Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />P.S. I've been working with Dag, and he seems kinds lost in <br />Deserado's AHR, perhaps Edna may be a better place to start since <br />I've done the prelim and he can check the CDOH material damage <br />criteria, and their surface water/ground water system is on one <br />stream (Trout Creek) and easy to figure out slope gradient and flow <br />gradient wise. Just a suggestion. . <br />REMEMBER FOR 1993 AHR REVIEW: Synopsis from 2/93 mtng with P &M. <br />For 1993 Affil P b M have agreed to the following commitments: <br />1. To verify the TDS value, an explanation of how the long <br />cation/anion balance is made in order to establish a consistent <br />relationship in the data. <br />2. P & M will "back-calculate" 8 months using McWhorter so that <br />field data will match PHC predictions more closely, with higher TDS <br />values accordingly. <br />3. Therefore, by doing #2, an explanation of what now exists in <br />TDS levels and what was predicted in TDS in the PHC can be made. <br />DMG COMMITMENTS IN ONE YEAR - END OF SECOND QUARTER 1994. <br />in turn, DMG has promised to review the AHR for cation/anion <br />balance, including the parameter potassium (R), sad determine after <br />oae year, if sufficient data exists to drop the R parameter from <br />the analysis. <br />Also, DMG authorized the dropping of the "dummy" sample to verify <br />TD8 value from P 6 M's methodology, if and only if, the <br />cation/anion balance is deemed unnessarv with the parameter <br />AOtas9lum. <br />