Susan G. Buto David M. Evetts Sienna Smith-Sager 2006 vector digital data http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?sir2006-5100_wanv_l Thomas J. Lopes Susan G. Buto J. LaRue Smith Toby L. Welborn 2006 U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5100 http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/sir2006-5100 This data set consists of water-table contours for Nevada. These data were created as part of an effort to provide statewide information on water table and depth to ground water for Nevada. The data set was constructed from water-table contours published in 38 reports between 1961 and 2004. Data used to make the contours were collected from 1947 to 2004. The reports used were a subset of 104 reports identified during a literature search of published water-table and depth to ground-water contours. Reports used in this data set were chosen based on a scoring system using four criteria: the percentage of the hydrographic area (HA) with contours, the contour interval, the date of the water-level measurements, and whether control points were plotted with the contours. For example, more current water-level measurements were given a higher score than older data and contours covering a high percentage of the HA were scored higher than those that covered less area. If not already available digitally, the contours were digitized from the selected report and combined to make the statewide data set. Although depth to ground-water contours were available from several of the reports, the selection process resulted in only water-table contours being used in all areas except HA 153, Diamond Valley. Depth to ground-water contours based on well measurements from the year 2001 were used in this HA because a large change in ground-water levels had occurred since ground-water altitude contours were published in 1968. To generate the final water-table data set, digitized contours from the selected reports were merged into a single data set. Contours from a single report were chosen where data from different reports covered the same HA. Where few or no contours were available for an HA, data from a statewide report, Bedinger and others (see the source citations) was used to fill in the gaps. The final data set consists of contours representing water levels measured between 1947 and 2004, most of which are in unconfined to semiconfined unconsolidated sediment aquifers. This data set was created as part of a U.S. Geological Survey study, done in cooperation with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, to evaluate the susceptibility and vulnerability of ground water to anthropogenic contamination. The data set was created as part of an effort to provide statewide information on depth to ground water and water-table levels in Nevada. One variable that may control the susceptibility of ground water to contamination and determines contamination transport is depth to water (Lopes and others, 2006). This data set was used to develop raster surfaces of water-table altitude and depth to ground water for Nevada. The intended uses of this data set include, but are not limited to, natural resource modeling, mapping, and visualization applications. Reference Cited Lopes, T.J., Buto, S.G., Smith, J.L., and Welborn, T.L., 2006, Water-table levels and gradients, Nevada, 1947-2004: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5100, 27 p. 1947 2004 ground condition at time of water-level measurement or the publication date of the source Complete None planned -120.088770 -113.844814 42.005002 35.332667 none water table contour ground water inlandWaters none Nevada Great Basin none Although this Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) compliant metadata file is intended to document the data set in nonproprietary form, as well as ArcGIS format, this metadata file may include some ArcGIS-specific terminology. These data are not intended to be used as a survey product and are for reference purposes only. Acknowledgment of the U.S. Geological Survey and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection would be appreciated in products derived from these data. U.S. Geological Survey Public Information Assistant mailing and physical address

333 W. Nye Lane

Carson City NV 89706 USA (775) 887-7600 (775) 887-7629 GS-W-NVpublic-info@usgs.gov Compilation of this data set and the associated metadata was done in cooperation with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. Technical review of this data set and metadata was provided by Natalie Houston and Douglas O. Shipley of the U.S. Geological Survey. Microsoft Windows XP Version 5.1 (Build 2600) Service Pack 1; ESRI ArcCatalog 9.0.0.580 Douglas K.Maurer Susan G. Buto 2006 vector digital data http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?sir2006-5100_dtwha153_l J. LaRue Smith Toby L. Welborn 2006 raster digital data http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?sir2006-5100_wanv_g J. LaRue Smith Toby L. Welborn 2006 raster digital data http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?sir2006-5100_dtwnv_g Susan G. Buto Sienna Smith-Sager 2006 vector digital data http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?nv_dtw750nv_l All attempts were made to compare 100 percent of the digital attribute data to the original source maps. Verification was done by visual and manual comparison, combined with on-screen review, of the source with hard copy plots. Frequency tests were run on the arc attributes to check for unlabeled, misspelled, or inconsistent feature labels. Corrections were made until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined 100 percent of the digital attribute data matched the original source maps. The logical consistency topologically is clean. Chain-node topology is present. Using ArcGIS Workstation commands and routines, all arcs were checked for node errors, overshoots, undershoots, dangles, intersections, and duplicate features Complete for Nevada. Errors resulting from the quality of the source map, the automation process, and the scale resolution can impact the accuracy of the data. This data set consists of digital data from sources of varying quality. In most cases, the paper source map had been folded and in many cases, the source map had small tears along the fold lines. Both conditions can adversely affect the positional accuracy of the digital data. In some cases, the original figure was scanned to facilitate data automation. Errors created from scanning the source are unknown. For the purpose of the following positional accuracy statements, these errors have been estimated at roughly half the value of the RMS error. Information about the root mean square (RMS) error in inches associated with the automation process was attached to each line segment as an attribute where the information was available. The data set contains source material of widely varying scale. National Map Accuracy Standards established for the United States in 1947 (U.S. Geological Survey, 1988) state that no more than 10 percent of features shall be more than 1/50th of an inch from their intended location on maps of scale smaller than 1:20,000. The standards translate to the following expected error at standard mapping scales: >1: 24,000-scale map - 12 meters >1: 62,500-scale map - 32 meters >1: 100,000-scale map - 51 meters >1: 250,000-scale map - 127 meters >1: 500,000-scale map - 254 meters >1:1,000,000-scale map - 508 meters All attempts were made to compare 100 percent of the digital spatial data to the original source map during data automation. Verification plots were generated at the appropriate scale and overlain on the original maps. If necessary, corrections were made until no light was visible between the original line and the digitized line. Two visual checks were done to verify that the digital data was a fair representation of the original source. A discussion of the acccuracy of each source is addressed in the following detailed assessments. The accuracy assessments are organized by report. Each report is identified by a unique report code as described in the entity and attribute portion of this document. Reference Cited U.S. Geological Survey, 1988, National mapping program technical instructions - Part 2: Specifications, Standards for Digital Line Graphs: U.S. Geological Survey, 56 p. 60 meters For ofr801224: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source map was estimated at 1:94,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 48 meters. The RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 60 meters. 370 meters For wrir834119b: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:500,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 254 meters. The RMS error during data automation was 0.006. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 370 meters. 65 meters For wrir954119: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:100,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 50 meters. The RMS error during data automation was not recorded and is unknown. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 65 meters. 35 meters For wrir994188: The published metadata for this data set has the following accuracy statement: "The water-level altitude contours were created from 1:62,500-scale maps. The error inherent from the scale is at least 32 meters on the x-y. Errors derived from the quality of the original map or found during the automation process also can affect the accuracy of these data. With a maximum RMS = 0.003, the maximum error is estimated at 35 meters." 15 meters For sir20045155: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:24,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 12 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.001. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 15 meters. 35 meters For wrir964297: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:62,500. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 32 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.002. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 35 meters. 130 meters For rr29: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was less than 0.001. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 130 meters. 45 meters For wrb22: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:62,500. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 32 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.006. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 45 meters. 145 meters For rr23: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.002. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 145 meters. 1000 meters For rr03: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:1,500,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 762 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.004. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 1000 meters. 370 meters For wrb32: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:500,000 The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 254 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 370 meters. 155 meters For rr42: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 155 meters. 155 meters For rr26: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 155 meters. 160 meters For wrir954177: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The RMS error during data automation was not recorded. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 160 meters. 650 meters For wrir964311: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:600,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 305 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.015. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 650 meters. 340 meters For wrir904050: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:350,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 178 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.012. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 340 meters. 145 meters For wrb35: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.002. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 145 meters. 80 meters For wrb37: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:125,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 64 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.004. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 80 meters. 50 meters For wrb42: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:75,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 38 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.004. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 50 meters. 205 meters For rr34: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:350,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 178 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.002. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 205 meters. 90 meters For wrb38: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:125,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 64 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.006. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 90 meters. 185 meters For wrb34: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.004. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 185 meters. 75 meters For wrb18: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:125,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 64 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.002. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 75 meters. 75 meters For wrb31: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:125,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 64 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.002. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 75 meters. 60 meters For wrir974123: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:80,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 40 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.006. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 60 meters. 155 meters For wrir964134: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 155 meters. 65 meters For wrir984209: Figures 3 and 4 were used as sources of data for the statewide data set. No documentation on the creation or verification of the contours from figure 3 exists, but limited information from figure 4 was located. Positional errors from both data sets were assumed to be similar. Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:100,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 51 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.004. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 65 meters. 110 meters For pp1409f: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:200,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 101 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.001. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 110 meters. 35 meters For rr41: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:63,500. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 32 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.001. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 35 meters. 135 meters For rr24: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.001. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 135 meters. 175 meters For rr58: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.005. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 175 meters. 155 meters For wrb41: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 155 meters. 195 meters For wrir914072: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.007. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 195 meters. 65 meters For wrir934118: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:100,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 51 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was unknown. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 65 meters. 155 meters For rr04: Errors resulting from scanning the figure before digitizing are unknown. The scale of the source was estimated at 1:250,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 127 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 155 meters. 17 meters For wsp1619aa: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:30,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 15 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.001. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 17 meters. 65 meters For pp1409e: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:100,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 51 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.003. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 65 meters. 110 meters For rr14: Errors resulting from the quality of the source map are unknown. The scale of the source was 1:125,000. The inherent error of a map at this scale is approximately 64 meters. The maximum RMS error during data automation was 0.010. The horizontal positional accuracy was verified by visual and manual comparison as described in the accuracy report and the process steps. The horizontal positional error is deductively estimated at 110 meters. Vertical accuracy cannot be assumed to exceed National Map Accuracy Standards for the scale each individual report was plotted. The vertical accuracy standard requires that the elevation of 90 percent of all points tested must be correct within half of the contour interval. On a map with a contour interval of 10 feet, the map must correctly show 90 percent of all points tested within 5 feet (1.5 meters) of the actual elevation. Arteaga, F.E. 1982 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-1224 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey Malmberg, G.T. Worts, G.F. 1966 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 39 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 94,000 (approximate) paper 1964 ground condition ofr801224 Spatial and attribute information Bedinger, M.S. Harrill, J.R. Langer, W.H. Thomas, J.M. Mulvihill, D.A. 1984 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4119b Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 500,000 paper 1984 publication date wrir834119b, Bedinger and others Spatial and attribute information Berger, D.L. 1995 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4119 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 100,000 unknown 1991 ground condition, Spring wrir954119 Spatial and attribute information Berger, D.L. Medina, R.L. 1999 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4188 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 62,500 CD-ROM 1998 ground condition, April and May wrir994188 Spatial and attribute information Berger, D.L. Maurer, D.K. Lopes, T.J. Halford, K.J. 2004 U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5155 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2004/5155/ 24,000 paper 2004 ground condition, Winter sir20045155 Spatial and attribute information Berger, D.L. Ross, W.C. Thodal, C.E. Robledo, A.R. 1997 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4297 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 62,500 unknown 1994 ground condition, December wrir964297 Spatial and attribute information Cohen, Philip 1964 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 29 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1962 ground condition, December rr29 Spatial and attribute information Cohen, Philip 1964 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 22 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 62,500 paper 1960 ground condition, December wrb22 Spatial and attribute information Cohen, Philip Everett, D.E. 1963 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 23 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1963 publication date rr23 Spatial and attribute information Eakin, T.E. 1961 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 3 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 1,500,000 (approximate) paper 1961 publication date rr03 Spatial and attribute information Eakin, T.E. Lamke, R.D. 1966 U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin 32 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 500,000 paper 1966 publication date wrb32 Spatial and attribute information Eakin, T.E. Hughes, J.L. Moore, D.O. 1967 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 42 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 paper 1965 ground condition rr42 Spatial and attribute information Everett, D.E. 1964 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 26 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1964 ground condition rr26 Spatial and attribute information Hale, G.S. Trudeau, D.A. Savard, C.S. 1995 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4177 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 50,000 unknown 1991 ground condition wrir954177 Spatial and attribute information Handman, E.H. Kilroy, K.C. 1997 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4311 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 600,000 (approximate) paper 1996 publication date wrir964311 Spatial and attribute information Handman, E.H. Londquist, C.J. Maurer, D.K. 1990 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4050 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 350,000 (approximate) paper 1990 publication date wrir904050 Spatial and attribute information Harrill, J.R. 1968 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 35 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1950 ground condition wrb35 Spatial and attribute information Harrill, J.R. 1969 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 37 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 125,000 (approximate) paper 1960 ground condition, spring wrb37 Spatial and attribute information Harrill, J.R. 1973 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 42 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 75,000 (approximate) paper 1971 ground condition, November wrb42 Spatial and attribute information Hood, J.W. Rush, F.E. 1965 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 34 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 350,000 (approximate) paper 1965 publication date rr34 Spatial and attribute information Huxel, C.J., Jr. Harris, E.E. 1969 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 38 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 125,000 (approximate) paper 1966 ground condition wrb38 Spatial and attribute information Huxel, C.J., Jr. Parkes, J.E. Everett, D.E. 1966 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 34 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1947 ground condition, September-October wrb34 Spatial and attribute information Malmberg, G.T. 1961 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 18 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 125,000 (approximate) paper 1955 ground condition, February wrb18 Spatial and attribute information Malmberg, G.T. Worts, G.F., Jr. 1966 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 31 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 125,000 (approximate) paper 1964 ground condition, March wrb31 Spatial and attribute information Maurer, D.K. 1997 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4123 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 80,000 (approximate) paper 1995 ground condition, December wrir974123 Spatial and atttribute information Maurer, D.K. Plume, R.W. Thomas, J.M. Johnson, A.K. 1996 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4134 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 250,000 unknown 1990 1991 ground condition wrir964134 Spatial and attribute information Plume, R.W. Ponce, D.A. 1999 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4209 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 100,000 mylar 1982 1996 ground condition wrir984209 Spatial and attribute information Prudic, D.E. Herman, M.E. 1996 U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1409-F Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 200,000 (approximate) mylar 1982 1992 ground condition pp1409f Spatial and attribute information Rush, F.E. 1967 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 41 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 63,500 (approximate) paper 1965 ground condition, October rr41 Spatial and attribute information Rush, F.E. Eakin, T.E. 1963 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 24 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1963 ground condition rr24 Spatial and attribute information Rush, F.E. Katzer, T.L. 1973 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 58 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 paper 1970 ground condition rr58 Spatial and attribute data Rush, F.E. Schroer, C.V. 1970 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Water Resources Bulletin 41 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 paper 1969 ground condition wrb41 Spatial and attribute information Schaefer, D.H. Whitney, Rita 1992 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4072 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 250,000 (approximate) paper 1991 ground condition wrir914072 Spatial and attribute information Seiler, R.L. Allander, K.K. 1993 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4118 Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 100,000 unknown 1992 ground condition wrir934118 Spatial and attribute information Sinclair, W.C. 1962 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 4 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 250,000 (approximate) paper 1960 ground condition, October rr04 Spatial and attribute information Sinclair, W.C. Loeltz, O.J. 1963 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1619-AA Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 30,000 (approximate) paper 1963 ground condition wsp1619aa Spatial and attribute information Thomas, J.M. Carlton, S.M. Hines, L.B. 1989 U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1409-E Carson City, NV U.S. Geological Survey 100,000 paper 1982 ground condition pp1409e Spatial and attribute information Walker, G.E. Eakin, T.E. 1963 Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 14 Carson City, NV Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 125,000 (approximate) paper 1962 ground condition rr14 Spatial and attribute information A literature search of published water-table contours found maps of varying detail and scope in 104 reports published between 1948 and 2004. Data used to make the contours were collected between 1947 and 2004. Twenty-eight maps had depth to ground water data and 90 contained water-table information. Each map was reviewed to determine which hydrographic area (HA) it covered. Where multiple maps covered the same HA, a scoring system helped decide which map to use. The most recent, detailed maps that covered the largest area and had control points plotted received the highest scores. The selection process resulted in only water-table contours being chosen for inclusion in these data. Process steps 2 through 38 are organized by selected report. Each report is identified by a unique report code as described in the entity and attribute information portion of this document. none 2003 - 2004 For ofr801224: 1. The source of contour data was figure 3. Because the figure was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. Figure 3 was modified from a figure in Worts and Malmberg, 1966 (see source citations). No base was cited for either figure, but the base for the 1966 figure appeared to be 1:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps. The figure did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by digitizing township-range intersections and township-range-longitude intersections from 1:24,000-scale topographic maps to match locations on the figure. The tics were digitized from the base topographic maps with a maximum RMS = 0.001. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with locations on the source. 3. Figure 3 was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, North American Datum 1927 (NAD 27) using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.003. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. ofr801224 2003 - 2004 For wrir834119b: 1. The data was digitized from the original paper map with RMS values ranging from 0.000 to 0.006. The contours were attributed. Hard copy plots of the digitized maps were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the original maps. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the original maps. Digitizing and verification were completed in 1997. 2. The digital data was retrieved from the project work space. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. wrir834119b 1997 - 2004 For wrir954119: 1. The data set was created in 1993 to support hydrologic work in Desert Valley, northwestern Nevada. No documentation on the creation or verification of the original data set exists. 2. The digital data was retrieved from the project work space and hard copy plots matching the scale of the published data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the published data. Two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the published data. 3. The projection was defined as UTM zone 11, NAD 27. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir954119 1993 - 2004 For wrir994188: 1. The data set was published on CD-ROM in 1999. The original data was thoroughly reviewed and documented before publication. Information on the original data can be found at http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getspatial?wrir99-4188_dtw 2. The data was retrieved from the CD-ROM. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. wrir994188 1999 - 2004 For sir20045155: 1. The data set was created in 2004 to support hydrologic work in Dry Valley, northwestern Nevada. Contours were hand drawn at 1:24,000-scale on a paper base map and digitized with a maximum RMS = 0.001. The contours were plotted on hard copy plots and, using a light table, the plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 2. The data was retrieved from the project work space and the contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. 3. Information on the original data can be found at http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/metadata/usgswrd/XML/sir2004-5155_geol250.xml sir20045155 2003 - 2004 For wrir964297: 1. The data set was created in 1995 to support hydrologic work in Spanish Springs Valley, northwestern Nevada. Contours were hand drawn at 1:62,500-scale on an unknown medium and digitized with a maximum RMS = 0.002. The contours were plotted on hard copy plots and, using a light table, the plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 2. The data was retrieved from the project work space and the contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir964297 1995 - 2004 For rr29: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The base for the plate was cited as U. S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Winnemucca (1958) and McDermit (1959). The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. Plate 1 was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS < 0.001. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr29 2003 - 2004 For wrb22: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 3. The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps 1939-59. No map names or scales were cited. Although the plate had latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system, PLSS township and range lines were used to create a tic data set for coordinate registration. The intersections of township and range lines were digitized from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000-scale topographic maps at RMS values ranging from 0.001 to 0.003. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. Plate 3 was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.006. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb22 2003 - 2004 For rr23: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Winnemucca (1958), Millet (1959) and Reno (1960). The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along the fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines which were used to make a tic data set for coordinate registration. Township-range intersections were digitized from the cited 1:250,000-scale base maps at RMS values ranging from 0.001 to 0.004. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.002. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr23 2003 - 2004 For rr3: 1. The source of the contour data was figure 2. Because the figure was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. No base was cited for the figure. The figure did not have latitude and longitude locations that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The figure did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 3. Figure 2 was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.004. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr3 2003 - 2004 For wrb32: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey State of Nevada Topographic Map (1965). The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate had latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The tic data set used to register the source to a coordinate system was developed from the latitude-longitude tics derived from a digital 1:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey map boundary data set projected to the Lambert Conformal Conic projection (central meridian -117) . The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to Lambert Conformal Conic projection (central meridian -117), NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.006. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design and projected to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the ArcGIS Workstation PROJECT command. Line topology was built using the BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb32 2003 - 2004 For rr42: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as Army Map Service 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Elko (1962), Ely (1963), and Lund (1963). The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The plate had latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The tic data set used to register the source to the coordinate system was developed from the latitude-longitude tics derived from a digital 1:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey map boundary data set. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.003. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr42 2003 - 2004 For rr26: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. Because the plate was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound plate. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic map Millet (1959). The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 3. The paper copy of the scanned plate was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.003. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr26 2003 - 2004 For wrir954177: 1. This data set was created in 1992 to support hydrologic work in Yucca Flat in Nye County, Nevada. The contours were drawn at 1:50,000 scale on an unknown medium. 2. The digital data was retrieved from the project work space and hard copy plots matching the scale of the published data were created. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the published data. Two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the published data. 3. The projection was defined as UTM zone 11, NAD 1927. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir954177 1992 - 2004 For wrir964311: 1. The source of the contour data was figure 28a. The contours represent simulated values from a calibrated model. Because the figure was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. The figure had latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed from the latitude-longitude tics derived from a digital 1:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey map boundary data set. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with tic locations on the source. 3. The copy of the source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.015. This was the best RMS achieved after multiple attempts at tic registration. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir964311 2003 - 2004 For wrir904050: 1. The source of the contour data was figure 28. The contours represent simulated values from a calibrated model. Because the figure was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. The figure had latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed from the latitude-longitude tics derived from a digital 1:24,000-scale U.S. Geological Survey map boundary data set. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with tic locations on the source. 3. The copy of the source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.012. This was the best RMS achieved after multiple attempts at tic registration. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir904050 2003 - 2004 For wrb35: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 2. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps. No map names or scales were cited. The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.002. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb35 2003 - 2004 For wrb37: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as Army Map Series 1:250,000-scale topographic map Vya (1961) and Lovelock (1955). The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Vya (1954, revised 1970) and Lovelock (1955, revised 1970). The tics were digitized at RMS values ranging from 0.001 to 0.002. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.004. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb37 2003 - 2004 For wrb42: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps. No map names or scales were cited. The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic coverage for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000-scale topographic maps. The tics were digitized at RMS values ranging from 0.002 to 0.004. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.004. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb42 2003 - 2004 For rr34: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Caliente (1954), Cedar City (1962), Delta (1962), Ely (1959), Lund (1956), and Richfield (1963). The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.002. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr34 2003 - 2004 For wrb38: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 2. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps at 1:250,000 and 1:62,500-scale. No map names were cited. The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.006. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb38 2003 - 2004 For wrb34: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps and Army Map Service 1:250,000-scale series. No specific map names were cited. The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a RMS = 0.004. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb34 2003 - 2004 For wrb18: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 3. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps Corn Creek Springs (1952), Grass Peak (1952), Dry Lake (1952), Henderson (1952), Las Vegas (1952) and Blue Diamond (1952) . No map scale was cited. The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with an RMS = 0.002. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb18 2003 - 2004 For wrb31: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey topographic and Army Map Service 1:250,000-scale map series. No specific map names were cited. The scale of the U.S. Geological Survey maps were not cited. The plate was printed on paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics.The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a RMS ranging between 0.001 and 0.002. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb31 2003 - 2004 For wrir974123: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 3. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey digital data 1:000,000-scale and 1:24,000-scale, 1974-1979. The plate was paper and was in fair condition with deep fold lines. The plate had latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system, but using them would require extrapolating the locations from the plate edges to the interior of the plate. Instead, the PLSS township and range lines were used to register the plate to the coordinate system. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.006. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir974123 2003 - 2004 For wrir964134: 1. The data set was created in 1994 to support work along the Carlin Trend, north-central Nevada. Contours were hand drawn at 1:250,000-scale on an unknown medium and digitized with a maximum RMS = 0.003. The contours were plotted on hard copy plots and, using a light table, the plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 2. The data was retrieved from the project work space and the contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir964134 1994 - 2004 For wrir984209: 1. Contour information from two plates were used. Figure 4 contours were from 1996 and figure 3 contours were from 1982. The data sets were created in 1997 to support hydrologic work in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central, Nevada. No documentation on the creation or verification of the contours from figure 3 exists. Processes are assumed to be similar to those used to create the figure 4 data set. The contours from figure 4 were digitized from a mylar base with a RMS ranging from 0.003 to 0.004. Contours in Buffalo Valley drawn and digitized in the 1992 data set were not published in the report. These contours were reviewed by the U.S. Geological Survey Ground Water Specialist in Carson City, Nevada in 2004. The contours are included in this data set. 2. The digital data was retrieved from the project work space and hard copy plots matching the scale of the published data were created. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the published data. Two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the original and digital lines and the attribute data matched the published data. 3. The projection was defined as UTM zone 11, NAD 27. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir984209 1997 - 2004 For pp1409f: 1. The data set was created in 1997 to support hydrologic work in Paradise Valley, Nevada. No documentation on the creation or verification of the original data set exists. 2. The digital data was retrieved from the project work space and hard copy plots matching the scale of the published data were created. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the published data. Two comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the original and digital lines and the attribute data matched the published data. 3. The projection was defined as UTM zone 11, NAD 27. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. pp1409f 1993 - 2004 For rr41: 1. The source of the contour data was figure 4. Because the figure was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. The figure did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The figure did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000-scale topographic map maps. The tics were digitized at RMS = 0.001. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 3. The scanned copy of the source figure was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.001. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr41 2003 -2004 For rr24: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic map Lund (1960). Because the plate was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from cited base map. The tics were digitized at RMS = 0.003. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 3. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.001. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr24 2003 - 2004 For rr58: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Goldfield (1954), and Mariposa (1957). The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from the cited base maps. The tics were digitized at RMS values ranging from 0.001 to 0.003. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.005. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr58 2003 - 2004 For wrb41: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Goldfield (1954) and Tonopah (1962). The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from the cited 1:250,000-scale base maps. The tics were digitized at RMS values ranging from 0.001 to 0.004. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.003. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrb41 2003 - 2004 For wrir914072: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 3. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000-scale topographic maps Reno (1957, revised 1971). The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The figure did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.007. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir914072 2003 - 2004 For wrir934118: 1. The data set was created in 1993 to support hydrologic work in the Fallon area, Churchill County, Nevada. No documentation on the creation or verification of the original data set exists. 2. The digital data was retrieved from the project work space and hard copy plots matching the scale of the published data were created. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the published data. Corrections were made until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the original and digital lines and the attribute data matched the published data. 3. The archived data was copied to a new data set and the projection defined as UTM zone 11, NAD 27. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wrir934118 1993 - 2004 For rr4: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as Army Map Service topographic map NK11-7 (1958). Because the plate was bound in the report, it was scanned at 200 dots per inch using a flatbed scanner. The image was printed at the same size as the bound figure from the report. Size and scale were verified by comparing the bound figure with the printed figure using a light table. 2. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 3. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.003. 4. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 5. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 6. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr4 2003 - 2004 For wsp1619aa: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 1. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:62,500-scale topographic maps Wadsworth and Two Tips. No map dates were cited. The plate was paper and was in poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. The plate did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was created by digitizing the intersections of township and range lines from the cited 1:62,500-scale topographic maps. The tics were digitized at RMS = 0.002. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.001. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. wsp1619aa 2003 - 2004 For pp1409e: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 2. The base for the plate was cited as U.S. Geological Survey 1:100,000-scale topographic map Smith Creek Valley (1975). The plate was paper and was in fair condition with folds but no tears. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. It did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.003. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. pp1409e 2003 - 2004 For rr14: 1. The source of the contour data was Plate 3. No base was cited for the plate. The plate was paper and was in very poor condition with deep creases and small tears along fold lines. The plate did not have latitude and longitude tics that could be used to register it to a coordinate system. It did have PLSS township and range lines. A tic data set for coordinate registration was developed by converting the intersections of township and range lines from digital 1:100,000-scale PLSS data to tics. The tic locations were verified by plotting them on a hard copy plot and visually and manually examining them against the source using a light table. Two visual and manual examinations determined that a minimum of 4 tics corresponded with township-range intersections on the source. 2. The source was securely taped to a digitizing table and registered to UTM zone 11, NAD 27 using the tic data set. The contours were digitized directly into the coordinate system with a maximum RMS = 0.010. 3. The contours were attributed to match the water-table data set design. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation BUILD command. 4. Hard copy plots of the digital data were generated. Using a light table, these plots were visually and manually compared with the source. Corrections were made to the spatial data until two visual and manual comparisons, combined with on-screen review, determined there was no light between the source and digital contour lines and the attribute data matched the source. 5. Line topology was built using the ArcGIS Workstation CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. rr14 2003 - 2004 A plot of each HA in Nevada was made showing all the contours that covered the HA. A preferred set of contours was chosen where HAs were covered by more than one set of contours. Where applicable, contours from different reports were chosen to cover a single HA. Contours crossed HA boundaries where the hydrogeology and literature indicated a continuous aquifer system. Where little or no data were available, contours from Bedinger and others, 1984 (wrir83119b) were used. 2004 1. Contours identified for inclusion in the final data set were selected using the ArcGIS Workstation ArcEdit module selection environment. The selected contours were added to the final data set using the PUT command. 2. Line topology for the final data set was built using the CLEAN command with the fuzzy tolerance = 0.001 meters and the dangle length = 0.01 meters. 3. The final data set was clipped to the extent of the state using the CLIP command. 2004 1. Using various ArcGIS workstation commands and the ArcEdit module, arcs were checked for node errors. 2. The attribute wanv-ID was calculated to be a unique sequential integer based on wanv#. 2004 Metadata were structured and validated using metadata tools, MP and CNS, developed by Peter Schweitzer, U.S. Geological Survey. 200407 Vector Complete chain 2370 Point 105 Universal Transverse Mercator 11 0.999600 -117.000000 0.000000 500000.000000 0.000000 coordinate pair 0.005359 0.005359 meters North American Datum of 1927 Clarke 1866 6378206.400000 294.978698 wanv_l.aat Arc Attribute Table ESRI FID Internal feature number. ESRI Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated. Shape Feature geometry. ESRI Coordinates defining the features. FNODE# Internal node number for the beginning of an arc (from-node). ESRI Whole numbers that are automatically generated. TNODE# Internal node number for the end of an arc (to-node). ESRI Whole numbers that are automatically generated. LPOLY# Internal node number for the left polygon. ESRI Whole numbers that are automatically generated. RPOLY# Internal node number for the right polygon. ESRI Whole numbers that are automatically generated. LENGTH Length of feature in internal units (meters). ESRI Positive real numbers that are automatically generated. WANV_L# Internal feature number. ESRI Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated. WANV_L-ID Whole numbers that are automatically generated. ESRI User defined whole numbers. RMS-I The root mean square error computed during registration of the map to a digitizer, in digitizer units (inches) ESRI Decimal number computed during the automation process. -9999 indicates no data. RMS-O The root mean square error computed during registration of the map to a digitizer, in map units (meters) ESRI Decimal number computed during the automation process. -9999 indicates no data. DATE-DIG The calendar date the contours were digitized user-defined Calendar date in the form yyyymm or yyyy. -9999 indicates no data. REPORT A code representing the report number where the contours were originally published user-defined ofr801224 Arteaga, F.E., 1982, Mathematical model analysis of the Eagle Valley ground-water basin, west-central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 80-1224, 55 p. user-defined wrir834119b Bedinger, M.S., Harrill, J.R., Langer, W.H., Thomas, J.M., and Mulvihill, D.A., 1984, Maps showing ground-water levels, springs, and depth to ground water, Basin and Range Province, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4119-B, 2 sheets, scale 1:500,000. user-defined wrir954119 Berger, D.L., 1995, Ground-water conditions and effects of mine dewatering in Desert Valley, Humboldt and Pershing Counties, northwestern Nevada, 1962-91: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4119, 94 p. user-defined wrir994188 Berger, D.L., and Medina, R.L., 1999, Spatial ground-water data base in Carson Valley, Douglas County, Nevada, and Alpine County, California--Development and documentation: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4188, 1 CD-ROM user-defined sir20045155 Berger, D.L., Maurer, D.K., Lopes, T.J., Halford, K.J., 2004, Estimates of natural ground-water discharge and characterization of water quality in Dry Valley, Washoe County, west-central Nevada, 2002-2003: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5155, 46 p. user-defined wrir964297 Berger, D.L., Ross, W.C., Thodal, C.E., and Robledo, A.R., 1997, Hydrogeology and simulated effects of urban development on water resources of Spanish Springs Valley, Washoe County, west-central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4297, 80 p. user-defined rr29 Cohen, Philip, 1964, A brief appraisal of the ground-water resources of the Grass Valley area, Humboldt and Pershing Counties, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 29, 40 p. user-defined wrb22 Cohen, Philip, 1964, Preliminary results of hydrologic investigations in the valley of the Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Bulletin 22, 59 p. user-defined rr23 Cohen, Philip, and Everett, D.E., 1963, A brief appraisal of the ground-water hydrology of the Dixie-Fairview Valley area, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 23, 40 p. user-defined rr3 Eakin, T.E., 1961, Ground-water appraisal of Long Valley, White Pine and Elko Counties, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 3, 35 p. user-defined wrb32 Eakin, T.E., and Lamke, R.D., 1966, Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Humboldt River Basin, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Bulletin 32, 107 p. user-defined rr42 Eakin, T.E., Hughes, J.L., and Moore, D.O., 1967, Water-resources appraisal of Steptoe Valley, White Pine and Elko Counties, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 42, 48 p. user-defined rr26 Everett, D.E., 1964, Ground-water appraisal of Edwards Creek Valley, Churchill County, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 26, 18 p. user-defined wrir954177 Hale, G.S., Trudeau, D.A., and Savard, C.S., 1995, Water-level data from wells and test holes through 1991 and potentiometric contours as of 1991 for Yucca Flat, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4177, scale 1:48,000. user-defined wrir964311 Handman, E.H., and Kilroy, K.C., 1997, Ground-water resources of northern Big Smoky Valley, Lander and Nye Counties, central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4311, 97 p. user-defined wrir904050 Handman, E.H., Londquist, C.J., and Maurer, D.K., 1990, Ground-water resources of Honey Lake Valley, Lassen County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4050, 112 p. user-defined wrb35 Harrill, J.R., 1968, Hydrologic response to irrigation pumping in Diamond Valley, Eureka and Elko Counties, Nevada, 1950-65, with a section on surface water by R.D. Lamke: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Bulletin 35, 85 p. user-defined wrb37 Harrill, J.R., 1969, Hydrologic response to irrigation pumping in Hualapai Flat, Washoe, Pershing, and Humboldt Counties, Nevada, 1960-67: Nevada Division of Water Resources, Bulletin 37, 75 p. user-defined wrb42 Harrill, J.R., 1973, Evaluation of the water resources of Lemmon Valley, Washoe County, Nevada, with emphasis on effects of ground-water development to 1971: Nevada Division of Water Resources, Bulletin 42, 130 p. user-defined rr34 Hood, J.W., and Rush, F.E., 1965, Water-resources appraisal of the Snake Valley area, Utah and Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 34, 43 p. user-defined wrb38 Huxel, C.J., Jr., and Harris, E.E., 1969, Water resources and development in Mason Valley, Lyon and Mineral Counties, Nevada, 1948-65: Nevada Division of Water Resources, Bulletin 38, 77 p. user-defined wrb34 Huxel, C.J., Jr., Parkes, J.E., and Everett, D.E., 1966, Effects of irrigation development on the water supply of Quinn River Valley area, Nevada and Oregon, 1950-64: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Bulletin 34, 80 p. user-defined wrb18 Malmberg, G.T., 1961, A summary of the hydrology of the Las Vegas ground-water basin, Nevada, with special reference to the available supply: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Bulletin 18, 23 p. user-defined wrb31 Malmberg, G.T., and Worts, G.F., Jr., 1966, The effects of pumping on the hydrology of Kings River Valley, Humboldt County, Nevada, 1957-64: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Bulletin 31, 57 p. user-defined wrir974123 Maurer, D.K., 1997, Hydrology and ground-water budgets of the Dayton Valley hydrographic area, west-central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4123, 89 p. user-defined wrir964134 Maurer, D.K., Plume, R.W., Thomas, J.M., and Johnson, A.K., 1996, Water resources and effects of changes in ground-water use along the Carlin Trend, north-central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4134, 146 p. user-defined wrir984209 Plume, R.W., and Ponce, D.A., 1999, Hydrogeologic framework and ground-water levels, 1982 and 1996, Middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4209, 2 sheets. user-defined pp1409f Prudic, D.E., and Herman, M.E., 1996, Ground-water flow and simulated effects of development in Paradise Valley, a basin tributary to the Humboldt River in Humboldt County, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1409-F, 92 p. user-defined rr41 Rush, F.E., 1967, Water-resources appraisal of Washoe Valley, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 41, 39 p. user-defined rr24 Rush, F.E., and Eakin, T.E., 1963, Ground-water appraisal of Lake Valley in Lincoln and White Pine Counties, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 24, 29 p. user-defined rr58 Rush, F.E., and Katzer, T.L., 1973, Water-resources appraisal of Fish Lake Valley, Nevada and California: Nevada Division of Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 58, 70 p. user-defined wrb41 Rush, F.E., and Schroer, C.V., 1970, Water resources of Big Smoky Valley, Lander, Nye, and Esmeralda Counties, Nevada: Nevada Division of Water Resources, Bulletin 41, 84 p. user-defined wrir914072 Schaefer, D.H., and Whitney, Rita, 1992, Geological framework and ground-water conditions in basin-fill aquifers of the Dayton Valley and Churchill Valley hydrographic areas, western Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4072, 12 p. user-defined wrir934118 Seiler, R.L., and Allander, K.K., 1993, Water-level changes and directions of ground-water flow in the shallow aquifer, Fallon area, Churchill County, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93-4118, 74 p. user-defined rr04 Sinclair, W.C., 1962, Ground-water resources of Pine Forest Valley, Humboldt County, Nevada: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 4, 22 p. user-defined wsp1619aa Sinclair, W.C., and Loeltz, O.J., 1963, Ground-water conditions in the Fernley-Wadsworth area, Churchill, Lyon, Storey, and Washoe Counties, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1619-AA, 22 p. user-defined pp1409e Thomas, J.M., Carlton, S.M., and Hines, L.B., 1989, Ground-water hydrology and simulated effects of development in Smith Creek Valley, a hydrologically closed basin in Lander County, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1409-E, 57 p. user-defined rr14 Walker, G.E., and Eakin, T.E., 1963, Geology and ground water of Amargosa Desert, Nevada-California: Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-Water Resources Reconnaissance Report 14, 45 p. user-defined REPORT-YR The year the report was published user-defined Calendar date in the form yyyy COMMENTS Used to document comments about the digital data or the original report user-defined Text ELEV-FT The water-table elevation, in feet user-defined 1200 6900 feet ELEV-M The water-table elevation, in meters computed from elev-ft (elev-ft * 0.3048) 365.76 2103.12 meters CONFIDENCE The confidence level associated with the contour user-defined approximate the contour is approximately located pp1409e, rr03, rr04, rr14, rr24, rr26, rr29, rr34, rr42, rr58, wrb18, wrb22, wrb31, wrb32, wrb34, wrb35, wrb37, wrb38, wrb41, wrb42, wrir834119b, wrir914072, wrir954119, wrir954177, wrir964297, wrir974123, wsp1619-aa certain the location of the contour is certain wrir994188 higher confidence the contour is located with higher confidence than others in the report wrir934118 inferred the location of the contour is inferred wrir834119b lower confidence the contour is located with lower confidence than others in the report wrir934118 lowest confidence the contour is located with the lowest confidence wrir934118 pre-Tertiary contour approximate ground-water altitude in pre-tertiary aquifers wrir834119b simulated the contour is simulated wrir904050, wrir964311 supplemental the contour supplements the stated contour interval wrir834119b supplemental-depression the contour indicates a depression and supplements the stated contour interval wrir834119b uncertain the location of the contour is uncertain wrir954177, wrir964134, wrir984209, wrir994188 > wanv_l.aat > >COLUMN ITEM NAME WIDTH OUTPUT TYPE N.DEC ALTERNATE NAME INDEXED? > 1 FNODE# 4 5 B - - > 5 TNODE# 4 5 B - - > 9 LPOLY# 4 5 B - - > 13 RPOLY# 4 5 B - - > 17 LENGTH 8 18 F 5 - > 25 WANV_L# 4 5 B - - > 29 WANV_L-ID 4 5 B - - > 33 RMS-I 4 8 F 3 - > 37 RMS-O 4 8 F 3 - > 41 DATE-DIG 8 8 I - - > 49 REPORT 20 20 C - - > 69 REPORT-YR 5 5 I - - > 74 COMMENTS 60 60 C - - > 134 ELEV-FT 5 5 I - - > 139 ELEV-M 4 8 F 3 - > 143 CONFIDENCE 30 30 C - - RMS-I is the root mean square error of registration to the digitizer in input coverage units (inches). The value -9999 is used where the information was not available. RMS-O is the root mean square error of registration to the digitizer in output coverage units (meters). The value -9999 is used where the information was not available. DATE-DIG is the calendar date the contours were digitized in the form yyyymm or yyyy. The value -9999 is used where the information was not available. REPORT is a code representing the report where the contours were originally published REPORT-YR is the year the report was published in the form yyyy COMMENTS holds comments about the digital data or original report ELEV-FT is the water table elevation, in feet ELEV-M is the water table elevation, in meters, calculated by multiplying the field ELEV-FT by the value 0.3048 CONFIDENCE is the confidence level associated with the contour. Values were retained from the published contours. provided above U.S. Geological Survey Ask USGS - Water Webserver Team mailing address

445 National Center

Reston VA 20192 http://answers.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/gsanswers?pemail=h2oteam&subject=GIS+Dataset+sir2006-5100_wanv_l Downloadable Data Although this data set has been used by the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior, no warranty expressed or implied is made by the U.S. Geological Survey as to the accuracy of the data and related materials. The act of distribution shall not constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by the U.S. Geological Survey in the use of these data, software, or related materials. The use of firm, trade, or brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. The names mentioned in this document may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective trademark owners. WinZipped ARCE spatial and attribute information WinZip .988 http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/dsdl/sir2006-5100_wanv_l.e00.zip None. This data set is provided by USGS as a public service. 20060508 U.S. Geological Survey Ask USGS -- Water Webserver Team mailing address

445 National Center

Reston VA 20192 1-888-275-8747 (1-888-ASK-USGS) http://answers.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/gsanswers?pemail=h2oteam&subject=GIS+Dataset+sir2006-5100_wanv_l FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998