Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiiiiiiiiu iii <br />999 <br />DRAFT <br />DATE: February 25, 1998 <br />TO: Dave Berry <br />FROM: Harry Posey <br />RE: West Elk Geochemical Assessment: Observations and Interpretations <br />The attached Draft Report represents my best guess regarding the data and interpretations <br />for the West Elk situation. Unequivocally, Dr. Mayo's interpretations are not the only <br />plausible explanations, and as shown in the memo, some of his arguments I believe are <br />not supported. My interpretation, if regarded, should be subject to at least some mass- <br />balance modeling as a check on its adequacy. However, in light of the lack of <br />completeness of the geochemical data in the reports, other interpretations could be <br />forthcoming. <br />To accept or dismiss Dr. Mayo's interpretations outright would require further sampling <br />along with clarification of some of the data we have already. Frankly, 1 do not thinl: this <br />is necessary; despite some of its shortcomings, this is an incredible data set, and I believe <br />we already have enough to make swell-supported interpretation. The alternative model <br />appears to me to support the Division's interpretations that the fault and sump waters are <br />the source of the seep water. My interpretation seems to incorporate more of the data, has <br />multiple avenues of support, and seems compatible with the probable hydrologic <br />consequences predictions. <br />This is only a summary document; I have been developing the supporting information for <br />it, which I have not yet finished. If you would like to discuss any of the work with rne, or <br />if you need a final draft, please let me know. I will be out of the office Thursday and <br />Friday for a tooth extraction, but back in on Monday. I would look forward to a <br />discussion of the isotope data with the group, if you Ihinl: that would help. <br />cc: Mike Boulay <br />Jim Burnell <br />Susan McCannon <br />Jim Pendleton <br />