Water Quality Assessment Sample Clauses

Water Quality Assessment. The status and trends of water quality were assessed by reviewing the data in Excel tables, plotting the important water quality indicators over time, and comparing the values to the Province’s water quality objectives for the Cowichan River 1, or to B.C. approved 3 and working 4 water quality guidelines or Canadian water quality guidelines 5 for indicators for which objectives have not been set. Water quality indicators that were plotted include those for which water quality objectives were set, those that were monitored consistently over time, and those that exceeded water quality guidelines at times. Any levels or changes of the indicators over time that may have been harmful to sensitive water uses, such as drinking water, aquatic life, wildlife, recreation, irrigation and livestock, are described below in alphabetical order. Water quality indicators not plotted or discussed met all water quality guidelines and did not change significantly over time. These included: antimony, boron, barium, beryllium, bromide, calcium, carbon- dissolved organic, chloride, colour, fluoride, lithium, mercury, potassium, magnesium, selenium, silicon, sodium, strontium, sulphate, tellurium, tin, titanium, thallium, uranium, vanadium, and zirconium. Before the assessment was conducted, the corrections recommended by the data approval reports 6, 7 were made, and the errors, possible errors, and probable errors identified by the reports were removed from the dataset. Ammonia nitrogenFigure 4 – had all values below average aquatic life objectives 1. There appears to have been an increasing (deteriorating) trend over time, but this impression is solely due to three higher samples in August 2001 during low flow. Cadmium (no figure) – had high minimum detectable limits (MDL), which were at or above the water quality guideline of 0.00001 mg/L at a hardness of 30 mg/L. There were four values above the water quality guideline, two of which have been identified as an error and possible error 7. An MDL at least 10 times below the guideline is needed to provide reliable data for comparison to the guideline. Chlorophyll a, periphyton – (no figure) – was measured at the station on one occasion in August 1993, and the water quality objective 1 of an average of 50 mg/m2 (0.05 g/m2) was met. In September 1998, the objective was met upstream from the Xxxxxx-North Cowichan sewage treatment plant outfall, but not met 200 m downstream from the outfall. A July 1998 survey of the river found t...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Water Quality Assessment. The status and trends of water quality were assessed by plotting the water quality indicators over time and comparing the values to the Province’s approved and working water quality guidelines (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 2001a & 2001b). Any levels or changes of the indicators over time that may have been harmful to sensitive water uses, such as drinking water, aquatic life, wildlife, recreation, irrigation and livestock, are described below in alphabetical order. Water quality indicators that were plotted but not discussed because they easily met all water quality guidelines and showed no harmful trends were: aluminum, total, arsenic, Canada – British Columbia Water Quality Monitoring Agreement 1 total, barium, total, beryllium, total, lithium, total, molybdenum, total, nickel, total, selenium, total, sodium, strontium, total, and vanadium, total. 0.005 mg/L irrigation guideline for trivalent chromium, and three of these values exceeded the 0.008 mg/L irrigation guideline for hexavalent chromium. The three highest values were measured when turbidity was low (0.83-2.6 NTU), and thus the chromium was not associated with suspended sediment and may have been in a bio-available form. Measurement of hexavalent and trivalent chromium with suitably low detection limits (at least 0.0001 mg/L) are needed to determine the extent to which guidelines are exceeded. There was no apparent change in mean total chromium levels during 1991-2000. Canada – British Columbia Water Quality Monitoring Agreement 2 Coliforms, fecal (Figure 12) were monitored during 1968-70 and 1975-2000. There was a dramatic decrease in fecal coliform levels after 1977 and then little or no change during 1978-2000. The decrease after 1977 was probably due to improved sewage treatment and disposal by the Town of Creston and in the US. The maximum level during 1978-2000 was 210/100 mL, and the next highest value was 99/100 mL, indicating that the water met the guidelines for swimming, livestock and irrigation (200/100 mL geometric mean) and raw drinking water that receives partial treatment and disinfection (100/100 mL 90th percentile). Canada – British Columbia Water Quality Monitoring Agreement 3 During 1974-2000, there has been a small increasing trend, but it had little environmental significance since the maximum hardness (hardness is mainly calcium plus magnesium expressed as CaCO3) of 139 mg/L was well below the poor, but tolerable, aesthetic guideline for drinking water.
Water Quality Assessment. The status and trends of water quality were assessed by plotting the water quality indicators over time and comparing the values to the Province’s approved and working water quality guidelines (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, 2001a & 2001b). Any levels or changes of the indicators over time that may have been harmful to sensitive water uses, such as drinking water, aquatic life, wildlife, recreation, irrigation and livestock, are described below in alphabetical order. Water quality indicators that were plotted but not discussed because they easily met all water quality guidelines and showed no harmful trends were: aluminum, total, barium, total and extractable, beryllium, total and extractable, boron, extractable, gallium, extractable, lanthanum, extractable, lithium, total and extractable, molybdenum, total, nickel, total and extractable, nitrogen, total dissolved, selenium, total and extractable, strontium, total and extractable, thallium, extractable, uranium, extractable, and vanadium, total and extractable. Trace elements at this station were measured by total and extractable methods. Total and extractable samples are both acidified in the field with nitric acid to about pH 2. Extractable zinc samples are then analysed in the laboratory without further treatment, while total zinc samples have additional nitric and hydrochloric acid added and are boiled to dryness before analysis. The additional extraction step has the potential to extract trace elements that are strongly bound to particulate matter and unlikely to be bio-available. The aquatic life guideline was always met during 1984-2000. Only data with a detection limit of 0.0001 mg/L, which is still above the aquatic life guidelines (0.00003-0.00006 mg/L), were included. Nevertheless, there were many detectable values above the guideline during 1973-2000, mostly occurring in freshet due to elevated turbidity, suggesting that the cadmium was particulate-bound and not likely to have been bio-available. Some of the detectable values may also be false positives since the values were all close to the detection limit. The maximum value of 0.0018 mg/L was still below the drinking water guideline of 0.005 mg/L. There may have been a slight decrease over time. These peaks occurred during spring freshet due to elevated turbidity and thus were probably not bioavailable. There were no apparent changes over time. Cobalt, extractable (Figure 14) was monitored during 1997-2000 with a detection limit of...
Water Quality Assessment. The status and trends of water quality were assessed by plotting water quality measurements for the Flathead River at the International Boundary on a graph over time, along with the relevant approved 2 and working 3 water quality guidelines or the Canadian water quality guidelines 4. (There are no site-specific water quality objectives for the Flathead River.) The data are plotted in Figures 3 to 31. (Note: For this assessment, 1980-95 data came from EMS 0200047 and 2002-04 data came from ENVIRODAT BC08NP0003). The graphs were inspected for "environmentally significant" trends - where the measurements are increasing or decreasing over time and the levels are close to the objectives or guidelines, or are otherwise judged to represent an important change in water quality. These trends are further evaluated to ensure that they were not caused by measurement errors, to identify their causes, and to determine whether they are statistically significant. A confidence level of 95% or better is used to define statistical significance, unless noted otherwise. When concentrations of a substance cannot be detected, we have plotted the concentration at the level of detection. We believe this to be a conservative approach to assessing possible trends. As well, there are times when measurements were not taken for some reason. In these cases, straight lines will join the two consecutive points and may give the illusion on the graph of a trend that does not exist. In some cases, testing for the presence of a variable has been terminated after a certain period. In general, this has been because a previous data assessment and review has indicated that collections of these data are not warranted for this station. For other variables, concerns about concentrations may have only arisen in recent years. Any levels or changes of the indicators over time that may have been harmful to sensitive water uses, such as drinking water, aquatic life, wildlife, recreation, irrigation and livestock, are described below in alphabetical order. Water quality indicators that were reviewed but not discussed because they easily met all water quality guidelines and showed no harmful trends were: antimony, barium, bismuth, boron, bromide, dissolved organic carbon, chloride, fecal coliforms, true colour, specific conductivity, gallium, lanthanum, lithium, molybdenum, potassium, rubidium, selenium, silver, sodium, strontium, sulphate, air temperature, thallium, uranium, and vanadium. The data for 198...

Related to Water Quality Assessment

  • Quality Assurance/Quality Control Contractor shall establish and maintain a quality assurance/quality control program which shall include procedures for continuous control of all construction and comprehensive inspection and testing of all items of Work, including any Work performed by Subcontractors, so as to ensure complete conformance to the Contract with respect to materials, workmanship, construction, finish, functional performance, and identification. The program established by Contractor shall comply with any quality assurance/quality control requirements incorporated in the Contract.

  • COUNTY’S QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN The County or its agent will evaluate the Contractor’s performance under this Contract on not less than an annual basis. Such evaluation will include assessing the Contractor’s compliance with all Contract terms and conditions and performance standards. Contractor deficiencies which the County determines are severe or continuing and that may place performance of the Contract in jeopardy if not corrected will be reported to the Board of Supervisors. The report will include improvement/corrective action measures taken by the County and the Contractor. If improvement does not occur consistent with the corrective action measures, the County may terminate this Contract or impose other penalties as specified in this Contract.

  • Quality Assurance The parties endorse the underlying principles of the Company’s Quality Management System, which seeks to ensure that its services are provided in a manner which best conforms to the requirements of the contract with its customer. This requires the Company to establish and maintain, implement, train and continuously improve its procedures and processes, and the employees to follow the procedures, document their compliance and participate in the improvement process. In particular, this will require employees to regularly and reliably fill out documentation and checklists to signify that work has been carried out in accordance with the customer’s specific requirements. Where necessary, training will be provided in these activities.

  • Risk Assessment An assessment of any risks inherent in the work requirements and actions to mitigate these risks.

  • Needs Assessment The determination of whether the Annual Income of a family or individual occupying or seeking to occupy a Qualifying Unit complies with the requirements for Extremely Low-Income Households or Low- to Moderate-Income Households shall be made by the applicable housing authority in the CDBG-DR Program area prior to admission of such family or individual to occupancy of a Qualifying Unit.

  • Quality Assurance Requirements There are no special Quality Assurance requirements under this Agreement.

  • Research Analyst Independence The Company acknowledges that the Underwriters’ research analysts and research departments are required to be independent from their respective investment banking divisions and are subject to certain regulations and internal policies, and that such Underwriters’ research analysts may hold views and make statements or investment recommendations and/or publish research reports with respect to the Company and/or the offering that differ from the views of their respective investment banking divisions. The Company hereby waives and releases, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any claims that the Company may have against the Underwriters with respect to any conflict of interest that may arise from the fact that the views expressed by their independent research analysts and research departments may be different from or inconsistent with the views or advice communicated to the Company by such Underwriters’ investment banking divisions. The Company acknowledges that each of the Underwriters is a full service securities firm and as such from time to time, subject to applicable securities laws, may effect transactions for its own account or the account of its customers and hold long or short positions in debt or equity securities of the companies that may be the subject of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement.

  • Accident Prevention Health and Safety Committee (a) The Employer and the Union agree that they mutually desire to maintain standards of safety and health in the workplace in order to prevent accidents, injury and illness. (b) Recognizing its responsibilities under the applicable legislation, the Employer agrees to accept as a member of its Accident Prevention – Health & Safety Committee at least three (3) representatives, one from each base, selected or appointed by the Union from amongst bargaining unit employees. At any time where a vote is required, an equal number of representatives from each side shall be entitled to vote. (c) Such Committee shall identify potential dangers and hazards, institute means of improving health and safety programs and recommend actions to be taken to improve conditions related to safety and health. (d) The Employee agrees to co-operate reasonably in providing necessary information to enable the Committee to fulfill its functions. (e) Meetings shall be held quarterly or more frequently at the call of the Chair if required. The Committee shall maintain minutes of all meetings and make the same available for review. (f) Any representative appointed or select in accordance with (b) hereof shall serve a term of one (1) calendar year from the date of appointment which may be renewed for further periods of one (1) year. The Union will encourage its representative(s) to serve at least one (1) year. Time off for such representative(s) to attend meetings of the Accident Prevention – Health & Safety Committee in accordance with the foregoing shall be granted and time so spent attending such meetings shall be deemed to be work time for which the representative(s) shall be paid by the Employer at his regular or premium rate as may be applicable. (g) The Union agrees to endeavour to obtain the full co-operation of its membership in the observation of all safety rules and practices. (h) Pregnant employees may request to be transferred from their current duties if, in the professional opinion of the employee’s physician, the pregnancy may be at risk. If such a transfer is not feasible, the pregnant employee, if she so requests, will be granted an unpaid leave of absence before commencement of the maternity leave referred to in Article 16.04

  • Report on Assessment of Compliance and Attestation (a) On or before March 1 of each calendar year, commencing in 2007, the Servicer shall: (i) deliver to the Owner and any Depositor a report (in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to the Owner and such Depositor) regarding the Servicer’s assessment of compliance with the Servicing Criteria during the immediately preceding calendar year, as required under Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 of the Exchange Act and Item 1122 of Regulation AB. Such report shall be addressed to the Owner and such Depositor and signed by an authorized officer of the Servicer, and shall address each of the Servicing Criteria specified on a certification substantially in the form of Exhibit 7 hereto delivered to the Owner concurrently with the execution of this Agreement; (ii) deliver to the Owner and any Depositor a report of a registered public accounting firm reasonably acceptable to the Owner and such Depositor that attests to, and reports on, the assessment of compliance made by the Servicer and delivered pursuant to the preceding paragraph. Such attestation shall be in accordance with Rules 1-02(a)(3) and 2-02(g) of Regulation S-X under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act; (iii) cause each Subservicer, and each Subcontractor determined by the Company pursuant to Section 12.06(b) to be “participating in the servicing function” within the meaning of Item 1122 of Regulation AB, to deliver to the Owner and any Depositor an assessment of compliance and accountants’ attestation as and when provided in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Section; and (iv) if requested by the Owner or any Depositor not later than February 1 of the calendar year in which such certification is to be delivered, deliver to the Owner, any Depositor and any other Person that will be responsible for signing the certification (a “Sarbanes Certification”) required by Rules 13a-14(d) and 15d-14(d) under the Exchange Act (pursuant to Section 302 of the Xxxxxxxx-Xxxxx Act of 2002) on behalf of an asset-backed issuer with respect to a Securitization Transaction a certification in the form attached hereto as Exhibit 6. The Servicer acknowledges that the parties identified in clause (a)(iv) above may rely on the certification provided by the Servicer pursuant to such clause in signing a Sarbanes Certification and filing such with the Commission. Neither the Owner nor any Depositor will request delivery of a certification under clause (a)(iv) above, unless a Depositor is required under the Exchange Act to file an annual report on Form 10-K with respect to an issuing entity whose asset pool includes Mortgage Loans. (b) Each assessment of compliance provided by a Subservicer pursuant to Section 12.05(a)(i) shall address each of the Servicing Criteria specified on a certification substantially in the form of Exhibit 7 hereto delivered to the Owner concurrently with the execution of this Agreement or, in the case of a Subservicer subsequently appointed as such, on or prior to the date of such appointment. An assessment of compliance provided by a Subcontractor pursuant to Section 12.05(a)(iii) need not address any elements of the Servicing Criteria other than those specified by the Servicer pursuant to Section 12.06.

  • Quality Assurance Program An employee shall be entitled to leave of absence without loss of earnings from her or his regularly scheduled working hours for the purpose of writing examinations required by the College of Nurses of Ontario arising out of the Quality Assurance Program.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!