NC0005762_Color Monitoring_20020819

RE: Color Monitoring
Subject: RE: Color Monitoring
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 15:32:05 -0400
From: Helton Yancy <[e-mail]>
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>,
"'Kitty Kramer (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>,
"'Grady Dobson (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>,
"'Paul Rawls (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>
CC: Lanier Eddie <[e-mail]>, Adams Wesley <[e-mail]>,
Hughes Steve <Hughes. Steve@wpsty. com>, Tarver Tony <Tarver. Tony@wpsty. corn>,
Benton Herman <[e-mail]>, Hurston John <[e-mail]>
The downstream river color samples taken today,
August 19 were not dissimiar to the upstream sample.
The ADMI color at the Upstream NCSR 1403 point was
48; the Downstream color at NCSR 1310 (McGirts Bridge Road) was 86 and the
Downstream Color at NC Hwy. 71 near Campbell Soup was 88. All samples had a
light tan hue, a bright luminance and were clear. The effluent sample was
342.
> Original Message
> From: Helton Yancy
> Sent: Friday; August 16, 2002 2:21 PM
> To: '[e-mail]'; 'Kitty Kramer (E-mail)'; 'Grady Dobson
> (E-mail) '; 'Paul Rawls (E-mail) '
> Cc: Lanier Eddie; Adams Wesley; Hughes Steve; Tarver Tony; Benton
> Herman; Hurston John
> Subject: RE: Color Monitoring
> The river color samples taken today, August 16 showed the
> ADMI color at the Upstream NCSR 1403 point to be 37; the Downstream color
> at NCSR 1310 (McGirts Bridge Road) was 104 and the Downstream Color at NC
> Hwy. 71 near Campbell Soup was 87. All samples had a light tan hue, a
> bright luminance and were clear. The effluent sample was 302.
> The dissimilarity is consistent with Wednesday's results and
> is still due primarily to the abnormally low color in the upstream sample
> and the low flow.
>
> Original Message
From: Helton Yancy
> Sent: Friday, August 16, 2002 8:00 AM
> To: '[e-mail]'; 'Kitty Kramer (E-mail)'; 'Grady
Dobson (E-mail) '; 'Paul Rawls (E-mail) '
> Cc: Lanier Eddie; Adams Wesley; Hughes Steve; Tarver Tony;
> Benton Berman; Hurston John
> Subject: RE: Color Monitoring
> The river color samples taken Wednesday showed the ADMI
> color at the Upstream NCSR 1403 point to be 41; the Downstream color at
> NCSR 1310 (McGirts Bridge Road) was 93 and the Downstream Color at NC Hwy.
> 71 near Campbell Soup was 107. All samples had a light tan hue, a bright
> luminance and were clear.
> The dissimilarity improved from Monday's reading and is
> still due primarily to the abnormally low color in the upstream sample and
1 of 2 8/19/2002 4:39 PM

RE: Color Monitoring
> the low flow. The effluent sample was 279.
> Original Message
> From: Helton Yancy
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 4:49 PM
> To: '[e-mail]'; Kitty Kramer (E-mail);
> Grady Dobson (E-mail); Paul Rawls (E-mail)
> Cc: Lanier Eddie; Adams Wesley; Hughes Steve; Tarver
> Tony; Benton Herman
> Subject: Color Monitoring
> As discussed with Ms. Henson and required by our permit no.
> NC0005762 Section A. (4.) Color Reopener and Monitoring Requirements, on
> Monday, August 12, 2002, the observable instream color at both downstream
> monitoring points were noted to be visually dissimilar to the background
> upstream monitoring point.
> The ADM' color at the Upstream NCSR 1403 point was 40; the
> Downstream color at NCSR 1310 (McGirts Bridge Road) was 105 and the
> Downstream Color at NC Hwy. 71 near Campbell Soup was 146. All samples
> had a light tan hue, a bright luminance and were clear.
> The dissimilarity was due primarily to the abnormally low
> color in the upstream sample and the low flow. The effluent sample was
> 310.
2 of 2
8/19/2002 4:39 PM