USGS Home
Contact USGS
Search USGS

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

Pennsylvania
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 4,499 stream-sediment, 4,401 surface-water, and 5,734 ground-water samples within 49 counties from Pennsylvania as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The sediment samples were collected during September - October 1976; July - December 1977; and July - August 1978, and water samples were collected during May - December 1977 and July - August 1978. Sample coverage included portions of the Baltimore, Canton, Clarksburg, Cleveland, Cumberland, Elmira, Harrisburg, Newark, Pittsburgh, Scranton, Warren, Williamsport, and Wilmington 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 571 stream-sediment, 511 surface-water, and 655 ground-water samples were collected within the Scranton 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 4,287 sediments and 10,100 waters from Pennsylvania; this includes 569 sediment and 1,159 water samples from the Scranton quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Pennsylvania samples were released in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York Data Report [GJBX-106(82)].

SRL sent 3,851 sediment samples from Pennsylvania to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 3,842 of these samples in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York Data Report [GJBX-106(82)]. The digital data file accompanying this report include Supplemental Analyses records for 501 Pennsylvania sediment samples within the Scranton quadrangle.

New York
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 5,696 stream-sediment, 5,047 surface-water, and 4,829 ground-water samples from New York as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. Samples were collected on a county-by-county basis from the eastern two-thirds of the state between July 1977 and August 1980. The sampled area included portions of the Albany, Binghamton, Elmira, Glens Falls, Hartford, Kingston, Lake Champlain, Ogdensburg, Rochester, Scranton, and Utica 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. The samples were sent to SRL for determinations of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters) by Neutron Activation Analysis. SRL was able to analyze 2,899 sediments and 9,863 waters from New York. The analytical and site location data for all New York samples were released in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York Data Report [GJBX-106(82)]. A total of 374 stream-sediment, 376 surface-water, and 458 ground-water samples were collected within the New York state portion of the Scranton quadrangle; of these samples, SRL was able to analyze 259 sediment and 832 water samples.

SRL sent 2,809 sediment samples from New York state to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 2,803 of these samples in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York Data Report [GJBX-106(82)]. The digital data file accompanying this report includes Supplemental Analyses for 374 New York state sediment samples from the Scranton quadrangle.

SRL sent 302 sediment samples from New York state portion of the Scranton quadrangle to the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP) for analysis of uranium and 31 additional elements. ORGDP released the analytical data for these samples in the Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-82(82) Data Report. The site coding information for this data set was summarized in the GJBX-51(82) report.

New Jersey
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 748 stream-sediment, 378 surface-water, and 1,038 ground-water samples within 21 counties from New Jersey as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The sediment samples were collected during August - November 1977 and June 1978, and water samples were collected during July - October 1977 and January - February 1978. Sample coverage included portions of the New York, Newark, Salisbury, Scranton, and Wilmington 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 104 stream-sediment, 105 stream-water, and 129 ground-water samples were collected within the Scranton 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 728 sediments and 1,414 waters from New Jersey; this includes 104 sediment and 230 water samples from the Newark quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all New Jersey samples were released in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York Data Report [GJBX-106(82)].

SRL sent 550 sediment samples from New Jersey to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 542 of these samples in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York Data Report [GJBX-106(82)]. The digital data file accompanying this report includes Supplemental Analyses for 104 New Jersey sediment samples within the Scranton quadrangle.

SRL: Scranton Quadrangle
SRL released a separate quadrangle report for the Scranton NTMS quadrangle, which includes data for 965 stream-sediment, 976 surface-water, and 1,251 ground-water samples. With some differences, these sample data are the same as that for corresponding samples found in the Pennsylvania, New York, and New Jersey State reports. SRL released the analytical data as the Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. The site coding information for this data set is summarized within the text of this report. (Records for 61 samples in this report contained no analytical data.)

SRL released a separate report for supplemental analyses of 966 sediment samples from the Scranton quadrangle as the Scranton NTMS Area, Supplemental Data Report [GJBX-24(81)]. Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 19 elements were reported for these samples.

Monticello Area Geochemical Orientation Survey
The SRL and the Bendix Field Engineering Corporation contracted a detailed orientation survey in the vicinity of uranium and copper-uranium occurrences near Monticello, Sullivan County, New York. Field work during the summer of 1979 collected samples of approximately 500 stream sediments, 500 stream waters, 500 ground waters, and 500 eastern hemlock. The samples were analyzed by standard SRL analytical methods. An interpretive report of this study was released as the Monticello Area Geochemical Orientation Survey GJBX-207(82) Report. A digital file accompanying this report only contained data records for 499 stream-sediment samples.

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 Scranton quadrangle samples.

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

These Scranton 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.
• OR2: Supplemental Analyses by Oak Ridge Neutron Activation Analysis of sediments for U.
• OR7: Supplemental Analyses by Oak Ridge Emission Spectrochemical Analysis of sediments for Ag, Al, B, Ba, Be, Ca, Ce, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hf, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb, Sc, Sr, Th, Ti, V, Y, Zn, and Zr.

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.)

Discussion of the Reformatting Process for Scranton Quadrangle

Sediment Records
The Scranton quadrangle sediment data consist of of reformatted records from the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report combined with data from the ORGDP Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-82(82) Data Report. These records were compared with corresponding sample records from the Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. Sediment records from the Monticello Area Geochemical Orientation Survey GJBX-207(82) Report were also added to the final sediment file. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Scranton quadrangle sediment data:

1. The SRL, the SRL Supplemental Laboratory and the ORGDP Laboratory each analyzed the same 302 stream-sediment samples from New York. Because of overlapping data fields, it was necessary to create two data records for each sample to preserve all the data.
2. For one sediment sample, the comparison process revealed major differences for analytical values reported for one or more elements determined by Neutron Activation. It could not be determined whether these alternate values represent a second analytical determination or a different interpretation of the data from the same Neutron Activation Analysis. For this sample, it was necessary to keep a second record containing the alternate analytical values. These records are identified by a comment in the REFORMAT field.
3. The original ORGDP files for the Scranton quadrangle 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 State files. The missing site descriptive data and the complete longitude value were added to ORGDP records from the corresponding SRL State file records. Sources of data and any problems found are described in the REFORMAT comment field.
4. Records for 82 sediment samples in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report had no corresponding records in the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. Many of these State records were missing latitude-longitude coordinates.
5. Scranton quadrangle file records for 46 samples contained no analytical determinations. Analytical data were found for these samples in the corresponding State records.
6. The Scranton NTMS Area, Supplemental Data Report [GJBX-24(81)] identified the sediment samples as stream waters (SAMPTYP 51). This was incorrect. All other reports identified these same samples as stream sediments (SAMPTYP 50). All of the sediment samples were checked to confirm that they were identified by the correct sample type code.
7. The analytical values for many Ce, Dy, Lu, and V determinations differed slightly between the Scranton quadrangle files and the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York 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.
8. Occasionally, analytical values for Ce, Eu, Fe, Hf, or Lu were found in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report that were missing or had differing lower detection limit values in the corresponding records from the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. These differences were noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
9. Occasionally, analytical values for Dy, Eu, Sc, Th, or U were found in the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report but were missing in the corresponding records from the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82) Data Report. These values were added and that change was noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
10. One sediment sample in the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report had an unlikely Fe determination value of 42%. The corresponding record in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report had no reported Fe value. This value was NOT added and noted only in the REFORMAT comment field.
11. During reformatting, contamination codes for "residential" and "recreation" were found to be missing from the CONTAMC field. These codes were not present in the published tables of the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York GJBX-106(82) Data Report. However, these missing codes were often found in corresponding records of the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. When found, these codes were added to the combined records and a comment was added to the REFORMAT field.
12. Uranium values from the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report were consistently lower (by 4-12%) than the corresponding data found in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report. A similar problem was noted in the nearby Portland quadrangle that was identified and corrected by a published errata sheet and replacement tables on microfiche. No such correction was given for the Scranton quadrangle. It is suspected, but unconfirmed, that the Quadrangle uranium data were systematically reported about 7% too low or the State data were about 7% too high. Since this problem could not be confirmed, the differing Quadrangle uranium values were added to the extra U_XX_PPM field and the analytical method code was added to the U_XX_MTHD field. This addition was also noted in the REFORMAT comment field.
13. The data file from the Monticello Area Geochemical Orientation Survey GJBX-207(82) Report identified one sample with an unlikely SRLID sample number of DSGW000S1. Since there were no hard copy data tables available in the report, the ID number was compared with a site map. No site 000 was found but a site 499 was found that had no corresponding data record. It is possible but unconfirmed that these two points correspond.
14. The New York supplemental data file from the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report identified one sample with an unlikely SRLID sample number of NYDE551S1. No corresponding sediment sample was found in any other data file. A comparison of other records with similar SRLID values suggest that possibly this unlikely value should be NYDE251S1.
15. 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 Sussex County, New Jersey and Pike County, Pennsylvania 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.
16. Sixty-eight stream-sediment samples were identified with a SRLID in the 300's. All of these samples were missing latitude and longitude coordinates. Evidence from original sample site field notes strongly suggests that these are duplicate samples collected later from a previously sampled 000's series site (i.e. SRLID site number PAPI318S1 is the same location as PAPI018S1). The coordinates from the original 000's series sites were added to the matching 300's records and this change was noted in the REFORMAT and COORDPRB comment fields.
17. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 83 stream-sediment collected within Sussex(11) County, New Jersey; Delaware(1), Sullivan(1 from the Monticello Area Special Study) and Ulster(1) Counties in New York; and Susquehanna(1) County in Pennsylvania were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 15 samples cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
18. 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 ppm is the lowest reported gold concentration in the entire report.

Water Records
The Scranton quadrangle water data consist primarily of reformatted records from the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report. These records were compared with corresponding sample records from the Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Scranton quadrangle water data:

1. Records for 13 water samples were found only in the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. These records were added to the final file.
2. Records for 24 water samples in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report had no corresponding records in the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report. Many of these records were missing latitude-longitude coordinates.
3. One ground-water sample in the SRL Scranton Quadrangle GJBX-2(79) Data Report had an unlikely pH measurement value of 1. The corresponding record in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York [GJBX-106(82)] Data Report had no reported pH value. This difference was noted only in the REFORMAT comment field.
4. The analytical values for many Al, Br, Dy, and Mn determinations differed slightly between the Scranton quadrangle files and the Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York 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.
5. For 2 records, the analytical value for Mn was found in the Scranton quadrangle file but was missing in the corresponding records from the state file. This value was added and that change was noted for the affected records in the REFORMAT comment field.
6. Occasionally, analytical values for U, Br, Dy, or V were found in the State files but were missing in the corresponding records from the Scranton quadrangle files. These differences were noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
7. 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.
8. Unlikely sample collection dates were found for three samples. These dates were removed from the SAMPDAT field. For each record, the original SAMPDAT value and the most likely correct value was added as a comment to the REFORMAT field.
9. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several stream-water 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 Sussex County, New Jersey and Pike County, Pennsylvania 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.
10. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several ground-water 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 Passaic and Sussex Counties, New Jersey; Orange, Sullivan, and Ulster Counties, New York; and Luzerne, Monroe, and Pike Counties, Pennsylvania 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.
11. After re-digitizing, one well water sample from Sussex County, New Jersey originally located in the Newark quadrangle now plots in the adjacent Scranton quadrangle.
12. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 17 water samples collected within Sussex(11) County, New Jersey; Orange(1) and Ulster(2) Counties in New York; and Susquehanna(1) and Wyoming(2) Counties in Pennsylvania were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 17 samples 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).

Scranton Quadrangle Sediment Data - 1,835 records
Scranton Quadrangle Water Data - 2,217 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 Scranton quadrangle is almost complete and includes samples from Bergen, Morris, Passaic, Sussex, and Warren Counties in New Jersey; Delaware, Orange, Rockland, and Ulster Counties in New York; and Carbon, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe, Pike, Susquehanna, Wayne, and Wyoming Counties in Pennsylvania. No ground-water samples were collected in the portion of Bergen County, New Jersey that falls within the Scranton quadrangle. The laboratory and analytical methods used also may vary by county such that adjacent counties often have very different analytical coverage.

Seven sediment and thirteen water samples collected within the Scranton quadrangle were not analyzed by any of the various laboratories. The following table summarizes the locations of those unanalyzed samples.

Other NURE Geochemical Data for the Scranton Quadrangle

Monticello Area Geochemical Orientation Survey
In addition to stream-sediment samples discussed above, the Monticello Area Geochemical Orientation Survey GJBX-207(82) Report mentions and interprets results from the sampling of approximately 500 stream waters, 500 ground waters, and 500 eastern hemlock. No accompanying digital data were available for these sample media and, other than summary statistics, apparently no hard copy data tables were published either.

Scranton Quadrangle NURE Summary
A NURE summary evaluation report was prepared for the Scranton quadrangle by the Bendix Field Engineering Corporation [GJQ-003(80)]. An additional 191 rock samples were collected from the quadrangle in areas with potential for uranium occurrences. These samples were analyzed for uranium and 29 other elements. These data were released only as an appendix table accompanying the summary report.

Scranton Quadrangle NURE Bibliography

• Baillieul, T.A., Indelicato, G.J., and Penley, H.M., 1979, National Uranium Resource Evaluation, Scranton quadrangle, Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey: Bendix Field Engineering Corporation, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colorado, GJQ-003(80), 39 p.
• Cook, J.R., Fay, W.M., and Sargent, K.A., 1982, Data report: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-26, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-106(82), 44 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.
• Ferguson, R.B., and Jones, P.L., 1979, Scranton 1° x 2° NTMS area, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, preliminary basic data report: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-78-146-6, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-2(79), 224 p.
• Heffner, J.D., 1981, Scranton NTMS 1° x 2° quadrangle area, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania, supplemental data report: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-78-146-6S, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-24(81), 16 p.
• Rose, A.W., Smith, A.T., and Wesolowski, David, 1982, A geochemical orientation survey of stream sediment, stream water and ground water near uranium prospects, Monticello area, New York: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-23, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-c), 127 p.
• Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance basic data for Scranton quadrangle, New York; Pennsylvania; New Jersey: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-437, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-82(82), 31 p.
• Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Supplement to hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance basic data reports K/UR-405 and K/UR-408 through K/UR-443 [GJBX-52(82) through GJBX-88(82)]: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-412, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-51(82), 25 p.

Links Within Open-File Report 97-492

Back to New Jersey NURE data
Back to New York NURE data
Back to Pennsylvania NURE data
Frequently Asked Questions Concerning NURE Data
Home Page: USGS National Geochemical Database - NURE HSSR data

Page written by Steven M. Smith.
Contact: Steven M. Smith (smsmith@usgs.gov)
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/1997/492/quad/q_scrant.htm Questions or Assistance: USGS Web Contact Page Last Modified: Wed Dec 7 16:28 EDT 2016