Laserfiche WebLink
The GC wells (GC -1, GC -2, GC -3, see Figure A-2) are located near the northeast corner <br />of the permit area (PA) slightly more than 1100 feet from mining activity. These wells are <br />completed in the HI, 3rd White and alluvial aquifers, respectively. The water -level changes in these <br />wells may not still be good indicators of natural recharge impacts on these aquifers due to the <br />upgradient mining. Water levels in well GC -1 have been overall steady from 2003 to 2009. In 2010 <br />and 2011 the water level rose while a decline was observed in 2012 through 2016. Water levels in <br />well GC -3 show some seasonal effects. Water levels in well GC -2 were overall steady from 1999 to <br />2005, while overall gradually increasing 2006 through 2016. Changes in these three wells are <br />probably natural. The alluvial aquifer response indicates continuation of above average recharge in <br />2011 from higher precipitation for the previous six years and a gradual decline in 2012 due to less <br />recharge and fairly normal recharge for the last four years. <br />Figure A-3 presents the static water -level elevations for wells GD -2, GD -3 and GP -9. <br />These wells are completed in the QR, QR backfill and 3rd White Sandstone aquifers. In 2006, water <br />levels in wells GD -2 and GD -3 declined sharply the first quarter of 2006 and then became fairly <br />steady with a large increase in water level in 2008. Water levels overall gradually rose in 2009 into <br />2011 in wells GD -2 and GD -3 before declining for four years and gradually rising in 2016 in well <br />GD -3 and overall steady in well GD -2. The earlier large water level declines are thought to be due <br />to drilling for deeper coal in this area. Water levels in 2011 and 2012 are higher than any historical <br />level in this backfill well. Backfill well GD -3 is approximately 1200 feet upgradient of well GD -2. <br />Well GD -3 is located topographically higher in the northern side of the D pit than the GD -2 location. <br />Water -level changes in well GD -3 have been more gradual than changes in well GD -2. The <br />unconfined backfill aquifer's storage parameter would be much larger than the storage coefficient <br />for the confined aquifer at GD -2 and, therefore, would be expected to dampen responses. <br />Trapper Mining Company 2-5 <br />2016 Annual Report <br />