DESCRIPTION OF PARAMETERS INCLUDED IN NADP/NTN REPORT OF DEPOSITIONS
(Depositions Reported in Kilograms/Hectare)

 



 Site ID

	Alpha-numeric site identification code, first two characters of

	which are the abbreviation of the state in which the site is

	located.  (For intercomparison sites this order is reversed.)



 Summary Period

      Summary period types are:  annual, water,winter, spring, summer, fall,

      jan, feb ... dec.  Annual represents calendar years and Water

      represents water years (Oct-Sep).  Months represent calendar months. 

      Seasons are defined as follows: 

            winter=Dec-Feb,

            spring=Mar-May,

            summer=Jun-Aug,

            fall=Sep-Nov.
 

	Also note that because the seasons are offset relative to the calendar 

	year, the annual (calendar-year) depositions cannot be obtained by 

	summing the four seasonal totals.



	Standard NADP operating procedures specify that weekly samples be

	collected on Tuesday mornings.  Beginning and ending dates of all

	summary periods are adjusted to accommodate this sampling

	schedule.



 Year

	Year of the summary period being reported.  Note that the winter

	summary period includes December of the previous year.



*Data Completeness Criteria

	Criteria established by the NADP Technical Committee to provide a

	measure of whether the data available are adequate to characterize

	the summary period as a whole. DATA USERS ARE URGED TO USE THIS

	INFORMATION TO ASSESS WHETHER THE DATA ARE ADEQUATE FOR AN

	INTENDED APPLICATION.  The NADP requires Completeness Criteria

	values >= 74.5 for criteria 1, 3 and 4, and >=   89.5

	for criterion 2, in its standard applications of deposition

	data (e.g., published maps and data summary tables); however, data

	users may wish to select different cut-off values, depending

	upon the intended application of  the data. Note that

	depositions and precipitation totals are reported regardless of whether

	the NADP Completeness Criteria were met. Following are brief

	definitions of the  four criteria. For a more complete explanation,

	see the attached excerpt from the NADP/NTN Annual Data Summary

	for 1991. 
		Criterion 1 - 	Percentage of the summary period for which there are

				valid samples. 
		Criterion 2 - 	Percentage of the summary period for which precipitation 

				amounts are available either from the rain gage or 

				from the sample volume. 
		Criterion 3 - 	Percentage of the total measured precipitation associated with

				valid samples. Criterion 4 -  Collection efficiency. This is 

				the sum of the sample bucket depths (in centimeters) in the 

				summary period divided by the sum of the rain gage amounts 

				(in centimeters) for all valid samples where both values 

				are available. Criterion 4 is reported as a percentage. 
*Depositions 

	Total depositions are reported in kilograms per

	hectare for calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium,

	ammonium, nitrate, inorganic nitrogen (from ammonium and nitrate),

	chloride, sulfate  and hydrogen. (Hydrogen depositions calculated

	from both laboratory and field pH measurements

	are given). Depositions are computed by multiplying

	the precipitation-weighted mean ion concentration (mg/L) for VALID samples by

	the total precipitation amount in centimeters for the summary

	period (Ppt, see description below) and dividing  by

	10. The precipitation-weighted mean concentrations used to

	calculate all of the depositions EXCEPT FOR FIELD HYDROGEN,

	H(field), were computed from measurements made on weekly samples at

	the Network's Central Analytical  Laboratory (CAL).

	The precipitation-weighted mean concentrations used to calculate H(field) were

	computed from pH measurements made on weekly samples by the site operator

	in the  field laboratory. See Valid Samp. below for

	more complete descriptions of the samples included in the means.

	H(field) values are not reported for periods prior to 1987.  A set

	of screening criteria have been approved by the NADP Technical

	Committee for use in assessing the validity of individual field

	chemistry measurements.  Only those field chemistry measurements

	which meet all of the screening criteria are selected for use in

	calculating the field means and depositions.  Individual field

	measurements made before 1987 cannot be adequately screened

	because sufficient measurements of a quality control check sample

	were not required by the Network.  For more information about the

	field chemistry data and the screening criteria applied to them,

	see the attached excerpt from the NADP/NTN Annual Data Summary for

	1991.



	For more information about the field chemistry data, see the

	attached excerpt from the NADP/NTN Annual Data Summary for 1991.



*Svol

	Total volume, in milliliters, of precipitation collected by the

	sampler for VALID samples during the summary period.



*Ppt

	Total amount of precipitation, in centimeters, measured by the

	rain gage during the summary period.  This value includes

	precipitation amounts calculated from the sample volumes in cases

	where the weekly rain gage measurements were unavailable.



*% Ppt Rep. by F Chem.

	The percentage of the total measured precipitation (Ppt)

	represented by the hydrogen deposition calculated from field pH

	measurements.  DATA USERS ARE URGED TO USE THIS VALUE TO ASSESS

	WHETHER THE FIELD HYDROGEN DEPOSITION, H(FIELD), IS ADEQUATE FOR

	AN INTENDED APPLICATION. The NADP requires this percentage to be

	>= 49.5 in its standard applications of field deposition data

	(e.g., published maps and data summary tables); however, data

	users may wish to select a different cut-off value, depending upon

	the intended application of the data.  Note that H(field) is

	reported regardless of whether this criterion is met.



	In most cases, Data Completeness Criterion 3 is equal to the

	percentage of precipitation represented by the depositions

	calculated from laboratory (CAL) measurements.  Precipitation

	amounts from sampling intervals during which < 0.01 inch of

	precipitation occurred are included in the Criterion 3 percentage,

	if less than 10 mL of sample was collected.  Complete laboratory

	analyses are not performed on such samples.  Therefore, the

	percentage of precipitation represented by the laboratory means is

	sometimes over-estimated by Criterion 3.  Data users may contact

	the Coordination Office for more information.



 Valid Samp.

	Numbers of samples used in calculating the precipitation-weighted

	mean concentrations for the summary period. These are the samples

	whose chemical measurements contribute to the deposition values.



	L - 	Number of samples used in calculating the laboratory

		means.  Only VALID samples with complete, valid

		LABORATORY (CAL) analyses and a valid measurement of

		precipitation amount (from the rain gage or sample

		volume) are used.  

	F - 	Number of samples used in calculating the field means.  

		Only VALID samples with complete, valid LABORATORY

		AND FIELD analyses, and a valid measurement of

		precipitation amount (from the rain gage or sample

		volume) are used.  The samples used in calculating the

		field means are the same samples or a subset of the

		samples used in calculating the laboratory means.



 Days

	Number of days included in the summary period.



 Dates

	The beginning date of the first sample included in the summary

	period and the ending date of the last sample included in the

	summary period, reported in Greenwich Mean Time (GMT), mmddyy.







*Missing values are indicated by --.





                         DATA SELECTION CRITERIA



A.  Criteria for Determining a Valid Sample

     Individual weekly samples are screened to determine their validity using 

criteria based on the following parameters:  



                    - Rain gage depth

                    - Sample volume

                    - Sampling interval

                    - Lab type

                    - Sample validation codes



- Rain gage depth is the precipitation depth measured by the rain gage

collocated with the wet/dry precipitation collector (see Bigelow 1984 for

details).  



- Sample volume is the amount of precipitation contained in the

wet-side sample bucket as determined by weight in the field laboratory.



- Sampling interval is the time period over which the precipitation sample

was collected.  The standard interval is one week, from 9:00 a.m. Tuesday

to 9:00 a.m. Tuesday of the following week.  Samples are collected on this

schedule whether or not precipitation occurs.  



- Lab type is a code assigned to samples received at the CAL, based on the

volume of the sample available for analysis.  Each lab type keys a

different set of sample processing and measurement steps.  A complete set

of laboratory measurements (pH, specific conductance, concentrations of

major cations and anions) is made only on samples with a lab type of wa or

w, which are samples of 10 mL volume or more.  (Samples of lab type wa are

diluted in the laboratory to produce sufficient volume for analysis;

samples of lab type w are large enough to be analyzed without dilution.)

Lab type t samples are samples of less than 10 mL.  Laboratory

measurements of pH and conductance are made on these samples if there is

sufficient undiluted sample volume.  No other chemical constituents are

measured for lab type t samples.  A lab type of da indicates that the

sample bucket was dry when it arrived in the laboratory.  Chemical

analyses for lab type da samples are not included in this report.  



- Sample validation codes (Bowersox 1985, Aubertin et al. 1990) are assigned

during routine NADP/NTN quality assurance evaluations to identify samples

that were not collected and/or processed according to NADP/NTN protocols,

or were contaminated.  Samples are considered valid and are included in

calculations of ion concentration and deposition summary statistics if all

of the following sample validity criteria are met:



    1.   NADP/NTN criteria for site location, sample collection and

         handling, and measurement protocols are satisfied (Bigelow 1984, 

         Bigelow and Dossett 1988).  

    2.   The sample consists of "wet-only deposition," i.e., it was 

         not exposed to excess dry deposition (see Bowersox 1985).  

    3.   The sample is not contaminated (see Bowersox 1985).  

    4.   A complete set of chemical measurements (made at the CAL) is 

         reported for the sample.  

    5.   The sampling interval is 6-8 days.  

    6.   There is a rain gage depth or sample volume reported for the 

         sample.  



In the evaluation of data completeness, two additional sample types are 

considered valid:



    1.   All samples from sampling periods during which it was confirmed

         that no precipitation occurred are considered valid.  These samples 

         are generally of lab type da.  

    2.   All samples from sampling periods during which a trace of precipitation

         (<0.01 in.) occurred are considered valid if the sample volume was 

         less than 10 mL (lab type da or t).



When calculating data Completeness Criterion 1 values (see Section III.C)

for periods of one year or longer, all sampling intervals with <0.02 in.

of precipitation are treated as valid.  (Note that this relaxation of the

above criteria applies only to the calculation of data Completeness

Criterion 1 and to summary periods of one year or longer.)



B.  Criteria for Determining the Validity of Field Chemistry Measurements



    Measurements of precipitation pH and conductance made by site

operators ("field pH" and "field conductance" measurements) are screened

to determine their validity based on the following information:  



        - Sample validation codes 

        - CAL measurements of pH and conductance 

        - Field measurements of the quality control check sample 

        - Field pH and conductance measurements of the precipitation sample 



Sample validation codes are applied to exclude samples that fail to meet

sample validity criteria 1-3, described in Section III.A.  Criterion 4,

the requirement for complete chemical analyses, is relaxed for field

chemistry measurements; it is required only that there be valid laboratory

pH and conductance measurements for the sample (see below).  Criteria 5

and 6 are not applied to individual field chemistry measurements; however,

to be included in calculations of weighted-mean field pH and hydrogen ion

deposition for seasonal and annual summary periods, and in the statistical

summaries of field pH and hydrogen ion concentrations in Section VII.C,

samples must meet all six of the criteria.



CAL measurements of pH and conductance are used by the CAL to screen

samples for possible contamination.  Valid laboratory measurements of

these parameters are required to ensure that the samples have been

subjected to this screening.



Field measurements of the quality control check sample are used to

evaluate the accuracy of the equipment and the site operator's measurement

technique.  Prior to making field pH and conductance measurements, the

site operator measures and records the pH and conductance of a quality

control check sample (Bigelow and Dossett 1988).  The CAL-certified values

of the quality control check sample are 22 microsiemens per centimeter

(S/cm) for conductance and 4.3 pH units for pH, and are known to the site

operator.  For field precipitation chemistry measurements to be considered

valid, both of the quality control check sample measurements must have

been made, and the reported values must be 22.0 4.0 S/cm for conductance

and 4.30  0.10 pH unit for pH.



Field pH and conductance measurements of the precipitation sample are used

to check for inconsistencies between the reported field pH and conductance

values.  For the field chemistry measurements to be considered valid, the

reported conductance must be equal to or greater than the calculated

conductance based entirely on the hydrogen ion concentration.  The

calculated conductance is the product of the hydrogen ion concentration

(determined in the field laboratory) and the equivalent conductance of

hydrogen ion at 25 degrees Celsius (Franson 1985, Weast 1989).  This check

ignores the potential contribution of other ions to the conductance, thus

only identifies certain cases where the hydrogen ion concentration is

likely to have been overestimated by the field pH measurement.  While it

is also possible that the conductance measurement was inaccurate, this

risk is reduced by excluding field conductance measurements where the

quality control check sample conductance is reported as being outside the

acceptable range of 22.0  4.0 S/cm.  Furthermore, field measurements of

conductance meet NADP/NTN accuracy goals more frequently than field

measurements of pH (Nilles et al. 1993).



C.  Criteria for  Including a Site  in  the Annual  Isopleth Maps and  

    Seasonal  Data Summary Tables 



Four Completeness Criteria form the basis for the decision to include 

the laboratory chemistry data from a site in the Annual Isopleth Maps 

and Seasonal Data Summary Tables in Section VI.  All four criteria must 

be met.  The criteria are listed below.



    Criterion 1.  There must be valid samples (as defined in Section

                  III.A) for at least 75 percent of the summary period.  



    Criterion 2.  For at least 90 percent of the summary period there 

                  must be precipitation amounts (including zero amounts) 

                  either from the rain gage or from the sample volume.  



    Criterion 3.  There must be valid samples (as defined in Section III.A) 

                  for at least 75 percent of the total precipitation amount 

                  reported for the summary period.  



    Criterion 4.  For the entire summary period the total precipitation 

                  as measured from the sample volume must be at least 75 

                  percent of the total precipitation measured by the rain 

                  gage for all valid samples where both values are available.  



    Criteria 1 and 2 ensure that measurements on valid wet deposition

samples and of precipitation amounts were reported for a minimum

acceptable fraction of the summary period.  This requires a properly

operating wet/dry collector and rain gage.  Criterion 3 ensures that there

are valid precipitation chemistry data to represent 75 percent of the

precipitation that was estimated to have occurred during the summary

period.  Criterion 4 sets the minimum acceptable level for the collection

efficiency of the wet/dry collector relative to the rain gage.  This

ensures some consistency in the operation of the rain gage and wet/dry

collector.



    It is important to recognize that if all the criteria were satisfied

at the lower limit of acceptability, the summary could still account for

less than 75 percent of the actual precipitation at the site.  This could

occur because the 90 percent precipitation coverage criterion (Criterion

2) is based on time and there may be no record of the amount of

precipitation missed during the unsampled 10 percent of the period.  Where

the precipitation coverage is 100 percent, however, these criteria ensure

that at least 75 percent of the precipitation is represented by valid

samples.



    The following example illustrates the interpretation of the

Completeness Criteria values for a hypothetical site.  For the annual

summary period, the hypothetical values for this site are:



	 Criterion 1    (Percent valid samples)                      91%

	 Criterion 2    (Percent precipitation coverage)             95%

	 Criterion 3    (Percent precipitation with valid samples)   65%

	 Criterion 4    (Percent collection efficiency)              98%



The values for Criteria 1 and 2 indicate that valid samples were obtained

for 91 percent of the summary period while valid precipitation

measurements were obtained for 95 percent of the summary period.  (The

amount of precipitation that occurred during the remaining 5 percent of

the period is unknown.)  Criterion 3 relates the amount of precipitation

represented by valid samples to the total measured precipitation.  The

value for this criterion is calculated by summing the rain gage

measurements associated with valid samples (substituting the sample volume

where necessary), then dividing by the total measured precipitation.  In

this case, although 91 percent of the summary period was represented by

valid samples, only 65 percent of the measured precipitation was

associated with valid samples.  (This can occur when a few very large

precipitation events are not represented by valid samples.)  Finally, the

value reported for Criterion 4 indicates that for valid samples, the

amount of precipitation captured by the wet-side bucket on the wet/dry

collector was 98 percent of that measured by the rain gage.  It should be

noted that since Criterion 3 was not met for this hypothetical site,

annual NADP/NTN Completeness Criteria are not satisfied; therefore, this

site would not be included in annual isopleth maps in this report.



    For each site, two sets of hydrogen ion values are included in this

report.  One set is from pH measurements made at the CAL ("laboratory

pH"); the other is from measurements made in the field laboratory at the

site ("field pH").  While the CAL laboratory measurements are subject to

more rigorous quality assurance and offer greater standardization among

sites than the field measurements, the field measurements have the

advantage of providing information about the chemistry of the sample

shortly after the sample was collected.  Comparisons of field and

laboratory pH measurements, as well as analyses of natural and simulated

precipitation samples processed according to the same protocols as

NADP/NTN samples, have shown that hydrogen ion concentrations tend to

decrease between the time the pH is measured in the field and when it is

measured again in the laboratory.  This loss of hydrogen ion has been

variously attributed to microbial activity, degradation of organic acids,

dissolution of particulate matter, and ion exchange processes involving

the walls and/or lid of the shipping container (Bigelow et al. 1989).  In

NADP/NTN samples, the annual median losses have ranged from 4

microequivalents per liter (eq/L) to 6 eq/L (Bigelow et al. 1989).

Because the pH scale is logarithmic, these losses have little effect on

sample pH values if the hydrogen ion concentrations are initially high.

However, where hydrogen ion concentrations are relatively low, as in the

western United States, these losses can result in changes of several

tenths of a pH unit.  Given the magnitude of these changes, the NADP/NTN

has elected to display both the field-measured and laboratory-measured

hydrogen ion values in this report.



    Precipitation-weighted means of field pH measurements are included in

the annual isopleth maps and seasonal data summary tables if:  (a) all

four of the Completeness Criteria were met for the summary period, and (b)

at least 50 percent of the precipitation which occurred during the summary

period is represented by samples with complete, valid laboratory chemistry

data and valid field pH measurements.  (Only these samples are included in

calculations of weighted-mean field pH and hydrogen ion deposition).  The

required percentage of precipitation represented by valid field pH

measurements is lower than that for the laboratory-determined ion

concentrations because NADP/NTN protocols call for field chemistry

measurements to be omitted on samples of less than 70 mL.