PERMFILE41959 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

water-level changes in these wells may not still be good indicators of natural recharge impacts on these aquifers due to the upgradient mining, Water levels in well GC-1 were higher in 2002 than they were in 2000 and 2001 but within natural variations. Similar water level changes were observed in well GC-3 in 2002. Water levels in well GC-2 very gradually increased in 2002. These changes in these three wells are probably natural. The alluvial aquifer response is generally of a larger magnitude. Figure A~ presents the static water-level elevations for wells GD-2, GD-3 and GP-9. These wells are completed in the QR, QR backfill and 3rd White Sandstone aquifers. In 2002, water levels in wells GD-2 and GD-3 gradually declined. The water-level elevation in 2002 for well GD-3 is several feet higher than the level downgradient at well GD-2. Well GD-3 is approximately 1200 feet upgradient of well GD-2. It is topographically higher and closer to D pit and is completed in backfill. Water-level changes in well GD-3 have been more gradual than changes in well GD-2. The unconfined backfill aquifer's storage parameter would be much larger than the storage coefficient for the confined aquifer at GD-2 and, therefore, would be expected to dampen responses. Water levels in well GP-9 gradually increased in 2002. This water-level change is likely natural. The GE wells (GE-1, GE-2, GE-3) are near the northwest corner of the PA. They are completed in the QR, HI and 2nd and 3rd White Sandstone aquifers, respectively. Water levels for these wells are presented in Figures A-5 and A-6. Water levels in wells GE-1, GE-2 and GE-3 were fairly steady with a small overall decline in 2002 after a rising trend during the higher precipitation years. These changes are likely due to variations in recharge. Figure A-6 also presents water levels for wells 81-03A and GLUX-1, which are completed in the 3rd and 1st White Sandstone aquifers, respectively. The 2002 water 2-5