Laserfiche WebLink
<br />impact to water quality. This issue should be investigated. At this time, a valid or stable baseline has not been established <br />to predict future water quality impacts. <br />Upper Aquifer (UPCl/Uinta/Perched) <br /> Bicarbonate TDS Chlorite Fluorite <br />mrJl Max Min Mcan Max Min Mean Max Min Mean htax Min Mean <br />AmSoda 20-8 2906 793 1903 2135 1180 1714 116 20 SS - - - <br />AmSoda 20-5 4158 774 2965 29400 1210 8924 I S9 7 84 8 7 2 6.3 <br />USGS (I) 918 307 SSO 2180 345 960 63 3.4 16 12 0 1.4 <br />C-b (I) 530 I 287 1900 530 1017 390 4.6 6S 20 0.1 3.4 <br />C-a M2U (3) - - 356 - - 1110 - - 17 - - - <br />USGS IA (4) - - 487 - - R68 - - 9.3 - - 0.4 <br />USGS 2A (4) - - 550 - - 991 - - 12 - - 4.8 <br />WRN 89-3 (S) 287 6G 197 520 362 434 40 5 12 1.4 0.02 0.39 <br />Signific~nJ}' high conccnhations of bicarh, TDS and chloride for American Soda well 20-5, indicate either poor sampling, poor <br />yualit}' assurance, or inadequate well completion. It is ccr}' interes-ling Ihat both AmSoda wells (20-5 and 20-8) initially <br />reported svnilar cona~nUations to mgional data base, especially USGS (4) al Horse Dmtv near American Soda. Therefore well <br />completioru would appear to be adequate, pcwr sampling or QA may esplain some of the estremel}' high readings, but more <br />disturbing is the trend toward high readings, indicating probable impacts to the upper aquifer, confirmed at both American <br />SOda WCIIS. <br />Lower Aquifer (UPC3B-Groove) <br />Bicarbonate TDS Chlorite Fluorite <br />mg/1 111ex Min Mean Max Min Mcan Ma: Min Mean hlax Min Mean <br />Am Soda 20-9 14322 0 7238 <br />USGS (1) noaquifcrspccificdata <br />Gb (2) LJI'C3 2600 I 838 <br />C-a (3) no aquifer specific data <br />USGS lA (4) - - 1020 <br />USGS 2A (4) - - 991 <br />WRN 89-I(S) 762 144 622 <br />9GIG 2995 7334 4070 210 2146 23.8 4.9 9.6 <br />3200 500 ISI8 1300 S 173 38 0.2 18 <br />- - 1170 - - 21 - - I.0 <br />- - 1060 - - 13 - - 10 <br />1100 446 875 44 6 16 3R 12 24.5 <br />American Soda dam is so ~ariablc and inconsistent ss. regional daw that no conclusion can be made other than useful baseline <br />has not been established to evaluate future impacts Sampling error, or periodic impacts ma}' be the problem. The three <br />samples for American Soda do not match regional dam; tvitlr much higher bicarb, TDS, chloride and lore fluoride a case can <br />be rrctdc for a bad well completion or impacts with influence from deeper aqui@rs. Regional data is relatively consistent for <br />bicarb and TDS, with regional di(lerences for chloride and Ouoride. <br />9 <br />