Laserfiche WebLink
Greg K. Vaughn • -3- • li May 1988 <br /> molar concentrations rather than equivalent concentrations. <br /> Whatever the reason, the balance must be recalculated and the source <br /> of the large discrepancies must be addressed before the data can be <br /> useful. In addition, the discrepancies in analyses of major ionic <br /> constituents brings other analytical results into question. Valid <br /> analytical results must be obtained and interpreted. Major ion data <br /> should be presented in Stiff, Piper or similar diagrams to <br /> facilitate comparison of background and downgradient water quality. <br /> Table VII-1 <br /> IONIC BALANCE - WELL X102 <br /> Cations Concentration (mg/1) (meq/1) <br /> Ca 34 . 0 1. 697 <br /> Na 33 . 0 1.436 <br /> K <5.0 <. 128 <br /> Mg 15.0 1.234 <br /> Total 4.494 <br /> Anions <br /> HCO3 (as CaCO3) 145. 0 1.449 <br /> Cl <5.0 <. 141 <br /> SO4 23.0 .479 <br /> NO3 (as N) 5.7 .407 <br /> Total 2 .476 <br /> Balance Cations - Anions) * 100 = 44.9% <br /> Cations <br /> VIII. Ground Water <br /> Identification of potentially affected aquifers <br /> Section 25208. 8 (f) of the Health and Safety Code requires an <br /> analysis of the vertical and lateral extent of each ground water <br /> body which could be affected by leachate from the surface <br />