Laserfiche WebLink
the recovery of water levels after production. This data <br /> indicates that the recovery of water levels in well GB1 is very <br /> slow with water levels not reaching the aquifer static level <br /> prior to being airlifted the next year. Well GB1 is monitored <br /> only for water-level data and is airlifted annually to test the <br /> responsiveness of the well. Due to the very slow recovery of <br /> water levels, truer static water-level data would be obtained by <br /> not air lifting this well. <br /> Water levels in well GB2, which is completed in the Third <br /> White Sandstone, were very steady until 1982 when a drop in water <br /> level of approximately six feet occurred over a two year period. <br /> Water levels the last four years have remained steady. <br /> Well GBS monitors the HI aquifer at the base of the A pit. <br />• i <br />ll <br />ll <br />f <br />( <br /> Water levels <br />see Figure A-5) <br />n this we <br />gradua <br />y rose <br />rom <br /> 1984 to March 1988. Water levels during the rest of 1988 have <br /> remained stable. The majority of this water-level response is <br /> thought to be due to recovery of the aquifer as mining in the A <br /> pit moves away from this area. The rate of water-level rise <br /> seems to have decreased some since 1987 indicating a possible <br /> stabilizing of water levels. Levels probably recovered from <br /> mining in this area much faster due to the high precipitation <br /> during 1983 through 1986. The stabilizing of the levels could be <br /> partially caused by the decline in recharge since 1986 (see <br /> Figure 2-1). <br /> The GC wells are approximately two and one-half miles from <br /> the nearest mining in the H and I coal seams. Well GCI is <br /> completed in the HI aquifer and has shown a considerable amount <br />2-5 <br />