HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC-2013-002151 - 0901a068803772d3DRC-2013 2151
ENERGYFUELS
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Blvd. Suite 600
Lakewood, CO, US, 80228
303 974 2140
www.energyfuels.com
Mr. Rusty Lundberg
Division of Radiation Control
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
April 30,2013
VIA PDF AND EXPRESS DELIVERY
195 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144850
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Dear Mr. Lundberg:
Re: State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit ("the Permit") No. UGW370004 White Mesa
Uranium Mill - Installation Report Pursuant to Part I.F.6 of the Permit
This letter transmits the As-Built Report for Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.'s ("EFRTs") perched
groundwater monitoring wells TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31 as required by January 31, 2013
conference call as documented in the February 14, 2013 Division of Radiation Control ("DRC") Confirmatory
Action Letter.
The February 14,2013 Confirmatory Action Letter (received February 20,2013) required the following:
• EFR will install one well < 200feet downgradient of well TW4-I2 and three wells < 200feet
downgradient of well TW4-27.
• On or before February 7, 2013 EFR would provide the DRC the locations of the four new wells
mentioned above and a schedule when these wells would be drilled and installed, well developed,
hydraulic testing, and sampled.
Based on the January 31, 2013 conference call, EFRI submitted the required locations, installation schedule,
development schedule, and hydraulic testing schedule on February 6, 2013. TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and
TW4-31were installed during the week of March 4,2013.
Installation History and Conformance with GWDP Requirements
Per the agreements, monitoring wells TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31were installed < 200 feet
downgradient of either TW4-12 or TW4-27. Development and hydraulic testing have been completed in TW4-
28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31 and the results of those activities are included in the attached As-Built
report. TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31 will be sampled in the second quarter of 2013. On or before
60 calendar days of receipt of the analytical data for the second quarter 2013 samples, BFRI will submit a
Contamination investigation Report ("CIR") that will contain the information required by the February 14,2013
Confirmatory Action Letter.
The enclosed As-Built Report in Attachment I includes the items required for As-Built Reports in the Permit
Part I.F.6, and is being submitted for TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31.
Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require any further information.
ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
Jo Ann Tischler
Manager of Compliance and Licensing
cc: David C. Frydenlund
Harold R. Roberts
David E. Turk
Katherine A. Weinel
Yours vei
HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
Environmental Science & Technology
INSTALLATION AND HYDRAULIC TESTING OF
PERCHED MONITORING WELLS
TW4-28 THROUGH TW4-31
WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
NEAR BLANDING, UTAH
April 30, 2013
Prepared for:
ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC
225 Union Blvd., Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Prepared by:
HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
51 West Wetmore Road, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85705
(520) 293-1500
Project Number 7180000.00-01.0
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1
2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION................................................................................ 3
2.1 Drilling and Logging Procedures............................................................................3
2.2 Construction............................................................................................................3
2.3 Development...........................................................................................................3
3. HYDRAULIC TESTING................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Testing Procedures..................................................................................................5
3.2 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis.................................................................................5
4. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................. 9
5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 11
6. LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................. 13
TABLES
1 Well Survey Data
2 Slug Test Parameters
3 Slug Test Results
FIGURES
1 Locations of New Temporary Perched Wells TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31,
White Mesa Site
2 TW4-28 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
3 TW4-29 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
4 TW4-30 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
5 TW4-31 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
6 Corrected and Uncorrected Displacement
APPENDICES
A Lithologic Logs
B Well Development Field Sheets
C Slug Test Plots
D Slug Test Data
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
ii
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
1
1. INTRODUCTION
This report describes the installation, development, and hydraulic testing of perched monitoring
wells TW4-28 through TW4-31 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill (the “Mill” or the “site”).
These four wells were installed pursuant to the January 31, 2013 conference call between Energy
Fuels Resources (USA) Inc (EFR) and the Utah Division of Radiation Control (DRC) that was
documented in the letter from DRC dated February 14, 2013 and received by EFR on February
20, 2013. The wells were installed to provide additional data regarding perched groundwater
nitrate concentrations in the vicinities of wells TW4-12 and TW4-27. Nitrate concentrations have
recently exceeded the State of Utah Groundwater Quality Standard of 10 milligrams per liter
(mg/L) in TW4-12, and have exceeded 10 mg/L in TW4-27 since installation in October 2011.
TW4-28 and TW4-31 were installed east of TW4-12 and TW4-27, respectively, and TW4-29
and TW4-30 were installed south and southeast of TW4-27, respectively, as shown on Figure 1,
during the week of March 4, 2013. Development consisted of surging and bailing on March 13
and March 14, followed by overpumping on March 25 and March 26, 2013. Hydraulic testing
consisted of slug tests conducted on April 3 and April 4, 2013.
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
2
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
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 EFR. As-built diagrams for the well construction, based primarily on
information provided by Mr. Casebolt, are shown in Figures 2 through 5. The depths to water
shown in the as-built diagrams were based on water level measurements taken just prior to
development. New wells were surveyed by a State of Utah licensed surveyor and the location
and elevation data are provided in Table 1.
2.1 Drilling and Logging Procedures
A 12¼ -inch diameter tricone bit was used to drill borings of sufficient diameter to install 8-inch-
diameter, Schedule 40 poly vinyl chloride (PVC) surface (conductor) casings. The surface
casings extended to depths of approximately 10 feet below land surface. Once the surface
casings were in place, the boreholes were drilled by air rotary using a 6¾ inch diameter tricone
bit. The boreholes penetrated the Dakota Sandstone and the Burro Canyon Formation and
terminated in the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation.
Drill cuttings 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.
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 depths of approximately 5 feet above the screened intervals. The annular spaces
above each filter pack were sealed with hydrated bentonite chips. Well casings were fitted with
4-inch PVC caps to keep foreign objects out of the wells and lockable steel security casings were
installed to protect the wells.
2.3 Development
Wells were developed by surging and bailing followed by overpumping. Development records
are provided in Appendix B.
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
4
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
5
3. HYDRAULIC TESTING
Hydraulic testing consisted of slug tests conducted by HGC personnel using a methodology
similar to that described in HGC (2005).
3.1 Testing Procedures
The slugs used for the tests consisted of two sealed, pea-gravel-filled, schedule 80 PVC pipes
approximately three and four feet long as described in HGC (2002). The three-foot slug
displaced approximately 3/4 gallons of water and the four-foot slug approximately 1/2 gallons of
water. 0-30 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) Level TrollJ data loggers were used for the
tests. One Level Troll was deployed below the static water column in the tested well and used to
measure the change in water level during the test. The other Level Troll was used to measure
barometric pressure and was placed in a protected environment near the wells for the duration of
the testing. Automatically logged water level data were collected at 3-second intervals and
barometric data at 5-minute intervals.
Prior to each test, the static water level was measured by hand using the electric water level
meter and recorded in the field notebook. The data logger was then lowered to a depth of
approximately one foot above the base of the well casing, and background pressure readings
were collected for approximately 60 minutes prior to beginning each test. The purpose of
collecting the background data was to allow correction for any detected water level trends.
Once background data were collected, the slug and electric water level meter sensor were
suspended in the tested well just above the static water level. The test commenced by lowering
the slug to a depth of approximately two 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 recorded in the field notebook were obtained more frequently in the first few minutes when
water levels were changing more rapidly, then less frequently as the rate of water level change
diminished. Upon completion of each test, automatically logged data were checked and backed
up on the hard drive of a laptop computer.
3.2 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis
Data from each test was 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. All data collected in the first 30
seconds were retained, then every 2nd, then 3rd, then 4th, etc. record was retained for analysis.
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
6
For example, if the first 10 records were retained (30 seconds of data at 3-second intervals), the
next records to be retained would be the 12th, the 15th, the 19th, the 24th, etc.
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
thicknesses were taken to be the difference between the depth of the static water level measured
just prior to each test and the depth to the Brushy Basin Member contact as defined in the drilling
logs (Appendix A). The static water levels were below the tops of the screened intervals in wells
TW4-29, TW4-30, and TW4-31 and the saturated thicknesses were taken to be the effective
screen lengths. Because of relatively rapid recoveries and relatively short test durations,
barometric pressure changes had minimal impact on the tests except at TW4-29 and TW4-30.
Automatically logged data from TW4-29 and TW4-30 were corrected for barometric pressure
changes using a correction factor of 20%. Figure 6 compares corrected and uncorrected water
level displacements for these tests.
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 when a straight-line is identifiable on a plot of the log of displacement
versus time (indicating that flow is nearly steady), 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 accounts for non-steady flow and storage, is sensitive to the specified initial
water level rise, and generally allows a fit to both early and late time data. 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.
Table 2 summarizes test parameters and Table 3 and Appendix C provide the results of the
analyses. Appendix C contains plots generated by AQTESOLVJ that show the quality of fit
between measured and simulated displacements, and reproduce the parameters used in each
analysis. Appendix D provides both raw and corrected displacement data. Estimates of hydraulic
conductivity range from 1.1 x 10-5 centimeters per second (cm/s) to 3.9 x 10-4 cm/s using
automatically logged data, and from 1.4 x 10-5 cm/s to 4.1 x 10-4 cm/s using hand-collected data.
Estimates are within the range previously measured at the site (approximately 2 x 10-8 cm/s to
0.01 cm/s).
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
7
In general, the agreement between estimates obtained from automatically logged and hand-
collected data is good, and within 30% for both solution methods except at TW4-30, where
agreement using Bouwer-Rice was within a factor of two. The agreement between hydraulic
conductivities estimated from the KGS and Bouwer-Rice solutions (for both automatically-
logged and hand-collected data) is also good, and values agree within 30% except at TW4-30,
where agreement (using middle-time data) is within a factor of 21/2. The data from TW4-30 were
difficult to interpret using Bouwer-Rice because the data did not clearly form straight lines on
the semi-log plots, suggesting that steady flow, a key assumption of the Bouwer-Rice solution,
was not approached over the course of the test. Fits to early-, middle- and late-time data were
attempted wherever a near straight line appeared to occur. Using Bower-Rice was also somewhat
difficult at TW4-29 for the same reasons, and fits to middle- and late-time data were attempted.
By contrast, the KGS solution provided good fits to all data (early-, middle-, and late-time). For
this reason, and because the KGS solution also accounts for non-steady flow and aquifer storage,
the results obtained using KGS are considered more representative than those obtained using
Bouwer-Rice.
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
8
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
9
4. CONCLUSIONS
Procedures for the installation, hydraulic testing, and development at new perched monitoring
wells TW4-28 through TW4-31 are similar to those used previously at the site for the
construction, testing, and development of other perched zone wells.
Automatically logged and hand-collected slug test data from new wells were analyzed using
KGS and Bouwer-Rice analytical solutions. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity range from 1.1 x
10-5 cm/s to 3.9 x 10-4 cm/s using automatically logged data, and from 1.4 x 10-5 cm/s to 4.1 x
10-4 cm/s using hand-collected data. Estimates are within the range previously measured at the
site (approximately 2 x 10-8 cm/s to 0.01 cm/s).
In general, the agreement between estimates obtained from automatically logged and hand-
collected data is good, and within 30% for both solution methods except at TW4-30, where
agreement using Bouwer-Rice was within a factor of two. The agreement between hydraulic
conductivities estimated from the KGS and Bouwer-Rice solutions (for both automatically-
logged and hand-collected data) is also good, and values agree within 30% except at TW4-30,
where agreement (using middle-time data) is within a factor of 21/2. The data from TW4-30 were
difficult to interpret using Bouwer-Rice because the data did not clearly form straight lines on
the semi-log plots, suggesting that steady flow, a key assumption of the Bouwer-Rice solution,
was not approached over the course of the test. Fits to early-, middle- and late-time data were
attempted wherever a near straight line appeared to occur. Using Bower-Rice was also somewhat
difficult at TW4-29 for the same reasons, and fits to middle- and late-time data were attempted.
By contrast, the KGS solution provided good fits to all data (early-, middle-, and late-time). For
this reason, and because the KGS solution also accounts for non-steady flow and aquifer storage,
the results obtained using KGS are considered more representative than those obtained using
Bouwer-Rice.
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
10
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
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.
HGC. 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
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
12
Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
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
TW4-28 Through TW4-31, White Mesa Uranium Mill
H:\718000\nitrateast\well_installation_0413_rev1.doc
April 30, 2013
14
TABLES
TABLE 1
Well Survey Data
Latitude Longitude Top of Casing Ground
(North) (West) (feet amsl) (feet amsl)
TW4-28 37o 31' 57.4499" 109
o 29' 51.4144"5617.00 5613.52
TW4-29 37o 31' 42.1024" 109
o 29' 54.7353"5606.04 5602.56
TW4-30 37o 31' 42.5413" 109
o 29' 52.8210"5602.81 5599.33
TW4-31 37o 31' 43.8201" 109
o 29' 52.0153"5604.58 5601.10
Notes:
amsl = above mean sea level
Well
H:\718000\hydtst13\Tables_0413.xls: Table 1 4/30/2013
TABLE 2
Slug Test Parameters
Depth to Depth to Depth to Top Depth to Base Saturated Thickness
Well Brushy Basin Water of Screen of Screen Above Brushy Basin
(feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet)
TW4-28 102.5 34.6 45.0 105.0 67.9
TW4-29 88.0 70.4 51.0 91.0 17.7
TW4-30 86.0 76.4 50.0 90.0 9.6
TW4-31 101.0 82.9 64.0 104.0 18.1
H:\718000\hydtst13\Tables_0413.xls: Table2 4/30/2013
TABLE 3
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)
TW4-28 67.9 3.52E-04 1.22E-06 3.92E-04 3.29E-04 7.49E-06 4.07E-04
TW4-29 17.7 4.24E-05 1.19E-03 5.24E-05 4.52E-05 9.62E-04 5.66E-05
TW4-29 (lt) 17.7 NA NA 2.00E-05 NA NA 3.80E-05
TW4-30 9.6 1.44E-04 1.00E-02 6.22E-05 1.34E-04 1.00E-02 1.38E-04
TW4-30 (et) 9.6 NA NA 1.63E-04 NA NA 2.91E-04
TW4-30 (lt) 9.6 NA NA 1.12E-05 NA NA 1.41E-05
TW4-31 18.1 4.18E-05 2.54E-05 3.87E-05 3.24E-05 9.65E-05 4.01E-05
Notes:
Bouwer-Rice = Unconfined Bouwer-Rice solution method in Aqtesolve™
cm/s = centimeters per second
et = early time data
lt = late time data
ft = feet
K = hydraulic conductivity
KGS = Unconfined KGS solution method in Aqtesolve™
Ss= specific storage
NA= Not Applicable
Automatically Logged Data Hand Collected Data
KGS KGS
H:\718000\hydtst13\Tables_0413.xls: Table 3 4/30/2013
FIGURES
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1000 feet
MW-25
MW-27
MW-31
TW4-01
TW4-02
TW4-03
TW4-04
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-10
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
MW-26
TW4-16
MW-32
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-20
TW4-21
TW4-22
TW4-23
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-26
TW4-27
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-07
TWN-18
TW4-07 TW4-08
MW-04
TW4-28
TW4-30
TW4-31
TW4-29
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well
temporary perched monitoring well
perched piezometer
MW-4
TW4-1
PIEZ-2
LOCATIONS OF NEW TEMPORARY PERCHED WELLS
TW4-28, TW4-29, TW4-30, AND TW4-31
WHITE MESA SITE
H:/718000/
nitrateast/newTWwells2013.srf
TW4-28
new perched monitoring well
TW4-27 temporary perched monitoring well
installed October 2011
1SJS 4/19/2013
H:\718000\hydtst13\Corrected_displacement.xls: Figure 6
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Minutes
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
(
f
e
e
t
)
TW4-29 uncorrected TW4-29 corrected
TW4-30 uncorrected TW4-30 corrected
CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED DISPLACEMENTSHYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.Approved FigureDateAuthorDateFile Name
SJS 4/19/13 6Figure 64/19/13SJS
APPENDIX A
LITHOLOGIC LOGS
APPENDIX B
WELL DEVELOPMENT FIELD SHEETS
APPENIDX C
SLUG TEST PLOTS
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw28\tw28.aqt
Date: 04/22/13 Time: 11:14:49
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-28
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 67.9 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-28)
Initial Displacement: 0.72 ft Static Water Column Height: 67.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 67.9 ft Screen Length: 62.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.000352 cm/sec Ss = 1.218E-6 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 3. 6. 9. 12. 15.
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\hydtst13\tw28\tw28br.aqt
Date: 04/22/13 Time: 11:17:00
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-28
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 67.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-28)
Initial Displacement: 0.72 ft Static Water Column Height: 67.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 67.9 ft Screen Length: 62.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0003917 cm/sec y0 = 0.4605 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw28\tw28h.aqt
Date: 04/22/13 Time: 11:17:21
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-28
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 67.9 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-28)
Initial Displacement: 0.72 ft Static Water Column Height: 67.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 67.9 ft Screen Length: 62.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.0003287 cm/sec Ss = 7.495E-6 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 4. 8. 12. 16. 20.
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\hydtst13\tw28\tw28hbr.aqt
Date: 04/22/13 Time: 11:43:53
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-28
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 67.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-28)
Initial Displacement: 0.72 ft Static Water Column Height: 67.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 67.9 ft Screen Length: 62.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0004071 cm/sec y0 = 0.4011 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw29\tw29.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 08:58:41
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-29
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.7 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-29)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.7 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.7 ft Screen Length: 17.7 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 4.241E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.001195 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw29\tw29br.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 08:59:02
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-29
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.7 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-29)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.7 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.7 ft Screen Length: 17.7 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 5.243E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.383 ft
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw29\tw29brlt.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 08:59:17
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-29
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.7 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-29)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.7 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.7 ft Screen Length: 17.7 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.003E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.1268 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw29\tw29h.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 08:59:33
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-29
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.7 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-29)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.7 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.7 ft Screen Length: 17.7 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 4.517E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.0009622 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw29\tw29hbr.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 08:59:52
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-29
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.7 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-29)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.7 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.7 ft Screen Length: 17.7 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 5.661E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.3922 ft
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw29\tw29hbrlt.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:00:11
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-29
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.7 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-29)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.7 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.7 ft Screen Length: 17.7 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.8E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.265 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:00:46
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.0001441 cm/sec Ss = 0.01 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30br.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:01:00
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 6.218E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.1055 ft
0. 20. 40. 60. 80. 100.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30bret.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:01:16
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0001628 cm/sec y0 = 0.1833 ft
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30brlt.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:01:35
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.123E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.03493 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30h.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:01:51
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.0001342 cm/sec Ss = 0.01 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30hbr.aqt
Date: 04/22/13 Time: 11:06:51
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0001375 cm/sec y0 = 0.1833 ft
0. 20. 40. 60. 80. 100.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30hbret.aqt
Date: 04/22/13 Time: 11:09:22
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0002907 cm/sec y0 = 0.265 ft
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
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\hydtst13\tw30\tw30hbrlt.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:02:41
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-30
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 9.61 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-30)
Initial Displacement: 0.44 ft Static Water Column Height: 9.61 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 9.61 ft Screen Length: 9.61 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.41E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.06656 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw31\tw31.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:03:02
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-31
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.1 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-31)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.1 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.1 ft Screen Length: 18.1 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 4.177E-5 cm/sec Ss = 2.538E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
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\hydtst13\tw31\tw31br.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:03:15
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-31
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.1 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-31)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.1 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.1 ft Screen Length: 18.1 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.867E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5287 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
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\hydtst13\tw31\tw31h.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:03:32
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-31
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.1 ft
WELL DATA (TW4-31)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.1 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.1 ft Screen Length: 18.1 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 3.24E-5 cm/sec Ss = 9.65E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
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\hydtst13\tw31\tw31hbr.aqt
Date: 04/19/13 Time: 09:03:44
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: TW4-31
Test Date: 4-3-13
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.1 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (TW4-31)
Initial Displacement: 0.7 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.1 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.1 ft Screen Length: 18.1 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 4.013E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5537 ft
APPENDIX D
SLUG TEST DATA
TW28DSP.TXT
TW4-28
elapsed time displacement
(min) (ft)
0.01 0.72
0.05 0.34
0.10 0.83
0.15 0.74
0.20 0.60
0.25 0.58
0.30 0.56
0.35 0.54
0.40 0.52
0.45 0.51
0.55 0.48
0.70 0.44
0.90 0.37
1.15 0.34
1.45 0.28
1.80 0.23
2.20 0.19
2.65 0.15
3.15 0.12
3.70 0.09
4.30 0.08
4.95 0.06
5.65 0.04
6.40 0.04
7.20 0.03
8.05 0.02
8.95 0.02
9.90 0.02
10.90 0.01
11.95 0.00
13.05 0.01
14.20 0.00
15.40 0.01
16.65 0.01
17.95 0.01
19.30 0.01
20.70 0.01
22.15 0.01
23.65 0.01
25.20 0.01
26.80 0.01
28.45 0.01
Page 1
TW28HDSP.TXT
TW4-28
elapsed time displacement
(min) (ft, hand collected)
0.25 0.54
0.58 0.45
0.92 0.36
1.28 0.27
1.48 0.24
1.8 0.2
2.18 0.17
2.5 0.14
2.97 0.11
3.47 0.09
4 0.07
4.53 0.06
4.8 0.07
5.22 0.05
5.68 0.04
6.05 0.03
7.2 0.02
10.8 0.01
18.2 0
Page 1
tw29dsp.txt
TW4-29
elapsed time displacement displacement
(min) (ft) (20% correction)
0.00 1.318 1.3180E+00
0.05 0.051 5.1000E-02
0.10 0.733 7.3300E-01
0.15 0.67 6.7000E-01
0.20 0.663 6.6300E-01
0.25 0.651 6.5100E-01
0.30 0.644 6.4400E-01
0.35 0.645 6.4500E-01
0.40 0.634 6.3400E-01
0.45 0.636 6.3600E-01
0.55 0.618 6.1800E-01
0.70 0.604 6.0400E-01
0.90 0.595 5.9500E-01
1.15 0.583 5.8300E-01
1.45 0.566 5.6580E-01
1.80 0.554 5.5380E-01
2.20 0.53 5.2980E-01
2.65 0.519 5.1880E-01
3.15 0.508 5.0780E-01
3.70 0.487 4.8660E-01
4.30 0.467 4.6660E-01
4.95 0.459 4.5860E-01
5.65 0.43 4.2960E-01
6.40 0.415 4.1480E-01
7.20 0.401 4.0080E-01
8.05 0.39 3.8980E-01
8.95 0.375 3.7500E-01
9.90 0.348 3.4800E-01
10.90 0.33 3.3020E-01
11.95 0.32 3.2040E-01
13.05 0.305 3.0560E-01
14.20 0.299 2.9980E-01
15.40 0.279 2.8000E-01
16.65 0.267 2.6780E-01
17.95 0.254 2.5460E-01
19.30 0.238 2.3860E-01
20.70 0.23 2.3060E-01
22.15 0.216 2.1680E-01
23.65 0.209 2.0980E-01
25.20 0.196 1.9700E-01
26.80 0.186 1.8660E-01
28.45 0.167 1.6740E-01
30.15 0.161 1.6100E-01
31.90 0.158 1.5840E-01
33.70 0.151 1.5180E-01
35.55 0.139 1.4000E-01
37.45 0.136 1.3680E-01
39.40 0.132 1.3260E-01
41.40 0.122 1.2260E-01
43.45 0.121 1.2180E-01
45.55 0.108 1.0900E-01
47.70 0.11 1.1120E-01
49.90 0.105 1.0640E-01
52.15 0.094 9.4800E-02
54.45 0.081 8.1200E-02
56.80 0.08 8.0400E-02
59.20 0.085 8.5800E-02
61.65 0.071 7.2200E-02
64.15 0.072 7.3400E-02
66.70 0.076 7.7000E-02
Page 1
tw29dsp.txt
69.30 0.061 6.1600E-02
71.95 0.062 6.2400E-02
74.65 0.067 6.7000E-02
77.40 0.065 6.5000E-02
80.20 0.053 5.3000E-02
83.05 0.053 5.3000E-02
85.95 0.051 5.1000E-02
88.90 0.045 4.5000E-02
91.90 0.049 4.8200E-02
94.95 0.048 4.6200E-02
98.05 0.044 4.2400E-02
101.20 0.051 4.9600E-02
104.40 0.04 3.8600E-02
107.65 0.048 4.6400E-02
110.95 0.039 3.7000E-02
114.30 0.04 3.7800E-02
117.70 0.045 4.2400E-02
121.15 0.033 3.0400E-02
124.65 0.033 3.0600E-02
128.20 0.044 4.1400E-02
131.80 0.042 3.9200E-02
135.45 0.034 3.1200E-02
139.15 0.032 2.8400E-02
142.90 0.029 2.5600E-02
146.70 0.03 2.6600E-02
150.55 0.035 3.1400E-02
154.45 0.024 2.0400E-02
158.40 0.029 2.5000E-02
162.40 0.026 2.1800E-02
166.45 0.025 2.1200E-02
170.55 0.025 2.1600E-02
174.70 0.031 2.6400E-02
178.90 0.032 2.8200E-02
183.15 0.024 2.0000E-02
187.45 0.021 1.6200E-02
191.80 0.024 1.8200E-02
196.20 0.02 1.4000E-02
200.65 0.022 1.6600E-02
205.15 0.021 1.6800E-02
209.70 0.028 2.2400E-02
214.30 0.022 1.6400E-02
218.95 0.021 1.5000E-02
223.65 0.024 1.7600E-02
228.40 0.022 1.6200E-02
233.20 0.02 1.3200E-02
238.05 0.021 1.3200E-02
242.95 0.033 2.5200E-02
247.90 0.026 1.8200E-02
252.90 0.021 1.2600E-02
257.95 0.019 1.0400E-02
263.05 0.022 1.3400E-02
268.20 0.024 1.4200E-02
273.40 0.022 1.2200E-02
278.65 0.02 9.8000E-03
283.95 0.027 1.6400E-02
289.30 0.022 1.0000E-02
294.70 0.023 1.0000E-02
300.15 0.022 9.4000E-03
305.65 0.021 8.4000E-03
311.20 0.025 1.2200E-02
316.80 0.02 7.0000E-03
322.45 0.021 6.8000E-03
328.15 0.022 7.6000E-03
Page 2
tw29dsp.txt
333.90 0.03 1.4800E-02
339.70 0.02 6.0000E-03
345.55 0.021 5.0000E-03
351.45 0.018 3.4000E-03
357.40 0.014 2.0000E-04
363.40 0.017 2.8000E-03
369.45 0.015 1.0000E-03
375.55 0.014 -6.0000E-04
381.70 0.019 4.0000E-03
387.90 0.018 3.8000E-03
394.15 0.015 2.0000E-04
400.45 0.016 1.0000E-03
406.80 0.017 8.0000E-04
413.20 0.019 3.4000E-03
Page 3
TW29HDSP.TXT
TW4-29
elapsed time displacement
(min) (ft, hand collected)
0.28 0.67
0.53 0.64
0.67 0.62
0.92 0.59
1.25 0.57
1.53 0.56
2 0.54
2.27 0.53
2.55 0.52
2.82 0.51
3.17 0.5
3.65 0.48
4.13 0.47
4.47 0.46
4.95 0.45
5.28 0.44
5.58 0.43
5.9 0.42
6.5 0.41
7.38 0.39
8 0.38
8.68 0.37
9.38 0.36
10.18 0.35
11.2 0.33
11.9 0.32
12.6 0.31
13.6 0.3
14.16 0.29
15.07 0.28
16.07 0.27
17.03 0.26
18.1 0.25
19.2 0.24
21 0.22
23 0.21
25 0.19
27 0.18
29 0.17
31 0.16
36 0.14
41 0.12
46 0.11
51 0.1
56 0.09
61 0.08
915 -0.12
Page 1
TW30DSP.TXT
TW4-30
elapsed time displacement displacement
(min) (ft) (20% correction)
0.00 0.552 5.5200E-01
0.05 0.327 3.2700E-01
0.10 0.397 3.9700E-01
0.15 0.388 3.8800E-01
0.20 0.373 3.7300E-01
0.25 0.363 3.6300E-01
0.30 0.352 3.5200E-01
0.35 0.346 3.4600E-01
0.40 0.336 3.3600E-01
0.45 0.332 3.3200E-01
0.55 0.321 3.2080E-01
0.70 0.305 3.0480E-01
0.90 0.289 2.8880E-01
1.15 0.27 2.6980E-01
1.45 0.252 2.5180E-01
1.80 0.239 2.3860E-01
2.20 0.22 2.1960E-01
2.65 0.203 2.0240E-01
3.15 0.191 1.9040E-01
3.70 0.173 1.7240E-01
4.30 0.165 1.6440E-01
4.95 0.156 1.5560E-01
5.65 0.146 1.4560E-01
6.40 0.137 1.3680E-01
7.20 0.127 1.2700E-01
8.05 0.118 1.1820E-01
8.95 0.112 1.1220E-01
9.90 0.107 1.0720E-01
10.90 0.1 1.0020E-01
11.95 0.093 9.3200E-02
13.05 0.091 9.1200E-02
14.20 0.084 8.4400E-02
15.40 0.082 8.2600E-02
16.65 0.07 7.0800E-02
17.95 0.073 7.4000E-02
19.30 0.072 7.3200E-02
20.70 0.063 6.4000E-02
22.15 0.065 6.5800E-02
23.65 0.061 6.1800E-02
25.20 0.068 6.8800E-02
26.80 0.062 6.3000E-02
28.45 0.053 5.4200E-02
30.15 0.054 5.5200E-02
31.90 0.051 5.2200E-02
33.70 0.048 4.9200E-02
35.55 0.042 4.3200E-02
37.45 0.036 3.7200E-02
39.40 0.047 4.8200E-02
41.40 0.046 4.7200E-02
43.45 0.042 4.3200E-02
45.55 0.038 3.9400E-02
47.70 0.039 4.0600E-02
49.90 0.039 4.0200E-02
52.15 0.036 3.6400E-02
54.45 0.036 3.6000E-02
56.80 0.033 3.3400E-02
59.20 0.032 3.2800E-02
61.65 0.031 3.2000E-02
64.15 0.028 2.9200E-02
66.70 0.027 2.7800E-02
Page 1
TW30DSP.TXT
69.30 0.027 2.7600E-02
71.95 0.026 2.6600E-02
74.65 0.03 3.0800E-02
77.40 0.026 2.7000E-02
80.20 0.03 3.1400E-02
83.05 0.022 2.4000E-02
85.95 0.025 2.7000E-02
88.90 0.016 1.8000E-02
91.90 0.02 2.1800E-02
94.95 0.02 2.1800E-02
98.05 0.016 1.8000E-02
101.20 0.014 1.6000E-02
104.40 0.022 2.4000E-02
107.65 0.019 2.1000E-02
110.95 0.017 1.9400E-02
114.30 0.017 1.9400E-02
117.70 0.019 2.0800E-02
121.15 0.021 2.2400E-02
124.65 0.019 2.0200E-02
128.20 0.012 1.3600E-02
131.80 0.016 1.8200E-02
135.45 0.018 2.0400E-02
139.15 0.019 2.1200E-02
142.90 0.012 1.4400E-02
146.70 0.016 1.8000E-02
150.55 0.016 1.8000E-02
154.45 0.016 1.8400E-02
158.40 0.012 1.4200E-02
162.40 0.018 2.0400E-02
166.45 0.017 1.9800E-02
170.55 0.017 1.9600E-02
174.70 0.007 8.8000E-03
178.90 0.017 1.9600E-02
183.15 0.013 1.6000E-02
187.45 0.013 1.5400E-02
191.80 0.015 1.6800E-02
196.20 0.013 1.4600E-02
200.65 0 1.6000E-03
205.15 0.013 1.4600E-02
209.70 0.024 2.5200E-02
214.30 0.018 1.7800E-02
218.95 0.019 1.9200E-02
223.65 0.011 1.1200E-02
228.40 0.007 6.8000E-03
233.20 0.014 1.3400E-02
238.05 0.013 1.1800E-02
242.95 0.015 1.4200E-02
247.90 0.016 1.5000E-02
252.90 0.013 1.1800E-02
257.95 0.016 1.4000E-02
263.05 0.015 1.3400E-02
268.20 0.012 1.0000E-02
273.40 0.018 1.6000E-02
278.65 0.013 1.0400E-02
283.95 0.014 1.1400E-02
289.30 0.018 1.6200E-02
294.70 0.012 9.2000E-03
300.15 0.017 1.4800E-02
305.65 0.014 1.0800E-02
311.20 0.012 7.8000E-03
316.80 0.013 8.8000E-03
322.45 0.014 1.1000E-02
328.15 0.013 9.2000E-03
Page 2
TW30DSP.TXT
333.90 0.016 1.2000E-02
339.70 0.015 1.0400E-02
345.55 0.017 1.2400E-02
351.45 0.015 1.0000E-02
Page 3
TW30HDSP.TXT
TW4-30
elapsed time displacement
(min) (ft, hand collected)
0.35 0.38
0.58 0.33
0.83 0.31
1.08 0.29
1.27 0.28
1.52 0.27
1.88 0.26
2.15 0.24
2.52 0.23
3 0.21
3.3 0.2
3.67 0.19
4.27 0.18
4.78 0.17
5.18 0.16
6.08 0.15
6.7 0.14
7.5 0.13
9.12 0.12
10.8 0.11
16.1 0.09
18.4 0.08
64 0.05
106 0.04
179 0.03
1005 -0.1
Page 1
TW31DSP.TXT
TW4-31
elapsed time displacement
(min) (ft)
0.00 2.397
0.05 0.55
0.10 0.744
0.15 0.68
0.20 0.675
0.25 0.688
0.30 0.679
0.35 0.687
0.40 0.673
0.45 0.666
0.55 0.669
0.70 0.66
0.90 0.661
1.15 0.643
1.45 0.641
1.80 0.631
2.20 0.616
2.65 0.599
3.15 0.588
3.70 0.584
4.30 0.573
4.95 0.562
5.65 0.549
6.40 0.527
7.20 0.524
8.05 0.514
8.95 0.494
9.90 0.487
10.90 0.472
11.95 0.456
13.05 0.447
14.20 0.433
15.40 0.408
16.65 0.409
17.95 0.399
19.30 0.384
20.70 0.37
22.15 0.362
23.65 0.35
25.20 0.332
26.80 0.324
28.45 0.306
30.15 0.291
31.90 0.286
33.70 0.278
35.55 0.265
37.45 0.245
39.40 0.247
41.40 0.227
43.45 0.222
45.55 0.213
47.70 0.204
49.90 0.191
52.15 0.181
54.45 0.178
56.80 0.162
59.20 0.155
61.65 0.155
64.15 0.151
66.70 0.146
Page 1
TW31DSP.TXT
69.30 0.131
71.95 0.12
74.65 0.116
77.40 0.112
80.20 0.107
83.05 0.103
85.95 0.093
88.90 0.086
91.90 0.081
94.95 0.079
98.05 0.074
101.20 0.075
104.40 0.076
107.65 0.061
110.95 0.055
114.30 0.053
117.70 0.049
121.15 0.042
124.65 0.044
128.20 0.042
131.80 0.04
135.45 0.037
139.15 0.031
142.90 0.034
146.70 0.028
150.55 0.027
154.45 0.02
158.40 0.026
162.40 0.021
166.45 0.02
170.55 0.018
174.70 0.024
178.90 0.022
183.15 0.013
187.45 0.012
191.80 0.014
196.20 0.007
200.65 0.01
205.15 -0.001
209.70 0.004
214.30 0.007
218.95 0.004
223.65 0.004
228.40 0.003
233.20 0.014
238.05 0.008
242.95 0.006
247.90 0.006
252.90 0.005
257.95 0.004
263.05 0.006
268.20 0.004
273.40 -0.001
278.65 0
283.95 0.003
Page 2
TW31HDSP.TXT
TW4-31`
elapsed time displacement
(min) (ft, hand collected)
0.5 0.68
0.75 0.67
1.08 0.66
1.4 0.65
1.65 0.64
1.97 0.63
2.23 0.62
2.68 0.61
3.07 0.6
3.65 0.59
4.08 0.58
4.53 0.57
5.12 0.56
5.7 0.55
6.33 0.54
7 0.53
7.92 0.52
8.5 0.51
9.23 0.5
10.2 0.49
10.92 0.48
11.63 0.47
12.58 0.46
13.33 0.45
14.25 0.44
15 0.43
15.7 0.42
16.73 0.41
17.65 0.4
18.7 0.39
19.97 0.38
21.27 0.37
22.55 0.36
23.92 0.35
24.9 0.34
26.23 0.33
27.52 0.32
28 0.31
30.22 0.3
31.71 0.29
33.6 0.28
35.37 0.27
36.92 0.26
38.78 0.25
40.82 0.24
42.78 0.23
45.17 0.22
47.4 0.21
50.8 0.2
55 0.18
60 0.16
65 0.15
75 0.11
170 0.05
Page 1