. Telemetry devices for obtaining 

timely information from data collection stations 

have been installed by individual agencies at 

more than 200 data stations, about 100 of which 

are designed for automatic polling at hourly, or 

more frequent, intervals. Choice of telemetry instrumentation is entirely the option of individual 

agencies, but is being coordinated by an interagency group to ensure compatibility with future 

CROHMS development. Data are presently processed by individual agencies and then made 

available to others by way of the Columbia Basin 

Teletype and other Teletype networks. As 

explained in the following section, it is planned 

that CROHMS will include a central facility 

where all data will be processed and stored for 

interagency use.

A Columbia River forecasting service is operated cooperatively through resources of National 

Weather Service, Corps of Engineers, and Bonneville Power Administration. National Weather 

Service prepares and releases the forecasts for 

private as well as government use. Soil Conservation Service and other agencies collect snow data 

for use in snowmelt forecasting by the Columbia 

River Forecast Service.

The U.S. Geological Survey provides rivergaging facilities, some telemetry services, and 

current stage-discharge ratings for converting 

stage data to discharge. These ratings are distributed to all offices that receive current stage 

data and need to convert them to discharge. In 

addition, the Geological Survey provides a dataprocessing service for computing daily discharges 

and reservoir contents for a large number of 

current-reporting stations and for releasing those 

data by weekly, monthly, and annual reports to 

public and private water-data users.

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF CROHMS

The goals in the development of CROHMS are 

not only to provide necessary water data as 

needed, but also to (1) prevent unnecessary duplication of work and services, (2) provide maximum 

utility and uniformity in collection and use of 

water data, (3) ensure the highest degree of reliability at a minimum cost, and (4) gain the 

economies of multiple use of existing and proposed facilities consistent with individual agency 

responsibilities. Eight agencies (U.S. Corps of 

Engineers, Bonneville Power Administration, 

U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, National Weather Service, U.S. Forest Service, Environmental Protection Agency, and the 

Washington State Department of Natural Resources) signed a Memorandum of Understanding 

committing their efforts to the achievement of the 

above goal. Soil Conservation Service and 

perhaps other Federal and State agencies, although presently not signatories to the Memorandum, plan to intertie with CROHMS for 

mutual benefit.

16
The design objectives of CROHMS are:

1. To instrument hydrometeorological data collection stations whereby data will be automatically transmitted to a central station 

at desired intervals without manual intervention. Nearly 100 data stations are now 

instrumented for automatic operation, and it 

is planned that more than 400 additional 

stations will be automated. Field stations 

are automated by individual agencies, based 

on their needs for realtime data.

2. To install a central facility for polling, processing, verifying and storing hydrometeorological data. The Corps of Engineers is in the 

process of acquiring a computer system dedicated to serve this function. All agencies are 

invited to participate in the use of the central facility for their data-processing and 

storage needs. This facility will eliminate 

the need for each agency to own and operate 

polling, processing, and storage facilities, 

and will output processed data through terminals in various formats suitable to individual agency needs.

3. To provide for online and periodic streamflow 

evaluations and simulations as required for 

hour-to-hour and day-to-day forecasting, for 

reservoir regulation, and for power scheduling in accordance with individual agency responsibilities. This will be accomplished 

either by built-in capability of the central 

facility, or by intertie with agency computers.

FUTURE OPERATION OF CROHMS

It is the responsibility of individual agencies to 

install, operate, and maintain field instrumentation. The central facility will be maintained by 

the Corps of Engineers and operated jointly by the 

participating agencies as appropriate to their 

function and expertise. For example, by interactive terminals the Geological Survey will direct 

the processing and verification of streamflow and 

storage data, and National Weather Service will 

perform a similar function for weather data. Various flow simulations will be conducted online or 

periodically by agencies to serve their individual 

or joint needs.

GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHING 

A REALTIME SYSTEM

The remaining part of this paper presents the

writer's views on pertinent factors involved in 

planning, designing, implementing, and operating a realtime, hydrometeorological data collection network. These views are based on experience gained in observing the development of 

CROHMS, and are limited mostly to collection of 

realtime streamflow records.

The develoment of a network as an interagency 

activity, as with CROHMS, is slow and seemingly 

inefficient because of differences in agency needs, 

policies, and priorities. However, planning and 

development must be conducted in a deliberate 

manner in order to meet the data needs of all 

agencies, to avoid duplication of services and 

facilities, and to comply with agency missions and 

constraints. CROHMS development is directed by 

an interagency group (Columbia River Water 

Management Group) and by committees thereof. 

Although slow and deliberate, development has 

kept pace with the evolution of telemetry and 

computer processing techniques. CROHMS has 

been a pioneering effort, and the development of 

similar interagency systems in the future may 

well benefit from CROHMS experience. Following 

are considerations that may be helpful in implementing similar systems:

PLANNING AND DESIGNING AN 

AUTOMATED DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM

Determine the optimum size of the system 

(number of stations, functions, and so forth) based 

on data and processing needs, and the costeffectiveness to each participant organization. 

From the standpoint of conceptual design, it 

would be desirable to project these needs far into 

the future, approaching a conception of the ultimate system. From the standpoint of material design, however, it may not be economical to design 

beyond about ten years because of rapid improvements in the art of data communications 

and processing.

Experienced leadership during initial planning 

would be very helpful, and expert help in the design of the system is essential. Leadership in interagency coordination and planning would most 

appropriately be supplied from within the participant agencies. Commercial assistance in design is available from private firms that specialize 

in this type of service. If a specialist is hired to 

perform the material design, his task should be 

well specified and all information necessary to 

perform the task should be known and prepared

17
in advance. Individuals from the private sector 

usually are not familiar with agency data needs 

and functions, therefore could not be expected to 

advise on data-acquisition rates, processing requirements, duration of data storage, output formats, etc. This information should be provided as 

input to the design task.

TELEMETRY INSTRUMENTATION

Telemetry instrumentation for the CROHMS 

system has been costly and at times, unsatisfactory. The policy of having each participant procure, install, and maintain telemetry equipment 

of his individual choice results in an assorment of 

instrument designs and maintenance problems, 

but it was practically a necessity in CROHMS development because not all participants were prepared to start field automation at the same time, 

and available instrumentation had not been tried 

and tested. Some of the first radiotelemetry instruments had to be replaced within a few years, 

and subsequent acquisistions from other vendors 

have not fared much better. Some of the instruments, even those that have functioned fairly 

well, are now difficult to maintain because the 

vendor is no longer in business or has discontinued the manufacture of replacement parts. 

Also, the diversity in instrument design makes it 

costly to keep an adequate stock of replacment 

parts.

From this experience, it appears that a telemetry system must be chosen with great care, and, 

if at all possible, the selection should be coordinated within the entire group. All participants 

might then procure the same types of instruments, thus simplifying maintenance and stocking of spare parts. It would be well to have some 

assurance that the supplier will stay in the business and continue supplying parts as needed.

CROHMS participants presently are delaying 

the procurement of additional terrestrial telemetry equipment in view of potential advantages 

of satellite and meteor-burst telemetry systems. 

The greatest advantage of these systems is that 

they do not require terrestrial repeaters to relay 

telemetry signals from river valleys and canyons. 

Repeaters are generally costly to maintain because they are often located on exposed sites at 

high altitudes. Moreover, because of esthetic objections, land-use permits for repeater installations may be difficult to obtain.

Of the satellite systems, the geostationary 

satellite seems to present the greatest potential at 

this time for a realtime telemetry system. In addition to the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite, which is a governmentowned system, there is at least one commercial 

firm that can provide a telemetry service using a 

commercial geostationary satellite. A polarorbiting satellite has been demonstrated to function very reliably, but the frequency at which 

data can be relayed is limited (from one to several 

times daily, depending on latitude of stations). 

The meteor-burst system utilizes meteor trails as 

repeaters (reflectors) and, therefore, does not require terrestrial nor satellite relay stations. 

Meteor-burst equipment can be purchased directly or leased as part of a commercial telemetry 

service.

ACCURACY OF REALTIME 

STREAMFLOW DATA

The accuracy of realtime streamflow (discharge) data is dependent on (1) the quality of 

sensing and telemetry equipment, (2) the stability of the stage-discharge relationship (rating) or 

the frequency at which the rating is checked by 

discharge measurements, and (3) the effectiveness of error-detection techniques (data verification). Realtime data are information sensed and 

reported shortly after occurrence and, presumably, are used for decisionmaking shortly after 

being reported. This allows very little time for 

verification; to provide reasonable reliability for 

decisionmaking, it is imperative that at least 

large errors (20 percent and greater) be detected 

and flagged. Although large errors in data may 

not occur very frequently, the fact that they can 

occur at any time affects confidence in the use of 

the data for hour-to-hour water management decisions.

A study of 109 gaging stations in the Columbia 

River basin by the U.S. Geological Survey (Lystrom, 1972), showed that a 20-percent error in 

daily mean discharges can be expected to occur at 

a station on the average of 15 days per year, and a 

50-percent error on an average of 5 days per year. 

Change in the stage-discharge relation (shifting 

control) was the most frequent source of error and 

can occur at any time, but most seriously during 

high flow. Errors caused by sensing and recording 

equipment (not including telemetry) were second 

most frequent, and backwater from ice was third.

18
Errors caused by backwater from ice are the most 

difficult to detect but, fortunately, occur only during a period of the year when accuracy is generally less critical.

Data verification appears essential in any realtime system, and to be performed effectively and 

expediently, it must be conducted as part of the 

realtime processing system. Techniques are being 

developed for CROHMS by which verification of 

streamflow and storage data will be performed by 

computer.

In a realtime system, stage-discharge ratings 

should be corrected as soon as possible after a 

change is detected by discharge measurement. 

Measurement computations must be completed in 

the field; if a significant change in rating is indicated, the measurement results should be reported from the field by telephone or by other 

expedient means. Ratings prepared for computation of historical records usually reflect past conditions, based on discharge measurements made 

during the period of record to be computed. Ratings for realtime use, on the other hand, represent 

a projection of conditions into the future. Any 

subsequent shift that occurs, if not detected by 

verification, would not be known until the next 

discharge measurement is made, and all the realtime data generated since the shift occurred will 

have been in error. For this reason, and because of 

limited time for verification, a realtime system 

cannot be expected to produce discharge data 

comparable in accuracy to data obtained by a conventional system (historical data) for an equivalent number of discharge measurements. Accuracy can be improved only by checking the rating 

more frequently by discharge measurements, or 

by applying effective data-verification techniques.

COST OF REALTIME DATA COLLECTION

Telemetry equipment costs vary considerably, 

depending mostly on type. Costs are increasing, 

but following are estimates of present costs of 

telemetry instrumentation per gaging station: 

VHP radio (terrestrial)........... .$15,000

Meteor burst ......................20,000

Satellite (GOES) ....................5,000

Associated with these costs are costs of equipment for repeating, receiving, polling, and so

forth, which depend on the size of a network or the 

number of users. A recent commercial quotation 

for telemetry service, utilizing the meteor-burst 

system, is $150 per month per field station, and 

$1,600 per month for a master station. One master station will accommodate at least 50 field stations at an hourly transmission rate.

The cost of operating a realtime streamflow 

network will depend on data-accuracy requirements, but will add to the cost of operating a conventional data collection system if both historical 

and realtime data are collected. In the collection 

of historical records, the Geological Survey generally visits gaging stations at a frequency ranging from once every four weeks to once every 

eight weeks. These visits are scheduled primarily 

to check the stage-discharge rating by discharge 

measurement and secondarily to check and maintain the equipment. Adding telemetry will make 

it possible to know when equipment failures occur, but field trips as needed to fix equipment will 

generally be in addition to scheduled measurement trips. Telemetry, in these cases, is an asset 

to improving the completeness of the record but at 

the extra cost of additional field trips. Great savings would be realized through telemetry if the 

frequency of field trips for both discharge measurements and equipment repair could be limited 

to an "as needed" basis. This would require data 

verification that is sensitive enough to detect errors that are near the limit of acceptable data 

accuracy. The reduction of field effort to an "asneeded" basis may be possible for some stations, 

depending on the stability of the stage-discharge 

rating, the sensitivity of data verification, and the 

limit of acceptable data accuracy.

If the need for accuracy is not the same for all 

stations, it would seem economical to design and 

operate the system to accommodate more than 

one level of data accuracy. In this way, field work 

for stations with lower accuracy requirements 

might be limited to measurements and maintenance only as needed. Also, the cost of sensors is 

generally proportional to their quality and precision; therefore, it might be economical to install a 

sensor suitable to the desired level of data accuracy. For example, the most precise water-level 

sensor is the stilling-well and float, but this may 

be very costly to install at some locations. A pressure transducer is less costly and less precise, but 

would be adequate for flood-warning stations.

19
STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL OF 

WATER-RESOURCES DATA

By Charles R. Showen

ABSTRACT

The U.S. Geological Survey investigates the occurrence, 

quantity, quality, distribution, and movement of the surface 

and underground waters that comprise the water resources of 

the United States. It is the principal Federal water-data 

agency and, as such, collects and disseminates about 70 percent of the water data currently being used by numerous 

State, local, private, and other Federal agencies to develop and 

manage the Nation's water resources. As part of the Geological Survey's program of releasing water data to the public, a 

large-scale computerized system has been developed for the 

processing, storage, and retrieval of water data collected 

through its activities.

The U.S. Geological Survey's National Water Data Storage 

and Retrieval System (WATSTORE) was established in 

November 1971 to modernize water-data processing procedures and techniques and to provide for more effective and 

efficient management of data-releasing activites. The system 

is operated and maintained on the central computer facilities 

of the Survey at its National Center in Reston, Va.

INTRODUCTION

The Geological Survey currently (1976) collects 

data at approximately 10,000 stream-gaging stations, 1,300 lakes and reservoirs, 4,300 surface 

water-quality stations, 4,100 water-temperature 

stations, 880 sediment stations, 2,50Q water-level 

observation wells, and 5,800 ground-water-quality wells. Each year, many water-data collection 

sites are added and others are discontinued; thus, 

large amounts of diversified data, both current 

and historical, are amassed by the Survey's data 

collection activities. A large-scale computerized 

storage and retrieval system is used by the 

Geological Survey to store and disseminate water 

data acquired through its many activities.

The National Water Data Storage and Retrieval System (WATSTORE) was established in 

November 1971 to provide for more effective and 

efficient management of the Survey's datareleasing activities. The WATSTORE system 

provides for the processing, storage, and retrieval 

of water data pertaining to surface water, quality 

of water, and ground water. At present, there are 

50 Geological Survey remote job-entry sites (fig. 

5), located in various offices throughout the country, that are equipped with high-speed computer 

terminals for remote access to the system.

GENERAL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

The WATSTORE system consists of several 

files (fig. 6) in which data are grouped and stored 

by common characteristics and data collection 

frequencies. The system is also designed to allow 

for the inclusion of additional data files if the need 

should arise in future years. Currently, the following files are maintained: (1) Daily Values File, 

which is composed of surface-water, quality-ofwater, and ground-water data measured on a 

daily or continuous basis; (2) Peak Flow File, 

which is composed of annual peak values for 

streamflow stations; (3) Water-Quality File, 

which is composed of chemical and biological 

analyses for surface- and ground-water sites; and 

(4) Ground-Water Site-Inventory File, which is 

composed of hydrologic, geologic, and wellinventory data for ground-water sites. In addition, 

a Station Header File, an index file of sites for 

which data are stored in the system, is also maintained.

Most of the computer programs used in the system are written in Programming Language/1 

(PL/1) for the IBM 360 or 370 series computers2 

and were developed internally to satisfy the 

data-processing requirements of the Geological 

Survey. The WATSTORE system is directly accessible by computer terminals which are maintained by the Geological Survey and other Federal and State agencies.

DETAILED SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

The WATSTORE system is designed to use 

magnetic disk to store current data and magnetic 

tape to store historical data. This technique is 

used because of the high cost involved in maintaining online disk files. Approximately 15 peruse of trade names does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological

Survey.

20
Computer Terminal Locations

(i»>«*\

s

FIGURE 5. Map indicating location of WATSTORE computer terminals.

cent of the data is stored on magnetic disk and the 

remainder on magnetic tape. "Current data" is 

defined as data for the current year and the year 

immediately preceding. Data failing to meet this 

criterion are removed periodically from disk and 

merged with data in the historical file, which is 

maintained in a sequential manner on magnetic 

tape by station identification number and date. 

The retrieval computer programs permit data to 

be retrieved from the current file, the historical 

file, or both files.

The Station Header File and the Daily Values 

File have the option to "password" protect data 

stored in these files for one or more specified sites. 

The use of password protection prohibits unauthorized updates and (or) retrieval from the files. 

These files also provide for the identification of 

data by an agency code which permits data to be 

stored for agencies outside the Geological Survey.

A brief description of each of the WATSTORE 

files is given below:

STATION HEADER FILE

The Station Header File contains information 

pertinent to the identification, location, and physical .description of over 130,000 sites for which 

data are stored in the WATSTORE files. The file 

serves as an automated index from which a retrieval list of stations may be obtained without 

searching massive data files. The information 

items stored in this file are listed below:

Agency code

Station identification number

Station locator (latitude-longitude)

State code

District code

County code

Drainage area

Contributing drainage area

Site code

Station name

Hydrologic unit code

21
NATIONAL WATER-DATA STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL SYSTEM

STATION-HEADER 

FILE

PEAK-FLOW 

FILE

DAILY-VALUES 

FILE

WATER-QUALITY 

FILE

GROUND-WATER SITE 

INVENTORY FILE

FIGURE 6. Schematic representation of WATSTORE files.

 Gage or land surface datum

 Geologic unit code

 Well depth

 Aquifer type

 Password

The eight underlined items are mandatory 

items for each station, and data are not permitted 

to be stored in the data files without this information. The mandatory fields were so designated because of retrieval purposes, for example, the 

capability of being able to retrieve all stations in 

a particular county in a particular State.

A typical example of the use of this file would be 

to select a group of data satisfying a defined set of 

criteria, such as to provide a list of stations that 

have surface-water data in the files and are located in Fairfax County, State of Virginia, that 

have a drainage area of less than 20 square miles.

Computer programs are available that will permit the retrieval stations to be plotted on a line 

printer using various scales suitable for use as a 

map overlay, as well as to print selected data only 

for the retrieval stations. The retrieval stations 

list also may be used as input to retrieval programs for other WATSTORE files.

DAILY VALUES FILE

The Daily Values File contains water-data 

parameters measured or observed either on a 

daily or on a continuous basis and numerically 

reduced to daily values. Instantaneous measurements at fixed-time intervals, daily mean values, 

and statistics such as daily maximum and 

minimum values also may be stored. This file currently contains over 120 million daily values in22
eluding data for streamflow values, river stages, 

reservoir contents, water temperatures, specific 

conductance values, sediment concentrations, 

sediment discharges, and ground water levels.

The data in this file are identified in the following manner:

 State code

 Agency code

 Station identification number

 Cross section locator (Distance in feet from 

left bank)

 Sampling depth (Depth at which observation was made)

 Parameter code (Five-digit numeric code to 

identify the parameter measured)

 Water year (The 12-month period, October 

1 through September 30)

 Statistic code (Five-digit numeric code to 

identify the frequency of measurement 

or numeric reduction of the data)

Each record in this file contains daily values for 

a water year (October 1 through September 30). 

Since most retrievals from the file are made on a 

State basis, the records in storage are grouped by 

States to minimize retrieval costs.

Data may be retrieved from the Daily Values 

File in the following formats: (1) in the form of a 

computer printout (listing), (2) in punched card 

form, (3) in a monthly character format on a 

magnetic device (usable on almost any type computer), and (4) in the standard daily values record 

format on a magnetic device.

This file also has password protection to protect 

records against unauthorized updating and (or) 

retrieval.

A generalized retrieval program retrieves records from this file in machine-readable form and 

passes the retrieved records to computer application programs. Examples of the application programs are:

 Publication tables

 Data inventory of selected portions of the 

file

 Preparation of X-Y plots on the Calcomp 

plotter

 Preparation of monthly and annual statistics

 Preparation of duration tables, low- and 

high-value sequence summaries, and 

log-Pearson frequency distributions

WATER-QUALITY FILE

The Water-Quality File contains information 

pertaining to the chemical, physical, biological, 

and radiochemical composition of both surface 

and ground water. The data stored in this file are 

primarily obtained through the analytical 

techniques performed by the three central 

water-quality laboratories operated by the 

Geological Survey. At present, this file contains 

the results of over 850,000 analyses of water samples, and the analyses may contain data for more 

than 570 different constituents.

The data in this file are identified as follows:

 Station identification number

 Collection date

 Time of collection

 Parameter code (Five-digit numeric code to

identify the parameter measured) 

Data may be retrieved from the Water-Quality 

File in the form of a computer printout (listing), 

in punch-card form or as punch-card images on a 

magnetic device, and in the standard waterquality record format on a magnetic device.

A generalized retrieval program retrieves records from this file in machine-readable form and 

passes the retrieved records to computer application programs. Examples of the application programs are:

Publication tables 

Frequency analyses 

Stiff diagrams 

Piper diagrams 

Collins diagrams 

Ropes diagrams 

Irrigation classification 

Ratio tables 

Map plots

Interface with statistical programs for 

plotting and contouring on Calcomp 

plotters

PEAK FLOW FILE

The Peak Flow File contains the annual 

maximum (peak) streamflow (discharge) and the 

annual maximum gage height (stage) values obtained at surface-water sites. It currently contains more than 350,000 annual maximum observations.

Data may be retrieved from the file in the form 

of tables, card images, or records on a magnetic 

device. The primary application program for this

23
file is a program that computes log-Pearson Type 

III frequency distribution. This program produces 

a table of basic statistics, theoretical values, and a 

frequency distribution plot of both actual and 

theoretical values.

GROUND-WATER SITE-INVENTORY FILE

The Ground-Water Site-Inventory File contains 

inventory data about wells, springs, and other 

sources of ground water. The data included are 

site location and identification, geohydrologic 

characteristics, well-construction history, and 

one-time field measurements such as water temperature.

The Ground-Water Site-Inventory File is managed and maintained through a generalized 

Data-Base Management System called SYSTEM 

2000. This system is marketed by MRI Systems 

Corp., Austin, Tex. SYSTEM 2000 is oriented to 

the collection, maintenance, and manipulation of 

data en masse, and it provides a report-generation capability, a data-base loading facility, a 

teleprocessing interface, and a query language. 

The Ground-Water Site-Inventory File is designed to accommodate 209 data elements. At 

present, the file contains data for 140,000 sites. 

This file is currently being built and the number 

of sites is anticipated to increase to 1 million 

within a year.

Using the retrieval language which is available 

as a part of SYSTEM 2000, data can be retrieved 

selectively and listed in a variety of ways. A program to retrieve selected data and prepare publication tables has been written, and programs to 

interface the file with plotter and statistical 

routines are under development.

SYSTEM OPERATION

All data files of the WATSTORE system are 

maintained and managed on the central computer 

facilities of the Geological Survey at its National 

Center in Reston, Va. However, data may be entered into or retrieved from WATSTORE through 

a number of locations that are part of a nationwide telecommunication network.

At present, there are 50 Geological Survey remote job-entry sites, located in various offices 

throughout the country, that are equipped with 

high-speed computer terminals for remote access 

to the WATSTORE system. These terminals provide rapid and efficient access to the system and

allow each site to enter data or retrieve data from 

the system within several minutes to overnight, 

depending upon the priority placed on the request.

The Geological Survey operates more than 

9,000 data collection stations that remotely collect water data on punched-paper tape. To provide 

for current and timely processing and reporting of 

these data, a transmission network provides for 

the local translation of data to a computercompatible form and transmits the translated 

data over telephone circuits to the central computer facility. These data are then processed by the 

central computer via a computer terminal located 

at the transmission site. The results obtained by 

this procedure are simultaneously stored in the 

WATSTORE files and printed at the transmission 

site.

Data are also entered into the files which are 

obtained from the LANDSAT and GOES (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite) 

satellite systems. At present data from 150 sites 

are being collected in this manner.

Three central water-quality laboratories that 

analyze more than 60,000 water samples per year 

also contribute data to the system. The laboratories are highly automated and perform chemical analyses that range from determinations of 

simple inorganic compounds such as chlorides to 

complex organic compounds such as pesticides. 

As each analysis is completed, the results are verified by laboratory personnel and then transmitted via a computer terminal and stored in the 

WATSTORE system.

SYSTEM PRODUCTS

Water data compiled by the Geological Survey 

are used in many ways by decision makers for the 

management, development, and monitoring of 

water resources. Thus, in addition to its data 

processing, storage, and retrieval capabilities, 

WATSTORE can provide a variety of useful products to meet diverse needs. These products range 

from simple retrieval of data in tabular form to 

complex statistical analyses. A wide variety of retrieval options for the system are available, such 

as,

 Individual station

 Polygon of latitude-longitude

 State

 County

 Aquifer code (for ground-water sites)

24
 Dates

 Individual parameters

 Greater than or less than specified parameter values

A typical retrieval request might be for a list of 

all the dissolved-oxygen values of less than 5.0 

mg/1 (milligrams per liter) for a particular county 

in a particular State.

A summary of the products available is as follows:

1. Computer-Printed Tables: Users most often 

request data from WATSTORE in the form 

of tables printed by the computer. These tables may contain lists of actual data or condensed indexes that indicate the availability 

of data stored in the files. A variety of formats is available to display the many types 

of data.

2. Computer-Printed Graphs: Another capability 

of WATSTORE is to computer-print graphs 

for the rapid analysis or display of data. 

Computer programs are available to produce 

bar graphs (histograms), line graphs, 

frequency-distribution curves, X-Y point 

plots, site-location map plots, and similar

items by means of line printers.

Statistical Analyses: WATSTORE uses the 

Geological Survey's collection of computer 

programs known as STATPAC (Statistical 

Package) to provide extensive analyses of 

data such as regression analyses, the 

analysis of variance, transformations, and 

correlations.

Digital Plotting: WATSTORE also makes use 

of software systems that prepare data for digital plotting on peripheral, offline Calcomp 

plotters available at the central computer 

site. Plots that can be obtained include hydrographs, frequency-distribution curves, 

X-Y point plots, contour plots, and threedimensional plots.

Data in Machine-Readable Form: Data stored 

in WATSTORE also can be obtained in 

machine-readable form for use on other 

computers or for use as input to user-written 

computer programs. These data are available in the standard storage formats of the 

WATSTORE system or in the form of punch 

cards or punch-card images on magnetic 

tape.

25
PUBLICATION OF WATER-RESOURCES DATA

By S. M. Lcmg and C. B. Ham

ABSTRACT

Water data are the raw materials used by scientists and 

engineers for determining the availability and accessibility of 

water resources and for the design, development, and management of major water facilities. The principal responsibility 

of a hydrologic service is to furnish the scientists and engineers the data they need in a consistent and timely manner. 

The medium most frequently used for release of water data is 

the data report. It is the principal product of the major hydrologic services, even in this era of big computers with their 

massive automated data storage and dissemination capabilities. Data publications meet the requirements of a widespread 

audience; they also provide archival capability that has not 

yet been equaled by automation techniques.

Most water-resources data are numeric in 

character and comprise information about the 

rate of flow (or discharge) of streams, the volume 

of water in lakes and reservoirs, the fluctuations 

of water levels in wells tapping principal aquifers, 

and the quality of surface and ground waters as 

determined by analyses of chemical constituents, 

analyses of biological and biochemical constituents, measurements of temperature 

(changes), and measurements of sediment loads 

transported.

These data are used for many purposes by many 

people with varied backgrounds and interests. 

Probably the data are used most extensively by 

engineers and scientists who are responsible for 

the planning, development, and management of 

the Nation's resources. However, the data are also 

needed by public administrators who must apportion resources among contending claimants, by 

the users of water (utility managers, irrigators, 

industrial managers), by developers interested in 

availability of water, by conservationists, by environmentalists, by recreationists, and by those 

guardians of public safety who must contend with 

major disasters such as floods and massive pollution.

As the number of data-collection sites has increased, as the variety of types of data collected 

has expanded, and as the availability of people to 

do routine calculations and listing of figures has 

decreased, the need for electronic computers and

data banks has arisen. C. R. Showen discusses the 

development and use of computers in the section 

on "Storage and Retrieval of Water-Resources 

Data." Computers, however, have not yet eliminated the need for water-resources data reports in 

book form. Most users of water-resources data are 

capable of obtaining needed information from a 

book by looking in the index and reading the station description and numbers. However, only a 

limited number of users have access to the specific 

terminal connected to the appropriate data bank 

and even fewer users know how to interrogate the 

computer to learn what data are in storage and 

how to retrieve the part they need of those data 

which are available.

It is one of the responsibilities of a hydrologic 

service to see that reliable water data are available to the investigators of that resource. One of 

the earliest methods of making data available 

was the publication of reports and the placing of 

those reports in conveniently located repositories 

such as public and university libraries throughout the country. The method is still worthwhile 

and is still in use.

Publication of reports actually serves another 

purpose in that the printed copy provides an archival capability that has not yet been matched 

by computers even though computer data banks 

are becoming more and more the mainstay of data 

storage and data dissemination. Accidents in the 

handling of computer files do happen and many 

people doubt that computer storage can serve as 

an archiving tool without multiple duplicate files 

in geographically separate locations. Moreover, 

magnetic tapes have not been used long enough to 

assure that they have a useful life of many years 

(40 or 50 or more). The need for data publications 

is as strong today as it was several decades ago, 

and will continue into the foreseeable future.

In addition to the archival factor, the ability to 

release large quantities of data to a broad audience and at a relatively low cost is still a principal 

plus factor for a publication program. A request 

for a relatively few pieces of data can be handled

26
much more conveniently, quickly, and economically by referral to a publication than to treat the 

request through our presently available computer 

equipment. However, a computer and its data 

bank are much better able to furnish a user large 

volumes of data covering a long period of years 

than are the many published books containing 

the same data. Therefore, the computer and published reports virtually go hand in hand in meeting the total needs of the hydro logic community.

Water resources publications have been major 

products of the U.S. Geological Survey since before the turn of the century. The streamflow measurements in the Water-Supply Paper series of 

the Geological Survey constitute an invaluable 

record of the history and flow of the rivers and 

streams in the United States. They represent a 

multibillion dollar investment in equipment and 

manpower resources that have permitted the Nation to develop and use its resources in a wise and 

efficient manner. The program as initially constituted was to develop a basic understanding of the 

quantity, quality, and availability of both surface 

water and ground water, but it also provided the 

background data for the principal developments 

of the resources throughout the Nation. The data 

reports resulting from the program of data collection of the Geological Survey are used extensively 

by the engineering community for the background support in the design of facilities to develop the Nation's water resources. In more recent years the emphasis has been on conservation 

of resources and environmental protection; the 

availability of data in published form plays a vital 

role in these areas.

The publication of basic data in reports of the 

U.S. Geological Survey usually falls into one of 

two types of presentations. The first type is as 

supporting evidence in a special analytical or 

project report. In such a report the data are 

specifically selected to support the technical findings of the investigation and to permit the reader 

an insight to the background leading to the decision, recommendation, or conclusion in the technical report. The second type of presentation, and 

the one with which this paper is concerned, is 

specifically designed to make available to every 

user all information collected and processed, 

without interpretation, recommendation, or conclusion. Examples of such reports are the series 

entitled "Surface Water Supply of the United 

States" (1900-1970) "Quality of Surface Waters of

the United States" (1941-70) and "Ground Water 

Levels in the United States" (1940-74). These reports contain tabulations of discharge (streamflow), reservoir storage, chemical and biological 

analyses, sediment determinations, water temperatures, well levels, and other related information.

By publishing data reports, the U.S. Geological 

Survey makes available to all interested and concerned parties reliable information on water resources. The information should be as nearly 

complete as the investigations warrant, and 

should be presented in such a manner that it can 

be understood by as many as possible of those 

people who need to use the information. The report should be made available while the need and 

desire for it are still fresh. The reports should also 

be in such form that they will be usable whenever 

needed as historical records for use in comparing 

currently collected data with those collected in 

the past and those which may be collected in the 

future.

The method of presenting data is to give as 

much of the information as possible in tabular 

form using printouts from computer storage as 

photo-offset copy. See figures 7 and 8. Aside from 

the obvious advantages of displaying maximum 

information in minimum space and elimination of 

much tedious, repetitive typing, this method provides an opportunity for visual check of figures 

stored in the computer data bank.

Tabulated streamflow data usually are daily 

mean discharges with monthly and yearly summaries of minimum, mean, and maximum daily 

values, total volumes, and sometimes unit runoff. 

Reservoir data are often given as daily contents, 

usually at a specified time. For some sites, 

streams, and reservoirs, daily stages only are 

listed. Ground-water levels are usually given at 5 

day or less frequent intervals (fig. 9).

Water-quality data include a wide variety of 

information, such as water temperature, sediment concentration and loads, conductivity, 

analyses and concentrations for chemical parameters, and analyses and concentrations for biological parameters.

There is a need for supplemental information to 

accompany the data in tables. First, the site at 

which the data are collected should be identified. 

The simplest and briefest location statement is, of 

course, latitude and longitude. Besides giving information for plotting the site on a map, the re27
OHIO RIVER MAIN STBH 

03216600 Ohio River at Greenup Dam, Ky.

LOCATION. Lat 38°38'48", long 82°51 t 38", Greenup County, at left end of Greenup Dam, 1.1 mi (1.8 km) upstream from Grays Branch, 

4.7 mi (7.6 km) downstream from Little Sandy River, S.O mi (8.0 km) north of Greenup, and at mile 341.0 (S48.7 km).

DRAINAGE AREA. 62,000 sq mi (161,000 sq km), approximately. 

PERIOD OF RECORD.--October 1968 to current year.

GAGE.--Gate-opening and water-stage recorders. Headwater gage 0.4 mi (0.6 km) upstream at datum 502.51 ft (153.165 m) above mean 

sea level, datum of 1929 or 503.06 ft (503.06 ft (153.333 m) above mean sea level, Ohio River datum. Tailwater gage 0.4 mi 

(0.6 km) downstream at datum 30.12 ft (9.181 m) loner.

AVERAGE DISCHARGE. 7 years, 95,100 cfs (2,693 cu m/s), 20.83 in/yr (529 mm/yr).

EXTREMES.--Current year: Maximum daily discharge, 400,000 cfs (11,300 cu m/s) Mar. 16; maximn observed headwater gage height, 

19.80 ft (6.035 m) Mar. 16; maximum tailwater gage height, 48.78 ft (14.868 m) Mar. 16; minimum daily discharge, 10,700 cfs 

(303 cu m/s) Aug. 3.

Period of record: Maxima daily discharge, 540,000 cfs (15,300 cu m/s) Jan. 12, 1974; maximal observed headwater gage height, 

26.2 ft (7.99 m) Jan. 13, 1974; maximmi tailwater gage height, 55.11 ft (16.798 m) Jan. 13, 1974; minimum daily discharge, 8,100 

cfs (229 cu m/s) Sept. 3, 1973.

REMARKS. Records good. Daily discharge computed from head, gage openings, and lockages. Flow regulated by Ohio River system of 

locks, dams, and reservoirs upstream from station.

DISCHARGE* IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND, MATER YEAR OCTOBER 1974 TO SEPTEMBER 1975 

DAY OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JfN JUL AUG SEP

1 

i. 

3

*

5

6

7

«J 

9

10

11 

It 

13 

1*

15

16

17 

IB

19

20

31 

22 

^3 

2*

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

TOTAL 891,500 1,**96.6M 4.504.6M 5,033.DM 6,065.0M 7.829.0M 4.399.3M 4.050.9M 2.517.7M 886,600 915,800 2,365.0M

MEAN 2t»,760 66,550 145,300 163,400 216,600 252,500 146,600 130,700 83,980 86,660 29,580 78,830

MAX 54,300 115,000 209,000 225,000 340,000 400,000 354,000 259,000 134,000 50,700 97.800 285,000

MIN 17,700 23,300 92,800 108,000 125,000 118,000 46,500 74,800 34,600 11,500 10,700 27,000

CAL YR 1974 TOTAL 38,037,800 MEAN 104,200 MAX 540,000 MIN 11,ZOO CFSM 1.68 IN. 22.82 

MTR YR 1975 TOTAL 41,394,400 MEAN 113,400 MAX 400,000 MIN 10,740 CFSM 1.83 IN. 24.84 

M Expressed in thousands.

FIGURE 7. Example of streamflow data table as published by U.S. Creological Survey

ports try to give enough information so that a markings, and local landmarks. Political subdiviperson can find the site in the field using com- sions (State, county, and distance from town) and

monly available road maps, street or highway an indication of where the site fits into the gen28

27,400

21,100

30,300

31,000

25,900

31,400

19,800

23,100

23,400

23.300

22.800

20,100

21.200

17,700

25.000

24,100

45.800

54.JQO

54.000

32.000

33.800

25.400

26.900

34.000

29.400

30.800

28.500

23.200

29,700

24,200

3l.9nn

26,600

30,000

23,400

23,300

32,800

47,400

52,500

50,800

44,500

41,000

39,200

44,800

t>5,200

b5,500

66,000

60,800

62,400

57,800

50,000

54,300

t»5,900

107,000

109,000

106,000

103,000

102,000

118,000

125,000

119,000

104,000

134,000

154,000

149,000

150,000

132,000

108,000

92,800

97,300

163,000

209,000

200,000

167,000

144,000

135,000

128,000

126,000

143,000

159,000

156,000

139,000

122,000

111,000

104,000

93,900

97,600

140,000

178,000

201,000

199,000

195,000

i 77.nnn

177,000

821,000

221,000

803,000

175,000

158,000

137,000

117,000

111,000

113,000

127,000

138,000

134,000

136,000

140,000

125,000

114,000

108.000

141,000

195,000

219,000

201,000

154,000

130,000

131,000

186,000

825,000

216,000

182,000

183,000 

2i<t.nnn

255,000

292,000

2U3,000

276,000

211,000

235,000

280,000

265,000

236,000

184,000

147,000

156,000

220,000

219,000

181,000

145,000

126,000

125,000

141,000

163,000

159,000

144,000

148,000

811,000

282,000

317*000

340*000

324,000

274,000

169,000

161,000

151,000

141,000

126,000

118,000

129,000

159,000

177,000

165,000

204,000

286,000

334,000

393,000

400,000

332,000

277,000

251,000

260,000

338,000

365,000

355,000

304*000

310,000

325,000

281,000

204,000

239,000

287,000 

it A.nnn

305,000

257,000

200,000

180,000

173,000

158,000

133,000

113,000

99,800

95,400

79,200

68,800

76,400

57,400

55,200

58,900

53,300

55,000

46,500

63,400

67,200

67,300

61,400

81,700

246,000

330,000

354,000

319,000

275,000

270,000

259,000

235,000

210,000

205,000

220,000

215,000

182,000

147,000

137,000

126,000

121,000

105,000

87,300

83,900

84,500

106,000

109*000

127,000

132,000

119,000

117,000

79,700

84,900

103,000

116.000

94,000

92,200

91,000

74,200

79,200 

i no.nnn

93.200

101,000

185,000

118,000

81,800

100,000

129,000

134,000

120,000

93,400

78,400

80,400

90,900

98,400

101,000

85,500

79,700

85.500

76,400

68,600

54,600

55*100

46,800

38,700

34,600

43,400

78,600

72,800

79,200

74,900

50*700

37,000

30,600

16,300

37,400

27,400

27,400

26,300

28,900

40,800

37,400

29,400

24,100

25,300

21,500

31,200

21,900

24,400

26,500

24,100

25,100

27,700

88,900

17,600

38*400

18,800

88,300

86,800

14,400

13,100 

1 1 .«inn

84,800

14,600

10,700

19,600

18,900

23,500

23,600

29,600

80,500

17.300

18,700

17,900

23,000

31,800

36,800

68,600

97,800

88,100

39,100

30,500

19,900

25,100

20,300

18,100

23,500

17,700

20,000

18,300

24,200

22,600

S6.7(tn

113,000

131,000

95,600

70,100

48,900

46,700

50,700

45,600

33,100

36,700

27,000

42,700

72,800

70*100

54,000

33,000

36,600

42,700

49,700

69,100

78,100

69,600

67,300

132,000

885,000

211,000

136,000

107,000

93,600

76,300
OHIO RIVER MAIN STEM

03216600 Ohio River at Greenup Dam, Ky.--Continued 

(National stream-quality accounting network station)

LOCATION.--Lat 38°38'48", long 82°Sl t 38", Greenup County, at Greenup Dam, 1.1 mi (1.8 km) upstream from Grays 

Branch, 4.7 mi (7.6 km) downstream from Little Sandy River, 5.0 mi (8.0 km) north of Greenup. and at mile 

341.0 (548.7 km).

DRAINAGE AREA.--62,000 sq mi (161,000 sq km), approximately.

PERIOD OF RECORD.--Chemical analyses: October 1974 to September 1975. 

Hater temperatures: October 1974 to September 1975.

EXTREMES.--1974-75:

Specific conductance: Maximum, 490 micromhos Nov. 13; minimum, 155 micromhos Apr. 1. 

Hater temperatures: Maximum, 31.0°C Aug. 2.

REMARKS.--Flow regulated by Ohio River system of locks, dams, and reservoirs. Records of conductance and

temperature for October and November collected by Corps of Engineers at Greenup Dam. Records of conductance and temperature for December to September collected 1.6 mi (2.6 km) upstream from Greenup Dam.

MATER QUALITY DATA* WATER YEAR OCTOBER 1974 TO SEPTEMBER 1975

DATE

OCT.

22...

NOV.

19...

DEC.

17...

JAN.

17...

FEB.

20...

MAR.

10...

APR.

22...

MAY

28...

JOLT

Ob...

AUG.

20...

SEP.

17...

DATE"

OCT.

22...

nOv.

19...

DEC.

17...

JAN.

17...

FEB.

20...

MAR.

18...

APR.

22...

MAY

28...

JULY

08...

AUG.

20...

SEP.

17...

INSTANTANEOUS

DISCHARGE

(CFSI

23900

48000

127000

110000

163000

29SOOU

73200

91300

2*000

2910 a

34520

TOTAL

NlfKlTE

PLUS

NITRATE

(N)

(MG/L)

1.1

1.2

1.0

.99

.67

.72

.72

.61

.79

1.4

1.2

DISSOLVED

SILICA

(SI02)

(MG/L)

4.*

4.9

6.3

6.6

6.5

6.4

5.9

5.0

3.4

1.3

6.1

TOTAL

KJELDAHL

NITROGEN

IN)

1 MG/L)

1.*

.71

.67

.63

.59

.74

.54

.42

.62

1.2

.45

DISSOLVED

CALCIUM

(CAi

(MG/L)

33

46

32

28

31

22

35

26

33

52

44

TOTAL

NITROGEN

IN)

(MG/L)

2.5

1.9

1.7

1.6

l.a

1.*

1.3

1.0

1.4

2.6

1.7

DISSOLVED

MAGNESIUM

(HG)

(MG/LI

1ft

12

a.i

8.3

9.2

6.7

10

7.9

9.5

14

11

TOTAL

PHOSPHORUS

(PI

(MG/L)

.07

.04

.14

.10

.U9

.12

.01

.06

.03

.05

.05

DISSOLVED

SODIUM

(NAI

(MG/LI

30

30

14

14

15

9.8

17

13

21

38

23

DISSOLVcD

SOLI os ( RESIDUE AT

180 Cl

(MG/L)

244

2B4

lt>8

158

194

140

224

175

203

378

263

DISSOLVED

POTASSIUM

(HI

(MG/LI

3.0

3.9

2.2

2.2

1.8

1.0

2.0

1.9

2.3

3.B

3.5

HARDNESS

ICA.MG)

(MG/L)

120

160

110

100

120

83

130

97

120

190

160

BICARBONATE

(HC03I

(M6/LI

57

56

49

52

44

36

SO

40

50

51

61

NONCARBONATE

HARDNESS

I MG/L)

77

120

79

61

79

S3

88

65

81

ISO

110

ALKALINITY

AS

CAC03

(MG/L)

47

46

40

43

36

30

41

33

41

42

50

SPECIFIC

CONDUCTANCE

(11CRUMHOSI

460

370

250

310

320

220

380

265

380

610

390

DISSOLVED

SULFATE

(504)

(MG/LI

92

120

74

64

81

52

as

68

79

160

110

PH

(UNITS)

7.6

7.1

7.2

7.4

7.5

6.8

7.1

6.8

7.2

7.1

DISSOLVED

CHLOAlDE

(CD

(MG/L)

34

37

18

17

18

13

21

14

25

47

27

TEMPERATURE

(OEG C)

19.0

11.5

15.t>

4.5

4.5

to. 5

12.0

22.0

28.0

2tt.O

24.0

DISSOLVED

FLUORlOfc

(F)

(MG/L)

.2

.3

.2

.2

.0

.1

.3

.3

.1

.4

.3

TURBIDITY

(JTU)

10

8

4

20

10

60

20

35

4

4

15

FIGURE 8. Example of water-quality data table as published by U.S. Geological Survey.

29
GROUND-WATER LEVELS

Jefferson County Continued

381315085502601. National Carbide Corp. Bells Lane. Drilled obaervation water-table well in glacial sand and gravel, diam 6 in 

(15 cm), dapth 108 ft (33 m), screened. Lsd 448.68 ft (136.76 m) above msl. HP top of caaing, 1.10 ft (0.34 m) above Isd. Highaat 

water lavel 48.21 ft (14.69 m) below Isd, Mar. 29, 1975; lowest 87.29 ft (26.61 m) balow Isd, Nov. 13, 1964. Recorda available: 

1956-75.

Water level at noon, from recorder graph, water year 1974

Day

S

10

IS

20 

25

Eom

Oct.

65.05 

65.13 

65.21

Nov.

65.42 

e65.10

Dec.

63.50 

63.54 

63.40

Jan.

61.00 

60.27 

59.79

Feb.

CQ CO

60.07 

60.26 

60.20

Mar.

59.76 

59.40 

59.01

Apr.

CQ Q 1

CO CQ

57.80 

57.90 

58.05

May

58 35

58.90 

58.69 

58.60

June

co e'j

co OQ

co 1 a

58.50 

58.81 

58.82

July

co 71

59.07 

59.27 

59.56

Aug.

59.97

60.33 

60.45 

60.61

Sept.

60.05 

60.15 

60.35

Water year 1975

5

10 

15 

?0

25

Eom

60.45 

60.50 

60.64 

60.78

60.83 

60.93

60.96 

61.05 

61.16 

61.04

61.14 

60.98

60.70 

60.78 

60.11 

59.79

59.40 

59.15

58.91 

58.34 

58.08 

57.25

57.30 

56.90

56.23 

56.35 

55.85 

55.58

55.26 

55.02

54.25 

53.78 

53.94

51.95

49.57

49.26

..... 51.62 

..... 51.90 

..... 51.95 

..... 52.30

51.13 52.48 

51.37 52.78

53.06 

53.40 

53. 74

54.30 

54.64

54.85 

55.10 

55.26 

55.48

55.50 

55.64

55.72 

55.75 

55.87 

55.87

55.83 

55.85

e Estimated.

381157085510201. Rubber Reaerve Co. Schenks Lane (previously reported Shanks Lane). Drilled observation water-table well in 

glacial sand and gravel, diam 6 in (15 cm), depth 112 ft (34 m). length of casing unknown. Lsd 446.27 ft (136.02 m) above mel. 

MP top of coupling, 4.85 ft (1.48 m) above Isd. Highest water level 37.14 ft (11.32 m) below Isd, July 6, 1975; lowest 57.62 

ft (17.56 m) below Isd, Feb. 25, 1956. Records available: 1945-75.

Water level at noon, from recorder graph, water year 1974

Day

5

10

IS

?0

?s

Eom

Oct.

42.29

42.30

42.33

42.40

42.43

42.40

Nov.

42.59

42.66

42.60

42.70

42.82

42.86

Dec.

42.87

42.92

42.97

42.98

42.99

43.05

Jan.

42.90

43.87

43.03

42.92

43.06

43.00

Feb.

42.90

42.82

42.75

42.75

42.66

42.48

Mar.

42.41

42.36

42.20

42.12

42.10

41.97

Apr.

41.94

41.81

41.70

41.60

41.50

41.36

May

41.23

41.14

41.07

40.98

40.91

40.86

June

40.80

40.77

40.72

40.71

40.70

40.63

July

40.64

40.63

40.62

40.66

40.70

40.76

Aug.

40.78

40.80

40.84

40.85

40.88

40.92

Sept.

41.00

41.05

41.12

41.17

41.18

41.27

Water year 1975

5

10

15

20

25

Eom

41.33

41.34

41.38

41.43

41.39

41.42

41.47

41.44

41.54

41.51

41.59

41.55

41.65

41.64

41.57

41.67

41.80

41.66

41.72

41.55

41.71

41.66

41.48

41.55

41.34

41.33

41.27

41.20

41.18

40.95

40.80

40.80

40.80

40.51

40.33

40.04

39.83

39.52

39.30

39.06

38.76

38.46

38.31

38.17

37.98

37.86

37.73

37.54

37.42

37. 3«

37.29

37.28

37.28

37.22

37.16

37.18

37.25

37.20

37.25

37.33

37.33

37.41

37.46

47.56

47.62

47.72

47.80

47.92

48.02

38.10

38.19

38.31

381443085470602. Brown-Foraan Distilleries. 1908 Howard St., Louieville. Drilled unused water-table well In glacial sand and 

gravel, diem 12 in (30 cm), depth 200 ft (61 m), cased to bottom. Lsd 451.13 ft (137.50 ) above ml. » top of casing, at Isd. 

Higheat Vater level 41.89 ft (12.77 m) below Isd, Sept. 19, 1975; lowest 79.64 ft (24.27 ) below lad, Apr. 22, 1965. Records 

available: 1961-75.

Date

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

23, 1973

12

17

18, 1974

19

22

Weter 

level

d53.80

d53. 75

d53.55

c53.50

c53.03

c52.98

c Nearby well being pumped, 

d Neerby well pumped recently.

Date

Apr. 19, 1974 

Hay 20 

June 21 

July 22 

Aug. 19 

Sept. 20

Water 

level

C53.27 

c52.55 

d52.36 

d50.36 

d49.22 

d49.13

Date

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

21, 1974

22

23

23, 1975

21

24

Water 

level

d48.23

d47.15

d46.44

d45.91

d45.52

d44.79

Date

Apr. 21, 1975 

Hay 22 

June 25 

July 21 

Aug. 18 

Sept. 19

Watsr 

level

dtt.80 

d44.27 

d43.77 

d43.24 

d43.56 

d41.89

Johnson County

374610082453001. Kentucky Hater Co. Van tear. Drilled unused artesian well la Breathitt Formation of Early and Middle Pennsylvenian age, diam 6 in (15 cm), depth 115 ft (35 »), length of caaing unknown. Lsd about 630 ft (192 m) above msl. » bottom of 

recorder base, 3.42 ft (1.04 m> above lad. Highest weter level 23.78 ft (7.25 m) balow lad, Jan. 29. 1972 <revieed); lowest 28.81 

ft (8.78 ) below Isd, Oct. 29, 1963. Recorda available: 1951-75. Measurement discontinusd Ang. 31, 1975.

FIGURE 9. Example of ground-water-level data tables as published by U.S. Geological Survey.

30
eral drainage pattern of the area are also given. 

Changes in the site during the history of the data 

collection should also be identified.

Next, there is a need to know what information 

is available and over what time span each type of 

information is available. In many instances, there 

is a fairly long period of one kind of information 

(usually streamflow or water level) with an even 

longer period of known extremes such as floods or 

droughts; and then shorter periods of increasingly 

varied kinds of information (usually waterquality parameters). A listing of the periods for 

which each type of data is available serves as a 

hunting guide to the user of data reports for previous years.

The value of giving the size of the drainage area 

tributary to a surface-water data site is so universally accepted that it need not be discussed.

Instrumentation at the site is also important in 

analyzing the completeness and reliability of the 

data; so it, too, should be stated. Recording instruments usually provide more frequent readings than do personal observations. Conditions at 

the site and the use to be made of the data determine whether the frequency should be once a 

year, once a month, once a week, once a day, once 

an hour, several times an hour, or continuously.

Probably the most commonly asked questions 

are, "What is the average?", "What is the 

greatest?", and "What is the least?" The questions 

may be asked about any parameter and often do 

not specify a given period, but should probably be 

interpreted as "What can usually be expected?" 

and "What are the widest extremes that can be 

expected?" Average values are given if the record 

for that parameter is continuous and long enough 

to be significant. Maximum or minimum or both 

are given for several parameters if the observations or samples are taken frequently enough so 

that the true extremes are probably represented. 

Extremes, if given, are stated for the current year 

and for the entire period of record for that 

parameter.

There is no unanimity of opinion about the 

quantity and nature of additional information 

that should be given about a site. Some people 

think that an evaluation of the quality or reliability of the data should be stated; others think that 

no evaluation is justified; as a compromise, discharge is the only parameter presently rated. 

Certainly the significant factors affecting the reported parameters should be stated.

The introductory pages of each report follow a 

standard format which describes the data collection and processing program, identifies cooperating agencies, defines the technical terms used in 

the report, cites the reports containing data for 

preceding years, and suggests supplementary information which can be obtained from office files.

There is neither enough money nor enough personnel to collect and process complete discharge 

data for every day at every site at which information is needed; so an additional network of 

"partial-record stations" has been established to 

extend the data coverage by collecting limited information at the extremes of high flow and low 

flow. The data for extreme high flow are listed in a 

table entitled "Annual maximum discharge at 

crest-stage partial-record stations" (fig. 10). The 

data for low flow are listed in a table entitled 

"Discharge measurements made at low-flow 

partial-record stations" (fig. 11). Additional 

streamflow data are listed as miscellaneous discharge measurements; these data are archived 

only, since they are not part of the continuing 

program of a network of basic-data sites.

Similarly, there are water-quality partialrecord sites and miscellaneous water-quality 

analyses made to answer questions for a specific 

site at a specific time (fig. 12).

As mentioned earlier, the U.S. Geological Survey published water-resources basic-data reports 

through 1970 in three series of water-supply papers, one each for surface water (quantity), water 

quality, and ground water (well levels). Each 

surface-water and water-quality report covered 

an area bounded by natural drainage divides. As 

the number of sites (and pages of data) increased, 

the areas covered by each report were subdivided 

to keep each book from becoming too cumbersome. Each ground water report covered a section 

of the country composed of a group of states. The 

reports were all reviewed, assembled, and published at headquarters (Reston, Va. and Denver, 

Colo.) from data furnished from field offices 

throughout the country.

In 1961, as part of a movement to release basic 

data in preliminary form more rapidly than could 

be done through publication at headquarters, the 

streamflow information was issued by the individual districts in virtually the same format as 

used in the water-supply papers. Each district report, however, contained data only for the area 

administered by that district (usually one State).

31
DISCHARGE AT PARTIAL-RECORD STATIONS 

Crest-stage partial-record stations

The following table contains annual maximum discharges for crest-stage stations. A crest-stage gage is a device which will 

register the peak stage occurring between inspections of the gage. At a few of these stations crest stages are determined from 

continuous water-stage recorder graphs. A stage-discharge relation for each gage is developed from discharge measurements made 

by indirect measurements of peak flow or by current meter. The date of the maximum discharge is not always certain but is usually 

determined by comparison with nearby continuous record stations, weather records, or local inquiry. Only the maxima discharge for 

each water year is given. Information on some lower floods may have been obtained but is not published herein. The years given in 

the period of record- represent water years for which the annual maximum has been determined.

Station name

Indian Run Tributary 

near Tollesboro, 

Ky.

03238030 Lawrence Creek near 

Maysville, Ky.

Indian Creek near 

Owingsville, Ky.

Rose Run Tributary 

near Olympia, Ky.

Licking River at Blue 

Lick Springs, Ky.

Lees Creek Tributary 

at Mays Lick, Ky.

Pleasant Run Creek at 

Crescent Springs, 

Ky.

03260012 Pleasant Run Creek 

Tributary at Fort 

Mitchell, Ky.

03277300 North Fork Kentucky 

River at Whitesburg, Ky.

03277400 Leatherwood Creek 

at Daisy, Ky.

03278000 Bear Branch near 

Noble, Ky.

03280935 Stamper Fork at 

Canoe, Ky.

03281200 South Fork Kentucky 

River at Oneida, 

Ky.

Annual maximum discharge at crest-stage partial-record stations

Cabin Creek basin

Lat 38°34'S2", long 83°30'01", Lewis County, 

at culvert on State Highway 10, 0.1 mi 

(0.2 km) above mouth, and 4.5 mi (7.2 km) 

northeast of Tollesboro.

Lawrence Creek basin

Lat 38°38'04M , long 83°47'32", Mason County, 

at culvert on U.S. Highway 62 and 68, 0.5 

mi (0.8 km) above tributary on left bank, 

and 1.8 mi (2.9 km) southwest of Maysville.

Licking River basin

Lat 38°09'24", long 83°39'OS", Bath County, 

at culvert on Interstate Highway 64, 1.3 

mi (2.1 km) above Knox Hill Branch, 1.5 

mi (2.4 km) above mouth, and 6.2 mi 

(10.0 km) east of Owingsville.

Lat 38°06'46", long 83°42'30", Bath County, 

at culvert on county road, 1.1 mi (1.78 km) 

above mouth, and 1.2 mi (1.9 km) northwest 

of Olympia.

Lat 38°2S'19", long 83°S9'S7", on bridge on 

U.S. Highway 68 and State Highway 32, at 

Blue Lick Springs, 1.2 mi (1.9 km) above 

Indian Run.

Lat 38°31'28", long 83°50'04", Mason County, 

at culvert on U.S. Highway 68, 0.5 mi 

(0.8 km) above mouth, and 0.6 mi (1.0 km) 

northeast of Mays Lick.

Pleasant Run Creek basin

Lat 39°03'18", long 84°33'S9", Kenton County, 

in trailer court at intersection of Venus 

Avenue and Mercury Way, about 2.5 mi 

(4.0 km) above mouth and near village of 

Crescent Springs.

Lat 39°03'4S", long 84 033'4S", Kenton County, 

at culvert on private road, 800 ft (240 m) 

above the mouth, and about 1.2 mi (1.9 km) 

east of the village of Crescent Springs.

Kentucky River basin

Lat 37°07'03", long 82°49'29", Letcher County, 

on brick wall of building at right downstream 

corner of bridge on State Highway IS, at 

Whitesburg, 0.6 mi (1.0 km) below Solomon 

Branch.

Lat 37°06'48", long 83°05'33", Perry County, 

on right bank on downstream side of bridge, 

at mouth of Hicks Branch, at Daisy, 0.6 mi 

(1.0 km) upstream from Little Leatherwood 

Creek, and 1.2 mi (1.9 km) upstream from 

mouth.

Lat 37°27'02", long 83°11'43", Breathitt 

County, on right bank, 800 ft (244 m) upstream from mouth, 0.2 mi (0.3 km) west of 

Noble, and 3.5 mi (5.6 km) north of Stacy.

Ut 37°26'24", long 83°26'17", Breathitt 

County, at culvert on county road, 200 ft 

(61 m) upstream from mouth, and 0.9 mi 

(1.4 km) southeast of Canoe.

tat 37°16'23", long 83°38'SO", Clay County, 

on bridge at Oneida, 850 ft (259 m) below 

Bullskin Creek.

Annual maximum

Drainage

area

(sq mi)

(sq km)

0.23

.60

1.90

4.92

2.43

6.29

.70

1.81

1,785

4,623

.45

1.17

.68

1.76

1.62

4.20

66.4

172

40.9

105.9

2.21

5.72

1.57

4.07

486

1,259

Period

of

record

1975

1975

1975

1975

1938-59)*

1960-75

1975

1973-75

1973-75

1957-75

1964-74j«

1975

19S4-73j«,

1974-75

1974-75

1957-75

Date

9-24-75

3-29-75

3-12-75

4-24-75

4-25-75

3-29-75

11-26-73

4-24-75

11-26-73

3-12-75

5-23-75

3-13-7S

3-14-75

3- -75

3-13-7S

Gage Disheight charge

(feet) (cfs)

86.54 76

91.63 397

101.07 1,080

87.46 210

33.48 21,300

94.51 110

7.48 220

7.00 205

4.70 275

7.65 430

7.36 2,320

8.47 2,530

2.58 220

88.58 345

32.63 33,300

; Operated as a continuous-record gaging station.

FIGURE 10. Example of table of annual maximum discharge at crest-stage partial-record stations as published

by U.S. Geological Survey.
DISCHARGE AT PARTIAL-RECORD STATIONS

As the number of streams on which streamflow information is likely to be desired far exceeds the mater of stream-gaging stations feasible to operate at one time, the Geological Survey collects limited streamflow data at sites other than stream-gaging 

stations. When limited streamflow data are collected on a systematic basis over a period of years for use in hydrologic analyses, 

the site at which the data are collected is called a partial-record station. Data collected at these partial-record stations are 

usable in low-flow or floodflow analyses, depending on the type of data collected. In addition, discharge measurements are made at 

other sites not included in the partial-record program. These measurements are generally made in time of drought or flood to give 

better area! coverage to those events. Those measurements and others collected for some special reason are called measurements at 

miscellaneous sitee.

Records collected at partial-record stations are presented in two tables. The first is a table of discharge measurements at 

low-flow partial-record stations and the second is a table of annual " *« stage and discharge at crest-stage stations. Discharge 

measurements made at miscellaneous sites for both low flow and high flow are given in a third table.

Low-flow partial-record stations

Measurements of streamflow in the area covered by this report made at low-flow partial-record stations are given in the following table. Most of these measurements were made during periods of base flow when streamflow is primarily from ground-water storage. 

These measurements, when correlated with the simultaneous discharge of a nearby stream where continuous records are available, will 

give a picture of the low-flow potentiality of stream. The column headed 'Teriod of record" shows the water years in which measurements were made at the same, or practically the same site.

Station No.

03209460

03209600

03214730

03215410

03216480

03216570

03216935

03248170

03248250

03248540

03248730

Station name

Discharge measurements made at low-flow partial-record stations during water year 1975

Measurements 

Location Date

Shelby Creek at 

Shelbiana, Ky.

Right Fork Beaver 

Creek at Wayland, Ky.

Rockcastle Creek at 

Clifford, Ky.

Blaine Creek near 

Blaine, Ky.

Little Fork Little 

Sandy River near 

Grayson, Ky.

East Fork Little 

Sandy River near 

Argillite, Ky.

Tygarts Creek near 

Kehoe, Ky.

Licking River at 

Fredville, Ky.

Licking River at 

Royalton, Ky.

Middle Fork near 

Salyersville, 

Ky.

Caney Creek near 

West Liberty, 

Ky.

Drainage

area 

(sq mi) 

(sqta)

Period

of 

record

Big Sandy River basin

Lat 37°2S'24", long 82°29'57", Pike County, 112 1965, 7-30-75

at concrete bridge, 0.2 mi (0.3 km) above 290 1972-75 8-26-75

Dry Creek, 0.3 mi (O.S km) above mouth,

and 0.3 mi (O.S km) southwest of Shelbiana. 

Lat 37°26'35", long 82°48'28", Floyd County, 73.9 1959-64 8-26-75

at Chesapeake and Ohio RR bridge at Way- 191.4 1967-75

land, 100 ft (30 m) downstream from Steele

Creek. 

Lat 38°00'07", long 82°31'12", Lawrence County, 121 1965, 8- 3-75

at bridge on State Highway 3, at mouth, at 313 1972-75 8-27-7S

Clifford. 

Lat 38°04'00", long 82°49'38", Lawrence County, 119 1972-75 8-27-7S

at bridge, 0.1 mi (0.2 km) below Cnerokee 308

Creek, and 2.7 mi (4.3 km) north of Blaine.

Little Sandy River basin

Lat 38°18'15", long 82°56'23", Carter County, 132 1965, 8- 3-75

just below old mill site, 0.5 mi (0.8 km) 342 1972-75 8-26-75

above mouth, 1.6 mi (2.6 km) below Canoe

Run and 2.0 mi (3.2 km) south of Grayson. 

Lat 38°28'44", long 82°45'46", Greenup County, 138 1968-75 8-27-75

at bridge on State Highway 747, 1.5 mi 3S7

(2.4 km) downstream from Pigott Branch,

and 3.6 mi (5.8 km) east of Argillite.

Tygarts Creek basin

Lat 38°26'06", long 83°02'04", Carter County, 125 1963-65, 7- 6-7S 

0.85 mi (1.4 km) below Ross Branch, 0.8S mi 324 1972-75 8-27-7S 

(1.4 km) above Shaws Branch, 2.4 mi (3.9 km) 

southeast of Kehoe, and 4.0 mi (6.4 km) above 

Buffalo Creek.

Licking River basin

Lat 37°36'13", long S^SS'l?", Magoffin County, 40.3 1973-75 10-10-74

at private walk bridge, 150 ft (46 m) south 104.4 8-25-75

of State Highway 7, 0.4 mi (0.6 km) west of

Fredville Post Office, 0.7 mi (1.1 km) below

Hhitley Branch, 1.0 mi (1.6 km) below Trace

Fork, and 1.1 mi (1.8 km) above Buck Branch. 

Lat 37°40'21", long 83°01'22", Magoffin County, 76.7 1973-75 10-10-74

at low-water bridge, 800 ft (244 m) above Gun 198.7 8-25-75

Creek, 0.2 mi (0.8 km) south of Royalton, 1.8

mi (2.9 km) above Oakley Creek, and 2.0 mi

(3.2 km) below Big Half Mountain Creek. 

Lat 37°44'24", long 83°07'48", Magoffin County, 45.7 1973-75 10-10-74

at bridge on Mountain Parkway Toll Road, 0.2 118.4 8-2S-7S

mi (0.3 km) above Patton Branch, 0.8 mi

(1.3 km) below Right Fork, 1.8 mi (2.9 km)

above mouth, and 3.3 mi (5.3 km) west of

Salyersville. 

Lat 37°S6'00", long 83°18'36", Morgan County, 41.4 1973-75 10-10-74

at bridge on county road, 0.3 mi (0.5 km) 107.2 8-27-75

above mouth, 0.9 mi (1.4 km) below Straight

Creek, and 2.9 mi (4.7 km) west of West

Liberty.

Discharge 

(cfs)

14. S 

11.8

1.S9

5.01

3.81

1.42

4.24

4.34

6.70

25.5

6.52

4.82 

.51

9.88

1.24

4.92 

.30

3.74 

.31

FIGURE 11. Example of table of discharge measurements made at low-flow partial-record stations as published by

U.S. Geological Survey.

33
ANALYSES OF SURFACE-WATER SAMPLES COLLECTED AT MISCELLANEOUS SITES 

CHEMICAL ANALYSES IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER, WATER YEAR OCTOBER 197 1* TO SEPTEMBER 1975

	DlS- oisDlS- SOLVED SOLVED DISINSTAN- SOLVED MAG- U1S- h>0- ALKA- DIS- SOLVED

TANEOUS CAL- NE- SOLVtO TAS- BICAft- CAT?- LllMlTY SOLVED CHLOU1S- ClUM S1LTM bOUlOM SlUM BONATE BONATt AS SuLFAft RIDE

CHAROt (CA) IMG) (MA) IK) (HC03) (C03) CAC03 (S04) (CD

UATE (CFS) IMb/L) (MG/L) (M(j/L) (H6/L) MG/L) (M(j/L) (MG/L) (MG/L) (MG/L)

SALT RIVER BASIN

03295900 - BRASHEARS CK AT TAYLORSVlLLE KY (LAT 38 ul 49 LONG 085 21 05)

AUG.. 1975 

27... 9.8 56 6.0 ~ 173 0 142 24 7.6

03298390 - FLOYOS Fu«K <MK OAP IN KNOb KY (LAT 38 02 04 LONG 085 J9 33)

JULY, 1975 

23... 22 64 16 198 0 162 4l 15

03298760 - NORTH ROLLlNb FORK AT BRAOSFOROVILLE ILAT 37 30 22 LONG Ob5 08 34)

AUU., IV75 

25... .50 43 It 154 0 126 32 3.t

03300498 - CAKTtfRlGHT CR AT FRtDRlCKTOwN KY (LAT 37 45 45 LONG 085 19 29)

OCT., 1974

31... 27 63 12 240 0 197 50 10 

SEP., 1975

15... 2.3 59 9.4 133 16 136 55 12

BLACKFORD CREEK BASIN

03303450 - SLACKFOHO c« NR MACEO KY (LAT 37 53 56 LUNO 086 59 ill

SEP., 1975

16... .7b 39 17 -- J8 0 31 140 6.2

GREEN RIVER BASIN

03305660 - 6RECN RlVtR NR. DONNVILLE. KY. (LAT 37 13 13 LONG 084 59 12)

AUG.. 1975 

<:5... 3.3 26 7.0 93 0 76 13 4.6

03305865 - CASEY Cft AT CASEY CK KY (LAT 37 17 57 LONG 085 09 00)

AUG.. 1975 

25... .42 19 4.7 6b 0 5o 11 3.4

TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL

ARSENIC DIS- CADMIUM DIS- CnROINSTAM- DlS- IN TOTAL SOLVED IN TOTAL SOLVED MlUM IN DISTANEOUS TOTAL SOLVtD BOTTOM CAD- CAD- BOTTOM CMRO- CUM- BOTTOM TOTAL SOLVED

DIS- TEMPER- ARSENIC ARSENIC MA- MlUM MlUM MA- MlUM MlUM MA- COBALl COBALT

CHARGE ATUHt (AS) (AS) TtRlAL (CD) (CO) TERIAL (CK) (CK) TER1AL (CO) (CO)

OAlE (CFS) (DEu C) (UG/L) (UO/L) luG/GI (06/L) (UG/L) (UG/GI lU(i/L) (UO/LI (UG/6) (UG/L) (U(j/L»

0330649D - GREEN R NR GREENSUOftG.KY. (LAT 37 14 43 LONG 085 28 47)

<10 0 0 

<10 0 0

JULY. 1975

Id... 119

SEP.

10... 121

JULY. 1975

16... 12

SEP.

10... 4.9

19

21

19

24

.5

,

.5

.5

.0

0

I

03307295

1

7

0

0

- BIG PITMAN

i

6

5

6

C NR

3

8

0

12

SUMMESSVILLE

3

4

0

0

KY (LAT

3

1

<10

<10

37 18

<lfl

<10

< 1 0 0

<10 0

17 LONS 085 31 39)

<10 0

<10 0

<10 0

FIGURE 12. Examples of tables of miscellaneous water-quality analyses as published by U.S. Geological Survey.

34
The response to the district streamflow data reports was so favorable that in 1964 water-quality 

data were released in similar district reports. The 

publication of surface-water and water-quality 

basic data at headquarters in the water-supply 

paper series was discontinued after 1970. In 1975 

the district reports were declared to be the official 

basic-data reports in a new series called U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Data Reports. In the 

new series, all basic data for an area (usually a 

State) are in one book; surface-water, waterquality, and ground-water data are combined in 

the same volume. The data for 1971 through 1974 

will be incorporated into the new series to provide 

continuity.

The water-supply paper series will continue to 

be used primarily for interpretative reports of national interest and for release of materials describing techniques and methodologies that have 

transfer value to other sectors of the country. As 

indicated earlier, data in those interpretative reports will be supporting evidence to the findings 

and results of the investigations.

The preparation of data reports in the U.S. 

Geological Survey is highly automated; the principal reason for automation is the large, volume of 

data collected. The data may be handled either 

manually or by automation; the decision as to 

what degree of automation is required will depend on the resources, both manpower and funds. 

In those organizations where labor expenses are 

high or constraints upon availability of manpower may exist, the interest in automation will 

be very high.

Potential for money and manpower savings in 

addition to the need for realtime data are also 

considerations which are being applied to the 

evaluation of current experiments with the satellite data programs. The implication in the name 

"realtime" is that the system is rather sophisticated and incorporates the latest in the way of 

processing equipment and technology in data 

transmission. The subject is raised at this time 

because it is frequently heard that there is an 

interest in publishing "realtime" data. Realtime 

data and publication are contradictory because of 

the inherent delays in preparing material for publication. In general, publications deal with historic data. Even though a site has a direct link 

with a satellite or telemetering device, data entered into a file require time for dissemination to 

points of interest. Essentially then, the situation

is a historic data system, albeit the data from the 

satellite program may be much more current than 

that available from a normal field operation. 

Printouts from the computer can be assembled for 

publication; however, at that stage they become 

historic because of the time delay factor in making the material available. An example of a publication and the computer working together to respond to the needs of the user community is a 

system incorporating either a satellite relay or a 

land-line system to provide data indicating conditions taking place at the station at the time of 

inquiry or interrogation. Data coming into the 

computer through the satellite program are immediately available for the user through terminal 

networks, and the same data are also available 

for future compilation and release in publications.

Recently, increasing recognition has been given 

in the United States to the role that many governmental agencies at Federal, State and local 

levels have in water resources planning, development, and management. Each agency collects and (or) uses water data to carry out its mission responsibilities, but very little of these data 

are published although they may be available in 

some other form. Because the data are not in published form, other agencies may not be aware of 

their existence. This lack of awareness has led to 

another kind of water data that is, data on data. 

The expression may sound confusing, but what it 

boils down to is the development of an index to the 

data holdings of the many agencies active in the 

field of water resources.

The nucleus of such an index already exists in 

the U.S. Geological Survey's Office of Water Data 

Coordination (OWDC), which is responsible for 

coordinating Federal water-data acquisition activities in the United States; its authority is based 

on OMB Circular A-67, which directs Federal 

agencies to cooperate with the Department of the 

Interior in eliminating duplicative activities in 

the acquisition of water data. The Department 

delegated A-67 responsibilities to the U.S. 

Geological Survey which, in turn, established the 

Office of Water Data Coordination in its Water 

Resources Division.

Every other year, the OWDC issues an updated 

edition of its Catalog of Information on Water 

Data, which is a compilation of data activities of 

about 20 Federal agencies and about 300 nonFederal agencies mostly State-level organizations which voluntarily submit information

35
CO 

05

WATER RESOURCES 

REGIONS

CARIBBEAN

FIGURE 13. Map of the United States showing OWDC amp numbers and Water Resources R
MASTER WA1ER DATA INDEX

MATER-DATA SI IE

.UNIQUE IDCNTIFICHS 

.A&l NCY CODE

.SITE IDENTIFICATION 

.GEOGRAPHIC IDENTIFIERS 

.PHYSICAL IDENTIFIERS 

.SITE STATUS 

.SUPPLEMENTARY DATA 

AVAILABLE

.BACTERIA

.PLANKTON

.PERIPHYTON

.INVtRTtBPATES

.VCRTFPRATES

.FUNGI

.VIRUSES

.OTHFR

.F«E<j(JENCY 

.MFPIft

AVAII ABLE 

.STAIU;, Of

ACTIVITY

,PH 

.SOLIDS

.FREQUENCY 

.MEDIA

AVAILABLE 

.STATUS OF

ACTIVITY

AUXILIARY

FILES

,nFD LOAD

 SUSPENDED

.TOTAL

.FREQUENCY 

.PARTICLE

SIZE 

.DISCHARGE

.TOTAL

.SUSPENDED

.HEDIA

AVAILABLE

.MAjnp !ONS

.PtOS.-HOP.US

.NITROGEN

.C4S3ON

.CPGAK1CS

.PESTICIDES

.OXYGfM

.OTHER CASES 

.PAD1OCMEMICAL

.FREQUENCY 

.MEDIA

AVAR ABLE 

.STATUS OF

ACTIVITY

FIGURE 14. Data elements in the Master Water Data Index of the National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX).

on their data activities for inclusion in the 

catalog. The catalog is published in 21 volumes, a 

separate volume for each of the Water Resources 

Council Regions (fig. 13) into which the United 

States is subdivided for water resources planning 

purposes. The catalog tells the user who is collecting what kinds of data and where; it also gives 

information as to how the data may be acquired, 

where it is, who should be contacted, and the 

media in which the data are available.

The information in the OWDC catalogs has 

been of great value to the data-user community as 

far as it goes, but it still leaves a "knowledge" gap 

in that in provides only summary type information for data stations of the contributing organizations. The catalog does not give the specifics 

that many users require in order to decide 

whether or not it is worth the time and cost to 

acquire the data to meet a particular need. 

Neither does it give any indication as to other 

organizations that collect data but do not participate in the catalog. As a result of this awareness

of data information deficiencies, a Federal interagency working group was formed under OWDC 

sponsorship to look into the problems associated 

with data handling. The work group recommended the development of a National system to 

improve access to water data. In its report, "Design Characteristics for a National System to 

Store, Retrieve, and Disseminate Water Data," 

the work group laid the foundation for the National Water Data Exchange (NAWDEX). A 

NAWDEX Program Office has been established 

within the Water Resources Division of the 

Geological Survey. One of its major functions, as 

described in the work group report, is "to assemble knowledge as to the locations of all types of 

water data." This function was further interpreted in the Summary Recommendations as "it 

will prepare and maintain an index to water-data 

activities which ultimately will include information on all water data in the files of member units 

of NAWDEX". Several contracts with private 

consultants have produced an implementation

37
MINOR OFFICES

.OFFICE NAME 

.TITLE/NAME OP CONTACT 

.ADDRESS

.NAHDEX AFFILIATION

LOCAL

ASSISTANCE 

CENTER

.OFFICE HOIKS 

.TELEPHONE

WATER DATA SOURCES DIRECTORY

WATER-DATA ORGANIZATION

.AGENCY CODE 

.ORGANIZATION NAME 

.NAWDfX AFFILIATION 

.SCOPE OF JURISDICTION 

.PROGRAM ORIENTATION

MAJOR OFFICES

.ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL 

.OFFICE NAME 

.TITLE/NAME OF CONTACT 

.ADDRESS

.SCOPE OF ACTIVITY 

.MEDIA OF DATA 

AVAILABILITY

.NAWDEX AFFILIATION

OTHER SOURCES OF 

ORGANIZATION'S DATA

.ORGANIZATION NAME 

.TITLE/NAME OF CONTACT 

.MEDIA OF DATA

AVAILABILITY 

.TYPES OF DATA AVAILABLE

.SURFACE WATER

.HATER QUALITY

 GROUND WATER

WATER-DATA ACTIVITIES

.COUNTRY/STATE

.TYPES OF DATA AVAILABLE 

.SURFACE MATER 

.HATCR DUALITY 

.GROUND HATER

I.COUNTIES

LOCAL

ASSISTANCE 

CENTER

.OFFICE HOURS 

.TELEPHONE

FIGURE 15. Data elements in the Water Data Sources Directory of NAWDEX.

plan for NAWDEX, part of which has been the 

establishment of a master index of water-data activities, and to incorporate the OWDC Catalog of 

Information into the master index in order to activate it as quickly as possible. However, the 

complete or detailed index will require considerable funds and manpower before it reaches the 

stage at which it will be effective in responding to 

information requests on availability of data. 

These problems have led to the concept for a second file which would complement the index a 

Water Data Sources Directory. The Directory will 

contain information on organizations that have 

water data, whereas the index will have the 

specifics on the data characteristics of individual 

activities. Figure 14 shows the data elements for 

the master index; figure 15 shows the elements 

for the Directory. Both will be online files accessible through remote terminals. In addition, the 

data contained in these files will be published 

periodically in order that they will be more readily available to the user community.

The Geological Survey recently experimented 

with the release of index material by publishing

the background information on data in the files of 

the Survey's National Water Data Storage and 

Retrieval System (WATSTORE). This index may 

be an indicator of future conditions showing that, 

as data networks expand, the volume of data increases exponentially. The resources required to 

make these data available in published form may 

become so great that media for release other than 

publication may be required. However, those 

other media must provide an archiving mechanism that will serve as well as a publication 

would.

Computer-related techniques for storing massive quantities of data have been developed in recent years, but many people are reluctatnt to rely 

solely on the computer for official archiving of 

data. Periodic computer failures in which data 

files have been wiped out, and occasional "bugs" 

in software packages which play havoc with data 

files are examples of the causes of such reluctance. A combination of the computer and the 

publication has resulted in better responsiveness 

to most needs of the user community than either 

one alone. However, the cost of publication con38
tinues to rise and the competition for use of available funds becomes more acute; a reevaluation of 

the data publication program may be required in 

the near future.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Standardization of Hydrologic Measurements

Davidian, Jacob, 1973, Calibration of current meters in a 

submerged jet: Proceedings Internat. Symposium on Hydrometry: Koblence, Germany, 1970, v. 1, p. 99-108.

Langford, R. H., and Doyel, W. W., 1974, Standards Development, a Government view: Reprint from Standardization 

News, v. 2, no. 6, American Society for Testing and Materials, p. 24-26.

Smoot, G. F., and Carter, R. W., 1968, Are individual 

current-meter ratings necessary?: Am. Soc. Civil Engineers Proc., Jour. Hydraulics Div., v. 94, no. HY2, 

p. 391-397.

World Meteorological Organization, 1970, Guide to hydrometeorological practices: World Meteorological Organization, 2d ed., no. 168, tp. 82, 281 p.

Operational Hydrometeorological Data Collection 

System for the Columbia River

Lystrom, D. J., 1972, Analysis of potential errors in realtime 

streamflow data and methods of data verification by digital computer: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file report, 58 p.

Storage and Retrieval of Water-Resources Data

Baker, C. H., Jr., and Foulk, D. G., 1975, Instructions for 

preparation and submission of ground-water data: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Open-File Report 75-589, 159 p.

Carter, R. W., and others, 1963, Automation of streamflow 

records: U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 474, 18 p.

Collins, W. D., 1923, Graphic representation of analyses: Indus, and Eng. Chemistry, v. 15, p. 394.

Hem, J. D., 1959, Study and interpretation of the chemical 

characteristics of natural water: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 1473, 269 p.

Hutchison, N. E., compiler, 1975, WATSTORE user's guide: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Open-File Report 75-476, 844 p.

McNellis, J. M., and Morgan, C. O., 1969, Modified Piper diagrams by the digital computer: Kansas Geol. Survey Spec. 

Distrib. Pub. 45, 36 p.

Morgan, C. O., and McNellis, J. M., 1969, Stiff diagrams of 

water-quality data programmed for the digital computer: 

Kansas Geol. Survey Spec. Distrib. Pub. 43, 27 p.

Ropes, L. H., Morgan, C. O., and McNellis, J. M., 1969, FORTRAN IV program for synthesis and plotting of waterquality data: Kansas Geol. Survey Spec. Distrib. Pub. 39, 

59 p.

Showen, C. R., 1971, Transmission of digital data: U.S. Geol. 

Survey open-file report, 13 p.

Stiff, H. A., Jr., 1951, The interpretation of chemical water 

analyses by means of patterns: Jour. Petroleum Technology, v. 3, no. 10, October, p. 15-17.

U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954, Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, 

Agriculture Handb. 60, 160 p.

Publication of Water-Resources Data

Federal Interagency Water Data Handling Work Group, 1971, 

Design characteristics for a national system to store, retrieve, and disseminate water data: U.S. Geol. Survey, 

Office of Water Data Coordination, 31 p.

Lang, S. M., and Doyel, W. W., 1972, A national system for 

exchange of water data: Internat. Assoc. Hydrology Bull. 

XVII, 1972, 7 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1972, Surface-water supply of the 

United States, 1966-70, pt. 3, v. 2. Ohio River basin from 

Kanawha River to Louisville, Kentucky: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 2108, 700 p.

 1975, Quality of surface waters of the United States, 

1970, Pt. 3, Ohio River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 2153, 444 p.

 1975, Ground water levels in the United States 1969- 

73, Southeastern States: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 2171, 250 p.

 1976, Water resources data for Kentucky, water year 

1975: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Data Rept, KY-75-1, 

334 p.

 1975, Catalog of information on water data, water resources region 05 (Ohio) Edition 1974: U.S. Geol. Survey, 

Office of Water Data Coordination, 172 p.

39

*U.S. GPO: 1978 789*107 #55