Laserfiche WebLink
Sandstone at the GC well site. Figure B-44 shows some scatter in <br />• the conductivity data, but when compared to the TDS plot on <br />Figure B-6, most of the values reflect a similar pattern with two <br />outliers. The alluvial aquifer is monitored at the GC site by <br />well GC3. Figure B-45 presents the conductivity versus time plot <br />for well GC3. A fair amount of scatter is seen on the plot, but <br />an increase in values was seen from 1984 to 1986 with stable <br />values before and after the rise. A similar pattern was presented <br />in the TD5 plot for this well. All changes in the aquifers at <br />the GC site are natural due to the distance from active mining. <br />Well GD1 is a Twenty Mile Sandstone well and is used as the <br />water supply well for the mine and the power plant since 1985. <br />The increase of water use resulted in the higher conductivities <br />since 1985 shown on Figure B-46. <br />• Wells GD2 and GD3 monitor the DR aquifer and the backfill <br />material where the DR coal was mined upgradient of well GD2 in <br />the Derringer Pit area. <br />Figure B-47 presents the field conductivity data for well <br />GD2. Conductivities for well GD2 have remained fairly steady the <br />last six years with the exception of the September 1988 value. <br />The backfill well GD3 was installed in July 1988 so only a very <br />few data points are available to plot. Figure B-48 presents the <br />field conductivity data for well GD3. The mining upgradient of <br />well GD2 has not affected conductivities in this area of the QR <br />aquifer. Any changes are thought to be within the range of <br />natural fluctuations. Conductivity and TDS plots for well GD2 <br />are very similar. <br />The DR, HI and Second White and Third White Sandstone <br />3-11 <br />