Laserfiche WebLink
relatively close to active mining in the HI seams, changes seen in <br />these wells are most likely natural fluctuations. <br />Conductivity plots for wells GP7 and GP8 present significant <br />scatter through 1986 (see Figures B-28 and B-29). Some of this <br />variation in the early data is probably due to the differences in <br />bailed water samples and pumped samples from the September <br />monitoring each year. Gradual declining trends have occurred in <br />these two wells the last few years since the precipitation rate has <br />increased. These two wells are located near the eastern boundary <br />of the PA and represent the undisturbed characteristics of the HI <br />and KLM aquifers. <br />Figure B-30 presents the conductivity versus time data for <br />well GP9, A fair amount of scatter is seen for this well, but a <br />recent overall declining trend seems to be occurring, <br />Wells P1 and P3 are alluvial and Lewis Shale completion <br />wells, respectively. The Lewis Shale is thought to contribute some <br />water to the alluvium in this area and, therefore, may influence <br />conductivity values in water from well P1. Figure B-31 shows <br />significant variations in conductivity values for well P1, as would <br />be expected for an alluvial system. Precipitation has also <br />influenced recharge to the Lewis Shale. Conductivity values for <br />1993 for both of these wells showed increased scatter with downward <br />spikes. <br />Wells P5 and PS have shown variations in values as expected <br />from shallow aquifers. Figures B-33 and B-34 each show general <br /> <br />• <br /> <br />3-6 <br />