DRC-2013-001442 - 0901a06880354878

February 22,2013
Mr. Rusty Lundberg, Executive Secretary
Utah Radiation Control Board
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
PO Box 144810
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4810
uraniumone^
investing in our energy
nd Re: Radioactive Materials License UT0900480, Semi-Annual Effluent Monitoring Report 2'
Half 2012
Dear Mr. Lundberg; DRC" 20 1 3-00 144 2
As required by Radioactive Materials License UT0900480 License Condition 12.2 Uranium One
is submitting the 2"^ Half 2012 Semi-Annual Effluent Monitoring Report. Air sampling
information has been included as Exhibit A to this report.
I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direct supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the persons who
manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the
information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the
possibility of fine and unprisonment for knowing violations.
Should you have any questions in regards to this matter, please contact at [phone] or e-
mail at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
^^^S=^^A|v*.SJ\rN-x-^- ^
Scott Schierman
Corporate Radiation Safety Officer
Shootaring Canyon Mill
Uranium One Americas, Inc.
cc: John Hultquist (UDEQVDRC)
Bill Kearney (Ul)
Shootaring Mill file

URANIUM ONE AMERICAS, INC

SHOOTARING CANYON MILL
GARFIELD COUNTY, UTAH

#UT0900480

EFFLUENT MONITORING REPORT
Report Period
July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012

February 22, 2012

Submitted by

Uranium One Americas Inc.
907 N. Poplar Street, Suite 260
Casper, Wyoming 80601
Shootaring Canyon Mill Effluent Monitoring Report – H2 2012
i
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1
2. AIR SAMPLING ......................................................................................................... 1
3. SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES ........................................................................................ 2
4. GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS ............................................................. 2
5. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ..................................................................................... 3

Exhibit A: Supporting Documentation
Shootaring Canyon Mill Effluent Monitoring Report – H2 2012
1 of 3
1. INTRODUCTION

The following Effluent Monitoring Report is presented to comply with Utah Department
of Environmental Quality, Division of Radiation Control requirements (UAC R313-24-
3), 10 CFR 40.65, and License Conditions 11.3 and 12.2 of Byproduct Material License
#UT0900480. The current Licensee is Uranium One Utah Inc.

The sampling data represent the period from July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012 for
the Shootaring Canyon Mill. License requirements reflect the current standby status of
the mill.

2. AIR SAMPLING

The license requires one 20-24-hour sampling period each calendar quarter with the
filters composited and analyzed for U-nat and Ra-226 on a semi-annual basis (License
Condition 11.2, Table 5.5-8). The dates of collection during the second half of 2012
were August 7th through August 8th and November 12th through November 13th. The
sampler (AP-3) is located downwind of the tailings facility. Supporting documentation
for this report is attached as Exhibit A.

The samples were obtained using a Graseby/GMW high volume air particulate sampler
with an average flow rate of 36.5 cfm. The sampler flow indicator was calibrated prior to
each quarterly sampling period using a series of orifice plates and an antifreeze-filled
manometer. The manometer readings were converted to actual flow rates using a
standard calibration curve. A graph of actual flow rate versus indicated flow rate was
constructed. The actual flow rate for the sampling period was taken from the graph. The
flow rate was multiplied by the elapsed time to obtain the volume of air sampled for each
of the two sampling periods. The volumes were added to obtain the total semi-annual
sample volume.

The total volume sampled for the two quarterly periods was 3.12 x 109 ml. The average
flow rate was 1.03 x 106 ml/minute (36.5 cfm). The total sampling time was 3,025.21
minutes (50.4 hours).

The results of the sample analyses are given in the following table:

Air Sample Composite Results
Radionuclide Concentration
(µCi/ml)
Error Estimate
(µCi/ml)
Lower Limit of
Detection
(µCi/ml)
% Effluent
Concentration
Limit
U-nat 1.54 x 10-16 N/A 4.0 x 10-17 0.2
Ra-226 1.54 x 10-16 7.70 x 10-17 5.80 x 10-17 0.017

Shootaring Canyon Mill Effluent Monitoring Report – H2 2012
2 of 3

3. SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES

a. The % Effluent Concentration Limit column for the air sample results refers to the 10
CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Effluent Concentration Limits for unrestricted areas.

Nuclide Effluent Concentration Limit
for Air
(µCi/ml)
Effluent Concentration Limit
for Water
(µCi/ml)
U-nat, Class Y 9 x 10-14 3 x 10-7
Ra-226 9 x 10-13 6 x 10-8

b. The airborne particulate sampler is operated for a minimum of 20 hours (1200 minutes)
each calendar quarter. The two quarterly samples are digested together for a total semi-
annual analysis.

c. The filters were analyzed by ALS located in Fort Collins, Colorado. The laboratory
reports concentrations, estimated uncertainties and lower limit of detection. Error limits
(uncertainties) for Ra-226 were 0.24 pCi/filter (7.70 x10-17 µCi/ml) for the second half
2012 air sample results. Error limits are not reported for U-nat analyses. The Ra-226
concentration minimum detectable concentration (MDC) was 0.18 pCi/filter (5.80 x10-17
µCi/ml). The error estimate for the 2nd half sampling event is shown in Section II, above.

4. GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS

The radioactive materials license condition 11.3A requires sampling of the following
wells on a semi-annual basis: RM-1, RM-2R, RM-7, RM-12, RM-14, RM-18, and RM-
19. RM-1 and RM-12 are the up gradient monitoring wells and represent the site
background. Uranium One has voluntarily sampled wells RM-8 and RM-20 and reports
these data semi-annually. Quarterly samples are collected as part of the on-going
accelerated background monitoring program as per Ground Water Quality Discharge
Permit UGW170003. Ground water samples are collected from monitoring wells
following the Groundwater Quality Assurance Plan for the site.

Third Quarter 2012 sampling was performed on July 23th. Fourth Quarter 2012 sampling
was performed on October 1st.

The threshold values for the Shootaring Canyon Mill, given in License Condition 11.3 B
are as follows:
Arsenic, dissolved 0.022 mg/L
Selenium, dissolved 0.022 mg/L
Chloride 40 mg/L
U-nat, dissolved 0.037 mg/L
pH <6.8 standard units

License Condition 11.3 B also references the standards in the Utah Administrative Code
(UAC) R313-24-4. This section of the UAC references the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), specifically 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A but explicitly replaces Criterion 5B(1)
Shootaring Canyon Mill Effluent Monitoring Report – H2 2012
3 of 3
through 5H, which includes the ground water protection standards, with the ground water
standards in UAC R317-6. No constituents in the approved monitoring program
exceeded any of the standards identified in License Condition 11.3 B or the Ground
Water Quality Standards in Table 1 of the Ground Water Discharge Permit (R317-6-2) in
the second half of 2012. Results of the ground water sample analyses will be submitted
with the Annual Ground Water Monitoring report under separate cover.

5. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

No airborne effluent concentration limits or ground water threshold values were exceeded
in the second half of 2012. A review of current and past air monitoring data does not
reveal any confirmed trends as results are near analytical lower limits of detection and
currently <1% of the effluent concentration limits listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B Table
2 for air and ground water limits are within the magnitude of the random variations that
have been historically observed in the ground water data.

EXHIBIT A
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Air Particulate High Vol Monitoring Station
7-Aug-12 12-Nov-12
Linear equation Linear equation
y = 0.8247x + 7.4111 y = 0.8704x + 5.4551
Measured Chart Fow:49.0 cfm Measured Chart Fow:52.0 cfm
Actual Flow 33.0 cfm Actual Flow 39.8 cfm
Q3 2012 Indicated vs Actual Q4 2012 Indicated vs Actual
Indicated Inches Actual Indicated Inches Actual
CFM H2O CFM CFM H2O CFM
0 0
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
12 12
13 13
14 14
15 15
16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 2.0 24.0 20 2 24
21 21
22 22
23 23
24 24
25 3.0 29.5 25
26 26
27 27
28 28 3.2 30.5
29 29
30 30
31 31
32 4.2 35.5 32
33 33
34 34
35 35 4.4 36.0
36 36
37 37
38 4.9 38.5 38 5.3 40.0
39 39
40 5.7 41.5 40
41 41
42 42 6.2 43.0
URANIUM ONE - SHOOTARING CANYON MILL
y = 0.8704x + 5.4551
R² = 0.99521
y = 0.8247x + 7.4111
R² = 0.98519
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54
Ac
t
u
a
l

(
C
F
M
)

Indicated (CFM)
AP-3 Measured Vs. Actual Flows
Q3 and Q4 2012
Q4 2012 Linear Equation Q Q3 2012 Linear Equation
Shootaring Canyon Mill
AP-3 Air Particulate High Vol Monitoring Station
2nd Half 2012
Q3, 2012 (Aug 7, 2012)
Linear equation
y = 0.8247x + 7.4111
Measured Chart Fow:49.0 cfm
Actual Flow 33.0 cfm
Q4, 2012 (Nov 12, 2012)
Linear equation
y = 0.8704x + 5.4551
Measured Chart Fow:52.0 cfm
Actual Flow 39.8 cfm 36.5 Average total flow
Quarter Date
Flow Rate
(cfm)
Duration
(min)
Volume
(ml)
Q3 8/7-8/12 33.0 1,484.7 1.39E+09
Q4 11/12-13/12 39.8 1,540.4 1.74E+09
3,025.10 3.12E+09 Total
ALS Work Order:1212110
Parameter pCi/filter pCi/ml uCi/ml Comment
Unat 0.48 1.5E-10 1.54E-16
Reporting Limit 0.14 4.3E-11 4.00E-17 Meets NRC Reg Guide 4.14 requirement of 1E-16 uCi/ml
Effluent Limit ----9.00E-14 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Effluent Concentration Limits for unrestricted areas.
% of Effluent Limit 0.2%
Ra-226 0.48 1.5E-10 1.54E-16
Precision (+/-)0.24 7.7E-11 7.70E-17
MDC 0.18 5.77E-11 5.80E-17 Meets NRC Reg Guide 4.14 requirement of 1E-16 uCi/ml
Effluent Limit ----9.00E-13 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Effluent Concentration Limits for unrestricted areas.
% of Effluent Limit 0.017%
...-:'!
&ranlUmoneinvestinginourenergy
URANIUM ONE U.S.A .
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES
SHOOTARING MILL SITE SOP EP-4
.-/High-Volume Air Sampler Calibration FormDate:'f/7 I~By:D,N\6\(\\;\.Sampling Station:A?-:3o
Temperature:fr'::;-Barometric Pressure:_
Remarks:CJ.('<=-..\~{/1A..
FROP IndicatedInches(H2O)Actual CFM
5 ;LoA.f10 {/
~
/j
~~
3/0
!O
3~'-t 2./1
L3
3gLj.'7
If
l~
J-jD5~/0
Note:Use an orifice calibration curve to translate inches of water into actual CFM.Plot indicated versus
actual points on graph paper,interpolate a straight line through the points,and use this line to get the
actual flow rate during sampling from the value on the flow recorder chart paper.
CFM =cubic foot/feet per minute
FROP =flow reducer orifice plate
H20 =water
Revision No.10 10
10 :J.~C:uv\
2~\-\<s '"Y/fV\I f\
9/18/08
---:1
&raniUmOne
investing in our energy
URANIUM ONE U.S.A.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES
SHOOT ARING MILL SITE SOP EP-4
High-Volume Air Sampler Calibration Form
Date:t\1\2.Il~By:0'O'--~N\on...·dl Sampling Station:Ar-~-S
Temperature:\~()0 Barometric Pressure:_
Remarks:(}.()()\.l~81\t-ore~~
FROP IndicatedInches(H2O)Actual CFM
.5
~();),11'
7-
2-g3~~II
/0
3C:;-//
'-1.'-1
~3
505.s II
~~
Lf~to4~
Note:Use an orifice calibration curve to translate inches of water into actual CFM.Plot indicated versus
actual points on graph paper,interpolate a straight line through the points,and use this line to get the
actual flow rate during sampling from the value on the flow recorder chart paper.
CFM =cubic foot/feet per minute
FROP =flow reducer orifice plate
H20 =water
Start
End
Total
Minutes
Revision No.10 10 9/18/08

1212110

Metals:
The sample was analyzed following SW-846, 3rd Edition procedures. Analysis by ICPMS followed
method 6020A and the current revision of SOP 827.

All acceptance criteria were met.

Radium-226:

This sample was prepared and analyzed according to the current revision of SOP 783.

All acceptance criteria were met.

1 of 10
OrderNum:1212110
Client Name:Uranium One
Client Project Name:Shootaring Mill
Client Project Number:
Client PO Number:
Lab Sample
Number
Client Sample
Number
Matrix Date
Collected
Time
Collected
COC Number
Sample Number(s) Cross-Reference Table
ALS Environmental -- FC
1212110-1AP-3 FILTER 13-Nov-12
Page 1 of 1 Saturday, December 29, 2012Date Printed:
LIMS Version: 6.627
ALS Environmental -- FC
2 of 10
3 of 10
4 of 10
5 of 10
Project: Shootaring Mill
Sample ID:AP-3
Collection Date:11/13/2012
Matrix:FILTER
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedReport
Limit
Client:Uranium One
Work Order:1212110
Dilution
Factor
Lab ID:1212110-1
ALS Environmental -- FC
Date:29-Dec-12
SAMPLE SUMMARY REPORT
Percent Moisture:
Legal Location:
ICPMS METALS SW6020 PrepBy:REMPrep Date:12/27/2012
URANIUM 12/27/2012 15:020.2 UG/sample 2000.72
RA-226 BY RADON EMANATION - METHOD 903.1 PAI 783 PrepBy:PJWPrep Date:12/19/2012
Ra-226 12/28/2012 13:290.18 pCi/sample NA0.48 (+/- 0.24)
Carr: BARIUM 12/28/2012 13:2940-110 %REC NA
AR Page 1 of 3LIMS Version: 6.627
ALS Environmental -- FC
6 of 10
Project: Shootaring Mill
Sample ID:AP-3
Collection Date:11/13/2012
Matrix:FILTER
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedReport
Limit
Client:Uranium One
Work Order:1212110
Dilution
Factor
Lab ID:1212110-1
ALS Environmental -- FC
Date:29-Dec-12
SAMPLE SUMMARY REPORT
Percent Moisture:
Legal Location:
Explanation of Qualifiers
Radiochemistry:
U or ND - Result is less than the sample specific MDC.
Y2 - Chemical Yield outside default limits.
Y1 - Chemical Yield is in control at 100-110%. Quantitative yield is assumed.
W - DER is greater than Warning Limit of 1.42
* - Aliquot Basis is 'As Received' while the Report Basis is 'Dry Weight'.
# - Aliquot Basis is 'Dry Weight' while the Report Basis is 'As Received'.
G - Sample density differs by more than 15% of LCS density.
M - Requested MDC not met.
L - LCS Recovery below lower control limit.
H - LCS Recovery above upper control limit.
P - LCS, Matrix Spike Recovery within control limits.
N - Matrix Spike Recovery outside control limits
NC - Not Calculated for duplicate results less than 5 times MDC
B3 - Analyte concentration greater than MDC but less than Requested
MDC.
B - Analyte concentration greater than MDC.
M3 - The requested MDC was not met, but the reported
activity is greater than the reported MDC.
D - DER is greater than Control Limit
Inorganics:
B - Result is less than the requested reporting limit but greater than the instrument method detection limit (MDL).
E - The reported value is estimated because of the presence of interference. An explanatory note may be included in the narrative.
U or ND - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not detected.
M - Duplicate injection precision was not met.
N - Spiked sample recovery not within control limits. A post spike is analyzed for all ICP analyses when the matrix spike and or spike
duplicate fail and the native sample concentration is less than four times the spike added concentration.
Z - Spiked recovery not within control limits. An explanatory note may be included in the narrative.
* - Duplicate analysis (relative percent difference) not within control limits.
Organics:
U or ND - Indicates that the compound was analyzed for but not detected.
E - Analyte concentration exceeds the upper level of the calibration range.
B - Analyte is detected in the associated method blank as well as in the sample. It indicates probable blank contamination and warns the data user.
J - Estimated value. The result is less than the reporting limit but greater than the instrument method detection limit (MDL).
A - A tentatively identified compound is a suspected aldol-condensation product.
X - The analyte was diluted below an accurate quantitation level.
* - The spike recovery is equal to or outside the control criteria used.
+ - The relative percent difference (RPD) equals or exceeds the control criteria.
Diesel Range Organics:
AR Page 2 of 3LIMS Version: 6.627
ALS Environmental -- FC
7 of 10
Project: Shootaring Mill
Sample ID:AP-3
Collection Date:11/13/2012
Matrix:FILTER
Analyses Result Qual Units Date AnalyzedReport
Limit
Client:Uranium One
Work Order:1212110
Dilution
Factor
Lab ID:1212110-1
ALS Environmental -- FC
Date:29-Dec-12
SAMPLE SUMMARY REPORT
Percent Moisture:
Legal Location:
G - A pattern resembling gasoline was detected in this sample.
M - A pattern resembling motor oil was detected in this sample.
D - A pattern resembling diesel was detected in this sample.
C - A pattern resembling crude oil was detected in this sample.
4 - A pattern resembling JP-4 was detected in this sample.
5 - A pattern resembling JP-5 was detected in this sample.
H - Indicates that the fuel pattern was in the heavier end of the retention time window for the analyte of interest.
L - Indicates that the fuel pattern was in the lighter end of the retention time window for the analyte of interest.
Z - This flag indicates that a significant fraction of the reported result did not resemble the patterns of any of the following petroleum hydrocarbon products:
- gasoline
- JP-8
- diesel
- mineral spirits
- motor oil
- Stoddard solvent
- bunker C
AR Page 3 of 3LIMS Version: 6.627
ALS Environmental -- FC
8 of 10
ALS Environmental -- FC 12/29/2012 11:5Date:
Project: Shootaring Mill
Client:Uranium One
Work Order:1212110 QC BATCH REPORT
Batch ID:RE121219-1-1 Instrument ID:Alpha Scin Method:Ra-226 by Radon Emanation - Me
Qual
Analysis Date:12/28/2012 13:29
Prep Date:12/19/2012
Analyte Result %REC
Units:pCi/sample
ReportLimit
Client ID:
LCS
Run ID:RE121219-1A
SPK Val
SPK Ref
Value
Control
Limit
DF:NA
Sample ID:RE121219-1
DER Ref
Value DER
DER
Limit
P47.37Ra-226 95 57-1260.245 (+/- 8.3)
Qual
Analysis Date:12/28/2012 13:29
Prep Date:12/19/2012
Analyte Result %REC
Units:pCi/sample
ReportLimit
Client ID:
LCSD
Run ID:RE121219-1A
SPK Val
SPK Ref
Value
Control
Limit
DF:NA
Sample ID:RE121219-1
DER Ref
Value DER
DER Limit
P4547.37Ra-226 97.4 57-126 2.130.2 0.096446.1 (+/- 8.5)
Qual
Analysis Date:12/28/2012 13:29
Prep Date:12/19/2012
Analyte Result %REC
Units:pCi/sample
ReportLimit
Client ID:
MB
Run ID:RE121219-1A
SPK Val
SPK Ref
Value
Control
Limit
DF:NA
Sample ID:RE121219-1
DER Ref
Value DER
DER
Limit
URa-226 0.18ND
The following samples were analyzed in this batch:1212110-1
QC Page: 1 of 2
LIMS Version: 6.627
ALS Environmental -- FC
9 of 10
Project: Shootaring Mill
Client:Uranium One
Work Order:1212110 QC BATCH REPORT
Batch ID:IP121227-22-1 Instrument ID:ICPMS2 Method:SW6020
Qual
Analysis Date:12/27/2012 14:58
Prep Date:12/27/2012
Analyte Result %REC
Units:UG/sample
ReportLimit
Client ID:
LCS
Run ID:IM121227-10A2
SPK Val
SPK Ref
Value
Control
Limit
DF:10
Sample ID:IP121227-22
RPD Ref
Value RPD
RPD
Limit
1URANIUM 100 80-120 200.010.999
Qual
Analysis Date:12/27/2012 15:00
Prep Date:12/27/2012
Analyte Result %REC
Units:UG/sample
ReportLimit
Client ID:
LCSD
Run ID:IM121227-10A2
SPK Val
SPK Ref
Value
Control
Limit
DF:10
Sample ID:IP121227-22
RPD Ref
Value RPD
RPD Limit
0.9991URANIUM100 80-120 200.01 00.996
Qual
Analysis Date:12/27/2012 14:56
Prep Date:12/27/2012
Analyte Result %REC
Units:UG/sample
ReportLimit
Client ID:
MB
Run ID:IM121227-10A2
SPK Val
SPK Ref
Value
Control
Limit
DF:10
Sample ID:IP121227-22
RPD Ref
Value RPD
RPD
Limit
URANIUM 0.01ND
The following samples were analyzed in this batch:1212110-1
QC Page: 2 of 2
LIMS Version: 6.627
ALS Environmental -- FC
10 of 10