Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Figure B-11 presents an overall gradual increasing trend of <br />r_onductivities for well GE1 since the late 1:380"s. A Gradual <br />overall increase in conductivity seems to be occurring at wells GE1 <br />and GE2 (Fie:ures B-11 .and B-12). Well GE3 shows considerable <br />scatter in concentrations since 1985. vo .apparent trend exists <br />(see Fig. B-13). This well is more susceptible to changes because <br />these sandstone .aquifers are shallower. !~. greater natural <br />variation in the conductivities for well GE.3 is expected. Changes <br />in the field conductivities for aquifers monit~::red at th? GE site <br />are net thought to be caused by any minin@: activities from Trapper <br />Mine. Mining on the west side of the Trapper Mine permit area was <br />re-started in i983. <br />• Twenty Mil= Ssnrlstoue well GF1 and I1 aqu.ifer well GE2 have <br />shown very little Change in field r_onductivit}~ during the period <br />presented (1984 through 1992) in Figures B-14 and B-15. <br />Concentration plots with le==-s scatter are expected from these <br />deeper aquifers. Figures B-16 and B-17 present the field <br />conductivity versus time plots £or wells GE3 xnd GF4. Ear_h plot <br />shows no ma.ior trends in date, to 1986 with a slight rise in values <br />since 1986. This slight ris? is still within na±ursl f L.~ctuaLions. <br />The backfill .aquifer in the Ashmore Pit ;>>-?.s is monitored by <br />well GF5. Figure P-18 shows that c_ondur_tivities for well GF5 have <br />been fairly stable since 1984. Figure B-19 present_ the <br />conductivity versus time plot for well GF6. 9 slight inca-?=se in <br />• conductivity ocr_urred in 198E to 1989. A declinr_ in conductivit~• <br />was observed in 1992. <br />3-3 <br />