Title:
Analysis of Quality-Assurance and Quality-Control Procedures for an Urban Water-Quality Monitoring Program, Gwinnett County, Georgia
Analysis of Quality-Assurance and Quality-Control Procedures for an Urban Water-Quality Monitoring Program, Gwinnett County, Georgia
| dc.contributor.author | Knaak, Andrew E. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ankcorn, Paul D. | |
| dc.contributor.corporatename | Geological Survey (U.S.) | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-07-03T18:46:36Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2013-07-03T18:46:36Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2007-03 | |
| dc.description | Proceedings of the 2007 Georgia Water Resources Conference, March 27-29, 2007, Athens, Georgia. | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | The U.S. Geological Survey has, during many years of environmental monitoring, developed quality-assurance and quality-control procedures to assist in the collection of accurate and representative water-quality data. Urban storm sampling typically is performed using one of two methods; the equal-width-increment method or the automated-point-sample method. Quality-control data (equipment blanks and concurrent samples) were collected from 1997 to 2006 at 12 watersheds in Gwinnett County, Georgia, to compare these methods and to evaluate the cleanliness of field procedures. Constituent concentrations in samples collected concurrently using both methods were compared to determine how representative point sample data were of cross-sectional stream conditions. Percent differences of concurrent-sample constituent concentrations were compared with storm size to identify bias or trend when collecting samples using the automated point-sample method. Data collected using the two different methods indicated that constituent concentrations in concurrent samples generally were within 10 percent. Constituent concentrations in equipment blanks typically were less than analytical method detection limits. | en_US |
| dc.description.sponsorship | Sponsored and Organized by: U.S. Geological Survey, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service, The University of Georgia, Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology | en_US |
| dc.description.statementofresponsibility | This book was published by the Institute of Ecology, The University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-2202. The views and statements advanced in this publication are solely those of the authors and do not represent official views or policies of The University of Georgia, the U.S. Geological Survey, the Georgia Water Research Institute as authorized by the Water Resources Research Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-397) or the other conference sponsors. | |
| dc.embargo.terms | null | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1853/48203 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Georgia Institute of Technology | en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | GWRI2007. Riverbasin and Stream Studies | en_US |
| dc.subject | Water resources management | en_US |
| dc.subject | Water quality data | en_US |
| dc.subject | Urban storm sampling | en_US |
| dc.subject | Quality control data | en_US |
| dc.subject | Quality assurance procedures | en_US |
| dc.subject | Constituent concentrations | en_US |
| dc.title | Analysis of Quality-Assurance and Quality-Control Procedures for an Urban Water-Quality Monitoring Program, Gwinnett County, Georgia | en_US |
| dc.type | Text | |
| dc.type.genre | Proceedings | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| local.contributor.corporatename | Georgia Water Resources Institute | |
| local.contributor.corporatename | School of Civil and Environmental Engineering | |
| local.contributor.corporatename | College of Engineering | |
| local.relation.ispartofseries | Georgia Water Resources Conference | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | 8873b408-9aff-48cc-ae3c-a3d1daf89a98 | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | 88639fad-d3ae-4867-9e7a-7c9e6d2ecc7c | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | 7c022d60-21d5-497c-b552-95e489a06569 | |
| relation.isSeriesOfPublication | e0bfffc9-c85a-4095-b626-c25ee130a2f3 |