Laserfiche WebLink
level in well GB-5. Similar water-level responses are being observed in the two equivalen <br />HI aquifer wells GF-5 and GF-7. Water levels seem to be just now approaching recovered <br />levels in well GF-7. <br />The water levels in the three GE wells stabilized in 1990, which is thought to be <br />due to the length of time since dewatering stopped at the adjacent underground operation. <br />Some of the water-level rise in the last three years in wells GE-1 and GE-2 is likely due to <br />some additional recovery from mine dewatering. <br />Water levels in the backfill areas are depressed and are not likely to ever recover <br />to pre-mine levels except near the northern end of the mine area. Map 2-1 shows that the <br />levels in the backfill and downgradient aquifers are similar. Well pairs GD-3-GD-2 and GF- <br />11-GF-6 present water levels that are very similar in water-level elevation for the backfill <br />and downgradient QR aquifer well. MinincLis significantly increasing the permeability of the <br />mined aquifers which is a benefit relative to potential yields from the aquifer.. The increased <br />permeability will likely not allow water levels to recover to pre-mine levels in the reclaimed <br />pits except near the northem (down-dip) end of the mined area, where levels will be above <br />their pre-mine level. <br />Significant drawdown has developed adjacent to the pits but the extent of these <br />drawdowns is very limited due to the small transmissivity in these aquifers, Recover of the <br />_water levels has occurred over a few years as the_pit_s have moved awa~rom an area. <br />Variations in natural recharge to the 2nd White Sandstone affects this aquifer <br />greatly. Mining affects on the system has not been detected. <br />The TDS of water in backfill wells GD-3, GF-5, and GF-11 are somewhat higher <br />but similar to those of the native aquifers in these areas. TDS for GF-5 is approximately <br />6-2 • <br />