the fits to the [*[FUSE]{}*]{} spectrum alone.

Because the [*[FUSE]{}*]{} spectrum of CH UMa is very noisy, and because of the broad emission lines and the absence of strong absorption lines, it is difficult to assess which model (disk or WD) is the best solution. However, the absence of strong absorption lines would favor the accretion disk model because of Keplerian broadening. Also because of the poor quality of the spectrum, composite models (WD+accretion disk, two-temperature WD) did not improve the fit. In view of all of the above, we cannot be confident that we have determined the temperature of the white dwarf in CH UMa.

Next we analyzed the combined [*[FUSE]{}*]{} + [*[IUE]{}*]{} spectra of CH UMa. The best white dwarf-only fit yielded T$_{eff} = 31,000$K, log $g = 9$ a $\chi^{2} = 3.02$ and $R_{wd}/R_{\sun} = 6.02 \times 10^{-3}$. For accretion disk models only, the best fit occurred with a $\chi^{2} = 
2.02$, corresponding to $\dot{M} = 3 \times 10^{-9} M_{\sun}$/yr. This disk fit is a modest improvement of the fit to CH UMa since the $\chi^{2}$ value was lowered to 2.02. The best-fitting white dwarf + accretion disk model resulted in only a modest, statistically insignificant improvement. 