Laserfiche WebLink
gradual decrease in the previous two years, likely due to the lower precipitation. The <br />unconfined alluvial aquifer responds gradually to recharge changes. <br />Wells GF-6 and GF-11 are completed in the QR aquifer and QR backfill, <br />respectively. Bacldill well GF-11 is located on the downgradient side of the inactive E pit, <br />while well GF-6 is located downgradient of the pit. GF-11 is 1150 feet upsiope and <br />upgradient of GF-6. An overall small decline was observed in both of these wells for 2001 <br />(see Figure A-SO). The head in well GF-il is greater than 17 feet above the head in well <br />GF-6. The water levels in the bacldll aquifer may be near the fully rernvered level from <br />mining. <br />The GP-1 and GP-2 wells (Figures A-li and A-12) are located in a previously <br />undisturbed area near the eastern boundary of the PA. Well GP-1 provides a natural <br />baseline for the QR aquifer until mine drainage starts in the G pit. The water levels in well <br />GP-I deceased in 2001 due to less recharge and possibly due to the initiation of mining <br />nearby. A similar decrease was observed in well GP-2 prior to 2001, which may be <br />influenced by the nearby mining. <br />Figure A-11 also presents water levels for GP-7 and GP-8, which are located very <br />near the eastern boundary of the PA. They are completed in the KLM and HI aquifers and <br />provide undisturbed baseline data for these intervals. Water levels in well GP-7 gradually <br />dedined in 2001 while a larger decline was observed in well GP-8. Both of these wells are <br />thought to be showing natural responses but could be influenced by the mining that is <br />appro~omately 3000 feet away. <br />Wells GP-3 and GP-4 are less than 1000 feet downgradient from A pit. Both are <br />flowing wells completed in the HI and KLM aquifers, respectively. Figures A-13 and A-14 <br />show similar responses in water levels due to changes in precipitation. Water levels in well <br />2-7 <br />