DRC-2010-005661 - 0901a068801d0765

DENISO
MINES
October 15, 2010
VIA PDF AND EXPRESS DELIVERY
Rusty Lundberg, Co-Executive Secretary
Utah Water Quality Board
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
195 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144810
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
^ v\ Received
OCT 2010 §
% Division of
'T Radiaiioii Confro! .sf/
\ ^/
DRC-2010-
Dwilsoii Mbies (USA) Coip.
10SO 17th Street; Suita 990
Oemsr, CO SOSM
USA
Tol:303 628-77S8
Pax: 303 389-4129
www.denisonminea.com
Dear Mr. Lundberg:
Re: State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit ("GWDP") No. UGW370004 White Mesa Uranium
Mill - Installation Report Pursuant to Part I.F.6 and I.H.6 ofthe Permit
This letter transmits the As-Built Report for Denison Mines (USA) Corp's ("Denison's") Monitoring Wells MW-33,
MW-34, and MW-35, adjacent to White Mesa Mill (the "Mill") tailings Cell 4B, as required by part I.H.6 of GWDP
No. UGW37G004. The requirements of Part I.H.6 are set forth below.
I.H. 6. Installation of New Groundwater Monitoring Wells - the Permittee shall install at least three hydraulically
downgradient wells adjacent to Tailings Cell 4B, in accordance with the following requirements:
a) New Compliance Monitoring Wells MW-33 and MW-34 - install two new compliance monitoring wells
(MW -33 and MW -34) prior to placement of tailings and wastewater in Cell4B. The locations of the
wells MW-33 and MW-34 shall be the same as shown pn Figure 4 of the February 8, 2010 submittal by
Hydro Geo Chem Inc. Said monitoring wells shall:
1) Provide early detection of tailings cell contamination of shallow groundwater from Tailings Cell 4B.
2) Provide discrete groundwater monitoring for tailings Cell 4B.
3) Comply with the design, construction, and development requirements found in Part I.E.4 of this
Permit.
b) Within 45 calendar days of completing well installation, submit a monitoring well As-Built report for wells
MW-33 and MW-34 to document said well construction for Executive Secretary approval. Said report
shall comply with the requirements of Part I.F.6. The As-Built report shall be approved by the Executive
Secretary before placement of tailings or wastewater in Tailings Cell 4B. In the event the Executive
Secretary requires additional information, the Permittee will provide all requested information within a
time frame approved by the Executive Secretary.
c) New Compliance Monitoring Well MW-35 - before placement of tailings or wastewater in Tailings Cell
4B, the Permittee shall submit to the Executive Secretary for approval a proposed location for new
Letter to Rusty Lundberg MW33, 34, and 35
October 15, 2010
Page 2
compliance monitoring well MW-35. Installation of well MW-35 shall be completed within 30 calendar
days of Executive Secretary approval of said location. The exact location of the well MW -35 shall be
determined after consideration of hydrogeologic information acquired through installation/development
of wells MW-33 and MW-34 and other related field investigations. The design, construction and
development of well MW-35 shall comply with the requirements of Part I.E.4 of this Permit.
d) Within 45 calendar days of completing installation of well MW-35, the Permittee shall submit a
monitoring well As-Built report to document said well construction for Executive Secretary approval.
Said report shall comply with the requirements of Part I.F.6. In the event the Executive Secretary
requires additional information, the Permittee will provide all requested information within a time frame
approved by the Executive Secretary.
e) The Permittee shall provide at least a 7 calendar day written notice to allow the Executive Secretary to
observe all drilling and well installation activities. In the event the Executive Secretary determines that
additional monitoring wells are required, these new wells will be installed and related As-Built Report(s)
submitted (for approval) within a time frame approved by the Executive Secretary.
Installation History and Conformance with GWDP Requirements
Per the requirements of GWDP Part I.H.6 a), above, perched zone monitoring wells MW-33 and MW-34 were
installed along the southern margins of Cell 4B on August 31, 2010 at locations identified in the February 8,
2010 submittal by Denison's hydrgeologic consultant. Hydro Geo Chem. Groundwater was not encountered at
MW-33, which has remained dry through the time of this submittal. The minimum seven-day notice required by
GWDP Part I.H.6 e) was provided on August 18, 2010.
The enclosed As-Built Report in Attachment 1, containing the items required for As-Built Reports in GWDP Part
I.F.6, is being submitted to meet the requirements of GWDP Part I.H.6.b) for MW-33 and MW-34.
Phil Goble of DRC and Stewart Smith of Hydro Geo Chem, were present on site at the Mill during the well
installation period. Denison consulted with Mr. Goble as well as Loren Morton of DRC on September 1, 2010
regarding MW-33, when it was determined the well was dry. Mr. Goble, after consideration of the hydrogeologic
information available from installation of MW-33 (that is, the ongoing dry conditions), concurred that it would be
appropriate to install MW-35 at that time. The location for MW-35 was determined from consultation between
Mr. Smith, Mr. Morton, and Mr. Goble. Mr. Morton confirmed by an email on September 1, 2010 to Mr. Roberts
that the information provided to him during this determination appeared to provisionally satisfy the requirements
of GWDP Part I.H.6c), subject to DRC review of the written submittal of all hydrogeologic information. A copy of
that email is enclosed as Attachment 2.
MW-35 was installed at the agreed upon location on September 1 and 2, 2010.
Aquifer hydraulic testing was attempted for MW-34 and completed for MW-35 on October 5, 2010. Well
development for both wells will be completed during October 2010. Neither well development nor hydraulic
testing can be performed for MW-33 which remains dry. The As-Built Report in Attachment 1, containing the
items required for As-Built Reports in GWDP I.F.6, is being submitted to meet the requirements of GWDP Part
I.H.6.d)for MW35.
Based on the foregoing information, it is Denison's understanding that we have met the GWDP requirements in
GWDP Part I.H.6 that are required to be performed prior to placement of tailings and wastewater in Cell 4B.
DENISO
MINES
Letter to Rusty Lundberg MW33, 34, and 35
October 15, 2010
Page 3
Please advise us if our understanding is not correct. Other requirements of the GWDP pertaining to activities
required prior to construction of Cell 4B and/or placement of tailings and wastewater in cell 4B, specifically:
• Part I.H.8 Revised BAT, Monitoring, Operations and Maintenance Plan for Cells 4A and 4B
• Part I.H.9 Cell 4B As Built Report
• I.H.10 Additional Hydrogeologic Investigation and Report
• I.H.11 Correction to Engineering Drawing Sheet 6 of 8
are in progress and will be submitted under separate cover.
Documentation required by GWDP Part I.H.7, Background Water Quality Report for New Monitoring Wells, will
be submitted after eight consecutive quarters of groundwater data have been collected from the subject wells.
Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require any further information.
Yours very truly,
DENISON MINES (USA) CORP.
Tio Ann Tischler
Director, Compliance and Permitting
cc: Rich Bartlett
David C, Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
Harold R. Roberts
David E. Turk
Kathy Weinel
Attachments
DENISO
MINES
ATTACHMENT 1
As-Built Report for MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35
ATTACHMENT 2
Email of September 1. 2010 from Mr. Loren Morton, DRC
Jo Ann Tischler
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Harold Roberts
Wednesday, September 01, 2010 3:21 PM
Jo Ann Tischler
FW: Denison Mines: Call Today about New Monitoring Wells for Cell 4B
Harold Roberts
Executive Vice President, US Operations
L [phone] | f: [phone]
1050 17th Street, Suite 950, Denver, CO 80265
DENISON MINES (USA) CORP
www.denisonmines.com
This e-mail is intended for the exclusive use of the person(s) mentioned as the recipient(s). This message and any attached files with it are confidential and may contain
privileged or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient(s) please delete this message and notify the sender. You may not use, distribute print or copy this
message if you are not the intended recipient(s).
From: Loren Morton [mailto:lmorton(5)utah.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 2:58 PM
To: Harold Roberts
Cc: Stewart Smith; John Hultquist; Phillip Goble; Rusty Lundberg
Subject: Denison Mines: Call Today about New Monitoring Wells for Cell 48
Harold,
The purpose of this email is to summarize our conversation this morning on the phone. Stewart Smith of HGC and Phil
Goble of my staff were also present in your office in Blanding. You presented your recent findings during drilling of Cell
48 wells MW-33 (on dike at SW corner of Cell 48), and MW-34 (near midpoint of Cell 48 south dike), and asked for DRC
concurrence regarding your plans for well MW-35.
DUSA Observations
1. Shallow aquifer thickness at well 34 appears to be 2-feet, and is perched on the Jurassic age Brushy Basin Shale
Member of the Morrison Formation (Jmb).
2. Well 33 was drilled to the upper Jmb contact, and no saturation was found as of this morning.
DUSA Proposal
1. Install well MW-35 at a location that is about midway on the crest of the west Cell 48 dike, as shown in a map you
provided today In your email (9/1/10, 10:45 am). You asked that DUSA be allowed to drill MW-35 today, in that your
driller was already on site, and
2. The DRC consider the provisions of Part LH.6(c) of the Permit to have been met, which require DUSA provide a
proposed location for well MW-35, based on hydrogeologic information from wells MW-33 and MW-34, and receive
Executive Secretary approval beforehand.
DUSA Basis
You explained that Stewart Smith had considered hydrogeologic information from the drilling of wells MW-33 and MW-34
in arriving at a proposed location for well MW-35, and that his work had included:
1) a revised water table contour map of the shallow aquifer, based on a December, 2009 equipotential map with hand
drawn contours near wells MW-33 and MW-34,
2) a revised structural contour map for the Jmb upper contact, based on geologic data from these same 2 wells. Both of
these maps were scanned into PDF files, and emailed to me this morning, and
3) Both maps above had been modified after DUSA completed an elevation survey of nearby surface seeps / springs, and
incorporated this data into the both the water table and structural contour maps.
DRC Observations / Recommendation
During the call, I recounted how nearby and former well MW-16 (found in the SW quadrant of Cell 48) had also been dry,
suggesting the possible presence of a NE - SW trending ridge or structural high in the upper Jmb contact between MW-16
and recent well MW-33.
I also told you that I consider your proposed course of action reasonable, and that you may proceed at your own risk. I
made this decision based on:
1. The informal information described to my over the phone and submitted by email today appears to provisionally
satisfy the Part LH.6(c) requirements,
2. A condition that final DRC approval will await the hydrogeologic findings and information that will be gathered during
installation of well MW-35, or any other wells that might need to be drilled, and
3. As with any subsurface investigation, the final decision on the adequacy of a monitoring well network for Cell 48, and
the ultimate number and location of said wells can only be after DUSA written submittal of all hydrogeologic information
gathered, and opportunity for formal DRC review and approval.
If you disagree with any of this summary, or the discussion we had this morning over the phone, please get in contact
with me tiefore the end of the day today.
Thanks for coordinating your field efforts with us today.
Loren

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
Environmental Science & Technology

INSTALLATION AND HYDRAULIC TESTING OF
PERCHED MONITORING WELLS MW-33, MW-34,
AND MW-35 AT THE WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
NEAR BLANDING, UTAH

October 11, 2010

Prepared for:

DENISON MINES (USA) CORPORATION
1050 17th Street
Independence Plaza, Suite 950
Denver, Colorado 80265

Prepared by:

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
51 West Wetmore Road, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85705
[phone]

Project Number 7180000.00-02.0

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1
2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION................................................................................ 3
2.1 Drilling and Logging Procedures............................................................................3
2.2 Construction............................................................................................................4
3. HYDRAULIC TESTING................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Testing Procedures..................................................................................................5
3.2 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis.................................................................................6
4. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................. 9
5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 11
6. LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................. 13

TABLES

1 Locations and Elevations of MW-34 and MW-35 (site coordinate system)
2 MW-35 Slug Test Results

FIGURES

1 Site Plan and Perched Well Locations, White Mesa Site
2 MW-33 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
3 MW-34 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
4 MW-35 As-Built Well Construction Schematic

APPENDICES

A Lithologic Logs
B Slug Test Plots
C Raw Test Data

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
ii

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
1
1. INTRODUCTION
This report describes the installation and hydraulic testing of perched monitoring wells MW-33,
MW-34, and MW-35. Wells were installed along the southern and western margins of new
tailings Cell 4B, as shown on Figure 1, between August 30 and September 2, 2010. Hydraulic
testing of the wells consisted of slug tests conducted on October 5, 2010. Well MW-33 was not
tested because it has been dry since installation on August 30. Testing of MW-34 was attempted
but was unsuccessful due the small saturated thickness and water column in the well.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
2

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
3
2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION
Well installation procedures were similar to those used previously at the site for the construction
of other perched zone wells (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. [HGC], 2005). Drilling and construction
were performed by Bayles Exploration, Inc., and borings logged by Mr. Lawrence Casebolt
under contract to Denison Mines (USA) Corporation (DUSA). Mr. Stewart Smith of HGC was
onsite during drilling and well construction activities. As-built diagrams for the well
constructions, based primarily on information provided by Mr. Casebolt, are shown in Figures 2,
3, and 4. The depths to water shown in the as-built diagrams are based on water level
measurements taken at the time of installation. Surveyed land surface and top-of-casing
elevations are provided on Figures 2 and 3. The elevations shown for MW-35 (Figure 4) are
approximate. Table 1 provides surveyed position coordinates for MW-33 and MW-34 based on
the site survey coordinate system. The position and elevations for MW-35 are approximate.
2.1 Drilling and Logging Procedures
An 11-inch diameter tricone bit was used to drill a boring of sufficient diameter to install 8-inch-
diameter, Schedule 40 PVC surface (conductor) casing. This surface casing extended to a depth
of approximately 10 to 12 feet below land surface. Once the surface casing was in place, the
boreholes were drilled by air rotary adding water and/or foam only when needed to maintain
circulation. The wells were drilled using a 6¾ inch diameter tricone bit. Each borehole
penetrated the Dakota Sandstone and the Burro Canyon Formation and terminated in the Brushy
Basin member of the Morrison Formation.
Drill cutting samples used for lithologic logging were collected at 2½-foot depth intervals and
placed in labeled, zip-sealed plastic bags and labeled plastic cuttings storage boxes. Copies of the
lithologic logs submitted by Mr. Casebolt are provided in Appendix A. In general, air was used
as a drilling fluid until poor cuttings retrieval necessitated the use of water and/or foam. Only air
was used at MW-33 because ground water was not encountered at that location. Each boring was
advanced into the Brushy Basin member of the Morrison Formation, then backfilled to a depth of
approximately 1 to 2 feet below the contact prior to well casing installation. Backfill at MW-35
consisted of Colorado Silica Sand TM. Backfill at MW-33 and MW-34 consisted of hydrated
bentonite chips overlain by Colorado Silica Sand. The bottom seal of bentonite installed in
MW-33 and MW-34 was not required in MW-35 because the borehole only penetrated
approximately 3 feet into the Brushy Basin.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
4
2.2 Construction
The wells were constructed using 4-inch diameter, Schedule 40, flush-threaded PVC casing and
0.02-slot, factory-slotted PVC screen. Colorado Silica Sand was used as a filter pack and
installed to a depth approximately 4½ feet above the screened interval. The annular space above
the filter pack was then sealed with approximately 5 feet of hydrated bentonite chips and grouted
to the surface using Portland cement. The surface casing was completed with an 8-inch diameter
Schedule 40 PVC cap with a 4-inch diameter cutout to accommodate the well casing, and the
well casing was fitted with a 4-inch PVC cap to keep foreign objects out of the well. Three steel
bollards (painted red) were installed around each well for protection.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
5
3. HYDRAULIC TESTING
Hydraulic testing consisted of slug tests conducted by HGC personnel in a fashion similar to that
described in HGC (2005). Hydraulic testing of MW-33 was not possible because the well was
dry. Testing of MW-34, although attempted, was unsuccessful due to the small saturated
thickness and water column at that location (approximately 2 feet above the base of the well).
Mr. Phil Goble and Mr. Dean Henderson of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality were
present during portions of the testing.
3.1 Testing Procedures
The slug used for the test at MW-35 consisted of a sealed, pea-gravel-filled, schedule 80 PVC
pipe approximately 3 feet long as described in HGC (2002). The 3-foot slug displaced
approximately 0.75 gallons of water. A Level TrollJ data logger was deployed near the bottom
of the static water column in the well and used to measure the change in water level during the
test. Automatically logged data were collected at 5-second intervals.
Prior to the test, the static water level was measured by hand using the electric water level meter.
The data logger was then lowered to a depth of approximately 12 feet below the static water
level, and background pressure readings were collected for approximately 50 minutes prior to
beginning the test. The purpose of collecting the background data was to allow correction of test
data for any trends detected in water levels measured at the well.
Once background data were collected, the slug and electric water level meter sensor were
suspended in the well just above the static water level. The test commenced by lowering the slug
to a depth of approximately 2 feet below the static water level over a period of a few seconds and
taking water level readings by hand as soon as possible afterwards. Hand-collected data were
obtained more frequently in the first few minutes when water levels were changing rapidly, then
less frequently as the rate of water level change diminished. Upon completion of the test,
automatically logged data were checked and backed up on the hard drive of a laptop computer.
Testing of MW-34 was attempted using procedures similar to those utilized at MW-35. As
discussed above, the testing of MW-34 was unsuccessful because of the small amount of water in
the well which prevented vertical separation of the downhole Level TrollJ data logger and the
slug. Data collected from the Level TrollJ were not interpretable. This extension of the slug
above the water column also prevented the water level meter probe from accessing the top of the
water column. Therefore no collection of water level data by hand was possible.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
6
3.2 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis
Data from MW-35 were analyzed using AQTESOLVTM (HydroSOLVE, 2000), a computer
program developed and marketed by HydroSOLVE, Inc. In preparing the automatically logged
data for analysis, the total number of records was reduced. In general, all data collected in the
first 30 seconds were retained, then every 2nd, then 3rd, then 4th, etc. record was retained for
analysis. For example, if the first 10 records were retained (50 seconds of data at 5-second
intervals), the next records to be retained would be the 12th, the 15th, the 19th, the 24th, etc. In
general, the maximum measured rise in water levels was less than would be expected
considering the slug volume, the volume in the 4-inch-diameter casing, and the volume in the
annular space between the casing and the 6¾-inch-diameter bore. Assuming a 30 percent
effective porosity for the filter pack, the expected rise in water level is approximately 1 foot per
gallon. The maximum expected rise for the 3-foot, 0.75-gallon slug is therefore about 0.75 feet.
If only the 4-inch diameter casing is considered, a maximum rise of approximately 1.12 ft is
expected for the 0.75 gallon slug.
Data were analyzed using two solution methods: the KGS unconfined method (Hyder et al.,
1994) and the Bouwer-Rice unconfined method (Bouwer and Rice, 1976). When filter pack
porosities were required by the analytical method, a value of 30 percent was used. The saturated
thickness was taken to be the difference between the depth of the static water level measured just
prior to the test and the depth to the Brushy Basin contact as defined in the drilling logs
(Appendix A). The static water level was below the top of the screened interval and the saturated
thickness was taken to be the effective screen length. The test duration was short enough that the
impact of changing barometric pressure could be ignored.
The KGS solution allows estimation of both specific storage and hydraulic conductivity, while
the Bouwer-Rice solution allows estimation of only the hydraulic conductivity. The Bouwer-
Rice solution is valid only for the straight-line portion of the data that results when the log of
displacement is plotted against time and is insensitive to both storage and the specified initial
water level rise. Typically, only the later-time data are interpretable using Bouwer-Rice.
The KGS solution generally allows a fit to both early and late time data and is sensitive to
storage and the specified initial water level rise. Both solutions were used for comparison.
Automatically logged and hand-collected data were analyzed separately using both solution
methods. The hand-collected data, therefore, served as an independent data set and a check on
the accuracy of the automatically logged data.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
7
The results of the analyses are provided in Table 2 and Appendix B. Appendix B contains plots
generated by AQTESOLVJ that show the quality of fit between measured and simulated
displacements, and reproduce the parameters used in each solution. Appendix C tabulates the
raw data. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity at MW-35 range from 2.18 x 10-4 centimeters per
second (cm/s) to 3.48 x 10-4 cm/s using automatically logged data, and from 1.65 x 10-4 to 2.59 x
10-4 cm/s using hand-collected data. These values are within the range previously measured at
the site.
Agreement between analyses using the KGS and Bouwer-Rice solutions, and between
automatically-logged and hand-collected data, was generally good. Estimates obtained from each
solution method were within a factor of two for both automatically-logged and hand-collected
data. Agreement between estimates obtained from automatically-logged and hand-collected data
by a particular solution method were also within a factor of two.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
8

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
9
4. CONCLUSIONS
Installation and hydraulic test procedures for new perched monitoring wells MW-33, MW-34,
and MW-35 were similar to those used previously at the site for the construction and testing of
other perched zone wells. MW-33 has been dry since installation. The thickness of the water
column in MW-34 was insufficient for successful hydraulic testing. Although testing of MW-34
was attempted, the test data obtained were not interpretable.
Automatically logged and hand-collected hydraulic test data from MW-35 were analyzed using
KGS and Bouwer-Rice analytical solutions. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity at MW-35 range
from 2.18 x 10-4 cm/s to 3.48 x 10-4 cm/s based on automatically logged data, and from 1.65 x
10-4 to 2.59 x 10-4 cm/s based on hand-collected data. These values are within the range
previously measured at the site.
Agreement between analyses using the KGS and Bouwer-Rice solutions, and between
automatically-logged and hand-collected data, was generally good. Estimates obtained from each
solution method were within a factor of two for both automatically-logged and hand-collected
data. Agreement between estimates obtained from automatically-logged and hand-collected data
by a particular solution method were also within a factor of two.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
10

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
11
5. REFERENCES
Bouwer, H. and R.C. Rice. 1976. A Slug-Test method for Determining Hydraulic Conductivity
of Unconfined Aquifers with Completely or Partially Penetrating Wells. Water Resources
Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, Pp. 423-428.
Hyder, Z, J.J. Butler, Jr. C.D. McElwee, and W. Liu. 1994. Slug Tests in Partially Penetrating
Wells. Water Resources Research, Vol. 30, No. 11, Pp. 2945-2957.
Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. (HGC). 2002. Hydraulic Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near
Blanding, Utah During July 2002. Submitted to International Uranium Corporation.
August 22, 2002.
Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. 2005. Perched Monitoring Well Installation and Testing at the White
Mesa Uranium Mill, April through June 2005. Submitted to International Uranium
Corporation. August 3, 2005.
HydroSOLVE, Inc. 2000. AQTESOLV for Windows. User=s Guide.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
12

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
13
6. LIMITATIONS
The information and conclusions presented in this report are based upon the scope of services
and information obtained through the performance of the services, as agreed upon by HGC and
the party for whom this report was originally prepared. Results of any investigations, tests, or
findings presented in this report apply solely to conditions existing at the time HGC’s
investigative work was performed and are inherently based on and limited to the available data
and the extent of the investigation activities. No representation, warranty, or guarantee, express
or implied, is intended or given. HGC makes no representation as to the accuracy or
completeness of any information provided by other parties not under contract to HGC to the
extent that HGC relied upon that information. This report is expressly for the sole and exclusive
use of the party for whom this report was originally prepared and for the particular purpose that
it was intended. Reuse of this report, or any portion thereof, for other than its intended purpose,
or if modified, or if used by third parties, shall be at the sole risk of the user.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\Wells\4B Well Inst_Rpt.doc
October 11, 2010
14

TABLES
TABLE 1
Locations and Elevations of MW-33, MW-34, and MW-35
(site coordinate system)
Location Northing
(feet)
Easting
(feet)
Elevation
(ft amsl)
MW-33-GROUND 319503.69 2576115.52 5596.81
MW-33-TOP OF CASING 319503.30 2576115.41 5597.82
MW-34-GROUND 319370.03 2576846.67 5598.12
MW-34-TOP OF CASING 319370.67 2576846.53 5599.90
MW-35-GROUND (approximate) 320150 2576065 5598
MW-35-TOP OF CASING (approximate) 320150 2576065 5599.5
H:\718000\cell4bjuly2010\MONITOR-33-34.xls: MONITOR-33-34 10/11/2010
TABLE 2
MW-35 Slug Test Results
Bouwer-Rice Bouwer-Rice
Test Saturated
Thickness
K
(cm/s)
Ss
(1/ft)
K
(cm/s)
K
(cm/s)
Ss
(1/ft)
K
(cm/s)
MW-35 12 3.48E-04 1.95E-05 2.18E-04 2.59E-04 1.78E-05 1.65E-04
Notes:
Bouwer-Rice = Unconfined Bouwer-Rice solution method in Aqtesolv™
cm/s = Centimeters per second
ft = Feet
K = hydraulic conductivity
KGS = Unconfined KGS solution method in Aqtesolv™
Ss= specific storage
Automatically Logged Data Hand Collected Data
KGS KGS
H:\718000\hydtst10b\MW35Tables.xls: Table 2 10/11/2010

FIGURES
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
CELL NO. 2
CELL NO. 4A
3332
MW-21
3000
BOUNDARY
PROPERTY
SCALE IN FEET
0
CELL NO. 1
MILL SITE
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14
MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
PIEZ-1
PIEZ-2
PIEZ-3
PIEZ-4
PIEZ-5
MW-26
TW4-1
TW4-2
TW4-3
TW4-4
TW4-5
TW4-6
TW4-9
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18
TW4-20
TW4-21
TW4-26
MW-04TW4-7 TW4-8
TW4-10
TW4-22
TW4-19
TW4-23
TW4-24
TW4-25
TWN-1
TWN-2
TWN-3
TWN-4
TWN-5
TWN-6
TWN-7
TWN-8
TWN-9
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35 (approximate)
CELL NO. 4B
MW-20
PIEZ-1
perched monitoring well
perched piezometer
temporary perched monitoring well
SITE PLAN
AND PERCHED WELL LOCATIONS
WHITE MESA SITE
H:/718000/cell4bjuly2010/oldbase/welloc.srf
TW4-19
EXPLANATION
wildlife pond
SJS
temporary perched nitrate
monitoring well
TWN-1
Cell 4B perched monitoring well
installed August-September, 2010
MW-33 1

APPENDIX A

LITHOLOGIC LOGS

APPENIDX B

SLUG TEST PLOTS
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\mw35.aqt
Date: 10/08/10 Time: 09:54:16
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Test Well: MW-35
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12. ft
WELL DATA (MW-35)
Initial Displacement: 0.42 ft Static Water Column Height: 12. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12. ft Screen Length: 12. ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.000348 cm/sec Ss = 1.948E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 8. 16. 24. 32. 40.
1.0E-4
0.001
0.01
0.1
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\mw35br.aqt
Date: 10/08/10 Time: 09:55:33
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Test Well: MW-35
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-35)
Initial Displacement: 0.42 ft Static Water Column Height: 12. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12. ft Screen Length: 12. ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0002183 cm/sec y0 = 0.3766 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\mw35h.aqt
Date: 10/08/10 Time: 09:56:05
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Test Well: MW-35
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12. ft
WELL DATA (MW-35)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 12. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12. ft Screen Length: 12. ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.0002585 cm/sec Ss = 1.782E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 8. 16. 24. 32. 40.
0.01
0.1
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\mw35hbr.aqt
Date: 10/08/10 Time: 09:56:27
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Test Well: MW-35
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-35)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 12. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12. ft Screen Length: 12. ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0001651 cm/sec y0 = 0.3944 ft

APPENDIX C

RAW TEST DATA
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Hand-Collected Depths to Water
elapsed time depth to water
(minutes) (feet below top of casing)
0 112.53
0.25 112.11
0.58 112.13
0.92 112.14
1.27 112.16
1.55 112.17
2.33 112.2
2.5 112.22
3 112.235
3.5 112.29
4 112.26
4.5 112.28
5.5 112.29
6.5 112.32
7.5 112.34
9 112.37
10 112.38
12 112.4
14 112.43
16 112.45
18 112.46
20 112.47
22 112.48
25 112.49
29 112.5
32 112.51
35 112.51
38 112.52
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: hand Page 1 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
0 0.4112
0.083333 0.40927
0.166667 0.3983
0.25 0.39252
0.333333 0.3817
0.416667 0.37953
0.5 0.3713
0.583333 0.36168
0.666667 0.35585
0.75 0.35339
0.833333 0.34954
0.916667 0.34356
1 0.3372
1.083333 0.33466
1.166667 0.32745
1.25 0.32186
1.333333 0.31994
1.416667 0.31438
1.5 0.31021
1.583333 0.30834
1.666667 0.30187
1.75 0.29841
1.833333 0.29481
1.916667 0.29309
2 0.28984
2.083333 0.28371
2.166667 0.28243
2.25 0.28078
2.333333 0.27066
2.416667 0.26812
2.5 0.27018
2.583333 0.26575
2.666667 0.26622
2.75 0.25889
2.833333 0.25399
2.916667 0.25319
3 0.25206
3.083333 0.24823
3.166667 0.24741
3.25 0.2407
3.333333 0.24098
3.416667 0.23518
3.5 0.2357
3.583333 0.23252
3.666667 0.22928
3.75 0.22766
3.833333 0.22163
3.916667 0.22246
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 2 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
4 0.21803
4.083333 0.21418
4.166667 0.21161
4.25 0.21323
4.333333 0.20959
4.416667 0.2103
4.5 0.20723
4.583333 0.20457
4.666667 0.19704
4.75 0.19962
4.833333 0.19819
4.916667 0.19497
5 0.19541
5.083333 0.19188
5.166667 0.19169
5.25 0.18855
5.333333 0.18764
5.416667 0.1873
5.5 0.1837
5.583333 0.18189
5.666667 0.1772
5.75 0.17395
5.833333 0.17771
5.916667 0.1742
6 0.17251
6.083333 0.16248
6.166667 0.17036
6.25 0.16861
6.333333 0.16404
6.416667 0.1633
6.5 0.1604
6.583333 0.15665
6.666667 0.15528
6.75 0.15419
6.833333 0.15653
6.916667 0.15513
7 0.15078
7.083333 0.15039
7.166667 0.14799
7.25 0.14676
7.333333 0.14707
7.416667 0.14648
7.5 0.14115
7.583333 0.14357
7.666667 0.14358
7.75 0.13735
7.833333 0.13964
7.916667 0.1364
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 3 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
8 0.13663
8.083333 0.13483
8.166667 0.13622
8.25 0.12976
8.333333 0.13125
8.416667 0.13086
8.5 0.12446
8.583333 0.12695
8.666667 0.12522
8.75 0.12409
8.833333 0.12324
8.916667 0.12324
9 0.12029
9.083333 0.12067
9.166667 0.11635
9.25 0.11583
9.333333 0.11615
9.416667 0.11771
9.5 0.11597
9.583333 0.11298
9.666667 0.11152
9.75 0.11271
9.833333 0.11296
9.916667 0.10886
10 0.10722
10.08333 0.10641
10.16667 0.10499
10.25 0.10507
10.33333 0.1056
10.41667 0.09979
10.5 0.10623
10.58333 0.10135
10.66667 0.10036
10.75 0.09805
10.83333 0.0971
10.91667 0.09778
11 0.09544
11.08333 0.09518
11.16667 0.09396
11.25 0.09184
11.33333 0.09411
11.41667 0.08988
11.5 0.09049
11.58333 0.0886
11.66667 0.08981
11.75 0.08765
11.83333 0.08418
11.91667 0.08523
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 4 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
12 0.08142
12.08333 0.08364
12.16667 0.0838
12.25 0.07949
12.33333 0.08304
12.41667 0.07889
12.5 0.079
12.58333 0.07697
12.66667 0.07832
12.75 0.07528
12.83333 0.07645
12.91667 0.07389
13 0.07437
13.08333 0.07471
13.16667 0.07235
13.25 0.07178
13.33333 0.07292
13.41667 0.0727
13.5 0.06913
13.58333 0.07076
13.66667 0.06654
13.75 0.06909
13.83333 0.06717
13.91667 0.06489
14 0.06276
14.08333 0.06123
14.16667 0.06363
14.25 0.06484
14.33333 0.06185
14.41667 0.06136
14.5 0.06245
14.58333 0.06028
14.66667 0.06087
14.75 0.06125
14.83333 0.05896
14.91667 0.05674
15 0.05381
15.08333 0.05727
15.16667 0.05569
15.25 0.05543
15.33333 0.05086
15.41667 0.04849
15.5 0.04988
15.58333 0.05305
15.66667 0.05116
15.75 0.04842
15.83333 0.04581
15.91667 0.04933
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 5 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
16 0.04925
16.08333 0.04133
16.16667 0.04488
16.25 0.04257
16.33333 0.04449
16.41667 0.04413
16.5 0.04774
16.58333 0.04644
16.66667 0.04353
16.75 0.04618
16.83333 0.04213
16.91667 0.04618
17 0.04407
17.08333 0.04109
17.16667 0.04179
17.25 0.04239
17.33333 0.03982
17.41667 0.03911
17.5 0.03857
17.58333 0.03876
17.66667 0.03686
17.75 0.04046
17.83333 0.03888
17.91667 0.03437
18 0.03831
18.08333 0.0405
18.16667 0.03807
18.25 0.03725
18.33333 0.03794
18.41667 0.03642
18.5 0.0359
18.58333 0.03624
18.66667 0.03425
18.75 0.03756
18.83333 0.03521
18.91667 0.03372
19 0.0292
19.08333 0.03062
19.16667 0.03414
19.25 0.03389
19.33333 0.03485
19.41667 0.02898
19.5 0.02843
19.58333 0.03475
19.66667 0.0334
19.75 0.03023
19.83333 0.03286
19.91667 0.03024
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 6 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
20 0.03091
20.08333 0.03193
20.16667 0.02844
20.25 0.02599
20.33333 0.02314
20.41667 0.02898
20.5 0.02334
20.58333 0.02797
20.66667 0.02491
20.75 0.02645
20.83333 0.0223
20.91667 0.02479
21 0.02468
21.08333 0.02214
21.16667 0.0239
21.25 0.02028
21.33333 0.02405
21.41667 0.02687
21.5 0.01923
21.58333 0.02402
21.66667 0.02118
21.75 0.02053
21.83333 0.02096
21.91667 0.02
22 0.01968
22.08333 0.01895
22.16667 0.01791
22.25 0.01799
22.33333 0.01918
22.41667 0.01561
22.5 0.01616
22.58333 0.01834
22.66667 0.01595
22.75 0.01714
22.83333 0.01551
22.91667 0.01509
23 0.01268
23.08333 0.01348
23.16667 0.01511
23.25 0.01487
23.33333 0.01309
23.41667 0.01115
23.5 0.01246
23.58333 0.0122
23.66667 0.01117
23.75 0.01346
23.83333 0.01183
23.91667 0.01371
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 7 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
24 0.0158
24.08333 0.01217
24.16667 0.01393
24.25 0.01197
24.33333 0.01461
24.41667 0.01041
24.5 0.01736
24.58333 0.01431
24.66667 0.01182
24.75 0.01499
24.83333 0.01058
24.91667 0.01341
25 0.01238
25.08333 0.0098
25.16667 0.00958
25.25 0.01035
25.33333 0.01232
25.41667 0.01027
25.5 0.00701
25.58333 0.00807
25.66667 0.00572
25.75 0.00713
25.83333 0.00643
25.91667 0.00589
26 0.01034
26.08333 0.00923
26.16667 0.00827
26.25 0.00697
26.33333 0.00703
26.41667 0.01223
26.5 0.00883
26.58333 0.00655
26.66667 0.00873
26.75 0.00875
26.83333 0.01295
26.91667 0.01149
27 0.00732
27.08333 0.01086
27.16667 0.00853
27.25 0.01134
27.33333 0.0066
27.41667 0.01049
27.5 0.00983
27.58333 0.0088
27.66667 0.00898
27.75 0.01179
27.83333 0.00706
27.91667 0.0091
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 8 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
28 0.00615
28.08333 0.00794
28.16667 0.00624
28.25 0.00951
28.33333 0.01057
28.41667 0.00717
28.5 0.00985
28.58333 0.01135
28.66667 0.01049
28.75 0.00952
28.83333 0.00502
28.91667 0.00704
29 0.00654
29.08333 0.00261
29.16667 0.00552
29.25 0.00592
29.33333 0.00395
29.41667 0.01022
29.5 0.00751
29.58333 0.00614
29.66667 0.00817
29.75 0.00638
29.83333 0.00726
29.91667 0.00572
30 0.00393
30.08333 0.00616
30.16667 0.00667
30.25 0.00478
30.33333 0.0052
30.41667 0.00484
30.5 0.00352
30.58333 0.00798
30.66667 0.00058
30.75 0.00202
30.83333 0.0042
30.91667 -0.0006
31 0.00618
31.08333 0.00376
31.16667 0.00205
31.25 0.00473
31.33333 0.00782
31.41667 0.01097
31.5 0.00496
31.58333 0.01029
31.66667 0.00511
31.75 0.00931
31.83333 0.00444
31.91667 0.00519
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 9 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
32 0.00628
32.08333 0.00636
32.16667 0.00418
32.25 -0.001
32.33333 0.00268
32.41667 -0.0001
32.5 0.00587
32.58333 -0.0002
32.66667 0.00496
32.75 0.00336
32.83333 0.0029
32.91667 0.00515
33 0.00319
33.08333 0.0047
33.16667 0.00758
33.25 0.00293
33.33333 0.00041
33.41667 0.00564
33.5 0.00606
33.58333 0.00415
33.66667 0.00523
33.75 0.00094
33.83333 0.00404
33.91667 0.00195
34 0.00349
34.08333 0.00557
34.16667 0.00184
34.25 0.00433
34.33333 0.00527
34.41667 -0.0022
34.5 0.00073
34.58333 0.00068
34.66667 0.00549
34.75 0.00136
34.83333 0.00178
34.91667 0.0011
35 0.00329
35.08333 0.00368
35.16667 0.00422
35.25 -0.0015
35.33333 0.00426
35.41667 0.00434
35.5 0.00388
35.58333 0.00159
35.66667 7.10046
35.75 0.00066
35.83333 0.00235
35.91667 0.00146
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 10 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
36 0.00365
36.08333 0.00321
36.16667 0.00399
36.25 0.00261
36.33333 0.00393
36.41667 0.0041
36.5 -0.001
36.58333 0.00015
36.66667 0.00098
36.75 0.00222
36.83333 0.0051
36.91667 0.00446
37 0.00128
37.08333 0.0069
37.16667 0.00469
37.25 0.00236
37.33333 0.0021
37.41667 0.00299
37.5 0.0005
37.58333 0.00495
37.66667 0.0061
37.75 0.00543
37.83333 0.00289
37.91667 0.00088
38 0.00219
38.08333 0.00103
38.16667 0.00496
38.25 0.00503
38.33333 0.002
38.41667 0.00458
38.5 0.00189
38.58333 0.00473
38.66667 0.00372
38.75 0.00287
38.83333 0.00352
38.91667 0.00107
39 0.00724
39.08333 0.00268
39.16667 0.00442
39.25 0.00351
39.33333 0.00502
39.41667 0.00853
39.5 0.00683
39.58333 0.00918
39.66667 0.00717
39.75 0.00634
39.83333 0.00518
39.91667 0.00897
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 11 of 12 10/11/2010
RAW TEST DATA
MW-35 Slug Test
Automatically Logged Displacements
elapsed time displacement
(minutes) (feet)
40 0.00602
40.08333 0.00858
40.16667 0.00957
40.25 0.00624
40.33333 0.00892
40.41667 0.00685
40.5 0.00693
40.58333 0.00867
40.66667 0.00932
40.75 0.00574
40.83333 0.01006
40.91667 0.00379
41 0.00699
41.08333 0.00659
41.16667 0.0064
41.25 0.0077
41.33333 0.00682
41.41667 0.00451
41.5 0.009
41.58333 0.0006
41.66667 0.01056
H:\718000\hydtst10b\mw35\raw_data.xls: logger Page 12 of 12 10/11/2010