REP46605 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. David Berry October 4, 1988 Page 14 Middle Creek Station - 1. Why are total dissolved solidata missing for Station 700? 2. The silver detection limit (Station 700) is not sufficiently low to determine whetl~.er the stream standard is being met. Please correct this situation(C~ 3. Is the June 1977 mercury,v~ue (Station 700) a data entry error? Fish Creek Stations - 1. Are there any water quality data for Station 1001? If so, the data should be incorporated into the data base. 2. Station 1002 exhibited a relatively elevated zinc values have also been recorded at this station. Trout Creek - 1. Figure 40 indicates a possible slight increasing trend for electrical conductivity. Additional analysis will be conducted to determine if such an increase is occurring. ~i- ~ N~/ CYVCC RESPONSE: Surface water 1. Foidel Creek Station - The graph Will be reviewed to determine if the data can be presented in a more concise manner. If so, the next AHR will be modified accordingly. 2. A review of the data indicates that four silver analyses have been performed in samples from Station 8D0. Of these four, three were below the detection limit and one was at the detection limit. Therefore, CYCC does not agree with the Division's comment that Station 800 exhibits elevated silver levels. In reference to zinc, thirty five dissolved and total recoverable zinc analyses have been conducted on samples obtained at Station 800. During the period of record only two sampling episodes resulted in zinc concentrations being reported at 100 ug/1 or greater. Also, the mean concentration of both species is less than 50 ug/1. A final point that should be noted is that the 1987 mean concentration for total recoverable zinc is less than the period of record mean concentration. Therefore, CYCC cannot agree with the Division's conclusion that the data indicates "relatively high" zinc levels. 3. The data was entered correctly into the system.