Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Figure A-29 presents the water-level ele•~ation versus time <br />data for well GP8. Well GP8 is completed iii the KLM aquifer <br />approximately 25 feei~ away from well GP7 (HI aquifer). Water level <br />changes in well GPBicompare well with KLM aquif~;r well GA2. Water <br />level changes for well GP4 had also been similar until water levels <br />rose in 1990. All of these changes are thought ':o be reflective of <br />natural variations'in the KLM aquifer. Water-level data for well <br />GP8 is tabulated in Table A-8. Water-level elev.3tions for well GP9 <br />are shown on Figure A-30. Levels were fairly steady in well GP9 <br />through 1987. In 1988 and 1989 the water level dropped <br />approximately three feet per year but declined only half this rate <br />in 1990. These declines are due to a reducti~~n in the recharge <br />rate to the Third White Sandstone. The GP9 water level for 1991 <br />rose back to the level seen in 1989. <br />Water-level data for the P series wells is ~~resented in Tables <br />A-8 and A-9 of Appendix A. Water levels in alluvial well P1 have <br />shown an overall decline during 1988 through 1991 from levels in <br />1987 (Figure A-31). Water levels in well P1 were high from 1984 <br />through 1987 because the base flow of Pyeatt Gulch had increased <br />and had kept the water levels in the alluvium high. The water <br />levels since September 1987 are lower than average, due to <br />declining flow in Pyeatt Gulch caused by the draught conditions of <br />recent years. Water levels in the Lewis Shaba (well P3, Figure <br />A-32), which is in contact with the Pyeatt alluvium, have varied <br />similar to the alluvial aquifer in this area. slater levels in the <br />Second White Sandstone aquifer near well P5 have been declining • <br />'i 2-12 <br />