Laserfiche WebLink
conductivity versus time plot for well GF6. Although there is scatter over a range from 880 to 1760 . <br />~.anhos/cm, overall, the values have been steady. <br />Figures B-20 and B-21 present conductivity data versus time for well GF7 and GF11, <br />respectively. Recovery of water levels in the backfill material neaz well GF7 has caused the rise in <br />conductivity since the well was installed in 1987. The increase in conductivity in this well is due <br />to ground water dissolving constituents as it enters the backfill material. Conductivit)~ has been <br />fairly steady for 1989 through 1991. The 1992 through 1994 results show considerable scatter but <br />may be the start of a decreasing trend. The March 1994 field value is thought to be in error when <br />compared to the laboratory value. An overall increasing trend seems to be occurring in the baclcfill <br />water at GFI1, with a significant amount of fluctuation for this uppermost aquifer. The <br />conductivities in this backfill aquifer are very• close to background values. <br />Figure B-22 presents the plot of conductivity versus time for well GP 1. A fair amount <br />of scatter is seen in the 1986-1987 data with a declining trend being observed in field values since <br />1990. This well is located to the ease in an area undisturbed by mining activity. It is completed <br />in the QR aquifer and is also in an upgradient position within the PA. Data from this well shows <br />how the conductivity of the ground water can naturally vary greatly with time. <br />Figure B-23 presents conductivity data for KLM well GP2. The 1986 data from well GP2 <br />contains considerable scatter when compared with values observed since 1986, which is probably <br />due to the variation in sampling procedure. In 1986 samples were obtained by bailing, after which <br />they were obtained by pumping. The ]993 and 1994 field conductivity values do not correlate well <br />with the values of TDS observed since 1986, however, the ] 993 and ] 9941aboratory values are in <br />good agreement with the observed TDS values. This plot shows that conductivity values have <br />remained fairly steady since 1986 when the field values are not used. GP2 is located at an • <br />3-4 <br />