USGS Home
Contact USGS
Search USGS

About USGS /  Science Topics /  Maps, Products & Publications /  Education / Publication: FAQ

Georgia
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 6,092 stream-sediment, 14 surface-water, and 5,990 ground-water samples within 142 counties from the northern two-thirds of Georgia as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The sediment samples were collected during June - December 1976, April 1977, and April - September 1978, and water samples were collected during January - December 1977 and March - November 1978. Sample coverage included portions of the Athens, Atlanta, Augusta, Brunswick, Dothan, Greenville, Macon, Phenix City, Rome, Savannah, Valdosta, and Waycross 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 38 stream-sediment and 45 ground-water samples were collected within the Augusta quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 5,958 sediments and 5,989 waters from Georgia; this includes all 38 sediment and 45 water samples from the Augusta quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Georgia samples were released in the Alabama and Georgia Data Report [GJBX-403(81)].

SRL sent 2,956 sediment samples from Georgia to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 2,951 of these samples in the Alabama and Georgia Data Report [GJBX-403(81)]. The digital data file accompanying this report includes Supplemental Analyses for 6 Georgia sediment samples within the Augusta quadrangle.

South Carolina
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 3,618 stream-sediment and 3,945 ground-water samples within 46 counties from South Carolina as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The sediment samples were collected during June - October 1976; April 1977; and January - April 1978, and water samples were collected during December 1976 - July 1977 and January - September 1978. Sample coverage included portions of the Athens, Augusta, Charlotte, Florence, Georgetown, Greenville, James Island, Knoxville, Savannah, and Spartanburg 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 737 stream-sediment and 1,254 ground-water samples were collected within the Augusta quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 3,581 sediments and 3,941 waters from South Carolina; this includes all 736 sediment and 1,254 water samples from the Augusta quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all South Carolina samples were released in the North and South Carolina Data Report [GJBX-102(82)].

SRL sent 2,483 sediment samples from South Carolina to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 2,476 of these samples in the North and South Carolina Data Report [GJBX-102(82)]. The digital data file accompanying this report include Supplemental Analyses for 288 South Carolina sediment samples within the Augusta quadrangle.

SRL: Augusta Quadrangle
SRL released a separate quadrangle report for the Augusta NTMS quadrangle, which includes data for 775 stream-sediment and 1,299 ground-water samples. With minor differences, these sample data are the same as the those for corresponding samples found in the North and South Carolina State reports. SRL released the analytical data as the Augusta Quadrangle GJBX-45(79) Preliminary Basic Data Report. The site coding information for this data set is summarized within the text of this report.

Aiken County Gorceixite Area
During 1979, the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) conducted a detailed study of the Aiken and Lexington County areas within the Augusta 1:250,000-scale quadrangle. During the Spring and Summer of 1979, 702 stream-sediment, 545 ground-water, and 804 surface-water samples were collected from Aiken County as part of that detailed survey. This survey was undertaken in order to determine the origin, abundance, and areal extent of uraniferous gorceixite deposits in the Aiken and Lexington Counties, South Carolina. Gorceixite is a hydrated barium aluminum phosphate mineral that occurs in Aiken County as thin seams and nodules. All of the samples collected for this survey were analyzed by SRL and the data released in the NURE Detailed Sampling in Aiken County, South Carolina GJBX-33(83) report. (Note: One sediment and one water sample collected at a single stream site during this study appears to be located just north of the Augusta quadrangle border inside the Spartanburg quadrangle).

In addition, 1306 water samples collected for the Aiken County Gorceixite Area detailed survey were sent to the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP) for supplemental analyses. The supplemental data were released as the Aiken County Detailed Survey GJBX-175(82) abbreviated report (on microfiche only). The site coding information for this data set was summarized in the GJBX-164(82) report.

Light Hydrocarbons Analyses
SRL analyses of light hydrocarbons (methane, ethane, propane, and butane) in ground waters were released in the GJBX-131(82) summary report for 44 western quadrangles and 3 eastern quadrangles within the United States. This report includes data for 826 of the Augusta quadrangle ground water samples that were collected for the Aiken County detailed study.

Gold Analyses
Data for gold analyses of sediments by SRL neutron activation were released in the GJBX-135(82) summary report. The introduction of that report states:

"This report contains previously unreported neutron-activation analyses of gold in sediment samples determined at SRL. These data were not included in the standard SRL NURE data reports because the gold spectrum was not measured in the original analytical procedure and the report format was designed without the gold analyses being included. Gold analyses became available as the analytical procedure was refined, but the report format was not modified to incorporate these data."

Only those sediment samples that had detectable concentrations of gold by neutron activation analysis were given in the GJBX-135(82) report. Sediment samples with concentrations below detection limits were not reported and can only be ascertained by identifying which samples were actually analyzed by neutron activation at SRL.

Summary Tables
Because of the various laboratories and analytical methods used, some SRL samples may have been analyzed once, twice, or not at all. The following table summarizes the analysis of Augusta quadrangle samples.

The following is a list of all sediment and water sample types collected and reported for NURE studies in the Augusta quadrangle.

These Augusta quadrangle samples were analyzed by one or more of the following methods:

Sediment Samples

• SR1: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis - Neutron Counting of sediments for U.
• SR2: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis of sediments for Al, Ce, Dy, Eu, Fe, Hf, La, Lu, Mn, Na, Sc, Sm, Th, Ti, V, and Yb. (Note: Au values were reported later for this method.)
• SR3-AA: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy Analysis of sediments for Ag, Ba, Be, Co, Cr, Cu, Mg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sn, Sr, Y, and Zn.
• SR3-CA: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Colorimetric Analysis of sediments for Nb, P, and W.
• SR3-FE: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Flame Emission Analysis of sediments for K and Li.

Water Samples

• SR4: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis - Neutron Counting of waters for U.
• SR5: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis of waters for Al, Br, Cl, Dy, F, Mn, Na, and V. (Note: Mg may also be reported by this method.)
• SR-GC: Savannah River Gas Chromatography of waters for light hydrocarbons.
• OR13: Supplemental Analyses by Oak Ridge Emission Spectrochemical Analysis of waters for Ag, Al, B, Ba, Be, Ca, Ce, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, K, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Ni, P, Sc, Si, Sr, Ti, V, Y, Zn, and Zr. (Note: Nb and Th may be included in this method.)

Discussion of the Reformatting Process for Augusta Quadrangle

Sediment Records
The Augusta quadrangle sediment data consist of reformatted records from the Augusta Quadrangle GJBX-45(79) Data Report. These records were compared with corresponding sample records from the South Carolina portion of the North and South Carolina [GJBX-102(82)] Data Report along with sample records from the Georgia portion of the Alabama and Georgia [GJBX-403(81)] Data Report. In addition, samples from the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Detailed Study [GJBX-33(83)] Data Report, were reformatted and added to the final digital data file. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Augusta quadrangle sediment data:

1. The analytical values for many U, Dy, Fe, Lu, and V determinations differed slightly between the Augusta quadrangle files and the South Carolina and Georgia State files. These variations are apparently due only to differences in rounding versus truncation of reported values or to differences in the number of recorded significant digits. Since the variation was insignificant, only one set of the values was retained for the affected elements.
2. For some records, analytical values for Ce, Dy, Eu, Fe, La, Lu, Sm, and Th were found in the South Carolina and Georgia State files but were missing in the corresponding records from the Augusta quadrangle files. These values were added and that change was noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
3. For some records, analytical values for U, Ce, Fe, Mn,and Ti were found in the Augusta quadrangle files but were missing in the corresponding records from the South Carolina and Georgia State files. These missing values were noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
4. For 12 records, Augusta quadrangle Neutron Activation Analytical values were significantly different from that found in the corresponding records from the South Carolina and Georgia State files. For all of these affected records, the differences between Augusta quadrangle files and South Carolina and Georgia State files required the creation of two separate records for each sample to preserve all the data.
5. The date on which a sample was analyzed by Neutron Activation Analysis was only recorded in the State digital data files from the South Carolina [GJBX-102(82)] Data Report and the Georgia [GJBX-403(81)] Data Report. This information was added to each of combined sediment data records.
6. During reformatting, contamination codes for "residential" and "recreation" were found to be missing from the state CONTAMC field. These codes were present in the quadrangle format and were added to the final digital data file.
7. The coordinates for one stream sediment sample from the Augusta quadrangle-Aiken County Gorceixite Area Study located the sample within the Spartanburg quadrangle. The record for this sample was assigned to the Spartanburg quadrangle.
8. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several stream-sediment samples that were missing coordinates, did not plot within expected state, county, or map boundaries, or had differing coordinates in corresponding records. To correct or confirm sample coordinates, the original field collection maps for Richmond County, Georgia and Barnwell County, South Carolina were obtained and re-digitized. The newly re-digitized coordinates were added to the database and the coordinates from the original file(s) were recorded in the COORDPRB comment field. When the newly re-digitized coordinates were not significantly different, that confirmation of the site location was also noted in the COORDPRB comment field.
9. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 5 sediment samples collected for the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Study in the Augusta quadrangle were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 5 samples cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
10. Gold concentrations from the GJBX-135(82) report were added to the appropriate sediment records. A value of -0.01 (<0.01 ppm Au) was added to all other sediment samples determined to have been analyzed by SRL neutron activation. This value was chosen because 0.01 is the lowest reported gold concentration in the entire report.

Water Records
The Augusta quadrangle water data consist of reformatted records from the Augusta Quadrangle GJBX-45(79) Data Report. These records were compared with corresponding sample records from the South Carolina portion of the North and South Carolina [GJBX-102(82)] Data Report along with sample records from the Georgia portion of the Alabama and Georgia [GJBX-403(81)] Data Report. In addition, samples from the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Detailed Study Data Reports, [GJBX-33(83)]and [GJBX-175(82)], were reformatted and added to the final digital data file. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Augusta quadrangle water data:

1. The analytical values for many Al, Br, Dy, and Mn determinations differed slightly between the Augusta quadrangle files and the South Carolina and Georgia State files. These variations are apparently due only to differences in rounding versus truncation of reported values or to differences in the number of recorded significant digits. Since the variation was insignificant, only one set of the values was retained for the affected elements.
2. For one record, the analytical value for Mn was found in the Augusta quadrangle file but was missing in the corresponding records from the South Carolina State files. This missing value was noted for this affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
3. For one record, Augusta quadrangle Neutron Activation Analytical values were significantly different from that found in the corresponding records from the South Carolina State files. For this affected record, the differences between quadrangle files and State files required the creation of two separate records for this sample to preserve all the data.
4. Because of overlapping determinations for five elements, records for the ORGDP Supplemental data were not combined with corresponding records from the SRL analyses of the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Detailed Study. Each of these samples are represented by two records.
5. The original ORGDP files for the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Study did not include all of the information about the character of the sample location. This missing information includes observations taken at each site on the stream width, depth, and flow, water color, surrounding vegetation, local relief, weather, and possible contaminants. In addition, the longitude coordinate reported in the ORGDP file only had 3 decimal places instead of the 4 decimal places found in the corresponding records from SRL files. The missing site descriptive data and the complete longitude value were added to ORGDP records from the corresponding SRL file records. Sources of data and any problems found are described in the REFORMAT comment field.
6. The coordinates for one stream water sample from the Augusta quadrangle-Aiken County Gorceixite Area Study located the sample within the Spartanburg quadrangle. Two records for this sample were assigned to the Spartanburg quadrangle; one record of the SRL analytical data and one record containing the ORGDP Supplemental analytical data.
7. One stream-water sample was collected at a longitude of exactly 80°W, the dividing line between the Augusta quadrangle and the Georgetown quadrangle. The data record for this sample was assigned to the Georgetown quadrangle.
8. The original NURE format for surface-water files did not include much information about the character of the sample location. This missing information includes observations taken at each site on the stream width, depth, and flow, water color, surrounding vegetation, local relief, weather, and possible contaminants. This information is given in records for stream-sediment samples that were collected at the same locations. The available site descriptive information for stream-water sites were compared with the corresponding stream-sediment site records. The missing site descriptive data were then added to stream-water records from the corresponding stream-sediment sample records. Sources of data and any problems found are described in the REFORMAT comment field.
9. During reformatting, contamination codes for "residential" and "recreation" were found to be missing from each State's CONTAMC field. The presence of one of these two codes was indicated only by a "." (period). Most, but not all of these contamination codes were present in the original quadrangle file. When possible, the missing contamination codes were replaced, otherwise the missing codes were assigned a value of "unknown" in the CONTAMC field within the final sediment data file.
10. Hydrocarbon data from the GJBX-131(82) report were added to fields in the appropriate ground water records and this addition was noted for each record in the REFORMAT comment field.
11. One sample analyzed by ORGDP has a determination value of 999.9 for at least one element. This value was checked in the original GJBX publication and confirmed to be as reported. It is unclear whether this value represents a valid determination, a determination that is above the reported limits of the analytical method, or a null value. This record can be identified by a comment in the REFORMAT field.
12. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 10 water samples collected for the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Study in the Augusta quadrangle were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 10 samples cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
13. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 1 water sample collected within Orangeburg County, South Carolina were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The record for this sample cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.

Download The Data

The NURE HSSR data are now available online in two databases: The sediment database (also includes data for soils and some rocks) at http://tin.er.usgs.gov/nure/sediment/ and the water database at http://tin.er.usgs.gov/nure/water/. From these two web sites, NURE HSSR data can be selected, examined, summarized, and downloaded by political boundaries (State and County), by quadrangle (1:250,000-scale, 1:100,000-scale, and 1:63,360-scale for Alaska or 1:24,000-scale for the Lower 48 States), and by hydrologic unit (drainage region, subregion, river basin, or sub-basin). Selected data can be downloaded as a dBase file, a shapefile, an HTML table, or ASCII text (tab- or comma-delimited).

Augusta Quadrangle Sediment Data - 1,483 records
Augusta Quadrangle Water Data - 3,941 records

Notes for Data Users

In the eastern United States, SRL collected samples primarily by county. Often, not all counties within a quadrangle were completely sampled. Sample coverage in the Augusta quadrangle is almost complete and includes samples from Aiken, Allendale, Bamberg, Barnwell, Berkeley, Calhoun, Charleston, Clarendon, Colleton, Dorchester, Edgefield, Lexington, Orangeburg, Richland, Saluda, Sumpter, and Williamsburg Counties in South Carolina; and Burke, Richmond and Screven Counties in Georgia. It appears that no samples were collected or reported from the Savannah River Plant property in parts of Aiken and Barnwell Counties, South Carolina. The laboratory and analytical methods used also may vary by county such that adjacent counties often have very different analytical coverage.

One stream-sediment sample from Dorchester County within the Augusta quadrangle was not analyzed by any of the various laboratories. Additionally, two stream-sediment samples from the Aiken County Gorceixite Area Detailed Study were also not analyzed by any of the various laboratories.

Other NURE Geochemical Data for the Augusta Quadrangle

Leesville Orientation Study
To assure that the SRL HSSR program would have a sound technical basis, orientation or pilot studies were conducted in a variety of geologic and geographic settings. During 1976, SRL conducted an orientation study in the Leesville, South Carolina, area [GJBX-61(78)]. During the study, a total of 43 sediment, 47 surface-water, and 49 ground-water samples were collected and analyzed for Al, Br, Cl, Dy, F, Mg, Mn, Na, Sc, V, and U by an unspecified method. In addition, water samples were analyzed in the field for sulfate by barium sulfate turbidimetry, and analyzed for nitrate, orthophosphate, and ammonia by colorimetry. Data tables of analytical results are included within the report. No digital data files were available for reformatting.

Uraniferous Gorceixite Study
As part of the NURE program, SRL had developed several chemical and geologic techniques to aid in identifying potential favorable areas for uranium exploration. Eight occurrences of the rare mineral gorceixite (a hydrated barium aluminum phosphate), which is associated with uranium mineralization, were described by SRL to assess uranium potential in Aiken County, South Carolina [GJBX-47(79)]. Gorceixite from this area has been shown to contain between 75 to 960 ppm uranium. This report contains chemical, mineralogical, and the location data for each occurrence. Data tables of analytical results are included within the report. No digital data files were available for reformatting.

Mineral Chemistry of the Southeastern Piedmont
SRL also conducted an analysis of monazite, zircon, and apatite in the Southeastern Piedmont [GJBX-101(82)]. SRL collected 263 monazite, 191 zircon, and 16 apatite grains from 52 stream-sediment locations and analyzed them by electron microprobe for one of the two following suites of elements: Ca, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Er, Dy, Y, Th, U, and F, or Ca, La, Ce, Fe, Er, Hf, Y, Th, U, P, Zr, Mg, Al, and Si. Samples were collected along eight traverses where reconnaissance data had previously revealed high concentrations of uranium, thorium, and cerium in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina (Athens, Augusta, Charlotte, Greenville, Knoxville, and Spartanburg 1:250,000-scale quadrangles). Data tables of analytical results are included within the report. No digital data files were available for reformatting.

Augusta Quadrangle NURE Summary
A summary evaluation report was prepared for the Augusta quadrangle by the Bendix Field Engineering Corporation of Grand Junction, Colorado [PGJ/F-031(82)]. A total of 366 ground-water samples were collected in the quadrangle to aid in the interpretation of uranium anomalies. These ground-water samples were analyzed for uranium oxide by fluorometry. A total of 673 ground water sites were analyzed in the field by an unspecified method, and 794 gamma-ray spectrometer reading were taken along the Medoc Fault Zone. These data were released only as appendices on microfiche accompanying the summary report.

North America and Africa Plutonic Rocks Special Study
The SRL in contract with the Department of Geology of the University of North Carolina conducted a special study to investigate the association of uranium deposits with granitic source or host rocks. The analytical results from 441 samples of 92 plutons were released in the North America and Africa Plutonic Rocks Special Study GJBX-221(82) report. See the North America and Africa Plutonic Rocks Special Study for the data and a more detailed description of this study. Plutons that were apparently sampled in the Augusta quadrangle include the Clouds Creek (6 samples).

Characteristics of the Southeastern Piedmont
Bendix Field Engineering Corporation released a report that contains stream-sediment, hydrogeochemical, and aeromagnetic data for 16 contiguous NTMS quadrangles in the eastern United States [GJBX-40(83)]. This compilation report is limited in scope to features that have specific interest to the geoscience community. Included in the report are aeromagnetic and geochemical maps, and tectonic and igneous rock distribution maps. When used together, these maps show geochemical, tectonic, and magnetic features unique to many of the geologic and physiographic provinces in the region. This report primarily covers the Southeastern Piedmont region and includes the Athens, Augusta, Bluefield, Charlotte, Florence, Georgetown, Greensboro, Greenville, Knoxville, Norfolk, Raleigh, Richmond, Roanoke, Rocky Mount, Spartanburg and Winston-Salem 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. The color maps are in 35mm-slide format. No digital data files accompany this report.

Augusta Quadrangle NURE Bibliography

• Dromgoole, E.L., 1982, Report of analyses for light hydrocarbons in ground water: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-19, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-131(82), 14 p.
• Fay, W.M., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Gold analyses by neutron activation from SRL NURE samples: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-38, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-135(82), 45 p.
• Fay, W.M., Sargent, K.A., and Cook, J.R., 1981, Data report: Alabama and Georgia: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-21, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-403(82), 34 p.
• Ferguson, R.B, Price, Van, Jr., and Mosley, W.C., Jr., 1979, Uraniferous gorceixite occurrences in Aiken County, South Carolina: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-79-318, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-47(79), 19 p.
• Jones, P.L., 1979, Augusta 1° x 2° NTMS area, Georgia and South Carolina; Data release: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-79-146-4, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-45(79), 172 p.
• Karfunkel, B.S., Fay, W.F., and Price, Van, Jr., 1982, Analysis of monazite, zircon, and apatite from the southeastern Piedmont: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-8, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-101(82), 57 p.
• Madson, M.E., Rush, S.F., Hardy, L.C., LaBonte, N.E., and Ludlam, J.R., 1983, NURE stream-sediment, hydrogeochemical, and aeromagnetic data characteristics of the Piedmont Region, eastern United States: A data release: Bendix Field Engineering Corporation, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-40(83), 18 p.
• Price, Van, and Jones, P.L., 1978, Savannah River Laboratory hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance; orientation study data release; VI, Leesville, South Carolina, area: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-78-141-1, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-61(78), 39 p.
• Price, Van, Fay, W.M., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Neutron activation and other analytical data for plutonic rocks from North America and Africa: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc., U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-221(82), 47 p.
• Sargent, K.A., Cook, J.R., and Fay, W.M., 1982, Data report: North and South Carolina: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-22, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-102(82), 45 p.
• Thayer, P.A., 1983, Results of NURE detailed sampling in the Aiken County, South Carolina area: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-36, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-33(83), 119 p.
• Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Detailed Survey for Aiken County Gorceixite, South Carolina: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-445, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-175(82), 31 p.
• Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Supplement to HSSR basic data reports K/UR-445 through K/UR-457 [GJBX-165(82) through GJBX-177(82)]: Union Carbide Corporation-Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-458, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-164(82), 25 p.
• Zenger, S.A., Whisnant, J.S., and Kiff, I.T., 1982, National Uranium Resource Evaluation, Augusta quadrangle, Georgia and South Carolina: Bendix Field Engineering Corporation, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., PGJ/F-031(82), 35 p.

Links Within Open-File Report 97-492

Back to Georgia NURE data
Back to South Carolina NURE data
Frequently Asked Questions Concerning NURE Data
Home Page: USGS National Geochemical Database - NURE HSSR data

Page written by Bryan G. Moravec and Steven M. Smith.
Contact: Steven M. Smith (smsmith@usgs.gov)
Version 1.30: September 11, 2001
Version 1.41: February 23, 2006

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices
U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/1997/ofr-97-0492/quad/q_august.htm Questions or Assistance: USGS Web Contact Page Last Modified: Wed Dec 7 16:10 EDT 2016